Beruflich Dokumente
Kultur Dokumente
IRAL REsoUcEs
MINISTRY or AGRICULTURF,,LIVESTOCK
ZA|%IBARcAsHcRoPsTARMINGSYSTEMSPROJECT
RwiewMecting
Paperpreprcd for theZARCfunual Ressarch
Nocnrber14fi & 15,1995
PARTICIPATORY TNCHNOI,OGYDEVELOPMENT
WITH FARMER RESEARCHGROUPS
zccFsP
PO Bor 228it
Zanzlbor
Tel./far: (05Q33121
CONTENTS
Pageno.
Introduction I
Localsocial,economic andinstitutional
factorswhichled I
to theadoptionofthe FRGapproach
WhyformFarmerResearch
Groups? 2
Initid orperiences 2
Currentmethodfor selectingandforminggoups 4
Problemareas 9
Otherapproaches
beingusedby ZCCFSP
andMALNR l0
Theinstitutional
constraints
to furtherdevelopment of the t2
FRGapproach in Zanabuandprospects for thefuture
Lessons t2
Summary
of methodology l4
ABBREVIATIONS
top-downcrop-oriented
Thisessentialty andthe decision
approachmetwith little success
was soonmadeto adopta moreparticipatoryapproach,to concentrate moreon the
farmingsystemspart of the projecttitle.
Rural areas
r High populationdensity,smallfarm size,considerable landbonowing in manyareas,
r Significantvariationbetweenare&s:agro-ecological; oropsgrown;importanceof ofl
farm income;accessto markets;involvementof womenin agriculture.
o Historyof governmentcontrolhasresultedin a reductionin the sens,eof responsibility
of farmersfor solvingtheir own problemsanda lack of communitystructurewithin
villages,outsideof familygroups. Also an expectationof directbenefitswhenworking
with government.
r Low input-low output agriculturepractisedin most il€as.
asfollows.
The reasonsfor usingthe FRG approachcanbe summarised
,5:t.':.:.''
'il{iil{
, .:: ..
,l
r:::i'iRi; INTIIAL EXPERIENCES
' '"1,1 "]j
Farming SystemZones
I sv es regarding locati on
Vlllage selection
Group selectlon
Havingdecidedon the village,a teamof turo peoplewere sentto the villagewith the task
of identiffingpossiblegoup members.Threeseparateinformantswere identifiedwithin
the village,who wereselectedon their abilityto be ableto identify possiblegroup
members. Theseinformantsweretold aboutthe aimsof forminga researchgroupand
wereaskedto suggesta mix of people-difFerentages,gorder,wealth,familygrouping.
The importantcharacteristicfor all groupmembersbeinga willingnessto participateand
' ' . 1 try newtechniques.
:..r;i;.':,ii
\'l',!ii i.:
'ij t iri:*
'..',:'',',.'}
'...
..'.:,..,.
. i'l.i.'; .:r::
'','.;'.il.
4. Eachday'sfindingsarediscussed collestivelyeacheveningandanynecessary
modificationsaremadeto the checklistof the followingday.
5. A meetingwith all the membersof the FRG is heldon the final morningto providean
opportunityto pres€ntanddiscusspreliminaryresultsof the surveyandoutlinesubsequent
stagesof the researchprocesswith farmersbeforethankingthemfor their co-operation,
Disadvantages
o Sometypesof informationarediffictrltto obtainwith zucha rapidprocess,for example
informationaboutincome.
o Farmersexpectquickrespomefrom the researchteam.
o Time consumingfor farmer.Takesroughlylr/2 daysfor eachfarmerand 4 - 5 daysfor
the wholegroup.
This was still not very satisfactoryasit wasdifficult to dealwith majoriszues,suchas soil
fertility andredevelopment of the cloveplantationares. A detailedstudywasthen
undertakenof eachfarmer(asdescribedfor PR.lrabove). Fromthis a muchwider rangeof
researchthemesarose.The themesareactuallyquite similarfor all the FRGs,although
therearesomedifferences.The cunentthernesfor DayaFRG are:
Inprts
Meetings
Topical studies
Reyalts
of a group:the
Therearetwo areasto considerwhentrying to evaluatethe effectiveness
changeswithin the group andthe effect on farmersoutsidethe group.
PROBI.EM AREAS
Expectation
Conceptof research
The FRG programmeis the mainmethodusedby the projectfor doinglong term in{epth
researchandderrelopm€ntof newtechnologiesin a participativenunner,but it is by no
meansthe only approachbeingusedby the projector the widerMinistry.
Other ZCCFSPapprmches
Differentapproaches
havebeentried,manyof whichwerezubsequently modifiedor
rejected,Onemethodwhichhasbeendroppedis the useof so-called'pilot trials'. This
approachwasbasedon commercialdevelopment of singlecrop. Within a givenarea
ll
farmerswereidentified(opento anyfarmer),potentialtradersfoundandplantingmaterials
weredistributed.
On the positiveside:
r The FRG approachreducesthe dependency of the groupon the institution,through
minimisingthe useof inputsandthroughparticipation.
r The MALhIR staffbenefitftom prolongedcontactwith farmersandthe flexibletwo-way
approachneededfor working with groups.
r Changlnginstitutionsis a slow process,oneof the bestinfluenceson positivechangeis
to demonstrate effectivemethodsfor agriculturaldevelopment.
o FRGsarean effectiveway of ensuringthat farmers'constraintsandoppornrnitiesform
the basisfor the work programme.
r FRGsareprobablyoneof the cheapestmethodsfor developingappropriateagricultural
technologies.
LESSONS
,ji
' r':' '. ).-
:: ':'..i
- l.a
i ',,:i
. , '. ]
'."1
.::.:11
I l,r'i
'.1,
t'.. i
.:i.;::I
' '.1.i
t '{,-1
: I
.:t:i.iJ
t .;l
-t
!,,
' , . !
.'l
.1
,i
'. . : r
1
;
t4
STIMMARYOF METHODOLOGY
Methodsfor Identifyresearchthemes
workingwith Mix of :
Sroups Formaltrials(Researcher designed- Farmerimplemented)
Informalinvestigations (Farmerdesignedurd managed)
Discussion on topicalissues.
Trainingandstudytours,
Minimisepaperwork.
Topicalstudieswhenmoreinformationneeded.
Minimalinputs,exceptwhenrisk to farmersis high.