1.2 Contact details of resource persons and institutions involved in the assessment and documentation of the Approach

Name of the institution(s) which facilitated the documentation/ evaluation of the Approach (if relevant)

CDE Centre for Development and Environment (CDE Centre for Development and Environment) - Switzerland

Name of the institution(s) which facilitated the documentation/ evaluation of the Approach (if relevant)

Africa Rice Center (AfricaRice) - Côte d'Ivoire

1.3 Conditions regarding the use of data documented through WOCAT

The compiler and key resource person(s) accept the conditions regarding the use of data documented through WOCAT:

Ja

2.1 Short description of the Approach

The Participatory Learning and Action Research approach to Integrated Rice Management (PLAR-IRM) is a bottom-up, social and experiential learning approach, leading to sustainable agricultural improvements, based on mutual support and communication among farmers.

2.2 Detailed description of the Approach

Detailed description of the Approach:

Aims / objectives: Innovation and agricultural change is aimed for, through capacity strengthening of all major stakeholders involved in the rice sub-sector. IRM refers to the production system and value chain as a whole. Innovation is not limited to technological change; it also includes time management and the building of social networks and institutions for mutual collaboration between farmers and other stakeholders within the rice value chain. A step-wise, self-discovery learning mode encourages the stakeholders to find solutions for their own site-specific problems. During the first years, groups of 25-30 producers are supported by a programme facilitator who animates the learning and innovation sessions. The main instruments are the learning modules dealing with specific crop management practices, harvest and post-harvest practices (involving processors and entrepreneurs also), as well as the agro-ecological and socio-economic conditions of rice production. The sessions aim to strengthen farmers’ and other rice stakeholders' capacity to observe, analyze, interpret, make decisions, innovate and share knowledge and experiences. PLAR is based on locally relevant knowledge, practices and skills. Exchanges about current practices, and their logic or justification, are the starting point in all modules.

Methods: In a learning-by-doing approach farmers are encouraged to try out any new ideas identified during PLAR sessions on some parts of their fields reserved for new practices (“innovation space”). This allows them to assess the impact of such innovations on their rice yield, or on the profitability of rice growing and the rice business as a whole, and consequently to adapt and fine-tune the measures taken according to their needs. These innovation spaces are regularly visited as part of learning sessions for knowledge sharing between farmers. Since 2005, innovations in land preparation, early transplanting of seedlings, weeds and water management - basically without external inputs - have resulted in three times higher yields, benefitting thousands of farmers. Rice value chain activities started in 2008 with a view to empowering farmers' position within the chains and improving the competitiveness. Groups are unifying into PLAR centres with common marketing of rice, and contract input providers and rice processors.

2.3 Photos of the Approach

2.5 Country/ region/ locations where the Approach has been applied

2.7 Type of Approach

• project/ programme based

2.8 Main aims/ objectives of the Approach

The Approach focused mainly on SLM with other activities (value chain develop¬ment: collective storage and marketing of rice; contractual arrangements with input providers and rice processors)

Sustainably improving food security, livelihoods and incomes of poor rice farmers by boosting the profitability of rice production and increasing the efficiency and competitiveness of the rice sub-sector; Capacity strengthening of all stake-holders involved in the rice-subsector

The SLM Approach addressed the following problems: Low yields in rice production; Most farmers live below subsistence level; Absence of government and NGO support; Limited access to markets, lack of infrastructure

3.1 Stakeholders involved in the Approach and their roles

3.2 Involvement of local land users/ local communities in the different phases of the Approach

	Involvement of local land users/ local communities	Specify who was involved and describe activities
initiation/ motivation	interactive
planning	interactive
implementation	interactive
monitoring/ evaluation	none
Research	none

3.4 Decision-making on the selection of SLM Technology/ Technologies

Specify who decided on the selection of the Technology/ Technologies to be implemented:

• land users alone (self-initiative)

Explain:

Decisions on the method of implementing the SLM Technology were made by mainly by land users supported by SLM specialists

4.1 Capacity building/ training

Was training provided to land users/ other stakeholders?

Ja

Specify who was trained:

• land users
• field staff/ advisers

Form of training:

• on-the-job
• farmer-to-farmer

Subjects covered:

crop management practices, harvest and post-harvest practices (incl. storage, marketing), socio-economic and ecological conditions of rice farming; curriculum based on needs assessment

4.2 Advisory service

Do land users have access to an advisory service?

Ja

Specify whether advisory service is provided:

• on land users' fields

Describe/ comments:

Name of method used for advisory service: modular learning sessions guided by a facilitator, farmer-to-farmer extension; Approach is based on indigenous knowledge

4.5 Research

Was research part of the Approach?

Ja

Give further details and indicate who did the research:

crop management practices

Research was carried out on-farm

5.1 Annual budget for the SLM component of the Approach

If precise annual budget is not known, indicate range:

• 100,000-1,000,000

Comments (e.g. main sources of funding/ major donors):

Approach costs were met by the following donors: international: 10.0%; national non-government: 30.0%; private sector: 10.0%; local community / land user(s): 50.0%

5.2 Financial/ material support provided to land users

Did land users receive financial/ material support for implementing the Technology/ Technologies?

Ja

5.3 Subsidies for specific inputs (including labour)

• equipment

Comments:

Two sarcleuses (weeding equipment) per starting group are provided for free and remain property of the group

5.4 Credit

Was credit provided under the Approach for SLM activities?

Ja

Specify conditions (interest rate, payback, etc.):

Interest rate charged: 2.5%; repayment conditions: Was supported by the approach in collaboration with an existing microfinance institution; loan period: 6-8 months, 2.5% monthly (!) interest rate.

6.1 Impacts of the Approach

6.2 Main motivation of land users to implement SLM

6.3 Sustainability of Approach activities

Can the land users sustain what has been implemented through the Approach (without external support)?

• yes

If yes, describe how:

In a 2nd phase farmers who are organised in PLAR groups gradually build up the capacity to manage the innovation and mutual learning approach on their own without programme support: Farmers facilitators are trained to take over the lead of PLAR groups with backstopping from programme facilitators.

6.4 Strengths/ advantages of the Approach

Strengths/ advantages/ opportunities in the compiler’s or other key resource person’s view
Farmers learn basic principles of rice management and develop their own locally adapted options for improvements; the innovation comes from inside the groups.
Farmers build up individual and organisational capacity to find solutions to their problems and build confidence as efficient partners with other value chain actors.

6.5 Weaknesses/ disadvantages of the Approach and ways of overcoming them

Weaknesses/ disadvantages/ risks in the compiler’s or other key resource person’s view	How can they be overcome?
Labour intensive improvements	provision of group credit to PLAR group members in collaboration with a local microfinance institution
Learning intensive approach, with regular group learning sessions	PLAR groups elaborate their own learning programmes and curricula according to their availability and needs

7.1 Methods/ sources of information

7.2 References to available publications

Title, author, year, ISBN:

Defoer T., M. Wopereis, S. Diack, and P. Idinoba. 2008. Apprentissage participatif et recherche action pour la gestion intégrée du riz à Madagascar: Manuel du facilitateur AKF, Genève, Suisse. Defoer T., M. Wopereis, P. Idinoba T. and Kadisha. 2006. Participatory Learning and Action Reseaerch (PLAR) for Integrated Rice Management in inland valleys in sub-saharan Africa: Facilitators’ manual. WARDA- the Africa Rcie Center, Bouaké, Côte d’Ivoire.

Title, author, year, ISBN:

Defoer T., M. Wopereis, P. Idinoba T. and Kadisha. 2006. Participatory Learning and Action Reseaerch (PLAR) for Integrated Rice Management in inland valleys in sub-saharan Africa: Facilitators’ manual. WARDA- the Africa Rcie Center, Bouaké, Côte d’Ivoire.