Productive development and food security programme (Nicaragua)

Description

An integrated programme-based approach promoting participatory testing and extension of various SWC technologies, as well as providing institutional support.

Aims / objectives: The Association for Agricultural Community Development and Diversification (ADDAC) is a non-profit NGO, founded in 1989, whose mission is to improve the living standard of poor rural families engaged in small/medium scale farming in marginal areas to the north of Nicaragua. The main purpose of ADDAC's approach is to develop and strengthen local capacity to analyse problems and find solutions for rural sustainable development. There are five main components: (1) food security and productive development, including technological improvement and diversification within traditional crop cultivation, and extension of alternative agricultural land use practices; (2) support to farmers??? organisations; (3) promotion of gender equality; (4) identification of alternatives in marketing; and (5) provision of an alternative credit system for farming. These fields of activities are based on the principles of organic agriculture and a powerful training process - using the methodology of 'popular education', which involves participatory training and extension activities.

Methods: ADDAC initiates its work in communities through PRA (Participatory Rural Appraisal) - evaluating problems and potential solutions. These serve as a base for the formulation of project proposals which are then submitted to interested financing organisations. Further steps include participatory planning, and later, evaluation, in collaboration with the land users. For execution of activities ADDAC contracts an interdisciplinary crew of specialists, which stays in the area. Twice a year a participatory reunion is organised to evaluate, and accordingly improve, the activities. Key to the approach is the formation of a grassroots organisation in each community to guarantee local management, build up alternative enterprises and promote community development. These organisations consist of representatives of local support groups, and farmers with a leading role in SWC application and extension. The organisations have various functions during the lifetime of a project: they are the counterparts of the extensionists for project execution, and later they ensure sustainability of activities. Farmers' associations are formed to improve storage and marketing of crops. Networks of local promoters exchange experience between communities and consolidate extension of alternative technologies. Demonstration farms serve as a tool for technology extension, innovation and validation.

Location

Location: Matagalpa, Nicaragua

Geo-reference of selected sites
  • -85.494, 12.921

Initiation date: 1989

Year of termination: n.a.

Type of Approach

Approach aims and enabling environment

Main aims / objectives of the approach
Support the economical sustainability and food security of land users in the project area through increased production, diversification, soil conservation and environmental protection. - develop feasible production models, aimed at self-sufficiency and the integration of land users into an alternative internal and external market; build up alternative forms of marketing and credit systems. - community development and capacity building: build-up local farmers' organisation

The SLM Approach addressed the following problems: Lack of organisation and skills to analyse and overcome underlying problems of: - poverty; lack of financial resources for investments (eg in SWC). - insufficient food/poor nutrition. - soil degradation/indiscriminate burning of vegetation. - lack of appropriate technologies. - lack of access to public services and markets
Conditions enabling the implementation of the Technology/ ies applied under the Approach
  • Legal framework (land tenure, land and water use rights): Most of the land users have individual properties which facilitates the implementation of the SWC approach activities.
Conditions hindering the implementation of the Technology/ ies applied under the Approach
  • Social/ cultural/ religious norms and values: Resistance to implement SWC technologies by some land users Treatment through the SLM Approach: Awareness raising, demonstration plots, convince with facts.
  • Availability/ access to financial resources and services: Poverty, lack of resources for investments into SWC. Treatment through the SLM Approach: Support in the form of credit, basically in kind but also in cash (see credit section).
  • Institutional setting: Lack of collaboration between land users. Treatment through the SLM Approach: Strengthen farmers' organisation.
  • Legal framework (land tenure, land and water use rights): Lack of land use rights. Treatment through the SLM Approach: Problem cannot be resolved under the project.

Participation and roles of stakeholders involved

Stakeholders involved in the Approach and their roles
What stakeholders / implementing bodies were involved in the Approach? Specify stakeholders Describe roles of stakeholders
local land users/ local communities The integration of women is a key element of the approach. Nevertheless, there are moderate differences due to cultural factors: men are mainly in charge of agricultural activities, whereas women work in the household.
SLM specialists/ agricultural advisers
national government (planners, decision-makers)
Involvement of local land users/ local communities in the different phases of the Approach
none
passive
external support
interactive
self-mobilization
initiation/ motivation
x
rapid/participatory rural appraisal; participatory planning in public meetings
planning
x
public meetings, workshops/seminars; assemblies for municipal planning (elaboration of community action plan)
implementation
x
responsibility for major steps; execution of the action plans where each community decides
monitoring/ evaluation
x
Mainly: public meetings; partly: workshop/seminars, measurements/observations; a specialist is in charge of the continuation of activities and of the planning process with each community; annual assembly of delegates representing all communities assisted by ADDAC
Research
x
on-farm; on-farm experimentation with interested land users: assessment of different technologies (variety tests, evaluation of ecological effects, etc)
Flow chart

Decision-making on the selection of SLM Technology

Decisions were taken by

  • land users alone (self-initiative)
  • mainly land users, supported by SLM specialists
  • all relevant actors, as part of a participatory approach
  • mainly SLM specialists, following consultation with land users
  • SLM specialists alone
  • politicians/ leaders

Decisions were made based on

  • evaluation of well-documented SLM knowledge (evidence-based decision-making)
  • research findings
  • personal experience and opinions (undocumented)

Technical support, capacity building, and knowledge management

The following activities or services have been part of the approach
Capacity building/ training
Training was provided to the following stakeholders
  • land users
  • field staff/ advisers
Form of training
  • on-the-job
  • farmer-to-farmer
  • demonstration areas
  • public meetings
  • courses
Subjects covered

The form of training promoted by ADDAC is called 'popular education'. It is a continuous and participatory process of mutual learning between farmers and technicians, based on a course of 'action - reassessment - action', with the aim of re-establishing indigenous knowledge, improving local self-esteem and the ability to analyse innovations, and, in the long term, to build up the capacity withi

Advisory service
Advisory service was provided
  • on land users' fields
  • at permanent centres
Key elements: demonstration areas, technical assistance through farm visits, farmer-to-farmer extension, local promoters organised into 'Local Support Groups', associated network.
Institution strengthening
Institutions have been strengthened / established
  • no
  • yes, a little
  • yes, moderately
  • yes, greatly
at the following level
  • local
  • regional
  • national
Describe institution, roles and responsibilities, members, etc.
Type of support
  • financial
  • capacity building/ training
  • equipment
  • building up groups (see Annexe 3)
Further details
Monitoring and evaluation
Socio-cultural aspects were ad hoc monitored by 0 through observations; indicators: land users needs Economic / production aspects were ad hoc monitored by 0 through observations; indicators: nutritional security, cost-benefit-ratio, deversification, organic products, certified production, production for markets No. of land users involved aspects were regular monitored by 0 through measurements; indicators: strategic plan, progress of project Management of Approach aspects were regular monitored by None through measurements; indicators: None Training aspects were regular monitored by None through observations; indicators: land users trained as local promoters There were several changes in the Approach as a result of monitoring and evaluation: at the beginning the approach consisted only of two components: training and research. Then it was broadened to involve extension of SWC technologies and promotion of crop diversification. Later the credit programme and the organisational component became part of the approach. The approach activities are supposed to be a continuously expanded based on the needs of the land users.
Research
Research treated the following topics
  • sociology
  • economics / marketing
  • ecology
  • technology

Research is carried out on demonstration farms through local promoters. Topics include on-farm testing of technologies, and adaptive trials with maize and pea varieties.

Financing and external material support

Annual budget in USD for the SLM component
  • < 2,000
  • 2,000-10,000
  • 10,000-100,000
  • 100,000-1,000,000
  • > 1,000,000
Precise annual budget: n.a.
Approach costs were met by the following donors: international non-government (-): 90.0%; national non-government (-): 10.0%
The following services or incentives have been provided to land users
  • Financial/ material support provided to land users
  • Subsidies for specific inputs
  • Credit
  • Other incentives or instruments
partly financed
fully financed
equipment: tools

x
community infrastructure

x

Labour by land users was

Credit

Impact analysis and concluding statements

Impacts of the Approach
No
Yes, little
Yes, moderately
Yes, greatly
Did the Approach help land users to implement and maintain SLM Technologies?

x
Did other land users / projects adopt the Approach?

There are 6 more projects assisted by ADDAC, which use the same approach in the north of Nicaragua.

x
Main motivation of land users to implement SLM
Sustainability of Approach activities
Can the land users sustain what hat been implemented through the Approach (without external support)?

Conclusions and lessons learnt

Strengths: land user's view
Strengths: compiler’s or other key resource person’s view
  • Growing active integration of women (25% more contribution to farm income and >25% more participation in decision making in comparison with non-participants) (How to sustain/ enhance this strength: Keep the gender programme as a component of the approach.)
  • Farmers' organisations: build up capacity for autonomous management of alternative development activities (How to sustain/ enhance this strength: Integrate more farmers in the baseline organisations.)
  • Efficient extension method: 86% of involved land users apply more than 3 different SWC technologies promoted by the approach which contributes to sustainable development of the region (How to sustain/ enhance this strength: Maintain and extend present farmer-to-farmer extension system: continue training of local promoters, network of promoters, local support group.)
  • Evaluation of land users' needs and involvement of new approach components according to their needs; continuous mutual learning process between land users and between land users and extensionists/specialists (How to sustain/ enhance this strength: Continue the present 6-monthly evaluation procedures; implement a system of information, communication, evaluation and monitoring to analyse the impact of the approach activities.)
  • Increasing self-esteem of the people.
Weaknesses/ disadvantages/ risks: land user's viewhow to overcome
Weaknesses/ disadvantages/ risks: compiler’s or other key resource person’s viewhow to overcome
  • Process takes long and requires high inputs of human resources and materials In an integrated approach with strong participation of land users this problem is unavoidable; formulation of good project proposals help in finding donors to finance long-term programmes.

References

Compiler
  • Philippe Zahner
Editors
Reviewer
  • David Streiff
  • Deborah Niggli
Date of documentation: Jan. 16, 2009
Last update: April 4, 2018
Resource persons
Full description in the WOCAT database
Linked SLM data
Documentation was faciliated by
Institution Project
Key references
  • Rolando Bunch (1990) Dos Mazorcas de Ma??z Anon (1990) El peque?? agricultor en Honduras ADDAC (2002) Plan:
This work is licensed under Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareaAlike 4.0 International