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

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

Scaling-up SLM practices by smallholder farmers (IFAD)

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

Uganda Landcare Network (ULN) - Uganda

1.3 Conditions regarding the use of data documented through WOCAT

When were the data compiled (in the field)?

12/12/2017

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

Yes

2.1 Short description of the Approach

A demonstration site is established where farmers come and learn about good intercropping practices. They are then tasked to replicate this practice at their homes in the baby demos.

2.2 Detailed description of the Approach

Detailed description of the Approach:

The baby demo approach involves establishing a mother demo in one location where members of the farmer group can come and learn about the technology of interest (intercropping in this case). The farmers who participate in the demo are then tasked to replicate what is carried out in the demo by establishing smaller baby demos at their homes so that whatever is performed in the mother demo, they transfer the knowledge to their own baby demos. This helps to take the ideas in the demonstration to the farmers' homes so that they can appreciate what is being done on the demo and own the technology being implemented.
This approach was promoted because most farmers in northern Uganda practice inappropriate intercropping methods where they plant together two cereals in the same garden and call it an inter crop e.g maize and rice or millet and sorghum. Baby demo helps the farmers to know that they can implement the practices on their own hence increasing sustainability of the approach. It also helps neighbours and family members who are not participating in the demonstration activities to learn from the baby demo.
During the project activities, a demonstration site was identified in collaboration with the farmer group, a field was established by the group members consisting of 35 people on average (composed of men, women and youth). The demo area measured about 10m x 10m. Each participant was then given a handful of seeds to go and establish their demo of approximately 8m2 on estimate.
The farmers then implemented the demo and baby demos with intercropping of maize and beans. Joint monitoring and evaluation was later carried out.

2.3 Photos of the Approach

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

2.6 Dates of initiation and termination of the Approach

2.7 Type of Approach

• project/ programme based

2.8 Main aims/ objectives of the Approach

improving farming systems resilience, farmers appreciation of the technology within their own farms

2.9 Conditions enabling or hindering implementation of the Technology/ Technologies applied under the Approach

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	external support	CIAT-draft of project for increasing food security and farming systems resilience in East Africa through wide scale adoption of Climate Smart Agricultural Practices
planning	external support	CIAT/IITA/IFAD-establishment of objecttives, sourcing of funds.
implementation	interactive	farmer groups formed, then they implement the demo at demo site and baby demos at their own homes. Stakeholders at village, sub-county, district and national levels also involved.
monitoring/ evaluation	interactive	Participatory monitoring and evaluation where farmers were able to rank the performance of their crops under the demo and baby demos, challenges, and possible solutions.

3.3 Flow chart (if available)

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

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

• all relevant actors, as part of a participatory approach

Explain:

Rappid appraisal with farmers to establish the needs of the farmers

Specify on what basis decisions were made:

• evaluation of well-documented SLM knowledge (evidence-based decision-making)

4.1 Capacity building/ training

Was training provided to land users/ other stakeholders?

Yes

Specify who was trained:

• land users

If relevant, specify gender, age, status, ethnicity, etc.

all gender, age group and people of different status quo

Form of training:

• demonstration areas

Subjects covered:

intercropping with legumes and cereals

4.2 Advisory service

Do land users have access to an advisory service?

Yes

Specify whether advisory service is provided:

• on land users' fields

4.3 Institution strengthening (organizational development)

Have institutions been established or strengthened through the Approach?

• yes, moderately

Specify the level(s) at which institutions have been strengthened or established:

• local

Describe institution, roles and responsibilities, members, etc.

Farmer groups for implementation of of technology, involvement of different age groups and gender in the implementation of technologies.

Specify type of support:

• capacity building/ training

4.4 Monitoring and evaluation

Is monitoring and evaluation part of the Approach?

Yes

Comments:

Participatory Monitoring and evaluation (PME)

If yes, is this documentation intended to be used for monitoring and evaluation?

No

4.5 Research

Was research part of the Approach?

Yes

Specify topics:

• technology

Give further details and indicate who did the research:

CIAT based research output

5.1 Annual budget for the SLM component of the Approach

If precise annual budget is not known, indicate range:

• 2,000-10,000

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

IFAD funded. 5 different demonstration groups were considered, one in each of the sub-county. Actual implementation cost could be obtained from CIAT.

5.2 Financial/ material support provided to land users

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

No

5.3 Subsidies for specific inputs (including labour)

• agricultural

If labour by land users was a substantial input, was it:

• voluntary

Comments:

farmers worked in groups

5.4 Credit

Was credit provided under the Approach for SLM activities?

No

5.5 Other incentives or instruments

Were other incentives or instruments used to promote implementation of SLM Technologies?

Yes

If yes, specify:

refreshments during demonstration activities

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:

simple and easy

6.4 Strengths/ advantages of the Approach

Strengths/ advantages/ opportunities in the land user’s view
Farmers appreciate the technology from within their homestead
Other neighboring farmers or family members who did not participate in the demo can learn from the baby demo
Farmer can easily reflect on the demo and compare with his baby demo

Strengths/ advantages/ opportunities in the compiler’s or other key resource person’s view
Knowledge spillover has a wider coverage as people who did not get opportunity to participate in the main demo would learn from their neighbors.
Project can be sustained for a longer period since the farmers can be tasked to do the baby demo in the following years.

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

Weaknesses/ disadvantages/ risks in the land user’s view	How can they be overcome?
Farmer overlook the importance of baby demos saying it looks like children playing garden.	establish a sizeable baby demo
Domestic animals eat the crops in the baby demos.	control the animals

7.1 Methods/ sources of information