A cluster of innovators in Kabale District, Uganda, with the national coordinator, Alex Lwakuba (far left).

Promoting farmer innovation (Uganda)

Descripción

Identification of farmer innovators in SWC and water harvesting, and using them as focal points for visits from other farmers to spread the practices and stimulate the process of innovation.

Aims / objectives: The Promoting Farmer Innovation (PFI) approach seeks to build on technical initiatives - innovations in the local context - developed by farmers themselves in dry/marginal areas where the conventional approach of transfer of technology from research to extension agents, and then on to farmers, has so often failed. The approach basically comprises identifying, validating and documenting local innovations/initiatives. Simple monitoring and evaluation systems are set up amongst those innovative farmers who are willing to co-operate. Through contact with researchers, extra value is added to these techniques where possible. Farmer innovators are brought together to share ideas. Finally, best-bet technologies, in other words those that are considered to be good enough to be shared, are disseminated through farmer-to-farmer extension. This takes two forms. First, farmers are brought to visit the innovators in their farms. Secondly farmer innovators are used as teachers/trainers to visit groups of farmers - including FAOs farmer field schools in some cases. Only in this second form of extension is an allowance payable to the innovator. A ten-step field activity methodology has been developed.

Methods: At programme level, there is capacity building of in-line extension and research staff, who are the main outside actors in the programme. In each of the countries the project has been implemented through a government ministry, which partners various NGOs in the field. The principle, and practice, is not to create separate project enclaves, but to work through existing personnel, sharing buildings and vehicles that are already operational in the area. A programme development process methodological framework shows how the ultimate goal of institutionalisation can be achieved. PFIs first phase, completed in 2000, was financed by the Government of The Netherlands, through UNDP, and was active in Kenya, Tanzania and Uganda.

Lugar

Lugar: East Africa (parts of Kenya, Tanzania and Uganda), Uganda

Georreferencia de sitios seleccionados
  • 33.892, 1.88

Dato de inicio: 1996

Año de conclusión: 2000

Tipo de Enfoque
A cluster of innovators in Kabale District, Uganda, with the national coordinator, Alex Lwakuba (far left).
Farmer-to-farmer extension: a female innovator shares her skills.

Metas del Enfoque y entorno facilitador

Propósitos/ objetivos principales del Enfoque
The Approach focused mainly on SLM with other activities (Better land husbandry practices (eg composting, crop selection))

Improve rural livelihoods through an increase in the rate of diffusion of appropriate SWC/water harvesting technologies based on farmer innovation, and through farmer-to-farmer exchange visits. At a higher level: to demonstrate the effectiveness of such an approach so that it can be institutionalised.

The SLM Approach addressed the following problems: - poor supply of relevant recommendations from research for small scale farmers in marginal areas - poor delivery of SWC technologies (where they exist) to farmers - lack of motivation of research and extension staff - isolation of promising ???innovative??? SWC/water harvesting ideas which address low crop yields, land degradation and poverty - lack of exchange of this knowledge
Condiciones que facilitan la implementación de la/s Tecnología/s aplicadas bajo el Enfoque
Condiciones que impiden la implementación de la/s Tecnología/s aplicadas bajo el Enfoque
  • Normas y valores sociales/ culturales/ religiosos: Favoured farmer syndrome: where too much attention is given to particular innovative farmers and jealousy is aroused in others Treatment through the SLM Approach: Avoid working with innovators who are so exceptional that they are outside society and others cannot relate to them. Rotate the farmers who are used as learning points: in other words once another farmer has adopted the technology, use him or her as the focal point.
  • Disponibilidad/ acceso a recursos y servicios financieros : Danger of identifying innovations that are good technically but too expensive for ordinary farmers to implement. Treatment through the SLM Approach: Linked to point (1) above: beware of farmers who are too exceptional/too rich.
  • Entorno institucional: Lack of motivation of research and extension institutions Treatment through the SLM Approach: Bringing them together with farmer innovatiors
  • Marco de trabajo legal (tenencia de tierra, derechos de uso de tierra y agua): Who gets the credit for the particular innovation? Treatment through the SLM Approach: Important to make sure that an innovation is traced back within the locality to its roots, identifying the 'owner'. Especially important when a name is attached to an innovation. The existing land ownership, land use rights / water rights hindered a little the approach implementation Farmers will only invest time and effort in innovation when they have secure land use rights (though not necessarily ownership), which is the case in all the areas where PFI has been operational. Access to land for women was a problem which inhibits women innovating.
  • Otros: Cultural: Gender imbalance in identification of innovators: women overlooked Treatment through the SLM Approach: Gender sensitisation and training: bring together the identifiers with the farmers - male and female.

Participación y roles de las partes interesadas involucradas

Partes interesadas involucradas en el Enfoque y sus roles
¿Qué partes interesadas/ entidades implementadoras estuvieron involucradas en el Enfoque? Especifique las partes interesadas Describa los roles de las partes interesadas
usuarios locales de tierras/ comunidades locales
especialistas MST/consejeros agrícolas
ONG All involved et different levels: after implementation mainly government and NGO
gobierno nacional (planificadores, autoridades) All involved et different levels: after implementation mainly government and NGO
organización internacional All involved et different levels: after implementation mainly government and NGO
Agencia líder
International specialists in collaboration with/after discussions with national specialists and land users
Involucramiento de los usuarios locales de tierras/ comunidades locales en las distintas fases del Enfoque
ninguno
pasivo
apoyo externo
interactivo
auto-movilización
iniciación/ motivación
public meetings, interviews/questionnaires, workshops/seminars, rapid/participatory rural appraisal; interviews/Participatory Rural Appraisals etc
planificación
rapid/participatory rural appraisal, interviews/questionnaires, public meetings, workshops/seminars; interviews/Participatory Rural Appraisals etc
implementación
Mainly: farmer-to-farmer exchange, responsibility for minor steps; partly: responsibility for major steps; interviews/Participatory Rural Appraisals etc
monitoreo y evaluación
Mainly: public meetings, measurements/observations; partly: workshop/seminars; monitoring, using forms designed mainly by specialists
Research
on-farm
Flujograma

Farmer innovation methodology left: Field activities: the ten steps– from identification through to using innovators as trainers. (Critchley, 2000) right: Programme development processes: the framew

La toma de decisiones en la selección de Tecnología MST

Las decisiones fueron tomadas por

  • solamente usuarios de tierras (autoiniciativa)
  • principalmente usuarios de tierras con el apoyo de especialistas MST
  • todos los actores relevantes, como parte de un enfoque participativo
  • principalmente por especialistas MST en consulta con usuarios de tierras
  • solo por especialistas MST
  • por políticos/ líderes

La toma de decisiones se basa en

  • la evaluación de conocimiento MST bien documentado (la toma de decisiones se basa en evidencia)
  • hallazgos de investigaciones
  • la experiencia personal y opiniones (no documentadas)

Apoyo técnico, fortalecimiento institucional y gestión del conocimiento

Las siguientes actividades o servicios fueron parte del enfoque
Construcción de capacidades/ capacitación
Se proporcionó capacitación a las siguientes partes interesadas
  • usuarios de tierras
  • personal de campo/ consejeros
  • SWC specialists, extensionists/trainers
Forma de capacitación
  • en el contexto de trabajo
  • de agricultor a agricultor
  • áreas de demostración
  • reuniones públicas
  • cursos
  • farm visits
Temas avanzados

Staff seconded from Ministries of Agriculture/NGOs provide: (1) methodology training for participating staff (2) presentational skill training for farmer innovators and (3) training in gender aspects.

Servicio de asesoría
Se proporcionó servicio de asesoría
  • en los campos de los usuarios de tierras
  • en centros permanentes
Name of method used for advisory service: Farmer innovator approach; Key elements: There are new roles for government/NGO extension staff under this methodology - as trainers and faci, Identify farmer innovators, form networks of farmer innovators, which meet, Bring farmers to se 'best bet' innovations; 1) Advisory service was carried out through: government's existing extension system, non-governmental agency; Extension staff: mainly government employees 3) Target groups for extension: land users

Advisory service is quite adequate to ensure the continuation of land conservation activities
Fortalecimiento institucional
Se fortalecieron/ establecieron instituciones
  • no
  • sí, un poco
  • sí, moderadamente
  • sí, mucho
en el siguiente nivel
  • local
  • regional
  • nacional
Describa la institución, los roles y las responsabilidades, miembros, etc.
Tipo de apoyo
  • financiero
  • construcción de capacidades/ entrenamiento
  • equipo
Detalles adicionales
training (see also Annex A3)
Monitoreo y evaluación
bio-physical aspects were regular monitored by 0 through observations; indicators: soils, moisture technical aspects were regular monitored by 0 through observations; indicators: inputs socio-cultural aspects were ad hoc monitored by 0 through measurements; indicators: number of men/women participating economic / production aspects were regular monitored by 0 through observations; indicators: yields area treated aspects were ad hoc monitored by 0 through observations; indicators: None no. of land users involved aspects were ad hoc monitored by 0 through observations; indicators: None There were few changes in the Approach as a result of monitoring and evaluation: Some changes, for example (a) increased numbers of women identified as innovators in response to gender sensitisation/training and (b) ???rotation??? of farmer innovators used for training - that is not using the same farmers all the time, as this can create envy. E.g. also better integration with government services/system for technical backstopping and extension
Investigación
La investigación trató los siguientes temas
  • sociología
  • economía/ marketing
  • ecología
  • tecnología
  • socio-economics

Theoretically, researchers should respond to the farmers??? research agenda, though this has proved difficult to achieve in practice. Apart from process monitoring of the methodology, which has led to improvements, technical research into the innovations has been relatively weak.

Research was carried out on-farm

Financiamiento y apoyo material externo

Presupuesto anual en dólares americanos para el componente MST
  • < 2,000
  • 2,000-10,000
  • 10,000-100,000
  • 100,000-1,000,000
  • > 1,000,000
Precise annual budget: n.d.
Approach costs were met by the following donors: government (national government): 20.0%; international (International agency): 60.0%; local community / land user(s) (-): 20.0%
Los siguientes servicios o incentivos fueron proporcionados a los usuarios de las tierras
  • Apoyo financiero/material proporcionado a los usuarios de tierras
  • Subsidios para insumos específicos
  • Crédito
  • Otros incentivos o instrumentos

Análisis de impacto y comentarios de conclusión

Impactos del Enfoque
No
Sí, un poco
Sí, moderadamente
Sí, mucho
¿El Enfoque mejoró cuestiones de tenencia de tierra/ derechos de usuarios que obstaculizaron la implementación de la Tecnologías MST?

Gender sensitisation training may have helped. The problem is unlikely to be overcome in the near future.

Motivación principal del usuario de la tierra para implementar MST
  • n.d.
Sostenibilidad de las actividades del Enfoque
¿Pueden los usuarios de tierras sostener lo que se implementó mediante el Enfoque (sin apoyo externo)?
  • no
  • sí
  • incierto

Conclusiones y lecciones aprendidas

Fortalezas: perspectiva del usuario de tierras
Fortalezas: punto de vista del compilador o de otra persona recurso clave
  • Builds on local ideas (How to sustain/ enhance this strength: Continue the approach and institutionalise.)
  • Revitalises the extension service (How to sustain/ enhance this strength: Train and make use of existing Government extension agents.)
  • attractive to stakeholders at all levels (How to sustain/ enhance this strength: Involve and inform stakeholders at all levels of plans and progress.)
  • Gives land users more confidence in their own abilities (How to sustain/ enhance this strength: Continue to prioritise farmers and keep them at centre of activities.)
  • Offers new locally tested ideas/technologies which work (How to sustain/ enhance this strength: Keep the focus on the farmers??? initiatives and use participatory technology development processes to improve these technologies.)
Debilidades/ desventajas/ riesgos: perspectiva del usuario de tierrascómo sobreponerse
Debilidades/ desventajas/ riesgos: punto de vista del compilador o de otra persona recurso clavecómo sobreponerse
  • Dependent on individual commitment and flexibility Training in skills and methodologies.
  • Does not follow the conventional institutional chain of command Considerable training in skills and methodologies required.
  • Sometime confers too much prestige on a particular group of ???favoured farmers??? Rotate??? farmers who are the focus of attention.
  • Researchers reluctant to respond to farmers??? agenda Effort needed to convince research staff of the need for, and potential benefits from, joint Critchley WRS (2000) Inquiry, Initiatives and Inventiveness: Farmer Innovators in East Africa. Phs Chem Earth (B), Vol 25, no 3, pp 285??¡§288Critchley WRS (2000) Inquiry, Initiatives and Inventiveness: Farmer Innovators in East Africa. Phs Chem Earth (B), Vol 25, no 3, pp 285??¡§288Critchley WRS (2000) Inquiry, Initiatives and Inventiveness: Farmer Innovators in East Africa. Phs Chem Earth (B), Vol 25, no 3, pp 285??¡§288Critchley WRS (2000) Inquiry, Initiatives and Inventiveness: Farmer Innovators in East Africa. Phs Chem Earth (B), Vol 25, no 3, pp 285??¡§288research with farmers.

Referencias

Compilador
  • Kithinji Mutunga
Editors
Revisado por
  • Fabian Ottiger
  • Deborah Niggli
Fecha de la implementación: 12 de enero de 2009
Últimas actualización: 4 de abril de 2018
Personas de referencia
Descripción completa en la base de datos de WOCAT
Datos MST vinculados
La documentación fue facilitada por
Institución Proyecto
Referencias claves
  • Critchley WRS (2000) Inquiry, Initiatives and Inventiveness: Farmer Innovators in East Africa. Phs Chem Earth (B), Vol 25, no 3,Mutunga K and Critchley W (2001) Farmers??? initiatives in land husbandry. Regional Land Management Unit, Nairobi, KenyaCritchley W and Mutunga K (2003) Local innovation in a global context: documenting farmer initiatives in land husbandry through WOCAT.Critchley et al. (1999). Promoting farmer innovationPromoting farmer innovation VIDEO: RELMA, Nairobi (cost free)RELMA, Nairobi (cost free)
  • Mutunga K and Critchley W (2001) Farmers initiatives in land husbandry. Regional Land Management Unit, Nairobi, Kenya:
  • Critchley W and Mutunga K (2003) Local innovation in a global context: documenting farmer initiatives in land husbandry through WOCAT.:
  • Critchley et al. (1999). Promoting farmer innovation: RELMA, Nairobi (cost free)
  • Promoting farmer innovation VIDEO: RELMA, Nairobi (cost free)
This work is licensed under Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareaAlike 4.0 International