Enfoques

Farmer field schools on integrated plant nutrient systems [Nepal]

Krishak Pathsala (Nepali)

approaches_2351 - Nepal

Visualizar secciones

Expandir todo
Completado: 72%

1. Información general

1.2 Detalles de contacto de las personas de referencia e instituciones involucradas en la evaluación y la documentación del Enfoque

Persona(s) de referencia clave/s

Especialista MST:
Especialista MST:

Soil Management Directorate

+977 1 5520314

Department of Agriculture

Harihar Bhawan, Lalitpur

Nepal

Especialista MST:

Team Leader Sustainable Sustainable Soil Management Programme (SSMP)

+977 1 5543591

ssmp@helvetas.org.np

Sustainable Soil Management Programme (SSMP)

GPO Box 688, Kathmandu

Nepal

Nombre del proyecto que facilitó la documentación/ evaluación del Enfoque (si fuera relevante)
Sustainable Soil Management Programme, Nepal (SSMP)
Nombre de la(s) institución(es) que facilitaron la documentación/ evaluación del Enfoque si fuera relevante)
HELVETAS (Swiss Intercooperation)

1.3 Condiciones referidas al uso de datos documentados mediante WOCAT

El compilador y la/s persona(s) de referencia claves aceptan las condiciones acerca del uso de los datos documentados mediante WOCAT :

1.4 Referencia/s al/los Cuestionario(s) de Tecnologías MST

Legume integration
technologies

Legume integration [Nepal]

Integration of leguminous crops as intercrops on terrace risers or as relay crops

  • Compilador: Richard Allen

2. Descripción del Enfoque MST

2.1 Breve descripción del Enfoque

Participatory and collaborative learning through the farmer field school approach

2.2 Descripción detallada del Enfoque MST

Descripción detallada del Enfoque MST:

There are different ways of carrying out agricultural extension. Farmer field schools represent a participatory approach that directly reaches farmers and addresses their day-to-day problems. The concept of farmer field schools builds on the belief that farmers are the main source of knowledge and experience in carrying out farm operations, in contrast to conventional top-down approaches that place most value on scientists' findings. The term 'farmer field schools' came from the Indonesian expression 'sekolah lapangan' which means 'field school'. It is a group based learning approach, which brings together concepts and method of agro-ecology, experiential education, and community development. The first field schools were established in 1989 in central Java when 50 plant protection officers tested and developed field training methods as part of an integrated pest management (IPM) training of trainers course. Two hundred field schools were established in that season involving 5,000 farmers. The following season, in 1990, an additional 45,000 farmers joined field schools run by 450 crop protection officers.
The same approach is being used in Nepal's integrated pest management programme. Several consultation meetings and workshops were held at national level to put the integrated nutrient management concept into practice. These meetings led to farmer field schools being recognised as an appropriate approach for putting this concept into practice. The approach was piloted in 2000 and 2001 and fully initiated in 2002 when 32 farmer field schools were run with support from SSMP. As far as SSMP knows, farmer field schools on integrated plant nutrient systems have been run since SSMP's involvement. The Government of Nepal's National Fertiliser Policy now recognises integrated plant nutrient systems as a concept to improve the efficient use of different nutrient inputs, and farmer field schools as an appropriate technology and extension approach for soil and plant nutrient management in Nepal. So far some 226 farmer field schools have been run in Nepal on integrated plant nutrient systems reaching more than 5,000 households.

2.3 Fotos del Enfoque

2.5 País/ región/ lugares donde el Enfoque fue aplicado

País:

Nepal

Región/ Estado/ Provincia:

Midhills

2.8 Propósitos/ objetivos principales del Enfoque

Transfer of technology to farmers on soil and plant nutrition management. Empowerment of farmers. Production of healthy crops without negative environmental effects.
The SLM Approach addressed the following problems: Lack of effective and efficient ways of transferring technologies to farmers. Conventional approach of technology transfer, where farmers are believed to have poor knowledge and skills. Farmers are always perceived as a recipient of technology and knowledge

2.9 Condiciones que facilitan o impiden la implementación de la/s Tecnología/s aplicadas bajo el Enfoque

normas y valores sociales/ culturales/ religiosos
  • impiden

Group: unintegrated, less organised group

conocimiento de MST, acceso a apoyo técnico
  • impiden

Soil-fertility management, plant nutrient dynamics

otros
  • impiden

Extension: Top-down, technology-centred, not farmer-centred

3. Participación y roles de las partes interesadas involucradas

3.1 Partes interesadas involucradas en el Enfoque y sus roles

  • usuarios locales de tierras/ comunidades locales
  • especialistas MST/consejeros agrícolas
3.2 Involucramiento de los usuarios locales de tierras/ comunidades locales en las distintas fases del Enfoque
Involucramiento de los usuarios locales de tierras/ comunidades locales Especifique quién se involucró y describa las actividades
iniciación/ motivación interactivo Participatory approach: group discussions involving all local stakeholders
planificación interactivo Orientation workshop involving all stakeholders - farmers participation is crucial
implementación interactivo Farmers are the key actors with trained staff of collaborating institutions (CI) facilitating the process
monitoreo y evaluación interactivo Farmers evaluate and monitor jointly on a regular basis
Research auto-movilización Farmer-led experimentation based on local needs and context

3.3 Flujograma (si estuviera disponible)

Descripción:

Farmer field schools are usually facilitated by a field staff member of a collaborating institution and funded by SSMP. The facilitators are supported technically by the regional soil testing

3.4 La toma de decisiones en la selección de Tecnología(s) MST

Especifique quién decidió la selección de las Tecnología/ Tecnologías a implementarse:
  • solo por especialistas MST
Explique:

In Nepal under the SSMP, farmer field schools have only been implemented to 'teach' integrated plant nutrient systems, there is no choice of technology.
Decisions on the method of implementing the SLM Technology were made by by SLM specialists alone (top-down). The curriculum for the farmer field school was developed by SSMP and the Government's Soil Management Directorate

4. Apoyo técnico, fortalecimiento institucional y gestión del conocimiento

4.1 Construcción de capacidades / capacitación

¿Se proporcionó la capacitación a usuarios de tierras/ otras partes interesadas?

Especifique quién fue capacitado:
  • usuarios de tierras
  • personal de campo/ consejeros
Forma de capacitación:
  • de agricultor a agricultor
  • áreas de demostración
  • reuniones públicas
  • cursos
Temas avanzados:

A training of trainers course is provided to selected staff from the collaborating institutions who have been involved substantially in agriculture development and farming practices activities. Seven days basic training on integrated plant nutrient systems and farmer field schools is provided. There is provision for a sharing forum at district level based on the demand of staff involved in conduc

4.3 Fortalecimiento institucional (desarrollo institucional)

¿Se establecieron o fortalecieron instituciones mediante el Enfoque?
  • sí, mucho
Especifique el nivel o los niveles en los que se fortalecieron o establecieron las instituciones:
  • local
Especifique el tipo de apoyo:
  • financiero
  • construcción de capacidades/ entrenamiento
Proporcione detalles adicionales:

Local level organisations are involved in carrying out the farmer field schools. Local institutions are supported financially and technically by SSMP. The major aim of this approach is to build local

4.4 Monitoreo y evaluación

¿El monitoreo y la evaluación forman parte del Enfoque?

Comentarios:

socio-cultural aspects were regular monitored through observations; indicators: status
bio-physical aspects were regular monitored through measurements; indicators: nitrate, nitrogen, pH, organic matter, P and K, yield measurements
technical aspects were regular monitored through observations; indicators: cash income
economic / production aspects were regular monitored through observations

4.5 Investigación

¿La investigación formó parte del Enfoque?

Especifique los temas:
  • tecnología
Proporcione detalles adicionales e indique quién hizo la investigación:

It is difficult to compare results if many treatments are applied at the same time in a plot. Therefore, it is always advised that component trials are run for different treatments. Such trials make for easier understanding of the different treatments and enable farmers to see the effects of particular treatments.

5. Financiamiento y apoyo material externo

5.1 Presupuesto anual para el componente MST del Enfoque

Comentarios (ej. fuentes principales de financiamiento/ donantes principales):

Approach costs were met by the following donors: local government (district, county, municipality, village etc) (participants): 20.0%; other (development project): 80.0%

6. Análisis de impacto y comentarios de conclusión

6.1 Impactos del Enfoque

¿El Enfoque ayudó a los usuarios de tierras a implementar y mantener Tecnologías MST?
  • No
  • Sí, un poco
  • Sí, moderadamente
  • Sí, mucho

Attendance at farmer field schools has led to many farmers adopting practices that have improved the fertility status of their soils and have increased crop productivity. Most of these farmers have realised the need for the judicious use of local and external resources to increase crop production

6.3 Sostenibilidad de las actividades del Enfoque

¿Pueden los usuarios de tierras sostener lo que se implementó mediante el Enfoque (sin apoyo externo)?
Si respondió que sí, describa cómo:

Capacity remains at the local level so that farmers are able to run farmer field schools themselves.

6.4 Fortalezas/ ventajas del Enfoque

Fuerzas/ ventajas/ oportunidades desde la perspectiva del compilador o de otra persona de referencia clave
Farmers are the source of knowledge; farmers adopt technologies based on their context (How to sustain/ enhance this strength: Involve farmers in a more participatory way)
Participatory approach
Farmers decide the pace of implementation and what should be done
The schools stress the importance of using local resources to reduce dependency on external resources
Increased effi ciency and effectiveness of local resources use

6.5 Debilidades/ desventajas del Enfoque y formas de sobreponerse a ellos

Debilidades/ desventajas/ riesgos desde la perspectiva del compilador o de otra persona de referencia clave ¿Cómo sobreponerse a ellas?
Farmer field schools need time and their costs are higher than other similar approaches
Non-technical staff are often involved in carrying out farmer field schools Ensure capacity building and regular sharing forums

7. Referencias y vínculos

7.1 Métodos/ fuentes de información

  • visitas de campo, encuestas de campo
  • entrevistas con usuarios de tierras

7.2 Referencias a publicaciones disponibles

Título, autor, año, ISBN:

Paudel, C.L.; Regmi, B.D.; Schulz, S. (2005) 'Participatory Innovation Development - Experiences of the Sustainable Soil Management Programme in Nepal

Título, autor, año, ISBN:

SSMP (2003) Introduction to Integrated Plant Nutrient Systems (in Nepali). Kathmandu: Sustainable Soil Management Programme

¿Dónde se halla disponible? ¿Costo?

SSMP

Título, autor, año, ISBN:

In Kolff, A.; van Veldhuizen, L.; Wettasinha, C. (eds) Farmer Centred Innovation Development ???? Experiences and Challenges from South Asia, pp. 109-126. Bern: Intercooperation

¿Dónde se halla disponible? ¿Costo?

SSMP

Vínculos y módulos

Expandir todo Colapsar todos

Módulos