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

Nombre de la(s) institución(es) que facilitaron la documentación/ evaluación del Enfoque si fuera relevante)

Golden Valley agricultural research trust (Golden Valley agricultural research trust) - Zambia

Nombre de la(s) institución(es) que facilitaron la documentación/ evaluación del Enfoque si fuera relevante)

Ministry of Agriculture of Zambia (MoA) - Zambia

1.3 Condiciones referidas al uso de datos documentados mediante WOCAT

¿Cuándo se compilaron los datos (en el campo)?

16/01/2013

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

Sí

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

2.1 Breve descripción del Enfoque

This is a collaborative process between researchers and farmers for developing and adapting new technologies that focus on incorporating the perspectives and inputs from the farmers into the development process.

2.2 Descripción detallada del Enfoque MST

Descripción detallada del Enfoque MST:

Aims / objectives: (1)To stimulate active farmer participation in the technology development process so that local conditions and perspectives are integrated in the process. (2)Build the capacity of farmers to identify problems and contribute to selecting/improving technology options. (3) Raise farmers’ yields in a sustainable manner and ultimately contribute to increased net farm income.

Methods: A series of on-farm experiments are set up to test a range of technology options. These trials are implemented by the farmers so that vital feedback on which technology works and why it does so is collected. Suggestions for improvements are also collected, reviewed and incorporated into new designs or all together new technologies developed. The process is repeated until spontaneous adoption is evident before the technologies are promoted widely.

Stages of implementation: (1) Preparation of trial protocols for technologies to be tested (2) Identification of farmers and mobilization into farmer groups (3) Capacity building and increasing the knowledge base of farmers to effectively participate and contribute to development process. (4) Setting up of on-farm trials (5) Monitoring trials and collecting data/feedback from farmers (6) incorporation of feedback into technology development process and conducting on-station trials (7) technologies adapted or developed and introduced and the process is repeated.

Role of stakeholders: The approach was designed by national specialists where ‘best-bet’ technologies were pre-selected for testing. The role of GART was that of research and training of trainers. The supervision of the farmers was carried out by government extension workers who were supervised by the researchers and GART field technicians. The farmers implemented the approach and the decision on which technology to adopt was made by them. The land users also participated in evaluating the technologies and made suggestions on possible improvements. The decision on how best to consolidate these suggestions and incorporate them into the technologies was made by the specialists in consultation with the land users.

2.3 Fotos del Enfoque

2.5 País/ región/ lugares donde el Enfoque fue aplicado

2.6 Fechas de inicio y conclusión del Enfoque

2.7 Tipo de Enfoque

• proyecto/ basado en un programa

2.8 Propósitos/ objetivos principales del Enfoque

The Approach focused mainly on SLM with other activities (Increasing agricultural productivity, improving livelihoods )

(1)To stimulate active farmer participation in the technology development process so that local conditions and perspectives are integrated in the process. (2)Build the capacity of farmers to identify problems and contribute to selecting/improving technology options. (3) Raise farmers’ yields in a sustainable manner through technology innovation and ultimately contribute to increased net farm income.

The SLM Approach addressed the following problems: Unsustainable farming practices leading to environmental degradation and low agricultural productivity

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

3.1 Partes interesadas involucradas en el Enfoque y sus roles

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	Approach inititated by specialists based on interactions with land-users from previous programmes
planificación	pasivo	Planning was done by specialists although farmers were informed and consulted at every stage
implementación	interactivo	Land users implemented the approach with the help of specialists
monitoreo y evaluación	pasivo	Monitoring/evaluation was done by the specialists together with the land users as well as external evaluators
Research	interactivo	Research was done by the specialists together with the land users

3.3 Flujograma (si estuviera disponible)

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

Especifique quién decidió la selección de las Tecnología/ Tecnologías a implementarse:

• principalmente usuarios de tierras con el apoyo de especialistas MST

Explique:

The choice of which technology to test was made by the specialist but the choice of which technology to implement was made by the land users

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

4.1 Construcción de capacidades / capacitación

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

Sí

Especifique quién fue capacitado:

• usuarios de tierras
• personal de campo/ consejeros

Forma de capacitación:

• de agricultor a agricultor
• áreas de demostración
• reuniones públicas

Temas avanzados:

soil conservation and soil fertility improvement, how to use the conservation agricultural technologies, crop-livestock integration

4.2 Servicio de asesoría

¿Los usuarios de tierras tienen acceso a un servicio de asesoría?

Sí

Especifique si servicio proporcionado se realizó:

• en los campos de los usuarios de tierras

Describa/ comentarios:

Name of method used for advisory service: Training of Trainers; Key elements: trainig of goverment extension workers and NGOs promoting of conservation agriculture (CA), on-farm demonstrations, field days

Advisory service is inadequate to ensure the continuation of land conservation activities; There are too few extension workers and there aren’t sufficient training manuals

4.3 Fortalecimiento institucional (desarrollo institucional)

¿Se establecieron o fortalecieron instituciones mediante el Enfoque?

• sí, moderadamente

Especifique el nivel o los niveles en los que se fortalecieron o establecieron las instituciones:

• local

Especifique el tipo de apoyo:

• construcción de capacidades/ entrenamiento
• equipo

Proporcione detalles adicionales:

Capacity building of local cooperatives and farmer associations, training of trainers and practical demonstrations

4.4 Monitoreo y evaluación

¿El monitoreo y la evaluación forman parte del Enfoque?

Sí

Comentarios:

bio-physical aspects were regular monitored by project staff, land users through observations; indicators: Soil properties, moisture conservation

bio-physical aspects were ad hoc monitored by project staff through measurements; indicators: soil miosture, soil fertility

technical aspects were regular monitored by project staff through observations; indicators: Yield, production area, labour, timeliness

technical aspects were None monitored by project staff through measurements; indicators: equipment breakdowns

socio-cultural aspects were None monitored by project staff through observations; indicators: Gender, mindset, status

economic / production aspects were None monitored through observations; indicators: Yields, labour inputs, costs, income, adoption

no. of land users involved aspects were monitored through observations

There were several changes in the Approach as a result of monitoring and evaluation: There was more emphasis on on-farm trials as the project went on with more training on weeding techniques and crop-livestock integration

There were several changes in the Technology as a result of monitoring and evaluation: The Magoye Ripper (T_ZAM003en) was modified to penetrate deeper and an altogether new technology called the Magoye Planter (Strip Tillage T_ZAM002en) was developed to overcome some of the constraints of the Magoye Ripper.

4.5 Investigación

¿La investigación formó parte del Enfoque?

Sí

Especifique los temas:

• tecnología

Proporcione detalles adicionales e indique quién hizo la investigación:

Research by GART focused on equipment development and adaptation of soil improvement technologies to make Conservation Agriculture (CA) a viable option for animal draft farmers

Research was carried out both on station and on-farm

5.1 Presupuesto anual para el componente MST del Enfoque

Si no se conoce el presupuesto anual preciso, indique el rango:

• 2,000-10,000

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

Approach costs were met by the following donors: local community / land user(s) (Land preparation by land user(s)): 100.0%

5.2 Apoyo financiero/material proporcionado a los usuarios de tierras

¿Los usuarios de tierras recibieron financiamiento/ apoyo material para implementar la Tecnología/ Tecnologías? :

Sí

Si respondió sí, especifique el tipo o los tipos de apoyo, condiciones y proveedor(es) :

Mostly contributions from EU supplemented by finances from commercial activities i.e. commercial crop production and contract research

5.3 Subsidios para insumos específicos (incluyendo mano de obra)

• equipo

Si la mano de obra de usuarios de tierras fue un insumo sustancial, ¿fue:

• voluntario?

Comentarios:

GART only provided technical support while the farmer provided all the inputs, labour

5.4 Crédito

¿Se proporcionó crédito bajo el Enfoque para actividades MST?

No

6.1 Impactos del Enfoque

6.2 Motivación principal del usuario de la tierra para implementar MST

6.3 Sostenibilidad de las actividades del Enfoque

¿Pueden los usuarios de tierras sostener lo que se implementó mediante el Enfoque (sin apoyo externo)?

• sí

Si respondió que sí, describa cómo:

Adoption rates for Conservation Agriculture are still fairly low indicating that the practice is still fairly new and the technologies still need to be adapted and refined to suit local conditions. The farmers still need technical support until the bottlenecks with the practices are addressed and there is evident spontaneous adoption. This all depends on how well research and planners respond to the current challenges.

6.4 Fortalezas/ ventajas del Enfoque

Fuerzas/ ventajas/ oportunidades desde la perspectiva del usuario de la tierra
Farmers well informed of current developments and technology advancements (How to sustain/ enhance this strength: Training farmers on current developments and technology advancements)

Fuerzas/ ventajas/ oportunidades desde la perspectiva del compilador o de otra persona de referencia clave
Farmers organizations strengthened (How to sustain/ enhance this strength: Capacity building)
There is strong farmer involvement in technology adaptation (How to sustain/ enhance this strength: Increase the farmers knowledge base to ensure effective participation)

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?
Too little emphasis on knowledge transfer and too much on practical demonstrations and ‘how-to’ training.	Focus more on understanding principles and technology selection

7.1 Métodos/ fuentes de información

7.2 Referencias a publicaciones disponibles

Título, autor, año, ISBN:

Impact study on the acceptance of the Magoye Ripper, Piet Stevens, David Samazaka, Ab Wanders, Douglas Moono, 2002 Conservation farming in Zambia, Steven Haggblade, Gelson Tembo, October 2003 Social-economic analysis of conservation agriculture in southern Africa, FAO, 2011Conservation farming in Zambia, Conservation farming unit (CFU), 2011

¿Dónde se halla disponible? ¿Costo?

GART/free onlineINDABA Project, Michigan State University/free onlineFAO/free onlinecfu@zamnet.zm

Título, autor, año, ISBN:

Conservation farming in Zambia, Steven Haggblade, Gelson Tembo, October 2003

¿Dónde se halla disponible? ¿Costo?

INDABA Project, Michigan State University/free online

Título, autor, año, ISBN:

Social-economic analysis of conservation agriculture in southern Africa, FAO, 2011

¿Dónde se halla disponible? ¿Costo?

FAO/free online

Título, autor, año, ISBN:

Conservation farming in Zambia, Conservation farming unit (CFU), 2011

¿Dónde se halla disponible? ¿Costo?

cfu@zamnet.zm