Demand farmer group observing a caulifl ower field (Christoph Morger)

Farmer-to-farmer diffusion (ເນໂປ)

Kisan-kisan krishi prasar (Nepali)

ຄຳອະທິບາຍ

Wider diffusion of sustainable soil management technologies through a demand responsive farmer-to-farmer diffusion approach

The Sustainable Soil Management Programme (SSMP) is spreading knowledge about sustainable soil management technologies through farmer organisations and government and non-government partners. These collaborating institutions are working closely with lead farmers in training and technology testing. These farmers in turn work in close collaboration with their local groups. Although this approach is successfully diffusing new technologies from lead to group farmers, and on to nearby farmers, it remains a big challenge to diffuse the technologies further to the wider community.
To increase the spread of the technologies, SSMP pilot tested farmer-to-farmer (FtF) diffusion in eight midhills districts in 2002, later expanding to an additional five districts. Firstly, district based FtF extension committees were formed. Their major function is to select and train experienced lead farmers (ELF); to identify demand farmer groups; to facilitate contact and agreements between ELFs and demand farmer groups; to assess these agreements; to approve and channel funds to accepted proposals, and to monitor and evaluate the services provided. The demand farmer groups both propose the training events and select which of the currently 500 ELFs they want to lead their training. Demand farmer groups may be any group of farmers. Their proposals need to be recommended by a ‘demand actor’ such as a non-government or government organisation, a local authority, or a development project. Once a demand proposal is approved, the FtF extension committee provides funds to the demand group to pay the ELF and the other costs of the training.
Experienced lead farmers play a pivotal role in this process. They are generally progressive farmers with long farming experience who have good leadership and communication skills, are motivated to bring about change, and are interested in serving disadvantaged groups. They are trained on sustainable soil management technologies to enable them to provide training and follow-up to farmers groups outside the areas of collaborating institutions and to disseminate technologies which have proven to be appropriate and successful under local conditions.

ສະຖານທີ່

ສະຖານທີ່: Midhills, ເນໂປ

ການຄັດເລືອກພື້ນທີ່ ທີ່ອີງໃສ່ຂໍ້ມູນທາງພູມີສາດ
  • 85.518, 27.75

ວັນທີເລີ່ມຕົ້ນ: n.a.

ປີ​ຂອງ​ການ​ສິ້ນ​ສຸດ: n.a.

ປະເພດຂອງແນວທາງ
An experienced lead farmer showing his protected farmyard manure heap (Juerg Merz)

ເປົ້າໝາຍຂອງແນວທາງ ແລະ ການປົກປັກຮັກສາສິ່ງແວດລ້ອມ

ເປົ້າໝາຍ / ຈຸດປະສົງຫຼັກໃນການຈັດຕັ້ງປະຕິບັດແນວທາງ
The aims are to provide agricultural extension services with a particular focus on sustainable soil management, to build up an extension system that is functional outside of central government structures, to achieve sustainable learning from local farmer to local farmer and to deliver cost effective service.
The SLM Approach addressed the following problems: The Nepal government's agricultural extension system was widely dysfunctional during the recent conflict (1996-2006). Many agricultural service centres were disbanded and were therefore unable to provide essential services to local farmers. Many farmers, especially in the remoter areas, had nowhere to turn for technical help with their agronomic problems, often resulting in lower yields and less income.
ເງື່ອນໄຂທີ່ສະໜັບສະໜູນໃຫ້ການຈັດຕັ້ງປະຕິບັດເຕັກໂນໂລຢີ ບົນພື້ນຖານແນວທາງ
ເງື່ອນໄຂທີ່ເຊື່ອງຊ້ອນໃຫ້ການຈັດຕັ້ງປະຕິບັດເຕັກໂນໂລຢີ ບົນພື້ນຖານແນວທາງ
  • ມີຄວາມສາມາດ / ເຂັ້າເຖິງຊັບພະຍາກອນດ້ານການເງິນ ແລະ ການບໍລິການ: Lack of money for technical support Treatment through the SLM Approach: Reliance on local human resources
  • ການກໍ່ຕັ້ງສະຖາບັນ: Dysfunctional government extension services Treatment through the SLM Approach: Farmer-to-farmer exchange and learning
  • ຄວາມຮູ້ກ່ຽວກັບການຄຸ້ມຄອງ ທີ່ດິນແບບຍືນຍົງ, ການເຂົ້າເຖິງການສະໜັບສະໜູນ ທາງດ້ານວິຊາການ: Soil fertility decline and soil degradation Treatment through the SLM Approach: Sustainable soil management technologies

ການມີສ່ວນຮ່ວມ ແລະ ບົດບາດຂອງພາກສ່ວນທີ່ກ່ຽວຂ້ອງທີ່ມີສ່ວນຮ່ວມ

ພາລະບົດບາດຂອງພາກສ່ວນທີ່ກ່ຽວຂ້ອງ ທີ່ມີສ່ວນຮ່ວມໃນການຈັດຕັ້ງປະຕິບັດແນວທາງ
ແມ່ນໃຜ / ພາກສ່ວນໃດ ທີ່ເປັນເຈົ້າການ ໃນການຈັດຕັ້ງປະຕິບັດ ວິທີການ? ລະບຸ ພາກສ່ວນທີ່ກ່ຽວຂ້ອງ ພັນລະນາ ບົດບາດ ໜ້າທີ່ ຂອງພາກສ່ວນທີ່ກ່ຽວຂ້ອງ
ຜູ້ນໍາໃຊ້ດິນໃນທ້ອງຖິ່ນ / ຊຸມຊົນທ້ອງຖິ່ນ
ການລວບລວມເອົາຜູ້ນໍາໃຊ້ທີ່ດິນໃນທ້ອງຖິ່ນ/ຊຸມຊົນທ້ອງຖິ່ນ ໃນການຈັດຕັ້ງປະຕິບັດແນວທາງ ແຕ່ລະໄລຍະ
ບໍ່ມີ
ການບໍ່ປະຕິບັດ
ການຊ່ວຍເຫຼືອຈາກພາຍນອກ
ການຮ່ວມມື
ການນໍາໃໍຊ້ເອງ
ການເລີ່ມຕົ້ນ / ແຮງຈູງໃຈ
Demand creation by demand actors and experienced lead farmers; in rare cases demand is created by demand farmer groups
ການວາງແຜນ
Preparation of demand proposals and submission to committee, Proposal assessment by committee Selection of experienced lead farmer Fund disbursement to demand farmer group
ການປະຕິບັດ
Experienced lead farmer provides training in appropriate season on basic knowledge required. The training is field based on the land of members of the demand farmer group. The experienced lead farmer visits the demand farmer group two to three times after the training to provide follow-up and supp
ຕິດຕາມກວດກາ / ການປະເມີນຜົນ
The demand farmer group pay the experienced lead farmer once they are satisfied with the services provided (= direct monitoring by clients); training report by experienced lead farmers to farmer-to-farmer committees including proposing potential new ELFs from amongst trainees; end of training mo
Research
ແຜ່ນວາດສະແດງ

Organogram of the farmer-to farmer diffusion process. The detailed process is described in the operational guidelines (Paudel et al. 2002).

ຜູ້ຂຽນ: SSMP
ການຕັດສິນໃຈໃນການເລືອກເຕັກໂນໂລຢີ ການຄຸ້ມຄອງທີ່ດິນແບບຍືນຍົງ

ການຕັດສິນໃຈໂດຍ

  • ຜູ້ນໍາໃຊ້ດິນຜູ້ດຽວ (ການລິເລີ່ມດ້ວຍຕົນເອງ)
  • ຜູ້ນໍາໃຊ້ທີ່ດິນຫຼັກ, ການສະໜັບສະໜູນ ໂດຍຜູ້ຊ່ຽວຊານ ການນໍາໃຊ້ທີ່ດິນແບບຍືນຍົງ
  • ພາກສ່ວນກ່ຽວຂ້ອງທັງໝົດ, ເປັນສ່ວນໜຶ່ງ ຂອງວິທີທາງແບບມີສ່ວນຮ່ວມ
  • ຜູ້ຊ່ຽວຊານ ຫຼັກດ້ານການຄຸ້ມຄອງ ທີ່ດິນແບບຍືນຍົງ, ມີການຕິດຕາມປຶກສາຫາລືກັບຜູ້ນໍາໃຊ້ທີ່ດິນ
  • ຊຽ່ວຊານ ສະເພາະດ້ານການຄຸ້ມຄອງ ດິນແບບຍືນຍົງຜູ້ດຽວ
  • ນັກການເມືອງ / ຜູ້ນໍາ

ການຕັດສິນໃຈບົນພື້ນຖານ

  • ປະເມີນເອກກະສານ ຄວາມຮູ້ກ່ຽວກັບ ການຄຸ້ມຄອງ ທີ່ດິນແບບຍືນຍົງ (ຫຼັກຖານທີ່ຊ່ວຍໃນການຕັດສິນໃຈ)
  • ຜົນທີ່ໄດ້ຮັບ ຈາກການຄົ້ນຄວ້າ
  • ປະສົບການສ່ວນບຸກຄົນ ແລະ ຄວາມຄິດເຫັນ (ທີ່ບໍ່ເປັນເອກກະສານ)

ການສະໜັບສະໜູນເຕັກໂນໂລຢີ, ການສ້າງຄວາມອາດສາມາດ ແລະ ການຄຸ້ມຄອງຄວາມຮູ້

ກິດຈະກຳ ດັ່ງລຸ່ມນີ້ ແມ່ນເປັນພາກໜຶ່ງຂອງແນວທາງ
ການສ້າງຄວາມອາດສາມາດ / ຝຶກອົບຮົມ
ໄດ້ສະໜັບສະໜູນຝຶກອົບຮົມໃຫ້ແກ່ພາກສ່ວນກ່ຽວຂ້ອງດັ່ງລຸ່ມນີ້
  • ຜູ້ນໍາໃຊ້ດິນ
  • ພະນັກງານພາກສະໜາມ / ທີ່ປຶກສາ
  • government organisations, non-government organisations
ຮູບແບບການຝຶກອົບຮົມ
  • ການເຮັດຕົວຈິງ
  • ຕົວຕໍ່ຕົວ
  • ເນື້ອທີ່ສວນທົດລອງ
  • ກອງປະຊຸມ
  • ຫຼັກສູດ
ກວມເອົາຫົວຂໍ້

Training on the farmer-to-farmer approach was provided to different demand actors including non-government and government organisations, by resource persons closely involved in designing the approach.

ການບໍລິການທາງດ້ານການໃຫ້ຄໍາປຶກສາ
ໄດ້ຮັບການບໍລິການທາງດ້ານການໃຫ້ຄໍາປຶກສາ
  • ໃນພື້ນທີ່ຂອງຜູ້ນໍາໃຊ້ດິນ
  • ສູນຄົ້ນຄວ້າ
The approach has been accepted by the government's Ministry of Agriculture and Cooperatives as part of its Agricultural Extension Policy (2007). Phase 3 of the Sustainable Soil Management Programme (2008 to 2010) will further support the institutionalisation of the approach at the operational level.
ການຕິດຕາມ ແລະ ປະເມີນຜົນ
bio-physical aspects were regular monitored through observations; indicators: sustainability of the promoted technology technical aspects were regular monitored through observations; indicators: client satisfaction after the training socio-cultural aspects were monitored through observations; indicators: sustainability of the promoted technology economic / production aspects were monitored through observations; indicators: sustainability of the promoted technology land users involved were monitored through measurements; indicators: regular recording of attendance during meetings/trainings/follow-up management of Approach aspects were monitored through measurements; indicators: expenses, demand assessment There were no changes in the Approach as a result of monitoring and evaluation: Regular monitoring and impact assessments have led to the continuous adaptation of the approach and its norms.
ການຄົ້ນຄວ້າ
ການວິໄຈໄດ້ຮັບການຮັກສາຫົວຂໍ້ຕໍ່ໄປນີ້
  • ສັງຄົມ
  • ເສດຖະສາດ / ການຕະຫຼາດ
  • ລະບົບນິເວດ
  • ເຕັກໂນໂລຢີ

Not applicable

ການສະໜັບສະໜູນທາງດ້ານການເງິນ ແລະ ອຸປະກອນຈາກພາຍນອກ

ງົບປະມານປະຈຳປີ ໃນກິດຈະກຳ ການຄຸ້ມຄອງທີ່ດິນແບບຍືນຍົງ ທີ່ເປັນສະກຸນເງິນໂດລາ
  • < 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: local community / land user(s) (labour, training costs): 50.0%; other (development projects (seeds, trainer)): 50.0%
ການບໍລິການ ຫຼື ສິ່ງກະຕຸກຊຸກຍູ້ ດັ່ງລຸ່ມນີ້ ແມ່ນໄດ້ສະໜອງໂດຍຜູ້ນຳໃຊ້ທີ່ດິນເອງ
  • ການສະໜັບສະໜູນ ທາງດ້ານການເງິນ / ອຸປະກອນ ສະໜອງໃຫ້ແກ່ຜູ້ນໍາທີ່ດິນ
  • ຫຼຸດປັດໃຈນໍາເຂົ້າ
  • ສິນເຊື່ອ
  • ສິ່ງຈູງໃຈ ຫຼື ເຄື່ອງມືອື່ນໆ
ງົບປະມານບາງສ່ວນ
ງົບປະມານເຕັມສ່ວນ
ກະສິກໍາ: ແນວພັນ, ແກ່ນພັນ

for one season

ແຮງງານຂອງຜູ້ນໍ້າໃຊ້ທີ່ດິນ

ການວິເຄາະຜົນກະທົບ ແລະ ສະຫຼຸບລວມ

ຜົນກະທົບຂອງການນໍາໃຊ້ແນວທາງ
ບໍ່
ມີ, ໜ້ອຍໜຶ່ງ
ມີ, ພໍສົມຄວນ
ມີ, ຫຼາຍ
ການຈັດຕັ້ງປະຕິບັດ ວິທີທາງ ສາມາດຊ່ວຍຜູ້ນໍາໃຊ້ທີ່ດິນ ໃນການຈັດຕັ້ງປະຕິບັດ ແລະ ບໍາລຸງຮັກສາ ເຕັກໂນໂລຢີ ການຄຸ້ມຄອງ ທີ່ດິນແບບຍືນຍົງໄດ້ບໍ?

Depends on the technology diffused to the group through this approach

Did other land users / projects adopt the Approach?

The approach has been included in the government's Agricultural Extension Policy (2007); although it still needs to be implemented. In some districts, other development partners have expressed an interest in supporting this approach with their funds.

ສິ່ງກະຕຸກຊຸກຍູ້ໃຫ້ຜູ້ນໍາໃຊ້ທີ່ດິນ ໃນການປະຕິບັດການຄຸ້ມຄອງທີ່ດິນແບບຍືນຍົງ
  • n.a.
ຄວາມຍືນຍົງຂອງການຈັດຕັ້ງປະຕິບັດກິດຈະກໍາຂອງແນວທາງ
ຜູ້ນໍາໃຊ້ທີ່ດິນ ສາມາດຈັດຕັ້ງປະຕິບັດຕາມແນວທາງໄດ້ເອງບໍ່ (ໂດຍປາດສະຈາກການສະໜັບສະໜູນຈາກພາກສ່ວນພາຍນອກ)?
  • ບໍ່ມີ
  • ແມ່ນ
  • ບໍ່ແນ່ນອນ

ບົດສະຫຼຸບ ແລະ ບົດຮຽນທີ່ໄດ້ຮັບ

ຄວາມເຂັ້ມແຂງ: ທັດສະນະມູມມອງ ຂອງຜູ້ນໍາໃຊ້ທີ່ດິນ
  • Technologies adopted through farmer-to-farmer diffusion are likely to be more stable and sustainable because experienced leader farmers will only disseminate successful technologies
  • This approach may carry messages and content on subjects other than sustainable soil management (How to sustain/ enhance this strength: institutionalise the approach as a general grass roots-based extension approach)
ຄວາມເຂັ້ມແຂງ: ທັດສະນະມຸມມອງ ຂອງຜູ້ປ້ອນຂໍ້ມູນເອງ
  • More cost-effective for wider dissemination in comparison with other extension systems
  • Especially effective in heterogeneous environments amongst non-literate farm communities
  • Builds on farmers' field experience and communicates the technology through farmers' own words/terminology rather than through more technical extension messages from scientists
  • The service providers are directly accountable to the farmer clients, in contrast to using government and NGO extension workers who are only accountable to their institutions
  • Both the service provider and the demand groups are local farmers; this programme therefore directly benef ts only the local farming community
ຈຸດອ່ອນ / ຂໍ້ເສຍ / ຄວາມສ່ຽງ: ທັດສະນະມູມມອງ ຂອງຜູ້ນໍາໃຊ້ທີ່ດິນວິທີການແກ້ໄຂແນວໃດ
  • Financial support for the programme at present comes from a development project and will end when the project ends efforts need to be made to institutionalise the approach and seek out local sources of funding
  • Farmers' interest is mainly on technologies that are profi table in the short term and less on long term sustainable soil management expand the farmer-to-farmer diffusion process to other topics and subjects as a part of agricultural extension
ຈຸດອ່ອນ / ຂໍ້ເສຍ / ຄວາມສ່ຽງ: ທັດສະນະມຸມມອງ ຂອງຜູ້ປ້ອນຂໍ້ມູນເອງວິທີການແກ້ໄຂແນວໃດ
  • Very small project agreements; wide scattered geographic area coverage; many proposals and difficulties in fi nancial management and monitoring operational guidelines need to be reviewed
  • The success of the programme depends mainly on the abilities and knowledge of the experienced leader farmers need to put more focus on selecting appropriate candidate ELFs and better training them and more extensively exposing them to new technologies
  • The facilitation from demand actors for this process is important; but they are reluctant to do this since the institutions do not fi nancially benefit from the process
  • Experienced leader farmers are reluctant to do paper work like fi lling in agreement proposal forms, maintaining a diary and preparing lesson plans
  • Difficulties in identifying demand groups according to the expertise of experienced lead farmers increase awareness of the approach in rural areas through a comprehensive dissemination strategy using all media

ເອກກະສານອ້າງອີງ

ການລວບລວມ
  • Richard Allen
Editors
ການທົບທວນຄືນ
  • Laura Ebneter
ວັນທີຂອງການປະຕິບັດ: Jan. 19, 2009
ປັບປຸງລ່າສຸດ: June 26, 2017
ບຸກຄົນທີ່ສໍາຄັນ
ການບັນຍາຍລາຍລະອຽດ ໃນຖານຂໍ້ມູນ ຂອງ WOCAT
ຂໍ້ມູນການເຊື່ອມໂຍງຂໍ້ມູນການຄຸ້ມຄອງການນໍາໃຊ້ດິນແບບຍືນຍົງ
ເອກກະສານ ແມ່ນໄດ້ອໍານວຍຄວາມສະດວກໂດຍ
ສະຖາບັນ ​ໂຄງ​ການ
ການອ້າງອີງທີ່ສໍາຄັນ
  • In Kolff, A.; van Veldhuizen, L.; Wettasinha, C. (eds) Farmer Centred Innovation Development - Experiences and Challenges from South Asia,: SSMP
  • Paudel, C.L.; Regmi, B.D.; Schulz, S. (2005) - Participatory Innovation Development - Experiences of the Sustainable:
  • Paudel, C.L.; Kafl e, B. R.; Bajracharya, B. (2007) Training Manual on Farmer-To-Farmer Diffusion Process for Sustainable Soil Management Practices in Nepal: SSMP
This work is licensed under Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareaAlike 4.0 International