On-farm research plan for technology evaluation

MISSING IMAGE

Material Information

Title:
On-farm research plan for technology evaluation USAID dryland agriculture applied research project
Physical Description:
66 p. : ill. ; 30 cm.
Language:
English
Creator:
Aridoculture Center
Publisher:
Aridoculture Center
Place of Publication:
Settat, Morocco
Publication Date:

Subjects

Subjects / Keywords:
Agriculture -- Research -- On-farm   ( lcsh )
Arid regions agriculture -- Research -- Morocco   ( lcsh )
Genre:
government publication (state, provincial, terriorial, dependent)   ( marcgt )
bibliography   ( marcgt )
non-fiction   ( marcgt )
Spatial Coverage:
Morocco

Notes

Bibliography:
Includes bibliographical references (p.24).
Statement of Responsibility:
Aridoculture Center.
General Note:
Caption title.
General Note:
Draft
General Note:
"April 1989"
General Note:
"USAID Project No. 608-0136"

Record Information

Source Institution:
University of Florida
Rights Management:
All applicable rights reserved by the source institution and holding location.
Resource Identifier:
oclc - 641293032
ocn641293032
System ID:
AA00007207:00001

Full Text









f I


g 1 ^/<-, J/ z >


/"~n,~l"v
S""


ON-FARM RESEARCH PLAN FOR TECHNOLOGY EVALUATION

USAID Dryland Agriculture Applied Research Project

Aridoculture Center \ 4- ( _--
Settat, Morocco T k

April, 1989

Introduction r

The research plan presented herein is designed to develop valid data

which will be used for the ongoing evaluation of new technnlogies as they

are developed by the Scientists at the Aridoculture Center, Settat,

Morocco. Data generated through the conduct of this plan may also be used

for overall project evaluation. a -A -L- I Co/C a 7.

The purpose of the INRA/MIAC Dryland Agriculture Applied Research 4a--c

Project (USAID N' 608-0136) is to establish a sustainable pld

capacity which is capable of providing technologies which can improve

farmer productivity. The research program headquartered at the

Aridoculture Center, Settat, Morocco, conducts applied agricultural

research which is particularly applicable to the 250-450 mm rainfall

region of central Morocco.

In order to achieve the project purpose, INRA, MIAC, and USAID have

agreed to the following Project outputs:


1. The development of Agronomic technologies and farming equipment that

are appropriate to sm ll and medium-scale dryland farmers.

2. Direct links between researchers and representative farmers V

established that provide: a) basic understanding of targeted farming'

systems b) baseline information for evaluation and feedback of

research programs, and; c) a model for evaluating economic and social










viability of alternative technologies.

3.' Links between national and international institutions involved in

dryland agriculture research.

4. A functioning and sustainable regional research station (the

Aridoculture Center).

5. A functioning and sustainable network of supporting satellite

research sub-stations for the Center.

6. A management system in place to carry out effective research programs

and develop budgets, accountability and evaluation.

7. A functioning and sustainable technology transfer unitthat is

transmitting new technology information to clients.



The plan described herein elaborates on how the Aridoculture program

will conduct technology evaluation in order to help achieve outputs 1, 2,

and 7.



On-Farm Research

On-farm research (OFR) refers to a research system where data are

collected from the farm or farm household rather than from the laboratory

or experiment station. It does not replace "on-station" research but it

complements it and adds a socioeconomic dimension to the total research

program. Aridoculture Center researchers have conducted researcher-

managed on-farm trials (RMT) for several years. These have included both

diagnostic and verification trials. Farmer participation in these trials

has included providing the land requirements and tillage requirements

prior to planting. Aridoculture Center researchers have provided all

inputs during the growing season. Biological data have been collected and

















S1


analyzed by the researchers in order to determine the need for a new

technology (diagnostic) or to determine how well a new technology works

(verification). In 1988, the Service de herche/et Developpemnent (SRD)

initiated several demonstration trials in order to demonstrate the

superiorityt f a technology package to local extension workers and

farmers. Also in 1988, Center researchers initiated farmer-managed on-

farm trials (FMT). These trials rely on the farmer's management system

and provide a suitable mechanism for the collection of economic and

sociological data in addition to biological data. They are a unique type

of verification trial.

On-farm research centered around FMT offers a suitable mechanism for

evaluating each new technology developed by researchers at the

Aridoculture Center. We assume that in order for a technology to be

accepted, it should be:



1. Superior using biological and/or physical measurements.
2. ---- --A / L
2. Profitable for the farmer who will use the technology.

3. Acceptable to the farmer who will use the technology.

4. Suitable for integration into the farmers' production system.-



FMT will pro ide biological, physical, economic, and sociological

data upen which a new technology accepted or rejected by the client

the tech ogy. It will provide a model for evaluating the economic and

social viability of alternative technologies as they are developed by

researchers at the Aridoculture Center. It will also provide a suitable

mechanism for/enhancing technology transfer/in the project area.










Project Area

The Aridoculture Program (the project) addresses Moroccan

agricultural production constraints in the 250 mm to 450 mm rainfall.

region. The Center's geographic area of responsibility is roughly the

middle third of Morocco west of the Atlas Mountains. Its western border

consists of the Atlantic Coast between Casablanca and Essouira. The

southern border runs from Essouira to Marrakesh. The eastern boundary

follows the foothills of the Atlas Mountains to the environs of Kasba

Tadla. From there the area's northern border continues northwest to

Casablanca. From west to east the area includes a flat to rolling

interior plain rising to an upland plateau. Included are the entireties

of seven provinces, parts of two others, and the Prefecture of Casablanca.

Soils, while admixed, generally vary from thin rocky reds in the south to

relatively deep blacks in the north.

Cereals and food legumes are the major crops while sheep are the

predominant livestock. Draft animals are in general use throughout. The

2.3 million hectares of cereals grown in the project area produces 45% of

the Ration's cereal crop. It produces 27% of the wheat, 56% of the

-barley, and 83% of the corn. About 500,000 ha of food legumes are

produced each year in Morocco. These legumes provide high quality (high

Protein) food for thle people of the project area. About 45% of the total

land of the project area is in permanent pasture. About 25% of the arable

land is devoted to weedy fallow each year. The 50% of the arable land

planted to cereals each year also provide forage in the form of temporar.-

grazing and/or straw. Almost all of the hay fed to livestock is barley

and wheat straw. Animals constitute the farmers "hedge" against hard

tines in this area of unpredictable rainfall.










Regional Research Regions

The Abda region of the project area is located in Safi Province,

bounded on the west by the coastal condensation zone, to the south by the

Oued Tensift, to the east by low rolling hills, and on the north by the

Doukkala Irrigated Perimeter. Annual precipitation averages 281 mm.

Soils range from reds to blacks, shallow and deep. Cereals and food

legumes are the major crops. Straw and aftermath are used for livestock

production consisting predominantly of sheep. Flocks are small to medium

sized and usually owned by one farmer or one of his close relatives, on

whose land they graze. Village units, or douars, are composed of

residential units which are often somewhat spatially dispersed, although a

center is usually recognizable.

The Abda region consists of two agro-climatic subregions: the Sahel,

or coastal plain, characterized by rocky, shallow soils and the Abda

r- inland plain, flat to gently rolling, where deep vertisols (tirs)

predominate.

The cereal producing region referred to as the Chaouia is located in

Settat Province. Annual precipitation averages 400 mm. in the north-

central part of the Chaouia, but declines significantly to the south and

east. The Chaouia is further subdivided into the Lower and Upper Chaoui'a

by an escarpment which runs from near Oulad Said in the west, northeast to

Mgarto, near Ben Ahmed. The Lower Chaouia extends from this escarpment

north to Nouasser. The Upper Chaoui'a plateau sits to south of the

escarpment and merges with the Khouribga phosphate plains to the east and

the Beni Meskine region to the south, which can be approximately delimited

by a diagonal running eastward from Mechrai Ben Abbou through Guisser to

Tlet Ouled Fares. Villages are often considerably dispersed to the north,










but increasingly grouped to the south.

The Lower Chaouia and the western and central subregions of the Upper

Chaouia plateau (Oulad Said, Ain N'Zagh, Ouled Bouziri) are characterized

for the most part by deep vertisols (tirs). Cereals and food legumes are

predominant, with very little fallow on the tirs. Corn (maize) occupies a

very important place in the rotations in the western and central part of

this subregion, but drops out rather abruptly to the east of the city of

Settat. Livestock are present, but animal production strategies tend to

be more intensive, with fattening occupying an important place.

The remainder of the Chaouia plateau presents considerable

heterogeneity in soil types and depth, with a tendency toward poorer and

more shallow soils to the southeast, although occasional pockets of tirs

are present. Crop portfolios and cultural practices vary in relation to

soil types represented in individual production units. Weedy fallow is

much more prevalent, and is directly associated with the more extensive

animal production practices characteristic of this subregion. Population

densities are lower here than in the tirs areas.

It must be emphasized that the Chaoui'a region is inextricably linked

with Casablanca, Morocco's largest urban center. Besides being a market

for agricultural produce and off-farm employment opportunities, it is the

place of residence for the holders of title to a significant percentage of

land in the region. These are for the most part small holdings that are

rented or sharecropped.

The Beni Meskine region, the boundaries of which are generally

congruent with those of the Cercle of El Borouj, is bounded on the north

by the Upper Chaouia and to the south by the Oued Oum Rbia. Its eastern

boundary blends into the Beni Amir plain. Annual precipitation averages










just under 250 mm. Much of the terrain is rough, and shallow red soils

and rocks predominate. Extensive sheep production has always played a

prominent role in the agriculture of the region. This reflected in the

land tenure structure, in which de jure much land is collectively owned,

including specifically designated common grazing lands. Large government

organized cooperatives have been established on former colonial estates

and are oriented toward animal production. The Friday market at Guisser

is one of the more important transhumant sheep markets in Morocco.

Increased population pressure on the land and mechanized traction

have both contributed to bringing more land into cereal production, with

barley occupying a predominate position, followed by bread wheat. Off-

farm sources of household income have played a very important role in the

recent development of the Beni Meskine region, influencing consumption

patterns as well as investment strategies. Increased mechanization is but

one aspect. Increasing socio-economic differentiation is another.



Target Zones

Target zones were defined in the Abda and Chaouia regions in 1985/86

and 1987/88, respectively. Each zone was chosen for its relative

homogeneity and representativeness of the region in which it is located.

Each is a 200 square kilometer rectangle, and is oriented with its longer

axes running north to south. A 10%, stratified random sample of farmers

in the Abda (154 farmers) and Chaouia (136 farmers) zones were interviewed,

to develop baseline data on crop production, capital, and farm family

production parameters. The farmers were identified in th? following

fashion: 1) Target zone boundaries were defined on a map; 2) All douars

within the zone were identified and numbered consecutivei. Ten










percent of the douars were chosen at random; 3) Census lists of all

farmers in the selected douars were obtained from the Cercle. Fifty

percent of the farmers were selected at random from these lists.

Three types of farming systems based primarily on cereals and food

legume production, were identified in the Abda and Chaoui'a zones. The

first consists of farms of tractor owners who both farm and sell custom

mechanized services. The second group consists of farms of non-tractor

owners who farm between 10 and 30 hectares of cropland. The third group

includes farms of non-tractor owners who farm less than 10 hectares.

These last two groups purchase mechanized custom services from the tractor

owners. Cereal, food legume, and sheep production are significant in each

region. Straw is baled and either kept for feed or sold.

About 1,540 farm families live in the Abda target zone and 1,360 farm

families in the Chaoura target zone. The major characteristics

distinguishing between Abda and Chaouia target zones are rainfall and

population density.

One major souk serves each zone. The major highway between El Jadida

and Essouira bisects the Abda zone while the main highway from Casablanca

to Marrakesh runs just east of the zone in the Chaouia. The Cercle is

headquartered at Jemaa Shaim in Abda and Berched in Chaouia. Major

distribution points' for fertilizers and other inputs are located in each

zone, and Centres de Travaux exist locally. Most people have access to

either animal or mechanical transport. Radio and television are evident

everywhere. Consequently, information flows freely, numerous examples of

various technologies can be seen, and willingness to test innovations is

already well established.










The Beni Meskine target zone, located in the dry region between

Yousafia and Beni Meskine, will be studied and types of farming systems

identified during the 1989/90 crop year. Livestock production is very

important in this area.



Recommendation Domains

A recommendation domain (RD) is composed of a group of roughly

homogeneous farmers. The same development recommendations are possible

for this group because of their similar circumstances. Recommendation

domains are defined in terms of natural factors such as rainfall and

soils, and socioeconomic factors such as farm size and family. A

particular agro-climatic environment where a crop exhibits roughly the

same biological expression may be sub-divided into more than one RD by

socioeconomic factors. Further, a RD does not necessarily need to be a

continuous geographical area. A thorough knowledge of farmer

circumstances and how they affect his acceptance of new technologies are

necessary in defining these RD. A tentative artitior of farmers into

RD will first be accomplished. As additional biological, economic, and

sociological data becomes available through this research, RD will be

redefined to improve homogeneity of the group.

Six RD are apparent from the research already accomplished at the

Center. They include: 1) tractor owners in the Abda target zone, and 2)

in the Chaoui' target zone; 3) non-tractor owners who operate between 10

and 30 ha of cropland in Abda, and 4) in Chaoui'a; 5) non-tractor owners

who operate less than 10 ha of cropland in Abda, and 6) in Chaouia.

However, data from the Abda Target Zone indicate that small farms (less

than 5 hectares) and large farms (more than 5 hectares) may be in the same










RD with regard to economic, price, and technical efficiencies. Based on

additional data also generated at the Aridoculture Center, we will be able

to refine and redefine RD on the basis of soil type, fertilizer usage,

crops grown and their relative importance, crop rotations, weed control

practices, tillage practices, livestock information, and other relevant

characteristics. In fact in 1988-89, we defined RD in Abda and Chaouia

based on soil types ( ). We have FMT on 10 farms in

Abda and 10 in Chaouia (not within the target zones) (Appendix I) to

evaluate Nesma vs. Saada and O nitrogen vs. 60 kg/ha nitrogen. We also

have seven FMT in Abda comparing winter chickpeas vs. spring chickpeas.

After we have completed at least one year of FMT, we should be able to

redefine RD based on variable environments (a component should be farmer

management of the crop), economic and sociological parameters.



Farmer Managed Trials

For purposes of the FMT, only farmers who fall within a specific RD

for which the technologies were designed will be selected to participate.

For example, only farmers who do not use nitrogen fertilizer will be

selected to test the hypothesis that the application of 60 kg/ha of

nitrogen will increase wheat yields and farm profits compared to the

application of no nitrogen. Thus, the RD must take into account the CK(

technology or technologies being evaluated. Also, they will be <

continually refined and redefined throughout the research process. Also,

note that a type of baseline data for the particular technology being

tested is generated at the same time as the FMT are conducted, i.e. the

farmer does not use the technology. The reasons why he does not use the

technology will also be determined and evaluated.











































~7F~'


r
~r~


Most of the FMT will be located within one or more of the three

target zones. However, some trials will be located outside the target

zones in order to/extend the population of infer if pnosih, th
entire region. FMT located outside the target zone will always be in the
same RD as farms within the target zone. By tying these farms to the
target zone through the RD, we should be able to extend our
recommendations on a particular technology to more farmers within the
region.
Even though farmers are stratified for selection with regard to the
technology being tested, they will be selected at random with regard to
all other considerations. Random samples of the 154 farmers in the Abda

target zone and of the 136 farmers in the Chaoui'a target zone will be
selected for all appropriate technologies. If these samples do not
provide adequate numbers of farmers qualified to participate, random
samples of all farmers within the target zones will be selected. Similar
sampling procedures will be applied in the Beni Meskine target zone.
Farms located outside the target zones will also be selected at random.
Farmers must be willing to cooperate and be willing to "experiment".
They will be expected to provide all inputs related to the production of
the crop with the exception of inputs related to the technology being
tested. Most technologies will need to be tested for more than one year
(we recommend three years for most); thus, the farmer must be willing and
able to devote more than one year to the research effort. A minimum of 30
participating farmers will be selected for each technology or combination/
of technologies.
of technologies.
--------~ */


-s ~bC~`
X)










Selection of Technologies

Most technologies developed by the project may be considered to be

agronomic since they will affect crop yields and/or quality. They may

include improved production practices, improved varieties, new crops, or

improved farming equipment. They will be developed to help meet the goal

f of increased food production. Technologies for FMT may be nominated by

Aridoculture Center researchers, technology transfer personnel, area

farmers, on-farm research team members, and other agriculturalists.

Research data which supports each technology will be compiled and

discussed. The final selections will be made by the FMT/team members.

The number of technologies which can be tested will be limited by the

technologies which are ready for testing, by the resources available to

the FMT teams, and by the availability of participant farmers in the

recommendation domain.



Design of the FMT

The experimental design will be kept relatively simple. Most

technologies will be tested two at a time in a 2 x 2 factorial. This

design will be of particular importance in evaluating interactions between

the two technologies.. A good example of testing technologies with this

design involves the 1988/89 FMT. These trials tested two varieties (Nesma

and Saada) and two levels of nitrogen fertilization (0 and 60 kg/ha). A

second design may be used to evaluate several alternatives of only one

technology. An example would be a variety test where several varieties

are evaluated in one experiment. A third design which may need to be used

when interactions among several factors are expected is the multi-factor

factorial. This design is more complex and will not be used for most FMT.





























VZ6LLJI


However, it provides an excellent method for the evaluation of more than

two technologies or more than two levels of each technology in the same

experiment. The overall design will be a Randomized Complete Block with

eachh FMT serving as one replication./ There will be at least 30 farms per

experiment per year. A particular experiment will usually be conducted,

on the same farms, for three years. However, some technologies may

require only one year and others may require more than three. Also, some

farmers may decline to participate for multiple years. In that case,

substitute farmers will be selected to participate. All farmers will be

selected at random. Check measurmets will be taken, whenever possible,

at random, in the farmers' production field. Samples will always come

from a field of the same crop and managed by the farmer who is

participating in the FMT. A field immediately adjacent to the trial will

be sampled when possible. Plot size will be variable but should be large

enough for good visual observations. Cereal plots which are 10-15 m wide

and 30-100 m long will be used for most FMT. Data collection and sampling

procedures will be described under sections on farmer, agronomic,

economic, and sociological performance evaluations.



FMT Research Teams

Farmer. The participating farmer is a key member of the research

team. He provides most of the physical inputs and managerial know-how for

the FMT on his farm. He provides information about his farm which will

permit it to be classified into one or more RD. His knowledge of his farm

will also allow the trial to be placed in a homogeneous area of the farm.

The farmer is likewise a teacher who instructs other members of the team

about his environment, his resources, his methods of production, his


~










problems and opportunities, and his aspirations. Recommendations made by

the FMT team will apply specifically to a particular farmer and to other

farmers in the same RD, thus, he represents many others who have his same

technology requirements.

e Field Research Team. he Field Team will have primary

responsibility for the selection of participating farmers and for the

general conduct of the experiment. They will collect all data. Each
S4-^
Field Team will consist of least three members. At least one member of

the team will be a representative of the biological sciences (usually an

Agronomist) and another from the social sciences (an Agricultural

Economist or Rural Sociologist). A member of the DPA headquarters staff

(extension member) will be invited to serve as the third member. If

someone from the DPA is not available, the third member may be either a

biological, physical, or social scientist. Depending on the technologies

to be tested and the number of trials to be evaluated, the team may need

additional members (up to five). For example, an Animal Scientist,

Agricultural Engineer, Entomologist, Pathologist, etc. may need to be

added depending on the technologies being tested and the characteristics

of the recommendation domain. A job description will be written for each

Field Team Member. Their qualifications should include an agriculture

background (if possible), a college degree, and the ability to work

together with others as a team. Appropriate short-term training will be

given to team members as necessary. Each team member will be given

responsibility for 11 research dat collection for a particular farm
,/-\ i "' -- '- --, _,_ ______ ^s -^^^ ^ ~~
during his regular visit even though it may involve other disciplines.

Thus, each team member will improve in technical knowledge and research

capabilities throughout the conduct of the FMT. His understanding of the










farm as a part of a complex biological and management system will

increase. This will allow him to make superior recommendations. A

regular report (probably monthly) will be prepared and given to each

participating farmer during the growing season. Information from these

reports will also be included in the Field Team Annual Report.

One member of the Field Team will be designated Field Team

oordiat He will report directly to the Headquarters Teaai

Coordinator. He will have the responsibility for the internal management
I ---------- -
of the Field Team including job assignments, requests for assistance from

research specialists when needed, securing cooperation of local government

officials, data analysis, preparing team reports and serving as spokesmen

for the team. However, these duties are in addition to his

responsibilities as a functioning team member. The Team Coordinator will

also recruit and supervise (with aid from team members) technicians and

workers who will be needed to help conduct the experiments. There must be

at least one Field Team for each Target Zone. One Field Team should be

able to conduct two experiments at one time. Thus, they would be

responsible for up to four technologies (2 per experiment) and 60 trials

(30 per e t).

A typical monthly schedule for the Field Team during the growing

season will include: 1) a general meeting with the FMT Headquarters Team

one day per week to review data collected during the past week, discuss

problems, and outline the work schedule for the week. 2) three visits

(one per team member) to each FMT/ (assume 10 days for visits and 2 farms

per member per day = 60 farms). Each team member will visit each farm at

least once during the month. These visits should, in most months, be

completed by the third week. 3) spending the fourth week at the









-Aridoculture Center meeting with members of other teams, with Center

Researchers, and with the Headquarters Team as needed. This time will

also be needed to conduct other duties related to the FMT, purchase

supplies, service vehicles, and make similar preparations for next months

activities. In addition to regular visits the Field Team will conduct

several tours to explain the experiment to area farmers. An effort will

be made to have at least one tour on each participating farm during the

growing season.

The FMT Headquarters Team. The Headquarters Team will be responsible

for the selection of technologies to be tested, for the overall planning

and conduct of the research, for providing regular guidance to the Field

Team, for the data analyses procedures, and for the reporting of research

results. The Headquarters Team will consist of four permanent members (an

Agronomist, and Agricultural Economist, a Rural Sociologist, and a

Technology Transfer Specialist). One member will be designated

Headquarters Team Coordinator. In addition, the Aridoculture Center

Scientist who developed the technology being tested will be aked h a

member of the Headquarters Team for that technology. However, he must be

an active member of the team with regard to his technology if he chooses

to participate. These researchers will secure technical help for the

Field Team and will serve as back-up to them when needed. They will meet

with the Field Team regularly to discuss the trials and the needs of the

Field Team. They will secure the required financial support from the

administration to conduct the research. They will supervise and evaluate

the members of the Field Team. These responsibilities will be included in

the job description of each member of the Headquarters Team. Their

qualification should include a M.S. or Ph.D. in Agronomy (or other


M A
/,14










biological or physical science), Agricultural Economics, or R'ural

Sociology. They should also have experience in conducting agricultural

research. Sr GO P' r -e .



Agronomic Performance Evaluation

Issues. From a biological standpoint, the mo important crop

characteristic affected by a new technology is yield. In most cases,

desirable responses to a new technology are increased yields and/or more

stable yields. Researchers who develop new technologies continually test

them to determine if they improve the crop for which they were developed.

They may develop, test, and discard many innovations before they decide

that a new technology is ready to be released to the public. Most of the

early testing is conducted in the laboratory or on experiment stations.

Thus, the test environment is more controlled when compared to the actual

*situations which occur on the farm. Prior to the release of a new

technology, researchers usually attempt to test it under conditions

similar to those where it will be used., Researcher managed on-farm trials

have been used for many years. by -reseachers for this final stage of

testing. However, this system still does not duplicate the actual farm

situation because the management capabilities of the farmer are not

cor -ed. Farmer managed on-farm trials appear to offer the researcher

t que opportunity to conduct this final evaluation under the same

aints and conditions that the farmer uses. A particular technology

could increase yields under researcher managed conditions but not be

profitable or acceptable under farmer managed conditions. Information

obtained through the use of FMT will help the researcher and farmer decide

if the new technology should be recommended and used. Information can









Iso be fed back into the research program to help the researcher modify

the research program to produce profitable and acceptable technologies.

Also, since farmers are actively involved in the final stages of testing a

new technology, they may accept it more readily.

Data: Biological data will be collected by the farmer, by the Field

Team and in some cases by the Headquarters Team. The farmer will be asked

to observe the plants carefully and report his observations to the Field

Team. For example, he may detect an insect or a disease before members of

the Field Team who do not visit the trial every day. He will be asked to

report rainfall amounts and other environmental factors which may affect

the crop. The Field Team will collect observation data and yield data.

(Appendix II). They will take stand counts, record levels of insect

infestation and damage, record levels of disease infection and damage,

record observations on plant color and other characteristics which may

influence technology adoption. '

Analysis Techniques: Data on crop yield will be taine by more

than one method. The first method will involve an evaluation of yield

components. For the cereals, an estimate of the number of spikes per

square meter will be made from 5 random samples per plot. An estimate of

the number of seeds per spike will be made from 40 spikes chosen at random

from each plot. Finally, the weight per kernel will be estimated by

counting 1000 kernels from each plot. Yield will be estimated by the

following formula:



spikes/m2 x seeds/spike x gms/seed = gms/m2

gms/m2 x 0.1 = kg/ha



..!-Z

sL~ '^^ YC /^T

5 I/JLC{^> )










Yield estimates using yield components of chickpeas or other test crops

wl b obtained in a similar manner.

The second method to estimate yield will be to harvest 3 to 5 sub-

- samples at random from each plot, thresh and weight the grain, and record

the yields of both grain and straw. Each sub-sample will be 4 m2 in size,

ttus gms/sub-sample x 0.25 = kg/ha. Finally, the farmer will harvest each

plot separately, weigh he grain and straw produced and report these

3. weights to the Field Team, who will convert them to kg/ha. Yield

estimates obtained by these three methods will be compared at the

Aridoculture Center. They should be highly correlated. If the yield

component method provides valid yield data, this method could be used

alone in future years. All yield data will be analyzed by the Analysis of

Variance, Modified Stability Analysis (using linear regression),

Distribution of Confidence Intervals, and other statistical techniques as

needed. The Modified Stability Analysis will allow us to confirm

recommendation domains or indicate a need to partition and redefine the

domain. The Distribution of Confidence Intervals will allow us to 4-
---- -

predict, with different levels of probability, the yields which should be

produced by the treatments on the farms within the recommendation domain.

The yield data will also be incorporated into the appropriate economic

analyses.

The observation data collected by the farmers and Field Team will be

summarized and included in the reports and publications generated by the

FMT.








19

i^x L^z ^^ ^o-^ />7s//^ J ^^-K










The Advisory Group. The Advisory Group will consist of three

permanent senior-level scientists/consultants who will assist in the

refinement of methodology, the development of appropriate questionnaires,

data gathering and analyses, reviews, etc. The group will consist of an

Agronomist, an Agricultural Economist, and a Rural Sociologist who have

experience in Farming Systems Research. This Advisory Group will visit

the project at least once per year and will be available for phone

consultation throughout the year.









Economic Performance Evaluation

Issues. Innovations may consist of a single practice or package of

practices. In either event the economic issue is efficiency. To be

adopted a practice or package must use available resources to produce more

output or use fewer resources to produce the previous level of output.

For analytical purposes the efficiency issue can be divided into two

parts. First, there is profitability pe r e. How much is net income /l

-- increased? Second, whole farm impacts. That is, does adoption of an

innovation alter a farmer's exposure to risk and result in changes in crop

portfolio composition and the amount of each crop produced?

Analysis Techniques. The first test that a new technology must pass

is profitability per se. Net income per hectare must be greater following

adoption. Since physical production levels, product prices, and input

costs vary over time, profitability must be measured over time. Partial

.budgeting analyses will be done annually for the uber of years

sufficient to obtain a good measure of average annual profitability and

nv 0'Uits variance. Breakeven analyses will also be performed to determine the
r^" ^ ^ --~---"
probability that farmers will at least recover their costs. If the new
Sp technology does not require major changes, in the farmers production

; practices, these analyses should be sufficient to make reliable

recommendations.

The second test is the change a new technology engenders in the

portfolio of crops produced. This is a more complex situation where the

new technology requires major changes in the farmer's production system.

This entails comparison of sk programming mode solutions with and

without inclusion of the proposed technology. First values of the profit

function (expressed in nominal and certainly equivalents) and with the


g a/)i~ &9 ( 20









technology are compared. Second, composition of the crop portfolio (kinds

of crops and hectares planted) are compared to identify new technology

induced effects.
Together the profitability and risk analyses delimit economic

performance of the proposed technology. First, whether or not a new

technology is profitable per se and what percent of time. Second, its

probable economic effects on the whole farm.

Data. The yearly economic analyses are based on agronomic

production, input cost, and product price information collected at the

farm level. The agronomic data comefrom FMT. These are managed by the

farmer cooperators as discussed in the preceding sections.

The FMT statistical design was developed to provide estimates of crop

response to new technologies within a specific RD. The data elements to

be collected are listed in Appendix III, following and the data collection

strategy is discussed in Appendix IV.
Data on farm size, resources controlled, and family size relate each

farm in the sample to all others. Data on innovations and crops support

the partial budgeting activities used to determine annual profitabilities

and breakeven probabilities. Data onlcrops makepssible calculation

of the variance-covariance matrices necessary in risk programming models

assessing innovations effects on crop portfolios. This test occurafter

(sufficient time serieshave been collected to permit estimation of the

variance-covariance matrix which relates income streams from various
^------------- --*----------- -
crops. It is the FMT research data on innovations and that collected for

all other crops which makes possible calculation of these matrices

necessary to formulation of the risk programming models used to assess

innovations effects on crop portfolios.


u^'


^M^^- ~C21


e~M^ o^'CPY C~-L^ -n
y ^^^ ^^t;









Sociology Evaluation

Issues. Central sociological issues include agricultural production

active nd practices within the context of the goals of the farm

household, access to and level of resources, and the strategies for using

those resources in the attempt to realize goals in face of physicaa1nd

social constraints. In regard to agricultural production objectives,

previous research indicates that small farmers are as efficient as large

farmers in their use of available resources to attain production goals.

The adoption of agricultural innovations by producers with small and

medium size farms is most likely to occur in those situations where the

proposed innovations are socially acceptable to the producers and their

households, and can be integrated into prevailing sets of production

strategies without a loss in efficiency. The proper elaboration and

targeting of innovations requires in turn the identification of groups of

producers characterized by similar production strategies, resources and

constraints (recommendation domains).

Another important sociological issue is the manner in which

agricultural innovation occurs: how information about innovations is

communicated and diffused, and the identification of patterns of adoption

that may indicate the most efficient ways to effect technology transfer.

Analysis Techniques. Sociological data are to be analyzed with a

view to assessing the impact of new technologies on farming systems, and

reasons for their adoption, partial acceptance or modification, or

rejection. Another objective of the analysis of economic and sociological

data is to better identify and define recommendation domains in relation

to specific technologies and techniques.










Sociological analysis involves the observation and identification of

recurrent patterns of behavior, and the attempt to understand those

patterns to the degree that they are oriented toward the accomplishment of

goals. An explanation of behavior (of which cereal cultural practices are

a pertinent example) requires not only an assessment of the technical

capacity of the actor, but also an elucidation of the set of family goals

and resources as well as constraints that constitute parameters within

which various objectives are elaborated and decisions made. Household

resources and goals must be taken into account in any attempt to

understand agricultural production strategies and decision making.

Different levels of decisions must also be identified. The decision to

invest resources in the production of a particular commodity will entail a

series of decisions as to the cultural practices that are to be employed,

some of which will be situational (e.g. availability of inputs, climatic

developments).

Discriminant analysis is an analytical tool that may be used for the
^ ^*~~L------ --- _
identification of types of farm households characterized by similar sets

of goals, resources and constraints. Methods specific to the study of

communication and diffusion will be used to identify patterns of

information flow.










References

1. Anderson, J. R. et al. 1977. Agricultural Decision Analysis. The

Iowa State University Press, Ames. 344 pp.

2. Barry, P. J., ed. 1984. Risk Management In Agriculture. The Iowa

State University Press, Ames. 282 pp.

3. Byerley, D., M. Collinson, et al. 1980. Planning technologies

appropriate to farmers concepts and procedures. CIMMYT, Mexico.

4. Caldwell, J. et al. 1987. Bibliography Of Readings In Farming

Systems, Volumes I-IV. University of Florida, Gainsville.

5. CIMMYT. 1988. From Agronomic Data To Farmer Recommendations: An

Economics Training Manual. Completely Revised Edition. Mexico, D.

F., Mexico. 79 pp.

6. Hildebrand, P. E. and F. Poey. 1987. On-Farm Agronomic Trials In

Farming Systems Research and Extension. Lynne Rienner Publishers,

Inc., Boulder, Colorado. 162 pp.

7. Matlon, P., R. Cantrell, D. King, and M. Benoit-Catlin. 1984.

Coming full circle: farmers' participation in the development of

technology. IDRC-189e. Ottawa, Canada.

8. Rafsnider, G. T. et al. 1988. Crop Enterprise Budgets For Cereals

And Food Legumes In Abda Region Of Safi Province, Morocco, MIAC

Agricultural Economics Bulletins, Nos. 1-8. Aridoculture Center,

Settat, Morocco.

9. Shaner, W. W., P. F. Philipp, and W. R. Schmehl. 1982. Farming

Systems Research and Development: Guidelines For Developing

Countries. Westview Press, Boulder, Colorado. 414 pp.










10. Tamehmacht, Z. 1988. Farm size and economic efficiency in a sample

of dryland farms in Morocco: A profit function approach. M.S.

Thesis. University of Nebraska, Lincoln, Nebraska.




77// Ldif


APPENDIX I

FARMER MANAGED ON-FARM TRIALS TO EVALUATE NITROGEN AND HESSIAN FLY
RESISTANCE, 1988-89

AGRICULTEU : KHABBAZ MOHAMED
DOUAR LAOOAGUEL
REGION : ABDA
SOL : CLASSES ISOHUMIQUE
GROUP CHAIN
SERIES TREES PROFOUND

-4---------- 90 a --------------

NESMA N1 113.5 S
I
----------------------------------
SAADA N1

------- ---a -- -a- -a--- ----
NESMA NO

------------*a**a*--------------a---
SAAD& NO








AGRICULTEUR ABID ABDZLLA&
DOUAR LAOUAGUEL
REGION ABDA
SOL : CLASS : CALCIMAGNESIQOU
GROUP : RENDZINES
SERIES : MOYINN~MT PROFONDE ,FAIBLEMENT CAILLOUTEUSE

----- ------- 50 a----------- W

NE~MA. N1
115 a
----- a--A------------ *
SAADA N1

----------**---- ----------***-----
NZSHA. NO

SD NO-------------------
SAADA NO


I.


_I / I/T4 '//












AGRICULTURE :ABID ABDELLAH
DOUAR LAOUAGUEL
REGION :ABDA
SOL : CLASSES ISOHUMIQUE
GROUP BRUNS ISOHUMIQUE
SERI : TRES PROFOUND
------------ 37 a ----------------

NESMA NL 113.5 m
---------------------------- r
I

SAADA N1
---------------------------------------

NESMA NO
----- ----- --f-a----a --------ee --n C
SAADA NO







AGRICULTEUR :MOHAMED BEN HADI
DOUAR :ZOUANNA
REGION : ABDA
SOL : CLASS : VERTISOLS
GROUP : A STRUCTURE ARRONDIE
SERI : TRBS MPROOND, TEXTURE FINE
4--- ...--...- 48 a. ---------

NESMA. NI 11.5 1


SAADA. N1




SAADA NO















AGRICULTEUR BAHJA ABDELKADER
DOUAR CHOUIRAT
REGION ABDA
SOL : CLASSES ISOBUMIQUB
GROUP : CHATINS
SERI : TRES PROFOND -
------------- 50 a --------------


T1.0 S
I
*


AGRICULTEU : SELLAM BER BBIB
DOUAR :OULED BRIKA
REGION : ABDA
SOL : CLASS : VERTISOLS
GROUPS : A STRUCTURE AMONDIE
SERI : TRBI PROBOND TEXTURE FINE
e----- 5--- *- 5 l. I----------. *
I IIa


19.5 a
I
q


NESMA Ni
- ---- -- -- ------- --- ---- ---
SAADA N1

- ---- ------n- -ee 0 C------- w -------
NESMA NO


SAADA NO
SAADA NO


NEISH N1


SAADA N1


NESMA NO


SAADA NO


1













AGRICULTEUR BOUMAAZ GHOUTt
DOUAR OULED HAMIDA (OUGAGDA)
REGION ABDA
SOL : CLASSES ISOHUMIQUE
GROUP CHATIN
SERIES TRES PROFOND

--------------- 30 a --------------
III II


T25 m
4,


AGRICULTEUR BOUMAAM MBAREK
DOUAR OULED HAMIDA (OUGAGDA)
REGION ABDA
SOL : CLASS : CALCIMAGNESIQUE
GROUPS : RENDZINES
SERIES : MOYENNEMET PROFOMDZ ,FAIBLEMENT CAILLOUTEUSE
4.-------------- 30 m --------------

SAADA NO 125 m
------------------------^
NESMA NO


SAADA NL


NESMA N1


SAADA NO


NESMA NO


SAADA NL


NESMA N1














AGRICULTEUR HAJ ABDELLAH BEN LARBI
DOUAR OULED HAMIDA (OUGAGDA)
REGION ABDA
SOL : CLASSES ISOHUMIQUG
GROUPS CHATINS
SERIES TRES PROFOUND
e-------------- 50 a --------------

NESMA NIL 15
-------------------------------------
SAADA N1


NESMA NO
----------------------------------
SAADA NO







AGRICULTEUR : AJ ABDELLAH BEN LARBS
DOUAR :OULED BAMIDA (OUGAGDA)
REGION ABDA
SOL : CLASS : CALCIMAGNESIQUK
GROUP : RENDZINES?"
SERIES MHOYENNEMEWT PROJMDE ,FAIBLEMENT CAILLOUTEUSE
4--...--.------- 50 a -------------

NESMA N1 t0 a
-- -e e e e-- ------ m I
SAADA N1


NESMA NO

SAADA NO
SMADA NO









--7
v9 -Z67) le10


46RICULTEUR
DOUAR
REGION
SOL : CLASSES
GROUP
SERIES






















AGRICULTEUR
DOUAR
REGION
SOL : CLASSES
GROUP
SERIES

4


: KHALIL ABDELJALIL
: URAT
SCHAOUIA
I ISOHUNIQUE
SCHATIN
PROFOND.PEU A NON CAILLOUTEUX

.----------- 47 m -.-.....--... p


16 a


:` 'HALIL ABOELJALIL
BURAT
CHAOUIA
: ISOHUNIOUE
s CHATIN
: PROFOND,PEU A NON C'ILLOUTEUX

------ 0 ------------


a ~


I
115 a



NESHA NO


SAAOA NO


NESMN N1


SAAOA N1


NESNA HN


SAADO Nt


NESMA NO


SA'AA NO


- -- ----------


D440


Cl~dNj~













AGRICULTEUR
DOUAR
REGION
SOL : CLASS
GROUP
SERIES


: BENNANI AMEUR
: LAGHFIRAT
CHAOUIA
E I SOHUMIQUE
'E : CHATIN
: MOYENNEMENT PR

4* .--------- 60 a --


IOFOND,NOM CAILLOUTEUX

-----------


|l2.S S
I


f ') -1-.- !. >'<
;'.f~y<^& ^


AGRICUL
DOUAR
REGION
SQL :


TEUR KARAKHI HAJ MOHAMED
s AARIF
CHA04A
CLASSES CALCINAGNESIQUE
GROUP RENDZINES
SERIES PEU A MOYENNEMENT PROFOND,PEU CAILLOUTEUX

-- ------- IL0 --------------

SAAOA NO 1,8.135


NESMA NO

----------- ----------m--------------
SAAOA N---

NES N------------ ----
NESNA Nt


NESMA Ni


SAADA NI

------ ---------- b -------- m----
NESMA NO


SAADA NO


I II III IIIIIIII


II















AGRICULTEUR
DOUAR
REGION
SOL : CLASS
GROUP
SEpIE


: KARAKHI FEKAK
: MAARIF
: CHAGUIA
E- t CALCMAB6NESIQUE
' : RENOZINES
i PEU A MOIYENNEMENT PROFOUND ,PEU CAILLOUTEUX

-...------- 73.17 -- 4

NESMA NO o20.5 a


SAAOA NO


NESHA lN


SAADA NI


ULTEUR : MOUFIDI LARBI
FOULED HNIDA
N s* CHAOUIA
CLASSE-- -ISOHUIflUE-
GROUPE CHAIN
SERIES PROFONO A TREES PROFOND,TRES PEU CAILLOUTEUX

-.-....------ 89.23 a ---.----.---

SAAOA NL t8.5 *


NESHA N1


SAAOA NO


NESMA NO


4-


AGRIC
DOUAR
REGSI
SOL r














AGRICULTURE
DOUAR
REGION
SOL : CLASS
GROUP
SERIES
























AGRICULTEUR
DOUAR
REGION
SOL : CLASS
GROUP
SERIES


SNAJI ASBELLAN
OULED HNIDA
CHAOUIA
E : ISOHUnIOUE
'E CHAIN
: PROFOUND A TRES PROFOUND ,TRES PEU CAILLOUTEUX

<------------- 60 a -------aaa ------

NESE Nt tLo.25
I


MAKHLOUKI BATTAH
OULED HNIDA
CHAOUIA
E ISOHUNIQUE
E CHATINS
TRES PROFONO,TRES PEU CAILLOUTEUX

4.--------..-- 40 --------------
4
NESnA NO l15
I
----------------------- w ----
SAADA NO


NESMA Nt


SAADA N1


SAADA Ni

----------------------------------
NESMn NO


SAADA NO


IIII II I J















AGRICULTEUR
OOUAR
REGION
SOL : CLASSES
GROUP
SERIES


AGRICULTURE
OOUAR
REGION
SOL : CLASSES
GROUPS
SERIES


ERRAHNI MOHAMED
EL AOUNAT
CHAOUIA
CALCIMAGNESIOUE
RENDZINES.
PEU PROFOUND


------.-------- 75 *a -----------
I I I III I II I II lIII I


110 a
I
,


TAHA BEN ABDERRAHMMA
EL AOUNAT
CHAOUIA
CALCIMASNESIQUE
DRUM CALCAIRE
ROYENNEMENT PROFONO MOYENNEMENT CAILLOUTEUX


4. ----.....--- 75 --------..----4


4
110 a
*


NESMA NO

----------------------------------
SAADA NO

~~-- ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ftft -------------~~~
NESMA Nt


SAADA NM


NtESA N1


SAADA NI


NESnA NO


SAADA NO


I.-, zI ,.







APPENDIX II
DATA COLLECTION SHEETS FOR FARMER MANAGED ON-FARM TRIALS, 1988-89
Project Aridoculture
Section de Sociologie
CRRA SETTAT


Encuata Aariculteur aut l ai' (


Noa de L'agricultaurt
Douar:
Zone :
SAU :


Essai: Especa :
Vari6t6:

A)PARCELLI


Nom de 1'enquiteur:


B)TECMNIQUES aCULTULES

1-Opiration labour


Traction Animale Traction HMcanique

Animal de Mat6tiel Traction Matirial
: iration Date Itat du trait
Sol .- -.-- ------
Pee Orig Type Olig Pee Orig Type Orig
UTA UTA









(*) Qutionnair ta-----bl l 10---01-89 p Mr H.B------A
(*) Questionnaire itabli le 10-01-89 par Mr K.SENAOUDA


PARCELL2 OCCUPATION de la PARCELLI

Eloignt Type de Sup Statut 83-84 84-85 85-86 86-87 87-81
de L'expl Sol en HA fancier











2- FERTILISATION :FMURE de OND.


Designation formula Dose Data Mode


2- SEMIS


SEMENCES Mode de seais

Au. seooir
Type Varitt6 Origine ManueL ....
a la volie an Ligne







4- PERTILISATIOH -uamug d couvrture


Designation Foruorul rigine Dose Data Stado Huaidit6 conditions
Vig6ta du sol Climatiques
-t -


5- DenSER

a-ManuaL


Main d'oeuvre
Friqence Date. Nb do jours ------ ------
Familiale Salait6e








b- Chimique.


Stado vig4 Conditi
Niveau d'infestation Produit Utilis6 DATE de la cult Climati
F M Fort Designation formula Dose



___I Ii_


6- RECOLTE
) Manuele.


P mtcaniaue._
Date Hatdtiel Origine Obsevations


OBSERVATIONS.


















I Jugement de l'Agriculteur sur la comportement des variet6s assaydes

E-- ----- -- !rrr r ----- ------------- --

-----------il wi w ---------

Enracinement
- - -------------------------- w -------------- )~------

LavBa
Lev6e
-- - tt- ---------- -rrrr l-~r ~ llrrrr r r--------- --

Tallage
------- ------ ------ ------- ------ ------ --- w -- ---ftft ------

Taille
--- -- --- -- --- ----------------- --------- w -------------

Epi

Groat -ran---------
Grossaur du *rain


--- -- m -----I

Coulaur du grain


----------------**--------

R6sistance:

*gel&a
--ee-----------e----------e

*maladies


*secheresse
---r--------------rrr

*versse
------------------------rrr

*Egrenage
-----~---------------------

Rendement

grains
----- ----- -- -----------me-

Rendement

paille
----------------------

Couleur de la farina


Formation da la patted pure


* m61angde avec.....
------------------------**

GoCt du pain pur
-----------

m61ang6e....
-------r---------- mrrr



Couleur du pain pur


* ml6ang6e avec ....
------------r-------------

Bon 2

Moyen 1

Mauvais 0


-------------


-------------


--------------









em-emm wm e -- -


M -----------


-------------


senseweeewee

-- e se e e -


-e----------.


------------.


.-----------




------------


-------------


-ft ----------


-------------



-------------



-------------
emeIIIemeemie
****IIIII***I


weeemeIIImeem


omIeimeiseme4


-------rr----


------------r-


r-------------





---r----------





--~---------


pememeammesee




---------r----





-----~rr-----


0 ----rr-------


-----------r---


------r-------


--- fft ----- m.




-r------------


-m -----------
IIeem eeIIIIII




neeme ImIemIIII










Appendix III

Data Bases and Elements

The data bases detailed in this appendix will contain the agronomic,

economic, and sociological data initially collected as part of the on-farm

research effort. These will be used to characterize the farming systems

and cropping systems being studied, the region being studied, and the

particular recommendation domain in which one or more technologies are

being evaluated. As mentioned previously, the data bases have been

partially developed for Abda and Chaoui'a. The Aridoculture Center

Agriculture Economics section has developed these data basis which contain

information on family size and composition, land resources, capital items

inventory, cereals, and corn and food legumes (see attached sheets).

Researchers in Agronomy and Sociology will aid in updating these data

bases to include additional relevant information. A modified data base

will be needed for Beni Meskine since livestock becomes a more important

component of the farming systems in that region.



Agronomic Data Bases

Extensive background information related to agronomic performance has

been and will be collected with the data base questionnaires (see attached

data base sheets). This includes information from each farmer sampled

about the number of hectares he plants to each crop, the equipment he

uses, fertilizer and herbicide usage, etc. This data will be used to

place each farmer into a particular recommendation domain with reference

to the technology being tested. For example, a farmer who uses no

fertilizer would qualify for participation in FMT where the alternative

levels are zero nitrogen versus 60 kilograms/hectare nitrogen on his wheat










crop. The actual agronomic base data will be collected at the same time

as the FMT data are obtained. This will be accomplished by including a

"farmer method" treatment in the experimental design or by sampling within

the farmer's field adjacent to the FMT. Yield will be the agronomic

measure of technology performance in almost all trials. However,

observational agronomic data will also be collected in order to help

explain the results.



Economics Data Bases

Baseline research for the Beni Meskine Target Zone will include seven

parameters. These include: 1) Cereal and food legume production,

technologies and costs; 2) Forage and livestock production, technologies,

and costs; 3) Household production and consumption functions; 4) Credit

use and demand; 5) Marketing; 6) Farm level capital and land endowments;

and, 7) Farm family age and gender structures, places of habitation, and

employment. At present a partial data base set is available for the Abda

Target Zone and one is being constructed for the Chaouia Target Zone.

Each consists or will consist of items one, six, and seven, listed above.

The individual elements of which each item is composed are listed in the

following subsections.

Each Target Zone data base set will be structured so it may be

searched on major farm and technology identifiers (characteristics). This

will permit definition of recommendation domains of interest within these

Target Zone as well as studies of the major farming systems in each Zone.









Sociological Data Bases

Sets of baseline data for the 200 km2 target zones will be organized

around seven production parameters, to include: 1) cereal and food legume

S production, technologies, and related costs; 2) forage and livestock

production, technologies and related costs; 3) household income and

consumption patterns; 4) credit use and demand; 5) marketing activities,

6) farm level capital and land endowments; and 7) farm household

composition and employment status.

Some data bases will be updated annually, while others concerning

parameters subject to more intensive monitoring will be updated at more

frequent intervals.

As indicated in the Economics Data Bases section above, a partial

data set is available for the Abda target zone, and another is being

constructed for the Chaouia target zone. The Sociology and Economics

sections will collaborate to complete data collection for those parameters

and target zones for which baseline data has yet to be collected. A

superordinant goal is the construction of combined sets of baseline data

that will serve as a reference source for all Aridoculture scientists and

concerned development agencies.






\y






.DATA BASE INFORMATION COLLECTED BY AGRICULTURE ECONOMICS FOR
ABDA AND CHAOUIA

FAMILY SIZE AND COMPOSITION TABLE

SECTION I. GENERAL INFORMATION
IDENTIFICATION R
Douar/Fanner Identification Number C
Sequential Number C

SECTION II PEOPLE
MEN R
Relation To Farmer C
Age C
Habitation C
Employment- C
WOMEN R
Relation To Farmer C
Age C
Habitation C
Employment C
MALE CHILDREN R
Relation To Farmer C
Age C
Habitation C
Employment C
FEMALE CHILDREN R
Relation To Farmer
Age
Habitation
Employment


L43







LND RESOURCES D BSE

SECTION I. GERAL INFORMATION
IDENTIFICATION R
Dollar/Farmer Identification Number C
Sequential Number

SECTION II. LAND RESOURCES
BARLEY R
Owned (Ha) C
Crop Shared (Ha) C
Rented (Ha) C
CORN R
Owned (Ha) C
Crop Shared (Ha) C
Rented (Ha) C
WHEAT, BREAD R
Owned (Ha) C'
Crop Shared (Ha) C
Rented (Ha) C
WHEAT, DURUM R
Owned (Ha) C
Crop Shared (Ha) C
Rented (Ha) C
CHICKPEAS R
Owned (Ha) C
Crop Shared (Ha) C
Rented (Ha) C
FABA BEANS R
Owned (Ha) C
Crop Shared (Ha) C
Rented (Ha) C
LENTILS R
Owned (Ha) C
Crop Shared (Ha) C
Rented (Ha) C
PEAS R
Owned (Ha) C
Crop Shared (Ha) C
Rented (Ha) C
FALLOW R
Owned (Ha) C
Crop Shared (Ha) C
Rented (Ha) C







*Note: Issue of how soil type will be handled remains to
be worked out.








CAPITAL I INVENTORY DAT BSE

SECTION I. GENERAL INFORMATION
IDENTIFICATION
Douar/Farmer Identification Number
Sequential Number

SECTION II. TRANSPORTATION
L AUTOMOBILE I
Age
Purchase Price
3 AUT(M BILE II
U 1 Age
S Purchase Price
PICK-UP 1
SAge
Purchase Price
PICK-UP 2
Age
Purchase Price
TRUCK 1
Age
Purchase Price
TRUCK 2
Age
Purchase Price


SECTION III FARM EQUIPMENT
TRACTOR 1
Age (Yrs)
H.P. (Ch)
Purchase Price (Dh)
TRACTOR 2
Age (Yrs)
H.P. (Ch)
Purchase Price (Dh)
TRACTOR 3
Age (Yrs)
H.P. (Ch)
Purchase Price (Dh)t-
CCLIBIN 1
Age (Yrs)
Size (n)
Purchase Price (Dh)
COMBINE 2
Age (Yrs)
Size (m)
Purchase Price (Dh)
WAGON I
Age (Yrs)
Size (m')
Purchase Price (Dh)








WAGON 2 R
Age (Yrg) C
Size (m") C
Purchase Price (Dh) C
COVERCROP I R
Age (Yrs) C
Size (Discs) C
Purchase Price (Dh) C
COVERCROP 2 R
Age (Yrs) C
Size (Discs) C
Purchase Price (Dh) C
COVERCROP 3 R
Age (Yrs) C
Size (Discs) C
Purchase Price (Dh) C
PLOW I R-
Age (Yrs) C
Size (Bottoms) C
Purchase Price (Dh) C
PLOW 2 R
Age (Yrs) C
Size (Bottom) C
Purchase Price (Dh) C
PLOW 3 R
Age (Yrs) C
Size (Bottoms) C
Purchase Price (Dh) C
HARROW 1 R
Age (Yrs) C
Size (ma or teeth) C
Purchase Price (Dh) C
HARROW 2 R
Age (Yrl) C
Size (a or teeth) C
Purchase Price (Dh) C
HARROW 3 R
Age (Yrsl C
Size (m or teeth) C
Purchase Price (Dh) C

SECTION IV. DRAFt ANIMALS
DONKEY I R
Age (Yrs) C
Purchase Price (Dh) C
DONKEY 2 R
Age (Yrs) C
Purchase Price (Dh) C
MULE I R
Age (Yrs) C
Purchase Price (Dh) C
MULE 2 R
Age (Yrs) C
Purchase Price (Dh) C








HORSE 1 R
Age (Yrs) C
Purchase Price (Dh) C
HORSE 2 R
Age (Yrs) C
Purchase Price (Dh) C
CAMEL 1 R
Age (Yrs) C
Purchase Price (Dh) C
CAMEL 2 R
Age (Yrs) C
Purchase Price (Dh) C
COW R
Age (Yrs) C
Purchase Price (Dh) C
COW 2 R
Age (Yrs) C
Purchase Price (Dh) C







CEREALS DTA RASE

SECTION I. GENERAL INFO TION
IDENTIFICATION R
Crop C
Douar/Farmer Identification Number C
Sequential Number C
Field Size (Ha) C
Harvest Yield (Q() C

SECTION II. SOIL PREPARATION
TILLAGE 1 R
Month (1,...,12) C
Tractor Use (Hr) C
Tractor Cost (Dh) C
Fuel Use (L) C
Fuel Cost (Dh) C
Lube Use (L) C
Lube Cost (Dh) C
Grease Use (Kg) C
Grease Cost (Dh) C
Family Labor Use (Hr) C
Hired Labor Use (Hr) C
Hired Labor Cost (Dh) C
Animal Use (Hr) C
Animal Cost (Dh)
TILLAGE 2 R
Month (1,...,12) C
Tractor Use (Hr) C
Tractor Cost (Dh). C
Fuel Use (L) C
Fuel Cost (Dh) C
Lube Use (L) C
Lube Cost (Dh) C
Grease Use (Kg) C
Grease Cost (Dh) C
Family Labor Use (Hr) C
Hired Labor Use (Hr) C
Hired Labor Cost (Dh) C
Animal Use (Hr) C
Animal Cost (Dh)' -. C
TILLACG 3 R
Month (1,...,12) C
Tractor Use (Hr) C
Tractor Cost (Dh) C
Fuel Use (L) C
Fuel Cost (Dh) C
Lube Use (L) C
Lube Cost (Dh) C
Grease Use (Kg) C
Grease Cost (Dh) C
Family Labor Use (Hr) C
Hired Labor Use (Kr) C
Hired Labor Cost (Dh) C








Animal Use (Hr) C
Animal Cost (Dh) C

SECTION III FERTILIZATION
COMMERCIAL FERTILIZER R
Red Bag (Kg) C
White Bag (Kg) C
Red Cost (Dh) C
White Cost (Dh) C
Family Labor Use (Hr) C
Hired Labor Cost (Dh) C
COMMERCIAL FERTILIZER COVERING R
Month (1,...,12) C
Tractor Use (Hr) C
Tractor Cost (Dh) C
Fuel Use (L) C
Fuel Cost (Dh) C
Lube Use (L) C
Lube Cost (Dh) C
Grease Use (Kg) C
Grease Cost (Dh) C
Family Labor Use (Hr) C
Hired Labor Use (Hr) C
Hired Labor Cost (Dh) C
Animal Use (Hr) C
Animal Cost (Dh) C
TOP DRESSING FERTILIZER R
Month (I,...,12) C
Red Bag (Kg) C
White Bag (Kg) C
Red Cost (Dh) C
White Cost (Dh) C
Family Labor Use (Hr) C
Hired Labor Use (Hr) C
Hired Labor Cost (Dh) C

SECTION IV. PLANTING"
SEEDING R
Month (1,...,12) C
Seed Use (Qx) C
Seed Cost (Dh) C
Tractor Use (Hr) C
Tractor Cost (Dhb) C
Fuel Use (L) C
Fuel Cost (Dh) C
Lube Use (L) C
Lube Cost (Dh) C
Family Labor Use (Hr) C
Hired Labor Use (Hr) C
Hired Labor Cost (Dh) C
SEED COVERING R
Month (1,...,12) C
Tractor Use (Hr) C
Tractor Cost (Dh) C
Fuel Use (L) C







Fuel Cost (Dh) C
Lube Use (L) C
Lube Cost (Dh) C
Grease Use (Kg) C
Grease Cost (Dh) C
Family Labor Use (Hr) C
Hired Labor Use (Hr) C
Hired Labor Cost (Dh) C
Animal Use (Hr) C
Animal Cost (Dh) C

SECTION V. CROP MAINTENANCE
CHEMICAL WEED CONTROL R
Month (I,...,12) C
Herbicide Use (L) C
Herbicide Cost (Dh) C
Family Labor Use (Hr) C
Hired Labor Use (Hr) C.
Hired Labor Cost (Dh) C

SECTION VI. HARVEST AND STORAGE
HARVEST R
Month (1,.. ,12) C
Combine Use (Hr) C
Combine Cost (Dh) C
Fuel Use (L) C
Fuel Cost (Dh) C
Lube Use (L) C
Lube Cost (Dh) C
Family Labor Use (Hr) C
Hired Labor Use (Hr) C
Hired Labor Cost (Dh) C
HARVEST TRANSPORT TO THRESHE R
Month (1,...,12) C
Tractor Use (Hr) C
Tractor Cost (Dh) C
Fuel Use (L) C
Fuel Cost (Dh) C
Lube Use (L) C
Lube Cost (Dh) C
Family Labor Use (Hr) C
Hired Labor Use (Hr) C
Animal Use (Hr) C
Animal Cost (Dh) C
THRESHING R
Month (1,...,12) C
Thresher Use (Hr) C
Thresher Rent (Dh) C
Fuel Use (L) C
Fuel Cost (Dh) C
Lube Use (L) C
Lube Cost (Dh) C
Family Labor Use (Hr) C
Hired Labor Use (Hr) C
Hired Labor Cost (Dh) C







Animal Use (Hr) C
Animal Coat (Dh) C
GRAIN TRANSE RT TO STRANGE R
Month (1,...,12) C
Tractor Use (Hr) C
Tractor Cost (Dh) C
Fuel Use (L) C
Fuel Cost (Dh) C
Lube Use (L) C
Lube Cost (Dh) C
Family Labor Use (Hr) C
Hired Labor Use (Hr) C
Hired Labor Cost (Dh) C
Animal Use (Hr) C
Animal Cost (Dh) C

SECTION VII. PRODUCT DISPOSITION
SALE R'
Amount (Qx) C
Price (Dh/Qx) C
Revenue (Dh) C
ONSUMPTION STOCK R
Amount (Qx) C
SEED SOURCE R
Amount (Qx) C







CORN VA FOOD =EGMES DATA BASES

SECTION I. GENERAL INFORMATION
IDENTIFICATION R
Crop C
Douar/Farmer Identification Number C
Sequential Number C
Field Size C
Harvest Yield C

SECTION II. SOIL PREPARATION
TILLAGE I R
Month (I,...,12) C
Tractor Use (Hr) C
Tractor Cost (Dh) C
Fuel Use (L) C
Fuel Cost (Dh) C
Lube Use (L) C'
Lube Cost (Dh) C
Grease Use (Kg) C
Grease Cost (Dh) C
Family Labor Use (Hr) C
Hired Labor Use (Hr) C
Hired Labor Cost (Dh) C
Animal Use (Hr) C
Animal Cost (Dh) C
TILLAGE 2 R
Month (1,...,12) C
Tractor Use (Hr) C
Tractor Cost (Dh) C
Fuel Use (L) C
Fuel Cost (Dh) C
Lube Use (L) C
Lube Cost (Dh) C
Grease Use (Kg) C
Grease Cost (Dh) C
Family Labor Use (Hr) C
Hired Labor Use (Hr) C
Hired Labor Cost (Dh) C
Animal Use (Hr) C
Animal Cost (Dh) C
TILLAGE I R
Month (1,...,12). C
Tractor Use (Hr) C
Tractor Cost (Dh) C
Fuel Use (L) C
Fuel Cost (Dh) C
Lube Use (L) C
Lube Cost (Dh) C
Grease Use (Kg) C
Grease Cost (Dh) C
Family Labor Use (Hr) C
Hired Labor Use (Hr) C
Hired Labor Cost (Dh) C







Animal Use (Hr) c
Animal Cost (Dh) C

SECTION III. FERTILIZATION
MANURE R
Month (1,..., 2) C
Manure Use (m ) C
Manure Cost (Dh) C
Tractor Use (Hr) C
Tractor Cost (Dh) C
Fuel Use (L) C
Fuel Cost (Dh) C
Lube Use (L) C
Lube Cost (Dh) C
Family Labor Use (Hr) C
Hired Labor Use (Hr) C
Hired Labor Cost (Dh) C
Animal Use (Hr) C
Animal Cost (Dh) C
COMMERCIAL FERTILIZER R
Red Bag (Kg) C
White Bag (Kg) C
Red Cost (Dh) C
White Cost (Dh) C
Family Labor Use (Hr) C
Hired Labor Use (Hr) C
Hired Labor Cost (Dh) C
COmERCIAL FERTILIZE COVERING R
Month (1,...,12) C
Tractor Use (Hr) C
Tractor Cost (Dh) C
Fuel Use (L) C
Fuel Cost (Dh) C
Lube Use (L) C
Lube Cost (Dh) C
Grease Use (Kg) C
Grease Cost (Dh) C
Family Labor Use (Hr) C
Hired Labor Use (Hr) C
Hired Labor Coat (Dh) C
TOP DRESSING FERTILIZE R
Month (1,...,12) C
Red Bag (Kg) C
White Bag (Kg) C
Red Cost (Dh) C
White Cost (10) C
Family Labor Use (Hr) C
Hired Labor Use (Hr) C
Hired Labor Cost (Dh) C

SECTION IV. PLANTING
SEEDING R
Month (1,...,12) C
Seed Use (Qx) C
Seed Cost (Dh) C


*







Tractor Use (Hr) C
Tractor Cost (Dh) C
Fuel Use (L) C
Fuel Cost (Dh) C
Lube Use (L) C
Lube Cost (Dh) C
Family Labor Use (Hr) C
Hired Labor Use (Hr) C
Hired Labor Cost (Dh) C
SEED COVERING R
Month (1,...,12) C
Tractor Use (Hr) C
Tractor Cost (Dh) C
Fuel Use (L) C
Fuel Cost (Dh) C
Lube Use (L) C
Lube Cost (Dh) C
Grease Use (Kg) C
Grease Cost (Dh) C
Family Labor Use (Hr) C
Hired Labor Use (Hr) C
Hired Labor Cost (Dh) C

SECTION V. CROP MAINTENANCE
HAND WEEDING R
Month (1,...,12) C
Family Labor Use (Hr C
Hired Labor Use (Hr) C
Hired Labor Cost (Dh) C
CULTIVATION R
Month (1,...,12) C
Family Labor Use (Hr) C
Hired Labor Use (Hr) C
Hired Labor Cost (Dh) C
Animal Use (Hr) C
Animal Cost (Dh) C
CHEMICAL WEED CONTROL R
Month (1,...,12) C
Herbicide Use (L) C
Herbicide Cost (Dh) C
Family Labor Use (Hr) C
Hired Labor Use (Hr) C
Hired Labor Coat (Dh) C

SECTION VT. HARVEST AND SIORAGE
HARVEST R
Month (1,...,12) C
Family Labor Use (Hr) C
Hired Labor Use (Hr) C
Hired Labor Cost (Dh) C
HARVEST TRANSPORT TO THRESHER R
Month (1,...,12) C
Tractor Use (Hr) C
Tractor Cost (Dh) C
Fuel Use (L) C







Fuel Cost (Dh) C
Lube Use (L) C
Lube Cost (Dh) C
Family Labor Use (Hr) C
Hired Labor Use (Hr) C
Hired Labor Cost (Dh) C
Animal Use (Hr) C
Animal Cost (Dh) C
DEH.SKING R
Month (1,...,12) C
Family Labor Use (Hr) C
Hired Labor Use (Hr) C
Hired Labor Cost (Dh) C
THRESHING R
Month (1,...,12) C
Tractor Use (Hr) C
Tractor Cost (Dh) C
Fuel Use (L) C
Fuel Cost (Dh) C
Lube Use (L) C
Lube Cost (Dh) C
Grease Use (Kg) C
Grease Cost (Dh) C
Family Labor Use (Hr) C
Hired Labor Use (Hr) C
Hired Labor Cost (Dh) C
Animal Use (Hr) C
Animal Cost (Dh) C
GRAIN TRANSPORT TO STORAGE Z R
Month (t,...,12) C
Tractor Use (Hr) C
Tractor Cost (Dh) C
Fuel Use (L) C
Fuel Cost (Dh) C
Lube Use (L) C
Lube Cost (Dh) C
Family Labor Use (1r) C
Hired Labor Use (Hr) C
Hired Labor Cost (Dh) C
Animal Use (Hr) C
Animal Cost (Dh) C

SECTION VII.. PROWUC DISPOSITION
SALE R
Amount (Qx) C
Price (Dh/Qx) C
Revenue (Dh) C
CONSUMPTION STOCK R
Amount (Qx) C
SEED SOURCE R
Amount (Qx) C










Appendix IV

On-Farm Research Data Collection Methods

The general methodology for the biological part of the on-farm

research program consists of the FMT and data to be collected discussed

previously. Its purpose is to provide statistically valid experimental

data on production responses to selected technologies. In the following

sub-sections the strategies for collecting agronomic, economic, and

sociological data are outlined.

S It must be noted that, given the annual variability in dryland

-production, the number of years required to test any one technology will

be extensive. At the very least three year time series of annual data

will be developed for each new technology. Further, additional data will

Sr need to be collected during the year following completion of the FMT's to

determine if participating farmers accepted or rejected the innovations
S' and for what reasons. Reasons for rejection will be relayed to the

appropriate Aridoculture Center scientists) so his (their) research

programs) may be modified as appropriate. Reasons for acceptance will

aid technology evaluation.



Agronomic Data Collection

All agronomic data will be collected by the farmer and FMT field

team. It will include observational data obtained during the regular

visits by the field team as well as yield measurements from the test crop.

Aridoculture Center scientists will be requested to help identify specific

insect, disease, nutrient deficiency symptoms, etc. when they occur.

Information on what observations are needed for a particular problem will

be passed from the Center Scientists to the Headquarters Team, Field Team,










and Farmer.


Economic Data Collection

Data collection will proceed over time in concert with technological

trials until statistical validity has been obtained. Consequently, data

will be collected annually for as long as trials proceed.

Farmer members of the recommendation domain of interest will be

interviewed at two points in the production cycle if a crop production

technology is being produced. The initial interview will occur after all

pre-harvest production activities have been completed. The second

interview will occur after harvest and storage has been accomplished. In

the case of livestock, six visits will be required each year.. The

strategies for credit, households, and marketing are in the process of

being developed.

Past experience has established that a farmer can be interviewed

about pre and post-harvest crop production activities, family structure,

and capital endowments in our hour) split evenly between two days. This

fact obtains for a number of reasons: 1) Social amenities which must be

observed; 2) Interruptions during the interviews; 3) Time required to

find farmers; and, 4) Days when farmers are unavailable for various

reasons such as going to the souk, douar meetings, and religious or

political obligations. It is estimated that twelve hours split into six

two hour visits will be required to interview each farmer regarding

livestock and forage production. Consequently, two full days will be

required for data collection on basic farming activities. This translates

into si months field time for basic data collection. Probably another

two months will be required to obtain information on the remaining:










dimensions. This translates into eleven months of field work each year

for ninety far



Sociology Data Collection

Data collection will proceed in relation to the FMT program both

within and outside the 200 km2 agro-ecological target zones. The

Sociology section will use the same sample as that used by the Economics

section. Farmer managed trials and socioeconomic data collection that are

conducted outside the delimited zones will serve to assess the degree to

which the results of research within the target zones can be extrapolated

to a wider population that generally conforms to the same recommendation

domain.

Some parameters, such as cultural practices and crop management, will

necessitate a more intense level of monitoring, some of which can be

conducted by the FMT field team during the regular visits. This more

intense monitoring will be necessary to better identify, for example, how

labor needs are met at different levels of demand throughout the

agricultural cycle. Rural household composition often fluctuates

throughout the year, in relation to the availability (or termination) of

off-farm employment opportunities and the school cycle. Critical periods

are also experienced in relation to agricultural credit, whether it be

access to loans or demands for repayment. Some production and marketing

decisions are situational, being made in the context of circumstantial

conjunctures at critical moments, such as at planting or harvesting. More

frequent monitoring using shorter interview schedules also obviates the

tendency to overburden producers' capacity for recall, and reduces the

degree to which evasive response patterns that may be elicited by the










discussion of sensitive topics will "spill over" into other less sensitive

areas of enquiry.

It should be emphasized that the analysis of sociological data must

be conceived of as a continual process, elements of which are to be

conducted throughout the production cycle. The results of preliminary

descriptive analysis, especially those concerning cultural practices and

crop management, will be made available to concerned researchers on a

timely basis in the form of brief reports.










Appendix V

On-Farm Research (FMT) and Evaluation Schedule

1988/89

1. Complete construction of initial data base for Chaouia Target Zone.

Parameters include: 1) Cereal and food legume production,

technologies and costs; 6) Farm level capital and land endowments;

and 7) Farm family age and gender structures, places of habitation,

and employment.

2. Develop research questionnaire for Beni Meskine Target Zone.

Parameters include the three listed above plus: 2) Forage and

livestock production, technologies, and costs; 3) Household

production and consumption functions; 4) Credit use and demand; and

5) Marketing.

3. Select technologies and farmer participants for FMT.

A. Technologies selected: 1) Saada (Hessian Fly Resistant) Wheat

vs. Nesma (susceptible) wheat; 2) 60 kg/ha nitrogen on wheat vs. 0

nitrogen on wheat; and 3) Winter chickpeas vs. spring chickpeas.

B. Participant farmers (see Appendix I): For technologies 1 and 2,

experiment consists o in Abda and Chaoui Regions, RD

further characterized by soil types.

C. Participant farmers for technology 3, experiment consists of7

farms in Abda region.

4. Collection of biological, economic, and sociological data from FMT.

Analysis of this data, interpretation of results, recommend

modification of FMT if appropriate.

5. Conduct field tours as appropriate.










1989/90

1. Collect baseline data (7 parameters from Beni Meskine Target Zone).

2. Continue FMT evaluation of technologies 1 and 2 tested in 1988/89.

A. Increase number of FMT to 30 in Abda (20 in Abda Target Zone + 10

in Abda Research Region outside Target Zone but all within

appropriate Recommendation Domain).

B. Increase number of FMT to 30 in Chaouia (same distribution as in

Abda).

3. Continue FMT evaluation of technology 3 tested in 1988/89. Increase

number of FMT to 30 in Abda (Same distribution as 2A above).

4. Select two new technologies (4 and 5) to be tested as 2 x 2 factorial

in Chaoui'a (30 FMT with 20 in Target Zone + 10 outside zone but

within Region).

5. Conduct FMT, collect data, analyze data, interpret results, make

recommendations.

6. Conduct field tours.










1990/91

1. Continue FMT for technologies 1 through 5 as in 1989/90.

2. Complete construction of database for Beni Meskine Target Zone.

3. Collect baseline data (remaining 4 parameters from Abda and Chaouia

Target Zones.

4. Conduct FMT, collect data, analyze data, interpret results, make

recommendations.

5. Make
research and other publications.

6. Provide data and supporting materials for mid-term project

evaluation.

7. Conduct field tours.










1991/92

1. Continue FMT for technologies 4 and 5.

2. Select technologies and former participants for FMT

A. In Abda, select 2 to 4 technologies.

B. In Chaouia, select 2 technologies.

C. In Beni Meskine, select 2 to 4 technologies.

3. Conduct FMT for above technologies using previous procedures, i.e.

2x2 factorials, 30 farms per experimental within specific

recommendation domains.

4. Collect biological, economic and sociological data from FMT. Analyze

data, interpret results, make recommendations.

5. Conduct field tours.

6. Make final recommendations on technoloies tested 3 years.

7. Conduct Year After survey to determine acceptability of technologies

1 through 3.










1992/93

1. Continue FMT of all technologies tested less than three years.

2. Add new technologies as appropriate. Could expand to 2 Field Teams

per Target Zone if needed.

3. Also could add a fourth target zone if appropriate.

4. Conduct FMT, collect data, analyze data, interpret results, make

recommendations.

5. Conduct field tours.

6. Conduct Year After survey to determine acceptability of technologies

4 and 5.










1993/94

1. Continue FMT of all technologies tested less than three years.

2. Add new technologies as appropriate.

3. Conduct FMT, collect data, analyze data, interpret results, make

recommendations.

4. Provide data and supporting materials for project evaluation.

5. Continue acceptability survey.










After 1994

1. Continue FMT as research procedure for the collection of biological,

economic and sociological data.

2. Continue FMT as a mechanism of technology evaluation.

3. Continue FMT as a mechanism of technology transfer.

4. Continue Year After survey to determine acceptability of

technologies.





~o~--
~~ ~
~ ;i~-~


~L/Q42 -~T


" A'" o/2o


Mn/ LS


c^.


/ZALezol


~&~e4 ZP(L-C-


4 -) jwv


~c;~ 9""-~~~-;o"


4A xv- z /c-te'e-


505:0u


( -,


/4e- O ty'


J