Program Coordinator's comments on the EEP (External Evaluation Panel) report on the Indonesia TropSoils Program

Material Information

Program Coordinator's comments on the EEP (External Evaluation Panel) report on the Indonesia TropSoils Program
University of Hawaii
University of Hawaii
Place of Publication:
Honolulu, Hawaii
TropSoils Project
Publication Date:


Subjects / Keywords:
Farming ( LCSH )
Agriculture ( LCSH )
Farm life ( LCSH )


Electronic resources created as part of a prototype UF Institutional Repository and Faculty Papers project by the University of Florida.

Record Information

Source Institution:
University of Florida
Holding Location:
University of Florida
Rights Management:
The University of Florida George A. Smathers Libraries respect the intellectual property rights of others and do not claim any copyright interest in this item. This item may be protected by copyright but is made available here under a claim of fair use (17 U.S.C. §107) for non-profit research and educational purposes. Users of this work have responsibility for determining copyright status prior to reusing, publishing or reproducing this item for purposes other than what is allowed by fair use or other copyright exemptions. Any reuse of this item in excess of fair use or other copyright exemptions requires permission of the copyright holder. The Smathers Libraries would like to learn more about this item and invite individuals or organizations to contact Digital Services ( with any additional information they can provide.

Full Text

Program Coordinator's Comments on

the External Evaluation Panel Report on

the Indonesia TropSoils Program

TropSoils Project
University of Hawaii

May 1987

Program Coordinator's Comments on
the EEP Report on the Indonesia TropSoils Program

The External Evaluation Panel's report on the Indonesia TropSoils Program is

a useful document as it clearly and for the first time highlights problems created by the

uncertain roles of the Management Entity and Program Coordinator. The report also

reveals for the first time that the Indonesia TropSoils program has been operating

under two conflicting aims--one designed and planned by the lead institution and

another advocated by the Management Entity. Resolution of these issues will be

helpful to both Management Entity and Program Coordinator.

To keep my comments to a manageable length, I will focus on (1) project

design, (2) project planning and management, and (3) staffing and management. I

will end with several conclusions and recommendations.

I would be pleased to repond to any issue which I have not addressed.

Project Design

The Panel is explicit about its impression that Drs. Wade's and Colfer's efforts

were directed towards meeting the needs of local farmers, whereas the Program

Coordinator "placed primary emphasis on the construction of semi-variograms using

geostatistical techniques to map soils variability, modeling phosphorus-lime

interactions, and developing expert systems to improve and transfer soil management

research information." The Panel faults the Program Coordinator for this "dichotomy of

approaches" and warns that expert systems (and I presume geostatistics and

models) should not be developed as "ends in themselves." Given these impressions,

the Panel has every right to be concerned about the project and its design.

These impressions of digressions from established aims are consistent with

item number 6 which states that "this project on the upland soils of Indonesia arose

from the need to evaluate some of the findings of research done under similar

conditions at the Yurimaguas site in the Upper Amazon area of Peru." Herein lies the

problem; the Indonesia TropSoils program has two aims--one to evaluate findings of

research done in Peru and another designed to generate, organize and preserve soil

management information for decision making. These conflicting aims detract from the

attainment of currently stated objectives.

What the Panel fails to mention, or chose to ignore is the fact that the

Indonesian Center for Soil Research and the University of Hawaii had completed five

years of soil management research in South Sumatra on similar soils under the AID-

funded Benchmark Soils Project just prior to the start of the TropSoils project. Owing

to the already large body of knowledge on Indonesian acid upland soils, the Program

Coordinator chose to hire an anthropologist on the project to provide feedback to

enable project scientists to design experiments which would produce results more

relevant to farmers. The Program Coordinator now understands why the Management

Entity expressed such strong reservations about this decision and warned of the

dangers of getting into extension work. Today the joint effort of soil and social

scientists is proclaimed as innovative, and the Panel confirms the correctness of this

approach. It even acknowledges the already large body of knowledge on soil behavior

and performance by stating that "there have been no major scientific surprises with

respect to soil management in the findings of the project to date." The project came

dangerously close to rediscovering what was already known and doing what had

already been done.

Acceptance of new ideas can be painful and takes time. I thought time had

healed the hurt of bringing geostatistics, expert systems, social science, and modeling

into the project, but the report indicates otherwise. Why geostatistics?

Soil management research must not be site specific, but the management

recommendations we make must be site specific. How does one make site specific

recommendations in the absence of site information? Geostatistics enables users to

estimate data for unsampled location from information that already exists in the

neighborhood. The alternative is to collect and analyze an endless array of soil

samples or make a guess. Geostatistics is a powerful tool for predicting soil
properties at unsampled locations for making soil management decisions. It can be

used by policy makers at the national level and by extension agents at the farm level

to complement information in soil survey reports. Anyone who reads the soil science

literature knows that geostatistics is prominently covered in the professional journals.

Our work in Indonesia and Hawaii has not gone unnoticed and Dr. Nyle Bady, Editor

of Advances in Agronomy, asked project personnel to prepare a review article on the

subject which was published in 1985. On the other hand, I was disappointed to hear

the Management Entity refer to our work with geostatistics as "silly maps." I might e

also add that contrary to the EEP report, Drs. Wade and Colfer did not consider

geostatistics and expert systems to be impositions on the team, but understood their

significance and supported and participated in their development. I had hoped the

Panel would applaud the team's effort on geostatistics rather than to downplay it as

emphasis of the Program Coordinator.

Our work with expert systems has fared well relatively to the initial opposition

encountered with social science or geostatistics. But coming in quick succession after

two unpopular activities did not help. In item number 21, the Panel warns the project

to view experts systems as "means to ends," and not as "ends in themselves," and

continues by advising the team that it "would profit from a coordinated effort to build

the many parts that are still needed to provide the missing parts for this specific

expert system." On the other hand the report states that "even some of the smallest

commercial experts systems cost at least $1,000,000." Based on these observations,

the Panel clearly should have recommend that all activity on expert systems be

stopped, especially if it truly believes that building even a small system cost a million

dollars. The Panel goes on to state "just because expert systems and models

represent an important hope for the future does not mean that everything else should

be abandoned in their pursuit."
Does the Panel realize that expert systems and models cannot be developed

by abandoning field research and that one of the principal aims of developing them is to

capture, organize and preserve biophysical and socioeconomic information generated

by the TropSoils project for decision making by users? The Panel obviously does

because item 11 states, "many of the biophysical and socioeconomic findings have

been incorporated into an "expert system" for lime use, which can be utilized not only

for the Sitiung area but also expandable to areas outside the study area and can serve

to help extrapolate the information developed from this project. The model is in a form

to accept new information as it becomes available, and is kept up to date at the

University of Hawaii."

It is not possible to have achieved what is described under item 11 if expert

systems cost one million dollars to develop, everything else was abandoned in their

pursuit and they were developed as ends in themselves. It requires an innovative,

well-planned, properly managed, cost-effective program to integrate social science

and the new science of artificial intelligence into traditional soil management research.

Project Planning and Management

In the report, the Panel expressed considerable dismay about the "laissez-

faire attitude" of the Program Coordinator (item 12) and the introduction of "an entirely

new research program" on the next to the last day of the review (item 14). The

laissez-faire charge is not consistent with a Program Coordinator who has introduced

social science, geostatistics, expert systems and models into a soil management

project. Frugality by team members (item 12) or the project as a whole, does not fit a

laissez-faire approach. If by laissez-faire attitude, one means to give team members

the intellectual freedom to pursue excellence in their own way, I accept that charge.

The charge that a totally new program was introduced by the Program

Coordinator during the review indicates that the Panel did not read the extensive

materials distributed to all members prior to the review. This "new program" has

been the principal framework for the Indonesia TropSoils project for several years. It

has been discussed on several occasions with the Management Entity, as recently as

November 1986 in a hotel room in New Orleans, and again at Cornell University a

month later in a private meeting in which I outlined on a blackboard the essential

components of the program. The structure of the program given in Figure 1 of the

"Strategic Plan for the Indonesia TropSoils Program" is part of the review materials

compiled for distribution to the Panel. Distribution of the Strategic Plan is

acknowledged under item 3 of the report, but the Panel failed to note its connection to

the "totally new program" or the Work Plans.

Did the Panel know that Colfer, Wade and Yost had been involved in the

development of the Work Plans? It obviously did not because in item 25, the Panel

recommends that "Drs. Colfer and Wade be brought into the program as consultants

to work for a period of two weeks in the design of the future research program and its

detailed elements." If the Panel believes the earlier plan, designed for the future

research program with the help of Drs. Colfer, Wade, Yost, Evensen, McCants, and

Indonesian scientists was unacceptable, it should have said so and pointed out its

deficiencies. Instead the report leaves the impression that nothing was done in the

past year to prepare for the arrival of two new team members and to develop work

plans for the future.

What about efforts to implement this Work Plan?

On July 3, I wrote to the Director of the Management Entity requesting

approval to hire a replacement for Dr. Colfer. My letter to him and his response are

attached. The Director's letter provides insight into two aspects of project

management. First, his continuing uncertainty about the value of Dr. Colfer's

contribution to the project which is reflected in his conclusion to not fill the position

until her work is reviewed, and to determine the priority of this type of activity relative

to other needs. Although the Panel now praises the project's socioeconomic

component, it failed to note that it has been necessary for us to repeatedly justify Dr.

Colfer's work to the Management Entity. In fact a paper "Social science contribution

to soil management: the TropSoils example, from the view of an Anthropologist"

which I included in the materials to the Panel was written by Dr. Colfer for the

Management Entity's benefit.

Not only was my request to hire a social scientist denied, the letter also

instructs me not to consider Dr. Vickie Sigman for a position owing to her orientation

in the extension area, even though my letter makes no mention of Dr. Sigman.' This

denial to replace Dr. Colfer and the added instruction not to consider Dr. Sigman for a

position reflect the Management Entity's attempt to assume the role of the Program

Coordinator. The havoc this situation creates in program management was

unfortunately not known to the Panel.

If the Panel's concern (item 24) about the level and quality of management from

the University of Hawaii is to be properly addressed, it needs to state very clearly the

roles of the Management Entity and Program Coordinator. Is it proper for the

Management Entity to tell the Program Coordinator who can and cannot be hired, or to

set program priorities by sending a graduate student from North Carolina State

University to Indonesia to review and make recommendations on agroforestry

research when the University of Hawaii has senior faculty with long international

experience in this area? While social science and agroforestry research was given

prominence in the June 1986 Work Plans, I believe it is in the program's best interest

to leave program management to Program Coordinators. I might add that even though

a decision to emphasize agroforestry over social science would have important

consequences to project management, the Program Coordinator was never given a 7
copy of the report or its recommendations...

In February of last year, in preparation for the departure of Carol Colfer and

Mike Wade, and the arrival of Ron Guyton and Lalit Arya, I wrote to Mr. Richard

Cobb of the USAID Mission (letter attached) requesting a meeting of Indonesian,

USAID, the Management Entity, and University of Hawaii representatives to

formulate plans for the future. In preparation for that meeting, I drafted the "Strategic

Plan for the TropSoils Program." Dr. McCants, Russ Yost, and I travelled to

Indonesia to prepare the Work Plan with Mike Wade, Carol Colfer, and other

Indonesian and U.S. team members. Upon our return to the U.S., I distributed clean

copies to all who were involved in developing the Work Plan and incorporated their

comments into a final Work Plan which I submitted to Ms. Joanne Hale of the USAID

Mission in August 1986. It should be noted that the project objectives as stated in

the Strategic Plan were to a large extent preserved in the Work Plan.

In item 15, the report states "The Panel members were frustrated by this turn

of events, for the program they came to review had disappeared." The program which

I tried to describe to the Panel was the Strategic Plan for the Indonesia TropSoils

Program and the Work Plan that emerged from it. Had the Panel done their homework

they would have recognized that what I was trying to do was show how TropSoils

interdisciplinary research might be used to obtain desired outcomes for users using

the framework provided in Figure 1 of the Strategic Plan. As indicated earlier, this

was not a totally new program which "had not been fully discussed or agreed upon by

the Hawaiian Team." The program had been prepared by the Team in the presence of,

and with the full approval of the Management Entity. The Panel did not recognize it

for what it was because they had not taken time to read the materials distributed to

them. If they were "frustrated by this turn of events" that situation could easily have

been changed by asking a few questions.

The seriousness of the Panel's concerns is reflected in an item 15 sentence

which states "without a well-thought-through program to review, it looked seriously

at the possibility of recommending the termination of the work in Indonesia, but

decided not to do so, because it considered that much of the progress made by Colfer,

Wade, and Yost would be lost." In saying this, the Panel misses a key point, namely

that one of the major aims of the project is to capture, organize and preserve research

results for dissemination to users. To lose the progress made by Drs. Colfer, Wade

and Yost, and other team members would indeed be criminal. It is precisely for this

reason that the program has been "well-thought-through" to exploit tools such as

expert systems, models and geostatistics to ensure that knowledge is not only

preserved but organized for quick dissemination and use. Expert systems and models

not only preserve knowledge, but are also excellent exposers of ignorance and

therefore are equally useful for setting research priorities. Our research priorities are

set not by a need to "evaluate findings of research done in Peru" but by our inability to

make sound soil management decisions because pieces of knowledge are missing.

A program pulled in two directions-one designed by the Program Coordinator

and the other by the Management Entity-is not easily managed. In an effort to

resolve this problem, I wrote to the Director of the Management Entity shortly after

the review. My letter and his response are attached.

Staffing and Management

The key to high staff performance in Sitiung resides in adding a social scientist

to the current U.S. team consisting of a crop scientist and a soil scientist. While our

attempt to fill the social scientist position was unsuccessful, it now appears that the

Mission is prepared to finance such a position. Based on this new development, I

have outlined a plan for team strengthening which has been submitted to the

Management Entity and the USAID Mission.

We were very fortunate in the first phase of the project to have two senior

scientists with Indonesian experience and language proficiency. The two new senior

scientists and their families received nearly a month of language training prior to their

arrival on post and have taken steps to improve their conversational skills. At the

time of the review, both were very much involved in closing down several projects

initiated by their predecessors. I take blame for their reticence during the review for I

instructed our U.S. staff to encourage the Indonesian scientists to take charge and

describe the on-going research to credit the Indonesians for their contributions. I also

misjudged the Panel's reaction to my agreement with the Indonesian scientists to

show the Panel TropSoils research conducted by our Indonesian counterparts on their

own initiative and funds at another location some distance away. I had hoped the

Panel would be impressed with the Indonesian scientists' effort to take TropSoils

results into farmers' fields, but only a brief mention is made of this in the report. I was

disappointed with this brevity because almost a whole day was spent on reviewing

Government of Indonesia TropSoils-related work. To paraphrase the Panel's words,

TropSoils is not an end in itself, but a means to an end.

I take full responsibility for on-site staff performance. The Department

Chairman and I are also responsible for encouraging an even larger on-campus staff to

make contributions to TropSoils. The Strategic Plan for the Indonesia TropSoils

Program which I prepared last year is a challenge that can be realized only if AID, the

U.S. Universities, and the host country agencies share resources to achieve common

goals. The Panel report fails to mention the role of the University even though Dr. Ray

Smith expressed the University of Hawaii Administration's strong commitment to the



1. This report indicates the need to define the roles of the Management Entity and

the Program Coordinator in program design, management and staffing.

A Program Coordinator designs and manages a program to exploit the

strengths of a University. The farming systems approach taken by the project was

based on the existence of faculty expertise and interest in the Departments of

Agricultural and Resource Economics and of Human Resources. The work on

expert system traces back to collaboration with supporting faculty in the

Department of Information and Computer Sciences. The program's strength in

geostatistics derives from the University's involvement in regional research, and

its modeling capability resides in an internationally recognized group of modelers

collaborating with the University of Hawaii in another AID-funded project. While

the University has many strengths, these particular areas were selected for their

relevance to the situation in Indonesia.

Program design and management cannot be evaluated by examining the

work in Sitiung in isolation of the total program. A program review conducted in

this way dwells too heavily on program management and too little on program


2. The project is a success not in spite of the Program Coordinator's efforts, but

because of them. The following evidences support this conclusion.

In a cover memo attached to a review document distributed to Panel

members dated January 13, 1987, I state, "The materials I have pulled together are

intended to show how the social science and agronomic research conducted in

Sitiung can be captured in expert systems and simulation models so that it can be

transferred to resource-poor farmers, not just in Sitiung, but anywhere in

Indonesia or the Humid Tropics. Our aim is to leave behind a soil management

decision support system which can be used by AARD, the USAID Mission and

the collaborating U.S. institutions when the TropSoils project comes to an end."

The Panel concludes that "the work of the TropSoils project in Indonesia

has been widely recognized for its quality and its potential contribution to

agricultural development on upland acid soils." It also briefly describes significant

project results in items 9, 10 and 11.

Thus the Panel does not find fault in program performance, but finds the

thrust imposed on the project by the Program Coordinator to be an imposition on

the team. However, the significant results described in items 10 and 11, and the

bottom half of item 9 are largely consequences of a program designed by the

Program Coordinator.


1. The External Evaluation Panel or some other group should define the roles of the

Director of the Management Entity and the Program Coordinator to minimize

conflict in program management responsibilities.

2. An External Evaluation Panel report should include a total program review

including on-campus activities conducted in support of the program to ascertain

institutional commitment and the relevance of project outputs to both host country

and U.S. agriculture.

3. The Director of the Management Entity should advise the Program Coordinator of

the nature of the review so that the Panel's expectation and the program review

agenda are identical. This was not the case in this review and although the

Management Entity distributed a preliminary agenda, there was no consensus

agenda during the review.





B. B. Trangmar,1 R. S. Yost,2 and G. Uehara2

' Soil Bureau. Department of Scientific and Industrial Research. Christchurch. New Zealand
SDepartment of Agronomy and Soil Science
College of Tropical Agriculture and Human Resources
University of Hawaii. Honolulu. Hawaii

I. Introduction. ........... ..... ........... ... ....... 45
II. Nature of Soil Variability ..................................... 47
A. Systematic and Random Variation . . . .. . 47
B. Nested Effects ..................................... 47
III. Traditional Methods of Describing Soil Variability. . . . 49
A. Soil Classification and Soil Survey . . . .... . .. 49
B. Statistical Analysis .................................. 51
IV. Regionalized Variable Theory and Geostatistics . . . ..... ....... 53
A. Development of Geostatistics .......................... 53
B. Theory of Regionalized Variables. .......................... 54
V. Analysis of Spatial Dependence................... ............ 56
A. Autocorrelation .. ................................. 56
B. Semi-variograms .................................... 57
VI. Interpolation by Kriging...... ............ ....... ............ 70
A. General .......... ....... ... .............. .... 70
B. Punctual Kriging ................ ........ ......... 71
C. Block Kriging .. ......... .. .. ....... ............. 75
D. Co-Kriging ................. ........... ..... ....... .. 80
E. Universal Kriging .... ....................... ....... 85
F. Kriging from Non-normally Distributed Data ................. 88
VII. Perspectives: Future Use of Geostatistics in Soil Research .............. 89
References ................ ............. ...... ..... 91


The precision of statements that can be made about soil properties at any
location depends largely on the amount of variation within the area sampled.
As heterogeneity of soils increases, the precision of statements about their

Copyright o 1985 by Academic Press. Inc.
All rights of reproduction in any form reserved.



Program Goal

The principal goal of the TropSoils program is to uncover principle which

will enable resource-poor farmers to adopt soil management practice that will

increase and stablize farm productivity and family income and, at the same time

preserve land quality for future generations. The research strategy is

designed to ensure that social, cultural, economic and environmental factors

that enhance adoption of soil management innovations are made an integral part

of the research plan. To achieve its goal, the program conducts a significant

part of its research in farmers' fields, using systems-based research.

The Problem

A backlog of potentially beneficial soil management practices remains

unused because the people who need them most do not have the time, resources or

skills to test every promising practice in each biophysical and socioeconomic

setting. The ecological range over which farmers operate is so broad that even

the largest research network cannot hope to deal with the uniqueness of every

farming system. Today the cost of testing new crops, products and practices in

existing farming systems far exceeds the cost to produce the crop, product or

practice. And if the new field of biotechnology delivers on its promise to

produce even more innovations, the inability to match the requirements of

technology to the resource characteristics of farmers will continue to be the

major bottleneck to agricultural development.

The Challenge

The Agency for International Development working with U.S. and host

country institutions is developing the means to overcome bottlenecks that now

prevent rapid integration of new crops, products and practices into existing

farming systems to make them more productive, stable, equitable and

sustainable. But at the same time, AID, the U.S. institutions and the host

country agencies are faced with diminishing resources to carry out their

responsibilities. The new challenge for the group, and particularly for the

U.S. institutions, is to provide more service of better quality with fewer

resources. To do so the U.S. institutions with their large technical base

must provide the scientific leadership to create with the USAID mission and

host country agencies the research structure to move quickly and efficiently,

the huge backlog of underexploited agroproduction technology from research

centers to farmer fields.


Recent advances in computer technology and artificial intelligence present

the Indonesia TropSoils program with an opportunity and responsibility to

measureably increase the flow of agroproduction technology from research

centers to farmer fields. These advances include personal computers with near

mainframe capability, data base management software to store large quantities

of information in readily retrievable form, and new developments in the

artificial intelligence field covering such areas as theorem proving, game

playing, machine learning, pattern recognition, natural language processing,

robotics, machine cognition and expert systems.

These advances in information technology enables agricultural researchers

to replace slow and costly trial and error research with systems-based

research. The central concept of systems-based research is that the whole

system must be understood in order to evaluate changes in any single system

component. This approach brings together existing acknowledge of the farming

system, identifies major components and processes and their interactions, and

seeks to identify the bottlenecks to improve performance.

Until recently this approach could not be applied to complex systems

consisting of large number of interdependent and interacting factors. Advances

in information technology now enable users to organize a minimum set of

relevant data to simulate complex process in agricultural systems so that

costly and time consuming trial and error adjustments can be avoided.

The basic aim of systems-based research is to enable users to apply

knowledge of specific processes in complex agricultural systems and then to be

able to utilize this knowledge to obtain a comprehensive understanding of

the way the systems operates as a whole. A thorough understanding of systems

operation is the basis for developing expert systems and simulation models that

mimic, and therefore, predict the behavior and performance of each part as

it interacts with other parts in the system. Understanding and prediction, in

turn, provide the basis for controlling outcomes. A thorough understanding

of how agricultural systems operate is crucial to helping farmers and

government planners control outcomes in desirable and predictable ways.

Data Bases, Expert Systems and Simulation Models

Data bases on the one hand and expert systems and simulation models on the

other are the critical ingredients of a systems-based research strategy.

Figure 1 illustrates how data bases and experts system/simulation models relate

to predicting and controlling outcomes of alternative choices. Predicted

outcomes have no credibility with users until the models that produce them have

been tested and validated in a number of environmentally different locations.

A simulation model is considered to be validated if it can reliably predict the

performance and yield of a crop anywhere in Indonesia, at any time of the year

and for a wide range of soil management options. To do so, the model must have

access to a data base that contain (1) a genetic resource data base, (2) a soil

resource data base and (3) a weather data base.

Simulation models are particularly useful for strategic planning by

government planners. With the proper natural resource data base for a country,

a planner can simulate the performance of a crop, product or practice for any

location and for as many years as one wishes. Simulation models are

indispensable not only because they provide answers cheaply, but because they

can do what no researcher can do experimentally. Models can simulate processes

for 25, 50, or 100 years. It is now possible to execute one year of simulation

in two or three seconds on a mainframe computer or two to three minutes on a

personal computer. Long term simulations require long term weather data.

Since few countries have long term weather data, modelers have developed

weather generators to extend 15-20 year weather data into long term

probabilistic weather patterns. The long term simulated results are

particularly valuable for risk analysis and will show the distribution of good

and bad years for a particular location and crop.

Expert systems are more useful for tactical planning at the farm level.

They can be used to identify and control plant diseases, schedule irrigation,

fertilizer application or spraying. The TropSoils Project, for example, has

produced an expert system to assist users to make lime recommendation to

correct soil acidity. By distilling and condensing the knowledge of human

experts into a set of interlinked rules, knowledge engineers are able to

develop computerized expert systems that enable young and inexperienced


extension agents to shift through a large knowledge base in a matter of few

minutes to obtain expert recommendations for specific problems for a specific

location and situation.

Using Farmer Knowledge in Decision Making

The power of expert systems lies in the system's capacity to capture and

mimic knowledge known not only to scientists, but to farmers as well.

Scientists generate quantitative, mechanistic knowledge that can be expressed

mathematically. This type of knowledge has been called algorithmic knowledge.

Farmers, on the other hand, employ rules of thumb, educated guesses, intuitive

judgements or what we call, plain common sense. This type of knowledge which

is receiving increasing attention in the field of artificial intelligence is

known as heuristic knowledge.

One reason for the poor communication between researchers and farmers is

that researchers think algorithmically whereas, farmers think heuristically.

In systems-based research, both types of knowledge and thinking process are

needed to enable both researcher and farmer to make responsible choices which

result in desired outcomes. But with few exceptions, researchers rarely take

time to ask the crucial questions of farmers. It is here that a social

scientists can make a difference by coupling algorithmic to heuristic knowledge

by serving as the "cultural broker" between farmer and scientist. It is the

social scientist's responsibility to see that the relevant farm data is

collected and that the chain of rules that link a given set of input conditions

to an appropriate output is uncovered.

Prototype Decision Support System

When the TropSoils program comes to an end, a computerized, interactive,

decision support system that provides users with easy access to data bases and

decision models to support decision making tasks for strategic planning by

government agencies and tactical planning for farmers by extension agents

should be in place. Like all decision support systems, this prototype is

designed to answer "what if" questions. What if a new cultivar of a soybean

were introduced into an area where soybean had never been grown? How will it

perform there? Will it do better in certain months? What would be the best

seeding rate? Do soils of that region pose special problems to soybean

production? Would lime application benefit the crop? What diseases and

insects can a grower expect to encounter and what measures would one need to

take to protect the crop from them? Are there crops other than soybean that

would do as well, be more profitable or present less risk?

To answer these questions and many more like them for different crops,

different locations and different situation, three essential elements of the

decision support system must be in place at project's end. These elements are

(1) the natural resource (soil, climate, plant genetics) data base, (2) the

decision models (crop simulation models and expert system), and (3) a dialog

generator (means through which users communicate with decision support


It is not the intent of the TropSoils Project to develop a decision

support system from scratch. Software for such systems are commercially

available and a suitable system currently under development by another AID

funded projects is available for use by the TropSoils program.

The value of a decision support system is that it serves as an instrument

for integrating the various components of a national agricultural research into

a coherent whole. In this way the TropSoils program is able to conduct its

research in concert with other activities of the national research system.

TropSoils considers this integration to be an essential part of systems-based



The objective of the Indonesia TropSoils Project is to establish a

prototype decision support system in Indonesia that will:

integrate TropSoils research with the national agricultural development


produce user-oriented decision models by adding farmer knowledge to the

knowledge base;

render soil management experimental results directly useful for decision

making; and

increase efficiency of soils-related research.


EXPERT SYSTEMS preservation


o o
o *




Figure 1. Systems-based research produces knowledge that enables clients to
make responsible choices which result in desired outcomes.

h North Carolina State University

Scliool of Agriculture and Life Sciences

M ianpiagvrm nt E|ityl)
Soil Managemeni CRSP
Box 7113. Raleigh 2z;ig-ri13
(9'9) 737-392=

July 8, 1986

Dr. Goro Uehara
Department of Agronomy and Soil Science
University of Hawaii
Honolulu, HI 96822

Dear Goro:

This reply is to your recent letter concerning employment
of Dr. Vickie Sigman as a replacement for Dr. Carol Colfer.

There are a number of factors which lead to the conclusion
that we should not fill the Colfer position at this time. These
include: (1) a need to review the accomplishments of Carol's
program, (2) the need to determine the future course of re-
search in the socio-economic area of work, (3) determine
the priority which this activity is given relative to other
needs, (4) arrive at a decision on how we are to address the
economic component of the program for which USAID is pressing us
on and (5) continued uncertainty on funding.

Dr. Sigman's training and orientation is in the extension
area, and while this is quite important to Indonesia in general,
there is continuing concern within AID/W about using TropSoils'
funds for this type of work.

My recommendations are: (1) explore arrangements for re-
taining Carol as a consultant on the program until a future
course of action is determined and (2) not consider Dr. Sigman
for a position in the program.

Thanks for providing me an opportunity to comment on this


C. B. McCants


North Carolina State Unier,sity is a Land-Grant Uniuersity and a constituent institution oj The Univrrsitv of North Carolna

:- \


University of Hawaii at Manoa

College of Tropical Agriculture and Human Resources
TROPSOIL Project Soil Management CRSP
Department of Agronomy and Soil Science
2500 Dole Street Krauss Hall 22 Honolulu. Hawaii 96822
Telephone: (808) 948-8858 Cable Address: UNIHAW

July 3, 1986

Dr. C. B. McCants
Director, Management Entity
Soil Management CRSP
N. C. St-ate University
P. 0. Box 7113
Raleigh, North Carolina 27695-7113

Dear Dr. McCants:

This is to request approval to proceed with the recruitment of a
replacement for Dr. Carol Colfer. This request is based on the personnel
requirement indicated in the "CRS/TropSoils Three Year Work Plan, October
1986-1989" prepared by us in May, revised by USAID and Indonesian
representatives in June and returned to you by Ms. Joanne Hale.

I was very pleased with the revised work plan. I thought the changes were
few and appropriate. It is a plan which I feel will serve us well.

We will proceed with recruitment of a farming systems specialist as soon
as we receive formal approval to do so from your office.


Goro Uehara
Principal Investigator


cc S. -E-1-Swaify--
A. Demb/M. R..: Smith
G -- -yTWO===IE! r z


(/AJ f- ,

23 June 1986

Social Science Contribution to Soil Management:

The Tropsoils Example, From the View of an Anthropologist

(Carol J. Pierce Colfer)

Despite general acceptance within the Sitiung Tropsoils

team, there has been a recurrent necessity to "justify" the

participation of a social scientist on the team to outsiders.

The following represents an attempt to express the kinds of

contributions I have made to the research in Sitiung. The

relevance of this kind of contribution depends on acceptance of

the following assumptions:

Agricultural research is undertaken to contribute to

knowledge, to enhance human quality of life, and to protect the

environment, as well as to increase agricultural yields.

There has often been a problem matching soil management

(and other) technology to the people who will use it.

Such a match is desirable.

Given these assumptions, there have been five basic kinds of

contributions I believe I have made. These are:

I. Responsibility for MakinQ the "Match". Although there is

often general agreement that human factors are important, when a

team is composed purely of agricultural scientists, there is a

tendency to neglect this aspect. Scientists, almost by

definition, have their particular bailiwicks about which they are

interested and in which they are trained. In any science there

are sufficient research needs to keep the scientists busy.

Paying attention to human factors, though perhaps desirable, is

time consuming; and scientists tend to consider it outside their

realm of expertise. Therefore they frequently don't do it. The

simple fact that I was part of the team, with the specific

responsibility to attend to such matters, contributed to various

research decisions which were responsive to human factors.

For instance, our current work on home gardens would

probably never have been undertaken. Despite the different

opportunities and constraints affecting home gardens vis-a-vis

upland fields, there appears to be a perception within

agriculture in general that the former are of marginal

importance. The economic and nutritional significance of home

gardens, as well as the opportunity to work more effectively with

women farmers (whom we have found to be very involved in

agricultural endeavours), came to our attention because of my


Similarly the important differences in indigenous farming

systems vis-a-vis transmigrant farming systems would likely have

escaped notice (as they have in every other agricultural project

with which I am familiar in Indonesia). There is a strong

government interest in transmigrants and considerable pressure to

attend to their agricultural needs. However, from an equity

point of view, as well as a potential source of knowledge and

experience about the local environment, research on matters of

concern to the indigenous population is warranted. The

observation that different management practices characterized the

different ethnic groups (a result of my work) has prompted us to

do a variety of experiments on different tillage practices, and

to urge'(as strongly as possible) the inclusion of research on

tree crops (especially with a marketable product) in this


II. Experience Dealing with Communities. The reticence of

agricultural scientists to work with people is only partly due to

overwork. Another important factor is their lack of experience

and training in how to do it (reasonably enough!). One of my

contributions has been to provide guidance in ways to deal with

farmers in a constructive manner.

One of our most valuable activities, for making the "match"

between technology and people, has been our collaborative work

with farmers in Sitiung V. In this work, we would develop

tentative research designs, submit them to the farmers, and

revise them so they were consistent with the goals .of both

farmers and researchers. We would then monitor their

implementation of our joint plans .

Agricultural scientists are frequently trained to look at

their activities as quite uni-directional. That is, they are

familiar with the usual extension systems where the researcher

does science, and then passes the "truth" on to the extension

agent, who in turn passes it on to the (lowly) farmer. We were

trying to operate under a different model: one where both the

farmers and the researchers brought knowledge and experience of

value to the joint endeavour. We were trying to collaborate,

joining their experience with our science. However, getting at

unfamiliar systems is not always easy.. Farmers may fear

researchers; or they may be unduly respectful of educated people,

and thud unwilling to share their views; or they may simply

delight in misleading outsiders.

Anthropologists are trained to understand alien systems. We

know simple techniques for learning people's views. The most

important techniques are extremely simple, but they do have to be

known. For example, I instructed my coworkers, on our first

sortee into the communities of Sitiung,

to listen and look, to record their observations,

to adopt a nonjudgmental attitude, to refrain from

correcting or arguing with misinformation; rather to note it down

for later reference.

to treat the farmers as equals, recognizing and

respecting their different kinds of knowledge/experience.

to notice as much as possible about their way of life

(e.g., division of labour, decisionmaking, health status, food

consumption patterns, family composition, anything that might

bear on agricultural activity).

And as we worked with the farmers, I frequently gave

guidance, as needed or requested. For instance, in meetings with

farmers of three ethnic groups, I noted that one Indonesian

coworker tended to address his remarks only to farmers of his own

ethnic group; whereas we actually wanted input from all. The

"slight" was unintentional, and he was happy to make eye contact

all around. I sometimes reminded my coworkers of the necessity

to check farmers' statements, by asking others or by observing

what they actually did. Despite women's observable involvement

in agriculture, coworkers sometimes forgot---prompting a comment

from me.

My ability to make this kind of contribution effectively was

greatly enhanced by the particular personalities of my coworkers

who appeared genuinely to want such advice from me. I also think

the willingness of farmers to express their points of view (which

we very much needed to know) was greatly enhanced by the

sympathetic atmosphere we were able to create by use of such

simple techniques as listening attentively, behaving

respectfully, and trying to comply with local custom to some


III. Taking a Holistic View. Although agriculture is

important to farmers, they remain enmeshed in a cultural system

which includes such diverse components as kinship, religion,

politics, education, health, and so on. Even within agriculture,

there are a variety of components of importance.

Agricultural scientists are trained in experimental research

designs. They think in terms of plots, fertilizer rates, ECEC,

and ANOVAS. That is their work. By looking at the Sitiung

context in a holistic manner, I was able to balance this

(necessary) preoccupation with the specifics of soil science,

with a grounding of sorts in the real world.

Unlike some farming systems projects, our goal was not to

address the whole farming system. Rather it was to keep in mind

the whole farming system, while determining our soil management

priorities. We used soil management practices (and global

issues) as the focus of Tropsoils activity, and investigated

other human spheres insofar as they appeared to have a link to,

or effect on, soil management.

Examples of my contributions in this sphere included such

things as:

During a team discussion of fertilizer rates on a new

experiment, someone suggests including a treatment with 6 tons bf

lime/ha. I remind them that farmers cannot afford that (though

we may still decide it's worthwhile for other reasons).

A team member suggests a new trial using cowpeas as a

crop because they are so aluminum tolerant. I remind them that

people don't really eat cowpeas, and can't get a very good price

for them.

The team is trying to decide whether it makes sense to do

an experiment on pasture grasses and legumes. I point out the

number of cattle and goats that are stall fed in Sitiung I, and

the amount of time people spend finding fodder for their animals,

in support of such an experiment.

Due to team labor shortage, we are considering abandoning

our "tree systems" trial. I remind them of the reduced labor

requirement for farmers of tree crops, as well as the higher cash

incomes, erosion control, source of organic matter, and lower

risk, as compared to food crops.

One of our surveys has shown that nutritional status in

the area is marginal. I suggest we initiate some experiments on

vegetable crops to enhance nutrition while doing soil science.

The suggestion is taken, and a comparison of barnyard manure,

composting, and inorganic fertilizers is initiated.

Building on this holistic approach to data collection

(systemic, yet tied to soil management), I have made some

progress in integrating such information into an expert system.

I expect to continue with this in the future.

IV. Provision of Specific Information. Anthropologists are

also trained in various research methods for getting at specific

kinds of information about people. A number of "special studies"

were designed on site in response to information needs perceived

by team members.

The agricultural scientists jumped right into experiments

on fertilizer and lime use, but they soon realized they wanted to

know how much cash farmers had available for the purchase of such

inputs. So we planned and conducted a survey to find out sources

and amounts of income.

We were concerned that our project not have deleterious

effects on community nutrition (a result of some agriculture

projects in the past). But to determine that, we needed a

measure of nutritional status in Sitiung. We interviewed 80

families for two days and recorded their food consumption during

that time.

We began to suspect that the local farming system

(Minang) might have some important pointers for us if only we

understood it better. We arranged for a four month study by an

Andalas University student in a nearby Minang village, focusing

on its tree farming practices.

Team members began to wonder what farmers saw as the

primary constraints to their production. So again we planned and

implemented a small, indepth survey to find out.

V. Research of Anthropological Interest. Although I have

seen my role on this project as supportive, by and large, I also

felt some commitment to do some research of a more scientific

nature---research on global concerns in social science. One of

the first studies I initiated on coming to Sitiung, besides the

collaborative research with farmers, was a time allocation study.

I knew we'd want to know what people were engaged in, how much

time was spent on what activities, and who was doing what. The

time allocation study mentioned above has done double duty in

this regard. Since I have used the same method in four

communities and among four ethnic groups, useful comparisons and

generalizations are possible.

My Galileo study measuring perceptions of soil as they

differed by ethnic group was not dictated by specific team needs

so much as by the absence of information on people's perceptions

of soil. Such a study seemed a legitimate contribution to soil

management in and of itself, since people's behaviour toward the

soil is influenced by their perceptions of it. It also has

significant possibilities for use in extension.

The related "Indigenous Knowledge Study" aims to compare the

"soil science" of the Minang with that of the soil scientists.

Do the Minang, thoroughly familiar with this environment,

recognize important differentiations that have escaped our

notice? Do their methods of choosing good land mesh with our own?

Do they alter their soil management practices by land type, and

if so, how? And so on.

The above discussion is intended to provide clarification to

those uncertain about the nature of anthropological input on a

soil management research project.

University of Hawaii at Manoa

College of Tropical Agriculture and Human Resources
TROPSOIL Project Soil Management CRSP
Department of Agronomy and Soil Science
2500 Dole Street Krauss Hall 22 Honolulu, Hawaii 96822
Telephone: (808) 948-8858 Cable Address: UNIHAW
February 3, 1986

Mr. Richard A. Cobb
Office of Agriculture
& Rural Development
APO San Francisco 96356-5000

Dear Mr. Cobb:

Within the next six months, the Indonesia TropSoils Project will undergo a
complete change in senior staff. Two new scientists, Drs. Lalit Arya and Ron
Guyton, are being readied for assignment in Indonesia and we plan to advertise
for Carol Colfer's replacement as soon as we learn more about our budget
situation. The tight budget situation and the change in personnel offer us a
timely opportunity to reassess our current objectives and to set new priorities
for our activities in Indonesia.

The purpose of this letter is to explore the possibility of a meeting of
Indonesian, USAID Mission and TropSoils representatives to discuss and jointly
develop a plan of action for the TropSoils Project that would be acceptable to
all parties. I firmly believe that for the TropSoils Project to be effective,
its activities must be consistent with the agricultural development goals set by
the Mission and Indonesian government. For this reason, I hope you will not
only agree to such a meeting, but will strongly endorse it.

If all parties agree to such a plan, we are prepared to meet with you, your
staff and Indonesian representatives at a place and time of your choice. The
obvious place would be the USAID Mission in Jakarta, but we are also prepared to
host the meeting at the University of Hawaii. A meeting in Hawaii will enable
the group to see the full problem-solving capability the university can bring to
bear on soil-related constraints in Indonesia. Some of this capability is being
condensed in microcomputer software for distribution and application in

A convenient meeting time for us would be the week of March 24 when we will
be free of teaching duties.


Mr. R. A. Cobb
February 3, 1986
Page 2

I look forward to hearing from you.


Goro Uehara
Program Coordinator

GU: nm

cc: C. Colfer
A. Demb
S. El-Swaify
C. B. McCants
P. A. Sanchez
G. Y. Tsuji


October 1986 September 1987

(prepared May 30, 1986)

I. Goal The principal goal of the TropSoils program is to uncover

principles which will enable resource-poor farmers to adopt soil management

practices that will increase farm productivity and family income, and at the

same time preserve land quality for future generations. The research strategy

is designed to ensure that social, cultural, economic and environmental factors

that enhance adoption of soil management innovations are made an integral part

of the research plan.

II. General Objectives The overall objective of the Indonesia TropSoils

Project is to establish a decision support system that will:

integrate TropSoils research with the national agricultural development


produce user-oriented decision models by adding farmer knowledge to the

knowledge base;

render soil management experimental results directly useful for

decision making; and

increase efficiency of soils-related research.

III. Activities and Associated Personnel TropSoils is a collaborative

project between the Centre for Soil Research, the University of Hawaii, and

North Carolina State University. Since it is impossible to separate the

Indonesian and American components of the project precisely, the research

described herein is that which will be conducted or directly supervised by UH

and NCSU.

The anticipated project team will include Ron Guyton (senior agronomist),

Lalit Arya (senior soil physicist), Carl Evensen (junior agronomist), Stacy

Evensen (nutritionist), Stephenie Kan (junior agricultural economics graduate

student), unnamed senior farming systems researcher with interest/experience in

extension, and an unnamed junior agroforester. Changes and additions may occur

due to funding uncertainties, and the unavailability of new team members to

participate in this planning process.

The following six major categories summarize our Indonesian on-site

program. Rationale, activities, and personnel requirements are listed for


1. Liming and Soil Fertility


Various lime trials have been done in Sitiung. The initial results have

been consistent with published information regarding soil acidity on similar

soils in other parts of the world. However, there is a noticeable lack of long

term lime studies on soils in Indonesia, as well as in the humid tropics in

general. Now we have the opportunity to study long term aspects of liming as

indicated below:

Maintenance: Studying annual lime application for maintaining an

established or desired level of acidity.

Residual: Duration or length of effectiveness of a single application.

Downward Movement of Ca into the soil profile and its effect on crop


Effectiveness of lime on various soil types.

Soil Fertility

Phosphorus: The studies on phosphorus have consistently indicated a very

strong response to P fertilizer on previously unfertilized soils, but relatively

low rates of both initial and maintenance applications have been sufficient to

establish and maintain plateau crop yields. A more indepth look at the

maintenance or longterm phosphorus fertilizer requirements needs to be done.

Also, experimentation of the interaction of phosphorus with lime has recently

been initiated and should be continued.

Potassium: There has been a remarkable response to K fertilizer on

Sitiung soils, requiring high rates and frequent applications to provide plateau

yields of most food crops. Apparently potassium leaches very rapidly from the

soil and at least one study (effect of organic materials on the replenishment of

potassium and curtailment of leaching) should be continued. Conservation of

potassium will be critical to establishing viable and continuous crop


Micronutrients: No experimentation has been initiated to date by

TropSoils on micronutrients. We have not witnessed any identifiable

deficiencies in either our research plots or farmer fields. However, a survey

of plant tissue from various locations and crops would help establish the

general micronutrient status of the soils and relevance of future research on

that subject.

All of the above topics will provide experimental data that can be used by

the CSR soil testing program, led by I. P. Gedjer Widjaja-Adhi, to help

establish valid indices for making lime and fertilizer recommendations, using an

expert system. The established trials will be supervised by Ron Guyton, and new

trials will be done in collaboration with anticipated new CSR personnel.

2. Soil and Water Conservation Work to date by TropSoils has illustrated

that soil moisture shortages, soil erosion, and excessive runoff are serious

problems in West Sumatra. Despite 2500-3000mm of annual rainfall, crops suffer

from moisture stress that eventually results in serious reductions in yields.

Crop roots appear to be confined within the depth of tillage, which is

manually performed with a hoe to a depth of ten to fifteen cm. This shallow

rooting depth reduces the amount of water stored in the soil that is available

to the plants. Thus, crops cannot utilize any of the soil moisture stored below

a depth of 6 inches. There is reason to believe that a further major

restriction to root development is the presence of toxic levels of aluminum

below the depth of tillage and, therefore below the depth of lime incorporation.

Neutralizing soil acidity creates favorable conditions for root growth and a

favorable chemical environment for nutrient availability

Soil moisture storage is affected by internal drainage conditions.

Although the West Sumatra soils are clayey, many of them are composed of stable

aggregates. We believe that much of the infiltrated water rapidly drains below

the root zone. It may be possible to alter the soils structure to impede this

internal drainage, thus increasing soil moisture storage in the root zone.

On the steeper cultivated slopes, excessive runoff and soil erosion occur

quite easily. A large portion of the rainfall that otherwise could be stored in

the soil profile is lost to runoff. Continued removal of topsoil, which holds

the limited amount of plant nutrients results in a serious decline in

productivity. The problem is most serious for resource-poor farmers because

they cannot easily replenish the lost nutrients and other inputs to restore soil

productivity. It is imperative that management practices developed for farmers

in this region be conservation-effective practices in order to sustain economic

crop production in this humid environment.

During 1986-1987, the major focus of research will be oriented toward the

following objectives:

Determining the extent and rate of downward movement of lime and the

effect on root development and water absorption;

Characterizing the available water retention properties of soils in the

Sitiung area;

Investigating the effect of residues, both surface and incorporated, on

water retention and soil losses;

Exploring the potential of various conservation effective farming

systems; and,

Investigating the effects of current and revised tillage practices on

soil and water conservation.

Anticipated non-CSR personnel involved in this project will include Lalit

Arya and a junior scientist. Involvement by the farming systems researcher in

the study is expected.

3. Organic Material and Forage Management The marked response of some crops

to green manure in previous experiments in Sitiung has suggested that the proper

management of organic materials might reduce the need for lime and fertilizers

on Sitiung farms. Also, the importance of livestock and difficulties in finding

adequate feed has suggested the need to assess more productive forage systems.

A series of experiments has been initiated in Sitiung to 1) quantify the

influence of green manures on crop yields, 2) evaluate fertilizer and

herbaceous legumes and forage grasses for use on transmigrant farms, and 3) to

incorporate information from Sitiung transmigrants in the selection and design

of green manure and forage management systems. These are:

Alley Cropping: There is presently one experiment being conducted to

determine the green manure and wood productivity of three legume trees at three

levels of lime application and their influence on intercropped food crops.

Source and Application Method of Green Manure: Two experiments are

being conducted to compare methods of production and application of two species

of herbaceous legumes.

Forage Crop Evaluation: Two experiments are underway designed to select

promising forage and green manure species and determine their fertilizer


Compost: A farmer-managed experiment is being conducted in Sitiung home

gardens to compare crop response to compost, farmyard manure, inorganic

fertilizers and fishpond sludge; and to assess the interest of farmers in these

different fertilizers and amendments.

Carl Evensen and Russell Yost in Hawaii are the primary researchers in

this series of experiments. For the composting trials, Carl will be assisted by

Stacy Evensen and the farming systems researcher.

4. Agroforestry The farming system of the indigenous population of Sitiung

includes shifting cultivation which culminates in tree crops (rubber, coffee,

fruit trees). A variety of tree crops are also grown on transmigrant home

gardens. The appropriateness and advantages of tree crops in the Sitiung

environment are now obvious, including tolerance to soil acidity, reduced risk

of pests, soil conservation, more effective use of available soil moisture, more

reliable cash incomes, and lower human labor requirements. It appears that the

development of improved soil management practices for field crops alone will

1) not result in a satisfactory income for transmigrants, and 2) is not

consistent with the farming system of the indigenous population at all. The

following activities have high priority:

Legume Tree Evaluation: This experiment has been undertaken in

collaboration with NFTA, investigating the nitrogen contribution of these

leguminous trees, and assessing suitability for the Sitiung environment.

Food-Tree Intercrop: Ideally a whole series of experiments would be

initiated which use these kinds of crop mixtures. Such experiments could focus

on soil fertility, soil biology, soil physical and/or conservation questions.

leguminous trees, and assessing suitability for the Sitiung environment.

Food-Tree Intercrop: Ideally a whole series of experiments would be

initiated which use these kinds of crop mixtures. Such experiments could focus

on soil fertility, soil biology, soil physical and/or conservation questions.

The legume tree evaluation is being undertaken by Carl Evensen. The

planned agroforestry graduate student would be responsible for the series of

experiments called "Food-Tree Intercrop". This would be an ideal context in

which to collaborate with another institution such as the Horticulture research

station in Solok, the Abai Siat Rubber Replanting Project in the Sitiung area,

or the NES coconut project in Rimbo Bujang.

5. Extrapolation Soil management research on infertile, strongly acid, Red

Yellow Podzolic soils of Indonesia by the TropSoils Project has uncovered three

major soil constraints that restrict crop yields. These are aluminum toxicity,

and severe phosphorus and potassium deficiencies. Project personnel have

developed a computerized expert system that enables extension agent to make

recommendations to neutralize toxic aluminum with lime or organic matter. The

research on phosphorus shows that although the soils are severely deficient in

this element, the problem can be corrected with relatively low initial, and

still lower maintenance, rates. In the case of potassium, rapid leaching of

this nutrient from the root zone into the toxic subsoil renders this element

more difficult to manage in these soils than similar clay soils elsewhere in the

world. Research, however, proves that lime and organic matter improve the

potassium fertilizer use efficiency by crops.

This two part activity is designed to test the technical, economic and

social suitability of TropSoils research findings in farmer fields.

The first part consists of testing the accuracy of the lime rates

recommended by an expert system, and establishing the range of transferability

of the low phosphorus fixation rate, the high potassium leaching rate and the

effectiveness of green manure to counter the toxic effects of aluminum in acid,

Red Yellow Podzolic soils of Indonesia. In addition, efforts will be made to

incorporate the diverse kinds of social science input into an expert systems

designed to predict the crops likely to be grown.

In line with the farming systems approach being utilized, the technologies

and systems identified as promising must be tested under farmer conditions. A

tentative set of "Best Management Practices" has been identified and the process

of testing the systems will be initiated. Similarly, two or three "special

studies" on aspects of the farming systems can be expected, dictated by

observations and information needs of the team. One, year-long study that will

be completed is the characterization of home gardens. An enterprise record

keeping study is being initiated and will be partially completed during this


The work in Sitiung will be carried out with the assistance of local

extension agents. To do so, appropriate contacts with extension officials and

provincial administrators will be required.

In addition, the project will require the services of an economist to

evaluate the benefits that accrue to users of the technology. The Farming

Systems Researcher will evaluate farmer reactions to the innovation and the

likelihood of their retaining the technology, as well as providing ongoing

feedback to other members of the team on matters related to farmer acceptance of

technology. Continued support is anticipated from Perry Philipp, Hal McArthur,

Kathy Wilson, and Carol Dixon at the University of Hawaii.

The development of the decision support system will continue at the

University of Hawaii, under the leadership of Goro Uehara, Russell Yost and

Steve Itoga.

6. Linkages The goals and objectives of TropSoils are closely related to

these many other programs and institutions in Indonesia. The total

accomplishments of these programs can be increased by periodic interaction to

share relevant information, and by working collaboratively where mutually

beneficial results can be achieved. Since its beginning in Indonesia, TropSoils

has had a highly beneficial collaborative relationship with the Centre for Soil

Research. However, there appear to be additional opportunities to add to this


As a means to initiate these actions, the following are suggested:

a. Continue the major collaborative effort with the Centre for Soil

Research in the same manner as has existed from the beginning of the


b. Appoint a joint committee to devise a plan and promote the

extrapolation of current technology on the proper use of lime. The

composition of the committee would include a representative from CSR,

one from Extension and one from TropSoils.

c. Initiate an exchange of the Annual Work Plans between the TropSoils

program and the SARIF program in Sitiung.

d. Conduct and annual joint meeting to review the accomplishments of each

program during the past year, and the plans for activities during the

coming year.

e. Maintain a sensitivity to the opportunities which may arise for

collaboration with other institutions which could be mutually


7. Constraints Major constraints to accomplishing the activities identified

above, in addition to uncontrollable environmental factors, are personnel

staffing and adequate funds for operations.


The level of funding from TropSoils to support operating expenses, is most

uncertain. This is due in part to the uncertainty of actions by the U.S.

Congress and in part to the competing demands for TropSoils funds from

components of the program in other countries. While every effort will be made

by the Management Entity to maximize the funding for TropSoils Indonesia,

substantial additional support will be required to conduct fully the activities

set forth above.

University of Hawaii at Manoa

College of Tropical Agriculture and Human Resources
TROPSOIL-Project-. Soil Management CRSP
Department of Agronomy and Soil Science
2500 Dole Street Krauss Hall 22 Honolulu. Hawaii 96822
Telephone: (808) 948-8858 Cable Address: UNIHAW

February 24, 1987

Dr. C.B. McCants
Director, Management Entity
Soil Management CRSP
N. C. State University
P. 0. Box 7113
Raleigh, North Carolina 27695-7113

Dear Charlie:

I am sure you were as disappointed as I was of the outcome of the
Indonesia TropSoils program review. Larry Apple has told Hal McArthur that the
review went badly. My feeling is that the review document will be more a
reflection of the continuing disagreements between you and me than a true
assessment of program quality. A program that sometimes receives compliments
from the USAID Mission must have some good qualities.

I am writing this letter to propose a plan which will ensure that future
disagreements between you and me do not spill over into, and damage the
program. This is not to say that you and I should not disagree in the future.
I believe a certain amount of tension is healthy and can be channeled to serve
useful ends.

As we now operate, you and I seem to be headed in different directions to
the detriment of the project. I have spent an inordinate amount of energy
getting farming systems research, geostatistics and expert systems accepted. I
now find myself in the same situation with modeling and decision support
systems. It almost seems as if success in Indonesia is acceptable only if it
occurs on your terms. My fears were confirmed when I heard from one of the
panel members in Sitiung that Mike Wade was coming to Indonesia to develop work
plans for the TropSoils project. It appeared to me that the recommendations of
the review panel had already been decided before the review had begun.

I could accept that plan if the TropSoils program were on the verge of
being asked by the Mission to leave the country. But the opposite is true, and
furthermore, Mike did not leave Sitiung voluntarily, but was forced to do so by
District Officials. While we all supported Mike during that period, to invite
him back to Sitiung would only open old wounds. Lalit and Ron were called in
by District Officials and interrogated to ascertain whether the incident that
led to Mike's expulsion from Sitiung might recur.

My choice would be to invite Vickie Sigman to a project planning meeting
in Sitiung if she is selected as the social scientist for the project. She

Dr. C.B. McCants
February 24, 1987
Page 2

knows a great deal about the project, having put together a case study of the
project after two visits to Sitiung. -She also -must develop work plans that
coincide with her interests and skills. But here again, we will probably
disagree. When I wrote to you about filling the vacant social scientist
position, you clearly indicated that you did not believe Vickie was the right
person for the position.

You and I want the TropSoils program to succeed. The responsibility of
making the program successful rests with me. By imposing your agenda on the
project, you create uncertainties about where we are headed. I also find
myself in a position whereby I am blamed for failures but not credited for
successes. I would like to be in a position where I am fully responsible for
both failures and successes.

I propose that responsibility for all future program planning be delegated
to the program coordinator. The program coordinator will seek the advice of
the Management Entity in matters such as funding and country clearance, but
will be fully responsible for staffing and technical planning. The Management
Entity also has the administrative responsibility to see that the program
conforms to the intent of the CRSP.

There is much unfinished business from the old agreement between the
Management Entity and the University of Hawaii. I hope these issues will not
detract from the need to maintain a program whose success is fully in the hands
of the program coordinator.

If the Government of Indonesia and the Mission agree to some form of the
proposal we submitted to Joanne Hale, we will need to meet with them in the
near future to develop work plans. It will be more efficient for the program
coordinator to have full responsibility to contact the Mission and Indonesian
agencies to initiate the process.

I realize that the Indonesia TropSoils program cannot operate effectively
without the full support of the Management Entity, but we need to have a clear
understanding of what this support entails. I have stated my position so that
the actions I take in the future come as no surprise to you.

I look forward to working with you towards the goal of making the
Indonesia TropSoils program a truly outstanding example of the meaning of


Goro Uehara
Program Coordinator
cc: R. Smith
S. El-Swaify
G. Y. Tsuji


The purpose of this report is to outline actions which the University of

Hawaii proposes to take to strengthen the TropSoils research-team in Sitiung, -

West Sumatra. This report focuses primarily on the activities of two University

of Hawaii senior scientists, Drs. Lalit Arya and Ron Guyton. Since TropSoils is

a collaborative project between Indonesian research organizations and U.S.

Universities, and may, in the near future involve the USAID Mission, the

proposed strengthening activities will require the concurrence of all project

partners. The areas to be strengthened include: (1) language proficiency, (2)

team building and working as a team, (3) communication and reporting (4) funding

and financial management, and (5) expediting administrative details. Procedures

for measuring the effect of each of the above areas on team performance are


Strengthening Activities

1. Language Proficiency

a. Background

When the first TropSoils team arrived in Sitiung, two of the three

senior scientists spoke fluent Indonesian, had several years experience

living in rural Indonesia, and had indicated a preference to live in

villages with the local people than to occupy newly constructed houses near

the city of Solok offered to the team by the former Director of the then,

Soil Research Institute. The Soil Research Institute Director and the USAID

project monitor expressed strong reservations about permitting foreign

scientists to live among the local people. Time proved the team's decision

to be the right one, and because of the team's close proximity to people, it

was able to work with farmers and to match TropSoils research to farmer

needs. Fluency in Indonesian was a critical factor for conducting research

on farmer fields with farmers. This factor is as critical today as it was


b. Action Taken

Prior to leaving for Indonesia, Drs. Arya and Guyton were given an

intensive short course in Indonesian at the University of Hawaii. Their

hope that their language skills would improve with use and time in Sitiung

has been slower than expected. In view of this, Dr. Arya has obtained the

service of a language teacher from Padang to give language lessons to the

two senior scientists and their wives. The instruction began on March 15,

1987. The project pays for salary and living costs for the instructor.

c. Evaluation.

The program coordinator will ask the Indonesian Project Country

Coordinator and Project Site Coordinator to offer their assessment of the

senior scientists' ability to communicate in Indonesian to non-English

speaking technicians and to non-English speaking farmers. Their assessments

will be used to judge senior scientists' progress in language proficiency

with the aim to achieve acceptable performance six months from the starting

date of March 15, 1987.

2. Team Building and Working as a Team

a. Background

In an article entitled "Social Science and Soil Management" by Carol

Colfer which appeared in the Farming Systems Support Project Newsletter

(article attached), Dr. Colfer states:

"Several factors may have contributed to the

particular operating style we developed. First,

we had a 'team building' period in Honolulu before

we went to the field which emphasized the

existence of difference in approach between

disciplines and the importance of our coming to

understand each others' research styles. ."

This team building exercise was crucial to team performance in Sitiung.

It was a team decision to live among transmigrants in the villages, and it

was a team decision to employ a farming systems approach to soil management

research. But the decision on the part of the University of Hawaii to hire

an anthropologist instead of another soil scientist was the major cause for

the particular operating style that emerged out of the Indonesia TropSoils

project. The need for a social scientist on the team is as important today

as before. As another anthropologist from the International Potato Center

said "social scientists serve as cultural brokers between researchers and

the farmers."

The team does not now have the critical mass of researchers to do work

of value to farmers. It needs, as a minimum, four senior scientists to

meet its bio-physical and socio-economic requirements. Dr. Guyton was hired

to fill the biological needs of the project and Dr. Arya for the physical

needs. Dr. Guyton is crops-oriented, whereas Dr. Arya is physics-oriented.

The team needs a social scientist and an economist. Under the current

budget situation, such a team can be assembled only if the Soil Management

CRSP, the Government of Indonesia and the USAID Mission agree to pool their

resources to support the project.

b. Action Taken

In a letter to the TropSoils Management Entity dated 3 July 1986, the

University of Hawaii program coordinator requested approval to hire a social

scientist to replace Dr. Colfer. The request was denied (letter attached).

A second request (-July 16, 1986) reiterating the urgent need to hire a

social scientist was similarly denied.

c. Action Required.

Since the Management Entity is unwilling or unable to provide funds to

support a social scientist, this position must be filled with funds from

other sources. In view of the USAID Mission expression of interest in

supporting the project, this position is one that we would encourage the

Mission to fill. In this regard, Dr. Vickie Sigman, a social scientist with

expertise in training and agricultural extension has expressed strong

interest in applying for such a position. Dr. Sigman is currently stationed

in Bandung, Indonesia and will be available in June or July 1987. If she is

given assurance of such an opportunity, she will immediately undertake

intensive language training to upgrade her Indonesian language skills. Dr.

Sigman has twice visited the Sitiung site and has prepared a case study of

Dr. Colfer's work. She, like Dr. Colfer, enjoys village life in Sitiung.

We have also been advised that two agroeconomists are currently

stationed in Sukarami. They participated in an agroeconomic workshop

conducted by Dr. Harrington in Sitiung last year. When the review team

visited Sukarami in February 1987, Dr. Sarifuddin expressed strong interest

in collaborating with the TropSoils project. It is likely that given an

opportunity to participate in the development of a mutually beneficial work

plan, Dr. Sarifuddin will permit one of the agroeconomists to join the

TropSoils team.

We need to take early action to obtain an indication of the USAID

Mission's and Sukarami's willingness to strengthen the TropSoils project

team in this way.

c. Evaluation

Assuming that a team consisting of a biological, a physical, and two

junior scientists supported by the Soil Management CRSP, a social scientist

supported by the Mission, an agroeconomist supported by the Sukarami

Station, and several senior and junior scientists supported by the Center

for Soil Research can be assembled, such a team must meet together to

participate in a team building workshop. An output of the workshop would be

a detailed work plan for the TropSoils project specifying the role of each

participant in attaining the objectives, the activities involved, and their


The success of the team building exercise will be measured by the

quality of the work plan that is produced. Team performance in the months

ahead will be evaluated on the basis of its adherence to the work plan;

visits by Mission, AARD, and Soil Management CRSP staff; and periodic on

site reviews by the external evaluation panel.

3. Communication and Reporting

a. Background

The team communicates its activities and research findings to others

through the following mechanisms: (1) trip reports; (2) monthly financial

reports prepared by individual scientists and organized and compiled by the

Team Leader; (3) bi-monthly field status reports; (4) field research briefs

containing experimental data and research results, interpretations and

conclusions; (5) annual reports; (6) invited talks and papers and; (7)

journal articles.

b. Action Required

The team will continue to prepare these reports and submit copies to

the following: (1) the Center for Soil Research, (2) the Sukarami Station,

(3) the USAID Mission, (4) the Management Entity of the Soil Management

CRSP, and (5) the University of Hawaii.

c. Evaluation

The team will be judged on the basis of the quality and timeliness of

the reports.

4. Funding and Financial Management

a. Background

Owing to budget cuts, the Management Entity recommended that the number

of senior expatriate staff in Sitiung be reduced from three to two.

However, the budget cut of 51% does not permit the CRSP component of the

TropSoils project to support two senior scientists in Indonesia. To be

effective contributors to the TropSoils project involving AARD, Mission and

CRSP personnel, the CRSP scientists must be adequately supported by the CRSP

Management Entity.

b. Action Required

(1) The University of Hawaii will make a.request to the Management

Entity to increase the budget for the CRSP component of the

Indonesia TropSoils project.

(2) The University of Hawaii will prepare monthly financial reports

detailing the financial contributions of the CRSP component to the

TropSoils project. The CRSP component team leader will be

responsible for preparing and distributing this report.

(3) It would be useful to assign an individual team member from the AARD

units and the USAID Mission to prepare similar monthly financial

reports for distribution to all participating groups.

c. Evaluation

Timely submission of financial reports which accurately reflect the

contribution of each component will be the measure of success for this.


5. Expediting Administrative Details

a. Background

An inordinate amount of scientist time is spent in clearing shipments,

purchasing or repairing equipment, renewing passports, visas, etc.,

preparing for site visit, and sending messages by telex and telephone.

b. Action Required

The TropSoils project and other CRSP projects operating in Indonesia

need to maintain an office in Jakarta to expedite processing of the above.

c. Evaluation

A quantitative assessment of savings in scientist time and travel cost

can show the cost-effectiveness of maintaining an expediting office in


The University of Hawaii is prepared to discuss these actions with the

Indonesian organization and the Mission. It believes that these actions will

enable the new team to equal and even surpass the performance of the first team

that arrived in Sitiung in 1983.