• TABLE OF CONTENTS
HIDE
 Editor's note
 Chris Andrew talks about the...
 Farming systems research and...
 FSSP activities in West Africa
 Distribution of privately and cooperatively...
 Kansas State University hosts FSR/E...






Title: Farming Systems Support Project newsletter
ALL VOLUMES CITATION THUMBNAILS PAGE IMAGE ZOOMABLE PAGE TEXT
Full Citation
STANDARD VIEW MARC VIEW
Permanent Link: http://ufdc.ufl.edu/UF00071908/00001
 Material Information
Title: Farming Systems Support Project newsletter
Alternate Title: FSSP newsletter
Physical Description: v. : ill. ; 28 cm.
Language: English
Creator: Farming Systems Support Project
University of Florida -- Institute of Food and Agricultural Sciences
Publisher: The Project
Place of Publication: Gainesville Fla
Publication Date: 1983-
Frequency: quarterly
regular
 Subjects
Subject: Agriculture -- Periodicals -- Developing countries   ( lcsh )
Agriculture -- International cooperation -- Periodicals   ( lcsh )
Genre: government publication (state, provincial, terriorial, dependent)   ( marcgt )
periodical   ( marcgt )
 Notes
Dates or Sequential Designation: Vol. 1, no. 1 (spring 1983)-
Issuing Body: Issued by: Farming Systems Support Project, which is administered by: Institute of Food and Agricultural Sciences, University of Florida.
General Note: Title from caption.
Funding: Electronic resources created as part of a prototype UF Institutional Repository and Faculty Papers project by the University of Florida.
 Record Information
Bibliographic ID: UF00071908
Volume ID: VID00001
Source Institution: University of Florida
Holding Location: University of Florida
Rights Management: All rights reserved by the source institution and holding location.
Resource Identifier: oclc - 10387162
lccn - sn 84011294

Table of Contents
    Editor's note
        Page 1
        Page 2
    Chris Andrew talks about the FSSP
        Page 3
    Farming systems research and development
        Page 4
        Page 5
    FSSP activities in West Africa
        Page 6
    Distribution of privately and cooperatively worked fields within households may effect technology adoption
        Page 7
    Kansas State University hosts FSR/E symposium, Jones named coordinator, and FSSP appoints Kearl editor
        Page 8
Full Text








VOL. ONE NO. ONE
SPRING 1983


Farming Systems Support Project Newsletter




I Editor's Note


With this issue the FSSP Newsletter
begins publication on a quarterly
basis to communicate about farming
systems and related information. The
newsletter will be published in three
editions- English, French, and
Spanish and distributed world-
wide, thus advancing knowledge and
an understanding of farming systems
in both developed and developing
countries.
Timely contributions that would be
of interest and appropriate to such an
audience may be submitted and will
gladly be considered for publication.


Articles that offer farming systems
research, extension or administrative
guidelines to field practitioners are of
special interest.
Manuscripts may be submitted in
any of the above languages. They
should be three to six double-spaced,
typewritten pages in length and
should include an article title, authors'
names with relevant biodata, and
agency or institutional affiliation. The
submission of black and white glossy
photographs of good quality that
illustrate manuscripts is also encouraged.
These photos should be at least 3 x 5


inches in size. Color slides are also
accepted for consideration, as are black
and white drawings or other graphic art.
Your comments about the FSSP
Newsletter and suggestions for additions
and improvements are welcome. Our
sincere hope is that it will become an
open and lively forum for communi-
cating innovative ideas and activities
about farming systems.
If you wish to remain on the mail-
ing list to received future issues of the
FSSP Newsletter, please complete and
return the form on page 2. O


FSSP...The Ball Is Rolling


When the U.S. Agency for Inter-
national Development (AID) signed
a cooperative agreement with the
University of Florida recently to im-
plement the Farming Systems Support
Project (FSSP), it set in motion an
innovative effort to strengthen and
expand farming systems development
activities worldwide. In its role as
the lead institution in the FSSP, the
University of Florida will be responsible
for coordinating the participation of
other institutions with farming systems
interest and expertise. At present, more
than 20 institutions- universities,
private consulting firms, international
research centers, and ministries of
agriculture- are potential collaborators
in the project.
The five-year, $9.9 million FSSP is
intended basically as a field support
project, taking its signals from and
responding to the needs of AID country


missions. In more general terms, the
project serves as a catalyst for co-
ordination, communication and
effective use of the farming systems
approach to help resolve farm-level
production and management problems
in developing countries. Central to this
goal is expanding the capacity of
collaborating institutions to provide
technical assistance, training and
guidance to farming systems research
and extension (FSR/E) programs.
Welfare of Farm Family
At the core of the FSSP is the welfare of
the farm family and the farm system. At
the program level the FSSP will focus on
individuals and institutions in developing
countries responsible for research,
training and extension for small-farm
food and fiber production systems. The
countries are then to be linked through
regional networks to strengthen the


transfer of information and experience
among FSR/E practitioners and their
respective national institutions. Thus,
while farming systems experiences may
be unique to specific country and
cultural settings, it is expected that
common threads of institutional,
behavioral, and managerial experiences
will emerge that are transferable among
various regions.
Strengthening FSR/E capabilities in
developing countries will involve both
technical assistance (to resolve specific
on-farm problems) and institution
building (to create the basis for self-
sustaining and coordinated FSR/E
national programs). Specific project
activities will involve the following:
*Technical assistance in the design,
implementation and evaluation of
FSR/E.
continued on pae two








..The Ball Is Rolling
continued from page one
Country based short-term training
programs for FSR/E practitioners
and administrators.
Networking among FSR/E
practitioners.
Analysis and synthesis of FSR/E
experiences.
A documentation center to provide
FSR/E publications.
State-of-the-art research.

Activities in Africa
At least 50 percent of the FSSP
activities will be concentrated in Africa,
with the bulk of them initially taking
place in western Africa. The balance of
activities will be shared by countries in
Latin America, the Caribbean and Asia.
A "proactive" stance will be taken
toward FSR/E assistance to Africa while
other regions will receive assistance on a
more "reactive" basis.
To this end, a link has been formed
between the International Institute for
Tropical Agriculture (IITA) in Nigeria and
the FSSP for joint planning and delivery
of farming systems training in West
Africa. The FSSP is also supportive of the
West Africa Farming Systems Research
Network (WAFSRN). It is anticipated that
FSSP activities in eastern and southern
Africa will be closely linked to AID-
funded farming systems programs
operated in these areas by CIMMYT
(The International Maize and Wheat
Improvement Center).
During the start-up months of the
FSSP, attention is being focused on
establishing the project's organizational
and administrative structure. Guiding
this process are two key considerations:
1) the need to develop a strong inter-
institutional base for the FSSP; and


2) the need to establish a centralized
administrative and leadership unit. A
broad institutional base is required to
meet the complex and multiple needs of
small-farm agriculture in developing
countries. A small, centralized (but
flexible) management structure is
necessary to bring the limited number
of FSR/E resources throughout the world
to bear on FSSP activities.
FSSP Administered from Florida
The FSSP is administered from the
University of Florida where a core staff
of six professionals will supervise and
coordinate overall program activities.
Three of the six FSSP core positions have
been filled: the project director, a train-
ing coordinator, and a communicator/
editor. An advisory council has been
formed from the cooperating institutions,
and an implementation structure which
includes program leaders, program asso-
ciates, task groups and technical
committees is emerging.
Beyond administrative support, many
cooperating institutions will be called
upon to help prepare and implement
FSSP field activities. This involvement
will be based on memoranda of
agreement between the University of
Florida/FSSP and cooperating entities
and will allow for the performance of
specific technical assistance, training,
networking and research activities. It will
be possible to establish a broad support
base that can mobilize effectively in
response to farming systems research
and extension needs in developing
countries.
During the upcoming months this
support base will be strengthened to
meet the emerging farming systems
needs currently being expressed by AID
missions. FSSP response teams are now
being formulated to meet the initial
requests. O


Numerous institutions currently are
cooperating in the FSSR In addition to
the universities, firms and other entities
listed below, various regional
development agencies and International
Agricultural Research Centers (IARCs)
also will be involved in FSSP activities.
Universities include:

University of Arkansas
SColorado State University
-* OCoell University
Un ersiBy of.Jodida

aStateUnivraterp

-.i~ierfityof Kentueky
- -Mfeei~v State Univwarity
Umivesity of Missouri
-North Carolina State University
SOklahoma State University
Purdue University
Southern Illinois University -
Carbondale
University of Tennessee
Texas A & M University
Virginia Polytechnic institute and
State University
West North Carolina State University
West Virginia University

Firms, agencies and other entities
include:

Agency for International Development
U.S. Department of Agriculture
Development Alternatives, Inc.
International Agricultural
Development Service
Research Triangle Institute
Winrock International Livestock
Center C


If you would like to be on the FSSP mailing list, please fill in the form below.

Il Yes, Please send the FSSP Newsletter to me at the address listed below.
Il I'm already on your mailing list, but there has been a change in my address. My new address is listed below.


Address:


Send To: FSSP Editor, 3028 McCarty Hall, University of Florida, Gainesville, Florida, 32611


___









Chris Andrew Talks About The FSSP


Dr. Chris O. Andrew brings extensive
experience in international work and
administrative responsibility in related
programs to his new role as director
of the Farming Systems Support Pro-
ject (FSSP).
He is associate director of the
University of Florida's Center for Tropical
Agriculture and International Programs.
He has also served as administrator for
the USDA-funded North Florida FSR/E
program and the farming systems train-
ing and technical assistance program of
UF's International Programs Office.
A Ph.D. in agricultural economics
from Michigan State University, Andrew
has more than 15 years experience
in international work. With Peter E.
Hildebrand, he is the author of Planning
and Conducting Applied Agricultural
Research (Westview Press, 1982.)
Andrew recently talked with the FSSP
editor about the mission of the project.
His answers to questions posed by the
editor are included here:




Q. The area of "farming systems"
has received a great deal of attention
recently from a growing number of
people who feel it has potential for
helping small farmers in developing
countries. What is unique about the
farming systems approach that offers
this potential?
A., The farming systems approach
views problems of agricultural pro-
duction from the farmer's perspective by
involving the farmer in the research
process. This is somewhat unique
because it is a "bottom-up" approach as
opposed to the "top-down" approach
that has characterized much of the
technical assistance and technology
transfer efforts for small farmers. Farming
systems is also unique because in
viewing problems from the farmer's
perspective, it involves a multi-
disciplinary team of biological and
social scientists. A farmer does not
approach production and management
problems from a discipline perspective.


Chris O. Andrew, FSSP Director


Thus, a holistic or systems approach is
called for which incorporates a team of
scientists and farmers in a process of
problem diagnosis and resolution. The
result is integrated solutions to farm
problems instead of single, isolated
solutions.

Q. Defining farming systems seems
to be a problem. Is there one particular
approach to farming systems research
and development?
A. No. I do not believe that there is a
single approach to farming systems or
one inclusive definition. It has been
suggested that there are two levels of
activity in farming systems one which
focuses on infrastructure and policy
concerns and a second which centers on
concerns for research and extension
at the farm level. But the several
methodologies and methods to farming
systems work at these two levels can
differ, depending on the particular
country or culture. Farming systems
methodologies frequently must address a
wide array of problems, and varying
degrees of scientific specificity are,
therefore, necessary to meet the distinct
agronomic and social problems faced.
The one clear commonality of farming
systems work is the farmer-directed
philosophy of technology development
and transfer.


Q. The Farming Systems Support
Project (FSSP) is literally global in
scope. It is intended to provide training,
technical assistance and networking
support to countries worldwide, with
particular emphasis on Africa. Given the
scope of the task, how do you rate the
FSSP's chances for success?
A. The task is indeed a large and
significant one. I am, however, very
optimistic that the FSSP will succeed.
I think the universities, international
centers, private firms, national gov-
ernments and AID can achieve a level of
cooperation that will make success
possible. Collectively, we have a great
deal of knowledge about technical
assistance and development.
The universities, through their Title XII
Strengthening Grant Programs, have
developed many of the resources
required for the FSSP There is a need to
continue to strengthen the support base,
but there are considerable resources that
can be drawn on at present. The FSSP is
designed to address a broad spectrum of
needs, but we are, I believe, up to the
task. The key is cooperation, mutual
support and a continuing commitment
by all the parties involved. I am quite
pleased with the support given and
interest expressed by the universities and
other institutions involved with the
project. O


i- ~1









Farming Systems Research and Development


P E. Hildebrand and R. K.
Waugh*
The term "farming systems" was
applied in the 1970s to several different
activities being developed around the
world. These activities had a common
thread and general purpose, but the
methods used to pursue the goals
differed greatly. The threads that bound
them all together and which are basic to
the farming systems approach are these:
A concern with small-scale family
farmers who generally reap a
disproportionately small share of
the benefits of organized research,
extension and other developmental
activities.

* Dr. Peter E. Hildebrand is a professor of
Food and Resource Economics in the
Institute of Food and Agricultural Sciences
(IFAS), University of Florida. Dr. Robert K.
Waugh is an international consultant in the
area of farming systems, working at the
University of Florida.


Recognition that thorough
understanding of the farmers'
situation gained firsthand is critical
to increasing their productivity and
to forming a basis for improving
their welfare.
The use of scientists and tech-
nicians from more than one
discipline as a means of
understanding the farm as an entire
system rather than the isolation of
components within the system.
Farming Systems Approach
In the 1980s, as the generic term
"Farming Systems Research" (FSR) came
into more common use (for example, see
Byerlee, et al. 1982), it became evident
that two basic components, when used
together, comprise the farming systems
approach to research and development.
This concept is similar to that used by
Shaner, et al. (1982) who termed it
FSR&D. This term will be adopted here.
The two complementary components of


FSR&D, recognized by Norman (1982)
under slightly different terminology, are:

The farming systems approach to
infrastructural support and policy
(FSIP).
The farming systems research and
extension (FSR/E) approach to
technology generation, evaluation
and delivery

FSIP and FSR/E Described
FSIP is more "macro" than is FSR/E.
Since it deals with policy, the variables it
treats are mainly outside the farm gate
and involve more social scientists and
economists than agro-biological scien-
tists. Methodologies frequently include
surveys to provide the perspective on
farming systems as a means of more
accurately predicting farmer responses
to different policy stimuli.
FSR/E is more "micro" in scope and
deals mostly with conditions inside the
farm gate. Because it is concerned with


Farmer in the Guatemala highlands participating in an on-farm trial.








technology generation, evaluation and
delivery, more agro-biological scientists
than socio-economic scientists are
involved and methodology is heavy
in on-farm biological research with
relatively little time devoted to surveys.
FSIP is applied, farmer-oriented, socio-
economic research, supported by the
agro-biological sciences in a team effort.
The principal product is information. The
primary clients are policy makers and
managers of services and infrastructure.
FSR/E is applied, farmer oriented,
agro-biological research, supported
by the socio-economic sciences in a
team effort which includes extension
responsibilities. The principal product is
technology The primary clients are
farmers.
Components Are Compatible
The two components use different
mixes of scientists and methods. Their
primary clients also are different. Still,
they are highly complementary and
compatible. FSR/E can have significant
impact on policy makers because it can
provide more detailed information on
farms and farmers than FSIP can obtain.
Similarly, FSIP can have significant im-
pact on agricultural technology because
it can provide FSR/E with more complete
information on infrastructure and policy
than it would otherwise be able to
obtain.
Taken together, then, FSR/E and FSIP
comprise a complete development
concept termed here FSR&D.
FSR/E Steps Outlined
Although FSR/E is flexible to fit the
agricultural and institutional conditions
found in different country and cultural
settings, it will usually involve a se-
quence of steps similar to the following:
1. Initial characterization and
analysis of existing farming systems
through close consultation with
farmers.
a. Tentative partitioning into
homogeneous farming systems
or recommendation domains.
b. First estimation of problems
and constraints.
2. Planning and design of first phase
work.


a. Biological research.
b. Continuing agro-
socioeconomic
characterization.
3. Selection, generation and
evaluation of technologies.
a. Commodity and discipline
research on experiment stations
and in laboratories.
b. Researcher managed on-farm
trials with farmer participation.
Exploratory trials.
Site-specific trials.
Regional agronomic trials.
Agro-socioeconomic trials.
c. Farmer managed trials.
Individual evaluation of
acceptability by the farmers.
Refined partitioning of
recommendation domains
by researchers.
Initiation of technology
transfer activities.
4. Information accumulation and
analysis.
a. Agro-technical data from on-
farm trials.
b. Economic records on farm
enterprises from farmers.
c. Other agro-socio-cultural-
economic and political
information through directed
surveys of area residents.
5. Frequently programmed
reevaluation of research
information to do the following:
a. Refine partitioning of
recommendation domains.
b. Make recommendations of
acceptable technology for
dissemination into specified
recommendation domains.
c. Feedback into the sequential
process.
d. Serve as a basis for planning
future work.
6. Extension of acceptable results
throughout appropriate
recommendation domain(s).

Farmer Manages Complex Processes
In many ways this sequence parallels
what farmers have always done. The
farmer manages a complex set of


biological processes which transform
the resources at his or her disposal
into useful products, either for home
consumption or for sale or trade. The
choice of crop and livestock enterprises
and the methods and timing of cultiva-
tion, husbandry and harvesting are
determined not only by physical and
biological constraints, but also by
economic and sociopolitical factors
which make up the larger milieu within
which the farmer operates.
Within this complex milieu, through a
process of trial and error and a number
of seasons or generations, farmers move
toward appropriate technologies and
allocation of resources which make best
use of those at their disposal given the
objectives of each individual farm family
While the choices available to each
farmer are different, those with similar
sets of resources and constraints tend to
make similar choices as to crops, live-
stock and management practices. Those
who have responded in similar ways
can be grouped together into homo-
geneous farming systems (recommen-
dation domains).
FSR/E brings scientific method and
additional expertise to bear on this
process of problem identification and
technology generation. Teams of
scientists from different disciplines,
working with farmers, can speed up the
process and make it more efficient in
responding to a rapidly changing world.




References
Byerlee, D., L. Harrington and D. L.
Winkelmann. 1982. Farming systems
research: issues in research strategy and
technology design. American Journal of
Agricultural Economics 64 (No. 5)
897-904
Norman, D. W. 1982. The farming
systems approach to research. Farming
Systems Research Paper No. 3. Kansas
State University, Manhattan, Kansas.
Shaner, W W, P. F Philipp and W. R.
Schmehl. 1982. Farming systems
research and development, guidelines
for developing countries. Westview
Press, Boulder, Colorado. E









FSSP Activities in West Africa


West Africa is the focal point of FSSP
effort at present. There the project is
collaborating with the International
Institute for Tropical Agriculture (IITA)
in Ibadan, Nigeria to support farming
systems activities in the region.
When Dr. Jim Jones, FSSP training
coordinator, was in Nigeria recently
working with the IITA staff on joint
training and networking efforts, he
filed the following report:
Representatives of several inter-
national agencies and West African
countries met at IITA in November 1982
to create the West African Farming
System Research Network (WAFSRN).
The workshop was organized by IITA,
the International Crops Research Institute
for the Semi-Arid Tropics (ICRISAT), the
Institute de Recherches Agronomiques
Tropicales et des Cultures Vivrieres (IRAT,
France), and The German Agency for
Technical Cooperation (GTZ).
In addition to the organizers, the
workshop was attended by repre-
sentatives of the Semi-Arid Food
Grains Research and Development
Project (SAFGRAD), the West Afri-
can Rice Development Association
(WARDA), the Food and Agriculture
Organization (FAO), the United States
Agency for International Development
(USAID) and the FSSP. The West African
countries of Senegal, Liberia, Nigeria,
Togo, Benin, Sierra Leone, Ghana, Came-
roon, Mali and the Ivory Coast also were
represented. It is anticipated that other
countries of the region will also partici-
pate in the network.
A seven-member steering committee
was elected at the November meeting,
after participants agreed that at least 50
percent of the committee should be West
African nationals. Dr. Jacques Faye of
Senegal was elected chairman and Dr.
George Ababu of Nigeria was elected
"animateur" and head of a rotating
secretariat to serve the committee. All
participants at the workshop were
designated correspondents of the
network.
The WAFSRN will aid the exchange of
information on methods and results of
research aimed at the development of


improved farming systems for small
farmers of the region. The commit-
tee appointed several task groups to
inventory institutions engaged in farming
systems research and Extension (FSR/E)
work in West Africa, surveying ongoing
FSR/E regional projects, and compiling
FSR/E publications from that research.
Another WAFSRN workshop is planned
for late 1983.
In related activities, a two week
farming systems workshop was held
in March at IITA. The workshop
emphasized diagnostic surveys and
involved researchers from IITA, the
FSSP, and from national research insti-
tutions in Nigeria, the Ivory Coast
and Cameroon.
In February representatives of IITA and
the FSSP were in the Ivory Coast to meet
with researchers in the Ministry of Scien-
tific Research and Technology and to
discuss plans for farming systems
research in the Ivory Coast and the
participation of Ivorian researchers in
the IITA March workshop.
In preparation for the IITA workshop,
the National Cereals Research Institute of
Ibadan hosted a two-day workshop in
January on the planning of farming
systems research in Nigeria. Researchers
from four Nigerian research institutes,
IITA, and the FSSP addressed such issues
as the incorporation of the farming
systems approach into existing agricul-
ture research structures in Nigeria and
the experiences of researchers with the
new approach in their respective
settings. 0


Hand harvesting maize (top) and harvest-
ing rice with sickle (center), IITA Farm-
ing Systems Program. Alley-cropping of
maize with Gliricidia sepium, Small
Ruminant Programme, ILCA, Nigeria.
(bottom)









Distribution of Privately and Cooperatively Worked

Fields Within Households May Effect Technology

Adoption Della McMillan*


If a "household" is defined as a "residential unit that works
together and eats together," then many African households
must be analyzed in terms of overlapping units of consump-
tion and production. One example of this can be found in the
subdivision of household land. In the Central Mossi Plateau,
Upper Volta, the wife or wives and married sons associated
with a household each usually farm a separate portion of the
household land. The cultivation of these private fields is not
inherited but is seen as the "right" of the individual. Private
fields are referred to as mam belogo to distinguish them from
cooperatively worked fields (man pugo) which provide basic
household needs.
The person responsible for cultivation of a private field has
the right to what the field produces. In the research reported
here, there were a number of cases in which wives were
forced to rely on grain from their private fields once the main
stores had been exhausted. In other households women used
their private grain to provide an extra meal. A few of the
products from the private fields were sold and the income
used to meet the needs of the individual farmer or, in the case
of women, the needs of their children. A portion of the cash
was usually used to purchase goods and livestock and to
invest in nonagricultural production activities such as trade
and beer-making.
One Village's Labor Allocation
In one village, about 60 percent of the land and 60 percent
of the labor were allocated to the cooperatively worked
fields. Because these fields generally are given priority in
the allocation of household labor, this restricts the control
an individual farmer can exercise on the timing of specific
operations such as planting and weeding in his or her
private fields.
Some crops are more commonly produced by certain
household subunits than others. For example, 37 percent of
the area planted in food staples (sorghum and millet), 74
percent of the area in peanuts, 90 percent of the area in
vegetables, and 26 percent of the area in cotton were
cultivated in private fields. Women planted 19 percent of the
total area planted to sorghum and millet; 66 percent
of the area in peanuts; and 56 percent of the area in veg-
etables. No women cultivated separate plots of cotton.
Because cooperative fields take labor priority, private fields
tend to be planted in peanuts and the earlier varieties of
sorghum and millet.


* The research on which this article is based was carried out by the
author as part of the West Africa project, Department of Agricul-
tural Economics, Purdue University. Ms. McMillan is the Assistant to
the Director, Center for African Studies, University of Florida.


Subsystems Have Important Implications
The identification of "subsystems" based on the allocation
of land within individual households can have important
implications for understanding constraints that farmers face
and the design of new technology If, for example, one is
advocating crop rotations to include sorghum, cotton and
peanuts, it is important to consider that peanuts have
traditionally been grown on private fields by wives and
unmarried children.
Such insights may also help to better predict ways in which
a particular innovation may affect subgroups such as women.
For example, if a dramatic increase in the area planted to a
cooperatively worked cash crop such as cotton were
recommended, this would increase total household labor
requirements, and/or a reallocation of labor from food to cash
crops or from private to cooperatively fields.
While increased production of the cash crop might
increase the aggregate income and standard of living of the
household, it would probably be associated with a decline in
the area of private fields and the independence of sub-
household units such as women vis-a-vis the household head. E
-


Women in the Central Mossi Plateau, Upper Volta, play an im-
portant role in raising crops and livestock as well as performing
household chores.








Kansas State University Hosts FSR/E Symposiun


Cornelia Butler Flora*

The variety and complexity of farming
systems research and extension (FSR/E)
programs were discussed by participants
at Kansas State University's second
annual farming systems symposium
November 21-23, 1982. Funded by
Kansas State's Title XII Strengthening
Grant through its Office of International
Agricultural Programs, the symposium
addressed issues in the application of
FSR/E to development projects by
examining ongoing projects from around
the world. It was attended by more than
200 participants from 15 countries.
While it was clear from the
presentations and discussions that much
progress has been made in terms of both
FSR/E concepts and field methodology,
much of that progress served to highlight
the problems inherent in the FSR/E
approach. One clear message from the
symposium is that flexibility is required
to institute as well as carry out FSR/E
projects. 1 his message was underscored
by Hubert Zandstra, International
Development Research Center (IDRC),
in his keynote address which
emphasized that farming systems


research is an approach, not a
technique. Like other forms of
international development assistance, it
can be detrimental if only the technique
is transferred without the underlying
rationale and concepts.
Case studies from Indonesia, Panama,
Syria, Costa Rica and the Philippines
pointed out that an important part of the
FSR/E approach has to do with linking
farmers' perceived goals with the goals
of national governments. Bill Judy, AID/
Washington, noted the importance of
considering national goals within the
political environment. The case studies
showed that researchers in developing
countries, working in networks formed
around the International Research
Centers, are taking the lead in fielding
FSR/E projects and are attempting to
institutionalize the approach.
Ken McDermott, International Agri-
cultural Development Service (lADS),
demonstrated the contribution of FSR/E
in filling the large gap between pure
research and pure extension. He stressed
the need for both contextual awareness
and farmer participation in adaptive
research.
The major addresses of the conference


Jones Named Training Coordinator


Dr. James C. Jones has been employed
as FSSP training coordinator with
responsibility for project activities that
deal with institution building through
FSR/E training.
He will promote networking activities
in project regions, initiating local
workshops and supervising the delivery
of FSR/E practitioner and administrator
training courses.
Jones has a Ph.D. in social anthro-
pology and a Masters of Agricultural


Management and Resource Develop-
ment from the University of Florida.
He is fluent in Spanish and has a good
knowledge of French.
He has taught courses in farming
systems methods both at the University
of Florida and in Latin America. In addi-
tion, he has conducted a "sondeo" in
Ecuador, provided technical assistance to
the UF/AID/Malawi farming systems pro-
gram, and also is helping establish a farm-
ing systems training program at IITA. O


FSSP Appoints Kearl Editor


Mr. Steven Kearl has accepted the
position of FSSP editor responsible for
overall communication support to the
project, including preparation of the
newsletter, other FSSP publications and
training materials.
Kearl has a Master's degree in com-
munication arts from Cornell University
and has had extensive experience in


communications, specifically publica-
tion production. He was a field editor
and managing editor with the American
Agriculturist magazine for five years.
More recently, Kearl completed
a three-month assignment at the Inter-
national Center of Insect Physiology and
Ecology (ICIPE) in Nairobi, Kenya, where
he prepared the center's annual report. O


raised issues related to FSR/E cost effec-
tiveness, project organization, linkages
with traditional forms of agricultural
research and extension, and team
formation. Small discussion groups led
by internationally known FSR/E
practitioners then focused on these and
other pertinent issues. O

* Dr. Cornelia Butler Flora is a professor in the
Department of Sociology, Anthropology,
and Social Work, Kansas State University.
Editors Note: The initiative taken by
Kansas State University in organizing
and hosting the past two farming systems
symposiums is commendable. This effort
has contributed greatly to the exchange
of FSR/E information and experiences.
Proceedings of the 1982 symposium
are available for $15.00 from the Office
of International Agricultural Programs,
KSU, Manhattan, KS, 66506.
Plans currently are underway for
the third annual FSR/E Symposium
October 31-November 4, 1983. Anyone
interested in presenting FSR/E project
experiences should contact Dr. Flora.

The FSSP newsletter is published
quarterly by the Farming Systems
Support Project (FSSP), which is
funded by AID Contract No. DAN-40
99-A-00-2083-00 and administered by
the Institute of Food and Agricultur-
al Sciences (IFAS), University of
Florida, Gainesville, Fla. 32611. IFAS
is an Equal Employment Opportun-
ity Affirmative Action Employer.

The FSSP Newsletter encourages
the contribution of stories, pictures
and ideas, which should be sent to
FSSP Editor, 3028 McCarty Hall, Uni-
versity of Florida, Gainesville, FL
32611.

PHOTO CREDITS: page 3, IFAS Ed-
itorial; Page 4, Peter E. Hildebrand;
page 6, top and center, IITA, and bot-
tom, ILCA, Ibadan, Nigeria;page 7,
Della McMillan.

This public document was promulgat-
ed at a cost of $3,068.00, or 56 cents
per copy, to provide information on
farming systems research, extension
and program administration.




University of Florida Home Page
© 2004 - 2010 University of Florida George A. Smathers Libraries.
All rights reserved.

Acceptable Use, Copyright, and Disclaimer Statement
Last updated October 10, 2010 - - mvs