• TABLE OF CONTENTS
HIDE
 Front Cover
 Table of Contents
 Gender analysis: The farming systems...
 Consumption aspects of sustainable...
 The bottom up and the top down:...
 Haymaking by pastoral women for...
 The extension agent in the research...
 The level of adoption of recommended...
 The Javanese homegarden, Otto Soemarwoto...
 Some organizational considerations...
 Mutual help systems among small...






Group Title: Journal for farming systems research-extension.
Title: Journal of farming systems research-extension
ALL VOLUMES CITATION PAGE IMAGE ZOOMABLE PAGE TEXT
Full Citation
STANDARD VIEW MARC VIEW
Permanent Link: http://ufdc.ufl.edu/UF00071921/00005
 Material Information
Title: Journal of farming systems research-extension
Alternate Title: Journal for farming systems research-extension
Abbreviated Title: J. farming syst. res.-ext.
Physical Description: v. : ill. ; 23 cm.
Language: English
Creator: Association of Farming Systems Research-Extension
Publisher: Association of Farming Systems Research-Extension
Place of Publication: Tucson Ariz. USA
Publication Date: 1990-
 Subjects
Subject: Agricultural systems -- Periodicals -- Developing countries   ( lcsh )
Agricultural extension work -- Research -- Periodicals   ( lcsh )
Sustainable agriculture -- Periodicals -- Developing countries   ( lcsh )
Genre: periodical   ( marcgt )
 Notes
Dates or Sequential Designation: Vol. 1, no. 1-
General Note: Title varies slightly.
General Note: Title from cover.
General Note: Latest issue consulted: Vol. 1, no. 2, published in 1990.
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: UF00071921
Volume ID: VID00005
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 - 22044949
lccn - sn 90001812
issn - 1051-6786

Table of Contents
    Front Cover
        Front Cover
    Table of Contents
        Table of Contents
    Gender analysis: The farming systems research-extension training experience, by A. L. Frio
        Page 1
        Page 2
        Page 3
        Page 4
        Page 5
        Page 6
        Page 7
        Page 8
        Page 9
        Page 10
    Consumption aspects of sustainable agriculture: Project methods and linkages in the Philippines, by M. S. Prehm
        Page 11
        Page 12
        Page 13
        Page 14
        Page 15
        Page 16
        Page 17
        Page 18
        Page 19
        Page 20
        Page 21
        Page 22
        Page 23
        Page 24
        Page 25
        Page 26
        Page 27
        Page 28
        Page 29
        Page 30
    The bottom up and the top down: Area farmers meet regional and central research and extension staff in Jordan, by A. F. Al-Kadi and D. L. Galt
        Page 31
        Page 32
        Page 33
        Page 34
        Page 35
        Page 36
        Page 37
        Page 38
        Page 39
        Page 40
        Page 41
        Page 42
        Page 43
        Page 44
        Page 45
        Page 46
        Page 47
        Page 48
        Page 49
        Page 50
    Haymaking by pastoral women for improved calf management in Ethiopia: Labor requirements, opportunity costs, and feasibility of intervention, by D. L. Coppock
        Page 51
        Page 52
        Page 53
        Page 54
        Page 55
        Page 56
        Page 57
        Page 58
        Page 59
        Page 60
        Page 61
        Page 62
        Page 63
        Page 64
        Page 65
        Page 66
        Page 67
        Page 68
    The extension agent in the research process: Working across ministries in Cameroon, by S. W. Almy, M. Besong, T. Woldetatios, C. Poubom, C. Ateh, and M. Mboussi
        Page 69
        Page 70
        Page 71
        Page 72
        Page 73
        Page 74
        Page 75
        Page 76
        Page 77
        Page 78
        Page 79
        Page 80
        Page 81
        Page 82
        Page 83
        Page 84
    The level of adoption of recommended package of technology by tomoto farmers in Calamba, Laguna, and Philippines, by Kausar Parveen and P. T. Depositario
        Page 85
        Page 86
        Page 87
        Page 88
        Page 89
        Page 90
        Page 91
        Page 92
        Page 93
        Page 94
    The Javanese homegarden, Otto Soemarwoto and G. R. Conway
        Page 95
        Page 96
        Page 97
        Page 98
        Page 99
        Page 100
        Page 101
        Page 102
        Page 103
        Page 104
        Page 105
        Page 106
        Page 107
        Page 108
        Page 109
        Page 110
        Page 111
        Page 112
        Page 113
        Page 114
        Page 115
        Page 116
        Page 117
        Page 118
    Some organizational considerations in implementing FSR in a harsh environment: Increasing farmer involvement in Botswana, by F. Worman, G. Heinrich, and D. Norman
        Page 119
        Page 120
        Page 121
        Page 122
        Page 123
        Page 124
        Page 125
        Page 126
        Page 127
        Page 128
        Page 129
        Page 130
        Page 131
        Page 132
        Page 133
        Page 134
        Page 135
        Page 136
        Page 137
        Page 138
    Mutual help systems among small agricultural producers in Colonia Caa-Guazu, Misiones, Argentina, by Denis Baranger
        Page 139
        Page 140
        Page 141
        Page 142
        Page 143
        Page 144
        Page 145
        Page 146
        Page 147
        Page 148
        Page 149
        Page 150
        Page 151
        Page 152
        Page 153
        Page 154
        Page 155
Full Text
Volume 2, Number 3
1991


journal
for Farming Systems
Research-Extension









Journal for Farming Systems Research-Extension
Volume 2, Number 3, 1991


CONTENTS


1 Gender Analysis: The Farming Systems Research-Extension
Training Experience
A.L. Frio

11 Consumption Aspects of Sustainable Agriculture: Project and
Linkages in the Philippines
M.S. Prehm

31 The Bottom Up and the Top Down: Area Farmers Meet
Regional and Central Research and Extension Staff in Jordan
A.F. Al-Kadi and D.L. Gait

51 Haymaking by Pastoral Women for Improved Calf Management
in Ethiopia: Labor Requirements, Opportunity Costs, and
Feasibility of Intervention
D.L. Coppock

69 The Extension Agent in the Research Process: Working Across
Ministries in Cameroon
S.W. Almy, M. Besong, T. Woldetatios, C. Poubom, C. Ateh, and M. Mboussi

85 The Level of Adoption of Recommended Package of Technology
by Tomato Farmers in Calamba, Laguna, the Philippines
Kausar Parveen and P.T. Depositario

95 The Javanese Homegarden
Otto Soemarwoto and G.R. Conway

119 Some Organizational Considerations in Implementing FSR in a Harsh
Environment: Increasing Farmer Involvement in Botswana
F. Worman, G. Heinrich, and D. Norman

139 Mutual Help Ssytems Among Small Agricultural Producers in
Colonia Cai-Guaz(i, Misiones, Argentina
Denis Baranger








Gender Analysis:
The Farming Systems Research-Extension
Training Experience'

A.L. Frio2



ABSTRACT
Gender issues are an integral, although unconventional, part of the
curriculum ofthe Farming Systems Research and Extension (FSRE) Skills
Training course, which is administered by the International Rice Re-
search Institute (IRRI) in Manila, the Philippines. The coursewas created
in response to demand among national research programs for a means to
improve their capabilities to conduct FSRE, particularly as it relates to rice
production and sustainability of rice ecosystems. The course develops
knowledge and skills in the concepts and methods of FSRE and assists
national systems and institutions in designing and executing in-country
FSRE training. By incorporating gender analysis into innovative and
participatory exercises, the course avoids the straight "hard-sell" ap-
proach usually associated with teaching gender analysis.


THE COURSE
The FSRE Skills Training course conducted at IRRI in Manila evolved from
the fusion of two training courses: a six-month Cropping Systems training
program and a two-month Farming Systems Socioeconomic Research course.
The new 17-week course is conducted by the Agroecology Unit of the
Agronomy, Physiology, and Agroecology Division of IRRI and the Training
Center. The course was created in response to demand among national
research programs for a means to improve their capabilities to conduct FSRE,
particularly as it relates to rice production and sustainability office ecosystems.
The course develops knowledge and skills in concepts and methods of FSRE
and assists national systems and institutions in designing and executing in-
country FSRE training.

1Paper presented at the Tenth Annual Association for Farming Systems Research-
Extension Symposium, Michigan State University, East Lansing, October 14-17,1990.
Senior Training Specialist at the Training Center, International Rice Research Institute,
Manila, the Philippines.






FRIO


Curriculum
The curriculum consists of five units:
Unit One provides participants with basic communication skills. It empha-
sizes design and production of instructional media for training and extension.
Unit Two emphasizes FSRE concepts. Topics include a systems-oriented
view of the farm, farmer participation in research activities, complementary
research and extension work, sustainability issues, and multidisciplinary team
work.
Unit Three teaches FSR skills. These include participatory tools and
techniques for eliciting information from farmers, indigenous knowledge and
its importance in a farmer's decision to adopt technology, and skills (or
methods) in conducting focused surveys.
Unit Four emphasizes methods for implementing FSR. The unit covers
topics such as ecosystem characterization and diagnosis, synthesis of improved
systems, and approaches to on-farm trials. Geographic Information Systems
(GIS) for environmental characterization, simulation modeling for cropping
pattern design, and computer-based analysis for large data sets for rice/fish
production are some of the advanced tools and techniques used for handling
and analyzing data. Economic analysis, principles of experimentation, and
statistical analysis also are discussed.
Unit Five complements topics studied earlier in the course. Case studies
from various ecosystems are discussed and analyzed, as well as specialized cases
such as rice/fish, crop/animal, and crop/crop research systems.

Participants
Participants are researchers, trainers, and extension workers from Asia,
Africa, and Latin America. The group is heterogeneous in terms of work
experience, level of knowledge/skill and understanding of FSRE, and com-
munication skills.

Training Methodology
The scope and nature of the course and frequent communication problems
among participants make it necessary to use a variety of teaching styles. Among
these are:
Concept mapping. This is an individual participatory type of classroom
exercise that stimulates participants to convey ideas, linkages, and abstract
thoughts through meaningful forms. The exercises stimulate interaction
among participants and allow exchange of information.


Journal for Farming Systems Research-Extension






GENDER ANALYSIS AND FSRE TRAINING


Self-learning modules. These are appropriate for introducing concepts that
are self-explanatory. Participants study at an individual pace. Even those who
have difficulty with both verbal and written English benefit because informa-
tion is conveyed through audio-visuals and a guide booklet.
Individual exercises. These serve as feedback for lessons on more technical
subject matter. This is done in a problem-solving mode to further reinforce
individual knowledge.
Video exposes. These are documented lessons on skills and techniques useful
in participatory research with farmers.
Field trips. Trips to various environments supplement ecosystems case
studies.
Fieldpracticum. These test practical application of theories, methods, and
skills through an intensive two-week stay in the practicum site.
Other methods. These include slide-illustrated lectures, a modified case
method, a "travelogue," games, and practical field-skills exercises.


INCORPORATING GENDER ISSUES

One of the issues in the curriculum is incorporation of gender analysis in the
different phases of FSR. Because the conventional approach of teaching
through lectures alone is not very effective and because language barriers
prohibit use of the case method, other teaching approaches are used.

Concepts
In teaching Unit Two (FSRE Concepts), three topics introduce the
concept of gender analysis:
1. What is farming systems research? In this, the first lesson in the course,
participants construct concept maps. As a first step, the instructor demon-
strates what is a concept map. The instructor draws her/his concept of a very
common thing or of an animal (a chicken, for example) familiar to the
participants. S/he explains why the drawing is as it is. The next step is for two
persons trained in different disciplines to go to the board and draw their
concepts of, say, fertilizer. Each person explains his/her concept to the group.
The participants have a good idea of what a concept map is by this time.
Participants are given drawing pens and brown paper on which to draw their
own concepts of farming systems or FSR.
Participants use diagrams, lines, arrows, drawings, symbols, and words to
explain their concepts. In verbal presentations, they explain the meaning of


Vol. 2, No. 3, 1991






FRIO


their work. The instructor then explains the different concepts shown in the
drawings from a systems point ofview. Central to this explanation are the farm
household and family. A short discussion of some farm activities and of who
normally does them follows. A general overview of the topic is drawn from
observing and listening to the participants' discussion.
This exercise is followed by a short lecture on concepts, approaches, and
general overview of FSR. Handouts supplement the lecture. Participants also
can study these lessons at their own pace by using the slide-tape modules and
accompanying booklets.
2. Gender issues in FSR. This topic is taught by lecture, using slides that
show examples of the different farm and nonfarm activities that men, women,
and children do in various countries. The emphasis is on activities that women
mostly do and activities that identify decision-makers. These include prepro-
duction activities for crops, such as land preparation and clearing; production
activities in both crop and animal enterprises, such as pulling seedlings and
feeding livestock; postharvest activities, such as seed selection and storage; and
other activities, such as gathering fuel, taking care of children, and tending the
vegetable patch.
3. "What do you see that Idon't?" This is an exercise in creating awareness
among participants of what others see on field visits. What do you normally
notice, and what do others see that you don't?
The exercise involves a "travelogue," an armchair trip to another country.
The objective is to do a quick initial characterization of the site using slides
from two farmers' villages. The slides show crops, animals, soil characteristics,
social indicators, and farm activities done by men, women, and children.
Each slide is shown for 30 seconds. After the slide show, each participant
answers a questionnaire that describes the village. The participants are then
divided into groups, either by nature of work (researcher, extensionist, or
lecturer) or by discipline. Each group answers the questions by consensus;
responses are written on brown paper or on the board. The groups present
their results. The instructor compares the groups' answers and points out
differences; the focus is on discipline-biased answers. The slides are shown
again, this time with narration. The instructor concludes the session by
synthesizing the lesson.

Skills
Gender analysis in Unit Three (Teaching Skills) is built in four topics:
learning farmers' indigenous knowledge, doing agroecosystem analysis, iden-


Journalfor Farming Systems Research-Extension






GENDER ANALYSIS AND FSRE TRAINING


tifying and diagnosing problems, and eliciting information from them.
What indigenous knowledge do farmers have and practice, and why do they
practice it? How important is a farmer's knowledge in his/her decision to
adopt or not to adopt technology? This lesson aims to document farmers'
indigenous technologies and to find out if and how farmers experiment.
A short lecture, with examples shown in slides, is given before field work.
The lesson next is conducted in villages with research projects, in order to
facilitate comparison of indigenous and introduced technologies. Farmers
then are interviewed in their homes and in the field; no questionnaires are
used.
Accompanied by facilitators, participants work in groups. The facilitator
leads the group in identifying possible areas where farmers experiment or
where farmers use homegrown technologies. Several observations are made
while walking through backyards and farms and visiting homes.
Whenever possible, farmers are asked to demonstrate some of their
indigenous technologies. Observations on how the technologies are used
usually show who the doers are. Examples of activities easily observed include
(1) pest control, which is done by both men and women (smudging plants to
reduce larval damage, using light traps to collect adult insects, and use of herbs
or ash in storing seeds), (2) animal care, which is done by men and children
(such as use of a vine, makabuhay, for controlling abortion in pregnant cows),
and (3) use ofindigenous materials to make farm implements (such as molding
tree branches into yokes).
Agroecosystem analysis, a field-oriented activity, is a good method for
teaching gender analysis awareness. Together with rapid rural appraisal
techniques, agrosystem mapping is an effective tool for site characterization.
Initial biophysical descriptions of a site, as well as land types, soil characteris-
tics, boundaries, and landmarks, can be easily indicated on base maps showing,
for example, the basic topographic and hydrologic characteristics of the area.
Enterprise maps are then constructed by land types. Major enterprises
typically include crops, animals, fish, and orchards. Enterprises, both agricul-
tural and nonagricultural, in the busy housing areas often reflect sensitive
gender differentiation. The final product is an agroecological zone transect
that is constructed from a composite section of every land type, including
crops, soil texture, trees, livestock, fish, problems, and opportunities.
Participants, female instructors/facilitators, and translators work together
as a team when doing field work, in farm visits, mappings, and farmer
interviews. This activity gives participants who have had no experience


Vol. 2, No. 3, 1991






FRIO


working with females the chance to be comfortable in their presence.
In the actual conduct of agroecosystem analysis, participants ask farm
women about social classification, if applicable. They also identify areas where
farm women and children graze animals, get fuel, grow vegetables, or catch
fish and snails for food.
That problems are perceived differently by men and women is an important
consideration in identifying and diagnosing problems. Some problems are
given more importance by female farmers than by male farmers.
This lesson is taught in three ways:
1. Class exercise using a case study. The participants first are grouped by
country; they work as an interdisciplinary team. Guide questions are used to
help participants focus on problem identification; some questions focus on
male and female perceptions of problems. Output is presented in the class.
2. Field exercise to supplement the agroecosystem lessons in the classroom. First
a one-day trip teaches participants how to use maps, charts, and calendars. This
activity also serves as a pretest for farmer interviews using different key-
informant panels (KIP), including an all-female group, for problem identifi-
cation.
3. Practicum activities to test theories learned in the classroom by working
with farmers in the village. Activities include group interviews of a mixed
group of male and female farmers, focused interviews of male farmers, and
interviews of an all-female KIP. This practicum activity simulates an actual
FSR site characterization.
Eliciting information from farmers is the fourth topic related to gender
analysis in Unit Three. An important skill taught in FSR is how to work
effectively with farmers. One approach is to ask questions to get information
on how farmers think, how they interact with each other, what their values are,
and how they evaluate the socioeconomic status of other farmers. Classifying
farmers by socioeconomic status is an important precursor to selecting
participants for on-farm trials. Together with biophysical considerations,
socioeconomic indicators help assure that participants are representive of
farmers in a village.
An exercise to classify the socioeconomic status of farmers in a village
employs the ABC technique. The objective of the exercise is to create
awareness among participants of the importance of knowing some farmers'
characteristics as perceived by the farmers themselves. The farmers in a village
are grouped into several categories according to their socioeconomic status.
One classification would be "rich, relatively rich, poor, or average" farmer.


Journal for Farming Systems Research-Extension






GENDER ANALYSIS AND FSRE TRAINING


The criteria for grouping farmers were previously agreed upon by the farmers
in the village. For example, the group may agree that a rich farmer owns 1 ha
of land and three work animals and sends his children to college, while a poor
farmer is a tenant on a 4-ha farm, has three work animals, and sends his
children to the local school.
The FSR course uses two exercises to teach this skill:
The first is a class exercise using a hypothetical village. The instructor first
prepares a list of hypothetical farmers, each described in terms of socioeco-
nomic indicators such as farm size, access to land, and type of housing. The
hypothetical farmers are grouped randomly, becoming, in effect, a KIP. Class
participants study the farmers' list and, by consensus, regroup the farmers
according to socioeconomic status. The new grouping of farmers and a list of
the criteria used for each socioeconomic category are presented. Finally, the
instructor summarizes the lesson, focusing on differences of categories used.
The second is afield exercise in farming village. The field exercise employs
the same concept as does the class exercise and also emphasizes women as a
reliable source of village information.
Farmers first are grouped into KIPs. One KIP is all male, another is all
female, and one or two are a mix. Each group is composed of nine to a dozen
members. Class participants are grouped by country. A complete list of farmers
in the village is used; the farmers are grouped by the KIPs into several
categories, and these categories then are discussed by the KIPs. A discussion/
dialogue between farmers and participants follows, and different groups
present their results in class. The instructor synthesizes the exercise, focusing
on similarities and differences of the KIPs' farmer groupings.
Experience has shown that this exercise illustrates clearly to class partici-
pants that some information is obtained reliably and equally well when using
an all-female KIP. The socioeconomic classification results in almost the same
grouping of farmers as do the other KIPs' classifications.

Methods
Gender analysis also is incorporated subtly into Unit Four (Methods).
Methodologies include assessment of technical feasibility, selection of farmer
cooperators, farmers' evaluation criteria, farmer-to-farmer transfer oftechnol-
ogy, and identification of technologies relevant to women.
Asessementoftechnical feasibility on both the community and the farm level
should be done before new technologies are introduced. Technical feasibility
can be assessed on the farm level through the use of(1) a "who-does-what"


Vol. 2, No. 3, 1991






FRIO


checklist of farm and nonfarm activities, together with (2) a seasonal activities
chart.
These two tools are useful for identifying, for example, what specific
activities are done by each gender and when they do them. This reveals some
possible constraints on, for example, supply of labor. At what periods should
a labor-intensive technology be introduced? Introduction of forage grasses in
areas where women are doing the cut-and-carry system may not be adopted
because women have no time for it.
Selection offarm cooperators is an important topic related to on-farm trials.
Selecting an inappropriate cooperator often leads to biased results or to
technologies that cannot be extrapolated.
The topic is approached by asking, "Who is the cooperating farmer?"
Participants often identify farmer leaders, innovative farmers, farmers with big
lands, male farmers, seed growers, etc., but rarely does anyone answer female
farmer or poor farmer.
The lesson should emphasize who the clients are. There are three primary
approaches: (1) Discuss Chambers' and Ghildyal's concept of resource-poor
and resource-rich farmers. Discover participants' perception of who their
clients are. (2) Assign an exercise using the "who-does-what" checklist again.
This time, the point is to identify the doers of farm activities in the participants'
own countries. (3) Summarize the results and compare across countries.
The segment on farmers'evaluation criteria teaches the lesson that women
farmers sometimes have different criteria for evaluating new or improved
technologies. This point is stressed in several ways, including a video; a "taste
panel," in which class participants taste a given dish in order to explore
preferences in aroma, cooking quality, etc.; and farmer feedback during the
field practicum, which both male and female farmers attend.
The results of the participants' agroecosystem analysis, problem identifica-
tion, and initial recommendation to solve problems or to improve systems are
presented to the group. Women are encouraged to comment on or to ask
questions about the participants' recommendations. Previous experience
shows that women place more emphasis on grain quality (e.g., taste) than on
the physical attributes ofa crop, except when the topic is fodder trees; women
are skeptical of this crop because of the difficulty of harvesting leaves from tall
trees for animal feed.
Some equipment (e.g., the mechanical seed drill for mungbean and
cowpea) also is shown during this activity to encourage the users, especially
women, to test them.


Journal for Farming Systems Research-Extension






GENDER ANALYSIS AND FSRE TRAINING


Farmer-to-farmer technology transfer is an approach to technology dissem-
ination in which previously trained farmers train other farmers. This concept
is taught in the classroom through lectures with slides that show different
projects using this approach.
Another support activity is field work in project sites where previously
trained farmers now teach other farmers. During village visits, participants
interview farmers about the process.
The fifth skill relevant to gender analysis in Unit Four is identification of
technologies relevant to women.
During the ecosystem case study visit, arrangements are made for demon-
strating the use of light machinery and equipment designed or modified at
IRRI. The equipment is adapted to users' needs (mostly women's) to help
lighten their workload. Some examples are the rice dehuller, the light
transplanter, and the treadle pump.

Case Studies
One of the objectives of Unit Five (Case Studies) is to show examples of
ongoing projects that involve both male and female researchers and cooper-
ators. Following are three such case studies.
1. Integrated pest management (IPM). Components include lectures with
slides showing activities in different IPM project sites; video of same project
showing involvement of mostly women and children in the research pro-
ject; field visit to the project site, including interviewing males, females,
and children involved in the project, and observing and interviewing the
researchers.
2. Crop/animal research system. Components include lectures with slides
showing activities in project site, field visit to project site, visit to cooperators
at their homes and farms, interviewing male and female cooperators for
feedback about the project, and interviewing the researchers about the
project.
3. Crop/fish research system. Components include lectures with slides
showing examples from projects in various countries, field visit to the pro-
ject site, and interviewing male and female cooperators about their projects
and modifications done, in the process of gathering feedback about the
technology.


Vol. 2, No. 3, 1991





FRIO


CONCLUSIONS

The approaches used in incorporating gender analysis in the FSR course
conform with the nature of the majority of the participants' learning styles and
encourage a relatively high level of participation. From the trainers' point of
view, these alternative approaches allow a wide range of teaching styles, thus
avoiding the straight "hard-sell" idea usually associated with teaching gender
analysis.
However, because most approaches are innovative and participatory,
trainees' feedback is needed to assess their appropriateness, applicability, and
acceptability in different countries. For example, feedback about the ABC
technique to determine socioeconomic status of farm families suggests that
some participants are not comfortable using it because farmers may lose face
if they are classified as "poor." Status is a very sensitive issue in these societies.
This technique has been modified as a result, so that groups of farmers are
identified in terms of their farming capabilities. The villagers themselves have
come up with descriptions that, when translated, mean "innovative farmer,
the first on the try new varieties, progressive," and "very industrious." These
descriptions are useful for researchers. Also, because there are many lessons
and small activities that address gender concerns in the course, participants
have a variety of options and approaches to choose from when they go back
to teach or work with farmers in their own countries.


Journal for Farming Systems Research-Extension








Consumption Aspects
of Sustainable Agriculture:
Project Methods and Linkages in the Philippines

M.S. Prehm'



ABSTRACT
This paper examines key aspects of consumption as they relate to
ecological, economic, social, and humanitarian dimensions ofsustainabil-
ity in the Bicol Rain-fed Agricultural Development Project in the
Philippines. Crop mix, seasonality, income, and marketing were found
to be the most important production/consumption linkages to ecolog-
ical and economic aspects ofsustainability. To increase sustainability, the
project promoted intercropping in both coconut- and corn-based crop-
ping systems, established local nurseries, and provided assistance in
postharvest handling and marketing of corn. Income generating activ-
ities involving women's groups included postharvest processing and
formation of a cooperative. Heavy participation by farmer cooperators
and women's groups, as well as increased staffawareness, led the project
personnel to give priority to consumption concerns. Although the
consumption aspects of the project need systematic evaluation, from
farmer adoption rates it appears that many innovations are highly
sustainable.


INTRODUCTION
The sustainability of agricultural development depends on more than just
maintaining the on-going productive capacity of the system (Allen and Van
Dusen, 1988). Sustainable agriculture is "ecologically sound, economically
viable, socially just, and humane" (Gips, 1988). Household food consump-
tion/nutrition is an underlying aspect of these criteria for sustainable agricul-
ture and has been suggested as an important criterion itself (Frankenberger et
al., 1989). However, plants and animals often receive more attention than
humans in agricultural development efforts (Murray, 1984).

1 International Food and Nutrition Program, Virginia Polytechnical Institute, Blacks-
burg, Va.





PREHM


The purpose of this paper is to describe key aspects of consumption as they
relate to ecological, economic, social, and humanitarian dimensions of
sustainability. Some of these aspects of consumption-related sustainability
then will be described within a specific project setting (the Bicol Rain-fed
Agricultural Development Project) in the Philippines.

Ecological Soundness
Ecological soundness applies to the entire agroecosystem, from humans
and wildlife to plants and soil organisms. The components of the system need
to be sound, healthy, and whole. As Gips (1988) suggests, the agroecosystem
should produce thriving, nutritious plants that nourish humans.
Crop quality and mix. Crop quality, crop mix, and the use ofagrochemicals
are important consumption-related aspects of ecological sustainability. There
is some evidence that the balance of minerals and other soil nutrients affects
the nutrient levels and balance in crops (Clancy, 1990). In terms of human
food consumption, the most deficient nutrients in Southeast Asian diets are
iron, vitamin A, and iodine, with calories and protein lacking overall (Maguire,
1988). Because studies suggest that differences in plant nutrients are based
on soil fertility, this needs to be taken into account along with crop mix.
Efforts to improve crop quality ofmicronutrients should take into account the
overall lack of calories and protein in the diet.
Pest and disease control. Other important ecological aspects include the
health- and consumption-related trade-offs with different types ofagrochem-
ical or biological control methods. Although there is considerable evidence
of potential and actual health problems with agrochemicals (Brun, 1988;
Lipton and deKadt, 1988; Clancy, 1990), their use saves millions of tons of
staple food crops and increases the income of poor people (Lipton and deKadt,
1988). The majority of farm households in developing countries rely upon
organic animal and plant matter to improve soil fertility. Little is known about
the health effects of these methods (Lipton and deKadt, 1988). Many of the
organically fertilized crops are potentially contaminated with disease vectors
and undergo little processing that would decrease their potential to cause
illness.

Economic Viability
Economic viability suggests that, at a minimum, there be a balance in terms
of resources expended and returned in order to warrant the costs involved. In
human terms, this suggests that the food energy necessary to produce and


Journal for Farming Systems Research-Extension






CONSUMPTION ASPECTS OF SUSTAINABLE AGRICULTURE 13

manage the farm household system should be supplied by the system without
calorie or nutrient deficiencies. In Southeast Asia, the overall availability of
food energy or calories is a problem, especially for women and children.
The net effect of inadequate food for agricultural workers is also an
important aspect of economic viability. Reviews of research on nutrition and
productivity of agricultural or other workers (Maturu, 1979; Flores et al.,
1984; Martorell and Arroyave, 1988) indicate that (1) adequate nutrition,
both during childhood and in adulthood, results in stronger, more energetic
workers; (2) improved nutrition lengthens working life span; (3) severe, and
perhaps moderate, malnutrition decreases cognitive skills, but the effect on
productivity is unknown; and (4) improved nutrition may lead to fewer days
lost to illness.
Although the importance of adequate nutrition to worker productivity
largely depends on how strenuous the activity is and the severity of malnutri-
tion, adequate nutrition appears to be an important factor to developing an
active workforce for economic development (Martorell and Arroyave, 1988).
Seasonality. A related aspect of appropriate resource balance in economic
viability is the problem of seasonal food and income gaps. Although the
promotion of irrigation in a region helps to decrease vulnerability to seasonal
changes, there are still problems in many areas with food and income gaps.
Studies in the Asian region suggest that adults as well as children lose and gain
weight according to seasonal shifts in food and income (Chowdhury et al.,
1981), which may have rather serious consequences for the malnourished and
for pregnant women (Pacey and Payne, 1985). Other studies indicate
households adopt a number of coping strategies to meet basic needs during
lean times (Nabarro et al., 1989; Frankenberger, 1990) and that one of the
major goals of households is to provide adequate food and cash throughout
the year (Korten, 1986). Innovations that require households to risk food
security will be much more difficult to promote.
Socialjustice. To be socially just, the system must ensure that resources and
power are distributed equitably so that the basic needs of all people are met
and their rights assured (Gips, 1988). Although the evidence is not conclu-
sive, in Asia gender biases appear to limit access to resources both within the
household and with credit and other agricultural services (Agarwal, 1988).
Projects and services are often directed primarily towards men, despite the fact
that women also have important agricultural roles. Some studies suggest
preferential treatment of male children over female children and that men
receive more food than women (Chen et al., 1981; Van Esterik, 1985). In


Vol. 2, No. 3, 1991





PREHM


some cases, these practices are complex coping mechanisms that maintain the
on-going viability of the household or kin system (Frankenberger, 1990).
It is important for sustainable agriculture projects to recognize how
resources and power are distributed and the possible effects of innovations on
these processes. In the case of Southeast Asia, where there are disparities
between irrigated and nonirrigated farms, it is important to develop policies
and promote programs that offset the negative consequences on vulnerable
households of the expansion of irrigation. Participation is an important part
ofsocial justice. It allows people to influence decisions that directly affect their
lives. Although participation may complicate otherwise tidy plans, there is
sufficient evidence to indicate that ifinnovations and services do not take into
account the preferences and cultural norms of the intended users, they will be
less effective and not sustainable over the long term.
Humanitarianism. The last recommendation for sustainable agriculture
is to respect life and cultural diversity (Gips, 1988). Some suggest that the
ultimate goal of agriculture is not the growing of crops but the cultivation and
perfection of human beings (Fukuoka, 1985). The consumption aspects of
humanitarianism derive from an understanding that cultural heritage and
identity are important components of farming systems. Cultural preferences
for certain cooking qualities often will determine farm-household preferences
for particular varieties or crops. A good example is the differences in
preferences for various types of rice in the Asian region (Barker et al., 1985).
Indigenous cultivation practices have also been shown to be instrumental in
the cultivation of particular crops or with particular cropping patterns (Alteri,
1987). Also, given the importance of kin networks and cultural traditions in
survival strategies (Frankenberger, 1990), cultural heritage is an important
consideration of sustainable agriculture.
Although this discussion certainly points out the need for consideration of
consumption concerns in sustainable agricultural development, it is not
feasible for all of the consumption concerns to be given equal attention in a
typical project setting. Closer examination of specific production and
consumption linkages in a project setting has been recommended as a means
to identify critical consumption issues (Frankenberger, 1985). However, a
serious limitation to describing the important linkages is often the lack of
appropriate methods to do so. Personnel of the Bicol Rain-fed Agricultural
Development Project were aware of many of these important consumption
concerns for sustainable agricultural development. Based on that awareness
they initiated activities to develop appropriate methods to describe produc-


Journal for Farming Systems Research-Extension






CONSUMPTION ASPECTS OF SUSTAINABLE AGRICULTURE 15

tion and consumption linkages in order to improve the sustainability of project
innovations. The next section of this paper describes the project, some of the
methods developed, and the production and consumption linkages that were
relevant to sustainability.


PROJECT BACKGROUND AND SETTING
The Bicol Rain-fed Agriculture Development Project was a joint project of the
Philippine Department of Agriculture and the U.S. Agency for International
Development. Beginning in 1983, its primary purpose was improving
national capacity to identify profitable and sustainable agricultural technolo-
gies for rain-fed areas and to develop ways to effectively disseminate them
(Winrock International, 1988). The overall goal was to improve family
production and income by optimal use of local resources and to prevent
environmental degradation (Florin, 1987). At its start, it focused on the
development of appropriate technologies by provincial level multidisciplinary
research teams with trials on farmers' fields. In 1985 there was some
expansion into production programs. With the beginning of a new cycle in
1988, the emphasis shifted from adaptive research to considerable expansion
and implementation in local sites. The research moved to farmer-led trial
designs with porboran ("to try," in Filipino) projects (Bitao et al., 1989).
The project operated primarily in the upland areas of six provinces in the
Bicol region on the southern part of the island of Luzon. The geography
ranges from forested and mountainous areas to rolling hills. Forty-seven
percent of the total land in the region is planted with annuals and perennials,
with 52 percent in wood or grass lands and 1 percent nonarable. Eighty-two
percent of the land in the region is upland (Winrock International, 1988). Of
the upland crop area, coconut accounts for 74 percent, corn 19 percent, abaca
(fiber) 3 percent, sugar cane 2 percent, and other trees 0.5 percent. The
average farm size in the region is 3 ha, with 51 percent of the farms 1.5 ha in
size and 17 percent less than 1 ha in size.
A survey of preschool children in the region prior to initiation of the project
indicated that 64 percent of the children were malnourished with 40 percent
having first-degree, 20 percent second-degree, and 4 percent third-degree
malnutrition. Other important nutritional problems included vitamin A
deficiency, anemia, and goiter. The average per capital food intake consisted
of 54 percent energy foods, 27 percent protein foods, 17 percent fruits and
vegetables, and 2 percent others (Velasco et al., 1985).


Vol. 2, No. 3, 1991






PREHM


Project Design and Implementation
Project design strategies addressed concerns about social justice and
humanitarianism largely through participatory processes. The overall ap-
proach to agricultural development was a farmer-led diagnosis and design
process. The project's diagnosis and design process used farmer knowledge
and views to make decisions about what types of activities would be imple-
mented. Although technical views of project staff differed from the practical
views offarmers (Haedrich, 1989), the farmers' decisions on innovations were
those implemented by the project.
Late in the project the technology development shifted primarily to
providing inputs for farmers to conduct and evaluate their own experiments.
Training shifted to hands-on community- or household-based projects. This
increased farmer involvement and addressed some issues of equitable access to
project inputs. For example, artificial reef construction, livestock projects, and
fish cages were available to all community members. Conversely, crop-based
innovations have an inherent bias towards those with land and greater
productive resources.

Development of Production Technologies
The project used a multidisciplinary team to work with farmers on
technology generation, verification, and dissemination. Each team consisted
of at least a production scientist, a social scientist, an extension specialist, and
a home management specialist, with the regional team composed of additional
production scientists. The regional team initially worked with provincial
teams to determine the locations of agricultural trials and trial designs. The
trials were implemented on farmers' fields by the provincial teams and
evaluated by both teams as well as by farmers.
After approximately two years of technology generation and verification,
the most promising technologies were promoted in additional sites near the
ones where they were developed. The technologies reported here are those
reported by the regional team as the most successful based on field trial data
and adoption rates by farm households.

Development of Consumption Methods
The consumption methods described here were developed collaboratively
by the project's multidisciplinary regional team and the author and tested
jointly with a field operations team. The methods were designed for incorpo-
ration into each of the steps of the project's regular diagnostic process-a form


Journal for Farming Systems Research-Extension






CONSUMPTION ASPECTS OF SUSTAINABLE AGRICULTURE 17

of rapid appraisal for design (Beebe, 1985). The project's typical diagnostic
process included secondary data collection, site reconnaissance, key informant
group interview, and community planning. For the purposes of obtaining
household-level information an additional step (household visits), was added
after the key informant group interview.
Nutrition surveillance data were used to describe the community in general
and then used to identify high-risk households during the site reconnaissance
and the household visits. The most vulnerable were the landless and fishing
families.
A number of measures were included in the key informant group interview
but the food-availability calendar, which lists months of food availability and
sources, was the most relevant to the description of linkages. A food- and
income-gap calendar was used during household visits to describe further the
relationship of crop mix, seasonality, and income. All food and income
sources were listed along the left-hand column with the months across the top
of the form. Households were then asked when they received the products
and/or proceeds from each and how long they lasted for household use. A
summary question was used to determine when the leanest months were for
food and income.


RESULTS OF PRODUCTION/CONSUMPTION LINKAGES
WITH IMPLICATIONS FOR SUSTAINABILITY OF
AGRICULTURAL INNOVATIONS

The most important production/consumption linkages appear to be related
to crop mix, seasonality, income, and marketing. As might be expected, all of
these linkages are interrelated (Frankenberger, 1985). The food- and income-
gap calendar for each coconut-based farming system indicates that gaps occur
before crops are harvested and after the proceeds from marketed goods no
longer meet household needs (Table 1). However, it is also important to note
that the food and income gaps (bottom row) are slightly different in each of
the farming systems (summarized in Table 2). Based on four representative
households from each farming system (Table 1), it appears that the coconut/
fish system has short and frequent gaps, while the coconut/karagomi (fiber)
group has two longer gaps during August and September and January through
March. The most diverse system, coconut/karagomi/rice, has three relatively
short gaps (July and part of January and February). Overall, the community
reported seasonal shortages of food from January through March and from


Vol. 2, No. 3, 1991






PREHM


Table 1. Food and Income Gaps Calendar
for Three Farming Systems Groups


Coconut/Fish Farming System Group'

Wet Season Dry Season

Item M J J A S O N D J F M A

Coconut/copra ..... .....H ...H ....H .....H ....H ....H .....H ......
Fish ..
Banana
Lubi-lubi
Chicken/swine
Cassava .............. .............. ....i.............. P.
Income and food gaps* .

* Strategies during gaps: 1) fish for food and income, 2) work as laborer, 3) sell livestock,
4) substitute root crops for rice in diet, and 5) gather more lubi-lubi and other greens.


Coconut/Karagomi Farming Systems Group'

Wet Season Dry Season

Item M J J A S O N D J F M A


Coconut/copra
Karagomi

Sweet potato
Banana
Lubi-lubi
Chi-c-et /swi


t Mats Limited mat making tMats
-.. -:.-. ......................................................................
. .. ... P .................... .... .... .. :.:. :.:::.:..:


./ Sell Sell Sell
.. ...m. ................... I.-.-, ............... ..... : .....................
Cassava ............H .. ...................H
Income and food gaps*

* Strategies during gaps: 1) do carpentry or household work off-farm, 2) sell livestock,
3) substitute root crops for rice in diet, 4) increase mat production, 5) gather more lubi-
lubi, 6) sell cassava cakes, and 7) water down rice into porridge.


Journal for Farming Systems Research-Extension






CONSUMPTION ASPECTS OF SUSTAINABLE AGRICULTURE 19
Table 1. Food and Income Gaps Calendar
for Three Farming System Groups (cont.)

Coconut/Karagomi/Rice Farming Systems Group'

Wet Season Dry Season

Item M J J A S O N D J F M A

Coconut/copra H ...H ..H....H.. ....H ...H -....H ... .....
Karagomi Mats Limited mat making t Mats

Seet potato ..... ...................... P .....................
Banana
Lubi-lubi
Chickens/swine Sell chicken Sell swine Sell chicken

C assava ................................... ............................. ......H
Income and food gaps* .............

Strategies during gaps: 1) sell livestock, 2) substitute root crops for rice in diet,
3) borrow from neighbors (food or cash), 4) increase mat production, 5) gather
more lubi-lubi, and 6) water down rice to porridge.

'Legend: Unavailable = .............. Harvest = H
Available = .gS Planted = P

June through September. As can be seen in Table 2, these coincide with the
occurrence of diarrhea and peaks in labor demand.
The differing sources of household food is another aspect of crop mix and
seasonality. As seen in Table 3, a number of the foods used by households were
both purchased and grown. As will be described later, the project promoted
peanuts, mung beans, rice, and snap beans for intercropping. All of these were
normally purchased for use by households. Household purchases also may
indicate seasonal problems or insufficient levels of production to ensure a
continuous supply to the household.

Coping Strategies
When food and income shortages occurred, households tended to use
coping strategies both to increase or diversify the production system and to
extend the food supply. Expansion of production included increasing
coconut, fiber, rice, fishing, livestock, and root crop production, other income
generating activities, and wage labor. To extend the food supply households
substituted root crops for rice, diluted rice porridge with water, borrowed rice,
gathered more wild foods, ate less, or fished more.

Vol. 2, No. 3, 1991






PREHM


Table 2. Summary of Food and Income Gaps for Coconut Farming Systems
and Interface with Household Conditions

Wet Season Dry Season

J F M A M J J A S O N D
Coconut/Fish System Gaps M M. ....
Coconut/Karagomi
Coconut/Karagomi/Rice i
High Occurrence of Diarrhea
Peaks in Labor Demands

Legend: Gaps or Peaks = i

The importance of income to consumption was illustrated when house-
holds were asked what they would buy with hypothetical extra income. The
answer was food (Haedrich, 1989). Seasonal fluctuations in market prices
were problems for both production returns and consumption. Other produc-
tion/consumption linkages, such as women's time, crop-labor demands, and
postharvest practices, were also important; more lengthy discussions of those
may be found elsewhere (Haedrich, 1989).


IMPLICATIONS OF CONSUMPTION LINKAGES FOR
AGRICULTURAL TRIALS

Given that food-crop production and seasonal food gaps are priorities, several
of the consumption problems, conditions, and constraints identified are useful
considerations in determining treatments for on-farm experimental trials
(Table 4).
The major consumption-related conditions identified by the community
and the team during the diagnosis related to the problem of inadequate food
supply. They include gaps in food and income along with a lack of calories,
protein, and iron. Peaks in labor demand appear to coincide with lean months
and high infection. Problems with human and animal waste may be important
factors that contribute to high rates of infection found in the community.
Households also lack access to health care and medicines.
Although it would be impossible to design trials that take all of these
conditions into account, they are important considerations when selecting
individual treatments for testing via on-farm agricultural trials. The major
implications of the conditions relate to crop and varietal selections for


Journal for Farming Systems Research-Extension






CONSUMPTION ASPECTS OF SUSTAINABLE AGRICULTURE 21

Table 3. Selected Foods and Sources
Foods Grow Buy Exchange Gather Purchase, not Purchase and
grown grow or
gather


CEREALS/ROOTS/TUBERS
Rice + +
Cassava + +
Sweet potatoes +
Spiny yam +
FRUITS/VEGETABLES
Bananas +
Avocado + +
Papaya (ripe) +
Grapefruit +
Berries +
Mango + +
Jackfruit (ripe) +
Nightshade +
greens
Other assorted +
greensa
Papaya (green) +
Jackfruit +
(unripe)
Banana
blossoms +
Swamp cabbage + +
Tomato +
Snap beans + +
LEGUMES
Peanuts +
Mungbeans +


Rice

Sweet potatoes



Avocado



Mango


Nightshade
greens


Tomato


Swamp cabbage


Peanuts
Mung beans


a Horseradish greens, sweet potato tops, taro leaves.


decreasing food and income gaps and increasing the availability of limited
nutrients such as vitamin A, protein, and iron. It is important to note that the
basic need is for adequate amounts of staple foods throughout the year.
Treatments that help to address this problem are more likely to be continued
by the households. Also, those that fill food and income gaps are especially
helpful.
Treatments also need to account for lack of capital and labor. Households
used very little fertilizer or other commercial inputs due to a lack of money.
Although improved income is an important expressed need of the community,
lack of time (or labor) is an important constraint that needs to be taken into
account. Household and farm labor-saving technologies may be key consid-


Vol. 2, No. 3, 1991






PREHM


Table 4. Implications of Problems, Conditions, and Constraints
for Design and Ex Ante Analysis

PROBLEMS/CONDITIONS/CONSTRAINTS: Gaps in production of staple
foods.
Implications for Treatment Selection
*Selection of crops/varieties and cropping pattern to fill gaps in supplies of
rice and roots during January through March and June through August.
*Postharvest storage options for extending food supplies.
Ex Ante Treatments
*How would selection contribute to filling food gaps?
*What are the trade-offs for households between cash and subsistence crop
production?
*In what areas could post-harvest storage be improved?
PROBLEMS/CONDITIONS/CONSTRAINTS: Gaps in income flow limit families'
ability to purchase food items.
Implications for Treatment Selection
*Selection of crops/varieties and cropping pattern for optimal market or trade
value.
*Balance of cash and subsistence crops in crop mix for maintaining adequate
diet.
Ex Ante Treatments
eAre there opportunities for marketing or trading selected varities/crops?
*Are selected crops/varities acceptable to families for production, preparation,
and consumption qualities?
PROBLEMS/CONDITIONS/CONSTRAINTS: Diets for many families inadequate
in overall calories as well as for specific nutrients. Also, specific family
members at higher nutritional risk.
Implications for Treatment Selection
*Crop selection to include crops rich in Vitamin A and C, iron, protein, and
calories.
Ex Ante Treatments
*Based on who received income from sale of produce, what consumption
effects may be expected within households?
*Are selected crops/varieties acceptable for productions, storage,
preparation, and consumption qualities?
PROBLEMS/CONDITIONS/CONSTRAINTS: Existing seasonal peaks in labor
demand for production. Also considering women's roles in gardening, their
time in production may tend to conflict with tasks of child-care and family
feeding.
Implications for Treatment Selection
*Planning cropping patterns for distribution of labor demand away from peak
labor times in May through June and December through February as well as
May through August for women.
*Selection of treatments with varied labor-demand times.
*Selection of labor-saving technologies.
*Location of planting area accessible to the home, for female workers.
Ex Ante Treatments
*Does the farm family have the labor resources necessary to adopt the
technology?
*Which family members will provide the labor?
*What are the necessary trade-offs in using household resources for labor-
saving technologies?

Journal for Farming Systems Research-Extension






CONSUMPTION ASPECTS OF SUSTAINABLE AGRICULTURE 23

Table 4. Implications of Problems, Conditions, and Constraints for
Design and Ex Ante Analysis (cont.)

PROBLEMS/CONDITIONS/CONSTRAINTS: Lack of animal and household
waste disposal systems poses sanitation hazard. High rates of enteral infections
contributing to malnutrition, infection, and anemia may be attributable
to poor sanitation.
Implications for Treatment Selection
*Soil improvement options should include composting with animal and house-
hold waste.
*Crop protection could entail containment of swine and chickens with collec-
tion of waste materials for composting.
Ex Ante Treatments
*Are there cultural restrictions on the use of animal waste for food crop pro-
duction?
Is labor available for the tasks of animal fencing and waste management?
Is there the potential for food contamination if women working in waste dis-
posal also perform tasks of food preparation and child-care?
PROBLEMS/CONDITIONS/CONSTRAINTS: Prevalence of enteral infections/
lack of access to health care services; medicines unavailable.
Implications for Treatment Selection
*Cropping pattern to minimize labor demands during periods of high infec-
tion rates (May through August).
*Crop selection to include medicinal herbs.
Ex Ante Treatments
*What is the expected acceptability and usefulness of particular medicinal
herbs?
PROBLEMS/CONDITIONS/CONSTRAINTS: Lack of capital for agricultural
inputs.
Implications for Treatment Selection
*Selection of technologies that are less capital intensive.
*Timing of cropping pattern to minimize peaks in input requirements.
Ex Ante Treatments
*Do households have the necessary resources to purchases needed inputs?

erations in the project for freeing up household members' time for improving
agricultural production.
The relationship between poor sanitation conditions and infection and
poor nutrition in the area is an important concern. Experimental agricultural
treatments that indirectly improve household sanitation through the collec-
tion and use of household and livestock waste are recommended as possible
criteria for treatment options. The high rates of infection and subsequent
diarrhea probably are as deleterious to nutritional status as is lack of food. If
composting of household waste or other strategies useful for agricultural
production that have a positive effect on household sanitation could be used,
they are likely to have a positive effect on both production as well as nutrition.
Increased crop diversification may also be an important strategy to offset
environmental and price/market problems.
Vol. 2, No. 3, 1991





PREHM


EX ANTE ANALYSIS OF TREATMENTS

Based on food consumption problems, resources, and constraints discussed,
the researchers formulated questions for ex ante analysis ofpossible treatments
(Caldwell and Walecka, 1987). They are presented here (Table 4) as an
example of how consumption/nutrition concerns are useful, along with other
criteria, in evaluating the sustainability of alternatives for trial design.
The major focus of the questions was whether the crops, varieties, and
cropping patterns selected helped fill food, cash, and nutrient gaps within the
labor and resource constraints of the household. The cultural acceptability of
the proposed treatments and the consumer qualities of the produce (storage,
taste, etc.) also are important considerations for selecting treatments that are
acceptable, and hence sustainable, for the families.


PROJECT TECHNOLOGIES LINKED TO CONSUMPTION
Although the project personnel did not have a full complement of consump-
tion-related data when the initial technologies were designed, many of the
technologies used were oriented towards consumption as well as production
goals. The major project technologies focused on diversifying cropping
patterns to provide more continuous and greater food and income flows, to
provide some security against heavy typhoon damage, and to improve
environmental conditions such as soil fertility.

Coconut-based Cropping Systems
The project used intercropping in coconut-growing areas as the main
strategy for participating landowner and tenant coconut farmers. The tenants
preferred annuals rather than perennials for intercropping. For tenants,
intercropping of yardlong beans with coconut provided a quick and steady
source of income and food for the household. A 2,500 m2 area planted with
yardlong beans provided the average household with food and a daily cash
income that was useful especially during lean times when families tend to go
into debt to buy rice.
Coconut farmers who owned land preferred to intercrop with pineapple,
coffee, and taro. Pineapple and upland taro provided a source of cash for seven
months after planting; five months later (one year after planting) income from
second-growth pineapple and, four to six months later, income from the first
planting ofpineapple were realized. Pineapple is both drought- and typhoon-
resistant, important characteristics of successful crops in the area.
Journal for Farming Systems Research-Extension





CONSUMPTION ASPECTS OF SUSTAINABLE AGRICULTURE 25

Although specific data were not generated by the project to evaluate the
consumption effects of the intercropping technologies, based on the adoption
of these cropping patterns by farm households it is hypothesized that the
income and subsistence food benefits were sufficient to sustain their contin-
ued use and adoption. For example, in one area five initial coconut farmer
cooperators were involved in the original pineapple intercropping trial. Near
the time of the first pineapple harvest an additional 17 new households had
established pineapple intercropping. By late 1989, there were 91 households
in four sites that had established this cropping pattern (Cambaya, 1989).

Corn-based Cropping Systems
In areas that predominantly grow corn, continuous corn cropping depleted
soil fertility, resulting in lower yields and increased areas of corn cultivation
(and thus increased labor demands). Intercropping was used by the project
to shift from a simple planting of two corn crops per year to a pattern of green
corn and upland rice and then corn and peanuts. Peanuts were selected for
their nitrogen-fixing capabilities and because there was a ready market.
Because they are typically purchased by most households, their production
may result in increased food for the household as well as cash savings. Upland
rice was an important addition to the cropping pattern because it is the most
important staple food item for households and one that households would go
into debt to buy. It is assumed that the more diverse crop mix provided a more
steady food and income flow to households, but the relationship needs to be
clarified with additional data.
Green corn provides a ready source of food and cash during lean months
(June, July, and August) and cash for school fees in June. "Where corn is
planted earlier (late April or May) it is a good source of cash for farm
households. A hectare of upland rice with green corn intercrop provides a
gross ofP10,000/ha [US$500 from 20,000 corn plants]" (Cambaya, 1989).

Nursery Development
Another important strategy was the establishment of nurseries in the
project area. Local agricultural college students and project personnel worked
with villages to establish village-level nurseries. Coffee, cacao, and fruit trees
were made available to project cooperators. Although the primary thrust of
the project was for greater diversification in production, some of the tree
planting also was used as an environmental strategy.


Vol. 2, No. 3, 1991





PREHM


Postharvest Marketing Assistance
In late 1989, the project initiated activities to provide support to farm
household for postharvest handling and marketing of corn. Local consultants
worked with farm cooperator core groups to form cooperatives. Farmers
received assistance in postharvest shelling, drying, and bagging of corn.
The project formed a communications link with a major market center to
monitor prices and made transportation arrangements for shipments when
local prices were too low. This resulted in considerable community interest
in the project, and the local prices remained sufficiently high to preclude more
than one shipment out of the area. Given the lack of longitudinal and farmer-
specific data, it is difficult to determine the benefits of the postharvest
marketing assistance. However, informal project appraisals indicated that
with the assistance farmers perceived higher returns. Because corn was the
major crop and returns were managed by women, it is likely that increased
returns contributed to improved household food security.

Income Generating Activities
Other project strategies included postharvest processing to increase cash
returns on products, primarily with women's groups making sweetened
coconut preserves, peanut butter, and ginger tea. These were marketed by the
women in local areas, and it appeared that the income was kept by the women
for their use. In one area, women formed a cooperative in the first phase of
the project (1985), and it has continued successfully through 1989 as a
revolving fund for emergency food needs, agricultural inputs, and materials to
start income-generating projects.


SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS

The consumption aspects of sustainable agriculture can be identified by
describing the linkages of nutrition and agriculture in the project area. The
most important production/consumption linkages relating primarily to eco-
logical and economic aspects of sustainability were crop mix, seasonality,
income, and marketing. The most successful and the major project technol-
ogies took into account the important consumption problems of food and
income gaps by increasing subsistence crops, crop yields, and flows of income
to households throughout the year. The strategies were also intended to
decrease household susceptibility to typhoon damage, a real concern of
households, and to improve environmental conditions such as soil fertility that


Journal for Farming Systems Research-Extension






CONSUMPTION ASPECTS OF SUSTAINABLE AGRICULTURE 27

eventually could build a stronger agricultural and household resource base.
The success of these technologies may be due to the project's activities
related to social justice and humanitarianism. In this particular project, heavy
participation of farmer cooperators may have been the driving force behind
the number of technologies generated that address food and income gaps.
Project participation opportunities were extended to reach the poorest-in
this case, the landless. Also, attention was given to the special concerns of
women and their participation was sought in the full range ofproject activities.
It appears that the project's participatory processes and staff awareness led
them to priority concerns of farmers that were related mostly to consumption
concerns. The consumption aspects of project sustainability need to be
systematically evaluated. However, judging from farmer adoption rates, it
would appear that many of the innovations are highly sustainable. Additional
information on production/consumption linkages may also help to stream-
line project monitoring for consumption benefits.


ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

The project reported here was funded under USAID Loan No. 492-068,
Project No. 492-0366. The author wishes to acknowledge the work of Lisa
Haedrich, regional and site teams, and reviewers of these activities.


REFERENCES
Allen, P.,and D. Van Dusen. 1988. Sustainable agriculture: Choosing the future. Pages
1-14 in P. Allen and D. Van Dusen, eds., Global perspectives on agro-ecology and
sustainable agricultural systems. Proceedings of the Sixth International Scientific
Conference of the International Federation of Organic Agriculture Movements,
Agroecology Program, University of California, Santa Cruz.
Agarwal, B. 1988. Structures of patriarchy: State, community and household in
modernizing Asia. Women and the household in Asia, volume 2. London: Zed Books,
Ltd.
Alteri,M.A. 1987. Agroecology: The scientific basis ofalternative agriculture. Westview
Special Studies in Agriculture Science and Policy. Boulder, Colo.: Westview Press.
Barker, R., R Herdt, and B. Rose. 1985. The rice economy ofAsia. Washington, D.C.:
Resources for the Future.
Beebe,J. 1985. Rapid ruralappraisal: The criticalfirststep in afarmingsystemsapproach
to research. Farming Systems Support Project Networking Paper No. 5. Gainesville,
Fl.
Bitao, R.R., G. Cambaya, I. Bordado, and J. Florin. 1989. Porboran methodology: A
tool for eliciting farmers participation in research and extension. Unpublished project
document. Department of Agriculture, Region V, the Philippines.


Vol. 2, No. 3, 1991






PREHM


Brun, T. 1988. Pesticide toxicity or hypoglycine: A poisoning (Ivory Coast, 1984)? The
Lancet April 23:934.
Caldwell, J.S., and L. Walecka, eds. 1987. Farming systems research and extension
training units, participant manual volume II. Design techniques for on-farm experi-
mentation (2nd ed.). Farming Systems Support Project, Gainesville, Fl.
Cambaya, R 1989. BRAD-P Successful production technologies. Personal communi-
cation.
Chen, L.C., E. Hag, and S. D'Sowza. 1981. Sex bias in the family allocation of food and
health care in rural Bangladesh. Population and Development Review 7(1):55-70.
Chowdhury,A.KM.A., S.L. Huffman, and L.C. Chen. 1981. Agriculture and nutrition
in Matlab Thana, Bangladesh. Pages 52-61 in R Chambers, R Longhurst, and A.
Pacey, eds., Seasonal dimensions to rural poverty. London: Frances Pinter Publishers.
Clancy, KL. 1990. Agriculture and human health. In C. Edwards, R. Lal, P. Maddes,
R. Miller, and G. House, eds., Sustainable agricultural systems. Ankeny, Iowa: Soil
and Water Conservation Society.
Flores, R., M.C.C. Immink, B. Torrun, E. Diaz, and F.E. Viteri. 1984. Functional
consequences of marginal malnutrition among agricultural workers in Guatemala.
Part I: Physical work capacity. Food Nutrition Bulletin 6(1):5-11.
Florin, J.R 1987. Farming systems research and development: Bicol experience. Paper
presented at the Bicol Rain-fed Agricultural Development Project Conference, Santo
Domingo, Albay, the Philippines, April 25.
Frankenberger, T.R. 1985. Adding a food consumption perspective to farming systems
research. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Agency for International Development and U.S.
Department of Agriculture/Office of International Cooperation and Development.
Frankenberger, T.R. 1990. Production-consumption linkages and coping strategies at
the household level. Paper presented at the Agriculture and Nutrition Linkage
Workshop, Rosslyn, Va., February.
Frankenberger, T.R, K. DeWalt, and P. O'Brien-Place. 1989. The role of farming
systems research and extension in promoting sustainable food systems. Farming
Systems Research-Extension Symposium Program and Abstracts, University of Ar-
kansas, Fayetteville.
Fukuoka, M. 1985. The one straw revolution. Toronto: Bantam Books.
Gips, T. 1988. What is sustainable agriculture? In P. Allen and D. Van Dusen, eds.,
Global perspectives on agroecology and sustainable agricultural systems. Proceedings of
the Sixth International Scientific Conference of the International Federation of
Organic Agriculture Movements, Agroecology Program, University of California,
Santa Cruz.
Haedrich, L. 1989. Integration of food consumption and nutrition considerations into
the RIARS Farming Systems Research and Extension Project in the Bicol Region of
the Philippines. Unpublished Master's thesis, Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State
University, Blacksburg, Va.
Korten, D., ed. 1986. Community management: Asian experience andperspectives. West
Hartford, Conn.: Kumarian Press.
Lipton, M., and E. deKadt. 1988. Agriculture-health linkages. WHO Offset Publication
No. 104. World Health Organization, Geneva, Switzerland.
Maguire, J. 1988. Malnutrition: Opportunities and challenges for A.I.D. National
Center for Food and Agricultural Policy, Resources for the Future, Washington, D.C.


Journal for Farming Systems Research-Extension






CONSUMPTION ASPECTS OF SUSTAINABLE AGRICULTURE 29

Martorell, R., and G. Arroyave. 1988. Malnutrition, work output and energy needs.
Pages 57-74 in R.J. Collins and D.F. Roberts, eds., Capacity for work in the tropics.
Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Maturu, N.R. 1979. Nutrition and labour productivity. International Labour Review
118(1):1-12.
Murray, E. 1984. Development and families. Paper presented to the Commission on
Home Economics and the Commission on International Agricultural Programs of the
National Association of State Universities and Landgrant Colleges, Denver, Colo.
Nabarro, D., C. Cassels, and M. Pant. 1989. Coping strategies of households in the hills
of Nepal: Can development initiatives help? Institute ofDevelopmentStudies Bulletin
20:68-74.
Pacey, A., and P. Payne. 1985. Agricultural development and nutrition. London:
Hutcheson and C. Publishers.
Van Esterik, P. 1985. Determinants of young child feeding and their implications for
nutritional surveillance. II: Intra-family food distribution: Its relevance for maternal
and child nutrition. Comell International Monograph Series No. 14. Comell
University, Ithaca, N.Y.
Velasco, M.M., L. Galang, and C. Aban. 1985. Resource assessment and policy analysis
component, Rain-fed Resources Development Project, Bicol Region Profile. Ministry
of Agriculture and Food, Manila, the Philippines.
Winrock International. 1988. No turning back. Rain-fed Resources Development
Project, Department ofAgriculture, Republic of the Philippines, USAID Project No.
492-0366. Morrilton, Ark.


Vol. 2, No. 3, 1991








The Bottom Up and the Top Down:
Area Farmers Meet Regional and Central Research
and Extension Staffin Jordan

A.F. Al-Kadi and D.L. Gait1



ABSTRACT
In Jordan, farmers were invited to joint regional meetings with research
and extension staffin order to express their priorities and problems as
bottom-up input into the annual work plan processes of Jordanian
research and extension. The main agricultural organizations affected
were (1) the Regional Agricultural Service Centers (RASCs) and (2) the
central commoditySection Heads oftheNational CenterforAgricultural
Research and Technology Transfer (NCARTT).
This paper provides details about the process of this joint meeting and
how it affected the evolving annual planning process at NCARTT.
Discussed are thejointfarmer-research-extension agent meetings; the use
of off-the-shelfsoftware (Decision Pad) and laptop computers to collect
and analyze farmer's opinions, priorities, and problems; the details of the
systematic use of farmer-prioritized problems in formulating both re-
gional and national work plans; and suggestions for improving the
selection and participation of farmers in the process. The authors make
a case for the applicability of the method to any National Agricultural
Research System (NARS).


INTRODUCTION
Farmers invited to joint regional meetings with research and extension staff
provide their priorities and problems as bottom-up input into the annual work
plan processes of two Jordanian agricultural organizations: (1) RASCs and (2)
the central commodity section heads ofNCARTT. The purpose of this paper
is to provide additional details about this joint meeting process as it affects the
evolving annual planning process at NCARTT.
The FSRE approach officially began in Jordan in January 1987 and has been
expanded in recent years (Gaudreau et al., 1989). In Jordan, research and

Head, monitoring and Evaluation Unit, NCARTT, MOA; and socioeconomic and
FSRE technical assistance advisor to NCARTT through the JNADP.





AL-KADI AND GALT


extension uses the combined sondeo approach.2 It is important to note that
the combined sondeo is a cyclical and therefore sustainable part of the
NCARTT annual planning process.
During the spring of 1990, staff at each RASC met with farmers in a group
setting. These meetings were led by the RASC director, the Head of the
Monitoring and Evaluation Unit, the research supervisor, and the extension
supervisor, and were assisted by the socioeconomist at each RASC. Follow-
up meetings were held with groups of invited farmers, regional Directorate of
Agriculture representatives, and interested commodity section heads or
representatives. In many cases, these NCARTT meetings were the first official
meeting between farmers and RASC and NCARTT central staff. The results
of these joint meetings allowed RASC staff to take farmer priorities directly
into consideration while planning research and extension activities for 1990-
91. This also was the first time that NCARTT central section work plans were
based on regional work plans, and not vice-versa.
Together, these two changes in the annual planning cycle represent a big
step forward in incorporating farmer opinion into NCARTT research and
extension processes at the earliest possible date. They also represent move-
ment toward institutionalizing a systematic planning process that will allow
for annual monitoring and evaluation. In other words, farmer input becomes
a sustainable part of the NCARTT research and technology transfer decentral-
ized annual planning process. The rest of this article describes the meetings
between farmers and research and extension staff.


METHODS

Listing Farmer-Identified Problems
Before each RASC meeting, NCARTT and RASC socioeconomic staff
prepared chart pages, listing those problems identified by farmers in 1989 as
most important in each region. These lists, which were written in Arabic by
RASC, were compared with lists that had been prepared previously in English.
Discrepancies between the two were reconciled through discussion.
Upon arrival at each RASC meeting, socioeconomic staff began by taping
these flip chart pages to the front wall of the meeting room. These problem
lists provided the focal point of the joint farmer-RASC meeting.

A detailed description of this process is presented in Gait and Al-Kadi, 1990, introduc-
tion.


Journal for Farming Systems Research-Extension






FARMERS MEET RESEARCH AND EXTENSION STAFF


Regional Group Meetings Between Farmers and Researchers and
Extension Staff
Introducing NCARTT, the regions, and the purpose of the meeting. With
both farmers and staff assembled, the Director of the RASC introduces
farmers to the concept of NCARTT. Next, another RASC staff member
introduces the agroecological and farming situations prevalent in the area.
Finally, the Head ofthe Monitoring and Evaluation Unit provides participants
with a brief purpose statement of the meeting. These meetings allow farmers
to assist researchers and extension agents in setting their respective priorities
for next year's work plans by refining and reranking problems currently
affecting their farming systems.
Discussion ofpastfarmer-identified problems. Once the introductory items
have been presented, the Head of the Monitoring and Evaluation Unit
facilitates an open discussion of the problem list generated last year by farmers
from this region. This discussion, which normally lasts two or three hours,
includes plenty of time for clarification of problems that have been listed in
brief on the flip chart pages. For example, a problem abbreviated on the list
may be "irrigation in vegetables," whereas the problem farmers were referring
to was, in fact, a recently-enacted legal ban on drilling any new groundwater
wells in the area. Clarifications such as this emerge during open discussion.
At times, it is appropriate to divide an existing problem into two or more
problems. It also is likely that during the discussion the group of farmers will
agree that one (or more) of the problems on the list is no longer of immediate
importance. The facilitator simply eliminates it from the flip chart page.
Adding new farmer-identified problems to the lists. In practice, it is not
possible to separate a discussion of existing problems from a discussion of
those that have arisen during the past year or from those whose importance
was neglected by previous surveys. Instead, during the open discussion, the
facilitator allows new problems to be mentioned and discussed. Then, if it
seems that the group is in agreement that this newly-mentioned problem is
now important, the facilitator adds it to the end ofthe list ofexisting problems.
Depending on the region, the group of farmers attending the meeting, and the
changes in perception of problems since the previous year, the number of new
problems added to the list ranges between two or three and ten or more.
Before proceeding with the joint meeting, the facilitator solicits more new
problems from the farmers in attendance. After these have all been agreed
upon and listed, the facilitator verifies that there are no more important
problems to be added to the list.


Vol. 2, No. 3, 1991






AL-KADI AND GALT


The process ofjoint problem prioritization. Joint problem prioritization is
the key step that allows farmers' opinions to be incorporated directly into
regional and national work plans for the coming year. Once all problems are
listed on the charts, ballots are distributed to each farmer.3 Next, the Head
of the Monitoring and Evaluation Unit explains how to complete a ballot. In
Jordan, each ballot allows farmers to indicate, in order, the three most
important problems for their farming system. It must be pointed out that
three is not a magic number. Farmers could just as easily be allowed to select
their top five problems, or some other number mutually agreed upon in
advance.
Voting is done simply by placing the number of each selected problem in
the appropriate space on the ballot. (Voting required no more than five
minutes to complete at a regional meeting.) After the ballots are filled out,
they are collected by a socioeconomic staff member.
While the participants break (usually for a lunch arranged for by the
Director of the RASC and paid for with external funds), the socioeconomic
staff tabulate the votes, using a laptop computer and the software program
Decision Pad.4 Existing problems (from the prior year) already have been
listed in the program file for the particular RASC as alternatives, and the only
criterion used by the model is the vote itself, which is scored from 1 to 3.
During the meeting and before voting starts, new problems agreed to be

3At several regional centers there were not enough farmers in attendance to allow a
meaningful vote for most important problems. In these centers, ballots also were
distributed to research and extension staff. Although votes were identified according
to background (farmer, extension agent, or researcher), all ballots were counted the
same way by the model for determining priority problems. No attempt has been made
to determine how farmers' perceptions of problems differ, if at all, from those of
research and extension staff. Although this is a shortcoming for the method used this
year, it will be corrected in subsequent years by increasing farmer attendance and
participation.
Decision Pad is essentially a three-dimensional spreadsheet program that allows for
specification of up to 250 "alternatives" (or problems, in this context), 250 criteria
(voting from 1 to 3 for one criterion only, in this case), and 60 scorers or voters (farmers,
in this case). Conceptually, alternatives are spread along the X-axis, criteria along the
Y-axis, and voters along the Z-axis. In fact, only two axes are visible at once. With the
alternatives and criteria visible, the user may scroll through the list of voters one at a
time. While doing this, the user will note that the scores given to alternatives for criteria
change match those given by each voter. Criteria can be grouped and/or weighted.
The end result is a reranking of all alternatives to reflect the scores given them by the
voters. Hard copies of the full model, a summary of the reranked alternatives, and
individual components of it may be printed out immediately or at any other time.


Journal for Farming Systems Research-Extension






FARMERS MEET RESEARCH AND EXTENSION STAFF


important to the farmers are added sequentially to the problems already listed
in the program file, and eliminated problems are deleted from the alternative
list in the program file.
As the votes from each ballot are entered into the computer, a consecutive
ballot identification entry number is made in the program file, and the same
number is placed on the ballot itself. In cases where farmers are joined by
researchers and extension agents, the ballot identification entries are made
using the following nomenclature: Fl = Farmer one; R3 = Researcher three;
E4 = Extension agent four.
After the last ballot has been entered into the program file, all data entries
are visually scanned for outliers and for other potential problems. Next, using
the Decision Pad software, the problems are reranked, with a rank of 1
assigned to the problem listed highest and most often by participants, a rank
of 2 to the problem listed next most often by participants, and so on to the end
of the list. Ties between problems are handled by listing, for example, two
problems with a rank of 5, then skipping over 6 to assign the next most
common problem a rank of 7.
A summary list ofreranked problems is then printed out. This list is given
to the facilitator, who enters the rank of each problem, in a contrasting color
with a marker pen, opposite each problem description on the charts on the
wall.
Finally, the Head of the Monitoring and Evaluation Unit reconvenes the
joint meeting, and the ranked problems are again discussed in open session.
During this discussion, regional staff make notes of potential solutions
mentioned for each ranked problem. These notes on possible solutions are
used later to help the regional staff prepare its next annual draft work plan.
Forming draft regional work plans. In practice, the farmers do not stay
around to assist in forming draft annual work plans with the researchers and
extension agents of each RASC. They are anxious to return to their farms.
However, the combined sondeo in Jordan allows their input to be systemat-
ically received, discussed, recorded, and acted upon later by the researchers
and extension agents attending the draft regional work plan meeting.
This regional work-plan formation meeting is attended by most RASC staff
and may be attended by representatives of the central commodity sections. It
also is attended by staff members from the Monitoring and Evaluation Unit.
The meeting usually is facilitated by the Director of the RASC.
At this time, the ranked problems are gone through one at a time, and notes
on possible solutions are expanded into draft work-plan items. As an example,


Vol. 2, No. 3, 1991






AL-KADI AND GALT


assume that the ranked problem addressed by the group is "rot in potatoes."
During the farmer-researcher-extension agent discussion that took place after
the problems were voted on, it was noted that this potato rot is caused by the
potato tuber moth. Thus, during this work-plan drafting meeting, it might
be suggested and noted that an insecticide application trial be designed and
laid out on two or three collaborating farmers' fields next year. A RASC staff
member usually is assigned the responsibility for filling out the details of the
design and the trial. Such details may figure in deciding (1) which insecticides(s)
to use, (2) when insecticides should be applied and how often, and (3) how
much insecticide will be needed.
By the end of the meeting, a work plan for next year usually exists in draft
form. After it has been reworked, the plan will be ready to be submitted to
the national center.

NCARTT Meetings of Commodity Section Staff
In 1989-90, for the first time in Jordan, the process of forming the annual
work plan proceeded from joint farmer-RASC meetings, to drafting regional
plans, to drafting central section plans. This reverses the traditional annual
planning process, which proceeded from central section work plans to RASC
work plans. This process reversal automatically allows the logical incorpora-
tion of farmer priorities into the process.
When each NCARTT commodity section has received a copy of each
regional work plan, sections meet individually to form their own work plans.
After these plans have been drafted, a meeting is held to discuss them. Also
new in 1990 at NCARTT were a set of research and extension activity forms.
(A copy of each original form, as well as the instructions for completing it, is
included as Appendix A.)
Completing NCARTT research or extension activity forms. It was envi-
sioned that an activity form would be completed for each research and
extension task proposed by each section. These activity forms contain several
elements. The top portion of each form (Items 1 through 7) contains the basic
information for identifying a proposed activity. The remainder of the form
(Item 8) is the system for scoring each activity. A scoring system with six
criteria is used for proposed research activities, and a scoring system with 10
criteria is used for proposed extension activities.
The scoring criteria represent criteria that gradually have been adapted
from the International Service for National Agricultural Research (ISNAR)
and previous work done by Washington State University (WSU). This


Journal for Farming Systems Research-Extension






FARMERS MEET RESEARCH AND EXTENSION STAFF


adaptation was necessary to make the criteria conform both to the planning
and to the research and extension conditions encountered in Jordan. Two sets
of criteria were agreed upon during a three-day NCARTT Strategic Planning
Workshop in March 1990. The weights assigned to each set of criteria
represent those proposed by a subcommittee of the Strategic Planning
Workshop (for research) and by the group assigned this task during the
workshop itself (for extension).
Each section head is responsible for completing one form per proposed
activity for the next year's work plan. The information from each form is
entered into Decision Pad, and an overall score is generated and assigned to
each activity. This overall score is placed on the bottom of each form, and the
forms are ranked on the basis of these scores, from highest to lowest.
Using NCARIT activity forms to write draft section work plans. Finally,
each section decides which proposed activities to include in its work plan next
year. Using their own pile of activity forms, the section head and staff go down
through the activities one at a time, until they finally reach an activity that does
not seem very important to them. The subpile of forms above this point in the
pile represents those activities that need to be written into next year's plans.5
Using this subpile, section heads put together a brief draft work plan for the
following year. Only those activities in this top subpile need to be written up
in the plan. Because not all proposed activities must be justified and presented
in detail, this process of prescreening should save considerable time for all
commodity sections.

The NCARTT Annual Work Plan Workshop
The NCARTT annual work plan workshop lasted three days in August,
1990. The new annual planning methodology was discussed, as was each draft

The activity forms contain a space for estimated cost (Item 7). An alternative to the
above method of prioritization is to keep track of the cost of each proposed activity,
stopping to form the workplan when the cumulative costs ofactivities reach the amount
of budget provided to the section for its work next year. Although this method makes
more sense than does the method described in the text, few national programs have
assigned budgetary figures to each section before this planning process. This means that
section heads do not know, in advance, how much money they will be allowed to spend
for research and extension the following year. In order to deal with this uncertainty,
another possibility is for section heads to assume that the budget they will have to work
with next year will be approximately equal to that used this year. Under this assumption,
section heads can go through the alternative pile until they reach a cost figure
approximately equal to last year's budget. Then, this subpile of proposed activities
represents the items to be included in next year's draft work plan.


Vol. 2, No. 3, 1991





AL-KADI AND GALT


section work plan. Some details of this workshop follow.
Discussion ofmethods. Because 1989-90 was the first fiscal year in which the
modified NCARTT annual planning process was in effect, considerable
discussion of the planning methods used took place during this annual
planning workshop. At the end of this discussion, the participants agreed to
add a sixth scoring criterion to the research activities form. The sixth criterion
was added so that researchers could score whether or not the proposed
research activity addressed the issue of marketing. This criterion, placed
between criteria numbered 2 and 3 (see Appendix A), received a weight of 10
percent (out ofa total of100 percent). No other changes were made in criteria
or weights.
Participants also decided that immediately after the meeting, each section
would complete a research or an extension activity form for each proposed
section activity in its 1990-91 work plan.
The participants also agreed that next year the activity forms would be
completed before the annual planning meeting, as was proposed in the revised
NCARTT planning methodology.
Discussion of draft section work plans. The rest of the planning workshop
was devoted to presentations and discussions of the nine section or unit work
plans. This was the first time that section heads presented their draft work
plans in a semipublic forum. These presentations were appreciated by the
other sections or units and by donor representatives, who attended the
workshop by invitation. Until 1991, donors had no chance to have input into
section or unit work plans until such plans were approved, unless they
happened to have access to staff working with a given section or unit. The
workshop solved this dilemma of "differential access" to section work plans.
The only drawback was the proposed simultaneous translation of the work
plan workshop into English from Arabic, and vice-versa, which did not occur.

Revising Annual Work Plans
Immediately after the annual planning meeting, NCARTT section heads
assigned staff to assist them in completing the research and extension activity
forms for each proposed activity in their work plans. Trained staff assisted
these section representatives to enter the scores from their sets of activity forms
into Decision Pad. Hard copies of these program files were used both by the
section or unit and by NCARTT to begin annual monitoring and evaluation.
These copies were used by each section or unit to reorder their sets offorms,
from highest to lowest priority. These reordered sets of activity forms were


Journal for Farming Systems Research-Extension






FARMERS MEET RESEARCH AND EXTENSION STAFF


used to revise each section's or unit's 1990-91 annual work plan (as per the
previous discussion).


RESULTS

Modification of the NCARTT Annual Planning Process
In 1990, the NCARTT annual work plan process was modified in three
areas: (1) selection of farmers for regional meetings, (2) the order in which
NCARTT research and extension activity forms are used in the planning
process, and (3) research activity form revision.
Farmers selected. The original intent of the revised NCARTT annual
planning process was to identify, and then to invite, Jordanian Development
Area Committee (DAC) representative farmers to participate each year in joint
farmer-RASC meetings. Unfortunately, the DACs are, at present, committees
on paper only, and no lists of representative farmers are available.
As a result, in 1990 farmers were invited to the joint farmer-RASC meetings
by RASC directors according to their own sets of individual criteria. In some
cases, several types of farmers attended these meetings.6 In other cases, the
group of farmers attending the meeting was too small to be representative of
the region. Unfortunately, most farmers attending the joint meetings were
relatively homogeneous and well-to-do. Although Jordanian farmers with
good access to resources should be included in any group meeting, such
meetings also should include those with less advantages or who live farther
away and have transportation difficulties. Next year, NCARTT must make a
greater effort to include farmers in the latter categories in regional meetings.
When to complete NCARTT research and extension activity forms. In 1990,
NCARTT section heads did not complete research and extension activity
forms before the annual planning workshop. This resulted in their having to
prepare draft work plans that included justifications for, and descriptions of,
all proposed research and extension activities. Because some of these activities
cannot be undertaken given current constraints on sections, it is more efficient
if an activity form first is completed for each proposed activity. The Decision
Pad program then is used to allow each section to prioritize its activities. After
proposed activities are prioritized, the pile can easily be divided into those
activities that will be undertaken and those that will not. A draft work plan
containing only those higher priority activities can then be produced.
6 In Ramtha, two of the farmers attending the joint meeting were women. However, no
other joint regional meeting was attended by female farmers.
Vol. 2, No. 3, 1991





AL-KADI AND GALT


Revisions to the NCARTT research activity form. The participants at the
1990 NCARTT annual planning workshop agreed to add a marketing
criterion to the five original research activity criteria. This new scoring
criterion was given a weight of 10 percent (out of 100 percent). After the
workshop, this change was made to the Decision Pad program files and to the
research activity forms. Then, new forms were produced and, along with the
unmodified extension activity forms, distributed to all NCARTT section
heads. It must be emphasized that this may be only the first ofseveral revisions
of forms, since these forms, and the model they represent, must be right in
order to improve the NCARTT planning process.


RECOMMENDATIONS
The following three recommendations are advanced in order to help the
future NCARTT research and extension annual planning process run more
smoothly.
1. Increase attendance of representative farmers. NCARTT should give
more stress to inviting, and assuring the attendance of, a more representative
group offarmers to each region's joint annual planning meeting. Governmen-
tal transportation may be necessary to assure attendance by the two sets of
farmers underrepresented this past year: (a) farmers who do not have personal
means of transportation and (b) farmers who do not live within a few
kilometers of the RASC center.
2. Complete research and extension and activity forms before beginning a
draft section workplan. Producing draft section work plans before NCARTT
activity forms are filled out wastes a good deal of time, since those activities
to be eliminated will be included unnecessarily. If a section or unit is able to
reflect half of its proposed activities based on a set of completed activity forms,
and the section or unit normally proposes from 70 to 80 research or extension
activities per year, such a section or unit can save having to prepare descrip-
tions, details, and justifications for 35 to 40 activities.
3. Modify any existing set of activity forms that prove to be less than wholly
useful. The set of activity forms (see Appendix A) has only been in use in
Jordan for one year. It is quite likely that one or more of the criteria, one or
more of the weights, or one or more of the sets of scoring directions will prove,
through continued use, to be inadequate. NCARTT should continue to make
the necessary modifications to these activity forms, changing both the form
and the Decision Pad model as appropriate.


Journal for Farming Systems Research-Extension






FARMERS MEET RESEARCH AND EXTENSION STAFF


CONCLUSIONS

Joint farmer-RASC meetings were held in all seven of Jordan's agricultural
regions in May of 1990. Each joint meeting was followed by a regional work
plan meeting, during which draft work plans for 1990-91 were begun. Upon
completion, these draft regional research and technology transfer work plans
were forwarded to the nine NCARTT commodity sections or units, which
helped form, for the first time in Jordan, section work plans. Section work
plans were still based partially on each section's work plan from last year, as
implemented this year.
Finally, these draft section and unit work plans formed the focus of the first
annual NCARTT planning workshop, which took place during the third week
of August 1990. The change in planning focus to using regional work plans
to assist in commodity section work plans has reinforced the move in
Jordanian agricultural research and technology transfer toward decentralized
planning. Decentralized planning now accompanies decentralized research
and technology transfer implementation. Both are based on explicit incorpor-
ation of farmer-identified and prioritized problems, via annual sets of follow-
up combined sondeos.
Thus, for the first time in Jordan, explicit farmer, or bottom-up, inputs feed
directly into annual research and extension workplans. Although this is a great
step forward, more emphasis has to be given in the future to assuring an
adequate amount of representative farmer input at each regional center.


SELECTED BIBLIOGRAPHY
Al-Kadi, A.F., and D.L. Gait. 1990. Farmer problems important to the cereals section.
Ministry of Agriculture (MOA)/National Center for Agricultural Research and
Technology Transfer (NCARTT)/Monitoring and Evaluation Unit Research Infor-
mation Bulletin 90-91. March 25. Amman, Jordan.
Apian Software. 1990. Decision Pad User Guide, Revision 2.0. P.O. Box 1224, Menlo
Park, CA 94026, USA.
Gait, D.L., and A.F. Al-Kadi. 1990. The role of farmers in the Jordanian combined
sondeo process. Paper presented at the Tenth Annual AFSRE Symposium, Michigan
State University, East Lansing, October 14-17, 1990.
Gaudreau, M., E. Khraisat, and D.L. Gait, eds. 1989. Proceedings of the Jordanian
Farming Systems Research and Extension Training Workshop. Ministry of Agriculture
(MOA)/National Center for Agricultural Research and Technology Transfer
(NCARTT)/Jordan National Agricultural Development Project (JNADP), Amman,
Jordan.
Hildebrand, P.E. 1981. Combining disciplines in rapid appraisal: The sondeo approach.
Agricultural Administration 8:423-32.


Vol. 2, No. 3, 1991






AL-KADI AND GALT


International Service for National Agricultural Research (ISNAR). 1988. Evaluating
research programs, draft. ISNAR, The Hague, The Netherlands.
Jordan National Agricultural Development Project (JNADP). 1988. Report of the
Policies and Priorities Committee to the Board of Directors/Steering Committee for
NCARTT. JNADP Publication 6. Amman, Jordan.
Mathema, S.B., and D.L. Gait. 1988. Samuhik Bhraman: A multidisciplinary group
activity to approach farmers. Paper presented at the Training Course on Socio-
Economic Survey Methods, Kathmandu, Nepal, February 1988.
Mathema, S.B., and D.L. Galt. 1989. Appraisal by group trek. Pages 68-73 in R.
Chambers, A. Pacey, and L.A. Thrupp, eds., Farmer first: Farmer innovation and
agricultural research. London: Intermediate Technology Publications.
Mann, C.J. 1990. Facilitator's report on NCARTT Strategic Planning/Implementation
Workshop. JNADP Publication 11. Jordan National Agricultural Development
Project, Amman, Jordan.


Journal for Farming Systems Research-Extension






FARMERS MEET RESEARCH AND EXTENSION STAFF


APPENDIX A7

NCARTT Research Activity Scoring Form
1. Year: 2. Section orRASC:
3. Number of activity: 4. ForProblem Number:
5. Name ofactivity:
6. Objective of activity:
7. Budget estimate for proposed research activity: JD
8. Score activity (refer to examples for help with scoring):
Criterion Score
and Weight Working Description: How to Use Criterion Range

1 20 Use the 8 NCARTI "Master Images" from the Strategic
Planning Workshop and determine how many of them the
activity achieves.
Score for this criterion: (0-8)
2 30 Assign the average score of the farmer-ranked priority problem
the activity solves.
Score for this criterion: (0-10)
3 20 Rate the activity as to how possible it should be to accomplish
technically, using the technology available to your section or
RASC.
Score for this criterion: (0-3)

4 10 Rate the availability of resources that must be in place for the
activity to be carried out in a proper, normal, manner.
Score for this criterion: (0-6)

5 20 Estimate how probable farmer adoption of the activity, or of its
results, is likely to be.
Score for this criterion: (0-3)
TOTAL SCORE FOR THIS ACTIVITY (< or = 30):





7We suggest that readers interested in a more detailed explanation ofAppendix A contact
the authors.


Vol. 2, No. 3, 1991






AL-KADI AND GALT


Examples for Using NCARTT Research Prioritization Criteria
Each page of this handout provides you with a repeat definition of one of the
five NCARTT research prioritization criteria, along with its weight and
possible range for scoring. Each page also provides you with an example ofhow
the criterion is scored, or a guideline to use for scoring it, or, in some cases, both.
Criterion Score
and Weight Working Description: How to Use Criterion Range

1 20 Use the 8 NCARTT "Master Images" from the 0-8
Strategic Planning Workshop and determine if the
activity leads to achieving one or more of them.

HOW TO SCORE CRITERION 1:
If there is no reference to the activity in anyof the "NCARTT Master Images
list" (see below), give it a score of 0. If the activity fits into one of the Master
Images, it receives a score of 2, and so on, up to a maximum score of 8 (which
an activity receives if it fits into all eight of the NCARTT Master Images).

NCARTT Master Images List8
1. Optimum Water and Land Utilization
2. Integrated Pest Management
3. Improved Cropping Systems
4. High-Quality Produce
5. Market-Oriented Production
6. Improved Farm Management
7. Local Seed Production
8. Improved Animal Productivity
For example, if Mr. Massanat is considering trials for the integrated control of
olive scale, he would score this as a 3 (1 for Integrated Pest Management, 1
for High-Quality Produce, and 1 for Market-Oriented Produce).







8This list is taken directly from Mann, 1990, p. 12.


Journal for Farming Systems Research-Extension






FARMERS MEET RESEARCH AND EXTENSION STAFF


Criterion Score
and Weight Working Description: How to Use Criterion Range

2 30 Assign the activity the average score of the 0-10
current year's farmer-ranked priority that
most closely matches this activity.
HOW TO SCORE CRITERION 2:
Numbers called "SCORES" were generated during the meetings held
during May between RASC staffand farmers to priority problems. As a section
or RASC, your work plan should address these problems. To score this
criterion, you go through these four steps: (1) select the RASC that will host
the proposed research trial, (2) use the list of farmer prioritized problems
produced for that RASC (a print-out from model 1), (3) locate the problem
that is being addressed by your proposed research activity, (4) use the score
given to this problem for this criterion on the research activity scoring form.
(NOTE FORSECTIONS ONLY: If more than one RASC is involved in the
proposed research activity, calculate the score by taking a simple average of all
the separate scores given to this problem by each RASC.)

Example for a RASC or a Section
Your RASC or section proposes a forage improvement trial. The farmer-
prioritized score of the most closely-related problem, "not enough fodder for
the livestock," is 3.4 for your RASC (or for the RASC closest to where the trial
will be carried out in the case of the Range and Livestock Section). Place a
"3.4" in the blank space following "Score" for criterion 2 on each form for
proposed research trials dealing with increasing fodder for livestock.

Section Example: Calculating an Average Score
The Cereals Section proposes a variety improvement trial in the areas of the
Ramtha, Mushaqr, and Rabba RASCs. The farmer-prioritized scores for the
most closely related problem, "no appropriate cereal varieties," are the
following for these three RASCs:
2 Ramtha 1 Mushaqar 3 Rabba
Calculate the average, which is 2 in this example ([2+1+3]/3). Place this
average number ("2.0") in the blank space following "Score" for criterion 2
on each form for proposed research trials dealing with cereals-variety improve-
ment.


Vol. 2, No. 3, 1991





AL-KADI AND GALT


Criterion Score
and Weight Working Description: How to Use Criterion Range

3 20 Rate the activity as to how possible it should 0-3
be to accomplish technically, using the
technology available to your section or RASC.

HOW TO SCORE CRITERION 3:
Here, use your technical judgement as well as that of your section or RASC
staff. Remember, you are asked to judge how technically difficult or easy such
a proposed research activity will be under current NCARTT conditions, not
under a set of the most ideal conditions for agricultural research that can be
imagined.
To apply this criterion, use this guide:
The activity should be technically easy............................... ............... 3
The activity should be technically moderately difficult............................ 2
The activity should be technically difficult.......................... .............1
The activity will be impossible.............................................................0

Criterion Score
and Weight Working Description: How to Use Criterion Range

4 10 Rate the availability of resources that 0-6
must be in place for the activity to be
carried out in a proper, normal manner.

HOW TO SCORE CRITERION 4:
Respond to the following set of questions by ticking the appropriate box for
each. Add up the numbers to the right of each ticked box and enter this score
in the box at the bottom of the page (for "Total Score"). This is the score you
give this criterion for this activity.

Do you currently have staff who can carry out this activity?
O Yes....1 0 No.....0
Do you have adequate facilities and equipment to carry out this activity?
0 Yes.... 1 No.....0


Journal for Farming Systems Research-Extension






FARMERS MEET RESEARCH AND EXTENSION STAFF


Do you have adequate transportation for this activity?
Q Yes....1 O No.....0
Do you have enough funds to carry out this activity?
O Yes....1 D No.....0
Does this activity duplicate other research in Jordan?
O Yes....1 Q No.....0
In carrying out this activity, is your section collaborating with (a) another
NCARTT section, (b) a Jordanian university, or (c) another Jordanian
organization?
O Yes....1 O No.....0
TOTAL SCORE FOR CRITERION 4 (MUST BE 6 OR LESS):

Criterion Score
and Weight Working Description: How to Use Criterion Range

5 20 Estimate how probable farmer adoption 0-3
of the activity, or of its results, is likely to be.

HOW TO SCORE CRITERION 5:
Here, you are trying to project how wide-spread the adoption of your
proposed research activity will be. Although a precise answer to this question
is impossible for any of us to estimate, your educated guess is the best estimate
that can be obtained. With this in mind, use the following simple guide to
assist you in scoring this fifth criterion:

The activity will be adopted all by target farmers................................... 3
The activity will be adopted by most target farmers................................ 2
The activity will be adopted by some target farmers................................1
No farm ers will adopt this activity..........................................................0


Vol. 2, No. 3, 1991






AL-KADI AND GALT


NCARTT Extension Activity Scoring Form
FILL OUT ONE FORM FOR EACH PROPOSED EXTENSION
ACTIVITY:
1. Year: 2. Section or RASC:
3. Number of activity: 4. For Problem Number:
5. Name ofactivity:
6. Objective ofactivity:
7. Budget estimate for proposed extension activity: JD
8. Score activity (circle "Y" if "Yes", "N" if "No;" refer to complete descrip-
tions if you need help with scoring):

Criterion
and Weight Working Description: How to Use Criterion Score

1 DO NOT SCORE. This criterion is mandatory, XXX
and the rest of the form cannot be completed
if it is not met.
2 H Solves an economically important problem Y/N
3 H Is consistent with national agricultural Y/N
policy & sustainable use of resources?
4 H Resources (human, facilities & equipment, Y/N
money) are adequate and available?
5 H Is adoptable, sustainable & profitable? Y/N
6 H Is technically feasible? Y/N
7 M Fill in with farmer-prioritized score,
(range = 0 to 10)
8 M Has a high probability of success? Y/N
9 L Demonstrates interdisciplinarity? Y/N
10 L Addresses needs as perceived by women clientele? Y/N

ENTER HERE THE TOTAL SCORE FOR THIS ACTIVITY
(from the Decision Pad computer program):


Journal for Farming Systems Research-Extension






FARMERS MEET RESEARCH AND EXTENSION STAFF


Complete Descriptions of NCARTT Extension Activity
Prioritization Criteria
This handout provides you with complete descriptions of the nine NCARTT
extension prioritization criteria. It also provides you with the relative weight
of each criterion as assigned to it by NCARTT.
Note that a total of ten NCARTT selection criteria were approved for
scoring technology transfer activities during the NCARTT/JNADP Strategic
Planning/Implementation Workshop. They represent the original eight as
given to the extension working group, plus two others added by this group.
Of these ten, only nine are considered here for scoring. This is because
criterion 1, "the... activity is within the stated NCARTT priorities and
contributes directly to achievement of NCARTT objectives," is a mandatory
criteria. Before the rest of the criteria can be considered, it must be fulfilled.
Because it never changes, it does not need to be scored on your extension
activity form.
Also as agreed upon in the NCARTT/JNADP Strategic Planning/Imple-
mentation Workshop, the weights assigned to the extension activity scoring
criteria are "H" (for "Highest"), "M" (for "Medium"), and "L" (for
"Lower"). All but one criteria are scored by answering a simple "Y" (for
"Yes") or "N" (for "No").
The only criterion which is notscored as either yes or no is number 7: "The
activity is perceived as needed by farmers." To score this criterion, use the
farmer-prioritized number that was generated during the follow-up NCARTT
combined sondeo meetings this spring. Simply assign this criterion the
number that was given to the problem that the extension activity has been
designed to overcome. Use the number for the RASC closest to where the
field activity(ies) will be carried out; in more than one RASC, use a simple
average of the farmer-prioritized numbers from all relevant RASCs for this
score.
Example: You plan to carry out pruning training on grapes in Deir-Alla, Al-
Balca (Salt), and Shuobak. You note that the farmer-ranked scores for the
problem, "insufficient knowledge of pruning," are 5.5, 3.2, and 6.3, respec-
tively, for these RASCs. The number you use to score criterion 7 is 5.0
([5.5+3.2+6.3]/3).


Vol. 2, No. 3, 1991






AL-KADI AND GALT


Criterion Weights and Complete Descriptions

Criterion
and Weight Full Description From Workshop Report:

1 DO NOT RANK: This criterion is mandatory and the
rest of the form cannot be completed if it is not met.
2 H The problem for which the activity is directed towards solving
is of economic importance to a high number of farmers
and/or effects a high percentage of an important
agricultural product (crop/livestock) or resource. The
committee noted that this criterion needs to be adjusted
to take into account potential new economically important
enterprises.
3 H The activity and the results thereof are consistent with
national agricultural policy, sustainable use of natural
resources, and the socioeconomic environment.
4 H Human and other resources (facilities, equipment,
money, etc.) are available and adequate in terms of
quality, quantity, and timing, to carry out the activity,
and the activity is not duplicative.
5 H The solution (technical, management, or policy) to
which the activity contributes must be adoptable,
sustainable, and profitable to the farmer or end-user,
within his/her system.
6 M The activity is technically feasible.
7 M Farmers' perception of the needs for the proposed
extension activity.
8 M The activity should result in immediate or rapid progress
and positive impact (a high probability of success).
9 L The activity demonstrates the use of the inter-
disciplinary production systems approach in planning
and/or implementation.
10 L The activity addresses needs as perceived by women
clientele.


Journal for Farming Systems Research-Extension








Haymaking by Pastoral Women for
Improved Calf Management in Ethiopia:
Labor Requirements, Opportunity Costs, and
Feasibility of Intervention

D.L. Coppock1



ABSTRACT
Calf management in the Borana pastoral system is an important function
of married women. One of their duties is to collect grass for calves
tethered in the family hut. This is most demanding in dry periods when
grass is scarce and has a lower nutritive value. Women also have more
work and are morelikelyto be nutritionallystressed themselves during dry
periods. Interventions are desirable to reduce women's labor burdens
during critical periods and improve calfnutrition. A bottom-up approach
by developers identified haymaking as a potential breakthrough. The
Boran had no experience storing feed. Hay was to be made by women
from local grasses after the long rains (when their labor demands were
lower) and used during the following warm, dry season. Research first
confirmed the high nutritive value of hay compared to standing grass in
the dry season, but questions remained as to whether women would be
able to make hay in a timely fashion.
Sixty-two households were observed making hay in an extension trial
during May and June of 1990. Enumerators assisted the Boran in feed
budgeting and recorded the daily time used by up to three participants
per household in haymaking and the activities forgone by each person as
a result. Haystacks were weighed at the end of the trials and compared
with the expected demand for hay by calves in the upcoming warm, dry
season. Households made an average of 121 kg of hay, with a range of
20 to 300 kg, in an average of 18 hours over 16 days. The rate of hay
production was 6.2 kg per hour. Married women contributed over 80
percent of the total labor, but all family members assisted. Searching for
and cutting grass took up 56 percent of the time, followed by time used
in hay drying (17 percent) and stacking and platform building (11 percent
each). The opportunity costs of this work were deemed to be negligible.

1 Research scientist, International Livestock Centre for Africa, Addis Ababa, Ethiopia.
Currently at the Department of Range Science, Utah State University, Logan.






COPPOCK


Time lost by women included an average of three hours each for child
care and household chores and two hours of leisure. Married women
delegated most tasks to other family members. Households made only
32 percent on average of the hay required for calves, and 41 more hours
of work were needed per household to put up the 375 kg of hay for five
calves over a 90-day dry period. This deficit is best explained by grass
biomass being more limiting than time. Major risks ofhaymaking include
movinglaterin the year and abandoning the haystacks and spoilage ofthe
hay due to poor drying or loose stacking. Haymaking, however, will
probably spread among the Boran. They are becoming more sedentary,
and hay has advantages in quality,is private resource, fits the culture,and
may conserve women' time in the dry season. If successful, this offers
evidence that opportunities exist to improve management in traditional
systems irrespective of new technology, but the challenge becomes one
of knowing the system well. Implications of results for extension,
development, and further research are presented.


INTRODUCTION

Nomadic and seminomadic pastoral production systems dominate land use in
the drier regions ofsub-Saharan Africa. These systems are defined in part by
the critical importance of livestock for food production, income generation,
and cultural values (Jahnke, 1982). Livestock performance in pastoral systems
is limited mostly by poor nutrition during dry seasons (Mosi et al., 1976;
Coppock et al., 1986b). Researchers typically have attempted to identify
promising exotic forages that provide top-down, "quick-fix" solutions, but
successes are rare. Few exotic species are suitable for drier environments and
many have poor prospects for success due to low management inputs,
communal land tenure, and high stocking rates (Pratt and Gwynne, 1977;
Jahnke, 1982). In addition, the complexity of pastoral livestock management
(Dahl and Hjort, 1976; Coppock et al., 1986a) makes it difficult to identify
which species, sex, or age classes of animals should receive benefits if range
improvements occur.
Research in the Borana pastoral system of southern Ethiopia indicates that
a key entry point for improving cattle production lies in better feeding
management of the nursing calf (Donaldson, 1986; Cossins and Upton,
1987, 1988a; Mulugeta, 1990; Holden et al., submitted). This is largely
related to reducing the negative effects on calves of competition with humans
for milk, especially in dry seasons. People may extract over 50 percent of the
milk yield during dry periods, which leaves less for the calf. Young, relatively


Journal for Farming Systems Research-Extension






HAYMAKING AND CALF MANAGEMENT IN ETHIOPIA


immobile calves are kept in and around the family hut, and married women
are responsible for handrearing, which includes trips to collect standing brown
grass for dry-season feeding (Donaldson, 1986; Mulugeta, 1990). Investiga-
tors here have failed to identify outstanding exotic forages that could be easily
implemented to supplement calves (Hodgson, 1990). However, a more
direct (bottom-up) approach of problem identification by development
agents led to the idea that simple haymaking with local grasses at the end of
the wet season for use in the dry season might be a promising intervention
(Hodgson, 1990). The Boran have no tradition of haymaking. Subsequent
research revealed the substantially improved nutritional value of grass hay
versus standing brown grass (Mulugeta, 1990; Coppock, submitted (c)).
However, questions remained as to the logistical problems associated with
timely haymaking. The women reported that labor constraints were their
most important problem in improving livestock production (Hodgson, 1990;
Mulugeta, 1990).
The primary objectives of this research were to document labor expendi-
ture, opportunity costs, and problems of haymaking for households involved
in the initial extension activities in 1990. Other objectives included exploring
why the Boran had not previously developed haymaking and clarifying priority
problems for extension. Thus, this work was intended to provide a close link
between research and extension and to reveal if haymaking could be a viable
intervention. If successful, haymaking would offer evidence, at least in this
case, that tangible impacts on animal production and human welfare may be
achieved more readily through improved management of existing resources
rather than through uncertain application of new forage technology.


STUDY AREA AND RESEARCH BACKGROUND
The Borana Plateau (1,000 to 1,600 m elevation) is characterized by a
predominantly semiarid climate with relatively cool, annual mean tempera-
tures (19-24C) and an annual, mean rainfall of about 600 mm, received
mostly during the long rains (April to May; 60 percent) and short rains
(October to November; 30 percent). Multiyear droughts occur every 20
years, with one isolated dry year in every five years (Cossins and Upton,
1988b). There is a cool, dry season from June to September, and a warm, dry
season from December to March, with the latter being the main period of
resource limitation. Plant communities consist of perennial savanna vegeta-
tion (Cossins and Upton, 1987).


Vol. 2, No. 3, 1991





COPPOCK


Borana pastoralists, who primarily herd cattle, dominate land-use. Popula-
tion density on the 15,475 km2 central plateau was estimated at about 5 people
and 21 cattle per km2 in 1990 (Coppock, submitted (a)). The favorable
environment and central distribution of wells encourage households to be
sedentary during most years. Pockets of agropastoralism have emerged in
favorable areas. These families cultivate 1-ha plots, which are planted mostly
to maize (90 percent) with some cowpea ( Vigna unguiculata).
The average production unit consists of a male head of household, a wife,
and two to three children, all ofwhom are dependent on about 20 cattle, a few
small ruminants, and an occasional camel or equine (Cossins and Upton,
1987). There is, however, wide variation in per capital livestock holdings,
resulting in a stratification of wealth (Mulugeta, 1990). Cow milk is the
mainstay of the human diet. Male cattle are sold to purchase grain and
clothing. Dairy products are also sold to buy grain and small discretionary
items (Holden, 1988). Animal sales are more common in dry periods when
milk production is reduced. Cattle breeding is regulated by nutrition and is
highly seasonal; about 60 percent of all calves are born during March to June
and 20 percent during September to December (Nicholson, 1983; Mulugeta,
1990). Lactation lasts an average of nine months. Milk flow peaks during the
long and short rains and tapers off during the warm, dry season (Nicholson,
1983; Mulugeta, 1990).
Although there is much variation, about 10 families on average aggregate
into encampments (olla) that may remain in the same site for up to eight years.
Families may also live in the same region for many years depending on resource
availability. These regions (madda) are organized in relation to distributions
of wells and grazing. There are about 35 madda on the central plateau.
Although men make the major decisions regarding cattle production and
sales, married women are responsible for calf management and determination
of milk offtake (Donaldson, 1986; Holden, 1988). If a calf is born during the
long rains, it is tethered in the family hut or calf shelter and reared on a
restricted suckling regime (i.e., usually access to two of four teats) for the first
two months. Restricted suckling continues through the rest of the lactation,
but is augmented with cut-and-carry forage from months three to four and
grazing thereafter. Calves are watered from local ponds during rainy periods,
but walk further to water during dry periods (Donaldson, 1986; Menwyelet,
1990). This pattern changes to include more labor-intensive management if
a calf is born at other times. For example, the 20 percent of calves born during
the short rains endure reduced milk production from their dams as well as


Journalfor Farming Systems Research-Extension






HAYMAKING AND CALF MANAGEMENT IN ETHIOPIA


enhanced competition from people for milk during the first five to seven
months of their lives. Reduced milk supply, in conjunction with lower
seasonal availability ofresources, leads to more intensive handrearing of calves
in terms of forage collection and water hauling. This reportedly occupies
about 30 percent of women's time during the warm, dry season (Mulugeta,
1990).
Haymaking was targeted to address problems associated with feeding this
latter group of calves during the warm, dry season. Improved feeding would
help to enhance animal condition, minimize risks of calf death, and maintain
milk production. As with other indigenous African breeds, milk production
in Borana cows is largely dependent on the presence of a nursing calf
(Donaldson, 1986). Finally, haymaking would benefit the seasonal labor
calendar of women. Making hay would occur at a favorable time, at the end
of the long rains, when work loads decline and human nutrition is improved.
Conversely, having hay available in the dry season would help women when
their work loads and nutritional status were limiting (Cossins and Upton,
1987, 1988b; Mulugeta, 1990).


METHODS
Data Collection
The study was conducted in the Dubluk madda, located in the geographic
center of the Borana Plateau about 625 km south of Addis Ababa near the
Kenya border. Observations were initially focused on eight olla with 88
households that volunteered to participate in the study. Four of the olla were
located in sites where cultivation was practiced in adjacent depressions; the
others did not have access to arable land. All families were aware of initial
demonstrations held the previous year on haymaking and had been instructed
in the proper procedures. Most households that were engaged in cultivation
had not made hay before, whereas the noncultivating families had made hay
the previous year. The family compositions were characterized and the
number of calves expected to be born in the short, rainy season four to six
months later was estimated. These calves were counted later, confirming
predictions.
Observations commenced in late May 1990, within two weeks after the
long rains had ended. Haymaking began after the vegetation had dried off
sufficiently and before dominant grasses flowered, helping to assure high-
quality hay (Lechtenberg and Hemken, 1985). Participants were instructed


Vol. 2, No. 3, 1991





COPPOCK


in making a feed budget and advised on the total quantity of hay needed for
their calves during the height of the upcoming warm, dry season (see
Discussion and Conclusions). An observer resided in each olla and monitored
about 10 households by recording daily progress and time used in (1)
constructing a hay-storage platform (a four-legged structure elevated 0.5 m
above the ground, made from wood poles with bark strips for fastening), (2)
searching for and cutting nutritious grass species such as Cenchrus, Chryso-
pogon, Cynodon, and Pennisetum spp. (a cattle rib-bone was typically used as
a sickle), (3) drying cut grass and guarding it from wandering livestock, (4)
transporting hay to the olla (carried by women), and (5) haystacking (which
required training to achieve a high degree of waterproofing). It was
recognized that several household members could participate, but that
married women would play the key role.
Although observers monitored a large number of people, this was simpli-
fied by the timing and participants: All households did not make hay on the
same days and the same individuals usually participated throughout. On each
work day participants were asked (1) how much time they had spent on each
haymaking task, (2) what other activities had been foregone, (3) how had
routine activity schedules been altered, and (4) whether problems had
occurred. Where possible the observers timed activities to verify verbal
statements. When haymaking was finished participants were asked their
opinions regarding major advantages and risks of implementing the practice.
The final air-dried weight of the hay stack was measured and evaluated in
relation to the projected feeding requirements of calves for each household.
Participants were interviewed again at the end of the warm, dry season in
March 1991 to assess if they intended to make hay again.

Data Analysis
Time invested in each activity and the amount of hay made were compared
between cultivators and noncultivators using t-tests. Simple regression anal-
yses were conducted to relate the amount of hay made (dependent variable)
versus independent variables of(1) total family time invested, (2) number of
calves expected in the short rains, and (3) family labor pool. The labor pool
was expressed for family members greater than five years of age as a composite
index of Active Adult Male Equivalents (AAME; ILCA, 1981).2

2 1.0 AAME=an adult male; 0.96 AAME=youths of both sexes, 11 to 16 years-old;
0.86=an adult woman; and 0.85 AAME=children of both sexes, 6 to 10 years-old.


Journal for Farming Systems Research-Extension





HAYMAKING AND CALF MANAGEMENT IN ETHIOPIA


Scatter diagrams were inspected to determine whether linear or nonlinear
regressions should be employed, and only linear relations were analyzed. Y-
intercepts were adjusted to zero in these regressions because zero effort should
equal zero hay produced. Separate analyses were conducted for cultivators
and noncultivators, and if relationships were statistically similar, they were
combined in the final analysis.
Activities were collated into nine major categories and composite on a
time basis for up to three participants per household. Data were expressed in
terms of activity budgets on a percentage basis.


RESULTS

Household Statistics and Labor Expenditure
Of the original 88 households, six dropped out of the activity and
insufficient data were collected for another 20. The remaining families were
about equally divided between cultivators (n=30) and noncultivators (n=32).
There were no significant differences (P>0.05) among cultivators and
noncultivators in terms of family labor pool or number of calves born per
household during the short rains of 1990. The overall means and standard
errors (+/-1 SE; n=62) were 3.6+/-0.20 AAME (range: 1.8 to 9.2) and 5.2
+/-0.51 calves (range: 1 to 15). With 20 percent of the calves born in the short
rains, this indicated that the average number of calves born annually per family
was on the order of 25 head with a range of 5 to 75. These families thus
represented the poor, middle, and wealthy strata of the society (Mulugeta,
1990).
Despite an average haymaking period per household ofjust over two weeks,
roughly five weeks were required to complete observations for all households.
Some started late while others took over a month to finish. Noncultivators
made about twice as much hay as cultivators, and, accordingly, this took about
double the person days and total work hours (Table 1). Amount of hay made
(AMT in kg) was positively correlated for both groups combined (r2=0.59;
P=0.0001; n=62) with total time invested (TT in hr) by the equation:
AMT = 6.21 (TT).
This indicates that 6.2 kg of hay was made per hour over the range observed.
In contrast, the amount of hay made was not correlated to the number of
calves expected or to the family labor pool (P>0.49).
The mean difference of 11 total work hours between cultivators and
noncultivators was largely due to an additional four and six hours used by the
Vol. 2, No. 3, 1991






COPPOCK


Table 1. Haymaking Statistics for Borana Households*
Category
Cultivators (n=30) Noncultivators (n=32) All (n=62)
Variableb Mean CV Max. Min. Mean CV Max. Min. Mean CV
(%) (%) (%)
Work lla 77 30 1 20b 37 31 3 16 59
period, days
Person-days 7a 69 14 1 10b 51 20 3 8 61
worked, days
Total 12a 59 33 1 23b 50 46 7 18 63
time, hrs
Platform, 2a 117 8 T 3a 153 18 T 2 145
hrs
Cutting, 8a 52 15 1 12b 63 36 2 10 63
hrs
Drying, Ta 4b 75 12 T 3 141
hrs
Transport, Ta 2b 166 12 T 1 230
hrs
Stacking, 2a 185 11 T 2a 127 8 T 2 154
hrs
Hay 81a 74 276 20 159b 49 300 40 121 66
made, kg
a Means within a row accompanied by the same letter (a,b) were not significantly different
(P>0.30) in t-test comparisons. Other means were different (P<0.02). Entries marked
by a T indicate a trace amount of time invested (<0.5 hrs). CV is the coefficient of
variation, which is the standard deviation expressed as a percentage of the mean. It is
a measure of the variability in a given sample.
bWhere work period is the length of time between initiation and conclusion of
haymaking. Person-days worked is the frequency of person-days within the work
period, which corresponds to any degree of work output on any given day.

noncultivators for haycutting and drying plus transporting, respectively
(Table 1). It is speculated that the noncultivators made more hay because (1)
they had experience making hay the previous year; (2) cultivators cut grass
from enclosed (bush-fenced) areas containing tilled fields that were restricted
in size, which may have limited hay production; and (3) possibly cultivators
counted on having crop residues for calf feeding. There was no evidence that
time used for cultivation detracted from the time available for haymaking (see
below).
Presence or absence of bush fencing affected time allocation. Because the
fencing protected drying grass from wandering animals and hay stacks could
be placed adjacent to cutting sites, cultivators invested less time drying or


Journal for Farming Systems Research-Extension






HAYMAKING AND CALF MANAGEMENT IN ETHIOPIA


transporting hay. In contrast, noncultivators not only needed to stay with
drying grass to ward off hungry stock, but also had to carry it back to the olla
for stacking. The proximity of fenced sites near the olla contributed to the
reduced time cultivators spent searching for ungrazed swards.
Considered across all families, searching/cutting (56 percent) dominated
the average of 18 hours of total work. In contrast, time used for other activities
was relatively minor.

Activities Foregone and Work Delegation
Of the 1,116 total work hours, 82 percent were contributed by the wife,
16 percent by a second family member and 2 percent by a third. The assistants
were commonly teenaged youths (mostly females), younger children (male
and female), older female relatives, and men. Men typically helped stack hay,
while the others participated in the remaining activities.
There were no appreciable differences in the composition of alternative
activities foregone between cultivators and noncultivators. Activities fore-
gone by the married women were most important (Table 2), but, for example,

Table 2. Time Budgets (%) of Activities Foregone for Three Priority Persons
Observed in 62 Borana Households Involved in Haymaking
Priority Persona
Activityb 1 2 3 Total
Firewood collection 10 16 11
Watering animals 9 25 18 12
Other livestock management 6 10 20 7
Child care 21 12 3 19
Social obligations 3 2 3
Leisure/hygiene 13 6 8 12
Milk processing 10 15 9 11
Household maintenance 18 11 17 16
Food preparation 10 3 25 .9

Average hours per household 15 3 <1 18
a Person 1 is a married woman, person 2 is usually a teenage female or older female relative
of the wife, and pe--: a 3 is a teenage youth, older female relative, child, or husband.
Where (1) other .vestock management is herding, health care, etc. For women this
commonly involves less important species such as camels or equines, while youths and
children tend to be herders of calves and small ruminants; (2) child care includes
playing, breast feeding, health care, etc.; (3) hygiene includes hairbraiding, washing,
etc.; (4) milk processing includes preparation of containers for milk collection, butter
churning, etc.; (5) household maintenance includes repair of house, clothing, and
miscellaneous storage containers; and (6) food preparation involves grinding grain,
making tea, and associated food activities not involving milk.


Vol. 2, No. 3, 1991





COPPOCK


in absolute terms the mother lost only three hours of child care time. Similarity
in most activities foregone by the wife and second person also indicated that
roles are somewhat flexible and that "back up" occurs to ensure that routine
work is still carried out. This flexibility was also evident in patterns of work
delegated by the wife so that she is able to engage in haymaking. There were
364 instances of such work delegation in the 62 households. Virtually every
activity except breastfeeding and some aspects ofmilk processing (e.g., butter-
making) was to some degree delegated to other household members. Sixteen
percent (58 instances) of work delegation involved the wife assigning tasks to
her husband.

Opinions on Haymaking
In keeping with the above findings, in 552 reports from wives on work days
concerning whether or not the opportunity costs ofhaymaking were too high,
85 percent of responses indicated they were not. At the end of the trial only
12 of 62 wives reported any significant problems associated with haymaking.
These included (1) abandonment of the haystacks if the family is forced to
relocate, (2) moldy and useless hay due to late precipitation after the long rains
or excessive moisture during the short rains, and (3) some calves apparently
do not like to eat hay. In contrast, 60 wives reported important benefits
associated with haymaking. They stated most frequently that hay provides
excellent forage for calves and that hay storage saves time collecting forage in
the next dry season.
Eighty-five of the families that made hay in Dubluk madda (including 62
studied) were interviewed at the end of the 1990-91 dry season, and 73
percent reported that they intended to make hay again in May 1991. The
remainder were not interested, either because they were in the process of
moving elsewhere, or because they were not convinced of the benefits.


DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS
I conclude, under these research conditions, that haymaking is a viable
production intervention in terms of the labor required to produce an average
of 121 kg of hay. The most important contingencies that make haymaking a
success are (1) the semisettled nature of households, which reduces risks of
having to abandon hay stacks; (2) the rangeland environment, which offers a
number of nutritious grass species; (3) the relatively minor modification that
haymaking represents over the traditionally intensive practices of calf rearing,


Journal for Farming Systems Research-Extension





HAYMAKING AND CALF MANAGEMENT IN ETHIOPIA


which is a valued activity in Borana culture; and (4) the apparent absence of
important time constraints, which would preclude families from making hay
during the optimal period.
Benefits ofhaymaking for the Borana production system are reported in full
elsewhere, but some of the key findings are highlighted as follows:

Women's Labor During the Dry Season
When the haymaking research was designed, we hypothesized that the
most important benefit would be in terms of reducing the dry-season labor
burden of married women (Coppock, 1990a). Mulugeta (1990) used
interviews of 60 Borana women to estimate time budgets for the warm, dry
season. Results suggested that women worked an average of 16 hours per day
(with only a trace amount of leisure time), and spent 13 percent of their
working week collecting calf forage, an activity that was ranked fourth in
importance out of 15 routine tasks. In contrast, continuous observation of
another 64 women for weekly periods during the following warm, dry season
(Coppock, submitted (b)) indicated that the women had 11 hours of work and
5 hours of leisure per day and used only two percent of their work week to
collect forage. Compared to women using traditional collection methods,
women with haystacks saved only 2.4 hours per week, equal to 26 hours over
12 weeks of the warm, dry season. This effect was thus considered negligible,
but it was postulated that the time saved in the dry season from haymaking
could vary annually depending on grazing pressure and forage production.

Calf Nutrition
Grass hay has significantly higher nitrogen content and in vitro dry-matter
digestibility (IVDMD) than standing grass in the dry season. Mulugeta
(1990) and Coppock (submitted (c)) reported similar improvements in
nitrogen content of 0.75 to 1.14 percent and 0.64 to 1.02 percent, respective-
ly, or an average increase of over 50 percent. This was expected to raise dietary
nitrogen content from submaintenance to that required for maintenance
levels of animal performance (ARC, 1980). Haymaking had an even greater
effect on IVDMD. Mulugeta (1990) and Coppock (submitted (c)) found that
IVDMD increased from 30 to 51 percent and 30 to 44 percent, respectively.
A 90-day feeding trial was used to evaluate calf response to hay compared to
cut-and-carry grass (Coppock, submitted (c)). At the start of the trial the 16
calves per treatment averaged 9 months ofage and 83 kg in live-weight. Calves
had access to all the hay or grass they could consume, with a traditional


Vol. 2, No. 3, 1991





COPPOCK


watering frequency of once every three days. Results confirmed that hay
feeding improved prospects for maintenance performance. Calves on the
grass diet lost 78 g per day ofliveweight while those on hay showed a negligible
loss of 7 g per day. The animals on hay consumed 25 percent more nitrogen
per day, but their water intake also rose by 28 percent compared to those on
grass.
These results suggest that haymaking has greater implications for improv-
ing animal production than reducing dry-season labor burdens for women.
However, interviews always have indicated that women perceive that the
greatest advantage of haymaking is to help them better manage their time in
dry periods (Coppock, submitted (b)). Regardless of the key factor, wide-
spread uptake of haymaking is anticipated in the Borana community (Brand-
stetter et al., 1990).


IMPLICATIONS FOR EXTENSION, DEVELOPMENT,
AND FURTHER RESEARCH

Improving management of local resources through haymaking offers an
important advantage over attempts to improve grazed vegetation in relation
to implementation and resource control in this system. Although a few
households (not included in this study) cooperated with each other to make
hay, hay was otherwise a private resource procured from communal grazing
areas. A given amount of work thus yielded a given benefit, in contrast to
extensive pasture interventions. Attempts to improve in situ vegetation are
often viewed as having poor prospects of success in pastoral Africa, largely
because of communal land tenure. Individual incentive to improve communal
forage is expected to be low because there is no guarantee of individual benefit
(Pratt and Gwynne, 1977). Finally, it is also important to illustrate a
dichotomy here between haymaking and extensive pasture improvements in
terms of research and development philosophy. Haymaking represents the
rapid success of bottom-up problem analysis with an emphasis on resource
management and participation of beneficiaries, whereas study of exotic
pasture forages emphasizes controlled production trials often in the absence
of careful consideration of how such materials will be introduced and used in
the existing system.
Although opportunity costs to produce an average of 121 kg of hay
appeared minor in this study, it is important to note that costs would probably
rise if households produced substantially more hay. However, because hay


Journal for Farming Systems Research-Extension






HAYMAKING AND CALF MANAGEMENT IN ETHIOPIA


production showed a steady, linear increase over time invested by all house-
holds, it is concluded that important opportunity costs were not encountered
with up to 300 kg of hay produced.
The lack ofa relationship between hay made and calves expected, however,
suggests that either the concept of a dry-season feed budget was not clear to
most households (i.e., only 15 of 62 households made enough hay), or other
constraints were encountered. Calculations of calf feed requirements suggest
that, on average, over 250 kg more hay should have been made per household.
For the three-month height of the dry season, 30-kg calves would each have
required about 75 kg of hay for maintenance according to the factorial method
(ARC, 1980), assuming a nitrogen content of 1.05 percent and digestibility
of 53 percent for good quality hay (Coppock, unpublished data). On average,
five calves per household thus required 375 kg, but only 32 percent of this was
produced. Assuming from the regression analysis that each additional hour
yields 6.2 kg of hay, roughly 41 more hours of labor would have been needed
per household to make 375 kg, an increase of 128 percent. Given that
haymaking is in the very early stages of extension, it is difficult to surmise
whether the people were unable to make more hay or did not feel that future
benefits merited the additional work. The latter issue may be solved through
experience. However, it is noteworthy that haymaking involves a behavioral
shift from focusing on current management problems to include planning for
the future. It is to be expected that poor rural producers would focus more
on current problems, and this impedes uptake of other interventions in the
southern rangelands that require planning for the future (Coppock, submitted
(a)). If it is assumed that the haymakers understood the need to attain their
feed budgets, the strongest hypothesis is that suitable grass biomass for
haymaking was more limiting than time. This is related to the patchy
distributions of favored grass species in relation to olla locations and the
difficulties of haymakers having to compete with cattle herds for forage on
communal rangeland.
The feed budget analysis above also indicates that hay quality is important
for labor as well as calf nutrition. If nutritive value is much below values
indicated above, not only could calf dietary intake be compromised (ARC,
1980), but the amount of hay required would also increase. The risk of
making poor-quality hay could be reduced by extending the concept of
supplementing the hay with local legumes. Coppock and Reed (in press)
found that Acacia tortilis fruits (pods with seeds), A. brevispica leaves, and
Vigna unguiculata hay are useful protein supplements that could be com-


Vol. 2, No. 3, 1991





COPPOCK


bined with a hay base. Given that these materials are up to two-and-a-half-
times more expensive to collect and store than grass hay because of their
limited abundance (Mulugeta, 1990), their inclusion into feeding packages
needs to be minimized.
One important question is: Why had the Boran, a clever and resourceful
people (Asmarom, 1973; Donaldson, 1986), not thought of haymaking
previously? Haymaking has existed in other agricultural systems for centuries.
Possibly no Boran ever thought of it before, and this is likely if under previous
conditions there was less need to prepare and store forage. The Borana system
is rapidly changing now, however, due to population pressure and rural
development (Coppock, submitted (a)). One hypothesis is that during
previous generations, with lower population densities of cattle and people,
haymaking may have been less important because forage was more abundant
in the dry season. Another is that haymaking may have been less feasible in
the past because households moved more often. Menwyelet (unpublished
data), in a survey of 67 olla, found that the Boran think they are becoming
more settled and they attribute this primarily to the attraction of roads and
markets. They also reported that because of increased population pressure,
there are fewer places for them to move to today compared to a generation ago
(Coppock, unpublished data). Water development has also contributed to
sedentarization (Bille and Assefa, 1983). Population pressure here has led to
other forms of increased resource control, such as enclosed areas of calf forage
or kalo (Menwyelet, 1990) and denial of reciprocal grazing rights among
madda during years of resource scarcity (Coppock, submitted (a)). Similar
patterns of changing resource use under population pressure and develop-
ment have been reported elsewhere in pastoral Africa (Dahl and Hjort, 1976;
Grandin, 1987). An annual growth rate of 2.5 percent in the Borana
population (B. Lindtjorn, University of Bergen, personal communication),
consistent with that for seminomadic pastoralists in general (Meir, 1987),
indicates that pressure on resources will increase in the future. Labor-intensive
activities such as haymaking will probably become more important as compe-
tition for resources increases (Boserup, 1965). There may be some opportu-
nities to improve the labor efficiency of haymaking, such as promoting the use
of donkeys to carry cut grass or hay and advocating the erection of bush-fenced
exclosures to protect grass swards from grazing stock. Interestingly, the
women preferred using cattle rib-bones to sickles for grass cutting despite the
fact that the rib bones were less efficient and that the sickles were available and
relatively inexpensive. Their reasoning was that they felt the risk of cutting


Journal for Farming Systems Research-Extension





HAYMAKING AND CALF MANAGEMENT IN ETHIOPIA


themselves with the sickles was too high (Hodgson, personal communica-
tion).
One final advantage ofhaymaking is that once the idea and methods have
been adopted, the people can teach themselves and spread the practice largely
independent of extension. Here, as elsewhere in rural Africa, extension
capabilities are modest. However, extension is particularly important at the
outset given the numerous problems that might occur, especially hay spoilage
due to improper drying and stacking. These problems might dissuade
adoption. Feed budgeting and promotion of feeding packages with native
legumes to improve hay are other useful extension activities.
Extension must also use a regional approach to recognize that haymaking
risks will vary in relation to movements ofpeople. Some madda have occupants
that must move seasonally because of grazing or water constraints, and they
will be less interested in haymaking (Hodgson, 1990). Likewise, extension
agents should realize that haymaking may not be practised every year. Years
of low or patchy rainfall may signal households to anticipate a move, and hay
will not be produced. The timing of haymaking after the main rainy season
is an advantage because households already would have the crucial informa-
tion on how the year will be when they decide whether or not to make hay,
which helps minimize risks. It may also be less necessary for households to
make hay when cattle population density is low and grass resources are more
available for dry season collection, such as during the few years after a drought
before the herd recovers its numbers (Cossins and Upton, 1988b). In
addition, if haymaking becomes widespread, competition and opportunity
costs of production may increase, and quantities produced per household may
decline. In sum, the amount of hay made each year will be dynamic and
affected by a variety of factors.
Extension of haymaking should be targeted to address acute problems for
certain strata of the society. Priority should be given to the poorest
households that reside within five kilometers of markets. These families,
because they have a submaintenance supply of milk, are forced to withhold
more milk from calves in order to sell it to buy a survival ration of grain
(Holden et al., submitted). Close proximity to market allows daily sales of
milk. The poorest households are often headed by widowed women, and on
average have one milk cow for every two family members. They extract about
50 percent of the milk yield from all cows on average and 35 percent from the
lowest producers. The wealthy, in contrast, have over two cows perperson and
extract 39 percent and 10 percent, respectively, of the milk yield from all their


Vol. 2, No. 3, 1991





COPPOCK


cows and the lowest producers. The wealthy families thus have the choice of
whether or not to milk every cow intensively while the poor families do not,
and this is most revealed in the milking management of the lowest producing
cows. As distance to market decreases from 15 to less than 5 km, the poorer
families reportedly increase their average milk offtake per cow from 48 to 63
percent (equivalent to about 150 ml per cow per day), which essentially robs
the calves of another one-third of their normal intake. This milk is sold to
purchase 1.75 kg of maize grain, which in combination with milk consumed
in the home maintains a family of four for a day. The risk to calves from this
practice, however, is substantial: Morbidity rates for calves of poor house-
holds increased from 15 to 30 percent as distance to market decreased.
Improved forage feeding could reduce risks of losing calves in these poorer
households, particularly those calves born to lower-producing cows. It is
unclear, however, whether these households have enough labor to make hay,
and this requires more investigation.
Applied research should focus on improved management of local grasses
suitable for haymaking. This may include use of prescribed fire (Coppock,
1990b), manuring, and/or bush-fencing (Menwyelet, 1990) to improve the
distribution and yield of grasses near encampments. More local legumes
should be evaluated as protein supplements for hay to encourage efficient use
of native resources that vary markedly by region and with elevation.


ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

The author acknowledges Shewangizaw Bekele for coordinating collection of
field data and Mesfin Shibre and John Sherington for assistance with data
analysis. The diligence of CARE-Ethiopia staff in pioneering the haymaking
intervention among the Boran is also greatly appreciated. The Third Live-
stock Development Project is thanked for collaboration and funding support
of related field research. This research was funded by the International
Livestock Centre for Africa.


REFERENCES
Agricultural Research Council (ARC). 1980. The nutrient requirements of ruminant
livestock. Slough, U.KI: Commonwealth Agricultural Bureau. 351 pp.
Asmarom Legesse. 1973. Gada: Three approachesto the study ofAfrican society. NewYork:
The Free Press. 340 pp.


Journal for Farming Systems Research-Extension






HAYMAKING AND CALF MANAGEMENT IN ETHIOPIA


Bill, J.C., and Assefa Eshete. 1983. Rangeland management and range condition: A
study in the Medecho and Did Hara areas ofthe effects of rangeland utilization. JEPSS
Research Report No. 7. Joint Ethiopian Pastoral Systems Study, International
Livestock Centre for Africa, Addis Ababa, Ethiopia. 34 pp.
Boserup, E. 1965. Theconditionsofagriculturalgrowth: The economicsofagrarian change
under population pressure. Hawthorne, N.Y.: Aldine Publishing Co. 124 pp.
Brandstetter, R.H., I.M.A. Ghanin, and R.C. Hendy. 1990. Midterm evaluation:
CARE/Borana Rangelands Development Project (PNO7), Ethiopia. CARE-Ethio-
pia, Addis Ababa, Ethiopia. Unpublished report. 66 pp.
Coppock, D.L. Submitted (a). The Borana Plateau of southern Ethiopia: Synthesis of
pastoral research, development, and change, 1980-91. Systems Study No. 5, Interna-
tional Livestock Centre for Africa, Addis Ababa, Ethiopia.
Coppock, D.L. Submitted (b). Culture, environment, technology: Interpretations of
development interventions in pastoral Ethiopia. National Geographic Research and
Exploration.
Coppock, D.L. Submitted (c). Grass hay and Acacia fruits: A local feeding system for
improved performance in semi-arid Ethiopia. Tropical Animal Health and Produc-
tion.
Coppock, D.L. 1990a. Water and forage development interventions: More benefits to
pastoral women or their calves? ILCA Newsletter 9(1):3-4,9. International Livestock
Centre for Africa, Addis Ababa, Ethiopia.
Coppock, D.L. 1990b. Bush control: Opportunity for resource management and
pastoral income generation? ILCA Newsletter 9(3):10-11. International Livestock
Centre for Africa, Addis Ababa, Ethiopia.
Coppock, D.L., and J.D. Reed. In press. Cultivated and native browse legumes as calf
supplements in Ethiopia. Journal of Range Management.
Coppock, D.L., J.E. Ellis, and D.M. Swift. 1986a. Livestock feeding ecology and
resource utilization in a nomadic pastoral ecosystem. Journal of Applied Ecology
23(2):573-584.
Coppock, D.L., D.M. Swift, and J.E. Ellis. 1986b. Seasonal nutritional characteristics of
livestock diets in a nomadic pastoral ecosystem. JournalofAppliedEcology23(2):585-
596.
Cossins, N.J., and M. Upton. 1987. The Borana pastoral system of southern Ethiopia.
Agricultural Systems 25:199-218.
Cossins, N.J., and M. Upton. 1988a. Options for improvement of the Borana pastoral
system. Agricultural Systems 27:251-278.
Cossins, N.J., and M. Upton. 1988b. The impact of climatic variation on the Borana
pastoral system. Agricultural Systems 27:117-135.
Dahl, G., and A. Hjort. 1976. Havingherds: Pastoralherdgrowth and household economy.
Stockholm Studies in Social Anthropology, University of Stockholm, Sweden. 335
pp.
Donaldson, T.J. 1986. Pastoralism and drought: A case study of the Borana of southern
Ethiopia. Unpublished M. Phil. thesis, University of Reading, U.K., 99 pp.
Grandin, B.E. 1987. Pastoral culture and range management: Recent lessons from
Masailand. ILCA Bulletin 28:7-13. International Livestock Centre for Africa, Addis
Ababa, Ethiopia.


Vol. 2, No. 3, 1991






COPPOCK


Hodgson, R.J. 1990. The southern Sidamo Rangelands Project, 1985-88: Perspectives
on development interventions and extension. CARE-Ethiopia, Addis Ababa, Ethio-
pia. Unpublished report. 207 pp.
Hodgson, R.J. CARE-Ethiopia. Personal communication.
Holden, S.J. 1988. Dairy marketing and pastoralism: Implications for development in the
southern Ethiopian rangelands. Unpublished M.S. thesis, University of Reading,
U.K., 67 pp.
Holden, S.J., D.L. Coppock, and Mulugeta Assefa. Submitted. Pastoral dairy marketing
and household wealth interactions and their implications for calves and humans in
Ethiopia. Human Ecology.
International Livestock Centre for Africa (ILCA). 1981. Introduction to the EastAfrican
Range Livestock Systems Study. ILCA-Kenya Working Document No. 23. Nairobi,
Kenya.
Jahnke, H.E. 1982. Livestock production systems and livestock development in tropical
Africa. Kieler Kiel, Germany: Wissenschaftsverlag Vauk. 253 pp.
Lechtenberg, V.L., and R.W. Hemken. 1985. Hay quality. Pages 460-469 in M.E.
Heath, R.F. Barnes, and D.S. Metcalf, eds., Forages: The science ofgrassland agricul-
ture (4th ed.). Ames: Iowa State University Press.
Meir, A. 1987. Comparative vital statistics along the pastoral nomadism-sedentarism
continuum. Human Ecology 15:91-107.
Menwyelet Atsedu. 1990. Ecology of calf pastures and supplementary feeding by Borana
pastoralists of southern Ethiopia. Unpublished M.S. thesis, Colorado State Universi-
ty, Fort Collins. 117 pp.
Mosi, A.IK, S. Tessema, and R.S. Temple. 1976. Livestock nutrition in the dry tropics of
Africa. Pages 392-400 in P.V. Fonnesbeck, L.E. Harris, and L.C. Kearl, eds., First
International Symposium on Feed Composition, Animal Nutrient Requirements, and
Computerization ofDiets. Utah Agricultural Experiment Station, Utah State Univer-
sity, Logan.
Mulugeta Assefa. 1990. Borana cattle herds: Productivity, constraints, and possible
interventions. Unpublished M.S. thesis, Colorado State University, Fort Collins. 154
PP.
Nicholson, M.J. 1983. Calfgrowth, milk offtake, and estimated lactationyields ofBorana
cattle in the southern rangelands of Ethiopia. JEPSS Research Report No. 6. Joint
Ethiopian Pastoral Systems Study, International Livestock Centre for Africa, Addis
Ababa, Ethiopia. 50 pp.
Pratt, D.J., and M.D. Gwynne. 1977. Rangeland managementand ecology inEastAfrica.
London: Hodder and Stoughton. 310 pp.


Journal for Farming Systems Research-Extension








The Extension Agent
in the Research Process:
Working Across Ministries in Cameroon'

S.W. Almy, M. Besong, T. Woldetatios, C. Poubom, C. Ateh,
and M. Mboussi2



ABSTRACT
Collaboration between research and extension services can be difficult,
especially when the two are in different ministries. For economic
efficiency, a Farming Systems Research and Extension (FSRE) program
must incorporate participatory elements not only for farmers, but also for
extensionists. Diverse institutional and ecological environments, how-
ever, make a standard solution impractical. The methods used by the
Ekona Testing and Liaison Unit (TLU) in Cameroon to diagnose, test,
and revise a locally-appropriate solution are described in this article, as are
the adaptations required by the imminent arrival of a Training and Visit
(T&V) system in the province.

INTRODUCTION

Many national governments, including that of Cameroon, have placed
responsibility for extension of agricultural research results and for research
generation in separate ministries. This presents a particular problem for
farming-systems methodology, which is based on the continuous, two-way
feedback between research users and research producers. It also undermines
the justification of the whole research activity; if research results reach only a
few farmers, Farming Systems Research (FSR) cannot be cost effective.
Much has been written in recent years about the necessity for and methods
of farmer participation in agricultural research. If the extension services are left
out of the picture, however, as they often are in this approach, only a few
farmers ultimately will benefit. Good technology does not automatically

1 Paper presented at the Tenth Annual Association for Farming Systems Research-
Extension Symposium, Michigan State University, East Lansing, October 14-17,1990.
2Testing and Liaison Unit-Ekona, Institute of Agronomic Research, PMB-25, Buea,
South West Province, Cameroon. Almy is currently at the International Rice Research
Institute, Antananarivo, Madagascar.






ALMY ET AL.


extend itself through farmer networks. The International Service for National
Agricultural Research (ISNAR) review of FSR programs found that this was
particularly true in heterogeneous environments, among resource-poor farm-
ers, and/or in situations using technology more complex than simple variety
introduction (Ewell, 1989).
Poor cooperation between research and extension is a common problem
and is worst in developing countries (Seegers and Kaimowitz, 1990). The
World Bank recommends a Training and Visit system (Benor and Baxter,
1984), which organizes the extension service into regular farmer contacts and
planning and training sessions with researchers. A major problem with T&V
is that many countries cannot afford it without outside funding (Cernea et al.,
1985). It also has proven less effective under the same conditions in which
farmer networks have faltered-heterogeneity, poverty, and complexity (Ewell,
1989).
The subject of this article, the provincial farming-systems unit at Ekona in
the South West Province of Cameroon, is part of the national Agricultural
Research Institute (IRA) under the Ministry of Higher Education, Informa-
tion Services, and Scientific Research. The sole agricultural extension service
is a part of the Ministry of Agriculture (MINAGRI). The institutional and
agronomic environments contain the three key elements for failure defined by
Ewell.
A major assumption of this article is that organizational methods that work
in one place and time are no more likely to be directly transferrable to another
place and time than would be a local maize-fertilizer recommendation. The
process of designing a functional research-extension program is as important
as the result, because it is the process that will have to be repeated.
The Ekona program was developed by the application of standard FSR
procedures to the extension system, simultaneous with mandated agronom-
ically focused research. Preliminary diagnosis identified a solution: local
adaptation of workshop and minikit "technologies." Informal evaluations by
participants led to redesign and evolution of the methodology.


BACKGROUND: THE SITUATION IN 1986
Farmers in South West Province
Agricultural production in the province is divided between a parastatal
sector of large commercial plantations and a private sector fragmented into
65,000 smallholdings, 90 percent of them smaller than 5 ha (MINAGRI,


Journal for Farming Systems Research-Extension






EXTENSION AGENTS IN THE RESEARCH PROCESS


1988). The plantations produce rubber, bananas, palm oil, and some black
pepper, all for export, and provide employment and social services for large
numbers of workers. The smallholders (henceforth, "farmers") produce
cocoa, some coffee, plantains, aroids, cassava, maize, melon seed, groundnuts,
palm oil, and fruits. The province contains only 7.7 percent of the national
population, but it produces 15.5 percent of the kilocalories derived from
staple foods and more than a fifth of the country's cocoa, aroids, cassava,
plantains, and bananas.
In most places, farm families subdivide responsibilities by sex. The men are
in charge of the entire household, directly operate the tree fields, and usually
control plantains and oil palms wherever they are planted. The women directly
operate the food fields and assist with the rest. Men attend public meetings
and consult with the extension agent, but women are the ones who know and
grow the food.
Capital investment in the farms is near zero. Most farmers have no formal
agricultural training and few pieces of agricultural machinery more complicat-
ed than a hoe or basket. Land preparation costs are heavy, restricting the
average farm holding to 2.6 ha, ofwhich 1.5 ha is in trees and 1.1 ha in seasonal
crops (calculated from MINAGRI, 1988). Individual food fields average 0.4
to 0.5 ha.
Most farmers in the province are above a subsistence level, having benefit-
ted much from cocoa/coffee sales in the past. Some kind of food can be
harvested throughout the year, and virtually all farmers participate in food-
crop markets. Only one out of nine farmers in a 1990 randomized adoption
survey still had thatch roofs, and three years ago virtually all children 5 to 17
years ofage were in school. The situation has worsened since 1987-88 because
the national economic crisis has eliminated all cocoa/coffee income. Cash
now comes into the villages only through food-crop sales and gifts from
relatives with urban jobs; cash flows out in taxes, school fees, and purchased
medicine, clothing, nonlocal foodstuffs, and beer.
Farmers' communities range in size from five to several thousand houses.
Their internal organization often is complex and informal. There are at least
40 ethnic groups in the province, and most farmers live in villages that contain
several of them; communities also cross-cut religious groups. Villages are
controlled formally by chiefs who rule by inheritance and who are served by
a council of "quarter heads" that are picked to represent both the geographic
neighborhoods and major ethnic groups. There are many small distinct
groups for saving money, exchanging farm work, and/or helping the sick. In


Vol. 2, No. 3, 1991






ALMY ET AL.


1990, only a quarter of the farmers reported membership in cooperatives,
which are regarded as a marketing arrangement rather than as a group activity.
No other organization above village level unites farmers as farmers.

Tripartite Relations Among the Two Ministries and the Farmers
Agricultural research falls within a special research ministry (MESIRES);
extension advice and input supply are within MINAGRI. Although several
provinces enjoy autonomous parastatal extension agencies endowed with
greater resources, the South West Province has only the basic extension
service. In the more market-oriented half of the province, extension agents
have benefitted from a Belgian project to provide motorbikes, inputs, and
training to establish cocoa and coffee demonstration plots and to promote
these crops generally. Project funds dwindled just when the program was
about to expand to the rest of the province, and it hardly touched on food
crops.
An extension agent is posted to every third to fifth village throughout most
of the province, although in the more remote areas most agents are untrained
assistants. Recently, greater emphasis also has been given to group farming
within the female-staffed Community Development (CD) service of MINA-
GRI. A recent study in one of the most urbanized, best-staffed zones found
a ratio of one extension agent to 600 households, and one CD agent to 1,600
households (Arze et al., 1990). More than half the agents in this zone have
no formal agricultural training, and CD staff are trained in a special program
that focuses on organizational skills rather than agronomy.
Owing to the great diversity in ecological zones, both at national and local
levels, agent training is only indirectly related to effectiveness. Training is done
in a few national-level schools, and none except the CD school are in areas
representative of South West ecologies. Agents cannot be taught the
information they will be expected to convey to the farmers in a specific place,
because the information needs vary so much across the country. An agent's
effectiveness has been a product of willingness to study the local situation, to
listen to the farmers, and to seek help from old textbooks, superiors, or IRA.
All extension workers, therefore, need to run mini-FSR programs of their
own.
Officially, the prescribed course for an extension agent with a technical
problem has been to write a letter to a superior, who would pass it up the chain
of command until it reached the national level, at which point it would cross
to IRA and start down again to the appropriate region and program head. For


Journal for Farming Systems Research-Extension






EXTENSION AGENTS IN THE RESEARCH PROCESS


obvious reasons, this rarely occurred. Instead, some local agents and their
immediate superiors, the subdelegates, visited nearby IRA stations seeking
advice.
Relations between farmers and research and extension services were
similarly fragmented and individual. Agents responded to requests; only a
few, trained in the old community-development techniques, formed farmer
groups. Research staff acted as individual advisors to farmers on request and
to a few nearby women's groups organized by the CD service.
Thus, when the Ekona farming systems unit became operational in mid-
1986, there was no systematic linkage between research and extension or
between research and farmer; the links between extension and farmer were
individualist and oriented primarily to cocoa and coffee development.

The Research Program in Relation to the Extension Service
Founded in mid-1986, the Ekona TLU is a farming-systems component of
the National Cereals Research and Extension Program, financially supported
by the U.S. Agency for International Development, technically supported by
the International Institute of Tropical Agriculture in Ibadan, Nigeria, and
situated within the Farming Systems Program of IRA. Its mandates are
farming-systems diagnosis, on-farm testing of food-crop technology, and
liaison between IRA (in MESIRES) and extension (in MINAGRI).
In 1986 there was no formal or even informal agreement between the two
ministries about TLUs, and no guidelines from IRA about the liaison
function. The only prior TLU, established five years previously in the
highland provinces, was integrated across ministries with a World Bank-
financed rural development program organized along T&V lines. The Ekona
mandate is the coastal humid forest zone, but it also includes the highland
parts of the two coastal provinces. The Unit has concentrated on the South
West Province, which accounts for most of the staple food production in the
coastal region.

Diagnosis of the Extension System
To cope with its liaison mandate, TLU undertook extension-oriented
diagnostic and training activities that complemented and converged with its
research program of agrosystems diagnosis and adaptive testing. A formal
analysis of the extension service was out of the question. TLU was not
mandated to do it, it was in another ministry, and thus it did not have access
to much of the necessary information and was not in a position to make


Vol. 2, No. 3, 1991





ALMY ET AL.


structural recommendations. TLU focused instead on three points related to
food crops: (1) locus and form of contact with food farmers, (2) identification
of individual extension cooperators, and (3) gaps in technical knowledge. The
methods used were in addition to on-going farming systems diagnosis.
TLU's introduction to each new division of the province was by way of its
senior extension staff, who helped with preliminary zoning and questionnaire
modification. Fortunately, most of the extension agents lived in rural areas.
Villages and villagers were sampled for formal interviewing, and the extension
agent living nearest each village was asked to locate a "typical" food-crop
farmer, usually a woman, for a special field visit by agent, farmer, and
researcher. During these visits, agents' attitudes toward food farmers and
their knowledge of local food crops were assessed. This was combined with
extension responses in the formal interviews and with results of discussions
with the immediate supervisors of the village-level staff (subdelegates).
It became apparent that about a third of the local-level extension service
was inactive (absent or nonresponsive) and that about a third was actively
attempting to respond to food-crop farmers' queries. Both active and inactive
members were found throughout the province and across training and
hierarchical levels. The remaining one-third ofthe agents focused only on tree
crops, some because they felt helpless to obtain food-crop inputs or advice and
others because they preferred working with farmers and with inputs that could
be converted to extra money. It was not possible to distinguish between these
subgroups at first-they distinguished themselves as the program advanced.
The focus was on those demonstrators, technicians, and subdelegates who
showed an understanding of and involvement with some food-crop farmers.
Agent-farmer interaction was not directly assessed again until the 1990
adoption survey.
There were few female agents in the agronomic extension service, although
there were some in special community development services. Virtually all the
female agronomic agents were based in the largest towns, owing to civil service
regulations relating to married female staff. They had little or no experience
with full-time food-crop farmers.

Incorporation of Extension into the Research Program
Extension staff were brought into the TLU research program through an
integrated complex of training and research activities that included formal
workshops, extension assistance in researcher-managed on-farm trials and
surveys, and extension implementation of farmer-managed variety and crop


Journal for Farming Systems Research-Extension






EXTENSION AGENTS IN THE RESEARCH PROCESS


protection tests. After each initial survey, the identified extension agents and
all subdelegates were invited to the next annual provincial workshop. At these
workshops, participants were asked to locate farmers to lend land for on-farm
trials. Those who succeeded were asked to act as local supervisors for the trials;
if they maintained good relationships with the farmers and helped to make the
trials a success, they were invited back in future years. Subdelegates who
interacted with farmers were brought back annually, and the rest rotated.
Simultaneously, minikits of improved maize and sometimes cassava varie-
ties were distributed through the subdelegates to the entire extension service,
and interested agents from areas not covered by the trial program were
identified from those returning the evaluations. The minikits were farmer-
implemented variety tests, with farmer/extension evaluation, and provided
approximate information on agronomic response in environments that TLU
could not reach with trials as well as on general consumer and market
preferences.
By 1989 TLU had a permanent core of about 30 active cooperators
scattered throughout the province, representing a quarter of the total exten-
sion staff. This recruitment, which reflected interest rather than structural
position or provincial-office favoritism, was important to success. Another
team in the country in a similar position recruited by asking for a list from the
provincial level and suffered from a lack ofactive participation both during and
after the workshop.

Workshop Mechanics
The workshops have been the focus of extension strategy. They reinforce
both extension and research-extension by providing training in food-crop
topics of use to farmers and research by providing incentives for extension
agents to help with on-farm trials and, increasingly, by including the agents'
experience when considering the research agenda. Each workshop has been
limited to a few days, owing to financial constraints, but invitations have been
prized opportunities to travel, meet colleagues, and learn about new tech-
niques and conditions elsewhere in the province.
The first workshop, in December 1986, started modestlywith 27 extension
participants (mostly from one division), 3 trainers (all from TLU), no farmers,
3 topics, and a lecture format. The workshops grew and by March 1990 there
were 52 participants from all parts of the province, media reporters, 12 trainers
from 4 IRAprograms, 9 farmers, 8 women other than TLU staff, 8 major topic
headings (covering maize fertilization and varieties, seed selection and fertil-


Vol. 2, No. 3, 1991






ALMY ET AL.


izer economics, cassava varieties and fertilization, cocoyam breeding, food-
crop markets, cooking IRA varieties, safe chemical use, maize storage, egusi
pest control, plantain pest control, sustainable agriculture principles, provin-
cial soil and weed management, weed control, and TLU plans), and several
mechanisms for group participation.
As the workshops evolved, four problems were defined and addressed: (1)
the selection of topics; (2) the participation of farmers; (3) the participation
of women, whether farmers or agents; and (4) the need to increase extension
agent input into research planning and evaluation.
One strategy was to identify specific topics about which the agents and
farmers wanted or needed to learn and then to look for IRA staff to present
them. Previously, researchers had been invited to MINAGRI training courses
to talk in general terms about "soils" or "maize" and had lectured without
reference to the resources or problems of their audience. The original surveys
included identification of the problems farmers faced and perceived in
producing food crops. Most of these were topics for which research had no
immediate solutions, such as cocoyam root rot and land-preparation costs.
Some were topics for which IRA already had useful knowledge, as yet
unknown to the extension staff.
The first such information gaps identified were plantain pest control and
maize disease identification; the farmers were most concerned about those
losses they could see. Through subsequent interaction during on-farm trials,
surveys, and workshops, a large collection of topics with partial solutions was
developed, including planting methods for root crops and plantains, pest
identification for many crops, appropriate improved maize and cassava varie-
ties, soil types, applicable principles of green manuring, and range of useful-
ness of fertilizers.
Researchers who were working on themes that were relevant to the
audience were picked, and areas of relevance were discussed with the speakers
well in advance. Sometimes, although IRA had nothing immediate to offer
on a keenly felt problem, IRA invited a researcher to describe efforts to solve
it. This served two functions: (1) to let the farmers and agents know IRA was
trying to respond and (2) to give the researcher some feedback on acceptable
solutions to the problem.

Inclusion of Farmers and Women
The presence of the farmers, and particularly the female farmers, in the
workshop has been somewhat controversial. Some extension staff claim the


Journal for Farming Systems Research-Extension






EXTENSION AGENTS IN THE RESEARCH PROCESS


farmers cannot follow what is said and that they take space that should be used
by more extension staff. We have found, however, that the farmers perform
three valuable functions:
1. They provide an incentive and an excuse for speakers to simplify their
language and occasionally to reinterpret what they have said into Pidgin. This
makes the points dearer for extension agents, who would be ashamed to admit
they cannot follow the technical language, and helps others to think how to
explain points to Pidgin-speaking farmers back home;
2. They remind researchers that farmers have different research agenda,
such as a focus on visible pests and diseases and a concern to reduce labor
inputs; and
3. Because very few active field agents are women, the female farmers are
doubly necessary, especially in reminding the extension agents that their
primary targets for food crops are women, not the few atypical men.
Finding representative farmers that can follow much of what is going on in
these sessions is difficult. Many of the male farmers who attend the workshops
are self-selected and tend to defend "modern" farming practices against the
adapted, traditional practices of the female farmers. The first farmers invited
were located in one-on-one interviews and were picked because they talked
openly and intelligently about their farms. Unlike the male farmers, the
women picked in individual interviews did not contribute in the predomin-
antly male, nonvillage setting of the workshop.
As we began to hold or attend meetings within the villages, we found
women with leadership experience in the nontraditional village women's
associations promoted by community-organizer staff. Especially after practice
in local meetings, these women proved willing to speak out in the workshops.
In the many villages that did not have such groupings, spokeswomen were not
immediately identifiable but emerged over several meetings as we solicited
farmers' opinions on technology. A major barrier to open communication is
the farmers' belief, partially justified, that researchers are sure their station-
based varieties and cultural practices are superior to the farmers' varieties.
Until this barrier is breached, many women will only say in public what they
think researchers want to hear.
Another approach to increasing the number of women is to promote the
participation of female agents. The original diagnosis showed that incorpo-
ration of the few existing female agronomic agents would only bias the
workshop toward a small minority of urban farmers. The province has two
government community-organizer services in two separate ministries, MINA-


Vol. 2, No. 3, 1991






ALMY ET AL.


GRI's Community Development (CD) and the Ministry of Social and
Women's Affairs (MSWA). Both are female-staffed and -oriented. Although
they are based in and near the largest towns, as their numbers have grown they
have moved out to full-time farming areas. Both organize groups around
home economics themes and are faced by the fact that their women partici-
pants are more interested in and knowledgeable about farming than they are.
A few CD staff have established informal arrangements with nearby agronom-
ic agents, but there is no formal assignment, except in one subdelegation, and
MSWA staff are discouraged from crossing ministerial lines.
In 1989, some of the CD and MSWA staff were invited to the workshop,
where a discussion developed among agronomic and organizer staffs. The two
groups agreed that they need each others' competence and that they ought to
cooperate more in the field. Unfortunately, the women's lack of agronomic
training made it difficult for them to learn or participate usefully. Although
the workshop brought these participants a little closer together, it did not
change the basic situation. Not enough organizer staff were invited to make
a critical mass back in their home offices. A special workshop just for them was
requested, but basic training was needed and the TLU did not have the
mandate to divert substantial resources to pursue it. In 1990, some newly
trained agronomists were diverted into the CD service to act as support staff
to local agents.

Participatory Research Planning
The participatory mechanisms introduced into the workshop have benefit-
ted research plans and increased enthusiasm among invitees. Nowhere else
can people from all 18 principal ecozones of the province be brought together
to evaluate the utility and acceptability of different techniques. The third
workshop introduced a small element of participation by allowing discussion
of some elements of the TLU workplan. But real participation began only in
1989.
The fourth workshop introduced a "participants' session" of testimony
about on-farm testing experiences with TLU. Eight agents and farmers were
notified well in advance that they would be asked to speak of their experience
with TLU maize and cassava variety trials. They were sent a list of questions
about (1) methods used for TLU trials and minikits in their area, (2) results,
and (3) relation of the results to farmers' needs. Participants were chosen on
the basis of speaking ability, distribution around the province (including some
places where failures were expected), and active interest. The session sparked


Journal for Farming Systems Research-Extension





EXTENSION AGENTS IN THE RESEARCH PROCESS


a lot of discussion among the other participants. Some volunteered on the
spot to add their own reports, and the CD/MSWA discussion evolved from
this. Although the speakers all adopted the stance that the TLU program was
wonderful, several pointed out methodological problems, such as late plant-
ing and provision of chemically treated seed to farmers for their own tests. But
opinions on preferred varieties and the criteria of choice were personal and no
consensus emerged.
In the fifth workshop, in addition to a "participants' session," five ecozone-
based groups were formed to evaluate maize varieties and potential sustainable
(green manuring) techniques. Each of these two discussion sessions was
preceded by a group of lectures. The maize session reviewed the past three
years of maize testing. The green-manuring session began with an introduc-
tion to the principles ofsustainability and techniques used in other countries
and continued with a review of TLU findings on farmers' practices in the
province. Participants and trainers were assigned to a group according to
present posting. The trainers acted only as guides, and the participants
selected a chair and reporter.
The variety discussion worked very well. Each zonal group ranked the four
to five varieties with which they were acquainted and explained the reasons for
local preference, which included consumption habits and marketing options
as well as yield and other agronomic factors. They also indicated where they
wanted greater research emphasis in the future.
The green-manuring session did not work as well, both because of its
complexity and because participants and trainers were less familiar with the
topic. The expert on sustainability came from Yaounde, and the training team
waited until his arrival to discuss what the session should accomplish and to
write the group guidelines. As a result, several trainers were unable to clarify
the guidelines, which narrowed the focus to one of discussing which classes
of nitrogen-fixing plants (e.g., bush or cover crop) and modes of use might
be acceptable in the local cropping system. Each zonal group addressed the
issues in a different way, and many did not reach closure. Still, some useful
ideas, such as a distinction between research aimed at highland savanna and
highland forest groups and the difficulty of practicing alley cropping where
burning is a vital component of land clearing, were brought out.
From the fifth workshop it became clear that although the group discussion
sessions were valuable, they could be used with complex or novel topics only
with careful preparation. Both more detailed introductory lectures and clear
and well understood guidelines to the discussion were needed. The "partic-


Vol. 2, No. 3, 1991





ALMY ET AL.


ipants' session" of testimony on individual experiences again aroused enthu-
siasm. With speakers from different zones, more women farmers, and less
advance notice, the reports were more oriented toward community receptive-
ness and details of trial methodology new to the farmers. A lecture by a CD
staff member on special cooking needs of IRA cassava and maize was very well
received. The workshop finally had reached the status ofa joint effort between
MINAGRI and IRA staff.


EVALUATION, RESTRUCTURING, AND THE T&V SYSTEM
By 1990 there was a functioning researcher-extension collaboration model.
The last element was a returning of the on-farm researcher-managed trial
program, which had been conducted in all villages in key zones in which
workshop participants had found cooperators, usually numbering 20 to 25.
During 1989 it was decided to restructure this program to focus on only eight
villages, two in each of the key zones, in order to develop closer relations with
farmers and to reduce logistical problems. Intensive collaborative research is
conducted in the focus villages and is communicated and re-evaluated within
the provincial context at the annual workshop. Returns from minikits, both
statistical and verbal at the workshop, form the basis for provincial re-
evaluation.
Although this model was implemented with the 1990 workshop and will
continue in 1991, it now will be revised to adjust to the additional resources
provided under the National Extension and Training Program (NETP), a
T&Vsystem that will be introduced, one administrative division at a time, into
the province in 1991. A 1990 adoption survey led to changes in the workshop
structure itself.

Evaluation of Impact
In July 1990, TLU carried out a survey of IRA impact on 390 food-crop
farmers in the province, comparing eight villages that had received substantial
direct input (trials and agent/farmer participation in the workshops) with
eight matched villages that had not. Twenty-two percent of farmers in the
high-contact villages had received a farm visit from the extension agent within
the past year, compared with nine percent in low-contact villages. More
important, 13 percent of farmers in high-contact villages had received a visit
to their food-crop fields, whereas only one percent of those in low-contact
villages had.


Journal for Farming Systems Research-Extension






EXTENSION AGENTS IN THE RESEARCH PROCESS


The TLU program thus has had the effect claimed by several extension
agents in the 1989 workshop: it has redirected extension attention to food
crops and intensified agents' efforts. The survey also showed that IRA material
distribution was reaching almost all villages to some extent, even those not
directly contacted. This distribution occurred partly through initiatives of
workshop attendees and partly through farmer-to-farmer contacts.
The survey revealed severe limitations on the distribution of materials and
information within villages. Individual recipients often kept material for
themselves, and even the most open farmers' groups excluded some part of
their community. Many groups reserved new planting material for themselves
even after they had multiplied enough for their own use. The extension agents
abetted or ignored this practice by concentrating on the largest or most
congenial groups. In one village, a few farmers had succeeded in keeping
material away from everyone else for a decade.
Furthermore, there were only a few signs of knowledge being transferred
from farmer to farmer or from extension agent to farmer. A new yam
multiplication method using local stock was not taught to neighbors by
farmers who had attended a course and were using it themselves. It had been
observed earlier in field visits that extension agents who had learned the
principal causes of plantain losses, a frequent workshop topic, had not passed
this information on to farmers unless they requested it specifically. Farmers
who said they provided extension advice to a few other farmers on an
individual basis complained of the amount of time it took.

NETP and the Future
In order to ensure that all farmers benefitted from IRA research, we revised
the extension agents' extension methods. Because the extension system was
about to be radically altered, we concentrated on developing specific recom-
mendations for presentation to the NETP planners.
Using standard T&V format, the NETP expects to assign one extension
agent to every eight villages or village segments. Each agent will visit each site
once a fortnight and work with one or more farmers' groups, teaching them
specific messages and establishing and evaluating adaptive trials similar to on-
farm trials on fields of some farmers in the group. Once a month they will
come to a central point for training on the next month's work. TLU will be
involved in designing the trials and in the training.
Other than severe logistical problems of personnel and transport, the chief
problem anticipated in the NETP plan is the lack of coherence between the


Vol. 2, No. 3, 1991





ALMY ET AL.


T&V structure and the complex reality of the province. T&V assumes a
homogeneous farming system and ecology for its divisional training units; all
agents are trained on the same day on the same topics and are expected to carry
the same simple message in the same fortnight to all their farmers.
In a region where it is difficult to find eight contiguous villages with the
same rainfall pattern and in some areas even the same general soil type, the
common message is impossible. In addition, each microzone has different
ways of planting and land preparation, which under the circumstances seems
more reasonable than the standardized sole cropping or intercropping meth-
ods that can be tested on station. This means that trials and crops must be
targeted to three to seven different zones per division, depending on the topic.
The NETP national planners have underlined that the program is to include
adaptive trials, not merely demonstrations, and that IRA is to guide them, but
the provincial planning has not yet reached the stage that will determine
whether their structure will permit this much variation.
The T&V method often has been criticized for its reliance on "contact
farmers," who often are the richest and most modern male farmers in the
locality. Partly in response to this criticism, the NETP plans to work only with
farmers' groups, but it includes no guidelines for group formation or for
selection of the farmers within these groups who will have the on-farm trials.
TLU's recommendations to the NETP covered (1) farmer selection, (2)
materials provision, (3) training, and (4) trial methods. For farmer selection,
TLU suggested that contact groups be formed in consultation with the chiefs
and quarter heads, so that all major groupings would be represented. The
specific contact farmers should (1) be chosen after several months of group
meetings, (2) represent each quarter of the village, and (3) farm less than 1 ha
of land. Similarly, materials distribution should occur in open meetings called
by the chief and quarter heads. Training of agents should be conducted at the
council (subdivisional) level, in order to allow for ecosystem diversity, and
should include field days in TLU focus villages in which the farmers would
explain their own research. The NETP trainers should become actively
involved in their nearest TLU focus village, in order to internalize the
collaborative research strategy.* Finally, all on-farm trials should be fully
discussed and modified at the local level before joint implementation and
should follow local cultural practices closely.
This refinement of regional messages for local use through local control of
adaptive testing requires restructuring the NETP agent's role relative to the
T&V system. The field agent would become equally responsible for reporting


Journal for Farming Systems Research-Extension






EXTENSION AGENTS IN THE RESEARCH PROCESS


the numbers of participating and adopting farmers and for reporting the
modifications and adaptability of the regional message in the local area.
On the research side, the annual workshop should be continued within the
NETP sequence as a service to IRA. The workshop series has been refined to
a highly interactive annual event that provides feedback on research themes
and that trains and motivates research collaborators in the extension service.
The workshop/minikit model for regional extension beyond an immediate
FSRE program has already proved its utility in a basic, non-T&V system. If
it can be achieved, the introduction into the T&V framework of locally
controlled village-level adaptive testing will strengthen greatly the regional
feedback now coming only from variety minikits and from speculative
discussion of future technologies.
However successful it has been as a research device, the workshop has
proved less useful for extension of results of IRA research to the region's
farmers. Weaknesses in the extension agents' relationships with the farmers
and farmers' relationships with each other include overdependence on mate-
rial inputs and exclusivity of farmer groups. Extension of varieties was slowed
by the exclusivity problem, but is also partly an artifact of seed-multiplication
problems (limited supplies). Adoption patterns for seed through the NETP
system will be a good indicator of the success or failure of new, open, ward-
based recruitment of groups and contact farmers. The increasingly active
participation of farmers in trial design and criticism in the focus villages may
create the conditions necessary for a more rapid transmission of agronomic
(cultural practice) innovations. If this proves so, the need will then be to
accelerate exposure of the agents outside the focus villages to a participatory
adaptive trial methodology.
As a farming systems entity, TLU has two responsibilities: research and
extension. Working within a research institution with limited resources,
TLU's primary responsibility is to conduct research; its secondary responsibil-
ity is to carry results of research to those organizations most capable of
spreading the news to the farmer population. Sometimes TLU can carry out
both functions in the same operation, as it tried to do with the workshop. This
may still be possible, provided participatory training on extension methodol-
ogy is included, but at present it serves primarily a research function. The
NETP offers hope of a broader influence on the extension side, provided the
T&V system can be adapted to incorporate the lessons learned in four years
of collaborative work.


Vol. 2, No. 3, 1991






ALMY ET AL.


ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

We wish to thank S.V. Poats, who instigated this paper in 1988, B. Mambi of
MINAGRI for long-term support, and P. McMillan and P. Hildebrand for
helpful criticism.


REFERENCES

Arze, J., C. den Biggelaar, W. Brinkman, E. Frimpong, J. Kimemia, E. Lazaro, and M.
Timmermans. 1990. Agricultural research and extension: A contribution to under-
standingofthe linkageswith small-scale farmers. A case studying Kumba-Corridoragro-
ecological zone, SWP, Cameroon. Institute of Agricultural Research (IRA), Ekona,
Cameroon, and International Course for Development Oriented Research in Agricul-
ture (ICRA), University of Wageningen, The Netherlands.
Benor, D., and M. Baxter. 1984. Training and visit extension. Washington, D.C.: World
Bank.
Cernea, M.M., J.K. Coulter, and J.F.A. Russell. 1985. Building the research-extension-
farmer continuum: Some current issues. In M.M. Cernea, J.K Coulter, and J.F.A.
Russell, eds., Research-extension-farmer: A two-way continuum for agricultural devel-
opment. Washington, D.C.: World Bank.
Ewell,P.T. 1989. Linkages between on-farm research and extension in nine countries. On-
Farm Client-Oriented Research (OFCOR) Comparative Study Paper No. 4. Inter-
national Service for National Agricultural Research (ISNAR), The Hague.
Ministry ofAgriculture (MINAGRI), National Directorate ofAgricultural Census. 1988.
The 1984 agricultural census in Cameroon: Traditional sector, South West Province.
Seegers, S., and D. Kaimowitz. 1990. Relations between agricultural researchers and
extension workers: The survey evidence. Journal for Farming Systems Research-
Extension 1(2):29-45.


Journalfor Farming Systems Research-Extension








The Level of Adoption of
Recommended Package of Technology
by Tomato Farmers in Calamba, Laguna,
the Philippines

Kausar Parveen and P.T. Depositario'



ABSTRACT
This study explores and describes the tomato farmers' adoption level and
reasons for nonadoption of the recommended package of tomato
technology in three villages in the municipality of Calamba, Laguna, the
Philippines. Using structured interviews, a complete enumeration was
performed of 75 tomato farmers with at least 2 ha planted in tomatoes.
The average farm size was 0.84 ha, and the annual average tomato
production was 9,237 kg for 1986-87. Typically, the farmers had an
average tomato technology adoption level. Reasons for nonadoption
were a lack of knowledge of recommended tomato varieties due to
inadequate extension services and a lackofeconomic resources due to low
tomato prices, which limit the purchase of expensive inputs.

INTRODUCTION
The economy of the Philippines, despite the country's advancement in trade
and industry, is dependent on agriculture, as evidenced by the fact that the
agricultural sector absorbs almost 48.9 percent of the total labor force. This
sector is the main source of foodstuffs for the growing population and the
supplier for the industrial sector. It also contributes about 30 percent (88.4
billion pesos2) to the annual gross national product (GNP) and almost 64
percent to the country's foreign exchange earnings (BAECON, 1985).
Because of the major economic role played by this sector, government efforts
have focused on its more active participation in the national economy.


1 Ph.D. candidate and Associate Professor, respectively, Department of Agricultural
Education and Rural Studies, University of the Philippines, Los Bafios.
The exchange rate during the period 1984-86 was approximately P20 = US$1.





PARVEEN AND DEPOSITARIO


Similarly, development programs have been concerned with increased pro-
duction of food crops to combat the country's malnutrition problems and
with the production of export crops and import substitutes.
Vegetables are a major source of nutrients for the population. They supply
the cheapest source ofprotein, minerals, and vitamins required by the human
body. Vegetables ranked sixth in importance among the country's food crops,
and tomatoes ranked among the 10 leading vegetable crops in the country in
1983 (Philippine Science Encyclopedia Agriculture, 1984). In 1984, the total
area planted in tomatoes was 16,060 ha, yielding a total production of
136,837 metric tons valued at P461,144,000.
The demand for tomato paste and related products has been increasing in
the Philippines, a fact reflected in the steady rise in importation of raw
materials used in the manufacture of this product. Statistics show that demand
for tomato paste increased from 2,100 metric tons in 1977 to 5,800 metric
tons in 1984. The increase in demand may be attributed to the proliferation
of fast-food chains in the country, specifically hamburger, spaghetti, hot dog,
pizza, and french fries chains. These products require large amounts of catsup
as a condiment, much of which is manufactured from tomato paste.
Despite technological development, the per-hectare yield of vegetables in
the Philippines-7.91 tons in 1978 (Philippine Science Encyclopedia Agricul-
ture, 1984)--still is lower than that in China, Korea, Taiwan, and the United
States. The daily per capital consumption of vegetables is low, too, in the
average Philippine diet. A minimum daily intake of 300 g of vegetables per
person is the established requirement, but people in the Southern Tagalog and
Western Visayas regions have an average daily intake of only 40 g; Central
Luzon, 60 g; Mindanao, 74 g; Eastern Visayas, 85 g; Ilocos, 115 g; the Bicol,
135 g; and the Cagayan Valley, 295 g. The average daily intake for the country
as a whole is about 106 g of vegetables per capital (FNRI, 1980).
The increasing imbalance between food availability and population size
threatens the Philippines. This situation is due to low agricultural productiv-
ity, resulting from a poor and inefficient application of technologies, and a
high rate of population growth (Castillo, 1979). The need to combat this
situation led to massive government efforts to develop improved agricultural
technologies tailored to farmers' needs and capabilities. The success of these
actions depends on research to develop appropriate technologies and their
subsequent transfer to farmers (Ashby, 1982).
Various agricultural programs have been launched for the economic
development of the Philippines, with vegetable production a government


Journal for Farming Systems Research-Extension






ADOPTION LEVELS OF TOMATO TECHNOLOGY


priority. Governmental and nongovernmental organizations and institutions
worldwide, such as universities and research centers, are now trying to
disseminate cost-effective technologies.
Several studies show that various recommendations made by scientists may
not be appropriate in field situations. The technologies that have been
disseminated are still at a very low level of adoption by farmers, and results
from farmers' field trials are still incongruous. There is a wide discrepancy
between yields on experiment stations and those in farmer field trials,
indicating a wide gap between technology-generating centers and technolo-
gy-using sectors. Madamba (1978) and Castillo (1979) observed that there
is limited use of technology among its end-users, owing to limited compre-
hension. Evidently, farmers have not yet achieved the desired level of
technological capability, as reflected in reported disparities between yields
obtained in experimental and on-farm trials (Wood, 1981).
Why do the results not coincide at both levels? This is the biggest challenge
to scientists and extension technicians. Amerasinghe (1974) attributes this
variability mainly to the piecemeal adoption of the package of improved
inputs. The objectives of our study were to determine (1) tomato farmers'
level of adoption of the recommended technology package and (2) reasons for
nonadoption of the tomato technology.


METHODOLOGY

Three barangays (villages) were selected from the municipality of Calamba,
Laguna, the Philippines. These were Uwisan, looc, and Sampiruhan, which
are on the shore of Laguna de Bay. These villages were selected because they
are vegetable-growing areas. They also have the largest area planted in
tomatoes and the highest level of production. The soil is sandy loam, which
is very suitable for tomato production. It is mainly unirrigated. Farmers grow
tomatoes during the dry season between November and early December.
Tomatoes are planted at this time because the soil has reserve moisture. The
tomato harvest begins in early February and lasts until mid-March.
Household heads were selected as study informants. Selection was limited
to farmers growing at least 2 ha of tomato for the previous three years. This
criterion is based on the assumption that farmers' expected average produc-
tion is marketable and can provide them an average gross income ofP4,000-
5,000. A master list of farmers in the three villages provided by Calamba's
agriculture office was used in the selection process. Complete enumeration


Vol. 2, No. 3, 1991





PARVEEN AND DEPOSITARIO


was undertaken of all tomato farmers. A total of 75 farmers from the three
villages was selected to participate in the study.
Recommendations for tomato production were published by the Horticul-
ture Department of the University of the Philippines at Los Bafios (UPLB),
IPB, and the Department of Agriculture. The recommendations include
technical information on planting location and situation. Twenty practices
were selected for the study. Weighted mean scores formed the basis for
analysis.
Adoption of the technology package is defined as the use of selected
recommended tomato production practices for at least three cropping seasons
from 1986 to 1988. An informant receives a score of4 for every practice used
for a given length of time. Hence, the total adoption score earned by a given
tomato farmer is equal to the number of practices used on-farm, multiplied by
4, which gives a total possible score of 80. One hundred percent adoption of
the technology is given 4 points; 75 percent, 3 points; 50 percent, 2 points;
and 25 percent, 1 point. The mean score becomes the index of the level of
adoption of the recommended tomato technology. Level of adoption refers
to the number of prescribed practices adopted and used by the farmer in his
field. Scores were categorized as high (53.88 to 80 points); medium (26.67
to 53.53 points); and low (1 to 26.66 points). A score of zero was classified
as nonadoption.
Data were gathered in March 1988 through personal interviews using a
structured interview schedule. Before finalizing the interview schedule, an
advisory committee of specialists in extension, rural studies, horticulture, and
statistics from UPLB was asked to review its contents. The interview schedule
was revised and pretested during the 1988 dry season among tomato farmers
living in a village that was not participating in the study. The interview
schedule was again revised based on pretest results. A computer was used to
quantify, classify, and analyze the data collected through interviews.
Although efforts were made to obtain reliable and accurate information
from informants during the field survey, some of the study possess certain
inherent limitations:
1. The study focused solely on dry-season tomato cultivation. Given its
proximity to Laguna de Bay in Calamba, the soil in the research area is suitable
for tomato production only during this time of the year. Consequently, the
results obtained would be useful only for planning, implementing, and
evaluating tomato extension activities on lakeshore lands during the dry
season.


Journal for Farming Systems Research-Extension






ADOPTION LEVELS OF TOMATO TECHNOLOGY


2. Owing to limitations of cost and time, only 75 informants were
interviewed in this study. Given variations in topography, rainfall pattern, soil
type, water source, and many other related factors, the results of this study may
not be generalized to farmers outside the study area without proper scrutiny
of situations in other areas of the country.
3. Because none of the farmers kept records of their farming activities,
reliability and accuracy of the data depended on farmers' recall ability.


RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

The recommendations for tomato production were published in pamphlet
form by the Horticulture Department ofUPLB, IPB, and the Department of
Agriculture. Specific recommendations for tomato production were designed
primarily for farmers, exchange agents, and researchers.
Twenty practices discussed in this pamphlet were selected in consultation
with the agriculture extension office and were promoted to determine
informants' level of technology adoption. Weighted mean scores were the
basis for analysis. The main indicator of a thorough understanding of a new
technology is whether the knowledge gained and the attitude formed are
translated into accurate practice (Balantac, 1985). Figure 1 shows that the
practices were adopted at varying levels by tomato farmers.


60-

50-

40-
30-
Z 30-
a-


MEDIUM
.ftA


ILevel of technology adoption

Figure 1. Distribution of Farmers According to Level of Technology Adoption


Vol. 2, No. 3, 1991






PARVEEN AND DEPOSITARIO


The adoption ofa recommended technology for insect control in seed beds
(0.00), for sterilizing seeds and seedbeds (0.76), and for fertilizer application
to seedlings (1.29) received low scores (Table 1). Informants reported that
they made the seedbeds in their backyards and on their farms. After seedlings
were transplanted, the seedbeds remained empty for about nine months;
during those months of idleness, the soil regained its fertility and there was no
need for fertilizer. Insects were killed by the sun's heat. If seedlings were again
attacked by insects, family members would kill them by hand. Informants
reported that they were aware of the recommended technology for insect
control, but felt that there was no need to spend the money.
The new, recommended tomato plant variety, harvesting, mulching, seed
rate, field plowing, and distance between seedbeds obtained higher scores of
4.00, 3.89, 3.31, 3.17, 3.00, and 2.81, respectively. The rest of the practices
scored at the medium level of adoption, so that the overall mean score,
however, also fell in the medium range at 2.27.
The study clearly showed that farmers' technology adoption rate was
higher for practices that were simple to understand, involved no extra cost,
and were relatively advantageous. This supported Roger and Shoemaker's


Table 1. Respondents' Level of Tomato Technology Adoption
Selected practices Weighted score (N=75) Mean scorea
New recommended varieties 300 4.00
Harvesting 292 3.89
Mulching 248 3.31
Seed rate 238 3.17
Plowing the field 225 3.00
Distance between beds 211 2.81
Heights of beds 190 2.53
Plant density 182 2.43
Age of seedlings at transplanting 176 2.35
Fertilizer application of field 170 2.27
Weeding 161 2.15
Application of insecticides and pesticides to field 156 2.03
Growing media 153 2.04
Application of fertilizer to beds 130 1.73
Removing unhealthy seedlings 114 1.52
Watering after transplanting 111 1.43
Fertilizer application to seedlings 97 1.29
Sterilizing seed and seedbed 0 0.00
TOTAL 3,409 2.27


Journal for Farming Systems Research-Extension


a The mean score is rated on a scale of 0-4 (0- not adopted and 4-100% adopted). Based
on the data, the rating scale has been broken into three groups: high (2.67-4), medium
(1.34-2.66), and low (0-1.33).





ADOPTION LEVELS OF TOMATO TECHNOLOGY


finding (1971) that the relative advantage, compatibility, complexity, trial-
ability, and observability of a certain practice may in itself have an impact on
the intended user. The reason for the high adoption level ofnewrecommend-
ed varieties was that farmers could easily obtain seeds for these varieties from
private seed agencies and from friends; each year they multiplied their own
seeds so that they purchased seed only once. Mulching required only rice
straw; most farmers grow rice and those who do not can obtain rice straw from
friends and relatives at no cost. Field plowing, distance between seedbeds, and
harvesting require only farmers' understanding of the practice and manual
labor. Consequently, these practices received high adoption scores.
The informants had a medium level of adoption for practices such as
fertilizer application to fields (2.27) and application of insecticides and
pesticides to fields (2.08). Informants reported that fertilizer, insecticides,
and pesticides were unaffordable, given their low income. The majority of
farmers (56 percent) had a medium level of technology adoption. Only 13
percent of farmers had a low level of adoption.
The main reason for farmers' failure to adopt the recommended practices
was their lack of knowledge on those practices, expensive inputs, insect pest
problems, and a low tomato price. These reasons were followed by poor
extension services, no guarantee of high yield, low capital and no credit
availability, nonadoption by other farmers, and unavailability of inputs.
Mean farm size was 0.84 ha. Average annual tomato production for 1986,
1987, and 1988 was 9,237 kg per ha. This was significantly lower than the
34,000-kg potential yield of the recommended high-yielding tomato variet-
ies. This clearly showed the yield difference between on-farm and experimen-
tal plot trials. Yield differences could be explained by farmers' reasons for
nonadoption of the recommended tomato technology package.


CONCLUSIONS
The tomato technology package had a medium level of adoption among
farmers. Most of the practices were incorrectly used. For example, most
farmers who applied insecticides to tomatoes did so during the plant's
maturity stage. This is not a good practice, because, instead of killing insects,
consumers are killed.
The level of technology adoption and productivity varied among tomato
farmers. This could be attributed to the influence of various factors and
reasons cited by the farmers, namely socioeconomic and extension factors.


Vol. 2, No. 3, 1991





PARVEEN AND DEPOSITARIO


IMPLICATIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

Based on study findings, it appears that the tomato enterprise in Calamba
needs development and promotion. The following implications are suggested
and recommendations offered:
General observation shows that tomato farmers adopted some recom-
mended practices while rejecting others. In light of this finding, there is a need
to give tomato production a commercial reorientation if it is to contribute to
the economic development of the area as a whole. It is necessary, therefore,
that the research agency, together with its cooperating research stations,
continuously search for feasible, alternative, commercial uses for the tomato
crop. Tomato processing industries should be developed in line with
recommended uses.
All tomato farmer informants reported lack of knowledge on the tomato
technology as a reason for nonadoption. This suggests an unbalanced
approach to agricultural development that heavily emphasizes the production
of major cash crops, such as rice, corn, sugarcane, and others, to the neglect
of vegetable crops, such as tomatoes. It is very likely that field technicians are
covering a wide geographic area and, thus, can neither reside in an assigned
barangay nor visit the barangays often.
The Department of Agriculture and Natural Resources has taken positive
steps to remedy the situation. However, greater strides could be made if field
technicians were provided regular inservice training in order to better dissem-
inate the latest information to farmers.
Finally, tomato farmers faced insect and pest problems that resulted in low
yields and, consequently, low income from tomato production. This, in turn,
hindered adoption of the new technology. The Philippine government should
provide loans, in the form of inputs, through supervised credit schemes, to
help break this cycle.


REFERENCES
Amerasinghe, N. 1974. Efficiency of resource utilization in paddy production settle-
ments in Sri-Lanka. Modem Ceylan Studies 5.
Ashby, J.A. 1982. Technology and ecology: Implications for innovative research in
agriculture and rural sociology. Rural Sociology 4(3):284-250.
Balantac, G.B. Nancy. 1985. Garlic technology utilization of farmers in Ilocos Norte.
Unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, University of the Philippines, Los Bafios.
Bureau of Agricultural Economics (BAECON). 1985. Quezon City, the Philippines.


Journal for Farming Systems Research-Extension






ADOPTION LEVELS OF TOMATO TECHNOLOGY


Castillo, G.T. 1979. Beyond Manila. International Development Research Centre,
Canada.
Food and Nutrition Research Institute (FNRI). 1980. Manila, the Philippines.
Madamba, J.C. 1978. Technology generation, verification, packaging dissemination and
utilization. Paper presented at the Workshop on Technology Generation, Verification
and Dissemination in Asia, Sorabia Manor, Iloilo City, the Philippines.
Philippine Science Encyclopedia Agriculture, volume 6. 1984. p. 264.
Roger, E.M., and Shoemaker, D. 1971. Communication ofinnovations: A cross cultural
approach. N.Y.: The Free Press. 476 pp.
Wood, J.L. 1981. Technoguide to Ilocos Norte. Technoguide for Virginia tobacco in
Ilocos Norte. PTRTC. Batac Ilocos Norte, the Philippines.


Vol. 2, No. 3, 1991








The Javanese Homegarden


Otto Soemarwoto and G.R. Conway'



ABSTRACT
On of the oldest forms of agroecosystems, the homegarden is present
throughout the world. It is most highly developed on the island of Java,
in Indonesia, whereittypicallyhas averyhigh diversityofuseful plants and
animals per unit area. This diversity and the intensive household care that
is given to the homegarden result in a unique combination of high levels
of productivity, stability, sustainability, and equitability. Compared with
rice fields on Java, the homegarden has a greater diversity of production
and frequently produces a higher net income. The harvest is more stable
over time, the system is buffered against pests and diseases, and the effects
of erosion are less severe. Also, the products ofthe homegarden are more
equitably shared among members of the household and village. In the
future, the homegarden will be a viable alternative to monocropped field
agriculture. It also is a highly valuable source of genetic diversity.


INTRODUCTION
Agroecosystem Analysis (AEA) is a form of farming systems research devel-
oped in Southeast Asia over the past twenty years (Conway, 1985, 1986,
1987; Conway and Barbier, 1990). The approach rests on certain key
concepts-the agroecosystem, the agroecosystem hierarchy, the properties of
agroecosystems, and the trade-offs between them. These concepts are used as
a means of stimulating interdisciplinary research and action, particularly
involving natural and social scientists. It differs from conventional Farming
Systems Research (FSR) in a number of respects, but particularly in its capacity
to extend analysis, using the same concepts and techniques, to systems in the
agricultural hierarchy above and below the farm.
Agroecosystems are ecological systems transformed for the purpose of
agriculture. For example, a homegarden is created out ofa forest. Around the
garden is a fence or hedge that defines the biophysical boundary. Inside the
great diversity of the original wildlife is reduced to a restricted assemblage of

1Professor, Institute of Geology, Padjadjaran University, Bandung, Indonesia, and
Professor, Centre for Environmental Technology, Imperial College of Science and
Technology, London.





SOEMARWOTO AND CONWAY


crop plants (trees, shrubs, and herbs), livestock (cattle, goats, and chickens)
and associated pests, diseases, and weeds. The basic, renewable ecological
processes remain: competition between the plants, consumption of the plants
by the livestock and by the pests, and predation of the pests by their natural
enemies. But these ecological processes are now overlain and regulated by the
agricultural processes of cultivation, subsidy (with fertilizers), control (of
water, pests, and diseases), and harvesting. And, in turn, these agricultural
processes are regulated by economic and social decisions. Farmers cooperate
or compete with one another and market, exchange, or consume their
produce. The resulting system is as much a socioeconomic system as it is an
ecological system and has a socioeconomic boundary, as well as a biophysical
one, defined by the activities of the farm household. This new, complex, agro/
socio/economic/ecological system, bounded in several dimensions, is an
agroecosystem.
More formally, an agroecosystem is an ecological and socioeconomic
system, comprising domesticated plants and/or animals and the people who
husband them, intended for the purpose of producing food, fiber, or other
agricultural products.
Several important consequences follow from defining agroecosystems in
this way. First, this definition helps to foster a genuinely interdisciplinary
approach to farming systems research. Despite a commitment to integrated
analysis, biological and social scientists often work separately, at best coming
together to write a final synthesis. Yet many, if not most, of the crucial
questions for agricultural development lie not in one province or the other,
but at their intersection.
Second, agroecosystems conceived in these terms readily fall into hier-
archies. At the lowest level is the individual plant or animal, its immediate
microenvironment, and the people who tend and harvest it (Figure 1). The
next level is the crop or herd, contained within a field or paddock, or in a
swidden, homegarden, or range. These systems, alone or in various combina-
tions, make up the farming system. The hierarchy continues upwards in a
similar fashion, each agroecosystem forming a component of the agroecosys-
tem at the next level.
Third, agroecosystems can be characterized in terms ofa set of four system
properties: (1) productivity-the output ofvalued product per unit of resource
input; (2) stability-the constancy of productivity in the face of small
disturbing forces arising from the normal fluctuations and cycles in the
surrounding environment; (3) sustainability-the ability of the agroecosys-


Journal for Farming Systems Research-Extension






JAVANESE HOMEGARDEN


World
Economic community

Nation

Region
Watershed

Village
I
Household
I
Livelihood
Gathering Handcraft Off-farm Trading
hunting manufacture employment

Farming system,

Swidden Range Home garden

SField

Crop Herd
I I
Plant- Animal-
environment environment


Figure 1. The Agroecosystem Hierarchy.

tern to maintain productivity when subject to a major disturbing force; and (4)
equitability-the evenness of distribution of the productivity of the agroeco-
system among the human beneficiaries, i.e., the level of equity that is
generated.
Fourth, significant trade-offs usually exist between agroecosystem proper-
ties. High productivity often occurs at the expense ofsustainability, and too
high an equitability may reduce productivity. Each agroecosystem is charac-
terized by a unique combination of the properties, partly reflecting the relative
values that the people in the agroecosystem place on them. They may value
productivity more highly than sustainability or equitability more than produc-
tivity. The emphasis may also change with time as certain needs are met and
others assume importance.


Vol. 2, No. 3, 1991





SOEMARWOTO AND CONWAY


RICE FIELD AND HOMEGARDEN

In Indonesia, the growing population and desire for higher living standards
have resulted in a development strategy that emphasizes rapid increases in
agricultural productivity. The strategy has focused on the productivity of the
rice field, using modern high-yielding rice varieties and their associated inputs.
By 1984 the country was self-sufficient in terms of rice production and had a
small stored surplus. However, this success has not been without considerable
environmental, social, and economic costs (Conway and McCauley, 1983;
KEPAS, 1984). The high productivity has been at the expense of stability,
sustainability, and equitability.
There have been growing pest and disease problems, caused by excessive
pesticide use and by the widespread, asynchronous planting of a limited
number of rice varieties. Over 80 percent of the 830,000 ha office in West Java
are planted with a single variety, the high-yielding Cisadane (Wirawan, 1987).
The most serious pest has been the rice brown planthopper (Nilaparvata
lugens), which had devastating outbreaks in the mid-1970s and as recently as
1986-87 (Chang, 1984; Oka and Bahagiawati, 1984).
Modernization of the rice culture has reduced the demand for labor,
especially female labor (Collier et al., 1982; Papanek, 1985). The traditional
practice of rice harvesting by women using a small hand knife is now widely
replaced by harvesting with a sickle, using contracted male laborers. Small rice
mills have virtually eliminated the jobs of women, who used to pound the
paddy, and the introduction of tractors has reduced labor demand overall
(Collier et al., 1974; Timmer, 1974).
In addition to these effects at the farm and village level, there have been
national costs that threaten the sustainability of the country's food produc-
tion. The current subsidy for fertilizers is about 68 percent of world prices; for
pesticides, more than 40 percent; for irrigation as much as 87 percent; and for
credit, an implicit rate of 8 percent (World Bank, 1987). Such levels of subsidy
are not sustainable. Already there are signs that total rice production has
started to level off and that rice stocks are decreasing.
The almost exclusive emphasis on rice production has also been at the
expense of the other Indonesian staples-maize, cassava, sago, and yams. Rice
has been elevated in sociocultural value; other staples are increasingly regarded
as fit only for the poor. Significantly, all nonrice foods, except wheat flour,
show a negative income elasticity (Afiff et al., 1980; Mears and Sidik
Moeljono, 1980; BPS, 1985). As a consequence, Indonesia is becoming


Journal for Farming Systems Research-Extension




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