• TABLE OF CONTENTS
HIDE
 Title Page
 Table of Contents
 Introduction
 Background on participatory...
 Consideration and analysis of the...
 Participatory problem-solving -...
 Field systems analysis - Protocol,...
 Participatory problem solving -...
 Bibliography
 A: Regional wealth ranking...
 B: Five day training program in...














Group Title: PRA field manual : strenthening extension delivery in Dominica
Title: PRA field manual
CITATION PAGE IMAGE ZOOMABLE
Full Citation
STANDARD VIEW MARC VIEW
Permanent Link: http://ufdc.ufl.edu/UF00073342/00001
 Material Information
Title: PRA field manual strenthening extension delivery in Dominica
Physical Description: 68 leaves : ill. ; 28 cm.
Language: English
Creator: Barham, J. G
Sullivan, A. J
University of Florida
Publisher: s.n.
Place of Publication: Gainesville FL University of Florida
Publication Date: 2002
 Subjects
Subject: Participatory rural appraisal -- Handbooks, manuals, etc -- Dominica   ( lcsh )
Field experiments -- Handbooks, manuals, etc -- Dominica   ( lcsh )
Genre: government publication (state, provincial, terriorial, dependent)   ( marcgt )
bibliography   ( marcgt )
non-fiction   ( marcgt )
Spatial Coverage: Dominica
 Notes
Bibliography: Includes bibliographical references (leaf 67).
Statement of Responsibility: J.G. Barham and A.J. Sullivan
General Note: Cover title.
General Note: "April 2002"--Intro.
 Record Information
Bibliographic ID: UF00073342
Volume ID: VID00001
Source Institution: University of Florida
Rights Management: All rights reserved by the source institution and holding location.
Resource Identifier: oclc - 77561873

Table of Contents
    Title Page
        Page i
    Table of Contents
        Page ii
    Introduction
        Page iii
        Page 1
    Background on participatory methods
        Page 2
        Background on participation
            Page 3
        Background on stakeholders
            Page 4
        Background on facilitation
            Page 5
        Background on gender
            Page 6
        Background on monitoring and evaluation
            Page 8
            Background on wealth status
                Page 7
    Consideration and analysis of the farm as a system - Tools and methods
        Page 9
        Background on systems approach
            Page 10
        Instructions for system diagram and template
            Page 11
            Page 12
            Page 13
        Instructions and sample of activity profiles and template
            Page 14
            Page 15
        Exercise on gender-disaggregated activity calendar and template
            Page 16
            Page 17
            Page 18
            Page 19
            Page 20
        Access/control sample and template
            Page 21
            Page 22
    Participatory problem-solving - Tools and methods
        Page 23
        Background on participatory problem-solving
            Page 24
        Exercise on facilitation
            Page 25
            Page 26
            Page 27
        Exercise on focus groups
            Page 28
            Page 29
            Page 30
            Page 31
        Ranking of constrains and example template
            Page 32
        Exercise on ranking problems and opportunities
            Page 33
            Page 34
            Page 35
        Pair-wise ranking template
            Page 36
        Exercise on causal diagrams
            Page 37
            Page 38
            Page 39
            Page 40
            Page 41
            Page 42
            Page 43
            Page 44
        Participatory problem-solving matrix
            Page 45
    Field systems analysis - Protocol, templates, profile
        Page 46
        Suggested protocol for farmer visits/interviews for PRA
            Page 47
            Page 48
            Page 49
            Page 50
        Farmer visit checklist
            Page 51
        System diagram template
            Page 52
        Activity profile template
            Page 53
        Seasonal calendar template
            Page 54
        Farmer profile
            Page 55
            Page 56
            Page 57
    Participatory problem solving - Protocol, profile
        Page 58
        Suggested protocol for focus groups
            Page 59
            Page 60
            Page 61
        Focus group profile
            Page 62
            Page 63
            Page 64
            Page 65
            Page 66
    Bibliography
        Page 67
    A: Regional wealth ranking criteria
        Page 68
        Page 69
        Page 70
        Page 71
        Page 72
        Page 73
        Page 74
        Page 75
    B: Five day training program in Dominica
        Page 76
        Page 77
Full Text









PRA
FIELD MANUAL


Strengthening Extension Delivery
In Dominica


J.G. Barham andA.J. Sullivan


/ UNIVERSITY OF
.FLORIDA






Table of Contents


INTRODUCTION
Keys to Participation............................................................... ................... 1

SECTION ONE: Background on Participatory Methods
Background on Participation................................................. .......... 3
Background on Stakeholders.......................................................... ................ 4
Background on Facilitation.......................................-............................5....... -5
Background on Gender............................................................................ ....6
Background on Wealth Status.....................................................................................7
Background on Monitoring and Evaluation.............................................. ...............8

SECTION TWO: Consideration and Analysis of the Farm as a System: Tools and Methods
Background on Systems Approach....................................................... ........... 10
Instructions for System Diagram and Template...............................................11-13
Instructions and Sample ofActivity Profiles and Template...................................14-15
Exercise on Gender-Disaggregated Activity Calendar and Template......................16-20
Access/Control Sample and Template........................................................... 1-22

SECTION THREE: Participatory Problem-Solving: Tools and Methods
Background on Participatory Problem-Solving...................................................24
Exercise on Facilitation.. ................................................................. ...... 25-27
Exercise on Focus Groups.......................... ......................................28-31
Ranking of Constrains and Example Template.................................................... 32
Exercise on Ranking Problems and Opportunities................................. ......... 33-35
Pair-Wise Ranking Template.......................................................................36
Exercise on Causal Diagrams............................................................... 37-44
Participatory Problem-Solving Matrix................................................. ......... 45

SECTION FOUR: Field Systems Analysis: Protocol, Templates, Profile
Suggested Protocol for farmer visits/interviews for PRA.......................................47-50
Farmer Visit Checklist.................................................................. 51
System Diagram Template................................................................ ............52
Activity Profile Template...........................................................................53
Seasonal Calendar Template .................................................................... 54
Farmer Profile ............................................... ...................................... 55-57

SECTION FIVE: Participatory Problem Solving: Protocol, Profile
Suggested Protocolfor Focus Groups...........................................................59-61
Focus Group Profile................................................................................62-66

BIBLIOGRAPHY..........................................................................................................67

APPENDICES
Appendix A: Regional Wealth Ranking Criteria............................................. 68-75
Appendix B: Five Day Training Program in Dominica...........................................76








Introduction


The PRA Field Manual is the result of a collaborative process between the consultants and the
extension officers that evolved over a two and half months period while conducting a
participatory rural appraisal (PRA) in Dominica. The basic framework of this field manual was
presented during a five day training workshop on participatory methods, techniques, and tools to
be utilized during the PRA. Considerable input and feedback came from the extension officers
during the training programme and subsequent PRA concerning the field manual's utility and
clarity as a practical reference guide for field use. Particular attention was given to the templates
and profiles presented in this manual to make them user-friendly to the extension officers, as
well as reflect the information collected during farmer interviews and focus group discussions.

Section One introduces the underlying theory and key concepts of our approach to the PRA
process, these include participation, facilitation, stakeholders, socio-economic differences, and
monitoring and evaluation. The diagram Keys to Participation (see next page) captures the
dynamic and complex nature of participation. Participation begins with considering and
understanding the stakeholders in a given process. Facilitation ensures that all stakeholders'
voices are heard and that the socio-economic differences among and within stakeholder groups
are recognized. The monitoring and evaluation of the participatory process provides
confirmation that all stakeholders have been invited to the table, and that once there, their voices
have been heard. If certain stakeholders have not been recognized and their interest not
considered, the process continues with a re-evaluation of the stakeholders and how those left out
can be effectively included in the development process.

Section Two introduces a systems or holistic approach to conceptualizing rural livelihoods in
Dominica. The notion of a systems approach and its relevance to strengthening delivery of
extension will be the foundation for re-orienting Extension toward a more farmer-centered
approach. Included in this section are a number of useful tools for analysing farmers' livelihood
systems as seen through their eyes.

Section Three presents a number of participatory techniques and tools for identifying and
prioritizing farmer constraints, eliciting causes, and finding farmer-derived, extension facilitated
solutions to their problems.

Section Four and Section Five are designed specifically for use in the field, and include
protocols, templates, and profiles to assist extension officers when carrying out a PRA. Section
four concentrates on how to conduct interviews with individual farmers and section five
concentrates on how to guide focus groups toward collaborative problem-solving and action.






J.G. Barham and A.J Sullivan
Scotshead, Dominica
April 2002







KEYS TO PARTICIPATION


Monitoring
&
Evaluation


Socio-Economic
Differences*


*Socio-economic differences include gender, wealth status, age,
ethnicity, race, religion, social position, class, kinship, etc.


F- 1




PRA Field Manual: Strengthening Extension Delivery in Dominica


PRA FIELD MANUAL
SECTION ONE








BACKGROUND ON
PARTICIPATORY METHODS





PRA Field Manual: Strengthening Extension Delivery in Dominica


Background on Participation

PRA can be considered "a growing family of approaches and methods to enable local people to
share, enhance and analyze their knowledge of life and conditions, and to plan, act, monitor and
evaluate. Its extensive and growing menu of methods includes visuals such as mapping and
diagramming. Practical applications have proliferated, especially in natural resources
management, agriculture, health and nutrition, poverty and livelihood programmes. PRA
approaches and methods present alternatives to questionnaire surveys in appraisal and research,
and generate insights of policy relevance."'

PRA is also "a cross-disciplinary, cross-sectoral approach to engaging communities in
development through interactive and participatory processes. It utilizes a wide range of tools,
often within a focus group discussion format, to elicit spatial, time-related and social or
institutional data."2

Participation (PRA) includes:
a) involvement in decision-making processes about what can be done
b) involvement in implementing programmes and decisions by contributing various
resources or managing specific organizations or activities
c) sharing in the benefits of development programmes
d) involvement in efforts to evaluate such programmes3


There is a "need for significant change in social, economic and political institutions in order to
address the deep rooted problems of poverty, unequal relations of power and environmental
degradation." The following six questions provide a checklist for ensuring positive outcomes:

1) Why is this participatory process needed? What ends does it serve?
2) What are the relations of power at play in the local community, in the larger social
context and in the specific activities planned?
3) Who is involved? Whose interests are at stake? Who is in control of the process?
4) What is the most appropriate time frame for the problems to be considered, the process
itself, and the plans and actions to follow?
5) What are the appropriate spatial and organizational scales for analysis, for action, for
advocacy, for policy change and for follow-up? How can participatory efforts scale up to'
influence regional and national policy?
6) How should a participatory process proceed? What methods, in what sequence, and
under whose direction will best serve the interests of the people involved?4




1Chambers 1997:102
2 Slocum, Wichhart, Rocheleau, and Thomas-Slayter 1995: 13.
3 Slocum et al. 1995: 10.
4 Slocum et al. 1995: 18.






PRA Field Manual: Strengthening Extension Delivery in Dominica


Background on Stakeholders


Effective agricultural planning and implementation requires negotiation among multiple groups.
These groups are differentiated by their relations to the resources in question by gender, wealth,
age, ethnicity, race, social origins, and other variables. Power plays a fundamental role when
trying to understand the relationship between those who can affect change, and those who are
affected by change. It is important to distinguish who these actors are, or who are the players,
where does this power manifest itself and how is this power is used. The concept of
"stakeholder" helps to identify the groups and individuals and their distinct "stakes" or interests
in specific sectors, enterprises, and/or livelihood systems.


STAKEHOLDERS
"A stakeholder is an individual or group who has the power to affect, or is in a position to be
affected by, the situation in question."5


POWER
"The right to have your definition of reality prevail over other people's definition of reality."6


One of the key aspects of PARTICIPATION is acknowledging ALL stakeholders in the process,
whether this process starts at the household, community, state, or international level. When
analyzing the stakeholders in a given process, we are investigating the power dynamics and
relations between individuals and groups by asking and investigating several key questions.
These include:
1) Who does what?
2) Who has what?
3) Who decides? How?
4) Who gains? Who loses?













SLitow 2000: personal communication.
6 Dorothy Rowe 1989, quoted in Chambers 1997: 76.





PRA Field Manual: Strengthening Extension Delivery in Dominica


Background on Facilitation

Enhancing active participation (with individuals as well as groups) is an essential skill for change
agents and development practitioners. The level of participation is often determined by the
ability and approach of the facilitator and one's ability to establish trust, and open and honest
communication. Facilitation means to "make easier" thus the role of the facilitator is to make
communication easier by assisting and guiding rather than controlling the situation. Facilitators
are responsible for encouraging and enabling participation of stakeholders.

The task of the facilitator is to make discussion easier, to make it flow, and to enable participants
to learn from each other. Encouraging the silent or less articulate, and subduing the aggressive,
over-assertive to make space for others, starts off a process of leveling which the facilitators
must handle with sensitivity and care. The facilitator must ensure that once at the table, every
voice is heard.

Good facilitation requires:
Good listening skills
Respect for the participants
Interest in what people have to offer
Assertiveness that is not overbearing knowing when to intervene decisively
Clear thinking and observation of the whole group
An understanding of the overall objectives of the group

Ethics for facilitators:
Demystify your role so as not to be perceived as the authority and reach a consensus with
the group on the scope of your work
Ensure that the group understands your role
Be explicit about your ends
Encourage the group to take responsibility
Do not use facilitating techniques to control the group
Facilitate to help a group work together 7

Rapport is the key to facilitating participation. Relaxed rapport between facilitators and
stakeholders, and some measure of trust, are minimum conditions for PRA. However it is
difficult for a facilitator to avoid influencing outcomes. The transfer of bias can take place
unintended. There is no complete escape from this trap, but solutions are sought in personal
behaviour transparent honesty, respect, sitting down, encouraging, listening, not interrupting,
etc.8


7 Adapted from Slocum et al. 1995.
SAdapted from Chambers 1997.






PRA Field Manual: Strengthening Extension Delivery in Dominica


Background on Gender


An analysis of gender often highlights the differential distribution of power and decision-making
processes as it pertains to women and men by exploring the production, reproduction, and
communal activities of men and women and how resources and benefits of these resources are
accessed, controlled and allocated. Whether at the household, community, state, or international
level, gender is a fundamental consideration when carrying out a development intervention. By
considering and taking into account of gender, as well as other social variables (age, wealth,
ethnicity, race, kinship, religion, etc.), extension officers can ensure that all STAKEHOLDERS
within specific groups are represented and can PARTICIPATE in the development process.

The inclusion of all pertinent stakeholders in a given process means considering the following
questions: Who does what? Who has what? Who decides? How? Who gains? Who loses? By
including gender, we also ask the questions, Which men? Which women?

In order to understand the concept of gender and its implications, it is vital to understand the
distinction between sex and gender. These terms can be defined as follows:

"Sex is the biological difference between men and women. Sex differences are concerned with
men's and women's bodies. Men produce sperm; women bear and breastfeed children. Sexual
differences are the same throughout the human race."9

"Gender refers to the social differences that are learned, changeable over time, and have wide
variations within and between cultures. Gender is a socio-economic variable to analyze roles,
responsibilities, constraints and opportunities of the people involved; it considers both women
and men."'0

There are few activities that cannot be performed by both women and men. We do, however,
begin to learn as children that men and women perform different roles. These are socially
constructed and, beyond reproduction, have nothing to do with biological differences between
the sexes. The social construction of gender influences the specific rights, roles, responsibilities
and expectations of men and women in any given task and within any given society.

"Gender relations are concerned with how power is distributed between the sexes. They create
and reproduce systemic differences in men's and women's position in a given society. They
define the way in which responsibilities and claims are allocated and the way in which each is
given a value. Gender relations vary according to time and place, and between different groups
of people. They also vary according to other social relations such as class, race, ethnicity,
disability, and so on.""


9 March et al. 1999: 17.
'0 March et al. 1999: 17.
" March et al. 1999: 18.






PRA Field Manual: Strengthening Extension Delivery in Dominica


Background on Monitoring and Evaluation

Many confuse monitoring and evaluation as processes, as well as in terms of goals to be
achieved. Monitoring measures and accounts for what is happening on a regular basis, and
whether or not certain tasks and actions are being accomplished (what is happening and how
frequently). Monitoring is recording and reporting. It must be simple, timely, relevant,
dependable, flexible, action-oriented, and cost-effective. Monitoring allows for corrective action
at the operational level.

MONITORING
"Monitoring is the process of keeping watch over an activity to see that it meets predetermined
schedules and standards."'4

Evaluation measures results based on specified objectives (how well things are done and how
accurately and well the objectives have been accomplished). Evaluations are related to
accountability in terms of inputs, outputs, and results. Evaluation allows modification in
objectives and processes.

EVALUATION
"Evaluation is the process of determining valued, significance, or worth of some activity or
factor that is important to management."15


Monitoring in Context:

In the context of participation and PRA, monitoring provides confirmation that all stakeholders
have been invited to the table, and that once there, their voices have been heard. Timely
monitoring of stakeholders involved in the process allows for the inclusion of those previously
excluded. Timely monitoring of facilitation processes ensures that all stakeholders are heard,
and their positions considered.


14 Andrew and McDermott 2000:75.
15 Andrew and McDermott 2000:74.






PRA Field Manual: Strengthening Extension Delivery in Dominica


Background on Wealth Status

Not all stakeholders have equal access to the process of development or equal power to make
decisions or impact change. The same holds true within groups of stakeholders where
differences in an individual's, family's, or community's well-being will likely impact their
ability to claim ownership over important decision-making processes. Wealth Status is a
fundamental attribute for distinguishing the differences between selected stakeholder groups.
Wealth status is not just an economic attribute that affects households and communities, it also
has important social and political implications:

"Poverty usually goes hand in hand with physical weakness, vulnerability (to hunger, illness,
natural disasters, exploitation, further loss of already limited resources), powerlessness and
isolation (including lack of education, services, general remoteness). Wealth is the direct
opposite of this, involving strength and versatility (of a person, the household, and production
strategy), patronage, authority and power, and access to both local and wider resources including
education (and hence job opportunities), and other services."12

In terms ofagricultural production, wealth status affects such factors as:
access to suitable land
the availability of labour (both family and hired)
money for purchasing inputs
for savings and investment (back into the farm enterprises)
the amount of cropping
type of crops grown
use of crops (home consumption versus sales)1

Agricultural research and extension must take into account differences in wealth among farmers
in order to determine priorities for research and to develop interventions and technical packages
that are relevant to, and can be adopted by, a wide-range of farmers.
(See Appendix A Regional Wealth Ranking Criteria)














12 Chamber 1983, taken from Grandin 1988: 2.
13 Adapted from Grandin 1988: 2.




PRA Field Manual: Strengthening Extension Delivery in Dominica


PRA FIELD MANUAL
SECTION TWO










CONSIDERATION AND ANALYSIS OF THE
FARM AS A SYSTEM:

TOOLS AND METHODS





PRA Field Manual: Strengthening Extension Delivery in Dominica


Background on Systems Approach

The central idea of a systems approach is that all parts are interconnected and a change in
one can influence any or all other components. This approach can be used to examine the
various biological and social components that interact with each other and their
surrounding environment. Any changes that occur naturally or innovations that are
introduced into the system may impact (positively, negatively or both) on the other
components of the system. It is helpful to conceptualize the farm unit not simply as a
series of independent components or commodities, but as a livelihood system. The
system concept facilitates analysis of the numerous interactions between household
members, the agricultural components, and the natural and social resources. A system
analysis also underscores the unique role of each household member and how individuals
interact within the system.

Household members have various farm, non-farm, and off-farm livelihood enterprises.
Different members of the household participate in different or same enterprises by
inputting their labour, capital, and resources. All these enterprises must be factored in to
provide an analysis of the household system. The system as a whole, as well as
individual enterprises, form the basis of the constraints experienced, as well as
opportunities for intervention.

The major types of systems in a region can be constructed by building them up
inductively by collecting data on each type of enterprise, the division of labour (who is
doing what) to carry it out, how important it is in the household system in terms of time
expended and income received or food produced, and how it is linked to the household,
market, and other enterprises. These models then become the basis for developing
recommendation domains (i.e. groups of farmers with similar problems and constraints).
The opportunities for new technologies and methods that extension can bring to these
different recommendation domains can then be delineated.'

















' Taken from Spring, Sullivan, Litow and Barham 2000.





PRA Field Manual: Strengthening Extension Delivery in Dominica


Instructions for System Diagrams:

Household at the center of the diagram. This should include number and sex of adults
and children in the household.

Markets) at the top or bottom of the diagram. This can be divided into sections
representing different marketing outlets for different goods and services.

Infrastructure or government at the top or bottom of the diagram. This can be divided
into sections representing agencies, specific ministries, credit or banking institutions,
research institutions, etc.

Agricultural Enterprises in boxes on the left and right sides of the diagram. Size of the
box corresponds to importance of enterprise-TO THE FARMER-the biggest box is for
the farmer's most important enterprise or crop. The second largest box represents the
second most important enterprise, etc. For our purposes, the system type is determined
by the primary agricultural enterprise.

Other Enterprises in circles. Other enterprises are typically cash or resource generating
activities that use the labor of household members. Examples might be driving a taxi,
teaching, working on another farm, etc.

Resource Flows are lines with arrows that indicate labor, money, input, or output flows to
and from the household and enterprises to various parts of the system.






Markets


Infrastructure


Main
Enterprise


Other
Enterprises


Household
Persons by
gender and age






PRA Field Manual: Strengthening Extension Delivery in Dominica





PRA Field Manual: Strengthening Extension Delivery in Dominica


Instructions and Sample Activity Profiles:

An exhaustive list of livelihood activities undertaken on the farm. This list should
include all agricultural activities, such as annual and perennial crops grown, and/or types
of livestock raised. Other on or off-farm enterprises should be included in this list.
Each activity should then be broken down into tasks undertaken to complete the activity.
For example, ifdasheen production is an activity, then tasks likely include land
preparation, preparing or securing planting material, planting, fertilizing, weeding,
harvesting, post harvest handling, marketing, etc
For each task, we need to identify who is responsible for doing the task and where it is
done. For example, is weeding done by women or men or both? Who does the
marketing of a particular crop, and where is it done; at the farm gate or in the city.

Example of Activity Profile

ACTIVITY TASKS WHO (hh members WHERE
or farm workers?)
Dasheen Land Preparation M (hh) + M (fw)
Securing Planting
Material
Preparing Planting
Material
Planting M F (hh)
Fertilizing
Weeding F (hh)
Harvesting
Marketing F (hh)


M=male
F=female
hh=household or family members, unpaid
fw=farm worker, paid labour




PRA Field Manual: Strengthening Extension Delivery in Dominica


Activity Profile Template
Farmer name(s):


ACTIVITY TASKS WHO (hh members WHERE
or farm workers?)


-~ 4


4- 4 1


+ 4- 1


M=male
F=female
hh=household or family members, unpaid
fw=farm worker, paid labour


-+






PRA Field Manual: Strengthening Extension Delivery in Dominica


Calendar

Livelihood activities vary with seasonal cycles and by age and
gender. The activity calendar makes patterns of production and
subsistence (such as plowing, harvesting, marketing, animal care,
and:. fetching wood and water) visible to development professionals
and community members. By categorizing responsibilities by
season, gender, age, and intensity of activity, the calendar highlights
constraints to participation which can then be factored into project
planning and timeframes.


The Gender-Disaggregated Activity Calendar generates information
illilli ,Mllll on gender- and age-based seasonal divisions of labor in livelihood
systems. The calendar can be a tool for working with the community
to analyze livelihood responsibilities and to address imbalances
between genders.


1. Calendars should be developed with both men and women's
input across socio-economic groups, but the facilitator can work
with individual key informants, families, or focus groups as best
suits the situation.

2. Community members work with the facilitator to develop calen-
dars fashioned after the model in Figure 2.5. The facilitator may
want to prepare the calendar outline before the meeting leaving
space to draw in the activities and agents during the meeting.

3. Those who perform activities (agents) should be separated by age
and gender with separate symbols for adult male, child male,
adult female, and child female as shown in the key to Figure 2.5.

4. Activities should be tailored to reflect the particular setting.
Categories to consider include:

*Source: Adapted Thomas-Slayter et al., 1993, Tools of Gender Analysis, pp. 22-23, and Feldstein and Jiggins, Tools for the Field, pp. 103-105.

Exercise taken from Thomas-Slayter, Barbara, Rachael Polestico, Andrea Esser, Octavia Taylor, and Elvina Mutua. 1995. A Manualfor Socio-
Economic and Gender Analysis: Responding to the Development Challenge. ECOGEN Research Project, International Development Program:
Worcester, Mass.: Clark University, p. 107-109.






PRA Field Manual: Strengthening Extension Delivery in Dominica


Gender-Disaggregated Activities Calendar



Stress periods: food shortages, drought, monsoon, extra
expenses-'.

Household production: cooking, construction/home repair,
childcare, care for elderly, fetching firewood, fetching water

Animal care: small livestock, large livestock

Farming activities: crops (cash and subsistence) listed by type,
plowing, weeding, watering, preparing fields, harvesting,
marketing

Fishing activities: commercial or subsistence fishing, fishponds,
marketing

Other livelihood activities: wage/salaried labor, small handi-
crafts, cottage industries

5. Activities may be divided by intensity of task by varying the type
of line. As shown in the key in the calendar example, continu-
ous activity is denoted by a solid line, sporadic activity is shown
by a dotted line. A heavy black line may be.used to show intense
activity,

6. A group discussion to analyze the data on the Activities Calendar
can enable communities to think through a number of issues.
Some suggested areas of questioning follow:

Why are there shortages of food or money during certain
months? Who feels these shortages most? What is done to
guard against shortages? What more can be done?

*Who is responsible for which types of livelihood activities?
Does the .division of labor seem fair? Are men working
harder than women? What do people do during the months
where activity is more sporadic?

Who is doing which types of household tasks? How much
time out of each day would you estimate these tasks take? Is
this an equitable breakdown of tasks? Why or why not?






PRA Field Manual: Strengthening Extension Delivery in Dominica


*What jobs do children do? Do male and female children do
the same jobs? Why or why not? Are children doing too
much work? Too little? Why?

Poster board, newsprint, or roll of brown paper
Markers


The calendar is designed to elicit age and gender-disaggregated
information, but calendars will also vary along socio-economic lines.
Facilitators can control forthis by developing calendars with repre-
sentatives from high and low status groups. Or, if a project is focus-
ing only on poorer groups, facilitators can develop calendars with
these groups only. Wealth Ranking (Tool #8) can help to delineate
between more and less advantaged groups so that facilitators can
work with designated groups.






Calendar of Activities
RAINS


Activity


Cereal Grains


OCT NOV DEC JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JNE JLY AUG SEP


aS
rA H H


Cowpeas


^-eo"--P 1

[=i WP H


Melons


Cattle i- Milking9 n Herding
Chickens
.......................................... I................................................................. ...................... I.....................I................................. 11.................. ...................................................... ... .................... ........................................ .................................................................................................................................................


Firewood**
Water
Meals
Cleaning/Laundry
Child Care


0-

cxT


Construction/Repair


0


MA
MC


O
O


FA
FC








I Seasonal Calendar Template
Farmer name(s):
. Site:
S Month
S Activity




I


LEGEND





Access/Control of Resources
ACCESS* CONTROL*
ISLAND
Who uses M, F M>F*
How M, F* M,F*

LABOR
For crops M, F* M, F*
For beer F F
Hired M,F M, F

STOOLS
Draft animals M M
Plows M M
Hand hoes/Ax F F

CASH (from)
Crops* M, F M
Selling livestock M M
Selling beer F F
Off-farm work ,
M, F M, F
CREDIT
Formal M M
informal F>M F






PRA Field Manual: Strengthening Extension Delivery in Dominica


Access and Control Template


RESOURCE

1)


ACCEr. TO


CONTROL. OF


2)



3)



4)



5)



6)



7)



KEY


ACCESS T




PRA Field Manual: Strengthening Extension Delivery in Dominica


PRA FIELD MANUAL
SECTION THREE








PARTICIPATORY PROBLEM-SOLVING:

TOOLS AND METHODS





PRA Field Manual: Strengthening Extension Delivery in Dominica


Background on Participatory Problem-Solving

The previous section of this manual included tools and techniques, along with the
appropriate templates, to identify and begin to understand the livelihood system and its
components. It is only when the complexity of the system has been understood from
the farmer's perspective can one proceed to identifying the constraints and problems
that exist within the system, as well as outside factors that contribute to these constraints.
Identifying constraints and their possible solutions entails the same participatory
methodologies wherein farmers are placed at the center of the problem-solving process.

When considering constraints faced by farmers, it is often worthwhile to establish small
group meetings in order to discuss specific topics of concern. Such a meeting is often
called a focus group. Focus groups are particularly helpful in gathering information and
can be used with virtually any participatory tool to elicit a wide-range of diverse opinions
and perceptions on a given topic. Extension officers can establish a focus group in order
to bring farmers together that share similar attributes (i.e. similar resource-level farmers,
women farmers, an informal farmer's group, related system types, similar constraints or
production enterprises, etc.) to discuss issues that impact their livelihood system.

A successful focus group outcome depends largely on good facilitation skills. As such,
the following section begins with sensitization to facilitation and focus group techniques
and then continues with the introduction of two tools for ranking and prioritizing farmer
problems. Finally, tools and methods are offered on how to identify causes of their
prioritized problems and work toward farmer-proposed and extension-facilitated
solutions.






PRA Field Manual: Strengthening Extension Delivery in Dominica


Enhancing the active participation of people in a group setting is an
essential community development skill. How much participation
takes place is governed in large part by the facilitator. To facilitate
means to make easier. It is the task of the facilitator to make discus-
sion easier, to make it flow, and to enable the participants to learn
from each other. The facilitator helps the group arrive at understand-
ings and decisions that are its task.

The role of the facilitator is one of assistance and guidance, not of
control. Getting feedback is fundamental to everything the facilitator
does. The direction and focus is always received from the group.


Co-facilitation
Experiences in field testing the manual both in the Philippines and
Costa Rica showed that co-facilitation was key in improving the
quality of the process. Whenever possible we recommend having
male and female co-facilitators, men and women having different
perspectives and ease of working with various groups. It is espe-
cially helpful to have one of the co-facilitators be from the local
community. This will:

encourage development of skills;
address issues of immediacy; and
ensure follow-up in a particular community

Managing meetings can be hard work, but the burden can be
lightened when shared with a team member. A compatible team
provides a balance and synergy that creates energy and enthusi-
asm in meetings.


How to stimulate active participation

Active listening: Listening attentively and asking open questions
encourage participants to expand on their theme. Active listen-

*Adapted from Catherine D. Crone and Carman St. John Hunter, n.d., From the Field: Tested Participatory Activities for
Trainers, p. 56. GENESYS Project, USAID Training Manual, 1994, Gender and Sustainable Development, p. 4. M. Avery et al.,
1981, Building United udgement, pp. 51-58.

SExercise taken from Thomas-Slayter, Barbara, Rachael Polestico, Andrea Esser, Octavia Taylor, and Elvina Mutua. 1995. A Manual for Socio-
Economic and Gender Analysis: Responding to the Development Challenge. ECOGEN Research Project, International Development Program:
Worcester, Mass.: Clark University, p. 61-63.






PRA Field Manual: Strengthening Extension Delivery in Dominica


Facilitation



ing also involves watching the participants for non-verbal cues,
such as facial expressions and posture.

Asking open questions. Open questions invite reflection and
encourage people to talk. Questions that ask: What do you
think about..., Why..., How..., What if... will elicit thoughtful
answers.

Note: An open question may not work as a discussion starter
with people who are not used to expressing their opinions
freely in a group.

Closed questions call for a brief, exact reply. They limit discus-
sion by discouraging expression of attitudes related to the topic.
Note: Closed questions, however, can focus discussions on a
specific point and can help the facilitator check whether or not
the group understands the content and agrees with content ideas.

A closed question: Is this a helpful discussion?
An open question: What do you see happening here?

Rephrasing participants' comments. Rewording the participants'
comments allows the facilitator to clarify if s/he understands what
someone is saying and reinforces points that the participants
bring up.

Equalizing participation. Some group members may speak more
or less than others based on their:

interest in the subject
knowledge of the issues
confidence in speaking in groups
self concept as affected by sex, age, class, etc.

The facilitator should be sensitive to these factors by including
more silent group members and asking dominating participants
to refrain from speaking at times.

Redirecting discussion. When a group leader is asked an open
question it is sometimes a good idea to offer it to the group for an
answer.





PRA Field Manual: Strengthening Extension Delivery in Dominica


Summarizing the discussion: This consists of reviewing
the main points, restating what decisions have been reached or
which issues are still to be clarified.

Assuming a friendly manner: Reacting to what people say
by nodding, maintaining eye contact or smiling shows that the
facilitator is listening attentively.

Managing conflict: Disagreement is a natural part of the
group process. If disagreements are focused on ideas and issues,
they can become a part of the creative process of group interac-
tion. If, however, criticisms are leveled at individuals personally,
they can be very destructive. The facilitator should interrupt the
attack and help participants re-focus on the issues. For more
information, see Conflict Management (Tool #4).






PRA Field Manual: Strengthening Extension Delivery in Dominica


A focus group is a small group meeting to discuss a specific topic in
an informal setting. A facilitator leads the discussion encouraging all
present to offer their ideas and opinions. A record keeper may keep
track of the exchanges.


l Focus groups are helpful in gathering data. Many of the tools in this
Hie manual rely on information gathered in groups discussions. Focus
groups are useful, for example, in generating history time lines,
diagrams of men's and women's perceptions of community organiza-
tions and trend lines for resource issues such as rainfall, crop produc-
tion, population, deforestation and health.


1. Logistics: Establish time, place and topic for discussion a few
ma I days ahead of time.

2. Participants: Group members can be from the same neighbor-
hoods, formal or informal community organizations and govern-
ment or community-sponsored projects. Meeting with men and
women in separate groups may bring out issues obscured in joint
meetings. It is also helpful to listen to individuals from different
age groups, ethnic groups or classes.

3. Group leaders: It is best to have two people to conduct the
focus group: one to facilitate the discussion, the other to record
information. Group leaders should be introduced to participants
by community members.

4. Optimal length: between one and two hours.

5. Opening statements: each participant may make an individual,
uninterrupted statement about themselves.



*Source: Adapted from B. Thomas-Slayter et al., 1993, Tools of ender Analysis, p. 12. Stanley and Jaya Gajanayake, 1993, Community
Empowerment, p. 27.


Exercise taken from Thomas-Slayter, Barbara, Rachael Polestico, Andrea Esser, Octavia Taylor, and Elvina Mutua. 1995. A Manual for Socio-
Economic and Gender Analysis: Responding to the Development Challenge. ECOGEN Research Project, International Development Program:
Worcester, Mass.: Clark University, p. 83-86.





PRA Field Manual: Strengthening Extension Delivery in Dominica


Focus Groups



6. Discussion Format:
Unstructured: discussion centers around 1 or 2 broadly
stated topic questions, or
Structured: facilitator uses 4 or 5 questions (written up
before the meeting) as a guide, with more specific probes
under each major question.

7. Formulating Questions
Decide on the information you want
Use simple language
Be sure the meaning of the question is clear
Keep questions short: Do not have several parts to each
question
Do not word questions in a way that people are made to feel
guilty or embarrassed
Avoid using too many 'why" questions: they may sound like
an interrogation

8. Role of the Facilitator
Low involvement. The facilitator:
a. presents initial topic followed by unstructured group
discussion
b. introduces second topic, based largely on what points
have already been raised
c. allows discussion to come to an end on its own

High involvement. The facilitator:
a. maintains clear and consistent order by application of a
guide throughout the discussion. S/he may find it helpful
to:
begin the structured discussion with a general
question, not intending to get a full answer, but to set
up an agenda of topics within the limits of the guide.
hold off comments which don't quite fit in a
particular stage of the discussion, but reintroduce
them at a logical pint; i.e. "I recall that some of you
mentioned something a little different earlier, and I
wonder how that fits into what we are discussing
now.'






PRA Field Manual: Strengthening Extension Delivery in Dominica


b. Ends session with final summary statements from
participants.

Advantages of Focus groups
Produce a great deal of information at low cost
Are an excellent way to obtain information from illiterate
participants
May reveal a range of attitudes and opinions that might not
come out in a survey
Are well accepted by the residents in a community as they
make use of group discussion a form of communication
found naturally in most communities
Can be good fun

Limitations of Focus Groups
They require well-trained facilitators
Results from discussion cannot usually be used to make
statements about the wider community
Participants often agree with responses from fellow
members
Focus groups have limited value in exploring complex
beliefs and issues


* List of guide questions for facilitator
* Notebook and pen for record keeper
* Large paper for charts
* Colored markers for diagrams and time lines
* Circles of various sizes needed for community institution

A focus group requires a competent facilitator to keep discussion on
track. The facilitator will need to foster interactions that explore the
participants' feelings in some depth. Open questions (why, what and
how) will elicit much information and keep discussion going. S/he
will need to be prepared to:

clearly explain the purpose of the discussion
include all participants in the discussion
assure that the full range of voices is heard
make sure that certain interest groups do not dominate the
discussion






PRA Field Manual: Strengthening Extension Delivery in Dominica


Focus Groups



be conscious of existing divisions within a particular group
be aware that the group will not work if participants do not
trust one another

For more on leading group discussions, see Facilitation (Tool #1).

In the case that there is no record keeper, a cassette recorder or
video camera may be used, if the group finds it suitable and if the
topic is not sensitive.

This tool is also helpful for role definition, project identification and
project formulation.


Focus Groups in Pwani, Kenya*

Pwani, located on the periphery of Lake Nakuru Park in Kenya's Rift Valley
Province, is a recently populated resettlement village. It was the first of several
sites in the region in which Participatory Rural Appraisal exercises were con-
ducted in 1990. Pwani was selected as a PRA site for primarily two reasons: 1) it
is representative of settlement communities which have experienced stresses in
natural resources management; and 2) it represents a situation encountered
throughout the world by communities located adjacent to parks. Subsequent
gender-focused research in Pwani addressed questions raised within the broader
context of PRA.

Focus group interviews and discussions can show priorities for community
action based on gender, class, caste, race, ethnicity and religion. In Pwani, the
problems identified by male leaders in the community, such as bad roads and
lack of access to markets, did not consider women's issues. The PRA exercises
did not reveal the extent of the fuelwood problem until women had an oppor-
tunity to meet separately in a focus group to discuss issues of concern to them,
such as the scarcity of fuelwood.







*Adapted from Dianhe Rocheleau et al., 1991, People, Property, Poverty and Parks, pp. 3-13.





PRA Field Manual: Strengthening Extension Delivery in Dominica


MIME


*Adapted from Bronson et a., Conducting PRA in the South Pacific, 1995, and NES et al., Participatory Rural Appraisal
Handbook, 1994.
Exercise taken from Thomas-Slayter, Barbara, Rachael Polestico, Andrea Esser, Octavia Taylor, and Elvina Mutua. 1995. A Manualfor Socio-
Economic and Gender Analysis: Responding to the Development Challenge. ECOGEN Research Project, International Development Program:
Worcester. Mass.: Clark University. o. 144-146.


U II~E


Opportunities*

After problems and opportunities have been identified, the task
remains to decide which problems are the most pressing and which
opportunities for solution will be pursued. Ranking Problems and
Opportunities brings together the community to discuss and agree
upon priorities. The exercise helps increase awareness and foster
community control over their own development by focusing on local
priorities and initiatives.


Ranking Problems and Opportunities draws on village perspectives
and initiatives for solving problems. Ranking assists community
members in establishing a realistic agenda given limited labor,
financial and other resources.


Ranking problems helps define which issues to address first. Rank-
ing opportunities defines priorities for action that are most appropri-
ate and sustainable for the community.

Ranking Problems

1. Assemble a community meeting and review the process of
data gathering and the kinds of information that the team
used to develop the problems, causes, and opportunities
chart.

2. Display the preliminary chart prepared by the team. Review
the information on the chart carefully with the community.
Invite residents to offer comments and suggestions for includ-
ing new information or making changes.

3. Work with the participants to prepare a list of the most
pressing problems in the village. This could be all of the
problems listed on the chart but if there are a lot of problems
listed, a shortened list of the most intensive problems is
sufficient.


I l'i~e~nrmOllllllllIIIIOI~~DBl~lilll


i11111 LP1






PRA Field Manual: Strengthening Extension Delivery in Dominica


4. Create a grid diagram large enough for everyone to see
which lists the problems along the top and left side of the
matrix (See Table 2.11). Each empty square of the grid
represents a paired comparison of the problems which allows
participants to rank problems two at a time against each
other. This is known as pair-wise ranking.

5. Participants raise hands to indicate which of the two prob-
lems at issue they see as the most important. Community
members may cover their eyes to minimize peer pressure
during voting. Facilitators should not vote as this could sway
the group. The problem receiving the most votes is listed in
the appropriate square. Totaling the number of times each
problem wins ranks its importance compared to other prob-
lems. See how this is done in Table 2.11.

Ranking Opportunities

1. Drawing again from the chart previously prepared by the
team, discuss options for solving the problems that were
ranked as the most pressing. Again, review the team's
suggestions with community members encouraging new
ideas and critical analysis of opportunities.

2. Rank actions that can be taken to solve each priority problem
by creating another pair-wise ranking matrix with opportuni-
ties listed along the top and left side.

3. Discuss criteria to be used for ranking options before voting.
Such criteria as cost, social and technical feasibility,
sustainability, equity, and productivity should be considered.


* Large size paper and markers


Ranking exercises can be done with groups separated by class,
gender, age or other delineating variables. This is often most useful if
groups do not cooperate well and the interests of one group appear
to be marginalized. Men and women separately ranked problems
during a PRA exercise in Vanuatu. Results showed that the problems






PRA Field Manual: Strengthening Extension Delivery in Dominica


Ranking


ranked highest by women were ranked lowest by men and vice
versa. The results were combined to reflect the community's collec-
tive priorities. The exercise revealed different concerns and interests
within each group and allowed a discussion of those differences
which fostered better understanding.


Table 2.11. Ranking of Problems*
Hog Harbour, Vanuatu


Problem Score Final Ranking


Natural resources
Gardens
Cooperation
Women's work
Health


#1 Women's work
#2 Cooperation
#3 Natural resources
S#4 Gardens
#5 Health


*Consolidated from Bronson et a., Conducting PRA in the South Pacific, 1995, pp. 53-56.


U





PRA Field Manual: Strengthening Extension Delivery in Dominica


RANKING OF CONSTRAINTS TWO COLUMNS

An important step for dealing with constraints is to identify which ones take priority over
others. Not every constraint can be addressed within a focus group and it is important
that some type of consensus-building occurs that will help participants tackle the
important problems first.

When faced with a situation where the list of problems is very long, it might be useful to
start with a simple two columns ranking matrix. The problems are listed in the first
column and second column is left empty for each participant to rank which problems take
priority. Once the problem column has been filled out, give each participant four to six
counters (beans, macaroni, rocks, paper clips, etc.) and ask them to place the counters on
the problems that are most important to them. Be flexible, if one participant wishes to
put all counters on one problem, let them. Once this part of the exercise has been
completed, total up the number of counters on each problem and list the top five
problems that the participants have prioritized. Begin discussion with the participants' top
priority or move to a pair-wise matrix (see next page) in order to find out which problem
should be tackled first.

Example Template

CONSTRAINTS IMPORTANCE OR PRIORITY






Pair-Wise Ranking Template


i31


Problems





,`< ', '--" ,,











.' ; .



--
.- ,. o


... iii : !






Method 1: Scored Causal Diagrams (SCDs)


1.1 Introduction


Problem listing, scoring and ranking is a commonly used and effective
PRA tool. However these techniques often fail to examine the
relationships between the problems identified, as scores are given for
each problem independently, even if the problems are closely linked.
This can result in closely related problems being seen in isolation.
Attempts have been made to look at these inter-relationships e.g. using
problem tree analysis, however this is often a method used purely for the
collection of information, with analysis and interpretation carried out by
outsiders rather than the community themselves.

Causal diagramming is a technique which helps the farmer and
researcher together to identify the linkages and relationships between
different problems. This technique has begun to be used by PRA
practitioners and is further developed in this manual, mainly through the
introduction of a scoring method which is used with the diagram. Scored
causal diagramming helps to clarify the nature of each problem more
exactly and to identify the 'root' causes or problems which need to be
addressed, and their relative importance. This also helps in identifying
possible key solutions and the knock-on effects of those solutions.

Scored Causal Diagrams help to examine in detail'the causes and':-
effects of problems'and to identify the root' causes which need to be
addressed.The scoring procedure helps to analyse the relative .
importance of the problems and prioritise them i. .


Scored Causal Diagrams (SCDs) are particularly useful when discussing
the problems associated with a specific crop or enterprise. However,
they can also be used to look at more general problems facing an
individual or a community as a whole.

In this section, Causal Diagrams (CDs) are first described and then the
scoring technique is introduced. Such a method is much easier to use in
the field, than it is to describe in a manual. We would therefore
encourage those who are put-off initially by.tie apparent complexity of
SCDs to persevere and have a go in the field, as this is when their
strengths become apparent. With increased experience and practice
more will be gained by both facilitators (researchers or extension
workers) and by farmers through the use of the method.



Exercise taken from Galpin, Mark, Peter Doward, and Derek Shepherd. 2000. Participatory Farm Management, Methods for Agricultural Research
and Extension: A Traininu Manual. Reading. England: University of Readine. v. 10-17.







1.2 Description of Causal Diagrams


Causal diagramming works most effectively after farmers have
discussed, listed and scored their problems. Each of the problems listed
is then represented on the ground by a symbol. Arrows are used to
represent the cause and effect relationships between these different
problems. Through discussion further problems and their causes and
effects might be added to the diagram. A Causal Diagram should not be
considered to be a 'definitive statement' but as a useful tool to aid
discussion and in-depth analysis of problems and issues together with
farmers.

It should be noted that individual problems are often causes of other
problems. For example from the simplified example given in Box 4,
'buses late' is a problem as well as a cause of 'drivers drive too fast'. It is
therefore artificial to distinguish between problems and causes. In the
text we therefore use the terms interchangeably.







Box 4 Simplified example of a Causal Diagram

S.The problems identified by various users of a bus company were:
..poorroads .- -:';. ..- ... -
." .many accidents ''" .
.. buses are late.

Through discussing and drawing the causes and relationships:
Between the problems, it became apparent that the problems were
closely linked. Another problem also came to light. .

-.Poor roads *,' b* th oo "a t,.


"-::"- :.**-C-;;. ; ..



';. -f,.,'. c:. :.



aciS a. a ls" yr -ta. t ;'
...4 .





hb s i- I ---', r-
-j^ *^ .* *




te b us company ie. salfe transport).

The 'root' cause of the'problems identified is therefore the 'poor
roads'. The solution is therefore to improve the condition of the roads.
Thi s will mea that buses arrive on time, therefore the drivers will not
need to drive too fast, which will result in fewer accidents. Better
roads will also directly redaisce the number of accidents. By solving the
e 'root cause of the problems identified poori oads) the'end problem'
(lots of accidents) will be solved. The objective of the bus company
(safe transport) will therefore be achieved. '






1.3 Procedure


a The topic or area of discussion is first identified with the participants.
This could be simply 'general' problems facing a community or could
be focused on a specific crop or enterprise which interests the
participants. The group should come to a consensus on the specific
enterprise or area they want to examine.
b The farmers discuss and list their problems using symbols to illustrate
each problem as it is identified. This list is then scored. The facilitator
explains that often problems are connected and the next step is to
look at the connections between the problems identified. This can be
explained briefly using an appropriate example (see Box 4).
c If a specific enterprise is being discussed, the objective of the
enterprise needs to be clarified with the participants by asking why
they are involved in this particular enterprise. For example, if it is a
cash crop the objective is likely to be to 'earn income'. If it is a food
crop it is likely to be to 'grow enough food to eat'. Often there may be
more than one objective, for example for a crop which is both eaten
and sold. All objectives should be identified.
d These objectives (or objective) are then expressed as problems and
symbolised on the ground. For example, if tomatoes were being
discussed and the objective of the farmers was to 'eam an income
from tomatoes', this objective expressed as a problem becomes 'low
income from tomatoes'. If the objective is 'enough tomatoes to eat' this
becomes 'not enough tomatoes to eat'. On a 'general' Causal
Diagram the objective is likely to be 'wealth' or 'happiness'. The end
problem would therefore be 'poverty' or 'unhappiness'. The objective
expressed as a problem is the 'end' or final problem on the Causal
Diagram which all other problems eventually cause.
e The direct causes of the 'end' problem are then identified by the
farmers. As they are identified the symbols are placed on the diagram
and arrows are drawn in to represent the causal relationships
between the problems. Each problem is represented on the ground
once only. The causes of those problems are identified and added to
the diagram. These may be from the original list or may be newly
Identified. The process is continued until the participants are happy
that all the problems have been included and all the connections
identified.
N.B. It is important that a general 'lack of money' as a cause, is
separated from the problem of 'low income from the enterprise',
otherwise it can result in a very confusing diagram. Often it is helpful
to exclude the problem of a general 'lack of money' altogether from the
diagram as it can dominate and be seen as the source of all the
problems.








f The problems at the edge of the diagram with no identified 'causes'
are the 'root' causes. If the logic of the diagram is correct, solving
these 'root' causes will result in the other problems being overcome. It
can therefore be useful to discuss possible solutions to these 'root'
causes with farmers and identify which ones can be influenced by the
farmers themselves, and which cannot. Those which are outside of
the control of the farmer are likely to be researchable constraints
which need outside support to overcome. Researchers should
investigate these problems further. For example 'poor rainfall' may be
overcome by a more appropriate crop variety or through water
conservation measures. Other problems which can be influenced by
the farmers are likely to be 'developmental' in nature and subject to
more immediate influence.
g The positive effects of the solution can be traced back on the diagram,
tuning problems into solutions e.g. 'buses late' becomes 'buses on
time'.
h This can result in the farmers prioritising the possible solutions which
they would like to explore further.
Photograph 1 Farmers constructing a Causal Diagram, BrongAhafo Region, Ghana






1.4 General Causal Diagram: example from Zimbabwe

Figure 1 Causal Diagram for 'general' problems experienced by a farmer group,
Gweru District, Zimbabwe


In the Causal Diagram above the 'end' problem is 'poverty/ hunger'
which are directly caused by low crop production and low prices for
cattle. The 'root causes' i.e. those with no identified cause are 'high
population' and 'expensive inputs'.







1.5 Example of a Causal Diagram for a specific enterprise


The following example is from an exercise carried out with a group of
farmers in Buhera District, Zimbabwe who specialise in cotton growing.
The problems associated with cotton production were discussed and a
Causal Diagram of these problems drawn up.

Figure 2 Causal Diagram for cotton growing, Buhera District, Zimbabwe


O = 'root' co.u-se
o iend lt pro^oe ouL
03* ed peOnd iv





Box 5 Tips for causal diagramming


Select a shady area with a large clear ground area to draw the
.:-diagram e.g. under a mango tree'.; '. :: '
Encourage the farmers to draw the arrows and circles clearly on ".
the ground. -
a Each problem should be illustrated on the ground once only..
If your diagram begins to look like a bicycle wheel it suggests that
cause and effect interactions are being left out.
-* Use symbols which have an actual connection with the problem .
they epresen.g. cow dung to represent 'lack of manure', so':...
Everyone can remember which symbol represents what problem..
*. Discuss the causes and effects of a problem before drawing it'on6.
the ground so it is clear whereitshould be positive on th
diagram.This avoids the diagram becoming too confusing ..-
N. It is important that thedistinction is made between the general" ,'
problem of: ack of cash', and the more specific problem of'lIow:
income from the enterprise being considered. They should not be
c. classified as th same problemtbut should be district o theJ.'-
diagram.:f this distinction is not made then the scoring technique
outlined in Section 1.6. below may notbwork ..
It is often better to exclude the problemof.'low income' total as.
ths tendsto dominate the diagram'This'can be done by ..
S' explaining to the participants that low income' is a universal.
problem, so it is better to exclude it from a diagram looking at':
specific problems. If it is includedthen it should be as a final effect
rather thanks cause. .. .
Lim t ith problems to those directly related to the enterprise and
actually experienced by the farmers..
* Whilst drawing the diagram the facilitator should encourage
discussion by asking questions. For example, "I don't understand
this connection, can you please explain it to me". This ensures
that all the group and the facilitator understand the diagram fully.
* Focus on solutions which the farmers themselves can implement.
p At the end of the exercise the diagram can be re-drawn onto paper
for the farmers to keep and refer back to laterif they so wish..
.. ... i ,-" : .r.. L. :- '





Participatory Problem-Solving Matrix


Prioritized Causes of the Farmer Farmers/Extension Roles and
Constraints Constraints Proposed/Extension Actions Responsibilities
Facilitated Solutions




PRA Field Manual: Strengthening Extension Delivery in Dominica


PRA FIELD MANUAL
SECTION FOUR:







FIELD SYSTEMS ANALYSIS:

PROTOCALS, TEMPLATES, PROFILE





PRA Field Manual: Strengthening Extension Delivery in Dominica


Suggested protocol for farmer visits/interviews for PRA


Ideal teams: 2 to 3 people, male and females
Ideal length of meeting: 1.5 hours if no one has somewhere else to be and discussion is
flowing.

1. Greetings, Personal and Team Introductions

The first and most important step to meeting with farmers for discussion is the
introduction of each team member. If possible, a 'spokesperson' for the team should
briefly introduce all team members in terms of NAME, AREA, SPECIALTY, etc. This
should be brief, clear and concise. We need to share and be clear if we expect the same
from farmers. Each team member must know the farmer's name before entering the
farm.

2. Explaining the purpose of the visit

This step in initiating discussion with farmers is crucial, and it is not always easy. It is
necessary to consider and practice this introduction to the approach (PARTICIPATION)
and the project (PRA) in order to explain it to someone who may have never heard the
term before. Your approach to this step will vary according to your existing relationship
with the farmerss, the make-up of your team, the farmer's relationship to previous
Extension Officers, and many other factors.

Your introduction might include the idea that "this is a project undertaken by the MOA to
better include farmer's ideas into planning, project design and delivery of services. The
project is designed to help allfarmers and we would like to have a discussion with you
today about what you are doing here and how you see your role in agriculture in
Dominica. This type of introduction lets the farmer know a) that you have government
support, b) that the idea is to include farmer's ideas in all stages of the process, c) that
you want to have a discussion with them, and d) that you are interested in how they see
their role as a farmer in Dominica. Of course you may have to alter this approach, but
consider that even farmers with whom you are very familiar deserve to know your
intentions before you start out. BE HONEST with the farmers and do not get carried
away and promise something that you cannot deliver. If we raise expectations and fail to
meet them, we have defeated the purpose of building trust. Tell them that we are trying.
The introduction should convey that you believe their opinions are important and valid,
and that you have something to learn from them. You may want to repeat or restate these
points several times during the meeting.

3. Initiating discussion

We are not beginning a questionnaire we are beginning a conversation. The first question
is always the hardest and usually sets the tone for the rest of the discussion. Pose an
open-ended question that will get the farmer talking about his/her operation.





PRA Field Manual: Strengthening Extension Delivery in Dominica


Could you tell us the kinds of things you are doing on your farm? Or
What kinds of things do you have going on here? Or
Could you explain to us what your system consists of?

DO NOT ASK LEADING QUESTIONS such as:
You are growing dasheen aren't you?
If you see dasheen growing, just ask how it is going and what else there is. Or
Land tenure is your biggest constraint, isn't it?

After posing the first question, LISTEN. Let the farmer continue talking about his/her
operation. From here on out, most questions will/should be posed in response to what the
farmer has been talking about. Ask questions related to the enterprises they have
mentioned. Pose the where, when, who, how, questions regarding different enterprises.
DO NOT BEGIN THE DISCUSSION BY ASKING ABOUT CONSTRAINTS. We
are focusing on assets, abilities, and potential not liabilities, disabilities, and inabilities.
We will hear about many of these things anyway, but keep it as positive as possible.

4. Keeping discussion focused, and progressing

The key to keeping the discussion focused and progressing is LISTENING. Each team
member is expected to be ACTIVELY LISTENING throughout the process, not just
when the farmer is responding to a question he/she has posed. Not listening carefully
may cause team members to pose the very same, or similar questions that the farmer has
already answered. At this point the farmer may assume that you are not taking his time
seriously, so he has little need to be honest. As farmers are talking, active listening
means thinking about what they are saying and formulating follow-up questions if
appropriate. It is O.K. to ask follow-up questions that take a farmer back to a previous
point in the conversation, but avoid jumping all over the place with questions, keep the
discussion flowing. Ask clarifying questions, for example if a farmer says that they
really have a problem with marketing, FIND OUT WHAT THEY REALLY MEAN. Do
they mean low price at certain times, no one to take their produce, expensive or non-
existent transport, etc. You can ask which aspects of marketing are the problem.

After the initial question and discussion of what the farmer is doing now (during which
constraints may come out naturally, DO NOT INTERRUPT THIS), make a point of
asking the farmer where he/she sees themselves and their operation in the future, maybe
5 years from now? What do they want it to look like? What would they like to be doing
at that point? How are they going about this? And finally, what is keeping them from
getting there? This question will help uncover additional constraints. Asking historical
questions regarding the farmer's operation often energizes the discussion.

5. Team dynamics

No team member should lead the entire discussion and monopolize the conversation.
This is not an exercise in how much Extension Officers know about conditions, it is an





PRA Field Manual: Strengthening Extension Delivery in Dominica


exercise in listening to farmers perspectives, concerns, opinions, beliefs, etc. Of course, a
discussion is two-way communication so do not sit by without speaking. Answer any
questions the farmers ask and show your interest in the conversation. Being in a relative
position of power (Team-leader, consultant, etc.) does not automatically make a great
facilitator, and all team members should be allowed to facilitate and participate to the
degree they feel comfortable.

6. Points of focus (as addressed by farmers themselves)

The following points should be addressed in each meeting IF POSSIBLE. Do not force
these issues, and not everyone will be able or interested in addressing each issue.
However, certain farmers will enjoy the chance to address any or all of these issues in
great detail.

*crops being produced including production scheduling and marketing
*opportunities for diversification and/or expansion
*production related constraints and technology gaps
*possible interest in future technologies demonstrated locally
*history with, interest in farmer groups

7. Departure

The decision to wrap up the meeting depends upon the participants (farmers and team)
and who gets worn out first. Many farmers appreciate the opportunity to air their
concerns in such a fashion and will continue the meeting long after the team is tired and
saturated. Other farmers simply have to get on with their work or have said all they
would like to. In any case, when the time comes for taking your leave, thank the farmer
for their time, their cooperation and their openness. Tell them that we all hope that this
process can continue.

8. Processing of meeting

Processing of the meeting should begin as immediately after departure as possible. Once
the team returns to the vehicle, or walks out of sight of the farm/farmer they should
assemble and take 10 to 15 minutes so each person can write down everything they
remember from the meeting. Some people do this chronologically from the start, some
do it by themes, and some just write whatever comes to mind. After giving sufficient
time for each team member to get all their thoughts down on paper, one team member
begins the 'processing' by talking through their list of information. Other team members
should validate or discuss if they all heard the same information.

After this discussion, team members should begin to systematize the information by
putting the relevant facts into existing templates. Ideally one member will focus on
diagramming the system, its elements and resource flows, another will put as much
information as possible onto a seasonal calendar or production schedule.





PRA Field Manual: Strengthening Extension Delivery in Dominica


It is critical to do this processing immediately after the meeting because by the end of the
day, it is impossible for team members to differentiate between the three or four farmers
they have spoken with. Upon return to the pre-arranged meeting place, each group will
finalize their materials and prepare to present their data, relative facts, and discussion
groups to all the other teams. Each team is expected to listen to all the other
presentations and will eventually be responsible for helping compile a regional profile of
the information garnered from the region.

For each farmer interviewed, consider the following issues:
WEALTH RANKING: try to get a sense, based upon the criteria you now have.
GENDER ISSUES: ask who helps the farmer, what tasks do they perform.
LAND TENURE:
AGRO-ECOLOGICAL ZONE:

If team members are talking more than farmers, SOMETHING IS WRONG. This is not
a debate, and never tell a farmer they are wrong.

The only reason meetings last less than 45 minutes is if the farmer is too busy to stay
longer or if the team is not actively listening to the farmer.





PRA Field Manual: Strengthening Extension Delivery in Dominica


FARMER VISIT CHECKLIST


Greetings
Purpose of visit
Starting the conversation with open ended question
Keep the discussion flowing, focused and moving forward
Pay attention to your teammates
Remember key issues
Ending the meeting and departing
Processing upon departure


INTERVIEWING DO'S & DON'T

DO introduce team members
DO allow the farmer to find a comfortable place
DO explain the purpose of the visit, make it clear
DO allow the farmer to ask questions
DO ask open-ended questions
DO allow team-members to pose questions
DO thank the farmer

DO NOT answer questions for the farmer
DO NOT ask leading questions
DO NOT contradict the farmer
DO NOT contradict team members
DO NOT monopolize the conversation






PRA Field Manual: Strengthening Extension Delivery in Dominica


SYSTEM DIAGRAM TEMPLATE






PRA Field Manual: Strengthening Extension Delivery in Dominica


ACTIVITY PROFILE TEMPLATE


Farmer namess:


ACTIVITY TASKS WHO (hh members WHERE
or farm workers?)


I I


-L 4


4 1


4 t 1


I- I


M=male
F=female
hh=household or family members, unpaid
fw=farm worker, paid labour







g Seasonal Calendar Template
.5 Farmer name(s):
6 Site:
S Month
Activity


.-


LEGEND





PRA Field Manual: Strengthening Extension Delivery in Dominica


FARMER PROFILE

Extension Officer Team Members:


Region/Community:
Code:
Farm Location:


Date:


Background Information


Farmer's name:
Sex:
Age Range:
Marital Status/Life Style:
# of Children and/or others who depend on the farmer for support:
Record Keeping:
Educational Level:
Health Status:
Contact # for Farmer:


Land and Climate


Altitude:
Topography (flat, gentle slope, steep, extremely steep):
Micro-Climates:
Land Tenure:
# of Holdings:
Access to Roads (can a vehicle reach the farm?) Y/N:

Level of Operation


Farmer Status (full time/part time):
Farmer Level (mostly subsistence or mostly commercial):
Type of Farming (organic, conventional, green houses):
Other Occupation/Enterprise(s):

Farmer History


Farmer #





PRA Field Manual: Strengthening Extension Delivery in Dominica


Most Important Enterprise(s), WHY?







-- Is this changing?

Opportunities for Diversification and Agricultural Goals of Farmer


-- What are the farmer's goals?

Future Plans


-- How will the farmer meet her/his goals?

Constraints Farmer's Suggested Solutions





PRA Field Manual: Strengthening Extension Delivery in Dominica


Motivations and Other Interests








Groups







-- Is the farmer a natural leader or motivator?

Relationship with and Expectation of Officer's Role









Possible Demonstration Plots


HOUSEHOLD WEALTH RANKING:

(use back of sheet for other important information)




PRA Field Manual: Strengthening Extension Delivery in Dominica


PRA FIELD MANUAL
SECTION FIVE








PARTICIPATORY PROBLEM-SOLVING:

FOCUS GROUP SET UP, PROFILE





PRA Field Manual: Strengthening Extension Delivery in Dominica


SUGGESTED PROTOCOL FOR FOCUS GROUPS


General Questions To Consider:

1) What focus?

After completing the first round, decide what issues your region would like to explore
with a group of farmers. Suggested focus groups from the 3rd day of processing will help
you get started. The focus of a farmer meeting can be wide-ranging, for example, by
commodity, specific constraints, topographical, land tenure, women farmers, processing
groups, existing farmer groups, etc.

2) Who will participate?

Once a focus has been decided, think about who are the topic-related farmers that we
visited. It is important that at least some of the farmers from the 1l" round are included in
the focus group for validation purposes.

Asking the farmers to participate: "We will be having a focus group based on a certain
topic we think this is an issue you are interesting in" (confirm, clarify, and validate the
information you have on the farmer) If the farmer agrees that it is an issue that concerns
her or him, ask if the farmer is interested in participating in a focus group meeting based
on this issue. If yes, then ask when is the best time to hold a meeting and what place
would be most suitable to conduct the meeting. Tell the farmer that this will be kept in
consideration (no promises we know for logistical reasons).

In order to conduct a worthwhile and successful focus group there should be at
least four farmers and not more than fifteen farmers (depending on the number of
facilitators, we can separate groups in half based on their prioritized constraints).

3) Where and When?

A focus group can happen almost anywhere. Decide on a time and place that is
convenient for the farmers, NOT what is convenient for you. Depending on the number
of facilitators present, there can be several focus groups happening at once, or several
focus groups at different times of the day. We have set aside two days in the region to
assist you with focus groups, we will make arrangements to be there at ANY TIME
necessary (see schedule for the two days set for your region).





PRA Field Manual: Strengthening Extension Delivery in Dominica


To Do Before Focus Group Meeting:

1) Materials needed

For each focus group, it will be helpful to have flipchart paper, tape, flipchart markers,
and some counters (for prioritizing constraints).

2) Which and Whose Constraints?

Prior to the focus group meeting, regional extension officers must compile a list of
constraints of those farmers interviewed during the lt round of PRA who will be
participating in the meeting. This list should be put on a flipchart/blackboard to be used
for the first part of the meeting (validating the information from l round).

3) How will you introduce yourself and the rest of the team?

4) What roles will the facilitators play?

For each focus group there must be at least two facilitators. It needs to be decided who
will play the role as lead discussant and who will play the role as recorder of information
(somebody to basically write down the ideas coming out of the discussion on a flipchart
for participants to see).

A good facilitator...

Keeps the group focused on task and process
Listens more than talks
Remains neutral
Encourages everyone to participate
Keeps discussion going by asking questions or introducing new ideas
Acknowledges differing viewpoints
Is alert to sensitive issues
Speaks clearly and slowly
Maintains eye contact
Summarizes main points and decisions made or issues resolved at close of session





PRA Field Manual: Strengthening Extension Delivery in Dominica


General Direction of Focus Group Meeting:

1) Validation, Clarification, Other Constraints

After introductions we will begin by validating the information collected during the 1st
round of the PRA, as it pertains to the farmers present. We will then ask farmers to
clarify, add to, and remove from the list of constraints.

2) Ranking and Prioritizing Constraints

Give each participants 3 to 5 counters (beans, paper clips, rocks, etc) and have them place
them on the constraints that are most important to them. Seefield manual for tools on
prioritizing and ranking constraints. We will then prioritize the constraints and begin
discussion with the top-ranked constraintss.

3) Identifying the Causes

Ask participants the reasons or the causes behind the specific constraint. List the various
causes on flipchart paper (it is important to keep the list of participants' constraints
visible so that they can refer back to it many of the constraints listed are actually the
causes of other constraints). We will work with the farmers to link and connect one
cause to other causes in order to see how they are interrelated.

4) "Picking Your Battles"

With the farmers' input, begin to identify those problems that can be tackled by them
alone, as well as those problems that cannot be solved without some external help.
Continue on by now identifying those problems that can be tackled with extension's help.

5) Proposed Solutions and Possible Action

Begin discussing possible solutions to those problems that can be tackled by
farmers/extension. Finish focus group meeting with a list of possible action items (steps
to be followed by farmers and extension) that can be undertaken that will make the
solutions) feasible.

6) Closing

Thank participants for attending the focus group and give them the opportunity to make
any final comments on the outcomes of the meeting. In the event that members of the
focus group are interested in continuing the process, it is possible for them to continue
without the aid of extension although this would be a great opportunity for extension
officers to improve communication with farmers and their communities. Once meeting
concludes, extension agents need to take the information from the meeting and put it into
the FOCUS GROUP PROFILE.






PRA Field Manual: Strengthening Extension Delivery in Dominica


FOCUS GROUP PROFILE


Region:
Date:


Background Information

A) Type of Focus Group:

B) Location and Time of Meeting:

C) List of Participants (farmers and extension officers present circle the farmers
interviewed during the I round):



















D) General Feelings about the Focus Group Meeting (problems that came up and how
they were addressed, other concerns, etc.)






PRA Field Manual: Strengthening Extension Delivery in Dominica


Follow-up Activities to Focus Group Meeting


Possible Extension Interventions based on Focus Group Discussion


Ideas for Demonstrations based on Focus Group Discussion






PRA Field Manual: Strengthening Extension Delivery in Dominica


Original List of Constraints


Modified List of Constraints (Ranked)


1








Constraints Analysed by Focus Group


Analysed Constraints Causes for the Constraint Problems (causes) that can be
Addressed by Farmers









Solutions and Action Items from Focus Group


Problems that can be Farmer Solutions to Problem Proposed Farmer Action Items to Problems
Addressed by Farmers






PRA Field Manual: Strengthening Extension Delivery in Dominica


Bibliography

Chambers, Robert. 1997. Whose Reality Counts? Putting the Last First. London: Intermediate
Technology Publications.

Galpin, Mark, Peter Doward, and Derek Shepherd. 2000. Participatory Farm Management,
Methods for Agricultural Research and Extension: A Training Manual. Reading, England:
University of Reading.

Grandin, Barbara. 1988. Wealth Ranking in Smallholder Communities: A Field Manual.
Nottingham, England: Russel Press Ltd.

Litow, Paul. 2000. Personal Communication.

March, Candida, Ines Smythe and Maitrayee Mukhopadhyay. 1999. A Guide to Gender Analysis
Frameworks. London: Oxfam GB.

Thomas-Slayter, Barbara, Rachael Polestico, Andrea Esser, Octavia Taylor, and Elvina Mutua.
1995. A Manual for Socio-Economic and Gender Analysis: Responding to the Development
Challenge. ECOGEN Research Project, International Development Program: Worcester,
Mass.: Clark University.

Slocum, Rachael, Lori Wichhart, Dianne Rocheleau, and Barbara Thomas-Slayter. 1995. Power,
Process, and Participation: Tools for Change. London: Intermediate Technology
Publications.

Spring, Anita, Amy Sullivan, Paul Litow, and James Barham. 2000. Strengthening the Delivery
ofExtension Services in St. Lucia: A Training Manual. Food and Agricultural Organization.





PRA Field Manual: Strengthening Extension Delivery in Dominica


Appendix A

Regional Wealth Ranking Criteria






APPENDIX A


Wealth Ranking Criteria for Central Region


Richest:


Access to inputs
Supply to market
Education
Other business
Access to labour
Land suitability
Security
Excellent management
Access to credit
Access to information
Land owned (size)


Productivity
Land tenure
Agronomic practices
Farm implementation
Transportation
Accessibility
Production
Market access
Adopting new technology
Social status


Not so Rich/Intermediate:


Formal education
Increased security
Land (owned)
Suitable land
Competent management
Access to credit
Access to information
Adapting new technology


Transportation
Hired labour
Production
Productivity
Market access
Land accessibility
Access to inputs


Poor:


Limited Formal Education
Reduced Security
Limited Credit
Transportation (own/access to)
Reduced access to inputs


Market access
Family Labour
Land access (tenants, family, own)
Access to information


Poorest:


No security
Inability to fulfill markets
Low management skills
No access to credit
No start up capital
No hired labour


Lack of formal education
Squatters
Tenants
Family Land
No transportation







APPENDIX A


Wealth Ranking Criteria for South Region


Richest:


Less than or equal to two heads per household (average)
Additional capital generated into farm
Tertiary level of education
Land Size (greater than 25 acres)
Establishment of large acreages of pure stand crops
Social Status (in relation to educ. level, family history)
On farm investments (farm infrastructure)
Intensive farming systems
High level of farm management skills


Farm access
Farm transportation
Target market: regional
Hired Labour: full time
Technology Application


Upper Middle:


Land Size (greater than or equal to 10 acres)
Social Status
Full time farmers (working capital solely
from on-farm activities)
Less intensive farming systems


Limited amount of operative capital
Target Market: regional/local
Hired Labour


Middle:


Target market: local
Primary/secondary level of education
Sporadic record-keeping


Full time farmers
Land size
Less operative capital
Sporadic labour

Lower Middle:


Minimal farm investment
Farm size: land under production
Primary level of education
Use of family labour
Limited record-keeping


Traditional farming techniques
Marginal land suitability
Target market: local
No transportation


Poorest:


Little/no farm investment
Primary/no formal education
Farm Size: equal to or less than 2 acres
Land tenure: rent
Self Labour
No transportation
Less than or equal to five heads per household (aver


Unsuitable lands
Minimal commercial approach
No operating capital
No credit association
Sporadic production Traditional farming techniques







APPENDIX A


Wealth Ranking Criteria for North Region


Richest


Money
Accessibility of Land
Availability of tools and Equipment
Efficient Use of Inputs
Greater use of appropriate technology
Use of hired labour (family support)
Availability of Utilities
Level of technical support & farm household
Level of Commercialization
Farm Development


Greater quantity of land
Excellent Managerial Skills
Transportation
Acreage under Cultivation (male)
Greater level of re-investment in farm
Tangible Security
Availability of information
Access to Credit
Excellent use of intelligence for personnel


Rich


Quantity of land (less)
Acreage under cultivation
Level of re-investment in farms
Ownership of land
Good use of inputs
Security
Access to Credit
Farm Development


Managerial Skills
Use of Appropriate technology
Money
Availability of tools and equipment
Use of hired labour
Availability of transportation
Good use of intelligence for personnel


Poor


Use of family land
Less Acreage under cultivation
Little access to Credit
Fair use of intelligence for personnel


Average Managerial Skill
Little use of appropriate technology
Little use of Inputs
Farm Development


Poorest


No Collateral
Little Evidence of Managerial Skills
No access to Credit
Little use of intelligence for personnel


Little Access to land (Shared/family/Squat)
Subsistence Farming
Little or no family support
Farm development







APPENDIX A


Wealth Ranking Criteria for Northeast Region


Richest


Education
Transport
Farm implements
Other Business
Nuclear Family
Market Control

Suitable Farm Enterprise & consistency to suit
Capabilities specialisedd)
Better business approach to farming (higher)

Are in Community group & organizations


Ownership of>10 acres
Have farm labourers
Finance (Capital)
Supporting Families
Access to information & new technologies
Accessibility & suitability of Land
(Infrastructure)
Easier Access to Credit

Have a say in decision making
(higher influence)
Receptive to Extension Advice


Rich


Less Land acreage <10 acres
No other supporting business/income
Less supporting family
Harder to obtain credit (less security) &
Amount of credit that is accessible
Less business approach to farming
Less resources available to implement new
Technology


Lower level of education
Less farm implements
Less access to information & Technology
Not as consistent in farm enterprise (not
as specialised)
Less influence in Community decision


Poor


Less land acreage/cultivated
Less Resources
Land less accessible
No ownership of land
No tools/equipment
Less access to information/new technology
Little or no finance
Less involved in groups


Lower level of education
No transport
Poor suitability for farming
No supporting family
Improper business approach
Less access to credit (no security)
Less influence in community


Poorest


No education
Small holding <3 acres
No supporting families
No finance
Little Business approach
No market contact


No ownership of land
No transport
Very little access to credit
Single headed household
Subsistence farmers
No resources to implement new technologies







APPENDIX A


Wealth Ranking Criteria for West Region


Rich


Land ownership/large acreage's 10+
Financially resourceful
Large Citrus Orchards
Aggressive farmers
Farm Accessibility
Own Market Arrangements
Water Availability
Suitable lands for farming


Knowledge
Numerous Green Houses
Own Vehicles and Homes
Good Management Skills
Easy Access to Credit
Own farm equipment, tools & Machinery
Own other business interest


Close to Rich


Land ownership/rented
Own homes/vehicles
Knowledge
Reasonable knowledge of cultural practices


Multiple cropping
Semi-resourceful (finances)
Credit support
Poor farm access


Close to Poor


Rented and Family Land
90% home ownership
Need assistance from M.O.A
Limited Access to Credit


Low Resources
90% own vehicles
Inadequate Knowledge of Cultural Practices
Poor farm accessibility


Poor


Rented/ Family Land
Small Mono-Cropping (vegetables)
Need to develop farm land
Single headed households
Poor farm access


M.O.A. Support
Very few resources
Poor management skill
No access to credit







APPENDIX A


Wealth Ranking Criteria for Southeast Region

Level of Social Life/Social Status


Larger number of labourers
Investment level is greater
Ability to re-invest/new inputs
More diversified
Land/vehicle/road accessibility
Greater entrepreneurship skills/more
Business minded
Greater political power/will

Willingness to change/new technology/
Seek information


Greater capacity to employ
Access to finance/credit management/security
Risk chances are greater
Greater production level/more commercialized
Full time farmers /management capabilities
Attitude towards work/greater work ethics

Involvement in community ventures/leadership
Qualities
Good communication skills


Closer to Rich
Difference between 1 & 2


1. Communication level is greater with 1
2. Greater risk taking; natural leaders, innovators, greater work ethics, willingness to learn (accept changes,
seek information, implement recommendation), Land (access, tenure, topography, socio-climate)
Aggressiveness towards predial larceny, commercial respect

Difference between 2&3. Characteristics of 3 that prevents them from being 2

- Land these farmers have access to land but rarely are owners
- 3 poorer access to credit
- Aggressiveness is not as great as 2
- 3 less seekers of information; not natural leaders; have preference to hand-outs

Difference between 3&4 (Close to being poor & poor)

- 4 are generally middle-aged farmers; not aggressive at all; not open minded, single headed
household;
- Access to land-limited
- Educational level- Primary


Rich














WEALTH RANKING CRITIRIA FOR EAST REGION


CATEGORY RICHEST NOT SO RICH NOT SO POOR POOR
Land Asset <7 acres owned <7>5 acres owned <5 acres owned/family <2 acres commend,
rent
Farming System Commercial Commercial Semi-Commercial Subsistence
Level of farm investment High Medium Low None
(structuring, irrigation, vehicles)
Education level Primary & greater Primary Primary & lower Primary & lower
Access to information Easy + non-Extension Mainly Extension Extension Extension
Access to Credit Easy Easy lower amounts Micro-loans No access
Labour Mainly hired Hired & family Mainly family Family
Type of Crops High cash value High cash value
Crop Diversity More specialized Less specialized More diversified Diversified
Level of Management High Medium Low Lower/ery low
Other non-farm assets Yes Yes, some No No
Influence in Community High Medium Low Very low
Receptive to Change Very Moderate Not receptive Not receptive
Level of Production/Productivity Very high High Medium Low
Group participation Very little Active Very Active Very Little
Gender Mainly Male Male/Female Male/Female Male/Female
Social Status Higher High Low Very Low





PRA Field Manual: Strengthening Extension Delivery in Dominica


Appendix B

5 Day PRA Training Programme in Dominica











FIVE DAY PRA TRAINING PROGRAMME IN DOMINICA


MONDAY TUESDAY WEDNESDAY THURSDAY FRIDAY
Setting the Stage: Identifying the System Participatory Problem- Field Training Participatory Program
Background and Theory and its Components Solving Planning

OPENING INTRODUCTION INTRODUCTION FIELD INTRODUCTION
PRACTICE
INTRODUCTIONS ADDRESSING SUGGESTED PROTOCALS OF FOCUS GROUP
EXPECTATIONS FOR FARM VISITS TOOLS PRESENTATION

WEALTH RANKING FOCUS GROUPS ADDRESSING CONCERNS
OF FIELD PRACTICE
EXPECTATIONS CONTINUATION OF CONSTRAINT BUILDING FARMER
WEALTH RANKING IDENTIFICATION PROFILES
OBJECTIVES EXERCISE
RANKING AND PRIORITIZING DATA MANAGEMENT
STAKEHOLDERS CONSTRAINTS
LUNCH LUNCH LUNCH LUNCH LUNCH
PARTICIPATION SYSTEMS APPROACH IDENTIFYING CAUSES PROCESSING REGIONAL REPORTING
INFORMATION FOR PRA
FACILATION DIAGRAMS FINDING SOLUTIONS
PROGRAM PLANNING
ACTIVITY PROFILES AND IMPLEMENTATION
GENDER SEASONAL CALENDARS TURNING SOLUTIONS INTO REVIEW REVIEW OF WEEK
ACTION
MONITORING ACCESS AND CONTROL FIELD VISIT EVALUATION EVALUATION
REVIEW
REVIEW REVIEW CLOSING CEREMONY
FIELD VISIT LOGISTICS




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