• TABLE OF CONTENTS
HIDE
 Title Page
 Table of Contents
 Main














Group Title: Quarterly report (Farming Systems Support Project)
Title: Quarterly report
ALL VOLUMES CITATION THUMBNAILS PAGE IMAGE ZOOMABLE
Full Citation
STANDARD VIEW MARC VIEW
Permanent Link: http://ufdc.ufl.edu/UF00091285/00004
 Material Information
Title: Quarterly report
Physical Description: Serial
Language: English
Creator: Farming Systems Support Project
Publisher: Institute of Food and Agricultural Sciences, Office of International Programs, University of Florida
Place of Publication: Gainesville, FL
Publication Date: July-September 1983
 Record Information
Bibliographic ID: UF00091285
Volume ID: VID00004
Source Institution: University of Florida
Holding Location: University of Florida
Rights Management: All rights reserved by the source institution and holding location.

Table of Contents
    Title Page
        Title Page
    Table of Contents
        Table of Contents
    Main
        Page 1
        Page 2
        Page 3
        Page 4
        Page 5
        Page 6
        Page 7
        Page 8
        Page 9
        Page 10
        Page 11
        Page 12
        Page 13
        Page 14
        Page 15
        Page 16
        Page 17
        Page 18
        Page 19
        Page 20
        Page 21
        Page 22
        Page 23
        Page 24
        Page 25
        Page 26
        Page 27
        Page 28
        Page 29
        Page 30
        Page 31
Full Text















QUARTERLY REPORT #4

1983 3rd Quarter

JULY SEPTEMBER 1983
THE FARMING SYSTEMS SUPPORT PROJECT

SUBMITTED BY:
INSTITUTE OF FOOD AND AGRICULTURAL SCIENCES
OFFICE OF INTERNATIONAL PROGRAMS
UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA

SUBMITTED TO:
U.S. AGENCY FOR INTERNATIONAL DEVELOPMENT
SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY












TABLE OF CONTENTS


Executive Summary ............................... .......1

Main Report................................................ 2

I. Setting .............................................2

II. General Accomplishments.............................2

III. Conclusion..........................................4

IV. Activity Reports

15. Hildebrand/D.Republic/07/07 to 07/13/83.........5

16. Poats/Upper Volta/08/04 to 08/13/83.............7

17. Jones/CIMMYT-Mexico/08/10/83...................9

18. Poey/D. Republic/08/11 to 09/15/83.............11

19. McDermott/Zambia/09/83 .................. ....14

20. Meiman/ISNAR?09/27 to 09/30/83.................19

21. Poats/Upper Volta/09/25 to 10/02/83............21

22. Franzel/Upper Volta/09/25 to 10/02/83...........25

23. Fresco/Upper Volta/09/25 to 10/02/83...........27

24. Freed/Mali/10/83 ..............................29









Fourth Quarter-Executive Summary


The provision of technical assistance dominated the start of the
fourth quarter. Travel and activities were varied. In Africa, FSSP
participated in a design team in Mali, a workshop in Upper Volta, and
a project evaluation in Zambia. Activity in Latin America centered on
the Dominican Republic including an initial visit in July and an FSSP
assisted workshop in September. Dr. Jones attended a CIMMYT
conference in Mexico. An FSSP representative attended the ISNAR
meetings.

Although the organization and delivery of the Mali design effort
was somewhat under par, the FSSP was not given authority to fully
develop the effort. Clearly, based on the Mali experience,
considerable attention must be given to briefing of teams. Topics of
the briefings should include an orientation to FSR, an orientation to
the country in which the work is being done, and an orientation to
USAID procedures and guidelines.

The first orientation workshop, under the direction of Dr. Poats,
was delivered in West Africa. Planning and preparation for delivery
of the workshop went quite smoothly in spite of some limitations. The
overall evaluation of the workshop suggested that the effort, while
not as strong as it might have been, achieved several very important
goals.

During the quarter, preparation for the second annual meeting of
the FSSP was underway, a livestock taskforce was established, and the
growing need for a visitor's program was identified. The domestic
workshop program was carried out at three Support Entities including
Michigan State University, Virginia Politechnic Institute, and
Colorado State University.









I. SETTING


The quarter began with a flurry of activity concerned with the
provision of technical assistance by a design team to the country of
Mali. Also, plans were well underway for the second domestic workshop
to be held in Gainesville. This last input by the FSSP was critical
for the workshops to move out to other entities during the remainder
of the year. Heavy reliance was placed on one support entity, VPI,
led by John Caldwell, to deliver the second workshop. Iowa State
University also supported this effort through Rosalee Norem, who
reviewed and developed some of the training materials. Bob Waugh and
Pete Hildebrand remained heavily involved in these efforts since
Training Coordinator Jim Jones was most involved with the Director in
both technical assistance and general management of the rapidly
expanding program. Susan Poats came on board under intense pressure
to become directly and immediately involved in the second workshop as
a leader.


II. GENERAL ACCOMPLISHMENTS

The second domestic workshop was a success, with participants from
numerous support entities and several AID Missions. The technical
assistance designs previously conducted in the Eastern Caribbean with
CARDI, and in Zaire, were topics for discussion at complementary
meetings during the workshop. Plans were also underway for work in
Mali and Paraguay. These programs provided a forum for discussion as
participants who were directed toward these technical assistance
activities discussed forthcoming plans and responsibilities.
Enthusiasm was running high even though it remained apparent that the
project was not prepared to move with full force into the technical
assistance effort.

Plans were unfolding for the delivery of a first orientation
workshop in West Africa. Susan Poats was in charge of the activity
and feeling the pressure associated with: 1) the first such
intervention by the FSSP, 2) the lack of clear channels and guidelines
for the organization of such a workshop involving several AID Missions
and AID Washington, 3) a lack of sufficient materials in French for
delivery to a French-speaking audience.

Nevertheless, planning and preparation for delivery of the
workshop went quite smoothly even with these limitations, due to
careful and considerable cooperation from AID Washington, S&T and
Africa Bureaus, and the AID Mission in Upper Volta. A willingness to
commit people and travel time by participating AID Missions in the
other countries also contributed to the success of the venture. When
the workshop began, it became clear that the audience was quite
heterogeneous and came with different needs and expectations.

The overall evaluation suggested that the effort, while not as
strong as it might have been, achieved several very important goals:







1) The participants were made better aware of the FSSP and its
mandate and capabilities generally.
2) Participants did share ideas on FSR with the workshop leaders
and with their peers from several countries.
3) The FSSP had established some precedent and some
channels for developing other training and networking programs in
Francophone West Africa.
4) The FSSP had identified two outstanding trainers in Louise
Fresco and Steve Franzel.
5) The FSSP had proven an ability to work with a bilateral
contractor, Purdue University, in delivery of a workshop and in
sharing the experience base established in farming systems by the
bilateral contract.

Several other benefits of lesser import resulted from the
activity. Time will show that the effort was very successful even
though some of the hour-to-hour discussions and presentations might
have questioned the overall value of the program. This type of
questioning is essential for exchange of information and learning, and
will occur in the best of workshops and courses.

The domestic workshop program moved on to three SEs including
Michigan State University, VPI and Colorado State University, where
participation by numerous entities was beneficial to the overall SE
base and the respective entities in their AID programs. Comments and
recommendations from these activities were fed back into the Core and
embodied in the overall efforts to further develop orientation and
training programs.

On the technical assistance front, the FSSP did not fare so well
in terms of the organization and delivery of the Mali design effort.
The FSSP was not, however, given authority to fully develop the
effort. The team itself and the institution in charge, Development
Alternatives, Inc., did an excellent job under conditions that were
limited by insufficient prior knowledge and planning for the overall
effort. The FSSP and the AID Mission, as well as AID Washington, were
involved in one of the first complete delivery potentials where the
full implications of the FSSP arrangement were under assault and being
tested. Such issues were raised as the procurement concern, who
should pay for various aspects of the activity, whether the project
should be performed by the FSSP or placed on bid in a collaborative
mode or performed by an IQC institution.

An important networking result of the Mali design was that several
people associated with it, both from the AID Mission and the FSSP
team, participated in the Upper Volta Workshop and further provided
strength to that effort. Four support entities were involved in the
Mali technical assistance effort.

From the Mall experience it is clear that considerable attention
must be given to briefing of teams, and that the several areas needed
in briefing must be carefully considered and measured against the best
capability for providing that type of orientation. The three areas to
be considered include an orientation to farming systems, an







orientation to the country where the work is to be done, and an
orientation to AID procedures and guidelines for the development of
the particular instrument requested by the Agency. The FSSP was not
fully prepared to do the farming systems briefing and certainly not
prepared to perform the other two tasks, though expectations were that
all tasks should have been completely covered by the FSSP.

Preparation was now intensely underway by the Director and the
Advisory Council for the second annual meeting of the FSSP to be held
in Manhattan, Kansas. During the quarter, final reports were received
from the first task force (which was established in the third quarter)
for review of social science and family concerns in farming systems.
A livestock task force was established through an initial meeting held
in AID/S&T/Washington, with meetings to follow for purposes of
addressing the direction that the FSSP should take in studying mixed
crop and livestock systems.


III. CONCLUSIONS

Greater emphasis needs to be given to structuring the demand for
technical assistance so that the FSSP can more fully anticipate
specific needs and prepare for a quality program of delivery. The
short-term nature of technical assistance requests made during the
quarter stressed the ability of the FSSP. A broader base of expertise
and a more thorough delivery than is in the project's capacity at the
present time were called for. This stress, however, is expected early
in the program and is only cited here to indicate that action in the
future can significantly improve the overall performance of the FSSP.
SE cooperation and AID Mission cooperation have been outstanding and
suggest that there is every reason to believe that the opportunities
for a successful support concept can be realized.

With reference to Core staff activity, it became evident that a
solid team of individuals was hired for work in the program. The
overall development of the program will challenge everyone because
many new programming modes are being established for which no direct
experience or guidelines can be identified for assistance. It also is
evident that visitors to the University of Florida, because of the
FSSP, will be numerous and that specific efforts need to be taken to
assist International Programs with visitor flow and to coordinate the
effort. Visits to the North Florida Farming Systems Research and
Extension Program should be productive, effective and efficient with
reference to both the visitors and the program staff in North Florida.







IV. ACTIVITY REPORTS

15. Hildebrand/Dominican Republic/07/07 to 07/13/83

Region: Caribbean
Country: Dominican Republic
Assignment: Informational Trip
Name: Peter E. Hildebrand
Date of Activity: July 7-13,1983
Team: P. Hildebrand and Jose Nova (student)
Home Institution: FSSP (University of Florida)
Address: Farming Systems Support Project
International Programs
Institute of food and Agricultural Sciences
University of Florida
3028 McCarty Hall
Gainesville, Florida 32611

PROGRAM ABSTRACT:

Objectives: 1. To discuss a sequence of activities that need to
be accomplished in an FSR/E project.

2. To recommend a schedule for a one week short course to
cover economic analysis and design and analysis of on-farm
trials.

3. To take pictures for development of a slide module.

Accomplishments: 1. Visited a number of farmers and took
pictures.

2. Visited Ocoa and saw one of the trials.

3. Discussed and gained background for the Natural Resources
Project.

4. Wrote a report for AID/Sto. Doming.

5. Showed the introductory slide set to Kemph, Hernandez, and
Kwiatkowski.


Needs/Problems: 1. The primary need right now as seen by AID is
Agricultural Economic Training (includes gathering farm
management data, gathering economic data from farm trials,
and making analyses of all data).

2. Need for training in on-farm agronomic research.

3. A bit more formal structuring of on-farm trials would be
beneicial.

CONTACTS







Institutions: USAID/Sto. Domingo; Uky Natural Resources Project
in Ocoa.

Individuals: Joe Kwiatkawski USAID
Jose Nova
Raul Martinez, Secretary of Agricultural Office
Padre Las Casas.
Ken Ellis SAID
Gary Kemph MSU
Avel Hernandez, Coordinator of the Natural
Resources Management Project in
the Secretaria de Agriculura
Tomas Montas,* U of Kentucky
Grant Thomas,* UKy in Ocoa(Soils)
Franklin Castillo*
Angel Lidiano*
Sra. De Montas*
Joaquin Azar*

FSR team

Potential Trainers:
Publication Potential:

FSSP INFORMATION

Demands on FSSP: 1. They would like a one or two week course in
Spanish to cover the two topics in September.

2. This course is seen as a broad introduction to the FSR/E
approach but with a concentration on economic data collection
and analyses from both on-farm trials and enterprise records
kept by farmers.

3. Several follow-up trips will need to be made to the area
by FSSP in order to provide continuing technical assistance.

4. More intensive short courses on specific topics could be
offered.


FSSP commitment-promised responses: It is understood that FSSP
will pay the international costs and the Mission will pay the
participant costs.
Materials collected:
Contributions to Inventory:







16. Poats/Upper Volta/08/04 to 08/13/83


Region: West Africa
Country: Upper Volta
Assignment: Planning of Farming Systems Workshop
Name: Susan Poats
Date of Activity: August 4-13, 1983
Team:
Home Institution: FSSP (University of Florida)
Address: Farming Systems Support Project
International Programs
Institute of Food and Agricultural Sciences
University of Florida
3028 McCarty Hall
Gainesville, Florida 32611

PROGRAM ABSTRACT:

Objectives: To make arrangements for the Farming Systems
Workshop scheduled for Sept. 25- Oct.1, 1983.


Accomplishments: 1. Discussions with USAID John Becker and Dale
Rachmeler clarified the logistics and needs for the workshop.

2. Administrative assistant arranged to aid in contacting
local persons.


3. Arrangements for the workshop made.
workshop into three separate potential
to hold the workshop back-to-back with
ICRISAT/SAFGRAD/IRAT Seminar.


Broke proposed
workshops, and decided
the


4. Field trip to Nedego Village(farm trials) arranged by Ron
Cantrell.

Needs/Problems:

CONTACTS

Institutions: USAID
Individuals: John Becker, USAID
Dale Rachmeher, USAID
Ron Cantrell, Purdue/SAFGRAD/FSU
Peter Matlon, ICRISAT

For list of participants see Poats report for actual
workshop(S.Poats/Upper Volta/Oct. 25-30,1983).
Potential Trainers:
Publication Potential:

FSSP INFORMATION

Demands on FSSP: Workshop to be held October 25-30, 1983.







FSSP commitment-promised responses:
Materials collected: Upper Volta materials currently in the Upper
Volta file.
Contributions to Inventory: Data on Purdue FSR project.







17. Jones/CIMMYT-Mexico/08/10/83


Region: Latin America
Country: Mexico
Assignment: To visit CIMMYT/INTSORMIL
Name: James C. Jones
Date of Activity: 08/10/83
Team:
Home Institution: FSSP (University of Florida)
Address: Farming Systems Support Project
International Programs
Institute of Food and Agricultural Sciences
University of Florida
3028 McCarty Hall
Gainesville, Florida 32611

PROGRAM ABSTRACT:

Objectives:
1. To assist with the development of INSORMIL Sorghum millet
workshop to be held in September 1983.

2. To discuss training and areas of collaboration with
CIMMYT.

Accomplishments:
1. Conversation with Dr. Robert Tripp about FSR Training in
Mexico/ In-country FSR Training/ General CIMMYT information/
Areas where CIMMYT Economics is active.

2. Conversation with Don Winkelman about FSSP and the
importance of training.

3. Planned a workshop on farming systems to be held September
16-22, 1984. The workshop objective is to increase the
effectiveness of sorghum and millets research in farming
systems as it is carried out in Latin America.

Needs/Problems: None specified.

CONTACTS

Institutions: CIMMYT, INTSORMIL
Individuals:
Dr. Robert Tripp, CIMMYT, Training coordinator
Ron Napp, CIMMYT, Wheat Production
Derrick Byrlee, CIMMYT, Economist
Don Winkelman, Head of CIMMYT Economics Program


FSSP INFORMATION


Potential Trainers:
Publication Potential:







Demands on FSSP:
1. Suggest that Tripp decides specifically what areas of
training he wants to develop and perhaps FSSP can help
through task groups assembled for this effort.

2. The FSSP modules would not be appropriate for many of the
CIMMYT trainees since they are too fast and too
sophisticated.

3. On-farm module can be broken into two modules:
a. The need to do OFR and basic approach
b. Methods such as environmental index and stability
analysis.

4. Byrlee suggests that Sierra Leone is a good place for the
FSSP to work; the country has well trained researchers,
though they do not have a farming systems orientation.

FSSP commitment-promised responses:
Materials collected:
Contributions to Inventory:







18. Poey/Dominican Republic/08/11 to 09/15/83 (No response
on review of abstract received as of printing date).

IDENTIFICATION

Region: Latin America
Country: Dominican Republic
Assignment: Preparation and coordination of a course on economic
analysis and interpretation within a farming system's
approach project in the Dominican Republic.
Name: Federico Poey
Date of Activity: 08/11 to 09/15/83
Team: Federico Poey:AGRIDEC, Jose Alvarez:UOF, John Wake:UOF
Home Institution: AGRIDEC Address: 1414 Ferdinand Street
Coral Gables, FL 33134


PROGRAM ABSTRACT:

Objectives:
1. To organize and prepare a short course in Gainesville for
delivery in the Dominican Republic.

2. To translate into Spanish and narrate 9 audiovisuals.

3. To translate selected reading materials.

4. To coordinate and participate in a short course in the
Dominican Republic (09/5 to 09/10).

Accomplishments:
1. Traveled to Gainesville to meet with Dr. Andrew and Dr.
Hildebrand to plan the short course.

2. John Wake traveled to Guatemala to receive guidance from
Sergio Ruano.

3. Nine audiovisuals were selected for Spanish translation
and narration. Five written articles were also translated.

4. Outlined an assignment to review and complete a manual on
on-farm research design and analysis.

5. The five day course was conducted as scheduled.
a. The objective of the course was to inform and train
participants in farming systems approach to research and
extension with emphasis of economic analysis and
interpretation of on-farm data.
b. Instructors' team considers that the objectives of the
course were fully reached, that the participants attendance
and interest was high, that local collaboration was adequate,
and that host counterparts were pleased with the results.







Needs/Problems:
1. Only inconvenience was caused by an improper delivery of
10 hand calculators that had been bought for the course.

2. MARENA project should consider follow-up training for the
.specific farming systems subproject of San Jose de Ocoa in
order to consolidate the approach in that location.


CONTACTS
Institutions:
Individuals:
Gary Kemph, USAID
Dr. Marion Ford, USAID, Rural Office Director
Dr. Grant Thomas, UOK
Ing. M.S. Abel Hernandez, Director of MARENA project

Participants:
Joaquin Azar, MARENA, Extension
Tomas, Montas, MARENA, Investigation
Carlos Jose Bonilla, MARENA, Administration
Luis E. Gomez Sipion, D. de Tierras y Aguas, Economics
Christian Almonte, S. de Extension agricola, Extension
Juan Tomas Filipo, D. de Tierras y Aguas, Conservation
Grant W. Thomas,MARENA, Advisor
Francisco Cespedes, MARENA, Environmental Education
Jose Rhadames Mateo, Armed Forces, Forestry
Julio Perez, S. de Produccion, Environmental Education
William N. Vargas, D. de Tierras y Aguas, Conservation
Jose Luis Guigni, D. de Tierras y Aguas, Conservation
Milton D. Cabrera, D. de Tierras y Aguas, Iventory
Daniel Estevez, D. de Tierras y Aguas, Conservation
Hernando Hernandez, D. de Tierras y Aguas, Administration
Jose M. Garcia, S. de Produccion, Agro. Industry
Monico Gomez, D. de Tierras y Aguas, Conservation
Mario Julio rodriguez, D. de Tierras y Aguas, Conservation
Orlando Perez, MARENA, Investigacion
Quintino Santana, D. de Tierrs y Aguas, Planning
Luis R. Martinez, MARENA, Conservation
Uvencio Ramirez, D. de Tierras y Aguas, Conservation
Romulo A. Perez, D. de Tierras y Aguas, Conservation
Rhadames Medina, MARENA,Administration
Fausto Escarraman, G.G. Forestal, Forestry
Ibrahim J.L. Perez, D. de Tierras y Aguas, Inventory,Stats
Andres Escarraman, J. Comite de Desarrollo, Community
Bonaventura Cespedes, S. De Produccion, Conservation
Hector Bueno, S. Recursos Naturales, Regional
Rafael R. M. Martinez, S. de Produccion, Coffee

Potential Trainers:
Publication Potential:

FSSP INFORMATION







Demands on FSSP:
FSSP commitment-promised responses:
Materials collected:
1. Nine Audio visuals translated and narrated (see original
report for titles).

2. Copy of official program for short course delivered in
Dominican Republic.

3. Forms used for class exercises in modified stability
parameters.

4. Participants' course evaluations.

Contributions to Inventory:







19. McDermott/Zambia/09/83


Region: Southern Africa
Country: Zambia
Assignment: Evaluation of Agricultural Development Research and
Research and Extension Project (611-0201) Zambia
Name: JKMcDermott
Date of Activity: September 1983
Team: Dr. K. McDermott, FSSP Team Leader
Dr. B. Gelaw, CIMMYT/East Africa
Dr. R. Benoit, Planning Unit, MAWD
Mr. F. Mwansa, Planning Unit, MAWD
Dr. J. Ragin, Team Leader. ZAMARE
Mr. F.B. Nyienda, AADO, AID/Zambia
Dr. E. Ellis, University of Maryland,E.S. (ex-officio)
Mr. E.F. Gibson, ADO, AID/Zambia (Evaluation Team Coor.)


Home Institution: FSSP (University of Florida)
Address: Farming Systems Support Project
International Programs
Institute of Food and Agricultural Sciences
University of Florida
3028 McCarty Hall
Gainesville, Florida 32611

PROGRAM ABSTRACT:

Objectives: To complete a start-up evaluation with the purpose
of providing counsel to the USAID Mission on project design, general
project direction, and any modification in design and project
management that needs to be considered at this point in project
history. The evaluation followed the scope of work contained in cable
Lusaka 02419 stated below.

1. Review project progress and accomplishments on the planning and
implementation of the work programs for the following components of the
project: Commodity Research Team (CRT), Adaptive Research PPlanning
Team (ARPT), and Extension program in designated project area.

2. Assess accomplishments to date of ARPT in identifying agricultural
production constraints of small farmers in the Mkushi and Serenje
Districts and how these identified farmer production constraints are
being fed into the CRT research program.

3. Review the methodologies and techniques being utilized by the
Extension Service in transferring relevant technology to farmers in
project areas. Specific attention should be directed toward the
Extension Service Program for training farmers in the use of relevant
technologies being recommended by the CRT's and the ARPT's.

4. Review and examine methodologies utilized to implement the
long-term, short-term and in-country training programs. Specific
attention should be directed toward the Extension Service Program for








training farmers in the use of relevant technologies being recommended
by the CRT's and ARPT's. Assess efforts effected by the contract team
in providing training to national scientists of the CRT's and ARPT's.

5. Examine working relationship between Ministry of Agriculture and
Water Development and UIUC contract team as well as performance of
contract team and provide recommendations for improving institutional
relationships.

6. Review participation and impact of UIUC Research Associate and UNZA
Special Studies component of the Project.

7. Review procedures and utilization of project and contractor provided
commodities, budget and library support.

8. Assess the goal and purpose of the project as stated in the project
paper.

9. Review current working mechanism developed between MAWD, Contractor,
and the international agricultural research centers (IARC's), for
networking purposes.

10. Assess Professional and Financial Support being provided by the
Government of Zambia.

11. Develop preliminary scope of work and team composition for mid-term
formative (2nd phase) evaluation team.



Accomplishments: Completed said evaluation, made recommendations, and
issued report. Recommendations include (numbers correspond to the above
noted objectives):

1. Consideration be given to bringing in consultants from INTSOY and/or
elsewhere, perhaps, IITA, to assist the Research Branch in developing
its soybean breeding strategy, much in the manner in which CIMMYT
assisted in maize breeding strategy. This in no way implies any lack
of confidence in the soybean team. It simply means the team deserves
the best resources the project can provide.

2. No specific recommendations.

3. USAID/Zambia explore possibilities of providing funds from outside
this project to Extension in the Central Province for the purpose of
relieving resource constraints but anticipating institutional
improvement to the extent feasible.

4a. Long- term training should be one of the priority components for
the utilization of savings from elsewhere in the project.

4b. The project should maintain a continued review of short-term and
in-country training needs and resources and the opportunities.








4c. The team and GRZ should explore possibilities of developing
seminars and formal courses for GRZ personnel in Zambia.

4d.The ZAMARE team should take the initiative in requesting home campus
support in meeting specific short run training needs.

5. The efforts should be continued to define the RELO role and job
description with respect to ARPT and research-extension linkage and
that two factors be kept in mind; a) ARPT is in a developmental stage
and innovation is required, not simply transfer of conventional
methodologies, b) No matter the merits of the case, the burden to
integrate with the national systems falls on the expatriate.

6. The project should maintain a continual review of these components
for the purpose of taking full advantage of them in support of the
objectives of the project. This "continual review" need not be
complicated and time-consuming.

7a. AID/Zambia should delegate substanitally more authority for project
management than currently exists in practice and that the contractor
assume responsibility commensurate with the authority. This will
facilitate decision making and establishment of accountability, both of
which are essential to good management. It will also decrease
substanitally USAID/Zambia-Contractor contracts on daily issues and
save considerable time, part of which can be utilized in implementing
other recommendations.

7b. Channels of communication should be established among the three
parties in the project appropriate to the types of issues involved and
that the volume of direct communication between USAID/Zambia and GRZ on
project issues be both increased and made more regular. This will
reduce reliance on the team leader as an intermediary. If, as we
expect, the number of problems, diminish, the regularity of contact
should still be maintained,-giving attention to such positive issues as
Research Branch development strategy, Extension Branch development
strategy, and activities subsequent to this project.

7c. The Project Paper should be interpreted more liberally than now
appears to be the case, according to the paper's spirit and intent and
project need rather than the letter of the PP.

7d. No specific recommendation is made with respect to the PSU and the
issue of an administrative assistant, holding that implementation of
the first three recommendations will greatly facilitate resolution of
these two issues.

8. No recommendations.

9. No recommendations.

10a. Project management should continue much as it has, making do with
the resources that are available. The project also could help out in
matters of operational funds but with considerable care to distinguish
between critical resource constraints and those constraints that cause








inconvenience but do not seriously threaten project achievement. Other
resources such as PL 480 funds may also be utilized here.

10b. The project should concern itself with a research support issue
larger than the limited issue of support to his project. Some
calculations presented to us show that the returns to investment in
maize research could be exceptionally high with some technological
improvements to be released within a few years. Returns already
realized by the Zambian economy from research in sunflower and soybeans
must also be very great. The project is concerned with the
institutional development of the Research Branch. One of the
essentials of institutional development is the development of linkages.
One linkage that is essential for institution building is the so-called
"enabling linkage", by which the institution acqires resources with
which to operate.


Needs/Problems: 1. Only a few Zambians are found in the program and then
only in the junior positions (with two exceptions).

2. The farming system research component is new, and there is still
much developmental work to be done.

3. The newness of the RELO(Research and Extension Liason Officer)
concept, its association with the new FSR concept, and severe resource
constraints in Extension need to be taken into account in developing
expectations for short run achievements.

4. Project management needs to seek resources for training beyond
project design provisions.

5. There have been numerous "problem incidents" with regard to
commodity and budget management.

6. There is inadequate de facto delegation of authority to the
contraction and acceptance of responsibility by the contractors.

7. There is inadequate direct communication between USAID/Zambia and
GRZ on certain issues that need to be treated directly.

CONTACTS

Institutions: USAID/Zambia; MAWD; ZAMARE
Individuals: Mr. John A. Patterson- AID Representative, Zambia
Dr. James Snell- Ag. Economist, AID/Zambia
Mr. Michael J. Ireland-Management Officer,AID/Zambia
Mr. Fred Perry- Capital Development Officer,AID/Z
Mr. N. Mumba-Director of Agriculture,MAWD
Mr. F. Mbewe-Director of Planning, MAWD
Mr4. Winter M. Chibasa- Asst Dir of Ag,MAWD
Dr. J.D.Naik-Chief Ag.Research Officer, MAWD
Mr. Alex Prior-Cereals Research Coordinator
Mr. Stewart Kean-National Coordinator, ARPT
Dr. G.M. Ravagnan-Oil Seeds Research Coor.,NODP









Dr. Ristanovi-Maize Breeder/team leader, SIDA(Yugo.)
Dr. Paul Gibson-Maize Breeder, ZAMARE
Miss Catherine Munga-Maize Breeder,Mt. Makulu, MAWD
Mr. Samson Syakwilimba- Maize Breeder, Nanga, MAWD
Mr. Jan Flink-Assistant Maize Breeder, SIDA
Mr. W. Chita-Officer in Charge,Magoye Research MAWD
Dr. Jagmohan Joshi- Soybean Breeder,ZAMARE
Mr. S. Nkambula- Soybean Breeder, Magoye, MAWD
Mr. J.F.C. Sikazwe-Officer in Charge, Kabwe Regional
Agriculture Research Station, MAWD
Dr. Robert E. Hudgens-ARPT Agronomist, Kabwe, ZAMARE
Dr. Alfred G. Harms-ARPT Farming Systems Economist,
Kabwe, ZAMARE
Dr. Ronald Dedert-ARPT Research Liaison Extension
Officer, Kabwe, ZAMARE
Mr. Kefi Chanda-ARPT Agronomist, Kabwe Regional
Agriculture Research Station, MAWD
Dr. S. Sanogho-Microbiologist, ZAMARE
Dr. W.A.Roath-Sunflower Agronomist, ZAMARE
Mr. Charles Chabala-ARPT Agronomist, Kabwe Regional
Agriculture Research Station, MAWD

Potential Trainers:
Publication Potential:

FSSP INFORMATION

Demands on FSSP:
FSSP commitment-promised responses:
Materials collected:
Contributions to Inventory:







20. Meiman/ISNAR/ 09/27 to 09/30/83


Region: Europe
Country: Netherlands- ISNAR
Assignment: ISNAR Workshop
Name: James R. Meiman
Date of Activity: 09/27 to 09/30/83
Team: Bob Waugh, James Meiman
Home Institution: Colorado State University
Address: International Programs
University Services Center
Fort Collins, CO 80523

PROGRAM ABSTRACT:
Objectives:
1. To attend the ISNAR workshop "Issues and Organization and
Management of Research with a Farming Systems perspective
Aimed at Technology Generation."

Accomplishments: General observations of the workshop:

1. Valuable in getting the first-hand experience from five
different organizations with hands-on experience in farming
systems.

2. The importance of hands-on training was re-emphasized in
all the programs.

3. Recommended that a target group for training be those
people teaching at the college level in developing countries.

4. Recommended that ISNAR could serve as a clearing house
both to identify existing opportunities for training as well
as to work with national government in selecting participants
to be trained.

5. Any study of farming systems would undoubtedly need to
concentrate on the cost of on-farm experimentation research.
Recommend selecting a number of case studies in different
regions and working with local people who would have access
and interest in such studies.

6. Considerable discussion at the workshop for an
international network to be formulated by ISNAR.

7. Addressed policy and external factors that relate to the
success of the on-farm research and technology generation.
Most of the case studies indicated some continuing tension
between the more traditional commodity-oriented research and
farming systems approaches. ISNAR could play an important
role by targeting the national research directors and working
with them to help gain an understanding of the farming
systems approach.







Needs/Problems:
1. There was a great reluctance at the Workshop to identify
the farming systems as a separate organizational entity. The
general direction was toward adding a farming systems
perspective to existing research organizations.

2. The workshop did not go very far in helping to devise
strategies for management or implementation.

3. Workshop was hampered by a diversity of views on what
farming systems really is and the lack of any clear
definition that is workable in the sense of helping to
separate farming systems approaches and methodologies from
those used in research in general.



CONTACTS

Institutions:
Individuals:
Dr. George Abalu, Institute of Agricultural Research, Ahmadu
Bello University, Nigeria
Dr. John Coulter, Agricultural Research Advisor, World Bank
Dr. Winter Chibasa, Assitant Director of Agricultural
Research, Department of Agriculture, Zambia
Dr. Harlan Davis, Deputy Director, Office of Agriculture,
USAID/S&T
Dr. Julio Delgado, Director General, Instituto Nacionalk de
Investigation Agro[ecuaria (INIAP), Ecuador
Ing. Astolfo Fumagalli, Gerente General, Instituto de
Ciencia y Tecnologia Agricolas (ICTA)
Dr. Gilberto Paez, Director, Centro Agronomico Tropical de
Investighacion y Ensenanza (CATIE)
Dr. J.F. Poulain, Centre National d'Enseignement et de
Recherches Agronomiques de Regions Chaudes (CNEARC),
France
Dr. Rodrigo Tarte, director General, Instituto de
Investigation Agropecuaria de Panama
Dr. Robert Waugh, University of Florida, International
Programs
Dr. Marius Wessel, Director, International Course for
Development Oriented Research in Agriculture (ICRA)

Potential Trainers:
Publication Potential:

FSSP INFORMATION

Demands on FSSP:
1. Peter Oram, from ISNAR, appeared quite interested in a
collaborative approach to the cost/data collection, and
this idea should be followed up with Bob Waugh.







2. There were considerable discussions at the workshop for an
international network to be formulated by ISNAR.
Alternate Proposal: FSSP to serve this role. I believe
that we should be very cautious in this respect because
there are alot of expectations of funding for this kind of
networking that I believe are beyond the present
capability of either the Florida FSSP or ISNAR.


FSSP commitment-promised responses:
Materials collected: Four papers on country programs
in the proceedings which are now available.
Contributions to Inventory:


to appear


21. Poats/Upper Volta/08/04 to 08/13/83

Region: West Africa
Country: Upper Volta
Assignment: West-African Farming Systems Workshop
Name: Susan Poats
Date of Activity: 09/25 to 10/02/83
Team: S. Poats, L. Fresco, S. Franzel
Home Institution: FSSP (University of Florida)
Address: Farming Systems Support Project
International Programs
Institute of Food and Agricultural Sciences
University of Florida
3028 McCarty Hall
Gainesville, Florida 32611

PROGRAM ABSTRACT:
Objectives: To carry out a workshop with the following
objectives:

1. To generate interest in the project.

2. To provide mission representatives and selected
participants with an overview of the Farming Systems
philosophy, approaches and methods.

3. To familiarize the participants with the kinds of support
activities FSSP could provide to the region.


Accomplishments: 1. Conducted first FSR overview workshop in
French in West Africa.

Needs/Problems: 1. The decision to hold the workshop in French
posed some problems in materials and potential leaders of
workshop sessions.

2. There was not enough time to prepare the workshop.

3. Lack of knowledge about the participants prior to workshop








did not allow us to adapt the workshop to their needs and
demands nor levels of experience. FSSP should in future
carefully screen participants to have a more homogeneous
group so that workshop or training course can be pitched to
the appropriate level.

4. Too many participants.

5. All participants must be advised in advance about content
of workshop so they can be prepared to participate.

6. A time should be allowed to handle the financial/
personal needs of the participants.

7. Transportation was a headache for the Ouagadougou workshop
field trip.

8. The part of the workshop focusing on household was not
well-put together. Question whether we should even do this
section as a separate section, or should we use a continuous
case study throughout the workshop, and draw the household,
gender, labor, economics etc. from the data and situation of
an actual case.

9. There is a need for two additional persons to run
workshops such as these:
1. General course moderator, discussion leader
2. Person responsible only for the organization/logistics
of the workshop.

10. Language. Ability to "work" in a foreign language is
different from ability to "teach" in a foreign language. We
must have top quality trainers in order to effectively
communicate the information.

11. Before any future workshop appropriate materials must be
identified.

CONTACTS

Institutions: FSSP/USAID; SAFGRAD/FSU; Purdue Project in Upper
Volta.

Individuals: Coordinators- Poats, Susan FSSP
Fresco, Louise
Franzel, Steve DAI

Assistant Administrators-
Kabore, Fatoumata
Sia, Pierre

FSSP Representatives-
Chris Andrew
Peter Hildebrand







Participants-


Aithnard, Tonyawa

Fotzo, Pascal T.

Sy, Ousmane
Traore, S. Jules

Mangassouba, Ba

Salif dem dit Nanadou

Diack, Abdarahmane

Sangare, Moulaye Idrissa
Sawadogo, Sibiri
Kobanka, Charles

Aste, Malcolm

Rachmeler, Dale

Yaro, Garba

Mullenax, John

Bliss, Sidney
Adri, Kwami

Walter-Echols, Gerd

Reddy, Sanath K.

Traore, Bonaventure

McCarthy, Dennice

Albert, Jocelyne

Strahler, Kay

Kambia, E.
Dyemkouma, D.

Fofana, Sau


Ouedraogo, Pierre


Kabore, Omer


Direction de la Recherche Agronomique
B.. 31 Lome, Togo
ADRAO/WARDA, B.P. 2551
Bouake, Cote D'Ivoire
DRSPR/IER B.P. 186 Sikasso (Mali)
Assistant du Directeur, Departement de
Recherche, INSAH Bamako B.P. 1530(MALI)
Department Chef de Secteur Agricole
Rosso, R.I. Mauritanie
Department de 1'Agriculture B.P. 180
Nouakchott R.I. Mauritanie
Coordinateur Travaux Economie Rural
SVPA/DA 180 Nouakchott, R.I. Mauritanie
DRSPR B.P. 186 Sikasso (MALI)
FSU/SAFGRAD Ouagadougou, Haute Volta
O.R.D. Yatenga, B.P. 39 Ouahigouya
Haute Volta
B.P. 28 (Peace Corps)
Mango, (Togo)
SAID B.P. 35
Ouagadougou, Haute Volta
SAID B.P. 35
Ouagadougou, Haute Volta
USAID B.P. 11201
Niamey, Niger
SAID B.P. 852 Lomw, (TOGO)
B.P. 7006
Lome (TOGO)
B.P. 1263
Lome, (TOGO)
SAID
Bamako (MALI)
SAID B.P. 35
Ouagadougou, Haute Volta
SAID
Bamako (MALI)
AID/S&T
Washington,D.C.
FSU/SAFGRAD B.P. 1783 (Peace Corps)
Ouagadougou, Haute Volta
DRDR Savanes B.P. 56 Dapaon. TOGO
Direction de Service Agricole
(Experimentation) Ouagadougou, Haute Vol
Direction de Service Agricole
B.P. 7028 (Experimentation)
Ougadougou, Haute Volta
Direction de Service Agricole
(Experimentation) B.P. 7028
Ouagadougou, Haute Volta
Direction de Service Agricole
Experimentation B.P. 7028


ta






Ibrahim, Dan-Magaria

Ibrahim, Hamed

O'Leary, Kim

Ohm, Herb

Boulama, Inoussa

Church, Phillip

Lippold, Paul
Olson, Thomas
Konare,

Ly, Racine
Quali Firmin


Ouagadougou, Haute Volta
Service Departemental de l'Agriculture
B.P. 379 Niamey (Niger)
Service Departemental de l'Agriculture
Zinder, (Niger)
FSU/SAFGRAD (Peace Corps)
B.P. 1783 Ouagadougou, Haute Volta
FSU/SAFGRAD
B.P. 1783 Ouagadougou, Haute Volta
Project Dosso
B.P. 42 NIGER
USAID/S&T
Washington, D.C.
USAID/W
USAID/Niamey
Operation Haute Valle
B.P. 178 Bamako (MALI)
INRZFH Bamako (MALI) B.P. 1704
IVRAZ B.P. 596
Ouagadougou, Haute Volta


Potential Trainers:
Publication Potential:


FSSP INFORMATION

Demands on FSSP: Follow-up will be needed for each mission (Mauritania,
Togo, Upper Volta, Mali, Niger), especially in Animal Traction workshop
in Togo.
FSSP commitment-promised responses: Follow-up mentioned above.
Materials collected:
Contributions to Inventory:








22. Franzel/Upper Volta/ 09/25/83 to 10/09/83


Region: West Africa
Country: Upper Volta
Assignment: Workshop
Name: Steve Franzel
Date of Activity: Oct 1983
Team:
Home Institution: DAI
Address: Development Alternatives, INC.
624 Ninth Street, NW
Washington, DC 20001

PROGRAM ABSTRACT:

Objectives: To evaluate of the FSR Workshop, and make
suggestions for planning new ones.

Accomplishments: Made the following observations:

1. In-country workshops for nationals of a given country
offer several advantages over regional workshops.

2. Thorough planning and coordination are critical to putting
on a successful workshop.

3. It is important that the workshop coordinators be
excellent speakers of the language in which the workshop is
carried out.

4. It would be useful for FSSP to acquaint itself with the
training activities of organizations with similar training
objectives.

5. It might be useful to call in some professional training
specialists to advise on the program.

6. It would be useful to have two persons upfront in the
presentations at any given time.

7. Should allow time for "personal business" (visas, visits
to embassies, shopping, etc...) to curtail the constant
in-out flow of participants at the sessions.

8. A high official in the agricultural research program of
the host country should be invited to give the welcoming
address to the participants.

9. There is a need early in the workshop to address the role
of FSR in an agricultural research institution.

10. Time should be allocated to presentation and discussion
of identifying recommendation domains as a specific function
in the diagnostic process.







11. "How-to" presentations are necessary for the critical
topics of the workshop.

12. We need to involve workshop participants with FSR/E
experience into planning and carrying out the program.

13. Two one-week workshops might be preferable to a single
workshop.

Needs/Problems:

1. The two principal groups attending the workshop, USAID
personnel and African participants, had divergent interests.

2. It was not clear how individual workshop activities
contributed to workshop objectives. More attention should be
give to discussing the proposed itinerary at the outset and
offer continual reinforcement of workshop objectives.

3. Although the model from the Gainesville workshop for
using interviews with farmer to identify farmer problems and
propose solutions worked effectively in Gainesville, it did
not meet such success in Upper Volta.

4. The slide modules were poorly received.

CONTACTS

Institutions:
Individuals: For specifics- See Susan Poats report.
Potential Trainers:
Publication Potential:



FSSP INFORMATION

Demands on FSSP:
FSSP commitment-promised responses:
Materials collected:
Contributions to Inventory:







23. Fresco/Upper Volta/09/25 to 10/07/83


Region: West Africa
Country: Upper Volta
Assignment: Evaluation of FSR Workshop
Name: Louise Fresco
Date of Activity: Oct 1983
Team: Poats, Fresco, Franzel
Home Institution: Agricultural University, Wageningen
The Netherlands
Address: Brouwersgracht 865
1015 GK Amsterdam
The Netherlands

PROGRAM ABSTRACT:

Objectives: Evaluation of the FSR Workshop in Ouagadougou, Upper
Volta.

Accomplishments: Completed Evaluation:

1. Objectives were formulated as clearly as possible given
the heterogenous composition of the group and our lack of
knowledge concerning their background inFSR. With the
exception of the elaboration of specific guidelines for FSR
in each country (which appeared to be unrealistic and did not
fit the participants' own objectives) the workshop objectives
were met.

2. The sequential design of the program was useful, the field
day in Nedego was essential, the working sessions in small
groups were generally effective.


Needs/Problems:

1. Although most of the modules contain useful ideas, they
require further elaboration and adaption to Francophone
Africa.

2. It is impossible to attribute responsibility for logistics
as well as program planning to a single person.

3. The heterogenous group of participants with various needs
limited the effectiveness of the workshop. Better selection
of participants is needed in the future.

CONTACTS

Institutions: For specifics see Susan Poats' Upper Volta Report.
Individuals:
Potential Trainers:
Publication Potential:







FSSP INFORMATION


Demands on FSSP: It is recommended that a follow-up evaluation
be monitored by sending a brief questionnaire to each of the
participants within six months asking for their reactions to
the course and its effect on their daily work.
FSSP commitment-promised responses:
Materials collected:
Contributions to Inventory:





24. Freed/Mali/10/83


Region: West Africa
Country: Mali
Assignment: Mali FSR/E Design Team
Name: Russ Freed
Date of Activity: 08/83
Team: R. Freed, E. Methany, S. Rogers
Home Institution: Michigan State University
Address:
Michigan State University
Department of Crop and Soil Sciences
Agriculture Hall
East Lansing, Michigan 48824

PROGRAM ABSTRACT:

Objectives: To participate on a PP design team for Mali.

Accomplishments:
1. Freed participated as an agronomic advisor.

2. Methany participated as a plant protectionist,
environmental impact advisor.

3. Rogers participated as the social science advisor.

Needs/Problems:
1. The orientation to FSR/E should not be done in orientation
type meetings. More information on Mali could have been
helpful.

2. The team's effectiveness was hampered by the following:

a. Inability to travel to the research stations or Sikasso
(site of FSR Unit) for two weeks.
b. Design team of 12 was too large.
c. The team needed more people who understood the research
process.
d. The omission of an animal scientist hampered the design
since this was a very important component of Malian
agriculture.

3. We needed more "changers" and fewer describerss."

4. A major problem that the design team faced was the issue
of where the FSR/E unit was to be located within the
institutional framework: autonomous or integrated within
agricultural research? I think they should be one unit, Mali
does not have the people or the money to afford the luxury of
two units.

CONTACTS







Institutions:
Individuals:
Mr. Chekaje Diarra


Mr. Fatugoma

Mr. John Shuring
Mr. Phil Serafini
Mr. Boubakar Sy

Mr. Tony Johnson


Mr. Jerry Johnson

Ms. Emmy Simmons


Mr. Parker Burg
Mr. Neal Parker

Mr. Lamin Traore


Mr. Nguyen Hoang Son


Mr. Tidiani Tall

Mamadou Simparar


Omar N'Niangado


Zana Diourte



Fousseyni Diarra

Paul Kleene


Director of Division de Recherche Sur
Les Systemes de Production Rural
(DRSPR), Ministry of Agriculture.
Director of Institut D'Economie
Rurale, Ministry of Agriculture.
Plant Breeder ICRISAT, Bamak.
Agronomist, ICRISAT, Bamak.
Director General, Compagnie Malienne
de Development Textile.
Agronomist IDRC (International
Development Research Center, Canada)
at Sikosso, Mali.
SAFGRAD(Semi Arid Food Grain Research
and Development Project, USAID/Bamako)
Agricultural Economist, Sahel
Development planning team,
USAID/Bamako.
U.S. Ambassasdor to Mali.
Chief of Party, Operation Haute Valle
USAID/Bamako.
Director, Semi arid food grain
research. Development project,
Bamako, Mali, USAID.
Curriculum Development Specialist,
Agricultural Curriculum Development
Project, USAID/Mali.
Director, Centre D'Apprenisage
Agricle, Somenko/Mali.
Agronomist, Division de Recherch
Agronomique, Ministry of Agriculture,
Bamako.
Directeur de la Station Recherche
Agronomique de Cinzana, Ministry of
Agriculture.
Chef de Section Agro-Economist,
Division D'etudes Techniques,
Institute D'economie rurale, Ministry
of Agriculture.
Director, Operation Riz Mopti, Mopti,
Mali.
Chef D'Equipe Hollandais, Project de
Recherche sur les systems de
production rurale, Ministry of
Agriculture.


Potential Trainers:
Publication Potential:


FSSP INFORMATION







Demands on FSSP:
FSSP commitment-promised responses:
Materials collected:
Contributions to Inventory:


nmw004:16




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