The analysis of institutional domains...
 Training and outreach programs
 New publications
 News and notes
 AFSRE 1992 nominees
 AFSRE networking database
 AFSRE membership information request...

Title: Association of Farming Systems Research-Extension newsletter
Full Citation
Permanent Link: http://ufdc.ufl.edu/UF00071919/00002
 Material Information
Title: Association of Farming Systems Research-Extension newsletter
Alternate Title: AFSRE newsletter
Physical Description: v. : ; 28 cm.
Language: English
Creator: Association of Farming Systems Research-Extension
Publisher: Association of Farming Systems Research-Extension
Place of Publication: Tucson AZ
Frequency: semiannual
Subject: Agricultural systems -- Research -- Periodicals   ( lcsh )
Agricultural extension work -- Research -- Periodicals   ( lcsh )
Genre: periodical   ( marcgt )
General Note: Description based on: Vol. 4, no. 1 (1993); title from caption.
Funding: Electronic resources created as part of a prototype UF Institutional Repository and Faculty Papers project by the University of Florida.
 Record Information
Bibliographic ID: UF00071919
Volume ID: VID00002
Source Institution: University of Florida
Holding Location: University of Florida
Rights Management: All rights reserved by the source institution and holding location.
Resource Identifier: oclc - 32987463

Table of Contents
    The analysis of institutional domains in FSRE, by William R. Prenzno
        Page 1
        Page 2
        Page 3
        Page 4
        Page 5
    Training and outreach programs
        Page 6
    New publications
        Page 7
    News and notes
        Page 8
    AFSRE 1992 nominees
        Page 9
        Page 10
    AFSRE networking database
        Page 11
    AFSRE membership information request form
        Page 12
Full Text

A R Volume 2,
Number 2, 1991

Association for Farming Systems Research-Extension Newsletter

The Analysis of

Institutional Domains

in Farming Systems

William R. Prenzno2


Although it is widely acknowledged that
farming systems research-extension
(FSRE) has tremendous potential for
increasing the effectiveness of agricul-
tural research and extension, FSRE
projects have experienced wide varia-
tions in impact (Frankenberger et al.,
1988; Merrill-Sands and McAllister,
1988; Byrnes, in press). Numerous FSRE
projects have been implemented
throughout Africa, Asia, and Latin
America, and progress towards institu-
tionalizing FSRE has been made in
certain countries (for example Zambia,
Malawi, and Zimbabwe; Norman and
Collinson, 1985). However, the lack of
widespread and unequivocal results
directly attributable to FSRE programs
has caused individuals and donor

1 Paper presented at the Tenth Annual
Association for Farming Systems Research-
Extension Symposium, Michigan State
University, East Lansing, October 14-17,
2 Department of Agricultural Education,
The University of Arizona, Tucson.

agencies, notably the U.S. Agency for
International Development (USAID), to
doubt the method's effectiveness
(Chapman et al., 1988).
If FSRE is to be effective, it must be
integrated into the national research
and extension systems of developing
countries. Frankenberger et al. (1988)
note that the "institutional innovation"
of incorporating FSRE into national
research systems is a necessary precursor
to generating technical change for low-
resource agricultural households.
Imperfect integration into national
research systems severely limits the
impact of FSRE.
However, it is important to realize
that not all research systems in the
developing world are able to institution-
alize FSRE to the same extent or within
the same time frame. Developing
countries vary greatly in their ability to
perform appropriate research activities
(de Janvry and Dethier, 1985; World
Bank, 1985). Researchers must take this
variation into account when planning
implementation of FSRE activities; those
who have failed to do so often have
faced severe constraints (Byrnes, 1988b,
1988e) and have experienced difficulties
maintaining operations after foreign
participation has ended.
In order to ensure institutional
sustainability of FSRE principles and
methodology, researchers must under-
stand accurately a country's current
research capabilities. Additionally, they
must analyze realistically the potential

for developing agricultural research
capability. In this analysis, farming
systems researchers must consider both
the agroecological environment and
existing research institutions. These
directly influence the capability of
research systems and the effectiveness of
FSRE activities within the institutions
(Merrill-Sands and McAllister, 1988).
Analysis that incorporates these two
aspects facilitates the identification of
underlying constraints to technology
generation and of the strengths of the
research system from which FSRE can


An institutional domain is a group of
national agricultural research systems
that share similar research capacities and
potentials. The role of institutional

In This Issue...

The Analysis of Institutional
Domains in FSRE,
by William R. Prenzno..............
Training and Outreach
Program s ................................ 6
New Publications.......................7
News & Notes................................8
AFSRE 1992 Nominees................ 9
AFSRE Networking
Database................................. 11

The Association for Farming Systems Research-Extension is an international society organized to promote the development and dissemination of
methods and results of participatory on-farm systems research and extension. The objective of such research is the development and adoption
through the participation by farm household members-male and female-of improved and appropriate technologies to meet the socioeconomic
needs of farm families; adequately supply global food, feed, and fiber requirements; and utilize resources in a sustainable and efficient manner.

domains in the analysis of research
systems is analogous to that of recom-
mendation domains in the analysis of
farming systems. National agricultural
research systems are grouped into
roughly homogeneous categories to
emphasize similarity within and differ-
ences between domains, while still
recognizing the locational specificity of
each research system. As with recom-
mendation domains, their relative
homogeneity permits the development
of sets of recommendations for each
institutional domain. Countries that are
similar in relation to environmental and
institutional variables can be said to
belong to the same institutional do-

Environmental Variables
The environmental variables under
consideration are (1) agroecological
diversity and (2) variation among
farming systems. Each has important
effects on a research system's capabili-
The amount of variation in the
agroecological environment and in
farming systems is related, and both
affect the range of technologies needed
by low-resource farmers throughout the
country. Because of the importance of
the agroecological environment in
shaping farming systems, increased
variation among farming systems tends
to reflect an increase in agroecological
diversity (Shaner et al., 1982; Norman,
1986). Greater diversity and variation
increase the number of different tech-
nologies that low-resource farmers need
and the amount of the adaptive research
needed to ensure the agroecological
compatibility of those technologies
(Merrill-Sands and McAllister, 1988).
The need for expanded adaptive research
may necessitate a larger number of FSRE
teams working in a particular country or
region and increased attention to
adapting on-shelf technologies.

Institutional Variables
Institutional variables reflect the
amount of resources available to agricul-
tural research, including trained person-
nel, funding, and the size of the research
system and facilities available. Low

levels of human and capital resources
traditionally have plagued research
systems in the developing world (World
Bank, 1985). Inadequate resources
available to agricultural research have
negatively affected the institutionaliza-
tion of the FSRE methodology after
donors have withdrawn financial and
technical support at the end of a project
(Frankenberger et al., 1988; Merrill-
Sands and McAllister, 1988). In a recent
review of USAID projects worldwide,
Byrnes (in press) notes that a lack of
both trained personnel and funding to
cover recurrent costs constrained the
majority of projects.
The size of the research system is
often a limiting factor in technology
generation. If the research system
experiences continual shortages of
manpower, it is difficult for the country
to dedicate sufficient personnel to a
program of agricultural research (Merrill-
Sands and McAllister, 1988). Addition-
ally, with few research stations or poor-
quality facilities available in the research
system, it is difficult to generate the
range of technologies needed for a wide
range of farming systems throughout
the country. As a result, research may
tend to be concentrated on a single
technology or geographical area. It is
necessary to consider the size of the
research system when attempting to
institutionalize FSRE, so as to avoid
imposing an overly ambitious program
that is beyond the system's immediate

Interaction Between Variables
The environmental and institutional
variables are intricately related.
Together they reflect the research
capacity and potential within a particu-
lar institutional domain. Countries that
are similar in relation to environmental
variables may not necessarily have
similar research capabilities or poten-
tials. Environmental variables may work
to limit the range of technologies that
are appropriate, in turn limiting the
options available to researchers. Institu-
tional variables, such as funding, may
limit the ability of a research system to
generate and adapt a wide range of
technologies for a large number of

distinct farming systems. Therefore, an
institutional domain represents multiple
interactions between the environmental
and institutional variables.

Classifying Institutional Domains
Applying the concept of institutional
domains to real-world situations can
prove problematic. Environmental
conditions fluctuate, and governmental
funding of agricultural research can
change abruptly (DeWalt and Hudgens,
1988). As Maxwell (1986) states "the
'target' is not static, but continuously on
the move." As with the FSRE approach
to generating agricultural change, the
analysis of institutional domains must
be dynamic, iterative, and flexible.
Additionally, generalizations across
several countries concerning the
physical environment or the strength of
the research institutions may be tenu-
ous. Conflicting data present different
portraits of the environmental and
institutional variables in different
countries. Analyzing institutional
domains under these conditions is
difficult, but not without basis. Institu-
tional domains are relative, delineated as
a basis for comparison. The identifica-
tion of general trends and patterns is the
goal, rather than the exact enumeration
of quantifiable data. The analysis does
not replace, but complements a detailed
institutional analysis of each research
system during the diagnostic phase of


This study suggests four institutional
domains, representing four types of
national research systems. Each domain
reflects a distinctive research capability
and the potential for development of
that capability. One research system
that is illustrative of each institutional
domain is presented to demonstrate (1)
the use of variables as criteria for
delineating institutional domains and
(2) the interaction between these
variables and the effect on the research
system. Table 1 classifies selected
countries into institutional domains.

Table 1. Selected Countries Listed According to Institutional Domaina


The Gambia


The Philippines


a The data were compiled using the following sources: Avila et al., 1989; Butler et al., 1988;
Byrnes, 1988a,1988b, 1988c, 1988d, 1988e, 1988f, in press; DeWalt and Hudgens, 1988;
Kayastha et al., 1989; McArthur and Rerkasem, 1988; McIntosh, 1986; Mills and Gilbert, 1989;
Rosario, 1985.

Institutional Domain I
The first institutional domain represents
countries with low environmental
variation and low research capacity.
These countries are generally small, with
relatively low variation in both
agroecological and farming systems.
These countries have small, centralized
research systems with a low research
capacity, due to small human-resource
bases and poor governmental funding of
agricultural research. The Gambia is a
good example of a country in this
institutional domain.
One of the most important institu-
tional constraints to agricultural re-
search in The Gambia is the low level of
available resources. The government's
ability to dedicate funds to research is
generally poor (Byrnes, 1988b; Mills and
Gilbert, 1989). Lack of trained person-
nel is the other key constraint (Byrnes,
in press). Fierce competition for
resources among on-station and on-farm
research projects within the research
system hinders the ability to pursue
integrated research programs (Mills and
Gilbert, 1989).
The low levels of agroecological
diversity and variation in farming
systems differentiate The Gambia from
other countries with very low levels of
resources available for research. Al-
though there is some variation in

rainfall throughout the country, the
numbers of distinctive agroecological
zones and farming systems are relatively
low (Mills and Gilbert, 1989).
The potential for extensive technol-
ogy generation in Domain I countries is
low. It is doubtful that these countries
are able to support comprehensive
research programs. However, because of
the relative homogeneity of the environ-
ment, small, low-resource countries such
as The Gambia "should focus research
efforts on technology adaptation and
testing while relying primarily on
International Agricultural Research
Centers (IARCs) and larger research
services in adjacent countries to supply a
range of technologies" (Gilbert and
Sompo-Ceesay, 1988; cited in Mills and
Gilbert, 1989). Thus, within this
institutional domain, a key constraint
for FSRE activities is the lack of access to
on-shelf technologies.

Institutional Domain II
Wide environmental variation and
insufficient research capacity character-
ize the second institutional domain.
Countries in this domain are generally
larger than in Domain I and contain a
greater variety of agroecological zones
and farming systems. Although these
countries have larger research systems,
research potential is low due to inad-

Institutional Domain

equate human or financial resources.
Nepal is representative of this institu-
tional domain.
Nepal has a larger research system
than that of The Gambia, and in certain
regions the system is able to generate
improved technologies. Human re-
sources do not constrain the present
research situation, although government
investment in research has been declin-
ing. Additionally, there are several
research institutes in Nepal with a fairly
large network of experimental farms
(Kayastha et al., 1989).
A key constraint limiting research
capacity in Nepal is environmental
variation. Nepal has three vastly
different agroecological zones, with a
great variety of farming systems within
each zone. The government has
allocated the majority of resources and
facilities for research in the lowland
Terai region. Technologies developed
for the Terai are not readily adaptable to
the hill or mountain zones. The level of
resources is not sufficient to sustain a
comprehensive research program in all
three agroecological zones (Kayastha et
al., 1989). As a result research activities
are unevenly distributed.
The potential for Nepal's research
system to target the multitude of
farming systems in the country is low.
Reallocation of resources from the Terai
to other regions may be helpful, but it is
unlikely that the present level of
resources would enable the system to
perform effectively in all three zones.
However, reallocation, combined with
increased inflow of resources from IARCs
and technologies from innovative
farmers, would increase the ability of
Nepal to focus more effectively on each

Institutional Domain III
Countries in the third institutional
domain have low environmental
variation and a good capacity for
research. These countries have research
systems equal or superior to those of
Domain II in terms of resources and
facilities, and less variation in
agroecological zones and farming
systems. Greater resources are available
for research than in Domain I, and there
is a greater capacity to generate tech-

nologies. However, government
funding is most often a limiting factor.
Bangladesh is typical of countries within
this institutional domain.
Although there are regional variations
in rainfall and soil types, agroecological
diversity and variation in farming
systems are low in Bangladesh. Mixed
crop-livestock systems predominate
(Jabbar and Abedin, 1989). Because of
the low variation in farming systems,
similar technologies may be adapted to
fit a large number of systems.
The research system consists of
several research institutions and agen-
cies, coordinated to a certain degree by a
central research council. There are
sufficient numbers of trained personnel
to carry out research activities. How-
ever, the research system is constrained
by a lack of financial resources. Al-
though government funding has
increased over time, there are periods of
insufficient funding for research.
Despite this, researchers have provided a
substantial amount of crop varieties that
farmers have adopted (Jabbar and
Abedin, 1989).
The potential for Bangladesh to
generate and adapt technologies is
greater than for The Gambia or Nepal.
Bangladesh has a larger research base
and greater resources for research than
The Gambia, especially in trained
personnel. The Bangladeshi research
system operates under similar institu-
tional conditions as Nepal; however, it is
able to focus its resources on fewer types
of farming systems and adapt technolo-
gies to a greater percentage of farms.
Within this institutional domain, the
key constraint for FSRE activities is a lack
of consistent funding for research.

Institutional Domain IV
The final institutional domain included
in this study consists of countries with
large environmental variation and
relatively strong research systems.
Research systems in this domain are
more extensive and have greater human
and capital resources than in Domains I,
11, or Ill. Funding, however, is still less
than optimal. Although these research
systems are able to generate and adapt
a wide range of technologies, extending
coverage to many of the numerous

agroecological zones and farming
systems, still there are regions that do
not receive adequate attention. Guate-
mala is a good example of a country
within this institutional domain.
The Guatemalan research system is
quite extensive, with a large base of
trained personnel. There are research
stations throughout much of the
country, enabling researchers to test
technologies on farms among a variety
of farming systems. The most important
constraint to research in Guatemala is
funding from the government, which
has decreased since the late 1970s
(DeWalt and Hudgens, 1988).
A large research network is important
in Guatemala because it is a diverse
country, both in terms of its
agroecological environment and its
farming systems. The research system is
burdened with providing a wide range of
technologies for a large number of
farming systems in various agro-
ecological zones. Research is still not
able to fully address the needs of all the
The potential for research in Guate-
mala is quite good. The research system
has proven able to generate technologi-
cal options and to make these available
to low-resource farmers (Ortiz and
Meneses, 1989). Additionally, Guate-
mala may be able to contribute to
regional research capabilities because of
its solid training approach and variety of
on-shelf technologies.


There are two key points that are
important to the analysis of institutional
domains. First, the division of national
research systems does not necessarily
follow geographic boundaries. For
example, there is no typical Central
American research system. Although
neighboring countries may share certain
agroecological conditions and farming
systems, their ability to generate tech-
nologies for these areas may differ
substantially. Geography does not
dictate the amount of funding for
research or the supply of trained
Second, although the analysis of

institutional domains gives an estimate
of the fundamental environmental and
institutional constraints that research
systems face, external variables, includ-
ing environmental conditions and
political stability, must be considered in
the analysis of institutional domains.


The main contribution of the analysis of
institutional domains to FSRE is a
standard framework for assessing
research capability and potential in
relation to both environmental and
institutional variables. Institutional
domains highlight basic trends and
patterns and provide a basis for compari-
son between countries. Additionally,
institutional domains can assist in two
areas of FSRE: setting realistic goals for
FSRE activities and expanding the
technological base for FSRE activities.

Setting Realistic Goals for FSRE
Donor projects too often have placed
overly ambitious projects into research
systems that were not able to sustain
them properly. This is especially
important in countries in Domains I and
II and has been a key constraint in both
The Gambia and Lesotho (Byrnes,
1988b; 1988e). FSRE projects or pro-
grams must be able to work within
environmental and institutional con-
straints. This does not imply acceptance
of the status quo; FSRE must work
toward institutional change. However, it
is important to remember that there is
no universally "ideal" research system.
A realistic assessment of a research
system's potential for generating
agricultural innovations aids in
addressing those areas that provide the
greatest opportunity for improvement.
Institutional domains also provide a
basic understanding of the future
prospects of research systems. For
example, The Gambia or Honduras
(Domains I and II, respectively) may not
be able attain the research capability of
Zambia or Guatemala (Domain IV).
However, both The Gambia and Hon-
duras can emphasize obtaining tech-
nologies from alternative sources and

invest their scarce resources in adapting
these technologies to particular farming

Expansion of the Technological Base
for FSRE Activities
In order to function effectively, FSRE
needs a base of technologies that is not
always available within national
research systems. Although all countries
would benefit from expanding their base
of technologies, expansion is most
critical in countries in Domains I and II.
Conversely, research systems in
Domains II and IV may be able to
provide technologies to the other
institutional domains. Combined with
farmers' indigenous knowledge and the
extensive network of IARCs, countries
with strong research bases can contrib-
ute to the body of knowledge available
to farming systems researchers. Use of
the institutional-domain framework
facilitates this process through the
identification of potential alternate
sources of technologies.


Recognition of basic constraints and
strengths in national agricultural
research systems is important in institu-
tionalizing the principles and methods
of FSRE within these systems. The
analysis of institutional domains is one
way to accomplish this objective. By
grouping national agricultural research
systems according to environmental and
institutional variables, this method
contributes to the identification of the
initial limits within which FSRE activi-
ties must function, as well as of the
future prospects for institutional change
within the research system. This pro-
vides a basis for analyzing research
capabilities and potentials and facilitates
realistic goal setting for FSRE activities.
Additionally, institutional domains aid
in the identification of the contributions
that research systems with superior
research capabilities can make to other
countries. Ultimately, the goal of the
analysis of institutional domains is to
aid in the planning of sustainable
institutionalization of FSRE into research
systems in developing countries.


Avila, M., E.E. Whingwiri, and B.G.
Mombeshora. 1989. Zimbabwe: Organiza-
tion and management of on-farm research in
the Department of Research and Specialist
Services, Ministry of Lands, Agriculture and
Resettlement. Special Series on the Organi-
zation and Management of On-Farm
Client Oriented Research, Case Study
No. 5. International Service for National
Agricultural Research (ISNAR): The Hague,
The Netherlands.
Butler, C.B., N. Young, T. Meyn, G. Buena-
vista, and S. Gacitua. 1988. Global review
of farming systems research and extension
activities: A results inventory based on
secondary sources. Report prepared for
USAID/S&T and USDA/OICD by the Office
of Arid Lands Studies, The University of
Arizona, Tucson.
Byrnes, K.J. 1988a. Draft case study of
Farming Systems Development Project-
Eastern Visayas (4920356). USAID, Center
for Development Information and
Evaluation, Washington, DC.
Byrnes, K.J. 1988b. Draft case study of
Gambia Mixed Farming and Resource
Management Project (6350203). USAID,
Center for Development Information and
Evaluation, Washington, DC.
Byrnes, K.J. 1988c. Draft case study of
Guatemala Food Productivity and
Nutritional Improvement Project
(5200232). USAID, Center for Develop-
ment Information and Evaluation,
Washington, DC.
Byrnes, K.J. 1988d. Draft case study of
Honduras Agricultural Research Project
(5220139). USAID, Center for Develop-
ment Information and Evaluation,
Washington, DC.
Byrnes, K.J. 1988e. Draft case study of
Lesotho Farming Systems Research Project
(6320065). USAID, Center for Develop-
ment Information and Evaluation,
Washington, DC.
Byrnes, K.J. 1988f. Draft case study of Zambia
Agricultural Development Research and
Extension Project (6110201). USAID,
Center for Development Information and
Evaluation, Washington, DC.
Byrnes, K.J. In press. A review of AID
experience: Farming systems research and
extension (FSRE) projects 1975-1987.
USAID/PPC/CDIE, Washington, DC.
Chapman, J.A., A.L. Brown, and R.J. Castro.
1988. Possible future directions for AID
activity in farming systems research: A
concept paper. Pages 369-385 in Proceed-
ings of the Farming Systems Research and
Extension Symposium, University of
Arkansas, Fayetteville.
Collinson, M. 1988. FSR in evolution: Past
and future. Pages 1-9 in Proceedings of the
Farming Systems Research and Extension
Symposium, University of Arkansas,
de Janvry, A., and J.J. Dethier. 1985. Techno-

logical innovation in agriculture: The political
economy of its bias. CGIAR Study Paper
No. 1. Consultative Group on Interna-
tional Agricultural Research,Washington,
DeWalt, B.R., and R. Hudgens. 1988. Farming
systems research and extension activities
in Guatemala: A results inventory. Report
prepared for USAID/S&T, USAID/Guate-
mala, and USDA/OICD by the Office of
Arid Lands Studies, The University of
Arizona, Tucson.
Frankenberger, T.R., T.J. Finan, B.R. DeWalt,
R.E. Hudgens, G. Mitawa, K. Rerkasem,
C.B. Flora, and N. Young. 1988. Identifica-
tion of results of farming systems research
and extension activities: A synthesis.
Report prepared for USAID/S&T and
USDA/OICD by the Office of Arid Lands
Studies, The University of Arizona,
Gilbert, E., and M.S. Sompo-Ceesay. 1988.
Dealing with the size constraint: Agricul-
tural research management in small
developing countries. Paper presented at
International Service for National
Agricultural Research (ISNAR)/Rutgers
Workshop, July, 1988.
Jabbar, M.A., and M.Z. Abedin. 1989.
Bangladesh: The evolution and significance of
on-farm and farming systems research in the
Bangladesh Agricultural Research Institute.
Special Series on the Organization and
Management of On-Farm Client Oriented
Research, Case Study No. 3. International
Service for National Agricultural Research
(ISNAR): The Hague, The Netherlands.
Kayastha, B.N., S.B. Mathema, and P. Rood.
1989. Nepal: Organization and management
ofon-farm research in the national agricul-
tural research system. Special Series on the
Organization and Management of On-
Farm Client Oriented Research, Case Study
No. 4. International Service for National
Agricultural Research (ISNAR): The Hague,
The Netherlands.
McArthur, H.J., and K. Rerkasem. 1988.
Farming systems research and extension
activities in Indonesia: A results inventory.
Report prepared for USAID/S&T, USAID/
Indonesia, and USDA/OICD by the Office
of Arid Lands Studies, The University of
Arizona, Tucson.
McIntosh, J.L. 1986. Institutionalizing FSRE:
The Indonesian experience. In Proceedings
of the Fourth Annual Farming Systems
Research Symposium, University of
Arkansas, Fayetteville.
Maxwell, S. 1986. Farming systems research:
I hitting a moving target. World Develop-
ment 14:65-77.
Merrill-Sands, D., and J. McAllister. 1988.
Strengthening the integration ofon-farm client
oriented research in national agricultural
research systems (NARS): Management
lessons from nine countries. Special Series on
the Organization and Management of On-
Farm Client Oriented Research, Compara-
tive Study No. 1. International Service for

National Agricultural Research (ISNAR):
The Hague, The Netherlands.
Mills, B., and E. Gilbert. 1989. Agricultural
innovation and technology testing by
Gambian farmers: Hope for institution-
alizing OFR in small country research
systems? Paper presented at the Ninth
Annual Farming Systems Research-
Extension Symposium, October 9-11,
1989, Fayetteville, Arkansas.
Norman, D.W. 1986. Defining a farming
system. In P.E. Hildebrand, ed., Perspectives
on farming systems research and extension.
Boulder, Colo.: Lynne Rienner.
Norman, D., and M. Collinson. 1985.

Farming systems research in practice and
theory. Pages 16-30 in J.V. Remenyi, ed.,
Agricultural systems research for developing
countries: Proceedings of an international
workshop held at Hawkesbury Agricultural
College 12-15 May 1985. Australian Centre
for International Agricultural Research,
Richmond, New South Wales.
Ortiz, R., and A. Meneses. 1989. Increasing
the adoption rates of new technologies
with a new technology transfer model.
Paper presented at the Ninth Annual
Farming Systems Research-Extension
Symposium, October 9-11, 1989,
Fayetteville, Arkansas.

Rosario, E.L. 1985. Farming systems research
in the Philippines. Pages 16-30 in J.V.
Remenyi, ed., Agricultural systems research
for developing countries: Proceedings of an
international workshop held at Hawkesbury
Agricultural College 12-15 May 1985.
Australian Centre for International
Agricultural Research, Richmond, New
South Wales.
Shaner, W.W., P.F. Phillip, and W.R.
Schemhl. 1982. Farming systems research
and development: Guidelines for developing
countries. Boulder, Colo.: Westview Press.
World Bank. 1985. Agricultural research and
extension: An evaluation of the World
Bank's experience. Washington, DC.


Training Program for
Female Health-Care

Boston University is offering a new
eight-week certificate program entitled
"Women Managers of Health Programs
in Developing Countries: Increasing
Their Effectiveness," to be held from
October 4 through November 30, 1991.
The course is intended for women who
are managers in health care as well as for
women and men who supervise women
managers and are responsible for
developing the management capacity of
their staff.
Classes are structured to maximize
skill development. Program topics will
include "Managing a more productive
health team," "Health care economics,"
and "Social marketing of health-care
services." Participants will also receive
up to 30 hours of training in computers
and software packages. Throughout
the course, faculty and special guest
lecturers will lead the participants in
informal group discussions on issues
related to being women managers. This
colloquium, entitled "Women-in-
management: Issues for the 1990s," is
designed to be a forum in which
participants can raise issues of concern
that have not been addressed in the
curriculum. "On-site" activities will
include visits to health-care facilities in
the Greater Boston area.
Applications for the program must be

received by September 15, 1991. For
more information, contact: Women
Managers of Health Programs, Center
for International Health, Boston
University, 53 Bay State Rd., Boston, MA
02215 U.S.A. Telephone: (617) 353-
4524; Fax: (617) 353-6330; Telex:
200191 BU UR.

The Farmer-to-Farmer


The Farmer-to-Farmer Program sends
U.S. volunteers to share needed skills
with small-scale farmers in Third World
countries. The program, which is
funded by the U.S. Agency for Interna-
tional Development/Bureau for Food
and Peace & Voluntary Assistance (U.S.
AID/FVA), seeks to improve nutrition for
rural families, increase income for the
poorest of the poor, and better the
quality of life in rural areas. Using a
hands-on, practical approach, volun-
teers work with people in developing
nations to improve farm practices of all
kinds. The program has proven to be an
exceedingly cost-effective form of
foreign assistance because it uses
dedicated volunteers instead of paid
consultants. Volunteer assignments
typically range from two to twelve
weeks and volunteers have worked all
over the world.
For information about becoming a
volunteer or about requesting volun-
teers, contact Thoric Cederstrom,

Coordinator, Farmer-to-Farmer Program,
Bureau of Applied Research in Anthro-
pology, 907 E. Sixth St., The University
of Arizona, Tucson, AZ 85721 U.S.A.
Telephone: (602) 626-8106 or 8107;
FAX: (602) 621-2088.

Tillers International

Training Courses

A nonprofit corporation, Tillers Interna-
tional promotes practical skills for
sustainable rural development with a
focus on small farms by adapting the
best ideas from generations of farmers to
the economic, social, and ecological
development of rural communities.
Tillers' specialty is the international
application of animal power.
Tillers offers training courses for
international agriculturalists and
development specialists who desire
hands-on instruction in agricultural
techniques. Training is offered in such
activities as design and building of
animal-drawn implements, yoke build-
ing and fitting, blacksmithing, ox
training and driving, and the role of
draft animals in rural development. In
addition to their regular workshops,
Tillers offers special sessions that are
tailored to the needs of specific individu-
als or groups. For more information,
contact: Tillers International, 5239
South 24th, Kalamazoo, MI 49002-2019
U.S.A. Telephone: (616) 344-3233 days,
342-6040 evenings.


The Social Sciences in
International Agricultural
Research: Lessons from the

Edited by Constance M. McCorkle
The Collaborative Research Support
Programs (CRSPs) constitute an innova-
tive effort to combat world food prob-
lems through research on smallholder
production and consumption systems in
Africa, Asia, and Latin America. A signal
feature of most CRSPs is their inclusion
of anthropologists and social scientists
in agricultural research and develop-
ment, reflecting a growing recognition
that solving world food problems is as
much a social, cultural, and policy
challenge as it is a technical one.
Drawing on experiences from five
CRSPs (Bean/Cowpea, Nutrition, Peanut,
Small Ruminant, and Sorghum/Millet),
this 300-page book documents the
positive ethnographic, methodological,
and analytical contributions that social
science research makes to the process of
technology design, testing, and delivery.
The authors review the history and
rationale of the CRSP concept and the
basic organizational structure of the five
CRSPs represented, present examples of
social science contributions to these
programs, and discuss the difficulties
and the rewards of collaborative inter-
disciplinary research.
The Social Sciences in International
Agricultural Research: Lessons From the
CRSPs is available for US$35.00 from
Lynne Rienner Publishers. Please
contact the publisher at 1800 30th St.,
Boulder, CO 80301 U.S.A. for more
information about ordering copies of
this book.

1986 to 1989 Project Summary

The Kerr Center for Sustainable
Agriculture, Inc.
This publication presents information
generated by the Kansas Center for
Sustainable Agriculture's (KCSA) demon-
stration and research projects in land
stewardship and animal husbandry. The
125-page book describes management
decisions, tabulates production, eco-
nomic, and marketing data, and evalu-
ates results.
Through education, demonstration,
research, and local support, KCSA helps
the agricultural community to develop
sustainable farming systems. Farmers
are interested in production systems that
reduce costs, address consumers'
changing tastes, and protect environ-
mental quality and human health. For
many, the primary obstacles to changing
their farming operations are a lack of
relevant, farm-based information, peer
support, appropriate expertise, and
sustainable farming demonstrations for
first-hand viewing.
Although outside specialists offer
valuable information, no substitute
exists for a farmer's skills. Information
can enhance these management skills
and increase understanding of economic
and biological processes involved. This
knowledge enables farmers to decrease
purchased inputs and to increase
resource-use efficiency, resulting in a
more profitable and sustainable farm
Sustainable farming methods are not
a well-defined set of practices or man-
agement techniques. Rather, they are a
range of choices and management
options to consider along with con-
straints and opportunities. The 1986-
1989 Project Summary provides valuable
information for helping farmers with
these choices.
To order a copy of the 1986-1989
Project Summary, send US$5.00 per copy
(which includes shipping and handling)
to KCSA, P.O. Box 588, Poteau, OK
74953-0588 U.S.A. Please make checks
and money orders payable to KCSA.

Beyond the Large Farm:
Ethics and Research Goals for

Edited by Paul B. Thompson and
Bill A. Stout
This 312-page book provides a much-
needed appraisal of where U.S. agricul-
tural policy has been and, more impor-
tantly, where it should go in the future.
In wide-ranging speculative essays, the
contributors consider the full spectrum
of agricultural activity and offer strong
reasons for changing policy agendas.
By weighing ethical and social values
equally with economic concerns of
production and consumption, the
discussions point the way to a new
formulation of agricultural research and
policy goals.
Essay topics include: Values in the
Agricultural Laboratory; Agroethics and
Agricultural Research; Balancing Moral
Imperatives Through Rural Develop-
ment; The Value Measure in Public
Agricultural Research; Moral Responsi-
bility in Agricultural Research, An
Agroecological Analysis of the Environ-
mental Degradation Resulting From the
Structure of Agriculture; Making the
Land Ethic Operations: Toward an
Integrated Theory of Environmental
Management; Ethics of U.S. Agricultural
Research in International Development;
The Cultural Ecologist Concept of
Justice; Agricultural Research Policy and
the Family Farm; Environmental Goals
in Agricultural Science; and U.S. Agricul-
tural Research Policy and International
Distributive Justice.
Beyond the Large Farm is available
from Westview Press for US$36.95. For
more information about ordering this
book, please contact Westview Press,
5500 Central Avenue, Boulder, CO
80301 U.S.A. Telephone: (303) 444-
3541; FAX: (303) 449-3356.

News & Notes

UPWARD: A New Network

The International Potato Center (C.I.P.)
has announced the inauguration of
UPWARD, the User's Perspective with
Agricultural Research and Development
network. UPWARD aims to bring the
users of agricultural technology closer to
the research efforts of technical scien-
tists. By focusing on those involved in
the full food chain from production to
consumption, the network will direct
more attention to aspects of agricultural
research beyond field production.
Contact: Dr. Robert E. Rhoades, UP-
WARD Coordinator, C.I.P., P.O. Box 933,
Manila, Philippines.

USAID Details Advances in
Child Survival

The U.S. Agency for International
Development, describing five years of an
intensified global immunization effort,
reported that 316 million children have
been immunized against the major
preventable diseases of diphtheria,
whooping cough, tetanus, polio, and
tuberculosis. At the same time, infant
mortality rates in USAID-assisted
countries have been cut overall by ten
percent. Advances were also reported in
the availability and use of oral
rehydration salts (ORS) to combat
dehydration from diarrheal diseases.
Contact: Mike Marlow, USAID. Tele-
phone: (202) 647-4274.

Loss of Genetic Diversity

The Institute for Agricultural Biodiversity
has been formed to address the problem
of diminishing agricultural genetic
diversity. The organization will develop
preservation models through training,
research, interdisciplinary education,
policy analysis, and direct conservation.
Contact: Shan Thomas or Hans Peter
Jorgensen, Institute for Agricultural
Biodiversity, Rural Route 3, Box 309,
Decorah, IA 52101 U.S.A. Telephone:
(319) 382-5947.

New Aflatoxin-
Control Method

Aflatoxin, produced by a fungus,
commonly contaminates oilseed crops,
such as cotton, corn, and peanuts.
Although it is poisonous if consumed in
large amounts, aflatoxin rarely is fatal.
However, it may be carcinogenic if
consumed over long periods.
In the United States and in many
other countries, oilseed crops routinely
are tested for aflatoxin contamination.
In many developing countries, testing
and treatment procedures are non-
existent, posing a potential health risk.
Food and safety expert Ralph Price
has developed an ammonium bicarbon-
ate powder that can be used to destroy
aflatoxin contamination on corn and
peanuts. The powder is cheap, readily
available, and safe to use on foods. For
more information, contact Dr. Ralph
Price, College of Agriculture, The
University of Arizona, Tucson, AZ 85721
U.S.A. Telephone: (602) 621-1728.

FERN: The Forest Ecosystem
Rescue Network

Grass-roots organizations worldwide are
being urged to meet simultaneously this
year around the theme: "The Fate of
Our Forests A Time to Act." The fourth
round of simultaneous conferences
called by FERN, the meetings will be
held September 13-15, 1991. Rather
than having one costly, centralized
conference, numerous smaller confer-
ences will be organized and held in
communities around the world. At
these conferences, participants evaluate
local forest concerns and decide upon
action. The purposes of the conferences
are to focus public attention on forest
death and decline, to devise practical
strategies for halting this decline, and to
share information with other concerned
people and organizations. Contact: Dan
Hemenway, co-coordinator, FERN, c/o
Yankee Permaculture, 7781 Lenox Ave.,
Jacksonville, FL 32221 U.S.A. Tele-
phone: (904) 781-9249.

One Peaceful World

Volunteers are being sought to travel to
the Soviet Union to help organic farmers
in Pushkin. Soviet authorities will pay
all expenses except airfare. Contact:
Alex Jack, One Peaceful World, Box 10,
Becket, MA 01223 U.S.A. Telephone:
(413) 623-5742.

Review of Home Gardens

Recognizing that home and school
gardens are effective ways of increasing
food availability, nutritional status, and
income among the urban and rural
poor, the Asian Vegetable Research and
Development Center (AVRDC) is under-
taking a review of home gardening
projects in South and Southeast Asia.
The review will survey the performance
of ongoing and completed garden
projects in the region. The Center hopes
to identify the factors that affect such
projects and the reasons why home and
school gardens have not been more
widely adopted in developing countries.
Contact: Office of Publications and
Communications, AVRDC, P.O. Box
205, Taipei, Taiwan 10099.

Find Your Feet

Find Your Feet is a small, international
organization that works at the interface
of nutrition and agriculture. The group
specializes in maximizing the use of leaf
crops through green crop fractionation
at a village co-op level. Presently, the
organization is working with cowpea as
a multipurpose crop in Nicaragua. They
fractionate the leaves, use the curd or
concentrate in child-nutrition interven-
tion programs, and use the residual fiber
for ruminant feed, for green manure to
improve soil structure, and for biogas
generation. Contact: Find Your Feet,
U.S.A. Office, 2720 Hutchinson Rd.,
Murfreesboro, TN 37130 U.S.A. Tele-
phone: (615) 895-2841.

AFSRE 1992


Please use this biographical information
to fill out the enclosed ballot.

David Norman currently is a profes-
sor of agricultural economics at Kansas
State University. He has wide experi-
ence in agriculture in general, beginning
as a farm laborer in Sussex, England, and
Tyrol, Austria, and in farming systems in
particular. He served for eleven years in
the Rural Economy Research Unit of
Ahmadu Bello University in Zaria,
Nigeria where he began developing his
framework for farming systems research
while working with farmers. Between
1982 and 1990, he led a farming systems
research and extension project in
Botswana. Dr. Norman has authored a
number of seminal works in FSR/E,
including Farming Systems in the Nigerian
Savanna: Research and Strategies for
Development (with Simmonds and Hays).
Robert Hart is a PhD trained in
agronomy and is the executive director
of International Forum for Sustainable
Land Use Systems Research (INFORM).
He served as the director of Rodale
Center at Pennsylvania and is also
experienced in the development of
agricultural systems and research
methodology. Currently Dr. Hart is
involved in farming systems research in
Central America and the Eastern

David Gibbon is a PhD lecturer at
the School of Development Studies,
University of East Anglia, Norwich,
England. He has worked extensively in
research on farming systems, agricultural
research, planning, organization, and
interdisciplinary field research. For the
last few years Dr. Gibbon has concen-
trated on African rural development.
Janice Jiggins is a PhD trained in
England. She has worked and lived in
Sub-Saharan Africa and South Asia. For

the last ten years she has worked as an
independent consultant in agricultural
and rural development. She also works
in women's health programming and
advocacy on behalf of women for the
Dutch Ministry of Development Coop-
eration, the World Bank, FAO, ILO, and
a number of non-profit foundations. Dr.
Jiggins has a special interest in the
methodological aspects of participatory
technology development, innovation,
and extension.
James Olukosi is an agricultural
economist from the Institute for Agro-
nomic Research at Ahmadu Bello
University, Zaria, Nigeria. He is also a
National FSR Coordinator in Nigeria and
a WAFSRN Steering Committee member.
Enos Shumba is head of agronomy at
the Department of Research and Special-
ist Services Division and Ministry of
Agriculture in Zimbabwe. Long a
participant in AFSR/E, he has presented
papers at the symposium and has had
numerous publications in the Zimbabwe
Agricultural Journal. He also is one of the
first leading Zimbabwe FSR/E practitio-

At Large
Susan Almy is currently a visiting
associate professor in the Food and
Resource Economics Department at the
University of Florida. Over the past ten
years, she has worked in agriculture and
rural development in Africa and Latin
America. Dr. Almy worked on farming
systems research in a university project
in Brazil and with the National Institute
in Cameroon.
Michael Collinson is trained as an
agricultural economist. He spent 22
years in Africa, based in Tanzania and
Kenya, and authored Farm Management
and Peasant Agriculture, a university
textbook in data collection. Initially, he
worked on microlevel farm management
surveys and emphasized methodology
development, but then later incorpo-
rated the macrolevel survey. Working in
project planning and appraisal, he
contributed to the development of a
farming systems methodology with
CIMMYT. Dr. Collinson worked for 12
years incorporatingjhe national level
programs in 15 countries in eastern and

southern Africa. His current work is in
the social sciences at the CGIAR

Nomination Chair
James Bingen is a PhD trained in
comparative politics, public administra-
tion, and socio-technical systems.
Currently he is the associate director of
the Senegal Research Project and co-
program chair of the Association for
Farming Systems Research/Extension
Annual Symposium (1990-92). From
1982-87, he worked as field project
director of the Senegal Agriculture
Research and Planning Project in Dakar,
Senegal. Dr. Bingen has vast work
experience in Africa and has long
worked in agriculture and farming
systems research and development
Dan Gait is an agricultural economist
and a consultant working in Jordan. In
recent years he worked in Nepal and
Honduras with USAID agriculture
research and farming system projects.
At the Universities of Florida and
California, he worked in cooperative
extension, agriculture, and farming
systems and development.

Timothy Finan is currently at the
Bureau of Applied Anthropology at the
University of Arizona. He has served as
secretary-treasurer of Association for
Farming Systems Research/Extension
since its inception. In addition to
extensive travel related to farming
systems work, Dr. Finan has developed
and maintained the financial ledgers
and the membership lists.

Clive Lightfoot is located at the
International Center for Living Aquatic
Resource Management (ICLARM) in the
Philippines. He is taking the knowledge
he gained from farming systems projects
in Africa and Asia to aquaculture. Dr.
Lightfoot has participated extensively in
FSR/E symposia, providing leadership for
the organization and presenting impor-
tant papers.


and Field Trip

This conference, sponsored by the
Engineering Foundation in cooperation
with the University of Arizona's Office of
Arid Lands Studies, the USDA's Coopera-
tive States Research Service, and RIKEN,
Waiko City, Saitama, Japan, will be held
August 4-10, 1991 at the Sheraton Hotel
and Spa, Santa Barbara, California.
The conference's goal is to obtain an
international perspective on state-of-the-
art arid lands research and the possible
application of its results towards tech-
niques that might be used to sustain
productivity and to ensure future
habitability of arid zones worldwide
through joint United States/Japanese
collaborative research. The conference is
designed to assess alternative products
from and uses of the world's arid lands
and the issues that surround their
various management strategies. This will
be achieved first by examining new crop
and product research pertinent to arid
zones and considering opportunities for
and constraints to their application.
Second, various desert-management
approaches will be considered within
this context. A field trip through
Southern California and Arizona will
provide a firsthand view of various arid
lands management programs.
The program will include invited
papers on the following topics:
Biotransformation of Natural Plant
Desalinization of Soils
Desert Architecture
Liquid Waxes
Sand Dune Stabilization
Solar Energy Development

Transportation Systems
Attendance at the conference is by
invitation or application. For more
information about the conference and
an application form, contact: Engineer-
ing Foundation, Collaborative Research
and Development Applications for Arid
Lands, 345 E. 47th St., N.Y., N.Y., 10017
U.S.A. Telephone: (212) 705-7835.

Conference on
Agriculture and the

What is the impact of today's agriculture
on the environment? In many develop-
ing countries, population pressure has
resulted in farming patterns, including
low-input systems, that have led to
deforestation, soil erosion, over-crop-
ping of unsuitable soils, and water
pollution. In many developed countries,
high crop yields and animal production
systems have been achieved by substitut-
ing machinery, chemicals, and technol-
ogy for labor, land, and rotations. What
are the economic, social, ecological, and
environmental impacts of these substitu-
tions? Are current agricultural practices
Such questions will be the focus of an
international conference to review the
overall impact of today's agriculture on
the environment. Hosted by the Ohio
State University, the conference will be
held in Columbus, Ohio, from Novem-
ber 10-13, 1991. Five sessions will
address global issues, such as deforesta-
tion, soil erosion, and water pollution;
economic, sociological, environmental,
and ecological aspects of a more sustain-
able agriculture; the role of integrated
pest management in agricultural
sustainability; the impact of agriculture
on water quality; and the issue of food
safety in relation to chemical inputs.
The conference, which will involve
invited presentations, workshops, and
poster sessions, will be published as
abstracts and in a proceedings volume
with full papers.
For further information, contact:
Dr. Clive A. Edwards, Department of
Entomology, The Ohio State University,

1735 Neil Ave., Columbus, OH 43210
U.S.A. Telephone: (614) 292-3786;
Fax: (614) 292-2180.

National Rural Families

Kansas State University is hosting the
11th Annual National Rural Families
Conference, from September 25-27,
1991. This year's theme is "Children,
Youth, and Their Families." Contact:
Conference Office, Kansas State Univer-
sity, 241 College Court Bldg., Manhat-
tan, KS 66506-6009 U.S.A. Telephone:
(913) 532-5575.

Irrigation Systems
Workshop: Performance
Measurement in FMIS

Farmer-Managed Irrigation Systems
(FMIS) are those in which most manage-
ment decisions and activities are made
and carried out by farmers, with the
government providing periodic techni-
cal or logistical support. An important
characteristic of FMIS is the control of
water resources by farmers. These
systems are often classified as "small-
scale irrigation systems" or "minor
irrigation systems", although in many
countries they contribute to the produc-
tion of a significant portion of the
subsistence food supply.
The International Irrigation Manage-
ment Institute and the Instituto
Nacional de Ciencia y Tecnica Hidricas
de Argentina will hold a workshop from
November 12-15, 1991 in Mendoza,
Argentina, which will focus on output
and impact objectives in FMIS. Specific
objectives include:
* To exchange experiences and ideas
on criteria best suited to achieve distinct
goals and objectives and to develop a set
of indicators for assessing FMIS perfor-
mance that will be useful for farmers,
farmer organizations, policymakers, and
* To discuss and develop appropriate
cost-effective methodologies for the
collection of data relevant to the
proposed performance indicators;

* To review case studies of the perfor-
mance of different FMIS and to synthe-
size their findings to draw general
conclusions and recommendations;
* To create an awareness that perfor-
mance evaluation is an important factor
in ensuring goals of economic viability,
social equity, and sustainability; and
* To discuss the possibilities of gener-
ating future programs for action in
performance and evaluation of FMIS.
Conference abstracts (300-500 words,
in English or Spanish) should reflect
clearly the content of the participants
conference paper and include the
author's name, mailing address, and
telephone and FAX numbers. Papers
should be submitted by July 31, 1991
and will be published in the Workshop
Proceedings. Abstracts and papers
should be submitted to Dr. Shaul Manor,
FMIS Network Coordinator, IMMI, P.O.
Box 2075, Colombo, Sri Lanka.

Networking Database

Dr. Clive Lightfoot, the AFSRE's Board
Member for Networking, is compiling a
computerized database on networks that
pertain to farming systems research-
extension. The database and its software
will be made available to all network

If you or your organization can contrib-
ute information to this database, please
fill out the form below and return it to
Dr. Clive Lightfoot, International Center
for Living Aquatic Resources Manage-
ment, MC P.O. Box 1501, Makati, Metro
Manila 1299, Philippines. FAX: (63-2)
816 3183; CGNET: CGI226.

---- -------------------- ---------
Network Name:

Coordinator/Contact Person:

Membership Number:
Membership Type:

Institutional Q Individuals LJ

By invitation Ci

Open C

Date of establishment:
Publish directory?
Publish newsletter?
Newsletter title:
Published by:

Number of issues/year:

The AFSRE Newsletter is supported by a U.S. AID-supported grant (58-319R-9-003) from the Office of International
Cooperation and Development, United States Department of Agriculture; the Office of International Programs, Institute
of Food and Agricultural Sciences, University of Florida; contributions from AFSRE members; Title XII funding; and the
Office of Arid Lands Studies, The University of Arizona. The editors welcome articles, news items, and publication
announcements for consideration in future issues.

Address comments, contributions, and requests for mailing to:

Timothy R. Frankenberger, Editor
Association of Farming Systems Research-Extension Newsletter
Office of Arid Lands Studies
The University of Arizona
845 N. Park Avenue
Tucson, Arizona 85719 U.S.A.
FAX: (602) 621-3816

Associate Editors:
Daniel M. Goldstein and
Nancy Schmidt
Design: Arid Lands Design, 1991

SAssociation for Farming Systems Research-Extension Newsletter
Office of Arid Lands Studies, The University of Arizona
845 North Park Avenue, Tucson, Arizona 85719 USA
Telephone: 602-621-1955, FAX: 602-621-3816

Membership Information

Please send membership fees (US $40 for persons from the United States, Canada, western Europe, Japan, Australia, and New
Zealand; US $20 for students studying in these countries; US $20 for all other persons; and US $10 for associate members from
developing countries) along with the completed form to:

Dr. Timothy J. Finan, Secretary/Treasurer
Department of Anthropology
The University of Arizona
Tucson, Arizona 85721 USA

1. Family name
2. First name and middle name or initial

3. Female Male Age Citizenship

4. Title or position
5. Department
6. Institution
7. Postal mailing address

8. Telephone Fax Telex

9. Primary languages)

10. Other spoken languages (indicate fluent, f, proficient, p, basic, b)

11. Other languages read
12. Highest educational degree Discipline
13. Current professional interests

14. Experience: Name of project, capacity, country

15. Would you like to volunteer to serve as an AFSRE country representative to collect association dues in local currency and
forward them, in US dollars, to the treasurer if you can legally do this in your country of residence?

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