Association of Farming Systems Research-Extension newsletter
Full Citation
Permanent Link: http://ufdc.ufl.edu/UF00071919/00008
 Material Information
Title: Association of Farming Systems Research-Extension newsletter
Portion of 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
Subjects / Keywords: Agricultural systems -- Research -- Periodicals   ( lcsh )
Agricultural extension work -- Research -- Periodicals   ( lcsh )
Genre: periodical   ( marcgt )
serial   ( sobekcm )
General Note: Description based on: Vol. 4, no. 1 (1993); title from caption.
 Record Information
Source Institution: University of Florida
Rights Management: All rights reserved by the source institution and holding location.
Resource Identifier: oclc - 32987463
System ID: UF00071919:00008

Full Text

Volume 4,
Number 1, 1993

Identifying Beneficiaries & Participants
in Client-Driven on -Farm Reseasrch
by Jacqueline A. Ashby .................................. 1

News & Notes ................................. 4

Conferences ..................................... 6

New Publications ......................... 8

Training Outreach & Programs... 10

Jacqueline A. Ashby2

Farmer participation in agricultural research and
development is now widely promoted as a vital
feature of sustainable agricultural innovation. The
* purpose of this paper is to raise some issues that
need to be addressed if farmers are to participate
on a regular basis in the design and evaluation of
technical innovations in agriculture. In particular,
the issue of "who is to participate" will be ex-
plored. The paper begins by analyzing some key
features of participatory research and development
(R & D), and then applies this framework to the
issue of "who participates?"

Participatory R & D has some unique character-
istics. First, it is client-driven. This means that
farmers' criteria, indigenous knowledge, and
subjective preferences have weight in decisions
about technical innovation. More fundamentally, it
also implies that farmers are actively involved in
decision-making about what kinds of innovations
are introduced.
Clients have differing needs, specific to their
own agronomic and socioeconomic situations.
SAddress prepared for the AFSRE Symposium. Michigan,
September 14-18, 1992.
SInternational Center for Tropical Agriculture (CIAT)
A.A. 6713, Call, Colombia, South America
3 The first section of this paper draws extensively on Ashby,
Jacqueline A. and Louise Sperling. "Institutionalizing
participatory client driven research and technology develop-
S ment in agriculture." Paper presented at the CGIAR Social
Scientists Meeting, The Hague, August 17-20, 1992.

Farmers innovate in a given locality with
particular constraints and opportunities in
mind. Addressing client needs means that
the technology development process itself
must be sufficiently decentralized to meet
diverse goals. Such decentralized technology
development, the second major feature of
participatory R & D, contrasts starkly with
applied agricultural science, which is
primarily concerned with discovering general
principles that permit technology to function
in a wide range of circumstances. Decentral-
izing technology development results in new
functions for both the formal research system
and farmer partners.
In applied research, decentralization
requires that the "pipeline" or transfer of
technology model give way to a highly
interactive relationship between technology
designers and clients. Farmers participate
early on in the design as well as testing and
validation of new technologies; not just at
the very late point in time when adoption (or
rejection) occurs, but early in the research
process when a particular technological
theme is chosen and design features are being
determined. Such client involvement gener-
ates important feedback for the design of
prototype technology, which is tested,
adapted, and redesigned to fit local
circumstances and may stimulate

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.

further applied research in response to client
specifications. Decentralizing toward an interac-
tive model means that applied research must have
a sharpened capacity to integrate feedback and
modify research schedules in response to client
In addition to responding, however, applied
research itself must take an active role in antici-
pating diverse clients' needs by assuring many
options, not only "on the shelves," but in the
actual fields or laboratories. National research
"Applied programs and regional experiment stations no
longer need to produce "finished" technologies or
research itself final recommendations. Instead, to facilitate
Decentralized testing, a "menu" of potentially
useful technologies needs to be identified, usually
active role in by bringing farmers onto experiment stations or
otherwise into contact with "prototype" equip-
anticipating ment, varieties, or cultural practices. Farmers
Sprescreen these prototypes to build the "menus"
diverse clients of options for localized, adaptive testing.

needs by Yet, effective decentralization of testing is a
task beyond most public sector research services
assuring many and it is in this realm that farmer partners
become key research leaders. The testing of many
options, not different "menus" tailored to different preferences

only "on the and localities sets the third major feature of
participatory R & D: the devolution to farmers of
shelves," but major responsibility for adaptive testing.
Farmers take the lead in identifying and
in the actual transmitting local recommendations.
fields or A fourth important feature of client-
driven R & D in agriculture is the sharing
laboratories." of accountability for quality control -"
over research among the organizations
taking part (state research/extension programs,
4 NGOs, producer organizations, local communi-
ties, and informal farmer groups). One of the
biggest obstacles to institutionalizing participa-
tory client-driven R & D is that presently most
public sector agricultural research systems and
their staff are not penalized for producing tech-
nologies that farmers cannot use. A necessary
feature of client-driven or demand-led R & D is
that clients must have the right to "buy into" (or
"sell out of") a research program via their control
over a significant proportion of resources needed
for that program. Were the level of applied
research resources tied to the impact obtained by
adaptive research, and were that same adaptive
research financed to a significant degree by
farmer-controlled resources, then the necessary
mechanisms for receptivity to client demand in
the research system could develop. Impact-
oriented agendas may differ markedly from those
geared primarily toward the generation of re-
search results.
Furthermore, clients have key roles in evaluat-

ing the performance of research programs to ensure
accountability. With rights go responsibilities, and
responsibility in this context implies that farmers
share in implementation and undertake some cost
sharing, which makes decentralization possible.
In summary, participatory R & D actively
involves farmers in decision-making about agricul-
tural innovation, and so requires decentralized
technology development with institutions capable
of receiving and acting upon feedback from clients.
Devolution of major responsibilities to farmers for
adaptive testing and for identifying and transmit-
ting local recommendations is an integral feature
of this approach. Decentralization and devolution
also require cost sharing, with farmers undertaking
some costs and acquiring a share of control over
and responsibility for the quality of R & D services
in order to ensure greater accountability and
responsiveness to farmers' research agendas.

A participatory approach to agricultural R & D
is usually equated with one that is more equitable.
Attention to the technology development needs of
resource-poor or women farmers, for example, is
more likely to be achieved if participatory methods
are used to give "voice" to their needs. In practice,
participatory methods are an efficient way
of giving voice to the agenda of the poor
)/ and disadvantaged, but are equitable
S only if certain conditions necessary to
S ensure their presence and active involve-
ment in a participatory process are ful-
filled. For this reason it is worthwhile to
distinguish participants and beneficiaries as two
distinct groups that must be of concern when
participatory R & D is implemented.
Figure 1. summarizes an analytic framework in
which active participants in client-driven R & D
are either representative or nonrepresentative of
the intended beneficiaries. These may experience
either equitable or narrowly distributed benefits
from the R & D program. Figure 1 shows us that
the achievement of equitable benefits rests on two
assumptions about the participatory process:
that a functional diffusion process occurs among
clients, requiring social mechanisms such as group
solidarity and altruism to ensure sharing of innovative
knowledge and inputs (such as seed), or;
that participants have an effective leader-constitu
ency exchange relationship with the beneficiary
group, which supports their leadership in the R & D
process in return for receiving benefits from it.
For example, experience of the International
Center for Tropical Agriculture (CIAT) farmer
participation project with farmer groups shows
that any of the four outcomes visualized in Fig. 1

may occur. A critical condition for broad-based,
equitable sharing of innovative knowledge and
inputs seems to be the identification of a common
interest, and a cooperative capacity among the
active participants and intended beneficiaries.
Where this is not the result of an indigenous
culture and social organization, then it may be
necessary to form and promote effective leadership
with local accountability to a constituency of
beneficiaries. In nondemocratic cultures, where
most resource-poor farmers are found, this is
difficult to achieve.
This section of the paper began by stating that
an equitable distribution of benefits from partici-
patory R & D in agriculture is not an automatic
outcome of using participatory methods, but
depends on certain conditions. The existence of
beneficiary group cooperation, solidarity, or
effective leadership constituency exchange relation-
ships are such conditions.

The choice of which research methods, institu-
tional arrangements, and resource allocation
procedures to use in order to articulate client
demand with research is likely to be made within
one of two broadly contrasting frameworks or
* models. The first model I call an "administered
partnership" between farmers and research organi-
zations. In this model, research organizations
receive and respond to client demand principally
by involving farmers in decision-making proce-
dures (diagnosis, planning, board meetings, etc.)
administered by the organization and by profes-
sional staff. The administered partnership requires
considerable knowledge of intended beneficiary
groups to permit the organization to select repre-
sentative farmer participants.
To generate information about client needs, and
feedback from them about R & D services, research
methods involve skilled communication with
farmers. The administered partnership also requires
an institutionalized capacity to synthesize and
prioritize the many, diverse demands that farmers
make on R & D. Data management to identify the
high-priority client groups and describe their
needs is a major activity. Farmers may take part in
planning research programs, and to this extent
they have a voice in the disposition of funds and
other resources. Examples of administered partner-
ships are cases in which on-farm research, FSRE
teams, or NGOs diagnose and bring farmers'
agendas to research programs for incorporation, in
which joint workplans are developed, or in which
joint projects are designed involving farmers and
research institutes. It is probably easier to target

research at disadvantaged groups via adminis-
tered partnerships because the selection of farmer
participants is principally in the hands of
research institutions. This approach is equally
susceptible to the bias of selecting the better-off,
more accessible farmers.
The second framework or model for making
decisions that affect who participates in an R &
D process I call a "contract partnership" between
farmers and research organizations. A contract
partnership involves exclusive client control over
significant portions of the funds for R & D.
Associations of commodity producers with strong
ties to a research institute that they partly (or
wholly) finance are a classical example of this
type of partnership. An example is the sugar cane
research institute CENICANIA sponsored by the
sugar producers in Colombia. The contract
partnership also may be mediated through a
political process in which organized farmers form
lobbies in support of government finance for
specific research activities, a contract partnership
that is typical of 20th century Europe and the
USA. As these examples suggest, contract
partnerships are usually found between well-
organized, financially successful, and politically
influential farm interest groups and the research
organizations they directly finance.
Contract partnerships are seldom formed by
resource-poor farmers, except in rare cases in
which they obtain grants to contract R & D
services. Such a case is the UAPI, the union of
cassava producers' associations in Ecuador, which
uses USAID-granted funds to contract research
from universities and the public sector national
research program. The UAPI suggests that
contract partnerships with research organizations
can be implemented by resource-poor farmers.
The contract (i.e., the decision to finance a
particular piece of research) is a relatively simple

Broad & Narrow &
Equitable Inequitable
Effective Ineffective
S leadership leadership, poor
o diffusion from communication,
S like-to-like, low altruism,
S altruism low solidarity.
P solidarity.
S. Effective
~ leadership Elite club
S' delivers benefits monopolizes
< 5 in return for R & D
< ~ client support.

(FARM continued on page 10)


capability of


and their


to diagnose


research needs

has to be

created or



Figure 1. Types of
participants and
impact on
beneficiaries in
R & D.



Contributed by Ted Stilwell

The 1993 SAAFSR-E conference proved the need, and
enthusiasm, for the Association. It brought together
individual FSRE scholars and practitioners from across the
subcontinent to share in a common vision to enhance the
welfare of rural families through improvements in farm
production, technological innovation, and policy support.
The theme of the conference was "building sustainable
agriculture in Southern Africa through FSR-E." SAAFSR-
E planned the symposium in cooperation with the
Ministry of Agriculture of the Kingdom of Swaziland to
address sustainable agriculture using a systems approach.
The conference opened with excellent addresses by
both His Excellency, the Prime Minsiter, Mr. Obed E.
Diamini and the keynote speaker Dr. David Norman,
President of the global AFSRE. The Prime Minsiter
observed that the conference offered an opportunity to
adopt strategies to observe and understand the small-scale
farming environment in Southern Africa, and warned
against the temptation to introduce "ready-made tech-
nologies" without understanding local farming systems.
He also noted the need to exploit the potential areas of
cooperation between the modern and traditional agricul-
tural sectors of the region. This cooperation should be
fostered within each country and among countries in the
subcontintent, instead of relying on imported technologies
from distant countries.
Dr. David Norman pointed out that as far as limited-
resource farmers in low-income countries are concerned,
strategies aimed at achieving ecological sustainability will
not be successful unless they are compatible and closely
linked to strategies for increasing productivity. Dr.
Norman made the important point that the characteristics
of FSRE provide a potentially powerful means of employ-
ing scarce government resources to improve agricultural
productivity and sustainability. He also argued that FSRE
should evolve to address "farming systems with a
livelihood systems focus," thus placing rural dwellers at
the center-stage of sustainability, both social and environ-
In his anaugural address, the incoming President of
SAAFSR-E, Mr. Joe Kotsokoane, also pointed out that
without food production and stable rural communities,
people will leave rural areas. Making life liveable in rural
areas he said is the greatest contribution of FSRE.
The following conclusions emerged from the confer-
The linkage between the technologies already
available and those that could be generated call for a
multidisciplinary approach combining technical,
socioeconomic, and policy issues if an impact on
agricultural production is to be achieved while
assuring sustainability.
An effort must be made to bridge the gap between
the long-term environmental sustainability visions of
the public, and the short-term socioeconomic

rationale of farmers by using important FSRE
participatory tools.
* The drought in southern Africa has exposed serious
deficiencies in traditional small and modern large
farming and pastoral systems. By reinforcing natural
vegetation with drought-tolerant browse plants it is
possible to rehabilitate degraded land.
* Development of cropping systems that are responsive
to farmers' strategies in choice of crop and manage-
ment practices set important boundaries for the
demarcation of technology development. The use of
farmers' local knowledge in solving problems in a
participatory manner is important in this respect.
Indigenous fruit and food crops adapted to semiarid
conditions also need more attention.
* The importance of institutionalizing FSRE into the
national agricultural research and extension service
was emphasized. The inability of FSRE to bring
about increased production without policy support
programs providing production inputs, credit, and
markets was also noted. The diagnostic phase of
FSRE provides techniques to appraise farmer support
systems and policy domains, and provides feedback to
* The household should be the focus of FSRE.
Household systems in southern Africa are often
complex because household activities are competing
for family time and captial resources. Off-farm
employment is an improtant contributor to house-
hold income and often a source of funds for farm
production. The possibility of accommodating
integrated rural development within FSRE was
raised, and this also was tied into problems relating
to land reform, particularly in South Africa. %

REFLECTIONS: 1992 Associationfor Farming Systems Research/Extension Symposium.

S An external advisory committee made up of three members
(Ruth Alsop, Chris Andrew, and Mary Andrews) was empow-
ered to serve as an independent source of information about the
most recent symposium. They collected a variety of data and
presented a number of valuable findings in a recent report. As
readers may already know, the 1992 symposium was the final
symposium to be hosted on an annual basis by a US University,
and so this report represents an attempt to preserve the best of
symposia in the recent past while looking forward to the fresh
insights and possibilities for involvement that future symposia
will bring. We present the report here in abbreviated form for
the information of AFSR/E members who may not have had a
chance to see it.
Over all, the advisory committee sensed a strong feeling of
satisfaction and support for the symposium. However, some
issues of concern were raised. These include:
Many were disappointed that the concurrent bazaar and
poster session prevented poster presenters from participat-
ing in bazaar activities.
Clearer guidelines could have been made available to
facilitators in order to improve the quality of small groups
discussion/planning session facilitation.
Management of concurrent paper sessions could be
improved. Moderators were not strict enough in monitor-
ing time. The quality of individual presentations varied
There is concern over insufficient female participation;
greater gender balance is desired.
Some participants noted the large number of no-shows on
one hand and wondered if all presenters got a chance to
present on the other. Some of this underlying confusion
may represent the fact that presenters had to send their full
papers in ahead of time in order to be scheduled on the
program, but some came with their papers in hand.
Some felt that the board members and other senior/
experienced resource persons were less available for informal
interaction than would have been desired.
Although most appreciated the set of bound papers
(proceedings), some felt that they were too cumbersome
and not all of equal interest to individuals.
InternationalSymposium: The majority of participant value the
symposium, but perhaps for differing reasons. Those from
developing countries appreciate the opportunity for sharing and
access to new tools, techniques, and contracts. Those of
developed countries seem to value the opportunity to compare
developments globally and to further the momentum of FSRE as
a movement. When more than one farming systems group exists
in a region, most feel that collaboration and joint programming/
networking should be developed. A dear linkage between the
global and regional organizations is preferred.
Joumal/Newsletter In terms of the journal, many question the
cost of the publication and wonder if it could be more readily
available to institutions in the developing countries of the world.
Many developing country professionals are hesitant to submit to
* the journal as the editorial process seems so formidable. Some
questions that emerged were: Are the guidelines for submission
well understood among potential contributors?; Are developing

country professionals on the review board?; Is editorial
assistance provided if papers are worthy of publishing?
The newsletter is viewed as a source of relatively timely
information, a forum for idea exchanges, and a place to
announce news of developments in the field. The current
newsletter appears too dense and journal-like. Perhaps the
articles could be less formal and more newsy and anecdotal. A
column on projects in progress and another on methodological
developments would be appreciated.
Reginaldevelopments: During the participation sessions
many developing country representatives seemed confused
about their role. Many were unaware of regional activities and
felt that they themselves were not part of those developments.
In-country networking is often poor and confusion exists as to
who should take responsibility for networking and organiza-
tional administration. Such lack of clarity of purpose is
understandable since only 50% of the symposium participants
are currently members of regional farming systems organiza-
tions. Perhaps the regions need a core group of experienced and
internationally connected FSRE promoters who can reinforce
each other through their contact with the global association.
FSRE orientation/preseretion ofhistorifundations: It was
generally felt that each region needs to assume responsibility to
orient new people to FSRE techniques and philosophies.
Training materials in local languages need to be developed,
peer reviewed, and shared widely to make use of scarce
resources. Databases, such as the CAB abstracts, are needed
within the regions. Case studies are also valued and of use both
locally and globally for comparative and integrative uses.
Global networking is also needed. Regional representatives
voiced an interest in accessing internationally experienced
people for training, conferences, and advisory consultancies.
The external advisory committee also presented a number
of personal observations/recommendations to be considered for
future work:
The process and principles of organizing this symposium
should be summarized in a form that would be useful for
future planners whether at the global or regional level.
Many organizational matters still need operational inputs
from the membership. Perhaps the board would consider
establishing a series of technical/program committees,
regional networking or facilitation committees, a strategic
and long range planning committee, and a resource
development committee or task force to attend to these
The output of this meeting in the form of the AFSRE
FUTURE DIRECTIONS statement should be widely
publicized to encourage broad comment, and alert donors
and institutional leaders to potential role for their
involvement and create linkages with similar organiza-
The organization needs to take a stronger advocacy role.
Members, whether in key international organizations or
line workers in ministries, need to be encouraged to
promote FSRE principles and actively challenge the status

Systems Approaches in North American Agriculture & Natural Resources
Broading the Scope of FSRE.

The Association for Farming Systems Research-
Extension will hold their North American Symposium
October 12-16, 1993 at the University of Florida in
Gainesville. This symposium will bring together those
working in North American farm, rural, and natural
resource systems with persons who have been using FSRE
methods around the world in agricultural development
and natural resource management. The objective of this
symposium is to investigate and expand the possibilities
for FSRE methods to be employed more effectively in
North America and to use North American applications to
broaden the scope of FSRE methods.
The symposium will officially begin with the opening
reception at 7:00 pm on Tuesday, October 12 and will
end with a barbecue Saturday evening, October 16. A
dance is tentatively scheduled for Thursday evening, and
sessions will end with the business meeting Friday

Preliminary Themes
Broadening the Scope of FSRE
Finding common methods
Considering structure and scale in agriculture
Applying FSRE in industrial agricultural systems
Incorporating sustainability and the environment
Applying FSRE in alternative agricultural systems
Evaluating sociocultural concerns
Accessing local and regional resources
Assisting beginning farmers and new enterprise
Integrating clients' resources
Advances in FSRE Methodology
**Methods and problems
Participatory interaction techniques
Farmer-initiated research and problem solving
Integrated pest management
Gender analysis
Women and farm management
Systems modeling
On-farm research
Crop, livestock, and agroforestry systems
Watershed management and environmental
*Institutions and policies
Policy issues, research agendas, and extension
Limited research and extension budgets
Interdisciplinary research and reward systmes
End-user empowerment
Communication systems and strategies
Institution building and strengthening
Institutional and organizational mandates
Networking and Information Flows
Farmer organizations and networking initiatives
Information transfer between farmers, between farmers

and research, between universities, and between
international and domestic efforts
Regional and global association linkages

Tentative Workshops

October 12, 1993
Introduction to FSRE
E.C. French and M.E. Swisher. Half Day
Farmer participation techniques and farmer-initiated
CA. Francis and D.N. Exner. Full day
Gender analysis: Basic methodologies and tools
C. Gladwin and H. Feldstein. Half day

OCTOBER 16, 1993
Modified Stability Analysis: Multiple environment
P.E. Hildebrand. Half day
Modeling for agricultural systems analysis
J.W. Jones and W.T. Bowen. Full day
Systems inquiry: Participatory problem solving for
complex natural resource issues
R. William. Full day
Administration and management:
Program linkages and evaluation. Half day
Tools for research/extension planning. Halfday
C.O. Andrew and J.K. McDermott
Workshop Fees:
Full day $100 non-student. $65 students
Half day $50 non-students $40 students

Tour of North Florida Farms
Study FSRE in Action: Developing perennial peanut as a
reduced input forage crop adapted to varied North Florida
farming systems

Cost: $35. Includes lunch and refreshments.


AFSRE/NA Symposium
University of Florida/DOCE
1221 NW 22 Ave.
Gainesville, FL 326091-3476, USA
Tel.: (904) 392-1701 : Fax: (904) 392-6950

NATIONAL VELD TRUST: Jubilee Conference

The National Veld Trust will hold its Golden Jubilee
Conference from 1 to 4 November 1993 in South Africa.
The organization strongly promotes the conservation of
natural resources, especially soil, vegetation and water,
and recognizes the all-important role played by socioeco-
nomic influences in achieving resource and environmen-
tal protection.


The theme of this conference is "Africa -One Conti-
nent: Agenda for Sustainable Land Management," in full
recognition of Africa's soil, water, vegetation, economic
and human resources. The program will accommodate
* the following:
International perspectives, the African scene
African case studies
Agendas for sustainable soil, water, and vegetation
land management,
Resolutions and conclusions
While the period for submission of posters and papers
to be presented at this conference has now closed, the
conference should nonetheless be of interest to all
persons concerned in resource conservation and sustain-
able land management, including decision makers,
politicians, scientists, extensionists, conservationists, and
land users.


Mr. J.F. du Preez, The National Veld Trust
P.O. Box 72862
LYNNWOOD RIDGE, 0400, South Africa
Tel.: (012) 841-2755
Mrs. Louise Botten, Foundation for Research Development
P.O. Box 2600
PRETORIA, 0001, South Africa


Systems-Oriented Research in
Agriculture and Rural Development

The "Amsterdam Group" of the International FSR/
E has joined organizing an international symposium to
be held on 21 to 25 November, 1994 in Montpellier,
France. Participants are invited to submit a paper, a
poster, or both in relation to one or more of the seven
main themes:
Methods: In what ways do the scope and method
ologies of systems research need to be redefined?
Natural resources and environment: How can
systems approaches best respond to emerging
needs in the management of natural resources and
the environment?
High input agriculture: Do systems approaches
have a role in enhancing the competitiveness of
commercial agriculture?
Indigenous knowledge and innovation: What role
does indigenous knowledge have in systems
approaches to agricultural innovation?
Local organizations and innovation: How far can
local organizations influence innovation in a
systems context?
Training: How can the formal training of
researchers and extensionists best be modified to
reflect systems approaches more fully?
Agricultural policy: How can systems approaches
relate better to policy needs?
These seven themes will be organized as workshops
that will differ from the format of workshops at past
International AFSR/E Symposia: Authors will not give
verbal presentations of their papers. Instead, for each
session, a small groups of facilitators will prepare and
present an overview paper that draws out the main
results, issues, and questions arising from the papers
submitted for that session. Authors will then have an
opportunity to respond to the overview paper, but is is
envisaged that a large part of the workshop will be
taken up by discussion. Proposals for papers or posters
should be submitted in French and/or.English by 1
October 1993, and papers must be submitted in full by
1 March 1994. The symposium will also include a
training tools bazaar, field visits, training courses, and
the publication of proceedings. 4


Jacques Faye and/or Michel Dulcire, International
Symposium, Systems-Oriented Research and Rural Development
BP 5035, 34032 Montpellier, FRANCE
Tel: (33) 67617185, Fax: (33) 67617186
Telex: 485221 F, Email: Sympo94@montp2.cirad.fr.


Alternative Agriculture News

This quarterly newsletter is published by the Henry A.
Wallace Institute for Alternative Agriculture. For
membership information write the institute at:
9200 Edmonston Road, Suite 117,
Greeenbelt, Maryland 20770-1551

Farmer Irrigation Newsletter

This newsletter presents recent research on irrigation
systems in Indonesia. The editor welcomes contribu-
tions of articles from readers. Address correspondence:
J1. S. Parman 81
Slipi, Jakarta 11420
Tel: (62-021) 5674211 Fax: (62-021) 5683785

Honey Bee Network
Indian Institute of Manangement
This informal newsletter documents innovations and
creativity at the grass-roots level. The first issues of
this newsletter have included reports of more than 200
new practices developed by small-scale farmers. Many
of these ideas are already being taken up for trails by
scientists and farmers. For subscription to this
network and newsletter please send cheque/draft/postal
order/money order of US$ 30 or Rs. 120 made out to:
Indian Institute of Management, A/c Honeybee.
Vastrapur, Ahmedabad 380 015, India;
Tel.: 407-241 Gram: INDINMAN
Telex: 121-6351 IIMA-IN Fax: 91-272-427896

International Ag-Sieve
Rodale Institute
The international Ag-Sieve is dedicated to the develop-
ment of productive, profitable and ecologically sound
agricultural systems by providing development
workers with quality information about current
research in regenerative agriculture. They do not
intend to provide site-specific "recipes," but rather to
plant ideas that promote the adaptation of regenerative
technologies globally. The newsletter is published six
times per year. For information on subscriptions or
back issues contact:
International Ag-Sieve, Rodale Institute
611 Siegfriedale Road, Kutztown
PA 19530, USA

International Service for National
Agricultural Research (ISNAR) Newsletter.

The mandate of ISNAR is to assist developing countries
in bringing about lasting improvements in the perfor-
mance of their national agricultural research systems and
organizations. It does this by promoting appropriate
agricultural research policies, sustainable research
institutions, and improved research management. the
ISNAR Newsletter is produced three times a year by the
institute's Publications Services. It is distributed free of
charge to an international readership working to
strengthen national agricultural research systems. Seek
more information from:
P.O. Box 93375
2509 AJ The Hague
The Netherlands

Rice Farming Systems Technical Exchange

Now in its third year, this quarterly newsletter published by
the Asian Rice Farming Systmes Network and the Farming
Systems and Soil Resources Institute provides a regional
forum for farming system specialists working in Asia. It
presents developments and breakthroughs in Asian rice
farming systems. Queries may be sent to: Training and
Extension Division, Farming Systems and Soil Resources
Institute, University of the Philippines at Los Bafios,
College, Laguna, Philippines or Asian Rice Farming
Systems Network Coordinator, Intenational Rice Research
Institute, Los Bafios, Laguna, Philippines.

Southern African Farming Systems
Research-Extension Newsletter

This newsletter published by the Southern African
Association for Farming Systems Research-Extension
encourages communication between farming system
researchers working in Southern Africa. It invites news
items, short communications, and short articles report-
ing on your projects or work that you may wish to share
with other colleagues in the FSRE field. Additionally,
if you are organizing an event such as a workshop or
symposium and would like this to be publicized please
send information well in advance for announcement in
this forum. Address correspondence to:
Ted Stilwell, Development Bank of SA
P.O. Box 1234, HALFWAY HOUSE, 1685
Tel.: (011)313-3138

The Seedhead News

10 years ago, Native seeds/SEARCH began as a grass-
roots organization whose goals were to "conserve and
promote the use of native or adapted agriculturally
valuable plants and to establish by research their
cultural, nutritive, and ecological value." They continue
this focus today with diverse initiatives in diabetes

research, a Native American farmers' association,
protecting habitat and agricutlrue in the Sierra Madre of
Mexico, establishing a botanical area of wild crop
relatives, and preserving heirloom fruit and nut trees. As
a gift to new members during their anniversary year,
Native seeds/SEARCH is offering a book to those who
join the organization at the rate of $US 30 for a family
membership. Please select either Yaqui Deer Songs, the
winner of the Chicago Folklore Prize, Or Mayordomo:
Chronicle of an Acequia in Northern New Mexico, from the
University of New Mexico Press. Send this selection,
along with a check or money order to:
Native seeds/SEARCH
2509 N. Cambell #325
Tucson, AZ 85719, USA


Food from Dryland Gardens:
An ecological, nutritional, and social approach to
small-scale household food production.
David A. Cleveland and Daniela Soleri
Household gardens are an important part of the indig-
enous agricultural production system in almost all
* developing countries. This book serves as a basic
reference work for field workers, extension agents,
students, project workers, and program planners in
encouraging gardens that serve local needs, that are based
on local knowledge and resources, and that conserve
natural resources and the biological diversity of tradi-
tional crops. It summarizes the basic principles of
nutrition and economics as they apply to gardens in the
Third World, it reviews the special nutritional needs of
women and children, it discusses the need to understand
gardeners' economic decision making, and it emphasizes
community control of assessment, monitoring, and
evaluation in garden projects. Furthermore, the book
discusses garden management, basic principles of plant
biology, cultivation and irrigation techniques, soil
conservation, and pest management all within an
ecosystemic approach. In addition to comprehensive and
useful lists of resource organizations and relevant
reference texts, the book also contains ideas for storing
harvests and preserving the nutritive value of dryland
garden crops. Order direct from the publisher:
Center for People, Food and Environment
344 South Third Avenue
Tucson, Arizona 85701, USA

The Hidden Harvest: Wild food and agricultural systems:
A literature review and annotated bibliography.
Ian Scoones, Mary Menyk, andJules N. Pretty.

This literature review and annotated bibliography of
close to 1,000 references highlights issues of contempo-
rary importance to agricultural and forestry policy,
namely that: a) conventional agricultural and forestry
research has paid too little attention to the wide range
of products used by rural people; b) wild foods are
important in all agricultural systems, and are not just
the preserve of hunter-gatherer societies; c) wild foods
are especially significant for women, children, and the
poor; d) the sustainable management of wild resources
reserve local management and control over resources; e)
wild foods have economic value, which must be
accounted for in planning; f) wild genetic resources are
critical for the future of agricultural production, and so
conservation of such resources by farmers will help
ensure the maintenance of biodiversity. The Hidden
Harvest is available for 12.95 + p&p. For more
information about ordering this book, please contact:
Marilyn John, Publications Department
IIED, 3 Endsleigh Street
London WC1H ODD

A Blighted Harvest: The World Bank and
African Agriculture in the 1980s
Peter Gibbon, KjellJ. Havnevik and Kenneth Hermele
There is a growing literature on structural adjustment,
but surprisingly little has been written on agricultural
adjustment. Using the World Bank's own information
on agricultural and agrarian development, the authors
examine the effects of agricultural adjustment in six
countries: Ghana, Kenya, Zambia, Mozambique,
Uganda, and Tanzania. The authors also discuss the
consolidation of the unified "aid coordination" of the
1980s as opposed to Scandanavian aid policies of the
time that emphasized price incentives and the support
of family agriculture.

Structural Adjustment and the African Farmer
Alex Duncan andJohn Howell, eds.
This book traces the impact of structural adjustment
policies upon the incomes and welfare of Africa's
peasant farmers. It provides evidence of the impacts,
both positive and negative, of these policies. The
editors argue for a more targeted, project-specific
approach to small farm development. To order A
Blighted Harvest: The World Bank and African Agricul-
ture in the 1980s or Structural Adjustment and the African
Farmer contact:
James Currey Publishers
54B Thornhill Square
London N1 1BE, UK
Tel.: (071) 609-9026 Fax: (071) 609-9605


January 10 and July 28, 1994 (English)
February 28 and September 15, 1994 (French)

The International Center for development
oriented Research in Agriculture (ICRA) presents
a post-academic course for researchers combining
theoretical studies in the Netherlands or France
with interdisciplinary group fieldwork in a
developing country. This combination provides
participants with the capacity to analyze con-
straints and opportunities for change in
agricultural systems, and to develop appropriate
research priorities and programs.

(FARM continued fron page 3)
method for determining farmers' priorities.
Diagnosis and prioritization of the portion of R &
D dependent on contract funding is "external-
ized" from the research organization to the
farmers' organizations) empowered to make
contracts. Decisions concerning the beneficiaries
of R & D are in the aggregate placed in the realm
of policy, which determines the groups of clients
or farmers that receive various portions of the
resources available for contracting R & D. Once
resources for contracting research are allocated
among groups by governments or donors, active
participation in the research and the distribution
of benefits from R & D within a group are
determined by internal group processes.
Contract partnerships, as a way of articulating
client demand for R & D with research institu-
tions, depend upon group organization and on
effective leader-constituency exchange relation-
ships, both a strength and a weakness of this
model. The capability of farmers and their
organizations to diagnose and prioritize research
needs has to be created or improved. Instead of
focusing on methods for skilled professionals to
help farmers articulate their needs and prefer-
ences, the contract partnership model demands
methods that can be implemented by farmers for
planning among themselves. Clearly this is
desirable, but difficult to achieve. Moreover,
inertia and alienation of members, unscrupulous
leadership, or simply the dominance of high-
status members can all bias contract partnership
away from representative participation and
equitably distributed benefits.

Requirements for admission to this course are
PhD/MSc, two years experience in developing
countries, and age under 40. The full course fee is
Df 54,000, including all travel, accommodation,
tuition, and allowances. A limited number of
scholarships are available for candidates from
developing countries, France, The Netherlands,
Switzerland and the UK. ICRA can arrange co-
funding for candidates whose sponsors cannot pay
the full fee. ,


Jon Daane, ICR
P.O. Box 6700 AB
Wageningen, The Netherlandr
Tel.: (31) (0) 8370-22938
Fax: (31) (0) 8370-27046 Telex: 45888 NL.

In on-farm research, we are concerned with
correctly identifying farmers who represent client
groups) the research is intended to benefit. Our
concern is to ensure that the conclusions of the
research are therefore relevant to the intended
beneficiaries, so that a broad and equitable impact
is obtained within any given client group. Partici-
patory, client-driven R & D incorporates a number
of features such as decentralization and devolution
of some research activities to farmers, who must
have the right to "buy in" (or sell out) of a research
program, to ensure that their priorities are taken
into account.
"Who participates" in this process can be
determined in different ways, none of which
guarantee representative participation or equitable
access to benefits. The organization of client
groups, their leadership-constituency relationships,
internal culture, and management skills have been
identified as critical factors that determine if
active participants in an R & D process truly
represent client-group demand-whether or not
they themselves are typical of that group.
How research institutions build effective
partnerships with client groups by strengthening
their organizations, leadership, and management
capabilities emerges, therefore, as a key issue for
designing agricultural R & D strategies for the
future. %


Office of Arid Lands Studies, The University of Arizona
845 N. Park Avenue, Tucson, AZ 85719 USA
Tel.: 602-621-1955, Fax: 602-621-3816


Institutional Individual Student
United States, Canada, Western Europe,
Japan, Australia, New Zealand $125 $65 $20
All other countries $125 $20 $20

Members receive both the AFSRE News Sheet and the Journal for Farming Systems Research-Extension. Membership dues can
be paid by a check drawn on a U.S. bank or by international money order payable to Association for Farming Systems
Research-Extension in U.S. dollars. Please send membership fees along with the completed form to:

Dr. TimothyJ. Finan, Secretary/Treasurer AFSRE
Department of Anthropology
The University of Arizona
Tucson, AZ 85721 USA


1. Family name

2. First name and middle name or initial

3. FemaleMaleAge 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, 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 U.S.

dollars, to the treasurer if you can legally do this in your country of residence?

The AFSRE Newsletter is supported by a grant from the Ford Foundation; contributions from AFSRE members; and the Office of Arid Lands Studies,
The University ofArizona. The editors welcome articles, news items, andpublication announcements for consideration in future issues.

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, AZ 85719 USA
Tel.: (602) 621-1955 Fax: (602) 621-3816

Staff: Associate Editors; Philip E. Coyle and Jennifer Manthei
Design; Sonia Telesco, Arid Lands Design, 1993