CIMHYT EVALUATION REPORT
EAST AFRICA.OCT 1983-McDermott

CIMMYT East Africa Economics

Grand Project 698-0444

EVAL.UATI ION

REPORT 'T

October 1983

J. K. McDermott
Farming Systems Support Project
University of Florida

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

EVALUATION REPORT

CIMMYT EAST AFRICA ECONOMICS

GRANT PROJECT 698-0444

October 1983

A) INTRODUCTION:

1. This evaluation is being conducted after a scarce 10 months

of operation. Grant was authorized in mid 1982 and personnel were on

board in January of 1983, a normal staffing interval.

2. The grant was made on the basis of a CIMMYT program in East

Africa dating from 1976. The CIMMYT system has been in evolution

since the early 1970"s and the East Africa program has benefitted from

and contributed to the CIMMYT worldwide experience. Some outputs of

the AID grant project have stemmed from the decade of experience

worldwide, but it is virtually impossible to make attribution.

Fo-tumately, it is not necessary.

3. This evaluation has ben based largely on judgements of Host

Country officials, USAID officers and U.S. university contractors, and

on information they supplied. In addition, some documents have also

been studied. Four countries were visited specifically for this

review: Swaziland, Lesotho, Zimbabwe, and Malawi. In addition, an

evaluation of the Zambia bilateral project provided input.

While one person is responsible for the report, Bob Armstrong of

REDSO participated in every interview and was extremely helpful both

in generating insights and judgements and in reacting to tentative

conclusions and recommendations. As provided in the grant agreement,

CIMMYT participated in the evaluation in the persons of Allan Low and

Page 2

Donald Winkmann, who divided the country visitations. Michael

Collinson and P. Anandajayasekeram spent a day in Nairobi reporting

and explaining the year's work.

B) PROJECT DESCRIPTION:

The .project has four components:

1. Perhaps most visable and resource consuming is the

comprehensive in-country training which covers the complete FSR

process in a series of training sessions over a 15 month period. The

grant called for two of these a year. This training is a mixture of

classroom work and practice, the practice being participation in a

real live ongoing program.

One program is well more than half finished in Zambia and

one has been initiated in Malawi. Tanzania, Kenya, and Sudan, are

viable candidates for the in-country training.

2. The second component is direct assistance which is, to a

large extent, training; but is not in the comprehensive format. A

series of exploratory meetings in most of the nine countries and

consultations on special problems, including research organization,

are other direct assistance activities.

3. The third component is net working which has four

activities:

a) Administrator seminar, planned to be recurring once a

year. CIMMYT is contemplating holding one every 15-18 months., because

of the number of meetings the directors attend. One has been held.

b) Technical workshops planned for two a year (or two

per administrator seminar). They are on discrete topics. These are

on substantive problems and bring F9R experts together with

conventional researchers. One on animal traction has been held.

Page 3

c) The third activity is inter-country visits. CIMMYT

finances travel, but initiative must come from recipients.

d) The Newsletter is the fourth activity. It is

published quarterly.

4. The fourth component is institutionalization. Grant

agreement expressed the expectation that little in this area would be

accomplished in two years.

5. IL is not a component in the grant, but the regional

training workshop is highly relevant to the grant. This is a two

session training program for individuals from countries who are not

prepared for comprehensive in-country training. 'At one time this was

held in Nairobi. The 1983 courses were held at the University of

Zimbabwe. This is highly relevant to ArID's needs, and use of grant

funds for this course can easily be justified if other CYMMIT funding

is not adequate.

C) EVALUATION

1. This has been'an exceptionally useful project. It takes

advantage of the considerable capital that CIMMYT has generated in

East Africa. Its design attends to both short-run needs (through

training) and long-run needs through net working. It was a wise

decision to make the grant in the first place, and there is

considerably more evidence to justify extension of the program.

2. In-country training could be judged to be behind schedule,

but in my judgement, such delay is not significant. In-country

training depends on countries getting their situation prepared for

this training. Not all variables are under CIMMYT control. The Malawi

program could have been underway by CIMMYT criteria, but Malawi had to

get its own situation in order.

Page 4

3. Net working is highly appreciated, especially by the smaller

countries who must depend on external sources for much of their

technology input. One Mission Director volunteered the judgement that

the value of net working alone justified the cost ot the project.

4. Relationship between CIMMYT and the U.S. university contract

teams have been extraordinary. In Swaziland, the Pennsylvania State

University team feels that having access to CIMMYT's system and

experience in East Africa saved.up to a year's time and helped the

team to coalesce. Adaptations have been made to the CIMMYT model, but

the systematic start has been greatly appreciated. Both Zambia and

Malawi have re-orcanized their research system. Both rely on a U.S.

university to help implement the re-organization. In both cases, the

rapport between the FSR leader of the contractor and CIMMYT has been

excellent.

5. CIMMYT has made substantial contribution to the

re-organization of the Zambia and Malawi research systems. FSR is to

play a significant role in the new organization. The decision to give

FSR this role, and the counsel on how to integrate it ito the system,

resulted from CIMMYT's reputation and credibility. The AID grant makes

possible the comprehensive training essential to adequate performance

of the new organization. We do not know the extent to which CIMMYT's

ability to provide training entered into either of the decisions. It

is clear that the ability to provide the training improves chances for

success.

6. CIMMYT's contribution in institutionalism in the first year

has been substantial, even though none was anticipated. The Zambia

and Malawi re-organizations are classical CIMMYT. The evidence is not

as powerful, but the administrators seminar is also helpful. No one

Page 5

we talked to gave CIMMYT credit for calling attention to the fact that

research was not quite relevant for the smallscale farmer. This they

recognized. They do give CIMMYT credit for helping them see what to

do about it. The Sawziland director would not allow Penn State

University to do on-farm research until after the administrators

seminarr. We did not establish cause and effect, but the chronology

suggests such a relation.

7. CIMMYT was criticized for the neglect of livestock, its own

lack of agronomists in the program and for not integrating extension

adequately. These have different dimensions.

Agronomy input, perhaps not adequate, is not lacking. There is

agronomic talent locally, and CIMMYT's great contribution is

economics. In Zambia training agronomists from CIMMYT/Mexico were

available as they were in the University of Zimbabwe regional course.

Still, as CIMMYT gives relatively more emphasis on on-farm research,

its need for agronomists becomes more evident. Partly this is because

of the substantive need, but it is also needed to help national

systems agronomists to adjust to FSR.

CIMMYT does not neglect livestock to the degree that not having a

livestock person may indicate. The CIMMYT system can turn up

livestock problem. One of the most serious livestock problems is

fodder and grass fed, both of which are addressed by the CYMMIT

approach. Finally, there was some tendency to look to FSR to solve

problems associated with large scale communal grazing.. That problem

lies outside the farming system being addressed by CMMYT.

8. CIMMYT is fully aware of the need to link extension and

reserach. The system makes a point to keep extension fully informed

and to involve extension. However, the system does not adequately

Page 6

integrate extension personnel. It is my judgement that the potential

for extension participation is considerably greater and that extension

needs to define its own interest in the process. This problem needs

serious attention, and in the course of CIMMYT program evolution it

will likely be attended. FSSP is also interested and can collaborate.

9. The University of Zimbabwe and Edgerton College are putting

FSR into their farm management academic programs. Discussions during

this evaluation indicated the feasibility of putting FSR into

extension courses which are offered by many Universities.

D, RECOMMENDAT I ONS:

1. Continue the qrant.

The basis for the decision on the current war.nt has bhen

proved correct. There is now more justification for extending the

grant than there was for making it in the first place.

2. Continue the project under current administrative

arrangements. AID-CIMMYT relationships seem to be almost ideal as

currently arranged. Much more information is available now than was

available early in the grant when the alternative of placing the grant

under the FSSP was considered. It now seems clear that almost nothing

would be gained by such action. There is a real risk that much could

be lost through a complication of administration.

3. Provide funding for expansion to enable CIMMYT to put at

least one agronomist in the programm There is jiusti f i cation f or even

more expansion but some stratagizing needs to be done cn the manner in

which it is implemented.

4. Make a commitment to CIMMYT to provide a five-year planning

horizon so that CIMMYT itself has some security of expectation and

can, in turn, give its clients or cooperators some security.

Page 7

5. Work on integrating extension into the FSR concept. REDSO

has a call on FSSP, which is also interested in this task. Missions

need to make modest investments of the right nature in extension.

Currently, donors are either ignoring extension or are making the

wrong investment. Extension needs a small staff, well trained and

working closely with research to provide technological support and

leadership to field agents. FSR offers an excellent opportunity for

extension and research to strengthen these relations.

6. REDSO and CIMMYT develop a networking strategy that (a)

involves administrators in a seminar meeting yearly and (b) exploits

the commonality of i interest in the region.

7. CIMMYT and FSSP hold a joint seminar involving all FSR

personnel.

8. CIMMYT review its Newsletter and quarterly reports for the

purpose of establishing an improved record of FSR in East Africa as

well as improving the current state of information.

Page 8

I. INTRODUCTION

This evaluation is being done very early in the project history.

The grant was awarded in mid-1982, and personnel provided by the grant

were on board in early 1983. That represents a rather normal start up

time. The cropping season in much of the region starts in the last

quarter of the year, and farming system activity has some relation to

crop cycles even if one-step removed as is CIMMYT. All of this means

that there simply are inadequate data for definitive evaluation.

Principal sources of information have been USAID officers,

expatriate teams, host government officials, and CIMMYT personnel.

Means of collecting information has been the interview. Chances to

observe work and results have been severely limited. Four countries

have been visited specifically for the evaluation--Swaziland, Lesotho,

Malawi and Zimbabwe. A recent evaluation of a bilateral project in

Zambia also provided information. Finally, grantee reports and

documents have provided inputs for this report.

This report has a single author. Given the newness of the

project and the subsequent scarcity of data, it has been necessary to

draw inferences and anticipate results. This carries its own risks.

I have attempted to present evidence and explain rationale at least

for some of these inferences in an attempt to facilitate evaluation of

the evaluation. However, much remains judgmental. If there are

serious challenges from reliable sources, they need to be given

careful considerate ion.

While I am responsible for the report I acknowledge with

gratitude the assistance of Michael Collinson and P. Anandajiayasekeram

of CiMMYT/Nai robi. Also special thanks are due Robert Armstrong of

AID/REDSO/Nairobi who accompanied me on all four country visits and to

Page 9

Allan Low CIMMYT/Mbabane and Donald Winkelmann, CIMMYT/Mexico, who

divided up country visitation. Not only were they the most pleasant

of travel companions they were stimulating participants in a

travelling seminar.

Gratitude must also be expressed to government officials, USAID

officers, contractor personnel, and others who supplied much of the

information and insight contained in this report. Their names are

listed in the country reports.

Finally my gratitude is also expressed to the Farming Systems

Support Project, University of Florida, and to others who provided the

opportunity for such an excellent opportunity to study research and

extension activities in this region of Africa.,

Page 10

II. PROJECT DESCRIPTION

The project has four components: training, direct assistance,

networking, and institutionalization.

A. TrainiDng is handled under two activities.

In-country training is a comprehensive program that runs

through the entire FSR process in a series of training sessions over

an 18-month period. The grant agreement calls for this program in two

countries a year. CIMMYT selects the countries for this training on

the basis of commitment, leadership, and resources, The chief

resource is personnel with training equal to the B.S., and ten is the

minimum. CIMMYT training is designed for the professional level

worker, B.S. or above.

The .ideal type in-country training program covers the

following topics in a series of five to eight sessions: Analysis of

secondary data and informal surveys; formal survey design,

questionnaire design and implementation; analysis of survey,

identification of priorities, screening of known technology for system

compatibility, and technology evaluation; design and establishment of

on-farm trials; monitoring of trials, recording of data, interact ion

with farmer; trial harvesting and recording of data; data analysis,

economic evaluation, and planning of next cycle. This sequence is

modified to fit needs and timing of national programs.. The sequence

is often preceded by an exploratory session to explain the FSR conc::ept

and perspective.

Another type of training is offered at the Un:ivers:i.ty of

Zimbabwe for individuals from countries who do not have enough

personnel for an in-country training program. This training is in two

Page 11

sessions of three weeks each. The first session is devoted to the

diagnostic components of the FSR sequence, and the second series is on

on-farm research. As originally conceived, the first session was for

economists and the second for agronomists. Currently, however, the

intent is for both groups to do both sessions.

All training is a mixture of study, classroom instruction,

and practical work. An FSR project serves as the laboratory for the

Zimbabwe training. A real live project serves as the laboratory in

in-country programs, and the training session often implements a phase

of the project.

B. ircet Ass.is.t.nce is offered to countries on the basis of

need. It is used heavily for those countries which have a project

with an expatriate team but too few national professionals to justify

an in-country program. It can also be used in response to whatever a

,country needs. It responds to request from ex-patriate teams as well

as from nationals.

In many cases, direct assistance is similar to training,

including an exploratory or an explanatory training exercise. Direct

assistance also includes counsel on reorganizing the research system,

and two countries, Zambia and Malawi, have received this type

assistance.

C. Networking is handled by four activities.

1. One is the Newsletter which performs the normal function

implied in its title,.

2. A second activity is a recurring seminar of research

administrators for all countries in the region. This will be held

either every 12 or every .18 months for the same participants. There

will be papers, but much of the time is spent in discussing

Page 12

management-institutional issues.

3. A third activity is a series of technical workshops on

selected topics. Plans are to hold two of these for every one of th

administrator seminars. They are non-recurring. They address a

problem area common to many countries and involve both FSR personnel

and conventional research personnel. One has been hold on animal

e

traction. This workshop also involves a CIMMYT consultant to

inventory work in the area.

4. The fourth activity is inter-country visitation.

Persons wanting to visit other countries can apply to the CIMMYT

project for travel assistance, CIMMYT does not hold itself

responsible for orgainizing these visits. That is left to personnel.

+o the region. This has been used for both technical and

administrative visits. It is expected that there will be requests as

participants of the animal traction workshop attempt to maintain

contacts made there.

D. Instityutiona.l i..ti n will be a function of all other

activities. The grant agreement anticipated no institutionalization

activity during the first two years. As a matter of fact there have

been several accomplishments which have important institutional

impacts.

Page 13

III. GENERAL CONSIDERATIONS

Evolution of FSR

FSR methodologies and management is not a mature area of

competence. The state of the art is evolving, and CIMMYT has been one

of the major contributors to this evolution. Its program started with

a straight forward adoption study made after the introduction of a

practice. In one of these studies it was found that although some 50

percent of the farmers had adopted the practice, some 95 percent of

those for whom the practice was appropriate had adopted it. This led

CIMMYT to a program of analysis before technological innovation and

attempts to identify innovations that would better fit the systems of

farming and thus increase the probability of adoption. FSR in CIMMYT

is lodged in its economics program and is still staffed by economists.

In one phase of the evolution,, the program emphasized surveys. The

current program places a much heavier emphasis on on-farm research

than formerly, but it is related to the survey component such that

they complement one another. The evolution continues. Integration of

extension into the process appears to be a phase not very far into the

future.

CIMIMY1 in. East Africa

It is necessary to have some understanding of what the CIMMYT

program is and what it is that AID is buying in the CIMMYT grant. On

the surface this program is a set of methodologies from rapid

assessment through formal survey to on-farm trials and technologies

tested in specific farming systems. However, the program is deeper

than that, and this ,extra depth adds considerably to the.product AID

is giving its LDC clientele access to,, The extra depth comes from the

perspective CIMMYT has developed. It is capsulated in the way CIMMYT

Page 14

now describes it program, "on-farm research with a farming system

perspective" (OFR/FSP). The perspective is of considerably more

significance than is the set of methodologies. The perspective lends

orientation to the work, Ain a sense establishing the objective.

Without the perspective, methodologies can be implemented but without

achieving their purpose, and they have in some FSR efforts.

Methodologies become means, and if one has the proper perspective,

there will be alternative means to reach objectives. This is not to

down play methodologies, since it is through methodologies that things

are accomplished, including understanding of the farming system

perspectives.

CIMMYT also offers an excellent knowledge and understanding of

East arid South African research institutions and a continuity :of

program that can be helpful to AID. This has enabled CIMMYT to work

effectively in the area of institutionalization even though the PP

indicated little was to be done the first year or so.

Page 15

FSR in Context

Since FSR is viewed in so many different ways, it is useful to

set forth my own conceptualization of FSR. That conceptualization

will likely have some influence on interpretations and conclusions.

1. Farming Systems Research addresses a segment of the total

technology innovation process.

2. The technology innovation process is a series of activities

that lead from the world's stock of kpowledne,, to common practice in

agricultural production. The activities are here presented in an over

simplified sequence.

Body of Scientific Tech. Tech, Tech. Dissemi- Dif- Common

Knowledge Research Develop- Testing Adapta- nation fusion Practice

ment tion

-------------------------------------------------------------------

The sequence is oversimplified, chiefly from the fact that there are

loops in the process. Feedback sets the process back from time to

*time, in one degree or another. It can even start the process all

over again.

3. In many L.DC'"s. f*or a variety of reasons, research stops part

way through the testing activity (or phase), but extension-does not

start until the dissemination activity (or phase). (Research stops

too soon; extension starts too late).

4. This break, in the process seriously hampers technology

innovation in agriculture. Some very powerful innovations may be able

to jump the gap or even bypass extension. External forces can bridge

the gap. These events, however, do not restore the integrity of the

Page 16

technology innovation process, even though they accomplish some

one-time innovations.

5. The FSR approach has the power not only to fill this gap for

selected innovations but also to restore the integrity of the total

technology innovation process. This is its potential, and it is

indeed significant.

6. In order to accomplish its potential, FSR must be managed in

relation to the other segments of the process. If FSR is managed as a

free-standing function, it will become the third disconnected segment

of a process and will likely have little more impact.

7. In order to complete the testing phase and to undertake the

adaptive phase, the research must come to the terms with the farming

systems in which the innovation is expected to perform. It is this

fact which gives FSR its name. Coming to terms with the farmer is

also a source of much of the power in FSR. The success of research

and extension is judged only by their service to the farmer. They

havs no other reason to exist,

8. It is necessary (a) that enough be known and understood about

the farming system to serve as a basis for planning technology

innovation and adaptation and (b) that innovations and adaptations to

them be tested in the farming system in which they are expected to

perform and by criteria of that system. It is not necessary to

address the total system..

TIw-. 1-Tie. r. or. T Jo li.men sio...'.

CIMMYT refers to its system as two-tier. One "tiier" is the

research acti vity that deals directly with the farmer and his system

of farming. The other is the research activity more nearly

Page 17

conventional. It is associated with the experiment station and

commodities or individual problems.

An alternate conceptualization is "two-dimension", with commodity

research along one axis and farming systems research activity along

the other. The FSR teams, often called adaptive research teams, are

responsible for a geographic area and must deal with all commodities.

The commodity research teams, CRT's, called applied research teams in

Malawi although they are to be organized by commodities, are

responsible for a coomodity, nation-wide, and must deal with all

areas. These two sets of responsibilities literally do constitute two

axes, in a sense perpendicular to each other. In analyzing research

data and planning annual programs, each axis must protect its own

interests, and yet the differences must be resolved.

Page 18

IV. SCOPE OF WORK

The Scope of Work for this evaluation was contained in a cable to

the field, Unclassified State 279487 of 29 September 1983.

This section contains the items listed in that document with the

responses.

Page 19

A. "Assess the effectiveness of the CIMMYT inputs provided under the

project and the impact these have had on achieving project outputs and

purpose. CIMMYT's efforts over the past several years have been

directed at strengthening and restructuring national agricultural

research and extension systems to be more responsive to farmers's

needs. A.I/D., through various bilateral efforts, is providing support

to selected host countries to facilitate this restructuring with

emphasis on farming systems research. The CIMMYT project is designed

to provide (refer to project paper and grant for more details): (1)

Direct assistance to host countries and A.I.D. contract teams in

esitalishinn methodol oqi es to carry out useful on-farm research, (2)

To provide training in FSR to selected host country scientists, (3) To

estarbish a coordinating network among COoperating national programs,

and (4) To assist in institutionalizing the farm-based research

process. The evaluation should review each of these objectives from

the viewpoint of the types of activities which CIMMYT has undertaken,

the quality of their effort and the quantity of accomplishments.

"It is noted in the project paper that nine countries are to be

serviced by the project. Some countries have received more support

and attention than others. The team should examine the rationale for

this and provide guidance to CIMMYT on allocation of inputs for the

remaining life of project. Additionally., given the experience of

CIMMYT to date, how should resources be allocated toward each of the

four objectives listed above, i.e., should more-effort be devoted to

training? and less to networking or institutional izing the FSR

approach."

This item calls for information and analysis provided elsewhere

in the report. The Description of Proj.ect Activities will respond to

Page 20

part of what is requested here, and Item I below discusses training in

more detail. To a certain extent that material will be summarized

here.

The purpose as stated in the project authorization document is:

To provide: networking among cooperating national programs, training

in participating countries, assitanse with on-farm research in

nine-countries, aid in institutionalizing the on-farm research

process, all in support of USAID efforts to build appropriate research

and extension systems in Eastern and Southern Africa.

There are certain discrepancies in the documentation. In another

place in the document cited above the n'.umber of countries was given as

ten, rather.than nine. The scope of work for this evaluation refers

to establishingg a coordinating network," whereas the project document

states, "networking .among cooperating national programs." This

evauation uses the latter edition on the basis that it is the most

useful to AID and is more in the spirit of the CIMMYT program. A

"cror rdinating network" implies a formal body dealing in bureaucratic,,

administrative issues rather than in technical and substantive issues.

It is my assessment that CIMMYT inputs provided under this

project have been exceptionally effective in achieving outputs and

purpose. In several cases these inputs have followed on pre-grant

CIMMYT activities.

1. In its direct e assistanDce CIMMYT has provided counsel to both

Zambia and Malawi in reorganization of their national research

agencies. In Swaziland direct assistance to the Pennsylvania State

University team has been exceptionally helpful in saving time and in

team building. Another form of direct assistance is the ex'pl oratory

meeting in which CIMMYT visits a country to seminar on FSR and the

Page 21

farming system perspective. All countries except Somalia and Burundi

have been visited for these explorations. Direct assistance is an

alternate form of training in that CIMMYT deals in intellectual

matters, not-in simple straightforward service.

"Impacts" have many dimensions. The most dramatic impact is the

saving of time and elimination of frustration of the technical

assistance teams that can take advantage of CIMMYT experience.

2. In country training, in A sense, is an alternative 'to direct

action since the trainees are working on a real live project as the

laboratory for their training. Our only evidence is the reports of

trainees all of which are positive, even though some more than others.

No in-country trainee has gone through a cropping cycle, so there is

no completely objectivee" measure of im.pact.

Impact of training must be questioned, in a positive sense. The

CIMMYT concepts are probably more complicated than CIMMYT personnel

realize, since they have worked with them so long. At this point

trainees have not been on their own enough to test the training as

opposed to execution of an exercise under CIMMIT guidance. It must be

emphasized that this is a question, not a conclusion.

We did not observe the University of Zimbabwe training. Of some

value as evidence is the fact that the demand for this trainiq is now

just about twice the supply:, 60 applicants for the last course which

could handle about 30. Applications are being received from all over

the continent, not just the nine-country area.

The Zimbabwe training is not included in the grant.

3. N!etwqrki.n.g seems to be exceptionally effective. One mission

director feels this activity alone justifies the project., Small

countries recognize very clearly that they are going to have to depend

Page 22

on resources beyond their own as a source of technology, and all

countries in the region are small to some degree. In Swaziland, the

research director told us that his country had long recognized the

need to become more relevant to the farmer but were frustrated in

means by which it could be accomplished. At least two donor projects

were described that were designed for that purpose. Neither were

adequate. The same director would not permit on farm research by the

PSU team in the 1982-83 season.. This season there will be an

extensive on-farm research activity. The director attended the

Administrators seminar, and a CIMMYT person has been stationed in

Swaziland for ten months. We are not able to establish cause and

e4fect.

Reports of the Animal Traction Workshop in Swaziland were

uniformly positive. This workshop brought together FSR personnel with

personnel doing conventional research on dry season feeding and use of

animal traction. "his workshop not only increased contact among

members of the two interest groups (which w.uld justify a workshop)

but it also facilitated the process of the two groups working

together.

Still a third activity is the inter-country visits, both on

technical matters and orcgan:i. national matters. A group from Malawi

visited both Zimbabwe and Zambia when Malawi was deciding on the

direction of its re-organization.
4. I.D tiu..ti.g... i .zat:i.on impact or even activity was not

anticipated in the project paper during th first two years to any

grant degree. However, the CIMMYT style demands institutionalization

in so far as human resource development is concerned. CIMMYT" has been

operating in East Africa as a one-man operation since 1977. An input

Page 23

of that magnitude demands the development of national human capacity.

But institutionalization requires more than the human resource. It

requires a system or organization in which that capacity can function

effectively. The CIMMYT program is addressing the national

organization issue through both its counsel with individual countries

and its administrators seminar. CIMMYT has provided major inputs into

the Zambia and Malawi re-organizations which are both committed to a

two-dimensional structure for their research programs,, Zambia has FSR

teams in five province (out of nine). Malawi will start with three

teams and plans to have on in each of its eight Agricultural

Development Divisions by 1986.

Page 24

We have little empirical evidence of the impact of the

administrators seminars. We have considerable historical evidence of

the value of this kind of association for professionals who do most of

their work in isolation from peers. There is only one research

director per country. Research in most of these countries for one

reason or another is not highly valued. Thus he waqes a lonely

battle. It is difficult even to maintain his own convictions, to know

what he should expect. A regular 'meeting with others in almost the

identical situation has a powerful impact both intellectually and

psychologically. He is able to re-affirm his convictions, he does

learn what to expect from research. he can set some norms, he can

learn management techniques, among many others. One example comes

from the first administrators seminar where the research directors set

30 as the minimum number of professional workers needed for a two

dimensional (or two-tiered) research program. With fewer than 30 a

research system can effectively deal only with testing and adaptation.

This is a highly significant concept. Perhaps the number "30"

indicates more precision than is possible, but the concept is sound

(see FSR in context in Section III General Considerations.)

The only conclusion one can reach is that CIMMYT is already making

sicgnifi cant contribution to institutionalization and further this

contribution is completely compatible with AID's concepts of

institutionalization and consistent with AID's efforts to that end.

CIMMYT has given some countries more attention than others. It

realized that some sort of strategy was needed. This strategy calls

for intensive training in countries with ten or more professionals to

be trained and who demonstrate commitment and i interest Otther country

needs are handled by request with the exception of Swaziland in which

Page 25

a CIMMYT man is stationed and which gets attention as a sort of "rent

payment." Networking and the Zimbabwe training are available to all.

It is difficult to suggest alternatives to CIMMYT's distribution

of efforts among the four areas and among nine countries with a few

exceptions which cannot be considered major., CIMMYT itself will make

some adaptations as it generates experience. It cannot handle more

than two comprehensive training programs a year. It expects requests

from Kenya, Tanzania, Sudan, and Zimbabwe, all of whom meet some of

the criteria.

Sugg.st i.onW_ for exceptions are these:

1. CIMMYT is now contemplating reducing the number of

administrators seminars to one every 18 months rather than one a year.

My own judgment is that the 12 months interval is justified., given the

importance of management to research development (not just FSR) in the

region.

One reason for reducing the frequency of the administrators

seminar is the demand on administrator's time. They are being invited

to international meetings by a variety of donors. CIMMYT may he able

to collaborate with some other meeting sponsors in such a way that the

number of meetings could be controlled but yet meetings are not so

spaced as to lose their effectiveness.

2. There may be a chance to economize on CIMMYT time resource by

transferring more responsibility to national programs for the

technical workshops. One gets the impression that these are valued so

highly that national programs,, including expatriate contract teams,,

would help out considerably. CIMMYT may also be able to use

consul tants.

3. For new starts in an!y -ese.,arc-h project in the re-gion., REDSO

Page 26

should consider making it virtually mandatory that (a) design teams

have at least a one-day CIMMYT briefing, more if CIMMYT can manage the

time, and (b) new AID-financed technical teams also have a briefing

from CIMMYT.

Those represent no major re-allocation of resources.

Page 27

B. "Examine the relationship of CIMMYT's efforts to ongoing and

planned programs of other international centers (ICRISAT, IITA, CIAT)

in Eastern and Shouthern Africa, to the various Title XII research

programs (both bilateral and Collaborative Research Support Project

(CRSP), and to the S and T Farming Systems Support Project being

implemented through the University of Florida."

CIMMYT operates in the area of research methodology and

organization. It has a very close convergence of interest with the

U.S. University contractors, and this is discussed under item F below.

Collaboration is good..

Some of the international agricultural research centers have FSR

pro-rams, but so far there has been little opportunity for

collaboration. The IlTA relationships abe discussed under "J" bel3o,..

CIrMMYT and ITTA have divided up the continent. CIMMYT has invited an

IITA agronomist to its team. The fact is IITA has very little to

contribute to a collaboration. CIMMYT and the ILCA are in

conversations on collaboration.. I do not know the ILCA program in

FSR, but it has had some joint activity with IITA. ICRISAT will

likely open a major front in Southern Africa, but it will be largely

devoted to sorghum. The ICRISAT FSR program aims at developing

improved systems per se and operates along lives substantially

different from those of CIMMYT. Collaboration with CRSP's will be

effected through national programs.

CIMMYT also has collaboration with IDRC oF Canada and the

Australian Center for International Agricultural Research. It has

worked with ISMAR, ICRAF, World Bank, ILCP, and IITA in national and

regi onal sem inars.

So far there doesn't seem to have been adequate collaboration on

Page 28

meetings organized for administrators of national systems. This may be

one of the most important collaboration opportunities. Administrators

are key to research success, and their contact with each other can be

highly productive. Yet their time and talent represent a scarce

resource that must be- utilized with care and respect.

It is my judgment that collaboration with other entities is quite

adequate. My attitude toward collaboration is specific, however.

Given the great number of donor entities operating in related areas or

quasi-related areas, one needs a strategy of collaboration that

insures that something worthwhile emerges from it and that not more

resources are allocated to it than are justified.

There is considerable interest in FSSP and CIMMYT collaboration.

The Farming Systems Support Project, managed by the University of

Florida, is scarcely a year old. The CIMMYT program has'been building

for a decade. CIMMYT has developed its FSR program deliberately and

has a well-defined identifiable CIMMYT system. Although FSSP is

heavily influenced by the Guatemala experience, it is expected to

mobilize resources and expertise from a wide range of sources. Some

of those sources are U.S. Universities operating in the CIMMYT program

area. The University of Florida itself has a project in Malawi which

has excellent relationship with CIMMYT, and FSSP has had contacts of

varying degrees with Kansas State, Washington State, Penn State,

Oregon State, Illinois, and Utah State with a program in Somalia.

FSSP has a standing offer to any Title XII University to give all the

support it can in FSR programs. The university teams we have

contacted have high respect for CIMMYT.

FSSP and CIMMYT have had considerable contact. The discussions

have centered more on ways to work together than on any divit:ng up

Page 29

the world. In Latin America FSSP and CIMMYT worked together in

Paraguay and other countries.

The two entities are not parallel. FSSP is an AID instrument,

totally funded by AID for specific AID purposes. It is responsible to

work worldwide, although with a focus on Africa. It is definitely a

sport entity. While CIMMYT is operating on AID funding in East

Africa, it has its own program with enough diversity of funding and

strategies to continue funding that it can almost be characterized as

autonomous. Even though it supports country programs CIMMYT is only a

short step from operational, and it is definitely developmental, i.e.

constantly extending the FSR concept. FSSP is quite far removed from

operations, and the extent to which it will further the state of the

art has simply not been determined.

There is not much likelihood that FSSP will mount a field type

operation of the CIMMYT East Africa type anywhere in the world and

even less that FSSP would pick up the specific program if the CIMMYT

Prcaraxm is terminated. If it did there .is little chance it could

equal CIMMYT at CIMMYT's own game. This is an i. individual an:al.ygi~.'

It has not been cleared with my FSSP colleagues and in no way reflects

FSSP policy or commits FSSP.

These considerations are important to AID. FSSP and CIMMYT

outputs are two different products. They should be expected to

develop complementarities. They are not very likely substitutes to

any great degree. They operate under substantially different AID

management styles,.

Missions in the CIMMYT region can call on CIMMYT for assistance

in training of various types and for some direct assistance in

response to specific problems. They can also look to CIMMYT for

Page 30

consultation with national systems on organization and management.

Support in the FSSP clearly includes help with the organization

and briefing of design and evaluation teams, and this function CIMMYT

likely will not do, although it may have an input. FSSP will develop

a literature program which missions can access. FSSP has networking

responsibility, but will not likely be active in this region except in

collaboration with CIMMYT.

FSSP could help bri-ef contractor teams and individuals coming on

University teams and support U.S. Universities in their back stop

operations, including recruiting of personnel.

FSSP can supporto" CIMMYT as well as any other entity. As CIMMYT

coritinures the evolution of its program it will create demands and

opportunities for collaboration. These opportunities will take the

form of field experimentation. Four areas are most likely:

Integration of Extension into the FSR to make it FSR/E, methods to

deal with livestock, refinements to on-farm research methodology, and

organization and management of national R/E systems. While FSSP may be

supporting the CIMMYT program it can be expected that the REDSO/CIMMYT

program will provide considerable experience that will be useful

elsewhere.

All indications are that collaboration is adequate and with the

relevant entities. AID should expect increased collaboration between

FSSP and CIMMYT as FSSP gathers momentum. Reasonable attention needs

to he given to collaborating with other entities in staging meetings

and seminars with administrators.

Page 31

-C. "Review project implementation and rate of expenditures to

determine further accomplishments which reasonably can be expected

through remaining life of project .or probable shortfalls against

targets. Provide a brief updated implementation schedule."

For all practical purposes the CIMMYT project started in January

1983, even though the grant was awarded in mid-1982. That's a scarce

ten months at the time of the review. That start up time is no cause

for concern.

Project costs have turned out to be somewhat less than budgeted

because many trainee costs were picked up by national systems.

Thus less than anticipated expenditures will likely not be

ref elected in project accomp i shments. Compre ensive train ing was

started in Zambia and Malawi in 1983. These are planned for an

18-month cycle. Expectations are to start two more in 1983 from

Tanzania, Kenya, and Sudan.

The only shortfall may be in the technical workshop.

As far as project accomplishments are concerned,

institutionalization is far ahead of schedule.

Use of consultants and a greater contribution from national

programs may help get the technical workshops back on a two per year

schedule.

Perhaps a more vigorous promotion of the inter-country

visitations in the Newsletter would increase special interest

networking.

Page 32

D. There was no Item "D" in referenced cable.

E. "Evaluation should address programmatic issues with respect to

further support to FSR program in Eastern and Southern Africa. Should

CIMMYT support to FSR objectives be continued beyond expiration of

project? and, if so, at what level of effort?

What are problems and constraints with respect to CIMMYT on this

i. issue? These recommendations wil. assist AID/W in reviewing any

proposed follow-on activities to the present CIMMYT activity. Should

geographic scope of project be examine/revised? How will countries

such as Rw.anda and Burund:i. w!h:ich have :impending agr. cu.. tura l. resear-ch

projects with FSR components, gain access to project services?"

The CIMM'YT (qrnt project must be justified on its increase in

effectiveness of country programs supported by JUSAID missions. This

impact on country programs will come through direct action (training

or assistance) to the country and by networking both at the

administrator level and at the technical level.

From our observations the activities under the grant have already

had substantial impact as evidence presented throughout this report

indicate. It is my judgment, and it is without reservation., that this

project should be ext ended,, Virtually all of the benefits to USAID

supported country programs are accumulative.. That is the impact of

five annual seminars of admini strators can be expected to i mpraovo

substantially the management of country research systems in the region

and the administrative environment in which UJSAIDI programs will b1 .

operating.

The C IMMYT program shou ld be ex :. panded to incl a. ud e an agronomim i. .

So far it is largely a program of economists. As emphasis grows on

the on-farm research and the program evolves the need for agronomy

expertise grows. Two factors should be considered before expansion

beyond that is concerned. One is that it is not CIMMYT nature to be

large and highly visible. The second is that as national competence

developed, the size of CIMMYT may not have to grow in relation to the

increased scope of action that AID may find useful.

There is indication from this evaluation that CIMMYT may be able

to have its greatest impact early in project history. Thus there may

be more net gain to provide at least limited assistance to Rwanda and

Burundi even at the expense of delay in certain calls in other

cciuntries,. Some assistance with design efforts, even if onl y team

briefing may also help new country programs.

This evaluation produces no evidence or analysis justifying.

termination of the project,. There has been much evidence presented

justifying its continuation and expansion.. After this short

experience there is a stronger case for extension than for making the

original grant.,

The general nature of the program needs only minor adjustment.

It's working well as is.

It should continue as a grant which gives CIMMYT op!erat:i.onal

f ].exibil.ity and does not place a heavy management lbur-den n AID.

Size and geographic scope must be decided on many factors that

can-'t be dealt with in an eval.uat.i on,, Project performance j ust ifi es a

some what larger investment,,

Given the dynamic nature of FSR, there needs to be some strategic:

planning between AID and CIMMYT,, FSR is in its starting phase, and

basic training is very much needed. At some point national systems

will not need that help at nearly the same degree as now. There may

Page 34

be need for other assistance, even for developmental work.

AID needs to give CIMMYT a reasonably long planning horizon in

its commitment so that CIMMYT can offers its clients and collaborators

some security of expectation.

During the development of this project, which preceded FSSP

approval, there was discussion of the possibility of merging the two.

That was a time of much uncertainty concerning both projects. Now

that experience has been gained an'd the t:wo projects are taking shape

there remains little reason to put them together. CIIMMYT is

providing a specific service to the REDSO region under an effective

-anrd ff icient management style,. The perspective for success is qond,

PC":clg 1... liMIYT i. allogpyed to .prsi.sIt. It is difficult to see any

advantage in merging the projects. It is easy to see serious risks,

both to content and to management style, from a merger.

F. "Examine the relationships between CIMMYT and A.I.D. contract

universities, E.G., at training sessions what is the mi;x c:f contract

univeristies and host country participants?"

The relationships between CIMMYT and USAID U.S. University

contractors have been better than might have been expected. U.S.

University personnel have been in research all their careers and in

fairly close contact with farmers. Still some of them have been

exceptionally responsive to the CIMMYT system and in some cases a

r emar kab le rapport seems to have developed.

In some countries, such as Zambia, only three U.S. University

personnel attended the course, but that is all that are working in

FSR. On the other hand, in Swaziland where most of the national staff

are in training, contact has been main.y.with the U.S. staff of eight.,

U.S. University staff as the resident experts in national

programs are highly important to the CIMMYT operation, and evidence

that we have gathered indicates this collaboration is completely

adequate. U.S. University teams turn over fairly rapidly, and

assessments will have to be made as to training ofn replacements. This

may be a problem that FSSP needs to worry about. FSSP may also help

in recruitment or selection.of personnel for University contract.

In several cases University personnel have played important roles

in CIMMYT activities, such as the Zimbabwe training and the technical

workshop. There have also been cases in which the University team has;

been a factor in getting CIMMYT involved in a country.

Many of the universities in the CIMMYT region are involved in

FSSP, including the University of Florida.

One problem was noted. Some UI,.S. University personnel do not

take readily to the CIMMYT system. Even th!ou.gh it is compatible with

Page 36

the "Land-Grant System," the means of applying it are different. It

is not easy to evaluate this problem. Confusion regarding means (or

form) interferes with a clear understanding of objectives (or

substance). In some-cases, but not all, this problem has been

reflected in some dissatisfaction regarding contractor recruitment.

Fortunately, the problem is not widespread. Some "old Land-Grant

.types" adapt very well to the CIMMYT system.

Page 37

G. "Review financial and project progress reports to REDSO/ESA,

RFMC/NAIROBI and AFR/RA reports in light of reporting requirements of

grant. Examine now CIMMYT reporting requirements can meet REDSO/ESA

and AFR/RA project reporting requirements."

This review identified no management problem in REDSO stemming

from inadequate reporting. The grant document available to me had no

reference to reporting. This should be a rather routine matter

between CIMMYT and REDSO that can:be resolved easily. Good reports,

even though time consuming, often work to the benefit of the grantee

and so are worth taking seriously. Complete reports also provide a

project history that are valuable to AID as well as to CIMMYT.

Somewhat more attention needs to be given to the reports, even though

immediate project management has not beeh impaired by reporting

inadequacy.

Page 38

H. "Assess the utility of CIMMYT's rapid assessment survey techniques

in terms of acceptance, strengths and weaknesses."

CIMMYT's rapid assessment survey techniques can be identified as

(a) analysis of secondary data and discussion with knowledgable

people, (b) the informal survey, and (c) the formal survey. 'The

techniques involve at least two disciplines, economics and agronomy.

The first two are e;xcept:ionall.y useful, in part because they

address problems and information sources that for many are virgin

territories. The learning curve is very high. These techniques are

also relatively simple to master. There is some structure to the

informal survey, but its main purpose is to start to know the farmer

and gain insights into how he conducts his business. It's a first and

vital step to establishing production linkage between the farmer and

the public research service. Most researchers accept it readily.

The formal survey is a good technique in the hands of masters.

It provides good data on what, farmers do. Making it useful to answer

hv questions and verify insights and hypotheses developed from

informal surveys requires considerable skill. It is not clear that

novices handle it well.

It is my j..iudqment that perhaps too much is made o- the "rapid

survey techniques." They are a nor-recurrinqg phase of FSR and are only

made necessary by the very substantial ignorance of the farmer that

prevails in many public institutions or-ganized to serve him. Real

understanding of the farmer and his strategies will come with

sustained interaction between the farmer and the research system via

FSR. On-farm trials and collaboration with extensi on will likely be

the really. y productive activity es for- understanding the f armer,,

Page 39

Once the research system has come to terms with the farmer the

rapid survey techniques will be of considerably less import. In the

meantime they serve their purpose quite well.

Page 40

I. "Examine the success of CIMMYT's methods used in training

sessions. What factors account for the success of these methods?"

Training deals at several levels. It can impart information, it

can teach skills, it can achieve understanding and attitude change,

and it.can teach problem solving or creativity. As CIMMYT emphasizes

the farming system perspective in addition to or along with

methodologies, it moves to the more complex of these levels of

training. It is not simply training in the implementation of a set of

procedures as it may some times appear. For example, in the informal

survey training, students must come to understand a bit of economics,

must learn to distinguish among systems, and must be able to identify

farmer strategies in the allocation of his resources. They must also

learn skills in selecting respondents, in conducting interviews, in

inter-disciplinary collaboration, and in handling data, not all

simple, straight forward skills. We have evidence that the CIMMYT

training in the utilization of secondary data and in the informed

survey has been quite good. In almost all cases trainees seem to have

made real progress. We have some comparative evidence. One team did

two informal surveys before training and one in connection with

training. The team's own judgment is our evidence.

We don't have that evidence with respect to the formal survey,.

However, at this early stage of project history one can say little

with respect to "success" as the discussion of "success factors" will

indi cate,,

The CIMMYT training in FSR methodology is a combination of study,

classroom work:, and learning by doing. The learning by doing is not

simply a training exercise, however. It almost always involves the

Page 41

actual completion of a task in a project area. Thus, in the Zambia

training an informal survey was actually accomplished and used as the

basis for a formal survey (also a training exercise) which in turn led

to a training session in technology screening and evaluation against

farmer strategies and problems and to the design of on-farm tests.

The Zambia training cycle is not complete. An evaluation of success

of training has to ask, at this point, if the trainees were well

trained or well supervised. We do not know how the students will do on

their own.

While handouts, written material, and some visual aids are

utilized, practice on a real live project with adequate CIMMYT

instruction and supervision is the distinguishing characteristic of

CIMMYT training in the standard FSR procc.ss.

However, CIMMYT does much training outside that mode. In fact,

all four areas of CIMMYT work under this grant finally devolve into

some sort of training. Direct assistance is a form of training, again

with work on real live problems, with individual attention.

Networking for adminri strators utilizes a seminar format, with

small group discussion to increase participation over large group

discussion, and these groups deal with real live problems. The

technical networking also makes heavy use of participation and is

built around prob 1 ems spec:i ficaly identify ied, with participants who

face those problems.

The only exception to the real live problem is the training at

the Un.iversity of Zimbabwe, The students do practical work w:i.th real

data, but it is a classroom exercise.

Practical:, work experience training on real live problems

supplemented by class work are factors responsible for success.

Page 42

J. "Review the status of the International Institute for Tropical

Agriculture, IITA, Research agroomist involvement in the CIMMYT

project."

The IITA agronomist position never materialized. IITA had

planned to station an agronomist in Nairobi to work with the CIMMYT

program for about two years. The plan was to bring the agronomist

back to IITA to work in its FSR program. The plan was not implemented

because IITA and the Government of Kenya could not come to an

agreement on the agronomist's being posted in Kenya,,

V. OTHER OBSERVATIONS

Li .stockm.i (ongonmys In Extnsion5lm

CIMMYT is being urged to deal more explicitly with livestock, to

bring extension into FSR, and to make more use of agronomists. These

urgings are on a sound basis, but the needs among the three are not

parallel. CIMMYT is not neglecting agronomy. It has access to

agronomists from CIMMYT/Mexica,, At least two ex-patriate agronomists

are working very well with CIMMYT, and there is considerable agronomic

talent in the region, which CIMMYT uses effectively. Up until now,

the lack of agronomists on the CIMMYT team has not been a limiting

factor. However, the on-farm trial is receiving increasing emphasis,

and agronomists are needed--both for their real contribution to the

process and for relating to other research agronomists.

(The need for engineers may emerge, since labor is the primary

constraint but no one raised the issue.)

The livestock issue is of a somewhat different nature. The claim

is .hat CIMMYT is dealing with cropping systems, not farming systems.

The fact is that one does not deal with the cropping systems without

an impact on the farming system. Another fact is that one of the

major problems with livestock is feed supply, which comes in large

part from the cropping system,, There is, of course, a need to deal

with livestock, but just what that need is and how to address it

require analysis beyond the conventional wisdom. CIMMYT is not likely

to add a livestock expert. It will likely wJork1 out a collaboration

with ILCA. Mixing the CIMMIT and ILCA systems may present some

problems,,

CIMMYT rec:o gn:i zes the need to and does invol ve Extension, hut so

Page 44

-far it has not figured how to do so adequately. The CIMMYT scheme is

to keep Extension informed, to work with extension personnel in

developing and taking surveys, and sometimes even to seeking extension

help in on-farm trial work. Until now, however, extension is involved

as an instrument of the research process, not as an entity with as

much to gain as does research from the improved research contact with

the farmer. In some countries extension is taking the initiative in

getting into the act in its own interest. In other countries,

however, not much activity is noted. CIMMYT needs to do some more

work on conceptualizing the role of Extension and its relation with

Research, as do national systems, USAID missions, and other projects.

NtWOsrk ing D andE -i-parAtrat

Networking possibilities are great in the REDSO/CIMMYT area and

could be (perhaps are) overlooked. CIMMYT has a great deal of

credibility in the REDSO area. This grant has enabled AID to

capitalize on that, but it is not clear to what extent. It is clear,

for example, that the CIMIMYT reputation has had a substantial

influence on the reorganization of Zambia and Malawi national systems.

What is not clear is whether these countries would have gone ahead

with reorganization according to CIMMYT if there had not been

resources to offer training and to stay with the systems through the

early stages. These resources comthethrough the CIMMYT grant, but they

also come through b i-lateral progr ams., Als

intangible regional (or other-country) psychological support that

convinces one country to make a substantial reorganization.

What is clear is the critical role ex-patriate teams from the

Page 45

bilateral programs will play in implanting the CIMMYT system in the

region. This sounds almost as if the country programs are supporting

CIMMYT, rather than CIMMYT supporting them. It really does not make

any difference. The CIMMYT program has seven years experience in the

region. Its aims are the same as those of AID, and its emphasis on

institutionalization is completely consistent with the AID and Title

XII tradition.

Networking and training from CIMMYT are commonly thought of as

aiming at national personnel, and certainly they should be. However,

for the intermediate period specific attention needs to be paid to

training and networking needs of expatriate personnel. Expatriates in

many countries of the region make up much of the national system

personnel complement. Even though that is likely to be temporary, it

will continue long enough that this class of personnel need attention

and not just incidentally.

Expatriate personnel expressed needs for contact with other

countries--both expatriates and nationals. REDSO/CIMMYT need to

recognize the networking-training potential and encourage expatriate

teams to take leadership in developing networking activities. Funds

could come from the CIMMYT grant and also from bi-lateral project

managers., CIMMYT can help by use of its good offices and by

facial itating communication.

P"'ersisstejnc::e vs.. Geni.uy

Two countries have reorganized their research systems to reflect

the CIMMYT system of "on farm research with a farming systems

perspective," and several others have made significant commitments to

the concept., Bi-l ateral projects are supporting these commitments.

Page 46

While the logic is sound, though simple, there is some risk in these

decisions and investments. The risk is that countries and supporting

donors will not persist in efforts to make them work. At this

juncture it is probable that persistence will be the better part of

genius. It is logical to associate the CIMMYT program with

persistence. Seven years in East Africa and ten years in evolution,

CIMMYT owes its achievements largely to persistence, a systematic,

planned, evolutionary persistence, AID, which has not been

particularly noted for persistence, has the opportunity in this project

to achieve a measure of persistence that is difficult under other

measures. Now is not the time to search for "innovative, new ideas"

but rather to persist in support of a concept that stands the tests of

logic and has proven effective in other environments and other eras..

FSR and. African Lyni.ver-_it.:.,..s

At least two African academic institutions, Edgerton College and

the University of Zimbabwe, are reported to be building the FSR

ccrcept into their teaching programs. We' did not see the former, but

the U of Z is using it in the farm management program and in an area

development project in the Zambesi River Valley which will involve

personnel from several disciplines.

Most universities teach courses in Extension. As soon as CIMMYT

and other develop the farming systems perspective to include

extension, these courses may offer a locus for FSR activities. These

programs are sometimes thin in content, and the FSR perspective will

be helpful. FSSP is oriented to FSR/E, and that orientation appears,

after this exercise, to be useful.

F:.ub .i c.atsi. ns., !ews lettec. BRierCEM

One mission raised a specific question about publications, who

Page 47

publishes them and who distributes them. The grant document takes

little note of publications.

The Newsletter is one element of networking. Limited examination

of the Newsletter leads to the impression that it needs more attention

to news items of what is happening in the region. CIMMYT invites

contributions, which have been scarce, but its personnel travel widely

in the region and could do some reporting. Knowledge of what is

happening in other countries, even if skimpy, would be useful to

readers.

CIMMYT reports to AID have also been on the skimpy side. They

seem to satisfy the administrative requirements., The project document

is almost silent on the matter. However, for substantive or technical

purposes, it would be useful for CIMMYT to make a record of its

activities and achievements in the program, completely aside from

administrative, contractual considerations.

The same sort of information could be used in the reports and the

newsletter.

Id1al .ye CIMMYT Sytvui

The CIMMYT system can be expected to work best if the country

situation permits initiating it from the beginning and if the

predominant farming system involves basic grains on non-irrigated

land. CIMMYT has had several chances for the ideal type program. Not

all have been,.however, and, further, national systems have made some

adaptations notg quite consist ent with the ideal,,

In Lesotho, for example, a project was underway for almost four

years before there was appreciable CIMMYT contact. There still has

-not been muchh. Plans are for more contact as new team members join

the Washington State team. Whether the CIMMYT system can make a

Page 48

contribution and still maintain project momentum remains to be known.

Lesotho has also added the "combination farm" concept that is not in

the CIMMYT system. Purpose of the combination farm is to put all of

the ideal technologies together in a single farming system.

Swaziland presented CIMMYT with commercial vegetable production

system on newly irrigated land. -CIMMYT seems to be accommodating this

variation in the "typical" system.

Zimbabwe has come up with the Farming Systems Development Center,

an experiment station FSR activity, which is not included in the ideal

type program.

We do not know how to predict how CIMMYT will react to and

accommodate each of these variations. In some cases it may learn from

them. In some cases it may learn that the variations are non

productive. Indications are that CIMMYT will retain and protect the

integrity of its ideal type but will not insist on strict compliance

as a price for its assistance. Most countries seem grateful for the

existence of the ideal type and seem eager to understand it. There

also seems to be a tendency to want to adapt it in such a way as to

have a program with some characteristics peculiarly national.

Sh o o r t- r .x. _e_._ : t z. ,t. .. ion .c

We only picked it up in one country, the only country in which

extension personnel were on our list of contacts, but it is definitely

expected of FSR in Malawi that useable, extendable results will be

produced fairly early. This is a mixed blessing. It does place the

right kind of pressure on FSR/E. FSR does not enjoy the long-term

shield claimed for conventional research. Yet it does need some time:,

and that could mean several years because of the annual cycle of

cropping. The danger is that the early-term expectations will be

Page 49

unreasonable term expectations.

CLMMiYT and the Sub-Prgf essi.onal

Up until now CIMMYT has emphasized the professional worker in its

programs, i.e. those who the B.S. or equivalent. In at least two

countries we picked up the need for training of the sub-professional.

This was especially noted for the technician who support the

professionals. and the kind of training specified was that which could

be characterized as basic training' in research methodology and not

limited to on-farm research.

Page 50

VI. RECOMMENDATIONS

It is recommended:

1. That the CIMMYT project be continued in its present format.

There is little room to question that the project is a profitable

one. It has many ways of paying off. The most straightforward is the

time it saves a new project, such as in Swaziland, in getting up to

fall steem. It almost certainly improves the quality of the work, but

that measure is not so straightforward. A few minor adjustments, such

as briefing project design teams and new project teams could increase

this pay off. Given the AID investment in agricultural research in

East Africa, it doesn't take much increase in effectiveness to cover

the CIMMYT costs. It is my judgment that CIMMYT contribution is

exceeding the break ,even point by a considerable margin.

The CIMMYT project also has complimentary effect through it

institutionalization activities. The fact, for example, that national

research administrators gather regularly to reinforce one anoth'-r in

their attempts to improve research management can be expected to

improve considerably the environment in which USAID projects operate.

CIMMYT assistance in research organization, such as in Malawi and

Zambia, should add further to the improved environment.

A further justification is the fact that CIMMYT is working well,

in some cases exceptionally (and surprisingly) well, with U.S.

University contractors. Even though CIMMYT aims to train nationals,

it is highly important to be synchronized with the resident technical

assistance teams. In some cases these teams today are the. de fact

research services and will be until enough trainees return to

nationalize the systems. In all cases they are critical to FSR

Page 51

ini ti atives..

Page 52

2. That the project be continued under currant administrative

arrangements.

This is a grant project. CIMMYT own efforts are so nearly in the

Agency's interest that AID can safely handle the project by a grant.

This greatly eases the management burden, and some missions expressed

appreciation for it. There is considerable discussion of bringing

this project under the Farming System Support Project. Such action

would expose the East Africa program to significant risks. One is the

shift of management from the Africa Bureau to the Science and

Technology Bureau. This not only moves the project from Africa

management, but it could change substantially the style of management.

The FSSP is not a grant, and AID insists in more participation in

management than is needed in the CIMMYT effort. The other risk is

under funding, since. CIMMYT would be in direct competition with many

other demands on a worldwide Title XII project.

Earlier discussions on merging the CIMMYT and FSSP projects need

to be discournte.d heavily a n Lhe basis of the information now available

from experience of the two projects and experience of missions with

the projects.

Page 53

3. That AID and CIMMYT consider expanding the project.

Several factors support expansion. Curently CIMMYT is oriented

to the professional level cadre of national research systems. The

other needs were identified in this evaluation. One was training for

the subprofessional in research, and the other was training for

extension, an activity that may also involve many subprofessionals.

Another factor that supports expansion is the need for the

services of an agronomist as .on-farm research receives increased

attention. Up until now, the CIMMYT program has been staffed by

agricultural economists.

A factor that needs to be carefully analyzed is the impact of

expansion on CIMMYT style and personality. CIMMYT has achieved its

current position as a small organization with a carefully drawn

strategy and low visibility. At some size there will be a

transformation, and that transformation needs to be managed and under

control.

Needs are likely to be- changing in the region, and CIMMYT/REDSO

needs to make some projection of needs as a basis for expansion.

Page 54

4. That AID make a commitment to provide CIMMYT a five-year

planning horizon so it has same security of expectations and can in

turn provide security to its clients and collaborators.

Page 55

5. That CIMMYT giv" early attention to integrating extension

into its "farming system perspective" and that USAID's be encouraged

to make modest investments of the right nature in extension.

FSR as CIMMYT is now promoting it offers perhaps the best

opportunity to link research and extension that has been available in

LDC's since Point IV days. At the same time extension has much to

contribute and could well improve chance of FSR success.

Investment needed by the missions is in the development within

extension of a relatively small group of well-trained personnel to

provide technical leadership to extension. There is currently a

significant over investment in nu.! r.br of field personnel in relation

the number of well trained people in this technical leadership group.

FSSP and U.S. Universities in the region can be expected to

collaborate with CIMMYT.

Page 56

6. That CIMMYT and REDSO develop a networking strategy for the

region.

There is a widespread common interest in the region, creating

ideal conditions for networking. The opportunity needs to be

exploited.

The emphasis needs to be on networking not a network, at thi.s

t.ime. Later, it may be wise to formalize relationships, but currently

the emphasis must be on communication.

Such a strategy should include regular meetings of research and

extension directors- in collaboration with others who call meetings

with them. It should also involve ex-patriates and bi-lateral

projects who can provide some leadership and even funds for networking

activities.

Page 57

7. That FSSP and CIMMYT be encouraged by AID to hold a joint

seminar to assess the state of the art, to explain each its own

program to the other, to explore various means of collaboration, and

to analyze needs in further development of the FSR area of competence.

This would need to be a working group between the two AID contractors

with fairly complete attendance of members of the two groups but with

severe limitations on attendance of outsiders.

Page 58

8. That CIMMYT review its Newsletter and quarterly report with

an eye to improving the status of current information on FSR interests

and activities and to improving the record with respect to FSR in East

A.frica.

Page 59

VII. COUNTRY NOTES

Lesotho has a farming systems project being implemented by

Washington State University which was started in 1979. While it was

designed as a farming systems project there was virtually no

foundation research capacity to which it could attach. Still there was

a tendency to go through the FSR ritual. The project has been

modi field substantially. It aims to help develop the general research

capacity but following the farming system perspective.

The CIMMYT comprehensive training program may not be as relevant

for Lesotho. Lesotho was represented at the administrators seminar

and at the technical workshop on draft power. It receives the

Newsletter. At this point CIMMYT has not made a contribution to the

institutionalization of FSR in Lesotho. Two CIMMYT visits have been

made, Yet all the evidence we could marshall indicated that the

CIMMYT project was not understood and no help was requested.

Much of our time was spent in explaining the project and getting

some feel of needs. One area of need that emerged in several

different forms was assistance with on-farm trials, including

development of an on-farm trial strategy, design of trials, and

analysis and interpretation of on-farm trial results,. There appeared

to be a definite tendency to apply vigorous scientific criteria

appropriate to highly controlled research- a fact which may indicate

an interpretation of the FSR concept different from that of CIMMYT.

Another need was that o f foster ng c communi. ca at ion among technical

people in the region with common interests. This would not be as

specific as the animal traction workshop, but would simply facilitate

communication among individuals who a're isolated from others with

Page 60

similar interest.. This kind of meeting would need CIMMYT sponsorship,

but could be staged in such a manner as to take few CIMMYT resources.

A third need identified was training of top layer

sub-professionals in basic research technologies. Currently, CIMMYT

training is geared to professional level people, but it is possible

CIMMYT can address this need or work with others in addressing it. A

need was also expressed for Farming Systems Extension.. While CIMMYT

recognizes the need to link with Extension, I am not satisfied that

the evolution of the CIMMYT system handles Extension adequately. FSSP

also does not address it adequately.

We were not able to talk to the deputy director for research

who attended the CIMMYT administrators seminar as well as the animal

traction workshop. He may have had a better understanding of the

CIMMYT program, but if he did he apparently was not communicating with

either his director or the team. Some of the confusions were

interesting. Some wanted more and different attention from the other

branches of CIMMYT. One set of needs addressed help in subject

matter.,

Even with this lack of CIMMYT-Lesotho interaction and

understanding we found no criticism of CIMMYT. The work of CIMMYT in

East Africa was known and respected. 'There did seem to be a hesitance

to call on CIMMYT, either a hesitancy or a lack of information.

The entire mission is interested in the concept of inter-country

coll aborati on, as well as in FSR., The missi on direct t or met with us

twice, in our first and last interviews. There is evidence of

considerable frustration over several inter-country efforts in

agricultural research being discussed or mounted for the area. As in

Swaziland the USAID recognizes that Lesotho most rely on other

Page 61

countries for much of its agricultural technology and is keenly

interested in contacts with other countries.

One generalized need was emphasized. That was the need -for more

attention to the training of some extension personnel up to a level

equal to that of most researchers. The WSU/Research Division group is

providing considerable training to extension field personnel, acting

almost as a specialist staff.

Keeping of detailed farm records was one of the first activities

started in the project. There are now mixed feelings as to the

utility of these records. The sample size will likely be reduced, but

there is real hesitancy to discontinue the activity.

It was in Lesotho that was expressed the most specific feeling of

need for ex-patriate team members to participate in regional

networking.

There is not a two-tier (or two dimensional) structure here.

Rather the entire research program is oriented to the farmer. This is

perhaps the logical structure for a small country. There is one

question, however. The Research Division aims at developing some

so-called "combination farms" on which "ideal systems" are utilized.

Persons contacted: Edna Borady, USAID Mission Director- Barry

Hill and Jim Dunn, USAID Agricultural Office; Winston Ntsche,

Director; and Abraham Sefeame of Research Division; Clark Ballard,

David Hollandr, Gordon Van Eps,, Earl K. osterman, Peter Wyetlh, and David

Youmans of the Washington State University team; and Mark Wood of

Peace Corps.

al .wi,.

Page 62

The Department of Agricultural Research (DAR) of the Ministry of

Agriculture is being reorganized to bring FSR in as integral part of

the research program. Called Adaptive Research Teams in three of the

eight Agricultural Development Divisions plus a national ART team.

Plans are to have ART's in all eight districts by 1986. There is a

considerable similarity to the Zambia program which also uses the

Adaptive Research terminology. A member of the University of Florida

team occupies the line position of director of the national ART. The

similarity with Zambia is not a coincidence. Both national systems

plan to adopt the CIMMYT system, and the Zambian reorganized system

was visited, as part of CIMMYT's networking, as Malawi was deciding on

its reorganization.

Extension may also add positions to'enable it to participate on

almost equal basis with research in the adaptive research effort. The

Director of Extension felt somewhat left out of the adaptive research

effort, commenting that Extension seems to be brought in on second

thought. He hopes to add two positions in each ADD to join the DAR

team of agronomist and farm economist,, If this can be accomplished,

Malawi will have one of the few (if not the only) program with

extension as a full partner.

Pieces seem to be in place for a program that has a good chance

for success if program managers stay with it for a long enough time

for the concept to be made.functional.

Plans are to have ART's in all ADD's plus a headquarters team

operating within three years. We were not able to discuss with the

commodity research teams their views of the organization.. The ART's

have several 1li n ages to establ ish --with farmers;, wi. th commod:i. ty

teams, with extension, and with the ADD's.. To a certain extent, but

Page 63

not entirely, ADD's and Extension are the same.

Some disappointment was expressed that CIMMYT does not work with

livestock. However, extension has very little work with livestock,

even through the ADD's. There was made mention that ILCA was

interested in providing livestock inputs. We do not know what it has

to contribute.

CIMMYT has provided training and assistance this year to enable

at least two ART's to do some on-farm research this season. Plans

are, however, for CIMMYT to bring its complete eight session

comprehensive in-country training program to Malawi, starting in March

1984 and continuing for 18 months. It will be the ideal CIMMYT

course. Some worries were expressed that the sessions would not be

long enough and that Malawi would need more help than CIMMYT could

provide to one country.

Two ADD's were visited -- Lilongwe and Kasumbo. Program officers

of each one were clear on their expectation of FSR. Both referred to

improved technologies for the intermediate to short term. They both

emphasized their interest for near term results. Both had the same

complaints about conventional research. It didn't seem to fit the

needs of their clients. Both called attention to the fact that FSR

goes directly to the farmer to learn about his problems and why he

dealt with them the way he did.

We also heard here, from extension, the expectation of early or

intermediate term results from DAR as a consequence of FSR. Our only

contact with extension was in Malawi. We do not know how general this

expectation is in the region.

Li longwe ADD (I....ADD) has had considerable experience with FSR and

considers itself a pioneer in the effort, while Kasumbo is .just now

Page 64

starting to work with the concept. CIMMYT helped with surveys in one

area of LADD in 1978, but it was not followed up with on-farm trials.

A University of Florida team member helped with a survey in another

area since 1980. The evaluation officer of LADD attended a CIMMYT

regional course in Nairobi.

Even though Kasumbo ADD was not as experienced in FSR, it was no

less clear on the problem it wanted to address. The program manager

wants to provide full cooperation and support to the ART of DAR and

made a special plea that needs to be taken seriously. That was to

provide ample training opportunities to certain of this staff so they

could participate fully with DAR personnel. DAR does not want to

share its training resource and exhorts Extension to find its own

donor.

We find here as in other countries excellent cooperation and

mutual respect between CIMMYT and U.S. University contractors. One

University of Florida staff member has served as instructor for the

CIMMYT-University of Zimbabwe regional training program.

The organization of the ART's is not the only organization task

faced by Malawi research. The conventional research component is also

being reorganized,. Until now it has been organized by subject matter

discipline. The re-organization will be by commodities, and each

commodity team will involve several disciplines. Thus conventional

research personnel will be faced not only with developing

relationships with the ART's but also with adapting to a new set of

relationships among themselves.

The internal changes along with extensions interest to get into

the FSR game puts a heavy responsibility on Malawi administrators.

The chance for payoff is high. If they succeed, Malawi, will have one

Page 65

of the most completely integrated technology innovation system in the

LDC world.

USAID/Malawi holds that extension participation in FSR is

essential and that technical assistance to help make FSR functional

will be needed for up to five years. FSR as a concept is now

completely accepted, but the task remains to make it fully functional.

A real fear exists that T.,A. may be terminated before FSR is

adequately institutional ized,,

Persons contacted: USAID: Bill Judy, Agricultural Officer, and

David Rarms, Acting Mission Director.

Ministry of Agriculture: Willie Lipato:, Principal Secretary;

Gilbert Chirwa., Chief Projects Officer, Planning Division; Terry Legg,

Chief Agricultural Research Officer; M, Muwill., Chief Agricultural

Extension Officer; Henry Mwandemere, Deputy Chief Agricultural

Research Officer; Tony Standen, Controller; Richard Bolt, Assistant to

Research Officer, and M. Erez, Planning Advisor; and S.S. Kamvazina,

L livestock iOf f:icer.

L..ilongwe Agricultural Development Division: F.M. Kangaude,

Program Officer; G.S,.Z. J.ere, Evaluation Officer; and Perine Jere,

Research Trials Officer.,,

Kasumnbo Agricultural Develop::ment Division: N:ick S:i chinga,.

Program Officer; PN.H.. Zulu, Crops and Trials Officer; G,, Ndolo,

Ex tension Officer; and M,,E. (3eake and A.G. Khum ban yina, Evaluation

Office ers.,

Bunda College: Ray Billingsley, Head, Department of Sociology

Page 66

The Swaziland research organization has 14 positions for

professional level people, one filled by a Ugandan and 13 by Swazis.

Two others have been appointed into positions they hope will be

approved. Of these, ten are now in U.S. training under the

Pennsylavnia State University project, which has eight persons on

board.,

One of the three CIMMYT persons, All.an Low, is stationed here

even though Swaziland does not meet the CIMMYT criteria for intensive

work. Plans were to station him in Zimbabwe, but diplomatic

arrangements could not be effected. Since Low had lived in Swaziland

previously he was posted back there.

Without exception, USAID, the contractor, and the Host Government

were grateful for CIMMYT assistance and recognized that had Low not

been posted in Swaziland they would have received much less attention.

The USAID is particular grateful for the networking services and

feels that networking results alone justify the project., USAID -also

appreciates the fact that CIMMYT collaboration has been well received

by its contractor. USAID, however, raised two issues one was the

training of sub-professionals in FSR. As of. now CIMMYT training i.s

aimed chiefly at professional level people. The other concerned the

provision for publications in the CIMMYT grant, both publishing and

di strib:ut i on.

The Host Government was grateful for the CIMMYT concept as well

as assistance,. For years it had been recognized that the technology

innovation system was not as affective as needed. Several attempts

had been made through F'AO to address the problem, but with limited

results. CIMMYT seminars :in-country and the administrators workshop

Page 67

gave an indication of direction in which to go, and the USAID/PSU

project provided a signifant resource with which to move.

One FAO initiative dealt with extension since that is the place

in the system where the problem was manifest. A type of specialist

service was developed as B,.S. level personnel were brought into

Extension for the first time. That group is still functioning and

could be important in the FSR program. Another FAO effort aimed at

establishing a socio-economic unit in research, hut it was never

adequately integrated.

In the short run the PSU team is virtually the Research Service.

The PSU team has found CIMMYT assistance to be very helpful. After a

seminar with Mike Collinson it did two informal surveys on its own.

They were helpful hut not highly productive. Low helped with a third

survey which the team found to be more helpful. Low is working with

the team in one of the three areas in which it is working. He has

region wide responsibilities, however, and cannot give the timely

attention PSU would like. For example, he helped disign the formal

survey following the informal survey, but timing is such that he was

not available for formal survey analysis and the translation of survey

information to on-farm trials. The Swaziland program presented one

challenge to the CIMMYT system. In one area, an irrigated commercial

(even though small scale) vegetable production was encountered. The

CIMMYT system has been designed for rain fed, food grain-general

production systems on small farms very close to subsistence type.

CIMMYT/PSU are working to adapt the system to this situation and

apparently with success.

PSU feels that CIMMYT collaboration saved them considerable time,,

It provided a concept and set of methodologies with which to start.

Page 68

Had the team been left to its own resources., it wuuld have had to

devise them. The concepts, methodologies, and limited attention also

helped the team come together around common themes. It is significant

that a group such as the PSU team which certainly was accustomed to

coming to terms with farmers not only found the assistance helpful but

also was willing to accept counsel and was grateful for it.

Although a few Swazis are closely involved in the FSR learning,,

it must be recognized that most of the research service has not been.

Extension has not been integrated into the on-farm trials. It is

kept informed and is provided some in-service training. Some agents

"pick: up quick 1ly" and are cooperat:i.ve.

Persons contacted:: USAID:). Robert Huesman, Director; Jimmy

Phil.pott, Deputy Director FPaul Daley, Agricultural Officer; and Shane

McCarthy, Project Officer.

Pennsylvania State University: Gale Dunn, irrigation agronomist;

Christopher Seubert, agronomist; Tom King, Chief of Party; D.

Grenoble, horti ulturist; Roland Freu.ind, economist.,

Government of Swaziland: Norma Themba, Director of Research

Planning; Frank Buckham, Chief Research Officer; Robert Thwalla,

Senior Agricultural Officer; Basil Maphala, research economist.

Page 69

Zambi.

Zambia was not visited in the course of this evaluation. These

notes are from an earlier evaluation of a Zambia bilateral project.

The Zambia research organization is larger and better managed

than most. It relies very heavily on expatriates for most technical

work. Only a few Zambians are to be found in the research program and

then only in jun ior positions. There are two exceptions. The

director and chief research officer are Zambian, and they are giving

-hat appears to be exceptional leadership. Evidence of the leadership

is the apparent firm control the leadershipp is exerting to maintain an

internal integrity of the research program in spite of the heavy

reliance on expatriate individuals and on donor agency programs and

support. Another evidence is the way the leadership is handling FSR.

It is firmly committed to implanting FSR and just as firmly committed

that it will be integrated with conventional research program. It is

dealing with five area FSR projects, largely manned by expatriates of

various nationalities and supported by various donors. It is firmly

committed that they will maintain a certain degree of standardization

of direction, concept, and method.,

CIMMYT has played a major role in the Government's arriving at

this position,, dating back to the late 1970's when CIMMYT started work

there. CIMMYT demonstrated its methodological system in the Central

Province and counselled with the Government as it set up the

organization to integrate FSR into the program. The integration is not

complete, but organization and management is aimed at making it so.,

At this point, the Government of Zambia is not disappointed in

its reliance on CIMMYT, and it clearly identifies itself with the

Page 70

CIMMYT system. However, it recognizes that FSR is not a mature area

of competency and is willing to accept other inputs and to see its own

activities evolve.

Currently, CIMMYT is a little more than half way through its

series of calls for trai-ninig,. Many of its trainees are the expatriate

implementers. The University of Illinois FSR team has participated in

the training series, three sessions of which are completed, all in its

area. The team has been grateful for CIMMYT help but acceptance has

varied among members. One Illinois person has been named director of

the area effort even though Zambians are involved. An agronomist, he

values the CIMIMYT assistance very highly and is following the general

CIHMYT system.

We can't report how well informed USAID is regarding the CIMMYT

operation butjudge that if both the Host Government and its contractor

were satisfied USAID would likely be positive.

Two points used to be made from the Zambia case.

1. AID in its grant to CIMMYT is building on to a significant

CIMMYT contribution in Zambia made from previous effort and is taking

advantage of CIMMYT experience and credibility in East Africa.

2. The second point is that CIMMYT has made a major contribution

in institutionalization in Zambia even though the PP indicated not

much was expected in institutionalization in the first two years of

the gi-ant. In the Zambia case, CIMMYT would have had an impact

without the extra resources from AID. It seems reasonable to think

however, that the CIMMYT training and networking under the grant will

be significant in helping implement the Zambia strategy developed with

its assistance.

Page 71

Zimbabwe

Zimbabwe is not included directly under the USAID Funding

Agreement, since USAID/Z has no Farming Systems project. However, the

country figures importantly in CIMMYT's program, and it may soon be

eligible for CIMMYT assistance through the University described below.

There has been an active Farming Systems project here since 1980,

the year of Independence. The country was faced with mounting a

program for farmers on the Communal Lands. Zimbabwe has three

classifications of farmers: Those who own land and cultivate more than

200 acres, the large scale commercial; land owners who farm less than

200 acres, the small scale commercial; and those who farm on communal

lands. These are the former Tribal Trust Lands. Farmers do not have

fee-simple title, but they do have secure use rights to areas of

arable land. Grazing lands are held and expl oited in common.,

A farming systems program was started with CIMMYT help and with a

close collaboration between the Research and Specialist services

Division (RSS) of the Ministry of Agriculture, the Ministry Extension

Service, and the Faculty of Agriculture of the University of Zimbabwe.

CIMMYT provided supervised training for RSS staff and University staff

in an area characterized by uncertain rain f al and relati vely poor

soils. Two years of drouth has not seemed to dampen interest.

In j1982 a second area was opened in a much more promising area.

One technology tested in the new area has generated considerable

farmer interest. It is a minimum tillage technology making use of a

tine, an implement to open a narrow farrow in which grain is planted.

Rationale is that this instrument will greatly decrease the demands

placed on oxen at the beginning of rains, the time they are weakest.

Researchers think that even those farmers not owning oxen will benefit

Page 72

in that oxen owners will complete their work more rapidly and can hire

their oxen out.

Zimbabwe is adding some elements to the conventional FSR process.

Meetings are held with farmers in planning on-farm trials. The

farmers select the sites for the trials and all are held responsible

for care and maintenance of the plots. This apparently stimulates much

interest. Farmers insisted the researchers discuss the on-farm trial

program after results were in. After only one year of experience

farmer demand for the tine was far beyond supply. RSS will make some

available through extension and anticipates that Extension will make a

repi:ort on its performance this crop cycle.

R3S has also organized a Farming Systems Research Center on a

branch experiment station. Its purpose is n~ t clear. CIMMYT worries,

and with some cause, that it will tend to lead FSR away from the

farmer and the authentic farming systems perspective.

We did not talk to anyone from Extension, but all our Ministry of

Agriculture respondents reported excellent coll aborarion of Extensi on

and a keen extension interest in the program. Also reported was a

growing interest from old-line researchers and plant breeders.

ILCA is interested in working with RSS to open the new areas this

year and will make a livestock officer available to the program.

Zimbabwe is also unusual in the degree to which it insists on

including livestock in FSR.,

They also report great interest from farmers. One meeting has

been held with farmers to report on year's work, largely at the

insistence of farmers who wanted to know what happened.,

The Ministry of Agriculture has kept in touch with CIMMYT from

the beginning and is confident in the CIMMYT work and wants further

Page 73

CIMMYT attention. Personnel do want more help in dealing with

livestock in the system than CIMMYT offers.

The Faculty of Agriculture, in existence only since independence,

is struggling for its own development. It wants to develop a

research base. The dean, who was formerly head of the Department of

Land Management, which houses economics, soil science, engineering,

and extension, used farming systems as the orienting concept for the

departmental research program. He was one of the first to contact

CIMMYT, and his department collaborated with RSS in the surveys in the

first area. His interest continues and he has an IRDC nrant for an

FSR program in the Zambesi valley.

The Faculty is currently develop ing. a program with USAID that

among other things will provide six expatriate staff:, three for three

years and three -For five years. To the extent that program is

associated with the Zambesi Valley project, it will make Zimbabwe

eligible for CIMMYT attention under the grant.

CIMMYT is also working ,with the Land Management Department to put

on two training sessions a year for the region. The Department's

contribution is largely logistics. CIMMYT and others provide the

staff. The departmental program benefits greatly from this talent.

The future of this program is not certain, and the Dean would like a

little more security of expectations. CIMMYT would like the University

to take more technical responsibility for the training.

Techn iical ly, this training program is not one of the items

included in the CIMMYT grant, but it is so compatible to the purposes

of the grant project that it would be in the Agency's interest to

allow grant funds to be used if needed. We have no direct evidence of

the quality and impact of this training, but we have much indirect

Page 74

evidence. Many of the leaders of FSR programs in the area have

attended similar courses held in Nairobi.

Our stop in Zimbabwe was very short, and we encountered some

mysteries that could not be cleared up. There seemed to be a great

enthusiasm for FSR, even to the point where one officer expressed fear

that too much was expected.. In spite of this, RSS has no plans to

increase its investment in FSR. In fact the opposite may be true.

The single agronomist assigned to 'FSR also is responsible for the

Farming Systems Development Center, and that will reduce his on-farm

tinie. One officer ex;-plained this lack of investment by a personnel

freeze. Another officer of higher rank, however, said there were ways

ot dealing with the freeze,,. There are no RSS economists availa:-.e to

work in FSR.

In the meantime, the University is increasing its investment and

commitment for FSR. We heard conflicting reports concerning UZ-RSS

collaboration.

No one from Extension was on our schedu..le..

Extension is receiving more attention than research. Apparently,

we were told that there are plans for a great increase in field staff.

We could get no information on plan for research staff development.

Persons Contacted:: Marc Winter, agricultural officer-, USAID;

Phillip Chigaru, director of Research Specialist Services, Ministry of

Agriculture; Ephraim Whingwiri, head of Agronomy Institute, RSS; Enos

Shumba, Agronomy Institute; Malc:olm Blacki:e, dean, Faculty of

Agriculture, University of Zambia; Mandie Rukuni Department of Land

Management, UZ; and Sam Muchena, Deputy Secretary, Ministry of

Agriculture.

Page 75

Southern Africa Development Coordinating Committee

SADCC

We visited with Carl Eicher of Michigan State University on

assignment to USAID/Zimbabwe as regional agricultural development

officer. He has had little opportunity to view the component of the

CIMMYT program being evaluated. He spends 25 percent of his time in

the Department of Land Management which is responsible for the CIMMYT

training course, but which is not technically a component of the AID

grant program. He offered some observations on that program, but

largely from the viewpoint of institutionalizing it within the

uni versity.

He also described the ICRISAT regional sorghum program to be

sited in Zimbabwe. It provides for an ICRISAT farming systems

economist in year four of the project. That is too far away to be of

any significance for this review.

The SADCC/AID program is now designing a project in grain

legumes, but too little is known about it to anticipate opportunities

for collaboration.

SADCC/AID is also organizing the SACCAR (Southern Africa Center

for Cooperation in Agricultural Research) to be sited in Botswana. It

will involve networking among national researchers and can be expected

to provide excellent opportunity for collaboration.