1. Farmer First Revisited 12 – 14 December 2007 at the Institute of Development Studies, Brighton, UK Presentation, Theme 1a, Farmer Participatory Research and Adaptive Management Discussant: Adrienne Martin, Natural Resources Institute

2. Theme 1. Agricultural Innovation Systems – putting farmers first? A. FARMER PARTICIPATORY RESEARCH AND ADAPTIVE MANAGEMENT Experiences of participatory research and technology development in a range of settings – methods, practices and politics.

3. Papers Cecilia Turin (National Agricultural University, La Molina, Peru) – Advocacy coalitions to build participatory processes in the Peruvian Altiplano: increasing human capacities to adapt to changes Ravi Prabhu et al (CIFOR) - Action research with local forest users and managers: Lessons from CIFOR’s research on Adaptive Collaborative Management Yan Zhaoli (ICIMOD) – Co- management of rangeland resources in Hindu Kush - Himalayan region: involving farmers in the policy process Todd Crane (Wageningen) - If we put farmers first, where do the pastoralists go? Political ecology and participation in central Mali. Edward Chuma and Jürgen Hagmann (PICOTEAM) - Start anywhere – follow everywhere; a systemic journey over 17 years in Africa, Asia and Latin America to find the triggers for making participation and innovation/extension systems work. Jean Claude Rubyogo & Louise Sperling (CIAT) – Developing seed systems with and for the poor and marginalised: case of beans in east, central and southern Africa. Rob Tripp (ODI) – Crop management innovation and the economics of attention. Norman Uphoff (CIIFOD) – Farmer innovations in the system of rice intensification (SRI)

4. Main themes 1 Four papers (Turin, Prabhu, Zhaoli, Crane) address participation among key actors for natural resource management, - issues of governance, conflict, social organisation, equity, power relations, cultural differences.  emphasise the importance of analysing and strengthening social, cultural, political and human capital, noting that these are interlinked with other forms of capital.  see this is essential for empowerment  found that capacity strengthening for participatory action research was needed, e.g. training for transformation increased confidence and engagement  stress the importance of linkages and communication and access to information.

5. 2  Action research with forest dependent communities to improve livelihoods, equity and forest systems, used the approach of Adaptive Collaborative Management (ACM), involving planning, action, learning, innovation cycles and self monitoring and joint reflection.  Conflict and power differences were addressed through social learning, governance innovations and active facilitation. BUT challenging. ACM approaches created space for negotiation and enhanced ‘voice’.  Equity assessment process - cross checked participation and community forestry benefits against wealth and diversity ranking – made visible extent to which equity objectives were matched by decisions and actions

6. 3 Two papers address participation specifically in relation to pastoralist groups and management of rangeland resources ( Zhaoli, Crane ).  Enabling pastoralists voices to be heard - promoting political and legal environment for pastoralists to participate in decision making and influence policy e.g. researchers and farmers convinced government authorities to set up trials on controlled burning  Conflicts between stakeholders addressed through processes of community regulation (pasture management sub committees). Visual model built to facilitate discussion of boundaries and agreed regulations.  Participatory approaches and capacity building enabled farmers and herders to address management problems and develop social networks, institutions and problem solving skills to address conflict over NRM  Importance of cultural analysis and sensitivity to local social processes to understand divergent visions of competing ethnic groups (farmers and herders) and different scales of operation and integrate these into participatory technology innovation.

7. 4 Exploring participatory approaches in research, extension and natural resource management - strengthening the demand side ( Chuma/Hagmann ).  challenge to make research and extension initiate & sustain the innovation development process as part of a broader stakeholder platform for service delivery.  analysed and identified systemic blockages, encouraged innovation  New roles and competences for research and extension, through coaching and mentoring and use of a range of dissemination methods and tools

8. 5 Support to informal seed systems in the absence of commercial seed sector – linking with sources of improved varieties, information and quality seed. (Rubyogo)  Long standing work on bean variety development through participatory plant breeding with end users, but lack of farmer access and awareness.  Decentralised seed systems identified by farmers as most appropriate way to access improved varieties.  Integration of formal and informal seed systems to speed up access to new preferred varieties  Multisectoral approach - extension agents, NGOs, government services, traders, seed companies, farmers organisations, national seed services.  Farmer training and training of trainers  Local seed production and farmer to farmer or local trader dissemination  Promotion through different media and field days

9. 6 ‘The economics of attention’ : crop management research makes many competing and disconnected demands on farmers’ attention – a scarce resource (Tripp )  Low external input technology - poorer subsistence oriented households, less likely to participate or take up  Re-examination of strategies promoting farmer centred technology development is needed.  More time efficient methods for engaging in technology generation and presenting information to farmers.  Need for mechanisms to allow farmers more efficient access to information and improve ability to share knowledge and sustainable institutions that support these

10. 7 System of rice intensification - yield increases through farmers changing their management practices, rather than increasing inputs; ‘producing more from less’. ( Uphoff )  Farmer innovations – many new methods for raising seedlings, marking out fields for transplanting, direct seeding, tillage and weed control.  Diversity and ingenuity. “Farmers can and will innovate if the production systems and options are presented to them not as a final finished product for adoption (or turning down) but rather as an opportunity, for which thought and innovation on their part are expected”.  NGOs and farmers worked on adapting system to dryland and to other crops and for diversification - complex transformations of farming systems under influence of new ideas.  … paternalism of any sort will be a barrier to realising the full extent of the opportunities that an understanding of SRI presents.

11. New methods or dimensions Methods build on earlier approaches, but have important new dimensions  Importance attached to analysis and strengthening of social, human, cultural and political capital  Capacity strengthening as an enabler of participatory engagement and empowerment  Greater engagement with issues of power and conflict  Focus on time requirements and efficiency of approaches in participatory technology development and knowledge access  Clearer recognition of innovation as a process and the challenges of creating a broader stakeholder platform

12. Questions for discussion Are minimum levels of social and human capital a precondition for participatory action research ?  How can these best be strengthened?  What are the mechanisms for sharing learning and promoting these processes over a wider area? How far should participatory research /adaptive management engage with issues of power and conflict? How can research and extension be supported in the innovation development process as part of a broader stakeholder platform for service delivery? What strategies could improve the efficiency of approaches in participatory technology development and farmers access to knowledge? What lessons on farmer innovation can be drawn from the SRI experience to inform future practice?