Typologies and Concepts1 - Definitions, Assumptions, Characteristics and Types of Farmer Participatory Research: International Development Research Centre

International Development Research Centre (IDRC)

Web Archives > Publications > IDRC Books > All our books > PARTICIPATORY RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT FOR SUSTAINABLE AGRICULTURE AND NATURAL RESOURCE MANAGEMENT: A SOURCEBOOK >

Topic Explorer

People

ID: 85043

Added: 2005-07-18 14:47

Modified: 2007-03-21 0:23

Refreshed: 2012-02-10 18:29

Click here to get the URL for the RSS format file

Typologies and Concepts
1 - Definitions, Assumptions, Characteristics and Types of Farmer Participatory Research

Document(s) 2 of 34

Daniel Selener

Farmer participatory research is...

a method in which the major emphasis is on production research, planned and carried out by and with the farmers on their own fields (Harwood, 1979).

a systematic approach of evolving or adapting technology among the people of a community (Tan, 1985).

a process where "the farmer acts as a subject who investigates, measures, and studies in collaboration with researchers" (Ashby et al., 1987).

a practical process for bringing together the knowledge and research capacities of the local farming communities with that of the commercial and scientific institutions in an interactive way (Haverkort et al., 1988).

The term was coined by Farrington and Martin in 1987 but the approach has also been called farmer-back-to-farmer research, farmer-first-and-last research, and participatory technology development by different proponents of the approach.

Adapted from:

Selener, D. 1997. Participatory Action Research and Social Change. The Cornell Participatory Action Research Network. Cornell University, Ithaca, NY, USA.

The focus of farmer participatory research is the development of agricultural technology to increase productivity. This centers on the identification, development or adaptation, and use of technologies specifically tailored to meet the needs of small, resource-poor farmers.

A basic tenet of this approach is that agricultural technology must emerge from the farmers' needs as they identify them. Farmers conduct experiments and evaluate the appropriateness of a technology on the basis of their own criteria.

Origins of Farmer Participatory Research

Farmer participatory research emerged as a response to the generation of inappropriate technologies by scientists at research stations whose work was based on the transfer-of-technology model. Those working in this field began to develop a series of new research approaches that would result in technologies that would be beneficial to, and therefore adopted by, small farmers.

The transfer-of-technology model was predominant in the 1950s and 1960s. The fact that small farmers did not adopt the technology packages developed at research stations led researchers to conclude that farmers were backward or ignorant, and that the key to success lay in creating a better extension service. Thus, the Training and Visit System (T&V) of Agricultural Extension was widely implemented.

In the 1970s and early 1980s, non-adoption, still a problem, was attributed to constraints occurring at the farm level. Farming Systems Research arose as a response, emphasizing research at the farm level to diminish constraints to the adoption of new technologies.

Finally, in the 1990s, some researchers came to believe that the problem was not the farmers, but the inappropriate technologies they were being encouraged to adopt. This marked the emergence and gradual evolution of farmer participatory research, an approach aimed at creating appropriate technology for small farmers (Chambers et al., 1989).

The Emergence of Farmer Participatory Research

For technical, environmental, political, social and economic reasons, the agricultural sciences have had little to offer small, resource-poor farmers. Farmer participatory research has emerged in response to this situation as a viable solution to the problem of developing appropriate technology.

Farmer participatory researchers view the lack of interaction between researchers and farmers as one of the principal weaknesses in the methods earlier developed. To correct this deficiency, proponents of this approach propose to work in collaboration with farmers to identify their most urgent agricultural problems and to develop appropriate technologies at the farm level. As a result, researchers learn about an array of interrelated matters at the farm level that need to be considered in the development or adaptation of technologies. This process involves tapping into the farmers' own agricultural knowledge. In the process, researchers come to appreciate and respect small farmers. The challenge for development workers, researchers, and farmers is to design and use research methodologies that ensure the development and adoption of improved agricultural technologies to create sustainable agricultural production that will benefit the resource-poor farmer.

Main Components and Characteristics of Farmer Participatory Research

1. The main goal of farmer participatory research is to develop appropriate agricultural technology to meet the production needs of the small, resource-poor farmers.

It is the reverse of the transfer of technology paradigm.

It involves small, resource-poor farmers to generate or adapt appropriate technology on-farm.

It includes farmers in the decision-making process. It wants to find out which aspect of an agriculture practice or technology the farmer would like to work on to improve.

2. Farmers participate actively in the entire farmer participatory research process.

Farmers become the researchers, experimenters and evaluators in this process. They actively participate in the identification of problems, needs, opportunities and priorities, in the design and implementation of experiments, and in the evaluation of results to ensure that the research will focus on their needs.

Indigenous knowledge and the capacity for experimentation facilitate the generation of technology. Farmers' knowledge of their own farming systems, including climate and soils, and the social, institutional and economic environment, is vital to the development of appropriate technologies.

Both farmers' and researchers' knowledge are crucial in coming up with technologies that fit local environment and circumstances.

The criterion of excellence is not the rigor of an on-station or in-laboratory research, or yields in research station or resource-rich farmer conditions, but the more rigorous test of whether new practices spread among the resource-poor.

Chambers and Ghildyal, 1985

3. Research is conducted in farmers' fields.

The research is conducted on-farm as this is where production occurs and farmers make their major production decisions.

Technologies developed in real conditions reflect the objectives and criteria of farmers based on their access to resources and inputs, agronomic constraints, marketing possibilities and so on. Appropriate technology is more likely to be developed.

Since farmer participatory research is location-specific, research must be conducted on farms representative of those in other areas so the technology developed can be more broadly disseminated.

4. The scientist is an investigator, colleague and advisor.

Scientists learn and work with farmers, facilitating and providing support. Together they set the research agenda, and experiment with and evaluate technologies.

The scientist is a colleague and advisor who brings new ideas and/or unknown technologies to the community. He or she can also facilitate analysis of the farming system to identify potential areas for improvement and support the informal agricultural research of farmers.

5. Farmer participatory research is based on a systems perspective.

A farm is a system composed of interacting subsystems that include land, labor, capital, crop and animal production, off-farm income, social and economic components, physical and biological components, etc.

Farmer participatory researchers emphasize the importance of understanding the entire system. The research effort focuses on solving an agricultural technology problem in order to benefit the farm as a whole.

Farmer participatory research promotes gradual, adaptive changes in the farming system rather than the abrupt transformation of the system.

The complexity of farms as systems is due to:

direct physical interactions between production activities generated by intercropping and crop rotation practices

competition and complementarity in resource use between different production activities

the multiple objective function of the farm household

These interactions, from both biological and socio-economic sources, underlie the need for a farming systems perspective and a multi-disciplinary approach in research on improved technology.

Byerlee et al., 1982

6. Farmer participatory research requires interdisciplinary collaboration between researchers and farmers.

Interdisciplinary analysis of the farming system is imperative for successful farmer participatory research. This involves collaboration between farmers and agricultural and social scientists. The research agenda must be established and the entire process focused on farmers' real needs. Dialogue between scientists and farmers is essential.

Interaction between farmers and scientists can be contractual, consultative, collaborative or collegial. Ideally, this is a relationship between legitimate colleagues and partners working as equals.

Direct interaction between researchers and farmers increases the researchers' understanding of the farmers' decision-making criteria and of the conditions in which they work. Researchers have to make sure that solutions emerge from a holistic analysis by farmers and researchers together.

7. Farmer participatory research promotes innovative methodologies and flexibility.

Proponents of farmer participatory research encourage the use of different innovative methods. Creative methodologies are necessary in developing appropriate technologies for resource-poor farmers working under very different conditions.

Participatory research promotes low cost technologies and a minimum of external inputs by using locally-available resources and strengthening the farmer's experimental capacity. These features aim at sustainable and environmentally-sound development.

Because this approach is broad, flexible and adaptive, scientists and farmers must be in continuous contact to agree on research procedures, monitor trials and respond to unexpected changes along the way. Because initial assumptions, hypotheses, needs and local conditions may change over time, flexibility facilitates adaptation to new circumstances.

Underlying Assumptions of Farmer Participatory Research

One of the principal tenets underlying farmer participatory research is that farmers act rationally in using resources available to achieve their production needs. Farmers manage a complex set of biological processes which transform these resources into useful products, either for home consumption or for sale.

Decisions about crop and livestock production, and the methods and timing of cultivation, husbandry and harvesting are determined not only by physical and biological constraints but also by economic, socio-political, infrastructural and policy factors that make up the larger milieu within which farmers operate.

In undertaking a farmer participatory research project, researchers assume that farmers: possess indigenous knowledge of their farming systems and their environment and have a capacity for experimentation that must be used and strengthened for technology development.

Farmers' Indigenous Knowledge Systems

Indigenous knowledge systems consist of the "theories, beliefs, practices, and technologies that all peoples in all times and places have elaborated without direct inputs from the modern, formal, scientific establishment" (McCorkle, 1989). Indigenous knowledge has been regarded as "backward and irrational" by researchers who rely on science-based knowledge. However, the fact that scientists are unaware of the scientific value, principle, or explanation for a practice does not mean the said practices or knowledge do not work well for farmers nor that they lack a scientific basis. It just might be that no one has conducted a research on traditional farming practices.

According to Howes and Chambers (1979), this is due, at least in part, to the dependence of officials and experts on scientific knowledge to legitimize their superior status, and in the process, pull down indigenous technical knowledge. Scientists often do not allow farmers to participate in the generation of new technical knowledge and agricultural practices. Thus, the task of scientists involved in farmer participatory research is to engage farmers in research so that the latter will gain confidence and knowledge.

Indigenous knowledge systems are concrete, practical, utilitarian, broad, detailed, comprehensive, and usually sustainable. They are based on empirical observation, trial and error, and controlled experimentation over centuries. Years of experience have led to the development of sustainable farming practices involving a minimum of risk. Indigenous knowledge systems do not focus exclusively on farming practices. In addition to agricultural knowledge, the adaptations farmers have evolved lead to knowledge about health, education, housing, community organization, management of local resources, etc.

Farmers' Capacity for Experimentation

Farmers' capacity for research and experimentation is generally not acknowledged by agricultural researchers and society at large. However, with the growing recognition of the value and usefulness of indigenous knowledge systems, scientists are increasingly aware of farmers' capacity for experimentation resulting in the evolution and adaptation of indigenous knowledge systems to production needs.

For 10,000 years, farmers have been experimenting to develop their farming systems which has had an evolutionary impact on plants, animals and the land. Aside from experiments to increase production, they also looked into processing and storage as well. Here, the farmer is "an active actor in the process: selecting, consciously observing, and manipulating and experimenting with plants, animals, tools, and the environment to improve production output" (Rhoades, 1987).

Farmers experiment in order to adjust to changing circumstances. This experimentation has led to the development of productive and sustainable farming systems well suited to their needs, environment, and resources. Examples: domestication of wild species; and selection/breeding for desirable qualities of a species.

Major breakthroughs in technology generated by scientists in experimental stations have been based on experiments conducted by farmers. Examples: invention of diffuse light storage in Peru; introduction of paddy rice production in the Amazon basin; rice production in Bangladesh and wheat in Mexico; and farmers' successful adaptations of high-yield varieties of wheat in India and Bangladesh in the 1960s and 1970s.

The emphasis on improving farmers' inherent capacity for experimentation is an important element in the sustainability of agricultural development programs. When an organization withdraws from a region, farmers continue to conduct experiments and share information with members of farmers' groups and organizations.

Rural communities throughout the world are more than just "passive recipients of technology that is transferred to them from Western countries or formal research and development programs" as shown by the examples given.

The three interrelated types of information generated by farmers' informal research are: technical and organizational innovations that use scarce resources efficiently; signposts for new research that scientists in formal research and development systems might start to work on; and methods for conducting cost-effective research and classifying knowledge, with the farmer as principal researcher.

Other Benefits Resulting from Participation by Farmers in the Process of Technology Development

improved understanding by scientists of the needs of small farmers, leading to better identification of problems appropriate for adaptive, on-farm research

improved feedback on farmers' needs and objectives to guide applied research in research stations

accelerated transfer and adoption of improved technology by small farmers

efficient, cost-effective use of scarce resources in on-farm research through better linkages among farmers, researchers and extensionists

development of organizational models, professional skills and values appropriate for demand-driven, problem-oriented technology design

Main Types of Farmer Participatory Research

Research conducted on farms can be classified according to the level of control and management exercised by farmers and researchers. This classification includes four categories (Figure 1).

researcher-managed on-farm trials

consultative researcher-managed on-farm trials

collaborative farmer-researcher participatory research

farmer managed participatory research

The first two types are not examples of farmer participatory research, but simply conventional on-farm research. The last two types are forms of farmer participatory research and, as such, reflect the characteristics and are based on the assumptions presented earlier in this paper. Between these poles, there exists a range of possibilities, combining farmer and researcher participating in the control and management of the research process. The four approaches are presented below to differentiate non-participatory on-farm trials (1 and 2) from genuine farmer participatory research (3 and 4).

Figure 1. Types of On-farm Research

Researcher-Managed On-Farm Trials

Researchers work in farmers' fields to develop technology for farmers or to test and validate research findings obtained in the research station. They generally design, implement and evaluate the technology in the farmers' fields, or they define the research agenda and design trials which farmers are allowed to implement under their supervision. The experimental designs used in this approach are similar to those used in research stations. The relationship between the researcher and farmer is hierarchical. Researchers are the main decision-makers, setting the research agenda and designing and implementing trials. Researchers identify the problem upon which research is based.

Participation by farmers in conventional on-farm trials is minimal. Occasionally, scientists may also allow farmers to comment on the outcomes of experiments. The farmers often rent their land to researchers conducting experiments, or are paid for their labor. But farmers do not define the research agenda or participate in decision-making. Because scientists bring technology from the experimental station to the farm for testing and validation, farmers are not involved in technology generation. Ultimately, they become the passive recipients of researchers' recommendations.

Consultative Researcher-Managed On-Farm Trials

Farmers are consulted by researchers about their needs, problems, goals and preferences. They are also asked about their agricultural practices and knowledge of the local environment, resource availability, and so on. Researchers may also ask farmers for feedback on their perceptions of the new technology under study.

Although farmers may be consulted at the beginning of the research process, such consultation is aimed primarily at assisting researchers in interpreting farmers' circumstances, problems, or needs, and to arrive at experimental designs for trials which often will not include farmer participation in the initial stages of on-farm testing (Ashby, 1987). Technologies are developed for farmers based on the researchers' understanding of their farming systems.

Some researchers may allow farmers limited participation in the testing, validation and evaluation of the new technology developed at the experimental station. Experiments are conducted to answer the researcher's scientific concerns as related to farm-level conditions. Trials are designed to acquire accurate information about the response of technologies in the farmer's fields, but do not incorporate the farmer's criteria on testing or evaluation. This type of on-farm trial is the last step of research conducted at the experimental station.

Compared to the conventional on-farm trial conducted solely by scientists, this approach involves more interaction between researchers and farmers. However, researchers continue to control the research process and develop technology. The farmer's minimal involvement does not include decisions regarding the research agenda, trial implementation, or evaluation criteria. Because of this, the research is consistent with the transfer-of-technology model, and therefore likely to result in agricultural practices and technologies that fail to meet farmers' needs.

Collaborative Farmer-Researcher Participatory Research

Farmers and researchers work together in this approach on problem definition, design, management and implementation of trials, and evaluation. In the early phases of the process, scientists and farmers discuss potential areas for collaborative research and choose decision-making and evaluation criteria. By combining informal research by farmers with formal on-farm testing procedures, indigenous knowledge and science-based knowledge are mixed to meet farmers' needs. Ideally, a collaborative relationship means balanced participation in and control over the research process in order to achieve the objectives of both farmers and scientists.

Farmer-Managed Participatory Research

Farmers are the main actors and decision-makers in this approach, developing technology through a process that includes problem definition, trial design, the implementation of experiments, and the evaluation of results.

In the diagnostic phase, farmers identify the problems and needs they want to address. In the planning and design phase, they choose the most important problem, identify potential solutions, design prototype technology, and decide how to test it. In the experimentation phase, they test and evaluate the technology. Finally, in the adaptation and validation phase, farmers further test the technology developed prior to dissemination (Ashby, 1991).

The experimental capacity and indigenous knowledge of farmers are used to the maximum in this approach. The scientist's role is to assure that the community's local experimental capacity is fully utilized and to link farmers to information and resources for which the community has expressed a need but which are unavailable at the local level.

Conclusion

Experimentation by farmers cannot entirely replace conventional scientific research and conventional scientific research cannot replace farmers' on-farm research. There is a need for an approach that favors a "symbiotic relationship" between the two. The result is the incorporation of the most important and valuable aspects of each into a new system which will both benefit the small resource-poor farmer and contribute to the scientific knowledge base.

References

Ashby, J.A. 1987. The Effects of Different Types of Farmer Participation in the Management of On-Farm Trials. Agricultural Administration and Extension, 25: 235-252.

Ashby, J.A., C.A. Quiros and Y.M. Rivera. 1987. Farmer Participation in On-Farm Varietal Trials. Discussion Paper No. 22. Agricultural Administration (Research and Extension) Network. Overseas Development Institute (ODI): UK. 30pp.

Ashby, J.A. 1991. Small Farmers' Participation in the Design of Technologies. In: Altieri, M.A. and S.B. Hecht (eds). Agroecology and Small Farm Development. CRC Press: Florida. pp 245-253.

Byerlee, D., L. Harrington and D.L. Winkelmann. 1982. Farming Systems Research: Issues in Research Strategy and Technology Design. American Journal of Agricultural Economics, 64, 5: 897-904.

Chambers, R. and B.P. Ghildyal. 1985. Agricultural Research for Resource-Poor Farmers: The Farmer-First-and-Last-Model. Discussion Paper No. 203. Institute of Development Studies. University of Sussex: Brighton, England. Also in Agricultural Administration, 20: 1-30.

Chambers, R., A. Pacey and L. Thrupp. 1989. Farmer First: Farmer Innovation and Agricultural Research. Intermediate Technology Publications: London.

Farrington, J. and A. Martin. 1987. Farmer Participatory Research: A Review of Concepts and Practices. Discussion Paper No. 19. Agricultural Administration Network, Overseas Development Institute: UK. 88pp.

Harwood, R.R. 1979. Research in Small Farm Development. In: Harwood, R.R. Small Farm Development. Westview Press: Boulder, Colorado. pp 32-41.

Haverkort, B., W. Hiemstra, C. Reijntjes and S. Essers. 1988. Strengthening Farmers' Capacity for Technology Development. ILEIA Newsletter. Issue on Participative Technology Development, 4, 3: 3-7.

Howes, M. and R. Chambers. 1979. Indigenous Technical Knowledge: Analysis, Implications and Issues. IDS Bulletin, 10, 2: 5-11.

McCorkle, C. 1989. Toward a Knowledge of Local Knowledge and its Importance for Agricultural RD&E (Agricultural Research, Development and Extension). Agriculture and Human Values, Summer, 4-12.

Rhoades, R.E. 1987. Farmers and Experimentation. Agricultural Administration (Research and Extension) Network. Discussion Paper No. 21. Overseas Development Unit (ODI): London, UK. Paper presented at the Workshop on Farmers and Agricultural Research: Complementary Methods, 27-31 July 1987. IDS, University of Sussex, Brighton, England as "The Role of Farmers in the Creation and Continuing Development of Agri-Technology and Systems".

Tan, J.K. 1985. Some Notes on Participatory Technology Development. IFDA Dossier, 45: 12-18.

Contributed by:
Daniel Selener
Email: chelibertango@yahoo.com

Document(s) 2 of 34

guest (Read)(Ottawa) Login