Assessment Report: IPMS – Farm Radio Participatory Agricultural Radio
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Assessment Report: IPMS – Farm Radio Participatory Agricultural Radio Series’ in Ethiopia February, 2012 Evaluation report by: Eyob Mihretab (Development Consultant) Submitted To: IPMS / ILRI Submitted By: Farm Radio International Executive Summary In 2011, the Improving Productivity and Marketing Success (IPMS) project of the International Livestock Research Institute (ILRI) asked Farm Radio international to coordinate the planning and delivery of a series of radio programs related to two of the commodity value chains involved in IPMS: apiculture in the Tigray Region, and fruit tree production in Sidama. Farm Radio International accepted this invitation, and, after signing an agreement with ILRI-IPMS, proceeded with the development, implementation and evaluation of a new approach to agricultural radio: the Participatory Agricultural Radio Series – or PARS. The PARS was conceptualized as a weekly series of 6 episodes of 30-minute radio programs related to some aspect of the apiculture or fruit tree value chains. Planned with input from and the participation of intended beneficiaries, the PARS engages farmers as central players to design, develop and implement a series of radio programs around an agricultural practice they deem essential to their livelihoods and overall food security. It was anticipated that the PARS would be successful in raising the knowledge levels of communities reached by the programs, but that a 6-week series was probably inadequate to have a short-term measurable impact on the practices/behaviours of farmers. (FRI’s Participatory Radio Campaigns, which last for 4-7 months, DO have a measurable impact on farmers’ practices).1 The PARS strategy involved the following steps: Selecting and engaging partner radio stations (one per value chain) Providing training and capacity development to partner radio stations Conducting formative research in communities to be served by the PARS Designing the PARS with direct involvement of broadcasters and input from farmers Producing, broadcasting, and monitoring the 6 PARS episodes with each station Conducting an outcome evaluation after the conclusion of the last episode of each PARS The outcome evaluation involved interviews with over 300 farmers for each PARS. Its aim was to provide quantitative and qualitative evidence of the effectiveness of the PARS with regards to changes in knowledge and attitudes related to the featured value chain. It included the following: a household survey covering 300 randomly selected household representatives in kebeles reached by the broadcasts; farm visits and field measurements; key informant interviews; and the collection of secondary data from other sources, such as regional agricultural extension services. The results of this outcome evaluation for the PARS are presented in this report. The evaluation of the two PARS, taken together, provide interesting conclusions about the effectiveness of the PARS strategy. The OE included a 10-question knowledge quiz that tested the knowledge that farmers had acquired about the value chains. Combining the data from the OEs of the PARS, we see that: PARS were quite popular, with 50% of surveyed listeners reporting listening to at least 3 of the 6 episodes. In fact, 40% of surveyed listeners listened to at least 4 of the 6 episodes. 1 See Farm Radio International, Participatory Radio Campaigns and food security: How radio can help farmers make informed decisions, 2011. http://bit.ly/farmradioprc 2 Although men were more likely to be aware of and listen to PARS than women, 39% of female respondents were aware of and listened to some of the PARS, and 15% heard 3 or more episodes. They added to the knowledge that was conveyed by the direct intervention of the IPMS program Farmers that did not receive the direct intervention of the IPMS but did hear the PARS also demonstrated more knowledge of the two value chains, indicating that PARS is a good strategy for extending knowledge of value chains far beyond the direct impact areas of IPMS As the graph below reveals, which combines responses from the two PARS, the more farmers listened to the PARS, the more knowledge they gained: Relationship of PARS Awareness/Listening with Average Knowledge Quiz Scores (out of 10) about two IPMS Value Chains 10.0 8.7 9.0 8.0 7.5 7.0 7.0 6.0 5.3 5.0 4.0 3.0 2.0 1.0 Average ScoreAverage (out of 10) onKnowledge Quiz 0.0 Not aware of PARS Listened to 2 or fewer Listened to 3 or 4 Listened to 5 or 6 episodes or didn't episodes episodes remember It is clear that radio provides effective complimentary support to programs such as IPMS that offer face- to-face interventions. Not only this, but it has significant impact on populations of farmers who do not receive this intervention, leading to a large scale-up potential. The following sections contain more detailed analysis of the individual radio series’ in Tigray and Sidama regions of Ethiopia. 3 Assessment Report: Participatory Agricultural Radio Series to scale out Modern apiculture in Tigray Region, Ethiopia February, 2012 Submitted To: Farm Radio International / IPMS Submitted By: Eyob Mihretab (Development Consultant) Table of Contents 1. Background ................................................................................................................................7 2. Objective of the Evaluation .........................................................................................................8 3. Participatory Agriculture Radio Series: Program Development, Format and Content ....................9 3.1 Program Development .................................................................................................................. 9 3.1.1 Identification of Broadcaster ....................................................................................................... 9 3.1.2 Formative Research ................................................................................................................... 10 3.1.3 In station Training ...................................................................................................................... 11 3.1.4 Designing Workshop .................................................................................................................. 12 4. Methodology ............................................................................................................................ 13 5. Discussion and Findings ............................................................................................................ 15 5.1 Socio Economic and Demographic Profile of Selected Sites ....................................................... 15 Atsbi Woreda ...................................................................................................................................... 15 Kilite Aw’alo Woreda .......................................................................................................................... 15 Saese Tsaeda Emba Woreda ............................................................................................................... 16 5.2 Profile of Respondents ................................................................................................................ 16 5.3 Awareness & Listenership to PARS: ............................................................................................ 18 5.4 Timing of the radio Programs ..................................................................................................... 21 5.5 Format and Presentation Style of the program .......................................................................... 22 5.6 Contents treated in PARS ............................................................................................................ 23 5.7 Attitude towards PARS ................................................................................................................ 25 5.8 Knowledge gained through PARS listening ................................................................................. 26 5.9 Attitude towards Improved Beekeeping Management .............................................................. 29 5.10 PARS and Agriculture Radio Journalists ...................................................................................... 29 6. Conclusion ................................................................................................................................ 31 5 Acronyms FRI: Farm Radio International Da: Development Agent DW: Dimtsi Woyane FGD: Focus group discussion IDI: In-depth interview IPMS: Improving Productivity and Market Success ILRI: International Livestock Research Institute PARS: Participatory Agricultural Radio Series PRC: Participatory Radio Campaign PW: Pilot Woredas SWOC: Strength, Weaknesses, Opportunities and Challenges 6 1. Background The success of an agricultural extension program depends on sharing information, exchanging knowledge, and effective communication and interaction between researchers, agricultural extension agents and farmers. Yet these aspects of agricultural extension are often neglected, or fail to be effective in many developing countries.2 To enhance the success of extension programs and help smallholder farmers learn about and adapt to new farming practices that improve their productivity and food security, effective communication strategies and tools are needed. Among the different communication tools available, radio can reach many farmers with relevant information. Participatory radio enables them to