7-2016 Dossier

A dossier by Misereor, Prolinnova and McKnight Foundation in collaboration with the editors of .

Small-scale farmer innovation How agricultural research works together with farmers

THE McKNIGHT FOUNDATION

Innovation by a farmer-led action research group in Burkina Faso: this onion store ensures good ventilation while also protecting the onions from the heat. Photo: Eva Wagner/Misereor Editorial Inhalt

3 Unexploited opportunities Dear readers, Agricultural research could contribute to intensifcation of small-scale Africa’s small-scale farmers have to com- agriculture in Africa – if it were organised pete more and more in globalised markets. participatively Although they face decreasing land availabil- Theo Rauch and Lorenz Bachman ity, declining soil fertility and unpredictable impacts of climate change, and have poor 6 Farmer innovation access to advisory and fnancial services, A hidden treasure for agricultural they must feed people in growing cities and research Msgr. Pirmin Spiegel must farm in such a way as to sustain their Roch Mongbo and is Director General of Misereor. livelihoods. To accomplish this Herculean Sabine Dorlöchter-Sulser task, they need to intensify their farming as much as possible. In the past and today, 9 Beyond the pipeline model many farmers have been innovative in trying New paths for agricultural research to to do this – doing their own informal experi- enhance capacity to innovate ments. Boru Douthwaite

National and international agricultural 11 The added value of collaboration research centres are expected to help them Researchers’ perspective on partnership do this. However, many “solutions” devel- with small-scale farmers oped by researchers have proven unprac- Anja Christinck, Brigitte Kaufmann Dr. Chris Macoloo tical, inappropriate or too expensive for and Eva Weltzien is Chair of the Prolinnova small-scale farmers. How should research 14 “We need research without walls!” Oversight Group. be carried out so that it supports small-scale Interview with Omer Agoligan, Benin farmers efectively? How should research priorities and research questions be defned, 17 Farmer organisations taking a decisive and by whom? How can small-scale farmers’ role in agricultural research capacity to innovate be enhanced? These are The case of FUMA Gaskiya some of the key questions addressed here. Bettina I.G. Haussmann and Ali M. Aminou The articles present diferent approaches to supporting farmer-led research, rang- 19 Promoting farmer-led innovation ing from partnerships between small-scale The role of multistakeholder partnerships farmer organisations and research institu- Gabriela Quiroga Gilardoni and Jane Maland Cady tions, to alliances of farmer groups, nongov- Ann Waters-Bayer is McKnight Foundation‘s ernmental organisations and researchers, International Program Director. to constellations in which farmer organi- 21 Farmer innovation contests sations directly contract researchers. The What can researchers learn from them? articles highlight some innovations that Tobias Wünscher have emerged from these processes and – 23 Beyond “the Answer is 42” more important still – show new ways of Changing policy and practice in agricul- organising research so that it strengthens tural research and development innovative capacities at grassroots level. All Ann Waters-Bayer and Fetien Abay authors share a joint vision of agricultural research embedded in society, working with 25 Recognising and valuing farmers’ know- and through small-scale farmers who thus ledge and creativity contribute to intensifying agriculture and Farmer Innovation Fair in West Africa alleviating poverty in a sustainable way. Aline Zongo

26 Reaching as many farmers as possible What is needed to spread farmer innovation Anne Floquet

7-2016 | Dossier Farmer innovation 3 Unexploited opportunities Agricultural research could contribute to intensifcation of small-scale agriculture in Africa – if it were organised participatively Photo: Lorenz Bachmann Photo:

| Theo Rauch and Lorenz Bachmann researchers and practitioners also fear. The international insect research centre ICIPE So must Africa’s smallholders make works in cooperation with farmers. It has Africa’s smallholders have an image developed an organic agent for pest control. way for large-scale agribusiness in problem. It is said that they are not So far, no company has come forward to order to combat world hunger, or can produce this biopesticide commercially. even in a position to feed themselves, they be helped? And what does agricul- let alone supply enough food for the tural research have to do with this? growing African population. And that tional comparisons, African small-scale farm- they may not be capable of competing ing performs poorly at frst glance. Average The agricultural sector in sub-Saharan Afri- grain yields weigh in at 1.5 tonnes per hec- in globalised agricultural markets – as ca, with the exceptions of South Africa and tare in comparison to 4 tonnes per hectare African politicians lament and many Namibia, is based predominantly on small- in South Asia. Sub-Saharan African countries scale farming: 65% of the population live import 10–20% of the cereals they need. A from agriculture. The average farm size is 1.6 disproportionately high number of people hectares; most farms are smaller. In interna-

Dossier | 7-2016 4 Farmer innovation

A female farmer experiments with mulching techniques on a mixed-cropping plot planted with coffee, manioc and banana. Lorenz Bachmann Photo:

afected by hunger live in rural areas and denly, Africa’s agricultural resources are of work in agriculture. interest to development policy, private capi- But on closer examination, a diferent pic- tal and the governments of emerging econo- ture emerges. Africa’s cereal production has mies concerned about feeding their people. quadrupled since 1960 and thus kept pace In view of rising demand and soil degrada- with population growth. Africa’s small-scale tion, many regions are now encountering farmers have largely adjusted to the increas- limits to further production gains from the ing demand. Where foodstufs are import- expansion of cultivated land alone. An inten- ed, this is because the populations of large sifcation of production – an increase in pro- port cities like Lagos, Accra, Dakar or Dar es ductivity per hectare – has become inevitable, Salaam can be supplied more cheaply with and could also be proftable. The question, subsidised foods brought in by sea than from however, is whether the vast majority of the remote and poorly accessible agricultural resource-poorer African smallholders are regions of their own hinterlands. able to make this happen, or just the better- The fact that productivity per hectare is positioned farm enterprises? low and rising only slowly cannot be blamed on a lack of smallholder potential or natural resources. Africa’s farmers have traditionally increased production by taking additional land into cultivation. Where there is still scope to increase production by expanding disadvantages when it comes to marketing land use today, it is not necessary to invest and access to support services. A marketing in intensifying agriculture – particularly if it and support system for tens of thousands of is unlikely to pay of in view of low producer farmers with fve sacks of surplus apiece is a prices and a poor market situation. S. Dorlöchter-Sulser Photo: more onerous proposition than the market- Likewise, when smallholder households ing of 100,000 sacks produced by one large fall short of self-sufciency in food, the farm. reason usually has nothing to do with inad- A further obstacle to the intensifcation equate production potential. Rather, house- of production is that resource-poorer small- holds have seasonal needs for cash and must holder households earn their living on the ofen sell part of their harvest cheaply, and basis of mixed rural-urban livelihood sys- then, when their stores have been used up tems, because neither the agricultural nor the and before the next harvest comes around, Seed – ready to be sown in field trials. urban sources of income sufce for a secure buy in cereals at higher prices on the market. The international crop research institute ICRISAT living. This is why most of the younger fam- Thus, Africa’s small-scale farmers have in Niger carries out participative research ily members have gone to look for work in the adjusted their production to the growing on agriculture in the semi-arid tropics. cities. Many turn their backs on agriculture, demand over the past 50 years by making the frustrated at how rural areas and the agricul- best possible use of their potential, despite tural sector have been neglected. Sometimes generally poor market conditions and sup- It is generally true that, for many products, only the wives with small children and the port services. If they could not increase their small-scale farming is more productive per old people remain behind in farming. Thus, production further, this was mainly because unit area and leads to higher quality than many households do not have enough labour they could not compete internationally, given large-scale farming. This is because fam- to intensify farming. Sometimes, local knowl- low global market prices and high transport ily labourers generally bring more care, local edge of farming techniques has been lost. costs. knowledge, fexibility and adaptability to Many African smallholders are thus “caught their work than do employed labourers and on the wrong foot” by the rising demand; | Unexploited potential standardised mechanical cultivation. Advan- the potential that they actually have cannot for intensification tages of farm size for use of machinery play be mobilised quickly. Expressed in economic Although unattractive prices and political a less important role because labour costs in terms, their elasticity of supply is low. neglect did not encourage intensifcation of Africa are low. These advantages on the pro- The fact that African smallholders do African agriculture before 2005, things have duction side are ofset by small-scale farmers’ indeed have potential for intensifcation is changed markedly for the farmers, especially confrmed by numerous NGO-supported since the agricultural price boom of 2008 and projects that are successfully helping farmers the improvement in their terms of trade. Sud-

7-2016 | Dossier Farmer innovation 5

advantages and a moderate level of invest- also allows farmers to exchange knowledge, ment. The resource-poorer smallholders, to develop or adapt innovations, and to breed who make up the vast majority of farmers and distribute seed locally. in Africa, cannot aford even moderate For the socially inclusive organisation of investment and, if they do take the risk, smallholders, an important function falls to interest rates of 20–50% can very quickly non-governmental organisations. If small- lead them into a debt trap. holders are to be organised nationwide, pub- ʀbŁřĜħŘŠųŽůħųħĎůĜľħƨŠůŽųĎůħřŠŽųŬħĜŁƧ- lic fnancing is needed for this. To ensure that cally oriented to women, poor and female- research fndings are adapted to local condi- headed households are particularly afect- tions, the process of agricultural research ed by this innovation gap. needs to be designed in a participative way. ʀiľħ ħƍĎŒƂĎŽħģ ɖŽŠŬ ŁřřŠƍĎŽŁŠřųɗ Šı Žľħ Practices need to be not only site-appropriate international agricultural research centres but, importantly, matched to specifc target were adopted by an average of only 5000 groups and able to address the constraints enterprises per “innovation”, so the rate of faced by resource-poorer households. practical application has been low thus far. The bottom line is that a socially inclu- There is insufcient provision of the inputs sive system of agricultural research and needed for wider adoption of the new tech- services geared towards ecological sustain- nologies, such as seed and advisory sup- ability must involve the smallholders. While port. it should not eschew the inclusion of pri- boost their productivity with locally adapted vate-sector initiative, it is ultimately a task innovations. The question that arises is what So agricultural research in Africa is predomi- of the public sector. In view of the urgency agricultural research is doing to mobilise this nantly geared towards the situation of more of this task and the long-term nature of underutilised potential. commercially oriented farmers in agricultur- eforts for better governance in many low- ally favourable zones. It is less well suited to income countries, international cooperation | Contribution of agricultural research to fostering the potential of resource-poorer remains indispensable. | | intensifying small-scale farming smallholders and especially women small- The current range of new technologies holders. Translation: Christopher Hay ofered by international agricultural research for Africa was evaluated in 2014 in a study | Demands on agricultural policy Reference commissioned by the German Federal Minis- and research Bachmann L, Woltering L, Letty B, Benasser A & try for Economic Cooperation and Develop- To be able to mobilise their unexploited Nyemba J. 2014. Assessment of the demand-supply ment (BMZ). A few key results: potential for intensifcation of agriculture, match for agricultural innovations. ITAACC. Final small-scale farmers need access to appropri- report (www.icipe.org/itaacc) ʀIJůŁĜƂŒŽƂůĎŒůħųħĎůĜľľĎųųŬħĜŁĎŒŁųħģŁřŽľħ ate knowledge about more productive and well-established, densely populated agro- resource-conserving practices. Private-sector ecological zones. It does not cover marginal service providers ofer such services only Prof. Dr. Theo Rauch areas such as arid zones and high moun- selectively, for lucrative product groups and is honorary professor at the tains or less common production systems. close to the urban centres. When it comes to Geographical Institute of the Thus, an important segment of marginal food security for vulnerable groups or devel- Free University of Berlin and smallholders who are not integrated into oping sustainable soil-conserving or water- specialises in agricultural de- value chains “fall through the net”, so to saving agriculture, the task falls to the public velopment and promotion of speak. sector. Socially and regionally inclusive agri- small-scale farmers in Africa. ʀŽľħřħƎŽħĜľřŠŒŠIJŁħųIJħřħůĎŽħģěƔĎIJůŁĜƂŒ- cultural services are needed that are fnanced tural research are afordable for only and controlled by the State. around one-third of small-scale farmers. In view of the weaknesses of many African Dr. Lorenz Bachmann Most of the technologies can be fnanced states and their bureaucracies, the resource- did his doctorate on only by larger enterprises or require subsi- poorer small-scale farmers need to organise parti cipative methods of dies or loans. The most important refer- themselves in order to gain access to relevant agricultural research and has ence criteria for the development of tech- knowledge. The organisation of farmers is worked for many years as a nologies are large comparative yield necessary not only for them to be accessible freelance consultant. and active partners of support services and to represent the farmers’ interests efectively. It

Dossier | 7-2016 6 Farmer innovation Farmer innovation A hidden treasure for agricultural research Eva Wagner/Misereor Eva Photo: Photo:

| Roch Mongbo und African smallholders’ wealth of ideas and Proud of her innovation: Sabine Dorlöchter-Sulser the originality of their solutions to the multi- a woman farmer in Burkina Faso presents tude of problems of African agriculture were mineral-lick stones made from local resources. The image of Africa as an emerging reafrmed once again at the regional farmer continent is still based mainly on its innovation fair in Ouagadougou, Burkina Faso, in May 2015. The event was an opportu- learned from experience as well as their untapped wealth of minerals and natu- nity for around 60 farmers from eight West knowledge of active ingredients found in ral resources. The potential of its peo- African countries to showcase their innova- nature. ple is seen, if at all, in creative start-ups, tions to a wide audience. However, traditional knowledge – also young companies or artists in cities They all have one important thing in com- known as indigenous knowledge – is just one mon: they do not capitulate in the face of the aspect of farmer innovation: this is a creative – but not in the men and women who myriad of problems they encounter in crop process in which men and women farmers are farming. Yet the resourcefulness farming, livestock keeping, animal health jointly experiment and develop new solu- and innovativeness of these small-scale and storing, processing and marketing their tions. This happens far away from agricul- products. Instead, they seek practical solu- tural research institutes, which actually have farmers has long been an important tions and make focused use of lessons the mandate to improve farming practice. asset for solving all kinds of problems But the technology packages developed by in agriculture.

7-2016 | Dossier Farmer innovation 7 Eva Wagner/Misereor Eva Wagner/Misereor Eva Photo: Photo: Photo:

Lively interest in new developments: visitors at the innovation fair (left). The ointment “Tao-Tao”, a remedy for parasite infestation, is applied to a chicken. It was developed by women who raise poultry in Toeghin in Burkina Faso.

formal agricultural research, which are usu- widespread as they theoretically could be. ally aimed at boosting productivity, are in Secondly, innovations are taken up into the | Example 1: Accessible and affordable low demand by small-scale farmers because programme of the state agricultural advisory solutions the research programmes continue to take service only afer they have been validated Post-harvest losses rank as among the main little notice of these farmers’ practical prob- by state agricultural research institutions. causes of Africa’s low agricultural productiv- lems in agriculture. Moreover, scientifc research has the appro- ity. Year afer year, the onion producers of Only in the 1980s did there gradually start priate means to rule out potential risks of Noungou – not far from Ouagadougou, to be an increasing recognition of what innovations, particularly in plant and animal Burkina Faso’s capital – lost out on higher small-scale farmers are achieving: indige- products destined for human consumption. revenues from their onions at the end of the nous knowledge was rediscovered; the This in no way implies any superiority of for- dry season. The major reason was that, for importance of fexible small-scale farming mal research over farmer innovation. Rather, want of an adapted storage technology, their systems in fuctuating environmental condi- the verifcation of all innovations is a neces- onions always rotted during the hot months. tions was revealed, particularly in arid and sary precondition for making available pub- Building on their knowledge about tradition- semiarid areas; and there was rising interest lic funding and personnel to disseminate al cereal storage, a farmer-led action-research in participatory approaches to agricultural them. Thirdly, it is only by taking men and group developed an onion store that ensures research and supporting farmer-led innova- women farmers’ priorities into account and good ventilation while also protecting the tion processes. In the meantime, such involving them actively in the programmes onions from the heat. Using the locally built approaches are found not only in the prac- of the research and development institu- storage facility, onions can be stored for up to tice of non-governmental organisations and tions that agricultural research can gear its ten months. To handle diferent production national and international research institu- work to the real needs in small-scale farming. capacities, models with storage volumes of tions but also up to the level of research pro- The following examples show what inter- between two and ten tonnes were eventually grammes supported by the World Bank. est the African states might have in making developed – at afordable prices ranging However, although they may be in the “main- use of the small-scale farmers’ innovative from €43 to €230. Today, men and women stream” of agricultural research, they are not capacities. who are growing onions on farms of difer- yet frmly institutionalised. By means of research approaches that put ent sizes and with diferent levels of income But do farmers’ innovations even need to men and women farmers at the centre (see can beneft from the innovation. be recognised by agricultural research or do box), the non-governmental organisations convincing innovations spread anyway by Diobass in Burkina Faso and ADAF-Galle in | Example 2: Testing the medicinal oint- themselves, as was the case, for example, Mali support farmers’ groups in developing ment “tao-tao” for effectiveness with the “zai” technique to reclaim degraded solutions to the problems of small-scale When agricultural research institutions veri- land in the Sahel? Institutional embedding farming. In this way, numerous promising fy the efectiveness of an innovation, it can of farmer innovations in formal agricultural local innovations have already been devel- be a fertile source of learning for researchers research is desirable for at least three rea- oped. and farmers. This is demonstrated by the sons. Firstly, even farmer innovation(s) run example of the women raising poultry in the risk of not becoming as geographically Toeghin. In the past, they made constant

Dossier | 7-2016 8 Farmer innovation

Farmer innovation develop- ment: the Diobass approach

The approach of the non-governmental organisation Diobass in Burkina Faso combines the principles of action research with elements of participatory innovation development. First, it works with farmers to collect and describe whereas the rest of their tomato plants were What is clear is that farmer innovations farmers’ initiatives and innovations infested with parasites. The women inferred harbour a sizeable and so far insufciently in the domains of plant and animal that potocolonimbo had an anti-parasitic exploited potential for African agriculture. production. These are reviewed by a efect and successfully carried out initial tri- The integration of men and women small- committee with equal representation als with infusions made from the plant. scale farmers into agricultural research on of farmers and advisers, and a selection When ADAF-Galle made its frst inventory of an equal footing with formal researchers is made on the basis of criteria they small-scale farmer innovations in its project would allow the development of relevant, predefned together. Men and women area, they became aware of these women accessible and, above all, afordable innova- farmers can then enrol in groups for the farmers, who had a reputation in their vil- tions. The farmers’ creativity, resourceful- innovations of their choice with a view lage for developing solutions to problems in ness and understanding of complex ecosys- to testing them in feld trials. In this vegetable growing. ADAF-Galle put the wom- tem interdependencies could open up new case, the farmer-innovators are called en in touch with a female entomologist from avenues in agricultural research. And if this upon to formulate open questions and the Malian research institute IER. She not research were oriented towards the develop- factors to be considered, which are then only confrmed the plant’s anti-parasitic ment of innovations with and by the farm- translated into an experimental setup efect but also carried out joint research with ers, not only would it help to incorporate the and methodology. All this is docu- the women on the dosage and optimum tim- specifc concerns and potentials of small- mented in a research protocol. The feld ing of application. As in formal research, scale farmers with difering social status, but trials are carried out by the men and observations on the interaction of plants, it would also help to embed the research women farmers in conjunction with the plant diseases and other natural phenomena itself more strongly in the midst of society. research scientists, the state agricultural are a signifcant source of ideas in the devel- The experiences with farmer-led innova- advisers and the advisers from Diobass. opment of farmers’ innovations. tion development show the importance of This multi-stakeholder strategy makes taking farmers’ priorities as the starting it easier to disseminate farmer innova- | Example 4: Exploring new horizons point for research, gearing lines of enquiry tions afer successful conclusion of the Some local innovations can pose a challenge and experimentation to the farmers’ obser- series of trials. for formal agricultural research. Two cases in vations and bringing in diferent perspec- Léon Zongo (Diobass) point are a plant-based remedy for Newcastle tives for the sake of cross-fertilisation of disease, a virus infection causing high mor- knowledge. In this way, the potential of all tality in chickens, and a powder to control men and women small-scale farmers could the weed Striga hermonthica. Although both contribute efectively to making an emerg- complaints about the high losses of birds products developed by farmer-led action- ing Africa into a reality. | | resulting from infestation with feas, ticks research groups supported by Diobass have and bugs. These parasites can transmit dis- proved extremely efective in poultry farm- Translation: Christopher Hay eases, which can lead to severe weight loss or ing and in the farmers’ felds, formal even bird death. The women therefore devel- researchers have not succeeded in their sci- oped an ointment to combat parasite infes- entifc trials to explain the mode of action of Prof. Dr. Roch Mongbo tation, particularly in chickens and turkeys. these products. Scientists still regard the vac- is an agronomist and The ointment was subsequently tested by cination of chickens is the only way to pre- anthropologist, a professor the state agricultural research institute vent Newcastle disease. If an infection breaks at the University of Calavi- INERA for efectiveness, tolerability and tox- out, all animals in the infected fock are killed Aborney in Benin and icity. In comparison with an imported veteri- to prevent the disease from spreading fur- the director of the social nary medicine, the ointment proved to be ther. However, when the local plant-based research institute LADYD. not only equally good but also cheaper to remedy is used, the farmers observe that the produce. INERA plans to refne the innova- disease can be treated successfully as soon as Dr. Sabine Dorlöchter- tion into a spray so that it will also appeal to the frst symptoms appear. Similarly, scien- Sulser more commercial poultry farmers. tists’ laboratory experiments on the efec- is a sociologist and geog- tiveness of songkoadba, a plant powder to rapher. Since 2001, she has | Example 3: “Potocolonimbo” or control Striga, have not yet yielded meaning- been working as a rural innovation by understanding nature ful results. Such farmer innovations seem to development specialist at The women in a Malian village observed that operate at the external limits of what is cur- Misereor. tomatoes growing right beside the plant they rently known to science – and could pave the call “potocolonimbo” remained undamaged, way for completely new approaches in the felds of veterinary medicine or crop protec- tion.

7-2016 | Dossier Farmer innovation 9 Photo: Felix Clay/Duckrabbit Photo:

Homestead pond near Khulna, Bangladesh, not only to produce fish but also for diverse other uses – a result of “Research in Development”

Beyond the pipeline model New paths for agricultural research to enhance capacity to innovate

| Boru Douthwaite model, including Farming Systems Research AAS, led by the CGIAR centre WorldFish, and Integrated Natural Resource Manage- developed the Research in Development In October 2015, the CGIAR – a con- ment. These have tried to make agricultural (RinD) approach to carry out Mode 2 research sortium of international agricultural research more grounded in the context of in fve geographically defned “hubs” in Bang- technology application and more driven by ladesh, Cambodia, Philippines, Solomon research centres – decided to close engagement in problem solving. Gibbons et Islands and Zambia. But, in October 2015, the down a programme meant to promote al (1994) described this as “Mode 2” research CGIAR decided to close AAS down. This paper applied, problem-solving research. in contrast to “Mode 1” academic work ini- explores what the programme was able to What did the programme achieve and tiated by researchers and producing disci- achieve with senior-level support and why pline-based knowledge. this support ebbed away. It then asks what it why did institutional support for this Despite the long efort to develop and will take for formal agricultural research to ebb away? embed Mode 2 research approaches in the enhance local capacity to innovate. CGIAR, none became mainstream. In 2011, Most agricultural research for development the CGIAR funded the CGIAR Research Pro- | Research in Development (RinD) carried out since the 1960s assumes that gram on Aquatic Agricultural Systems (AAS) approach researchers develop new technology and to change this – as the proposal made clear RinD involved building on local strengths pass it down through a chain of actors to – “to move beyond traditional circles and and engaging with communities and other farmers. Ofen called the “pipeline model”, change the way we do much of our research. local stakeholders through participatory this approach can undervalue and under- By emphasizing approaches that call for action research (PAR). In each hub, an AAS mine farmer innovation. The model has been research in development — rather than team and local people agreed on a pressing successful, albeit ofen contested. This was research and development or research for development challenge facing key aquatic how, for example, CGIAR research provided development — we will pursue a conscious agricultural systems and ways to tackle it. the new technology for the “Green Revolu- change in emphasis and mindset, one that The team supported the communities to car- tion”. can help the CGIAR to conceive and deliver ry out PAR as researcher-led initiatives linked Since the 1970s, CGIAR researchers have our research diferently.” to achieving community goals. explored some alternatives to the pipeline

Dossier | 7-2016 10 Farmer innovation

A farmer in Bangladesh shows fish from her homestead pond.

The way RinD worked can best be under- A knock-on efect of ISPC criticism of AAS stood with an example. In the Bangladesh was a loss of confdence of senior AAS and hub, the RinD engagement process identi- WorldFish leadership in the RinD approach. fed homestead ponds as an interest of both As a result, this approach – the main research small-scale farmers and researchers. Home- 2 . 0 ) BY-NC-ND (CC Tushar/WorldFish Yousuf M. Photo: output of AAS – was not mentioned at all in stead ponds have multiple uses, including the 2015 proposal to continue the work. keeping fsh and using the water for washing ple, increases in self-confdence and motiva- Despite its premature closure, AAS has had and growing vegetables. They make up about tion, better understanding of how research some infuence on the CGIAR. Together with one third of the area of small farms (less than can support farmer innovation, and changes the other system CRPs, AAS successfully lob- 0.2 ha) in the hub. They are generally shaded in norms that restricted women‘s access to bied to have building “capacity for innova- by trees and climbing crops. Conventional and control over family resources and deci- tion” established as an outcome in the CGIAR research and extension promote the use of sion-making. Strategy and Results Framework 2016–30. larger unshaded ponds for single-use aqua- For the people involved and their networks, This sends an important signal to research- culture. Homestead ponds require greater these changes can be regarded as increases ers and should help create an enabling envi- farmer adaptation to meet individual house- in their capacity to innovate in an equita- ronment for Mode 2 research. hold needs and so are less amenable to con- ble way. RinD assumes that many of its out- ventional Mode 1 research. comes come from having built such capacity. | Conclusions AAS formed a multidisciplinary science For example, in Zambia, PAR on salting fsh Some groups within international agricul- team that engaged with women in eight vil- led to better relationships between fshers, tural research have sought since the 1970s to lages to form research groups, supported the Department of Fisheries and the tradi- mainstream research approaches better able by a local facilitator. The science team and tional authority and this, in turn, led to bet- to support local innovation. In 2011, the the women’s research groups agreed on a ter enforcement of a fshing ban to protect a CGIAR launched its most ambitious attempt PAR protocol to improve fsh production in collapsing fsh population. In terms of Mode in this direction by funding the CRP on the ponds, while using these also for other 2 research, the very work of solving problems Aquatic Agricultural Systems to run for 10–12 purposes, and agreed on a set of treatments in salting fsh helped defne a research agen- years. By 2015, the programme had devel- involving diferent fsh species at diferent da on fsheries protection and governance. oped a research model that was building stocking rates, drawing on WorldFish exper- rural capacity to innovate and helped estab- tise. Normal practice is to stock the ponds at | The closing of AAS lish “capacity for innovation” as a measure of low rates with a single species (Indian carp) In 2015, the CGIAR’s core funding for its 15 success of CGIAR research. Nevertheless, the or simply to grow and catch fsh trapped in CGIAR Research Programs (CRPs), including CGIAR closed the programme. the ponds afer seasonal foodwater recedes. AAS, was cut by one third. The CGIAR decided This experience suggests that any future Through PAR, the farmer-researchers learned to channel the reduced funding to better- attempt to mainstream Mode 2 research in to analyse their results and chose what established and more mainstream research. the CGIAR should be carried out only when worked best for them. They started sharing AAS was closed down, together with another two preconditions are in place. Firstly, those successful stocking strategies with neigh- “system CRP”, and the RinD work stopped. funding the work must understand that bours. They gained self-confdence and the A main justifcation for closing AAS was research embedded in local development respect of their families and peers. Some took an unfavourable review by the Independ- processes follows a diferent dynamic in on leadership roles and were able to gain bet- ent Science and Partnership Council (ISPC), which the main outcomes fow from build- ter access to the market and information. In the ultimate arbitrator of science quality in ing local capacity to innovate rather than turn, the scientists learned to respect farm- the CGIAR. The ISPC concluded that AAS was from adopting researcher-developed tech- ers’ ability to identify and solve problems. an “excessive shif away from biotechnical nology. Secondly, the basis on which the work The success of the work led to more funding innovation research toward an experiment is to be evaluated, and its underlying theory to continue PAR in several villages. in development process”. It wanted AAS to of change, should be agreed at the outset. In terms of the theory behind how RinD demonstrate better how its research “adds | | works, PAR creates “safe spaces” for diferent value to the pipeline of biophysical tech- stakeholder groups to learn with each other nologies being developed in the commodi- over a period of time. In the case of home- ties CRPs”. In other words, it expected AAS stead ponds, the stakeholders were women research to enable the pipeline model rather farmers, local facilitators, and biophysical than explore alternative models, as it said it and social scientists including gender and would do in its proposal. Dr. Boru Douthwaite PAR experts. A number of outcomes fow is an independent from these spaces, such as generation of new research er and consultant. technology, increases in links between peo-

7-2016 | Dossier Farmer innovation 11 The added value of collaboration Researchers’ perspective on partnership with small-scale farmers

| Anja Christinck, Brigitte Kaufmann Since the early 20th century, progress in the their fnal adoption by small-scale farmers in and Eva Weltzien scientifc understanding of plant genetics, developing countries was ofen limited. along with the possibilities to produce agro- This was one reason why farmer participa- Since agriculture began, farmers have chemical inputs at industrial scales, led to tion came into focus, but several other paths innovated in farming practices and increasing crop yields in industrialised coun- also led towards it. In some developing coun- tries. tries, the objectives underlying common technologies, long before research- The large-scale promotion of resulting development strategies were seen as being ers entered the scene. The impressive agricultural practices, beginning most mark- imposed on the local societies; thus gave rise diversity of crop varieties found in rural edly in the 1960s, became known as the to approaches based on education and capac- areas worldwide is a telling example of “Green Revolution”. It included using seed of ity building rather than on technology trans- high-yielding varieties, synthetic fertilisers, fer. Increasing awareness of the limited avail- past and continuing farmer innovation. and chemicals to control pests, weeds and ability of natural resources emerged as an While farmers’ own capacities to inno- diseases. As a result, yields of some major issue of global importance, raising new inter- vate are undisputed, the focus here is cereal crops increased about threefold. Rais- est in low-input farming systems. Further- ing agricultural yields was seen as the way to on the advantages of farmer–research- overcome food shortages and uplif rural er collaboration – and how these can be economies. The Green Revolution relied on a Farmer in Mali assessing new sorghum varieties. systematically captured. “transfer-of-technology” model, with tech- She puts a coloured piece of paper in an envelo- nologies being generated in research centres pe hanging before the plot to show whether or followed by transfer into practice. However, not the variety should be further tested. Photo: Ousmane Traore Photo:

Dossier | 7-2016 12 Farmer innovation

Left: President of a seed cooperative in Wakoro, Mali, with the harvest from his field sown to hybrid seed.

Right: Training successfully completed: now these women and men are seed sellers for a cooperative in Nampossela, Mali. Mamourou Photo: Sidibe

more, attention grew for local innovation processes, challenging the predominant per- ception of farmers being passive “adopters” of technologies. In the 1980s, a group within the interna- tional agricultural research community developed the Farming Systems Research approach. Instead of focusing on single measures, they proposed taking a systems perspective. The active role of farmers as “managers” of agricultural production was recognised; for the frst time, attention was given to farmers’ own objectives in improv- ing their farming systems. The slogan “Farmer First!” summarised important criticisms of the technology- transfer model of agricultural research and called for broad participation of farmers. Participatory research approaches proved to be efective in various felds, including plant breeding and managing livestock and natu- ral resources. Some methods, e.g. interviews and participatory communication tools, have become widely established, but a fundamen- tal shif towards co-design, co-planning and co-implementation of agricultural research has yet to be made. However, donor initiatives are increasingly demanding a clearer orientation of research towards the needs of “end-users”. The Europe- an research funding initiative Horizon 2020, for example, builds on the concept of multi- actor projects: farmers, advisers, researchers, businesses etc. join in research to co-create innovations. Likewise, the Mc Knight Founda- tion’s Collaborative Crop Research Program (CCRP) has based its agricultural research funding strategy on regional “Communities between diferent elements of the farming information from all over the world and can of Practice” through which small-scale farm- system, e.g. plants and animals, and needs of spend much more time on plant breeding ers, researchers and development practition- the farm household; as well as the diverse and targeted provision of information than ers work together to address problems in uses of crops in relation to local needs. Based farmers can. farming and food systems. on previous experience, farmers ofen antici- pate how diferent plant types react to typi- | Creating added value through | Complementary perspectives, cal stresses such as low soil fertility, pests or partnership resources and skills drought. Participatory plant breeding show how the The perspective of farmers is usually focused Scientifc plant breeders, in contrast, have complementarity between farmers’ and on the local physical, economic and sociocul- highly specialised knowledge in genetics, sta- researchers’ knowledge, resources and skills tural conditions in which innovations have tistics and trial design. They can screen large creates added value in practice. One example to work. With regard to breeding crop varie- numbers of plants for specifc qualities, is the sorghum and pearl millet breeding ties, the farmers’ knowledge includes aspects increase the frequency of desired traits in programme for the Sahel region of West and such as the diversity of soil and climate con- plant populations or evaluate their perfor- Central Africa, implemented by ICRISAT ditions; available local varieties; interactions mance across environments. Furthermore, they have access to breeding materials and

7-2016 | Dossier Farmer innovation 13 Photo: Ousmane Traore Photo:

ple is a rather novel concept in plant breed- ing and requires integration of methods from other disciplines such as social sciences. Particularly in Africa, new challenges arise from regional initiatives for introducing new legal frameworks for intellectual property rights and seed laws. Hence, research part- ners need to consider from the outset how varieties can be protected against misappro- priation while, at the same time, ensure access to seed of the co-developed varieties for all farmers. Lastly, the added value of farmer–research- er collaboration depends not only on “who participates” but also on “how the collabora- tion is organised”. A strong focus on develop- ing sound concepts and methodologies for collaborative research could become a (International Crops Research Institute for ing a range of improved open-pollinating shared interest of farmers, researchers and the Semi-Arid Tropics). varieties, landrace-based sorghum hybrids donors alike. This could include steps such as Farmer organisations in Mali, Niger and are now available with up to 30% higher establishing and institutionalising coopera- Burkina Faso and plant breeders from ICRI- yields compared to local varieties, even under tion, facilitating dialogue, co-designing SAT, together with national partners, have low-input conditions. Selling seed of these experiments and applying the results in the established a long-term cooperation to hybrids is a new incentive for farmers to form of new products, knowledge, services or develop locally performing varieties that maintain local landraces, which are required forms of organisation. | | serve farmers’ needs. Arriving at a joint as pollinators and used as food crops. understanding of the complexity and varia- Some of the participating farmers started bility of conditions that farmers in these engaging in farmer-managed seed enterpris- areas face was a key frst step. The farmers’ es in order to ensure seed production in the own coping strategies, e.g. seed management longer term and on a legal basis, based on practices, served as entry point. For example, ofcial certifcation requirements. Members Dr. Anja Christinck by observing and understanding which traits of these seed enterprises produce and dis- is agricultural scientist farmers are looking for when selecting seed, tribute seed of various crops and variety focused on communication the scientists could learn which traits are of types – including hybrid seed. Based on an and extension. relevance to them, and why. understanding of weaknesses found in exist- The partners further established a decen- ing seed systems, innovative approaches for tralised system of variety testing, where seed marketing were co-developed, including farmers and scientifc plant breeders could new distribution pathways such as mobile Prof. Dr. Brigitte Kaufmann observe a large number of varieties grown in shops. is agricultural scientist so-called “mother trials” to evaluate the out- focused on social ecology comes jointly. Individual farmers could then | Conclusion of land-use systems in the select a set of 3–5 varieties for testing (“baby In this work, the farmer–researcher collabo- topics and subtropics. trials”) on their own farms. Here, farmers ration allowed many farmers to apply and could subject the selected varieties to their enrich their knowledge, so that the range of own management and test them for various options available to them increases and they Dr. Eva Weltzien purposes and uses. can take better-informed decisions. is agricultural scientist Afer 15 years of collaborative breeding, At the scientifc level, existing concepts focused on participatory varieties have been co-developed that per- were developed further, e.g. with regard to plant breeding and seed form well even under unpredictable rainfall the interactions between the performance of system development for patterns and low soil fertility. Besides ofer- plant populations and the environment. Tar- tropical grains. geting objectives of plant-breeding pro- grammes not only for specifc agroecological conditions but also to specifc needs of peo-

Dossier | 7-2016 14 Farmer innovation

“We need research without walls!” Interview with Omer Agoligan, Benin

More than two-thirds of the population in I have always been interested in agricultural Benin derive their living from agriculture. biodiversity, but I was also convinced that What is the best way to describe the agricul- pesticides and chemical fertilisers could tural system? be used more proftably. During the food crises of 2007 and 2008, the FAO in Benin

The government in Benin promotes conven- launched an emergency food-security pro- Espen Van Cécile Photo: tional agriculture based on certifed seed gramme, PUASA, which also provided farm- and subsidised chemical fertilisers and other ers with seed free of charge. PUASA enabled inputs, not only during farmer training but me – as a member of a group of six farmers also in practice. The agricultural policies of – to manage a farm covering about 1000 the African states in the Economic Com- hectares of land that was provided by the munity of West African States (ECOWAS) are state. We produced maize and rice seed for converging: the main focus lies on promot- the government. The revenue was very good. ing agribusiness. To boost the sector, Benin In 2009, the Senegalese association of small- relies on international cooperation with scale-scale seed producers (ASPSP) invited funding from Belgium, France and Germany. us to a forum in Djimini, where for the very A big assembly plant for tractors from India frst time I really started to understand the has already been set up here. At the same interdependencies in global agriculture. time, a large proportion of Benin farmers, in particular here in the north, focus on tradi- Men and women farmers all over the world tional agricultural practices and local seed. are facing the same problems, with seed, with pest and disease management, with What do you think of the agricultural policy of access to water for irrigation, with regard to your government? What consequences does the workload and also market access. this policy have for men and women farmers I was really shocked. I hadn’t realised that in Benin? European farmers have been literally dispos- sessed because seed production has been Until a short time ago, I would have taken over entirely by industry. I thought, assessed it as positive because seeds were that’s exactly what’s happening here with free. However, step by step, the government us! I no longer wanted to be part of a process has increased the prices. Now only chemical that was playing a major role in the erosion fertilisers and pesticides are subsidised. In of our crop diversity. In 2009, I then gave the past, the state took out loans to fnance up the production of conventional seed and subsidies meant to motivate farmers to use lef the 1000-ha farm. There was a great certifed seed. But how much longer can deal of outrage about the “betrayal of the this go on? Only with subsidies can farmers comrades”! generate a small proft and, even then, only those who cultivate large areas. That is why What personal experience did you have with farmers are increasingly going back to the the state agricultural research? helping the scientists with their research but cultivation practices and seed they have they spoke of “participatory” research. What used for generations, without expensive I worked as a conventional farmer together we are doing today in our work I would not pesticides and fertiliser. In the meantime, with agricultural researchers for rice and call participatory but rather joint research. the government can less and less aford to maize, but it was the researchers who In our project “Laboratoire Hors Murs” (labo- subsidise its farmers. determined how we went about it. The ratory without walls), the farmers them- whole thing was very technical. They selves defne the procedure, the production Initially you were a conventional farmer and recommended that we reduce the distance constraints such as pest infestation or plant then you switched to organic farming. Why? between the rows of seed and sow the maize disease, as well as the focus of our research. more densely. At that time, we were using They contribute their knowledge to the pro- We were referred to as the young, modern around 200 kilos of fertiliser per hectare; cess, together with the scientists. farmers in contrast to those farmers who they made us use a further 100 kilos. The rejected the state’s agricultural advice. researchers wanted to use us to test their The “laboratory without walls” was estab- results under farmers’ conditions. We were lished by ORAD in cooperation with BEDE, an organisation that promotes ecological farm-

7-2016 | Dossier Farmer innovation 15 Photo: Anne Berson/BEDE Photo:

Omer Agoligan is a farmer and chairperson its confining walls and for the farmers of the Rural Organisation for Sustainable themselves to decide what they need and Agriculture (ORAD) in Benin. In a state that want”, emphasises Omer Agoligan (left). promotes the modernisation of farming and industrial agriculture, ORAD advocates Open-air research: Omer Agoligan sustainable and organic farming. This means with students and farmers in protecting not only seed diversity but also the Djougou, Benin (above). rights of men and women farmers to participate in decision-making in agricultural Young farmers in Benin learn how to prepare research. “It is time for research to leave biopesticides from local plants (below). Photo: Omer Agoligan Photo:

ing and the conservation of biodiversity. Can you explain the concept to us?

We think it is time for agricultural research to leave the research centres, in which they decide what farmers need and should culti- vate. We believe it is time for researchers to go to the felds and work together with the farmers. The “Laboratoire Hors Murs” is the start of a democratisation of agricultural research. The researchers have a great deal of book knowledge but there are some things that only we know. And you can’t always fnd an explanation. But if something can’t be explained, it doesn’t exist for researchers.

Dossier | 7-2016 16 Farmer innovation

Take okra, for example. If farmers want to and providing good nutrition for all Beni- forgotten how to manage without chemical take eggs from guinea fowl to hatch under nese people. This is the stage we are at right products. Here in Benin, we are only begin- chickens, they use okra to ensure that the now. Research, as you know, takes time; it is ning to develop ideas and it is only recently chickens accept the other bird’s eggs until a continuous process. that researchers have wanted to be involved the chicks hatch. This cannot be explained in this work. scientifcally, but it works! If researchers We also had support from an entomologist want to work here together with us, then from Burkina Faso who practises organic Which are the prospects for agricultural only on the condition that no-one appropri- farming. That was interesting because we research with and by farmers? ates and patents the results, but rather that farmers really don’t know so much about everyone can use them. what insects are benefcial or harmful. We As a representative of farmers, I was invited need bees to pollinate the cowpea. How- to the General Assembly of the FAO, the Can you name an example of joint research ever, using pesticides kills not only the Food and Agriculture Organization of the between farmers and researchers? United Nations. I quickly realised that the countries that have a say there, such as the The niébé or cowpea is a staple food in Benin. The concept USA, Australia and Norway, have a high com- Many farmers use chemical products to con- “Laboratory without walls” mercial interest in the seed and food sector. trol pests when they grow cowpeas, because In these circumstances, it is very difcult the state’s extension services have advised The research concept “Laboratoires Hors to realise the objective of providing good them to do so for many years. Together with Murs pour l’agro-biodiversité” (LHM) food for humankind. In the end, the FAO as researchers, we have been seeking alterna- was frst developed and tested between an institution is dependent on their money. tives. What did our parents do? They didn’t 2013 and 2015 by the organisation BEDE From their point of view, participatory use pesticides. Using pesticides has led to in cooperation with the Fondation Sci- agricultural research is surely not desirable. the disappearance of the benefcial insects ences Citoyennes, two research groups However, agricultural research must meet that used to control pests in the past. As from Montpellier and the Universities the needs of all people. For example, wheat a consequence, the pest level has become of Abomey-Calavi (Cotonou, Benin) is not grown in Benin or in West Africa. higher and higher. and Béjaïa (Algeria). The aim of the But wherever you are in Africa, the people approach is to bring men and women eat food made of wheat. In our opinion, Together with the scientists at the University farmers from various regions and coun- something is seriously wrong! Agricultural of Cotonou, we therefore did research on a tries together with national research research should serve the country. As long as product made of locally available ingredi- institutes to boost biological diversity states do not fnance their research them- ents that protect the cowpea. We have sown in ecological farming by small-scale selves, we will not solve these problems. various diferent varieties of niébé, some producers. The focus lies on the farmers of which were not treated. The farmers who putting forward their own questions and For me, the prospects of agricultural took part in the project brought together problems and being involved in deciding research lie in the fact that it can increase their knowledge about which local plants on research content and objectives. Ini- people’s resilience to climate change. could be used to control the pests. As a tial results have been obtained relating Agricultural research that is biased by the result, we treated the cowpea with neem oil to cowpea pests in the Djougou Region interests of the agricultural industry is not extract, with a variety of bushmint (Hyptis (Benin), autonomous water manage- interested in agroecology. But if our world suaveolens) and with Ethiopian lemongrass. ment in Minervois (France) and increas- is to become sustainable, then we all have In the untreated patches, we looked at the ing the date-palm biodiversity in Mzab to be involved in developing our agricul- resistance of the individual varieties of cow- (Algeria). ture: producers, consumers, everyone. We pea to pests and disease. Afer 18 months, we want to eat well, to provide good food, but arrived at two main conclusions. One, that the current system contributes nothing to neem oil and Hyptis suaveolens are particu- refecting about what sensible agricultural larly efective against pests and, two, that we harmful insects but also the benefcial research could be. | | also have highly resistant local varieties of ones. The entomologist showed us what cowpea that grow well without treatment. kinds of insects protect the crops and help Translation: Lis Liesicke However, treating the cowpea with neem us control the pests. We will continue to oil and Hyptis suaveolens is very time-con- research this matter and work together with The interview was conducted by Rebecca Struck suming. But the main thing isn’t maximum colleagues from Mali, Senegal and Burkina (Communication Department, Misereor) in French. yield but meeting the population’s needs Faso. Agroecology is still uncharted terri- This text is an extract of the one-hour interview. tory for research institutes, because we have

7-2016 | Dossier Farmer innovation 17 Farmer organisations taking a decisive role in agricultural research The case of FUMA Gaskiya in West Africa

| Bettina I.G. Haussmann and Ali M. Aminou

In West Africa, farmer organisations are contributing increasingly to decision- making in agricultural research and Photo: Bettina Haussmann Photo: development (ARD). Here, we describe the development of a farmer federation in Niger – Fédération des Unions de Pro- ducteurs de Maradi (Federation of Farmer Unions of Maradi) FUMA Gaski- ya – from a research project partner to a research project leader, the positive changes this brought, challenges faced and a possible way forward to further improve the present ARD system using a “Farmer Research Network” approach.

| FUMA Gaskiya The farmer federation FUMA Gaskiya was created in April 2002 in the city of Maradi in Niger. The federation now consists of 21 (e.g. new crops or cultivars and/or soil fertili- In a field experiment, women farmers unions, 420 local farmer organisations and a sation techniques) they wanted to test, using discuss the advantages of different millet total of 12,131 members, of which 55% are the scientists’ protocol. Scientists took farm- varieties. A federation of farmers in Niger women. Since its creation, FUMA Gaskiya has ers’ preferences into account while moving leads the research project. been a partner in several ARD projects fund- ahead in the design of further activities. ed by a wide range of donors. Since 2012, Because the on-farm testing of new crops FUMA Gaskiya has also been leading a and cultivars went hand in hand with com- researchers, and the local leadership by FUMA research project of its own. munity-based seed production, local seed Gaskiya’s Executive Director Ali M Aminou. In 2014, FUMA Gaskiya received the Equa- marketing at afordable prices, seed fairs and The wide participation of the federation in tor Price from the United Nations Develop- mobile seed shops, farmers’ adoption of the diferent research projects put FUMA Gaskiya ment Programme (UNDP, http://equatorini- new options to diversify their farming sys- in a position to attract own funds: in 2012, the tiative.org) together with a special recogni- tems was facilitated, even in remote areas. McKnight Foundation Collaborative Crop tion for Sustainable Land Management in The year-by-year increase in amounts of seed Research Program (www.ccrp.org) granted a Sub-Saharan Africa. Both awards recognise produced and sold illustrates the sustainabil- research project to the farmer federation. community-based organisations that dem- ity of these research eforts. By facilitating onstrate leadership in advancing local inno- inventory credit (i.e. credit on the basis of | Research led by FUMA Gaskiya vative solutions for people, nature and resil- stored agricultural products) using revolving In the still ongoing research project led by ient communities. funds, FUMA Gaskiya supported its farmer FUMA Gaskiya, farmers set the priorities and members during difcult times, e.g. afer har- objectives of the research, whereas local or | Key success factors vest when crop prices are low. Keys to success international scientists support the farmers In the initial ARD projects in which FUMA were the signed partnership agreements clar- in implementing their agenda and analysing Gaskiya was associated as partner, scientists ifying the roles and responsibilities of each the results. This constellation represents a wrote the project proposal and then involved partner, the longer-term engagement by drastic change from usual ARD procedures. FUMA Gaskiya farmers in the on-farm donor agencies that enabled relationships of It was also a new “experiment” for the research activities. Scientists developed the trust to develop between farmers and Mc Knight Foundation as a donor organisa- research protocols, and farmers were then tion. Conventionally, scientists write a project able to choose which agricultural options proposal and decide on the research agenda, which they then may implement with farm-

Dossier | 7-2016 18 Farmer innovation

Achievements of FUMA Gaskiya and its research partners The collaboration between FUMA Gas- kiya and research scientists contributed to various outputs, such as participatory pearl millet breeding and variety selec- tion; farmer-based seed production and marketing; identifcation of options to diversify farming systems; small-scale of nutrient cycling in ecologically oriented | A possible way forward of-season gardening by women; soil agriculture and contributes to increases in Farmer organisations working together with fertilisation technique using locally productivity and in grain quality. One scien- development agencies form a collective available wood ash and sanitised urine tist suggested a partial frst weeding just infrastructure that could cooperate with from humans (easily accessible by wom- around the planting hills (instead of the usu- agricultural researchers to support testing en); time-saving technique of partial al complete weeding of the feld) at early stag- and refning of farming options, to under- weeding; and use of community radio es of crop growth, in order to reduce the stand patterns of crop performance, and to stations to share information and knowl- workload of the women. This method has match options to the contexts and needs of edge about agricultural innovations. proved to be benefcial not only in terms of specifc farmers. An approach being devel- saving women’s time but also because the oped within the McKnight Foundation Col- “Our relations with research have remaining weeds between the planting hills laborative Crop Research Program (CCRP) improved in the sense that our ideas, help to reduce soil erosion during early-sea- – Farmer Research Networks – represents a concerns and know-how are much more son sandstorms. strategy for building on this existing infra- taken into account”. Ms Hadjara Oumarou, structure in ARD. In the context of the CCRP, Vice-President of FUMA Gaskiya | Differences between farmer-led and such Farmer Research Networks aim at link- conventional research ing problem-solving research with action “What struck me the most is that the Some diferences perceived by both scien- that can provide a context-specifc evidence researcher comes to us and reports on tists and farmers in the research project led base for agroecological intensifcation, facili- the task we had given him; it’s amazing by FUMA Gaskiya include: tate positive changes for farmers at scale and but true”. Ms Tsayaba Adamou Garin Maigari, ʀľŁIJľħů ůħŒħƍĎřĜħ Šı Žľħ ůħųħĎůĜľ ıŠů ŒŠĜĎŒ meet requirements of mutuality, reciprocity, FUMA Gaskiya farmer farmers, especially women farmers; co-creation, benefciary ownership and local ʀŘĎƓŁŘĎŒŠƎřħůųľŁŬěƔŽľħıĎůŘħůųɎŒħĎģŁřIJ agency. “When the women in this project say to higher motivation and engagement; The vision of Farmer Research Networks that it is ‘our project, unique in Niger and ʀŘŠůħ ıĎůŘħůɴŽŠɴıĎůŘħů ŒħĎůřŁřIJ Ďřģ ĜŠŘ- is to transform the way that much of ARD is unheard of before’, we are proud!” munication of research results in a more done and to use modern information and Ms Balki Laouali, FUMA Gaskiya farmer farmer-friendly manner, for example, using communication technology to engage more community radio programmes in local lan- people (i.e. a representative set of stakeholders guages, farmer exchange visits, video clips, such as through a crowd-sourcing approach) and sharing of results at the FUMA Gaskiya in prioritisation, observation, experimenta- ers. Here, a farmer federation decided on the annual assembly; tion and utilisation of agricultural research. research agenda, which scientists are now ʀĜľĎřIJħ Łř ŬŠƎħů ůħŒĎŽŁŠřųɐ ŬůħƍŁŠƂųŒƔɎ ųĜŁ- Because of the participation of large num- supporting. entists had the money and therefore the bers of farmers in such an approach, scaling The research project led by FUMA Gaskiya power; with FUMA Gaskiya being responsi- is embedded in the process, which is expected focuses on women’s felds and gender issues ble for allocating funds to researchers, the to enhance impacts. | | related to agriculture. Options for diversify- power relations became quite diferent, i.e. ing and intensifying farming systems are researchers need to respond better to farm- being developed and tested that are specif- ers’ needs. Prof. Dr. Bettina cally adapted to the context of women farm- I.G. Haussmann ers in Niger. This context is characterised by One challenge encountered by FUMA Gaski- teaches at Hohenheim women’s access only to the poorest land, lim- ya as leader of a research project was the University‘s Institute of ited or no access to external agricultural members’ limited knowledge about experi- Plant Breeding and is con- inputs, and time constraints. In the project, mental designs, data collection tools and tact scientist for McKnight several crops and varieties were identifed data analysis. It was initially also difcult for Foundation. that serve especially women’s needs (e.g. okra, the farmers in the federation to fnd truly hibiscus, cassia, early-maturing varieties of participation-minded researchers who were cereals rich in micronutrients). Soil fertilisa- willing to support them. The McKnight Foun- Ali M. Aminou tion techniques were developed using wood dation Liaison Scientist for West Africa had studied agriculture in ash and sanitised urine from humans as local to encourage researchers to engage with the Nigeria and, since 2002, is resources that women can access. Using these farmers. Having good researchers working the Director of the farmer resources as fertiliser for pearl millet, sor- directly with the farmers is important, as the federation FUMA Gaskiya ghum, groundnut and cowpea ofers a form researchers can more easily link also to the in Niger. global knowledge base to support the farm- ers’ experimentation.

7-2016 | Dossier Farmer innovation 19 Promoting farmer-led innovation The role of multistakeholder partnerships

Joe Ouko, Kenyan farmer, developed a new goat feed mixture.

mentation. This recognition transforms how formal researchers and development actors view small-scale farmers – and how these view themselves. It changes the relationship

Photo: Laurens van Veldhuizen van Laurens Photo: between these actors and can stimulate inter- est to engage in Participatory Innovation Development (PID), integrating local innova- tiveness with formal science. The multi-stakeholder partnerships at national level are known as Country Plat- forms (CPs). A CP is self-initiated, convening at least three diferent stakeholder groups in a National Steering Committee (NSC). The CP partners jointly plan and implement activi- ties fnanced partly from own resources and partly from external funds.

| Creating social capital: example from Kenya Afer learning about Prolinnova at an interna- tional symposium in Uganda in 2006, some Kenyans decided to set up a CP involving NGOs, universities, government research and extension, and community-based organisa- tions. In its agenda to promote farmer-led innovation, the CP focused on joint learning about PID, communication, advocacy and fundraising. From the perspective of creating social capital to enable collective action for mutual beneft, the CP was able to build trust | Gabriela Quiroga Gilardoni and Ann Waters-Bayer with Prolinnova–Kenya among the partners, promote reciprocity and exchange, agree on norms and actions, and How can partnerships of farmers, re- rity, researchers and small-scale farmers marshal internal and external resources for searchers, extension agents and other should not work in their own cocoons but joint work. This long process (see Figure 1) was need to work together and complement one strengthened by the CP’s refection on what actors with a stake in agricultural re- another”. was happening and why. search and development work? Above Exactly such multi-stakeholder partner- According to Bruce Tuckmann, who in 1965 all, it is key that the stakeholders form ships are promoted by the international developed a phasing model for group devel- the partnerships themselves, with good network Prolinnova for joint learning and opment, the “storming”, “norming” and “per- action focused on discovering and encourag- forming” phases of a group bind the mem- facilitation. ing innovation by small-scale farmers. It is bers. In Kenya, over 50 people from diverse a positive approach that builds on farmers’ organisations came on their own resources to The Kenyan farmer Joe Ouko innovated in creativity rather than the common nega- the workshop to form the CP. They “stormed” mixing feed from local resources for dairy tive approach that dwells on their problems. in intensive exchange, getting to know each goats. In 2015, at an international consulta- It seeks to enhance local strengths and help other and the Prolinnova approach. When tion in Geneva on “Small-scale farmer inno- farmers explore site-specifc opportunities, they noted the guidelines defned by the vation”, he was strengthened in his conviction drawing from local and other sources of ideas. international network members, some organ- that “if we really want sustainable food secu- It recognises the dynamics of indigenous isations lef, especially those whose initial knowledge – how local people improve their interest was to access funds. Afer this “norm- farming through their own informal experi-

Dossier | 7-2016 20 Farmer innovation

Defining and PROLINNOVA in a nutshell (Self-) selection Defining roles, Performing agreeing on re- of partners including role to and sults to be reached facilitate the CP continuing together The network “Promoting Local Innova- tion in ecologically oriented agriculture and natural resource management” was born in 1999, when several non-govern- mental organisations (NGOs) from North and South and some like-minded Sharing Planning & researchers pledged to scale up participa- Getting expectations Starting committing tory approaches to ARD based on local to know and identifying with what is to initial each other benefits of part- already there innovation processes. A Global Partner- joint action nership ship Programme under the Global Forum for Agricultural Research (GFAR), the network envisions “a world where Figure 1: Main elements during CP storming, norming and performing women and men farmers play decisive roles in ARD for sustainable livelihoods”. Multi-stakeholder platforms are now ing” phase of stabilising with rules and norms, led joint innovation with researchers through active in several countries in Africa, Asia the group started “performing” in joint activi- FALIA-K, which he chairs. and Latin America. The secretariat is ties. This phase awakened new interest and hosted by KIT (Royal Tropical Institute, attracted new partners with similar aims. | Engaging the scientists Netherlands) with support from IIRR Efective collaboration started to happen. In 2015–16, a self-assessment of the Prolinno- (International Institute of Rural Recon- From the beginning, the partners knew va’s achievements showed that CP function- struction, Philippines). An Oversight they had to generate own funds to realise ing depends on the leadership and commit- Group elected by the Country Platforms their plans; this helped build ownership. The ment of the host organisation and NSC and governs the network. task force formed to constitute the CP and their ability to fnd a capable coordinator. www.prolinnova.net link it to the international secretariat became Handling the diverse motivations and inter- a strongly committed NSC that took frm ests of the partners is a balancing act that steps in guiding the CP and ensuring good requires sensitivity and moderation skills, coordination. and mentoring is essential to strengthen The Prolinnova network has managed to The Kenyan CP became part of a multi- leadership capacities. make its approach fairly well known in inter- country Prolinnova project for farmer-led The Kenyan CP is co-hosted by an NGO and national ARD fora but integration of PID into research to enhance resilience to change, a research organisation; this favours linkages national policies and organisations, includ- using locally managed innovation funds. This among state and non-state actors. Putting ing tertiary education, has yet to be achieved. drew national and international attention to the secretariat in the research organisation This will be a main agenda in the coming the CP and increased the partners’ confdence. helped make the CP better known among years. | | It also translated into funded projects such as other researchers. JOLISAA (Joint Learning in Innovation Sys- Multi-stakeholder partnerships were Links tems in African Agriculture) and holding sev- formed also in the districts where local inno- Prolinnova guidelines: www.prolinnova.net/ eral international events on farmer-led vation funds operated. The Local Steering content/prolinnova-guidelines research including the Eastern Africa Farmer Committees (LSCs) organise their own activi- JOLISAA: www.jolisaa.net Innovation Fair. These events triggered Ken- ties, such as local innovation fairs and farm- Eastern African Farmer Innovation Fair: http:// yan farmer innovators to form their own er-led experiments. They invite decision- aisa2013.wikispaces.com association (Farmer-Led Innovators Associa- makers from the local government to join tion of Kenya; FALIA-K) and stimulated the their events. In turn, LSC members are invit- Kenya Federation of Agricultural Producers ed to join county development committees (KENFAP) to join the CP. and can draw attention to local initiatives. Gabriela Quiroga Working directly with small-scale farmers In developing methods to strengthen farm- is an adviser in the Royal has been key to the CP’s success. As soon as er-led innovation, the greatest challenge has Tropical Institute (KIT) the local innovators realised they are “farmer been the work on PID involving formal and part of the Prolinnova researchers”, they quickly identifed other researchers. Much still needs to be done in International Support innovators. The recognition given by fellow research centres to encourage and enable Team since 2013. farmers and “outsiders” to their creativity staf to engage in PID and to accept farmers in strengthened bonds between them. It ampli- the lead. In Kenya, individual researchers are fed their voices in policy dialogue in their engaged, but the PID approach is still on the own areas and in national and international margins of formal research. It has been dif- Dr. Ann Waters-Bayer meetings to express what they expect from cult even for these researchers to shed their is an agricultural socio- agricultural research and development (ARD). habit of deciding what to investigate and how logist and part of the Afer Geneva, Joe Ouko felt encouraged to to assess the results (“validate”), which demo- Prolinnova International devote even more efort to promote farmer- tivates farmers, who then prefer to continue Support Team since 1999. experimentation on their own.

7-2016 | Dossier Farmer innovation 21 Farmer innovation contests What can researchers learn from them?

| Tobias Wünscher | Example 1: Using waste from shea- efect of sheabutter waste. Although the butter production to fight the sweet impact is not as high as with conventional Contests show that smallholders have potato weevil insecticides, the success rate is still remarka- developed diverse innovations by The importance of the sweet potato (also ble. known as batate) has grown signifcantly in themselves without any external sup- Upper East Ghana in the past few years. | Examples 2 and 3: Onion leaves and port. These innovations often use very Batate grows under very diverse conditions neem seeds to suppress striga in grain simple means. Because such innova- with relatively little efort, is resistant to fields tive practices are easy to access and be drought and is a good source of vitamin C. Striga is probably the most problematic par- The sweet potato weevil (Cylas formicarius) asitic weed in cereal production in Africa. implemented, they offer a huge poten- can cause devastating damage to the roots. The weed can be controlled only with a great tial for development in poorer rural Many farmers cannot aford to treat the deal of care and by using various crop-man- areas. plants with insecticides. The small-scale agement strategies. One essential element in farmer Akologo Anyagri from Garu-Tempane fghting the weed is the use of fertiliser, but discovered that sheabutter waste reduces the this is exactly what many small-scale farm- Upper East, one of the poorest regions in pest infestation. Sheabutter is widely pro- ers ofen lack. Through the contest, two alter- Ghana, lies in a semi-arid savanna, where duced in the region and the waste resulting native approaches to controlling striga were most of the people live on the land and make from production, for which there is no other identifed. their living from agriculture. In 2012, the use, is easily accessible for many land users. The young innovator Abdul Rhaman Abieli Center for Development Research (ZEF) and Field tests conducted by the Savanna Agricul- from Missiga observed that no striga was the West African Science Service Center on tural Research Institute (SARI) validated the growing on some areas of his millet and sor- Climate Change and Adapted Land Use (WAS- ghum felds where he had discarded leafy CAL), together with local partners from the residues from his onion harvest. He then Ghanaian Ministry of Food and Agriculture started to experiment deliberately with small (MoFA) and NABOCADO, a local non-govern- quantities of onion leaves to fght striga and mental organisation, began to systematically discovered that the efect was the same. Today seek innovations developed by small-scale farmers in Upper East by inviting them to

enter a contest. The aim of this exercise was Wünscher Tobias Photos: to fnd new development approaches.

Farmer innovations were defned as technol- ogies or practices that ʀĎůħƂųħģŁřŽľħƍĎŒƂħĜľĎŁřıŠůĎIJůŁĜƂŒŽƂůĎŒ products ʀģŁƨħůıůŠŘŽůĎģŁŽŁŠřĎŒŠůĜŠŘŘŠřıĎůŘŁřIJ practice ʀľĎƍħěħħřģħƍħŒŠŬħģěƔŠřħŠůŘŠůħıĎůŘ- ers without external help. he dries and pounds onion leaves to a powder Awards such as motorbikes, water pumps that he mixes together with millet and sor- and galvanised roofng sheets were ofered as ghum seeds. The low quantity of onion-leaf an incentive to take part in the contest. An powder used rules out any fertilisation efect. independent local selection committee Experiments conducted by SARI confrmed made up of farmers, scientists and staf from that treating the cereal seed with pulverised MoFA and NABOCADO assessed the innova- The sweet potato weevil causes severe damage. onion leaves indeed suppresses the emer- tions on the basis of four criteria: originality, Waste from sheabutter production can be used gence of striga. economic potential, dissemination potential to reduce pest infestation (photos above). Likewise in the fght against striga, Mallam and environmental sustainability. Anas Wechu from Kassena Nankana East test- Three contest rounds were held from 2012 Biological control of weeds. The striga plant, ed the efect of powdered neem seeds. The to 2014: in total, 222 applications were made which destroys a large part of the cereal harvest and 19 prizes awarded. Three impressive in Africa, can be controlled with onion leaves examples are presented below. (photo right).

Dossier | 7-2016 22 Farmer innovation

Also pulverised neem seeds help control the „witchweed“ striga: Mallam Anas Wechu uses Photo: Tobias Wünscher Tobias Photo: this as herbicide.

formal research that it is imperative to take the specifc requirements of small-scale farmers into account.

| Path to an inclusive research approach In their totality, farmer innovations probably ofer considerable development potential for poor rural areas. Important tasks of formal research are to recognise local innovations, to validate their relevance and efectiveness and, if required, to develop them further to ensure that they are included in agricultural extension just like innovations coming from formal research. An overview of farmer innovation activi- ties also provides formal science with indica- tions of areas where further research is need- ed and identifes research gaps beyond the innovation capacity of farmers. In the exam- ple described, this includes long-term invest- ment in techniques such as the development of seed as well as organisational innovation and new technical equipment. The importance of farmer innovation for agricultural research can be grasped efectively only through intensive commu- nication between farmers and researchers. fruits of the neem tree (Azadirachta indica) addressed the production of technical equip- Close cooperation between scientists, farm- are already known for their therapeutic prop- ment (such as solar incubators). Costly and ers, agricultural advisers and development erties for humans and for their pesticide time-consuming innovations, such as seed organisations is therefore absolutely imper- efects in farming. Mallam Anas Wechu used breeding, were not among the applications ative and should start already at the time neem seeds as herbicide, burying them into submitted. Although expressly requested in of seeking farmer innovations. One task of the earth in the direct proximity of young the application form, no organisational or scientists must be to actively involve innova- maize plants. In the experiments carried out institutional innovations were submitted. tive farmers in the research process, so that by SARI, this practice likewise restricted the The common element of most innovations their knowledge is used optimally in agricul- occurrence of striga. was the use of locally available materials and tural research. This paves the way for inclu- low investment. This shows that it is very dif- sive agricultural research that systematically | Characteristics of innovations identi- fcult for farmers in these poor regions to take integrates the innovation potential of the fied through the contest advantage of external inputs. Many farmer farmers. | | Two-thirds of the innovations identifed dur- innovations provide solutions to problems ing the contest addressed pest and disease for which “modern” solutions already exist, Translation: Lis Liesicke management in livestock and crop produc- but these are ofen not available on the mar- tion and in storage of the products. This can ket or cannot be aforded by small-scale farm- be seen as a contribution to adapting to cli- ers. Local innovations thus provide a less mate change, as changing environmental expensive substitute for modern products. Dr. Tobias Wünscher conditions can lead to an increase in pest Furthermore, the innovations are step-by- is an agricultural economist and disease pressure. Other areas of local step improvements on existing production and scientist at the Center innovation were related to crop and livestock systems that do not require fundamental for Development Research husbandry techniques, animal feed and soil restructuring of the farm. They can be tried (ZEF) in Bonn. fertility. Only two contest participants out in small “portions” and integrated into the running of the farm, so that the risk for farmers adopting the new method is low. This can all be understood as a direct message to

7-2016 | Dossier Farmer innovation 23 Beyond “the Answer is 42” Changing policy and practice in agricultural research

| Ann Waters-Bayer and Fetien Abay spective, explore farmers’ criteria and jointly assess the new ideas. An outstanding exam- Most agricultural research is still car- ple is the System of Rice Intensifcation (SRI) ried out in a transfer-of-technology – an innovative method of growing rice – which basically requires tender loving care: mode and most of the new technolo- the way that farmers (who live from the rice) gies emerging from this “pipeline” are apply the techniques, e.g. in transplanting, Nickolmann Sibylle Photo: suitable mainly for better-off farmers. will be quite diferent from how a hired This is because the scientists producing labourer on a research station would do so. SRI needs to be assessed in research by and such technologies are operating like the with farmers – and according to their criteria computer in the science fiction classic regarding labour inputs (and by whom), risk Hitchhiker’s Guide to the Galaxy: “the management, water use and much more, in addition to yield. Answer is 42 but what was the Ques- tion?” In agricultural research, the most | Key recommendations for important thing is which questions are ARD managers and policymakers posed – and by whom. What could ARD managers and policymakers do diferently so as to deepen the inroads of farmer-led research approaches into the The “Answer is 42” is still widely regarded as work of their institutions? They could, for what formal research should be producing. example: However, rather than adopting a specifc - Reward staf for identifying initiatives of technology developed by researchers and small-scale farmers to improve their farm- disseminated by extension agents, it is far ing through own experimentation and inno- more important that farmers become better vation, including social and institutional able to solve problems in dynamic innova- innovation tion systems within ongoing development - Encourage and enable staf to engage in processes that beneft from and enhance research with farmers in ways that enhance farmers’ own knowledge and creativity. local innovative capacities, e.g. by increasing This locally enriching approach calls for local skills and confdence in experimenta- research that does not seek Answer 42 for the tion and linking them with diverse informa- entire world of small-scale farmers but rath- tion sources er recognises local agroecological and socio- - Encourage and enable staf to recognise economic diferences. Also within a village, diversity within rural communities in terms subgroups of farmers difer in their access to of assets, societal position and motivation resources and their motivation for farming. and to give particular attention to resource- It is therefore impossible to identify “small- poor and women farmers, who may not scale farmers’ priorities” for research at a stand out as innovators but are making large scale such as a whole country. A highly incremental changes to improve their farm- decentralised approach to research is need- ing and could provide ideas for others in a ed, in collaboration with diferent types of similar situation farmers to meet their difering needs. - Ensure that staf at all levels in their institu- A farmer-led approach also calls for recog- tion understands the underlying principles Farmer representatives read nition that scientists and farmers assess of supporting farmer-led research and can out the Ouagadougou Declaration research outcomes diferently. Even among provide support at their respective levels on farmer-led research. scientists interested in farmer innovation, - Work closely with universities, colleges and their frst kneejerk reaction is to want to “val- training centres to prepare not only poten- idate” what farmers have developed, using tial new but also existing staf to interact scientifc methods and facilities and criteria. with small-scale farmers and other local They need to look beyond this narrow per- stakeholders in joint experimentation and innovation. This requires focused attention

Dossier | 7-2016 24 Farmer innovation

The Ouagadougou declaration on farmer-led research

At a workshop on farmer-led research ʀbŽůħřIJŽľħřůħųħĎůĜľħůųɕĜĎŬĎĜŁŽŁħųŁř before the West African Farmer Innova- approaches to farmer-led research, tion Fair in Burkina Faso in May 2015, with a view to changing attitudes and participants from farmer organisations, behaviour in favour of collaboration Donors need to plan this work in an open national and international research and with farming communities. way, allowing the specifc focus of the work to development organisations, and donors be identifed and agreed during the initial reflected on experiences with different To development support organisations: phase. They also need to accept the dynamic approaches to farmer-led research and ʀřIJĎIJħɎĎųŘƂĜľĎųŬŠųųŁěŒħŠƍħůĎŒŠřIJ nature of the external and internal condi- development in West Africa and formu- term, in supporting initiatives in par- tions of the groups they support and let the lated the following recommendations: ticipatory innovation development innovation processes follow unexpected ʀ(ĎĜŁŒŁŽĎŽħĎĜĜħųųŠıųŘĎŒŒɴųĜĎŒħıĎůŘħů paths. And they need to evaluate such pro- To government decision-makers: organisations, formal researchers and jects not according to the rate of adoption of ʀ2řųŽŁŽƂŽŁŠřĎŒŁųħůħųħĎůĜľěƔĎřģƎŁŽľ trainers to funding for farmer-led technologies but rather according to the men and women farmers within the research. increased capacity of actors within the locali- national and subnational agricultural ty to innovate together – continuously strategies and policies, while recognis- To small-scale farmer organisations: addressing new problems and new opportu- ing the importance and value of local ʀřĜŠƂůĎIJħůħųħĎůĜľŽľĎŽŁųŒħģěƔ nities. innovation men and women farmers, within all One way in which small-scale farmers can ʀųųƂůħĎĜĜħųųŽŠřĎŽŁŠřĎŒıƂřģųıŠů small-scale farmer organisations in the truly take the lead in decentralised ARD is by research by and with men and women subregion their having direct access to resources for farmers to support small-scale farmer ʀbŽůħřIJŽľħřŽľħĜĎŬĎĜŁŽƔŠıųŘĎŒŒɴųĜĎŒħ experimentation and deciding how to use innovation farmer organisations in advocacy with these resources. The Prolinnova network has ʀbħŽƂŬĎřĎŽŁŠřĎŒųƂŬŬŠůŽıƂřģıŠů decision-makers made good experience with community-gov- research by and with men and women ʀųųƂůħĎųŽůŠřIJůħŬůħųħřŽĎŽŁŠřŠı erned Local Innovation Support Funds. As farmers, where such a fund does not small-scale farmer organisations in this is still regarded as a radical change from already exist advocacy for institutionalising farmer- conventional ways of funding research, ʀZůŠƍŁģħųŬĎĜħıŠůůħŬůħųħřŽĎŽŁŠřŠı led research approaches where scientists have the fnal say, donor small-scale farmers in the governing ʀŠřŽůŁěƂŽħŽŠĎųƂŬŬŠůŽıƂřģıŠůųŘĎŒŒɴ funding will be needed for several years until bodies of research institutions. scale farmer innovation by mobilising the efectiveness of farmer-led research with fnancial resources generated through locally managed funds becomes widely visi- To formal researchers: agricultural activities. ble. We will then fnd that there are multiple ʀŠřųŁģħůŘħřĎřģƎŠŘħřıĎůŘħůųĎų answers for the multiple situations of small- innovators and legitimate partners in scale farmers – and the Question they are agricultural research and no longer pursuing keeps changing as they advance. | | simply as recipients of the results ing their views and needs to formal ARD. To exert efective infuence, it is not enough just to have one or two seats for farmers in deci- Dr. Ann Waters-Bayer sion-making bodies. The farmers should is an agricultural sociolo- have a good understanding of research and gist based in Germany to developing relevant courses and teaching the confdence to challenge formal research- who works within the modules, and practical internships with ers – and what better way to learn this than Prolinnova International farmer researchers. through farmer-led participatory research? Support Team (www.prolinnova.net). | Key roles for NGOs | … and for donor organisations There will never be enough public resources Donors who want to support farmer-led Dr. Fetien Abay to support farmer-led research in all parts of research approaches need to be prepared for is Professor of Plant Breeding a country. However, NGOs – national and the long haul – not spending lots of money and Seed and is Director of international – can play key roles in support- quickly but rather small amounts over long- the Institute of Environment, ing grassroots initiatives of interested farm- er periods, allowing time for all the actors Gender & Development ers in doing their own research, and linking (scientists, development agents, educators, Studies, Mekelle University, these initiatives so farmers can learn from local administrators, farmers, other commu- Ethiopia. each other and share their learning with for- nity members etc) to build up relationships mal ARD institutions. This will help strength- of mutual trust and respect and to learn new en the voice of small-scale farmers in convey- ways of working with each other. This will involve much learning by doing and then refecting on how it was done.

7-2016 | Dossier Farmer innovation 25

Recognising and valuing farmers’ knowledge and creativity The Farmer Innovation Fair in West Africa

| Aline Zongo

In the face of changing and increasingly difficult socio-economic conditions in rural areas, many small-scale farmers are adapting and developing their own innovations. How do these farmers receive the recognition and Photo: Eva Wagner/Misereor Eva Photo: appreciation that they deserve for their innovation and know-how? And how can agricultural research and farmer innovation complement each other?

This was the focus of the Farmer Innovation François Lompo, Fair in West Africa on 15–16 May 2015 in Oua- the Minister of gadougou, Burkina Faso, following similar Agriculture of fairs in Nepal in 2009 and in Kenya in 2013. Burkina Faso The fair put the spotlight on the important (on the right), role of men and women farmer innovators in during his visit further developing agriculture and the use of to the fair. natural resources and as partners in agricul- tural research and development. As Roch Mongbo from Abomey University said: “It is development to exchange experience and to how much endogenous knowledge there is. possible for both schools of thought, that is, network with each other. Fatou Seye, a par- This can be extremely helpful if it is used the approach of researchers and that of farm- ticipating farmer from Senegal who devel- accordingly. It can improve our production ers, to converge… Coming into contact with oped the innovation of making cofee from considerably!” The visits by the Prime Minis- researchers who do not simply appear with a cowpeas, said: “This is the frst time I have ter, Isaac Zida, and the Minister of Scientifc preconceived scheme or process, but rather travelled outside of Senegal and it is all thanks Research and Innovation, Jean Noël Poda, engage with the farmers’ questions and ways to my innovation. I have met up with other revealed the interest of policymakers from of working was enriching for both sides.” innovators…. I will continue to work on the host country in inclusive rural develop- More than 500 visitors from numerous improving my innovations…. so that I can ment in which all kinds of knowledge and countries – Belgium, Benin, Burkina Faso, participate in other fairs.” know-how are integrated, in particular the Cameroon, Germany, Ghana, Mali, Neth- The criteria for invitation to the fair were knowledge of the farmers. erlands, Niger, Senegal, Togo and the USA – uniqueness, relevance and transferability Nevertheless, declarations of intent do not attended the fair and side events (http://fpao. of the innovations and their technical, eco- sufce to structurally integrate farmer inno- faso-dev.net). Almost 60 innovative men and logical, economic and social viability. The vation within formal research approaches. women farmers and representatives of more selected innovations refect the great diver- Not only must the protection of knowledge than 40 non-governmental organisations, sity in farmers’ innovativeness. New prod- be ensured, but also concrete steps must be development projects, research centres and ucts and processes were presented related to taken so that scientifc research and farmer universities as well as numerous journalists animal production, use of natural resources, innovation can better complement each oth- attended the fair. They took part in the vari- processing of agro-silvo-pastoral products er in the future. | | ous events such as the West African workshop including conservation and storage, insti- on approaches to research and development tutional innovation and innovations in the Translation: Lis Liesicke by and with smallholders, the exhibition of communication sector and in agricultural innovations, mini-workshops and podium mechanisation. discussions as well as the screening of vid- The fair thus contributed to providing eos about local innovations to cope with the information and lobbying for measures to efects of climate change. promote research approaches by and with Aline Zongo The fair provided an opportunity for men farmers, where these are at the centre of the is the Director of INADES– and women small-scale farmers and other research. François Lompo, the Minister of Formation Burkina Faso, actors involved in agricultural research and Agriculture of Burkina Faso, said during his an NGO that works in ten tour of the fair: “If you look at all our tech- African countries. niques, for instance for fghting striga or for treating or feeding livestock, then you will see

Dossier | 7-2016 26 Farmer innovation Reaching as many farmers as possible What is needed to spread farmer innovation?

Radio programmes can be used to disseminate innovations.

| More complex innovations – more

f ner Kilian Kle Photo: complex dissemination processes Exchange of knowledge among farmers can be stimulated in many ways, for example, through farmer innovation fairs or exchange visits that allow a wide range of local innova- tions to be showcased. These events also rein- force the confdence of farmers and their supporters in the capacity of small-scale farmers to innovate. Another example: vide- os designed to share know-how from farmer to farmer, making use of commented images that show each step in implementing an innovation. Translations of these can reach potential users who would never have been able to communicate directly with the origi- nal innovators. Such ways of sharing are good for Type I innovations but, for Types II and III, the exchange can serve only as a source of inspi- ration. Farmers can take up the principles they have observed behind a new technique but have to experiment to fnetune it for | Anne Floquet ʀType I: Innovations that take the form of their own farm. For example, integrated crop agricultural inputs or standardised pro- protection measures are developed by com- Small-scale farmers are constantly cesses can be transferred relatively easily bining scientifc fndings about pests with innovating, either inspired by prac- from one person or place to another. This the farmers’ skills in assessing the condition is the case, for example, with seed or a food- of their crops. Afer groups of farmers have tices they have seen elsewhere or, less processing method. thus developed technical processes and have frequently, coming up with their own ʀ Type II: Innovations that are not easy to validated them, their fndings can be shared inventions. However, it is only rarely transfer from one place to another are in similar areas and among similar farmers. that enough support is provided for those that farmers need to adapt to their In a diferent environment, however, new local conditions. These innovations are adjustments will be needed. these innovations to be validated and ofen more complex and require a learning Type III innovations can be supported by adopted by other small-scale farmers process. Most innovations related to the helping to forge linkages between all relevant on a significant scale and with visible management of natural resources fall into actors to network and negotiate around the this category. Obstacles hindering their use conditions for transaction, to lobby govern- impact. may be, for example, lack of manpower or ment authorities etc. Here, too, experiences of ready cash or because the farmers are made elsewhere can provide a source of Innovations – particularly when taken up by operating in a high-risk environment. inspiration but each new situation requires many farmers – can bring about systemic ʀiƔŬħ 222ɐ These involve a chain of innova- that the people involved create their own change. In essence, the way that farmers’ tions. Technical change ofen generates fur- shared vision and agree on specifc ways of innovations spread does not difer from ther technical, organisational or institu- interacting with each other. how any other kind of innovation spreads. tional innovations, some of which may go Enabling conditions are needed to pro- It depends on the type of innovation. Basi- beyond the sphere of infuence of individu- mote innovation among farmers or between cally three types can be diferentiated, with al producers and require linkages with oth- farmers and other development actors. For increasing degrees of complexity and scale. er actors right up to high-level decision- researchers, working together with farm- makers.

7-2016 | Dossier Farmer innovation 27

ers requires investment of much more time over to farmer trainers in order to increase researchers, integration of diferent types of and efort to produce publishable scientifc the cost-efectiveness and sustainability of knowledge must become a plus point in their results, compared with doing on-station the processes. publications. To encourage agricultural research. For agricultural advisors, the con- advisers to work with numerous small-scale straints are more of a structural nature. The | Spreading farmer-led innovation farmers (rather than a few large ones), incen- extension agencies seldom recognise the processes tive mechanisms must be developed within capacity of farmers to innovate, particularly In order to multiply farmer-led innovation their organisations, such as awarding prizes of small-scale farmers. The hierarchal struc- processes and bring about change on a sig- for the outcomes of such processes. To be ture of extension has difculties in accom- nifcant scale, several reforms are needed. able to take on these tasks, agricultural advis- modating approaches that call for fexibility, Long-term and competitive funding mecha- ers need to gain skills; their profession and initiative and the ability to respond to farm- nisms to support innovation should elicit training must be redefned. | | ers’ demands. The functioning of extension proposals by farmers and their organisations normally involves passing on centrally decid- to carry out the work with the support of ser- Translation: Lis Liesicke & Ann Waters-Bayer ed content in the form of simple messages. vice providers of their choice. The process In some projects, approaches of participa- should be funded until the phase of broad tory development of innovations coming dissemination. This calls for recognising the from farmers and elsewhere have brought farmers’ innovative capacity so that they together groups of farmers, researchers and dare draw on their own experience and Dr. Anne Floquet extension agents in the stages of testing and knowledge in formulating their demand. is an agricultural econo- learning about Type II and III innovations. Participation in such processes led by mist in Benin. She works in Sometimes, the facilitation of the work in small-scale farmers needs to be attractive for teaching and research and these groups has even been partly handed agricultural researchers and advisers. For in an NGO.

Advertisement

5,50 € | 7,80 sFr www.welt-sichten.org

12-2015/1-2016 DEZEMBER/JAN UAR

KRIEG GEGEN DEN AFRI IS: Neuer Terror, alte Dummheiten KA: Die Geber zahlen für fragwürdige Wahlen KOLUMBIEN: Der Friedensschluss und seine Feinde

MAGAZIN FÜR GLOBALE

MAGAZINE FOR GLOBAL DEVELOPMENT AND ECUMENICAL COOPERATION ENTWICKLUNG UND ÖKU

MENISCHE ZUSA MMENARBEIT

The magazine for people who want to find out more.

JUNI The global economy and development policy 6-2016

www.welt-sichten.org Climate change and environmental protection 5,805,50 € | 7,80 sFr

Peace issues and the role of religions Was taugen Indie den Handelsabkommen? Fängen der Mafia AGRARINDUSTRIE EUROPA-AFRIKA:SAND-ABBAU: Buschfleisch auf dem Speiseplan Vitamine aus der Tüte analyses, questions, explains and makes its readers KOLUMBIEN: Umschlag_ws12-15.indd 1

ENARBEIT ZUSAMM curious. The magazine contains reports and interviews on the MENISCHE ENTWICKLUNG UND ÖKU countries of the South and global issues – and brings them right MAGAZIN FÜR GLOBALE Neue Chancen to your door. für die Kurden objective questioning Why not give us a try! thorough To order your free subscription, go to www.welt-sichten.org or ring +49 (0)69-58098-138

23.05.2016 16:08:51

Dossier | 7-2016 28 Imprint

This dossier is a supplement to the July 2016 Design: Silke Jarick, Angelika Fritsch Editorial ofce “welt-sichten” issue of . POB 50 05 50 Responsible: 60394 Frankfurt/Main Concept and editing: Dr. Ann Waters-Bayer Dr. Bernd Bornhorst (Misereor) www.welt-sichten.org (Prolinnova/KIT), Dr. Sabine Dorlöchter-Sul- ser (Misereor), Gabriela Quiroga (Prolinnova/ The views expressed by the authors To order, contact: KIT), Prof. Dr. Bettina Haussmann (McKnight named do not necessarily refect those of [email protected] Foundation), Anja Ruf (for ) the publisher.

Advertisement

is the German Catholic Bishops’ Organisation for Development Cooperation. For over 50 years, Misereor has been committed to fighting poverty in Africa, the Near East, Asia, Oceania and Latin America. Misereor’s partner organisations work with people in need, irrespective of ethnic background, gender, religion or nationality.

Change cannot come from outside. Misereor therefore supports Bischöfliches Hilfswerk initiatives driven and owned by the poor and the disadvantaged, MISEREOR e.V. according to the principle of helping people to help themselves. Mozartstr. 9 Project work is defined and designed according to the local 52064 Aachen / Germany people’s priorities and implemented by them – as a step toward Phone +49 (0)241 442 0 improving their lives sustainably. Fax +49 (0)241 442 188 [email protected] For further information, please visit our website www.misereor.org