‘They Said it Couldn't be Done’ Two Agricultural Development Projects in Kenya

Author(s):  
Jean M. Due
2016 ◽  
Vol 55 (S1) ◽  
pp. 67-83 ◽  
Author(s):  
RIC COE ◽  
JOYCE NJOLOMA ◽  
FERGUS SINCLAIR

SUMMARYAgricultural development projects frequently promote new crop production technologies for adoption at scale on the basis of research and pilot studies in a limited number of contexts. The performance of these production technologies is often variable and dependent on context. Using an example from the Agroforestry for Food Security Project in Malawi, that promoted agroforestry technologies for soil fertility enhancement, we explore the nature and implications of variation in performance across farmers. Mean effects of these technologies, measured by differences in maize yield between agroforestry and sole maize plots, were modest but positive. However, there was large variation in those differences, some explained by altitude, plot management and fertilizer use but with much unexplained. This represents risk to farmers. Those communicating with farmers need to be honest and clear about this risk. It can be reduced by explanation in terms of contextual factors. This should be an aim of research that can often be embedded in scaling up the promotion of agronomic innovations.


1997 ◽  
Vol 19 (3) ◽  
pp. 31-35
Author(s):  
Carlos Perez

Since the seventies, project managers have tried to incorporate farmers as active participants in projects. These efforts have been only partially successful. Typically, farmers' resources have been used, farmers have been interviewed, but farmers have not had a decisive role in the planning, implementation and evaluation of the projects. In this paper, I will attempt to address the issue of farmer participation in large-scale development programs initiated by nongovernmental organizations. Large-scale programs are defined here as those that can benefit over one thousand households. In particular, I seek to define the extent to which farmers can actively and conclusively participate in the design and implementation of development projects. I differentiate several forms of participation that can be basically placed into two groups: 1) those that inform, consult, and mobilize farmers in ways that facilitate the work of the implementing agency, and 2) those that promote the development of the analytical and problem-development skills of farmers through their active participation in project decision-making. I will point out that there is an apparent inherent contradiction between the way in which development projects are generally planned and implemented, and the active participation of beneficiaries in the definition of the project. I will show that this contradiction can be overcome. Grounding the discussion on the experience of some of CARE's Agricultural and Natural Resource projects (ANR), I will describe some project features that seem to be more conducive to facilitating the definition and implementation of project goals and activities jointly between project beneficiaries and agency staff. I will ground the discussion on the experience of some of the Agricultural and Natural Resource projects of CARE International (CARE stands for Cooperative for Assistance and Relief Everywhere) to describe some project features that seem to be more conducive to facilitating the definition and implementation of project goals and activities jointly between project beneficiaries and agency staff.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document