1. Participatory Research Aden Aw-Hassan Aleppo, April 28, 2005

2. FPR is NOT an extension program and is NOT a community development program. It is a research approach aimed at: Developing technologies and evaluating their performance with substantial and active input from farmers. Introduction

3. Why FPR? It is expected to increase research impact by: –Improving relevance of technology. –Reducing the research lag (development phase). –Reducing the adoption lag (early adoption). –Increasing adoption speed. It is expected to empower farmers through: –Giving them a say in research design & technology development –Building their technical and problem solving capacities, –Increasing farmers knowledge

4. Principles Can facilitate: –Group learning –Developing different circumstances –Spread of information 1.Working with a group of farmers: Farmers Interest Group

5. 2.Farmer Selection Farmers with similar interest on a specific technology (olive production with water harvesting, improving soil fertility, irrigation management, improved forage production). Farmers hosting experiments. Farmers joining the group evaluation.

6. 3.Farmers agreement with process The whole plan developed and agreed with farmers at the beginning of the season Clarify the process for the farmers from the beginning and get their input What is convenient for researchers may not be so for farmers, make sure that arrangements are mutually accommodating

7. 4.Participatory Research Process Timing of participation –Planning –Evaluation and observations: stage 1 stage 2 stage 3 stage 4 –Overall assessment of the results

8. Data Collection –How farmers will record their evaluation/observations: Individually by host farmers recording sheets. Individually by group of other farmers. Through facilitated group discussion. –Methods of data recording: Evaluation criteria (Farmers criteria, Researchers criteria) Evaluation sheets (individually) Participatory tools (scoring, ranking, using charts, etc.) - How do farmers monitor the improvement in their capacities and skills

9. Farmers filling varietal evaluation sheets

10. 5.Final assessment Discuss how the evaluation should be modified. Discuss if they suggest any changes.

11. Different FPR tools? RRA and PRA Participatory poverty assessment and Wealth ranking Community Resource mapping Gender and activity analysis Participator technology evaluation (PTE) Farmer interest groups Participatory land degradation assessment

12. RRA and PRA Diagnose the problem Identify potential solutions Determine the types of users who are most affected and could benefit the most Determine potential farmers participation in experimentation Tools: –Facilitated focus group discussions, use of cards, unstructured individual interviews, use of drawings or community mapping, historical trend analysis,

13. Participatory poverty assessment/wealth ranking Develop farmers own criteria on poverty and well- being indicators Solicit farmers assessment of relative poverty levels of different households and determining factors Identify farmers priorities for improving their well- being

14. Community resource mapping

15. Farmer Interest Groups Can facilitate: –Group learning through farmer-to-farmer exchange –Developing different circumstances (based on different farmers strategies and experiences) –Speedy diffusion of information(extension element) Needs: - good facilitation - clear learning program Its drawback is the cost

16. Farmer Field Schools Mainly building farmers knowledge of a problem so they can change their practices Strengthening of farmer research and decision- making capacity Mostly developed and used in the IPM programs This is now expanding to Integrated Crop Management and marketing areas (for example organic production)

17. Farmer Research Committees (CIALS) Build and support local communities to: – develop their own research capacity –Demand more effective R&D services

18. Participatory Technology Evaluation (PTE)? Farmers are involved in specific events for technology assessment (mid-season, at harvest, etc) Specific tools are used for soliciting farmers assessment of the technology –Facilitated Group discussions using cards, charts, voting, etc –Scoring forms (farmers score technologies based on agreed criteria including farmers)

19. Participatory land degradation assessment

20. Why participatory research?

21. Passive Collaborative Collegial Gradient of participation Degree of participation in decision-making Researcher- led Farmer led LowHigh Research type Extractive Empowered

22. Water and soil management Seeds of new varieties MFA Degree of particip ation High Intensity of knowledge required Maintaining crop varieties of different qualities Seeds of new varieties LFA Low Prioritizing livelihoods options Development of marketing network Collective action on CR management

23. Research lag and adoption lag Technology adoption Years Conventional research FPR 7 11 Impact of participatory research

29. What is required for successful FPR? Training of researchers Well defined approach with clear stages of planning, capacity building, experimentation, data collection, evaluation, feedback to users, and reflection. Genuine desire to incorporate farmers knowledge and realities into the research process Genuine desire to see the impact of research outputs on peoples livelihoods Commitment to continuous learning