Reaching farmers beyond project beneficiaries - The Tem Sesiabun Gorado model for improving farmer-to-farmer extension approaches - Global Soil Week
←
→
Page content transcription
If your browser does not render page correctly, please read the page content below
Reaching farmers beyond
TMG Working Paper
project beneficiaries
The Tem Sesiabun Gorado model
for improving farmer-to-farmer
extension approaches
May 2019
2 TMG Working Paper Reaching farmers beyond project beneficiaries
3
Reaching farmers beyond
project beneficiaries
The Tem Sesiabun Gorado model for improving
farmer-to-farmer extension approaches
May 2019
Written by
Check Abdel Kader Baba
TMG Research gGmbH
Nicolas Patt
TMG Research gGmbH
Acknowledgements
We are indebted to the communities of Kabanou and Sinawongourou for
their active participation in the pilot of this approach.
We are very grateful to Annegret Flohr for her critical and constructive
contributions and to Katrin Wlucka for her exceptional support in the design
and development of the image toolboxes for Tem Sesiabun Gorado. Thanks
also to Larissa Stiem-Bhatia for her critical review of the document and
numerous inputs.
Finally, we wish to express our sincere gratitude to Melanie Djédjé, the pro-
ject manager at ProSOL Benin, and her team for their various contributions
and support.
Many thanks also to Wassihou Moussibahou Djima (APEM NGO), AbdoulKa-
birou Imorou (GERED NGO), Adam Loukmanou, (LASDEL), Hafissou Issiako
(Alafia NGO), Djalidou Aboudou Salifou (CERABE NGO), and Youssoufou
Ouassou (INUDE NGO) for their commitment and valuable support.
Photo 1: The Hamlet of Dah Kpaare in Kabanou. A small location neglected by extension workers.
© Kader Baba/TMG Research
Contact
Kader.baba@tmg-thinktank.com
4 TMG Working Paper Reaching farmers beyond project beneficiaries
5
Table of contents
Acknowledgment 2
List of acronyms 4
Why sustainable land management matters 6
Critical review of SLM technology promotion approaches in
Benin and sub-Saharan Africa 8
The Tem Sesiabun Gorado technology diffusion model
Context and background information 11
Framework and implementation approach 12
Key principles for the implementation of the TSG model 14
Results of the model implementation
Quantitative spread of SLM knowledge: number of farmers reached 16
Spatial spread of SLM knowledge: Farmers’ networks
extend project reach 16
Promoting women’s leadership to reduce the gender gap
among trained farmers 19
Making use of farmers’ capacities to increase time
and resource effectiveness 19
Self-sustaining production of farm inputs for
increased post-project sustainability 19
Key messages and considerations for replication 20
List of acronyms
TSG Tem Sesiabun Gorado
References 22
SLM Sustainable land management
ProSOL Projet Protection and réhabilittion des Sols pour améliorer la
sécurité alimentaire
NGO Non-governmental organization
APEM Association pour la Protection de l’Enfance Malheureuse
CERABE Centre de Recherche et d’Actions pour le Bien-être et la
Sauvegarde de l’Environnement
INUDE Institution Non Gouvernementale d’Union pour le Développe-
ment et pour l’Environnement
GERED Groupe d’études et de Recherches sur l’Environnement et le
Développement
LASDEL Laboratoire d’Etudes et de Recherche sur les Dynamiques
Sociales et le Développement Local6 TMG Working Paper Reaching farmers beyond project beneficiaries
7
Why sustainable land
management matters
he issue of soil degradation in
T Operationalizing self-sustaining
sub-Saharan Africa and community-led processes
In sub-Saharan Africa, an estimated 750
for SLM
million hectares1 of land are affected by In order to address those issues, scholars
soil degradation, constituting an area 20 and development institutions frequently
times the size of Germany. This affects call for «self-sustaining and communi-
about 180 million people, or roughly the ty-led processes»2 when promoting SLM
combined populations of France, Ger- technologies, emphasizing the central
many, and Poland. Among the most role of local communities in bringing suc-
affected people are smallholder farmers, cessful land management innovations to
who account for 80% of all farms across scale. This call is not per se new, as devel-
the region (AGRA, 2014) and heavily rely opment programmes have been promot-
on healthy soils to sustain and intensify ing participatory and community-based
food production (Brondeau, 2014). approaches since the late 1980s. However,
operationalizing this call to provide sus-
Growing efforts but limited tainable knowledge diffusion mechanisms
achievements in SLM has remained a persistent challenge for
researchers and development practition-
Despite growing investment in sustain-
ers to date. Its resolution requires that
able land management (SLM), the adop-
past approaches to technology promo-
tion of good practices among smallholder
tion be revisited in order to learn from
farmers remains low (Cordingley et al.,
and build on lessons learned, rather than
2015; Kirui, 2016). Challenges to SLM
trying to reinvent the wheel.
technology adoption, i.e., the sustained
uptake of the promoted innovations,
1 R. Lal et al. (eds.), 2016: Climate Change and
include knowledge diffusion issues at the multi-Dimensional Sustainability in African Ag-
local scale (Baba et al. 2016; Bunning et riculture. Climate Change and Sustainability in
al., 2016; World Bank, 2006), farmers’ Agriculture. Chapter 5, 61-95. Switzerland, 717p.
perceptions of the promoted technol-
2
https://www.icrisat.org/the-future-of-land-
ogies (Assogba et al., 2017; Drechsel et restoration-is-community-led-says-wle-icrisat-
al., 2005), and the quality of local stake- at-tropentag/
Photo 2: Cattle feeding on rice residues in Donwari Village, Kandi District.
holders’ participation in the design and
© Kader Baba/TMG Research
implementation of the promoting project
(Dolinska and d’Aquino, 2016; Sanz et al.,
2017).8 TMG Working Paper Reaching farmers beyond project beneficiaries
9
ing with other farmers (trainees, farm- (Dolinska and d’Aquino, 2016; Franzel et
er-learners) within their communities al., 2019).
Critical review of SLM 3
(Kiptot and Franzel, 2015). In contrast to
How can effective accountability mech-
approaches which consider farmers as
anisms be established between farm-
passive users of SLM technologies, farm-
er-trainers and trainees? Reaching
technology promotion
er-to-farmer extension approaches put
farmers beyond direct project benefi-
farmers in the centre of technology gen-
ciaries, and disadvantaged groups such
eration and dissemination (de Janvry et
approaches in Benin and
as women and youth in particular, can be
al., 2016; Ssemakula and Mutimba, 2011).
challenging without effective accounta-
A growing body of research conducted
bility mechanisms. Open discussions and
in sub-Saharan countries confirms the
sub-Saharan Africa
exchanges between farmer-trainers and
potential of farmer-to-farmer extension
trainees promote famers’ active involve-
approaches, especially in creating own-
ment and leadership in the selection of
ership of project interventions and sus-
technologies (Assogba et al., 2017; Drech-
taining technology adoption at local scale
sel et al., 2005), as well as in the devel-
(Franzel et al., 2019; Kiptot and Franzel,
opment of knowledge transfer mecha-
2015). However, these authors have also
nisms (Dolinska and d’Aquino, 2016; Sanz
identified limitations and challenges
et al., 2017), and help to build trusting
which need to be addressed to ensure the
and accountable relationships.
Approaches based on model imbalances to the disadvantage of mar- effective dissemination of agricultural
farmers tend to exclude less ginalised farmers (Taylor and Bhasme, innovations. These include the following Ensuring the sustainability of
2018). As a consequence, farmers, who critical questions:
privileged farmers farmer-to-farmer approaches
1
are unable to commit sufficient time and
space to demonstration plots, or who are
What incentives and other measures are requires a clear shift in extension
In Benin, as in most African countries,
SLM technologies have been promoted socially disadvantaged, face additional
necessary to motivate farmer-trainers workers’ priorities from techni-
over the longer term? Both financial and
using various extension approaches, challenges in accessing agricultural inno-
non-financial mechanisms have been
cal operations to a careful
including trainings and visits, demon- vations promoted through model farm-
used by development programmes to facilitation and promotion of
ers approaches. These approaches have
stration plots, and farmer field schools
also been criticized by both researchers
reward the services provided by farm- farmer leadership
(Mburu and Kiragu-Wissler, 2017). When er-trainers. If successfully implemented
implementing these approaches, a group and practitioners, who have described Establishing self-sustaining approaches
processes are to be handed over to public
of farmers, often referred to as model them as top-down, ineffective in reach- on the ground will require a shift in the
extension systems, low-cost motivation
farmers, contact farmers, or project-in- ing beyond the circle of model farmers, promotion of sustainable land manage-
schemes must be established to ensure
itial beneficiaries, is targeted based on expensive to operate, financially unsus- ment practices from professional exten-
sustainability (Franzel et al., 2015). Such
predetermined criteria, often including tainable, and heavily dependent on exter- sion to measures with the capacity to
schemes are crucial to minimizing frus-
their capacity to host demonstration nal extension agents (Anderson, 2008; build local networks of well-organized
trations that develop over longer periods
plots and adopt promoted technologies Feder et al., 2010; Franzel et al., 2015; farmers who are empowered to take
and result in significant dropout rates
(Kondylis et al., 2014). Though presented Ssemakula and Mutimba, 2011). the lead in SLM technology promotion
among farmer-trainers (Franzel et al.,
as community-centred, these extension and knowledge diffusion. Achieving this
approaches tend to prioritise wealthy,
The farmer-to-farmer extension 2019; Kiptot and Franzel, 2015).
2
will require the investment of time and
progressive farmers, often known to approach faces sustainability What capacity development do farmer-
resources to develop farmer-trainers’
trainers need to confidently transfer
extension agents as early adopters, at challenges at practical level capacities and abilities, and a shift in the
knowledge and build trust-based rela-
the expense of resource-poor farmers, role of extension workers from promotion
As an alternative to training-and-visit tionships with their trainees? Training
in particular women and youth (Kondy- to facilitation.
approaches and farmer field schools, modules for development projects are
lis et al., 2017, 2014). For instance, the
farmer-to-farmer extension approaches often designed to strengthen farmers’ Unless, these issues are carefully ana-
minimum requirement for demonstra-
have attracted increasing interest over technical competences and focus on lysed and properly addressed, farmer-
tion plots usually varies between 0.25
the last decade. Defined as the provi- technical operations. However, support- to-farmer extension approaches will con-
and 0.5 ha (Liniger et al., 2011), while
sion of extension services (information, ing farmer-trainers in building legitimacy tinue to be dependent on the services of
smallholder farmers in Kenya and Ethi-
training, support) from farmers to farm- and confidence within their community professional external facilitators (public
opia operate farms of less than 1 ha on
ers, the approach relies on a network of and effectively addressing socio-cultural external agents, NGOs, etc.) and the call
average (Rapsomanikis, 2015). More
local farmers (farmer-trainers or farmer barriers and other barriers that can arise for self-sustaining and community-led
over, selecting model farmers based on
extension agents) who are often selected in the processes of technology adoption processes in sustainable land manage-
their political position or social status
by their peers, trained by the project and and knowledge transfer, is as important ment will remain wishful thinking. As
reinforces local hierarchies and power
given responsibility to share their learn- as the mastering of technical operations pointed out by John Conrood, Executive10 TMG Working Paper Reaching farmers beyond project beneficiaries
11
Vice President of the Hunger Project3, This paper contributes to this debate by
there is an urgent need to move away introducing the Tem Sesiabun Gorado
The Tem Sesiabun Gorado
from professional facilitation towards (TSG) model. The TSG model is an alter-
the use of well-mobilized farmer groups native farmer-to-farmer knowledge
who are empowered to take the lead in diffusion approach. It is based on a net-
technology diffusion model
the solution of their own problems. work of community-based agents (locally
referred as «Tem Sesiabun Gorado») and
«A paid extension worker lessons-learned from community-based
cannot possibly reach thou- health services in Benin. Framed by local
sands of remote small-holder learning processes and social networks, The Tem Sesiabun Gorado (TSG) model is a farmer-to-farmer
this model is built on the concept of
farmers with improved tech- technology diffusion model. It seeks to address common shortcomings
«social debt» as an incitation mechanism
niques, but a well-mobilized to promote effective knowledge diffusion
of conventional farmer-to-farmer extension approaches, in particular
community always can.» from project beneficiaries to non-bene- with respect to accountability mechanisms and sustaining the
John Coonrod, Executive ficiaries. motivation of farmer trainers. The overall objective of this model is
Vice President, The Hunger to ensure effective knowledge sharing and technology diffusion from
3 http://www.thebrokeronline.eu/Blogs/To-
Project. wards-a-food-secure-world/Rural-governan- project beneficiaries to communities.
ce-that-works
1
Figure 1: Location of research sites in northern Benin. The
GIZ project has been active in the villages of Kabanou and Context and background Understand farmers’ constraints in the
Sinawongourou since 2015. implementation of specific technologies,
© TMG Research gGmbH 2019 information
their preferences and support needs
2
The TSG diffusion model was devel- Go beyond the «quick-fix solutions» often
Sinawongourou
oped within the frame of accompanying proposed to farmers by field techni-
research carried out by TMG Research cians in order to design adaptable, con-
Kabanou in Benin to support the implementation text-specific solutions to their implemen-
of a GIZ4 project on soil protection and tation challenges
rehabilitation to improve food security
(as part of the Special Initiative «One
World. No Hunger»).
3 Understand the socio-cultural factors
that prevent effective knowledge diffu-
Municipality of Kandi sion between project beneficiaries and
It benefits from four years of quantita- non-beneficiaries.
Municipality of Bembéréké
tive (household surveys) and qualitative
The findings of this process were later
Study Sites research5 implemented in two villages6 in
presented to both farmer groups (project
northern Benin (figure 1). This contributes
beneficiaries and non-beneficiaries) dur-
to solid understandings of farmers’ living
ing village-level consultations that form
0 25 50 75 100 conditions and production assets, prior
N the first step in the TSG model implemen-
experience with sustainable land man-
tation approach. (See Figure 3).
agement practices, and perception of
promoted technologies. TSG also builds
4 German Development Cooperation
on the findings of a reflective process
5 Reports can be downloaded from
that consisted of critical and open dis- TMG Research webpage
cussions with both project beneficiaries 6 Sinawongourou is a prototype village where
and non-beneficiaries about the pro- basic conditions that support SLM technology
moted technologies and the implemen- adoption (access to market, social infrastructure,
tation approach (referred to as the Deep credit, etc.) are met. In contrast to this, access
to the village of Kabanou is difficult and farmers
Reflection Process). Engaging farmers face challenges to access credit and market
in reflective processes was essential to: facilities.
1912 TMG Working Paper Reaching farmers beyond project beneficiaries
13
Framework and The framework in Figure 2 offers a visual Process Goal 3 Multiplication of trainings, follow up and
adaptation of technologies
summary of how social debt is paid down
implementation approach
across generations of farmer-learners
3rd generation learners
At the core of the model is the so called through the provision of demand-driven
Tem Sesiabun Gorado (TSG), which lit- support. The main process goals and
erally means «community-based agent» mechanisms, which are the pillars for the Process Goal 2 Breaking socio-cultural
barriers by establishing
in Bariba, a language spoken in north- success of the model, are also described trust-based trainer-learner
ern Benin. The TSG are elected by their in this figure. relationship
2nd generation learners
communities and entrusted with the
At the practical level, this framework has 125
responsibility to train their fellow farm-
been operationalized through the nine
ers in the application of improved SLM
steps summarized in Figure 3.
practices. The number of TSG per hamlet
25 Process Goal 1 Establishing
or village neighborhood is also decided While each of these steps contributes responsibilty and
1st generation learners
by communities, based on their size and to the success of the process, the initial accountability
spatial spread. village consultations are of particular
strategic importance. The core objec- 5
Each Tem Sesiabun Gorado (TSG)
tive of these consultations is to ensure
assumes responsibility for training five
that both farmer groups (learners and
farmer-learners7 in the application of Initially trained farmers
trainers) develop a common and shared
SLM technologies she/he has learned in
understanding of the project’s upscaling
order to repay the «social debt» she/he
objectives, of the barriers that hinder Social recognition and
contracted towards the project and her/ Payment of social debt through training
the effective diffusion of SLM technol- 5 farmer-learners
public acknowledge-
his own community. This debt comprises ment of efforts
ogies by each farmer-group, and of the
free trainings, farm inputs and resources,
urgent need to remove these barriers.
as well as professional technical support, Demand-driven support through trust-based trainer/
Mechanisms to break down the barriers
which the Tem Sesiabun Gorado receives learner relationships at local scale
and concrete approaches to effective
on behalf of their respective communities.
technology diffusion are also discussed Figure 2: Framework of the Tem Sesiabun Gorado model implemented in northern Benin
Farmer-learners who successfully exper- and agreed upon in the course of these © TMG Research gGmbH 2019
iment with SLM subsequently take up consultations; this includes the develop-
the role of TSG themselves, assuming ment of selection criteria for TSG, their
responsibility for knowledge dissemina- specific tasks and responsibilities, as well
Model adjustment, adaptation, and re-evaluation
tion by selecting and training five new as evaluation and review protocols.
farmer-learners (i.e. a second generation
of farmer-learners). In this way, the pro- 7 The term «farmer-learner» is prioritized over
Assessment and continuous documentation
Continuous dialogue with farmer groups
terms such as «apprentices» or «trainees». We Village consultations Sharing or facilitating On-farm follow up
ject’s effects are multiplied, with each
consider learning as a two-way process that and ownership access to seed inputs to of promoted
generation consisting of five times as value the targeted farmers’ experience. The negotiation farmer-learners technologies
many farmer-trainers, as well as train- CBA and farmers he identified interact and learn
ees, as the previous generation. This pro- mutually from each other. Although the topic
discussed may be mastered by the CBA, others
cess can be continued with a minimum
input is needed to ensure a successful implemen-
of coaching from field technicians until tation.
Participatory selection
Training of
Participatory
a critical number of farmers is reached of the evaluation and progress
farmer-learners
Tem Sesiabun Gorado restitution
within a given location, after which it
becomes self-replicating.
Public
Training of the Selection of
acknowledgement of
Tem Sesiabun Gorado farmer-learners
diffusion efforts
Conditions for model upscaling and replication
Figure 3: Implementation steps for the Tem Sesiabun Gorado diffusion model in northern Benin. Grey-colored
shapes indicate community-based processes. Yellow-colored shapes are iterative actions to be considered at
each step of the model implementation. © TMG Research gGmbH 201914 TMG Working Paper Reaching farmers beyond project beneficiaries
15
Key principles for the
implementation of the TSG model
1 3 5
Ensure a shared understanding Ensure farmers’ agreement on Clear roles and responsibilities
of knowledge diffusion challenges the principle of ‘social debt’ in for effective knowledge diffusion
and the long-term risks for the order to build commitment and mechanisms
community if these are not prop- accountability Knowledge transfer is a two-way commu-
erly addressed Efforts to encourage farmers to take
nication channel that cannot be effective
unless farmer-trainers and farmer-learn-
During the village consultations, it is fun- responsibility for knowledge diffusion
ers establish bilateral partnerships
damental that project beneficiaries and within their communities through the
based on trust, mutual respect, and
non-beneficiaries openly discuss specific concept of social debt cannot work unless
clearly defined roles.
concerns, constraints, and challenges farmers understand and pledge to uphold
associated with project activities and its mechanisms. It is important that extension work-
knowledge transfer. It is also important ers facilitate this process carefully to
A public commitment to the role of Tem
to ensure that farmers agree on both the ensure trainers understand their role and
Sesiabun Gorado creates ownership and
necessity of addressing challenges and attributions. Likewise, it is necessary to
strengthens the social responsibility that
approaches to their resolution, including ensure farmer-learners are aware that
underpins social debt.
the collaborative development of knowl- knowledge diffusion needs demand-driven
edge sharing mechanisms.
4 support, i.e. that learners take an active
2
role in the acquisition and application of
Realistic expectations on TSG knowledge in experiments on the ground.
ensure long-term motivation and
Ensure selection mechanisms and
criteria are inclusive easy the repayment of the social 6
debt Acknowledge the risk of quality
It is crucial that farmers participate in
the development of the criteria applied The TSG model strongly assumes that loss over multiple generations
to select their representatives. Enabling farmers have the potential and capacity of farmer-to-farmer knowledge
farmers to reflect on the options for to provide context-based and effective transfer and anticipate correc-
support to other farmers if they are well-
effective knowledge/technology diffusion tive actions
and to define both the number of Tem trained and empowered to do so.
Sesiabun Gorado and their respective Time and resources must be invested
To ensure long-term motivation and com-
locations will foster ownership within the in order to safeguard the quality of
mitment, it is crucial that the workload
community and ensure effective spatial knowledge transfers across multiple
assigned to and expectations placed on
coverage. generations of learners. The associated
the TSG are manageable. For instance, challenges must be anticipated by pro-
Finally, it is vital that farmers’ choices the practice of working with cohorts of ject designers and addressed as capac-
are respected and that farmers selected five farmer-learners was discussed and ity-development objectives during the
to act as TSGs are not influenced by agreed upon during the village consulta- implementation of this farmer-to-farmer
external political motivations or social tions. model. This also requires a shift in the
privilege. provision of extension services to ensure
Limiting the knowledge transfer process
to a time frame of one or two growing that workers have the necessary facili-
seasons, for example, minimizes the tation skills in addition to the relevant
dropout rate among farmer-trainers and technical competences.
addresses long-term motivation issues
that frequently arise in standard farmer-
to-farmer approaches.16 TMG Working Paper Reaching farmers beyond project beneficiaries
17
Results of the model
Kabanou village Sinawongourou village
implementation
800
728
600
Quantitative spread of SLM ple, eight hamlets/camps8 that had not
previously in contact with the project 400
knowledge: number of farmers 327
were reached by these means. This was
reached occurred as a result of farmers taking
200 197
The 49 TSG who were initially selected, the initiative in order to repay their social 152
trained, and assigned responsibility for debt. Through the second generation of
farmer-learners, an additional three 28 21
knowledge diffusion in 2018 reached 0
a total of 349 farmers across the two hamlets were reached (Figure 5). As a
result, the spatial dissemination of the Tem Sesiabun Farmers - learners Farmers - learners Tem Sesiabun Farmers - learners Farmers - learners
villages (Kabanou and Sinawongourou) Gorado (1st - generation) (2nd - generation) Gorado (1st - generation) (2nd - generation)
within the first growing season. These promoted technologies and practices has
349 new learners, of whom 35 % are improved significantly. Figure 5 highlights
Figure 4: Reach of farmer-learners through the TSG technology diffusion model (field data, April 2019).
women, are referred to as 1st genera- this development and indicates the loca-
tion farmer-learners. This constitutes tions reached during the initial trainings
a multiplying factor of about 7; in other (pink bars indicating TSG), the first grow-
words, each TSG reached 7 new farmers ing season (yellow bar indicating 1st gen-
on average. During the second growing eration farmer-learners), and the second
season, about 65% of the first-gener- growing season (green bar indicating 2nd Tem Sesiabun Gorado
ation farmer-learners (n=217) selected generation farmer-learners).
new farmer-learners (based on field Overall, the implementation of the TSG 1st generation farmer-learners
data, April 2019), reaching out to 1055 model shows that entrusting farmers
new farmers (38% are women) across the with clear and strong leadership in SLM
two villages. These numbers are expected technology promotion approaches can
2nd generation farmer-learners
to increase over the course of this season enable projects to meet their quantita-
as the selection process is still ongoing tive expectations in terms of reaching
in both villages. farmers. Moreover, the improved spatial
Figure 5 shows the reach of new farmers diffusion of SLM knowledge could provide
a strong basis for post-project sustain- Sinawongourou
by the TSG technology diffusion model
in different sub-locations within the two ability.
villages.
8 Dispersed habitats with links to a central village
Spatial spread of SLM knowledge: where small or large groups of people live on a
seasonal (farmers) or permanent (pastoralists)
Farmers’ networks extend project basis.
reach
The findings also show that carefully
designed community processes that Kabanou
give ownership to communities stimulate 0 50 100 150 200
farmers’ social responsibility, account-
ability, and self-initiative. This empow-
ers farmers to activate their networks, Figure 5: Spatial distribution of farmer-learners reached (in numbers) through the implementation
of the TSG model. Yellow bars not supported by a pink bar represent hamlets or village neighbor-
thereby extending the effective reach of
hoods initially not covered by GIZ-project activities and reached through the implementation of the
project interventions. Through the gen- TSG model. Green bars not supported by yellow bars are new hamlets reached during the second
eration of farmer-learners, for exam- year of model implementation.18 TMG Working Paper Reaching farmers beyond project beneficiaries
19
Promoting women’s leadership Self-sustaining production
to reduce the gender gap among of farm inputs for increased
trained farmers post-project sustainability
The pilot trial of the TSG model in north- In the process of transferring gained
41 % 46%
ern Benin has shown that including knowledge to five new farmers (payment
Kabanou women and men equally as communi- of social debt), the TSG is requested to
50 % 50 % 59 % 54 % ty-based agents reduces gender imbal- identify those farmer-learners, train
ances among farmer-learners across them, provide them with seed inputs and
generations of learners. This is illustrated offer follow up services. This responsi-
by a comparison of the trials in Kabanou bility of providing seed inputs to farm-
Tem Sesiabun Farmers - learners Farmers - learners
Gorado (1st - generation) (2nd - generation) and Sinawongourou, where the effects of er-learners encourages participants to
the gender ratio among TSG are clearly establish their own seed stock using var-
reflected in the gender ratio among 1st ious innovative strategies, such as plant-
72 % 20 % and 2nd generation farmer-learners (Fig- ing fertilizing plants within their home
38 %
ure 6). gardens or in the vicinity of houses and
Sinawongourou camps, or planting seed trees in the cen-
This highlights the benefits for SLM pro-
62 % 73 % 80 % tre of yam or manioc fields to prevent
jects of maintaining gender balance in the cattle damage.
selection of initial project beneficiaries
and suggests that assigning leadership Around 38% of farmers who planted fer-
roles to women is likely to increase the tilizing plants were able to harvest and
female male
number of women among the project’s secure their own stock (Figure 7). As a
indirect beneficiaries. result, farmer-learners did not have to
rely on project donations (external funds)
Figure 6: Gender distribution of the community-based agents and their farmer-learners in the vil-
lage of Kabanou and Sinawongourou © TMG Research gGmbH 2019
Making use of farmers’ capacities to receive seed inputs but could rely on
to increase time and resource the TSG to provide these inputs. This out-
effectiveness come was secured for both 1st and 2nd
generation farmer-learners, effectively
Transferring responsibility for the dif- reducing the communities’ dependency
fusion process to farmers (with basic on external funding and safeguarding
training provided through extension post-project sustainability.
agents) and supporting their efforts to
share their learnings with communities In conclusion, the implementation of the
proved to be more effective than con- TSG model not only promotes sustaina-
ventional approaches to the promotion of bility but also delivers financial savings
SLM technology (such as demonstration for projects in relation to seed inputs,
plots, farmer-field schools, or reliance transportation, and transaction costs.
Sinawongourou
on external extension agents). The pilot
project suggests that the TSG diffusion
model is highly effective in reaching more
farmers within a shorter period of time
as demonstrated by the numbers reached
Kabanou over its year-long implementation phase.
With its ability to up-scale activities and
0 40 80 120 160
extend the reach of SLM promotion pro-
jects by activating farmers’ networks,
Cultivated fertilizing plants Managed to secure own seed stock this model could deliver significant time
and cost savings and relieve pressure on
field technicians.
Figure 7: Securing seed stock for 2nd generation farmer-learners (field data, January 2019)20 TMG Working Paper Reaching farmers beyond project beneficiaries
21
A GIZ soil rehabilitation project in Benin Key message #2: Promoting
recently picked up on the TSG knowledge
women’s leadership in technology
Key messages and
diffusion model and used the approach
as a core component in its upscaling diffusion reduces gender inequali-
strategy. In applying this model to dif- ties among farmer-learners.
considerations for replication
ferent contexts, the processes must be
Various patterns of exclusion can hinder
adapted to the socio-cultural conditions
the effective transfer of knowledge from
and realities on the ground. The follow-
farmer-trainers to other farmers, espe-
ing messages offer some guidance on
cially if gender and other socio-cultural
approaching this task.
differences are not accounted for in the
Key message #1: Technologies selection of farmer-trainers.
don’t travel naturally! We need to Male farmer-trainers tend to select male
devise appropriate mechanisms trainees, while female trainers tend to
that stimulate knowledge sharing give priority to women when selecting
their learners. Facilitating the selection
among farmer groups. of female farmer-trainers and giving
In promoting SLM technologies, it is them a clear role and responsibilities in
important to acknowledge that tech- technology diffusion is instrumental to
nologies do not travel naturally and that reaching more female learners among
socio-cultural factors hinder knowledge SLM project beneficiaries.
sharing between project beneficiaries
and the rest of the community9. Facil- Key message #3: Farmer-to-
itating exchange about these barriers farmer extension requires room
among farmers will build confidence for reflection, capacity-building,
among farmer-trainers and communi- and accountability mechanisms
ty-members and validate their involve-
ment in knowledge diffusion.
between model farmers and the
community.
Ensuring that pre-existing learning chan-
nels and farmers’ social networks are In order to achieve the sustained uptake
integrated into SLM technology diffusion of SLM technologies, the decision by
mechanisms reinforces ownership and farmers to apply and adopt technolo-
helps to account for ethnic diversity and gies must be a conscious one rather than
heterogeneity issues at the village level. being driven by project performance indi-
cators and other incentives.
In promoting SLM best practices, exten-
sion agents tend to focus on technical Giving farmers the opportunity to reflect
operations and give little time to farmers’ on the promoted technologies and their
self-reflection on promoted technologies own capacities during the implementation
and innovation capacities. As a result, phase of the project is a crucial step in
there is a clear need to revise the work addressing the challenges of technology
packages of extension agents in order diffusion and post-project sustainability
to integrate trainings on facilitation and issues. Reflecting on the promoted tech-
empowering farmer representatives to nologies not only builds ownership among
lead technology adoption and diffusion. participating farmers but also reinforces
accountability among trainers and train-
9 Baba, 2017: concept notes of the farmer-led ees. Ultimately, this reflection process
SLM technology diffusion model. Submitted to unlocks innovative capacities and sup-
Photo 3: The Tem Sesiabun Gorado and their farmer-learners in Koussounin Village of Kabanou. ProSOL–GIZ on December 2017 ports the collaborative development of
© Kader Baba/TMG Research
practical alternatives and context-spe-
cific solutions to SLM implementation
challenges.22 TMG Working Paper Reaching farmers beyond project beneficiaries
23
References
Sanz, M.J., Vente, J. de, Chotte, J.-L., Bernoux, M., Kust, G., Ruiz, I., Almagro, M., Alloza,
AGRA, 2014. Africa Agriculture Status Report. Climate change and smallholder agriculture
J.-A., Vallejo, R., Castillo, V., Hebel, A., Akhtar-Schuster, M., 2017. Sustainable Land
in sub-Saharan Africa, Climate Change and Smallholder Agriculture in Sub-Saha-
Management contribution to successful land- based climate change adaptation
ran Africa. Nairobi, Kenya. https://doi.org/http://hdl.handle.net/10568/42343
and mitigation. A Report of the Science-Policy Interface. Bonn.
Anderson, J.R., 2008. Background Paper For The World Development Report: 2008 Agricul-
Ssemakula, E., Mutimba, J.K., 2011. Effectiveness of the Farmer-To-Farmer Extension Model
tural Advisory Services. World Dev. 44.
in Increasing Technology Uptake in Masaka and Tororo Districts of Uganda. J. Ag-
Assogba, S.C., Akpinfa, É., Gouwakinnou, G., Stiem, L., 2017. La Gestion Durable des Terres : ric. Ext., Ssemakula Mutimba Cell 39, 30–46.
Analyse d ’expériences de projets de développement agricole au Bénin. Potsdam.
Taylor, M., Bhasme, S., 2018. Model Farmers , Extension Networks and the Politics of Agri-
Brondeau, F., 2014. Comment sécuriser l’accès au foncier pour assurer la sécurité alimen- cultural Knowledge Transfer. J. Rural Stud. 64, 10.
taire des populations africaines : éléments de réflexion (No. 14914), Vertigo, Avan- https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jrurstud.2018.09.015
cées cinématographiques 2014. Paris.
Cordingley, J.E., Snyder, K.A., Rosendahl, J., Kizito, F., Bossio, D., 2015. Thinking outside the
plot: Addressing low adoption of sustainable land management in sub-Saharan
Africa. Curr. Opin. Environ. Sustain. 15, 35–40.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cosust.2015.07.010
de Janvry, A., Sadoulet, E., Rao, M., 2016. Adjusting extension models to the way farmers
learn. Learning for adopting workshop., FERDI Workshop. Berkeley.
Dolinska, A., d’Aquino, P., 2016. Farmers as agents in innovation systems. Empowering far-
mers for innovation through communities of practice. Agric. Syst. 142, 122–130.
https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.agsy.2015.11.009
Drechsel, P., Olaleye, A., Adeoti, A., Thiombiano, L., Barry, B., Vohland, K., 2005. Adoption
driver and constraints of resource conservation technologies in sub-saharan Afri-
ca, FAO, IWMI, ….
Feder, G., Anderson, J.R., Birner, R., Deininger, K., 2010. Promises and realities of communi-
ty-based agricultural extension. Community, Mark. State Dev. 187–208.
https://doi.org/10.1057/9780230295018_12
Franzel, S., Degrande, A., Kiptot, E., Kirui, J., Kugonza, J., Preissing, J., Simpson, B., 2015.
NOTE 7 : Farmer-to-Farmer Extension 1–4.
Franzel, S., Kiptot, E., Degrande, A., 2019. Farmer-To-Farmer Extension : A Low-Cost
Approach for Promoting Climate-Smart Agriculture, in: T. S. Rosenstock et al.
(eds.) (Ed.), The Climate-Smart Agriculture Papers. Nairobi, Kenya, pp. 277–288.
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-92798-5
Kiptot, E., Franzel, S., 2015. Farmer-to-farmer extension: opportunities for enhancing per-
formance of volunteer farmer trainers in Kenya. Dev. Pract. 25, 503–517.
https://doi.org/10.1080/09614524.2015.1029438
Kirui, O.K., 2016. Economics of Land Degradation and Improvement – A Global Assessment
for Sustainable Development, in: Al., E.N. et (Ed.), . pp. 609–649.
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-19168-3
Kondylis, F., Mueller, V., Zhu, J., Zhu, S., 2017. Seeing is believing? Evidence from an extension
network experiment. J. Dev. Econ. 125, 1–41.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jdeveco.2016.10.004
Kondylis, F., Mueller, V., Zhu, S., 2014. Seeing is Believing? Evidence from an Extension Net-
work Experiment.
Liniger, H., Rima, M.S., Hauert, C., Gurtner, M., 2011. Sustainable Land Management in
Practice: Guidelines and Best Practices for Sub-Saharan Africa 246.
https://doi.org/978-92-5-1066904
Mburu, J., Kiragu-Wissler, S., 2017. Sustainable Land Management in Western Kenya: An
Analysis of Project-Based Interventions. Synthesis Report, IASS Working paper.
Potsdam.
Rapsomanikis, G., 2015. The economic lives of smallholder farmers. Fao 4, 48.
https://doi.org/10.5296/rae.v6i4.6320TMG Working Paper
May 2019
TMG – Think Tank for Sustainability
TMG Research gGmbH
EUREF-Campus 6-9
10829 Berlin, Germany
Telephone: (+49) 30 92 10 74 07_00
Email: info@tmg-thinktank.com
Website: www.tmg-thinktank.com
This publication is made possible with the financial
support by the German Federal Ministry for Economic
Cooperation and Development (BMZ).You can also read
