The activities to be carried out to implement changes

5.3 The activities to be carried out to implement changes

As has been mentioned above, when see-ing the two approaches of blueprint and PLA respectively as ‘ideal type’ concepts, it seems unlikely that agricultural projects, aimed at achieving sustainable landscape stability and increased agricultural pro-duction, following those individual ‘ideal’

concepts, will succeed. This is largely due to the socio-political environment, which may not promote effective participation.

‘Effective participation’ refers to the power and the right of people to use that power to shape decisions which affect their lives. When they cannot exercise this right, women and men are disempowered (Eade, 2000, p. 4). This therefore means that in the socio-political environment (see Figure 3.4 on page 41), the state, as represented by government institutions and civil society, in which “social move-ments become organized” (Eade, 2000, p.

5), must promote conditions in which this empowerment can take place. An effective market, which small-scale and subsistence farmers can access to use their endowment of exchange entitlement for the purpose of trading (see Sen and Drèze, 1999, p. 7) their produce, is an essential part of this.

In fact the three spheres of state, market, and civil society interface to evolve towards a democratic society. For our pur-pose however, subsistence farmers must have access to an effective market, if they are to be motivated to ‘grow’ from their direct entitlement (producing for their own needs only) towards having an exchange entitlement available. Once such open markets are available, small farmers may be motivated to take part in this

project aiming at improved food security and landscape stability.

5.3.2 Activities

Following the conceptual model of Fig-ure 2.4 (see page 41), the various activi-ties to be carried out are indicated in Table 5.3 (see page 78).

Expert environment

The process is initiated in the ‘expert environment’, where firstly a feasibility study is conducted. This study concen-trates on the socio-economic environment, endeavouring to assess variables such as the trends of per capita income and human development indices (HDI) in the area or region under observation. Economic resources, affecting economic develop-ment or economic stagnation in the long term are an important part of this study.

However, economic development is not considered on the bases of such economic factors alone. In order to arrive at some strategy factors, on which the approach to the project is to be based, historical, cul-tural, demographic, political and social factors should be included. Furthermore, ecological factors are of great importance when considering the potential for a suc-cessful implementation of a development project.

Socio-political environment

The historical, cultural, demographic, political and social factors come into play when assessing the population involved in subsistence farming and small-scale agri-culture.

Based on the information generated by a feasibility study and by their assessment of the socio-economic environment,

‘experts’ draw up an outline draft-project.

This, at some stage during the process of

Chapter 5 Researching the Situation to Define Strategies

setting up the project, will have to be dis-cussed with small-scale and subsistence farmers (groups) to obtain their willing-ness to lead research.

In that context an open and direct discus-sion between stakeholders, that is between the initiating outsiders and local farmers will have to take place. With Guijt (1998, p.13) important factors to be taken into account are:

• Fluctuating intensity of involvement It is likely that there will be a fluctuat-ing intensity of involvement by differ-ent groups over time in a range of monitoring tasks, such as data collec-tion, analysis and dissemination.

• The distinction between outsiders and local farmers

Some in the same group may offer a high level of participation, others in that group may offer none at all, thus remaining ‘outsiders’. Differences in power and influence exist between landed and landless farmers, female and male farmers. For instance it is most important that women farmers be involved in the monitoring process (see Figure 3.4 on page 41).

• The levels of participation

The local political context is likely to strongly influence what may be regarded as a feasible intensity and the manner in which local subsistence and small-scale farmers take part.

As the local small-scale and subsistence farmers will be the people managing ongoing innovation and change, they must be involved in the process of technologi-cal development and implementation of the project. As not all farmers will be interested to the same degree or able to participate in all aspects of the process

laid out in Figure 4.13 (see page 72), the discussions referred to here need to estab-lish the levels at which participation would occur. The following presents an example (Guijt, 1998, p. 14).

• A core of, for example, 10 farmers These come from farmer groups and have volunteered to become involved in strategic planning, data analysis of farmer-based experimentation, and designing/implementing the monitor-ing and evaluation process.

• Some 80 farmers

These comprise women and men, including community leaders and indi-vidual subsistence farmers. They are involved in joint experimentation, for instance regarding minimum soil till-age for soil conservation purposes, and/or intercropping crop production practices. Important aspects of their work is to be involved in key times of monitoring, evaluation and planning.

• General farming ‘public’ and commu-nity associations.

Activity-specific collaboration with these groups is undertaken. This gen-eral farming ‘public’ and community associations should entail at least some 30 communities and 400 to 500 small-scale and subsistence farmers, ready to adopt participatory measures.

The monitoring/evaluation findings of the experimental work will be shared with them as a spring board towards the wider community.

Farmer-led research and experi-mentation. A model on which a com-bined approach could be based is shown in Figure 5.3 below. In the context of agri-cultural development to achieve food security and landscape stability, this looks

The activities to be carried out to implement changes

at socio-political and economic empower-ment, regarded essential for economic growth.

Agricultural extension workers, selected for their ability to work according to a

‘people-first’ and ‘farmers-first’ approach (Burkey, 1993; Chambers et al.,1998), get involved with local subsistence and small-scale farmers along the lines indicated in the previous paragraph. They work with these selected people, and learn from and

with them from the farmer-led research, through its monitoring/evaluation process (see below). As the extension workers train a core of small local farmers, for instance in the use of soil conservation practices, these small farmers, and their farmer organizations, which are funds of local knowledge, strengthen their ability to change project identification and design. This then is applied to the farmer-led research in which say some 80 farmers

ECONOMIC

FIGURE 5.3. Worked out model for the combined approach. Adapted from Figure 7, page 31. Final Report OU Course TU874. © 2002, The Open University. Used with permission.

Chapter 5 Researching the Situation to Define Strategies

(women and men) take part. This increases the local knowledge underlying the research. In the socio-political envi-ronment this increases pressure towards good governance and allied economic development. If this repeated circular process is successful, potentially it could lead to a more stable small-scale farming community, by means of farmers discuss-ing results of their work with the wider community.

Evaluation of the experiment (involve-ment of the 80 farmers) may point to a desirability to set up a pilot scheme, involving a wider community of some 500 farmers, including the 80 farmers.

Once approved by funders, such a scheme might be set up by that, approximately 500 members strong, farming community.

Their specific monitoring and evaluation of the pilot scheme might lead to the design, again with their involvement, of a demonstration plot, which they would monitor, evaluate and control.

This produces increased local knowl-edge and increased influence in project design and therefore economic empower-ment. This means that if the demonstra-tion plot, upon evaluademonstra-tion by the farmers, is found to yield unsatisfactory results, the process can start again. Training by exten-sion workers of ten local farmers would make use of their increased understanding and know-how, leading to a new experi-ment, pilot scheme and demonstration plot.

If the demonstration plot is successful, funders, local institutions and farmer organizations, with ongoing monitoring, evaluation and control by farmer repre-sentatives (where possible the ten ‘origi-nal’ farmers) and extension workers, would enlarge the area under the revised production model, which should promote

a stable landscape, as well as increase and sustain food security. This would have a chance of contributing to economic growth.

5.4 The monitoring system

5.4.1 Introduction

From the above may follow that activity-specific monitoring, evaluation and the taking of control action by stakeholder user-owners, is vital if the sustainability of the agricultural process is to be ensured. Once user-owners, as designers of the project (and therefore model build-ers) are fully committed to the project, and a decision has been made to under-take it, measures of performance indica-tors (see Glossary), central to the monitoring process have to be defined (see Figure 3.4 on page 41). In this con-text, a clear definition of the aspiration, or expectations of participants should be regarded as essential.

5.4.2 The fundamental strategic steps

Following Guijt, 1998, the fundamental steps needed to set up a participatory indi-cator-based monitoring system are dis-cussed below. It is noted that these steps are not necessarily taken in the stated sequence. For example the selection of

‘indicators’ follows from the formulation of ‘objectives’, whereas clear indicators assist in the formulation of objectives.

1. Decide to undertake a participatory monitoring system.

As this participatory process involves a fairly sizeable group of people with