Sampling in the ABACO project

In both countries, farmers were selected from the groups that were part of the ABACO project.

Detailed information on how these farmers and groups were sampled to become part of the project is not available, although it is clear that two different strategies were followed in Kenya and Madagascar. In Madagascar, new groups were formed for the project on the basis of farmers’

interest to participate in co-designing CA systems. In the North, the new group included a pre-existing CA group of female farmers who had continued meeting after the end of the BV-Lac project and could therefore contribute a lot of knowledge to the group. In the South, there was no relevant pre-existing structure in the CA group, and membership was very fluid. Most farmers who

Research design

85

joined the group in the South were not very experienced with CA although they were aware of the concept through the previous BV-Lac project.

In Kenya, the ABACO project continued with the same FFSs that were part of the previous CA-SARD projects. Some of these FFSs existed even before that, and were involved in other activities such as the marketing of Aloe Vera. Other FFSs were formed for the CA-SARD project. In the ABACO project, activities tended to focus on 6 or 7 out of the 10 FFSs who were relatively active.

The other FFSs had problems of managing group processes, internal conflicts or had given up CA as a result of complete crop failure due to elephants (MoA local, personal communication, 08-09-2013).

4.8.2 Kenya

To limit the scope of the study, four FFSs were selected from nine FFSs involved in CA with the ABACO project. The selection represented the social and agro-ecological variety of Laikipia East in terms of average farm size, labour availability, average rainfall, and soil fertility. Information about these characteristics were obtained through various interviews with extension officers of Laikipia County. On this basis, Kilimo Hifadhi, Muramati, Mazingira and Kalalu FFSs were selected, of which the first two FFSs were located in the semi-arid zone with rainfall ranging from 450-900 mm/year and the last two FFSs were located in the semi humid/arid zone with rainfall ranging from 600-1100 mm/year.

For the adoption study with the RAA, a total of 95 smallholder farmers were interviewed in July-October 2013. One third (33) of the respondents were randomly selected from the four selected FFSs, referred to as ‘members’. From the immediate vicinity of these FFS farmers, another 62 non-FFS respondents were selected through geographical sampling starting with those living nearest to the FFS, referred to as ‘non-members’. The gender ratios were kept proportional with the district averages.

A follow-up questionnaire was held in May-June 2014 among 77 of the same sample assessing the actual adoption of CA practices. The repeat sample is smaller because 18 farmers had either moved away or were not available for an interview. In the repeat sample, the proportion of members was higher because members were easier to locate than non-members, while the gender balance and average age were not significantly different in both samples. To avoid a bias in the results, the panel data of the 77 respondents was used for all the analyses. The characteristics of the sample are described in section 7.2.1.

86 4.8.3 Madagascar

In Madagascar 100 farmers were selected, of which 30 were members of the ABACO groups. As ABACO was only active in two farmer groups, both were included in the sample and farmers were selected from them. In the commune of Amparahitsokatra, almost all members had to be interviewed to get to the target number of 15 farmers. In the commune of Ilafy, 15 farmers were selected by the chief of the area. Although some preferences for the random sampling could be made clear, little insight could be gained in the motivation of the chief to propose one farmer over another. The gender proportions of heads of households in the FFS sample were kept proportional to the district averages as much as possible. Sampling of non-member farmers followed geographical sampling. Because the villages were very small, and many farmers were away to work on the land, it was a challenge to find sufficient farmers at home that were available for interviews. Therefore, it was a priority to find enough farmers to fill in the questionnaire and less attention could be given to make sure that the sample of non-members was representative in terms of gender and age. This resulting in an overrepresentation of men relative to district averages. Of the non-members, practically everyone had heard about CA through the BV-Lac project that has been actively promoting CA in the area for the last 10 years, although few of them still practiced CA.

A follow-up questionnaire was held in March 2015 among 82 of the same sample assessing the actual adoption of CA practices. The repeat sample is smaller because 18 farmers had either moved away or were not available for an interview. As in Kenya, the proportion of members was higher in the repeat sample because members were easier to locate than non-members, while the gender balance and average age were not significantly different in both samples. To avoid a bias in the results, the panel data of the 82 respondents was used for all the analyses. The characteristics of the sample are described in section 7.2.2.

87 innovation system through their interactions with extension officers, through their participation in groups and projects, and through their interactions with agro-dealers and traders when buying inputs and selling outputs. Farmers are also deciding what practices are to be realized on their farm, and as such they are closely connected to the farming system.

Table 4-2 shows a schematic representation of the relation between the studied elements within the innovation system, and the farming system. The methods used to gain insight in the processes in the innovation system are stakeholder analysis based on semi-structured interviews and a Social Network Analysis. The method used to study the adoption of CA is the Reasoned Action Approach, together with FGDs and field observations.

Table 4-2 Overview of applied methods in relation to research questions

Method Objective RQ

Semi-structured interviews

(4.9.2)  Identify key stakeholders and their linkages in the innovation system

 Understand stakeholders’ legitimation and framing of CA

1 a 1 c Social network analysis

(4.9.3)  Understand linkages between stakeholders in the innovation system

1 a

Literature review (4.9.4)  Triangulate findings 1 b,c

Structured questionnaire:

(4.9.6)  Discuss adoption of CA, including gender

 Triangulate findings

 understand dynamics in the innovation system at field level and triangulate findings

 Triangulate findings

2 1 b