• Share
  • Email
  • Embed
  • Like
  • Save
  • Private Content
Farmers teaching farmers: challenges and opportunities of using volunteer farmers in technology dissemination
 

Farmers teaching farmers: challenges and opportunities of using volunteer farmers in technology dissemination

on

  • 778 views

Kiptot

Kiptot

Statistics

Views

Total Views
778
Views on SlideShare
738
Embed Views
40

Actions

Likes
0
Downloads
19
Comments
0

1 Embed 40

http://extensionconference2011.cta.int 40

Accessibility

Categories

Upload Details

Uploaded via as Microsoft PowerPoint

Usage Rights

© All Rights Reserved

Report content

Flagged as inappropriate Flag as inappropriate
Flag as inappropriate

Select your reason for flagging this presentation as inappropriate.

Cancel
  • Full Name Full Name Comment goes here.
    Are you sure you want to
    Your message goes here
    Processing…
Post Comment
Edit your comment

    Farmers teaching farmers: challenges and opportunities of using volunteer farmers in technology dissemination Farmers teaching farmers: challenges and opportunities of using volunteer farmers in technology dissemination Presentation Transcript

    • Farmers Teaching Farmers: Challenges and Opportunities of Using Volunteer Farmers in Technology Dissemination E. Kiptot, B.Lukuyu, S.Franzel and F.Place World Agroforestry Centre and International Livestock Research Institute
    • Introduction
      • Public extension services in developing countries are no longer able to meet the changing needs of farmers.
      • This is as a result of structural adjacent reforms which have reduced budgetary allocation to extension.
      • In order to meet the changing needs of farmers, NGOs have stepped in to fill the gap.
      • They are advocating for participatory, demand driven, client-oriented and farmer led agricultural extension systems.
    • Farmer centered approach
      • One such approach that is being used by the EADD to disseminate dairy feed technologies is known as the farmer trainers approach.
      • EADD is a collaborative project between Heifer International, Technoserve, International Livestock Research Institute (ILRI), African Breeders Services (ABS) and The World Agroforestry Centre (ICRAF).
      • ICRAF’s role is to facilitate the spread and use of improved feeds and feeding systems among targeted farmers through innovative extension approaches
    • The farmer trainers
      • The farmer trainers are volunteers selected on the basis of being good communicators, interest, being an active dairy farmer and be willing to give part of his/her land for demonstration purposes.
      • The selection is a participatory process involving farmers, their representatives and the management committee of the chilling plant in each project site.
      • They are trained in feeds and feeding methods by ToTs (extension officers, researchers , service providers etc )
    • Incentives
      • Are given seed for setting up demonstration plots of various feed technologies on their farms.
      • In addition, they are exposed through educational tours to innovative farms.
      • They disseminate information to other farmers without pay .
    • Justification of the study
      • The project started in 2008 with its main objective being to double the incomes of 179,000 dairy farmers in Kenya, Uganda and Rwanda through improved dairy production and marketing
      • As of June 2011, EADD had recruited 2157 farmer trainers who are operating in Kenya, Uganda and Rwanda. Uganda has 1014 trainers while Kenya has 1054 and Rwanda 89.
      • EADD has been operational for about three years and not much is understood about the effectiveness of the approach in technology dissemination.
    • Objectives
      • To get perspectives of farmer trainers about their motivational incentives, technologies disseminated, number of farmers reached, distance covered, how training sessions are organised, venues of training sessions, costs incurred, benefits, challenges and opportunities that exist in improving the effectiveness of the approach.
      • It is expected that such information will assist the project partners to design and implement strategies that will improve the effectiveness of this approach and also ensure its sustainability
    • Approach used
      • Group discussions were held in each of the sites with 5-20 trainers
      • Topics discussed were length of time served, distance covered, mode of transport used, challenges faced and opportunities to improve the approach among other issues.
    • Study sites and number of farmer trainers who participated Country Site Male trainers Female trainers Total Kenya Mweiga 18 5 23 Olkalou 10 3 13 Kipkaren 8 1 9 Cheptalal 8 2 10 Longisa 5 6 11 TOTAL 49 17 66 Uganda Jinja 11 6 17 Mukono 1 2 3 Mityana 7 2 9 TOTAL 19 10 29
    • Key Findings
      • FTs cover long distances
      • Common mode of transport used is by foot, followed by own & hired bicycles in Uganda and Kenya respectively ,
      • In Uganda, FTs have served 16 months, train 5 farmers /month.
      • In Kenya, FTs have served a12 months, train 17 farmers /month.
      Average Distance % of FFT(Kenya) n=62 % FFT(Uganda) n=28 <3 15 32 3-5 36 0 6-10 18 46 11-15 15 8 16-20 16 4 0ver 21 0 11
    • How trainers organize training sessions
      • Publicize through local and DMG leaders
      • Publicize through public gatherings
      • Use cell phones to mobilize farmers
      • Poster adverts placed at trading centres
      • Door to door
      • Mass media
      • Announce in training forums (field days, group trainings)
    • Motivation
      • Before
      • Increase milk production
      • Gain knowledge
      • Altruism (desire to help others, improve society)
      • Social benefits (status, satisfaction, kept busy, increases social networks, springboard to leadership position)
      • After
      • Increased household income
      • Gained Knowledge
      • Altruism (desire to help others, improve society)
      • Social benefits (status, satisfaction, kept busy, increases social networks, springboard to leadership position)
      • Project benefits
    • Technologies disseminated Technology Kenya % FTS (N=54) Uganda % FTs (n=22) Rhodes grass ( C.guyana ) 37 - Napier grass ( P.purpureum) 61 64 Silage making 54 23 Calliandra calorthysus 33 68 Sweet potato vines ( I. batatas ) 28 5 Forage sorghum ( S.vulgare ) 35 - Lucerne ( Medicago sativa ) 30 - Giant setaria (Setaria sphacelata) 6 32 Lablab ( Dolichos lablab) - 36 Mucuna pruriens - 36 Centrocema pubescens - 18 Hay making 28 -
    • Costs and benefits Costs Benefits Snacks/drinks Acquire new knowledge Transport/fare/maintenance of bicycles Improved social status/fame/popularity Training materials Increased social networks Airtime (mobile phones) Monetary benefits( sale of seed, fodder and charge for services) Lunch Self satisfaction Opportunity cost for family labour Exposure Time Gain self confidence Trampling of their crops during farmer visits An Availability of improved feeds to own animals
    • Monetary benefits Type of seeds sold and services offered Unit Cost (US$) Rhodes grass 6.5/kg Calliandra seedlings 0.1/seedling Calliandra seeds 32/kg Silage making (service) 10.75/tonne Hay baling (service) 1/bale Sale of hay 2.6/bale Sweet potato vines 0.1/bundle Napier canes 0.1/cane Forage sorghum seed 1.6/kg Columbus grass (Sorghum x almum) 2/kg
    • Constraints /Opportunities
      • Transport costs
      • Lack of training materials
      • Limited technical knowledge
      • Family conflicts
      • High expectations from farmers
      • Resistance to change
      • Families affected by HIV stigmatized
      • Use of bicycles
      • Sell seed to boost their income and also offset some of the expenses incurred
      • More training and sensitization about HIV/AIDS
      • More training to improve their knowledge
      • Both spouses should be involved
    • Recommendations and conclusion
      • The farmer trainers approach has the potential to disseminate technologies in a cost effective way, however for trainers to remain motivated, various incentives need to be explored. These include;
      • Linking farmer trainers to seed companies so that they can produce seed on contract basis in order to generate income and also ensure a reliable supply of seed to the community.
      • Various cooperative societies need to explore opportunities of having dairy farmers trained meet the costs of training provided by farmer trainers by embedding the costs in a wider service package through a check off system.
      • To ensure quality of information disseminated, farmers trainers need to be linked to extension service providers for technical support .
    • Thank you!!!