About FFS in Nepal

1. Farmer Field School
Himani Yadav
EXT-08M-2023
Department of Agricultural Extension and Rural Sociology

2. Introduction
• Group-based adult learning approach that teaches farmers how to
experiment and solve problems independently
• Common approach used to transfer specialist knowledge, promote
skills and empower farmers around the world (Waddington,2014)
• Sometimes called “schools without walls”, in FFS groups of farmers
meet regularly with a facilitator, observe, talk, ask questions, and learn
together.

3. Genesis
• First developed to teach integrated pest management (IPM) techniques in
rice farming
Emerged out of a concrete and serious challenge
• High usage of toxic pesticides for pest control in crops
• Health and environment problems
• In Indonesia – in 1980’s – offshoot of green revolution
• Government sought a massive large scale decentralized education program
for farmers – to reduce pesticides – but protect incomes and production
• Inadequacy of govt. extension systems to make this happen
• Demand from large no’s of poor farmers to be part of the program
• IPM-FFS designed to address the above in 1989

4. EVOLUTION
• (1991-1994) supported by FAO, Rice IPM-FFSs spread from Indonesia to
Bangladesh, Cambodia, China, India, Lao PDR, Philippines, Sri Lanka and
Vietnam
• During this period, the FFS Programme moved from its single-crop focus
to include secondary or rotation crops within the rice-based systems and
also vegetables in both low and highland systems
• Waves of adaptations in FFSs have occurred from a focus on a single
constraint (pest management) of a single crop (rice) to an emphasis on
the multiple dimensions of crop management to cropping systems to
resource management to socio-cultural dimensions of community life.

5. EVOLUTION
Figure 1: Context and Topics adapted to FFS Source: FAO,2016

6. EVOLUTION
Figure 2: Number of countries applying FFS approach (Source: Jha et al.,2020)

7. Philosophy & Principles
• Learning by doing –adults learn better through experience rather than
passive listening at lectures and demonstrations.
• Every FFS is unique, as far as content is concerned: Farmers decide what is
relevant and what FFS should address.
• Learning from mistakes - each person’s experience of reality is unique and
valid.
• Learning how to learn - farmers build their capacity to observe, analyze, and
make conscious decisions.
Source: Groenweg, K., et.al. 2006. Livestock farmer field schools: Guidelines for facilitation and technical manual. Nairobi: ILRI

8. Philosophy & Principles
• Problem posing/problem solving - problems are posed as challenges not
constraints.
• Farmers’ fields are the learning ground - the field - crop or livestock production
system - is the main learning tool.
• Extension workers are facilitators not teachers - because their role is to guide the
learning process.
• Unity is strength - farmers in a group have more power than individual farmers.
• All FFS follow a systematic training process - key steps are observation, group
discussion, analysis, decision-making, and action-planning.
Source: Groenweg, K., et.al. 2006. Livestock farmer field schools: Guidelines for facilitation and technical manual. Nairobi: ILRI

9. Approach
• FFS consist of groups of people with a common interest, who get
together on a regular basis to study the “how and why” of a particular
topic.
• One must have skills in managing participatory, discovery-based
learning as well as technical knowledge to guide the groups’ learning
and action process.
• Hands-on management skills and conceptual understanding

10. ELEMENTS
GROUP FIELD FACILITATOR CURRICULUM
PROGRAM
LEADER
FINANCING

11. ELEMENTS
Capacities required For Facilitator
• Encouraging
• High technical knowledge
• Farming experience
• Good leadership skills
• Good listener
• Sensitive to group dynamics
• Little idea for local language
Financing
• Budget allocation as needed to related training
• Externally funding if needed
• Cover the costs of facilitator training, curriculum
development, running field schools, field days,
supervision, and snacks for farmers attending

12. ELEMENTS
Box 1: A typical FFS session in the Original Indonesia Source: ( Braun & Duveskog, 2008)

13. EVOLUTION IN NEPAL
Table 1 : List of Major projects of IPM in Nepal (Source: Jha et al.,2020)

14. EVOLUTION IN NEPAL
Figure 3 : Adaptation of FFS approach in various context of Nepal (Source: Jha et al.,2020)
FFMS- Farmers’ Forestry Management School
FMLG- Forest Management Learning Group
FBS- Farmers’ Business School

15. POLICIES
• Nepal Agriculture Extension Strategy (2007) as a Participatory
Extension Approach
• Agriculture Development Strategy (2015-2030) as an institution for
generation and dissemination of technology
• Agricultural and Livestock Service Sections as an exclusive capacity
for development program
• FMS in VDCs for value chain development

16. ACHIEVEMENTS
Immediate
Output
• Enhanced observation skill, speaking ability, critical thinking ability,
leadership skill at individual level
Intermediate
Output
• Increased group cohesiveness and collective decision making, team
work
Outcome
• Increased knowledge and awareness, Adaptation of the interventions,
Change in husbandry practices
Impact
• Productivity Enhancement

17. Outcomes
Enhanced
Credibility
Pesticide
Use
Reduction
Social
Capital
Formation

18. ISSUES
• No account of opportunity cost
• Short training duration
• Weak financing
• Lack of transparent financial details
• Fake entry of farmers
• High turnover of facilitators
• Lack of practicing and result evaluation

19. RECOMMENDATION
• Adhere to the core FFS principles in designing and conducting
• Use other approaches including FFS
• Reorientation of quality assurance for monitoring, evaluation and
learning
• Advocacy strategies suitable to local, provincial and federal levels
• Right balance of human, social, natural and financial capital indicators
• Pluralistic approach
• FFS, an entry of modern agriextension as the ultimate goal “Human
Development”

20. My Personal Experience in FFS about Potato Cultivation in Dadeldhura