Applied Research for Inclusive Rural Communication

LIMITLESS POTENTIAL | LIMITLESS OPPORTUNITIES | LIMITLESS IMPACTLIMITLESS POTENTIAL | LIMITLESS OPPORTUNITIES | LIMITLESS IMPACTLIMITLESS POTENTIAL | LIMITLESS OPPORTUNITIES | LIMITLESS IMPACTCopyright Universityof Reading
APPLIED RESEARCH FOR INCLUSIVE
RURAL COMMUNICATION
Lessons from an agricultural innovation project in East Africa
1
School of Agriculture, Policy & Development
International Development Research Group

LIMITLESS POTENTIAL | LIMITLESS OPPORTUNITIES | LIMITLESS IMPACT
OUTLINE
• The presentation will focus on
• Project context
• Trends on farmer communication patterns and innovation systems
• Inclusion and exclusion in rural communication
• Methodological inputs on how to conduct gender and rural
communication analysis in the context of innovation systems
• Considerations for program design
2

INNOVATION SYSTEMS, AGRICULTURAL
GROWTH IN EAST AFRICA
• Funded by: DFID-ESRC Growth Programme
• University of Reading researchers: Chris Garforth, Peter Dorward, Sarah
Cardey, Graham Clarkson
• Overseas partners:
• University of Nairobi, Kenya
• Makerere University, Uganda
• Ahfad University for Women, Sudan
• University of Kiel, Germany
• George Mose Consultants, Kenya
• Start and end date: 16 June 2012 – 30 October 2014
3

CONTEXT
• innovation by farmers is key to tackling 21st century challenges
• climate; food security; poverty; economic growth ..
• competing policy narratives
• innovation = science and technology; large scale agri-business;
smallholder / family farms
• improving support through understanding how innovation happens for
smallholder farmers

CONTEXT IN 2011
• changing landscape of innovation support services, including extension
• rapid rise in access to mobile phones
• fragmentation of mass media
• policy tensions between ‘big agriculture’ and ‘smallholder livelihoods’

AIM OF THE PROJECT
• To find out:
• How different institutional arrangements for supporting smallholder
farming affect the innovation behaviour of men and women members
of farming households
• In what ways, and to what extent, innovation by smallholders affects
their incomes and livelihoods, and the local agricultural economy.
• Where ‘innovation’ can be both:
• product (a new [to the farmer] practice, technology or input)
• process (the steps, influences, interactions that lead to a change
taking place on the farm)

FOUR OBJECTIVES
• Document existing landscape and trends in provision (financing and
delivery) of innovation support
• Develop a detailed description and analysis of agricultural innovation
systems and processes for men and women in smallholder farming
households, leading to hypotheses linking innovation support to
innovation outcomes
• Test hypotheses through economic and gender analysis of the impact of
innovation on productivity, incomes and livelihoods in the three countries,
at household level and in the local rural economy
• Develop evidence-based conclusions on the potential and limitations for
enhancing support for SHFs’ innovation
Innovation systems, agricultural growth and rural livelihoods

METHODOLOGY
1. Literature review and key informant interviews
2. Timelines, innovation histories, communication maps
• Set of 3 participatory tools in 2 locations in Uganda, Kenya, Sudan
• 16 - 18 participatory activities per country
3. Survey and participatory farm management methods
• Survey: 400 respondents in 2 locations each in Uganda, Kenya, Sudan
• Set of three participatory farm management tools in set of households
(10-15) in two locations in Uganda, Kenya, Sudan
• All data was gathered from male and female respondents
• 100 males, 100 females minimum per area in questionnaire
• Gender disaggregated and gender mixed groups for participatory tools
Innovation systems, agricultural growth and rural livelihoods

INNOVATION SYSTEM
• The institutions, organisations, individuals that influence (support or
constrain) innovation in smallholder agriculture
• Some elements may be planned (government policy, public sector
research, extension, NGO project, outreach by agribusiness, ….)
• But much of it is unplanned – and can only be identified and explained by
farmers
9

COMMUNICATION & INNOVATION
• Change needs new institutional arrangements and processes to support
the changing context of farmer needs
• It needs communication intermediaries
• It should extend beyond the sphere of activity of farmers and
technology suppliers
• Networks need to be embedded or accompanied by communication
services and strategies

GENDER & INNOVATION
• Women and men do not receive similar levels of benefits from agriculture
• Arises from:
• way in which institutions deal with gender,
• from attitudes towards the respective roles of women and men
• government policies which do not do enough to create an institutional
environment in which women and men have equal access to
opportunities to improve their farming.
• New technologies and innovation processes tend to benefit men more
than women
• Gender inequalities run the risk of being reinforced
11

CONCEPTUAL FRAMEWORK
• Analytical framework for analysis of social differentiation
12

METHODS
13

Min. of lands; M of Env and Mineral Resources; Min of Water Resources and Irrigation
Min of fisheries Development; Min of RDAs; Min of N Kenyra and other Arid Areas; Min of cooperative
development
NASEP / Implementation Framework: overall policy framework covering all SP
sectors: vision is ‘Kenyan agricultural clientele demand and access
appropriate quality extension services from the best providers and attain
higher productivity, increased incomes and improved quality of livelihoods’.
Public sector
male and
female
SHFs
Sector
ministries
Commercial sector
ASCU
parastatals
Regulators
Ag Ls Fi Fo
NALEP
manu-
facturers
Input
suppliers
Farming
companies
Former
parastatals
Federations
media
ICTs
NGOs
– local
and
interna
tional
Research
Inst.
KARI CGIAR
HEIs private
Producer
organisations /
farmer associations
Cooperative
societies
Faith based
organisations
CBOs
Banks,
MFIs
Private sector
consultants /
advisers

Kyemeire village, Nankoma subcounty, Bugiri District, Uganda: men

Local Councils
District NAADS
Coordinator
Source of
communication
Information How useful/reliable
Village -
Kyemeire
District –level
BUGIRI
Information on
trainings and seminars
for various
enterprises; New seed
varieties; Health
information
(Vaccination
programs)
new methods of crop
management; new seed
varieties, and animal
breeds
Information is reliable
but sometimes takes
long to reach down the
farmers; This is because
there’s one extension
officer who has to
traverse the whole sub
county.
The group leader
and Local Councils
are easy to access
since they are
always with them
on the village
Information Gaps
More knowledge is
needed on
livestock
management;
More training is
needed on water
and soil
conservation
practices, as fields
are loosing their
fertility.
Sub-county
IWEMBA
Sub-county NAADS
Coordinator
Information on
Budgetary allocation for
enterprises; New
breeds of animals and
seed varieties.
Information is very
useful; Farmers get
to know which
varieties of seeds are
resistant to disease
when grown.
Farmer Groups
Kyemeire village, Nankoma subcounty,
Bugiri District, Uganda – women farmers

WADI RAMLI TIMELINE, SUDAN

1950 1960 1970 1980 1990 2000 2010 2012
diesel pump
replaces saqia
animal drawn
water
extraction from
river
innovation
tractor hire
service from
farmers union and
government
cooperative
use of tractors
for cultivation
new variety of
white onion
from research
station (high
yield)
increased use of
chemical fertiliser
promoted by EAs
cooperative
marketing
(failed after 6
years) wheat grown as
main crop
(because
finance
available)
irrigation
scheme
extended, from
farmer
pressure
bank finance
available
through
Farmers Union
policy
farming
system
Wadi Ramli
farmer
cooperative
started (1949)
National Food
Self-sufficiency
policy;promotion
of wheat
production
• sorghum, onion, beans, maize, coriander, tomato ….
for subsistence and market; using local varieties
• cultivation with oxen and camels
• irrigation by animal powered saqia
• some use of chemicals (DDT); manure for soil fertility
• credit from local moneylender (high interest; lender
took all profit)
• frequent crop failure
bananas
introduced;
stopped after
15 years
tomatoes
becomingless
tasty, because
of use of
chemical
fertiliser instead
of manure, and
modern
varieties
• chemical fertiliser preferred for quicker maturing
crops, and where fertiliser has high impact on yield (e.g.
potato); manure preferred for slower maturing crops
• market (still) controlled by middlemen, whether
farmers take crops to market or sell it in the field;
middlemen set prices
• banks give better service than moneylenders, but have
left farmers with problem of indebtedness
Wadi Ramli timeline, Sudan
wheat failed,
leaving farmers
in debt

19
Nankoma timeline, Uganda

TRENDS IN PROVISION
• Formal systems responding to changes in understanding of innovation
happens:
• decentralisation, devolution, enabling non-state actors
• demand-led
• But constrained by bureaucratisation
• committees, department boundaries, hierarchies, transaction costs
• Actors transcending mandates to diversify roles
• Government actors playing a linking role
• Local farming systems are inherently dynamic – which is not always
acknowledged by external actors

COMMUNICATION PATTERNS
• “Uptake”
• Innovation behaviour
• Constraints to innovation
• Unpacking local realities
21

“UPTAKE”
• Understanding the notion of ‘uptake’ is important to design effective
policies and interventions to support family farmers
• ‘Uptake’ of technology and innovation from an institutional (‘top-down’)
perspective is very different from farmer’s experience
• Farmers are actively looking to improve their livelihoods and their
individual farm enterprises; they seek, adapt and improve technologies to
fit their own individual context
• Market opportunities and household food security are key drivers of
innovation
22

INNOVATION BEHAVIOR
• Innovation follows varied trajectories:
• Initial use of a new idea, falling off after 2 or 3 seasons (variety: taste,
cooking, access to inputs …; animal traction: loss of animals, no follow
up from NGO)
• New practices quickly established as part of the local farming system
(striga control: effectiveness in control, plus other benefits)
• New enterprise establishes as niche activity for some
• Farmers’ adaptation and modification important in integrating new ideas
into their enterprise and system

CONSTRAINTS TO INNOVATION
• Absent or inadequate support institutions
• Gender based constraints
• Men forcibly take benefits from women’s innovations
• Men shift burden of household expenses to women when they know
women have some income
• Women’s inadequate access and control over resources
• Communication and information constraints
• Institutions based on culture remain constraints, but can change in
response to pressure from within communities

COMMUNICATION MAPS: SUDAN
• Localized communication sources reported to be more likely to influence
decision making in farmers’ enterprises
• Timeliness and cost of information remain issues
• Local connection important
• Preference for local rather than ‘external’ content
• Includes formal and informal communication sources
• Dependent on the location of the farmers
• Infrastructure challenges reported to cause significant disruption to
communication
• Different actors have different – and at times conflicting – access to
elements in value chain
25

INCLUSION
• Gendered communication
• Communication maps in Sudan
• Who is being heard?
26

GENDER
• Gender differences in communication networks
• Formal versus informal linkages
• Linkages with rural communication services versus interpersonal or
informal support
• Gender differences in access and processes of engagement with rural
communication sources
• Gendered support for crops (cash vs food)
• Assumptions about what will be done with income, therefore
innovation at different points in value chain
27

COMMUNICATION MAPS - SUDAN
• Variety of types of information
• i.e. market access information, types of seeds
• Women and men both report access to communication channels
discussed
• Men often thought to control radio stations (when they are home)
• Men reported to call in to stations less than women
• All have constraints of airtime, batteries, technical costs of accessing
different communication sources
• Women reportedly have more access to trainings
• Targeted, but what are the gender implications of this?
28

COMMUNICATION MAPS - MEN
• Farmers have little or no interest in a large proportion of radio
communication but no control over content
• Delays in information delivery
• There are too few sources of information (in some areas)
• NAADS is the main source of information & institutional influencer
• Fellow farmers, NAADS and community based facilitators greatly
influence decisions about farm enterprise
• Mobile phones do not greatly influence decisions about farm enterprise
• Sources mostly village and district (more spread than women)
29

COMMUNICATION MAPS - WOMEN
• Radio information is good but not always clear
• There is a delay in information from community-based facilitators (CBFs)
• Radio less influential on decision making
• Farmers usually decide to do something based on local observation
• CBFs influence farmers' decision-making because their advice is practical,
relevant and well understood
• Most sources were village level (except radio)
30

WHO IS BEING HEARD?
• Gender in policy
• Women’s voices are not often heard
• Fairly uncritical voice on gender – often assumption gender = woman
• Policy vague on issues of gender and agriculture
• Gender in literature
• Little about gender and innovation
• Need for more up to date tools on gender and communication
• Gender and communication for development research still scarce
• Gender in research process
• Communicating what constitutes “gendered” research
• What is asked of whom, how, and why
31

WHO IS BEING HEARD?
• Approaches to small scale farming/family farming mixed in policy
• International mandates
• National mandates
• Who is listening to the farmers?
• What is being asked of the farmers?
• Balancing types of evidence
• What narratives are being perpetuated through how research is
conducted with farmers?
• What narratives are being perpetuated in how that data is analysed?
32

IMPLICATIONS - PROJECTS
• “Uptake” must be understood from multiple perspectives
• It is not neutral
• It means different things to different actors
• It is not about persuasion but adaptation
• Farmers are active in communication processes – must be engaged with
communication design and delivery
• Different farmers have different assets and constraints, often conflicting
• Dynamic communication needed to cover farmer-led change
• Different stakeholders have different – sometimes conflicting –
understandings of innovation
• Multiple stakeholder engagement is key
• Institutional capacity building is important
• Make gender distinct in policy to avoid assumptions
33

METHODOLOGIES/PRINCIPLES
• Qualitative and quantitative
• Participatory research
• Essential: research at the beginning of any design process
• Participatory “toolbox”
• RAAKS
• Participatory Budgeting
• Gender analysis
• Use the tools to increase measurement and incorporation of factors of
social differentiation
• Inductive – deductive approach
• Grounded approach – clarify assumptions – generate hypotheses
34

WHAT IS IMPACT?
• Establishing causality is difficult
• Is this the question we need to be asking?
• What should we be asking?
• For whom are we asking?
• Power dynamics in generating and interpreting data
35

THANK YOU
36

Applied Research for Inclusive Rural Communication

Recommended

Recommended

More Related Content

What's hot

What's hot (19)

Viewers also liked

Viewers also liked (9)

Similar to Applied Research for Inclusive Rural Communication

Similar to Applied Research for Inclusive Rural Communication (20)

More from cccomdev

More from cccomdev (16)

Recently uploaded

Recently uploaded (20)

Applied Research for Inclusive Rural Communication