Participatory technology development


Published on

PTD deals with natural resources management by strengthening the local indigenous specialists and their communities to carry out experiments in becoming more sustainable and self reliant through drawing on their local resources.

Published in: Education

Participatory technology development

  1. 1. Seminar II Seminar On OnParticipatory Technology DevelopmentParticipatory Technology Development (PTD) (PTD)
  2. 2. Introduction Agricultural technology needs to be developed keeping the farmers’ livelihoods at the center of the innovation process. In order to be useful to the farmers, the technology needs to be rooted in their natural,social and cultural reality. Scientists, extensionists and other NGOs are outsiders to a community, hence there is need for involvement of farmers in the process of technology development. Conventional approaches, based on research station trials followed by unidirectional technology transfer, are unlikely to be fruitful.
  3. 3. Definition“PTD is a long-term interaction between outsiders and local people,with the aim of generating innovations based on indigenousknowledge and cultures to develop sustainable livelihood systems”.More broadly, PTD deals with natural resources management bystrengthening the local indigenous specialists and their communitiesto carry out experiments in becoming more sustainable and selfreliant through drawing on their local resources.
  4. 4. Participatory: involving and empowering local peopleTechnology: based on local people’s knowledge and practicalmethods of experimentationDevelopment: people-centered sustainable agricultural developmentbased on technological generation from within
  5. 5. Some fundamental aspects of participatory processes: Consultation and access to information for the local people about the intentions ofoutsiders Freedom of choice for local people to engage in a process of innovation. Empowerment through redistribution of power on the basis of equity and compatibility. Mutual trust and respect Distribution of benefits to partners equally. Adaptability and flexibility of outside institutions to changing and sometimes unforeseen circumstances.
  6. 6. The meaning of technology in PTDTechnology has to do with the ways and means with which humansapply them-selves to their environment to obtain sustenance and createa way of life.The Meaning of Development in PTDThe concept of development in the context of PTD emphasizes thecreativity of local people, their imagination to carry out self-definedpaths in the future.
  7. 7. Participatory Technology Development (PTD) offers a way forward,through active, involvement of farmers in decision-making and inevery stage of technology development right from the beginning i.e.identifying their problemsParticipatory technology development has been applied to theprocess and methodology by which various partners cooperate intechnology development.
  8. 8. History of PTDResource-poor farmers (RPFs) had been slow or unable to adoptrecommendations because of the fact that the technologies were notappropriate for them.This contributed to the emergence of the Farming Systems Research (FSR)movement in the 1970s. This was soon followed, and to some extentparalleled, by the growth of Farmer Participatory Research (FPR) andParticipatory Technology Development (PTD) during the 1980s and 1990s.
  9. 9. Problems with Traditional Technology Development (TTD) method Scientist who design the research problem is based on previous work done in the area Research layouts are done in the research stations which many timesdiffer from the actual situations of user TTD emphasis results in small area, the results of which are apportioned to larger area The scientist concentrate on one aspect while user is concerned aboutrelated aspects too
  10. 10. How PTD over come these problems It involves users in all the stages of technology development, designing toevaluation of results Experiments are conducted in user/farmer situations User wisdom is used while deciding the treatments Technology are evolved in larger and in multiple locations User is involved in evaluation of treatments/experiments
  11. 11. Characteristics of participatory technology development The main goal of farmer participatory research is to develop appropriate agricultural technology to meet the production needs of the small, resource-poor farmers. Farmers participate actively in the entire farmer participatory research process. Both farmers’ and researchers’ knowledge are crucial in coming up with technologies that fit local environment and circumstances. Research is conducted in farmers’ fields. The scientist is an investigator, colleague and advisor.
  12. 12. • Farmer participatory research is based on a systems perspective. A farm is a system composed of interacting subsystems that include land, labor, capital, crop and animal production, off farm income, social and economic components, physical and biological components, etc.• Farmer participatory research promotes innovative methodologies and flexibility.• Participatory research promotes low cost technologies and a minimum of external inputs by using locally-available resources and strengthening the farmer’s experimental capacity.
  13. 13. ROLE OF PTD To improve indigenous technologies by careful use of externalinputs. To enable greater acceptance of eco-friendly technologies byfarmers. To faster effective spread of new technologies within a region.
  14. 14. Six basic steps in PTD processStep I: Getting startedStep II: Understanding problems and opportunitiesStep III: Looking for things to tryStep IV: ExperimentationStep V: Sharing the resultsStep VI: Keeping up the process
  15. 15. Getting started Receiving a request to start collaboration, or selecting communities with which collaboration will be sought; Gathering and analyzing existing secondary data; Making an inventory of existing organizations; Clarifying one’s own agenda and possibilities for follow-up after situation analysis; Building a relationship with the local people and coming to a basic agreement on the form of future collaboration.
  16. 16. Understanding problems and opportunities Sharing impressions of trends and problems in local farming; Supporting farmers in identifying and analyzing their problems and the cause-effect relationships involved; Clarifying whose problems have been identified; Discussing the context of the problems (e.g. wider agro-ecological systems, socio-political changes) and analyzing driving/ restraining forces; Making an inventory of opportunities and potential resources, including human resources and good ideas. The PRA (Participatory Rural Appraisal) toolbox is an important source of methods and techniques for these activities.
  17. 17. Looking for things to try Gathering information for detailed analysis of the identified concerns and priority problems; Identifying promising solutions from local experience, farmer experts and sources outside the community; Making a critical review of the options by establishing criteria for selecting initial activities and assessing advantages and disadvantages;
  18. 18.  Clarifying expected effects of the options on different sub-groups within the community and the area; Developing an understanding of the need to experiment with the options selected; Agreeing on what exactly is to be found out by doing the experiment (formulating the hypothesis to be tested).
  19. 19. Experimentation Reviewing farmers’ existing experimental practices; Designing selected experiments; Defining evaluation criteria and choosing monitoring and evaluationtools; Training farmer experimenters; Establishing and managing the experiments;
  20. 20.  Monitoring by the farmer-experimenters supported by PTDfacilitators; Evaluating results, both during the course and at the end of the experiments, to decide if the option is suitable locally, to develop possible technical guidelines for applying it and/or to identify any need for further experiments; Reviewing the experience of collaboration and experimentation with a view to improving the PTD process.
  21. 21. Sharing the results Studying the existing patterns and channels of f a r m e r - t o - f a r m e r exchange and learning; Strengthening farmer-to farmer exchange: visits, farmer-to-farmer training through learning-by doing; developing manuals and audiovisuals by and for farmers; Training farmers as grassroots extensionists/ promoters.
  22. 22. Keeping up the process Stimulating group development and linking groups with farmers’organizations; Providing training in fields related to management; Strengthening linkages between (groups of) farmers and serviceorganizations; C o n s o l i d a t i n g institutional and policy support to PTDprocesses; Documenting the process and methods of experimentation and
  23. 23.  Supporting evaluation of the impacts of technologies and the PTD process on the livelihood system. Consolidated community networks or organizations for agricultural selfmanagement; A more supportive i n s t i t u t i o n a l environment; Documented and operationalised PTD approach and resource materials; Relevant services and input supply
  24. 24. ADVANTAGES PTD builds trust between farmers and outsiders It strengthens the link between indigenous and scientific knowledge It builds human capacity for self relianceDISADVANTAGES The PTD approach takes a long time Demands patience Humility on the part of the outsiders
  25. 25. Outcomes of using participatory researchThe major outcomes expected from using participatory research are related tobehavioral change, resulting benefits and finally impact.• Research more responsive to farmer needs and adjustment of the research agenda to being more relevant:• First-hand appreciation of the diversity of farmer problems;• Incorporation of farmers’ criteria into technology design and technologyevaluation;• Multi-disciplinary teams increase appreciation of socioeconomic factorsby biophysical scientists;
  26. 26. • Identification and use of information technology knowledge (ITK) and appreciation for farmer innovation adds value;• Expanding the integrated application of technologies through farmers’adaptation and use of system improvement principles;• Generation of win-win technologies (those that improve food, feed,income and environment) using farmer-led experimentation;• Collaborative activities and synergies between farmers, developmentpartners and researchers have improved chances for change.
  27. 27. A cAse on PTDA cAse on PTD
  28. 28. Project title: Participatory Technology Development and Participatory Technology TransferCollaborators: Sugarcane breeding institute Annamalai university NPKRR co-operative sugar millsProject Area: Nagapattinam district (Thiruvali, Athukudi and Keelaiyer villages)
  29. 29.  Nagapattinam district is located in the Cauvery delta region in the east coast zone of Tamilnadu Rice is the predominantly grown traditional crop Establishment of sugar factories encouraged farmers to cultivate sugarcane Farm holding size varies from 0.25 ha to 5.00 ha Average sugarcane yield was around 100 tons per hectare
  30. 30. Steps followed  Interaction meeting  Yield gap analysis at macro level  Selection of three villages with high yield gap  RRA exercise – transect analysis  Micro level survey for constraint analysis  Studying the community protocol  Organizing cane growers clubs  Prioritization  Identification of technologies  Farmers-scientist workshop  Conducting PTD experiments
  31. 31. Transect analysis  Conducted during August, 1993  To identify the problems  Constraints affecting sugarcane productivity were listed  Suggestions were discussed  Treatments to be included and observation to be recorded were finalized
  32. 32. Name of the trail: Selection of sugarcane verities for wetland conditions 14 pre-release and released verities were included in the trial Farmers assembled in large numbers on the day of planting and on the day of recording tiller count Farmers themselves were involved in taking yield measurements Taking into consideration of the yield obtained from different varieties, it was decided that farmers in the village would take up planting of CoG93076, Co 8021 and Co 89010 It was observed that the variety CoG 93076 spread very fast and was undercultivation in more than 800 ha
  33. 33. Name of the trail: Ratoon management Treatments included in the trail were “local practice”, “gap filling byquartering”, “gap filling with polybag seedling” and “local practice + trashmulching” It was observed that farmers practice of gap filling gave better resultscompared to others The farmers were visibly happy that their traditional practice would givebetter yields It was decided that this ITK could be popularized in other parts of the state It was further decided that the farmers would take up trash mulching alsowherever possible
  34. 34. BAIF/NRI (Natural resources institute) Goat Research Project To identify and address feed-related constraints affecting goat Production in semi-arid India. Conducted in Rajasthan and Dharwad District, Karnataka, primarily with poor people, Surveys were conducted in selected villages and constraints were identified Project then established some ‘in village’ trials to address one of the priorityproblems or needs identified. Three technologies developed to address these constraints Natural products were seen by both farmers and researchers as being locallyavailable at minimum cash outlay compared with pharmaceuticals,
  35. 35. Technologies developed through PTD in VFPCK  To minimize flower drop and increase the yield of cow pea  To boost bunch weight of banana  To control pseudo stem borer in banana  To control of pod borer in cowpea  To increase the growth and yield of amaranths  To control American Serpentine Leaf Miner spray Neem Oil Garlic Emulsion  Managing Sigatoka in banana
  36. 36. Participatory Technology Development (PTD) in Ginger in Sikkim Bilateral project between Swiss Development Cooperation (SDC) and Government ofSikkim, which is implemented by Inter-cooperation (IC) of Switzerland The project aims to improve the livelihoods of small and marginal farmers of Sikkimthrough natural resource management Since 2002 In August 2002, PTD concept was introduced to ten officials of the DOH from fourdistricts of Sikkim In September 2002, a training was conducted at Gangtok for the DOH field staff andnewly selected NGO staff to introduce the steps in PTD
  37. 37.  Along side the PTD process, formation of SHG and strengthening them was alsoundertaken The project provided a grant @ of Rs 1,000/- per farmer to each group so that farmers can take loan for timely purchase of inputs and operations The DOH provides technical backstopping to PTD in providing the necessary technical training on ginger cultivation and management of disease and soil A management structure and framework was put in place for timely decision makingand smooth implementation of the PTD process. NGOs act as intermediary between the farmers and the DOH Between November 2002 and March 2003, farmers in each SHG analyzed problemswith ginger cultivation
  38. 38.  The problem analysis of ginger cultivation was presented at the four day long GingerPlatform meeting consisting of farmers, DOH, Scientists from the region, IISR andabroad and ISPS and ETC India The scientists and DOH experts gave potential solution for the problems presented by the farmers. This basket of options was later presented to the farmers and the farmers selected options based on their priority problem Each farmer keeps record of the activities in each of the PTD ginger plots Farmers also record qualitative observations pertaining to disease incidence, plant growth and health during the growing season and at the time of harvest.
  39. 39.  The farmers in the neighboring village had been observing the PTD process The farmers from these villages came forward to join the PTD process. In the second year (2004), 5 more farmer groups joined and in the third year (2005), 7 farmer groups joined the PTD programme making it a total of 17 PTD SHG groups in the East and South districts of Sikkim.ResultsGinger yield increased from 1:3 to 1:6 to 10 in the plots which were relatively free ofdiseases. Farmers who got high yields adopted all the management practices like selection ofhealthy seeds, planting on raised beds, good drainage, thick mulching and appropriatenutrient management and maintaining hygienic conditions in the fields to avoid diseases.Farmers are able to identify diseases at different stages and take appropriate measures.
  40. 40. WESTERN ORISSA RURAL LIVELIHOODS PROJECT“PARTICIPATORY TECHNOLOGY DEVELOPMENT AND PROMOTIONOF MICRO IRRIGATION”Technologies were designed according to the need of the farmers, which directly related towater lifting, storage, distribution, application, etc.The design and development of technology was made in such a way that it reduces womendrudgery such as Surface Treadle Pump (STP), Pressure Pump (PP), Rope & Washer Pump(R&WP), KB Drip Irrigation Systems (Bucket Kit, Drum Kit & Customized drip), WaterStorage Bag, etc.
  41. 41. Some important NGOs which exclusively use PTD are  Peermade Development Society (Kerala)  AME Foundation  BIRD-K  Action for Social Advancement (Bhopal)
  42. 42. CONCLUSIONPTD is not a substitute for conventional research or researcher- managed on-farm trials. It isa complementary process which involves linking the power and capacities of agriculturalscience to the priorities and capacities of farming communities, in order to developproductive and sustainable farming systems.‘An active participation of the beneficiaries in the generation of technology can ensurethat it is ‘user-friendly’.