The document discusses modifications made to the Farmer Field School (FFS) methodology to make it more broad-based and cost-effective. Key modifications include shortening the training period for facilitators from 4-6 months to 1 month, selecting community members instead of extension agents as facilitators, and expanding the subject matter beyond IPM to include other livelihood activities. The holistic FFS approach aims to address multiple aspects of dryland agriculture and livelihood improvement. Short-term training of facilitators and inclusion of various farm and off-farm activities in FFS help broaden its impact and scaling. FFS is highlighted as an empowering methodology that can provide collective solutions through on-farm assessment, group action,

1. Farmers Field School – a holistic
methodology for broad based
extension
By Dr. J. Diraviam
Senior Scientist and Head
and Trained FFS Master Facilitator
ICAR Krishi Vigyan Kendra
Pulutheri Village, R.T. Malai(PO),
Kulithalai(TK), Karur(DT) - 621 313.Tamil Nadu,
mobile: 09488967675
Email: skvkk@yahoo.co.in, j_diraviam@rediffmail.com

2. Broad basing of FFS
 IPM Farmer Field School programs, at
various levels of development, are
being conducted in over 30 countries
worldwide. Subsequently it was further
applied to animal husbandry and
several other sectors such as health,
education, climate change, etc.

3. Limiting factors for the spread of
FFS
Huge cost factor in training
facilitators
Long duration (4- 6 months)
for the Training of Facilitators
(ToF)
Availability of limited number
of Master Facilitators

4. Modifications tried by the AME
Foundation (AMEF) - Modification
of content
 Broad-basing to cover all aspects of dryland
agriculture instead of the sole IPM with an
attempt to address livelihood improvement
that included crop husbandry and related
activities.
 Apart from the crop, support activities like
livestock management, biomass generation,
kitchen gardening, the cultivation of azolla
and vermicomposting were included to
ensure that the programme was “livelihood”

5. Modification of the
methodology
 Modification of the methodology of
training the facilitators from 5 days
classroom and 1 day practice FFS to 3
days classroom sessions followed by 3
days practice FFS.
 Selection of Community level Resource
persons (CRPs) instead of the usual way
of training government or NGO extension
personnel: The primary aim is that the
CRPs remain with the community even
after the withdrawal of projects/external

6. Short term ToF
 Introduction of a short term Training of
Facilitators (up to one month duration)
instead of the usual season long ToF
to reduce the cost.

7. Key factors for success of
FFS
 Severity of the problem in a particular
area (could be pests/diseases, drought,
problem soils, marketing factors, etc.)
that motivates the farmers to participate
in FFS
 Aptitude of the Facilitators to learn and
conduct the FFS towards fulfilling the
objectives of the programme
 Meticulous planning, preparation of
curriculum and providing adequate
preparation time before the start of FFS

8. Key factors for success of
FFS
 Cohesive group of participants
 Cooperation of the collaborator of the
FFS who provides his field for the
learning
 Support from various stakeholders to
take forward the learning process

9. Way forward for FFS
 FFS has some of the unique
advantages that can fulfil the
overall extension needs of a
particular area in the current
context of changing climate and
its direct and indirect impacts on
crops/livestock, declining fertility
status of soils and also fluctuating
markets

10. Empowerment
 The opportunity for continuous group
level situational analysis in FFS
facilitates in making informed
decisions by farmers/farmer group to
overcome any contingencies or to
minimize its impact.

11. On Farm Assessment
 The learning field in the FFS gives
wide scope for experimentation of new
crop varieties and technologies that
can generate new knowledge
(technology assessment) which can
be further disseminated to large
number of farmers through
demonstrations of that particular area.

12. Collective Action
 The group approach of the FFS can
build cohesiveness among farmers
that can help them to do collective
input mobilization, access various
services of development departments
and also collective marketing for better
price realization.

13. Scaling up
 The Field day programmes in FFS
and the visit by neighbouring area
farmers to the FFS field also
helps in larger reach of new
technologies among farmers.

14. Spread of FFS
 Spread of FFS can be done though
convergence programmes and also
dovetailing with the available
development initiatives. As funding is a
constraint for large scale adoption of
FFS, few ideas such as self financed
FFS have also been mooted by experts.
As of now, ways can be devised to fund
FFS through Revolving fund that can be
made returnable by the group in a
reasonable period of time to expand FFS
in a large scale.

15. Conclusion
 In nutshell FFS methodology can
definitely provide a broad based
extension services for the overall
development of agriculture in the
Country.

16. Thank you