CCAFS Science Meeting presentation by Jon Hellin - "Successes in linking science to action through participatory action research"

1. Successes in linking science to action
through participatory action
research
Jon Hellin
International Maize and Wheat
Improvement Center (CIMMYT), Mexico
CCAFS Science Meeting, Copenhagen
1 May, 20012

2. Outline of presentation
• Why participatory research?
• What is participatory research?
• Typology of participatory research
• Agricultural innovation systems
• MasAgro, a Mexican case study

3. Why participatory research?
• Climate change, need to enhance agricultural
yields, resilience of agro-ecosystems, &
improve farmers’ livelihoods
• Improved agronomic management & farmers’
use of climate-adapted germplasm
• Adoption by smallholder farmers has been low
(e.g. conservation agriculture (Ekboir, 2002))

4. Farmer adoption & non-adoption of
agricultural technologies/principles
• Farmers are, in general, risk adverse
• Technologies may not be profitable
in short-term and/or may not work
• Technologies & principles are
knowledge intensive
• Linear transfer of technology
approach that underestimates
complexity of technologies
• Farmers’ modifications do not
always coincide with the ideas or
the intentions of those who
originally developed or introduced
the technology … adaptation

5. What is participatory research?
• Systematic dialogue
between farmers &
scientists to solve
problems related to
agriculture
• Increase impact of
agricultural science
and technology

6. How participatory is “participatory research”?
• Farmer
interviews
• “Putting the last
first”
• Participatory
plant breeding
• Active – passive
participation

7. Four types of farmer participation (Biggs,
1988)
• Contractual where scientists contract with
farmers to provide land or services
• Consultative where information is sought from
farmers and scientists then develop
“solutions”
• Collaborative where there some task sharing
between researchers & farmers, along lines
determined by the formal research program
• Collegial where researchers support a farmer-
initiated and farmer-managed program

8. Farmers are social actors & not passive subjects
• Technology, knowledge and information generated
from a central source & then transferred from
researchers to farmers
• But agricultural development is an immensely
complex process characterized by a high degree of
nonlinearity.
• Technological change rather depends on learning
processes, feedback loops & iterative interactions
• Need an innovation approach - a process of
networking, interactive learning and negotiation
among a heterogeneous set of actors

9. Agricultural innovation systems
• Web of dynamic interactions among actors
including researchers, farmers, & service
providers
• Agricultural development results from combining
technological improvements in production,
processing & distribution with organizational
improvements in how information & knowledge
are exchanged
• Also policy changes that create favorable
incentives and institutions to promote change
• External input needed to generate & this
highlights crucial role of a facilitator or network
broker who catalyses rather than instructs

10. Innovation systems & conservation agriculture
Innovations systems have emerged around
conservation agriculture practices across a range of
emerging economies
• South and Meso America (e.g. Brazil, Bolivia,
Paraguay, Mexico),
• Africa (e.g. Ghana, southern Africa)
• Asia (the Indo-Gangetic Plains of South Asia , China
and Central Asia).
• But fewer examples of CA on small farms outside the
Americas

11. Mexico case study
• Due to climate change agricultural output in
Mexico could decrease by >25% by 2080
• A concept of innovation networks was
developed by CIMMYT with focus on
conservation agriculture
• In each network, exchange of information was
organized between the different partners with
CIMMYT as network broker
• Based on the results, Mexican federal
government launched MasAgro initiative in
2011 targeting maize and wheat-based
systems

12. Sustainable Modernization of
Traditional Agriculture (MasAgro)
• Develop, improve and spread innovative
sustainable agricultural practices
• Including conservation agriculture, high-
yielding germplasm, post-harvest technologies
• Dynamic and flexible approach of MasAgro
allows for decentralized experimentation
• Institutionalization of agricultural innovation
networks for smallholders

13. Structure & functioning of MasAgro
• Establish shared goals &
efficient coordination between
actors involved in the
agricultural production chain.
• Actors include: private sector,
international & national
research centers, universities,
farmers, extension workers,
input suppliers, & policy-makers
• The innovation network is called
a hub & includes establishment
of research/experimental
platforms, farmer modules &
extension areas

14. Hub
• The core of the hub is the experimental platform. These are
placed within universities, research institutes on farmers’ plots
• Research in the platforms locally adapts and improves the
proposed technologies
• Platforms also serve to train farmers, extension agents,
researchers & other collaborators
• Modules are established on farmers’ fields. Farmers are linked
with extension agents trained by CIMMYT and by MasAgro’s
partners
• Together, they test and further adapt the technologies. Feedback
is necessary
• Surrounding farmers, public & private extension agents &
service providers are invited to field day days

15. General structure of a hub

17. Federal and state level interest
Within one year
20 innovation hubs
13,000 farmers involved
20,000 hectares reached
Target: 260,000 farms

18. Sustainability of MasAgro?
• Idea is to expand hub approach within existing
agro-ecological areas for maize & small grain
based systems.
• Increasing number of local states including
approach in state-level policy frameworks
• Seed companies using hubs
• Change within CIMMYT, greater emphasis on
outcomes and impacts
• Ecology of disciplines along value chain

19. Functional and empowerment components
of participatory research
• Functional component includes
identification of traits that guide
crop breeders
• Is farmer empowerment best
carried out by development
organizations with longer-term
interaction with farmers
• Ultimately, partnerships between
research and development
organizations should translate into
larger and wider impact.

20. We are not there yet
• Have not yet comprehensively
achieved the paradigm shift
from a linear transfer-of-
technology approach to one
that fosters the emergence of
an agricultural innovation
systems & participatory
research
• The example of MasAgro in
Mexico, however, illustrates
how the change can be
fostered and institutionalized