Participatory Technology Development (PTD) emphasizes involving farmers in every stage of agricultural technology innovation to ensure it is relevant to their needs and local contexts. The approach fosters collaboration between scientists and farmers, promoting sustainable practices based on indigenous knowledge and participatory research methods. Key outcomes include improved agricultural productivity and stronger community resilience through empowered local populations and adaptive technologies.

1. Seminar II
Seminar
On
On
Participatory Technology Development
Participatory Technology Development
(PTD)
(PTD)

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. Definition
“PTD is a long-term interaction between outsiders and local people,
with the aim of generating innovations based on indigenous
knowledge and cultures to develop sustainable livelihood systems”.
More broadly, 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.

4. Participatory: involving and empowering local people
Technology: based on local people’s knowledge and practical
methods of experimentation
Development: people-centered sustainable agricultural development
based on technological generation from within

5. Some fundamental aspects of participatory processes:
 Consultation and access to information for the local people about the intentions of
outsiders
 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. The meaning of technology in PTD
Technology has to do with the ways and means with which humans
apply them-selves to their environment to obtain sustenance and create
a way of life.
The Meaning of Development in PTD
The concept of development in the context of PTD emphasizes the
creativity of local people, their imagination to carry out self-defined
paths in the future.

7. Participatory Technology Development (PTD) offers a way forward,
through active, involvement of farmers in decision-making and in
every stage of technology development right from the beginning i.e.
identifying their problems
Participatory technology development has been applied to the
process and methodology by which various partners cooperate in
technology development.

8. History of PTD
Resource-poor farmers (RPFs) had been slow or unable to adopt
recommendations because of the fact that the technologies were not
appropriate for them.
This contributed to the emergence of the Farming Systems Research (FSR)
movement in the 1970s. This was soon followed, and to some extent
paralleled, by the growth of Farmer Participatory Research (FPR) and
Participatory Technology Development (PTD) during the 1980s and 1990s.

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 times
differ 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 about
related aspects too

10. How PTD over come these problems
It involves users in all the stages of technology development, designing to
evaluation 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. 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. • 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. ROLE OF PTD
 To improve indigenous technologies by careful use of external
inputs.
 To enable greater acceptance of eco-friendly technologies by
farmers.
 To faster effective spread of new technologies within a region.

14. Six basic steps in PTD process
Step I: Getting started
Step II: Understanding problems and opportunities
Step III: Looking for things to try
Step IV: Experimentation
Step V: Sharing the results
Step VI: Keeping up the process

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. 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. 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.  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. Experimentation
 Reviewing farmers’ existing experimental practices;
 Designing selected experiments;
 Defining evaluation criteria and choosing monitoring and evaluation
tools;
 Training farmer experimenters;
 Establishing and managing the experiments;

20.  Monitoring by the farmer-experimenters supported by PTD
facilitators;
 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. 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. 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 service
organizations;
 C o n s o l i d a t i n g institutional and policy support to PTD
processes;
 Documenting the process and methods of experimentation and

23.  Supporting evaluation of the impacts of technologies and the PTD process on
the livelihood system.
 Consolidated community networks or organizations for agricultural self
management;
 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. ADVANTAGES
PTD builds trust between farmers and outsiders
It strengthens the link between indigenous and scientific knowledge
It builds human capacity for self reliance
DISADVANTAGES
The PTD approach takes a long time
Demands patience
Humility on the part of the outsiders

25. Outcomes of using participatory research
The major outcomes expected from using participatory research are related to
behavioral 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 technology
evaluation;
• Multi-disciplinary teams increase appreciation of socioeconomic factors
by biophysical scientists;

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, development
partners and researchers have improved chances for change.

27. A cAse on PTD
A cAse on PTD

28. Project title: Participatory Technology Development and Participatory
Technology Transfer
Collaborators: Sugarcane breeding institute
Annamalai university
NPKRR co-operative sugar mills
Project Area: Nagapattinam district (Thiruvali, Athukudi and Keelaiyer
villages)

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. 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. 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. 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 CoG
93076, Co 8021 and Co 89010
 It was observed that the variety CoG 93076 spread very fast and was under
cultivation in more than 800 ha

33. Name of the trail: Ratoon management
 Treatments included in the trail were “local practice”, “gap filling by
quartering”, “gap filling with polybag seedling” and “local practice + trash
mulching”
 It was observed that farmers practice of gap filling gave better results
compared to others
 The farmers were visibly happy that their traditional practice would give
better 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 also
wherever possible

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 priority
problems or needs identified.
 Three technologies developed to address these constraints
 Natural products were seen by both farmers and researchers as being locally
available at minimum cash outlay compared with pharmaceuticals,

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. Participatory Technology Development (PTD) in Ginger in Sikkim
 Bilateral project between Swiss Development Cooperation (SDC) and Government of
Sikkim, which is implemented by Inter-cooperation (IC) of Switzerland
 The project aims to improve the livelihoods of small and marginal farmers of Sikkim
through natural resource management
 Since 2002
 In August 2002, PTD concept was introduced to ten officials of the DOH from four
districts of Sikkim
 In September 2002, a training was conducted at Gangtok for the DOH field staff and
newly selected NGO staff to introduce the steps in PTD

37.  Along side the PTD process, formation of SHG and strengthening them was also
undertaken
 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 making
and 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 problems
with ginger cultivation

38.  The problem analysis of ginger cultivation was presented at the four day long Ginger
Platform meeting consisting of farmers, DOH, Scientists from the region, IISR and
abroad 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.  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.
Results
Ginger yield increased from 1:3 to 1:6 to 10 in the plots which were relatively free of
diseases. Farmers who got high yields adopted all the management practices like selection of
healthy seeds, planting on raised beds, good drainage, thick mulching and appropriate
nutrient 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. WESTERN ORISSA RURAL LIVELIHOODS PROJECT
“PARTICIPATORY TECHNOLOGY DEVELOPMENT AND PROMOTION
OF MICRO IRRIGATION”
Technologies were designed according to the need of the farmers, which directly related to
water lifting, storage, distribution, application, etc.
The design and development of technology was made in such a way that it reduces women
drudgery such as Surface Treadle Pump (STP), Pressure Pump (PP), Rope & Washer Pump
(R&WP), KB Drip Irrigation Systems (Bucket Kit, Drum Kit & Customized drip), Water
Storage Bag, etc.

41. Some important NGOs which exclusively use PTD are
 Peermade Development Society (Kerala)
 AME Foundation
 BIRD-K
 Action for Social Advancement (Bhopal)

42. CONCLUSION
PTD is not a substitute for conventional research or researcher- managed on-farm trials. It is
a complementary process which involves linking the power and capacities of agricultural
science to the priorities and capacities of farming communities, in order to develop
productive and sustainable farming systems.
‘An active participation of the beneficiaries in the generation of technology can ensure
that it is ‘user-friendly’.