Integrating formal research into a participatory process

ILEIA Newsletter • 11 nº 2 • July 1995

Integrating formal research into a participatory process

Jürgen Hagmann, Edward Chuma and Oliver Gundani

The Conservation Tillage Project has been involved in tillage and soil and water conservation research using a combined on-farm and on-station research approach since 1990. The initial objective was to test and develop tillage systems for soil and water conservation for smallholder farmers in Zimbabwe. Quantitative research data were obtained by both the on-station and the on-farm component. Farmer participatory research on-farm also focuses on qualitative aspects in farmers' experimentation, adaptation and adoption process. A major challenge has been the integration of quantitative research into the process of farmer participatory research.

To build trust between farmers and researchers and to get the research process started, farmers were familiarised with several conservation tillage techniques. These techniques corresponded to their priority need in the semi-arid area, namely water conservation. One technique, tied ridging, was suggested for further joint testing and development in farmer managed and farmer implemented adaptive trials.

In workshops principles of Freire's conscientisation (Training for Transformation) were introduced to catalyse active farmer participation, experimentation and openness in the farmer groups. A problem analysis was carried out and mutual roles and expectations as well as a simple trial design were clarified and agreed upon. After the first year when trust and farmers' spirit of curiosity had fully developed, the researcher-initiated process was taken over by farmer-initiated experimentation on various aspects of land husbandry while testing and development of tied ridging continued. Farmers' own way of experimentation was further encouraged in a "competition for the best ideas" and used as technology and idea pool to be screened every season.

The experimentation process was titled as kuturaya (meaning: let's try) and some farmers came up with more than 10 different trials, mostly based on traditional knowledge. Farmers' trials and experiments were jointly evaluated by the farmer groups, researchers and extensionists during the growing season in a qualitative manner. Quantitative evaluation took place in feedback and planning meetings after the results had been analysed.

As many farmer-initiated trials and ideas showed high potential but did not allow a quantitative comparison, they were jointly screened for either further testing and development using the simple paired design, for further testing on the research station or for promotion if the idea was extremely successful and clear.

Integrating formal research

To evaluate the performance of the tested techniques it was necessary to understand the processes determining their performance using a combined analysis of several methods. The following methods are applied:

• The core method for the researcher-driven quantitative technical evaluation is a simple paired treatment design where the traditional practice as control plot is right next to the improved technique in the same field. After explaining the basic principles of comparison (e.g. for tillage: same planting date, same population, same fertilisation rates) farmers manage their trial field and observe the performance of the two treatments.

• Check plot pairs which are close together in order to avoid high variability in soils and fertility are marked by the researchers. These check plots are used for further quantitative measurements and allow for more control by the researcher without interfering in the farmer's management and without sacrificing easiness of implementation which would be the case in completely randomised block designs. Results are analysed on the basis of the relative performance of the improved technique in comparison with the traditional technique. For statistical analysis each farmer's field is considered as a randomised block with five replicates (see Fig. 1).

• Qualitative observations are made and informal discussions are held with farmers during weekly visits. This tool has proved to be the most successful method to monitor the farmer's trial management and adaptations. The continuous, long-term interaction with individual farm families revealed how farmers' rationale and attitude towards technologies are influenced by the coping strategies within their livelihood system. It also revealed that farming circumstances are highly diverse. They vary between families and are dynamic within families.

• Joint evaluation tours with sharing experiences and results in group discussions among farmers revealed farmers' understanding of the techniques and processes and provided information on implementation.

• Formal questionnaire surveys are used to learn about the attitudes of participating and non-participating farmers towards certain techniques.

Hard and soft data contradict

In an in-depth analysis the results of the quantitative and qualitative methods were combined. However, high quality and reliable quantitative (hard) and qualitative (soft) data emerging from both on-station and on-farm research were often contradictory. Tied ridging, for example, yielded significantly lower than the conventional practice on-station whereas on-farm this technique improved yields significantly.