van de Fliert, E and A.R. Braun 2001. Conceptualizing Integrative, Farmer Participatory Research for Sustainable Agriculture: From Opportunities to Impact. Working Document No. 16. PRGA Program. Cali, Colombia. also published in 2002 in Agriculture and Human Values 19(1): 25-38.

Humphries, S. J. Gonzales, J. Jimenez and F. Sierra. 2000. Searching for sustainable land use practices in honduras: lessons from a programme of participatory research with hillside farmers. AgREN Network Paper 104. ISBN 0-85003-486-8Participatory Research in Central America (Investigación Participativa en Centroamerica, IPCA) is a project established by the International Centre for Tropical Agriculture, and coordinated through the University of Guelph, Canada, to support farmers in community-based agricultural research in the region. Local agricultural research committees, known by the Spanish acronym CIALs (comités de investigación agricola local), are found in eight Latin American countries at the present time. The IPCA project has been monitoring the development of CIALs in Honduras for the past five years. This paper presents the results of the evaluation to date and considers these in light of current debates around farmer participatory research.The experience of IPCA shows that teaching formal research methods to poor hillside farmers is viable and has served to link farmers to formal-sector researchers in innovative technology development programmes that directly meet users’ needs. Farmers have not only benefited through access to new technologies, but they have also learnt new ways to manage their environments and have been empowered in the process. However, evaluation of the project has shown that unless research has relatively short-term payoffs, farmers are apt to lose interest. Thus, complex research – in particular research involving natural resource management – needs to be framed within the context of social programmes that can provide more immediate benefit to farmers. Technology-led development must be supported by other development initiatives that aim to build social capital as widely as possible across the community.

Douthwaite, B. J.D.H. Keatinge and J.R. Park. 2002. Learning selection: A model for planning, implementing and evaluating participatory technology development. Agricultural Systems 72 (2):109-131. Request reprintThis paper develops a model of the early adoption process that takes into account modifications made by users. The model is based on data from 13 attempts to introduce six postharvest technologies into the Philippines and Vietnam. It is built on an analogy between technology change and Darwinian evolution. At the core of the model is the interactive experiential learning process –– learning selection (LS) –– that is analogous to natural selection in the living world. In learning selection stakeholders engage with a new technology, individually playing the evolutionary roles of novelty generation and selection, and in their interactions creating recombinations of ideas and experiences and the promulgation of beneficial novelties. Peoples' motivations to engage in learning selection, and its outcomes, are influenced by the interaction between their lifeworlds and their environments. The model has implications for management of agricultural technology change. It suggests the need for a nurturing of new technology during its early adaptation and adoption, until the point where the beneficiary stakeholders (manufacturers and users) are sufficiently numerous and have adequate knowledge to play the evolutionary roles themselves. The LS model, while developed with data from agro-mechanical technologies, could provide a theoretical underpinning for participatory technology development.

Ashby, J.A.; Braun, A.R.; Gracia T.; Guerrero, M.P.; Hernandez, L.A.; Quiros, C.A.; Roa, J.A. 2001. La comunidad se organiza para hacer investigación CIAL en America Latina. CIAT. Cali, Colombia.Este libro trata acerca de una nueva clase de institución aquella en la que los agricultores de escasos recursos se encargan de un proceso de investigación agrícola que los beneficia a ellos y a su comunidad. El Comité de Investigación Agrícola Local (CIAL) pretende, con la ayuda de personas capacitadas provenientes de otros lugares, animar a los agricultores para que realicen su propia investigación agrícola y para que involucren en esa tarea a su comunidad. Este enfoque participativo es efectivo mientras el CIAL dé resultados útiles a su comunidad. La metodología está diseñada para que garantice una capacitación eficaz tanto para los agricultores como para las personas ajenas a esa comunidad pero que estén interesadas, y para que sea relevante a diferentes ámbitos institucionales y culturales. La Fundación W.K. Kellogg patrocinó el proyecto que desarrolló originalmente la metodología. Se presentan resúmenes en inglés, español y francés. Disponible también en ingles.

CIAT (Centro Internacional de Agricultura Tropical) JIRCAS (Japanese Internacional Research Center for Agricultural Science); PRGA Program. 2002. Proc. Workshop on “How participatory research can complement conventional research approaches”, held in Tsukuba, Japan, 4-8 march 2002. (CD-Rom).

Braun, A.R. and H. Hocdé. 2000. Farmer Participatory Research in Latin America: Four Cases. pp. 32-53 IN: W.W.Stur, P.M. Horne, J.B.Hacker and P.C. Kerridge (Eds.) Working with Farmers: The Key to Adoption of Forage Technologies. ACIAR Publication PR095. 325 pp.Farmer Participatory Research (FPR) emerged in response to limitations of top-down R&D approaches. In Latin America, the principles and concepts of FPR are rooted in earlier participatory research experiences in fields such as education, sociology and health, usually played out within a community-development context. Contributions of Paulo Freire and Orlando Fals Borda are discussed briefly. To analyse these experiences, a typology based on decision-making locus in research, farmers’ and scientists’ roles, and the style of research conducted was used. Three approaches were distinguished: scientist-led, farmer-led and interactive research. Four cases are analysed: (1) Farmer-to-Farmer program, Nicaragua, founded in 1987 by the National Farmers and Ranchers Union (UNAG) based on volunteer farmer-promoters. The focus is on low external-input agriculture. (2) Diagnosis, Investigation and Participation (DIP), formed in 1994 by a multidisciplinary team with linkages to the Veterinary Medicine and Animal Science Faculty at the Autonomous University in Yucatan, Mexico. Their objective is to improve the quality of life of indigenous communities at the forest-agriculture interface through participatory innovation based on local resources. (3) Farmer Experimentation, initiated by PRIAG (Regional Program for Reinforcement of Agronomic Research on Basic Grains) in Central America, in 1991. The objective is to increase the self-reliance of small- and medium-scale producers in generating and disseminating technology. (4) Local agricultural research committees (CIALs), first launched by CIAT in Colombia in 1990, to strengthen rural communities’ capacity as decision-makers and innovators of agricultural solutions and to exert demand on the formal R&D system. The discussion focuses on similarities and differences in the processes, principles, roles and relationships underlying these experiences and key lessons learned.

Jabbar, M.A., M. A. Mohamed Saleem and H. Li-Pun. 2001. Evolution toward transdisciplinarity in technology and resource management research: the case of a project in Ethiopia. pp.167-172. In: Klein, J.T., W Grossssenbacher-Mansuy, R Haberli, A Bill, R W Scholz, M Welti (eds). 'Transdisciplinarity: Joint Problem-Solving among Science, Technology and Society'. Birkhauser, Basel, Switzerland.  Among the top ten papers presented at the transdisciplinarity conference, Swiss Federal Institute of Technology, Zurich, Switzerland, 2000.

Conroy, C., Y. Thakur and M. Vadher. 2002. The efficacy of participatory development of technologies: experiences with resource-poor goat-keepers in India. Livestock Research for Rural Development 14(3) 2002.The adoption by resource-poor livestock-keepers of technologies developed by livestock and forage researchers has been poor. It has been argued that a participatory approach to technology development can help to ensure that new technologies are more appropriate to livestock-keepers’ needs and circumstances, and hence increase the likelihood of adoption. This paper describes trials conducted in India by a goat research project that adopted a participatory approach, and assesses to what extent the postulated benefits of participatory technology development have been realised, and the factors affecting this. It describes trials involving two of the most promising technologies developed by the project. It then discusses: (a) the prospects for adoption of these and other technologies investigated by the project; (b) methodological issues relating to control groups; and (c) the challenges associated with achieving a high degree of participation by livestock-keepers. Finally, it identifies what conclusions can be drawn, and lessons learned, from the project’s experiences.

Bosma, R.H., R.L Roothaert, Ibrahim. 2001. Economic and social benefits of new forage technologies in East Kalimantan, Indonesia. CIAT Working Document No. 190. Centro Internacional de Agricultura Tropical, Los Banos, Philippines, 61 pp..

Horne, P. and W. Stür. 2003. Developing agricultural solutions with smallholder farmers -- how to get started with participatory approaches. ACIAR Monograph No. 99 120 pp.Contents1 - Before you start2- Why should I use participatory approaches3 - A participatory approach that has worked for us- Selecting villages- Agreeing on issues - Participatory Diagnosis- Searching for technology options with the focus-group- Testing and evaluating options - starting small- Reporting back to the village- Integrating promising solutions on farms- Reaching other farmers in the village- Sharing successful technologies with other villages4 - Communication and facilitation skills- Why is it important to be neutral?- What type of questions should I use?- How do I facilitate group meetings?- Using cards to analyse ideas5 - Tools- Ranking,scoring and weighting- Village walks- Village resource maps- Wealth analysis- Historical calendars- Seasonal calendars- Problem-cause diagrams- Preference analysis6 - Just do it!7 - Where can I get more information

Douthwaite, B., N.C. de Haan, V. Manyong and D. Keatinge 2002. Blending “Hard” and “Soft” Science: the “Follow-the-Technology” Approach to Catalyzing and Evaluating Technology Change. Special Feature on Integrated Natural Resource Management (INRM). Conservation Ecology. Vol 5(2). Other articles in this special issueThe types of technology change catalyzed by research interventions in integrated natural resource management (INRM) are likely to require much more social negotiation and adaptation than are changes related to plant breeding, the dominant discipline within the system of the Consultative Group on International Agricultural Research (CGIAR). Conceptual models for developing and delivering high-yielding varieties have proven inadequate for delivering natural resource management (NRM) technologies that are adopted in farmers' fields. Successful INRM requires tools and approaches that can blend the technical with the social, so that people from different disciplines and social backgrounds can effectively work and communicate with each other. This paper develops the "follow-the-technology" (FTT) approach to catalyzing, managing, and evaluating rural technology change as a framework that both "hard" and "soft" scientists can work with. To deal with complexity, INRM needs ways of working that are adaptive and flexible. The FTT approach uses technology as the entry point into a complex situation to determine what is important. In this way, it narrows the research arena to achievable boundaries. The methodology can also be used to catalyze technology change, both within and outside agriculture. The FTT approach can make it possible to channel the innovative potential of local people that is necessary in INRM to "scale up" from the pilot site to the landscape. The FTT approach is built on an analogy between technology change and Darwinian evolution, specifically between "learning selection" and natural selection. In learning selection, stakeholders experiment with a new technology and carry out the evolutionary roles of novelty generation, selection, and promulgation. The motivation to participate is a "plausible promise" made by the R&D team to solve a real farming problem. Case studies are presented from a spectrum of technologies to show that repeated learning selection cycles can result in an improvement in the performance of the plausible promise through adaptation and a sense of ownership by the stakeholders.

Braun, A. 2004. A training workshop on Participatory Research Approaches for the ICARDA project on Improving Rural Livelihoods through Efficient On-farm Water and Soil Fertility Management in Central Asia. 6-10 September, Tashkent, Uzbekistan. Facilitation Plan.Contents:1. Setting the context for the workshop2. Understanding participatory research Analysis of examples of participatory research Theory/Concepts3. Enabling participatory researchTools and skillsPotentials and constraints for adapting participatory research for application in Central Asia4. Doing participatory research# Taking advantage of the potentials /overcoming constraints# How are we doing research now and how can we make it more participatory?

Van Mele, P. and A.K.M. Zakaria. 2002. The Innovation Tree: A new PRA tool to reveal socio-psychological factors influencing the innovation adoption process. CABI Bioscience and Rural Development Academy, Bangladesh.A new PR A tool nam ely th e Innovation Tree h as been developed. It h as helped people to visualise and analyse th e w ay in w h ich an innovation is spread over tim e betw een community m em bers. Not only did we find it to be a very useful tool to distinguish betw een innovators, early and late adopters, but also to h elp both outsiders and the community to understand some of the social and psychological dim ensions that influence th e adoption of an innovation within th a community. The Innovation Tree also allowed for investigating how different personalities or types of innovators play a different role in promoting the technology to their colleagues, wh ich is of direct relevance for developing farmer-to-farmer extension activities.

Aarnink, W., S. Bunning, L. Collette, P.Mulvany. 1998. Sustaining Agricultural Biodiversity and Agro-ecosystem functions: Opportunities, incentives and approaches for the conservation and sustainable use of agricultural biodiversity in agro-ecosystems and production systems . Report of International Technical Workshop organized by FAO and the Secretariat of the Convention on Biological Diversity, with the support of the Government of the Netherlands. 2 - 4 December 1998, FAO, Rome, Italy.

cSnapp, S. 2003. Quantifying Farmer Evaluation of Technologies: The Mother and Baby Trial Design In: Bellon, M.R. and J. Reeves, (eds.). Quantitative Analysis of Data from Participatory Methods in Plant Breeding. Mexico, DF: CIMMYT.

ETC-RUAF and SIUPA. 2001. Proceedings of the expert workshop on Appropriate Methodologies for Urban Agriculture: Research, Policy development, Planning, Implementation and Evaluation. 1-5 Oct, 2001. Nairobi, Kenya. ETC Resource Centre on Urban Agriculture and Forestry, Leusden, the Netherlands and CGIAR Strategic Initiative on Urban and Peri-urban Agriculture SIUPA, Lima, Peru.Urban agriculture is an ancient practice but a recent focus of attention for a wide range of professionals associated with urban management, urban planning and agriculture. In the past these fields have been quite separate, and have elaborated their own approaches and methods associated with policy development, planning, research and monitoring and evaluation. The organisers of the workshop believe that to strengthen and develop agriculture in the urban environment, there is a pressing need not only to explore the adaptation of the wide range of methods used in rural agricultural research and development, but also to provide an innovative integration of these procedures with the specifically urban methods applied to understanding planning and policy issues. In order to stimulate such a process CGIAR-SIUPA and ETC-RUAF decided to jointly organise a multi media process of collection, discussion and synthesis of a set of appropriate methods for urban agriculture research, policy developoment, planning, implementation and evaluation. We started with a brain-storming meeting (in Leusden, the Netherlands )with a small group invited resource persons. As a result six thematic areas were chosen through which to identify and debate appropriate methods for urban agriculture. These themes, which are elaborated in more detail below, are: • Situation analysis/diagnosis and baseline studies on UA • Participatory UA policy formulation and action planning • Integration of UA in urban land use planning • Participatory technology development in UA • Marketing assessments and micro-enterprise development related to UA • Monitoring and evaluation of the impacts of UA As a next step we invited experts on each of these themes to prepare a synthesis paper. The topic coordinators identified interesting experiences, commissioned the preparation of case study papers and synthesized current methodological experiences. The synthesis papers were used as the basis for the discussions during the expert consultation held in Nairobi in October 2001, on which we report in this document. The objective of the workshop was: to bring together, exchange and discuss experiences gained with a variety of methodologies applied in intra-urban and peri-urban agriculture (UA)1 research, policy development, spatial urban planning, project planning, implementation, monitoring and evaluation.

Onduru, D., G.N. Gachini, A. de Jager and J-M. Diop. 1999. Participatory Research on Compost and Liquid Manure in Kenya. IIED Series on Managing Africa's Soils.No. 8.Soil fertility is declining in Kenya’s low potential areas. Soil fertility management technologies which are more appropriate to farmers’ socio-economic circumstances are needed. This paper presents the methodology and results of an on-farm experiment with the use of compost and liquid manure on maize, using a Participatory Technology Development (PTD) approach. One group comprised conventional farmers while the second comprised farmers using a Low External Input and Sustainable Agriculture (LEISA) approach. The study shows that with this approach, farmers and researchers can come to agreement on technologies to be tested, treatments and research design.

Gündel, S. 1998. Participatory Innovation Development and Diffusion: Adoption and adaption of introduced legumes in the traditional slash-and-burn peasant farming system in Yucatan, Mexico. Begleitprogramm Tropenökologie, GTZ, Eschborn, Germany.

Gündel, S. 1998. Innovación, desarrollo y difusión participativas: Adopción y adaptación de leguminosas introducidas en el sistema agrícola tradicional de rozatumba y quema en Yucatán, México. Begleitprogramm Tropenökologie, GTZ, Eschborn, Germany.

Reij, C. and A. Waters-Bayer (Eds). 2001 Farmer Innovation in Africa: A Source of Inspiration for Agricultural Development. Earthscan.One of Africa's major untapped resources is the creativity of its farmers. This book presents a series of clear and detailed studies that demonstrate how small-scale farmers, both men and women, experiment and innovate in order to improve their livelihoods, despite the adverse conditions and lack of appropriate external support with which they have to contend. The studies are based on fieldwork in a wide variety of farming systems throughout Africa, and have been written primarily by African researchers and extension specialists. Numerous lively examples show how a participatory approach to agricultural research and development that builds on local knowledge and innovation can stimulate the creativity of all involved – not only the farmers. This approach, which recognizes the farmers' capacity to innovate as the crucial component of success, provides a much-needed alternative to the conventional 'transfer of technology' paradigm. This book is a rich source of case studies and analyses of how agricultural research and development policy can be changed. It presents evidence of the resilience and resolution of rural communities in Africa and will be an inspiration for development workers, researchers and policy-makers, as well as for students and teachers of agriculture, environment and sustainable development.

Onduru, D., A. de Jager, G. Gachini and J-M. Diop. 2001. Exploring new pathways for innovative soil fertility management in Kenya. IIED Series on Managing Africa's Soils. No. 25.This working paper discusses the impact of a multi-institutional research programme in low potential areas of Kenya. The programme elaborated nutrient balances, combined with economic analysis, to better understand causes and effects of soil fertility decline. Alongside, better soil fertility management practices were developed using a participatory technology approach. This paper assesses to what extent farmers changed their practices, if the programme has influenced ways of working with extension and research, or has led to better informed policies.

Ashby, J, J. Beltran, T. Gracia, M. Guerrero, C. Quiros, J. Roa, C. Trujillo and F. Escobar. 1993. Cartillas para Comites de Investigacion Agricola Local 1-13/. Primers for Local Agricultural Research Committees 1-13 (translated by A. Braun). CIAT, Cali, Colombia.

Caldwell, J.S., S. Sukchan, W. On-Ok, N. Kabaki, C. Ogura, M. Prabpan and P. Rattanaprom. 2003. A Farmer Participatory Approach to Development of a Research Agenda for Water Management Priorities in Nong Saeng Village, Khon Kaen Province, Thailand. JIRCAS Working Report No. 30. pp. 33-41.Farmer participatory methods were used to develop a research agenda for water management priorities in a small watershed in Nong Saeng village, Khon Kaen Province, Thailand. A farmers’ meeting was held in March 2001 to determine placement of two transects to assess effects of water shortages and soil erosion. These transects were then surveyed with farmers over three days. Results indicated that soil erosion and pond water shortages during the rice growing season were primary farmer constraints. On transect 1, with less soil erosion, availability of supplemental pond water increased the number of years with normal or greater yields from 2 to 4 years, whereas with lack of access to pond water, normal yield was achieved only 1 out of 5 years. On transect 2, soil erosion, dike breakage, gully formation, and sand deposits resulted in normal yields achieved less than 1 year out of 10. To address these constraints, a menu of five technologies from on-station research was presented to farmers in a second farmers’ meeting February 2002: 1) pond reinforcement to reduce water loss; 2) dike strengthening to reduce water loss; 3) agro-forestry tree-crop strips to reduce soil erosion; 4) subsoiling to increase water infiltration; 5) no-till to reduce surface water runoff. Farmers considered lack of capital to be an impediment to use of equipment developed for technologies 1), 4), and 5). They considered potential conflicts between off-farm employment and tree management to be the most important impediment to agro-forestry technology 3). Farmers proposed testing dike strengthening to prevent breakage, as an entry-point technology to start watershed management research.

van de Fliert, E. and A.R. Braun. 1998. Farmer Field School for Integrated Crop Management of Sweetpotato: Field Guides and Technical Manual. CIP/UPWARD.Sweetpotato cultivation can be highly profitable for farmers. When market prices are high, farmers' profits double or triple compared to those from growing rice. The relatively high yield and low production costs contribute to this profitability, but unfortunately, in many places in the world sweetpotato prices fluctuate widely. The marketing system may also limit farmers' profits, particularly when middlemen are involved who make contracts with farmers to buy the standing crop. Because farmers rarely know how to estimate the yield of the unharvested crop and are not fully aware of the prevailing prices at wider distribution markets, they are at a disadvantage in price negotiations with the trader and usually accept the offer with little discussion. Most farmers believe that profit is determined more by their luck in making a sale agreement with the trader than by the yield of the crop. Highly fluctuating prices and a weak bargaining position influences farmers’ attitudes towards sweetpotato cultivation because it provides little incentive to produce high yields. Nevertheless, comparison of yields and profits obtained by farmers in Indonesia showed a tendency for farmers who produced higher yields to earn higher profits. This suggests that farmers can increase profits by increasing their yields through better crop management, and by learning to estimate what the yield is likely to be before entering into negotiations with a trader. How can farmers’ knowledge and skills be developed so that they can improve their crop management and business capacities? In the activities described in this guidebook, farmers analyze the relative importance of the sweetpotato enterprise and its constraints. Integrated Crop Management is presented as an alternative to tackle the constraints, and the Farner Field School as a way to learn about ICM.