Witcombe, J.R. and A. Joshi. 1997. The Impact of Farmer Participatory Research on Biodiversity of Crops. IN: Using Diversity: Enhancing and Maintaining Genetic Resources On-Farm. L. Sperling and M. Loevinsohn (Eds). IDRC 1, ISBN 0-88936-833-3.Farmers are increasingly participating in agricultural research as scientists and development workers become more aware of the philosophy of 'farmer first and its effectiveness. Many farmer participatory approaches are possible in farmer participatory research for improved crop cultivars by farmers. They should be broadly categorized into farmer participatory varietal selection (PVS) and farmer participatory plant breeding (PPB) since they conveniently define two approaches that are very different, and are likely to have very different impacts. Methods are reviewed in PVS and PPB that employ differing levels of farmer participation and researcher inputs. Depending on the situation, either PVS or PPB can be the most appropriate method to use. PPB often follows from the successful participatory identification of cultivars. Although both PVS and PPB can increase biodiversity found in farmers fields, PPB has the greatest effect. Indeed, if PPB is used with the maximum possible involvement of farmers using material generated from landrace x exotic crosses then it represents a dynamic form of in situ genetic conservation. This method is likely to have the greatest impact on conserving biodiversity. Little attention has been paid to the impact of farmer participatory research on biodiversity. In the published examples on participatory plant breeding (Salazar, 1992 and Worede and Mekbib, 1993) the idea of preserving biodiversity has been in the mind of the researchers, and there has been emphasis on improving landraces or using them as parents. The issue of biodiversity has hardly been considered in the work on PVS. In this paper, work and results are reported in PVS and, to a lesser extent, in PPB of the Crops Programme of the Krishak Bharati Cooperative Indo British Rainfed Farming Project (KRIBP).

P. K. Aiyasamy, Neal Bliven, Barbara Harriss, John Harriss, Mauricio Jaramillo, Per Pinstrup-Andersen, V. Rajagopalan, and Sudhir Wanmali, Edited by Peter B.R. Hazell and C. Ramasamy, 286 pages / 199, Published for IFPRI by Johns Hopkins University PressTHE "GREEN REVOLUTION"—a term used for rapid increases in wheat and rice yields in developing countries brought about by improved varieties combined with the expanded use of fertilizers and other chemical inputs—has had an important impact on incomes and food supplies in many developing countries. It has also spawned a lively controversy over its impact on the poor, with some critics claiming that inequality, and perhaps even absolute poverty, has increased in rural areas as a consequence of the green revolution. Given the importance of future rounds of yield-increasing technologies for fostering economic development and feeding growing populations in most developing countries, it is imperative that the economic and social forces released by these technologies be better understood so that they can be harnessed to achieve the twin goals of growth and equity. To this end, the International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI) embarked, in the early 1980s, on a series of in-depth case studies of the impact of technological change in agriculture. This study of the North Arcot district in South India is the first in that series, and it was undertaken in close collaboration with the Tamil Nadu Agricultural University (TNAU) at Coimbatore. A companion study has also been undertaken in the Eastern Province of Zambia. A unique feature of these studies lies in the emphasis given to the growth linkage effects of agricultural growth on the rural nonfarm economy. Inspired by the earlier work of John Mellor and associates at Cornell University, it was hypothesized that the rural poor may obtain significant indirect benefits from agricultural growth because of increases in income-earning opportunities that arise in the local nonfarm economy. Moreover, this potential has not been adequately addressed in previous studies of the green revolution.

Braun, A., D. Peters, M. Covault, and J.C. Mercado. 2002. Mid -Term Evaluation of: CATIE's Program on Ecologically-Based Participatory Implementation of IPM and Agroforestry in Nicaragua and Central America (CATIE-MIP/AF) Phase III. 59 pp. CATIE-MIP/AF is a well-conceived and well-managed program that has capitalized on lessons learned in previous phases and from other programs. It developed in response to the weakening of the extension function within national agricultural systems in Central America and has contributed to the reorientation of the linear transfer-of-technology model prevailing in Nicaragua and other Central American Countries into a participatory extension approach that links farm families, extensionists, researchers and trainers, and decision-makers. The participatory methodologies developed by the program are a major strength in addressing challenges posed by modern-day complexity, uncertainty and dynamism in agriculture and natural resource management by farmers. The Program has catalyzed the establishment of a field-based multi-level, multi-institutional platform for participatory development and extension of technology for three important Central American farming systems, coffee, vegetables and basic grains (maize and beans), combining these with a broad array of ecological practices based on principles of agroforestry, integrated pest management, and natural resource conservation. The participatory capacity-building supported by the program develops powers of ecological reasoning, and incorporates a gender and family focus. The program has supported participatory training of significant numbers of farmers, extensionists, trainers and has involved decision-makers in joint planning and public monitoring of the process. Future emphasis on developing empresarial reasoning as a complement to the current focus on ecological reasoning. could increase the sustainability of achievements and the chances of significant impact on poverty alleviation in the future

Buenavista, G. I. Coxhead, and K. Kim 1998. Making a Difference in the Community. Assessing the impact of a participatory research-oriented project: results of a survey. SANREM.If project evaluation is difficult, assessing the impact of a research project -- in which the major outputs are ideas -- is very difficult, and to do so for a participatory rural development project utilizing non-formal locally-based methods of information exchange is highly problematic. In this paper we report such an attempt for a project investigation sustainable agriculture and environmental management among mainly farm households in a Philippine watershed. We present and analyze data from surveys of individuals and 'opinion leaders' at the project site. To substitute for “with project” and “without project” samples of respondents (since other sources of heterogeneity may divide these) we construct several measures of “distance” from the project and locate our sample along these measures. While hypotheses of statistical causation remain to be tested, preliminary analysis of the survey results indicates that proximity to the project is positively correlated with heightened awareness of environmental linkages and concepts, more “environment-conscious” attitudes, and a higher propensity to adopt relatively costly sustainable agriculture practices such as integrated pest management (IPM), hedgerows and contour strips. These findings emerge in spite of a relatively brief project life (less than five years) and a concentration of project activities on research rather than training or extension. Moreover, 'opinion leaders' who report the project as a primary influence on their thinking are also cited as important sources by respondents in the random sample. This finding, in an era of administrative decentralization and political devolution, suggests that the project may have indirect as well as direct means to influence individual decision-makers. We conclude that a participatory approach to research design and implementation, as followed in the project under examination, is an effective means to transfer information to and among farmers, thus reducing the subjective costs of adopting new practices.

Ashby, J.A., A.R. Braun, T. Gracia, M.P. Guerrero, L.A. Hernandez, C.A. Quiros, J.I. Roa. 2000. Investing in Farmers as Researchers. Experience with Local Agricultural Research committees (CIALs) in Latin America. CIAT Publication No. 318. International Center for Tropical Agriculture. Cali. Colombia. More information...  How CIALs have spread to Armenia

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.

Mackay, R; Horton, D. 2003 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved. The rationale behind conducting impact assessment studies is the expectation that thefindings will be used to bring about improvements in policies and programs and thereby contribute to economic and social betterment. This paper addresses a number of issues related to why impact assessments and other kinds of evaluations are not always utilized in this way. Any particular impact assessment falls along a continuum between academic research at one extreme and utilization-focused evaluation at the other. We argue that impact assessment studies may enjoy greater use by decision makers if they are managed as evaluations conducted towards the utilization-focused end of the continuum. Several factors that influence the use of evaluations are discussed. These include the type of potential use and intended users; the nature of decision-making; factors over and above information that affect howdecisions are made; and the various decision levels where evaluations may be used.

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..

Ceccarelli, S. and S. Grando. 1999. Decentralised Participatory Plant Breeding. ILEIA.The objective of this PPB project conducted in Syria is to test an alternative way of producing improved varieties of crops, such as barley, for marginal environments. The project operates in 9 villages chosen to represent variations in annual rainfall, soil types, management practices, farm sizes and types of participatory selection. The project compared the following four strategies of selection:• By farmers in their own fields (decentralised participatory selection)• By farmers on the research station (centralised participatory selection)• By the breeder in farmers fields (decentralised non-participatory selection)• By the breeder in the research station (centralised non-participatory selection)Farmers acquired the ability to conduct the trials without supervision, and were able to formulate suggestions about potential parents for crosses. They were able to explain the project to other farmers. Farmers began to realise that there could be many different types of barley. We showed farmers how crosses were made, and the different types of barley generated by a single cross. In one of the villages, a farmer’s wife suddenly started sitting in the same room with us ‘foreigners’ and began participating in the discussion. Such a change obviously makes it much easier to find out the preferences of women which would otherwise be ‘filtered’ through the men. These reactions may seem small, but they indicate that this approach can have a major impact on variety adoption, skill building, increased female participation, and the capacity of farmers to redirect plant breeding and shape agricultural research to their needs.