Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Conceptualizing integrative, farmer participatory research for sustainable agriculture: From opportunities to impact

  • Published:
Agriculture and Human Values Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

This paper offers a conceptualmodel for participatory research projects thataim to improve the sustainability ofagriculture and natural resource management.The purpose of the model is to provide asystematic framework that can guide the designof participatory research projects, theiranalysis, and the documentation of results. Inthe model, conceptual boundaries are drawnbetween research and development, developmentand extension and between extension andimplementation. Objectives, activities, andactors associated with each of these realmsneed to be carefully selected, monitored, andevaluated throughout the course of a projectusing well-designed indicators. The depth ofdisciplinary and methodological integration,and quality of participation needed to reachthe desired impact effectively and efficiently,however, needs to be determined on acase-by-case basis depending on the context andissues surrounding each particular project.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Ashby, J. A., A. R. Braun, A. T. Gracia, M. P. Guerrero, L. A. Hernández, C. A. Quirós, and J. I. Roa (2000). Investing in Farmers as Researchers: Experience with Local Agricultural Research Committees in Latin America. Cali, Colombia: Centro Internacional de Agricultura Tropical (CIAT).

    Google Scholar 

  • Ashby, J. A., T. Gracia, M. P. Guerrero, C. A. Quirós, J. I. Roa, and J. A. Beltran (1995). Institutionalizing farmer participation in adaptive technology testing with the “CIAL.” ODI Agricultural Research and Extension Network. Network Paper 57.

  • Ashby, J. A. (1996). “What do we mean by participatory research in agriculture?” in PRGA, New Frontiers in Participatory Research and Gender Analysis. Proceedings international seminar on participatory research and gender analysis (PRGA), Cali, Colombia, 9-14 September 1996 (pp. 15–22). Cali, Colombia: Centro Internacional de Agricultura Tropical (CIAT), Publication No. 294.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bentley, J. W. (1994). “Facts, fantasies and failures of farmer participatory research.” Agriculture and Human Values 11: 140–150.

    Google Scholar 

  • Biggs, S. D. (1989). Resource-poor farmer participation in research: A synthesis of experiences from nine National Agricultural Research Systems. OFCOR Comparative Study Paper 3. The Hague: ISNAR.

    Google Scholar 

  • Braun, A. R. (1997). An Analysis of Quality in the Indonesian Integrated Pest Management Training Project. Report of a Technical Audit Conducted for the World Bank of the Indonesia Integrated Pest Management Training Project. Jakarta: National IPM Program.

    Google Scholar 

  • Braun, A. R. and H. Hocde (2000). “Participatory research in Latin America: Four cases.” In W. W. Stür, P. M. Horne, J. B. Hacker, and P. C. Kerridge (eds.), Working with Farmers: The Key to Adoption of Forage Technologies. ACIAR Proceedings 95: 32–53.

  • Braun, A. R., G. Thiele, and M. Fernandez (2000). Farmer field schools and local agricultural research committees: Complementary platforms for integrated decision-making in sustainable agriculture. AgREN Network Paper No. 105. London: Agricultural Research and Extension Network, ODI.

    Google Scholar 

  • Braun, A. R. and E. van de Fliert (1997). “The farmer field school approach to IPM and ICM in Indonesia: User participation.” In UPWARD, Local R&D: Institutionalizing Innovations in Rootcrop Agriculture (pp. 44–64). Los Baños, Laguna, Philippines: UPWARD.

    Google Scholar 

  • Braun, A., E. van de Fliert, C. Wheatley, G. Prain, and Y. Widodo (1995). “Improving profits from sweet potato by linking IPM with diversification of markets.” CIP Circular 21(3): 8–15.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brekelbaum, T. (1990). La organización campesina: una síntesis de los puntos más importantes encontradas en la literatura. Chara presentada en el CIAT, Cali, Colombia. (mimeo)

    Google Scholar 

  • Brekelbaum, T. (1994). Reflexiones sobre la autogestión en grupos campesinos: la experiencia con FEBESURCA. Informe de trabajo para CIPASLA, CIAT. Cali, Colombia.

    Google Scholar 

  • Capra, F. (1997). The Web of Life. London: Harper Collins.

    Google Scholar 

  • Carvalho, S. and H. White (1997). Combining the Quantitative and Qualitative Approaches to Poverty Measurement and Analysis: The Practice and the Potential. Washington, DC: The World Bank. World Bank Technical Paper No. 366.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ceccarelli, S., S. Grando, R. Tutwiler, J. Baha, A. M. Martini, H. Salahieh, A. Goodchild, and M. Michael (2000). “A methodological study on participatory barley breeding. 1. Selection Phase.” Euphytica 111: 91–104.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chambers, R. (1994). “The origins and practice of participatory rural appraisal.” World Development 22(7): 953–969.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chambers, R., A. Pacey, and L. A. Thrupp (eds.) (1989). Farmer First: Farmer Innovation and Agricultural Research. London: IT Publications.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cooperrider, D. L. and S. Srivastva. 1987. “Appreciative inquiry in organizational life.” Research in Organizational Change and Development 1: 129–169.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cooperrider, D. L., P. F. Sorensen, D. Whitney, and T. F. Yaeger (eds.) (1999). Appreciative Inquiry: Rethinking Human Organization: Toward a Positive Theory of Change. Champaign, Illinois: Stipes Publishing L.L.C.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cramb, R. (2000). “Processes influencing the successful adoption of new technologies by smallholders.” In W. W. Stür, P. M. Horne, J. B. Hacker, and P. C. Kerridge (eds.), Working with Farmers: The Key to Adoption of Forage Technologies. ACIAR Proceedings 95: 11–22.

  • Defoer, T., H. De Groote, T. Hilhorst, S. Kanté, and A. Budelman (1998). “Participatory action research and quantitative analysis for nutrient management in southern Mali: A fruitful marriage?” Agriculture, Ecosystems and Environment 71: 215–228.

    Google Scholar 

  • Elliot, C. (1999). Locating the Energy for Change: An Introduction to Appreciative Inquiry. Winnipeg, Canada: International Institute for Sustainable Development.

    Google Scholar 

  • Eveleens, K. G., R. Chisholm, E. van de Fliert, M. Kato, P. T. Nhat, and P. Schmidt (1996). Mid-term Review of Phase III Report. Makati, Metro Manila, Philippines: FAO Intercountry Program for the Development and Application of Integrated Pest Control in Rice in South and South-east Asia.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fano, H., O. Ortiz, and T. Walker (1996). “Peru: Interinstitutional cooperation for IPM.” In L. A. Thrupp (ed.), New Partnerships for Sustainable Agriculture (pp. 85–98). Washington, DC: World Resources Institute.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fujisaka, S. (1994). Will farmer participatory research survive in the International Agricultural Research Centers? Gatekeeper Series No. SA44. London: IIED.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gündel, S. (1998). Participatory Innovation Development and Diffusion: Adoption and Adaptation of Introduced Legumes in the Traditional Slash-and-burn Peasant Farming System in Yucatan, Mexico. Eschborn: GTZ.

    Google Scholar 

  • Guijt, I. (1998). Participatory monitoring and impact assessment of sustainable agriculture initiatives: An introduction to the key elements. SARL Discussion Paper No. 1. London: International Institute for Environment and Development.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hagmann, J. and E. Chuma (1998). Learning Together through Participatory Extension. A Guide to an Approach Developed in Zimbabwe. Harare, Zimbabwe: AGRITEX/GTZ/ITZ.

    Google Scholar 

  • Haverkort, B., J. Van der Kamp, and A. Waters-Bayer (eds.) (1991). Joining Farmers' Experiments. Experiences in Participatory Technology Development. London: IT Publications.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jiggins, J. and H. De Zeeuw (1992). “Participatory technology development in practice: Process and methods.” In C. Reijntjes, B. Haverkort, and A. Waters-Bayer (eds.), Farming for the Future: An Introduction to Low-externalinput and Sustainable Agriculture (pp. 1350–162). London: MacMillan.

    Google Scholar 

  • Johnson, N, N. Lilja, and J. A. Ashby (2000). User Participation and Gender Analysis in Natural Resource Management Research: An Empirical Analysis of the State of the Art. Cali, Colombia: CGIAR Program on Participatory Research and Gender Analysis, Working Document No. 10.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kaaria, S. and J. Ashby (2000). An Approach to Technological Innovation that Benefits Rural Women: The Resourceto-consumption System. Cali, Colombia: CGIAR Program on Participatory Research and Gender Analysis, Working Document No. 13.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lilja, N. and J. A. Ashby (1999). Types of participatory research based on the locus of decision-making. PRGA Working paper No. 6. Cali, Colombia: CGIAR Systemwide Program on Participatory Research and Gender Analysis.

    Google Scholar 

  • Loader, R and L. Amartya (1999). “Participatory rural appraisal: Extending the research methods base.” Agricultural Systems 62: 73–85.

    Google Scholar 

  • Matteson, P. C., K. D. Gallagher, and P. E. Kenmore (1994). “Extension of integrated pest management for planthoppers in Asian irrigated rice: Empowering the users.” In R. F. Denno and T. J. Perfect (eds.), Ecology and Management of Planthoppers (pp. 656–685). London: Chapman & Hall.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mikkelsen, B. (1995). Methods for Development Work and Research. A Guide for Practitioners. New Delhi: SAGE Publications.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ooi, P. A. C. (1998). Beyond the farmer field school: IPM and empowerment in Indonesia. Gatekeeper Series No. SA78. London: IIED.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pradhanang, P. M. and J. G. Elphinstone (eds.) (1997). Integrated Management of Bacterial Wilt of Potato: Lessons from the Hills of Nepal. Proceedings of a national workshop held at Lumle Agricultural Research Centre, Pokhara, Nepal, 4-5 November 1996.

  • PRGA (System-wide Program on Participatory Research and Gender Analysis) (1997). A global program on participatory research and gender analysis for technology development and organizational innovation. Agren Network Paper No. 72. London: ODI Agricultural Research and Extension Network.

    Google Scholar 

  • PRGA (2000). Equity, Well-Being, and Ecosystem Health: Participatory Research for Natural Resource Management. Cali, Colombia: CGIAR Systemwide Program on Participatory Research and Gender Analysis.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pretty, J. N. (1994). “Alternative systems of inquiry for sustainable agriculture.” IDS Bulletin 25(2): 37–48.

    Google Scholar 

  • Probst, K. (2000). “Success factors in natural resource management research: Dissection of a complex discourse.” In N. Lilja, J. A. Ashby, and L. Sperling (eds.), Assessing the Impact of Participatory Research and Gender Analysis (pp. 19–48). Cali, Colombia: CGIAR Program on Participatory Research and Gender Analysis, CIAT.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rogers, E. M. (1995). Diffusion of Innovations, 2nd ed. New York: Free Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Röling, N. (1988). Extension Science: Information Systems in Agricultural Development. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Röling, N. (1997). “Creating human platforms to manage natural resources: First results of a research program.” In A. Budelman (ed.), Agricultural R&D at the Crossroads. Merging Systems Research and Social Actor Approaches (pp. 149–158). Amsterdam: Royal Tropical Institute.

    Google Scholar 

  • Röling, N. and E. van de Fliert (1998). “Introducing integrated pest management in rice in Indonesia: A pioneering attempt to facilitate large scale change.” In N. G. Röling and M. A. E. Wagemakers (eds.), Sustainable Agriculture: Participatory Learning and Action (pp. 153–171). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Röling, N. and J. Jiggins (1998). “The ecological knowledge system.” In N. G. Röling and M. A. E. Wagemakers (eds.), Sustainable Agriculture: Participatory Learning and Action (pp. 283–211). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Snapp, S. (1999). “Mother and baby trials. A novel farmer participatory trial design and methodology being tried out in Malawi.” Target 17: 8.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sperling, L., M. E. Loevinsohn, and B. Ntabomvura (1993). “Rethinking the farmer's role in plant breeding: Local bean experts and on-station selection in Rwanda.” Experimental Agriculture 29: 501–519.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stroud, A. (2000). Participatory Natural Resource Management Research Methods used by African Highlands Initiative Research Teams. Nairobi, Kenya: International Centre for Research in Agroforestry, AHI Technical Series.

    Google Scholar 

  • Thiele, G., E. van de Fliert, and D. Campilan (2001). “What happened to participatory research at the International Potato Center?” Agriculture and Human Values 18(4): 429–446.

    Google Scholar 

  • van de Fliert, E. (1993). Integrated pest management: Farmer field schools generate sustainable practices. A case study in Central Java evaluating IPM training. Wageningen Agricultural University Papers (93)3.Wageningen, The Netherlands: PUDOC.

    Google Scholar 

  • van de Fliert, E. (1996). Identification of ICM and ICM Training Needs for Sweet Potato in East and Central Java. Los Baños: UPWARD. Progress report III to UPWARD.

    Google Scholar 

  • van de Fliert, E. (1998). “Integrated pest management: Springboard to sustainable agriculture.” In G. S. Dhaliwal and E. A. Heinrichs (eds.), Critical Issues in Insect Pest Management (pp. 250–266). New Delhi: Commonwealth Publishers.

    Google Scholar 

  • van de Fliert, E. and A. R. Braun (1997). “One step back, two steps forward: Sweet potato ICM development in Indonesia.” In UPWARD, Local R&D: Institutionalizing Innovations in Rootcrop Agriculture (pp. 153–167). Los Baños, Laguna, Philippines: UPWARD.

    Google Scholar 

  • van de Fliert, E., J. Pontius, and N. Röling (1995). “Searching for strategies to replicate a successful extension approach: Training of IPM trainers in Indonesia.” European Journal of Agricultural Education and Extension 1(4): 41–64.

    Google Scholar 

  • van de Fliert, E., A. Braun, S. R. Ghimire, and J. Brons (1998). “Three cases and a model: Application of an integrative, participatory R&D framework to UPWARD projects in Indonesia, Nepal and the Philippines.” In UPWARD, Sustainable Livelihood for Rural Households: Contribution from Rootcrop Agriculture (pp. 99–109). Los Baños, Laguna (Philippines), UPWARD.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wilson, E. O. (1998). Consilience: The Unity of Knowledge. New York: Vintage Books, Random House.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. ESEAP Regional Office, International Potato Center (CIP), Bogor, 16309, Indonesia

    Elske van de Fliert

  2. Paideia Resources, P.O. Box 462, Nelson, New Zealand

    Ann R. Braun

Authors
  1. Elske van de Fliert
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Ann R. Braun
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Elske van de Fliert.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

van de Fliert, E., Braun, A.R. Conceptualizing integrative, farmer participatory research for sustainable agriculture: From opportunities to impact. Agriculture and Human Values 19, 25–38 (2002). https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1015081030682

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1015081030682

Search

Navigation