El Batán, Mexico
September, 2006
Source:
CIMMYT E-News, vol 3 no.
9, September 2006
Farmers participate in a
significant portion of CIMMYT research and technology testing,
according to center researchers, and the scientists believe this
makes their efforts more effective.
The combined
budgets of 19 CIMMYT projects cited by their principal
investigators in a 2004 survey as including participatory
research components exceeded US$9 million—roughly a quarter of
the center’s total budget at the time. “Not all that money was
spent on participatory activities, but the figure bespeaks a
significant investment,” says Nina Lilja, Agricultural Economist
in the on
Participatory Research and CGIAR Systemwide Program Gender
Analysis for Technology Development and Institutional
Innovation (PRGA Program).
This conclusion
was one outcome of a
study* on participatory research at CIMMYT by Lilja and
Mauricio Bellon, Director, Diversity for Livelihoods Program,
International Plant Genetic Resources Institute (IPGRI), and
former Human Ecologist at CIMMYT. “Nearly all respondents felt
that the use of participatory approaches had been worthwhile and
most believed participatory methods had added value to the
research,” says Lilja. “In support of this, many respondents
provided evidence of project achievements through use of
participatory approaches.”
Participatory
research—particularly where farmers help evaluate and promote
new crop varieties or farming practices—have been used
increasingly in CIMMYT research in recent years. This study
represents the first-ever analysis of participatory approaches,
from the perspective of center researchers. Through the 2004
survey, the scientists reported on projects they considered as
having a participatory component. The range of the study was
broad: there was great variation in the types and
characteristics of participatory research for which researchers
provided information. The survey allowed characterization of the
projects, but not further critical analysis of the quality or
the appropriateness of the methods applied nor an objective
assessment of impacts. Information was received for 19 projects
from 18 scientists—15 male, 3 female; 5 social scientists, 13
biophysical scientists. Sixteen of the projects involved
farmer-participatory research; three targeted national-program
scientists and seed agronomists. Most of the projects covered
work in sub-Saharan Africa and Asia; only two had activities in
Latin America. About a third of the projects involved
participatory testing of crop varieties or production practices;
the remainder involved focus group activities or stakeholder
meetings.
The issues most
frequently addressed via participatory methods related to
increasing productivity and understanding farmers’ needs and
constraints. “Participatory research at CIMMYT was largely of
the functional type—that is, aimed at improving the efficiency
and relevance of the research, rather than specifically to
empower farmers,” says Bellon. “Also, there was an overall lack
of awareness of multiple beneficiaries or of differential
effects owing to gender. None of the respondents had been
trained previously in participatory methods.”
Two major
recommendations of this report for adding value to CIMMYT’s
participatory research efforts are to
(1) create a more
conducive environment within the center for scientists to share
experiences and learn from each other, and
(2) better document
outcomes and impacts of the center’s participatory research.
Study in PDF
format:http://www.cimmyt.org/english/docs/impacts/analysisParticipaResProj.pdf
For further information,
contact John Dixon. |