Product slo

See other products

---

Word version: File:product_slo.docx

---

Marc Schut ([marc.schut@wur.nl])

Nicole Lefore ([n.lefore@cgiar.org])

Valentine Ghandi ([v.ghandi@cgiar.org]) Beth Cullen ([b.cullen@cgiar.org]) Katherine Snyder ([k.snyder@cgiar.org]) Regis Chikowo ([chikowor@msu.edu]) Jo Cadilhon ([j.cadihon@cgiar.org])

Some statements and preliminary thoughts:

SLO1: Reduction in rural poverty

Rural poverty is very often the result of multiple components linked to the livelihoods of rural households ( Scoones, 1998). Rural poverty is not just a result of economic mismanagement or financial loss. Households’ livelihoods are also rooted in their endowment in natural, human and social capitals (among other forms of assets). Rural poverty is also a social construct. Sen ( 1979) captured this social dimension of rural poverty in his methodology to measure poverty by asking first, “who are the poor?”, before trying to aggregate different measures of poverty for its various characteristics within a given society. To capture the multiple dimensions of rural poverty, it is thus essential to use participatory tools and methods enabling the design of poverty measures that are relevant to the rural population under study. Participatory Poverty Assessments (PPAs) use participatory research methods to understand poverty from the perspective of the poor by focusing on their realities, needs, and priorities. These methods can ensure that the intended beneficiaries can influence the research process. Communities share their knowledge and are involved in analyzing the results. There is no single model for PPAs. The strength is that it does not fit people's realities in boxes or frameworks. PAR can provide an important contribution to analyzing the root causes of poverty, developing interventions for its reduction, and assessing the impact of projects and policies. The challenge for the development community is to effectively integrate the perspectives and values of the poor into the process of policy and project formulation and implementation. When people define and view their own problems they are better in coping with them or even adapting new strategies or technologies to combat the same, PAR makes this self reflective view with guidance from researchers, beneficial for the community as well as researchers and policy makers.

SLO2: Increase in food security

Low land productivity undermines potential food production, stifles income growth from the lack of surplus food and keeps many farming families impoverished and undernourished. Food insecurity and malnutrition are perennial problems for the majority of rural households in the developing world ( Kerr et al., 2011). This is the overriding concern to agricultural scientists and extension educators, yet too often single component technologies are promoted as solutions, and rarely does research contextualize and address the resource constraints articulated by farmers. The constraints include:

• Inadequate and outdated extension messages,
• Labor limitations,
• Variable rainfall,
• Nutrient deficient and/or degraded soils, and over-reliance on low protein staple crops ( Rowhani et al., 2011; Stoorvogel et al., 1993).

Many households largely rely on nutrient-poor staple crops, and have limited knowledge of the essential role that grain legumes play in human nutrition, especially for non-traditional crops such as soybean, that require training in appropriate local level processing for production of nutritious foods ( Saito et al., 1994). An integrated approach that ensures timely availability of inputs (seeds and fertilizers) and appropriate use of technologies to exploit the 'yield potential' as ingrained in the genetic material and bio-physical environment is a must for food and nutritional security ( Kerr et al., 2007). PAR is a potential vehicle to expedite the realization of this vision/outcome. Inadequate marketing channels also contribute to food insecurity when food cannot reach populations in need at a competitive price. Agricultural value chains require the collaboration of multiple stakeholders to be efficient ( Kaplinsky, 2000). PAR can bring together multiple stakeholders to discuss about their common problems and identify potential solutions and innovations to address these problems. PAR can play a leading role to foster more equitable and sustainable value chains which contribute to increased food security ( Birachi, 2013).

SLO3: Improving nutrition and health

Nutritional security entails availability of calories, protein and essential micronutrients (vitamins, Fe, Zn, etc). PAR with interest groups on nutrition can support the analysis of, amongst others, food consumption patterns and market participation, what are the food processing and utilization technology options that could be suitable for adoption by the targeted households to improve human nutrition and stimulate increased use technologies, training requirements at local level that can include appropriate practices on preservation of farm produce (preserve quality, local drying, minimize contamination and losses).

PAR activities towards improved nutrition and health may include:

• Nutrition workshops on local-level processing of grain legumes, knowledge can be a pull factor for step-wise increased production.
• Employing strategies that will improve availability of livestock products, especially goat production and cows for dairy products at the local level.
• Where the agro-ecological conditions permit, introducing climbing beans is perceived to be strategic - they are a good and cheap source of proteins, energy, and carbohydrates. Climbing beans generally have potential for higher yield compared to the dwarf (bush) beans, a trait that is advantageous for highly populated countries to achieve increased food and nutritional security levels and reduce poverty amongst farmers.
• Climbing beans also play a major role in crop rotation and intercropping systems, enhancing the productivity, not only to crops that are planted simultaneously, but also to those crops in sequence.

SLO4: Sustainable management of natural resources

Natural resource management (NRM) questions (e.g. related to land and water use) lie at the heart of many local, national and international conflicts and disputes ( Giller et al., 2008). One of the reasons is that natural resources have characteristics – limited quantity, increasingly scarce, extractability, culturally defined meaning and unevenly distributed ( Cloke and Park, 1985) – that give rise to people having competing claims on those natural resources. Natural resource management is generally characterised by (1) uncertain and unpredictable contexts, that are shaped by complex (2) multidimensional dynamics, (3) interactions between levels within and across different scales, and (4) multi-actor processes ( Schut et al., 2013). Participatory Agricultural Research (PAR) can contribute to addressing these challenges:

1. NRM uncertainty and unpredictability relates both to the nature of the problem and how it develops over time, as well as to the impact and side effects of solutions or strategies to address the problem. PAR can provide the basis for multi-actor collaboration that can enhance the (early) identification of NRM problems, and the ability to anticipate uncertainty and unpredictability regarding the sustainable management of natural resources.
2. NRM problems are an interplay of social-cultural, biophysical, economic, political and institutional dimensions ( Schut et al., 2010). Consequently, exploring and designing sustainable solutions to competing claims problems cannot be successful if these dimensions are analysed separately ( Spielman et al., 2009). Rather, integrated approaches in which the dynamics between the different dimensions are analysed holistically and interdisciplinary are required. PAR can stimulate the integration of knowledge from different scientific disciplines with local knowledge and expertise provided by – for example – farmers, extensionists and policymakers
3. The social-cultural, biophysical, economic, political and institutional dimensions of NRM problems often have different meaning across different scales and levels. Sustainable solutions may emerge from balancing interests and bridging perceptions across different scales and levels. PAR with actors and organisations that represent these different scales and levels can provide insight into the interactions and mismatches between different scales and levels. This can provide the basis for solution scenarios that inform policymakers on how changes or actions at one level may provide opportunities or create challenges at other levels ( Cash and Moser, 2000).
4. In any NRM process, the relationships and interactions between stakeholders, their organisations and networks are complex ( Morriss et al., 2006). Stakeholder participation in NRM processes has become an established way of addressing complex environmental problems and is perceived as a critical success factor for sustainable development. PAR can facilitate the interactions between multiple groups of stakeholders, and between stakeholders and researchers. PAR can facilitate the involvement of different groups of stakeholders in exploring sustainable NRM solutions. Hence, PAR can provide important insights into the different dimensions of the NRM problem, validate research findings, and what types of solutions are technically feasible, social-culturally acceptable and economically viable. This can enhance the credibility, legitimacy and relevance of research for different groups of stakeholders involved in the sustainable management of natural resources.

References: