keith m. moore adjunct professor of sociology and associate program director and sarah swenson...

K E I T H M . M O O R E

A D J U N C T P R O F E S S O R O F S O C I O L O G Y A N D

A S S O C I AT E P R O G R A M D I R E C T O R

A N D

S A R A H S W E N S O N

R E S E A R C H A S S I S TA N T

S U S TA I N A B L E A G R I C U LT U R E A N D N AT U R A L R E S O U R C E M A N A G E M E N T C O L L A B O R AT I V E R E S E A R C H S U P P O R T P R O G R A M

Challenges and Opportunities for Smallholder Adoption of Conservation Agriculture

Office of International Research, Education, and Development, Virginia Tech

Outline

Introductory framework innovation, knowledge networks, technology transfer,

adaptive management, frame of referenceConservation agriculture innovation pathways

United States Brazil Ghana

Some component questionsChallenges and opportunities for smallholder CA


Technology Transfer to Adaptive Management

Two paradigms:

Technology Transfer

Adaptive Management

In reality we can see these along a continuum


Reflecting on Networks and Technical Change

How should we think about technical change in agriculture?

What is the role of learning in the process of innovation?

Is learning a matter of information transfer resulting in adoption of innovations?

Or, is learning a matter of developing capacities for on-going adaptation?

Whose capacities should be developed?

Where, in fact, does innovation occur?


From Douthwaite, 2002

People and technologies are interconnected in ways that reproduce some types of knowledge and behavioral practices and not others

Knowledge networks rationalize socio-material relationships in the agro-ecology

There is often competition between knowledge network segments

Knowledge Networks/Systems


Knowledge Network Characteristics of Technology Transfer

Technology Transfer operates well under conditions where: • Technological change is a matter of component

replacement

• Shared knowledge systems extend from conception to execution

• Ecological and market conditions are stable and relatively homogeneous

• Linking investments with outputs allows for quantitative priority setting


Social Learning for Adaptive Management

Learning by doing

Local stakeholders innovate management techniques adapted to local conditions

Negotiation

Resistance

Accommodation From: Sayer and Campbell, 2004


Scientific Knowledge Commercial Knowledge

Conventional Agro Ecology constructed to

control variability

Social Learning: Negotiation Resistance

Accommodation

Transformation and Feedback

Resistant Agro Ecologies indigenously constructed to minimize risk

Local Knowledge and Socio-Ecological System

Knowledge Network Relationships

ConservationAgro Ecology constructed to enhance natural processes


Negotiation

Successful negotiation requires building trust across boundaries

To influence stakeholders scientific information needs to be:

Credible: scientific adequacy for technical evidence & arguments

Salient: relevance of assessment to needs of decision makers

Legitimate: perception that information has been respectful of stakeholder divergent values & beliefsOffice of International Research, Education, and Development, Virginia Tech

Inputs

FarmerOrganizations

Farm

Farmer

Mechanisms

Relationships

Institutions

BenefitStreams

fsdf

Research

Private Sector

Where does input X come from?

How can input X be delivered?

What is potential for integrating input X?

Can output Y be valorized?

Can input X produce desired output?

Ecological

I

NGOS

Manufacturing

State

Government

Economic

Non-Market Externalities

Markets

Local

Researchers

Suppliers

Farmers

Extension Agents

Market

Equipment Fertilizer

Generic Conservation Agriculture System

Financing Herbicides

Physical

Knowledge

Frames of Reference and CA Pathways

CA’s technological frame includes a wide variety of material, social, and technical elements, a few are listed here:

What is the problem? (erosion, moisture conservation, management of labor, lack of

income)Who is involved in defining the problem?

(farmers, researchers, government officials, commercial interests)

How is the problem approached? (technological fix, adaptive management, farmer problem solving)

Why are CA practices adopted? (increased income, resolves production constraint: weeds, double

cropping, timeliness)


Non-Local Local

Chemical CompanyVendor

NationalResearch

Local Manufacturer

Informal FarmOrganizations

Farm

Farmer

Technology

ExtensionAgent

Research Facilitator

Equipment Company

United States Conservation Agriculture

TechnologyDepartment of Agriculture

Non-Local Local

Chemical Company

Vendor

Ministry of Agriculture

International Research

NationalResearch

Local Manufacturer

FarmOrganizations

NGO

Farm

Farmer

Technology

ExtensionAgent


Equipment Company

Brazilian Conservation Agriculture

Technology

Non-Local Local




NationalResearch

Informal FarmOrganizations

Farm

Farmer

Technology

TechnologyExtension

Agent


Equipment Company

Ghana Conservation Agriculture

Technology

Credit Providers

Non-Farm

Options

Input Questions: Herbicides / Fertilizers / Seeds

Available at local market?

Appropriately packaged?

Local substitutes?

Sufficient labor for weeding?

Crop rotations to decrease weeds?

Possible livestock nutrient management?


Input Questions: Equipment

Forms of power available to farmer?

Access to appropriate power?

Appropriately scaled equipment?

Appropriate implement / tool?

Local manufacturers and maintenance available?

Use or modify existing equipment?


Input Questions: Knowledge

Use and safety of herbicides and equipment?

Maintenance of seedbed and equipment?

Knowledge adapted for local implementation?

Training / education for extension agents?

Local knowledge sufficient for innovation and adaptive learning?


Input Questions: Financing

Is local credit available?

Input supplied in kind?

Self-financing?


Delivery Mechanism Questions:State / NGO / Market

Vendors present for input supplies?

Is there a market demand?

Chemical / equipment companies aware of demand?

Affordable bank credit?

Government support or guarantees?


Delivery Mechanism Questions:Farmer Organization

Group purchases?

Can inputs be purchased and transported from elsewhere?

Environment conducive to knowledge sharing?

Network to consult concerning problems?

Network supporting a change in mindset?


Farmer Questions

Problem to be solved by implementing CA?

Alternative income generation possibilities?

Sufficient resources and willing to take a risk?

Adaptive capacity to solve problems?

Ability to adjust for labor requirements?

Knowledge regarding use of new inputs?Office of International Research, Education, and Development, Virginia Tech

Farm Questions

CA appropriate for soil type?

CA impact on pests and diseases?

CA adapted to livestock?

CA compensates for other crop residues uses?

Necessary to integrate all aspects of CA?


Benefit Stream Questions: Ecological

Soil health (structure, quality, moisture) improvement?

Increasing biodiversity?

Leading to long term carbon sequestration?

Otherwise sustainable?


Benefit Stream Questions: Economic

Definite short term income increase?

Allow for double cropped grain / soybean systems?

Accessible markets for selling crops?

Market for more than one crop?

Economic incentives for ecological benefits?


Challenges to Fostering Conservation Agriculture

Establishing a foundation for adaptive management to promote local innovation

Identifying where particular CA practices best fit and which farmers are most likely to benefit

Investigating questions in the CA system beyond biophysical field tests

Creating an incentive system that accounts for externalitiesOffice of International Research, Education, and Development, Virginia Tech

Opportunities for Fostering Conservation Agriculture

Growing interest and support for CA globally

Growing support for local adaption approaches

Increasing support for CA environmental service payments

Increasing recognition of the challenges

Varied experiences of CA adaptable to new local situations


Questions - Comments

Thank you


Non-Local Local




NationalResearch

Local Manufacturer

FarmOrganizationsInternational

NGO

NGO

Farm

Farmer

Non-Farm

Options

Technology

Technology

ExtensionAgent


Equipment Company

Complete Conservation Agriculture

Technology

Non-Local Local



NationalResearch

Local Manufacturer

FarmOrganizations

Farm

Farmer

Non-Farm

Options

Technology

ExtensionAgent

Equipment Company

Conventional Agriculture

Technology

Non-Local Local

Vendor


NationalResearch

FarmOrganizations

Farm

Farmer

Non-Farm

Options

ExtensionAgent

Risk Adverse Agriculture

Technology

Source of Power

Human muscle

Draught Animal Engine

Sub-Saharan Africa 65 25 10

East Asia 40 40 20

South Asia 30 30 40

Latin America & Caribbean 25 25 50

TABLE 2.2: Sources of power for land preparation (% of total)

Source: Clarke and Bishop (2002); Mrema and Odigboh (1993) drawing on various sources of information. Excerpted from: Farm power and mechanization for small farms in sub-Saharan Africa, Sims and Kienzle, FAO, 2006.

South

Asia

East &

South

east Asia

Latin Americ

a

Sub-Sa

haran Afri

ca

Developing C

ountries

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

196219822002

Fertilizer Use Intensity and Growth by Developing Region: 1962, 1982, and 2002 (kg/ha)

Calculated from FAOSTAT data: Morris et al. 2007. Fertilizer Use in African Agriculture. World Bank.

from: World Development Report, 2008: Agriculture for Development

keith m. moore adjunct professor of sociology and associate program director and sarah swenson...

Documents