Finding better ways of disseminating research results

Communication Strategy for
East African Semi-Arid Systems

Concerted efforts to reform extension work in poor, semi-arid areas of Kenya and Tanzania have yielded concrete results and a host of useful information. The project worked to ensure that communication and promotional strategies were embedded within existing systems and organizations. This was seen as key to ensuring that all stakeholders had better access to new products and knowledge. Other areas addressed included identifying what information stakeholders were demanding, and characterizing the ways in which people are currently given information. Working closely with farmers, the project also assessed how effective the different pathways and methods it used to reach farmers were. In Central Tanzania, for example, such testing indicated that the efforts had resulted in a high level of farmer uptake among both men and women.

Project Ref: CPP37:
Topic: 7. Spreading the Word: Knowledge Management & Dissemination
Lead Organisation: Natural Resources Institute (NRI), UK
Source: Crop Protection Programme

Contents:		Description
		Validation
		Current Situation
		Environmental Impact

Description

Research Programmes:

CROP PROTECTION PROGRAMME

Relevant Research Projects:

Main projects

R8428 [2005 - 2006] Crop Protection Communication and Research Promotional Strategies for Semi-arid East Africa (Kenya and Tanzania)

R8349 [2003 - 2005] Developing Crop Protection Research Promotional Strategies for Semi-arid East Africa (Kenya and Tanzania)

Closely associated projects:

This project promoted outputs from the semi-arid cluster of preceding CPP projects in E. Africa  (e.g. R7518 Management of Sorghum Smut, R7572 Insect Pests of African Sorghum; R7504 Integrated Control of Striga in East Africa; R7606 grain mould; R7445, R8105 rosette resistance; R8194 green manure; R8197 cotton IPM; R7966 Army worm).

It also shared ideas on approaches and issues with R8281, Uganda Linking Project, and drew on research outputs from other RNRRS research and research funded through DFID bilateral country programmes.

Lead Institute:       

The Natural Resources Institute, University of Greenwich, Central Avenue, Chatham Maritime, Kent, ME4 4TB, UK. Lead person: Dr Alistair Sutherland [email: a.j.sutherland@gre.ac.uk]. Contact persons: Richard Lamboll, NRI email r.i.lamboll@gre.ac.uk, Charlie Riches, NRI email charlie@riches27.freeserve.co.uk

Main partners and persons involved:      

Table 1: Eastern and Western Kenya Partners

Table 2: Central Tanzania Team

Research Outputs, Problems and Solutions:

People in less favoured areas depend on agriculture for their livelihoods but have very poor access to agricultural services, including advice and training on new products and technologies. The reasons for poor access by farmers include:- poorly developed systems for access of local-level service providers to new knowledge and products; private sector failure in service delivery; under-resourced public extension services; weak infrastructure, limited technical capacity among some service providers (e.g. some NGOs and CBOs).. The return on significant investment in agricultural research relevant to less favoured areas will be low unless the research outputs reach farmers.  Strategies and tools for improving local access to high quality agricultural knowledge are a pre-requisite for improving livelihoods and reducing vulnerability.

These problems were addressed through 3 main outputs:

1. Approaches and methodologies for developing strategies for getting research into use in the less favoured areas

The approach ensured that communication and promotional strategies to widen access by all stakeholders to new products and knowledge were embedded within existing institutional frameworks and initiatives, including policies and programmes reforming rural service delivery.  To enhance sustainable capacity development at the local/meso level, key actors were facilitated to develop a strategy that widens access to new knowledge and products within a specified mandate area. Developmental elements of the agricultural communication/promotion strategy include:-

• Identification of demand for new knowledge (including review and improvement of existing mechanisms of identifying demand),
• Characterisation of current knowledge access mechanisms, barriers to knowledge access,  and stakeholder knowledge access preferences,
• Characterisation of cost-effective options for the development and delivery of new agricultural knowledge,
• Approaches and tools for the monitoring and evaluation of emerging agricultural knowledge communication and promotion strategies. 

2. Locally developed information and training materials - focus on locally validated crop protection and post-harvest technologies for semi-arid areas (Sorghum, Maize, Tomatoes, Onions, Groundnuts - training manuals, leaflets, posters, radio programmes, videos).

3. Capacity building of the main stakeholders in relation to the above two outputs.

An action research process, with cross-cutting applicability for getting research outputs in to use in other less favoured areas,  enabled key actors to apply their knowledge and experience, and to "own" strategies that took account of local conditions and specific experiences of agricultural service delivery. Strengthened local capacity enabled much larger numbers of agricultural  service providers and farmers to access new knowledge through trusted sources and more sustainable processes.

Types of Research Output:

**The strategy development process provides a service of situational analysis and capacity development for meso-level research and innovation platforms in less favoured areas. This process could be used also in "better favoured" areas with higher productive potential.

Major Commodities Involved:

The projects which piloted this process worked with a range of technologies, most of which came through the Crop Protection Programme and related to pre and post-harvest  IPM for a range of crops including Sorghum, Maize, Tomatoes, Onions, Groundnuts.  However the process followed has cross-cutting applicability across a very wide range of commodities.

Production Systems:

P = potential application - some of the principles, approaches and tools involved could also apply to high potential and peri-urban production systems.

Farming Systems:

P= potential application - the principles, approaches and tools developed in a semi-arid context apply to a range of farming systems - more typically those where private sector agricultural services are less well developed.

Potential for Added Value:  

There are three major opportunities for clustering this output with related outputs:-

1. Combining insights and good practice from the RNRRS and elsewhere relating to the validation, promotion and communication of research knowledge,
2. Linking knowledge promotion with initiatives improving access to (input and output) markets - particularly in the context of widespread market failure in less favoured areas and its attendant consequences for poverty and livelihood strategies,
3. Drawing on well described and validated technical knowledge (and products) relevant to less favoured areas.

These are summarised below in three tables of projects with clustering opportunities:-

Table 3. Projects likely to offer complementary insights and good practice for validation and communication of research knowledge in the context of less favoured areas:-

Table 4: Projects likely to offer complementary insights and good practice for improving farmers' access to input and output markets in the context of less favoured areas.

Without being overly prescriptive, value could be added from a range of RNRRS projects targeting rainfed areas (including semi-arid), including outputs relating to crops, livestock and post-harvest technologies. This would depend on the opportunities and demand where promotional strategies are being developed.

Table 5: Projects likely to offer technology and supply options relevant to less favoured areas

Validation

How the outputs were validated:

The table below summarises who validated the main elements of the strategies, and how.

Table 6: Validation of output elements - Who and How

Local experts from national research and extension organisations assessed the content quality of technical information and training materials, based on knowledge that had been locally validated.  Training of trainer sessions with feedback from field extension staff were used to further refine training materials.   "New" research knowledge delivered was validated by farmers through their farming practice, assessing its efficacy, benefits and costs.  Training and information content varied at the district, village, and farmer group level according to need. The programme aimed to be responsive in the context of reforming (decentralized in Tanzania and pluralistic in Kenya) agricultural extension models.    Choice was provided by developing a range of materials for frontline service providers and farmers to select from, and by responding to emerging demands using available capacity.

Farmers involved represented a cross-section of gender, age and wealth groups.  For example in Central Tanzania farmer validation was primarily by 35 farmer groups with a total membership of 390 members, 43% of whom were women. These farmer groups included people from different wealth categories, but had higher proportion of relatively wealthy farmers than in the wider community.   In 5 sampled villages, at least 60% of respondents reported increased yield/ reduced crop loss and/or longer shelf life of stored products.

Where the Outputs were Validated:            

The promotional and communication strategies were validated in seven pilot districts in less-favour areas of Kenya and Tanzania as follows; Western Kenya

(Homa Bay and Rachuonya Districts), Eastern Kenya (Mwingi, Kitui>Makueni Districts); Central Tanzania (Dodoma Rural, Singida Rural and Kongwa Districts).  A factor in selecting districts was their strategic position vis a vis national initiatives on agricultural service reform programmes (see Section 15).

The process of developing and evaluating promotional strategies for less favoured semi-arid areas began in Nov 2003 and ended in January 2006.   More specific details are set out in the table below.

Table 7: Output elements - Where and When Validated

Current Situation

Who are the Users?

R8428 and R8349 produced two main types of outputs:-

                     I.      Local strategies (including approaches and methodologies) for getting research into use in the less favoured areas, reaching the many poor households beyond the reach of mainstream public extension services,

                   II.      "technical" information and training materials for semi-arid areas - with the main focus on locally validated crop protection and post-harvest technologies for semi-arid areas,

Both outputs required capacity building with the stakeholders involved and the development of monitoring and evaluation frameworks through which to assess the performance of uptake pathways, methodologies and technologies.

The main stakeholders involved in these projects (see Table 8) have used the experience and knowledge gained within their respective occupational settings - which range from using the key lessons in ongoing policy formulation and implementation, through extension service planning and implementation, through to practical application in dryland and small-holder irrigated farming in less favoured areas in the seven pilot districts. 

The tables below summarise how and by who these two types of outputs are being used.

Table 8: Use of Strategy approaches and methods - How and Who

Table 9: Use of Strategy Crop Protection Materials - How and Who

Where the outputs have been used:

The seven districts targeted were in the less favoured semi-arid areas of Western Kenya (Homa Bay and Rachuounya) Eastern Kenya (Makueni and Mwingi) and Central Tanzania (Dodoma, Singida and Kongwa).  

The promotional/communication strategies and the associated technical materials validated in seven pilot districts of Kenya and Tanzania are, according to current information, still being used by the extension providers and farmers who were trained.  In Kenya transfers of staff have resulted in some of the approaches and technical material being applied in additional districts (see  under "Promotion of Outputs").

The pilot districts were selected in relation to their strategic position vis a vis national initiatives on agricultural service reform in Tanzania and Kenya.

In Kenya, the Kenya Agricultural Productivity Project (KAPP) selected pilot districts to initiate extension reform after the start of R8349.  With continuation under R8428 two of the four districts selected by the project were also pilot districts for KAPP.  This provided a potential opportunity to develop an ongoing learning platform with respect to the promotional process in less favoured areas.  Since the project ended, as part of the reform of extension, the extension staff involved have been moved to new districts.  This provides an opportunity for applying the learning on promotional and dissemination strategies in their new geographical situations.

In Tanzania, the Agricultural Sector Development Programme (ASDP) is the umbrella programme for agriculture. A key programme under this, the Agricultural Sector Support Programme is reported to have been officially signed off in August 2006, but is still not operational.  NRI has been invited  to review the World Bank PADEP (Participatory Agricultural Development Project) project which could be a valuable entry point to feed in outputs from this project.

Scale of Current Use:

Within the selected districts, key stakeholders,  including research and communication service providers with a mandate to cover these districts, were involved.  The process of developing and delivering a promotion/communication strategy took about 18 months, which included a full season for delivery of knowledge, skills and products to farmers and an assessment of the performance of these products and the delivery methods.  A further 9 months was required to repeat the validation process, further develop the methods and materials, and consolidate the lesson learning process.  With the experience gained from this initiative, the process could probably be shortened in the event of scaling up to similar contexts elsewhere, to between 18-24 months.

To enable an assessment of the efficacy of a range of favoured and innovative pathways and methods for reaching farmers,  within districts specific communities and/or farmer groups were involved through ongoing agricultural extension programmes.  Assessment of the uptake of knowledge by farmers using the favoured pathways and methods was undertaken through a follow up surveys in a sample of communities.   In Central Tanzania, results indicate that the level of farmer uptake, defined as "acting on the information provided" was very high, both for men and for women members of farmer groups.

In terms of the spread of knowledge through farmer to farmer mechanisms,  follow-up surveys suggested that the majority of farmer group members receiving training had shared what they learned with other farmers.  Men tended to share their information with higher numbers of other farmers than women, while a higher proportion of women (93%) than men (84%) who received information reporting sharing it with others.

Table 10: Sharing of new information by farmer group members with others- Central Tanzania

Source: Follow-up survey in Central Zone Tanzania September 2005

Policy and Institutional Structures, and Key Components for Success:

In both Kenya and Tanzania, the project focus was at the next level below the national capital, working with organisations and stakeholders already engaged in agricultural service provision in districts.  This was to optimise the scope for  sustainability and scaling out by replicating the approaches developed building on local capacity in the process.  In addition, dialogue was fostered with key national programmes and also between three site core implementation teams, providing a regional forum for sharing of experiences.

The Kenya Agricultural Productivity Project (KAPP) had identified districts to pilot  extension reform options, and two of these were also targeted by the project to providing local learning platforms that would link to national programmes.  The Agricultural Sector Development Programme (ASDP) in Tanzania was due to start in Sept 05. The project team engaged with the ASDP design team on the scope for using lessons regarding enhancing farmer/service provider interaction at district level and the delivery of knowledge to service providers.

Table 11: Success Factors at Key levels of Capacity Building

Environmental Impact

Direct and Indirect Environmental Benefits:

There are no obvious direct environmental immediate benefits from the proposed scaling up programme.  The assumed indirect benefit is the promotion of knowledge and technologies that are locally validated and have been assessed for potential negative environmental impact. The approach is particularly suited to managing knowledge intensive information and products that require minimal external inputs.  The technologies promoted in R8428 and R8349 were mainly improvements in crop and post harvest pest management which would encourage natural resource conservation, reduced reliance on purchased chemical inputs and posed minimal risk to contamination of local water and food chains and minimise risk of pests developing resistance.    

Adverse Environmental Impacts:

There are no obvious adverse environmental effects from the proposed scaling up programme.  The approach is particularly suited to managing knowledge and technologies that are knowledge intensive and require minimal external inputs, and therefore are likely to have minor environmental impact in the shorter term.   There is a minor risk is that the more effective technologies will lead to the outcome of productivity increases, translating into improved food security which will in turn encourage more people to stay in less favoured areas, putting increased population pressure of environmental resources. 

Coping with the Effects of Climate Change, or Risk from Natural Disasters:

In this regard, the main strength of the approach is that local stakeholders, with in-depth understanding of local conditions, including climatic trends and the effects extreme events, are involved in selecting the knowledge and technologies to be promoted.  The methods used for training extension providers and farmers are knowledge-based and use experiential learning, which is empowering and enables the users to weigh issues such as risks posed by climate change and extreme events as they relate to investments in particular farming enterprises.  Many of the less-favoured areas are arid and semi-arid, and more likely to be negatively impact by climate change.  The process of developing a communication strategy, and technology options for promotion, provide a solid foundation for collective problem solving by local stakeholders which can also address challenges posed by climate change.  

Relevant Research Projects, with links to the
Research for Development (R4D) web site
and Technical Reports:

R4D	Project Title	Technical Report
R6306	Field trials for quality assurance for horticultural exports.
R6344	Developing effective and efficient marketing and credit systems in semi-arid production systems
R7013	The role of warehousing in improving performance of agricultural markets, Phase II.
R7445	Groundnut rosette disease management. Main Report. Annex.
R7472	Integrated management of root-knot nematodes on vegetables in Kenya
R7502	Optimising institutional arrangements for demand-driven post-harvest research, delivery, uptake and impact on the livelihoods of the poor, through public and private sector partnerships
	Hall A J, Yoganand B, Sulaiman R V, and Clark N G. (eds.). 2003. Post-harvest innovations in innovation: reflections on partnership and learning.
R7504	Study of factors affecting the uptake and adoption of outputs of crop protection research on yams in Ghana
R7518	Promotion of sustainable control of covered kernel smut of sorghum through broadening the cropping base
R7572	Management of key insect pests of sorghum in Southern and Eastern Africa: developing IPM approaches with expert panels
R7606	Dissemination of research findings on community conservation of wildlife in Africa
R7668	Impact and amelioration of sediment and agro-chemical pollution on Caribbean coastal waters
R7813	Sustainable control of the cotton bollworm, Helicoverpa armigera, in small-scale cotton production systems
R7865	Scaling-up strategies for pilot research experiences - a comparative review
R7966	Identifying the factors causing outbreaks of armyworm as part of improved monitoring and forecasting systems. Main Report. Annex 1, Annex 10, Annex 11.
R8041	Sustainable Integrated Management of Whiteflies as Pests and Vectors of Plant Viruses in the Tropics: Phase 2 - Network Strengthening, Pest and Disease Dynamics and IPM Component Research Africa. Andes. Central America. Coordination. Annex 1. Annex 2. Annex 3. Annex 4. Annex 5.
R8104	Promoting potato seed-tuber management for increased ware yields in Kapchorwa District, Easten Uganda. Main Report. Annex.
R8105	Farmer-led multiplication of rosette resistant groundnut varieties for Eastern Uganda. Main Report. Annex.
R8114	Improved food crops marketing though appropriate transport for poor farmers in Uganda
R8182	Strengthening technical innovation systems in potato-based agriculture in Bolivia: Bolivia Initiative
R8194	On-farm verification and promotion of green manure for enhancing upland rice productivity on Striga-infested fields in Tanzania. Main Report. Annex.
R8197	Development and promotion of appropriate IPM strategies for smallholder cotton in Uganda. Main Report. Annex 1, Annex 2, Annex 3, Annex 4, Annex 5, Annex 6.
R8219	Improved access to appropriate farm inputs for integrated maize crop management by small-scale farmers in Embu and Kirinyaga Districts, Kenya
R8250	Decentralised market information service in Lira District, Uganda
R8281	Linking the demand for, and supply of, agricultural production and post-harvest information in Uganda. Main Report. Annex.
R8296	Promotion of sustainable approaches for the management of root-knot nematodes on vegetables in Kenya. Main Report. Annex 1, Annex 2, Annex 4 , Annex 5, Annex 6, Annex 7a, Annex 7c.
R8297	Development of private sector service providers for the horticultural industry in Kenya
R8299	Accelerated uptake and impact of CPP research outputs in Kenya
R8349	Developing crop protection research promotion strategies for semi-arid East Africa (Kenya and Tanzania)
R8381	Institutionalised scaling-up and uptake promotion of outputs from soil and water management research in East and Central Africa
R8418	Promotion and development of the participatory market chain approach (PMCA) in Uganda
R8422	Improving farmer and other stakeholders' access to quality information and products for pre- and post- harvest maize systems management in the Southern Highlands of Tanzania.
R8428	Communication and research promotional strategies East Africa
R8429	Linking supply and demand in Uganda phase 2. Main Report. Annex.
R8435	Sustainable Potato Seed – Tuber Management and Marketing Through Commercialization (SPOMMAC). Main Report. Annex 3, Annex 4, Annex 5, Annex 7 to 11, Annex 12.
R8438	Development of Private Sector Service Providers for the Horticultural Industry in Kenya (NB: this is recorded on R4D as R8297)
R8480	The Good Seed Initiative - sharing the learning from CPP programmes into pro-poor seed systems in East Africa
ZC0208	Participatory Livestock Research Book: further details available at http://www.nri.org/publications/plr.htm

For relevant research projects, with links to further information

Geographical regions included:

Kenya, Tanzania,

Target Audiences for this content:

Crop farmers,