IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/ags/ovdeia/295957.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Institutionalising Participatory, Client-Driven Research And Technology Development In Agriculture

Author

Listed:
  • Ashby, Jacqueline
  • Sperling, Louise

Abstract

This paper identifies key characteristics of participatory research and development (R&D): it is client-driven, requires decentralised technology development, devolves to farmers the major responsibility for adaptive testing, and requires institutions and individuals to become accountable for the relevance and quality of technology on offer. The paper then reviews ways by which institutions can respond to these characteristics. For creating clientdriven agenda options commonly include: representation by clients on their governing boards, joint research planning and the establishment of researchextension liaison units. However, more effective than this "representation" strategy might be to place a significant proportion of the available research resources directly under client control: client groups would then contract as they deem appropriate. Decentralising technology development requires scientists to shift away from a "pipeline" model which defines a limited number of products towards the development of menus of options, and prototypes, which are then adapted to "niche" conditions by others. Such localised testing, requiring a community-based adaptive research capacity, can be achieved through working with groups of fanners (rather than individuals) and with producer organisations. The devolution of trial testing is discussed in reference to experimental methods, statistical validity and cost. Institutionalising accountability sharing is probably the most challenging issue. While scientists' rewards might be tied to the success or failure of technologies, clients' contracts with research or third party evaluations probably serve as more binding options. Three issues are signalled for future attention. First, clarification is needed of the respective roles of fanners and scientists in prototype screening: e.g. what features should scientists be screening for and at what stage?; how. early in the process can farmers be involved and to what degree can they control decisions on trial design and measurement? Second, decentralised technology development requires corresponding reorientation in service provision (e.g. credit, extension and seed multiplication). Third, steps need to be taken to safeguard equity, both between the more and less vocal groups of fanners,and between the requirements of present and future generations (the latter referring particularly to environmental concerns). Finally, participatory R&D alone is insufficient to deliver innovations relevant to diverse client groups: explicit procedures are required to define which clients are to participate, whose agenda are to drive the process, and what organisational innovations are needed to move agricultural R&D in these directions.

Suggested Citation

Handle: RePEc:ags:ovdeia:295957
DOI: 10.22004/ag.econ.295957
as

Download full text from publisher

File URL: https://ageconsearch.umn.edu/record/295957/files/odi036.pdf
Download Restriction: no

File URL: https://libkey.io/10.22004/ag.econ.295957?utm_source=ideas
LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
---><---

More about this item

Keywords

;

Statistics

Access and download statistics

Corrections

All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:ags:ovdeia:295957. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: AgEcon Search (email available below). General contact details of provider: .

Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.