Training News

 

In this section we welcome all your experiences in working directly with the end-users of arthropod and microbial biocontrol agents or in educational activities on natural enemies aimed at students, farmers, extension staff or policymakers.

Implementing the FFS Approach in Ethiopia

Save the Children Fund (SC (UK)) and the Ethiopian Ministry of Agriculture (MoA) are working together to adapt the Farmer Field School (FFS) approach for farmers in the northeastern highlands of Ethiopia. SC (UK) is the United Kingdom's leading international children's charity, working in more than 60 countries to help children in the world's most impoverished communities. It first delivered aid to Ethiopia (or Abyssinia as it was then) in 1932. The charity's main emphasis in Ethiopia is on food security and protecting children's livelihoods, which means helping rural families to achieve secure and sustained access to food. SC (UK)'s work in Ethiopia's Wollo Province during and since the famines of 1973-74 has put in place systems that allow it to respond quickly to crises, as well as contribute to establishing sustainable agricultural systems.

This area of Ethiopia is dominated by moderate- to high-altitude hills and mountains, interspersed with gorges, canyons and escarpments. The vast majority of the population today are small-scale subsistence farmers. Agricultural systems vary with altitude, but comprise mixed farming with varying reliance on crop production. Both pre- and post-harvest losses owing to pest infestation, erratic rainfall patterns, soil erosion and high population pressure (resulting in smaller farms) lead to food insecurity. In 1997, agricultural pest losses in Amhara Region were estimated as 164,000 tonnes, representing some 42% of total production.

The FFS project is the latest in a series of initiatives by SC (UK) to secure sustainable improvements in agricultural productivity in the province. An Emergency Pest Control Program, which began in 1994, was focused on containing outbreaks of - local rather than migratory - acridid pests (the Wollo bush cricket or 'degeza' (Decticoides brevipennis) and grasshoppers) and also rodent pests. The programme concentrated on provision of immediate relief in the form of pesticides and spraying equipment - and safety training for staff. Once the emergency was contained, SC (UK) began an Agricultural Rehabilitation Project, funded by the European Union, which made the transition from emergency pest control to agricultural rehabilitation activities (including crop protection and production, livestock restocking and veterinary activities, and capacity building). This two-pronged programme included a coordinated chemical pesticide spraying programme and, simultaneously, the start of IPM training for MoA partners to raise awareness of alternatives to chemical pesticides. It was recognized that the use of chemical pesticides was not sustainable. Thus the supply of free pesticides was replaced by a system that made them available on credit, and this led to a subsequent reduction in pesticide use.

The current EU-funded Agricultural Development Project began in 1998 with five pilot FFSs in North Wollo. The project is focused on the promotion of IPM through farmer participatory research (FPR). It is using the FFS approach to introduce farmers to sustainable pest management methods, and so reduce hazards posed by pesticides to human and (nontarget) animal health and the environment. It aims to reduce the proportion of farm income spent on agrochemical inputs by seeking locally available alternatives appropriate for resource-poor farmers. Specifically, it is looking at the potential of botanicals and products such as ash and urine as biological pesticides.

SC (UK) opted for a strategy of direct partnership with the MoA, working with and through their development agents and extension supervisors, rather than developing a parallel network, because it recognized that large scale and sustainable change will only be achieved by building the capacity of government services. The project is focused on assessing whether the successful participatory FFS approaches developed elsewhere (especially discovery learning and FPR methodology) could serve as a useful model for the smallholder mixed cropping systems in the northeast highlands of Ethiopia. The project incorporates the following features:

• Training of Trainers (TOT) for government extension workers (i.e. crop protection experts at national, regional and district (woreda) level)
• Cascading down the principles of participatory approaches at the community level through training of development agents (the field-level extensionists) and supervisors by TOT graduates
• Trickling down the principles and practices to farmers through FFSs facilitated by trained development agents and supervisors

This is in contrast to the conventional FFS model because it ends rather than begins with the farmer. However, acceptance of a farmer participatory approach by national agricultural bodies has been hard to achieve in many countries, and the journey from farmer's field to government office has often been long and gruelling. In Ethiopia, on the other hand, government agricultural staff are being challenged from above to change their way of thinking. In June 1999, SC (UK) and CABI Africa Regional Centre (ARC) staff held a TOT in Kobo, at which the pilot FFSs were reviewed, and 24 governmental and NGO staff were trained in the IPM FFS approach at the community level. The stage was set for bringing farmer participation to a wider audience through a further 20 FFSs.

The first step was to raise awareness about FPR and create a shared vision, the next to get down to detailed planning. The process began with a zonal pre-planning workshop, which laid out a timetable and outlined roles and responsibilities for different stakeholders. A planning workshop and training on participatory research activities then took place at the woreda level. This included training of development agents and supervisors in participatory methods, during which checklists for baseline data were agreed. Next, action planning took place at the community (peasant association) level through public meetings at which the fundamentals of participatory research were explained by teams comprising development agents and supervisors. At these meetings, key problems and possible solutions were suggested by the community. The extension workers used skills learned during training in the planning exercise, and were able to practise their newly-acquired participatory techniques. A woreda feedback meeting completed the planning process, with each team reporting on the planning procedure and activities agreed with 'their' community.

Trainers at the 20 FFSs focused on developing participatory approaches for IPM suitable for local farming systems and addressing local needs. They involved farmers in all aspects and at all stages of the research process. This is leading to the generation of IPM technologies that farmers are more likely to adopt, because they understand what they are based on. With one exception, the FFSs generated enormous enthusiasm, and farmers took to experimentation with a vengeance. The major crops in the region are teff, wheat, barley, peas and lentils. Wollo bush cricket (especially), aphids, 'black beetles' and rats were identified as the major pests to be targeted. As the FFSs progressed, farmers' motivation, enthusiasm and confidence in their ability to conduct research and gain meaningful results mounted, as did the sense of team spirit as they worked together to solve problems. They demonstrated a deep well of indigenous technical knowledge and resourcefulness. Extracts of various parts of 24 plant species were tested, as fresh or fermented products, and many of these proved effective against a variety of pests. Farmers were already familiar with many of these as traditional remedies of various kinds, and had chosen to experiment with them for that reason.

Debeko in North Wollo was the setting for one successful FFS. Development agents trained 24 farmers (22 men and 2 women) selected by the community during the participatory planning exercise. They chose to focus on one crop (teff) and one pest (Wollo bush cricket). One farmer donated two 500 m plots for IPM and control treatments, and the participants, in groups of six, met every Sunday for 9 weeks during the 1999/2000 season. Each group carried out agro-ecosystem analysis (AESA), observing and recording insect and disease problems, and also collected general agronomic data. At the end of each session, the groups met to share findings and agree action to overcome problems encountered. They found that fermented cow urine, sisal, melia (Melia azedarach), 'merez' (Acokanthera (formerly Carissa) schimperi), 'azohareg' (Dracaena steudneri/Grewia ferruginea), 'antharfa' (Acanthospermum sp., 'starburr'), 'tobia' (Calotropis procera, Sodom apple) and wood ash had insecticidal/antifeedant properties against the cricket. These were also effective against household and storage pests, and indeed have established ethnoveterinary, medical and household uses in this community.

The implementation of FFS during one season made the FFS farmers in Debeko highly motivated and enthusiastic about the new skills and knowledge they had acquired. There was also an encouraging dissemination of information to non-FFS members: 272 other farmers (including 56 women) learned about FFS experimentation, and in many cases began to experiment with natural pesticides themselves. This was achieved through formal and informal methods (from organized field days to simply talking). Overall there was 35% less pesticide use in 2000 than pre-FFS (1995-99). Although lower pest pressure may be partly responsible, the result is encouraging.

An evaluation workshop was held at the end of the season, in January 2000, to give stakeholders a chance to discuss achievements and identify problems. The sense of achievement of the community leaders and other stakeholders was high. A wealth of possibilities for further experimentation was identified, and it was recognized that farmers will continue to need training and backstopping to enable them to progress. A beginning was made on collating all the information generated and a number of priorities were set. The need for systematic recording of data was agreed and, importantly, for criteria to be set for trials. For example, what part of plants are most effective, at what concentration, and when applied fresh or fermented. Mixtures of extracts were popular and were found effective during the FFSs; it was agreed that limiting the number of constituents to two or three will allow the relative contribution of components to be determined more easily. Conservation of populations of some relatively rare plants used will be addressed, and the possibility of planting exotics with known pesticidal properties (such as neem) is being considered. In addition, aspects often ignored for 'natural' compounds will be considered: residues on produce and nontarget effects (indeed, burning of both skin and plants by fermented urine was recorded by some farmers in some of these FFSs).

The project is also notable for promoting mutual collaboration between farmers, researchers and extension workers, and it engaged the involvement of Sirinka Agricultural Research Center to this end. How well this worked is illustrated by what happened when researchers went out to meet with farmers in their fields for the first time, and were overwhelmed by the enthusiasm of the farmers for experimentation. The researchers and farmers worked together to identify priority activities to be undertaken in the laboratory, and agreed that the results would be reported back to the farmers.

The way in which the farmers have taken to experimentation is remarkable, both within FFS communities and beyond, to the extent that the current network is fully stretched trying to meet the clamour for FFS training from farmers. Wollo may continue to be beset by unforgiving climatic events and pest invasions, but by allowing farmers to take charge of the future of their agriculture, SC (UK) and the MoA are helping to ensure the future security and health of the people of this region.

By: Fantahun Assefa, Misganaw Asnakew and Jonathan McKee, SC (UK)

Contact: Dr Fantahun Assefa,
Integrated Pest Management - Farmer Field School (IPM-FFS)
Project Coordinator,
Amhara Regional State Government,
Save the Children (UK), P.O. Box 7165,
Addis Ababa, Ethiopia
Email: woldiyascf.uk@telecom.net 
or fantaw@telecom.net.et 
Fax: +251 3 31 05 08

❑

Weaver Ants in Citrus: a Revival

Improving citrus pest IPM and its uptake in Vietnam is focusing on the revival of centuries-old traditional practices together with the development of new and complementary control measures for pests and diseases. The biggest challenge, however, is disseminating knowledge and understanding effectively to stakeholders so uptake of IPM technology is improved.

The Mekong Delta region of Vietnam has long been its largest rice bowl, providing half the country's yield and contributing significantly to export earnings. Now, however, with world demand not supporting further growth in this sector, yet with some 60% of GDP for the region dependent on rice production, there is a drive to diversify agriculture. Tree fruits are traditional crops in this region - indeed, the Mekong delta is the country's principal fruit as well as rice bowl. A great diversity of fruit is grown. Most households have an orchard planted with fruit trees that have been found to do well at that site, so there is an enormous functional diversity. Citrus varieties, in particular, have been popular, both in home garden and intensive fruit production systems.

Since the late 1980s, there has been a fall-off in the traditional use of the weaver ant Oecophylla smaragdina as an endemic biocontrol agent. An analysis of the reasons for this turns up some familiar stories: low cost pesticides, aggressive marketing by pesticide companies, unfavourable market conditions for IPM and technically oriented extension activities promoting increased use of agrochemicals. More recently, there has been a drive to safeguard and improve the wider distribution of traditional knowledge along with the uptake of other IPM techniques in this crop, with interest focusing on farmer participatory methods.

Vietnam has been developing effective farmer participatory training and research (FPTR) methods through the Farmer Field School approach in rice for about 10 years and more recently in vegetable systems [see BNI 21(1), 10N-11N (March 2000) Vietnam showcase]. Despite its superficial informality, there is a strong underlying structure to succes