|
| Type: |
Academic thesis |
| Language |
English |
| Year of publication: |
2008 |
| Citation: |
Najjar, D., 2008. Learning through Farmer Field Schools: A Case Study of the Taita Hills, Kenya. MSc. thesis. Natural Resources Institute,
University of Manitoba, Winnipeg, Manitoba, Canada. |
| Authors: |
Dina Najjar |
| Target countries: |
Kenya |
| Download: |
 8,470kb |
| Summary |
Agricultural practices are central in the struggle to transition to a more fruitful food production system in sub-Saharan Africa (SSA). The choices farmers make around their practices stem from societal and environmental reasons engrained within their communities.
This research explores Farmers Field Schools (FFS) as an example of agricultural extension grounded in community development and environmental sustainability, and how they affect the learning of farmers involved in them. The underlying premise is that agriculture is the basis of rural communities in Kenya, and that the conventional agricultural system (including markets, labour, resources and access to resources) is unsustainable having been undermined by a number of interdependent factors including the HIV/AIDS epidemic, climate change, gender inequalities (encompassing access to and control over resources and decision making in local agriculture) and youth and male out-migration.
Using transformative learning theory, the research explores the learning that takes place amongst adults who participate in FFS, and how this affects their agricultural practices, roles and worldviews at large. The ultimate question investigated is whether the FFS outcomes can create lasting change amongst learners and their communities, resulting in more environmentally and socially responsible type of agriculture, and therefore a more sustainable agricultural system.
The objectives of the research were to examine the roles and practices of the current agricultural systems and limitations to agricultural production; consider gender specific interests with implications for the FFS program; assess the conditions of learning by operationalizing the ideal learning conditions in an FFS context concerning local people (both gender, of different generations and differing economic status), government workers (agricultural extension agents and coordinators) and NGOs (both local and transnational); examine individual learning associated with a mixed FFS; explore what this learning means in and for the broader community, and the potential impacts on sustainability.
The research was conducted in the Taita Hills of Kenya through face to face interviews, focus group discussions, document review of farmers’ notes and FFS reports for concerned NGOs as well as through the researcher’s own observations while attending FFS sessions and visiting and working on farms. Three different models of participant interfaces were considered: single-sex male groups, single-sex female groups and mixed groups.
The researcher found that all participants experienced either communicative or instrumental forms of learning, with cultural premises and roles profoundly impacting such learning. The role of experiential learning was key in creating changes in participants’ behaviour related to increasing production and soil and water conservation. Almost all participants experienced transformations in meaning schemes related to farming. This transformation was evident through epistemological changes and heightened levels of autonomous thinking and social responsibility, contributing to a more sustainable society.
Men’s participation in a mixed FFS points to the potential for transformations in their meaning perspectives. Closing the gap between gender inequalities by the provision of interaction between the two sexes on an equal basis, in informal learning programs that relate to their personal livelihoods, (agricultural production), in their own biophysical and societal conditions is not only a desirable step for the involvement of men in agricultural work in SSA and for the exchange of roles between the two sexes, but also in reaching a more equitable society.
|
|
|
|
