|
| Type: |
Working paper |
| Language |
English |
| Year of publication: |
2006 |
| Citation: |
Duveskog, D., 2006. Theoretical Perspectives of the Learning Process in Farmer Field Schools. With reference to East African experiences. Working Paper, December 2006. pp. 38. |
| Authors: |
Deborah Duveskog |
| Target countries: |
Kenya, Tanzania, United Rep of, Uganda |
| Download: |
 545kb |
| Summary |
Seven out of ten poor people in the world live in rural areas (UNDP, 2002). Reducing global poverty therefore requires thorough understanding of the factors that generate poverty and an assessment of policies and interventions designed to support rural poverty reduction. Agricultural extension and farmer education are important components for improving farmers’ livelihoods since a majority of the poor still derive their main livelihood from agriculture.
Extension was one of the top agricultural priorities listed by 24 African countries for a poverty reduction strategy (InterAcademy Council, 2004). Scoones and Thompson (1994), Chambers, (1993) and (Leeuwis 2004) argue that existing approaches and methods of transfer of technology do not fit the resource-poor farming context of the South. To achieve agricultural and rural development new approaches to extension are needed that make better use of knowledge among farmers and provide for them a stronger voice to demand advice and services and negotiating power (Christoplos, 2003). The specific concerns of women and youth farmers must also be addressed further. In Beyond Farmer First (Scoones and Thompson, 1994) it is argued that agricultural research and extension practice is far from a set of rational, systematic acts, but a dynamic process of coming to terms with conflicting interests, changing alliances and competing worldviews.
From having considered extension as mainly an act of transferring technologies to farmers there is now a focus on participation of farmers in the innovation process and facilitation of experimentation among communities. Knowledge and information are seen as powerful tools in the process of change. The strengthening of human capital, and the production of knowledge for a framework of action is thereby crucial for agricultural development (Haug, 1998).
Demand-driven advisory services, including strategies of privatisation, decentralisation, greater participation among farmers is generally seen as the way forward to improve effectiveness of extension. However, before demand-driven extension systems can take root in practice, farmers must be empowered to develop their capacity to articulate their demands and exert pressure on the system to deliver what they want (Rivera and Alex 2004). Farmers that can analyse their situation can then better articulate demand; linked to farmer group organisation this can secure better service provision and the more efficient use of public resources (DANIDA, 2004).
This calls for a new paradigm in extension, and as expressed by Freire (1973) with a stronger focus on education that is liberating in nature rather than domesticating. Based on the new focus on dialogue, knowledge and rural innovation in extension activities Leeuwis (2000) argues that the term extension is inappropriate, and labels agricultural extension in the new era as “Communication for rural innovation”.
Many developing countries are undergoing a progressive policy change towards more demand driven and market oriented agricultural services. In this context Farmer Field Schools (FFS) have been introduced and up-scaled in many countries as a mean of moving towards more demand-driven and process oriented agricultural services. With special focus on the East African situation this paper aim to explain how FFS fits into the new thinking in agricultural development and examine the theoretical perspectives that underlies the FFS approach.
|
|
|
|
