( Jan 2000 issue) MANAGE
Bulletin
NATP : INNOVATIONS IN TECHNOLOGY DISSEMINATION - REVIEW
WORKSHOP
A Mid-term Review
Workshop on Innovations in Technology Dissemination (ITD) Component of NATP was organised
at MANAGE during December, 7-8, 1999 wherein 50 participants from Ministry of Agriculture,
Govt. of India, , ICAR, State Agricultural Universities, State Nodal Officers, Project
Directors and Deputy Project Directors, ATMA, Heads of SAMETIs in the State, World Bank,
MANAGE, DOE, Department of Marketing, Govt.of India, NABARD, NCDC, NHDB, SFAC and invitees
from UPDASP participated.
The basic
objectives of this workshop were : to review the project activities and develop a common
understanding of the experiences, in the implementation of project, among the
stakeholders; to identify issues to design future course of action;and to review physical
and financial progress made so far.
A presentation by
Project Directors (PD) of ATMAs was followed by a presentation by state Nodal Officers;
MANAGE, DOE and UPDASP along with a review of activities.
The presentation
by PD ATMAs indicated that ITD work is picking up momentum and progress has been made in
implementing recommendations. The State Nodal officers identified a number of policy
issues requiring attention for effective operation of ATMAs and implementation of the work
programme. Progress has been made in establishment of SAMETIs.
The second day
started with deliberations relating to emerging issues in the implementation of the
project. The aspect relating to marketing interventions in the project district evoked
enthusiasm and interest among the delegates.
Improved coordination between ATMA and other agriculture Development programmes at
district level as well as convergence with other programmes being financed by the central
and the state government emerged as the most important issue for the project. Since market
intervention is going to be the key for further development in agricultural sector, some
decisions with reference to market interventions at ATMA level related to development of
district specific marketing strategies for developing time bound action plans including
strengthening market intelligence; capacity building of extension staff to respond to
marketing related issues; preparation of market related information; representation from
marketing organisation in ATMA Governing Board and Farmers Advisory Committee;
establishment of close working relationship between marketing committees at block level
and Farmers Advisory committee; active involvement of Directorate of Marketing, Government
of India, in project districts for developing marketing strategies including linkages with
ATMA; involving major stakeholders viz. NHB, NDDB, NCDC, SFAC, Directorate of Marketing
for support for market intervention; involvement of farmer groups promoted by NABARD in
project implementation.
The Maharashtra experience
relating to convergence between ATMA and line departments and with other on going schemes
and programmes (Central and State Govt) at district level/ in the district of Ahmednagar
was shared. IIM, Lucknow presented a paper on Monitoring & Evaluation system. There
was also a discussion on aspects relating to Farmers Organisation (FO) and IT connectivity
etc.
PARTICIPATORY TRAINING SKILLS
The
importance of Human Resource Development for Agricultural Extension Management is well
recognized. As part of its efforts in strengthening Capacity for HRD for agricultural
extension, MANAGE planned programmes for faculty / trainers of Extension Education
Institutes (EEIs), State Institutions and Heads of VEO training centres during 1999-2000.
The first course was organized at Hyderabad, during November 1-6, 1999, for the states
covered by EEI, Rajendranagar viz. Andhra Pradesh, Karnataka, Kerala, Orissa and Tamil
Nadu. The main objective of the programme was to develop skills of trainers in
participatory training methods and techniques with focus on the experiential learning
approach which MANAGE has been practicing over the years.
There were 11
participants, including seven from A.P. and four from Karnataka. While the focus was on
training methods, there were a few sessions for the personal development of trainers as
well. The idea was to develop the trainers both in job skills as well as individual
development. Thus motivation of trainers found an important place in the coverage.
As
regards methodology the focus being skill development, demonstration and practice of
different methods, using the participatory approach, were provided. Time was set apart for
action planning, i.e, planning for conducting sessions in backhome situation using
participatory techniques. The same were presented in the plenary for feedback. This
exercise along with the previous practice sessions went a long way in not only
familiarizing the trainers with different methods but also in developing skills as well.
With
a view to familiarising the participants with experiences of other institutions, a study
visit to State Bank Staff College, Hyderabad was organized.
Shri A.K.Goel, Director
General, MANAGE delivering the valedictory address highlighted the emerging perspective on
development front i.e., knowledge based society. He drew the attention of the trainers on
their role in this context and significance of learning from each other. He expressed that
while sharing its experience MANAGE would like to learn from the experiences of other
institutions and participants as well.
The participants found
the course informative, useful and particularly meaningful as it was learning through
participatory mode. They were convinced as to how activity oriented training could
influence learning and wisdom in the principles of andragogy. The course was coordinated
by Shri. V.K. Reddy, Deputy Director, MANAGE.
INSTITUTIONAL
CAPACITY BUILDING FOR TRAINING
MANAGE organised a programme on
Institutional Capacity Building for Training, at EEI, Jorhat from November 29 to December
03, 1999.
The objectives
were
There
were 15 participants from the states of Assam, Arunchal Pradesh, Meghalaya, and Nagaland,
from KVKs, Extension Training Centres, Farmers Training Centres, EEIs and Extension
departments of the Agricultural University.
The coverage of
the course included Systematic Approach to training; Creating Learning Environment;
Participatory and Field Oriented Training Methodologies; Management systems and styles in
training organizations; developing faculty and staff; and Information Technology for
Training.
The programme was
inaugurated by Prof. A.N. Mukhopadyay, Vice Chancellor, Assam Agricultural University and
was presided over by Dr. N.K.Mohan, Director of Extension of the university. Prof.
Mukhopadyay underlined the importance of interaction with farmers as part of the training.
In this context, he emphasized on the value of taking farmers on exposure visits to places
outside the state for learning from experiences of their counterparts in other states. He
looked forward to more collaboration of EEI with MANAGE. Dr. Mohan in his presidential
address mentioned that the themes of the course were useful for heads and trainers of
training organizations and stressed that the institutions should work with a missionary
zeal.
Besides
lecture-cum- discussions, group exercises, film shows on the themes relevant to the course
and field visits were organized. A field visit was arranged to Regional Research
laboratories, Jorhat to familiarize participants with the managerial aspects of the
organisations.
During the
valedictory address Prof. Bora, Registrar, Assam Agricultural University called upon the
participants to focus their training programmes to facilitate transfer of technologies to
the ground and to keep pace with the latest developments.
The faculty of
the course included Dr. Gogoi, Dr. Neog and Dr.Sharma of EEI and Shri. V.K. Reddy of
MANAGE.
The feedback from
the participants indicated that the programme gave them a different orientation as Heads
of training institutions. It provided them with a perspective for managing the
institutions particularly from the point of view of leadership patterns, motivation and
other organizational aspects. The programe also helped to realise the importance of a
learning environment and linkages with the villages around the institute for providing
practical orientation to training.
I nstitutionalising
Participation in Natural Management
Participatory
approaches to natural resource management have mostly been limited to specific instances
and initiatives from village based planning to development and implementation of
co-management arrangements. Recently, however the focus on a case by case approach has
given way to attempts by public and private agencies, including government departments,
development agencies, non-governmental organizations, international agencies to adopt and
apply participatory approaches on a large scale. While this trend offers scope for
increasing active involvement of local resource users in processes that have a bearing on
their livelihood security and well being, there is a danger that they may be misapplied in
the rush to scale up and spread the new innovations, leading to disillusionment with
people centered approaches. Emphasis on diversity, decentralisation and devolution of
decision-making powers in management of natural resources implies procedures and
organizational cultures that do not impose participation from above.
An action research initiative
undertaken by the International Institute for Environment and Development (IIED), London
and Institute of Development Studies (IDS), University of Sussex, UK is currently
examining questions relating to how bureaucracies and their staff can become flexible,
innovative and transparent; conditions under which they can ensure that their outcomes
promote real participation in natural resource management; appropriate roles for
bureaucracies in supporting the engagement of local actors throughout the management
process; policies needed to scale up participatory and people centred approaches; and
appropriate roles, rights and responsibilities of local groups in dynamics of
institutionalizing participation in NRM.
National partners associated with
this action research are analysing the dynamics of institutionalising and scaling up
participatory processes and approaches for NRM in the context of Gestion des Terriors
(village resource management) in Senegal and Burkino Faso; participatory watershed
management in India; farmer centered participatory integrated pest management in
Indonesia; local sustainable natural resource management plans in Mexico.
Members of the national research
teams and staff met in MANAGE, Hyderabad, during December 1-4, 1999 to review progress
made in the four country research projects during the first year of action research.
The objectives of the workshop
were:
To learn about each other's
work, share initial research findings, insights and concerns.
Critically reflect on
experience to date, including problems and new opportunities.
Strengthen links and synergies
between country case studies and the international components of the action research
Problem solving and forward
planning
A presentation of the progress on
the IIED-IDS project was followed by presentations of country cases and global trends in
participation and property rights likely to impact on national studies. These
presentations were followed by discussions on learnings from these case studies and
implications for the project.
A field visit was organized to
Mahboobnagar for an exposure to activities taking place in the district relating to
watershed management and self-help groups. This was followed by a presentation, in MANAGE,
on participatory video film production by a women's self-help group from Medak district.
The policy
implications for India were discussed on the fourth day. This was followed by group
discussions of questions raised during the workshop pertaining to issues relating to
participation, equity and gender, and livelihoods, institutionalsiation and participation;
issues of methodology and learning groups and questions relating to the scope of the study
and the outputs and impacts of research. Key learnings and outputs will be discussed with
individual country Research Officers as part of a forward planning process.
PRIORITY SETTING FOR RESEARCH & EXTENSION UNDER NATP
A meeting on
"Priority Setting for Research and Extension" under NATP was organised on
December 6th, 1999 at MANAGE. This was sponsored by the Ministry of
Agriculture, Government of India in collaboration with MANAGE. Thirty participants
representing World Bank, Govt. of India, PIU, NAARM, CRIDA, NCAP, MANAGE, DOE, some
Project Directors of ATMA and two representatives from UPDASP participated in this
meeting.
The basic
objective was to share the experiences of the concerned organisations in terms of Priority
Setting for Research and Extension as a necessary step
to be undertaken while developing SREPs in the NATP districts. The second objective was to
agree on some modalities to bring in all the stakeholders to support this process of
priority setting.
Dr. Ashok Seth,
Task Manager (NATP), World Bank stressed the need to integrate research and extension
component in preparation of SREP and the need for utilisation of SREP for Research and
Extension Planning. Initiating the panel discussion he expressed that there is need to
build in rigour in priority setting for preparation of SREP. He also mentioned
quantification of farmers feedback as very essential for setting up of priorities.
Sri A.K. Goel,
Director General, MANAGE highlighted the emerging trends of decentralisation of decision
making, involvement of multiple players in extension and diversification of production
systems in view of the changing global scenario.
He pointed out the need for Research-Extension-Farmer-Marketing loop for improving the
income of the farmers.
Dr. V.V.
Sadamate, Addl. Commissioner (Agri.Extn.), DAC, Govt. of India emphasized the need for
linkage between research system and ATMA at the district level.
Dr. G.R. Desai,
Project Coordinator & Team Leader (NATP) pointed out the need for shift in the
development paradigm among people in extension, research, input supply and farmers. He
suggested that ATMA would help to augment the process of paradigm shift for setting up
right priorities to the requirements and dovetailing the direction.
Dr. Jha,
Director, NCAP emphasised the need for developing a database for deciding the appropriate
characterization of agro-ecological and production systems.
He also suggested involvement of organizations for conducting pilot studies and organising
workshops on sensitization in priority setting. The need for participation of scientists
in SREP exercises, capacity building of staff involved in SREP and use of Decentralized
Agricultural Research Priority Setting (DARPS) experiences worked out for research earlier
was emphasized by Dr. K.P.C. Rao, Principal Scientist, NAARM. Dr. M.N. Reddy, Consultant
(NATP) explained the framework of SREP preparation in all the pilot States and highlighted
the participatory methodology being used for priority setting by involvement of farmers in
the present context. Dr. V.W. Ambekar, Consultant, UPDASP and Dr.(Mrs.) T.S. Raji Gain,
STE, UPDASP highlighted the experiences of SREP under UPDASP and suggested its utility for
deciding the adaptive trials. They also felt that the socio-economic analysis is necessary
before developing strategies. Dr. K.P.R. Vittal, Principal Scientist, CRIDA (ICAR) focused
on the Rainfed Farming Systems and related Crop Production systems to livestock in each
situation.
During the
afternoon session, Mr. Trejo, Consultant of FAO, Rome gave a presentation on Virtual
Extension Research Communication Network (VERCON) system developed by the FAO. He
demonstrated the prototype of VERCON System, which can provide a platform for exchange of
information between farmers, researchers and extensionists and shared his experiences of
implementation of the same in developing countries like Bhutan, Nepal and Mali.
The following
decisions were arrived at by the delegates :
Considering the resource
constraint and likely multiple objectives to be pursued, priority setting for both
research and extension is must.
Agricultural researchers either
from SAU, KVK, ICAR need to be involved continuously at different stages of SREP
preparation in each district. As a modality, this group of researchers should involve one
economist specifically for each district.
Since priority setting both for
Research and Extension is a new activity
to be pursued, it was agreed that NCAP and NAARM would conduct
a series of training programmes for the researchers and extension personnel on priority
setting methodology to be adopted for preparation of SREP in pilot states.
A working group on priority
setting for research and extension may be constituted under NATP with representation from
MANAGE, NCAP, NAARM, CRIDA, PIU and GOI to coordinate and oversee the execution of these
decisions.
-::-
|
