IMPACT-L Archives

Moderated conference on impact assessment of agricultural research: May 2014

Impact-L@LISTSERV.FAO.ORG

Options: Use Classic View

Use Monospaced Font
Show Text Part by Default
Show All Mail Headers

Topic: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]

Print Reply
Wed, 14 May 2014 12:45:11 +0200
text/plain (1 lines)
I am Annie Murimi from Kenya. I am a certified Monitoring and Evaluation professional and currently pursuing a masters degree in Project Management. My undergraduate was in social sciences. I work as a Development Manager at Utooni Development Organization; a Kenyan NGO working with farmers in the arid and semi-arid areas.  

 

First I would like to thank the organizers of this email conference. It is a great opportunity for us to share and learn from each other.



S.K.T. Nasar, I concur with you (Message 1), when you say that research is usually directed by the investors rather than the local community. I think this is caused by the fact that investors are guided by their strategic areas of focus (institutional goals and objectives) and their higher % contribution (cash or in-kind) in the research. In addition, agricultural needs in the community are many and complex at times hence the need to direct it.  

 

Ed Garrett (Message 4), you talked about situations that may cause current knowledge to become void when new knowledge emerges. I consider this very crucial because in my view, research helps us to identify gaps that exist within a given field/area (crop, livestock, forestry etc) and also gives rise to new ideologies; hence making agricultural research/epIA a continuous process.



Responding to Question 4.5 in the conference background document (on EpIA in the different food and agricultural sectors): 

According to me, we need continued research in virtually all agricultural sectors (crops, livestock, etc); a lot of diversity exists within our societies. What causes some areas to receive more attention than others is the urgency and/or degree at which issues (e.g. those of pests, diseases etc) occur. Diversity may also be as a result of physical or social factors such as geographical location, community preference, attitude and culture. Transferability of the methods developed in one area to another is very possible.  Lessons learned usually provide good feedback that can be used in another research area.



Responding to Question 4.6 (on cost effectiveness of EpIA): 

I would recommend that we improve on collaboration and resource sharing/apportionment. This is a trend in current times; several stakeholders are coming together to support research work. Gone are the days where investors/donors would fund research projects without looking deeply in both internal and external environments. Nowadays, there is increased sharing and networking among them and as such, I would encourage researchers to continue lobbying (sourcing) for funds in consortium. This gives them an added advantage and also helps to save on logistics/administration cost. It also gives room for increased accountability, information exchange and sharing. It also helps improve researchers’ capacities/capabilities.



Responding to Question 4.7 (on communication of epIA findings):

With regard to communication of epIA findings, this has always been a challenge. In most cases, the findings are sometimes difficult to decode/interpret; due the level of education or lack of relevant skills. I will give an example with the recent soil fertility results that were shared to us (Kenya). The end users of the report are farmers (including the small-scale farmers who are the majority). I am not so sure how many will be able to understand the scientific terms used in the report- especially those touching on components of the fertilizers (calcium, phosphorous, nitrogen etc). I am also not sure how many have the capacity to know whether the amounts (those of calcium etc.) they have used in their farms are enough or not - most farmers are continually applying the fertilizers with the hope that their crops will do well/they will reap maximum benefits. I see this as an excellent opportunity to conduct a future epIA to establish or evaluate the impact/usability of the new information that came out of the said report. We can for instance conduct research to establish (1) whether a limitation in incomes results in a limitation/hindrance in soil sampling & testing among small scale farmers thereby leading to low or inconsistent yields and (2) whether a limitation in incomes puts small-scale farmers at a disadvantaged level thus making them to be surpassed by their elite counterparts who are able employ or hire services of soil experts. [The report referred to, entitled "Soil suitability evaluation for maize production in Kenya", is from the National Accelerated Agricultural Input Access Program (NAAIAP) which is a pro-poor, food security and poverty alleviation government initiative. The report, "a useful tool to guide farmers, farmer groups, extension providers, dealers in fertilizers and other stakeholders on the types and levels of fertilizer application for different areas in the country", is available at http://www.kilimo.go.ke/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=732:the-national-soil-test-results-report&catid=215:reports ...Moderator].



Annie Murimi

Development Manager,

Utooni Development Organization

P.O Box 89 Kola, 

Machakos

Kenya

http://www.utoonidevelopment.org

Cell: +254 727 480 922

        +254 733 924 456

Skype name: annie.murimi

e-mail: murimi.annie (at) gmail.com



[To contribute to this conference, send your message to [log in to unmask] For further information, see http://www.fao.org/nr/research-extension-systems/res-home/news/detail/en/c/217706/ ].



########################################################################



To unsubscribe from the Impact-L list, click the following link:

https://listserv.fao.org/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=Impact-L&A=1


ATOM RSS1 RSS2