IPM Knowledge Transfer – Current Developments And Needs In Farmer Training For Ipm Implementation

Janny Vos. CABI Bioscience, Bakeham Lane, Egham, Surrey TW20 9TY, UK
E-mail: j.vos@cabi.org

Abstract

To become successful producers, farmers need access to advisory expertise that helps them make better and more open choices about their own livelihoods. Globalisation poses a threat to smallholders unless they get more effective support in accessing new technologies and markets, and in meeting new standards of quality and reliability. The extension role needs to move towards a mode ranging from advice and training on specific technologies to facilitation in relation to technologies (e.g. improved access) but also in relation to a wider service context (including credit, input supply, processing, marketing). The research role needs to be linked and move towards a mode of seeking to solve farmers’ problems and addressing their needs. Examples are given of tackling plant disease problems through farmer participatory training modes. Farmer Participatory Training (FPT) focuses on transfer of knowledge through discovery learning, facilitated by extension. Farmer Participatory Research (FPR) focuses on knowledge generation through novel farmer experimentation, facilitated by research and extension. The focus in FPR is on meeting farmers’ needs and demands in appropriate knowledge generation through local technology development and/or validation. The focus of knowledge transfer and generation is indirectly to achieve food security, but first and foremost to improve smallholder producers’ livelihoods. Impact assessments of participatory training programmes show more stable production with improved product quality and increase in farmers’ incomes. However, for these programmes to move beyond pilot stages, it is concluded that a wider focus would be needed to involve all stakeholders in the IPM knowledge system.