Advertisement

Agroforestry Systems

, Volume 15, Issue 2–3, pp 259–274 | Cite as

Farmer-augmented designs for participatory agroforestry research

  • Andrew Pinney
Article

Abstract

Two factors suggest that experimental designs used in on-station research are not appropriate for on-farm agroforestry research. First, successful technology development and validation requires farmer participation, which in turn requires more flexible experimental designs for on-farm experimentation. Second, the advent of widely available statistical computer packages and computing power allows the experimenter to deviate from ‘standard’ design restrictions of complete blocks and full replication. Farmer involvement in the research process should include the opportunity for farmers to ask questions and to define treatments along-side those of the researcher.

To make inferences about farmer-defined augmented treatments that may only appear on one farm requires estimates of farm-by-treatment effects. This estimate can be obtained from the associated researcher's treatments that are applied to all of the farms participating in the trial. The use of augmented designs minimises plot number, while still enabling the researcher's and farmer's questions to be answered. The proposed design fills a methodological gap between informal farmer observation trials (where no statistical analysis is attempted) and larger scale extension trials (composed of simple treatment comparisons tested over a large number of farms).

Key words

on-farm research farmer participation augmented design 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Atta-Krah AN and Francis PA (1987) The role of on-farm trials in the evaluation of composite technologies: alley cropping in Southern Nigeria, Agricultural Systems 23: 133–152CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Ashby JA (1986) Methodology for the participation of small farmers in the design of on-farm trials. Agricultural Administration 22: 1–19CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Clarke J (1990) On-farm agroforestry research lessons and innovations from a pilot project in Zimbabwe. A paper presented at ICRAF's workshop on Participatory Methods for On-Farm Agroforestry Research, February 19–23, 1990. NairobiGoogle Scholar
  4. Chambers R, Pacey A and Thrupp LA, eds (1989) Final reflections about on-farm research methods. In: Farmer First. Intermediate Technology Publications, London. pp 157–161Google Scholar
  5. Enyola M (1990) Participatory methods for on-farm agroforestry research in KWAP. A paper presented at ICRAF's workshop on Participatory Methods for On-Farm Agroforestry Research, February 19–23, 1990. NairobiGoogle Scholar
  6. Federer WT and Raghavarao D (1975) On augmented designs. Biometrics 31: 29–35Google Scholar
  7. Federer WT (1956) Augmented (or hoonuiaku) designs. Hawaiian Planters' Record 55 (2): 191–208Google Scholar
  8. Huxley PA and Mead R (1988) An ecological approach to on-farm experimentation. Working Paper 52, ICRAF, Nairobi, 40 pGoogle Scholar
  9. Huxley PA and Pinney AJ (1990) Tree/crop interface research: implications for understanding farmer's fields. A paper presented at ICRAF's workshop on Participatory Methods for On-Farm Agroforestry Research, February 19–23, 1990. NairobiGoogle Scholar
  10. Kerkhof P (1990) Agroforestry in Africa: a survey of project experience. Panos Institute, LondonGoogle Scholar
  11. Khon Kaen University (1988) Proceedings of the 1985 International Conference on Rapid Rural Appraisal. Khon Kaen University, ThailandGoogle Scholar
  12. Lightfoot C and Barker R (1988) On-farm trials: A survey of methods. Agricultural Administration and Extension 30: 15–23CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Mead R (1988) The Design of Experiments: Statistical Principles for Practical Applications. Cambridge University Press, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  14. Mead R (1989) On-farm research experimentation. A paper presented at the 160th Ordinary Meeting of the Biometrics Society, 14 December 1989, LondonGoogle Scholar
  15. Okali C and Sumberg JE (1986) Examining divergent strategies in farming systems research. Agricultural Administration 22: 233–253CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Raintree J (1987) Diagnosis and Design: A Users' Manual. ICRAF, NairobiGoogle Scholar
  17. Robinson LD (1987) REML User Manual. Scottish Agricultural Statistics Service, EdinburghGoogle Scholar
  18. Scherr S and Müller E (1990) Evaluating agroforestry interventions in extension projects. Agroforestry Systems 11: 259–280Google Scholar
  19. Sumberg JE and Okali C (1989) Farmers, on-farm research and new technology. In: Chambers R, Pacey A and Thrupp L A, eds, Farmer First, Intermediate Technology Publications, London, pp 109–114Google Scholar
  20. Tripp R and Woolley J (1989) The Planning Stage of On-Farm Research: Identifying Factors for Experimentation. Mexico, D.F. and Cali, Columbia, CIMMYT and CIATGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Kluwer Academic Publishers 1991

Authors and Affiliations

  • Andrew Pinney
    • 1
  1. 1.ICRAFNairobiKenya

Personalised recommendations