Farmer-augmented designs for participatory agroforestry research
- 66 Downloads
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 wordson-farm research farmer participation augmented design
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
- 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
- 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
- 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
- Federer WT and Raghavarao D (1975) On augmented designs. Biometrics 31: 29–35Google Scholar
- Federer WT (1956) Augmented (or hoonuiaku) designs. Hawaiian Planters' Record 55 (2): 191–208Google Scholar
- Huxley PA and Mead R (1988) An ecological approach to on-farm experimentation. Working Paper 52, ICRAF, Nairobi, 40 pGoogle Scholar
- 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
- Kerkhof P (1990) Agroforestry in Africa: a survey of project experience. Panos Institute, LondonGoogle Scholar
- Khon Kaen University (1988) Proceedings of the 1985 International Conference on Rapid Rural Appraisal. Khon Kaen University, ThailandGoogle Scholar
- Mead R (1988) The Design of Experiments: Statistical Principles for Practical Applications. Cambridge University Press, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
- Mead R (1989) On-farm research experimentation. A paper presented at the 160th Ordinary Meeting of the Biometrics Society, 14 December 1989, LondonGoogle Scholar
- Raintree J (1987) Diagnosis and Design: A Users' Manual. ICRAF, NairobiGoogle Scholar
- Robinson LD (1987) REML User Manual. Scottish Agricultural Statistics Service, EdinburghGoogle Scholar
- Scherr S and Müller E (1990) Evaluating agroforestry interventions in extension projects. Agroforestry Systems 11: 259–280Google Scholar
- 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
- 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