EcoHealth

, 1:SU109 | Cite as

Participatory Research Approaches and Social Dynamics that Influence Agricultural Practices to Improve Child Nutrition in Malawi

Original Contribution
First Online:

Abstract

The Soils, Food and Healthy Communities project in Malawi uses an interdisciplinary participatory approach to improving child nutrition with resource-poor farmers. The overall research question is: Can legume systems improve soil fertility, food security, and child nutrition? Over 2000 farmers are now experimenting with legume systems in the region. While this article examines the social issues that mitigate the potential success of legume options tested by the farmers, it does not aim at discussing extensively the complex web of interactions between soil fertility, food security, and nutritional status of children. Instead, its focus is on the research process, and more specifically on the social dimensions and participatory approaches, which influenced farmers’ adoption of organic matter technologies and legume options. The Farmer Research Team was critical in mobilizing community interest in changing agricultural practices to improve child health, but faced challenges in village politics and workload. The linkage with child nutrition was a major reason for increased adoption of legumes, and gender relations played a key role in the adoption. A deeper understanding of the limits of participatory approaches helped to develop innovations that may be replicated elsewhere, such as inclusion of grandmothers and a farmer apprenticeship program.

Keywords

legumes food security participatory research soil fertility child nutrition 
This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.

Notes

Acknowledgments

This research was carried out by the authors while working with the Soils, Food and Healthy Communities project in Ekwendeni, Malawi. Laifolo Dakishoni, Angela Shonga, Tanya Trevors, David Ryan, and Rodgers Msachi provided critical research assistance in the field. Wayne Bezner Kerr and Peter Berti gave invaluable input to earlier drafts of the article. The financial support of the International Development Research Centre (IDRC) for this project is gratefully acknowledged. The first author also received financial support from the Social Science and Humanities Research Council of the Government of Canada, the Einaudi International Center of Cornell University, and the Bradfield Award for her fieldwork. Finally, the important role of the Farmer Research Team and community members of participating villages in carrying out the research must be acknowledged. An earlier version of this article was presented at the International Forum on Ecosystem Approaches to Human Health, May 18–23, 2003, in Montreal, Canada.

References

  1. Ashby, J, Gracia, T, del Pilar Guerro, M, Patino, CA, Quiros, CA, Roa, JI (1997) “Supporting local farmer research committees” In: Thompson, J (editor), Farmers’ Research in Practice: Lessons from the Field, IT Publications, London, pp 245–261Google Scholar
  2. Aubel, J 2001Participatory communication to strengthen the role of grandmothers in child health: an alternative paradigm for health education and health communicationJournal of International Communication77697Google Scholar
  3. Benson T, Kaphuka J, Kanyanda S, Chinula R (2002) Malawi: an Atlas of Social Statistics, Zomba, Malawi and Washington, DC: National Statistical Office and International Food Policy Research InstituteGoogle Scholar
  4. Bezner Kerr R (1998) Food Security, Intra Household Dynamics and Manure Use on Resource-poor Farms in Northern Malawi. MSc Thesis, Guelph: University of GuelphGoogle Scholar
  5. Bezner Kerr, R (2004a) “Food security in northern Malawi: historical context and the significance of gender, kinship relations and entitlements” Journal of Southern African Studies (in press)Google Scholar
  6. Bezner Kerr, R (2004b) “Informal labor and social relations in northern Malawi: the theoretical challenges and implications of ganyu labor for food security” Rural Sociology (in press)Google Scholar
  7. Cooke, B, Kuthari, U 2001Participation, the New Tyranny?Zed BooksLondonGoogle Scholar
  8. David, S 1995What do farmers think? Farmer evaluations of hedgerow intercropping under semi-arid conditionsAgroforestry Systems321528Google Scholar
  9. Forget, G, Lebel, J 2001An ecosystem approach to human healthInternational Journal of Occupational and Environmental Health74Google Scholar
  10. Gubbles, P (1997) “Strengthening community capacity for sustainable agriculture” In: Thompson, J (editor), Farmers’ Research in Practice: Lessons from the Field, IT Publications, London, pp 217–244Google Scholar
  11. Guijt, I Shah, MK (1998) “Waking up to power, conflict and process” In: Shah, MK (editor), The Myth of Community: Gender Issues in Participatory Development, Intermediate Technology Publications Ltd, London, pp 3–50Google Scholar
  12. Hagmann, J, Chuma, E, Murwira, K (1997) “Kuturaya: participatory research, innovation and extension” In: Thompson, J (editor), Farmers’ Research in Practice: Lessons from the Field, IT Publications, London, pp 153–173Google Scholar
  13. Humphries S, Gonzales J, Jiminez J, Sierra F (2000) Searching for Sustainable Land Use Practices in Honduras: Lessons from a Programme of Participatory Research with Hillside Farmers, Agricultural Research and Extension Network Paper 104Google Scholar
  14. Kamanga B, Kanyama PGY, Snapp S (2001) Experiences with Farmer Participatory Mother-baby Trials and Watershed Management Improve Soil Fertility Options in Malawi, SoilFertNet Methods Working Paper No. 5, CIMMYT, HarareGoogle Scholar
  15. Kayira C (2002) Consultancy Report on Inter/Intra Household Dynamics for Ekwendeni Mission Hospital SFHC Project. Unpublished manuscript, Lilongwe, MalawiGoogle Scholar
  16. McAllister K, Vernooy R (1999) Action and Reflection: a Guide for Monitoring and Evaluating Participatory Research, Ottawa: International Development Research CentreGoogle Scholar
  17. NSO, Macro (2001) Malawi Demographic and Health Survey 2000, Zomba, Malawi and Calverton, MD: National Statistics Office and ORC MacroGoogle Scholar
  18. Patton, MQ (1990) Qualitative Evaluation and Research Methods, Sage Publications, Newbury Park, CAGoogle Scholar
  19. Rocheleau, D (2004) “Participation in context: what’s past, what’s present, and what’s next” In: Braun, AR (editor), Managing Natural Resources for Sustainable Livelihoods: Uniting Science and Participation, Earthscan and IDRC, London and Ottawa, pp 169–183Google Scholar
  20. Salunke, DK, Chavan, JK, Kadam, SS 1986Pigeonpea as important food sourceCRC Critical Review in Food Science and Nutrition23103141CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Slocum, R, Wichhart, L, Rocheleau, D, Thomas-Slayter, B 1995Power, Process and Participation: Tools for ChangeIT PublicationsLondonGoogle Scholar
  22. Snapp, S 1999.Commun Soil Sci Plant Anal2925712588CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Snapp, S, Blackie, M (2004) “Realigning research and extension to focus on farmers’ constraints and opportunities” Food Policy (in press)Google Scholar
  24. Snapp, SS, Mafongoya, PL, Waddington, S 1998Organic matter technologies for integrated nutrient management in smallholder cropping systems of southern AfricaAgriculture Ecosystems & Environment71185200Google Scholar
  25. Snapp, S, Rohrbach, D, Simtowe, F, Thombozi, J, Freeman, HA 2002Sustainable soil management options for Malawi: can smallholder farmers grow more legumes?Agriculture, Ecosystems & Environment91151174Google Scholar
  26. Young M (1997) Health and Housing Survey. Unpublished manuscript, Ekwendeni, MalawiGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© EcoHealth Journal Consortium 2004

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Development SociologyCornell UniversityIthaca
  2. 2.SFHC ProjectEkwendeni HospitalEkwendeni

Personalised recommendations