Food Security

, Volume 3, Issue 1, pp 65–79 | Cite as

Knowledge through participation: the triumphs and challenges of transferring Integrated Pest and Disease Management (IPDM) technology to cocoa farmers in Papua New Guinea

  • Rosalie Daniel
  • John Kamane Konam
  • Josephine Yaupin Saul-Maora
  • Anton Kamuso
  • Yak Namaliu
  • John-Thomas Vano
  • Ricky Wenani
  • Paul N’nelau
  • Rafiuddin Palinrungi
  • David Ian Guest
Original Paper

Abstract

Income from cocoa is the main source of cash used to purchase food and services in many communities in the tropical lowlands of Papua New Guinea (PNG). Despite the availability of improved management technology, there has been poor transfer and uptake of these technologies among smallholder cocoa farmers, and potentially high bean yields and farmer incomes remain unrealised. A series of IPDM options that were shown to improve crop management and cocoa bean yield in research trials were demonstrated to farmers using an on-farm participatory approach that enabled farmers to evaluate the costs and benefits of each strategy before committing to adoption. The options were designed to provide several levels of entry to improved management, and ranged from no inputs (Option 1), manual inputs (Option 2: pruning, sanitation, weed management and regular complete pod harvesting), high level inputs (Option 3: pruning, sanitation, weed management, regular complete pod harvesting and fertiliser application), to intensive management (Option 4: pruning, sanitation, weed management, regular complete pod harvesting, and the application of fertiliser, fungicide and pesticide). Farmers from East New Britain, Madang and Bougainville, the three main cocoa growing provinces in PNG, participated in on-farm IPDM training and surveys to monitor changes in knowledge and management practice. Farmers opted in or out of the training as their commitments or level of interest changed, and new farmers joined in after observing changes in the cocoa blocks. Farmers were trained in epidemiology and crop management, were shown how to apply the IPDM inputs in their own cocoa blocks, and were given a simple training manual. Surveys conducted prior to, and 3 years after the training, showed an improvement in the farmers’ knowledge of cocoa management and a better understanding of cocoa pest and disease epidemiology. Three years after the training, pest and disease incidence in participating cocoa blocks had declined and cocoa yields had increased by an average of 30%. Trained farmers were encouraged to demonstrate improved management to neighbouring farmers, and the program has now been officially adopted as the national strategy to improve cocoa production in PNG. The participatory approach is an effective way of disseminating information and technology to farmers, however, it requires frequent follow-up visits by trained extension staff. We also discuss the significant challenges associated with conducting farmer surveys.

Keywords

Cocoa Integrated pest and disease management Participatory action research Farmer training Learning-by-doing 

References

  1. Ajayi, M. T., Banmeke, T. O. A., & Okafor, C. (2008). Empowering farmers through discovery learning: a case study of farmer field school (FFS) training on cocoa integrated pest management (IPM) in Ondo State, Nigeria. Journal of Environmental Extension, 7, 37–42.Google Scholar
  2. Allen, M., Bourke, R. M., & McGregor, A. (2009). In: R. M. Bourke, & T. Harwood (Eds.), Food and agriculture in Papua New Guinea. Canberra: ANU E Press, The Australian National University.Google Scholar
  3. Asafu-Adaje, J. (1996). Revitalising growth in Papua New Guinea’s agricultural sector. Agricultural Systems, 51, 299–316.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Curry, G., Omuru, E., Nailina, R., & Koczberski, G. (2007). Farming or Foraging? Household labour and livelihood strategies amongst smallholder cocoa growers in Papua New Guinea. Perth: Black Swan Press.Google Scholar
  5. Efron, Y., Epaina, P., & Marfu, J. (2005). Breeding strategies to improve cocoa production in Papua New Guinea. In F. Bekele, M. J. End, & A. B. Eskes (Eds.), Proceedings of the international workshop on cocoa breeding for improved production systems, 2003 (pp. 79–91). Ghana: Accra.Google Scholar
  6. Ejembi, E. P., Omoregbee, F. E., & Ejembi, S. A. E. (2006). Farmers’ assessment of the training and visit extension system in central Nigeria: evidence from Barkin Ladi, Plateau State. Journal of Social Science, 12, 207–212.Google Scholar
  7. Fleming, E., & Lummani, J. (2001). Technical Efficiency of Smallholder Cocoa and Copra producers in Papua New Guinea, Occasional Paper 7, Understanding the Smallholder Cocoa and Coconut Sector in Papua New Guinea. PNG Cocoa and Coconut Research Institute/University of New England, Keravat and Armidale.Google Scholar
  8. Ghodake, R. D., Cook, K. E., Kurika, L., Ling, G., Moxon, J. E., & Nevenimo, T. (1995). A rapid rural appraisal of the cocoa and coconut farming systems in the northeast lowlands of the Gazelle Peninsula of East New Britain Province. Technical Report 95/1. Department of Agriculture & Livestock, Konedobu.Google Scholar
  9. Godyn, D. L. (1974). An economic survey of cocoa in Papua New Guinea: Part III Village cocoa. Department of Agriculture, Stock and Fisheries, Port Moresby.Google Scholar
  10. Guest, D. I., Daniel, R., Namaliu, Y., & Konam, J. K. (2010). Technology adoption: Classroom in the cocoa block. In N. V. Hardwick & M. L. Gullino (Eds.), Knowledge and technology transfer for plant pathology. Volume 4, Plant Pathology in the 21st Century. Dordrecht: Springer.Google Scholar
  11. Holderness, M. (1992). Biology and control of Phytophthora diseases of cocoa in Papua New Guinea. In: P. J. Keane, & C. A. Putter (Eds.), Cocoa pest and disease management in Southeast Asia and Australasia. FAO Plant Production and Protection Paper No. 112. Rome, Italy: Food and Agriculture Organisation of the United Nations.Google Scholar
  12. Konam, J. K., & Guest, D. I. (2002). Leaf litter mulch reduces the survival of Phytophthora palmivora under cocoa trees in Papua New Guinea. Australasian Plant Pathology, 31, 381–383.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Konam, J. K., & Guest, D. I. (2004). Role of flying beetles (Coleoptera: Scolytidae and Nitidulae) in the spread of Phytophthora pod rot of cocoa in Papua New Guinea. Australasian Plant Pathology, 33, 55–59.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Konam, J., Namaliu, Y., Daniel, R., & Guest, D. (2008). Integrated pest and disease management for sustainable cocoa production: a training manual for farmers and extension workers. Monograph No. 131. Canberra: Australian Centre for International Agricultural Research.Google Scholar
  15. Olanya, M., Nelson, R., Hakiza, J., Ewell, P., El-Bedewy, R., Kakuhenzire, R., et al. (2010). Comparative assessment of pest management practices in potato production at farmer field schools. Food Security, 2, 327–341.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Omuru, E., Nailina, R., & Fleming, E. (2001). A Socioeconomic Baseline Survey of Cocoa and Copra Smallholders in East New Britain, Occasional Paper 1, Understanding the Smallholder Cocoa and Coconut Sector in Papua New Guinea, PNG Cocoa and Coconut Research Institute/University of New England, Keravat and Armidale.Google Scholar
  17. Smith, E. S. C. (1981). An integrated control scheme for cocoa pests and diseases in Papua New Guinea. Tropical Pest Management, 27, 351–359.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Snapp, S., Kanyam-Phiri, G., Kamanga, B., Gilbert, R., & Wellard, K. (2002). Farmer and researcher partnerships in Malawi: developing soil fertility technologies for the near-term and far-term. Experimental Agriculture, 38, 411–431.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Yarbro, S., & Noble, S. (1989). Smallholder production, processing and marketing of cocoa and copra in Papua New Guinea: a baseline survey. In: Designing monitoring systems for smallholder agriculture in Papua New Guinea, Working Paper No. 10. Department of Human Geography, Research School of Pacific Studies, The Australian National University, Canberra.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science + Business Media B.V. & International Society for Plant Pathology 2011

Authors and Affiliations

  • Rosalie Daniel
    • 1
  • John Kamane Konam
    • 2
  • Josephine Yaupin Saul-Maora
    • 3
  • Anton Kamuso
    • 3
  • Yak Namaliu
    • 3
  • John-Thomas Vano
    • 3
  • Ricky Wenani
    • 3
  • Paul N’nelau
    • 4
  • Rafiuddin Palinrungi
    • 5
  • David Ian Guest
    • 1
  1. 1.Faculty of Faculty of Agriculture, Food and Natural ResourcesThe University of SydneySydneyAustralia
  2. 2.Cocoa Livelihoods Improvement Program (CLIP)HoniaraSolomon Islands
  3. 3.Papua New Guinea Cocoa and Coconut Institute LimitedRabaulPapua New Guinea
  4. 4.Papua New Guinea Cocoa and Coconut LimitedAutonomous Region of BougainvillePapua New Guinea
  5. 5.School of Geosciences, Faculty of ScienceThe University of SydneySydneyAustralia

Personalised recommendations