Participatory impact assessment: Bridging the gap between scientists' theory and farmers' practice

doi:10.1016/j.agsy.2016.07.002

Agricultural Systems

Volume 148, October 2016, Pages 38-43

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.agsy.2016.07.002 Get rights and content

Highlights

•
Ex-ante impact assessment supports to anticipate possible impacts of project interventions and makes them explicit
•
Participatory impact assessment facilitates insights into the complex socio-environmental context of a local community
•
Farmers and scientists have different views on the positive and negative impacts of proposed agricultural interventions
•
Ex-ante impact assessment should be mandatorily applied at local community level during planning phase
•
Ex-ante impact assessment is a critical step before implementation to adapt solutions to the context

Abstract

Food security is a major challenge for smallholders in Sub-Saharan Africa. Many development initiatives have attempted to enhance food security by improving agricultural production and productivity. An ex-ante impact assessment is a critical step for identifying positive and negative impacts before implementation of these agricultural innovations and it is therefore a critical component during project-/program planning. While many theoretical discourses have highlighted a strong need for active involvement of local stakeholders during project-/program planning to develop suitable solutions, in practice, local communities are still not mandatorily involved in the ex-ante impact assessment before the implementation of development initiatives. The purpose of this research is to highlight how stakeholders' and researchers' knowledge can enhance the quality of impact assessments if they are used in a complementary way. We applied two methodological impact assessment approaches (Framework for participatory impact assessment [FoPIA] and ScaIA-Food Security [ScaIA-FS]) to assess the impacts of five agricultural upgrading strategies (UPS) from a researcher's perspective as well as from a farmer's point of view in two case study villages in rural Dodoma, Tanzania. We observed that farmers and scientists had considerably different views on the impacts of the proposed agricultural UPS. While scientists focused on direct causal impact chains of the UPS, farmers considered more the indirect linkages, taking into account their complex livelihoods. Ex-ante impact assessment is a valuable tool to anticipate possible effects, and the process facilitates insights into complex socio-environmental contexts of local communities as well as structured thinking and knowledge exchange. We therefore see bi-lateral ex-ante impact assessments as a corrective step before UPS implementation, which would help to adapt solutions that will benefit local communities.

Introduction

Approximately 805 million people in the world were estimated to be chronically undernourished in 2014; this is particularly the case in the sub-Saharan region, where more than one in four people are undernourished (FAO, 2014). Although smallholders grow the majority of agricultural produce, they are the poorest and most hungry population group in developing countries in this region (IAASTD, 2009, Dethier and Effenberger, 2012, IFAD and UNEP, 2013). Several development initiatives have attempted to enhance food security by improving agricultural production and productivity of smallholder farmers. These initiatives all presuppose some theory of change (Millstone et al., 2010), implying that the implementation of new or modified agricultural practices, would improve the lives of the intended beneficiaries. Millstone et al. (2010) and Ridder and Pahl-Wostl (2005) emphasize that there is a strong need for actively inviting the likely beneficiaries to comment on the researcher's intended interventions during the planning stage, before its implementation. Ex-ante impact assessment is a critical step during the project-/program planning phase for identifying positive and negative impacts before implementation of these agricultural interventions (Maredia, 2009). The IAIA (2009) defines impact assessment as “the process of identifying the future consequences of a current or proposed action. On one hand it is a “technical tool for analysis of the consequences of a planned intervention (policy, plan, program, project), providing information to stakeholders and decision-makers” and on the other it is “a legal and institutional procedure linked to the decision-making process of a planned intervention”. With the help of an ex-ante impact assessment, negative side effects may be discovered that may help to adjust the intended measures to be more suitable in the local context (EIARD, 2003, Millstone et al., 2010).

Several researchers have highlighted in their theoretical discourses that the active involvement of local stakeholders throughout the impact assessment process is crucial (Bond et al., 2012, Bond and Morrison-Saunders, 2013, Gibson, 2006). Pro-poor development and improving practices of the smallholders requires the active involvement of the population targeted by the planned intervention (Mayoux and Chambers, 2005, Schindler et al., 2015, Ridder and Pahl-Wostl, 2005). By involving local stakeholders the quality and durability of collective decisions in planned interventions is likely to be greater (Reed, 2008).

The field of impact assessment lacks concrete case studies where the differences in perceptions between local farmers and researchers are analysed, showing the value of using local stakeholders' perceptions and scientific expert knowledge in an integrative way in order to enhance the quality and relevance of development initiatives. This is particularly needed in so-called developing countries, where local knowledge is crucial to understand the real needs of the community, in addition to more theoretical research project proposals that are often designed at a researcher's level without real stakeholder participation.

The purpose of this study is to highlight how stakeholders' and researchers' knowledge can enhance the quality of impact assessments if they are used in a complementary way.

We present the results of an ex-ante sustainability impact assessment of agricultural upgrading strategies (UPS) that were carried both out at the local farmer's level as well as separately with researchers. These UPS were developed within the framework of the research project Trans-SEC (http://project2.zalf.de/trans-sec/public/), which intends to implement best practices with high potential for enhancing food security in different case study villages in rural Tanzania.

Section snippets

Methodological approaches

For the ex-ante impact assessment on the researchers' and farmers' levels, we used two different methodological approaches, ScaIA-Food Security [ScaIA-FS] (Uckert et al., 2016) and Framework for participatory impact assessment [FoPIA] (Morris et al., 2011, König et al., 2012, König et al., 2013, Schindler et al., 2016a, Schindler et al., 2016b). We adapted both approaches to our case study in rural Tanzania (Uckert et al., 2016, Schindler et al., 2016a, Schindler et al., 2016b). ScaIA-FS is an

Results

We analysed in a comparable manner the impact assessments by farmers and scientists of the UPS: rainwater harvesting (infiltration pits), fertilizer micro-dosing, improved processing devices (millet winnowing machine), the development of a new product (sunflower oil) and nutrition education (Table 1) in the two case study villages Ilolo and Idifu.

Discussion

Kristjanson et al. (2002) argued that “[…] the typical approach to measuring impact of agricultural research has been to ask experts”. Farmers are rarely involved during planning and realization of impact assessment. Involving farmers is often considered as a “[…] substitute for the adaptive end of the formal research spectrum[…]” in regard to final adaptation of a technology (Sumberg et al., 2003). We emphasize that the local population should participate in the planning phase. Our study

Conclusion

Local communities are rarely involved during the planning and realization of research projects' impact assessments. The objective of our research was to show the impact assessment differences from farmers and scientists as well as the value of their complementary use to improve mutual learning for implementing suitable solutions. We observed that farmers and scientists have considerably different views on the positive and negative impacts of proposed agricultural UPS. While scientists focus

Acknowledgements

This publication is a product of the project Trans-SEC (www.trans-sec.org). The German Federal Ministry of Education and Research (BMBF) has funded the project, and the German Federal Ministry for Economic Cooperation and Development (BMZ) (031A249A) has co-financed the project Trans-SEC. The views expressed are purely those of the authors and may not under any circumstances be regarded as stating an official position of the BMBF and BMZ.

References (40)

D.R. Becker et al.
A participatory approach to social impact assessment: the interactive community forum
Environ. Impact Assess. Rev.
(2003)
C.M. Raymond et al.
Integrating local and scientific knowledge for environmental management. [Article]
J. Environ. Manag.
(2010)
M.S. Reed
Stakeholder participation for environmental management: A literature review
Biol. Conserv.
(2008)
J. Schindler et al.
Sustainability Impact Assessment to Improve Food Security of Smallholders in Tanzania
Environ. Impact Assess. Rev.
(2016)
J. Sumberg et al.
Agricultural research in the face of diversity, local knowledge and the participation imperative: Theoretical considerations
Agric. Syst.
(2003)
M. Bagayoko et al.
Microdose and N and P fertilizer application rates for pearl millet in West Africa
Afr. J. Agric. Res.
(2011)
A. Bond et al.
Better learning
A. Bond et al.
Sustainability assessment: The state of the art
Impact Assess. Proj. Apprais.
(2012)
A. Bond et al.
Designing an effective sustainability assessment process
W. Crewett et al.
Scaling up of Good Agricultural Practices

Dethier, J.-J., & Effenberger, A. (2012). Agriculture and development: a brief review of the literature. Econ. Syst.,...

EIARD (2003). Impact assessment and evaluation in agricultural research for development. Agric. Syst., 78(2), 329–336,...

FAO

The State of Food Insecurity in the World 2014. Strengthening the Enabling Environment for Food Security and Nutrition

(2014)

R.B. Gibson

Sustainability assessment: Basic components of a practical approach

Impact Assess. Proj. Apprais.

(2006)

V. Hoffmann et al.

Farmers and researchers: How can collaborative advantages be created in participatory research and technology development? [Article]

Agric. Hum. Values

(2007)

IAASTD

Agriculture at a Crossroads: Global Report

(2009)

IAIA

What Is Impact Assessment?

(2009)

IFAD et al.

Smallholders, Food Security, and the Environment

(2013)

H.J. König et al.

Assessing the impact of land use policy on urban-rural sustainability using the FoPIA approach in Yogyakarta, Indonesia

Sustainability

(2010)

H.J. König et al.

Participatory impact assessment of soil and water conservation scenarios in Oum Zessar watershed, Tunisia

Environ. Manag.

(2012)

Cited by (29)

Forward-looking impact assessment – An interdisciplinary systematic review and research agenda
2022, Journal of Cleaner Production
New and established ventures are under increasing pressure to consider how their current actions impact our future world. Whilst many practitioners are paying greater attention to their future impact, most impact assessment research focuses on the retrospective measurement of impact. Limited studies have explored how impact assessment is used as a tool to forecast or predict the intended impact of organisational action. This study aims to overcome this gap by exploring forward-looking approaches to impact assessment. An interdisciplinary systematic review of the impact assessment literature was conducted to answer the question: “How and why do organisations utilise forward-looking, future-oriented approaches to impact assessment?“. The findings elaborate on the common research themes, challenges, and gaps in understanding forward-looking impact assessment. An integrated process model is developed to show the relationships between various antecedents, methods, and effects of forward-looking impact assessment. Based on the review, the paper puts forward a research agenda to provoke further inquiry on forward-looking, future-oriented approaches to impact assessments related to four research themes: uncertainty, values and assumptions, stakeholder cooperation, and learning. The study contributes to the impact assessment literature by providing an overview of how the current literature comprehends forward-looking approaches and insights into how a more holistic view of temporality in impact assessment can be developed.
Combining sustainable livelihood and farm sustainability approaches to identify relevant intensification options: Implications for households with crop-based and gathering-based livelihoods in Tanzania
2022, Ecological Indicators
Citation Excerpt :
“Crop-based” households in Morogoro could benefit from such an intervention leading to improved soil fertility and higher yields, leading to an overall boost of the profitability. However, good efficiency of fertiliser application also requires farmer training and knowledge of the right dose and time of application, and depends strongly on soil water availability (Schindler et al., 2016). To improve soil water availability, we recommend implementation of rainwater harvesting, which is a cost-effective strategy for coping with droughts in a rainfall-limited context (Mak-Mensah et al., 2021).
In low-income countries, the livelihoods of smallholders are affected to different extent by multiple issues, such as food insecurity or low soil fertility, depending on their multiple assets and farming characteristics. In this study, we aim at assessing the current sustainability of households in Tanzania to suggest potential changes in farming system to increase the household́ sustainability. Household survey data from 891 households in two regions of Tanzania (dry Dodoma and humid Morogoro) were used to build composite sustainability indices representing the three pillars of sustainability (economic, environmental and social), based on 46 basic indicators. Then, a household typology was developed through principal component analysis and hierarchical clustering analysis of descriptive variables, and regression analysis linked the sustainability of farms with household characteristics. The analysis revealed significant differences in household types that relied on different livelihood strategies including particularly a “Gathering-based” type in Dodoma and two “Crop-based” types in both regions. These livelihoods significantly influenced the level of farming system sustainability. Particularly, the households in the “Gathering-based” type performed worst on all three pillars of sustainability. By examining the level of capitals from the different household types, we identified that the “Gathering-based” type and “Crop-based” types could improve their livelihood and be better off if they adopt various upgrading solutions. Such solutions include intercropping and optimised weeding to increase productivity and resource-use efficiency, for which these households have sufficient labour resources. Additionally, livestock rearing and use of fertilisers coupled with rainwater harvesting can increase soil fertility and water use efficiency, and hence food security, without compromising the environmental component of sustainability. To facilitate the adoption of these sustainable intensification options, agricultural policies and appropriate training need to be implemented to fit the local context and diversity of household types.
Four years of sustainability impact assessments accompanying the implementation of improved cooking stoves in Tanzania
2020, Environmental Impact Assessment Review
Development projects and innovations are often implemented based on scientific recommendations and do not incorporate local knowledge and demand for interventions. In this paper, we demonstrate the successful engagement of local stakeholders in the implementation and evaluation process of improved cooking stoves; a technology that improves food security in two climatically contrasting regions in Tanzania.
The Framework for Participatory Impact Assessment tool was used to conduct impact assessments on firewood-based improved cooking stoves to evaluate their contribution to food security at local stakeholder level. Between 2014 and 2017, four annual impact assessments were conducted with local stakeholders in four villages in the semi-arid Dodoma and the sub-humid Morogoro regions to assess the impact of improved cooking stoves on locally defined nine food security criteria. The Framework for Participatory Impact Assessment was used to (i) ex-ante identify the expected impact, and (ii) to ex-post assess the experienced impact of improved cooking stoves on the nine food security criteria. The impact assessments showed that the perceived contribution of improved cooking stoves towards the food security criteria was positive throughout all assessments. In particular, improved cooking stoves addressed relevant food security criteria such as social relations, food availability, and market participation. The Framework for Participatory Impact Assessment tool supported continuous knowledge exchange between scientists and local stakeholders, thus improving communication and co-learning; while identifying merits and demerits of the improved cooking stoves that could be addressed during the project lifetime.
Integrating evidence of land use and land cover change for land management policy formulation along the Kenya-Tanzania borderlands
2019, Anthropocene
This paper presents an overview of the scientific evidence providing insights into long term ecosystem and social dynamics across the northern Tanzania and southern Kenya borderlands. The data sources covered a range from palaeoenvironmental records and archaeological information to remote sensing and social science studies that examined human-environmental interactions and land use land cover changes (LULCC) in the region. This knowledge map of published LULCC research contributes to current debates about the drivers and dynamics of LULCC. The review aims to facilitate both multidisciplinary LULCC research and evidence-based policy analyses to improve familiarity and engagement between LULCC knowledge producers and end-users and to motivate research integration for land management policy formulation. Improving familiarity among researchers and non-academic stakeholders through the collation and synthesis of the scientific literature is among the challenges hindering policy formulation and land management decision-making by various stakeholders along the Kenya-Tanzania borderlands. Knowledge syntheses are necessary; yet, do not fully bridge the gap between knowledge and policy action. Cooperation across the science-policy interface is fundamental for the co-production of research questions by academics, policy makers and diverse stakeholders aimed at supporting land management decision making. For improved co-development and co-benefitting outcomes, the LULCC scientific community needs to mobilise knowledge for a broader audience and to advance co-development of relevant and meaningful LULCC products.
Agro-environmental aspects of conservation agriculture compared to conventional systems: A 3-year experience on 20 farms in the Po valley (Northern Italy)
2019, Agricultural Systems
Citation Excerpt :
Conversely, the lack of a technical support might result in the abandoning of CA practices with a return to conventional systems after the end of the 2014–2020 European subsidies program. Moreover, involving farmers with the participatory approach in defining the strategies to adopt at field and farm scale is regarded as fundamental for the effectiveness of their implementation (Nguyen et al., 2016; Schindler et al., 2016). As already suggested by Pradhan et al. (2017), institutionalizing CA into regional institutions will enhance the sustainability of the technology.
An evaluation of the effect of the conservation agriculture (CA) on agro-environmental aspects is needed at the farm scale in intensive production systems, which are likely prone to reduce soil fertility. Here, as part of the HelpSoil LIFE+ Project and involving 20 farms in the Po valley (Northern Italy), we have estimated the soil organic carbon (SOC) content, SOC stock, crop yield, biological fertility, soil biodiversity, and economic efficiency under different agricultural systems (CA and conventional, CvtA) at the beginning (March 2014) and end (October 2016) of the experimental period. CA was mostly represented by no-till practice (NT) coupled with the cultivation of winter cover crops. Minimum tillage (MT) was considered as CA or CvtA practice according to the farm design. The CA practices have been implemented on the monitored farms at different times (Long-term = before 2006, Medium-term = between 2006 and 2013, Short-term = after 2013). A direct comparison between CA and CvtA of soil-related variables, yields, and costs was performed on 14 out of the 20 farms; data were statistically treated with a linear mixed model. Overall, CA resulted in significantly higher SOC content, SOC stock, biological fertility, QBS-ar, and earthworms for the Medium-term group. Considering the effect of tillage practices observed on the 20 farms, SOC content was the highest in NT for the Long-term group. The biological fertility index was higher in NT and MT compared to CvtA within the Long-term and Medium-term groups in 2016. QBS-ar was the higher in MT and NT than CvtA for the Long-term and Medium-Term groups. The number of earthworms was the highest under NT for the Long-term group. Maize, winter wheat, and soybeans yields were generally 1 t ha⁻¹ higher in CvtA than in CA, but this did not reach statistical significance. The cost for herbicides was 18% more expensive in NT, whereas the fuel consumption and total costs for weeding operations did not differ between NT and CvtA. The overall outcome of the analysis was that CA is a viable solution for intensive farms in the monitored area, but further skills need still to be acquired in to enhance its economic feasibility.
Model results versus farmer realities. Operationalizing diversity within and among smallholder farm systems for a nuanced impact assessment of technology packages
2018, Agricultural Systems
Agricultural production in Northern Ghana is dominated by smallholder farm systems, which are characterized by low inputs and low outputs, declining soil fertility, large yield gaps and limited adoption of agricultural technologies. There is an urgent need for alternative farm designs that are more productive, yet more sustainable. Technology packages for sustainable intensification are promoted by an R4D project in the Upper East, Upper West and Northern Regions of Ghana. In this paper, we analyse differences in perceived suitability, and modelled technical impact per technology package.
We used a locally validated framework to categorise farm systems diversity that considers both, the horizontal (between households) and vertical (within households) dimension of diversity. Farm households were classified along a gradient of resource endowment. We selected one representative farm per type and per region to assess and compare their socio-economic and environmental performance (farm profitability, labour and soil organic matter inputs) using the whole-farm model Farm DESIGN. We then used Farm DESIGN to assess the potential impact of five proposed technology packages and to explore promising alternative farm configurations. We discussed model assumptions and results with farmers, including alternative cropping patterns and trade-offs. We evaluated the packages with different household members using a weighted scoring technique, subsequently juxtaposing model results with farmer perceptions.
Large differences prevailed among and within farms per type and per region, with low resource endowed farms being projected to benefit most in relative and least in absolute terms from an adoption of the packages. Farmer feedback confirmed the accuracy of alternative farm configurations, as determined by the model. However, the feedback also revealed that the most profitable farm designs would be hard to attain in reality, particularly for members of low and medium resource endowed households, due to high initial investment costs. Within households, women were more positive about the packages than men, since men heavily penalized extra costs and labour, translating into a greater congruence of model results with the male evaluation. We discuss the importance of distinguishing between technical (technology i.e. purchased tools and inputs) and managerial (techniques e.g. row planting) package components. We conclude that operationalizing inter- and intra-household diversity is a fundamental step in identifying sensible solutions for the challenges smallholder farm systems face in Northern Ghana.

View all citing articles on Scopus

View full text

Participatory impact assessment: Bridging the gap between scientists' theory and farmers' practice

Highlights

Abstract

Introduction

Section snippets

Methodological approaches

Results

Discussion

Conclusion

Acknowledgements

Environ. Impact Assess. Rev.

J. Environ. Manag.

Biol. Conserv.

Environ. Impact Assess. Rev.

Agric. Syst.

Microdose and N and P fertilizer application rates for pearl millet in West Africa

Afr. J. Agric. Res.

Better learning

Sustainability assessment: The state of the art

Impact Assess. Proj. Apprais.

Designing an effective sustainability assessment process

Scaling up of Good Agricultural Practices

The State of Food Insecurity in the World 2014. Strengthening the Enabling Environment for Food Security and Nutrition

Sustainability assessment: Basic components of a practical approach

Impact Assess. Proj. Apprais.

Farmers and researchers: How can collaborative advantages be created in participatory research and technology development? [Article]

Agric. Hum. Values

Agriculture at a Crossroads: Global Report

What Is Impact Assessment?

Smallholders, Food Security, and the Environment

Assessing the impact of land use policy on urban-rural sustainability using the FoPIA approach in Yogyakarta, Indonesia

Sustainability

Participatory impact assessment of soil and water conservation scenarios in Oum Zessar watershed, Tunisia

Environ. Manag.