The discussions focused on the need for networking, the need for a dedicated new conservation tillage network, and the desired focus and structure of such a network. 

The national working groups were asked to prepare a table outlining the subjects on which they expected a dedicated network to focus, the benefits they believed could accrue from such a network, its mode of operation, and who should be invited to join. They were also asked to name existing networks in their countries or regions. 

Possible role, objectives and tasks of a regional network 

The participants all believed a regional network should be initiated. Roles discussed ranged from it being a clearinghouse to that of a catalytic agent. It was felt that the objectives should be clearly defined and concentrate on a few specific issues only. 

Objectives proposed included: 

• To facilitate access to information and its exchange within the region and with Latin America.

Tasks proposed included: 

• Collect and provide information on conservation tillage technologies
• Disseminate of available information on conservation tillage(through, for example, hard and/or electronic newsletters, a web site, etc)
• Collect of information
• Share experience and expertise
• Exchange material, implements or seeds
• Facilitate mutual field visits
• Organize and conduct field days and workshops
• Mobilize funds for collaboration and exchange
• Mobilize resources for CT technology research and development

Need for a specific conservation tillage network? 

There are numerous networks existing in the region which focus on one or more aspects of agricultural and rural development. The workgroups listed those networks which are active in their own countries. In the limited time before the closing ceremony the participants could not detail their individual experiences and knowledge of these networks. However, the issue of creating a new Conservation Tillage Network or expanding an existing network was discussed, and the participants decided to send out a questionnaire to gain more information about structure and nature of existing networks. 

Arguments for making use of an existing network included: 

• There was already a marked overlap between the objectives and tasks of existing networks.
• The number of workshops and activities in the region was already excessive, often involving the same persons, only wearing different "Network-hats".
• Most of the persons working on the development and dissemination of conservation tillage technologies are members of existing networks.
• It is more convenient and economic to make use of one of the existing networks.
• Setting up a new network structure will only require more of already overcommitted persons time.

Arguments for a new dedicated Conservation Tillage Network included: 

• Existing networks have a different focus.
• Objectives will be obscured and confused by merging networks or broadening the scope of existing ones (danger of compromises).
• Most existing networks comprise only academics while a conservation tillage network should comprise all stakeholders, i.e. also farmers and farmers’ organizations, private sector, etc.

Conclusions 

It was not possible to discuss the issue fully during the workshop. It was felt, however, that: 

• More information on existing networks in the region needed to be collected before a decision could be made.
• The objectives of a conservation tillage network need to be clearly defined.
• The structure of a conservation tillage network needs to be defined on the basis of these objectives.

Table of Contents