Social farming (also called care farming): an innovative approach for promoting women’s economic empowerment, decent rural employment and social inclusion. What works in developing countries?
Social farming (also called care farming, more information available here) is a farming practice that uses agricultural resources to provide social or educational care services for vulnerable groups of people. It is widely practiced in Europe and now we are looking for examples of care farming in developing countries.
Concrete care farming examples include:
- the provision of on-farm child and elderly care services
- the integration of disadvantaged groups in productive activities to promote their rehabilitation, social inclusion and employability.
Social / Care farming experiences from European countries have shown that economic participation helps vulnerable persons (e.g. people with intellectual or physical disabilities, ex-combatants, convicts, etc.) integrate back into society. It does this by providing them with new skills and by rewarding them with a feeling of utility and self-appreciation.
Other experiences which focus on providing care and educational services are good models (e.g. the Italian kindergarten farms –‘agriasilo’-) for delivering innovative and effective social services in remote rural areas where public care services are often non-existent or inadequate, inaccessible and of poor quality.
The purpose of this discussion
While many examples of the use of care farming in developed countries exist, we are looking for examples from developing countries contexts, specifically in rural areas. The case studies will be analysed to develop a framework for promoting care farming practices in developing countries.
We hope that this forum discussion will solicit lots of interest around care farming practices, how they work and what makes them successful, and how the concept can be adapted to less developed countries. We would be interested in how care farming may help fill gaps in social service provision as well as provide rural employment opportunities – especially to women. Please include as many details as possible in your contribution, for example:
- details about the service providers (organizational form, agricultural activities, type of service offered, motivation of the provision of such services);
- users (who they are, what is the main benefit for them);
- financing methods or business model;
- main challenges;
- who else is involved (public health sector, private sector, professional organizations etc.);
- related regulatory or policy frameworks;
- any other relevant information.
The examples you will share will be part of a compilation of care farming practices. Through these cases we wish to explore the potential of social / care farming for care and educational service provision in poor rural areas with the goal of strengthening rural women’s economic empowerment, decent rural employment creation, and social inclusion. In collaboration with the University of Pisa and other international and national partners, we will also develop a country implementation framework to support countries’ efforts for reducing the burden of rural women’s unpaid care work by promoting social / care farming practices.
We look forward to a very interesting and rich discussion.
Thank you very much in advance for your contribution!
Hajnalka Petrics
Gender and Development Officer
Social Protection Division
Cross-cutting Theme on Gender
FAO
- Read 47 contributions
Dr. Bhubaneswor Dhakal
Dear Moderator,
From my understanding the meaning of 'care farming' is broader than what you define in this discussion. It also refers to any farming practices for protecting people, resources, economy and cultures in critical condition (otherwise can result irreversible disaster). You limited the phrase in education and socialization of people with special need (elderly people, children and disables) and by external agencies supports. Therefore many participants confused on providing examples in their communities or countries. Based on your definition, the kitchen gardening in primary school can be considered a care farming. The schools provide education, socialization and care to young children. The schools can achieve the services by involving students in the kitchen gardening.
I would like to present some indigenous practices of care farming in Nepal.
a. People living individually (alone) keep pet animals (cat, dog or bird) to reduce loneliness. Some of them do kitchen gardening or other farming to keep them busy. These are examples of self-care farming practices.
b. Some people grow vegetables or keep animals (e.g. milking cow or buffalo) to make happy to their elderly parents. The people could provide vegetable and milk from other sources with less cost and effort but the parents would not be that happy as they would be produced in own home. The practice provides mental care of the elderly.
c. People establish and care gardening in public places (e.g. temple area and community halls) where elderly people gathers for socialization with neighbors.
You might be interested to find the cases that help in developing projects. My contribution might not help you that much.
Thanks
Bhubaneswor Dhakal
Nature Palace Foundation (www.naturepalacefoundation.org) has worked with children and youth with disabilities, providing them with skills and inputs for profitable market gardening in Uganda, East Africa. See video on this link: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sTRzv2WkCrg.
Santosh Kumar Mishra
- Details about the service providers (organizational form, agricultural activities, type of service offered, motivation of the provision of such services):
a. Organizational form:
Community-Based, Resource-Orientated Farmer Organizations: This type could be a village-level cooperative or association dealing with inputs needed by the members, the resource owners, to enhance the productivity of their businesses based on land, water, or animals. These organizations are generally small, have well-defined geographical areas, and are predominantly concerned about inputs. However, the client group is highly diversified in terms of crops and commodities.
Farmer Organizations: These organizations specialize in a single commodity and opt for value-added products which have expanded markets. They are designated as output-dominated organizations. Not specific to any single community, they can obtain members from among the regional growers of that commodity who are interested in investing some share capital to acquire the most recent processing technology and professional manpower.
b. Agricultural activities:
Social farming also represents a new opportunity for farmers to deliver alternative services to broaden and diversify the scope of their activities and multi-functional role in society. This integration between agricultural and social activities can also provide farmers with new sources of income and enhance the image of agriculture in the ‘public eye’.
c. Type of service offered:
Social Farming adopts a multifunctional view of agriculture. The main products, in addition to saleable produce, are health and employment, education or therapy. Agriculture offers opportunities for people to participate in the varied rhythms of the day and the year, be it in growing food or working with domestic animals. Social farming includes agricultural enterprises and market gardens that integrate people with physical, mental or emotional disabilities; farms which offer openings for the socially disadvantaged, for young offenders or those with learning difficulties, people with drug dependencies, the long-term unemployed; active senior citizens; school and kindergarten farms and many more. Prevention of illness, inclusion and a better quality of life are features of social agriculture. The special added value of social farming is the possibility for disadvantaged people to be integrated into a living context, where their personal capabilities are valued and enhanced. The presence of the farmers, the contact and relationship with other living beings (animals and plants, the assumption of specific responsibilities) are some of the key features of the rehabilitative practices generated by social farming.
d. Motivation of the provision of such services:
Motivation factors in the provision of such services are: (a) employed in social care & horticulture, and (b) securing tenancy. Further, the integration between agricultural practices and social services may also allow new sources of income for farmers, sharpening up the image of agriculture in society at the same time, and favouring the development of new relations between rural and urban citizens.
- Users (who they are, what is the main benefit for them):
- Farm families,
- Statutory service providers, and
- Final beneficiaries, end users
- Financing methods or business model:
- Putting investment decision into the hands of entrepreneurs: Collective decision-making among groups of business owners has been a key success of micro-finance.
- Putting investment decision into the hands of entrepreneurs: Collective decision-making among groups of business owners has been a key success of micro-finance.
- Main challenges:
Economic and social concerns present significant challenges to sustainable agriculture. Specific issues include:
- farm profitability,
- economic comparisons among conventional and non-conventional farming components,
- viability of rural communities,
- fair trade, and
- agricultural labor.
- Who else is involved (public health sector, private sector, professional organizations etc.):
- Private companies,
- Non-governmental organizations (NGOs),
- Community representatives,
- Farmers associations, and
- Research and extension agencies
- Related regulatory or policy frameworks:
The special added value of social/care farming is the possibility for disadvantaged people to being integrated in a living context, where their personal potential may be valued and enhanced. The presence and the relationship with the farmers, the contact with other living beings – animal and vegetal ones – the assumption of specific responsibilities are some of the key-features of the rehabilitative practices generated by social farming.
- Any other relevant information:
Care farming as a development strategy could be a good alternative to give a farm future prospective. Care farms use the whole or part of a farm, provide health, social or educational care services for one or a range of vulnerable groups of people and provide a supervised, structured programme of farming-related activities. The purpose of care farming is to promote mental and physical health by giving people the opportunity to spend time working on the land. Care farms can provide supervised, structured programs of farming-related activities, including animal husbandry, crop and vegetable production and woodland management.
Dr. Santosh Kumar Mishra (Ph. D.)
Technical Assistant
Population Education Resource Centre
India.
I find the title, particularly the word "Care," confusing. The old CARE relief organization has been transformed into a very ineffective women's teach-for-self-help organization. I am very much in favor of the proclaimed idea, but CARE thinks sending Hollywood types around to African villages is more useful than finishing projects that have taught organization and agricultural skills to women. I worked as a volunteer professional for them in Egypt - they had a great paid staff. The staff supported oranizations run by local women, in many Upper Egypt farm villages. The women were beginning to learn to do things that would provide more food and income for their families. A report was written telling of their outstanding progress. However, before training could be completed, they fired all of the staff who had built their program. If this is the sort of "Care you mean, it is time to cut the waste and misery. Don't lead women (or men) to the starting line, then pull everything away from them.
Word are of no value, if the action does not adequately support the proclaimed goal.
What is EMPOWERMENT? Is offering some training empowerment?; Is helping the needy in villages with some medicines or fertilizer (a one-time offer) empowerment?; Is offering some off-hand doles empowerment? More over, do the Villagers/ Rural society NEED the empowerment that WE (at the helm of affairs, mostly in Five/ Seven star culture levels) define and design, “pushing” down on the villagers? Millions of Dollars are being spent on various such schemes … by the UN organizations, other Institutions and many Philanthropic Groups … But are we able to “empower” any one on a sustainable basis? If Yes... what are the figures? And why is it that Poverty is increasing in rural areas? If not... what are we to do? … instead of going on pumping in moneys into the drain? Having said that, this writer wishes to Define EMPOWERMENT of the Villagers/ Rural people as follows: A sustainable arrangement whereby an average Village family would be able to gain work and wages, such that the minimum earning power to live decently amongst society is made available. This writer is working on such concept in India,and would wish that many join and support the Cause/ venture. The idea is that, under Indian conditions, an average Village family (with Five members) should be able to have at least Two able bodied persons having full time (sustainable) Jobs … the two together earning not less than $2500 per annum. Today it is a ridiculously low level of $333.33 (GDP) and $33.33 real income (for a family of 5). There are over 150 million families in this pathetic condition in India. Are our Rural Group members listening? Most other developing countries also have equivalent problems.
Dear Hajnalka
I appreciate this very important initiative. Social Farming/Green Care encounters growing support in not a few European countries. For instance in Austria it became a key issue for policy makers and different interest groups after a cross-country study conducted in Austria and Italy (BABF Vienna, Eurac Bolzano) which was largely built on the conceptual background developed in COST Action 866. Now, we can envisage strong dynamics, the number of care farms is growing steadily, the fields of work are becoming more heterogeneous and there are even more options for financial support.
Best regards
Georg
Dr. Georg Wiesinger
Bundesanstalt für Bergbauernfragen (BABF)
Federal Institute for Mountainous and Less-Favoured Areas
Rural Sociology
Marxerg. 2/M
A-1030 Wien (Vienna)
Austria
Tel. +431.504886920
FAX +431.504886939
Thansk for this initiative. I do not have experience with social farming in developing countries. I would like to share, however, a recently published paper on social farming in Europe, with a case study of Belgium and the Netherlands. The first part of the paper describes the three prevailing discourses (frames) of Green Care in Europe. The second part then focuses on the institutionalisation of Green Care in Belgium and the Netherlands.
All the best,
Joost Dessein (ILVO, Belgium)
Dear Petrics,
Greetings from Action Works Nepal (AWON) !
Thank you very much for invitation.
I am on the way to Karnali ( a most poor, rural, conflict affected region in Nepal, NLSS 2011). Unfortunately, my flight is cancelled since last three days and I am waiting. Fortunately, I received the email while I am in airport (connecting airport, 1 hour flight from Kathamndu, I have to fly 30 minutes to reach my destination, called Jumla). Thank you for keeping me in loop. I really encouraged. I always felt isolated and stigmatized in such physical or online discussion because I speak from the grass root and my first hand experience. Nepal is itself considered a developing country and rural country for the western people at large. But the real rural women, poor women, conflict affected women do not have access of information and other resources to enjoy and claim the resources as program intended to reach.
Being a rural, poor, survivor of WAR and violence, I may have different perspectives regards the experience of care farming in Nepal.
1. Details about the service providers (organizational forms, agricultural activities, type of service offered, motivation of the provision of such services)
In central and eastern part of Nepal, few NGOs and private institutions are operating child care centers but it is targeted to the well off working women not for the poor, rural, conflict affected and other forms marginalized women because the cost is expensive. In some cases it is also more than caring center, it is called paly groups, Montessori schools which is so expensive where 2 years more children are kept by educated, well paid working mothers.
2. Users (who they are, what is the main benefit for them)
Already mentioned above
3. Financing methods or business model
Usually based on private institutions so models is vary.
4. Who else is involved (public health sector, private sector, professional organizations, etc)
Private sectors mostly
5. Related regulatory of policy frameworks
So far as private company, based on the volume of the investment and objectives, they registered under the government e.g. Small cottage industry or Company registrar or Social welfare council
6. Any other related information
If we see the statistics, Karnali region is the most rural, poor, and conflict affected region and then far west region where women are uneducated, working 18 hours/day, struggling with various forms of gender based violence, directly and indirectly affected by conflict, seasonal migration and many more issues. There are layers of layers issues. Neither they know nor enjoy the rights of Economic, cultural and social rights, nor Article 14 CEDAW, nor uNSCR 1325, 1820 and so on. Sometimes is more than rediculosus. Recently, few institutions are trying to engage though they also failed to work in holistic /system approach. Project, short term and working in single issue don’t make any sense in rural transformation and empowerment of rural women.
In Karnali, women are working with their children in field, forest or street if they do not have younger children to take care of smaller one. They worked from sunshine to sunset in the farm/forest but they are suffering from starvation (83% living under chronic malnutrition). In such situation, how they can think other rights, they just born for work, marriage, bearing children and die where there life expectancy is only 40 years (some reports says 47 years) where Kathmandu people have 81 years and National average life expectancy is 65 years (2012).
Sorry, I couldn’t share the entire experience of mine due to time limitation, in Jumla, I will not have internet, I will be in touch and share later. Please visit finds me in google and you tube by putting my Name Radha Paudel and visit www.actionworksnepal.org
In Peace and Solidarity,
Radha Paudel
Founder/President
Action Works Nepal
email: [email protected]
[email protected]
Writer: Khalangama Hamala
Social Worker Award 2013
Women Peace Maker 2012
URL: www.actionworksnepal.org*
Thanks for the invitation to this timely discussion of good practice and case studies on social farming.
Attached, please find a brief working paper on the financial inclusion of PWDs in relation to social farming. It is a background policy paper that raises some prerequisites to social farming, namely access to credit and financial services. As you know this is a cross-cutting issue in development debate and will probably be raised by different contributors. It is based on my work in Africa 2012-2013.
Kind regards and season’s greetings!
Majid Turmusani
Ps: If you plan to have an expert meeting on the subject at some point, I would be interested in developing this further and making e-presentation.
Cher Huguette,
Merci beaucoup d'avoir envoyé votre contribution et votre proposition pour ce qui pourrait être inclus dans le cadre méthodologique. Ceci est commentaire très précieux et nous examinerons lorsque nous serons en train de rédiger la partie conceptuelle et méthodologique. J'espère que nous pourrons vous consulter plus tard dans ce stade et ainsi recevoir vos nouvelles entrées! Nous nous réjouissons de notre collaboration.
Cordialement,
Hajnalka
This activity is now closed. Please contact [email protected] for any further information.