FAO.org

Effective and systemic capacity development is essential for the adoption of climate-smart agriculture (CSA). It embodies a complex process that involves not only technical, but also essential socio-cultural and political aspects. Accordingly, the assessment and analysis of the existing situation and related gaps and opportunities for tailored capacity development interventions to address adaptation and mitigation in agriculture must be grounded in a sound understanding of local knowledge, perceptions, behaviours and values. Hence the importance to complement a national level capacity assessment with conducting a participatory capacity assessment at the field/project level, and to share insights on how to identify and prioritize the capacity needs that must be addressed to mainstream CSA into smallholder farming systems.

Three simple steps

Complex questionnaires and methodologies are often not adapted to the flexibility that community capacity assessments require. Open discussions are indeed at the heart of participatory rural appraisals, with the objective of allowing the local actors to identify, share and analyse their own individual and organizational conditions, needs and capacities. The participatory methods used generally vary between key informant interviews, facilitated community focus group discussions, and field observations, depending on the local specificities. In this context, three simple steps can lead this process in identifying: 1) the main problems faced by the project’s beneficiaries (e.g. farmers are insecure to invest in land management practices as they do not have land titles), 2) the capacity strengths, gaps and opportunities that need to be filled to solve the identified problems (e.g. poor implementation of land reform and lack of awareness of farmers regarding their rights in relation to the land), and 3) the entry points and recommendations for the project development and implementation (ex. land use plans and environmental by-laws).

The participatory methods used enable local actors to make their implicit knowledge explicit, in order to strengthen local ownership and leadership over the CSA initiatives promoted. The capacity assessment is indeed much stronger and more legitimate if it is appropriated by local partners. In addition, developing a shared understanding and trust among all actors involved in the diagnostic process influences the quality of the diagnosis. It is thus important to use effective dialogue and participatory approaches to uncover reliable information about the local context as well as skilled and trusted facilitators.

Key informants and thematic areas