ISSN 1020-122X
Pieter Stemerding
Global IPM Facility
FAO, Rome, Italy
Arne Musch
University of Twente
Enschede, the Netherlands
Yaya Diarra
Office du Niger
Ségou, Mali
FOOD AND AGRICULTURE ORGANIZATION OF THE UNITED NATIONS
Rome, 2002
The designations employed and the presentation of material in this information product do not imply the expression of any opinion whatsoever on the part of the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations concerning the legal status of any country, territory, city or area or of its authorities, or concerning the delimitation of its frontiers or boundaries
ISBN 92-5-104777-4
All rights reserved Reproduction and dissemination of material in this information product for educational or other non-commercial purposes are authorized without any prior written permission from the copyright holders provided the source is fully acknowledged Reproduction of material in this information product for resale or other commercial purposes is prohibited without written permission of the copyright holders Applications for such permission should be addressed to the Chief, Publishing Management Service, Information Division, FAO, Viale delle Terme di Caracalla, 00100 Rome, Italy or by e-mail to copyright@fao org
© FAO 2002
1.1. Why study the social impact of IPM?
1.2. Enhancing farmers' knowledge through IPM: a brief introduction
1.3. The setting: IPM and the Office du Niger irrigation system in MaliSome characteristics of the case
The relevance of the Office du Niger as a case study
2.1. The first dimension: knowledge
2.2. The second dimension: collective action
2.3. The third dimension: locus of decision-making
3. STUDY OF THE IPM PROGRAMME IN THE OFFICE DU NIGER IN MALI
3.1. The institutional setting
3.2. The knowledge dimensionAwareness of sources of information
Skills and awareness of ways to communicate with bureaucracies
Reflections on the comparative method
Reflection on extension habits
Confidence3.3. The collective action dimension
Collective action and diversity before the IPM pilot project
3.4. The decision-making dimension
The changes in decisions taken by farmers themselves
Changes in the behaviour of farmers towards others
Changes in the behaviour of other actors towards farmers
4.1. Conclusions on technical impacts
4.2. Knowledge development and attitude changes
4.3. Collective Action
4.4. Locus of Decision-Making