Question 2 (opens 14 Nov.)

Producer organizations, as they grow in number whether as support groups or members, should also try to consider investing in setting up databases so that it would be easier and more systematic as they mobilize and network for more support groups/members. 

Databases would be a big help in locating existing and potential resources that would augment other means in the implementation of strategies that may be initiated or started by producer organizations for the benefit of their beneficiaries.

Producer organizations always tend to have database first to know who are their members and how many they are? Where do members live etc.. This is easy for local organization. This is more complicated for regional and Apec organizations. You are right there is a need for IC technolgy for that too.

These data base are also useful for the financial management of the organization.

A lot of cooperatives also have databases of input suplliers with their characteristics etc.. 

I agree with you Sir that database is easy for local organizations.  However, some producer organizations find difficulty in having their database because they don't have computers.  That's the usual reason that they are giving our office  if they are being asked for the masterlist of their farmer-members.  This hinders the immediate delivery of services.  Our agency will not give any government intervention to farmers' organizations which are not duly registered with concerned government agencies and the masterlist of farmer-beneficiaries is required for monitoring puposes.  - Joyce Wendam

True, # 4 'content/application,' (content management, delivery mechanisms, availability of relevant and localized content in an appropriate language, etc), as one of the key issues (Lalaine's post) because the manner ICT initiatives access, assess, and deliver content is necessary in the success of the project as it may influence the likelihood of its use by the farmers.

Content-related issues  in ICT projects in agriculture include, for instance, initiatives that supply generic information (should be context-specific situations), low content relevance (which could be the result of language), poor awareness of users or inadequate understanding of local needs, etc. In addition, individuals relate better to content that is locally produced but because of the high cost of generating and managing locally relevant content, relevant and localized content may not be readily accessible, available or affordable , thus, the need for community involvement and partnerships with exsperts for content development (http://idv.sagepub.com/content/27/4/301.full.pdf+html). 

The East and Southern Africa (ESA) Division of IFAD (Rome) is supporting the East Africa Farmers’ Federation (EAFF, based in Nairobi) for Strengthening the capacity of East African farmer organizations through knowledge management and institutional development. (project of 3 years, USD 1 200 000)

Following activity:  Promoting an innovation culture: systematization and sharing may add something to our debate about identifying What are the priority areas for producer organizations.

Context:

Knowledge management and institutional development are core functions and priorities of the EAFF regional secretariat. 

Through this Project, EAFF will link the different national members and support them in their own organizational development to ensure that  information and knowledge is generated and shared within and across the national unions, associations and at farmer level.

• National farmer organizations’ strategic plans focus mainly on lobbying and advocacy, capacity building, value chain development, and communication and information dissemination.
• This Project will build capacity of national FOs to generate information and translate it into knowledge to improve their lobbying and advocacy, and integration in value chains. 
• The project will complement the EC-funded Support to Farmers Organizations in Africa Programme (SFOAP), by deepening SFOAP’s impact in ESA, in particular in the areas of institutional strengthening and KM and learning. 
• Projects in Burundi, Kenya and Tanzania countries where there is a great overlap between the FOs and the IFAD/ESA project areas, will benefit directly. Projects in other countries will benefit through knowledge sharing. 

Promoting an innovation culture: systematization and sharing.  

The objective of this component is to promote a culture of innovation in the farmer organizations at all levels.

• The project will assist EAFF in setting up and managing a lean innovation sharing facility. The project will help EAFF to put in place the systems, processes and mechanisms for knowledge sharing, and coach the concerned staff on how to systematize information.
• Selected staff will be trained in how to select, analyse, document and share innovative practices, technologies and approaches. Each year, the most promising innovations will be packaged and shared through a variety of communication tools, tailored to the needs of specific audiences. It is envisaged, for example, that EAFF will organize an annual innovation competition among farmers and facilitators.
• Facilitators, who will work directly with FOs and farmers, will scout for innovations and pass them on to the innovation sharing facility,  which will then validate innovations, systematize them in a way that can be used and applied to other contexts and disseminate them at all levels.
• Tools and approaches such as write-shops and systematization will be made available. 

Remark:

As several other contributions mentioned: apart from identifying the best tools to comminicate among farmers, capacity building at the level of national farmer organisation on how to manage them is crucial.

I also confirm what Jimmie said about (mobile phone applications) : Frontline SMS has increased a lot the efficiency of f.i. radio broadcasting for farmers. They most of the time only find by coincidence a program which is interesting for their cultivation. But receiving an sms alert about a forthcoming program makes them tune in. Farmer  organisations are therefore to work closely with community radios.

I completely agree with you that innovation sharing or replication of best practices using ICt is one of the best avenues to promote ICTs to farmers.

Most farmers in rural areas have access to DVD players where it will be convenient to play best practices of other farmers to a group of people. Besides, videos are more interesting to farmers, especially if it will be translated in their native language.

The key for development actors is to understand the traditional process of farmer innovation in order to succeed in bringing ICT in line to support this. 

Video solutions are offering increased opportunities to record and disseminate innovative agricultural technologies from and to farmers:

• Growing interest in extension
• Attention to farmer innovation
• More organizations want to enhance their impact at regional level
• Many service providers have expressed their interest in using quality videos

From June to September 2011, Agro-Insight conducted a scoping study for SDC, GFRAS and SAI Platform on the production, dissemination and use of farmer training videos in developing countries, with a focus on sustainable agriculture. Literature was consulted, the internet screened, experts and users consulted and a global on-line survey launched in English, French and Spanish.

• About 85% of the respondents found local languages very important for farmer training videos. To ensure that videos are sharable and of use to the global community of extension service providers and farmers, producing many poor quality local language videos is not cost-effective.
• Organizations are willing to translate and use videos made in other countries if they are relevant and of good quality, and if video scripts are available. Lower quality videos serve intermediaries only and are rarely used to actually train farmers.
• The five priority areas for new video productions are: crops and trees, water management, plant health, soil health and farmer organizations.

There is a general consensus that farmers need good agricultural training videos, but they do not browse the web in search of them. For watching videos they rely mainly on outside agencies. 

• Farmers would watch videos on their own with their family or neighbours if video disc distribution mechanisms were in place. And they are willing to pay for video discs and video shows.
• Only about 20% of all respondents have never used video to train farmers and have never searched the web for agricultural videos.
• Many of those didn’t know where to look for videos, hadn’t found videos on the right subject or hadn’t found videos in their local language.
• Ideally, videos should entice multiple organizations to use them in multiple settings, facilitated or not, depending on the local context . Well-made videos can serve farmer organizations, extension services, radio broadcasters, and can be modified for use on mobile phones or in any other way.
• In terms of efficiency and scope to disseminate, it makes much more sense to translate one quality video into ten languages, rather than to completely reproduce the same video (or minor variations) in each single language.

To reach farmers with agricultural videos, a web-based platform is required, but not sufficient. Efforts to link people with different professional backgrounds and to establish regional and national communication, translation and video disc distribution mechanisms have to be established.

 

A not-for-profit organization, called Access Agriculture, facilitates content creation and sharing of agricultural training videos through its web-based platform and an evolving network of linkages and experts.

 

http://www.accessagriculture.org/ 

 

Hi Stepman,

I commend Access Agriculture for offering this service, this is truly a nice idea.  With the cost of DVDs and players going down, I think this can be useful to the farmers in our country, the Philippines (well, I'm thinking some of the farmers cooperatives have DVD players, or at least the mayor/governor in his/her office).  I think it will be nice to volunteer to translate a video into Tagalog, but I prefer that some videos remain intact and have subtitles instead.  Thank you for sharing.

Regards,

Harv

One area that a producer organization may invest in is a telecenter.  According to Wikipedia, a telecenter is a public place where people can access computers, the Internet, and other digital technologies that enable them to gather information, create, learn, and communicate with others while they develop essential digital skills.  While each telecenter is different, their common focus is on the use of digital technologies to support community, economic, educational, and social development - reducing isolation, bridging the digital divide, promoting health issues, creating economic opportunities, and reaching out.

Use of telecenters would enable a rural inhabitant, for example, to gain on-line access to distant productive assets and services, opportunities to learn better practices through formal and informal sources; to crucial market intelligence through informal networks that enhance bargaining power; to information on projects, financing institutions and options and  support for the rural population; to expanded distant job opportunities and telework,; and to persons with similar interests willing to work for a common cause (http://www.itu.int/ITU-D/ict/mexico04/doc/doc/10_telecenters_e.pdf).   

Are there examples where producer organizations have invested in telecenters?