Measuring the impact of user participation in agricultural and natural resource management research

被引:70
|
作者
Johnson, NL [1 ]
Lilja, N
Ashby, JA
机构
[1] CIAT, AA-6713 Cali, Colombia
[2] GGIAR, Systemwide Program Participatory Res & Gender Ana, PRG, AA-6713 Cali, Colombia
[3] CIAT, Rural Innovat Inst, AA-6713 Cali, Colombia
关键词
participatory research; impact; agricultural and natural resource management;
D O I
10.1016/S0308-521X(03)00130-6
中图分类号
S [农业科学];
学科分类号
09 ;
摘要
Persistent poverty and environmental degradation demand a constant effort to improve the effectiveness and impact of agricultural and natural resource management research. Participatory research methods have developed as a way to help researchers better target their work towards the needs and constraints of specific stakeholder groups. Participatory research may also strengthen the capacity of participants to initiate a continuous process of innovation. The capacity of farmers and other end users of technologies to innovate may be particularly important in poor, marginal environments where conditions are highly variable. This paper assesses the impact of using participatory methods in three agricultural research projects which have a natural resource management focus. Mixed methods are used to assess technological, economic, human, and social impacts and the cost implications of incorporating beneficiaries into the research process. User participation was found to influence priorities and practices within and beyond the specific projects studied. Participation led to more relevant technologies and greater economic impacts, especially when participation was early in the research process. Impacts on farmer capacity were high when farmers worked intensively with researchers over a period of time. Use of participatory methods changes research costs. When farmers took over tasks that were previously done by researchers, some of the research costs were transferred to farmers. When participatory methods were combined with conventional on-farm research, there were also start-up costs, because researchers and farmers needed to learn new research methods. However these additional one-time costs were not significant in terms of total research costs. (C) 2003 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
引用
收藏
页码:287 / 306
页数:20
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [21] Social principles for agricultural extension to assist in the promotion of natural resource management
    Vanclay, F
    AUSTRALIAN JOURNAL OF EXPERIMENTAL AGRICULTURE, 2004, 44 (03): : 213 - 222
  • [22] Phenology research for natural resource management in the United States
    Carolyn A. F. Enquist
    Jherime L. Kellermann
    Katharine L. Gerst
    Abraham J. Miller-Rushing
    International Journal of Biometeorology, 2014, 58 : 579 - 589
  • [23] Lessons for natural resource management technology adoption and research
    Place, F
    Swallow, BM
    Wangila, J
    Barrett, CB
    NATURAL RESOURCES MANAGEMENT IN AFRICAN AGRICULTURE: UNDERSTANDING AND IMPROVING CURRENT PRACTICES, 2002, : 275 - 285
  • [25] Phenology research for natural resource management in the United States
    Enquist, Carolyn A. F.
    Kellermann, Jherime L.
    Gerst, Katharine L.
    Miller-Rushing, Abraham J.
    INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF BIOMETEOROLOGY, 2014, 58 (04) : 579 - 589
  • [26] Theoretical and statistical models in natural resource management and research
    Mangel, M
    Fiksen, O
    Giske, J
    MODELING IN NATURAL RESOURCE MANAGEMENT: DEVELOPMENT INTERPRETATION AND APPLICATION, 2001, : 57 - 72
  • [28] Bioeconomic modelling for natural resource management impact assessment
    Holden, ST
    Natural Resources Management in Agriculture: Methods for Assessing Economic and Environmental Impacts, 2005, : 175 - 196
  • [29] From measuring impact to learning institutional lessons: an innovation systems perspective on improving the management of international agricultural research
    Hall, A
    Sulaiman, VR
    Clarke, N
    Yoganand, B
    AGRICULTURAL SYSTEMS, 2003, 78 (02) : 213 - 241
  • [30] On Measuring Community Participation in Research
    Khodyakov, Dmitry
    Stockdale, Susan
    Jones, Andrea
    Mango, Joseph
    Jones, Felica
    Lizaola, Elizabeth
    HEALTH EDUCATION & BEHAVIOR, 2013, 40 (03) : 346 - 354