View
147
Download
0
Category
Preview:
Citation preview
Technology Transfer Through
Farmer Field School in Indonesia A History
A Report ByMr Allah dad Khan
Outline of Presentation
History of Farmer Field School
Process of IPM Farmer Field School
FFS Follow-up Activities
Some Impact Studies
Closing Remarks
Prophylactic, calendar- based spraying
Heavy subsidy on pesticides (80%)
History of Farmer Field SchoolOutbreak of BPH during 1970-1980s
Presidential Decree (1986) banned the use of 57 pesticide formulation in rice production Phased-out of pesticide subsidies Established IPM training for farmers (Farmer Field School)
History of Farmer Field SchoolIPM Policy
FFS is is a group extension method based on adult education program that utilizes discovery learning and participatory techniques.
Composed of groups of 25-30 farmers who meet regularly during the course of the growing seasons.
FFS aims to increase the capacity of groups of farmers to carry out experiments in their own fields.
The facilitator is called a field leader (FL). The FLs are trained in both technology and facilitation skill in a program called a Training of Trainers (TOT).
History Farmer Field SchoolWhat is a Farmer Field School
Grow a healthy cropo Resistant varieties, proper fertilzers, water and soil management,
etc o Healthy crop can resist diseases and compensate for damage
Observe fields regularlyo To assess crop development, diseases, insect pest population,
and natural enemies. Conserve natural enemies of crop pests
o Abundance of natural enemies in the field Avoid the use of pesticides that kill natural enemies
Farmers understand ecology and become experts in their own field Make decisions based on observations and analysis of the field
situation
History of Farmer Field SchoolFour Major Principles of IPM FFS
Agroecosystem Analysis
Field visit / field observations
o Go to the field in subgroups (5 farmers per subgroup)
o Choose 10 plants randomly
o Observe plant, pests, natural enemies, diseases, weeds, weather etc
Process of Farmer Field School
Drawing Each subgroup presents
their observations and analysis in drawing.o planto weathero disease symptomo pestso natural enemieso water level
Process of Farmer Field SchoolAgroecosystem Analysis
Presentation and Discussion Each subgroup presents
their analysis Group discussion Decision about pest control
measure is made Facilitator will facilitate the
discussion
Process of Farmer Field SchoolAgroecosystem Analysis
IPM validation trials
IPM Practices vs Farmer Practices
Conducted on 1000 m2 plot, each 500 m2
Process of Farmer Field School
Supporting IPM Field Studies
Crop compensation
oTo demonstrate that crop plants can compensate for some damage by producing new leaves or shoots
Process of Farmer Field SchoolSupporting IPM Field Studies
Field cageso To demonstrate how
natural enemies keep pest population under control
Process of Farmer Field SchoolSupporting IPM Field Studies
Plastic baggingo To demonstrate how enclosing cacao pod with the pastic bag can prevent attack from pod borer
Process of Farmer Field SchoolSupporting IPM Field Studies
Side-graftingo Farmers learn how to
make a side-grafting on cacao
Process of Farmer Field SchoolSupporting IPM Field Studies
Use of insect trapso Farmers learn how to
monitor insect population using traps
Process of Farmer Field SchoolSupporting IPM Field Studies
Insect zooo To study life cycle of insectso To study feeding behavior of
insectso To study predator and
parasitoids
Process of Farmer Field SchoolSupporting IPM Field Studies
A variety of team building games and exercises employed during the training
Process of Farmer Field SchoolGroup Dynamics
To foster cooperation and togetherness within the group To sharpen farmer
communication and organizing skills
FFS starts with a ballot-box pretest of knowledge and ends with a posttest A simple tool to measure the level of a farmer’s knowledge on an agroecosystem Questions focus on:
recognition of pests, natural enemies, diseases recognition of damage from pests and diseases management of pests and diseases etc
Process of Farmer Field SchoolBallot Box
At the end of FFS season To show the results of FFS to other farmers, agricultural staff, local government officials.
o IPM plot vs Farmer Practice ploto Other field experimentso Insect zoo (pests and natural enemies)
Process of Farmer Field SchoolField Day
Farmer-to-Farmer FFS
One-week training is conducted for farmer trainers prior to organize farmer-led FFS;
Curriculum of TOT includes facilitation and management skills for organizing an FFS, and review and discuss background of FFS topics, e.g. agro-ecosystem analysis.
Farmer-to-Farmer FFS are implemented in the same way, except the trainers are farmers.
Key elements in the development of IPM over large areas.
Follow-up Activities
Farmer IPM Field Studies
To develop farmer’s own knowledge and technologies;
To develop a capacity to find an answer/proof or to test a method;
To develop farmer’s capacity on research and its networking with research-related institutions.
Follow-up Activities
Making plant extracts for botanical pesticides and testing the effectiveness
Farmer IPM Field Studies
Study on effects of plastic mulch Study on effects of bamboo staking in potatoes
Follow-up Activities
Farmer IPM Field Studies
Production and application of Trichoderma
Follow-up Activities
FFS - IPM Food crops Palawija crops Vegetable crops Fruit crops Industrial crops
• FFS-ICM Rice Soybean Corn
• FFS – GAP• FFS - Climate
Funding Sources Self financed FFS District government Pronvincial government Central government World Bank USAID ADB ACIAR etc
• Modified to train farmers of other crops• The training methodology was not changed.
Development of FFS
SEARCA (1999): Use of insecticides was 35% less for FFS farmers than for non-FFS farmers Yield of rice was 7.9 % higher for FFS farmers than for non-FFS farmers FFS farmers spent 21% less on pesticides, 12% more on fertilizers and 4% more on labor than non-FFS farmers FFS farmers had 5% lower production costs than non-FFS farmers FFS farmers had higher knowledge scores on pests, natural enemies and pesticides than non-FFS farmers.
FFS in Rice
Some Impact Studies
Feder et al 2003: Yields decreased from 1991-1999 for FFS farmers and non-FFS farmers Pesticide expenditure increased for FFS farmers and non-FFS farmers No significant effect of training on the change in yield or pesticide expenditure between FFS farmers and non-FFS farmers
FFS in Rice
Some Impact Studies
Yamazaki S and Resosudarmo BP (2006)[Utilizing the same data set as Feder et al (2004)]
Substantial positive impacts on agricultural productivities by the FFS for both farmers who participated in the FFS and those who indirectly obtained the new knowledge Farmers who participated in the FFS and those who indirectly obtained the new knowledge reduced their spending on pesticides and conducted this practice over time Farmers’ performance is positively-spatially correlated between neighbors in the same village. This positively supports the existence of farmer-to-farmer knowledge diffusion.
FFS in Rice
Some Impact Studies
Mariyono J (2009): Performance of FFS implementation was not as good as expected On average, the proportion of highly satisfactory FFS was only 32% Efforts to improve the performance of FFS implementation resulted in an increase in the number of highly satisfactory FFSs (50%) by the end of the project The impact of IPM technology on the reduction in pesticide use was significantly dependent on the performance of the FFS The better performance of the FFSs, the higher the level of rice production and the lower the level of pesticide use
FFS in Rice
Some Impact Studies
Londe, Hammig, Rauf (1999): The coefficient for IPM training (FFS) were positive and highly significant suggesting the overall effectiveness of training to be positive Farmers with IPM training were most likely to adopt sustainable practices.
FFS in Vegetables
Some Impact Studies
Hutabarat et al. (2004): IPM farmers had better ability to recognize insect natural enemies. IPM farmers earned a higher profit than non-IPM farmers IPM farmers used less pesticides as opposed to non-IPM farmers
FFS in Estate Crops
Some Impact Studies
Extending FFS program to other crops and activities should be accompanied by the quality assurance of its implementation
Closing Remarks
Recommended