Your search found 5 records
1 Mikhail, M.; de Bruin, A.. 2011. Opportunities for agricultural water management interventions in the Jaldhaka Watershed in Koch Bihar, West Bengal, India. Stockholm, Sweden: Stockholm Environment Institute (SEI). 4p. (SEI Policy Brief)
Water management ; Crop production ; Watersheds ; Rivers ; Groundwater ; Irrigation ; Pumps / India / West Bengal / Koch Bihar / Jaldhaka Watershed
(Location: IWMI HQ Call no: e-copy only Record No: H044901)
http://awm-solutions.iwmi.org/Data/Sites/3/Documents/PDF/publication-outputs/learning-and-discussion-briefs/jaldhakapb111208+logo.pdf
https://vlibrary.iwmi.org/pdf/H044901.pdf
https://vlibrary.iwmi.org/pdf/H044901.pdf
(0.31 MB) (203MB)
2 de Bruin, A.; Cinderby, S.; Stein, C.; Kongo, V.; Barron, J. 2011. Opportunities for agricultural water management interventions in the Mkindo Watershed in Tanzania. Stockholm, Sweden: Stockholm Environment Institute (SEI). 4p. (SEI Policy Brief)
Agriculture ; Water management ; Groundwater ; Surface water ; Watersheds / Tanzania / Mkindo Watershed
(Location: IWMI HQ Call no: e-copy only Record No: H044904)
(138.19KB)
3 Barron, Jennie; Kemp-Benedict, E.; Morris. J.; de Bruin, A.; Wang, G.; Fencl, A. 2015. Mapping the potential success of agricultural water management interventions for smallholders: where are the best opportunities? Water Resources and Rural Development, 6:24-49. (Special issue: Managing Rainwater and Small Reservoirs in Sub-Saharan Africa). [doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.wrr.2015.06.001]
Agriculture ; Water management ; Smallholders ; Farming systems ; Small scale farming ; Rainfed farming ; Rainwater ; Water harvesting ; Reservoir operation ; Bayesian theory ; Technology transfer ; River basins ; Smallholders ; Farmers ; Soil water ; Water conservation ; Climate change / Southern Africa / Limpopo River Basin / Volta River Basin
(Location: IWMI HQ Call no: e-copy only Record No: H047100)
(1.35 MB)
From field to basin scales, there are many appropriate interventions used to manage rainfall efficiently and productively in smallholder farming systems. Yet, successful targeting and scaling-out of these approaches remains a challenge. This paper presents an innovative approach in decision support called ‘Targeting Agricultural Water Management Interventions’ (TAGMI) that addresses this challenge with application in Limpopo and Volta river basins (available at www.seimapping.org/tagmi). The online open-access TAGMI uses country-scale Bayesian network models to assess the likelihood of success for outscaling various agricultural water management (AWM) interventions at sub-national level. The web tool integrates multiple sources of expertise on the enabling environment for outscaling based on key social, human, physical, financial, and natural factors. It estimates the relative probability of success of an AWM intervention across the Limpopo and Volta river basins. Here we present TAGMI as a ‘proof of concept’, current areas of high, medium, and low probability of success for three AWM technologies common in Limpopo and Volta River Basins: the soil water conservation/in situ rainwater harvesting technologies in rain-fed systems, small-scale private irrigation and small reservoirs used for communal irrigation purposes. We then apply a climate change scenario and discuss the robustness in potential AWM, according to the TAGMI tool. Finally, we discuss the need for further development of DSS for AWM interventions, and the need for generic or specific information on ‘best practices of implementation’ for successful uptake of technologies in poverty-constrained smallholder farming systems.
4 de Bruin, A.; Pateman, R.; Barron, Jennie; Balima, M.; Ouedraogo, I.; Dapola, E. D.; Fosu, M.; Annor, F. O.; Magombeyi, M.; Onema, J.-M. K. 2015. Setting up agricultural water management interventions - learning from successful case studies in the Volta and Limpopo river basins. Water Resources and Rural Development, 6:12-23. (Special issue: Managing Rainwater and Small Reservoirs in Sub-Saharan Africa). [doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.wrr.2015.09.001]
Agriculture ; Water management ; Technology ; Sustainability ; Investment ; Nongovernmental organizations ; State intervention ; Farmers ; River basins ; Case studies / Burkina Faso / Ghana / Zimbabwe / South Africa / Volta River Basin / Limpopo River Basin
(Location: IWMI HQ Call no: e-copy only Record No: H047521)
(0.23 MB)
Long-term investments in agricultural water management (AWM) interventions in the Volta and Limpopo river basins have aimed at improving water availability and quality for smallholder farming systems. However, sustained and wider uptake of AWM technologies and approaches has not been as successful. We need to learn from successful AWM interventions, those interventions that have led to a sustained or increased uptake of AWM technologies or approaches, and which have led to improved well-being of farmers and livestock keepers in the rural development context of sub-Sahara Africa. This paper explores AWM interventions, specifically, the impacts these interventions have had and the factors contributing to the success of these interventions. In four countries within the Volta and Limpopo river basins, consultations were carried in 33 case studies of successful AWM interventions with implementing organisations and beneficiaries using a participatory GIS methodology. A systematic text analysis of 55 case study reports showed that these 33 interventions have had a positive impact on the well-being of beneficiaries and there was a sustained and wider uptake of the AWM technologies or approaches introduced. A clear demand for the technology, appropriate design of the technology, input support, training and capacity building, and a sense of ownership of the community helped to sustain the uptake of AWM technologies and approaches. We conclude that implementing organisations would benefit from investing in the soft components of an AWM intervention, as this will increase the likelihood of successful adoption and adaptation of the AWM technologies and approaches in the long-term.
5 Ensor, J.; de Bruin, A.. 2022. The role of learning in farmer-led innovation. Agricultural Systems, 197:103356. [doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.agsy.2021.103356]
Farmers ; Social aspects ; Learning ; Innovation systems ; Stakeholders ; Collaboration ; Agricultural innovation ; Sustainability ; Policies ; Case studies / England / Scotland / Scottish Borders
(Location: IWMI HQ Call no: e-copy only Record No: H050939)
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0308521X21003097/pdfft?md5=daa115ecd66387e65db9cd3d3c15b5c7&pid=1-s2.0-S0308521X21003097-main.pdf
https://vlibrary.iwmi.org/pdf/H050939.pdf
https://vlibrary.iwmi.org/pdf/H050939.pdf
(0.95 MB) (976 KB)
CONTEXT: Farmer-led innovation brings farmers together with other stakeholders in a collaborative endeavour that recognises multiple forms of expertise. Critical engagement with mainstream models of agricultural science and technology (AST) development has drawn attention to the isolation of farmers as technology adopters within a compartmentalised model of AST development and dissemination. Academic, government and non-governmental actors and organisations are increasingly supporting facilitated processes in which farmers, scientists and engineers develop new knowledge, learning together about the nature of the problems being faced and the potential of different solution pathways.
OBJECTIVE: Despite the centrality of learning to farmer-led innovation, its role has yet to be systematically explored. In response, this paper looks to understand the forms of learning and their contribution to farmer-led innovation during a three-year action-research project involving two groups of farmers from northern England and the Scottish Borders in the UK.
METHODS: A researcher-facilitator convened a structured process of twenty meetings that together created opportunities for interaction, deliberation and re-framing of problems and solutions among groups of farmers, a university-based engineer, and wider stakeholders. Multiple qualitative methods were used to build understanding of the different farming contexts and to explore the issues the farmers wanted to work on. Meeting transcripts and fieldnotes were subject to thematic analysis, informed by the analytical framework of cognitive, normative and relational learning derived from the social learning literature.
RESULTS AND CONCLUSIONS: Cognitive, normative and relational learning were found to be mutually interdependent and equally significant, building iteratively rather than linearly: the farmers and engineer assessed new information and reappraised existing situations; they did so informed by and informing a shift in understanding of their goals for new technology; and in so doing they relied on and developed the trust and confidence needed to acknowledge or challenge each other's perspectives. By orientating the group engagement process around the space to explore and challenge histories and contexts of AST, and by drawing on social learning principles to facilitate interaction between the different expertise of farmers and between farmers and engineers, learning emerged that interleaved technology co-design with incremental refinement of the shared norms and values embedded in the process itself.
SIGNIFICANCE: A focus on learning helps deepen understanding of key mechanisms and processes that define and deliver innovation, and the findings suggest that priorities for farmer-led innovation process design should focus on modalities that open up spaces to negotiate both the purpose and products of innovation.
OBJECTIVE: Despite the centrality of learning to farmer-led innovation, its role has yet to be systematically explored. In response, this paper looks to understand the forms of learning and their contribution to farmer-led innovation during a three-year action-research project involving two groups of farmers from northern England and the Scottish Borders in the UK.
METHODS: A researcher-facilitator convened a structured process of twenty meetings that together created opportunities for interaction, deliberation and re-framing of problems and solutions among groups of farmers, a university-based engineer, and wider stakeholders. Multiple qualitative methods were used to build understanding of the different farming contexts and to explore the issues the farmers wanted to work on. Meeting transcripts and fieldnotes were subject to thematic analysis, informed by the analytical framework of cognitive, normative and relational learning derived from the social learning literature.
RESULTS AND CONCLUSIONS: Cognitive, normative and relational learning were found to be mutually interdependent and equally significant, building iteratively rather than linearly: the farmers and engineer assessed new information and reappraised existing situations; they did so informed by and informing a shift in understanding of their goals for new technology; and in so doing they relied on and developed the trust and confidence needed to acknowledge or challenge each other's perspectives. By orientating the group engagement process around the space to explore and challenge histories and contexts of AST, and by drawing on social learning principles to facilitate interaction between the different expertise of farmers and between farmers and engineers, learning emerged that interleaved technology co-design with incremental refinement of the shared norms and values embedded in the process itself.
SIGNIFICANCE: A focus on learning helps deepen understanding of key mechanisms and processes that define and deliver innovation, and the findings suggest that priorities for farmer-led innovation process design should focus on modalities that open up spaces to negotiate both the purpose and products of innovation.
Powered by DB/Text WebPublisher, from
