Meeting the Information Needs of Ghanaian Cocoa Farmers: Are Farmer Field Schools the Answer?

A number of farmer-led approaches to technology transfer have emerged in recent times to replace the largely discredited Transfer of Technology (TOT) and Training and Visit (T&V) models of agricultural extension. One such initiative is the Farmer Field School (FFS), an experiential learning approach originally developed in Southeast Asia for the integrated management of rice pests but adaptable to other crops and even to livestock and fisheries. The experiences in the use of FFS in other crops have been applied to cocoa in studies in the Central and Ashanti regions of Ghana. This study used a mixed method of group interviews, questionnaire survey and in-depth one-on-one interviews to elicit information from farmers in Atwima and Amansie-West districts of Ashanti where the sustainable tree crops programme (STCP) has been conducting FFSs since 2002, with the object of evaluating the extent to which the FFS approach could augment existing extension strategies in meeting farmers’ information needs. The sample included participants and non-participants alike providing a basis for comparative analysis. The results indicate that majority of the farmers (70%) rely on their social networks of friends, neighbours and family members for information and advice with only 13% regarding extension agents as their main source of advice. No significant differences (P<0.05) were found between FFS farmers and non-FFS farmers in terms of output, awareness or attitudes but FFS farmers undertook more of some production practices on their farm. The implications of these and other findings are discussed in relation to the quest for participatory modes of information sharing within the cocoa knowledge and information system. INTRODUCTION Agricultural extension as an activity has been used as an instrument to induce change in agricultural communities over the years. The transfer of technology (ToT) model of agricultural extension by which technological innovations are transferred from research to farmers via extension agents has been the dominant mode of information transfer until quite recently. It is now largely acknowledged that farmers are not merely passive receivers of the ideas of scientists; they are active researchers and experimenters themMeeting the Information needs of Ghanaian cocoa farmers Baah Journal of Science and Technology, Vol. 27, No. 3, December 2007 163 selves (Röling, 1994). This has led to the movement towards stronger participation by farmers in agricultural research and extension fuelled by the growing realization that the socio-economic and agro-ecological conditions of farmers are complex, diverse and risk-prone, and that conventional approaches such as the ToT model are unlikely to be fruitful (Farrington, 1998). A number of participatory approaches have been adopted in the past by national and international agricultural research and extension systems to involve farmers in the research and technology dissemination processes. These include, farming systems research and extension (Simmonds, 1986; Wiggins, 1995; Jiggins, 1981; Chambers, 1980, 1986; Tripp, 1989; Biggs, 1984), farmer participatory research (Okali et al, 1994; Tripp, 1989; Sumberg and Okali, 1988; Richards, 1986) and the farmer first and last (FFL) model (Chambers and Ghildyal, 1985). Each approach has had its fair share of criticisms (Baah, 2001a). The consensus appears that these approaches have not integrated and empowered farmers enough for them to reap the benefits of the technology development and dissemination processes. Farmer Field Schools (FFS) appears to be one strategy that has won the hearts of farmers and development workers alike. Farmer Field Schools (FFS) The FFS training methodology is said to have originated from the FAO intercountry programme in Asia where it has been used to train over one million farmers (Afreh-Nuamah, 1999). The FAO launched an Integrated Pest Management (IPM) programme in irrigated rice in seven Southeast Asian countries in 1979 (Bruin and Meerman, 2001). Initially, the extension approach used was the top-down transfer of technology methodology. This did not work and was replaced with a model in which groups of farmers were trained during a season-long activity. This approach was called the Farmer Field School (van de Fliert, Pontius and Röling, 1995). The FFS has proven to be a very effective tool for cultivating farmer learning and empowerment and helping farmers to develop their critical thinking. A FFS is organized by a facilitator who does not act as a teacher but facilitates a learning process. Farmers meet during the cropping season in groups at a location close to a field of study. The following important IPM principles underlie the FFS training programme (Bruin and Meerman, 2001; van de Fliert et al., 1995): 1. Growing a healthy crop. This involves proper crop and plant management practices, which allow the plant to recover better from environmental or pest injury. 2. Observe field (crops) regularly. The Agroecosystem Analysis (AESA) is the FFS’s core activity and sharpens farmers’ skills in the areas of observation and decisionmaking. Informed decision-making enables appropriate interventions to be made quickly for water, soil and plant management 3. Conserve natural enemies. This provides for biological control of pests and diseases by parasites, predators and pathogens. 4. Farmers become experts. Farmers acquire the basic understanding of the agroecological system and decision-making processes and this is important for long-term management of soils, pests and crops. According to Gallagher (2003), the basic format of an IPM Farmer Field School consists of three activities: agro-ecosystem observation, analysis and presentation of results; a special topic and a group dynamics activity. The AESA is the FFS’s core activity and other activities are designed to support it. A table of activities undertaken in a FFS session is shown below: The FFS may be adapted to any crop. However, the process must be learner-centred, participatory and rely on the experiential learning approach taking into consideration the key growth stages of the crop, local cropping patterns and specific local problems (Pontius, Dilts and Barlett, 2002). Meeting the Information needs of Ghanaian cocoa farmers Baah Journal of Science and Technology, Vol. 27, No. 3, December 2007 164