| Document Type
|
:
|
BL
|
| Record Number
|
:
|
779441
|
| Doc. No
|
:
|
b599457
|
| Main Entry
|
:
|
Prossy Isubikalu.
|
| Title & Author
|
:
|
Stepping-stones to improve upon functioning of participatory agricultural extension programmes : : farmer field schools in Uganda\ Prossy Isubikalu.
|
| Publication Statement
|
:
|
Wageningen : Wageningen Academic Publishers, 2007
|
| Page. NO
|
:
|
(215 pages) : illustrations, map
|
| ISBN
|
:
|
9086866018
|
|
|
:
|
: 9789086866014
|
| Contents
|
:
|
Table of contents; List of tables; List of figures; List of boxes; List of acronyms; Acknowledgements; Participation and poverty reduction: strategy in effecting agricultural extension programmes; 1.1 Introduction; 1.2 Agriculture as an important entry point in PRSP; 1.2.1 Uganda's commitment to rural development: the PEAP; 1.2.2 Uganda's plan for the modernisation of agriculture; 1.3 Re-organisation or transformation of agricultural extension in Uganda; 1.4 The origin and development of Farmer Field Schools; 1.4.1 Development and evolution of IPM. 1.4.2 Farmer Field Schools in South-East Asia1.4.3 Farmer field schools in Africa; 1.5 Focusing the study; 1.5.1 Technographic overview and descriptive/analytic strategy; 1.5.2 Influence of the formal institutional context on operation of FFS; 1.5.3 Influence of communities of learners on the operation of FFS; 1.5.4 Influence of curriculum on operation of FFS; 1.5.5 Specific research questions; 1.6 Approach to the study: unravelling the operation of FFS; 1.6.1 Research design and data collection methods; 1.6.2 Selection of cases and study sites; 1.7 Organization of this thesis. Development institutions and Ugandan FFS: a technographic sketch2.1 Introduction; 2.2 Ugandan FFS and the role of international institutions: a coup?; 2.2.1 The role of funding agencies; 2.2.2 The International Potato Center (CIP); 2.2.3 The Food and Agriculture Organisation (FAO); 2.3 Actors at the national level and their influence on FFS operation; 2.3.1 Ministry of Agriculture, Animal Industries and Fisheries; 2.3.2 Programme assistants: coordination and direction of projects; 2.3.3 Research institutions at national level; 2.4 Local actors and their influence on FFS operations. 2.4.1 Agricultural Extension service delivery and roles played2.4.2 Local community leaders; 2.5 International interests in shaping and re-shaping FFS; 2.6 Concluding remarks; New technological inputs and local farming activities: mobilizing actors and instruments for FFS; 3.1 Introduction; 3.2 Technology interventions covered by FFS in Uganda; 3.2.1 The crop level perspective; 3.2.2 Package level: the integrated approach perspective; 3.3 Preparation of FFS Facilitators; 3.3.1 Identification and selection of facilitators; 3.3.2 Perceived selection criteria for extension staff facilitators. 3.3.3 Criteria used for selecting farmer facilitators3.3.4 Training the facilitators; 3.4 Mobilization of the farming community; 3.4.1 Mobilization by extension workers; 3.3.2 Mobilization of farmers by local leaders; 3.4. Effect of mobilization method on group size and dynamics; 3.4.4 Verification and inauguration of projects in the communities; 3.5 Concluding remarks; FFS performance in wider context: farming and social systems in eastern and central Uganda; 4.1 Introduction; 4.2 Technology interventions and prevailing farming practices. 4.2.1 MAK-IPM project technology interventions --; pest management.
|
| Abstract
|
:
|
The Farmer Field School (FFS) originated in the 1980s in the context of integrated pest management in Indonesian rice farming. With the hope that it is the remedy for agricultural extension system, FFS has been promoted as a tool for participatory learning and experimentation all over the world. This work results from a critical analysis of the introduction of the FFS concept into the agricultural innovation system in Uganda. Ideally, an FFS produces new technical knowledge in the context of application through the input of local human resources. The analysis, framed as a technography, shows that implementation and operation of an FFS is hugely complex. This detailed study of institutional factors, from the level of international donor organizations down to the level of local leadership and gender relations, and analysis of technical factors in different rural areas of Uganda makes clear that and FFS is more than a local tool for farmer participatio.
|
| Subject
|
:
|
Agricultural extension work -- Uganda.
|
| Subject
|
:
|
Agricultural extension work.
|
| Subject
|
:
|
Uganda.
|
| LC Classification
|
:
|
S544.5.U33P767 2007
|
| Added Entry
|
:
|
Prossy Isubikalu
|