Capacity building and short term training for IPM in Latin America and the Caribbean - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

About This Presentation

Capacity building and short term training for IPM in Latin America and the Caribbean


Paul Backman, Penn State University Memphis, TN 27 March 2012 – PowerPoint PPT presentation

Number of Views:25
Avg rating:3.0/5.0
Slides: 15
Provided by: Jeffrey492


Transcript and Presenter's Notes

Title: Capacity building and short term training for IPM in Latin America and the Caribbean

Capacity building and short term training for
IPM in Latin America and the Caribbean
Paul Backman, Penn State University
  • Memphis, TN
  • 27 March 2012

  • Discuss challenges associated with building
    capacity for IPM programs in LAC
  • Discuss different approaches to short- and
    long-term training and how these approaches vary
    according to local conditions
  • Identify unique challenges associated with
    training for IPM packages (with an emphasis on
  • Describe training efforts for IPM in Latin
    America and Caribbean Region promoted by a
    specific projectthe IPM CRSP.

IPM and technology diffusion
  • Standard extension models involve training
    farmers about new production processes,
    techniques, etc. The model is one of technology
  • IPM is different because it involves knowledge
    about pests and their life-cycles, can include
    multiple practices (e.g. IPM packages), multiple
    disciplines, enhanced decision makingit is
    knowledge intensive and not easily transferred
  • IPM research is often participatory, recognizes
    farmer needs, and brings farmers into the
    processit is a people-intensive process
  • However, for IPM to have an impact, widespread
    adoption has to take place
  • Public agricultural extension budgets have been
    cut and often there are few incentives for
    private sector involvement
  • Conundrum difficult to train, few agents
    involved in dissemination, dissemination needed
    to ensure impact
  • Solution innovative diffusion mechanisms

Country examples
  • Two countries where IPM research is
    well-established Ecuador and Honduras
  • Key pests/complexes identified
  • IPM components tested
  • Some solutions are available, and are being
    tested and disseminated
  • Different challenges for short-term training
  • Scientist training
  • Access to extension and outreach systems
  • Generating buy-in
  • Engagement of women and other stakeholders

  • Research prioritization (objective) crops
    (economic importance versus food security) and
  • Secondary data to identify most important in
    terms of food security and exports
  • Stakeholder assessments (producers, extension
    agents, scientists) to identify major pest
  • Research prioritization (subjective) scientist
    preferences/training pet pests/diseases
  • Need to resolve differences possibly build
    capacity to address objective priorities
  • Building collaboration across disciplines
    systems approach versus discipline-centric
  • Moving from laboratories to farmer field
  • Publications few incentives to publish in
    developing-country institutions

Overcoming the challenges Short-term training
  • Scientist training (early in process)
  • Participatory methodsbuild stakeholder support
  • Train scientists in multi-disciplinary
    partnershipsinvolve pathologists, entomologists,
    and others
  • Social science inputs (i) prioritize research
    (according to objective criteria) (ii) gender
    training (especially important for IPM and
    participatory research)
  • Moving from laboratory science to farmer fields.
    Bigger problem with university scientists than
    with NARS scientists
  • Scientist training (through project)
  • Participation with US scientists on identifying
    research themes, designing the research,
    analysis, and writing
  • International short-term training IPM CRSP has
    provided several opportunities, mainly through
    its global themes

Short-term training for scientists
  • Regional virus workshop in Honduras, trichoderma
    workshop in India, virus workshop in India
  • Permit CRSP-affiliated scientists to learn state
    of the art techniques
  • Low-cost means of building capacity
  • Visits to US universities
  • Examples (i) annual visit to Purdue University
    for work in entomology and weed science (ii)
    impact assessment at Virginia Tech (iii) Penn
  • Strengthen long-term linkages
  • Build correspondence between field research and
    that in US
  • More likely to publish

Short-term training for project stakeholders
  • First principle is to include stakeholders in
    research planning participation builds
  • IPM CRSP has evaluated a number of
    training/dissemination measures
  • General lessons
  • Farmer field schools are effective, but expensive
    and generally do not reach many people
  • Field days are effective (and inexpensive) means
    of disseminating one or two practices, but not
    for complete IPM packages
  • Extension visit are effective, but relatively
  • Mass media can work for simple messages, but not
    complex packages
  • Broad participation by farmer groups in research
    helpstraining as a form of learning by doing
  • No silver bullet need to combine methods

Example Honduras Gender Workshop
  • 22 farmers(14 women and 8 men) from the area
    around La Esperanza, Honduras participated in a
    gender workshop (March 2012).
  • Women and men were split into two groups to
    perform activities (using the Harvard Analytical
    Framework) to identify
  • Activities they performed on a daily basis
    Agricultural activities they performed throughout
    the year Resources and benefits they controlled
    or had access to IPM technologies they adopted
    why or why not and, Other factors that affected
    their roles in agriculture and in the household
  • The IPM-CRSP objective of identifying gendered
    adoption rates for various technologies was met
  • Workshop Perspectives
  • The workshop was productive and fairly efficient
    in obtaining necessary information in a short
    amount of time.
  • All of the above tasks were accomplished in
    approximately 4 hours.
  • Several more workshops should be completed to
    obtain information that is more representative of
    and consistent with Honduran agriculture as a
  • Workshop approach represents model to
    simultaneouslu conduct research and disseminate
    IPM practices to farmers

Short-term training and dissemination
  • Dissemination is most effective when private
    sector is involved
  • Honduras combine IPM training with program to
    link farmers to high-valued market
  • Produce purchaser has incentive to train and
  • Producer has economic incentive to learn methods
  • Ecuador grafted naranjilla is sold by private
  • Company provides technical assistance to ensure
    that product (fusarium-resistant naranjilla) is
    properly managed

Challenges to long-term training
  • Mismatch between host-country institution needs
    and US scientist interests
  • Social scienceslittle interest in training
    economists, gender specialists, and other among
    NARS directors
  • US scientists focus their research on US-specific
    problems and applicability to developing
    countries is often difficult to communicate
    (example naranjilla research in Ecuador)
  • Preparation of host-country scientists is limited
  • Language and the TOEFL
  • GREschallenge to get students who meet US
    university standards
  • Expensive to train degree students at US
  • Sandwich type programs have not been successful
    in LAC
  • Training at regional (LAC) universities is less
    expensive, but at cost of limited linkages with
    US scientists

  • Focus on US scientists with a commitment toward
    service to host-countries (Rachel Melnick,
  • Build pipeline earlyidentify students and get
    them prepared do not be shy about evaluating
  • Build wide pipelineidentify several options for
    one or two positions
  • Language training can be built into degree
    training program

This presentation was made possible through
support provided by the Agriculture Office within
the Bureau for Economic Growth, Agriculture, and
Trade (EGAT) of the U.S. Agency for International
Development, under the terms of the Integrated
Pest Management Collaborative Research Support
Program (IPM CRSP) (Award No. EPP-A-00-04-00016-00
). The opinions expressed herein are those of the
author and do not necessarily reflect the views
of the U.S. Agency for International Development.
Write a Comment
User Comments (0)