Origins of The Farmer Field School
Almost one third of the world’s population are members of farming households in Asia. Most of these farming families are small holders. Forty years ago, the Green Revolution was launched with the aim of improving the productivity of small farmers. By improving access to water, improved varieties, and other inputs, the Green Revolution helped to double average rice yields between the 1960s and the 1990s.
During the 1970s it became increasingly apparent that pest resistance and resurgence caused by the indiscriminate use of insecticides posed an immediate threat to the gains of the Green Revolution. At the same time, research was being conducted that demonstrated the viability of biological control of major rice pests. However, gaps still existed between the science generated in research institutions and common farmer practice conditioned by years of aggressive promotion of pesticide use. Over the ensuing years, a number of approaches were tried to bring integrated pest management (IPM) to small farmers - particularly rice farmers - in Asia, with mixed results. Some experts claimed that the principles of IPM were too complex for small farmers to master, and that centrally designed messages were still the only way to convince farmers to change their practices.
By the end of the 1980s, a new approach to farmer training emerged in Indonesia called the 'Farmer Field School' (FFS). The broad problem which these field schools were designed to address was a lack of knowledge among Asian farmers relating to agroecology, particularly the relationship between insect pests and beneficial insects.
The implementation of projects using the FFS approach led to a deeper understanding of the problem and its causes. It was recognised that sustainable agricultural development required more than just the acquisition of ecological knowledge by individual farmers. It also required the development of a capability for generating, adapting and extending this knowledge within farming communities. The weakness of this capability in most farming communities is itself an important problem; one which has often been exacerbated by earlier agricultural development programmes that fostered a dependency on external sources of expertise.
This deeper understanding of the problem was first recognised by farmers in Indonesia who graduated from FFS but realised there was more they could do to improve rural livelihoods. They started to organise new groups, alliances, networks and associations, and became involved in planning and implementing their own interventions. These interventions were highly diverse, ranging from research and training, to marketing and advocacy work. In response to the activities of these groups, IPM projects started to support the idea of ‘Community IPM’, which gave considerable attention to organisational issues rather than focussing solely on technological and educational aspects of IPM.
Read more about this topic: Farmer Field School
Famous quotes containing the words origins of, origins, farmer, field and/or school:
“The origins of clothing are not practical. They are mystical and erotic. The primitive man in the wolf-pelt was not keeping dry; he was saying: “Look what I killed. Aren’t I the best?””
—Katharine Hamnett (b. 1948)
“The settlement of America had its origins in the unsettlement of Europe. America came into existence when the European was already so distant from the ancient ideas and ways of his birthplace that the whole span of the Atlantic did not widen the gulf.”
—Lewis Mumford (1895–1990)
“I think that the farmer displaces the Indian even because he redeems the meadow, and so makes himself stronger and in some respects more natural.”
—Henry David Thoreau (1817–1862)
“The poet will write for his peers alone. He will remember only that he saw truth and beauty from his position, and expect the time when a vision as broad shall overlook the same field as freely.”
—Henry David Thoreau (1817–1862)
“Nevertheless, no school can work well for children if parents and teachers do not act in partnership on behalf of the children’s best interests. Parents have every right to understand what is happening to their children at school, and teachers have the responsibility to share that information without prejudicial judgment.... Such communication, which can only be in a child’s interest, is not possible without mutual trust between parent and teacher.”
—Dorothy H. Cohen (20th century)