Given the limitations of the “project” mode of development assistance, and the likelihood that funding will not be as available in the future for financing large development projects as it has in the past, it is appropriate to consider alternative mechanisms for American institutions and professionals to remain engaged in development efforts overseas. One hopes these will be more effective and cost-effective than previous channels of development aid.The “collaboration” is suggested here as such a mechanism. It involves a US university (...) with overseas universities, government agencies, and nongovernmental organizations (NGOs) in interdisciplinary problem solving, with sustainable agricultural and rural development as the goal, requiring relatively modest levels of funding. There are also benefits to the US institution as it becomes more current and knowledgeable about development problems and opportunities, and better able to provide relevant teaching and research. New partnerships supported by private funding can usefully complement larger-scale official efforts and can fill in gaps where flexible operations relying on the quality of ideas and strong personal relationships offer high returns. (shrink)

The recent enthusiasm for “participation” in agricultural development has fueled the development of new approaches to research and extension. The rhetoric of “participation” extends the horizons of agricultural research and extension beyond technical problem-solving. Yet in practice few of the personal, political, and experiential aspects of this process are addressed. This paper aims to draw attention to these elements of practice and to locate research and extension within wider social processes. Through a critique of conventional methodological strategies, this paper considers (...) the possibilities offered by “participatory” alternatives. Considering the scope and objectives of agricultural development raises a series of methodological questions: What counts as knowledge? Who defines and represents this knowledge? Whose knowledge counts? Knowledge for what? Knowledge for whom?The paper goes on to assess a number of these “new” methodologies, within and beyond agricultural development. Through a consideration of their strengths and weaknesses, a series of further issues are highlighted for future methodological development. It is argued that for agricultural research and extension to acknowledge process, closer attention needs to be paid to context. The activities of research and extension need to be set in time. Strategies are needed to explore and address diversity and difference in communities. Situating the actors and agencies involved in development within relations of power involves addressing—and redressing—the nature of interactions between these actors. These changes require not an ever increasing array of methods, it is argued, but new approaches to learning. (shrink)

In this book Bruno Latour brings together these different approaches to provide a lively and challenging analysis of science, demonstrating how social context..

Numerous evaluations of the Bean/Cowpea Collaborative Research Support Program (CRSP) have documented CRSP contributions to food production and availability with impacts valued in the millions of dollars in developing countries as well as in the US. These reports emphasized collaboration as a critical factor in the success that emanated from CRSP research and training. Real collaboration among males and females across disciplinary, national, ethnic, cultural, and language differences is not easy. This review of CRSP experiences in building productive collaborations gives (...) actual case studies, including some failures, and discusses lessons learned in the process. The importance of wide participation, shared resources, and facilitated interpersonal relations to back up the dedication and commitment of the participants in emphasized. The program represents an investment of the US Agency for International Development with contributions in excess of 25 percent from participating US and Host Country institutions. (shrink)

User participation is a critical ingredient for relevant technology development, whether in agriculture or industry. This has long been recognized in private sector R&D firms. In most public sector agricultural research organizations in developing countries, however, systematic involvement of farmers, especially poor farmers, in research has been weak. These farmers are rarely powerful or well organized enough to bring pressure to bear on government agencies to respond to their needs and priorities. Farmer-responsive research methods, such as on-farm research, farming systems (...) research, and farmer participatory research, have been introduced into research organizations to compensate for the lack of mechanisms for bringing farmers' views into the formulation of research priorities and agendas. The impact of these approaches in achieving this objective, however, has been less than hoped for.Insufficient attention to the political and institutional dimensions of developing client-responsive research is a major reason for this lack of impact. To bring about permanent change, farmer-responsive research methods need to be reinforced by changes in the balance of power between research and its clients and in the constellation of decisionmakers responsible for formulating research agendas. Participatory planning methods applied at the level of research programs provide new opportunities for involving farmers in decision-making about program priorities and for systematically incorporating information about client's needs. Recent experiments with strengthening farmers' associations and linking them with research organizations suggest new opportunities for increasing farmers' ability to express demand, act as an external pressure group, and serve as viable partners with research organizations. (shrink)

This paper explores the concept of accountability in development efforts focusing specifically on member accountability. Accountability to members has been defined as the degree to which intended beneficiaries can hold decision-makers responsible for the outcomes of their decisions. A framework for assessing member accountability in grassroots organizations has been discussed. Data for this study were collected in four women's organizations working with income generating activities in India. A brief overview of the structures of each of the organizations is presented to (...) enable a comparison of those structures. The findings of the study reveal that development organizations that are more member-accountable are likely to deliver greater economic and social benefits to their members. (shrink)

It is widely accepted that the success of rural nongovernmental organizations depends heavily on leadership and the organizational abilities of individual leaders. Drawing on the recent history of the cotton farmers' movement in Mali, this article identifies critical issues related to the development and sustainability of rural leadership. Special attention is given to how both heroic and post-heroic approaches to leadership might be joined in order to help nongovernmental organizations contribute to both political democratization and economic development.