Diguettes in the Sahel A pragmatic look at the potential of - - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

Diguettes in the Sahel

A pragmatic look at the potential of participatory innovation for development

Alessandro Meschinelli

With the collaboration of Philippe Baret, Loic Monseur and Quentin Vandersteen

Université de Louvain in connection with Projet Neer-Tamba

alessandro.meschinelli@uclouvain.be

1

Collaboration IFAD - Université de Louvain (Belgium)

2

Funding Partnerships Development Education Research Societal impact Projects Impact Papers Knowledge Tools Aim

Collaboration IFAD - Université de Louvain

3

Partnerships Education Research Methodology Projects PIC-CUD PPILDA

2003 2009 2015

Context – Combat desertification in the Sahel

• The challenge magnitude

4

Context – Soil and Water Conservation Technologies (water harvesting and soil fertility management)

5

Xavi Fernández de Castro/IPS

Stone bunds Zaï Demi-lunes

IFAD IFAD

SHIFTING FROM THE « YIELDS INCREASE » MYTH TO THE CONCEPT OF TECHNOLOGY « ADOPTABILITY »

• Conventional Agricultural research main paradigm (the

« miserabilistic » view of N/S ties) focus and methods

• Results on the ground (beyond Green Revolution)
• More of the same (top-down diffusionist approaches)
• Alternative approaches: co-research and co-innovation.

Questioning the very « agricultural innovation system » - components, relationships, attributes/role of components

• The real impact: self-esteem and self-confidence of farmers
• Focussing on local circumstances and livelihood conditions
• Presenting a research carried out in Burkina Faso and
• riginally commissioned by IFAD in 2015.

Research purpose: enhancing project effectiveness and sustainability by relying on « local innovations/co- innovation » as alternative to transfer of technology mode

• Concentrating on stone bunds (diguettes/cordons

pierreux): erosion control structures built with rocks or stones in series of two or three. They are constructed in line along the natural contour of the land after 10-15 cm of the soil have been removed from the line where they have to be built. They are built to a height of 20/30 cm from the ground and spaced 20 to 50 meters apart depending on the inclination of the terrain (reason why this technology was chosen). Research process:

• - hypothesis (limits of ToT and potential alternatives)
• - desk study (documents, 2015)
• - field surveys (2016, 2017)
• - article writing (first draft 2016, available E and F)
• - feed back to project (workhops 2016)
• - capacity development (Agrinovia, 2016-2017)

MODEL OF CHANGE CONSIDERED:

Project technology limitations Farmers’ practices Identification & evaluation Adaptation of project interventions in support to local innovations design

IFAD projects in Burkina Faso concerned = 100.000 ha of stone bunds ! (to be scaled-up from 2015 by IFAD-financed project Neer Tamba = 114 million USD, 8 years, 3 regions)

9

Research methods - A diversity of sources

10

Scientific papers Reports MSc theses Interviews IFAD, GIZ, Oxfam ISDR Impacts & methods Interviews in Burkina (1 + 1 month field surveys)

Research methods – The IPAAD grid to assess adoptability

11

Information Profitabilité Acceptabilité Accessibilité Durabilité

Access to knowledge on the innovation Advantages, relevant answer to issues Change of habits, disruption Access to means, equal share of benefits Sustainability, long term persistence

Technical description of the diguette (variations during implementation recorded against a core conceptual model)

12

Diversity of implementations Diversity of achievements Diversity of impacts

Project model

Steps for the implementation of « project model » diguettes

Choice of site Stone collection Transport of stones Delineation of level curves Sous-solage Buiding the diguette

Project inputs

• Financial incentives
• Technical expertise
• Food for work
• Transport
• Equipment
• Group training/facilitation
• ….

The « project model» diguette analyzed

• Exercice 1: apply the IPAAD grid to the technology designed

by the project (groups)

• Discuss findings

15

Applying the IPAAD grid to documentation available. Main research findings (2015):

16

Information Profitabilité Acceptabilité Accessibilité Durabilité

Access to knowledge on innovation Advantage, relevant answer to issues Change of habits, disruption, Access to means, equal share of benefits Sustainability, long term persistence Good information, well understood innovation Focus on yield, variability of costs Adaptation of an existing technique High dependency to project funding Land,stones,work Project funding  no discrimination A project-dependent process ?

RESEARCH ON THE GROUND (9 villages): FINDINGS

• 36 innovations/adaptations by farmers of the original, project-

based stone bund concept (Master Thesis L.M. 2016)

• They are based on an array of motivations, dealing with

variations in topography, farmers’ priorities, limitations in stone and labour availability, land tenure circumstances, producers’ technical creativity and capacities

• They fall in 6 main categories: design of the diguettes;

arrangement of stones; vegetalisation; complementary technologies; plot management (Master Thesis Q.V. 2017)

• After evaluation and caracterisation according to IPAAD

criteria (improved), 9 typologies of stone bunds have been selected for dissemination, with project supports

• The production of « fiches technique » or technical notes:

different modalities of their individual or grouped diffusion (peer to peer, top-down…) to ensure their effective use

• Illustration of farmers’ adaptations/innovations

Burning « andropogon «

Recording diversity in implementation

23

Diversity in implementation Diversity of achievements Diversity of impacts

Project model

Rationale for the diversity in implementation

24

Diversity of implementations Diversity of achievements Diversity of impacts

Project model

Availability of stones, transport, food for work Perfect bunds, light bunds, adapted bunds

No integration of farmers’ innovations in project design

25

Technical proposition Impacts Implementation

Impacts

Integration of farmers’ innovations in project design

26

Technical proposal Adapted bunds

Farmers’ knowledge and practices

Impacts

Décalage entre la diguette réalisée et la diguette-type Organisational innovations Technical adaptations

Ideal stone bunds

Impacts

Integration of farmers’ innovations in project design

27

Technical proposal Adapted bunds

Farmer’s knowledge and practices

Impacts

Organisational innovations Technical adaptations

Model bunds Integration in new approach/projects

From « project model » to local adaptations

Comparing approaches: diguettes adaptations by farmers

• Exercice 2: are we in the context of an innovation ? Please

describe its main features based on what you define as « innovation ». (Groups)

30

Implications for re-designing Neer Tamba implementation

DISPOSITIF POUR LA MISE EN ŒUVRE DES CORDONS PIERREUX AVANT/APRES RECHERCHE

• Identification des sites pilote de réalisation des ouvrages/critères
• Exemple : avant guidé par des considérations bio-physiques ou sociales/après guidé par

la valorisation des initiatives et dynamiques en cours

• Phase de sensibilisation et d’organisation
• Exemple : avant comité de gestion impulsé par le projet/après rassemblement des

innovateurs/trices

• Standard techniques
• Exemple : avant optimum technique déterminé par les ingénieurs/après adaptation des

modèles de cordons pierreux aux initiatives et dynamiques en cours

• Mobilisation et organisation des communautés
• Exemple : avant protocole impulsé par les mesures d’incitation prévues et les attentes

du projet/après intégration de nouvelles formules selon les innovations socio-

• rganisationnelles locales et les objectifs des populations

Implications for re-designing Neer Tamba implementation

DISPOSITIF POUR LA MISE EN ŒUVRE DES CORDONS PIERREUX AVANT/APRES RECHERCHE(suite)

• Fourniture de matériel, nourriture, transport
• Exemple : avant stock prédéterminé de fourniture/après fournitures à la carte sur la base

d’un fonds géré par les communautés

• Apport expertise technique
• Exemple : avant expertise externe/après mix expertise externe et paysanne
• Réalisation des diguettes
• Exemple : avant formation en technique d’identification et de matérialisation des courbes

de niveau, collecte des moellons, transfert des moellons sur les sites, alignement des moellons/après nouvelles formations basées sur les innovations paysannes

• Supervision et contrôle
• Exemple : avant supervision du projet/après suivi-évaluation paysan en lien avec le

projet

Implications and challenges in terms of new capabilities

• New role of development agents : Innovation Brokers ?
• Skills, Terms of Reference, Conditions for emergence (see

special part)

• New approaches on the ground: how research becomes a

reflexive exercice for the project team, leading to a new investment in human resources to experiment innovative implementation methods (July 2016 training in Kaya)

• Agrinovia: « learn to innovate in partnership». Based on the

professional transformation observed in Niger (Aguié, 1998- 2013) and geared towards the dissemination of the related

• capacities. Tripartite agreements.

RECENT DEVELOPMENTS

• Protocol of Agreement Neer Tamba-Agrinovia (April 2017)
• Agrinovia 3.0 start-up (June 2017)

READINGS: Article and other material: available upon demand addressed to your Master manager

Acknowledgements

• We thank Professor Jacques Nanéma, Daniel Gampiné

Jacob Ouedraogo, Aicha Tapsoba and Serge Ganou for surveys and data collection in Burkina Faso. Souleymane Sankara for his support and Neer Tamba staff for their

• collaboration. Marcq Pascal and Louise Amand for help in

preparing the article. Loïc Monseur and Quentin Vandersteen for conducting the research on diguettes/stone bunds for UCL in the framework of their Master thesis.

• Our gratitude to IFAD for financing the original study and

specifically Cristiana Sparacino.

• THANKS TO YOU FOR LISTENING AND PARTICIPATING!

36