to the urban poor. Is this a good practice? Does this happen in your work environment? How can we improve on the situation?

Transcription

1 Results of discussion groups during Prof. Kees Stigter s Roving Seminar Reaching farmers in a changing climate held in Esfahan, Iran, from 14 till 17 November 2011 Each day, in the afternoon, several discussion groups were organized of which half discussed one subject and the other half another subject, in Farsi. Then one person in each group reported in English about that discussion to a plenary meeting, where we discussed these results. Below a report. B.Sc.-, M.Sc.- and Ph.D.-theses candidates form an important "work force". Good research by them can be designed by their supervisors: study how farmers cope (or prepare) with/(for) various weather & climate (or other environment) related risks. Research can this way become more relevant to problem solving and problems related teaching in/on farmer's livelihoods. It could also be applied to the urban poor. Is this a good practice? Does this happen in your work environment? How can we improve on the situation?

2 The three groups rather unanimously indicated that this good practice could hardly take place in Iran because of the different players working in isolation. Farmers, Agrometeorology, Universities all work on their own, without much contacts. It would never work without these coming together. Same for Science Ministry, Ministry of Agriculture, IRIMO having hardly any overlap. Also, there is hardly anywhere any Applied Agrometeorology. With little exception it does not happen in Iran, this practice, because professors just give the subjects to their students. The discussion on improvement of the situation focused on need assessments (but how?) and steering by funding. Ultimately one could think of funding having the condition of forming a collaborative network first. (Example Stigter of British CDKN project funds.) No collaboration, no funding! But the government, that has to stimulate that, is often part of the problem and not part of the solution. Even granting that agroforestry is an ancient art, there is a newly enhanced awareness of the importance of trees outside forests in climate and food production. How should this be encouraged in Iran? The Food and Agricultural Organization (FAO, Rome) lists agroforestry as an agricultural measure in its role in disaster risk reduction. How should this be followed up in Iran? One group focused on using trees around the farm and many details were shown to be protective but also productive. Another group came with again other examples among which berries on the boundaries of fields, trees as wind shelter, also for preventing wind erosion, and microclimate management using grape plantings. A third group placed the encouragement in the direction of producing food safety. These answers all show that encouragement of agroforestry in Iran is very feasible and could easily be promoted (remains the question by whom?). As to the follow up, the first group followed up on their answer to the first question and proposed extension in relation to trees around the farm and farming with trees. The second group was of the opinion that research should

3 be carried out to get this organized, assisted by education towards that goal of agroforestry for wind shelter, combating erosion and fighting chilling. The third group had a long list of examples from which it concluded that advantages of using trees were larger than disadvantages. But again collaboration with farmers would be necessary to get this organized. All in all plenty of opportunities! We want to get into a situation in which, in a farmer first paradigm, livelihood problems and farmer decision-making needs do actually guide the bottom-up design of actual services, as exemplified in the case studies. What has to change in Iran to make this happen? A first discussion group made a review of important issues for change: - meeting farmers face to face in trust; - speak friendly, not harshly with them; - have a real extension service; - use farmer leaders as facilitators; - use roundtables with farmers on TV; - use rural radio broadcastings; - use SMS systems; - make simple small brochures/leaflets; - use cooperatives, local NGOs. Other groups added: - designing of questionnaires; - improving of farmer awareness; - using of experimental farms; - meeting farmers in their environment; - importance of FFSs; - distinguishment of three levels: < farmers, < experts, < government decision makers; - show farmers advantages/disadvantages; - stimulate farmers by buying products; - develop insurances.

4 China came closest to our ideals of farmer oriented services, but much initiative can use improvements. One of these is reaching farmers more directly. In what ways could farmers in Iran be reached more directly from the point of view of communications? Because of a misunderstanding only one group instead of two reported here. The following ways were mentioned: - it is all about informing people; - use modern ICTs, SMS, publication media; - develop new agromet methods; - use examples from other countries; - have government channels and NGOs; - work on small scales and gain farmers confidence. Organic farming systems embody many elements of sustainability that make them suitable tools to reduce poverty. Organic agriculture has seen two primary avenues of expansion: (i) among the smaller farmers, who either chose to eschew or could not afford Green Revolution approaches; (ii) among the commercially oriented farmers, who perceived new market opportunities in certified organic products. Which one makes more chance in Iran? Should only that avenue be promoted or both avenues? The first group indicated that (i) had more chance in Iran, because most farmers farm at small scales. These farmers do agriculture as their livelihood.

5 Bio-/organic agriculture must be prepared and manipulated. Livestock is advisable because of the animal dung to be used as fertilizer. In such organic farming, suitable crops as leguminosae, intercropping etc. must be applied and farmers must aim at balancing micro-nutrients and micro organisms. Both avenues should be promoted. Small farmers as above and the commercial road through NGOs/co-operatives (e.g. apples). The second group approached the subject through problems in Society and with the Government. For the society problems they listed - attention for the looks of produce; - lack of common knowledge on organic farming; - lack of education related to health issues and bad agriculture; - small acreages. For problems related to government they listed: - high yields were wanted; - no stimulation of organic farming; - import of cheap food from other countries; - no warnings/information on bad effects of chemicals, etc. Is there sufficient rural education in Iran? Farmer Field Schools and Climate Field Schools would fill part of that void. Extension intermediaries must therefore be educated to participate in these FFSs and CFSs. But who trains these trainers? Do Universities, Research Institutes, National Weather Services (IRIMO) and other Environmental Services Institutes have a task here? Would this help in bringing these Institutes/Institutions closer to the needed rural response to climate change?

6 The two groups felt that there is insufficient rural education in Iran. There are also few FFSs and no CFSs. Extension is not really functional, there should be promoters between experts and farmers. Trainers of trainers could be rural sociologists on one hand and IRIMO and weather stations people on the other hand. The task of Universities, Research Institutes, IRIMO and other Environmental Services Institutes is to start working to solve problems of farmers. They also have extensional tasks, also related to climate change. The last question was answered positively for IRIMO, but it should be understood that NGOs and Government Institutions are very different. Promoters are city people and there is no relation between agrometeorologists and ministry people. Esfahan, November, Kees Stigter