AND SURVEY PROCEDURES FOLLOWED TO
CHAPTER 7: IMPACT EVALUATION OF THE ON-FARM RESEARCH AND TECHNOLOGY DISSEMINATION PROGRAMME
4.4. Interaction with the community and Extension staff
4.4.1 Community meeting to discuss the findings of the diagnostic survey
The objectives of the feedback meeting with the community in April 1998 were to present and discuss the information gained from the diagnostic study. Present at the meeting were staff members from the KwaZulu-Natal Department of Agriculture and Environmental Affairs, the Head of District, the Head of Extension (the chairman of the meeting) the Agricultural Development Technician, FSRS staff (4 members), 18 people from the community (farmers) and two Technikon students. The meeting was advertised through the members of the Amazizi Maize Association, posters were placed at strategic places in the community and notices were given to school-children. The reasons given by farmers for the poor attendance were the following:
a) some people will come later (it did not happen);
b) notices were not received by people;
c) a funeral in the area.
FSRS scientists presented the crop and livestock results of the diagnostic survey. Not all the respondents who were interviewed were present, but people agreed that the information was a true reflection of the situation in the community. The people again mentioned the problem of stray animals destroying crops and commented that this problem was not found on commercial farms (see Plates 4.9 and 4.10).
The following issues were raised and discussed at the meeting:
a) a lecture on maize production, covering the main production practices, was presented;
b) natural resources need to be assessed in order to understand some of the livestock constraints identified;
c) livestock owners need to get together to form an association. One of the benefits could be the buying of inputs in larger quantities, at lower prices;
d) cattle owners need to spend money if they want to have productive animals. The basic inputs for improved animal productivity and reduced mortalities include supplements to improve nutrition, dips/doses - to control ticks and parasites, vaccines to prevent disease and veterinary products to treat diseases and infections;
e) livestock owners were advised to keep certain drugs on hand, to treat animals quickly and effectively (names of drugs were mentioned);
f) to control tick-borne diseases, livestock owners were advised to consider knapsack sprayers, pour-ons and injectables, as alternatives to dips.
4.4.2 Meeting with Extension to discuss the findings of the survey and the feedback meeting Four Extension and four FSRS staff attended a meeting that was held in May 1998 at the Cedara Research Station. The aims of the meeting were to strengthen further the newly formed relationship with Extension colleaguesfrom the Bergville District and the head office of the North West Region and to discuss the findings of the diagnostic survey. At the start of the meeting the FSRS staff presented a slide show dealing with the survey.
The two main issues affecting agricultural activities in Obonjaneni were stray animals and a lack of knowledge (expertise).It was agreed that the control of stray livestock was a major issue and should be addressed first, before any other of the identified constraints. The livestockissue prompted the following questions:
a) how influential were the cattle owners in the community?
b) what were the people's objectives with maize and vegetable production?
c) why did they allow livestock to be a problem?
At the meeting, an appointment with the Nkosi (Chief) and the tribal authority to give feedback on the survey results, and to re-emphasise the negative effect of stray animals on crop production and thus agriculture in general in the community, was seen as an essential first step, before any other intervention could take place. The Agricultural Development Technician responsible for the Obonjaneni community was tasked to arrange a meeting with the Nkosi and the tribal authorities in June 1998.
4.4.3 Meeting with tribal authorities
The meeting with the tribal authorities was held in June 1998, at the Amazizi Tribal Court.
Present at the meeting were: the Induna (Headman) of Obonjaneni, representing the Nkosi (Chief), 12 members of the Amazizi tribal authority, the Amazizi Maize Association chairman, the KWANALU (KwaZulu-Natal Agricultural Union - organised agriculture) representative for the area, officials from the KwaZulu-Natal Department of Agriculture and Environmental Affairs, who included FSRS staff, the Control Agricultural Development
Technician of the Extension Region, the Head of the Bergville District Extension office, the Head of Extension (Bergville office), the Assistant Director Professional Services, the Agricultural Development Technician for the sub-ward of Obonjaneni and the North West Region Subject Matter Specialist for Crops.
The FSRS staff gave a report-back on the findings of the diagnostic survey. A suggestion was made to the tribal authorities that 1 November should be set as the deadline for livestock to be removed from the communal cropping fields. It was conveyed that this date needed to be enforced and strictly monitored. The local leaders were informed that officials of the Department of Agriculture and the farmers of Obonjaneni felt that the community, in conjunction with the tribal authority, needed to solve the livestock problem. It was made explicit during the discussions that without a solution to this problem it would be meaningless to address the other constraints identified by the people of Obonjaneni.
The community and tribal authority members raised the following important issues after the FSRS presentation:
a) "Many years ago there was a fence dividing the grazing camps and the maize fields. A date for removal ofstock each year was announced when the cattle were all moved to the mountains and the lands were closed. As the fence wire has deteriorated and parts ofthe fence were removed (from the 1950s) so the cattle problem has returned. "
b) "We need money to divide the grazing camps from the maize fields by fencing and so solve the problem."
c) "Our community is responsible for causing the problem; the fence existed, but the people removed it and brought their cattle to the fields.
If
we are serious about farming and committed to it, we can look after the fence and keep the livestock out.The community likes keeping livestock, but also likes food from the fields and we must decide what we want. "
d) "We need to decide on the penalty for cattle grazing in the cropping fields, when they should be in the grazing camps. The Nkosi's council and Indunas can help us. "
e) "This meeting needs to propose a solution, because the problem has already been discussed at a community meeting, at which the Nkosi was present."
.f) "A problem in the community (tribe) is that the people are difficult to control and no
longer respect each other."
g) "We can conclude by saying that the cattle must go to the mountains, but the problem
with stock theft there also needs to be addressed. "
h) "The Nkosi should issue an edict to say that by a certain date the cattle must be removed from the fields and
if
the cattle are found in the fields after this date, a penalty will have to be paid. This is our responsibility as a community."i) "We need a decisiontoday from the Induna."
The Induna said that the tribal authority does not decide unilaterally,but should go out to the wards to discuss these issues with the people. The communities must agree and bind themselves to the solutions that have been decided upon.Itwas requested that the councillors of the different wards should select dates for meetings in their areas. The Induna adjourned the meeting to enable the tribal authority to discuss and decide on how it could support the community and co-operate with the FSRS concerning on-farm research programmes and concerning addressing the constraints of the people of Obonjaneni.
At the conclusion of the meeting, the FSRS and the Extension staff thanked the Induna and councillors for their positive approach and requested a date on which the Departmental Officials could return for their report-back.
4.4.3.1Report-back meeting by the tribal authority
The Induna, eight members of the Amazizi tribal authority and the FSRS and Extension staff attended the report-back meeting held in August 1998. The Induna gave the following positive feedback:
a) "Animals need to be moved away from the fields at the end ofSeptember. "
b) "In close co-operation withfarmers, people will be identified next to the road opposite
the croppingfields to chase animals away. "
c) "The following punishment will be put into action:
i. R200 for people who deliberately put their animals on the fields after the set date.
ii. RI 00for owners whose animals wander into fields accidentally."
cl) "The Nkosi and his councillors are fully behind the effort of the KwaZulu-Natal Department ofAgriculture to assist the people ofObonjaneni to solve the agricultural constraints."
Staff from the FSRS and Extension staff thanked the Induna and councillors for the meeting,
for the positive report and for their future co-operation. Farmers who attended the meeting were requested by the Extension staff to start preparingimmediately for the planting season.
The communal cropping fields had been unplanted for five to seven years at the time of the interviews, largely due to the major problem of stray animals (no fences were in place to keep animals away from crops planted). The meeting with the tribal authorities was encouraging and resulted in a positive outcome in favour of the people of the community who wanted to plant crops and for the FSR team's on-farm,client-orientatedresearch programme.
4.4.4 Meeting with farmers to discuss the solutions and the research interventions
The meeting to plan the first season's on-farm research programme took place III the community in September 1998. It was attended by 20 farmers, FSR staff, the Head of the Bergville Extension District, the Agricultural Development Technician responsible for the community (sub-ward), the Assistant Director: Extension, the Head of Extension in the District, the Subject Matter Specialist for Crops and the local Induna.A trend observed at the meetings was that a small core of people regularly attended meetings, with some new faces appearing at each meeting. At the start of the meeting the Agricultural Development Technician summarised the process from September 1997. A further input by Extension staff was a crop production lecture by the Subject Matter Specialist for Crops of the North West Extension Region. He discussed land preparation, control of stalkborer, planting dates, moisture-saving practices, soil compaction and its effects, land preparation for good seed germination, calibration of planters, value and use of manure, effective use of fertilizers, maize cultivars and where to buy seed. The farmers were also requested to use the on-farm trials and demonstrations as learning opportunities, similar to a school class.
During the meeting the following comments of interest were made by farmers:
a) "We are very enthusiastic to use the fields after many years and people must use their fields that were not usedfor more than5to 7years."
b) "The Extension Officer needs to be used by people in the community and
Extension staffneed to visit them."
c) "I am happy to be part ofthe meeting andfor the opportunity to gain knowledge."
(comment from a farmer from the neighbouring community) d) "Is the planned on-farm research for all the people? "
e) "People can listen and learn during the demonstration."
f) "I am not familiar with farming and want to be taught. "
g) "Parents need to invite children back to the farm. "
h) "The Department is thankedfor their involvement. "
4.4.5 Addressing the agricultural constraints
In any given production system one may identify a number of constraints, but due to circumstances, as described by Matata et al. (2001), it is not always possible to handle all of these problems simultaneously. In Obonjaneni, people who attended the feedback and planning meeting were very clear about what they wanted from the on-farm trials. However, the poor attendance at the meetings was perhaps an indication of the paucity of people in the community really interested in making progress with agriculture.
The FSRS staff was not sure how to interpret the small numbers of people who attended the meetings and participated in the diagnostic survey. The Extension staff assured the FSRS staff that the low level of community participation was a common problem and was the reason why extension workers concentrate on interest groups or farmers' associations. They also commented that as soon as the research results were demonstrated and people benefited from them, others would join (Nelson Siteto, 1998 - personal communication - Assistant Director:
District Services). In a community or location it is, according to Okali et al. (1994), not everyone who wishes to, or will be able to, participate in research activities. In these authors' opinion, the question of who participates in the research process has ramifications for the wider concerns of many projects - equity, social development, empowerment and sustainability - and can be expected to have a direct impact on the immediate research activities.
4.4.6 Link between the Farming Systems Research Section, Extension staff and participants The diagnostic study was characterised by a good spirit of co-operation between the FSRS, Extension staff and the people in Obonjaneni. The diagnostic stage of the on-farm research programme contributed to the much-needed link between Extension staff, farmers and researchers. Itallowed both researchers and extension staff to learn more about the farmer, by literally"walking in the farmers' footsteps".