r ! TAC Working Document 
(Not for Public Citation)
TECHNICAL ADVISORY COMMITTEE
Seventy-First Meeting, ILRI, Addis Ababa (Ethiopia), 26-28 November 1996
SYSTEMWIDE PROGRAMME ON
PARTICIPATORY RESEARCH AND GENDER ANALYSIS
FOR TECHNOLOGY DEVELOPMENT AND INSTITUTION INNOVATION
A Proposal to TAC
Submitted by: CIAT, CIMMYT, IRRI and ICARDA
(Agenda Item 7)
For Discussion
At TAC 70, the Committee tentatively endorsed the proposed Systemwide 
Initiative on Participatory Research and Gender Analysis but asked CIAT to 
develop a revised proposal in time for TAC 71.
CIAT has now submitted the attached proposal for the Systemwide initiative to 
become a programme. TAC Members are invited to comment on the proposal 
and to make recommendations as to necessary follow up.
*
TAC SECRETARIAT
FOOD AND AGRICULTURE ORGANIZATION OF THE UNITED NATIONS
November 1996
C:\irmi\system.cov
) Systemwide Program
»
-p on
.i
Participatory Research and Gender Analysis 
for Technology Development and Institutional Innovation
A proposal to the: Technical Advisory Committee 
(TAC)
Submitted by: CIAT
(International Center for Tropical Agriculture)
CIMMYT
(International Maize and Wheat Improvement Center)
IRRI
(International Rice Research Institute)
ICARDA
* (International Center for Agricultural Research in the Dry Areas)
•*
October, 1996
Systemwide Program
on
Participatory Research and Gender Analysis 
for Technology Development and Institutional Innovation
A proposal to the: Technical Advisory Committee 
(TAC)
Submitted by: CIAT
(International Center for Tropical Agriculture)
CIMMYT
(International Maize and Wheat Improvement Center)
IRRI
(International Rice Research Institute)
ICARDA
(International Center for Agricultural Research in the Dry Areas)
» *•
October, 1996
•*) . / lo
Table of Contents
Systemwide Initiative on Participatory Research and Gender Analysis 
for Technology Development and Institutional Innovation
Contents Page
Executive Summary 1
Introduction 6
Need for a systemwide effort on methodology development and 
organizational innovation in participatory R&D and gender analysis 6
Innovative features of this proposal 9
Genesis of this proposal 9
Program Goal 9
Program Purpose 10
General Strategy 10
Background and Justification 11
Relationship to Ecoregional Research 16
Relationship to the CGIAR Program for Gender Analysis 16
Expected Outputs of the Systemwide Program 17
Program Strategy 18
Organization of the Systemwide Program 18
Activities 22
Workplan 25
Workplan, 1996 38
Expected Impact 38
Program Evaluation 41
Proposed Budget 45
Budget Notes 46
References 48
Annex I. List of Participants:
SWI Planning Meeting - September, 1996 50
Annex II. Examples Projects with which the Proposed 
Program will Work 56
Page
List of Figures
Figure 1. Program Strategy - A learning process approach 
18
  34
Figure 2. Project Overview
Figure 3 Work Breakdown Structure for PPB Working Group
35
  
Figure 4. Work Breakdown Structure for NRM Working Group
36
  Work Breakdown Structure for Gender Analysis Working Group 37
Figure 5.
List of Tables
Table 1. Outputs and Indicators of the PPB Working Group 
42
Table 2. Outputs and Indicators of the NRM Working Group 
43
Table 3. Gender Working Group Outputs and Indicators
44
 45
Table 4. Proposed Budget
List of Boxes
Box 1. Benefits of upstream participatory
7
 R&D
Advantages of working together: perceptions of participants from IARCs, 
Box 2. NARIs, NGOs and GROs in the SWI Planning Meeting
12
Box 3. Key issues to be addressed in PPB
Box 4. Key organizational questions to be addressed for PPB
13
Key management and organizational questions to be addressed by 
Box 5. 15
participatory NRM
Proposed criteria for inclusion of projects in the systemwide program 21
Box 6.
Examples of elements of a common framework for comparative analysis
25
Box 7.
Box 8. Specific outputs from methodology development in PPB
27
 
Box 9. Specific outputs from participatory NRM method development
29
 
Specific outputs from analysis of innovations and links within a 
Box 10. 32
participatory research perspective
Participatory plant breeding and varietal evaluation projects which will 
Box 11. 39benefit from systemwide methodology development
Box 12. Impact of gender analysis of the proposed systemwide program
40
 
Executive Summary
The Need for a Systemwide Program
The participation of farmers—especially women—in technology development is vital for 
achieving impact that benefits poor people. This is why the CGIAR system urgently needs to 
strengthen, consolidate, and mainstream its gender analysis and participatory research in a 
high-priority, high-visibility program that recognizes farmer participation as an important 
strategic research issue.
Over the last decade or more, the IARCs have done substantial work to introduce a user 
perspective into adaptive research. This proposal builds upon that work but offers something 
more. It originates from recent evidence that user participation can be critical in the pre- 
adaptive stages of certain types of research. In contrast to earlier approaches to on-farm 
research, pre-adaptive participatory R&D brings users into the early stages of technology 
development as researchers and decision makers, who help set priorities, define criteria for 
success, and determine when an innovation is "ready" for release to farmers. This new role
changes the division of labor between farmers and scientists, and may dramatically reduce the 
cost of applied research. We have some evidence that this novel approach can significantly 
improve the impact of research for poor farmers, especially women. However, evidence is 
patchy and it is not well understood how to replicate success on a large scale. The key 
contribution of this proposal will be to develop clear guidelines on how to achieve this, and 
build capacity to operationalize novel approaches in practice.
It is now widely recognized that sustaining the productivity gains from earlier CGIAR success 
must be done in a way that preserves biodiversity and the natural resource base, protects the 
environment, and maintains and protects the farm family's health and livelihood. Pre-adaptive 
participatory research will be an important research tool in developing NRM technologies.
To determine the potential of pre-adaptive participatory R&D involves considerable effort in 
methodology development. The outputs of this work are participatory techniques and tools for 
gender analysis that are useful inside and outside the CGIAR. These products are truly 
"international public goods," requiring rigorous empirical research on new techniques 
integrated with strategic and applied research for technology development.
This type of methodology development is dispersed and often sporadic. The result is 
duplication of effort and a persistent deficit of knowledge on how to incorporate the methods 
cost-effectively. By pooling resources in a systemwide effort, institutions will greatly 
accelerate the development of new tools that make farmers genuine partners in research.
1
Program Goal
To improve the ability of the CGIAR System and other collaborating institutions to develop 
technology which alleviates poverty, improves food security and protects the environment with 
greater equity.
Program Purpose
To assess and develop methodologies and organizational innovations for gender-sensitive 
participatory research, and operationalize their use in plant breeding, crop and natural resource 
management.
Beneficiaries
Poor farmers, especially women, will benefit from accelerated and more widespread 
adoption of more appropriate technology, by having regular input its development. 
CGIAR centers, NARIs, NGOs, and rural grassroots organizations will be able to work 
more effectively with technology users, and as a result, they will develop and deliver
appropriate technology for low-income farmers more cost-effectively.
Expected Impact
Methods
This research will accelerate technology development and adoption for crop 
improvement and natural resource management (NRM), by generating new, widely 
applicable methodologies for pre-adaptive participatory research and gender analysis 
tested in at least eight existing projects in ecoregional sites.
Researchers will have a stronger capacity to process feedback on technology design 
from gender-differentiated client groups.
Institutional strengthening
• Ecoregional programs will gain access to worldwide expertise on participatory research 
and gender analysis for capacity building and empirical studies at ecoregional sites.
• Better designed technologies, with a greater probability of adoption and with less time 
in the pipeline before testing by clients, will result in considerable savings and 
increased impact for NARS.
• Indigenous systems of crop development and natural resource management will be 
strengthened and integrated in a mutually reinforcing way with formal research.
• Organisational innovations required to "mainstream" gender analysis and participatory 
approaches will be identified and tested.
2
Poverty-alleviation and environmental protection
• The development and adoption of diverse germplasm that uses and conserves the 
genetic traits deemed valuable by farmers and breeders will be greatly accelerated in 
major food crops.
• Technologies for natural resource management that increase food security while 
protecting the environment will be more acceptable to users and will be adopted more 
rapidly.
Innovations
Methodologies for pre-adaptive participatory R&D will promote user involvement in 
the early stages of technology design.
Gender analysis will be integrated into core plant breeding and NRM research projects. 
Through empirical studies and comparative data, it will be possible to assess the payoff 
to participatory methods and gender analysis in different stages of research.
NARS, NGOs, and producers will be closely involved with the CGIAR in methodology 
development for participatory R&D.
The institutions involved will acquire a stronger capacity to operationalize participatory 
research and gender analysis in their core activities.
Institutional Partners
CIAT, CIMMYT, IRRI and ICARDA have agreed to work together as lead Centers in this 
initiative. They will develop a plan of work in consultation with interested institutions which 
have capacity to contribute to methodology development through the working groups and are
actively engaged in some aspect of participatory research. Among potential partners of this 
character, interest has been indicated to date by CIFOR, Cornell University (USA) , ICAR 
(India) , ICRISAT, ILEIA (Netherlands), INIAP and FLACSO (Ecuador), IPGRI, 
CORPOICA (Colombia), NORAGRIC (Norway), WARDA, and the World Resources Institute 
(USA): (see list of participants in the 1996 SWI Planning Meeting)
Implementation Period
• Planning phase: April to December 1996.
• Full program: Five years. 1997-2001
Location
This will be a global effort, linked with ecoregional programs to identify sites for empirical 
work, training, and dissemination in Africa, Asia, and Latin America.
3
Budget
Total program funding for one year amounts to US$0.9 million. This will enable partners to 
conduct empirical studies needed for methodology development, conduct capacity-building 
activities; assess current practices; and network by e-mail.
Management
Three decentralized working groups linked to ecoregional programs will integrate with 
CGIAR projects in their respective thematic areas: participatory plant breeding, participatory 
NRM research, and gender analysis. The 8-member Planning Group has elected 
representatives from each working group and from 4 types of stakeholders (NARIs, NGO's, 
Donors and IARCs).
Executing Agency
The International Center for Tropical Agriculture (CIAT) in Colombia, South America.
Outputs
1. Methods for participatory plant breeding (PPB)
Participatory research methods and gender analysis tools suitable for integrating farmer 
crop development systems with advanced breeding techniques.
Participatory breeding strategies refined for a cross section of species, with guidelines 
on appropriate breeding populations, field techniques, and suitable biotechnology tools. 
Methods to identify, strengthen, and link to research the knowledge and skills of rural 
men and women in germplasm management.
Varieties acceptable to farmers that incorporate traits derived from local landraces and 
global germplasm.
2. Methods for participatory research on natural resource management (NRM).
Participatory research methods and gender analysis tools suitable for integrating 
indigenous experimentation on NRM with formal research.
Strategies and methods for participatory development of a cross section of prototype 
NRM technologies, which can address the diversity of farmers' objectives in soil, 
water, and. plant management.
Methods to identify, strengthen, and link to research the knowledge and skills of rural 
men and women in experimenting with NRM practices.
Technologies acceptable to farmers for increasing productivity while protecting the 
environment.
4
3. Gender-sensitive methodologies suitable for pre-adaptive participatory 
research.
Participatory methods for determining when it is crucial to involve women at an early 
stage in technology design.
Methods that enable user groups to provide feedback to research from participatory 
monitoring of gender-differentiated effects of new technologies.
4. Organizational innovations for institutionalizing participatory approaches 
operationalized and evaluated.
Participatory projects will test and evaluate novel organizational linkages.
5. Capacity for participatory research and gender analysis further developed in the 
form of a critical mass of expertise in participatory research and gender analysis; 
innovative approaches to capacity building operationalized.
6. Procedures for building new partnerships among the IARCs, NARS, NGOs and 
farmer groups realized to utilize effectively complementarities among partners, and to 
accelerate learning about participatory research and gender analysis.
Activities:
Empirical field studies for methodology development will be integrated into ongoing 
CGIAR/NARS projects. *
Training in participatory research methods and gender analysis will be offered to 
IARCs, NARs, and producer organizations taking part in joint projects.
Specialized workshops will be organized on participatory plant breeding, participatory 
NRM research, and gender analysis.
International seminars on comparative analysis of results will be held to assess 
applications of the same methodologies across different fields.
5
Introduction
Achieving the participation of users - especially women - in the process of technology 
development is an important strategic research issue, vital to achieving impact which benefits 
poor people. User participation in the early stages of technology design ensures that new 
technologies can be adopted rapidly. Household food security, particularly among children in 
poor countries, is vitally affected by women's access to income-generating technologies.
Gender analysis is an important tool for ensuring that user participation includes women, so 
that their special needs and constraints are taken into account in technology development. The 
"feminization of poverty," a trend which is driving rural women in particular to form an 
increasing proportion of the very poor, makes it increasingly imperative that a high priority 
and visibility be given to strengthemng, consolidating and main streammg gender analysis and 
participatory research in the CGIAR system.
Need for a Systemwide Effort on Methodology Development and 
Organizational Innovation in Participatory R&D and Gender Analysis
Over the last decade, substantial work has been done to introduce a user perspective into 
adaptive research. For example, CIMMYT’s development of on-farm research methodology 
and resulting manuals and training have been very influential, as have CIP’s "farmer back-to- 
farmer" approach, IRRI’s experience with the Women and Rice Farming Network, FAO's 
Women and People's Participation in Development, ISNAR's study of client oriented 
approaches and CIAT's farmer participatory research. At present there is a significant growth 
in the application of extant participatory techniques in adaptive research and technology 
transfer.
This proposal builds upon past work, but offers something more. It originates from recent 
evidence that user participation can be critical in preadaptive stages of certain types of 
research. In contrast to earlier approaches to on-farm research, preadaptive participatory 
R&D brings users actively into the early stages of technology development, as researchers and 
decision-makers who help to set priorities, define criteria for success and determine when an 
innovation is "ready" for release to farmers. The benefits of this approach are summarized in
Box 1.
To determine the potential of preadaptive participatory R&D involves considerable effort in 
methodology development. At present, it is difficult to say what degree of user participation is 
appropriate at an early stage in the research process, and for which circumstances. Some 
experience suggests that preadaptive-adaptive participatory R&D moves scientists into a 
different set of strategic research questions, and creates a new division of labor between 
scientists and farmers. Other research suggests that preadaptive participatory R&D may 
reduce the costs of applied research, (see for example, Ashby, 1995; Berg, 1995; Thrupp, 
1995; Sperling, 1995; Welzein, 1995). A recent study which set out to evaluate a cross-section
6
of experiences in different parts of the world with participatory research, found that there was
too little evidence being collected on which to base an evaluation (Okali and Sumerg, 1995). 
Methodology development is needed to systematize approaches to this new division of labor, 
and to identify when it is advantageous. Investigation of the appropriate techniques to use in
preadaptive participatory R&D can significantly improve the efficiency of the whole research
process, and its relevance to users.
The CGIAR has been refocussing and restructuring its activities to address the interrelated 
issues of poverty alleviation, preservation of the natural resource base, and sustainable 
increases in agricultural productivity in developing countries. Simple production-only oriented 
technologies are no longer suitable within this more holistic perspective. CGIAR research has 
shown that it is possible to increase production while carefully husbanding the soil and water 
resource base and managing pests. However, the complex knowledge upon which such 
sustainable management practices are based must be synthesized in a way that farmers can 
readily adopt and modify them. We know little of what determines the acceptability of 
knowledge-intensive technologies or what approach may be the most efficient to developing 
and testing prototypes. Clearly a close working relationship with farmers should help us in 
understanding the issues impinging on the adoptability of these technologies and in their actual
development.
Box 1. Benefits of upstream participatory R&D.
Farmers participate in research priority-setting.
In the early stages of technology development, concepts of what technology clients are
likely to adopt are improved.
Target environments for evaluating technology are defined more accurately together 
with farmers.
Technologies are in users' hands, and adopted more rapidly.
There are fewer, costly "white elephant" technologies on the shelf.
Harnesses clients' knowledge and creativity to technology design._____________
Gender analysis is used in participatory research because it is necessary to determine which 
are the appropriate client groups to actively participate, and whether those participants need to 
be gender differentiated. Many of the available tools of gender analysis are a subset of 
participatory research methods (although not all gender analysis is participatory). More 
efficient, cost-effective diagnostic methods are needed which will serve as tmtial probes to 
determine the gender-specificity of a prototype technology in the early stages of research.
7
Researchers need sharper methods to understand when differentiating users by gender will be 
of critical importance; and farmers need tools to help them choose appropriate participants in a
joint research effort.
A vital element in the restructuring of the CGIAR is the creation of new partnerships 
emphasizing broader participation of stakeholders in setting research priorities, and in the 
conduct of development-oriented research. During the ICW ‘95 meetings in October, 
discussion of the priority-setting process was concerned with the urgent need to enhance the 
impact of research on the well-being of the poor with particular attention to women.
Achieving this goal will require building new partnerships not only with respect to institutional 
relationships, but also in terms of research methodology that promotes participation of gender- 
differentiated client groups in the process of technology design.
It is important that the CGIAR, as a role model for a participatory research process, have a
demonstrated capacity to use methodologies which create a common ground for working with 
the NGO sector and among producer organizations involved with the poor, and especially poor 
women in developing countries. A systemwide program of participatory research and gender 
analysis will testify to a serious effort to "mainstream" these methods within the new CGIAR.
There is growing recognition of this need in several of the CGIAR Centers, expressed in some 
of the systemwide programs of research, and scattered experience which shows important 
benefits of upstream participatory R&D in accelerating the adoption of technology. However, 
current experimentation with this approach in the Centers is dispersed and often sporadic. In 
the absence of a mechanism for systematizing this research, there is considerable duplication 
of this fragmentary, ad hoc effort, resulting in lost momentum.
Duplication of effort in methodology development for preadaptive participatory R&D not only 
slows down the learning process, but also contributes to inefficient use of the very scarce 
capacity world-wide for innovation in these methods. As a result, although references to the 
need for participatory approaches and for attention to gender analysis are plentiful, there is a 
deficit of knowledge on how to incorporate these methodological approaches into early stages 
of technology design in a cost-effective way.
A coordinated, systemwide research effort can address some important opportunities for 
methodology development which will determine how quickly participatory research and gender 
analysis are incorporated into the mainstream of CGIAR research.
The outputs of this work are participatory techniques and guidelines for their use that are 
useful inside and outside the CGIAR. These products are truly "international public goods" 
requiring rigorous empirical research.
8
Innovative features of this proposal
• A rigorous assessment of the general indications that participatory research methods 
and gender analysis are important for success of technology design and adoption, will 
be conducted.
• This research will provide guidelines well-grounded in scientific research on the 
circumstances in which these approaches work and why, and the costs and benefits of 
different ways to operationalize them.
• The program will provide a working model in the CG of how to operationalize and 
mainstream the use of participatory research and gender analysis, and the capacity 
building and organizational innovations needed to do this. The systemwide program 
will be carried out in close partnership among the organizations - IARCs, NGOs, 
NARIs, Universities and grassroots organizations - that need to institutionalize capacity 
to use participatory research and gender analysis.
Genesis of this proposal
This proposal is the product of a seminar and planning meeting conducted from September 9- 
14, 1996 at Cali, Colombia which brought together an international group of fifty researchers 
and development professionals highly experienced in participatory research and gender 
analysis. They represented IARCs, NARIs, universities, NGOs and donors (see Annex I for 
participant list). These scientists and development practitioners from Asia, Latin America, 
Central America, Africa (east, west, south and north), South and Southeast Asia, the Middle 
East and Europe joined efforts to develop this research plan to address the priority 
methodological issues in participatory research and gender analysis. They defined the 
program goal, purpose and workplans for three working groups: plant breeding; natural 
resource management, and gender analysis.
* #
This document synthesizes the recommendations developed by the participants in the 
planning meeting
Program Goal
To improve the ability of the CGIAR System and other collaborating institutions to develop 
technology which alleviates poverty, improves food security and protects the environment with 
greater equity.
9
Program Purpose
To assess and develop methodologies and organizational innovations for gender-sensitive 
participatory research, and operationalize their use in plant breeding, crop and natural resource 
management.
General Strategy
The strategy proposed for this program will be to integrate the proposed research on 
methodology development and organizational innovation and capacity building by the program 
into ongoing projects of the collaborating institutions. The Planning Meeting held by the 
systemwide initiative identified a promising body of initial work which can strengthened, 
further advanced, and united under this systemwide umbrella. Incorporating participatory 
research methods and gender analysis into ongoing research will enable partners to accomplish 
results by conducting systematic comparisons of new approaches in contrasting environments, 
to different types of technology development, and with diverse user and stakeholder groups. 
This will provide results on the use of these methods which command respect and ensure 
visibility.
The Systemwide program provide a framework for comparing results obtained from 
participatory research and gender analysis. This collaboration in comparative analysis will 
produce results not achievable by individuals or projects working in isolation. Box 2 shows 
pay-offs to joint efforts identified in the Planning Meeting. The introduction of participatory 
methods and gender analysis into ongoing research projects will involve training for this 
purpose, so helping to multiply capacity for use of the methods within NARIs, NGOs and 
other direct partners.
10
Box 2: Advantages of working together: perceptions of participants from IARCs, 
NARIs, NGOs and Grassroots Organizations in the SWI Planning Meeting
• Can develop guidelines for using methodologies and organization innovations on the 
basis of comparisons among technologies, user group, and agrosocioeconomic 
environment
• Can increase R&D capacity by joint work and accelerate a common learning 
process derived from sharing global experience.
• Joint work solidifies partnerships and the capacity to build them: this includes 
IARCs learning from NGOs.
• Joint work allows for more cost-effective divisions of research labor.
Background and Justification
Demand for Participatory Research and Gender Analysis
It is now well recognized that formal sector research, including that of the CGIAR, 
should be impact-oriented and focussed on utilization of results. Donors, research managers 
and scientists who are concerned about the extent and pace of impact are now increasingly 
articulate about the need for participatory approaches to achieve this goal.
Participatory plant breeding
Methodology to enable plant breeders to use participatory R&D in the preadaptive stages of 
research is perceived by IARCS, NARI's AND NGOs as needed to improve the impact of 
plant breeding in heterogenous environments.
The incorporation of participatory methods into plant breeding began in the mid-1980 by 
involving farmers in the evaluation of new materials. The gap between users' and breeders' 
criteria for acceptability of new plant types identified through participatory research is 
stimulating plant breeders to introduce user participation at earlier stages in applied research, 
to the point where farmers are selecting parents and individual plants from segregating 
populations. As a result, participatory methods are perceived by some plant breeders as 
comparable to biotechnology techniques in opening up new frontiers in breeding (Kornegay et 
al., 1995; Ceccarelli et al., 1995; Zimmermann, 1995; Hardon, 1995; Iglesias and Hernandez, 
1994).
11
Drawing on these experiences, a workshop on "Participatory Plant Breeding Approaches" was 
sponsored by IDRC, IPGRI, FAO and the Center for Genetic Resources, the Netherlands in 
July 1995. The participants included plant breeders and social scientists from CGIAR, NARIs 
and NGO programs. They identified the need for alternative approaches to classical 
centralized plant breeding to address genotype-environment interaction in highly heterogenous 
environments, typically those in which resource poor farmers in developing countries are 
found. Because there are no established guidelines on how to achieve this, a number of 
research needs were identified.
Specifically, the workshop identified a need for comparative analysis of different approaches, 
including conventional as well as participatory, and for building on farmer or community 
breeder systems. This analysis is needed to guide choice of the most appropriate breeding 
approaches for different circumstances, and for different types of crop (self-pollinated, open- 
pollinated or clonally-propagated). The comparative analysis of methods should address their 
rate of success, the time it takes for materials to reach farmers, and the costs of different 
approaches. The workshop participants proposed that:
"The CGIAR could play a major role in methodology development, and be able to 
transfer such methodology to the various partners in the processes. The CGIAR 
could establish an inter-center working group on participatory breeding methodology 
to provide some guidance in this, and to pool resources."
(Workshop proceedings - IPGRI, 1995).
Box 3. Key issues to be addressed in participatory plant breeding.
• Can participatory plant breeding combine indigenous and scientific knowledge by 
working with farmers, in a way that maximizes genetic diversity and increases 
productivity?
• What are the most appropriate technical breeding strategies (including 
biotechnologies) for partnership between farmers' crop selection systems and formal 
breeding programs, to achieve this goal?
Need for training of partners in participatory breeding was also identified by the workshop 
participants: for institutional breeders within the CGIAR, and in NARIs; and for NGO's, 
farmer organizations and seed producers, to improve the type of partnership which is integral 
to the new CGIAR:
"Many NGOs are already involved in such training activities at the local level, but 
often lack adequate knowledge and easy access to sources of information. Many 
institutional programmes see such activities as competing with rather than
12
complementing their own efforts to strengthen and expand the institutional system 
of breeding and seed production. These problems are at the root of the often 
strained relationships between CGIAR centers, NARIs and NGOs. They call for 
fundamental changes in attitudes, with awareness training at all levels, especially at 
the level of institutional management." (Workshop proceedings - IPGRI, 1995).
At the September 1996 SWI Planning Meeting, the plant breeding working group took 
another step forward in defining the rationale for this interinstitutional collaboration. The 
group elaborated a framework for participatory approaches in plant breeding research, and 
highlighted the need for institutional models to support decentralized breeding on a broad 
scale. Participatory breeding needs better targeting to specific users and agrosocioeconomic 
environments, and new kinds of support services which ensure that resource poor farmers 
benefit from the products of participatory breeding, (eg. the seed sector) (See Fig. 3)
Box 4. Key organizational questions to be addressed for participatory plant breeding.
• What degree of decentralization of research is needed to reach resource-poor farmers
• What institutional arrangements can achieve this decentralization most cost- 
effectively?
• What strategies provide farmers with access to the products of participatory plant 
breeding: what should be the balance between the formal seed sector and farmer-led 
seed systems?
The need to better differentiate just which users should participate in plant breeding and to 
identify which users and stakeholders actually benefit when participatory plant breeding 
approaches are used was identified as one of the important methodological challenges for the 
systemwide program. In the SWI Planning Meeting the working group addressed the need for 
methodology to incorporate user differentiation and gender analysis into participatory plant 
breeding: ie. direct users, seed producers, processors and consumers. Only some ongoing 
participatory breeding projects incorporate gender analysis and user differentiation- although it 
is recognized by most that women are often plant breeders in small farm production systems, 
responsible for domesticating wild species, selecting germplasm and saving seed.
Integrated Natural Resource Management Research
The application of participatory approaches (similar to that which occurred in plant breeding) is 
now underway in natural resource management (NRM) research in a broad array of 
organizations. A comparable disquiet is evident over the difficulty of achieving impact for this
13
research in heterogeneous, fragile environments, with diverse client groups. In these fragile 
environments and the supposedly robust and more favorable production environments, the 
technologies required to sustain agricultural productivity growth require informed, sophisticated 
and often collective management decisions by farmers. Thus, a similar call for participatory 
approaches to address these difficulties is now being made.
As in plant breeding, participatory methods and gender analysis can be applied to NRM to 
harness local knowledge and users' criteria for acceptability (which may often be women's 
knowledge and criteria). These are important for the design of flexible or plastic NRM prototypes 
or management options. They are key as well to a process of involving diverse and less visible 
stakeholders.
Close linkage between farmers and researchers, and farmer involvement in the process of 
technology design has been identified as essential in soil-water natural resource management 
research (TAC, 1995, Annex 1:53; Greenland et. al 1994; SWNM initiative proposal). Case 
studies of participatory watershed management identify a participatory approach to technological 
innovation as well as to social organization as an important element of success (Pretty et al, 1995; 
Ashby and Beltran, 1996 forthcoming). This view was fully supported by participants in the 
September 1996 SWI Planning Meeting NRM working group.
The SWI Planning Meeting in September 1996 was the first opportunity for a group of NRM 
practitioners from the CGIAR and other institutions to analyze the need for collaborative work 
on development of participatory methods and gender analysis for natural resource management 
research. The NRM research working group focused on improving the management of resources, 
rather than material technologies. The group emphasized need for participatory experimentation, 
and the development of interactive databases which include indigenous knowledge about NRM, 
and which can be readily accessed by stakeholders (including farmers). Local capacity has to be 
enhanced through participatory approaches for analyzing resource constraints, monitoring change 
in natural resources and adapting technologies to changing environments.
Organizational innovation for participatory approaches was also identified by the NRM working 
group as a central issue needing further work. Different types of technology and resources have
to be managed at different scales, by stakeholders with often diverse and even conflicting 
interests. A challenge in NRM research is to identify or help catalyze effective organizational 
arrangements at different scales, and to ensure inclusion of different user and stakeholder groups
throughout.
14
Box 5. Key management and organizational questions addressed by 
participatory natural management research.
• How can capacity for user participation in monitoring dynamic resource trends 
at different scales (field, farm, community level and beyond) be enhanced?.
• What are appropriate ways to conduct participatory assessment or
experimentation for the bulky technologies which are often characteristic of 
Ni M?
• How should suitable strategies be developed for building participation in local 
organizations at the scale needed for resource management and which are 
themselves sustainable and include the full range of relevant stakeholders?
The NRM group gave high importance to the use and development of participatory methods in 
a learning process approach (see Fig. 1). Developing tools and guidelines in a learning process 
approach is particularly important in NRM because there are a range of complex trade-offs 
between conservation and productivity acceptable to farmers, and to other stakeholders in natural 
resource management. Acceptable solutions need to be negotiated, and are typically highly
location specific. This makes the identification of technological as well as institutional 
recommendations difficult for centralized research and policy-makers. Instead, mechanisms 
methods and tools have to be provided that will enable stakeholders to develop locally acceptable
recommendations.
The NRM group prioritized two main thrusts for future work:
• An assessment of the state of the art in applications of participatory research and gender 
analysis to NRM problems. This would define where the main opportunities are for further 
work, the types of NRM technologies and management options, and the types of 
environment.
• Conduct case studies of action research for comparative analysis of the process of 
implementing participatory approaches and gender analysis in the NRM research projects. 
This would involve monitoring a learning process approach, emphasizing capacity building 
and operationalizing new methods and organizational approaches. Comparative analysis of j
a variety of approaches will provide guidance to researchers and farmers on ways to build
on their local knowledge, expand their management options, and develop processes for local 
and extra local management, organizational innovation and negotiation.
15
Relationship to Ecoregional Research
The CGIAR ecoregional concept involves multidisciplinary research on the sustainable 
improvement of agricultural productivity, to achieve demonstrated impact in common sites by 
joining efforts among institutions with complementary expertise.
This research program will forge a specialized resource for ecoregional initiatives to draw on. 
Integrating the proposed methodology development with ongoing CGIAR projects will include 
collaborative research in benchmark sites of ecoregional programs. This will bring world-wide 
expertise in participatory research to bear on ecoregional needs, and the training activities will 
strengthen the capacity-building function of ecoregional programs. Management support for 
coordinating this proposed program with NARIs will be sought through the ecoregional programs.
Use of participatory methods in CGIAR and collaborating national programs will help to promote 
effective communication and collaborative work with NGOs and grassroots organizations 
necessary to ecoregional partnerships.
Relationship to the CGIAR Program for Gender Analysis
At present, use of gender analysis in the CGIAR remains experimental, and "has not yet resulted 
in significant changes in research practice, although a few centers are making some progress." 
As a result the institutional commitment to main streaming gender analysis within the CGIAR 
Centers remains fragile (Report of Gender Program 1995:14-24).
Continuation of the CGIAR Gender program has been proposed to encourage, support and build
on the progress to date, Recognizing that "gender analysis is one dimension of the user
perspective in technology development and works best in this context (CGIAR Gender program 
proposal, October 1995:1) the program of research proposed here would support and strengthen 
the effectiveness of efforts to institutionalize gender analysis in the CGIAR system in two ways.
• by providing the Gender Analysis program with an avenue for institutionalization which 
maintains its visibility and at the same time, links its activities firmly to core research 
activities of the Centers through a systemwide initiative.
• by linking use of gender analysis to effective demand among CGIAR scientists for 
preadaptive-adaptive as well as adaptive participatory R&D approaches to plant breeding and 
NRM research.
At the mid-term meeting of the CG in Jakarta in May, 1996, the Gender Analysis Program made 
the following proposal to the participants in the donor meeting on this SWI. The proposed 
systemwide program will incorporate the resarch-related, gender analysis functions of the CG 
Gender Program, while the management and staffing-related functions of that program would 
continue to be conducted by the CG Secretariat.
16
It is proposed here that the Gender Analysis Program will maintain a visible identity within the 
systemwide program, with a separate budget to support capacity-building activities, and to 
contract the consultant who would manage its activities. These activities would continue to involve 
advising CG centers and their partners on the incorporation of gender analysis into their research 
programs, networking with IARC focal group members, as well as facilitating training, 
dissemination of training materials and consultancies for this purpose.
A new dimension of the Gender Analysis Program would be its membership of the Gender 
Analysis Working Group of the systemwide program, and participation of the consultant in 
providing methodological input and analysis by this group to the empirical research studies of the 
systemwide program.
Involvement of the CG Gender Analysis Program in implementing the core research agenda of 
the CG and its partners through this systemwide program, will provide the mechanisms for firm 
institutionalization of gender analysis in the CG with the inception of the Systemwide Program 
in 1997.
Expected Outputs of the Systemwide Program
The plan of work developed by the working groups in the systemwide initiative Planning Meeting 
identified six types of expected outputs:
1. Methods for participatory approaches in plant breeding developed and evaluated.
2. Methods for participatory natural resource management research assessed and developed.
3. Strategies for including gender-sensitive participatory methods in research assessed, 
developed and institutionalized.
4. Organizational innovations for institutionalizing participatory approaches operationalized and 
evaluated.
5. . Capacity for participatory research and gender analysis further developed in the form of a
critical mass of expertise in participatory research and gender analysis; innovative approaches 
to capacity building operationalized.
6. Procedures for building new partnerships among the IARCs, NARS, NGOs and farmer 
groups realized to utilize effectively complementarities among partners, and to accelerate 
learning about participatory research and gender analysis.
17
Program Strategy
The expected outputs will be achieved by integrating method development, organizational analysis 
and capacity building for participatory research and gender analysis (PR&GA) in a learning 
process approach (Figure 1). The elaboration and integration of these four elements is described 
in the section "Description of Expected Outputs". The learning process approach is a common 
strategy adopted by the SWI participants.
- - Figure 1. Program Strategy - A learning Process Approach
Develop innovative 
approaches for using 
PR & GA in preadaptive-research
/ \
Compare and evaluate Introduce and evaluate 
existing and new approaches innovations required to 
to PR & GA operationalize PR & GA 
approaches
\
Conduct capacity building 
needed to catalyze change 
in practice
Organization of the Systemwide Program
The program of work required to achieve the expected outputs identified by the participants in 
the SWI Planning Meeting exceeds the individual capacity of any one of the cooperating 
•institutions. The research program has been designed to be implemented through collaboration 
among IARCs, NARIs, NGOs and grassroot organizations. This collaboration demands 
transparent and cost-effective organization. Principles of organization were developed by the 
"Partnership" task force at the SWI Planning Meeting and endorsed by the participants.
18
Organizational principles include:
. Decentralized partnership among IARCs, NARIs, NGOs and GRO's which are a locus 
of practitioners of participatory research. Practitioners introduce applications of the 
methods into their ongoing plant breeding and/or natural resource management projects, 
consistent with their priorities, using the agreed-upon common strategy and workplan for 
comparing applications across different fields.
• Three working groups: participatory plant breeding; participatory natural resource 
management research; and gender analysis. Working groups involve practitioners from 
IARCs, NARIs, NGOs, GRO's and indigenous research systems in implementing studies 
consistent with the common workplan developed in September 1996. Working groups 
include a mix of biophysical and social scientists. Working group members need to meet 
face to face in periodic research workshops, or site visits; and to select members to 
contribute to the systemwide seminars.
• Planning Group composed of eight elected members:
• Three representatives, one elected from each of the three working groups;
• Four representatives elected from each of the four stakeholder groups in the initiative: 
NARIs, NGOs, IARCs (not including the convening center) and donors;
• One member from the Convening Center.
The Planning Group was mandated to obtain input from the working groups to finalize 
guidelines for the inclusion of projects in executing the workplan and to define the 
information exchange and capacity-building strategy for the program. A steering committee, 
elected from members of the planning group, is responsible for operational tasks delegated by 
the Planning Group and includes: one representative each from the working groups, and the 
Convening Center.
• Management of the program. Overall execution, coordination and technical and 
financial reporting will be the responsibility of the implementing agency for the program, 
CIAT. The main CGIAR partners will be IRRI, CIMMYT and CIAT and ICARDA. 
CIAT has assigned a staff member to support the program’s coordination.
• Projects submitted for membership by participants in the working groups and screened by 
the Planning Group for consistency with Program Guidelines (shown in Box 6), will be 
the mechanism for carrying out the plan of work described in detail below and in the 
work breakdown diagrams in Figures 3 and 4.
• Resource allocation. The workplan designed by the working group participants will be
the mechanism for allocating grants to the Systemwide program. These funds will be 
allocated to activities in the workplan by members' representatives in the Planning
19
Group. Grants to the program will be used to cofinance ongoing projects to execute 
elements of the Program's Workplan . Working group members may seek additional 
funding for projects with Program endorsement, and assistance, and will manage these
resources themselves.
20
Box 6: Proposed criteria for inclusion of projects in the systemwide program.*
Project proposals should specify:
1. Participatory approach: plan for how the project will work with fanners 
organizations or groups of farmers.
2. Interinstitutional linkages: involvement of at least two institutions.
3. Clear agreement from all partners on the resources each will allocate to the 
project.
4. Explicit consideration of gender representation (of partners) and gender issues in
the proposed research.
5. Plan to involve men and women in implementing the research.
6. Strategy for getting access to multidisciplinary teams which take into account 
social science and natural science skills.
7. Plan to build on farmers' skills.
8. Clearly-defined time frame.
9. Monitoring and evaluation plan.
IChClear definition of the roles of partners in research and capacity building.
11.Statement of what project will offer to the systemwide program.
12.Statement of what project expects from the systemwide program.
13.Statement of resources available and resources required.
14.Plan for sustaining project activities at community-level after phasing out of 
project. J
* Task Force on "Partnership", Systemwide Initiative Planning Meeting 9/14/96
21
Activities
Scientific conferences and information exchange
International seminars and papers for this will be the main mechanism for reporting progress 
on the workplan. The systemwide Planning Meeting in September, 1996 was preceded by a 
three day seminar in which participants in the plant breeding, natural resource management 
and gender working groups assessed the "state of the art", formulated methodology 
development needs and defined organizational concerns (see Proceedings of the International 
Seminar on Participatory Research and Gender Analysis for Technology Development, 1996- 
forthcoming). Working groups will conduct regional workshops to help partners monitor 
empirical studies, exchange results of work in progress, adjust research methods together, and 
visit sites. Regular email bulletins and information newsletters circulated thrice yearly have 
been proposed by the seminar participants as important for ensuring active exchange among 
globally-dispersed field researchers.
Dissemination of guidelines for using participatory approaches and gender 
analysis
The publication and distribution of results will include regular international seminars and 
working group proceedings; manuals on specific methodologies; results of empirical studies in 
journal and book form to a broad audience including Centers, NARIs, NGO's and grassroots 
organizations.
Capacity Building
Participants in the SWI Planning Meeting identified capacity building as an integral part of the 
general strategy for the proposed program. Capacity building activities will involve the 
following:
• Monitoring and evaluation of the operationalization of novel, gender-sensitive 
participatory approaches in plant breeding and NRM research in a learning process 
approach. This will involve capacity building among the participants in these empirical 
efforts, and will generate lessons to be shared in the systemwide working groups and 
international seminars.
• In the course of implementing empirical studies, working groups will identify common 
needs for training in participatory research approaches and gender analysis. The program 
coordination will help organize and fund inputs for this training, using resources of the 
program for this purpose. Every effort will be made to piggy-back training and 
workshops onto partners’ events organized for their ongoing projects.
• Consultancies on participatory approaches or gender analysis will be supplied, drawing on 
resources donated to the program and expertise marshaled by the systemwide program. 
Demand for and supply of technical advice will be identified through the working groups
22
in the course of conducting the empirical studies and may include requests from entities 
not actively involved in these studies. The program coordination will help network 
requests for technical advice with providers, through the working group members.
Empirical studies
The plans (see Fig. 3 and 4) developed by the Working Groups include two types of empirical 
studies to assess and develop participatory approaches and gender analysis for preadaptive 
plant breeding and NRM research. One involves controlled comparison of different strategies, 
ie the same breeding populations are managed with and without farmer participation. This 
enables breeders to evaluate the changes in genetic variation, as well as the degree of 
acceptability and rates of adoption which result from the classical and participatory breeding 
approaches. A second approach involves case studies selected for action research and process 
monitoring: methodology development integrated with capacity building for participatory 
NRM research lends itself to this approach.
Some of the key components of the empirical studies include:
• Identification and differentiation among the relevant user groups to determine who 
should participate and at what stages of the research process. Better methods are needed 
for assessing ex-ante, if there will likely be a differential impact of a proposed feature of a 
technology for different users: men or women; market or subsistence-oriented farmers; 
producers or consumers.
• Participatory ex ante evaluation of alternative technologies including indigenous 
practices, to obtain feedback from diverse users and stakeholders about their different 
criteria for acceptability. Participatory evaluations can be carried out in existing on-farm 
trials, experiment stations, in farmers' fields, or in broader community resource 
management units and can involve numerous contrasting types of user groups. The extent 
to which farmer knowledge helps to reorient technology design can be assessed. Method 
development is needed to enable farmers and scientists to evaluate the potential 
acceptability of prototype technological options in early stages of research.
• Experimentation to test selected technological options: experiments conducted in the 
early stages of research, may include treatments designed, managed and analyzed with
user participation alongside researcher-managed treatments. Methods are needed for 
participatory experimentation with large, diverse breeding populations, and with resource 
management at the landscape scale or in complex situations which defy replication.
• Indigenous experimentation is an important component in the methodology development 
studies. Monitoring local farmer experimentation provides a check on the validity of 
information obtained from ex-ante evaluations, and in experiments. It may also open up
avenues for redirecting research altogether. In plant breeding this involves study of the
23
local use of biodiversity and farmer' own breeding strategies. In natural resource 
management this involves monitoring farmer-introduced resource conservation practices 
and the evolution of management strategies. Methods need to be developed for 
participatory monitoring of indigenous experimentation by local people and for defining 
entry points where formal science might strengthen farmers' own research capacity.
• Innovation to assess and test which organizational options facilitate cost effective
participatory approaches and gender analysis; and which facilitate scaling up these efforts.
• Gender analysis for comparison of results obtained with and without the participation of 
women in a specific context provides empirical evidence of the effects of including gender
analysis on the design of the technology, on feedback to researchers about user 
preferences, and on rates of adaptation and adoption of the resulting technologies.
• Cost-benefit analysis can be carried out to assess the quality and quantity of human 
resources and other support costs required for different approaches, including 
conventional, participatory and indigenous experimentation. Participatory approaches to 
provide this feedback need to be developed and the concept of costs and benefits needs to 
be broadened to include social as well as grassroots criteria.
• Monitoring of rates of adaptation and adoption in the different user groups are 
monitored to provide data on the distribution of benefits of the different approaches. 
Participatory monitoring and impact assessment methodologies are needed which can 
rapidly feedback information to partners about farmer adaptations which can be readily 
incorporated into technology design, to improve adoption and impact.
• Operationalizing new practice through capacity building and institutionalization.
Strategies for motivating stakeholders to use participatory approaches and gender analysis, 
as well as for enhancing their capacity to do so need to be built into the conduct of the 
research itself. Action-research is an iterative process whereby all partners learn by doing. 
Early attention to capacity-building facilitates institutionalization of relevant results.
• Development of a framework for comparative analysis of results from empirical 
studies. A common framework for comparative analysis of the empirical studies is being 
developed jointly by the researchers involved in the Initiative. One goal is to identify the 
circumstances which render participatory approaches more or less useful and to generate 
widely-applicable guidelines for the use of the methodology. An explicit focus on site, 
crop, technology characterization will help define which participatory methods and 
organizational forms give the best results under what type of circumstances.
Some elements of a common framework are illustrated in Box 7.
24
Box 7. Example of elements of a common framework for comparative analysis
• Parameters to compare sites and projects.
typology of technologies to be contrasted eg. short-term productivity (varieties) vs. 
long-term conservation (NRM) technologies.
typology of agroecosystems or environments eg. highly heterogeneous vs. uniform;
favored vs. unfavored;
typology of indigenous crop development and natural conservation systems.
distinguishing features of local institutional context: eg strong local groups and 
community cohesiveness vs. weak or absent local groupings
• Parameters for methodology assessment across fields of research.
techniques of participatory research and gender analysis to be used in different 
situations.
stages of the learning process to be compared (Figure 1).
types of stakeholders who need to be directly and indirectly involved 
variables to be monitored to assess costs and rates of success.______________
Workplan
Five year workplan
Each of three working groups in the Systemwide Initiative Planning meeting developed a 
workplan showing outputs (or expected outputs), activities and indicators of progress The 
proposed activities address the six expected outputs presented in summary form earlier, 
which are now described in detail and related to the proposed outputs (shown in each section 
below in italics); and activities of the working groups, shown in Figures 3, 4 and 5 at the end
of this section.
25
Description of expected outputs
1. Assessment and Development of Participatory Approaches to Plant Breeding.
Workplan Outputs
• Assessment and development of effective participatory methods in plant breeding, 
with focus on:
- farmers ’ breeding
- plant selection (segregating lines) 
variety selection (fixed lines)
• Beneficiary groups more accurately involved & targeted in participatory breeding 
through methods development for involving direct & indirect stakeholders.
Most of the existing applications of participatory approaches in plant breeding involve fanners 
in relatively downstream selection of advanced lines or finished varieties. Preadaptive 
participatory research in breeding is an area where methodologies are still incipient. At 
present it is difficult to say what degree of user participation is appropriate, at what level of 
the breeding process, and for which environments. To develop methodological guidelines 
targeted at specific crops (ie. self pollinated, open-pollinating, clonally-propagated) and 
contexts, the proposed program will conduct empirical studies along the lines described above. 
One set of case studies will explore how most effectively to involve farmers in the formal 
research process, a second set of cases will look at the role of scientists in strengthening
farmers' own breeding efforts.
Empirical studies involve farmers in selecting parents, in making selection from segregating 
populations, in evaluating advanced lines on-station or on-farm, and in decisions about seed 
production of preferred varieties. At each stage in this process the different selections made 
by breeders, men and women farmers can be contrasted. Once farmer selection strategies are 
understood ways in which breeders can enhance these can be developed. The risks of early 
farmer involvement as well as the potential benefits (e.g. in terms of production, yield stability 
and genetic diversity) will be examined on a stage by stage basis. In some crops (eg. rice, 
cassava) use of biotechnology tools such as molecular markers can be important for linking 
farmers' knowledge with advanced breeding techniques.
The program will collaborate with ongoing breeding programs and involve a cross-section of 
IARC/NARI/NGO/Farmer Groups: eg. rainfed rice; pearl millet, barley, beans, maize; 
maize/beans in association; cassava. The participatory plant breeding group has already 
received signals of interest from potential collaborators in Ethiopia, India, Nepal, the 
Philippines and Syria.
26
Box 8. Specific outputs from methodology development in participatory plant 
breeding.
Participatory research methods and gender analysis tools suitable for integrating 
farmer crop development systems with advanced breeding techniques.
Participatory breeding strategies refined for a cross-section of species, with guidelines 
on appropriate breeding populations, field techniques, and suitable biotechnology 
tools.
Knowledge and skills of rural men and women specialized in germplasm management 
are recognized, strengthened and linked to research.
Varieties acceptable to farmers which incorporate traits derived from local land races 
and global germplasm.
2. Methods assessed and developed for participatory natural resource management 
research.
Workplan Outputs
• Synthesis of the state of the art in applying PR/GA approaches in NRM research for 
different types of technologies comparing three scales of management (field, 
community and watershed).
• Improved crop and natural resource management strategies incorporating better use of 
existing and new PR/GA methods at different scales of management developed and 
disseminated.
It is important to note that the NRM working group is at a different stage in the development 
of their workplan from the participatory plant breeding group. The NRM researchers within 
the SWI need a period to analyze and critically assess available evidence and insights for 
applying PR/GA to natural resource management subfields, some of which operate at very 
different scales: the field, farm, community, and the watershed. This work needs to be 
facilitated through email exchanges, systematic literature review, and commissioned papers on 
specific organizational and methodological challenges. Conference for the purpose can be 
piggy-backed onto already scheduled regional meetings in Africa, Asia and Latin America.
Some of the toughest methodological challenges for participatory NRM research concern how 
to link farmers' knowledge and interests with those of other stakeholders at different scales:
27
field, farm, community, and supra-community, including the watershed. NRM technologies 
(e.g. soil conservation practices, nutrient management, integrated pest management) are often 
knowledge-based, requiring collective management decisions and practices. The knowledge 
and management intensity of these technologies requires that farmers participate early in the 
design of prototypes as well as in their location-specific fine-tuning. Farmer involvement 
helps researchers to understand how stakeholders perceive tradeoffs between production and 
conservation, and the acceptable allocation of costs and benefits to different stakeholders.
In designing a workplan for comparative analysis, the NRM working group agreed that a focus 
on resource user management was essential. As the management scale widens, the number and 
diversity of stakeholders (including external stakeholders) is likely to increase, as is the need 
for collective or negotiated actions and resolution of possible conflict over resources. 
Innovative organizational arrangements, methodology for participatory resource monitoring by 
users as well as researchers in the short and long-term, and increased capacity of resource 
users to adapt to changing circumstances were seen as priority areas for further work in the 
proposed program.
The NRM working group took emphasized the use of a learning process approach (Fig. 1) in 
which improvements in participatory methods and in organizational capacity are 
operationalized and analyzed together. To start this process of mutual learning, the NRM 
working group identified as the first task an inventory and assessment of current uses of 
participatory research and gender analysis in NRM research. The discussion of these concrete 
experiences at more focused regional meetings will promote a shared understanding of 
problems and a baseline for further research. This state of the art synthesis will be the first 
output of the NRM Working Group. From this base, the working group will specify cases 
which will systematically develop, test, and compare participatory approaches in different 
contexts.
28
Box 9. Specific outputs from participatory NRM method development.
Current practice in applying gender analysis and participatory approaches to NRM 
research synthesized to identify method gaps.
Methods assessed and developed for user participation in design of knowledge- 
intensive technologies.
Methods for participatory resource monitoring by stakeholders at field, farm, 
community and watershed scales.
Methods assessed and developed for encouraging collective action, conflict resolution 
and negotiation at different scales.
Technologies acceptable to farmers for increasing productivity while protecting the 
environment. __________
3. Strategies for including gender-sensitive participatory methods in research assessed,
developed and institutionalized.
Workplan Outputs
. Effective methods and capacity developed for using gender analysis.
• The costs and benefits of using gender analysis in technology development assessed.
Inclusion of a gender perspective and gender analysis into the core research programs of the 
CG is a central objective of this program. The Gender Working Group will a) intergrate 
gender analysis, capacity building and the development of novel approaches to gender analysis 
into the empirical studies conducted on plant breeding and NRM; b) systhesize the implications 
for gender analysis of results from the empirical studies, with respect to its impact on 
technology design adoption, targeting poor rural women, and research planning; c) contribute 
to capacity building, provision of technical advice, and dissemination of results on gender 
analysis to a broad audience of IARCs, NARIs, NGOs and GROs through the systemwide 
program activities for this purpose.
Women play a vital role in agriculture and food security in developing countries . Research on
time budgets has shown that women work longer hours than men in every country studied. 
Women account for more than half of the labor required to produce the food in Asia, and as 
much as three-fourths of the labor in Africa. They are fully in charge of post-harvest 
operations, seed selection and preservation, and food processing activities. With increasing 
male migration in search of non-farm employment, women’s role as farm managers has been
growing.
29
Women's knowledge of agricultural practices, and the constraints to increasing their 
productivity need to be incorporated into planning: this includes involvement of women in 
selection and evaluation of improved germplasm; seed management practices; appropriate 
mechanical technologies; and management of natural resources.
Methods are needed which will enable user groups to rapidly assess for themselves, what type 
of people among them should participate in technology development. Rapid self-diagnosis 
needs to be made of the relevance of different attributes, such as wealth, age, gender, or 
particular expertise and the need to have separate or mixed groups of participants for reliable 
user input to a given technology. In some regions, appropriate methods must be developed to 
engage women's participation where this is a new experience or there are specific constraints. 
In NRM research, methods need to be assessed for identifying diverse stakeholders, including 
different kinds of women, and bringing them into the relevant design of technology options, 
organizational arrangements and approaches to capacity building.
Other methods are needed to enable users to monitor gender-differentiated effects of 
introducing new germplasm or resource management practices. Participatory diagnosis, 
monitoring, and assessment of the likely differential impact of technologies being tested on a
user group could provide powerful feedback to research in a low-cost fashion. It is also an
essential component of the learning process.
Comparison of results obtained in PB and NRM projects with and without the application of 
gender-sensitive participatory research methods will provide empirical evidence of the utility 
or value added of identifying and including particular groups. Researchers need cost-effective 
ways to validate, and assess the usefulness of such information obtained from a participatory 
process in terms of successful technology design and adoption (reaching the right users), 
targeting particular groups (such as poor rural women), and in achieving welfare and social 
equity objectives. Streamlining this process, so that it is reliable and replicable is essential for 
adoption of such methods by NARIs.
4. Organizational innovations for institutionalizing participatory approaches
operationalized, and evaluated.
Workplan Outputs
• Effective organizational forms for operationalizing participatory breeding identified 
and developed in the research process.
• User access to products of participatory breeding assured through identification of 
effective organizational forms and links to supporting seed services.
30
. Organizational capacity to use PR/GA methods in NRM research improved with a focus 
on: farmers, local institutions, individual scientists and extension workers, and research 
and extension institutions.
Effective use of participatory approaches and gender analysis not only requires appropriate 
methods, but also suitable organization. The organizational requirements of participatory 
research need to be examined for two reasons. First, user participation suggests that research 
may have to be decentralized to incorporate different user groups. Second, successful 
adoption of NRM technologies may depend less on the technologies per se that on 
organizational innovations in the way stakeholders collectively manage their resources.
In terms of the prospects for decentralizing research, the systemwide working group on 
participatory approaches in plant breeding recommended study of the alternate divisions of 
labor within the breeding process. These studies will assess the cost-effectiveness of different 
organizational forms. The implications of increased involvement of different partners also 
need to be assessed: for instance, what might be the advantages or constraints for each 
collaborator if farmers groups or NGOs take a lead role in adaptive research to permit a vastly 
increased scale of testing? Other questions which urgently need to be answered include: the 
extent of decentralization required for a particular crop and locale; the financial and logistical 
means by which decentralization can be achieved; the implications of decentralization for 
research quality; the implications of decentralization for the design of technology support 
services, eg. seed multiplication.
Participatory natural resource management needs to build on local organizational capacity to 
manage collective resources and to monitor resource trends. Local structures, whether 
indigenous or introduced may provide the key to scaling up location-specific efforts to achieve 
the large coverage demanded by watersheds, hillsides or desert expanses. Methodology 
development involves providing tools to define exactly what scale of resource management is 
functional and to strengthen the development of durable organizational mechanisms at that
scale.
31
Box 10. Specific outputs from analysis of organizational innovations and links 
within a participatory research perspective
. Identification of cost-effective organizational forms for different kinds of decentralized 
plant breeding research
• Options for organizational innovation and links for managing natural resources at different 
 scales*■ -
• Strategies for strengthening and catalyzing local and durable organizations which can lead 
site-specific management of resources
. Analysis of the ability of the formal and informal seed sector to deliver the products of 
participatory plant breeding
• Strategies for scaling up knowledge-intensive technology development and ensuring its
spread __________________________________________
5. Capacity for participatory research and gender analysis enhanced and innovative
approaches operationalized: a critical mass of expertise in PR/GA developed on the
basis of practical expertise.
Tfh..e. systemwide Planning Meeting adopted a learning process and capacity-building approach 
to developing participatory research and gender analysis. This capacity-building approach to 
experimentation contrasts markedly with participatory rural appraisal (PRA) methods in which 
a "tool kit of techniques" is used in local communities mainly to extract research information 
needed to plan subsequent experiments or development projects.
Capacity-building activities include: operationalising novel methods, training and workshops 
on participatory approaches and gender analysis consultancies to provide technical advice on 
methodologies, and the international seminars in which participants report progress on the 
workplan and exchange results. These are described in the section on activities earlier in this
document.
The systemwide program will use donations to the program to finance the international 
seminars and training - including training of trainers - to multiply capacity for participatory 
research and gender analysis. This training will be integrated to every extent possible with 
other courses and workshops of the participating institutions, and will be open to a broad
audience.
Each of the three working groups (plant breeding, NRM and gender analysis) will conduct 
workshops and may provide consultancies to support the implementation of the common
32
workplan. For example, the NRM Working Group proposes to conduct four regional 
workshops and one global workshop to carry out the synthesis of the state of the art in 
applications of participatory approaches and gender analysis to NRM research (Table 2.)
6. Procedures for building new partnerships among the IARCs, NARS, NGOs and 
farmer groups realized to utilize effectively complementarities among partners, and to 
accelerate learning about participatory research and gender analysis.
The proposed Systemwide Program is a collaborative research effort among diverse partners. 
The advantages of joining resources are many: from the outset, formal science will be 
effectively integrated with farmer-based experimentation, organizational as well as technical 
options can be explored through this program.
IARCs, NARIs, NGOS and grassroot organizations are developing a model for working 
together effectively and ethically. The program will provide a mechanism for involving 
grassroot client groups and organizations in research priority setting, technology development 
and program evaluation with the CGIAR and its partners.
Through the planning group, they are formulating guidelines for research partnership jointly 
defining organizational procedures; setting research priorities, and will evaluate success at the 
program and project level together.
33
> J>
r
r
Figure 2: Project Overview
Systemwide Initiative on Participatory Research and Gender Analysis for Technology Development and Institutional Innovation
Program Goal
To improve the ability of the CGIAR System and other collaborating institutions 
to develop technology which alleviates poverty, improves food security and 
protects the environment with greater equity.
Program Purpose
To assess and develop methodologies and organizational innovations 
for gender-sensitive participatory research, and operationalize their use in plant breeding, 
crop and natural resource management.
Participatory Plant Breeding (PPB) Research Natural Resource Management (NRM) Research -ir i
i iI
I
i
i
Output 1: Output 2:
Methods for participatory approaches in plant breeding Methods for participatory natural resource management ii
developed and evaluated. research assessed and developed. ii
i
i
Output 3: i
i
h Strategies for including gender-sensitive participatory imethods in assessed, developed and institutionalized. i
I l
i
i Output 4: i
i -i
L Organizational innovations for institutionalizing participatory 
approaches operationalized, and evaluated.
Capacity for participatory research and gender analysis further developed in the form of a 
critical mass of expertise in participatory research and gender analysis; innovative 
approaches to capacity building operationalized.
Output 6;
Participatory procedures for building new partnerships among lARCs, NARS, NGOs and 
farmer groups realized to utilize effectively complementarities among partners, and to 
accelerate learning about participatory research and gender analysis. ___
34
Figure 3.
Systemwide Program on Participatory Research and Gender Analysis 
for Technology Development and Institutional Innovation
Work Breakdown Structure for Participatory Plant Bleeding Working Group
i I 1
Outputs Effective participatory methods in plant Beneficiary groups in participatory breeding Effective organization forms for User access to products of participatory 
breeding assessed and developed, widi through methods development for involving operationalizing partici] itory breeding m breeding assured through identification of 
focus on: direct & indirect stakeholders accurately the research process identified and effective organizational forms and links to 
- farmer's breeding involved and targeted. developed. supporting seed services.
- plant selection (segregating lines)
- variety selection (fixed lines).
Activities Inventory and compare existing Revision of diagnostic methods tor Inventory and comparison of different A -.essment of various methods and tools 
participatory methods across crops and assessment of stakeholder preferences for divisions of labor among farmers and loi understanding local seed systems
environments plant varieties in short, medium & long breeders in the breeding process
term Identification of strategies for strengthening 
Identification and comparison of Revision of the ways existing breeding local seed systems
existing strategies for strengthening Assessment of methods to involve users in programs organize and fund links with 
farmer breeding (in reference to self- plant breeding differentiated by type, farmers
pollinated, open and vegetatively including, for example, by gender, wealth Revision and development of methods to 
propagated crops) and end-use (consumers, processors, seed Identification of promising links and link participatory approaches in breeding 
producers) innovations with local seed systems and markets
Implementation of experimental 
research for comparing classical Analysis of social and economic impacts on Monitoring and evaluation by partners of 
breeding approaches to participatory different users of various participatory plant organizational innovations (including cost- Identification of incentives and roles of 
plant selection and participatory variety breeding methods benefit analyses of different links and forms) CBOs and NGOs in enhancing seed and 
selection in reference to the 3 crop for participatory breeding seed information flow
types Analysis of the costs of alternative 
participatory methods for involving Formulation of guidelines for decision­ Exploration of constraints & opportunities to 
Impact assessment of impact of various different users in plant breeding makers on promising organizational forms include products of participatory breeding 
participatory strategies in 3 crops types in the existing regulatory frameworks
and diverse environments with respect Revision of methods for assessing indirect Revision of communication tools for 
to goals as: yield stability, production, stakeholder roles/needs improving farmer-scientist interaction
genetic diversity, and other farmer 
objectives Synthesis of findings on how to involve 
hidden and indirect stakeholders in 
Dissemination of results & relevant participatory approaches
methods by crop type, environment and 
according to priority goals Synthesis of case study findings on how to 
resolve conflicts among diverse users and 
Identification of opportunities for stakeholders in germplasm resources
institutionalizing relevant participatory 
breeding methods, by crop type, Publication of guidelines on the cost-benefits 
environment and according to priority ratios of different approaches to involving 
goals and targeting differentiated users
35
3
'
s
Figure 4.
Systemwide Program on Participatory Research and Gender Analysis 
for Technology Development and Institutional Innovation
Work Breakdown Structure for Natural Resource Management Working Group
Outputs Synthesis of die state of the art in Improved crop and natural resource Organizational capacity to use PR/GA Effective methods for involving gender 
     management strategies incorporating better methods in NRM research, improved with a differentiated and other direct and indirect applying PR/GA1 approaches in NRM stakeholders in NRM developed
research for different types of use of existing and new PR/GA methods at focus on: farmers, local institutions, 
technologies across diree scales of different scales of management developed individual scientists and extension workers, 
 and research and extension institutions.management2 compared. and disseminated.
Activities —+ Inventory and assessment of use of —► Development and assessment of new —► Development , implementation and Inventory and assessment of methods 
current PR/GA methods in NRM methods for participatory resource evaluation of new options for institutional from current practice to identify and include 
research. monitoring by stakeholders at field, farm, innovation and strengthemng of local different users in NRM research
community, watershed and odier scales organizational arrangements for PR/GA 
—► Inventory and assessment of use of Development and testing of new 
current institutional arrangements for —► Testing and development of new 
methods for NRM methods for including different types of 
participation of different users m NRM mechanisms for joining resource user _+ Experimentation with resource user- and users in NRM research and decision­
research and practice experimenters with each other and with researcher-generated methods for exploring making.
formal science in NRM and reducing resource conflicts.—► Identification of constraints to —+ Assessment of the costs and benefits of 
including specific user groups in NRM Experimentation with the development Monitoring of farmer to farmer, locality including different types of users to 
research and decision-making and testing of bundles of NRM options by to locality exchange and extension of technology development in NRM.
researchers and local users PR/GA approaches within and beyond die 
—* Inventory and assessment of ~► Assessment of the costs and benefits of study area.
methods and indicators for determining —► Development of participatory methods involving particular users, such as poor 
   rural women or odier marginal groups til impacts of PR/GA methods which improve resource users analytic tools —► Comparison of the costs and benefits of 
      and concepts for understanding and 
farmer to farmer and conventional scaling participatory NRM.
► Regional workshops based on initial managing resource processes up of the results of participatory NRM 
inventories of active projects to 
—► Evaluation of die use of free versus research.compare and assess PR/GA methods 
and orgamzaiional arrangements. controlled experimentation of NRM —► Promotion of farmer representation on 
technologies. decision-making committees in research and -► Global workshop of practitioners to 
-* Development of improved methods for extension organizations.identify the method gaps and prioritize 
areas for refining and developing operationalizing PR/GA at a large scale for —► Provision of guidelines for decision­
PR/GA methodology with respect to broad coverage in natural resource makers on promising orgamzaiional options 
specific types of NRM technology and management for strengthening the use of PR/GA methods 
scales of management —► Regional workshops for practitioners to of NRM research
—► Identification and selection of a compare, integrate, and contrast different Training of trainers and researchers in 
number of cases for methodology PR/GA methods and strategies for NRM PR/GA approaches for NRM research 
development and capacity building and research. —► Monitoring and evaluation by partners 
comparative analysis (partners, sites, Experimentation with technology on-going arrangements for collaborative 
technologies, scale, regions) options and orgamzaiional arrangements to NRM, decision-making and implementation.
reduce conflict over resources
—► Evaluation of different strategies for 
incorporating diverse stakeholder interests 
into collective action.
Publication of guidelines for improved 
PR/GA approaches and organizational 
arrangements for NRM research
‘pR/GA refers to the use of gender analysis to identify types of users by gender, wealth and other variables, and participate! ■ hods inclusive of different types of users.
2Three scales of NRM are (a) field and farm level, (b) community,, and ° beyond community, for example watershed management.
36
Figure 5.
Systemwide Program on Participatory Research and Gender Analysis for Technology D
Work Breakdown Structure for Gender Analysis Working Group evelopment
Outputs Effective methods and capacity for using 
gender analysis developed. The costs and benefits of using gender 
analysis in technology development 
assessed.
Activities -*• Assessment of current practices for 
including different types of users at -‘Comparison of the costs of including 
different stages of PB and NRM gender analysis. (Did it improve 
(including variables such as gender, design?)
wealth, location, direct and indirect 
stakeholders). —‘Assessment of the impact of gender 
analysis. (Did it improve adoption?)
-* Identification of constraints and 
method gaps to effectively include -►Assessment of the use of gender 
different types of users, particularly less analysis and gender sensitive 
visible stakeholder, in participatory participatory methods to effectively 
research and in organizational target PB and NRM technologies to 
arrangements for PB and NRM. particular types of users, especially 
poor rural women and other marginal 
-‘Monitoring and evaluation of new groups. (Did it improve targeting?)
approaches for including specific types 
of users in PB and NRM. -* Assessment of the costs and benefits 
of including different types of users in 
-‘Comparison of costs and benefits of local decision-making or implementing 
including different users at preadaptive institutions for PB and NRM. (Did it 
and adaptive stages of technology improve research planning?)
development in PB and NRM, and in 
different contexts. -‘Contribution to published guidelines 
and case studies on the effective 
-‘Contribution to guidelines for use of inclusion of gender analysis in PB and 
PR/GA methods. NRM technology development.
-‘Publication of guidelines and case Contribution to training courses, 
studies on effective inclusion of different workshops and seminars to disseminate 
users in technology development. results.
- Provision of training and technical 
assistance on gender analysis through 
consultancies to a broad audience.
Work with selected institutions to 
install permanent capacity for gender 
analysis.
37
Workplan, 1996
Completed:
• TAC approved a Systemwide Initiative in March, 1996.
• The first Systemwide Seminar was convened September 1996 to define expected outputs of 
the initiative and define the institutional and organizational procedures for CGIAR, NARIs 
and NGO collaboration. A first meeting of the three global working groups was held 
(participatory approaches in plant breeding and natural resource management and the 
gender analysis groups). Key methodological and organizational challenges have been 
defined; specific activities have been proposed, and elements of a comparative framework 
have been suggested.
• The Planning Group (duration of one year) was formed in September 1996, with eight 
elected members linked by e-mail.
• The proposal for the systemwide initiative was finalized and submitted to donors. The 
proposal incorporates recommendations of the systemwide Planning Meeting.
• The proposal is being submitted to TAC for consideration.
Workplan, 1997
• Planning Group finalizes guidelines for project submission and formally solicits and
endorses projects which fit within the workplan. Coordinator is recruited. CIAT appoints a 
core-funded senior staff members as coordinator.
• Activities in the first year will begin with the activities listed under the first output planned 
by each working group in Figure 3, 4, and 5.
Expected Impact
Impact in CGIAR System, NARIs, NGOs and GRO's
This systemwide effort will provide widely-applicable guidelines for the use of participatory 
R&D approaches to technology design in both preadaptive-adaptive and adaptive research, 
based on rigorous empirical assessment of its potential in two fields which are central to the 
agenda of the IARCs, NARIs and NGOs. Strategy for main streaming use of these methods in 
the CGIAR and beyond can be clearly defined, and given significant momentum by this work. 
Achieving the participation of users -- especially women — in the process of technology
38
development will enhance the capacity of the CGIAR and NARIs to work effectively with 
other types of institutions to benefit the poor.
Box 11. Participatory Plant Breeding and Varietal Evaluation projects which will 
benefit from system-wide methodology development
Site / Regions Institutions
Species Africa Asia LAC Selection IARCs NARS
Barley y Lines; seg pop. ICARDA NARIs
Beans/maize v/ 7 Lines/composite CIAT/CIMMYT EMBRAPA
Cassava v/ Seg. pop. CIAT/IITA EMBRAPA/CBN
Forages Accessions CIAT/IRRI NARIs
Maize y Composite NGOs
Pearl Millet V Population ICRISAT
Potato y Clones CIP CONDESAN
Rice y Lines IRRI NARI, NGOs
Various y y y Landraces Community-based, 
NGO's, CGN 
Wageningen
Incorporation of participatory methods and gender analysis into ongoing projects of the 
collaborating Centers, NARIs and NGOs will provide concrete demonstration of the pay-off to 
applying these methods, as well as a critical mass of people experienced in their use. This is 
vital to achieving progress in consolidating scientific credibility for gender analysis and user 
participation which goes beyond rhetoric about their importance.
Empirical assessment of methods for preadaptive-adaptive participatory plant breeding will 
help to guide breeders' choice of the most appropriate breeding approaches for different 
circumstances by clarifying the relative advantages of conventional, participatory and 
indigenous crop breeding strategies. Pooling resources among different institutions in a 
systemwide effort will greatly accelerate this methodology development.
Clear guidelines for decentralizing research using participatory approaches with current 
institutional arrangements or new partnerships will improve the cost-effectiveness of research 
and enhance its impact. Further explicit attention to local organizational arrangements within 
NRM specifically will open up possibilities not yet sufficiently explored for supporting 
durable, farmer-based, resource management systems.
39
By situating this work in a framework for comparative analysis of methodological and 
organizational issues which are common to other fields of research where use of participatory 
methods and gender analysis is less developed, the proposed program will maximize spill-over 
from one field to another, promoting economies of scale in methodology development. The 
proposed program of work can be expected therefore, to accelerate the process of learning 
about how to use participatory approaches and gender analysis effectively in preadaptive- 
adaptive plant breeding and NRM research.
Expected impact for men and women farmers
Gender analysis gives visibility to "the forgotten farmers," the rural women in developing 
countries who use and conserve germplasm, and manage natural resources. Preadaptive- 
adaptive and adaptive participatory approaches give them a voice in the definition and 
prioritization of research problems, and in the design of technologies to meet their needs. 
Bringing gender analysis and participatory methods into the mainstream of public sector 
research will scale up the visibility of women as users of technology, and allow their voices to 
be heard. This is vital to achieving impact which benefits poor people, both poor women and 
the families whose livelihood depends upon them.
Participatory methods and gender analysis also have the potential to strengthen indigenous 
systems of knowledge generation, of crop development, and of natural resource conservation. 
Strengthening these systems, as opposed to displacing or discrediting them, is often vital to a 
process of technology development which promotes sustainable production increases and 
natural resource conservation.
Box 12. Impact of gender analysis of proposed systemwide program.
Visibility and credibility of gender analysis reinforced by identification of its 
payoff to upstream research activities of the CGIAR.
Dissemination accelerated by formation of a critical mass of people from 
different disciplines, experienced in the use of gender analysis for technology 
development.
Use by NARIs catalyzed through joint projects and empirical evidence of 
impact on core plant breeding and NRM research programs.
40
Program evaluation
Progress in methodology development and organizational innovation will be assessed annually 
by Program's Planning Group, through independent consultants; Working Group technical 
reports; and papers on comparative analysis presented in the Systemwide Seminars. Indicators 
of progress and impact have been identified by the PB, NRM and Gender Analysis Global 
Working Groups (Tables 1, 2 and 3). Partner institutions will involve IARCs, NARIs, NGOs, 
farmers and other stakeholder groups in project-level monitoring and evaluation.
Program evaluation of the entire initiative will be scheduled near the mid-term point (about 2 
years) and at the completion of the Initiative (5 year point). Representatives from all major 
partner groups will be invited to participate (CGIAR, NARIs, NGOs, Donors and other 
stakeholders). Community evaluations of the program at each project site will be synthesized 
and integrated into the central evaluation findings.
41
Program Evaluation
Table 1. Outputs and Indicators of Participatory Plant Breeding Working Group
OUTPUTS INDICATORS
1. Assessment and development of effec­ 1.1 Methodology guidelines published for all 
tive participatory methods in plant three approaches.
breeding, with focus on 3 types: 1.2 Methods in use in at least four cases 
- farmer's breeding involving National programs and NGOs 
- plant selection (segregating lines) (at least one case) for each type
- variety selection (fixed lines) 1.3 Publications disseminated on the field 
level results of the use of such methods.
1.4 Workshops to exchange results 
conducted.
2. Beneficiary groups more accurately in­ 2.1 Published guidelines on the cost-benefits 
volved & targeted in participatory of different approaches to involving and 
breeding through methods development targeting differentiated users
for involving direct & indirect 2.2 Synthesized findings on how to involve 
stakeholders hidden and indirect stakeholders and how 
to resolve conflicts among diverse groups
2.3 Evidence available that PB products are 
more user-differentiated
2.4 Evidence available that indirect 
stakeholders, such as extension have 
been involved.
3. Effective organizational forms for 3.1 Ways existing breeding programs orga­
operationalizing participatory breeding nize and fund links with farmers 
identified and developed in the research reviewed and documented
process 3.2 Reports available on organizational 
options for participatory breeding along 
with cost-benefit analyses of these
3.3 Guidelines for decision-makers on 
promising organization forms
3.4 Capacity-building through training and 
consultancies provided.
4. User access to products of participatory 4.1 Synthesis of case studies on how to 
breeding assured through identification strengthen local seed system
of effective organizational forms and 4.2 Published analysis on the role of the 
links to supporting seed services. formal seed system in PB approaches
4.3 At least 2 channels identified which 
move PB products rapidly to different 
users
42
Program Evaluation
Table 2. Outputs and Indicators of NRM Working Group
OUTPUTS INDICATORS
1. Synthesis of the state of the art in applying PR/GA approaches in 1.1 Inventory and assessment of available methods for 
NRM research completed PR/GA in NRM research completed and available 
as a working paper.
1.2 Up to four regional workshops held to compare 
currently used PR/GA methods 
1.3 One global workshop held to identify the 
constraints and gaps in PR/GA approaches and to 
define the focus and determine priorities for next 
phase of research.
1.4 Proceedings of workshops published and 
disseminated.
2. Improved crop and natural resource management strategies 2.1 Workshops conducted at up to 6 research sites to 
incorporating better use of existing and new PR/GA methods incorporate gender analysis and gender sensitive 
developed and disseminated participatory methods into project activities 
2.2 Guidelines prepared on methods for scaling up of 
NRM options and participatory NRM methods.
2.3 Up to ten experiments on how resource user and 
researcher experimentation fit together conducted 
and evaluated.
2.4 Up to three community based and 3 researcher 
based resource monitoring tools tested, compared, 
and results ready for dissemination 
2.5 Up to four regional workshops for practitioners to 
compare PR/GA methods and strategies held 
2.6 Guidelines for PR/GA methods and organizational 
strategies published
3. Organizational capacity to use PR/GA methods in NRM research, 3.1 Research results and guidelines comparing new 
improved with a focus on: options for organizational innovation for different 
-farmers types of technologies and different management 
-local institutions scales are published.
-individual scientists and extension workers, and 3.2 Three case studies of organizational change for 
-research and extension institutions improving the effective participation of different 
stake holders are completed and synthesized.
3.3 New local networks for collective resource 
monitoring and action are formed.
3.4 Farmer representation in research decision-making 
fora increased.
3.5 Training of trainers and research partners 
conducted for new NRM research partnerships.
4. Effective methods for involving gender differentiated and other 4.1 A comparison of the costs and benefits to 
direct and indirect stakeholders in NRM developed technology design and adoption of different levels 
of participation and the inclusion of different types 
of users across types of NRM and scales of 
management is compiled and published as a 
working paper.
4.2 Guidelines for the involvement of different users in 
different types of NRM and scales of management 
are published.
43
Program Evaluation
Table 3. Gender Working Group Outputs and Indicators
OUTPUTS INDICATORS
1. Effective methods and capacity developed for 1.1 Guidelines are published on the use of gender 
using gender analysis and involving direct and analysis and the effective inclusion of 
indirect stakeholders in PB and NRM different types of users in PB and NRM 
technology development 
1.2 Gender analysis and guidelines for inclusion 
of different types of users are included in 
published PB and NRM participatory 
guidelines
1.3 A synthesis and case studies on the 
effectiveness of gender analysis and methods 
for including different users across 
technology development in PB and NRM is 
published
2. The costs and benefits of including PB and 2.1 A comparison of cost benefit ratios for 
NRM assessed. adoption of PB and NRM technologies by 
including different types of users completed 
and disseminated.
2.2 A comparison of cost benefit ratios for 
targeting particular types of users for PB or 
NRM technologies are completed and 
disseminated.
2.3 Guidelines on the costs and benefits of 
including gender analysis and different types 
of users in participatory PB and NRM 
technology development are included in the 
published PB and NRM guidelines.
44
Table 4. Proposed Budget (in US $): , ,
Systemwide Program on Participatory Research and Gender Analysis for Technology Development and Institutional Innovation
 Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 4 Year 5 TotalLine Item
1. Methods and organizational links for participatory plant breeding
Communications 500 1,000 1,000 1,000 1,000 4,500
Workshops 25,000 26,000 27,000 28,000 29,000
135,000
Empirical studies 
 275,000 303.500 315,500 327,500 340,000 1,561.5001) CG
2) Other Institutions 275,000 303,500 315,500 327,500 340,000 1,561,500
Community funds 40,000 83,000 87,000 90,000 94,000 394,000
Publications 0 0 15,000 0 25,000 40,000
Consultants 25,000 25.000 25,000 25,000 25,000 125,000
Total 1. 640,500 742,000 786,000 799,000 854,000 3,821,500
2. Methods and orgamzational linkages for participatory NRM
Communications 500 5,000 5.000 6,000 6,000 22,500
Workshops 83,000 26,000 27,000 28,000 29,000 135,000
Empirical studies 
1) CG 0 303,500 315,500 327,500 340,000 1,286,500
2) Other Institutions 0 303,500 315,500 327,500 340,000 1,286,500
 0 83,000 87,000 90,000 96,000 356,000Community funds
40,000
Publications 0 0 15,000 0 25,000
Consultants 50,000 50,000 50,000 50,000 50,000
250,000
Total 2. 133,500 746,000 790,000 804,000 861,000 3,334,500
3. Gender analysis for participatory research
Communications 500 500 500 500 500 2,500
CG Gender Analysis Program 100.000 100,000 100,000 100,000 100,000 500,000
Support to other instimtions: 
Empirical studies, training and 253,000
dissemination 30,000 50,000 57,000 58,000 58,000
Total 3. 130,500 150,500 157,500 158,500 158,500 755,500
4. Capacity building
 0 54,000 0 54,000 58,000 166.000Systemwide seminars
Publications 0 0 0 0 35,000
35.000
100.000,,
Short courses 40,000 60,000 0 0 0
Follow-up training 0 0 36,000 36,000 0 72,000
 72.000Trainer's workshops 0 0 36,000 0 36.000
445,000
Total 4. 40,000 114,000 72,000 90,000 129,000
5. Project Coordination 45,000 45,000 45,000 45,000 45,000 225,000
Communication 500 500 500 500 500
2500
45,500 227,500
Total 5. 45,500 45,500 45,500 45,500
990,000 1,798,000 1,851,000 1,897,000 2,048,000 8,584,000Grand Total
45
Budget Notes
The grant request has been approved by TAC for US $0.9 million for 1997, pending final 
TAC approval of the initiative as a systemwide program which will be requested in November, 
1996.
1. Resource allocation procedures
The Planning Group has been mandated by the participants in the SWI Planning Meeting 
held in September, 1996, to finalize guidelines for the inclusion of projects in executing 
the workplan and to work on funding the Program. It is envisaged that once the funding 
available for 1997 is designated by donors, the Planning Group will solicit proposals from 
ongoing projects such as those in Annex 2, with respect to how these projects would link 
up with the SW Program. The Planning Group will allocate resources for 1997 to those 
projects which best contribute to the overall workplan, using criteria developed by the 
Planning Meeting participants.
The Planning Group expects to allocate funds received by the Systemwide program to 
ongoing projects or research programs which demonstrate capacity to cofinance activities 
in the Program’s workplan, rather than to initiate new projects.
A portion of the funds donated to the program will be used to support and encourage 
partnerships among different types of orgnaizations for the implementation of the 
workplan. Therefore, the line item for empirical studies specifies amounts for CG and 
other institutions.
Projects receiving support from the Program will be members of the Working Groups 
together with other interested practitioners, who have joined the Program through the first 
International Seminar, or who may wish to do so in the future.
Partner institutions will also seek funding for projects with the endorsement of the 
Systemwide Program, in addition to donations made through the Participatory Research 
and Gender column of the CGIAR matrix. Such additional grants, made to partners, will 
contribute to the implementation of the proposed workplan, but will be administered by 
the recipient institutions.
-* X
2. Working groups on PPB and NRM research
a. Funding is requested for tow international working groups to carry out the workplan in 
Figures 3 and 4, for the assessment and development of participatory approaches and 
gender analysis in PB and NRM research.
b. Funds are to support email networking among participants in the working groups and 
workshops, which will be organized regionally for the exchange of methodology to
46
support the implementation of the empirical studies.
c. Funds for empirical studies are for research activities in the workplan.
d. Community funds are to provide rotating funds for farmers and GROs to conduct and 
continue participatory research activities when appropriate, after the termination of this 
Program and its constituent projects. These funds will also assist farmers and community 
participating in Program evaluation and in planning meetings.
3. Gender Analysis
a. Funds are requested to support the involvement of the CG Gender Analysis program’s 
research activities in the systemwide program, including consulting, technical advice and 
networking on research-related issues with IARCs.
b. Additional funds provided for the Gender Working Group will add to the CG Gender 
Analysis Program’s IARC network, the participation of non-CG institutions with expertise 
in the area. Gender Working Group members will also be members of the Plant Breeding 
and NRM Working Groups. Funds are requested to enable the Gender Working group 
network by email, and to support non-CG institutions in contributions to the workplan that 
are uniquely related to strengthening the integration of gender analysis into the overall 
workplan.
4. Capacity Building
a. Funds are requested for bi-annual systemwide seminars at which the working groups will 
present to each other and to a wide audience of interested practitioners in the field, results 
of work in progress.
b. Funds will be used to add support to training events of the working group members, so 
that these can include modules on participatory research and gender analysis. Using the 
same strategy, the program will conduct follow-up training and training for trainers for 
the same purpose after two years to consolidate capacity built this way.
c. Publications by the Program will be papers from the systemwide seminars. Commercial 
publication will be sought for the write-up of the guidelines and case studies based on the 
empirical research conducted by the working groups.
47
References:
Ashby, Jacqueline A., J. A. Beltran, M. P. Guerrero and H. F. Ramos, "Improving the 
Acceptability to Farmers of oil Conservation Practices", Soil and Water Conservation 
Society. Forthcoming.
Ashby, Jacqueline A. and Louise Sperling, 1995. "Institutionalizing participatory client- 
driven research and technology development in agriculture. Development and change. Voi. 26 
No. 4 October 1995, 753-770
Ceccarelli S, S. Granco and J.A. G. Van Leur. 1995. Understanding landraces: The fertile 
crescent's barley provides lesson to plant breeders. Diversity. In Press.
Cl AT, CIMMYT, IRRI, ICARDA, 1996. Systemwide Program on participatory Research and 
Gender Analysis for Technology Development: A proposal for the Technical Advisory 
Committee (TAC)
CIAT 1994-1995. Hillsides Program Annual Report, CIAT, Palmira, Colombia
Fernandez, M 1995
Greenland et al., 1994
Hardon, Jaap. 1995. "Plant breeders and Farmers: can the twain meet?" Paper presented at 
PB workshop, Wageningen, Holland.
Iglesias, Carlos and Luis Alfredo Hernandez, 1994. "Participatory Cassava Breeding", 
Cassava Program Annual Report, CIAT, Palmira.
IPGRI, 1995. "Participatory Plant Breeding". Issues in Genetic Resources No. 3, October 
1995.
Kornegay, Julia, Jorge Alonso Beltran and Jacqueline A. Ashby, 1995. "Farmer Selections
within Segregating Populations of Common Bean in Colombia . Paper presented at PPB 
Worksop, Wageningen, Holland.
- *
Okali, C., C.V. Sumberg and J. Farrington, 1994. Battlefields and trial plots: Rhetoric and 
reality of Farmer Participatory Research. Intermediate Technology Publications, London.
Pretty , J.N., and P. Shah, 1994. "Soil and water conservation in the 20th century: A history 
of coersion and control", Rural History Centre Research Series No. 1 ( Reading, MA. 
University of Reading, England.
48
Soil, Water and Nutrient Management Initiative: Report from the Feldafing Consultation 
(1995). DSE/IBSRAM/CIAT,1995.
Sarin, Madhu. 1996. Actions of the voiceless: the challenge of addressing subterranean 
conflicts related to marginalized groups and women in community forestry. Paper prepared 
for the FAO Email conference on Addressing Natural Resource Conflicts through Community
Forestry.
Sperling, Louise and Urs Scheidegger, 1995. "Participatory Selection of Beans in Rwanda: 
Results, Methods and Institutional Issues", IIED, Gatekeeper Series No. 51.
TAC 1995 Priorities and Strategies for Soil and Water Aspects of Natural Resources 
Management Research in the CGIAR. CGIAR Secretariat, Washington, D.C., October 30-
November 3, 1995.
Thrupp, Lori-Ann, 1995. Personal Communication, comments on this proposal.
Welzein R Eva, M.L. Whitaker and M.M. Anders, 1995. "Farmer Participation in Pearl
Millet Breeding for Marginal Environments" Paper presented at PPB Workshop, Wagemngen,
Holland.
Zimmermann, Maria J. de O. 1995. "Breeding for Marginal/Drought Prone Areas in 
Northeastern Brazil". Paper presented at PPB Workshop, Wagemngen, Holland.
* -
49
Annex 1:
International Seminar on "Participatory Research and Gender Analysis 
for Technology Development and Institutional Innovation", 
CIMMYT, IRRI ,CIAT 
CIAT, Cali - Colombia, 9-14 September 1996
List of Participants:
BOLIVIA Tel. (57-947) 860211 Ext. 24
Fax. (57-947) 860219
Graham Thiele EMail. Corpoica@Monteria.cetcol.net.co
Head
Department of Technological Innovation ECUADOR
Programa de Investigación de la Papa 
PROINPA Jorge Recharte 
Man Cesped 293, Coordinador
Casilla Postai 4285 Programa en Sociedades de Montana y 
Cochabamba, Bolivia Desarrollo Sostenible - DESO 
Tel. (591-42) 49013 - 49506 Facultad Latinoamericana de Ciencias Sociales 
Fax.(591-42) 45708 FLACCSO
Email: g.thiele@cgnet.com Ulpiano Paez 118 y Avenida Patria
Casilla 17-11-06362
CANADA Quito, Ecuador
Tel: (593-2) 528200
Ronnie Vernooy Fax:(593-2) 566139
Senior Program Officer EMail. Recharte@pddsflac.ecx.ec
International Development Research Centre
IDRC Hector J. Andrade 
250 Albert Street Responsable PNRT - PAPA 
P.O. Box 8500 INIAP- Programa de Raices y Tuberculos - 
Ottawa K1G 3H9 - Canada Rubro Papa, PNRT - PAPA / FORTIPAPA 
Tel. (1-613) 236-6163 Ext. 2229 Estación Experimental Santa Catarina 
Fax: (1-613) 567-7749 Panamericana Sur Km. 14 
Email: RVernooy@idrc.ca Casilla 17-21-1977 
R. Vernooy@cgnet.com Quito, Ecuador 
Tel. (593-2) 690364 - 690990 
COLOMBIA Fax:(593-2) 692604 
Email: andrade@cip.org.ec.
Antonio José Lopez Montes 
Coordinador, Grupo de Investigación en 
Sistemas de Producción Regional No. 2 
CORPOICA
Kilómetro 13 Carretera Monteria-Cereté- 
Turipanà
Apartado Aèreo 602 y 603 
Monteria, Cordoba, Colombia
50
ETHIOPIA INDIA
Habtu Assefa S. S. Baghel 
Plant (Bean) Pathologist Director of Research 
Institute of Agricultural Research, IAR Directorate of Research 
Nazareth Research Centre Indira Gandhi Agricultural University 
P.O. Box 436 Raipur 492 012 M.P., India 
Nazareth, Eajt Shoa, Ethiopia Tel. (91-771) 425335 (Office) 
Tel. (251-2) 112186 / 110045 (91-771) 425449 (Res.)
Fax. (251-1) 611222 -(251-2) 113777 Fax. (91-771) 424532
GERMANY Patel Kiritkumar K.
Secretary
Jiiergen Hagmann Society for Research and Initiatives for 
GTZ Sustainable Technologies and Institutions, 
Consultant for Natural Resource Management SRISTI
Talstrasse 129 Researcher at IIM-A
D-79194 Gundelfingen c/o Prof. Anil K. Gupta
Germany IIM-A Ahmedabad - 380015, India
Tel. (49-761) 54762 Tel. (91-79) 407 241
Fax. (49-761) 54775 Fax. (91-79) 642 7896
Email, jhagmann@aol.com Email: honeybee@iimahd.ernet.in
Dieter Neubert Eva Weltzien R.
Lecturer ICRISAT
University of Mainz " Institut fur Ethnologie Patancheru 502 324 
und Afrika-Studien " Andhra Pradesh, India 
Zip Code 55099 E-Mail. E.weltzien@cgnet.com
Mainz, Germany 
Tel. (49-6131) 395933 Rabindra Nath De
Fax. (49-6131) 393730 Senior Scientist
Home. (49-6131) 881677 Plant Breeding Division
Central Rice Research Institute C.R.R.I.
GHANA Cuttack, India 
Tel. (91-671) 614605
Elsie Cornelia Ayeh (91-671) 20020 Ext. 237
Director Fax. (91-671) 620644
Garu Agricultural Station (GAS) EMail. crri@400.nicgw.rice.in
P.O. Box 44 
Bawku UER, Ghana 
Fax: ( 233) 7123910
51
IVORY COAST Martha Willcox
Maize Breeder, Applications of Biotechnology 
Monty Patrick Jones Maize Program 
Principal Rice Breeder CIMMYT 
West Africa Rice Development Association Lisboa 27
WARDA Apartado Postal 6-641 
01 BP 2551 01 Bouake, Ivory Coast 06600 México, D.F., Mexico 
Tel. (225) 634514 Tel. (52-5) 7269091 
Fax.(225) 634714 Fax.(52-5) 7267558-9 
EMail. WARDA@cgnet.com Email. MWillcox@Cimmyt.mx
Timothy J. Dalton NEPAL
Production Economist
West Africa Rice Development Association B. R. Sthapit
WARDA Senior Rice Breeder
01 BP 2551 01 Bouake, Ivory Coast Nepal Agricultural Research Council
Tel. (225) 632396 NARC
Fax.(225) 634714 P.O. Box 1135
Email. Khumaltar Complex, Lalitpur 
DALTON@VM.CC.PURDUE.EDU Kathmandu, Bagmati Zone, Nepal 
WARDA@cgnet.com Tel. (977-1) 521614 
Fax: (977-1) 521197
MEXICO
NETHERLANDS
Fernando Castillo Gonzalez 
Profesor Walter S. de Boef 
Mejoramiento Genètico de Malz Research Coordinator 
Programa de Genètica CPRO-DLO-CGN 
Colegio de Postgraduados, CP Droevendaalsesteeg 1 
Km 36.5 Carretera Mexico-Texcoco Postbus 16
Montecillo, C.P. 56230 6700 AA Wageningen, Netherlands 
Estado de Mexico, Mexico Tel. (31-317) 477076 
Tel. (595) 10230 Fax. (31-317) 418094 
Fax:(595) 10230 Email: w.deboef@cpro.agro.nl
Larry Harrington Maria E. Fernandez
Manager Natural Resources Coordinator Institutional Support
Management Research Group ILEIA
 CIMMYT 
P.O. Box 64
• ■««
Lisboa 27 Zip Code 3800
Apartado Postal 6-641 Leusden, Netherlands
06600 México, D.F., Mexico Tel. (31-33) 4943086
Tel. (52-5) 7267532 Fax:(31-33) 4951779
Fax.(52-5) 7267558-9 Email: mfernand@msn.com
Email: lharrington@cimmyt.mx
52
Wenny Ho Country Facilitator
Research Assistant Center for Research and Information Exchange
Department of Gender Studies in Agriculture in Ecologically Sound Agriculture
Agricultural University of Wageningen ILEIA
De Leeuwenborch -Hollandseweg 1 10 Concio Apartment, Mayondon 
6706 KN 4030 Los Banos, Philippines 
Wageningen, Netherlands Tel. (63-94) 536-0163 
Tel. (31-317) 483932 E-Mail. csb@compass.com.ph
Fax. (31-317) 483990 
EMail. Robert S. Zeigler 
Patricia. Howard-Borjas@ ALG.VSL.WAU.NL Leader
ho wws@ world. access. ni Irrigated Rice Research Program
International Rice Research Institute, IRRI
Michael Loevinsohn P.O. Box 933
ISNAR Manila, Philippines
International Service for National Agricultural Tel. (63-2) 8181926 Ext. 639-708
Research Fax.(63-2) 8911292
Senior Officer, National Research Management Email: R.Zeigler@cgnet.com
P.O. Box 93375
2509 AJ, The Hague, Netherlands Thelma R. Paris
Tel. (31-70)3496100 Senior Assoc. Scientist and Coordinator
Email: M.LOEVINSOHN@cgnet.com of Gender Analysis Program
International Rice Research Institute, IRRI
Louise Sperling P.O. Box 933
Research Associate Manila, Philippines
Seeds & Biodiversity Program Tel. (63-2) 8181926 Loc. 312
Overseas Development Institute, ODI Fax.(63-2) 8911292
do Frankenstraat 26 Email. TParis@cgnet.com
2582 SL Den Haag, Netherlands
Tel. (31-70) 3559963
Email : Remote3@ISN AR .MSM.CGNET.COM SYRIA
PERU Salvatore Ceccarelli
Barley Breeder/Acting Program Leader
Edith Fernàndez-Baca International Center for Agricultural Research
Country Facilitator - Researcher in the Dry Areas, ICARDA
Grupo Yanapai - ILEIA P.O. Box 5466
Durerò 285, San Borja Aleppo, Syria
Lima 41, Peru Tel. (963-21) 225012 - 225112 - 234890 t' •
Tel. (51-1) 4359579 Fax: (963-21) 213490 or 225105 
Fax. (51-1) 4359519 Email: S.Ceccarelli@cgnet.com
Email: ferbaca@amauta.rcp.net.pe
PHILIPPINES
Carlos S. Basilio
53
Aden A. Aw-Hassan UNITED KINGDOM
Coordinator, Dry Land Resource Management 
Project Diana Carney 
International Center for Agricultural Research Research Fellow
in the Dry Areas, ICARDA Overseas Development Institute, ODI
P.O. Box 5466 Regent's College
Aleppo, Syria Inner Circle, Regent's Parkl
Tel. (963-21) 213477 - 213433 London NW1 4NS
Fax. (963-21) 213490 - 225105 United Kingdom
EMail. A.Aw-Hassan@cgnet.com Tel. (44-171) 487 7609
Fax: (44-171) 487 7590
THAILAND EMail, d.carney@odi.org.uk
Hans-Dieter Bechstedt John Witcombe
Socio-economist Senior Research Fellow
ASIALAND Network for Management Centre for Arid Zone Studies
of Sloping Lands University of Wales, Bangor
International Board for Soil Research Gwynedd LLS7 2UW , United Kingdom
& Management, IBSRAM Tel. (44-1248) 382922
6 FL. Dept, of Land Development, Fax. (44-1248) 371533
Phaholyothin Road Email: ODA.PSP@bangor.ac.uk
9-109, Bangkhen, Bangkok 
10900 - Thailand USA
Tel. (66-2) 5611322 - 5790900 - 5797590 - 
5794012 Hilary Sims Feldstein 
Fax.(66-2) 5611230 Program Leader, Gender Analysis 
E.Mail. IBSRAM@cgnet. com CGIAR Gender Program 
OIBSR AM@nontri. ku. ac. th do CGIAR Secretariat 
The World Bank J 4066 
1818 H St. N.W.
TUNISIA Washington, D.C. 20036-3006 - U.S.A. 
Tel. (1-202) 4738934 
Mongi Sghaier Fax. (1-202) 4738110 
Reseacher, Director of Extention Email: h.feldstein@cgnet.com
and Project of Development 
Institut des Regions Arides, IRA Margaret Smith 
4119 M edenine, Tunis ia Associate Professor 
Tel. (216-5) 640 661 Cornell University 
. >/ Fax. (216-5) 640435
252 Emerson Hall 
Ithaca, N.Y. 14853 
U.S.A.
Tel. (1-607) 2551654 
Fax. (1-607) 2556683 
Email: MES25@cornell.edu
54
ZIMBABWE Douglas Pachico 
Director Strategie Planning 
Ntombie Regina Gata EMail. D.Pachico@cgnet.com
Director of NARI 
Department of Research and Julia Kornegay 
Specialist Services DR&SS Leader
P.O. Box CY594, Causeway Bean Program
Harare, Zimbabwe E-Mail. J.Kornegay@cgnet.com
Tel: (263-4) 704531-728310 4
Fax: (263-4) 728317 Carlos Iglesias
Cassava Program
Isiah Mharapara E-Mail. C.Iglesias@cgnet.com
Head of Research Station
Department of Reserch and Specialist Services Ann Marie Thro 
DR&SS Cassava Program 
Chiredzi Research Station E-Mail. A.Thro@cgnet.com
P.O. Box 97 
Chiredzi, Zimbabwe Helle Munk Ravnborg
Tel. (26- 31) 2397/8 Hillsides Program
E-Mail. H.Ravnborg@cgnet.com
Edward Chuma 
Research Fellow Sam Fujisaka
Institute of Environmental Studies, IES Land Management
University of Zimbabwe, UZ E-Mail. S.Fujisaka@cgnet.com
P.O. Box MP 167 
Harare, Zimbabwe Richard Thomas
Tel. (26-34) 303211 Tropical Lowlands Program
Fax. (26-34) 3334071 - 335249 E-Mail. R.Thomas@cgnet.com
E-Mail.bcampbell@esanet.zw 
erudo@esanet.zw Tel: (57-2) 4450000 
Fax:(57-2) 4450073 
David Rohrbach EMail. Ciat@cgnet.corti 
Director, Socioeconomist and Policy Division Cali, Colombia
ICRISAT
P.O. Box 776
Bulawayo, Zimbabwe
Tel. (26-3) 838311
Fax.(26-3) 838253
Email: D.Rohrbach@cgnet.com
U •
Cl AT
Jacqueline A. Ashby 
Director
Research Natural Resources 
E-Mail. J.Ashby@cgnet.com
55
Annex 2.
Examples of Projects with which the Proposed Program will Work
The following summaries of ongoing projects involving the cosponsoring IARCs and their 
institutional partners are examples of the type of projects with which the proposed program 
will collaborate. This collaboration requires additional support provided through the program, 
to add capacity to the relevant partners in each ongoing project to carry out the workplan 
developed at the SWI Planning Meeting, September 9-14, 1996.
Project Overviews
1. Introduction and conservation of improved genetic diversity in farmers’ fields
Institutional Partners: CIAT; Colombian Institute for Agricultural Research (CORPOICA); 
Institute Nacional de Investigaci Agraria (INIA), Peru; the Associación para el Desarrollo 
Rural de Cajamarca (ASPADERUC), a Peruvian NGO; the PROFIZA network of national 
bean breeders in the Andean region; CONDESAN, a consortium of Andean research and 
development institutions which includes CIAT and CIP.
Overview: Collaboration with the systemwide initiative will aid these breeding programs in 
their search for a strategy which will combine science-based and farmer-based genetic 
improvement, at a regional or agroecosystem level, in a model that can be adapted to other 
regions and other crops.
Two types of crops will be involved: vegetatively propagated cassava and self-pollinated 
common beans. Presently ongoing studies of farmers’ varietal selection criteria will be 
expanded to better understand how farmers use, maintain and discard genetic diversity. Gender 
analysis will be a tool in determining the appropriate types of farmers to involve in the 
evaluation, collection and selection for different traits. Data will be integrated with GIS 
analysis to understand the spatial distribution of local genetic diversity, types of users and their 
preference structures.
Strategies will be tested for bringing a broad range of germplasm in the early stages of the 
breeding process to farmers’ fields and involving farmers in their selection. Germplasm will be 
drawn from segregating progenies from the recombination of elite materials from CIAT’s 
extensive collections as well as local landraces. At the same time these progenies will be 
evaluated within the normal breeding programs of the participating national and international 
partners.
The viability of alternative approaches to in situ conservation with farmer participation will be 
assessed, involving for example, farmer managed nurseries or conservation through breeding
56
with valued landraces. Research will compare differences in the selective pressures that 
farmers and professional breeders working alone, and working together, exert on the local 
genetic resources in these two crops; to characterize the advantages and disadvantages of 
different approaches to participatory breeding and in situ conservation.
It is hypothesized that a broader range of genotypes will be selected within a given ecosystem 
with farmer involvement, creating a mosaic of genetic diversity at the field, farm and 
community level. Effects of conventional and different strategies for farmer participation on 
genetic diversity will be monitored, as wells as the relationship of the resultant genetic 
diversity on yields, quality traits and the incidence of abiotic and biotic constraints to 
production.
The field work on cassava for this study will be initiated by CIAT and CORPOICA in the 
north coast of Colombia, and is expected to have an important methodological spin-off within 
a short time for related breeding work, linked to the semi-arid regions of Africa in a 
collaborative project with EMBRAPA, Brazil and IITA. The field work on beans will be 
carried out in Cajamarca, Peru - a center of diversity of common beans.
Duration: Five years.
Total value of the project: US $1,600,000 of which 50% is contributed by existing core of the 
partner institutions.
2. Maize diversity and conservation and utilization - A farmer-scientist collaborative 
approach
Institutional Partners: CIMMYT (executing agency); Mexican National Institute for Research 
on Forestry, Agriculture and Livestock (INIFAP); Mexican National Agricultural College 
(Chapingo) and Post-graduate School (Montecillos); NGOs involved in biodiversity 
conservation and agricultural/rural development in Mexico; ejido and farmer’s groups; 
collaboration with the McKnight Foundation funded project in the state of Puebla, Mexico.
Overview: Participation in the proposed systemwide program will enable the collaborating 
research program to develop and evaluate alternative methods for farmer involvement in 
improving maize landraces in situ and the conservation of diversity in maize in ex situ banks, 
which should be useful to farmers and maize breeders worldwide. The project involves 
innovative methodology development to merge farmers’ knowledge of the strengths and 
weaknesses of locally grown folk varieties with professional breeder’s knowledge of global 
germplasm resources, to improve the usefulness of folk varieties and thus the conservation of 
valued traits. Cultivars collected with farmer involvement as well as new ones resulting from 
participatory breeding will be preserved at CIMMYT and other Mexican genebanks. Gender 
analysis will be an essential tool for establishing the value of different traits and genetic 
material, for impact assessment and for determining what types of farmers should participate
57
in different aspects of the work; collection, evaluation, breeding, monitoring and 
dissemination. A review and comparative analysis of selected techniques for participatory 
breeding and monitoring of genetic diversity will be carried out, together with the 
development of a strategy to disseminate these techniques to different types of users. The 
development of methodology for evaluating the impact of the farmer-scientist collaborative 
approach will be integral to the research. The field work for this project will be located in four 
iJ- sites in Mexico, the center of origin of maize, and which today contains more maize diversity 
that any other part of the world, with 80% of its maize area planted to local landraces.
Duration: Six years
Total value of the project: US $4 million
3. Farmers and Breeders: Building a partnership for rainfed rice
Institutional Partners: IRRI, the Indian Council for Agricultural Research (ICAR), the 
International Rainfed Lowland and Upland Rice Research Consortia
Overview: Involvement with the proposed systemwide program will enable this project to test 
and evaluate a number of alternative strategies for bringing farmers into the generation of 
improved rice varieties for more than 50 million hectares of rainfed environments. Farmers 
will be provided with diverse plant populations for evaluation and selection, with respect to 
adaptation to stresses and increased productivity in contrasting subecosystems. These gene 
pools will include segregating populations, dihaploid lines, advanced breeding lines and 
composite populations.
Methodology development will include the examination of the results of farmer involvement in 
the selection of these different sources of genetic materials, and the advantages and 
disadvantages of alternative approaches to harnessing the complementary skills of farmers and 
breeders through farmer participation in this selection process. It will also involve attention to 
traits selected or easily detected by farmers. It is in these cases that the tools of 
biotechnology, such as tagged genes and molecular markers, may be applied in the farmers’ 
fields during the selection process. Particular attention will be given to developing applications 
of biotechnology which farmers can understand and use for selection and varietal deployment.
The project also involves the widespread dissemination and implementation of the most
efficacious strategies identified, in partnership with NARIs, NGOs, Universities and farmers 
organizations in eastern India, northeastern Thailand and the southern Philippines.
Duration: Three years.
Total value of the project:
58
4. Participatory natural resource management research in the drylands 
The case of Southern Tunisia
Institutional Partners: ICARDA, Syria in collaboration with the Insitut des Regions Arides 
(IRA) under the umbrella of the Dryland Resource Management Project (DRMP).
Overview. There is a growing concern among the developing Mediterranean countries on the 
degradation of natural resources (soil, water and natural vegetation) and its potential impact on 
the sustainability of agricultural development. As a result of rapid population growth and 
higher income levels, food demand continues to rise, thus exerting a mounting pressure on the 
limited land and water resources. Traditional resource management systems, where 
communities played a vital role, are weakening or disappearing due to social changes. 
Traditional conservation practices, such as terraces, are being neglected and abandoned, thus 
causing accelerated soil erosion and siltation in dams. Expansion of cultivation into the 
marginal lands, which were traditionally reserved for grazing, is increasing soil erosion by 
wind and water. Other environmental impacts of land degradation include the loss of natural 
bio-diversity which affects future crop improvement.
Policy makers in Tunisia, as in many countries in the region, are concerned about the effects 
of natural resource degradation on rural poverty and associated social problems. There is a 
direct linkage between resource degradation and poverty. Also, the impact of water shortage 
on the country’s future development is of particular concern to Tunisian policy makers.
Hence, they are very keen to enhance the conservation and efficient utilization of water 
resources in any way possible.
The institutional partners have initiated an inter-disciplinary and participatory resource 
management research under the umbrella of Dryland Resource Mangement Project (DRMP). 
While the participatory approach is necessary to ensure that the perspectives and views of 
individual land users, who will ultimately make the resource management decisions, are heard 
and their solutions incorporated into the research process. Users’ participation will enable 
researchers to understand why observed actions are being taken and assist in identifying the 
causes of degradation.
The approach emphasizes a watershed perspective, where groups of farmers using a micro­
watershed are identified, and collective group action on practices for overall improvement as 
well as individually selected practices are identified and evaluated. The step-by-step approach 
of the participatory methodology used to elicit farmers’ perspectives, understand their 
problems and allow their selection of solutions will be clearly documented. The significance 
and contribution of the participatory methods to the success of the research process will be 
demonstrated. The applied participatory approach involves the collaboration of different 
partners, including farmers, researchers, development agencies, NGOs, fanner organizations, 
community leaders and policy makers at different levels.
59
pfsoas _ Telèfono: (57-2)445-0000 Fax: (57-2)445-0273 Correo electrónlco (E-mall): CIAT@CGNET.COM  Dlrecclón postal (Mailing address): A.A. 6713, Call, Colombia
Centro Internaclonal de Agrlcultura Tropical 
,*®r’ International Center for Tropical Agriculture
#SDR / TAG©
DIR-8 78 Rec’d: 0 h NOV 1996
October 29, 1996
Referred to:
Dr. Donald Winkelmann Sok'
TAC Chair
355 East Palace Avenue AK
Santa Fe, New Mexico 87501 16 ...
U.S.A.
PR 3 j i o- 91 (jxsoer lefW)
Dear Dr. Winkelmann: Pr 3)1 * c\xr
J
CIAT would like to request that the agenda for the next TAC meeting TAC71 include 
consideration of the proposal from the systemwide initiative on participatory research and gender 
analysis to become a program.
The systemwide initiative has completed its planning phase and developed a workplan for the 
proposed program during the International Seminar on Participatory Research and Gender 
Analysis and subsequent Planning Meeting held in September. This was developed through a 
participatory planning process with partner institutions, including CIMMYT, IRRI, ICARDA 
and CIAT as the cosponsoring Centers, as well as other IARCs, several NARIs and international 
as well as grassroots NGOs. The revised proposal containing the workplan is being sent to TAC 
members and the TAC secretariat with a copy of this letter, by e-mail and courier.
CIAT has received preliminary indications of interest from several donors, including the 
Netherlands, Australia, Norway, IDRC and Germany. The cosponsoring Centers plan to explore 
further with donors the possibilities for support during ICW96. A favorable indication from TAC 
with respect to the status of the proposal will be important in consolidating donor support, in 
maintaining momentum and supporting the enthusiasm of our partners to start work on the 
proposed program in early 1997.
We look forward to your response.
With best regards,
GRANT SCOBIE 
Director General
cc: DGs: CIMMYT, IRRI, ICARDA, TAC Secretariat, TAC members
Systemwide Programme on Participatory Research and 
Gender Analysis for Technology Development and 
Institution Innovation
TAC considered the proposal submitted by CIAT for the Systemwide 
Programme on Participatory Research and Gender Analysis for Technology 
Development and Institution Innovation. The programme resulted from a series of 
deliberations and interactions that had begun with a Wageningen Workshop in July 
1995. The present final version includes CIAT, CIMMYT, IRRI and ICARDA as 
participating CGIAR Centres as well as a group of NARS partners and other 
institutions.
The Committee notes that the proposal does not mention the possible value of 
participatory approaches and gender analysis for the understanding of constraints and 
of poverty distribution for marginal lands. It, therefore, suggests that special 
consideration be given to these points by the researchers.
TAC also encourages the participating centres to make use of the relevant 
experiences of other institutions in order to better document their present proposal. It 
is suggested that a paper (mansucript/book) be produced on a survey of such 
experiences in order to document and to form a good “base” that would be available 
for the interested institutions.
Furthermore, the Committee recommends that the four Centres, together with 
their partners, devise a set of milestones and performance criteria in order to evaluate 
progress in the achievement of objectives.
It is also noted by TAC that institutionalization of methods (output 4) may not 
be a realistic pursuit for a research programme.
Finally, the programme was generally endorsed at the budget level requested, 
provided that the above-mentioned points are taken into account.