For years, IFAP has been insisting that agriculture research has to be farmer-focused. It must solve the problems farmers face both in production and in marketing. The 3rd Triennial Conference of the Global Forum on Agricultural Research (GFAR) that took place in New Delhi, India, 9-11 November 2006 was an opportunity for farmers to lobby for this agenda – with significant success.
It has been the case in many developed countries for years that agricultural research is focused on farmers needs, because farmers have been contributing to agricultural research through check-offs (commodity levies) and so have influence in directing it. In some Latin American countries, farmers’ organisations have representatives on the governing bodies of their national research institutes, and because government resources and producer check-offs flow through farmers’ organizations, they have created research institutes admired the world over. This is not the case everywhere, and particularly for small-scale producers who do not yet have strong farm organisations representing them – not yet.
This is where IFAP stepped in a number of years ago and insisted that GFAR must change the way it does business; regional and national institutes were asked to do the same. Success has been significant over the last few years with research institute after research institute opening up their structures to let farmers in. But does this in itself lead to change? Of course not. Change is measured by improvements in types of projects that are given priority, the inclusion of producer groups in determining their design, how the project is administered and the role out of the plan to make the technology available to producers.
Now back to the GFAR Congress. The new chair insisted on change; a large delegation of producers from around the world from large to small scale insisted on change. The research community and donor groups insisted on change. Many of the guest speakers are talking like farm leaders, asking “how do we really engage farmers in the market in a profitable way to respond to the industry concentration that has taken place?” How do we organize producers to meet the food safety/traceability requirements to sell to the today’s retail sector and, for small scale producers, “how do we give special attention to their needs?” This broad recognition in New Delhi of the need for a farmer-centred approach to agricultural research now needs to be translated into meaningful action on the ground.
The large question of bio-energy was talked about and how do we make sure some of the benefit goes to producers, and for small-scale producers in remote areas how does research play a role to deliver technologies that will work on a small-scale. Here is an opportunity to give rural communities not only sustainable food production, but, for the first time in their lives, sustainable energy. Energy that allows the opportunity to move forward in the area of personal and rural development to create the jobs so desperately needed.
There is no turning back. The genie is out of the bottle now. It is up to the farm community to get better organised and take advantage of this opportunity.
It has been the case in many developed countries for years that agricultural research is focused on farmers needs, because farmers have been contributing to agricultural research through check-offs (commodity levies) and so have influence in directing it. In some Latin American countries, farmers’ organisations have representatives on the governing bodies of their national research institutes, and because government resources and producer check-offs flow through farmers’ organizations, they have created research institutes admired the world over. This is not the case everywhere, and particularly for small-scale producers who do not yet have strong farm organisations representing them – not yet.
This is where IFAP stepped in a number of years ago and insisted that GFAR must change the way it does business; regional and national institutes were asked to do the same. Success has been significant over the last few years with research institute after research institute opening up their structures to let farmers in. But does this in itself lead to change? Of course not. Change is measured by improvements in types of projects that are given priority, the inclusion of producer groups in determining their design, how the project is administered and the role out of the plan to make the technology available to producers.
Now back to the GFAR Congress. The new chair insisted on change; a large delegation of producers from around the world from large to small scale insisted on change. The research community and donor groups insisted on change. Many of the guest speakers are talking like farm leaders, asking “how do we really engage farmers in the market in a profitable way to respond to the industry concentration that has taken place?” How do we organize producers to meet the food safety/traceability requirements to sell to the today’s retail sector and, for small scale producers, “how do we give special attention to their needs?” This broad recognition in New Delhi of the need for a farmer-centred approach to agricultural research now needs to be translated into meaningful action on the ground.
The large question of bio-energy was talked about and how do we make sure some of the benefit goes to producers, and for small-scale producers in remote areas how does research play a role to deliver technologies that will work on a small-scale. Here is an opportunity to give rural communities not only sustainable food production, but, for the first time in their lives, sustainable energy. Energy that allows the opportunity to move forward in the area of personal and rural development to create the jobs so desperately needed.
There is no turning back. The genie is out of the bottle now. It is up to the farm community to get better organised and take advantage of this opportunity.
Jack Wilkinson, IFAP President