Adoption/Diffusion - PD/A CRSP Eighth Work Plan

The research to date has endeavored to identify the characteristics and farm situations of aquaculture producers who are actual or potential adopters of PD/A CRSP technologies. If PD/A CRSP technologies and research findings are to have impacts at the farm level, it is important to understand the constraints and interests of producers who comprise the target audience for the project. Advances in basic understanding of the pond environment and cultural practices must eventually be translated and diffused to hatcheries, fish farmers, and other agencies and organizations involved in aquaculture development. Documenting the central mechanisms of transaction between fish farmers and the knowledge system in aquaculture is a fundamental objective of this work. Subsequent studies will address these issues at new sites, expand the scope of, and clarify socioeconomic dimensions as they affect the conduct and progress of the overall research program through the efforts of individual scientists and their host institutions.

The research has been cross-cutting in a number of ways. The studies conducted to date reflect a series of parallel studies conducted at four PD/A CRSP sites. The farm-level surveys have applied a common core survey instrument to small samples of fish farmers while including a significant component of site-specific questions and adaptations. The country-specific questions are designed to augment the outreach and research problem selection processes undertaken by each project.

Related activities of the site-specific work plans also synergize with this project. The studies that will be undertaken in Kenya replicate and extend previous work in Rwanda. The knowledge and experience gained in Rwanda may have significant implications and help fine-tune the research program in Kenya. The objectives of the Thailand site are to be a regional outreach site for neighboring countries, complementing the efforts of other donors and activities already underway at the Asian Institute of Technology. The study to be undertaken in Vietnam (after legal obstacles have been cleared) will be designed to complement the existing set of donor activities, to support the PD/A CRSP effort to contribute to aquacultural development in the region, and to complement and extend the host country's research and outreach effort to fish farmers.

1) Profile the human capital impacts of the Global Experiment in terms of training, advancement, and the technology transfer consequences of developing-country nationals affiliated with CRSP research sites.

2) Describe the practices, technical proficiency, and receptivity to the adoption of CRSP technologies and production regimes among tilapia farmers.

3) To obtain basic production, marketing, labor, input supply, and farming system information from potential adopters of CRSP-related technologies that might be incorporated in expert systems that rely on comprehensive socio-bio-economic models of pond aquaculture

4) Develop baseline information for technology development transfer efforts in Viet Nam.

The socioeconomic program of the PD/A CRSP relates to the research priorities and constraints described in the Continuation Plan in the following ways. Primarily, this work will elucidate barriers to assimilation of technological innovations through extension and training. It will endeavor to identify ways which circumvent or overcome such barriers. Some impediments reflect gender-related social patterns and differential access to information and technology. Others pertain to inadequate farm-level incentives and little-understood constraints to intensification of aquacultural activities. The limits of local markets, real or perceived production risks, and village-level organizational problems may inhibit participation in aquacultural development. An overall climate of food insecurity may undermine efforts to introduce new enterprises such as a aquaculture. Socioeconomic research undertaken through the PD/A CRSP will address these and other important aspects of interface between the research program and the rural sector.

1. This objective will be addressed by analysis of CRSP reports, interaction with CRSP personnel, and a mailed survey of CRSP counterparts, students, employees, and others associated with CRSP scientists. The objective will be to portray the technology transfer pathways whereby CRSP research has reached farms, hatcheries, industry, universities, and government agencies through personal experience with CRSP activity. An M.S. student will be supported by this work and the thesis will endeavor to apply established conceptual frameworks and research approaches from the sociology of science to examine this aspect of the CRSP.

The project will endeavor to utilize students from CRSP project sites to analyze data and address project objectives. The thesis and reports completed by these students will contribute to the CRSP project and develop the socioeconomic analytical abilities of students who will later undertake planning and management positions in their home countries.

2. An initial version of an integrated framework for considering socioeconomic factors affecting the implementation and sustained pursuit of pond aquaculture has been developed (Molnar et al. 1996). The project will extend the initial research approach and socioeconomic framework to new CRSP locales Kenya and Viet Nam (when permissible)^1.. This study has developed a standardized profile of aquaculture practices, profitability measures, community characteristics, and producer orientations in four CRSP countries.

3. This effort will endeavor to build upon previous research and analysis of socioeconomic issues linked to aquacultural development. Specific attention will be paid to the situations in CRSP site countries as contexts for receiving CRSP technologies. Thus Goal 2 continues and extends an established approach for documenting socioeconomic impact and diagnosing conditions impeding the utilization of CRSP research results in the field.

4. This objective will consist of a replication of the Honduras, Thailand, and Philippine data collection strategy in Viet Nam. The instrument and approach will be adapted to reflect the niche occupied by tilapia in the Viet Namese agricultural system. Molnar will collaborate with C. K. Lin to identify sites, institutional collaborators, and country-specific research issues. This work will be planned in consultation with AIT staff members Harvey Demaine and Peter Edwards who have established extensive contacts and relationships with Viet Namese institutions.

The extension of CRSP research efforts to Kenya and Viet Nam represents the opportunity to develop baseline information about the technology needs and production niches for fish farmers in these counties. This information may help guide the selection of research strategies and types of technologies to be developed by CRSP research. Information detailing farmer perceptions of production and marketing problems should be useful for shaping the problems addressed in research trials and the formulation of realistic prescriptions for farm level practice.

Recent visitors to Viet Nam report the street price of tilapia to be around $0.28 to $0.49 per kg or larger fish. Viet Namese are reputed to each fish up to 4 times per week and per capita consumption is around 12 kg/year, the lowest in Asia. Most families have small fish ponds located near houses. In low-lying areas, the ponds are associated with excavations resulting from home site construction. Land tenure is based on government concession, but sufficient title security apparently is present to motivate land improvements such as pond construction. Rents or taxes are paid by some farmers. The poorest people are in the uplands. They are targeted for aquacultural development.²

Cooperation across disciplinary boundaries is difficult enough, but the issue is not just one of philosophical recognition of the need for social science input, but also one of resource allocation. Social science researchers must have some continuity of relationship to CRSP scientists and researchers in order to learn the disciplinary subculture and provide sustained analyses to the project as it evolves.

Regular patterns of visits to field sites, collaboration with indigenous social science professionals, and interaction with CRSP scientists are fundamental aspects of the CRSP social scientist's role. There is a distinction to be made between critical, innovative research that enervates CRSP activities, and routine data collection and analysis that fulfill ritualistic needs but makes little substantive contribution.

Important questions pertain to the technologies and production regimes emerging from CRSP aquaculture research that can actually be implemented on farms in developing countries. Much of the baseline data commonly found in other agricultural sciences has been lacking in aquaculture. The CRSP has identified many of the needed parameters that apply across diverse environments. It is not clear how or to what extent the research findings are reaching institutions serving farmers in CRSP countries and whether they in turn are extending the findings to farmers.

There is a need to clarify the correspondence between the CRSP paradigm, farmer perspectives, and actual farming system potentials. It has not been established whether the assumed inputs are available, at what cost, and if farmers think that the production regimes fit their farming systems. It is well-understood that economic returns are only one of an array of forces that shape farmer decisions about technology. Thus the orientation of the CRSP social science research program is to complement and extend the biological, technology-development program of the CRSP.

The research team consists of a Rural Sociologist and an Aquacultural Biologist associated with the Asian Institute of Technology in Thailand ³. We will work with other CRSP researchers, host country counterparts to plan, design, and coordinate the new research efforts. Relationships have been established with the proposed investigators and AIT staff already working in Viet Nam. The Auburn University socioeconomic researcher has extensive experience of data collection in developing countries and the socioeconomic analysis of aquaculture projects.

The results of this research are expected to clarify mechanisms by which CRSP research is and can be disseminated. The research can be expected to establish principles for enhancing the transfer of CRSP technology to industry and farmers; it also can be expected to affect the choice of research strategy and problem selection clarifying the farm-level implications of various technologies and production strategies. Thus, the expected impact is dual; on the planning and conduct of the CRSP effort overall, as well on the diffusion and implementation of CRSP research findings in the field.

The project will provide baseline data for the new CRSP sites in a way that will allow the documentation of quantitative and qualitative impacts of aquacultural research on the institutional and farm levels. Gender is a central social variable in the analysis of developmental impacts; the research design will make provision for the gender-separate analysis of human capital impacts. In particular, we will examine the training needs and impacts of the CRSP as they pertain to men and women in host country institutions. Similarly we will endeavor to portray differential farm- and household-level impacts as they are differentially realized among men and women.

In Kenya and Viet Nam, the research will provide baseline data about the practice of aquaculture, the availability of inputs, and the structure of incentives and constraints that shape farm-level decision making. Understanding the role of fish culture in the household and the local economy is crucial for developing appropriate technology and selecting effective mechanisms for technology transfer.

Similarly, the proposed study will provide detailed information about the level of aquaculture practice in other CRSP sites not yet included in the study. It may feature return visits to accomplish field studies address emergent social and institutional issues identified collaboratively with CRSP personnel. It also will develop better specification of the role of fish culture in the household and farming system, particularly those segments most likely to need and implement CRSP technologies.

Basic information about fish farmers, their households, and their farming systems is usually nonexistent. Institutions often proceed on the basis of established practice or conventional wisdom that may neglect the circumstances of women and small-scale operators. Systematic information about the conditions, circumstances, and problems experienced by farmers provides basic knowledge for planning and guiding a research program. The perceptions and interests of representative samples of farm operators can be useful for informing the direction and strategy of technology development.

Surveys provide statistical estimates of target population parameters. Surveys can be efficient ways of collecting and aggregating information about the characteristics of individual farmers or individual farm units, information that is necessary to project planning as well as to some aspects of later project evaluation.

Survey data, however, is not as effective in revealing the interaction effects, the combination of circumstances that lead to the extremes of success or failure. Field studies can provide insight and human meaning to complement statistical fact. Field studies, involving such techniques as participant observation and the use of informants can be useful means for discovering patterns of perception, behavior, and organization that would not be readily revealed in surveys (Harrison 1995).

Survey and other quantitative data provides the numerical documentation often required by the evaluation system in USAID. Qualitative information emanating from trip reports and field studies provides the motivational understanding for success and failure on the ground. Verbatim quotations from fish farmer beneficiaries/participants are often critical aspects of an argument conveying the worth and utility of a program.

There is a need to supplement socioeconomic surveys with field studies devoted to specific topics or issues pertinent to the stage of the project or situation at hand. Field studies involve intensive interviewing, observation, and immersion in the situations confronting farmers and researchers. Field studies can constructively focus on specific themes, accumulate important data, and then articulate valid insights that further project objectives and enhance the impacts of fish culture on villages, farm families, and the rural poor (ALCOM 1990).

Field studies may be commissioned when a problem is perceived or experienced in terms of widespread de-adoption or conflicts among fish farmers or between fish farmers and other groups. Other issues may emerge from more routine field work objectives that lead to discoveries of certain patterns, problems, or circumstances that would have been otherwise overlooked or ignored to the eventual detriment of the CRSP in that locale.

The proposed project examines issues integrally related to the design and conduct of the Global Experiment. The first objective will clarify the mechanisms of technology transfer associated with the normal conduct of CRSP activities that have often been taken for granted or underutilized. Additional socioeconomic studies in additional CRSP locales will contribute to a comprehensive perspective on the findings and technology associated with the Global Experiment, its utilization by farmers and institutional systems, and its impacts on individual, family, and community well-being (Coughenour 1992, Veverica and Molnar 1996).

The institutional impacts of CRSP technologies are often uneven because the process depends on the organizational location of the researcher, her language capabilities, and varying levels of personal motivation and ability to spend non research time with farmers, hatchery operators, and industry representatives. The consulting practices of CRSP researchers may enhance the influence of CRSP technologies on national industries, but also may increase the inequities distancing small farmers from large-scale agribusiness. Researchers are sometimes faced with ethical dilemmas connected to the known efficacy of large-scale industrial enterprises in implementing new technology vis-a-vis the isolation, fragmentation, and caution of the small-scale sector.

Leaving the diffusion process entirely to the vagaries of the market may not accomplish the poverty alleviation and income improvement associated with USAID funding. Social science research may discover indigenous mechanisms for conveying technology, particularly to NGOs and other organized entities that can retail technology to small farmers, women, and other hard-to-reach categories of fish culturalists. The information channels that actually reach farmers can then be utilized in a realistic manner to convey practical information about the prospects for fish culture (Rogers 1983, Roling 1989).

We would endeavor to promote and disseminate the results of the study in manifold formal and informal ways. Within the CRSP itself, socioeconomic research is disseminated through presentations and discussions at the Annual Meeting. These are central mechanisms for getting the study results to the scientists, but email and the PD/A CRSP newsletter also are vital forums. Externally, the results are conveyed through disciplinary publications and serials devoted to development issues.

The International Center for Aquaculture and Aquatic Environments has extensive experience in conducting overseas aquaculture development projects. The knowledge of aquaculture technology, host country institutions, and personnel will be a valuable asset in the conduct of the proposed research. Similarly, the University of Hawaii has been the institutional home for the Philippine CRSP project and is well-positioned to assist the proposed work.

This project will build on established relationships with CRSP researchers around the world. Auburn University, University of Hawaii, and AIT personnel have established email and fax communication ties that will facilitate the conduct of the overall project. We will work closely with CRSP personnel and host country collaborators around the globe to implement the research activities associated with the first objective.

The benefits of regular participation of social scientists in the CRSP program stem from the trip reports, research articles, and other publications that emanate from the project. These documents can be called on to guide a new effort, elucidate a conflict or issue, help shape a decision about the direction or technology development, and contribute to the continued justification and support of the research program.

The development and availability of technology appropriate to the circumstances and environments of developing country farmers is a critical issue facing researchers around the globe. Sociological research identifying the mechanisms and channels facilitating the transfer and implementation of aquacultural technology in various locales may generate insights shortening the period between initiation and application of research results in some developing countries (Tendler 1993, Huisman 1990).

Along with C. Kwei Lin, the investigators have working relationships with AIT staff Peter Edwards and Harvey Demaine who have British ODA support for planning activities in the fisheries and aquaculture sector in Viet Nam. Auburn University has current ties to World Bank activities in Kenya and Viet Nam. The investigators have established relationships or are personally acquainted with nearly all CRSP personnel. This is a real strength in conducting globally-oriented research at far-flung sites with diverse personnel.

Although the consequences of CRSP research may be most centrally articulate, through accounts of technologies identified, publications accomplished, and patents received, effects on people are what justify continued support. The humanistic imperative to help others help themselves remains a fundamental motivation and justification for the CRSP. Social science research sustains a longitudinal base of information about the progress of the CRSP and can provide testimony and defense of CRSP activity. Gender issues and the differential impacts of project extension and training activities on women and men are fundamental considerations for social science research (Engle 1987).

The dialogue about project direction, issues, and agenda is informed by an interested participant with a comparative perspective on the impacts, consequences, and meaning of fish culture in developing countries. This relationship in turn informs the social scientist's apprehension of technical problems in the field and in the laboratory, increasing the relevance of the social science research that is conducted and communicated (Cernea 1991a, 1991b).

The many institutional actors working in aquaculture perhaps should be considered the primary audience for a global research project such as the PD/A CRSP. Although some level of direct farmer contact and training is necessary for keeping PD/A CRSP scientists in touch with the direct experiences and problems of fish farmers, the impacts and influence of the PD/A CRSP may be greater if institutions and industry are understood to be the primary consumers of PD/A CRSP outcomes.

Thus, seminars for NGOs that maintain extensive and long-term relationships with villages and small-scale farmers may be the most important mechanism for reaching this constituency than direct intervention by the PD/A CRSP. As long as small- and medium-scale farmers remains a central target segment for PD/A CRSP research impacts, the development of a continuing network of contacts with representatives of these groups will be a significant objective for the PD/A CRSP. The NGOs may be more effective at stimulating interest and reaching small-scale farmers than governmental organizations or the limited and sporadic activities of PD/A CRSP personnel (Kaimowitz 1993). These and other means may be used for wholesaling PD/A CRSP technology to actors closer to village life who will be there when PD/A CRSP is not.

ALCOM (Aquaculture for Local Community Development Programme). 1990. Methods to promote aquaculture in rural development workshop. FAO Report GCP/INT/436/SWE/REP/5. Harare, Zimbabwe.

Cernea, M. 1991a. Putting people first: sociological variables in rural development. Washington, DC: The World Bank.

Cernea, M. M. 1991b. Using knowledge from social science in development projects. Discussion Paper Number 114. Washington, DC: The World Bank.

Coughenour, C. M. 1992. A new agenda for CRSP social science research. In: C. M. Coughenour (Editor). Proceedings of the Workshop on Social Science Research and the CRSPs. Unnumbered Report. Lexington: Department of Rural Sociology, University of Kentucky.

Edwards, P. 1994. Partners in development: the promotion of sustainable aquaculture. AIT Aquaculture, Asian Institute of Technology, Bangkok.

Engle, C. R. 1987. Women in training and extension services in aquaculture. In: E. E. Nash, C. R. Engle, and D. Crosetti, (Editors). Women in Aquaculture. ADCP/REP/87/28. Food and Agricultural Organization of the United Nations, Rome:67-82.

Harrison, E. 1995. My pond has no fish: aquaculture development in Luapula Province, Zambia. Unnumbered Report. Brighton, England: University of Sussex, School of African and Asian Studies.

Huisman, E. A. 1990. Aquacultural research as a tool in international assistance. Ambio 19:400-403.

Kaimowitz. D. 1993. The role of nongovernmental organizations in agricultural research and technology transfer in Latin America. World Development 21:1139-1150.

Molnar, J. J. and B. L. Duncan. 1989. Monitoring and evaluating aquaculture projects. In: R.B. Pollnac (Editor). Monitoring and Evaluating the Impacts of Small-Scale Fishery Projects. International Center for Marine Resource Development, Kingston, Rhode Island:28-40.

Moehl, J. and J. Molnar. 1995. Dilemmas of aquacultural development in Rwanda. In: C. Bailey, S. Jentoff, and P. Sinclair (Editors). Social and Environmental Aspects of Aquacultural Development. Boulder: Westview Press.

Molnar, J. J., V. Adjavon, and A. Rubagumya. 1991. The sustainability of aquaculture as a farm enterprise in Rwanda. Journal of Applied Aquaculture (1)2:37-62.

Molnar, J., C. Cox, A. Rubagumya, and P. Nyirahabimana. 1993. Socioeconomic factors affecting the transfer and sustainability of aquaculture technology in Rwanda. Research and Development Series 35. Auburn University, Alabama. International Center for Aquaculture and Aquatic Environments.

Molnar, J. J., B. L. Duncan and U. Hatch. 1987. Fish in the farming system: the FSR approach to aquacultural development. In: H. Schwarzweller (Editor). Research in Rural Sociology and Rural Development. JAI Press, Greenwich, Connecticut:169-193.

Molnar, J. J., T. R. Hanson, and L. L. Lovshin. 1996. Social, economic, and institutional dimensions of aquacultural research: the pond dynamics/aquaculture CRSP in Rwanda, Honduras, the Philippines. and Thailand. Research and Development Series No. 38. Auburn University, Alabama: International Center for Aquaculture and Aquatic Environments.

Molnar, J. J., N. B. Schwartz, and L. L. Lovshin. 1985. Integrated aquacultural development: sociological issues in the cooperative management of community fish ponds. Sociological Ruralis XXV:61-80.

Roling, N. 1989. Extension science: information systems in agricultural development. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, England.

Tendler, J. 1993. Tales of dissemination in small-farm agriculture: lessons for institution builders. World Development 21:1567-1582.

Veverica, K. L. and J. J. Molnar. In press. Extending aquaculture technology to fish farmers. In: H. Egna and C. E. Boyd (Editors). Dynamics of Pond Aquaculture. CRC Press, New York.

^{1 Travel to Viet Nam is currently not permissible under State Department
regulations. Thus this project outline describes the nature of the work
to be conducted but does not allocate budget for the research. If U.S.
policy changes on this matter, efforts will be made to secure the resources
to conduct the work outlined here in a subsequent period; or an alternative
area in Asia will be proposed.}

^{2 Le Thanh Hung, Associate Fisheries Dean at the University of
Agriculture and Forestry in Saigon is interested in doing socioeconomic
assessments. We have met and exchange information with Mr. V. Sin, the
socioeconomist for aquaculture at the University.}

^{3 C.K. Lin and J. Molnar will collaborate though email interaction
and sharing of documents and other information pertinent to the project
objectives. The work in Viet Nam will be facilitate by the aquacultural
scientist's extensive experience in Asia and previous contacts with the
focal institutions and their key personnel. Dr. Lin will review data collection
instruments and participate in the preparation of project reports; he will
participate in the planning for the African site field studies and in the
identification of an alternative to Viet Nam if policy changes are not
forthcoming.}

The Pond Dynamics/Aquaculture CRSP is funded under USAID Grant No. LAG-G-00-96-90015-00 and by the participating US and Host Country institutions. Questions for or about the Aquaculture CRSP? Comments about this site? Email ACRSP@oregonstate.edu.

Disclaimers

Eighth Work Plan
1 August 1996 to 31 July 1998
Table of Contents