Who are the Managers of Diversity? Characterizing the social,

cultural, economic environments

Presentation in the Summer School on Agrobiodiversity, Rome Sept 2018

A. Farmers roles and the management of diversity

• Farmers decisions about crop diversity are shaped by their socially, culturally and economically determined roles in their communities

• These roles affect the extent and type of diversity they maintain by shaping their access to knowledge, resources; hence their actions

• Analyzing these roles provides an understanding of crop and varietal management systems and guides the design and implementation of on-farm diversity conservation programs

• To understand these roles, one needs to study the characteristics of farmers at different spatial scales- farm production unit, farmer groups, farming communities

• This brings out differences and enables comparisons

Bioversity International\B. VincetiBioversity International\A. Drucker

Characterizing the custodians and managers of

diversity

A. Social characteristics for understanding farmers’ management of crop diversity:

• Age : associated with specialized knowledge about diversity, local agro

environments and preferences; leading to different management decisions and

choices by age groups. (Indigenous knowledge-old people; unique crop and their

wild relatives knowledge – young farmers)

• Gender: Differences in knowledge or responsibilities about crops can result into

variation in uses, preferences, ownership or labour regimes associated with men

and women.

• Kinship: determines individuals access to seeds and specialized knowledge about

crops. Key aspects important to quantify are customary rules for residence,

inheritance filiation and marriage, as they influence the geographic structure of

crop genetic diversity

Social characteristics for understanding farmers’ management of crop diversity:

• Wealth and Income status: Depending on

the agro-environment and local socio-

economic context, there is a potential for

wealth to be positively or negatively

correlated with crop genetic diversity. Can

determine the kind of varieties grown /

consumed and the associated knowledge

• Education: Reflects literacy levels. Can

control the income generating activities,

social status, access to knowledge/

information and putting it to use.

• Social status: Can affect the role of

individuals within social networks and how

they benefit from them. May also account

for their influence on local seed systems and

flow of diversity

Social characteristics for understanding farmers’ management of crop diversity:

• Ethnicity: Different ethnic groups may

cultivate unique varieties and employ

different agro-ecological management

approaches based on traditions, norms and

ethnic values. Certain varieties may have

particular rituals or religious values.

• Language: Is a marker for socially and

culturally specific knowledge about crop

diversity. Identification and managing

diversity is often conceptualized differently

in different languages. May reflect historical

relationships or social constraints e.g trade

or political relationships can influence

distribution of diversity on different scales

B. Social Relationships and the Distribution of Crop Diversity

B. Social Relationships and the Distribution of Crop Diversity

Social relations / networks:

• influence access to seeds of varieties and information to grow them

successfully

• may be interpersonal based on kinship and intra community

• provide a measure of assurance about provenance, characteristics, quality of

seed

• Function similar to seed certification in formal seed markets

However some social norms may render social networks ineffective and compel

farmers to getting seed from other sources e.g markets but the quality of this

seed may not be reliable

Associations / Social Networks

• Some social networks are more effective in transferring seeds and

associated information than others and their role needs to be

recognized

• An important component of these networks are associations which

may be of internal or external origin

• All associations/ institutions that provide benefits to farmers build their

social capital and/ or their capacity to develop and use social networks

• They can be formal and led by outsiders like farmer credit clubs that

obtain modern varieties and inputs for farmers

• They can be informal within a village or town to cater for daily needs e.g

funds for weddings, burials, credit associations, work groups

• Associations are inclusive to different extents and can serve one or more

functions, some are for economic functions only

Diversity of farmer groups

• Informal – formal groups

• Cooperatives – associations

• PO’s, FO’s, FG’s, CBO’s, SHG’s, ....

• Economic–political orientation

• Multi-purpose – single purpose

• Different levels

• Specific farmer groups:

smallholders, women, youth, ...

• Farmers together with other

stakeholders

• Platforms

POs FGs

Cooperatives Informal

groups

FO’s

Formal

groups

Associations

Primary /

local groups

Higher tiers –

unions,

federations

SHG’s

Multi-

purpose

Single

purpose

Political -

representation

Economic

services

Platforms Networks

Do all farm households play an equal role in managing and maintaining

diversity in a community or seed network?

1. Nodal farmers :

• Are sources of seeds, information and expertise for managing diversity

• Are expert cultivators , may be ceremonial leaders or herbalists as well

• Roles vary with time, social and economic circumstances

2. Custodian farmers:

• maintain high amounts of diversity on-farm including locally or regionally rare

varieties and are often known locally or regionally

• Can be targeted for support to increase access and availability of diversity to the

community

3. Others may:

• Not maintain high levels of diversity

• Be exceptionally known as diligent, dedicated and skilled farmers who achieve surplus

harvests even under non ideal conditions

• Play a big role in local/ regional seed systems especially after poor seasons when

many farmers may have inadequate seed stock

C. Social Capital, Collective Action and Property Rights

Photo credit: Khant Zaw

C. Social Capital, Collective Action and Property RightsSocial networks / associations:

• influence farmers’ maintenance of diversity in

ways that reflect broader societal institutions

and policy structures

• Can facilitate farmers access to credit and

information about new management options

and practices

• Enable farmers engage in collective

management practices

• Strengthen the property rights of individuals

or groups

Collective actions:

• Are the voluntary steps taken by a group to

achieve common interests and property

regimes

• May Involve members of a group to act on

their own or through an organization

• Can help in dealing with market imperfections

and transaction costs e.g those on constraints

to accessing information, credit, marketingLI-BIRD/A. Subedi

Collective action FO – yes or no?A rich farmer decides to become an input dealer and to sell to neighbouring farmers

Yes

No

During wintertime farmers in the community decide to come together to discuss about new

varieties

Multipurpose cooperative deciding to establish a saving and credit wing

The Board of Abahinzi cooperative negotiates with rich farmer about delivery of 200 tonnes of

fertilizer

Farmers from different parts in the district destroying the local supermarket because they were not

paid in time

Y/IF

Yes

Y/IF

Women of ‘merry go round’ putting informal savings on bank account and using this as security

for bank loan

The cooperative agreeing with bank that first year member borrowers pay 2% interest per month,

second year borrowers (if they have repaid) 1.75%, third year 1.5% and fifth year 1.25% Yes

Y/IF

A specialized seed multiplication farmer selling his seeds to the extension service, who distributes

to farmersNo

Property Rights

• Imply the capacity to call upon the collective to stand behind one’s claim to a benefit stream

• Projects or policy interventions that strengthen individual or group property rights and farmers’ participation in collective activities can improve their bargaining power and ability to negotiate with other social actors

• Such interventions may involve development of institutional mechanisms for farmers organizing themselves to promote use of traditional varieties e.g private associations

• These mechanisms can result into closer linkages with policy institutions that support farmers’ unions and cooperatives efforts to sustain local and regional agriculture systems

Production

D.Tools and methods for documenting and relating farmer

characteristics to crop genetic diversity

D. Tools and methods for documenting and relating farmer

characteristics to crop genetic diversity

Social scientists developed a wide range of research methods to measure the

socially, culturally and economically defined roles of farmers and relate them

to crop diversity at different scales of analysis

Usually this starts with participatory diagnosis of the situation on the ground

using a combination of qualitative and quantitative methods

Participatory DiagnosisExplores how user groups understand and act on

problematic situations to define the agenda for the

subsequent project phases such as:

• Identifying and evaluating technology options

that build on local knowledge and resources

• Ensuring that technical innovations are

appropriate for the local socioeconomic,

cultural and political contexts

• Setting up mechanisms for wider sharing and

use of agricultural innovations

• Monitoring and evaluating agricultural

improvements resulting from the research and

development process

Useful when the purpose of the project is to

examine problems, needs and opportunities as

perceived by user groups (prioritize)

Does not substitute other research methods where

biophysical or social situations are observed and

interpreted

Can involve stakeholder/gender analysis, livelihood

systems assessment, local knowledge

documentation and baseline studies

LI-BIRD/A. Subedi

Participatory Diagnostic studies

Generate information about the agricultural

systems being targeted for improvement through

research and development efforts

Can be grouped into those that enable studying:

1.The biophysical characteristics of particular

ecosystems

2.The social profiles of farmers and other

managers of these agroecosystems

3. Local farmers knowledge about biophysical and

social dynamics of agroecosystems

4. Broad knowledge including concepts,

perceptions, beliefs, values, decisions and actions

(most useful here)

Qualitative Social Research Methods

• Enable researchers to document in depth the social and cultural

context of a farming community and get familiar with the local

management of diversity.

• Most tools are applicable in both individual and group settings

• Information in the social context of diversity management obtained

qualitatively is often vital for the full accurate interpretation of

subsequent data collected quantitatively

1. Interviews

• Individual or small group interviews are a better

setting for talking to people who may be shy to

express their true opinions in bigger groups

• Group interviews have the advantage of

presenting multiple perspectives from a social

group in a single sitting

What are the other advantages of group

interviews?

• The style can be open ended with the goal of

getting a general insight of themes e.g local life

• The style can be semi-structured where a

researcher makes an outline of the themes,

reference points or key questions to cover during

the interview

What are the advantages and disadvantages of

each style?

2. Oral Histories

• Kind of an interview with the goal of documenting past events, trends and

changes from the perspective of local collaborators.

• Can be organized in form of historical timeline or transect or seasonal calendar

on a shorter timescale

Bioversity International\A. Drucker

3. Participant Observation

• Extended interview where researcher joins collaborators in an activity e.g

selecting seed and gets information from the informal conversation and from

direct experience of doing the activity

• Enables one to ask detailed questions and verify information with what is being

observed

4. Mapping

• Involves preparing an informal map and

combines quite productively with interviewing

• Can be done with a group or a household to

capture spatial information efficiently

• The vernacular maps that result from such

sessions are not drawn to scale and local

landforms or features may be drawn from

unusual perspectives

• But these maps are extremely useful as

templates for asking questions about

agricultural practices, trends and community or

farm level management of plant genetic

resources

• Where collaborators are familiar with

interpreting formal baseline maps, these can

provide basis for discussion

• GPS technology can be used to standardize the

information generated through collaborative

mapping exercises

5. Diagramming

• Is used to illustrate and explain

processes, relationships and structures

even if originally the information is not

spatial in nature

• Time saving alternative to asking a

farmer many questions

• An example is the seedflow diagram

which is an efficient visual way for

farmers to convey precise information

about where and how they obtain seed

of different varieties and with whom they

share seeds

• Important to define all shapes and lines

of the diagram in the key

Quantitative Social Research methods

• Involve collecting socio and economic data in a systematic fashion such that the

results are statistically valid and representative of the entire population,

community or region depending on scale of sampling

• Quantitative information about the socio context of diversity is commonly

collected using survey instruments or standardized questions from individual

interviews

• However, when properly applied, the participatory methods described in the

previous slides can yield at least three distinctive types of quantitative

information

Quantitative information generated by participatory research

methodsi) Identification and characterization data: lists of

names, criteria, descriptions, reasons and

nominal data to identify and characterize a

particular subject (Data answering when, what,

where, how and why questions)

ii)Rating and comparison data: ranks, scores and

similar data where farmers are asked to rate,

compare and differentiate a set of variables

• To facilitate coding of this data , the same range

of scores or scales should be set when designing

the data collection instruments

• Belief statements also involve rating and

comparison where scores are assigned to each

possible response on a rating scale

• Belief statements represent the direction, extent

or degree of agreement or conformity to

particular beliefs, attitudes, norms and

motivations

12

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

1011

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

0

1

2

3

4

5

Score: Community perception on SEPL resilience

Kwangwenda

Yamba

12

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

1011

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

0

1

2

3

4

5

Trend: Community perception on SEPL resilience

Kwangwenda

Yamba

Quantitative information generated by participatory research

methodsiii) Visualization data: maps, diagrams and

specimens which are used as visual tools for

informants to articulate their knowledge of a

particular subject

• Used to illustrate location, direction, relationship

, pattern and trend

• Visual data can be processed using content

analysis

• Content analysis is a method for getting

meanings conveyed by farmers through symbols

as field data by encoding them into a database

through assigning them numerical values and

identities

• Each map or diagram from an individual or

group interview is one unit of observation

• After encoding in the database, visual data is

analyzed like more conventional survey data

12

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

1011

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

0

1

2

3

4

5Kwangwenda

Yamba

Quantitative Social Research methods

• Quantitative information can be collected from groups or individuals and it is

important to distinguish the unit of observation from which the data is gotten

• Data from a group discussion is a single quantitative observation, even a

community map generated by many participants is a single unit of observation

• Individual interviews are each separate units of observation regardless of

whether participatory tools or direct questions are used to collect the data using

a questionnaire

• Questionnaires and similar survey instruments involve an interviewer asking

respondents questions to get answers pertinent to the research hypothesis

• The wording of questions and sequence define the structure of the interview

Quantitative Social Research methods

• Survey interviews can vary in flexibility; in

structured interviews, questions are phrased

and ordered the same for each participant to

prevent varying interpretations of the questions

• With GIS it is feasible to map and analyze

spatial patterns of social and economic

variables with environmental factors

• Spatial information can be combined with

surveys focusing on relative importance of

different social or economic status groups in

diversity management

• As other quantitative techniques, properly

implemented surveys should produce data for

statistical analysis in particular for developing

empirical models that can test different

hypotheses

• Models are used to investigate decision

making about diversity at both individual and

household level and can integrate quantitative

economic, social, ecological, agronomic

variables depending on questions in survey

instrument

Use of social and economic data in the management of diversity• To work more efficiently, policy makers and conservationists concerned with

managing diversity on-farm, need to know individuals, households or communities

most likely to maintain diversity

• This ensures that conservation programs and policies are implemented in a cost

effective manner because they compete for scarce public funds

• The data collection tools discussed enable us understand social groups or networks

to be targeted by conservation policies and programs

Use of social and economic data in the management of diversity

• The farm household emerges as the key social institution for

understanding the evolution and persistence of crop diversity under farmer

management in agricultural contexts that are not fully commercialized

• However field research has demonstrated that focus should be on defining

the unit of decision making within social, cultural and economic contexts

• The tools can be used to identify potential institutions to collaborate with

in conservation programs on the ground

• They also provide suggestions of designing policies most effectively by

showing how different social actors value diversity and why they continue

to maintain it

Thank you

www.bioversityinternational.org/subscribe

@BioversityInt

http://agrobiodiversityplatform.org/cropbiodiversity/.