Change and innovation in the Volta Basin Development Challenge program

Change and Innovation in the Volta

Basin Development Challenge Program

A Working Presentation

Karen Marie Greenough, PhDV5, VBDC Science Meeting

18 September 2013

Contents The Research

Objectives What’s happened

Meeting & Tours

Interviews

Analysis Tentative “conclusions”

VBDC Changes and “Innovations”

Fostering Innovation? People: RTF &

Villagers Time Communication Investment

Objectives of the ResearchTo discover changes – possibly

innovations – that result from project activities

Among researchers, facilitators and extension agents partnered or subcontracted within the projects

Among local project participants (and non-participants): producers, NGO members, extension agents, bureaucrats, chefferie

To examine the characteristics of “innovations” and “innovators”

To provide some conclusions about the above for future projects

Methods: Meeting & ToursVSS Tours

V1 Learning Event,Yako PGIS Tour

V2 IP Meetings, BF & Gh

V3 Feedback Meetings, BF & Gh

Methods: Meeting & ToursV4

Commod Workshops, BF & Gh White Volta Basin Board

Reorganization Meeting

V5 Group d’apprentissage–Burkina

Common System of Documentation

Atelier de Concertation de Haut Niveau

Field Tour & Reflection 2012

Methods: Interviews VSS Tour interviews

Gave a broader picture of change and drivers of change

Local participants and non-participants: 95 “Non-participants” :

People not selected to participate in IPs or workshops

Interviews will show whether and how ideas generated by project activities are spreading

Researchers, Technicians & Facilitators: 45 Many different stories and experiences Many different views of change and innovation

Place Based Project No. Place Based Project No.

Ouaga all 13 Tamale V2 1Ouahigouya V2 4 Nyankpala V2 6Bobo V3/5 5 Lawra V2 1Dedougou V4 2 Babille V2 2

24 Wa V2 1

Participants & other interviewees Bawku V3 2Dano V4 3 Binaba V3 1Diébougou V4 6 16

Naburnye V4 1Tiankora V4 1 Binaba V3/4 21Diourawo V4 2 Lawra V2 30Bouroum-Bouroum V4 1 Golinga V2 10Gaoua V4 3 Digu V2 12

22 73

R,T,F based elsewhere V1 & 2 5 Total Interviewees 140

Participants & other interviewees5V4

2V4Bolgatanga

Bapla

GhanaBurkina Faso

Researchers, Technicians, Faciliatators Researchers, Technicians, Faciliatators

AnalysisCoding interview transcriptions & field

notes Looking for patterns Validating (or not) hypotheses and tentative

conclusions Coming up with new hypotheses

and conclusions

Reading

Social Network Analysis People to people People to Structures Structures to Structures Mapping

Tentative “conclusions”Definitions of “innovations”

There seems to be a difference between northernand local researchers

Local definitions : Not necessarily entirely new, but new to the context, i.e. “new to us”

Characteristics of Innovators Relatively wealthy: poor people do not have the

resources, including time, to innovate Connected: through commercial networks and/or

associations Participants of projects tend to be selected because

of previous project work

Tentative “conclusions”Communication and innovation

Face to face connections between people are mostbeneficial

Meetings cannot provide needed comprehensiveinformation

Programs need to study “how” people communicatewithin the projects and programs

Projects & innovation All stakeholders must understand the precise type & level of

participation “Stuff” & “Accompaniment”: need local contributions from the start People waiting for project activities or stuff seem less likely to innovate Development, especially participatory, takes time

“We underestimated the time needed. We need researchers as dedicated staff for the project core. We need to have more modest expectations of impacts.”

VBDC Changes and “Innovations”Changes in outlooks, knowledge and skills

Local researchers benefit from working with farmerson trial plots.

Villagers share knowledge that they have gained fromthe projects.

Villagers in Digu and Golinga build animal pens. Local researchers understand that policy must be

developed from the base.“In drafting policy, there should be room for adjustment when you move from one place to another.”

Researchers, Tech, and Facilitators learn from each other.

“Well, in terms of experience, one new thing is working on water.”

“And then, the researchers’ manner of approaching the question. Don’t just attack things like that. Really try to understand them and their causes.”

VBDC Changes and “Innovations”New interactions

Between villagers who never worked together before.

Between structures who have never worked together before.

“The project has definitely strengthened relationships with partner institutions.”

New technologies and processes TAGMI Improved crop varieties Rainwater harvesting techniques The participatory techniques of

multi-stakeholder platforms

Fostering Innovation? … PeopleResearch for Development involves

a multitude of very different kinds of people with very different understandings with very different goals

They don’t always understand each other

They can’t always talk to each other

Their goals may be in conflict with each other

They may only want “stuff” from each other Villagers want inputs and technology. Researchers want research results. Everyone wants their per diem.

Seeing like Researchers“It’s complicated! We have to have complex partnerships for complex problems. Of course, there are transaction costs.”

***********

“We need to involve the partner as early as possible to make them to understand the way we imagine the process. This is the most important step of the project, and if we cannot succeed in this first step, all the other steps will not work.”

***********

CPWF is “like a kind of laboratory, where people are testing and experimenting without being too mindful what that would mean in terms of demands on people implementing the projects.”

***********

“But in recent years, I think innovation is more an issue of psychological appropriation. It’s very important that local people have the impression that it comes from them, you see?”

***********

“This project was more like a trial and error. So we did not have the impression that it was really, completely well-planned.”

***********

“It is very difficult to have a scientific project, and simultaneously to have to communicate to our stakeholders. This requires different skills; it probably also requires different people.”

Seeing like Villagers

“They don’t like us.”

“I had to learn to humble myself.”

Researchers are a separate species: They have more money than we will ever see in our lifetimes. They travel very fast in rich vehicles; wear rich, fancy clothing;

live in rich, fancy houses.

They will never understand or respect us. They can barely stand to be in the places we live. They won’t drink our water or eat our food.

We watch them rush in and out … Knowing that when one project leaves another will come; Strategizing how to get as much as we can out of the one that

is here now; Wondering whether to risk resources by trying new technology.

They can and do leave; we cannot.

1979 ABC diguettes en terreDEF live fencing

1984-2004 GHI1 tree nurseriesnatural regeneration

2005-2009 GHI2 cordonnes pierreszaïtech trainingfoyers améliorés soap makingcomposting

2006-2009 JKL latrines2012 foot pedal pump wells 2008 MNO open wells

cordonnes pierresimproved seed tech trainingmanagement committeesimproved zaïcompostingdemi-lunes

2008-present PQR micro-creditsoap makingsoumbalarainwater harvest training

A Sketch of Projects in One Village

Fostering Innovation? … TimeAn Agricultural Innovation Systems approach

departs from a linear transfer from researcher to farmer goes beyond previous participatory development approaches

Participatory development takes time for .. understanding participatory approaches communication: face to face discussion and informal

conversation for going in-depth to understand the context of situations

Analysis of studies throughout the program takes time.

Time must be designed into the program.

Donors & directors must have the patience necessary for engaging participatory AIS development.

Fostering Innovation? … CommunicationDeveloping innovations takes communication

spontaneous conversational respectful two-way (“n”-way)

The AIS program should monitor how communication is happening among their stakeholders

Can researchers exchange with each other informally and often?

Are researchers, techs and facilitators engaging farmers in respectful exchanges?

Do researchers, techs and facilitators really understand the participatory processes?

Me? almost nothing. I mean, what is the definition of an innovation system?

Fostering Innovation? … Investment

Who owns the development? Researchers are reluctant to give up control.

Local stakeholders have little “stake” in the project.

Why should stakeholders care that you are trying to develop them?

An AIS program needs a careful balance between contributions from local stakeholders and inputs.

Stakeholders should contribute money from the very beginning of project.

This means, however… R4D personnel must deliver quality product.

All financing must be transparent.

All stakeholders must be engaged in two-way respectful conversations.

Acknowledgements Aly Diarra, research assistant

Kalie Lassiter, intern

Anna Tarrant, intern

Karin Neumayer, intern

Our translators in Ghana and Burkina, especially Adam Hudu

V5: Funke, Mahamoudou, Adjara, Joachim

Everyone who gave their time for interviews, allowed us to attend your meetings and workshops, and helped us with our site visits.

Thank you!!