Stephen Biggs

Evolving Themes in Rural Development 1950s- 2000s

∗ ∗ ∗ This article provides a brief overview of the major switches in rural development thinking that have occurred over the past half-century or so. Dominant and subsidiary themes are identified, as well as the co-existence of different narratives running in parallel. The continuing success of the long-running ‘small-farm efficiency’ paradigm is highlighted. The article concludes by asking whether sustainable livelihoods approaches can be interpreted as providing a new or different way forward for rural development in the future. The answer is a cautious ‘yes’, since these approaches potentially permit the cross-sectoral and multi-occupational character of contemporary rural livelihoods in low-income countries to be placed centre-stage in efforts to reduce rural poverty.

A multiple source of innovation model of agricultural research and technology promotion.

Abstract Two models of agricultural research and technology diffusion are described and contrasted. The central source of innovation model frequently underlies the theories and rhetoric of agricultural research and extension institutions. The multiple source of innovation model places agricultural research and diffusion processes in the historical, political, economic, agroclimatic, and institutional context in which technological change takes place. The paper discusses the evidence and reasons for the dominance of the central model and reviews the significance of the multiple source model for agricultural research policy.

Beyond methodologies: Coalition-building for participatory technology development

Abstract Participatory and other approaches to technology development have shared a recent preoccupation with specific methods and doubts about just how much can be expected of the methods themselves, as opposed to how they are applied, by whom, and in what circumstances. Detailed analysis of historical cases suggests that the development of both technologies and methodologies is highly dependent on local context. Such processes are characterized by conflicts over the direction of change and affected by the activities of a particular type of grouping, the development coalition. These coalitions are examined and implications are considered for training, education and Participatory technology development.

Sources of innovation in agricultural technology

Abstract This paper focuses attention on environmental and biological characteristics of agriculture which shape the process of technical innovation. The interaction of natural selection and human purposive selection and experimentation is shown to result in a continuous process of innovation placing farmers in the informal R and D systems as well as scientists in formal R and D systems in an innovative treadmill. The importance and limitations of informal R and D are reviewed. A discussion of the characteristics and potential of formal R and D systems leads to the identification of some major problems of policy inherent in, and specific to, the organization and management of agricultural research resources. These include: genetic vulnerability, choices between environmentally specific or widely adapted technologies, the location of research activity, the linkages between agricultural producers and scientists and methods for maintaining and strengthening informal R and D systems.

A Paradox of Learning in Project Cycle Management and the Role of Organizational Culture

Abstract Advocacy in favor of project cycle management (PCM) for development work continues to increase, with new PCM tools and techniques constantly introduced. There is, however, a growing literature documenting the “failures” of PCM in practice. There seems to be a paradox in the stance of the PCM literature. While at the center of its approach is the idea of a “learning cycle,” the normative PCM manuals appear remarkably robust against such learning. This paper argues that not enough attention is given to the influence of organizational culture on PCM and proposes that frameworks from cultural theory can help in addressing this shortcoming.

Stakeholders, science and decision making for poverty-focused rural mechanization research and development

Abstract This paper suggests that the long history of poor results from rural mechanization research and development interventions can be attributed at least in part to the use of limited sets of criteria for determining design and for monitoring and reviewing projects. We suggest that these sets of criteria reflect institutional history and understanding of development and the particular perspectives of the limited range of actors involved. We present information on the wide range of technical, economic, social and institutional issues that are integral to rural mechanization research and development interventions, and make the case for adopting a more holistic approach. To this end, two complementary tools — an adapted Tinbergen Framework and Stakeholder Analysis — are presented to enable researchers and policy makers to better grasp how their decisions relate to the total social and institutional environment.

Farming systems research and rural poverty: Relationships between context and content

Abstract In recent years there has been a great deal of interest in farming systems research (FSR) as a means of getting formal research and extension systems to work with and respond to the needs of resource-poor farmers. However, the results of many FSR programmes have been disappointing. This paper reviews a number of ‘successful’ FSR activities and argues that the development and use of research approaches and methods cannot be separated from the political, economic and institutional context in which they were developed and used. A closer examination of some of the new FSR methods shows that an understanding of the specific context in which these activities were developed and used is essential to understanding the potential relevance of the methods/approaches to other circumstances. A lack of an historical perspective concerning the source and advocacy of new FSR approaches and methods is one of the reasons why many FSR programmes in the past have given rise to disappointing results.

A farming systems approach: Some unanswered questions☆

Abstract This paper reviews major features generally found in Farming Systems Research (FSR) programmes and projects. The paper argues that while considerable attention has been given to the development of FSR manuals, survey techniques, etc., insufficient attention has been given to issues concerning the evaluation of FSR projects and the organisation and management of agricultural research in developing countries. The paper discusses important institutional issues such as control over agricultural research resources, creative conflict between disciplines, communications methods, evaluation and the need for research groups to define the specific clients (specific group of farmers) for whom they are working.

NGOs, agricultural technology and the rural poor

Abstract A wide range of agencies outside the public and private commercial sectors is involved in generating, introducing, testing and promoting agricultural technology, particularly for small farmers and landless labourers in marginal areas of less developed countries. Their experience is largely undocumented and tends to be overlooked. For specific locations, this paper discusses the significance of different types of voluntary agency vis-a-vis the public sector. Focusing on non-government organizations, it then examines in what roles they can be expected to perform well. Although still fragmentary, the evidence from Africa, Asia and Latin America indicates substantial unexploited complementarities between agencies within and outside the public sector.

The lost 1990s? Personal reflections on a history of participatory technology development

This article traces a history of agricultural participatory research, largely from the authors personal experience. Participatory research in the 1970s was mostly led by disciplinary scientists, and characterised by innovative activities and open academic debate, with some recognition that policy and development practice was a political process. The 1980s saw a shift to learning from past experience, and a participatory mainstream developed, seeking methods for scaling up. Meanwhile, others sought to understand and influence policy and institutional change in their political and cultural contexts, and to keep open the academic debates. The author considers the 1990s as ‘lost years’, during which mainstream participatory practitioners became inward-looking development generalists, not so interested in learning from others outside their paradigm. The late 2000s provide a chance to re-recognise the political and cultural embeddedness of science and technology; re-introduce strong, widely based disciplines; and learn from past activities that resulted in positive development outcomes (planned or unplanned).