The Impact of Farmer Field Schools on Knowledge and Productivity: A Study of Potato Farmers in the Peruvian Andes

Published in the Economic Development and Cultural Change journal, this study evaluates the impact of a farmer field school (FFS) programme on Peruvian Andes potato farmers' knowledge levels on pest management techniques. FFS is a participatory strategy in agricultural extension programmes aimed at helping farmers to acquire analytical skills, critical thinking, and other knowledge resources to make better and independent judgment. The effectiveness of communication strategies was not explicitly analysed in the study. However, given that communication components were an integral part of the key operational strategies of the present FFS programme (field activities, interactive learning, horizontal knowledge sharing, and information dissemination and feedback mechanisms between farmers and extension staff), the overall impacts of the project were expected to reflect the effectiveness and efficiency of communication components.


Evaluation/Research Methodologies:
The project took place in the department of Cajamarca, Peru, a high-altitude region where small-farm potato growing constitutes the main economic base, from 1998-1999. FFS participants learned integrated pest management techniques, and were expected to attend 12 training sessions (once a week). FFS participants were selected among farmers who had been already participating in a more conventional extension programme (the Andino programme).

The authors conducted a household survey to compare FFS farmers (four villages) to nonparticipating farmers (six villages) in terms of pest management technique knowledge. In addition, a third group (participating in the Andino programme, three villages) was introduced to assess the relative impact of FFS against the impact of a more common extension programme based on "training and visit" or transfer of technology approach. Two statistical techniques were employed - regression, and matching on probability propensity scores - to estimate the impacts of FFS participation on knowledge.



Key Findings/Impact:
The questionnaire asked farmers to provide their primary sources of information on tasks related to potato cultivation. "Family members" were cited most frequently as the primary source of information. Farmers also sought information on new technologies, such as new varieties and pesticides, from their neighbours. For more complex technical issues, farmers cited not only family members and neighbours as their primary sources of information but also CARE (the implementing organisation of the present FFS).

Both estimations (regression and matched propensity scores) found that FFS participants scored significantly higher than both the participants of a conventional agricultural extension programme (Andino participants) and nonparticipants. On average, the knowledge test scores of FFS participants were 14%-points higher than two other groups. However, noting that the survey was conducted immediately after the completion of FFS, the authors acknowledge that the findings may only reflect short-term knowledge acquisition.

The study also found that the participants of the Andino programme scored higher than nonparticipants. Recalling that all FFS participants were recruited among the Andino programme participants, the authors note that the FFS-effect should be understood in the context of the cumulative impacts of succeeding implementations of multiple programmes. Gains in knowledge almost doubled when Andino farmers also participated in FFS.

Finally, the authors used the potato productivity data from farmers not participating either FFS or Andino to simulate the potential impacts of FFS on potato productivity. (Direct empirical measurement was not possible because the FFS programme was only in its first year of operation and, thus, it was very unlikely for the impacts of FFS to show up on crop yields.) Simulation indicated that FFS participation would result in an increase of 2.5 points in the output-input ratio, representing a 32% increase over the average output-input ratio of 7.9 among farmers not participating in any programmes.