QAToCA - a qualitative expert assessment tool for CA adoption in Africa. Hycenth Tim Ndah

Leibniz Centre for Agricultural Landscape Research (ZALF), Germany

QAToCA

a Qualitative expert Assessment Tool for CA adoption in Africa

- selected applications in Kenya, Tanzania and Zambia

Ndah, HT1; Schuler, J1; Uthes, S1; Zander, P1; Triomphe, B2; Apina, T3; Corbeels, M2

1 Leibniz-Centre for Agricultural Landscape Research (ZALF), Institute of Socio-Economics, Germany.

2 Centre de Coopération Internationale en Recherche Agronomique pour le Développement (CIRAD), France.

3 African Conservation Tillage Network (ACT), Kenya


Introduction

In spite of the large amount of available literature on constraints to CA

adoption in Africa,

a comprehensive self-assessment tool is lacking that allows a

systematic evaluation of the determinants in the CA adoption

process from field, farm to regional scale and for use in a variety

of regional contexts.

This knowledge gap motivated us to develop a Qualitative expert

Assessment Tool for the assessment of CA adoption (QAToCA),

QAToCA, pronounced [ka:toka:])

Developed in EU-funded project ‘CA2Africa’ (www.ca2africa.eu).

http://www.ca2africa.eu/


CA2Africa scales of implementation and QAToCA Coverage

Source: adapted from Corbeels et al (2009) CA2Africa DoW

QA

ToC

A


Overall goal of QAToCA

QAToCA is designed to assess in a semi-qualitative manner conditions under the following three themes that promote or hinder the adoption of CA in the heterogeneous farming contexts of Africa.

Socio-economic

conditions

Institutional

conditions

Cultural

conditionsQAToCA


Specific questions of QAToCA

The following issues are considered through cross comparison amongst the CA2Africa case studies:Which region(s) have higher or lower CA adoption potential?Which thematic area within the CA innovation system or component of a particular case study is likely to be influencing the adoption status? What are some of the key determinants of the observed adoption status?


Further use of outcomes

Outcomes can be used as a basis for restitutions and discussions with stakeholders of the case studies as this will assist in….

providing new insights into the specific CA development and diffusion programs and projects, and in

providing entry points for planning /adjusting some of the on-going and future CA-related actions.


Material and methods

The following steps have assisted in the development of the tool:

A review of selected adoption theories and conceptual models of

innovation systems

Inspiration from the ScalA –Tool: Tool for the assessment of

sustainability, climate relevance and scaling-up potential of project

approaches (Bringe et al (2006)

used by GTZ (http://www.gtz.de/) and Sustainet (

http://wwww.sustainet.org/)

CA2Africa experts evaluation and feedback. Pretesting and feedback in

CA2Africa 1st regional workshops with CA experts and stakeholders

(Tanzania, Burkina Faso, Tunisia, Morocco, Madagascar, Zimbabwe)

-Origin and development of QAToCA-

http://wwww.sustainet.org/


Theories and concepts used as framework

A list of adoption theories and conceptual models have acted as a framework for this tool, e.g.:

The adoption and diffusion theories put forward by Hruschka (1994); Rogers (2003); Hoffmann (2005) and Triomphe et al (2007)

The conceptual models of innovation proposed by Lundvall (2004); World Bank (2006); OECD (1997); Callon and Latour following Law and Hassard (1999)

NB: For a more detailed and comprehensive list and description of these theories and concepts, see deliverable report D2.2 of CA2Africa: An inventory of bio-physical, socioeconomic and conceptual models of innovation systems for assessment of agricultural (Innovative) practices


Structure of QAToCA

Questions are grouped under specific thematic areas

Consideration is given to differerent scales of implementation of a project from Farm level to Village/Local and Regional levels:

Object of Adoption (CA)

Capacity of implementing organisation

Attributes of Scaling up

Political/Institutional framework at Regional Level

Political/Institutional framework at Village level

Economic Conditions

Community’s attitude towards CA


Object of Adoption (CA)

Issues relating to the characteristics of CA as an object of adoption. Subjective measurement of issues such as:

Trialability of CA, complexity, compatibility with societal norms and customs, observability

Divisibility

Financial requirements of CA

Knowledge intensive nature


Capacity of implementing organization

Targets the CA implementing organizations

Checks on the overall philosophy of the organization

The type and quality of staff

Leadership quality

Connectivity of the institution or the level of network


Attributes of Scaling up

Measurement of the diffusion strategy of the promoting organizations is the main focus of this theme

Overall objective of diffusion

Organization’s level of documentation

Monitoring and evaluation

Type and quality of communication channels; organization’s level of involvement in capacity building

Use of incentives in stimulating adoption


Political/Institutional framework at regional level

This theme is focused on subjectively checking on the political or institutional frame conditions of the region

Level of political stability

Tolerance level of the civil society towards CA

The system of administration and its effect on CA promotion

Nature of administrative set up

Type of policies as well as their possible influence on the CA adoption


Political/Institutional framework at village level

Questions under this theme are focused on assessing:

Compatibility of CA as an emerging innovation with local customs and traditions

Issues of land access and

Land ownership


Economic Conditions

The theme addresses issues related to

Market availability and access

Availability of basic infrastructures such as farm to market roads and irrigation possibilities

Level of other economic actors’ engagement in CA promotion

Availability of quality control measures and implementation


Community’s attitude towards CA

Questions that fall in this theme check issue of acceptability of CA by:

The entire community,

Village leaders and

Other influential persons in the decision making process of the village

Young farmers vs. elderly farmers

Measure of the dynamic and innovative level of the CA community under consideration


Procedure


Evaluation Scale for QAToCA

Three possible statements for each operational question

The scale from 0-2 indicates the strength of the suggested statements

with respect to their influence on the potential of adoption

With:

0 = not influential, has no/negative effect on adoption likelihood

1 = little influence, has limited positive effect on adoption,

2 = highest influence, has maximum positive effect on adoption likelihood

N = if non of the statements is appropriate [including a comment]


Example: decision rule

Step 1 Step 2Step 5

2

Step 6Step 3 Step 4


Who should fill in the tool to ensure a reasonable degree of scientific quality?

Ideally, one QAToCA file should be filled in by several experts for one case study, assuming that no single expert has knowledge about all levels considered by the tool. The best selection would be

a researcher, an extensionist/promoter of CA, a farmer (with appropriate knowledge), who

adopted, and if possible a farmer, who adopted, but stopped

practicing, or who considered adoption, but then didn't go for it.

Target group for QAToCA


CA-SARD case studiesRegion Bungoma, Kenya Karatu, Tanzania

Location Western Kenya Arusha Region, northern part of Tanzania

Elevation 1200 – 2000 m 1000 - 1900 m

Rainfall 1250 - 1800 m 400 – 1200 mm

Temperature 20.0-22.5° C in the southern part to about 5.0-10.0° C

15 C° (forest) to 24 C° at the level of Lake Eyasi

farming systems

subsistence agriculture with Maize, Sunflower, Sugarcane, Coffee, Tobacco, Potatoes, Beans and cotton

maize, beans and paddy (rice), also wheat, barley, beans, maize, coffee, flowers, pigeon pea, sorghum, finger millet and sunflower.

CA systems cover crops, dolichos lablab, pigeon peas

sub-soiler, rippers and direct seeders or planters

wider row spacing

cover crops, (mucuna, lablab, sunn hemp, pigeon peas)

sub-soiler, rippers and direct seeders or planters

Results and Discussion: CA-SARD project


For Bungoma (Kenya):

Attributes of scaling up (C=100%),

Political and institutional frame conditions at village and regional levels (D and E=100% each) and

Community’s attitude towards CA (G=100%)

were all observed to have outstanding positive influence on CA adoption potential

but...:

Characteristics of CA as an object of adoption (A=59%) and

CA inputs plus market conditions (F=80%)

were seen to be negatively influencing CA adoption potential

Results and Discussion


For Karatu (Tanzania)Capacity of implementing institutions (B=100%)

was observed to have a major positive influence over CA adoption potential in the region.

but..:Attributes of scaling up (C=79%) and

Characteristics of CA (A=79%)

were observed as having negative influence over CA adoption potential for the region.

Some results from Tanzania:

Results and Discussion


Visualisation of results from Kenya and Tanzania

Bungoma, Kenya


Legend: +Supporting factor; - Hindering factor

Overview of supporting and hindering factors to CA adoption in Kenya and Tanzania

Case study regions Thematic area ID Indicator Karatu,

Kenya Ndindikuru, Tanzania

A01 Cost of CA and liquidity issues - - A02 Availability of CA knowledge - - A03 Complexity of CA - - A04 Labour requirements vs. endowments - - A05 Availability of social networks/org. - - A06 Residue and seeds requirements vs. availability + - A07 Machinery + fuel requirement and availability - - A08 Land requirement and availability + + A09 Observability of CA + + A10 CA yield response and time - - A11 Relative economic risk + - A12 Trialability + + A13 Flexibility/adaptability + + A14 CA and social status + prestige of farmers + -

A Object of Adoption (CA)

A15 CA and conflict over resources + - B1 Concept of organisation + + B2 Availability and quality of human resources + + B3 Leadership and reputation + + B4 Organisational linkage to other CA organisations

in the region + -

B5 Organisational linkage with target group + +

B Capacity of the implementing organisation

B6 Organisational linkage with stakeholders in the CA innovation systems

+ +

C01 Scaling up area, target groups and characteristics + + C02 Clarity of scaling up strategy + + C03 State and level of documentation, monitoring and

evaluation - +

C04 Usage of established communication channels + + C05 Diffusion strategy + + C06 Compatibility of selected diffusion strategy with

the target groups - +

C07 Linkage of promoting organisation with farmers - + C08 Organisation and level of involvement in

capacity building + +

C09 Type of communication channel - +

C Attributes of Scaling up

C10 Usage of incentives in the diffusion process - + D1 Political state of the region + + D2 Availability of enabling government policies + + D3 Government attitude towards CA research + + D4 State/level of administrative set up - + D5 System of administration practiced in the region - +

D Political/ institutional framework at regional level

D6 Civil society and social freedom + + E1 Availability of local level governance structures - + E2 Presence of supportive local organisations + + E3 Compatibility of CA to local customs and/or

norms and rules + +

E4 Land access, ownership and used - +

E Political/ institutional framework at village level

E5 Household spatial distribution and effect on CA adoption

+ +

F1 Availability of Market for CA products + - F2 Accessibility of markets for CA produce' + + F3 Availability of interest from CA economic actors + + F4 Availability of basic infrastructure for CA

adoption target group - -

F Economic conditions

F5 Availability of quality control structures e.g. Certification

- +

G1 Acceptability of CA by community - + G2 Acceptability of CA by village leaders/elders + + G3 Acceptability of CA by young farmers - + G4 Acceptability of CA by target group (farmers) + + G5 Social acceptability of individuals engagement in

CA + +

G Community’s attitude towards CA

G6 Availability of a dynamic and innovative community

+ +

* a close look reveals a certain dominance of supporting factors over hindering

factors hence a much better chance for CA adoption in the region.

* improving on the needed basic infrastructures : market access and roads, credit facilities and adapted CA

equipments to this region are key measures to effecting a scaling up of the technology

Results for thematic area A:


Conservation Farming Units case study

Region Zambia

Location Most provinces of Zambia

Elevation 1000 - 1900 m

Rainfall 800 – 1000 mm

farming systems Focus on maize and cotton

CA systems hand hoe planting basin systems dry-season ripping mechanized minimum tillage methods with

leguminous crop rotations


Some results from Zambia[Conservation framing Unit (CFU-Zambia)]

Thematic contribution to CA adoption potential in Zambia

Thematic area (A….G)Maximum possible points

Total points achieved

Percentage achieved (unweighted) (Points achieved/total points)

Percentage achieved (weighted with equal strength for each level)

A Object of Adoption (CA) (ObjofAdoptFarmVillLev) 30 23 77% 77%

B Capacity of implementing institution (CapacityofImplInstVillRegLev) 12 11 92% 92%

C Attributes of dissemination strategy (AttrOfDissemStraVillRegLev) 20 17 85% 85%

D Political/Institutional framework (PolInstFramRegLev) 12 9 75% 75%

E Political/Institutional framework (PolInstFramVillLev) 10 5 50% 50%

F CA products & inputs Market conditions (ProInpMarkCondVillRegLev) 10 6 60% 60%

G Perception of community towards CA (PercepCommVillRegLev) 12 9 75% 75%

Total 106 80 75% 73%

Thematic areas with significant negative influence over adoption potential in Zambia

Thematic areas with significant positive influence over adoption potential in Zambia


Results from Zambia cont.

Organisational linkage of CFU to other CA organisations in the region

CFU leadership and Reputation

Availability and quality of human resources employed by the CFU

Concept, philosophy and organisational structure of the CFU

CFU’s diffusion strategy and use of CA champions (lead farmers)

An existing enabling environment and good linkage of CFU experts with CA farmers

CFU’s involvement in capacity building

Main supporting factors to CA adoption potential (QAToCA analysis)

Scattered settlement pattern in farming communities hence, negative effect on CA dissemination activities

Limited land access, ownership and used especially for women

No compatibility of CA to local customs and/or norms and rules in some cases e.g. the use of herbicides for weeding is not welcomed by some communities.

Limited availability and accessibility of markets for CA products

Main hindering factors to CA adoption potential (QAToCA analysis)


Have fun with QAToCA!!

Photo by: Ndah HT; Basins preparation in Kafue district (Zambia)

We wish to thank especially: • all the CFU team-Zambia for the moral and logistic support

during the field visit and • all stakeholders of CA2Africa for their contributions during

the QAToCA workshops


For more insight and references, see:

• Ndah, HT.; Schuler, J.; Uthes, S.; Zander, P.; Triomphe, B.; (2010): The concept of the Qualitative expert Assessment Tool for CA Adoption (QAToCA). Manual/working paper; ZALF Muencheberg, CIRAD France

• Uthes, S.; Ndah, HT.; Triomphe, B.; Schuler, J.; Zander, P. (2011): D2.2 Report on inventory of bio-physical and bio-economic models and conceptual models of innovation systems for assessment of agricultural (innovative) practices. ZALF Muencheberg, CIRAD France

Thank you for your attention!

Education

QAToCA - a qualitative expert assessment tool for CA adoption in Africa. Hycenth Tim Ndah