Biggelaar, Christoffel den (author) and Nancy Hart (ed.) (1996) Farmer experimentation and innovation: a study of knowledge generation processes in agroforestry systems in Rwanda. 134 pp. ISSN 1020-4466. Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, Rome. Forests, Trees and People Programme (FTPP), Community Forestry Case Study Series, No 12. The FTPP publications are distributed on request to members of the FTP network. In Africa, contact: Forest Action Network, P.O. Box 21428, Nairobi, Kenya. Fax: +254-2-718 398. In South Asia, contact: WATCH, G.P.O. Box 5723, Baneshor, Kathmandu, Nepal. Fax: +977-1-473 224. In the rest of Asia and Pacific countries, contact: RECOFTC, P.O.Box 1111, Bangkok 10903, Thailand. Fax: +66-2-561 4880. In North America and the Carribean, contact: NACARCE, 5400 Grosvenor Lane, Bethesda, Maryland 20814, USA. Fax: +1-301-897 3690. In Europe and Middle East countries, contact: Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences, Department of Rural Development Studies, Box 7005, SE-750 07, Uppsala, Sweden. Fax: +46-18-673 420.

This publication is based on a field study conducted in Rwanda, the African country that became known the world over for the genocides of 1959, 1973 and 1994. The researcher worked in Butare and Gikongoro in 1992 and finished his dissertation just before the massacres of 1994 took place. They were particularly severe in Butare. Initially, Den Biggelaar was too distracted by the events to continue writing, but finally he managed to turn his thesis into the present FAO document, hoping that it will be of use to the farmers who survived.

The research concerned farmers' knowledge of the cultivation of trees and bushes, taking into account that, locally, bushes are also defined as trees. With sensitivity to cultural specifics, the author describes how farmers develop their knowledge gradually through experience, over many growing seasons. From season to season they see ecological dynamics change and learn from these changes. The combined human and natural fluctuations continually provide new outcomes.

During interviews with groups of men and women, farmers were ranked according to their knowledge of trees. Forty-four tree experts were selected by the community and a random sample of 70 non-experts provided the basis for comparison. Interviews and observation revealed that the tree experts cultivated more trees, and more different kinds of trees, than the other group. They were able to do so because they had more land and other resources. They tended to be older, more experienced and more aggressive in approaching others for advice.

The non-experts had on average less knowledge about trees, less land and other assets, and took less risk in experimenting with new species. But they had specific types of knowledge and ways of experimenting that were targeted at the complex interactions between the low species diversity on their plots and the surrounding high-density agroforestry systems.

Effects of land size coincided to some extent with gender differences. Larger land owners and men were primarily interested in planting trees for timber and construction poles. Micro-holders and women focused more on trees as contributing to the family food supply.

The study recommends that development projects introducing new trees should not be too narrow in focus. Farmers want a number of tree species and management options that can be adjusted to land size, and they want safeguards against economic and ecological uncertainties. Farmers are accustomed to experimenting and then integrating their findings into their daily practice. For this reason, outside knowledge has a fair chance of application if it can be absorbed piecemeal and on the basis of the farmers' own experiments. External inputs can be derived from scientific research, but they can also be derived from indigenous knowledge systems elsewhere in Rwanda and other developing countries. Guided tours for exchanging findings are useful for this purpose, as are visually oriented media such as video films, CD-ROMs and 3-D computers.

(Peter van der Werff, Institute for Environmental Studies, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, the Netherlands)

Budelman, Arnoud (ed.) (1996) Agricultural R&D at the crossroads. Merging systems research and social actor approaches. 247 pp. ISBN 90-6832-107-2. HFL 59 Royal Tropical Institute, KIT Press, Mauritskade 63, P.O. Box 95001, 1090 HA Amsterdam, the Netherlands.
Tel.: +31-20-5688 272.
Fax: +31-20-5688 286.
E-mail: kitpress@kit.support.nl

Now here is a book which caught my attention, as it presents the views of researchers and development agents who are searching for ways to be useful to farmers. The book, edited by Dr Budelman, contains a selection of papers presented at an international symposium on systems-oriented research in agriculture and rural development which was held in Montpellier (France) from 21 to 25 November 1994.

Apart from the introduction, there are 17 contributions, of which six are in French and the rest are in English. (Each contribution is accompanied by an abstract in the other language.) All contributors acknowledge the fact that agricultural researchers alone cannot engineer development, which for many countries means increasing food production using sustainable methods. It is becoming increasingly clear that social, political and economic processes are often as critical as--and even overshadow--technological innovation. Various cases studies--mostly from Africa but also from Asia and Australia—illustrate this point.

The book presents interesting ideas regarding the role of farmers' organizations in the research and extension process, and suggests factors that can facilitate the emergence of such organizations. Comparisons between Anglophone and Francophone research, and discussion and integration of the different points of view, make the book especially interesting. R&D and recherche - développement can differ significantly.

The book contains a detailed annotated bibliography. It ends with a Swahili saying: 'Only the one who is willing to wait can eat ripe fruit.' Readers do not have to wait, however, since this book offers plenty of ripe fruit in the form of interesting discussions on how to integrate indigenous knowledge into development efforts.

(Jan Brouwers, Maastricht University, Center for European Studies, the Netherlands)

Cromwell, Elisabeth (1996) Governments, farmers and seeds in a changing Africa. 174 pp. ISBN 0-85198-976-4. £30 or US$55 (Americas only). CAB International, Wallingford, Oxon OX10 8DE, UK.
Tel.: +44-1491-832 111.
Fax: +44-1491-833 508.

This author has certainly worked closely with farmers in developing countries, as this book and her five earlier publications testify. She has also been a research fellow at the Overseas Development Institute (ODI), London (UK), which is known for its interest in indigenous knowledge. With this background, there is little doubt that she is among the scientists who are convinced that farmers have knowledge that should be taken into account any time that attempts are made to solve their problems.

The main points made in the book are:

• the importance of perserving genetic diversity, and of protecting this diversity against the practice common among extension services in Africa, which is to sweep away local seeds and replace them with new varieties;
• recognition of the fact that local seeds are still the ones best suited to the areas in question;
• provision of a framework for analysis of the seed sector.
  

In this review I will consider only the framework for analyzing the seed sector as it applies in Benin. Such analysis has been needed ever since the government in Benin withdrew from this sector, as governments in other countries have done. This withdrawal is a matter of serious concern. As regards the other points, it is especially important in countries with a high proportion of small farmers that developing efforts be directed towards organizing the informal seed sector. This makes more sense than spending huge amounts of money on research to find high-yield varieties.

In my opinion, the book's main contributions are:

• The conclusion from the case study of the National Seed Company of Malawi that there has been no significant change in the performance of the seed sector since its transfer from the public sector to the private sector. This is indeed an interesting result, especially in the present situation of developing countries facing adjustment programmes. As I see it, the private sector operating under monopoly conditions will never perform better than the public sector, since it has no incentive to do so.
• The emphasis on linkages between organizations. Most plant breeders have no idea what farmers want—a point that the book does well to make.
• The emphasis on national policy as another causal factor. The lack of investment in transport and communication is certainly a major constraint to the development of rural areas in Africa.

The book has one shortcoming, however. The author should have suggested a framework to deal with the informal seed sector. This important sector should not be ignored, since it provides food for the poor farmers and employment at the same time. There is a great need for research that would make sound suggestions for improvements.

This book will be useful for officers in the agricultural sector, and for ministries of agriculture and economics, NGOs, agriculture faculties at universities, the donor community, and international agencies such as FAO and UNDP. In Benin, where the need to reorganize national research is acute, the book will certainly be welcome.

(A. Adegbidi, Faculté des Sciences Agronomiques, Université National du Bénin)

Innis, Donald Q. (1997) Intercropping and the scientific basis of traditional agriculture.
179 pp. with 83 figures and tables. ISBN 1-85339-328-2. £19.95 Intermediate Technology Publications, Ltd., 103-105 Southampton Row, London WC1B 4HH, UK.

This book was written by the late Professor Donald Q. Innis, who lectured in geography at the State University of New York, Genesco, NY (USA) for more than two decades. The book represents the culmination of the late professor's work on traditional agriculture, and records his experiences and observations of working with farmers in the developing world.

The benefits of intercropping and the maintenance of soil fertility have been known to farmers almost since the very origins of agriculture in the Fertile Crescent. But mechanized farming and the planting of monocultures has eroded germplasm and degraded soils on a massive scale. Huge amounts of fertilizer and chemicals are needed to sustain the high yields required to keep large-scale, highly mechanized commercial farmers from losing money.

The author gives examples of the use of indigenous knowledge in farming systems of the Caribbean, Nepal and India. This reviewer has observed lathyrus being intercropped with rice as the only suitable alternative available to farmers in Nepal. Farm size among traditional farmers in Nepal varied from 0.08 to 22.26 ha, with a mean size of 2.46 ha. The size of families varied from 3 to 35 individuals, with an average of 8.65. There was a significant positive correlation between family size and farm size. The number of cattle owned varied from 0 to 22, with a mean of 4 cattle per farmer. There was also a highly significant correlation between family size and the number of cattle owned.

The author's example of intercropping in the Indian village of Girvi (page 80) is an excellent one, with much useful information and data not easily found elsewhere. A particularly interesting example of the use of indigenous knowledge for integrated pest management comes from Peru, where the insect Heliothus, which devastates cotton, has been virtually eliminated by planting a row of maize between every tenth row of cotton (page 27).

It would have been useful if the author had included some information on the role of farm animals in intercropping practices. Moreover, a few well chosen photographs showing some of the intercropping activities would have made an interesting book all the more so, and would have made the connection between the text and actual practice even more vivid than it is now. An index could have been useful. The Appendix of Plant Names could have included the page numbers on which the plants' names appear in the book. This would have made it easier for the reader to find information on specific crop plants.

Despite the few drawbacks mentioned above, the book is highly recommended to all those who seek information on the use of indigenous knowledge by small farmers in the developing world, as well as to serious researchers gathering information on sustainable development through intercropping.

(Ardeshir B. Damania, consultant on crop plant genetic resources, International Centre for Agricultural Research in the Dry Areas (ICARDA), Aleppo, Syria)

Selener, Daniel (1997) Participatory action research and social change. 384 pp. ISBN 9978-95-130-X. US$ 25 (postage included). Please make check payable to Global Action Publications, either in US dollars from a bank located in the USA, or in any European currency (equivalent to US$ 25) from a bank located in Europe. Send check to Global Action Publications, Apartado Postal 17-08-8494, Quito, Ecuador.
Fax: +593-2-443 763.
E-mail: daniel@iirr.ecx.ec

Claiming to be "the most complete book for those committed to research, participation and social change," this work focuses on a particular brand of social inquiry and its application to community-directed development.

The first half of the book, which takes the form of a detailed literature review, is divided into four key areas where participatory research has made significant inroads: participatory research in community development; action research in organizations, action research in schools; and farmer participatory research.

For each topic, numerous examples of actual research projects are used to illustrate how participatory methodologies may be used in the field. In addition, each chapter includes a detailed case study which demonstrates the successes, and pitfalls, of such approaches. Although a number of notable works are neglected (particularly more recent publications), these chapters provide a concise review of trends and issues within each sub-field. Of particular interest to readers of the Indigenous Knowledge and Development Monitor is the discussion of farmer participatory research, which presents a detailed critique of indigenous knowledge and the various ways that scientists have dealt with it.

The second part is concerned with how these branches of participatory research are applied within the broader framework of social change. The different levels of participation which researchers may employ, and the implications of each, are explored using examples from the field, with particular reference to issues of power, democracy and control. In addition, these chapters examine the frequently overlooked epistemological assumptions which underlie participatory research and social change more generally.

Readers interested solely in indigenous knowledge may find little use in this book's discussions of organizational and educational research, nor in the strongly theoretical content of the second part. However, it is one of the few works which presents a comprehensive and critical analysis of participatory research methodologies in both concept and application. With over 1000 citations, this book carries added value as a reference guide to a large and diverse body of literature. Although perhaps not invaluable, this book is certainly useful for anyone wishing to explore the broad range of theoretical and practical approaches to participatory research.

(B.L. Myer, Department of Social Anthropology, University of Cape Town, South Africa)

Emery, Alan R. & associates (1997) Guidelines for environmental assessment and traditional knowledge (protoype). Enquiries: CIDA, Environmental Assessment & Compliance Unit, Policy Branch, 12th floor, 200 Promenade du Portage, Hull, Quebec, Canada K1A 0G4.
Fax: +1-819-953 3348.

(See also IKDM 5(3), where this publication was signalled in Preview: Important new books.)

Upon request, the secretariat of the Commission for Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) agreed to comment on the prototype guidelines and to see if there are any possibilities for testing the guidelines in practice. Before providing my reaction, I would like to briefly introduce EIA.

The Commission for Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) is an independent foundation established in 1985. In 1993, this Commission agreed with the Directorate-General for International Cooperation (DGIS) of the Netherlands' Ministry of Foreign Affairs that it would perform certain activities in support of development cooperation. On request, the Commission provides DGIS with terms of reference for environmental impact statements that are to be incorporated into projects and programmes funded by DGIS. The Commission also reviews such statements at the request of DGIS. In 1996, the Commission issued 15 such recommendations to DGIS.

In addition to this advisory work, the Commission provides training in environmental impact assessment for employees of environmental organizations (This training is given both abroad and in the Netherlands.) It also contributes to projects being carried out by consulting firms, mainly by offering advice regarding the development of capacity that enables institutions in developing countries to undertake their own environmental impact assessments.

The Commission is currently developing a method for combining ecological, social, economic and institutional factors into an integrated analysis. The method will include a formal, step-by-step procedure.

I read the Guidelines for environmental assessment and traditional knowledge with great interest. The aim of the guidelines, as indicated on page 2 is as follows: "They are intended to guide the parties on how to include antagonist people and their knowledge in the process so that mutually beneficial results occur, based on fair play and equity."

In my opinion, the guidelines contain four forms of information:

• Information about what we call 'the participation of interest groups' and 'managing the process'. In view of the aim, this information is the most important. As far as I can judge, the guidelines are complete and sound in this regard. In fact, it is noteworthy to see how extensively this subject is treated. Guidelines that we have known up to now nearly always present the content of a model environmental assessment, and almost never deal with participation in a process, and with the management of that process. The present guidelines are thus an outstanding piece of work that fills a need.
• Background information about environmental assessment. On this subject, the information in my opinion is brief and insufficient. No attention is given to the relationship between the project cycle and environmental assessment, or to how this is related to the participation of antagonist people. In the project cycle, five phases can be distinguished: identification, formulation, assessment, implementation, and monitoring and evaluation. Ideally, an environmental assessment is conducted during the formulation phase. But participation is important in all five phases of the project cycle, and it is organized slightly differently in each one. Nothing is said on this subject. Moreover, the concept of environmental assessment is defined rather narrowly. In my opinion, these directives could also be used for social (impact) assessment. Ideally, the conduct of such impact studies would take into consideration not only environmental aspects, but also social and economic aspects, as well as aspects related to modern and traditional management. If a project is to affect an indigenous people, I would argue—more emphatically than in other situations—in favour of an integrated assessment of effects. The reason for this is that the various facets of the lives and livelihoods of indigenous people are strongly interdependent. The directives presented here would require very little adaptation to be suitable also for such an integrated assessment. The title of the document could then be Guidelines for involving indigenous people and their traditional knowledge in impact assessment studies.
• Background information on the way that indigenous peoples live in societies and value their environment. This information is presented partly in section 1, and partly in the other sections. In my opinion, placing this information in sections 2, 3 and 4 has detracted from the main purpose of these sections, which is to present guidelines for involving indigenous people in impact assessment studies. It seems to me that sufficient background information has already been offered as motive for presenting certain guidelines, but if such information is found necessary, I suggest that section 2 be expanded a bit.
• Hardly any guidelines are offered regarding the specific content of an environmental assessment study. After reading the document, it is clear to me that this omission was deliberate. In fact, the 'tools' are offered so that better use can be made of the traditional knowledge possessed by the indigenous groups that occupy the territory in question. In my opinion, this must be explained more clearly. I too initially expected that the guidelines would deal with content, partly because of the title. If the approach recommended here were indeed used, this would no doubt elicit a large amount of information for the actual environmental assessment study.

In conclusion, the Commission for Environmental Impact Assessment would appreciate being kept abreast of any further developments regarding the guidelines, and will certainly make use of them during its activities. My colleague Ineke Steinhauer will be going to Peru at the beginning of March. Together with a task force of Dutch and Peruvian experts, she will be assessing the quality of the environmental impact studies being conducted by Shell in connection with their drilling for gas in the Amazon region. (This is the Camisea project.) A Peruvian anthropologist will be responsible for assessing the social aspects. He and Ms Steinhauer will see how well the present guidelines work in the field.

(Arend Kolhoff, Secretary, Commission for Environmental Impact Assessment, Utrecht, the Netherlands)

Preview: Important new books

The appearance of important new publications is signalled here, and the books are briefly described. We have requested review copies, which will be sent to experts for their opinions regarding the books' practical usefulness. The reviewers' comments will be published in a subsequent issue of the Indigenous Knowledge and Development Monitor.

Barnard, David (ed.) (1997) PRODDER: The Southern African development directory. Enquiries: Programme for Development Research--PRODDER, Human Sciences Research Council, P.O. Box 32410, 2017 Braamfontein, South Africa.
Fax: +27-11-482 4739.
E-mail: BB@zeus.hsrc.ac.za attn Ms Beverly Bernhardt

More than 4000 organizations in the Southern African Development Community (SADC) are listed. These include government departments, para-state organizations, research institutions, business organizations, NGOs, training institions, local and international donor organizations, United Nations agencies, and diplomatic representations in the SADC. The directory also contains background information and indexes.

The review of this directory was promised for this issue (see IKDM 5(3)) but the review copy has not yet arrived in the post.

ITDG and IIRR (1996) Ethnoveterinary medicine in Kenya: A field manual of traditional animal health care practices. xxv + 226 pp. ISBN 9966-9606-2-7. US$10 (plus US$15 for packing and airmail postage in Africa; rest of world US$25). Enquiries: Intermediate Technologies Development Group, IT Kenya, P.O. Box 39493, Nairobi, Kenya and International Institute of Rural Reconstruction, Africa Regional Office, P.O. Box 66873, Westlands,Nairobi, Kenya.
Fax: +254-2-448 148.
E-mail: iirr_kenya@elci.gn.apc.org

This manual is the joint product of Intermediate Technology (IT) Kenya and the regional office of the International Institute of Rural Reconstruction (IIRR). IT Kenya is committed to using existing local technical knowledge to design community-oriented project activities that use available community resources. In 1996, IT Kenya investigated and validated ethnoveterinary practices among pastoral and marginal farming communities in Samburu, Marsabit, Turkana, Tharaka Nithi and Ukambani, with a view to promoting these practices and complementing modern medicine. IIRR has pioneered a particularly rapid and efficient method of producing information materials through participatory workshops. In July 1996, IT Kenya and the Africa Regional Office of IIRR held an intensive, two-week workshop during which the participants—traditional animal health-care practitioners, veterinary scientists, government officials, staff of NGOs, and extension workers—and workshop staff—editors, artists and computer technicians—together wrote, critiqued, edited, illustrated and desktop published the first draft of the book.

It is a book on traditional and indigenous practices in animal health care in Kenya. The information it contains is meant to supplement and complement standard veterinary practice, not to replace it. Apart from its direct applicability, the producers hope that the book will generate interest in R&D on indigenous veterinary practices .