The Decision to Adopt is with the Farmer

Jump to Comments

International Governance has its roots in the district office of the Ministry of Food and Agriculture in Tongo, a small community in the Upper East Region of Ghana. This small office is where I work with government extension agents, bringing improved technologies and development programs to farmers and their families.

 

They say that the health of the roots will determine the height of the tree. My experiences here in Ghana have led me question how well we who are concerned with the progress of human development, know what is happening here at the roots, in the field. How many of our statesmen, program developers, researchers and politicians take time to understand the decisions farmers make, and tackle the realities of policy implementation in places like the Talensi-Nabdam District in the Upper East Region of Ghana?

 

I meet Anobre Akologo on a monitoring visit with several district officers from Bolgatanga about two weeks ago. She is a frail elderly woman, a widow, shy and silent because we had interrupted her on her field. She is clearly intimidated by our presence and seems confused by our interest in her work. The small groundnut (peanut) plants in rows around her feet are stunted and flowering prematurely. The grains of her extended families’ early millet are hard and bland due to the recent drought, and the officers are concerned that the crop will not produce viable seed. Although it is now late in July, Akologo is planting cowpea and more groundnut among the failing plants in hopes that the rain will continue into October. She must harvest before the rains stop and the ground hardens, which makes it near impossible to remove the nuts undamaged. The rains normally begin to slow in mid-September.

 

Not five minutes drive down the dirt road we stop to meet Asimbaling Apuko, a model farmer who works closely with MOFA. To reach his house we pass through fields of tall, healthy millet and sorghum. The millet is almost ready to harvest and the grains look fat and healthy. Apuko is a confident man who speaks in broken English, and after a few tries we exchange words and manage to understand each other. His wives greet us from the doorway of the house and then disappear inside. He says that he uses a mixture of compost and chemical fertilizers to achieve such good results, but I know the timing of planting, the quality of seed and soil, and the ability to manage complex community relationships all play a part in Apuko’s success.

 

The diversity of the experience of a subsistence farmer in these examples becomes more clear after actually living and working at the community level. Many reasons for the disparity can be traced to the sophisticated and geographically specific social systems that govern village life, of which I have only the barest understanding after five months of living in Ghana. However, the best Agricultural Extension Agents (AEA’s) among MOFA’s staff understand it very well.

 

This brings me to a very important point, that I had left AEA’s entirely out of the story. The staff of MOFA are the representatives of local and international institutions of government to farmers. I watch carefully as the MOFA officers interact with both of the farmers. The female officer speaks gently with Akologo as the others stand aside to help her to feel comfortable expressing herself. I follow their lead and hang back after greeting her in the local dialect. The field workers ask very specific questions about the state of each farmer’s crops, and what impact the season has had on the wellbeing of their families. The officers give what advice they can to each farmer and communicate the results to the regional government.

 

I often ask my colleagues what they would advise international institutions and the donors that fund MOFA’s programs if they had the opportunity. Over and again, my co-workers repeat that assistance does not reach the poor and needy people in communities. They know it because everyday MOFA staff manages the impact of overambitious and poorly managed programs with limited resources. In the rush to spend budgets before they expire, many programs severely discount the time, expertise and supervision required to work well with local communities. In the end, this systematic neglect of the challenges of implementation limits MOFA’s ability to promote the development of agriculture.

 

These field realities are even more remote when decisions and pronouncements are being made from Geneva, Rome or Waterloo. The greater the distance, the clearer theory appears and the further the complications of implementation can be allowed to fall from serious consideration. The greater the distance, the easier it is to write a beautiful policy or plan, send it to another party to implement and declare success with satisfaction.

 

I wish I could invite international governance thinkers and policy developers into our district staff meetings with MOFA. For example, a few weeks ago there was a pertinent discussion on the challenges of fieldwork sparked by a field agent’s comments during a field report.

 

The AEA was speaking out of frustration. Each AEA was required to trial a new planting technique with their farmers, planting seeds with a small amount of compost in each hole in one of their fields. The practice is time consuming and very few farmers were willing to try the new technique. After a few hot comments to the effect that the practice would not be adopted, our district director, Dr. Quist, broke into the discussion with a few words.

 

He said, “You seem to have forgotten that the decision to adopt is always with the farmer. Introducing a new practice is an experiment, a joint venture undertaken by the farmer and the field agent.

 

When the results are in, it is for the farmer and the AEA to each take something from the experience and to decide how it can be applied. You are not the one who decides if hole composting is worthwhile for the farmer. We try it together and it is the farmer who decides.” The comments succeeded in re-focusing the discussion on how to demonstrate the technology more effectively.

 

I have referred to Dr. Quist’s words often in my work. In my limited experience it has been easy for me to forget that a brilliant program idea is only the first step towards a positive change for farming communities.

 

What lesson do this afternoon on a field visit and a discussion in a district staff meeting have to offer international governance theory?

 

It is imperative to account for the decisions community members make as they face the opportunities or challenges created by their government. These experiences teach that the interest of policy makers should be to know how Apuko or Akologo’s lives will actually change through a new policy direction, and that meaningful dialogue between key decision makers throughout implementation will show us what success, if any, is being realized.

 

The implementation of a policy is the true test of its quality, and the power to achieve results… or the decision to adopt, rests with the people whom policy is intended to assist.

 

The decision to adopt is with the farmer.

 

————————————————————————————————————

By no means does the mention of individuals’ names indicate agreement on the part of that individual with the conclusions I have drawn from these experiences. I would like to express my deep appreciation to Lawrence for his patience and wisdom, Clement for his skill and enthusiasm, Edward for his support and confidence, and to Dr. Quist for his critical eye. To every member of the Talensi-Nabdam MOFA District Staff I owe equal thanks and appreciation.

1 Comment

Filed under Uncategorized