Examples PA in SDCs work

Latin America	Latin America: BA contributes to increased relevance, strengthened relationships & empowerment In Latin America, where political contexts encourage a high level of civil society participation, BAs appear to have enhanced the relevance of development programmes. By seeking farmers’ perspectives on the technical, economic, social and ecological soundness of an agricultural programme (PASOLAC) BA was able to identify the 5–8 preferred and most effective soil conservation techniques. It also allowed farmers to challenge the government extension services and make them more responsive. The farmers actively challenged assumptions that such approaches are sufficient, arguing they need access to more formal research-driven agricultural innovation that addresses real farmers’ needs. The PASOLAC BA also had unintended outcomes likely to enhance the impact of the programme. 1) Farmer assessors’ questions about soil conservation techniques provided a relatively cheap and simple approach to estimating the adoption rate of different techniques, which are usually estimated with more expensive survey instruments. At their own initiative, they also broadly shared agricultural knowledge and innovations, including some research findings, with communities they visited. This allowed sharing of useful knowledge, with the potential to enhance impact. 2) Having been empowered by their roles as citizen observers, farmers surprised project staff by asking staff to organise workshops where they could present proposals for the next phase of the programme. The SDC was transparent in explaining that although these individual inputs were important for influencing the programme, it could not respond to proposals on an individual basis. 3) As a result of the BA, relationships and trust between farmers and partners were strengthened.
Madagascar	Madagascar BA: increased responsiveness and empowerment The Madagascar BA findings influenced planning for the next programme phase and decisions to institutionalise more participatory M&E approaches. It also influenced changes in the language programme staff used when talking about ‘beneficiary’ assessors. At the beginning they were referred to as ‘the peasants’, who staff viewed as lacking the capacity to undertake research. By the end of the BA, when the assessors had presented findings to government officials, the staff described them as ‘citizen observers’ (COs). Moreover, whereas at the beginning of the BA citizen observers relied on the local facilitator to translate for the general facilitators, once they gained confidence, those who spoke rudimentary French began intervening, telling the local facilitator, ‘you didn’t translate properly!’ One general facilitator commented on this indication of empowerment: “I think what we witnessed was the COs gradually realising that they too could argue and confront the facilitator’s interpretations and take matters into their own hands.”
Laos	Laos BA: a turning point for the SDC A BA in Laos proved an important learning and turning point for SDC. It enabled SDC staff to get beyond the perspectives of partner intermediaries, in this case the Laos National Extension Service, which was focused on technical approaches to enhancing agricultural productivity that tend to benefit the wealthy. By engaging poor farmers in a BA it was possible to discern the effects of extension work and identify weaknesses in the impact hypothesis. People from different wealth groups valued extension services for chicken, pigs and rice differently. The findings that revealed that programme effects are mediated by power relations. This lesson has since become central in the SDC's policy discussions with the partner. The BA findings helped enable the steering committee to advocate a pro-poor agenda in dialogue with the national extension service, and raised awareness of the benefits of extension service providers listening to poor farmers' voices. They have successfully advocated for a broader range of proposed services and differentiated service provision: 1) for farmers with access to market, and 2) for poorer subsistence farmers without access.

Latin America

Latin America: BA contributes to increased relevance, strengthened relationships & empowerment

In Latin America, where political contexts encourage a high level of civil society participation, BAs appear to have enhanced the relevance of development programmes. By seeking farmers’ perspectives on the technical, economic, social and ecological soundness of an agricultural programme (PASOLAC) BA was able to identify the 5–8 preferred and most effective soil conservation techniques. It also allowed farmers to challenge the government extension services and make them more responsive. The farmers actively challenged assumptions that such approaches are sufficient, arguing they need access to more formal research-driven agricultural innovation that addresses real farmers’ needs.

The PASOLAC BA also had unintended outcomes likely to enhance the impact of the programme.

1) Farmer assessors’ questions about soil conservation techniques provided a relatively cheap and simple approach to estimating the adoption rate of different techniques, which are usually estimated with more expensive survey instruments. At their own initiative, they also broadly shared agricultural knowledge and innovations, including some research findings, with communities they visited. This allowed sharing of useful knowledge, with the potential to enhance impact.

2) Having been empowered by their roles as citizen observers, farmers surprised project staff by asking staff to organise workshops where they could present proposals for the next phase of the programme. The SDC was transparent in explaining that although these individual inputs were important for influencing the programme, it could not respond to proposals on an individual basis.

3) As a result of the BA, relationships and trust between farmers and partners were strengthened.

Madagascar

Madagascar BA: increased responsiveness and empowerment

The Madagascar BA findings influenced planning for the next programme phase and decisions to institutionalise more participatory M&E approaches. It also influenced changes in the language programme staff used when talking about ‘beneficiary’ assessors. At the beginning they were referred to as ‘the peasants’, who staff viewed as lacking the capacity to undertake research. By the end of the BA, when the assessors had presented findings to government officials, the staff described them as ‘citizen observers’ (COs).

Moreover, whereas at the beginning of the BA citizen observers relied on the local facilitator to translate for the general facilitators, once they gained confidence, those who spoke rudimentary French began intervening, telling the local facilitator, ‘you didn’t translate properly!’ One general facilitator commented on this indication of empowerment: “I think what we witnessed was the COs gradually realising that they too could argue and confront the facilitator’s interpretations and take matters into their own hands.”

Laos

Laos BA: a turning point for the SDC

A BA in Laos proved an important learning and turning point for SDC. It enabled SDC staff to get beyond the perspectives of partner intermediaries, in this case the Laos National Extension Service, which was focused on technical approaches to enhancing agricultural productivity that tend to benefit the wealthy. By engaging poor farmers in a BA it was possible to discern the effects of extension work and identify weaknesses in the impact hypothesis. People from different wealth groups valued extension services for chicken, pigs and rice differently.

The findings that revealed that programme effects are mediated by power relations. This lesson has since become central in the SDC's policy discussions with the partner. The BA findings helped enable the steering committee to advocate a pro-poor agenda in dialogue with the national extension service, and raised awareness of the benefits of extension service providers listening to poor farmers' voices. They have successfully advocated for a broader range of proposed services and differentiated service provision: 1) for farmers with access to market, and 2) for poorer subsistence farmers without access.