Making Soil and Water Conservation Sustainable: From Coercion and Control to Partnerships and Participation

Pretty, Jules; Shah, Paru

doi:10.1002/(sici)1099-145x(199703)8:1<39::aid-ldr242>3.0.co;2-f

Cited by 85 publications

(51 citation statements)

References 23 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Pretty and Shah (1997) similarly report that the use of a participatory approach encourages an amalgamation of farmers' knowledge with scientific knowledge while strengthening local capacities to experiment and innovate. In general, a participatory approach is a necessary precondition for effective implementation of sustainable land management practices.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 76%

Farmer participation in the equitable payments for watershed services in Morogoro, Tanzania

2014

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This article contributes to the limited empirical evidence on the determinants of farmers' participation decision in agricultural land (land use-modifying) payments for ecosystem services (PES) in developing countries. It examines how farmer and farm characteristics, We used a multi-method approach to make use of both qualitative and quantitative data.We found that farm size, information, participation of farmers in the programme design and the needed degree of change in land management determined the adoption of sustainable land management practices. To foster the participation of small farmers, attention needs to be paid to the availability and access to information, participation of farmers in the design of programmes, local compatibility of practices, and support for initial costs of adoption. Keywords

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 76%

Farmer participation in the equitable payments for watershed services in Morogoro, Tanzania

2014

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Webler et al (2001) developed 5 criteria for good participation. A critical review of participatory approach has been given by Pretty and Shah (1997).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 72%

“…This study showed that the assumption of most experts that small farmers are traditional, conventional and have a little understanding of cassava production system (Pretty and Shah, 1997;Utomo et al, 1998) is not always true. As discussed before, this study showed that 92% of the respondents had realized the importance of the improve production technology either for increasing crop yield or for maintaining soil productivity.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Farmers’ Based Technology Development for Sustainable Cassava Production System

Yuniwati¹,

Utomo²,

Howeler³

2015

International J. of Agricultural Research

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The decrease in productivity and degradation process in land cropped with cassava occurs very rapidly. A conventional soil conservation approach has been shown do not give satisfactory result. A new approach, which is termed "land husbandry", seems to have a more prospective future. Different from soil conservation approach, which is aimed to control erosion rate to level of less than acceptable limit erosion, the aim of land husbandry is to obtain a high yield and income. Secondly, in contrary with soil conservation approach where most of the technology package is developed based on and by researchers, in the land husbandry approach the development of technology is based on farmers' idea and willingness and done by the farmers themselves. The methodology used in this study was Farmers' Participatory Research. The study shows that the FPR methodology have promising prospect for developing the sustainable cassava production technology. The introduced technology spread up quickly and the adoption sustained for a long periods. After 5 years of the project, 65% of the farmers in the study area had planted UB 477-2 variety and 76% of the cassava farmers had use cattle manure for their cassava crops. Ten years after the project, in addition to UB 477-2 variety, some farmers planted another introduced variety i.e., Malang 6 and Markonah. The number of farmers using manure also increased substantially and some farmers practiced compost technology. At the beginning of the project there was no farmer planted UB 477-2 and only few farmers used cattle manure.

show abstract

“…All effective soil conservation programmes now appreciate the need to focus on social capital formation as a prerequisite to widespread success. This is in contrast to past approaches that have tended to focus on coercion or incentives to adopt soil conservation (Pretty and Shah, 1997).…”

Section: Soil Conservation and Agroforestrymentioning

confidence: 99%