Building Multi-Stakeholder Partnerships to Promote Farmer Experimentation and Innovation in Ghana NotesKI I n the mid-1990s, various in 1977 as a network of church-based organisations concerned with projects seeking to promote Participa- agricultural development in tory Technology Development (PTD) northern Ghana sought ways to in a process of farmer-led experimen- promote joint research, extension, tation in collaboration with other advocacy and learning with farmers as stakeholders in agricultural R&D. equal partners. They were disillu- The NGLWG has continued to exist sioned with the conventional "agricul- for almost ten years and is now a tural modernisation" and "transfer-of- partner in the PROLINNOVA (Promot- technology" approach which all of ing Local Innovation) programme in them had tried to implement but with Ghana. This is one of the Country http://www.worldbank.org/afr/ik/default.htm little success. They had recognised Programmes in the international the need to build on the indigenous PROLINNOVA partnership programme knowledge (IK) and initiatives of initiated by non-governmental smallholder farmers in order to organisations (NGOs) to scale up R&D develop LEISA (Low-External-Input approaches that enhance local innova- and Sustainable Agriculture) technolo- tion in ecologically-oriented agricul- gies and to strengthen farmers' ture and natural resource manage- capacities to interact with formal ment. The NLGWG is responsible for research and development (R&D). The PROLINNOVA activities in northern No. 74 organisations that formed the North- November 2004 ern Ghana LEISA Working Group (NGLWG) in 1995 were the Associa- IK Notes reports periodically on Indigenous Knowledge (IK) initiatives tion of Church Development Projects in Sub-Saharan Africa and occasionally (ACDEP), the extension service of the on such initiatives outside the Region. It is published by the Africa Region's Ministry of Food and Agriculture Knowledge and Learning Center as (MoFA), the Savanna Agricultural part of an evolving IK partnership Research Institute (SARI), the Animal between the World Bank, communi- ties, NGOs, development institutions Research Institute (ARI) and the and multilateral organizations. The University for Development Studies views expressed in this article are those of the authors and should not be World Bank (UDS) in Tamale. attributed to the World Bank Group ACDEP -- the organisation that or its partners in this initiative. A facilitated this new institutional webpage on IK is available at // www.worldbank.org/afr/ik/ arrangement -- had been established default.htm 2 Ghana. In order to learn from experience and feed the The ACDEP field stations that facilitated the farmer-led lessons into the process of building partnerships to promote experimentation had already existed for some time and had local innovation, the NGLWG critically analysed its own established good rapport with the local people. The experiences in creating, facilitating and managing a multi- experimenting farmers and their communities, including stakeholder partnership. the chiefs, were very enthusiastic about the collaboration. The fact that farmers' priorities were taken as a starting point for PTD secured their interest and cooperation. Creating the partnership Several national policies had created a situation in which The NGLWG was created as part of an action-research farmers were seeking LEISA-based methods of production project in collaboration with the Centre for Information on for their own survival and for the market. For example, the Low External Input and Sustainable Agriculture (ILEIA). removal of subsidies on agricultural inputs had increased Initially, ILEIA was the legal holder for the project, as well the price of fertiliser and veterinary drugs far beyond the as a partner in the research, advocacy and learning process. reach of smallholder farmers. This encouraged experimen- Several factors favoured the formation of the NGLWG. tation with alternatives based on IK, such as ethno-veteri- The initiators of the collaboration, ILEIA and ACDEP, were nary treatments and using animal manure to improve soil bound by a common concern for sustainable agriculture, fertility. the environment and the livelihoods of resource-poor Monitoring and evaluation (M&E) has played an impor- farmers producing primarily for subsistence. The local tant role in building the partnership through joint learning partners (ACDEP, MoFA, SARI, ARI and UDS) felt that their processes. M&E takes place at different levels: own goals could be achieved only by focusing on the 1.Reports to donor organisations. These include reports on collective goal of increasing productivity in smallholder NGLWG training workshops and on fieldwork being farming. Collaboration was officially encouraged in the face undertaken. of dwindling government funding for agricultural R&D. As 2.Community open days. Farmers selected by the commu- part of government policy for financial rationalisation, wile nity to experiment on its behalf report back to the the operational budgets of many institutions had been community. During the open days, community members severely cut, they were still expected to implement their and other interested groups, including the NGLWG, visit field programmes. Collaborating with other institutions the farms of experimenting farmers and discuss progress. made better use of existing resources and expertise. 3.Community workshops. After an experiment has been The NGLWG went through a network-building process of completed, communities meet in a workshop, facilitated developing a collective vision and specific goals for the by the NGLWG, to discuss the benefits or otherwise of a group, gaining members' commitment, negotiating be- given practice. tween different interests (of individuals, institutions and in- 4.NGLWG meetings. Process issues and results of the groups) and developing its own ethos, norms, working process are subjected to peer review. principles and procedures. The members came not only from different institutions but also from different disci- Facilitating development of the partnership plines. Some were oriented more to research, others more to practical development on the ground. The diversity of Initially, ACDEP facilitated the NGLWG partnership. Within opinions had to be considered before majority decisions a year, other network members started to assume facilita- could be taken. Agreements have been mainly verbal, tion roles. ILEIA soon devolved authority and responsibility amongst individuals rather than their institutions. The for the network to the Ghanaian partners. The NGLWG saw process of agreeing on what to do and how to do it brought this as a sign of genuine partnership with collective respon- the stakeholders closer together. sibility for the success or failure of the project. It showed ILEIA's confidence in the local partners, who then felt challenged to live up to these expectations. 3 New potential members in the network are invited to rural areas where access to the Internet is difficult. E-mail take part in annual training workshops held by the NGLWG. is not a common form of communication within the group. Those whose interest is heightened by this interaction The members meet face-to-face several times a year at keep contact with the group and eventually become NGLWG meetings, networking meetings and training members. Membership does not require cash payment, but workshops, and while implementing fieldwork in support of rather an investment of time and a willingness to make farmers' experimentation. inputs into NGLWG activities. Members perceive the main benefit to be that of an association with professionals from Working culture different backgrounds; this provides stimulus for continuing The NGLWG has no written rules or sanctions but has, over the partnership. time, established a working culture that new members Conflict is not avoided and differences are aired openly. eventually imbibe. For example, the group attaches a high During formation of the network, behind-the-scene nego- level of seriousness to its work while maintaining its tiation was used as a tool in conflict resolution. From informality. Symbols of formality such as titles (Dr, Sir, experience, NGLWG members were well aware of the Madam etc) are never used at NGLWG meetings. All potential dangers should a network totally depend on members are treated as equals. external support. The members decided to stay together, with or without external influences. NGLWG members Financial management have, over time, developed a strong bond of trust and After the action-research project with ILEIA ended, the mutual respect. All views are considered important. Each ACDEP Secretariat continued to source external funding to member is expected to listen to the others. This creates an carry out activities, including support for the functioning of environment conducive for members to agree or disagree the NGLWG. Funds have been allocated so as to support with the general line of thought. As a result, members have activities facilitated by ACDEP stations. The NGLWG is a come to accept and act according to group decisions after source of resource persons who provide technical careful and, in some instances, long debates. backstopping to the stations as required. Transparency is one of the foremost requirements for developing trust and respect within a network. In the Organisation and management of the partnership NGLWG, few things ­ if any ­ are kept secret. All members Structure have access to project formulation documents and budgets. The NGLWG borrowed the management system of ACDEP, What can or cannot be done without the limits of each where authority lies with the members. Thus, a horizontal project is openly discussed. coordinating structure according to principles of collective management evolved. Committees mandated by the NGLWG and PROLINNOVA members execute the various functions of the network. The NGLWG forms a Research Coordinating Committee (RCC) When ACDEP received information about PROLINNOVA, the for each PTD activity. The composition of the RCC depends NGLWG was quick to show interest in the project sup- on the expertise required to backstop the work as well as a ported by the International Fund for Agricultural Develop- member's availability to be involved at that time of the ment (IFAD) to design a national PROLINNOVA programme. year. The RCC works as a facilitating group that frequently To be able to link up easily with national bodies, including visits farmers who are conducting PTD experiments. the IFAD-funded Root and Tuber Improvement Programme (RTIP), it was necessary to involve a network in southern Communication Ghana. This is how ECASARD (Ecumenical Association for The ACDEP Secretariat serves as the NGLWG Secretariat. Sustainable Agricultural and Rural Development) came into Invitations to meetings are by formal letter and also by the picture. phone, where possible. Most NGLWG members work in 4 ACDEP (in northern Ghana) and ECASARD (in southern Facilitating the development of this new national-level Ghana) agreed to work together, and asked the Ghana partnership has met several challenges. Communication Organic Agricultural Network (GOAN) to coordinate the between stakeholders has proved to be difficult, as condi- PROLINNOVA work in the middle belt of the country. tions differ across the country and across institutions. The Recognition of IK and local innovation forms the common NGLWG is the oldest and most stable of the three net- interest that binds the NGLWG, ECASARD and GOAN works. The other two are learning from its experience. At members. With GOAN's entrance, the stage was set for the national workshop, the problems faced thus far were building a new type of partnership across networks and openly discussed. For example, the failure to attract the across zones within Ghana. In each zone, the major stake- research community in the south was discussed at length. holders in agricultural R&D are involved in a Zonal Working Suggestions were made on how to improve the situation, Group. Following a series of consultations, it was decided e.g. through strategic targeting of potential partners in that ECASARD, GOAN and NGLWG would act as contact research, as the NGLWG has done for years. points for the R&D stakeholders in their respective zones, At the national workshop, differences between the three with ECASARD playing an overall coordinating role in networks emerged. Each network is used to different levels PROLINNOVA­Ghana. of transparency. For example, all NGLWG members had During the inception phase of PROLINNOVA­Ghana in been privy to all PROLINNOVA documents, but this was not 2003, workshops were held in the southern, middle and the case within the other two networks. The need for total northern zones. These workshops fed into a national openness on issues was stressed. workshop where participants from each zone presented the results of their zonal workshops and drew up plans for the coming years. Outlook Members of the Zonal Working Groups are responsible The PROLINNOVA strategy of working with and through for implementing the PROLINNOVA activities in their multi-stakeholder partnerships provides an opportunity not respective zones. At national level, a Country Coordinator only to work together with farmers, as NGOs have been was selected from the NGO community. The members of doing in the past, but also to institutionalise partnerships the National Steering Committee represent the major as a strategy to promote R&D that builds on IK and local governmental and non-governmental institutions in agricul- innovation processes. There is great value in exchanging tural R&D in Ghana. This committee acts like a Board of experiences both within and between countries. This will Directors in assisting and advising the Country Coordinator contribute to carrying partnerships to a higher level and and ensuring transparency in running the programme. influencing R&D policy. A monitoring system is being set up to ensure that The partnership-building process among the networks in PROLINNOVA activities are carried out properly and to serve the three zones of Ghana is benefiting from the experience as a means of country-wide information exchange made over the last ten years by the NGLWG. The freedom and learning. to exchange information and to discuss the difficulties encountered in networking in the different zones provides a promising window for further development. This article was written by Joy Bruce and N Karbo of the Animal Research Institute in Nyankpala, and Malex Alebekiya of ACDEP (Association of Church Development Projects) in Tamale, Ghana. Their analysis of the Ghana experience in building multi-stakeholder partnerships to promote local innovation was made for the First International Workshop of PROLINNOVA (Promoting Local Innovation in Ecologically-Oriented Agriculture and Natural Resource Management), held in March 2004 at the Furra Institute of Development Studies in Yirgalem, Ethiopia. More informa- tion is available under www.prolinnova.net. Contact: jpbruce@africaonline.com.gh