Transforming Extension and Service Delivery through Bottom-Up Climate Resilient Farmer Field School Approach to Agribusiness in Eastern Africa

There is consensus that climate variability and change is impacting food security in Eastern Africa, and that conventional extension approaches, based on top-down model of information dissemination and technology transfer, are too inadequate to help smallholder farmers tackle increasingly complex agro-climatic adversities. Innovative service delivery options exist but are mostly operated in silos with little effort to explore and blend them. There are efforts to develop a blended Climate-Resilient Farmers Field School methodology to address the gaps, with objective to improve participants’ knowledge, skills and attitude to apply the blended approach and to sensitize actors on what needs to be advocated at the policy level. Some 661 local trainers/facilitators (ToT/ToFs), 32% of them women and 54% youth, were trained across Kenya, Tanzania, and Uganda, with additional 76 Master Trainers (MToTs) trained to backstop the ToT/ToFs. Through the implementation, the process reached 36 agribusinesses covering some 237,250 smallholder farmers trained across Kenya, Tanzania, and Uganda on CSA technologies, practices, and innovations by the end of 2020. The blended approach offers lessons to transform extension to help farmers improve food security and resilience. Preliminary findings indicate that the process is rapidly shaping individual adaptive behavior and group adaptive thinking. Lessons also show a strong need for agronomists to work more closely with agro-meteorologists to ensure that farmers are properly guided to participate appropriately in the co-generation and application of climate information and agro-weather advisories, which they can interpret easily and utilize for their agricultural production purposes. Experience from this initiative can be leveraged to develop scalable participatory extension and training models.


Introduction
Climate change has been proven to adversely impact agricultural production, food systems and food security in East Africa. The need to increase agricultural productivity and improve agribusiness resilience on the backdrop of increased climate variability in the region calls for adoption of more climate resilient, ecologically sustainable methods of agricultural production. This call requires concerted efforts and joint investments by agricultural supply chain actors and partners in various agribusiness value chains to support transformational change in service delivery. Actionable climate information is critical for such a transformation [1,2]. However, currently, in running an FFS ( Figure 1) and running a CFS ( Figure 2) serve to illustrate the differences. Whereas FFS is practically cyclic and iterative, CFS is linear and unidirectional. In the CFS case, the middle level agriculture officers are trained by meteorologists to understand climate concepts, interpret climate forecasts, and ways of integrating them in agricultural activities. Then the middle level agriculture officers train local level extension workers. Finally, the local level extension workers conduct dialogues with farmers in meetings to "reinforce" farmer perceptions on climate patterns through the use of climate data and information [13]. Forecast reports are used in discussions at middle levels to provide agro-advisories for the season. The agro-advisories are then transferred down the chain of command to farmer groups at the local level. Key features of differences between Farmer Fields Schools and Climate Field Schools are presented in Table 1. Steps in running an FFS in Eastern Africa, with farmers brought on board at very early stages, and a farmer empowerment to take charge. Source [14] Instead of mirroring FFS, CFS ended up emphasizing more of dissemination, technology transfer and agroweather advisories (prescriptions on farm practices) than on farm observation (agroecosystem analysis -AESA) and knowledge co-creation. AESA is not emphasized in CFS while AGROMETA is not emphasized in FFS.
Further, blending conventional with traditional weather prediction is not emphasized in CFS but is covered in FFS [17].    The immediate objective of the trainings was to improve the decision-making skills of participants in the CR-FFS approach, including the use of climate information to manage climate-related risks that prevent farmers from closing yield gaps. The medium-term objective was to improve agricultural productivity, build resilience, and achieve climate change mitigation and co-benefits, where possible. The ultimate objective was to increase the capacity of actors to apply climate-smart technologies, practices, and innovations, with the aim of increasing their adoption among farmers, agribusiness SMEs, and farmer cooperatives. Specific objectives were to i) equip trainees with knowledge about climate change, climate variability and climate-related risks affecting agriculture; ii) provide participants with appropriate methodological tools to facilitate CR-FFS learning; iii) prepare participants on how to plan CR-FFS implementation; iv) prepare a climate-resilient crop production curriculum, with modules in the form of training aids for selected crops; and v) stimulate participants to share knowledge, skills and experience in local farming systems to improve production.

Study Area
The study area is the Climate Resilient Agribusiness For Tomorrow (CRAFT) Project mandate area, covering Kenya, Tanzania and Uganda [19]. Study area map is presented in Figure 4, showing climate trends and climate projections the initiative is responding to.

Theory of change/ impact pathway
A theory of change or impact pathway for CR-FFS capacity building in CRAFT is provided in Figure 4. The theory of change constructed for this CR-FFS initiative was informed by, among others, hypothesized FFS results chains in [6] and [20]. Using the FFS approach, with additional climate information modules, the training and implementation focused on integrating climate-resilient agricultural practices in the value chain development of selected crops from potato, cereals, pulses and oil crops in each of the CRAFT anchor countries.
The CR-FFS training of trainers (ToT/ToF) and Master Trainers (MToT) workshops were conducted between July-2019 and June-2020.

Training
The training events were led by FAO-trained FFS experts, with CCAFS providing critical input on knowledge of climate change and climate projections. Following the training of ToT/ToFs in each country, a Master Trainer Contribution to resilience of agriculture, food systems and livelihoods in Kenya, Tanzania, and Uganda increased Sustainable, climate-resilient food systems and Impact / Goal The number of first round trainees per country are as are presented in Table 2.

237,250
Source: Authors The process provides for a pre-test and post-test that participants take at the beginning and end of training, to record how much they know and how much they have learned from the process, and how they have gained from the learning. The process also includes semi-structured quiz and/or mood meters, and a "most significant change" story method of capturing change, done at regular intervals. A provision is made in the climate change modules for crop-water-weather calendar monitoring and recording, to assist in AGROMETA besides AESA.
Downscaled seasonal weather forecast information is provided to the FFS by the project modelling team and the local agro meteorologist, before the FFS team begins local seasonal monitoring for comparison.
AGROMETA and AESA monitoring period is decided by the group, depending on the type and nature of the focal value chain. Both indigenous weather information (using agreed indicators) and conventional/scientific weather information is observed, recorded, analysed, and reported. Data collection is done at predefined intervals using a blended AESA/AGROMETA data sheet. Both indigenous weather information (using agreed local indicators) and conventional/ scientific weather information is observed, recorded, analysed, and reported.
Facilitators and participants reflect on evidence of key changes participants are observing, what shows changes are occurring, how they are occurring, what is working or not working. Discussion is conducted to blend both indigenous and conventional weather information results for better, more robust decision making and appropriate action. Storytelling is used as a way of communicating information and influencing others, but the storylines can also be used as a qualitative monitoring tool to track change.

Implementation
The

Results
Analysis of the daily evaluation indicated above average satisfaction with a score of 4.5 points on a scale of 5 points. The evaluation of the session was conducted using Likert scale to understand the level of satisfaction as strongly agreed, agreed, disagree, and strongly disagree. Results of the pre-test and post-test are presented in

Value chains covered
The CR-FFS training of trainers (ToT/ToF) and Master Trainers (MToT) workshops were conducted between July-2019 and June-2020 for selected value chains in each of the CRAFT anchor countries (Table 2).

Trainers and Master Trainers Trained
In

Business cases and farmers reached
Through the CR-FFS ToT/ToFs and MToTs implementation, by the end of 2020, the process had reached 29 business cases (Table 3)

The methodology
The principal purpose of promoting participatory methodologies such as CR-FFS for CSA is to institutionalize adult learning, community participation, transdisciplinary research, stakeholder buy-in and ownership of the processes. The idea is based on the 'abstract-to-concrete continuum' which asserts that learning becomes more meaningful when abstract learning and concrete experience are related and combined [23] and that, in the end,

The facilitator trainings and the CR-FFS processes
At 32% women and 54% youth respectively, the training selection proactively addressed gender and social inclusion by drawing more on more women and youth. Trained trainers continued with community mobilization and field activities in 2019-2020. The initial facilitators will be graduated together with their farmer participants when they complete one learning cycle together. Candidates for the role of farmer-facilitator will be identified during the first CR-FFS sessions conducted by the initial ToTs/ ToFs. The identified and selected farmerfacilitators will be taken for further training and be supported by an extensionist-facilitator to initiate and run a CR-FFS.

Priority value chains for CR-FFS intervention
The priority value chains selected for intervention, namely potato, sorghum, common bean, green gram, soybean, sesame, and sunflower, are either those that are inherently climate-resilient but do not have organised supply chains and their value chains or markets are not yet well deveoped, or those that their value chains and markets are relatively well-developed but need interventions in climate resilience, or those that fall in both categories (Table 4). The main reasons for selecting the food crops were that the climate change projections and expected climate 3 risks for the region are such that the food insecurity of many people in society will further aggravate; the 4 cropping systems will be seriously affected by climate change; market developments for these crops show 5 increasing consumption and sector growth; significant involvement of women and youth in production and 6 supply of these food crops; growing private sector interests and a substantial investment potential; and 7 possibilities to intercrop cereals with pulses and to rotate with other important crops. The uptake of agricultural 8 technologies under conventional technology transfer model has not been very impressive in Eastern Africa 9 countries over the years [27]. Secondly, relevancy of research themes and extension 'messages' for agricultural 10 development has been unsatisfactory to the majority of the smallholder farmers in East Africa [28].

CR-FFS as an Institutional and Policy Engagement Process
Like formal, localized agricultural research initiatives, agriculture-based field school tools and methods focus on identifying concrete solutions for local problems but they apply different styles of experimentation and analysis [30]. However, both of them build local capacity for critical analysis and practical decision-making on how to manage local ecosystems, and both stimulate local innovation while emphasizing principles and processes rather than recipes or technology packages. Globally, reviews of agricultural (farmer, agropastoral, agribusiness, etc.) field school initiatives show that the approach has become a model for agricultural/ agropastoral education in many parts of the world [30]. However, to effectively incorporate climate literacy in the CR-FFS process, participants express strong opinions on the need to work more closely with available agrometeorological service providers to ensure that farmers are properly guided to participate appropriately in the "co-generation" and application of climate information and climate-informed "agro-weather" advisories for their agricultural production purposes. The field schools being formed will be coalesced into a movement of CSA CR-FFS networks to pursue this advocacy agenda from the ground [10,[31][32][33]. The kind of institutional framework that reflects the participants feedback is presented in Figure 8. The proposal in Figure 8 will require significant institutional commitment and support, which is currently being offered by the CRAFT project but will need institutional sustainability, driven by the private sector, when CRAFT folds up. The training and the roll-out events were found to be instrumental in empowering participants, both trainees and famers, with knowledge, skills, and attitude in the CR-FFS methodology, working like a local agricultural research forum, which will be nurtured to carry the mantle forward [22]. The anticipated institutional sustainability is being nurtured through inclusion of public extension agents in the ToTs and through policy engagement at the national level. The CR-FFS training and implementation events continue to offer lessons that can help to transform and strengthen agricultural extension and training 'from the ground up' in Eastern Africa to help farmers, farming systems, farming livelihoods and value chains become more resilient to climate variability and change, improve food security and increase rural incomes. However, the field school experience (in its various forms) has not been formally integrated into general, institutionalized service delivery processes, especially in East Africa, although policy documents of individual countries mention field school methodology as one of the known extension approaches. This is an area that requires further policy engagement with the governments. Kenya has noted it as an extension method in its national agricultural sector extension policy of 2012 but does not proceed to adopt it, in that document, as a method to promote in practice [34]. Document reviews for Tanzania shows that farmer field school methodology is one the extension methods used in Tanzania but there is no "one-endorsed" approach by the government of Tanzania, although the national agriculture policy of Tanzania (of 2013) states that "Junior Farmer Field and Life Schools (JFFLS) … shall be promoted" [35]. Uganda mentions it in its National

Conclusions and recommendations
Agricultural Extension Policy of 2016 and in the extension guidelines and standards of 2016 as one of the extension methods but does not expressly endorse it for promotion in the extension system [36]. The takeaway from here is that policy makers should continue to be engaged to get their opinion on formal adoption of the methodology in public agricultural system.
Questions of methodological sustainability and its use for climate services keep coming up, given that most of the FFS or CFS interventions tend to fold up when project funding dries up, due to absence of a sustainable financing model at scale to maintain the quality of the methodology. For the CR-FFS approach to be institutionalized in participatory agricultural extension in Eastern Africa, the approach needs to be incorporated into local and national agriculture policies and strategies. Policy makers will need to be engaged to get their buy-in for adoption of the methodology in formal extension systems. This may be achieved by blending and complementing CR-FFS with other modes of extension, dissemination, and communication while maintaining its original principles.
The experience from this CR-FFS capacity building activity can be leveraged to create scalable participatory extension and training models throughout the Eastern Africa region, especially through farmer-to-farmer replication methods by observation techniques and scaling up through farmer group networks. This scaling is possible if relevant authorities can develop and follow-through an enabling environment and sustainability plan for CR-FFS.
Finally, lessons from the Covid19 pandemic also calls for the need to explore the possibility of developing digital, climate-oriented farmers' field schools, that can operate despite pandemics, using mobile ICT technologies. Further, FAO has provided guidelines on how to conduct CR-FFS under of Covid19 rules [37,38].
A good example of digital FFS is documented in [39]. CR-FFS groups can use Apps to set up informal networks for information sharing. Video material is easily accessible and can be integrated in CR-FFS curricula to reach a larger population.