This study assessed the capacity for designing and implementing agricultural and rural development policies, strategies, and programs in Nigeria. Data for this study were derived from initial consultations at the Federal Ministry of Agriculture and Water Resources (FMAWR), Federal Ministry of Women affairs and Social Development (FMWASD), and the Federal Ministry of Environment (FMEnv) early in 2008. Two consultation workshops were also held, one for relevant staff in the ministries, parastatals, and NGOs; and the other for relevant university professors and researchers. This was followed by a review of relevant literature and a more detailed survey of institutions and individuals. A sample of relevant institutions and individuals were purposively selected from the Federal Capital, Abuja, Oyo, Kaduna, Enugu Ogun, Benue, and Abia States. At each location, trained data collectors compiled a list of state and federal agencies, nongovernmental organizations (NGOs), and universities where 32 institutional questionnaires were administered, of which 29 were valid for further analysis. Similarly, 320 individual questionnaires were administered, of which 183 were valid for further analysis. The null hypothesis that job satisfaction and institutional incentive was independent of selected background information (gender, position, years spent on job, nature of institution, and level of formal education) of the experts was tested using the Chi square analysis. The respondents were mostly male (23 of 24) and were either heads of departments (10 of 24) or directors, their deputies and their equivalents (12 of 24). Most of the respondents (22 of 24) exhibited an indifferent perception to the general environment and processes involved in policymaking. Reported capacity- strengthening efforts (for 13 of the 24 institutions surveyed) amounted to an average cost of US$76.98 per person per day for the 1-3 weeks training provided. While the practice of strategic planning was widespread, mission statements were widely used in only two-fifths of selected institutions; near-term strategies were widely used in about one third; and long-term visions were widely used in a little more than one third. Even the practice of participation in planning from a broad range of personnel within the institution was only widely used in one third of the selected intuitions. Similarly, written guidelines were widely available (22 of 24), but fully disseminated in less than half of the selected institutions. However, respondents claimed that the financial guidelines were being followed strictly, but half of the respondents (12 of 24) did not know the frequency of receiving reports from the accounting system. Most of the selected institutions had both a human resource management unit (70.8 percent) and dedicated staff training centers (54.2 percent), but about half of the respondents neither knew the regularity of review of staff training needs nor when last staff training needs were assessed. The implication of this is that the extent to which the training exercises match the skill gaps of staff and capacity requirements of the institutions were unknown. Between 75–80 percent of the selected institutions engaged in some collaborative programs and linkages with other government institutions, relevant NGOs, international development partners, training institutions, and research institutions. These collaborative ventures worked mainly through cost sharing, exchange, joint engagements, and sharing of reports. Over 70 percent of the individual respondents (experts) had at least a Master of Science (MSc) or its equivalent. The majority (79.7 percent) were male who had spent more than 10 years on the job. About half of the experts worked with universities, compared to 13.1 percent in the ministries and 37.7 percent in parastatals. Their expertise cut across a broad range of subjects relevant for designing and implementing agricultural and rural development policies— more than one quarter were experts in agricultural economics, extension, communication, rural development, and rural sociology. The most frequently mentioned (51.4 percent) person responsible for agricultural and rural development programs, policies, and strategies was the officer-in-charge, but the list of stakeholders was long and varied. Over 60 percent of the respondents stated that at least some consultation was done with stakeholders through face-to-face communication at stakeholder fora, meetings, conferences, summits, and talks. According to the respondents, the major concerns of stakeholders about agricultural and rural development policies, programs, or strategies were the extent to which they achieve stated goals. More than half of the respondents claimed that research evidence such as the achievements of previous and on going programs, results of fresh surveys, and extension and On farm Adaptive Research (OFAR) reports were used to support the development of agricultural and rural strategies, policies, and programs. This evidence was obtained mainly from agricultural institutions and universities as well as available reports, journals, and publications. The respondents stated that the major sources of funds for the process of agricultural and rural development policy were the Federal Government of Nigeria (FGN), The World Bank, state and local governments, and the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO). They also stated that the various agricultural and rural development policies, strategies, and programs largely benefited the poor (52.5 percent). It was noteworthy that respondents preceived that the number of women at the ministerial and research levels of agricultural and rural development was less than 1 percent. Even at the level of rural farming communities, only 15.3 percent of the respondents felt that there were more women. Furthermore, only 27.4 percent of the experts incorporated environmental issues in their work and only 20.4 percent undertook environmental analysis in their work. Finally, 91.3 percent were indifferent to their job, meaning that it would be difficult for them to perform to the best of their abilities without allowing them greater freedom in the performance of their jobs and work out a reasonable and acceptable reward package for the job done. The results of the Chi square tests showed that the experts’ perception of job satisfaction and institutional incentives is independent of all the background variables considered. The main capacity gaps for designing and implementing agricultural and rural development policies in Nigeria included 1) the need to entrench democratic principles and transparent leadership and 2) to bridge the gap between universities, research institutions, and policymaking and implementing entities. There was also a limited understanding of the relationships between institutional, human, and material resources versus impact of policy on target end-users at every level in the policy design, planning, implementation, and monitoring and evaluation. Finally, there was a need for the institutionalization of effective measures for tracking changes in the role of evidence in strategic, gender-sensitive planning, through regular monitoring and evaluation, impact assessment, adequate documentation, and commitment to utilize the results of the exercise. Efforts should also be targeted towards improving the quality, gender sensitivity, timeliness, and circulation of policy-relevant evidence.

Dimensions of the nature, scope, and complexity of collective action in Kenya have evolved over many years. In studying collective action, the aim is to understand why and how people participate in networks of trust. The purpose of this study was to investigate the different objectives that farmers pursue through collective action with the aim of understanding the patterns of people’s participation in collective action, identify factors that influence people to join groups, and identify the costs and benefits of participating in activities of groups. The study was carried out in four sites spread across the highlands of central Kenya. Data was collected from a total of 442 households, focusing on whether members of those households belonged to groups and if so, what type of groups these were and their activities. In addition we looked at how these groups functioned and identified some of the contributions members make to these groups and the benefits from the same. The analysis shows that collective action is used to accomplish a range of activities for different socioeconomic categories and that the majority of households in central Kenya engage in some form of group activity.... The study suggests that where institutions and policies that promote individual or private sector growth are weak, collective action can help to overcome these weaknesses and connect individuals in these institutions and policies.

The pre-independence transfer systems were a result of well-calculated strategy to civilise and Christianise the native farmer so that he would not compete with his white counterpart. Politics play a predominant role in reinforcing a culture of top-down extension in which the farmer did not play any meaningful role in technology-generation. the resultant system was so entrenched in the concept of technocentricism that African Agriculture became a shadow of European agriiculture and its commoditisation process. What we see today and probably for a long time in the future, is a perpetuation of seventy years of a well-orchestrated agenda in which knowledge is believed to flow from one source to the user in a hierarchical order. The fifteen years of independence have not made much change yet in influencing the systems.

Promotion of 'improved' conservation practiced in sub-Saharan Africa have rarely taken account of the practical, social and economic constraints faced by resource poor farmers. New technologies need to improve the supply and utilization of limited resources in these environments to satisfy the specific demands of the growing crop. At the same time they must not require costly inputs, unavailable skills or increase the demand on labour. Farmer uptake is therefore dependent upon the innovative use of existing implements, and thereby making the best use of what is generally available. This paper describes some of the lessons learned over the years and results from a five-year collaborative project between the Department of Research and Specialist Services (DRSS), Zimbabwe and Silsoe Research Institute, UK. The project aims to develop tillage systems that conserve water without increasing energy and labour requirements. Results of farmer managed trials sofar indicated that effective, low cost, conservation tillage practices can be achieved using existing implements to enhance water conservation, which will allow: i) earlier and more even crop establishment; ii) reduce effect of mid-season droughts and iii) extend the growing season where there is an early cut off to the rains. In order to identify whichh systems are appropriate and acceptable to dryland conditions, smallholder farmers have been fully involved in the selection and development of those technologies under investigation

The Conservatiuon Tillage for Sustainable Crop Production Systems has been testing and developing conservation tillage systems in the semi-arid areas of Masvingo Province since 1988. A dual approach of on-station research and adaptive on-farm research has been taken. Out of five tillage techniques, only mulch ripping can be considered ecologically sustainable. No-till tied ridging follows closely due to its perfect soil and water conservation effect. Two other minimum tillage systems, hand-hoeing and clean ripping are to reduce soil loss as compared to conventional mouldboard ploughing, but their level of soil loss is still above tolerable levels. Perfomance of the different tillage techniques has proved to be highly variable depending on soil, site and farmer specific conditions. To address the problem of high variability of conditions it was concluded that different techniques and systems should be promoted as options rather than blanket recommendations and that farmers should be encouraged to select, test and experiment with options in order to adapt technologies to their specific needs and conditions. The paper concludes that conservation tillage alone without further aspects of crop husbandry and soil fertility can only result in minor yield increases and does not necessarily increase the sustainability of the crop production system. Extension and further research should focus on integrated approach for land husbandry.

The paper outlines the occurence and distribution of vleis in Zimbabwe. Historical and Current utilization practices of these vleis are briefly described. Potentially safe and productive systems of cultivating vleis were investigated. These included three tillage practices (ridge and furrow, flat and paddy) and three cropping patterns (monocropping, intercropping and sequential cropping). Results of crop performance are discussed for the period 1983 to 1994. During the years when both maize and rice were harvested (1984/85, 1985/86, 1987/88, 1989/90, 1992/93 and 1993/94) maize grain yield averaged 6219 kg/ha whilst that of the rice was 2129 kkg/ha. Maize yielded grain every season even those with below average rainfall. In 1991/92 seasons when Zimbabwe and indeed the sub-Saharan region experienced the worst drought in history, vlei maize on ridges averaged grain yield of 1139 g/ha. Soil fertility, ground water levels and precipitation were monitored throughout the experimental period. Implications of vlei cultivation on the socio-economic aspects were assessed in view of possible transfer. Future research and extension objectives and strategies are highlighted. The need for coordinated and multi-displinary approach on the development of vlei utilization packkages is emphasized