Hostname: page-component-8448b6f56d-c47g7 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-19T01:04:50.669Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Integrating Agronomic and Economic Perspectives into the Diagnostic Stage of On-farm Research

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  03 October 2008

Derek Byerlee ,
Bernard Triomphe  and
Michel Sebillotte
Derek Byerlee
Affiliation:
International Maize and Wheat Improvement Centre (CIMMYT), PO Box 6-641, 06600Mexico, DF
Bernard Triomphe
Affiliation:
International Maize and Wheat Improvement Centre (CIMMYT), PO Box 6-641, 06600Mexico, DF
Michel Sebillotte
Affiliation:
Institut National Agronomique, Paris-Grignon, France
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Summary

Crop production surveys, which integrate the collection of data on both agronomic and economic variables, are increasingly common in on-farm research. A conceptual framework for designing and analysing such surveys is provided. Methodological issues in conducting crop production surveys are reviewed with respect to type of information collected, level of field observation, degree of quantification, frequency of observation, sampling, measurement of yields and yield components, and analysis of yield limiting factors. It is concluded that, while better integration of agronomic and economic perspectives in diagnosis may increase costs, the information and analysis obtained have considerable potential to improve the efficiency of experimentation.

Type
Research Article
Information
Experimental Agriculture , Volume 27 , Issue 2 , April 1991 , pp. 95 - 114
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1991

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

REFERENCES

Ali, M. & Byerlee, D. (1991). Economic efficiency of small farmers in a changing world: a survey of recent evidence. Journal of International Development. (In press).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bernsten, R. H. (1977). Constraints to higher rice yields in the Philippines. PhD thesis, University of Illinois.Google Scholar
Boiffin, J., Meynard, J. M., Sébillotte, M. & Caneill, J. (1981). Elaboration du rendement et fertilization azotée du blé d'hiver en Champagne Crayeuse. I Protocole d'étude d'un problème technique régional. Agronomie 1:549–558.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Boiffin, J., Meynard, J. M., Sébillotte, M. & Caneill, J. (1982). Elaboration du rendement et fertilization du blé d'hiver en Champagne Crayeuse. 3. Influence des variations pedologiques; consequences pour le conduite des cultures. Agronomie 2:417–428.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Byerlee, D. et al. (1980). Planning technologies appropriate to farmers: concepts and procedures. El Batan, Mexico: CIMMYT.Google Scholar
Byerlee, D., Heisey, P. & Hobbs, P. (1989a). Diagnosing research priorities for small farmers: experiences from on-farm research in Pakistan. Quarterly Journal of International Agriculture 28:254–265.Google Scholar
Byerlee, D., Iqbal, M. & Fischer, K. S. (1989b). Quantifying and valuing the joint production of grain and fodder from maize fields: evidence from northern Pakistan. Experimental Agriculture 25:435–446.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Byerlee, D., Sheikh, A. D., Aslam, M. & Hobbs, P. R. (1984). Wheat in the rice-based farming systems of the Punjab: implications for research and extension. Islamabad: National Agricultural Research Centre.Google Scholar
Byerlee, D., Sheikh, A. D., Khan, K. & Ahmed, M. (1987). Diagnosing research and extension priorities for small farmers: maize in the Swat Valley. PARC/CIMMYT Paper No. 87–19. Islamabad: Pakistan Agricultural Research Council.Google Scholar
Casley, D. J. & Lury, D. A. (1982). Monitoring and Evaluation of Agricultural and Rural Development Projects. Baltimore: John Hopkins University Press.Google Scholar
Cerf, M. & Sébillotte, M. (1988). Le concept de modèle general et l'analyse de la prise de decision technique. Comptes Rendus Académie d'Agriculture de France 74:71–80.Google Scholar
Cornish, P. S. & Murray, G. M, (1989) Low rainfall rarely limits wheat yields in southern New South Wales. Australian Journal of Experimental Agriculture 29:77–83.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Crozat, Y., Sitthicharoenchai, A., Kaewvongsri, P.Pornpinatepong, S. & Chitapong, P. (1986). The improvement of rice cultivation in Sathing Phra area, Songkhla Lake Basin. Illustration of a methodology based on the yield differentiation between farmers' plots. Publication No. 6. Bangkok: Thai-French Farming Systems Research Project, Faculty of Natural Resources, Prince of Songkhla University.Google Scholar
Edwards, R. (1987). Mapping and informal experimentation by farmers: agronomic monitoring of farmers' cropping systems as a form of informal experimentation. Fanning Systems Newsletter (CIM-MYT, Nairobi) 31:11–22.Google Scholar
Filloneau, C. (1981). Place et rôles des enquêtes agronomiques en milieu rural. Communication au Seminaire du C.U.R.D. ‘Methodologie Générate de Recherche en Milieu Rural’, 23–25 April, Abidjan.Google Scholar
Fleury, A., Masle, J. & Sébillotte, M. (1982). L'analyse de l'elaboration du rendement outil dejugement du milieu. Bulletin Technique de l'Agriculture 370–372, 357–362.Google Scholar
French, R. J. & Schultz, J. E. (1984). Water use efficiency of wheat in Mediterranean-type environment. I. The relation between yield, water use and climate. Australian Journal of Agricultural Research 35:743–764.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Garcia, A., Mendoza, J. & Hibon, A. (1986). Generando tecnología apropiada para los productores de maíz de temporal en La Huerta, Jalisco. Informe de Diagnostico Inicial (Agosto 1985–Marzo 1986). Draft paper, Mexico, DF: CIMMYT.Google Scholar
Gras, R. (1981). Aperçu méthodologique sur l'étude in situ des relations plantes–milieu–techniques: l'enquête. Institut National Recherches Agronomiques, Groupe de Recherches non Sectorielles.Google Scholar
Harrington, L. & Tripp, R. (1984). Recommendation domains: a framework for on-farm research. CIMMYT Economics Program Working Paper 02/84, Mexico DF: CIMMYT.Google Scholar
Hobbs, P. R., Razzaq, A., Hashmi, N. & Khan, B. R. (1989). A survey of wheat production practices in Rawalpindi District of the Punbjab from 1983 to 1986. PARC/CIMMYT Paper No. 89–1. Islamabad: Pakistan Agricultural Research Council.Google Scholar
Hoffnar, B. R. & Johnson, G. L. (1966). Summary and evaluation of the cooperative agronomic economic experimentation at Michigan State University. Experiment Station Bulletin 11. East Lansing: Michigan State University.Google Scholar
ICRISAT (1982). Annual Report. Niger: ICRISAT Sahelien Center.Google Scholar
James, C. & Teng, P. S., (1979). The quantification of production constraints associated with plant diseases. In Applied Biology, Vol. IV (Ed. Coaker, T. H.). London: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Just, R. E. & Candler, W. (1985). Production functions and rationality of mixed cropping. European Journal of Agricultural Economics 12:207–231.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Khan, K., Byerlee, D., Ahmad, M., Saleem, M. & Stevens, E. J. (1986). Farmer managed verification of improved maize technology: results from Swat, 1985. PARC/CIMMYT Paper No. 86–12. Islamabad: Pakistan Agricultural Research Council.Google Scholar
Kranz, J. (1987). Measuring plant diseases. In: Experimental Techniques in Plant Disease Epidemiology, Berlin: Springer-Verlag.Google Scholar
Lagemann, J. (1977). Traditional African Farming Systems in Eastern Nigeria. Munchen: Weltforum Verlag.Google Scholar
Manichon, H. & Sébillotte, M. (1973). Etude de la monoculture du maïs. Résultats d'une enquete agronomique dans les régions de Garlin et Navarreux (Pyréenées Atlantiques). Chaire d'Agronomie, Institut National Agronomique, Paris-Grignon.Google Scholar
Martin, R. J. et al. (1988). Survey of farm management practices of the northern wheat belt of New South Wales. Australian Journal of Experimental Agriculture 28:499–509.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Masle, J. (1984). Competition among tillers in winter wheat: consequences for growth and development of the crop. In Wheat Growth and Modelling. New York: Plenum Publishing Corporation, 33–54.Google Scholar
Milleville, P. (1976). Comportement technique sur une parcelle de cotonnier au Sénégal. Cahiers ORSTOM Serie Biologic 11:263–275.Google Scholar
Moock, P. R. (1981). Education and technical efficiency in small-farm production. Economic Development and Cultural Change 29:722–739.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pinstrup-Andersen, P., Ruiz de Londoño, N. & Infante, M. (1976). A suggested procedure for estimating yield production losses in crops. PANS 22:359–365.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Poate, D. (1988). A review of methods for measuring crop production from smallholder producers. Experimental Agriculture 24:1–14.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ruiz de Londoño, N., Pinstrup-Andersen, P., Sanders, J. H. & Infante, M. A. (1978). Factores que limitan la productividad de frijol en Colombia. Cali, Colombia: CIAT.Google Scholar
Sébillotte, M. (1975). Comment aborder et suivre l'introduction dans un système de culture de nouveaux precédés de travail du sol. Bulletin Technique de l'Agriculture 302–303, 555–567.Google Scholar
Sébillotte, M. (1978). Itinéraires techniques et evolution de la pensée agronomique. C. R. Académic d'Agriculture de France 2:906–914.Google Scholar
Sébillotte, M. (1979). Analyse du fonctionnament des exploitations agricoles. Trajectoire et typologie. In Elements pour tine Problèmatique de Rechercher sur les Systèmes Agraires et le Developpement. Assemblee Constitutive du Departement, Paris: SAD, INRA.Google Scholar
Sébillotte, M. (1980). An analysis of yield elaboration of wheat. In Wheat Technical Monograph, 25–32. Basle, Switzerland: Ciba Geigy.Google Scholar
Sébillotte, M. (1987). Approaches of the on-farm agronomist: some methodological considerations. Paper presented at the fourth Thailand National Farming Systems Seminar, Prince of Songkhla University, Haad Yai, Thailand, 04 7–10.Google Scholar
Sébillotte, M. (1988) Système de culture: un concept opératoire pour les agronomes. INRA, Paris. (In press).Google Scholar
Stynes, B. A. (1980). Synoptic methodologies for crop loss assessment. In Crop Loss Assessment. Proceedings of E. C. Stockman Commemorative Symposium. Miscellaneous Publication No. 7, Agricultural Experiment Station. St. Paul: University of Minnesota.Google Scholar
Tomerlin, J. R. & Howell, T. A. (1988). A computer program for training people to estimate disease severity on cereal leaves. Plant Diseases 72:455–459.Google Scholar
Triomphe, B. (1986). Diagnostic agronomique de Kpove, Village du Sud-TOGO 2. Analyse de la variabilité des rendements maïs et coton. Montpellier, France: Centre de Coopération Internationale en Recherche Agronomique pour le Développement, Montpellier.Google Scholar
Tripp, R. & Woolley, J. (1989). The planning stage of on-farm research: identifying factors for experimentation. Mexico, D.F. and Cali, Colombia: CIMMYT and CIAT.Google Scholar
Tripp, R., Anandajayasekeram, P., Byerlee, D. & Harrington, L. (1990). Farming systems research revisited. In Agricultural Development in The Third World, second edition (Eds. Eicher, C. K. and Staatz, J. M.). Baltimore: Johns Hopkins Universtity Press.Google Scholar
Verma, V., Marchant, T. & Scott, C. (1988). Evaluation of crop-cut methods and farmer reports for estimating crop production: results of a methodological study in five African countries. London: Longacre Agricultural Development Centre.Google Scholar
Von Arx, R., Ewell, P. T., Goueder, J., Essamet, M., Cheikh, M. & Ben Temine, A. (1988). Management of the potato tuber moth by Tunisian farmers: A report of on-farm monitoring and a socioeconomic survey. Lima, International Potato Center in colloboration with Institut National de la Recherche Agronomique, Tunisia.Google Scholar
Wiese, M. V. (1980). Comprehensive and systematic assessment of crop yield determinants. In Crop Loss Assessment: Proceedings of E. C. Stockman Commemorative Symposium, Miscellaneous Publication No. 7, Agricultural Experiment Station, St. Paul: University of Minnesota.Google Scholar
Wiese, M. V. (1982). Crop management by comprehensive appraisal of yield determining variables. Annual Review of Phytopathology 20:419–432.CrossRefGoogle Scholar