3.1. Training Farmers Using FFS Approach

The Farmer Field School (FFS) approach to agricultural extension is being implemented in many developing countries in Asia and Africa. In this approach, farmers go through 15 weeks of training exercises in identifying components of the ecosystem, discussing their functions (ecosystem analysis), and doing a series of simple experiments to evaluate ideas. They observe plants and insects, and then agree on how to manage the rice crop on the basis of their observations, experiences, and weather forecasts. In addition to pest management, farmers learn about fertilizer application, water management, and timing of pesticide sprays (Stone, 1992). The IPM learning process revolves around the following basic practices:

• growing a healthy crop by using resistant varieties; better seed selection processes; and efficient nutrient, water, and cultural management
• conserving beneficial insects like predators and parasitoids; and
• observing fields on a weekly basis to determine what management actions are necessary to produce a profitable crop
  

In Indonesia, FFS-trained farmers reduced insecticide spraying from an average of 2.8 to 0.9 sprays/farmers and the proportion of farmers not spraying increased from 26% to 50% (Matteson et al., 1994). However, a major drawback to this approach was the cost requirements. In a paper on the sustainability of the FFS approach to agricultural extension, the World Bank (Quizon, et al. 2000) noted the following:

“… Evidence from the Philippines and Indonesia, two key areas in implementing this extension effort, shows that the fiscal non-sustainability of the FFS if applied on a large scale is a risk that cannot be ignored. Because of high costs per trained farmer, the amount of funding for extension in the Philippines cannot provide for significant farmer outreach. Farmer-led field schools are viewed by some as a way out of this fiscal dilemma if part of the cost is shifted to the community, but farm survey data from Indonesia indicate that the extent of the takeover of training responsibilities by farmers has been minor and farmer-led schools are still mainly funded by government budgets. The results suggest a need for great selectivity and caution in initiating FFS pilots, with a focus on the fiscal sustainability of the program if the intention is to scale up these activities.”