Participation and empowerment: A comparative study of IPM technology generation in Nicaragua.

The heated debate over the limited impact of integrated pest management (IPM) in Central American agriculture suggests that we need to investigate the mechanisms of IPM technology generation. CATIE/MAG-IPM Nicaragua initiated a comparative study of two prototypic models with tomato farmers in the Sebaco Valley, in 1990-91. I created two ideal types from the literature: the scientist-led and farmer-led models. Each model was represented by three different communities. The study focused on the: (1) technology generation process, (2) IPM technologies and farmer opinion of IPM, (3) forms of participation and empowerment by farmers and scientists, and (4) institutionalization of the two models. The investigation methodology consisted of community level interviews, intensive pre- and post-program participant interviews, participant observation, and statistical evaluation of production and insect variables related to the experiments. The two models resulted in selection of different priority pests, different criteria for selecting technologies, and different technologies under experimentation. Farmer participation was greater in number, levels of influence, and forms of empowerment in the farmer-led model. A continuum for empowerment in the research process is presented. The scientist-led model was more costly, by.23%, than the farmer-led model. In addition, I analyzed the current debate about Central American IPM research and identified three worldviews. The first worldview, represented by Rogers' diffusion theory, finds problems in communication between extensionists and farmers and weak links between research and extension. The second worldview represented by Latour's 'tecnoscience' critique, finds problems in 'translation' a research program's inability to gather active support and participation by colleagues and farmers that would use the information and technologies. A third worldview approaches IPM research from a Foucaultian perspective, focusing on the non-involvement of many sectors of the agricultural society that have not been able to create their own knowledge and power due to the 'totalizing' nature of scientific inquiry. Coming from different worldviews to solve the problems in Central American IPM research and development, the group advocates find themselves proposing radically different solutions.PhDBiological SciencesEntomologyEnvironmental scienceHealth and Environmental SciencesSocial SciencesSociologyUniversity of Michigan, Horace H. Rackham School of Graduate Studieshttp://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/129294/2/9423274.pd