Drivers of farmer involvement in experimental forage trials in the Peruvian Andes and implications for participatory research design

Abstract This study analyses the experience and response of farmers within a multi-year collaborative research trial focused on the development of forage-based fallows in eight communities in the central Peruvian Andes. Quantitative data from a rural household survey were used to characterize farming household socioeconomic factors, livelihood strategies and soil and crop management practices of community members belonging to four participation groups with respect to the trials: 1) current participants near the end of the trial; 2.) those who participated early on, but dropped the trials after the first year; 3) those who participated in meetings but not directly in experiments; and 4) those who never participated meaningfully in the process. Furthermore, qualitative interviews of farmers in the four groups were used to examine trends and questions arising from the quantitative survey findings. Analysis of this mixed-methods dataset showed that better resource-endowed households (in terms of human and social capital, more livestock assets, higher levels of farm value production and income, and farm inputs) tended to be more likely to participate compared to households with lower levels of these variables. Our findings suggest that the differences in resource endowment among participation group households may be related to household life cycles, where access to resources change over time, reflecting the changing demography of a household. It was established that farm households with intermediate-age children, that is near the middle of a farm life cycle trajectory, are those with the most wherewithal to participate in trials and likely serve as examples and test cases for other farms with younger parents or older farmers with children moved away. Follow-up interviews indicated that farming households at either end of the farm life cycle trajectory may be using a ‘wait-and-see’ approach to the trials carried out by their neighbours who have more labour and other resources to deploy. In light of these findings, we suggest that participatory research should aim to ensure that the voices, challenges and opportunities of Non-participants are represented in the research process and experimental design. Additionally, greater consideration should be placed on understanding management by context issues in order to better target potential farming innovations such as improved fallows, at multiple levels, from the field to the household and to the community and beyond.