In 2014-2016, Katalyst project and the Bangladesh Crop Protection Association (BCPA) extended their work by training farmers, women, retailers and pesticide spray men on the safe and judicious use of pesticides (SUP). This initiative improved the ability of farmers to select the right types of pesticide, and to use them appropriately with the correct dosage.
Katalyst project has been facilitating awareness raising on the importance of balanced fertiliser application in Bangladesh since 2006.
Earlier high-value Tilapia, Koi and Pangus fry are mostly bought by lead farmers only while small farmers use low-yielding local species. A breakthrough was reached during Phase 2 of the Katalyst project, when hatcheries started marketing high-yielding fish fingerlings to small farmers. The promotion included pond management and cultivation improvements that further increased farmers’ productivity.
The ‘Licensing Fish Brood Import’ mini case study shows how Katalyst facilitated the linkage between local hatcheries and international brood sources and together with the Department of Fisheries established a standard operational procedure for brood import
Often, farmers excessively use chemical pesticides with detrimental effects on environmental and human health.The ‘Commercialising Bio-Pesticides in Bangladesh’ mini case study explains how the Katalyst project and private sector partner Ispahani Agro Ltd. formulated a policy recommendation on the amendment of the 1985 Pesticide Act to make the proper registration and marketing of “Bio-Pesticides” possible, allowing companies to market and distribute IPM products to a mass audience.
Building on this potential, Katalyst’s Women’s Economic Empowement (WEE) sector designed an intervention to provide training in modern prawn cultivation techniques and input and create linkages between feed and aqua-chemical companies with women prawn farmers of the Jessore-Khulna Bagerhat Satkhira Narail belt. Through this intervention, 22,170 women farmers have improved access to quality inputs and relevant know-how.
Participatory approaches have been discussed as alternatives to and complementary elements of more conventional research on sustainable land use and rural development in upland areas of Southeast Asia. Following a brief overview of the history of participatory approaches (Sect. 9.1), this chapter discusses the potential and limitations of applying Participatory Rural Appraisal (PRA) tools to field research practice in Vietnam (Sect. 9.2) and of involving stakeholders in priority setting, modeling and environmental valuation in the Southeast Asian uplands (Sect. 9.3).
The general aims of this chapter are to provide an overview of the historical development of rural advisory and knowledge provision in Vietnam, and how legal frameworks have changed over time, demonstrate how more client-centered extension approaches can be translated and utilized at the field level, and focus on examples of novel approaches to knowledge generation and diffusion, those currently evolving due to initiatives driven by state, private and NGO actors, or developed within the framework of the Uplands Program.
Competing models of innovation informing agricultural extension, such as transfer of technology, participatory extension and technology development, and innovation systems have been proposed over the last decades. These approaches are often presented as antagonistic or even mutually exclusive. This article shows how practitioners in a rural innovation system draw on different aspects of all three models, while creating a distinct local practice and discourse. We revisit and deepen the critique of Vietnam’s “model” approach to upland rural development, voiced a decade ago in this journal.