Communicating Agricultural Research in Africa: The New Role of Rural Radio
Helen Hambly Odame
Research Officer, International Service for National Agricultural Research, P.O. Box 93375, 2509
AJ, The Hague, The Netherlands.
ABSTRACT
New developments in rural radio in Africa hold promise for the application of farming systems thinking for agricultural innovation and development. This paper examines the challenge of international and national agricultural research institutions moving beyond the conventional “technology triangle” of researchextension-farmer linkages whereby information tends to be selectively released and controlled. In contrast, a web-like set of interactions among multiple stakeholders and research institutions prevails and requires a learning-centered approach to knowledge generation and information sharing to support agricultural innovation for rural development. A pilot project at the International Service for
National Agricultural Research (ISNAR) to investigate the current role of broadcast radio in linking farmers, research institutions and rural extension in
Africa is discussed.
* To date, the project has carried out a study of radio/research linkage needs and worked with teams of African researchers and radio broadcasters. The results suggest a ‘linkage gap’ exists that prevents the two
‘stations’ of research and radio rarely, if ever, interacting. Lack of teamwork, and certain policy and organizational issues operate against research/radio linkages.
Overcoming these limitations will be an on-going effort, but there are encouraging ways forward.
INTRODUCTION
Nowhere in the world is the outlook for farming systems more bleak than in sub-
Saharan Africa. In the last three decades, the continent has confronted a major decline in per capita food production; in the next two decades Africa is the only region of the world where the number and percentage of children who are malnourished is predicted increase to 49 million, an increase of 50% from 1997-
2020 (Rosegrant et. al, 2001). Scenarios of environmental degradation, the
* The partners in the project include ISNAR, the University of Guelph (Canada), the Developing
Countries Farm Radio Network (DCFRN), the Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) of the
United Nations and support from the Canada/CGIAR Linkage Fund of the Canadian International
Development Agency (CIDA).
1

HIV/AIDS pandemic and the persistent neglect for basic human rights reinforce the poverty and chronic deprivation of rural Africa (IFAD, 2001).
In most African countries, broadcast radio (not to be confused with two-way personal radio service) remains relevant to any strategy for rural development, including greater public accountability and decentralization of services, because it involves a relatively inexpensive technology that effectively reaches rural people in their own languages. Rural radio is technically defined in terms of its relatively local range (25-50 km radius) or functioning at frequencies of less than 1000
MHz. In some cases, rural radio stations using larger transmitters (e.g. 5000
Watts) can technically reach millions of listeners.
1
Multiple information and communication technologies (ICTs) support radio broadcasting, including in some contexts, digital systems, satellite communications and the Internet. Radio stations may be commercially or publicly operated, although distinguishing between the two is difficult as government-owned stations increasingly engage in commercial activity while some commercial stations offer free services to government or non-governmental organizations.
Another important type of rural radio broadcasting is defined as ‘community radio’, which is owned and operated by a community. Ilboudo (1991) argues that the success of this kind of rural radio station in Africa is that it complements the oral tradition of communication in many rural societies and builds on principles of participatory development. Such decentralized community radio maintains close ties to the local community and often provides local people with opportunities to voice their opinions and share their knowledge (Gumucio Dagron, 2001; Balit,
1999). Community radio stations are fast expanding in Africa. In South Africa, for example, over 90 community radio stations have joined the National
Community Radio Forum started in 1993, and 50 stations were reported on-air in
2001 (Stone, 2001).
Farm radio broadcasting has existed since the 1930s, taking off initially in
Canada, and soon after in the United States, Europe and Australia. In 1963,
UNESCO with Canadian support transferred the experience of its Farm Radio
Forums to three developing countries, India, Ghana and Kenya. The Forums are farmer listening and discussion groups communicating with each other and public services via radio programs. By the mid-1960s radio broadcasting disseminated information to farmers and their organizations about new wheat and rice technologies during the ‘Green Revolution’ (Borlaug, 1970). Since then, the context of research and radio linkages has changed both technologically and conceptually. For example, new ICTs create options like “Internet radio”
(downloaded audio clips) or “Internet browsing on radio” (searching the Internet
2

and discussing the finds on radio). As well, new agricultural biotechnologies are demanding more from public information systems, and last but not least, research itself is expected to go beyond the mere dissemination of new technical information to two-way dialogue with rural populations (Wette, 1997). This paper addresses the current role of rural radio in Africa and how researchers improve communication with farmers via radio, as well as research relationships with civil society where media is an influential but often underestimated institutional partner.
AGRICULTURAL RESEARCH LINKAGES
Global and national systems of agricultural knowledge generation and exchange are increasingly engaged in flows of cross-sectoral technology and information among stakeholder groups (Haverkort and de Zeeuw, 1992). Stakeholders of research have been defined as “those groups whose interests are likely to be affected by or, conversely, whose activities will affect the research system”
(Gijsbers et. al., 2001: 329).
2
Many of these groups are identifiable entities with defined objectives and responsibilities, and internal organization. They may be part of the public sector and hold responsibility for investment, policymaking, research, extension, or education. There are also community based-organizations such as farmer groups, non-governmental organizations (NGOs) and private sector agencies involved in systems of technology development and use.
Since 1988, ISNAR has defined and characterized research linkages, assisted in establishing linkage policies within national agricultural research systems
(NARS) and strengthened linkages through collaborative research and training projects.
3 Linkages between organizations representing research, extension and farmers were often captured in the metaphor of the “technology triangle” so that all are involved in planning and evaluation of research processes and products
(Kaimowitz, 1990; Merrill-Sands et. al, 1989). The concept of ‘linkages’ implies structured collaboration among stakeholder organizations based on achieving shared objectives and diversifying sources of income. It is argued that linkages work best when they are consciously planned and activated (Peterson, et. al.,
2001). Linkages may also be developed to avoid duplication of effort and build strategic alliances across and within sectors (Tabor and Faber, 1998). According to Peterson et. al. (2001), the four key aspects of linkage planning are: a) identifying linkage needs and partners, b) specifying linkage functions, c) defining linkage mechanisms, and d) determining resource requirements.
In practice, linkages are difficult to facilitate and even well planned linkages run the risk of falling short of their objectives when they reach implementation (Tola et. al., 2001). Linkage gaps (i.e. missing partners or disconnects among
3

stakeholders) are created by changing contexts which make some links less or more relevant. This point is illustrated by the description of a linkage gap between natural resource management research and policy created by a lack of trust and acceptance between the science and policy establishments.
Even when there are mechanisms established for official communication between agricultural research leaders and NRM policy makers, such communication is likely to be “noise”, periodic and characterized by a low match between signal and policy information-demand…Even where scientists and policy makers share a common definition of the natural resource use “problem”, they may not communicate because scientists may not view policy makers as a legitimate client for their research results, and policy makers may not perceive the research community as producing relevant information for policy making purposes (Tabor and
Faber, 1998:2)
In past work there was a tendency to strengthen linkages in terms of the number of linkage partners operating at different levels (i.e. their connectivity). Instead, an approach building on Granovetter (1985) would find the critical issue is the density of the linkages in terms of the quality of communication and partnership actions taken. This perspective on linkages fits well with constructivist approaches in which emphasis is placed on facilitating learning about rural development and farmer knowledge and values, rather than instructing policy decisions, extension advice or farmer adoption of technology (Loevinsohn et. al.,
2000). Constructivism rejects that objective science exists. Research driven by scientists who lead and manage on the basis of their own dominant worldview is rebuked. It is not accepted that there is a fixed amount of knowledge that farmers need to be “taught” and that scientists must “teach”. Questions initiated by farmers should be the impetus behind continuous dialogue and mutual learning in research and its application to development activity (Long and Long, 1992).
Farming systems thinking has long dealt with the constraints of a linear approach to scientists developing technologies, government extension agents disseminating them as packages, and farmers adopting them. Okali and Sumberg (1986), for example, report the neglect of farmers’ own knowledge and role in developing and adapting technology, which is often embedded in scientific organizations. As well, the middle ground of extension is seen on shaky ground, especially as structural adjustment in Africa reduces subsidies to agricultural inputs and technical services (Farrington, 1994). As a result, many new, mainly private sector technology and extension providers enter the arena (Janssen, 2000). Such services are not necessarily accessible to all, as some farmers are far too poor to pay for them. Even for farmers who can pay the ratio of extension personnel to
4

farmer population in Africa is estimated at no better than 1:3,000 (World Bank,
1999). Marginalized stakeholders such as women and youth are often targeted by non-governmental organizations, but their efforts to supplement or replace public services are not easily sustained (Hambly Odame, 2001). Overall, these are trends that indicate unprecedented institutional diversity as well as increasing crosssectoral demands on agriculture. The implicit relationships are not neat and triangular, but rather, like a spider’s web of institutional arrangements that form and reform in a constantly changing context (ISNAR, 2002; Uphoff, 2001).
A PROJECT ON FARMER, RESEARCH AND RADIO LINKAGES
In October 2000, ISNAR, together with four global partners, embarked on a pilot study of the linkage between agricultural research and rural radio in four African countries: Cameroon, Ghana, Mali, and Uganda. The project, known as Linking
Agricultural Research and Rural Radio , involved two types of partner organizations- national agricultural research centers and rural radio stations conducting farm broadcasting in local language(s). These countries were selected on the basis of their diverse experience with government and/or community farm radio broadcasting. Mali has for instance, the largest number of rural radio stations per capita in Africa (Ilboudo, 1999; 2001). Ghana operates over forty stations including centralized and decentralized government broadcasting, as well as nascent commercial and community radio broadcasting. Uganda is in the process of decentralizing its government broadcasting and significant resources have been invested in ICTs for agriculture and rural development by donor agencies. For example, the Department for International Development (DFID) of the United Kingdom has supported the expansion of the public radio station Mega
FM (formerly known as Radio Freedom Gulu), which will serve 4 million rural inhabitants of Northern Uganda and Southern Sudan. There are an estimated 45 radio stations in Uganda now, many of which are commercial FM stations serving a relatively small target audience (average of 4,000 households). Finally,
Cameroon represents a case in which decentralized rural radio broadcasting is quite new although in 2002 the country will initiate 15 new rural radio stations in the country with support from the United Nations Education, Social and Cultural
Organization (UNESCO).
The means of information sharing and communication in agriculture and rural development are diverse including newspapers, radio, television, books, magazines, the Internet, cellular telephones, films, and official press releases or published speeches. In Africa, most rural people do not have access to all of these different media. By the end of the 1990s, there were approximately 12 newspapers, 52 televisions, and 198 radios for every 1000 Africans (Niang,
2001). This included more than an estimated 65 million radio receivers in sub-
5

Saharan Africa, excluding South Africa (BBC, 1996). For Africa, the ‘ digital divide’
is real because less than 1% of rural people in Africa have access to any single ICT, although broadcast radio in the project countries is the most prevalent
(Table 1).
Table 1: Data on radio and Internet access for selected African countries
Selected Country
Radios per 1,000 people
(1997)
Internet hosts per 10,000 people
(Jan. 2000)
Cameroon
Ghana
Mali
Uganda
Mean low income countries
Mean middle income countries
Mean high income countries
163
238
54
128
157
359
1286
0.01
0.06
0.00
0.06
0.37
9.96
777.22
Source: World Development Report 2000/2001 and International Telecommunications Union
(1999). Data includes urban and rural radio and Internet access.
At the same time, it must be recognized that the Internet and mobile telephony have become increasingly accessible to organizations in Africa, if not affordable to all individual users. Telephony and Internet (email) access are just two of the popular services offered by telecenters in Africa. Benjamin (2000) distinguishes between two types of telecenters. One is the relatively small, private sector telecenter that operates mainly as a cybercafe or a secretarial/communications bureau. The second type is the larger, donor-funded telecenter that provides information services for development purposes to a defined rural population. One such case is the Nakaseke Telecenter which was started in March 1999 to test and demonstrate the value of ICTs on rural development in the rural areas of
Nakaseke and Kasangombe in Luweero District (see http://www.nakaseke.or.ug/ ).
Nakaseke Telecenter provides communication, secretarial, training and entertainment services including the generation (collection, documentation, storage. packaging and dissemination) of local knowledge on household health, mother-child health, nutrition and agriculture (UNESCO, 2002).
Cognizant of the different stages of rural radio/ICT development in the four countries in the project, some general findings are discussed under two headings:
1) key policy and organizational issues for research/radio linkages, and 2) identification and engagement with teams of researchers/broadcasters and extension workers.
1) Policy and Organizational Issues
Based on findings of the assessment of needs and organizational constraints documented by ISNAR et al (2001), a linkage gap between research and radio
6

exists and gains relevance with the ‘digital divide’ of ICTs in Africa. It is found that few research institutes in the four project countries have active research/radio linkages embodied in their work plans. No single institute, with the exception of the National Agricultural Research Organization of Uganda includes radio in its national agricultural research information and communication strategy.
Management attitudes within research and radio organizations also suggest lack of awareness about each other (ISNAR et. al, 2001). Research managers and scientists perceive broadcasters as “politician followers” and not agents for community development. Broadcasters find researchers highly academic with insufficient practical information to offer listeners. National research contributions to creative, locally popular formats such as story telling, drama and magazine radio programs are underutilized.
By putting researchers into contact with broadcasters in the needs and organizational constraints assessment exercise undertaken in March 2001 it came to light that research and radio stations had more, rather than less in common. For one thing, both stations serve the same audience: farmers. Secondly, scarce resources are common in both organizations, and therefore, collaboration could build upon resource sharing and mobilization of new resources (human, physical and financial) through partnership. Through a participatory process of needs and organizational constraints assessment the following priorities for policy and organizational change for research/radio linkages were identified:
 subregional, national, and provincial inventories of agricultural research facilities and rural radio stations.
 case studies of what constitutes high-impact agricultural research communication and information exchange to inform new policy development or improve existing information and communication policies in NARS.
 rapid priority-setting methods for research and radio collaboration.
 tools for assessing the added value of collaborative efforts.
 impact assessment of rural media and development communications.
 collaborative management such as appointing a scientist to the advisory board of the radio station.
2) Identification and Engagement with Research/Radio/Extension Teams
In July 2002, the project conducted a workshop in Kumasi, Ghana to develop the concept of research/radio linkages by testing an experiential learning module that included the development of team action plans (TAPs). The workshop was initiated by a competitive call for team applications from the four countries.
4 The criteria for selection required each team to include at least one researcher, one
7

radio broadcaster and one extension worker (from government or nongovernmental organizations). Eight teams could be selected but the competitive call received a total of 79 team applications representing 260 persons.
In the workshop, the teams worked on exercises designed to explore, generalize process and apply their individual experiences relevant to research/radio linkages.
Each team worked out a plan of collaboration known as a Team Action Plan
(TAP). Through facilitated learning sessions on team building, communication with farmers and new and existing resource mobilization, one TAP activity that required new resources or fundraising was developed into a first draft concept note. Table 2 presents a summary of the TAPs developed through this process.
Table 2: Summary of Eight Team Action Plans
Country
Ghana
Team
Cameroon Institute for Research for
Agricultural
Development (IRAD)
Cameroon Radio and
Television
SOWEDA Producer
Association
Cameroon Voice of Manyu Rural
Radio
IRAD
Title of First Draft Concept Note
Second season maize: an unexploited income generating opportunity for rural women in Fako and Meme Division of Cameroon
Disappearing forever? Disseminating appropriate technologies and indigenous knowledge to revitalize plantain production among resource poor farmers of Manyu
Division, Cameroon
Tomato for improved livelihoods: disseminating improved tomato production technologies to resource poor farmers in Techiman District,
Ghana
Ghana
Ghana
Uganda
CRI
Classic FM
Ministry of Food and
Agric.
Farmer groups
Ministry of Food and
Agric.
Radio Peace
District Assembly
SAARI
Community Welfare
Foundation
URA-Radio
Fuctional Literacy
Hoima District
Government
Radio Hoima
Hoima District Farmers
Association
Food for Life: Sustaining High-Yielding Sweet
Potato Production Among Resource Poor
Farmers in Awutu-Effutu-Senya and Gomoa
Districts, Ghana
Alleviating Poverty: Capacity Building for
Smallholder Farmers Food Security through
Distance Learning
Increased Banana Production: a source of food and income for resource poor rural women of
Hoima District, Uganda
8

Uganda
Uganda
JEEP
NARO
MNEMA
Sironko District Farmers
Association
Ministry of Agriculture
Ministry of Health
Budu Broadcasting
Service
Buganda Youth Alert
Barren Lands of Sironko: Participatory Rural
Radio to Mitigate the Deteriorating Soils of
Myembe Sub-County, Uganda
Roll Back Malaria: Neem Trees for Malaria and
Its Vector Control for Resource Poor Farmers in
Mukungwe, Uganda
The project is now involved in tracking these eight teams and their application of new knowledge, skills and attitudes for research/radio linkages. This requires analysis of the implementation of the TAPs, including the team’s ability to mobilize existing and new resources for partnership between farmers, researchers, and radio broadcasters. Socio-economic analysis of the extent to which there is involvement of marginalized stakeholders such as rural women and youth farmers will be included. The project continues in its efforts to test the hypothesis that research/radio linkages are more than simply a means for information dissemination.
CONCLUSION
Radio is acknowledged as the most important medium for communicating with the rural populations of developing countries (FAO, 2001). Farming systems thinking is presented with a continuing challenge to move beyond the “technology triangle” of research-extension-farmer linkages whereby information is selectively released and controlled towards a learning-centered approach for knowledge sharing. For linkage activities, emphasis must be placed on the “C”
(communication) of ICTs. Evidence to date from a project at ISNAR suggests that broadcast radio is still a highly relevant ICT for agricultural innovation for rural development in Africa.
Notes:
1 Topographic conditions determine the potential electromagnetic “reach” of radio broadcasts. For example, a 5000 Watt transmittor Garden City Radio in Kumasi, Ghana technically reaches about
40,000 households and once fully operational the new MegaFM radio station will include up to 4 million listeners in the regions of Northern Uganda and Southern Sudan.
2 Recently ISNAR has redefined its use of the term stakeholders of institutional innovation in agriculture. One group of stakeholders are those who are often most “powerful” – the owners – of the circumstances in the sense that they have undue influence in the situation. This group includes for example, the donors. The community of beneficiaries who are the assumed ‘focus’ of the intended transformation are another key group of stakeholders and they may include farmers
9

associations or national research organizations. There are also stakeholders who are the ‘actors’ – those who need to be involved in the actions for change. ISNAR itself is one such group of stakeholders and other advanced research institutes or non-governmental organizations could fall into this category Finally, and not least important are the stakeholders who are guardians of the interests of those who (or that which) cannot speak for themselves. This group often represents those whose ‘voice’ is unheard (e.g. marginalized people) or not yet heard (e.g. future generations).
3 Since 1988 ISNAR has produced over 50 publications on the topic of agricultural research linkages http://www.isnar.cgiar.org/publications/index.htm
4 Sufficient demand indicated that a French workshop should also be held. Applications from Mali will be included in this 2003 event.
REFERENCES
Balit, S. 1999. Voices for change: Rural women and communication . FAO
Communication for Development Group Extension, Education and
Communication Service, Rome, Italy. Proceedings of the High-Level
Consultation on Rural Women and Information, 4 to 6 October 1999,
Rome, Italy.
Haverkort, B. and H de Zeeuw. 1992. Development of Technologies towards
Sustainable Agriculture: Institutional Implications. In W.M. Rivera and
D.J. Gustafson (Eds.), Agricultural Extension: Worldwide Institutional
Evolution and Forces for Change . pp.231-242. New York: Elsevier
Science Publishing Company.
Ilboudo, Jean-Pierre. 1999. Rural Radio in Africa. In Fardon, Richard and
Graham Furniss. Eds. African Broadcast Cultures: Radio in Transition .
Oxford: James Currey.
IFAD. 2001. Rural Poverty Report 2001 . Rome: International Fund for
Agricultural Development.
ISNAR. 2002. Facilitating the Agricultural Innovation Process . Training
Modules. The Hague: International Service for National Agricultural
Research.
FAO. 1998. Knowledge and information for food security in Africa from traditional media to the Internet . Communication for Development
Group, Sustainable Development Department. Rome: FAO.
Farrington, J. 1994. Public Sector Agricultural Extension: Is There Life After
Structural Adjustment ? Overseas Development Institute Reports. Vol.2.
10

Gumucio Dagron, Alfonso. 2001. Making Waves Stories Of Participatory
Communication for Social Change . New York: The Rockefeller
Foundation. http://www.comminit.com/3-title_page/sld-450.html
Granovetter, M. 1985. Economic Action and Social Structure: The Problem of
Embeddedness.
American Journal of Sociology, 91(November): 481-510.
Hambly Odame, H. 2001.
The Rise and Fall of Women's Groups: agricultural development and local institutions.
Institute of Social Studies Seminar
Series paper, February 9, 2001. The Hague: ISS.
Hambly Odame, H. and A. Kassam. 2002. Listening to Stakeholders: Agricultural
Research and Rural Radio Linkages . ISNAR Briefing Paper 46. ISNAR:
The Hague.
Kaimowitz, D. Ed. Making the Link: Agricultural Research and Technology
Transfer in Developing Countries . The Hague: ISNAR.
Loevinsohn, M., Berdegue and I.Guijt. 2000. Deepening the Basis of Rural
Resource Management . Proceedings of a Workshop February 2000.
RIMISP and ISNAR.
Long, N. and A. Long. Eds. 1992. Battlefields of knowledge: the interlocking of theory and practice in social research and development . London/New
York: Routledge.
Merrill-Sands, D., D. Kaimowitz, K. Sayce, and S. Chater. 1989. The Technology
Triangle. Linking Farmers, Technology Transfer Agents and Agricultural
Researchers Report of the International Conference. The Hague: ISNAR.
Munyu, H. 2000. Application of ICTs in Africa’s Agricultural Sector: A Gender
Perspective. In Gender and the Information Revolution in Africa . E.
Rathgeber and (eds.). Ottawa: IDRC.
Niang, Thiendou. 2001. Rural Radio in Action: A CTA Experience. Presentation to the First International Workshop on Farm Radio Broadcasting. 19-22
February 2001, FAO, Rome, Italy.
11

Okali, C. and J.E. Sumberg. 1986. Examining divergent strategies in farming systems research’. Agricultural Administration , 22(4).
Pardey and Roseboom. 1998. Trends in Financing African Agricultural Research.
Financing Agricultural Research: A Sourcebook . Eds. S. Tabor, W.
Janssen and H. Bruneau. ISNAR/CABI.
Peterson, Warren, Viviana Galleno, Thomas Eponou, Anna Wuyts-Fivawo, and
Michèle Wilks. 2001.
Methods for Planning Effective Linkages .
ISNAR
Briefing Paper No.45 http://www.isnar.cgiar.org/publications/briefing/Bp45.htm
Richardson, Don. 1996. The Internet and Rural Development: Recommendations for Strategy and Activit y. Final report prepared for FAO, August 1996.
(Monograph)
Tabor, S.R. and D.C. Faber. 1998. Closing the Loop: From research on natural resources to policy change.
Policy Management Report No. 8. Maastricht:
European Centre for Development Policy Management. http://www.oneworld.org/ecdpm/pubs/pmr8_gb.htm
Uphoff, N. Ed. 2001. Agroecological Innovations: Increasing Food Production with Participatory Development.
Earthscan Books.
Vernon, R. 2001.
Knowing Where You’re Going: Information Systems for
Agricultural Research Management . CABI/ISNAR.
UNESCO. 2002. http://www.unesco.org/webworld/public_domain/mct.html
Women of Uganda Network. 2002. http://www.wougnet.org/News/cdupdate.html
Helen Hambly Odame , Ph.D. Research Officer, International Service for National Agricultural
Research (ISNAR), P.O. Box 93375, 2509 AJ The Hague, (t) 31-70-349-6100 ext. 205
(f) 31-70-381-9677, h.hambly@cgiar.org
Session: 4: Farming Systems Education and Training
12