Participatory implementation
.

[ Home ] [ Up ] [ Key factors affecting success ] [ Problem specification workshops ] [ Participatory implementation ] [ Conclusions ]

Experience has shown that workshop follow-up greatly enhances the workshop's impact on improving pest management. In-depth case studies of problem specification workshops were conducted (L. Aitken pers. comm. 1995) to evaluate their impacts. Workshop participants placed high value on:

their involvement in defining pest problems with other stakeholders;

the way the workshop acted as a forum for drawing information together and creating awareness of the depth and breadth of the problem; and

the exchange of viewpoints from a wide range of people.

The study also found that action plans tend to be implemented, but often become altered and/or absorbed into institutional activity. Whilst this interaction is effective, efficient, and demonstrates its relevance, it tends to obscure the workshop outcome from the view of many stakeholders. As a result, workshop participants felt a need for improved communication.

The study also showed that the level of extra communication required depended on existing networks between the stakeholders concerned. For instance, parthenium weed stakeholders felt better informed about workshop outcomes after the parthenium workshop than tomato pest management stakeholders were after a tomato workshop. In the case of parthenium, collaboration and communication existed between researchers and Landcare groups prior to the workshop, and continued afterwards in the participatory implementation of action plans. One Landcare group in a badly infested area reformed to become the Parthenium Action Group. They secured funds for a full-time coordinator to manage their biological agent rearing, release and exchange program, hiring out spray equipment, community education and communication amongst stakeholders. The group maintains strong links with researchers and extension officers from universities and state departments of agriculture and natural resources.

In comparison, general communication amongst members of the tomato industry seemed to be weaker, informal and less frequent. Many tomato workshop participants were not aware of the considerable progress made on action plans since the workshop, and some had concluded that very little had happened. Since the study, the tomato industry has begun publishing a monthly newsletter, including a section on pest management, for general distribution.

Whilst stakeholders enjoy participating in planning better pest management strategies, and some become involved in implementing action plans, many do not have the time to contribute on an ongoing basis. However, having donated two days of their time to participate in the workshop, they value follow-up communication. As stakeholders, they have a vested interest in the outcomes of the workshop and naturally want to be informed of progress. Thus, the final stage in a workshop is to plan a follow-up and communication strategy.

It is vital that someone at each workshop agrees to be the 'champion' for each action plan, and takes responsibility for following it up after the workshop.

Other aspects of a follow-up strategy which work well include the following:
Electing/nominating an action plan coordinator to keep regular contact with action plan champions to see if progress has been made or assistance required.

Establishing working parties for each action plan, with one person from each working party joining a steering committee to maximize the impact of the workshop.

Communicating the proceedings of the workshop to participants and other stakeholders as soon as possible after the workshop. A summary of action plans should be distributed within a few weeks of the workshop, and a full report prepared and distributed within a few months.

Communicating action plan progress to participants and the broader industry. This can take the form of a newsletter, or information included in existing industry magazines. It could also be in the form of follow-up workshops or up-date meetings.

[ Back ] [ Next ]

Larissa Bilston and Geoff Norton