To get a bigger research proposal funded, many donors now require a thorough pre-project preliminary study. This used to be called rapid rural appraisal or participatory rural appraisal (PRA) where a multidisciplinary team is commissioned to do a “quick and dirty” appraisal of the situation. A more fashionable term for this exercise is scoping study which has been used in environmental impact assessments.

What is a scoping study?

A scoping study is often done to focus on identifying research and implementation issues related to a problem. The aim is to assess the magnitude, seriousness and intensity of the problem and the actions taken by the people concerned and affected by it. This is done by reviewing the literature, historical data, and reports, and collecting preliminary data to scope for research and implementation issues, to provide some understanding of the problem, and develop an integrated strategy or a set of recommendations to deal with the problem. Various tools are available that can be used in a scoping study. Historical profiles, problem tree, seasonal charts, discrimination profiles, and strengths-weaknesses-and threats (SWOT) analysis are some examples.

Collecting preliminary data will involve field visits, key informant interviews and a series of focus group discussions with stakeholders.

ACIAR small research & development activity

Several months back, I was part of a team that carried out a small research and development activity (SRA) for the Australian Centre for International Agricultural Research (ACIAR) as a first step to developing an integrated management strategy for the brown planthopper (BPH)/virus problem in the Mekong Delta to prevent its spread as well as communication strategies to help farmers adapt and enable the Plant Protection Department (PPD) to scale up the dissemination of these strategies.

The rice virus problem in the Mekong Delta

In the last two years, rice production in the Mekong Delta, was vastly affected by outbreaks of virus diseases carried by the brown planthopper (BPH) which caused a loss of about 400,000 tons (or 1.1 percent of Vietnam’s total production). Vietnam’s rice exports were threatened and the infestations prompted officials and farmers to spray insecticides in excess in attempts to control the spread of the viral diseases, which, consequently led to a high usage of insecticides. Such practices can disrupt ecological balance and in turn favor BPH development rates. Also looming in the horizon is the possibility of the virus problem spreading north and west from the Mekong Delta, which might affect rice production in Cambodia, Laos, and central and northern Vietnam.

Scoping study

In the team my role was to identify major perception constraints of farmers to the viral diseases and their management and scope for opportunities for communication to farmers. To accomplish this, I worked with Vietnamese partners to do the following:

• Conducted field visits and focus group discussions in rural areas of north, centre and south to identify key farmers’ key beliefs and practices.

• Appraised the extension activities steps that PPD, extension, government used to help manage the problem – collect extension materials, broadcasts, etc. and other info through discussions with PPD and provincial agriculture directors.

• Examined potential extension mechanisms and ways to communicate to farmers and make suggestions.

From the above activities, we generated a focus group discussion report and a paper on major perception constraints to viral diseases, and presented our findings at a final consultation workshop in January 2008. A final SRA report has been submitted to ACIAR.

Here are some interesting results that came out of our part of the scoping study:

1. Interviews with farmers, extension, research and policy personnel showed that the central and provincial governments:

• distributed 2 million guidebooks, 2.5 million leaflets, > 2,000 posters, 1,000 television broadcasts

• organized 9,219 one-day training courses covering 404,938 farmers to combat the BPH/virus problem.

• with pesticide industry support, the Plant Protection Department also organized 13 large-scale demonstration fields on the escape strategy covering 872.6 ha and involving 1,425 farmers.

2. The government budget allocated for BPH/virus control in 2006 was VND 105,758.50 million (US$ 6.6 million), with this breakdown:

• 55% for pesticide purchase and distribution
• 38% for destroying infected fields and subsidizing farmers
• 7% for extension and training activities

3. The Mekong Delta farmers who had greater access to information through the mass media than counterparts in Central Vietnam had clearly more knowledge on pest and virus management. Thus, a greater effort for communication and training of farmers in using the “escape strategy” would have greater benefits and more sustainable than distributing pesticides.

4. Using decision analysis the team identified differences in concerns and information needs of various stakeholders that contributed to the variety of decisions in handling the crisis.

Stakeholders’ concerns about the BPH/virus disease

Decision needs

To read the full scoping study report, click here …