)w " m‘Httunzh‘ " I .' VIIIIIII'WII I III ' III-1. I. “ I: I.. II II IIIIII; I I . . IIIII'I I . I. .II III I. II I III III; III IWI III III IIIIIII IIII WWII ' I II' II‘III'I I I I III III III' III III II II II II III IIIIII IIIIII IIIII IIIIIII I. I H II III: ‘I'II‘II IIII . III'III III II IIIIIIIII II IIIIII IIIIIM III III I" I IIIIIIII II‘III '.' ,E‘l.‘ .' I IISII .I-I-IISIIIIII» I 4 'III IIIIIII I; IIIIIII IIIIIII I IIII I.I IIIIIII' II:iI I -. ""3 IIIIEIII: III “th {I I II I III IIII II IIIII=;.'II IIIII II II III III IIII'II II' I III III III III III‘IIIUIIIIII'I I III IsIIIIII IIIE III,“ III “IIIJIIII‘ 'I",II IIIIIIII‘ “II III III IIHIII II III IIIIIIIII IpII'I IIIII IIIIII IIIIIIIIIEII‘JEII; §§?L§$’IIII& I?" :lIIIfiII I g II II IIII II II III I IIII'IIIIIIIIIIIII” IIIII ... .II IIIIIII'I I", III I 'IIIIIII IIIIII II I III II II III MEI IiIISIIIII I II I III IIIIII III IIIIII III II. II ..III III IIIIIIIIIIIIII I’II'IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII: III’IIIIIIIIIII I" III 'I III IIIIIIIII IIIIIIIII III II III "III III III III IIIIIIIIIIIIIxIIIIIIIIIIIIII III III III" I ‘IIII II III II I I” II" I "IIIIIIIIII II" III IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII I III I III III III“ III I IIII"IIII“IIII II III III IIIIII III: III:1 III"IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII‘IIIIL IIIIIII II III-I IIIIIIIII “III III III III I III III III III ' III III III III I ’III III III I III. III I‘IIIIII‘IIII I II ' III, III IIIII I III III III" ”III III} III III IIIIIII IIIIII IIIIIIIIIIII III‘III IIIIIIIIIIIIIEII’IIIIIIIIIII I ., III II II III. I II II II III III II II III ‘III III III III, III IIIIIIII‘IIII iIIIII III II III II , II III" III II'“.,.,,IIIIIIII~IIII II IIIIIIIII I III"IIIIIIIIIIIIII‘ III” III III I ‘I IIIIIL IIIIIIIIII‘IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII I II I I I, II'III,I22:I.IIIII=IIIIIIIII I’IIIIII I I: IIIIIIIIIIIII, (II IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII II‘IIILII III IIIhI IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII ”MII‘III’TI. MILIIIII‘IIIIII'III‘I‘IIIIIII”IIII'IIIIIIIIIEIIII'IIIIII I IIIIII IIIIIIIIII h IIIIIII IIH IIIIIIIIIIIIIII I IIIIIIII II I IIIIIII“ LEIFIIIINIIIIGIIIFI’NW IIIILIII IIF'I IIIIIII‘I IIIIIIIIIIIIJ: IIIIIIIIIIII I I II III. IIIIIII III” III II“ II IIIIIIIIII III III ' IIIIJIII- I I IIIIIIII IIIII III III! I I IIIIII III III III I: IIIIIIHII WM;(EMITIIIIIIIIIIIIIII: III" III III'I'I III: II" III“ III III ”III" III III; III“ IIIEIIIIII-I-I . I IIIII‘IIIIIIIIIIIIIIII‘IIIIIIII‘IIIIIIIIIII IIII III’I (“II I'IIII IIIII IIII II II'IIIIIIIIII'III III II JIIII‘ “3“ :I II III‘III1:II-.I}I .III III. IIIIIII IIIIIIIII II I I III “III ;. I IIIIIIIIIIIIII‘I ,IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII-IIIIIIIIIIIIIIII I III III III I I IIIIII I,.IIII I IIIIgIII' “I” II‘ “If. I‘IIIIII‘II I I III" IIIII IIIIIIII IIIIIIII (III "III IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII IIII'IIII III) IIJII‘EI IL, “III IIII III II“ II II IIIIIIIIHIIHII IIIII II‘IIIIIII IIII IIII IIIIIIIIII II Kz-IIIIIIIIIII II'II‘ II’II'IIIIl III 'IIIIII IIIII IlIII IIIII III!III IIIIIIIIIHII’\ I I} I IIIHn I IIIIIII’ [It «II-v I I nIII II'IIII FIII'III I IIIIII IIIIIIIIIII'IIIIIIIIII II IIIII III III' III III IIIIIIIIII III IIIIIIIJIIIJ IIIIIIIII III [I I}? I EIJ ITIIII ’II II‘I‘ISIIIIIIIIIIII’IIIVI IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII'I III III. IIII‘.' IIII’" .‘II' I .‘ III III" I I III , III "IIII‘I‘IIIII I I'I‘I IIIIIIIII .IIIIIIII ”III" ‘II I III IIIIIII’ III III I IIIIIIII III III II I IIIIIIIIII I III III III. III I II III“ II “ IIII‘I IIIIII "IIIIII I IIIIIIIIIIII". IIII LII IIIIII IIIIII‘ IIIIIII IIIIII L July} ~IIIIIIIIIIIII‘IIIII r‘mnIlI M II IIIIIIIIIIIIII'IIIIII III II II III IIIIIIII‘II‘IIIIIIIIIIIII IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII MI" I II” III’II III I ' I III IIII’I'I‘I III“1 III I IIIIIII II .I‘II 'IIIIIII III IIIII 1- IIII ’Ilfllllllllll HI(Hilllllflllllllllllll ”55's 293 00649 3138 This is to certify that the thesis entitled EVALUATION OF A FARMER TRAINING PROGRAM IN NORTH CAMEROON presented by David Atwood has been accepted towards fulfillment of the requirements for M.S. fiemein Agricultural Economics 64 fifu/um Major professor (jg/T 9 )fiZ} Date 0-7639 MSU “BEARIEE “- RETURNING MATERIALS: RTace inib00k drop to remove this checkout from your record. FINES will be charged if book is returned after the date stamped below. JUL 2 9 13-32 . 19“.; L? I? 6 1922:: r“ '. \ .33 .L, L a. a EVALUATION OF A FARMER TRAINING PROGRAM IN NORTH CAMEROON BY David Atwood A THESIS Submitted to Michigan State University in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of MASTER OF SCIENCE Department of Agricultural Economics 1981 (€57/7Cj/5) ABSTRACT EVALUATION OF A FARMER TRAINING PROGRAM IN NORTH CAMEROON BY David Atwood Assessment of Cameroon's one—year Young Farmer Train— ing Centers (YFTCs) showed uneven training results. Almost all trainee families return to their villages as farmers. Of eleven farming techniques recommended, four are widely adopted by trainees. Broader adoption is constrained by a technical package ill-suited to on-farm conditions. Of eleven other health and home economics practices, seven are adopted by trainees; adoption may be due in some cases to trainees' finances rather than training. While neighbors are familiar with trainees' new techniques, only one technique is adopted by neighbors due to trainee contact. An inadequate technical package and the government-induced social isolation of some trainees constrain broader diffusion from trainees to non- trainees. YFTCs need to undertake adaptive research to de- velop an appropriate technical package, and to recruit trainees as members of farming groups supported by the YFTC. Continued doner support is warranted to help reorient YFTC activities. To my parents, Lois and Preston Atwood, and my wife, Nancy Reuschel. Their love and support made it possible. ii ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS The efforts of many people went into the making of this thesis, although I alone am responsible for its short- comings. Staff of the YFTC program who helped plan and carry out substantial portions of the research include Thomas Doufta, Jean-Paul Faucher, Barabé Mallum, Sylvestre Sirina, Antoine Souloukna, Adolphe Wangré, and NiColine Wasanaar. Their participation in the research was agreed to by DEA, RCC, and YFTC directors Andre Meka—Engamba, Moise Njoh-Sam, and Gabriel Sirandi. Emmanuel Djopsou of Dadjamka was a source of tireless translation, cross cultural information, and companionship. Mark Heffernan and Eric Witt of USAID/ Cameroon provided valuable field support. Carl Eicher, my major professor, provided intellectual and material support and helped to make my writing less mud— dled. Lester Manderscheid, my thesis supervisor, gave me invaluable help in approaching the research problem and in revising the thesis in draft form. The guidance, support and friendship of James Bingen, the principal investigator, were responsible for raising my initial interest, developing a workable research methodology involving Cameroonian staff members, and delivering research results in a useable form. iii The encouragement and help of Michael Weber and Paul Wolberg made my introduction to computer data analysis‘in- teresting and relatively painless. Eric Crawford, Felipe Korzenny, and Tom Zalla helped me delineate pdssible re- search approaches. Pat Eisele's intercontinental administrative support and her dedicated and repeated typing of my flawed French contributed to a successful research effort. Martha West's patience and accuracy permitted the transformation of my barely decipherable pages into readable copy. Michigan State University's Department of Agricultural Economics (through research assistantships funded by USAID ' and the IUCW) and African Studies Center (through a fellow- ship funded by the U.S. Department of Education) made possible my research and my graduate career and provided an environ- ment well-suited to the rational analysis of economic develop- ment problems. Finally, the interest and openness of the farmers of North Cameroon allowed me to gather the information on which my research is based. Although they will never read this thesis, I hope that its results return to them in the form of improved agricultural services. iv TABLE OF CONTENTS List Of Tables 0 O O C O O O O O O O O O O I O 0 0 List of Abbreviations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . CHAPTER I 0 INTRODUCTION 0 O O O O O O O C O C O O O O 0 II. SURVEY OF RESEARCH ON FARMER TRAINING CENTERS IN AFRICA . . . . . . . . . . . . . FTC Technical Recommendations. . . .~. . Sole—Cropping and-Row Seeding. . . . New Inputs and Crops . . . . . . . . New Equipment. . . . . . . . . . . . Farmer Participation in FT Programs . . Course Attendance. . . . . . . . . . Participation of Progressive Farmers Participation of Young, Unmarried Men Participation of Women . . . . . . . FTCs as Local Development Centers. . . . summary 0 O O O O O O O O I O I O O O 0 I III. THE BACKGROUND AND CURRENT OPERATION OF THE YOUNG FARMER TRAINING CENTERS . . . . . . . Cameroon and the Northern Province . . . Geographical Background. . . . . . . Agricultural Development Strategy in North Cameroon . . . . . . . . . . . Agricultural Training in the North . The Doukoula-Dadjamka Area . . . . . The YFTC Program . . . . . . . . . . . . Background . . . . . . . . . . . . . Staffing and Management. . . . . . . Training Program . . . . . . . . . . Summary. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .11 .15 .17 .19 .19 .19 .20 .22 .24 .27 .27 .28 .30 .32 CHAPTER IV. V. VI. VII. EVALUATION METHODOLOGY. . . . . . . . . . . Evaluation of African Agricultural Training and Extension Programs. . . . . Comparative Sample Surveys . . . . . Other Evaluation Methods . . . . . . Methodology for the Present Study. . . . Sample Design. . . . . . . . . . . . Survey Instruments . . . . . . . . . Summary. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ASSESSMENT OF THE TRAINING EFFECT . . . . . Care of Work Oxen and Equipment. . . . . Agronomic Practices. . . . . . . . . . . Plowing. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Planting Food Crops in Rows With No Intercrops . . . . . . ... . Weeding and Ridging. . . . . . . . . Crop Rotations and Manuring. . . . . Adoption of Other Farming Practices Taught at the YFTC . . . . . . . . . . . Health and Home Economics Behavior . . . Summary. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ASSESSMENT OF THE DIFFUSION EFFECT. . . . . Socio-economic Differences Between Trainees and Their Neighbors . . . . . . Contacts Between Trainees and Their Non-Trainee Neighbors. . . . . . . . . . Diffusion of New Techniques From Trainees to Non-Trainees. . . . . . . . . . . . . Summary. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ASSESSMENT OF THE YFTC'S ROLE AS A DEVELOPMENT CENTER 0 O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O YFTC Contact With Former Trainees. . . . YFTC Contact With Non-Trainees . . . . . YFTC Collaboration With Other Local Development Agencies . . . . . . . . . . Summary. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . vi PAGE 35 35 35 41 44 45 50 55 58 61 64 67 69 71 73 74 75 82 87 87 91 97 100 103 103 104 108 111 CHAPTER VIII. SUMMARY AND RECOMMENDATIONS. . . . . . . . Summary of Findings. . . . . . . . . . Policy Recommendations . . . . . . . . Agreement on Goals . . . . . . Farmer Input in YFTC Activities. . . Relating the Technical Curriculum to On—Farm Conditions. . . . . . . . Increasing the Diffusion Effect. . . Length of Training . . . . . . . . . RCC Support and Technical Assistance to the YFTCs . . . . . . . . . . . . Improved Monitoring an Evaluation . Economic Analysis. . . . . . . . . . APPENDICES ANNEX A: Data Analysis . . . . . . . . . . . . . ANNEX B: Production Coefficients Under Different Price/Quantity Assumptions. . . . . . . BIBLIOGRPAHY. O O O . O O O O O . . O O . O O . . vii PAGE .113 .113 .118 .119 .119 .120 .123 .124 .126 .128 .129 .132 .134 .138 LIST OF TABLES TABLE PAGE 4.1 Sample Design and Interview Schedule. . . . . 56 5.1 Practices Taught at the YFTC. . . . . . . . . 59 5.2 Care of Work Oxen and Equipment . . . . . . . 63 5.3 Regression Coefficients for Cultural Practices 0 O O O O O O O O O O O 0 O O O O O 66 5.4 Adoption of Row—Seeding and Sole-Cropping On the Red Sorghum Field. . . . . . . . . . . 70 5.5 Operations for Which Animal Traction Is Used. 72 5.6 Health and Child Care Practice. . . . . . . . 76 5.7 Home Economics Knowledge and Practices. . . . 78 6.1 Contacts Between Non-Trainees and Trainees. . 92 6.2 New Techniques Diffused from Trainees to Their Non-Trainee Neighbors . . . . . . . . . 98 7.1 Places of Equipment Purchase and Repair (Dadjamka). O O O O O O O O . O O O . O O O O 105 8—1 Production Coefficients Under Different Price/Quantity Assumptions . . . . . . . . . . 135 viii DEA FTC IRA IUCW MSU RCC USAID YFTC LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS Department of Agricultural Education (Direction de l'Enseignement Agricole) Farmer Training Center Agricultural Research Institute (Institut de la Recherche Agronomique) International Union for Child Welfare (Union Inter- nationale de Protection de l'Enfance) Michigan State University Regional Coordinating Center for the YFTCs (Centre de Coordination et d'Appui des Centres de Formation de Jeunes Agriculteurs CCA/CFJA)) U.S. Agency for International Development Young Farmer Training Center (Centre de Formation de Jeunes Agriculteurs (CFJA)) ix CHAPTER ONE INTRODUCTION Africa contains two-thirds of the world's low income countries (IBRD, 1980, p.110) and is the only part of the world where per capita food production has declined since 1950 (Christensen,l981,p.iv). It is therefore imperative for African countries to adopt agricultural strategies which will increase food production. Agricultural strategies cur- rently being pursued by some African countries include greater committments to agricultural research; increasing credit available to farmers so that they can make investments to increase production; and increasing agricultural extension and training available to farmers. This last strategy of providing farmers with more ex- tension and training has received substantial committments of resources in many African countries, although there has been little empirical work on the value of agricultural ex- tension in increasing production in Africa. What work has been done has given mixed results (Marticon, 1973; Saylor, 1974; Lockheed st 21., 1980). There has been even less work on the value of residen- tial farmer training, although residential farmer training centers (FTCs) are spread throughout Africa. FTCs take many 1 forms. East African FTC's train farmers in crop husbandry and in the use of new inputs during sessions lasting several days. Gambia's Mixed Farming Centers and the seasonal schools (écoles saisonniEres) of French-speaking Africa have trained farmers for several months in animal traction. The rural family centers (maisons familiales) of French-speaking Africa alternate training sessions with family farm work during two years for young people chosen as representatives by their vil— lage. The little that has been written about African FTC's concentrates on their management. There have been very few assessments of their impact on trainees' subsequent well-being or agricultural production. Attempts at such assessment have been either inconclusive (Francke, 1974; Petrini, 1973) or unfavorable (Lefebvre and Lefebvre, 1974; Honeybone and Marter, 1975). The problem addressed in this thesis is to assess the value of residential farmer training in increasing agricultural production and in helping farmers. The two objectives of this thesis are (l) to evaluate one farmer training program, the program of Young Farmer Training Centers (YFTCs) located in North Cameroon,which trains young farm families for a year in improved technology focused on animal traction; and (2) to make policy recommendations based on the results of the eval- uation. The evaluation of the YFTC program began in 1979 when two faculty members from Michigan State University, at the 3 request of the U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID), undertook a three-week review of the YFTC program in Cameroon. The report which followed their review recom- mended that a useful evaluation of the YFTC program required an in-depth study based on survey data from both program par— ticipants and non-participants. An in-depth study was financed from the Operational Program Grant made by USAID to the International Union for Child Welfare (IUCW) for support of the YFTC program. In August 1980, MSU and the IUCW agreed on the terms of reference for the in-depth evaluation, to take place from September 1980 to March 1981. The evaluation was directed by one MSU faculty member who was involved in the initial review; it was conducted by the author, who worked in the field in September 1980 and from January to March l981. A major concern of the MSU team was that the results of the evaluation be useful not only to the donor agencies, but also to the government of Cameroon. Every step of the evaluation was therefore taken in close collaboration with YFTC program staff; they helped determined performance crit- eria, elaborate and test questionnaires, interview respond- ents and analyze the data. Participation by YFTC program staff in the research process as well as in the elaboration of program recommendations was absolutely crucial to the suc- cess of the research effort. This thesis has greatly bene— fitted from their help. 4 In March 1981 the MSU team prepared a preliminary re- port based on partial data analysis. The YFTC program staff had never seen, much less been asked to comment on, the recom— mendations of several previous evaluations. In contrast, the MSU preliminary report raised a number of questions about the YFTC program and was widely circulated among the staff of the YFTC program. The prelimary report was presented for review at a meeting in Dadjamka, Cameroon in March 1981, at- tended by all YFTC program staff and supervisors; by rep- resentatives of USAID, the IUCW, and various Cameroonian agri— cultural agencies; and by the MSU team. At this meeting, recommendations were suggested, discussed, and agreed on. EA final report was written at MSU based on further data analy- sis; The recommendations of the final report were based on the March discussions and on later written comments by YFTC and IUCW staff. This thesis expands on the final report to include a more complete data analysis, a discussion of the methodology used, and a review of the FTC experience elsewhere in Africa. The outline of the thesis is as follows: Chapter Two reviews results of a number of studies of African agricultural training programs. Chapter Three describes the YFTC program and its geo- grphical, institutional, and historical background in order to provide the context for understanding both the program's role in Cameroonian agriculture and the evaluation methodology used to assess that role. Chapter Four analyzes methodologies used to evaluate other farmer training programs. Chapter Four then describes the evaluation methodology of the present study. Chapter Five evaluates the YFTC programs, "training ef- fect," that is the effect of the program on trainees. Chapter Six discusses the YFTC program's "diffusion effect," that is, the effect of the program on non-trainees who may learn new agricultural techniques from observing or listening to a trainee. Chapter Seven examines the role of one YFTC as a re- source and extension center for farmer's in its area. Chapter Eight summarizes the findings and discusses the policy implications of the study for the government of Cameroon and the donors who have supported the YFTC program. CHAPTER TWO SURVEY OF RESEARCH ON FARMER TRAINING CENTERS IN AFRICA There are two conflicting bodies of evidence concern- ing the value of agricultural training in Africa. A growing set of microeconomic studies suggests that many agricultural extension programs are neither helping farmers nor leading to increased production. (Marticou, 1973; Saylor, 1974). On the other hand, Lockheed g£_al.,l980 review a number-of studies which show the positive value of agricultural training and extension on production in developing countries. In the face of increasing financial commitments to agricultural training by national governments and donors, it is imperative for policy-makers to have the information neededtxymake decisions to invest in agricultural training programs which are pro— ductive. This chapter reviews studies of FTCs in Africa. Most studies of FTCs concentrate on management and pedagogy. This review will look at three additional aspects of FTC programs-- technical recommendations, farmer participation, and the role of FTCs as development centers. FTC Technical Recommendations The effectiveness of an FTC program is heavily de— pendent on the quality of its technical recommendations. A primary objective of most FTCs is to train farmers in new productive technologies capable of on—farm replication. USAID (1976) claimed that for trainees at Cameroon's YFTCs, "Significant increases in yield can be obtained by intro- ducing simple improved cultivation techniques which are easy to assimilate and can be widely propagated." (p.3). In re- viewing a number of FTC programs in English-speaking Africa, Markham (1967) asserts that it is necessary for an FTC train- ee "to observe the new techniques being successfully employed in circumstances with which he is familiar". (p.11). I Often, however, FTCs train farmers in techniques which are inappropriate to their on-farm conditions and cannot be used after training. FTCs, like extension services, rely for their technical recommendations on either national agri- cultural research stations or (in the case of former French colonies) regionwide recommendations based largely on research done at Bambey, Senegal (cf, France, 1974). Agricultural re- searchers may not have either the understanding of local on— farm resource constraints or the incentives required to de- velop technologies appropriate to on-farm conditions. Nor does one-way dissemination of information from agricultural researchers to extension staff (and FTC staff) promote better understanding of local conditions by researchers. (Belshaw and Hall, 1972). An FTC program can be effective only if the research on which its recommendations are based responds to farmers' problems and constraints. Few FTC studies are very specific about recommended practices, which are often assumed to be productive and ap- propriate. Three general types of technical recommendations made by FTCs will be explored here--sole-cropping and row- seeding, promotion of new inputs or crops, and use of new equipment. Sole-Cropping and Row-Seeding Planting several crops in mixtures on the same field has been done traditionally by farmers in Africa and in other parts of the tropics (Monyo, Ker, Campbell, 1976, p.5). Colo- nial administrators and their African successors in Ministries of Agriculture have attempted to discourage intercropping and to promote the planting of crops in rows and sole stands. Sole- cropping and row-seeding are taught at Cameroonian, Malian, and Tanzanian FTCs (Bingen, 1976; Petrini, 1973, p.182). Despite exhortations by staff of FTCs and of exten- sion and research agencies to plant in rows and sole stands, most small farmers in Africa continue to intercrop (Belshaw and Hall, 1972; Manyo, Ker, and Campbell, 1976, p.5). Ac- cording to a number of studies, small farmers in many parts of Africa are perfectly rational when they intercrop (cf. Monyo, Ker, and Campbell, 1976). Evidence from many parts of 9 Africa suggests that intercropping increases returns to land (Norman, gt_al., 1979, pp. 59ff; Andrews, 1972, 1974; Grimes, 1963; Keswani, st 31., 1977). It may also increase returns to labor (Norman 33 31., pp. 59ff). It is less risky than sole-cropping since if one crop fails, at least some of the intercrops will generally produce (Belshaw and Hall,1972,p, 56). Recommendations by FTCs and extension agencies to plant crops in rows and sole stands are therefore often inappropriate for small farmers in Africa. New Inputs and Crops FTCs often teach trainees the cultivation of new crops and the use of new inputs. In Zambia, farmers with greater than average resources were able to successfully adopt the cultivation of cash crops (cotton and sunflower) following training at an FTC)l However, the majority of trainees did not adopt these new crops after training because they did not have either the labor or the cash required to shift their farming operations towards them (Honeybone and Marter, 1975, pp.65—65). Poor Kenyan farmers were taught how to grow hybrid maize at an FTC. Following training they were given an in- kind loan of fertilizer and hybrid seed. Evidence from Ascroft, gt 31.,(1973) suggests that one hundred percent of the trainees used the fertilizer and seed. It is unclear, however, if they planted hybrid maize in subsequent years and if it was a technology suited to their low-resource 10 situation. Gerhardt (1974) cites evidence that Kenyan FTCs have helped to speed the diffusion of hybrid maize in some areas, but he believes that hybrid maize may not be adapted to low—rainfall areas of Kenya. One Chadian FTC encouraged female trainees to grow fruit trees and to shift land used for traditional vegetable cultivation to the growing of tomatoes and lettuce. How- ever, purchase of young fruit trees was beyond the trainees' financial abiility. And the "modern" vegetables could not be preserved as well as the traditional ones (Lefebvre and Lefebvre, 1974, pp. 304 ff.) New Equipment Many FTC programs train farmers in the use of new equipment. Evidence on the effectiveness of such training is mixed. Bingen (1976) cites the success of the Malian sea- sonal schools in the 1960's in training young men to use oxen and plows. But equipment demonstrated at FTC's is not al- ways capable of being used by farmers. Gambian Mixed Farming Centers trained farmers to use a tool bar which was too heavy for their animals to pull (Weil, 1969, p.38). The Mixed Farm— ing Centers also trained farmers in oxen traction at the same time that large numbers of farmers on their own were spon— taneously shifting from hoe cultivation to horse and donkey traction (Metrick, 1978). The majority of trainees from some Malian FTC's claimed to be unable to apply at home what they had learned in training- 11 Training had focused on the use of modern equipment, such as seeders, which was unavailable to farmers (Bingen, 1976, p. 56). Farmer Participation in FTC Programs An FTC's impact on agricultural production depends in part on the number of farmers it reaches, both directly, through courses, and indirectly, through former trainees' contacts with their neighbors. Evidence from a number of FTCs suggests that often very few farmers are reached by training programs. Courses are often not filled. Even when they are filled, women or poor farmers may be excluded from training. FTCs sometimes recruit farmers who are likely to have little influence on their neighbors following the train- ing program. Course Attendance Many farmers show little interest in FTC courses, and FTC facilities are often underutilized. Courses at Gambia's Mixed Farming Centers have been filled only to 70 percent of capacity (Mettrick, 1978). In Zambia, FTC courses were filled to 54 percent of capabity. Even to attain 54 percent atten- dance, FTC staff recruited the same farmers to take the same course several times in succession (Honeybone and Marter, 1978, pp. 27-28). 12 Farmers may lack interest in attending an FTC course for two reasons. They may be well-informed about the in- appropriateness of the FTC's technical recommendations. Or they may be poorly informed about their eligibility for FTC courses. In East Africa, FTC recruitment is often done by the agricultural extension service (Barwell, 1975, p.30). Several studies of East African extension personnel show the very limited contacts that they have with farmers (Saylor, 1970; Leonard, 1977, pp. 31-32). With such limited contacts it is to be expected that many farmers are not informed of upcoming FTC courses. Despite farmers' lack of interest and poor attendance in courses, some FTC's may be more cost- effective than existing extension services. The cost per farmer contact-hour of agricultural extension is 33% less than that of FTC training in Zambia (Honeybone and Matter, 1975, p.37). It is therefore, inaccurate to assert a priori that because of their problems residential farmer training programs are less efficient in reaching farmers than agri— cultural extension programs. Participation of Progressive Farmers FTC's often recruit farmers with more resources and higher levels of crop husbandry (Barwell, 1975, p.31). While this may sometimes be government policy, often it is a function of the personal perferences of FTC staff. Staff may find these "progressive farmers" more receptive to FTC recommenda- tions and better able to implement them, especially if such 13 recommendations require higher than average resource en- dowments. FTC staff may also find it easier to establish contact with "progressive farmers". For example, Kenyan FTC staff were unable to recruit any but progressive farmers, even in the face of a directive to recruit only poorer farmers. (Ascroft, 33 31., 1973, p. 63 ff). Government policies to recruit progressive farmers for FTC training are often based on a communications theory of the progressive attributes of "opinion leaders". (Ascroft st 31., 1973, p. 17, 18). Ac- cording to this theory, transmittal of "messages" about new agricultural techniques to opinion leaders is the most ef- fective way to insure that the "message" will have the widest possible diffusion (Ascroft 33 31., 1969, p. 128-30; Moris, 1967, p. 353—354). The progressive farmer strategy has been faulted for being inequitable, since the earliest adopters of a new tech- nique, the progressive farmers, may be the only ones to bene— fit from it, (Ascroft g£_al., 1973, p. 18). The strategy may lead to the formation of a well-off rural entrepreneurial class, (Schouherr and Mbugua, 1974; Lefebvre and Lefebvre, 1974, p.196; Weil, 1969, p. 38—39). There is mounting evidence that the communications theory behind the progressive farmer strategy may be based on a misunderstanding of African village life, for two rea- sons. First, agricultural recommendations appropriate to the conditions faced by progressive farmers may not be feasible for poorer farmers; "early adopters" may be the only adopters 14 of some agricultural innovations. In these situations, Ascroft (1973) and Honeybone and Marter (1975) have sug- gested developing different FTC courses for groups of train- ees with different resource endowments, so that each group would learn productive techniques usable under the conditions it faces. Second, farmers recruited for their "progressive" at- tributes may not be better opinion leaders than poorer farm- ers. Two Kenyan training experiments showed poor farmers to be good diffusers of hybrid maize cultivation (Ascroft, £5 31., 1973). Also, when FTC or extension staff target progressive farmers, they single them out; individuals who are singled out in rural Africa are often lg§§_like1y to be opinion leaders than are people dealt with as members of a social group (Belloncle, 1979, p. 185ff). Hulls (1971) says, "There is no point in seeking to encourage individual adop- tion of innovation in a local society which does not sanction individual achievement" (p.47). One way to avoid the problems of equity and of social isolation embodied in the progressive farmer strategy is group recruitment. Farmers are chosen by their neighbors to undergo FTC training, on the understanding that after training they will diffuse new techniques to their neighbors (Honeybone and Marter, 1975, p.86). This is similar to re- cent methods of group extension used by the World Bank (Benor and Harrison, 1977) and by Belloncle (1979) to speed the spread of new technologies. 15 Participation of Young, Unmarried Men Many FTCs recruit young, unmarried men with the inten- tion of providing them with the knowledge and training needed to become progressive farmers. The Gambian Mixed Farming Centers recruited such young men (Mettrick, 1978) as have various Cameroonian FTCs. Results in Cameroon have been dis- appointing: Former trainees have often migrated to the city rather than return to farming; those that return to their villages have little influence on their neighbors, who tend to scorn them instead of learning new techniques from them (Marchand, 1974, p. 543). When these young trainees are not farm decision-markers and do not have access to their own land, it is to be expected that FTC training is inadequate to make them into progressive farmers. Participation of Women Adult African women in many rural areas are farm decision-markers who can benefit from appropriate agricultural training (Staudt, 1978, p.442; Lele, 1975, pp.76-77). How- ever, most YFTC's provide women with less training and with lower quality training than men. Some FTCs in East Africa provide agricultural training for farm operators of either sex (Barwell, 1975, p.45). In Kenya, these courses are attended by a disproportionately small number of women (Staudt, 1978, 1975-76). Women's 16 attendance at Zambian FTC's courses is quite low (Honeybone and Marter, 1975, p.29). Mettrick (1978) observed that the Gambian Mixed Farming Centers effectively excluded women from training by ignoring the cultivation of swamp rice, an important crop grown by women. Women at FTCs may be taught by poorly trained or incompetent female trainers (Lefebvre and Lefebvre, 1974, p. 549). Many FTC courses for women place little emphasis on their role as farmers, concentrating instead on health and home economics (Barwell, 1975, p.45). FTCs As Local Development Centers Many FTCs have functions beyond the agricultural training of farmers. East African FTCs have evolved from a narrow focus on agricultural training under the aegis of the Ministry of Agriculture to a much wider focus which involves support for programs of%cooperatives,community development, and adult education, (Barwell, 1975, p.38; Kinyanjui and Ng'ethe, 1976, p.2). Gambia's Mixed Farming Centers under- took extensive research on animal traction equipment and fertilizer use (Weil, 1969, p.38-40). FTCs in East Africa provide in-service training for agricultural extension staff (Barwell, 1975, p.26). Some FTCs with substantial support from donor govern- ments or churches have grown to be multipurpose human ser— vice centers engaging in agricultural training, health care, and retailing of some basic products needed by farmers. The l7 Kibaha and Isinya centers in Tanzania and Kenya are examples (Mhina, 1972; Schlueter and Armstrong, 1975). The goal of the maisons familiales in French—speaking Africa is to become local resource centers directed and used by villagers. Each maison familiale has a farmer's associa- tion which helps it decide on course content and on activities it will undertake in villages (Lefebvre and Lefebvre, 1974, p. 11 ff). Malian FTCs performed none of the functions men- tioned above nor did they even collaborate with the exten- sion service in the training and follow-up of farmers (Bingen, 1976, p. 58-59). Summary Most FTC studies have concentrated on management and pedagogy. There is an underlying assumption in these studies that the technical package diffused by an FTC is appropriate and useful to farmers. However, those studies which have analyzed FTC technical recommendatiions have shown in many cases that an FTC's technical package is not appropriate to local on-farm conditions. FTC technical recommendations come either from national research agencies or--for former French colonies--from research conducted in Senegal and then diffused throughout West Africa. Recommendations coming out of such research are often inappropriate to on-farm conditions in the area surrounding an FTC. One reason for the poor course attendance noted in many FTCs may be that farmers 18 rightly perceive no advantage in learning and applying tech- niques being taught at the FTC. It is clear that any eval- uation of a farmer training program must concern itself with the program's technical recommendations. FTCs often have limited contacts with farmers and poor course attendance. Literature has shown that women farmers may benefit little or not at all from FTC training. Many FTCs focus on progressive farmers; there is evidence that this leads to two problems. The FTCs may make recommenda- tions usable only by progressive farmers, so that poorer farmers cannot adopt them. And concentrating on progressive farmers may isolate them from their communities, making them less influential and slowing the diffusion of new technologies. Group recruitment for FTC training has been proposed to avoid this problem. FTCs serve as local development centers in several ways. They may provide training in non-agricultural sub- jects. They may train agricultural staff. Or they may meet the material needs of their communities. Some FTCs perform none of these functions. CHAPTER THREE THE BACKGROUND AND CURRENT OPERATION OF THE YOUNG FARMER TRAINING CENTERS This chapter outlines the geography of Cameroon's Northern Province, where the YFTCs are located. It then describes agricultural development and agricultural educa- tion efforts in the Province. Finally it describes the history and current operation of the YFTCs. Cameroon and the Northern Province Geographical Background Cameroon is a middle income developing country located on the west coast of Africa. Per capita income is $460. While Cameroon has shown respectable industrial growth rates in re- cent years,i¢s economy remains overwhelmingly agricultural (IBRD, 1980, p.140; Ekani, 1980). The YFTCs are located in Cameroon's Northern Province, a Sahelian area which is the poorest part of the country. The extreme eastern area of the province, bordering Chad and sit- uated on the Logone River floodplain, is a rice producing area. The western part of the province is a mountainous area. The central part of Northern Province is where most of the 19 20 YFTCs are located. Millet and sorghum are the major staple crops, and are often grown in crop mixtures with other food crops. several_dry season sorghum varieties permit a second crop in many parts of the North. By far the most important cash crop in the North is cotton. The Moslem Fulbé are the dominant ethnic group in Northern Province. They gained control of much of the area, and subjugated many of its non-Fulbé ethnic groups, in the early nineteenth century, several decades prior to the estab- lishment of a European presence in the North (Azarya, 1976, pp.1l—12, 23). The Fulbé's control of land, commerce, cat- tle production and politics in the region far exceed their numerical representation. Consequently, many non-Islamized non-Fulbé in the North (referred to collectively as "Kirdi") must either rent land from the Fulbé or hire themselves out as farm labor (Azarya, 1976, pp. 57-58). The Kirdi peoples often live in close proximity to the Fulbe. Some Kirdi are farmers and cattle raisers. Others are exclusively small stock raisers with little or no inter- est in cattle raising. AgriculturalDEvelopment Strategy in North Cameroon The Cameroonian government is concerned about unemployed rural youth, about farmers with limited ties to the national economy, and about agricultural stagnation (Ekani, 1980). These concerns, voiced on numerous occasions by President 21 Ahidjo,1 are the basis for the government's agricultural development strategy in the Northern Province. The strategy is one of intensification of agricultural production through heavy state intervention in production and marketing. Govern- ment efforts are oriented towards cotton, although food crop production has been receiving some attention recently. Rural youth are viewed in the government strategy as the foundation for the modernization of Cameroon's agriculture. Cotton research is done by the regional agricultural research institute (IRA) established in the 19403. IRA is located in Maroua, the second largest Northern city. Al- though IRA concentrates on cotton it has recently increased the resources it devotes to food crop research. - Cotton production and marketing are the responsibility of the parastatal agency, Sodecoton. Sodecoton's predecessor, the French Fiber and Textile Company (CFDT), entered Cameroon in the early 19503 and introduced widespread cotton farming. In 1974, the CFDT was partially nationalized and became Sodecoton. Cotton production became more labor-intensive. and capital-intensive, with Sodecoton providing farmers with inputs and more frequent extension advice (Hoogstraten, 1978, p.31). Animal traction, long promoted by the CFDT, became an even more important part of Sodecoton's cotton production package. It is still only a small minority of Northern farmers who own oxen and traction equipment, however. Despite the nationalization of the CFDT, Sodecoton's services to 22 farmers are often characterized as authoritarian and obli- gatory rather than advisory.2 Sodecoton is the only source of fertilizer in the central area of the province, and its fertilizer is intended for use only on cotton. Parallel to Sodecoton is the government extension service, referred to in its early days as Semnord. The ex- tension.agency is presently organized as a system of agri- cultural posts. Resources of the agricultural posts are limited. In theory, extension agents from the agricultural posts concentrate their efforts on food crop production. In fact, extension agents spent some of their time helping Sodecoton in promoting cotton production. The parallelism between the two agencies will soon be ended when--with World Bank financing--Sodecoton absorbs the agricultural posts. Sodecoton will then promote production of both food and cash crops, expanding land planted to cotton while reducing land planted to food crops and increasing food crop yields (Camer- oon, Projet de Developpement Rural, 1979). Cameroon's strategy in the North also includes bring- ing "new lands" into production. Migration is encouraged from densely populated areas to sparsely populated ones, es- pecially by young families. Agricultural Training in the North According to government policy, the modernization of agriculture in the North requires a dynamic youth, trained 23 in new techniques and eager to remain on the land as modern farmers. Several uncoordinated programs currently exist to train young farmers in "modern" farming techniques. The government Civic Center in Langui, Northern Pro- vince is part of a national network of Civic Centers pro- viding paramilitary and agricultural training for youth. The Langui Civic Center trains young men, during a year-long residence, in modern agricultural techniques focused on animal traction. At the end of training, participants receive animal traction equipment and two oxen. However, many of the trainees do not return to their villages, but sell the oxen and equipment and move elsewhere (Sodecoton, 1980, ch. 3.4). The Catholic Church has run a rural center in Fignolé for almost two decades. In its early years the Fignolé training program was quite similar to that of the Civil Cen- ter--young men trained for a year and given animal traction equipment and oxen. Results were also the same: many train— ees sold their oxen or equipment and left (Marchand, 1974, p.543). The same phenomenon occurred for one of the first animal traction development schemes in the North when it recruited very young, single men for training in 1938. (Guil- lard, 1965, pp. 216—17). Until the YFTC program became part of the Ministry of Agriculture, 3 number of FTCs existed in the North, offering short courses to farmers. While some of these centers have now become part of the YFTC program, there is one that remains. 24 However, it has not offered courses in quite a while al- though it continues to be staffed by government civil ser- vants. In addition to the Fignolé center there are other private agricultural training initiatives. These include Catholic Agricultural Youth groups in villages as well as INADES correspondence courses. The Cameroon government encourages participants in some government training programs, including the YFTC and Langui programs, to return to their villages by giving them a "reinstallation subsidy" of $1500 with which to build a modern house, buy food and other family necessities, and purchase agricultural equipment. The reinstallation subsidy is 45 percent grant and 55 percent loan. The funds are administered by agents of Sodecoton's Young Farmer Service, which is responsible for following up the activiites of former trainees from the YFTCs and the Langui Civic Center. When they return to their villages, trainees in each village are encouraged to relocate all to- gether in the same part of the village and to use their re- installation subsidies to build themselves modern houses with tin roofs. Sometimes a well is dug very close to their houses. The Doukoula-Dadjamka Area The broader part of the evaluation research took place in the recruitment area of the Dadjamka YFTC, located in the 25 arrondissement of Doukoula. The arrondissement contains the three counties of Doukoula, Tchatibali, and Kalfou. The sur- vey took place in Doukoula county. The town of Doukoula is the administrative center of the area, being the capital of the county and of the arrondissement as well. Doukoula is also a market center with a small daily market and a large weekly one. Residents of even the most outlying villages in the area where this research took place visit Doukoula on market day or for celebrations. Doukoula has approximately 3800 residents; the entire county has 36,000? Dadjamka, where the YFTC is located, is six kilometers from Doukoula. Doukoula county, and the major part of the arrondis- sement, are populated by the Toupouri ethnic group, one of the few ethnic groups in the North which have successfully resisted Foulbe conquest or economic and cultural domination. Although Fulbé control some of the exterior commerce and organs of government administration of the area, the Toupouri alone control land, cattle and agricultural production, and the traditional administrative appartus. Unlike young men from Kirdi ethnic groups whose land is controlled by the Fulbé, young Toupouri men have access to enough land that they can cultivate their own dry season sorghum crops. They therefore do not have to hire themselves out to Fulbé land owners in the dry season,4 as is the case for the other Kirdi men. The Toupouri are cattle-raisers as well as farmers. The cattle-to-person ratio among the Toupouri is greater 26 than in either France or Rwanda-Burundi (Guillard, 1965, p.316). Cattle are an integral part of the Toupouri econ- omy and culture. Cattle are particularly important as bride- price, a major vehicle of wealth transfer (Podlewski, 1966, pp. 79ff). The bride-price system has an important impact on social standing. A young man may have to wait many years to be married if he has few sisters, sisters who could, upon marriage, bring into the family new wealth which might be used in the future to pay his own bride price. The same is true if a young man has many older brothers, who will drain the family's wealth with the bride-prices they pay at marriage (Guillard, 1965, p.135). Toupouri population density (68 people per square kilometer) is extremely high for Africa (de Garine, 1978, p.43). Population pressure on the land has resulted in ten- ure disputes, emigration of farmers to other areas, and a traditional agriculture which is very labor intensive for sub-Saharan Africa (Guillard, 1965, pp. 160—1). Abundant dry season sorghum crops and heavy manuring of fields allow the land to support its dense population. Experience with and use of animal traction is wide- spread in the Doukoula area; it was introduced there in 1938 (Guillard, 1965, p.216). Interest in and use of animal trac- tion became widespread in the mid-1950's under the impetus of the local section of Semnord. As a result of Semnord's remarkable efforts (cf. Guillard, 1965), and of the Toupouri's interest and ability, which may be attributed in part to their 27 longstanding experience as cattle-raisers, the Doukoula area in 1964 had the second largest number of plows per capita, and the largest number of carts per capita, in North Cameroon (CFDT, 1965, p.9). Agricultural technicians no longer teach farmers how to train their animals for plowing because farmers learn this as young men from their family and friends.5 There is an active market for cattle in the Doukoula area and most cattle used for animal traction are local. Flows and other traction equipment are available from the YFTC, the agri— cultural post in Doukoula, and two Sodecoton offices, all with some credit financing available. Also, plows are oc- casionally bought from individuals. The YFTC Program Background The first YFTC was established in Goyangbyaprivate Swiss aid organization in 1969. It was independent of the Ministry of Agriculture and staffed by expatriate technicians. The Goyang YFTC originally followed the pattern of the FTCs in Fignolé and Langui: it recruited young single men for a year's training, at the end of which they received animal traction equipment and oxen. The Goyang YFTC encountered problems similar to those of the Fignolé and Langui centers; many of its trainees never returned to their villages, but sold their equipment and moved to the city (Kamajou and Gow, 1979, p.2.; rucw, 1976, p.8.). 28 In 1973, the Goyang YFTC changed its recruitment policy. It recruited its first class of young, married couples. The recruitment process was very methodical-—YFTC staff wanted couples with adequate land resources, with community ties, and with no lingering debts or disputes which would keep them from returning to their village as well-equipped farmers after the training program. This new recruitment policy was successful in choosing trainees who wanted to return to their villages. Almost all YFTC trainees have returned to their villages, while a large proportion of trainees from the Langui Civic Center, which still recruits single men, have not (Sodecoton, 1980, ch.3.4.). In 1974, a second YFTC was opened, this one in Dadjamka, also built with Swiss aid and staffed by a team of Cameroon— ians and expatriates. The Dadjamka YFTC recruited young couples from its inception. In 1975, the two YFTCs were in- tegrated into the Ministry of Agriculture's Department of Agricultural Education (DEA); shortly thereafter they were fully staffed by Cameroonians, but continued to receive some outside funding. In 1977, USAID awarded an operational pro- gram grant to the Swiss IUCW to built and help staff a Re- gional Coordinating Center (RCC), and to build several more YFTCs. As of 1981, 3 more YFTCs, as well as the RCC, had been built and staffed. Staffing and Management Regional Coordinating Center. The role of the RCC is to provide supervision and technical assistance to the YFTCs. 29 RCC staff include a Cameroonian director, an expatriate training adviser and his Cameroonian counterpart, and an expatriate coordinator of women's activities. Initially it was planned that the RCC would be staffed also by two agrono— mists and a rural social scientist, but these additional pro- fessionals were not hired. Cameroonian RCC staff have at least three years of post-secondary technical education. The government of Cameroon makes an annual budgetary allotment to the RCC. In 1981-82, this allotment will be approximately $36,000. In addition, the RCC receives per- sonnel and material support from the IUCW, USAID, the Dutch volunteer organization, and other doner agencies. ggggg. Each YFTC contains staff housing, a trainee village, and a large farm. The YFTC director has substantial decision-making power in managing the various parts of the center. He decides how to use the revenue generated by the YFTC farm's harvest in order to get the best oxen and equip— ment for each class of trainees. The YFTCs are run on an annual budget allotment from the Cameroon government. In 1981—82, the allotment of the Dadjamka YFTC will be $45,000. In addition, YFTCs obtain revenue from selling the harvest from their farms each year. Some YFTCs have distributed food from the WorLdFood Program to trainees at the center. Each YFTC director is a civil servant, as are his im— mediate assistants, the farm chief and the follow-up chief. The farm chief is responsible for managing the YFTC's farm 30 and for organizing the training that takes place on it. The follow-up chief is responsible for recruitment and follow-up of trainees. Both have two or more years of secon- dary school followed by three years of technical training, while the director has four years of technical training be— yond the completion of secondary school. In addition, each YFTC hires a number of contractual employees. One of these is a female women's trainer,6 and another helps the farm chief and the follow-up chief. The rest are laborers, clerical workers, and a mechanic. Training Program Recruitment for the program is done over a period of three months, with ten meetings in each village. vThe YFTC staff decide, on the basis of these ten meetings, which young farm couples are most likely to benefit from training and to return to their villages as better farmers. It is these couples who are chosen for training. Training at the YFTC lasts almost one full year. Dur- ing that year trainee families live in the village which is part of the YFTC. Trainees live an entirely different life- style from their accustomed one. Life at the YFTC is quite regimented. Trainees may not leave the center without per- mission; they work on the fields that they are told to work on; production,sale or consumption of alcohol is prohibited- (This has a serious negative impact on trainee women, one 31 of whose main income sources is production and sale of millet beer). Because life at the YFTC is so different from tradi— tional village life, and because the Swiss who planned the YFTCs were conscious of the dangers of losing trainees to the temptations of the city, the YFTC village is constructed in the local style. Each family has its own hut, with a grass roof, and its own kitchen. The local style is much improved upon, using cinder-block rather than mud brick, but the hope is that trainees will not feel alienated from tra- ditional village life. Each family does its own cooking, as it would at home, using food and supplies it brought from home. Agricultural training is focused on the use of animal traction technology and on row-seeding, rotations, sole- cropping, seed treatment, storage, and the agricultural cal- endar. Agricultural training is largely learning-by-doing on the YFTC's extensive farm. There are also demonstrations, and-—for the men--occasional classroom training. Women re- ceive occasional classroom training in health, child care and home economics. Trainees receive animal traction equipment and a pair of oxen at the end of training. These are not gifts, however. Half of the value of the equipment and oxen comes from the reinstallation subsidy as an in-kind loan to be reimbursed. The remaining half comes from sale of the harvest of the YFTC 32 farm. A substantial portion of the harvest's value represents a return to trainees' labor on the YFTC farm; therefore, much of the remaining half of the value of oxen and equipment rep- resents a payment to trainees for their work on the YFTC farm. When they return to their villages after training, trainees receive the reinstallation subsidy and-—within the same village--are encouraged to relocate to a single area. Sodecoton's Young Farmer Service, the agricultural posts, and the YFTC follow-up chief all have specific directives to pay special attention to former YFTC trainees and to make sure that they have good extension advice. Summary The YFTC program is located in the poorest province of Cameroon, the Northern Province. Most YFTC's in the North are located in areas where the Fulbe ethnic group con- trols land rights as well as political and marketing insti- tutions. The Dadjamka YFTC is located in the Doukoula area, where the Fulbé have little power. The Doukoula-Dadjamka area is populated almost entirely by the Toupouri, a cattle- raising and farming group many of whom have been using animal traction for 25 years. A number of other agricultural education and agri- cultural development institutions exist in the Northern Pro— vince. The most important and extensive of these is Sodecoton, 33 a parastatal cotton produCtion agency. One section of Sode— coton, the Young Farmer Service, provides a substantial gov- ernment "reinstallation subsidy" to trainees from the YFTCs and from other agricultural development schemes. The YFTCs provide a year of residential training focused on animal traction technology to young farm families. Fami- lies receive equipment and oxen at the end of training. The first YFTC, in Goyang, was started by a Swiss aid agency in 1969. In 1974, the second YFTC opened. There are currently five YFTCs, fully staffed and supported by the Cameroon gov- ernment. The RCC, staffed and supported by both the govern- ment and donor agencies, provides limited supervision to the YFTCs. 34 ENDNOTES FOR CHAPTER THREE 1For example, his speech at the National Agricultural Fair, February, 1981. 2See Kamajou and Gow, 1979, p.7, and Pahai,l975.'To the extent that such characterizations are accurate, Sodecoton is following in the tradition of the CFDT (Guillard, 1965, p. 272). 3I am indebted to John Holtzman and Gabrial Sirandi for these population figures from the 1976 census. 4 . . . . Bingen, personal communication of results of in- Egggal interviews with Toupouri farmers in September—October, 5Chief of agricultural post (Ourlargo), personal com— munication. 6It was only in 1981 that all the YFTCs received a budgetary allotment to hire a female trainer. However, both the Goyang and Dadjamka YFTCs had female trainers at the time that the female trainees interviewed for this study were undergoing training. CHAPTER FOUR EVALUATION METHODOLOGY The objective of this chapter is to describethe method- ology developed to evaluate the Cameroon YFTC program. The chapter is divided into two sections. The first section dis- cusses various methodologies, including those used in previous Cameroon YFTC assessments, which have provided elements useful in the development of the present study's methodology. The second section describes the methodology used in this study. Evaluation of African Agricultural Training and Extension Programs Comparative Sample Surveys One very thorough way to evaluate the impact of an agricultural training or extension program is to compare the changes over time experienced by two groups, one having re- ceived training and the other not, (Hatry, Winnie, and Fisk, 1973, pp. 56ff). This is the method used to evaluate some Indian ”training and visit" extension systems (Cernea and Tepping, 1977, p.16) as well as to evaluate a Tanzanian FTC (Francke, 1974). This "experimental" method is very demanding of time and resources. First, it requires the collection of 35 36 relevant baseline data on both groups before one enters the training program. Second, it requires an extended time com- mitment by an analyst or a monitoring unit, since enough time must pass, following baseline data collection and training, for the trainees to have had the chance to put into practice what they learned in training. Third, it can be costly be- cause it requires data collection at two different times. Two other evaluation methods, the "before/after" and "with/ without" methods, adapt the experimental method to the con— straints of cost and time. Before/After. It is possible to gather data on a sin— gle sample--the trainees--in two different periods, one pre- ceding training and one following it. The before/after method is valid only to the extent that there are no factors extraneous to the training program which could lead to meas- ured before/after differences regardless of the effect of training. Ascroft, gt_gl. (1973) and Schonherr and Mbugua (1974) used this method to evaluate the impact of agricultural training on non-progressive farmers in Kenya and Tanzania. Several evaluations of the Cameroon YFTC program have used the before/after methodl (Meka-Engamba, 1978; USAID, 1976; Cameroon, Benefices Economiques, 1978). However, three ex— traneous intervening factors may compromise evaluations based on before/after data from the YFTC program. First, the establishment of the Dadjamka CFJA coin- cides with the creation of Sodecoton and the intensification of cotton farming. Before/after changes noticed in early 37 groups of trainees may therefore be attributed not to the YFTC training, but to the inputs and technical advice provided by Sodecoton. In particular, changes in yields and in total pro- duction of foodcrops may be due in part to the residual ef- fects of cotton fertilizer on subsequent food crops. Second, animal traction is widely available in the Dadjamka area, and somewhat available in the Goyang area. It is likely that even in the absence of YFTC training a certain proportion of trainees would have acquired animal traction on their own. Therefore, not all the before/after production changes due to animal traction can be attributed to the work of the YFTC program. Finally, the YFTC trainees are young couples. It is possible that in the several years between "before" and "after" production measurements, their families have grown enough to warrant increased food production. Such increased production would not be attributable to YFTC training but rather to the demands of the family life cycle. A variant of the before/after method is to gather data on trainees only after their training program and to ask them at this time about their situation before training. This is the method used by Honeybone and Marter (1975) for the Zambian FTCs and by Samatana (1980) and by Agbor-Tabi (1981) to evaluate the Cameroon YFTC program. The method poses two problems: accuracy of recall, and bias. The studies by Samatana and by Honeybone and Marter concentrate on fairly 38 important practices centered on adoption of hybrid corn and of animal traction. These are events which happen only once for any respondent, and which do not require measurement, so they are not difficult to remember. Accurate recall poses a problem, however, when respondents are asked to remember annual income, production, or storage loss, since these re— quire measurement and can vary from year to year. Agbor-Tabi sought responses concerning annual production and storage loss for the year preceding training. It would be unwise to assume a high degree of accuracy for the responses to these questions. In these "after" studies there is a danger that farmers might have biased their responses concerning time of adoption, either to make themselves look more progressive, or the FTC program more important, than is really the case. With/Without. A second adaptation of the experimental method, often used when no baseline data exist, is to gather data only after training on two samples, one trained, one untrained. Petrini (1973) evaluated Tanzanian FTCs using this method. Chaudhri (1979) and Lockheed £3 21- (1980) also used the method in their studies of the economic value of education in the aggregate in developing countries. The with/without method is valid to the extent that the two sam- ples are similar in all relevant respects except that one has been trained. That is, neither sample before training dif- fered in any of those characteristics which could affect the variables measured after training. 39 Since there are no baseline data in with/without eval- uations, it is of course quite difficult to verify such sim- ilarity in the two samples. The with/without studies by Chaudhri (1979) for India, and Lockheed 35 31. (1980), for a number of developing countries, provide examples of the possible dangers in analysis of the value of education based on data sets with no baseline data. Both studies use pro- duction functions for agricultural output in which education and agricultural training are productive inputs. However, neither study contains information on some other important productive inputs which should enter the production function. Chaudhri does not include land quality in his production function. Lockheed 23 31. include neither land quality nor, in some cases, the use of irrigation or fertilizer. It may be that the education and agricultural training pro- vided in developing countries do not increase agricultural production. They may be only proxies for possession of high quality land, and for use of irrigation and fertilizer. If this is the case, then it is possible that with/without analy- sis of the value of education and agricultural training would appear to show their positive effect on production; but the appearance would result from a failure to include other pro- ductive inputs, with which education and training were cor- related, in the analysis. Despite this major problem of the with/without method, it is often the only feasible method for quantitative analysis of the effects of agricultural training in the absence of 40 baseline data. One way to reduce the dangers of exager- rating the productive effects of agricultural training is to gather data on all variables which may increase production. This will permit analysis to separate the effects of educa— tion from those of other productive inputs with which it may be correlated. Training and Material Inputs. All the methods so far discussed pose an additional problem when training or exten- sion are accompanied by farm credit, fertilizer, equipment, or other inputs. It is of interest to know what training and extension alone contribute to production in the presence of new productive inputs. If the contribution of training is sufficiently low, it would make more sense to simply pro- vide farmers with the inputs without allocating resources to low-return training. However, many evaluations of train— ing and extension programs beg this question by considering training and the new inputs as a single "bundle" of inputs contributing to production in fixed proportions. This pre— vents assessment of the real value of training. For example, Ascroft g£_31. (1973) and Schonherr and Mbugua (1974) claimed that training of non-progressive farm- ers was valuable because following training large percen- tages of them successfully grew hybrid corn. But since the training program provided them with hybrid seed and ferti- lizer, it is not in fact possible to assess the contribution of training alone to the behavior and to the production of these non-progressive farmers. 41 The same problem exists among assessments of the Cameroon YFTC program which treat it as a "package" of equipment-provision and training in fixed proportions. (Meka- Engamba, 1978; USAID, 1976; Cameroon, Benefices Economiques, 1978). If properly done such assessments can tell us the value of the program in its entirety, but cannot tell us the value of the program's training component. Other Evaluation Methods There are several other ways of evaluating training and extension programs which require less rigorous sampling procedures. Such methods can provide information about the training program which can not be obtained by the methods described earlier. These methods are concerned with farmer attitudes towards a training or extension program, farmer contacts with the program, and diffusion of new techniques to farmers not directly affected by the program. Farmer Attitudes. Farmers can be asked their opinion about various aspects of the training or extension program. This was a key to the approach taken by Lefebvre and Lefebvre (1974) in evaluating the impact of FTCs in Senegal and in Chad. It was also one part of the Cameroon YFTC evaluations done by Kamajou and Gow (1979), Samatana (1980), and Pahai (1975). This approach can be extremely bias-prone when farmers perceive it not in their interest to give their real opinion about a training or extension program. Kamajou and 42 Gow explicitly recognized the problem of bias (p.7). Pahai did not, but the phrasing of farmers' responses to some of his questions lead one to suspect the presence of bias. When problems of bias are limited, this method can provide much valuable information which would not be col— lected in interviews concerning only agricultural practices and production. The study by Lefebvre and Lefebvre provides interesting information based on this method. Farmers were well-accustomed to being asked their opinion, since the FTCs being evaluated actively sought farmers input into training (Lefebvre and Lefebvre, 1974, p.12). Also, the evaluators sought out the most outspoken farmers (p.3). Farmer Contacts. Looking at contacts between farmers and a training or extension program can be important only in measuring the potential impact of the program. In measuring the extent of such contacts it must be remembered that con- tact does not necessarily lead to adoption of new techniques orto increased production unless the techniques are appro- priate to on-farm conditions. Therefore, while this approach is valuable, it is also incomplete. Farmers themselves can be questioned concerning their contacts with the training or extension program. Hulls (1971) and Ascroft 23 31. (1969) have used this method to evaluate extension coverage of farming populations. On the other hand, extension agents or FTC staff can be asked about their con— tacts with farmers. This is the approach of Saylor (1970) and Leonard (1977). 43 Diffusion of New Techniques. When one objective of training is to provide trainees with skills and knowledge which they will impart to their neighbors, it is important to assess the effect of diffusion of the skills and know- ledge from trainees to non-trainees. Such an assessment can be obtained by asking program participants how many non- participants they contacted and what the results of such con- tacts were (Ascroft gt 31.,1973; Schonherr and Mbugua, 1974). It may be difficult to verify the responses, however. The extent of diffusion can also be assessed by asking non- participants what they have learned from the trainees. Both of these approaches to the diffusion question are fraught with bias; this is particularly true of one-shot interviews in rural Africa. A trainee may exaggerate his im- pact as a diffuser in the hopes of being rewarded with another training session or perhaps some fertilizer or seed. (On the other hand, a trainee may not be aware of all the farmers who he has influenced by example). A non-trainee, if asked by an outsider what his con- tacts with a trainee are, may also exaggerate the trainee's role. He may perceive the interviewer as someone sent to check-up on the trainees in their villages. In this case, he may want to make sure that the outsider goes away with the impression that the trainee is "doing his job". Problems of bias in the responses of African farmers to interviewers (whether national civil servants or expatriates) 44 is a function of the minimal level of understanding that farmers and the administration have of each others' goals and ways of operating. What appears to farmers as frequent capricious disruption of village affairs by the authorities often leads them to be extremely circumspect in their deal- ings with outsiders. Such considerations, while not empiri- cally verifiable, are more than speculation. They must be taken into account when designing questionnaires to assess second-order diffusion effects of any training or extension program in Africa. The various methods discussed in this section have all been used in elaborating the survey instruments for this study, and the problems attendant on each method have been minimized as much as possible. Methodology for the Present Study This section describes the sampling procedure and sur- vey instruments used to assess the impact of the YFTC program. Sample design is presented in tabular form on Table 4.1; de- tails concerning methods of data analysis are given in Annex A. The research methodology uses a number of the evaluation techniques 'previously described. ‘The originalityaof the methodology derives from its combination in a single study of "with/without" comparative techniques, analysis of the diffusion of agricultural innovations, and concern with the productive effects of such innovations. The evaluation 45 took place in the areas surround the two oldest YFTCs, in Goyang and Dadjamka. It is based on assessment of three different aspects of the YFTC program. The "train- ing effect," the program's impact on trainees, is assessed by comparing a group of trainees to one of non-trainees. The "diffusion effect," the program's impact on trainees' neighbors, is assessed by looking at a second group of non- trainees. The role of the YFTC as a development center is assessed on the basis of information provided by all three groups. The household was the unit of analysis because it is young households, and not individuals, that are trained at the YFTCs.2 Data collection by interview proceeded in three stages, each stage done by a different interviewer. Parts of the survey were conducted in both the Dadjamka and Goyang areas . Sample Design Sample Designifor the Training Effect. Twenty-seven trainees in the Dadjamka area were compared to 18 non—trainees. Eighteen of the trainees selected came from one of the earliest classes because it was important for the survey to assess the effect of training on trainees who had had enough time since training to really master the skills that they had learned and to use these skills on their own farms. Since the evalu— ation was concerned with production, it was also important to choose trainees in villages where crops had not been seriously 46 damaged by heavy flooding in the cropping season preceding the survey. These two considerations led to the selection of the second class from the Dadjamka YFTC, the 1975-76 class. Of the twenty original trainees in the class, two had died leaving 18 trainees living in five villages. It became necessary during the evaluation to add more trainees to the sample. The 1975-76 class, it turned out, had not received weeders and ridgers. Since a major goal of the survey was to assess trainee use of animal traction technology, nine other trainees who had received these imple- ments were chosen. These nine were from the 1978—79 class, and lived in two villages very close to the five original villages. It was crucial for the non-trainee sample to have had no contact with the trainee sample in order to insure that measured differences between trainees and non—trainees were indicative of the results of YFTC training and not of non- trainees' increasing their production by copying some of the new techniques used by trainees. Therefore, the non-trainee sample for the training effect was chosen in an area with no trainees. Also, non-trainees' lack of meaningful contact with trainees was verified in the non-trainee interviews. The non-trainee sample was intended to be as similar to the trainee sample as possible. One non-trainee village was paired with each of the five trainee villages on the basis of the following similarities with the trainee villages: 47 proximity to Doukoula; access to local village markets; and minimal crop damage from flooding. Non-trainee households in the five non—trainee vil- lages were chosen on the basis of the following criteria: the household heads were approximately the same age as trainees;3 they had been married, like the trainees, for at least five years; they grew cotton for Sodecoton; and they had animal traction equipment. By comparing trainees to non-trainees who were also equipped with animal traction, it was hoped that the value of training itself could be iso— lated from the value of equipment provision.4 Trainees are self-selected in the sense that they volunteer for the training program. Assessment of the train- ing effect based on comparison of a self-selected group (trainees) with a randomly selected group (non-trainees) could be misleading if the same factors influencing self- selection also influence variables being measured in the assessment. However, since non-trainees are randomly selected from a population of farmers who have similar equipment to that of trainees, the problem is minimized. A primary Imati- vation of trainees to attend the YFTC is to get equipment and a pair of oxen; this is therefore a crucial factor in their self-selection. Farmers in the non-trainee sample have never had the chance to self-select for YFTC training, since the YFTC has not yet recruited in their villages. But they have had similar motivation in that they have had to actively 48 seek out a source of animal traction and oxen and have made an important investment to acquire them. Non-trainees invest income in a down payment, while trainees invest a year of foregone income at the training center. It is likely that the motivating factors for self-selection among trainees are similar to those among non—trainees who are equipped with animal traction. YFTC staff and the chiefs of each of the five non- trainee villages developed a sample frame of all household heads meeting the criteria outlined above. Random samples were drawn in each village, proportional to the size of the village's sample frame. The overall sample size was 18.5 The coordinator of women's training wanted to assess the impact of women's training in the Goyang area. She had very limited time, however, and interviewed only nine trainees. She interviewed no group of non-trainees without trainee con- tact. Sample Design for the Diffusion Effect. Evaluation of the diffusion effect was based on a sample of fifty non- trainees in the Goyang area and forty in the Dadjamka area. Two village selection strategies were possible in assessing the diffusion effect. A small number of villages could be chosen, and many non-trainees interviewed in each village. This would permit an in-depth understanding of the diffusion process in those villages, but there would be no way of know— ing if the few villages selected were representative of most villages in the area. On the other hand, a larger number 49 of villages could be selected, and fewer non-trainees inter- viewed in each village. This would increase the chances of representativeness, but would sacrificein-depth knowledge of intra-village communication. This second course was followed because program plan— ners and donors had absolutely no information on the diffusion effect. Under these circumstances, in—depth but unrepresenta— tive analysis of the diffusion effect in one or two villages could be quite misleading, whereas a more representative analysis of a few gross indicators of the diffusion effect could be quite useful to program planners. Three of the five villages inhabited by the 1975-76 class of trainees were chosen in the Dadjamka area; five were chosen in the Goyang area. It was thought that con- ducting the diffusion survey in eight villages would econ- omize on administrative time (contacts with the chief, travel, drawing up sample frames) while at the same time providing a representative sample of villages. The household is the basic agricultural production unit, and it is primarily married people who are farm decision- makers (Guillard, 1965, p.195). Therefore, it was thought likely that the diffusion effect would be greatest among mar- ried non-trainees. It was also assumed that old people would be less likely to adopt new cultural techniques than younger people. Finally, the staffs of the RCC and of the YFTC's be- lieved that some of the techniques taught to trainees could be diffused to non-trainees even when they did not have access 50~ to animal traction. Thus, the sample frame for assessment of the diffusion effect included households where the house- hold head was under 45 years of age (Dadjamka) or under 50 (Goyang). RCC and YFTC staff, in collaboration with village chiefs, developed sample frames according to these criteria in the eight villages chosen for assessment of the diffusion effect. Random samples were drawn in each village. In the Goyang survey, sample size was the same in each village, for ease of sample selection; sampling in the Dadjamka survey was approximately proportional to the size of the sample frame in each village. Role of the YFTC as a.Developmept Center; Assessment of the YFTC's role as a development center was based on data gathered in the Dadjamka area from the trainee sample and the two non—trainee samples, and in the Goyang area from the non- trainee sample. The assessment was also based on personal observation and on informal interviews with representatives of various local government agencies. Survey Instruments Three different interviews were administered, each by a different person, in order to optimize the use of the time and skills of all participants in the evaluation. The first interview concerned family composition and household posses- sions; the second concerned agricultural production and 51 practices, as well as contacts with other farmers and with government agencies. The third concerned family health and nutrition and female activities. Not all interviews took place with all respondents. Demographic Interview. The questionnaire for this interview was tested and modified in September 1980 with the Dadjamka YFTC staff. It was adminstered, only in the Dadjamka area, to household heads by YFTC staff from November 1980 to February 1981. Agricultural Interview. Questionnaires were tested and substantially modified in September 1980 and January 1981 in collaboration with staff from the RCC and the YFTCs in Dadjamka and Goyang. The interview was administered to house- hold heads from all samples (except for the nine trainees in the Goyang area) from January to March 1981. The author and a local interpreter administered the interview in the Dadjamka area; in the Goyang area, interviews were conducted by RCC and YFTC staff. The questionnaire modifications were intended to min- imize bias for those questions concerning contacts with train- ees and attitudes towards the YFTC. They were also intended to maximize the accuracy of production data. There was a serious concern with the possibility of biased responses to questions which asked non-trainees about their contacts with trainees, specifically about new practices that non-trainees may have adopted due to trainee advice or example. These problems of bias were dealt with by asking a 52 series of questions for the two most likely practices to be diffused from trainees to non-trainees (row-seeding and use of improved varieties). Each series of questions was struc— tured to include a cross-check on validity of responses and to minimize the possibility that the interview would be per- ceived as "checking up" on the activities of trainees in the village (and thereby minimize the possibility of responses biased in order to put the trainees in a favorable light). There was also a concern that trainees themselves would bias responses to questions about their opinion of the train- ing program. During questionnaire testing, responses to such questions were consistently on the order of, "the length of training was just right," "the program was very good for me," "I have no opinion on how to improve training; you should really ask the YFTC staff all about that". No reformulation of questions or restructuring of the questionnaire was able to elicit more useful, more specific responses, so this ser- ies of questions was not included in the final questionnaire. The limited resources available permitted collection of production data on one field from households in the Dadjamka area, but did not permit collection of labor data or of whole farm production information. RCC staff believed that no signi- ficant training effects would be seen on the cotton fields, since both trainees and non-trainees receive close supervision and the same inputs from Sodecoton. And since the YFTCs do not teach any productivity-increasing techniques for dry sea- son sorghum, it was decided to choose the most important 53 rainy season foodcrop, which is short cycle red sorghum, Sorghum caudatum var caudatum. Since the interview was conducted with the head of household, questions concerning red sorghum production were asked only if he grew some red sorghum (not if his wives alone had their own personal fields). Because intercropping is widely practiced with red sorghum, production data on all intercrops in the red sorghum field were also collected. Data collection proceeded in five steps: 1. Recall of amount of red sorghum taken from field during the "hungry season" before the harvest. 2. Conversion of this amount to 90-kilogram sack equivalents.6 3. Recall of red sorghum harvest. 4. Conversion to 90—kilogram sack equivalents. 5. Recall of harvest of intercrops in local units of measure. Before each step in this process, the respondent was asked if he would be able to perform that step (e.g., the question "Do you remember how much sorghum you and your family gathered before the harvest?" preceded step 1). Large num- bers of respondents were unable to perform all five steps. Data was analyzed only from the 29 respondents (out of a total of 85 in the three Dadjamka samples) who successfully performed all five steps. To increase the data base on agri- cultural production, 10 more non-trainees in one diffusion— sample village were interviewed. Four of them successfully 54 performed all five steps, and their production data was then added to the rest of the production data. Red sorghum fields of those 33 respondents who had good recall were measured for area using a compass, a tape measure and a T158C calculator programmed to calculate area from length and compass bearing. Doukoula retail prices for intercrops measured in local units, and wholesale prices for sorghum in sacks were obtained by the survey interpreter. Total production of all crops on the red sorghum field was then converted into value terms and standardized in terms of value per hectare. In the Goyang area, no production data was gathered. However, density was measured on one sorghum or millet field from each household. Women's Interview. The questionnaire for the women's survey was designed with the RCC's coordinator of women's activities and tested by her and the two female trainers in January 1981. The interview was administered by the RCC women's coordinator and the female trainers from the Dadjamka and the Goyang YFTCs from January to March 1980. The inter- view was conducted with the trainee samples from Dadjamka and Goyang, and with the non-trainee training effect sample in the Dadjamka area. It was also conducted with a small part of the non-trainee diffusion samples of both Dadjamka and Goyang. In those non-trainee households with more than one wife, the interview was conducted with the wife closest in age to anzaverage female trainee from the 1975-76 class. 55 Summary This chapter has discussed a number of evaluation methods used in past studies of the YFTC program and of other extension and training programs. These methods in- clude with/without sample surveys, interviews with farmers concerning their contacts with agricultural services, obser- vation of the diffusion of new techniques, and questioning farmers about their attitudes towards a training program. All of these techniques were used in developing a method to assess the impact of the YFTC program. Three different aspects of the YFTC program are evalu- ated: the training effect, the diffusion effect, and the role of the YFTC as a local development center. The training ef- fect was assessed by comparing a sample of trainees to a similar sample of non-trainees with no contact with the train- ees. Assessment of the diffusion effect was based on a sam- ple of non-trainees living in trainee villages. The role of the YFTC was assessed on the basis of data from all these samples. Three interviews were conducted: a demographic in- terview; an interview concerned with agriculture and with contacts with other farmers and agriculture services; and a women's interview. Table 4.1 summarizes this chapter. 5(5 Amauemn an no: muonuo q cue: 02 02 Oman. ANA :uai. mu» .m :ufizv he» ANA :uw3. no» easuuom pom uom mama pacer .mmmao oblmhmd 30d>u0ucn nor Aa cumm~1mo> Aw cue)» no» .oa cues. no» scum ha cuesv no» m.coeoz 02 no» .0n cad). no» now no» nuomucou guacamnomoum can acauospoLm no 30a>uoucH gunman ohumsan 30u>uouCH 02 oz no» no» eouw ma nuw3~ no» Uazamuoosoa o>anomusm1 soccmu Bowen» 206cmu nsncou vogue: ocmaasmm c0uooopom cud: xuozu cowuumuu answcm sud: camouflagml vac numoa me can» mmoJI Am. nmmau pao mums» 0H0 mumo> mum0> m abnohaa mo «damn oemuh oedema v oHnEmm uo cm can» when: we cmcu muons unwed am new pouuumxn .mav nmmHU ca COAnaaucH neonaaw> ad o>«A1 poduumzn noduumxn "moocwmuu ou uwawswm ohumhaa ouwucmu Low auuouauo coma cw mUMEmv and 1000a“ weaved pououusmi omaa mucous uoxume unawsuml ca oumemp ocapoo~u coHumHSQOQ oHnmumosool opu+up consumami acauuoaun v oedema meocwauu oson Hm «Anson unwomdaa> noocwmuu umofiaumo no oomaaa> >2 powunazcni >n pouwnmzcun >2 poudnmzcnn cocdmuu 0» umaaeam oeom >2 pouanmncun now mwuouwuu ~ m m m h mouunau> $0 LOLESB a om ov ma pm 92 uuouuo avowed uoowuo uoowwo uuouuo unacemuu cussed: codesuuao ouanmo: scamsuwap museum: ocacamuu whammo: ocacwmuu ouammox ooonusm mmo mmzH<¢B wmo mmzH mmzHm>mDm UZ¢>OO >w>¢3w <¥x¢NBZH Dz< ZOHmmo mdmzcw H.v mdmte 57 ENDNOTES FOR CHAPTER FOUR 1The recruitment process provides production and demo— graphic pre-training data on all applicants, thereby provid— ing an easily accessible data base for before/after comparisons. However, data quality, particularly concerning production, leaves much to be desired. Research in the area of Dadjamka does not present the same difficulties in disentangling the decision-making patterns of households as are encountered elsewhere in Africa. This is because due to Toupouri spacial and marital patterns, compounds are occupied only by nuclear families (albeit some- times polygamous) (Guillard, 1965, p. 130; confirmed by Dadjamka YFTC staff). 3In fact, they turned out to be on average two years older than the trainees. 4None of the non-trainees had weeders or ridgers, how- ever. 5Original sample size was 19, but data from one house- hold was not used in the analysis when it was discovered that the household head had been a trainee at the Langui Civic Cen- ter. Since the value of the YFTC training was being compared to a without—training situation, inclusion of a participant ‘ from a different training program would have been inappropriate. 690—kilogram sacks are widely used for purchase and sale of sorghum by farmers in the Dadjamka area. CHAPTER FIVE ASSESSMENT OF THE TRAINING EFFECT This chapter describes the effect of YFTC training on trainees' behavior in the Dadjamka area; this "training effect" is assessed by comparing the behavior of trainees to that of non-trainees who had no contact with trainees. Based on discussions with RCC and YFTC staff in September 1980, it was decided that the following types of behavior would best reflect the training effect: care of work oxen and equipment; adoption of some crop husbandry practices taught at the YFTC; and health and home economics behavior. Specific practices taught are outlined in Table 5.1. For some variables there was no information on non-trainees. In these cases, which are noted in the text, no comparison is made, but trainee behavior is nonetheless described. Many of the variables discussed in this chapter are dichotomous variables which have only "yes" or "no" values. They can indicate whether or not something has been done, but not how well or in what degree it has been done. Dichotomous variables are good indicators of the extent of adoption of new techniques, but they are not useful in distinguishing subtle differences between trainees and non-trainees. For 58 59 TABLE 5.1: PRACTICES TAUGHT AT THE YFTC Care of work oxen and equipment Animal nutrition* Castration * Animal training Agronomic practices Plowing Seeding in rows* Planting in sole stands Weeding with animal traction* Ridging* Crop rotations Other farming practices Health Use of chemicals for seed treatment and storage Use of certified seed for food crops* and child care practices Adequate care of children with malaria Adequate care of children with diarrhea* Adequate prenatal care Bathing infants with soap and warm water* Bathing infants' drinking water* Preparation of easily digestible meals for infants Home economics knowledge and practices Improvement in compound* Know how to prepare nutrition meal* Budgeted for purchases to improve health or income* Purchase of mosquito nets* Invested in children's education \ *Adopted by trainees as a result of YFTC training. 60 example, all that is known about plowing is who plowed and who did not. Information on depth and timeliness of plowing was not gathered because such information requires the re- spondent to remember a specific measurement or time which is different each year; it is therefore difficult to obtain accurate recall of such information. Analysis of the train- ing effect in this chapter may therefore not elucidate subtle differences in trainees' and non-trainees' behavior which are important to agricultural production. Due to the extremely limited number of trainees (12) and non-trainees with no trainee contact (5) who were able to provide accurate production data, it was impossible to com- pare differences in the agricultural production of trainees and non-trainees. Sixteen other non-trainees provided ac— curate production information, but because they lived in the same villages as trainees their production data could not be 1 Although the contri- used to assess the training effect. bution of training to trainees' production could not be analy— zed, the productive effect of some cultural practices taught at the YFTC was analyzed by adding data from these sixteen non-trainees to that from the twelve trainees and the five other non-trainees. This provided an adequate data base for the analysis of productivity of various cultural practices and for an assessment of the YFTC technical package. Many of the results presented in this chapter would not be found in the areas surrounding other YFTCs in North Cameroon. The control of land by the Toupouri people in the 61 Dadjamka area, their history as cattle raisers, and their previous animal traction experience all have important im- plications for the effect of YFTC training on their agri- cultural practices. Care of Work Oxen and Equipment Because YFTC training is focused on animal traction, good care of work oxen and equipment are crucial to a train- ee's success in adopting other agricultural practices which depend on animal traction. Nutrition, castration, and ox training were analyzed because they are among the most im- portant and easily verifiable sets of practices. YFTC staff encourage trainees to buy salt and cotton— seed cake for their oxen during the dry season in order to insure that they have the strength to plow when the dry sea— son ends. Evidence from the survey indicates that the YFTC program contributes to good animal nutrition by trainees, since 95 percent of trainees provide nutritious rations to their oxen, compared to only 77 percent of non-trainees. However, the effect of training is limited since a large percentage of non-trainees also provide their oxen with nu— tritious rations. The YFTC teaches farmers to train their oxen slowly, first insuring that the animals are comfortable with the yoke alone, then with increasing weight behind them, before they are used for plowing. There is no training effect for adoption of this step-by-step method to train work oxen. 62 The absence of any contribution by the YFTC to the way farmers train oxen, and its limited contribution to improving animal nutrition, are due to the fact that most trainees had adopted these practices before they even entered the YFTC. For example, 88 percent of trainees had trained oxen using the step—by—step method before the Dadjamka YFTC was ever built. The Dadjamka YFTC is training farmers in practices which they already use, since the Toupouri people in the area are cattle—raisers of long standing and have twenty years of experience with animal traction.2 It is likely that in other areas where animal traction is less widely used there is a much greater contribution made by YFTC training to adoption of good animal care practices. Castration is recommended by the YFTC to make animals more docile and to increase weight gain. Evidence from this survey suggests a tendency for more trainees (32 percent) than non-trainees (21 percent) to castrate their work animals. But even among trainees, two-thirds did not castrate. Re— luctance on the part of most trainees and non-trainees to castrate their animals may reflect the need of many house- holds for stud bulls in their cow herds. This may be a problem unique to the Dadjamka area where so many households have their own herds. Reluctance to castrate may also in- dicate a high cost to castration by the veterinary service. Whatever the cause, one result of non—castration may be that the toolbars received by trainees at the YFTC are not used for plowing; many of them are either in storage or used as 63 TABLE 5.2 CARE OF WORK OXEN AND EQUIPMENT Behavior % Trainees % Non-Trainees -Provided. nutritious ration to oxen in dry season* 95 77 Had oxen castrated 32 21 Learned to train oxen by step-by-step method since the establishment of the YFTC 8 12 Had equipment repaired when it was broken 100 100 *Difference significant at .10 level 64 spare parts. During the training program, trainees use the toolbar with the YFTC's animals, which are large and strong enough to pull it. However, 70 percent of the train- ees do not use the toolbar for plowing with their own animals in their villages. It is likely that the weight gain re— sulting from castration at a sufficiently young age would increase the capacity of trainees' oxen to work with the toolbar.3 Agronomic Practices Sorghum is the staple crop grown in the Dadjamka area. There are several varieties, some grown in the rainy season, others in the dry season. Rainy season sorghum varieties are often planted in mixtures with millet, cow- peas, gourds, squash or sesame. A serious constraint on increasing sorghum production is widespread infestation by the weed striga (Striga hermonthices, "witchweed"). Some sorghum fields are planted to sorghum year after year with no fallowing and no rotations; soil fertility is maintained by manuring. Other sorghum fields are part of the cotton/ sorghum rotation encouraged by Sodecoton. Cotton is always planted in rows and sole stands under Sodecoton's close super- vision. Many households have cattle which browse on sorghum and millet stalks after harvest, which are fed hay, and which provide manure, milk, and sometimes animal power. Limitations of time and resources permitted in-depth study of only one enterprise. For reasons detailed in 65 Chapter 4, the rainy season red sorghum enterprise was chosen for study. Practices taught at the YFTC for red sorghum in- clude plowing, row-seeding in sole stands, weeding with animal traction, ridging and crop rotations. As assessment of the feasibility and the productive value of agronomic practices taught at the YFTC and of those used traditionally by farmers is important for understanding trainees' adoption of some YFTC recommendations and rejection of others. For each recommended agronomic practice, this section first evaluates its feasibility before discussing the extent of trainee adoption of the practice. An assess— ment of the feasibility of some of these practices was made on the basis of information from the 33 cases in the Dadjamka area who provided data on red sorghum production. Multiple regression analysis was used to isolate the individual ef- fects of plowing, row—seeding, intercropping, and manuring on production per hectare. Production of red sorghum and intercrops on the red sorghum field was standardized by measuring production per hectare in terms of value in CFA francs. Only returns to land were analyzed. Time did not permit collection of data needed to calculate returns to labor. In addition to variables for various cultural practices, two variables which indicated degree of flooding on the field were added because these increased the explanatory power of the regression. Two regressions, shown in Table 5.3, were run. In Regression 1 all independent variables were dicho— tomous, including INTERCROP l for which a value of 1 indicated 665 N- .HH.V .Hm.. DOOJh SUD: mmmmd a DOOJL mozH: banal .mH.v .00.. Aoa.. .vo.. .ooo.. N mOmUmszH NmN + mmaze_ez<:o\me_ea efifirsessmssstaeszgsg fieflfe 136 cowpeas, rows 3 and 4 deflated the value Of sesame and nyesine harvested by a factor representing the measurement error as- sessed for unshelled cowpeas. Millet and sorghum are partial substitutes, yet whole- sale millet price was more than twice the wholesale price of sorghum, a price difference Observed nowhere else in North Cameroon. It is possible therefore that wholesale millet prices were greatly overestimated. Rows 5 and 6 result from the same deflation Of retail prices used in rows 1 and 2, plus an additiona deflation based on the possibility that wholesale millet prices had been seriously overestimated. Rows 7 and 8 combine all the deflationary factors used in rows 1 through 6 for wholesale prices, volumetric measurement error, and overestimated millet prices. Rows 9 and 10 are based on geometrical estimation Of the volume in liters of all local measuring units. Volume was converted to weight, using volume-tO-weight equivalences from northern Cameroon and northern Nigeria.1 Then weight was valued at prices in the regional capital, Maroua, since prices per unit weight were not available for the Doukoula market. ‘ The greatest explanatory power came from the first two sets of assumptions, based on deflated retail prices. How- ever, whatever assumptions are chosen, signs and orders of magnitude do not change for any of the coefficients. The analysis presented in Chapter 5 would therefore be supported under any of these assumptions. 137 ENDNOTE FOR ANNEX B 1I am indebted tO Tom Zalla, Larry Lev, and David Trechter for the North Cameroon data, and to Will Whelan for the northern Nigeria data. BIBLIOGRAPHY BIBLIOGRAPHY A. Published or Attributed Sources Agbor-Tabi, Peter. Quarterly Progress Report 1: Effective- ness Of Aid in Reaching Its Intended Beneficiaries. Yaounde: USAID, ca. 1981. Andrews, D.J. "Responses of Sorghum Varieties to Intercrop- ping." Experimental Agriculture 10 (1974): 57-63. , "Intercropping with Sorghum in Nigeria." Experimental Agriculture 8 (1972): 139-150. Ascroft, Joseph, gt 31. Extension and the Forgotton Farmer. Wageningen, Netherlands: Afdelingen Voor Sociale Wetenschappen aan de Landbouwhogeschool, 1973. (Bulletin No.37). Ascroft, Joseph et 31. Patterns Of Diffusion in Rural Eastern Nigeria. East Lansing: Michigan State University, Department Of Communications, 1969. Azarya, Victor. Dominance and Change in North Cameroon: The Fulbé Aristocracy. Beverly Hills, California: Sage Publications, 1976. Barrett, Vincent, e£_31, Agimal Traction in Eastern Upper Volta: A Technical, Economic, and Institutional Analy- gigo East Lansing, Michigan: Michigan State UniverSity, Departmentcfi'Agricultural Economics, 1981 (African Rural Economy Paper #24, in press). Barwell, Cryil. Farmer Training in East-Central and Southern Africa. Rome: FAO, 1975. Belloncle, Guy. Quel Developpement pour l'Afrique Noire? Dakar: Nouvelles Editions Africaines, 1979. Belshaw, D.G.R. and Hall, Malcolm. "The Analysis and Use Of Agriculture Experimental Data in TrOpical Africa." East African Journal Of Rural Development 5 (l) (1972): 39-71 O 138 139 Benor, Daniel and Harrison, James Q. Agricultural Extension: The Training,and Visit System. Washington, D.C.: World Bank, 1977. Bingen, James. "Farmer Training in the Republic of Mali," Rural Africana. (30) (l976):53-62. Bingen, James and Stavis, Benedict. A PlanningAnalysis for the Cameroon Younngarmer Training Center Progra . East Lansing, Michigan: Michigan State University, Department of Agricultural Economics, 1979. Cernea, Michael M. and Tepping, Benjamin J. A System for Monitoring and Evaluating Agricultural Extension Projects. Washington, D.C.: World Bank, 1977. (World Bank Staff Working Paper NO. 272). Charreau, C. and Nicou, R. "L' amelioration du profil cul- turel dans des sols sableux et sablO-argileux de la zone tropicale séche ouest-africaine et ses incidences agronomiques," Agronomic Tropicale. XXVI (1971): 903-978. Chaudhri, D.P. Education, Innovations, and Agricultural Development: A Study of North India (1961—72). London: Croom Helm, 1979. Christensen, Cheryl et al. food Problems and Prospects in Sub- Saharan Africa: The Decade of the 1980's. Washington: USDA, 1981. (Foreign Agricultural Economic Report #166). Compagnie Francaise pour la Developpement des Fibres Textiles (CFDT), Service Technique. "La culture attelée dans la zone cotonniere du Nord- Cameroun: Experience et Resultats." Machinisme Agricole Tropicale 11 (1965): 3-11. Ekani, Andra: "Nouvelle orientation du service civique: aller vers les jeunes." Cameroun Tribune, December 31, 1980, p.4. Federation Genevoise de Cooperation. Les Centres de Formation de Jeunes Agriculteurs au Cameroun du Nord: quang. Geneva: Federation, 1976. France. Ministére de la Cooperation. Memento de l'Agronome. revised edition. Paris: Ministere, 1974. Francke, Anita. Kibaha Farmers' Training Center Impact Study, 1965-1968. Coast Region, Tanzania. Uppsala: Scandinavian Institute for African Studies, 1974. (Institute for African Studies Report NO. 24). 140 de Garine, I. "Population, Production, and Culture in the Plains Societies Of Northern Cameroon and Chad: the Anthropologist in Development Projects." Current Anthropology l9 (1) (1978): 42-65. Gilbert, E.H.; Norman, D.W.; Winch, F.E. Farming Systems Research: A Critical Appraisal. East Lansing, Michigan: Michigan State University, Department of Agricultural Economics, 1980. (MSU Rural Development Paper #60.) Gittinger, J. Price. Economic Analysis Of Agricultural Pro- jects. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins/IBRD, 1972. Grimes, R.C. "Intercropping and Alternate Row Cropping of Cotton and Maize." East African Agriculture and Forestry Journal 28 (3) (l963):l6l-163. Guillard, Joanny. Golonpoui: Analyse des Conditiong de Modernisation d'un Village du Nord-Cameroun. Paris: Mouton and Co., 1965. Hatry, Harry; Winnie, Richard; and Fisk, Donald. Practical Prqgram Evaluation for State and Local Government Officials. Washington, D.C.: The Urban Institute, 1973. Honeybone, David and Marter, Alan. An Evalgation Study of Zambia's Farm Institutes and Farmer Traininngenters. Lusaka: University of Zambia, Rural Development Studies Bureau, 1975. Hoogstraten, Billy. Le Coton et le Developpement Rural: Etude sur une Structure d'Intervention en Milieu Rurale du Nord-Cameroun: La Sodecoton. Wageningen, Netherlands: Agricultural University, Department Of Rural Sociology for Tropical and Semi-Tropical Areas, July 1979. Hulls, Robert H. An Assessment Of Agricultural Extension in Sukumalan'd, Western Tanzania. Dar es Salaam: Uni- versity Of Dar es Salaam, 1971. (Economic Research Bureau Paper NO. 71.7). IBRD. World Development Report, 1980. New York: Oxford University Press, 1980. Kamajou, Francois and Gow, David. Narrative Case Study of the Dadjamka Young Farmers Training Center (YFTC), Cameroun. Ca. 1979. (Mimeo) Keswani, C.L., 23.21- "Effect of Intercropping on Rhizosphere Population in Maize (Zea mays L.) and Soybean (Gl cine max merill)." Agriculture and Environment 3 (4) (1977) 363-368. l4] Kinyanjui, Kabiru and Ng'ethe, Njuguna. Training Within Underdevelopment: The Case Of the Baringo Develop- ment TrainiggCenter (B.D.T.C.): An Evaluation. Nairobi: Institute for Development Studies, 1976. (IDS. Occasional Paper #24.) Lefebvre,Yvonne and Lefebvre, Michel. L'Association des Paysans, Moyen de Formation et d'Animation dans les Villages Africains: Le Cas des Maisons Familiales Rurales au Senegal at an Tchad. Paris: University of Paris, Institut d' Etude du Developpement Economique et Sociale,1974. Leonard, David K. Reaching the Peasant Farmer. Chicago: University Of Chicago Press, 1977. Lele, Uma. The Design Of Rural Development: Lessonstfrom Africa. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press, 1975. Lockheed, Marlaine, 23 3A. "Farmer Education and Farm Efficiency: A Survey." Economic Development and Cultural Change. 28 (1980): 37-76. Marchand, Claude. "Tentatives d' adaption de 1' enseignement aux realites camerounaises: l' enseignement agricole, 1921- 1970. Canadian Journal Of African Studies 8 (3) (1974): 539-551. Markham, A.E.G. A Study of Farmer Training in Some English- SpeakingCountries Of Africa. Rome: FAO, 1967. Marticou, H. "Les freins a la penetration du progres technique dans l'agriculture camerounaise." Agronomie Tropicale 28 (5) (1973): 519-536. Meka-Engamba, Andre. Essai d'Evaluation des Progr rammes Cen- tres de Formation des Jeunes Agriculteurs: Perspectives d'Avenir. Ca. 1978 (mimeO) Mettrick, H. Oxenisation in the Gambia: An Evaluation. London: United Kingdom, Ministry Of Overseas Develop- ment, 1978. Mhina, J.E.F. "The Kibaha Education Center in Tanzania," in J.A. Ponsioen (ed), Educational Innovations in Africa, pp. 98-106. The Hague: Institute of Social Studies, 1972. Moris, Jon. "Farmer Training as a Strategy Of Rural Develop- ment," in James Sheffield (ed), Education, Employment, and Rural Development, pp. 322-365. Nairobi: Univer- sity College, 1967. 142 Njoh-Sam, M.; Faucher, J.P; et Luisoni, E. Develpppement des Centres de Formation Professionnelle de Jeunes Agriculteurs--CFJA au Nord Cameroun: CFJA de Guetelé Maroua/Geneva: IUCW, 1978. Norman, David, et al. Technical Chapge and the Small Farmer in Hausaland, Northern Nigeria. East Lansing, Michigan: Michigan State University, Department of Agricultural Economics, 1979. (African Rural Economy Paper, NO. 21). Pahai, Jean. Interview Of Cameroon Farmers (Centers for TrainingTFarm Families) Yaounde: USAID, ca, 1975. (in French). Parker, C.; Hitchcock, A.M.; Ramaiah, K.V. "The Germination Of Striga Species by Crop Root Exudates Techniques for Selecting Resistant Crop Cultivars," Proceedipgs of the Asian-Pacific Weed Science Society Conference (Indonesia) (6) (1977): pp. 67- 74. (From Abstracts on Tropical Agriculture 4(5) (1978)) Petrini, F. "An Evaluation of Some Farmers' Training Centers in Tanzania." Swedish Journal Of Agricultural Re- search. 3 (4) (1973): 175-85. Podlewski, A.M. "La dynamisme des principales populations du Nord-Cameroun" Cahiers ORSTOM, Serie Sciences Humaines 3(4) (1966): 7-194. Samatana, Marc. De l'Adoption des Nouvelles Techniques gplturales par les Anciens Stagiares du Centre de Formation de Jeunes Agriculteurs de Goyapg. Yaounde, Cameroun: Ecole Nationale Supérieure d'Agriculture, 1980. (memoire for degree Of {_genieura aronome) Sargent, Merritt. A Village Level Extension Guide for the Introduction and Maintenance of Animal Traction. East Lansing, Michigan: Michigan State University, Department of Agricultural Economics, 1979. Saylor, R. Gerald, An Opinion Survey Of Bwana Shambas in Tanzania. Dar es Salaam: University Of Dar es Salaam, 1970 (Economic Research Bureau Paper NO. 70.15). Schlueter, Lynn and Armstrong, Susan. The Ispya Experience: A Descriptive Study Of the Masai Rural Training Center. Nairobi: National Christian Council of Kenya, 1975. Schonherr, Siegfried and Mbugua, Erastus S. New Extension Methods to Speed Up Diffusion Of Agricultural Innova- tions . Nairobi: Institute for Development Studies, 1974. (Duscussion Paper No.200). 143 Staudt, Kathleen. "Agricultural Productivity Gaps: A Case Study of Male Preference in Government Policy Implementation." Development and Change 9 (1978): , "Women Farmers and Inequities in Agricultural Services." Rural Africana 29 (1975- 76): 81- 94. de Vries, James. Has Extension Failed? A_Case Study of Maize- -Growing Practices in Iringa Tanzania. Dar es Salaam: University of Dar es Salaam, Department of Rural Economy, 1976. (RER Paper No. l). Weil, Peter M. "Recent Agricultural Development Research in the Gambia," Rural Africana. (8) (1969): 37-46. B. Government Documents (Cameroun. Ministére de l'Agriculture, DEA. CCA/CFJA.) (Unattributed). Bénéfices Economiques. Maroua, Cameroun: ca. 1978. Cameroun. Ministere de 1' Agriculture, DEA. CCA/CFJA. Compte- Rendu des Activites du Centre de Coordination et d' Appui. Maroua, Cameroun: CCA/CFJA, ca. 1978. Cameroun. Ministére de l'Agriculture, DEA. CCA/CFJA. Projet de Budget du Centre de Coordination et d'Appui des Centres de Formation de Jeunes Agriculteurs au Nord-Cameroun, Exercise 1981-82. Maroua, Cameroun: 1980. Cameroun. Ministére de 1' Agriculture, DEA. CCA/CFJA. Rapport Annuel 1979- 80 des Activites du Centre de Coordination at d' Appui des CFJA. Maroua, Cameroun: ca. 1980. Cameroun. Ministere de 1' Agriculture, DEA, CCA/CFJA. Résultats de la Formation Dispense-e dans les CFJA, 1978- 79 . Maroua, Cameroun: 1979. Cameroun. MinistEre de l'Agriculture, DEA. CFJA of Dadjamka. Rapport Semestriel Octobre 1975 a mars 1976. Dadjamka: 1976. Cameroun. Ministere de 1' '3 conomie et du Plan. Projet de Déyeloppement Rurale, Region Centre Nord-Cameroun: Volet Amélioration de la Production Agricole, Cultures Pluviales. Yaounde: Ministere, 1979. 144 Internal Rates of Return, Centers for Training Farm Families ' Project . Yaounde: USAID, ca. 1976. USAID Prgject Paper: Centers for Training Farm Families, Yaounde: USAID, 1976. Sodecoton, Service de Jeunes Agriculteurs. Operation Jeunes Agriculteurs, Rapport Annuel: Campagne Agricole 1980. Garoua, Cameroun: Sodecoton, n.d.