systems research - the IDRC Digital Library - International ...

composition, increases in income can also esacerbate malnutrition. Jodha (1994)
contends that commercialization can adversely influence the nutritional position of
the farming household if it leads to an overall decline in the availability for
consumption of general food commodities or of specific food items with high
nutritive value. Indeed, the link between FSR technologies and the nutritional
position of the household can be directly related to the consumption of 0~i.n-farm
produce and indirectly related to the income path (Gonzaga et a1 1990).
Although improvement in these welfare vari;ibles is an ideal goal, it cannot
be overemphasized that fulfillment of one Lvelfare indicator may lead to shortfalls in
others. The household makes decisions to meet its objectives according to the order
of their priorities. Impact assessment therefore should not consider a failure to
improve one or two welfare measures as a fdilure of FSR technologies in general.
Assessment is an integral component of FSR: from the diagnostic and design
phase (ex-ante), to the testing, preproduction, and production phases (on-going), to
the extension and monitoring phase (ex-post). Although the parameters used in
impact analysis for each FSR phase differ, each of these ph;lses in\.olves
measurements related to the impact of FSR technologies. During the ex-ante and
on-going phases of impact assessment, the focus of analysis is on biological and
technical feasibility, economic viability, and sociocultural acceptability of the
technoloby (Zandstra et a1 1981). Es-post assessment, ho\ive\/er,, goes beyond these
parameters and includes other indirect effects such as changes in real income levels,
asset accumulation, educational and nutritional positions, and health of the farming
households (Ranaweera 1985). In this study. impact assessment of indirect effects is
limited to changes in household income and the nutritional position of the
household. In addition, measurable direct effects such as yield le\iels, input use, and
changes in cropping patterns are assessed.
Several approaches can be used to assess the impact of introduced technologies
(Ranaweera 1988). One approach is the 11c.fot.c and ojtc>r approach. Different impact
parameters are compared using information obtained before the introduction of
technoloq and 5-10 yr after its introduction. This approach requires good baseline
informatbn. In the absence of baseline inforniation. a wirlz il~ld ~t.it/zol,t technology
approach can be used. Impact parameters from sites where the technology was
introduced are compared with parameters collccted from sites where no
technological innovation was introduced. The rocllt~olo~ udoptet. arid rzorltrliopter
approach, in which two groups of farniers are classified :iccording to specified
adoption rules, can be applied in a situation where it is diffic~~lt to find a site that is
homologous to the project site.
This study used a variant of the technology adopter and nonadopter
approach. One dilemma was deciding on the domain of the impact assessment.
Should it only recognize innovations carried out by the Regional Integrated
Agricultural Research Systems (RIARS) in Cagayan Valley Region? Or, sho~lld it
also take into account the contributions of other entities (e.g., seed companies),