Challenges to Rural Poverty Reduction in Viet Nam - Oxfam Blogs

Five-year Synthesis Report
Part 2: Challenges to Rural Poverty Reduction in Viet Nam
Box 7.1. IPM Training - “We should have more of those”
In 2011, ADDA in conjunction with the Farmers’ Union of Thanh Xuong - Dien Bien
organized an IPM class on the Chinese pea at Pa Dong village. More than 30 women
from the Thai ethnic group attended, of which 13 were from poor households.
Classes were one morning a week from March until June. They included 30 minutes
of theory, and practical demonstrations in a garden borrowed from a trainee.
113
Trainees learnt how to prepare soil, apply fertilizer and prevent insects. Even those
from the Thai ethnic group who were illiterate were able to learn. The head of the
Pa Dong village Women’s Union reported that about 50% of participants continue to
plant Chinese pea for their own consumption and sale.
--- “It’s hard to remember if someone just talks out of a book. IPM force people to
work, to water and catch the insect, so it’s easier to remember. We know when to
put the fertilizer. This is the first time we had practical class like this. It’s good to
have more classes on raising pigs and ducks.”
(L.T.H, a poor women from the Thai ethnic group, with grade 2 education)
Communication on agricultural extension services is more diverse, but more
attention should be paid to direct communication at the grassroots level.
Information on agricultural extension services is delivered to the people through various
channels, such as TV, radio, books, newspapers, leaflets, bulletins and village meetings.
In addition, with the support of various projects, some new types of communications
have been tested, such as the “information kiosk” funded by DANIDA in Eakar, Dak Lak,
and “market place agricultural extension services” funded by Oxfam in Lao Cai .
TV programs on agricultural extension services, including those in ethnic languages
provide updated information and have wide coverage. Some interviewees highly
value TV programs on agricultural extension services. However, for various reasons
(busy, little understanding of Kinh language, prefer entertainment programs) only 23%
of respondents watched agricultural extension services “regularly”. Most watched
“occasionally” or “rarely” (67%), and some “never” watched (10%).
About half of the respondents had received agricultural extension materials in the
previous 12 months. However, people in ethnic minority mountainous areas are not
used to written information. Interviews revealed that most people prefer to “ask the
village cadre” (57%), “ask local agricultural extension staff” (53%) and “ask the seller and
agencies” (43%). Only 13% “consult materials, books and newspapers”.
Demonstration models need to be more suitable to local conditions and
farming practices of poor ethnic minority households. Demonstration models are
an important tool for agricultural extension, and is an opportunity for farmers to “train
themselves” in applying technology and increasing their income. There have been a
number of successful models that were replicated by the farmers, particularly the more
well off group (high quality rice in Thuan Hoa - Tra Vinh, hybrid rice in Phuoc Dai - Ninh
Thuan, hybrid corn in Thuan Hoa - Ha Giang, micro bio fertilizer in Cu Hue - Dak La, and
black carp and duck in Thanh Xuong - Dien Bien). However, take up by the poor has
not been so successful. As poor farmers lack resources for intensive farming, they tend
to use labour intensive techniques on steep land. In many cases techniques applied in
low lying areas are not suited to ethnic minority mountainous areas. As a result farmers
appreciate models that are based on local conditions and that adapt standard models
to reduce labour and minimize inputs. Table 7.3 shows that only a small portion of the
population interviewed at the monitoring points think that knowledge and methods
introduced by agricultural extension services are suited to their own conditions.