“Evaluation of Impact of Learning Alliance Group on

Rice Farmer Livelihoods in Maubin Township,

Myanmar”

Aung Phyo, Assistant Lecturer,

Department of Agricultural Economics,
Yezin Agricultural University, Myanmar

Dr. Theingi Myint, Associate Professor,

Department of Agricultural Economics,
Yezin Agricultural University, Myanmar

Dr. Julian Prior, Senior Lecturer,

School of Environmental and Rural Science,
University of New England, Australia

Yezin Agricultural University

December 2016

i
Increasing productivity of legume-based farming systems in the Central Dry Zone of Myanmar
 Table of Contents

1. Introduction ............................................................................................................................ 1

1.1 Background .................................................................................................................. 1

1.2 Rationale of the study .................................................................................................. 2

1.3 Objectives of the study................................................................................................. 2

2. Method and Design ................................................................................................................ 3

2.1 Description of the project area ..................................................................................... 3

2.2 Data collection ............................................................................................................. 3

2.3 Sample size .................................................................................................................. 4

2.4 Analytical procedure/statistical methods ..................................................................... 4

3. Learning Alliance Project Activities in Maubin During 2013 to 2015 .................................. 5

4. Scoping Exercise for Stakeholder Analysis ........................................................................... 9

5. Research Findings ................................................................................................................ 12

5.1. Influential actors working between different stakeholder groups ............................. 12

5.2 Results from LA activities ......................................................................................... 13

5.3 Business Model coming out from LA activities ........................................................ 15

6. Conclusion ........................................................................................................................... 16

7. Implications and Recommendations .................................................................................... 18

8. References ............................................................................................................................ 19

9. Survey photos....................................................................................................................... 20

i
Increasing productivity of legume-based farming systems in the Central Dry Zone of Myanmar
 Evaluation of Impact of Learning Alliance Group on Rice Farmer Livelihoods in
Maubin Township, Myanmar

1. Introduction
1.1 Background

Learning alliances in agricultural research and development comprise a broad range

of stakeholders including government, NGOs, and the private sectors who form a “platform”
to build their capacity through sharing new scientific findings, identifying knowledge gaps,
and exchanging experiences about successes and failures of research and development
projects. The Learning Alliance (LA) is a way for stakeholders in the rice value chain
working together and cooperating to increase adoption of technologies, facilitate stronger
partnerships, and use resources sustainably. The LA is characterized by iterative learning
cycle of small groups in the network. A key part of a learning cycle involves a facilitated
reflection activity on what happened, what they experienced, and what resulted from it for
future planning and implementation. Through LA, the International Rice Research Institute
(IRRI) facilitated a network of stakeholders in the context of improving rice postharvest
management. The LA in Myanmar, composed of farmers and IRRI’s local partners from the
rice value chain, aimed to produce better quality rice and sell it to lager markets with higher
price. The Irrigated Rice Research Consortium (IRRC) facilitated the exchange of learning
among various stakeholders. It continued to do so in different projects in Myanmar through
impact pathway workshops and village level learning alliances.

Two Participatory Impact Pathway Analysis (PIPA) workshops were held: one in
Bogale on 11-12 July and another in Maubin on 2-3 December 2013. Representative farmers
from project villages, village leaders, extension institutes, NGOs, millers, and local
manufacturers joined to these workshops. Participants from different sectors identified the
underlying causes of a shared problem: farmers were not producing good quality rice and it
was not profitable in rice production. After that, the participants examined opportunities,
formulated their visions of success, and mapped the network of people in the value chain of
the relevant community. And then, they brought together what they found out and make
explicit possible change pathways to overcome the problem. Finally, they identified strategies
for the project to facilitate change for different groups in each pathway. At the end of each
1
Increasing productivity of legume-based farming systems in the Central Dry Zone of Myanmar
PIPA workshop, participants discussed forming a village-level learning alliance for activities
on specific topics. Accordingly, the learning alliances started focusing on improving quality
and linking with better markets.

The joint learning process brought about by PIPA and the LA provided more than a
networking technology that they could use. It improved the capacities of rice value chain
actors and provided an enabling environment for them to explore ways of working together
and with other interested groups. Through this experience, farmers realize that they can be
value chain players who have a more active hand in the profits they make from their harvests.
The inclusive learning approaches also brought in new and trusted allies for these rice value
chain actors who share a similar goal of lunching Myanmar back into the rice export market.

1.2 Rationale of the study

This study investigated the formation; operation and effectiveness of learning alliance
involve multiple stakeholders who aim to enhance various aspects of smallholder livelihoods.
In this research, the opportunities for knowledge sharing, innovation, co-learning, and
capacity building through the participating stakeholder groups were analyzed. Additionally,
the research also tracked how the sharing of scientific knowledge is translated into useful
knowledge for developing and improving smallholder livelihood interventions. This study
primarily focused on a learning alliance at local scale that focuses on the use of good quality
seed and postharvest technologies in rice production.

1.3 Objectives of the study

The research was conducted with the following objectives:

1. Identify parties’ expectations, needs, and incentives for participation

2. Analyze the institution building process
3. Identify opportunities for co-learning and capacity development
4. Identify Regional Learning Alliance (RLA) innovation process and
5. Distil lessons learned for further RLA development

2
Increasing productivity of legume-based farming systems in the Central Dry Zone of Myanmar
2. Method and Design
2.1 Description of the project area

The study area was Maubin Township, Ayeyarwaddy Region, Myanmar. Ayeyarwady
Region is occupying the delta region of the Ayeyarwady River. It is the most populous of
Myanma’s states and regions having over 6.5 million. The principal crop of Ayeyarwady
Region is rice, and the region is so called the “Granary of Myanmar.” In addition to rice,
other crops include maize, sesame, groundnut, sunflower, beans, pulses, and jute.

Maubin Township is situated between North Latitude from 16° 30'' and 16° 57'' and
East Longitude from 95° 24'' and 95° 52'', and has an area of 515.38 square miles. It is
bordered by Twantay and Nyaungdon Townships on the east, Wakema Township on the
west, Kyaiklat Township on the south and Pandanaw Township on the north. Maubin
Township occupies 330 thousand acres of total arable land. It is a port lying on the west bank
of Ayeyarwady River delta and is protected by flood-control embankments. The southern
coastline lies along the Andaman Sea. Rice growing and fishing are the major contributors to
the economy. It is developing town with growing transportation and communication services.
The town is linked with Yangon, 40 miles (65 km) east. There are 76 village tracts
comprising 470 villages in Maubin Township. This project has been done in four villages of
Maubin Township: Pan Pin Su, Nya Gyi Gayat, A Lann, and West Tar Pet.

2.2 Data collection

Both primary and secondary data were collected for analysis. The secondary data
were initially collected from the local township and village tract level government and non-
government organizations related to agriculture and administration. These data revealed that
the prior information of survey areas and supported the information provided by respondents.

In December 2015, the first key informant interview was carried out in the two study
villages, Pan Pin Su and Nya Gyi Gayat. Different kinds of stakeholders were interviewed
individually. The questionnaires for the stakeholders were prepared to overview their
perceptions on the objectives and the incentives of the learning alliances and the impact of
this environment. Focus group interview was also performed with rice growing farmers in
these villages by using semi-structured questionnaire. In focus group interview, demographic
3
Increasing productivity of legume-based farming systems in the Central Dry Zone of Myanmar
factors, economic factors, problems and constraints of the rice farmers were collected.
Farmers’ perceptions on the objectives and the incentives of the learning alliances and the
impact of the learning alliance group were also observed. The second time data collection
was done in September 2016.

2.3 Sample size

Stakeholder Heads

Farmer - 17

Miller - 2

Extension staff (Department of Agriculture, DoA) - 3

Township officer (DoA) - 1

District officer (Plant Protection, DoA) - 1

Township officer (Ministry of Commerce) - 1

Total - 25

2.4 Analytical procedure/statistical methods

A Stakeholders Analysis was performed as follows:

1. List all names of stakeholders including individuals, groups and institution, who have
any relationship in the project
2. Based on the criteria set by participants of the project, categorize the stakeholders into
groups such as beneficiaries, implementers, decision makers, funding agencies,
collaborators, potential opponents, and negatively affected group (the group which
has potential to receive a negative impact from a project).
3. Conduct focused analysis of the important stakeholders on their characteristics,
problems, strengths and weaknesses, opportunities and threats from outside.

4
Increasing productivity of legume-based farming systems in the Central Dry Zone of Myanmar
3. Learning Alliance Project Activities in Maubin During 2013 to 2015

As the LA members, different stakeholders were invited such as farmers, DoA staffs
and officer, Plant Protection Department officer, the Agricultural Bank officer, and seed
producers. In addition, private sector actors in the community such as millers, traders, service
providers and manufacturers of threshers and dryers were involved as well. IRRI researchers,
who also facilitated the learning alliance, managed who were invited into the network.
Involvement was on voluntary basis, depending on interest in the discussions and possible
activities.

In December 2013, the first learning alliance meeting in Maubin had been started with
46 participants who were NGO staffs, millers, farmers, as well as project staff joined. They
were divided into two groups: dryer operators and users. The operators raised their technical
questions on operations with IRRI scientists and the dryer manufacturers and discussed about
the management issues. The users also discussed interest in using the dryer, and the
facilitating the service available to farmers from eight surrounding villages. They also
discussed about the initial fees to sustain dryer operation, in order to get the incentive to dry
and get higher quality grains, scheduling and coordination on use, and information needs for
the farmers. The initial topics of the Learning Alliance Meeting for Maubin Township were
threshers and varieties (seeds).

The second learning alliance meeting was hold in March 2014. The meeting was to
review the first learning cycle, and plan for the next. There were 35 farmers, millers,
extension workers from DoA, officers from the Regional township level of DoA and
Agricultural Development Bank, and representatives from private sectors (Traders Company,
Milling Company) who attended the meeting. Farmers came from four project villages of
Maubin (Pan Pin Su, Nya Gyi Gayat, A Lann, and Nyaung Wine). In this meeting, farmers
discussed their experiences from rice and pulse variety trials. IRRI representative also shared
about the different activities of the project working with farmers. Millers argued the present
quality of Maubin rice and the relation of the quality and price. One miller explained that the
Maubin rice had very low quality so traders were not interested to buy their rice. Another
miller described the reasons of the low price. He said that the low price was caused by
delayed harvesting. The other reason was the purity of seed. Mixed grains caused low price
5
Increasing productivity of legume-based farming systems in the Central Dry Zone of Myanmar
and the quality would be deteriorated at the milling stage. One of the last activities was a
group exercise for the participants to identify their preferred activity and the main concerns
that they want to be addressed in relation to that activity. Each group focused on learning
activities which can be done to support other ongoing activities.

Table 1 Ongoing activities for Nga Gyi Gayat

Activity Concern/s
Pure seeds Seed availability for farmers and market price
Technologies What are the machines suitable with the technique? Money
problems to buy the machines
Support Needs skillful labor when using the machine
Market Fertilizers without guarantee/ safe credit support
No fixed market for the harvested crop

Table 2 Ongoing activities for Pan Pin Su

Activity Concern/s
Wants to try Sin Htwe Latt How to control “leaf rot” disease especially during heavy
rain period?
Wants to have/do (Participator Different soil types
Variety Selection) PVS trial
suitable on their rice farming
system (lowland, upland)
Establishment methods Different land level and soil type
Fertilizer trial ; which How to do? Need to learn the techniques
fertilizer should be used
Herbicide/pesticide trial Need to learn (knowledge)
Transportation from field to Poor transportation
home
Thresher to be finished (5-10 Not enough time for threshing in short period and for pulses
ac/day) sowing

6
Increasing productivity of legume-based farming systems in the Central Dry Zone of Myanmar
 The third learning alliance activity of Maubin was wholesale and export market visit.
It was conducted in May 2014 and participants were farmers form Maubnin and Boagle
Townships. They interacted with traders to learn about quality, varieties, logistics, and price.
Participants confirmed learning from this activity. Bulk selling activities were tried by the
farmers, but only at local markets. While the first event was successful, farmers needed
further support to strengthen the linkages so they can sell at wholesale markets in Yangon.
Farmers also shared the need to increase the number of farmers who have first‐hand
knowledge of that market and the quality requirements for selling there. This event was thus
conducted to raise more awareness on quality and markets, as well as to facilitate interaction
between farmers and traders.

In February 2015, the second time visit was conducted as a two-day study tour
program. The visitors included not only Maubin farmers, but also farmers from Bogale,
Mawlamyinegyun and Shwebo Townships. In the first day, thirty one participants were
visited to Hmawbi Seed Farm. The farm manager gave a presentation about the varieties
planted in this campus. He mentioned about Sin Thwe Latt, Sin Thukha and Paw San rice
varieties. The farmers also shared their experiences and asked questions related to crop
management and suitable varieties. Therefore, farmers had a chance to share their different
experiences from different area. Shwebo farmers shared their experiences on good quality
rice and markets with farmers from Bogale and Maubin. They were also discussed in light of
technologies they have tired from the IRRI project. Then farmers from Maubin Township
planned for their activities focusing on the new practices they would like to try in their
respective farms as follow:

- Ploughing and leave under the sun

- Seedbed method
- Plant spacing (6 rows, 1 row blank)
- Systematic fertilizer application
- Collecting main panicles for seed (seed selection)
- Keep purified seed row seeding
- Harvest on time, sun dry, and store
- Use drum seeder

7
Increasing productivity of legume-based farming systems in the Central Dry Zone of Myanmar
 From first day of visit, the participants enumerated their key lessons learnt as follow:

 Dry plowing
 Now want to try hand transplanting
 New varieties and
 Good water management (drainage and irrigation)
In the second day, the participants visited a wholesale market in Wardan. Participants
interacted with the traders form the different townships and inquired about the price, quality
and mechanism of trading. And then, they proceeded to the IRRI-Myanmar Office to gather
their reflections and lessons learnt from the two-day activity.
The third learning alliance meeting was held in Maubin Township on May 2015.
Thirty six participants attended the meeting, where they documented the lessons learnt from
the summer harvesting season, shared the postharvest losses along the value chain to the
alliance members, and shared key learning other alliance members from the market visit. In
discussion, farmers picked a topic of their interest that relates to quality and market. They
also discussed comparison between combine harvesting against traditional harvesting in
terms of harvesting, hauling, transportation and threshing fee and also labor requirement.
Central to the discussion was the lack of trust among traders, millers and farmers.
Towards the end of the meeting, ACIAR MYRice project review team discussed with
the farmers how the project could further help them relative to their existing problems.
Learning agendas proposed by the LA members form Nga Gyee Gayat and Pan Pin Su were
land leveling, effective weather forecast for better crop management, knowledge about insect
pests, irrigation needs, modernized farming, access to pure seed source for rice and pulse,
suitable rice varieties, market access of Sin Thwe Latt rice variety for export, and crop
insurance.

8
Increasing productivity of legume-based farming systems in the Central Dry Zone of Myanmar
4. Scoping Exercise for Stakeholder Analysis
Stakeholder
Objective of stakeholders
groups
Farmer - To improve the current
production practices
- To develop their
knowledge by
contributing with the
research station based on
their experiences (Pre-
harvest and post-harvest
technologies for rice and
marketing channel of rice)
- To maximize the farmers’
profit through improving
the quality of rice
- To develop the
agricultural sector by
coordinating from
Increasing productivity of legume-based farming systems in the Central Dry Zone of Myanmar
Role and activity of
stakeholders
- Variety Trial
- Deep-water rice demonstration
- Demonstration on rice
threshing machine
- Demonstration on rice dryer
- Research on postharvest losses
because of stacking system
- Study tour on Bayintnaung and
Wardan wholesale markets
- Excursion on Hmawbi Rice
Research stations
- Participation on farmer training
(importance of good quality
seeds, fertilizer utilization and
post-harvest technologies)
- Field visit exchange program
9
Returns from participation
Noticeable improvements
on LA group
- Technology for improve - Using the good quality seeds
seed production - More systematic on
- Technology for systematic production practices
usage of good quality seed - Start practicing soil fertility
- Production on improved managing
quality seeds - Knowing the wastes and loss
- Improve market due to conventional
bargaining power on harvesting practices and
product eager on reducing those
wastes
- Awareness on the quality of
paddy for improvement on
rice quality
 different point of view and sharing experiences
Rice miller - To be more effective in - Distribute the good quality - Technologies and - As the farmers are interest
rice production and seed knowledge and grow more better quality
increase the farmer - Training and sharing seed, the quality of rice is
income knowledge on postharvest higher and more convenient
operation of rice for the miller
Extension - To gain more benefit for - Assist in planning the - Knowing how to perform - Can build the mutual trust
staff (DoA) the farmers meeting/inviting the farmers a research trial with the farmers and became
- Assist in selecting the key - Knowing the postharvest more convenient in
farmers and area of the trial technologies performing extension service
- Coordinating between the - Understanding the - Gaining more better quality
farmers and the IRRI staff postharvest losses seed production technologies
Township - To gain success through - To maximize the yield and - Knowing about the LA - Support the requirements of
officer cooperating produce better and marketable group and its function participants in rice value
(DoA) crops chain (farmer, brokers,
miller, etc.) through
cooperating with the LA
District - To discuss and solve the - Explain and provide plant - Knowing about the LA - Knowing about cooperation

10
Increasing productivity of legume-based farming systems in the Central Dry Zone of Myanmar
officer (PP, current problems on
DoA) output of rice farmer
Facilitator - To participate all
(IRRI) stakeholders along the rice
value chain (from
producer to end user)
Increasing productivity of legume-based farming systems in the Central Dry Zone of Myanmar
protection technologies
- Organizing and facilitating the
LA meetings and initiating all
members to participate actively
in discussion
- Collecting proposed activities
for the future from the meeting
results and planning who will
implement which activity in
where and when
11
group and its function
- Farmers can get some of
the market bargaining
power and they know that
they can get higher
product price if they
produce more quality
product,
can create better
environment and conditions
- Mutual understanding
between the LA members
which is the most important
things for development
5. Research Findings
5.1. Influential actors working between different stakeholder groups

Among the LA member groups, the extension officer is a common broker between all
other groups. Due to its government mandate, DoA has strong linkages with the Agriculture
Bank, with farmers as well as with private sector. It thus has an influential role. The officer
can recommend and provide seeds of new varieties coming from the government. Moreover,
products such as pesticides and fertilizers are part of the interactions between the officer and
farmers. The officer also coordinates arrangements for credit, irrigation and even
transplanting. The release of loans from the Agriculture Development Bank is contingent
upon signing of the officer of the list of farmers who were planting rice for that particular
season. The bank then released loans to the farers in that list. The officer moreover
coordinates with the irrigation department on the release of water such that it synchronizes
with the cropping schedule.

The local project staff is another broker that linked farmers and researchers. The staff
administers the protocols and trials in plots, summarizes research data, as well as convenes
farmer meetings. These support the connection between research practices with that of
farmers, and promoted the recommended technologies for farmers. The staff facilitates links
for farmers to other stakeholders like miller and manufacturers.

Cooperative farmers broker between the farmers and other groups. These farmers use
their farms as well as the plots to convey their own reflections and recommendations. Some
of them are seed producers or retailers of pesticides and fertilizers. They also use these
objects to convey specific messages which may or may not be related to the learning trials by
the project. These farmers obtained training and technical support from DoA as well as input
companies. In some cases, they also get support for fertilizers and pesticides.

A few millers and manufacturers broker between the farmers and the private sector. In
the interactions, they use market practices and quality standard as a discussion tool to create
connections between themselves, researchers and farmers. From these interactions farmers
are able to use the existing connections of these private sector actors to link with other market
actors, or obtain seeds and inputs.
12
Increasing productivity of legume-based farming systems in the Central Dry Zone of Myanmar
5.2 Results from LA activities

There were delays in implementation of the agreed LA activities. Farmers were to

explore new types of threshers as planned during the first meeting; but this was postponed for
two reasons. First, local production of the IRRI-designed thresher (trial unit) was not done as
specified and did not work. Second, importing threshers into Myanmar took time. Learning
trials were expanded into producing better quality through good postharvest management.
However, while the initially planned activities were delayed, alliance members embarked on
other activities. Representatives from different groups, e.g. farmers, millers, manufacturers,
took initiatives to gather for meetings and discuss relevant issues and technologies. Learning
activities were implemented by different groups. During the meeting to share experiences
with varieties, farmers gave their observations of the plants or their suitability to specific
agro-ecological conditions but had no idea about the yields because the data was still being
collated and processed by the staff. The local staff also presented top 3 varieties which
farmers were interested to plant out of 13 choices. This opened discussions with millers and
government members of the alliance who commented that of the chosen 3 varieties, Sin Thwe
Latt was more marketable because the ‘millers know about it’, or ‘the government has
opened possibility for export of this variety’.

From these discussions, farmers decided what they planned to do next. Where there
was involvement by other group of actors, millers for example, it was also up to them what
they wanted to try, when and how extensive the trial would be. One miller set-up a trial in
collaboration with farmers, in which the miller bought fresh grains, then processed it using
improved postharvest practices. The miller then milled the grains to assess the quality of the
rice and the profitability for millers considering the quality of grains sold by farmers. The LA
members further discussed their observations from the experience of both farmers and
millers. A miller shared the result of a trial where, even with good postharvest practice, paddy
bought from farmers required additional milling because there were mixed red grains found.
Grains had to be sorted and re-polished to obtain uniform white grains. With such impure
paddy, the miller then calculated profits and showed how much profit was lost.

13
Increasing productivity of legume-based farming systems in the Central Dry Zone of Myanmar
 Discussions between farmers and millers on quality requirements, variety preferences
and pricing proceeded during learning alliance meetings. Millers not only shared which
varieties and rice quality were preferred but also encouraged farmers to ‘plant a variety which
they can sell in bulk’. Notably, this contrasts with the common farmer’s practice of using a
variety suited to location-specific conditions, naturally entailing several varieties if a farmer
had plots with varying conditions. It also contrasts with the practice of planting varieties with
varying maturity durations to manage labor needs during harvest period.

The farmer-managed trials were specifically on varieties. Aside from seeds, no inputs
or protocols were provided for farmer-managed trials, but researchers collected data on
management practices and results. Farmers implemented trials and activities on their own,
and information on the outcomes were noted by the farmer and shared at the LA meeting.
The LA had activities for learning about markets and seed sources. Farmers interacted with
millers and traders at the wholesale market in Yangon and with a nearby seed farm. They also
explored which varieties could be sold with a good price.

From the LA activities in 2014, some farmers decided to produce Sin Thwe Latt
variety with good quality to see if the price would be different. This activity integrated
learning about the variety, some crop management technologies, postharvest practices and
market practices. Interaction with farmers from another area, Shwebo, was also facilitated at
the initiative of local IRRI staff. Shwebo is known as an area which produces good quality
rice and the Shwebo Paw San variety is priced high in the market. The wholesale market in
Yangon had no line traders specifically for Maubin or Daik Oo, but they had for Shwebo. The
exchange with farmers from Shwebo was to learn from other farmers the integration of
variety, crop management practices, market, and bulk selling. Farmers from Maubin also
shared their experiences with the new technologies they have tried.

Aside from field trials, farmers were linked through other activities such as seed
production under a different project of DoA, sales of pesticides, or simply sitting together and
discussing as friends. Many of the trial plots were in front of areas where farmers normally
converge in the afternoon and evening. They also had facilitated interactions with groups
such as millers, seed producers and manufacturers linked through the learning alliance.

14
Increasing productivity of legume-based farming systems in the Central Dry Zone of Myanmar
However, farmers did not interact with these actors as frequently as they did with the
researchers. Thus there were several communities of practice involved in the interactions but
the frequency of interactions between these and the farmers were different.

As the final result, farmers have noticeable improvements in using the good quality
seeds, doing more systematic on production practices, starting soil fertility management
practices, knowing about the wastes and losses due to conventional harvesting practices and
eager on reducing those wastes, and having awareness on the quality of paddy for
improvement on rice quality. For the rice miller, as the farmers are interest and grow better
quality seed, the quality of rice becomes improved and more profitable in milling activities.
The extension department can also reconstruct the mutual trust with the farmers and become
more convenient in performing extension services. They also have opportunities to learn new
technologies such as better quality seed production technologies by themselves. All
stakeholders realized that cooperation can create better environment and conditions for all.

5.3 Business Model coming out from LA activities

Farmers from LA group from Maubin and Daik-U Townships have developed
business plans for the sustainable use of postharvest equipment and generating income by
providing postharvest services to other farmers. Eleven farmers created practical business
frameworks for threshing, drying, and storage technologies developed by IRRI. The plans
were formed with assistance from the Department of Agriculture and IRRI's postharvest
group. Through the LA, IRRI will lend threshers, solar dryers, and hermetic storage
technologies to the farmer groups that will provide postproduction-related services to other
rice farmers. The LA is a platform supported by the project, Diversification and
intensification of rice-based cropping systems in lower Myanmar (MyRice), and the
Australian Centre for International Agricultural Research. The farmer groups will then use
the earnings to pay for the equipment through MyRice. Using this approach, which is similar
to leasing, IRRI can demonstrate the viability of the business model without the need for an
upfront investment. Such an investment is an unrealistic requirement for farmers who have to
take considerable risks when trying a new technology. The farmer groups will validate and
fine tune the initial business model developed during the April 2016 harvesting season.

15
Increasing productivity of legume-based farming systems in the Central Dry Zone of Myanmar
Through the LA, MyRice will provide the technical assistance and advice on managerial
issues that might occur during the piloting.

6. Conclusion

Farmers have been developing agricultural practices and innovations without the
contributions of modern science and formal research institutions since the beginning of
agriculture. The most widespread area of farmers’ innovations and development is farm
machinery. Farmers have invented and developed many technical devices, machines and
procedures. In the case of LA Maubin, it was found that farmers actively discussed about the
farm machinery provided by IRRI and they made the adjustments adaptable for their field
conditions.

Most of the agricultural technology in use throughout the world is accounted for by
informal innovation and scientists often draw on technologies derived from farmers. G.
Goodell (1982) found that 90 percent of the technologies promoted by IRRI had been derived
from Asian farmers and were brought to IRRI by Asian researchers who came for a one-year
sabbatical. Farmers should be encouraged to evaluate and adapt technologies to their needs
according to their own ideas, methods, and economic possibilities. Farmers can express the
problems that they perceive to be relevant. Therefore, scientists need to describe the problems
they aim to solve from the users’ point of view when formulating their research proposals and
activities. In doing research, it is essential to transfer major responsibility for adaptive testing
to the farmers. Moreover, it is difficult for professional researchers to know farmers’
preferences and to understand the complexity of their situation. Farmers also have an
advantage in disseminating agricultural innovation. Having acquired new knowledge, farmers
may share it orally through their many social networks. Farmers consider it to be much more
risky to adopt innovations coming from socially distant outsiders than those developed by
other farmers.

The most successful researcher-developed technologies were those that the key stake
holders modified the most. Therefore, a co-development model is needed in which the key
stakeholders and formal researchers construct a technology together, particularly in the
adaptation phase. The improvements and adaptations made by farmers should be monitored,
16
Increasing productivity of legume-based farming systems in the Central Dry Zone of Myanmar
relayed back, and assessed by formal research in order to crystallize and disseminate the
respective principles or lessons that can be generalized. Farmers’ learning during action
occurs as part of the day-to-day practice and is experiential rather than experimental. Unlike
researchers, farmers live and work on their farms; they have more time for observation and
the particular advantage that unintentional perception goes hand in hand with intentional
analysis.

LA approach was useful in building bridges between farmers, researchers, extension

workers and the specific context of rice-farming in Myanmar. The interaction led to a largely
research-led mode of learning about agronomic processes through engaging farmers in
experimentation and demonstration plots, implementation of protocols, discussion of
technologies, and/or presentation of research data. This approach supported explicit learning
and adaptation evidenced by an evolving technical learning agenda and reflection of farmers
on agronomic adjustments. The inclusion of LA expanded the number of stakeholders with
whom farmers interact. With this broader network, the learning agenda also expanded out of
the initial concerns or interests targeted by the project.

Although having a LA had added value in linking technical and socio-institutional

innovation, and fostering self-organization with broader agenda, it is not a cure-all solution to
making research more inclusive. There certainly remains scope for improvement in several
areas. The greater autonomy and informality of the learning process implied that lessons were
not always explicated and shared, and may well have led to learning agenda that fit only a
specific segment of farmers. Moreover, the follow up on learning experiences could probably
be more systematic and strategic. Nonetheless, reducing control from the research side and
allowing a wider set of stakeholders to engage and guide the agenda and flow of learning is
likely to be conducive for aligning interdependent stakeholders. This will support the creation
of an enabling institutional environment for the uptake of technology.

Furthermore, the planned activities for the farmers should be consistent with the
actual conditions of the farmers and they are also affordable to do such activities with limited
their own resources. In the consideration of technological transfer, the introduced technology
and equipment should be on time and reliable with local situations. Additionally, to accept a

17
Increasing productivity of legume-based farming systems in the Central Dry Zone of Myanmar
new introduced technology by the farmers, the role of facilitator is one of the most important
things. The facilitator should realize the application of the technology in the actual field
conditions of Myanmar farmers.

7. Implications and Recommendations

The LA facilitated learning about quality required by the market, so farmers would
produce better quality grains according to these standards and so they can sell more with
profit. Moreover, it can also build the well communication and strong linkages between
various stakeholders participating along rice value chain. Creating a good learning
environment in the learning alliances is to reflect on progress and to define next steps based
upon experience of what works and what doesn’t. The study made recommendations on
public-private partnerships that would improve learning and adaptive capacity in the rice
sector. The Government of Myanmar also tapped IRRI for technical assistance for the
development and implementation of the Myanmar Rice Sector Development Strategy
(MRSDS), which is launched in May 2015. The MRSDS will serve as a guide for
stakeholders to revitalize the country’s rice sector and for Myanmar to regain its preeminent
role in the global rice market. Therefore, learning alliance can be used as one of the
approaches that is able to gather different rice value chain stakeholders and to link
smallholder farmers to the market.

18
Increasing productivity of legume-based farming systems in the Central Dry Zone of Myanmar
8. References

Ahmad, D. N. B. 2010. Handbook for Logical Framework Analysis, Economic Planning

Unit, Prime Minister’s Department.

Flor, R. J. 2014. Strengthening participatory learning in IRRC projects in Myanmar.

Flor, R. J. 2016. Network formation, learning and innovation in multi-stakeholder research

projects: Experiences with Adaptive Research and Learning Alliances in rice farming
communities in Southeast Asia. PhD thesis, Wageningen University, Wageningen,
NL (2016).

Flor, R., R. Quilloy, M. Gummert, M. A. Kyaw and Y. L. Aung. 2015. Learning Alliance
meeting: Quality and Markets Report, Yangon, Myanmar.

Hoffmann, V., K. Probst, and A. Christinck. 2007. Farmers and researchers: How can
collaborative advantages be created in participatory research and technology
development?. Agriculture and human values, 24(3), pp.355-368.

Quilloy, R., M. Gummert and R. J. Flor. 2014. Learning cycles continue in Myanmar.

19
Increasing productivity of legume-based farming systems in the Central Dry Zone of Myanmar
9. Survey photos

Figure 1 Individual interview with LA member farmer

Figure 2 Individual interview with DoA Extension Staff

20
Increasing productivity of legume-based farming systems in the Central Dry Zone of Myanmar
Figure 3 Reading the consent form by LA farmers

Figure 4 Group discussion with LA member farmers

21
Increasing productivity of legume-based farming systems in the Central Dry Zone of Myanmar
Figure 5 Individual interview with township trade officer

Figure 6 Individual interview with rice miller

22
Increasing productivity of legume-based farming systems in the Central Dry Zone of Myanmar