Revision history [back]

Micro-irrigation in a new location, in a new community, with new users, in a new context, is not an easy concept to introduce and take hold. Cultural, technical, economic, value proposition, lack of new idea adoption experience, lack of plant growth science knowledge, lack of soil knowledge, operational barriers, all get in the way fast. And the project fails to take hold.

To have micro-irrigation be accepted in such scenarios one has to follow a process of education, familiarization, proof of success and proof of economic benefit. One has to wait for the success of "early adopters" in order to be able to be able to see the "farmer community at large" accept, adopt and be enthusiastic about this new way of giving water to plants. All this takes much longer to implement than most outside agents are prepared to spend on any project.

Micro-irrigation brings a lot of new and unknown components to the farmer, it is not foolproof, and neither is it the only contributor to crop success. It has its place but this place has to be thoroughly and painstakingly explained and demonstrated.

To "western" farmers all the benefits and drawbacks of a micro-irrigation system may be clearly understood and understandable. But not so to the members of a community that has been using ancestral farming tools and methods inherited from generation to generation. Where pride is measured based on how well the farmer knows how to use these ancestral tools.

Without all the effort on "technology adoption" (this is Marketing 101) any micro irrigation system, no matter how good it may be, will soon be abandoned and the plastic and other parts sold, or stolen to be sold, in the local market.

The technical issues have been covered by other people on this post.

These considerations are not particular to micro-irrigation. I have faced exactly the same barriers trying to introduce "organic waste composting practices" in places like Mozambique and São Tomé e Príncipe.

Micro-irrigation in a new location, in a new community, with new users, in a new context, is not an easy concept to introduce and take hold. Cultural, technical, economic, value proposition, lack of new idea adoption experience, lack of plant growth science knowledge, lack of soil knowledge, operational barriers, all get in the way fast. And the project fails to take hold.

To have micro-irrigation be accepted in such scenarios one has to follow a process of education, familiarization, proof of success and proof of economic benefit. One has to wait for the success of "early adopters" in order to be able to be able to see the "farmer community at large" accept, adopt and be enthusiastic about this new way of giving water to plants. All this takes much longer to implement than most outside agents are prepared to spend on any project.

Micro-irrigation brings a lot of new and unknown components to the farmer, it is not foolproof, and neither is it the only contributor to crop success. It has its place but this place has to be thoroughly and painstakingly explained and demonstrated.

To "western" farmers all the benefits and drawbacks of a micro-irrigation system may be clearly understood and understandable. But not so to the members of a community that has been using ancestral farming tools and methods inherited from generation to generation. Where pride is measured based on how well the farmer knows how to use these ancestral tools.

Without all the effort on "technology adoption" (this is Marketing 101) any micro irrigation system, no matter how good it may be, will soon be abandoned and the plastic and other parts sold, or stolen to be sold, in the local market.

The technical issues have been covered by other people on this post.

These considerations are not particular to micro-irrigation. I have faced exactly the same barriers trying to introduce "organic waste composting practices" in places like Mozambique and São Tomé e Príncipe.

Micro-irrigation in a new location, in a new community, with new users, in a new context, is not an easy concept to introduce and take hold. Cultural, technical, economic, value proposition, lack of new idea adoption experience, lack of plant growth science knowledge, lack of soil knowledge, operational barriers, all get in the way fast. And the project fails to take hold.

To have micro-irrigation be accepted in such scenarios one has to follow a process of education, familiarization, proof of success and proof of economic benefit. One has to wait for the success of "early adopters" in order to be able to see the "farmer community at large" accept, adopt and be enthusiastic about this new way of giving water to plants. All this takes much longer to implement than most outside agents are prepared to spend on any project.

Micro-irrigation brings a lot of new and unknown components to the farmer, it is not foolproof, and neither is it the only contributor to crop success. It has its place but this place has to be thoroughly and painstakingly explained and demonstrated.

To "western" farmers all the benefits and drawbacks of a micro-irrigation system may be clearly understood and understandable. But not so to the members of a community that has been using ancestral farming tools and methods inherited from generation to generation. Where pride is measured based on how well the farmer knows how to use these ancestral tools.

Without all the effort on "technology adoption" (this is Marketing 101) any micro irrigation micro-irrigation system, no matter how good it may be, will soon be abandoned and the plastic and other parts sold, or stolen to be sold, in the local market.

The technical issues have been covered by other people on this post.

These considerations are not particular to micro-irrigation. I have faced exactly the same barriers trying to introduce "organic waste composting practices" in places like Mozambique and São Tomé e Príncipe.