20
this range of environments can result in compromised research (bad for the scientist) that may produce flawed information and incorrect production decisions (bad for farmers). The need for many environments and a wide range of participants should be clear.
Large-scale farmers often have the resources to contribute to the research process, and can easily grasp the relevance of self-generated information to their own operations. Using the principles described above, their efforts can be more productive if combined across locations, and at times combined with data from small-scale farm trials. A wide coalition of farmers, researchers,. and extension -specialists can, bring together the resources needed to broaden the range of environments over which results can be collected. If large farmers are incorporated into a technology evaluation network with small farmers, the length of time required for testing can be reduced because environments (locations) can substitute substantially for years. This can lead to greater efficiency in use of scarce resources, both from farmers and the government. It may well be possible for many of the larger farmers, in conjunction with the national researchLand extension organizations, to pick up costs associated with on-farm research that will benefit them, and at the same time enhance the development of technology for all farmers.
The role of the research and extension specialists in this system needs to be clearly
recognized. The upgrading of farmer participation and input into the research process does not devalue the scientists' role, but rather expands their capacity to recognize and work with real world problems that limit production and the range of solutions that may be available to solve them. The role of research specialists can, in fact, become more focused on describing the *why* behind questions in agriculture, ecology, biology and sustainability. The role of extension specialists can be to catalyze the exchange of information among a number of credible and relevant sources. The research: process; can.be a rigorousstatistical exercise, and.it is possible to determine where results can be applied in the-appropriate recommendation domains.I
Assumptions about roles of different players, cooperation among farmers and scientists, relevance of information from various sources, and ultimate objectives of the systems need to be recast. This is the paradigm shift described above. Many agricultural infrastructures are set up with good intentions, but fail to produce anticipated results due to inadequate communication, limited scientific literacy among specialists and farmers, and a strained relationship between those who develop theoretical knowledge and those who focus on practical application. This is a problem in both developing and developed countries. The farming systems paradigm, and especially the on-farm research approaches described here can offer enormous potential that will benefit national agricultural infrastructure as well as sustainable agricultural production systems.
REFERENCES
Bradley, J. P., K. H. Knittle, and A. F. Troyer. 1988. Statistical methods in seed corn product selection. J. Prod. Agric. 1:34-38.
Braidwood, R. J. 1967. Prehistoric men. Scott. Foresman and Co., Glenview, Illinois.
Byerlee, D., L Harrington and D.L. Winkelmann. 1982. Farming systems research: Issues in research strategy and technology design. J. Am. Econ. Assoc. 5:899-904.
Chambers, R. 1981. Rapid rural appraisal: Rationale and repertoire. Public Administration and Development. 1:95-106.