Dự án nông nghiệp " Introduction of the principles of GAP for citrus through implementation of citrus IPM using Farmer Field Schools " MS4 pot

1
0
Ministry of Agriculture & Rural Development
_____________________________________________________________________



037/06VIE Project Progress Report






MS4: 2
nd
six-monthly report
(October to March 2008)



2
GENERAL INFORMATION
Project Name
Introduction of the principles of GAP for citrus
through implementation of citrus IPM using
Farmer Field Schools
Vietnamese Institution
Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Development,
Plant Protection Department

Vietnamese Project Team Leader
Mr Ngo Tien Dung
Australian Organisation
University of Western Sydney
Australian Personnel
Oleg Nicetic, Robert Spooner-Hart
Date commenced
March 2007
Completion date (original)
February 2010
Completion date (revised)

Reporting period
October 2007 to March 2008

Contact Officer(s)
In Australia: Team Leader
Name:
Oleg Nicetic
Telephone:
+61245701329
Position:
Research Program
Coordinator
Fax:
+61245701103
Organisation
University of Western
Sydney

Email:


In Australia: Administrative contact
Name:
Gar Jones
Telephone:
+6124736 0631
Position:
Director, Research Services
Fax:
+6124736 0905
Organisation
University of Western
Sydney
Email:


In Vietnam
Name:
Mr
Ngo Tien Dung
Telephone:
+84-4-5330778
Position:
National IPM coordinator
Fax:
+84-4-5330780
Organisation
Plant Protection Department

Email:



3
1. Project Abstract


















2. Executive Summary

All activities undertaken in the second six months of the project resulted in successful
completion of all planned FFSs, review of the activities and the curriculum resulting
in a modified and improved program for 2008 and completion of a refresher TOT.
Other outcomes achieved in the reporting period include the first draft of the GAP

handbook and an advanced draft of Pest and Disease Field Guide for the North of
Vietnam and formation of coherent farmer group in Dong Thap that made a good start
in implementing VietGAP.

Within the reporting period a total of 24 FFS were completed in 13 provinces
resulting in 741 farmers being trained. An additional 17 FFSs were conducted by PPD
staff trained in this project or CARD project 036/04 VIE with funds provided by the
provincial government. That makes an estimated total of 1250 farmers trained in
principles of GAP including record keeping, IPM, understanding of citrus orchard
ecosystem, influence of pruning and tree density on yield and tree health, and
understanding of the influence of organic and mineral nutrients on soil health and
citrus orchard productivity.
Refresher TOTs were held in Vinh from 26 to 29 February and from 03 to 06 March,
and in My Tho from 04 to 07 March 2008. Refresher TOTs focused on discussions
about GAP and ways it could be implemented in Vietnam, and on identification of
citrus pests and diseases and importance of spray application including spray
calibration, calculation of spray volumes and pesticide dose on successful pest and
disease control.

The key objective of this project is to align the Vietnamese citrus industry with world standard
production practices and open opportunities for export markets. Adoption of sustainable integrated
pest management (IPM) aligned to principles of good agricultural practice (GAP) leads to both
economic and environmental benefits, and will enable Vietnamese citrus growers to be at the
forefront of production in the Asia-Pacific region. Production of export quarantine-compliant
citrus fruit with pesticide levels below international minimum residue levels (MRLs) as the result
of this project will open new market opportunities in the competitive export markets and will
enhance food safety for domestic consumption. The project is based on an interactive learning and
action research paradigm, and uses the farmer field school (FFS) model. Leading research
institutions from Southern and Northern Vietnam, together with extension officers from PPD and
farmer organisations including VACVINA and Farmers Union are working together to produce a

GAP procedures tailored to suit Vietnamese conditions. They are also work closely with the
farmers on validation of the GAP manual and providing training of trainers and farmers in IPM
and GAP through FFS. Project activities are conducted in 5 provinces in the Mekong delta and 8
provinces of Central and Northern Vietnam. The IPM component is based on practices developed
in project 036/04 VIE which have been adjusted in consultation with key personnel from Northern
Vietnam, to account for local conditions.

4
Dr Nguyen Van Hoa and his team from SOFRI made good progress with the writing
of the GAP manual but the implementation of GAP in My Long village cooperative in
Cai Be district, Thien Giang province was slow mainly because of the lack of finance
for necessary changes farmers have to make to comply with GAP requirements. Dr
Vo Mai and her team from VACVINA made very good progress with implementation
of GAP in Long Hau village, Lai Vung district, Dong Thap province. Eleven farmers
from the village have been participating in GAP implementation. They have Tieu
mandarin orchards with total area of 3.42 ha.

Dr Lam from PPRI completed a draft of the Field Guide for Citrus Pests and Diseases.
Dr Duc and Mr Dung from PPD together with master trainers have been evaluating
the draft and writing their inputs for the guide to optimise scientific and practical
aspects of the Guide.

The efficient management structure that was established at the beginning of the
project was improved by moving project funds management from the PPD Head
office in Hanoi to Regional Centre 4 in Vinh. The good planning, open
communication between project personnel and sustained efforts of all stakeholders
from farmers and local government to PPD staff and scientists from institutes have
resulted in a successful first year of the project with completion of all activities and
meeting all objectives on time.
3. Introduction & Background

Citrus fruit is one of the major fruit crops in Vietnam (MARD 2004) and citrus
production is an important source of income for many Vietnamese farmers. However,
productivity and production of citrus in Vietnam is considerably lower than in
Australia and major citrus producing countries of the world such as Brazil and the
USA. It has been stated by MARD that “in general, citrus cultivation has not been
significantly developed over the past few years, largely because of the serious damage
of pests and diseases, especially greening disease (officially known as huanglongbing)
and therefore studies on their control methods, in combination with managing citrus
plantations and using advanced and intensive technology is a vital necessity” (MARD
2004).
The objectives of this project are to develop GAP production procedures for the
Vietnamese citrus industry that will be published as a handbook and to introduce GAP
practices using the FFS model. Through the FFS training program a national cadre of
citrus IPM/GAP master trainers and provincial level FFS facilitator teams will be
established. The key methodologies adopted are participatory based learning and
action based research. The objective of both techniques is to fully engage participants
and allow them to direct the learning and research to best meet their needs. A key
component of this project is Training of Trainers and Master Trainers in citrus GAP
including IPM. Trainers will conduct FFSs in their provinces and together with the
trained farmers will become leaders in citrus production aligned to GAP.
Multiple outputs from FFS training have been demonstrated in previous CARD
projects in citrus. These include: farmer empowerment through increased knowledge
of the agro-ecosystem; the conservation of biodiversity and protection of the

5
environment through reduced pesticide application as a result of improved knowledge
of pests and diseases and more effective control measures; increased food security
through enhanced production; and protection of the health of farming communities
and consumers of fruit through reduced pesticide use in fruit production. In addition
to these outputs it is expected that this project will establish a locally relevant GAP

framework and begin the process of implementation of these practices in citrus
production. Implementation of GAP will open new market opportunities in both the
domestic and export markets.
4. Progress to Date
4.1 Implementation Highlights
The activities undertaken in the second six months of the projecthave resulted in all
objectives being achieved and delivering outputs on time. The activities undertaken in
this period are detailed below.

4.1.1. Completion of FFFs

Successful implementation of the program for 2007 has resulted in 98 trainers being
effectively trained in citrus IPM and GAP. These trainers conducting FFS at 24
locations in 5 provinces in the Mekong Delta and 8 provinces in the northern part of
Viet Nam (Table 1). Ten additional FFS were held in Mekong delta and 7 in Northern
Vietnam using local government funding. Funding from local government represents
a very significant endorsement of the relevance and usefulness of the training and it is
expected that as awareness of the FFS program and GAP in citrus increases, local
government will play a vital role in implementation of GAP in citrus.

Table 1. Location of FFSs completed in 2007
Province Number
of FFS
Number of farmers
trained (
CARD FFS only)
Proportion of
female participants
MEKONG DELTA
Tien Giang 2 + 2* 66 14%

Dong Thap 1 + 1* 45 22%
Vinh Long 2 60 2%
Can Tho 2 + 2* 60 3%
Ben Tre 1 + 5* 30 7%
Sub-Total 8+10* 261 9%
NORTHERN VIETNAM
Ha Tinh 2 60 60%
Nghe An 2+7* 60 20%
Hoa Binh 2 60 28%
Ha Tay 2 60 38%
Phu Tho 2 60 35%
Yen Bai 2 60 20%
Tuyen Quang 2 60 13%
Ha Giang 2 60 20%
Sub-Total 16+7* 480 29%
TOTAL 24+17* 741 22%
* Funded by local government

6
A total of 741 farmers were trained of which 22% were female (Table 1).
Participation of women was significantly higher in the Northern Vietnam where
female participation was 29% with Ha Tinh province recording 60% female
participation. In Mekong delta female participation was only 9% with Dong Thap
recording highest female participation of 22%. A list of the FFSs participants from the
Mekong delta is shown in Annex 1a and from Northern Vietnam in Annex 1b. In most
provinces FFSs commenced before flowering and terminated after harvest. A total of
21 sessions were held during the growing season covering topics presented in Annex
2.

4.1.2. Review workshops and refresher TOT

Within the reporting period from October 2007 to March 2008 review workshops
were conducted in My Tho on 27/11, in Vinh on 30/11 and in Ha Tay on 7/12. A
report from the review workshops and a list of the participants is presented in Annex 3
and Annex 4.
Two refresher TOTs for trainers that had completed TOT in 2007 from Northern
Vietnam, was held in PPSD of Nghe An province at Vinh from 26 to 29 February and
from 03 to 06 March 2008. For trainers from Mekong delta refresher TOT was
organised at the Regional Plant Protection Centre in Long Dinh Village, Tien Giang
province from 4 to 7 March 2008. More details about training are provided in the
‘Training Programs’ section of this report.

4.1.3. GAP Handbook and Pest and Diseases Field Guide for North of Viet Nam

In the project proposal and subsequent project documents we used the terms “GAP
procedures” and “GAP handbook”. It was envisaged that the GAP procedures would
include GAP implementation check points and the handbook would provide a more
general framework for GAP implementation. In consultation with Dr Hoa and Dr Vo
Mai we decided that we instead should write a GAP Manual consisting of a more
theoretical part that will introduce the GAP concept and a practical part that will
include procedures for GAP implementation. In essence the material that was
originally planned to be covered in two separate parts (handbook and procedures) has
now been put together in a single manual. Dr Hoa also agreed to make necessary
changes to align the GAP manual to GlobalGAP since the original work was based on
EurepGAP. The agreed timeline for the writing of the handbook was readjusted and
now the draft manual is expected to be submitted to CARD PMU by the end of
September 2008.
Dr Pham Van Lam from PPRI has been progressing very well with writing of the Pest
and Disease Field Guide. He already completed the first draft and now Dr Duc and Mr
Dung from PPD together with trainers involved in the project will evaluate the draft

and make their input so the Guide meet trainers and farmers needs. The guide is
expected to be published in June 2008.

4.1.4. Implementation of GAP

Output 6 of the project is to implement GAP in one of the cooperatives (farmer
groups) in the Mekong delta and implementation of GAP is the main focus of the 3
rd

year of the project (2009). However, because of the complexity of the certification
process and the existence of a large gap between the reality of Vietnamese citrus

7
production and GlobalGAP requirements, implementation of GAP has already
commenced and the farmers who will participate in the GAP implementation process
have been selected. The team from SOFRI headed by Dr Hoa has done the initial
assessment of farmers from a cooperative in My Luong village, Cai Be district, Tien
Giang province. More than 20 farmers have been assessed and the action plan for
implementation of GAP was drawn up. Following acceptance of the action plan the
cooperative will seek support from local government for financial help to cover part
of the costs associated with GAP implementation.
The team from VACVINA headed by Dr Vo Mai works with two groups of farmers.
The first group is from Long Hau village, Lai Vung district, Dong Thap province.
Eleven farmers from the village actively participate in GAP implementation. This
group grows Tieu mandarin, which is a very popular variety on the Vietnamese
market but with very low prospects for export. It was decided that for this group of
farmers VietGAP would be more appropriate. At the moment there is no certification
scheme for VietGAP but it is anticipated that the certification scheme will be
established before the end of the project. The second group of farmers Dr Vo Mai
works with are from My Hoa cooperative. All farmers involved in this cooperative

have graduated from 2007 FFS. The cooperative has received financial support from
the retail company Metro to implement GAP. The cooperative producing pomelo and
is involved in export of pomelo to Europe hence GlobalGAP has been implemented in
this cooperative.

4.2 Capacity Building
The institutional capacity of the PPD to facilitate farmer participatory training is high
and this project is further enhancing that capacity by addressing capability gaps in
relation to specific knowledge about GAP. In the first year of the project trainers
worked with farmers on implementation of elements of GAP related to IPM, farmers
and environmental safety, and record keeping. At the review workshop it became
clear that trainers understanding of GAP improved but there is still lot of conceptual
confusion in differentiation between IPM and GAP. At refresher TOTs the concept of
GAP and potential impacts of GAP implementation were studied and discussed. At
the end of the TOT the GAP implementation strategies were drafted.
Forming linkages between all stakeholders involved in the project is a critical
component of capacity building and all efforts are being made to build linkages
between institutions in Northern and Southern Vietnam. This project has successfully
facilitated sharing of expertise and knowledge related to GAP between stakeholders
from Mekong delta, who have higher levels of GAP knowledge and experience, and
stakeholders from the Northern provinces with less exposure to GAP. The very
important linkage has been established between PPD staff and non-government
organisation VACVINA that now driving implementation of GAP.
4.3 Training Programs
Training is a major component of this project and during 2007 it has been conducted
at two levels. At the trainers’ level 10 master trainers completed a 4 day workshop in
Hanoi and a total of 98 extension officers, mainly from PPD but some from ARD and
NGOs, received training in citrus IPM and GAP. These trainers then facilitated a total
of 24 FFSs in their local regions funded by CARD and an additional 17 FFSs funded
by provincial government.

8

At the farmers level training focussed on integrated crop management that included
IPM, plant nutrition and pruning. In regards to GAP training, the focus was on record
keeping. At workshops in November 2007 and refresher TOTs in February-March
2008 it was concluded that in Northern Vietnam the focus should remain on
Integrated Crop Management (ICM) and record keeping while in Mekong delta other
elements of GAP may be included in FFS curriculum.
Refresher TOTs were used for discussion about GAP principles and the ways GAP
can be implemented in Vietnam. Discussion focused particularly on the role of
cooperatives in implementation of GAP. Another important part of refresher TOTs
was the identification of pests and diseases in the orchard and practical exercises to
calibrate knapsack and calculate dose of pesticide applied. Participants also assessed
spray coverage of citrus canopy. At the end of refresher TOTs practical exercises for
FFS orchards were designed.
4.4 Publicity
A finding of the pre-intervention survey was that the best way to disseminate
information to farmers through the media is by television, as more than 90% of all
farmers have a television set in their own home. Every province in Vietnam has a
local television station and as 70% of the population live in rural areas, the level of
content relating to agricultural matters is high. Television reporters have been invited
to all major project events such as meetings and the opening and closing of FFS.
Details of coverage by local TV stations will be reported in the next report.

4.5 Project Management
A project management framework was established during the stakeholder meetings
held in February and March 2007. Mr Ngo Tien Dung (Vietnamese project leader) is
in charge of coordinating overall project activities in Vietnam and organising and
managing activities in the 8 participating provinces of Northern Vietnam. Mr Dung

and Oleg Nicetic are responsible for submission of reports and other milestones to
CARD-PMU. Dr Dinh Van Duc from PPD Head Office in Hanoi and Mr Nguyen
Tuan Loc, Vice Director of Regional Plant Protection Centre 4 in Vinh have a very
important role in the day to day management of the project. Mr Ho Van Chien
(Director SRPPC) is in charge of all activities (training and GAP related activities) in
the 5 participating provinces in the Mekong delta. Mr Le Quoc Cuong, Vice Director
of SRPPC has the important role of conducting the baseline study and assisting in
training related activities. Dr Hoa from SOFRI is in charge of writing the GAP
manual and developing an on-farm recording system. Dr Hoa is also responsible for
implementation of GAP in the pilot cooperative in My Long. Dr Vo Mai from
VACVINA is in charge of GAP implementation in Vinh Long and Dong Thap
province. To enable faster transfer of funds to the final user and to ensure smooth
running of the project, funds from UWS have been transferred separately for activities
in Mekong delta and activities in Northern Vietnam. From January 2008 Plant
Protection Regional Centre 4 is in charge of funds distribution for activities in
Northern Vietnam and SRPPC distribution of funds for activities in the Mekong delta.
It was noticed during the first six months of the project that the accounting system in
PPD head office in Hanoi is more complex than in SRPPC, simply due to the much

9
larger size of the organization and it was agreed that distribution of funds for the
North will be more efficiently managed by Regional Centre 4.
In the second half of the first year of the project management structure improved
because the changes in accounting system and more clearly define management
responsbilities between PPD head office in Ha Noi and Regional Centre 4, and it was
functioning very well with all institutions and individuals involved acting
independently with a high level of coordination that resulted in implementation of all
activities on time in accordance to the Logframe. Support and flexibility of CARD
PMU has contributed to the successful first year of the project.

5. Report on Cross-Cutting Issues
5.1 Environment
The focus of FFS is to increase the farmers understanding of the ecosystem and the
impact of human influences on it. This approach has the potential to reduce the
detrimental impacts of human activities on the environment. The IPM strategies
farmers learn and implementation of GAP should result in improved ecosystem
health. At this stage of the project it is too early to detect any evidence of
environmental improvement.
5.2 Gender and Social Issues
In the training of master trainers and trainers about 30% of the total number of trainers
was females. This proportion of males and females is reflective of the overall PPD
trainer gender balance. In the Mekong delta only 9% of trained farmers were woman
and in Northern Vietnam woman participation was 29% with Ha Tinh province
recording 60% female participation. This reflects the differences in traditional roles of
women between the regions.

All project activities are strongly supported by local government and farmer
organisations including the Farmers Union and The Women’s Union. Participants in
FFS are encouraged to actively engage with their local community and share
knowledge acquired in FFS. From previous CARD projects we have evidence that the
FFS participants became the founders and core members of farmer’s clubs and
cooperatives and it can be anticipated that FFS participants will become actively
involved in dissemination of their newly acquired information in this project as well.
6. Implementation Issues
6.1 Issues and Constraints
There are two issues that pose minor constraints to the project successful
implementation. These are limited knowledge of trainers in the area of citrus pests and
diseases in some provinces and the selection criteria for participants of FFS in the
North that is based on social status of the farmers with preference given to poorer
farmers without taking in account level of farmers’ knowledge and level of

production.

10
1. In some provinces in the North trainers do not have much experience with citrus
pests and diseases. Even though they completed a TOT in 2007 and a refresher TOT
in 2008 their knowledge of citrus pests and diseases is still limited. Other constrain is
the reliance on local (village) supplies of pesticide that in many cases ‘force” trainers
to use IPM incompatible pesticides.
2. The level of knowledge, production and capability of development of farmers from
many FFS is in the North is very low. That is partly a consequence of the selection
process use to select participants for FFS. In Mekong delta even though gender and
social status of the candidates for FFS are considered, generally more advanced
farmers in the community that are ready to adopt new technologies and with
capability to apply GAP in the future are selected. In the North selection is biased
towards poorer farmers, who are very often old. It is unlikely that local government
will agree to change the way FFS participants are selected so the project objectives in
some provinces should be modied to reflect the local farmers’ capability.
6.2 Options
1. Vietnamese experts from PPD Hanoi and Regional Centre 4 will more often visit
FFSs and provide ‘on-site’ training for trainers and farmers. They will also check list
of pesticide use and ensure that IPM compatible pesticide are used. If necessary a
supply of pesticide will be provided from provincial centres and not local village
shops.

2. In provinces where farmers can not improve their practices within the timeframe of
one FFS conducted for one growing season FFSs should be extended to two seasons.
7. Next Critical Steps

In the next 6 months 57 new FFSs will commence. In June the project managment
team will visit all provinces and conduct a baseline study of the second year FFS

participants.
The final drafts of GAP manual will be submitted to CARD PMU for evaluation and
the Pest and diseases field guide will be completed and printed.

8. Conclusion

In the first year of the project an efficient management structure was established.
Good planning, open communication between project personnel and sustained efforts
have resulted in successful training of 1250 farmers and 98 trainers. The GAP
handbook draft was written and GAP implementation is progressing well in in Dong
Thap and Vinh Long provinces. The final draft of Citrus Pest and Diseases Field
Guide for Northern provinces of Vietnam was completed and the guide will be printed
on time. The guide will be a very important reference book for trainers in the second
and third years of the project.


11




List of Annexes


Annex 2a Curriculum summary for FFSs in Northern Vietnam 2007

Annex 2b Curriculum summary for FFSs in Mekong delat 2007

Annex 3. Report from the workshops held in November 2007

12
Annex 2a: Training program for FFSs in 2007 Northern provinces


Week Contents
1 Selection of meeting room, study field, farmers
2 Opening Ceremony, arrangement of FFS, conduct pre-test, base line
survey and set the IPM experiment.
3 Introduction of record keeping and distribution of record keeping
notebooks. Introduction of GAP principles.

Ago-Ecosystem of Citrus orchard:
+ Introduction of Citrus orchard ecosystem in the class
+ Go to the Citrus orchard: Survey, collection the specimens,
+ Return the room: Drawing and analysis of Citrus orchard agro-
ecosystem
+ Practice on the field and discussion
- Group dynamic/team building activities
4 - Ago-Ecosystem analysis
- Citrus in building phase (Nutrition requirement after harvesting and
before flowering stage)
- Use compost in Citrus production; set up compost experiment
- Insect zoo
- Group dynamic/team building activities
5 - Ago-Ecosystem analysis
- Physiology of Citrus at stage of Summer flush cycle and Fruit
development, the factor affect this stage (Soil, Water, Nutrition)
- Role of Yellow ants on Citrus orchard (Ant keeping on Citrus orchard)

- Group dynamic/team building activities
6 - Ago-Ecosystem analysis
- Use of spray mineral oil and other IPM compatible pesticide for control
of major citrus pest:
spray techniques,
Determine the dosage, volume
- Insect zoo
- Group dynamic/team building activities
7 - Ago-Ecosystem analysis
- Management of Insects, Mites and Natural enemies
- Insect zoo
- Group dynamic/team building activities
8 - Ago-Ecosystem analysis
- Management of Insects, Mites and Natural enemies (continue)
- Insect zoo
- Group dynamic/team building activities
9 - Ago-Ecosystem analysis
- Disease management
- Insect zoo
- Group dynamic/team building activities
10 - Ago-Ecosystem analysis
- Disease management (continue)
- Physiology of Citrus at stage of Autumn flush cycle and Fruit mature, the

13
factors affect the this stage (Nutrition requirement at flowering and fruit
development stage)
- Group dynamic/team building activities
11 - Ago-Ecosystem analysis
- Negative affect of chemical pesticides and Mineral Oil on Pests and

Natural enemies, Human health, Environment
- Insect zoo
- Group dynamic/team building activities
12 - Ago-Ecosystem analysis
- Introduction of Bio-Agents
- Insect zoo
- Group dynamic/team building activities
13 - Ago-Ecosystem analysis
- Weed management
- Insect zoo
- Group dynamic/team building activities
14 - Ago-Ecosystem analysis
- Pruning technique; Pruning to form the shade
- Insect zoo
- Group dynamic/team building activities
15 - Ago-Ecosystem analysis
- Use of traps and baits to control Pests
- Insect zoo
- Group dynamic/team building activities
16 - Ago-Ecosystem analysis
- Harvest and post-harvest activities
- Insect zoo
- Group dynamic/team building activities
17 - Ago-Ecosystem analysis
- Physiology of Citrus at stage of flower formation and development
- Solutions for rehabilitation of citrus orchard after flooding –apply to the
South
- Insect zoo
- Group activities
18 - Survey and analysis of Citrus orchard ecosystem

- Physiology of Citrus at stager of Spring flush cycle and Flowering
- Life Cycle and Food web
- Group dynamic/team building activities
19 - Review of GAP standards implemented during FFS. Discussion on
implementation of GAP standards at farmers own farms.
- Survey farmers after FFS
20 - Synthesis and Analysis of Field Experiment data
- Advantages and disadvantages when conducting IPM training on Citrus
orchard
21 - Post-test
- Closing ceremony




14
Annex 2b: Training program for FFSs in 2007 Mekong delta


Week Activity
1 Contact, organise class and select orchard
2 Opening class, establish farmer groups and conduct pre-
intervention survey
3 Introduction of record keeping and distribution of record keeping
notebooks. Introduction of GAP principles.

Agro-ecosystem; difference between rice and citrus eco-system,
record keeping and monitoring
4 Game; need for nutrition, organic and mineral fertilizer. CD
provided

5 Continue 4
6 Impact of pesticide; resistance & outbreaks. PSO; how oil works,
spray application. Insect zoo & monitoring
7 Insect pests and beneficials, Insect zoo & monitoring
8 Insect pests and beneficials continued, Insect zoo & monitoring
9 Citrus diseases
10 Citrus diseases continued
11 Safety of pesticide handling. Quantifying economic inputs &
outputs
12 Biopesticides; Bt, Trichoderma. Advantages and disadvantages
13 Nutrition for flowering & fruit set
14 Techniques of growing citrus, pruning, tree spacing, weed
management without herbicide
15
IPM on citrus, Introduce the process of facilitating farmer to
conduct VietGAP
16
IPM on citrus continued, Introduce the process of facilitating
farmer to conduct VietGAP
17 Recovery management of citrus trees after flooding. Rearing fish
in canals.
18 Postharvest
19 Post-intervention survey and synthesis of knowledge
20 Discussion. Which pesticides to use and difficulties of IPM.
Results of monitoring, results of experimental trials.
21 Conclusion and close

1
Annex 3: Report from review workshops held in My Tho 27/11, Vinh
30/11 and Ha Tay 7/12 2007 (Report written by Dr Zina O’Leary)

REVIEW MEETINGS

At each of the three 2007 review meetings (held in My Tho on the 27
th
of November, Vinh on
the 30
th
of November and Hanoi on the 7
th
of December) workshop participants were asked to
come together to reflect on FFSs and GAP implementation processes in the first year of the
project.

To facilitate this process, working groups of 6-8 participants of varied stakeholder
backgrounds were formed at each workshop and asked to brainstorm around the following
themes:

• Current GAP conceptions and most effective means of implementation in citrus
farming
• Successes in the 2007 FFSs program and potential improvements for the 2008
program.


M
Y THO REVIEW MEETING 27/11

At the My Tho review meeting participants from five Mekong Delta provinces formed 4
working groups and brainstormed as follows:

Current GAP conceptions

Discussions at the My Tho review meeting centred on several macro issues related to the
potential that GAP offers farmers. These include
• a means for certification
• a way to drive policy development
• a way to leverage government support
• a means for the development of cooperatives
At a more micro level, participants refereed to gap as
• a systematic step by step process to improve production
• a standardized system for affecting practice

Most effective means of implementation in citrus farming

The clear focus of the My Tho participants was the need for cooperatives that could be
certified. It was thought that such cooperatives would be able to leverage government support
and subsidies. FFSs were seen as a good means for the development of cooperatives.

Elements of the FFS that worked well in 2007

Participants stated that
• IPM strategies were successfully developed with farmers
• IPM was seen as easier to ‘get your head around’ than GAP.
• there was some success in leveraging government support, i.e.) toilet subsidies

What should be done differently in 2008 FFS

At the micro level participants suggested that FFS should
• continue developing IPM strategies to accommodate need to constantly update IPM
skills but focus more on other aspects of GAP
• provide better record keeping forms
• provide more focus on market factors in order to increase profit margins


2
• ensure that knowledge effects practice

At a more macro level participants pointed to the for
• a stronger push for cooperative development at early stages
• a standard GAP framework such as VIETgap
• the clear pursuit of certification (as early as 2009)
• a need to visit provinces with certification
• the need to seek more government support


V
INH REVIEW MEETING 30/11

At the Vinh review meeting participants from Nghe An and Ha Thin provinces formed 3
working groups and brainstormed as follows:

Current GAP conceptions

Participants brainstormed the importance GAP in helping farmers understand
• nutrients
• pests
• disease

• pesticide use
• soils
• fertilizers
• record keeping
• clean water
• good health
• ecology
• the need to farm away from hospitals and residential areas

At a more macro level participants pointed to GAP as
• a community issue
• a way to leverage government support
• a means for the development of cooperatives

Most effective means of implementation in citrus farming

Participants suggested that knowledge of GAP was high but there was not enough available
on the actual steps farmers need to go through to achieve GAP. Participants suggested that
there needs to be a GAP manual that offers a step by step articulation of how it can be
implemented.

Elements of the FFS that worked well in 2007

Participants stated that farmer knowledge increase along several dimensions including
• environmental concerns
• appropriate pruning
• pest identification
• appropriate pesticide use
• appropriate fertilizer use
• beneficials/ natural enemies

• timing for spraying
• plant biology

This in turn led to
• decreased pesticide use


3
• improved cultivation practice
• decreased costs

Mention was also made of the value of two-way communication and the value in one FFS
leveraging the support of the Women’s Union.

What should be done differently in 2008 FFS

Participants were generally happy with the FFS curriculum but suggested the following
• increase the financial support available for participating farmers and trainers
• change criteria for selection of farmers for FFS. Currently social concideration is
main factor for selection of farmers. In future more farmers that have higher potential
for improvement should be selected
• start the 2008 FFS much earlier in the year just after the harvest
• provide record keeping materials
• focus more on anderstending of market
• encourage the development of cooperatives


H
ANOI REVIEW MEETING 7/12

At the Hanoi review meeting participants from 6 Northern provinces formed 5 working
groups and brainstormed as follows:

Current gap conceptions

Participants in Hanoi were the first to clearly articulate a difference between general good
agricultural practice and GAP as a certification scheme.

They also articulated several key elements in gap that they saw as integrated and part of a
chain
• IPM
• nutrients
• fertilizer use
• disease control
• post harvest
• storage
• clean production
• record keeping/ traceability
• soils
• seeds
• good water supply
• choosing good varieties
• the need to farm away from hospitals and residential areas
• food safety

Most effective means of implementation in citrus farming

Participants argued that for gap to be effectively implemented any changes to practice needs
to be constantly monitored. Also crucial is that the cost of implementing gap be recoverable
through higher product returns. Farmers must be able to increase the marketability of their

products to see that their efforts have been worthwhile.

Elements of the FFS that worked well in 2007

Participants stated that


4
• IPM was the most crucial knowledge to be shared - particularly related to leaf miners
and the identification of both pests and natural enemies.
• Knowledge of fertilizers increased
• General ecosystem knowledge also enhanced
• The sharing of knowledge amongst farmers was good
• Fired trials were useful but need to be limited.


What should be done differently in 2008 FFS

Participant’s comments were more about how the FFSs run, rather than the curriculum the
schools cover. Participants noted need for FFS to
• start much earlier in the year
• run for longer period (a full growing season)
• consider criteria for farmers selection (should level of education, age or community
influence be considered)
• hold an orientation session to gage farmer interest
• offer more financial support to participating farmers
• provide record keeping materials
• limit field studies to those that are specific to province/ community needs
• understand the appeal of farmers using cheap illegal Chinese pesticides

Participants also made suggestion directly related to trainers. They suggested that trainers
have access to
• more financial support
• trips to other provinces
• information on working with diverse groups of farmers
• better references with colour printing for pest identification
• more gap training
• a template for report writing
• a plan for 2008 FFSs as early as possible