Participants
"Three farmers were invited, but unfortunately due to very bad winter weather conditions just one could reach the workshop." (Saratov, Russia)
The workshop guidelines recommend the following composition of workshop participants: 6 to 10 local stakeholders (land users, local authorities, representatives of local NGOs), and 4 to 6 external stakeholders (researchers, representatives of regional NGOs and GOs), and heterogeneity of participants regarding age, sex, activities, disciplines, etc.
The rationale for these recommendations is, that given the limited time available, the group should not be too big to facilitate active participation and interaction of all participants in the learning process, and the heterogeneity of participants should ensure that different stakeholder perceptions are represented in the process.
Table 3: Participants of stakeholder workshops
| Study site | Total | % men | % women | Local | External | Farmers in % of total | comments | |
| 1 | Spain | 24 | 75% | 25% | 62% | 38% | 25% | good mix of L / E |
| 2 | Portugal, | 17 | 76% | 24% | 65% | 35% | 18% | |
| 6 | Turkey, Karapinar | 29 | 86% | 14% | 55% | 45% | 45% | Participation of female farmers difficult due to cultural reasons |
| 7 | Turkey, Eskisehir | 40 | 95% | 5% | 27% | 73% | 28% | High no. of researchers and GO representatives decreased productivity of discussions (comment SST) |
| 8 | Morocco | 23 | 83% | 17% | 37% | 63% | 29% | Additionally 4 persons from CDE and 2 from IRA, Tunisia |
| 9 | Tunisia | 25 | 80% | 20% | 76% | 24% | 52% | Additionally 4 people from CARI |
| 10 | Russia, Djanybek | 25 | 76% | 24% | 64% | 36% | 8% | Representatives of admin. of 14 villages -> 'regional' WS Local - external not clear! |
| 11 | Russia, Saratov | 20 | 80% | 20% | 40% | 60% | 5% | Local - external not clear! Only 1 land user! |
| 12 | China | 12 | 100% | 0% | 67% | 33% | 42% | Additionally 5 students |
| 13 | Botswana | 34 | 53% | 47% | 88% | 12% | 88% | No E except researchers |
| 15 | Chile | 26 | 77% | 23% | 54% | 46% | 54% | Additionally 4 external guests / observers Local - external not clear! |
| 16 | Cape Verde | 35 | 56% | 44% | 64% | 36% | 60% | |
| Mean | 26 | 78% | 22% | 58% | 42% | 38% | ||
| Range | 12-40 | 53-100% | 0-47% | 27-88% | 12-73% | 8-88% |
E = external participants L = local participants
The total number of participants was between 12 and 40 and in most workshops (10 out of 12) it exceeded the recommended number. From our own experience with similar participatory workshops we can say, that the bigger the group the more difficult it is to guide a participatory process with everybody actively engaging in sharing his knowledge and experience. This was somehow proven by the remark made by the study site team (SST) from Eskisehir, Turkey; that the productivity of discussions was hampered by the big number of researchers and participants from governmental organisations. In 5 study sites there were additional people besides the workshop participants, i.e. visitors from abroad (Morocco, Tunisia, Chile, Spain) or students (China).
Local and external participants
From the reports we got the impression, that not all study sites were clear about how to differentiate between local and external participants (for definition see above). In most study sites the proportion of local and external participants was fine (local participants ~ 50%-75%). In a few cases however, disequilibrium was found with an over-representation of local participants in Botswana (88%) and an under-representation in Eskisehir, Turkey (27%); in Morocco (37%); and in Novyi Saratov, Russia (40%).
The proportion of farmers / land users varies considerably from study site to study site, i.e. from 100% of local participants being farmers (Botswana) to only 1 land user in the case of Novyi Saratov, Russia.
Gendered participation
In all study sites, the number of male participants was higher than female participants. The highest proportion of female participants was found in Botswana and Cape Verde; no woman participated in China, and a weak female participation was found in Turkey (both study sites) and Morocco. The Turkish SSTs mentioned that it is difficult that female farmers participate in a workshop (Karapinar) or in SWC practices (Eskisehir) due to cultural reasons. The same might be assumed for Morocco. In the case of China we don't know the reasons why no women were participating.
