thesis topics for rural development in nepal

• Help & FAQ

The contribution of farmer field schools to rural development in Nepal

Research output : Thesis › external PhD, WU

 This thesis argues that Farmer Field Schools in Nepal contributed to agriculture and rural development and to gendered empowerment. The Nepalese government, but also NGOs involved in FFS applied a rather technocratic approach towards development (Li, 1999) and assumed that will well-defined plans, agricultural development and other objectives are products that can be rationally transmitted to farmers to produce desired outcomes. They considered development as a product that could be delivered to the farmers. This technocratic approach did not address political (Ferguson, 1998) and economic inequities or gender differences of farmers. Neither did it incorporate the multi-rationality of actors involved in the intervention (Grillo and Stirrat, 1997; Büscher, 2010). Drawing on the experience of active involvement in FFS at the start of the project in 1997, and consequently by collecting data during a mid-term project evaluation in 2002 and as a part of a PhD research project in 2009 this has become a longitudinal study of the institutional, social-cultural and political changes that have taken place during more than a decade. I have collected measurable data such as yield increase and I used survey data from 2002 and 2009. I have also collected qualitative information through Focus Group Discussions and in-depth individual semi-structured interviews with male and female farmers, project staff and government officials and NGO staff. Additionally I have gathered information from relevant project documentation and participatory observation among a wide range of actors in and around FFS. By looking at the different stages of FFS in Nepal, I reflect on its contribution to rural transformation and gendered empowerment. The Farmer Field School was first developed in 1989 Indonesia as a response to problems associated with the failure of the Green Revolution and particularly with the misuse of pesticides. FFS follows a participatory approach to agricultural extension and research, and aims to bring about change in rural areas. FFS has been implemented all over the world by various organisations. FFS was introduced in Nepal as an integrated pest management project in 1997 with concrete output oriented goals: the increase of agricultural production and the reduction of pesticide use. Despite the on-going debate on the impact of FFS, this thesis shows a rather consistently positive picture of short- and medium–term impact, with farmers able to improve their yield, reduced pesticide use and a better balanced fertilizer application system. Changing donor paradigms as well as a growing insight that farmers’ realities and needs were different and more complex than initially assumed during the planning of the project, made FFS more outcome and process oriented, focusing on empowerment and capacity-building of farmers. After more than a decade FFS indeed did contribute to rural development in Nepal not so much because of careful project planning, but rather in a complex way with largely unintended consequences, embedded in a socio-cultural context. When FFS started it was designed as a project, with a clear start, written documents in which the project duration was indicated, starting in 1997 and ending in 2002. I found that ten years after FFS was conducted, farmers still continued with some of the practices they learned in their FFS training. FFS has developed from a project into a continuous process of change. Although it might not be exactly the way project planners had envisaged in their documents, a fact is that farmers still apply agronomic practices as introduced in FFS. Farming practices have changed, yields increased. Fewer pesticides are used, less rice seedlings are planted per hill, and so on. Also more farmers started with vegetable production. For many women FFS was the first training in agriculture they received. It contributed to an increase in their knowledge and skills, boosted their confidence in participation in community events and speaking in public. Women appeared to be interested to participate in FFS to learn about farming and to contribute to the food security of their family. Men, on the other hand, were interested to use FFS to increase their livelihood options, to widen job opportunities or to earn a better income. At the turn of the century one of the objectives of FFS shifted from integrated pest management and agricultural production to farmer’s empowerment. Farmer field schools are vehicles for empowerment of farmers (Ooi, 1998; Pontius et al, 2002). Empowerment is an often debated concept in the academic world but in development practice it seems to be used without much debate, assuming that it is always a ‘good’ thing having a positive impact on farmers. In the FFS programme it was assumed that everybody had the same understanding of the concept of empowerment. My data showed that male and female farmers differ in their view on empowerment and that there is a big gap between policy makers, FFS facilitators and female and male farmers regarding the perception of empowerment. This research showed that empowerment is a social process that challenges our assumptions about empowerment as a deliverable, a product. Men and women FFS participants said that they experienced empowerment, but not in the way FFS technicians and policymakers had planned it, going through a rationally designed set of steps: identifying a problem in the field, experimenting with a solution and drawing conclusions. Our survey showed that women without FFS experience saw empowerment as increased individual strength, personal growth, stretching their comfort zone. Women who took part in FFS mainly considered empowerment as self-confidence and involvement in work and group activities. Men’s idea of empowerment was much more focused on their capacity to contribute to the improvement of society, on action outside the household, which would contribute to their prestige. FFS trainers spoke about empowerment in terms of a result of technology transfer or a change in behaviour that they had facilitated among farmers. Apparently, FFS staff had a very technical and non-political approach towards empowerment, not based on male and female farmers’ realities in rural Nepal. Most FFS facilitators claimed that they could empower farmers and they did not consider farmers’ interest and agency. FFS facilitators did not see empowerment as a process that farmers themselves are actively part of. Interviews confirmed that empowerment is a complex, multi-faceted process, which is not easily quantified or measured, let alone regulated in a technical way. Through participation in FFS men and particularly women expanded their framework of information, knowledge and analysis. It enlarged their room for manoeuvre, their negotiation space. They got involved in a process that enabled them to discover new options, new possibilities and eventually make better informed decisions in farming. Several female farmers replied that they could now make choices which were previously denied to them for historical and cultural reasons. They said that this was not the result of the discovery learning in FFS like it was assumed by policy makers, but of the group participation, singing and presenting, their learning to speak in a group. Women gained confidence, gained a voice in the weekly group sessions, as a result of the social space, the FFS team spirit and solidarity that was provided in the meetings. This ‘social capital route’ of empowerment (Bartlett, 2005), is rather different from the ‘human capital’ route that men follow in empowerment in Nepal. In this thesis I contend that FFS is ‘rendering technical’ (Li, 2007) a complex social, cultural, economic and political process of rural development by defining empowerment as a non-political tool, an asset that FFS participants can be taught, that they can learn to ‘own’. Consequently, gender differentiation, experiences of women being different from men and institutional structures that surround the poor and disempowered Dalit farmers, keeping them in poverty and powerless, were not addressed. I consider empowerment as a process in which people strengthen their own power and capacities, and improve their position in society. Empowerment is a process in which several factors but also actors play a role. The actors within the FFS project but also external actors like the state, the Maoist movement, NGOs, and individual forces are involved. They all work together in changing constellations, in time and place. An actor-oriented and contextual analysis of FFS, of how the actors implement FFS in the cultural, historical and political environment of Nepal at the turn of the century creates an understanding of state-society relations and governance issues. It provides an insight in decision-making processes and the power dynamics influenced by socio-cultural factors. A closer look at FFS reveals how the state seeks to govern the farmers, and the extent to which government agencies offer the means of empowerment to farmers. It also reveals how certain social categories in society remained excluded from participation until recently, especially women and Dalit. In project documents and interviews farmers are usually depicted as passive citizens, who are poor and in need of knowledge and new technologies. Farmers, on the other hand, consider the state as responsible to look after their well-being to a large extent, as care takers. But it is a rather simplified view to consider the government or NGOs as the actors or care-takers who can decide on behalf of farmers as passive beneficiaries or oppressed citizens. In this thesis I have described how relations between state and civil actors are subject to complex power dynamics. Power is woven into social relations at different levels (Wolf, 1999) starting from individual potency, to group interaction and structural or institutional levels. The implementation of FFS took place in the context of a dynamic environment where major political and socio-economic changes took place. The contribution of FFS to the development of Nepal cannot be studied without reference to history and the wider social, political-economic conditions during the last decade. The year 1997 when the Farmer Field Schools were introduced in Nepal was also the time that the Maoists officially declared their revolution. When data were collected in 2002 as part of a mid-term evaluation for FAO and the donor AUSAID there was a revolution going on and there were heavy fights between Maoists, the army and civilians. Many men had fled their homes to escape the violence and to resist being taken by either the government or the Maoists army. In 2001 King Birendra and a large part of his Royal family were murdered and the political scene was in turmoil. Migration for jobs abroad was at a rise and female-headed households in rural villages had increased (Gartaula, 2011). In 2009 during the last series of interviews, Nepal was in a flux again; a federal government had been elected, the Maoists had become part of the government, but disputes remained. The interim constitution was developed with much attention on social exclusion of marginalized groups. These changing political-economic conditions of rural transformation have resulted in an increased awareness of ethnic diversity, rights claims by historically marginalised groups, and interventions to divert caste discrimination in the rural areas where FFS has been conducted. Despite these changes FFS project staff keep focused on a technical, non-political approach and continue to speak about yield increase, opening market linkages, cash crop opportunities, as if these local dynamics do not matter.

• agricultural education
• rural development
• development
• least developed countries

This output contributes to the following UN Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs)

Access to Document

• https://edepot.wur.nl/238928

Fingerprint

• Contribution Social Sciences 100%
• Farmers Social Sciences 100%
• Schools Social Sciences 100%
• Rural Development Economics, Econometrics and Finance 100%
• Empowerment Social Sciences 80%
• Knowledge Economics, Econometrics and Finance 75%
• Information Economics, Econometrics and Finance 75%
• Learning Economics, Econometrics and Finance 50%

T1 - The contribution of farmer field schools to rural development in Nepal

AU - Westendorp, A.M.B.

N1 - WU thesis no. 5353

PY - 2012/11/20

Y1 - 2012/11/20

N2 -  This thesis argues that Farmer Field Schools in Nepal contributed to agriculture and rural development and to gendered empowerment. The Nepalese government, but also NGOs involved in FFS applied a rather technocratic approach towards development (Li, 1999) and assumed that will well-defined plans, agricultural development and other objectives are products that can be rationally transmitted to farmers to produce desired outcomes. They considered development as a product that could be delivered to the farmers. This technocratic approach did not address political (Ferguson, 1998) and economic inequities or gender differences of farmers. Neither did it incorporate the multi-rationality of actors involved in the intervention (Grillo and Stirrat, 1997; Büscher, 2010). Drawing on the experience of active involvement in FFS at the start of the project in 1997, and consequently by collecting data during a mid-term project evaluation in 2002 and as a part of a PhD research project in 2009 this has become a longitudinal study of the institutional, social-cultural and political changes that have taken place during more than a decade. I have collected measurable data such as yield increase and I used survey data from 2002 and 2009. I have also collected qualitative information through Focus Group Discussions and in-depth individual semi-structured interviews with male and female farmers, project staff and government officials and NGO staff. Additionally I have gathered information from relevant project documentation and participatory observation among a wide range of actors in and around FFS. By looking at the different stages of FFS in Nepal, I reflect on its contribution to rural transformation and gendered empowerment. The Farmer Field School was first developed in 1989 Indonesia as a response to problems associated with the failure of the Green Revolution and particularly with the misuse of pesticides. FFS follows a participatory approach to agricultural extension and research, and aims to bring about change in rural areas. FFS has been implemented all over the world by various organisations. FFS was introduced in Nepal as an integrated pest management project in 1997 with concrete output oriented goals: the increase of agricultural production and the reduction of pesticide use. Despite the on-going debate on the impact of FFS, this thesis shows a rather consistently positive picture of short- and medium–term impact, with farmers able to improve their yield, reduced pesticide use and a better balanced fertilizer application system. Changing donor paradigms as well as a growing insight that farmers’ realities and needs were different and more complex than initially assumed during the planning of the project, made FFS more outcome and process oriented, focusing on empowerment and capacity-building of farmers. After more than a decade FFS indeed did contribute to rural development in Nepal not so much because of careful project planning, but rather in a complex way with largely unintended consequences, embedded in a socio-cultural context. When FFS started it was designed as a project, with a clear start, written documents in which the project duration was indicated, starting in 1997 and ending in 2002. I found that ten years after FFS was conducted, farmers still continued with some of the practices they learned in their FFS training. FFS has developed from a project into a continuous process of change. Although it might not be exactly the way project planners had envisaged in their documents, a fact is that farmers still apply agronomic practices as introduced in FFS. Farming practices have changed, yields increased. Fewer pesticides are used, less rice seedlings are planted per hill, and so on. Also more farmers started with vegetable production. For many women FFS was the first training in agriculture they received. It contributed to an increase in their knowledge and skills, boosted their confidence in participation in community events and speaking in public. Women appeared to be interested to participate in FFS to learn about farming and to contribute to the food security of their family. Men, on the other hand, were interested to use FFS to increase their livelihood options, to widen job opportunities or to earn a better income. At the turn of the century one of the objectives of FFS shifted from integrated pest management and agricultural production to farmer’s empowerment. Farmer field schools are vehicles for empowerment of farmers (Ooi, 1998; Pontius et al, 2002). Empowerment is an often debated concept in the academic world but in development practice it seems to be used without much debate, assuming that it is always a ‘good’ thing having a positive impact on farmers. In the FFS programme it was assumed that everybody had the same understanding of the concept of empowerment. My data showed that male and female farmers differ in their view on empowerment and that there is a big gap between policy makers, FFS facilitators and female and male farmers regarding the perception of empowerment. This research showed that empowerment is a social process that challenges our assumptions about empowerment as a deliverable, a product. Men and women FFS participants said that they experienced empowerment, but not in the way FFS technicians and policymakers had planned it, going through a rationally designed set of steps: identifying a problem in the field, experimenting with a solution and drawing conclusions. Our survey showed that women without FFS experience saw empowerment as increased individual strength, personal growth, stretching their comfort zone. Women who took part in FFS mainly considered empowerment as self-confidence and involvement in work and group activities. Men’s idea of empowerment was much more focused on their capacity to contribute to the improvement of society, on action outside the household, which would contribute to their prestige. FFS trainers spoke about empowerment in terms of a result of technology transfer or a change in behaviour that they had facilitated among farmers. Apparently, FFS staff had a very technical and non-political approach towards empowerment, not based on male and female farmers’ realities in rural Nepal. Most FFS facilitators claimed that they could empower farmers and they did not consider farmers’ interest and agency. FFS facilitators did not see empowerment as a process that farmers themselves are actively part of. Interviews confirmed that empowerment is a complex, multi-faceted process, which is not easily quantified or measured, let alone regulated in a technical way. Through participation in FFS men and particularly women expanded their framework of information, knowledge and analysis. It enlarged their room for manoeuvre, their negotiation space. They got involved in a process that enabled them to discover new options, new possibilities and eventually make better informed decisions in farming. Several female farmers replied that they could now make choices which were previously denied to them for historical and cultural reasons. They said that this was not the result of the discovery learning in FFS like it was assumed by policy makers, but of the group participation, singing and presenting, their learning to speak in a group. Women gained confidence, gained a voice in the weekly group sessions, as a result of the social space, the FFS team spirit and solidarity that was provided in the meetings. This ‘social capital route’ of empowerment (Bartlett, 2005), is rather different from the ‘human capital’ route that men follow in empowerment in Nepal. In this thesis I contend that FFS is ‘rendering technical’ (Li, 2007) a complex social, cultural, economic and political process of rural development by defining empowerment as a non-political tool, an asset that FFS participants can be taught, that they can learn to ‘own’. Consequently, gender differentiation, experiences of women being different from men and institutional structures that surround the poor and disempowered Dalit farmers, keeping them in poverty and powerless, were not addressed. I consider empowerment as a process in which people strengthen their own power and capacities, and improve their position in society. Empowerment is a process in which several factors but also actors play a role. The actors within the FFS project but also external actors like the state, the Maoist movement, NGOs, and individual forces are involved. They all work together in changing constellations, in time and place. An actor-oriented and contextual analysis of FFS, of how the actors implement FFS in the cultural, historical and political environment of Nepal at the turn of the century creates an understanding of state-society relations and governance issues. It provides an insight in decision-making processes and the power dynamics influenced by socio-cultural factors. A closer look at FFS reveals how the state seeks to govern the farmers, and the extent to which government agencies offer the means of empowerment to farmers. It also reveals how certain social categories in society remained excluded from participation until recently, especially women and Dalit. In project documents and interviews farmers are usually depicted as passive citizens, who are poor and in need of knowledge and new technologies. Farmers, on the other hand, consider the state as responsible to look after their well-being to a large extent, as care takers. But it is a rather simplified view to consider the government or NGOs as the actors or care-takers who can decide on behalf of farmers as passive beneficiaries or oppressed citizens. In this thesis I have described how relations between state and civil actors are subject to complex power dynamics. Power is woven into social relations at different levels (Wolf, 1999) starting from individual potency, to group interaction and structural or institutional levels. The implementation of FFS took place in the context of a dynamic environment where major political and socio-economic changes took place. The contribution of FFS to the development of Nepal cannot be studied without reference to history and the wider social, political-economic conditions during the last decade. The year 1997 when the Farmer Field Schools were introduced in Nepal was also the time that the Maoists officially declared their revolution. When data were collected in 2002 as part of a mid-term evaluation for FAO and the donor AUSAID there was a revolution going on and there were heavy fights between Maoists, the army and civilians. Many men had fled their homes to escape the violence and to resist being taken by either the government or the Maoists army. In 2001 King Birendra and a large part of his Royal family were murdered and the political scene was in turmoil. Migration for jobs abroad was at a rise and female-headed households in rural villages had increased (Gartaula, 2011). In 2009 during the last series of interviews, Nepal was in a flux again; a federal government had been elected, the Maoists had become part of the government, but disputes remained. The interim constitution was developed with much attention on social exclusion of marginalized groups. These changing political-economic conditions of rural transformation have resulted in an increased awareness of ethnic diversity, rights claims by historically marginalised groups, and interventions to divert caste discrimination in the rural areas where FFS has been conducted. Despite these changes FFS project staff keep focused on a technical, non-political approach and continue to speak about yield increase, opening market linkages, cash crop opportunities, as if these local dynamics do not matter.

AB -  This thesis argues that Farmer Field Schools in Nepal contributed to agriculture and rural development and to gendered empowerment. The Nepalese government, but also NGOs involved in FFS applied a rather technocratic approach towards development (Li, 1999) and assumed that will well-defined plans, agricultural development and other objectives are products that can be rationally transmitted to farmers to produce desired outcomes. They considered development as a product that could be delivered to the farmers. This technocratic approach did not address political (Ferguson, 1998) and economic inequities or gender differences of farmers. Neither did it incorporate the multi-rationality of actors involved in the intervention (Grillo and Stirrat, 1997; Büscher, 2010). Drawing on the experience of active involvement in FFS at the start of the project in 1997, and consequently by collecting data during a mid-term project evaluation in 2002 and as a part of a PhD research project in 2009 this has become a longitudinal study of the institutional, social-cultural and political changes that have taken place during more than a decade. I have collected measurable data such as yield increase and I used survey data from 2002 and 2009. I have also collected qualitative information through Focus Group Discussions and in-depth individual semi-structured interviews with male and female farmers, project staff and government officials and NGO staff. Additionally I have gathered information from relevant project documentation and participatory observation among a wide range of actors in and around FFS. By looking at the different stages of FFS in Nepal, I reflect on its contribution to rural transformation and gendered empowerment. The Farmer Field School was first developed in 1989 Indonesia as a response to problems associated with the failure of the Green Revolution and particularly with the misuse of pesticides. FFS follows a participatory approach to agricultural extension and research, and aims to bring about change in rural areas. FFS has been implemented all over the world by various organisations. FFS was introduced in Nepal as an integrated pest management project in 1997 with concrete output oriented goals: the increase of agricultural production and the reduction of pesticide use. Despite the on-going debate on the impact of FFS, this thesis shows a rather consistently positive picture of short- and medium–term impact, with farmers able to improve their yield, reduced pesticide use and a better balanced fertilizer application system. Changing donor paradigms as well as a growing insight that farmers’ realities and needs were different and more complex than initially assumed during the planning of the project, made FFS more outcome and process oriented, focusing on empowerment and capacity-building of farmers. After more than a decade FFS indeed did contribute to rural development in Nepal not so much because of careful project planning, but rather in a complex way with largely unintended consequences, embedded in a socio-cultural context. When FFS started it was designed as a project, with a clear start, written documents in which the project duration was indicated, starting in 1997 and ending in 2002. I found that ten years after FFS was conducted, farmers still continued with some of the practices they learned in their FFS training. FFS has developed from a project into a continuous process of change. Although it might not be exactly the way project planners had envisaged in their documents, a fact is that farmers still apply agronomic practices as introduced in FFS. Farming practices have changed, yields increased. Fewer pesticides are used, less rice seedlings are planted per hill, and so on. Also more farmers started with vegetable production. For many women FFS was the first training in agriculture they received. It contributed to an increase in their knowledge and skills, boosted their confidence in participation in community events and speaking in public. Women appeared to be interested to participate in FFS to learn about farming and to contribute to the food security of their family. Men, on the other hand, were interested to use FFS to increase their livelihood options, to widen job opportunities or to earn a better income. At the turn of the century one of the objectives of FFS shifted from integrated pest management and agricultural production to farmer’s empowerment. Farmer field schools are vehicles for empowerment of farmers (Ooi, 1998; Pontius et al, 2002). Empowerment is an often debated concept in the academic world but in development practice it seems to be used without much debate, assuming that it is always a ‘good’ thing having a positive impact on farmers. In the FFS programme it was assumed that everybody had the same understanding of the concept of empowerment. My data showed that male and female farmers differ in their view on empowerment and that there is a big gap between policy makers, FFS facilitators and female and male farmers regarding the perception of empowerment. This research showed that empowerment is a social process that challenges our assumptions about empowerment as a deliverable, a product. Men and women FFS participants said that they experienced empowerment, but not in the way FFS technicians and policymakers had planned it, going through a rationally designed set of steps: identifying a problem in the field, experimenting with a solution and drawing conclusions. Our survey showed that women without FFS experience saw empowerment as increased individual strength, personal growth, stretching their comfort zone. Women who took part in FFS mainly considered empowerment as self-confidence and involvement in work and group activities. Men’s idea of empowerment was much more focused on their capacity to contribute to the improvement of society, on action outside the household, which would contribute to their prestige. FFS trainers spoke about empowerment in terms of a result of technology transfer or a change in behaviour that they had facilitated among farmers. Apparently, FFS staff had a very technical and non-political approach towards empowerment, not based on male and female farmers’ realities in rural Nepal. Most FFS facilitators claimed that they could empower farmers and they did not consider farmers’ interest and agency. FFS facilitators did not see empowerment as a process that farmers themselves are actively part of. Interviews confirmed that empowerment is a complex, multi-faceted process, which is not easily quantified or measured, let alone regulated in a technical way. Through participation in FFS men and particularly women expanded their framework of information, knowledge and analysis. It enlarged their room for manoeuvre, their negotiation space. They got involved in a process that enabled them to discover new options, new possibilities and eventually make better informed decisions in farming. Several female farmers replied that they could now make choices which were previously denied to them for historical and cultural reasons. They said that this was not the result of the discovery learning in FFS like it was assumed by policy makers, but of the group participation, singing and presenting, their learning to speak in a group. Women gained confidence, gained a voice in the weekly group sessions, as a result of the social space, the FFS team spirit and solidarity that was provided in the meetings. This ‘social capital route’ of empowerment (Bartlett, 2005), is rather different from the ‘human capital’ route that men follow in empowerment in Nepal. In this thesis I contend that FFS is ‘rendering technical’ (Li, 2007) a complex social, cultural, economic and political process of rural development by defining empowerment as a non-political tool, an asset that FFS participants can be taught, that they can learn to ‘own’. Consequently, gender differentiation, experiences of women being different from men and institutional structures that surround the poor and disempowered Dalit farmers, keeping them in poverty and powerless, were not addressed. I consider empowerment as a process in which people strengthen their own power and capacities, and improve their position in society. Empowerment is a process in which several factors but also actors play a role. The actors within the FFS project but also external actors like the state, the Maoist movement, NGOs, and individual forces are involved. They all work together in changing constellations, in time and place. An actor-oriented and contextual analysis of FFS, of how the actors implement FFS in the cultural, historical and political environment of Nepal at the turn of the century creates an understanding of state-society relations and governance issues. It provides an insight in decision-making processes and the power dynamics influenced by socio-cultural factors. A closer look at FFS reveals how the state seeks to govern the farmers, and the extent to which government agencies offer the means of empowerment to farmers. It also reveals how certain social categories in society remained excluded from participation until recently, especially women and Dalit. In project documents and interviews farmers are usually depicted as passive citizens, who are poor and in need of knowledge and new technologies. Farmers, on the other hand, consider the state as responsible to look after their well-being to a large extent, as care takers. But it is a rather simplified view to consider the government or NGOs as the actors or care-takers who can decide on behalf of farmers as passive beneficiaries or oppressed citizens. In this thesis I have described how relations between state and civil actors are subject to complex power dynamics. Power is woven into social relations at different levels (Wolf, 1999) starting from individual potency, to group interaction and structural or institutional levels. The implementation of FFS took place in the context of a dynamic environment where major political and socio-economic changes took place. The contribution of FFS to the development of Nepal cannot be studied without reference to history and the wider social, political-economic conditions during the last decade. The year 1997 when the Farmer Field Schools were introduced in Nepal was also the time that the Maoists officially declared their revolution. When data were collected in 2002 as part of a mid-term evaluation for FAO and the donor AUSAID there was a revolution going on and there were heavy fights between Maoists, the army and civilians. Many men had fled their homes to escape the violence and to resist being taken by either the government or the Maoists army. In 2001 King Birendra and a large part of his Royal family were murdered and the political scene was in turmoil. Migration for jobs abroad was at a rise and female-headed households in rural villages had increased (Gartaula, 2011). In 2009 during the last series of interviews, Nepal was in a flux again; a federal government had been elected, the Maoists had become part of the government, but disputes remained. The interim constitution was developed with much attention on social exclusion of marginalized groups. These changing political-economic conditions of rural transformation have resulted in an increased awareness of ethnic diversity, rights claims by historically marginalised groups, and interventions to divert caste discrimination in the rural areas where FFS has been conducted. Despite these changes FFS project staff keep focused on a technical, non-political approach and continue to speak about yield increase, opening market linkages, cash crop opportunities, as if these local dynamics do not matter.

KW - agrarisch onderwijs

KW - plattelandsontwikkeling

KW - ontwikkeling

KW - minst ontwikkelde landen

KW - zuid-azië

KW - agricultural education

KW - rural development

KW - development

KW - least developed countries

KW - south asia

M3 - external PhD, WU

SN - 9789461733948

CY - [S.l.]

This site uses cookies to optimize functionality and give you the best possible experience. If you continue to navigate this website beyond this page, cookies will be placed on your browser. To learn more about cookies, click here .

The department offers a Masters program(Master of Arts) in Rural Development. The program differs from the previous one(its predecessor) in terms of both theoretical structure and students’ performance evaluation system. Unlike its predecessor, it is based on the semester system, which is a recent development in the history of higher education in Nepal. The rational behind the adoption of such a system lies in the historically and empirically substantiated  fact that it is only through the academic programs based on a semester system that more students are more likely to develop their latent intellectual ability, which is reflected in such intellectual products as thesis, articles and books.

MA Semester Course Structure, 2019

The MA program in Rural Development aims at producing such men power(be they development practitioners, development researchers or university teachers) as are well equipped with both adequate theoretical knowledge and great skill required to translate that knowledge into action in the field of development in general and rural development in particular. Faculty members who have gained a critical and analytical understanding of various theoretical insights derived from different social science disciplines, which help us understand development in general and rural development in particular. They are also engaged in a serious research with a view to broadening the base of their knowledge and contributing to the knowledge base of the development studies they belong to.

• Core Faculty
• Visiting Professor
• Visiting Faculty
• Other Resource Person
• Administrative Staff
• First Semester
• Third Semester
• M.Phil/PhD (First Semester)
• M.Phil/PhD (Second Semester)
• MA First Semester
• MA Second Semester
• MA Third Semester
• MA Fourth Semester
• BA First Year
• BA Second Year
• BA Fourth Year
• Practical Evaluation Sheet
• B.A Program
• Eligibility Criteria for PhD Admission
• Eligibility Criteria for MA Admission

• Bibliography
• More Referencing guides Blog Automated transliteration Relevant bibliographies by topics
• Automated transliteration
• Relevant bibliographies by topics
• Referencing guides

Academic literature on the topic 'Rural development in Nepal'

Create a spot-on reference in apa, mla, chicago, harvard, and other styles.

Consult the lists of relevant articles, books, theses, conference reports, and other scholarly sources on the topic 'Rural development in Nepal.'

Next to every source in the list of references, there is an 'Add to bibliography' button. Press on it, and we will generate automatically the bibliographic reference to the chosen work in the citation style you need: APA, MLA, Harvard, Chicago, Vancouver, etc.

You can also download the full text of the academic publication as pdf and read online its abstract whenever available in the metadata.

• Journal articles
• Dissertations / Theses
• Book chapters
• Conference papers

Journal articles on the topic "Rural development in Nepal":

Khatri, Chakra Bahadur. "Rural Development Practices in Nepal." Nepal Journal of Multidisciplinary Research 2, no. 2 (November 8, 2019): 27–39. http://dx.doi.org/10.3126/njmr.v2i2.26283.

Gautam, Murari Krishna. "Rural Development in Nepal: A Historical Perspective." Interdisciplinary Journal of Management and Social Sciences 1, no. 1 (October 1, 2020): 66–79. http://dx.doi.org/10.3126/ijmss.v1i1.34513.

Umesh Acharya. "People’s Participation and Rural Development: Nepal’s Case." Interdisciplinary Journal of Management and Social Sciences 3, no. 1 (June 30, 2022): 148–53. http://dx.doi.org/10.3126/ijmss.v3i1.50242.

Thakuri, Indra Bahadur Malla, and Govind Nepal. "Community Oriented-Rural Tourism Development Model." American Economic & Social Review 2, no. 1 (January 2, 2018): 1–5. http://dx.doi.org/10.46281/aesr.v2i1.149.

Hatlebakk, Magnus. "Triadic Power Relations in Rural Nepal." Journal of Development Studies 47, no. 11 (November 2011): 1739–56. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/00220388.2010.509787.

Chaudhary, Deepak. "Agricultural Policies and Rural Development in Nepal: An Overview." Research Nepal Journal of Development Studies 1, no. 2 (November 1, 2018): 34–46. http://dx.doi.org/10.3126/rnjds.v1i2.22425.

Kaini, Malati. "Agro-tourism and Rural Development in Nepal." Patan Pragya 7, no. 1 (December 31, 2020): 101–9. http://dx.doi.org/10.3126/pragya.v7i1.35111.

Chaudhary, Phanindra Kumar, and Rajan Binayek Pasa. "Agriculture Education for Rural Development in Nepal." Journal of Training and Development 1 (July 31, 2015): 38–45. http://dx.doi.org/10.3126/jtd.v1i0.13089.

Acharya, Umesh. "Population growth and Rural Development in the interface of Climate Change in Nepal: A review." Pragya Darshan प्रज्ञा दर्शन 5, no. 1 (February 15, 2023): 39–42. http://dx.doi.org/10.3126/pdmdj.v5i1.52305.

Kharel, Suman. "Local Governance and Rural Development Practices in Nepal." NUTA Journal 6, no. 1-2 (March 22, 2019): 84–94. http://dx.doi.org/10.3126/nutaj.v6i1-2.23233.

Dissertations / Theses on the topic "Rural development in Nepal":

Jungblut, Benjamin Pablo. "Understanding the Changing Dynamics of Rural Development in Dolakha, Nepal." Thesis, Uppsala universitet, Institutionen för geovetenskaper, 2020. http://urn.kb.se/resolve?urn=urn:nbn:se:uu:diva-412361.

Bhattarai, Saroj K. "Monitoring and evaluation system for rural development projects in Nepal." Virtual Press, 1986. http://liblink.bsu.edu/uhtbin/catkey/508013.

Roberts, Eryl Haf. "Rural development by extension and indigenous communication systems in Nepal." Thesis, Loughborough University, 1997. https://dspace.lboro.ac.uk/2134/27623.

McMillan, Carolyn Lesley. "Entrepreneurship and development as freedom : the case of women in rural Nepal." Thesis, University of Strathclyde, 2017. http://digitool.lib.strath.ac.uk:80/R/?func=dbin-jump-full&object_id=28364.

Subedi, Anil. "A study of farmers communication networks in relation to the diffusion of innovations in the hills of Nepal." Thesis, University of Reading, 1996. http://ethos.bl.uk/OrderDetails.do?uin=uk.bl.ethos.296631.

Shrestha, Ava Darshan. "Eating cucumbers without any teeth : variations in the capacities of rural women to participate in rural development in Nepal." Thesis, University of Bath, 1994. http://ethos.bl.uk/OrderDetails.do?uin=uk.bl.ethos.318033.

Kumar, Sharan, University of Western Sydney, of Science Technology and Environment College, and School of Environment and Agriculture. "Filling the sinful stomach : a critical, systematic learning action research approach to food security in the eastern hills of Nepal." THESIS_CSTE_EAG_Kumar_S.xml, 2001. http://handle.uws.edu.au:8081/1959.7/210.

Bahadur, K. C. Krishna. "Combining socio-economic and spatial methodologies in rural resources and livelihood development a case from mountains of Nepal." Weikersheim Margraf, 2005. http://deposit.ddb.de/cgi-bin/dokserv?id=2674443&prov=M&dok_var=1&dok_ext=htm.

Morrison, Joanna. "Understanding the effect of a participatory intervention with women's groups to improve maternal and neonatal health in rural Nepal." Thesis, University College London (University of London), 2009. http://discovery.ucl.ac.uk/18566/.

Pradhan, Merina [Verfasser]. "Community mobilization and energy as a tool for development : impact of rural energy programme in Nepal / Merina Pradhan." Flensburg : Zentrale Hochschulbibliothek Flensburg, 2007. http://d-nb.info/1018283617/34.

Books on the topic "Rural development in Nepal":

Pokharel, Bharat. Rural political economy of Nepal . Kirtipur: New Hira Books Enterprises, 2004.

Agrawal, Govind Ram. Decentralization for rural development in Nepal . Kathmandu: Centre for Economic Development and Administration, Tribhuvan University, Kirtipur, 1986.

Gurung, Sant Bahadur. Rural development approaches in Nepal: Some experiences . Kathmandu: Development Associates for Rural & Regional Development, 1998.

Paudyal, Durga P. Access improvement and sustainable development: Rural road development in Nepal . Kathmandu: International Centre for Integrated Mountain Development, 1998.

Bista, Santosh Kumar. Rural development in Nepal: An alternative strategy . Kathmandu: Udaya Books, 2000.

Hamal, Krishna Bahadur. Rural development policy and poverty in Nepal . [Kathmandu?: Winrock Project?], 1987.

Miller, Casper J. Decision making in village Nepal . Kathmandu, Nepal: Sahayogi Press, 1990.

Shrestha, Shashi M. Challenges in rural development through education in Nepal . [Kathmandu]: S.M. Shrestha, 1985.

Dunsmore, J. R. KHARDEP: Rural development in the hills of Nepal. Surbiton: Land Resources Development Centre, 1987.

Subedi, Nani Ram. Rural development in Nepal, prospects and challenges: Magnitude of development, relation between rural development and politics . Kathmandu: Centre for Good Governance and Development, 2006.

Book chapters on the topic "Rural development in Nepal":

Thapa, Dhiraj, Dai Griffiths, and Ann L. Kolodziejski. "Constraining and Enabling Factors in the Use of ICT in Rural Schools in Nepal." In Information and Communication Technologies for Development , 102–13. Cham: Springer International Publishing, 2020. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-65828-1_9.

Petley, David N., Gareth J. Hearn, and Andrew Hart. "Towards the Development of a Landslide Risk Assessment for Rural Roads in Nepal." In Landslide Hazard and Risk , 595–619. Chichester, West Sussex, England: John Wiley & Sons, Ltd, 2012. http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/9780470012659.ch20.

Gyawali, Netra Pd. "Microhydro-Based Mini grid for Sustainable Development of Rural Communities: A Case Study of Nepal." In Sustainable Power Systems , 151–74. Singapore: Springer Singapore, 2017. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-981-10-2230-2_8.

Vaidya, Binod, and Jagan Nath Shrestha. "Rural Digital Library: Connecting Rural Communities in Nepal." In Lecture Notes in Computer Science , 354–65. Berlin, Heidelberg: Springer Berlin Heidelberg, 2002. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/3-540-36227-4_41.

Atkinson, Christopher L. "Rural Development." In Global Encyclopedia of Public Administration, Public Policy, and Governance , 5528–33. Cham: Springer International Publishing, 2018. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-20928-9_1014.

Atkinson, Christopher L. "Rural Development." In Global Encyclopedia of Public Administration, Public Policy, and Governance , 1–7. Cham: Springer International Publishing, 2017. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-31816-5_1014-1.

Rodwell, Dennis. "Rural development." In The Routledge Handbook on Historic Urban Landscapes in the Asia-Pacific , 406–23. New York : Routledge, 2020.: Routledge, 2019. http://dx.doi.org/10.4324/9780429486470-24.

Ali, Tanvir, Babar Shahbaz, Muhammad Iftikhtar, Ijaz Ashraf, Shoukat Ali, Ghazanfar Ali Khan, Aqeela Saghir, and Muhammad Saleem Mohsin. "Rural Development." In Developing Sustainable Agriculture in Pakistan , 703–29. Boca Raton, FL : CRC Press, Taylor & Francis Group, 2018.: CRC Press, 2018. http://dx.doi.org/10.1201/9781351208239-32.

Devkota, Binod, Richard Thwaites, and Digby Race. "Community forestry, rural livelihoods and poverty reduction in Nepal." In Community Forestry in Nepal , 59–81. Abingdon, Oxon ; New York, NY : Routledge, 2018. | Series: The Earthscan forest series: Routledge, 2017. http://dx.doi.org/10.4324/9781315445168-4.

Pain, Adam, and Kjell Hansen. "What is rural development?" In Rural Development , 1–33. Abingdon, Oxon ; New York, NY : Routledge, 2019.: Routledge, 2019. http://dx.doi.org/10.4324/9781315773643-1.

Conference papers on the topic "Rural development in Nepal":

Ghimire, Dilip C., Sudip Adhikari, Sunil Adhikary, Hideo Uchida, and Masayoshi Umeno. "Energy Demand, Availability in Nepal and Present PV Cost Analysis." In ASME 2005 International Solar Energy Conference . ASMEDC, 2005. http://dx.doi.org/10.1115/isec2005-76226.

Lombard, Antoinette, Hein Johan Wiese, and Jan Smit. "Economic Upliftment and Social Development through the Development of Digital Astuteness in Rural Areas." In InSITE 2016: Informing Science + IT Education Conferences: Lithuania . Informing Science Institute, 2016. http://dx.doi.org/10.28945/3491.

Ramankutty, Roshan, Kate Lassalle-Klein, Elise Herrmannsfeldt, Suparna Jasuja, Silvia Figueira, Skip Stritter, and David Sowerwine. "Lesson Planner for Rural Nepal." In 2018 IEEE Global Humanitarian Technology Conference (GHTC) . IEEE, 2018. http://dx.doi.org/10.1109/ghtc.2018.8601917.

Amatya, Swoyambhu Man. "Functioning of rural tele-centers in Nepal." In the 3rd International Conference . New York, New York, USA: ACM Press, 2009. http://dx.doi.org/10.1145/1693042.1693106.

Groeli, Robert. "Building 8500+ Trail Bridges in the Himalayas." In Footbridge 2022 (Madrid): Creating Experience . Madrid, Spain: Asociación Española de Ingeniería Estructural, 2021. http://dx.doi.org/10.24904/footbridge2022.125.

Primadona. "Rural Development." In International Conference on Applied Science and Technology on Social Science (ICAST-SS 2020) . Paris, France: Atlantis Press, 2021. http://dx.doi.org/10.2991/assehr.k.210424.090.

STREIKUS, Dionizas, Algirdas JASINSKAS, Rolandas DOMEIKA, Sigitas ČEKANAUSKAS, Nerijus PEDIŠIUS, Tomas VONŽODAS, and Andres ANNUK. "EVALUATION OF GIANT KNOTWEED AND MISCANTHUS AS PERSPECTIVE ENERGY PLANTS AND ASSESSMENT OF PRODUCED BIOFUEL QUALITY INDICATORS." In RURAL DEVELOPMENT . Aleksandras Stulginskis University, 2018. http://dx.doi.org/10.15544/rd.2017.004.

CÂRDEI, Petru, and Dragoș MANEA. "MATHEMATICAL MODEL FOR THE HEAT EXCHANGE OF GREENHOUSE AND SOLARIUM SOIL IN THE PLANT ROOT AREA." In RURAL DEVELOPMENT . Aleksandras Stulginskis University, 2018. http://dx.doi.org/10.15544/rd.2017.001.

KLIMAS, Evaldas, Jolanta LELIŪNIENĖ, and Ligita BALEŽENTIENĖ. "VERNALISATION IMPACT ON BIOMETRICAL PARAMETERS OF FESTULOLIUM VARIETIES." In RURAL DEVELOPMENT . Aleksandras Stulginskis University, 2018. http://dx.doi.org/10.15544/rd.2017.002.

LELIŪNIENĖ, Jolanta, Ligita BALEŽENTIENĖ, and Evaldas KLIMAS. "FESTULOLIUM METABOLITES ACCUMULATION RESPONSE TO PHOTOPERIOD OF FLOWERING TERMOINDUCTION." In RURAL DEVELOPMENT . Aleksandras Stulginskis University, 2018. http://dx.doi.org/10.15544/rd.2017.003.

Reports on the topic "Rural development in Nepal":

Paudyal, D. P. Access Improvement and Sustainable Development; Rural Road Development in Nepal . Kathmandu, Nepal: International Centre for Integrated Mountain Development (ICIMOD), 1998. http://dx.doi.org/10.53055/icimod.271.

Slavchevska, Vanya, Cheryl Doss, Erdgin Mane, Susan Kaaria, Anuja Kar, and Victor Villa. Rural outmigration and the gendered patterns of agricultural labor in Nepal . Washington, DC: International Food Policy Research Institute, 2020. http://dx.doi.org/10.2499/p15738coll2.134190.

Ahmad, F., M. B. Gurung, and S. R. Joshi. Beekeeping and Rural Development . Kathmandu, Nepal: International Centre for Integrated Mountain Development (ICIMOD), 2007. http://dx.doi.org/10.53055/icimod.458.

Bock, Bettina B. Rural Futures : Inclusive rural development in times of urbanisation . Wageningen: Wageningen University & Research, 2018. http://dx.doi.org/10.18174/465253.

Research Institute (IFPRI), International Food Policy. Estimating the impact of access to infrastructure and extension services in rural Nepal . Washington, DC: International Food Policy Research Institute, 2011. http://dx.doi.org/10.2499/9780896291881.

Gurung, M. B., Uma Pratap, N. C. T. D. Shrestha, H. K. Sharma, N. Islam, and N. B. Tamang. Beekeeping Training for Farmers in Afghanistan: Resource Manual for Trainers [in Urdu] . International Centre for Integrated Mountain Development (ICIMOD), 2012. http://dx.doi.org/10.53055/icimod.564.

Gunatilake, Herath, Priyantha Wijayatunga, and David Roland-Holst. Hydropower Development and Economic Growth in Nepal . Asian Development Bank, June 2020. http://dx.doi.org/10.22617/wps200161-2.

Jiménez, Raúl. Development Effects of Rural Electrification . Inter-American Development Bank, January 2017. http://dx.doi.org/10.18235/0000629.

Two Decades of Innovation in Public Health Leadership: SPH’s DrPH Program Turns 20

Maternal and Child Health Alums Honored at 24th Annual Networking and Alumni Reception

Two decades of innovation in public health leadership: sph’s drph program turns 20 ..

Founded in 2004, the DrPH program at the School of Public Health celebrates its 20th anniversary.

Megan jones.

Everyone enrolled in a doctoral program is going to be smart, says Eugene Declercq , a professor of community health sciences and the former director of the Doctor of Public Health (DrPH) program at the School of Public Health. “When we are making admissions decisions, we are asking the question, ‘Is this person going to make a difference? Can we see things in their history that suggests that when they leave us, they are going to actually change people’s lives?’”

Over the past two decades, SPH’s DrPH program has welcomed, and graduated, more than 100 highly motivated, mission-driven students. Developed under the guidance of former Dean Robert Meenan , the program was founded in 2004 to serve those who “wished to lead public health agencies and projects locally, nationally, and internationally,” says Meenan.

DrPH students are experienced public health professionals who enroll in the practice-oriented degree program to enhance their leadership, management, research, and policy skills to have a greater effect on the health of populations in need. Among the program’s alumni, for example, are global public health leaders like Arundati Muralidharan , co-founder of Menstrual Health Action for Impact (MHAi) , an organization that drives strategic investments and policy action to advance menstrual health and hygiene across India.

In addition to her DrPH, Muralidharan holds a bachelor’s degree in psychology and a master’s in social work. She designed and administered HIV and AIDS prevention programs for high-risk groups in India before beginning her doctoral studies at SPH. Since graduating from the School in 2012, Muralidharan has expanded upon her dissertation research on the healthcare-seeking behaviors of young women in Mumbai’s slums, implementing what she learned to improve the lives of women and girls across India through her work with MHAi.

“Everything we have done has been aimed at trying to develop a program for people who want to move to the next level and want the skills to be able to do that,” says Declercq. Under his leadership, SPH’s DrPH program has served as a model for other schools of public health across the country.

“One of the first things we did was reach out to all the other DrPH directors at the time and organize the DrPH directors’ group,” he says. The group assembled at American Public Health Association meetings to discuss common challenges in the evolution of the relatively young professional degree program, which first emerged in the early 20th century as a bridge between research science and the real-world implementation of public health interventions. Their conversations ranged from whether to require practicums and dissertations to how to structure comprehensive exams, Declercq says.

“We had the benefit of saying we wanted to go all in on what a practice-oriented program should be. And it would be much more management-oriented, much more leadership-oriented than what a lot of the [other] programs at the time looked like,” says Declercq. He points out that it was not until 2009 that the Association of Schools of Public Health (ASPH)—the predecessor of the current Association of Schools and Programs of Public Health (ASPPH)—released the DrPH Core Competency Model to formally guide preparation of the DrPH workforce.

In 2019, he passed leadership of the program to Patricia Elliott , a clinical associate professor of community health sciences and a graduate of the DrPH program. Elliott is one of several SPH faculty members to have completed the DrPH program, including Salma Mohamed Abdalla (SPH‘16,‘22); Craig Andrade (SPH‘11), associate dean for practice; Sophie Godley (SPH‘17), clinical associate professor of community health sciences; and Nancy Scott (SPH‘03,‘13), assistant professor of global health.

During Elliott’s five-year tenure, the program formalized its leadership curriculum, adding credit-bearing leadership seminars, an alumni mentorship program, and a variety of communications training opportunities. She also prioritized seeking out new sources of funding for DrPH student and faculty projects.

“Ultimately, as both an alum and outgoing director, I want to be able to say that we are training the next generation of public health leaders with an eye towards equity,” says Elliott, “which means we ensure that students with the capacity for impact and transformative leadership can come to BU and leave ready to help the world, regardless of their financial circumstances. Our students bring a wealth of experience to our campus community, and I am grateful to learn from them and to see them elevate the thinking of our master’s students.”

This summer, Elliott will transition leadership of the program to Jessica Leibler , associate professor of environmental health. In celebration of the program’s 20 th anniversary, Elliott identified several current students and alumni who embody the spirit of the program. Their stories may be found below.

“So many of our students come back and give guest lectures, or serve as instructors or TAs in our classes, and they contribute back to our community in really positive ways,” says Elliott. “It has been wonderful to be able to be the director of the program for the past 5 years—definitely a career highlight for me.”

Darius L. Fenelon

Upon completion of his degree, Darius Fenelon , a current DrPH student at SPH, plans to return home to Haiti to apply the skills and knowledge he has gained in leadership, management, and policy to tackle the mounting challenges posed by non-communicable diseases (NCDs). NCDs are a major but historically neglected cause of mortality due to resource limitations and a multitude of competing health challenges, he says.

As a physician and the former divisional director of the NCD program at Zanmi Lasante , Haitian sister organization to the global health nonprofit Partners in Health (PIH) , Fenelon has observed firsthand the complex interplay of the social, economic, and environmental factors that influence health outcomes. He points to Haiti’s devastating 2010 earthquake as a turning point in his life, when he realized the country’s health challenges were too great for any individual doctor to overcome.

“The substantial shortcomings in our health system made it evident that solo efforts to treat injuries and save lives were insufficient to tackle the deep-rooted systemic issues,” he says. “This harsh truth led me to an essential insight: To make a meaningful impact, I must extend my focus beyond individual treatment to include broader aspects of health policy, partnerships, and advocacy.”

Boston University was always on Fenelon’s radar as a top choice for advanced study due to the School’s rank and history of partnerships with PIH, he says, but a positive experience collaborating with an SPH DrPH student on a 2021 pilot study of SMS messaging as a means of coordinating outpatient NCD appointments at rural Haitian clinics ultimately solidified his decision to come to Boston.

One of the most significant lessons Fenelon has learned from his DrPH studies to date has been the vital role that effective communication plays in public health leadership. He says he found Professor Monica Onyango’s Managing Disasters and Complex Humanitarian Emergencies (GH755) course particularly illuminating. “Effective communication extends beyond merely sharing information,” he says. “It involves ensuring clarity, comprehension, and engagement across diverse stakeholders, translating complex data into accessible policies, and tailoring messages to suit various audiences such as policymakers, community leaders, and health professionals.”

Christian Mazimpaka

Prior to enrolling in the DrPH program at SPH, Christian Mazimpaka , like his classmate Fenelon, also worked for PIH (or Inshuti Mu Buzima, as the organization is known in Mazimpaka’s home country of Rwanda). Since 2014, Mazimpaka has used his clinical training as a medical doctor in service of the global health nonprofit, as well as the Rwandan Ministry of Health. As clinical director for Kayonza District, he oversaw the implementation and evaluation of clinical programs at all levels of the district’s health sector, including at health posts, health centers, and the district hospital.

Witnessing health disparities and the impact of infectious diseases in his community in Rwanda inspired Mazimpaka to pursue advanced studies in public health, he says. He first earned his MSc in global health delivery at the University of Global Health Equity in Butaro, Rwanda in 2016, and then began his DrPH at SPH in 2020. He was attracted by the program’s focus on leadership, management, and policy, he says, “which are critical areas for health systems strengthening in low-resource settings.”

Mazimpaka credits Professor Veronika Wirtz’s Seminar on Global Policy Issues (GH888) with teaching him some of the most important lessons of his studies so far. “This course deepened my understanding of the politics of the policy-making process in public health and its impact on health outcomes. It introduced new concepts and provided new tools that I believe will be invaluable back home in Rwanda,” he says.

In addition to his coursework, Mazimpaka also holds the position of evaluation coordinator with the School Health Institute for Education and Leadership Development (SHIELD) at SPH. In his role, he leads development of research and evaluation initiatives for the program, which provides continuing education to school nurses in the form of clinical, management, and leadership courses. He is also currently in the process of finalizing his dissertation proposal, which he says will focus on Rwanda’s Mass Drug Administration Program, evaluating its coverage for schistosomiasis and soil-transmitted helminthiasis and assessing its capacity for sustainability when donor funding runs out.

Throughout his studies, Mazimpaka has maintained research collaborations with colleagues back in Rwanda. He says he looks forward to returning home after graduation and applying his newfound expertise in health policy and systems management to improving his country’s national health system, particularly with respect to pediatric health and neglected tropical diseases.

Dana Rice (SPH‘10)

Dana Rice applies the training she received as part of the DrPH program’s first cohort to administer academic programs of public health and teach MPH students as an associate professor and assistant dean of master’s degree programs at the University of North Carolina Gillings School of Global Public Health .

Rice says it was largely a stroke of luck that she landed in the field of public health. While working as a research associate for a large academic hospital in Michigan, she was walking through the university’s affiliated school of public health to drop off her application to another master’s program when a display about epidemiology captured her attention. She says she immediately signed up for three graduate courses in the subject and never looked back, working at her local health department while earning her master’s in community health services research in the evenings. She later transitioned into a role in infection control at a local jail where she realized that if she wanted to have a greater effect on the health and wellbeing of incarcerated people, she would need additional public health training.

“I chose BU because it was the only DrPH program with a concentration in social and behavioral health, an area of focus that I thought would give me skills in leading systems change,” says Rice. “I also knew that there were amazing faculty at BU with expertise in substance-use prevention, program implementation and evaluation—skills I wanted to enhance.”

As a DrPH student, Rice completed her dissertation on the design, implementation, and evaluation of a jail-based rapid HIV screening program. She went on to receive more than a decade’s worth of funding to support her continued work on the program, which became the largest HIV screening site in the state, connecting many people in need to care. Much of her work in academia today still relates to the criminal legal system’s impact on the health and wellbeing of people and communities, she says.

“My dissertation work laid the foundation for all of my current work,” says Rice. “The system was changed—albeit slightly—for the better and the policies, practices and partnerships that were created during my time working on the screening program sustained past my tenure.”

Gampo Dorji (SPH‘14)

Gampo Dorji is likely one of the fastest students to have completed the DrPH program at SPH, matriculating in fall 2011 and graduating three years later in fall 2014. He has since held a variety of roles in government service and leadership across southeast Asia, and now works for the World Health Organization (WHO) Country Office for Nepal as the team leader for noncommunicable disease and mental health and disability inclusion.

In his current role at WHO, Dorji advises and supports the Nepalese government on the prevention of chronic diseases and the improvement of health services for people with cardiovascular disease, diabetes, cancer, chronic respiratory disease, and mental disorders. He also aids the government in the implementation of upstream interventions for a variety of complex public health challenges, such as alcohol control, tobacco cessation, suicide prevention, injury and road crash prevention, and mental health and healthy diet promotion. One of his notable recent contributions was to strengthen enforcement of a Nepalese law banning alcohol advertising, sponsorship, and promotion in the country. In partnership with the Nepal Consumer’s Forum, Dorji and his team successfully stopped Nepal-based editions of The New York Times newspaper from carrying alcohol advertisements.

Dorji first came to appreciate the value of public health practitioners while seeing patients as a primary care physician in remote regions of his native Bhutan. He realized then that he could have a larger effect through government service than as an individual clinician. He served in various levels of Bhutan’s Ministry of Health prior to coming to the United States to earn his MPH from Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health from 2007 to 2008. Seeking a more advanced, hands-on grounding in global public health leadership and practice, Dorji later applied to the DrPH program at SPH.

“We were seven [in the program], each one with a wealth of life experiences and highly passionate about making a difference in the world of public health. We would have rich discussions in- and out- of the classrooms,” recalls Dorji. “I also met wonderful professors who eventually became my lifelong mentors and friends— Lora Sabin , [Eugene] Declercq, Rich Feeley, Jon Simon and Susan Foster. Some of them visited me later in Bhutan. I continue to reach out to them and seek their advice in my professional work and life.”

Jen McCutcheon (SPH‘13)

Jen McCutcheon ’s background as a physical therapist specializing in neurological recovery and current role as an elected representative for a population of about 20,000 people living in the greater Vancouver area speak to the diversity of incoming DrPH students as well as the ever-expanding realm of applications for the skills the degree provides.

“I really appreciated that candidates in the program were coming from a strong breadth and depth of experiences from around the world,” says McCutcheon. “I was excited to learn from and with colleagues who already had real world working and leadership experience, and looking back on my time at BU, this really was a highlight.”

In her role as electoral area director, McCutcheon promotes policies that address social determinants of health and makes decisions for her constituents related to public transportation, infrastructure, climate action, parks and housing. The DrPH program provided excellent preparation for these responsibilities, she says. “Specifically, the leadership and communication skills, focus on solving complex problems, and linkages among health, climate and environment, and social justice issues have been central to my approach to challenging decisions in my current role.”

McCutcheon, who completed her DrPH while simultaneously working and raising two children, encourages current students to get to know their classmates as they can be a huge source of both knowledge and moral support. “I was fortunate to have a fantastic cohort, without whom I am not sure I would have made it though the program,” she says. To prospective students, McCutcheon says, “Do it! The program really helped me to think about complex problems in a more holistic and systematic way and left me with both skills and friendships that will last a lifetime.”

Explore Related Topics:

• alumni news
• doctoral students
• DrPH Program
• student news
• Share this story
• 0 Comments Add

Writer/Editor, School News

Megan Jones is the writer and editor focusing on school news at the School of Public Health. Profile

Comments & Discussion

Boston University moderates comments to facilitate an informed, substantive, civil conversation. Abusive, profane, self-promotional, misleading, incoherent or off-topic comments will be rejected. Moderators are staffed during regular business hours (EST) and can only accept comments written in English. Statistics or facts must include a citation or a link to the citation.

Post a comment. Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *