The major constraint was the short time in which the project was implemented. Participatory work requires virtually open-ended approaches which permit the development of trust and understanding between researchers and community. To partially alleviate time constraints, we selected partners and communities who had a history of trust and familiarity with each other. However, this has the disadvantage of reducing the open mindedness required to work with new approaches and to develop new insights.

Our policy analysts were not involved in the first orientation workshop which discussed concepts and methodology in detail nor in the field work. In retrospect they should have been. While the workshop focused largely on participatory methodologies applied to adaptive strategies and sustainable livelihoods, we needed to build a team approach from the inception with the policy analysts included. Their grasp of the concepts remained weak until a late stage in the project which resulted in difficulties in making all the necessary linkages between policy, technology and local adaptive strategies.

The local teams which conducted the participatory community work did not give enough attention to the contribution of external technology, except perhaps the South African team. This seems to be due to the composition of teams which were somewhat under represented in agricultural extension knowledge and skills, but also to the non-technological culture of groups who work with local communities. The remedy is in identifying this possibility early and addressing it in both team composition and orientation.