Chowdhury et al (2010); PDF file - Prolinnova

Comparing Two Styles of Participatory Video 361
Table 3. SWOT factors and their priority and overall priority scores as perceived by farmers
and facilitators.
Factor priority score
Overall priority score
Scripted
video
Scriptless
video
Scripted
video
Scriptless
video
SWOT groups FVT* RT** FVT RT FVT RT FVT RT
Downloaded By: [Vienna University Library] At: 20:39 7 January 2011
Strengths: 0.454 0.484 0.464 0.134
S1: Self-reliance 0.063 0.059 0.275 0.244 0.029 0.029 0.128 0.033
S2: Capacity building 0.393 0.401 0.106 0.123 0.178 0.194 0.049 0.016
S3: Participatory
0.066 0.044 0.462 0.454 0.030 0.021 0.198 0.061
monitoring tool
S4: Dissemination of 0.186 0.387 0.073 0.056 0.084 0.187 0.034 0.007
local innovative
practices
S5: Helps create supportive
network
0.292 0.109 0.121 0.123 0.132 0.053 0.056 0.016
Weaknesses: 0.164 0.068 0.154 0.153
W1: Initial cost high 0.313 0.640 0.089 0.086 0.051 0.044 0.014 0.013
W2: Context specificity 0.067 0.078 0.596 0.471 0.011 0.005 0.092 0.072
W3: Limited availability of 0.101 0.079 0.246 0.365 0.017 0.005 0.038 0.056
process facilitators
W4: Initially time consuming 0.519 0.202 0.069 0.078 0.085 0.014 0.001 0.012
Opportunities: 0.282 0.325 0.117 0.218
O1: Possibilities to build 0.313 0.529 0.056 0.126 0.088 0.172 0.007 0.028
learning alliance
O2: Cost-effective method... 0.463 0.228 0.333 0.115 0.131 0.074 0.039 0.025
O3: Favourable policy... 0.152 0.180 0.188 0.115 0.043 0.058 0.022 0.034
O4: Complementary use... 0.071 0.063 0.422 0.604 0.020 0.020 0.049 0.132
Threats: 0.100 0.123 0.265 0.495
T1: Difficulties of
0.044 0.569 0.525 0.561 0.004 0.070 0.139 0.277
institutionalization...
T2: Exploitation of clients 0.634 0.070 0.053 0.096 0.063 0.009 0.014 0.047
T3: Limited infrastructure... 0.114 0.232 0.151 0.069 0.011 0.029 0.040 0.034
T4: Less interest of R&D
actors...
0.209 0.128 0.271 0.274 0.021 0.016 0.072 0.136
Notes: *FVTFarmers’ video team and participant farmers; **RTResearch facilitation team and PV experts.
Source: Authors.
strengths and opportunities of this PV style would account for 45% and 28%
contributions to local seed innovation system development respectively.
The overall priority scores of the farmers and video facilitators for scripted
PV are presented in Figures 2 and 3 respectively and their scores for scriptless PV
in Figures 4 and 5 respectively. The lines in the top two quadrants indicate the
relative values of the factors of strengths and opportunities, whereas the lines in the
bottom two quadrants represent the relative values of the factors of weaknesses
and threats. The line in each quadrant indicates the total value of the factors of