We evaluated the usefulness of a co-design process to generate a relevant basket of options for climbing bean cultivation in the context of a large-scale project. The aim was to identify a range of options sufficiently diverse to be of interest for farmers of widely-different resource endowment. The co-design process consisted of three cycles of demonstration, evaluation and re-design in the eastern and southwestern highlands of Uganda in 2014–2015. Evaluations aimed to distinguish preferences of farmers between the two areas, and among farmers of different gender and socio-economic backgrounds. Farmers, researchers, extension officers and NGO staff re-designed treatments for demonstrations in the next season. Climbing bean yields and evaluation scores varied between seasons and sites. Evaluation scores were not always in line with yields, revealing that farmers used multiple evaluation criteria next to yield, such as marketability of varieties, availability of inputs and ease of staking methods. The co-design process enriched the basket of options, improved the relevance of options demonstrated and enhanced the understanding of preferences of a diversity of users. Developing options for resource-poor farmers was difficult, however, because they face multiple constraints. The basket of options developed in this study can be applied across the East-African highlands, with an ‘option-by-context’ matrix as a starting point for out-scaling. The study also showed, however, that consistent recommendations about the suitability of technologies for different types of farmers were hard to identify. This highlights the importance of a basket of options with flexible combinations of practices rather than developing narrowly specified technology packages for static farm types.

中文翻译：

---

为乌干达高地小农共同设计改良攀缘豆生产实践

我们评估了协同设计过程的有用性，以在大型项目的背景下为攀缘豆种植生成相关的一揽子选择。目的是确定一系列足够多样化的选择，以使资源禀赋差异很大的农民感兴趣。联合设计过程包括 2014-2015 年在乌干达东部和西南部高地的示范、评估和重新设计三个周期。评估旨在区分两个地区以及不同性别和社会经济背景的农民的偏好。农民、研究人员、推广人员和非政府组织工作人员为下一季的示威活动重新设计了治疗方法。攀缘豆产量和评估分数因季节和地点而异。评估分数并不总是与产量一致，揭示了农民在产量旁边使用了多个评估标准，例如品种的适销性、投入的可用性和放样方法的易用性。协同设计过程丰富了选项篮子，提高了所展示选项的相关性，并增强了对不同用户偏好的理解。然而，为资源匮乏的农民制定选择很困难，因为他们面临多重限制。本研究中开发的一揽子选项可应用于整个东非高地，并以“按上下文选择”矩阵作为扩展的起点。然而，该研究还表明，很难确定关于技术对不同类型农民的适用性的一致建议。