Developing culturally acceptable peanut nutrition bars with smallholder women farmers in Kaffrine, Senegal using participatory action research

ABSTRACT

This study aims at listening holistically with smallholder women farmers in Kaffrine, Senegal and then partnering with them to seek out impediments to value-added processing to develop a culturally acceptable and nutritious product for school-age children. A survey was conducted with 60 smallholder farmers in the four communities of Diamal, Ndangane, Keur serigne djibel and Ngouye Siwakh to identify constraints to peanut farming and value-added processing. Participants were invited to focus group discussions to provide in-depth commentary to survey findings and develop ideas for a healthy peanut product. Data from surveys and focus groups revealed quality seeds, farm input, access to mills, and income as the community needs to meet their challenges to peanut farming and food security. Specifically, the focus groups identified a peanut nutrition bar as the target peanut-based value-added product (PBVAP) and selected corn flour, cowpea flour and baobab powder as healthy ingredients for making the product.

KEYWORDS:

• Participatory action research
• women farmers
• peanut nutrition bar
• value-added processing

Introduction

Small-holder farmers of Africa are the strength of the continent. The strong extended family, the depth of accumulated knowledge of a specific location that has sustained their family for generations, and the egalitarian community governance, give this part of Africa resilience (Ayittey, 2005). As these farmers become empowered with the strength of their local knowledge, they rely on their people’s ancient regenerative practices aimed at self-sufficiency minus Global North inputs. Seed-saving of landraces and noncommercial soil enrichment practices contribute to these communities’ ability to survive climatic and political perturbations (Méndez et al., 2017).

This article presents an example of how local relationships, and local knowledge, linked with the low-impact collaboration of a university research team using Participatory Action Research (PAR) can strengthen the self-sufficiency of small-holder farmer communities in Africa. When that specific, requested, technical knowledge is combined with small-holder farmers contributing their local knowledge, value-added processing works.

Peanuts are a mainstay of Senegal’s economy accounting for approximately 20% of its GDP (Traore et al., 2021). However, only 3% of them are processed into peanut-based value-added products (hereafter, PBVAPs) such as snacks (Dong & Sylla, 2010; Mohammed, 2007) because they are largely used in Senegal for meal preparation, milled into peanut paste, or consumed as roasted nuts (Georges et al., 2016). This phenomenon has been unbeneficial to the country’s economic development since PBVAPs have been proven to help decrease poverty and food insecurity issues faced by rural households (i.e. smallholder farmers) in Sub-Saharan Africa including Senegal (Clark et al., 2021).

In Senegal, peanuts are an important cash crop for smallholder farmers who produce an annual 250,000 tons of peanuts (Georges et al., 2016). Despite their importance to peanuts production, (Cisse, 2014), very little has been documented about the impediments of smallholder farmers in farming and yielding peanuts. Studies have reasoned the drops in peanuts productivity in Senegal to draught and poor seed quality (Cisse et al., 2018; Faye et al., 2018). However, existing research projects, overall, have neglected to understand peanuts production from the perspective of smallholder farmers, the major player in peanuts production, and gender differences in peanuts production and PBVAPs development. Different views on peanuts production based on gender should be studied for different roles between men and women in farming, which may be critical to rebooting peanut productivity since Senegal has wanted to regain its fame in the peanut industry (Fofana et al., 2018). Understanding what smallholder farmers experience in farming peanuts, ultimately, decreases the poverty level of smallholder farmers and improves their food security.

PBVAPs open a new way to generate an income (Brethenoux et al., 2011; World Food Program, 2018), however, smallholder farmers have not seized a chance to develop PBVAPs (Georges et al., 2016) because they have not received sufficient training to transform raw peanuts to PBVAPs. In the past decades, there have been multiple efforts to increase peanut productivity in Senegal, largely initiated and directed by corporations and government agencies. Yet, those programs have not been a self-sustained practice because the involvement of smallholder farmers in the development and processing PBVAPs was absent from those programs (Akinola et al., 2020; de Groote et al., 2018; Kapelari et al., 2020). These rather reveal a strong interplay between smallholder farmers’ training and the production of self-sufficient PBVAPs in Senegal (Lu & Dudensing, 2015). For example, Georges et al. (2016) and Tankari (2017) pointed out that the lack of opportunities to learn and develop value-added processing of peanuts caused 47% of poverty and 57% of food insecurity among smallholder farmers in Sub-Saharan Africa including Senegal. Food scientists also designed programs to promote the production of PBVAPs such as peanut cookies and “chin-chin” with peanuts (a West African snack) among smallholder farmers (Mohammed, 2007) in Senegal and other Sub-Saharan African countries. However, their attempts were not fully recognized by the smallholder farmers (de Groote et al., 2018).

Given these, we investigated the hindering factors in farming peanuts, particularly investigating different perspectives on peanuts production by gender. To what extent to which smallholder women farmers face challenges to yield peanuts seems to be essential for different roles between men and women in peanuts farming and post-harvest processing (Adebiyi et al., 2018). Smallholder women farmers in Senegal account for 70% of the rural workforce and their roles are varied including making food products such as peanut flour and oil (World Food Program, 2018). However, low prices of peanuts and semi-processed peanuts like peanut paste have not greatly assisted with increasing their incomes. The views and expectations of smallholder farmers toward peanut productivity and PBVAPs should be understood to make peanut productivity and PBVAPs self-sufficient because smallholder women farmers are most likely the ones who develop PBVAPs using local ingredients (Adebiyi et al., 2018; Chigbu, 2015).

In Senegal, the majority of PBVAPs are imported from western countries, however, these PBVAPs (e.g. peanut snacks) rather are associated with childhood obesity in urban Sub-Saharan Africa (Feeley et al., 2016) for the lack of micronutrients (Feeley et al., 2016). Very few locally developed PBVAPs such as “Kungutu,” “Sousale,” “Guerte Thiaffe” produced, by, particularly, smallholder women farmers are available. Nevertheless, they are unpopular due to their short shelf-life and possible aflatoxin contamination (Georges et al., 2016). As such, PBVAPs resolving these consumption barriers would be beneficial to improving the livelihoods of smallholder farmers.

The objectives of this study are to (a) identify hindering factors that smallholder farmers in Senegal encounter in cultivating and yielding peanuts; for this objective, we differentiated views and expectations between men and women and (b) to assist smallholder women farmers to see a way to develop locally sourced PBVAPs, thereby allowing them to create a self-sustained process; for this objective, we introduced replicable PBVAPs and enabled them to assess the qualities and market potentials of those products. We achieved these objectives by interviewing smallholder men and women farmers in four rural communities of Senegal. This method was meaningful because participatory action research (PAR) has not explicitly appeared and is rarely used in the field of food science (Akinola et al., 2020; Kapelari et al., 2020). By implementing PAR, the present project centered around smallholder farmers.

We understand that several studies and projects on value-added processing in Sub-Saharan Africa have sought to improve the livelihood of farmers (OECD/FAO, 2016; Pindar et al., 2018; Rapsomanikis, 2015). Recent strategies to increase farmers’ income have advocated for the increased involvement of smallholder farmers in the value chain and have created policies and movements in the process to connect farmers with consumers (Gengenbach et al., 2018; Pindar et al., 2018). Such studies failed to understand community roles and gender dynamics and led to the adoption of western agriculture and business models which are not sustainable in rural communities (Gengenbach et al., 2018). This made us, the research team, focus on listening holistically to the needs of the smallholder farmers to understand their desired quality of life (Dunkel, 2018) and prioritize the ideas and opportunities presented in discussions by our collaborating smallholder farmers.

Value-added processing in Senegal

Value-added processing has been identified by both researchers and the government of Senegal as a means of improving rural households’ income and national food and nutrition security (Georges et al., 2016). Value-added processing has the potential to unveil innovative peanut products and reduce the sale of peanuts by smallholder farmers to middlemen and processing companies (Brethenoux et al., 2011; World Food Program, 2018). In Senegal, peanut products that have undergone value-added processing realized a significant acceptance by the public from conducted sensory tests which indicate a high market potential (de Groote et al., 2018). Such products are, however, made by scientists partnering with government agencies and small- and medium-sized enterprises. Smallholder farmers have minimal or no involvement in the product design and creation, making it difficult for the product to be self-sufficient with accessible tools, resources and local ingredients.

PBVAPs such as “Guerte Thiaff” and “Guerte Sukar” have been processed by smallholder women farmers but are limited to local consumption only due to their low quality and short shelf life (Georges et al., 2016). The low quality and short shelf life of PBVAPs produced by smallholder farmers have been attributed to the use of dilapidated machinery, lack of incentives for farmers, and the disorganization of the peanut industry. Smallholder farming communities also face problems of aflatoxin contamination after harvest which remains potent in value-added peanut products (Torres et al., 2014). Aflatoxins caused by Aspergillus flavus are responsible for 25% of post-harvest loss and are regulated due to their toxicological effect on humans and animals (Torres et al., 2014). In a study conducted in Dakar, Senegal, 40% of artisanal and industrial peanut butter products contained aflatoxin B1 (Diop et al., 2000) which reduces the market potential of local peanut products. Aflatoxin contamination can however be mitigated by early harvesting and processing as well as growing more fungi-resistant peanut varieties (Diedhiou et al., 2012).

Peanut production in Senegal

Senegal ranks as the 9^th largest exporter of peanuts globally which contributes to over $22 million in foreign exchange (Fofana et al., 2018). The peanut sector occupies 70% of the population with the major cultivation areas being Kaolack, Factick, Kaffrine, Diourbel, and Louga (Figure 1) which form the peanut basin (Georges et al., 2016).

Figure 1. Location of the study site, peanut basin of Senegal (source: SRI-RICE, Cornell University).

Note. The region colored green represents the peanut basin of Senegal

Peanut production is mainly undertaken by the men farmers who own land and have access to donkeys, plows, and other farm implements while the women are more involved in processing the harvest into peanut oil and paste (Elizabeth et al., 2015). The farmers do not make enough income from peanut production due to the high cost of seeds and the low prices of peanuts purchased by oil processing companies after harvest (Slette & Aradhey, 2016). The limited availability of labor-saving harvest and post-harvest equipment in the communities contributes to a reduced crop harvest with an increased risk of aflatoxins. Women farmers, who then sell harvested peanuts in the form of peanut paste, roasted peanuts, and other semi-processed products (Georges et al., 2016) suffer low prices due to questionable quality and safety.

Participatory action research (PAR)

Due to their focus on technical skills, the methods used to develop value-added products in Senegal have been insufficient in terms of their effectiveness in inspiring smallholder farmers’ interests and desires in developing PBVAPs. Furthermore, existing methods have excluded the roles and desires of smallholder farmers (i.e. community residents) in developing value-added products, thereby discouraging them to sustain their technical skills (Simonds & Christopher, 2013). The limitation of commercial value-added processing in rural communities calls for the involvement of smallholder farmers in efforts to develop innovative products from peanuts. This motivates farmers to share their concerns through holistic listening and conversation (Dunkel, 2018) and for the scientists to use participatory action research (PAR) that enables the scientists to appreciatively hear insights shared by the smallholder farmers (Mapfumo et al., 2013). This encourages the smallholder farmers to interact with the researchers for value-added peanut products (Shamrova & Cummings, 2017). There are notable advantages of this method in investigating phenomena in the context of farming and agriculture.

First, PAR emphasizes communication with the target population and the development of culturally centered research designs (Méndez et al., 2017) and has been used successfully in rural communities to instigate social change and development through a partnership with community members (Jull et al., 2017; Mapfumo et al., 2013). PAR has proved to be particularly effective with farming communities and has been adopted in studies to improve farming methods and activities (Méndez et al., 2017). For example, in Ghana and Zimbabwe, PAR coupled with a new concept of field-based farmer learning centers has been used to build the adaptive capacity of farmers to climate change and introduce integrated soil fertility management technologies (Mapfumo et al., 2013).

Second, PAR utilizes both quantitative and qualitative data collection tools to gather information on the prevailing situation and available resources in the community to solve the problem (Shamrova & Cummings, 2017). Surveys and focus group discussions are also applied to food product development (Mied & Bruseberg, 2000), and are utilized to understand the needs of the community and solutions locally developed (Méndez et al., 2017; Shamrova & Cummings, 2017). PAR also encourages continued communication with community members even after completing product development to evaluate feasibility in the local context and identify areas for further improvement (Méndez et al., 2017). Building on previous work and for our context, the PAR approach will engage smallholder farmers including women in focus groups to identify local resources and feasible mechanisms for product development. This study utilized PAR with both quantitative and qualitative methods to holistically collect information from smallholder farmers in Senegal. The use of both quantitative and qualitative methods provides an avenue for triangulation and validation of findings through cross-comparison (Salite, 2019).

Methods and procedures

Partnership and research sites

The study was conducted in four communities, Diamal, Ndangane, Keur serigne djibel, and Ngouye siwakh, in the Kaffrine region of Senegal, where peanut farming is a significant income source for the residents (Elizabeth et al., 2015). The Kaffrine region of Senegal is located in the country’s peanut basin, the sector with the largest peanut production. Peanuts are the foremost crop cultivated in every major cropping season in Kaffrine, along with significant production of maize, millet, and cowpeas. Both men and women farmers are involved in the cultivation of peanuts with women being less likely to have control of land, seeds, plows, and other means of production.

As a food product development lab, the research team, consisting of some members coming from West Africa and some members with over 35 years of research with smallholder African farmers and general community development, initially wanted to develop value-added pulse products with Sub-Saharan African pulse farmers. At an Institute of Food Technologists conference, the principal investigator remembered meeting Bountifield International, an organization that works with smallholder farmers in sub-Saharan Africa to make labor-saving farming equipment The research team connected with Bountifield International over a call and discussed our objective of working with farmers to develop value-added pulse products. The CEO of Bountifield International suggested working with Senegalese farmers because they grow peanuts and Bountifield International has a stronger presence and resources in Senegal than other Sub-Saharan African countries.

Bountifield International was an appropriate partner for this project because they partner personnel from the local African communities which allows them to build extensive and close relationships with smallholder farmers in rural areas where they have provided threshers, solar dryers, and hand mills (Appropriate Technology, 2013). Therefore, Bountifield understood the unique cultures of rural communities and the needs and desires of smallholder farmers.

From the initial contact with Bountifield International, the PAR plan developed by the PI specified each party’s major roles in this project: (a) the research team developed pre-and post-surveys, conducted focus group discussions with the assistance of Bountified International, analyzed smallholder farmers’ feedbacks generated in communities, developed a PBVAP based on the farmers’ comments and delivered a PBVAP to communities, (b) Bountifield International assisted the research team to identify research sites, delivered and generated pre-and post-surveys, assisted the research team on site, and became a middle person as communication arose between the research team and smallholder farmers, and (c) smallholder farmers attended focus groups, shared their needs and desires, and provided feedback on the developed PBVAP.

Upon the approval and confirmation of Bountified International to partner with the research team for the project, the director of the Bountifield International Senegal Office, also from the Kaffrine region, assisted us to conduct this project. Specifically, he identified and recommended four communities for the high level of peanut production, conducted pre-surveys on behalf of our research team to find whether the smallholder farmers in the communities were interested in this project (i.e. developing a value-added peanut product), assisted the research team (e.g. meeting arrangement) to conduct focus-group discussions when the team visited the communities, facilitated a post-survey after focus group discussions, and connected the research team and the participating farmers throughout this project.

Data collection

Our project involved three stages of data collection: (a) survey to identify research participants and their background, (b) focus group discussion to investigate the challenges they encounter in peanuts production and to gauge the possibility of PBVAPs, and (c) post-survey to evaluate the effectiveness of PAR and introduce a prototype of PBVAPs.

Survey

The study was conducted in June 2019 before the rainy season and in January 2020 after harvest to ensure farmers were available to participate in the research project. We performed a semi-structured survey to understand the demography of the communities, the livelihood of the farmers, and their interests in being part of our project. With the assistance of Bountifield, the survey was conducted in the local language “wolof” and responses of the smallholder farmers were recorded using the doForms data collection software (Zendesk Inc, Dublin, Ireland) and transcribed in French. Descriptive statistics with Microsoft XLSTAT (Addinsoft Inc, New York, New York) was used to present the survey data. This stage enabled us to recruit 24 men farmers and 24 women, farmers, for each focus group discussion and understand the community culture and develop topics for the focus group discussion on PBVAPs. The results from the survey signaled Senegalese farmers’ interests and desire to collaborate with us for PBVAPs.

Focus groups

A semi-structured discussion guide was used for the discussion (Jervis & Drake, 2014). The focus group discussions explored participants’ opinions on peanut farming, value-added processing, and healthy food development for school-age children. PBVAPs include Quaker Peanut Butter Baked Squares (Quaker, Salem, New Jersey), PB2 powdered peanut butter (PB2foods, Tifton, Georgia), Skippy P.B. Bites (Hormel foods, Austin, Minnesota), and Noflaye (Senegalese peanut flour) were presented to the focus groups for sampling to stimulate ideas for a PBVAP.

Focus group interviews were conducted in the four communities with the participants who expressed interest in being part of the research process in the preliminary survey. Other smallholder farmers present in the communities and who expressed interest, were invited and participated in the discussion without being involved in the survey. Therefore, focus groups for communities such as Ndangane and Ngouye Siwakh had more than ten participants. The focus group discussion was conducted in Wolof (Senegalese local language) and was translated into English with the help of staff from Bountifield International. Each focus group session was audiotaped with permission from the participants and typed into a transcript after cross-checking information with participants. Utilizing a focus group for women and men per community, a total of eight focus groups was created; eight to twenty participants participated per group.

Focus groups for women farmers

In focus group discussions, smallholder farmers were first asked about (a) the challenges with peanut farming, (b) ways to improve peanut farming, and (c) the biggest problem in the community for peanut production. Participants were divided into men and women groups to make them comfortable talking during discussions and to generate more data (Salite, 2019). In typical African communities, women are generally excluded from deciding for their household and community discussions on social and economic ventures (Salite, 2019). Therefore, forming women-only focus groups would make them express their thoughts and views more freely. We expected that this tactic allowed us to conduct an in-depth discussion on peanuts and PBVAPs. In the Ngouye Siwakh community, the community chief and the sanitation officer, acting as the women’s group secretary, presented at the discussion for the women’s focus group, which was a rare occurrence in a typical African community. Right before dismissing the focus group, the chief elaborated his presence as a venue to confirm our contribution to the community and women farmers.

After the focus groups were completed, the research team interacted with those communities to learn their traditions and farming situations. During the interactions, the research team was able to explore and understand the real stories of communities with the help of the director of the Bountifield Senegal office who translated “Wolof” to English. What the research team observed during the interactions was valuable to learn what resources they have, reinforcing our goal to develop a sustainable value-added product.

For example, the Diamal women farmers showed us their traditional farming tools, and local fruits and then took us to a local peanut oil processing plant where they did part-time work with a local businessman. The women farmers in Ndangane showed us their local household kitchen, and how they prepare meals for their family, and the women farmers in Keur serigne djbel showed us their peanut paste and roasted peanuts they sell to truck drivers as well as a local processing plant where they roast and grind peanuts. Finally, the women farmers in Ngouye siwakh, showed us their cowpea flour and corn flour they make for sale and demonstrated how they use the Bountifield hand mill to grind the corn and cowpea into flour. The research team’s experience during the visits was important because the smallholder women farmers consistently expressed their interest in learning skills and processes to develop a product from the research team and becoming an entrepreneur.

Data analysis

The discussions were transcribed verbatim. The principal investigator (PI) of this project developed a coding scheme based on challenges and ideas and then identified the similarities and differences from the participants’ comments on topics to organize and classify data using NVivo 12 (QSR, Melbourne, Australia). Two “needs” for challenges in peanuts production and three “ideas” for PBVAPs emerged from the data analysis.

Post-survey

A semi-structured post-survey was conducted after the focus group discussions to assess the participants’ satisfaction with the PAR process (Méndez et al., 2017) as well as test out prototype peanut products created from the collaboration. The post-survey was sent to the smallholder farmers who participated in focus group discussions to measure their satisfaction with PAR. The prototype of a PBVAP was sent to the women’s leaders in all four communities. The Director of Bountifield International’s Senegal office assisted this research team to distribute and collect the post-survey to the participants and women’s leaders of the four communities. This process generated 65 responses regarding PAR, and four women leaders assessed the prototype of a PBVAP.

Results

Needs of smallholder farmers

The needs of the smallholder farmers were grouped by gender, responses from the survey, and discussions in focus groups centered on the need to access quality seeds, farming equipment, and fertilizer (Table 1). The differences in discussing challenges of farming peanuts were distinctive between men and women farmers. Challenges expressed by men farmers were at a more macro level concerning quality seeds and on-farm equipment (Table 2). On the other hand, concerns by women farmers were more at the micro-level highlighting post-harvest processing (Table 2). Primarily, the challenges that smallholder farmers faced were associated with largely the lack of resources such as money and tools.

Table 1. Count of participants in each community interested in value-added processing^a.

Participants			Communities
	Diamal	Ndangane	Keur serigne djibel	Ngouye siwakh	Total
Male yes	3	3	6	5	17
Male no	3	3	0*	0*	6
Female yes	2	2	3	5	12
Female no	4	4	3	0*	11
Total yes	5	5	9	10	29
Total no	7	7	3	0*	17

^aWithin a column * indicates a significantly lower proportion at alpha level = 0.05.

Table 2. Needs of farmers and the entire community (N = 59 questionnaires, n = 8 FGD^a).

Category of needs	Expression from men focus groups	Study site	Number of references	Expression from women focus groups	Study site	Number of references
Farming needs	Quality seeds: “The government gives very little seeds, not enough for even one person’s farm. That is why we farm a little of everything because there are not enough peanut seeds”	Keur serigne djibel	FGD (2) Survey (27)	Farm input: “It is difficult to get seeds, animals, equipment, and money. Using a rented animal is expensive. It cost 6000 CFA per day to rent a machine, and 1,000 CFA per day to hire a person to plant”	Ndangane	FGD (4) Survey (15)
	Land availability: “The land available for farming is too short. There is population growth, and you can’t extend the land”	Keur serigne djibel	FGD (1) Survey (3)	Insect attack: “At the producing end, even if we plow and seed well, and the crops grow well, by the time of harvest when insects come, they can bring disease to the crop and damage the yield”	Ngouye siwakh	FGD (2)
	Soil fertility: “The soil fertility is very low, but no money to buy fertilizer”	Keur serigne djibel	FGD (2)	Farm income: “Lack of access to seeds, material, fertilizer and land. If farming, we need to borrow money for fertilizer. If the yield is however too low, you will not make a profit and that is like we worked for nothing”	Keur serigne djibel	FGD (2) Survey (10)
Community needs	Machinery: “More seeding machine. We have been using a seeding machine, which was given by the first Senegalese President. We need a newer seeding machine”	Diamal	FGD (1) Survey (18)	Post-harvest processing: “Our milling machine is too small. If we want faster and bigger production, we need to go to other villages to make corn flour. We also want to produce vegetables, but our water is not enough”	Ngouye Siwakh	FGD (11) Survey (18)
	Food security: “There is not enough harvest for all the needs of the family. In the past, the harvest could feed the family for the whole year, but now it can only feed us for two months”	Keur serigne djibel	FGD (2) Survey (9)	Post-harvest processing: “Hope to have the capacity to make products and be productive. We do not have the equipment to make couscous. Have the training to make the product as well. Want a milling machine, as we do not have one”	Ndangane	FGD (2) Survey (18)

^aFGD – Focus Group Discussion.

Smallholder men farmers

The smallholder men farmers expressed the limited access to quality peanut seeds as the foremost impediment to a good crop yield

We don’t have good seeds. The seeds we have, the rain is too short for it to finish its cycle (Table 2, Keur serign djibel, men’s FGD)

They acknowledged the receipt of quality peanut seeds by the government, however, the quantities received are never enough for their plots of land. The central government controls peanut seeds in Senegal (Tankari, 2012); the centralization of agricultural institutions restricts the distribution of peanut seeds, especially in rural areas.

The farmers attributed their growing of various crops in place of peanuts as a cash crop to the limited quantity of quality seeds. The lack of quality seeds contributes to the identification of fertilizer as a means of improving farming and farming outcomes by the farmers. The farmers expressed their frustration with using low-yielding seeds for farming.

Farming is difficult because the soil has low fertility” and “the soil fertility is very low, but no money to buy fertilizer (Table 2, Keur serign djibel, men’s FGD)

Smallholder women farmers

Smallholder women farmers expressed challenges for post-harvest processing and the market potential of their products (Table 2). Milling machines, threshers, and other post-harvest equipment were desired by the women (Table 1) to increase their production of peanut paste. For them, having those machines is equal to generating post-harvest income. The differences in farming equipment desired by the focus groups emphasize the delegation of gender roles in farming activities with smallholder women farmers being more involved in post-harvest processing (Brethenoux et al., 2011; World Food Program, 2018).

Simple labor-saving farming equipment such as seeding and milling machines were generally regarded as the needs at the community level and availability and accessibility to equipment were highlighted to improve peanut farming.

The animals will work for only one hour and be exhausted. Seeding machines will be an important support” (Table 2, Ndangane, women’s FGD).

The desire for synthetic chemicals for crop farming is also driven by insect attacks (which plague the farmers before and after harvest. “Yes, but insecticides are too expensive.

If I can afford them, I would use any that can work to get rid of the insects” (Table 2, Ngouye Siwakh, women’s FGD).

Table 2 presents the emerged themes regarding the need to improve peanuts productivity.

Ideas for a peanut-based value-added product

Generally, the smallholder women farmers were interested in value-added processing and were willing to be involved in developing a PBVAP during focus group discussions. When men farmers expressed an interest in value-added processing, their interests were tied to helping women farmers wanting to increase income. This reemphasized the gender roles attached to peanut farming and value-added processing.

This type of work is more for women. My wife is going to make it. Some duties are more for women (Table 3, Ngouye siwakh, men’s FGD)

Table 3. Ideas on making a value-added peanut product expressed by smallholder farmers (n = 8 FGD^a).

Process	Expression from men focus groups	Study site	Number of references	Expression from women focus groups	Study site	Number of references
Identifying existing peanut products	Local value-added products: “Sousale is similar to the peanut cake. It is a big cake cut into small pieces like kungutu. It is made by mixing the grilled peanut flour with millet flour and steaming it”	Keur serigne djibel	FGD (2)	Local value-added products: Peanut snack (peanut + salt or sugar), like a cake. “It is hard. It is a grilled product. Sugar with groundnut, heat sugar and it melts then put groundnut on it and makes it a hard cake”	Diamal	FGD (1)
	Reference peanut products “This has a kungutu-like taste” Referring to Quaker peanut butter baked squares	Ngouye siwakh	FGD (1)	Reference peanut products: “Yes we like the Quaker peanut butter baked squares and it tastes like kungutu”	Ngouye siwakh	FGD (4)
Identifying healthy Ingredients	Weaning foods: Millet, corn, rice, cowpea, peanut paste. “Keungheul makes flour from these ingredients. It is good for malnourished children.”	Keur serigne djibel	FGD (2)	Weaning foods: “I have a good recipe: Lahou bissap, cracked millet, groundnut flour or paste, dried fish, hibiscus, peanut paste. This is good for the kids who are unhealthy”	Ndangane	FGD (5)
	Healthy ingredients: “Baobab can be good for malnourished children. The product we make which is close to the Senegal noflaye that you showed us, we add baobab powder to it.”	Keur serigne djibel	FGD (4)	Pre-colonial foods: “In our childhood, we were eating more of Pearl Millet Couscous with milk or yogurt. When you were hungry or malnourished, that is what our mothers gave us.”	Ngouye Siwakh	FGD (9)
Identifying processing equipment	“Yes, they will be willing to share their oven with us, because they have been doing it with others also”	Keur serigne djibel	FGD (1)	Choice of processing method: “The traditional oven is preferable. The women do not own it. My son-in-law owns it.”	Diamal	FGD (2)
	Availability of equipment: “We have a gas oven”	Diamal	FGD (1)	Post-harvest equipment: “Yes, we have a grinder in our village”	Ngouye siwakh	FGD (4)
	Availability of equipment: “We can support them to build an oven.”	Ngouye siwakh	FGD (2)	Ownership of equipment: “Baba Ka Ndao can let us use the oven. That is my brother and so I can use the oven free”	Ngouye siwakh	FGD (5)

^aFGD – Focus Group Discussion.

All communities, therefore, agreed in the focus groups that any project to develop a peanut product would be carried out by the women.

We are 40 women. We can organize and divide into groups to make the product”

(Table 3, women’s FGD)

This introduced the research team to the organized women’s groups and their leadership in the four communities. The women’s groups, our collaborators from Bountifield International explained are groups of women in each community that come together to engage in business ventures to make a profit. The women’s group we encountered exhibited a willingness to carry on the development of PBVAPs by remarking:

Yes. We have received training to make our current products (referring to the peanut paste, peanut flour, and roasted peanuts displayed at the front of the group), and so we can also receive training to make this peanut bar product (Table 3, Keur serign djibel, women’s FGD)

All the focus groups agreed that any project to develop a food product using peanuts would be carried out by the women.

Participants from the Keur serigne djibel and Ngouye siwakh communities were more interested in value-added processing (Table 1) and were willing to be involved in research to develop a PBVAP. The interest in value-added processing by the Keur serigne djibel and Ngouye siwakh communities reported during the survey was also seen during the focus group discussions with women farmers. Women farmers in both communities displayed peanut products such as peanut oil, peanut paste and roasted peanuts and other products such as corn and cowpea flour in the focus group discussions. The men in these two communities offered to provide support to the women in making the product.

This type of work is more for women. Our support will be if they need money to buy equipment, we will give them the money. If they need more effort in making the product, we will help them (Table 3, Ngouye Siwakh, men’s FGD).

Fewer smallholder farmers from the Diamal and Ndangane communities expressed interest in value-added processing in the surveys compared to the previous two communities (Table 2). Nevertheless, both male and female farmers were willing to be involved in value-added processing, especially in Ndangane.

I have got an idea. We work for 2–4 months. If we make the product after harvest, we stay in the village for 6 months. This will help us avoid migration of the youth (Table 3, Ndangane, men’s FGD).

Diamal women expressed eagerness to participate in the project and remarked:

We thank you for coming here. We want you to bring income to the village with projects. We are open to partnerships (Table 2, Diamal, women’s FGD).

The disinterest in value-added processing expressed by the Diamal and Ndangane women farmers in the survey may be due to the lack of ownership of wood fire ovens and other processing equipment. The existence of a market for peanut products available to Keur serigne djibel and Ngouye Siwakh explains their interest and eagerness to participate in value-added processing. Table 1 presents the interest of farmers in making a PBVAP.

Making a value-added product

Value-added peanut products such as Quaker Peanut Butter Baked Squares (Quaker PBBS), PB2 powdered peanut butter, Skippy P.B. Bites, and Noflaye (Senegalese peanut flour) were presented to the farmers to stimulate ideas for a PBVAP. Participants were asked to taste the products and provide feedback on the samples and their preferences. They were also required to indicate if they would like to make a similar product.

It’s better to do peanut bar instead since we already have a flour product. The peanut bar is better than Kungutu. The kids like it (Table 3, women’s FGD).

Kungutu is a local Senegalese cake made by steaming the mixture of peanut paste, sugar, and millet. The participants especially the women farmers used local peanut products to describe and compare the taste and appearance of Quaker® PBBS (Table 3).

The smallholder women farmers and the research team defined the product development criteria as developing a peanut nutrition bar comparable to Kungutu (Table 3) and Quaker Peanut Butter Baked Squares for children. Crumbliness and short shelf life were also identified as deficiencies in local peanut products such as Kungutu (Georges et al., 2016).

Why we can’t market Kungutu is because we can’t make it durable. If we can store it longer, and package it, we can sell it (Table 3, Keur serign djibel, women’s FGD).

Optimizing the texture, nutrient profile, and shelf life by reducing water activity became the research objective for developing the peanut nutrition bar.

To develop peanut products such as Kungutu and Quaker PBBS, the women farmers designated as responsible for making the product, suggested healthy ingredients used to feed malnourished children (Table 3). Some groups also suggested ingredients used by health centers for making weaning foods for children as well as ingredients their parents used for making healthy foods in their childhood (Table 3). The women farmers shortlisted cowpea, corn, baobab powder, and millet as healthy ingredients to combine with peanuts for making a nutrition bar and agreed that children will be interested in a soft cohesive peanut nutrition bar.

Developing a peanut bar required the use of processing equipment readily available to the communities. Using available resources for developing community interventions is a key part of participatory action research and allows the target community to feel a sense of ownership in the research project (Mapfumo et al., 2013; Méndez et al., 2017). The mention of a wood oven by women in Diamal, Keur serigne djibel, and Ngouye siwakh (Table 3) provided more reason to develop a baked peanut nutrition bar. Ndangane women farmers admitted to having no wood oven in the community but suggested they could use the oven in Diamal, which is about 10 kilometers away. The women farmers also resolved the issue of weighing out ingredients in making the peanut nutrition bar.

We have to measure bowls that we know the weight of (Table 3, Ndangane, women’s FGD)

The presence of multi-purpose grinders (Table 2) supplied by Bountifield International (Appropriate Technology, 2013) validated the use of flours from healthy ingredients such as cowpea and corn (Table 3) for making the peanut nutrition bar. Table 3 presents the generated ideas regarding a PBVAP.

Evaluation of PAR and introduction of a prototype PBVAP

A post-survey was conducted to ensure the satisfaction of participants with the research approach, to collect feedback from the participants for the next steps, and to further deepen the sense of ownership of the project (Méndez et al., 2017). All smallholder farmers who participated in the focus group discussions were satisfied with PAR, willing to participate in the project, and excited at the prospects of generating better income from PBVAPs (Table 4).

Following the focus group with the information shared, we are impatient to see the execution of the project and the results it will have in the village. (Table 4, Ngouye Siwakh).

Table 4. Community feedback on focus group discussion and peanut nutrition bar prototypes.

Stakeholders	Comments	Study site
Participants’ opinions on the focus group discussion	Comments on the focus group discussion: “The focus group allowed us to see that we can have other products from our local products”	Ngouye siwakh
	Timeline: “We want the project to start activities before the harvest”	Diamal
	Expectation: “Following the focus group with the information shared, we are impatient to see the execution of the project and the results it will have in the village”	Ndangane
	Comment on the focus group discussion: “We are happy with the approach adopted and the focus group process and invite you to act quickly in the implementation of the project”	Keur serigne djibel
Women’s Leaders comments on peanut bar prototypes	Taste: “We love the taste of the peanut bar prototype and think it has vitamins”	Ndangane
	Stability: “The square peanut bar is easier to keep and therefore more suitable for the village”	Diamal
	Taste: “The taste of the peanut bar prototype is better; the peanut smells better and more consistent”	Ngouye siwakh
	Texture: “The peanut bar prototype is too brittle”	Keur serigne djibel

The results of the focus group discussions were used to develop a peanut bar prototype with some healthy ingredients suggested by the women farmers (Allan et al., 2022). Three basic recipes were developed with the peanut paste and varying levels of cowpea flour, corn flour, and baobab powder as the main ingredients. The samples were then provided to the leaders of the women’s groups in each of the four communities to taste and provide feedback (Table 3). The group leaders were satisfied with the taste and compared it to the Quaker PBBS introduced to them during the focus group discussions (Table 3). The texture of the prototypes was however identified as brittle, which served as a point for making improvements to the product. The sample testing results were used to develop a formal product development technical research (Allan et al., 2022) for optimizing the texture, taste, shelf life, and nutrition.

Comments from the post-survey were used to improve the texture of the peanut nutrition bar by adding acacia gum, which has been reported to improve the texture of gluten-free baked products (Michail, 2017). The women appreciated the taste of the peanut nutrition bar; and thought of the flavor as an indication of health. Table 4 presents the comments of smallholder farmers on PAR and the feedback on the prototype of a PBVAP whilst Table 5 provides a summary of the research methods used and key findings obtained in collaborating with the smallholder women farmers and their communities.

Table 5. Summary of research methods, participants and key findings.

Method	Purpose of the Research project	Sites (number of men and women participants)	Findings	Remarks
Survey (June 2019)	To understand the demography of the communities, the livelihood of the farmers, their interests in being part of our project	Diamal (6/6) Ndangane (6/6) Keur serigne djibel (6/6) Ngouye Siwakh (5/5)	Men = macro level concerning quality seeds and on-farm equipment Women = micro-level highlighting post-harvest processing	A focus group guide and the ideation for a PBVAP were developed based on their responses on seed quality, on-farm equipment, and postharvest processing.
Focus Group (July 2019)	To explore participants’ opinions on peanut farming, value-added processing, and healthy foods development for school-age children to stimulate ideas for a PBVAP	Diamal (10/10) Ndangane (8/15) Keur serigne djibel (11/15) Ngouye Siwakh (8/17)	Men = the limited access to quality peanut seeds, Land availability, the need for seeding machines, food security, & the development of PBVAPs for women to increase income. Women = farm input relating to costs, insect, income, and post-harvest processing including the development of PBVAPs that uses local ingredients and are nutritious to children.	A type of crop and estimating the yield of crops from each growing season are critical. The accessibility of proper equipment was considered to formulate, plan and introduce a peanut nutrition bar to the communities.
Post-survey (August 2019)	To assess the participants’ satisfaction with the PAR process as well as test out prototype peanut products created from the collaboration	Diamal (6/9) Ndangane (8/8) Keur serigne djibel (6/10) Ngouye Siwakh (8/8)	Men = satisfaction with PAR, willingness to participate in the project, the expectation for generating income Women = satisfaction with PAR, feedback on the developed PBVAP (i.e. the texture of peanut nutrition bar was brittle)	It was assessed that PAR could be used in future visits. The development of a PBVAP (i.e. peanut nutrition bar) will be continued until the smallholder farmers accept that as their product therefore embedded in the communities.

Discussion

The developments of value-added peanut products are recommended as a strategy for rural development (Clark et al., 2021) but have been unable to address the desires of smallholder farmers, owing to the lack of community involvement (Chinseu et al., 2021). Existing literature in the context of food product development has indicated that without farmers’ direct participation in the value-added processing, value-added products are most likely inviable (Deller et al., 2017; Pindar et al., 2018). This study fills the gap between value-added processing and the direct involvement of smallholder farmers as partners in the research and development process of a PBVAP.

A partnership with the smallholder farmers means we needed to confirm that we had a shared interest in value-added processing and developing a PBVAP. We conducted surveys in the four communities before our visit to give us a snapshot of the daily living situation of the farmers and to obtain an understanding of the priorities of the communities. From the surveys, the men participants viewed farming as a gateway to solving community problems, and therefore their identified needs centered on being more productive in farming and their efforts to improve their farming outcomes. The men farmers’ reports on limited access to seeds, declining government seed supply, and the need for seeding machines highlighted the absence of financial and technological investments in Sub-Saharan African agriculture (Giller, 2020).

We recognize that Ernesto Méndez (2017) consistently works toward sustainable food systems practices, such as seed saving and “artisanal fertilizers,” rather than chemical fertilizers and hybrid seeds. In our study, we aimed at assisting the smallholder farmers to increase their income from post-harvest processes, i.e. developing a value-added product. Achieving sustainable food system practices by generating higher income for farmers as well as promoting gender equity and providing more income opportunities for women farmers. The issue of chemical fertilizers and hybrid seeds however became an important opportunity to remind the farmers that their traditional farming methods are best for the land, and we hope to revisit this conversation in our continued collaboration.

The smallholder women farmers shared our interest in post-harvest processing as a priority in the surveys but also admitted to the on-farm problems of seed access, limited land availability, and insect attack. Studies on rural agriculture in sub-Saharan Africa always report women farmers as the driving force behind post-harvest processing (Brethenoux et al., 2011; World Food Program, 2018) which we observed in a larger number of smallholder women farmers reporting on post-harvest processing in the survey. The interest of women farmers in post-harvest processing has been associated with their concern for family food security and their urge to secure food for the unknown future (Tegbaru et al., 2020).

Our focus group discussions confirmed the knowledge and perceptions we had collected from the surveys on farming and post-harvest processing. Our discussions showed that the smallholder farmers knew about the current farming situation in Senegal, food security and nutrition in the community, as well as community development problems, accordant with studies that identify the community participants as local experts in the research problem (Dunkel, 2018; Sowell et al., 2014). The problems brought to light by the farmers transitioned from farming to the lack of opportunities to increase their income and take control of other community problems reflecting the global plight of low-income, smallholder farmers (Birthal & Joshi, 2007; Kawa & Kaitira, 2007; Tankari, 2017). The needs of the farmers stated in the conducted surveys and focus group discussions reemphasized the persistence of “wicked problems” of agriculture, health, and malnutrition in rural communities (Dunkel, 2018; Sowell et al., 2014) and the need for the inclusion of farmers in developing solutions.

The overall interest in value-added processing by smallholder farmers observed in our surveys and focus group discussion confirmed the understanding of community needs and was consistent with reports on farmers’ attitudes toward value-added processing by Adebiyi et al. (2018) and de Groote et al. (2018). The men farmers were not directly interested in pursuing value-added processing but saw an opportunity to help empower the women farmers and create jobs for the youth in the community. This was tied to the desire of the men farmers to prevent the youth from migrating from the community in search of greener pastures. Unlike studies focused solely on men farmers, our study also focused on listening holistically (Dunkel, 2018) to smallholder women farmers as both producers and consumers and therefore the source of our PBVAP design.

Smallholder women farmers have been identified as being more engaged in post-harvest processing in Sub-Saharan Africa (Brethenoux et al., 2011; World Food Program, 2018) and showed their expertise during focus group discussions. However, their participation in product development has been limited, despite studies reporting higher household food expenditure when women have higher incomes (Khorramrouz et al., 2020). The smallholder women farmers’ choice of a peanut nutrition bar as the target PBVAP highlighted the desire for improved household food and nutrition security. The smallholder women farmers’ selections of cowpea flour, corn flour and baobab powder as complementary ingredients for a peanut nutrition bar conveniently provide complete amino acids, calcium, vitamin C and folic acid, identified as insufficient in Senegalese school-age children (Fiorentino et al., 2016). The crops selected by the women in cowpea and corn are also considered women’s crops (Agholor, 2019) and therefore the women felt more confident in incorporating the selected crops in a peanut nutrition bar.

Selecting local ingredients for the peanut nutrition bar is also in line with recent efforts in Sub-Saharan Africa to replace low-micronutrient dense imports with locally developed snacks (Adebiyi et al., 2018; Georges et al., 2016). Consequently, the inclusion of ingredients and other ideas recommended by the smallholder women farmers in making the peanut nutrition bar initiated trust between the communities and the research team necessary for participatory action research (Mapfumo et al., 2013; Méndez et al., 2017). The use of a survey to evaluate the satisfaction and involvement of the communities in the project serves as a means of triangulation (Cohen & Crabtree, 2006) and follows the PAR approach of continuous involvement of partners (Bayala & Dayamba, 2016; Méndez et al., 2017). Bayala and Dayamba (2016) and Méndez et al. (2017) also report improvements in project continuity and willingness to collaborate on other development projects when the research team is committed to ensuring the community benefits from the research.

The smallholder women farmers reported being pleased with the research teams’ approach to discussing issues in the community and searching for solutions within. The women farmers were excited at the opportunity to minimize post-harvest loss by developing a peanut nutrition bar and using the profits to increase household nutrition. The field of food product development also requires continuous tasting and improvement to arrive at a formulation and product suitable for the market and consumers (Soodsang, 2015; Michel et al., 2011). The women, in this case, served as both producers and consumers and therefore their assessment of the prototypes provides data needed to improve the peanut nutrition bar.

Conclusion

The objective of this study was to collaborate with smallholder peanut farmers in Kaffrine, Senegal to develop a culturally acceptable, nutritious, value-added peanut product such as a peanut bar. The decision to make a peanut nutrition bar with smallholder women farmers was made by the four communities. Both men and women in focus group discussions identified the women farmers as responsible for post-harvest processing which led to the discovery of organized groups of smallholder women farmers. The women’s groups and their leadership were instrumental in developing the value-added peanut product with their knowledge of post-harvest processing and understanding of the domestic market. The women’s groups are present in each community and are eager to make additional income for their households with value-added processing.

The successful development and acceptance of the peanut nutrition bar indicate that needs, interests, recommendations, and feedback of the smallholder women farmers informed the research focus and product design. The use of healthy indigenous ingredients recommended by the communities caters to nutrient insufficiencies prevalent amongst school-age children, and feedback on the taste and texture informed the addition of acacia gum and the use of baobab powder. The peanut nutrition bar not only represents the potential for extra income and increased nutrition but the successful application of participatory action research in community food product development.

The participatory action research approach developed a partnership with the smallholder women farmers leading to the development of a peanut nutrition bar with indigenous ingredients and local equipment. The smallholder women farmers involved in the process with special regard to the women’s groups were selected for the study based on their interest and eagerness to add more value to their harvest. The success of the research model can be attributed to both the partnerships formed with the communities and the interest shown by the women farmers in value-added processing. The PAR model employed in the study can be, therefore, a useful tool for working with women’s groups in Senegal and other sub-Saharan African communities on food and agricultural projects.

Partnerships established with the communities and the smallholder farmers can be used to delve into the issues of seed availability, use of fertilizers, gender, and sustainability in future studies and related policy recommendations to improve rural food production. The geographical distance between the research team and the target community however puts a strain on continuous communication which is necessary for fostering partnerships

Disclosure statement

No potential conflict of interest was reported by the author(s).

Additional information

Funding

The work was supported by the College of Education, Health and Human Development Internal Fund [].