Upload 965 files to main/part_2

main/part_2/0004891005.json

@@ -0,0 +1 @@
+{"metadata":{"gardian_id":"8b4c7cb838e098a30ae7acd5dbfbd2d3","source":"gardian_index","url":"https://cgspace.cgiar.org/rest/bitstreams/fe9805f7-0148-4332-ab38-ea136dd5d8d8/retrieve","id":"915165267"},"keywords":[],"sieverID":"442d6bc5-1a98-4a93-a0d2-2c21af3355f9","content":"Many actors promoting irrigation technologies in low-and middle-income countries want to ensure that men, women, and different social groups have equal opportunity to participate in and benefit from irrigation but are uncertain how to do so. This tool provides a guide and structured set of questions to assess gender dynamics in irrigation in a specific context. The questions can be used to collect information prior to, during, or after project implementation to inform different strategic approaches of the project, including gender-sensitive marketing and dissemination strategies, design of technologies, risk mitigation approaches, adaptive management, and/or monitoring and evaluation (M&E) activities.Actors who are designing and/or promoting irrigation technologiesdevelopment practitioners, agricultural extension agents, agribusiness companies working with contract farmers, and irrigation companiescan use the tool to better understand the gendered constraints and opportunities around small-scale irrigation (SSI) technologies, which are typically used by individuals, households, and small groups.The question set helps identify gender-related barriers and differing preferences around accessing information about a technology, adopting it, and benefiting from it after adoption, including who will likely be able to participate in and benefit from a given irrigation project and who will not, as well as how the adoption of irrigation technologies can affect power dynamics between people. These areas of inquiry should be tailored to the local context and inform project strategies that ensure inclusive and equitable benefits from irrigation.A project that does not explore these kinds of questions is effectively \"gender-blind\" and runs the risk of unintentionally worsening gender inequality and exclusion. For example, irrigation projects can inadvertently increase men's control over income, assets, and production while increasing women's workloads.In addition, the tool supports research into the needs of different customer groups. Often irrigation users are assumed to be male by default, and promotion strategies fail to account for women's distinct priorities and challenges. The questions in this tool can inform user-centered design approaches to develop products and services related to SSI that women prefer. In addition, it can help refine market segmentation and marketing strategies to reach women. Understanding and addressing women's irrigation needs can serve to expand the user base of SSI technologies.Studying gender dynamics is examining how men and women interact. These patterns differ substantially across contexts.In some settings, men and women jointly own and share revenues from irrigation investments. In other contexts where there is less cooperation within the household, husbands and wives may control \"separate purses\"independent revenue streams from largely separate production activities. How husbands and wives (and other household members) currently share resources and labor is important to assess in the project setting to anticipate how irrigation activities will affect different members of the household. This can provide insights about how to engage men in support of greater equity and inclusion, such as supporting their wives' participation in women's producer groups or training.In addition, women are clearly not a homogeneous group with the same vulnerabilities and preferences. Marital status and household structure influence women's opportunities and challenges. Salient social differenc es may also include age, ethnicity, caste/class, religion, and whether women have young children who require care and supervision or older/adult children who assist with some of the labor of running the household and farming.The questions in this tool help to characterize how these intersecting forms of identity differentiate women's experiences and needs, so that project managers and researchers can investigate the specifics of women's experiences rather than operating on the assumption about how they are excluded.We generally differentiate three phases of technology adoption: awareness, initial adoption (tryout), and continued use.Women face particular challenges in each of the three phases: becoming aware of SSI technologies, adopting SSI technologies, and benefiting equally from these technologies as they are used (Theis et al. 2018).► Gendered constraints to SSI awareness: Even when information about technologies is disseminated with the intention of reaching everyone, this information may be less likely to reach women given women's mobility constraints, lower literacy, less ownership of and access to mobile phones, and distinct social networks. In addition, social norms, safety concerns, lack of affordable transit options, and child care and household obligations can make it more difficult for women to travel to demonstrations or trainings that are, in theory, open to all. In some contexts, women will not feel comfortable participating in mixed gender activities or their husbands may prohibit them from attending. Women may also trust different information providers, such as health workers or community leaders, more than traditional promoters of technology, such as extension agents.► Gendered constraints to SSI initial adoption: Both men and women face constraints to adopting new technologies, but constraints are gendered, and women often face additional barriers to adoption. Women who are female heads of household and women living in male-headed households encounter different constraints. Female heads of household often struggle with financial and labor-related constraints to acquiring a new technology, but as the primary decision maker in their household, they can choose to adopt a technology if they are able to overcome such constraints. In contrast, women in male-headed households may have greater financial resources and access to labor but lack sufficient decision-making power within the household to influence the decision to adopt a certain technology. For example, the primary male decision maker may have different preferences from women and undervalue the benefits of adopting a technology for women, such as reduced female labor. As a result, they may choose to adopt different technologies than women would, or adopt no technology at all.► Gendered constraints to SSI benefits (continued use): The benefits of SSI in promoting resilience, income, and nutrition are not always shared within households and may only reach women through their husbands or other household members. Intrahousehold power relations influence how the costs and benefits associated with the technology are distributed between household members. For example, women may contribute labor to operate the technology without necessarily controlling the profits from irrigated produce. For women living in households that adopt an SSI technology, they may see increases in workload without an increase in their control over earnings.Interventions that attempt to transfer irrigation technologies to women and designate them the \"owners\" may find that in practice, women have little control over the technology due to beliefs about who can own and operate certain assets.While awareness is typically a pre-requisite for initial adoption, and initial adoption is necessary for continued use, one phase does not automatically lead to the next. Projects often find it easier to track awareness (e.g., number of people trained) or initial adoption (i.e., number of irrigation kits purchased or distributed), but many technologies that are initially adopted or acquired in some way are abandoned or set aside. Projects should investigate gender differences in each phase, what aspects facilitate transitions between phases, and identify which phase or phases hold back women's inclusion.To summarize, in each phase of technology adoption, there are specific risks of exclusion that should be identified and mitigated:Table 2 Key risks of exclusion during the three phases of technology adoptionDissemination of new technology may unintentionally exclude women, so women never learn about the technologyProgram disseminates information to a producer or water user group with all male members or at an event primarily attended by menWomen are aware of the technology, but the technology does not benefit them adequately, or they do not have the resources or power required to adopt a new technologyWomen see the technology being used but they do not have access to credit or support from their husbands to acquire the technologyIntrahousehold relations and/or broader social norms constrain women's ability to benefit from the new technology so women may discontinue useThe household adopts the technology, and women provide labor to operate the technology, but are unable to control earnings generated by use of the technology and so withdraw their labor Source: Authors.The questions and concepts featured in this tool were developed through an iterative process of field research and stakeholder consultation. An initial workshop series was held in 2016 in Ethiopia, Ghana, and Tanzania to gather feedback from researchers, government officials, implementing organizations and donors on key questions on gender dynamics in irrigation, as part of the Feed the Future Innovation Lab for Small-Scale Irrigation (ILSSI). Qualitative research was then conducted in these countries under the same project to test an initial set of questions. These questions were further refined through qualitative fieldwork for the REACH programme. For this, researchers from the International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI) and the Ethiopian Development Research Institute/University of Bonn conducted in-depth interviews and focus-group discussions with 120 men and women irrigators and non-irrigators in 8 kebeles in Ethiopia's Tigray, Oromia, and Amhara regions in May-June 2017.The tool includes two components: Part 1 includes a series of general and specific questions to explore the risk of inequity and exclusion while Part 2 focuses on approaches and indicators for monitoring, learning and evaluation as follows.► Part 1, Assessment questions: Key questions are provided for each phase of technology adoptionawareness, initial adoption, and continued useto identify gender differences and potential risks of exclusion related to the adoption of irrigation. The questions explore potential causes of the risk of exclusion and how the project may affect gender and social dynamics. The questions in the left column of Table 3 help to identify whether there is a risk of exclusion, while those in the right column provide more detailed questions for projects.► Part 2, Approaches and indicators for measuring inclusion in irrigation projects: Possible project approaches and indicators are provided that can be used as is or adapted for use in M&E efforts.PART 1: ASSESSMENT QUESTIONS► Key Risk: Dissemination of new technology unintentionally exclude women, so women never learn about the technology. • Do dissemination efforts tap into existing networks (e.g. farmer's organizations, water user groups, existing relationships with extension workers)? Who participates in those networks? Are they predominately male? Are efforts made to reach women in their networks (e.g. self-help groups, health centers, etc.)? Women may not be in networks that receive information or invitations to participate in an event.If husbands are primarily targeted for dissemination, do they share information they receive with their wives and other household members?Who has access to the cell phones, radios, or other technologies used to disseminate information? Where are flyers or billboards posted? Are these spaces where both men and women gather? Who is able to read the flyers and other information provided?2. What are the constraints to participation in trainings, demonstrations, farmer field days, and other outreach events? Are they different for men and women?• Is the location and timing of the event safe and appropriate for women to attend? • Do project activities help overcome social constraints on women's mobility or secure approval from other household members to participate? Is information provided to other household members in order to support women's involvement?Are provisions made to facilitate women's participation, for example encouraging spouses or family members to participate together?3. How do farmers learn about the technology and build trust to try it? Are men and women receptive to different kinds of information, demonstrations, types of learning events, or who the extension agent/lead farmer is? How does the relationship with the information provider affect uptake?• Do women express comfort and learn as much as men do from the lead farmers or extension agents demonstrating the technology? • Does the program support household members in sharing information with others in the household? • Does the program take measures to help women secure the support of other household members for implementing change or making new investments?Source: Authors► Key Risk: Women are aware of the technology, but the technology does not benefit them adequately or they do not have the resources or the power required to adopt a new technology. • Do women perceive the SSI technology as providing sufficient benefits compared to costs/risks? Are the technologies designed to address women's preferences and/or are gendered preferences reflected in project information? • Are women's preferences and priorities regarding physical design, initial and ongoing cost, financing options, potential for multiple use, location, shared vs. individual, and maintenance requirements incorporated into technology design?2. Do women have sufficient access to and control over land needed to apply the new practice/technology?• Does the project support women's access to (often more expensive) land, that is suitable for irrigation (e.g. within access of a canal or shallow well)? • Does the project help strengthen women's tenure security, allow them to invest in the land, use the SSI technology, and be assured the investment will not be appropriated by someone else?3. Do women have sufficient access to and control over water needed to apply the practice/technology?• Are the criteria for membership in the water user association (WUA) inclusive of women, and do women participate in meaningful ways? Do women agree with the rules set by this WUA? Do women feel they can influence or are represented well by this WUA? • Are women included in water access rules, even if water access is linked to requirements to maintain common water resources like cleaning canals which often exclude women? • Does the project support women to make investments in water storage on their land that can then be used for irrigation?4. Do men and women have access to the financial services required to be able to invest in the technology?• How do sources of formal and informal credit differ for men and women?• Is credit accessible to women of different marital and socio-economic status? Is credit available under favorable terms for women's desired irrigation investments (long enough repayment period, acceptable interest rates and collateral)? • Do women access credit for individual or joint purchase of technology, either through groups or with their family? • Do other household members support women in taking out credit? Do women access credit in support of other family members' purchase of technologies?5. Do men and women have the means to generate sufficient revenue through the use of irrigation to make it economically viable?• Do women expect to benefit from the technology and value these benefits?• Do women think they can control the proceeds generated from the technology ?• Do women have access to markets to sell outputs from production?6. How does labor availability affect technology adoption decisions?Does the head of household/primary decision maker value saving women's time/reducing women's work burden through adopting SSI technologies? • Do men and women have sufficient access to labor (own, family, or hired) to apply the technology? Does the project help women overcome labor constraints?Source: Authors.► Key Risk: Intrahousehold relations constrain women's ability to benefit from the use of the new technology. • If men and women cultivate/manage separate plots of land, whose plots are included in the use of the technology? • Who physically operates the technology? Do men and women both know how to use it?• Who provides what type of labor to the application of the technology? How does this affect overall time burden and energy expenditure, for whom?2. How are the benefits from the technology distributed within the household? Who controls the proceeds?• Are men and women both informed about the revenues generated by use of the technology? • Who has decision-making power over how these revenues are used? Do women have a say over the proceeds from the use of the technology?3. What resources are required to maintain the use of the technology?• Do men and women have knowledge about how to maintain the technology or are they able to hire someone to fix it when broken? • Can women and men pay for the operation and maintenance of the technology? Source: Authors.All M&E indicators collected should be disaggregated by sex and any other social differences deemed relevant for the given setting (such as age, marital status, ethnicity, religion, household structure, and socioeconomic status). Sexdisaggregated indicators can most accurately measure progress on closing gender gaps by comparing change in the indicators for men and women. If there are resource constraints, some indicators can be collected for men only or women only to measure absolute change in indicators by gender on a particular issue.  "}

main/part_2/0014008891.json

@@ -0,0 +1 @@
+{"metadata":null,"keywords":null,"sieverID":"482e3e31-6fce-43d8-9113-e3fed2d8f4b4","content":"\n\n\n\n\n\n"}

main/part_2/0022043465.json

@@ -0,0 +1 @@
+{"metadata":{"gardian_id":"c4d247401c7980ab33f96028774198ee","source":"gardian_index","url":"https://cgspace.cgiar.org/rest/bitstreams/4f9f8734-0ce3-4b0e-9c0e-89feb3874a9b/retrieve","id":"1749625335"},"keywords":[],"sieverID":"1bb912e9-7c64-4c99-ae8f-253ccef4a6b5","content":"De dónde viene esta planta cultivada? origen geográfico = en cuál lugar del planeta proviene esta planta? origen biológico = cuál planta ancestral produjo la planta cutivada? Cosecha en el canasto: tipo silvestre, con absición de espiguillas!• > 100 unidades energéticas humanas (UEH)• 10-20 UEH en agricultura de subsistencia• 3 UEH en agriltura moderna• < 1 UEH en rizicultura en Japón fuente: Oka 1988 brillante idea: qué tal si agrupo las paniculas, en lugar de que estén sueltas?Cosecha en el canasto: silvestre tipo mutante, sin absición de espiguillas! brillante idea: qué tal si siembro una de estas plantas cerca de mi choza?Cosecha en el canasto: silvestre tipo mutante, con frecuencia cada vez mayor!Por qué voy a seguir sembrando el silvestre?: seguridad alimentaria! carácter decisivo en la domesticación del arroz: capa de absición no es funcional: el grano no se cae!• gen sh4 recesivo marca la pérdida de función → degradación pared celular • mutación en sh4 presente en toda la especie O. sativa fuentes : Konishi et al. 2006;Li et al. 2006;McCouch et al. 2012 • con muy pocas excepciones los agricultores no seleccionan sobre el sistema reproductivo• por cruzamientos con los silvestres regresará los alelos dominantes; importancia de aislar • parte del aislamiento se dará por los circuitos de semillas que llevarán el mutante afuera Por qué O. barthii? Por qué O. rufipogon?• QTL SH1 dominante es responsable de la ruptura del pedicelo • Otros QTLs con menor efecto en cromosomas 2,5, 11 y 12Transición desde la colecta/ caza hacia la agricultura: dependencia de la vida silvestre dependencia de la agricultura rápida ?10,000 9,500 0 síndrome de domesticación se fija en pocas generaciones avances tecnológicos rápidos para detoxificar los alimentos años a.P.o lenta ?10,000 5,000 0 cruzamientos entre cultivados y silvestres compuestos antinutricionales con herencia compleja años a.P.La teoria aceptada hoy es la de una transición lenta; y la agricultura es el modelo que ganó los pueblos que lograron el dominio de la rizicultura se expandieron demografica-/ politicamente "}

main/part_2/0025597138.json

@@ -0,0 +1 @@
+{"metadata":{"gardian_id":"4af9672c2ab44a8794c89812ca284446","source":"gardian_index","url":"https://cgspace.cgiar.org/rest/bitstreams/9ba05789-2d98-4d0f-a134-9d5c5011fdcc/retrieve","id":"-899034450"},"keywords":[],"sieverID":"2214f208-e1a7-4839-a37f-6589e75292c6","content":"T he International Institute of Tropical Agriculture (llTA) -one of the major links in a world-wide network of agricultural research and training centers-was established as an autonomous, non-profit corporation on July 27, 1967. The Federal Republic of Nigeria allOled 1,000 hectares of land for the llT A site, and the Ford Foundation provided initial capital for buildings and development.llT A is governed by an International Board of Trustees, the membership of which includes representatives from developing countries in areas of the Institute's concern.The principal financing of the Institute (and other centers) is arranged by the Consultative Group on International Agricultural Research (CGIAR)-an informal group of donor countries, development banks , foundations, and agencies. Support for IITA's research and training core program in 1980 was provided by the Canadian International Development Agency (ClDA), Overseas Development Ministry of the United Kingdom (ODM), U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID), World Bank, International Fund for Agricultural Development (IFAD), Ford Foundation, International Development Research Centre (IDRC) , and the governments of Australia, Belgium, Italy, Japan, Netherlands, Nigeria, Norway, and Fednal Republic of Germany. In addition, other donors provide funds to the Institute, particularly to support specific research or training program.The \"geographic mandate\" of liT A includes the humid and subhumid tropical zones, and the Institute concentrates its research and training in two major areas: farming systems and crop improvement of certain designated cereals (rice and maize), grain legumes, (cowpeas and soybeans), and roots and tubers (yams, sweet potatoes, and cassava).~his Institute now appears to have reached the stage where ..I.. its research material and lechniquescan make a significant contribution toward the solution of the food problems of the humid arrd subhumid tropics, especially those of the African region. A solid research base has been laid by lIT A and its dedicated scientists over the past decade which is a necessary step in the process of determining sound and practical soil and crop management components of efficient food production systems.Without sufficient knowledge of the relel'ant ecosystems and the reallife situations of farmers in Africa, the Institute's preliminary results from no-till farming, plant breeding for insect and disease control, and low-cost input \"packages \" of technology could not have been obtained.The time has come Jar I1TA to further increase its efforts 10 test 'esearch results in ,'arious countries and assist in speeding up the 'ansfer of technology 10 more national programs that in turn can ?Qch their farmers. i\\1oreover, we intend to strengthen Our 'nkages with national and international programs, universities, 1d other research institutes. Recent actions have been taken to acomplish this. For example, we have established a new Office oj In-\"national Programs to give additional impetus to this important ooperative phase of our work. Also, closer links are being forged \"ith the Institut de Recherches Agronomiques Tropicales (IRA T) ;imilar to those with our sister institutions (CIMMYT and IRRI) who hal'e placed liaison scientists with us at [baaan. And we will continue to strengthen our network of contacts and collaborations with African universities and research institutions and with those in the developed countries who have scientific personnel and sophisticated equipment not available to us but necessary for certain basic research.We have prepared this publication as testimony to various accomplishments during 1980. It records some of the highlights of I1TA 's research during that period but by 110 means all of it. If you wish to obtain more complete information, it can be found in the Institute 's 1980 Annual Report which is available to you upon request.T raditional, small-scale farming with the bush fallow system and large-scale modern farming in tropical Africa face the same basic and serious problem: how to maintain the productivity of the fragile tropical soil for sustained and stable food production . Technology adapted from other regions that disregards soil and climatic constraints can create serious problems associated with maintenance of soil productivity.lIT A scientists, therefore, have been making a major effort to improve traditional systems and develop alternative systems that would contribute toward a solution of problems of continuous crop production. Among them is no-till farming with appropriate agronomic \"packages\" for different soils, agro-ecological environments, and cropping systems.The merits of no-till farming lie in: (1) soil and water conservation; (2) reduction in capital inputs and land area for installing and maintaining the conventional soil conservation measures; (3) savings in time required for seedbed preparation; and (4) a drastic reduction in damage to the environment and the natural resource base caused by soil erosion. The savings in energy, as often believed, are quest ionable because herbicides-an essential component of the no-till \"package\" -are petro-based and comprise a large proportion of the energy consumed. Crop yields with the no-till system may be equivalent to those with conventional methods during the initial stages of development. Subsequently, when under conventional tillage the soil becomes degraded by erosion , the no-till system usually sustains higher yields. This \"soil conserving system,\" however, is not applicable for all soils and crops. But these conclusions can be drawn from ITTA research and relevant literature concerning the appropriate tillage methods required for soils from various agroecological zones with different moisture regimes:Humid and subhumid regions.No-till farming with periodic fallowing should be applicable for coarse-textured so ils for production of row crops (maize, cowpea, soybean, pigeon pea) and some root crops (cassava). Since so il erosion by water and the susceptibility of these soi ls LO drought are serio us problems, the no-till system can be successfu lly applied for management of these soi ls. For soils high in silt with crusting and capping prob lems of the sur face soi l, periodic physical manipulation may be necessary . For heavy textured soils, water logging and impeded surface drainage are major limitations. Unless appropriate measures are taken for draining the surface soil, tillage methods are of secondary importance. The no-till system will be harmful unless drainage con• ditions are improved.A successful no-tillage technology \"package\" for maiz( production has been developed for Alfisols for land newly cleared from seco ndary forest fallow (5 years or more) and with slopes up to 12\"70 in the transitional forest zone. This \"package\" is best applied on large-scale la nd development schemes, but a number of different packages are possible on farms of different sizes (20 ha, 50 ha, 100 hal. Generally la rge farms are recommended from a management point of view because additionaltracLOrs per farm increase the flexibility of operations during peak periods.Under upland conditions, effective erosion control can be ach ieved with a no-tillage system if cropp ing sequences and combinations are adopted that wi ll permit about 4 tl ha of residue at the surface during the first four weeks of crop establishment. Data in Figure I show that for six consecutive years consistently higher yields of maize were o btained from unplowed p lots. Soil erosion from plowed plots resulted in a poor crop sta nd , ferti lizer imbalance, impeded root growth, S A poor stand 0/ mai:e on a field that has been continuously plowed for six years. It suffers from soil erosion, compaction, and a decline in nutrient status.6 and reduced yield. However, mechanize\"~dons for seeding and harvesting can cause soil compaction below plow depth in the plowed system and in the surface layer of untilled land. The degree and severity of this compaction depend on soil texture, number and type of field operations, the soil moisture regime during the periods of seeding and harvesting, and the effective depth of rooting.Manual operations of seeding and harvesting-the practice on smalJ-scale farms-do not cause such compaction. Experiments conducted at IlT A involving 22 consecutivelygrown crops of maize with the no-till system indicate no symptoms of soil compaction in the surface or subsurface horizon. On the other hand, reduction in maize yield after eight consecutive crops of no-till maize with mechanized operations can be attributed to severe compaction and acidification in the surface horizons (Figure 1). Under these conditions, periodic chiselling, fallowing with deep-rooted tree crops and perennials to recycle soil nutrients, or occasional plowing at the end of the rainy season may be desirable to overcome the adverse effects of soil compaction.Although most of the information on soil ferti lity for crop production in the tropics is concerned mainly with tilled systems, limited data show the great importance of soil fertility (particulary nitrogen) for the success of the no-till system. On low N-status soil, higher yields were obtained with tilled maize, but on fertile soil with adequate fertilization no-tilled maize gave equal or higher yields (Figure 2). For upland crops, adequate weed control is an important factor for successful implementation of the no-till system. With continuous cultivation and the use of appropriate herbicides, there is generally a shift in weed population. Brachiaria and other grass species dominate in plowed plots but rhizomatus weeds (Imperata cylindrica) and bush regrowth are dominant in untilled land. However, the \"package\" for adequate weed control will differ for different soils and crops.The advantages of no-till farming for rice cultivation in lowland soils include savings in time and energy and easier double cropping. Equivalent yields of rice can be obtained from untilled plots for four to six consecutive crops (Figure 3). After this, however, no-tillage can have adverse effects on crop yield , and periodic plowing (both wet and dry) becomes necessary to overcome them. Frequency of plowing depends on soil texture and the moisture regime during the dry season. Semi-arid regions. Depending on the soil texture and land use, soils of this region suffer from wind and water erosion and frequent drought. Soils with a coarse-textured surface horizon can be cultivated by the no-till method with periodic (every two or three years) chiselling required to loosen the compacted soil surface. For soils high in silt and fine sand fraction, rough plowing at the end of the rainy season may be necessary to prevent wind and water erosion and loosen the compacted soil. Heavy-textured soils, such as Vertisoils, respond favorably to a permanent a'nd graded ridge/ furrow system that directs the water run-off into a storage tank to be used for supplementary irrigation. This, however, does not imply that mulch farming techniques are not useful for these areas, but the availability of crop residue mulch, in view of its alternate uses, could be a serious limitation. Arid regions. Wind erosion is serious in the arid regions, and soils predominant in fine sand and silt fraction are more susceptible to wind erosion than coarse-or heavy-textured soils. Crop yield depends on the availability of water reserves and their conservation in the root zone. Dry farming techniques , water harvesting, and use of wind breaks are appropriate methods of soil management.No single tillage method can be universally applicable for a range of soils and crops of the tropics. The objective is to optimize the • use of the limiting resource and conserve the natural resource base. The potential and use of no-till farming can be extended to other soils and ecological regions with_ suitable modifications in the agronomic \"package\" for that environment. Even if the mechanical tillage operations cannot be completely eliminated, either the number of operations required for seedbed preparation can be reduced or the mechanical tillage can be limited to a portion of the field (row zone) rather than covering the entire land surface. assava, produced on 6 million hectares in tropical Africa which constitutes 40070 of the world output, is grown under diverse soil and agro-ecological regions. It is generally the last crop in the rotation prior to returning the land to bush fallow. Although the highest yields are obtained through proper management and in soils that promote development of tuberous roots, cassava can still produce decent yields even under the most adverse soil conditions where other crops may not. This can be attributed partly to its deep root system.Cassava roots can penetrate soils of relatively high bulk density . No significant differences were observed in root density of cassava grown on sandy loam soil with a bulk density range of 1.4 to 1.8 g/ cm 3 (Figure 4). Development of tuberous roots within a few centimeters of the surface layer and a complete ground cover over 6 to 12 months can have beneficial effects on physical properties of the soil surface. Compaction and crusting of the surface layer caused by impacting raindrops, as commonly observed in open-row crops, become minimized in cassava due to the protective effects of its canopy structure. While soil beneath the tubers may be  Data of soil bulk density and penetrometer resistance of the surface layer under maize and cassava (Table 1) indicate severe compaction of the surface layer under maize but not under cassava. Loosening of the surface layer under cassava results in high water intake and relatively low runoff and erosion. Under favorable soil density and moisture regimes, root penetration may exceed 2 m depth, even within a short span of three months.Under equivalent soil moisture stress, cassava leaves can maintain higher leaf-water potential than maize or even sweet potato. With no rain for about 10 weeks, leaf-water potenfia!Bulk density (J/an 1 ) 0.67 269 1.17 1.84 1.1712 of cassava was observed to be -6 to -8 atmosphere compared with -10 to -12 for sweet potato. The mechanisms responsible for maintenance of high leaf-water potential throughout the growth of cassava during a prolonged dry season are not well understood : However, the presence of latex and the leaves' stomatal behavior and surface characteristics may be responsible for this adaptability. These characteristics will be investigated further.Dried Leucaena leaves are collected (below right) to be put on the soil to improve its nitrogen content, and then the stems will be used as stakes and firewood.Nitrogen , Stakes , and Firewood from Leucaena P opulation pressure and other factors in many parts of the tropics have shortened fallow periods so much that small farmers find it difficultLO effectively res LOre soil prOductivity or produce stakes, firewood , and o ther essentials usually harvested from bush fallow. To help alleviate this problem, investig;llions have been initiated to develop efficient alternatives LO bush fallow. One of these alternatives -\"alley cropping\" -was described in the 1979 issue of \"Research Highlights .\" Another alternative for farmers accustomed to open field cropping or conventional stakings is a Leucaena \"cut and carry method\" now being investigated.Using a 112 ha plot in which Leucaena leucocephala was once used for in-situ yam vine support, the potential leaf N and stake yield were evaluated. Leucaena was spaced 150 cm x 50 cm and cut back to about 15 cm at the end of the dry season following the yam harvest. Free regeneration was allowed with both seedlings and shoots which contributed to a thick regrowth with approximately 149,000 upright stems/ ha. During the early dry season of the following year (1980) , the plot was selectively harvested. Stems having a diameter over 2.0 cm at 100 Col above ground were cut. The data (Table I) show that 13 ,330 stems per ha or 9 .00/0 of the stems in the field were judged to be suitable for supporting yam vines. To harvest the leaves, the stems were leaned against a horizo ntal bar. The leaves which withered and fell from the stems after about seven days were collected on canvas or plastic sheets. The leaves from the harvested stems yielded 2,240 kg/ ha of dry matter with a nitrogen content of approximately 4.2\"70. This gave a nitrogen yield of 94.0 kg/ ha. The harvested stems represent a fraction of the total biomas and therefore only a fraction of the total leaf nitrogen yield, Farmers interested in higher nitrogen yield may harvest the entire crop of Leucaena. Although many of the stems may not make good stakes, unsuitable ones could be used as firewood.The labor data (Table 2) represent the man-hour I ha required for cutting and setti ng the stems to obtain dried leaves. The figure is high and indicates the difficulties involved in removing stems with leaves and branches attached. The figure could be much lower relative to yields in a clear felling situation.The benefit of nitrogen from leaves could be significant in developing countries where the shortage of foreign exchange limits the quantity of fertilizer purchased or where a poor infrastructure prevents efficient distribution and use. The stakes and firewood could be important in those areas where a shortened bush fallow period has already limited these supplies. A supply of stakes available from nearby managed lots could increase yam production in areas where a shortage of stakes has been adversely affecting production. Moreover, the used stakes make good firewood.Cocoyam, a component oj a larger yam-based farming system, may have a promising future. In an /ITA survey, farmers reported that they are increasing their production.I n a 1980 survey, llTA economists of the Farming Systems Program found that farmers in Western and Eastern Nigeria are increasing their cocoyam production and that the crop may have a more promising future. Nigeria is the world 's largest producer of the crop with 40\"10 of total production. (FAO reports.) It is the second most important root crop in Cameroon, Ghana , and Gabon . Forty percent of the 66 farmers in 10 different villages in the Nigerian survey sample grew coco yam (C%casio esu/en-10 and Xanthosoma sagillijolium) as a cash crop, selling at least half of their yearly production. Planting dates varied from Marchi April to April/May and seemed to depend on the planting and harvest dates for yam. As such, the cocoyam All varieties were cultivated on well-drained, fenile, upland soils. The choice of variety was largely dependent o n the method of food preparation. Qualities such as \"haJd\" vs . \"soft\" and \"scratchy\" vs. \"sweet\" were important. From the point of view of taste, yam (white or yellow) was preferred, but cocoyam had preference over maize or cassava. Pounding was the most common form of food preparation .Labor utilization fo r cocoyam was estimated to be 148 man-days per hectare and less labor-intensive than cassava (Table 3). The most common storage areas were a shady place in the field, huts or barns, houses, and pits .Hybrid Maize for Africa S ome countries in Africa have a program of genetic improvement in maize based on hybrids, and hybrid maize is extensively grown in Kenyan and Tanzanian highlands and on commercial as well as small-scale farms in Zambia. In West Africa, Senegal and Ivory Coast have developed hybrids which have established a good performance, but the state of the seed industry has restricted their large-scale popularization.Over the past two years, lIT A has had a very modest program to explore the prospects for hybrid maize, initially through top crosses (line x variety cross) which have obvious advantages in seed production over other types of hybrids. In the program of top crosses,a base location like ITT A does not develop the hybrids per se but only inbred lines (mainly S3 and S,v with specific attributes of adaptation, such as resistance to diseases and insects and combining ability. The lines so developed can be used by national programs either to develop synthetics and composites, or they can use the lines as male parents in the top cross seed production plots wherein the female parent will be the locally adapted variety (Figure 5). The detasseling will be limited to the local variety. Seed production in the male parent will be concurrent to the top cross seed production. Since the lines are not advance generation \"inbreds,\" they have reasonable vigor. The top cross seed will produce a crop of greater unformity than the composites and is expected to be more vigorous and prod!lctive. In general, the seed production technology is simpler, although the farmer will have to change seed each year as with regular hybrids. (2) Relative yield potential of the top crosses with the best available composites in a given situation.(3) Dominance of traits controlling specific adaptational attributes-resistance to streak, borer, ear-rot, stalk-rot. (4) Yield disparity from the best available hybrids.compared with the original TZE J composite variety (left)   FIGURE 6. Nigeria, 1980.  Research so far indicates an impressive yield gain in the top crosses over the parent populations (Figure 6). The potential for further improvement exists, since not enough effort has gone into the production of inbred lines .When the line employed in top crosses has resistance to maize streak virus, and the parent variety is sensitive, the F I (top cross derived commercial crop) is intermediate in reaction to maize streak virus . When exposed to an epidemic of MSV, an average of 20 F I crosses yielded 2,600 kg/ ha compared with the original 20 sensitive composites which yielded 125 kg/ ha. A similar opportunity may exist for other stresses where the trait is genetically dominant.Africa.20F looding regulation, irrigation, and/ or drainage facilities are necessary to make swamp rice productive. Semidwarf (IR 8) plant type for improved swamps with good water control and intermediate (IR 5) plant type for swamps with fluctuating water depths (not exceeding about 30 cm standing water) have generally been found to be suitable.Several such types are available from various breeding programs in Asia, South America, and elsewhere. They are being evaluated for either direct introduction or for use as parents in developing material tolerant to the prevailing stresses in Africa, such as blast, Rice Yellow Mottle Virus (R YMV), and tolerance to iron toxicity. Therefore, efforts at liT A are directed toward solving these problems.The screening for general performance and adaptation of fixed lines is being done through multilocational tests in Nigeria in cooperation with the National Cereals Research Institute (Ibadan). Screening and selection for blast resistance, RYMV tolerance, and grain type is done from the early generations by lTTA. The screening for iron toxicity tolerance is being accomplished through cooperation with the Central ITA 113 with 10llg, slellder, and trallsluceflt rice grains and ITA 212 with blast resistance were found to be high yielding.African Rice Development Association (WARDA) at Suakoko, Liberia. In addition, the international testing is being accomplished through the testing programs of WARDA in West Africa and through the International Rice Research Institute (IRRI) world-wide.In tests in various locations, Tax 514-16-101-1-1, TOM 1-3, and BO 6850 were the three highest yielding, semi-dwarf rice varieties for improved swamps. These cultivars have now been designated as ITA 121 , ITA 123, and ITA 212, respectively .ITA 121 (Moroberekan / SE 3630, Ikong Pao) was iniLially selected in upland environments up to the F, stage and then selected under low nutrient (N, P and K) irrigated paddies where it was superior to all the 120 other lines tested. It is tolerant to Fe-Loxicity. Further, it has exhibited good performance in well-managed paddies and was among the top three ranking cultivars yielding 7.0 t/ ha or more .ITT A 123 is a semi-dwarf mutant of as 6 -the most prominent tall, upland variety in Nigeria. Although this line has thick and deep roots similar to as 6, it is moderately susceptible to panicle discoloration under upland stress conditions. However, under irrigated paddies it has performed well in comparison with other varieties in various tests conducted in Nigeria. In addition to having high yield pOLential, the grains of ITA 123 , which are long, slender, and translucent, are preferred grain types by urban consumers in Lhe region. In llTA' s high rainfall substation (anne, M ost upland soils in African regions where rice is traditionally grown have a low water-holding capacity. This, coupled with the relatively shallow rooting habit of rice, limits the soil volume that the plants can exploit for moisture. They suffer from moisture stress due to breaks as short as one week during the rainy season. Therefore, extensive root development is one of the significant characteristics for drought resistance.Intensive research to understand the drought resistant mechanisms and to breed drought resistant rice varieties have been a primary focu s for upland rice improvement in various national programs and at the International Rice Research Institute (IRRI), Institut de Recherches Agronomiques Tropicales (IRA T), and UTA.Aware that the traditional O. saliva cultivars for West Africa are among the highly drought resistant varieties, UTA scientists evaluated their morphological characters and noted that they have a large proportion of long, thick roots which enable them to absorb soil moisture from deeper soil horizons and thus suffer less from drought. Experiments at the Institute demonstrated the advantage of root th ickness over high stomatal resistance among the rice varieties studied.Response of five rice cultivars (8G90-2, IR-442-2-58, IR 2035-120-3 , IR 2071-586-5-6-3, and TOx 504-13-14-1) to water stress at the flowering stage was studied in pot culture. Various traits related to drought resistance were measured . The latter two cultivars maintained higher leaf water potential and had lower stomatal densities but lower stomatal resistance compared with the control up to seven days after stress (Table 5) . Stomatal lengths were not significantly different. Also, differences in stomatal resistance between varieties disappeared nine days after stress. However, differences between varieties for their abi lity to maintain high leaf water potential persisted. In other experiments where 36 cultivars were screened under four moisture treatments, the grain yield differences could not be explained on the basis of leaf water potential alone. Ratio of root (up to 20 cm) to total shoot weight were different among th e cultivars but showed no clear relationship with water potential measurements. But ge nerally the cultivars which were higher yielding under drought co nditions had thicker roots. In a separate study under upland condition s, the percentage of root dry weight over total dry weight was actually lower (10 to 15\"70) for upland varieties such as Moroberekan, LAC 23 and 63-83 which are known to possess drought avoidance mechanism compared with improved low land types (14 to 24%). On the other hand , all the upland types had much thicker roots (2.1-3.3 score) while the improved lowland types had generally thin roots (5.7 -8.0 score). This suggests the importance of root type or thickness for the uplands rather than root density per se. Recent studies a t IRRI co nfirm that root thickness is associated with drought resistance.IITA scientists have focu sed their attention on combining the thick-rooted •character from the traditional upland types with lodging resistance and high yield potential from the semi-dwa rfs to develop improved semi-dwarf upland cultivars. Semi-dwarfs for the uplands should differ from the Thick rice roots rather than root mass is associated with drought resistance. /ITA scientists found that it is possible to select for root thickness and short stature at the rice seedling stage (upper right).typical IR 8 type for the lowlands in order to adapt to \"upland stresses.\" Among other things, they should have thick and deep roots, lower leaves droopy to suppress weed growth, upper leaves erect to efficiently use solar radiation, and well exerted panicles with good grain filling.Although selecting for short stature at seedling stage has been practiced by most breeders, the possibility of selecting for thick and deeper roots at this stage has not been explored in the past. However, evaluation by liT A scientists in 1980 of an F 2 population of TOx 936 (IR 1529-430-3/ lguape Catetoa semi-dwarf x tall cross) indicates that this may be possible.The fitness. of seedling stage selection of root thickness in short-statu red plants was as high as 95010. Also, the correlation between plant height and root thickness was not significant. Plant height and root thickness behaved as independent characters. This means that it should be possible to combine the thick-rooted character of the traditional , tall upland varieties with a short-statured character of the improved , high-yield potential semi-dwarfs. Furthermore, these two desirable traits can be recognized at the seedling stage.Seedling stage selection for plant height and root characters will increase the probability of developing superior semi-dwarfs for uplands because it is simple. M aize streak virus is the major production constraint in Africa in the lowlands and mid-altitude growing conditions. llTA research (c.r. llTA Research Highlights for 1978) led to the identification of two populations-TZSR(W) and TZSR (Y) -which held up their resistance under many conditions. Bul there was room for further yield improvement. Taking advantage of the hybridizations between TZSR and the well adapted improved varieties, the genetic base of TZSR populations was further broadened and the populations so developed have been redesignated as TZSR-Y -I and TZSR-W-I (Figure 7). Genetic makeup of the 50 selected TZSR-W-J families.Extensive multilocational testing of the newly constituted populations confirmed their yield potential to be comparable to the widely adapted and accepted (in Nigeria) streaksensitive populations (TZB and TZPB) named earlier by lITA (Table 6). Similar good performance has been reported from Cameroon (Table 7).lITA has always been concerned about determining the validity of resistance over a wide range of environments in Africa. At various stages in the development of resistant materials, international testing has been undertaken to be sure that the resistance holds up against the existing variation in the virus. The data from such tests conducted in several West African countries and in Zaire and Tanzania have clearly indicated that the IB-32 and La Revolution-based MSV resistance holds up in many locations in Africa. The most dramatic display was in the MSV epidemic of 1979 in Sao Tome where the susceptible populations stood up to the epidemic and gave decent yields.Satisfied with the wide relevance of streak resistant material and recognizing the scope for genetic advance in the reconstituted TZSR populations, scientists tested o. ver 700 half-sib families in different environments within Nigeria. In addition, two other types of streak resistant populations are being developed. Half-si b families of early maturing (90-95 days) white and yellow populations are being tested in five locations in Nigeria, and the best families will be recombined during the dry season of 1981 for international testing during 1982. Streak resistant populations adapted to the midaltitude ecology (700-1200 m) will also be available for international testing in 1982 for East and Central Africa.The CIMMYT International Testing Program has identified several experimental varieties with proven performance in one or more African countries. Their major weakness is susceptibility to MSV . Ten of these varieties are employed for conversion to streak resistance by the back-cross method . Also, CIMMYT has relocated the base populations of La Posta (population 43) at liT A with major emphasis on incorporating streak resistance.V irus diseases have a disastrous effect on crop yields and threaten the food producing potential of Africa and other parts of the world. A basic key for methods of control is the identification of the viruses, their characterization or description, and final diagnosis of the diseases observed in the field. Mixed or complex infections can occur, and in that case they have to be separated before biological and physicochemical properties can be studied.liT A virologists provide a specialized support service to the Institute's plant pathologists and breeders working on the improvement of cereals, grain legumes, and roOl and tuber crops. They survey these crops for possible virus diseases, identify and characterize the viruses, develop indexing techniques, determine the rate of seed transmission to make sure that virus-free seeds are distributed for multilocational testing, provide representative and pure virus isolates for resistance screening, develop resistance screening techniques, and assist in resistance screening and virus indexing where required.During I 980,research on the sweet potato virus disease involved further clarification of the two-component nature of the disease. It could be confirmed that both components are necessary to produce the disease symptoms, and it was found that the plants cannot be readily indexed by means of serological techniques if only one component is present. A simple and reliable virus indexing method was developed invol ving approach grafting to a purposely selected highlysusceptible sweet potato seedling clone. In a preliminary survey, it was found that symptomless plants among otherwise diseased sweet potato clones in the field can have either the aphid-transmitted or the whitefly-transmitted component or neither one.Maize mottle/ chlorotic stunt, like maize streak virus transmitted by the leafhopper vector, Cicadulina Iriangu/a, is largely overlooked as a virus disease, probably because the symptoms strongly resemble nutrient deficiencies. Close monitoring of this disease, both under greenhouse and field conditions, showed that even in UTA's improved maize popuhitions severe• chlorosis and stunted growth may occur in varying degrees of severity. But these varieties, like local maize varieties, are far less susceptible than any introduced exotic variety. During a 1980 survey in Northern Nigeria in the middle of the growing season, maize mottle/ chlorotic stunt infections were seen throughout the area, and the disease may present a potential constraint to production.In a search for possible wild grasses or other alternate hosts, it was found that sorghum plants in farmers' fields adjacent to a large-scale maize production area (Mokwa, Nigeria) were affected by a serious and epidemic disease. From artificial inoculations of sorghum in greenhouse experiments, further evidence was obtained that this disease was possibly caused by maize mottle/chlorotic stunt virus. A severe chlorosis, followed by leaf tip necrosis, developed in sorghum seedlings two to three weeks after inoculation. However, symptoms were completely transient in the sense that new growth did not develop any further chlorosis/ necrosis. However, in the late chronic phase, in the sorghum variety tested, the same disease syndrome developed as that observed in sorghum in the field.It is not impossible that large scale introduction of a relatively new crop like maize into areas traditionally growing millet and sorghum may result in dramatic shifts in the ecology of the maize mottle/ chlorotic stunt disease in the future.A set of 13 maize varieties and breeding lines was tested for resistance to an isolate of maize dwarf mosaic virus (MDMV) obtained from maize at lIT A. Some of these materials have useful resistances to other virus diseases, including MSV, maize rough dwarf virus (MRDV), and MDMV types from other places in the world (Table 8). One finding from this experiment was that the MSV-resistant TZSR (white population), which is also resistant to maize mottle/ chlorotic stunt and maize stripe virus, only developed comparatively mild symptoms in about half of the plants inoculated. Therefore, it can also be considered moderately  resistant to MDMV. This maize variety combines high levels of resistance to four different virus di seases of regional or continental importance in Africa and on neighboring islands.lIT A scientists found that a large reservoir of these viruses affect maize production on the Island of Sao Tome and that the TZSR lines developed at lIT A have performed very well under those conditions. (Table 9). Maize yields of the TZSR lines were approximately double the local Sao Tomean variety (6,369 vs. 3,443 kg/ ha and several times higher than other improved but disease-susceptible culti vars.A very sensitive serological technique-Enzyme-linked Immunosorbent Assay (ELlSA)-has been success full y applied to detect not only maize streak virus but also cowpea mottle, cowpea yellow mosaic, and rice mottle viruses. lIT A scienti sts are in the process of producing antisera against several other viruses occurring in food crops in West Africa.Progress made so far and the research underway are summarized in Table 10..~Progress made so far in the Virology Unit. Virus-free clonal material in the culture room (abo~'e right).Virus-Free Clonal Material in Tissue Culture D uring 1980. lhe Tissue Cullure Laboralory produc• ed virus-free clonal malerial of improved cullivars of cassava and sweel pOlalo and conlinued 10 work on lhe eSlablishment and mainlenance of a germplasm co lleclion of sweel pOlalo clones in virro.The produclion of virus-free clones has become essentia l for lhe internalional exc hange of clonal malerial because il is lhe only way 10 safely exchange such malerial Wil houl inlroducing new disease inlO non-affecled areas. Two major sleps are involved in produclion : (I) lhe merislem lip cullure and (2) indexing for virus.Plant leIs of 54 clones of sweel pOlalo have been oblained from merislem lip cullure. From lhese 54 clones. 20 are elile varielies developed al liT A. and lhey have been lesled for virus freedom. In addilion. planllel s of 10 clones of cassava have been produced by merislem lip cul lure and 8 of lhem are improved clones produced al II TA. They a lso have been leSled for virus freedom.During the year, 17 countries in Africa and Asia requested clonal material of improved varieties of cassava and sweet potato. A system of international distribution was developed, and, because of the close and effective collaboration between the Quarantine Station of Moor Plantation at Ibadan and I1TA, the material will be sent to these and other countries in 1981. Plants obtained through meristem tip culture are indexed for virus freedom at I1TA. Those that appear to be virusfree are then inspected and tested by the Quarantine Officer. If the material is confirmed virus free, phytosanitary certificates are issued according to information on the import permit sent to II TA by the requesting country.The virus-free material is then multiplied in tissue culture form and sh ipped to the requesting country together with the import permit, phytosanitary certificate, and a manual with recommendations for handling of the material upon receipt and its transfer from the culture tube to the soil. The tissue culture material is hand-carried whenever possible.The ill vilrD germ plasm collection of sweet potato now totals more than 300 clones and will be increased in 1981. It has been possible to keep some clones for up to 19 months without transfer to a fresh culture medium. Fourteen clones of water yam (Dioscorea a/ala L) are also maintained in tissue culture form. Sciemisls conducted soa king lests with waler yam leaves from greenhouse and field plams at various stages of growth. Leaves from eight different clones were subjected to different soaki ng treatments. Characteristic necrotic Ie ions and epidermal blacking, which are similar to or identical with D. a/ala anthracnose and \"scorch\" in Nigeria, were consistentl y induced by soaking leaves in ordinary tap water. Benonyl and Streptomicyn sulphate added to tap water did not reduce Ihe incidence of these symptoms.Additional investigations are underway to clarify the role of physiological stresses in the etiology of this disease so screening methods for resistance may be more reliably developed. R esults of a two-year lIT A study ( 1979-80) in different regions of Nigeria have revealed a definite pattern in the distribution of the three major stem borers of maize. The country can be divided into three \"stem borer ecological areas\"-Southeastern area of Sesamia ealamistis, Western area of Eldana saeeharina, a nd Northern area of Busseola fusea. The study also reinforces existing evidence and validates the practiced lIT A strategy that the testing, selection, and demonstration of breeding material should not take place at a si ngle location but a number of sites representative of the major ecological zones in which the crop is grown.Sesamia ealamislisa moist area oriented species -is abundant in the Southeast where it ranks as the most destructive pest of maize. Stemborer populations in the Umudike area (Southeast) consist almost exclusively (92%) of Sesamia miamis/is. The humid environment of the region is best suited for the development of this species. The stem borer attack is most serious during the seco nd seaso n (July-November). Therefore, farmers do not grow mai ze in this season.Nigeria.,., ,., ,., ,.,,., ,., Eldana saccharina, a dry area oriented species, has spread from the North to the West where it has become a major pest of maize. The species prefers maize to sorghum but can thrive almost equally well on both. Peaks of Eldana population coincide with the harvest-post-harvest period of maize in the West (Figure 8). Where the crop residues of the preceding crops are left, as in no-till farming, Eldana has been observed to build up a high pest load.Busseola fusca is a major pest in sorghum in the North. It thrives on this crop and also feeds readily on maize. Therefore, with the intensification and spread of maize cultivation in the savanna, it may also become an important pest for maize in the savanna. In Western Nigeria, Busseola populations do not normally build up to high levels comparable to the northern savanna. When Busseola populations from the West were reared on maize and sorghum stems, they showed a distinct \"preference\" for maize. The Western population of Busseola which was forced -fed on sorghum throughout the larval period has clearly shown evidence of prolonged larval phase, mortality, uneven sex ratio, and sterility while that fed continuously on maize was normal (Table 11). Similarly, the northern Busseola fed on maize for more than one life cycle results in sterile offspring. But the reciprocal sex attraction between the western and northern Busseola populations is normal. Artificial matings between these two forms of Busseola result in hybrid sterility. The hybrids produce only a limited number of unfertilized eggs. Although the northern and western forms of Busseola have been described under one species-B. 'Jusca\"-the host preference and hybrid sterility strongly indicate that they are genetically isolated and should be further investigated to verify their taxonomic status.It is interesting to speculate on the plant protection opportunity the above stated isolating mechanism can provide. Is it possible to reduce the population of northern Busseola by a massive release of males from the western Busseola in the savanna? liT A research on resistance breeding has thus far been limited to Sesamia and utilizing the heavy natural infestation during the second season at Umudike. The selected families of the \"borer resistant\" population showed a damage score of 3.56 against the susceptible checks with 4.85 in the severity scale of I to 5 where the most susceptible is scored at 5. There is justifiable optimism for resistance breeding against Sesamia, but the genetic advance will be speeded up by artificial infestation. Artificial diets have been developed and a pilot rearing laboratory has been set up.In order of preference, the destructive cassava mealybug feeds on the stem near the growing point, on petioles, and on leaves. S oon after it had first been discovered in Zaire in 1973, the cassava mealybug started developing and spreading out quickly into countries around the Gulf of Guinea and even farther west into Senegal . Now it is threatening cassava production in areas toward the east.Cassava mealybug specimens collected in Africa were used for the description of the new species, Phenacoccus manihoti (MAT-FERR), in 1977. Morphological similarities with the North American Phenacoccus spp. lead to the designation of the Americas as its area of origin. At the time of the description of the new species, a mealybug collected on cassava in northern Brazil had also been identified as being P. manihoti.As a result of IITA's investigation into the origin of P. Manihoti, it has been possible to clear the taxonomic status of the mealybug occuring on cassava in the northern part of South America. This mealybug, first identified as P. maniholi, has been described by Drs. Williams and Cox (1981), CIE, London, as Phenacoccus herreni. This clarification is significant since efficient parasitoids are usually very specific and therefore have to be collected from P. manilloli in the area of origin of this species. (Somewhere in the Americas between 30° latitude South).This insect pest has caused large economic losses and food shortages and is now a recurrent problem in several Central and West African countries. Yield losses may be as high as 60\",. of the roots and 100% of the leaves. These high losses are due mainly to the adverse effect of saliva toxin injected into the plant during the feeding process which depresses the plant 's growth.P. manilloli has a life cycle from egg to reproductive adult of 24 days at 26°C and is strict ly parthenogetic. The average fertility in the laboratory is 440 eggs per female, with a maximum of 750. The life span of an adult is about 26 days. The mealybug feeds generally (in order of preference) on the stem near the growing point, on petioles, and on leaves. The dispersal of the crawlers and the egg masses occurs passively with the wind . Man also helps to spread mealybugs by moving infested planting material.The population dynamics of the cassava mealybug follows a seaso nal pattern. During the dry season the population builds up very rapidly to reach a self-destructing level. At this point , which generally occurs before the onset of the rainy season, the population will break down because of lack of foo d, overcrowding, and entomopathogens. The survivors will eventually resettle on the newly produced shoots at the beginning of the rainy season and maintain themselves in small colonies throughout the cassava field s until the next dry season.The biological ~ontrol approach to solve the cassava mealybug problem has been advocated by IlTA for several reasons. Cassava is grown by small landholders in Africa in widely dispersed plots, and access to many of these plots is difficult. Also the crop is in continuous cultivation throughout the year. Therefore, it acts as an excellent host for insects si nce the plant, in several stages of growth, may be present in anyone area. Furthermore, most growers cannot obtain the required chemicals and equipment or do not have the money to buy them. Also, mealybug resistance to 42 chemicals is known to build up rapidly, and secondary pest outbreaks may be induced. Another reason it is difficult to take a chemical control approach: cassava leaves are used as a leafy vegetable in many African countries. liT A's research team is currently working on the bionomics of the cassava mealybug and of the presently available natural enemies. Adequate knowledge of the ecology, biology, and behavior of the insect pest, as well as its interaction with the host plant, are a \"must\" if a biological control program is to be carried out successfully. Efficient methods for mass-culturing of mealybugs and natural enemies and for releasing of the laller are being developed. Studies of the cassava agro-ecosystem are underway, as well as investigations of the arthopod fauna of areas surrounding cassava fields. Emphasis is given to the live table studies of the cassava mealybug since it is very important to know exactly the population dynamics and the factors regulating it to assess the impact of the released natural enemies. Scientists at liT A are collaborating closely with the Commonwealth Institute of Biological Control (eIBC) whose entomologists have already found a predator, P. Herreni. The predator, a coccinellid of the genus Hyperaspis, is being cultured successfully, and the first experimental releases have already been made in Nigeria by IITA. The development of the released predator population and its impact on the pest population are now carefully followed with the life table method.A cassava crop in Senegal wiped out by the mealybug.A close-up of mealybugs feeding on a cassava leaf and an adult predator (spotted insect) feeding on the mealybugs.IlT A in cassava fields in Nigeria.Breeding for resistance is the most promising method of comro/ of cassava green spider mite. The diseased p/am (left) is non-resistam to this insect pest, the one next 10 it resistant.R esistance against the destructive cassava green spider mite, (Mol1onychellus (0110)00), has been discovered in liT A germ plasm and seedling material. Both the germp lasm and the 1980 cassava seed ling nursery were evaluated for resistance. Researchers screened 149 previously selected cassava seed lings based on a scoring system ranging from I to 5 (I = resistant, 5 = susceptible) and selected a tOlal of 18 seed lings which showed high to moderate levels of resistance.All cassava material selected as resistant showed va rying degrees of pubescence on the young leaves while highly susceptible plants had fewer or no hairs . Subsequent hair counts per mmi gave evidence that hair density may be a factor for resistance. Table 12 shows the results on susceptible, intermediate, and resistant clones.The cassava green sp ider mite (COM), introd uced to the African continent about 10 yea rs ago, can reduce yields up to 40\",0, especially on late-planted cassava. The mite attacks the shoot area of the plant and causes severe chlorosis and reduction of leaf area during the dry season. For African farming conditions, breeding for resistance is the most promising control method because no additional inputs are necessary.  ajor emphasis has been put on the identification of insect resistant cowpea cultivars as a means of reducing the risks of growing the crop in the tropics. One of the most important pests is the legume podborer, Maruca leslu/a/is, which can wipe out the crop if not controlled, and field damage ranging from 20\"70 to 70% is not unusual.Previous research identified TVu 946 as resistant to Maruca, and work in 1980 confirmed this. The cultivar showed the lowest larval populations in the terminal buds, stems, flower buds, and flowers . In addition, since fewer pods were infested, there was less damage to seed (Table 13), and the build up in population was slower than on a typically susceptible cultivar such as VITA 3 (Figure 10).The seeds of TVu 946, however, are very small, dark pigmented, and speckled -a type generally unacceptable to consumers. (They prefer a large white or tan cowpea with a wrinkled seed coal.) The objective is to combine the Maruca resistance of TVu 946 with superior consumer-preferred seed and plant characteristics which permit higher yields.In 1980, all breeding material in which TVu 946 had been used as a parent were tested for resistance to Maruca. One such cross-TVx 3890-010F -has been identified and appears to possess high yield potential combined with moderate podborer resistance (Table 13).  Studies of the variation in a field population of Maruca, which allacks both the vegetative and reproductive pans of the cowpea crop, show that the allack stans around 21 days after planting (DAP). Terminal shoots and other pans of the stem are the main focus of damage at this early stage.Eggs are laid on the terminal shoots and young, paniallyopened leaves. When the larvae hatch, they feed on the terminal shoots and later bore into the young succulent stems. This constitutes the early generation of the borer population. From the terminal shoots, larvae migrate to flower buds and flowers, and the peak infestation is usually seen around 42-49 DAP. Counts indicate that there are more eggs on the flower buds and flowers Ihan on Olher plalll pans (Table 14), a facl lhal may be relaled lO proximily of larval food sources.There are usually fewer larvae on pods lhan on floral pan s. Damage lO pods is normally a resull of migralion of larvae from the floral pans . IL appears lhal larvae do nOl generally migrale during the firsl lwo inslars-lhe slage al which lhey are mOSl vulnerable. A generalion cycle lakes belween 22 and 25 days . IL is lherefore lheorelically possible lO have up lO four generalions of the insecl during one crop season. However, as generalions overlap, scientisls can only eSlimale the number of generalions in the course of a crop season.The populalion of adulls in the field during the day seems lO be affeCled by the lype of planl canopy. Cowpea cullivars wilh dense canopies (VITA 3, for example) usually harbor a large adult populalion. This cultivar of len shows high larval infeslalion (Figure 10), perhaps because of the high \" resident\" adull populalion. On cullivars wilh a lhin, open canopy (TVu 946, for example), few adulls. if any, are seen during the day. Research is underway lO delermine the influence of nalural enemies on the populalion of the podborer. Part of the research effort is devoted to development of methods to a rti ficia ll y infest the breeding material and so make selection more reliable. Work is in progress to develop techniques for mass rearing on the synthetic d iet. A suitable diet has already been developed which is comparab le to the natural diet, but moths did not mate in the confines of insectrearing facilities at liT A. Several factors may be responsible for this, and some of the probable ones have been identified. Noise and other forms of disturbance, food, and cage size and form may be important.In actively flying insects, flight patterns and mating are often intimately associated with each other. Normal mating does not happen if such flight patterns are denied. When Maruca is released, it tends to fly vertically rather than horizontally. The on-going studies show that female longevity ranges from 9 to 13 days (average 12) in tall, round cages (30 x 90 cm), whereas longevity was only 5-8 days (average 7) in small, square, wire-mesh cages (30 x 30 x 30 cm). Increased longevity will ensure better oviposition. In the tall cage, 82\"70 of the females mated , and 86% of these had empty ovaries when they died. In comparison, in the small cage 76% mated of which 46% were after oviposition . Therefore, the tall cage proved to be twice as effective as the short one. These studies on mating were carried out at lIT A during the dry season months and should be considered preliminary.Aphids on a cowpea seedling in Upper Volta.field.T he aphid, Aphis craccivora, is a pest of significant importance on cowpeas, and it has been observed to cause serious damage in fields in West Africa. Research was initiated at liT A in 1979 to identify cowpea cultivars resistant to this pest, and several lines were identified in 1980 as resistant. When aphid populations were compared from the different regions in Nigeria, presence of an additional biotype was observed. Based on the host reaction, they were identified as biotype A and B. TVx 3236-A Thrips Resistant Cowpea F lower thrips, Mega/uro/hrips sjostedti, may cause severe losses ranging from 30 to 100\"0 of a cowpea crop in Africa. Research was initiated at lIT A with the principal objective to develop cowpea cultivars resistant to flower thrips and with acceptable seed quality and superior yield.Resistance to flower thrips from TVu 1509, a cultivar identified as moderately resistant to thrips, has been successfully incorporated in lfe Brown -a locally improved variety developed at the University of Ife . Ife Brown, widely The grain yield of TVx 3236 was compared with its parent lines, with and without insecticide. Thrips in the unsprayed plots caused a large reduction in the yield of Ife Brown. The loss of yield from TVx 3236 and TVu 1509 was much smaller (Figure 12 and Table 16). Furthermore, TVx 3236 had superior yields at test locations in Nigeria, Upper Volta, Senegal, Tanzania, and Togo. . Pod Resistance to Cowpea Weevil F ive lines with significant pod resistance to cowpea weevil (Callosobruchus maculatus) have been identified. Although there was very little difference in the oviposition egg hatch and the number of larvae penetrating the pods between these lines and the Ife Brown and Vita 5 standards, larval survival, damaged seed, and the number of exit holes in the pods were strikingly lower (Table 17) .These reductions are attributed to pod wall characteristics that have not yet been identified, but a chemical may be responsible . As the newly hatched larvae bore through the pod wall, they may ingest sufficient amounts of the chemical to cause high mortality.The pod-resistant lines are being crossed with those known to have seed resistance to cowpea weevil. Research efforts continue to combine these characteristics with shatter-proof pods so that massive seed storage losses can be substantially reduced or even eliminated. The biology of stink bugs, especially Nezara spp., has been extensively studied because of their importance in Brazil, southern United States, and other major soybean growing areas. The insects have a wide host range, and a reservoir population is maintained on many wild leguminous plants and other weeds. They normally migrate into a soybean field in relatively small numbers, but the population rapidly increases as eggs are deposited on the crop. If the initial migratory population can be controlled, multiplication within the crop would be minimal, and the population may not reach levels that cause economic losses. In 19S0, UTA scientists studied a technique called \"trap cropping.\" It is based upon directing the initial invasion of adult stink bugs to a preferred food source. Since the insects are concentrated on the food source, they are effectively \"t.rapped,\" and the population can be controlled by applying insecticides only on the \"trap crops.\"Research conducted on a large government farm in Nigeria clearly illustrated the effectiveness of \"trap cropping.\" Early-maturing soybeans or cowpeas planted on the edges of the soybean field attracted the stink bugs as the main soybean crop did not have pods. The \"traps\" were sprayed '0 control the invading population before it was allowed to multiply. The insect population in the main soybean crop was reduced by 50-S00/. due to \"trap cropping\" (Table IS).The stink bug population never exceeded the economic threshold level in the soybean and cowpea \"trap\" treatments. Damage to pods was significantly reduced through the use of \"traps\" and this was reflected in the yield (Table 19). In the unsprayed plot, stink bugs reduced yields by S5%. In contrast, equal yields of soybean were obtained in the continuously sprayed plot and the treatment where \"traps\" were used.The principal advantage of \"trap cropping\" is more effective and economical use of insecticides. Since the \"trap\" occupies only 10-20% of the total crop, the area requiring insecticide application is reduced by SO-90%. For example, a  minimum of two to three applications of an insecticide is normally required to maintain the population below the economic threshold level of 4 insectsl2 m row. This amounts to 4-6 liters of chemical per hectare per growing season (assuming 2.0 Its/ ha is the recommended rate).If \"trap cropping\" is practiced, only 10-200/0 of the field is sprayed. Assuming three applications, this amounts to only 0.6-1.2 Its of chemical. Furthermore, the cost of applying the chemical is reduced by 80-90% because less area is treated. Since the insects are concentrated on the \"trap,\" insecticidal control is more effective (less insects escape) and environmentally acceptable. By concentrating the target insects on the \"trap,\" the beneficial insects such as predators are not killed on the main crop of soybean.By growing cowpeas on the edges of the soybean field, a farmer could essentially control the insects in the soybeans free of charge. This system produced yields of 1,564 kg/ha of cowpeas and 1,679 kg/ha of soybean-and only the cowpeas were sprayed. The main snag in the application of this technique may be the need to protect cowpeas not only against pod bugs but also against earlier flower pests, thus extending the number of sprays needed. O ne approach to develop wybean varieties for tropical environ ments is 10 combine the ability of soybean varieties from southeast Asia that nodulate freely with the improved , high-yielding soybeans from the United States or elsewhere that do not nodulate readily with rhizobia in African soils (liT A Research Highlights 1979). An alternati ve is 10 provide an inoculum of the rhizobia strains that the high-yielding, introduced soybeans will use . The effect of doing so is shown in Table 20. The yields of soybeans at widely different locations were substantially increased by the introduction of inoculant of suitable strain of rhizobia. They were comparable to or larger than those obtained with the addition of 90 kg / ha of nitrogen as fertilizer.For small African farms, the use of an inoculant would be difficult and expensive. Also, it is important 10 know how long the introduced inoculum will survive and remain effective . To provide an answer, un inoculated soybean seed was sown in 1980 at liT A in plots that had been inoculated and had grown soybeans two years earlier. Without inoculant or fertilizer, the yields of two American varieties-Bossier and TGm 294-were similar in the two years (Table 21). Addition of nitrogen fertilizer or inoculum substantially increased their yield. The inoculant that had been introduced two years earlier was almost , but not quite , as effective as freshly  introduced inoculum . The ELISA test (a sensitive serological technique used to identify strains of rhizobia) showed that more than 90% of the nodules on these two varieties were formed by the inoculant introduced in 1978. Scientists concluded that the introduced strain survived and was competitive with indigenous rhizobia. On an acid soil (pH 4.4) the initial response of Bossier to the addition of inoculum was large and all the nodules were formed by the introduced strain. A year later , however, there was no difference between the yield on these plots and uninoculated plots, although about 65\"70 of the nodules were formed by the strain of rhizobia introduced a year before. It seems, therefore, that some introduced strains do not survive well in acid soils.To select strains that may do well in acid soi ls, large numbers have been grown on artificial, acid media in the laboratory. Of 84 strains tested in this manner, 21 strains, including most of those isolated from tropical soils, were found to be tolerant to acid conditions. There seemed to be no relation between tolerance on the media and the pH of the soil from which the strain had been collected. It remains to be seen whether strains tolerant to acidity in an artificial medium are tolerant and can survive in acid soils.To strengthen research efforts to find ways of maximizing nitrogen fixation in crops, the United Nations Development Program (UNDP) has provided financial support to lITA, and the Institute has subcontracted several areas of investigation to Boyce Thompson Institute for Plant Research, Cornell University, and the University of Western Australia."}

main/part_2/0057991549.json

@@ -0,0 +1 @@
+{"metadata":{"gardian_id":"c88795f03181c5785242a1e0f32998af","source":"gardian_index","url":"https://cgspace.cgiar.org/rest/bitstreams/f79c84c6-03aa-4468-b1f1-e6ad6dee5639/retrieve","id":"213334087"},"keywords":[],"sieverID":"e5f34116-097b-4198-9657-844ac9e0541f","content":"Because of its long growing season and sensitivity to low temperatures, cassava (Manihot esculenta Crantz) is exclusively a crop of the tropics and subtropics. This effective exclusion from production in most of the developed world has had a strong and largely negative influence on the research investment in the crop. In spite of being one of the world's major calorie producers for human sustenance (second most important source of calo ries in sub-Saharan Africa after maize), cassava is little known in the developed world. Research investment into the crop was sparse until two centers of the CGIAR Consortium -the International Center for Tropical Agriculture (CIAT) and the International Institute of Tropical Agriculture (IITA) -began research on the crop in the mid-1970s.Cassava produces better than many crops on acid and low-fertility soils, and under periodic or even extended droughts. Because it has no specific maturity period, there is no period of growth during which it is especially vulnerable to environmental stresses. On the other hand, because of its long growing cycle, typically 10-16 months, it may be exposed to many stresses during this period. Especially, it may endure a number of pest and disease attacks or periods of drought in some environments.Cassava is more resilient than most crops in the face of multiple biotic and abiotic constraints, but it is vulnerable if inappropriately managed. On the one hand, this allows farmers to be moderately Contents 2 Background 5 Production constraints 7 Market constraints 9 Key eco-efficiency interventions for productivity 16 Eco-efficiency in processing 17 Addressing climate change 21 The key role of partnershipsproductive with low inputs, or even with crop and soil mismanagement. It is for this reason that cassava is sometimes cultivated on sloped lands without due protection against erosion, or on soils with declining fertility status and organic matter. The solutions lie in a combination of new ecoefficient technologies, education, policy, and improved market conditions so that farmers have fact-based advice and can afford to apply the appropriate inputs. Breeders, agronomists, and plant protection specialists should focus on technologies that support farmer income and food security through efficient use of inputs, natural resource management, and optimizing the genetic variability in genebanks to develop eco-efficient varieties.In early 2012 a press release picked up by several major media outlets announced that cassava is the \"Rambo of the crop world\" for its ability to stand up against the projected heat and drought stresses that will affect large areas of the tropics in the coming decades. The story was based on a special issue on cassava in the journal Tropical Plant Biology [vol. 5(1)]. This is hardly news to anyone who grows cassava or has been involved in its research for any period of time, but it was an important wake-up call for policy makers, research and development (R&D) agencies and donorslooking for opportunities to make agriculture more \"climate change ready.\" Most people in the developed world have never heard of cassava, in spite of its status as the fourth crop in importance in the tropics, just behind rice, maize, and wheat.In sub-Saharan Africa, it is second behind maize as a food security crop.The impending effects of climate change on crops are steadily gaining urgency for scientists and policy-makers. But climate change is only one of many forces that play out in the daily challenges that cassava farmers face. Ecoefficient cassava-based systems can contribute to multiple development goals aimed at some of the world's most vulnerable people living in hotspot environments.The people who rely on cassava to provide a significant part of their income or nutritional needs are typically among the world's poorest (Table 1). They are often farmers who earn their living cultivating degraded and marginal lands, or urban poor who subsist on the lowest-cost sources of calories. At the same time, rapidly expanding new markets for cassava productsespecially in Asia, but increasingly in Africa and the Americas -are providing unprecedented opportunities for farmers to improve their income and well-being, and to better supply the needs of multiple markets. These changes are creating both opportunities and challenges across an array of system components. This chapter explores the key roles that research on eco-efficient production, processing, and marketing can play in improving farmers' and consumers' livesthrough income generation, improved food security, better nutrition, and a healthier environment.By far the most important product of the cassava plant is the starchy roots. They may be peeled, boiled, and eaten directly, or may be processed into a wide array of products for food, feed, and industry. The roots are typically about 85% starch, on a dry-matter basis (Sánchez et al., 2009). Their principal nutritional value is calories. Leaves are consumed in some countries, especially in Africa, and they are very nutrient-dense, especially in protein.A range of evolutionary, agronomic, and commercial factors define where cassava is grown, how it is grown, how it is used, and the challenges growers face. The crop originated in the Americas, and was widely distributed throughout the tropics and subtropics of the western hemisphere before the arrival of Europeans in the 15 th century (Allem, 1990;2002;Allem et al., 2001;Olsen and Schaal, 2001;Nassar and Ortiz, 2008). Traders carried it to Africa relatively quickly after Columbus. While the introduction to Asia is not well documented, it appears that Spanish traders introduced the species from Mexico to the Philippines in the 19 th century, and independently from Africa to India.While about 100 countries grow cassava (FAOSTAT, 2012), production is skewed toward a relatively few major ones (Figure 1). Four countries harvest almost half of global output of fresh roots: Brazil, Indonesia, Nigeria, and Thailand; and three-quarters of production come from just ten countries. Over half the production area is in Africa, but only one of the top four producers is located there. The remainder of production consists of about 30% from Asia and 16% from the Americas.The species is uniquely tropical. Its long growing cycle of about eight months to a few years (average is about a year) and high susceptibility to frost limit its production to warm climates. In the subtropics, especially in southern Brazil, farmers often cut back the stems at the onset of winter, and the crop continues growth again in the spring, allowing harvest at about 18 months.Cassava roots can be \"stored\" in the ground for many months as part of an intact growing plant; there is no well-defined maturity period, although root quality may vary over time due to plant age and environmental factors. However, after harvest, roots begin to deteriorate quickly, often from a day to a few days (Beeching et al., 1993;Reilly et al., 2007). Over millennia, this rapid post-harvest deterioration stimulated the invention of many types of treatments and processing techniques to convert the roots into less perishable products.The main primary processes involve one or more of the following: grating or grinding and drying to produce flour; slicing or chipping and drying; and starch extraction. Variations include fermentation before or after grinding; forms of compressing to remove water; sun or artificial drying; and toasting or baking. Secondary processes include the production of a wide array of pellet-, flour-, and starch-based products for food, feed, and industry (Cock, 1985).The primary processes not only convert a perishable product into one that can be easily stored, but also they greatly reduce the poisonous component contained at lower or higher levels in all cassava varieties -cyanogenic glucosides that enzymatically break down to release HCN when cell structure is compromised (Du et al., 1995;McMahon et al., 1995;Wheatley and Chuzel, 1995;Andersen et al., 2000;Mkumbira et al., 2003). Roots that are boiled and eaten without additional processing need to be from types with low cyanogenic potential.While every cassava-producing continent encompasses a wide array of production systems and uses for this crop, some broad generalizations apply. These system characteristics impact the design of eco-efficient research strategies. In Africa, cassava is mostly grown on small farms (often less than one hectare) and intended for human food. Areas where fresh consumption is common include Ghana and Uganda. The leaves are an important source of protein, vitamins, and several minor nutrients, most notably in the Democratic Republic of Congo (DR Congo). Production in Asia is also mainly by smallholders, with a few exceptions such as some large plantations for starch production in Cambodia, Indonesia, Lao People's Democratic Republic (Lao PDR), and others. Uses are highly diversified within and across countries. India, Indonesia, and the Philippines produce mainly food products. China, Thailand, and Vietnam produce mainly animal feed and industrial starch; and China is also moving aggressively into biofuels from cassava. In the Americas, Brazil is by far the largest producer. Production systems range from the large plantations (up to a few thousand hectares) in the south, to the small landholdings for local markets in most of the rest of the country. In most other countries of the Americas, production is on small farms. In all continents, the vibrant market situation of recent years is attracting new, large investors. Often there is inadequate planning for the management implications of scaling up quickly in large plantations, and many of them have experienced early difficulties in production (Table 2).There are several reasons why cassava tends to be a crop of the poor, and these have strong implications for the kinds of eco-efficient research interventions that can lead to positive changes, from both socio-economic and environmental perspectives.• The crop is better adapted than many others to the harsh agro-environments where the rural poor tend to be concentrated, e.g., where rainfall is uncertain and drought stress is common; on soils with multiple production constraints, such as high acidity/high Al content and low native fertility; and on sloped lands where soils are prone to erosion and mechanization is difficult. • It is a crop that will in many cases produce reasonable yields with few, or no purchased inputs, such as fertilizers, pesticides, or irrigation. Its vegetative multiplication means that farmers do not need to purchase seeds. The planting material is usually produced on-farm or shared among farmers. There are few commercial initiatives to produce planting material. • Production practices are difficult to mechanize, although there has been considerable recent progress. Therefore, its cultivation can be a comparative advantage for farmers whose principal input resource is family labor. • In many environments, cassava can produce nearly year-round (no specific maturity period, plus ability to store roots in the ground as part of the growing plant). Thus it has appeal to the poor, who may lack resources to pay for and manage storage facilities, such as might be required for a grain crop. It can be harvested when farmers need it. In Africa, even where cereals are the main crop, cassava plays a key role as a back-up crop when cereal production fails.Although cassava is mostly cultivated under low-input and suboptimal soil and environmental conditions, in fact the crop has a very high production potential when provided optimum conditions. Both hypothetical models and field data show that cassava has a yield potential on the order of 80-90 t/ha per year (El-Sharkawy, 2012;El-Sharkawy et al., 1990). With a global average yield of about 12 t/ha, it is easy to see that there is a large yield gap that needs to be addressed to bring cassava's potential benefits to producers and consumers.It is common to find references in the early literature to cassava's \"rustic nature,\" or its ability to produce a crop under difficult conditions. Historically many scientists considered it a crop with few pest or disease problems, and easy to grow with minimum inputs and little care. At the same time, it has developed a reputation as a crop that, more than most, causes environmental degradation, especially soil nutrient depletion and erosion. While there are elements of truth that underlie all of these assertions, none accurately reflects reality on a broad scale. Growers face a range of biotic and abiotic constraints, which vary by region, cropping system, and season.Research organizations need to pay considerable attention to developing eco-efficient approaches to managing production constraints.More than 200 arthropod pests and pathogens affect cassava (Bellotti, 2002;Bellotti et al., 1999). Most do not reach economic threshold levels of damage; however, they are living organisms with the capacity to move across regions and national boundaries, and to evolve and adapt to new conditions and new hosts.Climate change especially opens new possibilities for distribution and adaptation in new areas where these organisms may not have existed, or they may increase due to more favorable conditions for their etiology (Ceballos et al., 2011;Herrera et al., 2011).One of the main features of the cassava crop that distinguishes it from the majority of annual crops is its long growing season. Pests and pathogens may complete many generations during the growing cycle. Furthermore, if host material is available in the field throughout the year, these pests and pathogens have no natural break in their cycle to limit their epidemiology. In this sense, cassava is an annual crop that has many of the features of a perennial crop, from the perspective of pest and pathogen dynamics.The historical belief that cassava was not vulnerable to pests and diseases came from a period when most of the crop was cultivated on small and isolated plantations, often in intercropping systems, and before there was extensive international travel that readily carried pests and pathogens among regions.Yield losses from pests and diseases are now understood to be common and widespread (Bellotti, 2002;Bellotti et al., 1999;Calvert and Thresh, 2002;Hillocks and Wydra, 2002). Nonetheless, the estimates of yield losses are generally on an experimental or localized level, and it is difficult to quantify losses on a broad scale. CIAT's Cassava Program attempted to develop realistic yield loss estimates for a broad range of constraints, including pests and diseases (Henry, 1995).In the Americas, where the crop evolved, the pests and pathogens co-evolved and attained their greatest genetic diversity. Additionally, the natural enemies of pests also co-evolved and became a fundamental part of the means for pest suppression. This combination of crop genetic diversity, pest/pathogen diversity, and natural enemy diversity has, for the most part, resulted in a reasonable suppression of the biological constraints in the Americas under traditional cultivation systems. The exploitation of these biological control agents can be one of the most eco-efficient approaches to pest control.In Africa, now with a history of some 500 years of cassava cultivation, there have been both the time and the means to introduce many cassava pests from the Americas. The cassava green mite (Mononychellus tanajoa), cassava mealybug (Phenacoccus manihoti), and cassava bacterial blight (Xanthomonas axonopodis pv. manihotis) are major constraints in Africa, originally introduced inadvertently from the Americas.Others have arisen indigenously either as newly evolved species or through some form of adaptation from other crops to cassava. Cassava mosaic disease (CMD) and cassava brown streak disease (CBSD) are both caused by viruses that appear to have arisen indigenously in Africa. To date they have not been reported in the Americas, but a variant of CMD is present in India and Sri Lanka.In Africa, green mites and mealybugs were quickly able to colonize cassava and spread across national borders. Without the genetic diversity of germplasm having some degree of host plant resistance, and without the presence of the natural enemies that helped suppress the same pests in the Americas, these pests spread virtually uninhibited throughout large areas of the African cassava belt in the 1970s and 1980s. CBSD is now raising similar concerns as it spreads widely within East Africa.In Asia, cassava was able to escape some of the most destructive pests until very recently. Growers in most areas did not have many concerns about pest and disease attacks, except in India (as mentioned above) where a variant of CMD from Africa has been a serious yield constraint since the first half of the 1900s. This is changing. In 2009, Thailand reported the presence of the cassava mealybug, and within a few years it was causing yield losses up to 80% in some fields. In 2010, on a national basis, yield losses were reported at 30%. Cassava is Thailand's second most economically important crop after rice, and the impact on the country was a wake-up call, both internally and for neighboring countries, facing the possibility of movement throughout the region.There are several broad lessons from our experience with biotic constraints in cassava, which inform eco-efficient approaches to their management. We will expand on these strategies in subsequent sections.• Cassava is host to a wide range of mites, insects, bacteria, fungi, phytoplasms, and viruses. While a limited number are currently highly destructive, and usually on a limited regional basis, many others can evolve into economic pests if conditions are right. There is no room for complacency in any cassava growing area. • Pests and pathogens can move globally in spite of existing quarantine regulations and the precautions of the scientific community. Most of the destructive pests and pathogens in Africa and Asia were introduced from the Americas via unauthorized movement of planting material. • Pests and pathogens can move from other crops and evolve into major problems to cassava. They may also evolve to overcome existing resistance mechanisms. Fortunately, there have been few instances of the latter, probably in part as a result of breeding for multi-genic, multi-mechanism resistance. • Experiences with intensified production give clear warning that changes in management can set the stage for pest and disease problems to change -often to become more severe unless integrated pest management strategies are incorporated in the production package.• There is emerging evidence that climate change will broadly affect pest and pathogen dynamics (Ceballos et al., 2011;Herrera et al., 2011;Jarvis et al., 2012). Rising temperatures and changing rainfall patterns will affect insect/ pathogen distribution and development.In many areas, cassava tends to be a second choice for farmers. If growers have better land, or have access to inputs that will improve growing conditions, they will often plant higher-value crops. It is part of the phenomenon that makes cassava a crop of the poor and one that faces a host of abiotic constraints. However, this is changing in some areas of strong market growth for cassava products, especially in Southeast Asia, where cassava prices have risen sharply in the past few years.Soil conditions. Cassava production predominates on acid and less-fertile soils (Howeler, 2011a). It has the well-known ability to tolerate high soil Al concentrations and soil acidity without lime amendments. In fact, where there is economic response to lime, it is often as a result of response to Ca rather than response to soil pH (Howeler, 2011a). This adaptation to soil acidity favors cassava production across large areas of the cassava belt of Africa, in the southern cone of South America, the savannas of Colombia and Venezuela, in Mesoamerica and the Caribbean, and in southern China.Cassava is especially adapted to soils with low P availability. The association with root mycorrhizae allows the plant to very effectively extract P from soils with very low levels. In fact, without the mycorrhizal associations, cassava grows poorly even where P levels are moderately high (Howeler, 2002).Cassava production is also common in sandy soils with low water-holding capacity. In these soils, many crops suffer quickly from short dry periods. Crop failure can result from longer dry periods. Risks in these soils are often not so much related to total annual rainfall as to the likelihood of dry periods during critical phases of crop ontology such as flowering time in cereal or grain legume crops. Cassava has no critical growth phase after establishment. Also, these soils tend to be leached and have low nutrient status because of the low organic matter status.Rainfall. Rainfall and soil conditions are highly interrelated in their effects on crop growth and development, as noted above. Cassava is adapted in the tropics and subtropics from some of the driest (e.g., 400 mm annual rainfall) in the Sertao of Northeast Brazil, to some of the wettest agricultural environments (e.g., 4000 mm annual rainfall) in the Pacific coast region of Colombia.Cassava uses several complementary mechanisms to tolerate long dry periods, including deep rooting to access subsoil moisture reserves; stomata that respond quickly to low ambient humidity, thereby reducing transpiration when water is limiting; and the ability to draw on carbohydrate and water reserves in the starchy roots (El-Sharkawy, 2012). Some of these mechanisms come at the expense of optimum yields, but they do allow the plant to survive and produce something where other crops may fail completely.Cassava is intolerant of flooding. Relatively short periods of submersion, of only a few days or less, can destroy a plantation. In heavy soils and in poorly drained soils, cassava often suffers from root rots and generally performs poorly.Certainly not all cassava growers are linked to markets; some are subsistence farmers, who grow only for family use. For these farmers, food security is often the first concern. However, increasingly, cassava farmers grow at least part of their crop for sale. Entry into the marketplace generates income to improve the family's ability to obtain a diversified and healthy diet, as well as broadly improve livelihoods. Access to markets is a critical part of food security for cassava growers.There is now a widespread interest, even for those countries where cassava's role is mainly for food security, to gradually transform it into a cash crop.Value addition of cassava, to bring benefits to growers, is currently a key objective in many countries in Africa, most notably in Nigeria. This transformation should result in poverty alleviation, rural development, and strengthened links between producers and their markets (Nweke et al., 2002).Nonetheless, in much of the cassava-growing world, and especially in Africa, most production is traded locally and is less influenced by global markets. Farmers who are connected to markets may face both the advantages and the disadvantages of a crop whose market prices are not closely linked to global grain markets.Lack of synchronization between production and market demand, especially in emerging markets, often creates wide fluctuations in farm-gate prices. But even in countries with a longestablished market tradition in cassava products, such as Thailand, the rapid market diversification is driving changes in the way the crop is grown, processed and marketed. Where there is greater market diversity, there is greater chance of stable demand and more stable prices. The mature markets of Asia include animal feed, starch for food and industry, biofuels and processed products for human food. While any one of these markets may experience considerable fluctuation in demand and prices, together they stabilize the prices that farmers receive. Stable markets encourage farmers to adopt new technologies (varieties, use of fertilizers, and soil conservation measures), which result in enhanced productivity and ultimately in more competitive prices, which in turn consolidate the competitiveness of these markets.Typically large farms have advantages over small farms in marketing their products. This is especially a challenge for cassava, since small farms remain the norm around the world even as industrialization of the crop progresses. The move to more intensive, industry-oriented production has not necessarily meant a move toward large farms in the case of cassava. Southern Brazil and Northeast Thailand present two contrasting cases in this regard. Southern Brazil produces cassava mainly for the starch market, based on large farms, often over a thousand hectares. It is an environment where large farms have been the norm for many years, and cassava production and processing have been adapted to this land tenure system. In Thailand and Paraguay, on the other hand, cassava farms remain small, usually a few hectares or less. Large centralized processing plants need to coordinate and aggregate the production from many farmers. Also typical in cassava processing plants is their location near the production areas because of the bulkiness and perishability of the roots. This is an important way for their operations to contribute to rural development. Nonetheless, there are increasingly examples of interest by companies buying or contracting large land areas for industrial use of cassava, e.g., in Cambodia, Colombia, Guyana, Indonesia, and Nigeria. Organizations focused on development-oriented support to cassava research will need to closely monitor the impact of such trends and the implications for target beneficiaries.Increasingly, food security and improved livelihoods will be associated with the ability of farmers to sell their products in the marketplace.The association between capacity to improve income and expansive markets is clear worldwide. Farmers adjust their choice of crops, the way they are grown and how they are marketed based on access to markets. Few farmers, when given the choice, will remain poor subsistence growers, enduring long hours of backbreaking fieldwork, if there are available markets to sell their products at a profit and make their lives more comfortable and prosperous.Market development for cassava has certainly evolved in most parts of the world, to one degree or another. But in Africa and in much of the Americas, these remain limited local markets, subject to easy saturation and price fluctuations. More robust, broader-scale markets typically need some initial support from public-private partnerships.Market expansion and market development often depend as well on new products, and these new products may need new varietal traits and new processes. The intricate linkage between production, processing, and marketing is not automatic at the outset, especially in most of the situations where new cassava markets are needed, i.e., where farmers are small scale and poor, infrastructure is limited, and credit for development is poor or non-existent. Research for development (R4D) organizations need to bring these initiatives into the context of an integrated and comprehensive project, in partnership with government agencies and the private sector. From the outset, such projects need to have a plan for reduced dependence on public subsidies and greater reliance on the marketplace for sustainable success.An analysis of the potential markets for cassava and its products in each cassava-producing country is well beyond the scope of this paper.Both Latin America and Africa can learn considerably from the experiences of Asia, but clearly local conditions will dictate different products and different pathways. The free market tends to be a pretty effective regulator of supply and demand in mature industries, but until that situation is reached, there normally needs to be some intervention to balance the push and pull factors along the value chain development.Bringing the poorest farmers and small landholders into the equation for successful market development can be especially difficult, but that is precisely what is needed if cassava is to contribute its potential to raising the standard of living of the poor who rely on it.An important lesson can be drawn from Vietnam. Cassava productivity in Vietnam in 1990 was almost the same as the average for Africa. However, as markets expanded there was a sharp surge of productivity that in few years almost doubled the levels of 1990. This is a clear indication of the beneficial effects of strong markets for cassava products. Where there is a market, farmers will seize the opportunity, invest in the crop, and increase their income. Another interesting example is cassava productivity in Thailand during the transition period when exports to the European Union (EU) were gradually phased out and before domestic markets in Asia developed. The upward trend in productivity reversed for few years. Only after the 1990s, yields started to increase and at a very healthy rate.The case of Vietnam offers another lesson. An important bottleneck in the development of markets is that they require cassava to reach a competitive price, which in turn depends on farmers investing and using proper technologies and inputs. There is always a subtle and difficult step to break a vicious cycle: there is no market because there is no cassava at a competitive price, and cassava does not reach the markets at competitive prices because the lack of markets does not encourage farmers to invest in inputs and technologies. Although it is difficult to demonstrate that this was the case, it is tempting to hypothesize that in the case of Vietnam the vicious circle was broken because initially there was on-farm processing. Farmers did not sell their cassava but used it to feed pigs, which was their final product. This on-farm processing (not capital intensive) generated enough motivation for farmers to adopt new technologies that eventually allowed the conditions for the emergence of local processing plants (mostly for starch production or drying yards).Already in the early years of cassava research by international centers CIAT and IITA, it was understood that the Green Revolution approach to improving cassava was not broadly applicable. The high inputs of fertilizer and irrigation, and dwarf architecture that had brought high yields to wheat and rice were not appropriate for cassava in most of the areas where it is grown (Kawano and Cock, 2005). Production and marketing systems, policy, and the nature of the crop were all very different from the cereal grains, and different approaches were required. This was not universally understood or accepted, however, and there was a number of programs that attempted to apply high-input practices to cassava, most of which were unsuccessful. The reasons for lack of success were a combination of socio-economic, agronomic, and genetic factors.Up to recent times, few cassava farmers anywhere in the world had access to purchased inputs to improve production, e.g., fertilizer, irrigation, chemical pest and weed management; or mechanization for land preparation, planting, or harvesting. There were, however, some important exceptions, such as in India, where farmers achieved high yields with moderate fertilizer inputs and irrigation. Because of its long crop cycle, cassava may be exposed to a wide range of pests and diseases over many months, such that successful chemical control of pests often needs to be repeated many times, and thereby is often costly. Because of the crop's drought tolerance, it is often not cost-effective to invest in irrigation systems. Even though cassava typically responds to soil fertility improvement, access to fertilizer and credit are typically out of the reach for cassava growers.Current buoyant demand for cassava and its by-products is motivating farmers, industry, and policy-makers to seek solutions to the problems that limit yield and income improvement from cassava production. The following sections review some of the eco-efficient alternatives that farmers and national, international, and private sector programs have developed and implemented.Soil fertility maintenance is a fundamental component of successful crop agriculture. Crops extract nutrients from the soil, and without their replenishment, yields in most soils will decline over time. Low soil fertility may be the single most pervasive constraint to high and sustainable cassava production worldwide. But it is highly amenable to improvements through eco-efficient intervention. Results from many cassava soil fertility trials have demostrated that (1) yields steadily decline without soil amendments, and(2) yields can be stable when appropriate amendments are made. Substantial improvements to crop productivity usually include the application of exogenous nutrients in organic or inorganic form (Howeler, 2011a).There are compelling reasons to work toward soil fertility solutions based on crop nutrient demand and optimized economic response. Fertilizer costs continue to rise worldwide, and their inappropriate application is frequently associated with nutrient runoff into water systems or seepage into groundwater. This creates imbalances in aquatic ecosystems and raises human health hazards from drinking water contamination, and wastes money for producers.In addition to practices that may be more broadly applicable to many crops, there are several innate characteristics of cassava that allow us to design eco-efficient agronomic management approaches. As already mentioned, the root association with mycorrhizae allows a very efficient extraction and uptake of soil phosphorous. The fungus exists naturally in virtually all cassava growing areas, and usually no special management is required to achieve good root infection for efficient P absorption. In some situations, where cassava is newly introduced into an area where it has not previously been planted, there may be an economic advantage to inoculation (Howeler et al., 1987).There has been limited research on the selection of more efficient biotypes of the fungus, but there are indications that this could be a productive line of research (Howeler et al., 1987). The main constraint to testing and selection of efficient biotypes is the difficulty of managing the inoculant, e.g., artificial production, controlling native populations, and cost-effective inoculation procedures. Because of these difficulties, there has been little commercial use of mycorrhizal inoculations in cassava.Development and application of crop management practices should avoid interference with the effectiveness of native populations. While the effect of agronomic practices on native systems is poorly understood, cassava researchers should be aware of, and test for, any deleterious effects that new inputs could cause. For example, systemic fungicides or herbicides should be especially monitored for their effect on mycorrhizal associations.CIAT has carried out multi-year germplasm screening for efficiency of nutrient use, especially emphasizing potash (K 2 Cl), which is used in relatively large quantities by cassava (reviewed by El-Sharkawy, 2012). There were large differences among genotypes, and probably these could be exploited through breeding. However, establishing selection systems that take into account nutrient use efficiency is an expensive and complicated addition to the many other selection criteria that breeders need to include in their program. As an alternative to a complex system that evaluates nutrient use efficiency by comparing response to low and high nutrient levels, CIAT has routinely selected under low nutrient levels, to allow the more efficient types to express their favorable traits. This is a research area with potential to benefit from development of molecular markers and the use of marker-assisted selection or genome-wide selection.Cassava is in the field for long periods, and it has no post-establishment critical period of drought vulnerability. This means that drought tolerance becomes very difficult to define. Drought can be comprised of a wide range of variables, e.g., total rainfall during the growing season; length of period(s) with low or zero rainfall; and the growing phase during which drought stress occurs (e.g., early, mid-, late season). While there would be clear advantages to better understanding of the mechanisms involved and the genetic control of tolerance to water deficits, this understanding will require much more research than is possible under natural and variable conditions.CIAT physiologists have extensively studied genetic variation and mechanisms for drought tolerance and water use efficiency in cassava.One of the key approaches has been to compare varietal responses under irrigated and nonirrigated conditions in dry environments. There appears to be wide genetic diversity (reviewed by El-Sharkawy, 2012). Several mechanisms come into play that confer a high degree of drought tolerance to cassava compared to many other species. Water use efficiency is largely the combination of stomatal sensitivity to low atmospheric humidity (stomata close and conserve water when humidity falls), deep-rooting systems, and high photosynthetic activity. Some varieties also appear to tolerate drought by an excessive leaf area index under favorable conditions, which is reduced to ideal levels (about four) under drought stress, thereby maximizing yield.Breeders have capitalized on this genetic variation through various strategies, but mainly by planting breeding nurseries under drought stress conditions. This strategy has some advantages and disadvantages. The advantages include simplicity of management, and the possibility to simultaneously select different mechanisms through exposure to conditions that are representative of where new varieties will actually be grown. Disadvantages include the fact that the specific conditions of drought tend to be highly variable from year to year. This means that in any given year, it may not be possible to target the specific desired varietal traits. CIAT, for example, has had a few experiences of \"drought\" trials in environments with historical severe drought stress, where the trials have been destroyed by flooding (LA Becerra 2011, pers. comm.).Because of cassava's relatively slow early growth, canopy closure can take up to three months or more, leaving the crop vulnerable to weed infestation. Weeds can be a serious constraint to crop growth and yield, and their economic control a major challenge. Typically, manual weed control requires about 40% of labor inputs to produce a cassava crop. Weeding is often done by women, especially in Africa and Asia.Research on eco-efficient weed management has received relatively little emphasis to date. In part this is because most weed management in cassava is still by hand hoeing, especially in Africa. However, this is changing as farmers look for more ways to reduce the high labor inputs and cost of growing cassava. Chemical weed control is possible, and herbicide use is rising, but mainly in Asia and in larger plantation systems elsewhere.Mechanized weeding is somewhat difficult in cassava except during the earliest stages of growth.Researchers face multiple challenges to integrate effective and economical weed control, with eco-efficiency principles, and gender-sensitive approaches. It is a research area that will become increasingly important and will require greater research emphasis.Herbicide-resistant cassava could be a popular option for farmers, as it has been for crops like maize, soybeans, and canola. Technically it will probably not be very difficult to incorporate resistance (e.g., to glyphosate) through transformation protocols. But the licensing, regulatory, and the socio-economic issues (e.g., gender implications; consumer acceptance) will likely mean that any such technology is many years from widespread use.Weed control is often the costliest input to cassava production, and it is imperative that science aggressively contribute to eco-efficient solutions as a means to reduce costs of production and increase farmer profits while protecting the environment.Because cassava is among the most tolerant of crops in marginal conditions, it often occupies lands that are prone to erosion. This is true worldwide, but is particularly an issue in the Andean zone of South America and in Southeast Asia. Slow early growth and relatively wide spacing among plants mean that canopy closure can take 2-3 months -a period when the soil remains exposed to the heavy rains which typically occur near planting time. This situation can lead to severe soil erosion with devastating environmental and social consequences. Soil erosion in cassava systems is one of the most urgent problems for the long-term sustainability of cassava-based farming systems to support smallholder farmers.Erosion control can be accomplished through soil preparation practices (e.g., ridge planting; conservation tillage, which leaves soil-protecting residue on the surface and soil-holding roots below the surface); strip cropping; intercropping; terracing; live barriers; practices that allow good ground cover (mulching; use of herbicides instead of hoeing); and practices that promote rapid canopy closure to protect exposed soil from direct rainfall impact (e.g., high early-vigor varieties; fertilization to promote rapid early growth).One of the most successful technologies is planting of vetiver grass barriers (Howeler, 2011b). However, farmers often are reluctant to invest in practices that do not provide short-term payback, especially if land is rented or, otherwise, not securely available for the long term.Very little research has been done on conservation tillage systems for cassava. Clearly there are challenges, namely, the need to plant a large stem piece instead of a small seed, the inevitable soil disturbance that takes place at harvest, and the scarcity of good weed management systems without soil disturbance. Nonetheless, the potential payoff in lowering costs of production, in soil conservation, and in energy conservation makes this a research area worth pursuing.Advances in small-plot mechanization may make no-till planting technologically feasible. Selection for herbicide-resistant varieties would also facilitate no-till technology, but is not a prerequisite for its success. Demonstration plots using farmer participatory approaches have been widely used in Asia to highlight the risks of soil erosion and the benefits of implementing preventive measures.The bottom line is that in spite of all these practices being well known at the research level, their adoption worldwide has been limited. The solution is a combination of opportunities provided by the marketplace, education, policy, and research into new avenues for erosion control.When market prices rise, farmers will be more easily convinced to invest in inputs that increase their productivity and profitability. In general, the market for cassava products has been buoyant over the past several years, giving hope that farmers will have greater motivation to invest in long-term sustainability of their systems through eco-efficient technologies.The impact of erosion control is often not immediately evident to farmers, nor easily quantified. Their concept of long-term income loss may not be based on real, field-level data over time. This is also a management area which will depend almost wholly on the public sector initiatives; there are, in a broad sense, few options that can be offered that will be brought about through a profit motive of the private sector. This gives the public sector a heavy responsibility to thoroughly research eco-efficient erosion control methods, to educate growers, and to educate policy-makers on the need for policy support.Eco-efficient pest management systems focus on three main solutions: host plant resistance, crop management, and biological control. The combination of these approaches can be effective for most pests and pathogens of economic importance in cassava. Use of chemical control has a low priority for research, with the exception of highly targeted applications such as for planting material (stakes) treatment or infestation focal points.Selection for resistance. Cassava evolved under pressure from many pests and diseases, and as a consequence genetic resistance co-evolved and was further brought into play by the conscious or unconscious selection by farmers. In many of the major crops, plant breeders protect nurseries with pesticides generation after generation, such that many resistance genes were probably lost due to genetic drift. In the case of cassava, this has rarely happened. First, cassava breeding has been practiced on a limited scale and for a limited time worldwide. Secondly, most cassava breeders allow natural infestations of pests and pathogens as a way of selecting for resistance. These strategies have allowed a remarkable opportunity for capitalizing on host-plant resistance in cassava, without breeders having to use exotic material or wild species in lengthy pre-breeding programs. Host-plant resistance is a clear and successful example of the development of eco-efficient practices. Nonetheless, as new pest challenges arise, especially as a result of climate change, there is greater likelihood of the need to delve further into germplasm collections and engage in pre-breeding to extract new resistance genes.Breeders have made excellent gains in developing resistance to several key pests and pathogens, including cassava bacterial blight, CMD, superelongation disease (Sphaceloma manihoticola), Phoma leaf spot, thrips, cassava green mite, and whiteflies (Jennings and Iglesias, 2002). In recent years, molecular tools have begun to aid in selection, specifically with CMD in Africa. A molecular marker for a single-gene resistance not only allows speeding up the breeding process, but it has allowed the selection for resistance in Colombia, where the disease does not exist. Breeders now have a greater ability to combine desired traits from the Americas with the virus resistance needed for adaptation in Africa (Okogbenin et al., 2011). While molecularassisted selection is so far very limited for cassava, this is likely to change quickly in the next few years as the costs of sequencing and of various -omics technologies decline rapidly.Crop management. The long growth cycle of cassava is conducive to the build-up of many types of pests and pathogens. This creates challenges, but also opens up many opportunities during the crop's long period in the field, to introduce variable management packages for suppressing pest and pathogen damage. Some of the common practices that can contribute to pest suppression include adjusting planting date, plant spacing, and intercropping. Early trials in the Eastern Plains of Colombia showed that planting near the end of the rainy season was a viable strategy for reducing losses from bacterial blight and superelongation disease (CIAT, unpublished). One of the challenges of using management practices to control pests and pathogens is to assure that any changes in management do not reduce yields even more than the pest under standard crop management.Biological control. Biological control is one of the most eco-efficient practices possible for pest management. The development time can be relatively rapid (in contrast to the long lead time for developing resistant varieties, for example); there is virtually no trade-off in yield or quality with the application of biocontrol methods; and in many cases, the control can be long-lasting without the continued need to reintroduce the organisms.In the Americas, biocontrol agents (parasites and predators) evolved along with the crop during many millennia. However, when traders introduced cassava to Africa and Asia, most of these beneficial organisms were left behind. When new pests were introduced, they were often able to spread uninhibited by the natural enemies they faced in their evolutionary homeland. There have been several examples of the introduction of natural enemies to successfully control mites and insects.In Africa, the cassava mealybug caused devastating losses until Anagyrus lopezi (a parasitic wasp) -an effective natural enemy -was introduced in the 1980s, saving billions of dollars in potential crop losses (Zeddies et al., 2001).The same predator was introduced to Thailand in 2010 after the cassava mealybug appeared there. By 2012, monitoring studies showed that A. Lopezi had become established throughout nearly the entire cassava-growing area where the mealybug was found, and is effective in control (Chariensak 2012, pers. comm.). It is hoped that the parasite will establish widely in other countries as well, following the mealybug spread in the region, to reduce population densities to economically insignificant levels.The cassava green mite also became a serious introduced pest of cassava in Africa by the late 1980s. Many different phytoseiid predators (also mites) act as biological control agents against the green mite. They probably account for the absence of major outbreaks of the green mite in the Americas (Bellotti et al., 1987). CIAT and IITA introduced many of these phytoseiid predators into Africa but Typhlodromalus aripo was most successful, reducing populations of the green mite by 35-60% with a parallel increase in fresh-root yield by 30-37% (Bellotti, 2002). Implementation of the biological control by T. aripo depends on the morphology of the apex and on the volatiles emitted by the plant host. Both characteristics are determined by the cassava genotype. This is a promising case of genotype-by-biological control interaction, hypothetically representing an opportunity to breed for a cassava plant that will favor the establishment and survival of the predator for a more efficient control of the green mite.Biological control never results in complete control, which leaves open the potential for fluctuations in levels of pest populations (similar to most types of host-plant resistance as well). In some years and in some locations, economic damage levels may be significant. Like other types of pest management, biological control must be accompanied by constant monitoring, preparation for additional releases, and preparation for supplemental management within an integrated pest management system.Despite cassava's global importance, the research investment has historically been far below that for other crops of similar importance. One of the reasons is its cultivation almost exclusively in developing countries. While there has been more public and private sector interest in recent years, there is not by any means a level of research funding that allows research institutions to carry out the kind of comprehensive research agenda possible for rice, wheat, maize, or potatoes, for example. This means that we need to be especially creative to find solutions with the most output per unit of input.Research needs to begin by understanding the combinations of biotic and abiotic stresses and pressures that farmers face now and may face in the future. Only then can we offer an effective means to find the right balance of traits and practices to optimize economic yield for the grower, while protecting the environment. One of the most effective strategies over some 40 years of research at CIAT has been the identification of research sites that are representative of broad target regions, in terms of soils, climate, pests, and pathogens. This has allowed effective development of integrated variety development and management systems that balance the needs for adaptation in the agroecological zone, along with yield potential and root quality. As techniques are developed or new genes identified, they can then be incorporated into the system to fine-tune the adaptation and resistance features.Cassava is exposed to a wide array of stresses during its growth in most parts of the world. Breeders and agronomists do not have the luxury of a long history of research to adequately understand mechanisms and the genetic basis for eco-efficient responses. Therefore, until now we have mainly relied on the plant response in selection environments and with management practices that place the crop under conditions that farmers will typically encounter, or can reasonably and economically create through use of inputs. In this way, without the deep understanding of physiology or genetics of each trait, we have developed varieties and management practices that contribute to eco-efficient production. Additional investment, an ever more precise set of measurement tools for plant response, and genetic tools for crop manipulation should provide greater progress.In the arena of cassava technology development, some of the world's greatest assets are the germplasm collections around the world. CIAT holds the largest of these as an in vitro collection at headquarters in Cali, Colombia. The CIAT genebank holds about 5500 landrace accessions, along with another approximately 600 advanced varieties and breeding lines. The collection is available to all interested parties, under the conditions of exchange and use of the International Treaty on Plant Genetic Resources for Food and Agriculture (ITPGRFA).The genebank probably represents most of the genetic diversity that exists in cassava, although the actual tests of this hypothesis have yet to be carried out. With the decreasing costs of sequencing and molecular marker development, the time is right to begin the genome-wide characterization of cassava genetic diversity and to fill gaps in the collection (see also next section). Nonetheless, based on the coverage of collected areas, we can probably make a reasonably safe assumption that the existing diversity is adequate to continue to make progress in genetic improvement for many years to come. On the other hand, there are known gaps in the collection that need to be filled before valuable diversity is lost. CIAT's collection has limited representation from Central America or Bolivia, and no accessions from Suriname or French Guyana, for example.In addition to cultivated cassava, there are some 100 wild relatives that are poorly collected and poorly evaluated. Many populations are at risk in their native habitats due to urbanization and expansion of agriculture. It is imperative to extend the collection of these species for their future potential contributions to eco-efficient production solutions.Africa has had limited exchange of germplasm with the Americas or with Asia due to the presence of some viruses in Africa that do not exist elsewhere, and several viruses in the Americas that also do not exist in Africa or Asia. Modern molecular methods now allow a very high level of security for the detection and cleaning of viruses, but it is still very difficult to exchange vegetative material between Africa and the Americas.Exchange between Asia and the Americas has been relatively straightforward.The CIAT genebank is an engine for eco-efficient technologies -a resource that has already been extensively tapped to produce income-generating technologies for farmers worldwide. But it has much more to offer in the future as the need for new traits expands, and as our ability to find those traits improves. The coordinated phenotyping and genotyping of the cassava genetic resources held in genebanks will be a core strategy toward development of eco-efficient technologies to improve people's livelihoods from cassava while protecting the environment.The development of molecular marker techniques for genetic analysis has increased our knowledge of cassava genetics and our understanding of the structure and behavior of the cassava genome. While microsatellites have been the basis for most work in cassava genetics, other valuable markers have also been used -including random amplified polymorphic DNA (RAPD) and amplified fragment length polymorphism (AFLP) markers -to produce cassava genetic maps.The availability of a cassava genome sequence since 2006 has allowed the identification of thousands of candidate simple sequence repeat (SSR) markers which may be used for genetic mapping and marker-assisted selection. However, the sequencing of multiple genotypes (including wild species) would provide the cassava community with a much greater density of markers in the form of single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs). These SNPs can be used to construct improved genetic maps and look for trait associations; the high density of SNPs will increase the likelihood of identifying markers tightly linked to loci encoding traits of interest such as drought tolerance or whitefly resistance.The combination of sequences from both wild species as well as cassava itself will give researchers the opportunity to discover genomic regions and individual genes which have played a role in the domestication of cassava. Having whole genome sequences allows the exploration of copy-number variations (CNVs) and genomic rearrangements which may be related to different characteristics of interest. While use of SNP markers can focus the search for causative trait loci, having a large number of genomic sequences from a variety of genotypes for a given region provides the wider genomic context and will enhance genomics-assisted breeding in cassava, boosting our breeding activities to develop desirable breeding lines in a shorter term.Molecular technologies have evolved at astonishing speed. The cost and efficiency of genotyping have advanced so much that the phenotyping that is often required along the molecular work is now the real bottleneck. Deficient field data and unreliable phenotypic information constrains the applied uses of molecular markers in cassava genetic enhancement. Plans are underway to sequence a large sample representing nearly the full range of cassava genetic diversity, set to begin in late 2012 and 2013.Cassava conversion to marketable products can involve a wide range of processing techniques and some of them produce large amounts of waste that can contribute significantly to environmental pollution and depletion of water resources (FAO, 2001). Into the early 1990s, much of Thailand's cassava was chipped and dried on large patios, a process that was essentially pollution free and relied primarily on sun energy for drying (plus use of tractor power for turning and collecting the chips). With the rise of the starch industry throughout Southeast Asia, and the ethanol industry in China, waste management is a growing concern, and many creative new technologies and systems are being developed to minimize environmental impact and increase profitability.The main issues are:• Use of large quantities of water for starch extraction • Environmental risks of wastewater disposal, especially when discharged into streams or bodies of water • Potential pollution from residues of processing • High energy use for artificial drying of chips for animal feed, starch, flour, or other end products (cost and CO 2 generation) • High energy use for ethanol distillation (cost and CO 2 generation).The treatment of effluent waters is a major issue in the process of starch extraction. It results in major economic costs (if the effluents are not properly recycled or otherwise managed) or environmental costs (if effluents are dumped into the surrounding environment). CLAYUCA Corporation has developed technology to efficiently produce high-quality flour that can substitute for starch for many uses, but whose processing has far less impact on the environment. Water is used only in the whole-root washing, while the flour is extracted simply by grinding dried root.Cassava markets will continue to change quickly. Eco-efficient production and processing technologies are closely linked and need to be developed in parallel. This can be quite challenging, given the lead time required for many types of technology, and especially for the breeding of new varieties.Two examples of production technologies that impact eco-efficiency of processing involve variations in starch functional properties:• The identification of a natural mutation of amylose-free starch in cassava (Ceballos et al., 2007) has generated a keen interest and investment by the starch sector. This mutation will allow industry to develop certain starchbased products without the chemical modification that is currently required, with potential benefits to both the environment and human health. • A different starch mutation (Ceballos et al., 2008) was generated through mutagenesis, resulting in the production of small starch granules (about 1/3 the normal size) with rough surfaces. This mutation would be ideal for the bioethanol industry as the starch is more easily degraded into simple sugars, a necessary step before fermentation can be initiated. This should result in lower energy use in the conversion process.The FAO study (FAO, 2001) concluded that cassava processing can have negative -mainly site-specific -effects on the environment, by producing unpleasant odors and an unsightly display of waste. However, the long-term and broad-based impact on the environment is generally minimal and can be corrected by proper waste treatment with technologies that are presently available or under development.Moreover, there is ever greater economic incentive to make use of the by-products from the development process of marketable value-added products. The residue from starch factories can be used in animal feed rations, to reapply to fields as a crop nutrient, or as a substrate for the culture of mushrooms, for example. While policy will be an important element for limiting environmental impact from cassava processing, the moreeffective strategies will be based on methods that generate greater income for processors.As mentioned at the outset of this chapter, there is an emerging consensus that cassava is among the most promising options of tropical crops in the context of rising temperatures and increasingly uncertain rainfall patterns. Achieving an ecoefficient response to climate change represents one of the great challenges of agricultural research, and cassava presents unique opportunities.Climate change may have direct effects on crop growth and development (temperature, rainfall, CO 2 levels) or indirect effects (soil organic matter, soil erosion, pest and disease patterns), and therefore the needed response through ecoefficient solutions can be complex and far-ranging.Climate maps combining temperature and rainfall parameters specific to cassava's growth responses (Figure 2) indicate that cassava will probably continue to be grown in nearly all areas where it is currently adapted. This is largely because of its combined high temperature and drought tolerance, even in some areas where these changes will create severe stress for other crops. In fact cassava is likely to expand into new areas of the subtropics that become more suitable as temperatures rise, and into areas where more-sensitive crops decline or disappear.On the whole, cassava is tolerant of very high temperatures compared to many crops. This is in part because there is no critical stage, such as flowering, when brief periods of high temperatures will cause drastic yield losses. Increasing temperatures may not have a large direct effect on cassava production. On the other hand, areas that become too hot for other crops could create new growing areas for cassava to fill the gap. Some climate models show that India could be especially affected by rising temperatures, with broad shifts away from grains and pulses in some areas (Ceballos et al., 2011).Possibly the most significant effect of temperature rise on cassava's adaptation will be to allow it to move into higher-altitude and higher/lowerlatitude regions. Currently, cassava's limit at the Equator is at about 2000 masl, and this just for a narrow range of germplasm accessions from the Andean zone of the Americas, especially Colombia. These extended new highland areas for cassava are likely to be most important in East Africa, and in the Andes of Colombia and Ecuador. Currently cassava can be grown in latitudes near the Tropics of Cancer and Capricorn. Global warming may extend this range, as winters become milder. This is of particular interest in China, which is looking for options to expand planted area but has a relatively limited region within the subtropics that is suitable for cassava. This is not to say that global warming will have overall positive effects on agriculture, but there will be opportunities for farmers to adapt with new crops and new practices if science can provide the appropriate technological support.Drought promises to be one of the most widespread negative impacts of climate change on crop production in general. Lower overall rainfall and greater uncertainty both come into play in climate change scenarios. Therefore, it is logical that breeding programs in many crops have begun to take into account major efforts to select for drought tolerance. Cassava models appear to indicate a different strategy.First, cassava will likely move into areas where other crops are constrained, especially grain crops, with their susceptibility to drought during certain development stages, such as flowering and early grain filling. But cassava is broadly drought tolerant already, so it will do quite well in areas where other crops cannot succeed. But the question remains about the advisability of stressing selection for drought tolerance in traditional cassava-growing areas that are already dry, and will become drier with climate change.Although breeding for drought tolerance has been limited, there are clear indications from physiological studies that selection for even better tolerance could succeed. So it is a matter of comparing returns on investment from alternative breeding goals. Climate change models and crop models suggest that other constraints brought about by climate change, and especially the effects of pests and diseases, are likely to be more severe, and often more amenable to management through breeding for resistance/tolerance than is drought.The other side of the rainfall issue is excess water. Cassava typically does not tolerate waterlogging. Root rots can become common if soils are waterlogged even for relatively short periods of time. Breeding has shown little promise, and in most cases management practices are probably more appropriate as an adaptation strategy.Atmospheric CO 2 is one of the major causes of climate change and has increased by 40% from a pre-industrial revolution baseline. Confinedenvironment studies indicate that increases in atmospheric CO 2 concentration could result in a Global cassava suitability will increase 5.1% on average by 2050, while many areas of Latin America will suffer negative impacts reduction in root production. Concentration of cyanogenic glucosides in the roots was not affected by increases in CO 2 . On the other hand, there was a large increase of glucosides in the leaves of plants grown in higher CO 2 concentrations (Gleadow and Woodrow, 2002;Gleadow et al., 2009). These results contradict earlier ones reported by Imai et al. (1984). Free-Air CO 2 Enrichment (FACE) methods allow field evaluation of crops under elevated CO 2 concentrations which simulate the predicted levels for the decades to come (El-Sharkawy, 2009). These studies suggest that photosynthetic efficiency would increase more in C 3 (like potatoes and cassava) than in C 4 crops (like maize and rice) (Long et al., 2004;2006). Modeling and FACE results could guide the molecular optimization of the photosynthetic apparatus to maximize carbon gains without increasing crop inputs (Rosenthal and Ort, 2012).There are several reasons why risks are increasing for introduction and spread of pests and pathogens into new areas. These include:• More international travel • Greater interest in introducing new materials by uninformed travelers, e.g., businessmen or women managing cassava plantations or processing plants • Greater potential for introduced pests or pathogens to encounter host plants (increasing area planted to cassava globally, e.g., larger contiguous cassava plantings that allow pests to spread quickly) • Climate change that transforms less suitable environments into more suitable ones for introduced pests or pathogens • The interest in new crops, such as Jatropha (also a member of the Euphorbiaceae family) which can be a reservoir of pests and diseases that can also affect cassava. The recent interest in this crop has resulted in vast and unregulated exchange of germplasm.The first defense against pest and pathogen spread to new areas is the double-pronged approach of education and regulation. The principle audience needs to be the general public -about the risks of moving uncontrolled plant materials and agricultural products across national borders. This is not to downplay the importance of official channels. Most countries have strict quarantine regulations on the books, but lack personnel and budget for enforcement. Understanding the risks is the primary motivation for investing in better enforcement.Climate change modeling, layered with pest adaptation maps, illustrates the potential spread to new areas in the context of climate change. This allows the application of resources in hotspot areas for monitoring, diagnosis, and management. It is expected that pests affecting cassava will evolve into more dynamic pattern, particularly as a result of increased temperatures that reduces the relevance of diapause and/or shortens their life cycle (Ceballos et al., 2011).Figures 3 and 4 illustrate areas where cassava green mite and whitefly, respectively, are likely to increase or decrease in severity due to climate change by 2020. For both species, there will be widespread effects in the Americas and Africa, but less so in Asia.Effective pest and pathogen monitoring and diagnosis systems are essential to early detection and effective management. Fortunately, such systems may be implemented across a number of crops, and do not need to be re-invented for each individual crop. The PlantWise system of CABI, for example, may be a good model to incorporate cassava data and take advantage of a system that is applicable for a broad range of crops. A pilot system is being established for Southeast Asia, which should develop into globally applied systems for information exchange about pests and diseases.Some of the new soil-related challenges likely to be exacerbated by climate change are: more rapid loss of organic matter due to higher soil temperatures; planting in areas more vulnerable to erosion (e.g., further up hillsides as temperatures rise); and greater nutrient leaching in areas where rainfall has increased.  For cassava in an era of climate change, one of the great challenges for sustainable soil management is in areas where the crop expands to replace species that are less adapted to drier conditions. Unless this expansion into new areas is accompanied by appropriate management and technologies, there is a risk that growers without the experience of growing the crop will use practices that exacerbate erosion. Certainly there should also be attempts to introduce diversification programs, such as the planting of perennial crops/pastures/trees in the most vulnerable areas.Conservation tillage or no-tillage systems have had relatively little application in cassava.Alternatives to conventional tillage will be important both in areas of reduced and increased rainfall. In reduced rainfall, conservation tillage conserves soil water. Under heavy rainfall, it reduces erosion and improves soil structure for better drainage. These advantages need to be weighed against the possibility of sacrificing yield or income as a result of adoption of these practices. The development of herbicide-tolerant genotypes would greatly facilitate the adoption of reduced-tillage practices. Technically, this should be relatively easy through transgenic methods, but the licensing, regulatory, and consumer acceptance issues would be huge hurdles to ultimate success. There need to be intensified efforts at the discovery of herbicide tolerance that is not transgenic. The most likely approaches are through screening of a broad genetic base of progeny from selfed genebank accessions, and through mutation and selection at the cellular level. There is a wide contrast on the use of cassava ranging from a key element in subsistence farming in Africa to mostly a cash crop to be used by different processing industries in Southeast Asia. CIAT is aware that in many cases wellintentioned interventions result in undesirable unforeseen impacts. A major thrust in our research is toward the gradual transformation of cassava from subsistence farming into incomegenerating crop. However, it has to be acknowledged that whenever this occurs, some gender-related issues may arise. In many resource-limited farming households, it is women who stay in the farm attending to the different chores, while men go to the villages in search of income-generating activities. If cassava becomes a cash crop, it is likely that the role women and men play will change. Many social scientists have expressed their concern that some of these changes may be negative, but also could result in positive trends, such as \"the return of men to the farm for a reunited family.\" The impact of turning cassava into a cash crop from the gender perspective is difficult to predict, not to mention to modulate, from a research position. It is important, however, to monitor them and make whatever intervention may be required to maximize the positive impacts while minimizing the negative ones.Researchers need to monitor potential genderrelated impact. Moreover, we actively search for potential areas where gender plays an important role. For instance, it has been recognized for many years that it is typically women who are in charge of weeding cassava fields in many regions of Africa. This implies that very often, women will invest the first two months of the crop in weedcontrol activities. Development of herbicide tolerance is therefore one such issue. It is envisioned that, in principle, this trait should benefit women as they could redirect their effort to other more-productive endeavors. Whenever the trait is identified or induced, however, careful analysis of its expected advantages will be tested through participatory approaches to make sure that the technology is well appreciated by the women we are targeting to benefit.Another activity typically linked to women and children is the peeling of cassava, for example, in the production of farinha in Northeast Brazil or gari and fufu in Western Africa. It is known that peel thickness is another trait that may offer a gender bias. Awareness of such a situation is relevant for orienting research in the right direction. A thin peel is desirable for those industries where the entire root is processed, since it maximizes the proportion of valuable tissue. On the other hand, a thick peel facilitates the operation of manual peeling reducing the overall cost of such operations, thus maintaining its competitiveness.Most importantly, study of gender biases need to be part of research design from the outset, rather than an afterthought after a technology is already developed and disseminated.Policies aimed specifically at eco-efficiency of crop research are nearly non-existent in developing countries. The scientific community has a major challenge to educate, inform, and advocate for such policies. We present a few examples here, although this is not by any means a comprehensive list.Developing countries that support technological and economic progress as a means of addressing food security and equity will find that cassava, where it is adapted, can often play significant food security and equity roles.Policies that favor new industries can open opportunities for cassava markets. The broad range of products that can derive from cassava provides an ideal vehicle for new industry development. Multiple industries can evolve from the many cassava end-uses, to the advantage of cassava growers. Multiple market opportunities for farmers mean that there are likely to be better prices and lower swings in the market prices. A key example of this kind of intervention is the policy to mix 10% cassava flour with wheat flour for the baking industry. However, as discussed during the West Africa Root and Tuber Crops Conference (Accra, Ghana, 12-16 Sept 2011) (Dixon, 2011), policies need to be turned into laws for an effective impact.Open versus protectionist trade policies will impact the kinds of markets where cassava can be competitive. Certainly the global tendency is toward more open markets, but there are many exceptions. Strong policies that protect local agricultural and industrial development are often a necessary short-to medium-term strategy in order to develop a competitive global position. On the other hand, protectionist policies tend to promote inefficiencies and, ultimately, higher prices for consumers. In any case, trade policies will rarely be developed specifically with the cassava market in mind, but rather with a broad agricultural or industrial vision.China is leading the way in biofuels from cassava, as a result of a dual policy that aims, on the one hand, to reduce reliance on fossil fuels and, on the other hand, to keep staple foods from competing in the biofuels market. Thus, cassava, as an efficient energy producer and with a very minor role as a food in China, is an ideal option.In Africa the situation is more complex, where cassava for biofuels is likely to compete with food markets, and where most of those who rely on cassava for food are not able to absorb cost increases even of small levels without suffering serious consequences.Thailand attempted for many years to support crop diversification in the northeast of the country, to prevent the continued spread of cassava into fragile soils. The policy had limited success because cassava is so much better adapted than most other crops that can provide a profit to farmers. These types of policies are, however, rather rare on a global basis. In order to succeed, they need to either strictly prevent the growing of cassava in inappropriate environments, or provide equal or better alternatives through technology support and/or subsidies that give farmers attractive options. In fact, effective policies that address the use of fragile landscapes are sorely needed in many countries. Along with policy, education of growers and the offering of ecoefficient technologies are needed for positive impact.Until recent times, there was nearly no private sector support to cassava research. This is changing, but slowly. In Thailand, for example, the private sector provides modest support for development of specialty starch varieties, provides extension services in the form of advice on management practices, and provides growers with biological control organisms for the cassava mealybug, a newly emerging pest problem. There are examples elsewhere as well of important but quite limited industry support to technology development. This means that public support for research is the main determinant of the success of cassava research in any given country. CIAT and IITA have strong multidisciplinary research programs, but they also rely on the capacity of national partners to jointly develop that technology and deliver it to farmers or to industry. Policy that supports a sustainable research and extension system is essential to the ability of cassava to play its full role as a vehicle for eco-efficient development.The public sector for cassava research is seriously underfunded in most countries. In Africa, donor support in the last few decades has made a dent, but the long-term consequences of donordependent funding of research are uncertain. On the one hand, it seems to be a necessary intermediate step, while local public and private support and capacity are developed. All too often, however, this support is not prioritized, leading to programs falling by the wayside when donor funding diminishes or dries up. There needs to be much more support from studies illustrating the impact of investment in research by national and local governments.The long cycle of cassava from planting to harvest often implies a heavy burden for the farmers because of the long time required to recover their investments. It is becoming a common practice for governments through different banking systems to provide soft credits to farmers, particularly in cases where they have some sort of agreement with the processing sector and after it has been demonstrated that proper inputs and management practices will be used in growing the crop. This practice offers several advantages as it promotes linkages between the production and processing sector and encourages the adoption of technologies for the sustainable and competitive production of cassava. Within the same policies, farmers can also have access to crop insurance. For insurance to have more widespread impact, however, more data on production risks are necessary.CIAT works with partners to develop technologies that are more productive, profitable and competitive, sustainable, resilient as well as more sustainable. The following summarizes how this relates to CIAT's cassava research for development.• More productive: Providing inexpensive and nutritious food for poor consumers. This is largely the CIAT legacy of its first 40 years, by producing clones with high and stable productivity, and giving special consideration to dry-matter content (Kawano, 2003;Kawano and Cock, 2005). • More profitable and competitive: Creating new opportunities for growers to increase their incomes. New or expanded markets are needed for cassava farmers to pull themselves out of poverty. Without markets to absorb increased productivity, moving beyond subsistence is only a dream for many.High-value traits such as the waxy and small-granule starches (Ceballos et al., 2007;2008;Sánchez et al., 2009)  Cassava is already one of the world's most resilient crops, and it has the potential to be even more resilient through a combination of genetic and management approaches. Its inherent drought tolerance, adaptation to high temperatures, efficient use of soil nutrients, and tolerance to highly acid soil conditions make it a popular crop where these conditions already exist. And with climate change, it will replace other crops as these conditions are newly created in some regions. • More equitable: Providing new opportunities for the rural poor. Equity issues that cassava can help address include income generation for the poor, and technologies that are prowomen. The very nature of traditional cassava production by smallholders and processing at the local level has contributed to equity issues. The challenge is to continue to address equity issues as scale of production increases and more sophisticated markets are developed.Specialty cassavas, such as waxy-starch varieties, should lead not only to increased value and higher incomes to farmers, but also should promote a closer association between farmers and processors (e.g., contract farming) which can favor both layers of the value chain.While biofuels are often seen as working against equity issues, examples in cassava illustrate other options. CLAYUCA is developing a model for cassava based on decentralized small plants at the village level that produce 50% ethanol, which is then shipped to a more sophisticated central plant for dehydration to 99%."}

main/part_2/0063212433.json

@@ -0,0 +1 @@
+{"metadata":{"gardian_id":"02b668f2298ffc5e8cb675f58be203d9","source":"gardian_index","url":"https://cgspace.cgiar.org/rest/bitstreams/ba1f21aa-03e9-49f1-84ce-b8a4cf4395fe/retrieve","id":"-1700755573"},"keywords":[],"sieverID":"fcdabc4a-bbd3-42bf-b700-f604b0adddd0","content":"Accurate measurement of crop cultivated area and corresponding field boundary is essential for assessing various agronomic key performance indicators (KPIs), including yield, profitability and resource use efficiency. In the past, household surveys have relied heavily on farmer-reported plot areas. However, it has been frequently noted that farmer-reported plot area is often inaccurate for various reasons. In addition, field boundary information -which is crucial for various agronomic analytics purposes -is rarely available. Here, we describe the procedure for a global positioning system (GPS)-based field area measurement using a smartphone/tablet application. We describe GPS Fields Area Measure, 1 an Android application freely downloadable from Google Play Store, as an example. The module describes the procedures for downloading and performing the measurements using this app. Many other apps with similar functions can also be used to measure field/plot area. Users need to refer to the corresponding user guides when using other Android applications. GPS Fields Area Measure is also available on the Apple App Store, 2 but the description below is only for the Android system. This GPS Fields Area Measure user guide was created using a smartphone running Android version 13, with which the app is compatible. Please check the compatibility of the GPS Fields Area Measure app with the smartphone/tablet you will be using before going to the field.• Android-based device (e.g. smartphone or tablet).Step 1: Search for \"GPS Fields Area Measure\" in the Google Play Store and install it on your device.Step 3: Settings can be accessed by pressing the menu icon at the top left (triple bar). Press the \"Settings\" options to change default measurement units.Step 4: The default measurement units are in \"Metric\" system, but can be changed to \"Imperial\" if needed. To ensure consistency, users are requested to use the \"Metric\" system. The unit for area measurements can be in the form of m 2 , ha and km 2 .Step 1: Go to one corner of the field to be measured. Mark your starting point with a range pole so you can identify the point when you return.Step 3: From the three popup options, select the \"Area\" icon (highlighted in the red).Step 4: Select the \"GPS measuring\" option from the following page.Step 5: The corner of the field where the range pole is located should coincide with the GPS location on the smartphone/tablet. Press the \"Start measuring\" button at the bottom left, then walk around the perimeter of the field.Step 6: The surveyor must walk on the edge of the field (not a meter outside or inside the plot). At every corner, you must stop for 5 seconds (counting slowly 1, 2, 3, 4, 5) and then continue walking. You must walk all the way around the field until you return to the location of the range pole. You should be able to see the boundaries of the field marked as you walk along. Now press \"Stop measuring\" and click \"Done\". Step 7: The next popup option will show perimeter and area estimates of the surveyed field. Press \"Save\" (disk) icon located second from top right to save the surveyed field on the device.Step 8: Provide a unique \"Measure name\" such as the Field ID used in Excellence in Agronomy for Sustainable Intensification and Climate Change Adaptation Initiative (EiA) and an appropriate description. You can take a photograph of the field using the \"Camera\" option to ensure a pictorial reference for later use. (This is optional.) Press the \"Save\" (disk) icon at the top right corner.Step 9: Now the surveyed field populated with relevant information can be seen on the screen. Press the \"Share\" icon located third from the top right and in the resultant window select \"Save to device\" to export the surveyed field to KML, KMZ, shape file, etc. Provide a unique name such as the Field ID used in EiA and an appropriate description.The data can now be opened in any GIS software.GPS Fields Area Measure will also work offline (but with no background map layers). The procedure is exactly the same as described above.Karthikeyan Matheswaran (International Water Management Institute [IWMI]) and Ali Ibrahim (Africa Rice Center [AfricaRice])"}

main/part_2/0091551283.json

@@ -0,0 +1 @@
+{"metadata":{"gardian_id":"e311103ae350de714c85ef7c4d59926c","source":"gardian_index","url":"https://cgspace.cgiar.org/rest/bitstreams/0519a398-d0bf-4235-bfb2-cfcb86fac4fb/retrieve","id":"-356800771"},"keywords":[],"sieverID":"be5d2181-2b0e-4f05-b289-5d3343653a27","content":"TechFit is a tool to prioritize and select animal feed interventions. It was developed by ILRI under the leadership of Alan Duncan. It has been further refined and developed with inputs from many individuals in and beyond CGIAR. This is one of a series of feed intervention 'TechSheets' developed alongside the TechFit tool to provide summarized information on different interventions included in the tool.Cow struggling to feed on un-chopped, nonpulverized hay Feed wastage as a result of not chopping or pulverizing feed A mobile pulveriser in the Rift Valley, Kenya Tractor pulverizes wheat straw Kenya Description  Pulverization reduces particle size of dry feed using physical treatment. It is generally used for crop residues that are used as basal feed. Pulverization reduces particle size of coarse feed (e.g. straw)to 2-3 mm length and fine feed (e.g. dried forage grasses) to >4 mm length. Pulverizers are either manual or mechanised and driven by either electricity or fuel. They can either be stationary or mobile. Pulverizing of feed increases feed intake by 30-60%.  Fine particle size enhances nutrient availability and the rate of passage of feed through the rumen. Pulverizing can reduce wastage by 30-60%.  Pulverized feed is easy to pack and transport, thus reducing transport costs of feed. Pulverizing feed improves its marketability.  It compresses densely so more feed can be stored.  It can be mixed easily with other locally available feed resources and reduces selection by animals. Pulverized feed can be ensiled in combination with other feeds. Pulverising machines are expensive to purchase and, the motorised types have high operating and maintenance costs (i.e. electricity, fuel and oil). "}

main/part_2/0091844075.json

@@ -0,0 +1 @@
+{"metadata":{"gardian_id":"c3be8f76f1ab76f029d71a1605f5ffcd","source":"gardian_index","url":"https://cgspace.cgiar.org/rest/bitstreams/1d6a86f4-9601-44ea-a427-08d6daac2df1/retrieve","id":"-1448596583"},"keywords":[],"sieverID":"cdcfaaac-93d6-482c-85f1-cca2d01ac66c","content":"The AfSIS project sets a baseline for monitoring changes and provides options for improved soil management. One of the aims of the project is to document farmers' characteristics and practises and use that to determine their current situation as well as their preparedness to engage in effective soil and crop management for improved productivity of their land and soils.Socio--economic and agronomic surveys integrate knowledge about the farmers conditions, wealth status, access to knowledge as well their livelihood status and access to markets.Agronomic surveys assess the farmers' practices related to crop and soil management and are linked to obtained yields using pre--designed questionnaires and field survey including the use of GPS based field survey and the GIS.Global positioning systems (GPSs) allow locating specific field locations including the farm location within a few feet or metres of accuracy. As a result, numerous observations and measurements can be taken at a specific position and analyzed with reference to the geographic space. Geographic information systems (GISs) are used to create electronic field maps. From this it is possible to make follow up visits to monitor situational changes based on GPS data that records the farmer location.The expected output is the extraction of actionable areas directed at the farmer, at the policy maker or the extension and other institutional services directed at the farmer. This short document presents the steps to realizing the best output of getting good data that can be used for a diverse range of analysis.Designing a survey in relation to a particular target, consists of defining the information sought, the acceptable level of accuracy, the nature and unit of observation, the population concerned, the variables and explanatory features associated with the main objective and the context in which it is intended to work.First before conducting a socio--economic survey, it is important to have an idea of the total population of the farmers living in the target area to enable the person going to collect the data have a fair sample of the total number of farmers to be studied. The sample size determination formula is as follows. SS= sample size Z = Z value (in this case 1.96 for 95% confidence level) p = percentage of selecting respondents expressed as decimal, in this case 0.5 (50%) c = confidence interval, expressed as decimal, in this case 6.75%.Basically the sample size is based on the level of accuracy required in the statistical analysis. The total population of the farmers in a locality may be obtained from the regional or national statistical records of the area. A 10% sample size is normally considered optimal for generating adequate results during the analysis. The farmers are randomly selected from a database of the existing farmers in an area held by the Census Office or the Local Populations Office if one exists. Should both be missing, it is advisable that a survey is conducted to map the entire farmer households in the targeted population. Use of local administration could assist fill in this gap. In order to have a spatial coverage of the area of interest, the AfSIS project has developed a spatial method for randomly selecting locations for the sampling based on geographic coordinates. In this method, the number of random latitude and number of random longitude points are obtained for the specific area of interest using an Excel random points generator that are then imported into a GIS mapping software such as ARCMAP or ARCVIEW. Once projected and confirmed to be the actual points, they are then exported into a file supported by a GPS waypoints software with the ...(gdb) file extension format system or into the Google Earth software if the points are to be displayed in Google Earth with the ..(kml) file extension format. Special training is required for this procedure. Free software is available for these operations over the Internet at the following links: http://www.geomidpoint.com/random/ http://www.dnr.state.mn.us/mis/gis/tools/arcview/extensions/DNRGarmin/DNRGarmin.htmlAgronomic surveys are carried out to assess the current famers crop management practises compared to what is recommended best practise. Agronomic surveys include measurements made on the farmers field that include time of planting, type of land preparation, type of seeds planted, whether or not mineral or organic fertilizers are used, whether weeding is practised and the level of labour or manpower that is sued in the field management operations. Farmers' production and productivity surveys are conducted in two plots measuring 3m x 3m in the main maize field or other crops.Before embarking on any agronomic survey the individual conducting the survey should first determine the geographic location of the area where the survey is to be conducted and be sure that the concerned farmers are pre--warned and are prepared to support the survey. At the household level, the key variable (e.g., HH -- the household variable) takes on unique values to identify a case. Data on the attributes of the plots of land owned by the household e.g.-- size, soil type, slope, fertilizer application and land management are extracted and geo--referenced and entered into a file that links to each plot, identified by three key variables, Household (HH), FARM and the individual maize FIELD plot. The common feature in the data is that the Farm and the field plot are all linked to the household, the base unit of observation on which other levels of data are based. The choice of base unit of observation depends on the analytical interest of the study. Food security research uses often the household as the base level. Before conducting an agronomic or a socio--economic survey, the enumerators concerned must be trained.Training is conducted in a venue with power supply and where electronic filed can be shared in Power Point Presentation where the survey instruments can elaborated and questions asked.The training normally lasts for three to four days. The first day is used to brief the enumerators on what is expected including the purposes of the survey. It is also made clear that the practical work is to be carried out in the field in and less artificial environment. It is important that those selected to participate in the data collection and whom the training is conducted have agricultural knowledge. A University Degree or a Diploma in the same fields is a minimum prerequisite. Since the theme for the data collection involves extracting information on the farmer practises, it is important that the Extension Service personnel are included in the enumeration team, first to get a better working relationship on the ground and secondly to get them to acquaint themselves with the farming in the area where they serve. We have found that in many instances, some extension staff for some reasons are not very familiar with their working environment and participating in such an exercise benefits them tremendously.The primary objective of enumerator training is to relay and empower them with the information and skills required to effectively implement the instrument with minimum personal influence and bias on the information recorded. In addition, researchers must carefully train enumerators and their supervisors, provide them with explicit instructions and sufficient logistical support, obtain the cooperation of respondents, and initiate data verification and analysis early in the study. During the training, there is a session on the use of handheld Global Positioning Systems (GPS) and how to transfer GPS data in to MapSource Garmin software and into a Geographical Information Systems (GIS).Before embarking on socio--economic and agronomic surveys the individual conducting the survey should take care of the following items:Investing time and attention to thinking carefully about survey issues during the design stage can ensure that questions and variables are structured in a format conducive to accurate data collection and efficient data entry. First it is important for the enumerators to understand the questionnaire before conducting the survey because the data--collection phase is very sensitive and is based on a two--way exchange, which is sometimes based on confidentiality and trust between the enumerator and the respondents. It is necessary to explain the relevance of the survey to the respondents, its purpose, and if necessary guarantee that the information supplied are treated with confidentiality.The practical implementation of a survey also depends on the skills and training of the researchers or supervisors, enumerators, their monitoring, as well as the methods used for their supervision. This means errors are minimized through appropriate training. These are essential points on which the success of a survey depends and they require very careful attention.The selection of effective enumerators to conduct structured survey interviews is an important task for collecting valid and reliable data. What constitutes an effective enumerator changes with the type of instrument used, the data desired and the local environment. Interaction between enumerators and respondents counts as much as an accurately designed questionnaire in obtaining accurate, quality data. This meant preferably using enumerators with rural backgrounds to conduct farm--level surveys. Enumerators with a rural background are likely to better understand the respondents' frame of reference, and can thus understand the context of responses. Enumerators should be trained to check for completeness and accuracy in respondent answers after interviews while the field supervisor checks interviewer errors and response consistencies.Enumerators with a higher educational level may also be required. Generally those to be involved should be University graduates who have elementary knowledge in computers. The enumerators must be able to communicate with the respondents in the language they understand.Only through the actual implementation of a questionnaire in a pretest is a researcher able assesses how the instrument works and how respondents interpret and actually answer questions. Pre--testing the questionnaires should be conducted before the actual survey to determine the number of farm households that could be interviewed in each day by looking at the length of questionnaires interviews, data verifications collected by the enumerators and the travel time between villages and between households. This will guide in preparing the timeframe for the survey.A social--economic survey largely depends on the specific objectives of the survey and the information requirements. For example, one can investigate at the level of the village structure, the household, the undertaking, the lineage, the family, the house, the individual, education etc. The most currently used surveying technique is the interview technique. It is often organized around a questionnaire during an interview between the enumerator and an individual or a group of persons being surveyed.The questionnaire comprises a number of linked questions relating to the same statistical unit and more often to the same level of observation. The quality of the information collected and the facility of processing it depend largely upon the way the questionnaire is structured. Above all it demands very sound experience on the part of the investigator in order to be effective and to obtain quality information. Interviewing techniques have been explored in an attempt to integrate socioeconomic information with biophysical data. Interviews should not be more than 30 minutes.Three instruments are used that include: (i) a Socio--economic Questionnaire and (ii) an Agronomy questionnaire (iii) a harvest data questionnaire. The respondents are randomly selected and the questionnaire administered through face--to--face interviews by an enumerator to each respondent. The instrument ensure that data collected refer to the same farming household each time by recording the name of the Household Head, including his/her geo-location. Following are some objectives for which the questionnaire is designed. 1) To get an indication of the farmer's situation and farming profile.2) To establish the extent to which farmers have access to various sources and channels of information.3) To determine how farmers are coping with situations of food deficit in case they face any. 4) To determine whether farmers were willing to pay to receive agricultural information, and the amount they were willing to pay for. Basically this is intended to obtained feedback on farmers' perception and value on knowledge. 5) To establish ways of improving farmers production and productivity. The Agronomic Survey instrument is appended in this document as Appendix 1 while the Socio Economic Survey Instrument is appended as Appendix 2.During the training, there is a session on the use of handheld Global Positioning Systems (GPS) and how to transfer GPS data in to the Mapsource Garmin software and into a Geographical Information Systems (GIS). Free, open, and dependable nature of GPS has led to the development of hundreds of applications affecting every aspect of modern life. GPS is a satellite--and ground--based radio navigation and locational system that enables the user to determine very accurate locations on the surface of the Earth. GPS technology has provided an indispensable tool for management of agricultural and natural resources. Although the GPS is a complex and sophisticated technology, user interfaces have evolved to become very accessible to the non--technical user. Simple and inexpensive GPS units are available with accuracies of less than 3 meters.The Global Positioning System (GPS) consists of a network of 24 continuously orbiting satellites that transmit low power radio signals. Ground--based receivers can use these signals to calculate a location on the surface of the Earth with a high degree of accuracy and precision. A GPS receiver must be locked on to the signal of at least three satellites to calculate a 2D position (latitude and longitude) and track movement. With four or more satellites in view, the receiver can determine the user's 3D position (latitude, longitude and altitude). Once the user's position has been determined, the GPS unit can calculate other information, such as speed, bearing, track, trip distance, distance to destination, sunrise and sunset time and more. A landmark, point of destination or point along a route on one's way noted and recorded using mapping or navigation coordinates is known as a waypoint.The type of equipment selected depends on a number of considerations, including the degree of accuracy required by the user, budget considerations, ease of use, and working conditions. Today's GPS receivers are extremely accurate, thanks to their parallel multi--channel design.Garmin's 12 parallel channel receivers are quick to lock onto satellites when first turned on and they maintain strong locks, even in dense foliage or urban settings with tall buildings.One is able to receive data from the GPS unit or storage card. From that you are able to send map sets, waypoints, routes, and tracks using your GPS unit or storage card, or Using the USB Cable to transfer data to or from your GPS unit into the computer. Each time you transfer maps to a data card; you completely erase all data currently stored on the card and replace it with new data. However, if you store maps on a data card and you can transfer waypoints, routes, or tracks, you will not erase the maps on the card.One is able to transfer waypoints, routes, and tracks from a data card to your GPS unit's internal memory to prevent them from being deleted from your data card. You cannot save maps from a data card to your GPS unit's internal memory. In case you want to transfer data back to your GPS, save your file as Garmin GPS Database Verson 3 (gdb) file format.The actual location of each farmer household is geo--referenced near the doorstep and recorded as HH001 for the first farmer visited. The four corners Farmers' plots and fields are then geo--referenced. The coding of the farm is HH001P1--HH001P4 and for the field is HH001F1--HH00F4 respectively. However some field are irregular or hexagonal shape and may require collecting more GPS points.The GPS provides accurate positioning of the sample points, so that accurate geo--referenced maps of nutrient levels can be made with geographic information systems (GIS), and related to other data sets such as yield maps including other biophysical, social or economic variables. GPS is used to navigate to each farmer's household (Figure 1). Two plots of 3m x 3m are randomly selected on the farmers' main maize field or tested crop.The plots are demarcated by pegging with a tape or a rope in which every 3 meters is marked with a stick or a knot to make a 3m x 3m square plot from where measurements are made and recorded.During the survey soil samples are collected from the marked 3m x 3m plot separately. From each plot, composite samples of three top soil samples (0--20cm) are collected using a soil auger. The three composite samples are thoroughly mixed to come up with a single sample. The mixed samples are placed in polythene sample bags and labelled according to household codes e.g. HH001S1, HH001S3, etc. The actual location of sampling points is geo--referenced to find back the accurate location on the farmers field (Figure 1). All samples from the agronomic trials are transported to regional laboratories for analysis. In these laboratories samples are processed according to AFSIS standard operating procedures for soil sample processing at regional laboratories. NIR analyses or the standard wet chemistry soil analyses are conducted on all of the samples in the regional labs to determine soil the soil spectroscopic and chemical characteristics.The selected farmers are informed of the project intent and harvest areas are pre--marked one month prior to harvest. This is to ensure that the farmers do not harvest the marked area before measurements are taken. Sections of the field to be harvested are selected at random.Harvest data on maize farming or other tested crop practices are recorded for each farm in a structured questionnaire for each farmers field surveyed.Grain and Stover yields in each plot are calculated from a net plot of 3 x 3 metres. First, the number of plants in the net plot are counted and recorded on the harvest form. In order to do this efficiently, one needs to make sure the net plot is marked properly such that plants outside the net plot are not counted. The cobs are then harvested in such a way that the husk still remains on the plant. The cobs are counted and the weight of the total number of cobs is weighed using weighing scale. All the plants in the plot are cut at the soil surface and total Stover fresh weights determined in the field. This can best be done by tying the Stover together with a rope. It is important to weigh the rope and correct it from the measured weight in order to obtain the actual weight of the Stover. Few randomly selected cobs are selected and their grains separated and weighed to determine moisture content. The maize grain yield is computed from the fresh cop weight as follows: Yield in (kg/ha) = Average cob fresh weight x ((100--average moisture content)/ (100--12)) x Net plot area. This is a method commonly used by the Kenya Agricultural Research Institute (KARI). The AfSIS project uses a slightly different method to determine the stover and grain yield. In this, a net plot of 3 rows x 3 metres is marked out. The number of plants in this net plot is counted and recorded. All the plants in the plot are then cut at the soil surface and the cobs harvested from plants with the husks remaining intact on the maize stems. All the stover is then tied together and the weight recorded in kilograms. A representative sample comprising of five stovers of varying sizes is them weighed and the weight recorded in grams. The five stovers are then cut into small pieces and from this a subsample is obtained and weighed in grams. This subsample is then packed in readiness for drying. After drying the stover sub--sample the weight is recorded and the stover yield determined as follows: Yield in t/ha= ((Total stover fresh weight*(stover subsample fresh weight/stover subsample dry weight))/net plot area *10). To determine grain yield, all the cobs harvested are weighed and the weight recorded in kilograms. From this, a representative sample of 5 cobs of varying sizes is obtained and weighed. From this sample, the grain is separated from the core and the fresh weight of both the core and the grain determined in grams. The grains are then dried and the dry weight obtained. The grain yield is then determined as follows: Yield in t/ha = ((Total cob fresh weight*(grain subsample dry weight/grain subsample fresh weight))/net plot area * 10).To organize the data for efficient entry, processing, and for correct analysis, a researcher needs to recognize the different levels of analysis. The ability of the project to complete data entry within the set time depends on the size and skill of the data processing staff and the amount of time and attention accorded by the researcher to oversee the work. Integrated data entry and analysis software facilitates the ability of researchers to create data files and enter data into a usable and analyzable form. The data must be verified by examining it in order to validate it and remove aberrant data. Data are entered into the CSPro software using pre--designed templates that are based on the survey instrument (Questionnaire). The data is then exported to an excel worksheet, text file format and GIS environment respectively. The geo--referenced data enables to effectively query the database and retrieve data according to particular selection criteria.CSPro is an acronym for Census and Survey Processing System, and it has 3 key features namely; Dictionary, Forms and Files. CSPro is a software package that is used for data entry and processing data from censuses and surveys. CSPro templates are designed and used to key in the data as it appears in the questionnaire. This improves the quality of data by eliminating or reducing the chances of errors. Quality data preparation leads to quality data analysis. CSPro data can be exported to other software including: SPSS, STATA or Excel for analysis. The Data preparation process include: 1) Checking quality of field responses, 2) Coding data, 3) Data entry, 4) Checking entered data, 5) Resolving queries, 6) Documenting everything that's been done. The stages of data management include:The CSPro program is very useful especially in tabulation, data documentation and validation as it captures all details unlike other data entry software.The analysis depends on the type of information collected and the desired output. The analysis to be undertaken dictates the levels at which data prepared that constitutes different variables, requiring that the researcher considers up--front the type of analysis that he/she wishes to perform to satisfy the study objectives. This phase must therefore be carefully thought out when designing the whole survey, making provision for verification by reference both to complementary sources of information and by cross--checking information taken from the data collected.From the point of view of the analysis as such, statistical methods can be used, but it should not be forgotten that these methods nevertheless need the skills of a practitioner as far as interpretation is concerned. The analyses will typically involve different kind of basic statistical analysis (Descriptive Statistics) in an exploratory phase where general conclusion can be drawn about the data and their suitability for specific analysis. Each objective has its own set of data requirements and for that reason, the data is sliced into subsets for specific analyses. For predictive statistics, regression analyses are used. Regression statistics and correlation statistics are used to measure the weight or extent to which different variables relate to specific dependent variables. For comparative statistics, analysis of variance or comparison of the means and box plots are used. GISs are used to provide a spatial distribution as well as relationships with reference to certain covariates. GISs may also be used to help refine the recommendations that relate to specific farmers' field. Spatial soil data in spatial maps are used to identify variation in soil properties over the landscape ad provides an indication as to what could be happening where and how that relates to the farmers productivity or required amendments. Soil pH, soil organic matter, soil texture and other factors influencing changes in soil responses including crop nutrient access and water content across the field can be estimated. This is important information to guide nutrient application rates, including reasons why certain yield returns are obtained. Typical outputs at this stage are graphs and maps that display the distribution of yield, soil constraints and crop growth variables per sentinel sites.The ability to enter data on a timely basis is an important part of controlling data quality .Data that has been entered in the computer should first be verified and errors corrected. Possible errors should be corrected by checking using the computer software or manually going through the hardcopy questionnaire. Having the files correctly structured facilitates the task of quality control, as data can be quickly entered and checked both manually and by the computer.The uses of GIS and GPS technologies, either individually or in combination, span a broad range of applications and degrees of complexity. Simple applications might involve determining the location of sampling sites, plotting maps for use in the field, or examining the distribution of soil types in relation to yields and productivity. More complex applications take advantage of the analytical capabilities of GIS software. It is therefore necessary to acquire new know--how. It should be noted that GIS and GPS is going to make it possible in the survey to link biological, physical and socio--economic data, and this is going to prove essential. Using appropriate computerized facilities (relational databases and GIS), this tool analyses and synthesizes the information for decision making.GIS applications enable the storage, management, and analysis of large quantities of spatially distributed data. These data are associated with their respective geographic features. For example, data on crop yields might be associated with fields or experimental plots, represented on a map by points or polygons (Figure 2). A GIS can manage different data types occupying the same geographic space. The power of a GIS lies in its ability to analyze relationships between features and their associated data. This analytical ability results in the generation of new information, as patterns and spatial relationships are revealed.Using GIS analytical capabilities, variable parameters that can affect agricultural production can be evaluated. These parameters include yield variability, physical parameters of the field, soil chemical and physical properties, crop variability (e.g., density, height, nutrient stress, water stress, chlorophyll content), anomalous factors (e.g., weed, insect, and disease infestation, wind damage), and variations in management practices (e.g., tillage practices, crop seeding rate, fertilizer and pesticide application, irrigation patterns and frequency). Site--specific data, such as soil characteristics, fertility and nutrient data, topographic and drainage characteristics, yield data, are collected from different sources and stored and managed in a spatial database, either contained within the GIS or connected to the GIS from an external source. The analytical power of a GIS is applied to the data to identify patterns in the field (e.g., areas of greater or lesser yield; correlations between yield and topography or characteristics such as nutrient concentrations or drainage).Once patterns and correlations are interpreted, management practices can be modified to optimize yield and production costs, and minimize environmental impacts caused by excessive applications of fertilizers and pesticides. Site--specific applications of fertilizers, pesticides and other applications can be implemented by dividing a field into smaller management zones that are more homogeneous in properties of interest than the field as a whole. GPS is a satellite--and ground--based radio navigation and locational system that enables the user to determine very accurate locations on the surface of the Earth. GPS technology has provided an indispensable tool for management of agricultural and natural resources. Although the GPS is a complex and sophisticated technology, user interfaces have evolved to become very accessible to the non--technical user. Simple and inexpensive GPS units are available with accuracies of less than 3 metersRecent advances, refinements, and expansion of GPS technology have provided a broad array of choices to users. The type of equipment selected depends on a number of considerations, including the degree of accuracy required by the user, budget considerations, ease of use, and working conditions. Today's GPS receivers are extremely accurate, thanks to their parallel multi-channel design. Garmin's 12 parallel channel receivers are quick to lock onto satellites when first turned on and they maintain strong locks, even in dense foliage or urban settings with tall buildings.The Global Positioning System (GPS) consists of a network of 24 continuously orbiting satellites that transmit low power radio signals. Ground--based receivers can use these signals to calculate a location on the surface of the Earth with a high degree of accuracy and precision. A GPS receiver must be locked on to the signal of at least three satellites to calculate a 2D position (latitude and longitude) and track movement. With four or more satellites in view, the receiver can determine the user's 3D position (latitude, longitude and altitude). Once the user's position has been determined, the GPS unit can calculate other information, such as speed, bearing, track, trip distance, distance to destination, sunrise and sunset time and more. A landmark, point of destination or point along a route on one's way noted and recorded using mapping or navigation coordinates is known as a waypoint.One is able to receive data from the GPS unit or storage card. From that you are able to send map sets, waypoints, routes, and tracks using your GPS unit or storage card, or Using the USB Cable to transfer data to or from your GPS unit into the computer.Each time you transfer maps to a data card; you completely erase all data currently stored on the card and replace it with new data. However, if you store maps on a data card and you can transfer waypoints, routes, or tracks, you will not erase the maps on the card.You can transfer waypoints, routes, and tracks from a data card to your GPS unit's internal memory to prevent them from being deleted from your data card. You cannot save maps from a data card to your GPS unit's internal memory. In case you want to transfer data back to your GPS, save your file as Garmin GPS Database Verson 3 (gdb) format.1. Connect your GPS with your laptop using USB cable  Timely and accurate information is the modern farmer's most valuable resource. This information should include data on crop characteristics, soil properties, fertility requirements, weather predictions, weed and pest populations, plant growth responses, harvest yield, post-harvest processing, and marketing projections. The aim of the surveys is to enable researchers, extension agents and farmers understand constraints which could reduce yields by as much as 70%. It allows a maize producer or other test crop to easily recognize the basic constraints that hinder the optimization of production and productivity.The outcome of the analyses will typically allow predicting response to added nutrients, and relate with social--economic and agronomic variables for larger areas based on soil and environmental characteristics. Knowledge of specific sources of yield variability can be used to guide the sampling pattern.A result from the survey is to develop, validate and implement spatial decision support system and to generate maps to enhance maize or test crop productivity. Lastly, it should be borne in mind that surveying operations often make it necessary to ensure feedback of the results so that the conclusions can be presented clearly for decision making process.PART 1: MAIZESite------------Date_________________One of the aims of the AfSIS project is to estimate the effect of improved management on reducing yield gap between farmer fields and researcher-managed plots. Estimation of yields of the test crop will be undertaken on a section of the field of the same farmer where the diagnostic trial is being conducted. This is the same farmer interviewed in the socio-economic survey.Farmer production survey will be on two plots measuring 5 m by 5 and located on the main maize field of the farmer conducting diagnostic trials. The selected portion of a farmers field should be as close as possible to the diagnostic trial (or at least where the same soil conditions are expected). The selected farmers will be informed of the project intent and harvest areas will be marked out one month prior to harvest. This is to ensure that farmers do not harvest the marked area before measurements are taken. Harvest area will be recorded for each farmer's field surveyed. Section to be harvested will be selected at random.The following data will also be collected for the crop used as test crop in the area. For Malawi, this is maize:    In the following sections, enumerators fill the information as pertains the total area under maize crop in parcel 1.Indicate the total land size (parcel 1) under maize in acres What type of land preparation did you use? (1=animals, 2 = tractors, 3 = manual labour 2 )Number of days for land preparation using animal on that piece of land1 Parcel 1 should be the main maize field. Enumerators should inform the farmer to treat parcel 1 as the main maize field.2 During data analysis labor will be rated at each agronomic practice on a scale of 0--100% with 0 meaning lack of labor and 100% optimum labor.2 During data analysis labor will be rated at each agronomic practice on a scale of 0--100% with 0 meaning lack of labor and 100% optimum labor.    "}

main/part_2/0095966313.json

@@ -0,0 +1 @@
+{"metadata":{"gardian_id":"abd867f3902f3a46face90316ad7b4a6","source":"gardian_index","url":"https://cgspace.cgiar.org/rest/bitstreams/f0bce74f-82e4-4c3f-bad1-32619f8ffee9/retrieve","id":"2018714235"},"keywords":[],"sieverID":"3f0fdecf-b794-477a-aa51-992b099908ee","content":"ICTs are applied along the research for development continuum that connects agricultural science with agricultural and rural change. They are used to transform agricultural extension, facilitate the delivery of education and learning, help to empower the rural poor, and power many agricultural finance, credit, market, weather, and other services.ICTs offer cost-effective means to discover new fishing grounds, monitor fish populations, track and trace catches for export, and combat illegal fishing activities. Weather information delivered by radio or satellite warns when to return home.ICTs are used in pest identification, prevention, education, knowledge sharing and eradication. Multi-media information is shared across the Internet; farmers and extension workers post symptoms and obtain advice by email, radio and phone. "}

main/part_2/0103594623.json

@@ -0,0 +1 @@
+{"metadata":{"gardian_id":"cc6578afa85bd5f837413353cbaa38d9","source":"gardian_index","url":"https://cgspace.cgiar.org/rest/bitstreams/bf751386-d5fa-4740-ae64-56a629c2d829/retrieve","id":"1377891685"},"keywords":[],"sieverID":"168ada58-648c-4edb-b1cd-27240bb04aa8","content":"The aim of this project is to develop weevil-resistant sweetpotato varieties through breeding and biotechnology. Bacillus thuringiensis (Bt) is a soil bacterium that is well-known for its insecticidal activity. Synthetic genes that produce the proteins active against speci c insect pests can be developed and introduced into the target plant to confer pest resistance. For example, this so-called Bt technology has been used successfully to increase resistance to bollworm in cotton and rootworm or stem borer in maize. The result has been reduced pesticide use and increased yields in those crops. Farmers, including small-scale producers, have been the primary bene ciaries of growing Bt crops. In the case of Bt sweetpotato, farmers will be able to harvest only what is needed while the rest of the crop will remain stored in the soil and protected from weevil devastation. In addition, health bene ts may be expected because farmers will not consume partially damaged roots containing toxic compounds as they do currently under severe food shortage.  A member of the CGIAR ConsortiumA farmer survey conducted in Uganda revealed that weevils are responsible for 28% of crop losses. As sweetpotato is at times the only food available, this can be quite devastating. The impact of weevils can a ect not only food security, but also sweetpotato production, marketability, and sustainability, especially in areas experiencing longer dry periods. With climate change predictions for Sub-Saharan Africa (SSA) foreseeing an expanding dry season, the threat and impact of weevils may increase further.Adapting conventional integrated pest management practices among smallholder farmers does not seem promising because of the great di culty associated with controlling eld sanitation in small-scale subsistence production systems. Extensive e orts to develop weevil-resistant sweetpotato through conventional breeding methods have failed in spite of considerable investment for decades. As a result, there is currently little farmers can do when weevils infest their elds, other than to quickly try to harvest and salvage what is left of their crop.and the University of Ghent, have worked on mode of action of the Cry proteins and capacity building respectively. Risk assessment is led by the Donald Danforth Plant Science Center in US. The project is targeting primarily sweetpotato production in Uganda and possibly Kenya.Between 2004 and 2007 with Rockefeller Foundation funding, we identi ed three distinct Cry proteins exhibiting useful weevil toxicity. Soon after, weevil-resistant (WR) genes were developed using genetic information from the sweetpotato crop itself in order to make 3 sweetpotato-like WR genes. Since 2009, the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation and USAID have funded the next developments. The WR genes were introduced into sweetpotato varieties but failed to control the weevils. Our research indicates that the level of accumulation of the Cry proteins is the likely cause of lack of e cacy because their quantities were lower than the lethal dose killing 50% (LC 50 ) larvae in arti cial diet assay. Although one event displayed accumulation above LC 50 , it failed to provide control of the weevil. This has raised doubts about the functional activity of the fusion protein ET33-34. A con ned eld trial conducted in Puerto Rico con rmed the absence of weevil control but one transgenic events expressing Cry3Ca1 displayed sub-lethal activity. Research on the mechanism of toxicity at the University of Valencia indicates that Cry7Aa1 and Cry3Ca1 may share the same insect gut receptor. Accordingly, new Cry genes were developed to enhance accumulation and many more transgenic events will be tested in the coming two years. Because of the results observed so far, we will focus on the Cry3Ca1 and the ET33 and ET34 genes expressed independently. Since sweetpotato tuberous roots are naturally poor in protein, we haveVisit the Sweetpotato Knowledge Portal www.sweetpotatoknowledge.org g gEmerging adults from 17 sweetpotato roots per transgenic event added a complementary strategy based on RNAi.Together with Venganza Ltd, the University of Ghent has made good progress in identifying candidate genes from the two African weevils by transcriptome analyses. Bioassays using African weevils are currently underway.The testing of resistance to weevils has been slow due to a number of unfavorable factors: the time-consuming protocol for genetic transformation of this crop, the need to produce tuberous roots in contained facilities, the transfer of plant material from Peru to the USA and to African countries. Therefore, an extension of this project by several months will be desirable to complete the evaluation of the existing and the new transgenic events for e cacy against both African weevil species. Finally, we rmly believe that the Cry protein expression possibly combined with RNAi will confer resistance to weevils which remain the single most important threat on sweetpotato food availability to the poor in many Sub Saharan African countries."}

main/part_2/0128790565.json

@@ -0,0 +1 @@
+{"metadata":{"gardian_id":"0b6503f85c42d2136bf47f7156261d68","source":"gardian_index","url":"https://cgspace.cgiar.org/rest/bitstreams/1a88ca38-1e89-4d58-8547-3c85cd7da2df/retrieve","id":"-370797664"},"keywords":[],"sieverID":"9c86d098-d530-42f8-be0a-fa1be5e7d464","content":"si bien se ha mantenido la mayor parte del tiempo por encima de la tasa del PIB fue altamente volátil, alcanzando varios picos con tasas promedio de crecimiento de hasta el 16% entre 2003-2012 o cayendo a tasas de crecimiento negativas de -1% durante la última década. Esta volatilidad, refleja la inestabilidad del cultivo cuyos precios se caracterizan por presentar alteraciones abruptas b que ponen en riesgo a los agricultores al reducir sus ingresos.Fuente: Elaborado por los autores con base en DANE (2021) y FAO (2021). Nota: (a) Tasa de crecimiento de media móvil de 10 años, para atenuar variaciones interanuales. A partir del 2019 los valores del PIB son preliminares. (b) De acuerdo con un reporte del Ministerio de Agricultura de 2020, las alteraciones de los precios se deben a escenarios de sobreoferta de la demanda de yuca dulce, la cual coincide con desabastecimiento de yuca amarga, lo que abre un escenario para la recomposición de la producción nacional. Según noticias recientes, esta situación también se ha presentado en el último año como efecto de las alteraciones de la pandemia.  1995-2004 1996-2005 1997-2006 1998-2007 1999-2008 2000-2009 2001-2010 2002-2011 2003-2012 2004-2013 2005-2014 2006-2015 2007-2016 2008-2017 2009-2018 2010-2019 Actores de la cadena productiva de la yuca (resumida) en Colombia en 2018Fuente: Elaborado por los autores con base en UPRA y FAO (2021). Nota: (a) Esta cantidad de consumo incluye las importaciones, que corresponden al 1.39% (FAOSTAT, 2021). (b) Alimentación: hace referencia a la cantidad total del producto disponible para consumo humano durante el período de referencia. Los datos también incluyen los productos derivados. (c) Otros usos: residuos, pérdidas, alimentación animal, otros no alimentarios.Un valor con potencial de crecimiento debido a la creciente demanda local y global para el uso industrial de la yuca. $ miles de millones de pesos colombianos (COP).Fuente: Cassava Lighthouse (2021) y FAO (2021). Colombia es el tercer país de Latinoamérica con mayor producción de yuca. En general, predomina la producción de yuca tradicional para consumo, no obstante, la superficie sembrada de yuca industrial se ha incrementado en un 290% entre 2010 y 2020, alcanzando el 6% de la superficie total sembrada de yuca. Por su parte, la superficie sembrada de yuca tradicional incrementó en un 5% en relación con el 2007, sin embargo, ha sido fluctuante durante todo el período alcanzando sus valores más altos en 2013 y 2018. El rendimiento promedio creció en un 7,6% entre 2007 y 2020. Nota: Los quintiles y probabilidades se obtienen a partir del puntaje obtenido por los hogares encuestados en la \"Poverty Score Card\". Cada columna nos indica el rango de probabilidad de los hogares en cada quintil de tener ingresos menores a la línea de pobreza de US$2,5. Por ejemplo, en la Costa Norte 1 de cada 10 hogares tiene probabilidades entre 90,7 y 67,8 de tener ingresos menores a la línea de pobreza. Mientras en el Cauca, 3,5 de cada 10 hogares enfrenta dichas probabilidades.Ton/ha El porcentaje de agricultores utilizando variedades mejoradas es de apenas 6% y 19% en Caribe y Cauca respectivamente, pero esos mismos agricultores representan porcentajes mayores de área sembrada y el 41% de la producción total en Cauca, lo cual resalta la importancia de diseminar variedades mejoradas con el objetivo de incrementar la productividad de los agricultores. "}

main/part_2/0134936899.json

@@ -0,0 +1 @@
+{"metadata":{"gardian_id":"4c8279b791145f40824f458a3dac03f4","source":"gardian_index","url":"https://cgspace.cgiar.org/rest/bitstreams/cd92f6c3-6e8d-4e0d-9372-7ec46cffde4c/retrieve","id":"-304099436"},"keywords":[],"sieverID":"8232bec3-24ab-4092-972e-97553c750153","content":"With PIM/FTA support, CIFOR collaborated with multi-stakeholder fora in Peru and Indonesia to develop a tool that allows participants to reflect on the processes and progress of their fora so that more equitable processes and outcomes may emerge. Partnering with Peru's Service for Natural Protected Areas (SERNANP), CIFOR adapted this tool for implementation by the multi-stakeholder management committees of 76 protected areas covering 15% of Peru's territory. In 2021, the tool was included in SERNANP's official guidebook for management committees.In Peru, interest in widening stakeholder participation in environmental management has led to an increase in the use of participatory spaces for decision making -also called multi-stakeholder fora. All protected areas managed by Peru's Service for Natural Protected Areas (SERNANP) are required to have a multi-stakeholder management committee. These committees include representatives of Indigenous Peoples and local communities, government, NGOs, researchers, and sometimes private companies.Multi-stakeholder fora (MSFs) have gained attention around the world because of their potential to improve collaboration between actors to address complex challenges. However, PIM/FTA research (synthesis on MSFs [1] and study of 13 MSFs in Brazil, Ethiopia, Indonesia and Peru [2][3]) found that broad participation from different groups in MSFs is not enough to guarantee inclusiveness and that MSFs often fail to address issues of inequity.These findings led CIFOR researchers to team up with participants in two multi-stakeholder management committees in the Peruvian Amazon and one forum in Indonesia to develop \"How are we doing?\", a PIM-and FTA-supported tool for participatory reflective monitoring and adaptive learning in MSFs [4]. This tool is designed to be used by forum participants and organizers themselves, not by external evaluators. Another unique feature of \"How are we doing?\" is that it goes beyond a simple assessment of indicators: after expressing their level of agreement with a set of statements (such as \"Our forum includes everyone who should be present\" or \"We are all treated as equals in our forum\"), guiding questions invite participants to discuss and agree on improvements.The tool was tested in two management committees in Peru. These pilots led to a second version of the tool developed specifically for SERNANP's management committees [5]. When the new version was tested in six additional management committees, participants noted its positive impact [6]. ¿Cómo vamos? was published by SERNANP in 2020 as an official government document and will be implemented in the 76 management committees, which support the management of protected areas covering 19M hectares i.e. 15% of the national territory [6] [7].A third version, a gender-responsive tool focused on issues related to indigenous women's participation in indigenous community governance, was developed in partnership with Peru's National Organization for Andean and Amazonian Women [8].By fostering better communication, mutual understanding and adaptive learning, these tools should ultimately contribute to reducing inequalities and improving livelihoods and tenure security for Indigenous Peoples, including women.• https://tinyurl.com/ydsossh2• https://tinyurl.com/ydw4ntqd• https://www.cifor.org/toolboxes/tools-for-managing-landscapes-inclusively/ • https://tinyurl.com/yf7b5bbgPart II: CGIAR system level reportingPIM/FTA research -a synthesis on multi-stakeholder fora (MSFs) [1] and a study of 13 fora in Brazil, Ethiopia, Indonesia and Peru [2] -demonstrates that the interest in MSFs has not been accompanied by a thorough analysis of how they operate, and highlights a lack of attention to the equity and effectiveness of MSFs' processes and outcomes.Building on this research, CIFOR worked with participants in two MSFs in Peru (the management committees of two protected areas) and one MSF in Indonesia (Provincial Council on Climate Change in East Kalimantan) to develop \"How are we doing?\", a PIM-and FTA-supported tool for participatory reflective monitoring and adaptive learning in MSFs [3].A specificity of this tool is that it is designed to be used by forum participants and organizers themselves, not by external evaluators. Another unique feature of \"How are we doing?\" is that it goes beyond a simple assessment of indicators: after expressing their level of agreement with a set of statements (such as \"Our forum includes everyone who should be present\" or \"We are all treated as equals in our forum\"), participants are invited to discuss and agree on improvements.In partnership with SERNANP, CIFOR facilitated the development of a second version of the tool specifically for SERNANP's 76 management committees [4]. The tool was customized during decentralized participatory workshops, then validated through workshops with SERNANP staff. When it was tested in six additional management committees, participants noted its positive impact. During follow-up interviews as part of an evaluation study, participants said that the tool enables a safe environment for discussion and raises awareness of the need to empower historically marginalized actors such as Indigenous People and women [5].¿Cómo vamos?, the version of the tool developed for SERNANP's 76 management committees, has been published by SERNANP as an official government document and will be implemented in all management committees of protected areas in Peru [4]. Marco Arenas, Head of SERNANP's Participatory Governance Unit, presented a paper on the tool at a conference organised by the International Model Forests Network [6]. The research team presented the tool at national events and in an international webinar organized by SERNANP and attended by presidents of management committees, heads of protected areas, and conservation practitioners [7]. In 2021, \"¿Cómo vamos?\" was included in SERNANP's official guidebook for management committees (8)."}

main/part_2/0170010279.json

@@ -0,0 +1 @@
+{"metadata":{"gardian_id":"845bf0d1ef254bdfafa81de63526d433","source":"gardian_index","url":"https://cgspace.cgiar.org/rest/bitstreams/32d69d47-7bc3-4186-bb06-ef925343e054/retrieve","id":"-40221339"},"keywords":["Adaptation","Climate change","Farm model","Household model","Mitigation","Review"],"sieverID":"17ef029c-ad60-4731-bcf2-f3545b91ffbe","content":"This study systematically reviewed the literature to evaluate how suitable existing farm and farm household models are to study aspects of food security in relation to climate change adaptation, risk management and mitigation. We systematically scanned approximately 16,000 research articles covering more than a 1000 models. We found 126 models that met the criteria for subsequent detailed analysis. Although many models use climate as an input, few were used to study climate change adaptation or mitigation at farm level. Promising mixtures of methodologies include mathematical programming for farm level decisionmaking, dynamic simulation for the production components and agent based modelling for the spread of information and technologies between farmers. There is a need for more explicit farm level analyses with a focus on adaptation, vulnerability and risk. In general terms, this systematic review concludes that there are enough techniques for integrated assessments of farm systems in relation to climate change, adaptation and mitigation, but they have not yet been combined in a way that is meaningful to farm level decision makers.Insight in farm functioning is important from an agricultural, social and from an environmental perspective. Farms and agricultural households naturally play a key role in food production and land use management, but their management decisions also play an important role around issues related to water use, pollution (Vatn et al. 2006), soil nutrient depletion, erosion, eutrophication of water bodies, and on an even larger scale the global emissions of greenhouse gasses as carbon dioxide (CO 2 ), methane (CH 4 ) and nitrous oxide (N 2 O). Global change is expected to have significant effects on management strategies of farmers. Insights in the capacity of farmers to adapt and identifying adaptation options are important to be able to estimate the consequences of internal and external changes on farmer's livelihoods, their land use and consequential effects on the environment. Such an integrated assessment [one definition is given by Rotmans and Asselt (1996), as 'an integrated and participatory process of combining, interpreting and communicating knowledge from diverse scientific disciplines to allow a better understanding of complex phenomena' (pg 327) of agricultural changes caused by climate change is a challenging task and modelling is seen as an essential tool to be able to make ex ante assessments of possible changes.An essential step in the integrated assessment of agricultural driven land use changes is the modelling of consequences of farmers or land users decision-making on processes at smaller and larger integration levels (Figure 1). Management decisions made at the household level have effects on the individual sub-components of the household-level system, and can have aggregated effects at village, regional, watershed and landscape (national, global, market) levels. However, simulating decision-making at farm and household levels is a major challenge. Farm systems across the world are highly complex and diverse, and therefore tools that address their behaviour are similarly diverse. A range of different techniques and approaches to simulate farm systems is available. Each approach has its pros and cons, and there is no consensus on the best way forward for using this diversity of approaches to address critical questions of food security under the conditions of a growing human population and a changing climate. Furthermore, few models really take into account in a balanced way the dynamic interactions between the social, production and environmental components of the farming system (Argent 2004), and models from different disciplines in general have a different representation of data, space and time (Ewert et al. 2011, Janssen et al. 2011). The detail of the description of the farm and its environment varies largely with the aims of the projects and background of the model developers. Several reviews have been written on the quantitative tools used to analyse and predict the behaviour of farm systems. However, these reviews often focused on certain techniques and were not comprehensive (McCown et al. 2009, Le Gal et al. 2011, Thornton and Herrero 2001, Janssen and van Ittersum 2007).None of these reviews focused on climate change and adaptation as a specific model application area. Models can help researchers to understand how farming households adapt to potential climate change. This area is still under-explored, and there is a need to evaluate how suitable existing farm household models are to study climate change adaptation and mitigation. This study has reviewed household and farm models worldwide, including models that address problems of both the developed and developing world.The specific goals of this review are:• To present a comprehensive overview of farm and household level models and to analyse trends in the use of modelling techniques in publications in peer-reviewed scientific journals.• To analyse how (combinations of) different approaches and techniques are used or can be used to study adaptation of farm systems to changes in the biophysical and socio- GHG emission models Biodiversity models Nutrient cycling models 10 economic environment. Special attention has been given to how models can deal with adaptation to potential changes in climate.• To identify models and modelling techniques that can be further developed to improve their representation of adaptation of farm households in response to environmental change.In this study we reviewed models, which focused on the farm and household level. The literature was approached through a systematic review of peer-reviewed publications. In this review, the farm was defined as the agricultural production system, consisting of a combination of cropping and livestock components that use labour, land, equipment, knowledge and capital resources over time and space to produce goods-which are consumed by the household members or marketed-and ecosystem services (Le Gal et al. 2011).Fisheries and aquaculture components are sometimes integrated with crop and/or livestock components in a farm, and sometimes they represent the unique components of the farm. A household was defined as a family-based co-residential unit that takes care of resource management and the primary needs of its members. A household is considered to be composed of individuals that do not necessarily live together in the same house but that share the majority of the household resources and daily activities (Rudie 1995). The household level includes not only farming activities but also off-farm activities that can bring in food and cash, and require labour. Management of a farm can be conceived, for the purposes of analysis, as taking place at different interconnected time scales: strategic (several years), tactical (seasonal), and operational (daily/weekly) (Le Gal et al. 2011).The literature review was carried out using the search engine SCOPUS (http://www.scopus.com/home.url), which covers the highest number of agronomy journals of the internationally available search engines. A matrix was formulated using key search words.The search words were separated into target concepts and application domain concepts (Table 1). Later on, the search was further refined using a list of modelling techniques to capture the variety of models applied to agriculture, fisheries and aquaculture, and natural resources management. This search resulted in 16,000 articles. The EndNote database of references will be made available as online supplementary material on the CCAFS website for download by interested users. The articles corresponding to each combination of target and domain terms went through initial scanning to select those publications dealing with model development or model application. At this step 2,500 papers were selected. All selected publications were imported into a literature database (EndNote; www.endnote.com; Thomson Reuters). After this step, each of the papers was read in detail, and the model evaluated on a series of attributes. We only kept studies that included explicitly the farm or farm-household level, and excluded those focusing on farm component levels or landscape, regional or global levels without taking into account processes at the farm or household level. At this step 450 papers were still considered in the study. The models presented or used in these studies were evaluated on whether they included climate as a direct or indirect variable, and in the end 126 models were characterised in detail. For all farm or farm household models information was recorded on:• modelling techniques used in the study;• whether the study was an application of an existing model, or was using a newly developed model;• the general characteristics of the model (Table 2);• the key attributes characterising the application possibilities of the model used/developed in the study.The model characteristics on which information was recorded were, i) model name; year of publication; application level (crop, field, livestock, fish pond, tree lots, farm, grassland, landscape, watershed, basin, region); ii) whether the model is dynamic (and in which aspects it is dynamic); iii) whether farm-level decision-making is included, and if yes, which type of technique is used; iv) which external factors are included; v) temporal resolution; vi) spatial resolution; and vii) system internal feedbacks included.A set of key attributes (see Table 2) was defined to characterise the application possibilities of the models of interest for farm household research, and specifically for climate adaptation and mitigation research. Attribute 'profit' is of general interest, attributes 'food self-sufficiency' and 'food security' are especially of interest in subsistence farming. Attributes 'climate variability and change', 'risk', 'mitigation' and 'adaptation' are of interest in relation to climate related research. Each selected model was evaluated on whether it can be used for assessing the behaviour of farm households for each of these attributes. Vulnerability (although not in Table 2, it is a term that will be used in this study) and adaptation are often defined in different ways in the literature. Here we define vulnerability as the susceptibility of a system to a hazard (Gallopin 2006). For a farm or household, vulnerability can be assessed using different indicators, for example the period of food shortages, food security, or bankruptcy, and therefore we did not include it as a separate attribute. Hazards are defined as threats to a system, comprised of perturbations and stresses. Perturbations are major spikes in pressure (e.g. extreme rainfall or drought events) beyond the normal range of variability in which the system operates. These normally originate outside of the system (Turner et al. 14 2003). Stress often comes from within the system and is defined as a continuous or slowly increasing pressure (e.g., soil degradation), commonly within the range of normal variability  (Gallopin 2006). The adaptive capacity is defined as 'the system's ability to adjust to a disturbance, moderate potential damage, take advantage of opportunities, and cope with the consequences of a transformation that occurs' and an adaptation is 'the system's restructuring after its responses' (Turner et al. 2003, pg 8075). In farm and household system research, focusing on systems where the structure is determined by human management, we understand adaptation as the change in farm management or livelihood strategy implemented by the households as a consequence of internal or external system changes. The widely used definition of resilience is that of Walker et al. (2004), first page: 'the capacity of a system to absorb disturbance and reorganise while undergoing change so as to still retain essentially the same function, structure, identity, and feedbacks.' Clearly this is a conservative definition, which makes sense for ecological systems, but for farm household systems a high resilience can also mean that a farm household is not able to benefit from the opportunities an outside change brings (see for example the definition of 'adaptation' above).We classified modelling techniques into three major categories: dynamic simulation, mathematical programming (MP), and multi-agent models. This is a very simple categorisation, and many models actually use combinations of these techniques. We grouped the models according to the most important technique that is listed in the description of the models, and only made a separate class called 'MP models together with simulation models'.The first category is (dynamic) simulation models. These models make use of ordinary or partial differential equations or difference equations to calculate the behaviour of systems in space and time (Leffelaar 1999). This category represents a wide and large group of models that can simulate the behaviour of a system in time and space. Typically they represent decision-making through parameter settings or what-if rules in the model, a type of approach we will call 'rule-based' decision-making in this review.The second category is optimisation models, which in their simple form are systems of equations aimed at characterising farm-level activities in relation to farm production, investment, marketing, etc. These types of models are based on the specification of behavioural assumptions (e.g. profit maximisation). Programming models (e.g. linear or multiple goal linear programming models) can be used to solve for optimal resource allocations subject to constraints. (Non-) Linear programming (LP) represents the farm as a (non-) linear combination of so-called 'activities'. An activity is a coherent set of operations with corresponding inputs and outputs. An activity is characterised by a set of (technical) coefficients that quantify the relationships between activities and certain defined goals or objectives (Ten Berge et al. 2000). As inputs are limited resources, constraints (i.e. minimum and maximum values) to the activities are defined. This system of activities is optimised within the limits of the constraints for a user-specified goal, such as profit. Standard mathematical formulations of different types of optimisation models can be found in (Hazell and Norton 1986).The third category is multi-agent modelling techniques, i.e. modelling approaches in which families, farmers or household members are represented as an individual entity (agents) explicitly taking into account interactions between these entities. Often in terms of modelling technique, they make use of the same approaches as dynamic simulation models, but whereas those models typically focus on one household or an average representation of a population of households, agent based models represent multiple instances of individual households in their models, together with their interactions.In this review, we have excluded empirical models (econometric and statistical), which by their nature have a limited application domain, and in general cannot be used for adaptation studies under climate change. Econometric models (e.g. structural econometric models) that were used in simulation or mathematical programming models at farm or household level were included. Dynamic simulation models (e.g. crop, soil, livestock models), which focused on the component level, have been excluded too.The term 'bio-economic model' is widely used in the literature for models that integrate biophysical and economic components (Janssen and van Ittersum 2007), where the latter are becoming relevant especially in the decision component of the models (Brown 2000).However, the level of integration can vary widely: some bio-economic models are 'biological process models' to which an economic component has been added, for example the SAVANNA model (Coughenour 1993, Thornton, Galvin andBoone 2003), the DAFOSYM model (Harrigan, Rotz and Black 1994) and the NUTMON model (Hengsdijk, Meijerink and Mosugu 2005). Other bio-economic models are economic optimisation models, in which modelled decisions are related to biological resources used as production. An example is the Mali Bio-Economic Farm household model (Ruben and Van Ruijven 2001) which models farm households with different resource endowments in a multi-objective optimisation framework and uses simulated biological processes as technical coefficients. Other integrated bio-economic models include the socio-economic features of the economic optimisation models on the one hand, and the process simulation features of the primary biological process models on the other. An example is the Vihiga Integrated Farm household model (Shepherd and Soule 1998) which, even when it does not incorporate an optimisation component, is able to assess both economic and biological sustainability of farm households with different resource endowments under different environmental, technical and policy scenarios. The term bio-economic model can be used for such a diverse set of models that is it no longer distinctive, and therefore we avoided using the term in this study.The systematic review included almost 16,000 peer-reviewed articles. The highest numbers of publications within farm/household research are focused on crops (28%), soils (26%) and water (28%) (see Table 3). There are fewer publications focusing on livestock (11%), ecosystems (6%), and fisheries and aquaculture (2%  The number of publications in which farm or household level models are used is increasing substantially over time (Figure 2A). The number of peer-reviewed publications presenting new models is increasing as well, but more slowly. This shows that in recent years relatively more studies are applications of existing models rather than newly developed models. Also the number of publications in which combinations of modelling techniques are used is increasing substantially over time (Figure 2A). The differences in the reuse of models using different techniques are smaller than expected (Figure 2B). Previous studies stressed that reuse of models using mathematical programming approaches is a major challenge for the future (e.g. Janssen and van Ittersum 2007). Although reuse of these models is less frequent than that of simulation models, substantial reuse is occurring and roughly between 20 and 50% of the publications using mathematical programming as a  4 and 5). We selected 2,528 articles for further reading. Of those articles, only 480 were selected for detailed evaluation because they explicitly included the farm or household level. That is, only 3% of the articles that resulted from the use of search words were initially scanned. Of the 480 selected studies, 54% used optimisation modelling techniques, 51% dynamic simulation, 7% were agent-based models, and 21% used a combination of modelling techniques. In the following sections we summarise the interesting features found in the models that can be useful for adaptation and mitigation studies.Of the 480 selected studies we selected 126 models (presented in 160 papers) which are working at farm or household level, and that were of potential interest for our study. The full list of attributes of these models is presented in Tables S1, S2, S3 and S4 in the supplementary material. We also present in Tables 4 and 5 a summary of these tables: which models have dealt and can potentially deal with an attribute, with the models grouped per technique: MP, MP in combination with simulation models, (dynamic) simulation models, and agent based models.In the detailed analyses a total of 24 MP models were assessed (Table 4A and 5A). These models included static linear programming models and only five dynamic or recursive MP models (Cittadini et al. 2008, Shively 2000, Louhichi, Alary and Grimaud 2004, Nicholson et al. 1994, Hansen and Krause 1989). Five models performed multiple goal or multiple criteria analyses (Rossing et al. 1997, Senthilkumar et al. 2011, Val-Arreola, Kebreab and France 2006, Dake, Mackay and Manderson 2005). These stand-alone MP models are quite restricted in the way they handle climate variability and climate change, as any change in production or prices should be directly incorporated into the technical coefficients the models use. Two studies take market and/or climate risk explicitly into account. One study focuses on the optimal trade-off between average gross margin and variations in gross margin caused by environmental fluctuations (Dake et al. 2005). The other study represents climate variability through defining nine explicit season types, with different rainfall conditions and amounts, and analyse the consequences for optimal management, and for the robustness of the estimates of optimal management (Kingwell, Pannell and Robinson 1993). In all models adaptation to climate change or changes in market conditions can be simulated through changes in crop, grass, livestock or fish production coefficients and through changes in prices, but with the restriction that the models assume that the farmer is optimizing his or her behaviour for a specific goal, normally maximizing profit. The changes in production coefficients can be based on experimental work, or based on dynamic modelling analyses, which brings us to the next group of models.Thirty-six MP models, which were combined with simulation models were analysed (Tables 4B and 5B). A wide range of modelling approaches was used for the simulation models, whereas for the MP techniques most models used optimisation through linear programming.Also used were Multiple Goal LP, dynamic or recursive LP (Popp et al. 2009), non-linear optimisation (García-Vila and Fereres 2011, Grove and Oosthuizen 2010), mixed integer optimisation (Dogliotti, Van Ittersum andRossing 2005, Gibbons, Ramsden andBlake 2006), nested optimisation (Roetter et al. 2007), stochastic MP (Moghaddam and DePuy 2011) and evolutionary search algorithms followed by constrained programming (Ramilan et al. 2011).Food security was only analysed by one model, IMPACT-HROM (Zingore et al. 2009, Waithaka et al. 2006), food self-sufficiency by two (Zingore et al. 2009, Waithaka et al. 2006, Thornton et al. 2004). Several models could potentially analyse food self-sufficiency but in the studies evaluated modellers did not focus on this attribute (Berntsen et al. 2003, Holman et al. 2005, Roetter et al. 2007, Moriondo et al. 2010, Ngambeki, Deuson and Preckel 1992, Keil et al. 2009, Herrero et al. 1999, Hatch et al. 1999, Moore, Robertson and Routley 2011).Basically all models incorporate effects of climate variability on production, but detailed risk analyses on effects of climate variability and change on farm level production and economic welfare are scarce. Grove and Oosthuizen (2010) analysed drought risk on a farm by assessing gross margin as a function of a risk aversion factor, which can differ between farmers. Income maximisation (Kingwell et al. 1993); (Kaya, Hildebrand and Nair 2000); (Laborte et al. 2009); (Louhichi et al. 2004); (Nicholson et al. 1994); (Salinas, Ramirez and Rumayor-Rodríguez 1999); (Schultheiß et al. 2005); (Shively 1998); (Shively 2000); (Val-Arreola et al. 2004) (Wise and Cacho 2011); ISFARM (Amir et al. 1991, Amir et al. 1993); FASSET-LP (Berntsen et al. 2003);MCID (Borges Jr et al. 2008); GAMS-MINOS (Carvallo et al. 1998);AQUACROP-LP (García-Vila and Fereres); FARM-ADAPT (Gibbons, Ramsden and Blake 2006); MoFEDS (Greiner 1997); SAPWAT-LP (Grove and Oosthuizen 2010)Income maximisation (Mimouni, Zekri and Flichman 2000); Savanna-MP (Thornton et al. 2004); DSSAT-LP (Hatch et al. 1999   (Kaya et al. 2000); (Louhichi et al. 2004); (Nicholson et al. 1994); (Rossing et al. 1997); (Salinas et al. 1999); (Senthilkumar et al. 2011); (Shively 1998); (Shively 2000); (Valderrama and Engle 2002); (Veysset et al. 2005 SAVANNA-PHEWS (Thornton et al. 2003, Boone et al. 2006); GAMEDE (Vayssières et al. 2009); (Pardo et al. 2010); (Hansen et al. 1997); (Hansen et al. 2009); DAFOSYM (Harrigan et al. 1996); DYNAMOF (Howden et al. 1996); FASSET (Hutchings et al. 2007); ADIEM (Kulshreshtha and Klein 1989); (Bell et al. 2010); WFM (Beukes et al. 2005, Beukes et al. 2008, Beukes et al. 2010); (Bontkes and Van Keulen 2003); (Brennan et al. 2008); (Cabrera et al. 2005);UDDER (Chapman et al. 2008c, Chapman et al. 2008b, Chapman et al. 2011); (Clark et al. 2010); CEEOT-LP (Gassman et al. 2006); APS-FARM (Rodriguez et al. 2011b, Power et al. 2011); IFSM (Rotz et al. 2005, Rotz et al. 2007, Rotz et al. 2011); (Savoie et al. 1985); (Shepherd and Soule 1998); @RISK (Jackson et al. 2011); (Luckert et al. 2000); (Parsons et al. 2011); (Tittonell et al. 2007); TOA (Claessens et al. 2010, Stoorvogel et al. 2004); NUANCES-FARMSIM (Tittonell et al. 2009, van Wijk et al. 2009b, Giller et al. 2011, Rufino et al. 2011); NUTMON (Hengsdijk et al. In their study, (Holman et al. 2005) optimised an objective that was the weighted value of gross margin and a risk indicator, although unfortunately the latter was not specified in the paper. Several studies analyse the consequences of different market and/or climate conditions for management and system behaviour (García-Vila and Fereres 2011, Quintero, Wunder and Estrada 2009, Moghaddam and DePuy 2011, Messina, Hansen and Hall 1999, Donnelly et al. 2002, Thomas et al. 2010, Keil et al. 2009, Thornton et al. 2004), and others apply sensitivity analyses to assess the robustness of the optimised strategies (Amir, Puech andGranier 1991, Amir, Puech andGranier 1993). What was lacking in the studies analysed were stochastic input and output analyses, in which rainfall and other factors are entered as a probability density function and outcomes and probabilities of outcomes are quantified as well as distributions rather than average single values.With regard to adaptation, MP techniques are widely used to assess this. MP models are used to quantify change in optimal management due to changes in the biophysical and socio-economic environment for an individual farmer (an average farm or of a specific farm types)and sometimes for a region [e.g. (Roetter et al. 2007)], and the biophysical consequences of these changes in management through the simulation models (García-Vila and Fereres 2011, Quintero et al. 2009, Moghaddam and DePuy 2011, Messina et al. 1999, Donnelly et al. 2002, Thomas et al. 2010, Keil et al. 2009, Thornton et al. 2004).The 52 simulation models found in the systematic review differ in calculation interval, and thereby the temporal resolution with which they estimate variables (Table 4C and 5C, Table S1): GAMEDE (Vayssières et al. 2009), APS-FARM (Rodriguez et al. 2011a), IFSM (Rotz et al. 2011)  WFM (Beukes et al. 2005, Beukes et al. 2008, Beukes et al. 2010), SEPATOU (Cros et al. 2001, Cros et al. 2003), CEEOT-LP (Gassman et al. 2006, Gassman et al. 2010) and GRAZPLAN (Donnelly et al. 2002) are just a few examples. Often these models were originally operating at component level (e.g. crop, soil and cattle (Keating et al. 2003, Parton et al. 1987, Rotz et al. 1999)), but in the last 15 -20 years were expanded to encompass farmlevel processes and interactions. The other group of simpler models were developed using a top-down approach, i.e. starting at farm level and then representing the component processes as simply as possible (e.g. (Bontkes and Van Keulen 2003, van Wijk et al. 2009a, Shepherd and Soule 1998). These models were developed for applications in data poor environments such as many developing countries. In spite of the lower temporal resolution and the simplicity with which processes are represented, this sort of model can be used to test climate adaptation strategies as long as the simulation models include climate variability to estimate production. This is the case for example for SCUAF (Tamubula and Sinden 2000), NUANCES-FARMSIM (van Wijk et al. 2009a), Savanna-PHEWS (Thornton et al. 2003, Boone et al. 2006), the model of (Bell, Lemos and Scavia 2010), the model of (Bontkes and Van Keulen 2003), and the model of (Pfister et al. 2005), all applied in data scarce environments.All 52 simulation models selected in this review are driven by rule-based management, either implemented through rules or through model parameter settings. Scenario analyses are possible by changing the settings of the management rules, which allows adaptation studies of many sorts. Traditionally, effects of market or environmental changes are assessed through scenario analyses, so-called 'what if' analyses. In these scenarios, responses of farmers are incorporated as the scenario to be analysed. Management rules can be related to climate, for example season types which trigger a management plan described by farmers (Kingwell, Pannell and Robinson 1993). Data needs are in general large for the daily time-step models.Not only for the drivers, but also for farm management: timing of decisions, flows of organic material, and decisions with regard to buying, storing and selling of produce. This is the case for models such as GAMEDE (Vayssières et al. 2009) and APS-FARM (Rodriguez et al. 2011a). If this information is available, the dynamic farm models are useful tools to study short-term risk and effects of climate variability on farm production, but as mentioned before, Exceptions are the models of (Nousiainen et al. 2011, Sulistyawati, Noble and Roderick 2005, Tichit et al. 2004, Villalba et al. 2010, Pardo, Riravololona and Munier-Jolain 2010, Eriksson, Elmquist and Nybrant 2005, Cabrera, Hildebrand and Jones 2005, Savoie et al. 1985).Climate affects crop and grassland production, and indirectly livestock production. This is described in all models that use climate variables, and in some models to assess climatic risk such as in the application of APSIM by (Hansen et al. 2009), in the application of COTFLEX by (Helms et al. 1990) to study the effectiveness of crop insurances, and in the modelling study of (Clark et al. 2010) to analyse risk due to extreme climate on shrimp production.Sixty per cent of the selected simulation models included evaluations of economic performance. The description of the economics of the farm varies largely across models: from simple cash balances (Sulistyawati et al. 2005, Thornton et al. 2003, Tittonell et al. 2007) or partial budgets (Villalba et al. 2010), to profitability of the whole farm enterprise (Bell et al. 2010, Gassman et al. 2006, Hansen et al. 1997). There is clearly no consensus on which indicators of economic performance are most relevant for evaluating the welfare of target agronomic households. Few models estimate household food self-sufficiency and/or food security, and this happened exclusively in model applications in the developing world, where food production is closely linked to home consumption. To estimate food self-sufficiency or food security requires the household to be explicitly described in the model so that energy or protein requirements can be calculated on the basis of gender and age classes. Examples of models which included food self-sufficiency estimations are Savanna-PHEWS, NUANCES, NUTMON (although it is a static model), and the models of (Bontkes and Van Keulen 2003, Cabrera et al. 2005, Luckert et al. 2000, Pfister et al. 2005, and Shepherd and Soule 1998).Food security was assessed only with the models of Bontkes and Van Keulen (2003) and Shepherd and Soule (1998), although none of them included food storages in their estimations.Climatic risk can be studied with most models that include climate effects on production;important to include here are the distribution of exogenous climate shocks and the frequency of severe events rather than changes in the mean. However, there is large variability in the way these effects are described in the selected models. Models that use annual climate data use one or more variables (modifiers) that affect crop or grassland production (e.g. (Hahn et al. 2005, Luckert et al. 2000), or annual or seasonal rainfall that has an effect on water availability, which translates into crop yields (Bontkes andVan Keulen 2003, van Wijk et al. 2009a). Daily time-step crop models using daily meteorological data can simulate crop stress or failure (e.g. APS-FARM, DSSAT, FASSET), although these processes are very difficult to parameterise and the simulations of these events remain largely uncertain. DYNAMOF (Howden, White and Bowman 1996) estimates methane and nitrous oxides emissions. FASSET (Hutchings et al. 2007), ISFM (Rotz et al. 2011) and DairyMod (Johnson et al. 2008) estimate full GHG emissions of dairy and pig systems.The 14 agent-based models analysed in this study (Tables 4D and 5D, Table S1) differ widely in their description of component processes, and the detail with which climate is taken into account. Most models work on a yearly time-step but a few have included detailed production models with a daily time-step [for example PALM (Matthews and Pilbeam 2005b)], and some versions of MPMAS (Schreinemachers and Berger 2011). In all cases decision-making takes place on a seasonal or yearly basis, thereby focusing on tactical and strategic decision- Also it is an option to change the coefficients and constraints of the optimisation models due to changes in the biophysical and socio-economic environment if there is a clear need for this when describing the system under change.Major developments are taking place especially in the implementation of decision-making in the models. First, approaches are being developed to make the constraints and options within the optimisation models more flexible, and thereby giving the system the possibility to  2008, Ponsioen et al. 2006, Herrero et al. 2007, González-Estrada et al. 2008). The coefficients in these databases can either be based on values from the literature, interviews or estimates from detailed model simulations. These databases give flexibility on the one hand:any type of data can be represented and thereby linked to the optimisation model so that many aspects of the farming system can be studied. On the other hand, the size and complexity of the database can also limit the flexibility of the household optimisation model, as a strict structure needs to be maintained, and the coefficients and strategic choices within the model are static. Furthermore, the flexibility is related to scope (more enterprises or regions can be simulated) rather than to flexibility in decision rules or adaptation strategies. Data availability can also be an issue, although this is a common problem for many modelling approaches.Therefore, in response to problems with data availability encountered while applying their own modelling approaches, researchers have developed so-called minimum data approaches to perform farm-level analyses (e.g. Stoorvogel et al. 2004, Claessens et al. 2010, Antle et al. 2010, Antle and Valdivia 2006).New models, the so-called 'biodecision models', are currently being developed to simulate decision-making of the farmers or households themselves, and then combined with biophysical models to assess the consequences of these simulated changes. An example of this is the 'IRRIGATE' model (Merot and Bergez 2010, Merot et al. 2008, Leenhardt et al. 2004). When dealing with a limited number of options this approach seems powerful, and it can link up easily to information given by farmers on their decision-making.From a technical perspective, it is clear that newly developed models and re-vamped existing models make use of new developments within information technology. The coupling of simulation models to mathematical programming models or of different component models was already possible in the 1990s (e.g. Stoorvogel 1995), but increasingly complex interactions are implemented in farm models through object oriented programming and open Modeling Interface (MI) (Janssen et al. 2011, Power et al. 2011, Schreinemachers and Berger 2011, Martin et al. 2011). This allows the dynamic coupling of models on time intervals that were not possible previously and thereby also interventions by decision-making on much smaller time scales. This can give more flexibility in terms of the set of decision-making options that can be tested in relation to mitigation and adaptation, but it can also lead to increased data demands.Different modelling techniques can deal with different aspects related to the consequences of global change for farm households (Table 4 and 5  Hansen et al. 2009, Helms et al. 1990, and Clark et al. 2010), long term effects on soil processes (Tamubula and Sinden 2000, van Wijk et al. 2009, Thornton et al. 2003, and Boone et al. 2006), quantification of mitigation options and effects of these (Eriksson et al. 2005, Howden et al. 1996, Hutchings et al. 2007, Rotz et al. 2011, and Johnson et al. 2008) are typical analyses that can be performed with such models. In general, decision-making is rule based, which can lead to limited flexibility in terms of representing adaptation by farmers.New approaches which through elaborate semantic 'if … then …' rules seem more flexible than the traditional approach for representing management decisions through different parameter settings (Merot and Bergez 2010, Merot et al. 2008, Leenhardt et al. 2004). When dealing with a limited number of options these decision models seem powerful, and can link up easily to information given by farmers on their decision-making processes. Mathematical Programming (MP) techniques seem to be the most powerful approach to represent farm-level decision-making: they are grounded in economic theory and are the only technique that can deal with the many options available to the model 'farmer' to make a decision (Janssen and van Ittersum, 2007). In combination with dynamic simulation models and agent-based models, consequences of climate change for production and greenhouse gas emissions can be evaluated and fed back into the optimisation program to affect decisionmaking, although this assumes that 'real' decision-making objectives can be appropriately encoded in model objectives.In their most simple form, MP models are systems of equations characterising farm-level activities in relation to farm production, investment, marketing, etc. These types of models specify behavioural assumptions (e.g. profit maximisation) and can be used to solve for optimal resource allocations subject to constraints. Optimisation models have the advantage that they generally produce the results that best achieve the specified objective (e.g. profit maximisation, or cost minimisation) given specified constraints. Another advantage is that they allow for analysis of technologies at both intensive and extensive margins. Optimisation models are less data intensive in comparison to other approaches (e.g. econometrics or simulation). However, two major weaknesses of these models are that they do not explicitly capture the interaction between the agents in the model, and they do not fully take into account the spatial dimension of agricultural activities (Berger 2001). For more details see Hajkowicz, Collins and Cattaneo (2009), Zander and Kächele (1999), and Antle and Capalbo (2001).Optimisation models are most useful when a very specific (often, single-variable) objective function and explicit constraints can be specified-they are less useful for determining what the objective function ought to be. Moreover, it is debatable whether optimisation is a good behavioural assumption for humans; optimisation models can be best thought of in most settings as 'normative benchmarks' (i.e., 'What's the best that can be done?' rather than 'How are people likely to respond in this situation?'). In part, this has to do with the information that is assumed to be available to decision makers.The application of mathematical programming (MP) techniques to farm decision-making dates back at least to the 1950s when linear programming (LP) techniques were applied to farm planning problems including the determination of optimal livestock feeding strategies given feed costs and livestock nutrient requirements (see e.g. Heady andCandler 1958, Waugh 1951). Linear programming methods in themselves continue to be of relevance to farm-level decision-making, while technique development has allowed for increased capabilities of LP models to handle complexities such as risk and dynamic changes (e.g., Valderrama andEngle 2002, Louhichi et al. 2004). In other LP-based models (e.g., Berger 2001, Schreinemachers andBerger 2011), spatial multi-agent programming techniques have been used to explicitly capture the social and spatial interactions of heterogeneous farmhouseholds by linking economic sub-models and biophysical models to spatial (Geographic Information Systems, GIS) data. Berger (2001) concludes that such GIS-based integrated multi-agent models are likely to be important tools for policy analysis and natural resource management in the near future.In general, there has been considerable progress in the development and application of mathematical programming models for decision-making in agricultural and related activities, including the use of non-linear and mixed-integer techniques, the application of risk programming techniques and the development of goal programming methods (Cabrini et al. 2004, Wui and Engle 2004, Tauer 1983, Val-Arreola et al. 2006). For example, quadratic programming models (QPM) have been used that incorporate risk analysis by defining risk distributions or distribution of parameters to assess risk. Goal programming (GP) models allow for incorporating different decision-making goals into a single model. Multiple goals or objectives are optimised simultaneously by giving prioritising weights. Other models integrate multiple goal linear programming models with econometric methods (Kuyvenhoven, Ruben and Kruseman 1998).Econometric models rely almost entirely on the availability of numerical data. These usually represent only a small subset of the information that might be useful for the development of modelling tools, which could also include perceptions, personal interviews, and focus groups.Econometric methods have issues with out-of-sample prediction if the moments of future outcomes (mean, variance, skewness, kurtosis) differ from the past-which is likely to be the case with climate change. Antle, Capalbo and Crissman (1994) developed a conceptual and empirical framework that integrates bio-physical and economic relationships at a disaggregated level and then statistically aggregates to a level that is relevant for policymakers and that can be used for welfare and (ex-ante and ex-post) policy analysis. This approach follows the logical sequence of how macro-level policy affects farmers' decisions, the impacts of which are seen at the micro-level, and then these impacts are aggregated back to the units in which policymakers need to work. One disadvantage of these models is that generally they are data intensive and costly to implement. As a way to deal with the complexity of these types of models, Antle and Valdivia (2006)  Despite recent progress made in modelling decision-making, models in general seem to give limited attention to the importance of non-agricultural activities (whether off-farm employment or 'on-farm non-agricultural activities'), although it might prove one of the more robust strategies of adaptation. There is evidence from some regions already that having a family member working in the city is good for overall 'farm' household welfare and models should be developed that can analyse these kind of situations.A relevant issue is the extent to which farm and household level models can address adaptation strategies, if the aggregated, responses of a larger set of households determines outcomes such as prices and nutrient flows. A single household model would assume values for exogenous drivers, but a key question is what the values of the drivers will be, and this often depends on aggregated behavioural responses of many households. That is, 'best' behaviour for an individual household will often depend on the behaviour of some collection of other households. This is typically addressed by multi-agent models, which was one of the main reasons to include them in this review. Also other studies used approaches to study the interactions between individual farm and household level behaviour and feedbacks from higher scales, mainly through prices (e.g. Bontkes and Van Keulen 2003;Roetter et al. 2007).In general, these studies seem to indicate that feedbacks from higher scale levels through prices are not that strong, and that policy interventions such as subsidies and price formation at larger regional (e.g. around big cities in developing countries), national and international scales play a more important role. Furthermore, the formulation of these price feedbacks in models is highly uncertain. However, it remains an interesting topic to study further through scenario analyses to quantify under which conditions it can be a key factor to take into account when analysing possible household level responses to, and the effects of, climate change.  Dake et al. 2005, Kingwell et al. 1993). In recent studies, the process, parameter and measurement of uncertainty of soil carbon have been taken into account in the simulation of continental soil carbon stocks (Ogle et al. 2010), and similar approaches could be used to assess risk (probabilities of specific outcomes) and uncertainty (lack of information, whether about soil carbon or possible distributions of rainfall) in farm system analyses. An overall setup of such an analysis could look like the one presented in Figure 3, whereas probability density functions are used for all uncertain information on the input side, which in multiple model runs will lead to the estimation of the probability density functions of important output variables. In risk analyses, thresholds can be determined for the key output variables and in combination with the probability density functions, the chances of exceeding those thresholds can be computed. Key output variables can be the management options of interest or the production or economic performance of the farming system.Obtaining results in such an analysis will give more robust information about farm household strategies, and will take into account the still uncertain predictions of potential climate change and uncertain knowledge about the system. Although there is a risk that the researcher will be drowned in uncertainty, and no conclusive recommendations can be made based on such a model analysis, it can identify the key areas in which progress is needed to be able to give reliable recommendations. A key input needed for analysing appropriate risks related to climate variables is daily meteorological variables. To analyse effects of droughts on crop and grassland production, heat stress on crops and livestock and flooding on production, daily timestep simulation models are needed on which to base risk analyses. These risk quantifications can be used subsequently as input for MP models or farm level simulation models. Results of the review clearly show that attributes such as 'food security' and related to this 'vulnerability' are still rarely addressed by farm household models. These attributes are not easy to model, as they require knowledge of the buffering capacity of many aspects of the farming system. However, progress is urgently needed in these areas of research and this is where dynamic or recursive optimisation models can play an important role. Dynamic optimisation could be combined with simple dynamic simulation models to quantify changes in important state variables such as food stored, cash, number and state of livestock and soil fertility indicators such as organic matter content of crop fields. With proper representation of uncertainties and variability this could lead to a flexible framework where information from lower integration levels (for example, risk profiles of crop production under current and changing climates) forms input for farm level analyses of risk profiles for food security and economic performance. For the development of such a framework, consisting of a set of models working at different integration levels, there will be a need to strongly link the socio-economic characterisation of farming systems to the modelling approaches in place, and to develop long-term field monitoring programs. There is a lack of data in which farms are followed for a long period of time and in which characterisation has taken place at key moments when farmers made strategic choices. An example of this is the expansion of maize in sub-Saharan Africa, replacing sorghum and millet in many regions including southern Zimbabwe. However, this expansion is badly recorded and mapped out and the main drivers for this remarkable change are not well known. As this expansion will also have major consequences for the drought risk of food production in these regions, this is an example of a problem in which modelling, production and socio-economic characterisation should go hand in hand.No generic approach to the coupling of models exists (Janssen et al., 2011). Existing models describing the different aspects of the farm system can be coupled dynamically, and interactions between the modules can be described explicitly. Approaches to such dynamic model integration and software coupling fall into two classes. First, embedded coupling is an approach in which all model components are incorporated into the same source code (Schreinemachers and Berger 2011). For integrated assessments of farm systems in which many different model components or models need to be connected, this practice is usually impractical. The run-time software coupling is preferable, which works through external driving programs, which steer the individual component models. This is typically the approach taken in large integrated international projects, which work across a range of spatial Several recent papers (e.g. Janssen et al. 2011, Martin et al. 2011) stress the possibilities given by new information technology developments for the coupling of models, but do not point out that several drawbacks exist to this type of extensive model coupling. These relate to model complexity and data availability. Model behaviour in complex frameworks becomes more and more difficult to control as the risk increases that models will exceed their range of validity when they are applied at higher or lower levels. Furthermore, component models developed with a focus on component-level processes might not have the required focus to analyse systems at higher integration levels. Actually incorporation of detailed models into higher scale analyses might harm the robustness of model outcomes at larger scales if uncertainties of model descriptions are not properly taken into account. Furthermore, some of these model frameworks go contrary to insights gained from hierarchy theory (Pattee 1973). In general, for complex systems that can be organised into hierarchical levels (i.e. separate levels with different characteristic rates of processes such as behavioural frequencies, relaxation time, cycle time, or response time), there is no need to define more than two hierarchical levels. For a given study that is focused on a particular level, constraints from higher levels can be expressed as constants, boundary conditions, or driving functions, whereas the rapid dynamics at levels lower than one level down only manifest themselves as averages or equilibria (Wu and David 2002). As already noted, occasional exceptions to this general rule exist, and certain nonlinear effects can penetrate through several levels above or below (Wu and David 2002).In particular, the extensive need for data for large coupled models can be a constraint for applications. Here we have to make a distinction between data needs for model exogenous data (external drivers such as weather, market prices, size and setup of the farm and household) and model endogenous data representing model parameters (e.g. parameters characterizing processes determining crop growth, soil dynamics, weights in decision-making calculations, and so on). In general, driver data can be collected quite easily but model endogenous data are less easy to collect. Roughly, one can say that the larger the model, the needier it is in terms of model endogenous data. For the biophysical part of the model one could use standard parameterizations for soils, crops and livestock breeds as a starting point, without worrying too much about model robustness, but it clear from large scale model testing that non-calibrated models have low model performance (e.g. Affholder et al. 2012).By coupling component models, which were originally developed with a focus on analysing and understanding a single component, data demands for characterisation of each of these components can be high. For example, if a crop -soil model is incorporated in a MP model which is embedded into a multi-agent system, data are needed for each of the components: biophysical and socio-economic inputs and parameters. As multi-agent systems generally work across a landscape or a region, it means the crop model needs input from across that region (different soil, hydrological and climatic conditions) and also needs crop parameters that reflect the crops and the crop varieties used in that region. Single location studies can be performed successfully with this type of framework, but it is hard to see how detailed approaches can simply be extrapolated to other situations without resulting in loss of robustness.When looking at problems related to model complexity and data availability, even when ignoring problems related to continued model maintenance, it seems preferable that models are not combined in large integrated model frameworks, but that 'loose' coupling approaches are used. In these approaches a set of models is used to analyse systems from different perspectives and information is passed on not automatically but through researcher action after filtering (e.g. Antle et al. 2010). Such a setup gives researchers much more flexibility to work on different aspects of the system and keeps the information technology load of a framework to a minimum. To limit data needs, other approaches to model coupling can be used. These basically try to simplify the outputs of component models into meaningful relationships (the transfer function approach), simplified models (so-called meta-models) or simple coefficients which can be used for analyses at higher integration levels. The latter is a standard approach in mathematical programming in which detailed process-oriented models provide the technical coefficients for the optimisation model (e.g. SEAMLESS). However it is clear that model coupling and use of coupled models still demands extensive knowledge of models and modelling in general. Actual fulfilment of a statement such as 'The linked models can now easily be used for integrated assessments of policy changes, technological innovations and societal and biophysical changes' (Janssen et al. 2011) still lies in the future, and it can be doubted whether it will ever be achieved.There this could lead to a flexible framework where information from lower integration levels (for example, risk profiles of crop production under current and changing climate) forms input for farm level analyses of risk profiles for food security and economic performance. Despite recent progress made in modelling decision-making, models generally seem to give limited attention to the importance of non-agricultural activities, although it might prove one of the more robust strategies of adaptation. Models should be improved so that the effects of these changes can be quantified. The appropriate incorporation of model and input uncertainty is important for climate related applications (e.g. Figure 3) and has only been done in a few studies. Approaches to deal with uncertainty are available in literature so they can be applied (e.g. Ogle et al. 2010, Vrugt et al. 2008, Fox et al. 2009). Agent based models and MP approaches working on different integration levels (e.g. farm level and regional level) can be used to study important feedbacks on price formation and price variations, thereby increasing the robustness of the assessment of possible adaptation options by taking into account the aggregated behavioural responses of many households.   "}

main/part_2/0199710306.json

@@ -0,0 +1 @@
+{"metadata":{"gardian_id":"7f58cd1e46dd0f5dd9dd676fa80ac0fe","source":"gardian_index","url":"https://cgspace.cgiar.org/rest/bitstreams/79deb209-eed5-49c0-baab-043c9c3eb4e1/retrieve","id":"-96748076"},"keywords":[],"sieverID":"b71cbbdc-ce27-4a21-95a9-185443878822","content":"The rapid value chain assessment study covered 2 enterprises; crop and livestock value chains. The study focused on the role and functioning of the agribusinesses involved in the purchase, processing and consumption of products generated by these value chains. The main aim of the assessment was to obtain a better understanding of these businesses and how they can play a role in expanding the volume of raw products produced, processed and sold. 3 crops and 3 livestock value chains were selected.The selection was based preference of men, women and youth, the enterprises that had commercial orientation or importance and finally, the enterprises that were well preferred for ease of scalability and learning. With respect to this market assessment report, various reliable interventions have been suggested. A total of 92 actors; 55 crop actors and 37 livestock actors were interviewed using a well-structured questionnaire. Based on the market assessment, participatory community appraisals (PCA) and other studies conducted within the project, various interventions have been suggested and ready for implementation.A rapid market assessment was carried on 3 crops; faba bean, wheat and potato. Also the input system that supports the value chain of the three crops was surveyed. It included seed, fertilizer, farm implement and chemical. To understand the crop value chain two major actors were interviewed, that is, traders and processors. The traders interviewed involved those who only do wholesale or retail but do not process the product.The wheat value chain in Tigray is quite different from the other Africa RISING sites. In Tigray it was noted that the source of wheat flour is outside the district. This is because there is no wheat processing factory within the districts. In Tigray wheat grain is used in the preparation of a range of products such as: the traditional staple pancake ('injera'), bread ('dabo'), local beer ('tella'), and several others local food items (i.e., 'dabokolo','ganfo', kinche'). Besides, wheat straw is commonly used as a roof thatching material, and as a feed for animals. Wheat grain market involves both retailers and wholesaler who sells wheat grains to collectors, end consumers and processors from outside districts. The bakeries are the main actors involved in wheat processing in Tigray. A wheat flour processing factory in the district will go a long way in supporting the wheat farmers and other actors involved in the wheat value chain.Faba bean value chain also involved retailers, wholesalers and processors. Dried faba bean grain is sold mostly in retailing form but also a small number of wholesalers are involved. In Tigray there are no faba bean processors except the hotels who use the faba bean to make local dishes; 'full' and 'wot'.Potato value chain in this region has not fully developed. It is still 'young' and therefore potato utilization is still minimal. Several potato retailers were identified during the assessment. There was no-potato wholesalers identified during the assessment. Retailers not only sell potato but also trade other products. During the market visit, it was observed that retailers keep small amounts of potatoes with tomato, onions and other vegetables/goods.During the market assessment survey in the sites, very minimal processing was noted. The major potato actors involved in processing is hotels and restaurants. The hotels and restaurants commonly use potato as boiled and as part of traditional dishes or 'wot' (sliced, boiled potato with pepper, onion, salt and oil) or 'Beyaynet' and there is little processing into chips. The few hotels and restaurants processors interviewed during the survey preferred large size potato for processing.The three value chains are supported by the input system and therefore the market survey also studied the input market. The input system is majorly steered by the government. In this region fertilizer, seed, farm implement and chemicals are supplied by the research centres, BOA, cooperatives and unions. Seed production business, chemical spraying services, farm implementation hiring among others, are suggested interventions.The rapid value chain assessment study covered 3 main livestock value chains i.e. the dairy value chain and the large and small ruminant value chains. All 3 studies focused on the role and functioning of the agribusinesses involved in the purchase, processing and consumption of products generated by these value chains. The main aim of the assessment was to obtain a better understanding of these businesses and how they can play a role in expanding the volume of raw products produced, processed and sold.The role of the agribusinesses in the dairy value chains in Endamehoni is still in its infancy with small quantities of milk produced and sold by the HizbaTeklehaymanot cooperative (which has its own farm) and the Bokra dairy union. Hence most milk is still sold directly from producer to consumers. Butter produced by the union is limited. No \"ayeb\" is produced from the skimmed milk left after the cream separation. It is proposed to explore the possible market potential of commercially produced ayeb in order to improve the economics of the business. An interesting development is the emerging dairy cafes, which purchase small quantities of milk which is served in boiled form and/or 'irgo' to customers inside the cafes. Possibilities for expanding the role of these dairy cafes for the sale of milk to outside customers as well as getting involved in small-scale processing should be examined-a study tour to Basona Worena might create interest. Furthermore the product range could be expanded (butter milk) and food safety may be improved by heating milk prior to further processing into 'irgo' and/or butter.The role of agribusiness in lactic butter production and processing is limited, since butter is produced at household level and sampled traders only buy and sell small quantities. Hence most butter is sold directly by the producers to individual consumers and hotel/restaurants. New businesses models could be established for butter processing in rural areas using new processing methods and technologies. Not only could this reduce the labour burden on women but also offer new business opportunities for women. To determine the commercial demand for the various dairy products it is proposed to conduct a consumer demand study, which may also include tasting of new products. To meet such increased demand, marketing groups for butter and milk should be encouraged to reduce individual marketing cost.The role of the agribusinesses in large and small ruminant trade in the district is more significant in terms of the number of animals traded by the traders and purchases by butchery shops and hotel restaurants. Trade in small ruminants reportedly also includes sales to the outside market, which seems consistent with the rather large small ruminant population in the district (as compared to other Africa RISING districts). Also supply and demand are seasonal which is reflected in decrease in the number of animals during low demand periods traded, as well as a drop in prices. The average age of traded large and small ruminants is rather high indicating a traditional consumption demand. However a consumer survey is proposed to explore demand by institutional and individual consumers. Such a study should explore possibilities for alternative products (younger animals, fattened animals). Based on the findings, different production cycles should be explored to produce for targeted markets/buyers and periods. Formation of marketing groups of producers should be encouraged to meet specific demands during the year as well as reduce marketing cost/animals through collective sales arrangements.To support the commercialization of all 3 value chains, some key service and input supply businesses require attention. Since the public sector so far is the only provider of veterinary services and drugs, it is proposed to explore possibilities for involvement of the private sector. This includes linkages between public sector services at PA and district level and marketing groups for butter, milk and small and large ruminants.The improvement in genetic resources, in particular for dairy animals is insufficient and the introduction of a more efficient system based on mass insemination supported by mobile teams and hormones has shown some improvements but require study to improve its performance.Involvement of agribusiness in the supply of agro-industrial by-products in the district is just starting with one union producing dairy and fattening mixtures and one feed shop selling oilcake and wheat bran. A major drawback for the feed business in the district is that none of the basic ingredients i.e. wheat bran and oilcake is produced commercially outside the district, thus adding to the cost of the feed (transportation). Exploring possibilities for commercial processing of wheat and pulses is therefore recommended in order to increase the availability of such ingredients in the district. To increase demand, awareness creation and demonstration of the use of AIBs is proposed together with collective (bulk) purchasing of feed by marketing groups and/or primary cooperative.The Africa Research In Sustainable Intensification for the Next Generation (Africa RISING) program comprises three research-for-development projects supported by the United States Agency for International Development as part of the US government's Feed the Future initiative.Through action research and development partnerships, Africa RISING will create opportunities to lift smallholder farmers out of hunger and poverty through sustainable intensification of farming systems to improve food, nutrition, and income security, particularly for women and children, and conserve or enhance the natural resource base.The three Africa RISING projects are led by the International Institute of Tropical Agriculture (in West Africa and East and Southern Africa) and the International Livestock Research Institute (in the Ethiopian Highlands). The International Food Policy Research Institute leads an associated project on monitoring, evaluation and impact assessment.In Ethiopia, the project is being implemented in two kebeles in each of the 4 regions of Amhara, Tigray, SNNRP and Oromia. So far Africa RISING project in Ethiopian highlands has conducted some on-farm demonstrations and detailed diagnostic work in the eight research kebeles for the last one and half years. Africa RISING in the Ethiopian highlands partner with CG centres, local universities, regional research institutions, woreda agricultural offices and federal research organizations. The project has identified seven thematic areas for implementation in the coming three years (2014)(2015)(2016), and value chain development is one of the cross-cutting themes. In 2013, the Africa RISING project conducted detailed diagnostic analysis in the project kebeles. As part of the diagnostics, participatory community analyses (PCA) were conducted in all the project sites to characterize agricultural production and livelihood systems, identify priority farm enterprises, major income sources, farm resources, and farmer-perceived constraints and opportunities for improving income, food security and/or reducing overall risks by intensifying farm enterprises.The value chain assessment study reported here builds on the PCA findings. The PCA identified farmer perceived priority enterprises and also mapped value chains for some crop and livestock enterprises including the constraints and opportunities faced by different chain actors. However, much of the focus in the PCA was at the production stage of the value chain and little attention was paid to other elements of the value chain, particularly the agribusinesses such as input suppliers, traders, processors who are key for the performance of the whole value chain. This study therefore focused on value chain of agribusinesses for the priority crop and livestock enterprises identified in the PCA.The specific objectives of the rapid value chain study were: 1.To identify and get an understanding of the role/importance of the value chain and input/services agribusinesses in each of the value chains 2.To get an understanding of market demand and supply of livestock products in and outside the district and suggest potential interventions based on the findings 3.To identify opportunities for strengthening linkages between value chain actors (input suppliers, producers, traders, processors and end consumers) and including suggestions for improvement in agribusiness performanceEndamehoni district is comprised of 18 PAs out of which Emba Hasti and Tsibet have been selected for testing the initial set of production interventions. The total population is 84,739of whom 42,052 are men and 42,687 women; 2986 or 3.52% are urban inhabitants. The district has a population density of 37.04, which is less than the Zone average of 53.91 persons per km 2 . A total of 18,816 households were counted in this woreda, resulting in an average of 4.50 persons to a household, and 18,371 housing units. The district occupies an area of 2287.71 km 2 . About 93.63% of the population said they were Orthodox Christians, and 6.36% were Muslim (CSA 2007). The district capital Maichew also serves as the zonal capital for the South Tigray Zone and is therefore a major supplier of inputs and services and trading and processing. Part of the district has a welldeveloped road network-see map with main socio economic characteristics.Most of Endamehoni district is classified in Agro-Ecological Zone (AEZ) 'dry (woina dega)'. The area receives rainfall between 600-1000 mm annually and most of the area is rather mountainous with valleys and ridges ranging from 1600 till well above 3000 masl. Average temperature varies with altitude. The majority of the soils are Vertisols with some Cambisols. Less than 50% of the land is cultivated,-see compilation of biophysical maps Figures 1 and 2). The market value chain studies used various approaches to gather information on different enterprises. This study was also based on findings from earlier studies/approaches that had been conducted in the project including Participatory Community Appraisals and Rapid Telephone Survey. Basing on these earlier studies enterprises were selected and value chain analysis carried to understand the enterprises in detail.Building on the previous work on PCA and telephone survey, the team was able to reduce the possible enterprises for subsequent value chain analyses to 3 crop and 3 livestock enterprises. The criteria used was that the enterprises were equally preferred by men, women and youth, that the enterprises had a commercial orientation or importance and finally, that the enterprises were well preferred across the four sites for ease of scalability and cross site learning. Based on these criteria, the enterprises selected are as shown in the Table 1. This approach was used to identify value chain actors and service providers for the input and output markets of the six enterprises. Tools used to carry out the study included: focus group discussions, key informants interviews and platform meeting with value chain actors. The key objectives of using this approach were:1.To determine the value chain actors and processes for the supply of inputs/services and the processing and marketing of selected marketable livestock and crop commodities. 2.To determine the main channels used for processing and marketing of the produce by farmers. 3.To analyse the mapping information to propose some initial (best bet)interventions to improve the efficiency of the input/service supply and processing/marketing system 4.To use the mapping information to select actors/processes for more detailed assessment/analysis.During the mapping of the value chains core problems and opportunities were identified that warrant further research by Africa RISING. The strengths, weaknesses and gaps were also noted and this based the key areas to analyse during the detailed surveyBased on the value chain mapping, actors and service providers were selected for the detailed survey. The market assessment survey took place on the month of February 2014.Questionnaires were used as the key tool to collect data. Field pretesting exercise was carried out across all the sites to assess the relevance of the questions across various actors. Also by carrying the pretesting of the questionnaires, the team was able to verify the findings of value chain mapping which had taken place earlier and also establish a sampling frame for the value chain actors.The research team sampled actors and service providers who were identified during the value chain mapping exercise. The following crop enterprises and actors were considered; those involved in seed supplying, seed production, farm implement supplying, crop chemical suppliers; wheat, faba bean, potato traders and processors. The value chain actors which were selected for livestock enterprises are large and small butchery/restaurant, dairy agribusiness, dairy restaurants, local butter, livestock feed, large and small ruminant, large and small abattoirs and veterinary drugs/services.A total of 55 and 37 actors were selected for interviews for crop and livestock enterprises, respectively (Tables 2 and 3). Data collection for the value chain analysis was carried out in several stages. First, telephone surveys and participatory community analyses were conducted in the project kebeles in 2013. Building on these approaches, a value chain mapping exercise was conducted through key informant interviews with representatives of chain actors and other members of the community and secondary data from government sources journals and other sources.To verify the findings of the value chain mapping and also understand the six enterprises value chains in detail, a market assessment study was carried out in February 2014 through interviewing input and output market actors. For this detailed market assessment, primary data was collected, analysed and consolidated with the other findings to produce interventions for each research site.Data entry, cleaning and analysis were done in March 2014. Using the SPSS statistical package data was divided into livestock data and crop data which was entered in different data templates. Descriptive statistics such as mean, frequency tables and ranges were used to analyse the data.After data analysis, the site coordinators and partners met in a writing workshop to interpret the results and came up with this report. The key objective for the writing workshop was:1) Sharing market value chain results 2) Writing up the value chain report for the Africa RISING project 3) Discussion and documentation of the best bet interventions for the project 4) Developing protocols for the value chains and market work for the project.3 Crop value chainsIn this chapter crop value chains are discussed. The actors considered include faba bean, wheat, potato and input supply chain; fertilizer, chemical, seed and farm implement. Value chain actors are classified as those individuals who take ownership of a product, through the exchange of money or equivalent goods or services during the transaction process of moving the product from conception to the end user. Those individuals or firms providing a service without taking ownership of the product are classified as service providers.The main processes of assessed value chains include input supply, processing and trading. Input suppliers include those that supply fertilizer, seeds, crop chemical, seed producers and farm implement to the farmers.Trading involves wholesalers and retailers who are in the business of buying and selling crop products without changing the form of the product. Processing involves any transformation of the form of the product to a different product. The traders who purchased crop product and carried out any process to change the form before selling the commodity to other traders or end consumers were considered as trader processors. They consist of traders, hotel restaurants, cafeterias and road side (street) processors.The processes and general actors in the potato value chain in Endamehoni district, Tigray region and the subsequent market outlets along the chain are shown in Figure 3. Ten potato value chain actors were sampled and interviewed in Endamehoni district. The actors are primarily female operating their sole proprietor businesses most of which were started between 2011 and 2013 for traders and between 1985 and 2012 for processors. Most of the sampled retail traders were not licensed and were being run by relatively low schooled owners. All processors; the hotels and restaurants are licensed and are run by mixture of relatively educated and lowly educated people (Table 4).  Potato retailers purchase potatoes from individual farmers at 6.6 Ethiopian birr (ETB) 1 per kg whereas the processors buy from individual farmers and the traders at ETB 9.6/kg. The difference in purchase price for retailers and processors is due to the fact that retailers purchase potatoes mainly during the market days when the supply is high and prices are lower whereas the processors buy during non-market days. In addition, retailers purchase large quantities at low price from the farmers while the processors purchase at low quantities at a high cost. Processors purchase raw potatoes from individual farmers and traders from within the district and districts around the businesses. Public transport and hired transport is used to transport potatoes to the business premises. Potato traders only engage in cleaning and grading as value addition activities before sales. Traders sell their products to end consumers from within the district at a margin of ETB 3.1 per kg above purchase price on cash basis. Data on prices and volumes of sales and purchases are presented in Table 5. Retailers buy an average of 210 kg/week which is five times as much as the quantity purchased by hotels and restaurant. The end products sold include 'beyayinet' and chips. The major constraints facing traders are: Low demand for potatoes, weight loss during storage, quick perishability, poor quality of potatoes and price fluctuations. throughout the year, increasing availability of inputs, support for construction of collective storage facilities, and access to cheaper credit facilities.Processors add value to the purchases through cleaning and food preparation to an amount of 40 kg, respectively per sampled processor. Processors rate their markets as adequate in some periods with high demand for products experienced in the month of February, March and April. These are months characterized by fasting and ceremonies in the region. Processors use face to face as their means of communication. Sampled processors do not have storage facilities and have not attended any training.The major constraints identified by the potato processors are low demand of potato products such as chips in the district, poor transportation and price fluctuations, poor quality of potatoes and perishability of the crop.A number of solutions to the constraints were proposed including Creation of awareness on production inputs, improving quality of products and inputs to solve challenges of low quality supply, Government to improve transportation facilities and create strong market linkage for potato.The processes and general actors in the faba bean value chain in Endamehoni and the subsequent market outlets along the chain are shown in Figure 4. In Endamehoni district, Tigray the faba bean traders who were interviewed include three retailers and two wholesalers. Wholesalers started their businesses quite earlier than retailers. Most actors are male and attained up to primary education levels. Table 6 gives the summary of the characteristics of the wholesalers and retailers. Traders buy dried grains from individual farmers in Neksege (local market 32 km far from the town of Endamehoni district and Edegakedam (market day in the town in Saturdays) places within the district. Some traders clean faba bean before selling to end consumers and retailers. The volume of faba bean wholesalers' purchase is ten times higher than that of an average trader. Faba bean is then transported to the premises using public transport, non-motorized transport and sometime no vehicle is used in transportation. Supply varies from season to season but major supplies are experienced between Novembers to January and that correspond low demand for products. The purchases and sales are presented in Table 7. Sampled retailers are observed to charge higher profit margin compared to wholesalers on both cash and credit terms. Dried grains are sold in high volumes during the months of February to July. This period coincides with the fasting time. Wholesalers have stores in which they store their purchases for 30 to 120 days whereas the retailers store for an average of 7 days. No trader sampled has undergone any training on storage or processing of faba bean.The major constraints in the faba bean value chain include: Seasonality in production, low quality of faba bean supplied, poor transportation, infrastructure and low credit access, inadequate storage and rodents and pests that destroy faba bean stored.To ameliorate the above mentioned challenges the following were suggested: Market infrastructures should be enlarged, encouraging production of quality seeds by model farmers and fair taxation and availing credit to small traders.Faba bean processors interviewed in Endamehoni district include 3 cafes, one trade processor sole proprietors and single flour processor owned by sole proprietor. Private businesses were started between 2008 and 2012 while flour processor was started in 1988 and all run by people who attained secondary education. Processors buy dried grains, unroasted and split grains from collectors, individual farmers and own production. The purchases are sourced from Edegakidam, Neksegie and kebele within the district and districts around businesses. Low supplies are experienced between June and August while high supplies between November and January after harvesting period.Public, non -motorized transport and with others no vehicle is used to fetch purchases to the business premises with an average cost of ETB 0.0018/kg. Faba bean is then cleaned, roasted, split and processed into 'full' and faba bean by-product. Some processors do sell dried grains only. The value addition activities are done by hired labour, owners and millers at an average cost of ETB 0.50/kg. Products produced by processors include 'full', faba bean by-product and dried grains (Table 8). Quantities sold throughout the year change depending on seasons. The highest demand for the products is mainly between February and June. This is attributed to ceremonies and fasting occasions.The following were the highlighted challenges facing faba bean processors: Low or seasonality of demand of faba bean, presence of non-licenced traders, poor transportation, lack of sustainable market linkage and attack by weevils.In order to alleviate some of the mentioned constraints, the following interventions were suggested: Transportation facilities especially through collective efforts by producers and traders should be promoted. In addition, enhancing access to affordable credit and creating strong market linkages will contribute to sustainable enterprises. Establishment of irrigation system will ensure steady supply of faba bean seeds and stable grain supplies.Five bakeries (wheat processors) and eight wheat traders who included four retailers and four wholesalers were interviewed. One of the wholesale businesses is owned by the union of cooperatives while three are owned by male entrepreneurs. All the retail businesses and bakeries are owned by males with either primary or secondary education. Only two bakeries were owned by individuals with university/college education.The processes and general actors in the wheat value chain in Endamehoni district, Tigray region and the subsequent market outlets along the chain are shown in Figure 5. The wheat wholesale traders started their businesses quite earlier (2002)(2003)(2004)(2005)(2006) compared to retailers who started later (2009)(2010)(2011)(2012)(2013)(2014). Wheat processors were started during the same period as retailers (Table 9). Education levels range between primary and college/university level where all businesses are licensed sole proprietors. Wheat traders purchase raw wheat from individual famers from market in the city (Edegakedam). Table 10 shows the average volumes traded and prices charged. Traders buy wheat on cash basis but sell on both cash and credit terms to end consumers and processors within the district. Animal transport, hired vehicles and own transport are the major transport means wholesalers use to transport wheat to their premises. Sampled retailers on the other hand do not use hired vehicles. Wheat supplies vary depending seasonally for example the months of May, June, July and August are the periods when supplies are low in the market which translates to high demand of wheat. On the other hand, from November till January low demand of wheat is experienced. Mobile phones and face to face communication were mainly used by traders. The wholesalers and retailers have not attained any training on wheat storage and processing.The major challenges highlighted by traders are: limited storage facilities, illegal trading, inconsistent quality supplies, poor quality supplied due to poor seeds sold to farmers and inadequate market, limited access to credit and over taxation and high cost of transport is still bottleneck for traders operations. The role of the government in ensuring regulation of faba bean trade will contribute to enhancing faba bean value chain.Five wheat processors were interviewed in Endamehoni district, Tigray region; large traders from districts around the businesses and beyond supply wheat flour to the processors. Processors used hired vehicles to transport flour at an average cost of ETB 0.0035 kg. High supplies of wheat flour are experienced in months between August and December. Processors buy wheat flour and bake into breads before they are sold. End consumers and retailers from within the district are major buyers of bread (Table 11). The only chemical supplier within Endamehoni district is Bureau of Agriculture (BOA) which was started in 1978 and it supplies pesticides and fungicides from regional BOA with set price. All the chemicals supplied are sold within the district. All supplied chemicals in BOA are stored in wooden storage together with fertilizers and other farm implements. The BOA deals with different types of fungicides and pesticides but at the time of data collection they had only two chemicals Mankozeb (fungicide) and Malatine (pesticides). The purchase price and selling price of fungicides (Mankozeb) and pesticides (Malatine) was ETB 118 and 79/kg/litres, respectively. There was no margin because the chemicals are provided by the government.Apart from selling chemicals, the enterprises offer other services to farmers such as technical training on use chemical spray, orientation and follow up on application. The respondent underwent training on quality control, storage, handling and usage of chemicals.1.The chemicals sold to farmers are not based on needed quantity. Most farmers need 0.25 litre Malatine or 0.5kg of Mankozeb , but in BOA smallest packed chemical is 1litre or 1kilo gram 2.Short shelf life of the chemicals. During low demand chemicals became expired.Poor handling of chemicals reduce the efficiency of chemicals. Due to high temperature, and poor storage quality.Almost all farmers have a problem of spray equipment; due to this reason the efficiency of chemicals reduced and causes risks of health.Four licensed seed producers were sampled for interview in Endamehoni district, Tigray region. They were started less than 10 years ago and they produce both wheat and potato seeds. Seed producers are equally owned by cooperative and sole proprietors.All sampled seed producers received their foundation seed in the year 2013 at an average cost of ETB 12.00/kg. BOA, government seed enterprise and Mekan kebele primary cooperatives were the source of foundation seed to these producers from within the district.Seeds are sold to individual farmers in the district and those from surrounding the district. Varieties of wheat produced are Digalu, Picaflor and Danfie seeds. Table 12 gives the summary of purchases and sales of potato and wheat seeds. Seed producers have different type of stores ranging from blocked houses, warehouse, concrete stores, and FTCs. Stores have an average storage capacity of 136,000 kg for cooperatives and 300,000 kg for union. The average storage period is three months before sales. The other services offered by seed producers include; orientation on seed handling, production, storage and protection. Sole proprietors do not store seeds they produce, possibly due to less quantity produced compared to cooperative.Trainings: All the sampled producers have undergone some training on crop husbandly. These include quality seed production, quality maintenance, weeding, pest control and post-harvest management done in 2013.The mentioned constraints include: Supply shortage, high cost of improved seed, inadequate rainfall, and high cost of production versus low prices of produce.In order to address the constraints, there is need to increases production of more seeds through farmers and cooperatives to reduce shortages in the district. Training should be conducted for farmers and processors on quality of seeds. In addition, efforts to create affordable credit and inputs would also positively enhance the seed enterprises.Six seed suppliers were interviewed in Endamehoni district, Tigray region of which four of them were primary cooperatives, one union and one government enterprise (Table 13). Seed suppliers started their operations between 1994 and 2007. Their supplies are sourced from within the district. The primary cooperatives purchase wheat seeds in advance, collect money from the farmers and they pay to the seeds enterprise therefore the purchase price and selling price of the seeds is the same (not profit making institution). The primary cooperatives are not involved in purchase they pick the seeds from the seed enterprises sell to farmers and then take the money back to the seeds enterprises. Seed producers purchase basic seeds at high prices to produce certified seeds, seed enterprise also purchase the certified seed by adding 15% of the grain price. Animal transport, own motor vehicles and public transport are then used to bring supplies to the premises.Most traded wheat varieties are Picaflor, Digalu and Danfie sold to buyers from within the district. Blocked houses, concrete stores, and wooden stores are used to store seeds before selling. Some of the challenges reported in storage include: poor quality stores, rodents and pests destruction, leakages, lack of chemical and postharvest protections. The constraints mentioned by wheat seed sellers are high cost of improved seed variety and fertilizers, lack of awareness by some farmers, delayed payment of loans/debts and poor quality of some wheat seed. There is need to create awareness on production, inputs, technology and products available should be made. The government through Bureau of Agriculture (BOA) should support seed producers with quality seeds and training on production, construct proper storage facilities and ensure timely supply of inputs.Sampled fertilizer suppliers in Endamehoni district, were five primary cooperatives and one union started between 1986 and 1999. The union purchase DAP and urea from the regional union federation in advance and supplies to primary cooperatives within the district. Primary cooperatives then sell to the individual farmers. Table 14 shows summary of purchases and sales done by fertilizer suppliers The union uses its own motor vehicles to collect fertilizer purchased while primary cooperatives use public transport. In some instances the union supplies the inputs to the premises of the primary cooperatives. The union purchase fertilizers in advance from the union federation and gets a commission by selling with the predetermined price to the farmers through the primary cooperatives. The selling price of fertilizers is determined by the Bureau of Agriculture and the unions. The primary cooperatives sell fertilizer to farmers at a price inclusive of the purchase price plus the transport cost only no profit margin.Fertilizer suppliers in Tigray offer other services in addition to selling fertilizers such as orient farmers on the advantages of using fertilizers and how to use it, explain modern banking, loan repayment and offer credit sales.The farm implements in Endamehoni district, Tigray region are supplied by sole proprietors mainly dominated by blacksmith and implement shop started between 1978 and 2014 and government (BoA) enterprise started in 1993. Drip irrigation, motor pump, treadle pump, pressurized pumps, rigger and tie rigger are some of the farm implement supplied by the district bureau of agriculture. The price of each material was determined by regional bureau of agriculture and the district Bureau of distributes the material with the stated price. But materials like tie rigger and rigger distribute freely to the farmers. Sole proprietor mostly sell shovel, hoe, mattock and spade to farmers while government enterprise sell drip irrigation equipment, pressure pump, treadle pump and motor pump. The trader (shop) purchases the material from Mekelle and Maichew market (from black smith) and sells to the users. The black smith also purchases the row materials from individual Metal workers and from market (pieces of metals from old vehicles and other materials). Sole proprietors purchase these implements from local blacksmiths and private companies both from within the district and beyond. On the other hand, government supplies the implements to the government enterprise. All farm implements supplied by BOA are from the regional BOA with the set price.The BoA mentions that high cost of the farm implement (farmer's affordability), lack of awareness and skill to use and to operate the implement and government enforcement to buy the farm implement as the main problem.The constraints mentioned by the traders in selling farm implements include: Financial constraints that make acquisition of implements and raw materials costly, lack of promotion for implements produced by blacksmith, supply shortage of quality implements, low demands of locally made implements by the blacksmith due to cheap implements from factories and lack of skills to modify implements for customer needs Some of the suggestions made to ameliorate the constraints include product promotions to create awareness and demand for the products and implements. Market linkages between producer and suppliers and linkages to credit suppliers should be supported.The majority of farmers in the district produce potato during Meher season and very few with irrigation. The potato is immediately sold on the market or consumed as most farmers do not have access to storage facilities. The price of potato is very low (up to ETB 3/kg) during the main production season (October, November and December). The low price of potato is because farmers are producing at the same time, they do not have storage facilities available at the farm level and this forces them to sell their product immediately after harvest. Starting from February the potato supply is very low and as a result the price of potato is also very high (ETB 10-14/kg). Establishment of storage facilities for farmers is one intervention that ensures that farmers can store and sell their potato produce during the low supply months and fetch higher market prices and returns to their produce. Furthermore, warehouse will enable consistent supply of produce throughout the year.Potato production is primarily under rain fed conditions, and most of the interviewed actors in the potato chain suggested investment in irrigation as one of the interventions for improving potato value chains.Most traders face storage problems with the potato they purchase; they use sacks and the ground to store potato and it causes spoilage and quality loss of potato when stored for more than a week. Support from government, NGOs and other stakeholders in potato storage infrastructure and post-harvest handling are key interventions identified for improving potato value chains in the research site.Capacity building on different potato food processing (chips, porridge, alcoholic drink, injera, bread, crisp etc.) should be encouraged. In this district potato processing into Chips, Crisps or other forms is not common. The Hotels and restaurants prepare only food for sell (locally called 'beyaynet' which is made from boiled potato, lentil, beetroot salad, head cabbage and chilies) especially during the fasting period.In the district most of the faba bean grain traders are retailers. Traders purchase Faba bean from 'Neksege market' which is 20 km away from the district town and some of them purchase from Maichew (Saturday market) mostly from farmers and sometimes from smaller retailers. The purchasing price somewhat vary but on average is from ETB 7.20 to 8.00/kg. Faba bean production should be encouraged in the district to reduce transport cost incurred by tradersThe study shows that there are few faba bean processors. In the district town there are only two large faba bean processors. Some hotel and restaurant are also faba bean processors, processors/hotel and restaurant/purchase the splitted faba bean product from market/from those large faba bean processor store in a small amount (8-50) kg per a week for cooking purpose (locally called 'full') and sell to end uses. The processors sell the prepared food ('full') from ETB 7 to 10 per 'full'. From 1 kg of splitted grain can prepare 28 full on average. There is therefore an opportunity in faba bean processing.Even though wheat is the first crop in the district both in terms of area coverage and production, there is no wheat processor except bakeries. Bakeries purchase the flour from Alamata and the district union to prepare bread for sale. Café, hotel and restaurant, bread retailer shops and other individual are customers of the bakeries. Currently bread market is attractive but flour shortage and transport problem from factories to the bakeries are the main constraints of the business. Therefore the study recommends establishment of flour processing in the district town.Market linkage should be encouraged. The traders mention weak or no permanent market linkage with factories.Traders also suggested that government to create strong linkage between factories and wheat suppliers, to create credit opportunities as per the need and the request of the trader and farmers.The most pertinent problem in faba bean seed system is disease outbreaks (some of them are not known).Disease resistant faba been seeds should be provided to farmers and also Strengthening community based seeds production system.The only chemical supplier within the district is BOA which supplies chemical types like pesticides and fungicides from regional BOA with set price. Among the supplied chemicals are sold within the district. The chemicals sold are not packaged in quantities needed by the farmers. For example most farmers need 0.25 litre Malatine or 0.5 kg of Mankozeb, but in BOA smallest packed chemical is 1 litre or 1 kilogram. It is suggested that, assuming involvement of private participation in chemical provision, establishment of chemical shops to supply crop chemicals should be encouraged and packaging in small quantities as per the farmers demand.Almost all farmers have a problem of spray equipment; due to this reason the efficiency of chemicals is reduced and causes risks of health. Technical training on chemical application is therefore proposedLack of skills to use and to operate the implement were mentioned as the main problem encountered by farmers with regard to farm implements. Demonstration of how to use some of farm implements is proposed.Capacity building to farm implements providers (e.g. to blacksmith on how to make implements that to meet customers' needs). The blacksmiths have knowledge on how to manufacture farm implements; they can be trained to make modern implements which are up to standard so that they remain relevant in the market.4 Livestock value chainsIn the districts are a total of 306 crossbreed cows (Holstein) and 16,364 local cows. Most crossbreed cows are kept by farmers in urban and peri-urban areas (Maichew) where they are used to produce fresh milk for urban consumers and for the dairy businesses interviewed and described in this section. Local cows are found in rural and peri-urban areas. The milk produced from these cows is processed on farm into butter. Part of the milk from local cows in peri-urban areas is also sold as fresh milk, especially during peak demand periods.Two businesses are engaged in commercial milk collection and processing, i.e. a dairy cooperative and a union. Furthermore dairy cafes are engaged in serving/using milk products. Butter traders buy and sell butter in the district.Sampled butter traders were all female, while 2 of the 5 sampled dairy cafe owners are also female. Except for the dairy collection/processing businesses, most sampled dairy businesses were established less than 10 years ago-see table 15. The HizbaTeklehaymanot cooperative has its own dairy cows (30 cows, 8 are milking). The Bokra union also has its own production unit (18 cows), but also purchase milk from farmers in and around Maichew town and recently also from the Hizba cooperative. The cooperative sells the unprocessed milk to individual consumers, hotel restaurants and the union. The Bokra union processes the bulk of its fresh milk into butter, which is sold to individual consumers, hotel/restaurants and dairy cafes. Part of the milk is also converted into 'Irgo' (naturally fermented yoghurt) which is also sold to individual consumers and hotel/restaurants. Skimmed milk (after removing the cream) is also sold to consumers and hotel/restaurants and a small amount of 'arera' (from the processed cream) is sold to individual consumers.Peak milk supply month are August-October as a result of available feed resources, while demand is high around holidays-January, April and September and low during fasting periods.Fluctuating seasonal demand/supply and poor quality milk are mentioned as bottlenecks. Improved management and processing of butter during the fasting period and selling during non-fasting are seen as possible improvements. Local butter is processed by individual households (by women) from soured milk using local churning technology.The traders involved in local butter collection are mostly illiterate, and farming themselves. Butter trading is taken as an additional task to farming. The traders purchase butter from Shikomayo, Neksege, Korem (outside the district) market and from farmers around their village to sell at Maichew market for end users, hotel and restaurants. Farmers and trader also sell to the end user and hotel and restaurants at the same market and time. Both farmers and traders purchase and sell butter with the local measurement i.e. 'tika'. Tika has different sizes, 1kg of butter will range from 2-4 Tika and the price of one kg butter is not more than ETB 175 reported by the union.Four of the five (5) sampled butter traders purchase their butter from individual farmers in the district and one from neighbouring districts. They use a combination of public and own transport to purchase the butterThe number of large ruminants in Endamehoni which are used for ploughing, reproduction and ultimately sold for meat consumption totals 61,557 oxen/bulls. The number of small ruminants total 107,774 (59,333 sheep and 48,441 goats). Farmers who produce these animals may sell them with or without fattening. Sales may take place directly from producers to consumers and through the businesses interviewed and described below.Businesses involved in small and large ruminants include traders, hotel/restaurants (usually with butchery) and butchery shops. All sampled businesses are privately owned. Female owners/operators are well represented in the sampled serving businesses, including butcheries, which are usually owned by males. Part of the traders are illiterate, all other sampled businesses owners had primary education or above. Animals purchased by the sampled traders can be subdivided into animals for slaughter and animals sold for reproduction and fattening (small ruminants) and ploughing/fattening (oxen).Most traders purchase animals from farmers (including marketing groups/associations) in and outside the district. Animals for slaughter are sold to hotel/restaurants, butcheries and end consumers in and outside the district. It is noted that consumer during festivities buy large ruminants as a group; meat is divided amongst the group members. Sales of animals for fattening, reproduction and ploughing is limited to traders and farmers in the district. It is reported that part of this trade is directly between farmers. Seasonality plays an important role in animal trade-some sampled traders only trade during peak demand periods (usually in and around religious and cultural holidays, harvesting time and weddings). Table 21 indicates a significant drop in the number of animals traded during low periods (small ruminants 100-57% decrease and large ruminants about 33-50% decrease) as well as a drop in prices (small ruminant around 56-20% and large ruminants (15-30%). April, September, august, December, February, November, and January, December, October and April, march Low/peak supply % 43%, 20%, 10%, 40%, 42% and 0% 67%, 67% and 50% Low/peak price margin (% low/peak price) 500-900/900-1300 (64%) 500-700/750-1200 (44%) 500-800/1000-1500 (52%) 400-700/800-1500 (48%) 550-725/700-900 (80%) 0/300-2500 3500-6000/4000-7500 (81%) 5000-6000/5000-8000 (85%) 3000-5000/4500-7000 (70%) Traders mentioned several bottlenecks, including conflicting market days, taxation, transportation problems and sick animals. They propose changes in market days, better veterinary care, and business flexibility during low periods.Two types of businesses are distinguished for large and small ruminants i.e. i) hotel/restaurants with their own butchery, which serve meat to customer in their restaurants and ii) butchery shops which only sells meat (beef) to individual consumers. While slaughtering of small animals takes place in hotel/restaurants, large animals are slaughtered in the district abattoir.Animals are purchased from farmer (groups) and small traders, mostly from within the district. Large ruminants are reportedly also purchased from outside the district.The average age of purchased animals is rather high, indicating that meat of younger animals is not preferred by the customers. The purchase price range is limited (as compared to other district) suggesting that there is not much variation in the type of animals purchased.Restaurants and butcheries mentioned poor quality services of the abattoir and transport services. Four service providers support the dairy and small ruminants value chain actors i.e. the district abattoir, livestock feed producers/traders, the veterinary services and the AI services.The abattoir was established by the government in the early nineties and only slaughters large ruminants for butcheries and hotel/restaurants. The majority of the slaughtered animals is over 4 years of age. Peak slaughtering months coincide with the religious holidays, while low periods are during fasting. A major bottleneck is the poor state of the abattoir Within Endamehoni a total of 4,635 ha of wheat is grown with average production of 36 quintal/ha, pulses 6,547 ha with average production of 18 quintal/ha. None of these wheat and pulses are processed commercially outside the district and hence no agro-industrial by products (AIB) are available in the district.Feed in Endamehoni district is produced and retailed by the Bokra feed processing union (also involved in dairy processing), while concentrate feeds are sold by one privately owned trader. Both companies started their business in the past 10 years and are licensed. Feed processing company A feed processing union started its operation in 2012. It buys all its agricultural industrial by-products (oilcake, wheat bran, limestone and salt) from outside and produces dairy meal and a fattening mix. Dairy meal is sold directly to farmers in the district for their dairy cows, while the fattening mix is sold to farmers outside the district for large ruminants. Sales increase during the dry season when green fodder is not readily available. The quantities sold are low since the union started recently, demand for dairy mix is higher than for fattening mix. The union mentions lack of linkages with users as a bottleneck and some water and electricity supply problems for the factory. Also lack of knowledge of these mixes by potential users. In addition there is distance of purchasing feeding ingredients which add to feed cost.There is only one feed shop in Maichew, which purchases wheat bran and oil cake from outside the district and sells it to farmers in the district. The feed traders/shop mentioned lack of credit as a bottleneck for the expansion of the business. Also storage is a problem.The public sector in Endamehoni is the sole provider of veterinary services in the district. The regional Bureau of agriculture (RBoA) provide drugs and equipment directly to the district Bureau of agriculture. The RBoA also has Three Animal health experts/technician/and 3DVM to provide technical support, training and monitoring activities to the district.There is one veterinary Clinic in the district office of agriculture, which provide the service with 6 animal health technicians and 1 DVM.The DVM mostly works at the district vet clinic and he provide necessary technical support to the animal health technicians. The district veterinary clinic provides services like, disease diagnosis and treatment, vaccination, spray for external parasite and castration. One animal health technician from the clinic once per week visit three sub-districts (kebeles) for providing services like treatment, spray, vaccination and castration. The drugs like antibiotics, vaccines, and anthelminthic are supplied directly from the regional government (regional bureau of agriculture). The drugs are provided to customers with predetermined prices. Diagnostic and treatment services are also provided to farmers freely and farmers only pay for the drugs price. The veterinary clinics also give advice and awareness creation services to farmers/animal owners on animal handling, prevention and control measures of diseases.Based on interviews with staff at district and PA level use of vaccines is highest, followed by antihelmetics, antibiotics and supplements. All drugs are used for dairy cows and small and large ruminants.Vaccines -are used year round, antibiotics are in January and June, antihelmetics from June-December, supplements are supplied as needed.Lack of supplies, shortages of veterinary equipment and transport problems are mentioned as bottlenecks. Also inadequate training and insufficient awareness on animal health by the community.In Endamehoni woreda there are only two AI technician, which are located in the district town. They provide service to the urban farmers and the nearest kebeles (one AI technician is expected to cover 4PAs). The cost is ETB 2 for one AI service.In the past year (2013/14) 981 hormone assisted mass inseminations were provided (in Tsibet, Emba Hasti, HizbaTeklehaimanot, Mekan,Tahtaihaya, Meswaeti, Shmta and Smret). Only 29% were successful however.The regional Bureau of agriculture provides directly liquid nitrogen, semen and other equipment to the district bureau of agriculture. The regional bureau of agriculture has 3 AI experts, the expert provide technical support and monitors the AI service provision at the district and regional level.The analysis presented in this section is based on a review of the linkages described and the present status/performance of the agribusinesses and their supporting businesses/services. Potential interventions are identified through comparison (gap analysis) of these findings with other districts and projects. Potential interventions are subdivided into those which may contribute to increased demand and those which may contribute to increased supply of the raw product.The fresh milk value chain in Endamehoni district consists of peri-urban producers (including producers cooperatives) which sell fresh milk and liquid dairy products (irgo, boiled milk) to various agribusinesses and consumers (institutional and individual). Based on the data summarized in the result section, the linkages between the fresh milk agribusinesses in Endamehoni district are summarized in Figure 6. The number of crossbreed cows, which are normally kept for fresh milk production/sale is rather low (306) in Endamehoni. The amount of milk produced from a 306 crossbreeds can be estimated at about 215.000 litre/year by assuming that 50% of cows are lactating during any one year, lactation period is around 200 days and average daily milk yield is 7.0 litres per year (LIVES baseline data).This estimated production is small as compared to all other Africa RISING districts. It is therefore not surprising to see that the involvement of agribusiness in the fresh milk dairy value chain in Endamehoni is also limited. Also, it is interesting to note that the union, focuses on the production of butter, rather than the sale of fresh raw milk. However commercial demand is increasing, because in the past 10 years, several commercial outlets in the form of shops, dairy cafes have emerged, thus contributing to the demand for fresh milk and dairy products. A consumer demand study is proposed to explore (present and future) local demand for milk and milky products (including raw milk, skimmed milk, irgo and arera) by individual consumers, hotel/restaurants, hospitals offices and schools. Such a study may contribute to increasing commercial demand for milk, in part replacing the producer-consumer channel through better quality milk. Such a study may include tasting of new products by consumers.  So far quantities sold are minimal and most of the possible linkages have been established. The dairy cafes may stimulate local demand, especially by enlarging their product range, to attract more youth, as business operator or consumer. Possible new products may include ice cream, milk shakes and butter milk 'Arera'. The latter product is produced by the union and directly sold to individual consumers, possibilities for sale through dairy cafes may be explored. The cafes may also consider selling some products, including milk to outside customers (like a shop)  Since all irgo produced by the union or dairy cafes is produced from soured fresh milk, heating the milk to reduce bacterial infection can be tested. Souring of the milk can then be stimulated with the help of pasteurized yoghurt culture.  To facilitate the increased fresh milk supply for the businesses, more producers can be linked to the processors, dairy cafes and hotel restaurants either on individual basis or as groups. As can be seen from the result tables, purchase of milk from groups or associations is not commonly practiced and can therefore be introduced.Input/service providers  Results show that veterinary drugs for peri-urban dairy farmers are available from the public sector only. It is proposed that, assuming increased commercialization of the dairy (and ruminants' value chains), establishment of private sector drug suppliers should be encouraged.  Similarly, for the genetic improvement of dairy animals peri-urban dairy farmers are relatively well served with public AI as compared to rural farmers. However it was noted that the attempts to increase the number of AI through hormone assisted mass insemination in the peri-urban PAs with mobile teams still requires fine tuning. It is therefore recommend that the present performance of the hormone assisted mass insemination by mobile teams, is studied in order to introduce additional measures to improve effectiveness and efficiency of the system.The production and supply of agro-industrial by-products (AIB) for peri urban dairy farmers is still in its infancy with only one shop/trader and the union. To stimulate demand and milk production, it is proposed to create awareness, demonstrate the beneficial effects of locally mixed AIB ingredients and commercial feeds. Furthermore demand may be stimulated by increased availability through the cooperative structure and linkages between the unions and the private feed shops (dairy mix). Supply linkages may also be created between private traders and the union and the dairy collection and processing businesses.The linkages between the peri-urban dairy farmers and the feed businesses are shown in the Figure 7.  The figure/study shows that the AIB businesses depend on the supply of ingredients from outside the district, resulting in additional cost for producing feed mixtures (transportation/marketing cost), as compared to other Africa RISING districts. To reduce the cost of wheat bran, possibilities for processing wheat produced in the district may be explored. Industrial processing of wheat by flour mills yields on average 15% bran-assuming that 25% of the present wheat production is processed commercially a total of 625 t of bran could be produced.  To increase production of individual farmers, new management interventions for health, genetics and feeding should be introduced. 3The butter value chain in Endamehoni consists of 2 channels i.e. i) lactic butter produced/churned on farms in peri-urban and rural areas, and ii) the fresh butter produced by the Union from the milk produced by themselves/purchased. The data in the result section indicate that the butter produced by the Union is relatively small as compared to the butter produced by households in the rural areas. The existing value chain linkages created by these agribusinesses are shown in Figure 8. The fact that the union focuses its attention on butter production, rather than the sale of fresh raw milk, suggests that demand and profitability of this business activity is high. Since overall demand for commercially and home produced butter is not known, a consumer study is proposed to assess demand for different types of butter by individual and institutional buyers.  To increase profitability of commercially produced butter, attention should be paid to the use of byproducts such butter milk. Linkages for the sale of such products in hotel restaurants and dairy cafes should be explored (see fluid milk value chain)  To reduce bacterial infection of butter produced from raw milk, heating may be introduced, thus producing a more health safe quality fresh butter.  It is noted that 'ayeb' is not produced from the skimmed milk (also see fluid milk value chain). It proposed to explore the local demand for 'ayeb' to increase the profitability of butter making.As indicated in the result section, most lactic butter is produced from local cows which total 16,364 in number. The amount of butter produced from these cows is estimated at 107,389 kg/annum-assuming that half of the cows are lactating, lactation period is 175 days, average daily production is 1.5 litres of milk per day and around 20 litres of milk are used to produce 1 kg of butter. (LIVES baseline survey).The rapid assessment suggests that the lactic butter traders in Endamehoni district only play modest role in the overall butter trade (small quantities, no measuring equipment, and no specialization). Most butter produced is probably sold directly by producer to consumers, including sales of butter to hotels/restaurants. Quality of home produced butter in rural areas, may be further improved by introducing small scale advanced churning and processing technologies. The introduction of such technologies can be combined with new business models, especially for women farmers in rural areas. Larger capacity churns may be operated by groups of women and or individual women who either process the soured milk from individual farmers and or the sour cream collected from the individual farmers. The latter will require new methods of souring milk in open containers, rather than in the traditional earthen churns.  To define improved butter processing interventions in the rural areas more precisely, a rapid assessment of the present processing technologies and organizational arrangements is proposed.The supply of inputs and services for veterinary drugs/services, AI and feed for farmers in rural areas, where the bulk of the butter is produced, is relatively weak as compared to milk and butter produced in peri-urban areas. While government initiatives aim at improving such health and AI services in the rural areas, some progress can be made in the short run by creating economics of scale through collective (bulk) purchase of these services and inputs.  Feed supply can be also be improved through bulk purchase through cooperative structures and/or group formation.Large and small ruminants value chain businesses.The number of oxen and bulls in the district suggest that there should be a considerable supply of large and small ruminants for consumption. Assuming that oxen/bulls on average will be used for 5 years, the estimated number of animals for consumption/year would be 12,312. Assuming an average slaughter age of small ruminants of 3 years, the number of sheep and goats for consumption could be estimated at respectively 19,778 and 16,147 animals/year.The Ethiopian livestock master plan clearly identifies deficits of red meat for the local market at present and even more in the future. It is therefore expected that prices and profit margins in this sector will be high and therefore investments in the development of the small and large ruminants' value chain should be encouraged.Based on the data summarized in the result section, the linkages between the small and large ruminants' agribusinesses in Endamehoni are summarized in Figures 9 and 10. The figures show that butcheries and hotel/restaurants in the district are major 'consumers' of the animals. Data from these businesses and the abattoir, which provides slaughtering services for large ruminants, suggest that demand is traditional i.e. farmers mainly produce for the cultural and religious holidays periods and the average age of the animals is rather old (large ruminants above 6 years and small ruminants above 2 years). It is proposed to conduct a demand study within the district for the type of small and large ruminants required by the different customers. Such a study should also consider demand for different types of animals during the year. 4  The study would enable the establishment of linkages between producers/fatteners of animals and agribusiness and consumers to produce animals throughout the year based on market demand.  Formation of marketing groups for the sale of animals should be explored to meet such market demand as well as improve marketing position of the producers.Input/service providers  The abattoir which provides slaughtering services for large ruminants only, may expand its services to include slaughter of small ruminants. However, as indicated in the result section, improvement in quality of the slaughtering services, including charges will be required.  To support the production of these animals by (groups) of farmers, linkages with veterinary services should be established using collective action to purchase inputs and services in bulk to reduce transaction cost.Presently very little linkages exist between the feed supply system and small and large ruminants' producers in rural areas-see Figure 11.  Demand for AIB should be encouraged through awareness creation/demonstration of potential beneficial effects. Furthermore, availability could be improved through the union and primary cooperatives. A priority link to be established is between (groups of) fatteners and the traders which produce and sell pulses bran. Supply of feed inputs in rural areas should be based on collective action (group, cooperative) to purchase feeds in bulk from the private feed shops and the union.  It is also proposed to explore the commercial potential for processing of pulses in the district, since pulses bran is commonly used for fattening animals. As indicated in the result section a total of 11.8 million kg of pulses is produced on 6,547 ha. Assuming that 25% of these pulses would be processed commercially a total of about 295 t of pulse bran could be produced (at a 10% by-product rate)."}

main/part_2/0200845436.json

@@ -0,0 +1 @@
+{"metadata":{"gardian_id":"4c96ba1ea60a6ba6e5d292c82df1e035","source":"gardian_index","url":"https://cgspace.cgiar.org/rest/bitstreams/41ab0ff6-2ec9-4428-b983-4a8a59441d5b/retrieve","id":"870949974"},"keywords":["No milestones associated Sub-IDOs","Contributing Centers/PPA partners","Evidence link","• https","//tinyurl.com/yxv886np"],"sieverID":"01902827-5acc-4587-a72f-97434bf02615","content":"This innovation makes it possible to synthetically modify viruses on the DNA level followed by initiating replication for production of variants which facilitate production of vaccine candidate."}

main/part_2/0212768321.json

@@ -0,0 +1 @@
+{"metadata":{"gardian_id":"24847667bce8bc2f1d4f4e79048fc5f7","source":"gardian_index","url":"https://repository.cimmyt.org/server/api/core/bitstreams/f66d06ee-69a4-43bb-8ef3-921de23bcabf/content","id":"-1323352642"},"keywords":[],"sieverID":"a7642b65-a2fe-44f5-85a6-92ff951f4edc","content":"Puma 1075 y puma 1076, híbridos de maíz de temporal para los valles altos de México (2200 a 2600 msnm)Los dos híbridos son de ciclo vegetativo intermedio de 150 d, y conformados por tres líneas; una de ellas es la línea IATolsol que participa como progenitor masculino común, con un nivel S4 de endogamia y que procede del híbrido comercial de maíz H-33, para los Valles Altos, y que es de la raza Cónico. La genealogía de esta línea es IA33F2-28-4-2-2.En el híbrido Puma 1075, la cruza simple progenitora hembra es CML246 X CML242 y para el híbrido Puma 1076 es la cruza CML244XCML349, ambas cruzas generadas en el Centro Internacional de Mejoramiento de Maíz y Trigo (CIMMYT). Las líneas que integran a la primera cruza simple fueron liberadas con endogamia S7 y S8, respectivamente. Puma 1075 presenta cubrimiento de espiga por la hoja bandera en 50 % de plantas en antesis; en cambio, en Puma 1076 la espiga está libre. En Puma 1075 la espiga es de forma semiabierta por el ángulo formado entre el eje principal y las ramas secundarias en el tercio inferior de la espiga, con ramas laterales; en Puma 1076 es abierta, con pocas ramas laterales y sin ramas secundarias. Pueden cosecharse con maquinaria porque su uniformidad aceptable lo permite. También exhiben tolerancia al acame con respecto al híbrido comercial H-33 y menor incidencia de las enfermedades virales Rayado Fino (Fine Stripe Virus, MRFV) y Achaparramiento (Corn Stunt Disease, CSD, Raza Mesa Central), que en los últimos años han ido en aumento en los Valles Altos. Los dos híbridos presentan pocos hijos con respecto al mismo testigo, el híbrido H-33.En pruebas de calidad nixtamalera presentan buen rendimiento de nixtamal. El color del grano de Puma 1075 es blanco, con características favorables para la fabricación de harina. En cambio, Puma 1076 presenta grano de color blanco cremoso, por lo cual no es adecuado para fabricar harina, de acuerdo con los estándares de la empresa MA-SECA ® .El rendimiento promedio del híbrido Puma 1075 en los años 1996 a 1999 fue 8700 kg ha -1 , valor que supera en 27 % al H-33, y el de Puma 1076 fue de 9000 kg ha -1 , 29 % más que H-33. El rendimiento potencial experimental de ambos es de 12 000 kg ha -1 , en el Valle de México, Cuautitlán, Méx., Valle de Puebla, Tlaxcoapan y Apan, Hgo., y en Tlaxcala. Prosperan en condiciones de buen temporal o secano, en humedad residual y en punta de riego; su adaptación puede extenderse a los estados de México, Puebla, Tlaxcala, Hidalgo y Michoacán, en sitios de 2100 a 2600 msnm. Estos híbridos fueron liberados hace 5 y 4 años, de modo que la multiplicación de semilla de sus progenitores la realizó la ex Productora Nacional de Semillas y el Departamento de Ciencias Agrícolas de la UNAM, donde actualmente se cuenta con semilla de los híbridos y sus progenitores para los productores y empresas semilleras interesados.La producción de semilla puede hacerse en el Valle de México, Valle de Puebla, Valle de Toluca y Temascalcingo, Méx. La relación de surcos de progenitor hembra con respecto a surcos de progenitor macho puede ser 6:2 u 8:2; es preferible usar 6:2 para asegurar una óptima fecundación. Las dos cruzas simples poseen buena capacidad de rendimiento y calidad física de semilla comercial, cuya productividad es de 4.5 a 5.0 t ha -1 , con 70 % de semilla de tamaño grande y mediana de forma plana, lo que da redituabilidad en la producción de semilla de ambos híbridos.El uso de estos híbridos podría ayudar a elevar el escaso empleo de semilla certificada (6 %), ya que compiten con los materiales de empresas semilleras. En los dos híbridos se cuenta con información para incrementar con facilidad la semilla, que puede consultarse con los obtentores. ."}

main/part_2/0214165416.json

@@ -0,0 +1 @@
+{"metadata":{"gardian_id":"ba0f4492334e5ff5a87cf57993a4ee2e","source":"gardian_index","url":"https://cgspace.cgiar.org/rest/bitstreams/477f2003-00b0-481a-99d4-418d763a4cf0/retrieve","id":"350471527"},"keywords":[],"sieverID":"c0e9e336-f6a5-4faf-a527-f39d322b734e","content":"Las condiciones heterogéneas de la agricultura como clima, suelos, topografía, manejo, materiales de siembra, entre otros, y la dificultad de predecir su comportamiento, como por ejemplo los cambios meteorológicos y las epidemias de plagas y enfermedades, han llevado al desarrollo de investigaciones que suministren tecnologías para cada finca de acuerdo a sus condiciones especificas, para cada lote de cultivo.Con este enfoque se define la Agricultura Específica por Sitio (AES) como \"el arte de ajustar las prácticas agronómicas requeridas por una especie vegetal de acuerdo con las condiciones espaciales y temporales del sitio donde se cultiva, para obtener de ella su máximo rendimiento\". (Isaacs. E., CH. et al. 2004). La Agricultura Específica por Sitio vincula la experiencia y los conocimientos de los agricultores y las prácticas en sus mismas fincas en la adaptación de nuevas tecnologías.La productividad de los cultivos hace referencia a los rendimientos (peso/unidad de área), la oportunidad (picos y precio de cosecha en el tiempo), y calidad de la fruta (apariencia, grados Brix, tamaño).La utilización de tecnologías específicas a cada sitio mejora la productividad de los cultivos.La importancia del conocimiento y experiencia de los productores. La confianza que tienen los productores en resultados y conclusiones derivados de sus campos bajo condiciones comerciales. La posibilidad de transferir resultados a una zona de otra homóloga en condiciones sociales y agro ecológicas.Agricultores, comercializadores, técnicos, científicos se convierten en investigadores que se involucran en todo el proceso desde el registro de sus observaciones sobre el comportamiento de los cultivos hasta la utilización de la información generada para tomar decisiones sobre qué cultivar y la mejor forma de hacerlo.• Muchos agricultores de diferentes sitios realizan observaciones sobre el comportamiento de sus cultivos en cada uno de sus lotes. • Se reúne toda la información de muchos agricultores y de muchos sitios.• Toda la información se analiza para entender qué pasa con los cultivos en los diferentes sitios.• Se interpreta la información con los agricultores para que la utilicen en la toma de decisiones para su finca. Contribuyen a entender los sistemas de producción con todas sus variables y predecir su comportamiento gracias a resultados anticipados ante una serie de situaciones. Por ejemplo un agricultor podrá conocer los sitios que reúnen las condiciones ideales para sembrar un cultivo o que cultivo es apropiado para sembrar en un lugar específico.Seleccionar sitios óptimos para establecer un nuevo cultivo; seleccionar el cultivo apropiado de acuerdo a las características de un lote; decidir qué material de siembra es apropiado para las características de un lote; determinar las tecnologías apropiadas de acuerdo al lote y al material vegetal.Objetivo: Encontrar en Colombia zonas homólogas (temperatura, precipitación) a aquellas donde se encuentran unidades productivas de mora, lulo y guanábana de las cuales se conocen sus características climáticas.La georreferenciación del lote permite acceder a información sobre el clima con una resolución espacial de 30sg ~1 km en la base de datos WorldClim, la cual tiene datos del promedio mes a mes del temperatura y precipitación, de los últimos 50 años.Los mapas se construyen a partir de la información de los puntos caracterizados en cada cultivo.El nivel de pertenencia de cada punto en el mapa a cada zona de referencia, fue convertido a un único valor (unión difusa). El nivel de color en la escala de azul a rojo representa la pertenencia al conjunto de zonas caracterizadas. Rojo: pertenecías altas. Azul: pertenencias bajas.Objetivo: Encontrar zonas homólogas a zonas donde se han identificado la presencia de materiales élite de guanábana empleando la metodología basada en la lógica difusa.Se seleccionaron árboles con las mejores características fenotípicas de acuerdo con su estructura, resistencia a plagas y enfermedades, calidad y cantidad de producción, que pueden servir como árboles élite para su propagación. Para esto se caracterizaron los árboles preseleccionados por cada propietario en cada finca. La caracterización incluyó: caracterización del suelo con la metodología RASTA, caracterización agromorfológica de los árboles, caracterización de frutos y caracterización socioeconómica del productor.De los 49 árboles caracterizados se seleccionaron 5 materiales élite, como resultado de análisis estadísticos.Árbol CBVA # 2: Finca Villa Angela, Vereda La Meza, El Pital (Huila) -Latitud 2o 15' 6.20\" Longitud 75o 49' 7.37\". Árbol CBVA # 3: Finca Villa Angela, Vereda La Meza, El Pital (Huila) -Latitud 2o 15' 6.28\" Longitud 75o 49' 68.9\". Árbol CBVM # 1: Finca Villa Medina, El Pital (Huila) -Latitud 2o 16' 38.5\" Longitud 75o 46' 11.5\".Árbol CBEA # 1: Finca El Avispero, Suaza (Huila) -Latitud: 1o 52' 8.93'' Longitud 75o 49' 12. 9''.Árbol CBLE # 2: Finca La Esperanza, Vereda La Sabina, Corregimiento Maito -Tarquí (Hulia) Latitud 2o 2' 27.1'' Longitud 75o 54' 60''.Figura 1. Zonas homólogas a las zonas donde se identificaron los materiales élite de guanábana. Metodología basada en lógica difusa.La figura 1 muestra en rojo los valores con pertenencia al conjunto de zonas donde se identificaron los materiales élite de guanábana marcados con una cruz (+). Valores cercanos al azul presentan pertenencias menores a las zonas donde se identificaron dichos materiales.Los resultados indican que además de las zonas donde se identificaron materiales élites, otras zonas como Norte de Santander, Santander, Cundinamarca, Tolima, Cauca y Nariño reúnen condiciones de temperatura y precipitación, similares.Utilidades: Identificar lugares apropiados para cultivar materiales seleccionados. Guiar la búsqueda de materiales élite.Experiencias Huila, Valle Nariño, Caldas, Risaralda, Cundinamarca y Tolima Desarrollo con los productores y con instituciones de asistencia técnica de la zona, capacidades para: r econocimiento de plagas y enfermedad"}

main/part_2/0221985785.json

@@ -0,0 +1 @@
+{"metadata":{"gardian_id":"c81bc0bb60a8f7b6526a239f202583bc","source":"gardian_index","url":"https://cgspace.cgiar.org/rest/bitstreams/c5f03208-1f72-4df2-bf6a-eb61bec80934/retrieve","id":"13005445"},"keywords":[],"sieverID":"8a8b1e88-0212-4f54-9c75-253a40fc39ce","content":"For reducing waste:• Developing early warning systems and information management for food demand and supply outlook, e.g., \"smart\" marketing and information platforms, such as \"justin-time\" production, or a farm-to-fork virtual marketplace to match food production and consumption. This may include optimizing inventory movement and warehouse storage, including procurement and supply chain policies. Such initiatives can reduce waste-related costs for value chain actors.• Organizing awareness campaigns in school food programs and institutional food services.• Developing regulation and incentives for smaller portions and reduced food waste, for example subsidies for innovations that recycle or higher costs for disposal of food waste.• Recycling and upcycling waste between cities and periurban agriculture to support reuse of biowaste as renewable energy and higher value co-products in areas with high density livestock or urban waste disposal issues.For reducing loss:• Using improved harvesting, processing and storage in low-and middle-income countries, including energy efficient cold chains. Initiatives and programs related to harvesting, processing and storage can be greatly scaled up in Nationally Determined Contributions and related national processes based on incentives for increased economic efficiency in the value chain. Making low-cost, easily replicated technologies available would give value chain actors incentives to switch practices. Support for entrepreneurship and public-private investment is needed to stimulate innovation and large-scale uptake.For both:• Creating incentives for companies to measure food loss and waste and implement food loss and waste policies, for example though success cases demonstrating possible cost savings, company reporting and disclosure to investors, or third-party monitoring.In 2013, 1.7 Gt of food loss and waste (FLW) and 2.1 Gt CO2e of FLW-associated greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions occurred globally. 1 Numerous opportunities for reducing food loss and wasteas well as the associated unnecessary emissions-exist, so supply chain analysis to target the most important loss points in a supply chain and waste points among consumers is needed to identify priorities. Countries and supply chains can set targets for food loss and waste reduction based on the Champions 12.3 roadmap 2 and use the World Resources Institute Food Loss and Waste Protocol 3 to support consistent accounting.Following SDG 12.3, we set the target at 50% reduction and focus on the following five major supply chains where both greenhouse gases and loss or waste are high: bovine meat, vegetables, fruits, dairy and roots and tubers. 1 Industrialized Asia, and South and Southeast Asia are priority regions. 1 Care is needed to avoid using interventions that result in higher overall emissions-due to higher fossil fuel use, for example.The Challenge By 2030, target 50% reductions in food loss and waste in five major supply chains where both greenhouse gasses and loss or waste are high, such as beef, dairy, and intensive fruit and vegetable production. Where?Target regions with high levels of loss and waste and supply chains with high emissions, e.g., dairy, meat, rice, fruits and vegetables.More efficient supply chains delivering food with minimal loss and waste. Demand for food production reduced proportionally, leading to lower production emissions.Our food systems are failing us. 4 Challenges commonly cited range from the quantity of food we need to produce to feed a growing population and the nutritional value that food needs to deliver, to inequalities in food systems and the impact of these systems on the environment. In addition, climate change is increasingly having severe negative impacts on food systems, while food systems themselves are part of the problem through direct and indirect emissions. 5 These challenges are cause for grave concern. To address them, numerous goals and targets have been proposed.Unfortunately, we can take almost any one of these goals and show that we are not on track to achieve it. 6 We must act, and act fast. But what are the most important and strategic actions we should focus on to meet the targets for agriculture and food systems, in particular those for climate adaptation and mitigation?Transforming Food Systems Under a Changing Climate is an initiative that aims to identify high-priority actions for food systems to both adapt to climate change and reduce emissions, while not losing sight of the many other functions of, and challenges to, our food systems. The action described in this briefing is one of 11 transformative actions that should take priority.To learn more about the initiative and see the full list of actions, visit www.transformingfoodsystems.com. "}

main/part_2/0230126749.json

@@ -0,0 +1 @@
+{"metadata":{"gardian_id":"09bf4ea85eee7c80a947555697534b5a","source":"gardian_index","url":"https://repository.cimmyt.org/server/api/core/bitstreams/b0761c5d-62db-44f3-8528-fa9a4c846fb8/content","id":"-2029592525"},"keywords":[],"sieverID":"aa375d9e-af6e-49ae-8323-bfdc4aad43fb","content":"\"Today more people are hungry than entire population of South Asia at beginning of Green Revolution (1970)  Strategy (5-year cycle)Up-scaled breeding and testing to deliver genetic gain. . .High value parents as donors for different traitsCrosses: ~1500 Biparental, ~500 Top and ~500 Back Targeted utilization of new genes, traits and germplasm Large population sizes (depends)Selection of progenies in segregation generations \"Each selection adds to the gains for more than one trait\"Borlaug's Shuttle BreedingLeaf rust, Fusarium Elite Nursery annually distributed by CIMMYT to collaborators ~200 sites with 50 lines (+checks) in α−lattice q q q q q q q q q q q q q qq q q q q q q q q q q q q q q q q q q q q q q q q q q q q q q q q q q q q q q q q q q q q q q q q q q q q q q q q qq q q q q q q q q q q q q q q q q q q q q q q q q q q q q q q q q q q q q q q q q q q q q q q qq q q q q q q q q q q q q q q q q q q q q q q q q q q q q q q q q q q q q Genetic Progress (gains) Pop (F 2:3 )Ped F 4:5Ped F 5:6Testcrosses GS 13.4% of gains against checks GS higher gains than pedigree (7.3%) "}

main/part_2/0238773546.json

@@ -0,0 +1 @@
+{"metadata":null,"keywords":null,"sieverID":"cf7762a6-ba7a-47f2-bab7-d11b09bb8451","content":"\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n"}

main/part_2/0248118729.json

@@ -0,0 +1 @@
+{"metadata":null,"keywords":null,"sieverID":"af4e7077-55f1-48a9-a98d-a84f1d1822c9","content":"\n\n"}

main/part_2/0248531115.json

@@ -0,0 +1 @@
+{"metadata":{"gardian_id":"edb0fa0f23af0b259572bc3d967159de","source":"gardian_index","url":"https://cgspace.cgiar.org/rest/bitstreams/3d55b30f-bc53-49e9-8e9a-2f404d88e82b/retrieve","id":"596090623"},"keywords":[],"sieverID":"51ee908d-8bdd-40f5-b36c-9e20a1aaf914","content":"Brief No. 2 † The Consultative Group on International Agricultural Research (CGIAR) is a strategic alliance of members, partners and international agricultural centers that mobilizes science to benefi t the poor (see www.cgiar.org).In order to better manage the complex and collaborative programs that many at the Workshop believe will contribute to poverty alleviation, the CGIAR should consider making a distinction between relatively 'complex' research more likely to require an active collaborative and dynamic approach, and relatively 'linear' research, which is more predictable and more likely to have a single causal strand directly related to the intervention.Examples of more linear research include: conserving, generating and disseminating knowledge about genepools; molecular characterization of indigenous livestock breeds; enhancing crop tolerance to abiotic stresses; and increasing micronutrient content through biotechnologies and breeding.Examples of more complex research include: strengthening knowledge of under-utilized plant genetic resources and identifying pro-poor opportunities for their use; enhancing opportunities for exploitation of high-value agricultural and forest products by the poor; developing options for sustainable management of water, land and forest resources targeted to the poor; and improving policies and facilitating institutional innovation supporting poor women in particular.Research management and evaluation procedures can then be differentiated according to approaches best suited to degree of complexity. Job descriptions, work-plans and performance assessments for senior scientists and managers should be reviewed to ensure that those who manage complex research are spanning boundaries between policy, civil society, private sector, farmers and local communities. Efforts by scientists and managers to do this should be recognized and rewarded. Performance measurement, medium-term planning, and other planning and evaluation mechanisms should recognize scientists' critical capacity-development role.It is time for the CGIAR to present a clear strategy and code of conduct for engaging users (including farmers, the poor and the civil society organizations that represent them) in on-the-ground research processes. In a practical sense, this could translate into better representation of civil society organizations, anthropologists, sociologists and political scientists on high-level boards and committees, and standards for engaging users in all stages of the research process.The CGIAR should ensure that it has adequate capacity across the range of social-science disciplines related to the many social, institutional and cultural systems affecting the farm, and capacity for inter-disciplinary research management (among social-science disciplines and between social and natural sciences).The CGIAR guidelines for impact assessment currently being fi nalized (based on a rate of return methodology alone) are not adequate for much of the research it conducts. We urge management to support the rapid development of another set of impact-assessment guidelines specifi cally for evaluating complex collaborative research, and to adapt the performance measurement and other systems to refl ect these new approaches. Without them, we risk inappropriately assessing the work we are doing that is most likely to lead to sustainable solutions to poverty, and possibly even driving it out of the CGIAR research portfolio.More realism needs to be applied to the concept of attribution and causation within complex collaborative research, where impacts are not likely to be attributable to the CGIAR or single causes. Knowing that different collaborators play different roles over time and multiple causal strands contribute to impact, we should focus assessments on contribution rather than attribution. Over-emphasis on attribution may damage the trust needed for effective collaboration. In addition, greater emphasis needs to be placed on understanding adaptation processes rather than adoption per se of fi nished technology.A range of methods and approaches should be made available and used for the evaluation of impacts of complex interventions. Mixed methodologies are needed to assess different kinds of data at different levels and scales (e.g. changes at the biological, social and individual level, in the short, medium and long term, and at the farm, community and higher scales). Skills should be built to ensure that adequate capacity exists to apply a range of methods (including qualitative), and portals or sourcebooks developed to facilitate wide and open-access to a broad range of methods.Participants and communities in collaborative research should be able to defi ne their own impacts and outcomes on their own terms. Currently, too much focus is put on assessing a narrow range of impacts defi ned by the CGIAR.Impact assessment should be an integral part of a comprehensive evaluation process, and the focus shifted from ex-post evaluations done long after the ending of an 'intervention' to ex-post evaluations done long after the ending of an 'intervention' to ex-post ex-ante and ongoing efforts to develop causal models and re-assess them as they evolve over time. Evaluation within complex systems should be managed as an integral part of the development process, built into the effort from the earliest planning stage, and given attention throughout the life of a project or program.Finally, while changes in processes and procedures are important, the CGIAR should take steps to build capacity for learning (both internal and through strategic partnerships). Because complex systems by defi nition are always changing, organizations need capacity to recognize and adapt to changing situations. Capacities associated with learning include: seeking out alternative viewpoints and opposing ideas; spending time on problem identifi cation, refl ection and knowledge-sharing; understanding perspectives of stakeholders, 'clients' and technological trends; tolerance for risk and uncertainty; dialogue and participatory decision-making; and, better understanding of the larger political and social context in which interventions take place, and its contribution to change. "}

main/part_2/0256852520.json

@@ -0,0 +1 @@
+{"metadata":{"gardian_id":"aa4fa155234abacd28fed5ea0e6763ca","source":"gardian_index","url":"https://cgspace.cgiar.org/rest/bitstreams/7f19023e-8b88-4e6a-8096-4caf874ea859/retrieve","id":"-1662522088"},"keywords":[],"sieverID":"1f1c7c26-a928-41fb-866b-0bacf10dd0bc","content":"In Vietnam, the CGIAR Research Program on Livestock and Fish (L&F) has identified two clusters of provinces where the program will implement R4D activities in collaboration with a number of partners. These clusters have been identified through a systematic site selection process and guided by GIS techniques and complemented with stakeholder consultations. One cluster spans the North Central Coast and the North West provinces; the other cluster includes four provinces in the Central Highlands and the Southeast. Dak Lak and Dak Nong are two of the provinces that have been identified in the latter. Within the L&F collaborative framework, CIAT and ILRI are working together to develop synergies from ongoing implementation of the Cambodia-Laos-Vietnam Livestock Project (CLVLP) that is being led by CIAT and the L&F pig value chain program in Vietnam that is being led by ILRI. The scoping study of the pig value chain in two sites in Dak Lak and Dak Nong is one of the first initiatives to be implemented to complement the ongoing activities under the CLVP and L&F in Vietnam. This scoping study was implemented under a Collaborative Research Agreement between Tay Nguyen University (TNU) and the International Livestock Research Institute (ILRI) that was officially signed on 15th of November 2013. The project activities were implemented from December 2013 until February 2014.The objectives of the study are: 1. To characterize the pig value chain in Dak Lak and Dak Nong including the types of breeds used, scale of production, nature of production practices in terms of feeding and health management, profile of pig producers and other value chain actors, market opportunities, and demand for pork locally and externally. 2. To identify opportunities for productivity gains through improved production practices (on feed, breed, animal health) and enhanced efficiency of the value chain and corresponding benefits to value chain actors through institutional and policy adjustments.The main activities of the research study were: Site selection to identify study sites in the Central Highlands;  Adapting the value chain assessment tools developed by the Value Chain Development team in L&F for use in data collection. The set of tools include the value chain scoping checklist and value chain assessment and benchmarking tools available for download at the L&F wiki (http://livestockfish.wikispaces.com/VC_Toolkit); Collecting primary data and information on the pig value chain at selected sites using the adapted tools and data analysis; Organizing a feedback workshop with stakeholders at study sites.The study team comprised of researchers from TNU, e.g., faculty of Veterinary and Animal Science, as well as members of the project team working with CIAT-led project on Foragebased feeding systems in Cambodia, Laos and Vietnam (CLVLP), and officers from district and provincial Agriculture and Rural Development Departments of the Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Development (MARD) (table 1).Table 1. Members of the study teamThe study was implemented during the period December 2013 to April 2014 including a nocost extension to accommodate delays in project start-up. The study was divided into three steps  Preparatory work: In July 2013, ILRI and TNU initiated discussions about formalizing the institutional partnership to pave the way for implementing collaborative activities in the Central Highlands of Vietnam between the two institutions, and specifically to provide a framework for implementing the pig value chain scoping study. In October 2013, ILRI met with TNU leaders to sign the Memorandum of Understanding (MoU) between TNU and ILRI and also to prepare the CRA for the scoping study. A field trip to visit possible sites for the study in Dak Lak and Dak Nong was also organized during this period. In December 2013, the TNU research team worked with ILRI in adapting the value chain scoping and assessment tools and also to finalize the site selection in Dak Lak and Dak Nong. Site selection: Ea Kar District in Dak Lak province and Krong No District in Dak Nong province were selected as study sites. Ea Kar District in Dak Lak Province is representative of a site with high pig production development, high access to markets and heterogeneous types of pig production systems and scales. Krong No District in Dak Nong Province is representative of a site with low access to markets and a predominance of smallholder pig production. Field survey: This activity involved consultations with different stakeholders in the pig value chain including input actors, producers, traders, processors, consumers, local authorities, extension officers, and member of farmer, women and youth associations to collect primary data and other information about the pig value chains in each study site. The team used the adapted value chain assessment tools for data collection. Reporting: This involved data analysis, report writing, organizing a feedback workshop and writing up the final technical report.Dak Lak and Dak Nong provinces were selected for the pig value chain scoping study because they belong to the list of provinces identified as study sites for the Vietnam Pig Value Chain under L&F.District selection: In October 2013, the research team from TNU and ILRI organized meetings with the local authorities in Dak Lak and Dak Nong provinces. The team met with provincial DARD, District DARD and extension offices at two selected districts, Ea Kar in Dak Lak and Krong No in Dak Nong. The district sites were chosen using L&F site selection criteria (e.g., poverty, pig population density, market access). Using this set of criteria, a short list of districts as potential sites was generated. The short list was then presented for discussion with local authorities to validate their suitability given other soft criteria such as presence of viable local counterparts to support the field activities and willingness of local authorities to cooperate with the research team. Based on the outcome of the consultations and groundtruthing, the following districts were selected as study sites: Ea Kar District, Dak Lak Province, representing a poor district, with high pig population and high access to markets, and  Krong No District, Dak Nong Province, representing a poor district, with high pig population and low access to markets.Within each district, communes were selected for as sties for the implementation of the field surveys in consultation with district authorities. Commune selection was based on their representativeness for pig production and market access. The communes selected in the two districts and their characteristics are shown in the table below. Intensive HH production and commercial farms, good access to market, some in local and mainly outside district and provinceMainly extensive HH production and some commercial farms, good access to markets, some in local and mainly outside district and provinceMainly intensive HH production some commercial farms good access to market some in local and mainly outside district and provinceSecondary data were collected from different sources including statistical yearbooks, records of livestock and veterinary departments at district offices, annual reports of extension offices, and annual reports of veterinary offices.Primary data was collected using the following approaches: Group discussions with pig producers:The tool used for group discussion was adapted from the L&F Value Chain Assessment tool kit after pre-testing and revision for implementation at the study sites (see Annex 1 for the adapted tools).Group discussions with farmers were organized in each site; there were 120 participants of farmers in both 2 sites were invited based on the following criteria: representatives is pig producers, representation for pig production in the site, 50% of women and 50% of men, and 125 (Ea Kar was 62 and Krong No 63) farmers were participated workshops, in which 63 men and 62 women (the 5 of participants over of plan were the communes or villages' extension worker).The group discussions were facilitated by the TNU research team comprising of five persons with specific responsibilities, i.e., two persons were facilitating two group discussions (one each for the group of male participants and female participants), two persons were documenting the process and taking notes during group discussions and one was supervising and leading the discussions at plenary.The individual interviews were conducted to survey other value chain actors and stakeholders. They included:Traders, including the following: Five (5) large pig traders in Ea Kar (e.g., those who bring pigs in large numbers to other provinces); Five (5) small pig traders (i.e., those traders who conduct business within the district) in each district; and  Two (2) brokers working in communes.Slaughterhouse operators and Processors: including the district slaughterhouse (at least one) and three household-based abattoirs in the three survey communes.Retailers: including retailers in local market outlets and in Buon Ma Thuot city markets in Dak Lak Province.Input actors: including 2 animal feed dealers and 2 veterinary agents.Local authorities: including heads of District DARDs and leaders at district level.The list of key informant interviewees is presented in Annex 2.    The increase in poverty rates in 2010 to 2012 was due to the government's use of the new poverty line that was much higher to align with the rising per capita income in Vietnam during these periods (table 7)  The share of animal production in the total GDP of province was not very high, especially in the areas where coffee production is dominant; however, animal production is very important for the poor households and in places where the natural conditions do not allow the development of coffee and other perennial crop industry. In Ea Kar District, livestock accounted for 40% of household income 4 . Livestock and fish farming was also known as the way for improving nutrition through increased consumption of protein by consumers in poor rural areas. Tables 8 and 9 show livestock production in terms of numbers and liveweight for different species.  The share of pig production in total animal production in liveweight is the highest among the different species raised in Dak Lak. Pig production contributes about 62% of total meat produced.The pig production was not very stable by years (table 10). Two main reasons for the observed trend are: epidemic diseases, especially the blue ear disease (Porcine Reproductive and Respiratory syndrome, PRRS), in the years of 2009 and 2010; in 2012 the blue ear disease had an outbreak in Dak Lak Province causing negative effects on pig production. The reduction in output from household pig production was the most significant source of decline in total pig production during this period. Pig price: the price of pig during the last 5 years was very unstable, changing from 33,000 per kg liveweight to more than 50,000 per kg liveweight. The price changes were short-lived however, e.g., only 3 -6 months. On the other hand, prices of feed have been continuously rising. Pig production contributes 80% of total liveweight of animals produced in the district (Dak Lak Statistical Yearbook, 2013). The strong increasing number of pigs in 2012 and 2013 were explained by 1) absence of epidemic disease during this period, 2) establishment of many large farms that sharply increased pig numbers in the district, 3) favourable prices of pig during this period, encouraging households to start pig production or to expand their herd. In Ea Kar, farmers from different places and across gender were ranking important activities differently. In Ea Kmut, the neighboring commune of Ea Kar town, with small farm size (on average about 7000 -8000 sqm/HH) and poor soils, farmers ranked the household pig and cattle production as top two most important livelihood activities; rice was ranked the third for household food security and coffee was fourth among men and fifth among women, as a cash income (table 14).In Cu Hue, the commune with extensive agriculture and high rate of ethnic minority (40%), male farmers ranked coffee and pepper as the two most important activities and then maize, rice, and pig production, respectively. These activities are inter-linked in that almost all maize and rice by-products were used as feeds for pig production, and manure from pigs are used as the main fertilizer for the maize and rice fields. In ethnic minority groups, farmers' responses suggest that pig production in the community declined in the last 10 years. The reasons for this observed trend were: The new rural program was banning free grazing of local pig breed because of environment problems; however, this type of pig could not be kept in confined conditions with intensive feeding because of low feed conversion and thereby resulting to high fat to lean meat ratios.  Poor marketing information; i.e., pigs were only sold to consumers who come to buy for special occasions like TET holiday, party, wedding, whereas there is potentially untapped demand from restaurants in the cities that sell special dishes using pork from local pigs.In Ea Tyl, there is very low natural condition for high value crop production, due to poor soils, low water resource, among others. Pig production was developing quickly in recent years; there were 18 pig \"trang trai\" 5 with scale >120 heads of pigs and 100 pig \"gia trai 6 \" with scale > 50 heads, and 60% of households are raising pigs as small scale (<50 heads). In Ea Tyl the male and female farmers both ranked sugarcane as the most important activity, followed by cassava and maize. These crops can be cultivated on less than fertile soil and commonly found in every household. The fourth most important activity was pig production for both men and women. Maize: almost all farmers in group discussions were producing two crops of maize per year, the first crop from May to August, the second from September to January. For the second crop, only a small number of farmers plant maize and in only a small area because the yield is much dependent on wet season rains which if not enough may require water from irrigation. Mainly, maize was sold to feed companies after harvesting, and farmers only leave a quantity enough for pig production.Rice: almost all farmers in the district practice rice production, and mainly paddy rice. Rice production is not only used for family consumption but it is also sold for cash income and for feeding animals.Cassava: In some communes, cassava was ranked as an important crop (Ea Tyl); cassava root was sold for income mainly and only a small portion of produce is stored for pig production. Table 16 summarizes all commune surveys. The differences across communes from results of three commune surveys were not extreme. In Ea Tyl, the income in March was highest from cassava harvesting but income in November and December was lower because coffee production in this commune was not very important. On the other hand, income from coffee was highest in other communes where coffee production was predominant. The main income sources of farmers in the district were crop production and animal production.The expenditures were highest at two periods: April and May where spending is highest for crop production, e.g., preparing land, purchase of seeds and fertilizers, etc. for annual crops. December is the period when debts are repaid for credit obtained from the bank and private sectors. Two reasons for payment of loans at this time were 1) the time that they have highest income in the year, 2) Vietnamese habit to pay the debt before the new year comes. In this study, the gender analysis and decision making was conducted by group discussions in separate groups of men and women. The gender roles in household and other social activities were assessed by using the activity clock tools. The typical day of work for members in the household is described in figures 1a-c below:All group discussions showed that a typical day work of men and women do not differ much. Both men and women work in the field in the morning and afternoon. The men are usually doing land preparation, watering coffee, while the women mainly look after pigs and chicken raised household farms, plant vegetables, among others. The women generally spend a longer time than men for household work and in looking after children. The children spend almost all their time during the day for studying and only spend a small amount of time for helping in household work. In terms of decision making, men and women generally make joint decisions about starting pig production, buying an animal, selecting breed for pig production and when selling animals (see table 17). Almost all production decisions were made jointly and based on agreement between the men and women. Some other production activities are discussed jointly but final decision is made by the person who is mainly responsible for the work or activity. For the household pig production, the decision is often made by the husband and wife together.Most of the men and women in group discussions in Ea Kar perform almost the same tasks in pig production. More women than men tend to be involved in looking after pigs and buying pigs for fattening. Generally, buying pigs for fattening was only done in some special cases by women when their sows were not producing enough piglets and they usually buy piglets from their neighbors to add to their stock for fattening. About 62% of participants in the meeting indicated having joined training courses on pig production in 2013. Among men, 75% indicated they have received training; among women, 50% did the same. On the other hand, 100% of women participants indicated that they are responsible for looking after pigs.In Ea Kar, most of the pig producers treat and vaccinate their animals. In all group discussions, farmers indicated three purposes for pig production: To improve income of the family by using available labor and feed; To collect manure for crop production; To earn employment income from commercial production, rental income from hiring out their land to other pig producers, and returns to investment in concentrate feed production.The pig production in Ea Kar can be divided into three main systems:This system is defined as the production with high investment and market orientation. This system is mainly found in commercial pig production, called \"Trang trai\" and some in \"Gia trai\" scales. The \"trang trai\" and \"gia trai\" scale are defined by local authorities as follows: \"Trang trai\": a pig farm that is managed by a family or jointly with some families with scale of more than 120 heads of fattening pig or more than 30 sows. \"Gia trai\": a pig farm that is managed by the family with scale >50 heads.In Ea Kar there were about 51 \"trang trai\" and 150 \"gia trai\" pig production units that have been in operation from 2005 to 2013.This system mainly applies to the scale of \"Gia trai\" and also in household production (e.g., household scale is defined as the family farm with number of pigs less than 50 heads). In this system, farmer mainly uses exotic breeds and crossbred pigs and also feed their pigs with concentrate feeds combined with other locally available feed.Extensive system mainly refers to producers who keep local pigs and wild pigs. For this type of production, pigs usually are free grazing in the village gardens or around a fenced area; others also try to keep pigs in pig pens. Feeds for this type of system only come from the household waste from family food and locally available feeds. The main diet of this type of pigs is usually vegetables and forages. In free grazing system, the natural feed that pigs can find for themselves are very important. The indigenous ethnic minority groups are the main producers in this system. The local pigs are traditionally and closely associated with their cultures.Pig value chain for crossbreeds and exotic pigs In Ea Kar, the different types of value chain actors and their functions are summarized in table 19. The main products from pig production in Ea Kar are: Live pigs: These include three main types, namely, lean pigs, fat pigs, and local pigs. Piglets: Since there were no breeding farms that produce and sell piglets, almost all piglets are sourced from households and a few from some large farms. Households produced piglets on farm for their own fattening, while the piglets sold in the market are sold only from farm to farm. Manure as a by-product from pig production.In Ea Kar, the existing markets for fattened pigs from the district are as follows: Inside the district: Slaughterhouses are the largest markets for pigs in the district at moment. There were 63 slaughterhouses in the district located around Ea Kar town and in every commune. On average, each slaughterhouse slaughters 4 heads per day (ranges from 1 -15 head). The traders estimate that about 30% of pigs produced are consumed in the district. Buon Ma Thuot city: The capital of Dak Lak province, it is the second largest market that consumes about 25% of pigs produced from Ea Kar. Neighboring provinces: The traders from 4 neighboring provinces frequently buy pigs from Ea Kar. These traders come from Gia Lai, Kon Tum, Phu Yen and Nha Trang. Pigs from these traders are mainly consumed in the capital of these provinces, namely Pleiku, Kontum, Tuy Hoa and Nha Trang; only traders from Kon Tum indicated that they transport some pigs to Ha Tinh province although this is not a regular practice. The piglets are only sold from farm to farm in the districtThe traders in Ea Kar commented that five years ago, some traders in Ea Kar transport pigs from Ea Kar to Ho Chi Minh City, and the demand from this market was very high. However, in the recent years, pig production around HCM city and the Mekong delta has grown and the price difference between Dak Lak and Ho Chi Minh (HCMC) market was no longer an attractive pull to traders. In addition, the quality requirements for pigs sold in HCMC are much more stringent and with higher transport price, selling to this market was no longer as highly profitable to traders as it was before.Many traders said that the potential markets for pigs still remain to be Ho Chi Minh City and the north of Vietnam but it also very much depends on the growth of and opportunities for exports to China.Quantity demand: The reflection from traders show that the demand has always been higher than supply. The price fluctuations just reflect the supply and availability of pigs.Quality demand: The result from farmer group discussions showed that the quality requirements from different market chains vary (table 20)Table 20. Market criteria of different markets * lean pig and fat pig were classified by trader and producer by visual inspection based on breed and body condition; almost all pigs from \"trang trai\" and some in \"gia trai\" are lean pigs, some pigs from \"gia trai\" and most pigs from small households are \"fat pigs\".Almost all traders who sold pigs to slaughterhouse in cities bought only the lean pig, while the traders who sold to rural areas bought both fat and lean pigs. The retailers in rural areas said that most of consumers in the rural areas who do physical work which require more energy want to buy pork that have both lean and fat. The type of pork cut that is highly demanded in the rural areas, especially during coffee harvesting when the coffee farmers hire many laborers to harvest coffee, is pork belly (lean and fat meat). Almost all feed companies operating in Dak Lak are present in Ea Kar; there were 13 feed companies including international companies such as CP, Cargill, Posy, Jaffa, and domestic companies like Vina, Thanh Loi, and Dong Tien (table 21). These companies are selling feed for pigs in Ea Kar. The main types of feed sold were complete concentrate feed and concentrate feed. Each large company has a feed sale agent level 1 in the town; these sales agents mainly distribute feed to feed retailers in different communes in the district. District veterinary shop is belongs to the veterinary office in the district and is the main drug source that supply and deliver to other shop in the district, especially providing vaccines for vaccination campaign or epidemic diseases and consulting for private drug shops (table 22).Commune shops were private shops; the owners/operators of these shops were the graduate of veterinary schools, or also the paravets. They sell drugs and supply veterinary services directly to producers.Veterinary companies are mainly private companies in different parts of the country. Many of these companies have access to the district and commune shops, and sell drugs from their companies and also provide training. In Ea Kar, producers were divided into three groups:  Producers who are the holders the pig farm with \"larger scale\", called \"trang trai\" (as explained above). Total pig production units classified as \"trang trai\" in Ea Kar was 51. These producers have good knowledge of pig production including breed and feeding systems, and market orientation. Problems that they identified were: o Pig price fluctuation during the last five years, with price changes happening over short period and the market prices difficult to predict, while the price of feeds continually increase.o Environment: the cost of standard waste treatment (e.g., for manure, urine) was very high  Producers who are classified as \"medium scale\" (gia trai) 7 have more than 50 heads of fattening pigs. The extension office report about 150 -200 producers of this type in Ea Kar. As documented from producer discussions and information from extension officers and veterinary officers, it was shown that the knowledge and skills in animal production and markets among these actors were very variable. Only some of them have good knowledge and almost all of them still do not have very good knowledge. These households were most sensitive to the risks from epidemic disease and market instability; they invest significant economic assets for this activity, but face risks that are always unknown while their knowledge and skills are still not enough to enable them to manage disease risks effectively. Some problems highlighted by these producers were:o How to produce on their own the good piglets for producing lean pigs since the price of good quality piglets from trang trai or companies are very high, o Lack of market information; this group was perceived to be the most sensitive when it comes to the fluctuation of market prices, with many of them starting pig production when pig price was high and selling pigs when price is low, o Environment problems from air and water pollution were the factor limitations for household pig production.Traders who bought pigs from Ea Kar come from different provinces in the central region of Vietnam. During the last 5 years, traders groups Ea Kar (10 persons) and Krong Pak (10 persons) districts in Dak Lak Province, Phu Yen (5 persons), Gia Lai (7 persons), Kon Tum (10 persons) and Khanh Hoa (5 persons) have been regularly trading in Ea Kar. The traders from outside Ea Kar usually buy the pigs from Ea Kar and sell them to slaughterhouses in the provincial capital. These traders mainly look for and buy lean pigs while the traders in Ea Kar district usually buy both lean and fat pigs.The broker for pig trading in Ea Kar is defined as the people supplying information about where the pigs are, who have fattened pigs for sale, when they are likely to sell, and in some cases even the prices offered by the traders to farmers. In Ea Kar, the brokers were working quite permanently for traders on field; one trader may work with some brokers in different communes and a broker mainly work with one trader but they have contact with other traders to sell pigs in case his/her traders can not buy. Brokers are paid by traders; the prices paid are almost the same among the traders, at about VND20,000 -VND 15,000 to 20,000 per head depending on the time of sale and quantity of pigs available.The district has no large slaughterhouse; the slaughterhouses were distributed in every commune, and the number of slaughterhouses per commune depends on the volume of meat consumption per day. There were 63 slaughterhouses in the district. On average one slaughterhouse slaughters 4 -5 heads per day and at 70 -100kg/head.The research group worked with two types of retailers in the district, namely retailers in the town market and retailers in the rural markets. The products from slaughtering were divided into three (3) classes with the same price. They are the \"leg meat\" including meat from legs, shoulders and tender loin, the belly meat and other parts including bone (bone and meat) and intestines.The price of leg meat in the town is higher than in rural markets, but the price of belly in the rural markets is usually higher (table 24). Retailers explain that the leg meat was not the same quality for every shop; it depends on whether meat comes from fat or lean pigs. The customers who come to buy pork were mainly women; in rural areas, about 90% and in town about 80% of customers buying pork were women. The types of pork consumers want to buy were not dependent on the gender of the buyers but more on the purpose for which the meat will be used. At the time of coffee harvesting, pork is almost used to feed the labourers, so most customers wanted to buy the belly meat. The share of pork in total meat consumption in the family was estimated by farmer groups to be about 70 -80%, chicken and duck about 15 -20%, and beef is only used in some special cases because it is very expensive. Most of the farmers said they want to eat belly meat because of its good taste and it is cheap. The lean meat is also preferred but it is quite expensive compared to belly meat.The main pork processors in both districts were producing lean pork paste and fluffy dry meat (Pemmican). These processors buy the lean pork from slaughterhouses for processing into pork products. These pork products are found in traditional meals of Vietnamese households and are also often served in parties. There were only a few numbers of processors in the districts, and they are mainly producing in the towns and distributing to the rural markets. The volume produced depends on demand during holiday seasons like TET holiday, wedding season, etc.The local pig is mainly kept in small households by people in ethnic minority groups in the central highlands. The local pigs can be scavenging for feeds quite far from the houses and villages. Traditionally, farmers let their pigs graze to search for feeds in natural conditions. Feed supplied from natural conditions depend on area of \"grazing land\" and available feeds.The natural feeds include vegetation roots, vegetables, and grasses on grazing lands.The main products from local pig production can be classified into two types, namely small pigs called \"MINI pigs\" from 7 -15 kg that are sold during the year and mainly used in restaurants, and mature pigs weighing with 40 -50 kgs that are mainly used for parties or TET holiday celebrations at the end the year.Markets for local pigs were different compared markets for exotic and crossbred pigs. The mini pig can be sold anytime during the year to restaurants that serve specialty dishes, and both mini and mature pig sales are quite high at the end of the year for parties and TET holidays. The potential markets for mini pigs identified by traders were the city markets for special foods.Feeds used for local pigs usually come from household available feeds; farmers only buy some rice bran, maize or cassava when necessary from local markets. Drugs and veterinary services were also available in the areas. There were still no training courses for local pig production in the district.In Ea Kar, there was a survey done by the extension office in early 2013 that showed that about 30% of ethnic minority households are keeping local pigs. On average, herd size ranges from 2 -10 pigs. In the remote areas, the proportion of households keeping pigs was higher than in the areas around the town because they still have opportunity for grazing. In recent years, some Kinh people operated local pig farms on larger scale. Their production scale ranges from 20 to some hundred heads of pigs. The local pig was used as the sows for crossing with wild pigs for making F1 for fattening under commercial production. These pigs are sold mainly to restaurants or to other city markets such as Ho Chi Minh City, Buon Ma Thuot City, etc.Traders There were a few traders who were trading only local pigs, while most of pig traders in Ea Kar also bought some local pigs following the order from customers. The number of pigs traded in this system was not very high.The research team has interviewed one woman who was only trading local pigs from Ea Kar and Krong Buk (neighboring district) to Buon Ma Thuot and outside of Dak Lak. She started trading local pigs since 2007 and started to transport local pigs to Ho Chi Minh City from 2011. The number of pigs sold is quite stable every month, at about 300 kg per month (20 -30 heads). She delivers to Ho Chi Minh City about 200 kg per month. Most of the pigs she sold went to restaurants in Buon Ma Thuot and Ho Chi Minh City and some were sold directly to customers on order. The pigs weighing from 10 -15 kg can be sold every month, but the pigs weighing 30 -40 kg can only be sold during Tet holiday and wedding season.The price she paid for pigs at farm gate was VND 80,000/kg live weight; she sold them to restaurants in Buon Ma Thuot or to people who bring pigs to HCMC at VND110,000/kg live weight. In HCMC the price in restaurants was about VND150,000 -170,000/kg live weight.Transport cost for 1 pig of 10 kg to HCMC was about VND100,000/kg live weight. The gross margin from 1 pig at 10 kg weight is computed as follows (table 25): One pig of 10 kg that she trades to Buon Ma Thuot restaurants generates benefits of around VND250,000; if brought to HCMC, the benefits generated is around VND600,000. If she sells to Buon Ma Thuot 25 heads in one month, she generates benefits of around VND250,000, and if she sells to HCMC 15 heads in a month, she generates benefits of around VND600,000. Total benefits from her trading is about VND 12,250,000 in one month.She commented that she can be expanding her trading business in Ho Chi Minh City by looking for new restaurants to supply, but the supply was limited and it was also difficult to find pigs that meet requirement of the markets with lean meat and body weight of 10 -15 kg.The consumers of local pigs were mainly the customers in the restaurants or party groups.The local pig was often processed from a whole pig to make different dishes that is enough for one party. The pig weighing from 7 -15 kg at 4 to 6 months is the most demanded by customers. The pig is also often used to make the traditional roast pig for weddings. During Tet holiday, the family or group of families often buy a local pig for use during their holiday celebration.The main feeds used in pig production in the district were: Complete concentrate feeds, consisting a mix of different single feeds following a formulation that ensures to supply adequate required nutrients for each type of pigs. Non-complete concentrate feeds, consisting a mix of only some single feeds for supplying important nutrients (such as protein, mineral elements, vitamins) for each type of pigs. The pig keepers usually buy the non-concentrate feeds and mix these with other energy feeds following the direction on the bag to get the complete concentrate feeds. Locally available feeds are the feeds available in the household and village, and can be used in fresh form or in dry from and mixed with concentrate feed or any types of feeds that can be used to feed pigs.The feeding systems differ among the production systems. In the intensive system, the producers keep exotic breeds and use mainly complete concentrate feeds for their pigs. For this system of feeding, the producers mainly rely for their feed supply on feed companies; in some cases, these producers obtain supply of feed in advance and pay back the cost to the company after they have sold their pigs. In semi-intensive systems, farmers mainly use both complete and non-complete concentrate feeds. Many farmers use the complete concentrate feeds only for the piglets after weaning. When the pigs have reached about 30 kg body weight up, they use the non-concentrate feeds mixed with locally available energy feeds for older pigs. This way, the feed cost may be reduced although the quality of feed may not be guaranteed to provide sufficient and appropriate nutrient requirements.Both complete and non-complete concentrate feeds were supplied at every commune by different feed sale agents. This situation was one of very important factors to encourage the development of exotic and crossbred pig production in the areas.In terms of differences between the two systems, in the extensive system where mainly local pigs are produced, the feeds used were largely from locally available feed resources. A study from TNU in 2008 showed that traditionally, farmers let their pigs graze to search for feeds in natural conditions. The local pigs can be scavenging for feeds quite far from the houses and villages. Feeds supplied from natural conditions depend on the area of \"grazing land\" and feeds available. The natural feeds include vegetation roots, vegetables, and grasses on grazing lands. Feed intake of pigs from natural feeds is very important for their nutrition. On average, farmers supply only 1 kg of rice bran or other low protein concentrate (e.g., cassava, maize) and some kg of vegetables for 1 mature sow at 45 kg 8 . Under this feeding system, the production for this type of pig was very low. Under new alternative ways of management, pigs were kept in pens or fence that limits feed scavenging from natural condition to zero or very low. Farmers have to supply feed for their pigs in this new feeding system. The feeds were mainly from local feeds such as rice bran, maize, cassava and vegetables. Farmers have to buy these feeds from local markets. Problems that still persist include not having any feed nutrition standard for local pigs, and the rising cost of production.The breeds used in Ea Kar include: Exotic breed and crossbred such as Landrace, Yorkshire, Duroc, Pietrain, and crosses among these breeds to produce piglets for commercial fattening pigs. These breeds were only used in the intensive industrial systems with high investment to produce lean pigs.The breeding production in this system mainly uses the crossbreeding between exotic pig breeds. The breeding strategy that is mainly used in Ea Kar is described below: Produce the mother pig breed by crossing between the boar of Landrace (L) and the sow of Yorkshire (Y). Using F1 (L x Y) as the mother breed, cross with Pietrain or Duroc boar for producing commercial piglet for fattening.♂L x ♀Y (gran parent breeding stock)This type of piglet is used to produce lean pigs that are then sold to different markets. Crossbred pig (heo lai): almost all the small scale producers in the study areas were using this type of pig. All pig keepers did not know the sources of the pig; they only know the breed was the result of crossbreeding of different pig breeds that have been present in the area for long time. These breeds have relatively longer growing period compared to the pure exotic breed, but they are also easier to keep as farmers can use lower quality, cheap feed types for feeding them. The product from this breed is usually considered a fat pig. Local breed: a breed that has been widely domesticated by indigenous ethnic minority people in the central highlands, called \"heo soc\" with small body size, low growth rate, and high scavenging ability to look for feed in natural conditions. The meat from this breed is highly appreciated by consumers.Local breed of pig was named as \"lon soc\"; the characteristics of this local breed are low growth rate and small body size. Ethnic minority people usually keep the pigs only for self consumption or for villages' party in some special festivals. However, in recent times, the food processing from the piglets of this breed has been highly demanded by consumers in many bigger markets in cities due to the increasing living standards and increased income. Many people organize parties, wedding in restaurants and the mini pig was usually chosen as a special food to serve. This demand for local pigs presents an opportunity for improving pig production through market oriented production.The main constraints identified during the study were: The price of fattened pigs fluctuated during the last 5 years. The main reasons for this observed trend were the weakness of market forecast by producers leading to unpredictability in quantity to supply to meet demand of markets, and also the effects of epidemic diseases on production. These market and production risks prevent producers in both large and small farms to expand their scale because they were afraid of investment losses from the uncertainty. The most vulnerable groups for these types of risks are perceived to be those engaged in small scale pig production. Epidemic diseases, especially Foot and Mouth Disease and Blue Ear disease, were always considered as threats to pig farms (mostly in Ea Kar); the threat was not only from animals dying but importantly they can not sell their pigs for long time during epidemics. The farmers engaged in small scale production in both districts complain that their pig breed (crossbred) were low growing, have low feed conversion ratios, and the products were the fat pigs with low price, while the good piglets from companies or trang trai were very expensive and difficult to keep because of high demand for feed and high investment for labor to manage this type of pig. Both the large and small scale production in two districts recognized that their sows have poor reproduction performance, the sows were only able to deliver good yield from the first to the fourth litter; from then on, the sows stop reproducing or show significant reduction in the number of piglets/litter. The farmers indicated that have no clear idea for the reason behind this observation. Producing piglets themselves for fattening was the best strategy that farmers consider for reducing cost of breeding stock, but farmers still have low knowledge in how to produce high quality piglets. In the trang trai scale, they keep the stock of grandparents and parents breed to produce high quality piglets, but it was expensive and required high technologies. Concentrate feeds have high price, while farmers do not have enough knowledge to make the formulation and mix complete concentrate feed on their own. Price of fat pigs was much lower than price of lean pigs, especially when pigs' price went down, while farmers did not know how to improve their products. Local pig breed is very low in both reproduction and growing rate; there is still no existing interventions or programs or projects to improve the situation of the breed. Inbreeding in local pig production as a factor for reducing the productivity of local breed. The grazing of local pigs in the villages was banned because of environmental issues but if farmers keep it in confined system the issues were lost money because of very low feed conversion ratios and high fat to lean meat ratio of pigs because farmers often use mainly energy feeds for feeding animal and no places for pig to exercise; hence these pigs are so difficult to sell. There were still no researches and guidelines from any organizations to help farmers how to manage this type of pig efficiently. Local breed pork has become a special food for the city people, for parties, with high price paid by consumers but farm gate price received by producers has remained low. Lack of information on local pig markets. Low linkage between stakeholders in the value chain and between producers. Very few research on technologies for local pig production. Both the large and small scale producers recognized the important environment problems (e.g., hygiene, smell). The capacity and skills of veterinary and extension workers at village and commune levels still low.Although the household animal production has lots of weak aspects in terms of disease control and technology application, it is still very important for improving the livelihood of the rural people, especially since pig production is an activity that most households in Vietnamese villages have practiced for years. Pig production has been practiced not only as a source of income but also for improving the nutrition of the poor in rural areas in terms of providing low-cost protein to their diets. The Ministry of Agricultural and Rural Development has proposed a government-initiated program to help the household animal production improve their production efficiency and product safety. The support to researchers for improving pig production in the rural areas is necessary at this time. From the study, the potential opportunities for studying interventions to improve pig production in Dak Lak and Dak Nong are: For breed issues:1. Improve the knowledge and skills of pig keepers, especially for small household farmers on: Pig breeds and their biology and production characteristics, nutrition requirement, and product quality. Pig breeds selection for their farm based on their economic, technology conditions and markets demand. Selection of pigs for breeding including sow and boar. Producing high quality piglets through breed program in their family.2. Study on improving the production capacities of local breed on reproduction and growing rate.3. Building pig breed centre/farm in the areas.  12 and 23.35% in 2013 13 .Animal production accounts for a very low share in total GDP in Dak Nong; it's share was only 5.1% in 2012, but it was still very important for the poor households and in places where the land resources is poor and difficult for cropping. Livestock and fish farming was also known to provide cash income and contribute to improving nutrition through increased consumption of protein by consumers in poor rural areas.Pig production was the most important among all animal production activities in Dak Nong in terms of animal numbers (table 28). Pig production contributes about 80% of total meat produced in the areas. Pig was the main source of animal liveweight production in the district; it accounts for 96% of total live weight of all meats produced from pig, buffalo and cattle production in the area (table 30). Pig production was very unstable in the last 5 years (table 31). According to interviews with pig producers from farmer group discussion and also interviews with authorities in the district, main reasons for observed unstable trend was the price of pigs in these years. Small scale producers were always starting or increase the herd of pigs when prices increase high enough to generate some profits, and stop or reduce the herd when prices go down. Hence, they are exposed to risk of having to invest when prices are high and then having to sell pigs when prices are low, giving them negative returns on their investment.  The calendar of four important crops is shown in the table 33.Coffee production: In Krong No most of land was not suitable for coffee plantation and farmers have to incur high labor cost but generate yields that are still lower than that in other places. Coffee production during the year requires labor at the time of watering and harvesting. Watering season is from January to April and harvesting season from November to December.Maize production: Almost all farmers in group discussions were producing two crops of maize per year, the first crop from May to August, the second from September to January. For the second crop, only a few farmers plant maize and in only a small area because the yield is much dependent on wet season rains which, if not enough, may require water from irrigation. Mainly, maize was sold to feed companies after harvesting, and farmers only leave quantities enough for pig production.Rice production: almost all farmers in the district practice rice production, and mainly paddy rice. Rice production is not only used for the family consumption but it is also sold for cash income and for feeding animals.Cassava production: In some communes, cassava was ranked as an important crop; cassava root was sold for income mainly and only a small portion of produce is stored for pig production. In Krong No, The income of farmers is mainly from four types of crops (table 34). Rice crop: On average the paddy field of rice is 2000m 2 , it ranges from 500 m 2 to 5000m 2 . Rice production is mainly used for the family's consumption and only a small amount is sold for cash income. The time rice is available to sell is usually in March, after harvesting the first crop. Maize crop: There were two crops of maize per year, maize was mainly sold for cash income; only the maize harvested from the first crop was sold in August, the second crop was almost used for feeding animals. Coffee: Coffee production was the main source of income of almost all the households in the group discussion; coffee is generally harvested and sold in November and December. Cassava: Cassava was also an important cash income for farmers but only a small part of households in Num Ndir raise cassava; in some other communes, farmers grow cassava to sell. Pigs: pigs were considered very important for cash income by farmers; farmers were selling pigs at 4 -5 times per year. The income was used for reinvestment in pig production and to pay for consumption expenses by the family. In this study, the gender analysis and decision making was conducted by group discussions in separate groups of men and women. The gender roles in household and social activities were assessed by using activity clock tools. The results of discussions are described in figures 5a-c below: Both men and women work in the field in the morning and afternoon. The men are usually doing land preparation and watering coffee, while the women mainly look after pigs and chicken raised in household farm and plant vegetables. The women generally spend a longer time than men for house work and in looking after children. The children spend almost all their time during the day studying and only spend a small amount of time for helping in household work.In terms of decision making, men and women generally make joint decisions in most of pig production activities, such as starting pig production, buying an animal, selecting breed for pig production and when selling animals (see table 35). The women are involved with most of pig production activities; 100% of women are involved with buying pigs, looking after pigs, buying feed, and selling pigs. On the other hand, only a small proportion of women are involved in accessing credit and participating in training for pig production. None of the women participants have undertaken tasks for treating pig diseases, while about a fourth of men participants have done so.From discussions among pig producers, pig production has two main purposes, namely as a source of family income, and as a source of manure for crop production.The participants classified pig production into two main systems:This system is characterized by presence of household production with 5 -50 heads. In this system, farmers mainly use the \"crossbreeds\", and concentrate feeds combined with other locally available feed. The purpose of pig production in this system was for improving the livelihoods of the household. Based on estimates from farmer groups discussions and interviews with authorities of the district, about 30% of total households in the district belong to this system.Extensive system mainly refers to producers who keep local pigs and wild pigs. For this type of production, pigs usually are free grazing in the village garden or around a fenced area; others also try to keep pigs in pig pens. Feeds for this type of system only come from the household waste from family food and locally available feeds. The main diet of this type of pigs is usually vegetables and forages. In free grazing system, the natural feed that pigs can find for themselves are very important. The indigenous ethnic minority groups are the main producers in this system. The local pigs are traditionally and closely associated with their cultures.The pig value chain map for crossbreed and exotics pigs in Dak Nong are shown in figure 6.  The main producers were farmers in household pig production, accounting for about 30% of total households in the villages keeping pigs. Most of them were in the semi-intensive system.The trader network was quite simple; the traders were also abattoir operators who slaughter pigs in communes, with only some trading pigs from the village to slaughterhouse.The brokers for pig trading was defined as the people supplying information about where the pigs are, who have fattened pigs for sale, when they sell, and in some cases even the prices offered by the traders to farmers. Brokers are paid by traders; the prices paid are almost the same among the traders, at about VND15,000 -VND25,000 per head. This price depends on the availability of pigs; during times when pigs are in short supply, the fees charged per head were usually higher.There were 6 slaughterhouses in Krong No and they are located in 6 communes. There were 4 -5 abattoirs using the slaughterhouses for slaughtering their pigs. The slaughter houses are responsible for providing slaughter facilities, organizing veterinary inspection, etc. On average, one slaughterhouse slaughtered 15 pigs/day; the slaughterhouse operator revealed that during coffee harvesting, the number of pigs slaughtered may increase to 25 pigs/day.The research group worked with two types of retailers in the district, namely retailers in the town market and retailers in the rural markets.The retailers classified pork into three types, with each type being at different prices. These are the first class cuts including leg, shoulder, tender loin meat; the second class cuts including the belly meat; and the third class cuts include the bone and internal organs. The price of meat did not vary much between the district town and rural markets; only a small difference in price between bone and internal organs of pigs was observed. The price in the rural area was higher than the town. The retailers explained that consumption habits between consumers in district town and communes in Krong No did not vary much because the town is small and main customers were the farmers. Only people in remote areas are likely to be more interested to eat the internal organs of pigs. The share of pork in total meat consumption in the family was estimated by farmer groups to be about 70 -80%, chicken and duck about 15 -20%, and beef is only used in some special cases because it is very expensive. Most of farmers said they want to eat belly meat, because of its good taste and it is cheap. The lean meat is also preferred but it is quite expensive compared to belly meat.The main processors in Krong No districts were producing lean pork paste and fluffy dry meat (Pemmican). These processors buy the lean pork from slaughterhouse for processing into pork products. These pork products are found in traditional dishes of Vietnamese cuisine that are often served in parties. There were only a few processors in the districts, and they are mainly producing in the towns and distributing to the rural markets. The volume produced depends on demand during holiday seasons like Tet holiday, wedding season, etc.The local breed value chain in Krong No was similar to that in Ea Kar; the main pig producers were the ethnic minority groups. The customers and consumers were mainly in the districts.Only a small number of pigs were traded through pig traders to the customers in town or restaurants.The main feeds used in pig production in Krong No are similar to that in Ea Kar. They are complete concentrate feeds, non-complete concentrate feeds, and locally available feeds. Farmers only used complete concentrate for the piglets after weaning, while other types of pigs use mainly the non-complete concentrate feed mix with locally available feeds.The local pigs were fed mainly the low nutrient value feeds such as vegetables, grasses, and available energy feeds from household production or bought in the local markets.The breeds used in Krong No include: Crossbred pig (heo lai): all households in the survey used only this type of pig in their farms. Most farmers do not know the breed of their pigs. The growth rate of crossbred pigs is quite good, about 4 to 5 month from date of birth the pig can achieve a body weight of 70 -80 kg/head. Local breed: a breed that has been widely domesticated by indigenous ethnic minority people in the central highlands, called \"heo soc\" with small body size, low growth rate, and high scavenging ability to look for feed in natural conditions; the meat from this breed is highly appreciated by consumers.The main constraints for pig production in Krong No were: Market price fluctuation which creates market risks and exposes farmers to risks of losses in their pig production investments. What usually happens is that farmers would start to expand pig numbers when prices increase, however, with price volatility, prices quickly change, so by the time pigs are ready for sale, prices will have changed, e.g., dropped, resulting in low sale prices for their outputs. The cost of pig production in smallholders was high because the pig breed was poor and poor quality feed results low yield per unit of feeding used. Poor quality of breed because of poor quality of the boars; the district have only 1 breed farm supplying semen for AI and the farm only has 3 boars. The boars have no breed profiles, and the farmers do not know what breeds they have. In each commune only 1 boar is available for direct service so the inbreeding was often happening. Poor reproduction of the sows,  Concentrate feeds have high price, while farmers do not have enough knowledge to make the formulation and mix complete concentrate feed. Local pig breed is very low in both reproduction and growing rate; no interventions or programs or projects exist to improve the situation of the breed. Inbreeding in local pig production as a factor for reducing the productivity of local breed. Local pigs generally achieve good sales at the end the year during Tet holiday celebration; while farmers have to keep them and feed them throughout the year. Very poor linkage between producers and traders in the study areas  Very few research on technologies for local pig production. Air and water pollution from pig production are also identified as the main constraints for pig production. The capacity and skills of veterinary and extension workers at village and commune levels are still low.Potential opportunities for improving the pig production in the areas  For breed issues:1. Set up a breed improvement program for managing/controlling the quality of the boars in order to improve quality of pig breeds in the district.2. Improve capacity of farmers in selecting female pigs for sows.o Study on improving the production capacities of local breed on reproduction and growing rate.o Building pig breed centre/farm in the areas. Feed and feeding systems 1. Improving knowledge and skills of local extension and development workers and pig keepers on animal nutrition, and knowledge and skills for complete concentrate production using locally available feeds for different types of pigs.2. Feeding fattening pigs, breeding pigs in different stages.3. Study of factor affecting to low yield of reproduction of the sow in area, increasing the yield of sows through improving feeding systems.4. Study on feed and feeding systems, pig management of local pig breed to meet the demand of different markets and increase efficiency of production. From the different of site selection criteria were the access to markets, while Ea Kar district was selected as high access to market, Krong No was selected as the low access to market, this is the main reason leading to different of characteristics of pig production in the areas.The key similarities between two pig market value chain were: Pig production was ranked as one of four most important activities for farmers' livelihood; a significant number of householders (30 -40%) in the villages were keeping pig as the key cash income for family. In Ea Kar, the pig production were ranking from 1st -4th and in Krong No from 2nd -4th. This ranking indicates that pig production has an important in the household production, the improving this system will have a significantly for household livelihood of communities. Household pig production contributed the main pig productivity in community, in Ea Kar was about 60%, and in Krong No only household production. Even in Ea Kar, the larger scale pig production has developed with more than 50 \"Trang trai\" and 150 \"Gia trai\" but the number of pig produced in the district still much higher that the large scale. In krong No almost all the pigs produced were from household production. The household pig production in both districts have has similarly problems on pig breed and feeding systems. Most of small householders, who were keeping pig in both districts, don't know clearly what breeds they are keeping; all of them called \"heo lai\" (crossbred pig). The crossbred were kept in both districts has similar problems: the growing rate lower than exotic pigs, feed conversion higher, and most of them were classified as the fat pig when selling. All farmers using non complete concentrate feed mixing with available energy feeds for their pigs both the sow and fattening pigs, most of them don't following the guideline that producing factory direction on the bags of concentrate feed because they want to reduce the cost of feeds. This may be also the causes for result of fat pig. The small household pig production was the most sensitive with the epidemic diseases and fluctuation of pig price. Most of them are the poor or small capital fro production, many householders have to stop pig production after a epidemic disease. The cost production in household pig production were higher compared to in large farm; most of farmers weighting for the price increasing (until VND44,000/kg) to starting the production or expanding the herd, many of them lost the investment if the price going down when the selling pigs. The local pig production, as the traditional activity of ethnic minority groups, is in front of loss from agricultural production, because the change of pig management from free grazing to confining, while the market demand having a sign of potential for development. If keeping pig in pen, farmers have to investment for buying feeds but the growing rate of pig was low and the fat rate in the fattened pig is high because of using higher energy feeds and may the characteristic of the breed. The linkage and cooperation between the producer and producer was poor, there were no farmer groups or cooperatives on pig production formed in both district. The environment issues are the serious consideration of producers and other involvement stakeholders.The key differences between two pig market value chains were: Difference on production systems: in Ea Kar the production was more development; \"Trang trai\" and \"gia trai\" were developing in the last 5 years. The production in these systems was commercial and market orientation, while in Krong no was only existing in household production with small scale. Difference on trading systems: while in Ea Kar, most of pigs produced were sold to other districts and provinces, the pigs produced in Krong No almost consumed in the district.The traders come to buy pig in Ea Kar from different provinces, transport to different markets but in Krong No traders only in the districts. Different in the input and service actors: In Ea Kar were presenting of a large numbers of feed and drug companies to provide feeds and drug and services, in Krong No these system were very few. The linkage among market value chain actors: In Ea Kar, especial in the commercial pig farms, the linkages between the producers and input companies, traders were quite strong, the feed supply for the farm was mainly though the contract and payment after selling pigs. In Krong No these linkages were still very poor.Through the scoping study showed that the area of household pig production, including semi-intensive and extensive production, are still have many issues that constraint for household pig production that should be researching and enhancing knowledge and skills to improve the systems. The question researches are:1) How to improve the efficiency of household pig production? a. Breed issues: What is the technology/breed program that can be improving the production capacity of the pig breed has used in household production, at present?  What other breeds may be suitable to replace the poor production capacity of crossbred has used in the communities? What are the breed factors that effect to the low reproduction of the sow in household production? And how can overcome the issues?b. Feed and feeding issues: What are the local available feeds that can use for pig production? How to sue better of the local available feeds in pig production that can be reducing the feed cost and improving the quality of fattened pigs? What are the nutrition factors that effect to the low reproduction of the sow in household production? And how can overcome the issues? c. Social, economical and market issues  How to improve the market oriented production of household pig producers? Market information and market forecast for pig production? Improve linkage among the actors in the pig value chain? Pig production is having a significant role of livelihood activities and rural development in the rural areas of the Central Highlands of Vietnam. There were about 30% of total household in the rural are keeping and receiving from pig production as the fourth most important income sources. The main problems of pig production for household pig production are: 1) The producer are still low efficiency because of poor technologies on breed selection, feeding system and disease controlling, and access to markets; 2) The most sensitivity with the risk of epidemic diseases and fluctuant markets; and 3) Poor linkage with other stakeholders in the value chain and among the producers; 4) Air and water pollution are also the important constrain for developing household pig production.Local pig production was the traditional production of indigenous ethnic minority which is very extensive and low productivity BUT having potential markets in both rural and urban consumers in many cases: restaurant, party, wedding, festival… as the special foodThe government of Vietnam has asked for different organizations, ministries to comment for making a decision to support the household animal production on March 13rd 14. The the objectives of decision are encourage farmers to develop household animal production by the way increasing productivity, reducing production cost, safety in animal health and human food. The support program includes breed, feed and feeding system, feed production, link farmers with other value chain components, production organization, environment, and sustainability.The result from our scoping study above showed detail of things should be support farmers in those areas in Central Highlands of Vietnam. A R4D project for developing the household pig production in efficiency, sustainability and safety is needed. It is not only for improving the livelihood of famers but contributing for sustainability for crop production, women progress program, environment improvement.A research on understanding of local pig market chain, and improving production capacity of local pig breed, feeds and feeding system, pig management to produce the pig meeting the requirement of market will be high potential to livelihood the poor and ethnic minority in the area.4. When does the household have high and low household expenditure on agricultural activities (not L&F)? 5. When does the household have high and low household expenditure on L&F activities? 6. When does the household have high and low household expenses on other major items? Specify what the major items are.Component C -Gender roles (activity clock)Group participants: Separate groups of men and womenThe objective is to understand specific roles of men, women, boys and girls in the daily activities undertaken by household members at different times of year. Also, it can help to facilitate the discussion on changes in the gender division of labour and how this is relevant to pig production.1. Having described the example, ask the participants to produce their own clock, focussing on the activities of a typical day in this season, building up a picture of all the activities carried out at various times of day and how long they took.Plot each activity on a pie chart (to look like a clock). Activities that are carried out simultaneously, such as child care and gardening can be noted within the same spaces. Review the clock when it is complete. Anywhere where they indicate an activity they conduct for livestock, probe for the different livestock species.Note: Make sure that you get the women's group to focus on their activities and those of girls below 15 (and indicate this separately in two different clocks) and ask the men to focus on their activities and those of the boys below 15 years of age.2. When the clock is completed ask the participants, whether this is the same at other times of the year. If necessary create a second clock for another season. The objective is to identify the areas that men and women make decisions on and the control they have over the income derived from pig production.To buy an animal for fattening? Identify the types of formal and informal groups that are active in the community and whether there are any boundaries for men / women or other sub-groups to belong to and participate in these groups.Discuss the questions listed below and record them on the recording sheet provided.1. Are there any ways in which people collaborate with each other in the village? 2. What kind of groups are these? (formal/ informal, based on production activity / family-ties, geographical location etc.). Are they formally organized? 3. Why do you belong to the group(s)? 4. What are the challenges to the continued activities of these groups? 5. What are the reasons that people would NOT be interested to join a group? (record reasons by gender) To identify the production systems in which the target L&F species are produced and the main purposes for which households keep the target L&F species.Facilitate a discussion around the questions below. Record the responses on the data recording sheet provided.1. What are the three main purposes for keeping L&F? (List purposes for men and women) 2. For these three main purposes, have you been successful in achieving them in the last two years? Separate hand count for men and women for separate lists (include total number present) 3. What are the indicators of success in meeting each purpose? (List indicators for men and women separately) 4. What has made it difficult for you to achieve these purposes? List the constraints and ask participants to identify the two key constraints for each of the purposes for men and women separately. 5. What type of L&F production system do people in the community practice? (For example: Pig: breeding, fattening, other; Dairy: primarily beef, primarily dairy; Small ruminants: occasional sale, fattening for sale; Fish: pond / cage / tank; monoculture / polyculture -integrated / non-integrated). For fish also ask which fish species are kept. 6. From their point of view, what number of L&F would they consider a farmer who is a smallholder, medium-holder and large holder: (record minimum and maximum per category). Adapt to L&F specie. 7. In your community, what proportions of farmers belong to each group? (group exercise giving 100 beans to each group, for them to allocate to the different groups) 8. Have the numbers of people in the community who practice the different systems (and producing each fish species) been increasing or decreasing over the last 5 years? What are the reasons for the increases and decreases? To examine:the composition of the value chain, including the main actors, services, and enablers, the main market channels and their relative importance and requirements, and geographical spread, to visualize linkages and demonstrate interdependencies in the chain the major sources of inputs and services and their accessibility to different types of producers the relative access to and control over the different market channels and services by men and women respectively major constraints in selling products and buying inputs and accessing servicesTape six flipchart pages to the floor to allow sketching of actors and transaction linkages. This is a discussion focused on the place of the producer in the L&F value chain and uses an interactive diagram-based process, which successively:  sketches the actors buying from and selling to producers  identifies and characterizes marketing channels  describes the transactions and relations between buyers, sellers, and others  tests awareness and enthusiasm surrounding potential interventions, including collective action and hub-type arrangements  provides checks/triangulations for research investigations for specific domains (feeds, breeding and animal health)The outputs are a map of the value chain and discussion notes recorded in the recording sheet.Use the following guiding questions for discussion:Market map 1. Ask the participants to draw themselves on the sheet of paper 2. Who was buying their fatted pig? Where they come from? 3. Then, ask them to identify and draw the sales channels (buyers from the producer). Indicate this for each product type separately (include also home processed product types). 4. How many buyers are there in each channel? Indicate this on the map 5. To whom do these buyers sell onwards to? Draw the next product destination(s) 6. Who are the final consumers? Are they in urban or rural places? Draw on the map 7. Identify the channels through which producers buy animals for fattening and/or breeding / purchase fry / fingerlings 8. Identify and draw purchase channels for feed and other inputs (indicate which inputs) 9. Identify and draw credit sources available 10. Discuss whether sales to these channels/locations vary during the year, due to fluctuations in demand or supply 3. Present the list of constraints (see above instructions for compiling the list) to the participants and let them review the list to identify any gaps. 4. Discuss each of the constraints to determine whether they are related to land and water, labour, capital, policy, information and knowledge, or other constraining factors. The purpose of this discussion is to help elaborate each constraint and to get a clear understanding of the factors that cause it. For example, \"shortage of land\" might be related to a lack of capital with which to purchase land, or it might be related to a policy that prevents some people from accessing land. 5. For each solution: a. Was it was it successful? b. If yes, what were the benefits that accrued to men and women, rich and poor, producer and trader etc. c. What were some of the negative consequences for men or women, rich or poor, producer or trader etc.? d. If it was not successful, why not? e. What other solutions do you suggest for overcoming these constraints?  Consumers: Interview participant in producer groups 1. Separate group men and women discuss on what types of animal product that they used in the family: List the types of product use in the families? Sources of products? Ranking in the quantity of use in the family? Estimate percentage of each type of product? 2. In pock use, discuss a. How often they use the pock? b. What type of pock they are most often to use? c. On average how much use per capita per day/month? d. Is the pock use in every day? Or only some special cases? e. When they use more pock? Whay? f. Where they buy the pock? g. Is pock supplying enough for the demand? h. The characteristics of pocks that you selected when buying?"}

main/part_2/0263489480.json

@@ -0,0 +1 @@
+{"metadata":{"gardian_id":"8de18d041f98e38af3cb43e7f372752b","source":"gardian_index","url":"https://repository.cimmyt.org/server/api/core/bitstreams/124f94b1-bc00-4833-ad1d-6d27a7ad20c4/content","id":"159352646"},"keywords":[],"sieverID":"133d662a-6900-4928-819a-3487269f3e8c","content":"The allelic composition at five glutenin loci was assessed by one-dimensional sodium dodecyl sulphate polyacrylamide gel electrophoresis (1D SDS-PAGE) on a set of 155 landraces (from 21 Mediterranean countries) and 18 representative modern varieties. Gluten strength was determined by SDS-sedimentation on samples grown under rainfed conditions during 3 years in north-eastern Spain. One hundred and fourteen alleles/banding patterns were identified (25 at Glu-1 and 89 at Glu-2/Glu-3 loci); 0•85 of them were in landraces at very low frequency and 0•72 were unreported. Genetic diversity index was 0•71 for landraces and 0•38 for modern varieties. All modern varieties exhibited medium to strong gluten type with none of their 13 banding patterns having a significant effect on gluten-strength type. Ten banding patterns significantly affected gluten strength in landraces. Alleles Glu-B1e (band 20), Glu-A3a (band 6), Glu-A3d (bands 6 + 11), Glu-B3a (bands 2 + 4 + 15 + 19) and Glu-B2a (band 12) significantly increased the SDS-value, and their effects were associated with their frequency. Two alleles, Glu-A3b (band 5) and Glu-B2b (null), significantly reduced gluten strength, but only the effect of the latter locus could be associated with its frequency. Only three rare banding patterns affected gluten strength significantly: Glu-B1a (band 7), found in six landraces, had a negative effect, whereas banding patterns 2 + 4 + 14 + 15 + 18 and 2 + 4 + 15 + 18 + 19 at Glu-B3 had a positive effect. Landraces with outstanding gluten strength were more frequent in eastern than in western Mediterranean countries. The geographical pattern displayed from the frequencies of Glu-A1c is discussed.Historically the Mediterranean Basin is the most important area for production of durum wheat (Triticum turgidum L. var. durum), being the most significant durum import market, and the largest consumer of products derived from this cereal grain (Royo et al. 2009). Many traditional Mediterranean foods are manufactured from durum wheat. Pasta is the most common durum end product in southern Europe and North Africa as well as in non-Mediterranean regions such as North America and the former Soviet Union. Durum wheat is extensively consumed as couscous in North Africa and flat bread and bulgur are part of the staple diet in Eastern-Mediterranean countries. Durum wheat is usually cultivated under rainfed conditions in the Mediterranean Basin, which often imposes a number of environmental stresses on the crop. Terminal drought stress, a combination of water scarcity and warm temperatures during the grain-filling period, usually results in yield reductions, but in most cases results in high grain quality.Archaeological evidence shows that the earliest domesticated wheats came from the Near East, in the region known as the Fertile Crescent. Dated to c. 10 000 years before the present time, they spread to the west of the Mediterranean Basin, reaching the Iberian Peninsula c. 7000 years BP (Feldman 2001). This migration process and both natural and human selections resulted in the establishment of local landraces along the Mediterranean Basin that were well adapted to diverse but specific agro-ecological zones. These unimproved landraces, which contain the largest genetic diversity within the species, practically disappeared from farmers' fields as a consequence of the introduction of the more productive and homogeneous semi-dwarf varieties released since the Green Revolution. The extreme homogeneity in cultivar structures typical of modern agriculture caused a dramatic loss of natural variation from the middle of the 20th century in southern Europe and during the 1970s-80s in Northern Africa, which resulted in genetic erosion and possibly an increase in genetic vulnerability of wheat crops. Landraces, mostly conserved in germplasm repositories, can be considered as likely sources of putatively lost variability and may provide new favourable genes/ alleles, which could be introgressed into modern cultivars.Some studies have shown the existence of variability for quality traits in durum wheat landraces (Moragues et al. 2006;Aguiriano et al. 2008), as well as in related tetraploid species (Sissons & Batey 2003). The ability to tap into this diversity depends on the identification of accessions containing genes and alleles demonstrated to be useful in breeding programmes for quality improvement. Gluten strength is one of the main factors influencing durum wheat quality. It is commonly determined by the sodium dodecyl sulphate (SDS)-sedimentation test and depends on the composition of the storage proteins. They are comprised of gliadins (monomeric proteins) and glutenins (polymeric proteins), the major components of gluten with the latter reported to be the most influential on gluten strength. Based on their mobility in sodium dodecyl sulphate polyacrylamide gel electrophoresis (SDS-PAGE), single polypeptides from the glutenin fraction are separated after di-sulphide bond reduction, into high molecular weight-glutenin subunits (HMW-GS) and low molecular weight-glutenin subunits (LMW-GS). The HMW-GS are encoded by the complex at the Glu-1 loci (Glu-A1 and Glu-B1), located on the long arm of group 1 homologous chromosomes (Shewry et al. 1992), whereas the LMW-GS are encoded by genes at Glu-A3, Glu-B3 and Glu-B2 loci located on the short arm of group 1 homologous chromosomes (Vázquez et al. 1996).The allelic polymorphism controlling the HMW-GS and the LMW-GS has been used in diversity studies and cultivar identification. However, the difficulty in scoring alleles of the LMW-GS has limited their use in research (Lerner et al. 2009) and hindered the selection for specific LMW-GS alleles in wheat breeding programmes. Recent improvements in uni-dimensional SDS-PAGE separation protocols implemented at the International Maize and Wheat Improvement Center (CIMMYT) have allowed better discrimination between LMW-GS alleles and have opened up the possibility of using them effectively in diversity studies (Peña et al. 2004).The present study examined the SDS-PAGE glutenin protein banding patterns in a set of 155 Mediterranean durum wheat landraces from 21 countries and a set of 18 representative modern varieties, with the main purpose of determining the diversity of banding patterns related to known allelic variability for HMW-GS and LMW-GS. The relationship between glutenin composition and gluten strength and the possible existence of a geographic structure in the collection, based on both glutenin composition and gluten strength, were also investigated.The study was conducted on a collection of 155 durum wheat landraces and old varieties from 21 Mediterranean countries including the major durum producers/ users (Table 1) and 18 representative modern cultivars. Landraces were selected from a larger collection of 231 accessions, on the basis of their genetic variability determined by 33 simple sequence repeat (SSR) markers, in order to represent the genetic diversity of ancient local durum populations from the Mediterranean Basin (Nazco et al. 2012). The modern set included the following varieties: Amilcar, Ancalei, Arment, Astigi, Boabdil, Bolo, Claudio, Gallareta, Hispasano, Jupare, Meridiano, Ocotillo, Senadur, Simeto, Sula, Svevo, Vitron and Vitronero. Several of them, particularly those from Spain, are derived from CIMMYT and have been released, under different names, as major cultivars also in North Africa and elsewhere around the Mediterranean Basin. The landraces received from the Germplasm Banks in 2005 were bulk purified selecting the dominant type (usually with a frequency above 80% of the bulk) and increased in 2006. Seed used for the field experiments from 2007 to 2009 came from purified bulks grown during each previous year. Grain samples were collected from field trials established under rainfed conditions during 3 years (2007-09) at Gimenells (41°40′N, 0°20′E, 200 m a.s.l.) in the Lleida province (north-eastern Spain). Field experiments consisted of non-replicated entries sown in plots of 6 m 2 comprising 5 m rows, spaced 0•15 m apart, and arranged in a modified augmented design with three replicated controls (cultivars Claudio, Simeto and Vitron). Sowing density was adjusted to 250 viable seeds/m 2 and plots were kept free of weeds and diseases according to standard cultural practices. A sample of grain, mechanically harvested at full maturity, was drawn randomly from each plot, cleaned and used for gluten-strength determination. Data of other quality attributes determined on grain samples from the same experiments used in this investigation may be found in Nazco et al. (2012).Electrophoresis was run on a bulk of ten seeds from a purified head-row of the dominant type. The procedure was as follows: a spike of the dominant type was selected from the population and its grains were sown in a single row that was harvested at ripening and ten seeds were bulked for electrophoresis.Electrophoretic analysis (1D SDS-PAGE) was conducted according to the protocols implemented at CIMMYT by Peña et al. (2004), following the nomenclature of Nieto-Taladriz et al. (1997) and Martinez et al. (2004), to identify high-and low molecular weight glutenin subunit compositions at five loci (Glu-A1, Glu-B1, Glu-A3, Glu-B3 and Glu-B2). The banding patterns/alleles with a frequency below 0•05 were classified as rare.Gluten-strength was determined for each experimental field plot on a sample of 1 g of whole wheat flour using the SDS-sedimentation test of Axford et al. (1978), as modified by Peña et al. (1990).The SDS-sedimentation data were fitted to a linear mixed model with the control cultivars as fixed effects, and row number, column number and genotype as random effects (Littell et al. 1996). Restricted maximum likelihood (REML) was used to estimate the variance components and to produce the best linear unbiased predictors (BLUPs) for data from each cultivar/year combination. The calculations were done through the MIXED procedure of the SAS-STAT statistical package, which was used for all the analyses. A standard analysis of variance (ANOVA) was conducted with the BLUPs of gluten-strength data using the genotype × year interaction as an error term. Genotypes were classified according to the mean value of SDS-sedimentation across experiments as outstanding (SDS 5 11), very high (10 < SDS < 11), high (9 4 SDS 4 10), medium (7 4 SDS < 9) and low (SDS < 7) gluten-strength groups and the genotype effect was partitioned in the ANOVA according to this classification. Means were compared by the Student-Newman-Keuls (SNK) test at P = 0•05. The FREQ procedure of the SAS-STAT statistical package (SAS 2011) was used to conduct a 2 × 5 Fisher's exact test on each significant allele/banding pattern, to determine whether there were any significant differences between the gluten-strength groups with regard to banding pattern frequency. Genetic diversity was calculated with the D index, according to the following:where p is the frequency of the i th allele at locus j th . The allelic effect on gluten strength was computed as the difference between the mean SDS-sedimentation values across years of genotypes carrying or notcarrying a given allele/banding pattern. The allelic frequency of the allele Glu-A1c (null) for each country was used to conduct hierarchical cluster analyses by the Ward method of the JMP V.8 software (SAS 2009).One hundred and fourteen banding patterns, potentially Glu-1/Glu-3 allele-specific, were identified by SDS-PAGE (bottom part of Table 1), 97 of which appeared only in the landraces and with frequencies below 0•05, thus being considered herein as rare patterns/alleles. All the patterns detected in modern cultivars, which are considered allele-specific according to the Glu-1/Glu-2/Glu-3 nomenclature used, were also present in the landraces. For the two loci encoding for HMW-GS, 25 alleles/banding patterns were identified in landraces and only five of them were detected in the modern varieties. For the three loci encoding the LMW-GS the difference in variability was even higher between the two groups, with landraces exhibiting some 89 potentially allele-specific banding patterns and only eight of them preserved in the modern cultivars. Glu-B3, encoding for LMW-GS, was the locus showing the largest number of patterns in landraces, while Glu-B1 (HMW-GS) was the most variable locus in the modern cultivars (bottom part of Table 1). The allelic/banding pattern frequencies at each presumed locus are shown in Table 2. Only 25•4% of the banding patterns detected have been previously described. The most frequent allele in the collection was the null allele at Glu-A1, and was monomorphic in modern cultivars. A banding pattern tentatively designated as 2** (Branlard et al. 1989) was detected in the area corresponding to the size of the subunits expected at this locus. At the Glu-B1 locus, the second one coding for HMW-GS, modern cultivars exhibited the three most frequent banding patterns known to be present in germplasm groups worldwide, namely, 7 + 8, 6 + 8 and 20 (Branlard et al. 1989;Aguiriano et al. 2008), while as many as 20 banding patterns could be distinguished in the landrace group in the mobility area corresponding to these HMW-GS. Subunit 20 was the most common in the landraces, whereas 7 + 8 was the most common in modern varieties (Table 2). At Glu-A3, of the 15 patterns identified overall, the most frequent was allele Glu-A3a (band 6). The second most prevalent allele in the modern varieties was Glu-A3d (bands 6 + 11), and the null allele in the landraces, the latter being absent in modern cultivars. The two alleles reported and described elsewhere (Nieto-Taladriz et al. 1997;Carrillo et al. 2000) at Glu-B2 (Glu-B2b or null and Glu-B2a or band 12) were observed at higher frequencies in both sets of germplasm, with the null allele being the most frequent in the landraces, whereas Glu-B2a was found at twice the frequency of the alternative allele in modern varieties. At the most variable locus overall, Glu-B3, 72 banding pattern/putative alleles were found in landraces but only three of them were present in modern varieties and 55 of them were recorded only in a single landrace (Table 2). The most frequent banding pattern at this locus was 2 + 4 + 15 + 19 (Glu-B3a). Other patterns with relatively high frequency in the landraces were 2 + 4 + 15 + 18 and 14 + 17, and 4 + 15 + 19 in modern varieties (Table 2). The allele 3 + 15 + 19 was found only in the modern French cultivar Arment.The overall genetic diversity index (D) for landraces was 0•71, substantially higher than the same index for modern varieties (0•38) (Table 3). It was highest in landraces from Spain (0•68), Portugal (0•67), Egypt (0•62) and Croatia (0•61), and lowest in accessions from Algeria and Bulgaria (0•30), Turkey (0•33), France (0•34) and Tunisia (0•35) (Table 3). For the HMW-G subunits locus Glu-A1, the highest diversity indices were observed in landraces from Egypt, Portugal and Spain, while landraces from Portugal, Spain, Algeria, Cyprus and Greece had the highest diversity indices for Glu-B1. The largest diversity was found in landraces from Spain, Portugal, Macedonia and Croatia at Glu-A3, from Spain, Egypt, Macedonia and Lebanon at Glu-B3 and from Lebanon, Croatia, Tunisia and Jordan for Glu-B2 (Table 3).The ANOVA for gluten strength showed that both year and genotype effect were statistically significant (P < 0•001), accounting for 9 and 73%, respectively, of the total variation (Table 4) (see also Nazco et al. ). The partitioning of the genotype effect into its individual components revealed that differences between groups of accessions, based on their SDS-sedimentation values, accounted for 91•5% of the genotypic variability, which corresponded to 67% of the total variation, while differences within each sedimentation group were not statistically significant (Table 4). The effect on gluten strength of each allele/banding pattern was computed separately for landraces and modern varieties, as the difference between the mean SDS-sedimentation test value of the accessions carrying and not carrying the allele/pattern (Table 5). Allelic/banding pattern effect was not significant among the modern cultivars group, with all members showing high to outstanding SDS-values. On the other hand, significant main effects of some alleles/banding patterns were detected within the landraces. At the HMW-GS loci, the only allele with a significant effect was Glu-B1e (band 20). Four alleles/banding patterns at LMW-GS loci increased significantly the gluten strength of landraces (Table 5). Only three among the rare banding patterns found in the landraces had a significant effect on gluten strength (data not shown). One of them was putative allele 7 at Glu-B1, present in six landraces (three Montenegrin, one Croatian and Table 3. Genetic diversity indices calculated for five glutenin loci for 155 landraces and 18 representative modern varieties and for the landraces per country of origin The frequency of alleles/banding patterns significantly affecting gluten strength was calculated for each of the gluten-strength groups considered in the ANOVA. The rare allele Glu-B1a (band 7) was not present in any of the 50 landraces with stronger gluten (SDS 5 9 ml), but it was detected in 2•8% of the 71 landraces with medium gluten strength, and in 11•8% of the 34 landraces with low gluten strength (Table 6). For the landraces, allele Glu-B1e (band 20) was present with a high frequency in the five glutenstrength groups, particularly in c. 60% of the genotypes with high and very high gluten strength. It was also detected in modern varieties, but with lower frequencies and not in the outstanding gluten-strength group (Table 6). Band 5 (Glu-A3b) at locus Glu-A3 was absent in landraces with SDS-values >10, but its frequency increased in landraces as gluten strength decreased. In contrast, bands 6 (Glu-A3a) and 6 + 11 (Glu-A3d ) at Glu-A3 and 2 + 4 + 15 + 19 (Glu-B3a) at Glu-B3 were detected in higher frequencies in accessions with SDS-values 59, both in landraces and modern varieties. The rare patterns 2 + 4 + 14 + 15 + 18 and 2 + 4 + 15 + 18 + 19 were only present in the landraces with the highest SDS-values (Table 6). Alleles at Glu-B2 were uniformly distributed among all the gluten-strength groups for the landraces, but they were only present in modern varieties with SDS-values 59. Band 12 (Glu-B2a) was present in more than 50% of genotypes with SDS-values 59, while the alternative null (Glu-B2b) allele was highly frequent in landraces with medium and low SDS-values. The results of the Fisher's exact test revealed that, except for Glu-B1a (band 7) and Glu-A3b (band 5), differences between gluten-strength groups were associated with banding pattern frequencies (Table 6). When this test was conducted for landraces and modern varieties separately, no significant association appeared for modern varieties, while for the landraces the significant relationships coincided with the ones shown in Table 6 for the whole set of cultivars.Only eight genotypes in the whole collection, five landraces and three modern varieties, had SDS-values 511. None of them carried the alleles/banding patterns associated with negative main effects such as band 5 (GluA-3b) at Glu-A3 or the rare allele 7 at Glu-B1. However, alleles/patterns found to significantly increase gluten strength were detected in all Table 5. Effect of known allelic/banding patterns and their effect on SDS-sedimentation volume (ml) in the collection of 155 landraces and 18 modern cultivars    of them. This was the case for band 6 (Glu-A3a) at Glu-A3 and band 12 (Glu-B2a) at Glu-B2, which were present in three of the five landraces and in the three modern varieties with the highest SDS-values, and the pattern 2 + 4 + 15 + 19 (Glu-B3a) at Glu-B3, which was also carried by the three modern varieties and one of the landraces with outstanding gluten strength.The overall genetic diversity was much higher in landraces than in modern varieties, as noted previously. This tendency was also observed when considering diversity within the different gluten-strength groups (bottom part of Table 6). Modern varieties with SDS-sedimentation values 511 were essentially monomorphic at Glu-A3, Glu-B3 and Glu-B2, all exhibiting the Glu-B3 pattern commonly known as LMW-2 type (Pogna et al. 1988), which is associated with strong gluten type and high pasta-cooking quality (Pogna et al. 1988;Peña & Pfeiffer 2005). Modern varieties with high and very high gluten strength had intermediate-to-low diversity index values for all loci. The diversity indices for the five SDS-sedimentation groups of the landraces ranged from 0•58 to 0•71.The geographic distribution of the five glutenstrength groups along the Mediterranean Basin is shown in Fig. 1. The highest percentages of accessions with strong to very strong gluten were found in Cyprus, Syria and Turkey, whereas 100% of the accessions from Jordan, Israel, Bulgaria, Serbia, Montenegro and Greece had medium to low gluten strength. All accessions from Algeria, Tunisia and Libya had SDS-values that were in the intermediate classes, with none belonging to either outstanding or low SDS-values groups. All the western Mediterranean countries had a high percentage of accessions with medium gluten-strength and, with the exception of France, none of the western Mediterranean accessions had SDS-values 511.The clustering of countries based on the frequencies of all known alleles/banding patterns did not result in a clear geographical pattern except for the null allele (Glu-A1c) at Glu-A1, the most frequent in the present collection. Figure 2 shows that the allelic frequencies for the null allele clusters countries with high (75-100%, branch A) and low (0-60%, branch B) frequencies of this allele. Branch C clustered modern varieties and countries in which all the accessions were monomorphic for this locus, while branch D grouped countries in which this allele was present in very high frequency (75-92%). In the lower part of Fig. 2, branch E grouped countries with low to medium frequencies (27-60%), while Croatia, Macedonia and  Montenegro, with accessions lacking this allele, were clustered in branch F.Although the number of modern cultivars included for comparison in the present study was lower than that of landraces, it can be considered as reliably representative of the current modern Mediterranean germplasm in terms of its variability for glutenin loci, in particular for Glu-A1, Glu-B1 and Glu-B3. Because the genotypes are not only the major cultivars in the northern-Mediterranean countries where they were released, but also several are extensively grown under different names in North Africa and elsewhere, alleles or banding patterns that would be present in the overall modern Mediterranean germplasm are highly likely to be represented within the group of 18 cultivars included in this study. One exception is the LMW-1 pattern associated with low gluten strength, which was eliminated from most modern European varieties, but remains in some widely grown North-African cultivars.All others alleles present in the set of 18 modern cultivars were the overwhelmingly predominant ones identified in large collections of durum wheat by In this context, the present collection of 155 landraces clearly showed much more variability in glutenin composition than modern varieties with only 13 of the 114 alleles/banding patterns identified in the landraces being also present in modern varieties. This indicates an overall loss of 88•6% in allelic variability going from landraces to modern cultivars. Eighty-five per cent of the alleles/banding patterns identified in the landraces had a frequency lower than 5%, therefore considered as rare forms, and 84•5% of them had not been described previously. This clearly confirms that local/native durum germplasm resources from the region indeed represent a rich reservoir of untapped diversity for glutenin composition and could be used towards widening the variability within modern germplasm, should some alleles or banding patterns prove to be useful for enhancing/diversifying gluten characteristics.The largest diversity for HMW-GS was found at the Glu-B1 locus, both in landraces and modern varieties. However, at the Glu-A1 locus, modern cultivars were monomorphic, all exhibiting the null allele, whereas four alternative, non-null alleles were expressed in close to 40% of the landraces. The null allele has been found in very high frequencies in other durum collections (Branlard et al. 1989), and practically fixed in modern germplasm worldwide. The same order in allelic frequencies at Glu-A1, namely null >1 > 2*, has been reported previously in durum wheat (Kaan et al. 1993;Moragues et al. 2006;Aguiriano et al. 2008).The genetic variability found at Glu-B1 in the present study was much greater than that reported by previous studies conducted with Mediterranean landraces (Moragues et al. 2006) or with durum world collections (Kaan et al. 1993). The four banding patterns identified at the Glu-B1 locus in modern varieties represented only 77•4% of the allelic frequency in the landraces group, in which 16 additional rare banding patterns were detected. However, the most frequent banding pattern in the landraces (HMWGS-20) did not coincide with that prevalent in modern varieties (HMWGS-7 + 8). Previous studies have reported a wide presence of band 20 in landraces from North Africa and South West Asia (Moragues et al. 2006). The high frequency of the 7 + 8 banding pattern in modern varieties may have resulted from selection in breeding programmes, since it has been widely associated with strong gluten and therefore good pasta-making quality (Du Cros 1987;Sissons et al. 2005), although its positive effect could not be evidenced in the present set of genotypes. The rare band 7 at Glu-B1 locus had been previously detected at very low frequencies in landraces from the Iberian Peninsula and South West Asia (Moragues et al. 2006).The variability detected for LMW-GS was even wider than the one characterizing HMW-GS as found in other studies (Du Cros 1987;Brites & Carrillo 2001;Sissons et al. 2005). Additionally, the number of banding patterns identified at LMW-GS loci in the present collection was much higher than that reported in previous studies, confirming the wide genetic diversity of the germplasm used in the present study, especially for the Glu-B3 locus. Nine of the 15 banding patterns detected at Glu-A3 locus were rare. The most frequent banding pattern at this locus, either in landraces and modern varieties, was Glu-A3a (band 6), in agreement with the results obtained by Nieto-Taladriz et al. (1997), Carrillo et al. (2000) and Moragues et al. (2006). The 2 + 4 + 15 + 19 banding pattern (Glu-B3a allele) at Glu-B3 was the most prevalent in landraces as well as in modern varieties, in accordance with the results obtained by Nieto-Taladriz et al. (1997), Carrillo et al. (2000) and Moragues et al. (2006).There was no clear sub-regional or geographic trend in the distribution of diversity within the set of landraces studied. Among the most diverse landrace groups were those of the Iberian Peninsula. It is worth noting that in spite of the Spanish landraces being about three times more represented than the Portuguese, the genetic diversity indices of both countries were similar, and also similar to that previously reported by Moragues et al. (2006) who found an index of 0•62 in a set of 25 landraces from the Iberian Peninsula. The lowest genetic diversity indices were found for the Algerian, Tunisian, Bulgarian, French and Turkish sub-groups. This is in agreement with the results reported by Hamdi et al. (2010) in a study with 856 accessions of Algerian durum wheat, and by Moragues et al. (2006) which reported little diversity in Turkish and Bulgarian landraces. As suggested by Ganeva et al. (2010), this could be attributed either to agro-ecological factors or to the efficient and consistent selection done by farmers through time, with the aim of improving the uniformity and yield of local populations.The clustering based on the frequency of the null allele at Glu-A1, the most frequent either in modern varieties and landraces, displayed a clear geographical pattern. A very high frequency of this allele was detected in the modern varieties and in landraces from the Middle East and North African countries, France and Italy. With the exception of Egypt, in which this allele was found at a medium frequency, this geographic distribution is consistent with the dispersal route of durum wheat from the Fertile Crescent to North Africa through the south side of the Mediterranean Basin, as suggested by Moragues et al. (2007). The close relationships between France and its former colonies in North Africa (Morocco, Algeria and Tunisia) would explain the French landraces being clustered in this group. Moreover, the inclusion of Italian germplasm in this cluster may be a consequence of the extensive use of North African landraces by Italian scientists and breeders during the first half of the 20th century (Di Fonzo et al. 2005). In contrast, all Balkan countries, as well as the Iberian Peninsula countries, Turkey and Egypt were clustered in a branch associated with a low frequency of the null allele at Glu-A1 that is consistent with a northern dispersal through the Mediterranean Basin.The ANOVA for gluten strength showed that the component of variation due to genotype was more than eight times greater than the component due to the year effect, suggesting that this trait in durum wheat is largely under genetic control. The classification of genotypes in five groups according to their gluten strength determined by the SDS-sedimentation test was appropriate, as demonstrated by the large amount of the total variance explained by differences between groups (91•5%) and the lack of significant differences in gluten-strength values within groups.None of the Glu-A1 alleles had a significant main effect on gluten strength, as determined by the SDS-sedimentation test, which is in line with the findings of Du Cros (1987), and different to the findings of other authors who found a positive relationship between Glu-A1 alleles and gluten strength when dough rheological parameters were considered (Ciaffi et al. 1995;Brites & Carrillo 2001). Also, increases in gluten and dough strength have been achieved in durum wheat by transferring HMW-GS coded by Glu-A1 from Triticum dicoccoides (Ciaffi et al. 1995). In bread wheat the alleles Glu-A1a (1) and Glu-A1b (2*) have been shown to improve dough quality and strength compared to the Glu-A1c (null) allele (He et al. 2005). However, the Glu-A1 subunits in bread wheat interact with a relatively different set of additional HMW-GS and a drastically different set of LMW-GS than those present in durum wheat, which may explain the difference in importance of this locus between the two species. It is also important to note that the SDS-sedimentation test is an indirect measure of gluten strength, based on the extent of aggregation/ precipitation of the gluten polymer, not a direct physical measurement of viscoelastic properties of the gluten complex or dough. Further studies using dough rheology parameters may be needed to definitively determine actual strength differences associated with allelic variations at Glu-A1 in the group of landraces evaluated.The present results showed that at Glu-B1, only banding pattern 20 had a significant main effect on the gluten strength of the landraces, while its effect in modern varieties was negligible. Previous studies addressing the effect of banding pattern 20 at Glu-B1 have reported contrasting results, ranging from a reduction of gluten strength (Peña et al. 1994;Ammar et al. 2000;Brites & Carrillo 2001;Sissons et al. 2005) to a positive effect on bread volume, a trait highly and positively correlated with gluten strength (Boggini & Pogna 1989), to no significant effects (Vázquez et al. 1996). Again, these divergent results may be due to interactions among HMW-GS and LMW-GS in the formation of the gluten complex, and therefore main effects of a given allele depend on the overall glutenin combination in which it is present. This may be the case particularly for durum wheat in which LMW-GS effect dominates over the effect of the HMW-GS, making any HMW-GS main effect highly dependent on LMW-GS background (Peña & Pfeiffer 2005). In the present study, the presence of subunit 7 at Glu-B1 had the most detrimental effect on gluten strength, but differences between gluten-strength groups were not significantly associated to its frequency, probably due to its low occurrence in the present population.Two of the three alleles found at Glu-A3 in modern varieties had a significant and positive effect on the gluten strength in the landraces. The main effect of Glu-A3a on gluten strength was not significant in modern varieties, possibly because alleles from other loci with stronger main effects were present and did not allow the detection of the individual effect of Glu-A3a. Previous studies have related durum quality with the presence of Glu-A3a (Nieto-Taladriz et al. 1997;Carrillo et al. 2000). Allele Glu-A3d was more frequent in modern varieties than in landraces, and it had the largest positive effect on the SDS-values of landraces, but its effect in modern varieties was not significant, probably due to additive or complementary effects of individual Glu-1/Glu2/Glu3 alleles. However, allele Glu-A3b (band 5) absent in modern varieties and present in 13 landraces had the worst effect on gluten strength, in agreement with the findings of Carrillo et al. (2000). The data from the present study could not determine whether differences between gluten strength groups were associated with the frequency of this allele within each group.The Glu-B3a allele had a positive effect on gluten strength in the landraces, while its effect on modern varieties was negligible. The relationship between good quality and the presence of Glu-B3a has been observed by other authors (Nieto-Taladriz et al. 1997;Carrillo et al. 2000).Two rare banding patterns at Glu-B3 increased significantly the gluten strength in the landraces, 2 + 4 + 14 + 15 + 18 and 2 + 4 + 15 + 18 + 19. The first one was present in only one landrace (PI-366109 from Egypt), which SDS-value was 3•44 ml higher than the mean SDS-value of the whole population of landraces. A previous study (Nazco et al. 2012) identified this landrace as having the highest EU quality index, due mostly to its very high gluten strength and protein content. Thus, it could be considered as a valuable gluten-strength enhancer in durum breeding programmes. The banding pattern 2 + 4 + 15 + 18 + 19 was detected in two landraces: Trigo Glutinoso and Lobeiro de Grao Escuro from France and Portugal, respectively, and its effect on SDS-value was estimated at 2•96 ml, greater than the main effect of any known allele evaluated in the present study. Both landraces have a high EU quality index (Nazco et al. 2012), and the high quality of their protein, associated with the presence of the banding pattern 2 + 4 + 15 + 18 + 19 at Glu-B3, supports their use as parents in breeding programmes.The two alleles detected at Glu-B2 locus had significant and opposite effects on the landraces gluten strength; Glu-B2a was found to exert a positive, but moderate effect on gluten strength. It was more frequent in modern varieties than in landraces, the opposite being true for the null allele Glu-B2b. Very few studies have been conducted on the relationship between Glu-B2 alleles and gluten strength, and generally the presence or absence of Glu-B2a did not result in any significant difference in gluten strength (Martinez et al. 2004). This was the case of the set of modern varieties used in the present study, in which the variation at this locus was not large enough to be statistically significant. However, the results obtained in the landraces, with much wider genetic background, generally weaker gluten overall and more opportunities to measure moderate effects, indicate that these alleles caused moderate and opposite effects on gluten strength.The country-specific classification of the frequencies within the five gluten strength-groups offered a picture of the 'native' or 'pre-green revolution' gluten quality distribution around the Mediterranean Basin. Although a clear pattern was not evident, four of the five landraces with outstanding gluten strength, and seven of the 14 landraces with very high gluten strength came from eastern Mediterranean countries (Syria, Turkey, Cyprus and Egypt), providing an indication that the best gluten quality may have been concentrated originally in the Fertile Crescent, where tetraploid wheat originated (Feldman 2001). The Balkan Peninsula was characterized by a large number of landraces with poor gluten strength, probably associated to a different geographic origin (Nazco et al. 2012). Western Mediterranean countries showed a wide diversity of gluten types, possibly due in part to their broad representation in the collection, but members with outstanding gluten strength were lacking in this sub-region. These results suggest that during the dispersal of wheat from the east to the west of the Mediterranean Basin, the alleles conferring outstanding gluten strength were probably not linked to any variability resulting in increased fitness or adaptation to the new environments and not associated with any local preference.Mediterranean landraces retain a wide genetic diversity for glutenin composition that has been mostly lost in modern varieties. They are a natural reservoir of alleles potentially useful to enhance and diversify gluten characteristics in durum wheat breeding programmes. Landraces from the Iberian Peninsula and Egypt were among the most diverse. The null allele was fixed at the Glu-A1 locus in the modern varieties studied, while four alternative banding patterns were recognized in the landraces. Only four of the 20 banding patterns identified in the landraces at the Glu-B1 locus were present in modern varieties. The present study confirms previous findings that the variability detected in durum wheat landraces for LMW-GS was wider than for HMW-GS, especially for the Glu-B3 locus. Only eight of the 89 banding patterns found in the landraces at Glu-2/Glu3 loci appeared in modern varieties. The clustering of the countries based on the frequency of the null allele at Glu-A1 was consistent with the proposed routes of durum wheat dispersal from the Fertile Crescent through the West of the Mediterranean Basin.The medium-to-high values of gluten strength found in modern varieties reflects the efforts made by breeding programmes to improve grain quality. The low variation for gluten strength in modern varieties when compared with landraces could probably explain the lack of significant relationships between the 13 banding patterns identified in this group and gluten strength. Significant increases in the SDS-values of the landraces resulted from the presence of alleles Glu-B1e (band 20), Glu-A3a (band 6), Glu-A3d (bands 6 + 11), Glu-B3a (bands 2 + 4 + 15 + 19) and Glu-B2a (band 12) and the two hitherto unpublished banding patterns: 2 + 4 + 14 + 15 + 18 and 2 + 4 + 15 + 18 + 19 at Glu-B3 locus. However, landraces carrying the Glu-B2b (null allele), Glu-A3b (band 5) and the rare allele Glu-B1a (band 7) showed lower gluten-strength values, but only for Glu-B2b (null allele) could differences between the gluten-strength groups considered in the present study be associated with the allelic frequency.Geographic distribution of gluten strength suggests that the best gluten quality probably originated in the Fertile Crescent and that, during the dispersal of wheat from the east to the west of the Mediterranean Basin, the alleles conferring outstanding gluten strength were frequently lost, likely due to their lack of association with other desirable traits such as yield or local adaptation."}

main/part_2/0278301594.json

@@ -0,0 +1 @@
+{"metadata":{"gardian_id":"1be4b428768f720c975ed0c55e769037","source":"gardian_index","url":"https://cgspace.cgiar.org/rest/bitstreams/c0902771-2581-493b-83e4-28c5ae428e07/retrieve","id":"1272658336"},"keywords":[],"sieverID":"ffaa5925-8f80-490e-b8f8-92ad38657645","content":"Table of Contents Background .Agriculture is the economic mainstay of Kenya and it contributes approximately 25% of the GDP, employing 75% of the national labour force (Republic of Kenya 2005). Research indicates that over 80% of the Kenyan population derive their livelihoods directly/indirectly from agriculture (FAO 2006, KIPPRA 2013). While Kenyans depend on agriculture not just for their livelihood, but also for their nutritional needs; agricultural productivity is said to be stagnating even as the population is increasing. This has posed challenges to food security in a country where two to four million people receive food aid annually 1 ; statistics from the Food and Agriculture Organization, put this figure at 1.6million (FAO 2010). Much of the problem of food production in sub-Saharan African and in Kenya specifically, is as a result of soil-fertility depletion in smallholder farms (Sanchez 2002, Graffenried 2006, Kamau et al 2013). This depletion is attributable to multiple factors, and those that have been identified in different studies include: cultivation without adequate replenishment of plant nutrients in soil, and lack of access to sufficient quantities of quality inputs, compounded by the adverse effects of climate change and variability (Graffenried 2006, KIPPRA 2014).To address the challenge of food security, various initiatives have been launched to improve soil health. To this end the government of Kenya through the Ministry of Agriculture, along with various stakeholders have initiated some processes which include: use of organic manure in combination with inorganic fertilizers (AGRA soil health programmes), Crop Diversificationmixed/inter cropping, Promotion of water & soil management measures, Water harvesting & supplementary irrigation, Green house farming, ISFM Programmes (KALRO, MoA, Tropical Soil, Biology and Fertility Institute (TSBF), Contour and Conservation Agriculture farming Agroforestry (VI-AFP and ICRAF) in Western Kenya. It is notable that despite these efforts, poor soil health still remains a challenge much more needs to be done.The purpose of this paper is to provide research and analysis that will support rollout and implementation of large-scale soil rehabilitation efforts within German bilateral programs. To this end, this paper focusses on the institutional context that soils research and investment takes place. The paper posits that farmers have significant and often sophisticated knowledge regarding soil quality in their own fields but lack access to the means to improve their soils.Consequently, they are constrained from applying new knowledge and techniques by: cost, a distrust of the promoted products, or the perception that ultimately these products will not help their soils. Accordingly, there are significant institutional challenges surrounding access to knowledge and inputs, but also delivery of quality products.The paper's methodological approach combines a qualitative analysis of the policy context as well as, grey literature, online articles sourced through Google Scholar, and Google web-based search engines. The references covered journal papers, academic and non-academic reports, government documents, donor reports, contents of web pages, policy documents and strategy papers. Data collection also included semi-structured interviews where face-to-face interviews were held with technocrats in the ministries, parastatals and institutions. The expected outcomes from these interviews are: an understanding of policy and law issues on soils, as well as, finding existing opportunities and weaknesses in the policy environment. Institutional studies were carried out in Nairobi district and these included: government ministries, non-governmental organizations, universities, and private firms dealing with soil health.There has been some effort to address soil health by the Ministry of Agriculture and this has been mainly through donor funded programs. However, as noted from the interviews, donor funded initiatives are limited because, the program visions are not owned by the government rendering them unsustainable. Key informants revealed that the initiatives driven by donors were abandoned once donors withdrew funding. The reasons given for lack of follow through were varied, but the predominant one was lack of budgets.The mode of funding notwithstanding, soil health interventions mainly take place through promotion of programs targeting soil erosion, promotion of agroforestry, and riverbank protection. Apart from donor initiated programs, other attempts to address soil health issues are demonstrable at the policy level. These have mainly been through: The Agriculture policy, For example, the Draft Bill on Fertilizers & Soil Conditioners is envisaged to form the main reference point for regulation of importation, exportation, manufacture and sale of fertilizers and soil conditioners. (The specific policies and their institutional context are discussed in a separate section in the paper.) In general, the policy formulation approach is multi-sectoral, and mostly centralized, with devolved structures provided for local implementation only. More recently, there has been devolution of responsibilities to the counties as part of the implementation process of county governance beginning 2013. This has specific transitional challenges since it is a radical shift away from the centralized structure that was in place previously. Indeed key informants revealed some of these challenges in as far as dissemination of extension services is concerned, as well as, planning and financing of specific county initiatives.Overall, it can be argued that the approaches to address the soil health problem have been marginally effective especially at the policy formulation/implementation level and at the institutional level. This could be for varied reasons, but literature highlights the fact that there has been little inclusion of soil management in the Legal and policy framework in Kenya (see Achieng et al 2011). To this end, Achieng rightly argues that where policies have been in place, the same have been fragmented and not coordinated across sectors with similar mandates.Moreover, there is no routine policy analysis cycle in Kenya, nor is there a local core of experts available to undertake policy formulation and analysis (Yatich et al 2007). This problem has been compounded by transitional challenges from central government to county government, as there are teething problems and a disconnection between the two bodies. More than these reasons, there is poor use of information in the policy documents by planners (in the government) and quality data still remains a constraint since the national databases are few with little data to support the policy formulation process (ibid).Besides policies, the institutions that support soils also remain central in soil health, because they are the bodies that disseminate knowledge to farmers and are also important because of the dual function in bridging blocked channels between scientists and farmers (Anderson 2008). It is true that the institutions themselves make little sense without the people that create and disseminate soil specific knowledge. The problem with institutions in the context of soil in Kenya, is that they are hardly effective since there is minimal interaction between extension officers, scientists and farmers. Effective teaching and successful extension delivery of soil fertility management practices lies with the competency of extension officers (Kimaru-There is limited interaction between farmers, extension officers, and research officers to enhance effective knowledge transfer. A better interaction between scientists, extension officers and farmers would improve soil health since improved access to information is envisaged to increase adoption of soil fertility management practices (Kimaru-Muchai et al 2013). Presently, Kenya lacks suitable mechanisms for transferring the available knowledge from researchers to extension officers and ultimately to farmers'. The existing extension system is argued to be part of a gradual evolution which has seen entry of the private sector, civil society organizations, NGOs and donors. These changes have shaped the management of extension services even though it is noted in this paper that the changes were nonlinear and were as a result of different events in the social, economic and political context of Kenya. Extension services mainly took place through training and visits because this approach gave more detailed information and personal advice such as advising on the optimal type and quantity of fertilizer for local soil conditions (Gautam 2000). It is observable In Kenya, there are three basic models identified by NASEP even though these are basic categories that do not explain the related features and course content of different extension types. These are: one, free public extension services mostly to smallholder farmers engaged in growing staple foods and minor cash crops across all the agro-ecological zones, two, partial cost-shared provision of extension services, mostly within the public sector where limited commercialization has taken place and the third model is fully commercialized and mostly involving the private sector (e.g. private companies and cooperatives) and quasi-public organizations mainly for specific commodities such as tea, coffee, sugar, pyrethrum barley, tobacco, horticulture and dairy. Under this system, extension services are usually embedded in agricultural services (NASEP 2011). Extension services have staffing challenges since research highlights inadequacy in capacity building given that the human resource required to offer advisory services stands at 1:2000 beyond the recommended international ratio of 1:400 (NASEP 2011). The extension services offered, are discussed at a later section of the paper.The goal related to soil conservation in the Sessional paper is, judicious use of resources through effective management of river basins that fully recognizes the contribution of forests and soil conservation innovations. This paper participatory approach to address the problem of poverty as per the poverty reduction strategy paper. The policy recognizes increased human activity in catchment areas as well as inappropriate land use within farmlands adjacent to forested areas. The policy seeks judicious use of resources through effective management of river basins so as to conserve soils and forests. The paper does not explicitly address soil health, rather, it seeks to address soil conservation.The Agriculture Act, Cap. 318 of 1986 (revised) is the principal agricultural law with the primary objective of promoting agriculture. Section 14 of the act mandates, the Ministry of Agriculture to deal with issues of soil health management. Therefore, the Ministry prohibits land use that results to soil erosion. The Agriculture act (the principal agricultural law) mandates the Ministry of Agriculture to deal with issues of soil health management, giving the ministry the authority to prohibit land use systems that contribute to soil erosion. The structure of the Ministry of Agriculture seems fairly good. However, it is notable that even as there is a fairly good structural framework to implement the policy, this is never effective as there is lack of resources to monitor and implement sanctions on violations of land uses (Mumma 2003). Moreover, the Ministry can be criticized for a stronger focus on land use than soil health per se. The Agricultural Act is argued to be the single most authoritative land use legal document, since the framework of the act is on controls of land use (Odhiambo and Nyangito 2002)   Over the 2009/10-2012/13 period, Kenya's total budget increased by 131% reaching Ksh 1,459.9 billion in 2012/13 from Ksh 634 billion. Over the same period, the total budget of the ARD sector only rose by 56.6% to reach Ksh 50.4 billion in 2013. But despite the growth of the ARD budget, as a ratio of the total budget it declined considerably from 5.1% in 2009/10 to 3.5% in 2012/13. Kenya falls short of meeting the Maputo declaration of allocating 10% of its budget to the agricultural sector. This is also contrary to policy reports and declarations that consider agriculture as Kenya's economic mainstay (ibid)The MTIP came out of an extensive participatory national consultation process coordinated by the Agricultural Sector Coordination Unit. Premised on Vision 2030, it extends the strategy papers developed over the previous years for example: the 2004 Strategy for Revitalizing Agriculture, the 2010 Agricultural Sector Development Strategy, and the CAADP (Comprehensive Africa Agriculture Development Programme) 2010. Overall, it is a reflection of the government's sector wide approach to agricultural and food security enhancement. Its critical pillars for investment include: increasing productivity, commercialization and competitiveness, promoting private sector participation, promoting sustainable land and natural resources management, reforming delivery of agricultural services, increasing market access and trade, and ensuring effective coordination and implementation. It encapsulates integration of infrastructure and management practices for climate proofing and resilience (which also includes soil restoration and conservation) that is prioritized in the ASDS and CAADP Compact.)The first pillar seeks to increase productivity, commercialization and competitiveness whereas its rationale and prioritization criteria focuses on activities that feature strategic combination of technical advances with institutional innovations. This has been done with the aim of building robust technologies in specific areas such as soil and water management. The other related pillar is the investment pillar that seeks to promote sustainable land and natural resource management. Notably, the pillar seeks to support activities that promote sustainable management of land and other agriculture-related natural resources that are under growing population pressure, and these include: soil improvement, new crop and livestock varieties and farmer collective action in value chains.The MTIP identifies challenges and opportunities that cut across the six investment pillars and these are: policy and institutional reform, gender, food security and nutrition, the role of the private sector, research and extension, climate change adaptation, and capacity development. Soil is mentioned in regard to its restoration and conservation as a part of the climate adaptation framework to address the challenge of climate change. It is noteworthy that issues on soil health are not addressed exclusively even though soil conservation is mentioned in the plan. Overall the investment plan seems like a useful approach that provides the road map to execute written policy. However, it still remains questionable to what level this platform is being leveraged.The In as far as other initiative are concerned; these are, capacity building for agricultural extension services personnel. Specific intervention measures were also undertaken for degraded lands outside the designated catchment for rehabilitation, and this included the Integrated Soil and Water Conservation Component of the Lake Victoria Environmental Management Program which dealt with environmental management of the Lake Victoria catchments. The program relied significantly on the agricultural extension services with the specific role of disseminating technology and improving land husbandry practices. The core of the project was to improve arable land through building terraces, a technique dabbed \"fanya juu\" (Mutisya 2010). This 'fanya juu' initiative was later replaced with more focus towards agroforestry. Overall, the program was argued to have been successful in communicating simple extension messages that were easily understood by farmers. Its major undoing its unsustainability since it provided free farm tools and inputs and these could only be supplied for a limited period.Regarding policy initiatives, although Kenya has numerous legislation governing land use and management, there is no concise national policy framework that governs the health of soil in as far as soil content is concerned. To this end there is neither provision of subsidy to farmers nor mandate for them to conduct soil tests and analyses. Nevertheless To understand the institutional context within which soils research and investment takes place it is important to understand the socio-political context in which the institutional context is embedded. The diversity of tenure regimes in Kenya has had major implications on soil health since these regimes have shaped various forms of farming which could include: ranching, plantation agriculture, family farms, communal farming, contract farming. In return, each of these forms of farming has different effects on how soil is used, managed and conserved.Understanding the political context helps in appreciating the institutional challenges that surround policy development and implementation. The current agricultural policies remain connected to established historical narratives. In written records, the history of soil conservation in Kenya dates back to colonial eviction of the local people as The British settled into fertile lands and introduced new crops such as maize, beans, coffee, tea, cotton, tobacco, and pyrethrum (Mutisya 2010). The shifts in sectorial policies and the institutions around soil can be classified in three phases. The first phase was between 1898 and 1963. During this period policies and laws were made with the view of enhancing production, preserving soils and wildlife. It is also good to note that these policies were observed to the letter through direct rule by the British Colonialists. The next phase from 1963 to 1983, when Kenya gained independence and adopted the rules that were previously governing the country. British authorities sold most of the farms in the white highlands to the new Government which later sold them to native farmers through a native's settlement scheme. The government availed loans to the natives to purchase the farms and start intensive commercial agriculture. Post 1983, the government adopted the institutional framework that was in place, and this generally shaped the present framework. Smith et al (2004) in their study examining the political context in which policies are embedded in Kenya and to this end, posit that influence of the patrimonial system of politics meant concentration of power in the presidency. This meant that policy formulation and implementation were dependent on presidential approval. Presently, despite changes in the constitution, the presidency still has significant powers to influence policy formulation and implementation. For example, despite establishment of regional development authorities, there are no guidelines to operationalize any recommendations. The regional development authorities still draw their mandates from respective Acts of Parliament (ASDS 2010). More than this, ethnicity which largely shapes the political landscape has molded agricultural policy. This ethnicization of agriculture is a result of the historical linkages which have been significant in shaping agricultural policy (Smith et al 2004).Apart from ethnicity, the processes and the procedures in policy development and implementation are seen to have issues on governance since they are bureaucratic and serve personal interests. Nyangito and Okello (2006) highlight the fact that the institutional framework is influenced by a political elite, who have stake in public institutions and resources and they use this influence to serve their private interests. The implication is increased corruption and poverty with declining public institutions. With these governance issues there has been reluctance to embrace change in the agricultural sector. Indeed in looking at the political context of Kenya it is evident that policies are not neutral and are \"...the product of the interested actions of private parties who bring their resources to bear upon politically ambitious politicians and the political process\" (Bates, 1989: 5). Key informants have highlighted corruption as a hindrance to development of policies that served farmers. One example of how corruption in the political context shapes the implementation of policies is the, 'Shamba System' which was introduced in Kenya in the 1900s. The system seen as the best approach of plantation development was initially supported by politicians, however, with time politicians began using it strategically to allocate land to family and clan (see Yatich et al 2007).Even as agricultural policy has been shaped by the local politics in Kenya, external influence cannot be ignored. Developments in the international scenario have contributed to shaping the agricultural policy, for example the onset of neoliberal policies. There is less government support for institutions and at the same time there is significant entry by private firms who venture into soil health for profit purposes. Besides this, the present institutional framework lacks a strong consumer driven regulatory framework that ensures quality of soil inputs at competitive pricing. Because of inefficiencies in the market, prices are raised upward thus excluding poorer farmers from purchasing (policy brief 2014). As well, most of the soil inputs are adulterated because of limited quality checks. Beyond this, the country lacks organic fertilizer processing plants and there are no policies in place to establish these plants (ibid).Institutional challenges exist in as far as the following are concerned: capacity to train in emerging areas such as husbandry of indigenous animals and plants, organic farming and advanced bio-technology, as well as soils. In as far as extension services are concerned, there is limited employment opportunities in the public and private sectors and these have been In its bid to enhance policy effectiveness, the government established a National Integrated Monitoring and Evaluation System which has the objectives of measuring efficiency of governments and effectiveness of its policies. Its usefulness remains is yet to be seen.The Government developed and launched the SRA in March 2004 with the objective of transforming agriculture into a profitable activity. The paper highlighted a shift from subsistence agriculture to agriculture as a business that is profitable and commercially oriented. It also gave policy direction and actions that needed to be taken in each agricultural subsector to achieve the vision. The paper was later revised to the Agricultural Sector Development Strategy.The agricultural sector strategy was developed with the purpose of positioning agriculture as the key driver for delivering annual economic growth as envisaged in the Vision 2030. The document was developed as a revision of the Strategy for Revitalizing Agriculture (SRA). The overriding goal of the strategy is to achieve progressive reduction in unemployment, poverty, and food security. The strategy outlines the agricultural policies, institutional reforms, and programs and projects that the Government will implement in the short and long term to achieve this goal. Soil health is not mentioned much in this strategy document, in the few instances that soil is mentioned, erosion is highlighted as a major constraint. For example, soil erosion is considered a constraint in implementing the national climate change response strategy, and on conserving river banks, water bodies and catchments. The proposal to address these challenges include: formulating and implementing appropriate policy and legal frameworks, improving agribusiness and market access, strengthening research, extension and training, improving land use and crop development, enhancing farmer access to affordable inputs and credit and enhancing institutional efficiency and effectiveness in implementation and service delivery. Improving land use and crop production seeks to enhance land management through promoting development and adoption of soil and water conservation measures.The Agriculture PolicyPolicies have considerable impact on the practices employed by farmers, either encouraging or hampering investment in sound soil health strategies. The agricultural policy is complex as encompasses different subsectors. Under the old Constitution agriculture was managed under about 10 different subsectors: food and industrial crops, horticulture, livestock, fisheries, land, water, cooperatives and marketing, environment and natural resources, regional development, and development of arid and semi-arid lands (KIPPRA 2013). The main objective of the policy is to increase productivity and income for smallholders, enhance food security and equity, increase irrigation to introduce stability in agricultural output, commercialize and intensify production and enhance environmental sustainability. The key areas of concern for the policy are: increasing agricultural productivity and incomes especially for small-holder farmers, its emphasis is on irrigation to reduce over-reliance on rain-fed agriculture in the face of limited high potential agricultural land, it encourages diversification into non-traditional agricultural commodities and value addition to reduce vulnerability, enhance food security and a reduction in the number of those suffering from hunger and hence the achievement of MDGs, it encourages private-sector-led development of the sector, ensuring environmental sustainability.The critical concerns that the policy addresses includes: Declining agricultural performance, Limited high potential agricultural land and over-reliance on rain fed agriculture, Limited diversification of Agricultural production, Poor and inadequate rural infrastructure, Inadequate and declining research in agriculture, Agricultural sector financing and related activities, Limited development and exploitation of the livestock sector, Lack of a comprehensive land use policy.The policy does not explicitly focus much on soil, in fact, it has been criticized to have an over emphasis on the protection of property rights with little provision for the regulation of the rights in the interest of soil conservation (see Nyangito and Okello 2006).The process of formulating the National environmental formulation process started in 2007 but slowed down towards the end of 2008 after thorough stakeholder consultations. The promulgation of The Constitution of Kenya 2010 and the emergence of issues like climate change brought a new push not only to align the policy with the Constitution but also to address such emerging issues 2 .A wide range of individuals and institutions in the private sector, academia, civil society and government agencies have participated in the process. In as far as soil is concerned, the policy identifies poor soil and water management practices as an activity that contributes to environmental degradation. The policy statements regarding soil conservation and management include: Develop and implement a National Soil Conservation Policy (it is noted that this is in progress 2015) Promote and support eco and organic farming so as to maintain soil fertility. Ensure the protection of wetlands, riverbanks, hilltops and slopes from unsustainable practices to prevent soil erosion and environmental degradation. Promote good soil management practices to avert landslides, mudslides, floods and other disasters that are preventable.The document outlines an implementation strategy  Institutionalize cooperative governance and integrated approach to the management of the environment and natural resources by explicitly identifying and integrating environmental considerations in relevant sectoral and cross sectoral policies, laws, planning and development process. Ensure synergies between National and County Development planning processes. Institutionalize strategic environmental assessments approaches to all policies, programs and plans. Ensure that all significant development projects are subjected to Environmental ImpactThe policy is comprehensive as it outlines key statements as well as an implementation framework. However, since soil is subsumed in the discourse of natural resource management, it remains a challenge to see how soil health can be addressed by this specific policy.The National Land Policy was developed through a consultative process and its vision is to, \"guide the country towards efficient, sustainable and equitable use of land for prosperity and posterity\". Stakeholders from public, private and civil society contributed towards the policy formulation through thematic groups based discussions, regional workshops and written submission. The policy paper focusses on land ownership, land use, administration and management. In as far as land use management is concerned, the policy stipulates that it shall restore environmental integrity of land and facilitate sustainable management The land policy regulated under the Environmental Management and Coordination Act of 1999, is an integrated approach to management of land, policies, regulations and laws that deal with natural resources (soils is incorporated in this). It establishes appropriate legal and institutional mechanisms for the management of the environment. It provides for improved legal and administrative co-ordination of the diverse sectoral initiatives in order to improve the national capacity for the management of the environment. This is in view of the fact that the environment constitutes the foundation of national economic, social, cultural and spiritual advancement. This is compounded by the lack of a well-coordinated land management policy with respect to various land uses. The act, highlights specific actions to be taken so as to conserve soil. It stipulates that each district have a District Environment Committee that is responsible for management of land and soil. The Minister is also mandated in consultation with the relevant lead agencies, to develop, issue and implement regulations, procedures, guidelines and measures for the sustainable use of hill sides, hill tops, mountain areas and forests and such regulations, guidelines, procedures and measures shall control the harvesting of forests and any natural resources located in or on a hill side, hill top or mountain areas so as to protect water catchment areas, prevent soil erosion and regulate human settlementBefore 1990 the main input agencies were KGGCU (Kenya Grain Growers Cooperative Union), KFA (Kenya Farmers Association) and the KNTC (Kenya National Trading Cooperation). During this period, government control was heavy with imports being poorly coordinated hence leading to deficits and in some cases surplus of fertilizer. After 1992, during the neo liberal era when Kenya adopted the Structural Adjustment Programs and liberalized its markets to including the foreign exchange regime. During this liberalization period, state and donor imports declined significantly. In 2008, the market was characterized by high world prices for fertilizers and the food crisis was further worsened by the postelection violence that happened in the country. The government (National Cereals and Produce Board) responded to this crisis through distributing subsidized fertilizer. It also led policies on fertilizer to enhance fertilizer use to support smallholder farmers and to increase private-sector investment in fertilizer retailing. It is notable that this policy focusses more on control of the market than on soil health in particular.The ministry realized 6 Policies and 4 Acts of Parliament between late 2011 and early 2013.The overall aim of these legislations is to create a more business-oriented and efficient sector to boost food security interventions (MAFAP 2014) Soils care is an initiative by a private organization that supports: individuals, cooperatives, agricultural entrepreneurs, to improve their agricultural production through soil analysis.According to their mission statement, they want to empower clients to take good care of their soils to enhance production. It is part of Dutch Sprouts an Investment fund founded by the former owner of BLGG Group, one of the leading agricultural laboratory in the Netherlands. It mostly caters to large producers since most small scale farmers are unable to afford their services.KEPHIS-Is a government parastatal whose responsibility is to assure the quality of agricultural inputs and produce to prevent adverse impact on the economy, the environment and human health. In regard to soil, the institute conducts soil analysis for fertility evaluation and fertilizer use recommendations. It also undertakes manure and organic compost analyses.CROPNuts-Is an agricultural testing laboratory that offers a wide range of laboratory services which include: Soil testing and soil fertility correction with fertilizer recommendations  Soil Mapping and Variable rate prescriptions-grid sampling of soil for creation of pH nutrient maps  Pre-planting available nitrogen-topsoil and subsoil samplingThe laboratory works with forty agents to increase their reach. However, being a private organization that is for profit, it may not reach the smallholder farmers who cannot afford the services they offer. Its engagement in the soils and institutions context is fairly extensive even though its support is not extended to government extension workers. This is a gap that could be filled by stakeholders.The Kenya Soils Survey (KSS) undertakes research on soil fertility and it collaborates with international institutions. It mainly conducts research on land resources (soils and land use) even though it is believed to have no clear coordination mechanisms among partners and soil information is not easily accessible. (African Conservation Tillage Network)The Private SectorSoil fertility and management have also been supported by the private sector. For example, the initiative undertaken by Kenya Electricity Generating Company Limited (KenGen), East African Brewers, Coca Cola and the Nairobi Water Company through the Nairobi Waterfund Project.The project is being implemented through a public-private partnership led by The Nature Conservancy (TNC), which has its headquarters in the United States. In February, 2015, Safaricom partnered with the Ministry of Agriculture, Livestock and Fisheries and developed the E-Fertilizer Subsidy that is an electronic platform used to distribute fertilizer to farmers. Farmers are expected to receive electronic vouchers on their cell phones and these are to be redeemed appointed stockiest at a discounted rate. Toyota Tsusho Corporation is expected to construct a fertilizer plant in the country.The role of extension services are wide-ranging and in the case of Kenya, they are diverse. They include: sharing various forms of knowledge, technology and agricultural information, and linking farmers to researchers and new forms of agricultural knowledge.Agricultural extension services in Kenya go as far back as the early 1900s when Kenya was a British Colony. Its notable success was on the dissemination of high breed maize technology in the late 1960s and the 1970s 3 . It was initially dominated by the public sector but this changed after Kenya gained independence and was much more prominent after implementation of ne0liberal policies.At its inception, extension services were implemented through an approach that was coercive. However, after independence, this developed into a more persuasive and educational approach (NASEP 2011). During the period of 1980s Kenya received support from the World Bank to implement Structural Adjustment Programs to address its structural weaknesses in the economy. It was during this neoliberal era that, (the period that saw declined staffing levels as well as reduced facilitation of public sector extension), the government was under pressure to scale down funding towards extension services, meaning less support for extension services.Indeed up the 1980s extension service was well staffed up to the sub-location level, and adequately facilitated to perform its duties, and the last years have seen a significant decline (ibid).This lack of support is still evident as staffing and funding remains low. The ratio of frontline extension worker to farmers is about1:1000 compared to the desired level of 1:400 (NASEP 2011). Partnerships with the private sector have not been strengthened, and in the absence of effective private sector operations to fill the vacuum, the situation has led to reduced spatial coverage. Gautam (2000) rightly observes that in the Kenyan communities, extension services does not reach the areas where services are inadequate-mostly low-potential and poorer area. Subsequently, while NGOs are active in these areas, extension services remain unreachable. Apart from this, some of these NGOs charge a fee, although indirectly, as a membership fee for a group (p.11). Extension services are sporadic and irregular especially among the poor (ibid). It also notable that the objectives of private extension are not always aligned with those of the public extension system since private extension services are always geared towards respective priorities in different organizations (Muyanga and Jayne 2006).Apart from being affected by neoliberal policies, the extension system has structural challenges, regarding its top down, paternalistic and bureaucratic management system (Muyanga and Jayne 2006). Generally, extension services are not formally guided as there is not code of ethics and working standards for extension service providers. In a bid to counter this, the National Agricultural Extension Policy (NAEP) was developed with the idea that, it was the basis for all extension work within the government and its interaction with other stakeholders in agricultural research and development. In as far as the public sector is concerned, some of the major institutions that are the Undergraduate degree level with very few males at the Masters level and no women at this level. In all the levels it is notable that there are more men compared to women. The trend in gender disparity is not surprising as literature review demonstrated the same. The ratio of extension workers to farmers is inadequate, giving room to maneuver to collaborate with the government and train more extension officers.Some of the challenges in extension services specific to the public sector include: Declining human capital and financial resources for public extension without a corresponding private sector input, uncoordinated pluralistic extension service delivery, and poor linkages with extension facilitating factors 4 .Overall, based on the interviews with key informants and extension workers in the Ministry of Agriculture, the main impediment is choice of an appropriate and dynamic approach that is context specific and considers the farmers local context in as far as the use of natural resources, and the social environment is concerned.After Kenya's independence, donors were still interested in supporting the agricultural sector. SIDA was involved in agricultural extension along other donors including GIZ, and DANIDA. However, information from key informants revealed that the objectives of each donor were not well aligned and there was need to streamline objectives and minimize duplication.The tensions that arose from these relationships led to the formation of the Kenya Joint Agriculture and those of concern to this paper include:• Reform of the legal and regulatory framework• Support reform of Kenya's research and extension services to strengthen the link between farmers' demands and supply of improved technology and advice.Emphasis will be placed on promoting environmentally-sound technologies that enhance soil quality and improve the management of water resourcesIn general, the present system could be improved, since the current extension system is not entirely effective and efficient in delivering the needed services to farmers since the institutional design lacks focus on active farmer participation. Beyond this, the extension system lacks adequate operational funding, there is no attention paid the quality of the relationship between field extension workers and farmers, and the service delivery is uncoordinated.The The agricultural sector faces many challenges which include: low and declining soil fertility, inadequate budgetary allocations, reduced effectiveness of extension services, low absorption of modern technology, high costs and increased adulteration of key inputs, limited investment capital and poor access to affordable credit, heavy crop and livestock losses due to diseases and pests, an inappropriate legal and regulatory framework, adequate disaster preparedness and response. When Key informants were asked how soil fertility is addressed at the Ministerial level, they reported that it is addressed through promoting programs targeting soil erosion, agroforestry, and riverbank protection. They are mainly funded by donors and have minimal budget of their own. The informants reported that soil was neglected and there was lack of adequate information on soils. As well, they reported that soil testing was expensive and out of reach for majority of smallholder farmers that they engage with. In regards to challenges faced in policy formulation, they reported that that the power dynamics in the policy formulation process was such that it was difficult to include marginal voices. Their observations can be corroborated with literature review, where policy formulation is argued to be top down (See Kinyanjui 2000 et. al). The existing policy initiatives, is that they provide a blanket approach that may not be applicable in all sites. Key informants reported that the strategy for soil fertilization should be site specific and recommendation should not be a one-size-fits-all approach, rather, recommendations should be specific to the site. More than this, the time it took to review policies was considered too long. Thus the informants argued that, the bottom up approach was largely unsuccessful since there was no platform to include marginalized voices (there was no stipulated framework that would guide this process). Because the bottom up approach was unsuccessful, the Crops Act, a successor to the previous regulatory institutions was developed.The act is administered by the Agriculture Fisheries and Food Authority (AFFA), whose mandate include: Administer the Crops Act, and the Fisheries Act in accordance with the provisions of these Acts  Promote best practices and regulate, the production, processing and marketing of agricultural and aquatic products  Collect, collate data and maintain a database on agricultural and aquatic products; Determine the research priorities in agriculture and aquaculture  Advise the national government and the county governments on agricultural levies for purposes of planning, enhancing harmony and equity in the sector.The Crops act is an Act of Parliament aimed at consolidating and repealing various statutes relating to crops and to provide for the growth and development of agricultural crops and for connected purposes. Soil is in the periphery of this act, rarely is it overtly mentioned, but it is part of what has been referred to as 'relating to crops'. Indeed the only section it is explicitly mentioned in the act, is to the extent that it is conserved along with water. To this end, it stipulates that respective counties provide for: Measures of maintaining soil fertility including soil testing and regulation of soil salination, chemical degradation and toxic levels in plants  Developing guidelines for public education on safe use of agrochemicalApart from challenges with policies, the informants reported that even as extension services have been devolved, there is no enabling environment. This is attributed to transitional challenges which include transfer of funds and articulation of roles. It still remains unclear how better transition can take place, as the national extensions services are left with the institutional knowledge that they are unclear on how to disseminate to counties. Apart from this, they reported that extension officers were not in a position to reach farmers widely. Presently, the ratio of extension worker to farmer is 1:1000 way below the recommended ratio of 1:400. The counties also have challenges of funding and politicization of development projects, such that funding of projects is pegged on political advantage. The extension officers also lack equipment and facilities to execute their duties.When asked whether soils were integrated in agricultural policy, most of the key informants were of the opinion that this was the case and the best way to manage soil health was to: conduct more soil surveys and collect more soil samples for analysis, prevent soil erosion-as a physical measure, and address discharge from physical structures. In the literature review, and from the policy documents, it was notable that this was the main approach to soil conservation. The other recommendation made was strengthening Soil Conservation Networks-A good example is the Cheranganyi falls. The Ministry of Environment and NaturalResources in a bid to conserve the Cheranganyi water towers also targets supplies of water essential for soil fertility. It is noteworthy that the Ministry is in a joint strategy with the European Union and is in collaboration with the Kenya Forest Service, the Kenya Water Towers Agency and the Kenya Wildlife Service, there is not collaboration with a soils institute so the impact on soil health could be minimal. The informants also mentioned other initiatives, for example the water harvesting and management branch-of SIDA which started a program of training engineers-this is still ongoing.When asked the main problem with agriculture in the country particularly in relation to policy, some of the responses were that the policies have taken too long to review. It emerged from the informants that some of the ways that soil fertility could be enhanced would be to embrace technology. For example, prior to introduction of county governance, the government had embarked on an e-extension services program. This approach works through the use of text messaging, WhatsApp (applies for photo messaging), and Twitter-extension (this approach began roughly two years ago Regarding the understanding of ISFM, the informants understood it to be a method that combines all aspects of soil management that also incorporates farmers' local knowledge, it was viewed as a useful strategy in light of this. On the question on soil fertility, they pointed out the fact that it was complex since it was not just the physical context that soils are embedded in.They argued that soil exists in a social context, people relate with it, interpret it, and use it in varied ways. As one aptly put it, \"You can't deal with the physical and not social or the livelihoods…\" he argued that since soil was critical to people's security, and livelihoods systems, soil health cannot be addressed without taking this into consideration. He reiterated that people will talk about soil fertility and productivity only to the level they see it addresses their needs. For this reason, interventions must be contextualized and unpacked to the level of the personal.There is some positive direction towards addressing this as can be see with NALEP through initiatives like: addressing the challenge of HIV and Aids among extension officers and farmers, addressing gender inequality in program activities. Such an initiative has seen women of different social classes (such as widows) forming part of the farmer groups, while it is commendable that NALEP promotes an approach that provides better representation of women and other marginalized groups; it is also true that equality requires more than including women and marginalized groups.From the interviews it emerged that there weren't enough conversations to improve dialogue on knowledge and information flow since tacit/indigenous knowledge was not incorporated in the curriculum for training extension officers. Moreover, the key informants observed that there was no way of tapping tacit knowledge since there wasn't a known system to incorporate this local knowledge.The key informants reported that the main problem of Agriculture Soil Conservation, included continuous mining of the soil without replenishing the soils, hence low soil fertility.Chemical fertilizers are the ones that are mostly promoted, e.g. The National fertilizer subsidy program targeting resource poor farmers (1bag of DAP and 1bag of CAN). These fertilizers are stocked through the National Cereals and Produce Board depots stationed countrywide and farmers are informed through public media. At the sub division offices, the officers will verify the specific \"status\" of farmer to distribute the fertilizers to. One posited that \"People just use DAP and CAN year in year out\", this point came out consistently, with informants arguing that some soils did not require these inputs for soil health.In as far as extension service delivery is concerned, the Ministry of Agriculture trains the extension officers with information they get from national research institutions and this is what is disseminated to the extension officers. This information is relayed to farmers during field days, chief barazas, demonstration plots, radio, and TV programs. The advice includes: how to prepare land, what seed to plant, the type of crop to be grown, and fertilizer to be used. While this mode of dissemination seems effective, some informants reported that the process of disseminating information is not always straight forward. For example, as much as KALRO does the research, the process of disseminating this information to extension officers is never clear cut because of poor coordination between the KALRO staff and extension officers. It is possible that the problem in dissemination of information could be as a result of the perceptions researchers have on extension officers and the perception of the extension officers on the farmers. During the interviews, it was observable that farmers in large part are viewed as passive without the agency to think and make the decisions for themselves. For example, one key informant posited that, \"Our job is to change their mindsets so that they can embrace technology\", the informant further observed that, the education system that farmers have is based on 'past teaching' and there is resistance to new technology. This perception of farmers is problematic in many ways: it assumes that knowledge is found only in specific sites therefore obscuring the fact that knowledge is multiple and is found in different forms. This kind of thinking also creates the illusory divide between farmers and extension officers, casting the two in the binary of modernity and traditional. The challenge with this form of perception is that, it closes out opportunity for dialogue on knowledge and information between the farmer and the extension officer. To this end, it is argued that extension services should be offered to farmers in a manner that allows interaction and exchange of information and knowledge. Such should be the case between researchers and extension officers, or researchers and farmers.It emerged from the discussions that the main constraints to development of more efficient soil management approaches include-farmers not being able to afford fertilizer, because of the middlemen and cartels who increase prices and as a result exploit farmers. It also emerged that the quality of the fertilizer is questionable as there have been cases of adulteration. There are also cases of interference by politicians, with fertilizer being used 'strategically' for political mileage. Fertilizer subsidies rightly attract political interest who compete for votes by offering ever more generous and indiscriminate subsidies. Finally, in as far as extension services are concerned, the linkage between the Ministry of Agriculture and Universities is poor, and in some cases there is contradiction between what is taught in the university and what the latest research reveals, e.g. the tension between minimum tillage and land should being ploughed twice before planting.From discussions with key informants and a review of available policies and literature, it was evident that there has been little inclusion of soil management (specifically in respect to soil content) in the legal and policy framework in Kenya. Indeed where policies have been in place, these are fragmented and not coordinated across sectors with similar mandates. The main strategy applied by the Ministry of Agriculture addresses soil fertility through promoting programs targeting soil erosion, agroforestry, riverbank protection. Besides the promotion of fertilizers, there is no specific support to farmers to encourage soil testing and analysis. It was noted that the Ministry relies significantly on donor support and while this approach gets funding for soil conservation, it remains unsustainable if the government does not financially commit to soil health. In as far a policy is concerned, the government has made efforts to address declining soil health. Some of the policies formulated include: Agriculture policy, It was noted that the private sector has some interest in soil health and some of the initiatives they have taken can be used as an opportunity to expand the scope and scale of the kind of soil health issues they deal with. For example, the -subsidy provided by Safaricom, could be an opportunity to use the mobile platform to engage farmers on knowledge from research on soil health. Partnerships with the private sector has not been strengthened, and in the absence of effective private sector operations to fill the vacuum, the situation has led to reduced spatial coverage. This reduced spatial coverage is also evident in extension services since these are sporadic and irregular especially among the poor. It also notable that the objectives of private extension are not always aligned with those of the public extension system since private extension services are always geared towards respective priorities in different organizations.In general, the present system could be improved, since the current extension system is not entirely effective and efficient in delivering the needed services to farmers since the institutional design lacks focus on active farmer participation. One of the ways this can be done is through"}

main/part_2/0320403557.json

@@ -0,0 +1 @@
+{"metadata":{"gardian_id":"e810b8bdd20b86c6f1656de2560a3d31","source":"gardian_index","url":"https://cgspace.cgiar.org/rest/bitstreams/a9feac32-9fac-4280-9027-4b2bd40cb67c/retrieve","id":"-1831036069"},"keywords":[],"sieverID":"caca9e9f-640f-46d4-abe4-cff6c08105b6","content":"The International Center for Tropical Agriculture (CIAT) -a CGIAR Research Center -develops technologies, innovative methods, and new knowledge that better enable farmers, especially smallholders, to make agriculture eco-efficient -that is, competitive and profitable as well as sustainable and resilient. Headquartered near Cali, Colombia, CIAT conducts research for development in tropical regions of Latin America, Africa, and Asia. www.ciat.cgiar.org CGIAR is a global research partnership for a food-secure future. Its science is carried out by 15 Research Centers in collaboration with hundreds of partners across the globe. www.cgiar.orgTables Table 1: A summary and distribution for some selected socioeconomic variables in Kenya .................................. 7A summary and distribution for some selected socioeconomic variables in Ethiopia .............................. 8Table 3:The effect of different socioeconomic characteristics on the adoption of different agricultural practices that have potential to increase soil carbon in both the short and long term in Ethiopia .....11The effect of different socioeconomic characteristics on the adoption of different agricultural practices that have potential to increase soil carbon in both the short and long term in Kenya .........14  A pragmatic definition of a few technical terms and concepts as used in this report is provided below.Carbon sequestration is defined as the actual transfer and secure storage of atmospheric CO 2 into soil pools comprising soil organic matter (SOC) and soil inorganic matter (SIC). Atmospheric CO 2 is transferred into the soil carbon stock through plants. Increasing the soil carbon stock improves biomass productivity, soil quality, and water holding, and strengthens soil nutrient cycling. However, the amount of soil carbon sequestered is dependent on soil type, climate, and the nature of vegetation. Therefore, soil, land, and agricultural management practices that reduce land degradation and soil erosion also help to increase SOC.Agricultural management (or \"best\" management) practices are defined as a set of practices that reduce the potentially negative impact of agricultural operations. These practices reflect household capabilities and the conditions of the farm where they are applied, and their main goal is to minimize the loss of nutrients. Some agricultural management practices that increase SOC are no-till farming (NT), cover crops, manure and sludge application, mulching, water conservation, and agroforestry. Practices with low external inputs, such as no-till, conservation agriculture, water management techniques, and the use of organic manure are also referred to as natural resource management (NRM) technologies. NRM aims at mitigating stresses associated with land degradation and nutrient depletion. However, the rate of SOC sequestration by best management practices depends on soil texture, structure, rainfall, temperature, farming system, and farm management.Sustainable land management (SLM) practices stand for any set of comprehensive land management practices that has potential to make a significant difference, in terms of reducing land degradation and improving land productivity, in both the near future and in the long term. SLM practices comprise both technologies and approaches. Examples of SLM practices include stone/ soil buds, terraces, tree planting, compost, farmyard manure (FYM), minimum tillage, contour planting, etc. Some SLM technologies have short-term benefits (e.g., farmyard manure) while others have long-term benefits (e.g., stone buds). Some SLM practices, such as stone bunds, soil bunds, terraces, etc., are also considered as NRM practices.Adoption is defined as the degree of use of a new technology in the long-run equilibrium when the farmer has full information about the new technology and its potential. Adoption is usually described as an ongoing process occurring in a stepwise fashion: knowledge (learning about a new technology), persuasion (when adopters are convinced to accept the new technology), decision (deciding to take up the technology), implementation (putting the technology in practice), and confirmation (adopters reaffirm or reject their decision to adopt a technology). Adopter in the context of this study refers to a farmer who consistently uses a given technology.viiiIn most countries of sub-Saharan Africa (SSA), soil and nutrient loss has been an inherent problem, especially in agricultural lands; hence, the adoption of sustainable land management (SLM) practices to improve land productivity. The adoption of management practices that reduce soil erosion and degradation, improve soil quality, and mitigate nutrient loss enhance soil carbon sequestration potential for increasing farm productivity, income, and food security among farming households. Therefore, understanding the factors that determine the adoption of such practices is essential for making targeted interventions. The main objective of this report is to identify the socioeconomic factors that constrain or enable the adoption of agricultural management practices that increase soil carbon in Kenya and Ethiopia.To achieve this objective, a literature review was first conducted. This was then followed by an analysis of secondary data on agricultural management practices that increase soil carbon in Kenya and Ethiopia.A structured literature review on SLM and agricultural practices that enhance carbon sequestration was carried out from peer-reviewed journals, reports, and working papers. A total of 90 and 54 papers were reviewed from Ethiopia and Kenya, respectively. Data from the WOCAT (World Overview of Conservation Approaches and Technologies) and CIAT databases on best-bet practices were also analyzed, which involved the conversion of qualitative data into quantitative data. The households were then clustered into three homogeneous groups using agglomerative hierarchical analysis, based on the adoption of crop and forage, water harvesting, and carbon sequestration enhancing practices. The three categories were further categorized into two deriving the dependent variable whereby households that had adopted carbon-enhancing practices were assigned a dummy variable of 1 and the remaining two assigned a value of 0. A probit model was used to estimate the effect of household characteristics (from the dataset) on the dependent variable distinctly in the two countries.The results from the review in both countries revealed that basic econometric models (logit, probit, and tobit) were used in analyzing the adoption of carbonenhancing SLM practices. Descriptive and inferential methods of analysis -e.g., ordinary least squares (OLS) regressions, correlations, chi-square, t-test, and analysis of variance (ANOVA) -were also used in some analyses. The study concludes that the adoption of carbonenhancing SLM practices is variedly influenced by socioeconomic and external factors, which are dependent on the nature of technology, locality, and prevailing conditions. The review reveals that the capacity of farmers, incentives derived from the adoption of SLM technologies, and the provision of services played an important role in the adoption of such practices in both countries. Notably, the analysisshows that net returns, knowledge/information on the technology in question, and market orientation were crucial factors influencing adoption. There is an urgent need for a policy formulation framework and development partners to facilitate the dissemination of information and to provide technical assistance and training, which would enhance the knowledge, skills, and capacity required for implementing such technologies.The development of cost-effective SLM practices in both the short and long run, and that fit market needs, is plausible for scaling up adoption. Also, access to credit facilities and encouragement of off-farm incomegenerating activities would be a milestone in improving the adoption of SLM carbon-enhancing technologies. The review recommends further research on a combination of socioeconomic factors that can support the adoption of specific technologies in a given context. This would provide a better understanding on the most significant constraining or enabling factors to the adoption of carbon-enhancing agricultural practices and help design policies aimed at increasing their uptake.Understanding the factors that affect the adoption of soil carbon-enhancing agricultural practices is essential for targeting and planning interventions by government, development practitioners, and nongovernment organizations (NGOs). Agricultural management practices comprise a number of key characteristics that may affect their adoption decision at the farm level in one way or another (Adesina and Baidu-Forson, 1995). The literature on the adoption of agricultural technologies, including on sustainable land management (SLM) practices that reduce soil and nutrient loss through degradation, is extensive (Adimassu et al., 2016;Feder and Umali, 1993;Rogers, 1995;Sunding and Zilberman, 2001). In areas where soil erosion is common, nutrient depletion occurs and this causes the land to become unproductive (Bewket and Sterk, 2002;Kassie et al., 2009a). In response, farmers tend to invest in agricultural and SLM practices that have potential to improve land productivity (Liniger et al., 2011). The adoption of agricultural practices that have potential to improve soil organic carbon, in particular, has potential for enhancing farm productivity, income, and food security (Bekele and Drake, 2003).Evidence from published research shows that the most important part of agricultural research, development, and innovation occurs only when farmers adopt and implement agricultural practices that enhance soil carbon (Koirala et al., 2015;Powlson et al., 2011).Improving soil organic carbon is important because it improves soil properties, which, in turn, ensures the sustainability of soil functions that are critical for ensuring that ecosystem functioning is maintained and hence crop and livestock production (Powlson et al., 2011). However, in East Africa, the adoption of agricultural management and SLM practices that enhance soil carbon by farmers is still limited (Adimassu et al., 2014;Bewket, 2007). An analysis of the factors that influence the adoption of carbon-enhancing practices by farmers can help to unravel what constrains or facilitates farmers' ability to invest in these practices.Evidence from the literature shows that various factors influence the adoption of soil carbon-enhancing practices, such as households' socioeconomic characteristics, biophysical characteristics, plot and farm characteristics, and institutional factors (Gebremedhin et al., 1999;Requier-Desjardins et al., 2011;Shiferaw andHolden, 1998, 2001). Variation exists, however, in the way different studies categorize these factors. Some studies categorize these factors into (i) economic, social, and institutional (e.g., Akudugu et al., 2012);(ii) economic, social, physical, and technical factors, and risk attitude of the farmers (e.g., Kebede et al., 1990); (iii) farmers' characteristics, farm structure, institutional characteristics, and managerial structure (e.g., McNamara et al., 1991); (iv) information, economic, and ecological (e.g., Nowak, 1987); (v) human capital, production, policy, and natural resource characteristics (e.g., Wu and Babcock, 1998); and (vi) institutional, technological, economic, financial, physical, human, cultural, and household-specific factors (e.g., Obayelu et al., 2017).This report comprises the knowledge synthesized from both the literature review and the findings derived from analyzing secondary data contained in the WOCAT database. It aims to identify the socioeconomic factors that constrain or facilitate the adoption of agricultural management practices (both physical and agronomic) that enhance the sequestration of soil carbon in Kenya and Ethiopia. Enhanced understanding of the constraining or enabling factors can be used as a guide in the development of well-tailored policies that can promote the effective adoption of practices and technologies that enhance soil organic carbon in East Africa, and potentially in other areas of sub-Saharan Africa (SSA).The report is organized as follows: In section 2, we present the materials and methods used in reviewing the literature and in the analysis of secondary data and introduce our focus countries. The main socioeconomic factors that constrain or enable the adoption of soil organic carbon-enhancing practices -based on the reviewed literature -are discussed and summarized in section 3. Section 4 contains the results and discussion of the socioeconomic factors (contained in the WOCAT and CIAT best-bet practices databases) that constrain or facilitate the adoption of practices and technologies that promote carbon sequestration in Kenya and Ethiopia (www.wocat.net). The conclusions and recommendations are provided in section 5.The information contained in the review section of this report was derived from published peer-reviewed journal papers, reports, and working papers -mainly the digital literature. However, a few hard copies were also considered. Following a framework described by Kruse (2007), the review starts by providing a list of the key terms that were used in the literature search. Some of the keywords that were used in the electronic search are adoption, SLM practices, willingness to pay, socioeconomic factors, constrain, affect, facilitate, determinants, investment, willingness to accept, land management, agricultural practices, sequestration, soil carbon, the economics of SLM, Ethiopia, and Kenya. The review was systematically structured and made explicit through a design that is reproducible for identifying, evaluating, and interpreting the existing body of knowledge. This was then followed by a detailed examination of the socioeconomic factors that can constrain or facilitate the adoption of practices and technologies that increase soil carbon. For the detailed examination, a database containing various socioeconomic literature was created in Microsoft Excel and then summarized in Microsoft Word. This was followed by recording the direction (e.g., positive or negative) and the frequencies with which each of the socioeconomic variables constrains or facilitates the adoption of different practices or technologies 1 that enhance soil carbon sequestration.The most important technologies considered are stone bunds (level/graded), soil bunds (level/graded), Fanya juu (level/graded), tree planting, compost, farmyard manure (FYM), minimum tillage, contour ploughing, gully treatment, mixed farming, drainage ditch, intercropping, stone terraces, conservation agriculture, wood shrub contour, tree fallow, inorganic fertilizer, and the use of crop residue. Physical practices such as stone and soil bunds were considered as practices whose soil carbon sequestration benefits take a long time to be realized (Liniger et al., 2011). Agronomic practices are considered practices whose carbon sequestration benefits take a short time to be realized. This is because agronomic practices do not remove considerable areas from cultivation when compared with physical practices.We collated household-level data on various socioeconomic variables such as human, natural, financial, and physical capital, and access to markets and information (Table A1). Since we are interested in identifying the socioeconomic factors that facilitate or constrain the adoption of SLM technologies ( The clustering seeks to maximize between-cluster variance and to minimize within-cluster variance (Figures 1 and 2). We use three groups at a rescaled distance of 1 in both Kenya and Ethiopia for our analysis. We refer to the three group types as (i) the crop and forage farmers' group, (ii) the water harvesting and/or drainage farmers' group, and (iii) the carbon sequestration farmers' group.We developed these categories by \"letting the data speak\" and not explicitly based on theory. The crop and forage group (HG1) comprises households that implement SLM practices with the aim of increasing the crop (e.g., through better crop and residue management) and livestock yield (e.g., through increased forage). The water group (HG2) implements SLM technologies mainly for the purpose of improving their ability to harvest water and/or to improve water drainage. The carbon sequestration group (HG3) implements SLM technologies with the reduction in soil erosion and land degradation as its main goal. We use the classification into the three groups or types in our subsequent analysis (Table A3). A summary of the main aggregating variables for the three groups of households is presented in Table A4.The agglomerative hierarchical clustering of households in Kenya into relatively homogeneous household groups (HGs). At a rescaled distance of 1.5, 1.0, and 0.5, we had two, three, and five HGs, respectively. Source: WOCAT database. Figure 2 The agglomerative hierarchical clustering of households in Ethiopia into relatively homogeneous household groups (HGs). At a rescaled distance of 1.5, 1.0, and 0.5, we had two, three, and five HGs, respectively. Source: WOCAT database. A summary and distribution for some selected socioeconomic variables in KenyaUsing Stata 14, a Shapiro-Wilk test was run on all the variables to test whether the socioeconomic data were normally distributed (Sheskin, 2004). Most of the socioeconomic variables in both Kenya and Ethiopia followed a non-normal distribution, except the gender of the households, access to off-farm income, and benefits versus the estimated costs in both the short and long run, that is, most of the aggregating variables had a strong left-sided frequency distribution (Tables 1   and 2). In addition, the dataset contained both discrete and continuous variables. Thus, to test whether the null hypothesis (H o ) that all the socioeconomic variables are independent among the three HGs in both countries (Table A3), we opted to use both parametric and non-parametric tests. A non-parametric Pearson chisquare and analysis of variance (ANOVA) were used for categorical variables and continuous variables, respectively (Beasley and Schumacker, 1995;García-Pérez and Núñez-Antón, 2003). A comparison procedure including Bonferroni corrections of P was then applied only if the Kruskal-Wallis test indicated an overall existence of differences.  A summary and distribution for some selected socioeconomic variables in Ethiopia households in HG3 a dummy value of 1, and those in HG2 and HG3 a dummy value of 0. By doing so, we implicitly assumed that all the households are equally likely to provide information correctly, or that any propensity to under-or over-report does not correlate with the factors constraining or facilitating the adoption of SLM practices that enhance the sequestration of soil carbon. We believe this is plausible. Therefore, using Stata release 14, we estimated a probit model -since the dependent variable is censored at zero -as shown in Equation 1.where Yᵢ represents the adoption of soil carbonenhancing technology for household i, Xᵢ is a vector of characteristics (including access to infrastructure and impact of technologies on household livelihoods) for i, and εᵢ is the random error variable associated with the equation. If a specific household characteristic facilitates the adoption of a soil carbon-enhancing technology, then β 1 will be greater than 0 (i.e., β 1 >0). if, in contrast, a specific household characteristic constrains the adoption of a specific carbon sequestration-enhancing technology, then we would expect β 1 to be less than 0 (i.e., β 1 <0). Since we are interested in identifying factors that constrain or facilitate the adoption of carbon-enhancing practices, it is important to establish exogenous variation in our household characteristics. This will then enable us to identify whether the selected socioeconomic characteristics have a positive or negative effect on the adoption of soil carbon-enhancing practices. The challenge for this approach, however, is that we need a dataset in which the dependent variable can have only one of two possible outcomes [i.e., 1 (for adopters) or 0 (for non-adopters)]. This is because we are interested in knowing how specific household characteristics affect the behavior of the household toward adopting technologies that enhance sequestration of soil carbon or not. This study uses secondary data recorded in the WOCAT database (www.wocat.net). Nevertheless, the data contained in the WOCAT database were not collected with the idea of studying socioeconomic factors that influence the behavior of the households to adopt or not adopt. Consequently, we had to develop -from the existing data -the two categories of households: the adopters and non-adopters of practices that enhance soil carbon sequestration. This was done by assigning all theThe review was limited to East Africa, specifically Kenya and Ethiopia, in order to limit the scope and challenges associated with the literature review. A brief description of the biophysical and socioeconomic characteristics of Kenya and Ethiopia is provided in Appendix 1. The agricultural practices considered in this review are those that the reviewed studies show as having some potential to reduce the rate of soil erosion and land degradation -thereby mitigating the loss of the already sequestered carbon stocks -or those that accelerate the rate of soil carbon accumulation in the soil. The reader should, therefore, interpret the findings with this caveat in mind.The carbon sequestering and carbon stock potential of various SLM technologies as showed by some of the reviewed literature is summarized in Table A5.In Ethiopia, about 93% of the 80 papers, reports, and working papers considered in this review use the most common econometric models in the adoption literature -such as probit, logit, 2 and tobit 3 -in their analysis, while only about 5% and 2% used techniques such as ordinary least squares (OLS) regression and the factor approach, respectively. The socioeconomic factors that had a positive (enabling) or negative (constraining) effect on the adoption of soil carbon-enhancing practices by farmers were identified using the logit, tobit, and probit models. The average sample size for households in the reviewed papers was about 350, with a standard deviation of 500. A majority of the reviewed studies (61%) had been conducted in the regions of Tigray and Amhara in the north and northwestern part of Ethiopia, respectively, while 39% had been conducted in Oromia, Southern Nations, Nationalities, and People's Region (SNNP), and the mixed region. Both Tigray and Amhara are situated in a highland (where torrential rain is not uncommon), characterized by a rugged landscape, and are therefore prone to land degradation and soil erosion (www.idp-uk.org).In Kenya, about 30% of the 52 papers reviewed had used probit, logit, and tobit models for analyzing the socioeconomic factors affecting the adoption of SLM practices. About 52% of the studies used descriptive and inferential methods of analysis (i.e., OLS regressions, correlations, chi-square, t-test, and ANOVA). A few studies (i.e., 7%) used cost-benefit analysis (CBA), marginal rate of returns, and partial budgeting to assess the economic viability and profitability of adopting certain SLM practices. The reviewed studies in Kenya showed that SLM practices are being used -although in varying intensities -in many regions across the country:Nairobi, Coast, Western/Nyanza, Central, Eastern, and Rift Valley regions. A positive implication of this finding could be that the adoption of these practices has become widespread and thus a positive step toward achieving sustainable lands. While there is no standard measure against which the farmers that use certain SLM practices should be weighed, the number of households studied could be an indicator. For instance, the average sample size of the households studied in the reviewed papers in Kenya is 948, with a standard deviation of 2,357, which is higher than the number in Ethiopia. The other implication -albeit negative -for this review summary could be that land degradation is rampant in Kenya, forcing households to employ various techniques that would improve the quality of their land. Hence, an urgent need exists for development and policy interventions to change the current state.The literature points out some dominance in land management practices adopted across regions. For example, in arid and semi-arid regions (e.g., Eastern, Coast, and Lower Central) where rainfall is low and unreliable, soils have poor water retention capacity and soil erosion is more rampant, leading to low soil organic matter and hence declining fertility. In these areas, the common practices used include building ridges, applying fertilizer, planting cover crops (including trees and grasses), and harvesting rainwater (Mganga et al., 2015;Okeyo et al., 2014). Even though the high-potential areas (such as the Central Highlands, parts of the Rift Valley, and the Western region, including Nyanza) have well-drained, fertile soils and receive reliable rainfall, the population pressure poses a challenge. This has led to intensive agricultural production and hence a decline  Gebremedhin et al. (2003) in soil fertility. In the Central, Rift Valley, and Western regions, soil nutrient replenishment measures such as fertilizer and manure application are common (Chikowo et al., 2014;Mugwe et al., 2009).The results from both countries indicate that, as expected, the effects of different socioeconomic factors on the adoption of different soil carbon-enhancing technologies differ. This is because the identified factors affect farmers' decisions negatively or positively. The effect of age on the adoption of SLM practices, for example, is mixed (Tables 3 and 4). The age of the household head tends to constrain the adoption of soil/ stone bunds 4 in about 75% of the studies conducted in Ethiopia (Table 3), that is, progression in age of the household head has a negative effect on the adoption of technologies such as soil bunds. This could be because, as the age of the main decision maker increases, his/ her planning horizon shrinks. It could also be due to the inability to have the energy required for adopting, implementing, and maintaining the soil bund practice.The opposite is true in that the adoption of soil/stone bunds seems less constraining for younger household heads who are relatively healthier and stronger (see column 1 in Table 3), suggesting that any policy (e.g., on extension) aiming to promote soil/stone bunds as a practice that mitigates the loss of soil carbon may need to consider critical demographic characteristics, such as age of the household head.The effect of different socioeconomic characteristics on the adoption of different agricultural practices that have potential to increase soil carbon in both the short and long term in Ethiopia          In Western Kenya, older farmers exhibit a lower likelihood of adopting fertilizer (Table 4). Mwangi et al. (2015) also show mixed effects of age on the adoption of cover crops. Farmers whose age ranges from 36 to 45 and 46 to 55 years are less likely and more likely to adopt cover crops, respectively, than those who are over 55 years. In Ethiopia, Anley et al. (2007) also found a negative and significant effect of age on the adoption of improved soil bunds. A similar effect of age is observed for conservation tillage (Kassie et al., 2009a). This could be due to the risk-averse nature of young farmers (Marenya and Barrett, 2007) compared with older farmers who tend to have a short planning horizon (Heyi and Mberengwa, 2012). This clearly indicates that it is very difficult to single out a uniform influence by some of the socioeconomic factors such as age of the household head on adoption (Nkonya et al., 2011).The gender of the household head has varied effects (i.e., both negative and positive) on the adoption of carbon-enhancing soil practices in both countries (Kassie et al., 2009b). For example, male-headed households had a negative and significant influence on the adoption of cover crops and the use of compost in Kenya and Ethiopia, respectively; which could be attributed to men's perception on the usefulness of these practices (Mwangi et al., 2015). This observation is sustained by García de Jalón et al. (2015), who observed that male-headed households in Makueni (Eastern Kenya) generally have a skeptical response to climate change, which is a behavioral barrier in the adoption of climate change strategies. Male-headed households are likely to adopt fertilizer and manure (including compost) in both countries (Kassie et al., 2009b;Marenya and Barrett, 2007;Ogada et al., 2014), but the opposite is true for their female counterparts. This could be explained by the resource-constrained nature of female-headed households, which undermines their ability to mobilize labor. This finding resonates with those in the western and eastern highlands where men are more likely to apply animal manure on their farms (Ndiritu et al., 2014), while women tend to manage soils with lower fertility.In both Kenya and Ethiopia, the effect of farmers' education status is either positive or negative. A positive impact on the adoption of technologies (e.g., conservation measures) suggests that it facilitates communication of the key messages on interventions (Noordin et al., 2001). Moreover, education enhances farmers' insight into the available options for adapting to and better understanding the importance of maintaining soil fertility (e.g., via the use of fertilizer) (Kamau et al., 2014;Ogada et al., 2014;Waithaka et al., 2007). Education, therefore, increases the propensity for making landrelated investment (Ketema and Bauer, 2012). Some soil carbon-enhancing practices (such as intercropping and minimum tillage) may require certain skills and knowledge to implement, manage, and maintain. For such practices, a high level of education tends to facilitate their adoption, and vice versa. This finding suggests that any attempt to improve the adoption of intercropping and minimum tillage as soil carbon-enhancing technologies among farmers in a given region may need to make a provision for some education (albeit low).A negative effect of education on the adoption of soil carbon-enhancing technologies is because education improves the ability of the household member to analyze data, including calculating the costs and benefits of different practices. Practices that seem less profitable are less appealing for adoption. Education also improves access to off-farm income-generating activities, thereby making farmers reluctant to adopt practices that enhance soil carbon (Adimassu et al., 2016).In most of the studies reviewed, household size exerts a positive influence on the adoption of soil carbonenhancing practices among farmers (Gebremariam and Edriss, 2010;Kassie et al., 2015;Ndiritu et al., 2014;Schmidt and Tadesse, 2012;Simtowe and Muange, 2013;Teshome et al., 2016). This could be because most of these practices, for example, the construction and maintenance of soil and water conservation measures such as soil/stone bunds, are labor intensive. Labor is crucial in the adoption of SLM practices, especially during installation and for maintenance (Millington et al., 1989). Consequently, households with more members (i.e., economically active household members) can invest easily in soil carbon-enhancing practices (Kassie et al., 2015;Ndiritu et al., 2014;Simtowe and Muange, 2013;Tadesse and Belay, 2004). This is because family labor can be channeled to labor-intensive soil and land improvement practices. Small-sized households are more likely to adopt less labor intensive practices such as the use of fertilizer (Freeman and Omiti, 2003) compared with manure or compost.Nevertheless, labor availability has varied effects on the adoption of soil carbon-enhancing practices. For example, the use of manure increases significantly with the availability of family labor but declines with an increase in casual labor (Waithaka et al., 2007). The implication of this is that, although manure application is a labor-intensive process, when collection and application are done using casual laborers, a cost element is introduced and this acts as an additional constraint (Kamau et al., 2014).The adoption of almost all the carbon-enhancing practices requires a cash outlay for the acquisition of inputs and labor. The positive effect of off-farm income on the adoption of soil bunds, mixed farming, and tree planting indicates that it facilitates the adoption of practices that require some cash outlay for implementation. Cash from off-farm income may facilitate the initial implementation of an agricultural or sustainable land practice through the purchase of seed and seedlings in the case of crops and agro-forestry, respectively. In the case of soil/stone bunds, however, cash income is used largely for implementation and maintenance. Low income among farmers is, therefore, a major limiting factor in the adoption of agricultural technologies that enhance soil carbon. In Western Kenya, the adoption of soil fertility management, soil erosion control, and the use of inorganic fertilizer is more common among wealthy farmers than among poor farmers (Chikowo et al., 2014;Kamau et al., 2014;Mwirigi et al., 2014). The importance of income cannot, therefore, be overemphasized in that it improves farmers' livelihoods by relaxing the capital constraint and it stimulates farm productivity by facilitating the adoption of improved technologies (Ng'ang'a et al., 2016a), especially in areas with a poorly developed credit market (Ketema and Bauer, 2012).Nevertheless, involvement in off-farm incomegenerating activities has a negative impact on the adoption of technologies because it diverts labor from on-farm activities (Gebregziabher et al., 2013;Heyi and Mberengwa, 2012). Farmers who are involved in off-farm activities are likely to encounter time and labor constraints for investing in intensive SLM practices such as soil/stone bunds and the use of manure (Waithaka et al., 2007). These findings suggest that farm households need to prioritize their needs before pursuing income-related objectives. The implication is that, when introducing new technologies, there is a need for development partners to focus on opportunity cost aspects.The duration for which a household has been growing trees (i.e., experience) positively influences the density and diversity of tree species, and hence the sequestration of soil carbon. The same applies to fertilizer use, whereby farmers who have used it over a long period are likely to continue using it. This could be because of technical information and economies of scale that farmers acquire over time (Freeman and Omiti, 2003;Nyaga et al., 2015).Livestock are generally considered as assets to farm households (e.g., Ng'ang'a et al., 2016b) that could be either used in the production process or exchanged for cash or other productive assets that could help in influencing the adoption of soil carbon-enhancing practices (Adimassu et al., 2016). Nevertheless, the effects of livestock holding on the adoption of soil carbon-enhancing practices are inconsistent. This is because some farmers' livelihoods depend on livestock production and they may want to invest in measures reducing soil erosion and land degradation. In arid and semi-arid areas (ASALs), for example, rearing of livestock is the main source of livelihoods, and maintenance of high-quality pastures may help to improve resilience for rangeland. In such areas, households may be motivated to adopt strategies that reduce migration (and hence land degradation) through maintenance of enclosures aimed to improve livestock productivity and management (Wairore et al., 2016).Farm size has a mixed effect on the adoption of different soil carbon-enhancing practices in both Kenya and Ethiopia. For example, large plot size has a positive effect on the adoption of intercropping, soil and water conservation, minimum tillage, and the use of fertilizer and manure (Mugwe et al., 2014;Ogada et al., 2014). The positive effect of farm size on the different soil carbonenhancing practices (i.e., soil bunds, soil/stone bunds, compost, farmyard manure, and gulley treatment) suggests that these practices may not be strictly scale neutral or that the opportunity costs facing farms vary systematically by farm size. The positive effect of farm size could also be because farm size is highly correlated with household wealth (Ng'ang'a et al., 2016a), which may help in easing the financial constraint since land could be used as collateral. The negative effect of land size on the adoption of various soil carbon-enhancing practices is because, when land availability is not a problem, farmers may not worry about soil erosion and degradation, thereby reducing their propensity to invest in soil carbonenhancing practices (Adimassu et al., 2016;Gebremedhin and Swinton, 2003;Hagos and Holden, 2006;Pender and Gebremedhin, 2006). Diminishing farm size may hinder the adoption of practices that have potential to sequester carbon (Teshome et al., 2016). For example, Thuo et al. (2014) show that small farm size negatively affects the adoption of improved varieties of groundnuts, while households with large farms are likely to adopt the use of manure and tree fallows (Mugwe et al., 2009;Pisanelli et al., 2008). These findings suggest that households with larger landholdings have an advantage associated with economies of scale, thereby investing in technologies that improve soil fertility and hence agricultural productivity and income (Kebebe et al., 2017).By drawing a parallel from the reviewed studies in Ethiopia and Kenya, it is apparent that the effects of different socioeconomic factors vary under different types of land tenure. For example, Ogada et al. (2014) and Wainaina et al. (2016) note that households with tenure security have a higher probability of adopting the use of inorganic fertilizer, stone terracing, and manure. However, this is not always the case as tenure security has also been shown to have a negative and significant influence on the use of inorganic fertilizer and zero tillage. This could be because of differences in decisionmaking processes as influenced by the type of land ownership (i.e., whether the land is rented or owned) (Millington et al., 1989). Technologies that demand high reliance on machinery and agro-chemicals for maintenance result in spiraling expenditure and, given the difficulty in obtaining sufficient income for employing laborers, they are prohibitive (Millington et al., 1989). However, farmers who own land could use their title deeds as collateral to obtain credit.The observed differences in the effect of socioeconomic factors on the adoption of soil carbon-enhancing practices could be associated with the type of tenure systems (i.e., farm or some plots being owned while others are in-rented). Households with secure land tenure are more likely to adopt long-term soil conservation measures such as stone terraces and agroforestry (Gebremedhin and Swinton, 2003;Nyaga et al., 2015), and vice versa. For example, in cases in which farmers own land, and possess the title deeds, their land-use rights are well established on the land and they can, therefore, invest in long-term improvement.The results show that farmers invest more in physical practices that enhance soil carbon in plots with steep slopes, because of the more obvious erosion risks and rates of loss of soil fertility than in plots on gentle slopes. For instance, the adoption of stone bunds, terraces, soil bunds, and minimum tillage is more likely on steep slopes for preventing soil erosion and fertility loss (Gebremedhin and Swinton, 2003;Wainaina et al., 2016). Ndiritu et al. (2014) also found that soil and water conservation and fertilizer are less likely to be used on flat plots. However, soil conservation measures and the use of manure are likely to be applied on slopes (Anley et al., 2007;FAO, 2016).Access to credit accelerates the adoption of SLM practices such as agroforestry, soil and water conservation, and minimum tillage (Ndiiri et al., 2013;Noordin et al., 2001;Recha et al., 2015). This is because credit helps households in relaxing binding financial constraints, thereby enabling farmers to acquire inputs (Abate et al., 2016). Receiving quality information (e.g., through radio, television, and extension officers) on new technologies can help in narrowing the gap between what is perceived by households and the reality (Bekele and Drake, 2003;Murage et al., 2015). Consequently, access to information has a positive effect on the adoption of the use of soil erosion prevention strategies, and inorganic fertilizer (Bekele and Drake, 2003;Mogaka et al., 2014;Ogada et al., 2014;Thuo et al., 2014). Access to extension services has a positive influence on the adoption of inorganic fertilizer, manure, soil bunds, terraces, and conservation agriculture (Jaleta et al., 2013;Kulecho and Weatherhead, 2006;Ndiritu et al., 2014). This could be because of the better understanding of the new technologies, and hence their diffusion.Access to input and output markets by households is usually associated with some transaction costs, but as to whether these costs have a positive or negative effect on the adoption of technology depends on other factors such as distance or the state of infrastructure. For example, improved access to markets is associated with the adoption of fertilizer use (Freeman and Omiti, 2003;Murage et al., 2015;Recha et al., 2015), while poor market access tends to constrain fertilizer use (Kassie et al., 2015;Ogada et al., 2014;Waithaka et al., 2007). An increase in the price of fertilizer has a negative effect on the adoption of inorganic fertilizer (Kamau et al., 2014), and this may lead to the use of alternative measures such as manure. In order to curb the negative effect of price on fertilizer use, subsidies are sometimes introduced and they play a significant role in the adoption of inorganic fertilizer (Millington et al., 1989).Social networks among farmers play a crucial role in enhancing learning, and hence the adoption of new technologies such as the use of fertilizer and manure (Thuo et al., 2014). Social networks aid the flow of information and can (albeit indirectly) bring benefits such as access to credit (Ng'ang'a et al., 2016a) and information on access to specific inputs such as manure.Farmers who are organized in groups are more likely to adopt improved varieties and fertilizer. This is because groups are a focal point for information exchange and capacity building, and a form of social capital (Ng'ang'a et al., 2016b). Farmers who are organized in groups, therefore, have the advantage of meeting technical experts who can inform them about the consequences of soil erosion. Improved access to information and social capital benefits can thus enhance technology adoption (Kassie et al., 2015;Mogaka et al., 2014). Nevertheless, Ketema and Bauer (2012) observed a negative effect of membership in organizations on the adoption of stone terraces probably because the group's focus was on short-term land management strategies such as the use of fertilizer. Community culture could act as an impediment to the adoption of some practices. For example, pastoralists have been noted to form the bulk of discontinuers of soil conservation methods (Kulecho and Weatherhead, 2006). This could be because they are not used to arable farming and, therefore, find soil conservation measures laborious.Farmers are most likely to use fertilizer during the main season because they maximize returns on fertilizer when rainfall is abundant (Kamau et al., 2014). In line with theoretical expectations, smallholders indeed follow an economic logic so that their primary goal is to maximize output. Therefore, an expected increase in output is likely to increase the adoption of fertilizer use (Ogada et al., 2014). Increased output from the farm, in turn, increases the use of crop residues for soil fertility management (Jaleta et al., 2013).The review of the socioeconomic factors that influence or constrain the adoption of practices that enhance soil carbon sequestration (i.e., Tables 3 and 4) showed that the papers reviewed contain several inconsistent results.To this end, an attempt is hereby made to summarize the review results and to identify any distinct pattern among the factors that constrain or facilitate the adoption of soil carbon-enhancing practices (Table 5). This was achieved by grouping all the variables into categories that are easy to understand by policymakers and a wider non-academic audience. As stated previously, both agricultural management practices and sustainable land management practices that enhance the sequestration of soil carbon or that mitigate the loss of carbon were considered as soil carbon-enhancing practices. This is because the adopted agricultural practices can influence soil carbon either by mitigating losses to the atmosphere or by increasing the accumulation of carbon stock. The results in Tables 5 and 6 show summarized frequencies of the analyzed variables that influence or constrain the adoption of soil carbon-enhancing practices in both Ethiopia and Kenya, respectively. The results show that, although most of the household-and plot-level variables have similar trends for both the longterm and short-term results in both countries, some inconsistencies were observed. In Ethiopia, for example, 71% of the studies showed a positive relationship between household size and farmers' adoption of shortterm soil carbon-enhancing practices. However, 80% of the studies showed a negative relationship between household size and the adoption of long-term soil carbon-enhancing practices. Compared with the results presented in Tables 3 and  4, the results in Table 5 showed a clearer pattern of the effect of different factors on the adoption of soil carbonenhancing practices. For instance, the following factors (plot size, plot slope, land tenure) related to land/farm are in general positively related to the adoption of soil carbon-enhancing practices in both Kenya and Ethiopia. This shows that farmers with large plot size, whose farm is situated on a slope, and those with land tenure (i.e., a title deed) are more likely to adopt soil carbonenhancing practices than those whose plot size is small, whose farm is situated on a flat area, and those without a title deed. Similarly, the education level and gender of the household head, off-farm income, household size, and access to information and extension services are in general positively related to the adoption of soil carbonenhancing practices in both Kenya and Ethiopia. This is because large household size ensures that sufficient labor is invested in a practice, while a high level of education enables the household to process information (including likely benefits) quickly, hence facilitating the adoption of a practice. The positive effect of off-farm income implies that farmers with higher financial capital invested more in soil carbon-enhancing practices than farmers with lower off-farm income. Farmers with better service provision (i.e., extension support) also invest more in soil carbon-enhancing practices.Whereas the results in Table 5 show a better consolidation than the ones in Tables 3 and 4, a more detailed analysis could help to simplify the presentation even further. However, the results clearly show that the adoption of soil carbon-enhancing practices is mainly driven by factors that increase household investment capacity (i.e., off-farm income and education) and those that act as incentives (i.e., land tenure) for adoption.The capacity to invest and the incentives to adopt soil carbon-enhancing practices are, in turn, affected by the support provided to the farmers (e.g., extension services, access to markets and credit).The descriptive results for SLM practices as analyzed, using data from the WOCAT database for Kenya and Ethiopia, reveal the wealth status, role of gender in household decisions, market orientation, income levels, land size, access to technical assistance, and weighed costs-benefits. The results, which differ slightly between the two countries, point out the capacity of these households in adopting SLM technologies. Detailed results are summarized in Appendix 2 (Tables A7 and  A8) and Appendix 3 (Tables A9 and A10) for Kenya and Ethiopia, respectively.The results in Table 7 show that the model explained 68% of the variations in the likelihood of households adopting SLM practices that enhance soil carbon sequestration.The estimated probability was greater than the chisquare value (probability > chi-square = 0.0000), implying that all the model parameters were jointly significant in explaining the dependent variable, indicating the goodness-of-fit of the model. The level of significance of each explanatory variable was tested using the null hypothesis, which states that explanatory variables have no significant effect on the adoption of SLM practices that enhance soil carbon sequestration. The p-values show the lowest level at which the null hypothesis can be rejected.  Market orientation had a positive and significant influence on the adoption of carbon-sequestering SLM techniques.Households that had a commercial market orientation were more likely to adopt such technologies. This could be because households whose production is commercially oriented seek to maximize output; hence, they are more likely to invest in practices that would improve output/ yield. This finding is consistent with Gebreselassie et al. (2015), who found that households with access to both input and output markets had a higher number of adopted SLM technologies, as they represent a reduction in transaction costs and improved access to technical services. Gender was found to have a positive and significant influence on the adoption of SLM practices. Households in which decisions are jointly made were more likely to adopt carbon-sequestering SLM practices than households in which decisions are made separately by the female or male in the household. This implies that, when decisions are made jointly, there is an effectual management of resources that minimizes the costs and wastage of available resources, thus encouraging adoption. The variable strength that can be a proxy for the perception of the importance of the SLM practice was found to be positive and significant. This means that households that found an SLM practice of great significance were more likely to adopt the technology as opposed to those who found it not important.Off-farm income had a negative and significant influence on the adoption of SLM practices whereby households in the middle-income category were less likely to adopt such practices. Our finding concurs with Waithaka et al. (2007)  Although not significant, the coefficient for poorer households is positive, implying that, in smallholder settings, households have no option but to invest in SLM practices that are critical for food production. Contrary to studies that show a positive relationship between income and the adoption of technologies (Kamau et al., 2014;Marenya and Barrett, 2007;Ng'ang'a et al., 2016a), the negative coefficient for richer households could imply that wealthier households shift to activities with higher income, thus reducing investments in SLM practices. A contrary finding was observed in studies that disclosed a positive significance of access to technical assistance on the adoption of SLM practices (Jaleta et al., 2013;Kebebe et al., 2017;Noordin et al., 2001). A number of households have access that can be categorized as poor, moderate, or good, but the significance of access to technical assistance is negative. This could imply that the technical assistance accessible to the households is more inclined toward enhancing the quality of production. It could also be presumed that the source of technical assistance is not knowledgeable on modern SLM techniques. Millington et al. (1989), for instance, show that technical experts overlook other factors that influence soil conservation and tend to concentrate on issues such as soil, rainfall, topography, and cropping patterns.The variable benefits and maintenance costs had a negative and significant influence on the adoption of SLM practices. Households whose assessment showed a negative benefit compared with costs in the short run were less likely to adopt the practices. High-impact SLM techniques are costly to maintain; hence, they ideally take a long time before benefits are realized. The implication of this is that households are resource constrained and are likely to adopt or use SLM techniques that would bring instant returns, and have a low maintenance cost in the short run. Such techniques, however, have low impacts in the long run.For instance, Savini et al. (2016) found that the adoption of phosphorus fertilizer by farmers in Kenya is profitable for increasing maize yield and biomass, with a marginal rate of return of above 100%, the standard minimum acceptable rate of return that is required for farmers to switch technologies. Guto et al. (2011) also show that the initial negative returns and high investment costs can be major limitations to the adoption of soil and water conservation measures by smallholder farmers. Surprisingly, though not significant, households that assessed benefits vs maintenance costs as positive had a negative correlation with adoption. This could mean that most households are not willing to spend their resources on implementing SLM practices but expect to benefit from them.The results in Table 8 show that the overall model explains 47% of the variations in the likelihood of households adopting carbon-sequestering SLM practices. The estimated probability was greater than the chi-square value (probability > chi-square = 0.0047). This implies that all the model parameters were jointly significant in explaining the dependent variable, indicating the goodness-of-fit of the model. The level of significance of each explanatory variable was tested using the null hypothesis that states that explanatory variables have no significant effect on the adoption of carbon sequestering SLM practices. The p-values show the lowest level at which the null hypothesis can be rejected.Access to knowledge about the technology had a negative and significant effect on the adoption of SLM practices, suggesting that the households studied in Ethiopia lack knowledge of the existing technologies, which hinders adoption. Knowledge has been attributed to education level and training that equips farmers with the technical know-how required for undertaking conservation activities (Anley et al., 2007;Ketema and Bauer, 2012). This finding suggests a lack of effort by extension services in the diffusion of information on the adoption of conservation practices (Shiferaw and Holden, 1998). Planting as an establishment activity had a negative and significant effect on the adoption of SLM techniques. This was despite the fact that a majority of the households (80%) practiced this activity, implying that households prioritize plants on their farms as a staple or a field seasonal crop (for food security) and as food crops rather than as a carbon sequestration measure (Tadesse and Belay, 2004). The maintenance costs of inputs had a positive and significant effect on adoption, implying that these costs are relatively low and easily afforded by a majority of the households (including the poor). The introduction of land redistribution and credit programs in Ethiopia also promotes the intensity of input use by relaxing binding financial constraints (Benin and Pender, 2001).Households with a mixed market orientation were less likely to adopt SLM practices. This could mean that, as much as production is for both commercial and mixed purposes, farmers focus mainly on meeting their food needs while commercialization is dependent on surplus. The positivity of benefits vs costs in the long run increased the probability of adopting SLM techniques.This could be because SLM practices incur a lot of costs during establishment, whereas the benefits are realized afterward. This finding suggests that the practices implemented by households have higher benefits in the long run; hence, farmers are willing to take the risk of adopting and implementing them as they wait for the returns. However, even in cases in which farmers may perceive some benefits from a technology, its adoption is also determined partly by land tenure. This is because land tenure affects household investment behavior, especially for costly practices (Deininger and Jin, 2006).Cheap labor has a positive and significant effect on the adoption of SLM practices. A unit increase in cheap labor increases the probability of adopting SLM technologies by about 0.5. This could mean that some SLM practices are labor intensive, and hence the establishment of such techniques is prohibitive, especially with limited labor. Therefore, households with access to cheap labor are more likely to adopt such techniques than those without access. The adoption of some SLM and conservation measures is laborious in nature. For such practices, the scarcity of labor acts as an impediment to their adoption in Ethiopia.A reduction in the area under cultivation had a negative and significant effect on the adoption of SLM practices. This implies that households have smaller land sizes that are sufficient only for production to sustain their livelihoods. Thus, as small land size reduces the probability of adopting such practices, this means that households with larger land sizes are more likely to adopt land conservation techniques than those with smaller land sizes. Evidence shows that farmers with larger land sizes have more resources and capacity to allocate part of their farms to conservation practices (Anley et al., 2007;Ng'ang'a et al., 2016a).This report reviewed and synthesized past research in order to identify the factors that influence or constrain the adoption of soil carbon-enhancing practices in Kenya and Ethiopia. It also sought to identify the factors that influence the adoption of sustainable management practices that enhance soil carbon sequestration using secondary data in the WOCAT database. The overall goal was to provide evidence that can help to evolve thinking and policy prescriptions to improve the adoption of soil carbon-enhancing practices. The review has identified several socioeconomic factors that influence the adoption of these practices. Generally, the review and synthesis identified some factors that contribute in a major way to the slowed investment in soil carbon sequestration in Kenya and Ethiopia. These factors include farmers' capacity to adopt soil carbon-enhancing practices, incentives that farmers derive from investing in these practices, and the poor provision of services or conditions for motivating farmers to invest in these practices and/or technologies. Further, the analysis showed that net returns, knowledge/information on the technology in use, and market orientation were significant factors influencing adoption. Thus, our review and synthesis underscored the need for improving the capacity of farmers to adopt soil carbon-enhancing practices. To this end, strategies such as improving households' access to off-farm income-generating opportunities, credit, and training (on the value of soil carbon enhancement), and the provision of technical assistance can be used to improve the adoption of soil carbon-enhancing practices.The analysis of the factors that influence or constrain the adoption of SLM practices that enhance soil carbon sequestration showed that, when farmers have low to moderate income, and the perceived benefits of the SLM technologies are low in the short run, farmers are not keen on adopting them. However, wealthy households have no problem in adopting such practices. This indicates that, among the poor households, soilenhancing SLM practices may be given low priority if the benefits in the short run are perceived to be uncertain.As such, there is a need to look into ways that can boost farmer incentives to invest in soil carbon-enhancing practices, even for those whose benefits may not be forthcoming in the short run. In that way, long-term soil carbon-enhancing practices will also be adopted, thereby reducing risks such as those associated with land degradation in a given landscape. Alternatively, the introduction of cost-effective SLM practices that fit the needs of the market would be plausible.The results of the factors influencing or constraining the adoption of soil carbon-enhancing SLM practices have also shown that, rather than searching for a general blueprint, appropriate strategies may differ from one location to another, depending on the local agroecological, socioeconomic, and market conditions. This review and synthesis also provide a basis for looking at the socioeconomic factors that affect the adoptionof different technologies in different contexts, and as such open an avenue for identifying complementarities and trade-offs. This study sheds light to counter misconceptions that socioeconomic factors affect the adoption of carbon-enhancing technologies in either a strictly positive or strictly negative way. The importance of the different factors and the direction of influence vary depending on the nature of the technology. As such, there is a need for further analysis of how to create enabling conditions that can enhance the adoption of soil carbon sequestration practices in different regions and farming systems. This will provide more robust findings upon which targeted recommendations and economic incentives for improved adoption of different soil enhancing practices in different locations can be based. Moreover, such findings may help to design policies aimed at increasing the development and uptake of soil carbon-enhancing practices in Africa.Most of the literature reviewed focuses on smallholder adoption of an individual practice rather than a comparison between different types of technologies in the same context. Consequently, it is very difficult to compare different technologies in the same context. Moreover, the data and methodologies used in many studies are not easily comparable. The market orientation available to the land users of this technology (1 for mixed subsistence and commercial, 2 for subsistence, 3 for commercial)Off-farm income of the users of this technology Proportion of household income sourced from outside the farmer's or land user's farm (1 for <10%, 2 for 10-50%, 3 for >50%)Land size Total area of the farm owned or leased by a farmer or a land user in hectares (1 for <0.5, 2 for 0.5-2.0, 3 for 2-20, 4 for 20-100, 5 for >100)An indicator variable for land tenure of the land on which the technology is being implemented (1 for individual titled, 2 for individual not titled, 3 for state owned, 4 for company, 5 for individual titled & individual not titled, 6 for communal)Access to health services The level of land users' access to health services (0 for not stated, 1 for poor, 2 for moderate, 3 for good)The level of land users' access to education (0 for not stated, 1 for poor, 2 for moderate, 3 for good)The level of land users' access to technical assistance (0 for not stated, 1 for poor, 2 for moderate, 3 for good)Access to off-farm employment The level of land users' access to off-farm employment (0 for not stated, 1 for poor, 2 for moderate, 3 for good)The level of land users' access to markets (0 for not stated, 1 for poor, 2 for moderate, 3 for good)The level of land users' access to energy (0 for not stated, 1 for poor, 2 for moderate, 3 for good)The level of land users' access to transportation (0 for not stated, 1 for poor, 2 for moderate, 3 for good)The level of land users' access to clean water and sanitation (0 for not stated, 1 for poor, 2 for moderate, 3 for good)The level of land users' access to financial services (0 for not stated, 1 for poor, 2 for moderate, 3 for good)Socioeconomic impact on the rate of increase in food production A socioeconomic variable for the effectiveness of the technology in increasing food production on a scale of 1 to 10 Socioeconomic impact on the rate of increase in fodder production A socioeconomic variable for the effectiveness of the technology in increasing fodder production on a scale of 1 to 10A socioeconomic variable for the effectiveness of the technology in increasing animal production on a scale of 1 to 10 Socioeconomic impact on the rate of decrease in risk of production failure A socioeconomic variable for the effectiveness of the technology in decreasing the risk of production failure on a scale of 1 to 10 Socioeconomic impact on the rate of increased diversity of income sources A socioeconomic variable for the effectiveness of the technology in increasing diversity of income sources on a scale of 1 to 10 Socioeconomic impact on the rate of increased fuelwood productionA socioeconomic variable for the effectiveness of the technology in increasing fuelwood production on a scale of 1 to 10Socio-cultural impact on the rate of improvement in food securityA socio-cultural variable for the effectiveness of the technology in improving food security on a scale of 1 to 10Socio-cultural impact on the rate of improvement in SLM/land degradation knowledge A socio-cultural variable for the effectiveness of the technology in improving SLM knowledge on a scale of 1 to 10A variable for the effectiveness of the technology in reducing downstream siltation on a scale of 1 to 10Rate of stabilization of dry-season stream flows A variable for the effectiveness of the technology on a scale of 1 to 10Rate of reduction of groundwater/river pollution A variable for the effectiveness of the technology on a scale of 1 to 10Socioeconomic constraint of adopting and scaling up An indicator variable for the constraints of adopting and scaling up the technologyThe strength of the technology in reducing soil loss from a farmland and/or improving land cover on the farm on a scale of 1 to 10Benefits with the establishment cost in the short run A variable comparing the benefits accrued from implementing the technology with the costs of establishment of the technology in the short run (1 for slightly positive, 2 for positive, 3 for very positive, 4 for negative, 5 for balanced/neutral) Benefits with the establishment cost in the long run A variable comparing the benefits accrued from implementing the technology with the costs of establishment of the technology in the long run (1 for slightly positive, 2 for positive, 3 for very positive, 4 for negative, 5 for balanced/neutral) Benefits with the maintenance cost in the short run A variable comparing the benefits accrued from implementing the technology with the costs of maintenance of the technology in the short run (1 for slightly positive, 2 for positive, 3 for very positive, 4 for negative, 5 for balanced/neutral) Benefits with the maintenance cost in the long run A variable comparing the benefits accrued from implementing the technology with the costs of maintenance of the technology in the long run (1 for slightly positive, 2 for positive, 3 for very positive, 4 for negative, 5 for balanced/neutral) Households that have adopted the technology with external material support (μ = no information)The total number of households that have adopted the technology in the area under study with incentives Households that have adopted the technology with external material support in % (μ = no information)The proportion of the households that have adopted the technology in the area under study with incentives Households that have adopted the technology without external material support (μ = no information)The total number of households that have adopted the technology in the area under study without incentives % of the population with spontaneous adoption of technology without incentivesThe proportion of the households that have adopted the technology in the area under study without incentives [(1 representing 0-10 (very weak), 2 for 11-50 (weak), 3 for 51-70 (moderate), 4 for 71-90 (strong), 5 for 91-100 (very strong)]Reasons that could encourage adoption of the technology (cheap labor required)A variable for the reasons encouraging the adoption of the technology based on cheap costs of labor (i.e., 1 for cheap labor, 0 for high costs of labor)Reasons that could encourage adoption of the technology (cheap inputs required)A variable for the reasons encouraging the adoption of the technology based on cheap costs of inputs (1 for cheap input costs, 0 for high costs)Reasons that could encourage adoption of the technology (it is applicable for long periods of time)A variable for the reasons encouraging the adoption of the technology based on its sustainability (1 for sustainable, 0 for unsustainable)Reasons that could encourage adoption of the technology (high benefits in returns/it is effective)A variable for the reasons encouraging the adoption of the technology based on high returns obtained from implementing it (1 for high returns, 0 for low returns)Reasons that could encourage adoption of the technology (saves time and money)A variable for the reasons encouraging the adoption of the technology based on saving time and money (1 for it saves time and money, 0 for it doesn't)Reasons that could discourage the adoption of the technology (high costs of labor/labor intensive)A variable for the reasons discouraging the adoption of the technology based on high costs of labor (1 for high costs, 0 for low costs)Reasons that could discourage the adoption of the technology (high costs of inputs)A variable for the reasons discouraging the adoption of the technology based on high costs of inputs (1 for high costs, 0 for low costs)Reasons that could discourage the adoption of the technology (less benefits)A variable for the reasons discouraging the adoption of the technology based on less benefits or returns from implementing it (1 for less benefits, 0 for more benefits)Reasons that could discourage the adoption of the technology (crop-animal conflict on residues)A variable for the reasons discouraging the adoption of the technology based on crop residue trade-offs between spreading on the farm and feeding animals for it leads to conflict on residues (0 for it doesn't)Reasons that could discourage the adoption of the technology (community conflicts)A variable for the reasons discouraging the adoption of the technology based on community conflicts (1 for it leads to conflicts, 0 for it doesn't)Reasons that could discourage the adoption of the technology (encourages pest infestation)A variable for the reasons discouraging the adoption of the technology based on the ability of the technology in encouraging infestation of pests (1 for it encourages, 0 for it doesn't)Reasons that could discourage the adoption of the technology (discourages machine operations)A variable for the reasons discouraging the adoption of the technology as it discourages machine operations on the farm (1 for it discourages, 0 for it doesn't)Reasons that could discourage the adoption of the technology (reduced cultivation land)A variable for the reasons discouraging the adoption of the technology based on a reduction in cultivation land by the technology (1 for the tech reduces cultivation land, 0 for it doesn't)Reasons that could discourage the adoption of the technology (dangerous shrubs)A variable for the reasons discouraging the adoption of the technology as it involves dangerous shrubs that could hurt or poison users (1 for availability of dangerous shrubs, 0 for the technology lacking dangerous shrubs)  1325, 1580, 1569, 1146, 1567, 941, 1743 1484, 1485, 1486, 1489, 1537, 1483 1740, 1096, 1318, 1736, 1487, 1244, 1094, 1323, 1581, 1326, 507, 1735, 1570, 958, 1243, 1336, 1320, 1490, 1322, 940, 1095, 1097, 1135, 1676 Ethiopia Households 5 24 21 50 Some selected practices 954, 1072, 1063 1073, 1197, 1065, 1077, 980, 1060, 1069, 1074, 991, 1546, 978, 993, 1468 1418, 1598, 1067, 1597, 1058, 979, 1048, 943, 1066, 1068, 1061, 1049, 1524, 1078, 1389, 1601, 949, 1469, 1059, 1046, 1547, 1526, 1467  Appendix 1. General biophysical and socioeconomic characteristics of the study sitesMost of the reviewed studies in Kenya were conducted in areas where SLM practices can potentially improve crop and livestock yields. A majority of these studies were conducted in Western Kenya because of its good potential for agriculture, relatively high rainfall, and well-drained soils that support the growth of food crops. However, the fertility of the soils is inherently low due to continuous cropping over the years. Western Kenya covers a land area of 7,400 km 2 and falls between the humid and sub-humid agro-ecological zones, with a bimodal distribution of rainfall ranging from about 1,200 mm to 2,000 mm annually. The altitude and the annual temperature range from 1,300 to 1,500 meters above sea level (masl) and 15 to 29 °C, respectively. The Eastern region occupies 140,699 km 2 and falls mostly in the semi-arid agro-ecological zone, where rainfall is unreliable and recurrent droughts are common. The area is characterized by shallow soils with low organic matter content and declining soil fertility. The altitude is 1,560 masl, with annual rainfall ranging from 350 to 800 mm. The study areas in the Rift Valley region span arid, semi-arid, and semi-humid agro-ecological zones, with low, unreliable, and poorly distributed rainfall. The soils are poorly drained and saline, with annual rainfall ranging from 400 to 1,200 mm. The area covers 182,505 km 2 at an altitude ranging from 900 to 1,900 masl. The Central region covers a land area of 13,191 km 2 with fairly reliable rainfall, characterized by vertisols that have varied organic matter content. The area traverses sub-humid and semi-arid agro-ecological zones with changing altitudes, which can be as low as 1,500 m and as high as 4,000 m, affecting rainfall and temperature distribution. Rainfall in the lowest areas can be 450 mm, with 2,000 mm in the highest areas; temperatures range from 16 to 19 °C, where night temperatures can go as low as 10 °C.In Ethiopia, climatic conditions vary with altitude and temperature. The areas in the plateau zone (e.g., Harar) vary in altitude, from 1,700 to 2,300 masl; annual rainfall ranges from 850 to 1,200 mm. The arid and semi-arid zones (e.g., Tigray and Somali) that surround the plateau are lower altitude areas with declining rainfall. Annual rainfall can be as low as 700 mm, while temperatures can be as high as 28 °C, with extremes of 40 °C in some months. Altitude varies, with lower regions at 1,000 m and higher regions at 2,000 m. In the Danakil zone (e.g., Afar), the climate is desert and hot throughout the year. The altitude is as low as 125 m below sea level and the area is regarded as one of the hottest regions in the world, with temperatures ranging from 30 to 35 °C throughout the year. Traditionally, Ethiopia is divided into five climatic zones (Table A6), under which the above areas fall. The results in Table A7 show that the majority of households practicing SLM in Kenya does it extensively -implying the use of low inputs, low capital, and less labor. The results showed that 67% of these households own 2 ha of land or less. This finding echoes Pisanelli et al. (2008), who observed that households that were adopters of SLM technologies in Kenya own land whose size ranges from 1 to 2 ha. Chikowo et al. (2014) also observed that the average size of land for farmers that practice SLM in the Kenyan highlands ranges from 0.2 to 2 ha. According to García de Jalón et al. ( 2015), households with large farm size have more resources that enable them to accomplish agricultural tasks better than those with smaller farms.About 51% of the studied households have a mixed market orientation, with only very few aligned to commercial farming. About 60% of the households are in the middle-income category, with approximately 50%, 20%, and 17% having an annual off-farm income of USD 100 or less, from USD 100 to USD 500, and above USD 500, respectively. This finding resembles those of Simtowe and Muange (2013), who found that the average income per annum for households in communities where the adoption of SLM is widespread is about USD 130.The decisions relating to SLM practices are made jointly by the male and female in slightly more than 50% of the studied households. Access to technical assistance for SLM practices is moderate. However, for adopters of SLM that enhances soil carbon sequestration, access to technical information was significantly higher than for non-adopters. In more than 70% of the households, the benefits vs costs can be evaluated as positive in the short run, which means that they are proficient in cutting cost or use with low-cost technologies. Mugwe et al. (2009) observed that the adoption of techniques such as manure and fertilizer application is typical in Kenya because these techniques tend to be the most financially and socially profitable. On a scale of 1-10, the practices are rated at 7, with the benefits in the short run outweighing the costs (or exhibiting positivity). The main costs incurred when implementing SLM practices in the short run are labor costs, followed by the cost for maintaining inputs (Table A8).Appendix   "}

main/part_2/0330823845.json

@@ -0,0 +1 @@
+{"metadata":{"gardian_id":"7b1b66c91c6e2a10d5e03ec0a913431c","source":"gardian_index","url":"https://cgspace.cgiar.org/rest/bitstreams/0436cf1f-8306-4752-a1e3-8d1ea8a27061/retrieve","id":"2024620259"},"keywords":[],"sieverID":"2c52d42d-9709-4912-a3e5-47bce8b46fd6","content":"Fair dealing and other rights are in no way affected by the above. The parts used must not misrepresent the meaning of the publication. ILRI would appreciate being sent a copy of any materials in which text, photos etc. have been used.Editing, design and layout-The concept of farmer-to-farmer field days (F2F-FD) builds on the understanding that socially diverse farmers' epistemologies are varied yet similar among people who define themselves as 'farmers', but they are rather different from the epistemological understanding of people who define themselves as 'scientists': social worlds influence the ways of knowing of different actors, and farmers have a range of ways of knowing what they value, that is rarely equally valued by scientists (Habermann, 2014). For example, farmers rely on more varied ways of knowing than scientists, who rely mostly on reason and authority, whilst farmers trust in senses and language, but also in emotional and intuitive aspects such as spirituality and memories (Habermann, 2014).Both scientific outreach and extension approaches have attempted to involve farmers in technology transfer activities in ways that were understood to be more apt to farmers' needs than conventional technology demonstrations on research farms: examples are farmer field schools (Duveskog, Friis-Hansen, & Taylor, 2011;FAO, 2018;Mfitumukiza et al., 2014;Siregar & Crane, 2011), farmer research groups (Mekonnen et al., 2006), farmer research networks (Nelson, Coe, & Haussmann, 2016;Richardson et al., 2022), farmerto-farmer extension (F2FE) and the idea of farmers teaching farmers (Franzel, Kiptot, & Degrande, 2019;Khaila, Tchuwa, Franzel, & Simpson, 2015;Kiptot & Franzel, 2013) and many others. These approaches respond to the increasing need for information and support demands by farmers at a time of extension systems with reduced capacity (Franzel et al., 2019;Kiptot & Franzel, 2013). Moreover, the F2FE approach builds on the fact that most farmers tend to 'rely on other farmers as their primary source of information about new technologies. The F2FE approach therefore can be viewed as an extension of farmers' existing practices.' (Franzel et al., 2019, p. 277). The terminology may vary, as sometimes the farmers are called lead farmers, in other cases farmer-trainers or contact farmers, community facilitators (Franzel et al., 2019, p. 279), or with a similar idea but differently implemented they are called model farmers or lead farmers (Taylor & Bhasme, 2018). What makes these approaches successful is that 'farmers preferred to learn novel practices from their colleagues rather than from extension staff.' (Franzel et al., 2019, p. 280). Thus, there is an indication that this also has to do with language and communication (Habermann, Felt, Vogl, Bekele, & Mekonnen, 2012;Habermann, Vogl, Mekonnen, Bekele, & Felt, 2021) as well as trust -and expectations:Organizations reported three main problems in implementing F2FE […] First, as reported by over 40% of organizations in Cameroon and over 20% in Kenya and Malawi, farmers sometimes had unreasonably high expectations in terms of financial and non-financial benefits, despite organizations' attempts to reduce such expectations. Unmet expectations could be a cause of high dropout rates, which were also reported as a problem. Limited budgets for supporting farmer-trainers also created challenges. (Franzel et al., 2019, pp. 280-281) However, the effectiveness of working with farmer trainers in F2FE tends to be positive: farmer trainers manage to reach a relatively reasonable number of farmers per month (Kiptot & Franzel, 2013), and the cost is lower than in conventional approaches (Franzel et al., 2019). It is also an opportunity for female farmers to get recognition for their knowledge, and the proportion of female farmer trainers in Kenya was in fact higher than the proportion of female extension staff (Franzel et al., 2019). But it is not a substitute for the agricultural extension system as such, it is merely complementary (Franzel et al., 2019).It is noteworthy that beyond the financial incentive, the societal aspect of being recognized as a knowledgeable farmer is quite an important incentive. Yet, F2FE is not suitable for all kinds of innovations, and supervision by extension staff has been recommended (Degrande & Benoudji, 2017). A combination of different approaches may be most effective in reaching larger numbers of farmers (Franzel et al., 2019).These learning grounds have informed the development of the farmer-to-farmer field days (F2F-FD). The F2F-FD were developed while implementing an approach to support positive deviant farmers in explaining to their fellow farmers how they manage to adapt better to the impact of climate change in their livestock production. The positive deviant approach is based on the idea that some people act differently from the mainstream, but in an effective waythey achieve certain things better than the majority (Herington & van de Fliert, 2018;Spreitzer & Sonenshein, 2016). This approach has been tested for adaptation to climate change in livestock production in East Africa (Habermann, Crane, Worku, Gichuki, & Mugumya, 2021;Habermann, Crane, Worku, Mugumya, & Gichuki, 2021;Habermann, Crane, Gichuki, & Worku, 2022;B. Habermann, Todd A. Crane, et al., 2021). Through the process of implementing this approach, the concept of the F2F-FD emerged and became an essential part of the process: the positive deviant farmers, called 'adaptation pioneers' were farmers who were doings things differently from other, and were successful in increasing productivity and sustainable livelihoods for their families in doing so, better than mainstream farmers in their vicinity, and they were willing to show other farmers how to follow their path while learning from each other at the same time (B. Habermann, T. Crane, T. Worku, L. Gichuki, et al., 2021;Habermann et al., 2022).The research process studying positive deviance in adaptation to climate change by livestock keepers involved regular interviews and biophysical measurements of the adaptation practices applied by local livestock keepers. This helped these adaptation pioneers in livestock management to better understand their own practices -and it was the outcome of this learning process, that they then demonstrated to others at the F2F-FD. (Habermann, Crane, Worku, Gichuki et al. 2021;Habermann et al. 2022) While many such projects document outcomes, little research is done on social processes and group dynamics taking place in these projects (Akpo, Crane, Vissoh, & Tossou, 2014). While studying what makes adaptation pioneers successful, we need to understand how others can implement their adaptation practices and become equally successful. To further develop the adaptation practices into technologies suitable to a wider community of local livestock keepers it is important to offer learning events where others can participate and then adapt the technologies to their own circumstances. In facilitating such learning events we hope to enable local livestock keepers to both share and evaluate their experiences and knowledge with others (Akpo et al., 2014).Technology uptake by end-users would get easier if the process is more transparent and collaborative from the start to the end, wherein consumers of technologies are also explicit co-producers of it. Social spaces are useful to share knowledge and experiences. Learning takes place each time people exchange and reflect on a common problem that requires a timely and appropriate solution. The way the process is designed and conducted has a great effect on the ownership by the participants. (Akpo et al., 2014, p. 17) Together with adaptation pioneer farmers, we therefore developed an approach for collaborative learning that is driven by pioneer farmers involving peer farmers, that they wanted to be involved in, at the place and date that they had chosen themselves. The objective of developing the F2F-FD was to facilitate learning among livestock keepers on adaptation to climate change to upscale expertise of pioneers of adaptation and to understand social processes enabling livestock keepers to benefit from each other's knowledge and experiences in adaptation to climate change. To do so we applied a social practice approach on learning and transdisciplinary co-production explained in the following section (Slater & Robinson, 2020).In transdisciplinary co-production, research activities take place among people to enable researchers and other actors to work together on knowledge production. This process starts from understanding of the problems, development of research objectives as well as the implementation and ownership of the actual research process (Habermann, 2013;Slater & Robinson, 2020).To understand the nature of transdisciplinary co-production during the field days, we focused on observing social learning processes: social learning emerges through dialogue and joint problem-solving, hoping to understand how through sharing, new knowledge emerges and helps to address complex problems, helps to build trust, empowerment, social networks and even producing new identities and capacities (Slater & Robinson, 2020). As part of the twelve month long participatory adaptation analysis (B. Habermann, T. Crane, T. Worku, L. Gichuki, et al., 2021), adaptation pioneers were organizing 'field days'. The purpose of the field day was to offer an opportunity for the adaptation pioneers to explain to others 1) how they were implementing their livestock management adaptation practices; 2) what they had learned from the implementation while collecting data on the practice; 3) what they believed they were doing differently from others.Beyond that, the field days are also an opportunity for the adaptation pioneers to get feedback and learn from others. It is important to explain to the farmers that this is a learning event, not just a regular field day where the government or researchers demonstrate technologies. The focus is on the adaptation pioneers, and the knowledge exchange among livestock keepers. The external visitors are merely observers and only the researchers should be documenting the field day, or experts brought in to cover a specific demand expressed by the farmers.The program for the field days is developed by the adaptation pioneers in direct communication with the researchers. The preparation starts about 3 to 4 months ahead of the event. Adaptation pioneers can hold field days together or organize them individually. However, either way the number of participants should be limited to 15 people. The adaptation pioneers decide whom to invite.Step 1: Clarify with adaptation pioneers what the field days are, ensure expectations are clear on all sides. Explain to them that the program depends on them, as well as the selection of participants.Step 2: Adaptation pioneers explain what they want to demonstrate at the field visit and suggest a date for the field day.Step 3: List of participants -the people attending the field day should fulfill these criteria:1. Invited local livestock keepers should have good relations with the adaptation pioneers, but they should not be relatives or direct neighbours. 2. Invited local livestock keepers should be eager learners during discussions at the field day, and they should be able to implement in their own farm what they see. 3. Invited local livestock keepers should ideally be able to learn something new and different, as well as contribute their own knowledge to the group. 4. Invited local livestock keepers should be interested in being farmer-to-farmer trainers as well, so they should be interested in passing on what they learn to others.The attendants of the field days are locally determined, but the focus should be on livestock keepers inviting other livestock keepers, possibly avoiding political representatives. The program is determined by the adaptation pioneer who invites the group to visit their farm/ herd. Thus, it could follow the following sequence:1. Introduction: Registration, informed and photo consent and filling of attendance sheets with full names and contact details to be able to follow up with the participants later.Welcome speeches should be done by the inviting adaptation pioneer representing the household, ideally more than one person per household (e.g., husband and wife), and a few words by the researcher explaining the background of the project. The researcher should explain at this point that at the end of the pioneer's program there will be a group discussion, and a few months later, a brief follow-up interview to understand how the attendants have used what they learned on the day in their own practices, and a second field day later on.2. Demonstration by host (example from a site in Ethiopia):• Showing the barn and the compound where they are keeping sheep.Explaining where they got them from, which breed, which requirements, benefits, and disadvantages.Demonstrating home-made feed supplements.Demonstrating feed storage/preservation.Demonstrating market-based feed.Showing feed and forage on field/ field boundaries.If possible, the adaptation pioneer will support the explanations with findings from data collected on the practice in the survey. This may be difficult at the first field day after 4 to 6 months, but it will be part of the second field day after 10 to 12 months.4. Feedback sessionContact form: There is a contact form (see Appendix I) that helps the researchers to document their observations during the field days. Follow up interview with host: This recorded interview serves to understand what the host learns on this day, about the practice but also about the experience of presenting to other people on their own, on their farm, and if they are willing to do this again (guidelines in Appendix III).Follow up interviews with participants: At a later stage the participants will be contacted again via phone and asked about the impact of this event (guidelines in Appendix IV).Team reflection: After each series of field days, the research team will hold a reflection meeting where they report on observations and lessons learned.The second field day builds on the results of the documentation and evaluation of field day 1. The researchers discuss with the adaptation pioneers what they want to show at this field day. New experiences may have emerged, seasons may have changed, and the data collection may have led to new insights. The follow-up interviews inform which additional expertise may be required and which topics should be revisited or addressed. Additional experts can be brought in on demand, ideally local extension agents, veterinary officers etc.Again, the adaptation pioneer household decides when to hold the field day, and what the program should be like. Participants should ideally be the same people as last time. For new participants, the same criteria as above apply.The program follows a similar sequence, but brings in additional expertise in the second part:1. Introduction 2. Demonstration by host 3. Question and answer session with additional expert(s) 4. Feedback sessionThe event will be documented by the researcher with the contact forms (see Appendix I). Further evaluation, as in field day 1, will only be done if another field day is planned as a follow-up. For example, it is possible that adaptation pioneers and field day participants will already have started forming a group to continue this knowledge exchange. In this case it might be helpful to organize a follow-up field day that also addresses group management, by-laws etc. 4. Reports on field days in Ethiopia, Kenya and UgandaThe F2F-FDs took place in North Shewa Zone (Amhara Region). This is a mountainous area with elevation between 2,800 and 37,00 metres, extreme temperature and rainfall ranges (Abebaw & Mesele, 2022;Shefine, 2018). The impact of climate change is noticeable in increased occurrence of frost and hale, as well as a shift in seasonal patterns and the extent and timing of rainfall in the two rainy seasons. The shorter rainy season is on the verge of disappearing entirely. Two rounds of field days were carried out. The first round of field days was hosted by four adaptation pioneer farmers in their respective compounds in April 2021 together with their families. After each of these field days, a group discussion was done with the participants split into two groups. The hosts were interviewed separately. Six months after the first field day, a phone interview was conducted as a follow up to understand how useful this day was for the participants, and how much they could implement from what they learned. The second field day took place much later, in April 2022, when the second round of field days was organized.Unfortunately, one of the four pioneer farmers was ill and could not host a second field day. Among the other three, two neighbouring pioneers decided to hold the field day together at one of their compounds. The fourth pioneer, together with his wife, invited farmers to his compound, like the first time.The research team was initially worried if farmers would engage in open and free discussion, but the set-up of the F2F-FDs was very well received. The adaptation pioneers were initially hesitant, but then proud to present their experiences to the others. The positive feedback that they received inspired them and gave them confidence.Participants expressed their appreciation for the hands-on learning opportunity. Some participants and one adaptation pioneer indicated that they had never participated in such an event before and that it was an excellent opportunity to share knowledge. A participant said, 'We all have [sheep] fattening experiences, but we never exchanged our experiences. We may visit each other and appreciate or comment on the practice, but we haven't had such a group discussion and experience-sharing session.'On the second field day, the representatives of the district (woreda) and village (kebele) agriculture and livestock offices attended the field days. Participants got the opportunity to get answers to some of their questions from the agriculture officers regarding access to livestock feed, improving breeding, livestock diseases, medication, market access and linkage. They were given suggestions for addressing some challenges regarding livestock production in general and sheep fattening in particular, including organizing themselves in a group to access improved livestock breeds, feeds from the suppliers, and creating market linkages.Participants appreciated the free exchange of opinions and insights during the discussion.The environment which was created by the field day was valued by all participants, and they requested the continuity of such a platform. Nandi and Bomet are two counties in the western highlands of Kenya. The distance from Nairobi to Bomet town is 220 km and 308 km to Kapsabet town, the capital of Nandi County. The altitude in both counties averages 2,000 m, but it can vary, similar to the agro-ecological zones in the two counties. Livestock production focuses primarily on semi-intensive dairy with crossbred dairy cows. In terms of the impact of climate change, the most severe impact comes from the extended dry season. In line with the change in livestock management, the demand for feed has increased, and farmers face challenges managing the lack of feed sufficient in quantity and quality for the new breeds in the dry seasons.In the feedback group discussions, farmers appreciated the field day hosts, but they also had suggestions on how they can even further improve their practices. This shows how important this kind of interaction is, a practical learning ground for people who can talk to each other at the same level and understand each other because they have a similar epistemology. Like one adaptation pioneer said, 'There are things I didn't also know, so the other pioneers helped in that. Through questions raised, I learned many things because some things I didn't know came  Furthermore, the participants mentioned several times in the group discussions that they were surprised to learn so many new things from their neighbour. They pass each other's places, and talk, but not on this level. As one participant explained, 'We have learned a lot by the way. We used to think that we know but we don't know.'Another interesting aspect was also the interaction with female participants. Some of the pioneers did not that many women played such an important role in livestock management, it was a new experience for the pioneers. Women on the other hand perceived this as a unique opportunity for them: one participant remarked that she usually hears information in the radio, but at the field day, she could see it with her own eyes. It is the women who are mostly at home with the cattle. One of the women also remarked, ' Some farmers also collected Desmodium and other plants that can easily be propagated vegetatively. And they also requested to obtain seeds and samples at the second field day to take something practical home with them. The second field day was also appreciated because of the seasonal changes: for example, participants were interested to see how the pioneer grows sorghum from the start, so returning at another time of year was important for them.Appreciation was given by a participant for the fact that the field day was in their own language, as some of them struggle with English and Swahili. Using local languages in such events not only appreciates linguistic diversity, but also enables more equitable access to information. Sanga sub-county is in southwestern Uganda, in Kiruhura District and along Uganda's cattle corridor. The area experiences a bimodal rainfall pattern with two long dry seasons. The effect of climate change in Sanga and surrounding areas is mainly noticeable in prolonged droughts for livestock keepers.Livestock production in Sanga is mainly carried out for milk and meat. The greater part of Kiruhura District consists of large grazing areas that are commonly fenced with either barbed wire or natural shrubs or a combination of both (Wurzinger, Okeyo, Semambo, & Soelkner, 2009).Discussions and exchange of information and ideas in the first field day went on smoothly among participants and the inviting adaptation pioneer. The views of participants were respected, and contributions were made without interruptions. Contentious and divergent issues were solved through consensus. For example, the issue of why acaricides seemed ineffective was intensely discussed, as it is a great concern to all livestock keepers in the area. To answer this question, participants had to agree: Are the acaricides indeed fake or adulterated? Are livestock keepers unaware of how to spray? Are livestock keepers not mixing the acaricide in right proportions?Figure 6: Mixing acaricides in preparation for spraying on the farm of adaptation pioneer, George K., Uganda.Photo: Pamela Wairagala/ILRI.Generally, the field day was the first of its kind in the area in many years. In fact, Sanga has not had such events in the past at all. Their experience was that livestock keepers were taken to farms of big livestock keepers to obtain information from them, without involving exchange of ideas with the host. The F2F-FD provided an avenue for learning and exchange of ideas on livestock production and on how livestock keepers were addressing various climate change related challenges.The field days generally provided an avenue for learning and exchange of ideas from the host and the participants. A male participant from Sanga who attended a field day stated that 'Learning is a continuous process, which has to be carried out regularly'. The local researcher working with the adaptation pioneers reaffirmed this by stating that 'any learning opportunity comes with new ideas that are supposed to transform the activities that are carried out for the benefits of households or communities'.Participants who attended the field days were able to learn and acquire new knowledge related to water management, disease control, pasture improvement and feeding. Under water management, participants saw for themselves that one can have several water harvesting technologies on their farm rather than relying on one water harvesting technology.An elderly male livestock keeper from Nyakiganda village stated that 'I saw a water pond located up the hill at the adaptation pioneer's farm. The ponds normally have water available throughout the year, implying that his cattle do not have to look for water elsewhere or move long distances in search for water'. The research team was enthusiastic about the success of the field days, and the feedback from the participants and the organizers, the adaptation pioneers, was overwhelmingly positive. Adaptation pioneers and the field day participants started forming learning groups by themselves, and the whole experience reportedly gave them confidence to become farmerto-farmer trainers, and to engage with extension agents on an equal footing. However, there were also lessons learned in this first round of field days that will be important for future F2F-FDs to consider. In the sections below, we report on the reflections shared by the adaptation pioneers and field day participants, and the research team consisting of nine researchers in three countries.An issue addressed by the adaptation pioneers and the other farmers was the relatively small number of pioneers selected. This was due to the qualitative research method and the piloting character of the first phase of the research. A solution for this is to select pioneers with a more quantitative approach using pareto-optimality (Shija, Mwai, Migwi, Komwihangilo, & Bebe, 2022;Steinke et al., 2019). If the respondents for the household survey for this approach are selected randomly over a wider geographical area, then more farmers can be reached overall (Gichuki et al. forthcoming).In terms of representativeness, it was astonishing how difficult it was to achieve gender balance at the field days. The participants were largely male mostly over 40 years of age -a more detailed calculation on the numbers for all organized field days will be presented in a forthcoming publication. In some places, there were many senior farmers participating, and it is challenging for others to manage them if they lead the discussion off-topic because their senior positions must be respected.Participating women were often the wives of participants, or the wives of pioneers, and they were hardly involved, and spent more time cooking the meal for lunch than participating. This was also true when the adaption pioneer was from a female-headed household. It is therefore important to redefine the nature of an adaptation pioneer from a person to a household. In that case, the invitation for a field day will come from a household to another household, making sure the person participating is the one who has the main responsibility for managing the livestock in that household. However, the topic of the field day will always influence who is invited and who attends. For example, in East Africa, more men than women are likely to be invited to and attend a field day on livestock breeding.In some cases, most local livestock keepers were invited from the neighborhood. That has the disadvantage that they already know each other too well, and they cannot see what is new or innovative, because they often visit each other. It is better to mix people from different but comparable locations. Then they will be more attentive and interested in the topics presented.While in some cases it may be important to have government representatives involved, in other countries it is important to avoid this so that people can discuss matters freely. Issues of power and trust should never be underestimated. Where there is only a minimal level of trust, there will be no knowledge exchange and no learning. Beyond trust, people invited should have an interest in, or be practising aspects of the technology being pretested.For a lively and rich discussion, it can work well to invite other adaptation pioneers to attend the field days of others. The linkages between them can become very fruitful and it also helps the other participants to better understand the work of the pioneers.Apart from making sure to have the right people at the farm, it is equally important to ensure that the date is chosen by livestock keepers and not the researcher who is working with them.For example, at the peak season for ploughing and harvesting, it is not a good idea to try and organize a field day. The season must be right both for demonstration purpose and for livestock keepers' availability. This applies both to time and place, even if the farm is difficult to access it is not advisable to try and relocate the field day somewhere else, that would defeat the purpose of the entire process.Regarding the self-perception of the adaptation pioneers, we found that many were not confident about their own practice in the beginning of the research process. It was only through the field days that they realized that they were doing something different from others. However, most local livestock keepers participating in the field days brought in their own experiences, and the learning and exchange was in multiple directions, between the farmers, but also between farmers and extension agents who in many cases were not aware of the adaptation pioneers' innovations.Many farmers and extension agents have a preconceived idea of what a 'field day' means, which may be different from F2F-FDs. The conventional field day comes with certain connotations, and it needs to be clarified which ones apply to the F2F-FDs and which ones do not.An important clarification are incentives for participation, as there are already well-established expectations in many countries regarding travel refunds and other payments for attending events like field days. The other important clarification is that the nature of research being tested and shared in F2F-FDs, is different from that in development projects, and so the benefit of this activity is non-physical/non-monetary: it is focused on learning and experience sharing.For this purpose, it is important to explain well in the introduction to participants who you are, explain the project, organization, people involved, how the pioneers and this farm were selected, and what happens with the information collected (see also enclosed informed consent form in Appendix V).Based on the experiences in the field days, we believe it is important to meet each adaptation pioneer household briefly before the event to discuss all open questions, and to help the pioneers in choosing topics for the field day if they ask for help. If other pioneers are invited to the field day, clearly specify their roles to avoid having many facilitators or exceeding the required number of people for group meetings.Furthermore, it is important to check the lists of participants invited for the field day and discuss the rationale of the selection. Preferably, invited participants should be those that will benefit from the field day, regardless of whether they are neighbours or friends.Inevitably, many questions and issues related to livestock management will come up that were not the focus of the field day. In this regard, it is crucial to avoid the temptation to make promises which cannot be fulfilled while trying to respond to such questions or issues. Time planning can be a challenge. There are always participants coming early, others late. If the field day starts much later than planned, some participants will get tired before the end of the event. If delays occur, then the research team should call the missing participants, as too much familiarity with the organizer (the pioneer) may prevent them from feeling any urgency to come on time.In the second round of field days, experts can be invited if necessary. Invitation of the experts should depend on the results of the first field days. However, the role of the experts must be clearly defined. Experts are expected to be humble and ready to answer open-ended question and or technical questions that cannot be answered by pioneers or farmers. The questions could include among others, those related to animal health, breeding and feed analysis.For political reasons and where applicable, local leaders or local administrators can be informed about the proposed field day. It is the pioneer's responsibility to choose whether to involve local leaders -researchers should only interfere if they are aware of any problematic connotations of doing so and not doing so.F2F-FDs build on existing approaches that acknowledge the fact that in many cases farmers' epistemologies are complex, diverse, and different from scientists' epistemologies. They adjust methods of knowledge generation to co-production and work with participatory methods. F2F-FDs are an approach that recognizes co-production as important, as well as building on existing success stories of adaptation pioneers in livestock management in adaptation to climate change.Farmers appreciate the novelty of the approach, and that it respects the fact that farmers like to learn about innovations in practical and visual ways, ideally from other farmers. Inherent in the approach is the option to reach more people through group formation and working with a snowball effect. Another added benefit is that learning in the F2F-FDs is mutual; both the adaptation pioneers, the people invited and visiting external experts all learn from each other.The F2F-FDs can also be beneficial to women if they can practically see information they usually only hear about. It is also an opportunity for them to form networks with other female farmers engaged in livestock keeping. However, the role of women in the field days needs attention, as there is a risk that they are sidelined and too engaged in domestic activities to actively participate and benefit.Adaptation pioneers emerged highly motivated from the field days: not only did the events increase their self-respect as their perception of their own expertise changed, but it helped them to create more linkages to other farmers, and to extension agents, to create a knowledge network and groups to continue learning in mutual and practical ways.Participating in survey is voluntary and choosing to withdraw will not affect you or your relationship with ILRI now and in the future. ILRI will not tell anyone about your objection to participate. You are free also not to answer any question that makes you uncomfortable.Giving my consent (discussant/ respondent) to the publication of these materials (Films, photographs, audio recordings or images of me) will not lead to me receiving any monies or gifts now or in the future unless specified by ILRI.Provision of a witness For participants that are either illiterate or mentally incapacitated or physically handicapped, a witness may be provided.Please "}

main/part_2/0334798385.json

@@ -0,0 +1 @@
+{"metadata":{"gardian_id":"b038e0df40615b244e1c119c3eb59409","source":"gardian_index","url":"https://cgspace.cgiar.org/rest/bitstreams/1e67f865-7f2f-4102-b1ab-cbdb22247ebc/retrieve","id":"1766838623"},"keywords":[],"sieverID":"052c3db9-56b7-41b3-9611-754b976c26b1","content":"iFEED is an integrated assessment framework that can explore the risks and opportunities associated with agricultural policy decisions. The scenarios for iFEED can explore policy priorities such as: what does crop diversity, irrigation and land use change mean for future nutrition security? How bad will climate change be by 2050? How might agricultural land use change? Will crop diversity increase? What water will be available for irrigation? What will happen to agricultural imports and exports?The modelling process combines implication statements for a comprehensive assessment of future issues regarding crop diversification and irrigation in Zambia for the first phase of the ClimBer work Package 3. Calibrated Statements with confidence scores are used to summarise the models outcomes, e.g.: \"The mean percentage change to maize yield with autonomous adaptation for RCP2.6 is -14%.\" And then experts may respond by indicating a statement, for example, \"High confidence\", \"medium confidence\" and \"low confidence\" As a result of the need to combine implication statements from experts, we plan to engage with some actors working on agricultural policies, specifically, crop, irrigation, climate change, land and nutrition sector. Hence, the formation of a \"Policy engagement Team for iFEED\"The \"Policy engagement Team for iFEED\" is composed of a range of individuals who have expertise in climate smart agriculture, nutrition security and agricultural and food systems policy. The mandate of the \"Policy engagement Team for iFEED\" shall include:The \"Policy engagement Team for iFEED\" will guide the modelling of future scenarios to make them as relevant as possible for each country so that climate-smart, nutrition security policies can be best informed. The \"Policy engagement Team for iFEED\" will achieve this by advising on country-specific details of how each future scenario should be represented. This will include information on future • land use patterns (agricultural land expansion; livestock pasture expansion; crop diversity); • irrigation levels; • crop productivity; • trade scenarios.The second role for the \"Policy engagement Team for iFEED\" is to provide feedback on how results are presented online, in order to support subsequent use in decision-making. Feedback from the \"Policy engagement Team for iFEED\" will include which outputs to focus on, and the level of detail necessary for different users in order to make the results presentation as clear and informative as possible from a policy-maker's perspective.The third role of the \"Policy engagement Team for iFEED\" is to use the country-specific scenarios to develop desirable pathways of regional land use, agricultural technology development and use, and nutrition security. Scenario outputs will therefore be discussed with reference to where governments desire to be mid-century. These discussions will highlight synergies and trade-offs between different criteria (e.g. water requirements for agriculture vs other uses, emissions vs productivity); and \"policy incoherence,\" where different sectoral requirements conflict. The discussion will lead to clearly articulated policy choices that directly or indirectly support desired development pathways.During the Zambia ClimBer kickoff meeting in August 2022, we identified some actors who are willing to engage in the iFEED modelling process, including some existing actors who were initially part of the AFRICAP project."}

main/part_2/0336058970.json

@@ -0,0 +1 @@
+{"metadata":{"gardian_id":"bdb17cb589a20dace023834eb3c7289f","source":"gardian_index","url":"https://cgspace.cgiar.org/rest/bitstreams/187558d2-cb49-45f9-a8ed-c55a6b888304/retrieve","id":"-1481415802"},"keywords":[],"sieverID":"4cb6701a-19ee-4b01-b809-ed61f4f7f6ec","content":"Burundi  DRC (East and West)  Ethiopia  Kenya  Madagascar  Rwanda  Sudan (Northern)???  Sudan (Southern)???  Tanzania (Northern)  Uganda ECABREN Highlights 2010-11 OVERVIEW  Implementing the PABRA frame work 2009-2013 vis-a-vis the JEEP Report  Germplasm / nurseries distribution  Fundraising  Capacity building  Publications  Development and dissemination of a new generation of higher yielding bean varieties (nutritional quality for domestic consumption, excellent market acceptance for income generation): Great strides in varietal development for resilience and significant progress in micronutrient-rich and niche market varieties  Improve production and its reliability through better crop, soil and pest management by farmers:  PABRA IPDM/ISFWM Working Group and Partnerships  2-pronged approach involving delivery of ICM as single package and policy advocacy/harnessing enabling policies  1.83 million HHs or 36.6% of 5 M HH target reached; forty two percent (42%) of them women. THE JEEP REPORT JEEP REPORT Cont'd  Achieve wider impact by extending farmer access to new bean technologies to all main bean production areas in Africa: Backstopping WECABREN, (Southern) Sudan, Madagascar  Improve and disseminate understanding of how communities in diverse situations can best achieve food security, income and other livelihood aspirations: Innovation Platforms in 7 ECABREN countries, MIS, Policy Advocacy  Strengthen the capacity of NGOs and local agricultural services and strengthen the research sector (NARS, farmer research groups) -Capacity building (ICM, Gender, M&E, Markets, Scientific Writing Workshop, etc)  More than 400 micronutrient dense lines were distributed and evaluated for reaction to diseases, pests and local adaptation at Mulungu, Mvuasi and Kipopo (DR Congo), Nyagatare (Rwanda), Kabete, Mwea, Laikipia and Thika (Kenya)  Advanced bush and climbing snap bean lines and populations were distributed from Kabete to bean programs in Madagascar, Uganda, Burundi, Tanzania, Cameroon, Togo and Senegal for local evaluation and selection.  Seed of 32 BILFA lines was increased at Mulungu, DR Congo and at Kabete.  Despatch of released varieties and advanced climbing bean lines to Kagera region of NW Tanzania (Maruku Agricultural Research Institute) Despatch of selected nurseries to Eastern Equatoria State, S. Sudan Development and dissemination of a new generation of higher yielding bean varietiesBean Germplasm Distribution in ECABREN -A Restructured Regional Nurseries Framework "}

main/part_2/0338371689.json

@@ -0,0 +1 @@
+{"metadata":{"gardian_id":"4130dbccc5a65c60b51fdea199f3e4ad","source":"gardian_index","url":"https://cgspace.cgiar.org/rest/bitstreams/1175c05e-4f92-42f1-b3db-ebe722a7800e/retrieve","id":"1941463427"},"keywords":[],"sieverID":"8885be70-c1de-481a-ae59-ccef8e308e62","content":"From mid-November to December 2023, Nepal witnessed the lowest Consumer Price Inflation (CPI) in 12 months. The average year-on-year CPI registered a decline of 4.9 percent, which was primarily propelled by a 3.1 percent fall in food and beverage prices. This decline will have positive implications on poor rural and urban households allowing them to access and afford more food and nutrients.In November 2023, the monthly prices of vegetables, eggs, fish, meat, medium-grain rice, and wheat flour showed moderate reductions. On the other hand, the prices of lentils, bananas, and apples experienced a slight increase compared to the previous month. During this period, Nepal witnessed an increase in remittance inflows, even though there was a decline in both the issuance and renewal of labor permits between mid-November and December. The rise in remittances is expected to contribute to an increase in consumption expenditure.The Ministry of Agriculture and Livestock Development (MoALD) has reported an increase in rice production for the fiscal year 2023/24 (i.e., 2080/81 Nepali year), attributing the slight increase to a lack of flooding in 2023 compared to previous years and early supply pf fertilizer. 1 However, moving into the winter season, as fertilizer plays important role in enhancing crop yields, the price variation, particularly, the higher prices for both Diammonium Phosphate (DAP) and Muriate of Potash (MoP) in Madesh Province, and the higher price of Urea in Sudurpashchim will are likely to have some negative effect for cash-strapped farmers in these provinces.particularly vegetables and fruits showed a decline in prices (16.0 percent and 4.9 percent respectively) compared to the preceding month (Annex 3).Year-on-year prices for ghee and oil, vegetables, and meat and fish didn't increase much compared to last year, while they also declined when compared to last month. All these factors helped in keeping inflation low during the reporting period. 2 The decrease in prices holds the potential to benefit low-income households by allowing them to afford more nutrient-rich food items like vegetables and fruits. The Ministry of Agriculture and Livestock Development (MoALD) released annual rice statistics, revealing a notable 4.3 percent increase in rice production, bringing Nepal's total rice production to 5.7 million metric tons. It surpassed the average rice production of the last four years by 5.1 percent. This increase was witnessed despite a decrease of 1.7 percent in the total land area for paddy harvesting. In fact, the increase in paddy yield drove the paddy production in Nepal; rice productivity stood at 4.0 metric tons per hectare in 2023, a significant 6.9 percent higher than the average productivity of the last four years. -The estimation is derived from the data gathered from all seven provincial agricultural ministries, satellite images facilitated by ICIMOD, information on cultivated land area for paddy, and data on rice plantations within the fiscal year .1 By province, Koshi witnessed the highest rice productivity at 4.4 mt/hectare, followed by Lumbini (4.3 mt/hectare), Bagmati (3.9 mt/hectare), Gandaki (3.8 mt/hectare), Sudurpashchim (3.8 mt/hectare), and Madhesh (3.5 mt/hectare). The Karnali province reported the lowest rice productivity at 3.4 mt/hectare. 1 The enhanced rice productivity is attributed to the adoption of improved seeds, reduced damage from insects, pests, and diseases, improved availability of chemical fertilizers, increased agricultural mechanization. Salaries and wages: In December, the year-on-year wage rate index (WRI) increased by 7.1 percent increase in general. There was a corresponding 5.2 percent rise in the WRI for agricultural laborers in Nepal during the same period. With the augmented wage rates for agricultural laborers, there would be an expansion in their disposable income, contributing to a broader food basket and an increased nutritional intake for rural households in Nepal.Migration and remittances: Between mid-October and mid-November, Nepal received remittances totaling NPR 112.6 billion (USD 846.7 million), and from mid-November to mid-December, this amount increased to NPR 135.3 billion (USD 1.01 billion). The inflow saw a significant 20.2 percent increase in November-December 2023 compared to the previous month. However, there was a noticeable decline in the issuance of labor permits, with new permits decreasing by 26.7 percent and renewals by 10.3 percent compared to the previous year. These trends, if sustained, may impact future remittance patterns. Nevertheless, a reduced dependency on foreign remittances could motivate Nepal to explore alternative income sources, fostering the growth of domestic industries and employment opportunities. This shift may prompt increased attention to agricultural transformation in Nepal.Key messages: Price fluctuations were observed in various provinces, particularly in the western provinces of Nepal. There has been a noticeable year-on-year increase in commodity prices, particularly for coarse rice, apples, milk, and fish. Fruit prices also exhibited variations over the past month, with apples becoming more expensive at the national level, while in the western provinces, the price of apples remained relatively affordable. Orange prices experienced a sharp rise, particularly in the western provinces compared to the previous month, while banana prices showed a more pronounced increase at the national level. Furthermore, milk prices in the western provinces saw a substantial surge of 28.4 percent compared to the previous year, potentially influenced by the outbreak of lumpy skin disease in farming cattle in the region. This complex interplay of regional and national price dynamics underscores the diverse economic factors influencing commodity prices in different parts of the country.Fertilizers: In December, household surveys conducted under CSISA across nine different districts of FtF ZoI, including the proposed ZOI, revealed that urea fertilizer had a mean cost of NPR 28.2 (USD 0.2) per kg. The Sudurpashchim province recorded the highest price at NPR 30.8 (USD 0.2) per kg, while the Karnali province reported the lowest at NPR 26.1 (USD 0.2) (Figure 2). Similarly, the average price for DAP fertilizer was NPR 55.3 (USD 0.4) per kg, with Lumbini reporting the lowest at NPR 52 (USD 0.4) per kg and the Madhesh province reporting the highest at NPR 62.1 (USD 0.5) per kg. The market price of DAP in Karnali and Sudurpashchim provinces strongly correlated with the price reported in the household survey, while in other provinces, the market price was reported to be lower. The average price of potash was NPR 52.3 (USD 0.3) per kg, with both Sudurpashchim and Madhesh provinces recording the highest price at NPR 60.0 (USD 0.5) per kg, and Lumbini province reporting the lowest at NPR 44.9 (USD 0.3). Energy: The prices of petrol, diesel, kerosene, and LPG remained relatively stable this month compared to the previous month. The current price of petrol stood at NPR 167 (USD 1.3) per liter, while both diesel and kerosene were NPR 157 (USD 1.2) per liter. Additionally, the cost of a liquefied petroleum gas (LPG) cylinder remains unchanged at NPR 1895 (USD 14.3) this month. However, based on the data from the Nepal Oil Corporation, notable fluctuations in the prices of petrol, diesel, and kerosene, as well as LPG over the years from January 2018 to January 2024 was observed.Comparing each subsequent year to the preceding one, the data illustrates the percentage variations in prices (Annex 4). Petrol prices experienced significant fluctuations, with a substantial increase of 26.4 percent in January 2022 and 25.9 percent in January 2023, followed by a decrease of 4.7 percent in January 2024. Diesel and kerosene prices also displayed notable shifts, such as a 41.0 percent increase in January 2023. On the other hand, LPG prices generally showed a gradual upward trend, with the highest percentage change occurring in January 2024, registering a 5.3 percent increase compared to the previous year. 3 The slight decreases in fuel prices, especially in petrol and diesel, might provide a degree of alleviation for smallholder farmers in Nepal, as it could lower transportation expenses and the operational costs associated with machinery. Nevertheless, the consistent pricing of LPG may pose challenges for households' dependent on LPG for cooking, potentially shifting to traditional firewood-based stoves.Seed: According to data from USAID Feed the Future implementing partners, the average price of hybrid seeds for rice was NPR 559.5 (USD 4.2) per kg in December. The minimum price for hybrid rice seeds was NPR 456.5 (USD 3.4) per kg in Bardiya, while the maximum price was NPR 700 (USD 5. In mid-November, there was a significant year-on-year increase in the prices of coarse rice, witnessing a surge of 25.1 percent, and the price of medium grain rice increased by 11.5 percent at the national level. Similarly, national prices for wheat flour also registered an increase of 14.8 percent. Although the prices for these cereals in the western provinces generally followed the national trends, there was a notable deviation of NPR 11.7 (USD 0.09) for medium grain rice, and NPR 4.8 (USD 0.04) for coarse rice. While these price hikes in essential cereals have the potential to enhance income for farmers, they may pose a financial challenge for consumers, particularly those with limited means. These households may find themselves in trouble in terms of the ability to diversify their diets towards nutritionally rich food items with higher value because of increased expenditure on staple cereals.Vegetables: Prices for various horticultural crops experienced year-on-year declines, such as tomatoes (12.8 percent), red potatoes (11.1 percent), pumpkin (17.5 percent), carrots (8.9 percent), and cabbage (10.7 percent). While the pricing trends for potatoes, cabbage, pumpkin, and carrots in the western provinces generally aligned with the national patterns, there was a significant deviation in prices of tomatoes, marked by a difference of NPR 16.2 (USD 0.12,). The difference in price is 20.3 percent higher compared to the national price of NPR 80.0 (USD 0.6). These reductions in vegetable prices may potentially diminish the income of struggling farmers, affecting their motivation to engage in vegetable cultivation. However, for non-producing impoverished households, the decline in vegetable prices could be advantageous, enabling these consumers to incorporate vegetables into their diets.Fruits: The year-on-year growth in the prices of apples in November was 17.1 percent at the national level (NPR 281.4 per kg, USD 2.11) and 26.5 percent in the western provinces (NPR 273.1 per kg, USD 2.05). The price of apples in the western provinces was 3.0 percent lower than the national level. In the western provinces, there was a 3.6 percent increase in the year-on-year price of oranges at NPR 145.4 (USD 1.09) per kg, with a slightly higher deviation of only NPR 2.0 (USD 0.02) from the national level. Although the price of bananas increased by 4.1 percent from the previous month, the data indicate only an 8.8 percent year-on-year price rise at the national level. Banana prices in the western provinces stood 16.8 percent higher than the national average. The escalation in the prices of fruits will have pronounced effects on both rural and urban poor populations. In rural areas, where many communities rely on agricultural produce for their livelihoods, an increase in fruit prices directly impacts the cost of living for farmers and their families. Higher prices may squeeze their already limited budgets, leading to potential challenges of reduction in the consumption of nutritious food. Additionally, the urban poor, already struggling with financial constraints, find it increasingly difficult to afford a diverse and healthy diet, potentially leading to nutritional deficiencies.Milk: In the western provinces of Nepal, there has been a significant surge in milk prices, rising sharply by 28.4 percent over the past year and reaching NPR 132.7 (USD 0.98) per liter. This price is notably higher than the national average of NPR 119.0 (USD 0.89), marking a 10.3 percent difference. Despite the initial perception of an advantage for livestock farmers heavily reliant on dairy production, the increase in milk prices could be offset by rising production costs, encompassing expenses for feed, healthcare, and livestock maintenance.Eggs: Conversely, the price of eggs has decreased by 6.3 percent nationally compared to the previous year, with an even more pronounced decline of 7.2 percent in the western provinces, where eggs cost NPR 19.8 (USD 0.15) per piece. Both milk and eggs are crucial sources of nutrition, especially for children and elderly members of households. The heightened prices of milk may limit access to this essential dietary component, leading to nutritional deficiencies among vulnerable populations. However, the decline in egg prices could potentially compensate for these deficiencies, providing a more affordable alternative for essential nutrients.Animal based foods: Meat and fish play a crucial role as primary sources of protein in Nepalese households' diets, making their pricing dynamics significant for the overall food basket. In the national context, chicken meat experienced a marginal increase of 1.7 percent compared to the previous month, while a slight decrease of 0.6 percent was observed in the Western provinces. This subtle fluctuation in chicken meat prices has a direct impact on the affordability and accessibility of a key protein source for many households.In the western provinces, the cost of fish increased to 28.5 percent above the national average in the last month. Nationally, the price of fish recorded a year-on-year increase of 8.5 percent in November 2023. This disparity in fish prices, particularly in the Western provinces, underscores regional variations that can significantly influence household food budgets protein sources witness changes in pricing, and the implications for households' dietary patterns and overall food security remain noteworthy.The prices of mustard and soybean oil have been dropping nationally and in the Western provinces of Nepal. In November, year-on-year price of mustard oil and soybean fell by 21.4 percent and 23.7 percent, respectively, across the country. The price of mustard oil in western provinces was NPR 22.7 (USD 0.17) lower than the price at the national level. Compared to the previous month, the prices of edible oils stayed relatively stable in November 2023.At the provincial level, the most significant decrease in the price of mustard and soybean oil occurred in the Bagmati province in November 2023, with reductions of 38.2 percent and 27.3 percent yearon-year, respectively. Conversely, during the same period, the least decrease in the price of mustard oil occurred in the Sudurpashchim province, with a decline of 11.6 percent. Similarly, the minimum decline in the price of soybean oil was observed in the Koshi province, with 16.5 percent.Both soybean oil and mustard oil offer distinct health benefits that make them valuable additions to a balanced diet. Soybean oil is recognized for its ability to lower bad cholesterol levels, contributing to improved overall cholesterol profiles 4 . On the other hand, mustard oil is renowned for its abundance of heart-friendly monounsaturated and polyunsaturated fats 5 . With the recent decline in their prices, incorporating these oils into daily meals becomes economically viable to boost nutritional intake and sustain a healthy lifestyle for consumers.   "}

main/part_2/0350218920.json

@@ -0,0 +1 @@
+{"metadata":{"gardian_id":"8b0a9f84118a74849898510e94cf8ec7","source":"gardian_index","url":"https://repository.cimmyt.org/server/api/core/bitstreams/08dcd863-665e-4c1e-80a3-d05402e7ef97/content","id":"1506640768"},"keywords":[],"sieverID":"7483e8e8-4934-430c-9f26-7707510328cc","content":"The objective• How? Working with breeders to define best practice and which tools and services would increase rate of genetic gain per dollar invested. Then, enabling this to be implemented! • Four regional hubs: West Africa, South/Sub-Saharan Africa, South Asia, and, Latin America.• From where? EiB, CGIAR, ARIs, private sector• Benefit to: Public and private sector breeding programs targeting low-and middle-income countries    With whom EiB will interact…• Members• ContributorsWith whom EiB will interact…• Sign membership agreement, describing commitment to work with the EiB• Agreement is signed by breeding teams and their managers.• Available (for free) to all CGIAR breeding programs and (initially) 4 selected pilot NARS. Additional availability on a cost recovery basis.• Members to commit to breeding program improvement plan.• Will receive full EiB support to implement breeding program improvements.• Full access to the toolbox, including restricted member sites.• Potential to include over 100 individual programs.• Decentralized training strategy focused around four regional hubs in South Asia, E&S Africa, W Africa, Latin America.• Anyone contributing to achieving breeding program improvements through EiB, by providing tools, best practices, services, training etc.• EiB will lead the dissemination of these tools and best practices across the system• Will come from EiB staff, CGIAR, Private sector, ARI's….• Can register through the toolbox.• Interaction with members will occur through workshops (personal and virtual), individual one on one mentoring / consultation and through the toolbox.• Focus is on enabling members to implement the seven main ambitions.With whom EiB will interact… Key contributors • Development and distribution of membership agreement.• Development of templates for capturing status of breeding programs.• Surveys executed and summarized.• Workshops and Hackathons.• Toolbox is now live!• Module 1 leader -George Kotch (Full time!)• Module 2 leader -Very strong candidates in final stages of selection process "}

main/part_2/0362783597.json

@@ -0,0 +1 @@
+{"metadata":{"gardian_id":"6cb45c7e509d9982e8e3c54413d151dc","source":"gardian_index","url":"https://www.iwmi.cgiar.org/Publications/Books/PDF/resource_recovery_from_waste-679-690.pdf","id":"1478454390"},"keywords":[],"sieverID":"bfa9c076-4eb5-4156-b111-05986fde2af7","content":"This business case presents an example of integrated water resources management (IWRM) in support of a voluntary water exchange between local farmers and the Catalonian Water Agency (ACA) in the LIobregate River basin delta. The inter-sectoral water transfer builds on a flexible approach which allows negotiation between the parties involved to adapt to the intensity of seasonal drought and priority water needs. In this European Union co-funded project, the ACA treats urban wastewater to different, reuse defined levels. The main clients are farmers who are obliged to stop using surface water in times of drought. In exchange for accepting treated wastewater the city obtains the protected freshwater for aquifer recharge. This is in large a social responsibility business model, which allows on one hand (i) ACA to deliver on its water supply mandate also in times of extreme water shortage; and on the other hand (ii) gives farmers a reliable water supply to cope with drought or to go beyond (low revenue) rainfed farming; while (iii) the city gains in terms of drinking water, environmental health, aquifer protection and more resilient short food supply chains. From an economic perspective, the investment costs are marginal compared to the direct and indirect costs of a severe drought as experienced in 2007-2008(Martin-Ortega et al., 2012). The case also realizes an often demanded paradigm shift where the degree of water treatment and allocation differ between types of reuse to optimize the overall returns on investment.Land use:1076 ha (maximum irrigation area potentially served) Wastewater treated:Up to 146MCM per year with about 20MCM for agriculture (water swap) Capital investment:EUR 15.12 million (treatment upgrades) O&M: EUR 3.11 million per year (treatment); EUR 2.56 million per year (water conveyance)Output: Among others, the possible release of up to 20MCM freshwater per year Potential social and/or environmental impact:Improvements in economic development because of additional freshwater, for domestic use and environmental flow, and reduced overexploitation and protection of the local aquifer. Benefit-cost ratio:3-5 to 1Eastern Spain has been experiencing severe droughts in its recent past and is expected to experience even more in the coming years. To support Barcelona, the government is using multiple strategies, including long distance transfer and seawater desalination. Another measure to reduce the water deficit is reallocation matching water needs and water quality. Reuse of treated wastewater is part of this approach. Already today, about 13% of Spain's total wastewater volume is reused, which is far above the European average 1 . The Lloberegat delta region presents an example of Spain's reuse efforts applying an IWRM approach to deal with the complexity of surface and groundwater resources under stress within a basin cutting across rural and urban boundaries. This stress has qualitative and quantitative dimensions. By the end of the 1980s, the Llobregat River, which runs through parts of Barcelona was one of the most degraded rivers in Western Europe, putting increasing pressure on water users and the aquifer (Sabater et al., 2012). Supported by the 1991 European directive on urban wastewater treatment, a comprehensive rehabilitation programme has been implemented along the river allowing the situation to improve dramatically.The Llobregat River's lower valley and delta, located in Barcelona's province, consist of about 30 km 2 of alluvial valley, up to 1 km wide, and a delta of 80 km 2 . In spite of the delta's very close proximity to the city, it constitutes a wetland of international importance for wildlife, especially migrating birds. Its fertile farmland supports intensive agriculture (fruits, vegetables) for the urban market, and as a protected green belt, the delta helps restricting urban sprawl. The delta aquifer is one of the most important fresh water resources of the Barcelona area, forming an underground source with a capacity of 100 million cubic meters (MCM) of water, 2 which is however under pressure from seawater intrusion. With an average annual precipitation in the Lloberegat delta around 620mm/yr (2015: only 346mm), spread over two to six rainy days per month, not only the city and local industries but also the delta farmers rely on the aquifer for supplementary irrigation, resulting increasingly in over-exploitation and water salinization. The need to optimize water allocations across sectors was highlighted during the severe drought of 2007-2008 in Northeast Spain, which caused very high societal, economic and environmental cost of an estimated EUR 1605 million (Martin-Ortega et al., 2012). Aside supporting human needs, a significant part of the EU supported effort targeted ecosystem services of the CASE: FLEXIBLE WASTEWATER-FRESHWATER SWAP Llobregat River and delta by reducing water loss to the sea, and pumping it upstream over 15 km to re-support the natural river flow.In a region suffering regularly from very low rainfall, access to water is fundamental to many economic sectors, including agriculture, as well as environmental needs. Based on a participatory stakeholder dialog, the treatment of the wastewater in the Llobregat delta follows a step-wise approach to meet the particular water quality requirement of each reuse purpose, considering that any additional treatment will cost extra and should only be activated on demand. Wastewater leaving the plant for the sea undergoes secondary treatment, while for aquifer recharge tertiary treatment including reverse osmosis can be used, while farmers demanded in addition the demineralization of the reclaimed water as water salinity prevented them from using it. As a result, the two wastewater treatment plants (El Prat and Sant Feliu) in the district of Baix Llobregat were designed to support directly or via water exchange a range of demands (agriculture, environmental flow, wetland ecosystem services, seawater barrier through managed aquifer recharge, urban water supply, recreation and industry) (Table 57).About 20MCM/year of treated effluent from the two plants could support seasonal irrigation of up to about 1,000 ha (Heinz et al., 2011a(Heinz et al., , 2011b)). As drought conditions vary, the water exchange was set up on voluntary base without specific quantitative targets. In general, most farmers prefer the usually less saline river or groundwater. Only when these sources get scarce, and farmers are no longer allowed to abstract water, reclaimed water was used. The efforts by the authorities to install additional treatment capacity for halving the salinity level of the reclaimed water to about 1.4 millisiemens per centimeter (mS/cm) responded directly to farmers' water quality concerns.The water exchange can build in this case on an efficient water distribution system, where farmers are in relatively close proximity to the wastewater treatment system and freshwater users, limiting upstream pumping costs of the treated water.The government of Spain is giving high priority to the improvement of water use efficiency across sectors, especially in the drought affected Eastern region around Barcelona. While different coping strategies are being implemented, inter-sectoral water transfer based on wastewater treatment for reuse was described as the least costly option (EUR 0.34/m³) compared with desalination of sea water (EUR0.45-1.00/m 3 ) and water transfer from other areas (EUR 8.38/m 3 ) (Hernández-Sancho et al., 2011). To assess the economics of water exchange between farmers (releasing freshwater) and cities (providing reclaimed water) a broader perspective at watershed level is needed. The IWRM concept offers an appropriate framework which allows to consider water-related sectors, services and their interdependencies. The first analysis showed that water reclamation (treatment and conveyance) costs would be more than offset by the value the exchange offers urban water supply, not to mention the direct and indirect costs of the next prolonged drought. The macro-economic benefits will increase with more water transferred to high-value usage. While farmers' financial advantages are limited, the urban water sector is best positioned to absorb the costs for the exchange (Figure 245) unless the investment is considered an insurance against the possibility of significant loss.The business model offers multiple value propositions through need-based wastewater treatment for different water reuse purposes. Aside the support of ecosystem services, irrigated crop production will be an important water user in periods of drought when farmers are asked to withdraw from1. Farmers are encouraged to use treated urban wastewater which also supports the local aquifer and wetland functions. Farmers' payments for water conveyance is being discussed but might be a disincentive while the swap costs are easier recovered via the urban water bill.3. Farmers accept the more reliable reclaimed water in times of drought and stop using freshwater, securing its availability for urban water users.urban water agency for reclaimed water.4. The swap will not change total water availability in the river basin context but more freshwater could get reallocated to higher valued uses, which finance the exchange.Source: Adapted and modified from GWI, 2009.surface water use. Through freshwater savings and additional aquifer recharge, ACA can continue its freshwater supply for the urban population. The volume of the business transaction depends on the duration of the drought and related negotiations between ACA and farmers. While urban users would be the main source of finance for the costs, there will be a range of environmental benefits (Figure 246). While farmers can save in pumping costs and fertilizer application, the benefits for the city are large, and can provide the exchange with a net benefit depending on the traded water volume (see Finances below).Table 57 shows the technically possible volumetric benefits of the exchange for different usage of the water released by the two mentioned treatment plants in the Llobregat delta. While the numbers show the potential, the majority of the treated wastewater is used so far to maintain or re-establish the Llobregat River's flow while farmers shifted to treated wastewater so far only in those periods when there was no other (equally reliable) alternative left to maintain crop yields and/or to avoid shifting to low value rain fed crops. The city gains in this situation by securing additional freshwater for domestic and industrial purposes with a higher water value than what it can offer agriculture. While the exchange is so far of voluntary nature, farmers could gain higher bargaining power and opt for a formal exchange of water rights with other buyers once they have better information on the nature of the water market.The main stakeholders in the project are farmers, the water company of the metropolitan area of Barcelona, the water administrations (at regional and local level), and the environmental administration.Because the inter-sectoral water transfer relies on farmers and the city, a cooperation and negotiation process between farmers and the water supply company ACA was essential. Being part of the decision-making process, has been described as an important pillar for farmers' support of the model.The European Water Framework Directive (WFD) and the Catalonian Water Reuse Program were key for the development and financial support of the water swap model, and also the regulations for reuse to be considered.Since the swap became operational, farmers are making use of the reclaimed water, however, to a smaller extent than what could be made available based on treatment capacity. Farmers view the reclaimed water only as a last resort to be used when freshwater use is no longer permitted, reliable or salinity of the freshwater exceeds the one of the reclaimed water. As each swap is a response to a particular drought, negotiation between farmers and the water administration remain dynamic and prevented so far contractual commitments. To increase farmers' use of reclaimed water also under normal seasonal water stress, there are different instruments and incentives possible which have however to be aligned with farmers water rights (concessions), especially in view of groundwater abstraction.By generating a reliable flow of high quality reclaimed water, the options available for integrated water resources management have widely expanded to allow in-stream river water substitution, restoration of natural wetland areas, agricultural irrigation and aquifer recharge to block seawater intrusion. Those management options have been possible thanks to the implementation of an extensive water distribution system that allows distribution of reclaimed water to a point 15 km upstream of the reclamation facility, and to a seawater intrusion barrier within a few kilometers of the plant. The water distribution network has 18.8 km of main pipes.The wastewater treatment plant of El Prat de Llobregat has been operating since 2004 and has a capacity of up to 420,000m 3 /day. It includes an activated sludge treatment process that was upgraded in 2006 to achieve nutrient removal, using biological nitrification-denitrification, plus biological and chemical phosphorus removal. About two-thirds of the secondary treated water is discharged into the Mediterranean Sea, while one-third could undergo depending on demand tertiary treatment for reuse, with a smaller part of it also reverse osmosis (RO). An additional desalination plant which is using membranes for electrodialysis reversal (EDR), is able to produce for farmers up to 57m 3 of improved irrigation water per day (18.8MCM/yr ). The overall project had an initial budget of EUR102 million; 85% of that amount has been covered by European Union Cohesion Funds, through the Spanish Ministry of the Environment, and the remaining 15% has been covered by the Catalan Water Agency. Comparing costs and benefits of the water swap, including discounted capital costs, the projected net profit of water transfer when considering agriculture and the city is around EUR16 million per annum (Table 58), without counting environmental benefits. The water swap could lead to savings as well as gains for farmers and the city. In an ideal situation, the investment of one euro in the use of reclaimed water creates an income increase in agriculture of approximately EUR1.6 (Hernández-Sancho et al., 2011). Farmers face less groundwater and surface water pumping costs as well as costs of fertilizing, while they can maintain high value crops or expand irrigation. The magnitude of the benefits increases with the duration of the swap.In general, the cost of the additional wastewater treatment is paid by the urban water users and the cost of conveying irrigation water by farmers. However, with the largest share of benefits accruing at the city level, and the fact that the system depends on farmers' voluntary contribution, they would need A third WWTP operates since 2010 on the western edge of the delta at Gavà-Viladecans with a capacity of about 23MCM/yr. The treated effluent is sent to the headwaters of the system of canals and corridors feeding into the Murtra lagoon, with the goal of protecting water quality in the nature reserves and preventing eutrophication. One of the lines, which treats 50% of the total flow, has a membrane bioreactor system (MBR). This process gives high quality reclaimed water which can be reused. However, the water is usually not used directly for irrigation, but for stabilizing the hydrological balance and to recharge wetlands.to be convinced of the value of the exchange for themselves (reliability of the water supply, savings of pumping, nutrient value) and depending on urban needs be supported by additional incentives to engage in the exchange. If farmers' buy-in can be augmented, the urban benefits could be sufficiently high to carry the exchange, also if farmers do not pay for water conveyance.It should also be considered that aside the stigma of wastewater use, farmers expressed concerns how the [European] market and legislations would perceive the use of reclaimed water.Based on the first evaluation (Hernández-Sancho et al., 2011) the water swap model started successfully as farmers accepted the reclaimed water in times of water stress. In the first 1.5 years, 35.5MCM were reused to re-establish the Llobregat River flow, 2.4MCM for agricultural irrigation, 4.8MCM to stabilize wetland ecology and 0.4MCM to reduce salt water intrusion in the aquifer. Since then agricultural reuse (and water release) remained at a similar level although details on actual volumes during the drought of 2012 and 2015-2016 could not be accessed (Santos and Marcos, 2009).If a sensitivity analysis were to be done, it would show that the overall NPV would be highly sensitive to the size of released water and resulting urban water benefits (FAO, 2010), which were so far much lower due to sufficient precipitation. Urban cost recovery remains also challenged due to low water tariffs combined with difficulties to accurately determine the cost of wholesale water services in a complex situation when the infrastructure is shared among different uses, e.g. regulation and transport of raw water for populations, energy uses and irrigation (García-Rubio et al., 2015).The anticipated main impact is based on the reduction of the direct and indirect costs of any forthcoming severe drought as in 2007-2008. The exchange of water towards higher value water use Copyright Material -Provided by Taylor & Francis allows economic gains for different sectors without that the overall amount of water is changing. The project appears to succeed because farmers started to use the reclaimed water and freshwater has been released to other sectors, such that the overall availability of water in the metropolitan area of Barcelona has improved. The income of the farmers has increased to some extent and the availability of reclaimed water for irrigation has been improved in times of low freshwater supply.An interesting side-effect is that water consumption for domestic use has decreased and the water quality of the Llobregat aquifer has improved widely. Although this was not a direct objective of the business case, the water crisis in 2007-2008 and implementation of the inter-sectoral water exchange and related educational efforts increased public awareness for water savings. Energy savings associated with the reduction of pumping groundwater were quantified at around 4m kWh/yr which translates approximately into 1,440t of CO 2 equivalent per year. The use of reclaimed water has also led to cost savings in chemical fertilizers and related energy quantified as 2,170t/yr, including the avoided use of phosphorus (Hernández-Sancho et al., 2011).Also an improvement in the Delta aquifer for all parameters related to seawater intrusion has been verified (Hernández et al., 2011), and even the wastewater which is with less treatment discarded into the sea, still serves a purpose: brine produced at Barcelona's Desalinization plant (which support 20% of Barcelona with potable water) is blended with treated water from the El Prat WWTP in a ratio lower than 1:1 before it enters the sea.The key drivers for the success of this business model are common in many water-stressed regions and replicable: Water scarcity combined with growing urban water needs made water reclamation and innovative water allocations for reuse important and necessary for the region.Early stakeholder consultation leading to the adaptation of treatment quality to farmers' needs and their voluntary acceptance of the seasonal water swap (which can also be key risk factor as long as the exchange remains voluntary).Single agency (ACA) with mandate for wastewater treatment and providing drinking water to the city, thus providing greater flexibility and ease for negotiating with farmers on the inter-sectoral water exchange. Economic analysis showed an overall positive economic balance, not counting improved ecosystem services. Support from the Government of Spain and European Commission to improve inter-sectoral water use efficiency.Replication of the case is recommended as it represents an interesting example of the often demanded paradigm shift (e.g. Huibers et al., 2010;Murray and Buckley, 2010) where different water uses are matched with their required water quality, which includes that (i) wastewater treatment is designed for the planned type of reuse; and (ii) water is allocated to the type of use which allows the highest returns for the respective water quality. It is also a case where the IWRM framework was successfully applied across sectors including the urban one. However, monitoring crop and water quality will be needed to prevent that produce markets, also in other EU countries may reject crops irrigated with reclaimed water.For a full success of the swap, the city might prefer to plan with a released minimum water volume, while farmers should not see the reclaimed water as additional water to increase their irrigated area, which would prevent any release of freshwater for the city. GWI (2009) stressed that voluntary water swap models can be flawed due to the potentially unlimited agricultural water demand and no direct benefit for farmers from the release of their water. Thus the swap needs regulatory support, for example in form of seasonal surface or groundwater abstraction limits (volumes, time periods) which farmers have to adhere to, in exchange of a reliable supply with reclaimed quality water. In the case of the Llobregat delta, extraction from the common irrigation channels by farmers is prohibited in drought periods and, at such times, farmers are obliged to use reclaimed wastewater from the El Prat de Llobregrat WWTP.The same applies to the Sant Feliu de Llobregat WWTP where the limit for agricultural use of water from the Llobregat river is 1.5m 3 /s, but in periods of water shortage this use is reduced to 0.8m 3 /s, and farmers are obliged to use treated wastewater or to switch to less demanding crops (FAO, 2010).In this case significant investments went into infrastructure able to produce high-quality reclaimed water to secure farmers' acceptance of a water swap in prolonged periods of drought. Thus the water swap contract remained like an insurance policy flexible, given the, in large, unpredictable nature of the extent of a possible drought period and actual need for farmers to seek alternative water sources. Despite harsh conditions in 2007-2008, 2012 and 2015-2016, the  While farmers prefer to use the aquifer as their main water source, supplemented by the Llobregat River water, they complied with the swap although to a lower extent than anticipated. Without set targets, it is difficult to assess the difference between any intended and actual outcome or to predict if the swap will remain an option of choice once Barcelona can rely on sea water desalinization. This also poses questions how far the presented cost-benefit analysis (e.g. FAO, 2010;Heinz et al., 2011aHeinz et al., , 2011b;;Hernández-Sancho et al., 2011) for a regular water exchange remains valid. On the other hand, in view of the possible damage an extended drought period could cause, any of the current investments in risk mitigation (water swap, desalination, water transfer) would have significantly higher returns on investments already with the next drought (Martin-Ortega et al., 2012).Figure 247 presents the SWOT analysis for water exchange in LIobregate. As the success of the water exchange depends mostly on farmers' willingness to accept reclaimed water, while stopping the use of other sources, tax and/or regulatory incentives should be discussed in support of the process. For a detailed risk analysis see FAO (2010).Francesco "}

main/part_2/0371571361.json

@@ -0,0 +1 @@
+{"metadata":{"gardian_id":"c9f5ae275e6440d75debf248df8dee3e","source":"gardian_index","url":"http://ir.kib.ac.cn/bitstream/151853/46043/1/26154-90625-1-PB.pdf","id":"522216397"},"keywords":["coelomycetes","morphology","new species","phylogeny"],"sieverID":"edaacd1e-6d94-473d-9f75-5ca5586f6788","content":"Monochaetia is a pestalotiopsis-like genus characterized by 3-5-septate hyaline to brown conidia with single apical and basal appendages. Monochaetia species exhibit diverse conidial morphology, but many species lack molecular data and thus it is not clear if the genus is monophyletic. In this paper, combined LSU and ITS sequence data and morphological traits are used to introduce a new Monochaetia species, M. ilexae from Yunnan Province, China from dead leaves of Ilex species. Monochaetia ilexae shares similar morphology with the type, M. monochaeta and M. kansensis having fusiform conidia and has a similar range of conidia. However M. ilexae differs from M. monochaeta and M. kansensis having different conidia length, apical and basal appendage lengths. Phylogeny agrees with morphological differences allowing Monochaetia ilexae as a new species that clusters with Monochaetia species, but is separated from the main clade with high support.Monochaetia is a pestalotiopsis-like genus in the family Pestalotiopsidaceae which has not been linked to a sexual-morph (Senanayake et al. 2015, Maharachchikumbura et al. 2015a,b, 2016). Recent studies include the genera Ciliochorella, Lepteutypa, Neopestalotiopsis, Pestalotiopsis, Pseudopestalotiopsis and Seiridium in the family Pestalotiopsidaceae (Senanayake et al. 2015, Maharachchikumbura et al. 2016). Monochaetia species are often plant pathogens that cause post-harvest losses and found on different plant hosts such as Coniferales, Salicales, Rosales and Ericales (Guba 1961, Gonthier et al. 2006, Wijayawardene et al. 2016). Saccardo (1884) introduced Monochaetia as a sub genus of Pestalotia (as Pestolozzia). The genus Monochaetia was introduced by Allescher (1902) who included 23 species, without designating a type. Allescher (1931) designated the type Monochaetia monochaeta which has a single apical appendage (Guba 1961, Maharachchikumbura et al. 2014, Senanayake et al. 2015). Steyaert (1949) transferred numerous Monochaetia species to Pestalotiopsis or Truncatella. More than 40 species of Monochaetia were recognized by the monograph of Guba (1961). There are 121 Monochaetia epithets in the Index Fungorum (2016) and most have been transferred to other genera such as Sarcostroma, Seimatosporium and Seiridium (Nag Rag 1993, Maharachchikumbura et al. 2011, 2014, 2016, Wijayawardene et al. 2016).The family Pestalotiopsidaceae is characterized by immersed, erumpent acervular or pycnidial conidiomata and ellipsoid to clavate, or fusiform, 3-4-euseptate, hyaline, pale olivaceous or brown conidia with cellular appendages (Senanayake et al. 2015). Conidiomata of Monochaetia species are usually true acervuli, sometimes pycnidia or pseudopycnidia, superficial to subepidermal, usually without a true ostiole. Conidia are coloured, clavate, narrowly fusiform and septate with characteristic hyaline or rarely dilute yellow or faintly coloured single apical and basal appendages (Guba 1961, Senanayake et al. 2015, Wijayawardene et al. 2016).Most of the genera of Pestalotiopsidaceae contain over-lapping morphological characters of conidia such as the number of median cells, colour of median cells, presence of apical and basal appendages (Jeewon et al. 2002). However, most of the Monochaetia species lack molecular data. In this study, we made a collection of Monochaetia species on dead leaves of Ilex species in Yunnan Province, China and morphological characters plus multi-gene molecular analyses were used to resolve the species in the genus.The fungus was collected and isolated from dead leaves of Ilex sp. in China. Specimens were returned to the laboratory in Zip lock plastic bags and observed with a JNOEC JSZ4 stereomicroscope. Morphological structures were examined with an OLYMPUS SZ61 compound microscope. Images were taken using a Nikon ECLIPSE 80i compound microscope with a Canon EOS 600D digital camera. All microscopic measurements were made with Tarosoft image framework (v. 0.9.0.7) and images used in the paper were processed with Adobe Photoshop CS3 Extended version. Cultures of the fungus were obtained through single spore isolation (Chomnunti et al. 2014). Germinating conidia were aseptically transferred to fresh PDA media.Herbarium material is deposited in the Herbarium, Kunming Institute of Botany, Chinese Academy of Sciences (KUN), Kunming, China and living cultures are deposited at Kunming Culture Collection (KUMCC) and duplicated at Mae Fah Luang University Culture Collection (MFLUCC). Facesoffungi and Index Fungorum numbers are processed as described in Jayasiri et al. (2015) and Index Fungorum (2016) respectively. Sequence data derived from this study is deposited in GenBank (Table 1).DNA extraction, PCR amplification and gene sequencing Fresh fungal mycelium grown on PDA for 7 days, was scraped and used for DNA extraction. DNA extraction was carried out using a Biospin fungus genomic DNA kit (BioFlux®, P.R. China) following the manufacturer's protocol.PCR amplification of the partial large subunit nuclear rDNA (LSU) was amplified with primer pair LROR and LR5 (Vilgalys et al. 1990). The internal transcribed spacers (ITS) were amplified with primer pair ITS5 and ITS4 (White et al. 1990). PCR was performed with a 25 μl reaction mixture consisting of 1.0 μl of DNA template, 1 μl each primers, 12.5 μl Taq PCR Master Mix (Bioteke Co., China) and 9.5 μl sterilized water. The PCR amplification was performed with an initial denaturing step of 94 °C for 3 min, followed by 40 amplification cycles of 94 °C for 45 s, 55 °C for 50 s and 72 °C for 1 min and a final extension step of 72 °C for 10 min. The PCR products were checked on 1 % agarose gel stained with ethidium bromide. PCR purification and DNA sequencing of PCR products were carried out at Shanghai Sangon Biological Engineering Technology & Services Co., China.The BLAST search engine of the National Centre for Biotechnology Information (NCBI) was used for the preliminary identification of DNA sequences of the new isolate. Other related sequences from the family Pestalotiopsidaceae were downloaded from GenBank based on recently published data (Senanayake et al. 2015, Maharachchikumbura et al. 2016).Phylogenetic analyses were based on combined LSU and ITS sequence data. Multiple sequence alignments were visually prepared with MEGA v. 5.2.2 (Kumar et al. 2012) andBioEdit v. 7.0.9 (Hall 1999). The phylogenetic analyses were performed for maximum likelihood in RAxMl GUI v. 1.3 (Silvestro & Michalak 2012). Parameters of the RAxMl GUI v. 1.3 were set to rapid bootstrapping and the analysis carried out using 1000 replicates and GTRGAMMA model of nucleotide substitution. Bootstrap values for maximum likelihood are shown at nodes (ML, black) (Fig 1).Evolutionary model for phylogenetic analyses was selected using MrModeltest v. 3.7 (Posada & Crandall 1998) under the Akaike Information Criterion (AIC). The GTR+I+G model was used for Bayesian analysis. A Bayesian analysis was conducted using MrBayes v. 3.2.1 (Ronquist et al. 2012). Markov chains were run for 1 000 000 generations and trees were sampled every 100 th generations (printfreq=100) and 10 000 trees were obtained. Initial trees were discarded (20% burn-in value) and remaining trees were used to evaluate posterior probabilities (PP) in the majority rule consensus tree. Branches with Bayesian posterior probabilities greater than 0.90 are shown as black bold (Fig 1 ).A maximum parsimony analysis (MP) was carried out using PAUP (Phylogenetic Analysis Using Parsimony) v. 4.0b10 (Swofford 2002). Parsimony bootstrap analyses parameters were set-up as heuristic search option, random stepwise addition, and 1000 random sequence additions, with 1000 maxtrees. Gaps were treated as 'missing' data. Descriptive tree statistics for parsimony Tree Length [TL], Consistency Index [CI], Retention Index [RI], Relative Consistency Index [RC] and Homoplasy Index [HI] were calculated for the Maximum Parsimonious Tree (MPT). The Kishino-Hasegawa tests (KHT) (Kishino & Hasegawa 1989) were performed to determine whether the trees were significantly different. Bootstrap values for maximum parsimony are shown at nodes (MP, red) (Fig 1). Phylogenetic trees were viewed in FigTree v. 1.4.0 (Rambaut & Drummond 2008) and further editing was done using in Microsoft power point (2007). The combined LSU and ITS sequence data set comprised 22 strains including the new strain Monochaetia ilexae (KUMCC 15-0520) in Pestalotiopsidaceae with Bartalinia robillardoides as the out-group taxon. The maximum likelihood analysis, maximum parsimony and Bayesian analyses resulted in a tree with similar topology that did not differ significantly from one another (data not shown).The maximum parsimony analysis comprised 1404 total characters and of this 1190 characters were constant, 68 variable characters were parsimony-uninformative and 146 characters were parsimony-informative. The parsimony analysis resulted in 1000 equally parsimonious trees and the first tree (length = 294 steps with CI = 0.796, RI = 0.881, RC = 0.701and HI = 0.204) is shown here. The new strain clustered in genus Monochaetia, but separated from other sequence available species in the genus.Monochaetia ilexae N.I. de Silva, Phookamsak & K.D. Hyde, sp. nov.Index Fungorum number: IF552505, Faces of Fungi number: FoF 02622Etymology: the epithet \"ilexae\" refers to the host, of which the taxon was collected. Saprobic on dead leaves of Ilex sp. Sexual morph: Undetermined. Asexual morph: Conidiomata 115-180 μm diam, pycnidial, solitary, scattered, immersed to erumpent, easily broken, visible as brown, flat, scar-like structures on the host, uni-loculate, glabrous, without an ostiole, releasing conidia by breaking the host surface. Conidiomata wall multi-layered, thin walled, brown, comprising cells of textura angularis. Conidiophores indistinct. Conidiogenous cells 4-6 × 1-2 μm ( x =5.4 × 1.4 μm), holoblastic, phialidic, discrete, cylindrical, hyaline, smooth, thin-walled.Conidia 20-27 × 3-5 μm diam. ( x =23.7 × 6 μm), fusiform, tapering at both ends, 4-septate, erect or sometimes slightly curved; apical cell 2.5-4.7 μm long ( x =3.7 μm) , conical, hyaline and smooth-walled; three median cells together 13-18 μm long ( x =15.8 μm) , doliiform, brown, rough-walled, echinulate, upper second cell 4.9-7.1 μm long ( x =5.7 μm), upper third cell 3.5-5.9 μm long ( x =5.1 μm), upper fourth cell 4.3-6.9 μm long ( x =5.6 μm); basal cell 2.6-5.2 μm long ( x =3.7 μm), conic, hyaline and smooth-walled; apical appendage 6-24 μm long ( x =15.3 μm), single, tubular, filiform; basal appendage 3-12 μm long ( x =7.3 μm), single, central, tubular, filiform.Culture characteristics: Colonies on PDA 35 mm diameter after 7 days at 25 °C, circular, raised, dense surface with lobate edge, zonate with different sector light brown at the margin, brown at the center and; reverse brown at the margin, dark brown at the center.Material examined: CHINA, Yunnan Province, Shangri-La, on a dead leaf of Ilex sp. (Aquifeliaceae), July 2014, R. Phookamsak, NI009 (HKAS 92492, holotype, MFLU 16-1429 isotype), ex-type living culture KUMCC 15-0520, MFLUCC 16-0829.Notes: The new strain, Monochaetia ilexae clusters with Monochaetia species, but is separated from the main clade with high bootstrap support (100% ML, 98% MP, 1.00 PP, Fig. 1). Monochaetia ilexae shares similar morphology with the type, M. monochaeta (Guba 1961) in having fusiform conidia and has a similar range of conidia (20-27 μm) with M. kansensis (18-26 μm) (Guba 1961). However, M. ilexae differs from M. monochaeta as the former has fusiform, brown, 20-27 μm long conidia with a 6-24 μm long, single, apical appendage, whereas M. monochaeta has pale olivaceous, 15-21 μm long conidia, with a 5-19 μm long, single, apical appendage (Guba 1961). Monochaetia kansensis differs in its erect, slightly curved, olivaceous or umber conidia, with a 10-38 μm long, single, apical appendage.In Table 2 we tabulate the morphological data for different Monochaetia species (Guba 1961). Monochaetia species have been recorded from range of host species, including Alnus sp., Bellota sp., Camellia sp., Castanea sp., Corylus sp., Cryptomeria sp., Osyris sp., Pteridium sp., Quercus sp., Rosa sp., Russelia sp., Schinus sp, (Guba 1961) and this is the first record from Ilex sp. in China (Guba 1961, Farr & Rossman 2016).Monochaetia bicornis, M. hysteriiformis, M. macropoda, M. miersii, M. monochaeta, M. osyrella and M. osyridella have fusiform conidia, which are similar to those of M. ilexae. Among them, M. hysteriiformis and M. osyridella have overlapping conidial lengths with M. ilexae. However, M. hysteriiformis has umber-coloured conidia, with 19-24 μm median cells and M. osyridella has chestnut brown conidia, with 15-18 μm long, basal appendage, that differs from M. illexae. Monochaetia alnea, M. cryptomeriae, M. kansensis, M. phyllostictea, M. rosae-caninae and M. schini do not have fusiform conidia.   The distinct morphology of the conidia is the main feature that initiated the interest to study Monochaetia species (Guba 1961, Maharachchikumbura et al. 2014). Monochaetia species are morphologically diverse in conidial morphology.The number and colour of median cells of conidia and other biometric measurements are used to differentiate and define Monochaetia species (Guba 1961).Monochaetia ilexae, Monochaetia monochaeta (type species) and Monochaetia kansensis are 5-celled conidia forms that cluster together in the current phylogenetic analysis (Guba 1961). Guba (1961) designated a three section classification of Monochaetia species including, Quadriloculatae, Quinqueloculatae, and Sexloculatae for threeseptate, four-septate, and five-septate conidia, respectively. According to Guba's classification, the main character he used to distinguish Monochaetia and Pestalotiopsis is that Monochaetia possess a single apical appendage, whereas Pestalotiopsis possess more than one apical appendage (Jeewon et al. 2002(Jeewon et al. , 2003)). Monochaetia and Pestalotiopsis show a close relationship because of similar conidial morphology of the euseptate nature of the three median cells (Jeewon et al. 2002). However previous studies have shown that they are phylogenetically distinct (Jeewon et al. 2002, 2003, Maharachchikumbura et al. 2014) and the current study is in agreement.The presence of a single apical appendage is not a unique character for Monochaetia (Jeewon et al. 2002). Single apical appendages are also present in Pestalotiopsis, Seiridium and Seimatosporium species (Jeewon et al. 2002, Maharachchikumbura et al. 2014). Monochaetia karstenii has a single apical appendage (Jeewon et al. 2002). Nag Rag (1993) synonymized Monochaetia karstenii with Pestalotiopsis karstenii because of their similar conidial morphology, such as an apical appendage arising as a tubular extension from the apical cell and median cells having thin walls (Jeewon et al. 2002). Phylogenetic analyses of Jeewon et al. (2002) and the current study show Monochaetia karstenii clustering with Pestalotiopsis species.According to the present phylogenetic analysis (Fig. 1), Seridium and Ciliochorella form a sister clade to Monochaetia. Seridium species share the character with Monochaetia in having a single apical appendage (Jeewon et al. 2002). The species also have different morphological characters. Conidia of Seridium are distoseptate, whereas in Monochaetia they are euseptate (Jeewon et al. 2002). Another difference between Seridium and Monochaetia is that Seridium has thick-walled median cells, whereas those of Monochaetia have a less elaborate structure with thinnerwalled and lighter-colored median cells (Jeewon et al. 2002). These morphological differences are supported by the current phylogenetic analysis, showing separate clades for Monochaetia and Seridium. The sexual morph of Seridium species has been reported to be Lepteutypa, whereas no sexual morph is known for Monochaetia species (Jeewon et al. 2002)."}

main/part_2/0372726954.json

@@ -0,0 +1 @@
+{"metadata":{"gardian_id":"4b8a4308f7c0159e1101089b8c17d966","source":"gardian_index","url":"https://cgspace.cgiar.org/rest/bitstreams/129b2606-c5db-485e-850f-db7fa262595c/retrieve","id":"-1102636978"},"keywords":["community seed bank","custodians","seed producers","seed sector development","strategies","sustainability"],"sieverID":"f1f9e7df-f737-4ca6-9d87-2d46c1e3dfa9","content":"Community seed banks are farmer-managed organizations that conserve and sustainably manage local crop and tree diversity. They are found in many countries of the Global South and increasingly in the Global North. Altogether, they maintain hundreds of crop and tree species and thousands of mostly local varieties and distribute tons of quality seed per year. Through their activities, they share and safeguard the world's agrobiodiversity, contribute to seed security, and allow farming households in local communities to produce and consume more affordable, secure, diverse, and nutritious foods. However, community seed banks are knowledge-, resource-, and timeintensive organizations that operate through their members' voluntary contributions. The purpose of this article is to analyze the sustainability challenge of community seed banks and identify strategies that address it. Focus group discussions and key informant interviews were used, complemented by secondary data analysis of research reports and other deliverables, resulting in five case study countries in Africa and Asia. Five promising sustainability strategies can support viable community seed bank development: value addition; nature-positive agriculture; enabling environment and national genebank partnership; networking and digitalization; and modern, low-cost seed quality technologies. Sustainable community seed banks can make important contributions to national seed sector development but they need stronger policy and legal support to maintain their sustainability.A community seed bank, in some countries called community seed wealth center (Bangladesh), farmer seed house (France), (community) seed library (Canada, United Kingdom), and seed reserve (Guatemala), is a farmer-managed organization with the functions of conservation and sustainable management of local crop-and, increasingly, tree diversity [1]. A community seed bank conserves local crop/tree varieties and related knowledge under direct control of the community. Seeds and seedlings are collected from farmers' fields and home gardens and sometimes from the wild [1][2][3]. Women actively participate and make decisions in many community seed banks concerning the tasks related to seed collection, management and distribution, the organization of meetings and events, participate and make decisions in many community seed banks concerning the tasks related to seed collection, management and distribution, the organization of meetings and events, and collaboration with other seed sector stakeholders. Some community seed banks with whom the authors collaborate have only female farmer members, such as Kabudi-Agoro in Kenya and Gumbu in South Africa. Community seed banks are found in many countries of the Global South and increasingly in the Global North, and worldwide, their number is on the rise [4,5].Community seed banks emerged in the early 1990s, initially as a response to crisis situations. Ethiopia pioneered community seed banks as a response to a devastating famine. With international support, community seed banks were set up and supplied with seeds of preferred crop varieties. In Guatemala and Nicaragua, the first community seed houses and reserves were built after the devastating impact of a hurricane. There were other motivating factors that led to the establishment of one or more community seed banks. In China, community seed banks emerged to maintain both traditional and newly acquired varieties through participatory crop improvement [4]. Very recently, national organizations in Somaliland, South Sudan, and Sudan established new community seed banks for the first time in their countries to deal with seed insecurity, amidst the very fragile situation of conflict and warfare [5]. In Kenya, the first established community seed bank focuses on conserving traditional leafy vegetable seeds to improve nutrition and health through more diverse diets [6].Community seed banks manage seeds collectively and are usually led by a small commi ee of 5-7 members who have been elected by the local farming community. The seed storage building can have just one room equipped with shelves and seed containers or it can be larger, with separate rooms for seed conservation, bulk storage of seed, office space, and meeting space. A new type recently piloted in Ghana is a community seed/field bank. This combines seeds stored in a facility and seeds (i.e., plants/planting material) conserved in the fields of farmers, in particular, banana, root, and tuber species. In practice, most community seed banks store seeds only for a relatively short time (one or two seasons) and regenerate seeds regularly through various mechanisms, such as communally managed seed plots (a ached to the seed storage facility) or individually managed seed plots. Often, the community seed bank management commi ee will ask farmermembers with known crop management skills to take responsibility for the multiplication of a certain crop. Each season, available seed is borrowed to interested members (and sometimes also non-members). Dedicated management commi ee members inspect the quality of all the seed received and distributed and maintain a registry to track all the seed borrowing and returning transactions. Figure 1 presents the regular operations of a community seed bank.  Through its operations, a community seed bank can greatly improve seed access to and availability of a large diversity of crops and crop varieties and fruit and timber tree species. Community seed banks also play a role in adaptation to climate change through the deliberate management of crop and varietal diversity [7]. In addition, community seed banks also (i) promote knowledge-and skill-sharing [8]; (ii) build capacity in farm and natural resource management [9]; (iii) engage with plant breeders to do participatory variety selection for climate-change adaptation; (iv) serve as a platform for community action, social development, and women's empowerment (some community seed banks have one hundred percent women membership); (v) offer credit; (vi) manufacture and sell value-added products; and (vii) represent farmers' views and interests at community and national levels [10]. In some countries, the interactions and joint efforts among community seed bank members are leading to more peace and security [11]. Some community seed banks have become private sector seed producers, delivering large amounts of quality seed to the market and customers (India, Nepal), including a government endorsed certified seed type known as Quality Declared Seed (QDS, Uganda) [12]. Through all these activities, they contribute to several of the (17) goals and associated (169) targets of the \"Transforming our world: 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development\" of the United Nations (https: //sdgs.un.org/2030agenda, accessed on 2 October 2024).Community seed banks are knowledge-, time-, and resource-intensive organizations that largely operate through voluntary contributions of their members. Community seed banks are usually managed by a small group of farmers elected from the community volunteers, but usually without much managerial and organizational experience. Membership often fluctuates over time. It takes knowledge, skills, time, and effort to run a well-functioning community seed bank and become experienced crop and tree conservationists and seed multipliers and distributors. To deal with the challenges related to this kind of organizational set-up, community seed bank members and their leaders (managers) need to develop the financial, managerial, organizational, and technical skills required to keep the organization viable over time. Community seed bank financial management has received little attention [13]. Economic expertise is particularly needed when the original support to establish a community seed bank ceases because such support is often provided by outsiders (e.g., international or national non-government organizations (NGOs), research organizations, the national genebank). As the accumulated experience of the authors and others has demonstrated, tackling the multiple dimensions of sustainability is a major development challenge [1,[14][15][16]. The purpose of this article is to analyze how community seed banks are addressing this sustainability challenge through innovative strategies and what the emerging results are. The research questions addressed are as follows: (i) What capacities do community seed banks need to contribute to sustainability over time and (ii) how they can acquire these capacities? Section 2 presents the material and methods of this study, including a brief discussion of the key concepts. Section 3.1 introduces five country case studies (India, Kenya, Nepal, South Africa, Uganda), where community seed banks are piloting new sustainability strategies. The strategies are synthesized in Section 4. Section 5 concludes the article.Our work connects to the conceptual domains of organizational sustainability and seed systems and seed sector development, which are discussed briefly in Sections 2.1 and 2.2. Our methods are presented in Section 2.3.Our analysis of the sustainability of community seed banks builds on the extensive literature about sustainable development but zooms in on organizational sustainability. According to Ref. [17], sustainable development requires the integration of three key dimensions: environmental (through the conservation of biodiversity and ecosystems and population control), economic (through production, distribution, and consumption), and social (through progressive culture, proper human resource management, and people's participation). Other authors have argued, building on the work of John Stuart Mill, for a (classical) political economy approach that has a strong integrative power in which history, interdisciplinarity, and social classes are central elements [18,19]. Following Ref. [20], we define organizational sustainability as a comprehensive strategy to build capacity to respond to environmental, economic, institutional (including political/legal), and social dynamics that shape sustainability outcomes. This definition explicitly addresses the environmental dimension of sustainability, which is in line with Ref. [17].Environmental sustainability requires optimizing the use of local resources (energy, equipment, labor, land, machinery, seeds/seedlings, storage facility, timber, tools, water) and reuse, recycling, and reduction of waste. Nature-positive and agroecological practices, such as agroforestry, incorporating crop residues in the soil, crop rotation and intercropping, producing and using biopesticides and natural repellents, and water harvesting, contribute to environmental sustainability. The work of Ref. [20] resonates with our previous work on the sustainability challenge of community seed banks, which identified five critical conditions to achieve sustainability: (i) effective operational mechanisms (social-organizational dimension); (ii) legal recognition and protection (institutional/policy dimension); (iii) members having adequate technical knowledge and social skills (social-technical dimension) and resources (environmental dimension); (iv) feasible options for financial viability (economic dimension); and (v) the use of strategic planning from the very beginning.Community seed bank long-term operations include conservation, multiplication, distribution, improvement, and adding value to seeds, mostly of local varieties and varieties improved through participatory crop improvement. When well-executed, these operations can contribute to seed security and seed system resilience, which are core elements of seed sector development. This means that farmers can easily obtain enough quality seeds that they prefer when needed and for a reasonable \"price\" (most community seed banks distribute seeds on a 1:2 ratio, meaning that for 1 kg of seeds, 2 kg need to be returned after harvest [1]). Community seed banks have their roots in farmer-managed seed systems and community-based seed entrepreneurship, which focuses on household and community livelihoods and fulfilling certain social functions, in contrast to purely commercial seed systems and private sector seed entrepreneurship, represented by national and international seed companies that are formally registered and operate purely for profit. As such, community seed banks have some elements in common with solidarity economy organizations, such as the collective action for the common good, striving for equity, and participatory decision-making [21,22]. In acknowledging the dynamic nature of seed sector development [23], community seed banks can evolve over time from being fully embedded in the farmer-managed seed system to becoming connected to various local markets (solidarity and commercial) and (partially) operating under the formal seed governance regime. They then have similarities with enterprises that Sperling and Almekinders have recently labeled as belonging to the \"informal commercial seed systems\" [24].To collect data on the operations, results, and challenges of community seed banks, we used a field-based participatory action learning approach to study and learn from community seed banks in Kenya and Uganda, complemented by a secondary data review of India, Nepal, and South Africa, which together are presented as five country case studies. We used data collected concerning the years 2021 to 2024, which includes the period of the COVID-19 pandemic, during which field activities were badly affected but not completely halted. Field activities included monitoring visits to the community seed banks, targeted training activities, and participatory crop experimentation. Many community seed banks assumed a key role in this difficult period through keeping their doors open and providing access to small quantities of seed, while the formal seed delivery system faced major challenges and, in most countries, could not reach local communities anymore [25]. The methods used include focus group discussions (FGDs) on community seed bank operations and sustainability challenges with community seed bank management committee teams and core members (usually about 10 persons with more or less equal representation of men and women). Three FGDs were held in Kenya and four in Uganda, facilitated by staff of the Alliance (Kenya) and NARO-PGRC and the Alliance (Uganda) at the premises of the community seed banks. The sessions took place in May and September 2023, and each lasted about 2.5 h.The topics and key questions of the FGDs were as follows: We also conducted open key informant interviews with professionals from government and non-government organizations about personal and institutional interests and motivation to work with community seed banks, operations of the community seed banks, and the sustainability challenges faced. Professionals included female and male agricultural researchers, extensionists, government officials, national genebank managers and staff, and community promotors. Interviews in Kenya and Uganda were conducted on several occasions during 2023 and 2024 by staff of the Alliance.The topics addressed were as follows:• The financial viability and operational sustainability, and options and initiatives to strengthen these;Challenges and opportunities of organizational linkages to national or international actors, and new initiatives underway or planned; • The policy and legal environment, and the related challenges and opportunities.The field work was complemented by a review of secondary data, including articles, briefs, and technical reports of community seed bank initiatives and projects. The data analyzed concerned the origins and evolution of the number and type of operations of community seed banks, conservation activities and results (number of crops and varieties), seed distributions activities and results (types of channels, seed volumes), engagement in participatory crop improvement and the results, and engagement in value addition activities and the results. Also reviewed were relevant national policies, laws, and regulations that affect farmer-managed seed systems in the five countries, including the recognition of, support to, and collaboration with community seed banks. A review of these policies/laws/regulations in 14 African countries, including Kenya and Uganda, was published as a report in 2023 [26]. All the data were analyzed and organized in the form of country cases studies that include context, community seed bank activities, evolution, results, institutional environment, and challenges.Five country cases are presented, in which each addresses different community seed bank sustainability dimensions, as summarized in Table 1. In India, the seeds of farmers' varieties and landraces are not part of the formal seed system but remain largely farmer-managed. Crop diversity is at the core of smallholder farming [27]. It is a key source of food and nutrition, a buffer against environmental shocks, and a cultural and spiritual treasure [27]. However, across the country, crop diversity is being lost due to agricultural commercialization, industrial food sector expansion, seed production monopolies and the pushing of hybrids, recurring natural disasters, and climate variability. The emergence of community seed banks in India in the 1990s, facilitated by several NGOs, was driven by the need to urgently conserve disappearing traditional crop varieties. Traditional practices of seed saving and exchange evolved to organized community seed banks with support from NGOs and, at a later stage, government agencies alike [28,29]. By and large, community seed banks operate on a local scale and conserve farmer-managed seeds on a short-term basis. These local operations can lead to a larger scale impact when community seed banks network with other seed sector actors. The establishment of the Protection of Plant Varieties and Farmers' Rights Authority (PPVFRA) in 2001, which recognized and incentivized farmers' contributions to conserving plant genetic resources, gave the community seed banks important recognition and support (https://plantauthority.gov.in/, accessed on 2 October 2024). This kind of validation of farmers' knowledge, hardly seen anywhere in the world, energized and motivated many others to start community seed banking to rescue and share traditional climateresilient landraces.Since 2010, the Alliance of Bioversity International and CIAT in India (Alliance India team), in collaboration with various public institutions and civil society organizations, has promoted community seed banking as part of a strategy to strengthen farmer-managed seed systems. The novel Seeds4Needs program started community seed banking in 2011 to support the program's participatory variety selection activities aimed at strengthening farmers' adaptive capacities in the light of climate change and improving their livelihoods [30,31]. Between 2011 and 2020, 10 community seed banks were established and equipped with modern equipment and low-cost hermetic storage technologies (combined with the use of zeolite beads, a natural product) to increase seed viability, the longevity of farmers' varieties, and varieties obtained from the national genebank for variety testing. National Genebank and Alliance staff introduced and promoted these modern, low-cost technologies as a means to prolong and increase the storage capability of community seed banks.More recently (2016-2023), with the support of a United Nation Environment-GEF project (https://www.thegef.org/projects-operations/projects/5137, accessed on 2 October 2024), the Alliance India team and partners established 32 new community seed banks at 17 sites, conserving a total of more than 3000 farmers' varieties of more than 25 crops (cereals, legumes, oilseeds, millets, and vegetables). For adopting best conservation practices at the community level, 600 farmers were trained and designated as champion farmers to manage community seed banks. In the same period, ICAR's National Bureau of Plant Genetic Resources, under the National Agriculture Innovation Project \"Harmonizing biodiversity conservation and agricultural intensification through integration of plant, animal and fish genetic resources for livelihood security in fragile ecosystems\", established 26 community seed banks in three states, i.e., Andhra Pradesh, Himachal Pradesh, and Rajasthan. To create business opportunities for the community seed banks and generate income, interviewed staff of the support organizations pointed out that all these new community seed banks have a capacity of 15-20 T seed storage, which is much more than in the past. They mentioned that the new operational model is to combine seed storage with large-scale distribution of farmers' varieties of major and minor crops.According to the evaluation of the functionality and post-project sustainability of community seed banks, it was observed that those community seed banks that operate under a business model by developing value chains of one or more native crops continued to thrive even after project funding ended [32]. In some other cases, such as in Rajasthan, where this did not work, farmers lost interest, and many varieties disappeared from the area. This important lesson about poor post-project functioning led to the development of a new community seed bank sustainability strategy: emphasis on value addition from the very start of a community seed bank and the design of a locally suited business model at once.To put this new strategy in practice, the Alliance team in India and its partners tested more than 5000 native varieties of 20 crops following a crowdsourcing approach developed by the Seeds4Needs program across four agroecological regions of India [33]. This resulted in nearly 300 native varieties that are potentially suitable for addressing diverse needs, which can be cultivated at scale within a nature-based production environment. For adopting best practices at the community level, farmers were trained and a network of self-help groups (SHGs), farmers' producer organizations, private companies, and local startups was established on value addition and product development for improved adaptation and livelihoods. To generate awareness and to enhance farmers' skills in agrobiodiversity conservation and use, the Alliance India team conducted trainings, awareness workshops, field days, famers' interaction meetings, and cross-learning exposure visits. To add value, nutrition profiling of selected landraces of target crops was undertaken. Apart from this, other activities, such as branding, trademarking, tag-lining, packaging, labeling, food safety licensing, and the use of media platforms, were organized. As a result, varieties and products marked with different brand names, such as Dhartee Naturals, Gramouday, Hill Hatt, Native Basket, Natural Basket, Sahalee, and Mountain Grains, were developed at different sites by community seed banks (https://www.thegef.org/projects-operations/projects/5137, accessed on 2 October 2024). Community seed banks armed with such brand names sell native rice varieties at 30-35 percent higher market rates comparted with improved/commercial varieties. Over 30,000 farmer families are benefiting from the variety of activities from production to processing and sale at different sites [34]. Community seed banks were also linked with the hiring and installation of custom threshing/processing machines, such as mini dal mill-cum-graders, oil extractors, mini rice mills, and millet dehullers.To support the in situ and on-farm conservation management for food and nutrition security and to establish a suitable policy framework, in 2023, the Alliance India team organized a strategic policy dialogue with national and regional stakeholders. The dialogue concluded that the establishment of community seed banks and genebanks can benefit greatly from intergovernmental conventions and mandates of various kinds on issues of sustainable use of agrobiodiversity, access and benefit sharing, indigenous and traditional knowledge, rights of indigenous communities and farmers, and intellectual property rights. Governmental and civil society organizations, as well as international cooperation agencies, can be instrumental in connecting community seed banks with appropriate research and training institutions, such as universities, public research institutes, and private sector or non-governmental research units, to create synergies and contribute to sustainability.In Kenya, an estimated 75-80% of seeds used by smallholder farmers are sourced from farmer-managed seed systems. For generations, farmers have been managing seed and other propagating plant materials through on-farm conservation and deliberate selection for sustainable use. Community seedbanks in Kenya have recently become important actors in farmer-managed systems. In the past four years, there has been a proliferation of community seed banks, particularly in regions with heightened negative climate change effects. The emergence of community seed banks has been led by NGOs. The Kenya Seed Savers Network (SNN) played a critical role in establishing the first network of community seed banks in Gilgil, which is a semi-arid area with low rainfall, drought, and poor soil conditions. The SNN has since then established more than 50 community seed banks in farmers' homes, where 10-20 families converge to store, save, and exchange seeds. According to interviewed SNN staff, there is a growing demand from farmers to strengthen their farmer-managed seed systems and develop viable farmer-managed seed businesses.In the past five years, the Alliance of Bioversity International and CIAT, in collaboration with Kenya's National Genebank (the Genetic Resources Research Institute (GeRRI) of the Kenya Agricultural and Livestock Research Organization (KALRO)), established four new community seed banks in three counties, namely, Kisumu, Vihiga, and Kericho, and a fifth will be set up in Kisumu in 2024. The establishment resulted from a subregional project on \"open-source seed systems\" for climate change adaptation, in which over 1000 Kenyan, Tanzanian, and Ugandan farmers tested over 400 accessions of bean, finger millet, and sorghum from the three national genebanks to identify diversity that is adaptable and well-suited to local climatic conditions. After three rounds of participatory variety selection, the farmers selected the preferred varieties of the three crops, which are currently being conserved in the community seed banks. In addition, a number of seed fairs attracted over 2000 farmers within the project period and led to the exchange of more diversity, which has led to an increase in crop and varietal diversity [35].The interviewed community seed bank members mentioned that this new diversity encouraged them to explore business opportunities, a challenge that was taken up by the Alliance Kenya team. The team used a value-chain development strategy based on a participatory research and learning methodology to research the current and potential roles of neglected and underutilized species. In 2023, the Alliance Kenya team equipped the community seed banks in Nyando and Vihiga with threshers, seed cleaners, solar dryers, and roller mills. They are now producing quality seed and composite flour made from mixes of the various crops they have grown [36]. They are also producing dried traditional leafy vegetables, which they sell in the markets. Over 200 farmers have been trained in various aspects of quality seed production, and there is a network of over 30 seed producers. At the same time, about 200 farmers have been trained in value addition, including the production of composite flour and snacks from a diversity of 18 crops. The community seed bank management teams expressed their satisfaction about the initial results, which are the beginning of an economic foundation of the community seed banks, but observed that they need to gain more experience to become better entrepreneurs.Community seed banking in western Kenya adheres to the practice of nature-positive agriculture, which encompasses regeneration, non-depletion, and non-destructive use of the natural resource base and protection, sustainable management, and restoration of the productive systems. Community seed bank farmers explained that they practice agroecological farming on their farms by using locally available resources, intercropping and crop rotation, natural pesticides and organic fertilizers, and non-genetically modified seeds. They also mentioned that they participate in a new nature-positive initiative led by the Alliance Kenya team to practice nature-positive agriculture at the landscape level. Two large-scale farms were established (of 76 and 55 ha) with the support of the county government, where two groups of organized farmers will practice permaculture and other sustainable practices, including the development of equitable and fair value chains for key products. A third group of farmers agreed to coordinate and diversify individual farm production activities across the landscape to create aggregate agroecological benefits.The interviewed extension staff of SNN described how the organization is addressing this challenge through the establishment of a seed exchange platform (https://seedexchangekenya. org/), where farmers are able to exchange seeds of diverse varieties of bean, cow pea, local maize, pigeon pea, sorghum, and traditional leafy vegetables. The website provides the variety description and the agronomic and functional traits and uses, offering basic information needed to select a variety suitable for agroecological and functional needs. To facilitate the functioning of this platform, the SNN team trained farmers, who have listed their diversity on the platform in quality seed production. Although farmers can exchange seed through this platform, the selling of seed is prohibited under the Seeds and Plant Varieties Act Cap. 326 of Kenya [37]. The interviewed SNN staff remarked that a more enabling environment is critical for community seed bank sustainability. They mentioned that the government is preparing regulations to implement the International Treaty on Plant Genetic Resources for Food and Agriculture (ITPGRFA) and Article 11 (b) of the Kenyan Constitution, which stipulates that the constitution shall \"recognize and protect the ownership of indigenous seeds and plant varieties, their genetic and diverse characteristics and their use by the communities of Kenya\" [38]. A team of experts is currently reviewing the national access and benefit sharing regulations and the regulations on farmers' rights. The team is proposing that farmers are allowed to register and sell their varieties. The SNN and Alliance Kenya teams concurred that this is a positive development.Since 1990, community seed banks in Nepal have conserved and sustainably used agrobiodiversity [39]. They also came to the seed re-supply rescue of farmers affected by the devastating earthquake of 2015, when hundreds of families lost their seed stocks [40]. LI-BIRD developed and mainstreamed community seed banking for on-farm management of crop genetic resources and providing effective access to quality seeds and seedlings for food security, nutrition, and climate change adaptation [39]. Over time, LI-BIRD developed a multi-pronged community seed bank sustainability strategy, including five elements: (i) legally registered farmer organizations (e.g., a cooperative) or a local NGO are in charge of management; (ii) community seed banks combine the conservation and promotion of local crop genetic resources with the production and marketing of seeds of registered varieties in large volume and earn some income; (iii) where feasible, a community biodiversity management fund of approximately USD 10,000 is created and mobilized as a soft loan for income generation activities among its members, and the interest generated supports operations of the community seed bank; (iv) a seed fund of approximately USD 5000 is created, which is used for seed business and to maintain a regular cash flow; and (v) a friendly working relationship is developed with the local government and extension agency, so that they allocate land and some financial resources to support the community seed banks [41].Altogether, the LI-BIRD-supported community seed banks have conserved over 1700 local varieties of 75 crop species. In addition, these community seed banks produced and marketed nearly 400 metric tons of seeds of registered varieties of maize, potato, rice, vegetables, and wheat. These activities have increased crop production, productivity, income, and local employment. LI-BIRD, NARC, and the Alliance of Bioversity International and CIAT supported the registration of 19 crop landraces of seven crop species in the National Seed Board (NSB) by ten community seed banks supported by LI-BIRD [42]. Despite these positive results, community seed banks remain organizationally fragile, operating in isolation and struggling to grow into strong organizations [39].To address these organizational and networking challenges, in 2023, LI-BIRD and the Alliance of Bioversity International and CIAT supported the establishment of a national network of community seed banks, which was legally registered as the Community Seed Banks Association of Nepal (CSBAN) in 2019 [43]. CSBAN has been facilitating the exchange of seeds and seedlings and related information among the member community seed banks and providing strategic support as per their needs. The interviewed NGO extensionists mentioned that by learning from LI-BIRD, their organizations also started providing support to community seed banks. A recent database jointly updated by LI-BIRD and the Center for Crop Development and Agrobiodiversity Conservation (CCDABC) under the Department of Agriculture (DoA) recorded that there are 47 active community seed banks spread over 40 municipalities/rural municipalities of 29 districts in the country. The number of community seed banks keeps changing as some become inactive and some new ones are added over time. The new community seed banks are planning to join CSBAN.In 2019, to strengthen the networking capacity of CSBAN, LI-BIRD, CSBAN, and the Alliance of Bioversity International and CIAT, a mobile seed app called 'Hamro Biu' ('Our Seed' in Nepali) was developed. The app served to list and display the local diversity conserved by CSBAN members. Through the app, requests could be made for seeds and seedlings of associated community seed banks. According to community seed bank management team members, effective and continuous use of the app was hampered by poor internet access and operational challenges [43]. To address these challenges, the app was transformed to a website (www.csbnepal.org), which is expected to function more effectively.The government of Nepal adopted community seed banking in 2009 and endorsed the \"Community Seed Bank Implementation Guideline\". The aim was to set up 17 community seed banks led by district-level extension agencies. It was piloted in Dadelhura, Okhaldhunga, and Sindhupalchok districts and replicated in others in subsequent years. Additional policy support came in 2014, when the Agrobiodiversity Policy 2007 was amended to incorporate community seed banking in the community-based biodiversity management program. Since 2022, the Crop Development Directorate of the Department of Agriculture (now the Center for Crop Development and Agrobiodiversity Conservation) has allocated resources to strengthen community seed banks and promote agrobiodiversity on a regular basis. For example, USD 2.08 million was allocated in 2022. There are other national-level planning documents that have incorporated community seed banking to promote local agrobiodiversity, including the National Seed Vision 2013-2025, and the National Adaptation Plan, which envisioned establishing community seed banks by 40% of the 753 local governments by 2030.In South Africa, the government has recognized farm-level crop-diversity management (including by community seed banks) to be effective for agrobiodiversity conservation [44]. Since 2013, the Department of Agriculture, Land Reform, and Rural Development (DAL-RRD; formerly the Department of Agriculture, Forestry, and Fisheries or DAFF), through its Plant Genetic Resources Centre (housing the National Genebank), in collaboration with the Alliance of Bioversity International and CIAT, has established and financially, organizationally, and technically supported three community seed banks, one in Limpopo (Gumbu, an all-women-managed community seed bank), one in Eastern Cape (Mbobo village, not far from Sterkspruit, Joe Nqabi district municipality), and one in North West province (Jericho). The community seed banks collaborate with other seed sector stakeholders, such as the National Genebank of South Africa (under DALRRD), agricultural departments, plant breeders, and other agricultural/rural development scientists and practitioners. At the end of 2022, the Alliance ceased its collaboration due to termination of the agreement with DALRRD, but DALRRD has continued supporting the three community seed banks. As of 2023, Gumbu had a seed collection of 246 donations of 15 crop and one tree species. Additionally, Jericho conserves 119 donations of 16 crop species, and Sterkspruit, 103 donations of 11 species. All the donations (we cannot use the term varieties, as some of the donations could be identical) are farmer-managed or local varieties [45].The seed bank farmers in the three locations experienced the impact of climate change through more variable temperatures; changing levels, durations, and intensities of rains; and shifting rainy season starting dates. To address this challenge, the DALRRD team decided to join forces with the Agricultural Research Council (ARC) of South Africa to initiate participatory crop improvement activities. This aimed to support adapting to the changing climatic conditions, strengthening the community seed banks, and building a more resilient seed system. Participatory variety selection was performed on priority crops selected by the farmers (cowpea, okra, pearl millet, and sorghum), with varieties/lines sourced from the National Genebank, ARC, and farmers. These crops are drought-tolerant, very nutritious, and well-adapted to resource-limited agricultural practices. The bestperforming varieties were kept for seed multiplication by the ARC. Seeds were handed to community seed banks for storage and use. Based on FGDs organized at the three sites by DALRRD and ARC, the experiments and direct benefits generated were considered a success. The farmers expressed interest in conducting more participatory variety selection on other important food crops [45].The model of institutional support set up in South Africa, with DALRRD and the Plant Genetic Resources Centre (PGRC) coordinating and supporting the community seed bank work in the long run, is innovative. It directly connects the ex situ conservation work by the PGRC with the community seed bank activities. It ensures long-term financial, organizational, and technical support to the community seed banks, while the community seed banks can also explore other avenues that contribute to sustainability. In early 2024, DALRRD informed the Alliance that there is interest in establishing more community seed banks across South Africa.In many parts of Uganda, farmers traditionally saved grains and seeds in household granaries. However, due to civil unrest and insecurity, which has caused large-scale displacement of people and dependence on food relief, granaries were abandoned and their use forgotten. Community seed banks, first introduced in 2010 in Sheema, followed by Nakaskeke in 2013 and Kabale in 2015, have gradually become important facilities to conserve seeds. The establishment of community seed banks was started based on the results of research carried out by Uganda's Plant Genetic Resources Centre (NARO-PGRC) together with Bioversity International (now the Alliance of Bioversity International and CIAT) in three districts of western and central Uganda. According to the interviewed NARO-PGRC staff, the findings revealed that farmers were obtaining seeds from several sources, including markets, their own saved seeds, neighbors, friends, and relatives, but these seed sources were not reliable, and the seed was often of poor quality (in fact, the seeds obtained were often grain).To facilitate timely access to good quality and diverse seeds, NARO-PGRC took the lead in training farmers and establishing community seed banks throughout the country. Community seed banks serve multiple purposes: they connect formal and farmer-managed seed systems; serve as a one-stop center for conserving and sharing non-national catalogueregistered farmer varieties (which are not sold anywhere); revive lost and rare varieties in the farming communities; and research the adaptive capacity of these farmer varieties. Our FGDs revealed that community seed bank membership is increasing, with strong representation of women. Regular monitoring of community seed bank activities by NARO-PGRC indicates that community seed banks increase the crop and varietal diversity in an area over time. They have also given back to farmers the conservation responsibility, ownership of plant genetic resources, and trust in local organization. Community seed banks have been recognized in the National Seed Policy (2018) as key actors in Uganda's conservation strategy (https://www.agriculture.go.ug/wp-content/uploads/2019/05/Ministry-of-Agriculture-Animal-Industry-and-Fisheries-National-Seed-Policy.pdf, accessed 2 October 2024). Our FGD data show that to date, three community seed banks have ventured into seed business development, but this has not yet become a common strategy to address economic sustainability. The leaders of these community seed banks interviewed remarked that at the moment, Uganda's seed policy only allows the production and commercialization of formally registered varieties but not of (traditional) farmer varieties.Currently, NARO-PGRC and the Alliance support seven community seed banks in Uganda; the seventh opened its doors in September 2023 in Masindi. However, through collaboration and partnership with other organizations, several new community seed banks have been set up. Collaborators included OXFAM-Uganda, Participatory Ecological Land Use Management (PELUM-Uganda), and the East and Southern African Farmers' Forum (ESAFF-Uganda). The rapid increase in number led the NARO-PGRC team to reflect on the policy and institutional dimensions of community seed bank sustainability. As a result, the team developed three instruments for guiding Ugandan community seed bank establishment, operations, and networking. First, the guidelines for establishing and managing Ugandan community seed banks were developed, referred to as its Standard Operating Procedure (SOP). The SOP elucidates the various steps involved and the basic tools and equipment required.The second instrument is a protocol for collaboration between the National Genebank and the community seed banks, which was developed together with other countries, including Kenya, South Africa, and Zimbabwe, under the guidance of the Alliance of Bioversity International and CIAT and WCDI-WUR [46]. The third instrument is a database website (portal) for all the community seed banks in Uganda (http://www.csb.naro.go.ug/). The website is near completion and is updated concurrently with the newest developments. The objectives of the website are to keep track of available materials in the community seed banks, capture and provide feedback, store information, and generate statistical reports of the community seed banks. Currently, of the 25 community seed banks in the country, 11 have already joined the portal, which is housed by NARO-PGRC. According to the NARO-PGRC team, the aim is to further professionalize the platform, connect all the community seed banks in Uganda to it, facilitate the dynamic distribution of seeds and related knowledge, and position the community seed banks at the center of the farmermanaged seed systems in the country.Each of the five country cases addresses several dimensions of the community seed bank sustainability challenge through the piloting of an adaptive strategy. These strategies have produced some first results but still remain a work in progress. In this section, we bring all the strategies together as elements of a new holistic community seed bank sustainability framework that can be put into practice. Table 2 presents the overview; each of the strategies is elaborated in the following paragraphs. Economic sustainability is one of the major challenges that community seed banks face. This concerns the maintenance of the storage facility, organization of awarenessand capacity-development activities, and engagement with other seed-sector stakeholders. Additionally, it concerns keeping the management team motivated and rewarding them for their time and efforts and creating incentives for members to remain engaged. Experience indicates that where community seed banks receive financial support from one or more other organizations, this challenge may not emerge until this support ceases [1]. Since 2020, as illustrated by the cases of India and Kenya, a new and more coherent strategy has emerged to address this dimension of sustainability value-chain development of local specialty varieties (e.g., black and red rice in India) and of neglected and underutilized species (e.g., finger millet and sorghum in Kenya) conserved by the community seed banks. In Kenya, this led to the production of novel (nutritious) composite flours using/mixing amaranth, cassava, millets, yellow (instead of white) maize and sorghum for particular consumer groups, e.g., adults, adults with diabetes, and babies. These composite flours offer an alternative to the maize-only based flour, which is a staple food in Kenya used for porridge and \"ugali\" (mush or pap). This novel healthy and nutritious product development, for which there is growing demand, takes place in the context of maize production suffering from the impact of climate change across East and Southern Africa. In Kenya, farmers started selling the new composite flours in small quantities individually and through the community seed banks of Kabudi-Agoro and Lower Nyando. This promising strategy builds on earlier attempts of community seed banks to generate income from activities directly related to the community seed bank. These include seed sales, which remain a challenge in many countries due to financial, organizational, and policy and legal issues. A key issue remains the difficulty or impossibility of registering farmer-selected or farmerimproved varieties [47,48]. Policy discussions are underway in Kenya and Uganda to address this bottleneck.Researchers in the CGIAR embraced the concept of nature-positive agriculture through the development of a new CGIAR research initiative named \"Nature positive solutions for shifting agrifoodsystems to more resilient and sustainable pathways\" (known as the Nature+ Initiative; https://www.cgiar.org/initiative/nature-positive-solutions/, accessed on 2 October 2024). This initiative is implemented by the Alliance and international and national research partners in five countries, among which are India and Kenya. The initiative builds on the \"Boost nature-positive production\" pathway, which was one of the five action tracks agreed upon by the United Nations Food Summit in 2021 towards sustainable food systems. The concept of nature-positive agriculture encompasses regeneration, nondepletion, and non-destructive use of the natural resource base, and protection, sustainable management, and restoration of the productive systems. Nature-positive food systems include sustainable and healthy nutrition [49].Community seed bank farmers in the five case study countries adhere to naturepositive agriculture to varying degrees through the use of various agroecology-based technologies and practices, such as agroforestry, the application of organic manure and natural pesticides and herbicides, composting, drip irrigation, inter-and relay-cropping, mulching, permaculture, and the use of non-GMO seed. The Kenyan community seed bank members in the Kisumu area participate in the Nature+ initiative led by the Alliance Kenya team to practice nature-positive agriculture at the aggregate (landscape) level. Two aggregate farms have been established and are currently being developed through a large variety of productive activities that include bees, crops (food crops and forages), fish, trees, and livestock. In India, community seed banks supported by the Alliance are also taking part in landscape-level agroecosystem management activities, such as land restoration.Like many farmer groups around the world, community seed banks operate largely at the local level (village or district) and have limited resources, time, and technological capacity to interact and collaborate with others. This impedes the exchange of experience, knowledge, and seeds among community seed banks from different areas in a country, regionally, and globally. It also hinders the creation of a solid organization that can operate at scale and engage in policy debate and development. The most advanced web platform for community seed banking communication and collaboration is the Uganda case. This serves as a common (national) database to be used for compiling, analyzing, and exchanging data and monitoring operations. The NARO-PGRC team managing the platform developed a simple-to-use community seed bank database checklist (10 key items). The platform connects the community seed banks with each other; it also serves to connect the community seed banks to other seed-sector actors.The rapid spread of mobile and internet connectivity in many rural areas presents opportunities to digitally network community seed banks. By creating centralized databases and platforms, individual community seed banks can be interlinked to enable coordination regarding access to and sharing and multiplication of seed and related knowledge. Such pooling also allows other seed-sector actors to interact more easily with and possibly support community seed banks. With appropriate information systems, digitally connected community seed banks can integrate into national and global networks to enhance genetic material availability and exchange. However, to date, only limited attention has been paid to this dimension of sustainability. After a pilot period, the SNN seed portal benefited from these improvements, which can also guide other initiatives:Increasing seed information and adding an analogue SMS format to cater to farmers without smart phones.Developing organizational seed information hubs for e-extension to link with the main portal. The hubs should have the following information: (a) a seed database with names of the farmers, their contact information, and the seed they grow, using a computer program that traces seed records and availability; (b) a seed catalogue; (c) a seed library for seed samples.Bulking and saving seeds of rare varieties within each organizational area of work.Conducting focus group discussions at the hub level to name and describe all the seed posted online.Recruiting more farmers to join and use the platform by conducting four online seed fairs.Conducting exchange visits for farmers to interact and learn from each other.Holding quarterly consultative meetings for implementing partners.As already mentioned, the main finding of a recent review of seed (related) policies and laws in 14 African countries in West, East, and Southern Africa is that recognition of and concrete support for farmer-managed seed systems are largely lacking [26]. Much remains to be done to recognize, promote, and support the conservation, distribution, and use of diverse genetic (crop and tree) resources, such as that carried out by community seed banks and local seed businesses. The situation in many countries in Asia and Latin America is not much better and has not changed very much during the last decade. However, in a few countries, more positive developments are underway, from which others can learn and build upon. Among those are the exemplary cases of India, Nepal, and Uganda. Kenya, South Sudan, Tanzania, and Uganda, inspired by the examples of Nepal and South Africa documented in this article, endorsed a protocol for collaboration between the national genebank and community seed banks. The protocol was developed by several national government units and NGOs in East and Southern Africa with the support of WCDI-WUR and the Alliance of Bioversity International and CIAT. In Kenya, networking and cooperation between community seed banks, the Seed Savers Network of Kenya, and the National Genebank were initiated about three years ago. Farmers visited the National Genebank for the first time and learned about its operations. The National Genebank offered seed of some of its vegetable accessions of crop varieties lost in communities, a move that led to an agreement to explore more collaboration in the future. Community seed banks are acknowledged as important actors to support community-based management of biodiversity in partnership with the Kenyan National Genebank [50].The protocol promotes a system in which in situ and ex situ conservation are connected and complement each other instead of being separated and operating in silos. The protocol has articles on (i) the functions and activities of the national genebank; (ii) the functions and activities of community seed banks; (iii) the basic rules and regulations of working together; and (iv) joint initiatives to be organized. The proposed joint initiatives will lead to more sustainable community seed bank operations. Some examples are as follows: (i) broadening the functions to operate as a community development and learning center (e.g., as is already happening in the case of the community seed banks of Hoima, Joy and Family Farm, and Kiziba in Uganda, and Kabudi-Agoro and Lower Nyando in Kenya); (ii) conducting research on seed storage, conservation, and multiplication methods; (iii) fostering seed business development (e.g., the India, Kenya, and Nepal cases); (iv) introducing participatory crop improvement; (v) producing locally adapted seed for wider distribution, through targeted multiplication; (vi) bringing back varieties that disappeared from the community; and (vii) using modern communication technologies to increase efficiency and effectiveness.One of the technical challenges that community seed banks face is to store seeds effectively for one to a few years. It requires that the general scientific principles of quality seed control need to be respected. Most community seed banks use local materials and indigenous practices for storing seeds and seedlings, including clay pots, dried bottle gourds, granaries on stilts, bamboo poles, mud, stones, and straw. Seeds are sun-dried and then cooled before they are packed and stored. Various local practices are used to deal with factors that affect seed quality (humidity, diseases, and pests), such as (i) using cooled-off ash to mix with the seeds; (ii) using dried cow dung on top of the seeds; (iii) smoking seeds above a fire; (iv) and using natural repellents. These methods work very well but can be complimented by modern ones, which can increase efficiency.The first modern practice is the use of airtight containers, which can range from smallto medium-sized plastic jars to metallic silos. The foremost novel seed storage technology introduced by research partners is the use of various kinds of desiccants, which are easy to use and cost-effective at the same time. WCDI and the Alliance of Bioversity International and CIAT have introduced and trained community seed banks in Africa, Asia, and Latin America in the use of zeolite beads (a clay-type of bead), which are added to seed containers to absorb moisture, then removed after some time and dried in an oven, after which they can be used again [51]. To monitor the seed moisture content, a hygrometer can be used to monitor the temperature and relative humidity in the containers and in the storage facility. Regular field inspections of the seeds conserved by the use of these modern methods by national organizations and staff of WCDI and the Alliance of Bioversity International and CIAT in India, Kenya, South Africa, and Uganda reveal that the seed quality is good, and that longevity has increased compared with seed from before the introduction.The five cases presented in this article demonstrate that the effectiveness and sustainability of community seed banks can be enhanced through the adoption of one or more of the tested strategies, leading to enhanced environmental, financial, institutional (policy), social, and technical capacities. We hypothesize that the inclusion of all five strategies together will lead to very solid sustainability.Based on the analysis of the experiences of the community seed banks in the five case study countries, to develop the promising sustainability strategies discussed in Section 4, we can answer our first research question. The key capacities needed to implement these sustainability strategies effectively are (i) collective and inclusive operational management and continuous learning; (ii) optimum use of traditional and modern seed management equipment, processes, practices, and technologies; (iii) mobilizing support for the development of a supportive institutional, policy, and legal environment; (iv) generating financial incentives for individual members and the collective through value addition and other activities; and (v) efficient use of local resources, including the seed collection, needed for community seed bank operations, based on agroecology and nature+ principles.When compared to a study of factors enhancing the sustainability of solidarity economic organization in Brazil [52]-several community seed banks in India, Kenya, and Nepal are evolving toward this type of organization-similarities and differences can be observed. Two factors identified are similar: networking and financial support. Two differ: social incubation and predominant women leadership [49]. The former was not used in the five case study countries. The latter occurs in two community seed banks in the five countries but was not identified as a key factor in our analysis. Through strengthened capacities, community seed banks can become well-organized and well-performing seed-system actors. They can then fulfill seed key sector development roles of (i) digitally supported seed custodians, in particular of local (farmer) varieties; (ii) seed (contract) producers and farmer seed businesses; (iii) producers and sellers of new crop-based products, in particular those that are highly nutritious; (iv) agrobiodiversity conservation collaborators with the national genebank and other seed sector actors; and (v) research partners with plant breeding programs. This resonates well with studies about the key roles required for resilient seed systems and integrated seed sector development [53][54][55], although our work on digital support for community seed banks has not yet been taken up by others as far as is known. Seed custodianship is also central to studies of the seed commons, agroecological farming, and food sovereignty, which argue for the (re)commoning of seeds throughout the whole seed management process [56].We will now address our second research question. The five identified key capacities together are the necessary inputs towards the sustainability of the community seed banks and require strong community seed-bank-focused managerial knowledge and skills. The community seed banks in the five case study countries have already acquired some degree of managerial knowledge and skills through learning by doing and through capacity building offered by the supporting organizations. The managerial knowledge and skills could be further strengthened through targeted training offered by professional institutions. Another option could be to establish community seed bank farmer field schools with modules that cover the key activities and capacities. At the moment, there are very few regular community seed bank training courses available anywhere in the world, which is a limitation to further professionalize community seed bank operations.India, Nepal, South Africa, Uganda, and, to a lesser extent, Kenya are countries that have made a start with providing policy/legal support to community seed banks. The protocol for collaboration between community seed banks and the national genebank was published under the umbrella of the Integrated Seed Sector Africa program (https: //issdafrica.org/) and endorsed in Kenya and Uganda. Kenya, Nepal, and Uganda have established a digitally supported national community seed bank/seed portal or platform. Community seed banks in India, Kenya, Nepal, and Uganda have entered the local and even national seed market. Community seed banks in India, Kenya, and Uganda have started to produce and sell new products made from conserved crops (e.g., composite flours of grain crops).Although, indeed, some countries have made a start with creating an enabling policy/legal environment, more (seed) policy and legal support is needed to enable this transition and allow community seed banks to operate as legitimate and viable seed-sector actors. Policy recommendations include the following: (i) create a legal space for the recognition of community seed banks as a type of civil society organization; (ii) include the multiple roles that community seed banks can play in national and sub-national policies and legislation concerning the conservation and sustainable use of agrobiodiversity; (iii) include the funding for community seed banks under the national budget for the conservation and sustainable use of agrobiodiversity and/or plant genetic resources for food and agriculture; and (iv) promote the adoption of the protocol for collaboration between the national genebank and community seed banks."}

main/part_2/0385056791.json

@@ -0,0 +1 @@
+{"metadata":{"gardian_id":"893efe5fdfe177e80f255127d7354532","source":"gardian_index","url":"https://cgspace.cgiar.org/rest/bitstreams/9960694d-b996-4ab7-814a-acac19f9b86f/retrieve","id":"10519397"},"keywords":[],"sieverID":"dcff16a6-0f73-46c2-911e-7dc4a128e492","content":"Invest in Knowledge Initiative (IKI), assisted with the coordination and data collection. We are especially grateful to Denview Magalasi and Richard Kusseni (IKI) for their hard work during the field work. Pascale Schnitzer (Independent Consultant) provided support with field supervision and Ainsley Charles (Independent Consultant) supported the M&E team during the early stages of the preparation. Zhe Guo (GIS Specialist) oversaw the site characterization and stratification exercise. Regis Chikowo (MSU) provided invaluable comments during the planning and implementation of the survey and identification of control villages. Ivy Romero (Administrative Coordinator) provided excellent assistance in various aspects of the management and administration of the survey. We are grateful to Orlando Ortega and his colleagues at Westat for generously loaning us 30 tablets and accessories to aid with electronic data collection.The Africa Research in Sustainable Intensification for the Next Generation (Africa RISING -AR) in Malawi is a research-for-development project supported by the United States Agency for International Development (USAID) as part of the U.S. Government's Feed the Future (FtF) initiative. The main objective of the project is to create opportunities through action research and development for smallholder farm households to move out of hunger and poverty through sustainably intensified (SI) farming systems that improve food, nutrition, and income security, particularly for women and children, and conserve or enhance the natural resource base. This report presents overall summaries of Malawi Africa RISING Baseline Evaluation Survey (MARBES) data that cover 1,149 households in Africa RISING areas in central region of Malawi covering two districts (Dedza and Ntcheu). Following a description of survey design and tools, the report presents main findings in the form of cross tabulation, tables and graphs for both household and community level survey data. The summaries of the household data include demography, agricultural land characteristics, production and inputs, storage facility, livestock ownership, dwelling characteristics, agricultural related shocks, and children and women anthropometry. The community data summary covers community demography, access to basic services, labor in agriculture, agriculture related problems and solutions, land use and major crops, migration, availability of water resources, and prevalence of shocks.Malawi Africa RISING follows an approach called \"mother and baby trials\" and the participating farmers are identified as early adopters, progressive and model farmers, they are usually not a representative farmer. Under such circumstances the program evaluation of Malawi AR faces challenges in terms of identification, external validity and spillover effect of technology. To address this challenge, IFPRI's M&E team adopted a Quasi-Randomized Control Trial which is an empirical causal impact evaluation method similar to RCT, but lacks element of random assignment of the technologies to the treatment group.Malawi AR target districts were predetermined as part of the Feed the Future initiative and the beneficiary villages are selected by AR project implementers. The M&E team selected the control sites that were in the same development domain (agro-ecology) with the selected action sites to produce statistically valid and generalizable estimates of program impact. Also to prevent contamination the team selected control sites physically isolated from the action sites. After identification of action households by AR implementers, IFPRI M&E team sampled villages such that they fall within each homogeneous agro-ecology areas as AR beneficiary sections. Altogether 26 control villages were sampled from within identified control area using probability proportional to size. Finally, random sampling of households from control and AR villages (AR non-beneficiary households) were done. So the survey households are categorized as three research groups; AR beneficiary, non-beneficiary and control households. The data summary presented in this report analyzes the main variables of interest by these three research groups.MARBES employs two structured survey tools, namely the household questionnaire and the community questionnaire. Overall, the household survey questionnaire covers 22 modules whereas community survey questionnaire contains 9 modules. Furthermore, due the complexity of the survey instruments and the need for minimizing possible sources of measurement error (e.g. data entry errors, non-sampling error more in general), the main technique for data collection was a Computer Assisted Personal Interviewing (CAPI) using tablets.Both household and community survey data analysis reveal that crop production is the primary economic activity of the surveyed households and communities. Average household level land size in the sample is about 2.7 hectares but the cultivable land holding is about one hectare per household. The main crops cultivated in the area are maize, groundnut, soybean and beans. Most households practice mixed farming with prevalence of chicken raising in the households. The findings from the community interviews in all 54 villages confirm the general findings out of household survey data. Total cultivable land in average community is 45% which confirms the average percentage of cultivable land from the household survey data. The community survey data also confirms that the main crops in the area are maize, groundnut, soybean and beans. In terms of the most serious shock to agriculture, community data reinforce that the shortage of inputs and their high prices cause the most serious negative shock to agriculture.1 Malawi Africa RISING Baseline Evaluation Survey (MARBES)Malawi Africa Research in Sustainable Intensification for the Next Generation (Africa RISING or AR) program is an agricultural research for development program that began in 2012 to promote sustainable intensification of agriculture among smallholder farmers. The main aim of the program is to promote system based agricultural technologies and practices that are tailored to smallholder farmers' local conditions. Farmers participating in the program from selected sites are offered a menu of improved technologies and management practices. Malawi AR operates in two districts, Dedza and Ntcheu and follows an approach called \"mother and baby trials\" (MBTs). MBTs are adaptive research platforms created to identify and disseminate successful practices with the active participation of farmers. The mother trials are conducted with lead farmers selected from targeted villages that are convenient for exposure visits by other farmers. The mother farmers actively participate in interactive, researcher-designed, scientific demonstration trials of varied agricultural technologies. Other selected lead farmers are then given exposure visits to mother trials and are allowed to select technologies that are suitable for them. These are called baby trials. The mother and baby trial farmers are selfselected farmers who are willing to devote plots of certain size for replication of trials. Various system based technologies are explored within MBTs which include intercropping of different hybrid maize with improved groundnut, soybean, cowpea, pigeon pea and bean varieties with different doses of NPK fertilizer (List of varieties are provided in the appendix table A1).The above mentioned experimental design of MBTs pose a challenge on socioeconomic evaluation of the program in terms of measuring its impact on participating households and on scaling up the technology to a wider population. Ideally, Randomized Control Trial (RCT) design is preferred to evaluate the impact of such technologies. However, since the participating farmers in Malawi AR program are identified as early adopters, progressive and model farmers, they are usually not a representative farmer. Under such circumstances the program evaluation of Malawi AR faces challenges in terms of identification, external validity and spillover effect of technology. Identifying the program impact by comparing participants with non-participants may reflect not only the impact of the technologies but also the innate difference between participants and non-participants. When the participants are not selected randomly, the systematic difference between the participants and non-participants can influence the program impact. In case of Malawi AR, the program impact may be overestimated if the outcome variables such as crop productivity, income etc. are systematically better for beneficiaries compared to non-beneficiaries. In terms of external validity, the non-random participation of farmers in AR program may not provide unbiased and representative impact of the targeted population and hence pose challenges on program scaling up. For example, the program can provide strong impact on selected group of progressive farmers in high potential area whereas the same program can yield low impact if the group of farmers are selected from low potential area. Finally, technology spillover effect can complicate the program evaluation by spreading the impact of technology to non-treated households. That is why evaluation design should be such that it can disentangle the technology effect from the learning effect.To address the three challenges mentioned above IFPRI's M&E team adopted a Quasi-Randomized Control Trial (QRCT). A QRCT is an empirical causal impact evaluation method similar to RCT, but lacks element of random assignment of the technologies to the treatment group. The Malawi AR evaluation design involves the following sequential stages: 1) Malawi AR target districts (Dedza and Ntcheu) were predetermined as part of the Feed the Future initiative and the beneficiary sections and villages within the designated EPAs (Extension Planning Areas) are selected by AR project implementers. The M&E team selected the control (counterfactual) sites that were in the same development domain (agro-ecology) with the selected action (beneficiary) sites to produce statistically valid and generalizable estimates of program impact. Also to prevent contamination the team selected control sites physically isolated from the action sites. In order to stratify and characterize the target areas by agro-ecology we reviewed various biophysical and socio-economic data layers (such as population density, elevation, precipitation, market access, slope, maize harvested area, length of growing period, farming systems, and temperature) (see Table A2 in the appendix for different data layers and their sources). Among these data layers, elevation and temperature adjusted rainfall deemed as the two best proxies for capturing variability in the biophysical characteristics, and are then used in final classification process (see appendix Figure A1). Within the homogenous agro-ecology areas two beneficiary EPAs per district (Golomoti and Linthipe EPAs in Dedza and Kandeu and Nsipe EPAs in Ntcheu) are selected by the AR project implementers. The villages within each EPAs were selected by the project implementers and the households in a village were selected through community meetings. 2) After identification of action households by AR implementers, IFPRI M&E team sampled four control sections (Mtakataka and Thete in Dedza and Sitolo and Mwalaoyera in Ntcheu) such that they fall within each homogeneous agro-ecology areas as AR beneficiary sections. 3) IFPRI M&E team then sampled 26 control villages from within identified control sections using probability proportional to size. 4) Finally, random sampling of households from control and AR villages (AR nonbeneficiary households) were done. Control households would allow us to identify valid counterfactual to estimate program impact while comparison of observed outcomes for AR non-beneficiaries and control households would provide estimates of potential spillover. Given the non-random selection of AR villages, comparison of AR nonbeneficiary households and control households would also capture the effect of potential targeting bias.While the beneficiary sample is pre-determined, the size of non-beneficiary and control samples was guided by power calculations based on maize yield data from the 2011 Malawi Integrated Household Survey 1 . Baseline maize yield was estimated at 1049 kilogram per hectare (kg/ha) and the power calculation was based on several assumption: a 20% increase in average maize yield (to 1259 kg/ha) between baseline and follow up, a 0.1 correlation in maize yield between baseline and follow up, and an intra-cluster correlation of 0.05. A sample size of 1260 households (20 households per village and about 60 villages) was determined to achieve 80% chance that our design identifies a statistically significant impact. Sensitivity of power calculation was performed using different parameter estimates and ultimately the final sample size was determined, also by considering budget constraints. Detailed socioeconomic data were collected from three groups of households during August -October 2013.Beneficiary households -400 program beneficiary households (as of July 2013) were included. Names and identifying information about beneficiaries were obtained from Malawi Africa RISING research scientists. This group is referred to as \"AR beneficiary\" thereafter.Non-beneficiary households -In order to sample the target 200 non-beneficiary households, and given that action villages were predetermined, we obtained a household list for all the 24 action villages from District Agricultural Offices. The target sample of 200 was divided into the four action Sections (Mposa and Golomoti Center Sections in Dedza and Kampanje and Mpamadzi Sections in Ntcheu) proportional to the share of each Section's population of the total population for the four Sections. Then a fixed number of household were randomly sampled from each of the action villages using simple random sampling. This group is referred to as \"Non-beneficiary\" thereafter.Control households -From within the geographic area that was identified to serve as control, villages were chosen such that selected villages were physically isolated from the action villages.In some areas, which were internally homogeneous, it was possible to find control villages that were both similar to action villages and physically separate from them, whereas in others -with greater variations in topography, climate and access -this proved to be difficult. In the latter case, the M&E team decided to randomly select sites from an adjacent area.The sampling of control households was done in three stages. In the first stage, and based on results from the site characterization, four control Sections were identified (Mtakataka Center and Thete in Dedza and Sitolo and Mwalaoyera in Ntcheu District). In the second and third stages, control villages and households were selected from the four control Sections using Probability Proportional to Size (PPS). In order to attain the target sample of 560 control households, 28 control villages and 20 households per village were sampled. The 10% reserve households sampled for Ntcheu were found to be inadequate and the reserve sample was raised to 25% for Dedza district.To assess sustainable intensification trajectories, to provide evidence on the effectiveness of AR interventions, and to inform the development of scaling up and scaling out strategies, data need to be collected on the composition of households, crops grown at the plot level, livestock systems, farm and crop management practices, use of inputs, and key livelihood strategies employed. Towards this end, the M&E team developed detailed household and community questionnaires to capture baseline characteristics of AR beneficiary, non-beneficiary and control households and communities. These data are crucial to evaluate sustainable intensification trajectories, and evolution of changes in farm practices within the development domains of interest.The main objective of the household survey tool is to collect high-quality baseline household data to support the M&E activities of the AR Program in Malawi. More specifically, the survey collects detailed information on the composition of the household, employment, health, agriculture, income and expenditures, credit, assets, subjective welfare and food security, shocks, and the anthropometric status of children and women. Overall, the household survey questionnaire covers 22 modules (module A to V, Appendix Table A3 summarizes the modules).A great emphasis is given to agricultural production and livestock rearing through six modules (modules E through J) dealing with agricultural land, crop inputs, crop production, crop sales and storage, livestock ownership and feeding. Information are gathered on the parcels of land used by the household, whether owned by the household or not. A specific feature of the survey tool regards the comparison of self-reported area of cultivated parcel with objective measurement through GPS of the same parcel of land on a sub-sample of farming households randomly selected. Module G looks in depth into the production of crops at the plot/parcel level. Hence, it asks information about different crops that were grown on each plot as well as the different varieties of the crops. In case of intercropping (i.e. multiple crops on the same plot), a 'bean game' has been included in the survey instrument to illustrate the distribution of crops on the same plot.In order to capture the outcome variable of interest which can be used as key variables to assessing impact of AR program in Malawi we collect household income and consumption data through module Q to S. Subjective welfare and food security variables are collected at the household level in module P. Key challenges in agricultural production and their coping strategies are captured in module K. In order to evaluate the effect of increased agricultural production on nutritional status of the most vulnerable individuals within the household, namely women and children, module U and V are devoted to women and child anthropometry, respectively. Module U collects anthropometric measurements of women who are of reproductive age (i.e. 15 to 49 years) and who are not pregnant or breastfeeding whereas module V records body measurement of children between 0 to 59 months.The main objective of administering the community questionnaire is to collect baseline community data in 54 villages in the two districts (Dedza and Ntcheu) in Malawi. The community-level data complement the data from the household survey to analyze economic environment and market-and community-level challenges in agricultural production. Appendix In the middle of August 2013 the team left for the field. Initial five days were spent on verification of the households which was carried out by the enumerators. The team was distributed in four sub teams for data collection. Each team included a supervisor, 4 enumerators and a driver. There was also a quality control team constituting 2 enumerators and one driver. A shorter version of the main questionnaire was developed for quality control. About 10-15% of the households in a village were re-interviewed by the quality control team. Any inconsistencies and missing data were collected with the recommendation from the quality control team.    Compared to non-beneficiary and control households, AR beneficiary households exhibit larger household size, higher average adult years of education, more likely to be married or cohabiting, and higher likelihood to be male headed household.From the t-test we see that average AR beneficiary household size is significantly different from that of non-beneficiary and control households, whereas average household size is not statistically different between non-beneficiary and control households. Similarly, the average adult years of education in AR beneficiary households is higher and statistically different from those of non-beneficiary and control households. Overall, about 66% of heads of household are either married (monogamous and polygamous) or living together with the distribution of married or cohabiting heads in AR beneficiary households are significantly higher (75%) than non-beneficiary (60%) and control households (65%). The household size and average adult years of education are further depicted by district and research group in Figure 2.1.2 and 2.1.3 respectively. The average household size of AR beneficiary in Ntcheu district is higher than that of Dedza district. Regarding average adult years of education, Ntcheu district has significantly higher number of years for all three research groups than Dedza district.    Christian is predominantly the main religion declared by 93% of heads of the household, followed by 3% household heads declaring to be Muslim. About 68% of the households are male-headed with the distribution of male-headed households being higher (73%) among AR beneficiary households than that of non-beneficiary (64%) and control (66%) households. The average age of the head of the household is about 46 years across all research sample groups.Regarding education level of the household head, about 16% of head of household reported no schooling whereas a modest 5% reported o level or above (more than 12 years of education). About 34% of head of household received education between standard 1 to standard 4. Other 34% have achieved education level between grad 5 to grade 8. A modest 10% received education level between Form 1 to Form 3. In relation to primary economic activity, about 85% of head of household are involved in crop production whereas 6% of heads identified non-firm employment as their primary economic activity and about 6% declared to be self-employed.  The summary of agricultural land variables are further depicted by district and research group in     MARBES collected information on crops grown by the households, area under cultivation, production, and input usage and practices. Table 2.1.7 reports the percentage of households cultivated key crops by research groups. It is seen that almost entire sample (99.7%) cultivate maize. Groundnut is the second major crop cultivated with overall 70% households being involved in its cultivation but there is great variation of percentage of households among three research groups. Among AR beneficiary households the percentage of groundnut cultivating households is 84%, among non-beneficiary households is 70% and 60% among the control households. Soybean and beans are the third and fourth major crops cultivated by 49% and 44% households, respectively. Looking at the distribution of households growing soybean, it particularly dominant crop for AR beneficiary households (72%) compared to non-beneficiary (51%) and control households (31%). In contrast, beans is dominant crop among non-beneficiary households, as 56% declared growing such crop. Cowpea, millet and pigeon pea are also important crops cultivated in the sample by 24%, 19% and 13%, respectively. Other crops cultivated are sweet potato, sorghum, Bambara, rice and chickpea but they attract relatively small percentage of households.  Table 2.1.9 reports the average production of main crops in kilograms from a hectare of land. The output of each crop was reported in local measurement units. We converted the local units of quantity to kilograms by direct transformation of local units given in questionnaire and by using community level crop-location specific conversion. The yield data are plotted in a histogram in Figure 2.1.8 that shows that on average sweet potato provides the highest yield with an average yield of 2909 kg/ha, followed by rice with an average yield of 2497 kg/ha. The average yield of maize, the most important crop in the sample, is reported to be 1826 kg/ha and the average yield for AR beneficiary (2027 kg/ha) and non-beneficiary (2137.6 kg/ha) households are much higher than that of control households (1560 kg/ha). The average yield of groundnut, millet and soybeans are 1184 kg/ha, 785 kg/ha and 679 kg/ha, respectively. Although widely grown crops the yield of beans, pigeon pea, chick pea and bambara are reported to be the lowest on average in the sample, the yields being 503 kg/ha, 343 kg/ha, 365 kg/ha, 421 kg/ha, respectively.  In terms of agricultural input use during rainy season, overall 23% households declared use of chemical fertilizer. The average amount of fertilizer application per household is 95 kg. On average the amount of fertilizer use per household for AR beneficiary households are higher than that of non-beneficiary and control households. In terms of labor inputs, on average 42% of households employ hired labor and 33% of households use communal labor in agricultural production. Regarding access to seed, the average time to nearest seed supplier is reported to be 41 minutes (one way with usual mode of transport). Crop rotation is a common practice in the sample, about 71% households practice crop rotation. The percentage of households practicing crop rotation in AR beneficiary (85%) households is higher than that of nonbeneficiary (73%) and control households (59%). Practicing fallowing is observed only for 9% of the sample households. Zero tillage for soil moisture conservation is practices rarely in the sample, about 1% of the sample households. In terms of manure use almost half household in the sample apply manure. The percentage of households using manure for AR beneficiary (68%) and non-beneficiary (55%) households are higher than that of control households (43%). Overall, the percentage of households using improved maize seed is 71%, improved maize seed is used by 87% of the AR beneficiary households whereas only 64% of non-beneficiary and 61% of control households.Labor use data in person-days as agricultural input were also collected in the survey. The average total person-days including communal labor for the entire sample is 270. The gendered breakdown of the average person-days use in agriculture is the following. For male agricultural labor the total person-days used on average is 125, whereas for female agricultural labor, the average total person days is 139. The average values of the fertilizer purchased per household is reported to be 14380 MWK. I terms of the value of seed purchase, the average values per household for traditional see is 652 MWK, whereas the average value for improved seed is 1472 MWK per household. The summary of fertilizer use, labor input, access to seed and improved maize seed use are further depicted by district and research group in Figure 2.1.9 to Figure 2.1.12. Figure 2.1.9 shows that on average Ntcheu district has higher average amount of fertilizer use per household than Dedza district for all three research groups. Similarly, as depicted by Figure 2.1.10, the average person-days used (including communal labor) in Ntchue is higher than that of Dedza for all three research groups. The average travel times (in minutes for one way travel with usual model of transport) to see supplier are much higher in Ntcheu compared to Dedza for the research groups, meaning on average, access to seed is more difficult in Ntcheu than Dedza (Figure 2.1.11). The percentage of households using improved maize seed are similar for both the districts except the percentage is significantly hgher for SR beneficiary households of Ntcheu compared to AR beneficiary households in Dedza (Figure 2.1.12).    MARBES collected information about crop storage condition in the household survey. Table 2.1.11 shows that 96% of households reported that they had maize in storage one month after harvest. For other key crops such as groundnut, finger millet, rice, bean and soybean the percentage of households that declared keeping the crops in storage one month after harvest are 91%, 89%, 88%, 88%, 87%, respectively.   MARBES collected information on condition of the dwelling unit such as materials used for the wall, floor and roof, source of drinking water, type of toilet etc. Table 2.1.14 provides summary of the characteristics of housing for the three research groups and for the whole sample. From the table it is seen that on average 65% households use mud/ mud brick/clay as main material for wall of the housing unit, and a moderate 34% households use stone/ burned bricks for wall of the house. Regarding materials for floor, 89% households report use of earth/mud/mud brick and 11% households use cement/concrete as main material for floor of the house. In terms of material used for roof, 73% households report use of leaves/raffia/ thatch as the main material for roof, a moderate 24% households employ corrugated metal for constructing roof of the housing unit. MARBES also collected sources of drinking water and type of toilet to assess household health information. Majority of the households (82%) report to access drinking water from borehole, well and pump, whereas 11% households have access to public tap for drinking water. Only 4% households report to have well without pump for drinking water and 2% household source drinking water from river. In terms of type of toilet, majority of households (72%) have private latrine, a moderate 26% households have access to shared latrine. For other remaining households, 1% households have access to shared KVIP (Kumasi Ventilated Improved Pit) and 0.5% use bush or field as a type of toilet.We construct aggregate wealth index using housing condition, durable non-agricultural assets, durable agricultural assets, livestock ownership and land ownership. We compute aggregate wealth index through factorial analysis using principle component factor (PCF) method. Table 2.1.15 shows the summary statistics of the household level aggregate wealth index in quintiles. The higher the wealth index for a household, the wealthier are its members on average.  Among the second activity, trainings and demonstration field days are reported as main activities identified by 15% and 7% of the households, respectively. Among the third activity, demonstration field days remain the main AR activity reported by 12% households. MARBES collected information on recent shocks to household welfare over the past five years (Table 2.1.17). On average, 48% of households reported to have suffered from agriculture related shocks in past five years. In particular, 45% households reported to have severely affected negatively from drought or flood over the past five years. Large rise in agricultural input prices and price of food are identified to have affected household welfare negatively as reported by 35% and 28% households, respectively. Livestock deaths and predation are also reported as a major shock identified by 19% households. This section provides information on physical measurements and health outcomes among children under five. Data are collected on weight and height of targeted informants to construct anthropometric indicators. Using the WHO (2006) guidelines we construct z-score, which refers to the deviation of an individual's measurement from the median value of a reference population divided by the standard deviation of the reference population. Three indicators are used for nutritional assessment of children aged below 59 months, namely stunting, underweight, and wasting. Stunting is measured as height-for-age (haz) being two z-scores below the international reference and is usually an indicator for long term under nutrition. Underweight is measured as weight-for-age (waz) becoming two z-scores below the international reference. Wasting is defined as weight-for-height (whz) falling two z-scores below the international reference indicating a consequence of acute starvation or disease. Table 2.1.18 presents the prevalence of moderate and severe under nutrition. By definition if the calculated z-scores fall below two standard deviations from the reference population the nutritional status is called moderate undernutrition, whereas the situation is called as severe undernutrition if the z-scores fall further below three standard deviation from the reference population. Overall, 29 percent children suffer from moderate stunting, 9 percent from moderate underweight and 2 percent from moderate wasting. Severe stunting affect about 12 percent of the sample.  To summarize the key findings, the household section points out that the majority of the households are Christian, male-headed and involved in crop production. The main crops cultivated in majority of the land are maize, groundnut, soybean and beans. Although average land holding per household is about 2.7 hectares, each households cultivates only an area of about one hectare. Irrigation is extremely rare; less than 1 percent of households reported irrigating their land in rainy season whereas about 10 percent households declared irrigating their land in dry season. Intercropping is widely used practice in the sample with 79 percent households practicing intercropping. Overall, 23 percent households use chemical fertilizer whereas application of manure is common practice concerning about half of the sample households.In terms of storing the main crops, households mostly use sacks and bags. Granary (which is a safer storage) is used by a quarter of the households in the sample only for storing maize but they are not used for storing other crops. Along with agriculture, households usually raise chicken and goats. About housing condition, majority of the households use mud/ mud brick/ clay as the main materials for wall and floor and roofed with leaves or thatch. About 82 percent households access drinking water from borehole, well and pump. Regarding agricultural shocks, about the half of the surveyed households reported to have suffered from agriculture related shocks in past five years. In particular, droughts and floods severely affected 45 percent of them, followed by large rise in agricultural input prices and price for food. The household section also provides information on anthropometric measures for children and women to assess nutritional status in the sample. MARBES finds that overall 29 percent children suffer from moderate stunting, 9 percent from moderate underweight and 2 percent from moderate wasting. Among women, 21 percent suffer from overweight, 8 percent suffer from underweight and 4 percent is obese.Next section presents the summary report of the data collected at the community level. The community data summary covers community demography, access to basic services, labor in agriculture, agriculture related problems and solutions, land use and major crops, migration, availability of water resources, and prevalence of shocks.MARBES successfully conducted community interviews in 54 communities involving 356 informants. Key village and informant characteristics are provided in Table 2.2.1. Average number of informants per village is 6.6 with minimum 5 and maximum 8 per village. Average age of informants is 45 years and all have long standing village tenure, having spent 36 years living in the community on average. Average village population is 1125 with Amosi (6000) and Zaunda (120) being the largest and smallest villages, respectively, among the 54 survey villages (see Figure 2.2.1). Average elevation of the surveyed communities is about 924 meters. Among all 356 informants, two in five are female. Table 2.2.2 shows the distribution of informants by sex and research group. Among action villages, 105 males and 65 females participated in the focus group, whereas among control villages, 115 males and 71 females were involved. In terms of the position hold within the community, among the action villages, 23village chiefs, 16 village counselors, 28 village development committee members, 26 religious leaders, and 15 teachers were among the key informants providing information on community characteristics. Among the control villages, 24 village chiefs, 21 village counselors, 27 village development committee members, 23 religious leaders, and 15 teachers were among the key participants for community survey. Table 2.2.3 provides availability of basic services within each community. All communities have access to primary and secondary school but only 38 communities (18 action and 20 control) have access to pre-primary school. Almost all communities have access to health center, weekly market and milling machine. In contrast, communities face difficulty accessing agricultural and financial services including livestock services. Agricultural extension services are provided in 45 communities (all 25 action and 20 control), bank and financial services in 35 communities (19 action and 16 control), public tap water in only 18 communities (10 action and 8 control), slaughter slab in 28 communities (13 action and 15 control), veterinary clinic only in 31 communities (12 action and 19 control). Further, livestock market available only in 13 communities (7 action and 6 control), but there is no milk collection center available for these communities. Milk collection center 0 0The average one way travel time in minutes are shown in Tale 2.2.4. Overall, average travel time to basic services are higher for control communities than for action communities. Pre-primary schools and primary schools are in the close proximity as on average 12 and 21 minutes are needed to reach them, respectively. Secondary schools are less accessible as on average 65 minutes needed to reach them. On average 67 minutes are needed to reach agricultural extension services from the community. Health centers are usually less accessible, take about 77 minutes to reach there. Travel to daily and weekly market and financial institutions take about an hour. By usual mode of transport, service most quickly reachable include public tap water, pre-primary and primary schools (7, 12, and 21 minutes, respectively). Services furthest away include livestock market, post office and bus stop (78, 83, 83 minutes, respectively). For district and EPA headquarters it takes about one and half hours to two hours. Average travel times for various basic services are depicted in Figure 2.2.2.   Community level information on labor allocation for agricultural activities was gathered. Table 2.2.6 presents the gendered breakdown of various labor use by type (family, hired and communal). Agriculture within these communities remain a family run system. Labor use for various agricultural activities are skewed heavily toward family members and hired labor, with communal labor being the least preferred option. Main activities such as planting, clearing and fertilizer application involve most family members including male, female and children. Herbicide, fungicide and pesticides are mostly applied by male and female members of the family, children are rarely used for these activities, whereas for livestock management children (27) are employed more than male members (25) of the family. In regards to irrigation, on average 32 communities declared that male and female are employed whereas only 24 communities employ children. For harvest also more male and female are employed compared to children. Compost making also attracted more male and female member of the family than children.Lesser number of communities reported the use of hired labor for various agricultural activities. Hired labors are employed more for ploughing and fertilizer application compared to other activities. Compost making and herbicide application are not done by hired labors. Female labors are not hired for livestock management, livestock related activities are usually considered as family activity. Significant number of communities reported the use of hired child labor for ploughing (27), clearing (24) and fertilizer application (24). Use of communal labor is usually practiced less in these communities. For harvest, ploughing and weeding, communal labor are used greatly used these communities. Compared to male and children, female are employed more for communal agricultural activities. For example, for clearing 17 communities reported use of female communal labor whereas only 4 and 7 communities reported use of male and children labor. For harvest 20 communities reported use of female labor while only 11 and 8 communities employed male and children labor, respectively. Similar trends are also revealed in case of ploughing and weeding activities.The community informants were asked about the major agricultural problems faced by the households in the community.   2.2.10 presents the land ownership and inheritance of land in the community. 47 communities reported land ownership by both men and women. In 7 communities however, only women are entitled to own land. This is unusual finding compared to other sub-Saharan African countries where persistence of gender inequality is observed in the sense that access to land is privileged by men only. To further investigate the gender dimension of land ownership, the 47 communities where both men and women can own land, are inquired about inheritance of land. Majority of such communities (10 action and 16 control communities) reported that wife can inherit husband's land after his death. On the other hand, only 3 communities reported that husband can inherit wife's land after her death. The proportion of cultivated land dedicated to various crops are presented in table 2.2.12 by disaggregating the data at the district level. The data confirm that maze is by far the leading crop grown in those communities accounting for more than half of the available cultivated land, with a wide variation of the percentage ranging from 20 to 95 percent. The proportion of cultivated lands by main crops by district are depicted in Figure 2.2.4. The district level pattern of the proportion of land by crops are similar. However, in Ntcheu the proportion of land devoted by maize is higher on average than that of Dedza. Groundnuts are important secondary crop, accounting for about 14 percent of total cultivated land in the community. The next highest proportion of land is devoted to Soybeans that accounts for 7.5 percent on average.     Community level data show that access to primary education is available in all 54 surveyed communities and the primary schools are in close proximity as on average 21 minutes needed to reach them. Although health facilities are available in all communities they are usually less accessible as about 77 minutes travel on average is required to reach them. Overall, the average travel time to basic services are found to be higher for control communities compared to action communities.Labor use in the communities for various agricultural activities are skewed heavily toward family members and hired labor, with communal labor being the least preferred option. The main agricultural activities such as planting, clearing and fertilizer application involve most family members including male, female and children. For application of herbicide, fungicide and pesticides children are rarely used whereas for livestock management children are more involved in a family. Community data show that overall 45 percent of the total land in the communities is cultivable which confirms the picture emerging from the household level data. Lands can be owned by men and women and wife can inherit husband's land after death. The community data also confirm that the main crops in the area are maize, groundnut, soybean and beans. Maize is by far the leading crop grown in the surveyed communities accounting for more than half of the available cultivated land.Regarding the most important agricultural problems, high price of agricultural inputs is by far the most important problem reported by most communities. Consistently, the most important strategy taken by the communities is adjustment of input (seeds and fertilizer) use. Farmer cooperatives are present in most communities and are used primarily for sharing knowledge. In terms of the most serious shock to agriculture, community data reinforce that the shortage of inputs and their high prices cause the most serious negative shock to agriculture.MARBES was successfully conducted in 54 communities (28 control and 26 intervention) selected for AR evaluation study. The household dataset covers 1,149 households where the survey tool was developed to collect information on various socioeconomic variables such as demography, agricultural land characteristics, production and inputs, storage facility, livestock ownership, dwelling characteristics, agricultural related shocks, and children and women anthropometry. The community tool was designed to collect information on community demography, access to basic services, labor in agriculture, agriculture related problems and solutions, land use and major crops, migration, availability of water resources, and prevalence of shocks.Both household and community survey data analysis reveal that crop production is the primary economic activity of the surveyed households and communities. Average household level land size in the sample is about 2.7 hectares but the cultivable land holding is about one hectare per household. The main crops cultivated in the area are maize, groundnut, soybean and beans. Most households practice mixed farming with prevalence of chicken raising in the households. The findings from the community interviews in all 54 villages confirm the general findings out of household survey data. Total cultivable land in average community is 45% which confirms the average percentage of cultivable land from the household data. The community data also confirm that the main crops in the area are maize, groundnut, soybean and beans. In terms of the most serious shock to agriculture, community data reinforce that the shortage of inputs and their high prices cause the most serious negative shock to agriculture.The data presentation of the household level variables by AR beneficiary, non-beneficiary and control households and their equality of means tests show some clear differences between AR beneficiary, non-beneficiary and control households. Compared to non-beneficiary and control households, AR beneficiary households present larger household size, higher average adult years of education, more likely to be married or cohabiting, and higher likelihood to be male headed household. AR beneficiary households are also better off than non-beneficiary and control households in terms of average per capita land size at household level, irrigation in dry season, and travel time to the nearest parcel with usual mode of transport.With the present evaluation design along with both household and community level data MARBES can be used to evaluate overall effectiveness of AR program in Malawi. The baseline dataset can facilitate monitoring and devaluation information system. The MARBES can facilitate research on characterization of complex production system, socioeconomic modeling and household decision making. Finally, these detailed baseline household information can facilitate deeper research integration. For example, the investigation on mechanics of technology adoption can be carried out by conducting follow up survey and tracking technology use and associated constraints of adoption. Africa RISING project has been introducing various improved technologies through trials in the field. But it is not clear whether small holder farmers would be willing to pay for these "}

main/part_2/0385855601.json

@@ -0,0 +1 @@
+{"metadata":null,"keywords":null,"sieverID":"c3a2ad4c-f7f1-4003-92a1-b06178967683","content":"\n"}

main/part_2/0386208509.json

@@ -0,0 +1 @@
+{"metadata":{"gardian_id":"78667111d14accbaa9ca35a291f2c50c","source":"gardian_index","url":"https://repository.cimmyt.org/server/api/core/bitstreams/7c805f30-0b28-4b71-b027-455fb4d95ba6/content","id":"1055995339"},"keywords":["DArTseq markers","Genome-wide association study","Marker-assisted selection","Striga hermonthica","Striga resistance","Zea mays L"],"sieverID":"d169af2a-a3f2-4fb8-9637-54fda16c0656","content":"Background: Striga hermonthica (Benth.) parasitism militates against increased maize production and productivity in savannas of sub-Saharan Africa (SSA). Identification of Striga resistance genes is important in developing genotypes with durable resistance. So far, there is only one report on the existence of QTL for Striga resistance on chromosome 6 of maize. The objective of this study was to identify genomic regions significantly associated with grain yield and other agronomic traits under artificial Striga field infestation. A panel of 132 early-maturing maize inbreds were phenotyped for key agronomic traits under Striga-infested and Striga-free conditions. The inbred lines were also genotyped using 47,440 DArTseq markers from which 7224 markers were retained for population structure analysis and genome-wide association study (GWAS). Results: The inbred lines were grouped into two major clusters based on structure analysis as well as the neighborjoining hierarchical clustering. A total of 24 SNPs significantly associated with grain yield, Striga damage at 8 and 10 weeks after planting (WAP), ears per plant and ear aspect under Striga infestation were detected. Under Striga-free conditions, 11 SNPs significantly associated with grain yield, number of ears per plant and ear aspect were identified. Three markers physically located close to the putative genes GRMZM2G164743 (bin 10.05), GRMZM2G060216 (bin 3.06) and GRMZM2G103085 (bin 5.07) were detected, linked to grain yield, Striga damage at 8 and 10 WAP and number of ears per plant under Striga infestation, explaining 9 to 42% of the phenotypic variance. Furthermore, the S9_154,978,426 locus on chromosome 9 was found at 2.61 Mb close to the ZmCCD1 gene known to be associated with the reduction of strigolactone production in the maize roots. Conclusions: Presented in this study is the first report of the identification of significant loci on chromosomes 9 and 10 of maize that are closely linked to ZmCCD1 and amt5 genes, respectively and may be related to plant defense mechanisms against Striga parasitism. After validation, the identified loci could be targets for breeders for marker-assisted selection (MAS) to accelerate genetic enhancement of maize for Striga resistance in the tropics, particularly in SSA, where the parasitic weed is endemic.Striga hermonthica is a parasitic weed causing remarkable reduction in maize yield in the SSA and threatens the livelihoods of more than 300 million people [1]. Striga infestation is most severe in areas with low soil fertility, low rainfall and farming systems characterized by poor crop management practices and little use of inputs such as fertilizer, pesticides, and improved seeds [2]. Yield losses attributable to Striga parasitism range from 20 to 80% and the levels of infestation are often so high that maize may suffer 100% yield loss, and farmers could be forced to abandon their fields [3][4][5][6].Striga seeds germinate in response to strigolactones in the root exudates of maize plants. Germinated seeds develop haustoria which attach to the roots of the host plants through which photosynthates and nutrients are transferred from the maize to the Striga plant [1]. Once attached to maize roots, the Striga plants survive by siphoning-off water and nutrients from the host plant for its own growth and development. The development of Striga plants impairs the normal host-plant growth, resulting in a large reduction in plant height, biomass, and eventually grain yield [7]. Feasible control options include intercropping, rotation of cereals with crops that are not susceptible to S. hermonthica such as cotton (Gossypium spp), soybean (Glycine max L.), and cowpea (Vigna unguiculata L.), herbicide treatment, handpulling, use of catch and trap crops, high nitrogen fertilization and use of tolerant and resistant varieties [1]. Among these options, host plant resistance is the most economical, sustainable and environmentally friendly.During the past two decades, the maize improvement program of the International Institute of Tropical Agriculture (MIP-IITA) has placed a major emphasis on the development of stable and durable resistance to Striga from the wild maize (Zea diploperennis L.) and African landraces. Through these efforts, several populations, inbred lines and hybrids with durable Striga resistance have been developed. For example, the early-maturing Striga resistant and drought-tolerant maize inbred line, TZdEI 352, derived from a cross between the normal endosperm white maize population TZEW Pop DT STR and the Z. diploperennis, has displayed increased grain yield and durable Striga resistance [8]. Akaogu et al. [8] reported dominance gene effects to be higher than the additive effects for the number of emerged Striga plants in TZdEI 352, implying that non-additive gene action conditioned inheritance of Striga resistance. This inbred TZdEI 352 and other inbreds including TZEI 1203, TZEI 1252, and TZEI 1348, have been reported to possess significant positive/negative general combining ability (GCA) effects for grain yield, Striga damage, number of emerged Striga plants, ears per plant and ear aspect.The present focus of the IITA-MIP is to transfer novel Striga resistance genes into Striga susceptible but outstanding genotypes, through gene stacking. This will allow the development of inbreds, hybrids and other available maize germplasm with durable resistance and increased maize production and productivity in SSA. With the advent of rapid genome-wide high-density marker data using high-throughput and next-generation sequencing technologies, GWAS has become a common tool for identifying resistance genes and/or loci through genome-wide association mapping [9,10]. Identified genes and/or loci, once validated, could be fixed to provide maize germplasm with durable Striga resistance in tropical maize.Information on the identification of QTL for Striga resistance in maize is very limited. Amusan [11] mapped two putative QTL on chromosome 6 of maize, from an F 2 mapping population involving a cross between the Striga susceptible inbred line, 5057 and the resistant inbred line ZD05. These two QTL accounted for 55% of the phenotypic variability with dominant effects overlapping in importance. Unlike maize, the progress in the identification of QTL for marker assisted selection in sorghum is more advanced. The identification of lg gene mutant alleles at the LGS1 (Low Germination Stimulant 1) locus on chromosome 5 of sorghum has reduced greatly the Striga hermonthica germination stimulant activity [12]. This gene was found to code for a sulfotransferase enzyme, and when silenced led to a change of 5-deoxystrigol into orobanchol compounds in the root exudates [12]. In addition, other loci have been reported to play important roles in parasitic resistance, including the genes CCD1, CCD7 and CCD8 [13,14]. In maize, roots with mycorrhizal formations have shown a higher ZmCCD1 expression and induced lower germination of Striga [13]. Liu et al. [15] provided evidence for strigolactones and strigolactone perception genes of the MAX-2-type in Striga hermonthica, namely ShCCD7 and ShCCD8. In tobacco, the silencing of CCD7 and CCD8 genes retarded the virus parasite formation in the host, indicating that these two genes are key in parasitic life cycle [14].In Striga resistance breeding, the primary traits of interest in selecting for resistance and high grain yield are host plant damage, number of emerged Striga plants, ears per plant and ear aspect [1,[16][17][18]. The host plant damage is positively correlated with the number of emerged Striga plants, and the two traits are negatively correlated with yield. Therefore, there is need to identify the genomic regions and genes that control the inheritance of grain yield and closely associated traits for successful use of MAS in maize improvement under Striga field infestation. Identification of genomic regions for Striga resistance would therefore facilitate rapid and efficient transfer of resistance genes to susceptible maize genotypes. The objectives of this study were to i) determine the genetic structure of a panel of 132 diverse early maturing white maize inbred lines with varying levels of resistance to Striga hermonthica parasitism and ii) identify putative genes associated with grain yield and other Striga adaptive traits under Striga-infested and Strigafree environments, using GWAS.Analysis of variance (ANOVA) across Striga infested environments revealed significant genotype (G) and environment (E) mean squares for all measured traits except environment mean squares for grain yield and Striga damage at 8 WAP (Table 1 and G x E mean squares for grain yield, ears per plant and ear aspect. Broad sense heritability estimates ranged from 28% for ears per plant to 58% for ear aspect when Striga-free.The phenotypic correlations among grain yield and other measured Striga adaptive traits differed under artificial Striga infestation (Fig. 1). Grain yield had significant negative correlation with ear aspect (r = − 0. A total of 47,440 SNPs were generated for the maize inbred lines using DArT sequencing technology. After quality filtering of the unmapped and multilocation markers, SNPs with missing values > 10%, heterozygosity > 20% and MAF < 5% were excluded and thus, a total of 7224 SNPs were retained for the analysis (Additional file 1: Figure S1). The results of the summary statistics of the maize inbred lines based on the filtered  S1. The PIC ranged from 0.09 to 0.37 with an average of 0.26 whereas the heterozygosity averaged 0.07 and varied from 0.00 to 0.20. The minor allele frequencies of the 7224 primers recorded a mean of 0.24 with minimum and maximum minor allele frequencies of 0.05 and 0.5, respectively. Gene diversity varied from 0.10 to 0.50 with an average of 0.33. Population structure was inferred through the admixture model-based clustering method [19]. The STRUCT URE algorithm and STRUCTURE HARVESTER results revealed delta K plot peak value of two (Fig. 2b). The results of the unweighted neighbor joining phylogenetic tree, color coded from the STRUCTURE results, also indicated two major groups (Fig. 2a). At k = 2, 89% of the inbred lines were assigned into two groups, and only 11% of the lines were assigned in the mixed group. A total of 45 inbred lines were placed in group 1, 72 in group  Linkage disequilibrium analysis revealed the presence of 359,926 loci pairs within a physical distance extending up to 55,266,364 bp. About 22.05% (79,364) of the loci pairs were in significant LD (P < 0.001). In addition, 1231 (0.30%) of the loci pairs were in complete LD (R 2 = 1). Pearson's correlation coefficients showed negative and significant correlation (r = − 0.035) between the linkage disequilibrium (R 2 ) and the physical distance (bp) as well as between the P-value and R 2 (r = − 0.59), indicating the existence of linkage decay. The rate of LD  decay differed across the chromosomes (Additional file 3: Figure S2), ranging from 6948 kb for chromosome 5 to 8367 kb for chromosome 10 at r 2 < 0.2 (Table 2). The average pairwise r 2 and LD decay at r 2 < 0.2 for the entire genome was approximately 0.03 and 7636 kb, respectively. The slowest LD decay was observed for chromosome 10 (8367 kb), followed by chromosome 4 (8213 kb) and chromosome 8 (7924 kb).Under artificial Striga infestation, 24 significant SNPs were detected for five different traits at a GWAS threshold of -log (p) = 4 (Table 3). The trait variation explained by each marker R 2 varied from 9 to 42%. Of the 24 SNPs that were significant, nine were located on chromosome 10. Three markers located on chromosomes 10 and 9 were associated with grain yield and explained about 34% of the phenotypic variation. Ears per plant was associated with seven markers located on chromosomes 4, 5, 7, and 10. These markers revealed 9 to 13% of the phenotypic variation. Ear aspect had only one significant SNP located on chromosome Under Striga-free conditions, 11 SNPs significantly associated with grain yield, ears per plant and ear aspect were detected (threshold of -log (p) = 4), accounting for 13 to 23% of the total phenotypic variation observed among the traits. Two markers located on chromosomes 3 and 4 were associated with grain yield and explained 14 to 15% of the phenotypic variation in grain yield. Number of ears per plant had four significant SNPs situated on chromosomes 8, 2 and 1 explaining 13 to 21% of the phenotypic variation. In addition, five different SNPs located on chromosomes 3, 6 and 8 were associated with ear aspect, describing 19 to 24% of the phenotypic variation. Significant SNPs identified for grain yield, ears per plant and ear aspect under Striga-infestation were different from those under Striga-free conditions. The results of the SNPs for grain yield, ears per plant and Striga damage under Striga infestation are illustrated in the Manhattan and quantile-quantile plots (Figs. 3 and 4). The quantile-quantile plots revealed good data adjustment and a few significant SNPs above the interval for the expected values of the null hypothesis. LD block heatmaps of the three candidate gene loci identified are shown in Fig. 5. LD analysis of each of the three loci revealed that these markers had relatively low LD parameter (R 2 ), indicating relatively low correlation with each other.The genomic regions of the significant SNPs were examined to identify the protein-coding genes located in or  close to the significant SNPs based on the data retrieved from the maize genetic database (http://www.maizegdb. org/). The list of annotated genes, including those encoding uncharacterized proteins of the most significant SNPs are presented in Table 4. The SNP S10_133,224, 759 having significant association with grain yield and Striga damage under Striga infestation was located within the candidate gene amt5 (ammonium transporter 5) with identifier GRMZM2G164743. Similarly, SNP S10_16,561,232 having strong association with ears per plant under Striga infestation was located on another candidate gene GRMZM2G310674, which encodes a Polynucleotidyl transferase putative protein, belonging to the ribonuclease H-like superfamily protein. On chromosome 9, SNP S9_7,249,203 associated with grain yield under Striga infestation was physically located within the putative genes GRMZM2G080044 and GRMZM5G898880. These genes are responsible for cellular respiration, oxidative phosphorylation and NAD (P) H dehydrogenase activities. Additionally, SNP S9_154, 978,426 significantly associated with Striga damage was located on the protein-coding putative gene GRMZM2G010017 that encodes a protein phosphatase 2C family protein and 2.62 Mb close to the Zmccd1 gene, GRMZM2G057243. On chromosome 5, S5_207, 493,972 and S5_215,584,703 associated with ears per plant under Striga infestation were located on the GRMZM2G315127 and 131.43 kb close to GRMZM2G103085 putative genes, respectively. The putative gene GRMZM2G315127 encodes for an uncharacterized protein while the GRMZM2G103085/EREB139 putative gene encodes for ethylene-responsive elementbinding proteins. Marker S3_179,448,461 having significant association with Striga damage was found 60.7 kb close to the candidate gene lg2, GRMZM2G060216, which encodes a basic leucine zipper protein transcription factor. On chromosome 7, S7_137,739,978 having significant association with ears per plant under Striga infestation was located on the putative gene GRMZM2G016836, which encodes the NAD (P)-binding Rossmann-fold superfamily protein.Under Striga-free conditions, S1_67,606,758 and S1_ 68,549,674 linked with ears per plant on chromosome 1 were found on the GRMZM2G078806 and The significant variation observed among the inbred lines for grain yield and other agronomic traits revealed the existence of adequate genetic variability among the early maturing maize inbred lines under Striga-infested and Striga-free research conditions. The significant environment mean squares observed for most traits in the present study showed the distinctness of the environments in discriminating among the genotypes under each research condition [20,21]. Moderate to high heritability estimates detected for grain yield and other Striga adaptive traits implied increased power of SNP detection in the maize panel allowing for identification of true associations between a marker and putative gene [22][23][24]. The significant positive correlation observed between grain yield and ears per plant and significant negative correlations between grain yield and Striga damage, number of emerged Striga plants and ear aspect suggested simultaneous improvement of these traits would result in high yield under Striga infestation. Previous studies identified grain yield, number of emerged Striga plants, Striga damage, ears per plant and ear aspect as the most reliable traits in selecting for Striga resistant maize genotypes, thus justifying their inclusion in the selection index for yield improvement in Striga-prone environments in SSA [17,25].Approximately 70% of the SNPs used in the study had heterozygosity < 5%. The lower values of heterozygosity observed among the inbred lines in the two groups indicated that the SNPs were efficient in forming homogenous groups. Thus, making them a valuable resource for genetic studies and association mapping where uniformity of inbred lines and genetic divergence are required [26]. The average PIC value of 0.26 obtained in this study is higher than that reported by Adu et al. [26] but comparable to those reported previously by Simko et al. [27] and Zhang et al. [28]. This reveals the informativeness of the markers used in this study. The frequency of minor alleles is a crucial factor influencing the accuracy of LD analysis and GWAS, especially when using small number of genotypes [29,30]. The filtered high-quality SNPs used in this study had a large proportion of MAFs distributed uniformly across the genome, frequencies greater than 5%. Most of the significant SNPs identified in the present study had MAFs greater than 10%, implying the positive detection power of the GWAS as the biasness associated with rare alleles was removed [31].Estimation of population structure and within-group relatedness in maize genomic association studies is necessary in order to reduce the risk of false-positives [22,32]. The 132 inbred lines used in this study were classified into two major clusters (k = 2) by the DArTseq markers and each cluster was further partitioned into sub-clusters. Results obtained from the population structure analysis were similar to those previously reported by Cui et al. [33] in sesame, Campa et al. [34] in common bean, Mogga et al. [35] in rice, Maldonado et al. [36] in maize. It is interesting that the grouping of the inbred lines by the markers was mostly based on the reactions of the inbred lines to Striga as each group contained both resistant and susceptible inbred lines. The results of the population structure analysis were confirmed by the neighbor joining phylogenetic tree. The average genome-wide LD decay was estimated at 7636kbp at r 2 < 0.2. Previous studies reported LD less than 1000 bp for maize landraces, about 100 kb for commercial elite breeding lines and about 830Kbp for diverse breeding lines [30,37]. The existence of marker pairs in LD over long distances in the present study was expected since such large LD is a feature of advanced maize inbred lines that have gone through selection [30]. The large LD could lead to the identification of SNPs in genes that either cause or contribute to Striga resistance, or which act as linked markers associated with Striga resistance.The model fitness for the GWAS was confirmed by inspecting quantile-quantile (QQ) plots that compared the observed and expected p-values under the null hypothesis of no associations. Our results revealed that majority of points in the QQ plots were aligned on the diagonal line for all the measured traits, indicating that spurious associations due to population structure and familial relatedness were largely corrected. Similar findings were reported by Kuki et al. [23], who identified genomic regions, including putative genes, associated with resistance to gray leaf spot disease in tropical maize under natural disease infection.Marker-trait association analyses have demonstrated that association between specific phenotypes and genotypes within a genome, could lead to the discovery of genes controlling the traits [38]. In order to increase the level of resistance to Striga in the available early maturing tropical maize germplasm, 24 markers significantly associated with Striga damage, number of emerged Striga plants, number of ears per plant, ear aspect and grain yield under Striga infestation were identified, at the threshold of -log = 4. These markers were located on chromosomes 10, 9, 8, 7, 5, 4, 3 and 1. In contrast to the present results, Amusan [11] identified two putative loci for resistance to Striga on chromosome 6 of maize, using SSR markers and composite interval mapping (CIM) in a late maturing maize F 2 mapping population. The first QTL was found between markers umc2170 and bnlg1142 whereas the second QTL was found between SSR markers bnlg1867 and umc1014 [11]. These loci were found to govern the incompatible response to Striga parasitism and accounted for 55% of the phenotypic variation (PV) with predominance of dominance genetic effects over additive genetic effects in the expression of the two Striga resistance QTLs [11]. In our present study, no significant loci were identified on chromosome 6. The differences in the results of the two studies could be attributed to the differences in the genetic materials used in the two different studies. Furthermore, 11 markers were identified to be associated with grain yield, ears per plant and ear aspect under Strigafree conditions. These markers were located on chromosomes 8, 6, 4, 3 and 2. Lack of SNPs overlap for the measured traits under Striga infested and Striga-free environments indicated the genetic divergence between the two contrasting test environments. In addition, results of the present study showed that the Striga resistance indicator traits under artificial Striga-infested environments were complex in nature and were controlled by multiple minor QTLs with small effects distributed across the maize genome. The markers having significant association with Striga resistance indicator traits such as reduced Striga damage symptoms, increased number of ears per plant and high grain yield under Striga infestation could be used as candidate markers for simultaneous selection for the target traits in maize [1]. Allelic variations at each significant SNP were associated with 9 to 42% of the phenotypic variance, suggesting that these markers could be useful for marker-assisted selection for improved Striga resistance in tropical maize improvement programs. Striga resistance in maize is a polygenic trait making it relatively difficult to achieve good progress from selection. However, the identification of molecular markers tightly linked to functional genes is an important step towards development of genotypes with enhanced levels of resistance through gene pyramiding.The most noticeable candidate genes identified in the present study are located at SNPs S9_154,978,426 and S10_133,224,759 on chromosomes 9 and 10, respectively. The SNP S9_154,978,426 is located at 2.62 Mb from the ZmCCD1 gene on chromosome 9 [13]. It has been shown that maize roots colonized by arbuscular mycorrhizal fungi had a higher ZmCCD1 expression that could limit Striga germination [13]. This finding is particularly interesting as it is well known that the lowering of strigolactone production is still the best-known mechanism for preventing Striga germination [39,40]). Since the ZmCCD1 gene is involved in the formation of the yellow pigment apocarotenoids [13], it would be interesting in the future to understand the carotenoid levels of the lines and its relationship with Striga resistance in the maize inbred lines. On chromosome 10, the SNPs S10_133,224,759 and S10_112,661,466 are particularly interesting because they are significant for Striga damage at 8 and 10 WAP whereas S10_133,224,759 was significant for grain yield under Striga infestation. The SNP S10_133,224,759 located at the physical coordinates chr 10: 133,224,759 had the largest proportion of phenotypic variance (46%) for Striga damage in the panel of the IITA early maturing maize inbred lines. This SNP marker is close to the functional gene GRMZM2G164743 (bin 10.05), which encodes an ammonium transporter protein (amt5). AMT genes have been identified in many plant species including Zea mays [41] and Sorghum bicolor [42]. Nitrate (NO − 3 ) and ammonium (NH + 4 ) are the major forms of nitrogen (N) uptake in higher plants. The NH + 4 ions accumulate in cells either by direct uptake from the rhizosphere via ammonium transporters (AMTs) or by reduction of NO − 3 . Dechorgnat et al. [43] found ZmAMT2.1 gene (a member of the AMT family) to be expressed in all organs with some specificity to roots and tassels. Interestingly, Koegel et al. [42] reported a similar expression pattern of the ZmAMT2.1 orthologue in sorghum. The authors observed that in sorghum, SbAMT2.1 was expressed in all organs studied with higher expression in roots and stamens. Nitrogen status of the plants is also closely associated with plant defense against Striga parasitism as several authors have reported significant reduction in number of emerged Striga plants under high nitrogen concentration [43,44]. The SNP S10_133,224, 759 indicated that the candidate gene (amt5) identified in the present study could be responsible for the defense mechanism against Striga parasitism in maize. The gene therefore could be a novel target for further unravelling of the regulatory mechanism of Striga resistance in the roots of maize plants and should be tested further in breeding programs for its usefulness in selecting inbred lines with resistance to Striga hermonthica parasitism.Marked association around lg2 gene was detected for Striga damage. The SNP S3_179,448,461, located at the long arm of chromosome 3, was found close (60.7 kb) to the candidate gene GRMZM2G060216 (3.06), which is associated with loci lg2 (liguleless2). The lg2 gene encodes a basic leucine zipper protein transcription factor and has mutants known to affect leaf angle in maize. In maize, lg1 and lg2 mutants have no ligule or auricle, leading to considerably more upright leaves than their normal counterparts, thereby increasing photosynthetic activity and eventually leading significant grain yield increase in maize hybrids [45]. Thus, the lg2 gene may be associated with maize plant defense mechanism under Striga infestation. Previous studies have revealed that Striga infection influences the rate of photosynthesis in the host plants' leaves by decreasing the effectiveness of the photosynthetic process. This has been demonstrated in sorghum, millet, cowpea as well as in maize [7,[46][47][48][49][50]. The complex interplay between photosynthesis and plant defenses have been recently elucidated [51] and showed that both biological processes share common regulators. It would be interesting to further understand the contribution of the lg2 gene to host plant defense mechanisms under Striga infestation in the inbred lines studied.The S5_215,584,703 is close (131.43 kb) to the gene \"GRMZM2G103085-ereb13-AP2-EREBP\". EREBPs (also referred to as ethylene-responsive element-binding proteins) containing a single AP2 domain are involved in regulatory networks of response to hormones, pathogen attack, and environmental signals involving DREBs (dehydration responsive element binding proteins) and ERFs (ethylene responsive factors) [52,53]. Interestingly, Li et al. [54] identified TaPARG-2A and TaPRG-2G in wheat, belonging to the AP2 subfamily of AP2/EREBP transcription factors, that are involved in regulation of diverse processes of plant development and stress response. Hirota et al. [55] reported that the AP2/EREBP gene PUCHI is required for morphogenesis in the early lateral root primordium of Arabidopsis. However, this putative gene has not been well investigated in maize and needs further studies for better understanding of its importance in Striga resistance.Through this GWAS, we were able to detect reliable QTLs associated with maize plant defense mechanisms under Striga infestation. The information provided in this study would serve as the starting point for functional gene studies to clarify the genetic mechanisms underlying Striga resistance in tropical maize inbred lines. After validation, the significant loci identified in this study could be targets for breeders in markerassisted selection to accelerate genetic enhancement of maize for Striga resistance in the tropics, particularly in the West and Central Africa sub-region.To the best of our knowledge, the present study is the first report of genome-wide association analysis for Striga resistance in maize. Twenty-four SNPs were significantly associated with Striga adaptive traits in maize. The candidate putative genes GRMZM2G060216, GRMZM2G057243 and GRMZM2G164743, on chromosomes 3, 9 and 10, respectively, could be invaluable for the development of Striga resistant maize genotypes in SSA. Further studies, using different mapping populations, are urgently needed to validate the markers identified in the present study so that marker-assisted breeding for Striga resistance in tropical maize could be a reality and widely adopted in SSA where Striga is endemic. The broad based Striga resistant population TZE COMP 5-W DT C7 from which the inbred lines evaluated in this study were derived, had gone through 7 cycles of recurrent selection for improved Striga resistance. TZE COMP 5-W DT C7 was crossed to the inbred lines TZEI 65, TZEI 18, TZEI 31, TZEI 87, TZEI 2 and TZEI 56 selected for drought tolerance to improve the population for drought tolerance. Following the introgression of the drought tolerance genes into the population, a program was initiated to extract inbred lines with combined Striga resistance and drought tolerance using repeated self-pollination and selection for Striga resistance and drought tolerance. After eight cycles of inbreeding, the inbred lines were evaluated under drought and Striga infestation. Based on the results of the evaluations, the S 8 inbred lines used in the present study were selected.The inbred lines were phenotyped for key agronomic traits across two environments under artificial Striga infestation and two Striga-free environments at Mokwa, Nigeria (9 0 18′N, 5 0 4′E, m altitude, 1100 mm annual during the rainy seasons of 2017 and 2018. The experimental design was 11 × 12 alpha lattice with two replications. Each experimental unit consisted of 3 m single-row plots, with a row spacing of 0.75 m and intrarow spacing of 0.4 m. The fields were injected with ethylene gas at about 10 days before planting, to stimulate suicidal germination of residual Striga seeds in the soil. The artificial Striga infestation at Mokwa was carried out as recommended by IITA-MIP [56]. Striga seeds collected from sorghum fields were stored for about 6 months to break seed dormancy and used for the infestation. Each hole in the Striga plot received about 5000 germinable seeds of Striga mixed with fine sand in the ratio 1:99. Fertilizer rate was reduced (30 kg N/ha, 30 kg each of P and K applied as NPK 15-15-15) and application was delayed till 3 weeks after planting to induce the production of strigolactones stimulate good germination of the Striga seeds and the attachment of the Striga plants to the roots of host plants [57]. Under the artificial Striga infestation, data were collected on number of emerged Striga plants and host plant damage syndrome rating at 8 and 10 weeks after planting (WAP). The host plant damage syndrome rating was recorded on a scale of 1-9 (1 = normal plant growth, no visible symptoms, and 9 = complete scorching of all leaves, causing premature death or collapse of host plant and no ear formation). Under both Striga-infested and Striga-free environments, data were collected on the inbred lines for ear aspect, number of ears per plant and grain yield.Analyses of variance (ANOVA) were performed across test environments for each experiment on plot mean basis for grain yield and other key agronomic traits with PROC GLM in SAS [58], using a RANDOM statement with TEST option. Location-year combinations were treated as environments. The IITA base index was used to identify Striga resistant and susceptible inbred lines under artificial Striga infestation [1]. The means of the selected traits were expressed in standard deviation units and the index scores were computed as: I = ((2 × YLD) + EPP -(SDR8 + SDR10) -0.5(ESP8 + ESP10)), where YLD = grain yield of the Striga-infested plots, EPP is the number of ears at harvest in the Striga infested plots, SDR8 and SDR10 were Striga damage syndrome ratings at 8 and 10 WAP, and ESP8 and ESP10 were number of emerged Striga plants at 8 and 10 WAP. Broad sense heritability (H 2 ) estimates were calculated from phenotypic variance (σ 2 p ) and the genotypic variance (σ 2 g ) [59]. Correlation analysis was done using the performance analytics package in R [60].Samples of leaves were taken in the field at 2 weeks after planting. The DArT protocol was used for genomic DNA extraction (www.diversityarrays.com/files/DArT_ DNA_isolation.pdf). The quality and quantity of the DNA was ascertained by running the gDNA in a 1% agarose gel and measuring its concentration and purity in a NanoDrop 2000 spectrophotometer. The DNA samples were sent to the Integrated Genomic Service and Support (IGSS) genotyping platform, Nairobi, Kenya for genotyping. High-throughput genotyping was conducted in 96 plex DArTseq protocol as described previously [26]. Reads and tags found in each sequencing result were aligned to the Zea mays L. genome reference, version AGPV3 (B73 Ref-Gen v4 assembly) [61], resulting in a raw dataset of 47,440 markers. The 47,440 DArTseq markers were filtered to eliminate SNPs with missing rate greater than 10%, heterozygosity greater than 20% and minor allele frequency (MAF) less than 5%. SNPs with unknown or multiple chromosomes locations were also eliminated. After quality filtering, a total of 7224 DArTseq markers distributed across the 10 maize chromosomes were used for the population structure, phylogenetic analysis and GWAS analyses.Population structure, linkage disequilibrium and markertrait association analyses An admixture model-based clustering method was used to infer population structure of the 132 genotypes using the software package STRUCTURE, version 2.3.4 [62]. The assumed number of subpopulations was simulated from k = 1 to k = 10 for an initial assessment of the most likely number of subpopulations; each K was run 10 times with 10,000 iterations of burn-in followed by 10, 000 Markov chain Monte Carlo iterations and the ideal number of subpopulations (K) was found by examining the optimal ΔK value [19] in STRUCTURE Harvester [63]. In the model-based method, membership coefficients (Q values) for each inbred line were estimated to have its memberships in multiple subgroups. Inbred lines with membership probabilities ≥0.70 were assigned to the corresponding subgroup and lines with membership probabilities < 0.70 were assigned to a mixed subgroup. Linkage disequilibrium was determined using the squared allele frequency correlations R 2 value from which the number of significant allele pairs (P < 0.01) was determined using 1000 permutations [64].. Association analysis between the SNPs and traits was performed using the mixed linear model (MLM) implemented in the GAPIT (Genetic Association and Prediction Integrated Tools) R package. The MLM adopted was proposed by Yu et al. [32] with each molecular marker considered a fixed effect and evaluated individually: Y = X β + W α + Q v + Z u + ε where Y is the observed vector of means; β the fixed vector (p × 1) other than molecular markers effects and population structure; α is the fixed effect vector of the molecular markers; ν is the fixed effect vector from the population structure; u is the random effect vector from the polygenic background effect; X, W, and Z are the incidence matrixes from the associated β, α, ν, and u parameters; and ε is the residual effect vector. MLM in comparison with other models for detecting marker/trait associations such as the general linear model (GLM), could reduce the false-positive associations by controlling both types I and II errors [65,66]. The Bonferroni correction showed a very stringent threshold. Consequently, a GWAS threshold of -log (p) = 4 was used to declare significant marker-trait associations, which was determined based on the Q-Q plots and distribution of p-values for all the traits [22,35,67]. To identify gene models for Striga resistance, the physical positions of the significant SNPs were compared with the MaizeGDB database according to version 4 (RefGen_v4) from the reference genome of the maize B73 inbred line, available at the MaizeGDB database. Zoom mapping was conducted on the chromosome where a significant SNP marker was identified and associated with a trait. The extent of local LD was evaluated for each selected significant SNP to determine the interval of each locus. The heatmap of regional LD was made with the LD heatmap package [68] for SNPs with a MAF greater than 0.05 within 500 kb downstream and upstream of the top associated SNP."}

main/part_2/0388391068.json

@@ -0,0 +1 @@
+{"metadata":{"gardian_id":"36b0d758bc9ef380d24a0a42b9c190d7","source":"gardian_index","url":"https://cgspace.cgiar.org/rest/bitstreams/d39ea90e-4811-427c-81b8-e015032ce818/retrieve","id":"-363288125"},"keywords":[],"sieverID":"2008b479-7d96-419a-b013-c6d244e1e656","content":"The main innovation the use of the tricot crowdsourced citizen science approach for variety trials, which is a cost-effective way to massively test new climate-stress tolerant and nutritious crop varieties directly on farm, generating information about local adaptation/acceptability and disseminating the seeds in one go. ISSD-Ethiopia adopted this approach in its large-scale seed sector development programme and used the approach with 5,995 farmers, who subsequently shared seeds with others and created seed demand, affecting an estimated 1.3 million farmers.Contributing CRPs/Platforms:• CCAFS -Climate Change, Agriculture and Food Security Contributing Flagships:• FP2: Climate-Smart Technologies and Practices Contributing Regional programs:• EA: East Africa Contributing external partners:• WUR -Wageningen University and Research Centre CGIAR innovation(s) or findings that have resulted in this outcome or impact: <Not Defined>The innovation developed by Bioversity behind this outcome is the triadic comparisons of technologies (tricot) approach, which applies a crowdsourced citizen science strategy to participatory crop variety selection. The tricot approach allows for massive testing of varieties, providing specific, contextually-rich feedback on local adaptation and acceptability of varieties, which facilitates the rapid variety replacement required by climate change.Bioversity was invited in 2015 to meetings organized by ISSD-Ethiopia, and presented the tricot approach and the ClimMob digital platform as a possible tool. ISSD-Ethiopia recognized the potential of this tool for its seed sector development efforts and invited Bioversity to lead trainings in the tricot approach in 2017.Trials were conducted with 60 farmer training centres. ISSD reports \"Crowdsourcing approach demonstrated to be rapid means to deploy a large number of new and improved varieties cost-effectively to farmers\" (1, p. 31). ISSD-Ethiopia has performed on-farm experimentation with varieties of sorghum, haricot bean, wheat, barley, chickpea, potato, finger millet, faba bean, teff and field pea (1, p. 82). (1, p. 83-84). On-farm selection enables local adaptation and selection for stress tolerance. For example, early-maturing varieties of barley, and varieties of sorghum and millet support adaptation to drought (1, 83-84). But the trials did not look at climate adaptation in isolation. \"Increased attention to gender helped bring specific traits of crop varieties that end users pay attention to into view, such as: colour, aroma, taste and nutrition; process-and cook-ability; and kernel weight.\" (1, p. 82).Direct users of the approach were 5,995 Ethiopian farmers who participated in trials, of whom 53% were women (1, pp. 82-85). Seeds harvested from these trials will be directly shared with an estimated 17,985-29,975 farmers (1, p. 84). Through its partnerships with 149 seed producer cooperatives and 20 private seed producers, ISSD-Ethiopia makes seeds of the identified varieties available to 1.3 million farmers covered geographically by these organizations (1, p. 72).ISSD concludes that \"our partnership with Bioversity International in crowdsourcing has been an obvious source of enthusiasm in 2017.\" (1, p. 79)."}

main/part_2/0397112103.json

@@ -0,0 +1 @@
+{"metadata":{"gardian_id":"fbdcfd81f20c29e7108bc4ae3032bca1","source":"gardian_index","url":"https://cgspace.cgiar.org/rest/bitstreams/56c77c15-3c54-43c4-b1dd-cb19d843f728/retrieve","id":"-610806473"},"keywords":[],"sieverID":"2d58fb28-6702-432b-bce9-62eda5edf489","content":"2 0 1 4 Climbing beans in Rwanda © CIAT/Neil PalmerThis fourth CRP Portfolio Report provides a brief synthesis and assessment of progress and achievements by the Genebanks program, and the portfolio of 15 CGIAR research programs (together, CRPs) in 2014. The 15 CRPs report against the four overarching objectives (or System Level Outcomes, 'SLO') in CGIAR's 2010 -2015 Strategy and Results Framework (SRF) as follows:SLO 1 -Reduction of rural poverty; SLO 2 -Improved food security; SLO 3 -Improved nutrition and health; SLO 4 -Improved management of natural resources.It follows the format approved by the Fund Council for the CRP Portfolio Report. It is based upon the 15 CRPs Annual Performance Reports submitted to the Consortium Office (CO), also following the format approved by the Fund Council.This CRP Portfolio Report continues to use the typology of CRPs developed last year (see the Preamble of the 2013 Annual Portfolio Report for details). In summary: ¡ Type 1 CRPs are programs built upon a strong research base initiated decades ago by two or three Centers The CRPs were approved by donors at different points in times, and thus started implementation at diverse times. The more mature CRPs report on their fourth full year of operations in 2014 whilst the most recent CRPs report results only for their second full year of operations. These differences in length of functioning have been taken into account when assessing progress.Progress of the current supporting research platform \"Managing & Sustaining Crop Collections\" (the Genebanks CRP) is summarized in Appendix 1. www.wheat.org¡ In 2014 both the quality and quantity of outputs and outcomes produced by the CRP portfolio improved over their 2013 levels, as the traffic light assessment (figures 1 and 2) shows at a glance. After only 2 to 4 years following the creation of the CRPs, research outputs and development outcomes appear to have acquired a momentum. ¡ Positively, the scope of outputs and outcomes across the CRP portfolio was clearly relevant to CGIAR's strategic goals, or 'System Level Outcomes' (SLOs), that were adopted across the system for the 2010 -2016 first phase of CRPs 2 . There is of course still room for improvement, in particular for demonstrating more achievement in regard to the 'nutrition and health' and 'natural resources management' SLOs (see section 6). However, the CRP portfolio is now embracing delivery against the SLOs in a more balanced manner than before, and end 2014 represents the first time that the portfolio was, as a whole, on track to deliver on the SLOs. Encouragingly, performance to end 2014 also shows good prospect to deliver outcomes that are relevant to the Sustainable Development Goals, newly adopted in September 2015, after considerable debate over the 2014 calendar year. ¡ Across the CRP portfolio strategic partnerships were consolidated and they increased in number to 3,100. These include research and capacity strengthening partnerships, partnerships with development implementers and value chain actors, with the private sector, with global, regional and national stakeholders, as well as the generalized participation of non-CGIAR partners and independent experts in the governance and management mechanisms of the CRPs. ¡ Not only did collaboration and linkages among the CRPs increase compared to last year but also they started to produce joint results across CRPs (see section 5). Such joint results are an excellent indicator of the increasing programmatic coherence of the CRP portfolio itself. ¡ A major highlight of the 2014 CRP portfolio is the noticeable momentum that has been reached, largely by four large CRPs, through their involvement and contributions to global fora and international policy arenas. FTA, PIM, WLE, CCAFS have thus been contributing new scientific evidence and analyses to the G20 3 (PIM), IPBES 4 (WLE), IPCC 5 (CCAFS), UNFCCC 6 (FTA, CCAFS) and the SDGs 7 (PIM, WLE). The capacity to influence policy-making at these levels is an excellent indicator of the relevance, robustness and credibility of the scientific evidence and associated analyses produced by these CRPs. It is also a very effective mean to 'scale up' results to the global scale. ¡ Type 1 CRPs have continued to facilitate the release of large numbers of new varieties of rice, wheat and maize in Asia, Africa and Latin America. Pre-breeding results expanded, including through high throughput genomic and phenomics approaches. These, together 2 Whilst the current SRF was approved for 2010 -2015, it will continue to guide CGIAR research during 2016 as a key transition year.3The G20 membership comprises a mix of the world's largest advanced and emerging economies, representing about two-thirds of the world's population, 85 per cent of global gross domestic product and over 75 per cent of global trade.The Intergovernmental science-policy Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services (IPBES) is an independent intergovernmental body established to strengthen the science-policy interface for biodiversity and ecosystem services for the conservation and sustainable use of biodiversity, long-term human well-being and sustainable development. Since W1-2 funds are normally used to fund strategic core research, a significant decrease in these funds is a threat to the strategic core research. This would put the CRP portfolio in a situation comparable to that pre-reform, when a multiplicity of bilateral projects drove the research agenda (see section 6).Figures 1 and 2 assess progress at the CRP portfolio level through a 'traffic light' system for the same set of criteria. Figure 1 is the 2013 assessment and Figure 2 is the 2014 assessment. The figures show how the portfolio progressed in producing outputs and outcomes, mainstreaming gender, managing risks, and positioning itself to implement results-based management. The overriding conclusion of this comparison of results between 2013 and 2014 is that in 2014 there was a marked improvement in the fulfillment of all the criteria.Output quality and quantity was fully satisfactory for 80% of the CRPs (versus 66% in Most CRPs now demonstrate more mature and sounder risk assessment and mitigation strategies. Some CRPs are particularly expert at drawing lessons from their experiences and identifying potential risks limiting their capacity to deliver outputs and outcomes (e.g., A4NH, PIM, RTB, and CCAFS). These CRPs also design constructive contingency plans to mitigate risks. Others are less expert but compared with last year, in 2014 the portfolio did not have a single CRP with a totally unsatisfactory approach to risk management.Finally, concerning the effectiveness of CRPs' internal organization for results-based management (RBM), progress has been made over last year, in particular through the 5 RBM pilots, but this is still a weak dimension of the portfolio. Some CRPs have made commendable efforts to improve their indicators and monitoring tools (e.g. CCAFS, GRiSP, RTB, Humidtropics and Dryland Systems). Additional effort is required across all CRPs to develop robust monitoring and evaluation tools appropriate to their research focus before the portfolio can credibly implement a RBM system (see section 7). Pre-breeding (molecular breeding technologies) is defined by FAO as the identification of desirable characteristics or genes from unadapted materials and the transfer of these traits to an intermediate set of materials that breeders can then use in producing improved varieties. It is a necessary first step in the use of the genetic diversity found in wild relatives and other unimproved materials. Prebreeding facilitates the efficiency and effectiveness of breeding by enabling increased access to the genetic variations conserved in genebanks. Various relevant pre-breeding results are reported by type 1 CRPs, indicating the strength of their upstream scientific activities and of the breeding activities into which they feed.The highly accessed SNP-SEEK database of GRiSP is a SNP public-domain database created in 2014 to identify new alleles for high-priority traits and accessions carrying trait-associated haplotypes. In a complementary approach, the Genotyping Services Lab at IRRI successfully processed more than 10,000 samples for SNP genotyping, resulting in more than 32 million SNP marker data points used for marker-assisted selection, genetic diversity analysis, SNP fingerprinting, QTL mapping, and for calculating genomic-estimated breeding values. A key output from the re-sequencing \"3K rice genome project\" is the corresponding paper in GigaScience which has been accessed 20,571 times since its publication.To further explore phenotypic diversity (with emphasis on yield potential and abiotic stress tolerance), a GRiSP Global Rice Phenotyping Network was established. Gene validation pipelines were created to analyze potential candidate genes for disease resistance and abiotic stresses as cold, salt or drought-tolerance. New sources of resistance to major diseases (bacterial blight, sheath blight, rice ragged stunt and grassy stunt viruses) and abiotic stresses (salinity and drought) identified from distantly related wild Oryza species were transferred into elite cultivar backgrounds. The Multiparent Advanced Generation Inter-Cross (MAGIC) materials are now being used by national programs and the MAGIC approach has influenced the genetic and breeding strategy of other research programs, with an article on rice MAGIC population being accessed 9,608 times since its publication in May 2013.WHEAT used information on photosynthetic and partitioning traits to design hybridization schemes to combine physiological traits and achieve cumulative gene action for yield potential. The resulting germplasm has produced superior yields and biomass in global, multi-location trials (the International Wheat Yield Consortium Yield Trial -WYCYT.The Improved Maize for Africa Soils (IMAS) phenotyping network created by CIMMYT-MAIZE in 2011 expanded to over 120,000 research plots at 25 locations in 10 countries in Sub-Saharan Africa. Twenty percent of these phenotyping locations are at private sector research stations. A large population of DH lines derived through IMAS project has greatly accelerated breeding progress. In 2014, three confined field trial sites for testing nutrient use efficiency transgenics were in advanced stage of certification by regulatory agencies. Forty-one new three-way cross hybrids were submitted for release in partnership with private sector seed companies in 10 countries in Eastern and Southern Africa, along with 7 hybrids combining MLN tolerance with low N tolerance. For instance, GRiSP facilitated the production of 10 tons of breeder seed of different varieties, at AfricaRice, that were delivered to national seed producers. An estimated 6 million rice farmers were thus reached with quality seed of improved varieties through an e-wallet and voucher system. By linking with the Emergency Rice Initiative for Africa, certified seed production increased from 2,155 tons in 2010 to 75,585 tons in 2014. 1,613 tons of certified seed were produced for varieties requested by each country and delivered to 109,306 farmers (30,410 were women) in 28 countries in sub-Saharan Africa. In South Asia, new stress-tolerant rice varieties are estimated to have reached about 10.9 million farmers and planted on about 4.6 million hectares.In 2014 MAIZE and partners produced more than 135 tons of the aflatoxin bio-control agent AflasafeTM in IITA's Nigeria-based production unit, for deployment to Nigeria, Senegal, Zambia, Gambia, Ghana and Mozambique. Initial data from a separate ex ante study in Nigeria showed that farmers should receive a return of from 20 to 60 percent on investment in AflasafeTM. Currently, MAIZE supports Aspergillus strain identification/collection in Burkina Faso, Burundi, Rwanda, Tanzania and Malawi. The number of countries requesting AflasafeTM continues to expand, and in Kenya a new AflasafeTM production plant is scheduled to be constructed in 2015.In Afghanistan, WHEAT supported the production of 24,000 tons of certified seed derived from high-yielding, disease resistant CGIAR germplasm -enough to sow 190,000 hectares. In this country, seed systems research has increased supply productivity by between 65% and 79%. In Kenya, Ethiopia and Pakistan (through the Wheat Production Enhancement Program (WPEP) involving the Pakistan Ministry of Agriculture and USDA and CIMMYT) almost 1,000 tons of seed of local disease resistant improved varieties were supplied to smallholder resource-poor farmers.A last category of outcome produced by type 1 CRPs consist of decision support tools and the establishment of innovation platforms. In the Philippines for instance, GRiSP introduced a phonebased Rice Crop Manager decision support tool to the national extension service. This tool aims to provide farmers (22% women) with 290,000 printed one-page crop management guidelines, customized for the field-specific needs and conditions of farmers. In field trials switching from current farmers' practice to the Rice Crop Manager recommendations increased yield by an average of 0.4 t/ha and increased income by about US$100 per hectare. Similarly in Bangladesh, the distribution of 7,600 crop management guidelines to farmers increased income in field trials by US$79 to 97 per hectare and in Vietnam, 240,000 farmers implemented best practices with an ex ante estimated benefit ofUS$128/ha. The Sustainable Intensification strategy in MAIZE addresses challenges to maizebased farming systems through an increasing number of innovation platforms (51 in Africa, 40 in South Asia and 41 in Latin America) which aim to strengthen multi-stakeholder collaboration in Latin America, Africa and Asia.Type 1 CRPs contributed mainly to the food security SLO by facilitating increases in the availability of improved rice, maize and wheat varieties through their partnerships and to the poverty reduction SLO by contributing to raising the income of resourcepoor farmers as many of these varieties have been adapted to perform under the specific conditions of these farmers. They contributed, to a lesser extent, to the nutrition SLO by developing enriched cereal varieties. These CRPs have started to address the SLO on natural resource management by developing soil management and water management practices that mitigate some of the environmental impacts of cereal production.Understanding adoption processes and bottlenecks to adoption, where they occur, as well as understanding impacts ex post would provide essential information and feedback to scientists and breeders in type 1 CRPs for the design of sustainable long-term improvements in cereal-based systems. National partners often have limited resources to engage in such work, and development partners may not have the necessary scientific skills among their staff. The international public goods that would ensue from cross country analyses of adoption and its impacts on rural poverty, food security and the sustainability of the resource base of cereal systems would be tremendous for these CRPs.All type 2 CRPs produced new tools and methods within their respective remits, new technologies, improved management practices and policies.They worked with development actors to consolidate the sustainability of the value chains they are involved with. Compared to previous years, the greater scope of many of the options they produced and their greater focus on balancing tradeoffs between productivity and sustainability concerns, from a pro-poor perspective is noteworthy. This, in turn, is leading to a strong demand for their results by national, regional and international partners and stakeholders. PIM's research results have been informing the development of the Sustainable Development Goals and of strategies to achieve them. An example concerns the high impact and high cost of electricity, paved roads, and railways in reducing post-harvest losses. PIM showed that USD 239 billion invested over the next 15 years in roads and rails to connect farms to markets and in electrification to improve cold storage would yield benefits of USD 3.1 trillion in avoided loss. However, comparable increments in food supply could be achieved at lower cost through investment in agricultural research, with a benefitcost ratio more than twice that of investment in infrastructure. Infrastructure to reduce loss and waste is needed for food security but it should be concurrent with investments in agricultural research to yield more significant returns.FAO published in 2014 the first Report on the State of the World's Forest Genetic Resources and associated Global Plan of Action for Conservation, Sustainable Use and Development of Forest Genetic Resources (GPA FGR). Presented to the governments of the world, the 27 priority actions at national, regional and international levels integrate issues, priorities and recommendations derived from FTA research (Appendix F, pages 33-56). The representatives to FAO of the 14 countries of the Asia Pacific Forest Genetic Resources Network (APFORGEN) have decided to implement the Global Plan of Action in Asia and the Pacific and have defined action plans to this effect.To promote more inclusive and sustainable forestry and agricultural development FTA engaged 149 agriculture and forestry investors and 299 civil society, academic, and government stakeholders around innovative approaches to corporate governance and improved business models. They convened a seminar with Dutch policy makers, NGOs, and banks in collaboration with the Dutch Ministry of Foreign Affairs. FTA contributed analytical inputs to the LANDforum, a multi-stakeholder platform led by the Netherlands Academy for Land Governance (LANDac) aiming at promoting discussion on options for sustainable investment and business models, and in addition to inform the Land Governance Multi-stakeholder Dialogue (LG-MSD) in the Netherlands. These activities helped inform key groups of investors and decision makers, in both producer and consumer countries, on investment options that support sustainable supply of forest and tree products while simultaneously providing ways out of poverty for the rural poor.L&F published in World Development results showing that investments to improve aquaculture have had beneficial impacts on the poor and extremely poor in Bangladesh. Improved aquaculture enhanced nutritional security for the very poor between 2001-2010, as this group had good access to greater amounts of fish protein, at a stable price, whilst the price of inland wild fish kept rising and was not affordable. This new evidence supports L&F's theory of change that pro-poor development of animal-source food value chains can enhance nutritional security of lowincome consumers. This new evidence debunks a previous hypothesis that aquaculture produces large and high value fish, thereby excluding the poor from consumption.To increase global RTB productivity through more targeted use of global RTB genetic diversity RTB brought together all participating Centers and conservation biologists, breeders, molecular geneticists, molecular biologists, biochemists, and bioinformatics experts. This was to build a research platform that brings state-of-the-art biological tools (pre-breeding) to advance breeding for bananas, cassava, potatoes, sweet potatoes, and yams.To tap the genetic potential of the RTB crop diversity nearly 6,500 RTB accessions from CGIAR genebanks and elite breeding pools were characterized using next-generation sequencing. This helped identify hundreds of thousands of single nucleotide variants that together will help RTB scientists in the near future to unravel genetic mechanisms behind key sustainability traits, including drought and pest/diseases tolerance, or those related to high productivity (e.g., heterosis), high quality (e.g., postharvest losses and consumer preferences), and high nutritional potential (e.g., high vitamin and micronutrient content).Dryland Cereals completed the genome sequencing of pearl millet and Grain Legumes re-sequenced 300 accessions for chickpea and identified a \"QTL-hotspot\" for drought tolerance traits. In addition, Grain Legumes facilitated the release of 42 new varieties of pigeonpea hybrid, common bean, chickpea, faba bean, lentil, groundnut and soybean.Grain Legumes and partners in Bangladesh, Nepal, India and Myanmar have developed lowcost technologies for cultivating 25% of the 14 million ha of fallow lands in South Asia. Extra-early maturing chickpea and lentil varieties (maturing in 80 days) were bred to perform under the specific constraints of these fallows (using residual moisture, adapted to rising temperatures). Combining these new varieties with appropriate crop management practices is being tested in farmers' fields in various countries. Preliminary results indicate that gains in income and in farming households' nutritional status can be expected. However, the longer-term consequences on soil fertility and on labor costs of not fallowing but planting nitrogen fixing legumes still need to be assessed.L&F developed ICT tools to support livestock and fish value chain diagnosis and interventions. These are being tested in different countries, for different animals and fish. In one instance, to speed up the efficiency of selective breeding and gain information on livestock performance under farm conditions, a cell phone technology, \"Ng'ombe planner\", has been used on a trial basis in Kenya. It captures and feeds back cattle performance on real time basis to key actors, including farmers. The large data sets that result can be used by scientists to inform decision-making on future genetic improvement of livestock. Findings are fed into bio-economic simulation models that estimate genetic gains and profits under different scenarios. Such tools are being used by value chain actors and the intent is to facilitate effective and fair (propoor) value chains that rely on up to date genetic material.L&F's work on decreasing the environmental footprint of agriculture produced a framework for environmental impact assessment in livestock value chains that considers environmental sustainability in terms of water, soil, biodiversity and greenhouse gas impacts. It was reported at the 6th All Africa Conference on Animal Agriculture; the framework has now been applied in Tanzania.In addition to its contributions to the SDGs process, already mentioned, PIM also provided scientific inputs into the G20 process. Its work on price volatility and its transmission from international to local markets contributes to the Agricultural Market Information Systems (AMIS) and the Food Security and Nutrition Indicators Network (FSIN). The work informed activities of the 2014 G20 meeting in Australia. PIM researchers were co-authors of the recommendations of international organizations, specifically of the G20 Food Security and Nutrition Framework, and assisted with the design of the food security strategy for the G20 meeting led by Turkey in 2015.WLE also contributed to the SDG process, providing inputs into the development of various indicators in water quality and water use efficiency in agriculture, agricultural biodiversity and sustainability. In addition, together with IWMI, FAO and UNESCO-IHE they established a Water Accounting Platform to support and monitor the implementation of the SDGs related to water in developing countries. Various institutions are interested in applying this water accounting framework. FAO requested implementation in the 32 Helmand Basin (Afghanistan); the Arab Water Council is discussing application in the MENA region and the Water Research Commission in South Africa to its national water accounting. Finally, the Asian Development Bank requested UNESCO-IHE to assist with the preparations of the Vietnam national water resources plan based upon this framework.In addition, WLE engaged with the Intergovernmental Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystems (IPBES), the biodiversity equivalent to the IPCC in climate change. WLE provided inputs into the scoping studies for the Africa Regional Assessment and the Thematic Assessment on Land Degradation, resulting in the inclusion of the food-energy-environment nexus in these reports.As part of its involvement with the UNFCCC process FTA generated Terra-i, an open data access system to detect vegetation changes from human activities in Latin America in near real-time. In Peru, FTA partnered with the Ministry of Environment to implement Terra-i as an early warning system for land-cover change. In the Congo Basin, FTA research showed that the Forest Stewardship Council (FSC) voluntary certification scheme improved living and working conditions in commercial forest use. These results have received significant attention and are being used by international organizations such as FSC and WWF which use the data to improve current standards and support FSC campaigns. Terra-i also supplies Global Forest Watch with regionally verified data.The outputs and outcomes produced by type 2 CRPs form a very solid set of results, to which a greater number of countries than before are requesting access and use (e.g., data bases, tools and methods). Engagement with global policymaking processes such as the SDGs (PIM and WLE), G20 (PIM), UNFCCC (FTA) and IPBES (WLE) is noteworthy. It is a strong indicator of the global recognition of the usefulness and relevance of the results produced by these CRPs (e.g., data base and analyses of issues). The strong pro-poor emphasis of these results and of the options type 2 CRPs devised to better balance the interests of resource poor farmers with sustainable development and the preservation of genetic and natural resources led to progress toward all four SLOs. A4NH published 'Food Safety and Informal Markets: Animal products in sub-Saharan Africa' a book summarizing 10 years of research on food safety in informal markets. Meat, milk, egg, and fish are mainly sold on informal markets in developing countries. Most of these markets lack modern infrastructure and effective health and safety regulation and inspection. Using case studies from eight African countries the book offers policy makers and public health experts examples of challenges and solutions in managing food safety in informal markets. A4NH shows in particular how a participatory food safety risk assessment can be implemented by poor producers so they are not excluded from informal markets, while at the same time providing an effective strategy for reducing risks of food borne diseases for consumers.A4NH researchers contributed to the 2013 Hunger and Nutrition Commitment Index (HANCI) Report, published in 2014 and led by the Institute for Development Studies (University of Sussex). This is a global report, which ranks governments on their political commitment to tackling hunger and under nutrition. It is used as a reference report by policy-makers and donors to developing countries.The first ever Global Nutrition Report was published. A4NH co-chaired and contributed scientists to the group of international experts who put the report together. The Lancet undertook the refereeing process. The report is the first comprehensive summary and scorecard on both global and country level progress on nutrition for 193 countries. The Report points to ways to address malnutrition and to strengthen accountability. With formal endorsements from a wide range of policy-makers and government representatives, it is becoming a powerful tool for improving global, regional, and country-level policies, programs and investments for nutrition.Humidtropics developed a geospatial tool to enable them to use remotely sensed data at different scales (farms -villages -landscapes), as inputs into a crop model for assessing actual crop yields and total factor productivity at these scales and within a broader systems context. The geospatial tool and the model will provide rapid and reliable field measures of the yield effects of scaled up adoption of different crop varieties and will do so over large expanses of land. It will provide a very effective tool for measuring extent of adoption and associated yield increases, at different spatial scales and within a systems context. A Proof of Concept was conducted by applying the model and its remotely sensed data to potato yield predictions. The model performed well, predicting potato yields with a high level of accuracy.AAS and L&F worked jointly with their partners to scale up the adoption of improved aquaculture production technologies in Bangladesh. This was through adoption of small fish and vegetable production at household level and a value chain approach for small fish, commercial tilapia and shrimp production. As a result, the income of half a million farmers in the polder zone of Bangladesh was increased.The commercialization of the Aflasafe™ biocontrol product (resulting from the work of A4NH, Humidtropics and MAIZE) started in Nigeria. In its first year of production, an Aflasafe™ manufacturing and demonstration plant in Nigeria manufactured and supplied 218 tons of country-specific Aflasafe™ products to eight African countries. Interest from the private sector in the commercialization of Aflasafe™ is growing. In Kenya, the construction of a manufacturing plant, designed by IITA and USDA-ARS, started in 2014 at one of the Kenya Agriculture and Livestock Research Organization research stations.CCAFS took advantage of a television reality show \"Shamba Shape Up\" to provide information on climate smart agricultural practices to more than 9 million viewers; this is benefiting Kenya's GDP by an estimated US$24 million through changes in practices. CCAFS also analyzed 18 case studies of weather and climate information advisory services for smallholders across Africa and South Asia. The analysis highlights what is needed to build effective national systems that produce, deliver, communicate and evaluate operational climate services for smallholders across the developing world. This and other research outputs from CCAFS' 266 publications shaped at least $16 million of new investments in climate services, including Nora's investment under the UN Global Framework for Climate Services (GFCS) in Tanzania and Malawi; World Bank investments in Myanmar and USAID seed grants to strengthen regional climate services.Nine varieties of iron fortified beans (A4NH) with up to 94% of the target iron increment have been released in Rwanda and the Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC) has ten varieties of iron bean with up to 100% of the target iron increment. By end of 2014, an estimated total of 800,000 households in Rwanda and 350,000 households in eastern DRC were using iron beans. Innovative marketing campaigns were implemented to stimulate urban consumers' awareness. A music video and outreach tour by Rwanda's top musicians touting the benefits of growing and consuming iron beans were launched, including live performances to more than 30,000 people alongside exhibitions on iron beans. Dryland Systems analyzed the results of more than 750 on-farm trials in South Asia. These evaluations showed that new combinations of improved crop varieties and integrated soil nutrient management practices can increase crop yield from 10% to 150%, depending on crops and site condition. More than 120 on-farm trials in different areas in Malawi showed that cereallegume rotations using new bean varieties and soil fertility management practices yielded 189% higher than the long term national average.Humidtropics has been implementing a project in Uganda on: Policy Action for Sustainable Intensification of Ugandan Cropping systems (PASIC). The Uganda's Ministry of Agriculture, Animal Industry and Fisheries decided to use the project's investment planning approach and cognitive mapping tool to draft the 2015-2019 agricultural strategy of the Government of Uganda.CCAFS helped establish the Global Alliance for Climate-Smart Agriculture (GACSA), with climate smart agriculture likely to become a major investment area in agriculture. It continued to play a role in establishing agriculture as a negotiating topic in the UNFCCC and at regional level, CCAFS has been actively engaged in major policy initiatives with NEPAD, ECOWAS, COMESA, CAC, ASEAN and OECD.The outcomes produced by type 3 CRPs indicate progress toward all four SLOs. All type 3 CRPs contributed to the poverty alleviation and food security SLOs. Whist A4NH contributed very strongly to the nutrition SLO, the three systems CRPs (AAS, Dryland Systems and Humidtropics) also contributed to this SLO as they address nutrition challenges within a systems perspective, in their respective regions. All type 3 CRPs, finally, contributed to the natural resources management SLO, including A4NH through its approach to biodiversity management for nutritive landscapes. CCAFS contributed new outputs and outcomes to strengthen agriculture's adaptation to and mitigation of climate change.CGIAR research aims to deliver clear explanations of gender relations that provide a sound basis for developing innovations that are more gender responsive or transformative. Putting these innovations to work through development partners to empower poor women and men, CGIAR aims for the adoption and sustained use of agricultural and natural resources innovations that result in a gender equitable distribution of food and income.Working across CGIAR Research Programs (CRPs), the CGIAR Gender and Agriculture Research Network defined a shared theory of change. Based on indicators agreed for the common gender theory of change, the Network contributed to the definition of gender outcomes for the CGIAR's Strategic Results Framework. This shared framework of accountability for improving gender equity is important in the process of mainstreaming gender in research, to which the CGIAR first committed in 2010.There was a notable increase in the collection of sex-disaggregated data in household and farm surveys by all CRPs, as recommended in the guidelines promoted by the Network. Furthermore, while in the 2013 Portfolio Report gender studies challenges were not sufficiently well addressed, this year it is one of the strengths since all CRP Annual Reports now clearly include Gender as one of their IDOs.Gender-responsive research has increased in CRPs. Advances in diagnostic analyses in 2014 show that agricultural innovations can change the balance of power in gender relations and require careful targeting to benefit women equitably. A wide ranging analysis of gender aspects of asset ownership provides new perspectives on the significance of the gender gap in ownership with a set of eight case studies (IFPRI and ILRI). Diagnostic studies looked at the status of women in production systems, access to seed and farm mechanization. As an example, one study analyzes the process of feminization of agriculture in rural Tajikistan (WLE). Roll-out of the Women's Empowerment in Agriculture Index (designed by PIM) expanded to cover more than 19 countries, demonstrating the utility of the Index for establishing a baseline at aggregate, country scale in terms of female and male empowerment and for measuring future impact. The baseline analysis (PIM) identified excessive workload as one of three important factors contributing to low levels of female empowerment.L&F has helped address program needs by partnership in 2014 with The Royal Tropical Institute (KIT) and the testing of gender tools and approaches. L&F conducted extensive new work on gender, seeking to ensure that women have more equitable access to affordable and nutritious animal source foods. L&F collaborates with A4NH on gender and nutrition by focusing on consumption in Ethiopia and Egypt and on drawing lessons related to gender from other parts of their work. A Gender, Agriculture and Assets Project (GAAP, led by IFPRI and ILRI) conceptual framework has been developed and previous goals have been reviewed for their sufficient inclusion of the gender dimension.An advance that will improve targeting is modeling climate smart technologies to benefit small-scale women farmers, a component of CCAFS' Climate Smart Villages. Another research approach of relevance in numerous CRPs for improving targeting involves consideration of gender differentiated varietal preferences in setting breeding objectives. RTB has broken ground with its identification of gender preferences in varietal traits for cassava.A meta-analysis of 170 IRRI participatory rice varietal evaluations showed gender-related varietal preferences: female farmers were more concerned about good grain quality, straw for livestock fodder, thatching material, and farmyard manure; ease of harvesting and competitiveness with weeds. A4NH/Harvest Plus conducted a gender assessment that can be expected to augment the level of attention to genderdifferentiated preferences in bio-fortification research.Another diagnostic research advance in 2014 was the implementation by 11 CRPs of a standard, qualitative method for conducting case studies of gender norms, agency and innovation. Over 50 cases were conducted in various sites and regions where these CRPs have ongoing work, in preparation for cross-case, comparative analysis.CRPs also progressed with the interchange of approaches and coordination of gender research on cross-cutting themes. Value chain analysis is a cross-cutting theme of significance for the majority of CRPs. Thus work on understanding and improving gender equity in value chains is an important aspect of mainstreaming gender in research. The set of guidelines for gathering sex-disaggregated data is a very relevant output from PIM that all the other CRPs will find useful. The Gender, Agriculture, and Assets Project produced relevant results further demonstrating PIM's important role in designing gender research tools and methods directly relevant to all CRPs. A clear outcome directly related to PIM's work is the decision to hire more women than men as extension agents by the National Smallholder Farmers Association of Malawi.FTA has developed research designed to empower women in value chains for forest, tree and agroforestry products. Findings target policy change, as for example, policy recommendations from work on indigenous women, forests and value chains in Latin America that the Peruvian Environment Ministry has used for formulating collective land rights and climate change policy with a gender focus. A4NH continued its leadership for cross-program capacity development and knowledge-sharing on the theme of gender and nutrition impact.Gender Partnerships are critical to the achievement of the SLOs, given the disparity between the magnitude of the problems addressed and the resources that CGIAR working alone can bring to bear on these challenges. In 2014 strategic partnerships increased to a total of some 3,100 partnerships that were essential to the results produced by the CRPs and synthesized in section 2.Research and capacity strengthening partnerships: the institutions with which the CRPs collaborate for their research and for capacity building purposes are essentially similar. They are the numerous and better known public and private research institutions and universities, from the South and from the North. CRP Annual Reports provide details.Scaling up and scaling out with development implementers and value chain actors: Partnerships with development and value chain actors vary across countries and development areas. They include national extension services, farmers' organizations, national, regional and international development organizations including NGOs, and the private sector particularly in value chain contexts.Tracking of adoption at a significant spatial scale requires extensive monitoring, which is very costly and requires the expertise of specialists; most CRPs rely on partners that have developed such monitoring systems and have the resources to implement them. In 2014, A4NH (HarvestPlus) and its partners delivered iron beans to more than 1 million farming households. Delivery partnerships for wider dissemination have largely been developed in the context of individual countries (e.g., Nirmal Seeds in India) but NGOs with a global reach (e.g., World Vision for African countries) are also partnering with CRPs to deliver improved technologies and practices at scale.with stakeholders at global, regional and national levels: these partnerships also increased in quality and intensity by comparison with previous years. Specific examples are provided in section 2. The global stakeholders with which the CRPs engaged in 2014 include the G20, the SDGs, IPPC, UNFCCC, IPBES, the World Food Program, and FAO in addition to large development banks such as the World Bank, IFAD, the Asian Development Bank, and the African Development Bank. At the regional level, many CRPs engaged with a continental organization (FARA) and sub-regional organizations (e.g., CORAF, ASARECA, APAARI). Most CRPs worked to ensure alignment of their work in Africa with the Comprehensive Africa Agriculture Development Program (CAADP) of the African Union, to make certain their research is driven by the demands of the national agricultural agenda in African countries. The steps taken by some CRPs to align their work with CAADP's priorities were noted in the 2013 CRP Portfolio Report. In 2014 a majority of CRPs thus engaged in the dialogue with CAADP, so alignment was strengthened. Contributing to this momentum, PIM hosted a meeting of representatives from the Africa Union Commission and regional bodies with CRPs to discuss how CGIAR can support the new Science Agenda for African Agriculture.Public Private Partnership (PPP): These became an important feature of the CRP portfolio as all CRPs have now forged such partnerships. They include partnerships with the private seed sector (e.g., Pioneer, Syngenta, Monsanto, private seed companies in more than 80 countries) for all the CRPs producing improved crop varieties; fertilizer companies for many crop improvement CRPs; the commercial vaccine sector ( L&F), and the specialized private sector companies working in the varied domains of relevance to type 2 and type 3 CRPs. Examples include FTA's PPP with Unilever to launch the first product based on Allanblackia oil in Europe, with Mars Inc. (for cocoa) and with Clarins for Chinese tree products used in cosmetics. L&F (CIAT) has forged a partnership with Dow Agrosciences and Papalotla (Tropical seed) to introduce improved hybrid forage seed from Latin America to Africa. L&F (WorldFish) also has formal links to Merck Animal health to assess tilapia diseases in Egypt and Bangladesh and with Skretting Feeds and Aller Aqua for joint development of fish feeds and producers training.Finally, the involvement of partners in the governance and decision-making mechanisms of CRPs has progressed. Nearly all CRPs had an independent Steering Committee (or equivalent body) with independent scientific experts (non-CGIAR, not involved with the CRP), chaired by one such independent individual and including representatives of key non-CGIAR partners (including from the private sector). The opening up of the CRPs to the different ideas and ways of doing business that this represents is noteworthy. It should result in strengthening CRPs research, mode of functioning and partnerships.The CRP Annual Reports 2014 provide many additional examples of outputs and outcomes successfully produced through these wide ranging partnerships.Strategic collaboration among CRPs has strengthened overtime, resulting in scientific synergies that became manifest in 2014 in the number and significance of jointly produced outputs and outcomes (section 2). Naturally, when different CRPs work jointly to produce results, attribution of these results to the different CRPs, in particular for RBM purposes, becomes difficult. It is similarly difficult to attribute to different partners the results produced by a CRP.One of the advantages of cross CRP collaborations is that the tools developed by a CRP can be used by other CRPs and that a wellconnected set of CRPs can progress towards their IDOs and the SLOs more effectively than a disconnected set of CRPs by drawing lessons from one another and not repeating the same mistakes. PIM has continued to be particularly active in this respect. For instance, its value chains portal, which became fully operational in 2014, is being used by a majority of CRPs. The successful biofortified crops developed by A4NH (HarvestPlus) are the result of a close collaboration between A4NH, Grain Legumes, Dryland Cereals and WHEAT. A4NH also collaborated with WHEAT, MAIZE and L&F on feed quality of wheat and maize varieties within the Agricultural Innovation Program for Pakistan.The aflatoxin results reported in section 2 reflect the joint work of many CRPs, as reported last year.Wider cross CRP partnerships are found in the CCAFS Climate Smart Villages where several CRPs (WHEAT, MAIZE, GRiSP, RTB, Grains Legumes, Dryland Cereals, Livestock & Fish, WLE, Dryland Systems, and FTA) are jointly testing technologies, practices and institutional arrangements. FTA combined forces with WLE and CCAFS to develop a monitoring instrument that enables implementers of development interventions to monitor changes in resilience mapping. WLE also collaborated with Humidtropics to develop participatory methods to assess how ecosystem services are valued by men and women. GRiSP, AAS and WLE are jointly testing innovative ways to improve water management for rice and aquaculture production. MAIZE, Humidtropics and RTB collaborate on maize/cassava intercropping in the Democratic Republic of Congo. Active collaboration among the systems CRPs (Humidtropics, AAS and Dryland Systems) continued, with regular consultative meetings and a jointly organized International Conference on Integrated Systems Research for Sustainable Intensification.At the end of 2014 the CRP portfolio is more on track towards achieving the SLOs than it had been in previous years. Whilst the CRP portfolio has always delivered a large majority of outputs and outcomes addressing the food security and poverty alleviation SLOs, significantly fewer outputs and outcomes were produced at CRP portfolio level concerning the nutrition and natural resources SLOs. For the first time, in 2014, outputs and outcomes concerning these others SLOs reached a noticeable momentum.Food security and poverty reduction: the portfolio is on track and well positioned to deliver on the SLOs on food security and rural poverty reduction. The CRP portfolio continues to be scientifically robust in terms of cutting edge crop breeding; climate change research to better mitigate change and adapt agricultural systems and crops to climate change; gender research targeting gender equity in access to the benefits of agricultural development; value chain approaches and relevant partnerships with the private sector for scaling up and scaling out. Gender research mainstreaming has progressed in all the CRPs leading to more gender equity in options for reducing poverty and improving food security.Improved nutrition and health: the portfolio now appears better positioned than it was in the past to deliver significant outcomes towards this SLO. A4NH is of course the CRP most involved with this SLO but a good number of other CRPs are now contributing to it (from all 3 types of CRPs). A4NH demonstrated previously that diversity and quality of food are essential to nutritional content and health and the other CRPs have taken on board this evidence. Many CRPs now pay special attention to the nutritional dimension of the crops, fruits, animal and fish that is their focus. They also pay more attention to nutritional diversity, for instance through a specific emphasis on managing landscapes for their nutritional dimensions (Bioversity with A4NH, Humidtropics, AAS, WLE). The relationship between food quality and health is now being recognized widely and the results of the development and rapid scaling up of AflasafeTM (resulting from collaboration across various CRPs and Centers) is a good illustration.Sustainable natural resource management: The portfolio's delivery on the SLO on sustainable natural resource management improved compared to previous years. In addition to WLE, FTA, CCAFS, PIM, DS, HT and AAS that have been working toward this SLO since their inception, a number of other CRPs have started to produce results concerning sustainable intensification that contribute to this SLO. There is however still room for progress at portfolio level, to more systematically address the ecological and environmental footprints of new technologies in agriculture, forestry, livestock and fisheries to contribute innovative results to this SLO. Work on in situ biodiversity management as a potential pathway to balancing productivity, profitability and resilience is yet to be developed sufficiently to produce concrete outcomes.As table 1 (following) depicts, a majority of CRPs succeeded in increasing their initially allocated total budget by attracting more bilateral funds than originally envisaged and approved, thereby increasing their spent budget above the initially approved level. Allocation of bilateral projects and W3 funds to a CRP follows different rules across the Centers and CRPs, so it is not possible to infer from the figures in Table 1 that all the CRPs with a seemingly higher bilateral and W3 allocations have automatically been more successful than the others in obtaining such funds. Small discrepancies between initially approved budgets and spent budgets since CRP inception were explained in the 2013 CRP Portfolio Report (e.g., delays in receiving W1-2 allocated funds; late approval and inception of the CRP).As already emphasized in 2013, financial sustainability for CRPs is impossible to assess in the current short-term funding environment. In 2014 all CRPs had to manage retrospectively 6 WHETHER THE PORTFOLIO IS ON TRACK TO DELIVER ON THE SLOS AND WHETHER IT IS FINANCIALLY SUSTAINABLE a financially sustainable CRP portfolio hard to pin down at this point in time, but even the less demanding concept of financial stability is turning out to be elusive for the CRPs.an 11% decrease in W1-2 funds (announced in October 2014). This decrease was followed by a 19% decrease for 2015 and a projected 35% decrease for 2016. Not only is the concept of The actual CRP expenses in the table above have been compiled from the CGIAR Financial Report, which is an aggregation of the audited Financial Statements of the Centers.The major lessons learned in 2014 concern the need for the CRPs to ensure that they are fully prepared to implement an effective RBM (Results-Based Management). These lessons were learned in particular through the experience of five CRPs piloting RBM projects.In 2014 the Consortium Office managed a competitive call for RBM pilot projects and five CRPs (CCAFS, GRiSP, RTB, HT and AAS) received a supplementary W1 allocation (approved by the CB and the FC), to implement their proposed pilot RBM project.CCAFS developed a Monitoring and Evaluation (M&E) strategy, approved by its Independent Science Panel, and it set up a web-based system that facilitates project and CRP planning, reporting, M&E and RBM, all on one platform. GRiSP started its pilot by designing a monitoring and evaluation framework and starting to design a supporting Management Information System (MIS). Humidtropics' pilot led to developing and demonstrating a Theory of Change at the level of R4D platforms, following a project logic that fits within the Humidtropics IDOs. Data collection and management protocols were introduced and a software program, DevResults was introduced to guide data organization in order to measure progress towards IDOs across all projects. Through its RBM pilot RTB organized stakeholder planning workshops for two of its clusters of activities. In these workshops, stakeholders and RTB scientists co-constructed more realistic, nonlinear Impact Pathways and agreed on a framework of indicators for monitoring jointly expected changes.These RBM pilots demonstrated for the benefits of all CRPs that RBM has a number of prerequisites. None of these issues is particularly new, but the pilots provided a proof of concept, which is more convincing than abstract recommendations. The main lessons from these pilots follow. ¡ A prerequisite to implement RBM is for each CRP to have robust M&E systems, with an effective supporting information system. Some of the CRPs which managed RBM pilots initially assumed that their existing M&E system were adequate, but realized that they had to strengthen their systems before they could proceed with RBM. The following six major risks can potentially constrain the portfolio's progress toward the IDOs and the SLOs. The second call for proposals and the guidance for preparing proposals constitute strategic opportunities to mitigate these risks over the coming years.Given the lag time required for outcomes to become manifest in an outcome-based approach to research for development, donors' expectations for quick results could lead CRPs to prioritizing short term over long term results, undermining the delivery of high-quality outcomes. This would undermine the capacity of the CRP portfolio over the medium and long term to deliver high-quality outcomes and IDOs and it would slow down progress toward the SLOs. The lag time that is required before research can be translated into significant outputs and outcomes needs more explicit recognition and explanation. This problem is particularly worrisome for the CRPs that have a relatively short historical base (type 2 and 3). It is essential that the CO, Centers and CRPs better manage donors' expectations by providing much clearer communication on this point.A major risk to the portfolio is the persistence of the current lack of synchrony between timing and duration of funding and the long term nature of CGIAR's research-for-development agenda.CRPs have been requested to provide proposals for multiyear research programs in keeping with an outcome-based research approach. Funding from W1-2 is however announced on a yearly basis and it started to decline in 2014. Following a retrospective decrease in W1-2 funds of 11% in 2014, CRPs experienced a shortfall of 19% in these funds in 2015. CRPs absorbed these two decreases in different manners and it is estimated that about 750 scientific positions were closed across the portfolio of CRPs. A likely decrease of W1-2 funds of 35% has been announced for 2016. There are three particularly worrisome knock on effects of budget cuts in W1-2 of such amplitude. First, funding from W1-2 provides crucial support for the core strategic research and the longer term research of the CRPs. Cuts and uncertainty in funding from W1-2 shift attention of researchers to more reliably funded bilateral projects, and undermine multiyear research planning and the continuity of core research. Second, CRP Management Committees are seriously weakened by the loss of flexibility because of the increased reliance on W3 and bilateral projects that are constrained by the agreement between the funder and the recipient Center. This leads to an increased focus on bilateral projects and a fragmentation of the research agenda of the CRP, reverting to pre-reform modes of functioning. Third, announcements of significant decreases in budgets for strategic core research with relatively short notice damage the credibility of CRPs with their non-CGIAR partners, including the private sector, which are not used to this yearly and hard to predict funding system. The phase II CRPs will need a more stable and longer commitment of funding from W1 and W2 if the CGIAR is to pursue long term mission orientated research.In many CRPs management teams are handicapped by the difficulties in linking programmatic research activities and financial requirements. CRP management teams have in most cases no access to real time views of expenditure. Previous CRP Portfolio Reports, and CRP Directors, have stressed the need for a system-wide project management and reporting system with real-time access to data on burn rates and deliverables. From an accounting perspective, 9 Centers and the Consortium Office have started to use the 'One Corporate System' (OCS) platform, with three Centers having fully completed the implementation phase. What is missing is the integration of program management aspects with the financial aspects, and then across the system as a whole. Such a system has been discussed over the last four years, with the Consortium advocating its strengths, yet the system is still not yet in place. Consequently this risk has not diminished relative to 2013. To date, linking programmatic and financial requirements at CRP level remains difficult as financial systems in the Centers were never set up to do this. Despite efforts to harmonize budget categories at CRP portfolio level, these are still interpreted differently in the different Centers.It will be necessary to have a standardized and aligned financial and programmatic monitoring system across the CRP portfolio in place for the second call to address this particular risk.The uncertain funding from W 1-2 may result in a curtailed ability to mobilize sufficient human resources with skills in interdisciplinary and transdisciplinary research, to provide a necessary complement to the solid cadre of more timehonored disciplines that the CGIAR has acquired over time. The new SRF recognizes the complexity of the challenges ahead, the interconnections between productivity, sustainability and resilience with environmental factors and the consequences of globalization. A transformative integration of many scientific fields (life, natural, social, human health, mathematical) through trans-disciplinary approaches has been shown to produce major improvements for and truly innovative solutions to large-scale, complex problems (e.g., National Academy of Sciences, 2014). One way to mobilize such skills is through appropriate collaborations, and a number of CRPs recognize this is a viable option. However, a minimum of funding stability is necessary for CRPs to successfully engage in such collaborations and partnerships.CRP and Flagship Project (FP) leaders ensure that appropriate outputs and outcomes are produced by their FP and CRP. Their level of authority does not often match this level of responsibility. Both CRP and FP leaders should have the managerial authority to allocate resources (staff, budget) within the CRP and across FPs components. They should also have a key role in staff supervision and performance assessment. Without this level of managerial authority it is extremely difficult for them to successfully deliver on their own responsibilities and to be champions of a culture of results. This recommendation is supported by the findings of the first external evaluation of a CRP (FTA) by the IEA in 2014.This risk, already discussed last year, is linked to questions of integrity and ethics in research for development. Different CRPs deal with these issues in diverse manners and it is not clear whether all CRPs have an adequate strategy to deal with integrity and ethics in their specific research for development activities. For instance, the CRPs that rely principally upon development partners for monitoring rates of adoption and evaluating the impacts of adoption need to ensure that these partners use methods of measurement of adoption and impacts that meet the highest international scientific standards. This is even though development actors may not be familiar with such standards and influencing them to adopt these standards may be quite challenging. A scoping study or baseline of where the portfolio as a whole stands in this respect, as was done for gender research, would provide a good point of departure to determine whether there is room for improvement on a system wide basis through relevant holistic policies and procedures.A total of 124,319 germplasm samples was provided by the CGIAR genebanks to users in 2014 (Figure 1); 35,258 distinct accessions were provided to CGIAR Research Programs (CRPs) and 33,240 accessions were distributed outside the CGIAR directly to advanced research institutes & universities (45%), NARS (37%) and to farmers and the private sector (18%) in 112 countries (Figure 2).Although the total number of distributions is lower than in 2013, the number of requests from and distributions to external users continues to rise steadily (Figure 1) and may be predicted to continue increasing and become more targeted as the availability of good quality data improves over the next five years. The CGIAR Centers have an obligation to the world to conserve and make available the 35 ex situ crop and tree collections under their management according to the provisions of the International Treaty of Plant Genetic Resources for Food and Agriculture (ITPGRFA). The Genebanks \"CGIAR Research Program\" (Genebanks CRP) provides security in funding for the routine operations of the genebanks and works towards improving individual performance standards and strengthening quality and risk management systems in all genebanks.The CGIAR genebanks presently manage 738,215 accessions, including 31,681 in vitro accessions and 27,763 accessions of crops and trees held as plants in the field. Approximately 71% of total accessions are immediately available for international distribution under SMTA. Of the seed accessions, 59% are secured in safety duplication at two levels and, 55% of accessions from clonal crop collections are safety duplicated in the form of tissue TABLE 1. STATUS OF GENEBANKS ACCORDING TO PERFORMANCE TARGETS culture in vitro or in cryopreservation or as seed. Currently, 73% of the accessions have passport and characterization data accessible online.The status of individual seed and clonal crop genebanks is illustrated in Table 1. All genebanks are actively working towards improving the percentage availability and safety duplication of the collections through seed increase, viability testing and disease cleaning, as well as through PERFORMANCE TARGETS 1. Availability: % collection which is clean, viable, in sufficient seed number to be made immediately available for international distribution from medium term storage (90% target) 2. Security: % collection which is held in long term storage conditions in two locations and also in the Svalbard Global Seed Vault or for clonal crops % collection in vitro in two locations (90% target seed collections; 90% clonal crop collections) 3. Data availability: % collection with minimum passport and characterization data available online (90% target) 4. QMS: Stage of development (from 1 to 5) of quality and risk management system 5. Distribution: diversity: % collection disseminated over 10 year period (tentative target 10% per year) 6. Distribution: quantity: number of samples disseminated/year as a proportion of the total collection size (tentative target 20% per year) more strategic acquisition and curation. In 2014, a specialist in Quality Management Systems (QMS) for genebanks was hired. A custom-made QMS has been developed to incorporate all genebank operations, and the minimum elements of QMS for implementation by 2016 have been agreed by the genebank managers. All genebanks are now investing staff time in drafting comprehensive standard operating procedures, which is also providing a valuable mechanism for a number of retiring staff to transfer their unique knowledge and practices.A significant step has been made in the development of more robust data management systems. CIMMYT has adopted GRIN-Global and, for the first time, has been able to provide integrated accession data online. At least two other CGIAR genebanks are planning to adopt GRIN-Global before 2016. Adopting Centers are working together as \"Frontrunners\" in improving the software and sharing advances. The global portal for accession data, Genesys, now provides updated information, maps and meta-data on 2.8 million accessions.A process of determining a strategy for the conservation of tropical forages was launched in 2014, coordinated by an external consultant. The process aims to bring together the views of the tropical forage community to develop and implement a more strategic approach to conservation, ensuring that diversity of priority species are available and promoted for use, while lesser priority species or accessions are safely archived. The process will help provide direction and support to CIAT, ILRI and ICARDA in developing a coherent and rationalized approach to forages conservation and a coordinated interface with the users.Eight of 11 genebanks have been reviewed by external experts and six of them have developed workplans to address key recommendations. CIAT and CIMMYT commenced work in 2014 on improving and increasing the rate of regeneration of accessions with insufficient viability or seed number, especially more difficult-to-conserve accessions such as high-altitude Andean maize varieties. IRRI is pilot-testing an automated, highthroughput seed phenotype sorting system that will allow what has until now been an intensely manual activity to be undertaken overnight. ICARDA received funding at the end of 2014 to initiate the building and furbishing of genebanks and field stations in Morocco and Lebanon as part of the Center's decentralization plan. Remaining Center genebanks will be reviewed and launch their individual workplans in 2015. Continued pronounced improvements in the status of several collections are expected to be evident in 2015 and 2016 as a result of the implementation of these workplans.CGIAR is a global research partnership for a food-secure future. CGIAR research is dedicated to reducing rural poverty, strengthening food security, improving human health and nutrition, and sustainably managing natural resources. Research is carried out by the 15 Centers, members of the CGIAR Consortium, in close collaboration with hundreds of partners, including national and regional research institutes, civil society organizations, academia, development organizations and the private sector.For more information, visit www.cgiar.org"}

main/part_2/0399303943.json

@@ -0,0 +1 @@
+{"metadata":{"gardian_id":"5587ff9e28bc3461aa603efc198d208d","source":"gardian_index","url":"https://cgspace.cgiar.org/rest/bitstreams/9c0c03ad-0de1-4cf1-b356-a2d9e62f20da/retrieve","id":"-1722907570"},"keywords":[],"sieverID":"d81dafdb-ca9b-4ad8-8147-c2ca4a3a3563","content":"This review aims to take stock of existing research addressing the complex relationship between climate change, mobility, and human security in Vietnam's Mekong Delta (VMD) region.The term mobility encompasses various movements of individuals or households, nearly all of which are multicausal. As such, mobility outcomes include migration, displacement, relocation, and immobility, each driven by a range of agentic decisions and external stimuli (Ober, 2020). Climate-related mobility refers to mobility outcomes that are at least partially influenced by climate change and/or variability. Rather than acting as a primary driver, climate risk often exacerbates non-climate risks (economic, social, political, environmental) to influence mobility outcomes (Black, 2011;McLeman 2021). The temporal, spatial, and motivational dimensions of these movements are diverse. Thus, mobility can be \"temporary or long-term, short-or long-distance, voluntary or forced, and seasonal or permanent movement as well as planned relocation\" (Rigaud et al., 2018). Agentic decisions about when, where, why, and how long to move are based on individual or household risk calculations (McLeman 2021). As climate impacts are more pronounced in communities whose livelihoods are highly dependent on natural resources, climate often impacts the mobility outcomes of households with high vulnerability and low adaptive capacity (Savelli et al., 2022).As climate-often through its effect on land, water, and food systems-has direct and indirect impacts on mobility outcomes, consideration must be given to the linkages between climate and human security, which are known as climate security. Human security refers to \"the right of people to live in freedom and dignity, free from poverty and despair\" (UNGA, 2012). It recognizes that \"all individuals, in particular vulnerable people, are entitled to freedom from fear and freedom from want, with an equal opportunity to enjoy all their rights and fully develop their human potential\" (UNGA, 2012). Human security comprises seven dimensions: economic security, food security, health security, environmental security, personal security, community security, and political security (UNDP's Human Development Report 1994). Human security provides a holistic framework to address cross-cutting challenges to the survival, livelihood, and dignity of all human lives (UNGA, 2012). This comprehensive approach emphasizes the interconnectedness of human security' components resulting threats to wellbeing (OCHA 2010).The climate security-mobility nexus encompasses the multi-causal, bi-directional and heterogeneous linkages that can, under some circumstances, connect climate change, mobility outcomes, and violent conflict. The climate security-mobility nexus is highly contextual; its characteristics are more dependent on the impact that local political, social, economic, environmental, and demographic variables have on human security than the direct impact of climatic factors. Pre-existing insecurities and structural risk factors significantly shape emergent pathways across geographic contexts (Barnett & Adger, 2007). Common pathways include conflict as a result of climate-related disaster displacement, conflict as a result of scarcity-related mobility, conflict as a result of abundance-related migration, and conflict as a result of pre-existing tensions and migratory patterns interacting with climate change and/or variability (Savelli et al., 2022).The study-part of the CGIAR Initiative: Securing the Food Systems of Asian Mega-Deltas for Climate and Livelihood Resilience (CGIAR, n.d.)-explores the linkages between climaterelated mobility and human security in Vietnam's Mekong Delta region. By examining the available evidence through a systematic literature review, the results of previous studies are mapped an analyzed. Evidence gaps and opportunities for future research on climate-related mobility and human security in the VMD are then articulated.This study employs an adapted version of the scoping review methodology suggested by (Peters et al., 2015). First, a list of keywords for different thematic categories, including climate and environment, human security, mobility, and the geographic focus, was manually constructed to ensure that relevant areas of climate-related mobility and human security were covered. The full list of categories and keywords used for the search strategy is provided in Appendix 1. A machine-assisted search was performed to identify relevant literature for review. An automated bibliometric scan was conducted to extract relevant peer-reviewed papers from the Web of Science database. To be considered for inclusion, a paper's bibliography had to include at least one keyword from each of the four thematic categories, and the paper should be published from 2010 onwards. The approach is based on the foundations of bibliometrics analysis, broadly defined as a set of quantitative methods to assess books, articles and other publications. This field has been expanding beyond measuring the impact of academic outputs to include systematic, machine-driven thematic reviews (Carneiro et al, 2022). This analysis draws upon such methodological innovations to explore relevant topics within the climate security debate in the Asian mega-deltas region.Full records of the resulting citations were exported and the key terms were detected in the text of the abstracts, enabling analysis of combinations of co-occurring keywords to identify relevant literature for the review. Provided the authors were associated with public agencies, established research centers, and/or development organizations grey literature was also considered in the scoping review. Though not peer-reviewed, high-quality grey literature can still provide important insights (Godin et al., 2015). A keyword search query (\"Mekong Delta\" AND (migration OR displace OR relocation) AND climate AND (security OR conflict\") was performed on Google Search, and the first 10 pages of results were manually filtered to identify relevant journal articles, reports, book chapters, and working papers for inclusion.Once relevant peer-reviewed and grey literature was extracted, a short-list for inclusion was produced. This involved validating the keyword search results, confirming identified literature was published between 2010 and 2022, and ensuring papers focused explicitly on Vietnam's Mekong Delta region. Papers not meeting any of these criteria were excluded from the review. This strategy yielded 166 publications in total. After screening for inclusion criteria, 40 papers were selected for review and subsequently analysed.Next, papers selected for review were analyzed in relation to several research questions, including: Which methodological designs and data sources have been used to examine the connection between climate-related mobility and human security?  Where has previous research focused geographically?  Which groups of people have been the focus of previous research?  What climate events have been discussed?  What primary drivers of mobility have been identified?  Which components of human security were a focus of previous research?  What conclusions have been reached by previous research?  What research gaps have been identified?As each paper was reviewed, key information related to the above questions was recorded. From this dataset, descriptive analyses relating to research methods, geographical focus, social groups, climate factors, mobility drivers, and forms of human security were developed. Finally, these key results were synthesized to generate recommendations for future research.This section presents main findings of the scoping review in relation to the above research questions.A mixed methods approach involving both quantitative and qualitative analysis was most widely used in the literature to study the connection between climate-related mobility and human security in the Mekong Delta of Vietnam. Of the 40 papers analysed, 50% utilized a mixed methods approach, 30% used qualitative methods, and 20% used quantitative methods. On the one hand, specific qualitative methods included literature review, case studies, interviews, focus group discussions, and participatory action research tools (e.g., participatory observation) (Ngo et al., 2020;Dun, 2011;Sudmeier-Rieux et al., 2015). On the other hand, quantitative methods included surveys, statistical analysis, modelling, and regression analysis (Vuong et al., 2022;Huong & Pathirana, 2013;Thi Quyen, 2022). The three most common techniques were surveys, applied in nearly half of the studies (47%), interviews (40%), and literature reviews (35%). While quantitative surveys allow for large quantity sampling-sample sizes in reviewed papers ranged from 50 to 4,400 household (Mekong Migration Network & Asian Migrant Centre, 2013;Quinones et al., 2021)-qualitative interviews help articulate personal perceptions of climate change and build an in-depth understanding of the context, individual decision-making processes, and other micro-factors that shape mobility outcomes (Van der Geest and Nguyen, 2014;Duyen et al., 2021).Regarding data sources, 50% of papers used primary data, 33% used secondary data, and 18% used a combination of both. Secondary data included previous research, the Government of Vietnam's Household Living Standard Survey (VHLSS), other census data, and some additional dataset from governmental agencies including line ministries and the General Statistics Office. Regardless of its source, many papers stressed the importance of primary data in understanding the climate security-mobility nexus due to its inherently context-specific nature (Dun, 2011).Research on climate-related mobility and human security in the Mekong Delta has been conducted at multiple geographic scales. While our focus is sub-national, our review included research performed at the global and national levels if it included a partial but specific focus on the Vietnamese Mekong Delta. Research conducted at the provincial level accounts for 33% of papers, followed by community level (23%) and national levels (20%), delta level (18%), district level (5%), and global level (3%). At provincial level, Ca Mau (60%) and Long An (60%) were the most frequent research settings, followed by Dong Thap (58%) and Can Tho (53%) (see Figure 1, below, for a visual distribution). Although Ho Chi Minh City (47%) does not belong to the Mekong Delta region, being the nearest major metropolitan area (with a population greater than five million residents) it is a common destination area for migrants from the VMD seeking work, education, or marriage (Dun, 2011;Ngo et al., 2022). Similarly, Can Tho is the urban heart of the VMD region and also a popular destination for migrants from regional provinces. Thematically, research set in Ho Chi Minh City and Can Tho tended to focus on the living conditions of migrants in receiving areas (Dun, 2011;Ngo et al., 2022;Huong & Pathirana, 2013). In less urban provinces, research was more oriented toward the drivers and impacts of climate-related mobility (e.g., Tran, 2019;Miller, 2020;Koubi et al., 2016;Le & Truong, 2017).Provinces in the Mekong Delta that have been less frequently studied include Vinh Long (44%), Tien Giang (47%), Hau Giang (47%), Soc Trang (47%), Bac Lieu (47%), and Kien Giang (47%). Nevertheless, according to the General Statistics Office of Vietnam (GSO) (2020), Soc Trang is the province with the highest net migration rate (75%), followed by Hau Giang (61%) and Bac Lieu (52%). Soc Trang and Bac Lieu are coastal provinces vulnerable to sea-level rise, salinity intrusion, and drought (Tran et al., 2021;Steimanis & Vollan, 2022). Surprisingly, even when removing national and globally-focused literature, only two studies included primary data collection related to climate mobility and human security in Soc Trang and Bac Lieu. Thus, additional research is needed to have a complete picture of climate-related mobility in the Mekong Delta (Steimanis & Vollan, 2022). s e c u r i t y i n V i e t n a m ' s M e k o n g D e l t a : A s c o p i n g r e v i e w A majority of the literature reviewed (65%) was not focused on a specific social group, but on the general population or \"households\". This indicates the absence of specific target populations, although some papers differentiate between low-, middle-and high-income households (Entzinger & Scholtenn, 2018;Entzinger & Scholtenn, 2022). Van der Geest and Nguyen (2014), for example, explored how climate-related migration functions as a risk management strategy through an income-group-differentiated analysis of climate impacts and migration drivers in the Upper Mekong Delta of Vietnam.Twenty percent of the studies reviewed focused on farmers specifically, while mentioning cross-cutting issues about subsidiary social groups, including women and youth. For example, Duyen et al. ( 2021) discuss gendered labour dynamics among rice farmers and analysed gender-differentiated awareness and adoption of climate-smart agricultural technologies. The authors stress that Vietnam's economic liberalization and its impact on male labour migration have caused rapid changes in traditional gender roles. As a result, women are increasingly involved in critical on-farm activities like crop selection, post-harvest activities, and general operational management. Specific topics concerning youth addressed the link between the growing demand for industrial labour, rising levels of education, and limited access to technology as factors driving youth migration (Van der Geest & Nguyen, 2014). According to the authors, the increase in rural-urban migration is related to \"a desire of younger people to adopt a more urban lifestyle and move away from their rural homes and tedious work in agriculture\" (Van der Geest & Nguyen, 2014). Tran et al. (2021) show that farmers in Soc Trang province are severely impacted by the effects of saline intrusion and drought, resulting in dryland losses, environmental degradation, food insecurity, and water-borne diseases. These outcomes also drive youth migration toward cities.Other studies examined the changing strategies of rice and shrimp farmers in the face of climate change. Lan (2013) explored shifting livelihood strategies, such as rural-urban migration, vis-a-vis the risks associated with shrimp production. Price fluctuations, changing environmental conditions, and disease outbreaks are all elements that contribute to microeconomic instability, and, as a result, mobility outcomes. Tran (2019) also explored links between changing land use dynamics and the out-migration of smallholder farmers affected by rising agricultural production costs, stagnating markets, and changing environmental conditions. Other social groups analysed include factory workers and resettled households (Ngo et al., 2022;Miller, 2020).Vietnam's Mekong Delta region is highly vulnerable to a variety of climate hazards, including flood, drought, sea-level rise, and subsidence (Padilla, 2011). Most of the literature explores a combination of climate and environmental stressors rather than addressing a single climaterelated factor, often grouping them into slow-onset (drought, sea level rise, salinity intrusion) and sudden-onset (floods and storms) hazards (Koubi et al., 2016;Ngo et al., 2022;Quiñones et al., 2021).Flooding is the most discussed climate event in the papers reviewed, appearing in 73% of the selected literature. The impacts of flooding on mobility in the Mekong Delta can be direct or indirect. The direct effect is often linked with government resettlement projects to move people away from flood-prone areas of riverbank (Dun, 2011;Miller, 2020). For example, the Government of Vietnam implemented the \"Living With The Flood\" program, which resettled more than one million VMD residents (Danh & Mushtaq, 2011). Indirectly, recurrent flooding can decrease agricultural productivity or destroy crops, harming the livelihoods of small producers (especially rice farmers) and indirectly driving out-migration or income diversification measures (Dun, 2011;Koubi et al., 2016;Le & Vo, 2021). In extreme cases, vulnerability to flood or other water-related stressors was related to human trafficking into neighbouring areas. Interviewing a Vietnamese medical doctor in Cambodia, Dun (2011) presents anecdotal evidence of Vietnamese girls sold into the sex industry in Cambodia by their families after flooding in the Mekong Delta lead to poverty.Other climate events explored in the literature include sea level rise (38%), drought (33%), storm (33%), and salinity intrusion (30%). Sea level rise is often discussed alongside other environmental stressors such as flooding, salinity intrusion, and drought. In the dry season, rising sea levels and decreased rainfall intensify salinity gradients in coastal provinces of the Mekong Delta (Smajgl et al., 2015). In the rainy season, sea level rise can cause flooding in lower areas of the region such as Can Tho, Dong Thap, and Long An (Huong & Pathirana, 2013). These climate-related factors negatively affect agriculture productivity and household incomes, potentially driving out-migration in rural households (Mekong Migration Network & Asian Migrant Centre, 2013;van der Geest et al., 2014).In contrast, other studies find that droughts and salinity intrusion decrease migration rates (Quiñones et al., 2021;Koubi et al., 2016). Using longitudinal household and climate data from Thailand and Vietnam, Quiñones et al. (2021b) found that two years of successive drought rendered households less likely to migrate outward. As drought decreased financial resources, affected households became more risk averse, which translated to negative migration participation. Similarly, Koubi et al. (2016) found that perceptions of slow-onset events such as droughts and salinity intrusion significantly decrease the likelihood of migration. While Quiñones et al. (2021) argue that migration is inhibited by poverty, Koubi et al. (2016) suggest people might opt to adapt in place rather than migrate outward when experiencing slow-onset and long-term environmental stressors. In situ adaptation strategies such as adopting drought-resistant varieties and plants and investing in irrigation systems are often preferable in this case. Using a choice experiment design, Trinh & Munro (2022) reached a different conclusion; that the combination of drought and salinity intrusion significantly increased the likelihood of migration.Environmental factors less frequently researched include subsidence (1%) and pollution (1%). These are often considered man-made environmental problems that can exacerbate other climate impacts, such as flooding and salinity intrusion. Minderhoud et al. (2020) projects that continuously increasing groundwater extraction could lead to the displacement of millions in the Mekong Delta due to flooding and/or subsidence by the end of the century. Environmental pollution is often associated with shifting production systems from rice to shrimp farming in the region (Thi & Lan, 2013). Soil and water pollution caused by unsustainable shrimp production may lead to future labour migration due to decreased profitability. Climate change is rarely the sole driver of mobility outcomes. Many of the reviewed papers recognize that climate factors interact with other drivers to shape migration pathways (Ngo et al., 2022;Dun, 2012;Chun, 2014). The capacity of a household to adapt to climate change is primarily influenced by its socioeconomic status. Poorer households are less able to relocate or successfully adapt in place (Chun, 2014). Impoverished households are more likely than non-poor households to be adversely impacted by climatic stressors, as they lack financial Climate factors resources such as land or assets (van der Geest 2014). Due to their limited adaptative and coping capacity, internal migration is a common alternative to in situ adaptation for many individuals and households. Rather than occurring in isolation, climate-related rural-urban migration takes within the context of broader developmental processes such as urbanization, industrialization, and market liberalization (Thi & Lan, 2013).Mobility drivers are the factors that influence the movement of individuals or communities. They can be economic (e.g., employment opportunities, income levels), social (e.g., access to public services, marriage opportunities), environmental (e.g., climate-related hazards, ecosystem services), political (e.g., policy incentives, inequality), or demographic (e.g., population density, disease prevalence) (Black et al., 2011). The combination of these factors shapes individual decision processes when faced with risk and, ultimately, resultant mobility outcomes.Economic drivers of mobility were addressed in 58% of reviewed papers, environmental drivers in 53%, and social drivers in 15%. Notably, one-third of the papers noted both environmental and economic factors as significant drivers of mobility. For example, Entzinger and Scholten (2022) explored the positive relationship between climate-related migration and the adoption of innovative professional skills, arguing that migration corridors enable the diversification of local economies. Warner et al. (2010) noted that rice farmers' lack of alternative livelihood strategies in flood-prone areas, along with rising debt and other financial constraints, also influenced their decision to migrate (or not).When addressing economic factors solely, labour demand in industrial centres often appears as a pull-factor incentivizing migration (Duyen 2021; Thi Quyen 2022). Processes such as the liberalization of private industry and land markets have contributed to rapid urbanization in Vietnam (Sudmeier-Rieux et al., 2015). Most literature highlights the bidirectional influence of internal migration and socio-economic development at the local and national levels, and vice versa (Marx & Fleischer, 2010).Regarding environmental factors, some studies framed migration as a risk management strategy in the face of climate change (Warner & Afifi, 2014). Others examine state-led environmental relocation programs (Chun, 2015). There is also evidence highlighting the effects of climate variation on economic activities and general quality-of-life factors as determinants of migration decisions (T. K. O. Le & Truong, 2017).Social factors are frequently addressed alongside other drivers, such as economic or environmental. Ngo, et al. (2022) examined migration as a strategy for coping with livelihood insecurity in the Mekong Delta, notably in terms of health risks associated with climate variability. Similarly, in Can Tho city's Thanh An commune, environmental change, health risks, and lack of employment opportunities are presented as the main factors driving out-migration from the origin community (Mekong Migration Network & Asian Migrant Centre, 2013).Rural-urban migration is the primary mobility pattern addressed in the literature. Most movement is internal, which has increased in the past decade due to structural socioeconomic transformations in Vietnam (UNESCO, UNDP, IOM, and UN-Habitat, 2018). The migration corridor between the Mekong Delta region and Ho Chi Minh City has been established as one of the most important in the country, not just in terms of human mobility, but also for transfer of goods, commodities, and skills (Entzinger & Scholten, 2022; T. K. O. Le & Truong, 2017). Other studies have focused on government-managed resettlement schemes and relocation programs targeting poor households that are highly vulnerable to climate hazards. Displacement and international migration have been less covered in the literature on climate-related migration (Minderhoud et al. 2020;Kumar et al. 2020). Minderhoud et al. 2020;Kumar et al. 2020).Immobility is also a focus, with several papers examining how and why inhabitants choose to adapt in situ or migrate. The drivers of migration were explored through surveys and interviews with migrants and non-migrants (Koubi et al., 2016;Quiñones et al., 2021). When faced with climate hazards, Koubi et al. (2016) suggest wealthier households are more likely to adapt in place. Alternatively, poorer families facing climate risks are more likely to migrate due to a lack of adaptive capacity. In contrast, Quiñones et al. (2021) stresses that impoverished individuals may lack the ability to move due to a scarcity of economic resources-a phenomenon proverbially known as \"the poverty trap.\" In a choice-comparison experimental setting, Trinh & Munro (2022) compared samples of those who moved with those who remained. Variables such as age, financial assets, social network strength, and climate impact magnitude were analysed. Results showed that people who move tend to be younger, better educated, own less land, and have lower incomes. Additionally, larger household sizes tend to anchor people in place. Finally, households are more inclined to migrate when their vulnerability to climate hazards is high. Additional qualitative research is needed to understand how these differences affect individual decision-making processes.Of the seven dimensions of human security, economic security (45%) and food security (28%) are most discussed in the literature (Figure 3). Numerous studies indicate a link between extreme climatic events and decreased agricultural productivity, food accessibility, and economic security. Food and economic insecurity are important drivers of mobility outcomes as households dependent on agricultural production must seek alternative food and income sources if productivity declines (Dun, 2011). Environmental security was discussed in the literature with less frequency (15%). Other human security components, such as social (5%) and personal (3%), are rarely mentioned. None of the literature reviewed discussed political security issues. Additional research is needed to explore the impact of climate-related mobility on these lesser-discussed components of human security. Generally speaking, the links between climate-related mobility and human security are complex. Low human security is a driver of mobility, which is also an adaptation strategy to adverse climate impacts. Conversely, climate-related mobility can decrease human security, especially when migrants face harsh conditions or cannot access public services in destination areas, or become trapped in place in origin areas. As an economic strategy, mobility can improve human security by diversifying incomes and generating remittances. Some studies also describe rural-urban migration as an important strategy for upward economic mobility. Overall, migration is an essential coping strategy for many households facing overlapping and inter-related climate and human security risks in Vietnam's Mekong Delta, (UNDP, 2014). Tran (2019) concludes that agricultural mechanization for rice cultivation increases the instability and unemployment of the poorest farmers. Consequently, out-migration becomes a viable adaptation strategy to avoid becoming trapped in impoverished rural areas (ibid). In addition, Entzinger & Scholten (2022) argues that while financial remittances support basic household needs, non-financial remittances, such as the transfer of knowledge and skills through returning migrants, helps to diversify local economies in origin areas.Besides these positive impacts, climate-related mobility can sometimes threaten human security. Numerous articles discuss the unintended consequences of government-led resettlement programs aiming to alleviate the impacts of slow-onset environmental hazards (e.g., Chun, 2015;Miller & Dun, 2019). Resettlement programs can expose those affected to new hazards by relocating them to inappropriate places, provide them with poor housing infrastructure, or push them into accepting predatory loans. Ultimately, Vietnam's \"Living With The Flood\" program may have created more environmental, social, and economic risks for relocated households than it protected against (Chun, 2015). Regarding migration, Dun (2012) discusses losses in terms of the natural, physical, financial, human, and social capital of migrant households. For Dun, migration is not a direct consequence of increasing salinity intrusion; it is an eventual choice due to the financial hardship inflicted by progressive environmental change. Those who migrated as a result faced new threats to their human security, particularly regarding access to healthcare and education. These findings emphasize the complexity inherent to the climate security-mobility nexus in Vietnam's Mekong Delta. This section summarizes the research gaps put forth in the papers reviewed, which have been clustered together to illustrate key findings.A recurring theme is the need for greater conceptual and theoretical clarity when addressing the complex connections between climate-related mobility and human security in the VMD. According to the Mekong Migration Network and Asian Migrant Centre (2013), these shortcomings make it harder to identify and understand event pathways within the nexus. For example, the wide variety of climatic stressors and geographies covered by migration research obscures our understanding of whether migration is a successful form of adaptation, or the result of a failure to adapt (Warner & Afifi, 2014). Consequently, the literature argues it is important to explore the tipping points and risk thresholds that influence individual decisionmaking processes in the context of climate-related mobility, as well as to better define the specific role climate plays in shaping mobility outcomes relative to more primary drivers (Warner et al., 2010).Data gaps on the climate security-mobility nexus in Vietnam's Mekong Delta impede an adequate understanding of the nexus' operational dynamics. Available statistics from state institutions do not contain a comprehensive record of migration data disaggregated by sex, age, places of origin or destination (IOM, 2017). Additionally, the various types of mobility (migration, displacement, relocation, etc.) are rarely disaggregated in census data (Marx & Fleischer 2010). One of the government instruments to control and monitor migration is a household registration system known as Ho Khau. However, large numbers of migrants move without registering, limiting the system's ability to provide accurate statistics (World Bank & VASS, 2016). Hence, in Vietnam there is often a significant gap between official statistics and the true number of people on the move.Recognizing mobility as a spectrum requires analytical frameworks that can link the multiple intrinsic and extrinsic factors driving climate-related mobility. As mobility outcomes are influenced by climate drivers in combination with micro-level (individual), meso-level (households), and macro-level (socioeconomic, historical, and political) factors (Black et al., 2011;Koubi et al., 2016), systemic frameworks and methodological designs are needed to understand human mobility's spatial, temporal, and motivational dimensions. According to Thi Trinh and Munro (2022), using historical data to understand the relationship between climate change and migration flows may not reveal the true drivers of mobility. For example, households may choose to engage in migration due to anticipated future conditions rather than current or past experiences. Thus, a longitudinal and systems-oriented perspective is vital to developing a more precise understanding of mobility processes.Evidence from applied and in-person qualitative research, rather than generalized assumptions, are needed to understand people's experiences of everyday risks, and further raise awareness of how social capital, including intra-communal bonds' role and place-based cultural connections, influence mobility outcomes (Miller, 2020;Chun, 2014). Tran et al. (2021) suggest that evidence-based research is vital for developing context-sensitive agricultural techniques that allow farmers to adapt to climate change. Primary data collection is also necessary to carry out comparative studies (Koubi et al, 2016) and inform the design of meaningful multi-level policies.The interconnected and multi-layered factors shaping mobility processes remain understudied. Mobility outcomes intersect with larger development trajectories, including industrialization and urbanization. While several studies highlight the link between climate change and mobility outcomes in the VMD, they do not always examine the specifics of the relationship (Le Thi Kim and Le Minh, 2017). For example, additional research is required to unpack the effects of climate change on labour and employment dynamics (Thi Quyen, 2022), on the relationship between land-use changes and out-migration processes (Tran 2019), and on the effects of non-financial remittances on building resilience among environmentally vulnerable communities (Entzinger & Scholten 2022).Based on these findings, the research team has developed a number of conceptual, methodological, and practical recommendations for future studies aiming to unpack the complex relationship between climate-related mobility and human security outcomes in Vietnam's Mekong Delta region.While most research addresses mobility outcomes related to food security, economic security, and sometimes environmental security, a broader spectrum of human security elements requires closer consideration. Though the potential for climate hazards to negatively impactdeltaic agricultural production, and in turn impact local and national food security has been examined, the relationship between nutrition security (at the household level) and mobility outcomes deserves a greater focus in future research. Anecdotal evidence points to how social and physical security is related to climate mobility in the VMD (Dun, 2011). However, research on how climate-related mobility impacts physical security, including violent conflicts, and social security-especially for immobile populations-is still lacking.Few papers have articulated the implications of climate-related mobility for vulnerable social groups such as women, youth, the poor, and ethnic minorities. These groups are often the worst affected by adverse climate impacts due to having a lower adaptive capacity. Provinces like Soc Trang or Bac Lieu, where many Khmers are located, have been less studied than other provinces in the region. Thus, future studies should employ in-person qualitative research to understand how climate-related mobility impacts these groups. Given the higher likelihood of immobility among groups with less financial resources, research with households or members of households who adapt in situ should also be prioritized. Additionally, more research is required to identify households facing overlapping climate hazards. This can provide entry points for reducing the risk and vulnerability of households and inform the creation of multihazard early warning systems.Research in the Vietnamese Mekong Delta suggests that land use changes driven by mechanized agriculture is dispossessing farmers from their lands, endangering livelihoods, and increasing inequality (Tran, 2019). More research is required to unpack the relationship between contemporary agrarian transformation processes and the climate security-mobility nexus. Key variables for examination include state-led and private development strategies that prioritize agricultural intensification, changing land use trends, shifting generational dynamics, the commodification of agricultural production, and the feminization of agriculture. Political economy and political ecology approaches may provide a useful theoretical framework for understanding emerging power dynamics emerging within the context of increasing climate-related mobility.Given the importance of migration to Vietnam's socioeconomic development, policymakers must ensure a safe environment for migrants both in transit and at destination. To this end, it is imperative to fill data gaps and improve conceptual frameworks for understanding human mobility. This includes, for example, improving the quality of censuses and quantitative indicators to track internal migration dynamics and improving housing conditions in urban destination areas (Marx and Fleische 2010). The current Ho Khau system is limited to monitoring migration data, and often acts as a barrier for migrants to access public services, including healthcare and education (World Bank & VASS, 2016). Improved migration data can contribute to reforming the Ho Khau system and improving access to services.In addition, mixed and innovative research methods are needed to provide evidence on the drivers, causal pathways, and mitigating factors that characterize the complex relationship between climate-related mobility and human security. These include methods that incorporate big data, behavioural experiments, participatory assessments, and qualitative comparative analyses. Generally, conceptual frames that understand mobility and development as complementary processes can better position mobility as a normal part of Vietnam's socioeconomic development, rather than as a problem that requires solving.While research can improve the understanding of climate-related mobility trajectories, it is critical to ensure that these findings transcend academic spheres and reach policymakers. For example, vulnerability and adaptability assessments conducted at sectoral, regional, and community levels to identify at-risk populations can guide policy and program development (UN, 2010). Additionally, although population redistribution and resettlement have been crucial policy concerns in Vietnam, a clear division of responsibilities regarding climate-related resettlement management is still needed (Chun, 2015). For instance, while the Ministry of Natural Resources and Environment (MONRE) oversees climate change planning, the Ministry of Construction, the Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Development (MARD), and provincial People's Committees oversee flood-related resettlement (Chun, 2015). Research outputs can help identify policy loopholes, entry points for \"whole of government\" approaches, and incentives for policy reforms that empower local institutions and improve response capacity.In this paper, a scoping review was performed to better understand how previous research has examined climate-related mobility and human security in the Vietnamese Mekong Delta. Forty papers were systematically identified and reviewed to answer several research questions and summarize research gaps identified in the reviewed literature. Finally, recommendations for future research were formulated.The main findings of the scoping review show that a mixed methods approach has been most frequently employed to study the relationship between climate-related mobility and human security in the Vietnamese Mekong Delta. While Ca Mau and Long An were the most researched geographical areas, other climate-vulnerable areas, like Soc Trang and Bac Lieu, were under-studied. Additionally, most of the literature reviewed did not target specific social groups such as women, youth, or ethnic minorities, and only one-fifth of the papers reviewed focused specifically on farming households. The most discussed climate hazards studied are flooding, sea level rise, and drought. Although literature finds mixed evidence of climate impacts on migration, it is widely recognized that climate factors interact with other drivers to shape mobility outcomes. However, the results indicate that economic drivers of mobility are the most commonly addressed by research, particularly regarding rural-urban labour migration. However, immobility has also received attention, examined mainly through resource inequality and level of adaptive capacity. Finally, the complex link between climateinduced mobility and human security has been most commonly studied through the lens of economic and food security risks.Based on our results, future research on the climate security-mobility nexus in Vietnam's Mekong Delta region should explore the relationship between nutrition, physical and social security, and human mobility. In addition, more research is needed to identify vulnerable social groups with high exposure and low adaptive capacity. Thus, there is a need to take a wider view on vulnerability dynamics by situating climate security research within contemporary agrarian transformation processes. Understanding these emerging dynamics are key to understanding mobility pathways. Developing innovative, trans-disciplinary methodologies is also necessary. While mobility is generally considered an adaptation strategy, it can also result in maladaptation that threaten human security in origin and destination areas. Therefore, conducting evidence-based research becomes critical to guide the implementation of appropriate programs and policies that provide a safe environment for households engaging in climate-related mobility. In short, studying the climate-related mobility and human security nexus in the VMD is important for better understanding how climate change is exacerbating various components of human insecurity, what mobility dynamics are emerging in this setting, and how policies and programming can be employed to support local and national development."}

main/part_2/0406927229.json

@@ -0,0 +1 @@
+{"metadata":{"gardian_id":"024a17e041bd4dae61a02de5592c90ae","source":"gardian_index","url":"https://cgspace.cgiar.org/rest/bitstreams/8486f059-fcfc-41b6-8d7e-defa443fde2d/retrieve","id":"-26620552"},"keywords":[],"sieverID":"6fd996bd-d284-404d-aaa8-20403992674e","content":"O distrito de Tororo é uma das áreas mais pobres do Uganda, com mais de 60 por cento de agregados familiares vivendo abaixo do limiar de pobreza absoluta. Um diagnóstico participativo realizado em 2003 pela ONG Africa 2000 Network (A2N) e pelo CIAT, revelou a importância da disponibilidade de alimentos para o gado caprino e bovino leiteiro de raça cruzada e melhorada, especialmente durante a segunda época seca que vai de Dezembro a Março. Em 1997 criou-se um consórcio de organizações de investigação e desenvolvimento (I&D) distritais denominado Iniciativa Integrada de Produtividade do Solo através de Pesquisa e Educação (INSPIRE), com o fim de superar a insegurança alimentar e a pobreza através da melhoria da fertilidade do solo. Os agricultores avaliaram inicialmente o desempenho de várias culturas leguminosas de cobertura como a Mucuna e a Canavalia usando principalmente critérios agronómicos, mas mais tarde incluíram o uso de leguminosas para a alimentação dos animais como um critério adicional. Em 2003 o CIAT e a A2N seleccionaram dois grupos de agricultores interessados, Kamata e Umoja, para avaliarem as forragens melhoradas para o seu gado leiteiro. Os membros destes grupos já estavam a receber gado leiteiro de empréstimo através de um esquema de distribuição da A2N. O primeiro objectivo deste estudo foi identificar as espécies e as variedades de forragem mais adequadas que proporcionassem grandes quantidades de alimentos de alta qualidade durante a época seca usando uma combinação de critérios dos agricultores e cientistas. O segundo objectivo foi desenvolver uma abordagem para a avaliação participativa de forragens em África.Embora os agricultores estivessem familiarizados com espécies de árvores forrageiras, nomeadamente a Calliandra e Sesbania, e com o capim elefante, tinham um conhecimento limitado sobre o uso e a gestão de forragens herbáceas.Os agricultores e os investigadores concordaram com as espécies e variedades de forragens a testar (Tabela 1) e com uma concepção comum para cada parcela de viveiro. Os critérios dos agricultores relacionados com o rendimento eram: o crescimento e vigor, a altura da planta, o rendimento da forragem e a resistência à seca. Eles mencionaram também a germinação, altura da floração, produção de semente, resistência a pragas e doenças e palatabilidade para o gado. Concordouse que os membros dos grupos de agricultores iriam recolher a maioria dos dados (excepto dados de biomassa da forragem) e que depois de cada época de cultivo os dados seriam analisados e os métodos de recolha dos dados seriam revistos em conjunto com os facilitadores de investigação. Os investigadores geriram a recolha dos dados da produção de biomassa da forragem, já que necessitavam de dados rigorosos para compararem a produção da forragem entre as espécies e acessões.Durante o primeiro ciclo experimental os agricultores adquiriram conhecimentos sobre a aparência das novas plantas forrageiras, padrões de germinação e crescimento inicial. A recolha dos dados quantitativos pelos membros dos grupos usando os seus próprios critérios provou ser um desafio, especialmente porque um dos grupos teve problemas de liderança. Para facilitar o processo de investigação, os membros reduziram o número de parâmetros a serem medidos. Com entusiasmo renovado, os membros realizaram testes de paladar. A Brachiaria híbrida Mulato, Brachiaria var. Toledo, Panicum maximum e P.coloratum ocuparam as posições mais altas em termos de preferência para o gado local, enquanto que o gado leiteiro melhorado comeu todos os tipos sem preferência aparente. Durante a época seca seguinte as duas variedades de Stylosanthes guinesse; Brachiaria híbrida Mulato; Brachiaria var. Toledo e Chamaecrista rotundifolia demonstraram a sua superior capacidade de permanecerem verdes durante a seca.A expansão das forragens dos viveiros para outros lugares nos campos de produção dos membros dos grupos teve lugar lentamente e em pequena escala. Por exemplo, os agricultores usaram a divisão de raízes das ervas a fim de expandir o cultivo de forragem. As grandes variações em termos de compromisso dos produtores com o processo de experimentação foram consideradas relacionadas com o programa de distribuição do gado leiteiro, em que os que receberam uma vaca estavam mais comprometidos com o processo. É claro que a selecção das áreas para experimentação das forragens deveria depender do nível de desenvolvimento dos serviços associados ao sector de lacticínios nessas áreas. Na ausência de bons serviços de lacticínios, a melhoria da produtividade podia ser alcançada com gado local ou de raça cruzada, cabras ou ovelhas. O projecto ampliou-se agora a outros 11 grupos de cabras e gado leiteiro em Tororo, onde a variedade e o híbrido de Brachiaria são cultivadas em filas e parcelas nos campos de cultivo.Os grupos de agricultores estavam envolvidos em ensaios agrícolas simultâneos para os quais desenvolveram planos de monitorização e avaliação participativa. A integração dos ensaios de forragens nestes planos facilitou o processo de investigação.Os processos internos dos grupos foram um factor importante para a continuidade e empenhamento na experimentação com forragens. Na ausência de coesão de grupo a gestão das parcelas funciona melhor numa base individual.A Brachiaria híbrida Mulato, Brachiaria var. Toledo e Stylosanthes tiveram melhor desempenho do que as outras forragens e atingem rendimentos comparáveis aos do bem conhecido capim elefante. Sob condições similares, sem o uso de fertilizantes, o capim elefante pode produzir até 40 toneladas de forragem fresca (10 toneladas de matéria seca). As brachiarias são resistentes a doenças tais como a ferrugem e o atrofiamento, que constituem uma grave ameaça para os sistemas de produção de lacticínios baseados no capim elefante na África Oriental. A Brachiaria é originária da África Oriental, mas a variedade e o híbrido de qualidade superior usados neste ensaio foram examinados e melhorados pelo CIAT e pelos seus parceiros na América Latina. A Stylosanthes, uma leguminosa exótica, proporciona proteínas baratas para suplementar as dietas pobres dos animais durante a época seca.Embora a investigação aqui descrita esteja ainda num estágio inicial, foi possível identificar as forragens que se adaptam bem e que podem ser expandidas para outras áreas similares. Quando as forragens estiverem integradas nos sistemas de produção, haverá vantagens claras em termos de geração de receitas, gestão de recursos naturais (GRN) e outros benefícios socioeconómicos. Por exemplo, nos sistemas de produção de pequenos agricultores do sudeste da Ásia as tecnologias das forragens aumentaram a receita dos agregados familiares proveniente do gado em 30 por cento, resultando também no aumento da produção de estrume e na poupança de tempo e de mão-de-obra que de outra forma seria usada para tomar conta do gado ou na procura de forragem para cortar e carregar.Porém, o uso das forragens pode, de muitas formas, ser mais complexo que o de outras culturas. A forma mais provável de adoptar as forragens é através de integração com outras culturas, em vez de cultivadas isoladamente. Há uma grande diversidade de espécies e variedades de forragens, cada uma delas com os seus requisitos de adaptação ambiental e gestão específicos. Estas características inerentes das tecnologias de forragens prestam-se, e na verdade exigem, a experimentação por pequenos agricultores, para experimentarem as \"melhores opções\" de espécies e variedades e inventarem estratégias locais que tornem as forragens lucrativas, sustentáveis e compatíveis com as outras culturas."}

main/part_2/0424152271.json

@@ -0,0 +1 @@
+{"metadata":{"gardian_id":"b90255cf89d8ab026650dbbd196349b0","source":"gardian_index","url":"https://cgspace.cgiar.org/rest/bitstreams/a42ae8c7-cf1f-45ec-b0f0-72b9a11a16ec/retrieve","id":"-343432782"},"keywords":[],"sieverID":"e0a638e3-97d3-4f34-800e-8de5bb57af73","content":"■ Invasive cactus degrades rangelands and reduces availability and accessibility of pasture and other natural resources. ■ Cactus invasion reduces biodiversity hence affecting ecosystem goods and services that are essential for human well-being. ■ There is limited information and lack of public awareness on the harmful impacts caused by invasive cactus. ■ Rural households lose between 50 and 100 thousand shillings a year because of cactus ■ Map and list threatened areas and species to improve biodiversity conservation. ■ Increase awareness and understanding of the harmful effects of cactus invasions and their possible solutions and best practices. ■ Rehabilitate and restore rangeland ecosystems through integrated management plan ■ Develop and implement policy guidelines to prevent further invasionWhat are prickly pear cactus plants?The prickly pear cactus has a negative impact on food security, biodiversity and human well-being (Figure 1).The cactus invades mostly arid and semi-arid lands (ASALs), which form more than 80% of Kenya's land mass. Livestock keeping is the main socio-economic activity in these areas. The plant is hardly appreciated due to presence of spines and glochids (small spines on fruits) that cause injuries to people and livestock. In Narok County, cactus invasion has increased rapidly over the last five years and has displaced people and pasture [1]. The plant has been present in Laikipia County for more than 10 years and has invaded grazing land, contributing to the death of livestock and wildlife [2]. Several conservancies and national parks have also been invaded by the plant. The plant is not only a serious threat to a wide range of wildlife but also to plant diversity. For example, in the Serengeti-Mara ecosystem, prickly pear cactus is among the intentionally introduced plants that have displacedPrickly pear cactus, is among the most common introduced invasive plant in Kenya. Originally from America, the plant is widespread in the arid and grass and other fodder plants [3]. It has also occupied more than 500km 2 in the Tsavo East National Park and its surrounding areas [4] . In Naibunga conservancy, the plant has occupied about 17000 acres of land and invades at least 2 km of habitat per year [5] . The potential costs associated with the invasion in natural pasture are based on reduced grazing land, replacement of natural pasture, negative impacts to livestock health and reduced mobility of livestock. Although the full cost of the impacts of cactus invasion in Kenya has not yet been quantified, rural households lose between 50 and 100 thousand shillings a year because of cactus [2] . With the current changes in climate, the plant is likely to be a growing problem to the rural livelihoods if appropriate measures to control its spread are not put into place.semi-arid areas. Prickly pear is a spiny shrub with different shapes, which has attractive yellow flowers and purple-reddish fruits (Figure 2). The seeds are dispersed by baboons, birds and elephants. Broken pieces are scattered by animals as they move from one place to another. The plant can survive well during prolonged drought and the seeds can stay in the soil for almost two years as they wait to sprout during the rainy season. These characteristics enable it to be more aggressive than others.The most applied methods of controlling cactus are manual such as chopping, burying and burning. These are difficult, involve a lot of labour and cannot provide a lasting solution. Chemicals on the other hand are used after chopping but the plant regenerates after some time. The control of prickly pear cactus in other countries such as South Africa is entirely reliant on bio-control insect, which was introduced in a pilot project in Laikipia and showeda positive result. However, local pastoralists reported that the insect was released in a few areas and the plant was spreading faster in the neighbouring areas where it had not invaded before especially in the mountains and valleys [5]. Complete removal of cactus plants also left bare grounds that could open spaces for further degradation. Successful management of the plant therefore requires an integrated management plan of the infested areas.  "}

main/part_2/0431059348.json

@@ -0,0 +1 @@
+{"metadata":{"gardian_id":"18f0141bfd979ed7cee8d1ca0b027ac6","source":"gardian_index","url":"https://cgspace.cgiar.org/rest/bitstreams/cea24dba-f779-4721-8358-778d4d7abadf/retrieve","id":"687625861"},"keywords":[],"sieverID":"0e865c71-51a1-4c18-b79e-87c019d81850","content":"The parts used must not misrepresent the meaning of the publication. ILRI would appreciate being sent a copy of any materials in which text, photos etc. have been used.The CGIAR Research Program on Livestock and Fish started in January 2012. It aims to increase the productivity of small-scale livestock and fish systems in sustainable ways, making meat, milk and fish more available and affordable to poor consumers across the developing world.Drawing on recent lessons in researchfor-development, the Program applies a solution-driven approach to achieve the targeted impact. It has the following key features:• A value chain approach: The Program uses the value chain concept as an organizing framework, with improving the value chain as the objective. This means considering what is needed to make the value chain work more effectively as a system, exploring the full range of constraints it faces, from policies and institutional issues down to specific technological problems.• Focus: The Program works in a few value chains across the developing world. The initial set of value chains includes 3 smallholder dairy systems (Tanzania, India, Nicaragua), 2 small ruminant systems (Mali, Ethiopia), 2 smallholder pig systems (Vietnam, Uganda) and 1 aquaculture system (Egypt). All the research will address the constraints in these value chains.• Working with development partners: The program collaborates with development partners in each value chain so they are involved, co-creating, contributing to, drawing from, and testing the evolving research outputs.• Impact at scale: Working in a few value chains allows the Program to fully engage with the research and development partners in each chain to identify technological and institutional strategies and interventions, generate the evidence that they indeed work, and use this evidence to attract the development investment needed to take the intervention to scale.• A more relevant agenda of basic research: Research-for-development work in the selected value chains will be supported by technology development and basic research on the main productivity drivers of feeds, genetics and health.In 2012, the Program launched a series of planning meetings for each of its 'value chain development' components.The value chain development processes are intended to produce the following outputs (see figure ): • Output 1: Sectoral and economy-wide models established to evaluate propoor development scenarios in each target value chain -The situation analysis will be a first review to serve as the basis for developing sectoral and economy-wide models for simulation analysis• Output 2: Methods for identifying pro-poor upgrading opportunities in animal-source food value chains -Site selection and an initial value chain assessment contributes to identifying upgrading opportunities• Output 3: R&D innovation alliances created to promote target pro-poor value chains -Engagement activities are meant to create an R&D alliance supporting the transformation of the target value chain.• Output 4: Pro-poor, gender-sensitive technological and institutional options devised and validated for each target value chain -From the reviews and value chain assessment, we will identify best-bet options we can begin testing.• Output 5: Integrated pro-poor, gender-sensitive intervention strategies formulated and piloted in each target value chain -Validation of the best-bet options will provide the basis for developing our ultimate integrated intervention strategy to upgrade the value chain Engagement Planning WorkshopOn 30 April and 1 May 2012, the Program convened a meeting of CIAT and ILRI staff to prepare an overall work plan for VCD activities in the Vietnam smallholder pig value chain. Information on the workshop is documented at http://livestock-fish.wikispaces.com/events. This document provides some background information and outlines the main activities discussed by the participants.The meeting aimed to:• Develop a common understanding of the CRP objectives for the value chain and the proposed approach • Review and refine the implementation plan, including individual roles and responsibilities, project sites and agree on the timetable for 2012 • Identify resource mobilization priorities and agree on responsibilitiesThe workshop began with a general introduction to the Program (for those people not familiar with it). It then discussed an initial 'situational analysis' giving an overview of the pig sector in Uganda and reviewed information on several ongoing projects related to the value chain. The different projects 'mapped' included:The heart of the meeting was a systematic discussion of several activities and milestones identified as important for the coming 12-18 months. These were: "}

main/part_2/0434346356.json

@@ -0,0 +1 @@
+{"metadata":{"gardian_id":"78dc43c9efe43f49dcaca9af842d30ea","source":"gardian_index","url":"https://cgspace.cgiar.org/rest/bitstreams/033fafcf-215e-4e6b-8047-ad152c4fa055/retrieve","id":"1131195701"},"keywords":[],"sieverID":"5e068320-58d1-4b93-a0e3-b33cd0544303","content":"Helping restore the quality of drinking water after the tsunami Issue 7 -2010Within the first week following the tsunami, a Senior Scientist from IWMI, Karen Villholth, was on the ground assessing the situation along the east coast. She soon realized that representatives from several different NGOs were attempting to clean wells but were not following any standard protocols or recording the locations or details of any actions taken. Families living along the island's east coast found their supplies of freshwater abruptly cut off.Many people were attempting to clean wells by simply pumping out the saltwater and discharging it on the surface close to the well. This simply caused more saline water to flow into the well and the water recently pumped out soon percolated back into the well. This chaotic approach prolonged contamination of the water and prompted Karen to draw up guidelines and contact NGOs and relevant authorities to help explain that well owners should remove debris and dirty water from their wells but not keep pumping out water. The well water could be used for bathing and over time, rainfall would dilute the saltwater and the wells could once again be used for drinking water.As various coordinating committees were set up for food and shelter, drinking water and sanitation, Karen attended meetings to disseminate the new guidelines and conduct training sessions to prevent further damage being caused from pumping. Two and a half months after the tsunami, IWMI initiated a monitoring program to assess the extent of the damage and monitor the recovery of water quality. Scientists selected 150 wells in Kallady, Kaluthavalai and Oluvil, within the Batticaloa and Ampara districts, each lying within 2 kilometers (km) of the coast. Although many of these wells had been affected by the tsunami, others had not, and these provided a useful baseline for pre-tsunami conditions.Directly after the tsunami, salinity levels of flooded wells were similar to those of seawater. The levels dropped after a few weeks but then remained more or less constant during the ongoing dry season. Following the first rains after the tsunami, salinity levels in the affected wells continued to decrease and came close to the range of drinking water, although they were on average still above the levels observed in the unflooded control wells. This indicated that the groundwater had still not fully recovered from the saltwater intrusion. Continued monitoring revealed that the water quality in affected wells was restored to pre-tsunami levels one and a half years after the event.Following the monitoring program, IWMI scientists drew up a series of recommendations. They suggested cleaning wells immediately after a tsunami to remove debris and avoid outbreaks of infectious diseases from pathogenic microorganisms. They also recommended no further pumping as this has little positive impact. Instead, they advised letting the natural cycle of rainy seasons dilute the salinity until acceptable drinking water levels are reached. In 2008, the World Health Organization (WHO) officially endorsed the well-cleaning protocol from IWMI and partners as part of its series of Emergency Guidelines."}

main/part_2/0445170189.json

@@ -0,0 +1 @@
+{"metadata":{"gardian_id":"4acdb2ce393904e78e56017ae2cc0804","source":"gardian_index","url":"https://cgspace.cgiar.org/rest/bitstreams/cdefa6d3-40bb-4791-829f-c2dced4c026f/retrieve","id":"173541235"},"keywords":[],"sieverID":"84b3b3b6-a7e1-431b-afa5-4424c6a8cef7","content":"In order to make sound recommendations in the face of climate change, and related low-emission farming solutions, a detailed database on fuel consumption has been started through the activity of the present report. This database will provide oversight to fuel consumption, based on tractor horsepower, attach ancillary equipment and field operation duration, and will provide base line data for fuel consumption modelling, to support climate change mitigation recommendations.For this, fuel gauge sensors were installed on two four-wheel tractors to monitor fuel usage during field operation with specific ancillary equipment, and an Excel file was generated to capture the starting values. This database includes the following parameters: tractor used, agricultural activity performed, crop, implement used, fuel consumption, time of the activity performed and location. The database will be expanded during the next year, to include two-wheel tractors and a wider variety of ancillary equipment and different field conditions."}

main/part_2/0467069370.json

@@ -0,0 +1 @@
+{"metadata":{"gardian_id":"5856e949c1febf6ca3df2033fb02bfcf","source":"gardian_index","url":"https://repository.cimmyt.org/server/api/core/bitstreams/0cb4b4e4-545a-4f6b-b084-4bcfc540afca/content","id":"1196461842"},"keywords":["Adoption","agricultural innovation","extension","multistakeholder platforms","partnerships","smallholder farmers","sustainable intensification"],"sieverID":"07c3c9a0-dbdf-479d-9e90-dfe12c1d8586","content":"Conservation agriculture-based sustainable intensification (CASI) is a package of practices that could improve the sustainability of smallholder farm productivity and profitability. However, existing extension systems are unable to facilitate widespread adoption to have the impact necessary to meet food security and livelihood requirements. This paper examines the utility of 'Innovation Platforms' (IPs) as a tool to catalyse adoption of CASI for smallholder farmers in South Asia and generate opportunities for rural micro-entrepreneurship in areas with high rates of poverty, small farm sizes and complex labour markets. We established 37 village-level and five District-level IPs across the Eastern Gangetic Plains of Nepal, Bangladesh, and India. IPs allowed widespread uptake of CASI with benefits to smallholder farmers, input and output suppliers, and enabled extension systems to be more efficient. There was variability across locations with different modes of IPs established, building on existing farmer or community youth groups, and enabling micro-entrepreneur business opportunities. IPs were effective in developing trust in communities, among stakeholders, empowering rural youth and women through direct engagement. Ensuring strong ownership was key. Further work is needed to provide opportunities for high-level policy support to assist IPs to have a wider impact in supporting large-scale adoption of CASI.Conservation agriculture-based sustainable Intensification (CASI) has been proposed as package of practices that could be used to improve the sustainability of smallholder farm productivity and profitability (Gathala et al., 2013;Gathala et al., 2021;Islam et al., 2019;Jat et al., 2021;Keil et al., 2015). However, existing extension systems are not set up to support widespread adoption by using the innovation structures to have the impact necessary to solve food security and livelihood demands. Traditionally, adoption has often seen as a 'top-down' linear process (Rogers, 2003). Current linear models of technology transfer do not work (Sanyang et al., 2016): they fail to deliver programs to poor and marginal farmers. In Bangladesh and some parts of India, there is one government extension officer for 2000-3000 farmers, more often engaged in implementation of government schemes. There are simply not enough extension agents, even if the linear transfer of technology paradigm could work. Adoption is further complicated because CASI is a package of technologies, practices and knowledge, thus it is more difficult to achieve adoption (Andersson & D'Souza, 2014;Brown et al., 2018). New approaches are therefore needed.The Eastern Gangetic Plains (EGP) of Bangladesh, India and Nepal, is home to over 300 million people, with the world's highest concentration of rural poverty and a strong dependence on agriculture for food security and livelihoods (Ericksen et al., 2011). The EGP has the potential to become a major contributor to South Asian regional food security, but rice and wheat productivity remain low and diversification is limited because of poorly developed markets, sparse agricultural knowledge and service networks, and inadequate development of available water resources and sustainable production practices (Gathala et al., 2021;Islam et al., 2019;Sugden et al., 2014). Most smallholder farmers have small areas of land (<1 ha) and labour shortages are becoming more acute as feminization of agriculture increases (Darbas et al., 2020), but this has not occurred equally across the region (Sen et al., 2019). Regional natural resource challenges include groundwater depletion, pollution, and inefficient use of water and energy, potentially further compounding the foodenergy-water nexus (Gathala et al., 2020b;Kishore, 2019). Additionally, there are institutional and governance constraints such as limited public services and dominance of small, informal enterprises, poor coordination between agricultural research and development agencies, poor infrastructure and poor connectivity (Brown et al., 2020). These factors lead to smallholder vulnerability to climate shocks (Brown et al., 2019Sugden et al., 2014;) and market risks that limit farmer and private sector investments in productivity-enhancing technologies. Access to quality inputs is also a major issue. However, there is variation across the EGP: in NW Bangladesh water policy and agricultural technologies have increased crop yields, although the sustainability of present rates of groundwater use is a concern.A study was designed to explore the extent to which CASI could be applied in the EGP ('Sustainable and Resilient Farming Systems Intensification', SRFSI). SRFSI focused on raising the productivity of the rice-, wheat-and maize-based farming systems characteristic of the EGP with Conservation Agriculture (CA) practices. Farm mechanization has been a strong focus, specifically the introduction of CA machinery which reduces inputs (labour, water, seed) while improving soil fertility by retaining and planting into crop residues (Gathala et al., 2020a;Gathala et al., 2020b;Islam et al., 2019;Sinha et al., 2019). This strategy is referred to as Sustainable Intensification (SI). These practices are largely proven and uncontroversial (Islam et al., 2019), although they need to be adapted to the local social-ecological systems within the EGP. Together, these are referred to as Conservation Agriculture based Sustainable Intensification (CASI) practices. This provided the basis for exploring pathways for catalysing adoption of CASI.Innovation Platforms (IPs) and other multi-stakeholder forums have been identified and used to successfully overcome constraints in agricultural systems, particularly in developing countries in Africa (Adekunle & Fatunbi, 2012;Makini et al., 2013; see Section 2). IPs are a network of stakeholders established around a commodity or system of interest to identify 'bottom-up' solutions to problems (see Section 2 below and Schut et al., 2019 for overview). However, IPs have not been trialled extensively in South Asian situations, although there are limited examples in India for the supply of cotton (Andres et al., 2016) and milk production (Ravichandran et al., 2016). Furthermore, IPs have not been trialled in a systems perspective with key livelihood and food security cropping systems of rice-, wheat-and maize-dominated systems across the EGP. According to Kilelu et al. (2013), IPs need a degree of flexibility to be able to respond to specific situations and uncertainties, emergent outcomes, and provide windows of opportunity in innovation processes. Using the SRFSI project as case studies in the EGP across eight districts in three countries (Bihar and West Bengal in India, Eastern Nepal terai and Northwest Bangladesh), we examine the application of IPs in South Asia. This enabled an opportunity for evaluation of similarities and differences across the region. Over a 5-year period (2015)(2016)(2017)(2018)(2019), we reviewed various approaches for implementing IPs and modified them for use in the EGP, conducted training with local partners (n = 20), assisted with implementation of 37 village IPs in eight districts, conducted ongoing monitoring and evaluation and finally reviewed overall progress and learnings and suggest for the better governance and structural management changes as per local need and adaptability.In this paper, we examine the utility of Innovation Platforms as a tool to catalyse adoption of CASI practices for smallholder farmers in South Asia and create rural business opportunities. Our evaluations are based on Sparrow and Traoré (2018) and Davies et al. (2018) to provide an overarching framework to help evaluate the IPs used in the SRFSI project. We recognize there are a wide range of differences in functionality, governance and structure among areas throughout the EGP and try to take this into account to explore the overall utility of IPs.An important factor in explaining lower than expected use of new technology is the design of extension programs, largely implementing a 'linear process' (Pamuk et al., 2014). Conventional extension efforts, following classic 'diffusion' theory of Rogers (2003), have produced disappointing results and have generally failed to promote the adoption of agricultural innovations (Pamuk et al., 2014). There is large heterogeneity among smallholders (Williams et al., 2016), which means that blanket recommendations are unlikely to be relevant for many farming populations (Sanyang et al., 2016). This has been further exacerbated through insufficient public funding and perverse incentive effects. The linear model of technology transfer has therefore become obsolete, and as such there has been a move towards capacity building and farmer empowerment. Rather than lay the blame on 'extension' per se, this is a sign of broader system problems. One way to overcome these problems has been to use an agricultural innovation systems approach which includes dynamic networks of interactions and feedback loops involving institutional and policy settings to nudge the system to help stimulate technological change and innovation (Hall et al., 2016;Horton et al., 2017;Klerkx et al., 2010;World Bank, 2012). Innovation Platforms are considered part of this broader agricultural innovation systems approach (ISPC, 2015;Maru et al., 2018).Innovation Platforms have been identified as a powerful tool for promoting agricultural development (Adekunle & Fatunbi, 2012;Dror et al., 2016;Hall et al., 2001;Hounkonnou et al., 2012;Jiggins et al., 2016;Kilelu et al., 2013;Sanyang et al., 2016;Schut et al., 2016;Sparrow & Traoré, 2018). The ISPC (2015) note there are various definitions of IPs, and using the definition of Adekunle and Fatunbi (2012, p. 983), they define IPs as 'a physical, virtual, or physicovirtual network of stakeholders which has been set up around a commodity or system of mutual interest to foster collaboration, partnership and mutual focus to generate innovation on the commodity or system'. Stakeholders are brought together in socalled local 'innovation platforms' enabling bottomup searches for solutions to local bottlenecks (Pamuk et al., 2014). Multi-stakeholder processes, including IPs in value chains and food systems, are used to diagnose constraints, explore opportunities, investigate solutions, and catalyse collaborative learning and collective action (Sanyang et al., 2016). An ideal and sustainable IP is based on local context and attracts stakeholders through a participatory and bottom-up process (Sanyang et al., 2016). Stakeholder analyses should be based on 'entry points' dictated by the constraints and/or opportunities for enhancing the productivity of the value chain (Sanyang et al., 2016). The IP serves as a vehicle for change in the interaction among research, farmers and farmer organizations, advisory services (public and private), agro-food processors, traders, input dealers, financial institutions (such as microfinance and banks), policy-makers, transporters, and the media (including rural radio) (Sanyang et al., 2016). Innovation priorities vary across IPs as each IP decides on its own priorities according to local preferences, opportunities and constraints. The success of IPs could be related to pre-existing levels of social capital (Sanyang et al., 2016) and the match between local conditions and innovations (Pamuk et al., 2014).There are now a plethora of technical manuals, guides and experiences with using IPs, but these are largely based in Sub-Saharan Africa. The guides include Nederlof et al. (2011), Boogaard et al. (2013), Makini et al. (2013), plus a series of 12 IP Practice Briefs developed by CGIAR Humid Tropics research program (https://cgspace.cgiar.org/handle/ 10568/33667). These manuals were reviewed to determine the relevance of IPs for South Asia. We found many elements across each of these were relevant, but no single approach looked like it was sufficient. These guides formed the basis of some training provided to >20 partners across the four research regions. Further details are provided below about how the IPs were implemented in the SRFSI project.This paper builds on other work in the EGP through the SRFSI project (Brown et al., 2020;Gathala et al., 2020a;Gathala et al., 2020b;Gathala et al., 2021;Islam et al., 2019;Sinha et al., 2019). Districts were originally selected because they are considered as typical marginal areas with a range of constraints (Islam et al., 2019), but they were also matched in pairs across country borders to enable comparison of similar physical conditions (soil type, rainfall, ground water resources), but with different socioeconomics and institutional settings (e.g., comparison of Rangpur, Northwest Bangladesh with Coochbehar, West Bengal, India) (Figure 1).Participatory on-farm trials were conducted over several years across Rabi/winter crops and Kharif/ summer crops. These were conducted on five communities ('nodes') in each district (n = 8) and involved 433 farming households (Islam et al., 2019). The climate was a typical monsoon dominated tropical climate, and there was some variability in soil types and hydrology (full details in Islam et al., 2019). There was a package of CASI practices trialled as part of the SRFSI project for rice-based, wheat, maize and lentils cropping systems compared to conventional cultivation technologies (see Islam et al., 2019 for details). Essentially, for rice, different technologies of traditional, conventionally tilled and puddled transplanted rice were compared to zero-tilled (ZT), unpuddled and dry seeded rice. Similarly, for wheat, maize and lentils, conventional tillage was compared to zero-tilled crops. Standardized fertilizer and herbicide recommendations were provided to farmers. The economics of these practices was also examined (see Brown et al., 2020 andGathala et al., 2021 for details) to determine the benefits of CASI on labour resources, production costs and gross margins. CASI therefore involved a series of interlinked activities (technologies) and knowledge that the trial farmers needed to understand and adopt. These practices ranged from use of zero-till (ZT) machines to sow their crops, seeding rates, application of fertilizers, management of weeds, pests and diseases, and water (irrigation) management (see Islam et al., 2019 for details).Given the poor state of the extension system throughout the EGP, we were interested to explore whether Innovation Platforms could be a useful way to enable the adoption of the CASI practices. We conducted a literature review of multi-stakeholder platforms and IPs to determine how they have been used in similar situations around the world. We wanted to know what they did, how they worked and who was involved etc. Ultimately, we wanted to know if an IP approach would be relevant for South Asia, and the EGP in particular. The literature review identified relevant materials developed principally in Sub-Saharan Africa (see Section 2). Whilst there are many similarities between Africa and South Asia, the situation in South Asia is highly complex, with numerous political, governance and institutional issues dominating the agricultural system. This is further exacerbated by the huge population pressure, poverty and problems with access to resources (land, water, energy, incentives etc.), as well as public food grain distribution systems (Banerjee et al., 2014), targeted support programs, minimum support price, and minimum employment guarantee (2005 National Rural Employment Guarantee Act, NREGA, Bauri, 2010;Sarkar et al., 2011). This meant that there could potentially be a large number of potential stakeholders involved in IPs, and many of which would have little 'power' or ability to change the system.We developed a training package based on the identified literature and synthesized advantages and disadvantages of the different approaches to have a unified approach building components from several approaches. This was rolled out to researchers in the four jurisdictions of the SRFSI project. The emphasis of the training was as a tool to discuss the relevant issues for setting up, establishing and supporting the IPs as part of the SRFSI project in the EGP. A large part of the training was on how to facilitate the process of establishing an IP, and in particular, who should convene it, who should facilitate it, who should participate (which stakeholders) and how to make it relevant for the SRFSI project, along with the importance of utilizing participatory approaches. As part of this process we put together a framework to help understand the flow of logic, who to involve and how the IP develops and reflects through different iterations (following an Action Learning approach, Figure 2).An analysis of key institutions and stakeholders in each of the SRFSI Districts around agricultural innovation was used to help identify key stakeholders and understand where potential constraints and opportunities lay (Darbas et al., 2015). The analysis used the Agricultural Innovations Systems approach (Biggs, 1990;Hall et al., 2002;World Bank, 2012). There were 159 key informant interviews analysed across the eight Districts of the SRFSI project detailing the constraints and opportunities for scaling out the CASI technologies.After the initial training, ongoing support was provided to SRFSI project partners implementing the IPs and the facilitators. We aimed to establish one IP for each 'Node' (village) where the project was being implemented. Several additional training events were held to provide ongoing support. One of the key support events was termed a 'structured training workshop' in mid-2016 which included cross-visits from neighbouring jurisdictions (Nepali colleagues joined the workshop in Bihar, and the Bangladeshi colleagues joined with West Bengal). Additional site visits to each jurisdiction occurred through 2016 and 2017, along with presentation and discussion of progress being made at the annual SRFSI project planning workshops to review progress and consider learnings. There was also a strong emphasis on continuous cycles of learning and reflection throughout, which was built in from the beginning: what was working well, what was not working well, and consideration of options of improving the IPs. There are several approaches for reviewing progress and the success of IPs, which have emerged recently (Boogaard et al., 2013;Davies et al., 2018;ISPC, 2015Sparrow & Traoré, 2018;Watson et al., 2015;). The factors determining the success of IPs need to include institutional, technological and organizational factors (Pamuk et al., 2014). Given the number and complexity of the IPs that were established as part of the SRFSI project in the EGP, we used a range of approaches with selected in depth case studies, depending on opportunities for site visits for primary data collection via key informant interviews or using self-assessments (see Appendix A for details; essentially responses to a set of open questions with some requiring scores using a 5-point Likert scale). Our approach relied primarily on the conceptual framework of Sparrow and Traoré (2018) and Davies et al. (2018). The framework of Davies et al. (2018) was used to explain performance of IPs exploring context, structure, conduct, process, and performance and to consider the prospects of ongoing change and impact of the IPs with a focus on the detailed case studies in Bihar and West Bengal. We also offer some general comments from observations in Bangladesh and Nepal. Quotes in this paper are identified using bracketed codes to maintain anonymity as required by our human research ethics approval. The IPs in Northwest Bangladesh were evaluated via the self-assessments and site visits and key informant interviews were held with representatives of IPs in Purnea in Bihar and Coochbehar in West Bengal (26 interviews conducted).Unfortunately, towards the end of the SRFSI project, there was no on-going involvement with IPs in Madhubani in Bihar because of budgeting constraints. In addition, the constitutional and structural change in Nepal meant that there were no District representatives (District Agriculture Development Office of the Department of Agriculture were the implementers of the IPs, which operated at the District Level, but Districts functionaries no longer existed), so we were unable to evaluate the performance of the IPs in Dhanusha or Sunsari. However, we did review progress and evaluate learnings with several key staff through key informant interviews to reflect the experiences in Nepal.Measurement of the adoption of CASI technologies, knowledge and practices in the context of this analysis was confounded by the way the project was implemented. The project had a strong focus of including smallholder farmers in the testing of CASI technologies, in comparison with conventional technologies. Farmers were encouraged to run trials, Steps involved in the IPs as initially used in the SRFSI project, essentially with continuous cycles to identify problems, map partners, discuss issues, review issues, take action and reflect.with project support, on their own farms to explore the benefits of CASI on yields and water productivity (Islam et al., 2019), energy use and greenhouse emissions (Gathala et al., 2020b) and gross margins and labour-use efficiency (Gathala et al., 2021). As such, all trial farmers practiced a range of CASI technologies. The IPs were then built in the same villages (Nodes) and Districts within these farming communities. A comprehensive assessment of the adoption of CASI technologies would need to be independently conducted at some point in the future after the conclusion of the project and the support provided by the project has been withdrawn. This assessment would need to include core trial farmers, other farmers within their communities and farmers outside the sphere of influence of the project. We recognize that this is a limitation of the current analysis. Adoption is also compounded by the complex nature inherent in CASI: it is multi-faceted with technologies, knowledge and practices to be considered (Andersson & D'Souza, 2014;Brown et al., 2018). Forthcoming publications by project colleagues will consider broader adoption of CASI.The IPs were initially established in 2015. By 2017, there were 37 'node' (village) IPs established (out of a possible 40 nodes) and five 'district' IPs established (out of a possible 8 districts) (Table 1). The primary issues being discussed in the IPs included: potential of CA, convergence of government programs, machinery hire, business models, sharing of market news, input supply issues, marketing issues, sharing of research results, technical knowledge and pest management (Table 1). Different modes of operation emerged in different districts, which are explored further below.RDRS Bangladesh (NGO) has been working in NW region since 1972. Since the beginning, agriculture development has been one of its prime activities. While initially, it focused on helping individual farmers, it has subsequently shifted its approach to working with farmer groups in the form of Union Federations. RDRS established Union Federations (UFs) as grassroots association of poor people to help them attain greater collective strength, improved cooperation and unity and to evolve as a more productive agency for achieving broader objectives of sustainable production systems on behalf of their membership and community. Two out of five IPs supported by the SRFSI project in Rangpur have been established in Union Federations (Borodargha and Mohonpur) which performed better than other IPs, as self-assessed by RDRS. There was little evidence of more specialized livelihood strategies, nor improvements in how the markets work, changes in the capacity of R4D systems and associated institutions, nor changes in policy or formal institutions (see Appendix B).The aim at the establishment of the IPs in Bangladesh was 'to provide various quality services and inputs at farmer level by creating a common platform of different stakeholders' (self-assessment). Furthermore, the vision was 'to identify problems and opportunities in relation to CASI technology'. In terms of implementation of IPs in NW Bangladesh, IPs played a role in providing technologies and practices and embed services for increasing crop production in a cost-effective manner to change the market system. The IP participants found that the CASI practices were good, but there was a need to improve the performance of the machines.It was apparent that some IPs in NW Bangladesh were performing better than others (Table 2), as assessed by project partners. For example, in Rangpur, Borodargha and Mohonpur had higher self-assessed scores than for Durgapur, Kolkondo and Lakkhatari. The differences appeared to be related to level of participation, facilitation and negotiation and opportunity analysis (Table 2). Furthermore, most of the changes in outcomes and impacts from the IPs were realized through more accessible finance and changes in the capacity of local actors and socially embedded institutions (able to deal with emergent/unexpected capacity changes and changes in cultural/gendered institutions) (Appendix B).In 2015, the District Agriculture Development Office (DADO) in Nepal was tasked as the leading organization for initiating and establishing the IPs. DADO was responsible for agricultural extension and support at the District-level at the time. The Nepal Agricultural Research Council (NARC) also provided research support to the IP efforts. The IPs were established as a new entity (not through an existing group). For each IP, there were 15-25 people involved comprising a range of stakeholders, including farmers, tractor drivers, and service providers, to share problems and identify solutions (Table 1). Unfortunately, there happened to be a large turn-over of DADO staff during the early phase of the IPs, and there appeared to be a lack of coordination between DADO and NARC and a lack of a driving force, with no budget to support and so no momentum was achieved. The ongoing functioning of IPs was difficult partly due to the constitutional crisis that engulfed Nepal during 2015 and 2016, which saw the abolishment of Districts including agricultural institutions such as DADO and the establishment of Provinces.Despite the challenges in establishing and maintaining IPs in Nepal, some benefits of being involved in IPs were observed. The involvement of a range of different stakeholders were involved which openedup new opportunities, and that farmers were able to access subsidy support. The performance of the IPs in terms of accessing agricultural inputs, subsidies and other services from the stakeholders, scaling out of CASI practices, marketing of agricultural products was excellent in some of the nodes (Bhokraha and Kaptangunj in Sunsari, and Sinurjoda in Dhanusha). These IPs had active IP members and had better linkages with the DADO, NARC and other stakeholders, particularly up until the abolishment of Districts; however, there were significant problems with resources. Some stakeholders found little meaning or benefits to be involved in the IPs. The Nepalese participants found there was no clear examples of functioning IPs to learn from and, thus, found it difficult if they were organizing something new (establishing IPs). With the restructuring of the country, local level governments, such as municipalities, now act as the key institution in providing various supports to the people. Hence, it will be crucial to have their participation or leadership in future IP facilitation/ mobilization.Two case studies were explored in detail in Bihar: (1) Aranyak farmer producer company and (2) DeHaat micro-entrepreneur models.Case Study 1: Aranyak farmer producer company model The Aranyak farmer producer company is a model supported by Jeevika and Technoserve (https:// www.technoserve.org/), an NGO with a strong focus on benefits to women. The Aranyak farmer producer company is 100% run by women with support from Jeevika. Aranyak started out as a women's self-help group (SHG), which grew into a Village Organization, then converted into a Producer Group (PG), and into a Farmer Producer Company. Inputs and marketing were considered big issues raised by the communities, so the Aranyak PG was set up to provide '360°s upport' to women farmers with profits split across all members. The Aranyak model has been highlighted as a successful approach for engaging with women and improving their livelihoods (Darbas et al., 2020). The original focus was on maize procurement to overcome problems including unfair payments. Aranyak improved grain quality, introduced electronic moisture meters, weighing machines, and established payments into bank accounts. Aranyak operated beyond SRFSI project communities (nodes). Aranyak is considered an IP because they bring in relevant stakeholder to solve a range of problems.  Mrs D (#11) pays 250 INR (∼$5 AUD) per year to be a member in Aranyak and has been involved over the past 4 years. She considers that Aranyak is an IP, which was built jointly by Jeevika and the SRFSI project. IP meetings were held about once per month at the Block level (local administrative unit), with up to 1,000 people attending (farmers, private sector companies and officials of Aranyak) along with the Aranyak Village Resource Person and Community Mobilizer (paid positions). Farmers discussed issues, purchased inputs and fertilizers, and sold produce. The initial focus was on maize procurement. There are several problems creeping into Aranyak, and Mrs D (#11) complained that Aranyak was not functioning as well as it had a few years ago. She directly blamed the President, Secretary and Treasurer of Aranyak for the current problems. ('Cream of the cake eaten by the President', Mrs D, #11). She said Aranyak were purchasing things for their community, but were then selling to other communities (implying malpractice). There was a loss in purchasing power because purchases occurred at the wrong time (purchasing maize at higher price in the beginning of the season and selling to the market at the end of the season during the glut period). This was not realized by Aranyak, and they lost money which lead to mistrust among the members. It showed that Aranyak was inexperienced in marketing and so need to improve their marketing skills to rebuild the group. Previously, they purchased maize, then banana and paddy, but are not purchasing anything now. Aranyak originally worked directly with farmers and made payments into bank accounts. They are now working through a middleman and payments are made through brokers (receiving lower prices) and are delayed; essentially reverting to traditional practices. There is strong interest in continuing with Aranyak, but there needs to be significant change (Mrs D, #11).Case Study 2: DeHaat micro-entrepreneur model DeHaat is a micro-entrepreneur model based in villages to provide inputs, assist with marketing and crop advice, supported through 'agrevolution' (https://agrevolution.in/home). Local entrepreneurs are appointed in each village and receive training and guidance to support the local farming community. They market various inputs (seeds, pesticides, fertilizers, services, e.g. laser land levellers, sprinklers, small machines), assist with maize marketing, and have a mobile-based support service (mobile phone app or toll-free number) to assist farmers to make agronomic decisions. They charge a small service fee. DeHaat was brought into various SRFSI project nodes (particularly in Purnea in Bihar). DeHaat has credibility in this sector and is growing its footprint, and is expected to be a sustainable model in the future.DeHaat was considered an IP, although it is not a typical IP in that DeHaat modified its business approach to build business opportunities. The micro-entrepreneurs acted in a similar role to what partners do in an IP by talking to different stakeholders to identify problems, and talking to a different set of stakeholders to identify potential solutions. They were well-positioned to identify and access relevant stakeholders because of their established networks.DeHaat also provided capital support for poor farmers, who returned credit after harvest. For example, the main problems faced by Mr K1 (#3) was the availability of agro-chemicals (rates, types), seed and market at harvest. Mr K1 (#3) normally solved his problems by himself, but if he contacted DeHaat for help if he could not solve a problem. Mr K2 (#4) said that DeHaat meetings were held each season to discuss new agro-chemicals and technologies. Furthermore, they were able to ask questions and all issues were solved during these meetings.There were often 50-300 farmers attending meetings depending on the technology being discussed, the time and the season. Participation in DeHaat has resulted in changes in some farming practices. For example, Mr K3 (#5) previously used a traditional maize variety, but he now uses a hybrid variety, also growing vegetables and paddy because of increased awareness and support. Mr K3 (#5) is looking to purchase a subsidized zero-till machine through the Farmers Fair at District headquarters. He plans to use the machine himself, and to rent it out to others for a fee.Mr K2 (#4) noted that many women came to meetings, also from other villages, who ask questions too. Mr K3's (#5) wife participates also in the meetings, and he feels she is now more empowered. Improved income was the main motivation for their family's participation in DeHaat.Mr J (#6) used to go to the Krishi Vigyan Kendras (KVK), an extension system or farm science centre associated with agricultural universities in India, at the block office, but through DeHaat, now has support on his doorstep. Mr J (#6) stated that it is very important to have timely intervention of activities. He has been well-supported through the SRFSI project but believes he can continue things himself with the support of DeHaat. He is part of a self-help group (SHG), and through the support of DeHaat, the SHG will purchase a zero-till machine.Two case studies are explored in detail in West Bengal:(1) Satmile IP group, and (2) Dinhata farmer group IP.Case Study 3: Satmile IP Satmile Satish Club O Pathagar (SSCOP; abbreviated to 'Satmile' here) started as a youth club in 1974. The original focus was for cultural and sports programs (not farming) and was registered it as an NGO in 2001. They then shifted focus to farming through support from NABARD. In 2011 Satmile started to support and implement zero-till (ZT) wheat, and in 2013 with maize, with support (machinery) and guidance from Uttar Banga Krishi Viswavidyalya university (UBKV). Some initial technologies performed poorly (Mr K, #13). In 2013/14, UBKV initiated training on ZT machines and support services as a demonstration site, then the SRFSI project formally establish participatory trails. Satmile was set up as a 'service provider' in three project Nodes (villages), relying on SRFSI machines provided by UBVK. In 2014/15, Satmile purchased their first ZT machine. Satmile gradually moulded themselves as a 'trusted' provider of most major services (through Single Window Service provider model), which was then expanded to further farmers (10-20 farmers) looking for new business opportunities. Satmile has gone well beyond a farmer club: 'Farmers clubs are not always vibrant and dynamic, but Satmile is' (Mr D, #16).As Satmile developed into a service provider, they started to see themselves as a broker to help overcome problems that farmers were experiencing. UBKV facilitated initial meetings with key stakeholders (farmer groups, progressive farmers, finance institutions) to provide the concept of an IP. Through technical advice and support from UBKV and DoA, Satmile formed strong networks with a range of other stakeholders (inclusive of other Farmers Clubs or Farmers Producers organizations), and essentially acted as an 'IP' (linking farmers, farmer clubs, input retailers and extension officials). Personal contact was critical to enable links to relevant market representatives and political leaders (local council) in the community (Mr D, #16). After initial establishment, Satmile themselves took on facilitation and coordination responsibilities. There was, however, some confusion about who would then take the lead with the IPs and subsequent meetings (e.g. role of Secretary). Initial meetings were planned monthly, but the government officials declined to participate because the invitation came from a farmer group representative (thus, considered there was no power/influence). The government officials expected UBKV to send the invitation, which highlighted the problems with administration and hierarchies, particularly in India, which was not fruitful (Mr D, #16).Once these early problems were resolved and stakeholders could see the benefits of being involved in the IPs, they expanded from three to seven nodes. Satmile IPs have improved farmer knowledge, especially the importance of quality seeds at sowing to achieve good yield at harvest, and knowledge of correct fertilizer doses (Mr R, #17). Mr R (#20) recognized the need for the IP for farmer development, especially through knowledge of technologies and diseases. Mr A (#23) said that there are always new technologies and pesticides coming, and he has been trying to solve a blast-like diseases problem in wheat; he would not have been aware of the problems without the IP. Mr R (#20) emphasized the importance of setting up meetings with seed and chemical companies (e.g. Monsanto), and knowledge about input use, e.g. people should know what, when and how to use inputs correctly. In the past, farmers relied on information given to them by input suppliers (fertilizer shop), which Mr R (#17) now knows was not always correct information, or herbicides were not available in the market (Mrs B, #21). Satmile IP holds regular seasonal meetings to discuss problems (with 50-100 farmers in attendance in groups, with 25-50% involvement of women; Mr R, #20, Mr A, #23). Farmers are very happy with this approach. More farmers participate in meetings if they know experts from UBKV or DoA will attend (Mr R, #17). Mr R (#20) has a smartphone to get technical support through the Satmile IP, or if Satmile can't help, then the request is forwarded on to someone else to help (showing importance of links and networks). He has also requested more harvesting machines.The link with the SRFSI project has enabled linkage with the government and access government schemes (subsidy programs, support for women entrepreneurship, diversified ventures like fishery, duckery, lentil mill, etc.). High-level government support has been provided by The Chief Advisor (on agriculture) of West Bengal Chief Minister. Mr K (#13) said that because of the success of the SRFSI project, the CASI machines and technologies are well known and accepted, and ZT is becoming very popular, thus a good agribusiness opportunity for Satmile. The overall Satmile model is working well (Mr K, #13) and they are considered a 'change agent' (Mr D, #16). More models like this are needed because demand is growing but needs time (Dr C, #15). Farmers are happy to invest their money from their own pockets, but they want to make sure it works (Mr K, #13). On the contrary, if they get things for free, they do not care very much.The benefits for women are clear: women are now recognized as the 'farmer' (Mr R, #20). Mrs B (#19) attributes this to her exposure and continuous link with the Satmile IP. She contacts Satmile, UBKV or DoA for advice, and she can use a mobile phone in the group to send photos to identify diseases and obtain advice (strong sense of coming together). Additionally, Mrs B (#19) has adopted CASI, and can now undertake a range of other activities and earn additional income. She can do all the farm work, and her husband can take work outside (Mrs B, #19). In the past, she used to sit at home with no work and no money, but now has a mobile phone, TV, water pump for use in the kitchen, gas for cooking, and she can afford school fees, so her children are now educated.Satmile became a large distributor for agricultural machines (zero tillage, rice transplanter, harvesters, threshers and dal mills, etc.) and seed and input supplier in West Bengal. Under Satmile, there are now >60 Farmers Groups being supported to facilitate the implementation of all agricultural-related government schemes. Satmile is also a hub for developing capacity building by accessing the Civil Society Money (e.g. Mahindra). Satmile received support from NABARD to establish a training facility.Case Study 4: Dinhata farmer group IP An IP was established through a farmer group in Dinhata through the support from UBKV and the SRFSI project. There was a contractual arrangement established between stakeholders (farmers, farmer club, input suppliers, etc.) for crop cultivation, initially for maize, but extended to other crops. The IP integrated a range of stakeholders whilst at the same time was a contractual business. Because the SRFSI trials were reasonably successful, many farmers believed the scientists, particularly the importance of quality seeds, in successful crop cultivation. The driving force for the Dinhata IP was income earning (through payments) rather than mutual help, so more of a 'bottom-up' farmer group-driven IP. It was a separate entity to the Farmer Club, but there were connections with other villages, so others get to know about other schemes or activities that were around (Mr B, #24).For many years, farmers used to discuss their problems amongst themselves, but could not find a solution (Mrs D, #25). They were introduced to the concept of IPs by UBKV, and the farmers were happy to try them (Mr B, #24). There was lots of interaction with markets, veterinarians, fertilizer agents, seed dealers (e.g. Monsanto) (Mr B, #24). There was also a strong link with the Coochbehar KVK about relevant schemes on offer (Mrs D, #25). The IP meetings were held twice per month initially where a range of representatives came along to discuss problems. The frequency of meetings has decreased but key stakeholders still interact through phone calls etc. (maintained connections) (Mr B, #24). Women felt it was important to be involved as members of the IP (Mr B, #24). Mrs D (#25) was worried when she was married (= 'sold'), but she now has economic power and independence. Mrs D (#25) stated that the IPs allowed many women to discuss a wide range of problems with other women, which is a form of informal information exchange, helping to solve some problems, and help alleviate depression and improve standards of living. Having experience with these benefits and success means that there are economic (improved distribution of income and purchasing power) and social gains; they believe they can do something for themselves or their family (self-empowerment; Mrs D, #25). Farming households now get more time for family and domestic work (Mrs D, #25). Mr B (#24) has the influence and confidence to help create new IPs in neighbouring areas as an integral unit in the confederation.It became evident that IPs established through the SRFSI project have had variable success in supporting adoption of CASI technologies and practices. Using the approach of Davies et al. (2018), we consider some of the important indicators for aspects of the IPs that worked well, and where they could be improved (Table 3): . Context: IPs had a clear need (income earning, access programs and subsidies) and clear prior relationships (involvement of respected NGOs). . Structure: IPs were built on existing institutions/ organizations, with strong links and networks. . Conduct: There was initial high trust, it was bottom-up farmer driven, there was strong market and business orientation, and IPs were considered vibrant and dynamic. . Process: IPs were considered as a change agent, with a strong focus on brokering and capacity building, and had strong participation and involvement by women. . Performance: IPs enabled timely interventions and improved inputs, knowledge and services (marketing, payments) to farmers.Some of the factors that might affect the ongoing change and impact from the IPs established in the EGP include (Table 4): . Context: Well-established networks, with a focus on solving problems, providing economic and social gains, and a focus on opportunities for women. In Nepal, context was hampered by the constitutional crisis. . Structure: Well-supported through connections with NGOs, local authorities and government programs, with strong membership and vision, but well-functioning examples are required, especially to improve marketing skills (e.g. for Aranyak). . Conduct: Strong sense of ownership with focus on benefits to women, modified business models including Single Window Service provider model, but there was a lack of change in the market in Bangladesh. . Process: Strong incentive to solve problems, provided more accessible finances and improved capacity, but lacked specialised livelihood strategies and broader R4D system and policy change in Bangladesh and lacked coordination and budget to sustain in Nepal. . Performance: Strong evidence of distribution of CASI machines (in some cases), improved capacity, empowerment and motivation of farmers, and benefits to women, but there was example of loss of purchasing power (e.g. Aranyak).There were several issues that emerged through our experiences with implementing the IPs as part of the SRFSI project in the EGP. We did not achieve success in all locations, but we were able to test out a range of approaches, which provide some opportunity for developing some broad principles for success. There were several different 'modes' of IP implemented, four of which were shown through our case studies. (1) DeHaat business model which provided all inputs through a commercial service model, (2) Aranyak women's group for maize procurement, (3) Satmile Club as another service provider model which provided mechanical inputs for farmers, and (4) formalized IP farmer group (Dinhata), set-up through support of UBKV (Table 3). Each IP had strong support during the establishment phase from our SRFSI partners (BAU, UBKV, DoA). In the past, farmers struggled with solving problems and they were not aware of technologies. They mainly took advice from fertilizer sellers at the market or from other farmers. After the implementation of the IPs, many of the problems have been solved, but some problems still exist, and evidence that farmers were willing to use the IPs to try and solve them. Many farmers were also firmly convinced they are now more empowered to solve any new problems that might emerge.The initial set-up and establishment of the IP is critical for its success (Davies et al., 2015). Arenas of transition, such as multi-stakeholder IPs, must be facilitated to achieve concerted action and change, and success often depends on the relationships among multiple stakeholders and actors with different but complementary interests (Sanyang et al., 2016). Satmile and the Dinhata IPs showed the importance of early discussions with a range of potential stakeholders, but also with local government officials to gain support. Having project-related support early on (such as through the SRFSI project) gave the IPs some credibility. This was especially important when introducing complex technologies or practices like CASI. Because of the success of the field trials undertaken in trial plots in these villages (through SRFSI; Islam et al., 2019), farmers saw the benefits of CASI, and were also willing to be involved in the establishment of the IPs. Having clear lines of accountability for who is involved in the IP and how they would be established and operated were important. The problems encountered with the IPs in Nepal also underlined this, because of confusion and high turn-over of staff. The role of the facilitator was critical, who needs to be an engaging personality willing to bring various stakeholders together. According to Sanyang et al. (2016), the main bottleneck in starting IPs was the weak facilitators, who are usually researchers with a natural science background, who had limited or no competence, skills, or experience in multi-stakeholder processes. To better facilitate IPs, facilitators and practitioners need to learn to observe, recreate, test, and perfect the IP process (Sanyang et al., 2016). Good facilitators can build mutual trust (ISPC, 2015).Initiating an IP should be based on clear and welldefined entry point(s) to allow systematic facilitation of interactions and relationships among social and economic operators with divergent interests but potentially common objectives (Sanyang et al., 2016). There were a range of entry points associated with the SRFSI IPs (Table 1). Organizing the interactions of stakeholders is the key enabler of innovation (ISPC, 2015). These interactions enable the two-way flows of information, enabling links to market opportunities, creating immediate benefits to keep participants engaged and willing to learn. Further, innovation systems thinking makes it clear that technological change rarely happens without institutional and policy change (Hall et al., 2003;Hounkonnou et al., 2012). Innovation brokers or intermediaries are key actors that required to facilitate the innovation process. IP members can utilize pre-existing networks to influence work areas (ISPC, 2015), but there also needs to be fluid membership, which depends on the innovations being pursued (Davies et al., 2015). It is important, though, to ensure that vulnerable stakeholders are not further disadvantaged through this process (Eidt et al., 2020).Having support from a project such as SRFSI gave the IPs some focus and helped to enable adoption of the CASI practices that were being tested. There were questions about the sustainability of the IPs after the SRFSI project ends. Some IPs (such as Satmile, DeHaat and Aranyak) were likely to continue because they were also receiving support from other sources, and were likely to expand their businesses. Strong links with research and extension personnel enabled adoption of practices, for example, the role that UBKV and DoA play both in Satmile and Dinhata IPs in West Bengal. The problems encountered with of the IPs in Nepal were partly due to weak institutional support from DADO and NARC. Supportive institutional conditions can assist with integration with government interventions and access to schemes and programs, further assisting with scaling (Totin et al., 2020), but this needs to be balanced to ensure existing power relations are not further strengthened to serve their own interests, rather than for broader community benefits of minorities (Eidt et al., 2020).Building on the previous point and to build sustainability after project support is withdrawn, IPs can often struggle with how to 'institutionalize' the approach more widely (ISPC, 2015). Often, what is missing is the institutional reforms to make those necessary changes happen (Struik et al., 2014). IPs are unlikely to be an effective way of achieving impact at scale unless their use is informed by wider systems thinking and conceptualization of change (ISPC, 2015). Our case studies have revealed that a range of approaches for the institutionalization of IPs could be achieved. Some IPs are small (12 participants) and others large (∼100 participants) with a range of issues being discussed and resolved. It seemed appropriate for new forms of business to emerge to take the role of an IP to help farmers solve problems (e.g. DeHaat, Satmile). Similarly, existing farmer groups (e.g. Aranyak), or new farmer groups (e.g. Dinhata) could be established, some needing assistance with establishment. Entrepreneurship exists throughout the EGP, and various business opportunities should be built upon, as found in West and Central Africa (Davies et al., 2015). It is important, particularly in a highly complex location like the EGP, that there are different models available to achieve success. The degree of engagement with a range of actors and stakeholders beyond the farm can determine the sustainability of the IP (Davies et al., 2015). Lots of different stakeholders were involved early, but their involvement has waned. Some interviewees were not concerned by this because they had already established and built strong networks, and could maintain contact. It takes time for IPs to be established, mature and deliver impacts (Pamuk et al., 2014). Older platforms (operational for 2 years) are more likely to show outcomes than younger ones (operational for 1 year), and this would be common for business models too. Platform maturity and social capital explain some of the variation in platform performance. Mutual interest(s) and benefit(s) are the key to success and sustainability of IPs. Successful IPs develop trust within the community and among stakeholders. The critical question on whether IPs should be formalized or to remain as an informal dynamic platform remains unanswered. IPs should remain informal in shape, but can become non-functional if it is not formalized (especially, in the question of convening meetings), however, some groups have credibility to call meetings (such as Satmile). It takes time; initially, it should be shouldered by a local institution (e.g. UBKV or DoA), but then by a credible private player.Continuous learning is important. The objective of monitoring, evaluation and learning (MEL) in IPs is (Boogaard et al., 2013): (1) to generate researchbased evidence for the effectiveness of IP across different contexts and (2) needed for joint learning among partners to help assess performance and to adapt the course of action accordingly. A functional IP will normally experience a series of iterative learning events, at the interface of which innovation is generated (Adekunle & Fatunbi, 2012). Through this project, we had several rounds of learning and reflection, as embodied in our original IP framework (Figure 2). Our thematic analysis here also constitutes a significant learning and reflection event for the project team. As such, we have redrawn the IP framework and nested it amongst a wider domain of the agricultural community and broader contexts (Figure 3). Providing business opportunities for the rural youth and women was also a significant learning.A key desire through the development of the IPs was to have strong benefits and outcomes for women, through direct engagement and empowerment. Rahma Adam and Maria Fay Rola-Rubzen et al. (personal communication) identified that membership in farmer and rural producer organizations could be a pathway to cultivate gender equality in both Africa and South Asia. We found that some strong benefits for women emerged, in that they felt more empowered and they felt they were in a better economic position (due to the SRFSI project and the IPs). As highlighted in the case studies for Satmile and Dinhata, the benefits for women included more economic power, more independence and social gain; they believed they can now do something for themselves (self-empowerment).Moving beyond village level case studies for broad-scale adoption of CASI Our project-related IPs enabled the adoption of CASI practices. Some IPs were operating beyond the original spatial scale of the project communities. DeHaat and Satmile worked across more communities benefiting many more farmers. CASI practices are now being adopted across the whole of West Bengal, because of connections established through the SRFSI project, a true example of enabling widespread adoption of CASI. A key reason for not adopting CASI is because of a lack of machines (Mr D, #16), but this is changing because of the creation of demand and through the IPs. However, the willingness for support by implementers, research and development leaders including policy makers is key for a functional and more vibrant IP that facilitates wider scale CASI adoption.IPs have enabled the adoption of CASI technologies and knowledge beyond the project-initiated activities (e.g. Aranyak, Satmile and DeHaat). This is in addition to general uptake of the CASI technologies because of the multiple benefits that have been demonstrated (Gathala et al., 2020a;Gathala et al., 2020b;Gathala et al., 2021;Islam et al., 2019;Sinha et al., 2019). Dixon et al. (2020) (citing Cummins 2018), showed that IP capacities and impacts varied across each region, but there were positive outcomes in terms of demonstrated changes in crop management, financing, crop input retail business services, adoption of CASI seeding systems, access to CASI machinery, knowledge, attitudes, skills, aspirations and social capital benefits. There were also broader business opportunities created because of demand for services and support (Dixon et al. 2020). These business opportunities include the DeHaat micro-entrepreneur model that has enabled participation of rural youth (opportunities for tractor drivers through to a service provider model), while Satmile has been instrumental in the capture and convergence of development programs through 'single-window' businesses.The IPs as described here in the EGP have added value over and above existing systems, particularly systems that are underperforming. There are many examples of farmer groups and service providers throughout the EGP. SRFSI has established a systems approach to enable these groups to go beyond project boundaries and to seek answers to a range of problems that 'single-issue' projects can provide whilst building trust amongst the community, youth, women and stakeholders. IPs enable stakeholders to seize opportunities quickly and to respond to a range of contextual dynamics (ISPC, 2015). We are not necessarily advocating that our approach can solve all problems, but there are some key principles that should nudge the system towards improved outcomes, which are outlined above. We strongly endorse the benefits that IPs can provide as described by Boogaard et al. (2013): support impact of research, strengthening interactions between multiple stakeholders to achieve a common objective, identifying and solving complex problems, provide an enabling environment for innovation, and contribute to overcoming institutional barriers and creating institutional change.Innovation Platforms can be a useful approach, particularly to enable the adoption of conservation agriculture-based sustainable intensification (CASI) practices. We identified that the IPs had a clear context (clear need, building on prior relationships), structure (built on existing links and networks), conduct (initial trust, bottom-up farmer-driven, strong market and business orientation), process (IPs as a change agent, brokering and capacity building and involvement by women), and performance (timely interventions, knowledge and services). A large amount of effort was required to train and support local partners to establish and initiate the IPs through our project communities. Not all IPs were successful, and this was largely the result of poor coordination, lack of budget, poor leadership, lack of CASI machines, or knowledge and skills in implementing CASI technologies. Where there was good project-related support and guidance, IPs were successful at addressing a range of issues as identified by smallholder farmers (e.g. farm advisory, technical knowledge, quality inputs, mechanization, service providers, finance/credit, pest management, market news, new business models). Different models were trialled, from establishing IPs through existing farmer groups, to new farmer groups, through to support for businesses that played the role as a successful IP. It was apparent that there had to be immediate benefits for the IPs themselves and for their farmers, and it seems that creation of business opportunities has led to much of that success. These businesses also had the added incentive to make it profitable.Our key learnings were: (1) the initial set-up and establishment of the IP was critical, as was the importance of finding a good facilitator, (2) importance of defining clear entry points to facilitate interactions to develop common objectives, (3) providing initial project support to help give focus and links with research and extension personnel, (4) look to institutionalize the IP to enable sustainability, which can occur through development of business models or building on existing networks (e.g. existing farmer groups), (5) build in continuous learning and reflection, as is good practice through iterative learning events, and (6) look for opportunities to build strong benefits for women to improve engagement and empowerment. Through this approach, it should be possible to move beyond case studies at the village level for broad-scale adoption of CASI to benefit many more farmers.The Eastern Gangetic Plains is a highly complex area with a high rate of poverty, high population pressure, poor extension systems, but also a highly complex institutional environment. Therefore, commitment, dedication and dynamism are required among stakeholders involved to identify solutions. Agriculture in the EGP is not always profitable, so many are seeking wages in other locations (Darbas et al., 2020), further exacerbating the situation. The introduction of CASI, primarily through use of zerotill farming practices and improved timing of planting and harvesting of crops has enabled more profitable farming systems and reduced labour input (Gathala et al., 2021). The IPs have enabled this to occur through the identification of problems faced by smallholder farmers and interactions with a range of stakeholders in a facilitated approach to help to overcome these problems. The IPs are contributing to overcoming institutional barriers and creating institutional change (Boogaard et al., 2013) and leading to broader adoption of CASI approaches.Table B1. Domains of change in the agricultural system with outcomes and impacts from IP activities, from the SRFSI project in the EGP for Northwest Bangladesh (Rajshahi and Rangpur Districts) (following approach of Davies et al., 2018). Partner agencies conducted a 'self-assessment' of their own IPs. "}