Four Seasons of Learning and Engaging Smallholder Farmers - icrisat

More documents

Recommendations

Info

Available technologies Although improved pigeonpea varieties were released as early as 1987, their dissemination and adoption by smallholder farmers remain low. Simtowe et al. (2009) reported that only 10% of the sampled farmers grew improved pigeonpea varieties in 2007, although 40% of them could potentially adopt improved varieties of pigeonpea if they were exposed to the varieties and had access to seed. The main constraint to the adoption of improved pigeonpea varieties has been the lack of access by farmers to sufficient quantity of good quality seed. The analysis on technology awareness indicated that about 74% of the households are aware of at least one pigeonpea variety. The awareness rate for improved pigeonpea varieties (ICP 9145 [released in 1987] and ICEAP 00040) is much lower. Of the two improved varieties, ICEAP 00040 is the most widely known by 20% of the farmers while ICP 9145 is only known by 8% of the farmers. Aside from the lack of awareness for some of the legume varieties, seed is a major constraint to adoption. Among pigeonpea varieties, Mthawajuni and ICEAP 00040 are the preferred varieties with overall rankings of 4.3 and 4.1, respectively (on a 1 to 5 scale: 1= poor and 5= excellent). The findings further indicate that most highly preferred varieties are liked for the three key traits they exhibit: high yield, early maturity and short cooking time. Interestingly, Mthawajuni, considered as a local variety, is preferred for its high yield, as well as early maturity, and shorter cooking time. Three varieties were released in Tanzania, namely Mali (ICEAP 00040, long duration), Tumia (ICEAP 00068) and Komboa (ICPL 87091) in long, medium and short duration groups, respectively. Productivity In Malawi, the average grain yield of pigeonpea for the period 2001-2006 was about 700 kg per ha. This is about half of the potential yield on station of about 1300 kg per ha for improved varieties. The observed yield gap suggests that there is scope for increasing pigeonpea productivity once farmers adopt improved varieties and if they follow recommended management practices. The low adoption of available new varieties is mainly attributed to the underdeveloped and inadequate seed systems, shortage of quality seed and lack of timely delivery, lack of awareness, and insufficient access to credit to farmers, among others. The improved varieties yielded about 1297 kg per ha in Tanzania while locals averaged around 1097 kg per ha. The net income (to land and family labor) was MK 9340 per ha in Malawi and Tsh 388,129 per ha in Tanzania. The net income from improved varieties was about 15- 18% higher than local varieties. Utilization Available estimates indicate that 65% of the pigeonpea produced is consumed on-farm, 25% is exported, while 10% is traded on the domestic markets. However, the consumption rate of 35% reported for Tanzania attributes the low on-farm consumption rates in Tanzania to the high integration of producers in the market channels. Marketing systems The actors in Malawi’s pigeonpea market include small- and large-scale producers, intermediate buyers, farmers’ associations, processors and consumers. The most prevalent grain legume marketing system involves individual farmers selling small quantities to intermediate buyers. Other prevalent marketing systems involve (i) individual farmers selling pigeonpea to local markets, (ii) farmers organizing themselves into groups which pool together their products, identify buyers (often a company) and sell at negotiated prices, and (iii) farmers selling their grain legumes to NGOs. There are several categories of buyers which include intermediate buyers, processing and packaging companies, and other consumers of grain legumes. For example, Muli Brothers Ltd, a Malawian local company, is one of the companies involved in the marketing of pigeonpea. Malawi has the largest concentration of processing companies for pigeonpea. About 40% of the pigeonpea exports to India are processed, while 60% is exported in the form of raw pigeonpea grain. There are more than twelve pigeonpea millers in Malawi with a total milling capacity 208 Engaging Smallholder Farmers | Tropical Legumes II Project
of 20,000 MT of dhal per annum. The companies processing pigeonpea include Transglobe Produce Exports, Rab Processors and Bharat Trading Company. A processing plant was installed in Blantyre by Export Trading Company Ltd in April 2009. Threats and opportunities Demand for pigeonpea continues to rise; however, there is increasing pressure on African farmers to benefit from these markets due to intense competition for export markets (mainly India) from Myanmar and other emerging producers, as well as the surging demand for other substitutes (e.g. yellow pea produced mainly in Canada and France). The findings suggest the need for faster productivity enhancement, strengthening seed delivery systems to reach farmers who continue to rely on lowyielding and disease-susceptible local varieties, and development of existing value chains and alternative pigeonpea export markets. Lo Monaco further reports that seasonal pigeonpea price variations in India offer a window of hope for African countries to export pigeonpea to India when prices are high. Lo Monaco further reports that pigeonpea prices in India are lowest in March-April, and begin to rise from July. The prices are reported to be at the peak around November-December. In Malawi pigeonpea is harvested between July and August which coincides with a period of high prices in India. Malawi could, therefore, take advantage of this window to improve its pigeonpea competitiveness. The same is the case with Tanzania; harvest season of long duration varieties in northern Tanzania coincides with lean pigeonpea availability in India. Fast-Tracking, Development, and Release of Varieties Variety development Varietal development and evaluation in the two target counties centered on target ecologies and farmer- and market-preferred grain traits. Keeping the existing biotic and/or abiotic constraints that affect productivity in the smallholder farming systems in the region, three preliminary test sites Kabete (high altitude cool environment), Kampi Ya Mawe (purely rain fed) and Kiboko (hot spot for Fusarium wilt) are integral parts of pigeonpea breeding program at ICRISAT in Kenya. ICRISAT-Nairobi with large collection of regional germplasm and on-going breeding program on three maturity groups (short, medium and long) evaluated 325 new genotypes(short-72, medium-71, long-182) at the three test locations mentioned above. Simultaneously, best lines in each maturity group based on agro-ecologies in target countries supplied and evaluated. In Tanzania, Selian and Ilonga, respectively representing Northern Zone (more emphasis on long duration) and Eastern Zone (more emphasis on medium duration) evaluated 45 medium and 85 long duration genotypes. Ilonga center also evaluated 36 short duration genotypes. Similarly, in Malawi, 45 medium and 69 long duration genotypes were evaluated at central (more focus on medium) and southern regions. Through multi-locational and multi-year evaluations, ICEAP 00673, ICEAP 01170, ICEAP 01179, ICEAP 01499/7, ICEAP 01169, ICEAP 01147, and 00671/2, possessing drought tolerance coupled with high yield were carried out under medium maturity group. In long duration-late group that are suitable for Northern Tanzania, ICEAP 01423 and ICEAP 01202 outperformed other varieties/lines. Under the long duration- normal group, ICEAP 01484, ICEAP 01511, ICEAP 01528, ICEAP 01489 and ICEAP 01485 were superior; these are suitable to Southern Malawi and mid altitude areas. Fusarium wilt is one of the major diseases, constraining pigeonpea productivity in ESA. The virulence pattern existing in ESA is entirely different from that of Asia. Further, it is believed that landraces in ESA co-evolved with virulent wilt races of ESA. Hence, the landraces collected from Tanzania, Mozambique, Kenya and Malawi were evaluated in wilt sick plots at Kiboko over the years. Wilt progression data indicated that Acc 128, 125, 130, 74 and 135 (Tanzania), Acc 72 (Mozambique) and Mthwajuni (Malawi) showed less wilt incidence and high yield; accordingly, they are more potential donors in wilt resistance breeding. Multilocational evaluation of seven genotypes at Makoka, Chitala, Bvumbwe Progress of Phase 1 209
Page 1 and 2:
Tropical Legumes II Project TROPICA
Page 3:
TROPICAL LEGUMES II Tropical Legume
Page 6 and 7:
Seed Production and Delivery System
Page 8 and 9:
Enhancing Pigeonpea Productivity an
Page 10 and 11:
NARES NASFAM NASSPA NPT NSC NSO NSS
Page 12 and 13:
TL II was implemented in 10 target
Page 14 and 15:
country governments in agricultural
Page 16 and 17:
Table 1-2: continued Variety code (
Page 18 and 19:
Table 1-3: Seed production and deli
Page 20 and 21:
As stated earlier in this chapter,
Page 22 and 23:
Table 1-5: Graduate degree students
Page 24 and 25:
Ndjeunga J, Ibro A, Cisse Y, Ben Ah
Page 26 and 27:
Project background Groundnut is one
Page 28 and 29:
Table 2-2: Performance of ICGV 0035
Page 30 and 31:
Table 2-6: Performance of ICGV 9111
Page 32 and 33:
Table 2-11: Results of 255 paired c
Page 34 and 35:
Table 2-16: Groundnut seed of vario
Page 36 and 37:
Infrastructure facilities For effic
Page 38 and 39:
Project sites Tamil Nadu The presen
Page 40 and 41:
In Karnataka, the PDKV model was pr
Page 42 and 43:
Training course A total of four tra
Page 44 and 45:
Background The yield of groundnut i
Page 46 and 47:
Table 3-2: Groundnut production tre
Page 48 and 49:
In order of importance, the largest
Page 50 and 51:
Table 3-5: Results of pair-wise com
Page 52 and 53:
Finally, the variety choices are co
Page 54 and 55:
hybridization techniques, design of
Page 56 and 57:
Figure 3-2: The Malawi model of the
Page 58 and 59:
Tanzania TL II has contributed to t
Page 60 and 61:
Annex 3-2: Performance of Virginia
Page 62 and 63:
Annex 3-4: Regional elite groundnut
Page 64 and 65:
54 Engaging Smallholder Farmers | T
Page 66 and 67:
The European Union still remains th
Page 68 and 69:
Table 4-2: Proportion of households
Page 70 and 71:
Table 4-4: Amount requested, amount
Page 72 and 73:
Table 4-6. Comparison of groundnut
Page 74 and 75:
The use of other inputs (credit, in
Page 76 and 77:
A PVS evaluation was launched in pi
Page 78 and 79:
Table 4-10: Locations and contact f
Page 80 and 81:
Table 4-11: Mean pod yield (kg per
Page 82 and 83:
99511 (Table 4-12). Most important
Page 84 and 85:
Table 4-15: Evaluation of groundnut
Page 86 and 87:
A 10-day intensive training worksho
Page 88 and 89:
Seed production of all classes A to
Page 90 and 91:
Testing seed marketing strategies A
Page 92 and 93:
as Nigeria that will face the great
Page 94 and 95:
100 Million hectares 80 60 40 20 0
Page 96 and 97:
70 73 76 79 82 85 88 91 94 97 00 03
Page 98 and 99:
In Niger, changes in cowpea product
Page 100 and 101:
irregular rainfall early in the cro
Page 102 and 103:
Table 5-4: Cowpea breeding lines se
Page 104 and 105:
Cowpea varieties released The proje
Page 106 and 107:
Table 5-8: Number of days to flower
Page 108 and 109:
Evaluation for phosphorus-use effic
Page 110 and 111:
Figure 5-8: Reactions of some culti
Page 112 and 113:
ASS6 ASS64 ASS110 ASS56 Figure 5-9:
Page 114 and 115:
Figure 5-10: Meeting of farmers’
Page 116 and 117:
The best approach to spread the imp
Page 118 and 119:
declining soil fertility, increasin
Page 120 and 121:
In Nigeria, the small seed pack app
Page 122 and 123:
112 Engaging Smallholder Farmers |
Page 124 and 125:
Phase I Social Sciences research in
Page 126 and 127:
The consequences are that the impro
Page 128 and 129:
about half of area share of land al
Page 130 and 131:
Figure 6-3: Average area (ha) per h
Page 132 and 133:
single lingering bottleneck on whic
Page 134 and 135:
In Kenya, the small seed pack appro
Page 136 and 137:
Summary, process gains and people r
Page 138 and 139:
Fast-Tracking and Technology Genera
Page 140 and 141:
Figure 6-6: Distribution of PVS sit
Page 142 and 143:
Table 6-12: Yields of fast track bu
Page 144 and 145:
Table 6-15: Farmer evaluation of in
Page 146 and 147:
While the fast track entries were r
Page 148 and 149:
Technology generation Mechanistic s
Page 150 and 151:
60 50 Rainfall Pan evaporation Maxi
Page 152 and 153:
Table 6-22: Yield under drought ind
Page 154 and 155:
Number of degree training students
Page 156 and 157:
Number of NARS technicians trained
Page 158 and 159:
Rain-out shelter in CIAT-Colombia T
Page 160 and 161:
Impact assessment and enhancement P
Page 162 and 163:
Annex 6-2: TL IIEthiopia: decentral
Page 164 and 165:
154 Engaging Smallholder Farmers |
Page 166 and 167:
farmers for enhancing their awarene
Page 168 and 169: • Designing, testing and implemen
Page 170 and 171: Andhra Pradesh The overall sample s
Page 172 and 173: Prakasam district: Crops grown in P
Page 174 and 175: Constraints in adoption of chickpea
Page 176 and 177: Cost-benefit analysis for chickpea
Page 178 and 179: Identification of farmer-and-market
Page 180 and 181: Table 7-6: Breeder Seed of differen
Page 182 and 183: Capacity building Knowledge empower
Page 184 and 185: Table 7-15: Training of local seed
Page 186 and 187: • In addition to yield, maturity
Page 188 and 189: Introduction Chickpea is grown in E
Page 190 and 191: Chickpea seed access The first majo
Page 192 and 193: Grades and standards About 75% of t
Page 194 and 195: Table 8-6: Varieties used in PVS tr
Page 196 and 197: private sector lacks the incentive
Page 198 and 199: • LZARDI-Ukiriguru: Land along wi
Page 200 and 201: • Establishing functional legume
Page 202 and 203: Table 9-1: Farmers’ preferred var
Page 204 and 205: Table 9-3: Baby trials conducted in
Page 206 and 207: Table 9-5: Reaction of pigeonpea li
Page 208 and 209: TL II focuses on farmer-participato
Page 210 and 211: Production of Breeder, Foundation,
Page 212 and 213: Mahaboobnagar and Ranga Reddy distr
Page 214 and 215: (Table 9-9 Continued) Particular To
Page 216 and 217: Chichewa) and Tanzania (Swahili). O
Page 220 and 221: and Chitedze in Malawi showed that
Page 222 and 223: Table 10-6: Various classes of qual
Page 224 and 225: Awareness activities Farmers’ fie
Page 226 and 227: Annex 10-1: Target locations for pi
Page 228 and 229: Adoption studies Adoption studies f
Page 230 and 231: 3.5 Yields (Tonnes/hectare) 3.0 2.5
Page 232 and 233: Table 11-1: Preferred soybean trait
Page 234 and 235: The up-scaling program signals the
Page 236 and 237: Across districts, TGx 1740-2F out-y
Page 238 and 239: Table 11-9: Communities and famers
Page 240 and 241: Table 11-14 Average performance of
Page 242 and 243: Table 11-15: Release notes of the t
Page 244 and 245: In Nigeria, across locations mean p
Page 246 and 247: Table 11-21: Grain yield (kg per ha
Page 248 and 249: Progress in selection of Bradyrhizo
Page 250 and 251: the major soybean producing localit
Page 252 and 253: Seed Production and Delivery System
Page 254 and 255: Table 11-29: Quantity (MT) of Found
Page 256 and 257: utilization and marketing. In Niger
Page 258 and 259: Annex 11-2: Tobit Model estimate of
Page 260: 250 Engaging Smallholder Farmers |
show all

Four Seasons of Learning and Engaging Smallholder Farmers - icrisat

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?