CGIAR Research Program on Grain Legumes: Proposal - Library

More documents

Recommendations

Info

In Ghana, Sanders (1994) reported on a new variety, Vallenga, which was released in 1987 andintroduced on more than 20,000 ha in the north already in early 1990s. In 2007, Abatania et al.(2000) found adoption estimates of 16% of the cowpea area in the Northern and Upper Westregions. The continued dominance of old improved varieties that were introduced several decadesago means that adoption studies should distinguish between old and new improved varieties. Thislack of distinction probably explains the significant variability in adoption estimates for particularregions and countries. In northern Senegal, for example, Schwartz et al. (1990) found that theintroduction of an early maturing cowpea variety in 1985 doubled the area sown to cowpeas andincreased the national production from the previous 15-year average of 17,800 to 66,000 tons inthat year. Boys et al. (2007), on the other hand, found that less than 4% of the sample householdssurveyed in 2004 adopted new cowpea varieties. In Burkina Faso, Sanders (1994) found that alreadyby 1992 diffusion of eight new cowpea varieties was almost 100% of the cowpea area.The estimated yield differentials between improved and traditional cowpea varieties vary greatlydepending on the production techniques. In Niger and Cameroon, the yield advantage wasestimated to range from 25 to 46% depending on the region (Sterns and Bernsten 1994; Mazzucatoand Ly 1994). The yield advantage of the most recent NARS releases in Senegal was about 40% in onfarmtrials over older improved varieties. The available evidence of economic returns to cowpearesearch show positive returns ranging from as low as 3% in northern Cameroon to as high as 32–92% in Senegal, suggesting that research and technology transfer activities on cowpeas in Africahave contributed to increased productivity of the agricultural sector in several countries. Thebenefits of cowpea research are also in the form of gains due to maintaining yields over time in anincreasingly difficult environment. Sanders (1994) estimates about 25-50% aversion in yield loss dueto the development and diffusion of improved varieties. According to his estimates for Burkina Fasoand Mali, the annual benefits to maintaining farmers’ yields ranged from $0.8 to $4.8 million peryear between 1984 and 1992 with the most conservative assumption of 25% yield decline in theabsence of new varieties.Expert survey evidence of adoption of improved cowpeaIn 2010, IITA carried out a survey of national cowpea improvement programs in 16 countries, whichtogether account for over 95% of the total cowpea production in Sub-Saharan Africa (Alene et al.2012). Table 7 presents the expert estimates of adoption of improved cowpea varieties in Sub-Saharan Africa. The results showed that improved varieties accounted for an estimated 23% of thetotal cowpea area in Sub-Saharan Africa. However, the average adoption estimate of 23% for Sub-Saharan Africa masks important variations across sub-regions. In West and Central Africa, forexample, nearly 50% of the cowpea area is under improved varieties, compared with 16% in Eastand Southern Africa. The highest adoption rates are recorded in D.R. Congo, Ghana, Cameroon,Guinea, Benin, Niger, and Mali where the share of improved cowpea area is between 50 and 87% ofthe total area under cowpea cultivation. Six countries (i.e. Zimbabwe, Togo, Nigeria, Tanzania,Senegal and Cote d'Ivoire) are classified in the middle category for improved cowpea adoption inAfrica. These countries have reached adoption rates of at least 20% but fall below 50% of totalcowpea area. Nigeria has largest number of released varieties and relatively higher researchexpenditures committed towards cowpea improvement programs in Africa but the country has amodest cowpea adoption rate estimated at 39% compared to other countries in the high-adoptioncategory.Grain Legumes – Appendix 9. Adoption successes and constraints 201
Table 7: Adoption of improved cowpea varieties in Sub-Saharan Africa, 2009CountryImproved varieties(% cowpea area)IITA-related varieties(% cowpea area)Benin 51 45Burkina Faso 10 5Cameroon 71 50D.R. Congo 87 51Ghana 82 78Guinea 62 60Malawi 10 10Mali 53 31Mozambique 11 9Niger 9 3Nigeria 39 28Senegal 27 19Tanzania 31 31Togo 40 40Uganda 15 15Zambia 17 11All 24 16Sub-Saharan Africa 23 16The lowest adoption rates were reported for Malawi, Burkina Faso, Mozambique, and Zambia withrates below 20%. These countries except Mozambique have released few improved cowpea varietiesand as such farmers have limited opportunities for selecting suitable/elite varieties. The pool ofavailable improved varieties may not substantially address the needs of the cowpea producers andconsumers in the changing biotic and socio-cultural environment. Malawi, Mozambique and Zambiahave low to medium research expenditures committed towards cowpea improvement activities. It isnoteworthy that apart from the Bean/Cowpea CRSP research program, no other major collaborativeresearch program has been implemented in southern Africa that is of equal magnitude to thoseimplemented in West and Central Africa.The popular varieties in terms of farmer adoption are IT82E-32 covering 23% of the total cowpeaarea in Ghana, 11% in Benin and 2% in Cameroon followed by VITA-7 accounting for 22% of totalcowpea area in Guinea and 13% in D.R. Congo. The adoption rate for variety IT81D-1137 is estimatedat 17% in D.R. Congo and 14% in Benin. These varieties are attractive to the farmers because theyembrace multiple attributes such as high yield potential, disease tolerance, and short maturityperiod. Other varieties with high single-country adoption rates are IT81D-985 or BR1 (30%) and LoriNiebe (18%) in Cameroon; IT82E-16 (8%) in Benin; H36 (33%) and Diamant (11%) in D.R. Congo;IT87D-1951 or Asetenapa (19%), ITXP-148-1 (Apagbaala) (14%), IT97K-499-35/Songtra (10%), andIT95K-193-2 (Bawutawuta) (6%) in Ghana; IT83S-899 (11%) in Guinea; Korobalen (IT89KD-374) (18%),Sangaraka (IT89KD-245) (12%), Yere wolo (PRL 73) (11%), and Djemani (PBL 22) (7%) in Mali. In Nigerthe famous improved cowpea varieties are KVX30-309-6G (10%), IT89KD-374-57 (9%), IT90K372-1-2(8%), TN27-80 (7%) and TN5-78 (7%).Groundnut in Sub-Saharan Africa and South AsiaFew studies have examined the adoption rates of improved groundnut varieties in sub-SaharanAfrica. Most of these studies have been undertaken in and around project/program interventionsites. Adoption rates vary significantly from zero in Senegal to 59% in Zambia. A baseline householdsurvey of adoption of improved groundnut varieties, conducted as part of the Groundnut SeedGrain Legumes – Appendix 9. Adoption successes and constraints 202
Page 4:
AcknowledgmentsThe eleven core part
Page 7 and 8:
ISRAITITASITPGRFAKARIKMKSLACLIFDCMA
Page 9 and 10:
One, farmers in some regions have s
Page 11:
• Central and Western Asia and No
Page 14 and 15:
Justification of a CRP on Grain Leg
Page 16 and 17:
Highest levels of poverty/hunger an
Page 18 and 19:
That the consumption of milk, eggs,
Page 20 and 21:
system level; while for policy-econ
Page 22 and 23:
Table 5. Summaries of pan-legume co
Page 24 and 25:
Table 6. Estimated gross value of p
Page 26 and 27:
Crops addressed are chickpea, pigeo
Page 28 and 29:
appear to share common mechanisms o
Page 30 and 31:
new technologies is affected by the
Page 32 and 33:
ProductLines and Strategic Componen
Page 34 and 35:
Product Lines (PLs)Addressing abiot
Page 36 and 37:
Activities• Identify potential re
Page 38 and 39:
screening. Comparative studies on p
Page 40 and 41:
Increased water use efficiency (WUE
Page 42 and 43:
• Short-duration, drought toleran
Page 44 and 45:
Table 13. Targeted countries for Pr
Page 46 and 47:
an Integrated Pest Management (IPM)
Page 48 and 49:
Impact pathwayFor improved varietie
Page 50 and 51:
• Multi-environment evaluation of
Page 52 and 53:
Table 18. Targeted countries for Pr
Page 54 and 55:
Promotion of seed business ventures
Page 56 and 57:
producers and input and product mar
Page 58 and 59:
target production domains and valid
Page 60 and 61:
systems must be employed to adequat
Page 62 and 63:
characterization and development of
Page 64 and 65:
Innovative contributionsPublic-priv
Page 66 and 67:
Harvest destination:Bean -LACBean-A
Page 68 and 69:
Promoting institutional innovations
Page 70 and 71:
The CRP will produce diverse types
Page 72 and 73:
Student scholarshipsStudent scholar
Page 74 and 75:
2010). The availability of high yie
Page 76 and 77:
disseminate the technologies. On a
Page 78 and 79:
Gender StrategyRationaleLegumes are
Page 80 and 81:
uilding activities will lead to inc
Page 82 and 83:
Gender considerate skills and knowl
Page 84 and 85:
InnovationsGrain Legumes constitute
Page 86 and 87:
Utilize bio-economic modeling to un
Page 88 and 89:
oles to play in (i) providing viabl
Page 90 and 91:
male and female farmer’s prioriti
Page 92 and 93:
evaluation in crop-livestock system
Page 94 and 95:
CRP is appropriately reflected in t
Page 96 and 97:
As the CRP will work with a wide ra
Page 98 and 99:
Mitigating RisksGrain Legumes is in
Page 100 and 101:
• Crop and region specific post-h
Page 102 and 103:
The CRP is projecting a budget of U
Page 104 and 105:
Costs for gender research and analy
Page 106 and 107:
Bhullar NK, Street K, Mackay M, Yah
Page 108 and 109:
ICARDA. 2010. Ethiopia and ICARDA.
Page 110 and 111:
Pande S. 2007. Prospects of legumes
Page 112 and 113:
365. http://dx.doi.org/10.1071/FP11
Page 114 and 115:
AppendicesAppendix 1. Profiles of t
Page 116 and 117:
(68,000 ha) (Saxena et al. 2010). W
Page 118 and 119:
Appendix 2. Profiles of Grain Legum
Page 120 and 121:
Latin America and the Caribbean (LA
Page 122 and 123:
Appendix 3. Global trends in grain
Page 124 and 125:
WCA: COWPEAArea trend: t t-value: 1
Page 126 and 127:
Direct consumption trend: t-value:
Page 128 and 129:
ESA: CHICKPEAArea trend: t-value: 7
Page 130 and 131:
Food consumption trend: : t-value:
Page 132 and 133:
Production trend: t-value: 5.26 sig
Page 134 and 135:
ESA: PIGEONPEAArea trend: t-value:
Page 136 and 137:
Food trend: t-value: 5.07 significa
Page 138 and 139:
SSEA: GROUNDNUTArea trend: t-value:
Page 140 and 141:
Production trend: t-value: 8.6 sign
Page 142 and 143:
LAC: DRY BEANArea trend: t-value: 0
Page 144 and 145:
CWANA: CHICKPEAArea trend: t-value:
Page 146:
SyriaTunisiaGrain Legumes - Appendi
Page 149 and 150:
MoroccooCWANA: LENTILSAreatrend: t-
Page 151 and 152:
MoroccooTurkeyGrain Legumes - Appen
Page 153 and 154:
In order to make an income group wi
Page 155 and 156:
In view of the nutritional status a
Page 157 and 158: Crop/constraint Asia ESA WCA CWANA
Page 159 and 160: ChickpeaCentral and West Asia and N
Page 161 and 162: Figure 4: Area, demand andd supply
Page 163 and 164: Figure 8: Area, demand and supply p
Page 165 and 166: Figure12: Area, demand and supply p
Page 167 and 168: Figure16: Area, demand and supply p
Page 169 and 170: Figure 18: Area, demand andd supply
Page 171 and 172: Table 1. Values of key parameters u
Page 173 and 174: 35%30%25%20%15%10%5%0%2014201520162
Page 175 and 176: Measure / RegionTable 2. Summary me
Page 177 and 178: Table 3. Potential impacts of cowpe
Page 179 and 180: Table 5. Potential impacts of groun
Page 181 and 182: Table 6. Potential impact of invest
Page 183 and 184: Table 8. Summary of the potential i
Page 185 and 186: Table 11. A summary of the potentia
Page 187 and 188: Country Chickpeas Groundnut Lentils
Page 189 and 190: these genes have been incorporated
Page 191 and 192: Control of flower thrips (Megalurot
Page 193 and 194: maize in both locations in the two
Page 195 and 196: WeedsWeeds (parasitic and non-paras
Page 197 and 198: Butare L, Rao IM, Lepoivre P, Polan
Page 199 and 200: Khalil S, Kharrat M, Malhotra RS, S
Page 201 and 202: Sanginga N and Woolmer PN (eds.). 2
Page 203 and 204: Visalakshmi V, Ranga Rao GV and Arj
Page 205 and 206: them, or how to manage them). The u
Page 207: Grain Legumes should take into acco
Page 211 and 212: 2005 rainy season. In neighboring a
Page 213 and 214: Machine harvestingManual harvest of
Page 215 and 216: Hangen LA and Bennink MR. 2003. Con
Page 217 and 218: Appendix 10. Product Line logframes
Page 219 and 220: Product Line 2. Heat tolerant chick
Page 221 and 222: Output targets Milestones Target re
Page 231 and 232: Product Line 6. Extra-early chickpe
Page 233 and 234: Product Line 7. Herbicide tolerant,
Page 235 and 236: Product Line 8. Pigeonpea hybrids a
show all

CGIAR Research Program on Grain Legumes: Proposal - Library

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?