Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-rdxmf Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-25T23:35:37.089Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

ASSESSING THE IMPACT OF PARTICIPATORY RESEARCH IN RICE BREEDING ON WOMEN FARMERS: A CASE STUDY IN EASTERN UTTAR PRADESH, INDIA

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 January 2008

THELMA R. PARIS ,
ABHA SINGH ,
AMELIA D. CUENO  and
V. N. SINGH
THELMA R. PARIS*
Affiliation:
Social Sciences Division, International Rice Research Institute, DAPO Box 7777, Metro Manila, The Philippines
ABHA SINGH
Affiliation:
M/01 Neel Vihar Colony, Faizabad, Uttar Pradesh, India
AMELIA D. CUENO
Affiliation:
Social Sciences Division, International Rice Research Institute, DAPO Box 7777, Metro Manila, The Philippines
V. N. SINGH
Affiliation:
Narendra Deva University of Agricultural Technology (NDUAT), Kumarganj, Faizabad, Uttar Pradesh, India
*
†Corresponding author. E-mail: [email protected]
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Summary

This paper assesses farmer adoption of rice varieties and new genotypes introduced through participatory varietal selection (PVS) in villages which represent submergence- and drought/submergence-prone villages in eastern Uttar Pradesh, India. It focuses on the involvement of women farmers in participatory research for screening improved varieties for areas which suffer from abiotic stresses. It further assesses the impact on the decision-making authority (or women's empowerment) on rice varietal choice, seed acquisition and disposal, and crop management after participating in PVS trials. It suggests strategies to empower women farmers in making sound and timely decisions on farm-related matters and to enhance their roles in accelerating the adoption of new varieties.

Type
Research Article
Information
Experimental Agriculture , Volume 44 , Issue 1 , January 2008 , pp. 97 - 112
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2008

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

REFERENCES

Ashby, J. and Lilja, N. (2004). Participatory research: does it work? Evidence from participatory plant breeding. Paper presented at the 4th International Crop Congress ‘New Directions for a Diverse Planet’, Brisbane, Queensland, Australia, 26 September to 1 October 2004.Google Scholar
Atlin, G. N., Paris, T. R. and Courtois, B. (2002). Sources of variation in participatory varietal selection trials with rainfed rice: implications for the design of mother-baby trial networks. In Quantitative Analysis of Data from Participatory Methods in Plant Breeding, 36–43 (Eds Bellon, M. R. and Reeves, J.). Mexico, DF: CIMMYT.Google Scholar
Bagchi, D. (1982). Female roles in agricultural modernization: an Indian case study. Working Paper No. 10. East Lansing, Michigan: Michigan State University.Google Scholar
Banziger, M. and Diallo, A. O. (2001). Stress-tolerant maize for farmers in sub-Saharan Africa. In Maize Research Highlights 1999–2000. Mexico, DF: CIMMYT.Google Scholar
Courtois, B., Singh, R. K., Bartolome, B., Chaudhury, D., McLaren, G., Misra, C. G., Mandal, N. P., Pandey, S., Paris, T., Piggin, C., Prasad, K., Roy, A. T., Sahu, R. K., Sahu, V. N., Sarkarung, S., Sharma, S. K., Singh, A., Singh, H. N., Singh, O. N., Singh, N. K., Singh, R. K., Singh, S., Sinha, P. K., Sisodia, B. V. S. and Takur, R. (2001). Comparing farmers and breeders ranking in varietal selection for low-input environments: a case of rainfed rice in eastern India. Euphytica 122:537–501.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dalton, T. and Guei, R. (2003). Productivity gains from rice genetic enhancements in West African ecologies. World Development 31:359–374.Google Scholar
de Groote, H., Siambi, M., Friesen, D. and Diallo, A. (2002). Identifying farmers' preferences for new maize varieties in eastern Africa. In Quantitative Analysis of Data from Participatory Methods in Plant Breeding, 82–102 (Eds Bellon, M. R. and Reeves, J.). Mexico, DF: CIMMYT.Google Scholar
Farnworth, C. R. and Jiggins, J. (2003). Participatory plant breeding and gender analysis. Participatory Plant Breeding Monograph No. 4. Cali, Colombia: CGIAR Systemwide Program on Participatory Research and Gender Analysis for Technology Development and Institutional Innovation.Google Scholar
Feldstein, H. S. (1999). Methodology issues in differentiating users of new technologies: participatory research and gender analysis for technology development. In Frontiers in Participatory Research and Gender Analysis, 75–85. Proceedings of the International Seminar on Participatory Research and Gender Analaysis, 11–14 September 1996 CIAT, Columbia.Google Scholar
Gridley, H. (2002). Participatory varietal selection in West and Central Africa. In Quantitative Analysis of Data from Participatory Methods in Plant Breeding, 132–133 (Eds Bellon, M. R. and Reeves, J.). Mexico, DF: CIMMYT.Google Scholar
Hossain, M., Bose, M. L. and Ahmad, A. (2004). Nature and impact of women's participation in economic activities in rural Bangladesh: insights from household surveys. CPD–IRRI Policy Brief 7. Dhaka, Bangladesh: IRRI.Google Scholar
Johnson, N., Lilja, N. and Ashby, J. (2000). Using participatory research and gender analysis in natural resource management. Working Document No. 10. Cali, Colombia: CGIAR Systemwide Program on Participatory Research and Gender Analysis for Technology Development and Institutional Innovation.Google Scholar
Kabeer, N. (1999). The conditions and consequences of choices: reflections on the measurement of women's empowerment, UNRISD Discussion Paper DP108. Geneva: United Nations Research Institute for Social Development.Google Scholar
Lilja, N. and Ashby, J. A. (1999). Types of gender analysis in natural resource management and plant breeding. PRGA Working Document No. 8. Cali, Colombia: CGIAR Systemwide Program on Participatory Research and Gender Analysis for Technology Development and Institutional Innovation.Google Scholar
Lilja, N. and Dalton, T. (1997). Developing African public goods: rice – varietal selection in Côte d'Ivoire. A discussion paper presented at the American Agricultural Economics meeting, Salt Lake City, USA.Google Scholar
Lilja, N. and Erenstein, O. (2002). Institutional process impacts of participatory rice improvement and gender analysis in West Africa. PRGA Working Document 20 Cali, Colombia: CGIAR Systemwide Program on Participatory Research and Gender Analysis for Technology Development and Institutional Innovation.Google Scholar
Lilja, N. and Johnson, N. (2001). Guide to impact assessment of participatory research and gender analysis. Working Document No. 7. Cali, Columbia: CGIAR Systemwide Program on Participatory Research and Gender Analysis for Technology Development and Institutional Innovation.Google Scholar
Monyo, E. S., Ipinge, S. A., Heinrich, G. M. and Chinhema, E (2001). Participatory breeding: does it make a difference? Lessons from Namibian pearl millet farmers. In Assessing the Impact of Participatory Research and Gender Analysis, Chapter 11 (Eds Lilja, N., Ashby, J. and Sperling, L.). Cali, Columbia: CGIAR Systemwide Program on Participatory Research and Gender Analysis.Google Scholar
Morris, M. L. and Bellon, M. R. (2004). Participatory plant breeding: opportunities and challenges for the international crop improvement system. Euphytica 136:21–35.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Paris, T. R., Singh, A., Hossain, M. and Luis, J. (2000). Using gender analysis in characterizing and understanding rainfed lowland rice environments. In Characterising and Understanding Rainfed Environments, 339–370 (Eds Tuong, T. P., Kam, S. P., Wade, L., Pandey, S., Bouman, B. A. M. and Hardy, B.). Proceedings of the International Workshop on Characterising and Understanding Rainfed Environments., 5–9 December 1999 Bali, Indonesia. Los Baños, The Philippines: International Rice Research Institute.Google Scholar
Paris, T. R., Singh, A. and Luis, J. (2001). Listening to male and female farmers in rice varietal selection: a case in eastern India. In An Exchange of Experiences from South and Southeast Asia. Proceedings of the International Symposium on Participatory Plant Breeding and Participatory Plant Genetic Resource Enhancement, Pokhara, Nepal, 1–5 May 2000. Cali, Columbia: CIAT.Google Scholar
Paris, T., Singh, A. and Luis, J. (2005). Impact of male out-migration on rice household economy and gender roles: a case in eastern Uttar Pradesh, India. Economic and Political Weekly 40 (25):2522–2529.Google Scholar
Snapp, S. (1999). Mother and baby trials: a novel trial design being tried in Malawi. TARGET (The Newsletter of the Soil Fertility Research Network for Maize-Based Cropping Systems in Malawi and Zimbabwe) January 1999 issue. Zimbabwe: Centro Internacional de Mejoramiento de Maiz y Trigo (CIMMYT).Google Scholar
Snapp, S. (2002). Quantifying evaluation of technologies: the mother and baby trial design. In Quantitative Analysis of Data from Participatory Methods in Plant Breeding, 9–16 (Eds Bellon, M. R. and Reeves, J.). Mexico, DF: CIMMYT.Google Scholar
Witcombe, J. R., Joshi, K. D., Gyawali, S. and Subedi, A. (2002). An impact assessment of participatory crop improvement in the low-altitude regions of Nepal. In Plant Sciences Programme Annual Report, 11–18, CAZS, Bangor, UK.Google Scholar
White, S. (1992). Arguing with the Crocodile. Dhaka: Zed Books, University Press.Google Scholar