Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-8ctnn Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-22T21:46:12.604Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Rethinking the Farmer's Role in Plant Breeding: Local Bean Experts and On-station Selection in Rwanda

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  03 October 2008

Louise Sperling ,
Michael E. Loevinsohn  and
Beatrice Ntabomvura
Louise Sperling
Affiliation:
Great Lakes Bean Program, International Center for Tropical Agriculture, BP 259, Butare, Rwanda
Michael E. Loevinsohn
Affiliation:
Applied Ecology Consultants, BP 259, Butare, Rwanda
Beatrice Ntabomvura
Affiliation:
Institut des Sciences Agronomiques du Rwanda, BP 138, Butare, Rwanda
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Summary

Varietal selection is particularly difficult for very heterogeneous environments where farmers have a range of preferences. To address these issues in Rwanda, local bean experts, generally women, are invited to the research station to assess cultivars and to select those they prefer for their plots. Farmers use observed yield as only one of several criteria to predict varietal performance in their more stressed home environments. The varieties they choose are often higher yielding on-farm and are retained longer by farmers than those selected by the breeders. The results of early farmer involvement also compare favourably with those of the standard breeding programme in terms of enhanced genetic diversity and reduced research costs. There are few pre-conditions for developing such a client-driven breeding programme.

Papel del agricultor en la selección de variedades para una estación inaestigación

Type
Research Article
Information
Experimental Agriculture , Volume 29 , Issue 4 , October 1993 , pp. 509 - 519
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1993

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

Ashby, J. (1987). The effects of different types of farmer participation on the management of on-farm trials. Agricultural Administration and Extension 25:235–252.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Biggs, S. (1989). Resource-poor farmer participation in research: a synthesis of experiences from nine National Agricultural Research Systems. ISNAR: OFCOR Comparative Study Paper No. 3.Google Scholar
CIAT (1991). Annual Report. Bean Program. Cali, Colombia: Centro Internacional de Agricultura Tropical.Google Scholar
CIAT (1990). Annual Report. Bean Improvement. Cali, Colombia: Centro International de Agricultura Tropical.Google Scholar
Davis, J. (1990). Breeding for intercrops—with special attention to beans for intercropping with maize. In Research Methods for Cereal/Legume Intercropping. Proceedings of a Workshop on Research Methods for Cereal/Legume Intercropping in Eastern and Southern Africa. Lilongwe, Malawi, 23–27 January 1988 (Eds. Waddington, S. R., Palmer, A. F. E. and Edge, O. T.).Google Scholar
Galt, D. (1989). Joining FSR to commodity programme breeding efforts earlier: increasing plant breeding efficiency in Nepal. Network Paper 8. London: Overseas Development Institute.Google Scholar
Haugerud, A. (1987). Social science and the management and selection of agricultural technology in Rwanda. In Social Science Perspectives in Managing Agricultural Technology (Eds. Moock, J. and Groenfeldt, D.). The Rockefeller Foundation.Google Scholar
Maurya, D. M., Bottrall, A. & Farrington, J. (1988). Improved livelihoods, genetic diversity and farmer participation: a strategy for rice breeding in rainfed areas of India. Experimental Agriculture 24:311–320.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Merrill-Sands, D., Ewell, P., Briggs, S. & McAllister, J. (1989). Issues in institutionalizing on-farm client-oriented research: a review of experiences from nine national agricultural research systems. Quarterly Journal of International Agriculture 28 (3/4):279–300.Google Scholar
Nyabyenda, P. (1986). Programme de recherche objectifs et methodologie ISAR-Rwanda. In Production et Amélioration du Haricot dans les Pays des Grands Lacs. Institut de Recherche Agronomique et Zootechnique de la Communauté Economiques des Pays des Grands Lacs.Google Scholar
Peto, R., Pike, M. C., Armitage, P., Breslow, N., Cox, D. R., Doward, S. V., Mantel, N., McPherson, K., Peto, J. & Smith, P. G. (1977). Design and analysis of randomized clinical trials requiring prolonged observation of each patient. II. Analysis and examples. British Journal of Cancer 35:1–39.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Prain, G., Uribe, F. & Scheidegger, U. (1992). “The friendly potato”: farmer selection of potato varieties for all occasions. In Diversity, Farmer Knowledge and Sustainabilíty (Eds.Moock, J. M. and Rhoades, R. E.). Ithaca, New York: Cornell University Press.Google Scholar
Siegel, S. (1956). Nonparametric Statistics for the Behavioral Sciences. Tokyo: McGraw-Hill Kogakusha.Google Scholar
Simmonds, N. W. (1991). Selection for local adaptation in a plant breeding programme. Theoretical and Applied Genetics 82:363–367.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Scheidegger, U. C. & Sperling, L. (1991). La participation paysanne dans la sélection du haricot. In Actes du Sixième Séminaire Régional sur le Haricot dans les Pays des Grands Lacs. Kigali, le 21–25 Janvier 1991. Cali, Colombia: CIAT.Google Scholar
Sperling, L. (1992). Farmer participation and the development of bean varieties in Rwanda. In Diversity, Farmer Knowledge and Sustainability (Eds. Moock, J. and Rhoades, R.). Ithaca, New York: Cornell University Press.Google Scholar
Sperling, L. & Loevinsohn, M. (1993). The dynamics of adoption: distribution and mortality of bean varieties among small farmers in Rwanda. Agricultural Systems 41:441–453.CrossRefGoogle Scholar