Skip to main content

CGIAR breeding programs need more than just tech upgrades — they need change management

Shivali Sharma (right), pre-breeding research leader at ICRISAT, explains pearl millet pollination techniques to visitors at the ICRISAT campus. (Photo: Michael Major/Crop Trust)
Shivali Sharma (right), pre-breeding research leader at ICRISAT, explains pearl millet pollination techniques to visitors at the ICRISAT campus. (Photo: Michael Major/Crop Trust)

Did you know that vehicles with steering wheels on the left are often cheaper to make than right hand-drive cars? They are mass-produced in much larger batches. But many drivers and governments were just unwilling to change to this dominant design.

We humans are not so adept at change. Instead of embracing novel ways of thinking, we’d rather stick to the old ones. We cling onto what is safe, what is familiar or what we are already good at. We see this in the workplace, in our personal lives and in society as a whole. The world still can’t agree on using the metric system!

Within the domain of plant breeding, we are both driving and responding to rapid change. It is mesmerizing to visualize the changes gene editing is about to deliver, not to mention what genomic prediction is already delivering. We are being challenged on every single aspect of plant breeding.

Change of a different sort is about to cascade through the world’s main network of agricultural research centers — which includes centers at the global forefront of plant breeding. CGIAR is embarking on a transition into a much more integrated One CGIAR organization.

An overarching goal of this integration is no other than to ensure breeding improvement plans — and the changes they aim to drive — are implemented as seamlessly and quickly as possible. The Excellence in Breeding Platform is both driving and supporting this change among CGIAR centers and international and national partners.

The case for change in plant breeding programs

Plant breeders are in fact missing some vital opportunities. For example, there continues to be a rather limited use of real market insights to inform resource allocation within programs. This in turn results in a selection of traits weighted towards what breeders and associated scientists think are needed, which may not necessarily meet actual market needs.

With new goals and structures foisting change on breeding programs, their success depends on one thing above all else: savvy change management. Fortunately, there are some steps we can take to manage change well.

1. Drive out complacency with a sense of urgency

Most change management efforts fail when insufficient urgency is built early enough in the process. But this urgency can be the most effective antidote against complacency. Organizations that have either secured a very dominant and successful position in the market, or lack effective and threatening competition, can very easily slide into a sense of self-righteousness and an inward-looking perspective.

Although CGIAR breeding efforts could be thought of as an example of the latter — lacking competitors — seasoned managers in industry and marketing like to think that “there is no such thing as a lack of competition.” Funding, for one, is by nature a competition. Funding agencies might look at other fields and/or players to support if they deliver a higher return on investment, not only financially but also socially.

The impact of high complacency cultures can be seen in plant breeding. For instance, a rather large number of breeding programs still lack a high enough rate of what is called “elite x elite crosses.” Unless breeding pipelines run on such crosses, they achieve less than optimal genetic gains and delivery at the field. And donors get a lesser return on investment. Moreover, this complacency means not delivering the best varieties smallholder farmers need to support their families.

The parable of the slowly boiling frog is oftentimes used to portray the consequences of complacency. In any complacency-filled organization, no matter how intelligent, educated and well-intentioned its members are, change is often dead on arrival.

You may already have an inkling of what it takes to create enough urgency: bold and sometimes risk-taking leadership. For instance, some years ago, Unilever was one of the first global companies to decouple its financial growth from its environmental footprint, and it established the then outrageous sounding goal of halving its environmental footprint by 2030.

A good urgency-raising example that could inspire our line of work may be this one: let’s renew at least 50% of a current portfolio of cultivars within the next five years in a given Target Population of Environments (TPE). A second could be: let’s deploy sparse testing in at least 90% of field trials within six months.

To create urgency we need to articulate the gap between opportunities available, and the current ability of the organization to pursue such opportunities. But we must also spell out — upfront — the risks if we don’t bridge such a gap.

2. Build a guiding coalition

These days, driving change is too complex to be led by single individuals. We live in fast-paced times. And situations are full of evident and not-so-evident links among myriad moving pieces. We cannot expect one individual to be able to gather enough information fast enough, and then to consistently make the right decisions. Instead, a guiding coalition is needed, with sufficient determination, commitment and thought diversity. Such coalitions require five traits: a position of power, credibility, leadership, expertise, and individual egos held at bay. Once such teams are assembled, the main drivers of success are having a common goal, and enough trust and safety so the real issues are unearthed and addressed.

3. Develop a vision and a strategy

When leadership tries to drive change by applying dated approaches such as micromanagement or an authoritarian stance, plans are likely to fail upon arrival. These methods may breed compliance, but certainly not a fierce and sincere commitment. Because of the extreme uncertainty and organizational survival being at stake, crafting a vision plays a bigger role during change management than during business as usual.

Two main aspects of developing a vision are especially relevant to CGIAR breeding programs.

Firstly, academic and R&D organizations often keep doing what has worked well in the past. But any change management effort ought to be very explicit about what it is known as “strategic dismissal.” This is the ability to stop and phase out activities no longer providing enough value, or where the outcomes of which are not wanted/needed by funding agencies or beneficiaries. For instance, programs investing in developing hybrid cultivars for the first time in a crop could downsize previous cultivar development efforts. Alternatively, they could scale down efforts in countries that have their own strong local breeding programs. These changes are no small feat, but the inability to phase out activities clashes with the very first posit of any effective strategy: don’t just “keep doing.”

Secondly, a vision provides an invisible fabric that pulls all efforts together in a cohesive way. Therefore, its scope is much wider than most people realize, stretching across strategies, plans, and the budgets and means needed to exert change at the depth and speed needed.

4. Encourage constructive confrontation

One characteristic of a complacent organization stands out: a rather low-candor, low-confrontation culture. No one needs excessively high-confrontation, “take no prisoners”, toxic cultures. But low-confrontation cultures tend to breed under-performance, status quo maintenance and deeply ingrained complacency. And perhaps the most negative consequence is that they fail to instill a strong enough sense of ownership and accountability among its members.

Change is coming (it has arrived already…)

Yes, change is hard, but it is coming. Maybe not for drivers of right-hand drive cars. But certainly for those who want to modernize and optimize their breeding programs. Now is the time for us to invest in a smart and forward-looking change management processes.

Hugo Campos is the Chair of the CGIAR Excellence in Breeding (EiB) Platform Steering Committee and Director of Research for the International Potato Center (CIP). This blog was developed with support from EiB’s communications lead Adam Hunt.This is the second in a series of blogs on change in the breeding domain. See the first.

Supporting smallholder farmers to better combat drought

A farmer in Banke district during monsoon season drought in 2017. (Photo: Anton Urfels/CIMMYT)
A farmer in Banke district during monsoon season drought in 2017. (Photo: Anton Urfels/CIMMYT)

Researchers from the Cereal Systems Initiative for South Asia (CSISA) project have been exploring the drivers of smallholder farmers’ underuse of groundwater wells to combat in-season drought during the monsoon rice season in Nepal’s breadbasket — the Terai region.

Their study, published in Water International, finds that several barriers inhibit full use of groundwater irrigation infrastructure.

Inconsistent rainfall has repeatedly damaged paddy crops in Nepal over the last years, even though most agricultural lands are equipped with groundwater wells. This has contributed to missed national policy targets of food self-sufficiency and slow growth in cereal productivity.

A key issue is farmers’ tendency to schedule irrigation very late in an effort to save their crops when in-season drought occurs. By this time, rice crops have already been damaged by lack of water and yields will be decreased. High irrigation costs, especially due to pumping equipment rental rates, are a major factor of this aversion to investment. Private irrigation is also a relatively new technology for many farmers making water use decisions.

After farmers decide to irrigate, queuing for pumpsets, tubewells, and repairs and maintenance further increases irrigation delays. Some villages have only a handful of pumpsets or tubewells shared between all households, so it can take up to two weeks for everybody to irrigate.

To address these issues, CSISA provides suggestions for three support pathways to support farmers in combatting monsoon season drought:

1. Raise awareness of the importance of timely irrigation

To avoid yield penalties and improve operational efficiency through better-matched pumpsets, CSISA has raised awareness through agricultural FM radio broadcasts on the strong relationship between water stress and yield penalties. Messages highlight the role of the plough pan in keeping infiltration rates low and encouraging farmers to improve irrigation scheduling. Anecdotal evidence suggests that improved pump selection may decrease irrigation costs by up to 50%, and CSISA has initiated follow-up studies to develop recommendations for farmers.

Social interaction is necessary for purchasing fuel, transporting and installing pumps, or sharing irrigation equipment. These activities pose risks of COVID-19 exposure and transmission and therefore require farmers to follow increased safety and hygiene practices, which may cause further delays to irrigation. Raising awareness about the importance of timely irrigation therefore needs to go hand in hand with the promotion of safe and hygienic irrigation practices. This information has been streamlined into CSISA’s ongoing partnerships and FM broadcasts.

2. Improve community-level water markets through increased focus on drought preparedness and overcoming financial constraints

Farmers can save time by taking an anticipatory approach to the terms and conditions of rentals, instead of negotiating them when cracks in the soil are already large. Many farmers reported that pump owners are reluctant to rent out pumpsets if renters cannot pay up front. Given the seasonality of cash flows in agriculture, pro-poor and low interest credit provisions are likely to further smoothen community-level water markets.

Quantified ethnographic-decision tree based on households’ surveys of smallholder decision to use groundwater irrigation in Nepal’s Terai. (Graphic: Urfels et al. (2020))
Quantified ethnographic-decision tree based on households’ surveys of smallholder decision to use groundwater irrigation in Nepal’s Terai. (Graphic: Urfels et al., 2020)

3. Prioritize regional investment

The study shows that delay factors differ across districts and that selectively targeted interventions will be most useful to provide high returns to investments. For example, farmers in Kailali reported that land access issues — due to use of large bullock carts to transport pumpsets — and fuel shortages constitute a barrier for 10% and 39% of the farmers, while in Rupandehi, maintenance and tubewell availability were reported to be of greater importance.

As drought is increasingly threatening paddy production in Nepal’s Terai region, CSISA’s research shows that several support pathways exist to support farmers in combatting droughts. Sustainable water use can only be brought up to a scale where it benefits most farmers if all available tools including electrification, solar pumps and improved water level monitoring are deployed to provide benefits to a wide range of farmers.

Read the study:
Drivers of groundwater utilization in water-limited rice production systems in Nepal

When mothers learn from babies

Kiyasi Gwalale walking through her baby trial in Chebvute, Masvingo. Photo: C. Thierfelder/CIMMYT
Kiyasi Gwalale walking through her baby trial in Chebvute, Masvingo. Photo: C. Thierfelder/CIMMYT

It was an early morning on March 12, 2020, when we entered Kiyasi Gwalale’s field in the Chebvute area of Masvingo, southern Zimbabwe. Gwalale participates in the Zambuko Livelihoods Initiative, funded by the United States Agency for International Development (USAID).

The Zambuko initiative aims to increase rural resilience against the negative effects of climate change. More than 70% of smallholders in Zimbabwe farm on sandy soils that are low in soil fertility and are increasingly affected by the vagaries of climate. The Gwalale family is an example of one of the millions affected.

In Chebvute, the International Maize and Wheat Improvement Center (CIMMYT) has established trials to test the effectiveness and productivity of conservation agriculture and climate resilient crop species since 2018. This has been in the form of “mother and baby” trials.

A traditional tool of breeders, “mother trials” show different technologies to farmers to allow them to select the best option. In Chebvute, these trials were amplified to demonstrate farmers’ crop management practices such as conservation agriculture, crop rotation with legumes and different drought-resilient crop varieties.

A baby trial with DT maize, cowpea and white sorghum in Chebvute. Photo: C. Thierfelder/CIMMYT
A baby trial with DT maize, cowpea and white sorghum in Chebvute. Photo: C. Thierfelder/CIMMYT

Baby trial farmers taking after their ‘mothers’

Since 2019, the best options have been taken on by follower farmers in so called “baby trials”, where they use a subset from the mother trials to gain first-hand experience with the technology. Learning by doing is a central concept of this approach.

Gwalale as a “baby trial farmer” learned from the mother trials that drought-tolerant maize varieties out-yield traditional varieties under conservation agriculture, but need to be rotated with legumes to also improve the soil and the nutrition of the farm household. In addition, she realized that planting white sorghum is a drought-resilient strategy in this area as small grains are less affected by in-season dry-spells.

Gwalale and her family have been resident in Chebvute for 15 years but farm only on 0.4 ha of land. With her husband and three children, she grows maize, sorghum, groundnuts and Bambara nuts. What she gets from these fields is barely enough to survive.

In the 2019/20 cropping season, a devastating drought lasting from mid-December to mid-January destroyed all her hopes that this year would be a better season. Instead, she went on an educational journey to find out how improved farming practices can make a difference in her own life.

“We planted this baby trial for the first time in December 2019, as we had seen from the nearby mother trials that these varieties planted under no-tillage seem to grow better than our own. We planted the baby at the same times as our own crops, but instead of tilling the soil and clearing the land, which we are used to, we just planted in riplines without tillage and covered the soil with mulch,” explains Gwalale.

“When the drought came, all my other crops in the tilled fields started to wilt and die — some did not even germinate. We could not believe what was happening in this baby trial”.

CIMMYT scientist Christian Thierfielder pleased with the results in another baby trial plot in Chebvute. Photo: C. Thierfelder/CIMMYT
CIMMYT scientist Christian Thierfielder pleased with the results in another baby trial plot in Chebvute. Photo: C. Thierfelder/CIMMYT

Resounding results in the baby trial

All crops in the baby trial survived the dry-spell and when the rains started to fall again in January, they continued to grow very well. Gwalale replanted the crops in the affected fields but they never caught up with the baby trial. Even after using the ripper to make more riplines, it was too late to experience the same wonder seen in the baby trial. “For now, we are yet to see how much we will get from this small field, but we learned a big lesson and want to expand our land area with this way of planting next year,” she says.

More than 200 baby trial farmers in Chebvute, the majority of which are women, have experienced the same in their own baby trials and realized that it does not take much effort to achieve food security.

Timely planting, conserving the soil and the moisture with conservation agriculture, effective weeding and application of adequate plant nutrients are the key ingredients of success. This can be learned effectively in a small plot such as a baby trial. Farmers have realized that it is possible to make a difference when they apply the principles of sustainable agriculture in their farming systems. The interventions introduced will help them to become more climate-resilient and ultimately more food secure.

Don’t forget about the impact of COVID-19 on the rural poor and on food security

A woman sells maize at the market in Sidameika Tura, Arsi Negele, Ethiopia. (Photo: Peter Lowe/CIMMYT)
A woman sells maize at the market in Sidameika Tura, Arsi Negele, Ethiopia. (Photo: Peter Lowe/CIMMYT)

Disclaimer: The views and opinions expressed in this article are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the official views or position of the International Maize and Wheat Improvement Center (CIMMYT).

While all eyes are on Lombardy, Madrid, New York and Wuhan, what do we know about the impact of COVID-19 on the rural poor and on food security in developing countries? How can the impact of the crisis be moderated? What positive breakthroughs could be provoked by this shock to move us into a better “new normal”? What can donors and implementing organizations do to support low- and middle-income countries during and beyond this crisis?

Members of the Agriculture and Rural Development working group of the international Scaling Up community of practice held a virtual meeting to discuss these questions and how scaling-up innovations could help to recover from the current crisis and mitigate future ones.

Poor rural communities are particularly vulnerable

When it comes to a highly contagious disease, being in a rural area sounds better than being in a busy city, but that is a deceptive impression. Smallholder farmers often are older than average and hence more vulnerable to the virus, and they have less access to health services.

They also depend on field laborers that are not able to travel from surrounding villages to help with planting, weeding and harvesting. To process crops, smallholder farmers need to transport crops to processing centers, which may be closed, as are the markets where they obtain agricultural inputs or sell farm products. Large international agrobusiness firms, which supply inputs and purchase local famers’ products may withdraw, at least temporarily, from the rural economies. There are already reports of farmers feeding cattle strawberries and broccoli in India, as they are unable to get their goods to the market.

Most farmers also depend on non-farm and off-farm activities for their livelihoods, as they may be field laborers for other farmers, work in the processing industry or work in construction. Interrupted transportation and closures pose serious challenges to maintain safe business continuity throughout the rural economy. The risk is not only that immediate rural production, food deliveries, exports, employment and incomes will collapse, but also that planting for next year’s crops will be disrupted.

It is key to differentiate between global and local supply chains, which will suffer in different ways. For example, in Uganda, supermarkets are open but small, informal markets are closed. In past crises, governments have focused on the survival of global value chains over local ones. Small, rural businesses are more likely to close permanently than large international ones.

Globally, international support for agriculture and rural development has been lagging in recent years.  Today, the international support from aid agencies and NGOs is interrupted, as travels are restricted and community meetings are prohibited. With increased donor attention to a domestic and international health crisis, aid for rural communities may drop precipitously.

Men transport wheat straw on donkey karts in Ethiopia’s Dodula district. (Photo: Peter Lowe/CIMMYT)
Men transport wheat straw on donkey karts in Ethiopia’s Dodula district. (Photo: Peter Lowe/CIMMYT)

Opportunities for an improved “new normal” as we respond to the crisis

The short-term response to help minimize the impact of the COVID-19 crisis on the rural poor is critical, but we also need to support the shaping of a “new normal” where rural food systems are resilient, profitable and inclusive for poor rural communities. Members of the Scaling Up community of practice explored various ideas.

First, the COVID-19 pandemic could present opportunities to break silos and show how closely health and agriculture are related.

“COVID-19 cuts across sectors and jurisdictions in ways that single organizations and established governance structures are ill-equipped to accommodate,” said Larry Cooley, Scaling Expert and Founder and President Emeritus of Management Systems International (MSI)

For example, rural agricultural extension networks could be used to disseminate information on health awareness and education around COVID-19 and collect data on local impacts. This may cause and provide relief in the short term, but may also provide opportunities for collaboration in the long run.

“Our agricultural networks go deep into the rural areas and we are training our agri-entrepreneurs in India to disseminate health messages, products and services to help address COVID-19,” said Simon Winter, Executive Director of the Syngenta Foundation.

“At the African Development Bank we are providing emergency relief finance and re-purposing funding to have a link with COVID-19,” said Atsuko Toda, the bank’s Director of Agricultural Finance and Rural Development.

Second, a “new normal” could also mean an even stronger independence from externally funded projects, experts and solutions to more local ownership and expertise in rural areas, something that the community of practice has been promoting strongly. We could help to support more autonomy of the farmer, a strong local market and scale-up local value chains. Strengthening the capacity of small and medium enterprises linking farmers to urban markets could help ensure stability in future economic shocks.

“Governments and donor ‘projects’ looked too much at export and global value chains. I see great opportunities to scale up local and regional input and output value chains that benefit local farmers and small and medium enterprises,” said Margret Will, expert on value chains.

Third, the COVID-19 pandemic presents an opportunity to accelerate the scaling of innovations.

“Lack of access to labor could be disrupting harvesting and planting in our Feed the Future countries, accelerating an already predominant trend of migration, especially among the young, to urban areas. We see a looming need for mechanization of farms at scale, using mini-tillers, planters, harvesters and other time- and labor-saving equipment,” said Mark Huisenga, Senior Program Manager for the USAID Bureau for Resilience and Food Security.

Masimba Mawire collects bare maize cobs after removing the grain using a mechanized maize sheller in Zimbabwe. (Photo: Matthew O’Leary/CIMMYT)
Masimba Mawire collects bare maize cobs after removing the grain using a mechanized maize sheller in Zimbabwe. (Photo: Matthew O’Leary/CIMMYT)

Rural communities that use more ecological intensive practices, such as conservation agriculture and push-pull farming or safe storage practices are less dependent on external inputs and labor.

The current crisis forces us to use digital communication systems, replace human work with digital tools where possible and use technology to help target interventions. Both the public and private sector could build on this opportunity to invest in increased access to internet, electricity and other digital resources, including in impoverished areas. All these technological innovations can help farmers to better cope with the constraints of COVID-19 and any future crises or stresses to the food system, while also making agriculture more productive and more attractive to the young.

“The pandemic creates an opportunity to accelerate the use of digital technologies in smallholder agriculture, not only for extension advice but to crowdsource information about COVID-19 impacts,” said Julie Howard, Senior Advisor for the Center for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS).

Finally, COVID-19 will change our global governance system, and the agriculture, research and development sector has a role to play in this transformation. A systems change must focus on dietary diversity and food safety and security, paying attention to the rural poor in low- and middle-income countries. We can work together to scale cross-sector platforms to build solid networks and scale-up innovations to strengthen sustainable and resilient food systems.

Systems change beyond the agricultural sector, sustainability through local ownership and uptake of innovations that support profitable and resilient agricultural and related rural activities are key components of how the Scaling Up Community of Practice approaches scaling. A systems change is imminent, and it is important to support a transformation in a direction where local markets, rural labor and regional economies come out stronger in the long term. This requires vision, expertise, mobilization of resources, information sharing and crowdsourced leadership, and the network of scaling experts can contribute to this.

The Agriculture and Rural Development working group of the international Scaling Up community of practice is made up of individuals from more than 100 official donors, foundations, think tanks, research and development organizations united by their interest in scaling the impact of innovations on food security and rural poverty. Areas of particular interest for the group include designing for scale, using scaling frameworks, learning about scaling, responsible scaling, sustainability and system thinking. Members of the working group include professionals with vast experience from the field, and the group explicitly tries to learn from the application of complex concepts such as sustainability, systems change and scaling in real world settings by local actors. In addition to quarterly virtual meetings, the working group encourages and supports exchanges among its members on a variety of subjects. Participation in, and management of, the Agriculture and Rural Development working group is done on a purely voluntary basis.

About the Authors:

Lennart Woltering — Scaling catalyst at CIMMYT and chair of the Agriculture and Rural Development working group.

Johannes Linn — Non-resident Senior Fellow at Brookings and former Vice President of the World Bank.

Maria Boa — Scaling coordinator at CIMMYT and secretary of the Agriculture and Rural Development working group

Mary Donovan — Communications Consultant at CIMMYT.

Moving out of poverty or staying poor

Farmer Dhansa Bhandari (left) sows maize seed while Bikram Daugi (right) ploughs with his oxen in Ramghat, Surkhet, Nepal. (Photo: P. Lowe/CIMMYT)
Farmer Dhansa Bhandari (left) sows maize seed while Bikram Daugi (right) ploughs with his oxen in Ramghat, Surkhet, Nepal. (Photo: P. Lowe/CIMMYT)

Although the conventional wisdom in South Asian rural villages is that men are principally responsible for pulling their families out of poverty, our recent study showed the truth to be more subtle, and more female.

In our new paper we dig into focus groups and individual life stories in a sample of 32 farming villages from five countries of South Asia. Although we asked about both men’s and women’s roles, focus groups of both sexes emphasized men in their responses — whether explaining how families escaped poverty or why they remained poor.

“Women usually cannot bring a big change, but they can assist their men in climbing up,” explains a member of the poor men’s focus group from Ismashal village (a pseudonym) of Pakistan’s Khyber Pakhtunkhwa province.

The focus group testimonies presented rich examples of the strong influence of gender norms: the social rules that dictate differential roles and conducts for men and women in their society. These norms significantly influenced how local people conceived of movements in and out of poverty in their village and in their own lives.

According to the women’s focus group from Rangpur district in Bangladesh, women “cannot work outside the home for fear of losing their reputation and respect.”

However, in these same communities, men’s and women’s productive roles proved far more variable in the mobility processes of their families than conveyed by the focus groups. We encountered many households with men making irregular or very limited contributions to family maintenance. This happens for a number of reasons, including men’s labor migration, disability, family conflict and separations, aging and death.

What’s more, when sharing their life stories in individual interviews, nearly every woman testified to her own persistent efforts to make a living, cover household expenses, deal with debts, and, when conditions allowed, provide a better life for their families. In fact, our life story sample captured 12 women who testified to making substantial contributions to moving their families out of poverty.

Movers and shakers

We were especially struck by how many of these women “movers” were employing innovative agricultural technologies and practices to expand their production and earnings.

“In 2015, using zero tillage machines I started maize farming, for which I had a great yield and large profit,” reports a 30-year-old woman and mother of two from Matipur, Bangladesh who brought her family out of poverty.

Another 30-year-old mover, a farmer and mother of two from the village of Thool in Nepal, attests to diversification and adoption of improved cultivation practices: “I got training on vegetable farming. In the beginning the agriculture office provided some vegetable seeds as well. And I began to grow vegetables along with cereal crops like wheat, paddy, maize, oats. […] I learnt how to make soil rows.”

Among the women who got ahead, a large majority credited an important man in their life with flouting local customs and directly supporting them to innovate in their agricultural livelihoods and bring their families out of poverty.

Across the “mover” stories, women gained access to family resources which enabled them to step up their livelihood activities. For example, three quarters of the women “movers” spoke of husbands or brothers supporting them to pursue important goals in their lives.

Women’s most important relationship helping them to pursue goals in life: women "movers" (on left) versus "chronic poor" (right).
Women’s most important relationship helping them to pursue goals in life: women “movers” (on left) versus “chronic poor” (right).

Sufia, from a village in the Rajshahi district of Bangladesh, describes how she overcame great resistance from her husband to access a farm plot provided by her brother. The plot enabled Sufia to cultivate betel leaves and paddy rice, and with those profits and additional earnings from livestock activities, she purchased more land and diversified into eggplant, chilies and bitter gourd. Sufia’s husband had struggled to maintain the family and shortly after Sufia began to prosper, he suffered a stroke and required years of medical treatments before passing away.

When Sufia reflects on her life, she considers the most important relationship in her life to be with her brother. “Because of him I can now stand on my two feet.”

We also studied women and their families who did not move out of poverty. These “chronic poor” women rarely mentioned accessing innovations or garnering significant benefits from their livelihoods. In these life stories, we find far fewer testimonies about men who financially supported a wife or sister to help her pursue an important goal.

The restrictive normative climate in much of South Asia means that women’s capacity to enable change in their livelihoods is rarely recognized or encouraged by the wider community as a way for a poor family to prosper. Still, the life stories of these “movers” open a window onto the possibilities unlocked when women have opportunities to take on more equitable household roles and are able to access agricultural innovations.

The women movers, and the men who support them, provide insights into pathways of more equitable agricultural change. What we can learn from these experiences holds great potential for programs aiming to relax gender norms, catalyze agricultural innovation, and unlock faster transitions to gender equality and poverty reduction in the region. Nevertheless, challenging social norms can be risky and can result in backlash from family or other community members. To address this, collaborative research models offer promise. These approaches engage researchers and local women and men in action learning to build understanding of and support for inclusive agricultural change. Our research suggests that such interventions, which combine social, institutional and technical dimensions of agricultural innovation, can help diverse types of families to leave poverty behind.

Read the full study:
Gender Norms and Poverty Dynamics in 32 Villages of South Asia

Explore our coverage of International Women’s Day 2020.
Explore our coverage of International Women’s Day 2020.

‘Sharing’ or ‘sparing’ land?

Any fifth grader is familiar with the Cretaceous-Tertiary mass extinction, which saw dinosaurs — and three quarters of all species alive at that time — disappear from Earth, probably after it was struck by a very large asteroid. However, few people are aware the planet is currently going through a similar event of an equally large magnitude: a recent report from the World Wide Fund for Nature highlighted a 60% decline in the populations of over 4,000 vertebrate species monitored globally since 1970. This time, the culprit is not an asteroid, but human beings. The biggest threat we represent to other species is also the way we meet one of our most fundamental needs: food production.

As a response, scientists, particularly ecologists, have looked for strategies to minimize trade-offs between agriculture and biodiversity. One such strategy is “land sparing,” also known as the “Borlaug effect.” It seeks to segregate production and conservation and to maximize yield on areas as small as possible, sparing land for nature. Another strategy is “land sharing” or “wildlife-friendly farming,” which seeks to integrate production and conservation in the same land units and make farming as benign as possible to biodiversity. It minimizes the use of external inputs and retains unfarmed patches on farmland.

A heated debate between proponents of land sparing and proponents of land sharing has taken place over the past 15 years. Most studies, however, have found land sparing to lead to better outcomes than land sharing, in a range of contexts. With collaborators from CIFOR, UBC and other organizations, I hypothesized that this belief was biased because researchers assessed farming through a narrow lens, only looking at calories or crop yield.

Many more people today suffer from hidden hunger, or lack of vitamins and minerals in their diets, than lack of calories. Several studies have found more diverse and nutritious diets consumed by people living in or near areas with greater tree cover as trees are a key component of biodiversity. However, most of these studies have not looked at mechanisms explaining this positive association.

Forests for food

Studying seven tropical landscapes in Bangladesh, Burkina Faso, Cameroon, Ethiopia, Indonesia, Nicaragua and Zambia, we found evidence that tree cover directly supports diets in four landscapes out of seven. This may be through the harvest of bushmeat, wild fruits, wild vegetables and other forest-sourced foods. The study further found evidence of an agroecological pathway — that forests and trees support diverse crop and livestock production through an array of ecosystem services, ultimately leading to improved diets — in five landscapes out of seven. These results clearly demonstrate that although land sparing may have the best outcomes for biodiversity, it would cut off rural households from forest products such as forest food, firewood and livestock feed. It would also cut off smallholder farms from ecosystem services provided by biodiversity, and smallholders in the tropics tend to depend more on ecosystem services than on external inputs.

In Ethiopia, previous research conducted by some of the same authors has demonstrated that multifunctional landscapes that do not qualify as land sparing nor as land sharing may host high biodiversity whilst being more productive than simpler landscapes. They are more sustainable and resilient, provide more diverse diets and produce cereals with higher nutritional content.

The debate on land sparing vs. sharing has largely remained confined to the circles of conservation ecologists and has seldom involved agricultural scientists. As a result, most studies on land sparing vs. sharing have focused on minimizing the negative impact of farming on biodiversity, instead of looking for the best compromises between agricultural production and biodiversity conservation.

To design landscapes that truly balance the needs of people and nature, it is urgent for agronomists, agricultural economists, rural sociologists and crop breeders to participate in the land sparing vs. sharing debate.

Read more:
Testing the Various Pathways Linking Forest Cover to Dietary Diversity in Tropical Landscapes

This study was made possible by funding from the UK’s Department for International Development (DFID), the United States Agency for International Development (USAID) through the project Agrarian Change in Tropical Landscapes, and by the CGIAR Research Programs on MAIZE and WHEAT.

Closing the yield gap: Why localized analysis matters

General view of the experimental field in Lempira, Honduras. (Photo: Nele Verhulst/CIMMYT)
General view of the experimental field in Lempira, Honduras. (Photo: Nele Verhulst/CIMMYT)

Populations in Central America are rising rapidly, but staple crop production seems unable to keep up with increasing food demands.

Maize yields are particularly low compared to other regions. Cumulatively, farmers in El Salvador, Guatemala, Honduras and Nicaragua produce maize on nearly 2.5 million hectares, with a large proportion of these maize systems also including beans, either through relay cropping or intercropping. Though potential yields are estimated to be as high as 10 metric tons per hectare, average production remains low at around 2.28.

There is clearly immense opportunity for improvement, but it is not always obvious which issues need tackling.

Yield gap analysis — which measures the difference between potential and actual yield — is a useful starting point for addressing the issue and identifying intensification prospects. It is not a new concept in applied agronomy, but it has not been adequately applied in many regions. For example, Analyses of Central America tend to be grouped with the rest of Latin America, making it difficult to provide recommendations tailored to local contexts.

I see a more comprehensive understanding of the region’s specific crop production limitations as the first step towards improving food security.

Along with fellow researchers from the International Maize and Wheat Improvement Center (CIMMYT) and other institutions, we set out to identify the main factors limiting production in these areas. We established field trials in six maize and bean producing regions in El Salvador, Guatemala and Honduras, which represent about three-quarters of the maize producing area. We assessed factors such as water stress, nutrient deficiency, pressure from pests and diseases, and inter-plant competition, hypothesizing that optimized fertilization and supplementary irrigation would have the greatest effects on yields.

A maize cob in La Libertad, El Salvador, shows kernels affected by tar spot complex which have not filled completely (Photo: Nele Verhulst/CIMMYT)
A maize cob in La Libertad, El Salvador, shows kernels affected by tar spot complex which have not filled completely (Photo: Nele Verhulst/CIMMYT)

We found that while improved fertilization improved maize yields by 11% on average, it did not have a significant effect on bean production. Irrigation had no effect, though this was mainly due to good rainfall distribution throughout the growing season in the study year. On average, optimized planting arrangements increased maize yields by 18%, making it the most promising factor we evaluated.

It was interesting though perhaps unsurprising to note that the contribution of each limiting factor to yield gaps carried across all sites and no single treatment effectively increased yields consistently across all sites. The trial results confirmed that production constraints are highly dependent on local management practices and agroecological location.

With this in mind, we recommend that development actors aiming to increase crop production begin by conducting multi-year, participatory experiments to understand the primary causes of yield gaps and identify the limitations specific to the areas in question, as this will allow for more effective research and policy efforts.

Read the full article “Factors contributing to maize and bean yield gaps in Central America vary with site and agroecological conditions” in The Journal of Agricultural Science.

New tools guide interventions against acid soils in Africa using lime

Researchers visit maize fields in Ethiopia's Wondo Genet Agricultural Research Center. (Photo: Peter Lowe/CIMMYT)
Researchers visit maize fields in Ethiopia’s Wondo Genet Agricultural Research Center. (Photo: Peter Lowe/CIMMYT)

One major reason why maize productivity in sub-Saharan Africa is very low is poor soil health. Soil acidity is often mentioned because of its impact on crop yields and the extent of acid soils in the region. A recent soil mapping exercise, conducted by the Ethiopian Soil Information System (EthioSIS) under the administration of the Ethiopian Agricultural Transformation Agency (ATA), estimated that 43% of arable lands were affected by acid soils and that 3.6 million people, about 10% of the total rural population, live in areas with acidic soils.

Very acid soils — those with a pH below 5.5, roughly one hundred times more acidic than neutral soils — are associated with certain toxicities, like aluminum and iron excess, and some nutrient deficiencies. Soil acidity pushes soil nutrients out of reach of the plant, leading to stunting of root system and plant. As a result, the plant becomes also less tolerant to drought.

Soil acidification depends on soil nature, agroecology and farming systems. It happens through natural leaching of CO2 after rainfall and excess application of nitrogenous fertilizer or organic matter, for instance.

As a result, soil acidity significantly affects maize yields. In Ethiopia, studies have revealed substantial impacts on crop productivity related to acid soils and the importance of acid soil management for Ethiopia’s food security. The Ethiopian Institute of Agricultural Research (EIAR) estimated that soil acidity on wheat production alone costed the country over 9 billion Ethiopian Birr, about $300 million per year.

Acidic soils in the limelight

Preliminary analysis led by the International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI) suggests that yields of major cereal crops, such as wheat and barley, could increase by 20 to 40% with the application of lime in acidic areas of the country.

While these preliminary results are significant, we need to know more about local farmers’ experience with acidic soil and their mitigation strategies. Such impact assessments are however typically determined at either the national or experimental plot level and do not map where mitigating against acid soils would be the most profitable.

To improve acid soils, farmers may apply lime on their fields to raise the pH, a practice known as liming. How much lime to apply will depend on the crop, soil type but also on the quality of lime available. Liming has multiple beneficial effects like improving nitrogen fixation of legume nodules, boosting yields of legume crops.

But liming has a cost. It can quickly become a very bulky affair as we need to apply 3 to 4 tons per hectare for sandy soils and up to 8 tons per hectare for clay and humifere soils.

Furthermore, existing lime markets are quite limited or even non-existent in many areas, even those where acidic soils are prevalent. Developing supply chains from scratch is difficult and costly. Understanding the costs and potential returns to such investments is important. There are many questions to ask at different levels, from the farm and farming system to the lime supply chain. What are the available lime sources — calcitic, dolomite or blend — and lime quality? Where are the lime processing units and how could you assess the transport cost to the farms? What could be the crop yield response depending on the lime application?

User-friendly and scalable dashboard

IFPRI, in collaboration with EIAR, the International Maize and Wheat Improvement Center (CIMMYT) and the German aid agency GIZ, developed a pilot in Ethiopia’s Amhara region to help better target lime interventions for a greater impact. Amhara region was chosen because of the importance of acid soils, and access to extensive soil data.

Combination of several spatial datasets on soil quality, agroecological, weather, long-term agronomic trials and crop modelling tools enabled to generate at scale, georeferenced estimates of crop yield responses for different lime applications. Calibration of this spatial model for wheat estimated a yield increase of approximately 30% increasing the pH from 5.5 to 6.5, which is relatively consistent with general research data and expert opinion.

Mapped estimates of the grain prices and the delivered costs of lime, based on the location of the lime crushers in the region and transport costs, enables then to map out the spatial profitability of lime operations.

Initial calculations revealed a great variability of lime costs at the farmgate, with transportation representing at least half of total lime costs. It showed also that farmers often do not use the most cost-effective combination of inputs to tackle soil acidity.

Another possible application is to determine maize growing areas where lime benefits outweigh the costs, which would be ideal sites for demonstrating to farmers the positive impact lime applications could have to their livelihoods.

This Amhara lime dashboard prototype demonstrated its scalability. A national dashboard is currently being developed, which includes lime sources GPS location, grain prices and district-level soil quality mapping. This approach is tested also in Tanzania.

CIMMYT and its partners plan to package such tool in a user-friendly open-access web version that can be rapidly updated and customized depending on the area of intervention, for instance integrating a new lime source, and applied for different crops, and across the Eastern African region. Such dashboards will help development organizations and government make better informed decisions regarding lime investments.

More with less: Research for intensified food production with scarcer resources and heating climates

Technical assistant Tigist Masresra examines breeding trials at the Ambo Research Center in Ethiopia. (Photo: Peter Lowe/CIMMYT)
Technical assistant Tigist Masresra examines breeding trials at the Ambo Research Center in Ethiopia. (Photo: Peter Lowe/CIMMYT)

After declining for nearly a decade to around 770 million, in the last three years the number of hungry people has shot up to more than 850 million. At the same time, erratic weather and crop pests and diseases are ruining harvests, intensifying farmers’ risks, and threatening local and global food security.

In an article for Rural 21, I describe how plant breeding has changed over the last four decades and which methods the international research community is developing to master present and future challenges.

Read the full article

Six investments to help family farmers thrive in the next decade

A farmer requests weather information via SMS.
A farmer requests weather information via SMS.

Family farmers produce more than 80% of the world’s food, but often have the least amount of access to support.

As the UN Decade of Family Farming launched on May 29, 2019, I talked with Trevor Nicholls, CEO of the Centre for Agriculture and Bioscience International (CABI), on this topic.

On an article published on the Economist Intelligence Unit’s Food Sustainability Index blog, we propose six key actions that can help family farmers thrive in the coming decade:

  1. Invest in women and youth: Make family farming work for all
  2. Attract young farmers into tech-smart farming
  3. Make climate-resilient crops more accessible
  4. Share practical plant health advice with family farmers
  5. Help family farmers diversify and grow more from less land
  6. Translate national and global goals into practical farming support

Read the full article

Sustainable tradition

The indigenous peoples who lived in central and southern Mexico thousands of years ago developed a resilient intercropping system to domesticate some of the basic grains and vegetables that contribute to a healthy diet.

Today, small farmers in roughly the same areas of Mexico continue to use this flexible system called “milpa” to grow chili, tomatoes, beans, squashes, seasonal fruits and maize, which are essential ingredients of most Mexican dishes.

An analysis of the Mexican diet done in the context of a recent report by the EAT – Lancet Commission found that Mexicans are eating too much animal fat but not enough fruits, vegetables, legumes and wholegrains. As a result, a serious public health issue is affecting Mexico due to the triple burden of malnutrition: obesity, micronutrient deficiency and/or low caloric intake. The study also urges Mexico to increase the availability of basic foodstuffs of higher nutritional value produced locally and sustainably.

Although changing food consumption habits may be hard to achieve, the traditional diet based on the milpa system is widely regarded as a healthy option in Mexico. Although nutritional diversity increases with the number of crops included in the milpa system, its nutritional impact in the consumers will also depend on their availability, number, uses, processing and consumption patterns.

Unfortunately, milpa farmers often practice slash-and-burn agriculture at the expense of soils and tropical rainforests. For that reason, it is also important to address some of the production-side obstacles on the way to a healthier diet, such as soil degradation and post-harvest losses, which have a negative effect on agricultural productivity and human health.

The International Maize and Wheat Improvement Center (CIMMYT) engages in participatory field research and local capacity-building activities with farmers, local partners and authorities to foster innovation and to co-create strategies and procedures that help farmers produce food sustainably.

Francisco Canul Poot in his land. (Photo: CIMMYT)
Francisco Canul Poot in his land. (Photo: CIMMYT)

These efforts led Francisco Canul Poot, a milpa farmer from the Yucatan Peninsula, to adopt conservation agriculture concepts in his milpa and to stop burning soil residues since 2016. As a result, his maize yield grew by 70%, from 430 to 730 kg per hectare, and his income increased by $300 dollars. 15 farmers sharing property rights over communal land have followed his example since.

These outstanding results are encouraging more farmers to adopt sustainable intensification practices across Mexico, an important change considering that falling levels of nitrogen and phosphorus content in Mexican soils may lead to a 70 percent increase in fertilizer use by 2050.

By implementing a sustainable intensification project called MasAgro, CIMMYT contributes, in turn, to expand the use of sustainable milpa practices in more intensive production systems. CIMMYT is also using this approach in the Milpa Sustentable Península de Yucatán project.

At present, more than 500 thousand farmers have adopted sustainable intensification practices — including crop diversification and low tillage — to grow maize, wheat and related crops on more than 1.2 million hectares across Mexico.

The impact of climate inaction on food security

While in Australia, Matthew Morell, director general of IRRI, and I spoke to Devex about the limits of agricultural research to solve food crises in a fast-changing environment.

Read the full story on Devex: https://www.devex.com/news/the-impact-of-climate-inaction-on-food-security-94015

A farmer watering plants at an organic farm in Boung Phao Village, Laos. (Photo: Asian Development Bank)
A farmer watering plants at an organic farm in Boung Phao Village, Laos. (Photo: Asian Development Bank)

 

Gratitude for soil

If we take care of our soils, our soils will take care of us. (Photo: Shashish Maharjan/CIMMYT)
If we take care of our soils, our soils will take care of us. (Photo: Shashish Maharjan/CIMMYT)

On December 5, we celebrate World Soil Day. This year the theme is “Be the solution to soil pollution.” Most of you may not have been aware that such a day even existed or perhaps even question the reason why the world even dedicates an entire day to celebrate soil. The authors of this article are soil scientists; we have devoted our professional careers to studying soil. Perhaps we are biased, but we use this opportunity to enlighten readers with a greater appreciation for the importance of this thin layer of our planet we call soil.

Humankind has a conflicting relationship with soil. In English, “dirt” and “dirty” are synonyms for unclean, calling a man or a woman “dirty” is a terrible insult. A baby’s dirty diapers are said to be “soiled.” But if we dig deeper into human consciousness, we find a different story.

For Hindus, the Panchtatva defines the universal laws of life. Everything, including life, is composed of five basic elements: Akash, space or sky; Vayu, air; Jal, water; Agni, fire; and Prithvi, earth or soil. In the Judeo-Christian tradition, the first two human beings on the planet were Adam and Eve. In Hebrew, the original language of the Bible’s Old Testament, the name Adam means “earth” or “soil” and Eve means “life.” These images and symbols portray that human life originally derived from soil.

It gets even deeper: The English terms “human” and “humanity” are rooted in the Greek word “humus,” the fertile black topsoil.

When we use the words “soil” and “dirt” as derogatory terms, we literally define ourselves as soil. Soil is important and here are a few reasons why.

Soil is absolutely critical for the survival of our species and of all living life on the planet. Over 90 percent of all food produced in the world comes from soil and a greater percentage of the world’s freshwater passes through soil.

Arguably, climate change is the greatest threat to our species. Despite mitigation efforts by the global community, soil is frequently forgotten. However, soil holds roughly two and a half times the amount of carbon held in the atmosphere and in all of the plants and animals combined.

Soil is also the greatest reservoir of biodiversity on the planet. In one pinch of soil, there are over 1 billion individual organisms and 1 million unique species, most of which we know almost nothing about. In one handful of soil, there are more living organisms than the total number of human beings that have ever walked on the planet. As all of our antibiotics have been derived from soil microorganisms, the secrets to fighting all kinds of diseases are just under your feet.

In Nepal, soil is deeply interrelated with culture. From birth to death, Nepalese use soil in many rituals: naming ceremonies, birthday celebrations, soiling on Ashar 15, local healing and medicine, etc.

The government of Nepal has set ambitious targets for increasing the levels of organic matter in soil. This is essential to ensure that the soils that have sustained Nepali civilization for centuries will continue to sustain future generations. We need to encourage farmers and land managers in Nepal to maintain terracing on steeply sloped lands to protect against soil erosion. It is also important to appropriately use agrochemicals, such as pesticides and inorganic fertilizers, to improve soil health and crop productivity.

Soil has been polluted by heavy metals, effluents from chemical industries, indiscriminate use of agrochemicals, urbanization without proper planning, networking of roads without considering the carrying capacity of the soil and other factors. So let’s not overlook the importance of soil. We need to value the cleansing properties of soil, particularly riverine soils, and prevent these areas from continuing as the dumping grounds and sewers of Kathmandu and other cities.

On this day, the day when we celebrate soil, take a moment to look under your feet and marvel at the beauty and complexity of soil.

If we take care of our soils, our soils will take care of us.

Let’s make hunger history

Samjhana Khanal surveys heat-tolerant maize varieties in Ludhiana, India, during a field day at the 13th Asian Maize Conference. (Photo: Manjit Singh/Punjab Agricultural University)
Samjhana Khanal surveys heat-tolerant maize varieties in Ludhiana, India, during a field day at the 13th Asian Maize Conference. (Photo: Manjit Singh/Punjab Agricultural University)

KATHMANDU, Nepal — I feel humbled and honored to have been chosen for the 2018 MAIZE-Asia Youth Innovators Award. I want to thank my father and brother for never clipping my wings and letting me fly high. I want to thank my mother, who despite having no education, not being able to read or write a single word, dreamed of having a scientist daughter. Everyone has a story and this is mine.

Due to my family’s poverty and the hardships faced during the civil war in Nepal, I had to leave school at grade 5 and was compelled to work as child labor in a local hotel to meet my family’s daily needs. I remember those difficult months where I used to cry every day, as the hotel was right across from the school and I wanted to study so badly but I was deprived from education due to my family’s condition. My life changed when a mountain climber staying at the hotel heard my story and generously decided to pay my school fees. I would go on to graduate top of my class.

Everyone has challenges. It is my dream to dedicate my life to fight the greatest challenge of all: hunger.

The amount of undernourished people in the world has been increasing. According to the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO), over 820 million people face chronic food deprivation. Many of these people live in developing countries, including my home country, Nepal. About 6 million people, which is about 23% of Nepal’s population, are undernourished. Moreover, half of children under the age of five suffer from malnutrition in Nepal.

Increasing agricultural production, gender equity and awareness is crucial to meet sustainable development goals by 2030. As an agricultural student, I chose to focus on maize-based systems, as maize is a staple food crop and a major component of feed and fodder for farm animals. It is the second major crop in Nepal after rice — first in the hill region of Nepal — and can be a backbone for food security and a good source of income for resource-poor farmers.

Demand for maize is growing in Nepal, but production has remained stagnant. This is partly due to lack of knowledge on proper nutrient management and fertilizer use. In addition, due to the economic situation in Nepal, many men have been forced to migrate to find work and support their families, which has led to an increased “feminization” of agriculture. However, female farmers frequently have less access to information and resources that would help them to increase yields.

Since my undergraduate degree, I have carried out research on nutrient management in maize in the Eastern Terai region of Nepal, particularly focusing on women, to increase the maize production and income of smallholder farmers. My research involved the use of Nutrient Expert, a dynamic nutrient management tool based on site-specific nutrient management principles, to increase maize production and enhance soil quality without negatively affecting the environment. Regional fertilizer recommendations are often too broad and cannot take into account the soil quality of individual farmers’ field, as it varies greatly among fields, seasons and years. Applying the incorrect amount of fertilizer is costly to farmers and can negatively affect the environment and crop yields.

The Nutrient Expert app rapidly provides farm-specific fertilizer recommendations for nitrogen, phosphorus and potassium for crops in the presence or absence of soil testing results, contributing to dynamic nutrient management, increased productivity and net returns from crops for farmers. In the meantime, it helps to decrease the nitrogen and phosphorous leaching from the soil into rivers, which protects the water ecosystem both in wetlands and oceans. This technology is sustainable because it optimizes the use of nutrients in the soil for higher productivity and prevents the overuse of fertilizer. It decreases the farmer’s cost of production and is environmentally friendly. Further, my research showed that Nutrient Expert helped farmers to produce 86.6% more maize grain than their previous fertilizer practice.

Proper nutrient management is just one of the challenges facing agriculture today. To address these challenges and to create a world without hunger it is extremely important to work with and include young people. Effective extension tools to train and motivate young minds in research and create more interest in maize-based systems and farming is necessary for the overall adoption and proper utilization of improved varieties and technologies.

Samjhana Khanal was recently awarded the 2018 MAIZE-Asia Youth Innovators Award from the CGIAR Research Program on Maize (MAIZE) in the category of “Change Agent” for her research on the productivity and profitability of hybrid maize in Eastern Terai, Nepal. Using Nutrient Expert, a decision support tool, individual maize farmers can get specific soil nutrition and fertilizer recommendations, resulting in higher grain yield, productivity and profits.

An agricultural graduate, Khanal has founded and co-founded several local social organizations in Nepal to involve young minds in the development of innovative strategies to work towards sustainable agriculture and zero hunger. Her organizations support more than 285 households with community microfinance, help resource-poor farmers and assist women farmers.

The MAIZE-Asia Youth Innovators Awards aim to celebrate youth participation in maize-based agri-food systems and are sponsored by the CGIAR Research Program on Maize (MAIZE) in collaboration with Young Professionals for Agricultural Development (YPARD).

The Director General of CIMMYT, Martin Kropff (left), and the Chair of the MAIZE Independent Steering Committee, Michael Robinson (right), present Samjhana Khanal with the 2018 MAIZE-Asia Youth Innovator Award in the category of Change Agent. (Photo: Manjit Singh/Punjab Agricultural University)
The Director General of CIMMYT, Martin Kropff (left), and the Chair of the MAIZE Independent Steering Committee, Michael Robinson (right), present Samjhana Khanal with the 2018 MAIZE-Asia Youth Innovator Award in the category of Change Agent. (Photo: Manjit Singh/Punjab Agricultural University)

Experts at Asian Maize Conference express concern over growing incidence of fall armyworm

B.M. Prasanna and I joined colleagues at the 13th Asian Maize Conference and stressed the need for continued funding for maize research, keeping in mind climate change and the challenge of the insatiable fall armyworm, which spread to India this year.

Read the full story on Krishi Jagran: https://krishijagran.com/news/experts-at-asian-maize-conference-express-concern-over-growing-incidence-of-fall-armyworm/

The 13th Asian Maize Conference took place from October 8 to October 10 in Ludhiana, India. (Photo: Manjit Singh/Punjab Agricultural University)
The 13th Asian Maize Conference took place from October 8 to October 10 in Ludhiana, India. (Photo: Manjit Singh/Punjab Agricultural University)