Skip to main content

Allen McHugh reports on conservation agriculture in China

caunews_-China3The past few weeks have been busy and interesting in China: preparing for the International Conservation Agriculture Forum in Yinchuan and work travels to Beijing, Yangling (Shaanxi province), and Xuchang (Henan province) are a sure way to keep oneself occupied.

Strengthening partnerships in Beijing

I travelled to Beijing during 2-4 May to discuss future cooperation between the University of Southern Queensland (USQ) and the China Agricultural University (CAU) at a meeting with Jan Thomas, USQ vice-chancellor, and K.E. Bingsheng, CAU president, accompanied by the USQ delegation and CAU senior professors. What does this have to do with CIMMYT? Part of my mandate in China is to forge new partnerships, especially with universities seeking to expand internationally. This requires putting on the CIMMYT uniform to demonstrate presence and reinforce linkages with old and new colleagues. As a result, we hope to see a memorandum of understanding and the facilitation of staff and student exchanges between these universities, Ningxia institutions, and CIMMYT.

Water-use efficiency in Yangling

The Northwest Agricultural and Forestry University in Yangling hosted the final review of the ACIAR “More effective water use by rainfed wheat in China and Australia” project led by Tony Condon (Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organisation, CSIRO), in which the Ningxia Academy of Agriculture and Forestry Sciences is a partner (led by Yuan Hanmin). The project aims to improve and stabilize farmer returns from growing wheat in dry, rainfed environments in northwest China through development of higher-yielding wheat germplasm that uses water and soil resources more effectively. I spent 6-10 May first hearing about and seeing the extensive breeding work with Australian and Chinese lines, and later discussing the role of conservation agriculture and soil management in breeding with the reviewers and other participants, including Greg Rebetzke from CSIRO. During a Combined China-EU-Australia Workshop on Phenotyping for Abiotic Stress Tolerance and Water-Use Efficiency in Crop Breeding, which followed the review, Richard Richards (CSIRO) presented a very pertinent paper on “Opportunities to improve cereal root systems for greater productivity.” His focus on below-ground processes provides considerable and significant support for conservation agriculture and associated management practices in improving root system functions.

Farm mechanization in Xuchang

The 30th anniversary of the Henan Haofeng Machinery Manufacturing Company in Xuchang, Henan province, provided an excellent opportunity to present conservation agriculture and small machinery requirements for developing countries to 4 academicians, about 10 high level officials from the Ministry of Science and Technology, Ministry of Agriculture, Henan Provincial Government, and many highly regarded Chinese mechanization scientists and extension workers.

During 16-18 May, the factory hosted two forums, one focused on combination of wheat agricultural machinery and agronomy, and another on scientific innovation and development of Chinese agricultural machinery. Although the language of the forums was Chinese, my presentation in English was understood by the senior people, some of whom later inquired about the new Chinese Turbo Happy Seeder developed by CIMMYT. The discussion on conservation agriculture per se was limited, but I was able to meet many old Chinese friends and strengthen new relationships for CIMMYT and the Global Conservation Agriculture Program.

Farmers in Kenya’s Embu County try nitrogen use efficient maize varieties

Mercy Wawira, farmer who participated in the IMAS on-farm trial in Kenya’s Embu County
Mercy Wawira, farmer who participated in the IMAS on-farm trial in Kenya’s Embu County

High fertilizer prices are among the major constraints facing maize farmers in Eastern and Southern Africa. “We apply just a little fertilizer, just the way you would apply salt to taste,” says a maize farmer in the Embu County, Kenya. “We lack enough fertilizer for our maize crop,” explains another one during a focus group discussion.

Kenya imports all its fertilizer, which results in high input costs borne by smallholder farmers. As agriculture forms the backbone of Kenya’s economy, the government offers farmers fertilizer at subsidized rates. “The subsidized price of Urea is about US$ 30 per 50kg bag, while without the subsidy it goes for up to US$ 50 per 50kg bag,” said the County’s land development officer Samuel Kibiu. “Despite the subsidy, not all farmers can afford the fertilizer,” he added. But even if they can, they still have to face several other challenges, such as transporting the fertilizer to their farms in Kieni, about 40 kilometers from the collection point in Embu town, after going through an elaborate process of obtaining subsidy receipts from the local agriculture office.

In October 2012, a team from CIMMYT’s Improved Maize for African Soils (IMAS) project, together with the Kenya Agricultural Research Institute (KARI) and extension workers from the Ministry of Agriculture, visited a group of farmers in the Kieni Division, Embu County. “Fertilizer is essential in Sub-Saharan Africa,’’ says Biswanath Das, IMAS project leader, “but fertilizer use in the region is amongst the lowest in the world, averaging less than 20kg per hectare.” This falls way below the recommended application rates and below average of what farmers apply in Asia and Latin America. “Most smallholder farmers in Africa are extremely risk averse, as the bulk of smallholder production is under rain-fed systems,” says Das. “As a result, farmers are reluctant to invest in expensive inputs such as fertilizer due to unpredictable rainfall.”

Making fertilizer more accessible in Africa has proved extremely difficult and researchers have thus begun searching for other ways to address the issue. The IMAS project is developing new maize varieties that are more efficient at using the small quantities of nitrogen currently applied in smallholder maize production systems in Southern and Eastern Africa. The goal is to develop maize varieties that yield up to 50% more than the existing varieties through better nitrogen use efficiency. The first set of varieties developed through the IMAS breeding pipeline showed promising results during onstation trials and is being tested by farmers in Kieni. “Despite the poor rains, we got good yields,” said Mercy Wawira commenting on the IMAS hybrid she planted on her farm. “We have seen our yields improve with this new variety,” said John Bosco Mugendi who also participated in the IMAS on-farm trial. “This variety is good,” he added. Members of the community were present to help Wawira and Mugendi harvest the maize from the small trial plot. “We hope we shall get this variety again to plant in the next season,” said Obed Nyaga Njamura, agribusiness development officer in Embu’s Kieni Division.

Farmer John Bosco Mugambi also participated in the IMAS on-farm trial in the Embu County.
Farmer John Bosco Mugambi also participated in the IMAS on-farm trial in the Embu County.

As yield gains observed under managed low-nitrogen stress trials on station are being replicated under farm conditions in the region, IMAS scientists feel encouraged. Together with partners in the national agricultural research systems in Eastern and Southern Africa (KARI and the Agricultural Research Council of South Africa, ARC) and Pioneer Hi-Bred in the USA, IMAS is developing nitrogen use efficient varieties to benefit smallholder maize farmers in Africa. “We broker technology through these partnerships. We also build capacity through the comparative advantage in the different institutions,” said KARI’s director Ephraim Mukisira.

 

Confined field trial of drought-tolerant maize yields promising results

IMG_1036The fourth confined field trial of MON87460, a genetically modified maize variety developed to tolerate moderate drought, recently concluded at the Kenya Agricultural Research Institute (KARI) in Kiboko with promising results.

The Water Efficient Maize for Africa (WEMA) project has been conducting field trials of MON87460 since 2010. The most recent trial was planted on 28 November 2012 and harvested on 16 April 2013. Throughout the season, the genetically modified plants outperformed those without the drought-tolerance-enhancing gene, including commercial checks.

This was even more evident at harvest, with ears from the genetically modified plants looking superior to the conventional checks. Charles Kariuki, center director at KARI-Katumani, who was present during the harvesting, was particularly impressed with the performance of the WEMA 18, 36, 41, 50, and 55 entries. “From these, we should be able to generate high quality data to back these impressive performances,” he said. Kariuki urged the project to nominate the conventional entries (without the MON87460 gene), that were also tested in the trials and performed very well, to the Kenya National Performance Trials to fast-track their commercial release.

IMG_1189

Murenga Mwimali, WEMA’s national coordinator for Kenya, was looking forward to the outcomes of the data analysis to ascertain this yield performance in detail, comparing the performance against those without the gene and the commercial checks: “This will enable us to make informed conclusions on the potential benefits of MON87460.” Representatives from the regulatory authorities—the Kenya National Biosafety Authority (NBA) and the Kenya Plant Health Inspectorate Service (KEPHIS)—also lauded the WEMA team for their good confined field trial management.

Biosafety training for harvest staff

The day before the harvest, required training on regulatory compliance was conducted for everyone expected to participate in the harvest. The training covered management requirements and standard operating procedures for confined field trials as well as biosafety requirements for planting, harvesting, and post-harvest monitoring. The 46 participants were drawn from WEMA partner institutions (CIMMYT, African Agricultural Technology Foundation, KARI, and Monsanto), as well as the Ministry of Agriculture, KEPHIS, and NBA.

Jane Otadoh, assistant director for biotechnology in the Ministry of Agriculture, emphasized the importance of training to enable staff to effectively handle confined field trials. “There is lack of awareness, information, and knowledge on biotechnology in Kenya, and more so on confined field trial operations, requirements, and regulations. This training is to help you understand the process, the role of scientists, the regulatory process, and the regulators,” she said. She reiterated the ministry’s support for technology that boosts agricultural productivity.

James Karanja of the KARI-Katumani biotechnology program took participants through the standard operating procedures for harvesting confined field trials. Julia Njagi, biosafety officer at NBA, noted that staff training was critical to ensure compliance with biosafety regulations while performing the trials. As part of confined field trial management and regulatory compliance, all harvested materials including grains had to be destroyed by burning and burying, to avoid unintended release of genetically modified materials into the environment.

IMG_0997Eveline Shitabule, an inspector with KEPHIS, noted that training helped the participants to understand and follow instructions to ensure compliance. Having competent and well-trained personnel is one of the three pillars of compliance, the other two being a secure facility and records that are accessible and understandable.

Participants said they gained valuable knowledge during the workshop that improved their ability to work on confined field trials.

WEMA reaches out to local communities in Kenya

WEMA13On 02 May 2013, the Water Efficient Maize for Africa (WEMA) project organized a sensitization workshop for local community leaders, provincial administration members, agricultural extension workers, farmers, and representatives of farmer groups. The meeting was held at the Kenya Agricultural Research Institute (KARI) in Kiboko and attracted over 40 participants from the neighboring maize growing areas in the Makueni and Machakos counties in eastern Kenya, along with representatives from CIMMYT, Monsanto, African Biotechnology Stakeholders Forum, and the Ministry of Agriculture. It aimed to explain WEMA’s work on development of drought-tolerant and insect-resistant maize varieties using both conventional and genetic engineering techniques. It was also an opportunity for WEMA to demystify myths, allay fears, and enlighten participants on genetically modified organisms (GMOs) and confined field trials.

In his opening remarks, E.O. Mungabe, KARI-Katumani center deputy director, noted that the use of genetic engineering in crop breeding still triggers panic among some Kenyans. However, the emerging challenges of climate change, diseases such as maize lethal necrosis, and pests like the larger grain borer call for new approaches, as conventional ways of breeding alone might not overcome or solve these problems. “It is necessary that we combine our conventional breeding techniques with genetic engineering to effectively respond to these emerging challenges. Think positively of genetic engineering as a technology that has the potential to address them,” Mungabe explained the situation to the participants. “Africa is a drought-prone continent with approximately 300 million people depending on agriculture for their livelihood,” said Murenga Mwimali, WEMA-Kenya national project coordinator, reminding participants that due to climate change, the incidences and severity of droughts will increase. Combined with insect and pest attacks, this could make maize farming an unrewarding enterprise if these issues are not addressed. Mwimali then briefed the participants on the progress todate in developing drought-tolerant and insect-resistant maize varieties using biotechnology and conventional breeding techniques. “Trials show that these new varieties,” Mwimali added, “will yield 25% more than commercial hybrids.”

Joseph Bii of KARI-Kiboko Rangeland Research Station stressed that 80% of Kenya’s land is classified as arid or semiarid. It is therefore important to develop maize varieties that can tolerate the little and erratic rainfall experienced in these areas to enable farmers to continue the production of Kenya’s main staple crop and an important fodder crop for livestock, maize.

The meeting then focused on the topics of GMOs and confined field trials within the scope of WEMA. The project has so far conducted four confined field trials for genetically modified drought tolerant maize variety MON87460 with promising results; another currently conducted confined field trial with genetically modified maize variety resistant to stem borers (MON810) is progressing well. It might take a few more years before farmers can plant the genetically modified maize varieties, but the drought-tolerant CKH110078 conventional variety developed from the Drought Tolerant Maize for Africa (DTMA) materials is likely to be available this year, according to Mwimali. In addition, 14 water efficient WEMA hybrids are already in national performance trials in Kenya and could, therefore, be released as early as next year.

The participants welcomed the opportunity to exchange ideas and get clarifications on many GMO issues: sources of seed and price implications; implications of recycling seed; cross-pollination of GMOs with their local varieties; as well as the reasons why WEMA has not improved local varieties such as Kinyanya. The farmers were also advised on sources of seed and appropriate varieties for their region, particularly the Ministry of Agriculture and the Kenya Plant Health Inspectorate Service through their SMS service, and warned against relying on agro-dealers for information as they are in the business to sell.

The stakeholders toured the MON810 trial and the WEMA confined field trial facility, where they had a chance to observe a genetically modified crop for the first time. It was heartening for the meeting organizers to hear most of the farmers speak positively of the technology and the varieties in the trial, with many expressing their eagerness to try out the genetically modified varieties.

WEMA22

Honoring Dr. Evangelina Villegas Moreno, celebrating science and humanity

DSC_0420“I am so excited to be here,” said Dr. Evangelina Villegas as she received her Outstanding Alumni Award from the Department of Grain Science and Industry at the Kansas State University (KSU) at CIMMYT-El Batán on 07 May 2013. “This award is not just for me,” she added, “it is for everyone who worked with me, and everyone I worked with. I have such fond memories of my time both at CIMMYT and Kansas State, and I am very appreciative of the awards I am receiving today.” Awards? Yes, besides the KSU Award honoring Dr. Villegas and her achievements in helping to alleviate hunger and malnutrition, she also received the CIMMYT-Borlaug Award for her contributions to the Green Revolution. “Eva is an incredible woman who helped to achieve incredible progress in the improvement of maize and wheat,” said Thomas Lumpkin, CIMMYT director general, during the ceremony.

Dr. Villegas spent more than 20 years working for CIMMYT as a cereal chemist in charge of the cereal protein quality laboratory. “It was in this laboratory,” noted Lumpkin in his opening speech, “that Dr. Villegas worked with Dr. Surinder K. Vasal to develop quality protein maize, or QPM.” By the year 2000, QPM was grown on more than 1 million hectares worldwide, dramatically reversing the effects of malnutrition and increasing child health. This work earned the two researchers the 2000 World Food Prize. Dr. Villegas was the first female ever awarded this accolade, and she became a role model for women worldwide. But her “contributions to society did not end with science,” Lumpkin reminded the audience. Dr. Villegas was also responsible for overseeing an education fund for the young ‘bird boys’ of CIMMYT, who were hired to protect the experimental crops from being eaten by birds. Her efforts helped many of them pay for schooling.

After Lumpkin’s introductory speech, the microphone went to Dirk Maier, head of the Department of Grain Sciences and Industry at KSU, where Dr. Villegas received her Master’s degree in 1962. “I was reading Noel Vietmeyer’s ‘Our Daily Bread, The Essential Norman Borlaug’ and it was not until I got to about page 176 when I learned about Dr. Villegas,” said Maier. “We feel very sorry that it took us so many years to realize what a distinguished alumna we have in Dr. Villegas. We use her story to inspire our students; it helps them to understand the importance of food production and food security.” JesĂșs Moncada de la Fuente, director general of Colegio de Postgraduados and long-time friend of Dr. Villegas, then lauded her friendly personality and incredible flexibility in her work: “Usually, people work only on wheat, or only on maize, but Evangelina worked on both. She was a hybrid in that sense.”

“We are honored to call Dr. Evangelina Villegas a member of the CIMMYT family, and are delighted that she has chosen to receive her most recent accolade, from Kansas State University, here at CIMMYT Headquarters,” concluded Lumpkin before taking Dr. Villegas and the guests on a tour around CIMMYT, including the new Biosciences Complex.

Agricultural Innovation Systems: what do they mean to the work we do?

DSC_7906On daily basis, we interact with farmers, extension workers, researchers, seed companies, government officials, and many others. Our work would not be possible without these actors, many of whom focus on bringing new products, new processes, new policies, and new forms of organization into economic use. In their attempts to bring about change in agriculture, these multiple stakeholders are all part of what may be seen as agricultural innovation systems (AIS). However, CIMMYT’s engagement with AIS and its role within innovation platforms was not discussed more closely until recently. To review CIMMYT’s role and current approach to the AIS framework, summarize what has been done, and touch upon future plans, CRP MAIZE, the Global Conservation Agriculture Program (GCAP), and the Royal Tropical Institute (KIT) organized a workshop on “Agricultural Innovation Systems: what does it mean to the work we do?” The day-long event took place at CIMMYT-El Batán on 11 April 2013; it was attended by over 30 participants from several CIMMYT departments, programs, and regional offices, and facilitated by Remco Mur and Mariana Wongtschowski from KIT.

What led to this cooperation between KIT and CRP MAIZE? When presented with the challenges of CRP MAIZE, such as lifting 10 million people out of extreme poverty in 10 years, David Watson, CRP MAIZE program manager, realized that innovations systems and innovation platforms are often seen as key in achieving these high-aiming goals. “I looked on the ground, but there was no explicit agricultural innovation expertise,” Watson said, explaining why CRP MAIZE contacted KIT to take stock of innovation platform structures and operation processes in CRP MAIZE projects, and suggest ways to strengthen the AIS approach and multi-stakeholder interaction structures.

Wongtschowski presented some of the KIT report findings. Addressing the strong technology focus of CIMMYT, she stressed that innovation is not only about developing technology, but also about setting up mechanisms that would put the technology into practice. “Innovation emerges from interaction,” Wongtschowski added, casting more light on the potential role of CIMMYT, “and while researchers may play a role, their role isn’t the most important one.” Jens Andersson, CIMMYT innovation systems scientist based in Zimbabwe, provided a reflection on the KIT report focusing on the implications of adopting an AIS framework for CIMMYT’s organization of research and its partnerships. “At CIMMYT, we look at innovation platforms as a means to reach impact at scale, or as a vehicle for technology transfer,” he said; but, as the report states, feedback loops from farmers and other stakeholders back to the researchers are often missing. At the same time, innovation platforms play a key role in articulating demand for research within the AIS framework. Yet, as Andersson pointed out, there are a number of problematic assumptions about how stakeholders interact within such platforms. For example, it is generally assumed that once an innovation platform has been established, stakeholders can voice their demands. “We have to be wary of those who talk very little,” Andersson said, alluding to the often silent majority of women farmers in meetings. “They might talk little because they can’t express their ideas,” he explained, pointing to the continued role of research in identifying demand. Then he followed with a photograph from first-year on-farm trial plots under conventional ridgeand- tillage and conservation agriculture in southern Africa. Against all expectation, the maize on the conservation agriculture plot was significantly taller than the conventionally grown maize, despite the same fertilizer regime and the absence of soil cover and nitrogen-mineralizing soil tillage in the conservation agriculture treatment. Behind this mystery lies another assumption about stakeholder participation: are farmers participating in researchers’ field trials because of their keen interest in a technology package, or do they have other reasons? In this case, the trialhosting farmer ‘helped’ the researcher by deliberately planting the conventional treatment late so that the researcher’s treatment would look better. The farmer sought to secure the farm inputs supplied to him also for next season. In this area, farmers’ biggest struggle is to source expensive inputs, notably fertilizer, and the input-supported trials of the researcher provided an opportunity. Farmer participation was thus motivated by a constraint beyond the field scale. “If we don’t research and understand how the wider system works, we can’t effectively introduce new technologies,” Andersson concluded his argument for a system-oriented research.

The workshop’s morning section was wrapped up with a group discussion on the changes necessary for successful innovation. Participants discussed and presented their ideas on what could be improved in our daily work regarding AIS. One question recurred several times during the lively discussions: is it our role to always be the facilitator within innovation platforms, or should this role be carried out by farmers’ associations or other actors?

The afternoon session was devoted to presentations by Bram Govaerts, leader of the Take it to the Farmer component of MasAgro, and Michael Misiko, GCAP innovation specialist, who focused on innovation platforms and their components within Take it to the Farmer and SIMLESA, respectively. While providing an overview of Take it to the Farmer, Govaerts stressed the importance, complexity, and history of farmer organizations as parts of agricultural innovation systems, reiterating Andersson’s previous statement on the importance of understanding the system. Misiko focused on the forms of and need for innovation platforms within SIMLESA. The foundations of SIMLESA lie on integration and partnerships of systems and institutions, sustainable innovation, and impact. However, the organizations operating within SIMLESA are often poorly clustered, sometimes completely detached from the commodities with which they work. According to Misiko, the next step towards further efficiency of the project is a higher level of integration of institutions within SIMLESA’s innovation platform systems.

Bruno Gerard, GCAP director, and Watson, concluded the workshop with reflections on AIS and their roles. “Innovation platforms and innovation approaches should not be taken as the next silver bullet to achieve impact scale,” said Gerard. “They are a mean rather than an end. They are critical for better understanding of social processes within farming systems and for putting technical innovations in context as they can provide important missing knowledge for researchers, farmers, and other actors, including the private sector, in a co-learning fashion.” Gerard pointed out some of the drawbacks as well; innovation platforms and approaches are often resource-intensive and difficult to scale out and scale up due to their context-specificity. “But they can generate valuable, more generic lessons on adoption, adoptability, and the way forward,” he added. “As researchers we have to be careful to intervene more as a catalyst and honest broker and not be too central in order to achieve positive long-term changes. We have to think of a good exit strategy from the beginning. At GCAP, innovations approaches are one piece of the puzzle within our systems research framework and impact pathways,” Gerard concluded.DSC_0004

Women in Triticum visited CIMMYT

During the month of March, CIMMYT-Obregon hosted six winners of the Jeanie Borlaug Laube Women in Triticum (WIT) Early Career Award. The Award, established in 2010 by the Borlaug Global Rust Initiative, provides professional development opportunities for women working in wheat during the early stages of their careers. This year, CIMMYT provided its facilities to support Samia Berraeis (Tunisia), Sandra M. Dunckel (Switzerland), Naruoka Yukiko (Japan), Maria Newcomb (USA), Kaori Ando (Japan), and Lida Derevnina (Australia). Through the support of the WIT program, CIMMYT seeks to increase scientific knowledge and collaborative research to improve agricultural productivity. The participants had the opportunity to attend CIMMYT’s Visitors Week, benefit from daily interactions with scientists from around the world and from working with CIMMYT scientists and a group of 26 trainees from 16 different countries.

The Early Career Award is named after Jeanie Borlaug Laube, a mentor to many and the daughter of Nobel Laureate Dr. Norman E. Borlaug. She has served as Chair of the Borlaug Global Rust Initiative since October 2009. 10 candidates received the WIT Award but only 6 of them, representing 5 countries, were able to visit CIMMYT this season.

Kaori Ando (WIT Award winner from Japan and a post-doc from Washington State University) reflected on her experience at CIMMYT-Obregon: “I would like to thank all of the staff who made my visit to CIMMYT possible. Visiting CIMMYT was one of my life-long dreams; words cannot describe how ecstatic I was to be here. It was nice that our first week coincided with the Visitors Week, so that we could see each group’s field and get acquainted with their programs. It was also nice that we were given the opportunities to interact with scientists from all over the world and that we were given an overview of CIMMYT’s work. Overall, my visit to CIMMYT was very fruitful. I was able to see the organization and the latest research. I was able to deepen my knowledge of wheat breeding. The visit reminded me that there are so many things I can learn and improve, and it provided me with an opportunity to refocus my research. Through my reflection, I realized that there is room for me to improve my communication skills to be an effective scientist. The most significant aspect of my visit at CIMMYT was that I met and made many new great friends with whom I can share my passion for wheat breeding. I am especially thankful that I happened to share room with Lida [Derevnina] who has become a great friend of mine. Once again, thank you very much for providing this opportunity to me, I am newly equipped and focused and will strive to accomplish great things worthy of a WIT scientist.”WIT

Far in the South and seeking food security: East Timor farmers adopt improved maize seed

CIMMYT photo
Buddhi Kunwar, Informal Seed Production Advisor, Seeds of Life Program, MAF-East Timor (third from right wearing a hat and with sunglasses hanging from shirt) with members of Community Seed Production Group at ‘Sele’ maize harvest ceremony.”

Through five years of on-farm trials supported by the governments of East Timor and Australia using locally-suited crop varieties provided by five centers of the CGIAR-Consortium, small-scale farmers in East Timor learned about and acquired seed of improved varieties of maize and other key food crops, as well as improved cropping practices. The hungry season for the major staple, maize, was significantly reduced among the adopters and, with more recent support from the “Seed of Life” project and East Timor’s Ministry of Agriculture and Fisheries, farming communities are producing improved maize seed to satisfy local demand.

A mountainous nation at the very end of the 4,200 kilometer-long Indonesian Archipelago in the Indian Ocean, East Timor has poor soils and limited irrigation that barely support farming of its staple crops, maize and rice. It has one of the fastest-growing economies in the world, but 80% of East Timor’s working population practices agriculture. The struggles leading up to the country’s independence in 1999 left widespread food insecurity. Rural inhabitants—particularly in the uplands—suffer a several-month-long hungry season, when annual stocks of the staples and of root crops (cassava, sweet potato, taro, arrowroot) run out.

Launched in 2000 with support from the governments of Australia and East Timor, the Seeds of Life initiative organized more than 3,000 on-farm demonstrations in the initial 5 years of the project to raise awareness among farmers about improved varieties and cropping practices for maize, rice, groundnut, sweet potato, and cassava. Through more than 1,000 on-farm trials during 2006-10, East Timor’s Ministry of Agriculture and Fisheries (MAF) found that an improved open-pollinated maize variety “Sele,” derived from CIMMYT breeding programs, yielded nearly 50% more grain on average than traditional varieties. During 2008-11, nearly 28,000 households obtained seed of Sele and by 2010 more than 70% of those families (up from only 58% in 2006-07) were harvesting enough maize grain for their entire year’s food needs. Overall, Seeds of Life’s efforts to identify, multiply, and distribute seed of higher-yielding, more nutritional varieties of the food crops farmers grow have measurably improved the food security and general welfare of participating households.

“A major bottleneck for maize has been the shortage of quality seed of improved varieties,” says Buddhi Kunwar, Informal Seed Production Advisor of MAF who has been working in Seeds of Life. “Despite intensive efforts, the supply of MAF-released Sele seed was only 32 tons in 2011 and 89 tons in 2012, far below the nation’s total maize seed requirement. To address this, we have included community-based seed production as a key part of the Seeds of Life’s most recent phase, which began in 2011 and runs through 2016.”

In community-based seed production, organized groups of farmers operating close to their homes produce, store, and market maize seed, initially with training and other backstopping from MAF or non-government organizations (see the list below). Each group eventually operates on its own, once members gain experience in producing quality seed and marketing or distributing it within the group and their community.

During 2011, more than 700 community-based seed production groups were facilitated by MAF and non-government organizations. Of these, 320 were growing Sele, using 5 kilograms of certified seed they received to sow a 2,000 m2 seed plot. That year 289 groups produced a total of 46 tons of seed, which was stored in airtight steel drums and used to meet the seed requirements of group members and, with the seed left over, for barter or sale.

One problem encountered was grazing animals: these consumed the entire maize seed crops of 31 groups. “During the 2012-13 maize cropping season, MAF and NGO extension officers have selected seed plots that are well protected by fencing in most locations,” says Kunwar, “and a few communities have introduced ‘tara bandu’–a traditional social rule to restrain animals–to protect seed plots.”

In 2012-13 Seeds of Life operates in 11 of East Timor’s 13 districts, including 45 sub-districts and 135 villages. There are 680 community-based seed producer groups supported by MAF extension and another 400 groups supported by non-government organizations. According to Kunwar, Phase 3 of Seeds of Life runs from February 2011 through January 2016 and will support more than 1,000 community seed production groups for subsistence seed production and 50 farmer associations for commercial seed production, covering all 13 districts. The groups produce seed of maize as well as seed of improved varieties of rice and peanuts and cuttings of cassava and sweet potato.

For more information: B.M. Prasanna, Director, Global Maize Program, CIMMYT (b.m.prasanna@cgiar.org), or Buddhi Kunwar, Seeds of Life Program, MAF (buddhi.kunwar@seedsoflifetimor.org)

Australian funding for Seeds of Life comes through the Australian Agency for International Development (AusAID) and ACIAR; it is managed by ACIAR. The Centre for Legumes in Mediterranean Agriculture (CLIMA) within The University of Western Australia coordinates Australian-funded activities. Adapted lines of food crops for on-farm tests were provided by CIMMYT, IRRI, CIP, ICRISAT, and CIAT. Field work has been led by the Ministry of Agriculture and Fisheries (MAF), with facilitation by non-government organizations such as CARE-International, Mercy Corps, Hivos, USC-Canada, World Vision International (WVI), and Catholic Relief Services (CRS).

Water-saving techniques salvage wheat in drought-stricken Kazakhstan

Kazakhstan’s 2012 drought and high temperatures cut the country’s wheat harvests by more than half from 2011 output, but wheat under zero-tillage practices gave up to three times more grain than conventionally cultivated crops. Two million hectares are currently under zero tillage, making Kazakhstan one of the top-ten countries for conservation agriculture and helping to avoid severe wheat shortages.

“If no-till practices had not been used this period of drought, we would have gotten nothing. It would have been an absolute catastrophe,” says Valentin Dvurechenskii, Director General of the Kostanay Agricultural Research Institute in Kazakhstan, giving his verdict on the 2012 wheat crop.

After farmers planted their wheat in April, Kostanay—the country’s main wheat growing region—went two months without rain. Making matters worse, daily temperatures were several degrees above normal. At the time, farmer and Director General of the Agrofirm Dievskaya, Oleg Danilenko, echoed the view of peers: “I’ve been a farmer for 35 years, and I’ve never seen anything like this.” Danilenko said the harsh conditions pointed up the advantages of conservation agriculture, which involves reduced or zero tillage, keeping crop residues on the soil, and rotating crops. “No other results have been nearly as successful.”

Wheat on Kazakhstani farms using conventional agriculture has been severely affected by 2012's drought and high temperatures. According to farmer Idris Kozhebayev, wheat crops in Akmola Region normally average 42 grains per spike, but this year are producing only 2-4 grains per spike.
Wheat on Kazakhstani farms using conventional agriculture has been severely affected by 2012’s drought and high temperatures. According to farmer Idris Kozhebayev, wheat crops in Akmola Region normally average 42 grains per spike, but this year are producing only 2-4 grains per spike.

Lack of rain darkens crop outlook

In the village of Tonkeris, 45 km from the capital Astana in the Akmola region, farmers’ fields had received no rainfall between May and September. According to farmers in the area, drought conditions used to be rare but are becoming more frequent. “I’ve been a farmer for 30 years,” said Idris Kozhabayev. “There was drought like this in 2000 and 2010. In recent years, it’s getting worse.”

Cultivated using conventional practices, the fields of Akmola were expected to produce only enough wheat for next year’s seed. “The farmers’ fields I work with all look like this. Some are worse,” said Daniyar Andibayev, an agronomist in the region.

Meanwhile, in Kostanay, many farmers had adopted conservation agriculture techniques that protected them from drought’s worst effects. With these, farmers reported yields of 2 tons per hectare, while some farmers using conventional practices lost their entire crop.

 Wheat grown under conservation agriculture in the Kostanay region of Kazakhstan has stayed healthy and is set to give a good yield despite the year's severe drought and high temperatures.
Wheat grown under conservation agriculture in the Kostanay region of Kazakhstan has stayed healthy and is set to give a good yield despite the year’s severe drought and high temperatures.

Conserving where it counts

Kazakhstan is the world’s sixth largest wheat exporter. More than 14 million of the country’s 15 million hectares of wheat is rainfed, meaning the crop relies on precipitation and is thus vulnerable to dry weather. Reports in January 2013 said the 2012 drought had shrunk the wheat crop 57% from 2011’s record harvests.

Farmers are initially attracted to zero tillage and conservation agriculture because the approaches dramatically cut costs: farming this way requires less labor, machinery use, fuel, water, or fertilizers. In rainfed cropping, conservation agriculture can also boost yields.

Research has shown that conservation agriculture increases soil moisture by as much as 24% on most fields. In Kazakhstan the practices capture snow on the surface and improve water retention under heavy snowfall and subzero temperatures. Zero tillage also augments soil organic matter and cuts erosion by 75-100%. All this has helped to nearly double average wheat yields, from 1.4 to 2.6 tons per hectare, according to Dvurechenskii. In December 2011 Dvurechenskii was awarded the “Gold Star” medal and the rank “Hero of Labor of Kazakhstan” by the country’s President, in recognition of his work to promote conservation agriculture.

The findings of a 2012 FAO-Investment Centre mission to Kazakhstan1 suggest that adoption of zero tillage and conservation agriculture had raised domestic wheat production by almost 2 million tons. According to the mission report, this represents some US$ 0.58 billion more income over 2010-12, enough grain to satisfy the annual cereal requirements of almost 5 million people, and the sequestering of about 1.8 million additional tons of CO2 per year.

Pushing out with better practices

With the support of CIMMYT, FAO, ICARDA, the World Bank, the Ministry of Agriculture of Kazakhstan, and other international organizations and donors, Kazakhstan went from practically nothing under conservation agriculture in 2000 to 0.5 million hectares in 2007. In 2012, as a result of ongoing farmer engagement through demonstration plots, field days, and close work with farmer unions, conservation agriculture is now practiced on 2.0 million hectares—13% of the country’s wheat-growing area.”This amazing adoption is thanks to a few scientists who saw the potential, but more importantly to the pioneer farmers who perfected the techniques and put them into practice; farmers believe farmers,” says conservation agriculture expert Pat Wall, who, together with CIMMYT colleagues Alexei Morgounov and Muratbek Karabayev, initiated field trials with Kazakhstani scientists in the country’s northern steppes in 2000.

“The main achievement of CIMMYT in Kazakhstan has been the changing of the minds of farmers and scientists,” observes Bayan Alimgazinova, head of the Crop Production Department of KazAgroInnovation, a specialized organization created by the Ministry of Agriculture to increase the competitiveness of the country’s agricultural sector. Based on the positive results of research trials and tests in farmers’ fields, Kazakhstan’s current state policy calls for every province to pursue zero tillage.

“Kazakhstan has a wheat growing area of 15 million hectares presently and can increase it up to 20 million hectares,” added Murat Karabayev, CIMMYT representative in Kazakhstan. “This is extremely important for the food security of the country, the Central Asian region, and globally. There is a real opportunity to double yields using new advanced technologies and improved varieties. We’ve already seen this through conservation agriculture.”

For more information: Muratbek Karabayev, CIMMYT Representative in Kazakhstan (m.karabayev@cgiar.org)
CIMMYT’s conservation agriculture activities in Kazakhstan have been funded by the different sources, including from CIMMYT’s own resources and the comprehensive World Bank Agriculture Competitiveness Project (ACP). CIMMYT received two grants between 2008 and 2010 from the World Bank’s ACP to promote conservation agriculture practices in Kazakhstan.

Muratbek Karabayev, CIMMYT Representative in Kazakhstan (left) and Auyezkhan K. Darinov, President–Chairman, Republic Public Union of Farmers of Kazakhstan.
Muratbek Karabayev, CIMMYT Representative in Kazakhstan (left) and Auyezkhan K. Darinov, President–Chairman, Republic Public Union of Farmers of Kazakhstan.

Interview: Auyezkhan K. Darinov, 2012

Auyezkhan K. Darinov has been a farmer since 1993, and represents two million of his fellows as President-Chairman of the”Kazakhstan Farmers Union”. He works to unite and provide a voice to small and medium-scale farmers in Kazakhstan and to promote pro-farmer policies with the Ministry of Agriculture.

What are the main activities of the Kazakhstan Farmers Union?
We work with farmers to influence the government and to push for policies that can benefit farmers. The government sometimes doesn’t understand the issues farmers are facing. We meet with the Prime Minister, ministers, other officials every week to push for ideas for farmers. We organize events, meetings, and seminars and this has been our best strategy for getting conservation agriculture to farmers.

What strategies do you use to introduce conservation agriculture to farmers?
The Farmers Union was established in 2000. Since 2002, we have been working with farmers to introduce them to the merits of conservation agriculture. Now, we are working with farmers in all of the provinces and districts. Through our representatives, we have established a network of farmers who work on spreading the technology of conservation agriculture throughout the country. We are the largest NGO in Kazakhstan and we represent the interests of farmers in all levels of the social-economic and political spheres of the country. We are working with the government to develop policies for next year and to draft programs.

What does this year’s drought mean for farmers?
There are estimates of expected yields for this year which are being reported. However since we know the stories of farmers and the real situation of farmers’ fields, we know that the official estimates are higher than the reality. We’re expecting up to 2 million tons of grain less than official estimates. This year, many farmers are in crucial situations and need assistance from the government.

Do you think more farmers will be convinced to start using conservation agriculture following the drought?
Conservation agriculture is still a challenge in some areas, like Southern Kazakhstan. However, on the whole, farmers are already convinced of the merits of conservation agriculture, but it’s a problem of resources. There have to be changes in the agriculture system to equip small and medium-sized farmers with equipment that they can’t afford. It’s an expensive venture to make the shift from traditional practices to new technologies. That’s why we’re working with farmers to form cooperatives so equipment can be shared and lent to farmers.

What role has CIMMYT played in Kazakhstan?
Kazakhstan is now the most experienced in conservation agriculture in Central Asia. We worked with pioneers of conservation agriculture technologies such as Ken Sayre and Pat Wall. CIMMYT was one of the first and the best in conservation agriculture. In all large projects, CIMMYT invites the Farmers’ Union and similarly, the Farmers’ Union invites CIMMYT.

What are some of the main challenges you see for agriculture in Kazakhstan in the future?
All irrigation water is coming from neighboring countries. We need to change the agriculture system to use less water and produce higher yields. There is also a need to develop new varieties which are drought tolerant. That’s where the work of CIMMYT comes in. That’s why the work of CIMMYT in Kazakhstan is so important.

Wheat seems to have a special importance to farmers here. Why is that?
Wheat
 it is our money. Basically, if farmers have wheat, they have money. We are a wheat and meat country. Other crops have importance, but not like wheat. Changing the volume of wheat changes the national economy. Farmers cannot imagine how they would survive without wheat. Farmers knew that this year would be dry. But nevertheless, they planted wheat. That’s how important wheat is in Kazakhstan.

1 Unpublished; see also a 2009 Investment Centre report on zero tillage in Kasakhstan.

Inspiring a new generation of scientists: The Borlaug-Ruan Internship

Liz-RocheMany scientists begin exploring at a young age; they try to figure out the things they don’t know, ask questions of others, and see how this information might be useful to them in creating new knowledge. The very lucky ones might have a mentor, or at the very least, a place where they are encouraged to cultivate their curiosity and use what they find out to help others.

This is one of the many reasons why CIMMYT participates in hosting Borlaug-Ruan Interns. Since 1998, over 180 Borlaug-Ruan Interns have traveled to Bangladesh, Brazil, China, Costa Rica, Egypt, Ethiopia, India, Indonesia, Kenya, Malaysia, Mexico, Peru, Philippines, Taiwan, Tanzania, Thailand, Trinidad, and Turkey; CIMMYT has proudly hosted 19 of these intelligent, ambitious individuals. One such student, Elizabeth Roche, visited CIMMYT-Mexico during the summer of 2011. “I loved every minute of my two month internship at CIMMYT,” she said. “Working in the wheat pathology lab enabled me to learn so much about agriculture and global food security.” Elizabeth is now majoring in Plant Pathology at Ohio State University. According to Hans Braun, Director of CIMMYT’s Global Wheat Program, by actively working alongside senior scientists, in the lab and the field, interns “really experience what science is. This is not sitting in a classroom reading from a textbook; it is about discovering a potential career and being inspired to further their scientific knowledge.”

Last summer, Tessa Ries left her hometown of Hastings, Minnesota, to conduct an internship at CIMMYT-Turkey. Based mainly at the field station in Eskisehir, Tessa worked alongside wheat pathologists screening wheat for resistance to crown rot and cereal cyst nematodes, two of the most serious constraints to wheat production in the region. Tessa is now studying at the University of Minnesota and has written a blog for the Global Agricultural Development Initiative about her time at CIMMYT. In 2013, CIMMYT hopes to welcome two more interns to its centers in Mexico and Turkey, continuing Norman Borlaug’s mission in inspiring young people worldwide to join the fight against hunger.

For more information on the Borlaug-Ruan International Internship click here.

Women driving changes in agriculture

Marianne BĂ€nziger is the Deputy Director General for Research and Partnerships for CIMMYT.

mbanziger_womensDayMarianne started her career with CIMMYT as a post-doctoral fellow in 1994 working in Maize Physiology to develop varieties tolerant to low soil fertility and drought. She was based at the CIMMYT office in Zimbabwe during 1996-2004, after which she was appointed Director of the Maize Program, based in Nairobi. In 2009 Marianne became the DDG-Research. In that capacity, she led the development of the CGIAR research programs for maize and wheat.

Why did you choose agriculture?

I chose agriculture because it’s a science that impacts people’s lives. It’s as simple as that. I was also attracted to that it builds up on a wide range of disciplines – biology, chemistry, math, socioeconomics.

Your maize breeding work in Eastern and Southern Africa had, and still has, an enormous impact. Do you think that as a woman you gave a specific gender perspective to your research?

I lived in Africa for almost 15 years and it was impossible to ignore the people — the families — who struggled to improve their livelihoods. I saw them every day. We interacted frequently with both men and women farmers. In the environments we worked, the concern of the women farmers was more on avenues that improved household food security while the men were more concerned about selling their crops and generating income. Of course, families need both: Enough food to eat and income to pay for education fees, health costs, and things like farm inputs.

Another very obvious learning was that Africa has many strong women who drive change across the continent. You find them among farmers, among professionals, and among researchers alike.

Did you work differently as a woman breeder?

There have been books written about differences in men and women “behavior” or “traits” – In my opinion, these are stereotypes and they often break down. Every person puts their imprint, their personality, on their work, for better or worse, whether with “male” and “female” stereo-typed traits.

Did you have rural women in mind when you were developing different varieties of maize?

Interacting with farmers in Africa, I tried to understand how they make decisions and how those decisions link with and meet up with real options in the value chain. For instance, there was a stronger preference for hybrids by male farmers while female farmers preferred OPVs (open-pollinated varieties, which allow farmers to save seeds). We created an integrated breeding program that offered both OPVs and hybrids. The first generation of successful products was OPVs, “women typed” products. However, the reason for them to become available early on had to do with the seed sector ability to scale them up more rapidly as compared drought tolerant hybrids, not whether they were “female” or “male” preferred. The lesson learned is that researchers can craft gender differentiated options, we however need to understand the value chain to ensure that those options indeed become available and accessible at farm level.

Why did women prefer OPVs?

It gave them a greater sense of security about their ability to feed their families. Because they could save seed from year-to-year they felt more in control of their lives. Men preferred hybrids because they had a higher yield which meant more money in the market.

Unfortunately, preferences too often get treated as an either/or issue. We involved schools in rural areas in executing on-farm trials. I remember one particular instance talking to the headmaster of a school located in a drought prone area. I learned that classes had only one schoolbook which they had to share and pass around more than 50 children. Except for two old benches everybody was sitting on the floor. I asked him if the children – under these circumstances – were able to get a quality education and go to secondary school later on. He said the greatest concern wasn’t the lack of benches or books but that the children came to school and fell asleep because they were hungry. They were hungry because they only got one meal a day.

That school was in a drought-prone area and it made me once again realize how real and prominent food insecurity was. So, if you are a mother in such an environment, clearly the first thing you are concerned about is feeding your family and have a sense of control that you can achieve that. Setting food security as a priority does not mean that the woman would not want to grow hybrids as her family becomes more food secure. She also wants income for books and school fees. She would like to see her children learning a profession and likely leave agriculture. We must understand that poverty and hunger are intertwined and do our best to address both.

What do you think are the priorities to empower rural women in regions where we work?

Last week, I was in India at a meeting with farmers – both men and women – and one of the women stood up and said, “We want to have the same access to information and opportunities as men have.”

In the past, women have been deprived of information, of access to credit, and of the same opportunities offered to men. Fortunately many organizations including governmental organization begin to put more proactive gender strategies in place. We can and must ensure that more women get access to empowering information and opportunities. In our case, we are right now engaging in a gender audit of our projects, looking for new avenues to empower women. This is not just about analyzing how women or men think, but asking ourselves how we can empower women through our interventions. We however also have to accept that certain, indeed many, interventions have benefits to men and women alike. So doing a gender audit isn’t about being able to tick off the box and say ‘we addressed the gender aspects of this project’. It is about enriching our understanding how interventions, people, society, value chains, opportunities connect and then choosing more effective interventions that improve the livelihoods of the poor.

What advice would you give to young women scientists?

Pursue your dreams and be what you would like to be. I’d offer that advice to everyone, independent of whether they are a woman or a man, tall or short, or one nationality or the other.

My research engages gender in multiple ways

IMG_1965Emma Gaalaas Mullaney is a researcher studying gender and agriculture. She has served as a Youth Representative to the United Nations Convention on Biological Diversity and Commission on the Status of Women since 2010.

What is your field of research?

I am currently pursuing a dual-PhD in Geography and Women’s Studies at Pennsylvania State University. My dissertation centers on an ethnography of maize production in the eastern Central Highland region of Mexico. I lived in the region for over a year, conducting livelihood studies and oral histories with small-scale, commercially-oriented maize farmers in the Amecameca Valley, and with agricultural extension technicians and scientific researchers working in the nearby Texcoco Valley.

How does gender figure into your research?

My research engages gender in multiple ways. For example, I work closely with farming households and analyze the gendered divisions of labor and decision-making involved in agricultural production. I conducted the oral histories and participatory observation with both female and male members of a given family who are involved in different aspect of maize cultivation, use, and marketing. I also work with both female and male agricultural extension agents and scientists, examining commonalities and differences in their work experiences and practices. I am interested in how gender interacts with other forms of social difference to shape our work and our everyday lives.

What drew you to this work?

I was raised in the rural Midwest (United States), and my extended family has grown corn and soybeans in south-central Wisconsin for generations. The lived experiences of those who work in agriculture has always been a deep interest of mine. I have found that paying close attention to what’s going on with food producers – or with farmers who no longer produce food for human consumption, as is the case for corn growers in the United States – can yield important insight into the strengths and failings of our society. Over the years, as my interests in agriculture and social justice have taken me through many different spaces of formal education, policy negotiation, and scholarly debate, I often gain the most inspiration and understanding while hanging out in fields, in kitchens, and in street markets. Ultimately, my work as a researcher is guided by and accountable to what’s happening on the farm.

When you were gathering the oral histories did certain themes or consistencies emerge?

The oral histories offer rich detail into the livelihoods of different actors and the challenges they face in their daily work routines. As these narratives make abundantly clear, each of the farmers, extension agents, and researchers with whom I spoke is an expert in her or his field. Moreover, they all expressed a high degree of ingenuity and innovation in their work, though this creativity was not necessarily rewarded by their respective institutions. The oral histories also highlighted the gendered divisions of labor among these agricultural workers. Though both women and men worked in leading positions – whether as farmers and maize vendors, as directors of extension teams, or as heads of research departments – the women consistently faced greater risks and uncertainties in their job. In every case I encountered, women took primary responsibility for the household management and decision-making that fell outside of their official job (childcare, bills, etc), putting them in a more highly pressured and less predictable position than their male counterparts. Women were also more likely to find their innovative ideas and contributions dismissed by colleagues on a regular basis, and many described feeling consistently like an outsider in their own work environment.

When you were gathering the oral histories what surprised you?

I did not expect to find such dramatic differences in the level of authority and control that women had over their own work among farming households as compared to women working as extension agents or scientific researchers. Though strict gender roles are perhaps more obvious in the rural farming communities of the Amecameca Valley – where men take charge of the planting, harvesting, and other fieldwork and women handle much of the food preparation, seed selection, and selling of maize in regional street markets – women in these communities are the undisputed experts in the work that they do, which grants them a great deal of space for creative problem solving and risk management on behalf of their family and the local maize economy. In contrast, women working as agricultural technicians, engineers, and researchers are in an environment where gender equality is an explicit priority, but where the standard worker in their position is, and has historically been, male. These women described finding themselves competing for recognition in a setting that often undervalues their individual insights and capabilities.

Do you think there are misconceptions about the research you’ve chosen to pursue?

Well, judging by a common response to my academic affiliation, many people mistakenly assume that, since I come from a Women’s Studies Department, I must begin my research by looking around for women. In fact, I begin my research by asking how particular agricultural systems work, and who is empowered or excluded by these systems. Gender is a force that shapes the agricultural practices and opportunities of both women and men around the world, and it is therefore necessary that I am well trained in gender analysis in order to ask the questions that I do. Gender, interacting with other forms of social difference, dictates who does what kind of work, whether that work is recognized or valued, who has access to resources such as land and credit, and who is allowed to speak with authority on a given subject. Understanding how gender functions is therefore essential to understanding how agriculture is happening and how to improve it. This is true even, perhaps especially, when I walk onto a cornfield, or into an office or lab and encounter only men.

Generally speaking, what are the conclusions your research revealed?

Given that I am still in the process of analyzing data from my dissertation research, I have not yet finished drawing conclusions about maize production in the eastern Central Highlands and its implications for development and biodiversity conservation. At the same time, there are clear themes that have emerged over the course of my fieldwork and which resonate with existing interdisciplinary research. By far the most prominent are the interdependence of innovation and diversity, and their combined importance in agricultural production. Diversity, in terms of maize germplasm, cultivation strategies, and economic systems, is both a resource for and product of innovation in agricultural production, and is a primary source of resilience for small-scale farming households in the Amecameca Valley. A diverse set of perspectives, specialties, and lived experiences is also an obvious source of creativity and innovation among agricultural extension agents and scientific researchers. My research highlights that the strongest and most productive work environments are those that foster these forms of diversification.

What did you discover about gender and agriculture in Mexico?

The most important lessons that I learned about gender and agriculture, after over a year of fieldwork in Mexico’s Central Highlands, are for the most part not new discoveries at all. Decades and decades of extensive research has shown that gender is not merely one social factor among many, one that may or may not be relevant in a given situation. Rather, gender is a dominant social institution that is guaranteed to play a role in shaping agricultural outcomes, even though this process takes many different forms in different places. That Mexico, along with countries around the world, including the United States, currently has such a high degree of gender inequality has devastating consequences for those whose work is ignored or undervalued, and for agricultural production as a whole. Perhaps the new lesson offered by my research is that these very old patterns of inequality still persist today.

What types of changes (policy, research, etc.) do you think would help women and families in Mexico?

There must be public accountability for gender inequality and violence. The different types of gender injustice occurring in Mexico today are not equivalent, but invisible women farmers, gender discrimination in the workplace, and femicide are all products of a society that systematically devalues women’s work and their lives. This is not a problem that is caused by individuals acting alone, nor is it one that can be solved at the individual level; public policy must be held responsible for the fact that gender inequality continues to increase in the face of economic restructuring and global climate change. One important starting point, that is also an important part of any ongoing solution, would be for researchers and policymakers alike to listen carefully to the many women who are already struggling for change.

Finally, I’d like to express my heartfelt thanks to everyone who has worked with me in my research. I am indebted to all the farmers, extension agents, and researchers who graciously allowed me to interview them and to poke my nose into their lives. They do such important, inspiring work, and I look forward to building on these relationships in future research.

 

Women entering the workforce raises wheat consumption

MasonNicole Mason is an assistant professor of International Development at the Department of Agricultural, Food, and Resource Economics at Michigan State University.

Currently on long-term assignment with the Indaba Agricultural Policy Research Institute in Lusaka, Zambia, Mason completed her PhD in Agricultural Economics at MSU in August 2011. Her research focuses on various dimensions of agricultural input and output subsidy programs in Africa, including political economy aspects as well as program effects on smallholder farmer behavior, poverty, inequality, and maize market prices. Prior to joining MSU, Mason served as a Peace Corps volunteer in Guinea and worked with the Partnership to Cut Hunger & Poverty in Africa. Mason was an invited speaker at the conference “Wheat for food security in Africa: Science and policy dialogue about the future of wheat in Africa,” held in Addis Ababa, Ethiopia, during October 2012, and organized by the Ethiopian Institute of Agricultural Research (EIAR), CIMMYT, ICARDA, IFPRI, the African Union, and WHEAT-the CGIAR research program.

What drew you to international development research and outreach?

During my undergraduate studies at Allegheny College, I took a class entitled “Understanding Environmental Problems in Africa,” taught by the applied economist and returned Peace Corps volunteer Dr. Terrence Bensel. He piqued my interest in Africa and the Peace Corps, and I decided to join the Peace Corps after college. I had the privilege of serving as a volunteer in the rural community of Dalein in the Fouta Djallon region of Guinea in West Africa. I worked with smallholder farmers and women’s gardening cooperatives and saw firsthand the critical role that agriculture plays in the livelihoods of so many rural Africans. These experiences inspired me to pursue a career in international agricultural development research, capacity building, and outreach.

What drew you to work on the trends and drivers of wheat consumption in sub-Saharan Africa?

In the summer of 2007, I worked with colleagues from the Food Security Research Project and the Zambia Central Statistical Office to implement an Urban Consumption Survey in four cities in Zambia (Lusaka, Kitwe, Mansa, and Kasama). We interviewed over 2,000 households and asked them about all of the food and non-food items they had consumed in the preceding 30 days. We also visited many food retail outlets in the four cities, including supermarkets, bakeries, small grocers, and roadside and mobile vendors. I was struck by how popular bread and other wheat products were among respondents of all income groups. It was also interesting to see the long queues for bread in the supermarkets and the vendors selling bread at a slight markup right outside the supermarket to people who wanted to avoid the long lines inside. I learned that similar things were happening in other African cities and towns, and decided to work with MSU agricultural economist Thomas S. Jayne and CIMMYT socioeconomist Bekele Shiferaw to delve into the factors driving rising wheat consumption in Africa.

What did you discover?

I expected urbanization to be a key factor driving rising wheat consumption in Africa but surprisingly, our results suggest that after controlling for other factors like GDP, total population, and the prices of bread and products that are complements or substitutes for bread, changes in the percentage of the total population that resides in urban areas don’t have a significant effect on country-level wheat consumption. This was surprising because in most countries in Africa (Ethiopia is an exception), wheat consumption is much higher in urban than in rural areas. We’re still investigating this finding to unpack what is going on. One possibility is that it’s not urbanization per se that drives wheat consumption but rather the demographic and socioeconomic changes that go along with it. These are things like rising incomes and increased labor force participation by women.

What did you observe about gender and wheat consumption in Africa?

A key finding of our study related to gender is that rising labor force participation by women—especially if it rises faster than labor force participation by men—has a significant, positive effect on country-level wheat consumption. We suspect that this is because wheat products (bread, pasta, chapati, etc.) take less time to prepare than many other popular staple carbohydrates like maize meal porridge (called nshima in Zambia and consumed widely in eastern and southern Africa). When women work more outside of the home, they have less time to devote to food preparation and may prefer quicker options like these wheat products.

What types of changes (policy, research, etc.) do you think would help women and families in sub-Saharan Africa?

This is really broad. But in general, I believe women provide most of the labor for agricultural production in Africa but often don’t have much control over the revenue from the sales of products they helped to produce. Women also tend to have less access to productive assets and technologies that could help raise agricultural productivity. Empowering women—for example, through formal education as well as adult education on improved farming practices and business/management skills, improving their access to credit, etc.—is critical not only for improving the well-being of women but also that of their children, families, and communities.

To see the full study on rising wheat consumption in sub-Saharan Africa by Mason, Jayne, and Shiferaw,  please visit http://fsg.afre.msu.edu/papers/idwp127.pdf

 

Published 2013

Carlos Slim, Bill Gates and Mexican dignitaries visit CIMMYT to inaugurate Biosciences Complex

DSC_9572On 13 February 2013, CIMMYT inaugurated a new US$ 25 million research complex at its headquarters in El BatĂĄn. The new advanced bioscience research facilities, 45 kilometers (20 miles) from Mexico City, marked its grand opening to a crowd of more than 100 invited guests.

The event was attended by Bill Gates, Carlos Slim, Lic. Enrique Martínez y Martínez, Mexican Secretary of Agriculture and leader of the Ministry of Agriculture, Livestock, Rural Development, Fisheries and Food (SAGARPA), and Dr. Eruviel Ávila Villegas, Governor of the State of Mexico.

The new bioscience complex will allow researchers to speed the development of valuable seed, by way of more precise characterization of its genetic traits, such as heat and drought tolerance, disease and pest resistance, and seed health, as well as the nutritional and industrial quality of the grain. CIMMYT was the cradle of the Green Revolution 60 years ago. By providing cutting-edge facilities and an enhanced research capacity, this alliance will significantly improve farm productivity.

“We are enthusiastic about this alliance,” said Bill Gates, co-founder of the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation. “Bringing together the collective experience of our respective organizations, we can promote innovation to transform the lives of farmers in Mexico and around the world. Investing in agricultural development is one of the most effective investments we can make. It allows farming communities to become self-sufficient and prosperous by growing and selling more of what they produce.”

Carlos Slim added: “This alliance to promote research and development by CIMMYT, with the collaboration of national and international scientists dedicated to improved seed and generating more efficient techniques, is a step toward making this knowledge available to farmers everywhere, particularly small- and intermediate-scale farmers, as well as promoting economic growth, employment, and food self-sufficiency and exports from this sector.”

Both the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation and the Carlos Slim Foundation have been generous supporters of CIMMYT’s mission. The buildings inaugurated today are the result of the Carlos Slim Foundation’s investment in CIMMYT. The Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation partners with CIMMYT in projects to fight hunger around the world. The impact of the commitment made today by both foundations will be felt beyond Mexico’s borders.

“We will see the introduction of modern and more sustainable farming practices,” said CIMMYT Director General Thomas A. Lumpkin. “These include precision and conservation agriculture, backed by intelligent mobile phone services in farmers’ fields and digital tools in labs that will open our access to the full genetic diversity of maize and wheat to benefit the world’s poorest farming communities.”

Speaking at the ribbon-cutting ceremony, Mr. Gates spoke of the importance of CIMMYT’s role in agricultural research and development: “When you ask where the best work is done for poor farmers, the answer is here, at CIMMYT.”

Ribbon-cutting ceremony: Sara Boettiger, Chair, CIMMYT Board of Trustees; Eruviel Ávila, Governor of the State of Mexico; Bill Gates, President of the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation; Lic. Enrique Martínez, Secretary of SAGARPA; Carlos Slim, President of the Carlos Slim Foundation; and Thomas Lumpkin, CIMMYT Director General.
Ribbon-cutting ceremony: Sara Boettiger, Chair, CIMMYT Board of Trustees; Eruviel Ávila, Governor of the State of Mexico; Bill Gates, President of the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation; Lic. Enrique Martínez, Secretary of SAGARPA; Carlos Slim, President of the Carlos Slim Foundation; and Thomas Lumpkin, CIMMYT Director General.

Bill Gates and Carlos Slim Partner to Support Innovation for Farmers

Daimoniz Miondo is one of 800 farmers in Chipeni, Mvera Extension Planning Area, Dowa District, Malawi, who has adopted conservation agriculture practices in recent years with joint support from Malawi’s Department of Agricultural Extension Services, the NGO Total LandCare, and CIMMYT. “I’m harvesting between 30 and 40 bags of maize now per acre, where I used to get only 15 or 20 bags,” says Miondo, who farms to support a household of seven. “Before conservation agriculture, there was a lot of erosion and the rain would wash away the fertilizer and affect the yields.” Conservation agriculture practices cut labor and other farm costs, as well as helping to capture and hold rainfall, thus salvaging harvests when drought hits. Photo credit: Trevor Samson/CIMMYT

Originally posted on the Impatient Optimists blog (Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation) on 13 February 2013.

We are extremely pleased to welcome Bill Gates and Carlos Slim HelĂș to CIMMYT headquarters near Mexico City today. They have come to inaugurate major infrastructure improvements for CIMMYT supported by their respective foundations. The nearly 20,000 square meters of construction include badly-needed advanced laboratories, greenhouses, and training facilities. They will be used for cutting-edge research by CIMMYT to help speed the access of developing country farmers to the benefits of science and innovation.

Where are we now and what have we learned? 

The repeated food price hikes of recent years most sorely affect the poor, who spend as much as three-quarters of their daily income simply to eat. We know that 0.8 billion human beings are not eating enough.

We’ve not seen the last of food price crises. Widespread, severe droughts of 2012 have devastated global grain harvests, further reduced food stocks, made export markets skittish. Because the world relies heavily on a few, high-production “bread basket” countries, low stocks superimposed on financial speculation will surely bring further, seismic shocks to global food markets.

From the 2007-08 food price peaks, which fueled food riots in more than 30 countries, it should be clear that global food security is everyone’s concern, in both developed and developing countries.

Not all is gloom and doom: Innovation can support more precise and productive science and farming.

There is hope, and more bountiful harvests and sustainable agriculture are key parts of the solution. In many developing countries farming continues to employ large segments of the populace and plays a central role in national economies. There is enormous potential for farmers to boost productivity, reduce reliance on destructive practices, move beyond subsistence, and power development at large. Best of all, new, exciting science is available to adapt to small-scale farmers’ needs, and these farmers are actually looking to policymakers and research and extension organizations to support them.

CIMMYT partners with those actors and others worldwide to offer farmers improved options: better seed and knowhow, improved cropping systems, more secure crop storage methods. Progressive farmers begin to view their daily occupation as an enterprise, rather than mere subsistence, so the focus shifts onto science and innovation to gain precision. Several examples:

  • DNA analysis to home in on high-value maize and wheat traits for better yields, disease resistance, heat and drought tolerance.
  • Doubled haploids to speed the creation of genetically pure inbred lines and new maize hybrids.
  • Conservation and precision agriculture, including more targeted application of irrigation water and fertilizer to boost system output while saving resources and the environment.
  • Cell phone services so farmers can access precise, locally-tailored information on weather, markets, recommended crops and practices for their fields.

An extraordinary initiative funded by and co-coordinated with Mexico—known as MasAgro, the Sustainable Modernization of Traditional Agriculture—is taking these and other innovations directly to Mexican farmers and sequencing the DNA of CIMMYT’s vast maize and wheat seed collections. Similarly innovative partnerships in Africa and Asia feature cropping systems approaches to increase yields and the resilience of the resource base, while supporting farmers’ direct involvement to test and promote new practices. Millions of smallholder farmers and consumers in sub-Saharan Africa are benefiting from the adoption of drought tolerant maize varieties developed using advanced breeding techniques.

The work of all these partners, including CIMMYT, would not be possible without the support of other key partners: national governments, foundations, development banks, and other public and private agencies, including the CGIAR Consortium, who represent the political will and commitment of their constituents through their donations and engagement. The Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation provides not only momentous funding for our work, but invaluable technical guidance and political support.

Returning to today’s inauguration, thanks to the generous support of the Carlos Slim Foundation and the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, we have effectively doubled our research capacity here in Mexico.

We can accelerate our efforts to unlock the tremendous potential of wheat and maize using modern information and communications technology, combined with the improved and more sustainable agricultural practices. The very personal and proactive engagement in CIMMYT’s mission of visionary personalities such as Mr. Slim HelĂș and Mr. Gates, and the on-going support of their respective foundations for our relatively little-known research institute, send a strong signal to the world that something important must be going on here. Indeed there is.