Brief Background to the Project: Brief Background to the Project Bronte Hotel, Zimbabwe
16 April 2004
Justification: Justification Aware of the value of agrobiodiversity to individuals, communities and nations (ecological, genetic, social, economic, scientific, educational, cultural, recreational and aesthetic)
Concerned that agrobiodiversity is being significantly reduced by certain human activities (introduction of a few uniform varieties and alien and invasive species, overexploitation, war etc)
Aware that the best way of conserving agrobiodiversity is to manage it in its natural habitat (on-farm)
Justification 2: Justification 2 Aware of the lack of consensus on the best way to support on-farm conservation of agrobiodiversity, what incentives/interventions (pay farmers or move towards conservation through utilization)
Also aware of the fact that many studies have been done to understand on-farm conservation dynamics (IPGRI, FAO, GTZ)
Realising that no best practice guidelines and concrete policy recommendations for supporting and scaling-up on-farm conservation efforts have been developed
Objectives: Objectives To assess the potential for scaling-up different kinds of grass-roots level support for on-farm conservation of agrobiodiversity in Eastern and Southern Africa
To provide information for grass-roots development workers, national policy makers and the international biodiversity community on what kinds of support are most effective and what are the pre-conditions for their success
The focus is on looking at the institutional conditions for success. Success being assessed using defined indicators (biodiversity, knowledge, livelihoods)
Methodology: Methodology Regional Methodology Workshop
Held in Lusaka, June 2002
To build the project team
Develop a shared understanding of the issues in agrobiodiversity
Develop and field test research methodology
Identify case study projects
Methodology 2: Methodology 2 Data Collection (Field)
Team of two per case study (biodiversity expert, participatory expert)
Tools used (semi-structured interviews, scoring, institutional mapping, stakeholder analysis, time lines, trend analysis)
Data Analysis Workshop
Held in Addis Ababa, February 2003
Analyse data
Synthesize reports
Develop project web site
Case Studies: Case Studies Ethiopia: Ethio-Organic Seed Action Project (EOSA) – Tamiru Mulualem & Joanne Manda
Kenya: The East African Sub-Regional Pilot Project for Farmer Field Schools, Integrated Production and Pest Management (IPPM FFS) Martin Kimani & Abisai Mafa
Zambia: Ipongo Development Programme (IDP) Arthur Nkonde & Tamiru Mulualem
Zambia: Organic Producers and Processors Association of Zambia (OPPAZ) Arthur Nkonde
Case Studies 2: Case Studies 2 Zimbabwe: A programme for the Development of Strategies for in situ Conservation of Plant Genetic Resources for Food and Agriculture in the Semi-Arid Regions of Zimbabwe. Elijah Rusike & Morag Ferguson
Zimbabwe: Southern Africa Landrace Research, Extension and Development (SALRED) Project. Abisai Mafa & Joanne Manda
IPGRI/FAO – Zimbabwe: IPGRI/FAO – Zimbabwe 1997 in Zimbabwe and Mali incl Tcholotcho, 120km Bulawayo
conservation measurement (surveys) farmer, molecular, GIS), research & support
Two Wards, ? farmers
Seed fairs, seed banks, farmer field fora
IPGRI/FAO - impact: IPGRI/FAO - impact Marginal ↑ # varieties – all improved; 4 MVs replaced 5 FVs of sorghum
Knowledge thru’ farmer field fora only
Livelihoods: prizes, what else?
Seed fairs ↑ interaction (highly valued), but not much control
IPGRI/FAO – institutional conditions: IPGRI/FAO – institutional conditions Traditionally strong community sharing and pulling together
Shifting objectives & staff changes
Poor communication channels top-down
Long funding chain
Limited/conflicting incentives
Inadequate capacity building for community control eg seed fairs
Drought, politics
EOSA – Ethiopia: EOSA – Ethiopia Since 2002, various sites nationwide incl. Ejere
conservation thru’ organic farming + marketing
530 farmers at Ejere
community seed supply (loans, seed banks), organic production techniques, market links to national + international
EOSA - impact: EOSA - impact Increased on-farm biodiversity (total), enhanced farmers varieties, focussing on durum wheat
Positive impact on livelihoods: production, income, access to markets
Integrated modern + trad. production + conservation systems
530 ïƒ 1,000 farmers. Improved coordination + organisation thru’ community groups: training, demo plots
EOSA – institutional conditions: EOSA – institutional conditions Long-standing relationships (since 1994)
Appropriate technologies
Potentially sustainable funding from industry (strong links)
20-30% price premium; 40,000 t p.a. unfilled demand
Poor infrastructure
Increasing climatic variability
Policy environment
Limited availability of seed + staff
Ipongo – Zambia: Ipongo – Zambia Since 1994, 188km NW of Lusaka
food security through adapted IRDP
1,000 farmers in 36 farmers’ clubs
Micro-credit + revolving fund for seed, cattle, cash; extension + CAWs for sust. agriculture
Farmer seed multiplication, CSBs, on-farm storage, seed fairs
Ipongo - impact: Ipongo - impact 10-13 (modern) varieties, min. 2 new crops
Ecological farming building on local knowledge
↑ ha, 50% farmers food secure but local infrastructure
1,000 farmers in 36 clubs (1 out of 5)
Goal=self-managing CBO
Ipongo – institutional conditions: Ipongo – institutional conditions
Grassroots empowerment
Appropriate agricultural techniques
local service delivery
Price negotiation in agribusinesses
Local infrastructure inadequate
OPPAZ - Zambia: OPPAZ - Zambia Since 1999, Kabwe, Mazabuka, Mpongwe
income generation thru’ organics for export
70+ large farmers, 4,500 small farmers in 48 groups
Advice on all aspects organic production + marketing, organic ag. research, certification
OPPAZ - impact: OPPAZ - impact
Promotes targetted field cash crops (esp. groundnut), high value spp. (essential oils) +wild plants (moringa)
Knowledge of organic production
Household incomes (untapped potential)
4,500 small farmer members
OPPAZ – institutional conditions: OPPAZ – institutional conditions High international demand
Staff commitment
Multiple national partnerships
Market liberalisation
Diverse requests, limited resources
Export delays
EU organic import regulations