Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

The cost of participatory barley breeding

  • Published:
Euphytica Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Farmer participation in agricultural research is increasingly seen as a powerful methodology to increase the relevance of technologies developed to benefit farmers' communities. In plant breeding, farmer participation is considered as a way to increase the probability of adoption of new varieties. However, the higher expected cost of participatory plant breeding (PPB) is seen as one of the main obstacles to its wider adoption.

This paper addresses the issue of the different costs to an Institution of running a PPB program or a non-participatory program and uses the barley-breeding program at the International Center for Agricultural Research in the Dry Areas (ICARDA) as a case study.

Observations and data collection were carried out during one full cropping season on the cost of the three main components of the breeding program, i.e. the management of the field trials (land and seedbed preparation, planting, fertilizer application, weed control, harvesting, and seed threshing, cleaning, treating and packaging), the travel to farmers' fields or to the research sites, and the human resources (scientists, technical staff, local workers and farmers) involved in breeding activities.

We compared two options for the centralized–non-participatory breeding program, differing in the number of sites (8 and 16) used for the on-farm trials, with 160 options for the decentralized-participatory breeding program, differing in the combination of number of sites (from 4 to 16) and number of trials per site (from 1 to 10).

The results show that in both decentralized-participatory and centralized–non-participatory plant breeding the cost of managing the field trials is the highest followed by the cost of human resources and that of travel: the contribution of each component to the total cost varies with the various options and the various combinations of the number of sites and of farmers.

The comparison of the aggregated costs indicates that in the case of the ICARDA' barley-breeding program there are no relevant differences between the participatory and the non-participatory plant breeding programs. This is largely associated with the fact that the decentralized-participatory breeding program reaches the same level of development of the breeding material 3 years earlier than the centralized–non-participatory breeding program. Depending on the type of centralized-breeding program and on the combination of number of sites and number of farmers per site in the participatory program, the aggregated costs of the participatory program are lower than those of the centralized-breeding program by between 5 and 28%. At the same level of cost of the centralized program, the model of participatory program used in this study generates more information due to the use of more trials at each site. This improves selection efficiency and provides an analytical tool to optimize the number of sites and of farmers per site.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Ashby JA, Garcia T, del Pilar Guerrero M, Quiros CA, Roa JI, Beltran JA (1996) Innovation in the organization of participatory plant breeding. In: Eyzaguirre P, Iwanaga M (eds), Participatory plant breeding. proceedings of a workshop on participatory plant breeding, 26–29 July 1995, Wageningen, The Netherlands, pp 77–97

  • Ashby JA, Lilja N (2004) Participatory research: Does it work? Evidence from participatory plant breeding. Proceedings of the 4th international crop science congress, new directions for a diverse planet, 26th September–1 October, 2004, Brisbane, Queensland, Australia

  • Aw-Hassan A, Sghaier M (1996) Participatory natural resource management research in the dry areas: Challenges and opportunities. In: New Frontiers in Participatory research and gender analysis. Proceedings of an international seminar on participatory research and gender analysis for technology development. CIAT Cali, Colombia, pp 251–259

    Google Scholar 

  • Bowers W (1975) Machinery management. How to select machinery to fit the real needs of farm mangers. Farm business management. Deere & Company Publisher

  • Carney D (1996) Scaling up participatory research. In: New frontiers in participatory research and gender analysis. Proceedings of an international seminar on participatory research and gender analysis for technology development. CIAT Cali, Colombia, pp 113–121

    Google Scholar 

  • Ceccarelli S, Grando S, Singh M, Michael M, Shikho A, Al Issa M, Al Saleh A, Kaleonjy G, Al Ghanem S, Al Hasan AL, Dalla H, Basha S, Basha T (2003) A methodological study on participatory barley breeding. II. Response to selection. Euphytica 133:185–200

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ceccarelli S, Grando S (2005) Decentralized-participatory plant breeding. in: Tuberosa R, Phillips RL (eds), Proceedings of the congress “In the wake of the double helix: From the green revolution to the gene revolution” Bologna, 26–30 May, 2003, pp.145–156,

  • Farnworth CR, Jiggins J (2003) Participatory breeding and gender analysis. CGIAR systemwide program on participatory research and gender analysis for technology development and institutional innovation. PPB Monograph No. 4. PRGA Program Coordination Office, Cali, Colombia

  • Farrington J, Martin A (1988) Farmer participation in agricultural research: A review of concepts and practices. Overseas development institute, agricultural administration unit, occasional paper 9. 1988. Reprint 1990 ODI, London

    Google Scholar 

  • Lilja N, Aw-Hasaan A (2002) Benefits and costs of participatory barley breeding in Syria. In: A back-ground paper to a poster presented at the Proceedings of the 25th International Conference of IAAE, Durban, South Africa, 16–22 August 2003

  • Lilja N, Aw-Hassan A, Salahieh H, Ashby J, Ceccarelli S, Grando S (2002) Benefits and costs of decentralized participatory barley breeding at ICARDA, Syria. In: Presentation made at the workshop “The quality of science in participatory plant breeding. Co-hosted by CGIAR PRGA program and SGRP program Maccarese, Rome, Italy IPGRI Headquarters, September 30–October 4, 2002

  • Morris ML, Bellon MR (2004) Participatory plant breeding research: Opportunities and challenges for the international crop improvement system. Euphytica 136:21–35

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pachico DH (1996) Farmer participatory research: Measuring impact. In: New frontiers in participatory research and gender analysis. proceedings of an international seminar on participatory research and gender analysis for technology development. CIAT Cali, Colombia, pp 109–111

    Google Scholar 

  • Sthapit BR, Joshi KD, Witcombe JR (1996) Farmer participatory crop improvement. III Participatory plant breeding, a case study of rice in Nepal. Exp Agric 32:479–496

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Weltzien E, Smith ME, Meitzner LS, Sperling L (2003) Technical and institutional issued in participatory plant breeding–from the perspective of formal plant breeding. CGIAR systemwide program on participatory research and gender analysis for technology development and institutional innovation. PPB Monograph No. 1. PRGA Program Coordination Office, Cali, Colombia

  • Witcombe J (1996) Decentralization versus farmer participation in plant breeding: some methodology issues. In: New frontiers in participatory research and gender analysis. Proceedings of an international seminar on participatory research and gender analysis for technology development. CIAT Cali, Colombia, pp 135–153

    Google Scholar 

  • Witcombe JR, Virk DS (1996) Challenges and alternatives for varietal testing. Paper presented in workshop on reforming regulatory frameworks for small farmer seed supply. Regent's College, London, 29–31 May 1996

    Google Scholar 

  • Zeigler RS (1996) Implementing farmer participatory plant breeding: a research management perspective. In: New frontiers in participatory research and gender analysis. Proceedings of an international seminar on participatory research and gender analysis for technology development. CIAT Cali, Colombia, pp 37–41.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO), via delle Terme di Caracalla, 00100, Rome, Italy

    D. Mangione

  2. University of Tuscia, via S. Camillo de Lellis, 01100, Viterbo, Italy

    S. Senni

  3. Istituto Agronomico per l'Oltremare (IAO), via A.Cocchi 4, 50131, Firenze, Italy

    M. Puccioni

  4. The International Center for Agricultural Research in the Dry Areas (ICARDA), P.O. Box 5466, Aleppo, Syria

    S. Grando & S. Ceccarelli

Authors
  1. D. Mangione
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. S. Senni
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. M. Puccioni
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. S. Grando
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. S. Ceccarelli
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to S. Ceccarelli.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Mangione, D., Senni, S., Puccioni, M. et al. The cost of participatory barley breeding. Euphytica 150, 289–306 (2006). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10681-006-0226-x

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10681-006-0226-x

Keywords

Search

Navigation