Participatory varietal selection in rice in Nepal in favourable agricultural environments: A comparison of two methods assessed by varietal adoption
Two participatory approaches to varietal selection were compared in February-sown (Chaite) rice and main-season rice in high potential production systems in Nepal. One method, called farmer managed participatory research (FAMPAR), was researcher intensive, while the other, called informal research a...
Gespeichert in:
Veröffentlicht in: | Euphytica 2002-01, Vol.127 (3), p.445-458 |
---|---|
Hauptverfasser: | , |
Format: | Artikel |
Sprache: | eng |
Schlagworte: | |
Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
container_end_page | 458 |
---|---|
container_issue | 3 |
container_start_page | 445 |
container_title | Euphytica |
container_volume | 127 |
creator | JOSHI, K. D WITCOMBE, J. R |
description | Two participatory approaches to varietal selection were compared in February-sown (Chaite) rice and main-season rice in high potential production systems in Nepal. One method, called farmer managed participatory research (FAMPAR), was researcher intensive, while the other, called informal research and development (IRD), demanded fewer resources. The trials were conducted in 18 villages in high potential production systems in Chitwan and Nawalparasi districts of Nepal. Six new varieties of Chaite rice and 16 of main-season rice were tested in over 300 trials of Chaite rice and nearly 1100 trials of main-season rice over two years in 1997 and 1998. Surveys were done in 1997, 1998 and 1999 to record the extent of adoption and spread of the new rice varieties in the study villages. In many cases, farmers tested varieties for two years before deciding whether to adopt or drop them. Varieties were quite widely accepted, adopted for niches in a few villages, or rejected. The two participatory approaches identified the same varieties, but FAMPAR, which used formal survey methods, was more useful for diagnosing reasons for adoption or rejection. However, IRD used much cheaper anecdotal methods of evaluation, so it was more cost-effective. Moreover,farmer-to-farmer seed dissemination was higher in IRD villages, probably because farmers in FAMPAR villages felt that the project would re-supply seed if needed. The benefits from both approaches are considerable, but to adopt them substantial policy changes in varietal testing, release and extension systems will be required. |
doi_str_mv | 10.1023/A:1020348620286 |
format | Article |
fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>proquest_pasca</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_journals_741249406</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>2106203771</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c256t-561da7f3cf95b2ae2b2bf0296008ab330344fe3cca6d8ffde8ee2934f75fb22f3</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNpNUE1LxDAQDaLg-nH2GgSP1WnSpK23ZfELFvWg52WaTjTSbWqSXfF_-ION6EEYeDO8x3u8YeykhPMShLyYX2YAWTVagGj0DpuVqpaFAg27bAZQVoWQUu-zgxjfAKCtFczY1yOG5IybMPnwybcYHCUceKSBTHJ-5G7kwRn6wXuaMpUXi1u_CdgNxPEls5sh5XPgNG5d8OOaxhQv-Zwbv56yY8w23vL04fma0qvvI8cYKU_Pu3-h2PvpJ_OI7VkcIh3_4SF7vr56WtwWy4ebu8V8WRihdCqULnusrTS2VZ1AEp3oLIhWAzTYSZmfUVmSxqDuG2t7aohEKytbK9sJYeUhO_31nYJ_31BMq7dca8yRq7oqRdVWoLPo7E-E0eBgA47GxdUU3BrD56qUrValAvkNeL94pQ</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>741249406</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Participatory varietal selection in rice in Nepal in favourable agricultural environments: A comparison of two methods assessed by varietal adoption</title><source>SpringerLink Journals - AutoHoldings</source><creator>JOSHI, K. D ; WITCOMBE, J. R</creator><creatorcontrib>JOSHI, K. D ; WITCOMBE, J. R</creatorcontrib><description>Two participatory approaches to varietal selection were compared in February-sown (Chaite) rice and main-season rice in high potential production systems in Nepal. One method, called farmer managed participatory research (FAMPAR), was researcher intensive, while the other, called informal research and development (IRD), demanded fewer resources. The trials were conducted in 18 villages in high potential production systems in Chitwan and Nawalparasi districts of Nepal. Six new varieties of Chaite rice and 16 of main-season rice were tested in over 300 trials of Chaite rice and nearly 1100 trials of main-season rice over two years in 1997 and 1998. Surveys were done in 1997, 1998 and 1999 to record the extent of adoption and spread of the new rice varieties in the study villages. In many cases, farmers tested varieties for two years before deciding whether to adopt or drop them. Varieties were quite widely accepted, adopted for niches in a few villages, or rejected. The two participatory approaches identified the same varieties, but FAMPAR, which used formal survey methods, was more useful for diagnosing reasons for adoption or rejection. However, IRD used much cheaper anecdotal methods of evaluation, so it was more cost-effective. Moreover,farmer-to-farmer seed dissemination was higher in IRD villages, probably because farmers in FAMPAR villages felt that the project would re-supply seed if needed. The benefits from both approaches are considerable, but to adopt them substantial policy changes in varietal testing, release and extension systems will be required.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0014-2336</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1573-5060</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1023/A:1020348620286</identifier><identifier>CODEN: EUPHAA</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Dordrecht: Springer</publisher><subject>Agronomy. Soil science and plant productions ; Biological and medical sciences ; Breeding schemes. Varia ; Farmers ; Fundamental and applied biological sciences. Psychology ; Genetics and breeding of economic plants ; Methods ; New varieties ; Plant breeding: fundamental aspects and methodology ; R&D ; Research & development ; Rice ; Seasons ; Villages</subject><ispartof>Euphytica, 2002-01, Vol.127 (3), p.445-458</ispartof><rights>2003 INIST-CNRS</rights><rights>Kluwer Academic Publishers 2002.</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c256t-561da7f3cf95b2ae2b2bf0296008ab330344fe3cca6d8ffde8ee2934f75fb22f3</citedby></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><link.rule.ids>314,776,780,27901,27902</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttp://pascal-francis.inist.fr/vibad/index.php?action=getRecordDetail&idt=13965150$$DView record in Pascal Francis$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>JOSHI, K. D</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>WITCOMBE, J. R</creatorcontrib><title>Participatory varietal selection in rice in Nepal in favourable agricultural environments: A comparison of two methods assessed by varietal adoption</title><title>Euphytica</title><description>Two participatory approaches to varietal selection were compared in February-sown (Chaite) rice and main-season rice in high potential production systems in Nepal. One method, called farmer managed participatory research (FAMPAR), was researcher intensive, while the other, called informal research and development (IRD), demanded fewer resources. The trials were conducted in 18 villages in high potential production systems in Chitwan and Nawalparasi districts of Nepal. Six new varieties of Chaite rice and 16 of main-season rice were tested in over 300 trials of Chaite rice and nearly 1100 trials of main-season rice over two years in 1997 and 1998. Surveys were done in 1997, 1998 and 1999 to record the extent of adoption and spread of the new rice varieties in the study villages. In many cases, farmers tested varieties for two years before deciding whether to adopt or drop them. Varieties were quite widely accepted, adopted for niches in a few villages, or rejected. The two participatory approaches identified the same varieties, but FAMPAR, which used formal survey methods, was more useful for diagnosing reasons for adoption or rejection. However, IRD used much cheaper anecdotal methods of evaluation, so it was more cost-effective. Moreover,farmer-to-farmer seed dissemination was higher in IRD villages, probably because farmers in FAMPAR villages felt that the project would re-supply seed if needed. The benefits from both approaches are considerable, but to adopt them substantial policy changes in varietal testing, release and extension systems will be required.</description><subject>Agronomy. Soil science and plant productions</subject><subject>Biological and medical sciences</subject><subject>Breeding schemes. Varia</subject><subject>Farmers</subject><subject>Fundamental and applied biological sciences. Psychology</subject><subject>Genetics and breeding of economic plants</subject><subject>Methods</subject><subject>New varieties</subject><subject>Plant breeding: fundamental aspects and methodology</subject><subject>R&D</subject><subject>Research & development</subject><subject>Rice</subject><subject>Seasons</subject><subject>Villages</subject><issn>0014-2336</issn><issn>1573-5060</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2002</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>BENPR</sourceid><recordid>eNpNUE1LxDAQDaLg-nH2GgSP1WnSpK23ZfELFvWg52WaTjTSbWqSXfF_-ION6EEYeDO8x3u8YeykhPMShLyYX2YAWTVagGj0DpuVqpaFAg27bAZQVoWQUu-zgxjfAKCtFczY1yOG5IybMPnwybcYHCUceKSBTHJ-5G7kwRn6wXuaMpUXi1u_CdgNxPEls5sh5XPgNG5d8OOaxhQv-Zwbv56yY8w23vL04fma0qvvI8cYKU_Pu3-h2PvpJ_OI7VkcIh3_4SF7vr56WtwWy4ebu8V8WRihdCqULnusrTS2VZ1AEp3oLIhWAzTYSZmfUVmSxqDuG2t7aohEKytbK9sJYeUhO_31nYJ_31BMq7dca8yRq7oqRdVWoLPo7E-E0eBgA47GxdUU3BrD56qUrValAvkNeL94pQ</recordid><startdate>20020101</startdate><enddate>20020101</enddate><creator>JOSHI, K. D</creator><creator>WITCOMBE, J. R</creator><general>Springer</general><general>Springer Nature B.V</general><scope>IQODW</scope><scope>3V.</scope><scope>7SN</scope><scope>7SS</scope><scope>7T7</scope><scope>7TM</scope><scope>7X2</scope><scope>7XB</scope><scope>88I</scope><scope>8FD</scope><scope>8FE</scope><scope>8FH</scope><scope>8FK</scope><scope>ABUWG</scope><scope>AEUYN</scope><scope>AFKRA</scope><scope>ATCPS</scope><scope>AZQEC</scope><scope>BENPR</scope><scope>BHPHI</scope><scope>C1K</scope><scope>CCPQU</scope><scope>DWQXO</scope><scope>FR3</scope><scope>GNUQQ</scope><scope>HCIFZ</scope><scope>M0K</scope><scope>M2P</scope><scope>M7N</scope><scope>P64</scope><scope>PATMY</scope><scope>PQEST</scope><scope>PQQKQ</scope><scope>PQUKI</scope><scope>PYCSY</scope><scope>Q9U</scope><scope>RC3</scope></search><sort><creationdate>20020101</creationdate><title>Participatory varietal selection in rice in Nepal in favourable agricultural environments: A comparison of two methods assessed by varietal adoption</title><author>JOSHI, K. D ; WITCOMBE, J. R</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c256t-561da7f3cf95b2ae2b2bf0296008ab330344fe3cca6d8ffde8ee2934f75fb22f3</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2002</creationdate><topic>Agronomy. Soil science and plant productions</topic><topic>Biological and medical sciences</topic><topic>Breeding schemes. Varia</topic><topic>Farmers</topic><topic>Fundamental and applied biological sciences. Psychology</topic><topic>Genetics and breeding of economic plants</topic><topic>Methods</topic><topic>New varieties</topic><topic>Plant breeding: fundamental aspects and methodology</topic><topic>R&D</topic><topic>Research & development</topic><topic>Rice</topic><topic>Seasons</topic><topic>Villages</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>JOSHI, K. D</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>WITCOMBE, J. R</creatorcontrib><collection>Pascal-Francis</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Corporate)</collection><collection>Ecology Abstracts</collection><collection>Entomology Abstracts (Full archive)</collection><collection>Industrial and Applied Microbiology Abstracts (Microbiology A)</collection><collection>Nucleic Acids Abstracts</collection><collection>Agricultural Science Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>Science Database (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Technology Research Database</collection><collection>ProQuest SciTech Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Natural Science Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni) (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Sustainability</collection><collection>ProQuest Central UK/Ireland</collection><collection>Agricultural & Environmental Science Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Essentials</collection><collection>ProQuest Central</collection><collection>Natural Science Collection</collection><collection>Environmental Sciences and Pollution Management</collection><collection>ProQuest One Community College</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Korea</collection><collection>Engineering Research Database</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Student</collection><collection>SciTech Premium Collection</collection><collection>Agricultural Science Database</collection><collection>Science Database</collection><collection>Algology Mycology and Protozoology Abstracts (Microbiology C)</collection><collection>Biotechnology and BioEngineering Abstracts</collection><collection>Environmental Science Database</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic Eastern Edition (DO NOT USE)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic UKI Edition</collection><collection>Environmental Science Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Basic</collection><collection>Genetics Abstracts</collection><jtitle>Euphytica</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>JOSHI, K. D</au><au>WITCOMBE, J. R</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Participatory varietal selection in rice in Nepal in favourable agricultural environments: A comparison of two methods assessed by varietal adoption</atitle><jtitle>Euphytica</jtitle><date>2002-01-01</date><risdate>2002</risdate><volume>127</volume><issue>3</issue><spage>445</spage><epage>458</epage><pages>445-458</pages><issn>0014-2336</issn><eissn>1573-5060</eissn><coden>EUPHAA</coden><abstract>Two participatory approaches to varietal selection were compared in February-sown (Chaite) rice and main-season rice in high potential production systems in Nepal. One method, called farmer managed participatory research (FAMPAR), was researcher intensive, while the other, called informal research and development (IRD), demanded fewer resources. The trials were conducted in 18 villages in high potential production systems in Chitwan and Nawalparasi districts of Nepal. Six new varieties of Chaite rice and 16 of main-season rice were tested in over 300 trials of Chaite rice and nearly 1100 trials of main-season rice over two years in 1997 and 1998. Surveys were done in 1997, 1998 and 1999 to record the extent of adoption and spread of the new rice varieties in the study villages. In many cases, farmers tested varieties for two years before deciding whether to adopt or drop them. Varieties were quite widely accepted, adopted for niches in a few villages, or rejected. The two participatory approaches identified the same varieties, but FAMPAR, which used formal survey methods, was more useful for diagnosing reasons for adoption or rejection. However, IRD used much cheaper anecdotal methods of evaluation, so it was more cost-effective. Moreover,farmer-to-farmer seed dissemination was higher in IRD villages, probably because farmers in FAMPAR villages felt that the project would re-supply seed if needed. The benefits from both approaches are considerable, but to adopt them substantial policy changes in varietal testing, release and extension systems will be required.</abstract><cop>Dordrecht</cop><pub>Springer</pub><doi>10.1023/A:1020348620286</doi><tpages>14</tpages></addata></record> |
fulltext | fulltext |
identifier | ISSN: 0014-2336 |
ispartof | Euphytica, 2002-01, Vol.127 (3), p.445-458 |
issn | 0014-2336 1573-5060 |
language | eng |
recordid | cdi_proquest_journals_741249406 |
source | SpringerLink Journals - AutoHoldings |
subjects | Agronomy. Soil science and plant productions Biological and medical sciences Breeding schemes. Varia Farmers Fundamental and applied biological sciences. Psychology Genetics and breeding of economic plants Methods New varieties Plant breeding: fundamental aspects and methodology R&D Research & development Rice Seasons Villages |
title | Participatory varietal selection in rice in Nepal in favourable agricultural environments: A comparison of two methods assessed by varietal adoption |
url | https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-02-04T19%3A55%3A51IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_pasca&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Participatory%20varietal%20selection%20in%20rice%20in%20Nepal%20in%20favourable%20agricultural%20environments:%20A%20comparison%20of%20two%20methods%20assessed%20by%20varietal%20adoption&rft.jtitle=Euphytica&rft.au=JOSHI,%20K.%20D&rft.date=2002-01-01&rft.volume=127&rft.issue=3&rft.spage=445&rft.epage=458&rft.pages=445-458&rft.issn=0014-2336&rft.eissn=1573-5060&rft.coden=EUPHAA&rft_id=info:doi/10.1023/A:1020348620286&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_pasca%3E2106203771%3C/proquest_pasca%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=741249406&rft_id=info:pmid/&rfr_iscdi=true |