Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-mwx4w Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-07-02T12:42:11.347Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Assessing farmer interest in participatory plant breeding: Who wants to work with scientists?

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  30 June 2008

Julie C. Dawson  and
Jessica R. Goldberger
Julie C. Dawson
Affiliation:
Department of Crop and Soil Sciences, Washington State University, Pullman, WA 99164-6420, USA.
Jessica R. Goldberger*
Affiliation:
Department of Community and Rural Sociology, Washington State University, Pullman, WA 99164-4006, USA.
*
*Corresponding author: jgoldberger@wsu.edu
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Participatory research, particularly participatory plant breeding (PPB), can increase the relevance of public-sector research to the agricultural community. PPB has mostly been used in developing countries with resource-poor farmers, but there is increasing interest among farmers in developed countries who are dissatisfied with the performance of available varieties. In 2006, scientists associated with the winter and spring wheat breeding programs in the Department of Crop and Soil Sciences and the Department of Community and Rural Sociology at Washington State University (WSU) conducted a survey of members of the Washington Association of Wheat Growers. Through analysis of the survey results, we sought to understand (1) whether or not farmers want to work with scientists in PPB programs and (2) the determinants of PPB interest. Results indicated that 52% of Washington wheat growers were interested in working with WSU scientists in a participatory breeding program. Interested farmers tended to be younger and college educated with fewer years of farming experience. Moreover, PPB interest appeared to be related positively to farm size, the number of wheat varieties planted, use of and interest in alternative production and marketing practices (e.g., seed saving, organic agriculture), and prior experience with WSU. Based on this analysis and ongoing discussions with farmers, we hope to develop a participatory wheat breeding program where farmers are able to choose their level of involvement with the breeding process based on their interest and needs. This new program will increase the relevance of WSU's wheat breeding programs to farmers in the state and could serve as a model for other public agricultural research programs seeking to increase farmer involvement and, thereby, democratize agricultural research.

Keywords

democratization of scienceparticipatory researchparticipatory plant breedingwheat production
Type
Research Papers
Information
Renewable Agriculture and Food Systems , Volume 23 , Issue 3 , September 2008 , pp. 177 - 187
Copyright
Copyright © 2008 Cambridge University Press

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1 Lacy, W. and Glenna, L. 2006. Democratizing science in an era of expert and private knowledge. International Journal of Technology, Knowledge and Society 1(3):37–45.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
2 Kleinman, D.L. (ed.). 2000. Science, Technology, and Democracy. State University Press of New York, Albany, NY.Google Scholar
3 Middendorf, G. and Busch, L. 1997. Inquiry for the public good: democratic participation in agricultural research. Agriculture and Human Values 14(1):45–57.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
4 Busch, L. and Lacy, W.B. 1983. Science, Agriculture, and the Politics of Research. Westview Press, Boulder, CO.Google Scholar
5 Kloppenburg, J.R. 1991. Social theory and the de/reconstruction of agricultural science: local knowledge for an alternative agriculture. Rural Sociology 56(4):519–548.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
6 Hassanein, N. 1999. Changing the Way America Farms: Knowledge and Community in the Sustainable Agriculture Movement. University of Nebraska Press, Lincoln, NE.Google Scholar
7 Ostrom, M. and Jackson-Smith, D. 2005. Defining a purpose: diverse farm constituencies and publicly funded agricultural research and extension. Journal of Sustainable Agriculture 27(3):57–76.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
8 Fitzgerald, D. 1993. Farmers deskilled: hybrid corn and farmers' work. Technology and Culture 34(2):324–343.Google Scholar
9 Witcombe, J.R., Joshi, K.D., Gyawali, S., Musa, A.M., Johansen, C., Virk, D.S., and Sthapit, B.R. 2005. Participatory plant breeding is better described as highly client-oriented plant breeding. I. Four indicators of client-orientation in plant breeding. Experimental Agriculture 41:299–319.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
10 Haugerud, A. and Collinson, M.P. 1990. Plants, genes and people: improving the relevance of plant breeding in Africa. Experimental Agriculture 26:341–362.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
11 Conroy, C., Sutherland, A., and Martin, A. 1999. Conducting farmer participatory research: what, when and how. In Grant, I.F. and Sear, C. (eds). Decision Tools for Sustainable Development. Natural Resources Institute, Chatham, UK. p. 12–45.Google Scholar
12 Cleveland, D.A. and Soleri, D. 2002. Farmers, scientists and plant breeding: knowledge, practice and the possibilities for collaboration. In Cleveland, D.A. and Soleri, D. (eds). Farmers, Scientists and Plant Breeding: Integrating Knowledge and Practice. CAB International, Oxon, UK. p. 1–18.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
13 Ceccarelli, S. and Grando, S. 2007. Decentralized-participatory plant breeding: an example of demand driven research. Euphytica 155:349–360.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
14 Murphy, K., Lammer, D., Lyon, S., Carter, B., and Jones, S.S. 2005. Breeding for organic and low-input farming systems: an evolutionary-participatory breeding method for inbred cereal grains. Renewable Agriculture and Food Systems 20(1):48–55.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
15 Duvick, D. 2004. The current state of plant breeding: how did we get here? In Sligh, M. and Lauffer, L. (eds). Summit Proceedings: Summit on Seeds and Breeds for 21st Century Agriculture. Rural Advancement Foundation International-USA, Pittsboro, NC. p. 71–91.Google Scholar
16 Sperling, L., Ashby, J.A., Smith, M.E., Weltzien, E. and McGuire, S. 2001. A framework for analyzing participatory plant breeding approaches and results. Euphytica 122:439–450.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
17 Witcombe, J.R. 1999. Do farmer participatory methods apply more to high potential areas than to marginal ones? Outlook on Agriculture 28(1):43–49.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
18 Brummer, E.C. 2004. Breeding for sustainable cropping systems. In Lauffer, L. and Sligh, M. (eds). Summit Proceedings: Summit on Seeds and Breeds for 21st Century Agriculture. Rural Advancement Foundation International-USA, Pittsboro, NC. p. 63–70.Google Scholar
19 Chiffoleau, Y. and Desclaux, D. 2006. ‘Participatory plant breeding: the best way to breed for sustainable agriculture?’ International Journal of Agricultural Sustainability 4(2):119–130.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
20 Gyawali, S., Sunwar, S., Subedi, M., Tripathi, M., Joshi, K.D., and Witcombe, J.R. 2007. Collaborative breeding with farmers can be effective. Field Crops Research 101:88–95.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
21 Almekinders, C.J.M. and Elings, A. 2001. Collaboration of farmers and breeders: Participatory crop improvement in perspective. Euphytica 122:425–438.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
22 Smith, M.E., Castillo, G.F., and Gomez, F. 2001. Participatory plant breeding with maize in Mexico and Honduras. Euphytica 122(3):551–565.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
23 Sthapit, B., Joshi, K.D., and Witcombe, J.R. 1996. Farmer participatory crop improvement. III. Participatory plant breeding, a case study for rice in Nepal. Experimental Agriculture 32:479–496.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
24 Sperling, L., Loevinsohn, M.E., and Ntabomvura, B. 1993. Rethinking the farmer's role in plant breeding: local bean experts and on-station selection in Rwanda. Experimental Agriculture 29:509–519.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
25 Sligh, M. and Lauffer, L. (eds). 2004. Summit Proceedings: Summit on Seeds and Breeds for 21st Century Agriculture. Rural Advancement Foundation International-USA, Pittsboro, NC.Google Scholar
26 Carena, M.J. (ed.). 2005. Abstracts of Panel Discussion on Developing Farmer-Breeder Teams. Session 310 of the American Society of Agronomy Annual Meeting, Salt Lake City, UT, 10 November 2005. Northern Plains Sustainable Agriculture Society and the Crop Science Society of America.Google Scholar
27 Desclaux, D. and Hédont, M. (eds). 2006. Proceedings of the ECO-PB Workshop on ‘Participatory Plant Breeding: Relevance for Organic Agriculture?’, Domaine de la Besse (Camon, Ariège), France, 11–13 June 2006. ITAB, Paris, France.Google Scholar
US Department of Agriculture–National Agricultural Statistics Service (USDA–NASS). 2006. 2002 Census of Agriculture. Available at Web site: http://www.nass.usda.gov/Census_of_Agriculture/ (verified 6 October 2007).Google Scholar
US Department of Agriculture–National Agricultural Statistics Service (USDA–NASS). 2007. The Pride of Washington State. Pamphlet. Available at Web site: http://www.nass.usda.gov/Statistics_by_State/Washington/Publications/wabro.pdf (verified 6 October 2007).Google Scholar
30 Dillman, D.A. 2000. Mail and Internet Surveys: The Tailored Design Method. John Wiley and Sons, New York, NY.Google Scholar