IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jresou/v11y2022i6p58-d842479.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Community Seedbanks in Uganda: Fostering Access to Genetic Diversity and Its Conservation

Author

Listed:
  • Rose Nankya

    (Alliance of Bioversity International and CIAT, Uganda Office, Kampala P.O. Box 24384, Uganda)

  • Abdel Kader Naino Jika

    (Alliance of Bioversity International and CIAT, 00153 Rome, Italy)

  • Paola De Santis

    (Alliance of Bioversity International and CIAT, 00153 Rome, Italy)

  • Hannington Lwandasa

    (National Agriculture Research Organization of Uganda, Entebbe P.O. Box 295, Uganda)

  • Devra Ivy Jarvis

    (Alliance of Bioversity International and CIAT, 00153 Rome, Italy
    Platform for Agrobiodiversity, Museo Orto Botanico di Roma-Universita’ La Sapienza, Largo Cristina di Svezia 23A-24, 00165 Rome, Italy
    Department of Crop and Soil Sciences, Adjunct Faculty, Washington State University, Pullman, WA 99163, USA)

  • John Wasswa Mulumba

    (National Agriculture Research Organization of Uganda, Entebbe P.O. Box 295, Uganda)

Abstract

Community seedbanks promote conservation and the use of crop genetic diversity, as well as supporting farmer seed systems. This study analyses seed flow and access to crop genetic diversity over time in the Nakaseke, Rubaya, and Kibuga seedbanks of Uganda. The modes of operation of the banks were compared through scrutinizing records of crops and varieties being conserved, quantities of seed distributed, to whom, and quantities returned. The Nakaseke seed bank distributed the highest varietal diversity of common bean ( Phaseolus vulgaris ) and groundnuts (Arachis hypogaea L.), whereas the Rubaya seedbank distributed the highest quantity of common bean seed, followed by the Kibuga seedbank. There were no significant differences between the type of variety of seed, quantities of seed accessed, and seed returned to the seedbanks by women and men—except for the Nakaseke seedbank, where women returned significantly higher quantities of common bean seed. The Kibuga and Rubaya seedbanks dealt with individual farmers, whereas the Nakaseke seedbank dealt with individual farmers and groups. The extent to which core functions were achieved by a particular seedbank depended on the mode of operation, including actors, management, degree of development, socio-economic setting, among others. Further research is recommended to unpack these factors and come up with the most appropriate combinations for greater seedbank effectiveness.

Suggested Citation

  • Rose Nankya & Abdel Kader Naino Jika & Paola De Santis & Hannington Lwandasa & Devra Ivy Jarvis & John Wasswa Mulumba, 2022. "Community Seedbanks in Uganda: Fostering Access to Genetic Diversity and Its Conservation," Resources, MDPI, vol. 11(6), pages 1-11, June.
  • Handle: RePEc:gam:jresou:v:11:y:2022:i:6:p:58-:d:842479
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2079-9276/11/6/58/pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2079-9276/11/6/58/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Asrat, Sinafikeh & Yesuf, Mahmud & Carlsson, Fredrik & Wale, Edilegnaw, 2010. "Farmers' preferences for crop variety traits: Lessons for on-farm conservation and technology adoption," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 69(12), pages 2394-2401, October.
    2. Lourenco Borges & Adalfredo Rosario Ferreira & Deolindo Silva & Robert Williams & Rebecca Andersen & Alex Dalley & Brian Monaghan & Harry Nesbitt & William Erskine, 2009. "Improving food security through agricultural research and development in Timor-Leste: a country emerging from conflict," Food Security: The Science, Sociology and Economics of Food Production and Access to Food, Springer;The International Society for Plant Pathology, vol. 1(4), pages 403-412, December.
    3. Ronnie Vernooy & Bhuwon Sthapit & Gea Galluzzi & Pitambar Shrestha, 2014. "The Multiple Functions and Services of Community Seedbanks," Resources, MDPI, vol. 3(4), pages 1-21, November.
    4. Coomes, Oliver T. & McGuire, Shawn J. & Garine, Eric & Caillon, Sophie & McKey, Doyle & Demeulenaere, Elise & Jarvis, Devra & Aistara, Guntra & Barnaud, Adeline & Clouvel, Pascal & Emperaire, Laure & , 2015. "Farmer seed networks make a limited contribution to agriculture? Four common misconceptions," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 56(C), pages 41-50.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Ronnie Vernooy & Joyce Adokorach & Arnab Gupta & Gloria Otieno & Jai Rana & Pitambar Shrestha & Abishkar Subedi, 2024. "Promising Strategies to Enhance the Sustainability of Community Seed Banks," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 16(19), pages 1-20, October.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Viviana Meixner Vásquez & Regine Andersen, 2023. "Community seed banks: Instruments for food security or unsustainable endeavour? A case study of Mkombezi Community Seed Bank in Malawi," Food Security: The Science, Sociology and Economics of Food Production and Access to Food, Springer;The International Society for Plant Pathology, vol. 15(4), pages 1087-1108, August.
    2. Giroux, Stacey & Kaminski, Patrick & Waldman, Kurt & Blekking, Jordan & Evans, Tom & Caylor, Kelly K., 2023. "Smallholder social networks: Advice seeking and adaptation in rural Kenya," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 205(C).
    3. Aude Ridier & Caroline Roussy & Karim Chaib, 2021. "Adoption of crop diversification by specialized grain farmers in south-western France: evidence from a choice-modelling experiment," Review of Agricultural, Food and Environmental Studies, Springer, vol. 102(3), pages 265-283, September.
    4. Paul Rachkara & David Paul Phillips & Stephen Wamala Kalule & Richard William Gibson, 2017. "Innovative and beneficial informal sweetpotato seed private enterprise in northern Uganda," Food Security: The Science, Sociology and Economics of Food Production and Access to Food, Springer;The International Society for Plant Pathology, vol. 9(3), pages 595-610, June.
    5. Roussy, Caroline & Ridier, Aude & Chaib, Karim, 2014. "A methodological proposal to approach farmers’ adoption behavior: stated preferences and perceptions of the innovation," 2014 International Congress, August 26-29, 2014, Ljubljana, Slovenia 182983, European Association of Agricultural Economists.
    6. Caroline Roussy & Aude Ridier & Karim Chaïb, 2014. "Adoption d’innovations par les agriculteurs : rôle des perceptions et des préférences," Post-Print hal-01123427, HAL.
    7. Meressa, Abrha Megos & Navrud, Stale, 2020. "Not my cup of coffee: Farmers’ preferences for coffee variety traits – Lessons for crop breeding in the age of climate change," Bio-based and Applied Economics Journal, Italian Association of Agricultural and Applied Economics (AIEAA), vol. 9(3), December.
    8. Rose Nankya & John W. Mulumba & Francesco Caracciolo & Maria Raimondo & Francesca Schiavello & Elisabetta Gotor & Enoch Kikulwe & Devra I. Jarvis, 2017. "Yield Perceptions, Determinants and Adoption Impact of on Farm Varietal Mixtures for Common Bean and Banana in Uganda," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 9(8), pages 1-15, July.
    9. Astrid Mastenbroek & Irma Sirutyte & Robert Sparrow, 2021. "Information Barriers to Adoption of Agricultural Technologies: Willingness to Pay for Certified Seed of an Open Pollinated Maize Variety in Northern Uganda," Journal of Agricultural Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 72(1), pages 180-201, February.
    10. Franklin Simtowe & Paswel Marenya & Emily Amondo & Mosisa Worku & Dil Bahadur Rahut & Olaf Erenstein, 2019. "Heterogeneous seed access and information exposure: implications for the adoption of drought-tolerant maize varieties in Uganda," Agricultural and Food Economics, Springer;Italian Society of Agricultural Economics (SIDEA), vol. 7(1), pages 1-23, December.
    11. Louise Sperling & Conny J. M. Almekinders, 2023. "Informal Commercial Seed Systems: Leave, Suppress or Support Them?," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(18), pages 1-14, September.
    12. Yingjie Song & Qiong Fang & Devra Jarvis & Keyu Bai & Dongmei Liu & Jinchao Feng & Chunlin Long, 2019. "Network Analysis of Seed Flow, a Traditional Method for Conserving Tartary Buckwheat ( Fagopyrum tataricum ) Landraces in Liangshan, Southwest China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(16), pages 1-14, August.
    13. Conny J. M. Almekinders & Steve Walsh & Kim S. Jacobsen & Jorge L. Andrade-Piedra & Margaret A. McEwan & Stef Haan & Lava Kumar & Charles Staver, 2019. "Why interventions in the seed systems of roots, tubers and bananas crops do not reach their full potential," Food Security: The Science, Sociology and Economics of Food Production and Access to Food, Springer;The International Society for Plant Pathology, vol. 11(1), pages 23-42, February.
    14. Teferi, Ermias Tesfaye & Kassie, Girma T. & Pe, Mario Enrico & Fadda, Carlo, 2020. "Are farmers willing to pay for climate related traits of wheat? Evidence from rural parts of Ethiopia," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 185(C).
    15. Spielman, David J. & Smale, Melinda, 2017. "Policy options to accelerate variety change among smallholder farmers in South Asia and Africa South of the Sahara," IFPRI discussion papers 1666, International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI).
    16. Mahadevan, Renuka & Asafu-Adjaye, John, 2015. "Exploring the potential for green revolution: a choice experiment on maize farmers in Northern Ghana," African Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, African Association of Agricultural Economists, vol. 10(3), pages 1-15.
    17. Gloria Otieno & Wesley Mlsna Zebrowski & John Recha & Travis William Reynolds, 2021. "Gender and Social Seed Networks for Climate Change Adaptation: Evidence from Bean, Finger Millet, and Sorghum Seed Systems in East Africa," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(4), pages 1-24, February.
    18. Martin, Inès & Vranken, Liesbet & Ugás, Roberto, 2021. "Farmers’ Preferences to Cultivate Threatened Crop Varieties: Evidence from Peru," 2021 Conference, August 17-31, 2021, Virtual 315216, International Association of Agricultural Economists.
    19. Gebretsadik, Rebeka & Shimelis, H. & Laing, M.D. & Tongoona, P. & Mandefro, N., 2014. "A diagnostic appraisal of the sorghum farming system and breeding priorities in Striga infested agro-ecologies of Ethiopia," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 123(C), pages 54-61.
    20. Botero, Hernan & Barnes, Andrew P. & Perez, Lisset & Rios, David & Ramirez-Villegas, Julian, 2021. "The determinants of common bean variety selection and diversification in Colombia," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 190(C).

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jresou:v:11:y:2022:i:6:p:58-:d:842479. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.