IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/ibn/jsd123/v7y2014i2p194.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Exploration of Farmers’ Preferences and Perceptions of Maize Varieties: Implications on Development and Adoption of Quality Protein Maize (QPM) Varieties in Zimbabwe

Author

Listed:
  • Lewis Machida
  • John Derera
  • Pangirayi Tongoona
  • Augustine Langyintuo
  • John MacRobert

Abstract

Quality protein maize (QPM) technology is relatively new in Zimbabwe and farmer awareness of QPM was low. Participation of smallholder farmers in the development of QPM breeding objectives and dissemination strategies was solicited through participatory rural appraisal (PRA) techniques. Seventy two farmers participated; the farmers were involved in the Mother Baby Trial (MBT) projects in four selected villages from three districts of Zimbabwe. Data collection techniques included work-sharing, village or resource mapping, Venn diagramming, semi structured interviewing, matrix scoring and ranking and pairwise ranking. The results suggested that protein malnutrition was prevalent in the districts. Maize was the most important crop and farmers grew three types of maize, namely landrace (“Hickory King”), open pollinated varieties (OPV) and hybrid varieties all representing normal endosperm maize. Hybrids were dominant and produced mainly for sale, while “Hickory King”, although not supported by the formal seed system, continued to be produced for home consumption because of its superior taste, white kernel color, large kernel size, high kernel density, kernel hardness, and perceived weevil-resistance. Lateness and foliar disease susceptibility were the disadvantages of Hickory King. The ideal maize variety should be early-maturing, with a high yield potential, drought tolerant, foliar disease resistant and stem borer tolerant. For any QPM variety to be acceptable, farmers expected it to combine the agronomic attributes of hybrids and the grain quality characteristics of “Hickory King”, an “heirloom” variety. To effectively promote the adoption of QPM, the Agricultural Research and Extension (AREX) arm of government was the farmers' choice compared to other modes of information dissemination which were radio, television, newspaper, church NGO and councillor.

Suggested Citation

  • Lewis Machida & John Derera & Pangirayi Tongoona & Augustine Langyintuo & John MacRobert, 2014. "Exploration of Farmers’ Preferences and Perceptions of Maize Varieties: Implications on Development and Adoption of Quality Protein Maize (QPM) Varieties in Zimbabwe," Journal of Sustainable Development, Canadian Center of Science and Education, vol. 7(2), pages 194-194, February.
    • Handle: RePEc:ibn:jsd123:v:7:y:2014:i:2:p:194
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://ccsenet.org/journal/index.php/jsd/article/download/28782/20036
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://ccsenet.org/journal/index.php/jsd/article/view/28782
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Gunaratna, Nilupa S. & Groote, Hugo De & Nestel, Penelope & Pixley, Kevin V. & McCabe, George P., 2010. "A meta-analysis of community-based studies on quality protein maize," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 35(3), pages 202-210, June.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. Renkow, Mitch & Byerlee, Derek, 2010. "The impacts of CGIAR research: A review of recent evidence," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 35(5), pages 391-402, October.
    2. Hugo De Groote & Nilupa S. Gunaratna & Monica Fisher & E. G. Kebebe & Frank Mmbando & Dennis Friesen, 2016. "The effectiveness of extension strategies for increasing the adoption of biofortified crops: the case of quality protein maize in East Africa," Food Security: The Science, Sociology and Economics of Food Production and Access to Food, Springer;The International Society for Plant Pathology, vol. 8(6), pages 1101-1121, December.
    3. A. V. Vijaya Bhaskar & D. J. Nithya & S. Raju & R. V. Bhavani, 2017. "Establishing integrated agriculture-nutrition programmes to diversify household food and diets in rural India," Food Security: The Science, Sociology and Economics of Food Production and Access to Food, Springer;The International Society for Plant Pathology, vol. 9(5), pages 981-999, October.
    4. Diro, Samuel & De Groote, Hugo & Gunarata, Nilupa, 2016. "Effect of nutritional information and sensory quality on the willingness to pay for quality protein maize - results of a field experiment in Jimma zone, Ethiopia," 2016 Fifth International Conference, September 23-26, 2016, Addis Ababa, Ethiopia 246979, African Association of Agricultural Economists (AAAE).
    5. De Groote, Hugo & Gunaratna, Nilupa S. & Ergano, Kebebe & Friesen, Dennis, 2010. "Extension and adoption of biofortified crops: Quality protein maize in East Africa," 2010 AAAE Third Conference/AEASA 48th Conference, September 19-23, 2010, Cape Town, South Africa 96429, African Association of Agricultural Economists (AAAE).
    6. Jaah, Mkupete & Fintel, Dieter von & Burger, Ronelle, 2021. "Maize Price Shock, Agriculture Production and Children Nutrition Outcomes in Tanzania," 2021 Conference, August 17-31, 2021, Virtual 314974, International Association of Agricultural Economists.

    More about this item

    JEL classification:

    • R00 - Urban, Rural, Regional, Real Estate, and Transportation Economics - - General - - - General
    • Z0 - Other Special Topics - - General

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:ibn:jsd123:v:7:y:2014:i:2:p:194. 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: Canadian Center of Science and Education (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/cepflch.html .

    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.