An emergency banana seed system intervention: A case study of the Crop Crisis Control Project (C3P) in East and Central Africa Stephen Walsh

RTB Annual Meeting

September 30, 2014

The case study

What?A well-documented six country seed system intervention examined through R&D questions in the seed systems framework.

Why?• Seed system interventions in emergency context.• Identify lessons learned and generate new questions• Improve the RTB seed system framework.

Crop Crisis Control Project = C3P

When? 2006-2008 What?

Cassava and banana Viral (CMV) and Bacterial (BXW) epidemics in the East and

Central African Great Lakes Region Total budget = 4,5 million USD Number of countries = 6 CRS, IITA, Bioversity + 40 partners (NARS / NGO’s /

ASARECA) The case study: multiplication of banana clean planting materials

via use of macropropagation chambers + mother gardens

Banana Xanthomonas Wilt (BXW)

Eradication of banana fields in Rwanda

This farmer lost 80% of his income to BXW

Region, Scale

Eradication of banana fields in Rwanda

DRC, Uganda, Kenya, Tanzania, Burundi, Rwanda

1,000 extension/research agents trained

51,400 farmers trained (awareness raising)

Macropropagation

The corms from the maiden suckers uprooted, pared and heat-treated

Heat-treated corms placed into the macro-propagator

Hardening of banana plantlets from the macro-propagator

General context

Type of farming systems: EAHB, also dessert, plantain, cooking and othersBanana subsistence farming system, also backyard gardens and some commercial plantations.

Market importance of the case crop for farmers: Cross border trade, cooking/beer (eg. Rwanda substituting labour for land = cash for beer/ha buys more beans than ha can produce; storage),

General seed sector characteristics: Farmer seed system (no easy access to any type of formal seed system at time of C3P)No traditional use of multiplication technologies (unless promoted by NGO/IARCS/NARS)

Trends, developments, on-going change of context: BXW arrived after years of socio-economic, biotic and abiotic constraints; Uganda: shifts towards lower input/output banana farming systemsKenya: rise of the supermarketDRC: war..

SEED USERS: Accessibility of seed

What did the interveners know: ● Massive demand for planting materials due to uprooting as a control

measure but no clear demand estimates.● Plan was to produce 180 000 plantlets via macropropagation yet

Rwanda alone lost 329,7ha = 500 000 plants (1,500 plant per HA / N. Vanhoudt 2009).

● Limited knowledge on epidemiology (plant after 6 months after mats removed) hard to enforce.

● TC was not considered viable due to cost at + 1 USD per plant.● Little/no in-depth reflection / lessons learned from previous

interventions (i.e. National Banana Research Program + IITA 1995 in Uganda, KCDP 1998-2003 in Tanzania)

SEED USERS: Accessibility

What changed as a consequence of the intervention• Greater demand for ‘BXW free’ planting material in all BXW endemic

zones.• Appreciation of the challenges to scale Mac-P technology.● Uganda: MP chambers under local management● DRC: MP chambers established, concern about funding, security

issues● Rwanda: late start to MP activities.● Burundi & Kenya & Tanzania: no MP chambers.

SEED USERS: Affordability

Is it profitable to use macro-propagated plantlets?

YES - but there is need for quality control in supply chain.

Business case / econ returns for MAC P chambers were not well established.

Willingness to pay for something traditionally free?

Study in Nigeria and Cameroon suggests yes, if quality assured.

High in endemic BXW zones of C3P– demand exponentially outstripped supply leading to farmers willing to ‘plant anything’.

Opportunity costs of macropropagation

Wasted investment if clean MAC-P plantlets into diseased soil.

Seed multiplication tools and techniques

Seed multiplication tools and techniques

SEED QUALITY

What was /is known from the situation before the intervention situation:

Average annual yield loss (in USD) due to BXW • In Uganda: 35 million USD • In Rwanda: 1 200 000 USD• In Tanzania: 350 000 USD• In DRC: 1600 USD/ha/y lost

What changed as a consequence of the intervention:Clean planting material BUT dependent on good banana husbandry

Access to clean planting materials (starter materials!) was an on-going concern during C3P.

In later years, novel management technologies were developed better adapted to smallholder systems (single diseased stem removal, research on incomplete systemicity…)

Seed producers and seed availability

The Model: Emergency seed system intervention● Success is measured by ability to address emergency situation

● However, previous MP projects in Nigeria and Cameroon had problems (production pathways, sustainability issues, quality control) and the MP technology had not been used in emergency context before

● The same shortcomings from Nigeria and Cameroon were not listed in project reports for C3P. Why?

● Did C3P not have these problems? Were farmers less critical of planting materials received due to emergency context? Or were the measures of success different due to the emergency context?

Scaling up, how?

More attention to the whole value chain – quality control and business case for MAC P.

More attention to planting material demand estimates and different channels of provision.

Cost-benefit analyses, incl. opportunity costs under different conditions to determine pricing margins and overall business feasibility;

Development of a practical Quality Declared Seed certification protocol and process to validate / brand MAC P producers.

Utility of the framework

The seed systems framework= Insights/lessons/comments on how seed system interventions for VPC could (should?) be improved, implemented…

The case study+ re-examining a past project using insights from the framework+ testing a theoretic framework with field reports

- project documentation was created with past insights (difficult to go beyond the documentation)- ex post evaluation is time-limited (sustainable today?)

The seed systems frameworkPattern emergence? Key guidelines? Adequacy of the framework?

Utility of the framework for C3P

The seed systems frameworkAllows an examination of multiple cases, including C3P, following the same structured approach

The case studyC3P is an emergency seed system intervention. Scale vs Duration + steep BXW learning curve => very specific challengesLost opportunities to learn from past interventionsLack of consideration for farmer seed systems and local contextWas macropropagation the best technology to roll out region wide during an emergency? Key seed security aspects (availability, accessibility and quality) not adequately considered/documentedMany questions remain = limitations of a desk study

The seed systems frameworkNeeds to accommodate emergency seed system interventionsVPC require unique approach due to bulkiness, time to multiply, perishability etc compared to SPC