Who maintains fruit tree diversity on farm?Hugo Lamers, Francesco Caracciolo, TM Gajanana et al

21 August 2014, International Horticulture Conference, Brisbane, Australia

Mango growers in Malihabad, UP, India

Outline

• Introduction and purpose

• Research question

• Methodology

• Data and results

• Conclusions and recommendations

Introduction

• Increasing interest for on-farm conservation programs next to ex situ conservation

• Often assumed that crop diversity is maintained by the poor

• Which social and economic factors or farm practices of households can explain or are highly associated with a high level of on-farm diversity

in partnership with

The Tropical Fruit Tree Project

On-farm and in situ conservation throughCommunity Biodiversity Management

How to intervene?

CBM

• 4 countries

• 22 sites

• 36 communities

• 15,000 households

Three types of benefits from TFT diversity

• Fundamental source for new seedling material through open pollination and human & natural selection

• Ecosystem services (pollination, lower pest & disease pressure)

• Risk management (economic, agronomic, climate)• Source of food items (nutritional diversity)• Source of non-food items• Source of income

Why on-farm and in situ conservation of PGR?

• Sustains the evolutionary process to create new diversity

• Sustains ecosystem services and beneficial interactions with other species

• Sustains the cultural and traditional knowledge that is associated with the species or varieties

• Recognizes farmers’ rights - farmers as breeders

• Fruit tree species are recalcitrant

• Field genebanks are expensive and lack space

Who maintains fruit tree diversity on farm?

And why?

Methodology

1. Household questionnaire• Random sampling of approx. 10% of the fruit farmers in each

community• Total of 944 respondents• Intraspecific diversity of mango, family characteristics, assets,

farm practices, income, market distance and use of services (microfinance, technical assistance)

2. Semi-structured interviews with ‘custodian farmers’• Households who maintain most diversity and knowledge• Identified by researchers, development workers or fellow

villagers

Sites

• 5 sites

• 18 communities

• 7,000 Households

Selection indicators• Range of

agroecosystems

• Traditional farming area with low incomes

• Fruit trees important for livelihoods

• Availability of local institutions

Results 1-.

4-.

20

.2.4

Wea

lth I

ndex

Amravati Chittoor Malihabat Pusa Sirsi

01

23

45

Ric

hnes

s in

tras

peci

fic

man

gife

ra

Amravati Chittoor Malihabat Pusa Sirsi

05

1015

20

-2 0 2 4 6Wealth index

Ric

hnes

s in

tra-

spec

ific

_man

gife

ra

Results 2

• The wealth index affects positively both the diversity indexes

• Intraspecific diversity affects positively the wealth index; however there is no evidence of the effect of Simpson index on the wealth index

• Weighted orchard age affects positively the intraspecific diversity of mango, there is no effect on Simpson index

• Factors affecting intraspecific diversity of mango are: household location, received technical assistance (+).

• Factors affecting the Simpson index are: household location, received technical assistance (+) irrigation (+) number of female household members (+) weeding (-) and market distance (-)

Results 3

cultural celebrationshobby

incomeadaptationforefathers

loss of diversityhome use

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%

36%

52%

62%

74%

85%

86%

91%

Why do you maintain a wide range of different fruit tree species and varieties at your farm?

No Yes

Don’t know

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60%

35%

53%

12%

I earn more income if I replace and grow commercial types

Conclusions• Mango diversity maintained most likely by wealthier households

in traditional agricultural regions

• Motivations of custodian households are not only private and economic but also common and social – secure crop diversity, heritage from forefathers

• Different profiles for ‘users’ and ‘custodians’ of fruit tree diversity

So what?• Policy makers, donors and

practitioners often link crop diversity directly to poverty

• To improve impact and effectiveness of interventions

Recommendations• Need for tailored interventions to

custodians and users

• How to facilitate beneficial linkages between both groups

Thank You