An Economic Assessment of Banana Genetic Improvement and ...

More documents

Recommendations

Info

60 CHAPTER 5 Table 5.14 Number and share of banana mats planted to improved banana cultivars, by users, Uganda Elevation Exposure Cultivar type Low High Exposed Not exposed All Number of mats Exotic or hybrid 7.9 0.0 5.4*** 8.3*** 7.9 Elite endemic 9.2 0.0 9.2*** 6.7*** 9.2 All improved 17.0** 0.0** 17.0*** 15.0*** 17.04 Mat share Exotic or hybrid 0.03** 0.0** 0.1*** 0.02*** 0.03 Elite endemic 0.1* 0.0* 0.2** 0.1** 0.10 All improved 0.13** 0.0** 0.3*** 0.12*** 0.13 Notes: ***, **, and * indicate statistical significance at the 1 percent, 5 percent, and 10 percent levels, respectively, in the difference of means or distributions across elevation and exposure strata within country. Mean number of mats in improved material is calculated only for those growing the improved material. A mat is a mother plant and all of its plantlets. Exotic refers to introduced farmers’ cultivars; elite endemic refers to endemic types selected and enhanced by the National Agricultural Research Organization; and all improved combines exotic, elite endemic, and hybrid categories. Table 5.15 Percentage of farmers growing improved banana cultivars, Tanzania Elevation Exposure Type of cultivar Low High Exposed Not exposed All Exotic 97.3 100 97.3 100 97.7 Hybrid 21.4*** 5.0*** 18.6 20 18.9 Either exotic or hybrid 97.3 100 97.3 100 97.7 Notes: Differences across strata are tested by cross-tabulation using the chi-square distribution. *** indicates statistical significance at the 1 percent level. Columns do not total because 35 households were found growing both exotics and hybrids on their plots, reducing the total number of households growing at least one improved cultivar to 132 instead of 174. Exotic refers to introduced farmers’ cultivars. the effects of farmer-to-farmer diffusion. This finding is consistent with the pattern estimated by the KCDP project, in Table 4.3 of Chapter 4. Farmer-based exchange more than offset project-based exchange, even when project efforts were as intensive as those undertaken in Kagera Region. Use of recommended banana-management practices was studied only in Uganda (Katungi 2006). Use rates for recommended management practices are much higher than for improved cultivars (Table 5.17). However, farmers use a wide range of organic fertilizers and sanitation practices to manage their banana groves. They apply mulch (in the form of grass, crop residues, or household refuse) to control weeds, enable water penetration, and add nutrients to the soil when decomposed. Other organic fertilizers are applied directly to the soil as organic manure (that is, animal waste and composted household refuse). On average, mulching, animal manure, and soil and water conservation (SWC) bands are more
BANANA-GROWING HOUSEHOLDS AND BANANA CULTIVARS 61 Table 5.16 Number and share of banana mats planted to improved banana cultivars, by users, Tanzania Elevation Exposure Cultivar type Low High Exposed Not exposed All Number of mats Exotic 16.4*** 51.9*** 17.4** 40.8** 25.2 Hybrid 5.6*** 22.5*** 6.4 4.9 6.0 Exotic or hybrid 16.4*** 51.9*** 17.4** 40.8** 25.2 Mat share Exotic 0.40*** 0.14*** 0.30** 0.38** 0.33 Hybrid 0.01** 0.001** 0.01 0.01 0.01 Exotic or hybrid 0.41*** 0.14*** 0.31** 0.39** 0.34 Notes: *** and ** indicate statistical significance at the 1 percent and 5 percent levels, respectively, in the difference of means or distributions across elevation and exposure strata within country. Exotic refers to introduced farmers’ cultivars. Table 5.17 Percentage of farmers adopting selected banana management practices, Uganda Elevation Exposure Practice Low High Exposed Not exposed All Natural resource management Mulching 66.5*** 91.9*** 73.5** 59.4** 75.1 Animal manure 35.6*** 64.6*** 37.8 33.3 45.4 Composting 17.01 15.2 26.5*** 7.3*** 16.4 Soil and water conservation contour bands 9.8 15.2 16.3*** 3.1*** 11.6 Soil and water conservation other bands 12.4*** 30.3*** 19.4*** 5.2*** 18.4 Mat management (sanitation practices) Corm paring 18.9 14.3 33.0*** 6.1*** 17.3 Desuckering 73.5*** 92.9*** 79.4* 67.7* 79.9 Detrashing 95.4** 98.9** 97.9* 92.9* 95.6 Stumping 64.3*** 98.9*** 68.0 60.6 75.9 Splitting/chopping pseudostem 65.3*** 79.6*** 67.0 63.6 75.9 Corm removal 50 80.6 57.0*** 34.3*** 60.2 Weevil trapping 31.6 24.5 37.1 26.3 29.3 Note: ***, **, and * indicate statistical significance at the 1 percent, 5 percent, and 10 percent levels, respectively, in the difference of means or distributions across elevation and exposure strata within country.
Page 1 and 2:
An Economic Assessment of Banana Ge
Page 3 and 4:
Contents List of Tables List of Fig
Page 5 and 6:
Tables 3.1 Net marketing margins pe
Page 7 and 8:
TABLES vii 6.5 Characteristics of h
Page 9 and 10:
Figures 2.1 Sample domain: Elevatio
Page 11 and 12:
Acknowledgments The International F
Page 13 and 14:
SUMMARY xiii en’s education--and
Page 15 and 16:
Acronyms and Abbreviations AGT ARDI
Page 17:
Part I. Research Methods
Page 20 and 21:
4 CHAPTER 1 practices in Africa are
Page 22 and 23:
6 CHAPTER 1 periment station. Not a
Page 24 and 25:
8 CHAPTER 1 niques (based on seed p
Page 26 and 27: 10 CHAPTER 1 Cohen, J. I., and R. P
Page 28 and 29: CHAPTER 2 Elements of the Conceptua
Page 30 and 31: 14 CHAPTER 2 ples of adoption disco
Page 32 and 33: 16 CHAPTER 2 transgenic bananas cur
Page 34 and 35: 18 CHAPTER 2 Figure 2.2 Sites sampl
Page 36 and 37: 20 CHAPTER 2 Figure 2.4 Time profil
Page 39: Part II. Research Context
Page 42 and 43: here> 1near 3. 26 CHAPTER 3 major f
Page 44 and 45: 28 CHAPTER 3 disease, which affects
Page 46 and 47: here> 1near 3. 30 CHAPTER 3 Table 3
Page 48 and 49: 32 CHAPTER 3 Table 3.2 Banana produ
Page 50 and 51: 34 CHAPTER 3 would only be able to
Page 52 and 53: 36 CHAPTER 3 Nkonya, E., J. Pender,
Page 54 and 55: here> 1near 4. 38 CHAPTER 4 cash ne
Page 56 and 57: 40 CHAPTER 4 Figure 4.1 Introductio
Page 58 and 59: 42 CHAPTER 4 Research Introductions
Page 60 and 61: 44 CHAPTER 4 Table 4.2 Names of the
Page 62 and 63: 46 CHAPTER 4 The most widely used m
Page 64 and 65: 48 CHAPTER 4 Ortíz, R., and D. Vuy
Page 66 and 67: here> 5.3near here>
Page 68 and 69: 52 CHAPTER 5 Table 5.4 Percentage o
Page 70 and 71: 54 CHAPTER 5 Table 5.7 Percentage o
Page 72 and 73: here> 9near 5. here> 10near 5. 56 C
Page 74 and 75: here> 12near 5. 58 CHAPTER 5 Table
Page 78 and 79: here> 18near 5. 62 CHAPTER 5 Table
Page 80 and 81: 64 CHAPTER 5 Table 5.20 Average num
Page 82 and 83: 66 CHAPTER 5 Table 5.23 Percentage
Page 84 and 85: 68 CHAPTER 5 Table 5.26 Average dis
Page 86 and 87: 70 CHAPTER 5 considerably higher in
Page 89: Part III. Economic Assessment of Te
Page 92 and 93: 76 CHAPTER 6 The agricultural house
Page 94 and 95: 78 CHAPTER 6 grow, but have grown i
Page 96 and 97: 80 CHAPTER 6 Table 6.2 Summary stat
Page 98 and 99: 82 CHAPTER 6 tion. More frequent vi
Page 100 and 101: 84 CHAPTER 6 Table 6.4 Prototype ho
Page 102 and 103: 86 CHAPTER 6 Table 6.5 Characterist
Page 104 and 105: 88 CHAPTER 6 References Cameron, A.
Page 106 and 107: 90 CHAPTER 7 by-products of other f
Page 108 and 109: here> 1near 7. 92 CHAPTER 7 Table 7
Page 110 and 111: 94 CHAPTER 7 ity in the two technol
Page 112 and 113: 96 CHAPTER 7 Table 7.2 Definition o
Page 114 and 115: 98 CHAPTER 7 The direct link betwee
Page 116 and 117: 100 CHAPTER 7 Table 7.3 Factors inf
Page 118 and 119: 102 CHAPTER 7 tive sign but are onl
Page 120 and 121: 104 CHAPTER 7 fertility management
Page 122 and 123: 106 CHAPTER 7 participatory decisio
Page 124 and 125: 108 CHAPTER 7 Stevens, J. P. 2002.
Page 126 and 127:
110 CHAPTER 8 defined as a function
Page 128 and 129:
112 CHAPTER 8 inputs or implement c
Page 130 and 131:
114 CHAPTER 8 Crop output is determ
Page 132 and 133:
116 CHAPTER 8 Table 8.1 Variable de
Page 134 and 135:
here> 8.6near here> 8.2near 8.3nea
Page 136 and 137:
120 CHAPTER 8 Table 8.4 Production
Page 138 and 139:
122 CHAPTER 8 during the SOM decomp
Page 140 and 141:
124 CHAPTER 8 Supplementary Tables
Page 142 and 143:
126 CHAPTER 8 Table 8A.3 Production
Page 144 and 145:
128 CHAPTER 8 Thomas, G. W. 1982. E
Page 146 and 147:
130 CHAPTER 9 (Nkuba et al. 1999).
Page 148 and 149:
132 CHAPTER 9 be reduced through la
Page 150 and 151:
134 CHAPTER 9 Table 9.2 Summary sta
Page 152 and 153:
136 CHAPTER 9 Table 9.3 Coefficient
Page 154 and 155:
138 CHAPTER 9 Table 9.4 Mean compar
Page 156 and 157:
140 CHAPTER 9 References Anandajaya
Page 158 and 159:
142 CHAPTER 10 Table 10.1 Ugandan c
Page 160 and 161:
144 CHAPTER 10 (Kangire and Rutherf
Page 162 and 163:
146 CHAPTER 10 Table 10.4 Predomina
Page 164 and 165:
here> 7near 10. 148 CHAPTER 10 Tabl
Page 166 and 167:
150 CHAPTER 10 Table 10.8 Present v
Page 168 and 169:
152 CHAPTER 10 In terms of specific
Page 171:
Part IV. Conclusions
Page 174 and 175:
158 CHAPTER 11 in cooking, brewing
Page 176 and 177:
160 CHAPTER 11 sumption and income
Page 178 and 179:
162 CHAPTER 11 4. 5. for which the
Page 181 and 182:
APPENDIX A Banana Taxonomy for Ugan
Page 183 and 184:
BANANA TAXONOMY FOR UGANDA 167 Tabl
Page 185 and 186:
BANANA TAXONOMY FOR UGANDA 169 Tabl
Page 187 and 188:
BANANA TAXONOMY FOR TANZANIA 171 Ta
Page 189 and 190:
BANANA TAXONOMY FOR TANZANIA 173 Ta
Page 191 and 192:
APPENDIX C Use of Improved Banana V
Page 193 and 194:
DETAILS OF SAMPLE SURVEY DESIGN 177
Page 195 and 196:
Page 197 and 198:
Page 199 and 200:
VILLAGE SOCIAL STRUCTURE IN UGANDA
Page 201 and 202:
List of Principal Authors and Contr
Page 203 and 204:
ABOUT THE AUTHORS 187 rigation, and
show all

An Economic Assessment of Banana Genetic Improvement and ...

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?