Academia.eduAcademia.edu

Outline

Title
Abstract
Introduction
Methods
Study Area, Crops, and Actors
Conclusions
Institutional Review Board Statement
References
All Topics
Agriculture
General Agricultural and Biological Sciences

Pluralistic Seed System Development: A Path to Seed Security?

Profile image of Sarah Paule DalleSarah Paule Dalle

2021, Agronomy

https://doi.org/10.3390/AGRONOMY11020372
visibility

…

description

42 pages

link

1 file

Abstract

Seed security is central to crop production for smallholder farmers in developing countries, but it remains understudied in relation to long-term seed sector development. Here, we compare seed systems in two districts of Central Ethiopia characterized by subsistence-oriented teff cultivation and commercially oriented wheat production and relate this to the country’s pluralistic seed system development strategy (PSSDS). Our analysis is based on quantitative and qualitative information from a household survey and focus group discussions with farmers, as well as document review and key informant interviews with actors that make up the seed sector in the study sites. Farmers in both districts used a range of seed sources but primarily obtained their seeds from informal sources. Evidence of seed insecurity was found in both districts, as apparent from discrepancies between what the seed farmers say they prefer and those they actually use, limited availability of improved varieties and es...

Related papers

Social institutions mediating seed access in West African seed systems
Kristal Jones

FACETS, 2017

Contemporary approaches to market-oriented agricultural development focus on increasing production and economic efficiency to improve livelihoods and well-being. For seed system development, this has meant a focus on seed value chains predicated on standardized economic transactions and improved variety seeds. Building formal seed systems requires establishing and strengthening social institutions that reflect the market-oriented values of efficiency and standardization, institutions that often do not currently exist in many local and informal seed systems. This paper describes and analyzes efforts to develop formal seed systems in Sahelian West Africa over the past 10 years, and identifies the impacts for farmers of the social institutions that constitute formal seed systems. Using qualitative and spatial data and analysis, the paper characterizes farmers’ and communities’ experiences with seed access through the newly established formal seed system. The results demonstrate that th...

View PDFchevron_right
Estimation of Smallholder Farmers’ Demand for Certified Seed: Evidence From Wheat and Tef Seed Systems in Ethiopia
Bekele Gemechu

Research Square (Research Square), 2024

The previous studies conducted in Ethiopia have mainly concentrated on the adoption of tef and wheat crops, along with complementary inputs. However, there has been a notable gap in research when it comes to examining the factors that influence the demand for certified seeds in the country. The study aimed to assess the factors that influence farmers' decisions to purchase certified seeds and the quantity of certified seeds purchased by tef and wheat farmers. Data were collected from 186 randomly selected sample farmers using a multistage sampling approach. A double hurdle model was used to analyze the data, considering that the decisions to participate in certified seed purchase and the quantity of purchased are influenced by different factors. The results showed that household size, tef farming experience, and proximity to cooperative office, age, and land size had a significant effect on the likelihood of purchasing certified tef seeds. Education level, distance to extension office, certified wheat seed price, and extension contacts were found to significantly influenced the decision to purchase certified wheat seeds. Furthermore, education level, land size, certified tef and wheat seed price, livestock ownership were significantly influenced both quantity of certified tef and wheat seeds purchased. In conclusion, enhancing farmers' skills, ensuring local seed availability through collective actions, and implementing a seed price subsidy program could enhance crop productivity for farmers with limited resources. The study suggests that farmers' seed producer cooperatives and private seed suppliers should be encouraged to increase their involvement in producing certified self-pollinated seeds.

View PDFchevron_right
Farmer-Based Seed Multiplication in the Ethiopian Seed System: Approaches, Priorities and Performance
Dawit Alemu
View PDFchevron_right
Farmer-Based Seed Multiplication in the Ethiopian Seed System: Approaches, Priorities & Performance
Dawit Alemu

2011

View PDFchevron_right
Constraints to private seed sector development in Ethiopia: A case study
Abebe atilaw

African Journal of Agricultural Research, 2018

The purpose of this assessment was to identify, analyse and document major policies, laws, regulations, administrative practices, governance and institutional setups that constrained private seed sector investment in Ethiopia and identify evidence based alternative solutions to improve the supply of certified seed to small holder farmers and livelihoods in the country. The study was conducted in 2017 in Oromia, Amhara, SNNPR and Tigray regions. Both primary and secondary data that comprise quantitative and qualitative data sets were used. Primary data collected using on 21 domestic and international private seed companies, 22 Key informant interviews, and 12 focus group discussions were conducted at various levels. The results of the analysis showed that there are problems connected with policy environment, institutional and administrative bottlenecks. Based on the result of the survey, 89.5 and 82.7% of the respondents replied there is inadequate marketing system and inefficient market access, respectively; 84.2% said availability of poor quality of early generation seed (EGS), and 68.4% limited availability of EGS; 71.4% respondents replied there is inadequate government support in terms of finance, and capacity development; 61.9% inadequate access to fertile land and suitable irrigable land. Hence, to improve the private seed sector investment in Ethiopia there is a need to develop a clear policy and directives across the seed value chain. In general, for the private sector to develop in the country there is a need to foster a stepwise reduction of government intervention in private seed production to ensure a level playing field between the public and private sector producers to attract more private companies to the seed sector and expand farmer choice.

View PDFchevron_right
Status of improved crop seed utilization system across small scale farmers in southern Ethiopia: The case of Sodo Zuirya in Wolaiyta, Mareka in Dawuro and Kacha Birra in Kambata Tambaro zones
Tessema Erchafo

Open Access Journal of Science

The small scale farmers and other producers in Southern Ethiopia challenged by lack of quality seeds at the right place and time, poor farmers seed preservation and reutilization practices, high price of seeds, lack of awareness for farmers, erratic rain fall and related crop failure that are one of the key factors accounting for low adoption of improved seeds and failure to exploit the potential of improved crop seeds, which further contributing for low agricultural productivity. Therefore, the study aimed to asses improved seed utilization system and constraints related to improved seed utilization in Wolaiyta, Kembata, Tembaro and Dawuro Zones. The study used key informant interview, literature reviewed, and household survey in three respective districts (Sodo Zuirya, Kacha Birra and Mareka). The survey adopted random sampling techniques for sampled producers and purpose sampling techniques in selecting the study districts in relation to experience of seed utilization, secondary information gathered and key informant interview undertaken. The survey result justified that there was variation in level of improved crop and forage seed utilization across districts and producers, increment in production of source seeds at research centers and improved participation of producers and other stakeholders in production and utilization of seeds. Total amount of improved seeds disseminated and utilized from 2015 to 2016 showed decreasing trend for crops like: teff, and faba bean. In relation to climate variability and concurrent erratic rain fall, the extent of improved seeds disseminated and utilized showed different trend in the two consecutive years across the study districts. The major sources of improved seed sources identified were government, market and farmers themselves for major crops produced in the districts. The interviewed sampled producers confirmed that the major challenge for not adopting and using improved seed were, farmers experience of reutilization of seeds, Unaffordable price of seed, untimely supply of seeds, lack of seeds inform of credit, lack of difference in productivity in comparison to local seeds and packaging problem and lack of varieties demanded by producers. Therefore the study result pointed out that it is possible to increase trend of improved crop seeds dissemination and utilization through awareness creation, undertaking demonstration of improved seed packages, experience sharing promotion and improving access and quality seeds supplied for producers.

View PDFchevron_right
Analyzing Pathways of Nurturing Informal Seed Production into Formal Private Ventures for Sustainable Seed Delivery and Crop Productivity: Experiences from Ethiopia
essegbemon akpo

Sustainability

Sustaining crop production and productivity in sub-Saharan Africa requires the availability and use of quality seed of improved varieties by smallholder farmers. The private sector has been considered as the best way to sustain seed supply and crop productivity. Unfortunately, the private sector’s share in the seed production and delivery in sub-Saharan Africa countries has not been very substantial for decades. As a consequence, farmer access to quality seed of recently released varieties remains very low. This manuscript analyzes the experiences of informal seed producers who graduated to formal private seed enterprises to understand the effectiveness of the support they receive to become viable seed ventures. We used comparative research methods to analyze the qualitative and quantitative data collected to understand the underlying mechanisms. The findings showed that the analyzed seed enterprises started with as little as about USD 300 and have already multiplied over tenfold th...

View PDFchevron_right
Perception of farmers and agricultural experts for farmers’ saved seed: The case of East Showa, Ethiopia
Fisseha Zegeye Zegeye

There is limited information on the perception of the performance of farmers’ saved seed (FSS) despite enormous effort to address the farmers with improved and quality seed. The paper therefore presents perception of farmers, researchers, agricultural experts on the performance of farmers’ saved seed and its underlying factors. The perceived performance of farmers' saved seed was assessed based on the survey made in East Shewa zone of Oromia Region, Ethiopia using two questionnaires responded by 65 relevant agricultural experts (Development Agents, Subject Matter Specialists, Agricultural Researchers) and 92 randomly selected farmers. The study found that of the total respondents, 52% perceived that FSS perform poor for all crops and the rest 48% perceived that the poor performance is for some crops. Similarly, perceptions about the poor performance of FSS were not statistically different between farmers and experts. In terms of the perception of the poor performance of FSS for the different crops, however, statistically significant differences were observed between farmers and experts except for teff. Concerning the estimated reduction due to the use of FSS, based on the response of those farmers who perceived the performance poorly, the estimated yield reductions are considerably high ranging from close to 6 quintals/ha for teff (26.1%) and haricot beans (27.3%) to close to 9 quintals/ha for chickpea (25.7%), 10 quintals/ha (21.3%) for wheat, and about 14 quintals/ha for maize (47.8%). The overall statistical analysis found that there is not statistically significant difference in reduction of yields due to use of FSS between the farmers and experts’ estimates for all crops. Majority of the respondents perceived that the poor performances of the FSS are associated with the variety deterioration, poor post-harvest management, and pest and disease damages. The other perceived reasons are related with poor quality due to open pollination and high contamination. The perceptions about the stated reasons between farmers and experts are found to be not significantly different. Key words: Perception of farmers and experts, farmers’ saved seed.

View PDFchevron_right
Seed systems smallholder farmers use
Shawn McGuire

Food Security, 2016

Seed can be an important entry point for promoting productivity, nutrition and resilience among smallholder farmers. While investments have primarily focused on strengthening the formal sector, this article documents the degree to which the informal sector remains the core for seed acquisition, especially in Africa. Conclusions drawn from a uniquely comprehensive data set, 9660 observations across six countries and covering 40 crops, show that farmers access 90.2 % of their seed from informal systems with 50.9 % of that deriving from local markets. Further, 55 % of seed is paid for by cash, indicating that smallholders are already making important investments in this arena. Targeted interventions are proposed for rendering formal and informal seed sector more smallholder-responsive and for scaling up positive impacts.

View PDFchevron_right
9 Participatory varietal selection for enhancing farmers’ access to quality seed in Ethiopia
Fetien Abera

Community Biodiversity Management, 2013

About 85% of Ethiopia's 80 million inhabitants depend on agriculture for their livelihoods. The agricultural sector is largely characterized by small-scale subsistence farming and low productivity. Farmer access to quality seed of better adapted varieties is of utmost importance for increasing productivity (Bishaw et al., 2008). Public research institutes and universities are primarily responsible for plant breeding. Their varieties generally target high-potential agricultural environments and as such are not specifically adapted to the marginal growing conditions with which small-scale farmers most often have to contend. Participatory varietal selection (PVS) is becoming a common tool for identifying which materials should be incorporated into breeding programmes, and which traits should be addressed, as well as for testing materials in farming conditions before release (Ceccarelli et al., 2009). The formal seed system takes responsibility for the dissemination of just a few released, high-demand varieties, resulting in the limited accessibility of improved varieties that are adapted to diverse conditions. For example, over the past six years, thirty bread wheat varieties have been released, but the variety Kubsa remains dominant in 60-70% of the area in the country that is planted with seed of improved wheat varieties. The major reason for its dominance is its widespread dissemination through the public seed and extension system. In 2010, the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO) reported that 410 000 hectares of Kubsa were highly affected by rust, which had a detrimental impact on the livelihoods of over 65 000 farmers. This situation shows the vulnerability caused by the development-oriented structure of the public seed value chain, which focuses on a limited number of released varieties (Louwaars and De Boef, 2012). One of the options for overcoming these bottlenecks is the production of quality seed of a wide range of adapted varieties by groups of small-scale farmers who market this quality seed locally (Neate and Guei, 2011). PVS is a common strategy for exposing farmers to released varieties, and it can help farmer seed producer groups identify which varieties to select for producing seed. PVS can even be used to identify local varieties that perform well, in case improved released varieties do not do well in the target environment (Abay and Bjørnstad, 2008; De Boef et al., 2010). The Integrated Seed Sector Development (ISSD) programme in Ethiopia works with farmers' groups that are involved in seed production. The programme

View PDFchevron_right

References (189)

  1. Ariga, J.; Mabaya, E.; Waithaka, M.; Wanzala-Mlobela, M. Can improved agricultural technologies spur a green revolution in Africa? A multicountry analysis of seed and fertilizer delivery systems. Agric. Econ. 2019, 50, 63-74. [CrossRef]
  2. MoA. Transforming the Ethiopian Seed Sector: Issues and Strategies; Ministry of Agriculture (MoA): Addis Ababa, Ethiopia, 2019;
  3. MoA; ATA. Seed System Development Strategy: Vision, Systematic Challenges, and Prioritized Interventions; Working Strategy Document; Ministry of Agriculture (MoA) and Agricultural Transformation Agency (ATA): Addis Ababa, Ethiopia, 2017. Available online: http://www.ata.gov.et/download/seed-system-development-strategy/ (accessed on 1 November 2020).
  4. Sperling, L.; McGuire, S. Fatal gaps in seed security strategy. Food Secur. 2012, 4, 569-579. [CrossRef]
  5. Louwaars, N.P.; de Boef, W.S. Integrated seed sector development in Africa: A conceptual framework for creating coherence between practices, programs, and policies. J. Crop Improv. 2012, 26, 39-59. [CrossRef]
  6. Almekinders, C.J.M.; Louwaars, N.P.; De Bruijn, G.H. Local seed systems and their importance for an improved seed supply in developing countries. Euphytica 1994, 78, 207-216. [CrossRef]
  7. Bellon, M.R. The dynamics of crop infraspecific diversity: A conceptual framework at the farmer level 1. Econ. Bot. 1996, 50, 26-39. [CrossRef]
  8. Thiele, G. Informal potato seed systems in the Andes: Why are they important and what should we do with them? World Dev. 1999, 27, 83-99. [CrossRef]
  9. Richards, P. Indigenous Agricultural Revolution: Ecology and Food Production in West Africa; Hutchinson: London, UK, 1985; p. 192.
  10. Richards, P.; de Bruin-Hoekzema, M.; Hughes, S.G.; Kudadjie-Freeman, C.; Offei, S.; Struik, P.; Zannou, A. Seed systems for African food security: Linking molecular genetic analysis and cultivator knowledge in West Africa. Int. J. Technol. Manag. 2009, 45, 196-214. [CrossRef]
  11. McGuire, S. Securing access to seed: Social relations and sorghum seed exchange in eastern Ethiopia. Hum. Ecol. 2008, 36, 217-229.
  12. Brush, S.B. Farmers Bounty: Locating Crop Diversity in the Contemporary World; Yale University Press: New Haven, CT, USA, 2004; p. 352.
  13. Munyi, P.; de Jonge, B. Seed systems support in Kenya: Consideration for an integrated seed sector development approach. J. Sustain. Dev. 2015, 8, 161-173. [CrossRef]
  14. Tripp, R. Supporting integrated seed systems: Institutions, organizations and regulations. In Proceedings of Integrating Seed Systems for Annual Food Crops, Proceedings of the Workshop, Malang, Indonesia, 24-27 October 1995; CGPRT Centre: Bogor, Indonesia, 1995; pp. 53-64.
  15. Okry, F.; Van Mele, P.; Nuijten, E.; Struik, P.C.; Mongbo, R.L. Organizational analysis of the seed sector of rice in Guinea: Stakeholders, perception and institutional linkages. Exp. Agric. 2011, 47, 137-157. [CrossRef]
  16. Mulatu, E.; Ibrahim, O.E.; Bekele, E. Policy changes to improve vegetable production and seed supply in Hararghe, Eastern Ethiopia. J. Veg. Sci. 2005, 11, 81-106. [CrossRef]
  17. Sperling, L.; Louwaars, N.; de Ponti, O.; Smale, M.; Baributsa, D.; van Etten, J. Viewpoint: COVID-19 and seed security response now and beyond. Food Policy 2020, 102000. [CrossRef]
  18. McGuire, S.; Sperling, L. The links between food security and seed security: Facts and fiction that guide response. Dev. Pract. 2011, 21, 493-508. [CrossRef]
  19. FAO. Household Seed Security Concepts and Indicators; Discusion Paper Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations and European Commission Humanitarian Aid Department; FAO: Rome, Italy, 2015; p. 10.
  20. Dalle, S.P.; Westengen, O.T. Seed Security in Theory and Practice: A Comparative Study of Seed Security Frameworks and Their Use; Department of International Environment and Development Studies (Noragric), Norwegian University of Life Sciences: Ås, Norway, 2020; p. 37.
  21. FAO. Developing seed security strategies and programmes for food security in developing countries. In Proceedings of the International Workshop on Seed Security for Food Security, Florence, Italy, 30 November-1 December 1997.
  22. Remington, T.; Maroko, J.; Walsh, S.; Omanga, P.; Charles, E. Getting off the seeds-and-tools treadmill with CRS seed vouchers and fairs. Disasters 2002, 26, 316-328. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  23. FAO. Seed Security Assessment: A Practitioner's Guide; Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO): Rome, Italy, 2016; p. 61.
  24. Shrestha, P.K. Participatory Seed Security Assessment and Action Plan: A Guide, 1st ed.; Canada, U., Ed.; SeedChange: Ottawa, ON, Canada, 2020; p. 115.
  25. FAO. Seed Security Assessment a Practitioner's Toolbox; Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO): Rome, Italy, 2016; p. 79.
  26. CGIAR. Multi-Stakeholder Framework for Intervening in RTB Seed Systems: User's Guide; Consultative Group on International Agricultural Research (CGIAR) Program on Roots, Tubers and Bananas: Lima, Peru, 2016; p. 13. [CrossRef]
  27. Bentley, J.W.; Andrade-Piedra, J.; Demo, P.; Dzomeku, B.; Jacobsen, K.; Kikulwe, E.; Kromann, P.; Kumar, P.L.; McEwan, M.; Mudege, N.; et al. Understanding root, tuber, and banana seed systems and coordination breakdown: A multi-stakeholder framework. J. Crop Improv. 2018, 32, 599-621. [CrossRef]
  28. Coomes, O.T.; McGuire, S.J.; Garine, E.; Caillon, S.; McKey, D.; Demeulenaere, E.; Jarvis, D.; Aistara, G.; Barnaud, A.; Clouvel, P. Farmer seed networks make a limited contribution to agriculture? Four common misconceptions. Food Policy 2015, 56, 41-50.
  29. FAO. Voluntary Guide for National Seed Policy Formulation; Comission on Genetic Resources for Food and Agriculture of the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO): Rome, Italy, 2015; p. 60.
  30. Sperling, L.; Cooper, H.D.; Remington, T. Moving towards more effective seed aid. J. Dev. Stud. 2008, 44, 586-612. [CrossRef]
  31. Almekinders, C.J.M.; Louwaars, N.P. The importance of the farmers seed systems in a functional national seed sector. J. New Seeds 2002, 4, 15-33. [CrossRef]
  32. Bishaw, Z.; Struik, P.C.; van Gastel, A.J.G. Wheat seed system in Ethiopia: Farmers varietal perception, seed sources, and seed management. J. New Seeds 2010, 11, 281-327. [CrossRef]
  33. Tekle-Wold, A.; Fikre, A.; Alemu, D.; Desalegn, L.; Kirub, A. The Defining Moment in Ethiopian Seed System; Ethiopian Institute of Agricultural Research: Addis Ababa, Ethiopia, 2012; p. 544.
  34. Alemu, D.; Rashid, S.; Tripp, R. Seed System Potential in Ethiopia: Constraints and Opportunities for Enhancing the Seed Sector; International Food Policy Research Institute: Washington, DC, USA, 2010; p. 62.
  35. McGuire, S. Getting Genes: Rethinking Seed System Analysis and Reform for Sorghum in Ethiopia; Wageningen University: Wageningen, The Netherlands, 2005.
  36. Gebru, M.; Holden, S.T.; Alfnes, F. Adoption of agricultural technologies in the semi-arid northern Ethiopia: A panel data analysis. Agric. Food Econ. 2020, in press. Available online: https://hdl.handle.net/11250/2673438 (accessed on 7 October 2020).
  37. Fisher, M.; Carr, E.R. The influence of gendered roles and responsibilities on the adoption of technologies that mitigate drought risk: The case of drought-tolerant maize seed in eastern Uganda. Glob. Environ. Chang. 2015, 35, 82-92. [CrossRef]
  38. Asfaw, S.; Shiferaw, B.; Simtowe, F.P.; Haile, M. Agricultural technology adoption, seed access constraints and commercialization in Ethiopia. J. Dev. Agric. Econ. 2011, 3, 436-477. Available online: https://ssrn.com/abstract=2056976 (accessed on 1 November 2020).
  39. Shiferaw, B.A.; Kebede, T.A.; You, L. Technology adoption under seed access constraints and the economic impacts of improved pigeonpea varieties in Tanzania. Agric. Econ. 2008, 39, 309-323. Available online: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1574-0862.2008.00335 .x (accessed on 1 November 2020). [CrossRef]
  40. Abera, H.B. Adoption of Improved Tef and Wheat Production Technologies in Crop-Livestock Mixed Systems in Northern and Western Shewa Zones of Ethiopia; University of Pretoria: Pretoria, South Africa, 2008.
  41. Morris, M.L. Impacts of International Maize Breeding Research in Developing Countries, 1966-1998; Impact Studies 23722; International Maize and Wheat Improvement Center: Mexico City, Mexico, 2002; p. 54. Available online: https://ideas.repec.org/p/ags/ cimmis/23722.html (accessed on 5 October 2020).
  42. Feder, G.; Umali, D.L. The adoption of agricultural innovations: A review. Technol. Forecast. Soc. Chang. 1993, 43, 215-239.
  43. Croppenstedt, A.; Goldstein, M.; Rosas, N. Gender and agriculture: Inefficiencies, segregation, and low productivity traps. World Bank Res. Obs. Spec. Issue Gend. Equal. Dev. 2013, 28, 79-109. Available online: https://www.jstor.org/stable/24582373 (accessed on 5 October 2020). [CrossRef]
  44. Doss, C.R.; Morris, M.L. How does gender affect the adoption of agricltural innovations? Agric. Econ. 2001, 25, 27-39. [CrossRef]
  45. Peterman, A.; Behrman, J.A.; Quisumbing, A.R. A review of empirical evidence on gender differences in nonland agricultural inputs, technology, and services in developing countries. In Gender in Agriculture: Closing the Knowledge Gap; Quisumbing, A.R., Meinzen-Dick, R., Raney, T.L., Croppenstedt, A., Behrman, J.A., Peterman, A., Eds.; Springer: Dordrecht, The Netherlands, 2014; pp. 145-186. [CrossRef]
  46. Makate, C.; Makate, M.; Mango, N. Wealth-related inequalities in adoption of drought-tolerant maize and conservation agriculture in Zimbabwe. Food Secur. 2019, 11, 881-896. [CrossRef]
  47. Langyintuo, A.S.; Mungoma, C. The effect of household wealth on the adoption of improved maize varieties in Zambia. Food Policy 2008, 33, 550-559. [CrossRef]
  48. Beshir, B.; Wegary, D. Determinants of smallholder farmers hybrid maize adoption in the drought prone central rift valley of Ethiopia. Afr. J. Agric. Res. 2014, 9, 1334-1343. [CrossRef]
  49. Engels, J.M.M.; Hawkes, J.G.; Worede, M. Plant Genetic Resources of Ethiopia; Cambridge University Press: Cambridge, UK, 1991; p. 383. Available online: https://prd-idrc.azureedge.net/sites/default/files/openebooks/884-8/index.html (accessed on 9 September 2020).
  50. Harlan, J.R. Ethiopia: A center of diversity. Econ. Bot. 1969, 23, 309-314. Available online: https://www.jstor.org/stable/4253081 (accessed on 12 March 2020). [CrossRef]
  51. Vavilov, N.I. Wheats of Ethiopia. Bull. Appl. Bot. Genet. Plant Breed. 1929, 20, 324-356.
  52. Sperling, L.; Deressa, A.; Assefa, S.; Assefa, T.; McGuire, S.; Amsalu, B.; Negusse, G.; Asfaw, A.; Mulugeta, W.; Dagne, B.; et al. Long-Term Seed Aid in Ethiopia: Past, Present, and Future Perspectives; Ethiopian Institute of Agricultural Research; International Center for Tropical Agriculture and Overseas Development Group: Addis Ababa, Ethiopia, 2007; p. 141. Available online: https://seedsystem.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/03/long_term_seed_aid_Eth07_full.pdf (accessed on 5 February 2020).
  53. CRS; EWNRA; IISD; ORDA; REST; ECC-SDCO. Seed System Security Assessment in Ethiopia; Catholic Relief Services (CRS), Ethio-Wetlands and Natural Resources Association (EWNRA), Integrated Seed Sector Development (ISSD), Organization for Rehabilitation and Development in Amhara (ORDA), Relief Society of Tigray (REST), and the Ethiopian Catholic Church- Social and Development Coordinating Offices (ECC-SDCO): Addis Ababa, Ethiopia, 2016; p. 81. Available online: https: //seedsystem.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/01/Ethiopia-SSSA-Final-Report-Dec-2016.pdf (accessed on 18 February 2020).
  54. FDRE. Draft National Seed Industry Policy; Federal Democratic Republic of Ethiopia (FDRE): Addis Ababa, Ethiopia, 2019; Unpublished. 55. MoA; ATA. Quality Declared Seeds Directive No. 1/2007; Ministry of Agriculture(MoA) and Agricultural Transformation Agency (ATA): Addis Ababa, Ethiopia, 2015. (in Amharic)
  55. FDRE. Plant breeder's right proclamation. proclamation No.1068/2017. In Negarit Gazeta of the Federal Democratic Republic of Ethiopia; Negarit Gazeta of the Federal Democratic Republic of Ethiopia (FDRE): Addis Ababa, Ethiopia, 2017; pp. 10281-10302.
  56. Bishaw, Z.; Sahlu, Y.; Simane, B. The status of the Ethiopian seed industry. In Farmers, Seeds and Varieties: Supporting Informal Seed Supply in Ethiopia; Thijssen, M.H., Bishaw, Z., Beshir, A., de Boef, W.S., Eds.; Wageningen International: Wageningen, The Netherlands, 2008; pp. 23-33.
  57. Louwaars, N.P.; de Boef, W.S.; Edeme, J. Integrated seed sector development in Africa: A basis for seed policy and law. J. Crop Improv. 2013, 27, 186-214. [CrossRef]
  58. Fikre, A.; Wakjira, A.; Mekbib, F.; Gebeyehu, S. Practices and developments in the informal seed system of Ethiopia. In The Defining Moment in Ethiopian Seed System; Tekle-Wold, A., Fikre, A., Alemu, D., Desalegn, L., Kirub, A., Eds.; Ethiopian Institute of Agricultural Research: Addis Ababa, Ethiopia, 2012; pp. 237-252.
  59. Alemu, D.; Mwangi, W.; Nigussie, M.; Spielman, D.J. An Analysis of Maize Seed Production and Distribution Systems In Ethiopia's Rift Valley; Ethiopian Institute of Agricultural Research: Addis Ababa, Ethiopia, 2007; p. 35.
  60. Mucioki, M.; Pelletier, B.; Johns, T.; Muhammad, L.W.; Hickey, G.M. On developing a scale to measure chronic household seed insecurity in semi-arid Kenya and the implications for food security policy. Food Security 2018, 10, 571-587. [CrossRef]
  61. Otieno, G.A.; Reynolds, T.W.; Karasapan, A.; Noriega, I.L. Implications of seed policies for on-farm agro-biodiversity in Ethiopia and Uganda. Sustain. Agric. Res. 2017, 6, 12-30. [CrossRef]
  62. Mulesa, T.H.; Westengen, O.T. Against the grain? A historical institutional analysis of access governance of plant genetic resources for food and agriculture in Ethiopia. J. World Intellect. Prop. 2020, 23, 82-120. [CrossRef]
  63. Thijssen, M.H.; Bishaw, Z.; Beshir, A.; de Boef, W.S. Farmers, Seeds and Varieties: Supporting Informal Seed Supply in Ethiopia; Wageningen International: Wageningen, The Netherlands, 2008; p. 348.
  64. Ayana, A.; Borman, G.; Subedi, A.; Abay, F.; Mohammed, H.; Nefo, K.; Dechassa, N.; Dessalegn, T. Integrated seed sector development in Ethiopia: Local seed business development as an entrepreneurial model for communi-ty-based seed production in Ethiopia. In Community Seed Production, Workshop Proceedings, Addis Ababa, Ethiopia, 9-11 December 2013; Ojiewo, C.O., Kugbei, S., Bishaw, Z., Rubyogo, J.C., Eds.; FAO and ICRISAT: Addis Ababa, Ethiopia, 2013; pp. 88-97.
  65. Mulugeta, F.; Eshetu, J.; Nikus, O. Seed Value Chain Analysis as a Means for Sustainable Seed System: A Case of Farmers Based Seed Production and Marketing in Arsi Zone, Oromia Region; FAO-Crop Diversification and Marketing Development Project: Asella, Ethiopia, 2010; p. 35.
  66. Feyissa, R.; Gezu, G.; Tsegaye, B.; Desalegn, T. On-farm management of plant genetic resources through community seed banks in Ethiopia. In Community Biodiversity Management Promoting Resilience and the Conservation of Plant Genetic Resources; de Boef, W.S., Subedi, A., Peroni, N., Thijssen, M., O'Keeffe, E., Eds.; Routledge: New York, NY, USA, 2013; pp. 26-31.
  67. Mohammed, H.; Dessalegn, T.; Abay, F.; Thijssen, M.H. Participatory varietal selection for enhancing farmers' access to quality seed in Ethiopia. In Community Biodiversity Management, Promoting Resilience the Conservation of Plant Genetic Resources; de Boef, W.S., Subedi, A., Peroni, N., Thijssen, M., O'Keeffe, E., Eds.; Routledge: New York, NY, USA, 2013; pp. 279-284.
  68. Workineh, A.; Abate, B.; Kefalle, D. Participatory evaluation and selection of bread wheat (Triticum aestivum L.) varieties: Implication for sustainable community based seed production and farmer level varietal portfolio managements at southern Ethiopia. World J. Agric. Res. 2014, 2, 315-320. [CrossRef]
  69. McGuire, S.; Sperling, L. Seed systems smallholder farmers use. Food Secur. 2016, 8, 179-195. [CrossRef]
  70. Pautasso, M.; Aistara, G.; Barnaud, A.; Caillon, S.; Clouvel, P.; Coomes, O.T.; Delêtre, M.; Demeulenaere, E.; De Santis, P.; Döring, T. Seed exchange networks for agrobiodiversity conservation. A review. Agron. Sustain. Dev. 2013, 33, 151-175. [CrossRef]
  71. Jaffee, S.; Srivastava, J. The roles of the private and public sectors in enhancing the performance of seed systems. World Bank Res. Obs. 1994, 9, 97-117. [CrossRef]
  72. Alemu, D. The political economy of Ethiopian cereal seed systems: State control, market liberalisation and decentralisation. IDS Bull. 2011, 42, 69-77. [CrossRef]
  73. Ertiro, B.T.; Azmach, G.; Keno, T.; Chibsa, T.; Abebe, B.; Demissie, G.; Wegary, D.; Wolde, L.; Teklewold, A.; Worku, M. Fast- tracking the development and dissemination of a drought-tolerant maize variety in Ethiopia in response to the risks of climate change. In The Climate-Smart Agriculture Papers: Investigating the Business of a Productive, Resilient and Low Emission Future, Rosenstock; Nowak, T.S., Girvetz, E.A., Eds.; Springer International Publishing: Cham, Switzerland, 2019; pp. 79-86. [CrossRef]
  74. Kansiime, M.K.; Mastenbroek, A. Enhancing resilience of farmer seed system to climate-induced stresses: Insights from a case study in West Nile region, Uganda. J. Rural Stud. 2016, 47, 220-230. [CrossRef]
  75. Sisay, D.T.; Verhees, F.J.H.M.; van Trijp, H.C.M. Seed producer cooperatives in the Ethiopian seed sector and their role in seed supply improvement: A review. J. Crop Improv. 2017, 31, 323-355. [CrossRef]
  76. Fadda, C.; van Etten, J. Generating farm-validated variety recommendations for climate adaptation. In The Climate-Smart Agriculture Papers: Investigating the Business of a Productive, Resilient and Low Emission Future, Rosenstock; Nowak, T.S., Girvetz, E.A., Eds.; Springer International Publishing: Cham, Switzerland, 2019; pp. 127-138. [CrossRef]
  77. FAO. Quality Declared Seed (QDS) System; Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO): Rome, Italy, 2006; p. 243.
  78. Vernooy, R.; Shrestha, P.; Sthapit, B. Community Seed Banks: Origins, Evolution and Prospects; Routledge: Oxford, UK, 2015; p. 270.
  79. FDRE. A Proclamation on Seed; Proclamation No.782/2013. In Federal Negarit Gazette No. 27; Negarit Gazeta of the Federal Democratic Republic of Ethiopia (FDRE): Addis Ababa, Ethiopia, 2013; pp. 6808-6825.
  80. FDRE. Regulation on Seed; Council of Ministers Regulation No. 375/2016. In Federal Negarit Gazeta No. 42; Negarit Gazeta of the Federal Democratic Republic of Ethiopia (FDRE): Addis Ababa, Ethiopia, 2016.
  81. Subedi, A.; De Boef, W.S.; Audet-Bélanger, G.; Gildemacher, P.; Heemskerk, W. Seed Systems Analysis; Centre for Development Innovation, Wageningen UR and Royal Tropical Institute: Amsterdam, The Netherlands, 2013; p. 7.
  82. Audet-Bélanger, G.; Thijssen, M.H.; Gildemacher, P.; Subedi, A.; De Boef, W.S.; Heemskerk, W. Seed Value Chain Analysis; ISSD Technical Notes. Issue No. 3; Centre for Development Innovation (CDI) and Royal Tropical Institute: Amsterdam, The Netherlands, 2013; p. 10.
  83. StataCorp, L. Stata Statistical Software: Release 14; computer program; StataCorp LP: College Station, TX, USA, 2015.
  84. Cohen, J.M. Effects of green revolution strategies on tenants and small-scale landowners in the Chilalo region of Ethiopia. J. Dev. Areas 1975, 9, 335-358. Available online: https://www.jstor.org/stable/4190267 (accessed on 1 November 2020).
  85. Challa, T.G. Economic evaluation of asella model-III multi-crop thresher. Int. J. Agric. Econ. 2018, 3, 45. [CrossRef]
  86. CSA. The 2007 Population and Housing Census of Ethiopia: Oromia Regional State Central Statistics Agency (CSA); CSA: Addis Ababa, Ethiopia, 2007; p. 116+Vii.
  87. Amenu, B.; Galmessa, U.; Fita, L.; Regasa, B. Assessment of productive and reproductive performance of dairy cows in gindeberet and abuna gindeberet districts of west shoa zone, oromia regional state, Ethiopia. J. Biol. Agric. Healthc. 2017, 7, 137-144.
  88. Yiemene, G. Agricultural Research and Delivery in the South-Eastern Highlands of Ethiopia: A Case Study of the SG-2000 Approach in Hitosa District; African Technology Policy Studies Network (ATPS): Nairobi, Kenya, 2001; p. 55.
  89. CSA. Area and Production of Crops and Crop Utilization: Oromia Region; Central Statistical Agency (CSA) of Ethiopia: Addis Ababa, Ethiopia, 2006; p. 1379.
  90. Mulesa, T.H. Local Crop Genetic Resource Utilization and Management in Gindeberet, West Central Ethiopia. Master's Thesis, Norwegian University of Life Sciences, Ås, Norway, 2006.
  91. Mulubiran, T.F. An Assessment of Woreda Capacity: The Case of Gindeberet and Abuna Gindeberet Wereda in Oromia National Regional State; Addis Ababa University: Addis Ababa, Ethiopia, 2012.
  92. Amade, B.; Goshu, G.; Terefe, G. Producers' perception and practices of hide and skin management and assessment of defects at collection centers in two districts of east Arsi zone, Ethiopia. Eur. J. Biol. Sci. 2017, 9, 137-144. [CrossRef]
  93. BFED. Physical and Socio Economic Profile of Arsi Zone and Districts; Bureau of Finance and Economic Development (BFED)- Regional Data and Information Core Process, The National Regional Government of Oromia: Finfinne, Ethiopia, 2011; p. 496.
  94. Beressa, B.A. Hetosa District Health Profile Description, Arsi Oromia Region. Master's Thesis, Addis Ababa University, Addis Ababa, Ethiopia, 2014.
  95. Nurgi, C. Rainfall Intensity-Duration-Frequency Analysis under Changing Climate Scenario in Selected Stations of the Central Highland of Ethiopia; Haramaya University: Haramaya, Ethiopia, 2014.
  96. Bishaw, Z.; Struik, P.C.; van Gastel, A.J.G. Wheat and barley seed system in Syria: Farmers, varietal perceptions, seed sources and seed management. Int. J. Plant Prod. 2011, 5, 323-347. [CrossRef]
  97. Jaleta, M.; Hodson, D.; Abeyo, B.; Yirga, C.; Erenstein, O. Smallholders' coping mechanisms with wheat rust epidemics: Lessons from Ethiopia. PLoS ONE 2019, 14, e0219327. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  98. Hailu, F. Farmers perception of pesticide use and genetic erosion of landraces of tetraploid wheat (Triticum spp.) in Ethiopia. Genet. Resour. Crop. Evol. 2017, 64, 979-994. [CrossRef]
  99. Bishaw, Z.; Alemu, D.; Atilaw, A.; Kirub, A. (Eds.) Containing the Menace of Wheat Rusts: Institutionalized Interventions and Impacts; Ethiopian Institute of Agricultural Research: Addis Ababa, Ethiopia, 2016.
  100. Almekinders, C.J.M.; Walsh, S.; Jacobsen, K.S.; Andrade-Piedra, J.L.; McEwan, M.A.; de Haan, S.; Kumar, L.; Staver, C. Why interventions in the seed systems of roots, tubers and bananas crops do not reach their full potential. Food Secur. 2019, 11, 23-42.
  101. Tsegaye, B.; Berg, T. Genetic erosion of Ethiopian tetraploid wheat landraces in Eastern Shewa, Central Ethiopia. Genet. Resour. Crop Evol. 2007, 54, 715-726. [CrossRef]
  102. Teklu, Y.; Hammer, K. Farmers' perception and genetic erosion of tetraploid wheats landraces in Ethiopia. Genet. Resour. Crop Evol. 2006, 53, 1099-1113. [CrossRef]
  103. Ferede, S. Linking smallholder farmers to the durum value chain: A retrospective analysis of experience in Ethiopia. In Containing the Menace of Wheat Rusts: Institutionalized Interventions and Impacts; Bishaw, Z., Alemu, D., Atilaw, A., Kirub, A., Eds.; Ethiopian Institute of Agricultural Research: Addis Ababa, Ethiopia, 2016; pp. 99-111.
  104. Jones, R.B.; Bramel, P.; Longley, C.; Remington, T. The need to look beyond the production and provision of relief seed: Experiences from southern Sudan. Disasters 2002, 26, 302-315. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  105. Sperling, L.; McGuire, S. Persistent myths about emergency seed aid. Food Policy 2010, 35, 195-201. [CrossRef]
  106. Sperling, L. The effects of the Rwandan war on crop production, seed security and varietal security: A comparison of two crops. In Proceedings of Restoring Farmers' Seed Systems in Disaster Situations, Proceedings of the International Workshop on Developing Institutional Agreements and Capacity to Assist Farmers in Disaster Situation to Restore Agricultural Systems and Seed Security Activities, Rome, Italy, 3-5 November 1998; Overseas Development Institute: London, UK; pp. 71-91.
  107. Traedal, L.T.; Berg, T. The case of cassava brown streak disease in coastal areas of northern Mozambique. In Addressing Seed Security in Disaster Response: Linking Relief with Development; Sperling, L., Remington, T., Haugen, J.M., Nagoda, S., Eds.; International Center for Tropical Agriculture: Cali, Columbia, 2004; pp. 91-109.
  108. Spielman, D.J.; Mekonnen, D.K. Seed demand and supply responses. In The economics of Teff: Exploring Ethiopia's Biggest Cash Crop; Minten, B., Taffesse, A.S., Brown, P., Eds.; International Food Policy Research Institute: Washington, DC, USA, 2018; pp. 71-96.
  109. Alemu, D.; Atilaw, A.; Ferede, S. The tef seed system: Challenges & opportunities. In Achievements and Prospects of Tef Improvement, Proceedings of the Second International Workshop, Debre Zeit, Ethiopia, 7-9 November 2011; Assefa, K., Chanyalew, S., Tadele, Z., Eds.; Ethiopian Institute of Agricultural Research and Institute of Plant Sciences, University of Bern: Bern, Switzerland, 2013; pp. 291-304. Available online: https://boris.unibe.ch/73185/ (accessed on 31 October 2020).
  110. Alemu, D.; Bishaw, Z. Commercial behaviours of smallholder farmers in wheat seed use and its implication for demand assessment in Ethiopia. Dev. Pract. 2015, 25, 798-814. [CrossRef]
  111. Yirga, C.; Mohammad, A.; Kassie, M.; Groote, H.D.; Mebratu, T.; Jaleta, M.; Shiferaw, B. Analysisof Adoption and Diffusion of Improved Wheat Technologies in Ethiopia; Ethiopian Institute of Agricultural Research (EIAR) and International Maize and Wheat Improvement Center: Addis Ababa, Ethiopia, 2013; p. 55.
  112. Sperling, L.; Gallagher, P.; McGuire, S.; March, J.; Templer, N. Potential seed traders: The backbone of seed business and African smallholder seed supply. Sustainability 2020, 12, 7074. [CrossRef]
  113. Mekonen, L.K.; Minot, N.; Warner, J.; Abate, G.T. Performance of Direct Seed Marketing Pilot Program in Ethiopia: Lessons for Scaling-up; International Food Policy Research Institute and Policy Studies Institute of the Federal Democratic Republic of Ethiopia: Addis Ababa, Ethiopia, 2019; p. 52.
  114. Benson, T.; Spielman, D.; Kasa, L. Direct Seed Marketing Program in Ethiopia in 2013: An Operational Evaluation to Guide Seed-Sector Reform; International Food Policy Research Institute: Washington, DC, USA, 2014; p. 55.
  115. MoANR. Crop Variety Register; Issue No. 19; Plant Variety Release, Protection and Seed Quality Control Directorate, Ministry of Agriculture and Natural Resources (MoANR): Addis Ababa, Ethiopia, 2016.
  116. McGuire, S. Vulnerability in farmer seed systems: Farmer practices for coping with seed insecurity for sorghum in Eastern Ethiopia. Econ. Bot. 2007, 61, 211-222. Available online: https://www.jstor.org/stable/4257218 (accessed on 10 October 2020).
  117. van Gastel, A.J.G.; Bishaw, Z.; Gregg, B.R. Wheat seed production. In Bread Wheat: Improvement and Production; Curtis, B.C., Rajaram, S., Macpherson, G.H., Eds.; Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations: Rome, Italy, 2002; pp. 462-482.
  118. Hailemichael, S.; Haug, R. The use and abuse of the 'model farmer' approach in agricultural extension in Ethiopia. J. Agric. Educ. Ext. 2020, 26, 465-484. [CrossRef]
  119. de Roo, N. The Socio-Political Dimensions of Agricultural Technology Promotion in Ethiopia. Ph.D. Dissertation, Wageningen University, Wageningen, The Netherlands, 2020.
  120. de Roo, N.; Almekinders, C.; Leeuwis, C.; Tefera, T. Scaling modern technology or scaling exclusion? The socio-political dynamics of accessing in malt barley innovation in two highland communities in Southern Ethiopia. Agric. Syst. 2019, 174, 52-62. [CrossRef]
  121. De Roo, N.; Andersson, J.A.; Krupnik, T.J. On-farm trials for development impact? The organisation of research and the scaling of agricultural technologies. Exp. Agric. 2019, 55, 163-184. [CrossRef]
  122. Tiruneh, A.; Tesfaye, T.; Mwangi, W.; Verkuijl, H. Gender Differentials in Agricultural Production and Decision-Making Among Smallholders in Ada, Lume, and Gimbichu Woredas of the Central Highlands of Ethiopia; International Maize and Wheat Improvement Center and Ethiopian Agricultural Research Organization: Mexico City, Mexico, 2001; p. 62.
  123. Shiferaw, B.; Kassie, M.; Jaleta, M.; Yirga, C. Adoption of improved wheat varieties and impacts on household food security in Ethiopia. Food Policy 2014, 44, 272-284. [CrossRef]
  124. Ensermu, R.; Mwangi, W.M.; Verkuijl, H.; Hasenna, M.; Alemayehu, Z. Farmers' Wheat Seed Sources and Seed Management in Chilalo Awraja, Ethiopia; Institute of Agricultural Research-Ethiopia and International Maize and Wheat Improvement Center: Mexico City, Mexico, 1998; p. 36.
  125. Hirpa, A.; Meuwissen, M.P.M.; Tesfaye, A.; Lommen, W.J.M.; Oude Lansink, A.; Tsegaye, A.; Struik, P.C. Analysis of seed potato systems in Ethiopia. Am. J. Potato Res. 2010, 87, 537-552. [CrossRef]
  126. Mulema, A.A. Understanding Women's Empowerment: A Qualitative Study for the UN Joint Programme on Accelerating Progress towards the Economic Empowerment of Rural Women Conducted in Adami Tulu and Yaya Gulele Woredas, Ethiopia; International Livestock Research Institute: Nairobi, Kenya, 2018; p. 26.
  127. Cohen, M.J.; Lemma, M. Agricultural Extension Services and Gender Equality; Ethiopia Strategy Support Program II (ESSP II);
  128. ESSP II Working Paper 28; International Food Policy Research Institute: Addis Ababa, Ethiopia, 2011.
  129. Ogato, G.S. The quest for gender equality and womens empowerment in least developed countries: Policy and strategy implications for achieving millennium development goals in Ethiopia. Int. J. Sociol. Anthropol. 2013, 5, 358-372. [CrossRef]
  130. FAO. Seeds Toolkit-Module 3: Seed Quality Assurance; Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO) and AfricaSeeds: Rome, Italy, 2018; p. 106.
  131. Atlaw, A.; Kaske, K.; Haile, M. Wheat Production Manual for Quality Seed Production; Ethiopian Institute of Agricultural Research: Addis Ababa, Ethiopia, 2014; p. 72.
  132. Wiggins, S.; Cromwell, E. NGOs and seed provision to smallholders in developing countries. World Dev. 1995, 23, 413-422.
  133. FAO. Seeds Toolkit-Module 6: Seed Storage; Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO) and AfricaSeeds: Rome, Italy, 2018; p. 112.
  134. Sperling, L. Emergency seed aid in Kenya: Some case study insights on lessons learned during the 1990s. Disasters 2002, 26, 329-342. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  135. Mekbib, F. Farmers seed system of sorghum [Sorghum bicolor (L.) Moench] in the center of diversity: II. seed quality, storage, protection and security. J. New Seeds 2008, 9, 191-211. [CrossRef]
  136. Alemu, D. Farmer-based seed multiplication in the Ethiopian seed system. In The Defining Moments in Ethiopian Seed System; Tekle-Wold, A., Fikre, A., Alemu, D., Desalegn, L., Kirub, A., Eds.; Ethiopian Institute of Agricultural Research (EIAR): Addis Ababa, Ethiopia, 2012; pp. 271-292.
  137. Abebe, Z.; Teshome, T.; Woyema, A.; Tuli, M. Integrated Seed Sector Development (ISSD) programme in Oromia: Performances and Achievements; Oromia National Regional State: Finfinne, Ethiopia, 2020; p. 87.
  138. Woyema, A.; Abebe, Z.; Ayana, A.; Teshome, T.; Tuli, M.; Bogale, A. Updated Version of Analysis of Seed System in Oromia: Opportunities for Improvement; Oromia National Regional State Bureau of Agriculture and Natural Resource: Finfinne, Ethiopia, 2019; p. 45.
  139. Assefa, K.; Chanyalew, S.; Tadele, Z. Tef, eragrostis tef (Zucc.) trotter. In Millets and Sorghum: Biology and Genetic Improvement; Patil, J.V., Ed.; John Wiley & Sons: Sussex, UK, 2017; p. 226.
  140. Gizaw, B.; ZerihunTsegay, G.T.; Aynalem, E.; Abatneh, E.; Amsalu, G. Traditional knowledge on teff (eragrostistef) farming practice and role of crop rotation to enrich plant growth promoting microbes for soil fertility in east Showa, Ethiopia. Agric. Res. Technol. 2018, 16, 39-55. [CrossRef]
  141. Baributsa, D.; Ignacio, M.C.C. Developments in the use of hermetic bags for grain storage. In Advances in Postharvest Management of Cereals and Grains; Maier, D.E., Ed.; Burleigh Dodds Science Publishing: Cambridge, UK, 2020.
  142. Kalsa, K.K. Farmers' attitudes and practices towards variety and certified seed use, seed replacement and seed storage in wheat growing areas of Ethiopia. Afr. J. Sci. Technol. Innov. Dev. 2019, 11, 107-120. [CrossRef]
  143. Kalsa, K.K.; Subramanyam, B.; Demisse, G.; Worku, A.; Workneh, S.; Gabbiye, N. On-farm performance and assessment of farmers' perceptions of hermetic bags for farm-stored wheat and maize in northwestern Ethiopia. In Advances of Science and Technology; Habtu, N.G., Ayele, D.W., Fanta, S.W., Admasu, B.T., Bitew, M.A., Eds.; Springer International Publishing: Cham, Switzerland, 2020; pp. 98-109. Available online: https://link.springer.com/book/10.1007/978-3-030-43690-2 (accessed on 23 September 2020).
  144. Ndjeunga, J. Local village seed systems and pearl millet seed quality in Niger. Exp. Agric. 2002, 38, 149-162. [CrossRef]
  145. Belay, K.; Abebaw, D. Challenges facing agricultural extension agents: A case study from south-western Ethiopia. Afr. Dev. Rev. 2004, 16, 139-168. [CrossRef]
  146. Belay, K. The Contribution of Sasakawa Global 2000 (SG 2000) to the Ethiopian Agricultural Extension System: A Review of Literature; Haramaya University: Haramaya, Ethiopia, 2008; p. 28.
  147. Keeley, J.; Scoones, I. Knowledge, power and politics: The environmental policy-making process in Ethiopia. J. Mod. Afr. Stud. 2000, 38, 89-120. Available online: https://www.jstor.org/stable/161953 (accessed on 28 December 2020). [CrossRef]
  148. Alemu, D.; Koomen, I.; Schaap, M.; Ayana, A.; Borman, G.; Elias, E.; Smaling, E.; Getaw, H.; Becx, G.; Sopov, M.; et al. BENEFIT Partnership-2019 Annual Report: Bilateral Ethiopian-Netherlands Effort for Food, Income and Trade Partnership; Wageningen Centre for Development Innovation: Wageningen, The Netherlands, 2019.
  149. Beko, M.H. Seed for Change: The Making and Implementation of Seed Policies in Ethiopia. Ph.D. Thesis, Wageningen University, Wageningen, The Netherlands, 2017.
  150. Spielman, D.J.; Mekonnen, D.K.; Alemu, A.D. Seed, fertilizer, and agricultural extension in Ethiopia. In Food and Agriculture in Ethiopia: Progress and Policy Challenges; Dorosh, P., Rashid, S., Eds.; University of Pennsylvania Press: Philadelphia, PA, USA, 2012; Volume 74, pp. 84-122.
  151. Scoones, I.; Thompson, J. The politics of seed in Africa's green revolution: Alternative narratives and competing pathways. IDS Bull. 2011, 42, 1-23. [CrossRef]
  152. Wedajo, D.Y.; Belissa, T.K.; Jilito, M.F. Harnessing indigenous social institutions for technology adoption:'Afoosha'society of Ethiopia. Dev. Stud. Res. 2019, 6, 152-162. [CrossRef]
  153. Guzzon, F.; Bello, P.; Bradford, K.J.; Mérida Guzman, M.D.L.A.; Costich, D.E. Enhancing seed conservation in rural communities of Guatemala by implementing the dry chain concept. Biodivers. Conserv. 2020. [CrossRef]
  154. FAO. National Community Seed Bank Platform for Strengthening Informal Seed System in Ethiopia. Benefit Sharing Fund Project-Fourth Cycle. Available online: http://www.fao.org/plant-treaty/areas-of-work/benefit-sharing-fund/projects- funded/bsf-details/en/c/1198833/?iso3=ETH (accessed on 2 November 2020).
  155. FAO. Using Local Durum Wheat and Barley Diversity to Support the Adaptation of Small-Scale Farmer Systems to the Changing Climate in Ethiopia. Available online: http://www.fao.org/3/a-bb155e.pdf (accessed on 2 November 2020).
  156. EBI. A New Project on Nagoya Protocol Implementation Has Been Launched. Available online: http://www.ebi.gov.et/a-new- project-on-nagoya-protocol-implementation-has-been-launched/ (accessed on 2 November 2020).
  157. Holtland, G. Contract Farming in Ethiopia: Concept and practice; Holtland, G., Ed.; AgriProFocus: Arnhem, The Netherlands, 2017.
  158. Kosmowski, F.; Alemu, S.; Mallia, P.; Stevenson, J.; Macours, K. Shining a Brighter Light: Comprehensive Evidence on Adoption and Diffusion of CGIAR-Related Innovations in Ethiopia; Standing Panel on Impact Assessment: Rome, Italy, 2020; p. 129.
  159. Mekonnen, D.K.; Abate, G.T.; Yimam, S.; Benfica, R.; Spielman, D.J.; Place, F. The Impact of Ethiopia's Direct Seed Marketing Approach on Smallholders' Access to Seeds, Productivity, and Commercialization; International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI): Washington, DC, USA, 2021. [CrossRef]
  160. Minten, B.; Taffesse, A.S.; Brown, P. The Economics of Teff: Exploring Ethiopia's Biggest Cash Crop; International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI): Washington, DC, USA, 2018; p. 425. [CrossRef]
  161. ATA. Working Strategy for Strengthening Ethiopia's Tef Value Chain: Vision, Systemic Challenges, and Prioritized Interventions; Agricul- tural Transformation Agency (ATA), Ethiopian Institute of Agricultural Research and the Ministry of Agriculture of the Federal Democratic Republic of Ethiopia: Addis Ababa, Ethiopia, 2013. Available online: http://www.ata.gov.et/download/working- strategy-for-strengthening-ethiopias-tef-value-chain/ (accessed on 21 August 2020).
  162. Chanyalew, S.; Ferede, S.; Damte, T.; Fikre, T.; Genet, Y.; Kebede, W.; Tolossa, K.; Tadele, Z.; Assefa, K. Significance and prospects of an orphan crop tef. Planta 2019, 250, 753-767. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  163. Fikre, T.; Genet, Y.; Kebede, W.; Tolossa, K.; Assefa, K.; Chanyalew, S.; Hussein, N.; Fentahun, A.; Belay, N.; Tadele, Z. Tef (Eragrostis tef (Zucc.) Trotter) variety 'felagot'. Ethiop. J. Agric. Sci. 2020, 30, 29-37. Available online: https://www.ajol.info/ index.php/ejas/article/view/201108 (accessed on 14 September 2020).
  164. Ferede, S. Technological change & economic viability in tef production. In Achievements and Prospects of Tef Improvement, Proceedings of the Second International Workshop, Debre Zeit, Ethiopia, 7-9 November 2011; Assefa, K., Chanyalew, S., Tadele, Z., Eds.; Ethiopian Institute of Agricultural Research and Institute of Plant Sciences, University of Bern: Bern, Switzerland, 2013; pp. 255-274. Available online: https://boris.unibe.ch/73185/ (accessed on 2 November 2020).
  165. Brasesco, F.; Asgedom, D.; Sommacal, V.; Casari, G. Strategic Analysis and Intervention Plan for Wheat and Wheat Products in the Agro-Commodities Procurement Zone of the Pilot Integrated Agro-Industrial Park in Central-Eastern Oromia, Ethiopia; Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations: Addis Ababa, Ethiopia, 2019; p. 104.
  166. Bishaw, Z. Rapid deployment of rust resistant wheat varieties: ICARDA 's experience and lessons learned. In Containing the Menace of Wheat Rusts: Institutional Interventions and Impacts; Bishaw, Z., Alemu, D., Atilaw, A., Kirub, A., Eds.; Ethiopian Institute of Agricultural Research: Addis Ababa, Ethiopia, 2016; pp. 1-40.
  167. Asnake, D.; Abeyo, B.; Legesse, W.; Tadesse, Z.; Zegeye, H.; Gebre, D.; Badebo, A. Achievements in fast-track germplasm testing and pre-release multiplication of seed of rust resistant wheat varieties in Ethiopia. In Achievements in Fast-Track Variety Testing, Seed Multiplication and Scaling of Rust Resistant Varieties: Lessons from the Wheat Seed Scaling Project, Ethiopia; Geleta, A.B., Badebo, A., Gebre, D., Listman, G.M., Eds.; International Maize and Wheat Improvement Center and Ethiopian Institute of Agricultural Research: Mexico City, Mexico, 2020; pp. 25-36.
  168. Hundie, B.; Badebo, A.; Hodson, D.; Bacha, N.; Yirga, F.; Rouse, M.; Abeyo, B. Enhancement of rust surveillance, early warnings and phenotyping of wheat genotypes in Ethiopia. In Achievements in Fast-Track Variety Testing, Seed Multiplication and Scaling of Rust Resistant Varieties: Lessons from the Wheat Seed Scaling Project, Ethiopia; Geleta, A.B., Badebo, A., Gebre, D., Listman, G.M., Eds.; International Maize and Wheat Improvement Center and Ethiopian Institute of Agricultural Research: CDMX, Mexico, 2020; pp. 9-24.
  169. Ojiewo, C.; Rubyogo, J.; Wesonga, J.; Bishaw, Z.; Abang, M.; Gelalcha, S. Mainstreaming Efficient Legume Seed Systems in Eastern Africa: Challenges, Opportunities and Contributions towards Improved Livelihoods; Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations: Rome, Italy, 2018; p. 72.
  170. Akpo, E.; Ojiewo, C.O.; Kapran, I.; Omoigui, L.O.; Diama, A.; Varshney, R.K. Enhancing Smallholder Farmers' Access to Seed of Improved Legume Varieties Through Multi-Stakeholder Platforms: Learning from the TLIII Project Experiences in Sub-Saharan Africa and South Asia; Springer: Singapore, 2021. [CrossRef]
  171. Assefa, K.; Aliye, S.; Belay, G.; Metaferia, G.; Tefera, H.; Sorrells, M.E. Quncho: The first popular tef variety in Ethiopia. Int. J. Agric. Sustain. 2011, 9, 25-34. [CrossRef]
  172. Belay, G.; Tefera, H.; Getachew, A.; Assefa, K.; Metaferia, G. Highly client-oriented breeding with farmer participation in the Ethiopian cereal tef [Eragrostis tef (Zucc.) Trotter]. Afr. J. Agric. Res. 2008, 3, 22-28. [CrossRef]
  173. Hailu, M.; Tolossa, D.; Kassa, B.; Girma, A. Understanding factors affecting the performance of agricultural extension system in Ethiopia. Ethiop. J. Agric. Sci. 2020, 30, 237-263. Available online: https://www.ajol.info/index.php/ejas/article/view/201145 (accessed on 3 November 2020).
  174. Cafer, A.; Rikoon, S. Coerced agricultural modernization: A political ecology perspective of agricultural input packages in south Wollo, Ethiopia. J. Rural Soc. Sci. 2017, 32, 77. Available online: https://egrove.olemiss.edu/jrss/vol32/iss1/6 (accessed on 1 November 2020).
  175. Berhanu, K.; Poulton, C. The political economy of agricultural extension policy in Ethiopia: Economic growth and political control. Dev. Policy Rev. 2014, 32, S1467-S7679. [CrossRef]
  176. Spielman, D.J.; Byerlee, D.; Alemu, D.; Kelemework, D. Policies to promote cereal intensification in Ethiopia: The search for appropriate public and private roles. Food Policy 2010, 35, 185-194. [CrossRef]
  177. Hassena, M.; van den Broek, J.; Borman, G. Institutional Mapping & Needs Assessment of Ethiopia's Public Seed Sector Services; Final Report to Netherlands Enterprise Agency (RVO.nl);
  178. Wageningen Centre for Development Innovation, Wageningen University & Research: Wageningen, The Netherlands, 2020; p. 29. [CrossRef]
  179. EIAR. Status of Seed Quality Control and Assurance in Ethiopia: Required Measures for Improved Performance; Nigussie, M., Kalsa, K.K., Ayana, A., Alemu, D., Hassena, M., Zeray, T., Adam, A., Mengistu, A., Eds.; Ethiopian Institute of Agricultural Research: Addis Ababa, Ethiopia, 2020.
  180. Tripp, R.; Louwaars, N. Seed regulation: Choices on the road to reform. Food Policy 1997, 22, 433-446. [CrossRef]
  181. Ogato, G.S.; Boon, E.K.; Subramani, J. Improving access to productive resources and agricultural services through gender empowerment: A case study of three rural communities in Ambo District, Ethiopia. J. Hum. Ecol. 2009, 27, 85-100. [CrossRef]
  182. Thijssen, M.H.; Borman, G.D.; Verhoosel, K.S.; Mastenbroek, A.; Heemskerk, W. Local seed business in the context of integrated seed sector development. In Proceedings of the Community Seed Production, Workshop Proceedings, Rome, Italy, 9-11 December 2013; pp. 39-45.
  183. Bogale, S.A.; Verhees, F.J.H.M.; van Trijp, H.C.M. Customer evaluation of supply systems: The case of ethiopian seed supply systems. J. Afr. Bus. 2018, 19, 550-570. [CrossRef]
  184. Akpo, E.; Feleke, G.; Fikre, A.; Chichaybelu, M.; Ojiewo, C.O.; Varshney, R.K. Analyzing pathways of nurturing informal seed production into formal private ventures for sustainable seed delivery and crop productivity: Experiences from Ethiopia. Sustainability 2020, 12, 6828. [CrossRef]
  185. Andersen, R. The Impact of the Development Fund's and LI-BIRD's Community-Based Agrobiodiversity Programme in South Asia-With Emphasis on Nepal; Fridtjof Nansen Institute: Lysaker, Norway, 2019; p. 49.
  186. Andersen, R. The Impact of the Development Funds' and EOSA's Community-Based Agrobiodiversity Management Programme in Ethiopia; Fridtjof Nansen Institute: Lysaker, Norway, 2019; p. 64.
  187. Dalle, S.P.; Walsh, S. USC Canada's experiance in supporting community seed banks in Africa, Asia and the Americas. In Community Seed Banks: Origins, Evolution and Prospects; Vernooy, R., Shrestha, P., Sthapit, B., Eds.; Routledge: London, UK, 2015; pp. 212-230.
  188. Hoogendoorn, J.; Gildemacher, P.; Heemskerk, W.; Thijssen, M. Integrated Seed Sector Development (ISSD)-how informal and formal seed systems can work together for the conservation and use of agricultural biodiversity. Indian J. Plant Genet. Resour. 2016, 29, 281-284. [CrossRef]
  189. Gotor, E.; Usman, M.A.; Occelli, M.; Fantahun, B.; Fadda, C.; Kidane, Y.G.; Mengistu, D.; Kiros, A.Y.; Mohammed, J.N.; Assefa, M.; et al. Wheat varietal diversification increases Ethiopian smallholders food security: Evidence from a participatory development initiative. Sustainability 2021, 13, 1029. [CrossRef]

Related papers

Dynamics of Formal Seed Utilization and Use Intensity: Evidence from Wheat Growers in East Gojjam Province, Northwestern Ethiopia
Amare Tesfaw

International Journal of Economics & Management Sciences, 2015

Commercial agriculture is driven by utilization of modern agricultural inputs despite the variable rate of adoption and use intensity. This study investigates the major factors attributed to variation in households' participation and intensity of formal seed useby taking 4 districts as a case in East Gojjam, Northwestern Ethiopia. A total of 250 farmers were selected following 3 stages and data were processed with Heckman Two-Stage Model using STATA (version 13). The result showed that households participation in formal seed use was significantly affected by land allocated for wheat and the number of oxen (positively, P<0.01), farming experience (positively, P<0.1) and age and off-farm income (negatively, P<0.01 and P<0.05 respectively). Similarly, intensity of formal seed utilized was significantly influenced by size of wheat land, number of oxen and frequency of extension services (positively, P<0.01) and sex and family size (positively, P<0.05). The existing seed supply chains are inefficient, seed systems are institutionalized and there are weak initiatives for community based seed systems. Strong extension services, empowering females with financial incentives and encouraging farmer based seed multiplication system can improve farmers' tendency of improved seed use. Rapid intervention on monopolistic distribution of seeds can bring about competitive seed markets which lead to sufficient supply with optimum prices.

View PDFchevron_right
Vulnerability in Farmer Seed Systems: Farmer Practices for Coping with Seed Insecurity for Sorghum in Eastern Ethiopia
Shawn McGuire

Economic Botany, 2007

Many interventions try to address farmers’ seed insecurity, though few assess the causes of farmers’ vulnerability or understand their coping strategies. This paper analyzes farmers’ practices for maintaining sorghum seed security in a specific season (1998–99) in Ethiopia, which provides a richer picture of coping strategies than accounts of “general” practices, as it shows how responses reflect events unfolding over time and household-specific situations. High seeding rates ensure against environmental uncertainty, but not everyone has sufficient seed for repeated sowing should stands fail to establish. Off-farm seed fills this gap, though payment is usually required for substantial quantities; only 20% of seed from other farmers came for free in 1998. Differences between seed suppliers and recipients suggest indicators for chronic seed insecurity. The discussion explores implications for supporting farmers’ coping strategies. Helping the poorest farmers access off-farm seed, from other farmers or from merchants, can reduce their vulnerability.

View PDFchevron_right
Farmers, seeds and varieties : supporting informal seed supply in Ethiopia
Karen Verhoosel, M. Ugen, Bhuwon Sthapit, feten abay abera, Tesfaye Tadesse, Solomon Benor, Zewdie B Bishaw, Gemechu Keneni

Proceedings of The Nutrition Society, 2008

View PDFchevron_right
ANALYSIS OF INFORMAL SEED SUPPLY SYSTEM: THE CASE OF MIDEGHA TOLLA DISTRICT, EAST HARARGHE ZONE, ETHIOPIA In Partial Fulfilment of the Requirements for the Degree of MASTER OF SCIENCE IN RURAL DEVELOPMENT AND AGRICULTURAL EXTENSION (RURAL DEVELOPMENT
Meseret Getahun

Seed is a vital input to improve agricultural production and productivity. Farmers obtain seed from both formal and informal sources. The informal seed sector in Ethiopia is the major seed supplier of seed for many crops grown in the country. Access to the formal seed sector is limited for the farmers, and hence the role of informal seed supply system is significant. The study is intended to assess the strengths, weaknesses, opportunities and prevailing challenges and institutional frameworks of the informal seed supply system of sorghum and maize crops in Medegha Tolla district of east Haraghe zone, Ethiopia. Purposive sampling method was employed to select four sample KAs and probability proportional to size random sampling was used to select 200 sorghum and maize grower sample respondents. The data collected from sample respondents was using structured interview schedule were processed using descriptive statistics with the help of SPSS software. In addition, the qualitative data were also collected using FGDs, key informant interviews and field observations. The qualitative data were analyzed using narrative analysis, SWOT analysis and actor linkage analysis. The research revealed that the main seed sources for the farmers in the study area were own saved seed, neighbours, local markets, NGOs and the woreda agricultural and rural development office. Farmers in the study area obtain seed mainly by means of exchange with other seed/grain, gift and cash. The respondents and discussants indicated that timely availability, easily accessibility, local adaptability, knowledge and skill sharing along with the seed were the important strengths of the informal seed supply system of the study area. However, the major weaknesses, as reported by the respondents were low quality of seed, lack of purity and lack of specificity of variety. The major challenges faced by the farmers to improve the system were frequent drought, lack of adequate knowledge and skill in seed related activities and lack of appropriate storage. The study also identified the opportunities to strengthen the informal seed system and thereby improve the seed supply system in the area. The presence of traditional seed experts, farmers’ cooperatives, facilitating GOs and NGOs, proximity to research centre and Haramaya University were among the opportunities available. The informal seed supply system in relation to achieving seed security was assessed and it was found that it has a strong contribution. The main actors involved in the informal seed supply system of the study area were farmers, NGO and GOs; and the linkage between these actors found to be very weak. Therefore to strengthen the informal seed supply system, the existing opportunities should be used as a tool and the linkage between actors should be strengthened. Key words: informal seed system, SWOT, institutional frameworks, actor linkages

View PDFchevron_right
Wheat Seed System in Ethiopia: Farmers' Varietal Perception, Seed Sources, and Seed Management
A.J. G van Gastel, Zewdie B Bishaw
View PDFchevron_right

Related topics

  • Business
  • Agronomy
  • Subsistence Agriculture

    • Cited by

    Crop Diversity Management System Commons: Revisiting the Role of Genebanks in the Network of Crop Diversity Actors
    Selim Louafi

    Agronomy

    This paper rethinks the governance of genebanks in a social and political context that has significantly evolved since their establishment. The theoretical basis for the paper is the commons conceptual framework in relation to both seed and plant genetic resources. This framework is applied to question the current policy ecosystem of genetic research and breeding and explore different collective governance models. The concept of crop diversity management system (CDMS) commons is proposed as the new foundation for a more holistic and inclusive framework for crop diversity management, that covers a broad range of concerns and requires different actors. The paper presents a multi-stakeholder process established within the context of the two recent projects CoEx and Dynaversity, imagining possible collective arrangements to overcome existing deadlocks, foster collective learning, and design collaborative relationships among genebanks, researchers, and farmers’ civil society organization...

    View PDFchevron_right
    Advances in the Registration of Farmers’ Varieties: Four Cases from the Global South
    Devendra Gauchan

    Agronomy

    Over the last few decades, there has been a growing appreciation of crop varieties developed by local farmers, commonly referred to as farmers’ varieties. These varieties often have attractive characteristics for both producers and consumers, such as adaptability to harsh environmental conditions and high nutritional values. Yet they are usually not sold in formal markets, and tend to be limited to farmers’ seed systems. This is partially due to national seed laws that, in an effort to guarantee good quality seed of uniform and stable varieties, create obstacles for farmers’ varieties to reach the market. This article describes the experiences of four countries—Bolivia, Laos, Nepal and Zimbabwe—that are developing alternative variety registration systems for farmers’ varieties. Most of these cases have never been documented before. The cases present the main drivers behind and approaches to the registration of farmers’ varieties in different legal contexts and at different stages of...

    View PDFchevron_right
    Institutionalizing Quality Declared Seed in Uganda
    Bonny Ntare

    Agronomy

    Farmer-led seed enterprises can produce good quality seed and market it. However, for them to thrive, they need a conducive policy and regulatory framework that is inclusive and less stringent than existing regulatory frameworks. One way to provide a more enabling environment for farmer-led enterprises is through the Quality Declared Seed (QDS) production and marketing system. In Uganda, this seed class is specifically introduced for farmer-led enterprises to produce and market quality assured seed of crops and varieties not served by the private sector. The class is anchored in the Ugandan National Seed Policy and its seed regulations and its operationalization plan. We identified a combination of three strategies that enabled the QDS class to be incorporated into the National Seed Policy. These were: (i) to generate evidence to demonstrate that local seed businesses (farmer groups) can produce and market quality seed; (ii) to engage stakeholders towards an inclusive seed policy; a...

    View PDFchevron_right
    Toolbox for Working with Root, Tuber, and Banana Seed Systems
    Margaret McEwan

    Root, Tuber and Banana Food System Innovations, 2022

    Root, tuber, and banana (RT&B) crops are critical for global food security. They are vegetatively propagated crops (VPCs) sharing common features: low reproductive rates, bulky planting materials, and vulnerability to accumulating and spreading pathogens and pests through seed. These crops are difficult to breed, so new varieties may be released slowly relative to new emerging threats. VPC seed systems are complex and face several challenges: poor-quality seed of existing varieties, low adoption rates of improved varieties, and slow varietal turnover, limiting yield increases and farmers’ ability to adapt to new threats and opportunities. Addressing these challenges requires first identifying key knowledge gaps on seed systems to guide research for development in a holistic and coherent way. Working together across 10 crops and 26 countries in Africa, Asia, and Central and South America, the CGIAR seed systems research community has developed a “Toolbox for Working with Root, Tuber,...

    View PDFchevron_right
    Seed Systems Resilience—An Overview
    gigi manicad

    Seeds, 2022

    Seeds are a basic input for all crop production. Good seed is crucial for the global food and nutrition security, for rural development and farmers' livelihoods and for all green value chains. What "good seed" is depends on individual farmer's needs. The sustainable availability of seed and seed choice is thus an essential issue for every farmer. Farmers access seeds from multiple sources. Different seed systems have their strengths and vulnerabilities. With changing farming conditions around the world due to climate change, soil degradation and market demands, an analysis of possible disruptions and general future-proofing appears necessary. Such analysis also informs the kinds of support that different seed systems may need to be optimally resilient. Given the very limited studies on resilience of current seed systems, we performed a literature review on the opportunities and vulnerabilities of seed systems to identify possible resilience challenges. Seed system resilience in terms of future-proofing is closely linked with "seed security", the secured access to preferred seeds by farmers. Such resilience depends on the functioning of each of the formal and farmers' seed systems and how these two systems complement each other, particularly when one falters. In this paper, we describe the major characteristics of seed systems, analyze their strength and vulnerabilities, and describe support functions toward future-proofing them. Both the farmers' and the formal seed systems are increasingly facing varying forms and degrees of sustainability challenges. These require various types of support. Farmers' seed systems may find it hard to respond to radically changing conditions without support. Commercial formal seed systems are less vulnerable, as they generally are better equipped to respond to the (changing) needs of their customers. Commercial formal seed systems, however, only serve those farmers that are able and willing to pay for quality seeds. This immediately indicates a significant limitation. A common feature of both formal and farmers' systems is their dependence on the continuous flow and capacity to use a diversity of plant genetic resources. In conclusion, no single seed system can be considered totally resilient and thus future-proof without specific external support.

    View PDFchevron_right
    580 California St., Suite 400
    San Francisco, CA, 94104
    © 2025 Academia. All rights reserved