Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Economic concepts for designing policies to conserve crop genetic resources on farms

  • Published:
Genetic Resources and Crop Evolution Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The future food supply of all societies depends on the exploitation of genetic recombination and allelic diversity for crop improvement, and many of the world's farmers depend directly on the harvests of the genetic diversity they sow for food and fodder as well as the next season's seed. On farm conservation is an important component of the global strategy to conserve crop genetic resources, though the structure of costs and benefits from on farm conservation differ from those associated with ex situ conservation in gene banks. A fundamental problem that affects the design of policies to encourage on farm conservation is that crop genetic diversity is an impure public good, meaning that it has both private and public economic attributes. This concept is defined and made operational in order to assist practitioners in identifying (1) least-cost sites for on farm conservation (2) the types of policy instruments that might be appropriate for supporting conservation once a site has been located. Published findings regarding prospects for on farm conservation as economies develop are summarized and empirical examples of suitable policies to support farmers' decisions are placed in the context of economics principles.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Aguirre Gomez J.A., Bellon M.R. and Smale M. 2000. A Regional Analysis of Maize Biological Diversity in Southeastern Guanajuato, Mexico. Economic Botany 54: 60–72.

    Google Scholar 

  • Antle J.M. 1999. The new economics of agriculture Presidential Address prepared for the Annual Meetings of the American Agricultural Economics Association August, 1999, Nashville.

  • Baidu-Forson J., Ntare B.R. and Waliyar F. 1997. Utilizing conjoint analysis to design modern crop varieties: empirical example for groundnut in Niger. Agricultural Economics 16: 219–226.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bellon M.R. 2001. Demand and Supply of Crop Infraspecific Diversity on Farms: Towards a Policy Framework for On-Farm Conservation CIMMYT EconomicsWorking Paper 01–01. International Maize and Wheat Improvement Center (CIMMYT), Mexico, D.F.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bellon M.R. 1996. The dynamics of crop infraspeci.c diversity: A conceptual framework at the farmer level. Economic Botany 50: 26–39.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bellon M.R., Pham J.-L., Sebastian L.S., Francisco S.R., Loresto G.C., Erasga D. et al. 1998. Farmers' perceptions of varietal diversity. Implications for on-farm conservation of rice. In: Smale M. (ed.), Farmers, Gene Banks, and Crop Breeding. Economic Analyses of Diversity in Wheat, Maize, and Rice. Kluwer Academic Publishers and International Maize and Wheat Improvement Center (CIMMYT), Dordrecht, Mexico D.F., pp. 95–108.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bellon M.R., Pham J.-L. and Jackson M.T. 1997. Genetic conservation: a role for rice farmers. In: Maxted N., Ford-Lloyd B.V. and Hawkes J.G. (eds), Plant Genetic Conservation: The In-Situ Approach. Chapman and Hall, London, pp. 263–289.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bellon M.R. and Brush S.B. 1994. Keepers of maize in Chiapas, Mexico. Economic Botany 48: 196–209.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bellon M.R. and Taylor J.E. 1993. Folk soil taxonomy and the partial adoption of new seed varieties. Economic Development and Cultural Change 41: 763–786.

    Google Scholar 

  • Boserup E. 1965. Conditions of Agricultural Growth. Aldine Publishing Company, Chicago.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brown A.H.D. 2000. The genetic structure of crop landraces and the challenge to conserve them in situ on farms. In: Maxted N., Ford-Lloyd B.V. and Hawkes J.G. (eds), Plant Genetic Conservation: The In Situ Approach. Chapman and Hall, London.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brush S.B. 2000. The issues of in situ conservation of crop genetic resources. In: Brush S.B. (ed.), Genes in the Fields: On-Farm Conservation of Crop Diversity. International Plant Genetic Resources Institute (IPGRI), Rome International Development Research Centre (IDRC), Ottawa, and Lewis Publishers, Boca Raton.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brush S.B. 1995. In situ conservation of landraces in centers of crop diversity. Crop Science 35: 354–346.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brush S.B. and Meng E. 1998. Farmers' valuation and conservation of crop genetic resources. Genetic Resources and Crop Evolution 5: 2445–2451.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brush S.B., Taylor J.E. and Bellon M.R. 1992. Biological diversity and technology adoption in Andean potato agriculture. Journal of Development Economics 38: 365–387.

    Google Scholar 

  • Byerlee D. 1996. Modern varieties, productivity, and sustainability: recent experience and emerging challenges.World Development 24: 697–718.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chambers R. 1988. An Interim Note on Ranking Methods. Institute of Development Studies, University of Sussex, Brighton.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cornes R. and Sandler T. 1986. The Theory of Externalities, Public Goods, and Club Goods. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cromwell E. 1996. Governments, Farmers, and Seeds in a Chang-ing Africa. CABI, Wallingford, UK.

    Google Scholar 

  • Falcinelli M. 1997. Il miglioramento genetico delle colture tipiche locali. L'Informatore Agrario 47 Edizioni l'Informatore Agrario, s.r.l, Verona.: 75–75.

  • Friis-Hansen E. 1996. The role of local plant genetic resources management in participatory breeding. In: Eyzaguirre P. and Iwanaga M. (eds), Participatory Plant Breeding. Proceedings of a Workshop on Participatory Plant Breeding, 26–29 July 1995, Wageningen, Netherlands. International Plant Genetic Resources Institute (IPGRI), Rome, pp. 66–76.

    Google Scholar 

  • Friis-Hansen E. and Sthapit B. (eds) 2000. Participatory Approaches to the Conservation and use of Plant Genetic Resources. International Plant Genetic Resources Institute (IPGRI), Rome, Italy.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gauchan D. 2000. EconomicValuation of Rice Landrace Diversity. A Case Study of Bara Ecosite, Nepal-Terai. International Plant Genetic Resources Institute (IPGRI), Rome.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gauchan D., Chaudhary P., Sthapit B., Upadhaya M.P., Smale M. and Jarvis D. 2001. An Analysis of Market Incentives for On Farm Conservation of Rice Landraces in Central Terai, Nepal Paper presented at the National In Situ Conservation of Agrobiodiversity On-farm Workshop held on April 24–26, 2001, Lumle (Kaski), Nepal.

  • Hayami Y. and Ruttan V.W. 1985. Agricultural Development. An International Perspective. Johns Hopkins University Press, Baltimore, Revised and Extended Edition.

    Google Scholar 

  • Heisey P., Smale M., Byerlee D. and Souza E. 1997. Wheat Rusts and the Costs of Genetic Diversity in the Punjab or Pakistan. American Journal of Agricultural Economics 79: 726–737.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jarvis D.I., Myer L., Klemick H., Guarino L., Smale M., Brown A.H.D. et al. 2000. A Training Guide for In Situ Conservation On-farm.Version 1. International Plant Genetic Resources Institute (IPGRI), Rome.

    Google Scholar 

  • Joshi K.D. and Sthapit B.R. 1990. Informal research and development (IRD). A new approach to research and extension Lumle Agricultural Research Centre Discussion Paper No. 90/ 4. Lumle Agricultural Research Centre, Pokhara, Nepal.

    Google Scholar 

  • Joshi K.D., Subedi M., Kadayat K.B., Rana R.B. and Sthapit B.R. 1997. Enhancing on-farm varietal diversity through participatory variety selection. A case study of Chaite rice in Nepal. Experimental Agriculture 33: 1–10.

    Google Scholar 

  • Loevinsohn M. and Sperling L. (eds) 1995. Joining dynamic conservation to decentralized genetic enhancement. Prospects and issues Using Diversity. Enhancing and Maintaining Genetic Resources On-Farm, Proceedings of a workshop held on 19–21 June 1995. International Development Research Centre, New Delhi, India., pp. 1–7.

  • Mackenzie J. 1993. A Comparison of Contingent Preference Models. American Journal of Agricultural Economics 75: 593–603.

    Google Scholar 

  • Maurya D.M., Bottrall A. and Farrington J. 1988. Improved livelihoods, genetic diversity and farmers’ participation. a strategy for rice-breeding in rainfed areas of India. Experimental Agriculture 5: 2445–2451.

    Google Scholar 

  • Marshall D.R. and Brown A.H.D. 1975. Optimum sampling strategies in genetic conservation. In: Frankel O.H. and Hawkes J.G. (eds), Crop Genetic Resources for Today and Tomorrow. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, pp. 53–80.

    Google Scholar 

  • Maxted N., Ford-Lloyd B.V. and Hawkes J.G. (eds) 1997. Plant Genetic Conservation. The In-Situ Approach. Chapman and Hall, London.

  • Meng E.C.H. 1997. Land allocation decisions and in situ conservation of crop genetic resources. The case of wheat landraces in Turkey, PhD, University of California, Davis.

    Google Scholar 

  • Meng E.C.H., Taylor J.E. and Brush S.B. 1998. Implications for the conservation of wheat landraces in Turkey from a household model of varietal choice. In: Smale M. (ed.), Farmers, Gene Banks and Crop Breeding. Economic Analyses of Diversity in Wheat, Maize, and Rice. Kluwer Academic Press and CIMMYT, Dordrecht, Mexico D.F., pp. 127–143.

    Google Scholar 

  • Morris M.L. 1998. Maize Seed Industries in Developing Countries. Lynne Rienner and CIMMYT, Boulder.

    Google Scholar 

  • Morris M.L., Rusike J. and Smale M. 1998. Maize seed industries. a conceptual framework. In: Morris M. (ed.), Maize Seed Industries in Developing Countries. Lynne Rienner and CIMMYT, Boulder, Mexico D.F., pp. 35–56.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nassif F. 2000. Social, cultural, and economic data collection and analysis including gender. Methods for increasing access, partici-pation and decision-making. In: Jarvis D., Sthapit B. and Sears L. (eds), Conserving Agricultural Biodiversity In Situ. A Scientific Basis for Sustainable Agriculture. International Plant Genetic Resources Institute, Rome, pp. 51–53.

    Google Scholar 

  • Newbury H.J. and Ford-Lloyd B.V. 1997. Estimation of genetic diversity. In: Maxted N., Ford-Lloyd B.V. and Hawkes J.G. (eds), Plant Genetic Conservation. The In-Situ Approach. Chapman and Hall, London, pp. 263–289.

    Google Scholar 

  • Perales R.H., Brush S.B. and Qualset C.O. 1998. Agronomic and economic competitiveness of maize landraces and in situ conservation in Mexico. In: Smale M. (ed.), Farmers, Gene Banks and Crop Breeding. Economic Analyses of Diversity in Wheat, Maize, and Rice Dordrecht and Mexico, D.F. Kluwer Academic Press and International Maize and Wheat Improvement Center, pp. 109–126.

  • Pingali P. 1997. From subsistence to commercial production systems. American Journal of Agricultural Economics 79: 628–634.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pingali P., Hossain M. and Gerpacio R.V. 1997. Asian Rice Market: Demand and Supply Prospects. Chapter 6 in Asian Rice Bowls: the Returning Crisis? CAB International and International Rice Research Institute (IRRI), Wallingford, Los Banos. 126–144.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pray C.E. 1998. Impact of biotechnology on the demand for rice biodiversity. In: Evenson R.E., Gollin D. and Santaniello V. (eds), Agricultural Values of Plant Genetic Resources. CAB International and Food and Agricultural Organization of the United Nations (FAO), Wallingford, Rome, pp. 249–259.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rana R.B., Gauchan D., Rijal D.K., Khatiwada S.P., Paudel C.L., Chaudhary P. et al. 2000. Socioeconomic data collection and analysis. Nepal. In: Jarvis D., Sthapit B. and Sears L. (eds), Conserving Agricultural Biodiversity In Situ. A Scientific Basis for Sustainable Agriculture. International Plant Genetic Re-sources Institute (IPGRI), Rome, pp. 54–55.

    Google Scholar 

  • Renkow M. and Traxler G. 1994. Incomplete Adoption of Modern Cereal Varieties. The Role of Grain-Fodder Tradeoffs Selected paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Agricultural Economics Association, San Diego, August 7–10, 1994.

  • Rijal D.K., Rana R., Subedi A. and Sthapit B.R. 2000. Adding value to landraces. Community-based approaches for in situ conservation of plant genetic resources in Nepal. In: Friis-Hansen E. and Sthapit B. (eds), Participatory Approaches to the Conservation and Use of Plant Genetic Resources. International Plant Genetic Resources Institute (IPGRI), Rome, pp. 166–172.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rice E., Smale M. and Blanco J.-L. 1998. Farmers’ use of improved seed selection practices in Mexican maize. Evidence and issues from the Sierra de Santa Marta.World Development 26: 1625–1640.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rijal D.K., Subedi A., Upadhaya M.P., Rana R.B., Chaudhary P., Tiwari P.R. et al. 2001. Community biodiversity registers. de-veloping community-based databases for genetic resources and local knowledge in Nepal Paper prepared for the First National Workshop of the Project, Strengthening Scientific Basis of In situ Conservation of Agrobiodiversity On-farm. Nepal, 24–26 April, 2001, Lumle, Nepal.

  • Romer P.M. 1992. Two Strategies for economic development. using ideas and producing ideas Proceedings of the 1992 World Bank Annual Conference on Development Economics. The World Bank, Washington D.C.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sandler T. 1999. Intergenerational Public Goods. Strategies, Efficiency and Institutions. In: Kaul I., Grunberg I. and Stein M.A. (eds), Global Public Goods. United Nations Development Pro-gramme and Oxford University Press, Oxford.

    Google Scholar 

  • Smale M., Bellon M., Aguirre A., Manuel I., Mendoza J., Solano A.M. et al. 2002. The Economic Costs and Benefits of a Par-ticipatory Project to Conserve Maize Landraces on Farms. A Case Study in the Central Valleys of Oaxaca, Mexico Paper presented at the International Conference on Impacts of Agricultural Research and Development, Organized by the Standing Panel on Impact Assessment of the Technical Advisory Committee of the Consultative Group on International Agricultural Research and the International Maize and Wheat Improvement ´ Center, San Jose, Costa Rica, February 4–7, 2002.

  • Smale M., Bellon M. and Aguirre Gomez J.A. 2001. Maize diversity, variety attributes, and farmers’ choices in Southeastern Guanajuato, Mexico. Economic Development and Cultural Change 50: 201–225.

    Google Scholar 

  • Smale M. and Bellon M. 1999. A Conceptual Framework for ´ Valuing On-Farm Genetic Resources. In: Wood D. and Lenne J. (eds), Agrobiodiversity. Characterization, Utilization, and Management. CAB International, Wallingford, pp. 387–408.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sperling L., Loevinsohn M. and Ntambovura B. 1993. Rethinking the farmer's role in plant breeding. Local bean experts and on-extension selection in Rwanda. Experimental Agriculture 29: 509–519.

    Google Scholar 

  • Steward J.H. (ed.) 1955. Theory of Cultural Change. University of Illinois Press, Urbana, IL.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sthapit B.R., Joshi K.D. and Witcombe J.R. 1996. Farmer par-ticipatory cultivar improvement. III. Participatory plant breeding, A case of high altitude rice from Nepal. Experimental Agriculture 32: 479–496.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stiglitz J. 1987. Some theoretical aspects of agricultural policies. The World Bank Research Observer 43–60.

  • Tapia M.E. and Rosa A. 1993. Seed fairs in the Andes. A strategy for local conservation of plant genetic resources. In: de Boef W., Amanor K., Wellard K. and Bebbington A. (eds), Cultivating Knowledge. Intermediate Technology Publications, London, pp. 111–118.

    Google Scholar 

  • Thiele G., Gardiner G., Torrez R. and Gabriel J. 1997. Farmer involvement in selecting new varieties. Potatoes in Bolivia. Experimental Agriculture 33: 275–90.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tiesl M.F., Roe B. and Levy A.S. 1999. Ecocertification. Why it may not be a “Field of Dreams.”. American Journal of Agricultural Economics 81: 1066–1071.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tripp R. 2000. Seed Provision and Agricultural Development. The Institutions of Rural Change. Overseas Development Institute, London, James Currey, Oxford, and Heinemann, Portsmouth (N.H.).

    Google Scholar 

  • Unnevehr L., Duff B. and Juliano B.O. 1992. Consumer Demand for Rice Grain Quality. Terminal Report of IDRC Projects. National Grain Quality (Asia) and International Grain Quality Economics (Asia). International Development Research Centre (IDRC), Ottawa, International Rice Research Institute (IRRI), Los Banos, Laguna, Philippines.

    Google Scholar 

  • Van Dusen E. 2000. In Situ Conservation of Crop Genetic Resources in Mexican Milpa Systems, PhD, University of California, Davis, USA.

    Google Scholar 

  • Weltzien E., Smith M.E., Meitzner L.S. and Sperling S. 2000. Technical and Institutional Issues in Participatory Plant Breeding — from the Perspective of Formal Plant Breeding. A Global Analysis of Issues, Results, and Current Experience CGIAR Systemwide Program on Participatory Research and Gender Analysis for Technology Development and Institutional Innovation.

  • Westgren R.E. 1999. Delivering food safety, food quality, and sustainable production practices. The Label Rouge poultry sys-tem in France. American Journal of Agricultural Economics 81: 1107–1111.

    Google Scholar 

  • Witcombe J.R. and Joshi A. 1995. The impact of farmer participatory research on the biodiversity of crops. In: Sperling L. and Loevinsohn M. (eds), Using Diversity. Enhancing and Maintain-ing Genetic Resources On-Farm, Workshop Proceedings. International Development Research Center, New Delhi, India June 19–21., pp. 87–101.

    Google Scholar 

  • Witcombe J.R., Joshi K.D. and Sthapit B.R. 1996. Farmer participatory cultivar improvement. I. Varietal selection and breeding methods and their impact on biodiversity. Experimental Agriculture 5: 2445–2451.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zimmerer K.S. 1996. Changing Fortunes. Biodiversity and Peasant Livelihood in the Peruvian Andes. University of California Press, Berkeley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zimmerer K.S. and Douches D. 1991. Geographical approaches to crop conservation. The partitioning of genetic diversity in Andean potatoes. Economic Botany 5: 2445–2451.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. International Plant Genetic Resources Institute (IPGRI) and, International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI), 2033 K Street, N.W., Washington D.C., 20006, USA (e-mail

    Melinda Smale & Bhuwon Sthapit

  2. International Maize and Wheat Improvement Center (CIMMYT), Apda Postal, D.F. o06600, Mexico

    Mauricio R. Bellon

  3. International Plant Genetic Resources Institute (IPGRI), via dei Tre Denari 472/a, Maccarese, Italy

    Devra Jarvis

Authors
  1. Melinda Smale
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Mauricio R. Bellon
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Devra Jarvis
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Bhuwon Sthapit
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Melinda Smale.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Smale, M., Bellon, M.R., Jarvis, D. et al. Economic concepts for designing policies to conserve crop genetic resources on farms. Genetic Resources and Crop Evolution 51, 121–135 (2004). https://doi.org/10.1023/B:GRES.0000020678.82581.76

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1023/B:GRES.0000020678.82581.76

Search

Navigation