Metodologías participativas para innovación y seguridad alimentaria
1. Metodologías Participativas para la Innovación, Soberanía y Seguridad Alimentaria Carlos Arturo Quiros, CIAT Julio 2011 CAMBIO ANDINO J. Ashby, 2009
19. Pasos en la Metodología CIAL Análisis de Resultados Planeación Diagnostico con la Comunidad Elección del Comité Motivación Experimentación Evaluación Retroinformación S&EP
20.
21. La Escasez de Alimentos en Ciertas Temporadas es m á s Alta en Cumunidades sin CIALs Cauca Colombia 1998 % de familias Meses– escasez de alimentos
22. Aumentan producción Sin CIAL, menor seguridad alimentaria Con CIAL, aumento en los rendimientos
23. % 1990 1992 1994 1996 1998 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 Fríjol: acceso más rápido a semillas de calidad Communidades sin CIAL. Vecinos de un CIAL Comunidades con CIALs
24. Producción total de fríjol y maíz en 4 comunidades participantes en el proyecto de la Secretaria de Agricultura y Pesca. Valle, Col. 2006- 2007 B * Falta contabilizar cosechas de algunos municipios 2008-A Fríjol 4 siembras 27 toneladas de grano 3 toneladas de semilla 30 toneladas cosecha US$46.000 venta Maíz 4 siembras 84 toneladas de grano 5 toneladas de semilla 89 toneladas cosecha US$70.500 venta Gran total 111 toneladas de grano 8 toneladas de semilla 119 toneladas cosecha US$116.500 venta
29. Iniciativa de Fortalecimiento de Capacidades y Gestión de Conocimiento del CIAT Lograr el uso efectivo de los resultados de investigación
30.
Notas del editor
Mejoramiento Participativo consiste en procedimientos, métodos y herramientas para organizar el ciclo de mejoramiento genético de un cultivo con la participación activa de productores de escasos recursos.
From a 7-year seed tracer study, we know that the conventional barley varieties have lower adoption ceiling potential (25%) because of their limited capacity to adapt to the different conditions of the marginal environments which are characteristic of area where barley is grown. A survey of farmers involved in participatory plant breeding reported that they would plant up to 60% of area in PPB lines. The participating farmers were also willing to pay a 24% premium on the new barley seed over the local seed. The first two years of the conventional and PPB research structure are the same, the crosses are made and initial increases are made on-station. ICARDA’s participatory barley breeding takes the lines to farmer selection in year, whereas on-farm testing in conventional breeding takes place 3 years later, in year 6. This means that participatory research has potentially a 3-year reduction research lag. Whether or not one uses participatory approaches in breeding or not, mostly only the operating costs of a breeding budget are affected, the overhead and the personnel cost remaining nearly the same in both methods. The operating costs constitute only 23% of the total budget, and the PPB increases the total budget only by 2% as compared to the conventional on-farm breeding. And these results are important because reduction in research lag and increasing adoption ceiling, increase the economic benefits, especially when there is very small increase in research costs.The economic surplus model results show that the benefits in reduction in research lag and 10% yield increase due to participatory research increases total benefits by 90%.
The research lag is the interval between commencing the research activity and generating new technology which is adopted. This figure based on ICARDÄ experience illustrates how research lag differs between conventional and participatory breeding approaches. The first two years are the same, the crosses are made and initial increases are made on-station. Then participatory barley breeding takes the lines to farmer selection in year 3. This happens in conventional breeding in year 6. This means that participatory research chieved a 3-year reduction in research lag from commencement to adoption The conventional breeding research lag is 8 years at the minimum.
Fuente; Humphries, S.,O. Gallardo,J. Jimenez, and F. Sierra, 2005. Linking small farmers to the formal research sector: lessons from a participatory plant breeding programme in Honduras. AGREN Netowk paper No 142
Fuente: IPRA, CIAT
Los CIALes aumentan el alcance y beneficios de los sistemas de investigacion y transferencia hacia los pobres, a crear una capacidad de innovacion local para la evaluacion y ajuste de tecnologias. Aumentan rendimientos , seguridad alimentaria y la gestion de riesgo en base al conocimiento tecnico indigena y las sistemas de produccion apropriadas al lugar, segun las prioridades establecidas con grupos de productores.
Fuente Classen, L. et al 2008. Opening spaces for the most marginal: learning from collective action in the Honduran hillsides. World Development .
Fuente: IPRA, CIAT. An impact study showed that over 80 percent of farmers in communities with CIAls had seed of a new bean variety selected and distributed by the local committee. Fifty percent of farmers in three nearby communities and over 20% of farmers in four communities without CIALs also had planted the seed.