Integrating gender into Kenya’s evolving seed policies and regulations for roots and tubers

In many developing countries where farmers grow vegetatively propagated crops (VPCs), they are often unable to increase on-farm productivity partly due to limited access to quality seeds. Yet, seed policy and legal frameworks for VPCs in many countries show a limited consideration of the specific characteristics of the seed systems for root, tuber and banana crops. Moreover, there is a lack of understanding of how the implementation of current seed policy frameworks affect participation by men and women as either seed producers or seed users. This paper examines the Kenyan seed policy processes and discusses the gender-sensitivity of how seed policy decisions are made in order to understand how these can be made gender sensitive. It unpacks the context in which seed policies are implemented; how the content of seed policies can differently affect men and women farmers’ participation in seed production and access to seed; and provides recommendations on how seed policy can be made more inclusive. In many developing countries where farmers grow vegetatively propagated crops (VPCs), they are often unable to increase on-farm productivity partly due to limited access to quality seeds. Yet, seed policy and legal frameworks for VPCs in many countries show a limited consideration of the specific characteristics of the seed systems for root, tuber and banana crops. Moreover, there is a lack of understanding of how the implementation of current seed policy frameworks affect participation by men and women as either seed producers or seed users. This paper examines the Kenyan seed policy processes and discusses the gender-sensitivity of how seed policy decisions are made in order to understand how these can be made gender sensitive. It unpacks the context in which seed policies are implemented; how the content of seed policies can differently affect men and women farmers’ participation in seed production and access to seed; and provides recommendations on how seed policy can be made more inclusive

Inventory of novel approaches to seed quality assurance mechanisms for vegetatively propagated crops (VPCs) in seven African countries

This paper provides an inventory of novel approaches to and mechanisms for quality assurance of the seeds of vegetatively produced crops (VPCs). It explores to what extent seven African countries (Ethiopia, Kenya, Malawi, Nigeria, Tanzania, Uganda and Zambia) are decentralising and integrating VPC seed systems, in terms of regulations governing the sector, methods of seed production, and methods of seed inspection and certification. It consolidates existing data and presents new data on decentralised seed quality assurance (SQA) approaches for VPCs in these seven selected countries. It makes relevant information readily available for policy dialogue on appropriate and inclusive SQA approaches, by providing an assessment of (i) the extent to which SQA has been decentralised, i.e., the extent to which third-party accredited inspectors have been deployed; (ii) countries’ use of e-certification platforms; (iii) the involvement of seed producer groups and cooperatives in SQA; and (iv) any novel approaches to disease diagnostics or other relevant aspects of SQA. The paper uses different, appropriately sequenced methods to ensure the different methods complement each other to offset the disadvantages of each method. These include a comprehensive literature review, an online survey, and key informants’ virtual interviews. These are complemented by expert interviews, especially with both IITA and CIP experts based in Tanzania, Uganda, and Ethiopia plus one CIP expert with overall knowledge of the project countries in Africa. Based on an online survey completed by officials from regulatory agencies from eight countries, and follow-up interviews with seed certification officials and researchers in the seed sector, the paper finds that almost all studied countries have some sort of decentralised seed production system in place, allowing large-scale companies, medium-semi-commercial companies and small holder farmers opportunities to produce both quality declared and certified seeds. These decentralised seed production systems may be regarded as novel, in that they deviate from the standard seed system practices proposed at international level, which focus on enforcing certified seed production. Further, the novelty is based on different countries adopting different processes because of different local constraints and different government/political structures. Such novelty is necessary in the African context of, inter alia, poor infrastructure for transporting VPC seeds long distance and limited technical skills for certifying seed. The innovative approaches chosen by these African countries are suitable for VPC seeds like those of cassava, sweetpotato, bananas, yams and potato – all of which have bulky and perishable planting materials. The paper shows that it is possible to make decentralised VPC seed systems a reality in the right circumstances, and that in some cases countries have already made strides in doing so. However, several gaps exist in different countries, all of which need to be addressed. They include problems such as (i) legislation and regulations not specifically considering the quality assurance requirements of VPCs; (ii) shortages of trained staff throughout the system, but especially in far-flung areas; (iii) unavailable or inadequate training materials and handbooks; (iv) inadequate resources at local level, including support for inspection equipment and resources (e.g., vehicles); (v) poor monitoring and administration capacity in farmers’ cooperatives/associations; and (vi) poor consideration given to gender empowerment. Each of these and other issues are discussed throughout the report and in the recommendations at the end of the document. Stakeholders in the VPC sectors need to address key challenges facing VPC seed producers and users such as the lack of specific regulations for VPCs and standards, especially in the countries which are either still developing such standards and regulations, or entirely do not have such tools in place. The absence of crop specific guidelines and standard operating procedures result in (i) low capacity to produce quality VPC seed, (ii) poor storage and handling facilities for seed and (iii) inadequate experience, technical skills and training among the seed inspectors and certifying officials from state seed regulatory agencies, especially lack of staff specialised in certifying VPCs. Simple, flexible and less bureaucratic systems are much more desirable for developing countries, even while countries must maintain a focus on quality control and quality assurance mechanisms within the legal provisions of seed laws, including those of novel approaches (Loch and Boyce, 2001). Quality control and quality assurance are important preconditions for ensuring the availability of planting materials and for piloting novel approaches such as decentralised seed production and quality control approaches. It is thus important for countries to mainstream and scale up sustainable quality assurance systems that work by establishing context-appropriate seed regulatory frameworks. While individual farmers, farm-based associations, farmer cooperatives and private companies have invested and continue to invest in production of VPC seeds, public investments in this sector are needed to realise wider system change and impact. Because VPC seeds are bulky, perishable and have high disease risks, many seed companies are not interested in these crops. Therefore, is important to secure political buy-in for decentralised VPC production and devolved VPC seed inspection so that states are encouraged to invest in supporting regulatory agencies and decentralised offices to deliver their services efficiently and effectively. In turn, this will allow farmers to secure the extension services they require. To ensure scalability and sustainability of novel approaches like the decentralisation of seed production and quality assurance, piloted initiatives must be sustained, including (i) for capacity development; (ii) providing adequate resources (competent personnel, funding and the necessary technologies like electronic platforms); and (iii) more importantly, the presence of an entrenched policy, legal and institutional framework that is implemented on the ground. As part of the remedy for these challenges, the paper recommends that engaged stakeholders in the VPCs sector provide targeted training of seed inspectors. In many countries, seed standards for VPCs and provisions in the law were designed based on the experiences of grain (maize) seeds, which have significant differences with VPCs. Therefore, seed inspectors need training for inspection of VPCs (i.e. varietal identification, crop specific pests and diseases). This can be complemented by capacity development efforts at different levels; for example, (i) training extension officers to undertake inspections and how to use relevant equipment (including any ICT devices); (ii) training seed producer associations on technical and governance/administrative aspects for ensuring equity, accountability and monitoring; and (iii) training seed producers to inspect their own seed and fields. Countries need to establish and scale up seed producers’ associations. In countries where seed producer associations are in place, they have shown to be cost-effective by mobilising fellow seed producers who need seed inspections to pay inspectors as a group instead of as individuals. This has in turn also driven the demand for inspection from the relevant authorities, because inspection activities such as these generate income for government agencies. With associations in place, it is possible to help seed producers and farmers to identify markets for both seed and produce, to create a virtuous cycle whereby producers buy improved seed because they have a market for their improved produce. Finally, stakeholders need to implement or scale up e-certification platforms like SeedTrackerTM to reduce the burden and costs associated with manual and physical activities related to seed inspection and certification. Where ICT systems such as SeedTrackerTM have not been implemented, roll these out in all countries, ensuring both that they are suitable for each country’s specific needs, and that they align with regional and international seed policy. In countries like Nigeria and Tanzania where SeedTrackerTM is in place, it is imperative that most of these tools are improved to address the current limitations. Meanwhile, achievements – including the use of successful ICT tools – need to be promoted through regular communication and dialogue at all levels, including between farmers, seed producers and breeders (about the preferred traits for improved varieties and any challenges farmers are facing), and between stakeholders (to ensure alignment on the goals of seed quality assurance, how to ensure quality, and how to address problems)

Consensus document on controversial issues for the treatment of hospital-associated pneumonia

Background: Hospital-associated pneumonia (HAP) remains an important cause of morbidity and mortality despite advances in antimicrobial therapy. Many aspects of the treatment of HAP caused by multi-resistant Gram-positive microorganisms have been extensively studied, but controversial issues remain. Controversial issues: The aim of this GISIG (Gruppo Italiano di Studio sulle Infezioni Gravi) working group – a panel of multidisciplinary experts – was to define recommendations for some controversial issues using an evidence-based and analytical approach. The controversial issues were: (1) Is combination antibiotic therapy or monotherapy more effective in the treatment of HAP? (2) What role do pharmacokinetic/pharmacodynamic antibiotic features have as a guide in the selection of treatment for HAP? (3) Is a de-escalation approach for the management of HAP effective? An analysis of the studies published up until April 2009 is presented and discussed in detail. Methods: A systematic literature search using PubMed, MEDLINE, and EMBASE databases and the Cochrane Library was performed. A matrix was created to extract evidence from original studies using the CONSORT method to evaluate randomized clinical trials and the Newcastle–Ottawa Quality Assessment Scale for case–control studies, longitudinal cohorts, and retrospective studies. The GRADE method for grading quality of evidence was applied. 2010 International Society for Infectious Diseases. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserve

Plantations, outgrowers and commercial farming in Africa: agricultural commercialisation and implications for agrarian change

Whether or not investments in African agriculture can generate quality employment at scale,avoid dispossessing local people of their land,promote diversified and sustainable livelihoods, and catalyse more vibrant local economies depends on what farming model is pursued. In this Forum, we build on recent scholarship by discussing the key findings of our recent studies in Ghana, Kenya and Zambia. We examined cases of three models of agricultural commercialisation, characterised by different sets of institutional arrangements that link land, labour and capital. The three models are: plantations or estates with on-farm processing; contract farming and outgrower schemes; and medium-scale commercial farming areas. Building on core debates in the critical agrarian studies literature, we identify commercial farming areas and contract farming as producing the most local economic linkages, and plantations/estates as producing more jobs, although these are of low quality and mostly casual. We point to the gender and generational dynamics emerging in the three models, which reflect the changing demand for family and wage labour. Models of agricultural commercialisation do not always deliver what is expected of them in part because local conditions play a critical role in the unfolding outcomes for land relations, labour regimes, livelihoods and local economies

Women, wellbeing and Wildlife Management Areas in Tanzania

Community-based wildlife management claims pro-poor, gender-sensitive outcomes. However, intersectional political ecology predicts adverse impacts on marginalised people. Our large-scale quantitative approach draws out common patterns and differentiated ways women are affected by Tanzania’s Wildlife Management Areas (WMAs). This first large-scale, rigorous evaluation studies WMA impacts on livelihoods and wellbeing of 937 married women in 42 villages across six WMAs and matched controls in Northern and Southern Tanzania. While WMAs bring community infrastructure benefits, most women have limited political participation, and experience resource use restrictions and fear of wildlife attacks. Wealth and region are important determinants, with the poorest worst impacted

The new enclosures: critical perspectives on corporate land deals

The contributions to this collection use the tools of agrarian political economy to explore the rapid growth and complex dynamics of large-scale land deals in recent years, with a special focus on the implications of big land deals for property and labour regimes, labour processes and structures of accumulation. The first part of this introductory essay examines the implications of this agrarian political economy perspective. First we explore the continuities and contrasts between historical and contemporary land grabs, before examining the core underlying debate around large- versus small-scale farming futures. Next, we unpack the diverse contexts and causes of land grabbing today, highlighting six overlapping mechanisms. The following section turns to assessing the crisis narratives that frame the justifications for land deals, and the flaws in the argument around there being excess, empty or idle land available. Next the paper turns to an examination of the impacts of land deals, and the processes of inclusion and exclusion at play, before looking at patterns of resistance and constructions of alternatives. The final section introduces the papers in the collection.ESR

Community land formalization and company land acquisition procedures: A review of 33 procedures in 15 countries

Indigenous and community lands, crucial for rural livelihoods, are typically held under informal customary tenure arrangements. This can leave the land vulnerable to outside commercial interests, so communities may seek to formalize their land rights in a government registry and obtain an official land document. But this process can be time-consuming and complex, and in contrast, companies can acquire land relatively quickly and find shortcuts around regulatory burdens. This article reviews and maps 19 community land formalization and 14 company land acquisition procedures is 15 countries in Africa, Asia and Latin America. Comparing community and company procedures identifies multiple sources of inequity