Report of a
Maize Breeders Technical Exchange Network In
Africa Meeting Held on 23-24 April 2003
1.0 Background
A consultative and brainstorming
meeting was held in Kenya on 23rd-24th April 2003 to discuss a
way forward in terms of what the scientists are lacking and what they
need to effectively deliver improved maize varieties to farmers.
Participants were from Kenya, 2 scientists; Malawi, 1; Uganda, 1;
Zimbabwe, 1; and Mozambique, 1. Funding for this initiative
was received from the Rockefeller Foundation.
The maize breeders for Africa
network is a technical exchange initiative among maize scientists within
the region. The reference is therefore made of countries within
the region with active maize breeding programs and that have good will
to make progress in terms of delivery of improved maize varieties to
farmers. In many African breeding programs scientists are
constraint by lack of resources, poor and under developed
infrastructure, and lack of adequately trained scientists and technical
staff to effectively execute viable breeding activities. The
network would be initiated to explore areas where we as African breeders
are underprovided for, our current and future needs, what is required
and how to effectively share information and resources. This
opportunity would drive a within Africa sustainable technical exchange
program that leads to closer collaboration and networking among maize
breeders in Africa. The network will also entail exchange of
information and collaborative projects in activities related to maize
breeding for Africa. We propose to initiate this project in six
countries within the region and later expand to other countries.
The initial countries to be involved are Mozambique, Zimbabwe, Malawi,
Uganda, Tanzania and Kenya.
1.1
Key outputs
The Key outputs of this meeting
were that the nationals from the six countries strongly felt that they
needed a within Africa network. Issues related to germplasm
ownership were strongly highlighted as an important component of the
network. At present there are no precautions taken to monitor
resources in terms of germplasm wealth and preservation within the
region and in national breeding programs. The breeders felt that
they needed direct linkages among and between themselves as they need
direct communication and free exchange of information through whatever
means available. There was also a strong feeling that there is a
missing link between private seed companies and public breeders and
joint collaborative projects between private and public seed delivery
systems need to be initiated.
This network would serve
as a forum for lobbying direct government funding to promote variety
improvement that will directly impact on benefit the farmers in Africa.
At present funding is only through International Level. The
current networks do not provide adequate funds for breeding work.
Participants agreed that the network is good and it will work.
2.0
AGENDA
2.1
Personal introductions
2.2
Objectives of the meeting
2.3
Country Briefs
2.4
Discussion on network proposal
2.5
What is the missing link and importance of the network
2.6
Forward planning
2.7
Field trip to Muguga, and Embu
3.0
PROCEEDINGS
3.1
Country Reports
To familiarize ourselves with each
other each participant was given an opportunity to talk about their
country with respect to the ecology and maize improvement activities
(table 1). Each participants gave a brief overview of the various
activities they are involved in their respective countries.
3.2
Constraints/Concerns
The participants identified missing
links in the following areas
A Stop-Gap Measure: The
network was viewed by participants as a stop gap measure especially in
areas of germplasm wealth, storage and in information exchange.
Product Dissemination:
A major area of concern was cited in product dissemination, variety
marketing and areas that would drive seed companies to be interested in
the national products. Seed
companies probably feel that there are have no exclusive rights to
products and a system needs to be developed that will prompt seed
company support. For
example initial linkages need to be initiated as early as the time of
variety testing instead of the current ongoing procedure.
Ownership:
Participants
felt there was over-reliance on international staff thus making national
staff less keen to develop and freely interact with seed companies to
promote varieties they have participated in evaluation.
Furthermore parental material of some of the products are not
available. Thus nationals
feel that germplasm ownership is a very important component of the
network.
Lack of a consistent active Variety Development in
National Programs. The nationals felt that
previous networks have emphasized ‘Evaluation
of International Trials’ at the expense of variety
development for those unique niches and ecologies with special
needs in our environment thus denying the farmer elite materials that
meet their unique requirements in special environments.
Lack of ownership and Peer Review. Lack of Complementation in different countries.
In Africa it can be said ‘If you are missing, somebody else is
missing you’. Some
countries have deficits in certain areas but resources to meet this
deficit are available elsewhere. The
previous networks have not identified areas of comparative advantage.
No direct linkages among breeders. The national breeders need to be networked among themselves
so that they can exchange information and make their own contacts.
Lack of direct linkages with other networks and
projects
Forward
Planning
A
report will be submitted to the Rockefeller Foundation and also
circulated to all the participants. The feedback will be
communicated to all participants through E-Mails.
It
was found necessary to arrange a second meeting. A tentative venue
was agreed on as Kenya again in August.
|