Hostname: page-component-cb9f654ff-h4f6x Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-08-30T06:51:38.265Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Application of a Systems Approach in a Commodity Research Programme: Evaluating Burundi Highland Maize

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  03 October 2008

R. S. Zeigler
R. S. Zeigler
Affiliation:
Programme Maïs, ISABU, Station de Recherche Kisozi, BP 75, Bujumbura, Burundi
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Summary

A late-maturing, high-yielding maize released for the Burundi highlands was rejected by subsistence farmers. Analysis of this variety in terms of the local cropping system shows that it offers no advantage over earlier maturing varieties when whole-system biological and economic yield and Land Equivalent Ratios are examined, while farmer risk is apparently substantially increased. The value of incorporating a ‘farming systems’ approach into national commodity research programmes in developing countries is demonstrated.

Information

Type
Research Article
Information
Experimental Agriculture , Volume 22 , Issue 4 , October 1986 , pp. 319 - 328
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1986

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Article purchase

Temporarily unavailable

References

REFERENCES

Eicher, C. & Baker, D. (1982). Research on Agricultural Development in Sub-Saharan Africa: A Critical Survey. International Development Paper No. 1. East Lansing, MI, USA: Department of Agricultural Economics, Michigan State University.Google Scholar
Gilbert, E., Norman, D. & Winch, F. (1980). Farming Systems Research: A Critical Appraisal. Rural Development Paper No. 6. East Lansing, MI, USA: Department of Agricultural Economics, Michigan State University.Google Scholar
Horton, D. (1984). Social Scientist in Agricultural Research: Lessons from the Mantaro Valley Project, Peru. Ottawa, Ontario: IDRC-219e.Google Scholar
ISABU (1984). Rapport annuel du programme mais. In Rapport Annuel de l'Institut des Sciences Agronomiques du Burundi, 1983, Bujumbura, Burundi.Google Scholar
Kirkby, R. (1981). The Study of Agronomic Practices and Maize Varieties Appropriate to the Circumstances of Small Farmers in Highland Ecuador. PhD Thesis, Cornell University, Ithaca, NY, USA.Google Scholar
Maton, P. (1983). Contribution à la Connaissance des Regions Naturelles du Burundi: Inventaire de l'Occupation du Sol: Mugamba. Publication No. 19. Bujumbura, Burundi: Institut des Sciences Agronomiques du Burundi.Google Scholar
Mead, R. & Willey, R. W. (1980). The concept of a ‘Land Equivalent Ratio’ and advantages of yields from intercropping. Experimental Agriculture 16:217–228.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Poleman, T. & Freebaim, D. (1973). Food, Population and Employment. New York: Praeger.Google Scholar
Riley, J. (1984). A general form of the ‘Land Equivalent Ratio’. Experimental Agriculture 20:19–29.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
SAS Institute Inc. (1982). SAS User's Guide: Basics, 1982 Edition. Cary, NC.Google Scholar
Schalbroeck, J. & Bagona, P. (1983). Interaction Variétés × Environments dans les Eaais Variétaux de Maïs Conduits au Burundi en 1978 et 1979. Note Technique No. 31. Bujumbura, Burundi: Institut des Sciences Agronomigues du Burundi.Google Scholar
Zandstra, H., Swanberg, K., Zulberti, C. & Nestel, B. (1979). Caqueza: Living Rural Development. Ottawa, Canada: IDRC-107e.Google Scholar
Zeigler, R. & Manassé, K. (1984). Toward a maize program responsive to Burundi farmers. In Crop Improvement in Eastern and Southern Africa: Research Objectives and On-Farm Testing, 30–35 (Ed. Kirkby, R.). Ottawa, Canada: IDRC-218e.Google Scholar