From Mexico to Nepal: CIMMYT evaluates its impacts on small-scale farmers

On opposite sides of the globe and with distinct geographies, cultures, and histories, Mexico and Nepal are literally night and day in comparison. Yet in each country, small-scale farmers that often live far from markets grow maize on hillsides for food security and livelihoods. A new study by CIMMYT teases out the differing and evolving roles of maize in each setting and gauges the value to farmers of work done by the center and its partners.

On the face of it, you'd be hard-pressed to find two countries further apart—both in distance and in culture—than Mexico and Nepal. But for CIMMYT impact specialist Roberto La Rovere, the possible similarities in maize agriculture were intriguing enough to warrant further study. "Both countries have rural economies based on maize in hill areas," says La Rovere, "and in both places farmers were actively involved in participatory research projects, allowing us to draw comparative lessons.”

The investigation by La Rovere and his colleagues, reported in the new publication "Economic and livelihood impacts of maize research in hill regions in Mexico and Nepal," shows how maize's economic importance is waning in one setting and growing in the other, and how participatory research—that is, projects where farmers are directly involved—can bring significant benefits for farm productivity and household livelihoods.

Mixed results with Mexican farmers
Located in the heart of Mexico, the state of Oaxaca is known for its culinary traditions, its temperate climate, and its cities' stunning architecture. But it is also home to many impoverished rural inhabitants and to numerous native maize varieties that embody significant portions of the crop's original genetic diversity.

Seeking economically viable ways for farmers to preserve those varieties, CIMMYT teamed up with the Mexican National Institute of Forestry, Agriculture, and Livestock (INIFAP) during 1996-2001 in the "Oaxaca Project." Their work aimed to improve maize yields, thereby making farming more profitable and helping farmers who choose to continue growing native maize. Initiatives included promoting improved varieties and practices, like the use of small metal silos for grain storage, and the collection and regional sale of native varieties for seed. There was also limited breeding with native maize varieties to improve their lodging resistance and yield while conserving the grain quality and other traits valued by farmers.

Returning in 2006, CIMMYT socioeconomists found that maize area had declined, due to the unprofitability of small-scale maize farming in Mexico and the fact that many farmers had left or gotten old, with few youths staying on to continue in agriculture. “We were a bit surprised to find that the role of maize in Mexico is declining commercially, and there is only a moderate use of improved varieties, as more people move out of rural areas and cultural knowledge and manpower are lost,” says La Rovere. Only 27% of farmers from the study group were still using varieties developed or promoted through the Oaxaca Project. "Use of those varieties, however, had a significant and positive causal effect on the contribution of maize production value to total income, generating a 24% advantage for adopters," he says. The researchers' analyses also showed that adoption was associated with reduced poverty for adopters. "Finally, we found that the use of promoted varieties and of the storage silos—the latter in particular among younger, more educated farmers—had spread beyond the study area," says La Rovere. "This shows that there was farmer-to-farmer sharing of the seed and knowledge."

Regarding diversity, many farmers (51%) were still growing the popular native maize "Blanco," although this is fewer than in the 1990s, and some native varieties were no longer sown. The study found that more prosperous farmers tend to use improved varieties and get higher yields, growing little of the native maize.

Maize moving uphill among smallholder farmers in Nepal
In contrast with Oaxaca, new varieties were increasingly important for farmers’ livelihoods in Nepal's mid-hill areas and yields tended to be higher, partly thanks to CIMMYT efforts. Since 1999, the center has provided technical expertise, improved maize varieties, training, and administrative support to the Hill Maize Research Project (HMRP) in Nepal, which also involves Nepal’s National Agricultural Research Council (NARC) and the Swiss Agency for Development and Cooperation (SCD). The HMRP has specifically targeted women and resource-poor, low-caste groups.

In 2006 an external review of HMRP’s impacts showed lasting positive effects. “Before the project, maize was grown mainly for household consumption, but farmers have recently begun to sell it, helping to diversify their incomes,” says La Rovere. The added income has helped defray household expenses, including those for children's educations. At locations where small-scale farmers had contact with the project, more than six-tenths of the area was sown with improved varieties and these areas yielded nearly 3 tons per hectare—double the average yield of local varieties. The portion of households that were food self-sufficient had increased from 11% to 24%.

“Farmers liked the improved varieties for their yields, flavor, and ability to stand up in wind and rain,” says La Rovere. "They were also preferred as forage for animals."

During a discussion group in the village of Dhandidanda in the Dorkha District, 23 low-caste women confirmed that they had particularly benefited from the community-based seed production program introduced by the HMRP, citing increased maize yields and agricultural knowledge, according to Sudarshan Mathema, Agricultural economist and co-author of the study.

A "lively" way to assess impacts
The study employed a "livelihoods" approach to complement conventional measures of impact, like varietal adoption, according to La Rovere. "In the livelihoods approach, crops are just one element in the impact pathways that determines changes in people's lives," he says. "This approach gives a better idea of the complexity of how impacts are achieved and how we, as researchers and through local partners, can and actually do contribute to such impacts." Among other things, La Rovere's work at CIMMYT has resulted in practical guidelines for assessing impacts in agricultural research for development.

The study described here illustrates how work by a global organization like CIMMYT on maize—a food crop from the Americas—can benefit disadvantaged farmers in far-away Asia, while shedding light on important trends occurring in the crop's own center of diversity.

For more information: Roberto La Rovere, impact specialist (r.larovere@cgiar.org)