1. International Food Security
Dialogue 2014
May 2nd, 2014: University of Alberta
Theme: “Enhancing Food Production,
Gender Equity and Nutritional Security
in a Changing World”

2. Participatory Plant Breeding
in Honduras: An Economic
Impact Assessment
Sebastian Daly Kindsvater
Dr. Sally Humphries
Dr. Getu Hailu

3. Background
• PPB project: funded by IDRC/USC Canada-
CIDA since 1999
• Project goals:
– Increase food security through improvement of
maize and bean varieties by Honduran farmers
– Increase productive capacity of farmers through
capacity building
– Increase economic development by value addition
to local production, linking local economies to
markets, etc.

4. Background
• PPB: Participatory Plant Breeding
– A plant breeding process whereby seed varieties
are designed, tested and diffused by farmers
– Seed varieties produced as a result of the PPB
process: PPB varieties
• CIAL: Local Agricultural Research Committee
– Teams of farmers conduct plant breeding research
to determine which varieties are best suited to
local conditions

5. Motivation
• Prior studies claim:
– PPB variety adoption and CIAL membership are
associated with increased yield levels
• Studies lack quantitative evidence
• We intend to further understanding of the
economic impacts of the PPB approach
focusing on bean production.

6. Research Questions
• Does PPB variety adoption have a positive
effect on bean yield levels?
• Does CIAL membership have a positive effect
on bean yield levels?

7. Methods/Data
• Primary data collected: Spring and Fall 2012
• Bean yield data based on farmer reporting
• 314 surveys from 40 communities
• Our analysis will focus on 30 communities
• Kruskal-Wallis Test, Ordinary Least Squares,
Propensity Score Matching

8. Take Home Messages
1) Variety adoption decisions are complex:
• Rankings/Previous studies
• Yield is not the only adoption consideration
2) PPB variety adoption may not have a positive effect
on yields in 2012:
• High and low yielding PPB varieties
• Econometric analysis (OLS, PSM, K-W test)
3) The impact of CIAL membership on yields is unclear in
2012:
• Spring : Positive effect on yield
• Fall: Negative effect on yield
• Econometric analysis (OLS,PSM)

9. 1)Variety Adoption Decisions are
Complex

10. Variety Categories and Traits
Rank Yield Drought
Resistance
Flood
Resistance
Pest
Resistance
Disease
Resistance
Taste Days to
Maturity
Sale Value
1 Marcelino
(*)
Marcelino
(*)
Marcelino
(*)
Amadeus
(***)
Marcelino
(*)
Vaina
Rosada
(**)
Vaina
Rosada
(**)
Marcelino
(*)
2 Macuzalito
(*)
Cedron
(*)
Vaina
Rosada
(**)
Macuzalito
(*)
Amadeus
(***)
Marcelino
(*)
Macuzalito
(*)
Deoro
(***)
3 Cedron
(*)
Carrizalito
(***)
Macuzalito
(*)
Cedron
(*)
Chepe
(*)
Deoro
(***)
Carrizalito
(***)
Macuzalito
(*)
(*)PPB (**)Traditional (***)Conventional (n=245)
• PPB varieties: improved by farmers through formal
research (design testing diffusion)
• Traditional varieties: improved by farmers through
informal research (testing diffusion)
• Conventional varieties: improved by scientists through
formal research (design testing diffusion)

11. Variety Adoption Rates by Season
Spring 2012 (n=127) Fall 2012 (n=140)
68%
64%
40%
21% 18%
39%
11%
18% 21%
Old-CIAL New-CIAL Non-CIAL
PPB Traditional Conventional
69% 69%
61%
22%
17%
28%
9%
14%
11%
Old-CIAL New-CIAL Non-CIAL
PPB Traditional Conventional

12. 2) PPB Variety Adoption has no
Positive Effect on Yields in 2012

13. Yield by Variety Type and Season
998
808
868
972
911
848
Spring 2012 (n=124) Fall 2012 (n=140)
PPB Traditional Conventional

14. Yield by Variety Type and Season
Spring 2012 Fall 2012
PPB TRADITIONAL CON PPB TRADITIONAL CON
0
0 10 20 30 40
Individual Bean Variety (Spring 2012)
0
1000200030004000
YieldKilos/Hectare
0 10 20 30 40
Individual Bean Variety (Fall 2012)

15. Non-Parametric Test of Yield
Distributions
• Kruskal Wallis equality of populations rank
test shows no difference between
PPB, traditional and conventional in either
season, w/r/t yield levels
SPRING 2012 FALL 2012
Variety Type # Obs Chi
Squared
w/ Ties
Probability # Obs Chi
Squared
w/ Ties
Probability
PPB 70 1.395
d.f.=2
0.498 93 3.150
d.f.=2
0.207
Traditional 34 31
Conventional 20 16

16. OLS Regression and PSM Results
• Spring: PPB adoption has no effect on yields
• Fall: PPB adoption has a negative effect on
yields (relative to traditional varieties)
SPRING 2012 FALL 2012
ATET
(z-value)
OLS
Coefficient
(t-stat)
ATET
(z-value)
OLS
Coefficient
(t-stat)
-2.307
(-0.02)
0.031
(0.21)
-101.393
(-1.08)
-0.342**
(-2.08)

17. 3) The Impact of CIAL
Membership on Yields is Unclear

18. Yield by CIAL Membership and Season
1001
726
805 838
979 967
Spring 2012 (n=124) Fall 2012 (n=142)
Old-CIAL New-CIAL Non-CIAL

19. OLS Regression and PSM Results
• Spring: CIAL membership has a positive effect
on yields
• Fall: CIAL membership has a negative effect on
yields
SPRING 2012 FALL 2012
ATET
(z-value)
OLS
Coefficient
(t-stat)
ATET
(z-value)
OLS
Coefficient
(t-stat)
339.839***
(3.93)
0.024
(0.16)
-407.230***
(-3.55)
-0.092
(-0.55)

20. Conclusions
• PPB adoption may not have a positive effect
on yield levels
– High and low yielding varieties within each
category
– PPB does not dominate other categories in either
season
– PPB and conventional varieties may come from
the same origins

21. Conclusions
• The impact of CIAL membership on yield levels is
unclear in 2012
– Spring 2012: Positive effect
– Possibly resulting from better productive
practices, access to improved seed varieties (focus
group answers)
– Fall 2012: Negative effect
– Entrepreneurial of CIAL members may be more
inclined to take risks
– Yield may not be the most important adoption
characteristic for Old-CIAL members (eg. commercial
value)

22. Final Thoughts
• Given yield fluctuations by season and variety
type, our results support arguments for
increased access to a broad range of varieties
(agrobiodiversity and resilience)
• Our study highlights the complexity of impact
assessment and mixed methods studies

23. THANK YOU
Happy to answer any questions

24. Qualitative Responses

25. CIAL Member Perception of Benefits
21%
79%
Has your income increased as a result of CIAL membership?
(n=199)
No (n=41) Yes (n=158)

26. Focus Group Responses: Ranked
Benefits
1) Access to Improved seed varieties
2) More food/better nutrition
3) Better grain storage/More personal satisfaction and
self-esteem
4)Better productive practices/Better ability to teach
children and family
5)Ability to produce new seed varieties
6)Leadership and the participation of women
7) More opportunities to generate income
8) Better quality of life
9) Better access to credit/Increased productivity