Skip to main content

Advertisement

Log in

Farmers perception of pesticide use and genetic erosion of landraces of tetraploid wheat (Triticum spp.) in Ethiopia

  • Research Article
  • Published:
Genetic Resources and Crop Evolution Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Perception of farmers’ about the use of pesticides and genetic erosion of tetraploid wheat landraces of Ethiopia was assessed through focus group discussions with farmers, on-farm observations, personal interviews with farmers, by using structured questionnaires of temporal and spatial methods. A total of 1496 farmers from seven provinces in the country were interviewed. Farmers’ knowledge about pesticide increases suggests that they are not happy on using chemicals because of their negative impact on farm land. About 75 % of the farmers believe that, although the use of pesticides may increase the production of wheat, it has a negative impact on (human) health and environment. Women showed a higher concern for pesticides’ harmfulness than men. Farmers’ valuation of genetic erosion was estimated as reduced importance of landraces, as shown by a the lower proportion of landraces either grown or sold on the market. The four most important factors cited for loss of landraces were reduction in land area per capita, displacement by released/modern varieties of hexaploid wheat and teff, reduced benefit from landraces, and displacement by other crops and chat. Genetic erosion of 100 % was observed for Triticum dicoccon in the provinces of Gojam and Gonder and for T. polonicum in Tigray and Gojam. Overall, genetic erosion in the country was 32.0, 35.3, 55.9, 84.4 and 84.4 % for T. durum Desf., T. turgidum L., T. aethiopicum Jakubz., T. polonicum L. and T. dicoccon Schrank, respectively.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Abate A, Amera T (2008) An assessment of the pesticide use, practice and hazards in the Ethiopian rift valley. Africa stockpiles program project report

  • Ahmed N, Englund JE, Åhman I, Lieberg M, Johansson E (2011) Perception of pesticide use by farmers and neighbours in two periurban areas. Sci Tot Environ 412–413:77–86

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bechere E, Kebede H, Belay G (2000) Durum wheat in Ethiopia. An old crop in an ancient land. IBCR, Addis Ababa

    Google Scholar 

  • Bellon MR, Pham J, Jackson MT (1997) Genetic conservation: a role for rice farmers. In: Maxted N, Ford-Lloyd BV, Hawkes JG (eds) Plant genetic conservation: the in situ approach. Chapman & Hall, London, pp 263–289

    Google Scholar 

  • Bisht IS, Mehta PS, Bhandari DC (2007) Traditional crop diversity and its conservation on-farm for sustainable agricultural production in Kumaon Himalaya of Uttaranchal state: a case study. Genet Resour Crop Evol 54:345–357

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bouyer M, Bagdassarian S, Chaabanne S, Mullet E (2001) Personality correlates of risk perception. Risk Anal 21:457–465

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Brush SB (1995) In situ conservation of landraces in centers of crop diversity: implication of germplasm conservation and utilization. Crop Sci 35:346–354

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brush SB, Meng E (1998) Farmers’ valuation and conservation of crop genetic resources. Genet Resour Crop Evol 45:139–150

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cochran A (2015) by William Davis. http://www.ethiofreedom.com/modern-wheat-a-perfect-chronic-poison-doctor-says-video/said. Accessed 15 May 2015

  • CSA (2010) National Statistics (Abstract) of the Central Statistics Agency of Ethiopia. http://www.csa.gov.et/index.php?option=com_rubberdoc&view=category&id=75&Itemid=561

  • CSA (2014) The Federal Democratic Republic of Ethiopia Central Statistical Agency Agricultural sample survey 2013/2014 (2006 E.C.) Statistical Bulletin volume I report on area and production of major crops (private peasant holdings, meher season) Addis Ababa May, 2014. http://www.csa.gov.et/images/general/news/area%20and%20 production%202013_2014. Accessed 26 June 2015)

  • Davidson DJ, Freudenburg WR (1996) Gender and environmental risk concerns: a review and analysis of available research. Environ Behav 28:302–339

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dosman DM, Adamowicz WL, Hrudey SE (2001) Socioeconomic determinants of health- and food safety-related risk perceptions. Risk Anal 21:307–317

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Dunlap RE, Beus CE (1992) Understanding public concerns about pesticides: an empirical exmination. J Consum Aff 26:418–438

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • FAO (1996) Global plan of action for the conservation and sustainable utilisation of plant genetic resources for food and agriculture. FAO, Rome

    Google Scholar 

  • Flynn J, Slovic P, Mertz CK (1994) Gender, race, and perception of environmental health, risks. Risk Anal 16:1101–1108

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fogelfors H, Wivstad M, Eckersten H, Holstein F, Johansson S, Verwijst T (2009) Strategic analysis of Swedish agriculture production systems and agricultural landscapes in time of change. Report from the Department of Crop Production Ecology No. 10 SLU

  • Fowler C, Mooney PP (1990) Shattering: food politics, and the loss of genetic diversity. University of Arizona Press, Tucson

    Google Scholar 

  • Franzen A, Meyer R (2010) Environmental attitudes in cross-national perspective: a multilevel analysis of the ISSP 1993 and 2000. Eur Sociol Rev 26:219–234

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gashaw A, Mohammed HI, Singh H (2007) Genetic divergence in selected durum wheat genotypes of Ethiopian germplasm. Afr Crop Sci J 15:67–72

    Google Scholar 

  • Hailu F, Johansson E, Merker A, Belay G, Harjit-Singh Zeleke H (2006) Composition of and variation in high- and low-molecular weight glutenin subunits, and omega gliadins in Ethiopian tetraploid wheat germplasm. Plant Genet Resour 4:134–143

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Hailu F, Johansson E, Merker A (2010) Patterns of phenotypic diversity for phonologic and qualitative traits in Ethiopian tetraploid wheat germplasm. Genet Resour Crop Evol 57:781–790

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hammer K, Knüpffer H, Xhuveli L, Perrino P (1996) Estimating genetic erosion in landraces—two case studies. Genet Resour Crop Evol 43:329–336

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Harlan JR (1971) Agricultural origins: centres and non-centres. Science 174:468–473

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Harlan JR (1975) Our vanishing genetic resources. Science 188:618–621

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hawkes JG (1983) The diversity of crop plants. Harvard University Press, Cambridge

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Hicks B (2012) Agricultural pesticides and human health. http://serc.carleton.edu/NAGTWorkshops/health/case_studies/pesticides.html. Accessed April 2015

  • Institute of Biodiversity Conservation (IBC) (2002) IBC newsletter. October, Addis Ababa, Ethiopia

  • Lewis WJ, Van Lenteren JC, Phatak SC, Tumlinson Iii JH (1997) A total system approach to sustainable pest management. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 94:12243–12248

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • Mekbib F (2008) Genetic erosion of sorghum (Sorghum bicolor (L.) Moench) in the centre of diversity, Ethiopia. Genet Resour Crop Evol 55:351–364

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Montgomery ME, Woodworth LM, Nurthen RK, Gilligan DM, Briscoe DA, Frankham R (2000) Relationships between population size and loss of genetic diversity: comparisons of experimental results with theoretical predictions. Conserv Genet 1:33–43

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Nieuwenhuijsen MJ, Grey CNB, Golding J, the ALSPAC Group (2005) Exposure misclassification of household pesticides and risk perception and behaviour. Ann Occup Hyg 49:703–709

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Schreinemachers P, Tipraqsa P (2012) Agricultural pesticides and land use intensification in high, middle and low income countries. Food Policy 37:616–626

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Soares WL, Porto MFS (2009) Estimating the social cost of pesticide use: an assessment from acute poisoning in Brazil. Ecol Econ 68:2721–2728

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tait J (2001) Pesticide regulation, product innovation and public attitudes. J Environ Monit 3(4):64N–69N

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Teklu Y, Hammer K (2006) Farmers’ perception and genetic erosion of tetraploid wheats landraces in Ethiopia. Genet Resour Crop Evol 53:1099–1113

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tesemma T, Bechere E (1998) Developing elite durum wheat landrace selections (composites) for Ethiopian peasant farm use: raising productivity while keeping diversity alive. Euphytica 102:323–328

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tsegaye B, Berg T (2007) Genetic erosion of Ethiopian tetraploid wheat landraces in Eastern Shewa, Central Ethiopia. Genet Resour Crop Evol 54:715–726

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tsehaye Y (2002) The significance of in situ conservation: a comparative analysis of durum wheat diversity between in situ (Bale and eastern Shewa Zones) and ex situ (Ethiopia) conservation sites. In: Raupp J (ed.) Annual Wheat Newsletter, vol 48. Kansas State University, Manhattan, USA, pp 54–59

  • van Tassell LW, Ferrell MA, Yang B, Legg DE, Lloyd JE (1999) Pesticide practices and perceptions of Wyoming farmers and ranchers. J Soil Water Conserv 54:410–414

    Google Scholar 

  • Vavilov NI (1997) Five continents. IPGRI, Rome

    Google Scholar 

  • WHO (2011) Occupational health and safety risks for the most vulnerable workers. http://www.europarl.europa.eu/RegData/etudes/etudes/join/2011/464436/IPOL-EMPL_ET(2011)464436_EN.pdf. Accessed 20 June 2016

  • Worede M (1997) Ethiopian in situ conservation. In: Maxted N, Ford-Lloyd BV, Hawkes JG (eds) Plant genetic conservation: the in situ approach. Chapman and Hall, London, pp 290–301

    Google Scholar 

  • Worede M (1998) SOS/E: Promoting Farmers’ Seed- its conservation, enhancement and effective utilization. A paper presented at the SSC—Africa Project Workshop, Harare, Sep 27, Oct 1, 1998

  • Worede M, Mekbib H (1993) Linking genetic resource conservation to farmers in Ethiopia. In: de Boef W, Amanour K, Wellard K, Bebbington A (eds) Cultivars knowledge. Intermediate Technology Publications, London, pp 78–84

    Google Scholar 

  • Zaharieva M, Ayana NG, Hakimi AA, Misra SC, Monneveux P (2010) Cultivated emmer wheat (Triticum dicoccon Schrank), an old crop with promising future: a review. Genet Resour Crop Evol 57:937–962

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zimmerer KS (1996) Changing fortunes: biodiversity and peasant livelihood in the Peruvian andes. University of California Press, Berkley

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

I am grateful for Ethiopian farmers for their participation and sharing their ideas and knowledge on the different aspects of landraces of wheat and the use of pesticides. The field assistants who helped in interview of farmers and field assessment are highly appreciated. The write up of this publication was done during my scholarship of Swedish Institute, thanks to Swedish Institute.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Faris Hailu.

Electronic supplementary material

Below is the link to the electronic supplementary material.

Supplementary material 1 (DOCX 25 kb)

Appendices

Appendix 1: Assessment of genetic erosion and use of pesticides (questionnaires used in the study that was distributed to farmers through individuals who know their local language)

figure a
figure b
figure c

Appendix 2: Deciding factors and important variables for farmers choosing to grow landraces

Factor

Important variables

Assessment

Agro-ecology

Land quality, soil type

Most of the traditional coarse cereals are grown under rain-fed conditions in poor soil as complete mixtures or intercropped. Many of the rare wheat landraces grown under rain-fed conditions are grown in very small patches adapted to specific soil types and microclimate niches

Market infrastructure

Distance to nearest market

Cash crops such as off-season vegetables are grown for both local and distant markets. Most landraces are grown for household consumption. Not much seed is acquired from off-farm sources

Land resources

Small and fragmented

There is a high degree of fragmentation of the land due to the rules of the country

Human resources

Family size

Farmers with large family size invariably grow coarse-grained landraces with high yield potential, regardless of their wealth status and land size

Economic status and objectives

Land size, percentage of household food

About 55 % are marginal farmers and they are self-sufficient in food for only 83 % of the year and mainly grow coarse grains. Farmers with larger farms grow more cash crops (including farm-saved seeds for sale to resource-poor marginal farmers) and are self-sufficient in food. Only those who have large farms can afford to maintain locally rare landraces

Comparative advantages

Traits

Released varieties

Landraces

Food value (preference in diet in different forms)

Less nutritious

Nutritious (tasteful)

Storability

Less period

Long period

Tolerant to draught

Less

High

Tolerant to disease and pest

Less

High

Requirement of fertilizer and pesticides

High

Less (sometimes not at all)

Seed requirements while sawing

More seed

Less seed

Yield stability

Unstable

More or less stable

Plant height

Uniform and short

Not uniform and commonly tall

Production

High

Less

Appendix 3: Provinces surveyed and household characteristics at the sites included in the study

Provinces

Gender of interviewed farmers

Average family size (number)

Average farm size (hectare)

Average farm size planted with tetraploid wheat (ha)

Average farm size planted with hexaploid wheat (ha)

Total number of households in part of province used for this study

Educational level

 

Male

Female

Total

≤grade 6

From 7 to 10

From 11 to 12

University graduate

Arsi

167

33

200

4.38

2.18

0.9

0.8

128,806

40

120

25

15

Bale

166

34

200

4.8

2.4

1.0

0.7

181,345

35

127

20

18

Gojam

162

38

200

4.35

1.83

0.8

0.5

134,226

32

130

17

21

Gondor

223

25

248

4.48

1.68

0.72

0.6

194,552

67

133

25

23

Shewa

160

40

200

4.68

1.87

0.8

0.4

131,346

56

94

26

24

Tigray

156

44

200

4.68

1.78

0.5

0.5

85,572

40

120

27

13

Wollo

213

35

248

4.3

1.38

0.4

0.3

126,898

79

125

23

21

Provinces

Age group

Religion

 

≤30

31–45

46–60

>60

Orthodox

Muslim

Protestant

Arsi

35

89

51

25

54

120

26

Bale

39

100

38

23

44

98

58

Gojam

43

107

31

19

160

20

20

Gondor

37

109

75

27

130

70

48

Shewa

23

119

37

21

110

57

33

Tigray

36

94

37

33

120

70

10

Wollo

22

126

57

43

102

99

47

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Hailu, F. Farmers perception of pesticide use and genetic erosion of landraces of tetraploid wheat (Triticum spp.) in Ethiopia. Genet Resour Crop Evol 64, 979–994 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10722-016-0419-7

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10722-016-0419-7

Keywords

Navigation