Future of Participatory Plant Breeding

  • Atul Bhargava
  • Shilpi Srivastava


The Green Revolution was a huge success especially in cereals and had a tremendous impact on food production, socioeconomic conditions, and environmental sustainability. However, this success story seemed incomplete since Green Revolution created islands of prosperity in vast stretches of low productive areas. To mitigate this problem, participatory plant breeding was conceived and extensive work carried out in this new field. PPB is extremely advantageous in those geographic areas where classical breeding efforts have been less successful and failed to leave a positive impact on farmers’ conditions. PPB can be resorted to for multiple uses like increasing productivity, preserving diversity and benefits for specific end users. However, most of these goals are not mutually compatible leading to trade-offs when any one option is given priority. Participatory approaches have certain limitations when compared to the conventional breeding methodologies especially the cost that is sometimes exorbitant and lead to selection of conventional methods as way of improvement. Thus, it is important that one should have total clarity regarding the objective of participatory research as to whether it is being used for improving the efficiency of agricultural research or merely being used as a tool for empowering farmers or partner organizations. Plant breeding institutions need to focus on the functional components of participatory breeding along with the empowerment of intermediate/partner organizations rather than the direct empowerment of large numbers of farmers.


  1. Bellon MR, Berthaud J, Smale M, Aguirre JA, Taba S, Aragon F, Dıaz J, Castro H (2003) Participatory landrace selection for on-farm conservation: an example from the Central Valleys of Oaxaca, Mexico. Genet Resour Crop Evol 50:401–416CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Biggs SD (1988) Resource poor farmer participation in research: a synthesis of experiences from nine national agricultural research systems, OFCOR comparative study paper no. 3. ISNAR, The HagueGoogle Scholar
  3. Bocci R (2011) Seed legislation and agrobiodiversity: conservation varieties. J Agric Environ Int Dev 103:31–49Google Scholar
  4. Christinck A, von Brocke K, Kshirsagar KG, Weltzien E, Bramel-Cox PJ (1997) Participatory method for collecting germplasm: experiences with farmers in Rajasthan, India. Plant Genet Res Newslett 121:1–9Google Scholar
  5. Delmer DP (2005) Agriculture in the developing world: connecting innovations in plant research to downstream applications. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 102:15739–15746CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Dixon J, Gulliver A, Gibbon D (2001) Farming systems and poverty: improving farmers’ livelihoods in a changing world. FAO, RomeGoogle Scholar
  7. Evenson RE, Gollin D (2003) Assessing the impact of the Green Revolution, 1960 to 2000. Science 300:758–762CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Gabriel J, Herbas J, Salazar M, Ruiz J, López J, Villarroel J, Cossio D (2004) Participatory plant breeding: a new challenge in the generation and appropriation of potato varieties by farmers in Bolivia. PRGA/CGIAR/Fundación PROINPA, CaliGoogle Scholar
  9. Hardon J, Norbu U, Nguyen S, Luangkhot N (2005) Evaluation report of the biodiversity use and conservation in Asia programme (BUCAP). NORAD, OsloGoogle Scholar
  10. Hellin J, Bellon MR, Badstue DJ, Rovere RLA (2008) Increasing the impact of participatory research. Exp Agric 44:81–95CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Khush GH (2001) Green revolution: the way forward. Nat Rev Genet 2:815–822CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Lilja N, Bellon MR (2006) Analysis of participatory research projects in the International Maize and Wheat Improvement Center. CIMMYT, MexicoGoogle Scholar
  13. Louwaars NP (2018) Plant breeding and diversity: a troubled relationship? Euphytica 214:114CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Maurya DM, Bottrall A, Farrington J (1988) Improved livelihoods, genetic diversity and farmer participation: a strategy for rice breeding in rainfed area of India. Exp Agric 24:311–320CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Salazar R, Louwaars NP, Visser B (2006) Protecting farmers’ new varieties: new approaches to rights on collective innovations in plant genetic resources. World Dev 35:1515–1528CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Smolders H (2006) Enhancing farmers’ role in crop development: framework information for participatory plant breeding in farmer field schools. Centre for Genetic Resources, WageningenGoogle Scholar
  17. Weltzien E, Smith ME, Meitzner LS, Sperling L (2003) Technical and institutional issues in participatory plant breeding- from the perspective of formal plant breeding. A global analysis of issues, results and current experience. CGIAR Systemwide Program on Participatory Research and Gender Analysis for Technology Development and Institutional Innovation. Centro Internacional de Agricultura Tropical (CIAT)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd. 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  • Atul Bhargava
    • 1
  • Shilpi Srivastava
    • 2
  1. 1.Amity Institute of BiotechnologyAmity University Uttar Pradesh (Lucknow Campus)LucknowIndia
  2. 2.Amity Institute of BiotechnologyAmity University Uttar Pradesh (Lucknow Campus)LucknowIndia

Personalised recommendations