Global Study on CBM and Empowerment: ETHIOPIA
EJERE
CHEFE DONSA
CBM STUDY TEAM
ISRAEL OLIVER KING (INDIA)
BHARAT BHANDARI (NEPAL)
SERGIO GUILHERME DE AZEVEDO
(BRAZIL)
KUMAR NAT ARAJAN (INDIA)
HARBU
October 2010
Addis Ababa, Ethiopia
Wageningen University and Research Centre/Centre for Development Innovation
P.O. Box 88, 6700 AA, Wageningen, the Netherlands;
In collaboration with:
Ethio-Organic Seed Action, Addis Ababa, Ethiopia
Wageningen University and Research Centre /Centre for Development Innovation ©
T he current document is the result of the Exchange Programme within the Global Study on
Community Biodiversity Management and Empowerment, coordinated by Wageningen University and
Research Centre/Centre for Development Innovation, in cooperation with Ethio-Organic Seed Action
(Ethiopia); MS Swaminathan Research Foundation (India); Local Initiatives for Biodiversity,
Research and Development (Nepal); the Federal University of Santa Catarina (Brazil); the Brazilian
Agricultural Research Corporation, Embrapa (Brazil); and Bioversity International. T he study is
financed through Wageningen University and Research Centre – Directorate General for International
Cooperation Partnership Programme.
Editorial support:
Copy-editing:
Walter Simon de Boef and Genene Gezu
Elizabeth O’Keeffe
Citation:
Israel Oliver King, Bharat Bhandari, Sergio Guilherme de Azevedo and Kumar Natarajan, with
Genene Gezu, Samson Gashu and T emesgen Desalegn, 2010. Global Study on CBM and
Empowerment - Ethiopia Exchange Report. Wageningen, Wageningen University and Research
Centre/Centre for Development Innovation.
1
Contents
Acknowledgements .................................................................................................................. 3
.
Introduction ...................................................................................................................... 4
.
Historic drivers for empowerment ............................................................................... 17
.
Definition for empowerment......................................................................................... 23
.
.
Methodology and processes............................................................................................. 5
Site Characterization ........................................................................................................ 6
3.1
Ejere site ..................................................................................................................... 6
3.1.1 Introduction ............................................................................................................ 6
3.1.2 CBM approaches and a processes .......................................................................... 7
3.1.3 CBM practices........................................................................................................ 7
3.2
Chefe Donsa site......................................................................................................... 9
3.2.1 Introduction ............................................................................................................ 9
3.2.2 CBM approaches and processes........................................................................... 10
3.2.3 CBM practices...................................................................................................... 11
3.3.
Harbu site ................................................................................................................. 12
3.3.1 Introduction .......................................................................................................... 12
3.3.2 CBM approaches and processes........................................................................... 14
3.3.3 CBM practices...................................................................................................... 14
. Diversity of sites: impact on empowerment ................................................................ 15
.
.
.
Cultural drivers for empowerment............................................................................... 20
Drivers for CBM............................................................................................................... 22
Community within the term CBM: is this collective management?............................ 24
. Inclusion / equality and gender .................................................................................... 25
. Competing claims: land ownership, CBM and empowerment, marketing and
varieties ................................................................................................................................... 27
. Governance and CBM...................................................................................................... 29
. Sustainability of CBM...................................................................................................... 31
. CBM and genetic resource policies in Ethiopia ............................................................ 32
. CBM and farmers’ rights................................................................................................. 34
. Relation between customary rights and custodianship.............................................. 36
. CBM and access and benefit‐sharing over genetic resources ..................................... 37
. CBM, empowerment and in situ conservation.............................................................. 38
. General synthesis............................................................................................................ 39
ANNEXES ................................................................................................................................. 40
Annex 1: Integrated Agro-Biodiversity M anagement and Seed Security Programme .... 40
Annex 2: Activities and plan for the study....................................................................... 41
Annex 3: Roles and responsibilities of CBM study team in Ethiopia.............................. 42
2
Acknowledgements
T he CBM expert team in Ethiopia expresses their deep sense of gratitude to:
T he EOSA team members, Mr. Genene Gezu, Mr. T emesgen Desalegn, and Mr. Samson Gashu, for
their support in organizing the focus group discussions and sharing their experience in the field; and
Ms. Bekelech and Mr. Ermias for their assistance during the field work.
Dr. Walter Boef, Dr. Regassa Feyissa, Dr. Melaku Worede, Mr. Hailu Getu, Dr. Awegechew T eshome
and Dr. Bayush T segaye, for sharing their expertise, guidance and insights on CBM and
Empowerment.
Farmers and extension officials from the Ejere, Chefe Donsa and Harbu sites, for sharing their
invaluable experiences and their time.
Israel Oliver King (India)
Bharat Bhandari (Nepal)
Sergio Guilherme De Azevedo (Brazil)
Kumar Natarajan (India)
Addis Ababa, 11 October 2010
3
1. Introduction
T he Global Community Biodiversity Management (CBM) study project began in 2009, with the
objective of analyzing the contribution of CBM, and the experiences of community management of
agrobiodiversity in four countries that play a key role in the global plant genetic resources debate:
Ethiopia, India, Brazil and Nepal. T he research and rural development organizations involved in the
study are Ethio-Organic Seed Action, in Ethiopia; M.S. Swaminathan Research Foundation, and
Bioversity International, in India; Local Initiatives for Biodiversity, Research and Development, in
Nepal; and Embrapa, and the Federal University of Santa Catarina, in Brazil.
Ethio-Organic Seed Action (EOSA), and Wageningen University and Research Centre/Centre for
Development Innovation (Wageningen UR/CDI), the Netherlands, organized the exchange visit in
Ethiopia, from 23rd of September to 12th of October, 2010.
Ethio-Organic Seed Action (EOSA) is the host organization that convened the exchange visit in
Ethiopia. EOSA is a non-profit, non-governmental organization (NGO), which was established in
2003, and which promotes integrated agrobiodiversity management and seed security programmes in
Woreilu and Kalu woredas, of the South Wollo zone; Lume and Gimbichu woredas, in the East Showa
zone; Dendi woreda in the West Shewa zone; Hitosa woreda in the Arsi zone; Dolo Mena woreda in
the Bale zone; and Hawassa Zuria woreda in the Sidama zone. EOSA is an accredited Slow Food
award-winning organization and has been funded by local and international partners for community
based agrobiodiversity management. EOSA provides technical, material, and financial support;
coordinates all on-farm and off-farm agrobiodiversity development activities; and facilitates capacitybuilding, strengthening farmers’ institutions and linking community groups and organizations with
different local, regional and international stakeholders. A detailed note on EOSA’s Integrated AgroBiodiversity Management and Seed Security Programme is provided in Annex 1.
During this exchange visit, the exchange team, Oliver and Kumar (MSSRF, India), Bharat (LI-BIRD,
Nepal) and Sergio (Embrapa, Brazil) visited the Ejere, Chefe Donsa and Harbu sites, to see the CBM
activities of the communities that are facilitated by EOSA. T he team had the opportunity to learn and
share knowledge related to CBM from the representative sites. T his exchange visit helped to
understand and document the drivers of empowerment in the context of CBM, and assess the impacts
of the in situ conservation programme in Ethiopia. Finally, the lessons learned by stakeholders at the
project sites, and the views of experts, were used to develop this draft report.
4
2. Methodology and processes
Review of the terms of reference (T oRs) of the CBM study.
Formation of working groups to share the roles and responsibilities, based on the expertise of the
team members.
Orientation on the CBM study (provided by the Coach), including general recommendations on
how to conduct the CBM exchange visit, dos and don’ts of the exchange programme, carried out
by Dr. Walter de Boef.
Discussions with the Director of the Hosting Organization (EOSA) and the official coordinator of
the exchange programme regarding the organizational policies, roles and responsibilities of the
host organizations in facilitating CBM, and on the position of the organization regarding the PGR
and ABS regimes.
Review of literature currently available on the CBM sites, with the host organization, including
maps, secondary data, economic analyses, published papers, national policy reviews and other
means of verification.
Site briefings by scholars from the host organization, including site history, drivers of change,
project implementation, and the socio-economic, and political scenarios of the sites.
Field visits to respective sites, including transect walks, the physical verification of records,
photography and general observations.
Focus group discussions with the stakeholders in respective sites, including CBOs, farmers’
organizations, women’s representatives, agricultural and rural development offices and
cooperatives.
Post field visit discussions within the team, including clarification of doubts, triangulation and
verification of information.
Drafting of the chapters, analysis, review and interpretations as per the T oRs.
5
3. Site Characterization
3.1
Ejere site
3.1.1 Introduction
T he EOSA project site of Ejere is located about 40 km away from the city of Adama, in the central
highlands of the Oromia region of Lume district. It represents a hilly landscape in the great East
African Rift Valley. Around 400 households from the surrounding kebeles of Lume district make up
the site, with scattered settlement patterns. T he area is characterized by a mixed, crop-livestock
farming system. T he soil is predominantly of a clay-loam and vertisol type. T he altitude of the area is
about 2400 masl and has an annual rainfall of approximately 900 mm, most of which falls during the
summer season. T he inhabitants of Ejere are traditional farmers and the site represents a good
production environment, despite being located in a semi-arid region. Rain-fed subsistence agriculture
is the mainstay of the livelihoods of the community, and is based on the rearing of livestock (cattle,
sheep, and donkey) and the cultivation of wheat and legumes such as chick pea, lentil, and fenugreek
and grass pea. T he farmers use mainly draught animals to power the plough and manual labour for
sowing and harvesting. T hey also hire farm labourers from others regions with different harvesting
seasons, especially from the northern part of the country. “Debo” (exchange labour practice) is also a
common and traditional activity. Ejere farmers have until now been concentrating on small-scale
production, using traditional production methods. However, it seems they will soon be moving
towards semi-commercial agricultural systems. T he Oromo and Amhara ethnic groups are the main
ethnic groups in this area, and Oromifa and Amharic are the main languages spoken.
T he Ejere community has access to its nearest markets in Mojo town and Addis Ababa, the national
capital, which has a high population, transformation industries and is well served by good roads. T he
area has the potential for high quality seed production of adapted crops due to its favourable climate,
productive soil and the market access. T he Ejere area was considered to be a biodiversity hotspot due
to the presence of tetraploid wheat. T his is evident from the durum wheat collections maintained and
used in the community seed bank complex at Ejere.
T o meet the increasing demand for food in the communities, changing socio-economic conditions and
national agricultural policies, diversity-based cultivars were replaced by uniform semi-dwarf wheat
varieties to increase the production and productivity of major crops that had threatened crop genetic
diversity of this region. Land fragmentation, the introduction of new varieties, the shortage of external
inputs as well as changes in climatic conditions in rain-fed agricultural systems, were the key
production constraints encountered by the farmers. Efforts have been made by the Institute of
Biodiversity Conservation (IBC) and by EOSA, with the full participation of the communities, to
restore the traditional crops and the overall cropping pattern, through the reintroduction of lost wheat
crop diversity.
T he Ejere CBM site focuses mainly on the reintroduction, and on-farm management, of traditional
wheat varieties and some legumes, through crop rotation practices. Farmers are involved in on-farm
conservation by means of a seed bank and seed production activities to fulfil their local seed security
needs, and ultimately to support their household food security. T he CBM activities facilitated by
EOSA are of particular importance because the traditional crops and varieties are neglected by the
formal research, extension and seed supply programme. Moreover, EOSA has been addressing the
6
research and development agenda of farmers, since the formal system focuses on introduced
germplasm that perform well under high input situations, but which are frequently vulnerable to biotic
and abiotic stresses that have direct negative impacts on the livelihoods of the community.
3.1.2 CBM approaches and a processes
During discussions with the communities and various stakeholders, including the staff of EOSA,
farmers’ associations, women’s representatives of the communities, and extension services from the
area, the CBM team understood that the following steps had been taken as a part of the CBM
processes:
Awareness-raising programmes on issues related to plant genetic resources (PGRs) management
and environmental degradation, focusing on the importance of local PGR in the region with
particular emphasis on durum wheat varieties.
Inventory, collection, documentation, cataloguing genetic resources and understanding the status
of crop diversity, using baseline surveys and tracing back germplasm with the national genebank.
Documentation of traditional knowledge and practices of the elder farmers associated to those
traditional crops and varieties.
Restoration of the cropping pattern using the older collections from the locality maintained in the
national genebank; and putting into practice the reintroduction of traditional wheat varieties
through participatory varietal selection (PVS), seed production and linkage with community seed
banks, seed processing, seed fairs, and food-tasting panels.
Establishment and empowerment of farmers’ institutions through the community seed bank
approach, and initiation of institutional linkages.
Continuous handholding or technical backstopping to ensure sustainability of the practices and
approaches.
Scaling-up of good practices of CBM within and outside the target community.
3.1.3 CBM practices
Community awareness:
A village-based ‘community seed bank’ complex was initiated to raise awareness on the need for
integrated agrobiodiversity management, and to motivate the community to manage and conserve
biodiversity at household and community levels for food and livelihood security. T his initiative was
designed as an early warning system for issues related to PGR.
On‐farm seed multiplication:
In Ejere, seed multiplication includes both of the enhanced varieties of durum wheat landraces and
basic seeds of improved varieties obtained from national agricultural research centres and the
Ethiopian Seed Enterprise (ESE), through extension services.
Soil fertility management practices:
EOSA’s activities focus on revitalizing the declining crop rotation practices by encouraging the
cultivation of pulses and promoting compost use and proper agronomic practices that conserve the
resource base through improving soil fertility.
Reintroduction, on‐farm conservation and enhancement of farmers’ varieties:
EOSA, together with the local farmers, is attempting to restore the cropping pattern and the displaced
genetic diversity of durum wheat in the area, for which Ethiopia is a centre of diversity. T his
restoration, and the broadening of the options for locally adapted planting materials, is essential to
ensure seed security of the farm households and also to cope with the growing challenges of climate
7
change. Enhancement of the local materials is carried out in a participatory process where experts
from research and academic institutions, as well as agricultural development workers, worked together
with the local farmers. T his participatory process provided opportunities to exchange and utilize
formal and informal knowledge systems.
Crop and livelihood diversification:
Diversification is the key to ensuring food and livelihood security. EOSA promotes the diversification
of planting materials to break the cycle of mono cropping, diversify dietary sources, enrich soil
fertility, generate income and ensure harvest security. Livelihood diversification activities include
vegetable production, the production and marketing of improved energy-saving stoves by women’s
groups, and so on.
Community seed bank (CSB):
EOSA is providing technical support to the community seed bank (CSB) in East Shewa (Ejere) to
ensure seed security. T he community seed bank acts as a bridge between the formal genebank and the
individual seed stores at household level. T he seed bank has short and medium-term storage facility.
T he CSB facility provides space for germplasm preservation, as well as seed and grain storage, at
community level. T his structure maintains a sustainable distribution of quality seed adapted to the
locality (revolving seed system) and developed from enhanced local varieties. It links the on-farm
management of biodiversity with the formal conservation of genetic diversity ex situ. T his communitylevel farmer-managed facility also serves as a centre for community empowerment. So far more than
90 varieties of wheat are conserved in the CSB, and are frequently checked for their adaptation and
viability under on-farm conditions. Out of this huge diversity, farmers selected five varieties in a
participatory way, based on their better adaptation traits, higher production potential and quality traits
for seed and food production. If they have enough seed, they distribute some varieties formally and
informally beyond their members, in the locality. A number of important legumes such as chick pea,
grass pea, and fenugreek are also conserved and multiplied by members of the CSB, as a source of
cash and for use in crop rotation, for maintaining the soil fertility status.
Participatory variety selection (PVS):
PVS of enhanced forms of landraces ensures the sustainable management and use of biodiversity. T he
main objective of this practice is to select better performing or more desirable varieties or accessions
from heterogeneous populations. T he aim is that the selected variety will contribute towards
community seed security, which will imply immediate utilization of PGR. T he reintroduction and
participatory selection of these traditional wheat varieties under on-farm conditions, with the full
participation of farmers, contributes to in situ conservation and hence the sustainable utilization of
plant genetic resources.
Market linkages, seed fair and food tasting panel:
As an incentive for farmers and to ensure the sustainability of the approach, part of the durum wheat
produce was sold to a food-processing factory. However, based on an assessment of qualitative traits,
the volume is not big enough to create links with industries that produce pasta. A seed cleaner is being
introduced as a way of scaling-up and strengthening the capacity of the community seed bank to add
value to, and enhance the utility of, traditional wheat varieties. EOSA facilitated a seed fair and a
food-tasting panel, involving the display of a large diversity of crops and varieties with the associated
local food options.
8
Ejere area farmers’ conservator and seed producer cooperatives:
T he farmers’ association organized under the umbrella of the community seed bank complex is
slightly dominated by men. Since households were represented by women. T he women farmers
participate actively in the PVS and food-tasting panel activities. Young and old farmers are also
equally represented in the groups. T he elder farmers participate in exchanging knowledge and
practices regarding the conservation, enhancement, marketing and utilization of diverse local plant
genetic resources. 240 Ejere farmers are legally registered as members of a farmers’ association called
‘Ejere area farmers’ conservator and seed producer cooperatives’.
Training:
Formal and informal training is provided to farmers by EOSA, agricultural development agents, and
researchers involved in crop improvement activities. T he training programmes are carried out in
collaboration with national and international organizations. T he subjects dealt with in such
programmes include participatory varietal selection, quality seed production, soil fertility
management, integrated pest management, community seed bank management and on-farm
conservation of local varieties.
Networking and partnership development:
EOSA believes that the concerted and coordinated efforts of different actors are crucial for achieving
meaningful development. EOSA organizes various fora that bring together research institutions, food
processing industries, government offices and NGOs engaged in the field of agricultural and rural
development. Field days, as well as seed and food fairs, are organized by EOSA to share experiences
and lessons learned on the conservation and use of farmers’ varieties.
3.2 Chefe Donsa site
3.2.1 Introduction
T he CBM site of Chefe Donsa is located in the central highland areas of the Oromia region of
Gimbichu district, and includes numerous households that cover 14 kebeles (villages). T he area is
characterized by a crop-livestock mixed farming system. The soil is predominantly vertisol. T here is
an annual rainfall of about 1000mm, most of which is concentrated in the summer season. T he site
area is at an altitude of more than 2500 masl. Agriculture is still the mainstay and the source of
revenue of the community. Livestock, wheat, and legumes such as chick pea, lentil and grass pea
provide the major cash earnings in the area. A few farmers near the town of Chefe Donsa are involved
in the grain trade, butchery, the cattle business, and rural shops. T he largest and nearest grain market
for the farmers is located in Addis Ababa.
T he Chefe Donsa area was considered to be one of the diversity hotspots of tetraploid wheat.
Considerable collections of durum wheat were obtained from the surrounding areas of the site.
However, environmental changes and changes in agricultural practices, including the replacement of
diversity-based cultivars with the introduction and release of uniform semi-dwarf varieties by
Haramaya University and the Debre Zeit Agricultural Research Centre (part of the national
agricultural research system), threatened crop genetic diversity and disrupted socio-economic, agroecological and biological conditions. T he consequences of genetic erosion in agricultural crops,
including the tetraploid wheat, are significant and together with land fragmentation of the farms it
remains one of the main production constraints for the farmers. Massive efforts have been made to
restore the cropping pattern through the reintroduction of lost crop diversity, as a result of which at
present there is a relatively balanced occurrence of cereals and legumes at Chefe Donsa and the
9
surrounding areas. T o sustain and systematize the approach, the farmers have been organized into crop
conservator and seed producer groups and also own and fully manage a community seed bank
complex.
T he farming system of the project area is mainly based on small-scale production, which is managed
with traditional production technologies. Farmers involved in on-farm conservation, seed banking and
seed production activities are composed of representatives from 14 kebeles of Gimbichu district.
Members belong to the Oromo and Amhara ethnic groups, and as such Oromifa and Amharic are the
main languages spoken. T hese farmers are predominantly Christians (Orthodox and Protestant).
T he farmer association that owns the community seed bank complex is made up of household
representatives, which are for the most part men. T here are only a few women household
representatives in the association. Women farmers are involved in income generation, in participatory
knowledge sharing events like PVS and food fairs or exhibitions. Young and old farmers are involved
in the knowledge sharing practices for the conservation, enhancement, marketing and utilization of the
diverse plant genetic resources. Chefe Donsa seems to be better connected with the extension services
than Ejere. Like farmers in Ejere, farmers in Chefe Donsa use animal power to plough, and manual
labour for sowing and harvesting. Animal husbandry represents a larger part of the agricultural
activities and is a way of saving resources ($$). T he labour exchange and wage labour systems are also
common practices in the site, as in Ejere. T he farmers are more inclined to conserve the local varieties
as guardians of agrobiodiversity. T hey participate in the seed production and local sale of seeds.
T he Chefe Donsa site mainly focuses on the reintroduction and on-farm management of traditional
wheat varieties and some legumes. T he reason for focusing on these wheat types is that such valuable
resources are totally neglected by the formal research, extension and seed supply programme. T he
research and development agenda focuses on introduced germplasm, which perform well under high
input situations, but which are frequently susceptible to biotic and abiotic stresses that have direct
negative impacts on the livelihoods of the community. The reintroduction and participatory selection
of varieties of these traditional wheat species under on-farm conditions, with the full participation of
farmers, contribute to in situ PGR conservation and sustainable utilization.
3.2.2 CBM approaches and processes
T he major steps that were taken while starting the implementation of EOSA’s integrated
agrobiodiversity management and seed security programme at Chef Donsa include:
Organizing frequent awareness-raising programmes on issues of PGR management and
environment degradation.
Carrying out an inventory and understanding the level of crop diversity, including the
development of baseline surveys, tracing back the previous diversity from the national genebank,
and discussions with elderly farmers for documenting the knowledge and practices associated to
those traditional crops/varieties.
Strengthening the seed production of selected/enhanced traditional varieties to address the
growing demand for seed from farmers in the surrounding areas.
Promoting value addition programmes for enhanced traditional wheat varieties.
Conducting seed fairs and food-tasting panels that display a larger diversity of crops and varieties
with the associated local food options.
Scaling-up and strengthening the community seed banking system.
Capacity-building of farmers and their institutions.
Setting-up institutional working modalities.
10
Restoring the cropping pattern using the older collections from the locality.
Providing continuous backstopping to ensure sustainability of the approach.
Scaling-up good practices of CBM.
3.2.3 CBM practices
Community awareness:
T he aim of this initiative is to raise awareness on the need for integrated agrobiodiversity management
and to motivate the community to manage and conserve biodiversity at household and community
levels, using the village-based ‘community seed bank’ complex. T his initiative is also designed as an
early warning system on the state of PGR and the environment in general.
Community seed bank:
T his facility provides storage for germplasm, seed and grain at village or community level. T his
structure maintains a sustainable distribution of quality seed, adapted to the locality (through a
revolving seed fund) and developed from enhanced local varieties. T he community seed bank (CSB)
links the on-farm management of biodiversity with the formal conservation of genetic diversity ex situ.
T his village-level farmer-managed facility also serves as a centre for community empowerment.
Participatory varietal selection (PVS):
PVS of enhanced forms of landraces ensures the sustainable management and use of biodiversity. T he
main objective of this practice is to select better performing or desirable varieties or accessions from
heterogeneous populations. T he aim is that the selected varieties will contribute towards community
seed security and ensure the continued use of crop genetic resources.
Conservation and reintroduction of the local wheat varieties:
So far more than 90 varieties of wheat are conserved in the CSB, and are also frequently checked for
their adaptation on-farm. About 10 varieties have been selected by farmers in a participatory scheme
and the seed revolves annually amongst member farmers. Seeds of some varieties are distributed
formally and informally beyond their members or locality. A number of important legumes such as
chick pea, grass pea, and fenugreek are being conserved and multiplied by members of the CSB (as a
source of cash and for use in crop rotation in order to maintain the soil fertility status).
On‐farm seed multiplication:
Seed multiplication includes enhanced materials and basic seeds obtained from the national
agricultural research centres and the national seed enterprise.
Reintroduction, on‐farm conservation and enhancement of farmers’ varieties:
T his activity includes the restoration of the cropping pattern, and of the displaced genetic diversity of
durum wheat and sorghum landraces, for which Ethiopia is centre of diversity. T his restoration and the
broader range of options of locally adapted planting materials are critical for ensuring seed security of
the farm households and also for coping with the growing challenges of climate change. T he
enhancement of local materials is carried out in a participatory process where partners i.e. experts
from research and teaching institutions, as well as agricultural development workers, team-up with
farmers, the latter playing a dynamic role in the activity. Such integration promotes synergy between
the formal and informal knowledge systems.
11
Revitalizing and strengthening the local seed supply system:
T o ensure seed security, EOSA provides technical support to the community seed bank in East Shewa
(Chefe Donsa). T he community seed bank acts as a bridge between the formal genebank and the
individual seed stores, at household level. T he seed bank has short and medium term storage facilities
and, therefore, serves as a seed reserve to stabilize the local seed supply in case of unexpected crop
failures.
Crop and livelihood diversification:
Diversification is the key to ensuring food and livelihood security. EOSA promotes the diversification
of planting materials to break the cycle of mono cropping, diversify dietary sources, enrich soil
fertility, generate income and ensure harvest security. Livelihood diversification activities include
vegetable production as well as the production and marketing of improved energy-saving stoves by
women. T he initiatives tried out on a pilot basis have been well accepted by the farming communities
and have raised a good deal of interest.
Networking and partnership development:
EOSA believes that the concerted and coordinated efforts of different actors are crucial to achieving
meaningful development. Along this line, EOSA organizes various fora that bring together research
institutions, food processing industries, government offices and NGOs engaged in the field of
agricultural and rural development. Field days, seed and food fairs are also fora that EOSA deploys to
share experiences and lessons learned on the conservation and use of farmer varieties. The entry point
for the CBM practices in Ethiopia in general, and that of Chefe Donsa in particular, is the
reintroduction of traditional wheat varieties followed by capacity-building, community seed banking,
PVS, seed production, seed fairs, and food-tasting panels.
Training:
Formal and informal training has been provided to farmers, agricultural development agents and
researchers involved in crop improvement activities. T he training programmes are carried out in
collaboration with national and international organizations. Participatory varietal selection/breeding,
quality seed production, soil fertility management, integrated pest management, community seed bank
management and on-farm conservation of local varieties were the key issues addressed.
Chefe Donsa area farmers’ conservator and seed producer cooperatives:
Interested small scale farmer holdings are the primary stakeholders. About 496 men and 70 women are
members of the legally registered farmers’ association, ‘Chefe Donsa area farmers’ conservator and
seed producer cooperatives’.
Seed Cleaning Facility
T he seed producer groups currently own a seed cleaning facility, obtained with a support from the
Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO). A separate women’s association has
also been set up for conducting different income-generating activities, such as the production and
marketing of energy-saving biomass stoves and vegetables.
3.3. Harbu site
3.3.1 Introduction
T he Harbu site is located in the Amhara Regional Government area in the northern part of Ethiopia.
Amharic-speaking Muslims are the dominant inhabitants of the site and its surrounding areas. T he area
is characterized by a crop-livestock mixed farming system. The agro-ecology ranges from lowland to
12
mid-altitude conditions. T he altitude is less than 1500 masl. T he area is generally characterized by an
undulating topography with a marginal and fragile environment that frequently encounters drought
stresses. In most of the areas the fertility is variable but the soils in the lower parts are of good fertility.
T he stoniness of the soil is mostly visible in the steeper area. T he area is also considered marginal for
the formal research and development initiatives of the region. The land is fragmented, as compared to
other sites. T he area is largely a sorghum-based farming system and hence sometimes referred to as
the ‘Country’s Heart of Sorghum Diversity’. T eff, chick pea and different fruits and vegetables are
also cultivated in the site. T here were attempts to introduce wheat in this region. Subsistence
agriculture is the mainstay of the farmers’ livelihoods.
T he infamous drought of 1984 resulted in serious environmental degradation and threatened the home
of sorghum genetic diversity. Moreover, the drought disrupted socio-economic, agro-ecological and
biological conditions. As a consequence of this genetic erosion and the lack of any planting materials,
the farmers suffered. T he Seeds of Survival (SoS) Programme was initiated by the Unitarian Service
Committee of Canada (USC) to restore the cropping pattern and to support the desperate farming
community. Significant investments have been undertaken since the initiation of the integrated
agrobiodiversity and seed security programme at Harbu.
T he farming system of the Harbu site is based mainly on small-scale production, which is managed
using traditional production technologies. Farmers involved in on-farm conservation, seed bank and
seed production activities are composed of representatives from four kebeles of Kalu district.
Membership of the farmers’ association is slightly dominated by men, with few women heads of
households represented. Young and old farmers are equally represented in the target groups. T he
presence of older farmers is to incorporate farmers’ time-tested knowledge and practices in the
conservation, enhancement, marketing and utilization of diverse plant genetic resources. About 200
men and 27 women farmers are members of the legally registered farmers’ association, ‘Harbu area
farmers’ conservator and seed producer cooperatives’. Currently, the farming community owns an
additional CSB complex, in a well-ventilated upland area of Harbu, to facilitate the prolonged storage
of seeds (sorghum) without using artificial ventilating facilities. Members are mainly Amharicspeaking Muslims.
Since the establishment of the SoS programme in the Harbu-Wollo area, the prime focus was on the
restoration and reintroduction of the lost sorghum genetic diversity. Previous collections from the
national genebank, and target collections from households in pocket areas, enable the programme to
enrich sorghum diversity again. T he reason for focusing on diversity is that the area is known for
maintaining several sorghum varieties on-farm. T he livelihood of the whole community depends on
sorghum. T he vast importance of traditional sorghum varieties has not been fully recognized by formal
research, extension and seed supply programmes. In other words, sorghum has long history of
environmental, socio-economic, cultural, and ethno-botanical linkages with the farmers of the region.
T here is also a considerable diversity of teff in the region.
T he farming community in Harbu and the surrounding area is interested more in the traditional
sorghum varieties because of their unique adaptation potential to harsh environmental conditions; their
ability to give optimum yield with no or minimal inputs; their support to household or community
level seed security; their diverse socio-economic and cultural importance; their desirable nutritional
values, and the multiple-use nature of the stalk for construction, fencing, firewood, livestock feed, and
so on. T he reintroduction and participatory selection of sorghum varieties under on-farm conditions,
with full participation of farmers, forms the basis for in situ conservation and CBM practices in
13
Ethiopia. More than 66 morphotypes or intra-specific varieties of sorghum exist in the Harbu area of
the South Wollo zone.
3.3.2 CBM approaches and processes
T he major steps undertaken since starting to implement the integrated agrobiodiversity management
and seed security programme in the Harbu area of Kalu district include:
Organizing frequent awareness-raising programmes on issues concerning PGR management and
environmental degradation, with particular focus on climate change.
Carrying out an inventory and understanding the level of crop diversity, through baseline surveys,
tracing back the previous diversity from the national genebank and discussions with elderly
farmers for documenting the knowledge and practices associated to those traditional
crops/varieties.
Capacity-building of farmers and their institutions at different levels.
Setting-up institutional building processes.
Restoring the cropping pattern by reintroducing older collections from the locality, maintaining
the community seed bank, participatory variety selection, seed multiplication and distribution, and
other practices.
Continuous backstopping to ensure sustainability of the approach.
Scaling-up and strengthening the community seed banking system.
Strengthening the seed production of selected/enhanced traditional varieties to address the
growing demand for seed by farmers.
Promoting value addition programmes for enhanced traditional sorghum varieties.
Conducting seed fairs and advocacy work, displaying a larger diversity of crops and varieties with
the associated local food types. T hrough this practice, public and private sectors can learn about
the increasing number of challenges to seed and food insecurity, accelerated drought due to
climate change, and other biotic and abiotic stresses.
3.3.3 CBM practices
As with the CBM sites of Ejere and Chef Donsa, community awareness-raising, the community seed
bank, participatory varietal selection, and the farmers’ cooperatives, are the key activities of
community biodiversity management. T he Harbu area has an additional seed bank with natural
ventilation, located in an elevated part of the region. The new facility could facilitate more interaction
between farmers and scientists.
14
4. Diversity of sites: impact on empowerment
Ejere represents one of the most favourable production environments in Ethiopia, for most of the crops
that are adapted to central highland areas, in terms of soil fertility and access to market and extension
services. T he farmers in Ejere have better formal and informal contact with agricultural extension
services. Such connections have enabled them to have a greater access to improved seeds from the
very beginning, when the government extension services started promoting improved wheat varieties.
Despite the fact that the farmers are more inclined towards growing modern varieties of chickpea
“ Kabuli” and wheat, in order to benefit from market incentives, the cultivation of landraces is
important to the community. It seems to us that the Ejere community is proactive and knowledgeable
concerning the cultivation of crop varieties and landraces for the markets of this region. T he
cultivation of cereals, largely teff and wheat, as well as legumes (chickpea, fenugreek), is at present
quite visible in Ejere and in the surrounding areas. T o sustain the conservation and use of traditional
landraces and varieties, farmers have been organized into crop conservator and seed producer groups,
enabling them to own and fully manage a community seed bank complex. The mechanisms to support
local farmers’ efforts in managing the genetic resource-base and its diversity, while increasing
production and productivity, have been developed and promoted. T he farmers have a strategy to
promote on-farm diversity, to spread the risks, as well as add value to local varieties, through seed
production and market linkages to obtain economic incentives for strengthening the local seed supply
system. T he CSB was established as a community-based seed network where seed and grain reserves,
and access to markets, form the back-up strategy. T his contributes to food and seed self-sufficiency at
local, community level. However, strong marketing links between local farmers and users, such as
food industries, need to be strengthened. T here is the capacity to promote organic agriculture and
introduce the products to organic market outlets.
Whereas the Chefe Donsa site represents the same agro-ecology, it is comparatively less fertile and is
located at a greater distance from the markets than the Ejere site. Farmers in Chefe Donsa have been
cultivating traditional varieties in a larger area than in Ejere although this is linked to the agricultural
research and extension services that promote improved varieties. Because of the soil and agro-climatic
variations, farmers rely on traditional rather than improved varieties. T he farmers grow purple wheat
in a larger area, and have maintained a higher number of farmers’ varieties in the seed bank, than the
farmers in Ejere. Every household appears to be aware of the need to maintain enough seed stocks to
use for repeated seeding if necessary. T he management of the cooperative seems to be more effective
than in the other two sites, in terms of building maintenance, record keeping and the development of
operational strategies to provide better services locally to their members. It also has a stronger
leadership to deal with outsiders. T he decision to increase the number of members in the cooperative,
in order to have access to seed and other benefits of the community seed bank complex, are
expressions of the more innovative and strategic ways in which this cooperative operates.
In the Harbu region, farmers mainly cultivate varieties of sorghum. T he area is prone to drought and
is, for the most part, marginal, in terms of soil fertility. T hese are the key factors that led farmers in
this region to take up rain-fed farmers’ varieties like sorghum. T he topography of the area is
undulating terrain and farmers are increasingly cultivating on terraces as a strategy for soil and water
conservation, owing to EOSA’s intervention. It is clear that EOSA has a strong presence in the site, for
strategic reasons. T he restoration of the disrupted cropping pattern, awareness-raising, establishing and
maintaining the community seed bank, PVS, and capacity-building activities, are being implemented
15
with the full participation of target farmers and other concerned stakeholders. T he CSB complex is
fully managed and administered by member farmers. Decisions regarding revolving seeds, variety
selections, and the sale of any surplus, are the responsibility of member farmers and their management
body. Since its inception, EOSA has been strongly supporting the local cooperative to enable them to
establish an autonomous community-based decision-making process. T he CSB at Harbu is the model
for all other CSBs in EOSA programmes. EOSA itself has learned and benefited a lot from the CSB
experience of Harbu, which contributes significantly towards further improvement, building selfconfidence and self-reliance of farmers in food production, economic empowerment and ensuring food
sovereignty.
16
5. Historic drivers for empowerment
Ethiopia was known as Abyssinia until the twentieth century. T his country is the oldest independent
country in Africa. T he ancient monarchy maintained its power right up until the 1970s, except during
the brief period of Italian colonization, from 1936-1941. Ethiopia is unique among African countries
and is widely considered to be the site where man emerged in its history of development. Many parts
of the country has already been identified as the centre of diversity for crops, particularly durum
wheat, sorghum, teff, coffee, some legumes, and oil seed crops (niger seed, sesame, safflower). It has
shown evidence of how human development and the domestication of crops and livestock went
together hand in hand, in the past. T he country is still harbouring rich genetic resources of both crops
and livestock in its diverse agro-ecology and farming systems.
Historically, until now, agriculture has been the mainstay of the Ethiopian economy. T his sector
accounts for about 45% of the national GDP, generates about 90% of export earnings, supplies about
70% of the country’s raw materials required by agro-industries, and is supporting for more than 85%
of the total employment. T he rural population is entirely dependent on farming activities for their
livelihoods. However, the agricultural sector, which is largely rain-fed in Ethiopia, has suffered from
frequent droughts and the subsequent attacks of pests and diseases, resulting in famine.
From discussions with farmers of the study-sites, and scientists working on plant genetic resource
management, it was found that the loss of crop landraces began during the mid 1970s and ended
during late 1980s, with mostly modern varieties. It coincided with the severe drought and outbreak of
pests and diseases, and also with the great political movement that led the nation to the socialist or
military regime in 1974. Improved varieties and foreign food aid were brought in, in an attempt to
increase production and feed the people who were victims of the drought. T his triggered the loss of
crop landraces and also changed the production system towards high input monoculture in some parts
of the country.
T he farmers of the central highlands, particularly in Ejere and Chefe Donsa, still remember the historic
wheat devastation of 1974, caused by pests and disease (rust), as being when they lost their local
wheat landraces. T he socialist government introduced modern bread wheat varieties in the area and
promoted their use under the communal system of production. It was largely a commercial
monoculture for which the state provided inputs and pesticides at a subsidised price. Even though the
state introduced the modern varieties, the farmers of Chefe Donsa suffered more than Ejere with their
wheat crops due to the loss of their locally adapted landraces.
T he Harbu village, located in the northern highlands of the country, represents one of the droughtprone marginal areas. It was known for its high diversity of sorghum, which declined gradually after
1975 because of frequent droughts and the introduction of modern crop varieties by government
extension services. However, modern semi-dwarf sorghum varieties did not perform well in this dry
marginal environment and farmers were disappointed.
By the late 1980s, the negative consequences of such high input monoculture was apparent in terms of
loss of crop landraces (cereals, legumes and oilseeds), soil fertility degradation as well as higher
production costs due to increased input prices. Production costs increased by more than 35% since
there were no government subsidies on inputs, unlike before. Farmers in drought-prone areas such as
17
Harbu, and in marginal production environments like Chefe Donsa, realized the increased cost of
production would obtain few benefits from the market, since they were selling only the surplus amount
after home consumption. Furthermore, the farmers realized the multiple uses of the landraces and that
they had better quality traits for preparing traditional foods, and also better adaptation traits, than the
modern varieties, particularly during the drought years.
In the meantime, some visionary scientists, particularly Dr Melaku Worede, the then Director of the
Plant Genetic Resources Centre/Ethiopia (PGRC/E), and researchers such as Mr. Hailu Getu and Dr.
Regassa Feyissa from the Institute of Biodiversity Conservation and Research (IBCR), were worried
about using such intensive modern agricultural inputs and food aid to feed the population in a
sustainable way. T hey realized the greater loss of indigenous crop landraces, and its effect on farmers’
livelihoods, as they were almost at the stage of losing their control over their seed, which had been
better adapted to produce under adverse and low input conditions.
Dr Melaku conceptualized the idea of collection, enhancement and promotion of durum wheat
landraces for central highland areas, and sorghum for northern midland areas, to sustain on-farm
production and conservation in a participatory way. It was often very difficult to convince the
government and international community.
Finally, the scientists initiated a project under the national genebank with support from the Unitarian
Service Committee of Canada (USC Canada), and named it Seed of Survival (SOS). T he project
started to collect and enhance farmers’ varieties and gave seeds back to farmers with the major focus
on durum wheat in the central highlands (Ejere and Chefe Donsa) and on sorghum for Wollo in the
northern parts of the country. Later, in 1996, a project funded by the Global Environmental Facility
(GEF) of the United Nations Development Programme (UNDP), under the IBCR, continued and
scaled-up the activities to utilize durum wheat and sorghum landraces in their respective domains,
through on-farm demonstrations on conservation, variety selection, community seed banking, seed
multiplication and distribution initiatives.
Dr. Regassa was the successor of Dr. Melaku in the SoS programme. As part of the implementation,
the CSB approach was adopted to organize communities in a cooperative mode and empower them
both technically and institutionally so as to increase the community’s role and capacity for sustaining
the on-farm conservation of target farmers’ varieties in the respective sites. T he project constructed
twelve seed banks in various strategic areas of the country, taking into account the diversity rich areas
and finally handed them over to the farmers’ cooperatives. After retiring from the IBRC, and
establishing the NGO, Ethio-Organic Seed Action, in 2003, Dr. Regassa began to strengthen these
seed banks and the cooperatives in order to continue the conservation, sustainable use and promotion
of farmers’ varieties (for more details see Annex 2).
Gradually, community seed banks and the cooperatives of the CBM sites in the central highland areas
(Ejere and Chefe Donsa) and the CBM site at Harbu have been continuing the conservation and
promotion activities with technical support from EOSA. EOSA has been playing a facilitating role to
promote learning and sharing among scientists, extension workers and farmers for increasing capacity
as well as generating the knowledge base for its wider application and dissemination within and
outside the country.
In the past, Ethiopia has been through very difficult situations, like crop pests and diseases, and
droughts, which have led to food and livelihood insecurity and famine. Although the farmers had all
18
the insights into testing modern varieties, using inputs as well as improving production practices,
mostly facilitated by the government extension services during 1975-1995, they did not address the
major problems faced by the farmers and instead, rather increased their vulnerability. As an option,
farming communities organized and started working more closely with institutions such as the national
genebank, donors, NGOs like EOSA, extension offices and so on. During the process, farmers were
empowered by organizing themselves to cope with the changing socio-economic and political
conditions. Farming communities in the study-sites are using the lessons learned from past experiences
of success and failure to adapt themselves for the future.
19
6. Cultural drivers for empowerment
It is clear that Ethiopia has rich socio-cultural traditions, which are deeply rooted in both rural and
urban society. T he way the people dress and take part in celebrating festivals and ceremonies give the
impression of a very unique culture to outsiders. In the food culture of orthodox Christians, there are
two fasting days in the week (Wednesday and Friday) when meat and milk products are prohibited.
T his tradition has been maintained and passed down through generations. Although there have been
gradual changes in lifestyles due to education and modernization, traditional festive and food cultures
exist everywhere. Communities prefer to prepare and eat injera using teff and other local crops as a
main course. Unlike many other countries, the traditional food dishes, such as injera and tella (a local
drink), are being promoted nationally and are therefore available everywhere in urban cafés and
restaurants. T his has motivated people to learn, prepare and consume cultural foods, which ultimately
provide incentives to rural farmers who are growing teff, barley, durum wheat and many other
indigenous crops. Serving coffee in a cup immediately after the food is very traditional and is still
common not only in rural villages but in every city. T hese socio-cultural traditions are empowering the
farming community to link the conservation and utilization of crop diversity, which has already been
documented, and published (Bayush and T rygve, 2007 1 ).
T he Ejere and Chefe Donsa villages, which are located in the central highlands of the Oromia
Regional State, share similar agro-ecological and socio-cultural conditions. There are two main ethnic
groups in the area: Oromo (majority) and Amhara (minority), and they speak both Oromifa (regional)
and Amharic (national). T he majority of the inhabitants of both sites are followers of Orthodox
Christianity. T he farmers in Ejere and Chefe Donsa observe and celebrate similar festivals, such as
Ethiopian New Year, Mescal, Christmas, Easter and the Epiphany. During every festival, the villagers
prepare the local food, tella, using local wheat landraces. During Easter, in particular, the villagers
prefer to slaughter sheep, cows and chickens, and prepare traditional foods. T his reflects the close
relationship between the food culture and the crops and livestock the communities produce. In the
village of Harbu, Muslims are the dominant ethnic group and they celebrate the Islamic festivals.
However, no difference was observed in the food culture within the ethnic groups in the study sites.
T hey live in harmony, respecting each other’s values and sharing food traditions.
Unlike many South Asian countries where there are multi-ethnic cultures, the Ethiopian society has a
more homogenous social construct with little or no social discrimination. T here are differences among
community members with regard to landholding size but these differences are not reflected by
economic classes in the society. T he socio-cultural structure of society is one of the bases for the
division of work among men and women in the households. T hey share labour practices and seed
exchange practices commonly, as seen in all sites. T hese traditions enabled farming communities to
continue with the conservation and use of the traditional crops and varieties as well as with the
enhancement of associated knowledge. In addition, these socio-cultural traditions are important for
sharing and providing opportunities to individuals to participate in different events in the society.
In the northeast of Brazil, the community in the CBM site of Porteirinha began as a homogeneous
community. Later, several Christian churches arrived in the area and started to work with the
community, bringing about social improvements and changing the matrix of religions; without
1
Bay ush Tsegay e and Trygve Berg, 2007. Utilization of durum wheat landraces in East Shewa, central Ethiopia: Are home uses an
incentive for on-farm conservation? Agriculture and Human Values 24 (2): 219-230.
20
changing the livelihoods. Historically, in Brazil, economic developments involved different
production systems (cotton, dairy cattle, beef and leather, mining, coffee, etc), with high specialization
in the systems, direct marketing and assistance (industries, exporters, input companies connected to
farmers) resulting in the loss of agrobiodiversity, land degradation, land claims and the loss of
autonomy.
In all the CBM sites in Ethiopia, men are responsible for representing the households and therefore are
better exposed and empowered than women. T he team realized that a blend of traditional and modern
cultures exists side by side in Ethiopia. From the CBM perceptive, the way the communities have
maintained the food traditions can be considered the main cultural driver for continuing the
conservation of local landraces. T heir maintenance of socio-cultural traditions that are deeply
embedded in the community, promotes the utilization and conservation of indigenous crops and
animal genetic resources in the study-sites, and also in the country as a whole.
21
7. Drivers for CBM
From all the discussions with the stakeholders working in agrobiodiversity conservation, it is evident
that the most significant driver for conceptualizing and initiating the CBM processes and practices in
the context of Ethiopia, is the loss of their durum wheat and sorghum landraces due to recurrent
droughts and pests; and the introduction of modern varieties. In 1974, drought, pests and diseases
caused devastation in the wheat crops of central highland areas, and as a consequence the farmers lost
durum wheat landraces. Similarly, due to recurrent droughts in the 1980s, the sorghum diversity of the
northern highlands was reduced considerably, affecting rural livelihoods. If those natural calamities
had not occurred and the farmers had not lost the diversity of landraces, the communities may still not
have realized the need to initiate CBM practices. In the late 1980s, a group of scientists working at the
Institute of Biodiversity Conservation and Research (IBCR) realized the immediate need to develop an
agenda for action to conserve, utilize and promote wheat landraces, particularly durum wheat and
sorghum, and they initiated the reintroduction of landraces through the support of the GEF and USCCanada programmes. T o continue this dynamic initiative, EOSA was established early 2003, and took
on the lead role in on-farm management, and the use and promotion of farmers’ varieties like durum
wheat and sorghum, in strategically selected locations. T herefore, 2003 was the milestone for initiating
the CBM concept in Ethiopia and empowering scientists and development workers, through
awareness-raising activities and the establishment of conservation organizations like EOSA.
From the community’s perspective, CBM was initiated and accepted when the seed bank was
established, strengthening the local seed supply system. Efforts were made to empower the
communities for conserving and enhancing germplasm of durum wheat and sorghum on-farm, by
participatory varietal selection, mass production of quality seeds and distribution using the community
seed bank approach. Initially, it was hard to convince farmers from the central highlands (Ejere and
Chefe Donsa); an area which represents a high production environment, to produce forgotten wheat
landraces, but many of them increasingly realized their value in terms of quality, adaptive traits and
low input requirements.
T he Seeds of Survival (SOS) programme initiated the intensive restoration of local landraces with onfarm demonstrations, and seed distribution, and also provided incentives to farmers by buying seeds at
a premium price for the initial years. However, farmers of the Harbu site, which represents a more
marginal environment for crop production, were eager to accept the sorghum landraces and therefore
adopted the programme easily from the very beginning. T he communities of Ejere, Chefe Donsa and
Harbu appreciate the contribution of pioneering scientists and EOSA in encouraging and empowering
them for the utilization of local crops. EOSA is a key institutional driver that not only links
community groups with extension agencies, national genebanks and research centres, but also attempts
to link them to the markets in Ejere and Chefe Donsa. T he capacitating process of EOSA is a
triggering factor that has empowered communities in terms of awareness, regulating the functions of
the cooperatives, management of the seed bank activities and also participation in the collective
decision-making processes. It is, needless to say, the key contributions of the eminent scientists and
development catalysts like Dr. Melaku Worede, Mr. Hailu, and Dr. Regassa, who took path-breaking
decisions, at different points in time, to conceptualize and effectively implement changes in
empowerment, although the scale is varied between sites due to varied contexts and needs of the
communities.
22
8. Definition for empowerment
T he team agreed that empowerment is the most targeted outcome in any interventions that lead
towards sustainability in the long run. However, it was complex for us to define exactly what it meant
to farmers, stakeholders and others, in the context of CBM in Ethiopia. We attempted to look at it by
disaggregating empowerment into elements, such as technical, social, economic and legal domain.
EOSA has been treating the farming communities in Ejere, Chefe Donsa and Harbu, in more or less
the same way. T here are no significant differences in the educational status and food culture of the
communities. However, there are differences in production resources.
T he Harbu community is more marginal in terms of production environment and the landholdings are
small compared with those of Ejere and Chefe Donsa. T he level of awareness, technical skills, social
mobilization, group coherence and collectiveness, as well as legal understanding, regarding crop
genetic resources, were similar among the three sites, owing to the fact that the same kind of CBM
practices were facilitated in the sites. In other words, the package of practices, and the duration of the
communities’ participation in the CBM processes, was very similar. Due to the time limitations of the
current study, a more in depth analysis was not possible.
Analyzing the views of community, they relate empowerment to the quality of life. For them,
“ empowerment is to increase the level of self-confidence in decision-making, through acquiring
knowledge and skills to influence others and identify opportunities for a better life.” T he farming
communities are looking forward to gaining more knowledge and skills, and to working in a more
organized way in order to increase their income and sustain and improve their living conditions.
However, from the outsiders’ perspective, we felt that there was more of a focus on social aspects,
which is a prerequisite during the initial stages. After EOSA came in to the picture, the community
groups turned their attention to economic aspects in order to demonstrate the benefits that lead towards
sustainability.
If we analyze the discussions held with a number of EOSA staff members who are working with these
community groups, empowerment is “a process that increases the capability of smallholder farmers
and their groups to make choices and to have an influence in making collective decisions, in an
autonomous way, towards desired actions and outcomes”. Information is a key to begin with, for all
of these processes. T he stakeholders’, particularly the government extension agency’s, perspective on
empowerment in Ethiopia is to “capacitate farmers and their groups through providing inputs such as
training and technology to enhance their social and financial capital, which ultimately leads to
increasing their self-reliance”.
Invariably, in all the sites, “freedom to decide, freedom of choice, and autonomous decision-making
processes” for better opportunities were expressed primarily by the farmers’ cooperatives, which gave
us the impression that empowerment in the contexts we studied in Ethiopia could be the “ability of
farmers to congregate; collectively learn and practice in groups; recognize and share knowledge
among farmers and scientists; help and support other farmers with material and skills; and take
decisions to manage their resources suitably in order to enjoy the autonomy and freedom of choice of
living, question and clarify doubts and be aware of the nuances in the use and abuse of PGRs from
external elements”.
23
9. Community within the term CBM: is this collective management?
In general, collective management is considered according to the increased participation and concerns
of community members, who share the material and knowledge, resolve conflicts and carry out
decision-making processes. T hese are the elements that ensure the sustainability of the communitybased organizations in the long run. T he CBM practices in Ethiopia have been institutionalized in the
form of farmer cooperatives. T hese community-based organizations are legal entities, governed by the
respective district authorities of the regional states.
T here are a general set of functional and management rules and regulations governing these
organizations. The members of the executive committee and its sub-committees have improved their
capacities in terms of knowledge and skills, as well as in dealing with others through participation in
the CBM processes, thereby their leadership skills, confidence and loyalty are visible. T he team
observed similar conditions in Ejere, Chefe Donsa and Harbu, although the chairman of the Chefe
Donsa site seems to be more authoritative than the chairmen in the other two sites. By and large,
collective decision-making processes are being carried out in all the sites.
From our observations, quality participation by the women, and the ability to voice their concerns in
the committee, was relatively higher in Ejere and Chefe Donsa, than in the Harbu site, as this site is
composed of Muslim ethnic groups. However, when we looked at individual households, there is
always collective decision-making among household members for selecting crops and allocating
resources.
We got the impression that there is an increasing interest among women and men of the farming
community cooperatives, to access seeds and knowledge, in Chefe Donsa and Harbu more so than in
Ejere. Invariably in all sites, there was enough of an indication of the active participation of
“ Guardians of Biodiversity” in the cooperatives, those community members who conserve the most
local varieties in the villages, and who contribute seeds to the system thereby contributing to
conservation and reducing the vulnerability of the farming community in the respective sites. T hose
guardians/custodians of agrobiodiversity share their materials and knowledge with the community at
collective and individual levels. T he seed-sharing and seed-revolving mechanisms are the key
collective elements of empowerment, which have strong linkages with conservation and use, and also
promote sustainability through addressing the some of the challenges of climate change.
All the CBM practices, such as the community seed bank, PVS, capacity-building and value additions,
are implemented with the full involvement of target farmers and other concerned stakeholders. T he
seed bank complex is fully managed and administered by farmer members. Decisions concerning the
variety selection process, the revolving seed system, and seed buying/selling, is the responsibility of
member farmers and their management. Since its inception, EOSA has been encouraging the CBOs to
follow the principles of collectiveness and autonomy to enable community-based collective decisionmaking processes.
24
10.
Inclusion / equality and gender
Inclusiveness and gender participation in CBM practices is visible across all the sites. As per the social
norms, men are the main representatives in social groups, except in women’s groups. In other words,
membership in the farmers’ cooperatives at the three CBM sites is by household, not individual, and
the head of the family is usually a man, hence their high representation. Only the women who are
heads of households participate in the formal sense in all the cooperatives. Women participants of the
cooperatives, i.e. heads of households, make up 28 representatives in Ejere, 70 in Chefe Donsa, and 27
in Harbu, reflecting the inclusiveness of the cooperatives. T he cooperatives are inclusive for the
membership of women and women-headed households. Invariably in all the locations, women have
been given an opportunity to be a part of, or lead the sub-committees and take on responsibilities.
We noticed that the women had a stronger influence in Ejere, compared to Chefe Donsa and Harbu.
Women in Ejere took the opportunity to express their opinions and points of view proactively in the
assemblies. T he women in Chefe Donsa and Harbu are less empowered to deal with the issues
compared to the women in Ejere. This indicates the different levels of empowerment that are largely
determined by the level of education, socio economic status as well as opportunities provided to them.
T here are cultural constraints limiting the active participation of women in the public fora, which was
evident in the Harbu site. Although the cooperative systems provide opportunities for the increased
participation of women in different events, they are bound by the cultural and customary norms of
their rural traditional society. Hence, socio-cultural aspects and levels of education are factors
hindering participation and empowerment of Ethiopian women in general.
T he fact that women are heads of various committees of the cooperatives was visible across all the
sites. Being a patriarchal society, as is also the case of many South Asian countries, men play a lead
role in the decision-making processes in the public fora. However, at the household level, joint
decisions are often made by the women, who have a stake in making decisions related to crop diversity
management, the choice of crops, and so on. T he society in Northeast Brazil is also of a patriarchal
nature. However, women in Brazil are currently enhancing their participation in the decision-making
processes and are taking high positions in formal and informal social structures. T his process began in
the middle of the last century, when women were given the right to vote and be elected. Since then,
women have been increasing their participation in the livelihood of the household, community
associations, cooperatives and political positions.
Across the CBM sites in Ethiopia, women’s groups are promoting energy-saving stoves to the
members of the cooperatives. T here have been attempts to demonstrate spaghetti-making machines to
build the capacities of the women’s groups in value addition to agrobiodiversity products. Women are
being offered equal space to participate in knowledge-sharing events like PVS, food panels, and so on.
Furthermore, women have equal opportunities for accessing credit, training and seeds.
T here are a number of articulate women in the cooperative of Ejere who have participated in several
national and international workshops, and whose contribution to CBM has been recognized. A woman
member of the Chefe Donsa cooperative received a state award for her outstanding achievement and
maintenance of diverse crops in the area. T hese are a few examples to indicate the level of
empowerment of women in the CBM processes. T hey have been playing such crucial roles as master
25
trainers in the cooperatives, and have served as resource persons within and outside the community,
including for the state mediated training programmes.
T he cooperatives have played decisive roles in developing cohesiveness and consciousness among the
members of the community, with collectiveness as the common goal. Credit groups and forests groups
have been established by former members (both women and men) of the cooperatives. It is clear to us
in all the study sites that women and men in the communities have gradually been empowered by
participating in CBM processes, activities and events. All the sites follow the bottom-up approach in
planning, where the communities themselves identify their needs each year under the broader
framework of CBM.
26
11.
Competing claims: land ownership, CBM and empowerment,
marketing and varieties
Looking at the history of land ownership and its distribution in the country, the northern highland
areas made up the core of the ancient Christian kingdom, and the southern highlands were brought
under imperial rule after their conquest. This was reflected in the land tenancy systems. In the North,
there was a kind of communal system of ownership called Rist. T he Orthodox Christian church also
held large areas of land. In the south, the land was in the hands of the state, the church and local
leaders (landlords).
In Great Rift Valley system, nomads controlled the land for grazing according to transhumance tribal
customs. Landownership practices were complex up until 1975 when the socialist government
reformed and nationalized all rural land without compensation. All commercial farms remained under
state control and granted each farm family so called “ possessing rights", to use the land for farming.
T he land reforms abolished all tenancy systems and changed landowning patterns, in favour of small
landholders. T hey provided an opportunity for small farmers to grow more crops as well as establish
and participate in associations. The same policy still governs state land and there are separate tenancy
systems for urban settlements and rural farmlands.
Unlike the urban policy, rural land policy does not allow the landowner to sell their land but rather
pass it down to their offspring over generations for farming. However, in practice, it is more common
to provide land to those family members who have no other opportunities and rely on farming. In our
view, such a land policy and practice has increased land fragmentation and might discourage long term
investments, such as plantations and soil and water conservation practices, for the better use of the
land resources to produce crop diversity on farm.
In cases where the government seized farmland for some reason, the landowner, and his family, will
have been displaced from their society, although compensated. From discussions with the farmers and
stakeholders of CBM sites, it seems likely that such cases will appear more in the future than now, in
more accessible areas, due to the increasing interest of multinational companies involved in the
establishment of industries and high tech-agriculture. T here have already been incidents of land
seizures in peri-urban areas, which have led to the displacement of small farmers and the total loss of
crop-land. Such incidents have not yet been observed in the study areas. In the Ejere, Chefe Donsa and
Harbu areas there are no conflicting situations regarding land ownership and tenure. T he practice of
leasing land seems common in the Ejere and Chefe Donsa sites, which may be due to the class
differences in the community, and the lack of financial and human resources, but this land issue needs
to be further verified. Details regarding the use of leased lands, the choice of crops grown on those
lands, and the influence of these trends on traditional farming systems, are pertinent to the current
study but due to time constraints the team could not dwell on this further. It was clear that the
communities are faced with the challenge of accommodating growing families and the migrants of
other villages and therefore the farmers’ associations are often advocating policy adjustments to
address these problems.
T he farmers were reluctant to invest in infrastructure to improve their farms simply because of the fear
that they would not receive adequate compensation in the case of land seizure. It seems there are no
27
easy state financial mechanisms for agriculture that could help small landholders with crop loans and
subsidies.
In the case of Brazil, farmers own or rent land, or occupy open, occupy lands that belong to the
government. Most of the investments, nowadays, are supported by the farmers themselves, or by
official programmes to finance activities of small farmers, like the National Programme for
Strengthening Family Farming (PRONAF). Other ways to support investments are through social
security, public policies to support the poor people, and programmes to improve infrastructures like
roads, places for markets. Unlike the farmers in many countries in Southern Asia and Brazil, the
farmers in Ethiopia are not able to use land as collateral for accessing loans. T his was felt more deeply
by the farmers of Chefe Donsa and Harbu than those of Ejere, due to the fact that it has not been easy
for them to access loans from the commercial bank to support their agricultural operations.
T he Ejere farmers mentioned a conflict that exists at household level between the use of modern crop
varieties and the cultivation of landraces. External factors such as market access, extension services
and technology (seeds and inputs), are always triggering farmers to find a strategic balance in
allocating their land for modern varieties and landraces, considering the potential risk of rain-fed
farming systems, particularly in high production environment situations. This is not the case in Harbu,
which represents a more drought-prone marginal environment. Some other conflicting situations
involving land allocation that can arise as potential threats for using land for crop production and
livestock farming are the eucalyptus plantations in the highlands, and the increased use of farm
machinery, which can promote monoculture instead of the maintenance of diverse crops and varieties.
Although farmers in Ejere and Chefe Donsa were facilitated in linking with markets in the bigger
cities, and for supplying grain to pasta companies, such efforts were suspended. In Ejere, the markets
have been inducing the farmers to consistently supply an increasing volume of a suitable variety, and
this may result in potential harm to the crop diversity of that community. In Chefe Donsa, owing to
internal conflicts in the cooperatives, such promotions of crops by the markets were halted, whereas in
Harbu, such efforts have so far not been attempted. However, in all the sites, the community expressed
the difficulties in accessing financial resources, rural infrastructures, roads, transport systems and
market opportunities.
28
12.
Governance and CBM
In all the sites, the ways that decision-making is carried out are more or less similar. All the
cooperatives are led by a General Assembly, which is concerned with decisions related to the goals
and principles of the cooperative. T he agendas are first discussed among the appropriate subcommittees and are addressed in the executive committee. Critical points are put forward for decisionmaking in the General Assembly. T his process seems to be a very participative and decentralized way
of managing the cooperative. All members of the cooperative (directly) and the community
(indirectly) participate in the decision-making process. T his collectiveness seems to be very strong and
has been fully appropriated by the cooperative body. Looking at the history of the sites, it is clear that
the cooperative policies were continuously enhanced during the Derg (socialist) period. T he
cooperatives have a clear mandate to prepare and submit their annual plan to the district government
cooperative office for the provision of technical support and for monitoring purposes. International
programmes, like GEF of the UNDP, have been supporting the efforts of the IBC and continue to do
so with EOSA in strengthening technical, financial and institutional aspects of the CBM farming
communities. Although there is a high level of collectiveness and governance within the cooperative,
from an outsider’s perspective, we could see the role EOSA plays in supporting and strengthening the
capacity of the cooperative to manage the production of quality seeds for the market, adding value to
grain through ensuring a market, and as such the economic empowerment that will contribute to the
long term sustainability of community institutions and thereby the conservation efforts.
CBM steps and practices such as community seed banking, PVS, capacity-building and value addition
are being implemented with the full involvement of target farmers and other concerned stakeholders.
T he CSB is fully managed and administered by farmer members. Decisions on the revolving seed,
variety selection and the sale of surplus seed, are the responsibility of members and are implemented
through the cooperative’s management body.
T he democratic set-up of the cooperative is helpful for taking innovative and independent decisions,
according to the needs of the locality. T here are members of the cooperatives who are also members of
various other local institutions. Lellistu Women Farmers’ Cooperative, in Ejere; and Burkitu Gitu
Energy Saving Stove Producing Womens’ Association, in Chefe Donsa, are examples of such
initiatives.
In all the sites, the organization of the cooperative is sub-divided into auditory, financial and propertycontrol sub-committees, under the umbrella of the executive committee. T he executive committee is
democratically elected by the General Assembly, for terms of one to three years, depending on the
site. Overall decision-making takes place during the assemblies (occasionally), and is mainly
delegated to the executive committee and its sub-committees.
In Ejere, farmers have access to improved varieties of wheat, vegetables and pulses from nearby
unions, which indicates the cooperative’s autonomy and flexibility for achieving benefits. T hey are
inclined towards accommodating improved varieties as a strategy for diversification. T his is an
indication not only of their ability to make decisions concerning the conservation of landraces but also
shows how the cooperative exercises its autonomy.
29
T he management of the cooperative in Chefe Donsa is more functional and active, as reflected in the
arrangement of documents and files and in the maintenance of the community seed bank. T he farmers
of the Chef Donsa site are conserving a higher number of landraces than the farmers in Ejere. T he
cooperative consists of more members and has clear plans for increasing the membership as well as
raising the amount of revolving seed. It has developed a condition for increasing the membership for
the society rather than lending seeds to non-members of the seeds bank. T he seed transactions carried
out through the CSB of Chefe Donsa were impressive. T he farmers are continuing to cultivate local
landraces in spite of having access to agriculture research and extension services that promote
improved varieties, close to its village. T he cooperative has very good support from the district
agricultural extension and cooperative services in its conservation and seed production activities.
In Harbu, the farmers are promising, in terms of access to PGRs of sorghum. Unlike the farmers in
Ejere and Chefe Donsa, they have been little exposed to the marketing initiatives driven by EOSA.
T his is because of the dominance of the subsistence system, which is associated with the marginal
production environment and the small size of landholdings in this area. However, the farmers in Harbu
have had a close relationship with their mentors in EOSA for a long time, owing to their contribution
in maintaining sorghum diversity in the country. EOSA seems to have strategic attachment to, and a
continuous development plan in place for, this site, as the place is known for drought, poverty and
vulnerability.
30
13.
Sustainability of CBM
Invariably in all the sites, the farmers are aware of their responsibilities concerning the conservation,
use and maintenance of local genetic resources. As in other countries, there are a number of innovative
farmers who play an important role in enhancing landraces and promoting the use of a diversity of
crops. T his is well reflected in Ejere, where the cooperative has adopted local and improved varieties.
An increased understanding in how to access the materials; analyze the costs and benefits; account for
consumption; ensure seed security; seek opportunities to increase income; and promote the
commercialization of seed of local crops and varieties, are expressions and pathways towards
sustainability.
T he process of enhancing human and social capital, aided by EOSA, allows for a high degree of
autonomy and the strengthening of the cooperative and gender equality. T he recent strategy to
promote seed production entrepreneurship for economic empowerment is a key to future
sustainability, provided that they have an adequate understanding of the production and marketing
sides. It is pertinent to indicate that value addition and the identification of niche markets for
promoting local varieties with traits of high culinary and nutritional values, as well as packaged seed,
is needed for stable production. Based on our observations and discussions with the community in
each site, we feel that the farmers have more socially than economically empowered. Economic
empowerment needs to be further strengthened for the long-term sustainability of CBM. In parallel,
the strategy to promote more genetic variability, in particular in very fragile production environments,
like Harbu, shows a distinct way of ensuring the adaptability of crops and food security. T his insight
gives sustainability to the crops but needs a high degree of commitment.
T here is a great potential for promoting organic/agro-ecological production, which could be linked to
organizing organic and fair-trade markets. T hese pathways could provide insights into enhancing the
value of cooperative/community products and ensuring the sustainability of the cooperative in the long
run. Some of the marketing initiatives in Ejere and Chefe Donsa, which were halted, shall be reviewed
for refinement and improvement. T hese initiatives could be helpful for encouraging younger
generations to continue with farming, as this would be a remunerative option, rather than just mere
farming.
Alarmingly, in all the sites, the elders we met during the discussions indicated that their children
would be more successful than them in terms of accessing better education, jobs and quality of life.
T his indicates that the sustainability of CBM depends on meeting the expectations of the farmers
without compromising the core principles of the CBM. T hat is the challenge for the days to come. It is
also necessary to improve different strategies, such as public policies, long-term financial support for
cooperatives, easy access to credit for farmers, value addition to the products of small farmers – seeds,
grain, vegetables, handicrafts - and capacity-building to enhance rural but non-agricultural services.
T he possibility to provide and generate income in rural areas, so that the younger generation will want
to continue with agriculture and that these young farmers will be better educated, is one farmer’s wish
in the site of Harbu.
31
14.
CBM and genetic resource policies in Ethiopia
Ethiopian national policies pertaining to plant genetic resources and CBM are examined in this
chapter.
T he National Seed Industry Policy (1992) recognizes the accelerated genetic erosion of crop landraces
due to the promotion of exotic varieties and suggests a balanced strategy in conservation and seed
production and supply (Articles 3.07 & 7.01) be considered. T his policy recognizes farmers’
participation in the seed industry for promoting the sustainable use of local plant varieties, and also
emphasizes farmers’ rights to share the benefits arising from the use of local varieties they have
developed over generations.
T he Ethiopian Constitution (1995) (Constitution of the Federal Democratic Republic of Ethiopia)
emphasizes that the government and citizens have the duty to protect the country’s natural resources.
Citizens have the right to benefit from the country’s legacy of natural resources and the right to
participate in the formulation of national development policies and programmes (Art.89).
T he Access to Genetic Resources and Community Knowledge, and Community Rights Proclamation
(2006) aims to ensure that the state and community share the benefits arising from the use of genetic
resources, in a fair and equitable manner. It recognizes the contribution of the community in genetic
resources conservation and the right of the community to participate and share benefits from the use of
their knowledge and resources.
T he Environmental Policy (1997) aims to promote sustainable social and economic development
through the management of natural, human, cultural and environmental resources. T he Ethiopian
Environmental Protection Authority (EPA) looks at all these issues and serves as a focal point for
issues related to the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD).
T he National Policy on Biodiversity Conservation and Research (1998) aims to ensure sustainable
conservation and management of plants, animals and microbial genetic resources. T his policy
promotes community participation, recognizing community knowledge and their ownership as well as
the sharing of benefits.
Both the Environmental Policy and the National Policy on Biodiversity Conservation and Research
recognize community rights to own and use biodiversity resources, as well as their rights to share
benefits derived from such use, and to participate in planning and decision-making in the conservation
and use of these resources.
T he protection of farmers’ and the communities’ traditional knowledge is recognized in all relevant
policies, which aim to ensure that farmers decide on access to, and use of their knowledge, combined
with the right to equitably share benefits arising from the use of such knowledge.
A recent Proclamation on Access to Genetic Resources and Community Knowledge and Community
Rights, as well as a Proclamation on Plant Breeder’ Rights, are seen as progressive steps taken to
address issues of community and farmers’ rights. It is anticipated that clarification of this and other
32
aspects may be achieved when the rules and regulations for these proclamations are adopted and
implemented.
T he Plant Breeders’ Rights Proclamation (2006) encourages the development of new varieties, and
recognizes the contribution of farmers in the conservation and use of genetic resources, as a basis for
crop improvement. This Proclamation upholds farmers’ rights to save, use, multiply, exchange and sell
farm-saved seed of protected varieties, although they are not allowed to sell seed that has been
protected with plant breeders’ rights. Despite the fact that this proclamation provides for farmers’
rights in a separate article, the provisions are limited to the conditions under which farmers can use
protected varieties. There is no mention of supporting and recognizing farmers for the role they play in
conserving and developing crop genetic diversity, or of how their rights to share benefits derived from
the use of their varieties are ensured.
It is clear that Ethiopia has made efforts to protect the interests of the community through genetic
resource policies that aid in promoting CBM in the country. But there are noticeable gaps in the
proclamations including the lack of a clear definition of farmers and communities, as well as a lack of
clarity regarding the role of farmers within the local community structures in Ethiopia. T he result is a
weak emphasis on both the role that farmers play in crop genetic resources conservation and
development, and their rights to be rewarded for the contributions they make in maintaining and
developing plant genetic resources for food and agriculture. T hese gaps necessarily require careful
examination and treatment when adopting implementation rules and regulations.
Although policies like those relating to seed, plant breeders’ rights, access and community rights,
biodiversity and the environment, all address farmers’ and community rights, the details of these
policies are little known amongst most farmers, even those who are active in the CBM activities.
However, even though they may not know the genetic resources policies and their rights at national
and global levels, some of them have a basic understanding of how these policies relate to their
livelihoods, through the legal empowerment processes facilitated by EOSA.
References for policy issues are the following:
Abeba T adesse Gebreselassie, 2009. Material sharing agreements on T eff and Veronia – Ethiopian
Plant Genetic Resources. Journal of Politics and Law 2 (4).
FAO, 1996. Ethiopia Country Report, FAO International T echnical Conference on Plant Genetic
resources (Leipzig, 1996). Plant Genetic Resources Centre, Addis Ababa, 1995.
GT Z, not dated. Access and benefit sharing in (ABS) Africa. Cases of bio prospecting and ABS
legislation in Eastern and Southern Africa. GT Z, Eschborn.
Jonathan McKee, 2007. Ethiopia Environmental Profile. EC Delegation, Addis Ababa.
Regassa Feyissa, 2006. Farmers’ Rights in Ethiopia: A case study. GT Z T he Fridtjof Nansen
Institute report 7.
United Nations University, 2008. Access to genetic resources in Africa. Analysing ABS Policy
Development in four African Countries. United Nations University, T okyo.
33
15.
CBM and farmers’ rights
Ethiopia has been an active supporter of farmers’ rights ever since the mid 1980s when the concept of
farmers’ rights began to emerge. Since then, it has played a significant role in all the negotiation
processes related to farmers’ rights and access to genetic resources. A particular mention should be
made of the work of the Plant Genetic Resources Centre/ Ethiopia (PGRC/E), later known as the
Biodiversity Conservation Institute, through its former Director, Dr. Melaku Worede, and his
successors. Ethiopia has also significantly contributed to the development of African Model
Legislation for the protection of the rights of local communities, farmers and breeders, and for the
regulation of access to biological resources.
T he National Seed Industry Policy of Ethiopia (1992) recognizes the active participation of farmers in
the seed industry for the promotion of the sustainable use of local cultivars. According to Seed
Proclamation No.2006/2000 farmers can produce and sell certified seed to other farmers, but cannot
engage in large-scale seed sale without being certified by the National Seed Agency (Art. 3).
T he National Policy on Biodiversity Conservation and Research (1998) ensures the sustainable
conservation and management of the country’s plant, animal, microbial genetic resources and essential
ecosystems (section 2, 1998). The policy emphasizes: community participation in decision-making on
biodiversity conservation, development and utilization activities; the creation of community-based
systems that recognize community rights to biodiversity resource ownership and use; the fostering of
indigenous knowledge and methods relevant to the conservation, development and sustainable use of
biological diversity; and the sharing of benefits accrued as a result of the use of indigenous knowledge
and germplasm, within the community.
T he Plant Breeders’ Rights Proclamation (Proclamation No. 481/2006) was developed to encourage
plant breeders by offering economic rewards as incentives for their contributions in the agricultural
sector, realizing that the utilization of new plant varieties developed through research play a
significant role in improving agricultural production and productivity. T he Proclamation also
recognizes the contributions of local farmers in the conservation and use of genetic resources that
constitute the basis for breeding new varieties for agricultural production (Art. 27).
According to Article 28, the inclusion of farmers’ rights in the Plant Breeders’ Rights Proclamation is
more concerned with the conditions under which farmers are to be allowed to use protected varieties.
Farmers can save, use, multiply and sell protected varieties but not as certified seed. T he role that
farmers play in conserving and developing plant genetic resources constitutes the basis of breeding,
and rewarding them for what they are doing, and will continue to do, is not mentioned.
T he scope of the application of this Proclamation is to be specified in directives to be issued by the
Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Development (Art. 3 on the scope of application). Similarly, the
Ministry may revise, from time to time, as necessary, the list of plant genera and species to which this
Proclamation applies (Art.3.2). T his may provide room for developing mechanisms through which
farmers’ varieties are recognized and protected, aimed at enabling benefit-sharing among farmers from
the use of such varieties.
34
T he Access to Genetic Resources and Community Knowledge, and Community Rights Proclamation
(Proclamation No. 482/ 2006) is to ensure that the state and communities obtain fair and equitable
shares from the benefits arising from the use of genetic resources. T he Proclamation recognizes the
contributions of communities in genetic resources conservation, their right to participate in relevant
decision-making, and the right to share benefits derived from the use of their knowledge and the
resources in their care.
Accordingly, the Institute of Biodiversity Conservation and Research (IBCR), established by
Proclamation No. 120/1998 has been designated by the state to decide on and facilitate access to
genetic resources and community knowledge. Recently, the name was changed to the Institute of
Biodiversity Conservation (IBC). Communities, however, have the right to obtain prior informed
consent on access to genetic resources when this may affect their socio-economic life or their natural
or cultural heritage (Proclamation 482/2006, Art.7.1c-d). Communities may even demand restriction
or withdrawal of access agreements entered into by the IBC.
Similarly, the recently approved Proclamation to Protect Breeders’ Rights (No. 481/2006) provides
farmers with the following rights: to save, use, exchange and sell farm-saved seed of their own
varieties; to use protected varieties, including genebank materials, for developing new farmers’
varieties; and to save, use, multiply, exchange and sell farm-saved seed of protected varieties. But the
Proclamation restricts farmers from selling farm-saved seeds of protected varieties on a large scale and
as certified seed, unless licensed (Art.31).
Awareness on the issues of farmers’ rights is limited to circles of a few individuals and institutions
that are involved in international negotiations. Similarly, although policies like those relating to seed,
plant breeders’ rights, access and community rights, biodiversity and environment all address farmers’
and community rights, the details of these policies are not known to most local farmers. Protection of
farmers’ and community traditional knowledge is recognized in all relevant policies. Farmers and
communities have the right to decide on access to and use of their traditional knowledge, including the
right to share benefits derived from the use of this knowledge. T he farmers of the CBM sites believe
that they have all the rights to conserve, use, share and sell the genetic resources of their habitats. T he
CBM processes have empowered them to firm up their commitments to exercise their rights. EOSA,
through training and capacity-building processes, encourages farmers and their associations to exercise
their rights thereby protecting and encouraging the customary use of genetic resources, which is
relevant to the conservation and sustainable use of the genetic resources of the country. Although the
policy environment is conducive to implementing community and farmers’ rights in Ethiopia, there is
a need to study the nature of community structures as well as relevant policies thoroughly, in order to
avoid unnecessary gaps and overlaps that may hamper the implementation of customary and
community rights.
35
16.
Relation between customary rights and custodianship
In Ethiopia, any proclamations and policies, or customary rules relating to the use of genetic resources
were not identified by us. Farmers are entitled to conserve, use and grow crop varieties according to
their own interests. Although policies recognize farmers’ participation in decision-making processes, a
formal arrangement is lacking. EOSA, as an organization, is committed to safeguarding the rights of
the seed and food sovereignty of the communities. T he organization encourages and supports the
Guardians and Custodians of crop genetic resources. Ethiopian customary practices are linked to the
conservation of plant genetic resources, and are embedded in their life. T hey derive food, fuel, fodder,
and thatching materials from their resources. Their lives are intimately interwoven with their natural
resource habitats. Over time, customary norms and traditions related to the access to and use of local
resources evolved within the communities. Consequently, the communities have safeguarded
innumerable landraces of crops through selection, based on their choice and preferences.
A community, conservation oriented NGO like EOSA is enabling farming communities to sustain and
promote the conservation and sustainable use of local resources, and helping them to exercise their
customary rights. Such efforts are vital for ensuring local food security and food sovereignty. In the
cooperatives promoted by EOSA, selected farmers of the executive committee, whom the team had a
chance to meet, expressed their awareness of the importance of crop genetic resources conservation;
customary rights of the community to use germplasm; issues related to accessing those resources, and
so on.
As yet, no legal tools have been created for protecting or guaranteeing those rights, but it is expected
that such tools will be developed with the enactment of laws to implement the 2006 Proclamations on
Plant Breeders’ Rights, and on Access to Genetic Resources and Community Knowledge and
Community Rights. Important progress has been made in developing policy frameworks to address the
rights of communities, farmers and breeders at national level. However, the pace at which farmers’
rights are being implemented in Ethiopia has not been as significant as demonstrated during its
articulation and participation in discussions at regional and global levels. Regardless of all these policy
commitments made to address farmers’ and community rights, the process of formulating legal
instruments for the implementation of policies at national level has been very slow.
As in Nepal, the team in Ethiopia realized there is a need for rules and regulatory mechanisms, and
governmental support systems, like the Protection of Plant Varieties and Farmers’ Rights Act in India;
the Biodiversity Act, also in India; and the Access and Benefit-sharing Decree, in Brazil. T hese legal
instruments are essential for enabling custodian farmers to exercise their customary rights.
Concerns of the farming community include: control over their produce; the right to save and
exchange seed in accordance with the customary practices; the right to benefit from the use by others
of their traditional knowledge and experience; land tenure insecurity, due to state ownership; claims
for compensation over the use of genetic resources; security of tenure on the lands they farm or
occupy; the right to have equal social security such as credit and collateral for loans; water supply;
health centres; schools and infrastructure, like roads; access to proper markets and to technology; and
being consulted on decisions that directly affect them. T hese concerns of the farming communities
should be addressed by the implementation of those policies that have been developed, but not fully
and effectively implemented, in Ethiopia.
36
17.
CBM and access and benefit‐sharing over genetic resources
T he National Seed Industry Policy (National Seed Industry Policy, section.3.07, 1992) and the
Environmental Policy (section 3.3.j, 1997), as well as the National Policy on Biodiversity
Conservation and Research Policies recognize the rights of farmers and communities to share benefits
accrued as a result of the use of their knowledge and resources.
T he Proclamation on Access to Genetic Resources and Community Knowledge, and Community
Rights provides communities with the right to 50% of the share that the state obtains in monetary form
from the use of genetic resources (Art. 9.2). T he money obtained in this form is channelled to services
of common advantage to the concerned local communities, as will be specified by a regulation to be
issued under this Proclamation. T he portion of monetary benefit left after deducting the community
share shall be allocated by the state for the conservation of biodiversity and promotion of community
knowledge (Article 18). Non-monetary benefits arising from the same are to be shared between the
state and the concerned communities as specified in each access agreement, and based on the kinds of
benefits agreed to be shared with the access permit-holder (Article 18.3).
Some access agreements were made prior to the approval of the Proclamation on Access to Genetic
Resources and Community Knowledge, and Community Rights. One of these is the Agreement on
Access to, and Benefit Sharing from T eff Genetic Resources, between IBC and the Ethiopian
Agricultural Research Organization (EARO) on the Ethiopian side, and Health and Performance Food
International (HPFI) of the Netherlands. T he agreement, which was concluded in December 2004,
concerning access to teff germplasm, was new for the country, in terms of formalized arrangements of
access to genetic resources and benefit-sharing that recognizes farmers’ rights. As a starting point for
formal access and benefit-sharing arrangements, useful lessons were expected from the process,
particularly with regard to the treatment of benefit-sharing arising from the use of uncultivated plant
genetic resources.
Unlike India, which has established documentation and validation mechanisms (people’s biodiversity
registers); grassroots institutions (biodiversity management committees); regulatory mechanisms, like
the Plants Variety Registry of the National Protection of Plant Variety and Farmers’ Rights Authority
(PPVFRA); the National Biodiversity Authority; state biodiversity boards, following the development
of the Biodiversity Act; a treasury for accessing benefits arising out of the use of the genetic recourses
and associated knowledge (the National Gene Fund and the National Biodiversity Fund); such
mechanisms have not yet been formed in Ethiopia. Likewise, a clear structure for addressing access
issues, such as a decision-making body on genetic resources; prior informed consent; and material
transfer agreements; such as the Access and Benefit Sharing Decree that was implemented in Brazil, is
not yet in place in Ethiopia. T here are many similarities between Ethiopia and Nepal regarding the
national priority to implement an access and benefit-sharing regime. Unlike Ethiopia, the ABS bill is
still pending in Nepal owing to political circumstances. As a signatory of the CBD, Ethiopia appears to
be moving forwards in this direction without compromising the customary rights of the community
and sovereignty of the country.
37
18.
CBM, empowerment and in situ conservation
T he team noticed that CBM is being practiced in similar ways in all the study sites visited. T he same
steps were taken from the very beginning, such as raising awareness; organizing the community;
enhancing knowledge and skills; participatory landrace enhancement; seed multiplication and
institutional development through seed banking and networking. Based on our observations, these
steps can be considered as part of the CBM methodology in Ethiopia.
CSB cooperatives are at the centre of CBM activities in all the sites. T hrough these CSB cooperatives,
seed collection, participatory selection, seed multiplication, access to credit and marketing, capacitybuilding, value addition and networking within groups and stakeholders, have been addressed with the
facilitation of EOSA. Due to the limitations of time, we were not able to interact with the National
Genebank authority, or with agricultural research centres and other I/NGOs working in agriculture and
agrobiodiversity management. However, there is a positive understanding of CBM in government
extension offices, and they support it indirectly. In analyzing the contribution being made by CBM to
on-farm conservation of crop genetic resources, its greatest role was obvious to us: to revive, maintain
and utilize the durum wheat and sorghum landraces in their original production environment. Both
Ejere and Chefe Donsa are in potentially high production areas for wheat, which were covered by
modern varieties when local landraces were lost during the 1980s.
Due to CBM interventions, there is now a high demand for landraces even though they are less
productive (1.5 tons/ha). T his is due to the increasing realization of their usefulness and mostly high
quality traits, as well as their adaptation potential and low input requirements. Modern varieties are
high yielding (4 tons/ha) and dominated cultivation in both sites. Farmers now grow landraces side by
side in an average land-size of half a hectare. Particularly in Chefe Donsa, which is more marginal
than Ejere, the membership of the CSB is increasing every year so that they can access durum wheat
and legume crops. In Harbu, the community diversity of sorghum landrace populations has increased
to 67 following CBM interventions. Sorghum diversity was almost lost during late 1980s. Farmers are
enjoying the diversity by planting mixtures of sorghum populations of the same maturity groups. In
the CSBs across the sites, after each harvest, farmers deposit the seed of their local varieties in the
bank for next year as security. T here is an increasing realization of the importance of growing many
varieties and landraces, thereby spreading risk, increasing resources in terms of soil fertility, and
reducing production costs. Landraces allow the farmers to adapt to changing conditions, and to
maintain their cultural and culinary practices. In all three sites, there is a linkage between CBM
practices, empowerment and the role of CBM in promoting the conservation of particular crop
diversity on-farm. Growing demands for seed of local varieties of wheat and sorghum has also been
noticed. T he CSBs have plans to increase the volume of seed production for the market. In addition,
they aim to add value by selling produce as their own brand, providing economic benefit to the
custodian farmers.
Here in Ethiopia, it is clear that CBM evolved because of the realization of how it would benefit the
community and through joint learning of farmers and scientists working on agrobiodiversity
conservation. T he reintroduction of displaced landraces on-farm; participatory research on their
adaptation; maintenance of local varieties and landraces in the CSB; seed multiplication; and the
establishment of farmers’ institutions (CBOs) to maintain this dynamic process, have direct and
positive implications on the in situ conservation of traditional wheat and sorghum varieties.
38
19.
General synthesis
T he CBM team had a good experience during the visit in Ethiopia. We had opportunity to interact
with experts like Dr. Melaku Worede, Mr. Hailu Getu and Dr. Regassa Feyissa, and the
knowledgeable stakeholders of the communities in the CBM sites. T he insights received from the
interactions with them, and the observations made in the field, have been captured in the report
after triangulation with the field experts. The team also wishes to highlight the limitations of the
study in terms of time and language, as well as the limited access to visit all stakeholders involved
in the CBM processes.
Ethiopia is a pioneer country in piloting CBM practices. It is evident from the historical CBM
processes that communities have struggled because of natural calamities, particularly drought,
pests and diseases, in various part of the country. Over time, the traditional customary systems like
culinary practices, seed exchange and seed storage mechanisms, have saved the country with the
support and able guidance of indigenous expertise. Participatory decision-making processes have
been the coping mechanisms of the communities for a long time.
T he team had the impression that the package and practices facilitated by EOSA, and the inception
of the processes, are same across all the sites visited. Although the CBM activities are similar in
all the sites, the level of empowerment varied in many respects.
It is vital to mention here that the country has faced the loss of landraces due to environmental
factors like drought, pests and diseases. Down through the years, Ethiopians have continued to use
traditional foods and beverages made from local landraces of crops. T herefore, food culture and
agro-ecological diversity is a key reason for sustaining the interest of communities to ensure the
conservation and use of local varieties on a larger scale across the country.
T he CBM processes of one and half decades of work, in all the sites, have adequately motivated
the communities to participate collectively. T he team felt that efforts towards creating economic
incentives in conservation would further strengthen the communities to be actively involved in the
CBM processes. Attempts in this direction would attract more youth in the CBM processes.
Customary beliefs and norms are obstacles preventing women from participating freely in the
decisions-making processes, as is the case in many societies. T he Ethiopian context is not
exceptional in this respect. T he team understood that there is a need for more opportunities/space
for women to participate in the decision-making processes in the public sphere, like in the
cooperatives. T he team understood the efforts made by EOSA to capacitate several women in the
communities who are knowledgeable, eloquent and resourceful.
T he team of indigenous expertise conceptualized and developed the methodology of CBM and
implemented it with the support of like-minded international donors. T he team worked hard to
implement CBM and achieve its mission of seed security, food sovereignty and food security for
the community across the country.
T he community has a cursory understanding of access and benefit-sharing of germplasm. T he
nation has formulated necessary policies for safeguarding the genetic resources, which have
helped the communities exercise their community rights associated with the resources. T he
functional mechanisms/implementation pathways for ABS are not clear in national policies.
On the outset, the CBM empowerment processes and practices adopted by the communities in the
Ejere, Chefe Donsa and Harbu regions of Ethiopia would certainly assist and safeguard them in an
era of climate change and provide resilience to protect and sustain them in the long run.
39
ANNEXES
Annex 1: Integrated Agro‐Biodiversity Management and Seed Security
Programme
T he key objectives of the programme are to:
Promote community-based management and enhancement of agrobiodiversity.
Strengthen local seed supply systems in order to ensure seed security at community level.
Promote market and non-market incentives to improve the socio-economic gains for the farming
communities.
Minimize the conflicts between the need to introduce new agricultural technologies and the need
to maintain and enhance traditional technologies and crop varieties while the natural resource base
is sustainably managed and used.
T his programme is based on the understanding that the management of agrobiodiversity and
increasing agricultural productivity require integrated multi-sectoral efforts. EOSA is working towards
bringing together farmers, researchers, food processors and consumers, in order to ensure sustainable
production through enhanced social and economic incentives, particularly for local farmers. EOSA
also attempts to increase food security and improve local farmers’ livelihoods, by developing and
enhancing indigenous crop varieties, thereby diversifying and broadening the options of planting
materials for local farmers. T he first phase of the project was supported by GEF (2002) and after
phasing out of the GEF project, EOSA has been maintaining the programme through support from
USC-Canada, and since 2006, with the full support of the Community Biodiversity Development and
Conservation Programme (CBDC). CBDC is a regional African programme involving Ethiopia,
Zimbabwe, Malawi, Mali, Sierra Leone, Burkina Faso, Lesotho and Zambia; and is supported by the
Development Fund (DF) of Norway; SwedBio of Sweden; and Hivos/Oxfam, of the Netherlands.
EOSA tactically follows the farmer-centred approach whereby farmers’ decisions, objectives and
needs play the lead in initiating programme activities. On-farm conservation of indigenous crop
varieties is carried out in such a way that conservation complements production by providing options
and sources of adapted planting materials. Decentralized and participatory varietal development is the
basic strategy followed for developing varieties that fit into different agro-ecological conditions and
meet farmers’ needs and objectives. T he programme capitalizes on the complementarities between the
need for introducing new agricultural technologies and that of maintaining and enhancing traditional
crop varieties and technologies, and ensuring food sovereignty. T he ability of farmers to train other
communities to launch similar CBM initiatives could also be taken as empowerment for the Ejere
community. T he reintroduction of displaced landraces on-farm; research on their adaptation;
maintenance in the community seed bank; seed multiplication of enhanced forms; and support of
farmers’ institutions to maintain this dynamic process, have had direct and positive implications for in
situ conservation of the targeted traditional wheat varieties. Especially the presence of a CSB in the
village, which currently functions as a CBO, strongly supports the in situ conservation of PGR. T he
farming community is more interested in traditional crops/varieties for a number of reasons, including:
(a) their adaptation to adverse environmental conditions; (b) their ability to give optimum yield with
little or no inputs; (c) their support to household or community level seed security; (d) their sociocultural significance; (e) their desirable nutritional values, specially tastes; and (f) their use as straw
for cattle feed.
40
Annex 2: Activities and plan for the study
Coach and discuss the terms of reference (T oRs), in the presence of Walter de Boef, in order to
understand and share roles and responsibilities.
Identify the key relevant questions to facilitate discussions with the communities and stakeholders
in each topic.
Discuss and finalize questions before moving to the field sites/community groups.
Carry out field visits and discussions (community and local stakeholders).
Carry out a consultation with Walter following the initial two visits, on progress and initial ideas
concerning outcomes of the exchange study.
Hold discussions with national experts of government and non government organizations.
Draft documentation on the process and outcomes and its synthesis (daily).
Produce and submit a synthesis report.
41
Annex 3: Roles and responsibilities of CBM study team in Ethiopia
T opic
Cluster 1
Cluster 5
Site characterization: CBM
components and practices
Diversity for sites: impact on
empowerment
Historical drivers for empowerment
Cultural drivers for empowerment
Drivers for empowerment
Definition of empowerment
Competing claims: land ownership,
CBM and empowerment
CBM, empowerment and in situ
conservation
Community within the term CBM: is
this collective management
Inclusion/equality and gender
Governance and CBM
Sustainability of CBM
CBM and genetic resource policies
CBM and farmers’ rights
Relation between customary rights and
custodianship
CBM and access and benefit-sharing
over genetic resources
General synthesis
T eam
leader
Overall compilation and reporting to
Global CBM
Cluster 2
Cluster 3
Cluster 4
T oRs Document
section
Section 1
Section 2:1
Responsibility
Lead
Support
Kumar
Sergio, Oliver
EOSA
Kumar
Sergio, EOSA
Section 2:2
Section 2:3
Section 2:4
Section 2:5
Section 2:8
Bharat
Bharat
Bharat
Bharat
Bharat
Sergio, EOSA
Kumar, EOSA
Kumar, EOSA
All
Kumar, EOSA
Section 2:15
Bharat
All
Section 2:6
Sergio
Oliver, EOSA
Section 2:7
Section 2:9
Section 2:10
Section 2:11
Section 2:12
Section 2:13
Sergio
Sergio
Sergio
Oliver
Oliver
Oliver
Oliver, EOSA
Oliver, EOSA
Oliver, EOSA
Bharat, EOSA
Bharat, EOSA
Bharat, EOSA
Section 2:14
Oliver
Bharat, EOSA
Section 2:16
All
Oliver
All
EOSA (host institution) personnel and CBM experts provided technical and managerial support to the
team. T he following persons made their contributions.
Mr. Genene Gezu
Mr. Samson Gashu
Mr. T emesgen Desalegn
Dr. Bayush T segaye
Dr. Awegechew T eshome
Dr. Regassa Feyissa
Dr. Melaku Worede
Mr. Hailu Getu
42