Farmers’ practices and genetic diversity
Farmers' practices and genetic diversity are intricately linked, with traditional agricultural methods emphasizing the importance of maintaining a broad genetic base in cultivars. Throughout history, farmers have practiced integrated farming, cultivating diverse crop varieties that exhibit resilience to environmental conditions. These farmers typically engage in mixed cropping, cultivating multiple crops together in their fields. Crucially, they have a tradition of saving and maintaining their own seeds, often without applying strong selection pressures to achieve uniformity (Gauchan et al. 2005). Instead, nature often plays a significant role in determining the seeds for the next planting season.
A key aspect of their seed-saving practices is handling seeds in bulk, which inadvertently contributes to the preservation, promotion, and conservation of genetic diversity within landraces. This bulk handling method allows for a wide range of genetic variation to persist within these cultivars. Furthermore, farmers frequently engage in seed exchange practices, often mixing seeds of the same crop types. This approach, combined with the cultivation of cultivar mixtures, provides farmers with various advantages, particularly in terms of environmental resilience. These mixed crop practices are a testament to the sustainable and adaptive strategies employed by farmers over generations, resulting in robust agricultural systems that can withstand various environmental challenges.
Farmers’ reflections on cultivar mixtures and EP in Jumla and Lamjung
During the focus group discussions, many farmers indicated that they found evolutionary populations of rice and beans to be well-suited for handling both abiotic (climate-related) and biotic (disease and insect-related) stresses. Likewise, farmers shared their success in cultivating evolutionary populations in organic and low-input conditions. In the Jumla district, several farmers reported integrating evolutionary population-based crops into the district's organic program. Additionally, farmers expressed their satisfaction with the taste, cooking quality, and strong aroma of evolutionary populations in comparison to pure stand varieties.
However, some farmers noted a high degree of heterogeneity in terms of grain color, shape, and size, which they considered less favorable. This heterogeneity was partly attributed to existing seed-related policies and guidelines that favor a high level of uniformity in pure stand varieties. These policies did not adequately support inter and intra-varietal diversity and the use of evolutionary populations.
On the other hand, certain farmers reported that varietal mixtures of local landraces exhibited lower susceptibility to diseases and insect infestations. Nevertheless, reluctance to cultivate these mixtures and evolutionary populations stemmed from the lack of government subsidies.
Many farmers consistently argued that mixtures and evolutionary populations delivered favorable results even when facing both biotic (disease and insect-related) and abiotic (e.g., hailstone, drought, heat, frost) stresses. Farmers explained that if one component of the mixture suffered due to extreme weather, the other components protected against complete loss in the face of extreme environmental shocks. This level of resilience was not attainable with pure stand varieties, which were monomorphic in nature and experienced losses of up to 100%. In the 2021 growing season, farmers in Jumli Marshi encountered nearly 100% crop loss due to blast infestation. In contrast, neighboring farmers who had grown EPB lines in minikits obtained a good grain yield with minimal blast disease damage.
Conversations with farmers about the testing and evaluation of evolutionary population trials for beans revealed that the Kalo Male (local landrace) was highly favored, followed by mixtures of landraces, improved varieties, and breeding lines. Black-colored pod grains were preferred by farmers, while a combination of black and red-colored bean grains was ranked as intermediate in terms of pricing compared to pure stand black and red varieties. White spots within black-colored beans, specifically in the Kalo Male variety, were highly preferred and ranked as the number one choice compared to pure stand varieties. However, buyers placed higher priority on graded (similar in size) seeds compared to non-graded mixtures, reflecting market demand and the need for a more supportive policy framework for mixed varieties.
The findings from the Focus Group Discussions (FGD) in Jumla regarding rice and beans underscored the increasing interest of farmers in evolutionary populations. Nevertheless, the policy framework stands as a significant obstacle. Similarly, in the FGD conducted in Lamjung, a parallel trend was observed, where farmers are increasingly drawn to evolutionary populations. However, it's important to note that the materials used in evolutionary populations in Lamjung are entirely distinct from those in Jumla. Despite being on a small scale, farmers in Lamjung are keen on cultivating and maintaining these varieties at the community level.
Farmers in Lamjung shared their experiences, noting that mixtures of rice not only taste better but also exhibit improved cooking quality and a more enticing aroma compared to the pure Khumal 4 variety. Gaure, a local variety, is highly favored by farmers, but some selection lines from evolutionary populations are even superior when compared to local and improved check varieties. Interestingly, there is a noticeable difference in preferences between male and female farmers. Female farmers emphasize eating and cooking quality, while male farmers prioritize yield. However, both groups agree that mixtures offer a balanced combination of these traits when compared to existing pure stand varieties.
The FGD in Lamjung revealed that inter- and intra-varietal diversity not only enriches diversity but also provides farmers with preferred varieties at the field level. These diversities enhance eating and cooking quality, resulting in a growing demand for these varieties in the local market. It was also observed that cultivar mixtures prove effective in low-input and marginal environments. Farmers reported that cultivar mixtures are equally effective in resource-managed and fragile environments.
Despite the increasing interest among farmers, policy provisions have been identified as a hindrance to the promotion of these varieties. The FGDs in both Jumla and Lamjung revealed that evolutionary populations and varietal mixtures are not readily accessible in the market due to insufficient policies and guidelines for their registration and marketing.
Experts, researchers, and officials reflections on cultivar mixtures and EP
The introduction of Evolutionary Population Breeding (EPB) was met with enthusiasm and satisfaction among all participants. They expressed their contentment with the concept and were eager to learn about the promising results of cultivar mixtures. Some experts recommended the establishment of EP in all research stations, primarily because these stations accumulate a substantial number of breeding lines, segregating lines, and various landraces each year, which are often discarded. These resources could be effectively utilized in EPs.
A significant concern raised was the challenge of maintaining varietal purity, identification, conducting field inspections, and managing different classes of seeds within EPs. These are essential aspects to ensure the integrity of the breeding program. Additional concerns were voiced regarding the practicality of harvesting EP crops by machine, as this can be a complex task, raising questions about efficiency and cost-effectiveness.
Experts acknowledged the potential misconception by consumers and observers who might perceive EPs and cultivar mixtures as impure or less desirable. The perception of impurity could affect the marketability and acceptance of such crops. However, experts also highlighted the critical importance of genetic diversity and variation in the context of climate change and for promoting balanced nutrition. These traits can enhance the resilience of crops in changing environmental conditions and offer more diverse and nutritious food options.
The outcomes-sharing workshop for Evolutionary Population Breeding (EPB) served as an enlightening platform for the exchange of experiences related to evolutionary populations and varietal mixtures among high-level stakeholders in Gandaki province. The workshop was attended by 28 participants, consisting of 25 males and 3 females. These participants represented various sectors, including research, development, and academia. Key organizations such as AKC, Seed Lab, MOAEWR/Gandaki province, Bioversity International, NARC/Gene Bank, DoAR/Lumle, AFU, Soil Lab, and even a private sector partner, Annapaat Agro Pvt. Ltd., were present.
One pressing issue is the urgent need for registering these populations, either as a technology or by registering their component lines as distinct varieties within the national system. The existing seed regulations and guidelines lack provisions to accommodate the full range of inter and intra-varietal diversity found in mixtures and evolutionary populations. Thus, it is essential to establish legal provisions for registering these varieties in the national system and outlining a package of practices (PoP) to encourage farmers to cultivate them.
To further this cause, sensitization and awareness-raising activities should be conducted at the local and provincial levels to emphasize the significance of inter and intra-varietal diversity in field-level agriculture (Table 1). Additionally, a range of promotional and capacity-building initiatives must be undertaken to motivate farmers to adopt these diverse populations. At the governmental level, local, provincial, and federal authorities should integrate varietal mixtures and evolutionary populations into their programs and plans. This will ensure that grassroots farmers and communities have access to high-quality seeds of these varieties at the local level, thereby promoting their widespread adoption.
Table 1
The key suggestions generated by groups in Pokhara, Kaski on mainstreaming Landraces, EPs and varietal mixtures
Constraints and Challenges | Suggested potential interventions and actions |
Group 1 | |
• Less focused program on government policy • Lack of coordination • Lack of documentation of EP and mixture • Lack of agronomic practice • Lack of awareness and knowhow • Lack of incentives and subsidy • No mechanism of EP and mixture registration • Patent right issue | • Implementation budget and programs in NARC and Government sectors • Coordination among related stakeholders • Conduct research, trials, survey, and Focus Group Discussion (FGD) • Package of practices guideline required • Build awareness program for dissemination • Incentives required for landraces and EP • Provision of flexible norms in seed act • Access to benefit sharing for the farmers |
Group 2 |
• Market uncertainty • No subsidy and insurance aligned with EPB • No support in existing formal seed system • Knowledge gap as this is new evolving science (less database) • Lack of compatible policy • Lack of research support • Reluctant farmers • Existing government programs | • Develop alternate pathways for seed system • Awareness program among different level of stakeholders • Policy reform • Suitable research policy • Program review during planning and execution in actions • Market assurance |
Group 3 |
• Lack of landrace identification and database management system • Compatibility issue in mixture and EP • No characterization of varieties • Lack of research • Lack of study on nutritional value • Farmers resistance to adopt • Registration and certification Issue • Lack of priority in government sector • New topic to policy makers and technicians | • Conformity of technology required • Incorporate into the research system • Training, awareness, extension required • Legal provision required • Incentives, subsidy and support required • Alignment in Government Priority (program and budget) |
Key policies and provisions
Key policies and provisions related to cultivar management in Nepal reflect both opportunities and challenges in the agricultural sector. While there are established policies detailed in Table 2, a significant focus within these policies is on increasing productivity, a common goal shared by many stakeholders. However, one noticeable gap is the lack of discussions regarding the specific approaches required to achieve the goal of increasing total production. This omission represents an area that policymakers and stakeholders need to address to create a more holistic and effective policy framework.
Interestingly, there is a prevailing perception among educated individuals that the key to achieving higher agricultural yields lies in the adoption of uniform, high-yielding crop varieties. This perception, while not without merit, tends to overshadow the importance of multiple traits in crop varieties, which can contribute significantly to the agricultural diversity and resilience needed to meet the challenges of a changing climate. Research policies and guidelines are another area that warrants attention. Many research stations routinely test exotic genotypes, highlighting the need for a more comprehensive research framework that incorporates both modern and traditional varieties to maximize the potential for diverse crop cultivation.
A critical issue facing Nepal's agricultural research and development policies is the primary emphasis on promoting modern crop varieties with narrow genetic bases. This focus does not adequately consider the consequences on the genetic diversity of on-farm crops, potentially limiting the resilience and adaptability of agriculture in the face of evolving challenges. Additionally, there is a persistent philosophy that "economic benefits can be derived only from the promotion of modern varieties and technologies." This guiding philosophy has been instrumental in policy formulation, but it may need reevaluation to ensure a more balanced approach to agricultural development.
Furthermore, seed policies primarily concentrate on distinct, uniform, and stable (DUS) criteria for seed multiplication, certification, and quality control. This emphasis on improved uniform varieties can inadvertently discourage farmers from cultivating diverse, resilient, and nutrient-dense crop varieties that contribute significantly to nutritious diets. Finally, the current seed regulation system in Nepal, as depicted in Fig. 1, largely overlooks diversity-related aspects, leading to the loss of many valuable genetic variations that could be vital for the future of agriculture in the country.
In light of these observations, it becomes evident that Nepal's policies and provisions in cultivar management and research on varietal development would benefit from a more comprehensive and diversified approach. This approach should better address the needs of the agricultural sector, foster agricultural diversity, and enhance food security in a changing world.
Table 2
Key policy provisions governing seed sector in Nepal
Policy | Provision |
Agriculture Development Strategy (ADS) 2015 | • Encourage the utilization of local genetic assets • Formulate guidelines for genetically modified organisms (GMOs) • Foster community-based seed cultivation • Conduct research on climate-resilient varieties • Reallocate investment in public research towards biosafety, climate change mitigation, environmental conservation, and biodiversity preservation • Concentrate efforts on a limited number of significant crop species • Promote widespread adoption of consistent and commercially viable varieties/populations • Concentrate efforts on a limited number of significant crop species |
Agrobiodiversity Policy 2007 (amendment 2014) | • Manage, conserve and sustainable use of agrobiodiversity and traditional knowledge • Protection of farmers and traditional knowledge • Arrangements for equitable sharing of benefits • Incentives for the conservation of native AGRs • Ex-situ, on-farm and in-situ conservation strategies |
National Agricultural Policy 2004 | • Concentrating on the commercialization and advancement of widely embraced, standardized, and enhanced varieties • Offering gene banks and biodiversity reserves • Advocating for on-site preservation and conservation |
National Seed Vision 2013–2025 | • Utilize indigenous landraces and their wild counterparts to create varieties resilient to climate changes and rich in nutrients • Enhance local seed security and support community-based conservation initiatives • Encourage the sharing of genetic material among national and international gene banks and community seed banks |
Seed Act 1988 (2nd amendment 2020) | • Encouraging and overseeing the quality and introduction of exotic seeds • Establishing ownership rights for indigenous varieties • Mandating the registration and approval of uniform and distinguishable varieties as prerequisites for their marketing and commercialization • Granting various categories of seeds and production rights to diverse stakeholders |
The formal system for disseminating crop varieties raises significant concerns, particularly related to its disregard for native landraces, cultivar mixtures, inter and intra-varietal diversity, and evolutionary populations. These vital components of agricultural diversity and resilience have been largely overlooked in the existing system. Table 2 provides key policy provisions, with the Seed Act offering four different formats for the registration and release of conditional varieties. Notably, there is a registration format for landraces, but it still emphasizes the need for uniformity. While efforts have been made to simplify the landrace registration format to make it more accessible to farmers, uniformity remains a dominant criterion. The consequences of the current registration system are depicted in Fig. 1, illustrating the need for a reevaluation of these policies.
An essential gap in the policy framework lies in the exclusion of farmer's varieties, which are not permitted for registration and marketing without formal registration. This prioritizes seeds over farmers' produce, despite the potential for farmers to maintain and produce their seeds. Farmers often face difficulties in accessing markets for their produce, highlighting the need for legal provisions related to farm products, not solely focusing on seed systems. In the past, the informal seed system played a crucial role without significant issues or concerns. However, over time, the seeds system, which was an integral part of farming, became detached from farmers. The formal seed system that has emerged subsequently places control in the hands of entities other than farmers, requiring farmers to pay to access the benefits of this system.
Moreover, the existing system has created barriers for farmer's varieties, mixtures, including Evolutionary Populations (EP), preventing their integration into the formal seed system. This exclusion presents a significant gap in promoting agricultural diversity and resilience.
Stakeholders and policy formulation mechanism
Stakeholders in agriculture share common objectives, focusing on boosting productivity for food security, nutrition, and financial gain (Table 3). However, there is a noticeable gap in discussions regarding the specific approaches required to achieve these goals. Surprisingly, none of the stakeholders have addressed the importance of intra-level diversity in cultivars within their policy considerations. To bridge this gap, interventions have been outlined and organized in Table 4 for three distinct types of varieties, including improved, landrace, and evolutionary populations. These interventions aim to provide a strategic framework for stakeholders to enhance agricultural productivity and sustainability.
Table 3
Stakeholders, their goals and policy criteria
Stakeholders | Goal | Criterion 1 | Criterion 2 | Criterion 3 |
Policy makers and decision makers (MoALD, Ministry of Law, SQCC, NARC, CDABCC) | Increase productivity through development of technology | Yield per hectare | Cost | Benefit |
Agri-extension (Agriculture Knowledge Centre, NGOs, DoA) | Provide access to technology options to farmers | Simple and easily available | High market demand | Profitable |
Researchers and academicians | Research funding and capacity enhancement Technology generation | New and evolving concept | Fund availability | Benefit |
Agri business firms | Profit making | High benefit cost ratio | High demand | Dependency |
Farmers | Food and nutrition security, income generation | Resilient agriculture technologies | Low inputs | Accessible and simple |
Table 4
Potential policy interventions and analysis
Policy goal | Generic tools | Strength of tool | Weakness of tool |
Promote improved variety adoption | • Subsidy • Capacity building (education, training) | • Reduce cost • Confidence build-up | • Costly to government • Time and cost |
Promote agrobiodiversity on-farm (landraces) | • Capacity buildings (education, training) • Inducements (awards, incentives) • System changing (market intervention for demand creation and benefitting farmers) | • Larger number of farmers involved • Recognition to key players • Dynamic genetic resources conserved and promoted | • Poor market demand • Require different concept and techniques • Low production |
Promote agrobiodiversity on-farm (evolutionary populations) | • Capacity buildings (education, training) • Inducements • (awards/recognition, incentives) • System changing (market intervention for demand creation) | • Larger number of farmers involved • Recognition to key players • Long-term impact • Farmers can maintain seeds themselves | • Require different concept and techniques • Inadvertent consequences • Difficult to maintain purity |
Policy exercise around the world for EP and cultivar mixture
Globally, the formal research and promotion of Evolutionary Populations (EPs) in agriculture are primarily led by national agricultural research systems. Jordan, for instance, has undertaken efforts in EPs for wheat and barley, while Iran has focused on barley, wheat, and rice. Recently, positive initiatives have emerged in Ethiopia for Durum wheat and barley, and in Uganda for the Common Bean. However, policies addressing EPs on a global scale remain limited.
Existing literature highlights the scarcity of comprehensive EP policies worldwide. Notably, some policies, such as the European Union's organic guidelines, particularly Regulation 2018/848, align with the principles of evolutionary plant breeding and the promotion of inter and intra-varietal diversity. These principles are aimed at developing plant varieties that are finely attuned to local growing conditions and resilient in the face of environmental challenges.
Article 17 of the European Union's regulation emphasizes the use of varieties and breeding lines suitable for organic production, including traditional and locally adapted varieties. Furthermore, the EU's seed legislation recognizes the significance of maintaining intravarietal diversity in crop species, permitting the registration and marketing of traditional varieties. Similarly, the United States Department of Agriculture's National Organic Program and Canada's Organic Products Regulations acknowledge the importance of traditional seed systems and actively support the use of locally adapted plant varieties. These policy initiatives reflect a growing awareness of the benefits of EPs and cultivar mixtures in building resilient and sustainable agricultural systems.
Gaps and challenges
One significant challenge in Nepal's current policy landscape is the bias toward uniform varieties in seed regulation. The existing regulations allow only uniform varieties or landraces to be registered or released, posing a dilemma as many landraces exhibit inherent polymorphism, making them ineligible for standard variety registration (Joshi et al. 2018). To overcome this gap, there is a pressing need to establish a regulatory framework that accommodates crop populations with broad genetic bases, including polymorphic landraces, cultivar mixture and evolutionary plant populations. Revisions to the regulation are imperative to embrace the variation of each trait at the population level, simplifying the process for registering and releasing such populations. A straightforward solution could involve integrating provisions that ensure an equal proportion of each variant within a population, making it easier to manage, cultivate, and distribute these valuable genetic resources.
Another challenge stems from the predominant focus on average yield of each variety in research and policy frameworks. The current approach favors crop varieties with minimal standard deviation in yields across various sites and locations, inadvertently discouraging the inclusion of highly variable varieties. To foster the development of more resilient and dynamic crop varieties capable of adapting to evolving environmental challenges, it is vital to encourage varieties with higher minimum, maximum, and standard deviation values within the population. These variations can enhance the crops' ability to adapt to changing environmental conditions, mitigating the risks associated with environmental shocks. It's essential to acknowledge that seeds are often produced in regions separate from primary grain production areas, which further underscores the importance of accounting for environmental variability, and this pose the environmental shock to varieties.
Despite the critical role heterogeneous farmers' varieties play in Nepal's agricultural landscape, there is a glaring gap in policy focus and support for these diverse genetic resources. Farmers' local varieties meet a substantial proportion of the seed requirements for both major food crops (over 80%) and indigenous crops (over 90%) in Nepal, but policies and incentives, such as subsidies for seeds, inputs, and market support, are largely lacking for traditional heterogeneous varieties (Gauchan et al. 2018). This oversight has resulted in the inadequate protection and the absence of legal pathways for the commercialization of these valuable traditional crops. To address this gap, policymakers must prioritize farmers' rights and promote the conservation and use of heterogeneous varieties. Creating the necessary support mechanisms for their sustainable cultivation and commercialization is crucial to ensuring the preservation and utilization of these valuable genetic resources.
Alternative policy options and recommendations
Establish an enabling environment through comprehensive policies, program activities, and practices that prioritize and enhance heterogeneous populations, varieties, landraces, cultivar mixtures, and evolutionary populations within the production environment and market. This should include support for traditional and diverse farming systems.
Recognize the significance of evolutionary populations and cultivar mixtures including landraces in building resilient agroecosystems and conserving agrobiodiversity. Develop detailed guidelines for the maintenance, production, registration, and handling of mixtures and evolutionary populations, ensuring their sustainable management.
Promote nutritionally dense production systems by acknowledging the inherent nutritional balance of native crop landraces. Widespread initiatives and activities that support landraces should be implemented to improve the overall nutritional quality of crops.
Simplify the crop variety registration system to make room for the registration of mixtures and evolutionary populations. Remove unnecessary barriers that hinder the inclusion of these diverse populations in the formal system.
Provide incentives and awards to encourage the production and marketing of mixtures and evolutionary populations. Recognizing and rewarding these sustainable practices can motivate farmers and stakeholders to actively engage in promoting crop diversity.
Integrate provisions within policy and legal frameworks that actively promote, register, and develop mixtures and evolutionary populations alongside site-specific cultivars. This inclusion reflects the importance of diverse genetic resources in agriculture.
Establish a system for documenting the benefits and production technologies associated with mixtures and evolutionary populations across various crops. This knowledge will aid in disseminating best practices and enhancing the adoption of diverse farming systems.
Revise the registration process for mixtures and evolutionary populations. Consider two possible provisions: either registering mixtures and evolutionary populations as distinct entities or registering each component separately while encouraging cultivation by combining these registered lines.
Standardize the proportion of each variant within mixtures and evolutionary populations. Clearly define the acceptable range of variation for each trait to ensure consistency and predictability in crop outcomes.
Develop an identification and recognition system for mixtures and evolutionary populations, facilitating their traceability and market differentiation. This system should empower consumers to make informed choices.
Recognize that landraces, cultivar mixtures, and evolutionary populations can thrive without formal registration. Encourage farmers to maintain their own seed stocks for planting and sharing, with neighbor. Focus on regulating only the end products that reach consumers to ensure quality and safety.
By implementing these alternative policy options and recommendations, we can foster agricultural diversity, improve resilience, and support the conservation of traditional farming practices and crop genetic resources. This holistic approach will contribute to more sustainable and nutritious agricultural systems in Nepal and beyond.