Crop improvement, adoption and impact of improved bean varieties in Sub Saharan Africa

The crop improvement research effort of the Consultative Group on International Agricultural Research (CGIAR) centers and their national agricultural research systems (NARS) partners has had a large impact on world food production. Although bean impact has been documented in a number of past studies, the last comprehensive study of the international crop improvement effort, organized by the Standing Panel for Impact Assessment (SPIA, formerly the Impact Assessment and Evaluation Group), was based on data collected a decade ago (Evenson and Gollin, 2003 based on 1997-98 data). Important changes have occurred in the funding and conduct of the international crop improvement effort and in the general climate for agriculture in the developing world since the completion of the Evenson and Gollin study.
The level and focus of funding for research in the NARS and in the CGIAR centers have fluctuated greatly, and the role of the private sector has evolved. Yet, the importance of the CGIAR/NARS crop improvement effort in feeding the world is arguably as important today as it has been at any time in history. The steady uptake and turnover of crop varieties is fundamental to realizing a Green Revolution in Africa, and it is still important for helping achieve income growth for numerous poor rural households. But our present understanding of improved variety adoption—by crop, by location, by adopter and by source—is limited in Africa.
The data seeks to redress this anomaly, by providing a versatile database on bean variety adoption by crop, by location, by adopter and by source in sub-saharan countries. The following countries are covered: Burundi, DRCongo, Ethiopia, Malawi, Mozambique, Rwanda, Tanzania, Uganda and Zambia.

Crop improvement, adoption and impact of improved bean varieties in Sub Saharan Africa

The crop improvement research effort of the Consultative Group on International Agricultural Research (CGIAR) centers and their national agricultural research systems (NARS) partners has had a large impact on world food production. Although bean impact has been documented in a number of past studies, the last comprehensive study of the international crop improvement effort, organized by the Standing Panel for Impact Assessment (SPIA, formerly the Impact Assessment and Evaluation Group), was based on data collected a decade ago (Evenson and Gollin, 2003 based on 1997-98 data). Important changes have occurred in the funding and conduct of the international crop improvement effort and in the general climate for agriculture in the developing world since the completion of the Evenson and Gollin study.
The level and focus of funding for research in the NARS and in the CGIAR centers have fluctuated greatly, and the role of the private sector has evolved. Yet, the importance of the CGIAR/NARS crop improvement effort in feeding the world is arguably as important today as it has been at any time in history. The steady uptake and turnover of crop varieties is fundamental to realizing a Green Revolution in Africa, and it is still important for helping achieve income growth for numerous poor rural households. But our present understanding of improved variety adoption—by crop, by location, by adopter and by source—is limited in Africa.
The data seeks to redress this anomaly, by providing a versatile database on bean variety adoption by crop, by location, by adopter and by source in sub-saharan countries. The following countries are covered: Burundi, DRCongo, Ethiopia, Malawi, Mozambique, Rwanda, Tanzania, Uganda and Zambia.

Reaching end users (REU) socioeconomic endline survey 2009, Mozambique

Between 2006 and 2009, HarvestPlus conducted the Reaching End Users (REU) project in Mozambique and Uganda. The objective of the project was to distribute the first biofortified crop with high micronutrient density, provitamin A-rich orange-fleshed sweet potato (OFSP). HarvestPlus selected regions of Uganda and Mozambique for this initiative because in these areas of each country white- or yellow-fleshed sweet potato is either the staple crop (Uganda) or an important secondary source of starch (Mozambique). The project strategy involved conducting a coordinated three-pronged approach to encourage adoption and consumption of OFSP including: (i) vine distribution and agricultural extension (seed systems), (ii) demand creation through nutrition trainings; and (iii) trainings in marketing and product development. HarvestPlus planned to reach over 10,000 farming household in each country, but also wanted to use this opportunity to learn about how the impact and cost-effectiveness of integrated dissemination strategies of differing intensity. The data were used for a rigorous impact evaluation and cost-effectiveness study of the REU OFSP project conducted from 2006-2009 in Mozambique, and the 2012 data were collected to understand how adoption and dietary intakes had evolved.

HarvestPlus collaborated with the International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI) and the International Potato Center (CIP) to design and implement a randomized-controlled evaluation during the implementation of the REU project in each country. The point of intervention for the REU project included local farmer groups in Uganda and more loosely organized community or church-based groups in Mozambique. Before the intervention, these groups were sampled for the evaluation study and group members with young children were randomly selected for the evaluation household sample. Baseline surveys were conducted in the sampled church groups in Mozambique in 2006. The baseline included a detailed socioeconomic and agricultural survey as well as a nutrition and dietary intake survey. The dietary intake survey included 24-hour dietary recall interviews to measure intakes of vitamin A and other nutrients of target groups of young children and women in the sample. As a basis for identifying impact through the evaluation, sampled farmer groups or church groups were randomly assigned into one of three intervention arms: the intensive 2-3 year intervention (Model 1), a less intensive intervention with reduced activity after the first year (Model 2) and a Control group. In 2009, endline surveys were conducted in Mozambique, and in 2012, the communities were visited a third time, three years after the intervention had left.

Characterization of Maize Producing Households in Drought Prone Regions of Eastern Africa

Agriculture in eastern Africa is predominantly rainfed and maize is a major food crop, primarily produced for home consumption and the market by small-scale family farms. The study characterized farm households in the drought prone maize growing areas of eastern Africa synthesizing data from parallel household surveys in Ethiopia, Kenya, Uganda and Tanzania. The study provides a comparative analysis of the farm households’ assets, livelihood strategies and crop management practices, with an emphasis on maize and maize seed. This illustrates how farmers in a similar agro-ecological environment but with different socio-economic and institutional settings have variously adapted to living with drought and how the inherent weather risk co-determines the livelihood portfolio, agricultural intensification incentives and system development pathways. The study thereby illustrates the challenges for agricultural intensification in such drought prone environments and the scope for drought tolerant maize varieties and explores the research and development implications.

Uganda−Policies for Improved Land Management Dataset, 1999-2001

This survey was conducted during the “Policies for Improved Land Management Project in Uganda, 1999-2003.” The long term objective of the project was to contribute to improved land management in Uganda, in order to increase agricultural productivity, reduce poverty and ensure sustainable use of natural resources, with an immediate purpose of helping policy makers identify and assess policy, institutional and technological strategies to improve land management.

The questionnaires were administered to 107 communities, the lowest administrative units in Uganda called Local Council 1 or LC1. The study region covered most of Uganda, including more densely populated and more secure areas in the southwest, central, eastern and parts of the north, representing seven of the nine major farming systems of the country. Within the study region, communities were selected using a stratified random sample, with the stratification based on population density and development domains defined by the different agro-ecological and market access zones. One hundred villages were selected in this way. Additional communities were purposely selected in southwest Uganda, where the African Highlands Initiative is conducting research, and in Iganga district, where the International Center for Tropical Agriculture (CIAT) is conducting research.

Topics covered in the LC1 survey included community concerns and priorities, establishment and change of local council boundaries, population change, use of local council revenue, infrastructure and services, programs and organizations, land rights, and collective resource management.

Usually, each LC1 had one village, i.e. a cluster of households living in the neighborhood. In the case where the LC1 had more than one village, a village was randomly selected for the village level survey. Topics in the village survey included livelihood strategies, land use, land tenure and land markets, labor, wage rates and credit, crop production, commercialization and management, livestock management and commercialization, tree product and commercialization. In both the LC1 and village surveys, interviews were conducted with a group of representative people from each selected community.

Baseline evaluation of the impact of e-verification on counterfeit agricultural inputs and technology adoption in Uganda

In Uganda, use of high-quality agricultural inputs like hybrid seed, agrochemicals, and fertilizer is extremely low. This depresses farm incomes and contributes to low agricultural productivity that continues to be hampered by poor agronomic practices, low quality germplasm, declining soil fertility, and losses due to pests, disease, and postharvest handling practices. Low levels of agricultural technology adoption have been compounded by a lack of farmer trust in the current inputs supply system, which has been plagues by counterfeiting. Counterfeit products range from benign fake or adulterated materials to banned substances that are harmful to crops and human health. Counterfeit agricultural inputs directly reduce productivity and, together with the perception of widespread counterfeiting, reduce demand for high-quality inputs. This lowers input prices and reduces profits for producers of genuine products, causing a form of “adverse selection” in which counterfeit products push high-quality genuine products out of the market.

In the face of this problem, United States Agency for International Development (USAID) through Feed the Future (FTF) initiative is supporting the development of a program for input quality assurance called e-verification (EV). E-verification involves labeling genuine agricultural inputs with a scratch-off label that provides an authentication code that can be used to confirm that the labeled product is genuine. Given the potential importance of this initiative, USAID is funding an independent impact evaluation of the effectiveness of the EV system at improving adoption of high-quality inputs and reducing the prevalence of counterfeiting. The impact evaluation will estimate the impact of the e-verification scheme on each of these outcomes and will examine how the e-verification project achieved it results.

To undertake the impact evaluation, IFPRI conducted a baseline survey of communities, shops, and households. This survey resulted in the dataset contained in this study. The team identified ten major maize growing regions, termed market hubs, which covered districts (and surroundings) of Hoima, Iganga, Kasese, Kiboga, Luwero, Masaka, Masindi, Mbale, Mityana, and Mubende. Within these market hubs, the study sampled 120 market locations (trading centres or collections of shops) from which households source agricultural inputs. Within each market location, a matched pair of two villages was sampled. The baseline survey was targeted towards ten households in each of the 240 villages (LC1s). The sample ultimately resulted in 2,378 households being surveyed. The study is designed to measure the impact of e-verification interventions on glyphosate herbicide, hybrid maize seed and inorganic fertilizer. Glyphosate herbicide is expected to be the first input released through the e-verification scheme.

Assessing the Potential of Farmer Field Schools (FFS) to Fight Poverty and Foster Innovation in East Africa

This is a unique primary household and community level survey data in Kenya, Tanzania, and Uganda. The study was started in 2008/2009 and the data collection took place in selected districts in Kenya, Tanzania, and Uganda. The project’s goal was to provide strong evidence to policy makers and other stakeholders in development on the effectiveness of Farmer Field Schools (FFS) in fighting poverty and fostering innovation. The specific objectives of the field data collection were to characterize farm households in terms of poverty and well-being, members-and non- FFS members, on the basis of socio-economic parameters; analyze farmers’ access to agricultural services (markets, credit and extension); and assess household’s level of individual and collective empowerment.

Baseline evaluation of the impact of e-verification on counterfeit agricultural inputs and technology adoption in Uganda: Community survey

In Uganda, use of high-quality agricultural inputs like hybrid seed, agrochemicals, and fertilizer is extremely low. This depresses farm incomes and contributes to low agricultural productivity that continues to be hampered by poor agronomic practices, low quality germplasm, declining soil fertility, and losses due to pests, disease, and postharvest handling practices. Low levels of agricultural technology adoption have been compounded by a lack of farmer trust in the current inputs supply system, which has been plagues by counterfeiting. Counterfeit products range from benign fake or adulterated materials to banned substances that are harmful to crops and human health. Counterfeit agricultural inputs directly reduce productivity and, together with the perception of widespread counterfeiting, reduce demand for high-quality inputs. This lowers input prices and reduces profits for producers of genuine products, causing a form of “adverse selection” in which counterfeit products push high-quality genuine products out of the market.

In the face of this problem, United States Agency for International Development (USAID) through Feed the Future (FTF) initiative is supporting the development of a program for input quality assurance called e-verification (EV). E-verification involves labeling genuine agricultural inputs with a scratch-off label that provides an authentication code that can be used to confirm that the labeled product is genuine. Given the potential importance of this initiative, USAID is funding an independent impact evaluation of the effectiveness of the EV system at improving adoption of high-quality inputs and reducing the prevalence of counterfeiting. The impact evaluation will estimate the impact of the e-verification scheme on each of these outcomes and will examine how the e-verification project achieved it results.

To undertake the impact evaluation, IFPRI conducted a baseline survey of communities, shops, and households. This survey resulted in the dataset contained in this study. The team identified ten major maize growing regions, termed market hubs, which covered districts (and surroundings) of Hoima, Iganga, Kasese, Kiboga, Luwero, Masaka, Masindi, Mbale, Mityana, and Mubende. Within these market hubs, the study sampled 120 market locations (trading centres or collections of shops) from which households source agricultural inputs. Within each market location, a matched pair of two villages was sampled. The baseline survey was targeted towards ten households in each of the 240 villages (LC1s). The sample ultimately resulted in 2,378 households being surveyed. The study is designed to measure the impact of e-verification interventions on glyphosate herbicide, hybrid maize seed and inorganic fertilizer. Glyphosate herbicide is expected to be the first input released through the e-verification scheme.


Baseline evaluation of the impact of e-verification on counterfeit agricultural inputs and technology adoption in Uganda: Household survey

In Uganda, use of high-quality agricultural inputs like hybrid seed, agrochemicals, and fertilizer is extremely low. This depresses farm incomes and contributes to low agricultural productivity that continues to be hampered by poor agronomic practices, low quality germplasm, declining soil fertility, and losses due to pests, disease, and postharvest handling practices. Low levels of agricultural technology adoption have been compounded by a lack of farmer trust in the current inputs supply system, which has been plagues by counterfeiting. Counterfeit products range from benign fake or adulterated materials to banned substances that are harmful to crops and human health. Counterfeit agricultural inputs directly reduce productivity and, together with the perception of widespread counterfeiting, reduce demand for high-quality inputs. This lowers input prices and reduces profits for producers of genuine products, causing a form of “adverse selection” in which counterfeit products push high-quality genuine products out of the market.


In the face of this problem, United States Agency for International Development (USAID) through Feed the Future (FTF) initiative is supporting the development of a program for input quality assurance called e-verification (EV). E-verification involves labeling genuine agricultural inputs with a scratch-off label that provides an authentication code that can be used to confirm that the labeled product is genuine. Given the potential importance of this initiative, USAID is funding an independent impact evaluation of the effectiveness of the EV system at improving adoption of high-quality inputs and reducing the prevalence of counterfeiting. The impact evaluation will estimate the impact of the e-verification scheme on each of these outcomes and will examine how the e-verification project achieved it results.


To undertake the impact evaluation, IFPRI conducted a baseline survey of communities, shops, and households. This survey resulted in the dataset contained in this study. The team identified ten major maize growing regions, termed market hubs, which covered districts (and surroundings) of Hoima, Iganga, Kasese, Kiboga, Luwero, Masaka, Masindi, Mbale, Mityana, and Mubende. Within these market hubs, the study sampled 120 market locations (trading centres or collections of shops) from which households source agricultural inputs. Within each market location, a matched pair of two villages was sampled. The baseline survey was targeted towards ten households in each of the 240 villages (LC1s). The sample ultimately resulted in 2,378 households being surveyed. The study is designed to measure the impact of e-verification interventions on glyphosate herbicide, hybrid maize seed and inorganic fertilizer. Glyphosate herbicide is expected to be the first input released through the e-verification scheme.

Baseline evaluation of the impact of e-verification on counterfeit agricultural inputs and technology adoption in Uganda: Community listing exercise

In Uganda, use of high-quality agricultural inputs like hybrid seed, agrochemicals, and fertilizer is extremely low. This depresses farm incomes and contributes to low agricultural productivity that continues to be hampered by poor agronomic practices, low quality germplasm, declining soil fertility, and losses due to pests, disease, and postharvest handling practices. Low levels of agricultural technology adoption have been compounded by a lack of farmer trust in the current inputs supply system, which has been plagued by counterfeiting. Counterfeit products range from benign fake or adulterated materials to banned substances that are harmful to crops and human health. Counterfeit agricultural inputs directly reduce productivity and, together with the perception of widespread counterfeiting, reduce demand for high-quality inputs. This lowers input prices and reduces profits for producers of genuine products, causing a form of “adverse selection” in which counterfeit products push high-quality genuine products out of the market.


In the face of this problem, United States Agency for International Development (USAID) through the Feed the Future (FTF) initiative is supporting the development of a program for input quality assurance called e-verification (EV). E-verification involves labeling genuine agricultural inputs with a scratch-off label that provides an authentication code that can be used to confirm that the labeled product is genuine. Given the potential importance of this initiative, USAID is funding an independent impact evaluation of the effectiveness of the EV system at improving adoption of high-quality inputs and reducing the prevalence of counterfeiting. The impact evaluation will estimate the impact of the e-verification scheme on each of these outcomes and will examine how the e-verification project achieved its results.


To undertake the impact evaluation, IFPRI conducted a baseline survey of communities, shops, and households. This survey resulted in the dataset contained in this study. The team identified ten major maize growing regions, termed market hubs, which covered districts (and surroundings) of Hoima, Iganga, Kasese, Kiboga, Luwero, Masaka, Masindi, Mbale, Mityana, and Mubende. Within these market hubs, the study sampled 120 market locations (trading centres or collections of shops) from which households source agricultural inputs. Within each market location, a matched pair of two villages was sampled. The baseline survey was targeted towards ten households in each of the 240 villages (LC1s). The sample ultimately resulted in 2,378 households being surveyed. The study is designed to measure the impact of e-verification interventions on glyphosate herbicide, hybrid maize seed and inorganic fertilizer. Glyphosate herbicide is expected to be the first input released through the e-verification scheme.