How can pairing quantitative with qualitative data collection methods better elicit rice varietal selection? Evidence from Burundi
Participatory Varietal Selection (PVS) is the selection by stakeholders of varieties in advanced testing stages by plant breeding programs. With Burundi as a case example, this study incorporated qualitative Focus Group Discussions (FGDs) into the quantitative PVS structure so as to elicit deeper in...
| Autores principales: | , , , |
|---|---|
| Formato: | Journal Article |
| Lenguaje: | Inglés |
| Publicado: |
SAGE Publications
2023
|
| Materias: | |
| Acceso en línea: | https://hdl.handle.net/10568/136890 |
| _version_ | 1855537994239311872 |
|---|---|
| author | Ng'endo, Mary Nduwimana, Julien Villanueva, Donald Demont, Matty |
| author_browse | Demont, Matty Nduwimana, Julien Ng'endo, Mary Villanueva, Donald |
| author_facet | Ng'endo, Mary Nduwimana, Julien Villanueva, Donald Demont, Matty |
| author_sort | Ng'endo, Mary |
| collection | Repository of Agricultural Research Outputs (CGSpace) |
| description | Participatory Varietal Selection (PVS) is the selection by stakeholders of varieties in advanced testing stages by plant breeding
programs. With Burundi as a case example, this study incorporated qualitative Focus Group Discussions (FGDs) into the
quantitative PVS structure so as to elicit deeper insights into rice trait preferences and illuminate broader issues affecting rice
farmers. During two consecutive years, this study surveyed 174 participants across six stakeholder groups (administrators,
farmers, custom millers, researchers, seed producers, and traders) in three locations. There were statistically significant associations in rice trait preferences across locations, participating stakeholders, and genders, highlighting preference alignment.
Moreover, multiple traits were desired simultaneously, beyond productivity-related traits, and sometimes contradicting
researchers’ preferences, especially in rainfed systems. By moving beyond quantitative PVS preference scores as being the
only way of gathering trait preference data, this study has shown how the incorporation of qualitative FGDs into the PVS
structure can elicit deeper insights on trait preferences and illuminate broader issues affecting rice farmers, which when
solved can accelerate the momentum in widespread adoption of new rice varieties. |
| format | Journal Article |
| id | CGSpace136890 |
| institution | CGIAR Consortium |
| language | Inglés |
| publishDate | 2023 |
| publishDateRange | 2023 |
| publishDateSort | 2023 |
| publisher | SAGE Publications |
| publisherStr | SAGE Publications |
| record_format | dspace |
| spelling | CGSpace1368902025-12-08T10:11:39Z How can pairing quantitative with qualitative data collection methods better elicit rice varietal selection? Evidence from Burundi Ng'endo, Mary Nduwimana, Julien Villanueva, Donald Demont, Matty gender rainfed irrigation varietal screening methods selection rice data collection Participatory Varietal Selection (PVS) is the selection by stakeholders of varieties in advanced testing stages by plant breeding programs. With Burundi as a case example, this study incorporated qualitative Focus Group Discussions (FGDs) into the quantitative PVS structure so as to elicit deeper insights into rice trait preferences and illuminate broader issues affecting rice farmers. During two consecutive years, this study surveyed 174 participants across six stakeholder groups (administrators, farmers, custom millers, researchers, seed producers, and traders) in three locations. There were statistically significant associations in rice trait preferences across locations, participating stakeholders, and genders, highlighting preference alignment. Moreover, multiple traits were desired simultaneously, beyond productivity-related traits, and sometimes contradicting researchers’ preferences, especially in rainfed systems. By moving beyond quantitative PVS preference scores as being the only way of gathering trait preference data, this study has shown how the incorporation of qualitative FGDs into the PVS structure can elicit deeper insights on trait preferences and illuminate broader issues affecting rice farmers, which when solved can accelerate the momentum in widespread adoption of new rice varieties. 2023-10 2024-01-04T09:11:17Z 2024-01-04T09:11:17Z Journal Article https://hdl.handle.net/10568/136890 en Open Access application/pdf SAGE Publications Ng’endo, Mary, Julien Nduwimana, Donald Villanueva, and Matty Demont (2023). How can pairing quantitative with qualitative data collection methods better elicit rice varietal selection? Evidence from Burundi. SAGE Open 13, no. 4 (2023): 1-20. |
| spellingShingle | gender rainfed irrigation varietal screening methods selection rice data collection Ng'endo, Mary Nduwimana, Julien Villanueva, Donald Demont, Matty How can pairing quantitative with qualitative data collection methods better elicit rice varietal selection? Evidence from Burundi |
| title | How can pairing quantitative with qualitative data collection methods better elicit rice varietal selection? Evidence from Burundi |
| title_full | How can pairing quantitative with qualitative data collection methods better elicit rice varietal selection? Evidence from Burundi |
| title_fullStr | How can pairing quantitative with qualitative data collection methods better elicit rice varietal selection? Evidence from Burundi |
| title_full_unstemmed | How can pairing quantitative with qualitative data collection methods better elicit rice varietal selection? Evidence from Burundi |
| title_short | How can pairing quantitative with qualitative data collection methods better elicit rice varietal selection? Evidence from Burundi |
| title_sort | how can pairing quantitative with qualitative data collection methods better elicit rice varietal selection evidence from burundi |
| topic | gender rainfed irrigation varietal screening methods selection rice data collection |
| url | https://hdl.handle.net/10568/136890 |
| work_keys_str_mv | AT ngendomary howcanpairingquantitativewithqualitativedatacollectionmethodsbetterelicitricevarietalselectionevidencefromburundi AT nduwimanajulien howcanpairingquantitativewithqualitativedatacollectionmethodsbetterelicitricevarietalselectionevidencefromburundi AT villanuevadonald howcanpairingquantitativewithqualitativedatacollectionmethodsbetterelicitricevarietalselectionevidencefromburundi AT demontmatty howcanpairingquantitativewithqualitativedatacollectionmethodsbetterelicitricevarietalselectionevidencefromburundi |