BACKGROUND: This paper documents farmer perceptions and management practices for fall armyworm (Spodoptera frugiderda J.E. Smith), providing a baseline for the development of sustainable pest management strategies.RESULTS: 91% of farmers correctly identified fall armyworm, and reported it as the most important maize pest during 2016/2017 cropping season, affecting nearly half of cultivated area. Estimated maize yield loss during the season, attributed to fall armyworm was 28%. A majority of farmers (60%) used pesticides for fall armyworm control, along with other cultural/physical practices – hand picking and crushing egg masses/caterpillars (36%), and application of ash/sand in the funnel (19%). Farmers used various pesticide active ingredients, and protective measures were inadequate; >50% of farmers did not use any protective measures while spraying. Significantly more male than female farmers used pesticides (P = 0.05), and the reverse was true for cultural practices. Significant maize yield differences (P = 0.001) were observed by gender, attributed to differences in utilization of production inputs/practices. At least 77% of farmers received and shared agricultural advice, which can be optimized to spread information on fall armyworm management options.CONCLUSION: Increased use of pesticides to manage fall armyworm poses health and environmental risks, besides the high cost for farmers and governments. Research into cultural and indigenous practices used by farmers will offer opportunities for alternative and sustainable management practices. Research efforts should pay attention to gender differences in access to resources and inputs. Tackling fall armyworm at the farm level, and averting yield losses will require integrated messaging addressing other production risks. © 2019 The Authors. Pest Management Science published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of Society of Chemical Industry.

Fall armyworm (FAW) is a new invasive pest that is causing devastating effects on maize production and threatening the livelihoods of millions of poor smallholders across sub-Saharan Africa and Asia. Using unique survey data from 2356 maize-growing households in Ghana, Rwanda, Uganda, Zambia and Zimbabwe, we examined how smallholder farmers are fighting this voracious pest. In particular, we assessed the FAW management strategies used by smallholders, socio-economic factors driving the choice of the management options, the complementarities or tradeoffs among the management options, and the (un)safe pesticide use practices of farmers. Results showed that smallholder farm households have adopted a variety of cultural, physical, chemical and local options to mitigate the effects of FAW, but the use of synthetic pesticides remains the most popular option. Results from multivariate probit regressions indicated that the extensive use of synthetic pesticides is driven by household asset wealth, and access to subsidised farm inputs and extension information. We observed that farm households are using a wide range of pesticides, including highly hazardous and banned products. Unfortunately, a majority of the households do not use personal protective equipment while handling the pesticides, resulting in reports of acute pesticide-related illness. Our findings have important implications for policies and interventions aimed at promoting environmentally friendly and sustainable ways of managing invasive pests in smallholder farming systems.

Background: Although Kenya has a relatively high number of registered biopesticide products, little is known about biopesticide use by smallholders. This paper documents farmers' current use and perception of chemical pesticides and biopesticides, their willingness to pay for biopesticides, and the key challenges to biopesticide uptake. Results: A survey found that chemical pesticides are used widely by smallholders despite awareness of the risks to human health and the environment. Almost half of respondents showed awareness of biopesticides, but current use in the survey localities was low (10%). Key reasons for the low use of biopesticides by smallholders in this study are: perceptions of effectiveness, primarily speed of action and spectrum of activity, availability and affordability. Smallholders who used biopesticides cited effectiveness, recommendation by advisory services and perception of safety as key reasons for their choice. Although farmers viewed both pesticides and biopesticides as costly, they invested in the former due to their perceived effectiveness. Average willingness to pay, above current chemical pesticide expenditures per cropping season was 9.6% (US$5.7). Willingness to pay differed significantly between counties, and was higher among farmers with more education or greater awareness of the health risks associated with pesticide use. Conclusion: This study confirms the low use of biopesticide products in the survey areas, alongside high use of conventional chemical pesticides. In order to promote greater uptake of biopesticides, addressing farmers' awareness and their perceptions of effectiveness is important, as well as increasing the knowledge of those providing advice and ensuring registered products are available locally at competitive prices. © 2020 The Authors. Pest Management Science published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of Society of Chemical Industry.

We assessed barriers and opportunities for youth engagement in agribusiness. Results show that the majority of youth were engaged in agricultural production, especially in Zambia, while in Vietnam, they engaged in more diversified agricultural activities including input supply, transportation and advisory services delivery. Perceptions regarding the agricultural sector showed significant (P < 0.01) negative impact on youth participation in agribusiness in Vietnam, but not in Zambia. Barriers to effective youth engagement were; lack of start-up capital, low profitability of enterprises, and personal aspirations. Employing innovative value chain financing and market linkages can enhance enterprise profitability and youth participation in agribusiness.

Background: Quality seed is at the core of the technological packages needed to increase crop production, nutrition, and rural wellbeing. However, smallholder farmers in Tanzania have limited access to affordable quality seeds, and over 90% of seed sown is saved by farmers from previous harvests, though its quality is often poor. The Good Seed Initiative (GSI) aimed to enhance access to quality African indigenous vegetable (AIV) seed in Tanzania, through the promotion of farmer seed production, using two models—contract farming and Quality Declared Seed (QDS). This study assessed post-GSI project sustainability factors and explored the prospects for replicating the approach in a wider regional context.Methods: The study was conducted in Arusha and Dodoma, targeting locations where the GSI project was implemented. Qualitative tools employing focus group discussions (73 men, 69 women), and key informant interviews were used for data collection.Results: Farmer seed production under both models continued to thrive, creating avenues for income diversification and contributing over 50% to household incomes. Farmer seed production contributed to increased availability of quality seed for vegetable growers, especially in central Tanzania that is less served by the formal sector. However, QDS production was challenged by a lack of access to foundation seed, inspections, and seed testing services, which are key for quality seed production.Conclusions: Results reveal unequivocally that farmer seed production offers a potentially sustainable solution to the problem of seed supply while providing income benefits for seed producers. The market-based approach used by the project and partnerships with the formal sector, coupled with stimulation of demand through nutritional awareness campaigns, were strong contributory factors to the survival of farmer seed production. Farmer-led seed systems, especially QDS, deserve support from the government to develop a tailored and appropriate seed system that meets the ever-evolving needs of smallholder farmers. Adoption gender-inclusive approaches, particularly in contract farming is paramount to benefit women as much as men.