INFORMAL AGROFORESTRY TREE SEED QUALITY AND SUPPLY SYSTEMS: A CASE OF PERI-URBAN NAIROBI, MERU AND WESTERN KENYA KIURA JONATHAN MURIUKI A THESIS SUBMITTED IN PARTIAL FULFILMENT FOR THE DEGREE OF MASTER OF ENVIRONMENTAL STUDIES (AGROFORESTRY AND RURAL DEVELOPMENT) OF KENYATTA UNIVERSITY JANUARY 2005
109
Embed
INFORMAL AGROFORESTRY TREE SEED QUALITY AND SUPPLY SYSTEMS: A
This document is posted to help you gain knowledge. Please leave a comment to let me know what you think about it! Share it to your friends and learn new things together.
Transcript
INFORMAL AGROFORESTRY TREE SEED QUALITY AND SUPPLY SYSTEMS: A CASE OF PERI-URBAN NAIROBI, MERU
AND WESTERN KENYA
KIURA JONATHAN MURIUKI
A THESIS SUBMITTED IN PARTIAL FULFILMENT FOR THE DEGREE OF MASTER OF ENVIRONMENTAL STUDIES (AGROFORESTRY AND RURAL
DEVELOPMENT) OF KENYATTA UNIVERSITY
JANUARY 2005
i
DECLARATION Candidate′s Declaration
The thesis is my original work and has not been presented for a degree in any other university or any other award
_________________________ ____________________
Jonathan Muriuki Kiura (N50/9017/2000) Date
Declaration by supervisors
This work has been submitted with our approval as supervisors
Chapter 1: Introduction ..............................................................................................1 1.1 Background of the study ....................................................................................1
1.2 Statement of the research problem.....................................................................2
1.3 Research questions.............................................................................................3
2.5 Gaps in literature..............................................................................................14
Chapter 3: Research methodology ...........................................................................16 3.1 Study area description......................................................................................16
3.2 The sampling design ........................................................................................19
3.3 Primary data collection ....................................................................................20
3.5 Determination of seedling vigour ....................................................................23
iv
3.6. Secondary data collection ...............................................................................24
3.7 Data analysis ....................................................................................................24
Chapter 4: Results and discussion............................................................................25
4.1 Background of respondents..............................................................................25
4.1.1 Gender proportions of the respondents .................................................. 25 4.1.2 Respondents’ age-groups ........................................................................26
4.1.3 Education levels of the respondents....................................................... 27 4.1.4 Seed dealers introduction into the seed vending business ..................... 28
4.2 Sources of seed used by nursery operators in peri-urban Nairobi, Meru and
Western Kenya.................................................................................................32
4.3 Seed sources comparisons by nursery operators..............................................37
4.4 Seed quality and handling by decentralised seed dealers ................................42
4.5 Seed storage by seed dealers and nursery operators in Meru, peri-urban
Nairobi and Western Kenya.............................................................................49
4.6. Laboratory tests for the quality of seeds procured from informal seed dealers
in Meru, peri-urban Nairobi and Western Kenya ............................................53
4.7 Perception of seed demand by the seed dealers and client relationship ..........57
4.8 Informal seed dealers’ constraints, associations and linkages .........................63
Chapter 5: Conclusion and recommendations ........................................................68 5.1 Conclusion .......................................................................................................68
Table 1: Gender proportions for nursery operators and informal seed dealers in selected parts of Kenya ..............................................................................25
Table 2: Age categories for nursery operators and informal seed dealers in selected parts of Kenya ..............................................................................27
Table 3: Education levels for nursery operators and informal seed dealers in selected parts of Kenya ..............................................................................28
Table 4: Duration of training attained and experience in handling of seeds by seed dealers in Meru, peri-urban Nairobi and western Kenya...................30
Table 5: Content of seed related training that seed dealers in Meru, Nairobi and Western Kenya had participated in .....................................................31
Table 6: Frequency of tree seed suppliers as mentioned by nursery operators in Meru, Nairobi and Western Kenya for the season between June and October 2002..............................................................................................32
Table 7: Efforts undertaken by nursery operators in Meru, Nairobi and Western Kenya to ascertain the quality of seeds procured.......................................34
Table 8: Problems observed with informal seed dealers by nursery operators in Meru, Nairobi and Western Kenya ............................................................35
Table 9: Factors considered by nursery operators in Meru, Nairobi and Western Kenya when deciding which seed dealers to purchase tree seeds from ..................................................................................................37
Table 10: Ranking of different seed suppliers by nursery operators in Meru, Nairobi and Western Kenya.......................................................................38
Table 11: Germination rates of seeds of different species procured by nursery operators in Meru, Nairobi and Western Kenya from different sources expressed as percentage of expected germination rates as given in literature .....................................................................................................41
Table 12: Seed access shortfalls by nursery operators in selected parts of Kenya ....42
Table 13: Factors considered by seed dealers in peri-Nairobi, Meru and Western Kenya as describing good quality tree seeds .............................................43
Table 14: The influence of training in agroforestry and experience in seed handling by seed dealers on the average number of mother trees harvested and their average separation distance in Meru, Nairobi and Western Kenya...........................................................................................44
Table 15: Correlations of average number of mother trees harvested by seed dealers and their separation distances with the seed dealers’ level of
vi
training, education and experience in Meru, Nairobi and Western Kenya .........................................................................................................46
Table 16: Criteria used by seed dealers in Meru, peri-urban Nairobi and Western Kenya to select mother trees for seed harvesting.......................................48
Table 17: Reasons given by seed dealers in Meru, peri-urban Nairobi and Western Kenya for the number of mother trees harvested from in seed collection............................................................................................49
Table 18: Containers used by nursery operators and seed dealers for seed storage in Meru, peri-urban Nairobi and Western Kenya..........................50
Table 19: Average seed storage period by seed dealers in Meru, peri-urban Nairobi and Western Kenya comparing training category and experience of the seed dealers....................................................................51
Table 20: Means of verification on the viability of stored seeds by nursery operators and seed dealers in Meru, peri-urban Nairobi and western Kenya .........................................................................................................52
Table 21: Seed test results for Eucalyptus saligna supplied by seed dealers of different training categories and levels of experience in seed handling from Meru, peri-urban Nairobi and Western Kenya..................................54
Table 22: Comparisons of purity levels and germination rates of seeds collected from different seed dealers in Meru, western Kenya and peri-urban Nairobi .......................................................................................................55
Table 23: Seedling heights of Eucalyptus saligna procured from Meru and Western Kenya seed dealers and Cupressus lusitanica procured from peri-urban Nairobi seed dealers after 60 days in the nursery.....................56
Table 24: Average clients turn-over and prices charged for seeds for four top dealt with tree species by seed dealers in Meru, peri-urban Nairobi and Western Kenya ....................................................................................60
Table 25: Information supplied with seed consignments to clients by the informal seed dealers in Meru, Western Kenya and peri-urban Nairobi..................63
Table 26: Interactions of informal seed dealers in Meru, Western Kenya and peri-urban Nairobi with the Seed Centre of the KEFRI ............................67
vii
List of Figures Page
Figure 1: Conceptual model for quality seed supply factors and outcomes ..................6
Figure 2: Map of Kenya showing the target study areas ............................................19
Figure 3: Reasons given by seed dealers in Meru, Nairobi and Western Kenya as to why they got into tree seed business ....................................................29
Figure 4: Agencies that had offered training to seed dealers in Meru, peri-urban Nairobi and western Kenya...........................................................................30
Figure 5: Seed collection methods used by seed dealers in Meru, peri-urban Nairobi and Western Kenya..........................................................................47
Figure 6: Species encountered by seed dealers as having highest seed demand .........58
Figure 7: Constraints identified by seed dealers in their business ...............................64
Figure 8: Suggested points of interaction between informal seed dealers in Meru, Western Kenya and peri-urban Nairobi ........................................................65
viii
List of abbreviations and acronyms AFRENA-ECA -Agroforestry Research Networks for Africa; East and Central Africa
ICRAF - International Centre for Research in Agroforestry
KENGO - Kenya Energy Non-Governmental Organisation
JICA - Japan International Co-operation Agency
NGO - Non-Governmental Organisation
CBO - Community Based Organisation
GTZ - Deutsche Gesellschaft für Technische Zusammenarbeit
HIV-AIDS - Human Immuno-deficient Virus that causes Acquired Human Immune
Deficiency Syndrome
ISTA - International Seed Testing Association
KWAP - Kenya Woodfuel and Agroforestry Programme
KEFRI - Kenya Forestry Research Institute
KFSC - Kenya Forest Seed Centre of KEFRI
ix
Definition of key concepts (Glossary)
Agroforestry is a collective name for land use systems and practices where woody
perennials are grown on the same land management unit as agricultural crops
and animals either in a spatial mixture or temporal sequence. There must be
significant ecological and economic interactions between the woody and non-
woody components.
Seed viability is the percentage of seeds in a seedlot, which germinate under the test
conditions, or the number of seeds that germinate per unit weight of the
seedlot.
Germination energy is a measure of the rapidity of germination, and can be
expressed as the percentage of the viable seeds in the sample, which
germinate within a given time, or as the number of days required for a given
percentage (for example 50 %) of the viable seeds to germinate.
Propagules are seedlings, cuttings or grafts or any parts of plants with the potential
for producing new individuals (Huxley and Houten, 1997).
Informal systems are systems that operate outside the spheres of central government
or organized (formal) private sector running and supply products and/or
services to the users alongside formal service systems.
Genepool is the total genetic information possessed by the reproductive members of a
population of sexually reproducing organisms.
Seedlot is a quantity of seeds having uniform quality produced at a specific location
and collected from a single crop.
Seed supply systems are systems that ensure that users are able to get the desired tree
seeds in order to establish successful agroforestry systems
Peri-urban Nairobi as used in this study refers to the city of Nairobi (in Kenya) and
the bordering administrative divisions namely Limuru, Ruiru, Athi River,
Kiambaa, Kikuyu and Ngong.
Meru as used in this study refers to Meru Central district in the Eastern Province of
Kenya and the neighbouring Muthaara division in Meru North district.
Western Kenya as used in this study refers to Vihiga district in the Western Province
of Kenya and part of the neighbouring Yala, Impala and Winam divisions in
Nyanza province.
x
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
I wish to thank the almighty God for the enablement and renewal of energy through the whole process from proposal development through data collection and to thesis write-up.
This work would not have been possible without the support of the Department for International Development of the British government (DfID) through the domestication of agroforestry trees project, ANAFE (African Network for Agroforestry Education) East and Central Africa both of who supported my research work and Rockeffeler Foundation (FORUM) who supported my studies in tuition fees. I am very grateful for their support. I also acknowledge the support of my supervisors; Dr James B. Kungu, Dr Daniel N. Mugendi and Dr. Tony Simons for their guidance in the whole process ensuring that it maintained science quality. Alongside them, the invaluable contributions of Mr. Jens Peter Barnekow Lillesø who ensured to read every draft in time and communicate very precious comments cannot be overlooked.
In ICRAF I wish to acknowledge other colleagues in the trees and markets theme that contributed in various ways, Lucy Mwaura, Gertrude Mundia and Carol Njau for the seed tests, Benson Mutua and Bernard Muia with the laboratory experiment, Alexious Mutua with data entry and Sammy Carsan with handling part of my office work when studies would not allow me, I greatly appreciate. This also extends to Steve Ruigu and John Were in ICRAF Maseno for their help in facilitating surveys and seed collection. Thanks go to Rita Mulinge and Dr. Kebadire Mogotsi for their efforts in facilitating disbursing of ANAFE funds in time and to Mr. Joseph Kanyonyo who facilitated my transport home when I had to inevitably miss the bus in order to clear the pile on my desk.
It was a hard time for Esther and Grace when I had to be away most of the times from what was then a very young family in order to study and I appreciate their patience and encouragement. I would not have made it without them. I also remember my classmates in Kenyatta University particularly Mercy, Kinyua and Mairula for helping me out in handling some course issues when I was tied up in office duties and other friends, colleagues and relatives who contributed in many ways to make sure that I could make it to the end. I can never thank you enough though it may be hard to mention each person by name. MAY GOD BLESS YOU ALL.
xi
ABSTRACT
The supply of germplasm in sufficient quantities and quality at the small-scale users
level is a limiting factor to agroforestry development. While the past trend has been to
put more emphasis on central supply systems such as national tree seed centres and
government nurseries, policies are now being adopted to encourage decentralized
supply of seeds, seedlings or vegetative propagules. This study was therefore carried
out to investigate the mechanisms of supply and quality of the seeds supplied by the
informal supply systems, the species and amounts supplied by these systems in
selected parts of Kenya. The study focused on the seed supply systems in Nairobi,
Central (Meru district) and Western Kenya (Vihiga district). The selected districts
were representative of the regions and though nurseries were based in the districts,
seed suppliers from neighbouring districts were considered. The study involved a
survey of the nursery operators and seed dealers in the districts and seed tests and
nursery experiments at ICRAF to compare seed quality and early seedling vigour.
The seed tests at the laboratory followed the International Seed Testing Association
(ISTA) rules on seed testing while the nursery experiment was on a completely
randomised design to analyse seed quality and seedling vigour issues.
Results revealed that informal suppliers were supplying more seeds at the farm level
than formal systems with many seed dealers having joined the business after working
with the formal sector. They however, mainly supplied seeds of orthodox exotic
species that were easy to handle (collect, process and store). Many nursery operators
considered physiological quality factors in their choice of tree seeds and thus the seed
dealers’ seeds were of similar physiological quality (purity and germination potential)
as the seeds from the formal sector. This was also confirmed by the results of seed
xii
tests in the laboratory and seedling heights in the nursery experiment. These results
were found to agree with others observed with supply of agricultural crops in
different parts of the world. The genetic quality of the informally supplied seeds was
found to be low as revealed by a low number of closely spaced mother trees the seeds
were harvested from. Results were similar even for seed dealers who had undergone
some training or had some level of experience in seed handling. The linkages between
seed dealers and the formal sector represented by the Kenya Forest Seed Centre were
found to be low and limiting their operations. Thus the seed dealers were not able to
meet existing tree seed demand that they also had observed to be increasing. The
study recommends the recognition of the informal tree seed suppliers since they
contribute positively to agroforestry development by the formal sector. The formal
sector should devolve the supply of the seeds of majority species to the seed dealers
and only work to ensure that information on genetic quality issues is available to all
actors so that seed quality is maintained. The study also recommends that the seed
dealers form associations for closer linkages between themselves and the formal
sector. The farmers who were found to be major recipients of the seeds from the
informal suppliers should also be made more aware of quality issues so as to raise the
quality premiums with the informal suppliers when procuring seeds.
1
CHAPTER ONE INTRODUCTION
1.1 Background of the study Trees and shrubs have significant contributions to climate amelioration, carbon
sequestration and other desirable environmental benefits. As the world changes in
respect to industrial capacity and other human activities that lead to reduced
environmental stability, the need for more trees can not be over-emphasized. The
trend however, has been the reduction of total tree cover in forests especially in the
tropics (Roper and Roberts, 1999). In Kenya alone, gazetted forest cover has reduced
from about 10% to less than 2% of the total land-size in the last three decades (Kenya
Land Alliance, 2002; Wass, 1999; Ngece, 2003). These forests also serve as water
catchment zones and their unabated conversion to agricultural land and other land
uses leads to reduced water flows in the river systems as well as siltation in water
reservoirs which reduces the amount of water available to the population as well as
other side effects such as reduced hydro-power generation. Reduced water catchment
also implies less agricultural productivity as about 70% of water consumption in
Kenya goes to agricultural activities (Mogaka et al., 2002).
A possible mitigating factor against these environmental threats is to take trees to
farms, which is the core mission of agroforestry, which simply can be defined as the
incorporation of woody perennials into farming systems, whether croplands or
pastures. The discipline involves technologies that play key roles in soil fertility
replenishment, provision of fodder as well as other tree products such as fruits,
fuelwood, timber and medicine. There are promising levels of adoption of
agroforestry systems and technologies in various regions, which are even expected to
2
increase as farmers become increasingly aware of the potential of agroforestry to
alleviate economical and ecological problems. This uptake results in increased
demand for woody perennials to be planted in farms, which then raises the demand
for suitable tree germplasm for both exotic and indigenous species in form of seeds or
seedlings by farming communities.
Farmers currently meet their seed or seedling demands in a variety of ways. The
sources of seed, seedlings or wildings are either from forests or other public lands,
central nurseries, neighbours or their own farms, amongst others. Less than half of the
trees on farms originate from seedlings retained on the site; the rest are planted on
purpose (Jaenicke, 2001; Lengkeek and Carsan, 2003). Some farmers produce
seedlings only for their own use while others produce for sale. The International
Centre for Research in Agroforestry (ICRAF) has established that the major
constraints facing nursery operators include seed supply among others such as
marketing information and technical issues (Muriuki and Jaenicke, 2001; Basweti et
al., 2001).
1.2 Statement of the research problem Shortage of tree germplasm in sufficient quantities and quality has hindered
widespread adoption of agroforestry technologies by farmers. While use of wildlings
with high genetic quality as tree regeneration materials was common in the past due
to abundance of forests and natural woodlands, the widespread conversion of these
sources to agricultural use and increased planting of exotic tree species have led to
minimal use of wildlings. Governments and development agencies are also devolving
production of seedlings for on-farm use from their central nurseries to community
3
group and individual nurseries within the farming populations (Muriuki et al., 2001).
The increase of these nurseries as well as agroforestry technologies that require direct
seeding such as improved fallows has raised the demand for tree seeds to figures that
cannot be supplied by established formal institutions (ICRAF, 2000; Ruigu et al.,
unpublished). Farmers and nursery operators thus turn to informal decentralised
mechanisms such as seed dealers and own collection to satisfy the high seed demand.
While the role that these informal seed dealers can play in alleviating the shortage of
tree germplasm is appreciated, their functioning in terms of amounts and species
supplied as well as their reach remains unknown. The quality of the seeds supplied by
the informal seed dealers in terms of both genetic and physiological aspects is also
unknown. This can have far reaching effects on the establishment and productivity of
the trees established on the farms. The purpose of this study was therefore to assess
the functions and the quality of the seeds supplied by these informal seed dealers in
order to identify ways of developing them as a useful channel to address the
constraint of insufficient tree seed supply.
1.3 Research questions In carrying out this study, the following were the guiding research questions:-
1. What are the existing informal mechanisms for the supply of agroforestry tree
seed at the farmers’ level and do the systems meet the demand that exists?
2. What is the quality (genetic and physiological) of the seeds that are supplied
by these informal seed supply systems as compared with the formal systems?
3. Does training and/or experience on seed handling by informal seed dealers
affect the quality of seeds supplied by these systems?
4
1.4 Objectives The main aim of this study was to investigate the mechanisms of supply and quality
of the seeds, the species and amounts supplied by the informal tree seed supply
systems in selected parts of Kenya. The specific objectives pursued were:-
1. To assess the mechanisms of informal tree seed supply and their effectiveness
2. To assess the species and quality (genetic and physiological) of the tree seed
supplied by the informal decentralised systems and compare with that
supplied by formal institutions
3. To assess the effect of training and experience on seed handling by seed
dealers on the quality of seeds supplied by the informal systems
1.5 Research hypotheses
1. Informal seed supply systems are not effective in meeting the current demand
for agroforestry tree seeds
2. The seeds supplied by the informal seed supply systems are of low genetic
quality
3. Training and experience on seed handling by seed dealers has no impact on
the quality of seeds supplied by the decentralised systems
1.6 Research rationale Tree seed and seedling supply for agroforestry trees establishment has been done by
formal institutions for about two decades ensuring that the propagules are of high
quality. This supply however, has been limited in quantity and can not meet the
increasing demand at the farmers’ level. To ensure increased adoption of agroforestry
as a livelihood option for small-scale farmers in the tropics it is imperative that there
5
is ensured supply of tree seeds in sufficient quantity and quality. Many farmers are
unable to reach centralised seed sources and have had to collect seeds for themselves
implying that they plant only the species that can be accessed locally and therefore
the species diversity in farms is reducing. The alternative tree seed sources are the
informal seed dealers who supply to both the farmers and the on-farm tree nursery
operators. While some efforts have been geared towards developing tree nursery
operators’ skills, little has been done about the informal seed dealers who fill a big
gap in tree seeds supply. These seed dealers are a channel that can be developed to
ensure that they are aware of and take into consideration seed quality issues in their
operations. This would build their capacity to handle seeds of diverse tree species in
appropriate genetic and physiological quality and to develop systems that meet tree
seed demand among farmers and users.
1.7 Theoretical framework Supply of germplasm to the farmers is crucial to the scaling up of agroforestry
adoption. Cooper and Denning (1999) gave ten fundamentals of scaling up
agroforestry technologies uptake, which included ensured supply of quality tree
germplasm. Since the continued supply by organisations is not adequate and
sustainable, informal systems develop to bridge the gap between demand and supply.
Quite often, these systems reach out to majority of the users and will continue to
satisfy demand even long after organisations have devolved their activities. Efficient
supply of seeds in terms of quality and quantity by these systems is therefore
important in scaling up agroforestry adoption. The factors that determine seed quality
as well as effectively functioning seed supply systems are envisaged to interact and
ensure these systems are successful given an enabling environment (Fig 1). By
6
opening these systems up to interact more with the formal systems, they are expected
to evolve and improve on their efficiency in seed supply. More interactions with these
systems as well as self-regulation evolving from within can provide efficient systems
that will ensure high productivity, minimum loss of investments and genepool
conservation in agroforestry systems. This will ultimately contribute to sustainable
production systems especially through public-private sector collaboration. The
summary conceptual framework for sustainable quality tree seed supply is given in
W. Kenya 0 0 5 50 5 50 0 0 Nairobi 1 10 5 50 4 40 0 0
Seed dealers (N = 10 per zone)
Average 1 10 5 50 3 30 1 13
4.1.4 Seed dealers introduction into the seed vending business Thirty percent of the seed dealers had started the seed business mainly through
interactions with non-governmental organizations (NGOs) and working in forestry
related activities (Figure 3). Others (17%) got involved due to their love of trees
while others had operated nurseries and encountered the seed needs. Only 7% of the
seed dealers got into the business through their interaction with the Ministry of
Agriculture. Since until recently tree seed vending had not been established as a
private entrepreneurial activity, it is only the people who had experienced the demand
of tree seeds as they engage in agroforestry activities who would be expected to start
such ventures. These findings agree with Tripp and Pal’s (2001), observations with
private rice seed dealers in India where most of them had experience with seed
dealings either as contract seed growers for private seed companies or as organizers
for seed outgrowing activities for such companies.
29
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
Worked in forestryprojects
Interaction withMoA
Initiated thruNGOs
Operated nursery Love of trees
Reason
% o
f res
pond
ents
stat
ing
reas
on
Figure 3: Reasons given by seed dealers in Meru, Nairobi and Western Kenya as to why they got into tree seed business
Majority of the seed dealers (53%) had recently joined the tree seed supply business
and had only one to five years working experience while 30% of the seed dealers had
operated the business for between six and ten years (Table 4). Only 17% of the
respondents had more than 10 years experience in seed handling and vending. On
training relevant to tree seed handling, 10% of the seed dealers had attended courses
for more than four weeks, 23% for between two and four weeks while 20% had
attended one week or a few days (less than one week) of training courses. Forty-seven
percent (47%) had attended no training course at all (Table 4). The category of seed
dealers with over four weeks of training was taken as the most enlightened on issues
of seed handling among all the respondents.
30
Table 4: Duration of training attained and experience in handling of seeds by seed dealers in Meru, peri-urban Nairobi and western Kenya
Item Category No of respondents Percentage
None 14 47 1 week or less 6 20 2-4 weeks 7 23
Training duration
Over 4 weeks 3 10 1-5 years 16 53 6-10 years 9 30
Experience in seed handling
Over 10 years 5 17
Figure 4 shows that the tree seed related training courses had been offered by
government departments (Ministry of Agriculture and Forestry Department; 33%)
and non-governmental organizations. The NGOs included the Japan International Co-
operation Agency (JICA) and KEFRI (13% each), KWAP (10%), the Kenya Energy
Non-governmental Organisation (KENGO), ICRAF, VI Agroforestry and GTZ
(Deutsche Gesellschaft für Technische Zusammenarbeit; 7% each) and Plan
International (3%).
JICA (13%)
KEFRI (13%)
KWAP (10%)
KENGO (7%)
ICRAF (7%)
GTZ (7%)
VI (7%)
Plan International (3%)
MoA and FD (33%)
Figure 4: Agencies that had offered training to seed dealers in Meru, peri-urban
Nairobi and western Kenya
31
The contents of training courses undertaken included seed collection, processing,
storage, testing, treatment and general handling (Table 5). Others included general
agroforestry, tree nursery operations, tree management for seed production and seed
harvesting (tree climbing). With a great variety of topics in rather short sessions of
training, it is possible that quality tree seed production did not really get emphasized
in the training that majority of the seed dealers participated in. Muturi (1999)
observed that farmers were co-opted in training sessions together with extension
agents in the development efforts of many organisations of 1980s, which were rather
uncoordinated and this could result in poor adoption which could then influence the
quality of seeds supplied by the seed dealers.
Table 5: Content of seed related training that seed dealers in Meru, Nairobi and Western Kenya had participated in
Training content Number of responses Percentage†
Agroforestry 1 3
Climbing trees for seed collection 2 7
Nursery operations 7 23
Seed collection 14 47
Seed handling 8 27
Seed processing 3 10
Seed storage 5 17
Seed testing 2 7
Seed treatment 1 3
Tree management for seed collection 3 10 † Percentages add up to more than 100 because some dealers had attended more than once and most courses included more than one topic
32
4.2 Sources of seed used by nursery operators in peri-urban Nairobi, Meru and Western Kenya
Nursery operators reported procurement of seeds from both formal and informal
sources. The formal sources included the Forest Department of the Ministry of
Environment and Natural Resources (FD), KEFRI, Ministry of Agriculture (MoA)
and various NGOs. These suppliers contributed only 16% of the seeds while all the
rest came from the informal dealers (Table 6). Informal sources included self-
collection (57%), purchase from seed dealers (24%) and seed exchanges with other
nursery operators (3%).
Table 6: Frequency of tree seed suppliers as mentioned by nursery operators in Meru,
Nairobi and Western Kenya for the season between June and October 2002
Species stock present Species not present Seed supplier / contribution Frequency Percent† Frequency Percent†
Average percent
Formal/ Informal
Dealer 49 25 39 22 24 I FD 9 5 18 10 7 F KEFRI 6 3 3 2 2 F MoA 1 1 1 1 1 F NGO 7 4 14 8 6 F Nursery operator 4 2 6 3 3 I Self 115 60 97 54 57 I Total 191 100 178 100 100
† The percentage calculation is based on the number of species and not the total amount of seeds supplied
It can be observed from Table 6 that informal sources were supplying five times the
amount of seeds that was supplied by the formal channels to the nurseries in the three
areas covered by the study. As the amounts being supplied by the formal sources
continue reducing and demand increases due to more dissemination of agroforestry
related information, it is expected that there will be more entries into the informal tree
seed business. There is an indication that since most of the entrants into the business
had been influenced by NGOs and other agroforestry promoters to meet the
increasing demand (as shown above); entrepreneurship was not their initial driving
33
factor. This could have limited their vision of expansion as well as quality assurance
since they had not yet been able to meet demand in a competitive manner. This
situation may have led to nursery operators only being concerned with physiological
quality factors such as germination potential as the only parameters to check out for
in seed supply.
Table 7 shows that after getting seeds from any source, 28% of the nursery operators
sowed them without undertaking any quality test, others (3%), relied on the
information supplied by the supplier to decide on the quality while 3% of the nursery
operators were working closely with forestry extension staff to determine the quality
of the seeds they purchased. Two percent (2%) of the nursery operators reported
comparing with other seeds from their own experience while another 2% would only
buy from seed dealers who collected seeds from known sources. The nursery
operators who conducted quality tests before sowing the seeds reported conducting
cutting tests on the seeds to check if they were still alive (30%), germination of a
sample of the seedlots (11%) or judging from visual observation on pest attacks or
colour of the seeds (12%). Attempts to sort the data using Microsoft Excell by the
level of education received by nursery operators did not relate any differences in
these efforts to ascertain seed quality to the seed dealers’ level of education.
34
Table 7: Efforts undertaken by nursery operators in Meru, Nairobi and Western Kenya to ascertain the quality of seeds procured
Quality check item Frequency Percent
Compare with others from experience 1 2
Cutting test 19 30
Germination of sample 7 11
Seek help from extension staff 2 3
Sends dealers to collect from known sources 1 2
Visual observation 8 12
Rely on information given by supplier 2 3
No other seed source except self collection 6 9
No test done 18 28
Some of the problems nursery operators had observed with seed dealers, as shown in
Table 8, included dishonesty (4%), high seed costs (6%), delivery of immature,
unhealthy or old seeds (32%), late deliveries of seeds (3%), and low purity and
germination rates (32%). Other problems included poor seed information and species
† N represents the number of nursery operators that gave a rank to the supplier for that factor ± There is no price for seeds when self collected or exchanged with nursery operators hence ranked as
zero ≠ No nursery operator gave a rank for the seedling quality aspect for seeds exchanged with other
nursery operators.
The formal sources were ranked rather well in terms of germination rates, seed prices
and seedling quality (apart from KEFRI seed centre) but could not be relied on to
always deliver seeds in time. The poor ranking of KEFRI may have been as a result
39
of late procurement of seeds of the species not accessible elsewhere by the nursery
operators from the seed centre, which may not have performed well. The fact that the
other formal sources were ranked well in seed prices can be attributed to the provision
of free and/or subsidised seeds by the Forest Department, Ministry of Agriculture and
many NGOs. Lillesø et al. (2004a) observed this kind of market distortion through
delivery of free or subsidised seeds in Uganda and recommended that it should be
discontinued. Informal seed dealers were also ranked poorly in the price of seeds and
seedling quality but fairly well in delivery time and germination rates. The ranks
given about seedling quality were often confusing and given by only a few nursery
operators such that they were not reliable. However the fact that nursery operators
were able to give an estimate rank of various seed sources shows that they may still
get a rough idea of germination percentage of seed from different dealers even if
many of them do not test seeds.
The similarity in ranking between self collected seeds and seeds exchanged with other
nursery operators can be related to the exchange of agricultural seeds between
farmers. Farmers were reported to select and save seeds of different varieties
especially in remote areas where formal seed systems were not accessible and even
where they were accessible (Cromwell et al., 1993; Tripp and Pal, 2001). Tripp and
Pal (2001), also observed that the proportion of seeds exchanged between farmers
was higher than that coming from other sources in Andhra Pradesh, India. Farmers
also accessed new varieties even before the private seed suppliers. This implies that
nursery operators also need to understand seed quality issues so as to exchange seeds
of high quality. With a good number of seed dealers having started as nursery
operators, it is clear that both nursery operators and seed dealers are closely linked
40
and should be developed together to ensure easier supply of seeds of high quality at
the farmers’ level.
The formal sources supplied seeds of high quality (reflected by high rank of
germination levels) but not in good time for coinciding with peak demand season.
These sources can be useful in supplying seeds of newly introduced species and
provenances to nursery operators and seed dealers which can be established into seed
stands which then will serve as the sources of seeds for the nursery operators.
Cromwell et al. (1993), reported that even in crop seeds, farmers are more interested
in the timeliness of seed delivery, accessibility of seed delivery points and the
appropriate quantity. As pertains to quality, the same authors reported that ISTA
standards do not bother farmers as long as seeds are of proven and reliable
physiological quality which agrees with the observations noted with the nursery
operators in this study.
The germination rates reported by nursery operators from the seedlings of the species
that were found in the various nursery stocks were very varied. The rates reported by
each nursery operator were expressed as percentages of those expected as given in
literature by Salim et al. (2002), and Albrecht (1993), for each species (Table 11).
Comparison of the percentages showed unreliable deviations for the sources (see
standard deviations for self, other nursery operators and general average) and
although ANOVA showed a significant difference (F = 0.863, P = 0.01; Appendix 5),
it was difficult to rely on the nursery operators’ reports. Many of the nurseries did not
have records to verify the germination rates and some of the reported seedlings had
grown for about three to four months hence nursery operators could have forgotten
41
the original germination figures. There was however no significant difference (P =
0.01) observed between the seeds procured from formal and informal sources
(average 25% for both). Better record keeping by nursery operators could have given
a better indication of the germination rates, which would help them to judge their
seed sources in a better way.
Table 11: Germination rates of seeds of different species procured by nursery operators in Meru, Nairobi and Western Kenya from different sources expressed as percentage of expected germination rates as given in literature
Seed supplier Mean percent Number of cases Std. Dev SE MeanSelf collected 27 115 91 8 Seed dealers 16 47 23 3 Forestry Department 3 9 4 1 NGOs 74 7 76 29 KEFRI 3 6 3 1 Ministry of Agriculture 16 1 Other nursery operators 61 4 94 47 Neighbours 33 2 47 33 Total / Average 25 191 75 5
As shown in Table 12, only 27% of the nursery operators were able to procure
enough seeds to meet their clients’ demand, in the three areas where the survey was
carried out. Others had shortfalls of some species that were in demand with the
highest shortfalls being reported by the urban and peri-urban nursery operators in
Nairobi. Many nursery operators however indicated that they were able to access
surplus seeds of some species such as Azandrachta indica, which were reported as not
being sufficient by others (see Appendix 7). This revealed unequal demand segments
of seeds, which could be met through proper linkages between nursery operators and
seed dealers resulting in less surplus for some and deficit for others. Surplus seeds
were given out or sold to other nursery operators, stored until the next season or
42
sowed and the seedlings displayed in the market until they could be purchased even
beyond the target season.
Table 12: Seed access shortfalls by nursery operators in selected parts of Kenya
Number of nurseries getting enough seeds
Number of nurseries not getting enough seeds
Area
Number Percentage Number Percentage Meru 8 40 12 60 Western Kenya 5 25 15 75 Nairobi 3 15 17 85 Overall 16 27 44 73
With the informal seed systems supplying five times the quantity of formal suppliers
as shown in Table 6, the diversity of species in agroforestry systems is likely to
reduce if only those species that can be found in abundance locally are supplied. The
failure by the informal seed dealers to supply seeds of some species is also likely to
impact negatively on their enterprises as farmers may be forced to look elsewhere for
the species they need. This can be resolved through vegetative propagation techniques
for the rare species to avoid cases of poor genetic diversity when farmers are forced
to collect seeds and exchange from the very few trees of such species that may exist
in a community. Better linkages between nursery operators, seed dealers and the
formal sources such as the Forest Department can help meet the demand for the rare
species such as indigenous medicinal species whose seeds the nursery operators
found difficult to access. These linkages were found to be poor.
4.4 Seed quality and handling by decentralised seed dealers
Seed dealers mainly considered physiological parameters when giving their opinion
for seed quality and paid little attention to genetic quality factors (Table 13). The
major concerns included high germination (22%), maturity of the seeds (33%) and
43
seeds that were still alive (14%). Only 6% reported good quality mother trees as an
aspect they considered in seed quality. Some influence of the level of education was
observed because all the seed dealers who reported good quality mother trees as a
parameter had attained either secondary school or college education. This was not
however related in anyway to training in agroforestry issues or experience in seed
handling as the seed dealers who reported mother tree quality were scattered in all
categories of the training and experience when data was sorted using Microsoft
Excell.
Table 13: Factors considered by seed dealers in peri-Nairobi, Meru and Western
Kenya as describing good quality tree seeds
Parameter Frequency Percentage
High germination rates 11 22
Seeds maturity 17 33
Healthy seeds 3 6
Seeds still alive (not old) 7 14
Seed colour (from experience) 3 6
Good quality mother trees 3 6
Seeds cleanliness 2 4
Seeds dryness 2 4
Others† 3 6 † Parameters labelled others included whole seeds that are not broken and seeds that do not float in
water
Poor premium on genetic quality issues in seed collection by the seed dealers was
also reflected in the low number of mother trees that seed dealers were harvesting
seeds from and the separation distances between the mother trees (Table 14). The
overall average number of mother trees was about half the recommended number
(sixteen trees instead of a minimum of thirty) while the separation distance between
mother trees was even worse (eighteen metres instead of about fifty to one hundred).
44
Lillesø et al. (2004a) also reported that in Uganda much local seed collection was
done sub-optimally in terms of number of trees and collection methods.
Table 14: The influence of training in agroforestry and experience in seed handling by seed dealers on the average number of mother trees harvested and their average separation distance in Meru, Nairobi and Western Kenya
Category No of mother trees Average distance (M) Mean N† Std. Dev Mean N† Std. Dev
Tertiary 24 12 27 13 7 7 Average / total 16 152 16 18 96 35
† N is calculated by species reported as harvested by seed dealers and since each seed dealer collected seeds for more than one species, the number goes beyond 30
With the majority of the species that were being supplied by the informal seed dealers
being exotic species it is clear that some species have low genetic diversity arising
from the initial seedlots that were used to establish the original trees which
naturalized as has been reported for Grevillea robusta (Harwood, 1992). This means
that collecting seeds from a small number of mother trees allows collecting offspring
of closely related individuals. The situation was made worse by the fact that
collections were mainly from very closely spaced trees, which could easily be related.
Earlier studies by Basweti et al. (2001) and Lengkeek et al. (2003a) revealed that
even the nursery operators who collected seeds for themselves collected from a very
small number of mother trees in both Nairobi and Meru. Indigenous species may not
be affected if there are a substantial number of remnant trees of the original
45
population which can still maintain genetic diversity and sufficient out crossing levels
(Lengkeek et al., 2003a). However with increasing clearance of natural forests and
woodlands for agricultural cultivation and other land uses, these remnants are
decreasing by the day and it is important to ensure wider collections of the indigenous
species too.
As shown in Table 14 (overleaf), training and experience in seed handling did not
influence the genetic quality parameters although the seed dealers that had not
received any training were collecting from the least number of trees. The trend was
distorted by the fact those not trained at all followed the category that had participated
in the longest period of training in the number of mother trees harvested from
(average of 7 and 9 mother trees respectively), although there was a low positive
correlation of 0.328 (Table 15). The separation distance of mother trees did not show
any trend that would support improvement with training although there was a positive
correlation but expressed by a very low coefficient (0.053). The experience trend
shows an opposite relationship with the number of mother trees harvested and their
separation distances from the one expected, which is shown by a negative correlation
coefficient (-0.278 and -0.3 respectively; Table 15). Those who attained secondary
and tertiary education were however harvesting from more mother trees although
there was no relationship between education level and the distance between the
mother trees. The relationship between the level of education and the number of
mother trees harvested from (also shown by a positive correlation in Table 15) may
have been coincidental but could also show that education had influenced their
reception to development information. Vandebosch et al. (2002) said that reception of
basic education is important in achieving development.
46
Table 15: Correlations of average number of mother trees harvested by seed dealers and their separation distances with the seed dealers’ level of training, education and experience in Meru, Nairobi and Western Kenya
No of mother trees Average distance
Pearson Correlation -0.278 -0.300 Experience in seedhandling Sig. (2-tailed) 0.001 0.003
Pearson Correlation 0.328 0.053 Category of trainingon agroforestry issues Sig. (2-tailed) 0.000 0.607
Pearson Correlation 0.565 0.122 Education levelattained Sig. (2-tailed) 0.000 0.236 N 152 96
The content of the training courses that seed dealers had participated in, as reported
before, was broad and may not have had a lot of emphasis on seed genetic quality.
With little emphasis on genetic quality, training is not likely to impact much on the
genetic quality of seeds supplied by the seed dealers. Seed genetic quality premiums
are more likely to be imparted to seed dealers through formal recognition, more
specialized training and interactions with experts at fora in which genetic quality
issues are discussed clearly. Since seed dealers were collecting seeds from about a
half of the recommended number of mother trees and about a third of them
considered genetic issues in seed collection, more awareness is likely to push them
towards improving on seed genetic quality. Farmers were reported to consider genetic
issues when saving their agricultural seed because they were aware of the
implications of poor quality (Cromwell et al., 1993). If farmers were also aware of
the implication of genetic quality in tree germplasm they would push nursery
operators and seed dealers to put premium in quality by inquiring about the seed
collection details.
As shown in Figure 5, many seed dealers in the study areas ensured good seed
physiological quality by collecting seeds from the crown. Seventy nine percent (79
47
%) of the seed harvests were done from the crown, 17% from the ground and 4%
from both the crown and the ground. Collection from the crown was the most
common method and this ensured quality as seeds had not been exposed to soil
moisture, micro-organisms, pests and diseases. It is however easier for small-scale
dealers to collect seeds of some species from the ground and it is good in such cases,
for the dealers to ensure that collection is done regularly to avoid collection of spoilt
seeds. Early fruits and/or seeds should also be avoided as they are usually of poorer
quality (Mulawarman et al., 2003).
Ground (17%)
Crown (79%)
Both (4%)
Figure 5: Seed collection methods used by seed dealers in Meru, peri-urban Nairobi and Western Kenya
The main criteria considered in the selection of mother trees from which seed dealers
collected seeds included maturity of the trees (22%), resistance to diseases and pests
(14%), straight stems (20%) and fruit or seed quality (7%). Other criteria considered
included growth rate (6%), size of the tree (heights and diameter; 4%), and abundance
of trees (3%; Table 16). It was positively observed that some seed dealers considered
aspects of the tree size, straightness, maturity of the trees, big boles and resistance to
pests and diseases. However, these were the minority of the interviewed seed dealers
48
and the same case was mentioned for the nursery operators who collected seeds for
themselves (Lengkeek et al., 2003a; Basweti et al., 2001).
Table 16: Criteria used by seed dealers in Meru, peri-urban Nairobi and Western
Kenya to select mother trees for seed harvesting
Criteria Frequency Percentage
Abundance of trees 6 3
Size of the tree (heights and diameter) 7 4
Growth rate 11 6
Fruit/seed quality 12 7
Health of the tree 14 8
Number of branches 1 1
Maturity of the trees 39 22
Resistance to pests and diseases 24 14
Availability of seeds on the tree 13 7
Straight stems 35 20
None† 9 30 † While the percentage for other criteria is given as the frequency of each criterion in a pool of all
mentioned, the case of none is given as percentage of the total number of seed dealers since these 9 seed dealers gave no criteria while the others could give more than one criteria
As shown in Table 17, the reasons given for the number of mother trees harvested for
seeds by informal seed dealers included diversity of germplasm (33%) and as many
trees as were available (32%) or enough to give the required amount of seeds (26%).
Others included saving time in seed collection (2%), as many trees as had seeds on
them (2%) and trees felled for other purposes (11%). Most of these reasons revealed
that in many cases, seed dealers did not even consider the criteria given above
especially in cases of few available mother trees and seeds required in great
quantities. It is however notable that over 30% of the seed dealers had genetic quality
related considerations when collecting seeds. Sorting the data (using Microsoft
49
Excell) by training categories showed that the respondents who considered diversity
of germplasm (33%), had attained some level of training in agroforestry and tree seed
issues. These respondents who considered diversity of germplasm were however
scattered in all categories of experience showing no influence of experience.
Table 17: Reasons given by seed dealers in Meru, peri-urban Nairobi and Western
Kenya for the number of mother trees harvested from in seed collection
Reason Frequency Percent
As many trees as available 56 32
Cross pollination and diversity (of germplasm) 58 33
Economics of time in collection 3 2
Seeds available in trees 4 2
Sufficient seeds for required purpose 46 26
Trees felled for other purposes 11 6
Total 178 100
4.5. Seed storage by seed dealers and nursery operators in Meru, peri-urban Nairobi and Western Kenya
The storage of seeds by both the seed dealers and nursery operators could not ensure
long viability. Table 18 shows that the main containers used for storing seeds were
polythene bags (56% of seed dealers and 33% of nursery operators) and plastic
containers (34% of seed dealers and 6% of nursery operators). Other containers
reported by a few seed dealers and nursery operators included gunny bags, paper
bags, envelopes, tins, baskets and bottles (Table 18). The main storage areas were the
dealers’ main houses and grain stores which ensured air ventilation while two dealers
in Meru stored seeds at the forester’s office since they found it better ventilated than
their houses. A significant number of nursery operators (37%) did not store seeds and
preferred to stock them as seedlings, while all but a few (7%) seed dealers reported
50
storing seeds. Stocking seedlings instead of storing seeds is particularly important for
recalcitrant seeds, which do not store easily under normal conditions. However even
for the orthodox species, seed dealers and nursery operators would benefit from
setting apart specific rooms for storing seeds (Mulawarman et al., 2003). The plastic
containers and polythene bags which were found to be the common containers would
ensure longer storage when kept airtight and any remaining spaces filled with stable
material and kept in rooms where there would be less temperature and humidity
variations. The dealers who stored their seeds in grain stores have a better chance of
ensuring this.
Table 18: Containers used by nursery operators and seed dealers for seed storage in Meru, peri-urban Nairobi and Western Kenya
Seed dealers Nursery operators Type of container Number % Number %
† While the percentage for other containers is given as the frequency of each type of container in a pool of all mentioned, the case of none is given as percentage of the total number of seed dealers/nursery operators since these 2 seed dealers and 22 nursery operators did not store seeds while the others could use more than one type of storage container
The seed storage period by seed dealers varied from around one week to half a year
with the average period being twenty weeks. As shown in Table 19, the average
period of seed storage increased with the period of training received by the seed
dealers but contrasted at some point because the seed dealers trained for more than
51
four weeks had the shortest average storage period. Analysis of experience in seed
dealings and level of education of the seed dealers did not show any trend in the
longevity of the seed storage period. This could have been because the seed dealers
and nursery operators did not face severe seed scarcity as a result of species’
seasonality in seed production and did not have to collect much more than their
periodic demands. As the seed dealers grow and expand their businesses however,
they may require long storage of some species and therefore need to ensure proper
storage methods and at the same time periodic verification of the stored seed will be
vital (Jones, 2004).
Table 19: Average seed storage period by seed dealers in Meru, peri-urban Nairobi and Western Kenya comparing training category and experience of the seed dealers
Category Average storage
period in weeks No of cases
Std. Dev
SE of Mean
None 19 53 20 3 1 week or less 23 20 10 2 2-4 weeks 27 30 18 3
Level of training on agroforestry issues Over 4 weeks 9 15 3 1
Several seed dealers (26%) and nursery operators (35%) that reported storing seeds
did not carry out any verification on the quality of the seeds after the storage periods.
The influence of training was observed when the data was sorted in that all the seed
dealers who did not carry out verification of the stored seeds had received no training
related to agroforestry and tree seeds handling. Among the ones that attempted
52
verification, 24% of seed dealers and 5% of nursery operators just did visual
observation on any pest attacks or seed colour appearance and judged from their
experience with the species. As shown in Table 20, the best means of seed viability
verification reported was germination of a sample of seeds (53% of seed dealers and
15% of nursery operators) followed by cutting test, which was done by 43% of seed
dealers and 5% of nursery operators. Three percent (3%) of the seed dealers and 3%
of the nursery operators reported using floating method and only sowed the seeds that
did not float. Since most of the species dealt with were orthodox and the storage
periods were not long it may not have been necessary to verify viability of stored
seedlots as it would not change significantly. As reported by Cromwell et al. (1993),
farmers have traditional methods to ensure as little as possible storage losses and
therefore since nursery operators had experience with the tree seeds they dealt with
frequently, they may not have needed to verify the germination of stored lots as they
were confident that the seeds were still viable.
Table 20: Means of verification on the viability of stored seeds by nursery operators
and seed dealers in Meru, peri-urban Nairobi and western Kenya
Nursery operators Seed dealers Means of verification Frequency Percentage Frequency Percentage None 21 35 8 26 Visual observation 3 5 7 24 Germination of a sample 9 15 16 53 Cutting test 3 5 13 43 Floating method 2 3 1 3 Total 28 63† 45 150†
† The percentages in this case add up to more than 100 because some seed dealers would report more than one verification method. The tabulation also does not include those respondents who were not storing seeds hence the percentages for nursery operators add up to less than 100
Seed dealers that bought seeds from other people (who constituted 60% of all the seed
dealers) used the same verification methods although only 13% did cutting tests and
17% did germination tests. This was mainly done once they received the seeds after
53
which the seeds were bulked with other lots of the same species. All but 20% of the
dealers that procured seeds of the same species from different sources bulked them
into one consignment since they did not factor intra-specific differences. Seven (7%)
among those who did not bulk the seeds wanted to compare the health of the different
seedlots, 7% wanted to compare the germination rates while the other 7% wanted to
compare the provenances. The later 7% had gone through between two and four
weeks of training again showing a positive effect of training in genetic quality
considerations.
Among those who dealt with seeds procured from other people none had established
any contracts in order to be sure of the seeds sources but 17% had implied (not
written) contracts with their suppliers and 14% among these had access to the seed
sources. All these 14% had gone through at least two weeks of training showing some
effect of training on genetic quality premiums. A group of seed dealers in Laikipia
district were also reported to be very keen on genetic quality issues after intensive
training and interactions with organisations in seed handling (Anne Mbora pers
comm.). This shows the need for more effort in specialised training and follow-up on
seed quality issues especially genetic quality.
4.6. Laboratory tests for the quality of seeds procured from informal seed
dealers in Meru, peri-urban Nairobi and Western Kenya
The results of seed tests in the laboratory did not show any marked differences
between the various seed sources and even between the informal seed dealers as
shown by the standard deviations of the various species’ purity and germination rates
in Tables 21 and 22. Apart from two seed dealers (7%) who gave seeds of Eucalyptus
54
globulus labelled as Eucalyptus saligna, others genuinely labelled all the species.
Another seed dealer gave seeds with the label Eucalyptus meadnii that is not a known
species name but all the other labels were true to species. Germination energy trends
were also similar on weekly basis when seeds from the different suppliers were
compared. Although germination rates for seeds of some species from all the
suppliers did not exceed 50%, they were still in the range of expected germination
rates as given in literature (Albrecht, 1993; Salim et al., 2002).
Table 21: Seed test results for Eucalyptus saligna supplied by seed dealers of
different training categories and levels of experience in seed handling from Meru, peri-urban Nairobi and Western Kenya
Level of training in agroforestry issues Over 4 weeks 100 6 94 70 87 94
1 - 5 years 97 6.9 90 65 81 90 6 - 10 years 100 7.4 93 68 84 93
Years of experience in seed handling Over 10 years 99 6 89 69 82 88 KEFRI 96 7.2 88 65 79 88
From the analysis of Eucalyptus saligna (Table 21) the results of purity tests,
moisture content analysis and germination tests did not show any significant
differences that could be associated with the level of training or experience in seed
handling. The same trend was observed for other species that were tested as shown by
the low standard deviations in Table 22. There was no difference in quality between
the seeds procured from formal sources (KEFRI) and informal seed dealers for all
species whose seeds were tested. Similar results were observed between agricultural
crop seeds obtained from private sources when compared with certified seeds from
public seed sources in India (Tripp and Pal, 2001). These observations could diffuse
55
the fear that most informal seed dealers are likely to deceive farmers with substandard
seeds if they are recognised as important seed distribution channels.
Table 22: Comparisons of purity levels and germination rates of seeds collected from different seed dealers in Meru, western Kenya and peri-urban Nairobi
Species† Purity % Germination rate % Germination energy Min Avg Max St
Fagara macrophyla, Juniperus procera, Leucaena trichandra, Leucaena leucocephala, Markhamia lutea, Schinus molle, Sesbania sesban and Prunus africana were not compared because only one seed dealer had supplied the seeds of each of the species.
In the nursery experiment, Eucalyptus saligna seedlings from Meru and western
Kenya did not show any significant differences between the five categories of seed
dealers tested as well as seedlings from the KEFRI seedlot (Table 23). The ANOVA
on the Cupressus lusitanica seedlings heights from seeds acquired from Nairobi
dealers showed significant differences (P = 0.01 and P = 0.001; Appendix 6) between
the dealers’ seeds performances but the means did not reveal any patterns that would
indicate effect of training and/or experience. The mean height of seedlings of KEFRI
seeds was also close to the general mean in that case (Table 23). A t-test for paired
samples indicated that seedlings from only two seed dealers (the lowest and highest
56
means) were differing significantly from others (P = 0.01, 0.005 and 0.001) but the
differences were not related to the level of training or experience period. Quoting
CIAT (1992), Cromwell et al. (1993), reported that experiments conducted in East
Africa to compare agricultural crop seeds saved by farmers with seeds obtained from
a local agricultural research station found no statistical differences in vigour,
emergence and even yield, which is in agreement with the results of this study.
Table 23: Seedling heights of Eucalyptus saligna procured from Meru and Western
Kenya seed dealers and Cupressus lusitanica procured from peri-urban Nairobi seed dealers after 60 days in the nursery
Total 300 74.4 18.6 1.1 72.3 76.6 † Sample seed dealers were categorised in such a way that the lowest category (1) had the least training
and experience in tree seed handling and the highest (5) had attained the highest training and experience in that area
± Eucalyptus saligna seeds from Western Kenya were sowed in the nursery later than those from Meru and a cold spell that prevailed in the first few weeks slowed their growth hence their heights were on average lower than those of Meru after 60 days in the nursery
57
4.7 Perception of seed demand by the seed dealers and client relationship
The demand for seeds was reported by seed dealers to peak as the rain seasons
approached although this did not seem to determine when they collected their seeds
apart from 33% of them who collected seeds just before the rainy season. Seed
collections were mainly done when species were in season (43%) while a significant
number of seed dealers (23%) did collections anytime of the year. Collecting seeds at
anytime of the year may lead to seeds that are not mature or inferior if they are not
collected in the right season for each species and this should be discouraged. A third
(33%) of the seed dealers reported meeting their clients’ seed demand while 67% had
shortfalls for a number of species (Appendix 8). Many species were also found by
some dealers to be in demand from clients but their seeds were not accessible. Again
some of these rare or insufficient species were in the list of species mentioned by
other seed dealers and nursery operators as having surplus seed supply and proper
linkages could reduce the gap. The suggestion by a majority of seed dealers on scarce
species is mainly that governments and NGOs establish and/or protect seed sources of
those species and link the dealers to those stands. The seed dealers saw tree seed
demand as increasing for the species they were dealing with together with rare
indigenous species, which they found more difficult to procure.
Grevillea robusta was the species with the highest seed demand generally and
consequently was the most dealt with species by a majority of the seed dealers (24%
dealings and 42% demand) followed by Eucalyptus saligna (20%). Seed dealers
normally supplied more of the species that were in high demand and devoted more
time to find the seeds of those species compared to those in less demand. Therefore
the list of those in high demand compared closely with those supplied in high
58
quantities (Figure 6; Appendix 9). The findings agree with those of private rice seed
dealers in Andhra Pradesh (India) who were also found to only deal with the varieties
that had ready demand with few attempting to sell new varieties (Tripp and Pal,
2001). The extension and NGOs should widely disseminate new species (and
provenances and/or cultivars) and inform farmers well so as to create demand of
species still low in the domestication pathways. Lillesø et al. (2004b), pointed out the
need for farmers’ awareness on varieties that can meet their requirements in order to
have a well functioning seed system that also avails such varieties. It is important that
any new species and/or provenances introduced have a high intra-specific variation as
the initial introductions are likely to be future seed sources for the informal dealers.
The success of Calliandra calothyrsus dissemination as a useful fodder species as
reported by Franzel et al. (2003), is a good example but efforts also need to be geared
into the dissemination of other species especially indigenous ones.
Figure 6: Species encountered by seed dealers as having highest seed demand
59
As shown in Table 24, the main clients for seed dealers included farmers, nursery
operators, schools, NGOs, the Forest Department, Community-Based Organisations
(CBOs) and others such as tea companies. Their turnovers and prices were compared
for the top four most dealt with species. Farmers and nursery operators were the
clients with the highest turn-over apart from the case of Grevillea robusta in Meru
and Western Kenya where NGOs had the highest turn-over. This could be attributed
to on-going promotional efforts of NGOs for the species and that demand segment
might just have been temporal. It was observed that NGOs did not have high
turnovers for the other species and even for Grevillea robusta in Nairobi. That left the
small-scale farmers, schools and nursery operators as the main clients. This is a
favourable aspect for developing seed and seedling enterprises as NGOs mainly buy
seeds and then distribute them freely or subsidised to farmers, which effectively
distorts the market for the informal seed and seedling dealers.
60
Table 24: Average clients turn-over and prices charged for seeds for four top dealt with tree species by seed dealers in Meru, peri-urban Nairobi and Western Kenya
AFRENA Report No. 127 AFRENA. 1998. Agroforestry Research Network for Eastern and Central Africa
(AFRENA -ECA) Research proposal and five year plan 1999 - 2003. Submitted to ASARECA July 1998
Albrecht J. (ed). 1993. Tree seed handbook of Kenya. GTZ Forestry Seed Centre
Muguga, Nairobi, Kenya Basweti C., A. Lengkeek, P. Prytz and H. Jaenicke. 2001. Tree nursery trade in urban
and peri-urban areas. A survey in Nairobi and Kiambu Districts, Kenya. RELMA Working Paper No. 13. Regional Land Management Unit (RELMA), Swedish International development Cooperation Agency (Sida). Nairobi, Kenya.
Betser L., J. Mugwe, and J. Muriuki. 1999. On-farm Production and Marketing of
High-value Tree Products in the Central highlands of Kenya. In Temu A. B. et, al (Eds) Off-forest Tree Resources of Africa. Proceedings of a Workshop held at Arusha Tanzania. The African Academy of Sciences.
Bockari-Kugbei S.M. 1994. The role of small scale enterprises in African seed
industries. PhD thesis, University of Reading, UK. Bonner F.T. 1998. Testing tree seeds for vigour. A review. Seed Technology, Vol. 20,
No. 1, 1998. USDA Forest Service Southern Research Station Carter J. and P. Bradley.1994. The Kenya Woodfuel/Agroforestry Development
Programme. In: Shanks E and J Carter. 1994. The organisation of small-scale tree nurseries; Studies from Asia, Africa and Latin America. Rural development forestry study guide 1. Overseas Development Institute. London, UK.
Case D.D. 1990. The community’s toolbox. The idea, methods and tools for
participatory assessment, monitoring and evaluation in community forestry. Community forestry field manual 2. FAO, Rome.
CIAT. 1992. Farmer participatory research and the development of an improved bean
seed strategy in Rwanda. Paper prepared workshop on farmer participatory research, 17-19 February, Addis Ababa, Ethiopia.
Cooper P.J.M. and G.L. Denning. 1999. Scaling up the impact of agroforestry
research. Report of the agroforestry dissemination workshop. 14 - 15 September 1999. Nairobi, Kenya.
75
Cromwell E., S. Wiggins and S. Wentzel. 1993. Sowing beyond the state. NGOs and seed supply in developing countries. Overseas Develoment Institute (ODI), London.
Dawson I. and J. Were. 1998. Multiplication, that's the name of the game: Guidelines
for seed production of agroforestry trees. Agroforestry Today, Vol. 10 No. 4, October-December 1998.
Desmond D.F. 1989. Forest tree nurseries in agricultural high schools: An analysis of
Ecuadorean experiences. ODI Social Forestry Network Paper 9e, London. Esbo H. 1980. Seed quality control. In: Thomson JR (Ed). Advances in research and
technology of seeds; Part 5. Centre for Agricultural Publishing and Documentation, Wageningen, Netherlands.
Foeken D. and A.M. Mwangi. 1998. Farming in the City of Nairobi. African Studies
Centre working paper 30. Leiden, The Netherlands Franzel S., C. Wambugu, P. Tuwei and G. Karanja. 2001. The adoption and scaling
up the use of fodder trees in central Kenya. Paper presented at the workshop on Forage Demand and Adoption by Smallholder Livestock Keepers, International Livestock Research Centre. Addis Ababa, Ethiopia. 23 - 25 June, 2001.
Franzel S., C. Wambugu and P. Tuwei. 2003. The adoption and dissemination of
fodder shrubs in central Kenya. Agricultural Research and Extension Network (AGREN), Network Paper No. 131, ODI, United Kingdom
Graudal L. and E.D. Kjaer. 2000. Can national tree seed programmes generate
economic, social and/or environmental benefits that cover their costs? Danida Forest Seed Centre.
Hampton J.G. and M.J. Hill. 2002. Seed quality and New Zealand’s native plants: an unexplained relationship? New Zealand Journal of Botany, 2002, Vol. 40: 357-364. The Royal Society of New Zealand.
Harris S.M. 1993. Working towards the wider distribution of tree seed in Africa: The activities of the Henry Doubleday Research Association. Rural Development Forestry Network (RDFN) Network Paper 16e. RDFN London, United Kingdom.
Harwood C.E. (ed) 1992. Grevillea robusta in agroforestry and forestry. Proceedings
of an international workshop. August 28 - 31, 1990. ICRAF, Nairobi, Kenya Hide J.M., C.F. Hide and J. Kimani. 2001. Informal irrigation in the peri-urban zone
of Nairobi, Kenya - An assessment of surface water quality used for irrigation. Report OD/TN 105 HR Wallingford and DFID. HR Wallingford.
76
Huxley P. and van H. Houten. 1997. Glossary for agroforestry. ICRAF, Nairobi. ICRAF, 2000. International Centre for Research in Agroforestry. Corporate report,
2000. International Seed Testing Association (ISTA). 1999. International rules for seed
testing. Seed Sci. & Technol. 27, Supplement. ISTA, Zurich, Switzerland. Jaenicke, H. 2001. Innovative strategies for small-scale tree nursery development.
ICRAF position paper. Jaetzold R. and Schmidt H. 1983. Farm management handbook of Kenya Vol II.
Natural conditions and farm management information Vol II/C, East Kenya (Eastern and Coast provinces). Ministry of Agriculture and German Agricultural Team of GTZ. Nairobi
Jiggins J. 1993. Networking with women farmers. In: Alders C, B Haverkort and L
van Veldhuizen (eds). Linking with farmers: Networking for low-external-input and sustainable agriculture. Intemediate Technology Publications, London, UK
Jones N. 2004. Forestry Technology No 1: Seed Collection. Agroforestry Net, Inc.
www.agroforestry.net/pubs/Jonestech1.html. Page Last Updated: March 9, 2004 Kamondo B.M., M. Mwangi and J. Were. 1996. Strategy to ensure sufficient supply
of tree propagative material for agroforestry development in Kenya. In: People and institutional participation in agroforestry for sustainable development. Proceedings of the first Kenya agroforestry conference. Kenya Forestry Research Institute, Muguga, Nairobi Kenya. 25 - 29 March 1996.
Kenya Land Alliance (KLA). 2002. Land Use in Kenya: The case for a national land-
use policy. Kenya Land Alliance, Nakuru, Kenya. Koffa S. and D.P. Garrity. 2001. Grassroots empowerment and sustainability in the
management of critical natural resources: The Agroforestry Tree Seed Association of Lantapan. In Coxhead I and Buenavista G (Eds). Seeking sustainability: Challenges of agricultural development and environmental management in a philipine watershed. Los Banos, Laguna, Philipines. PCARRD, 2001
Lechner W.R. 1997. Seed multiplication and distribution through a farmers’
cooperative in Namibia. In: Rohrbach DDR, Z Bishaw and AJG van Gastel (eds). Alternative strategies for smallholder seed supply. Proceedings of an International Conference on Options Strengthening National and Regional Seed Systems in Africa and West Asia. 10-14 March 1997. Harare, Zimbambwe. Patancheru 502 324, Andhra Pradesh, India: ICRISAT
Lengkeek A. and S. Carsan. 2003. Diversity makes a difference. Farmers, perception
of tree species diversity in Meru district Kenya. PhD Thesis, Wageningen University. Also submitted to Netherlands Journal of Agricultural Science.
77
Lengkeek A., S. Carsan and H. Jaenicke. 2003a. A wealth of knowledge. How
farmers in Meru, Central Kenya, manage their tree nurseries. In Diversity makes a difference. Farmers, perception of tree species diversity in Meru district Kenya. PhD Thesis, Wageningen University. Also submitted to Agroforestry Systems.
Lengkeek A., I.K. Dawson and H. Jaenicke. 2003b. Genetic bottlenecks in
agroforestry systems: Results of tree nursery surveys in East Africa. In Diversity makes a difference. Farmers, perception of tree species diversity in Meru district Kenya. PhD Thesis, Wageningen University. Also submitted to Agroforestry Systems.
demand for propagation material of woody species. Part I: Analysis and Strategy proposal. DFSC Case Study No.3. TISC Document No. 104. Danida Forest Seed Centre, Denmark.
Lillesø J.P.B., S. Moestrup and E. Brandi-Hansen. 2004a. Species, seed sources, seed
procurement and seed distribution for agroforestry in Uganda - (preliminary findings from a survey, April 2004). ICRAF.
Lillesø J.P.B., S. Moestrup and E. Brandi-Hansen. 2004b. Characterising, assessing
and recommending seed supply systems for agroforestry tree species (draft strategy April 2004). ICRAF.
Lossau A., B. Weiskopf and W. Kasten. 2000. Support for the informal seed sector in
development co-operation - Conceptual issues. GTZ, Germany and Centre for Genetic Resources, the Netherlands
Martin F. and S. Sherman. 1992. Agroforestry Principles. ECHO Technical Note,
1992 Masangano C. 1996. Diffusion of agroforestry technologies. Michigan State
University. Ministry of Planning and National Development (MPND). 1989. Meru District
Development Plan 1989 - 1993. Government Printer. Mogaka H., S. Gichere, R. Davis and R. Hirji. 2002. Impacts and costs of climate
variability and water resources degradation in Kenya. Rationale for promoting improved water resources development and management. World Bank Report, Kenya.
Mulawarman, J.M. Roshetko, S.M. Sasongko and D. Irianto. 2003. Tree seed
management - Seed sources, seed collection and seed handling: A field manual for field workers and farmers. ICRAF and Winrock International. Indonesia.
Muriuki J., H. Jaenicke and W. Frost. 2001. Strategies for tree seedling production
and distribution. Tree Domestication Training Workshop Lecture Notes.
78
Muriuki J. and H. Jaenicke. 2001 . Tree nurseries under individual and group
management. A case study from Meru District, Kenya. ICRAF internal report. Muturi S.N. 1999. Agroforestry extension manuals. A survey of their use in Kenya.
Sida’s Regional Land Management Unit (RELMA), Nairobi, Kenya. Nathan I. and K. Thomsen. 2001. Can smallholders be supplied with quality tree seed
through commercial distribution of tree seed in small bags? Paper presented at the International Workshop on Tree Seed: Matching supply with demand from small-scale farmers in tropical countries, Nairobi, Kenya 11-26 June 2001. DFSC, Denmark.
Njenga A. and W. Frost. 2001. Economic and Market condition analysis of peri-urban
nurseries: Results of a PFSA workshop conducted in Kiambu district, Central Kenya.. Working Paper, ICRAF.
Ngece K. 2003. Challenges in forestry conservation in East Africa. Is community
based forestry the key to forest survival? East African Ecotourism Development and Conservation Consultants. Nairobi, Kenya. January 2003
Ochsner P., I. Nathan and A. Pedersen. 2001. How to reach rural people in
developing countries with quality tree planting material. In: Assisting Forest Owner, Farmer and Stakeholder Decision-Making. International Union of Forestry Research Organizations. Proceedings of the Extension Working Party (S6.06-03) Symposium 2001. DFSC, Denmark.
Ocran V.K. 1997. The role of seed growers’ associations in seed production and
marketing in Africa. In: Rohrbach DDR, Z Bishaw and AJG van Gastel (eds). Alternative strategies for smallholder seed supply. Proceedings of an International Conference on Options Strengthening National and Regional Seed Systems in Africa and West Asia. 10-14 March 1997. Harare, Zimbambwe. Patancheru 502 324, Andhra Pradesh, India: ICRISAT
Omondi W.O. 1991. Role of quality seed in forestry and agroforestry. Proceedings of
the First National Tree Seed Workshop. Kenya Forest Seed Centre. 1-5 July 1991. Nairobi.
Oyalo OA. 1994. On-farm tree seed production. Experiences of KWDP/KWAP,
Kenya. ETC Kenya Consultants, B.V. Place F. and R. Kindt. 1997. The complexities of supply of tree germplasm: The need
for policy interventions. Proceedings of the International Workshop on Policy Aspects of Tree Germplasm Demand and Supply. ICRAF, Nairobi, Kenya. 6 - 8 October, 1997.
Poulsen K. 1993. Seed Quality. Lecture Note C-14. Danida Forest Seed Centre. Rohrbach D.D.R., Z. Bishaw and A.J.G. van Gastel (eds). 1997. Alternative strategies
for smallholder seed supply. Proceedings of an International Conference on
79
Options Strengthening National and Regional Seed Systems in Africa and West Asia. 10-14 March 1997. Harare, Zimbambwe. Patancheru 502 324, Andhra Pradesh, India: ICRISAT
Roper J. and R.W. Roberts. 1999. Deforestation: Tropical forests in decline. CIDA
Forestry Advisers Network (CFAN), Quebec, Canada Ruigu S., M. Nyasimi and J. Aduwo (unpublished) Farmers’ seed production
strategies: a case of the improved fallow technology in Western Kenya. Salim A.S., A.J. Simons, C. Orwa, J. Chege, B. Owuor and A. Mutua. 2002
Agroforestree Database: a tree species reference and selection guide. ICRAF Nairobi, Kenya
Shanks E. and J. Carter. 1994. The organisation of small-scale tree nurseries; Studies
from Asia, Africa and Latin America. Rural development forestry study guide 1. Overseas Development Institute. London, UK.
Sombroek W.G., H.M.H. Braun and B.J.A. van der Poun. 1980. Exploratory soil map and agro-climatic zone map of Kenya. Kenya Soil Survey, Nairobi, Kenya
Spiers N. and M. Stewart. (1992). Use of Grevillea robusta in Embu and Meru Districts of Kenya. in Harwood, C.E., (ed). Grevillea robusta in agroforestry and forestry: proceedings of an international workshop. ICRAF, Nairobi.
Simons T. 1997. The importance of germplasm policies in tree domestication.
Proceedings of the International Workshop on Policy Aspects of Tree Germplasm Demand and Supply. ICRAF, Nairobi, Kenya. 6 - 8 October, 1997.
Stubsgaard F. 1992. Seed Storage. Lecture Note C-9. Danida Forest Seed Centre.
Tengnas B. 1994. Agroforestry extension manual for Kenya. ICRAF, Nairobi
Tripp R. 1997. New seed and old laws. Regulatory and the diversification of national seed systems. Intermediate Technology Publications. London, UK.
Tripp R. 2000. Strategies for seed system development in Sub-Saharan Africa: A study of Kenya, Malawi, Zambia and Zimbabwe. ICRISAT Zimbabwe and Overseas Development Institute (ODI), London, UK
Tripp R. and S. Pal. 2001. The private delivery of public crop varieties: Rice in Andhra Pradesh. World Development Vol. 29. No. 1. Elsevier Science Ltd.
80
Vandenbosch T., P. Taylor, J. Beniest and A. Bekele-Tesema. 2002. Farmers of the future: A strategy for action. World Agroforestry Centre (ICRAF). Nairobi, Kenya.
Wass P. 1999. Kenya’s forests are disappearing: So what? East African Wildlife Society. Swara Magazine, April - September, 1999. Nairobi, Kenya.
Wightman K.E. 1999. Good tree nursery practices: Practical guidelines for community nurseries. ICRAF, Nairobi.
81
APPENDIX Appendix 1: Survey checklist for nursery operators The objective of this survey is to provide information on access, quality and pathways of germplasm for agroforestry tree species through informal systems (apart from government and organizations). We are encouraging nursery operators to fill in this questionnaire and all information will be handled confidentially. Your collaboration will be highly esteemed. 1. Interview schedule no _________ 2. Name of nursery __________________________________ 3. Location of the nursery Village ___________________
District ______________ Division ____________ Location ___________
4. Name of nursery operator ___________________________ Sex (male/female)________
Tertially/college ___________________ 7. For the species you have in stock currently please give the following details Species Seed
supplier Seed sources
Amount of seeds procured*
Pretreatment method (if any)
Number of seedlings germinated*
* Used to calculate the % germination the nursery operator achieved 8. Please give the origin of the seeds for species that are not currently in stock
Seed origin Species Own farm
Neighbours Forest Market KFSC/ICRAF/NGO (specify)
Seed dealer
9. When do you go sourcing out for seeds? – 1. Anytime, 2. When less busy, 3.
When in season, 4. In the dry season 5. In the sowing season ______________________________
10. Do you place orders for seeds or just procure when needed?
__________________________________________________________________ 11. How do you ascertain whether seed is good before buying? __________________
82
12. Is there a seed dealer you stop dealing with? Yes/No
If yes how many and what reason(s) ___________________________________________________________
13. Do you store your seeds after procurement Yes/no
If yes what are the storage facilities? ____________________________________ Do you test the seed later after the storage? Yes/no ____ Which method do you use? ______________________________________________________________
14. What do you consider as the qualities of a good seed dealer
1. Lowest price 2. Information on the seeds supplied 3. Ensured high germination rates 4. Others (specify)
15. What are the major problems with seed supplied by dealers and what solutions
would you suggest? Problem Suggested solution (s)
16. If seeds have been procured from organizations other than private dealers (such as
KEFRI, Forest department etc), how do you compare the seeds of organizations with that of seed dealers? [Compare from one species which you have acquired from different sources or give general view]
Supplier \ Parameter
Price of seeds
Germination rates
Seedling quality
Delivery time when by order
Other
Seed dealers KEFRI/KFSC Forest Department
Ministry of Agric
Other NGO (specify)
Others 17. Do you access enough seeds of all species you require to satisfy the demand of
seedlings by your clients (yes/no) 18. If not, what species have shortfalls __________________________
19. Are there any species with excess supply of seeds Yes/No __________ If yes, what species and what do you do with the surplus seeds ____________________________________________________
20. Any other comments on seed supply ____________________________________ 21. Please give us the contacts of your seed suppliers
Name Area of operation Contact address (telephone if possible)
THANK YOU FOR YOUR ASSISTANCE
84
Appendix 2: Survey questionnaire for seed dealers and nursery operators who collect seeds for themselves
The objective of this survey is to provide information on access, quality and pathways of germplasm for agroforestry tree species through informal systems (apart from government and organizations). We are encouraging seed dealers to fill in this questionnaire and all information will be handled confidentially. Your collaboration will be highly esteemed. Background details 1. Questionnaire number __________________
2. Name of seed dealer ____________________ Sex (male/female)________ 3. Age <20, 21-25, 26-30, 31-35, 36-40, 41-45, 46-50, 50-55, >56 _______
4. Level of education None _____ Primary _____ Secondary ______
Tertially ___________________
5. District ______________ Division ____________ Location ___________
6. How did you get into the seed business 1. Worked in forestry related issues 2. Interaction with MoARD staff activities 3. Initiated through NGOs 4. Used to operate nursery 5. For the love of trees 6. Other (specify) ____________________________________
7. For how long have you been doing this business? Number of years _________ 8. Have you ever attended any course on seed harvesting or technology or related
issues. Yes/No _______ If yes please give details in the table below Course Who offered Duration Details of content
9. What in your opinion constitutes good quality seeds _______________________
Seed stock and collection details
10. For the species currently in stock please give these details Collector Seed origin (give physical location where applicable) Quantity -
kgs Seed supplied (botanical name or local name)
Self Others Native (forest)
Own farm
Market KFSC (NGO specify)
Other
85
11. For the species whose seeds you collect yourself, please fill in the next table Seed harvesting methods Species
name No. of mother trees
Average distance (m) Ground Crown
Why this number of mother trees
12. What criteria do you use to select mother trees from which to obtain seeds?
(Interviewer not to give the criteria but let them come from the seed dealers) Selection criteria Tree species Fruit quality
Fast growing
Straight stem
Resistance to pest
Mature tree
Other (specify)
NB: Tick for all criteria used
13. Do you bulk seeds collected from various sources? Yes no. Give reasons _____ __________________________________________________________________
For seeds procured from others 14. Do you inquire on where the seeds were collected and the mother tree details? _
__________________________________________________________________ 15. How do you know that the seeds you are buying are good enough ___________ 16. Do you carry out any test on the seeds you deal with and how frequently? _____
_________________________________________________________________ 17. Do you have any contracted people who supply seeds of particular species to
you? If yes, do you have access to their seed sources or do you ascertain details on the mother trees they collect from? Give details ________________________
Seed storage details
18. Do you store seeds? Yes / No ______ If yes, please fill the following table for the species whose seeds you store
Name of seed species Method of storage Period of storage Quality verification method
Clients demand, supply and feedback information 19. What species have the greatest demand ________________________________
86
20. Who are your main clients and what is their proportionate turn-over for top three species Species Client Amount Cost/amount % turn-over*
Others (specify) * To calculate 21. Which is the peak demand season/trend for your seeds?
_________________________ How do you determine when to collect/procure seeds? ____________________
22. In your opinion, do you meet the demand by supplying enough of the species
clients need? Yes/No _____ If no what species have shortfalls ____________________________________
23. Are there species in demand that you can not get seeds of? Which species and
what are possible suggestions you can give _____________________________ 24. Do you know which environmental conditions match every seedlot you have?
Yes/No. How would that information help you __________________________ 25. Do you supply any information on the seeds/species when supplying - please give
details _________________________________________________________ 26. Do you inquire from your clients where they will plant the seeds? What kind of
information do you seek from them and how is it useful __________________ 27. Do you inquire for feedback from clients on the seed performance either in the
nurseries or fields? Yes/No How would that information help you _____________
28. Do you see the demand for tree seed increasing or decreasing ___________ How
are you adjusting to the trend? _________________________________ Linkage and network details 29. Do you know of any other seed dealers operating around? Yes/No How do you
interact with each other ______________________________________________ 30. Do you have an association of seed dealers Yes/no
If yes how has the association helped you _____________________________ If no do you think such an association would be of help to you in this business? Please explain _________________________________________________
87
31. Do you relate with the Kenya forestry seed center or any other organization dealing with seeds Yes /No If yes how has the relationship helped you? __________________________ If no do you think such a relationship would be of help to you in this business? Please explain __________________________________________________
32. What are the major constraints in the seed business? Suggest ways in which
they can be solved ____________________________________________ 33. Any other comments about seed supply ____________________________
Thank you for taking your time to answer the questions. We would like to carry some of the seeds you have in stock to help us in comparison with those we have at our stores. We are willing to pay for the quantities we will carry and to communicate the results of our study to you when it’s complete. We also wish to come and collect some more seeds later (after six months) for further comparisons.
THANK YOU FOR YOUR ASSISTANCE
88
Appendix 3: List of nurseries interviewed in the study and their localities Nursery name District Division Location Western Kenya Wakulima Youth Group Vihiga Luanda West Bunyole Shinda women group Vihiga Luanda West Bunyole Jua Kali Nursery Vihiga Luanda South Bunyole Wilfred Nursery Vihiga Tiriki West Taboa Equator Nursery Vihiga Tiriki West Taboa Luero Agroforestry Youth Group Siaya Yala Yala Township Wangneno Mbalawandu Youth Kisumu Maseno N. W. Kisumu Impala Park Kisumu Impala Milimani Kinda Self Help Tree Nursery project Kisumu Winam Kanyakwar Mukoya tree nursery Kisumu Impala Milimani Museum Junction Garden Nursery Kisumu Impala Milimani Nairobi route nursery Kisumu Impala Milimani Mama Flower nursery Kisumu Winam Milimani Nyalenda Tree nursery Kisumu Winam West Kolwa Mary Nurseries Kisumu Winam West Kolwa St Judes Tree nursery Kisumu Winam West Kolwa St Andrew Tree nursery Kisumu Winam West Kolwa Police line Tree nursery Kisumu Winam West Kolwa Kariero tree nursery Kisumu Winam West Kolwa Obila nursery Kisumu Winam West Kolwa Meru Nkumbuku nursery Meru North Muthaara Athwana Magaju nursery Meru Central Abo. Central Ruiri Bundi nursery Meru Central Abo. Central Ruiri Kireria Nursery Meru Central Buuri Naari Stephen M'Ikiao nursery Meru Central Kibirichia Kibirichia Athiri Gakando Group nursery Meru Central Kibirichia Ntugi Kipkona Group nursery Meru Central Kibirichia Ntumburi Zakayo Karuntimi nursery Meru Central Abo. West Katheri Central Karugwa tree nursery Meru Central Abo. West Githongo East
89
Nkubu Associated nurseries Meru Central Nkuene Kathera Kirindini Murithi Nursery Meru Central Nkuene Mikumbuni Kithua nursery Meru Central M. M. East Nyaki Joel Nursery Meru Central M. M. East Munithu Daniel's nursery Meru Central M. M. West Ntima Farm work nursery Meru Central M. M. West Ntima Murea seedlings Meru Central M. M. West Ntima Njuri Ncheke Museum nursery Meru North Uringu Nkomo Kirera Nursery Meru Central Abo. West Kithurine West Kamau nursery Meru Central Buuri Naari Kangau Youth group nursery Meru Central Timau Kangau Nairobi Njoma tree nursery Kiambu Limuru Ngarariga Grace nurseries Kiambu Lari Lari Roromo nurseries Kiambu Lari Gitithua Tigoni Chief's nursery Kiambu Limuru Tigoni Mombasa Road Nursery Machakos Athi river Mavoko Athi River Tree Nursery Machakos Athi river Mavoko Mugesan Nurseries Kajiado Ngong Rongai Kiserian Nursery Kajiado Ngong Kiserian Saitoti nurseries Kajiado Ngong Kiserian Kimani nurseries Kajiado Ngong Ngong Juja nurseries Thika Ruiru Juja Mutuku's nursery trees and flowers Thika Ruiru Ruiru Ricinus nursery Nairobi Kasarani Githurai Survey nursery Nairobi Kasarani Survey Francista Nurseries Nairobi Dagoretti Jamhuri Children Garden nursery Nairobi Dagoretti Riruta Dakikas Nursery Nairobi Langata Bomas Daffodils Nursery Nairobi Langata Karen Green nursery Gitaru Kiambu Kikuyu Muguga Indigenous and exotic tree nursery Kiambu Kikuyu Muguga
90
Appendix 4: List of seed dealers interviewed in the study and their localities Seed dealer name District Division Location Meru Nkumbuku Silinga Meru North Muthaara Athwana Abraham Muthee Kailemia Meru North Muthaara Kitherene Nyaga and Kinoti Meru Central MM West Ntima Stephen M'Ikiao Meru Central Kibirichia Kibirichia Benjamin Mutembei Meru Central North Imenti Nyaki M'Makinya M'Mungania Meru Central North Imenti Nyaki Reuben Meme Meru Central MM West Ntima Paul Muthuri Meru Central Buuri Naari Murugu M'Rintaara Meru Central Abo West Marathi M'Anampiu M'Nkanatha Meru Central Abo West Ntugi Western Kenya Christopher Liyala Busia Butula Marachi Central Wilfred Egesa Busia Matayos Bahayo South Peter Ogola Makokha Busia Matayos Nangoma Titus Mutoka Busia Nambale Nambale Township Alfred George Etiang'o Busia Nambale Nambale Township James Murende Kakamega Shinyalu Isukha Central Agnes Nekesa Trans Nzoia Kwanza Bwayi Angela Nekesa Trans Nzoia Sabaoti Waitalu Zakayo Kwendo Vihiga Luanda S. Bunyole Luka Echenye Vihiga Luanda S. Bunyole Nairobi Protus Simiyu Nairobi Langata Philip Kahia Kiambu Limuru Limuru Muturi Kinuthia Kiambu Kiambaa Karuri Peter Ndungu Kiambu Kiambaa Karuri Patrick Kimwana Kiambu Kikuyu Gitaru Chrysanthus Mabeya Kiambu Kikuyu Muguga Harrison Karanja Kiambu Kiambaa Kiambaa Munyao Ndolo Nairobi Langata Kibera David Magichu Kiambu Limuru Limuru Silas Ojienda Nairobi Dagoretti Riruta
91
Appendix 5: ANOVA table of the achieved germination rates given as percentage of expected germination rates as given in literature
Sum of Squares df Mean Square F Sig.
Between Groups (Combined) 33759.309 7 4822.758 0.863 0.537
Within Groups 1023173.958 183 5591.115
Total 1056933.267 190
Appendix 6: ANOVA on Seedling heights (mm) of Eucalyptus saligna procured
from Meru and western Kenya seed dealers and Cupressus lusitanica procured from peri-urban Nairobi seed dealers after 60 days in the nursery
Area / species Sum of
Squares df Mean
Square F Sig.
Between Groups 24653.2 5 4930.6 4.4 0.001Within Groups 195875.5 174 1125.7
Meru (Eucalyptus saligna) Total 220528.7 179
Between Groups 7526.2 5 1505.2 2.9 0.014Within Groups 89184.1 174 512.6
Western Kenya (Eucalyptus saligna) Total 96710.3 179
Between Groups 50091.4 5 10018.3 54.7 0.000Within Groups 53842.3 294 183.1
Peri-Nairobi (Cupressus lusitanica) Total 103933.7 299
92
Appendix 7: Species shortfalls in nurseries compared species whose seeds are procured in excess and species with rare seed access in Meru, peri-urban Nairobi and western Kenya
Percentages are given as the proportion of the frequency of the species out of the total number of זּtimber al species are mentioned and not as percentage of the number of seed dealers