The study was conducted in Mbarali and Mbozi districts in the Mbeya region. Mbarali district lies between latitudes 70 and 90 S and longitudes 330 8’ and 350 E. Mean annual rainfall ranges from 300-800 mm, with high, unpredictable distribution and the altitude ranging from 750 to 1200 metres above sea level (m.a.s.l.). Mbozi district lies between latitudes of 80 and 90 S and longitudes 320 7’ and 330 2’ E. The East African Rift Valley divides Mbozi district into lowland (Rift Valley or dry part) and highland (wet) areas.
Mean annual rainfall ranges from 750 - 1200 and 1350 - 1550 mm for rift valley and
57
highlands, respectively. The district lies between 900 and 2750 m.a.s.l. The rift valley (900 - 1400m.a.s.l) has deep, well drained volcanic soils, whereas the highlands (1400 - 2750 m.a.s.l.) have loamy and reddish soils with low natural fertility regeneration. The two districts have a unimodal rainfall, which falls between November and May.
The study sites comprised eight villages, four in each district and involved 214 maize farmers (Table 2.1). In order to record farmers’ perceptions on agronomic and breeding aspects across the maize farming communities, the study was conducted in Mbarali in January, 2008, when the crop was at the vegetative stage, whereas in Mbozi, it was conducted in June, 2008, when the crop was at or near harvesting stage. For convenience and economic reasons the growth stages of these crops were considered, in order to gather data on crop management and on the aspects of grain yield and physiological maturity, and their components. All farmers were asked the same questions.
Table 2.1: Study sites and number of participants by gender
District Village Sex Total
Female Male
Mbarali Itipingi 7 20 27
Igomelo 5 16 21
Utengule-Usangu 4 22 26
Ruiwa 12 15 27
SUB TOTAL 28 䡮䡮䡮1 101
Mbozi Igamba 7 24 31
Msia 11 10 21
Msangano 17 14 31
Chitete 8 22 30
SUB TOTAL 43 70 113
TOTAL 71 143 214
2.2.2 Criteria for selecting study sites
The criteria for selecting study sites were obtained jointly with district and community officials during a pre-survey tour. The following factors were considered:
maize as an important crop, i.e. food, feed, and cash,
intermediate altitudes (900-1600 m.a.s.l.), targeting a bit shorter maturity period compared with high altitude,
logistical reasons, i.e. road accessibility, and
58 rainfall of
≤
1000 mm per annum.2.2.3 Sampling procedures and experimental design
A pre-survey tour was conducted in each district before formal interviews were held to select study sites, gain an insight into situation analysis, test study tools, and get items for pair-wise matrix ranking. The districts and villages were obtained by purposive sampling. The sampling frame was maize farmers in the respective districts in which a total of 214 farmers selected from Mbarali (101) and Mbozi (113) were randomly sampled. Farmers were interviewed individually using questionnaires that constituted a formal survey. In each village, farmers who could be interviewed in the formal survey and those who could not were divided into three groups, based on their socio-economic status. Other criteria were not applicable, thus the poverty index was established as high, medium, and low income. Extension officers and community leaders assisted with the anonymous study, conducted with farmers at village offices. Grouping criteria included the ability to purchase agricultural inputs with the voucher system, the ability to educate their children, ownership of land, use of iron-sheet thatched houses, food security throughout the year and lenience in paying government levies and taxes, among others.
Items for cross validation were obtained from farmers and local officials after their views, obtained during the pre-survey stage of the study, were grouped into four categories and subjected to the three established socioeconomic strata above:
i) limitations to maize production, ii) suggested solutions,
iii) uses of maize, and
iv) traits in the desired varieties.
Information from group discussions was evaluated across the three socioeconomic strata, using a pair-wise matrix sheet. The generated information was organised and used to validate the information from the formal survey. The information helped to check on the validity of individual responses, test the level of agreement, reliability, and repetition of the results from individual interviews. The scores given by respective social
59
strata to the sub-factors was used to infer the agreement and disagreement among sub- factors. The closeness of scores among socioeconomic strata would imply some levels of agreement, whereas contrasting scores would suggest some disagreement among the socioeconomic strata. Furthermore, the validation helps to involve both quantitative and qualitative data, consequently maintaining the objectivity of the results of participatory rural appraisal (Clavarrino et al., 1995; Martin, 1995; Grenier, 1998;
Bänziger et al., 2000). Very sensitive information would entail a low percentage in agreement (Clavarrino et al., 1985; Grenier, 1998). The native speaker to the respective communities was therefore included in a pre-survey team to deal with problems related to sensitive information.
2.2.4 Data collected
Farmers were questioned in Kiswahili, the national language, except in a few cases, where a native speaker to the community translated the survey items and the following data were collected during the formal survey:
Socioeconomic characteristics of farmers;
Farmers’ training level;
Crops grown in the study area, including the land utilised per crop;
Categories of maize varieties;
Agronomic features and crop management;
Preferences of varieties by physiological maturity in months;
Choice of characters and stage of crop growth considered important for earliness and high grain yield potential;
The stay-green and rate of kernel dry-down characters;
Accessibility to credit, extension and input services; and Major limitations to maize productivity and suggested solutions.
2.2.5 Data analysis
The questionnaire data was processed and analysed by the SPSS computer program (Version 15.0). Scores from group discussions were summarised from pair-wise matrix scores across all socio-economic categories in the eight villages and these were compared against SPSS output to validate the results of the entire study.
60 2.3 Results