Module 4 - Tree seed distribution and
tree seed forecasting
Tony Simons, ICRAF, Nairobi
Tree seed distribution and forecasting
1. Current scenario
2. Clients
3. Demand and Supply
4. Plant Breeder’s Rights (cf. crops)
5. Control of Tree Seed Sector
6. Tree type and germplasm origin
7. Germplasm delivery
8. Farmer demand for trees
9. Sources of tree propagules
10. DFSC examples
11. Germplasm forecasting
12. Seed or seedlings
1. Current Scenario
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Seed supply (timing and amount) is cited as a constraint to tree planting
Well meaning free seed handouts prevail but are they sustainable
Marketing of tree seed is in its infancy (poor naming)
Seed delivery mechanisms are under-researched for trees
Few methods for germplasm demand forecasting are available
Little private sector involvement in tree seed industry
Uncertainly in changes over time in farmer self-sufficiency of germplasm
Lack of coordination of activities by National Tree Seed Centres, bilateral
projects, NGOs (local and international), private sector, seed dealers
Ambiguous/weak IPR and Plant Breeder’s Rights conditions
Most farmers are not well informed about trees or tree seed
Certification and regulation can both help and hinder seed availability
No single approach will work for the diversity of trees, farmers
and locations
Problems of germplasm supply
Number
of species
Popular species
Second string species
Species for diversity
Amount germplasm
needed per species (kg)
5
100
50
10
500
1
2. Clients
Can be classified according to:
• Size of farm (focus on small-scale but perhaps not exclusively)
• Resource endowment levels (dimensions of poverty)
• Gender
• Tree planting culture (established, recent or beginning)
• Tree function needs (fruit, timber, fodder)
Farmer surveys reveal:
• 75% of tree germplasm comes from own farm/neighbour
• perception of low seed and tree information availability
• Current trees on farm are a footprint of past and not
necessarily what farmers want
Changes over time in the source of germplasm for timber spp.
(Peru, 1996)
80
70
60
50
original
present
40
30
20
10
0
forest
field
relation
source
n'bour
unspec.
Changes over time in the source of germplasm for fruit spp.
(Peru, 1996)
70
60
50
40
original
present
30
20
10
0
forest
field
relation
n'bour
source
market
outside unspec.
Form of original germplasm for fruit trees
(Peru, 1996)
wildings
seedlings
unspec.
grafts
seeds
Seed sources
Nurseries
No. of species
Neighbours’ farm
8
11
Own farm
20
25
Forest
2
2
Forest Dept (incl KFSC)
9
26
Meru town
4
5
ATDAM / ICIPE / MoA
4
2
KARI (Embu)
4
2
MDFP
2
5
CRF Ruiru
3
2
Local markets
6
7
Common land
2
2
Far places (not specific)
8
6
Respondents can not tell
39
23
3. Demand and Supply
Demand
• How much seed is required by farmers? And when?
• Farmers may source off-farm or on-farm
• May be indirectly expressed by others (e.g. NGOs)
• Supply may drive demand (can only plant what is available)
• Farmers are a very diverse group with diverse demands
• Beware the “Miracle” species
Supply
• Formal or informal system
• Current mechanisms are inadequate
• Supply can be by trade, barter, swap, exchange or gift
Tree Seed Demand
Key issues:
1. Lack of assessment methodology
2. Inadequate involvement of farmers
3. Uncertain economics of tree seed provision
4. Inappropriate policies
5. Lack of technical information
6. Poor extension knowledge/experience
Tree Seed Supply
Key issues:
1. Seed production areas/trees lacking
2. Markets poorly functioning/understood
3. Inadequate methods for handling and use of seed
4. Problems with seed quality
5. Mismatch of scale
6. Organisational difficulties
Demand and Supply of Tree Seed
Location of
seed trees
Wild
stands
Plantations
Farms
Supplier/
Collector
Nurseries
NGOs
Farmers
& Assoc.
Users
of seed
Seed
Producers
Farmers
Nursery
Operators
Station
trials
Seed
Dealers
Plantations
NTSCs
Central
Seed orchards
NARIs
Donor
Projects
Research
Trials/SSO Conservation
4. Plant Breeder’s Rights
PBR are granted by a State to plant breeders to exclude
others from commercialising varieties they have developed.
They only operate within a state’s boundary and generally
have a minimum duration of 15-20 years.
PBR protection is based on the assumption that the prospect
of returns on investment will stimulate breeders to develop
varieties.
Variety – must be distinct, uniform and stable
UPOV (Union for Protection of New Varieties of Plants)
• Intergovernmental Convention set up in 1961
• To date 47 countries have enacted legislation
• Only 11 are developing tropical countries
Argentina (1994)
Bolivia
(1999)
Brazil
(1999)
Colombia (1996)
Ecuador (1997)
Mexico
(1997)
Panama (1999)
Paraguay (1997)
Kenya
(1999)
South Africa (1977)
(http://www.upov.org/eng/index.htm)
China (1999)
Type of seed
For annual crops the use of improved or certified seed
is a good indirect indicator of the type of agriculture.
Commercial agriculture generally uses improved seed,
either bought or saved, while subsistence agriculture relies
mostly on landraces and seed obtained through informal
channels.
When there is a well developed seed industry, and farmers
are well informed, seed marketing starts to be deregulated,
and certification becomes less important.
Whilst some countries have well developed tree seed centres,
the tree seed industry is not well developed. For crops the
initiation of the seed industry has been directly linked to modern
plant breeding.
Evolution of crop seed industry
Public
sector
involvement
Initiation of modern plant breeding
Initiation of seed production by public sector
Initiation of private seed industry
Creation of seed certification
Arrival of multinationals
Private
sector
involvement
Evolution of tree seed industry
- plantation species •
Initiation of modern plant breeding
(since 1950s, 40 taxa, 1-4th generation)
•
Initiation of seed production by public sector
(more seed collection than production, FAO, bilateral donors, government)
•
Initiation of private seed industry
(just beginning, SMURFIT, Costa Rica, cooperatives - CAMCORE)
•
Creation of seed certification
(only OECD scheme, incipient legislation in developing countries)
•
Arrival of multinationals
(Shell Forestry dabbled in 1980s, tax-break biotech companies in SE Asia)
for agroforestry species, bilaterals and private seed dealers operate
Annual crops compared to trees
Crop seed systems (formal and informal) have been in place
for a long time
• Crop seeds are consumed by humans (saved seed)
• Trees are perennial
• Trees have a higher multiplication potential
(annually and generationally)
•
Legislation on tree seed lower priority
5. Control of tree seed sector
In 1992, a IUFRO/GTZ tree seed workshop recommended
tropical countries should:
• Pass new national tree seed laws (sensu OECD)
• Set up national designated authority
• License all tree seed producers/collectors
• Construct seed source inventory, use to give approval
• Certify all tree seed (identity, origin, disease)
• Delineate of eco-zones for all tree species
• Require mandatory seed testing
Are these feasible, are they a priority for agroforestry trees?
OECD Scheme for control of forest reproductive
material in international trade
• First meeting on the subject in 1966 in Paris
• Scheme established in 1974
• Aim is to encourage production and use of tree seed that
ensures their trueness to name
• Publication of a National List of Approved Basic Material is a
pre-requisite to implementation of the Scheme
• Seed zones (regions of provenance) have to be established
within a country and a detailed seed stand identification data
sheet prepared
• Four categories of reproductive material
- “source-identified seed stands” (natural or artificial)
- “selected category” for phenotypic superiority
- “untested seed orchards”
- “tested category” (seed stands, orchards and clones)
Is the OECD scheme realistic for the numerous agroforestry species?
- interestingly Rwanda applied in 1992 to join the scheme
Eucalyptus Case Study – what prospects for other species?
• First seed exported 1770s, steady increase since
• 30,000 kg exported each year from Australia
• Reliable figures on amount of seed exported are hard to obtain as
suppliers are reluctant to provide information on their markets
• One third of all plantation trees established is a eucalypt
• Presence of Australian Tree Seed Centre – centre of excellence
• Australia supports OECD certification scheme but does enforce it
as it is thought of as a small industry and the cost of enforcement
would be out of proportion of its value
• Few government controls, no self-regulation so it’s “buyer beware”
• Most seed dealers are professional, but unscrupulous ones also
6. Tree type and germplasm origin
Fuel
Live
wood Fallow fences Fodder Medicine
Timber
Fruit
Undocumented
origin







Open-pollinated
landrace







Provenance
identified







Seedling seed
orchard







Clonal seed
orchard
Clones from
mother blocks
 - infrequently
 - normally
 - very common


Emphasis of various stakeholders on quantity
and quality of tree germplasm
Quality
Quantity
ARIs
IARCs
Bilateral project
NARS
NGOs
CBOs
Farmers
Seed dealers
7. Germplasm Delivery
• Distribution
- macro-delivery to NARS, NGOs, CBOs
• Dissemination
- directly to farmers, nurseries, farmer groups
• Diffusion
- farmer to farmer exchange, expansion
8. Farmer demand for trees:
Tree taxa
Family (e.g. Fabaceae)
Genera (e.g. Acacia)
Species (e.g. Calliandra calothyrsus)
Provenance (Retalhuleu – Gliricidia sepium)
Landrace (Mt Kenya – Vitex keniensis)
Variety (K8 – Leucaena leucocephala)
Clone (Tommy Atkins – Mango)
Tree function
Fruit
Timber
Medicine
Fodder
Fencing
Fallow
Shade/support
Incentives
fertiliser, tree planting subsidy, livestock, food for work
Linked benefits
access to NARS/NGOs, chief, officials; human interest
9. Sources and types of tree propagule for farmers
Nurseries
Seed
(for direct
seeding and
nurseries)
Seed
dealer
NGO/Govt
Project
On-farm
Nearby farms
or forest
Group
Individual
Central












Seedling

(nursery raised)
Clone
(cutting, graft,
marcot)
Wilding
(in situ)
Transplanted
wilding
 - occasionally
 - regularly
 - most usually








10. DFSC examples
No country in Central America, Africa or Asia has during the past 15
years established a satisfactory tree seed procurement system, with or without donor support!
The technical part is ‘easy’, - not the limiting factor.
The organisational, political, market part is difficult.
No model works every where. Some models work in some parts of
some countries.
Factors: No. of seed users, size of demand, no. of spp. in demand,
ecological variation, size of country, infrastructure, national
capacity (financial, adm.).
Examples from Tanzania, Nepal and Indonesia.
Nepal: Tree Improvement and Silvicultural Component
Donor support for more than 30 years (Australia, UK and
Denmark).
Centralised to semi-centralised??
Meets approx. 10% of the national demand.
Quality of seed, - probably mixed.
Price OK.
Sell only in big quantities (from TISC), and only to users
close to the 3 seed centres.
Seed co-operatives: Impact in small local areas. Model
might be good, but total impact is small.
Seed in small bags: Under test at present.
Tanzania: National Tree Seed Programme.
Danida support for more than 15 years.
Centralised or decentralised??
Meets less than 5% of the national demand.
Seed of OK quality but expensive.
Sell only in big quantities.
Provide seed only to users close to the three seed centres.
DFSC provided a Mercedes, when there was a need for a Morris Minor!!
Indonesia: Indonesia Tree Seed Project.
Nordic and Danida support for 12 years.
Only capacity building through training, extension, information and
advisory services, - no direct seed production.
Seed production by seed dealers and big private companies.
Impact?? If yes, on the country’s own conditions.
Has put tree seed on the government’s agenda, - a lot more govt
inputs to the tree seed sector (10 times up), - good or bad??
Information, extension etc. lead to demand for quality seed (when
users are ‘ready’), which leads to the production of quality seed.
Quality seed to farmers through NGO’s as part of extension (collab.
with ICRAF, Bogor).
What can fail a seed distribution system?
• Lack of preparedness-poor seed procurement
strategies
• Poor infrastructure –inadequate means of
communication
• Distances involved – if excessive
• (Temporary) storage facilities
What can fail a seed distribution system? ( cont.)
• Inappropriate packaging materials
• Type of seed being distributed
• Mode and Language of instructions on seed
use/treatments
• Timing of the event(s)- should not conflict with
other farmers’ activities that may deemed to
be more important e. g., harvesting
DFSC Conclusions:
Difficult to provide real quality seed, when users do not attach a value
to seed.
What to do?
Tree seed should in general be part of much ‘wider’ programmes (land
rehabilitation, forest management and establishment, rural
development, etc.). Then tree seed will find its right ‘level’ and it will be
easier to sell to donors, - maybe.
Tree seed procurement systems have to be ‘tailor made’ and one
system works only for one part of the demand (companies, donors,
farmers, etc.) or in one geographical area (co-operatives, NGOs).
More emphasis on training, extension, information (capacity building), less on setting up ‘systems’ (DFSC/ISAAC).
Realise that development takes time, - in Denmark it took 20 years to
establish a well functioning tree seed procurement system (1946-66).
11. Germplasm Forecasting
Currently no methods available
Important as shortage of seed is often cited as a problem
Often dealing with a tree rich but species poor landscape
so getting germplasm of new species or low species of
low abundance is a problem
Amounts needed/forecast will be affected by
- germination and survival rates
- novelty and uniqueness of species
- adoption/expansion rates
- ability/time when farmers can be self-sufficient
- degree of extension efforts
Seed needs for plantation tree species
% of planting by species
Annual
planting
(1000 ha)
Africa
Other
Acacia Eucalyptus broad-leafed Pinus conifer
Other
194,000
6
30
27
27
10
Asia
3,500,000
8
12
45
15
20
South
America
4,458,000
0
46
8
45
1
Total
8,152,000
4
31
24
32
9
Number
of
trees
required
what %
propagules
will come
from farmer’s
fields ?
Time
Clonal fruit trees
Fallow species of short generation
e.g. Tephrosia vogelii
Orthodox species of average
generation interval
Hybrid timber tree
Farmer self-sufficiency in germplasm will happen at varying times for different trees
12. Seeds or Seedlings
Community
Nursery
Nursery
Association
Community
Nursery
Central Nursery
Nursery
Association
Community
Nursery
Established small-scale nurseries
Novice small-scale nurseries
Who are the Tree Extension Officers of the future?
Tree nursery operators
Elements of a tree seed system
Farmer groups
Govt
institutions
farmers
ICRAF short term,
long term?
ICRAF
nurseries
Species selection
Extension
providers
Govt
Farmers
NGO’s, CBO’s
NGO’s CBO’s
Seed sourcing
Private sector?
nurseries
Seed quality
Farmers
Users
CBOs
Seed producers
What institutional
framework?
Extension
providers
Extension
providers
Tree nursery
networks
NTSCs
Seed dealers
CBOs
NGOs
Seed marketing
NGOs
Seed multiplication
How information
flow?