Seeds, hands, and lands Maize genetic resources of highland Guatemala in space and time Promotoren Prof. dr. P. Richards Hoogleraar Technologie en Agrarische Ontwikkeling Wageningen Universiteit Prof. dr. ir. A.K. Bregt Hoogleraar Geo-informatiekunde Wageningen Universiteit Co-promotoren Dr. ir. S. de Bruin Universitair docent, Centrum voor Geo-Informatie Wageningen Universiteit Dr. ir. H. Maat Universitair docent, leerstoelgroep Technologie en Agrarische Ontwikkeling Wageningen Universiteit Promotiecommissie Dr. E.F. Fischer (Vanderbilt University, Nashville, USA) Dr. ir. Th.J.L. van Hintum (Centrum voor Genetische Bronnen Nederland, Wageningen) Prof. dr. L.E. Visser (Wageningen Universiteit) Prof. dr. K.S. Zimmerer (University of Wisconsin-Madison, USA) Dit onderzoek is uitgevoerd binnen CERES Research School for Resource Studies for Development en C.T. de Wit Graduate School for Production Ecology and Resource Conservation. Seeds, hands, and lands Maize genetic resources of highland Guatemala in space and time Jacob van Etten Proefschrift ter verkrijging van de graad van doctor op gezag van de rector magnificus van Wageningen Universiteit, prof. dr. M.J. Kropff, in het openbaar te verdedigen op woensdag 11 oktober 2006 des namiddags te vier uur in de Aula © Jacob van Etten, except Chapter 2 Keywords: plant genetic resources, Guatemala, maize ISBN: 90-8504-485-5 Cover design: Marisa Rappard For Laura and Hanna Acknowledgments This work was financially supported by Wageningen University and Research Centre through the CERES Research School for Resource Studies for Human Development and through the C.T. de Wit Graduate School for Production Ecology and Resource Conservation. I am grateful for having such good supervisors, who advised me on crucial points but also allowed me much freedom. Paul Richards has been a source of inspiration since I began my studies in Wageningen. Even before this research started, Paul procured finances to write a research proposal. Arnold Bregt welcomed me in his group after which I disappeared to the field to come back three years later. Arnold has supported me greatly in many ways, but especially in helping to structure my work and time efficiently. Sytze de Bruin suggested classification trees as an interesting method and helped to write Chapter 4. Harro Maat, among other things, read many radically different versions of the Introduction, giving helpful suggestions until the end. He also supported me with practical matters. Mario Fuentes generously supported my field work in Guatemala by helping to procure an experimental plot, and by organising the genetic analysis. He also made it possible for me to learn about ongoing maize breeding projects in Guatemala and participate in several activities. ICTA as an institute also supported my work in various ways. Many persons helped me doing surveys and field experiments. I would like to mention Juan Espital, a constant factor in Guatemalan agricultural research. I would also like to thank Adela, Belinda, Filemón and Melvin for their dedicated work. The men and women who took time to answer our sometimes silly questions are thanked again here. I hope that my work contributes to a better understanding and use of the green riches they maintain on their farms. My colleagues at CGI and TAO made work very pleasant. Gerd Weitkamp endured many disturbances of his work. I enjoyed the lengthy conversations with Edwin Nuijten about crop genetic resources. Mijn familie wil ik bedanken voor het helpen met het vinden, inrichten en schoonmaken van ons huis in Wageningen. Mijn ouders hielpen met alles wat er gedaan moest worden in Nederland terwijl wij weg waren. Bedankt! Mi familia política hizo sentirme en casa en Guatemala. Mis suegros y mis cuñados nos ayudaron con un sinnúmero de cosas. ¡Muchas gracias! Laura me ha apoyado en estos cuatro años más que nadie. Te amo. En Hanna maakte alle dagen speciaal. Ik hou van jou. Soli Deo Gloria . Table of contents Chapter 1: Introduction 12 Examining crop improvement 12 Rationale 13 Problem, conceptual framework and research questions 15 Study area 17 Chapter outline 18 Chapter 2: Historical change of maize diversity in regional context (±1500-2005) 20 Introduction 20 Imagining seed dynamics 22 Postclassic Maya societies (until 1524) 23 Colonial society (1524-1821) 25 Independence and the Conservatives (1821-1871) 29 Liberal reforms (1871-1944) 30 Revolutionising society (1944-1978) 32 Political violence (1979-1984) 34 Democratic capitalism (1985 to present) 35 Discussion 37 Future perspectives 38 Chapter 3: Changes in farmers knowledge of maize diversity (1927/37-2004) 42 Introduction 42 Maize diversity and cultivar naming 43 Context and baseline data 45 Research question and methods 47 Discussion 59 Conclusions 63 Appendix: Consensus analysis 64 Chapter 4: Regional and local maize seed exchange and replacement 66 Introduction 66 Methodology 67 Results 70 Discussion 79 Conclusions 83 Chapter 5: Geographical patterns of genetic diversity 88 Introduction 88 Materials and methods 89 Data analysis 92 Results 95 Discussion 102 Conclusions 104 Chapter 6: Conclusions 106 Main findings of this study 106 An open system perspective 108 Implications for genetic management 110 Summaries in English, Dutch and Spanish 113 Summary 113 Samenvatting 115 Resumen 118 Bibliography 121 About the author 133 Chapter 1 Introduction Chapter 1: Introduction Examining crop improvement This study examines the genetic resources of maize in the western highlands of Guatemala. Genetic diversity of crops is an important component of farming systems and agricultural innovation. New cultivars and varieties can improve the performance of existing farming systems. Better understanding of the mechanisms underlying crop diversity may help innovation in these systems in order to support food security. Agricultural research and, more specifically, the development of improved varieties through plant breeding, is an important and efficient approach to enhance food security and economic development (Morris and Heisey 2003). Studies of current farmer practices dealing with crop diversity are important, because modern varieties and breeding techniques have failed to reach a large part of the world’s farming systems. Beginning in the 1960s, the Green Revolution, which promoted the use of modern varieties, had a major impact on agricultural productivity (Evenson and Gollin 2003b). However, at present, some 1.4 billion persons still depend largely on self- produced seed (FAO 1998). 1 Maize, the subject of this study, is a typical case. At the end of the 1990s, 52.9% of the area under maize in tropical regions was planted with landraces or modern varieties that were recycled at least three times. In Latin America, this percentage is even slightly higher (Morris 2001). The impact of the Green Revolution on farming systems has also been unequal, geographically and socially (Evenson and Gollin 2003a). To overcome the geographical and social limitations of the Green Revolution, beginning in the 1970s and 1980s (but drawing on older scientific traditions), agricultural researchers have emphasised the need for more specific targeting of crop improvement by means of farming systems or on-farm research (Hildebrand and Poey 1985, Simmonds 1985). Farming systems research was done on farms in order to take into account the specific conditions and limitations of those environments. However, the quantitative approaches followed in farming systems research soon came under critique. For instance, Suppe (1984) argued that the diversity among different farms is too high to allow for generalisations of the kind pursued in farming systems research. Agricultural research outcomes are only made useful to farmers by careful interpretative translation to the context of the farm, not by extrapolation of statistical results. Participatory approaches to development were in part an attempt to address these issues of contextuality. Scientific innovations are seldom readily translated to the conditions of farms, but are actively reworked by farmers to incorporate them in the socio-technological fabric of their livelihoods. Participatory or collaborative approaches recognise that farmers are not only passive recipients of scientific innovations but play (and should play) an important, active role in innovation and knowledge development. Participatory or collaborative approaches are being promoted and used in the context of crop improvement as well (Almekinders and Elings 2001, Almekinders and Louwaars 2002, Cleveland and Soleri 2002, McGuire et al. 2003, Weltzien et al. 2000). The emerging approaches in this broad field underpin a 1 This is a rough estimate only; precise figures are lacking. The global agricultural population is estimated at 2.6 billion persons (96 % living in developing countries) (FAOSTAT 2005a). Introduction 13 new set of insights or assumptions about farming practices, which tend to emphasise the local, specific nature of farmer innovation. This study contributes to the proposed approaches, which have to be seen as evolving and open for improvement. The next section will offer a conceptual critique of some ideas prominent in the literature on participatory crop development. As will be argued below, many studies treat farming practice from an individualistic point of view. This distracts attention from the connections between households and villages which are materialised through the exchange of seeds. Directing attention to these components may bring into focus different,