Native Fruit Tree Improvement in Amazonia: An Overview - Indigenous Fruit Trees in the Tropics: Domestication, Utilization and Commercialization - page 106

agroforestry systems and native fruit crops in Amazonia. They participated in the
peach palm expeditions of 1983-1984 and created a collection at Araracuara
on the Caquetá River. They also did considerable work with inchi as a nut and
oil crop, but it has not been adopted by Colombian fruit growers.
In the 1990s, the Bolivian government, with support from the USA and the
European Community, started a programme called Alternative Tropical
Development, designed to identify and develop economically attractive
alternatives to illicit coca production ( Erythroxylum coca Lam.). Among the
native Amazonian fruit species, they worked with camu-camu, pineapple,
peach palm (for heart-of-palm) and cocoa in both monoculture orchards and
agroforestry systems (F. Alemán, Bolivia, 2006, personal communication).
Although they have had some success, their impact has been limited due to the
high returns available from illicit coca production.
6.3 Participatory versus Conventional Improvement
Participatory improvement is defined as genetic improvement that includes
close farmer-researcher collaboration (Christinck et al ., 2005). The approach is
essentially a reaction to some shortcomings of conventional plant breeding.
The basic premise of participatory plant breeding is that by involving farmers in
such a way that they can express their preferences and their local knowledge
can be effectively used, the relevance of research products to the needs of small
farmers will be increased. Thus, the fundamental objective is to ensure that
research responds to farmers' needs (Vernooy, 2003). Increased relevance can
be achieved at various levels. For example, selection of species and
identification of traits for improvement, and production of germplasm for 'real'
conditions, including potentially marginal sites, are feasible.
The increased relevance of participatory research products, coupled with
the nature of the process itself, also promises to facilitate adoption, especially
by avoiding delays in transfer of technology from experimental stations to
farmers' fields (Simons and Leakey, 2004; Christinck et al ., 2005). However,
careful planning and design will still be necessary to avoid delays in transferring
technology from participating farmers to wider target groups. In addition, the
approach promises to correct another problem associated with conventional
plant breeding, i.e. the replacement of landraces with 'modern' varieties, which
is widely considered to be the principal cause of erosion of crop genetic
resources. Participatory approaches are likely to maintain and even increase
diversity, as different groups of farmers in different places are unlikely to have
the same priorities and needs and, even in one location, farmers may well
prefer retention of a 'bundle' of landraces for different needs and conditions.
Rather than being abandoned, in many cases landraces may be preserved as
sources of material for breeding programmes (Christinck et al ., 2005). Also, the
presence in farmers' fields of diverse experimental plantings and, in some
cases, of new seed sources, may directly increase within-species diversity.
Finally, participatory improvement has the potential to serve as a
mechanism for sharing the benefits from the sustainable use of biodiversity, as