Setting Priorities among Indigenous Fruit Tree Species in Africa: Examples from Southern, Eastern and Western Africa Regions - Indigenous Fruit Trees in the Tropics: Domestication, Utilization and Commercialization - page 2

timber) and services (e.g. windbreak or shade) are often difficult to value
(Franzel et al ., 1996).
In the past, researchers' own interests and opinions on the importance of
particular species were probably the most important criteria in setting research
priorities when choosing between tropical agroforestry tree species. This in turn
led to a focus on a few exotic species, e.g. Eucalyptus spp. and Leucaena
leucocephala (Lam.) de Wit, in many areas at the expense of valuable, but little
known, indigenous species. The priority-setting exercises conducted in Africa
and reported in this chapter, in contrast, provide a more objective and
systematic approach to dealing with setting priorities and arriving at a best
possible set of research activities. The priority-setting exercises encouraged the
participation and integrated the views and expertise of various stakeholders:
rural households, research scientists, development practitioners and policy
makers.
This chapter presents examples of the setting of priorities among
indigenous fruit species for domestication research in three regions of Africa:
the humid lowlands of West Africa (Franzel et al ., 1996), the semi-arid Sahelian
zone of West Africa (ICRAF, 1996), and the miombo woodlands of southern
Africa (Maghembe et al ., 1998). An example is also given from southern Africa
of setting priorities among indigenous fruit products. First, the methods are
discussed. Next, we present the results from each of the three areas. Finally, the
priority-setting process is assessed and we present the lessons learned.
1.2 Approaches for Priority Setting
Priority setting is not just an analytical process - it also seeks to bring about
agreement and consensus among the various stakeholders involved in research
on indigenous fruits (Franzel et al ., 1996). Simplicity, transparency and
collaborative appraisal are three features of an effective priority-setting
approach. These features encourage the participation and support of the
various partners in the priority-setting process, including scientists of national
and international research institutions, policy makers, donor agencies, and
farmers. The challenge of priority setting is to design a procedure that combines
simplicity, transparency, participation and analytical rigour in order to ensure
that the right decisions are made and that suitable conditions are created for
successfully implementing them.
The methods used in the priority-setting procedures presented in this
chapter are summarized in Franzel et al . (1996). The priority-setting exercises
took place in the humid lowlands of West Africa in 1994/1995, in the Sahel in
1995, and in the miombo woodlands of southern Africa in 1997/1998. Over
time, alterations to the priority species have been made, as conditions and
markets have changed. The priority-setting procedure involves seven key steps,
although there has been some variation in the methods used in each zone
(Fig. 1.1).