Figure 1: A conceptual Framework for the study to assess the influence of seed systems governance on access to seeds in Arua district: a case study of pigeonpea seed system ……………….14

Figure 2: A map of Uganda showing the location of North-western Farmlands agro-ecological zone (Worthmann and Eledu, 1999)…………………………………….………………………49

LIST OF TABLES

Table Page

Table 1: Categories of Respondents, Population, Sample Size, and Strategy for the Study …..34

Table 2: Categories of Respondents, Sample Size, and Strategy for the Study ……………….34

Table 3: Phased work plan for the research project ………………………………….………..47

Table 4: Budget estimates for the research project ……………………………………………48

LIST OF ACRONYMS

CVI Content Validity Index

FAO Food and Agriculture Organization

FAOSTAT Food and Agriculture Organization Statistics

ICRISAT International Crop Research Institute for Semi-Arid Tropics

ITPGRFA International Treaty on Plant Genetic Resources for Food and Agriculture

IITA International Institute of Tropical Agriculture

KII Key Informant Interviews

MAAIF Ministry of Agriculture, Animal Industry, and Fisheries

NARO National Agriculture Research Organisation

NSCS National Seed Certification Services

PVPA Plant Variety Protection Act

QDS Quality Declared Seed

UNADA Uganda National Agro input dealers Association

UPOV International Union for the Protection of New Varieties of Plants

UTAMU Uganda Technology and Management University

ZARDI Zonal Agriculture Research Institute

CHAPTER ONE

1.0 INTRODUCTION

1.1 Introduction

This study will examine the influence of seed systems governance on the access to pigeonpea seeds in Arua District, Uganda, focusing on the case of pigeonpea seed system. It explores how different governance structures influence access to and use of pigeonpea seed for smallholder farmers in Arua District. This study will also assess the benefits and challenges associated with different seed systems governance structures in terms of improved access to and use of pigeonpea seed, as well as their effect on access to quality seeds and related benefits of using quality seeds by farmers in the district. Finally, the study will identify potential strategies to improve seed systems governance in the district.

Seed systems refer to a range of technologies, organizational set-ups, and market and non-market institutions through which seeds are accessed and used (McGuire and Sperling, 2013). Smallholder farmers access seeds through both informal and formal seed systems (Louwaars and de Boef, 2012). In the informal seed systems, farmers conduct seed production, selection and storage and use their own saved seed or access seed through informal networks where seed is exchanged, received as gift, bartered, or purchased from local markets.

Seed systems governance in Uganda refers to the management and regulation of the production, distribution, and utilization of agricultural seeds in the country. It involves various stakeholders including government agencies, seed companies, farmers’ organizations, and research institutions. The governance framework aims to ensure the availability of quality seeds, promote farmers’ access to diverse and affordable seed varieties, and enhance seed security. Effective seed systems governance is crucial for sustainable agricultural development and food security in Uganda (Oxfam, 2010) thus directly contributing to household livelihoods in a predominantly peasantry farming society such in Uganda and specifically Arua district.

This chapter will also detail the background to the study, the statement of the problem, the general objectives of the study, the research questions, the hypotheses, the scope of the study, the significance, justification, and operational definition of terms and concepts.

1.2 Background to the study

Globally Less than 10 percent of the world’s smallholder farmers have access to the improved, quality seeds that can halt hunger and tolerate climate change impacts, a new report shows (Adigoun et al., 2022). The Access to Seeds Index 2019 report reveals that only 47 million of the world’s 500 million smallholder farmers were able to acquire improved seeds from the world’s 13 biggest global seed companies in 2017 (Otieno et al., 2022). According to (Sanou et al., 2022), states there is need for the global seed industry to do more, noting that reaching additional smallholder farmers with improved seeds is critical to tackle rising malnourishment as the number of people suffering from hunger rose from 784 million in 2014 to nearly 821 million in 2017, The role of the global seed industry remains crucial if Sustainable Development Goal 2 on zero hunger is to be achieved by 2030 (Sperling et al., 2021).

There is a big disparity to access to quality seeds with developing countries like in sub Saharan Africa lacking quality seedlings disproportionately to the western counter parts (Schreinemachers etal., 2021), this situation is equally high in African continent where Farmers have limited access to seeds with a range of high-performing and adaptable varieties that meet farmers’ and customers’ needs, adoption rates of modern varieties remain stubbornly low in SSA due to limited access and awareness. Often, quality seed is only available for 20% – 30% of the area, with considerable variations between crops and countries (Shilomboleni et al., 2023).

Despite the importance of seed systems in agricultural production, food security, economic growth, and rural livelihoods (Rajak et al., 2020; Okello et al., 2019; Hernandez & Dufour, 2020), seed systems in many African countries remain largely informal and poorly regulated (Vereijken et al., 2020; Gezu et al., 2020; Gebremariam et al., 2019), leading to limited access to quality seeds (Vereijken et al., 2020; Gezu et al., 2020; Gebremariam et al., 2019).

The pigeon pea is produced in tropical and sub-tropical regions. Its cultivation goes back more than 3,500 years, spreading from India to Africa and the Middle East, and further to the Caribbean and Latin America (Sperling et al., 2021), Unlike other pulses, the pigeon pea is a perennial bush. It reaches heights of 2 to 4 metres and lives for about five years. However, in commercial cultivation the peas are grown as annual crops. Pigeon peas grow pods with four to five seeds that can range in colour from cream to light brown, purple and grey. Pigeon peas are robust plants that can deal with poor soils and little water. Smallholder farmers also use the seeds as chicken feed while the plants provide shelter for birds, the roots are said to deter rats and other rodents (Rutsaert et al., 2021).

Due to the tropical and subtropical nature of the crop, Europe does not have its own commercial production of pigeon peas (Otieno et al., 2022), In the last five years, imports fluctuated between around 2,100 tonnes in 2019 and over 4,000 tonnes in 2017 and 2020, About 15-33% of the imported volume is re-exported to destinations outside Europe, mainly the USA and the Caribbean (Donovan et al., 2021).

In Sub-Saharan Africa, about 7.8 million households grow pigeon peas. According to the National Bureau of Statistics, in Tanzania, 209,299 households and more than three-quarters of farmers in the southern zone grow pigeon peas. Pigeon peas are rich sources of essential amino acids (lysine, methionine, and tryptophan), fiber, vitamins (riboflavin and niacin), and minerals (phosphorus, iron, and magnesium) (Yamini et al., 2018).

Globally, it is estimated that about 4,982,000 tons of pigeon peas was consumed in 2015, either as dehulled splits, whole, canned, boiled, roasted, or grind into flour to make a variety of desserts, noodles, snacks, and main dishes (Kaur, & Saini, 2018), In Africa, it is estimated that 65% of pigeon peas produced are consumed by farmers. The average consumption of pigeon peas in Sub-Saharan Africa is estimated to be around 0.4 kg/person/year (Sekhon et al., 2017).

In particular, Malawi has been reported to have the highest per capita consumption of pigeon peas (22.35 kg/year), followed by Kenya (6.72 kg/year) and Tanzania (5.16 kg/year) . In Tanzania, pigeon peas are grown in several regions, including Manyara, Arusha, Lindi, Mtwara, Dodoma, Singida, Coastal, and Morogoro. Of the aforementioned 209,299 households that produce pigeon peas in Tanzania, 46,171 are from the Manyara region, followed by 40,405 in Lindi and 25,913 in Mtwara. An average of 15,869 ha is cultivated in the Lindi region, of which 8971 ha are from the Nachingwea district and 4450 ha are from the Ruangwa district. Some places like Lindi region in Tanzania almost 70% of the farmers grow pigeon peas there (Behera et al., 2020).

In Uganda, a National Seed Policy was approved in 2018 with the main goal of guiding, promoting, developing and regulating the seed sub-sector in order to ensure availability and access to safe and high-quality seed to all stakeholders for increased food and nutrition security, household income, wealth creation and export earnings (National Seed Policy, 2018). The seed policy therefore focuses on investing in a system for verifying input quality, the effectiveness of education-oriented interventions, such as training farmers or dealers in the value of quality inputs. Pigeonpea is a major crop in Arua District and a key source of nutrition, income and livelihoods for smallholder farmers (Nagamuthu et al., 2020; Kalule et al., 2020), however, the seed production and distribution is characterized by low quality, high cost and limited access to quality seed by farmers (Geleta & Woldemariam, 2020; Asfaw et al., 2020).

Viable seed systems have been identified as a critical factor for the success of agricultural production, and improved seed systems have been shown to have a positive effect on food security, economic growth, and rural livelihoods (Rajak et al., 2020; Okello et al., 2019; Hernandez & Dufour, 2020). Pigeonpea is a key source of nutrition, income and livelihoods for smallholder farmers (Nagamuthu et al., 2020; Kalule et al., 2020). However, pigeonpea seed production and distribution is characterized by low quality, high cost and limited access (Geleta & Woldemariam, 2020).

Seed systems governance can affect the quality, cost and access to seed in a number of ways. Poor governance can lead to the proliferation of low-quality seed in the market, as well as a lack of enforcement of seed standards and regulations (Gebremariam et al., 2019). This can result in high costs for farmers due to the need to purchase additional quantities of seed in order to produce a successful crop, as well as limited access to quality seed (Geleta & Woldemariam, 2019). Furthermore, inadequate governance can lead to a lack of investment in research and development of new varieties and technologies, making it difficult for farmers to access the most up-to-date information and techniques for seed production and distribution (Rajak et al., 2020).

The study will explore the current state of pigeonpea seed system in the district, identify its challenges and opportunities, and assess how governance of the pigeonpea seed system through implementation of the National Seed Policy, 2018 is influencing access to quality pigeonpea seeds.

1.3 Statement of the problem

Weak enforcement of seed regulations and standards aimed at ensuring reliable supplies of quality seeds has led to proliferation of low-quality seeds in the market resulting in access to poor quality seeds and services by farmers affecting the production and productivity of crops and leading low returns from crop production. These nonviable governance practices can lead to a lack of investment in the development and supply of improved crop varieties by the stakeholders, and so in farming systems, making it difficult for farmers to access the most up-to-date information and technologies for profitable crop production, and leading to over 80% of farmers in Uganda using poor quality seeds from farmer managed seed systems in crop production (Rajak et al., 2020).

Viable seed sector governance aims at improving the quality, cost, and access to seed through the enforcement of seed standards and regulations to ensure the availability of quality seed in the market, as well as the provision of financial and technical assistance to farmers to facilitate seed production and distribution (Gebremariam et al., 2019), including the promotion of research and development of new varieties and technologies, coordination of stakeholders in the seed chain system, and measures to ensure transparency and accountability in the seed sector (Okello et al., 2019).

The pigeonpea seed system in Uganda is largely informal and poorly regulated, leading to low seed standards, unreliable supply of seeds and limited access to quality seeds by farmers among a range of other constraints (Vereijken et al., 2020; Gezu et al., 2020; Gebremariam et al., 2019). This has the potential to negatively influence the livelihoods of pigeonpea farmers in the country (Nagamuthu et al., 2020; Kalule et al., 2020). Therefore, viable seed sector regulation practices for reliable supply and access to quality seeds by farmers will restrict the use poor quality seeds that lead to low plant density (due to poor germination, and diseases among others) leading to low yields (Hogh-Jensen, et al., 2007) and low returns from farming thus affecting livelihoods.

1.4 Objectives of the Study

1.4.1 General Study Objective

The general objective of this study is to assess the relationship between common seed systems governance practices and access to quality pigeonpea seeds in Arua District.

1.4.2 Specific objectives

To examine the relationship between seed development and access to improved pigeonpea seed varieties in Arua District.
To investigate the relationship between seed distribution channels and access to quality seeds in Arua District.
To evaluate the effect of government’s seed awareness creation services on access and use of quality pigeonpea seeds by farmers in Arua District.

1.5 Research Questions

How does pigeon pea seed development influence the access and use of improved pigeonpea varieties by farmers in Arua District?
What is the relationship between different formal seed distribution channels and the accessibility and use of quality pigeonpea seeds in Arua District?
How effective are the government’s seed awareness creation services in promoting access and utilization of quality pigeonpea seeds by farmers in Arua District?

1.6 Research Hypothesis

1.6.1 Null Hypotheses (Ho)

H₀: There is no relationship between pigeonpea seed development efforts and access to improved pigeonpea seed varieties in Arua District.
H₀: There is no relationship between formal pigeonpea seed distribution channels and the accessibility and use of quality pigeonpea seeds in Arua District.
H₀: The government’s seed awareness creation efforts do not influence access and utilization of quality pigeonpea seeds by farmers in Arua District.

1.7 Conceptual Framework

The conceptual framework for this research is presented in Figure 1. This framework outlines the main elements of seed systems governance and their influence on access and use of quality seeds in Arua District, Uganda.

Through the integration of the Institutional Theory, and Diffusion of Innovations Theory, this theoretical framework enables an assessment of the effect of seed systems governance on access to quality seeds which greatly influences the benefits farmers may get from the use of quality seeds including higher yields, higher incomes from the sale of produce, and bigger resultant investment into farming among others. It considers the influence of institutional arrangements, policies, and regulations on stakeholder behaviour and decision-making, the adoption and dissemination of innovative governance models, and the broader implications for household well-being and livelihood outcomes.

The framework is based on the premise that adequate seed systems governance is essential for improved access to quality seed, increased investment in research and development of new varieties and technologies, and improved coordination between stakeholders in the seed production and distribution system. The framework also suggests that good seed systems governance can lead to improved livelihoods for pigeonpea farmers as there will be higher yields, better food security, and higher incomes from sales of harvested produce and higher resilience of households to shocks.

Figure 1. Conceptual Framework for the study

1.8 Significance of the Study

This study will make an important academic contribution to the field of seed systems governance and rural livelihoods in Arua District, and Uganda at large. By assessing the influence of seed systems governance on access to quality seeds in the district, this study will provide valuable insights into how improved seed systems governance can lead to increased access to quality seed, reduced cost of seed production and distribution, increased efficiency of seed production and distribution, increased investment in research and development, improved coordination between stakeholders, and improved livelihoods for pigeonpea farmers in Arua District.

1.9 Justification of the Study

Assessing the roles and practices of the different actors in the seed chain for improved seed systems governance will provide the most viable solution to address the limited access to quality planting materials, present easy access to quality agricultural inputs and services in Arua district, Uganda.

Viable seed systems governance will improve livelihoods of especially smallholder farmers by increasing access to quality seed, reducing the cost of seed production and distribution, and improving the efficiency of seed production and distribution processes. It will also lead to increased investment in research and development of new varieties and technologies, as well as improved coordination between stakeholders in the seed production and distribution system by creating an environment that allows for greater collaboration between stakeholders, ensures transparency in the decision-making process, sets regulations to protect the interests of smallholder farmers, and provides support for research and innovation (Centre for Agriculture and Bioscience International, 2021). Furthermore, good seed systems governance can ensure the transparency and accountability, which can help to ensure that the rights of farmers are respected and protected. All of these factors can have a positive bearing on the livelihoods of farmers in Arua District.

This research will contribute to the level of knowledge needed for future decision making in the academia, future research, and aid in designing tailored development interventions for specific stakeholders and beneficiaries since the roles of the different actors will have been well understood.

1.10 Scope of the Study (Geographical, Time and Content Scope)

This study will assess how implementation of the National Seed Policy strategies for ensuring reliable access to quality seeds are influencing access and use of quality pigeonpea seeds in Arua District, Uganda. The specific strategies under investigation are local seed production and development; seed distribution and marketing; and farmer education. Arua district has been selected for undertaking this study due to the high number of pigeonpea farmers in the district, and the generally high poverty headcount in the Northern region (Moses, 2020).

The geographical scope of the study shall be limited to two pigeonpea producing sub-counties of Vurra, and Arivu; in Arua District, West Nile region, Uganda.

The timing of this study is strategic (the month of October 2023) as the first cropping season will have ended; harvests and marketing of the first season’s harvest will have taken place leading to the most recent primary data being obtained from farmers.

The study will therefore evaluate the relationships and effectiveness of the current governance practices (specific actions, and processes) to access and use of quality pigeonpea seeds by farmers in Arua. As such, this study will focus on the specific actions and practices in local seed production and development; seed distribution and marketing; and farmer education while assessing the influences of these practices on the access and use of quality pigeonpea seeds by farmers in the district, as well as identifying challenges and opportunities for promoting effective implementation of the strategies.

1.11 Operational Definitions

The following are the operational definitions of the key concepts in this study based on the operational and or practical context of the study; and not dictionary definitions.

Awareness creation in the seed sector: The activities or strategies aimed at informing and educating stakeholders, about the importance of utilizing high-quality seeds, implementing sustainable seed practices, and understanding the resultant benefits (FAO, 2012).
Farmers: Small-scale farmers in Arua District, Uganda who are engaged in the production and/or distribution of pigeonpea seed (Smith et al., 2020).

Seed distribution: The sale and/or dissemination of pigeonpea seed to farmers for planting (Stals et al., 2015).

Livelihoods: The capability of individuals, households, and communities to sustain their well-being through a combination of activities, including but not limited to agricultural production, access to resources and services, and the use of assets (Yeley et al., 2017).
Pigeonpea seed system: The network of actors, institutions and processes involved in the production, storage, preservation, use, and dissemination of pigeonpea seed in Arua District, Uganda (Weaver & Schrag, 2018).
Quality seed: Pigeonpea seed that is free from physical, chemical and biological contaminants, and has been tested and certified to have a higher yield potential compared to non-certified seed (Jamison et al., 2020).

Seed production: The growing and harvesting of pigeonpea seed for sale and/or distribution (Birkhofer, 2019).
Seed sector regulation: The legal framework, policies, and guidelines put in place by the public sector to oversee and control the activities of the seed sector mostly aimed at ensuring the production, distribution, and marketing of high-quality seeds that meet expected standards (Seed Regulatory Harmonization Initiative, n.d).

Seed systems governance: The process of developing, regulating and enforcing policies and regulations related to the production, storage, preservation, use, and dissemination of seed in order to improve quality, cost and access to seed (Gomez et al., 2017).
The Seed Sector: The collection of organizations, institutions, and individuals involved in the production, processing, distribution, and marketing of seeds including seed producers, seed companies, seed breeders, seed dealers, seed processors, and seed distributors, as well as government agencies responsible for seed regulation and certification (ISTA, n.d.).

CHAPTER TWO

2.0 LITERATURE REVIEW

2.0 Introduction

The literature review chapter aims to provide a comprehensive overview of the existing body of knowledge in seed systems governance and how it influences sustainable access to quality seeds and its subsequent effect of incomes, investments and household livelihoods. The chapter serves as a foundation for the current study by examining relevant theories, concepts, empirical studies, and best practices from both global, continental, regional, national and local perspectives. Through an extensive review of the existing literature, this chapter will critically analyse the existing practices, gaps, challenges, and opportunities in seed systems governance, laying the groundwork for the research questions and hypotheses addressed in this study. By synthesizing and integrating the findings from diverse sources, the literature review will contribute to a deeper understanding of the relationship between seed systems governance, farm outputs, incomes, and investments including in quality farm inputs like seeds; thereby guiding the subsequent empirical investigations in this field.

2.1 Theoretical framework: Concepts of Governance, Diffusion of Technology

2.1.1 Institutional Theory

This study will use the institutional theory, founded by sociologists Meyer and Rowan (1977), and DiMaggio and Powell (1983), focuses on the influence of formal and informal rules, regulations, and norms on social behaviour and organizational structures; with the use of “institution” to denote a specific organizational practice or requirement (Meyer & Rowan, 1977). In the context of seed systems governance, this theory can help explain how institutional arrangements, policies, and regulations affect the behaviour and decision-making of stakeholders involved in the seed sector (Meyer & Rowan, 1977; DiMaggio & Powell, 1983).

The three key concepts in the Institutional Theory include Institutional Environment referring to the broader social, political, and economic context within which organizations operate like the government policies, regulations, cultural norms, and the overall governance frameworks (Meyer & Rowan, 1977; DiMaggio & Powell, 1983); the Institutional Isomorphism which refers to the tendency of organizations to adopt similar structures, practices, and behaviours in response to institutional pressures possibly due to coercive formal rules and regulations, mimetic or imitation of successful practices, or normative isomorphism or adherence to cultural or professional norms e.g., how seed producers and other stakeholders conform to existing regulations and standards, or adopt certain practices based on what others in the industry are doing (DiMaggio & Powell, 1983); and Institutional Logics which is often guided by different logics, or underlying principles and values which shape the way actors perceive and make sense of their environment, and guide their behaviours and decision-making such as profit maximization, environmental sustainability, or social equity (DiMaggio & Powell, 1983).

The Institutional Theory has the main advantages of providing a comprehensive framework for examining the influence of formal and informal institutions on behaviour and decision-making; it also recognizes that institutions are shaped by the broader social, political, and economic context hence encouraging analysis of specific institutional environment in which actors operate and influence behaviours and outcomes; and the theory also explains stability and change in institutional arrangements allowing a researcher to understand why certain institutional arrangements persist over time, as well as the mechanisms through which institutional change occurs (Meyer & Rowan, 1977; DiMaggio & Powell, 1983).

However, the use of institutional theory in a study of this nature has disadvantages including its tendency to overemphasise structure and its constraints (overemphasis of the power of institutions in shaping behaviour, neglecting individual agency and other factors that may influence decisions) which can overlook how individuals actively navigate and negotiate institutions; and the theory’s lack of attention to diversity and complexity by not fully capturing the diversity and complexity of institutional contexts through, among others, the limited focus on micro-level processes (DiMaggio & Powell, 1983).

2.1.2 Diffusion of Innovations Theory

The study will additionally employ the Diffusion of Innovations Theory developed by Everett Rogers in 1962, which examines the process by which new ideas, practices, and technologies spread within a social system (Rogers, 1962).

In this study, the Diffusion of Innovations Theory will be applied to understand the adoption and dissemination of improved pigeonpea seed technologies, practices, and governance models among farmers, seed producers, and other actors in the seed system. The Diffusion of Innovations Theory will be used to explore the characteristics and attributes of pigeonpea seed technologies and innovations that influence their adoption (Rogers, 1962). For example, the study could examine how knowledge about effective seed systems governance practices is shared and communicated among seed producers, farmers, and relevant institutions.

The Diffusion of Innovations Theory can provide insights into the processes, mechanisms, and factors influencing the adoption and dissemination of improved pigeonpea seed technologies and governance models (Rogers, 1962). By understanding these dynamics, the study can inform strategies and interventions for promoting the adoption of effective seed systems and, in particular, pigeonpea seed systems governance practices such as fostering collaboration between stakeholders and enhancing the livelihoods of farmers in Arua District (Rogers, 1962).

The main advantages of the Diffusion of Innovations Theory include its focus on the social aspects of innovation diffusion, the consideration of multiple factors that influence adoption, and its applicability to various fields (Rogers, 1962). However, some shortcomings include the potential oversimplification of complex social processes, the limited consideration of social and cultural contexts, and the assumption of a linear diffusion process which may not always accurately reflect real-world complexities (Rogers, 1962).

2.1.3 Parasuraman theory

According to Asubonteng et al., (1996), due to intense competition and the hostility of environmental factors, service quality has become a cornerstone marketing strategy for companies. This highlights how important improving service quality is to organisations for their survival and growth since it could help them tackle these challenges they face in the competitive markets. This means that service-based companies are compelled to provide excellent services to their customers in order to have a sustainable competitive advantage. There is however, a need for these organisations to understand what service quality is in order to attain their objectives.

Parasuraman’s SERVQUAL model is commonly used in service quality research and focuses on five dimensions: Tangibles, Reliability, Responsiveness, Assurance, and Empathy. Applying this model to the context of seed systems governance and access to quality seeds involves examining these dimensions in the seed supply chain and associated services. In analysing the different dimensions, the Tangibles dimensions in the context seed systems governance and access to quality seeds involves Evaluating the physical appearance of seed facilities, packaging, and documentation and also Assessing the availability of information, education, and promotional materials regarding seed quality and governance.

Reliability; It is also essential to ensure Reliability by Analysing the consistency and dependability of seed supply in terms of quality and quantity and Examining the reliability of seed testing and certification processes.

In Responsiveness; It is worth noting that Assessing the ability of the seed system to respond promptly to changing market demands or emerging challenges. Evaluating the responsiveness of regulatory bodies to issues related to seed quality and governance.

In an ensuring the Assurance; Evaluate the competence of individuals and organizations involved in the seed supply chain, Examine the security and integrity of the seed certification and distribution processes.

Empathy: Assessing the level of understanding and care provided to farmers in terms of their seed-related needs and also Examining the communication and support mechanisms in place to address farmer concerns.

Applying the SERVQUAL model in this context allows for a comprehensive evaluation of the seed system, including the governance structure, regulatory processes, seed production, certification, and distribution channels.

2.2 Influence of Seed Systems Governance on Access to Agricultural Inputs in Uganda: Global and National Perspectives

Access to agricultural inputs, such as quality seeds, fertilizers, and pesticides, plays a crucial role in enhancing agricultural productivity, food security, and rural livelihoods. In Uganda, access to inputs is largely influenced by seed systems governance at both global and national levels. This write-up aims to explore the influence of seed systems governance on access to agricultural inputs in Uganda, considering the perspectives of both global and national stakeholders (Adigoun et al., 2022).

Global seed systems governance involves international agreements, regulations, and policies that shape seed trade, plant breeding, and intellectual property rights (Otieno et al., 2022), One influential international agreement is the International Treaty on Plant Genetic Resources for Food and Agriculture (ITPGRFA) implemented by the FAO. The treaty encourages countries to establish national seed policies that prioritize farmers’ rights and promote the conservation and sustainable use of plant genetic resources (FAO, 2001).

In Uganda, the ITPGRFA has influenced the development of the National Seed Policy (NSP) and the Plant Variety Protection Act (PVPA). The NSP emphasizes farmers’ rights to access quality seeds, encourages the participation of small-scale farmers, and promotes the conservation and sustainable use of plant genetic resources (MAAIF, 2008). The PVPA provides legal protection for breeder’s rights, incentivizing private sector investment in plant breeding and seed production while balancing the interests of farmers and breeders (UPOV, 2010).

According to Kloppenburg (2008), until the 1930s, farmers in both the North and South enjoyed nearly complete sovereignty over their seeds. They had the power to decide «what seeds to plant, what seeds to save, and who else might receive or be allocated their seed as either food or planting material». Seed sovereignty thrived in a largely open system based on reciprocity and gift exchange rather than the market. However, since the 1930s, seed sovereignty for farmers has been eroded as TNCs took charge of the global seed industry with the view to appropriate profit. They have been able to do that by capturing science for private gains, which helped them replace classical crop breeding methods with approaches that deprive farmers of control over the seed management process. But also, they have captured public research institutions to serve private commercial interests, while states are forced to legislate rules such as PBR laws that erode farmers’ seed sovereignty.

At the national level, Uganda has implemented various initiatives to enhance access to agricultural inputs. The Uganda National Seed Policy prioritizes the availability, affordability, and accessibility of quality seeds to smallholder farmers (MAAIF, 2008). The establishment of the National Seed Certification System ensures that only high-quality seeds are available in the market, safeguarding farmers from low-quality and counterfeit seeds (MAAIIF, 2015).

In general terms, Tanzania is designated as having a strong legal framework for the regulation of seed variety release, seed certification, quarantine, and phytosanitary measures (New Market Lab 2016). The legal regime is comprised of (a) the Seeds Act of 2003, read together with the Seeds Regulations of 2007; (b) the Plant Protection Act of 1997, read together with the Plant Protection Regulations of 1998; and (c) the Plant Breeders Right (No 222, 2002). What is vividly being recognised in the Seeds Act, 2003 is Quality Declared Seed, which is defined as a «seed produced by a registered smallholder farmer which conforms to the specified standards for crop species concerned and which has been subject to the quality control measures prescribed in the regulations to be made under the same Act». Section 19-(2) of the Seeds Act provides that the Act does not in any way prevent the sale of QDS by farmers to a neighbour, and where such seeds are grown by a smallholder farmer for use as seeds in his farm.

Agriculture is the mainstay of most Sub-Saharan African economies, contributing 54% of employment and 15% of Gross Domestic Product (World Bank, 2019). Agriculture’s central economic role makes its development a key component for overall economic growth and the reduction of food insecurity. How[1]ever, Africa is facing daunting food security challenges as a result of population growth and climate vari[1]ability and change. Africa currently has an annual population growth rate of 2.52% (Worldometers.com, 2019). At this rate, Africa’s population is expected to double by 2050 (United Nations, 2019) and is projected to surpass that of Asia by 2075 (United Nations, 2017). This rapid population growth is accompanied by socioeconomic changes such as urbanization, changing food preferences, changing livelihood structures, industrialization, and changing relationships with the global economy.

According to Louwaars, De Boef, & Edeme, (2013), the African seed sector makes an important contribution to food systems challenges by supporting food security and nutrition, livelihoods, sustainable resource use, and climate change mitigation. Recent case studies in Malawi, Zambia, the state of Chiapas in Mexico and the state of Bihar in India indicate that smallholder farmers are increasingly purchasing seed from the formal seed systems, especially the maize seed system in these different parts of the world. This, among other factors, has contributed to improved yields that translate to increased farm incomes. However, the seed systems here need to be well-functioning to sustain this demand and efforts toward continuous improvement are vital. Countries with robust seed systems that allow farmers to respond to market needs and produce profitably have a good blend of public and private investments and healthy competition among stakeholders.

However, challenges persist in Uganda’s seed systems governance, limiting access to agricultural inputs. Limited enforcement of seed regulations, inadequate infrastructure, and low awareness among farmers about seed quality and availability hinder effective governance (Kikulwe, et al., 2011). Additionally, weak coordination among stakeholders, including government agencies, seed companies, farmers’ organizations, and development partners, undermines the efficiency and effectiveness of seed systems in the country.

To improve seed systems governance and enhance access to quality agricultural inputs in Uganda, innovative solutions are therefore required. Collaborations between government agencies, research institutions, seed companies, and farmers’ organizations can foster stronger coordination and knowledge sharing. This can be achieved through platforms such as national seed associations, dialogue forums, and training programs to address the awareness gap among farmers and promote best practices in seed selection, storage, and utilization (Okonya, et al., 2020).

Additionally, investing in seed infrastructure, including seed storage facilities, testing laboratories, and seed distribution networks, is essential to strengthen the seed value chain and ensure the availability of quality seeds to farmers, particularly in remote and underserved areas (MAAIF, 2020).

2.3 Seed distribution

Seed distribution in Africa is a complex and multifaceted issue that involves various stakeholders, including governments, non-governmental organizations (NGOs), international organizations, and the private sector. The distribution of seeds in Africa is critical for ensuring food security, promoting sustainable agriculture, and supporting rural livelihoods. Here are some key aspects related to seed distribution in Africa (Cacho et al., 2020).

Access to Quality Seeds, Many farmers in Africa face challenges in accessing high-quality seeds, particularly improved and certified varieties that are resilient to pests, diseases, and climate variations. Limited access to quality seeds hampers agricultural productivity and can lead to food insecurity (Waniale et al 2021).

In many regions of Africa, farmers rely on traditional seed-saving practices and local seed systems. However, these systems may not always provide access to the best-performing and disease-resistant varieties. Efforts have been made to strengthen formal seed systems, including the production, certification, and distribution of improved seed varieties. This involves collaboration between governments, agricultural research institutions, and the private sector (Mburu et al., 2020).

Government policies play a crucial role in shaping seed distribution systems. Some governments have implemented policies to support the development and distribution of improved seeds, while others may face challenges related to regulatory frameworks (Khan et al., 2014).

International organizations such as the Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO), the International Seed Testing Association (ISTA), and NGOs like the Alliance for a Green Revolution in Africa (AGRA) are actively involved in promoting sustainable seed systems and distribution (Zida, et al., 2020).

The private sector, including seed companies, can contribute to seed distribution by investing in research and development, production, and commercialization of improved seed varieties. However, challenges such as affordability for smallholder farmers need to be addressed (Sperling et al., 2021).

Capacity building programs aimed at educating farmers on the importance of using improved seeds, proper planting techniques, and sustainable agricultural practices are essential for the success of seed distribution initiatives. Given the impact of climate change on agriculture, there is a growing emphasis on developing and distributing climate-resilient seed varieties that can withstand changing environmental conditions (Sperling et al., 2020).

Some countries have established seed banks to preserve and safeguard traditional and improved seed varieties, ensuring a repository for future use and conservation. Challenges such as inadequate infrastructure, lack of awareness, and economic constraints can hinder the effective distribution of seeds in certain regions (Zhang et al., 2022).

Efforts to improve seed distribution in Africa often involve a combination of these elements, and a holistic approach is necessary to address the diverse needs and challenges faced by farmers across the continent. Collaboration between governments, NGOs, international organizations, and the private sector is key to implementing sustainable and effective seed distribution systems (White, 2023).

Africa’s development priorities are spelt out in Agenda 2063 – the blueprint for African Union’s economic development. Specifically, Agenda 2063 identifies agricultural development as a high priority, as detailed in the Comprehensive Africa Agriculture Development Program (CAADP) and further elaborated in the Malabo Declaration on Accelerated Agricultural Growth and Transformation for Shared Prosperity and Improved Livelihoods. The Malabo Declaration (June 2014) specifies seven key commitments including boosting intra-African trade in agricultural commodities and services1 . These commitments were advanced by the launch of the African Continental Free Trade Area (AfCFTA) which seeks to harness market and trade opportunities locally, regionally, and internationally (AU 2018). While there is demonstrated political will to expand intra-regional trade, African countries face challenges in this regard. On the plus side, regional integration is on the rise, and this has contributed to reduced tariffs. However, the inefficient application of non-tariff measures, such as Sanitary and Phytosanitary (SPS) regulations, remains an impediment to effective trade. Reducing these bottlenecks is an important aspect of trade facilitation. At the farm level, yields must increase if surpluses available for trade are to be realized.

It is cultivated mostly under rain fed agriculture by resource poor farmers on marginal lands mostly intercropped. There are several traditional varieties of pigeon peas (land races) that are commonly long durational crops taking 5-11 months to mature. On the other hand, International Crop Research Institute for Semi-Arid Tropics (ICRISAT) has developed short duration varieties that take 3-4 months to mature. Pigeonpea is the one of the most important grain legume in Northern Uganda, and the relatively close in importance to cowpea in North Eastern Uganda, making the crop one of the most valuable/useful grain legumes in the country (Musaana & Njogedde, 1994).

Pigeonpea is currently being grown in the Districts of Apac, Lira, Kitgum, Arua, Gulu, Soroti and Kotido, while Mbale, Masindi and Hoima Districts are seeing an increase in the production of the crop (Tuwafe, Silim, & Singh, 1994). In Uganda, the crop is more adapted to the North Eastern zone, North Eastern Savannah Grassland, North Western savannah Grassland and to a smaller extend in the Para Savannah Grassland agro-ecological zones where average rainfall are 745 mm (millimetres), 1197 mm, 1340 mm and 1259 mm respectively while average temperatures ranges in degrees Celsius are 12.5-32.5, 15-32.5, 15-25 and 17.5-32.5 respectively.

2.4 Government’s seed awareness creation services in promoting access and utilization of quality

Seed Awareness Programs; Governments often run awareness programs to educate farmers about the importance of using quality seeds. These programs may include workshops, training sessions, and distribution of informational materials (Adhikari, 2021).

Promotion of Certified Seeds, Governments may encourage the use of certified seeds by providing subsidies or other incentives to farmers.Certification ensures that seeds meet specific quality standards, leading to better crop yields and overall agricultural productivity (Aziz, & Naima, 2021).

Governments invest in research and development of improved seed varieties that are more resilient to pests, diseases, and environmental conditions.This can include the development of genetically modified (GM) seeds or traditional breeding methods to enhance seed quality (Foley et a., 2021).).

Government agricultural extension services play a crucial role in disseminating information about modern agricultural practices, including the use of quality seeds. Governments may invest in developing infrastructure for seed production, storage, and distribution. This includes establishing seed banks and storage facilities to ensure the availability of quality seeds throughout the year (Ullah, 2021).

Financial Support, Governments may offer financial assistance, subsidies, or credit facilities to farmers for the purchase of quality seeds, This helps reduce the financial burden on farmers and promotes the widespread adoption of quality seeds (Bello et al., 2021).

Collaboration between the government and private seed companies can enhance the accessibility and availability of quality seeds. Public-private partnerships can also facilitate technology transfer and the adoption of innovative seed technologies. Governments often regulate the seed industry to ensure the quality and authenticity of seeds in the market (Patwa et al., 2021).

Monitoring and enforcement of seed laws and regulations contribute to the overall quality of seeds available to farmers. In Uganda, pigeonpea is used as food mainly in forms of either the green cooked pea or in form of whole dry grain and it can be cooked with many vegetables and forms one of the most delicious local meals in the main growing areas in Northern and North-eastern Uganda (Adjei-Nsiah, 2012). According to Global Crop Diversity Trust, 2013, pigeonpea contains high levels of Vitamins A and C, vitamin B, higher proteins levels (20-30%), carbohydrates and very useful amino acids (Adjei-Nsiah, 2012), hence it makes an important contribution to human diets considering the numerous benefits these nutrients impart into the body. Besides the consumption of the grains, pigeonpea green pods and leaves are used as livestock feeds, the plant residues provide an important source of manure in the soil, it can be planted as a fence at home or in the gardens and also, the dry stems are used as wood fuel (Jones, et al., 2002).

According to Adjei-Nsiah, 2012, pigeonpea also has a vast potential to improve the soil fertility through either a complementary of supplementary supply of organic fertiliser though this potential has not been appreciably exploited. Studies in Ghana showed that pigeonpea with maize rotations can increase maize yields by up to 75-200 percent (Adjei-Nsiah, 2012) and it further shows that legumes like pigeonpea have a high potential to improve soil fertilities in subsistence farming systems.

Pigeon pea is one of the most drought resistant legumes (Valenzuela & Smith, 2002), as it is the only common legume that produces some considerable yield under dry conditions where common legumes like field beans may have failed (Okiror, 1986). This therefore positions pigeonpea as an important crop in the whole of Sub-Saharan Africa which has suffered increasing climatic changes especially with the increase in temperatures, prolonged droughts and unpredictable rainfall patterns over the recent years.

Pigeonpea is basically cultivated by resource poor farmers in Northern Uganda on marginal lands, where agro inputs like fertilizers and pesticides are not used in production and they grow mainly medium to long term varieties (land races) or local varieties that are obtained through the informal seed systems (F. Singh & Diwakar, 1993). It is an excellent legume to utilise poor soils as it has a high potential to grow and produce satisfactorily in poor soils (Bogda, 1977; Dalal, 1980), a condition that limits the production and productivity of most other legumes like groundnuts, Bambara groundnut and beans.

2.5 Constraints to Pigeonpea Seed Systems and Value Chain

There are several constraints to pigeonpea production in Arua District that can be related to seed systems governance. Poor governance of seed systems can lead to a lack of enforcement of seed standards and regulations, resulting in the proliferation of low-quality seed in the market (Gebremariam et al., 2019). This can result in high costs for farmers due to the need to purchase additional quantities of seed in order to produce a successful crop, as well as limited access to quality seed (Geleta & Woldemariam, 2019). Additionally, inadequate governance can lead to a lack of investment in research and development of new varieties and technologies, making it difficult for farmers to access the most up-to-date information and techniques for seed production and distribution (Rajak et al., 2020). These constraints can negatively influence access to quality seeds and resultantly, livelihoods of pigeonpea farmers in Arua district.

In addition to the constraints already mentioned, inadequate seed systems governance has also lead to a lack of access to financing and other services, such as extension and marketing, which are essential for successful seed production and distribution (Vereijken et al., 2020). Furthermore, poor governance can lead to a lack of coordination between different stakeholders in the seed production and distribution system, making it difficult to identify and address problems in the system (Okello et al., 2019). Finally, inadequate governance can lead to a lack of transparency and accountability in the seed system, making it difficult to ensure that the rights of farmers are respected and protected (Hernandez & Dufour, 2020).

Historical trends show a rise in the demand for pigeonpea worldwide together with a rise in the areas harvested, yields and production thereby presenting the future for this crop as promising with the situational analysis of the production, and exports suggesting the area under cultivation, production and productivity including domestic demand will continue to rise (Simtowe, et al., 2010). However, a number of obstacles have existed and they negatively impact on the pigeon pea sub sector; including existing organizational weaknesses in the pigeonpea seed and technology delivery and poor grain marketing systems which have a direct bearing on the rate of technology adoption (Simtowe, et al., 2010).

In Africa, the production and dissemination of pigeonpea is basically through the informal seed sector with recent efforts to meet farmers seed needs through the formal seed sector (Joshi, et al., 2001). The high pigeonpea seed multiplication rate of over 100 as compared to other cereal grains like sorghum and legumes like groundnuts with a much lower seed multiplication rate of less than 10, absence of clearly differentiated seed quality parameters and seed saving culture of farmers are some of the disincentives to the formal seed sector to indulge and invest in pigeonpea seed production and distribution (Joshi, et al., 2001), hence the prevalence of the informal seed sector to produce, distribute and market pigeonpea seeds in Africa.

Countries like India have a better developed formal seed system that Uganda with about 150 organised seed companies most of which have government recognised research, and development agencies that develop and release a good number of new varieties and hybrids and in several crops (Gadwal, 2003), as compared to 23 seed companies in Uganda majority of which do not undertake research and development into new varieties and they obtain all varieties from public research from the National Agriculture Research Organisation (NARO) that essentially is the main source of new varieties in Uganda (Joughin, 2013).

According to Joughin, 2013, the informal seed sector that is subdivided into farmer saving seed for own use, seed exchange among neighbouring farmers and farmers and farmers’ group seed production or multiplication for sale comprise over 87% of the total seed systems share in Uganda. This therefore implies that the informal and semi-formal seed sectors play a crucial role in seed production, multiplication and delivery to users to meet the farmers’ seed needs in the country especially in vegetable seeds, fruit seeds and seeds that do not easily lose genetic constitution through degeneration or gene differentiation and cross pollination like ground nuts, soybean, pigeonpea, cowpea and rice among others. These informal seed sector and markets receive minimal attention and funding from the public sector particularly governments focus and relevant researchers despite their centrality to farmers’ seed security to supply and restock seed and plant genetic materials in both normal and stressful periods in the agricultural circles (Sperling & McGuire, 2010).

In Northern and eastern Uganda, farmer saved seeds, seeds from neighbours and seeds from local markets selected from grain for sale comprise the bulk majority of the seed source in these two regions (Nangoti, Kayobyo, & Rees, 2004) whereby use of modern varieties on pigeonpea was estimated at a very low 4% compared to other crops grown in the region.

Some of the major constraints that restrain farmers to the informal seed sector are limited access to organised seed markets, unfavourable functionality of seed markets especially to rural farmers, limited access to financial resources for seed production and lack of capacity in the research department to produce locally adapted varieties for production in the farmers’ local environments (Louwaars & de Boef, 2012).

The seed industry in Uganda is now well understood and there are now renewed efforts by the government and relevant private sector actors to gear towards addressing the above challenges especially by the Ministry of Agriculture, Animal Industry, and Fisheries (MAAIF) and other governmental bodies, Integrated Seeds Sector Development and Uganda National Agro input dealers Association (UNADA) among others such that the access to improved inputs through the formal seed sector increases more than the 10-15% after several years of these efforts (Joughin, 2014).

2.6 Seed Systems Governance in Uganda

Seed systems governance is an important factor in ensuring access to quality seed and improved livelihoods for smallholder farmers (Rajak et al., 2020; Okello et al., 2019; Hernandez & Dufour, 2020). Poor seed systems governance can lead to the proliferation of poor quality seed sold in markets, as well as a lack of enforcement of seed standards and regulations (Gebremariam et al., 2019). This can result in high costs for farmers due to the need to purchase additional quantities of seed in order to produce a successful crop, as well as limited access to quality seed (Geleta & Woldemariam, 2019). Furthermore, inadequate governance can lead to a lack of investment in research and development of new varieties and technologies, making it difficult for farmers to access the most up-to-date information and techniques for seed production and distribution (Rajak et al., 2020).

The main challenge in increasing the productivity of pigeonpea is the limited adoption of production of the crop as a result of the challenges it faces like prevalence of numerous pests and diseases, unavailability of good quality planting materials and limited introduction of improved package of production practices (S. Singh, Singh, Singh, & Singh, 2007). In order to ensure successful adoption by resource poor farmer especially in the rural area researchers need to ensure farmer participation in the development of new technologies where scientists combine their efforts with the technical expertise of the farmers obtained over long generations in farming such that the products are acceptable to the farmers (Musaana & Njogedde, 1994).

As the measure of e the success of new technologies has for a long time been based on adoption, scientists in most instances have been blaming extension agents for not delivering the technologies to farmers, input dealers have been blamed for not making available the technologies to farmers, and the unattractive prices of produce but has been demonstrated that the low adoption rates are caused by the inappropriateness of these developed technologies to the farmers (Musaana & Njogedde, 1994).

In Tanzania, adoption of pigeonpea improved varieties has been shown to depend on the exposure of farmers to these improved varieties and also in their involvement in a participatory variety selection of these improved varieties (Simtowe, 2011) where it is estimated that potential adoption rate of improved pigeonpea varieties is 62% when the farmers are exposed to these varieties. However, adoption of agricultural innovations is usually slower and that to date, many aspects of adoption remain poorly understood (Foster & Rosenzweig, 2010). Experimentation in this case may lead to adoption by the farmers, however it can also negatively affect adoption by when farmers are able to see that a particular technology in inferior (Foster & Rosenzweig, 2010).

2.9 Access to quality seeds

Effective management of pigeonpea seed systems has positively impacted the well-being of farmers in Uganda and globally. According to a 2020 report by the International Institute of Tropical Agriculture (IITA), the successful administration of pigeonpea systems has facilitated farmers’ access to superior agricultural inputs, enhanced market accessibility, and boosted crop yields. The report highlights that enhanced market access has led to a significant surge in farmers’ incomes, with some in Uganda experiencing a remarkable 400% increase over the past five years (IITA, 2020).

Moreover, the heightened yields of pigeonpea have contributed favorably to food security in Uganda and beyond, given its status as a highly nutritious crop and a staple in various regions. In line with a 2020 study conducted by researchers from the University of Edinburgh and Makerere University, the improved production and marketing of pigeonpea through effective governance have resulted in heightened dietary diversity, improved nutrition and diet quality, and enhanced household welfare (Kabasa et al., 2020).

Additionally, the efficient management of pigeonpea seed systems has generated increased employment opportunities, particularly within the broader agricultural sector in Uganda. A 2020 report from the Ministry of Agriculture, Animal Industry, and Fisheries of Uganda (MAAIF) reveals that improved access to agricultural inputs, enhanced market reach, and increased yields have collectively contributed to the creation of approximately 70,000 jobs in the sector over the past five years (MAAIF, 2020).

In conclusion, the proficient governance of pigeonpea seed systems has brought about positive transformations in the livelihoods of farmers in Uganda and globally. The enhanced access to inputs, markets, and increased yields has translated into higher incomes, improved food security and nutrition, and the creation of more employment opportunities.

CHAPTER THREE

3.0 METHODOLOGY

3.1 Materials and Methods

This chapter describes the research design that will be used, the study population, the sample size, the sampling techniques and procedures, data collection methods, data collection instruments, the validity and reliability, data collection procedures, data analysis and measurement of variables during the course of this study.

3.2 Research design

This study will employ a cross-sectional research design, using both quantitative and qualitative methods, to assess how governance of seed systems influences access to seeds in Arua District, Uganda. The quantitative component of the study will employ a survey to collect data from a sample of smallholder pigeonpea farmers in the district in order to investigate the factors influencing their access and use of quality pigeonpea seed. Descriptive and inferential statistical analyses will be used to analyse the data and then interpret the results in terms of the objectives of the study. The qualitative component of the study will utilize semi-structured interviews, focus group discussions, and observation techniques to explore farmer behaviour in pigeonpea seed access and use in the district and to assess the effect of Uganda Seed Policy, 2018 on access to improved quality pigeonpea seeds by farmers in the district. According to recent literature from Fida et al. (2020), employing a combination of quantitative and qualitative techniques (otherwise known as triangulation) increases the quality of the research, as results from each technique can reinforce each other for consistency. Furthermore, recent research by Bhalachandra & Ravindranath (2020) and Gold et al. (2018) indicates that cross-sectional research designs are relatively inexpensive and can accurately estimate the prevalence of the outcome of interest.

3.3 Sources of data

The data for this research study will be collected from two sources: primary and secondary sources. Primary data will be collected through a survey of smallholder pigeonpea farmers in Arua District, as well as semi-structured interviews, focus group discussions, and observations. The survey will employ both closed and open-ended questions to investigate the factors influencing farmer access to quality pigeonpea seeds in the district. The other qualitative data collection methods like Key Informant Interviews (KII), and documentation analysis will be used to explore farmer behaviour in pigeonpea seed access and use in Arua district, and to assess the effect of Uganda National Seed Policy, 2018 on access to improved quality pigeonpea seeds by farmers in Arua district. Secondary data will be collected from relevant literature, reports, statistical sources, as well as online sources such as journals, websites, and forums where reliably appropriate.

3.4 Study Area and Population

This research shall be undertaken in Arua District which is located in the West Nile sub-region, Northern Uganda. West Nile is one of the five sub-regions of Northern Uganda (others are Acholi, Karamoja, Lango and Teso sub-regions of Northern Uganda). Northern Uganda is one of the 4 main regions of Uganda with an estimated population of 7.188 million according to the 2014 Uganda population census. The sub-region is bordered by the Democratic republic of Congo to the West, Southern Sudan to the North, Acholi-sub region to the South.

The region receives bimodal rainfall annually averaging about 800mm per annum. The research experiments shall be undertaken in the two predominant agro-ecological zones of North-western Savannah Grass Lands and the Kyoga plains.

There are two predominant farming systems zones in Northern Uganda and these are the annual cropping and cattle West Nile system covering 12 Local Governments (City/Districts) (Adjumani,,Arua citry, Arua district, Koboko, Maracha, Moyo, Nebbi, Obongi Pakwach, Terego, Yumbe, and Zombo) However Zombo District, the medium altitude banana coffee system is practiced. These have been categorised as the West Nile and Northern farming systems respectively.

Overall, the research shall be undertaken in the 2 sub-counties of Vurra, and Arivu, Arua district. The data shall be collected from the respondents in all the 2 sub-counties of the District.

Arua District is one of the oldest districts in Uganda located in the West Nile sub-region of the greater Northern Uganda; with Geographical Information System Coordinates 03⁰ 00’ North and 31⁰ 10’ East with a population of 785,189 according to 2014 population census and an estimated land area of 1,249.6 square miles.

2 pigeonpea producing Sub-counties shall be selected in Arua district and 38 farmers shall be interviewed from each Sub-county each consisting of 23 women & 15 men.

Data shall be collected from other primary stakeholders/actors in the pigeonpea seed value chain including pigeonpea farmers, relevant local government administrators (production and marketing staff of local governments), researchers, seed business, seed producers, seed companies in the region (Equator seeds and Victoria seeds) and agricultural extension actors. 23 key informant interviews shall be held with: Relevant local administrators – 9; Researchers – 2; Seed dealers – 4; Relevant Non-Governmental Organizations with interventions in seed systems – 4, and Opinion Leaders – 4 .

3.5 Sample size and selection

Mugenda and Mugenda (2003), argue that it is impossible to study the whole targeted population and therefore the researcher shall take a sample of the population. A sample is a subset of the population that comprises members selected from the population. Using Krejcie and Morgan’s (1970) table for sample size determination approach, a sample size of 86 employees was selected from the total population of 110 Respondents.

The different categories of targeted respondents are listed in the table below

Table 1: Categories of Respondents, Population, Sample Size, and Strategy for the Study

Category	Sample size	Sampling Strategy
Pigeonpea farmers	76	Random sampling
Relevant Local administrators (Agriculture)	2	Purposive and snowball
Relevant NGO Leaders (seed actor)	2	Purposive
Opinion Leaders	2	Purposive and snowball
Seed Dealers	3	Random Sampling
Researchers at NARO	1	Purposive and snowball
Total	86

Source: Author

Table 2: Categories of Respondents, Sample Size, and Strategy for the Study

Category	Sample	Sampling strategy
Pigeonpea farmers	76 (46 women & 30 men)	Purposive sampling
Relevant local administrators (Agriculture)	2	Purposive and snowball
Relevant NGO Leaders (seed actor)	2	Random Sampling
Opinion Leaders	2	Random sampling
Seed Dealers	3	Random sampling
Researchers at NARO	1	Purposive and snowball
Total	86	–

Source: Author

3.6 Sampling techniques

3.6.1 Purposive sampling

This sampling technique will help the researcher to access targeted respondents with knowledge about the topic being investigated as argued by (Castillo, 2009). In this method, the researcher shall target a specific group of primary actors in the pigeonpea value chain including pigeonpea farmers (both male and female), and local agriculture administrators in Arua district because they are believed to be reliable and knowledgeable about the topic (pigeonpea seed system) and so they are in position to give dependable and detailed information about the study.

3.6.2 Simple random sampling

After selecting the respondents with the knowledge of pigeonpea seed system using purposive sampling, the researcher will apply simple random sampling technique to researchers from NARO Zonal Agriculture Research Institute (ZARDI) in the West Nile region, formal seed dealers and agriculture extension agents in working in Arua district. A list of agriculture extension workers and formal seed business shall be obtained from the local government to randomly select the above respondents from. Paper list of each respondent group representatives will be generated and randomly mixed up in a box for each and simple random picking without replacing will be done until the sample size is reached.

According to Amin (2005), simple random sampling is advantageous because it is free of classification error, and it requires minimum advance knowledge of the population other than the frame. As such, simple random sampling best suits situations where not much information is available about the population and data collection can be efficiently conducted on randomly distributed items, or where the cost of sampling is small enough to make efficiency less important than simplicity (Castillo, 2009).

3.7 Data Collection Methods

Questionnaires shall be developed to evaluate the functioning and governance practices of the pigeonpea seed system, and their influence on the access and use of quality pigeonpea seeds in Arua district. The different gender roles and behaviours in the selection of pigeonpea varieties for production, access and use of pigeonpea seeds shall be also assessed. The questionnaires shall be pretested before the survey and necessary corrections shall be undertaken. Pigeonpea farmers; and Seed Dealers, will be subjected to the questionnaires. They will also be subjected to a guided documentation analysis based on checklist/guide.

Meanwhile, Key Informant Interview guides will also be developed, pretested and subjected to the representatives of Local Administrators, Researchers at NARO, and Opinion Leaders

As the research shall be typically cross-sectional in nature, questionnaires shall be administered to individual respondents by the researcher. The questionnaire captures information on the seed systems governance context and practices, seed acquisition and use, production of the crop, post-harvest handling and marketing of the crop while looking at variety preference plus reasons and, challenges farmers face in the different stages of pigeon pea value chain shall be captured. It will further capture the level of education of pigeonpea farmers and their association to use of different varieties of pigeonpea both local and improved varieties. Information on income earned from sale of farmer produced pigeonpea, portion of this incomes invested into pigeonpea production in terms of input acquisition shall be further captured.

Qualitative data shall be collected in the survey to complement the quantitative data to give more insight and offer in-depth explanation on information that could not be explained by figures alone.

The sample size for this survey shall be 100 [(Z-score) ² * StdDev*(1-StdDev) / (margin of error) ²] at Standard deviation = 0.25, CI 95% and Error 0.05.

Both probability and non-probability sampling shall be used to pick up respondents depending on their categories. There shall be a purposive sample size of 15 women and 10 men because of the great role women play in the pigeonpea value chain. The respondents shall be picked randomly.

Enumerators shall be used for data collection through interviews so that illiterate respondents could be helped in translation and recording in the questionnaires.

3.8 Validity of Instruments

For this study, quality control measures shall be ensured throughout the study process from the process of designing the tools, data collection, analysis and presentation of the research findings. The researcher will determine the validity using the content validity. After soliciting the opinions from four groups of people to be interviewed, and relevance of the instrument to the objectives of the study. After the judgment and assessment, amendments will be done accordingly and they will reexamine the instrument in order to establish its validity. According to Williamson (2002), the validity index below can be used to determine the validity of research instruments and any result above 0.6 makes the instrument valid.

The following formula is used to test validity index.

CVI = Number of items regarded relevant

Total number of items

3.9 Reliability of Instruments

For the reliability of the instruments, a pilot study shall be undertaken together with pre-testing the questionnaire and interview guide, to a few respondents other than the target respondents, normally around 10%. These few questionnaires will be entered in SPSS and a reliability test done there and then and a value above 0.5 depicts a reliable instrument and one which is less than 0.5 calls for adjustments to be done until it produces a better reliability value over several numbers of presentations. Either way, reliability of the instruments can be tested using CRONBACH Alpha Coefficient based on the internal consistency concept (how well the items within the tool are related to each other).

3.10 Procedure of Data Collection

Once the data collection tools for this study are pre-tested, reviewed and research assistants well oriented on the study and data collection tools and processes, the targeted pigeonpea farmers and the respondents of Key Informant Interviews (KII) will be appropriately informed (two weeks advance) so that targeted staffs/respondents are found at the targeted stations for the KIIs. Two research assistants will be allocated to each sub-county with an objective of each interviewer interacting with ten pigeonpea farmers per day; and one sub-county covered in 2 days while other KIIs especially with local administrators, extension workers, researchers and formal seed dealers shall be completed on day 5 by all 4 research assistants. The principal researcher will be part of team to interview key informants and actively review key documents relating to the objectives of the study. Meetings with research assistants will be held at every end of the day to discuss challenges and crosschecking for data completeness and accuracy. Where any identified data may be missing, site revisits shall be promptly arranged with the respondents to clarify or correct the data where appropriate. Completed data collection tools shall be compiled and data cleaning processes shall therefore follow.

3.11 Data Management and Analysis

The study data collected shall be entered into Excel data sheets and then analysed. The quantitative data generated in the survey through questionnaires shall be cleaned, entered into a spread sheet. Qualitative data collected will be edited for completeness and accuracy after which it will be entered into a data sheet and coded for analysis. The data with thereafter be analysed using Statistical Package for Social Scientists (SPSS) computer package version 27 which will generate descriptive statistics including frequencies, percentages, and means which shall be used to characterize the practices, norms and behaviors in governance of pigeonpea seed chain; gender relations in seed access and use; pigeonpea production and sale; and the effect of pigeonpea seed systems governance on the access and use of quality seeds by farmers. Correlations shall be also performed to establish the perceived relationships between income and input acquisition for pigeonpea production, and preferences by farmers.

3.12 Ethical Considerations

The ethical considerations of this research study shall be based on the guidelines set forth by the government of Uganda. The key ethical principles of research including voluntary participation, informed consent, anonymity, confidentiality, potential for harm, and results communication shall be observed and upheld during the conduct of this study. Any information collected as part of this research project will remain confidential. Participants will be informed of their rights and obligations before they agree to participate in the study. The names of participants will not be disclosed unless specific consent is provided. All participants will be provided with full information about the research project, as well as informed consent forms to complete before participating in the research project. Furthermore, all data collected will be stored securely and access to it will be restricted only to authorized personnel. Respect for cultural values and privacy will be ensured throughout the research process. The results of the research will not be used to make judgments about individuals, but rather to inform policy development and provide recommendations for improved seed system governance in Arua District, and Uganda at large.

REFERENCES

Almekinders, C. J. M., Louwaars, N., & de Bruijn, G. (1994). Local seed systems and their importance for an improved seed supply in developing countries. Euphytica, 78, 207-216. https://doi.org/10.1007/bf00027519

Amin, M. (2005). Sampling techniques. Journal of Business & Economic Studies, 6(1), 34-37.

Asfaw, A., Getachew, S., & Gebre, E. (2020). Determinants of Pigeonpea Seed Accessibility in Rural

Centre for Agriculture and Bioscience International. (2021). Good Seed System Governance: What is it and Why does it Matter? Retrieved 05 Apr 2021, from https://www.cabi.org/Seed-System-Governance.

Birkhofer, K. (2019). Global seed production and the biopolitics of life. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.

Bhalachandra, S., & Ravindranath, B. (2020). Integrated seed systems governance for improved access to seed of improved varieties in India. Food security, 12(3), 1105-1126.

Castillo, C. (2009). Understanding choices in research sampling. Public Health Nursing, 26(4), 340-345.

ChaoHong, Z., Zhenghong, L., Saxena, K., Jianqiu, Z., Yong, G., ShiYing, Y., et al. (2001). Traditional and alternative uses of pigeonpea in China. International Chickpea and Pigeonpea Newsletter (8), 55-57.

Chauhan, Y.S., A. Apphun, V.K. Singh, B.S. Dwivedi. 2004. Foliar sprays of concentrated urea at maturity of pigeonpea to induce defoliation and increase its residual benefit to wheat. Field Crops Research 89:17–25.

DiMaggio, P. J., & Powell, W. W. (1983). The iron cage revisited: Institutional isomorphism and collective rationality in organizational fields. American Sociological Review, 48(2), 147-160.

Faris, D., Singh, U., Nene, YL., Hall, SD., & Sheila, VK. (1990). Pigeonpea: nutrition and products. The pigeonpea, 401-433.

Fida, M., Boffa, J., Habtamu, Z., Mitiku, B., Adugna, E., Jalloh, W., & Javan, R. (2020). Seed System Governance Structures and Challenges: Learnings from Four Countries in Sub-Saharan Africa. African Crop Science Journal, 28(4), 197-209.

Food and Agriculture Organization Statistics (FAOSTAT) 2012.

Food and Agriculture Organization Statistics (FAOSTAT) 2013.

Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO). (2001). The International Treaty on Plant Genetic Resources for Food and Agriculture. Retrieved from http://www.fao.org/3/x9502e/x9502e00.htm

Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO). (2012). Seed Policy and Programmes for Food Security: A guide for countries in Africa. Rome: FAO.

Foster, A. D., & Rosenzweig, M. R. (2010). Microeconomics of technology adoption. Annual Review of Economics, 2.

Gadwal, V. (2003). The Indian seed industry: Its history, current status and future. Current science, 84(3), 399-406.

Gebremariam, A., Amare, M., & Okello, M. (2019). Seed Systems in Ethiopia: Challenges and Opportunities. Sustainability, 11(5), 1424.

Gebremariam, S., Muluvi, G., Woldeamlak, B., Gebremedhin, B., & Tadesse, M. (2019). Seed system governance and seed sector performance: Evidence from Ethiopia. Food Security, 11(2), 493–508. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12571-018-0860-6

Geleta, B. & Woldemariam, D. (2020). Analysis of Seed Systems in Ethiopia. In M.A. Amare (Ed.), Agricultural Innovation System for Sustainable Food Security (pp. 61-83). Springer, Cham.

Georgiev G.Z. (2017) “The Case for Non-Inferiority A/B Tests”, [online] https://blog.analytics-toolkit.com/2017/case-non-inferiority-designs-ab-testing.

Gezu, S., Tesfaye, K., & Ayana, M. (2020). Challenges and Opportunities of Seed Systems in Ethiopia: The Case of Sesame. Sustainability, 12(2), 717.

Gold, C., Kudita, P. B., Gover, E., Tumbwe, J., Kalema, J., Nakayiwa, C., & Franzel, S. (2018). Impact of Uganda’s seed law on the seed practices of smallholder maize farmers. Food policy, 73, 78-87.

Gomez, A. A., Wood, S., Francis, C. A., McMaster, G., Hutcheon, S., & Smale, M. (2017). Seeds of Change: Navigating the Complex Landscape of Sustainable Seed System Governance. Sustainability, 9(10), 1921. https://doi.org/10.3390/su9101921.

Gowda, C., Saxena, K., Srivastava, R., Upadhyaya, H., & Silim, S. (2011). Pigeonpea: from an orphan to a leader in food legumes.

Hernandez, P., & Dufour, S. (2020). Impact Evaluation of Improved Seed Systems in Uganda. Journal of Development Effectiveness, 12(1), 97-125.

Høgh-Jensen, H., Myaka, F. A., Sakala, W. D., Kamalongo, D., Ngwira, A., Vesterager, J.M., Odgaard R., & Adu-Gyamfi, J. J. (2007). Yields and qualities of pigeonpea varieties grown under smallholder farmers’ conditions in Eastern and Southern Africa, 270.

ICRISAT (International Crops Research Institute for the Semi-Arid Tropics).Annual report 1999. Patancheru 502 324, Andhra Pradesh, India: ICRISAT. 80 pp.

IITA. (2020). Good Governance at the Centre of Pigeonpea Success in Uganda. Retrieved from https://www.iita.org/news/good-governance-at-the-centre-of-pigeonpea-success-in-uganda/.

International Seed Testing Association (ISTA). (n.d.). Seed sector. Retrieved from https://www.seedtest.org/en/seed-sector.html.

Jamison, J., Schachtschneider, D., Surabhi, D., McDermott, P., Kamudoni, P., & Gesitobu, T. (2020). Quality Seeds Foster Innovation and Change in Developing-Country Food Systems: A Reflection on a Multi-Cropping Private Sector Participation Project in Uganda. Sustainability, 12(20), 8384. https://doi.org/10.3390/su12208384.

Jones, R.B., Freeman, H.A., Lo Monaco, G., 2002. Improving the access of small farmers in Eastern and Southern Africa to global pigeonpea markets. Agricultural Research and Extension Network, 120: 1–11.

Joshi, P., Rao, P. P., Gowda, C., Jones, R., Silim, S., Saxena, K., et al. (2001). The World Chickpea and Pigeonpea Economies Facts, Trends, and Outlook: International Crops Research Institute for the Semi-Arid Tropics.

Joughin, J. (2013). The Political Economy of Seed Reform in Uganda. Promoting the Development of a Regional EAC Seed Market, background paper prepared for Poverty Reduction and Economic Management (PREM), Africa Region, The World Bank, Washington DC.

Joughin, J. (2014). The Political Economy of Seed Reform in Uganda: Promoting a Regional Seed Trade Market.

Kabasa, J., Kassie, M., Nankabirwa, J., Quiros, C., & Okello, J. J. (2020). Improved production and marketing of pigeonpea in Uganda: Impact on dietary diversity, nutrition and household welfare. Food Security, 12(2), 513–530. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12571-019-00992-w.

Kalule, I., Murungi, H., Beck, H., & Yirga, G. (2020). Understanding the Dynamics of Pigeonpea Seed Systems in Eastern Uganda. Sustainability, 12(3), 1212.

Kikulwe, E., Birol, E., Wesseler, J., & Falck-Zepeda, J. (2011). A latent class approach to investigating demand for genetically modified banana in Uganda. Agricultural Economics, 42(5), 547-560.

Louwaars, N. P., & de Boef, W. S. (2012). Integrated seed sector development in Africa: a conceptual framework for creating coherence between practices, programs, and policies. Journal of Crop Improvement, 26(1), 39-59. https://doi.org/10.1080/15427528.2011.611277.

MAAIF. (2008). National Seed Policy.

MAAIF. (2015). National Seed Certification System. Retrieved from https://www.naroug.org/index.php/documents/licenses-certificates/325-uganda-national-seed-certification-system/file.

Malik, D. Y. (2019). Limited access to quality seed: The major hindrance of performance of the maize seed sector in Tanzania. International Journal of Seed Technology, 1(3), 4-14.

McGuire, S., Sperling, L., 2013. Making seed systems more resilient to stress. Global. Environ. Change Hum. Pol. Dimens. 23, 644–653. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2013.02.001.

Meyer, J. W., & Rowan, B. (1977). Institutionalized organizations: Formal structure as myth and ceremony. American Journal of Sociology, 83(2), 340-363.

Ministry of Agriculture, Animal Industry and Fisheries (MAAIF). (2008). National Seed Policy. Retrieved from https://www.naro.go.ug/index.php/documents/publications/184-national-seed-policy/file.

Minja, E. (2001). Yield losses due to field pests and integrated pest management strategies for pigeonpea–a synthesis. Paper presented at the Status and potential of pigeonpea in Eastern and Southern Africa: proceedings of a regional workshop, 12-15 Sep 2000, Nairobi, Kenya. B-5030.

Moses Owori, (2020). Poverty in Uganda: National and regional data and trends.

Gembloux, Belgium: Gembloux Agricultural University; and Patancheru 502 324, Andhra Pradesh, India: International Crops Research Institute for the Semi-Arid Tropics. 232 pp.

Musaana, M., & Njogedde, J. (1994). Pigeonpea Breeding Research at the Kawanda Agricultural Research Institute, Uganda. Paper presented at the Laxman Singh (eds.). 1994. Pigeonpea Improvement in Eastern and Southern Africa—Annual Research Planning Meeting 1993, 25-27 Oct 1993, Bulawayo, Zimbabwe.

Nagamuthu, S., Trivedi, S., & Srivastava, A. (2020). Pigeonpea Production and Marketing in India: Problems, Challenges and Policy Implications. International Journal of Social Science and Economic Research, 5(1), 1-14.

Nangoti, N., Kayobyo, G., & Rees, D. (2004). Seed demand and supply in eastern and northern Uganda—implications for government and non-government interventions. Uganda journal of agricultural sciences, 9, 778-784.

Naylor, R. L., Falcon, W. P., Goodman, R. M., Jahn, M. M., Sengooba, T., Tefera, H., et al. (2004). Biotechnology in the developing world: a case for increased investments in orphan crops. Food Policy, 29(1), 15-44.

Ntabomvura Bedigard, A. (2016). Strengthening the Enabling Environment for Quality Seed Systems in Africa: Case Study of Ugandan Seed Sector. African Regional Intellectual Property Organization.

Odeny, D. A. (2007). The potential of pigeonpea (Cajanus cajan (L.) Millsp.) in Africa. Paper presented at the Natural Resources Forum.

Okello, M., Okello, F., & Rajak, K. (2019). Seed System Governance and Farmers’ Livelihoods: Evidence from the West Nile Region of Uganda. Sustainability, 11(3), 864.

Okiror, M.A., 1986. Breeding for Resistance to Fusarium wilt. PhD thesis, University of Nairobi.

Okonya, J. S., et al. (2020). Informed Gender-Equitable Seed and Input Access Improvement in Eastern Uganda: On- and off -station Participatory Action Research. Frontiers in Sustainable Food Systems, 4, 83.

Onwuegbuzie, A.J., Jiao, Q.G. and Bostick, S.L. (2004) Library Anxiety: Theory, Research, and Applications. Lanham, MD: Scarecrow Press.

Otim, G., Ntare, B., & Arnab, G. (2020). Assessment of the Performance of the Seed Subsector Regulatory and Institutional Framework in Uganda.

Oxfam. (2010). Seed security in Uganda: A review of seed policy, seed sector development, and informal seed systems. Oxford, UK: Oxfam International.

Rajak, K., Okello, M., & Okello, F. (2020). Seed System Governance and Smallholder Farmers’ Livelihoods: Evidence from Uganda. Sustainability, 12(18), 7139.

Rao, S., Coleman, S., & Mayeux, H. (2002). Forage production and nutritive value of selected pigeonpea ecotypes in the southern Great Plains. Crop Science, 42(4), 1259-1263.

Reddy, L., Upadhyaya, H. D., Gowda, C., & Singh, S. (2005). Development of core collection in pigeonpea [Cajanus cajan (L.) Millspaugh] using geographic and qualitative morphological descriptors. Genetic Resources and Crop Evolution, 52(8), 1049-1056.

Rogers, E. M. (1962). Diffusion of innovations. Free Press.

Republic of Uganda. (2020). Agriculture Sector Strategic Plan IV 2020/21 – 2024/25. Ministry of Agriculture, Animal Industry and Fisheries. Retrieved from https://www.agriculture.go.ug/attachments/article/303/ASSP_IV_final.pdf.

Rusike, J., Dimes, J.P., 2006. Effecting change through private sector client services for smallholder farmers in Africa. 4th International Crop Science Congress, Brisbane. http://www.cropscience.org.au/ icsc2004/symposia/4/6/997_rusikej.htm.

Saxena, K. (2008). Genetic improvement of pigeonpea, a review. Tropical Plant Biology, 1(2), 159-178.

Sebstad, J. and C. Manfre. 2011. FIELD Report 12: Behaviour change Perspectives on Gender and Value Chain Development: a Framework for Analysis and Implementation. Field-Support LWA. Washington, D.C.: ACDI/VOCA and FHI 360.

Seed Regulatory Harmonization Initiative. (n.d.). The seed sector and regulation. Retrieved from http://srhi.seednet.gov.et/sites/default/files/doclib/seedsector.pdf.

Shanower, T.G., J. Romeis, and E. M. Minja. 1999. Insect pests of pigeonpea and their management. Annu. Rev. Entomol. 1999. 44:77–96.

Simtowe, F. (2011). Determinants of Agricultural Technology adoption: the Case of Improved Pigeonpea Varieties in Tanzania.

Simtowe, F., Shiferaw, B., Kassie, M., Abate, T., Silim, S., Siambi, M., et al. (2010). Assessment of the current situation and future outlooks for the pigeonpea sub-sector in Malawi. Nairobi: ICRISAT.

Singh, F., & Diwakar, B. (1993). Nutritive value and uses of pigeonpea and groundnut. Skills Development Series (14).

Singh, F., & Oswalt, D. (1992). Pigeonpea Botany and Production Practices.

Singh, S., Singh, V., Singh, R., & Singh, R. K. (2007). Adoption Constraints of Pigeonpea Cultivation in Lucknow District of Central Uttar Pradesh. Indian Research Journal of Extension and Education, 7(1).

Smith, J., Katusiime, F., Wekulo, P., Buyinza, M., Vosti, S., Nalunaina, D., & Opio, A. (2020). Small-scale farmers’ perceptions, determinants, and adoption of hybrid pigeonpeas in Uganda. Food Security, 12(1), 207–221. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12571-019-00959-8

Snapp, S.S., Rohrback, D.D, Simtowe, F., and Freeman, H. A. (2002). Sustainable soil management options for Malawi: can smallholder farmers grow more legumes? Agriculture Ecosystems and Environment 91:159–174.

Stals, R., Hayes, B., Shaffer, M., Nankya, V., & Zhenghong, Y. (2015). Seed systems sourcing needs and current practices of the mixed crop–livestock producers of Northern Uganda. Renewable Agriculture and Food Systems, 30(3), 307–319. https://doi.org/10.1017/S1742170514000215

Syme, G. (2020). Access to improved seeds and associated challenges-a Ugandan case. Seed Science & Technology, 48(3), 343-355.

Sperling, L., & McGuire, S. (2010). Understanding and strengthening informal seed markets. Experimental Agriculture, 46(02), 119-136.

Tuwafe, S., Silim, S., & Singh, L. (1994). ICRISAT/AfDB pigeonpea improvement project in Eastern and southern Africa. Paper presented at the Laxman Singh (eds.). 1994. Pigeonpea Improvement in Eastern and Southern Africa—Annual Research Planning Meeting 1993, 25-27 Oct 1993, Bulawayo, Zimbabwe.

Uganda Ministry of Agriculture, Animal Industry and Fisheries. (2020). Agricultural Sector Development Strategy 2020/21-2024/25. Retrieved from http://www.agriculture.go.ug/index.php/publications/policy-documents/1741-agricultural-sector-development-strategy-2020-21-2024-25.

Uganda Ministry of Agriculture, Animal Industry and Fisheries. The National Seed Policy, 2018.

UPOV. (2010). Uganda: Plant Variety Protection Act, 2010. Retrieved from https://www.upov.int/edocs/mdocs/u/u601ug.pdf.

Valenzuela, H., & Smith, J. (2002). Pigeonpea (Green Manure Crops).

Valenzuela, H., Smith, J., 2002. Pigeonpea. Sustainable Agriculture Green Manure Crops, Aug. 2002, SA-GM-8.

Vereijken, P., Mkuh, E., & Kebenei, J. (2020). Informal Seed Systems in Uganda: Dynamics, Challenges and Opportunities. African Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, 15(2), 31-53.

Waddington, S., Webster D Sakala, W.D. and M. Mekuria. 2004. Progress in lifting soil fertility in Southern Africa. In: “New directions for a diverse planet”. Proceedings of the 4th International Crop Science Congress, 26 Sep – 1 Oct, 2004.

Weaver, C., & Schrag, A. (2018). Tying seeds, sorting out moralities: An ethnography of pigeonpea seed systems in Bihar, India. Development and Change, 49(4), 1061–1086. https://doi.org/10.1111/dech.12.

Williamson, P. (2002). Validity Index for Research Instruments. Retrieved from http://www.socialresearchmethods.net/kb/conval.php.

Yeley, S. M., Epplin, F. M., Chaudhuri, A., & Karimov, A. (2017). Frameworks for Conceptualizing and Evaluating the Effectiveness of Rural Development Programs. Journal of the ASFMRA, 2017(80), 9-39.

APPENDICES

Appendix 1: Work Plan for the Research Project

Table 3: Phased work plan for the research project

2022 – 2023
	Activity	8	9	10	11	12	1	2	3	4	5	6	7-11
1	Course work
2	Proposal Development
3	Questionnaire development
4	Pretesting and correction
5	Data collection
6	Collection of survey data, entry and analysis
7	Preliminary Data analysis
8	Data Analysis, writing & submission

Appendix 2: Research Budget

Table 2: Budget estimates for the research project

DETAILS (FIELD RESEARCH)	COST IN UG SHS
Stationery & photocopying. Papers, permanent markers, pencils, posters, Rubber, Printing	300,000
Field travels and internal data collection travels	630,000
Living expenses in the fields 3 nights during data collection	240,000
Data collection, compiling and analysis in (field travel expenses, pretesting, actual data collection, editing and data entry)	800,000
Data cleaning and analysis	300,000
Supervisors’ visit (once)	400,000
Report and thesis writing related costs	200,000
Information dissemination and publicity	400,000
GRAND TOTAL	3,270,000

Appendix 3: Agricultural Systems in Uganda

Figure 2: Map of Uganda showing areas with different types of agricultural systems (Source: Osiru, 2006)

Appendix 5: Data Collection Questionnaire for the Study

GENERAL INFORMATION

Name of the enumerator		Date of interview (dd/mm/yy)
District		Sub-county
Parish		Village

SECTION 1: SOCIO-ECONOMIC AND DEMOGRAPHIC INFORMATION

1.1	Name of respondent		1.2 Tel: Contact
1.2	Respondent’s gender	1= Male [ ], 2 = Female [ ]
1.3	Age (complete years)
1.4	Marital status (*see codes*)
1.5	Educational level completed (*see codes*)		No. of years in school
1.6	Religion (*1. Catholic, 2. Anglican, 3. Islam, 4. Pentecostal, 5. SDA, 6. Others (specify)………………*.)
1.7	Main occupation (*see codes*)
1.8	Household Size
1.9.	Household size by gender Codes 1. Male *2. Female*
1.10	Pigeonpea growing status of the household (Tick applicable): 1. Grower [ ] 2. Non grower [ ]

Codes

1.4: Marital status:

1. Married,

2. Single,

3. Divorced/separated

4. Widow

5. Widower,

6. Other (specify)……

1.5: Education level:

1. No formal education,

2. Primary,

3. Ordinary level,

4. Advanced level,

5. Vocational college,

6. Tertiary

7. Others (specify)………………

1.7. Occupation:

1. Crop farming

2.Trading

3. Civil servant,

4. Livestock,

5.Fishing,

6. Farm worker,

7. Off-farm worker,

8. Housekeeping,

9=Other (Specify) ……………………

1.11.1	Is respondent head of the household?	1. Yes [ ] 2. No [ ]
1.11.2	If not head of household, what is the relation to the head of household (*Circle the applicable*)	1. Spouse, 2. Son/Daughter, 3. Parent, 4. In-law, 5. Sibling 6. Others (specify)…………………..
1.12	Gender of Household Head	1= Male [ ], 2 = Female [ ]
1.13	Age of Household Head (in complete years)
1.14	Marital status of Household Head (*see codes*)
1.15	Educational level completed by Household Head (*see codes*)
1.16	Main occupation other than farming (*see codes*)

Codes

1.14: Marital status of Head of HH:

1. Married,

2. Single,

3. Divorced/separated

4. Widow

5. Widower,

6. Other (specify)……

1.15: Education level of Head of HH:

1. No formal education,

2. Primary,

3. Ordinary level,

4. Advanced level,

5. Vocational college,

6. Tertiary

7. Others (specify)………………

1.16: Occupation of Head of HH:

1. Crop farming

2.Trading

3. Civil servant,

4. Livestock,

5.Fishing,

6. Farm worker,

7. Off-farm worker,

8. Housekeeping,

9=Other (Specify) ……………………

SECTION 2: CROP PRODUCTION

Part A

2.1 What is the total size of land under crop production in acres? ………………….

2.2 (a) Is pigeonpea your major crop? 1. Yes [ ] 2. No [ ]

2.2 (b) If yes, do you grow pigeonpea yearly? 1. Yes [ ] 2. No [ ]

2.3	What is the purpose for growing pigeonpea? (*Tick all that apply) 1. Food, 2. Cash, 3. Food and cash, 4. Animal feed, 5. Others (specify) …………*
2.4	What percentage of your farm income is generated from sale of pigeonpea? (*Tick all that apply*) (a) 0 – 5% (b) 6 – 10% (c) 11 – 25% (d) 26 – 50% (e) 50 – 75% (f) 76 – 100%
2.5	Apart from Seeds, which other farm inputs do you use in pigeonpea production? (see codes) a) Inorganic fertilizers (b) Organic fertilizers (c) Rhizobia (d) Pesticides/ insecticides b) (e) Others (specify) ………………..
2.6.1	What was the main source of your pigeonpea seeds (*Tick all that apply) (a) Purchased from local market (b) Purchased from an input dealer (c) From relative (d) NARO/Research station (e) From neighbour and friend (f) NAADS/OWC (g) Last season’s own saved seed (h) NGO specify*…………….. (i) ICRISAT (j) Other (Specify)…………………………………………………….
2.6.2	On a scale of 1-5 (1 being the lowest rating and 5 the highest); rate the sources you obtained seeds from above for reliability to supply pigeonpea seeds consistently 1 = strongly disagree, 2 = disagree, 3 = neutral, 4 = agree, and 5 = strongly agree
2.6.3	On a scale of 1-5 (1 being the lowest rating and 5 the highest); rate the quality of the pigeonpea seeds you obtained from the above source based on the observed germination rate of the seeds in the field 1 = very low, 2 = low, 3 = fair, 4 = high, and 5 = very high

Part B: Pigeonpea production in the second season of 2022 or first season 2023

2.7.1	Did you grow pigeonpea in the second season of 2022? 1. Yes [ ] 2. No [ ]
2.7.2	If yes, which variety/varieties did you plant? (*Tick all that apply*) (a) Sepi 1 (e) Sepi 2 (b) Engekea (f) Tamatru (c) Api lina (g) Agali (d) Agogi (h) Others (specify) ………………………
2.8.1	What was the total size of land under crop production in acres in second season 2022?
2.8.2	What was the total size of plot in acres under pigeonpea in the second season of 2022?
2.9.1	Did you grow pigeonpea in the year 2023? 1. Yes [ ] 2. No [ ]
2.9.2	If yes, which variety/varieties did you plant in the first season of 2023? (*Tick all that apply*) (a) Sepi 1 (e) Sepi 2 (b) Engekea (f) Tamatru (c) Api lina (g) Agali (d) Agogi (h) Others (specify) ………………………
2.9.1	What is the total size of land under crop production in acres in 2023?
2.9.2	What is the total size of plot in acres under pigeonpea in the year 2023?

2.10. Which is your most liked variety? (Circle one)

Sepi 1 (b) Sepi 2

(e) Api lina (f) Agali

(g) Agogi (h) Other (Specify)…………………………

Part C: Knowledge on pigeonpea varieties and variety preference

2.17	Name all the pigeonpea varieties that you know (*Tick all that apply*) (a) Sepi 1 (e) Sepi 2 (b) Engekea (f) Tamatru (c) Apii lina (g) Agali (d) Agogi (h) Others (specify) ………………………
2.18	Which is your most liked variety of pigeonpea? (*Tick only one*) (a) Sepi 1 (e) Sepi 2 (b) Engekea (f) Tamatru (c) Api lina (g) Agali (d) Agogi (h) Others (specify) ………………………
2.19	Why is this (above in 5.2) your most preferred variety? (*Tick all apply*)
	Reason for preference	Name of variety
	Reason for preference	Sepi 1	Sepi2	Agali	Agogi	Apii lina	Engekea	Tamatru	Other specify
	Disease resistance
	Drought tolerance
	Minimum shattering
	High yield
	Early maturity
	Big seed size
	Good seed colour
	Perennial production

SECTION 3: MARKETING

3.1	Did you sell any pigeonpea in the last 6 months? 1. Yes [ ] 2. No [ ]
3.2	What gender controlled the income from the sale of pigeonpea? (*Tick only one*) (a) Men (b) Both men and women (c) Women
3.3	If you sold, where did you sell your pigeonpea? (*Tick all that apply*) What price did you receive per Kilogram of pigeonpea? (a) Farm-gate/ home Price (Ushs) per Kg ……………………………… (b) Rural Market Price (Ushs) per Kg ……………………………… (c) Urban market Price (Ushs) per Kg ……………………………… (d) Community store Price (Ushs) per Kg ……………………………… (e) Other (specify) …………………. Price (Ushs) per Kg ………………………………
3.4	Who were the buyers of your pigeonpea? (a) Wholesalers (c) Processors (b) Retailers (d) Local consumers within community (e ) Other (specify) …………………………………

SECTION 4: CONSUMPTION

4.1	Do the household members consume pigeonpeas? 1. Yes [ ] 2. No [ ]
4.2.1	Do you have a particular variety you prefer to consume in this household? 1. Yes [ ] 2. No [ ]
4.2.2	If yes to question.4.2.1, which particular variety do you prefer to consume? (*Tick only one*) (a) Sepi 1 (e) Sepi 2 (b) Engekea (f) Tamatru (c) Api lina (g) Agali (d) Agogi (h) Others (specify) ………………………
4.2.3	Why do you prefer that (in question 4.2.2) variety to other varieties? ……………………………………………………………………………………………………
4.3	How do you prepare pigeonpeas? (a) Roasting (e) Cook fresh peas and paste (b) Toasting (f) Cook dry peas and paste (c) Cook fresh peas and fry (h) Cook dry peas and fry (d) Other (specify)………………………………………………………….
4.4	In a week, how many times do you consume pigeonpeas on average? (*Tick only one*) (a) None (e) Once (b) Twice (f) Thrice (c) Four times (g) Five times (d) Six times (h) Daily

SECTION 5: HOUSEHOLD INCOME AND PIGEONPEA PRODUCTION

5.1	What were the sources of income for this household in the last 12 months? (a) Crop sales (b) Livestock sales (c) Rentals (d) Sales of other products (e) Casual Agricultural employment (f) Remittances (g) Casual non-agricultural employment (h) Running own business (i) Other (Specify)………………………………
5.2.1	Did you buy new seed and other inputs for pigeonpea production this season? 1. Yes [ ] 2. No [ ]
5.2.2	If yes to question 5.3.1, what estimated percentage of the household income was used to buy new seeds or other inputs? (a) ≤25 (c) 26-50 (b) 51-75 (d) 76-100
5.2.3	If No to question 5.2.1, why? ………………………………………………………………………………………………………

SECTION 6: BENEFITS AND PROBLEMS OF PIGEONPEA PRODUCTION

6.1.1	In general, do you believe pigeonpea production is beneficial to your household or not? 1. Yes [ ] 2. No [ ]
6.1.2	If no to question 6.1.1, why? ……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………..
6.1.3	If yes to question 6.1.1, explain the benefits of pigeonpea production to your household? ………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
6.2	What problems do you experience in pigeonpea production? (*Tick all that apply*) (a) Low soil fertility (h) Diseases (b) Lack of access to inputs (i) Pests (c) Lack of improved high yielding, early maturing, (j) Vermin/rodents and disease resistant varieties (d) Financial constraint to get inputs (k) Weeds (e) Limited technical extension support (l) Lack of labour (f) Limited access to inputs (m) Small land holding (g) Poor postharvest handling facilities (n) Other (Specify)……………………

6.3 Do you have any comment/ question regarding what we have discussed on pigeonpeas?

……………………………………………………………………………………………………

Thanks for your participation!

Appendix 6: Key Informant Interview (KII) Guide

The National Seed Policy, 2018 Implementation: Key Informant Interview (KII)

Note

Target: Key Government, Opinion Leaders, and NGOs Officials e.g. Government agriculture officers at, District or lower levels; NGO Programme Officers/Coordinators – at regional, county, district or lower levels

Objective: These guide questions will help the researcher get an overview of the implementation of the National Seed Policy, 2018 and its influence in shaping the pigeonpea seed systems and farmers’ access to quality seeds in the district. It is important to have such general information in order to situate the specific data collected as well as find out who else could be interviewed on seed systems.

Part I: Crop Production / Seed System Overview

Which are the main crops grown in this district/sub-county? Which are most important for food and which for income?
Is pigeonpea an important crop in the district/sub-county? If so is there an evolution in the importance of the pigeonpea crop? If so, is it increasing in area, or decreasing? Why?
Are there any ‘value chain’ projects and/or any projects supporting farmers in this area? If yes, who runs the project, where? Which crop value chains are the interventions mainly targeting? Is pigeonpea one of the crops?
Please share any documents that you have on the seed systems / value chain in your district/sub-county.

Part II: Seed Formal Seed Sector Operation and co-ordination

Are there agro-input dealers in the district/sub-county? If yes, how many and what crop seed do they sell? Are they registered with the relevant ministry and seed sector regulation bodies like UNADA?
Are there seed-producing groups in this district/sub-county? If yes, where are they? What are they producing?
Who ensures the quality of the seed they are producing? Are there projects that support seed multiplication in the state/county? Who runs these projects?
Are aware of the existence and functions of the following major Uganda’s Public Sector institutions for governing the seed system? (The National Seed Board; The National Seed Certification Services; and The National Variety Release Committee)
To what extent does government coordinate seed sector stakeholders?
Are the various seed sector players aware or being educated on their roles and obligations in the sector? Who is spearheading the awareness/education? Do you think there are gaps in the awareness creation? What more needs to be done to make the awareness effective?
To what extent is sharing of information, coordination of activities and alignment of existing strategies among seed sector stakeholders effective?
Are you aware on the main contents/provisions of the Uganda National Seed Policy, 2018? In your view, is the seed policy being implemented in the district/sub-county? Which key provisions/sections of the seed policy are being implemented in your district/sub-county? What more needs to be done to implement the policy in the district/sub-county? Which other provisions need to be implemented to better streamline the seed sector?
Do you have access to seed policy documents OR any seed assessment document/reports? If yes, what would you consider as the strengths and weaknesses of these policy document/reports? Can you provide us with copies? Could you also provide us with any seed intervention/evaluation report?

Part III: Seed security in generals

In this district/sub-county, do farmers have access to adequate seed of the right varieties they need in time for planting?
Are there concerns around the quality of the seed planted or being planted in this area?
Are there some seed sources considered unsuitable but being promoted in the areas and why? Which varieties are these?
Are there efforts to combat or regulate unsafe sources/illegal acts/actors? Which agency is the most active in regulating these efforts to regulate the seed sector in the district/sub-county?
To what extent is field inspection for seed quality assurance effective for QDS?
To what extent is field inspection for seed quality assurance effective certified seed?
To what extent are seed sampling and laboratory testing for seed quality assurance effective?

Part IV: Important documents and contact

Are there any other important seed sector or systems information documents you might be able to share with us? (This could be overviews, or yearly reports or evaluations. etc. Even seasonal data could be useful).
Are there key contacts to which the research team should speak to/consult?
- Key people?
- Key organizations?