The tomato industry in northern Ghana: Production constraints and strategies to improve competitiveness.

Clottey, VA; Karbo, N.; Gyasi, K. O.

doi:10.4314/ajfand.v9i6.46265

Cited by 19 publications

(23 citation statements)

References 3 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Empirical findings from a recent study in the Upper West Region found that adoption of high input agriculture following the introduction of a hybrid maize technology was threatening the fragile agricultural lands, reducing yields and worsening the food security situation of smallholder farmers (Nyantakyi-Frimpong & Bezner-Kerr, 2015). On the contrary, Clottey, Karbo, and Gyasi (2009) revealed calls on various stakeholders (CSIR and MoFA) by both tomato farmers and a manufacturing company in the northern parts of Ghana to make available improved tomato varieties due to their accompanying advantages.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Debated agronomy: public discourse and the future of biotechnology policy in Ghana

et al. 2017

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This paper examines the highly contested and ongoing biotechnology (Bt) policy-making process in Ghana. We analyse media content on how Bt is viewed in the context of Ghana’s parliamentary debate on the Plant Breeders Bill and within the broader public policy-making literature. This paper does not seek to take a position on Bt or the Bill, but to understand how policy actors influence the debate with political and scientific rhetoric in Ghana. The study reveals that in the midst of scientific uncertainties of Bt’s potential for sustainable agriculture production and food security, policy decisions that encourage its future adoption are heavily influenced by health, scientific, economic, environmental and political factors dictated by different ideologies, values and norms. While locally pioneered plant breeding is visible and common in the Ghanaian food chain, plant breeding/GMOs/Bt from international corporations is strongly resisted by anti-GMO coalitions. Understanding the complex and messy nature of Bt policy-making is critical for future development of agricultural technology in Ghana and elsewhere.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Debated agronomy: public discourse and the future of biotechnology policy in Ghana

et al. 2017

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Further, CC is noted to encourage community participation; promote collaboration and partnership; and engage traditional leadership, local governance institutions, researchers, and livelihood groupings in livelihood development activities (Kopelman, 1990: p. 327;Carney, 1997;Norris and Stevens, 2006;Mochizuki and Fadeeva, 2010;Possardt and Reid, 2010;Hout et al, 2011;Reid and Muruvi, 2011). For example, building community capacity to plan, and implement community projects such as farms and their related organizations is effective in enabling tomato farmers to develop greater roles and improve their position in tomato chain management, and also effective in building the competences of tomato farmers in the Northern region of Ghana (Clottey et al, 2008).…”

Section: Literature Review and Theoretical Frameworkmentioning

confidence: 99%

Developing competence for communities impacted by dam construction

Arthur¹

2017

Int. J. Biodivers. Conserv.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This paper contributes to the discussion on community competence by focusing on thirteen communities near Bui dam and Bui National Park, Ghana to address the impacts of Bui Dam construction and related resettlements through analysis of community competence. For each of these questions, further analysis was undertaken to assess the role of resettlement, ethnicity, age, livelihood type and gender. Data was gathered through multiple methods. In the design of a survey, administered to 339 respondents across the thirteen communities, document analysis and interviews were conducted to provide inputs for the survey. Community competence for this study was defined to have 4 dimensions: governance training; sustainability training; training to plan and implement; and training for participatory enabling strategies. Overall, respondents indicated low level of support for each aspect of community competence training. Villages not relocated tended to perceive these impacts less negatively, as did people of Nafana ethnicity, and people relying mainly on a farming livelihood. Age and gender had little impact. Further analysis through regression analysis was undertaken to determine the relative influence of each of these predictor variables on community competency. The multiple regression analysis indicated that regarding governance training, only one predictor variable was significant: "livelihood type" (beta = 0.296), and the overall R squared was low (0.080), but significant. Regarding sustainability training, only "livelihood type" was a significant predictor (beta = 0.310), and the overall R squared was low (0.085) but significant. Regarding capacity to plan and implement, two predictor variables were significant: livelihood type (beta=0.167), and relocate (beta=0.213). R squared was low (0.048) but significant. Regarding participatory enabling strategies, only livelihood type was significant (beta=0.070), and the overall R squared was low (0.086) but significant. It is concluded that training opportunities provided for dam impacted communities did not meet the core needs and focus of the impacted communities; because the number of training modules were few; training modules failed to focus on the core skills domains (e.g. governance, sustainability, capacity to plan and implement, and participatory enabling activities). The study showed that people perceive community competence to be decreasing on many spheres, but there is variability between households in the perceived impacts.

show abstract

“…Research regarding the supply chain is conducted intensively in both, countries dominating at the tomato market like Netherlands (Aramyana et al, 2009), Spain (Valenciano et al, 2008;Rodrıguez and Hernandez, 2005), Turkey (Serin and Civan, 2008) and Morocco (Codron a et al, 2014), but also the countries striving to improve their position at the tomato market like Pakistan (Tahir et al, 2012), Ghana (Clottey et al, 2009), Moldova (Stratan, 2014), or the countries of West Africa (Venus et al, 2013).…”

Section: Literature Reviewmentioning

confidence: 99%