Disease-Resistant Cassava Cuttings for Higher Yields
The "Disease Resistant Cassava Varieties" technology refers to a range of cassava varieties specially selected and developed to resist the viral diseases that hamper cassava production in sub-Saharan Africa, in particular cassava mosaic and cassava brown streak. These cassava varieties have been created to address the major challenges affecting this key crop in the region. The adoption of these disease-resistant varieties offers farmers a sustainable means of protecting their cassava crops, improving yields and enhancing food security in sub-Saharan Africa. What's more, these varieties often display resistance to other common cassava pathogens, promoting integrated crop health management. Breeding and development programs continue to identify new disease-resistant cassava varieties, contributing to the sustainability of cassava production in sub-Saharan Africa.
This technology is TAAT1 validated.
Adults 18 and over: Positive high
The poor: Positive high
Under 18: No impact
Women: Positive high
Climate adaptability: Highly adaptable
Farmer climate change readiness: Significant improvement
Biodiversity: No impact on biodiversity
Carbon footprint: A bit less carbon released
Environmental health: Moderately improves environmental health
Soil quality: Does not affect soil health and fertility
Water use: Same amount of water used
The technology of disease-resistant cassava varieties significantly contributes to various aspects of sustainable development. By reducing yield losses, improving food security, and promoting sustainable agriculture, these varieties empower women, mitigate climate change impacts, and contribute to achieving global development objectives.
To integrate this cassava technology into your project, consider the following activities and prerequisites:
Raise awareness among multipliers, farmers, and food processors about the benefits of disease-resistant cassava varieties.
Identify and acquire elite immune lines adapted to local conditions.
Build stakeholder capacity in propagating healthy planting material through local delivery hubs.
Estimate the quantity of cassava roots needed for your project, with planting materials typically costing between USD 30 to 35 per hectare.
Include delivery costs to the project site, accounting for potential import clearance and duties, as the technology is available in various countries.
Including costs for training and post-training support.
Develop communication materials such as flyers, videos, and radio broadcasts to raise awareness.
Associate this technology with an integrated weed, pest, and soil management system (GAP) and seed bulking for cassava multiplication for optimal results.
Explore collaborations with agricultural development institutes and seed multiplication companies for effective implementation in your country.
Incidences of cassava mosaic disease with resistant varieties
Scaling Readiness describes how complete a technology’s development is and its ability to be scaled. It produces a score that measures a technology’s readiness along two axes: the level of maturity of the idea itself, and the level to which the technology has been used so far.
Each axis goes from 0 to 9 where 9 is the “ready-to-scale” status. For each technology profile in the e-catalogs we have documented the scaling readiness status from evidence given by the technology providers. The e-catalogs only showcase technologies for which the scaling readiness score is at least 8 for maturity of the idea and 7 for the level of use.
The graph below represents visually the scaling readiness status for this technology, you can see the label of each level by hovering your mouse cursor on the number.
Read more about scaling readiness ›
Semi-controlled environment: prototype
Common use by projects NOT connected to technology provider
| Maturity of the idea | Level of use | |||||||||
| 9 | ||||||||||
| 8 | ||||||||||
| 7 | ||||||||||
| 6 | ||||||||||
| 5 | ||||||||||
| 4 | ||||||||||
| 3 | ||||||||||
| 2 | ||||||||||
| 1 | ||||||||||
| 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | ||
Enabling Environments for Sustainable Regional Agriculture Extension (ENSURE)
Projet d’Appui au Développement des Chaînes de Valeurs en soutien au Programme de Transformation de l’Agriculture (PADCV-PTA)
Project funder: African Development Bank
Planned Budget: USD 311.609 million
Location: 6 provinces in Congo (Kongo Central, Kwango, Maï-Ndombe, Kasaï Oriental, Lomami, Sud-Kivu)
Planned duration: 2024–2029
Deployment means: Direct access to improved seeds and planting materials, seed system strengthening (INERA, SENASEM, multipliers), Farmer Field Schools and demonstration plots (1,600 sites), strengthened public extension (SNV), training/capacity building, subsidized or cost-shared inputs and equipment, irrigation infrastructure (5,200 ha), rural road rehabilitation (600 km), contract farming and private sector partnerships
Project main implementer: Social Fund of the Democratic Republic of the Congo
Project Description: Implements the National Pact for Food and Agriculture (PNAA) using an integrated value chain approach combining technology access (seeds, practices), infrastructure development (irrigation, roads), extension services, farmer organization, finance, and market access to boost productivity, reduce imports, strengthen resilience, and structure agricultural value chains.
Objective: Restore national seed capital, scale improved and climate-resilient technologies, increase productivity, facilitate access to inputs/advisory/markets/finance, promote climate-smart agriculture, strengthen farmer organizations and value chain governance, reduce food imports, and enhance resilience to climate shocks and conflict.
Expected outcome: ~80% crop yield increase (rice, cassava, maize, soybean), 1.68 million tons/year additional production, expansion of irrigated rice, improved access to seeds/inputs, stronger farmer organizations, better post-harvest handling and market integration, increased private sector engagement, reduced food imports, improved national food security.
Figures of adoption: 900,000 farming households directly supported, ~295,000 ha cultivated with improved seeds, 5,200 ha irrigated rice, 600 km rural roads rehabilitated, 1,600 FFS/demonstration plots, 2 million households indirectly benefiting, +4.1 million tons private sector processing, ~1.68 million tons annual production increase
Profiles of adopters: Smallholder farmers, women farmers (100% of women-headed households in target areas), youth/agripreneurs, internally displaced persons (IDPs) in South Kivu, seed producers, cooperatives, farmer organizations/inter-professional associations, public extension services, local authorities
Lessons learnt: Infrastructure (irrigation, roads) and market access are critical for adoption, seed system reform is a bottleneck, contract farming/aggregation incentivizes adoption, combining inputs + extension + finance accelerates impact, governance and institutional coordination are key for scaling and sustainability
Emergency Food Production Project (Projet de Production Alimentaire d’Urgence - PPAU)
Constraints: High international input prices, climate vulnerability
Success factors: Strong existing UGP (PATAG-EAJ), e-Voucher digitalization for transparency, TAAT technical support for rapid multiplication technologies (SAH)
| Country | Testing ongoing | Tested | Adopted |
|---|---|---|---|
| Benin | –No ongoing testing | Tested | Adopted |
| Burkina Faso | –No ongoing testing | Tested | Adopted |
| Burundi | –No ongoing testing | Tested | Adopted |
| Cameroon | –No ongoing testing | Tested | Adopted |
| Democratic Republic of the Congo | –No ongoing testing | Tested | Adopted |
| Ethiopia | –No ongoing testing | Tested | Adopted |
| Kenya | –No ongoing testing | Tested | Adopted |
| Liberia | –No ongoing testing | Tested | Adopted |
| Madagascar | –No ongoing testing | Tested | Adopted |
| Malawi | –No ongoing testing | Tested | Adopted |
| Mozambique | –No ongoing testing | Tested | Adopted |
| Nigeria | –No ongoing testing | Tested | Adopted |
| Rwanda | –No ongoing testing | Tested | Adopted |
| Uganda | –No ongoing testing | Tested | Adopted |
| Zambia | –No ongoing testing | Tested | Adopted |
This technology can be used in the colored agro-ecological zones. Any zones shown in white are not suitable for this technology.
| AEZ | Subtropic - warm | Subtropic - cool | Tropic - warm | Tropic - cool |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Arid | ||||
| Semiarid | ||||
| Subhumid | ||||
| Humid |
Source: HarvestChoice/IFPRI 2009
The United Nations Sustainable Development Goals that are applicable to this technology.
Last updated on 8 April 2026