CFU experiences and lessons on Conservation Agriculture
77
By Peter Aagaard
-
Upload
african-conservation-tillage-network -
Category
Technology
-
view
150 -
download
8
Transcript of CFU experiences and lessons on Conservation Agriculture
By Peter Aagaard
No Farmers no Future
Conservation Farming Unit CFU established in Zambia in 1996 – conservationagriculture.org
WELCOME
1
By Peter Aagaard
What farmers want?
African farmers aspirations are no different from farmers the world over. They want to:
Feed their families
Drive down costs labour inputs, increase yields, make more money.
Survive adverse climatic conditions
Ride out the crests and troughs of market turbulence
Have ready access to sound technical advice
Be linked to input supplies, markets and other farming services
Benefit from stable agricultural policies
1A
The early enthusiasts
Ron Landless A Zambian commercial farmer with a social conscience
Brian Oldreive Pioneer of Min-till systems for small-scale hoe farmers in Zimbabwe
Henry Elwell Years of research on the effects of conventional tillage on soils - Zimbabwe
Richard Winkfield ART Farm Zimbabwe – Mechanized Zero Till Research
Isiah Nyangumbo Professor of Agriculture University of Zimbabwe
Stephen Muliokela GART Farm Golden Valley Zambia
Ed Voss EU Crucial early support to get our ideas together
Chaim Helman IDA Knocked on Norwegian, Swedish and Finnish doors to get funding
George Grey Former Executive Director of the ZNFU
Ben Kapita Former President of the ZNFU
Ginty Melville Executive Director Lonrho Cotton
James Burke’s – TV program showed how various discoveries and technological breakthroughs were built from one another successively in an interconnected and
often informal way
‘CONNECTIONS’ – THE BIRTH OF THE CFU
2
Some Early Milestones:
April 1996 Meeting convened by the ZNFU where we made our pitch to Norad, Sida, Finnida to support a small, tightknit and highly focused organization to promote CF among small-scale farmers in Zambia
May 1996 CFU registered as an independent entity associated with the ZNFU
1996/7 Planting Season Launch of small demonstration program based on Hoe Min-Till and rotations – 6 staff
August 1999 Ministry of Agriculture embed the promotion of CF in national extension policy.
By 2000/2001 800 demonstrations and 150 on-farm trials
By 2002/3 No more demonstrations necessary and program funded by Norway alone
3
Acknowledging the pioneers of No-till
From the devastating experience of the Dust Bowl, the principles and practices of CF gradually emerged and to this day are the subject of continuous refinement. 4
We must all recognize the invaluable contributions of the No-till pioneers:
Hugh Bennett of Dust Bowl fame, Edward Faulkner, Albert Howard, Walter Lowdermilk, George McKibben, Shirley Phillips, Herbert Bartz, John Landers, Rolph Derpsh, Ademir Calegari and many
others who have dedicated their lives to the development of what we call CF.
Also ICI, Monsanto, John Deere one of the first manufacturers of Zero Till planters and many other companies and manufacturers.
Min-Till Pioneer
In 1962 Haywood County farmer John Kirkpatrick used this homemade unit to prepare a narrow, tilled zone which was later followed with a regular planter. Erosion control on a steep slope was a major goal.
The obvious is seldom seen until expressed simply. 5
At the CFU we have never tried to ‘be something’ - what we have always tried is to ‘do something’
We don’t work for an
organization we work on an idea, we work for farmers
6
Who funds us, where do we operate now, what is the scope of our programs?
What are the agro-ecological settings within the countries and regions we operate?
Conventional Farming practices – what are they, what are the disadvantages with them?
Min-till and Zero till based CF practices - what is MT,CT, RT, CF, CA, CSA, what are the advantages?
What practices do we recommend for hoe, ox and mechanized farmers ? Can it work anywhere or not?
How do we deliver training and knowledge to farmers?
How do we encourage farmer to farmer service provision as a business and what services are provided?
How do we measure the impact of our programs? Adoption numbers, areas of adoption what exactly is being adopted and what are the socio\economic benefits – M&E & Research?
If CF is so good then why isn’t everybody doing it?
What other technologies/practices do we promote alongside CF/CA ? Agro-forestry, food security crops?
How do we engage with the private sector to ensure farmers can access the equipment and inputs they require to convert?
What is our position on GMO’s?
What is the national agricultural policy setting in Zambia and how does it differ in other ESA countries?
What are they major constraints confronting the promotion and adoption of CF/CSA in ESA?
The dilemma - what to talk about?
7
Starting From 2006/7 Significant Scale up Zambia Conservation Agriculture Programme (CAPI) 2006 - 2010
Zambia Conservation Agriculture Programme (CAPII) 2011 - 2015
Uganda, Kenya, Malawi, Tanzania Conservation Agriculture Regional Programme (CARP) 2011 -2015
Indirect Support Services Madagascar, Senegal, Ghana
Sponsored by the Norwegian Government, implemented by the CFU
8
Region 111 Rainfall 1000-1200mm Miombo woodland
Region 11a Rainfall 800-850mm Maize Production Belt Zambia’s plateau’s
Region 11b Rainfall 800-900mm Zambezi floodplains
Region 1 Rainfall 700-750mm Low altitude river valleys
Rainfall Mono-modal Late Nov to Mid March
9
CAP Areas : 4 Administrative Regions – 16 Districts out of 73
Western Region
Southern Region
Central Region
Eastern Region
Mongu, Mkuski and Lundazi Sub-Regions
Most of Agro-ecological Region IIa & part of IIb
Mainly Zambia’s Maize & Cotton belts
509,000 farm households (+-)
10
10a
Comparison of Crop Yields World Bank 2008
African Agriculture – The Backdrop
11
Between 2000/2008, 25% to 40% of the Maize planted by smallholders was abandoned .
Over these 8 years, smallholders abandoned 1,700,000 hectares of Maize that was planted .
Average yields on area committed to Maize ranged from 1.0 to 1.5 tons per hectare.
73% of small-scale growers didn’t sell any maize at all.
67% of small-scale farmers didn’t use fertiliser.
80% of surplus SSF production came from 10% of farmers. Source MACO/CSO/FSRP 2000-2008 analysis
Some Extraordinary Statistics Relating to SSF Maize Production in Zambia
12
13
About 3 decades ago something changed?
Farming and agriculture became boring and we entered a brave new world driven by impenetrable jargon
Community mobilization, community coordination groups, safety net management capacities, focus group assessment, positive deviance enquiry, trigger indicators, strategic incrementalism, livelihood frameworks etc.
‘Finance like other forms of human behaviour underwent a change, a break with commonsense, a turn toward abstractionism and notions that couldn’t be explained in workaday English: John Lanchester –Whoops
The rationalisation of nonsense
Often researchers propose that much ‘local adaptation’ will be required if CF is to take off in different agro-regions and countries, that blanket recommendations are dangerous and much more research is needed.
This idea confuses ‘tillage’ with ‘cropping’. ‘On the ground’ must be separated from ‘above the ground’. Ploughing, harrowing, overall digging and ridge-splitting are the conventions that reflect what the vast majority of smallholders do to establish their crops. Min Till and Zero-Till are the ‘non negotiables’ on which CF/CA is built and they provide a foundation that can accommodate a wide range of agronomic practices, planting configurations, crops and cropping systems suited to local conditions including rotations, inter-crops, relays, and agro-forestry trees.
14
Conservation Farming is a system.
If you can’t describe it you can’t define it.
If you can’t define it you can’t distinguish it from other farming systems.
If you can’t distinguish if from other farming systems you can’t compare its performance with them.
If you can’t compare performance you can’t establish program goals, objectives and expected results.
Conservation Farming definitions - why they are important
15
Some well known Definitions of CA
“A concept for resource-saving agricultural crop production that strives to achieve acceptable profits together with high and sustained production levels while concurrently conserving the environment”.
Embodies general principles that do not provide a sufficiently precise basis for comparative evaluation
“CA promotes the concept of optimizing yields and profits while ensuring provision of local and global environmental benefits and services”.
A sweeping declaration of aims that is equally unhelpful
16
The common agronomic definition of CA is equally unhelpful:
‘Minimum tillage, permanent ground cover and 30% of
cropped area occupied by legumes in rotation’. Sets standards that are nigh impossible in areas of mono-modal
rainfall (e.g. permanent ground cover).
Ignores economic considerations such as fluctuating commodity prices and market opportunities which drive the proportion of different crops grown by farmers.
Eliminates all farmers who may have adopted highly significant and beneficial components of CF but not all of them.
17
19
20
Conventional farming - the common denominator
Continuous and unnecessary overall soil disturbance by hoes, ox ploughs and ridgers,
tractor ploughs and harrows
The universal and everlasting turning and churning of soil
The destructive practice that links all conventional farming systems:-
21
Conventional Farming Practice
22
Africa – Active Fire Detections February and August 2004
23
Owned
24
25
Hired
26
Ridging with Plough
27
Hired
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
Annual soil movement 300 tons/ha
Total in Malawi > 540 million tons
17 million km of ridges built up annually
Farming Families 2.5m?
Annual Dry Season Ridge Splitting
36
38
39
40
CF Basins show significant benefit in seasons with difficult early rains
CF Basins Ridges
2,769 1,291
34
35
36
37
Low Yields
Soil erosion, nutrient depletion, acidification
Soil compaction, poor root development
Excessive crop stress in dry spells
Water logging in wet spells
Late planting
Waste of purchased and on-farm resources
Poor crop emergence & low plant populations
Excessive weed competition
Food insecurity
Deforestation
Land degradation
Migration
Negative effects of conventional farming practices
38
Example - Maize Production Losses
Causes Losses
4.0 tons Expected Yield
Partially degraded soils. Acidic, compacted, oxidised. 10%
Inaccurate application and loss of nutrients. 5%
Loss of rainwater. Intermittent moisture stress. 10% TOTAL LOSS 65%
Planting 15 days after 1st opportunity. 20%
Inaccurate seeding. Poor plant populations. 5%
Weed Competition. 15% 1.4 tons Actual Yield
Note: Fairly skilled farmer AER IIA - Adequate rainfall - Hybrid Seed + fert
The escalator to disillusionment
The proportion of specific losses will vary considerably depending on numerous local circumstances
41
Conservation Farming Practice
Hoe MT
H
If the technologies work so well why isn’t everybody doing it
In Zambia Government incentivises farmers to mono-crop Maize with costly and inefficient input and marketing subsidies. No incentive to improve efficiency.
No differentiation between agriculture and social welfare. NGO handouts and Govt subsidies undermine growth of private sector driven services to SSA.
Govt extension staff focus on numerous services not related to extension & training
Stop start interventions by donors. Lack of coordination, fragmentation and confusion.
Inadequate focus on farming and farmers. Endless top down strategic planning and dialogue among institutions. Insufficient penetration of knowhow to grass roots.
Programmes overloaded with peripheral add-ons to satisfy political imperatives of donors.
Shallow knowledge of CF/CA among promoters. Very few experienced agriculturalists anywhere.
Dumbing down, oversimplification and distortion of CF/CA.
Reasons for not attending training
Digging ofCF basins istoo labourintensive
Do not haveaccess to CFimplements
Do notreceive
inputs tomake CFpractice
morebeneficial
No access toinformation
andknowledge
about CF
Notconvincedabout its
benefits inimproving
yields
Notinterested in
changingfarming
practices
Only applymechanised
farmingmethods of
ridgingand/or
ploughing
Ripping ofsoils too
difficult tomanage
Unable tocontrol
weeds inripped fieldsor dug with
basins
HIGH 17.4 18.2 11.2 31.8 5.8 9.3 0.0 1.6 4.7
MEDIUM 15.1 16.0 6.9 39.1 9.6 8.7 0.2 0.7 3.6
LOW 11.7 8.7 5.3 58.9 7.4 4.2 0.5 0.9 2.4
0.0
10.0
20.0
30.0
40.0
50.0
60.0
70.0
Chart 10: Main Reasons given for not Adopting CF (%)
If its so good why isn’t everybody doing it?
40 CFU Trials under Mature Trees for 4 seasons
Maize outside tree
Maize Under tree
4 Crops. All plots Zero Fertiliser & CF basins
Maize yields under and outside Mature Faidherbia - 4 seasons means
Zero Fertilizer
