Building Resilience to Climate Change in Malawi: Trends in Crop Yields under

CA and Factors Affecting Adoption

Prepared by Total LandCare and CIMMYT

CA Congress, Zambia Mar 18-22, 2014

Bunderson, W.T. 1, Thierfelder, C.2, Jere, Z.D. 1, Gama, M.3, Museka, R., 1Ng’oma, S.W.D. 1, Paul,

J.M. 1, Mwale, B.M. 1 and Chisui, J.L.1

• TLC began a serious program on Conservation Agriculture in 2005 through a program of collaboration with CIMMYT and the Min of Agriculture. A key aim is to document the benefits of CA versus conventional ridge tillage in different agro-ecologies to provide a foundation for promoting CA across Malawi.

• The first part of this presentation will briefly describe TLC’s development philosophy and extension approach.

• The second part will summarize key results and findings from long term on-farm trials with CA.

• The third part will focus on TLC’s experiences and challenges with promoting CA in Malawi.

Focus of Presentation

3

TLC’s Development Philosophy

● TLC’s mission is to improve the livelihoods of rural communities through a

community focus that instills ownership and responsibility in addressing

priority needs to increase food security, productivity and incomes on a

sustainable basis with greater resilience to climate change.

● Fundamental to this mission is to empower communities with the knowledge,

skills and resources to become self-sufficient under the philosophy of “giving

a hand-up, not a hand-out”.

● TLC’s community focus is “all inclusive” to benefit all members of the

community without discrimination as to social status, income, gender,

background, religion or ability. Special efforts are made to include those

sidelined by social distinctions, e.g., women, HIV/AIDS, physical challenges.

● Extension services focus on a diverse range of “proven” interventions to

address multiple needs which create synergies for sustainability and impact.

4

TLC Extension Approach ● Selection of sites and communities is coordinated with the District

Executive Committee, local leaders and other stakeholders based on

participatory assessments to prioritize needs and opportunities.

● Thereafter, community-based action plans are developed with clearly

defined roles and responsibilities of the beneficiaries, local leaders,

TLC, Govt extension agencies and other service providers.

● Agreed actions are facilitated through a network of Field Coordinators

(FCs), Community Extension Workers (CEWs) and Lead Farmers to

deliver quality training and extension services under the direction of

centrally placed field offices in different regions of the country.

● Experiences and lessons with farmers are monitored and evaluated

regularly through a robust community-based M&E system to improve

efficiency and effectiveness.

CA System Promoted by TLC ● Minimum soil disturbance (mandatory)

No ridging or tillage by manual or mechanical means

Direct sowing into a) small planting holes on the flat or tops of old ridges using a hand-hoe, dibble stick or jab-planter, b) planting basins 35 cm long x 15 wide x 20 deep, or c) rip lines opened by animal drawn rippers

● Retention of crop residues or other plant biomass on the soil surface (whenever this is feasible and practical)

● Crop rotations, associations and agroforestry (whenever possible given the limited land holdings of most smallholders)

● Quality seed & fertilizers maximize the potential of CA (when available and accessible)

● Herbicides reduce soil disturbance and competition from weeds with lower labor & input costs (when available and accessible)

Conventional Ridges built with Hand-Hoes

Labor and Soil Moved for Ridging

Avg Soil moved in forming 1 m of ridge= 50 kg

• Malawi smallholders ridge about 2 million ha per year.

• With a ridge spacing of 90 cm, the soil moved every year averages 500 tons / ha.

• This means that Malawi farmers build over 22 million km of new ridges every year which requires moving over 1000 million tons of soil.

CA Planting Holes: Planting holes prepared with hoes on alluvial soils which were

formerly ridged manually with hand-hoes

Retention of Crop Residues on the Surface

Safe and proper use of herbicides to control weeds at planting time

Uniform stand of young, weed-free maize planted on old ridges with crop residues & use of herbicides

Integration of Faidherbia albida with CA: Studies have recorded increased maize yields of 50-200% through improvements in soil fertility and the micro-environment which greatly enhance resilience to climate change

CA with zero tillage and crop residues spread evenly between vetiver hedges on slopes

Conventional Ridge Tillage vs. CA

Ridged land shows runoff & standing water in the

compacted furrows; tied ridges were built to reduce runoff &

loss of top soil

CA with crop residues in adjacent plot on same date and time: excellent infiltration with no sign of runoff or loss of top

On-Farm Results with Farmers: 2005/06 to 2012/13

• Long term on-farm trials were established to

compare 2 CA plots with conventional ridge tillage in

up to 12 different communities, each with 6 farmers.

• From the year of establishment, each trial has been

maintained to evaluate long term benefits and

impacts in terms of yields, soil properties, economic

returns and labor costs.

Treatments

CRT Maize: Conventional ridge tillage & land clearing using hand-hoes for ridging, planting and weeding

CA Maize Sole Crop: Crop residues spread & retained on the surface; direct sowing with dibble sticks on the flat or old ridges, weed control with pre & post emergent herbicides

CA Maize + Cowpea/ P Pea Intercrop: Crop residues spread & retained on the surface; direct sowing with dibble sticks on the flat or old ridges, weed control with round-up only

Agronomy ● Trials planted in up to 12 target communities with

replicates of 6 farms per community

● Maize planted at 75cm x 25cm (53,300 plants/ha)

● All plots were 0.1 ha in size

● Fertilizer was applied uniformly across treatments at 69N:21P205:4S as basal and top-dressing

● Crop varieties used were uniform within communities

● Residues at least 3t/ha before the onset of rain

Agronomy - continued

● Intercrops on treatment 3: cowpeas in central Malawi and pigeon peas in southern Malawi

● From 2011/12 trials included full rotations of maize-groundnuts & maize - pigeon peas

● Advantages of planting legume crops under CA:

Legume crops can be grown at closer row spacing (37.5cm) than with ridges which increases much higher yields

Closer spacing also provides much better groundcover to reduce runoff and loss of top soil

Maize yields across years in up to 12 communities (p significant between CRT and CA except 2005/06)

0

1 000

2 000

3 000

4 000

5 000

6 000

2005/06 2006/07 2007/08 2008/09 2009/10 2010/11 2011/12 2012/13 Mean

Kg

/ha

CRT-Mz CA-Mz CA-Mz+Leg

N=24 N=36 N=54

N=48

N=54

N=396 N=54

N=54 N=72

Maize yields in 9 communities in a dry year, 2011/12 (Yield increase 64% & 70% - p significant)

2 485

4 086 4 224

0

1 000

2 000

3 000

4 000

5 000

6 000

7 000

Kg

/ h

a

CRT-Mz CA-Mz CA-Mz+Leg

Maize yields in 12 communities, normal year (2012/13) Yield increase of 35% & 42% - p significant all sites

3 129

4 222 4 421

0

1 000

2 000

3 000

4 000

5 000

6 000

7 000

8 000

9 000

Kg/

ha

CRT-Mz CA-Mz CA-Mz+Leg

Groundnut yields in 6 communities, Malawi 2012/13 Yield increases of 122% - p all significant except Zidyana

658

1 463 1 470

0

500

1 000

1 500

2 000

2 500

3 000

Chipeni Mwansambo Zidyana Lemu Linga Chinguluwe Mean

Kg

/ha

CRT-Mz CA-Mz

CA-Mz+Leg

Communities

Summary of yields under CA vs. CRT

• Results clearly show the superiority of CA vs. CRT with significant increases in maize yields for all sites after year 1.

• Planting intercrops showed no negative effects on maize and provides a higher return to land, labour and capital from a 2nd crop on the same land.

• Yield increases of maize ranged from 11% to 70% across years with greater increases in years of low rainfall.

• Farmers realized higher yields of groundnuts under CA because of the closer row spacing which is not possible with ridging.

• Closer spacing of groundnuts increased the ground cover significantly which will help to reduce runoff, loss of top soil and rosette disease.

Over all result: Higher and more stable yields of cereals and legumes will benefit households in terms of improved food security, nutrition and

income to increase their resilience to climate change.

TLC Experiences in Promoting CA

2005/06

2006/07

2007/08

2008/09

2009/10

2010/11

2011/12

2012/13

Farmers Trained in CA 321 585 799 2 879 5 827 23 706 27 000 35 197

Farmers Practicing CA 46 114 591 2 067 3 924 6 634 10 645 17 797

Ha under CA 14 34 236 499 1 275 2 704 5 461 5 865

-

1 000

2 000

3 000

4 000

5 000

6 000

7 000

-

5 000

10 000

15 000

20 000

25 000

30 000

35 000

40 000

# Ha

# Farmers

Farmers Trained and Practicing CA, 2005/06 to 2012/13

2005/06 2006/07 2007/08 2008/09 2009/10 2010/11 2011/12 2012/13

Male Farmers 34 80 413 1 369 2 630 4 799 7 194 11 199

Female Farmers 12 34 178 698 1 294 1 835 3 451 6 598

-

2 000

4 000

6 000

8 000

10 000

12 000

# F

arm

ers

Gender of Farmers Practicing CA

2005/06 to 2012/13

Note: Gender breakdown is based on

who signed for Inputs, but in reality,

women take the lead in undertaking CA

and clearly will be instrumental in

efforts to scale up CA

Observed Benefits of CA

Farmer surveys revealed several key benefits of CA:

● Significant savings in labor for land preparation, ridging, weeding and banking.

● Increased yields, especially in years of poor rainfall, which farmers related to moisture conservation.

● Reduced loss of top soil was evident in fields from low runoff.

Farmer Interviews on Factors Affecting Adoption

785 households were randomly sampled across 14 different sites under 4 different projects

Interviews involved 438 men and 347 women

The number of farmers adopting CA was low relative to the number trained or exposed to CA

Results revealed that 335 farmers (47%) were practicing CA, 12% had tried and stopped, and 40 % never tried CA

Key Factors Affecting Adoption of Farmers Practicing CA

Key Constraint No.

Farmers

% of Sample

Lack of information or conflicting messages 144 43%

Resistance to change (from traditional ridging and land clearing)

76 23%

Poor understanding of herbicides & their use 10 3%

Lack of inputs and crop residues & related labour to gather and spread crop residues over the field

105 31%

Total 335 100%

Reasons for Dropping CA

Factors for dropping practicing CA No.

Farmers

% of Sample

Resistance to change from traditional farming 4 4%

Problems with applying herbicides 24 22%

No access to inputs or limited crop residues/biomass

67 62%

Inadequate knowledge about CA / poor extension services

13 12%

Total 108 100%

Key Challenges to Adoption 1. Breaking the deep-rooted culture of ridging and tradition

that fields must be clean of all plant biomass, living or dead.

2. Lack of clear evidence of the benefits of CA and that it can be used successfully with other major crops, i.e., not limited to maize and groundnuts.

3. Delivery of inconsistent and conflicting technical messages on CA by different organizations creates confusion among both staff and farmers with impacts on the benefits.

4. Perceptions among farmers and extension staff that specific inputs and/or tools are needed to undertake CA (e.g., fertilizers, herbicides, large amounts of crop residues, etc).

Key Actions to Address Challenges ● Strengthen knowledge and support for CA among all

stakeholders and clarify what it really means with compelling evidence of its benefits and application with major crops across different agro-ecologies.

● Harmonize technical messages among implementers to avoid distorting the basic concept of CA and its benefits and confusing extension staff and farmers.

● Facilitate access to basic inputs and tools by farmers.

Note: The issue of inputs has raised a dilemma: how to balance the need for inputs (to maximise and demonstrate the potential of CA as a new technology) with the risk of that CA will become

input-driven, which may limit adoption.

Confusion about the meaning of CA

It is clear that CA is not well understood by implementers, NGOs, projects, extension agents and farmers.

● For example, the definition of CA as comprising 3 core principles has been interpreted to mean that undertaking any of them qualifies as CA. The diagram to describe CA in this way has been changed to avoid this problem (see the 2 diagrams below).

● Another good example is the distortion of making small planting basins to excavating deep pits (see photos below).

Good Soil CoverMinimal Soil

Disturbance

Crop Rotations /

Crop Associations

Growing Crops in the Field No Ploughing / TillageBalanced 3 or 4 Way

Rotations

No Ridging

No Banking

No Burning of weeds or crop

residuesNo Pitting Intercropping / Associations

Organic ManuresContour Vetiver

HedgesAgroforestry Practices

Chemical

FertilizersSelected Herbicides

Improve soil structure &

fertility

Reduce runoff &

erosion

Improve soil structure &

fertility with provision of

wood & other products

Complement

other practices to

improve soil

fertility

Complement use of surface

mulch to control weeds with

reduced labor costs

Complementary Practices

CORE PRINCIPLES OF CONSERVATION

AGRICULTURE

Surface distribution of crop

residues & cut weeds2-way / Partial Rotations

Core Principles of Conservation Agriculture and Complementary Practices

CORE PRINCIPLES OF CONSERVATION AGRICULTURE AND COMPLEMENTARY PRACTICES

Minimal Soil Disturbance

No Ploughing

No Tilling

No Ridging

No Banking

Good Soil Cover

Growing Crops

Crop Residues & Other Plant Biomass

No Burning

Organic Manures

Compost

Animal Manures

Green Manures

Crop Rotations / Crop Associations

Full & Partial Rotations

Intercropping / Associations

Methods & Tools for Planting

Dibble Sticks

Chaka Hoes

Rippers

Other Soil & Water Conservation Measures

Contour Vetiver Hedges

Raised Foot-Paths

Storm Drains

Agroforestry

Soil Fertility

Ground Cover

Wood Products/Uses

Herbicides

Weed Control withIncreased Yields

Conservation of soil nutrients and moisture

Chemical Fertilizers

Soil Fertility

Increased Yields& Ground Cover

CA Planting Basins (CFU Zambia) Planting basins are a one-off operation to help capture

water and/or to break hoe pans

Distortion of the Concept of Planting Basins Pitting as shown below is promoted by some

organizations but this is NOT CA (Note the heap of top soil next to the pits on the right)

Left Photo by T Bunderson, right photo from CFU

THANK YOU FOR LISTENING