conservation agriculture and sustainable intensification in ssa: overcoming challenges and taking...
TRANSCRIPT
Ethiopian pre-meeting of partners – 29 January 2015Frédéric Baudron,
CIMMYT-Ethiopia
CA/SI in Ethiopia:Overcoming challenges, taking advantage
of opportunities
Challenges vs. Prerequisites…(see Sumberg, 2005)
Challenges: variables that are endogenous to the fit between an innovation and a specified group of potential users
Prerequisites: variables that are exogenous
Drivers of CA adoption in the world:
Constraint/cost of energy (= power × time) for crop establishment
Delayed planting (with consequences on yields)
Water-limited yield
Massive erosion problems (threatening medium term productivity of farmland)
These are prerequisites to the adoption of CA (particularly by smallholders who are concerned by short-term benefits)
Challenge 1: competition
with livestock for biomass
Dual-purpose maize variety5 maize varieties
Similar grain and stover yields
640
660
680
700
720
740
760
SC-403 BH-140 Melkassa2
MH_130 MHQ-138
Fib
er c
on
ten
t(g
ND
P k
g D
M-1
)
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
SC-403 BH-140 Melkassa 2 MH_130 MHQ-138
Dig
esti
bili
ty (
% IV
OM
D)
Dual-purpose maize variety
90%
95%
100%
105%
110%
115%
Type 1 Type 2 Type 3
Fulf
ilmen
t o
f th
e en
ergy
re
qu
irem
ent
of
the
her
d
0
2
4
6
8
Type 1 Type 2 Type 3
Mai
ze s
tove
r to
be
use
d a
s su
rfac
e m
ulc
h (
t h
a-1
)
90%140%
SC 403 BH 140 Melkassa 2 MHQ 138 MH 130
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
16
18
0 2 4 6 8 10 12
Pro
du
cti
on
co
st
(KS
H L
-1)
Intake of maize residue (kg day-1)(from Romney et al., 2004)
(from Baudron et al., 2014)
Providing incentives to increase
livestock productivity
27%
33%7%
15%
18% Oxen
Cows
Bulls
Heifers
Calves
Providing substitutes to the
current functions of livestock
0%
20%
40%
60%
80%
0 1 to
500
501 to
1000
1001
to
1500
1501
to
2000
2001
to
2500
2501
to
3000
3001
to
3500
3501
or
more
0%
20%
40%
60%
80%
0 1 to
500
501 to
1000
1001
to
1500
1501
to
2000
2001
to
2500
2501
to
3000
3001
to
3500
3501
or
more
3%
25%
Collective action to control
communal grazing
t = 4.68
P < 0.001
0.0
0.5
1.0
1.5
2.0
2.5
3.0
3.5
Enclosed Open
Teff
yie
ld (
t h
a-1
)
0.0
0.5
1.0
1.5
2.0
2.5
3.0
3.5
4.0
Enclosed Open
Soil
org
anic
mat
ter
(%)
t = 2.86
P < 0.01
Challenge 2: lack of appropriate
implements to seed with minimum
soil disturbance
CA with a Two-Wheel Tractor:
options commercially available
Strip tillage Direct-seeding: 2 rows Direct-seeding: 1 row
Dramatic reduction in the time
needed to establish a crop…
0
20
40
60
80
100
Conv land
prep +
planting
Conv
planting
Danyang
2BFG
VMP National
ZT
Fitarelli 2R Fitarelli 1R Morrisson
seeder
Tim
e (
ho
ur
ha
-1)
(Data from Hawassa, Ethiopia)
Yield advantage for small grain
0
2
4
6
8
10
Mechanical
seeding
Sowing by hand
Yie
ld (
t/h
a)
Grain
Straw
Challenge 3: increased pest
incidence
Designing pest-suppressive
landscapes
0
5
10
1 10 30
Nu
mb
er
of
par
asit
oid
was
ps
cap
ture
d in
ye
llow
…
Distance to ensete field (m)
0
20
40
60
80
1 10 30Nu
mb
er
of
rove
b
ee
tle
s ca
ptu
red
in
yello
w p
an t
rap
s
Distance to ensete field (m)
0
20
40
60
1 10 30Nu
mb
er
of
ants
ca
ptu
red
in p
itfa
ll tr
aps
Distance to dense hedgerow (m)
Challenge 4: managing
water in CA
Flexibility:
Drainage during wet events
Water harvesting during dry events (tied)
Improved field access for mechanized agriculture
Mechanical weed control
N application when crop N use efficiency is the highest
Reduced seed rates and logging for small grain crops
Permanent Raised Beds/Ridges
Challenge 5: managing
nitrogen in CA
Precision agriculture
Ciudad Obregon, 6 sites, 2001 and 2002
y = 506.42e175.91x
R2 = 0.78
0
1000
2000
3000
4000
5000
6000
7000
8000
9000
10000
0 0.002 0.004 0.006 0.008 0.01 0.012 0.014 0.016 0.018
INSEY
Gra
in y
ield
, kg
/ha
O226, 2001
P209, 2001
P227WR, 2002
P227, 2002
P226, 2002
Q212, 2002
(from Freeman and Sayre, pers. com.) INSEY
YIE
LD
No N
limitation
ΔN = 2% × ΔYIELD
Challenge 6: converting
retained resources into
productivity gains
Increased water use efficiency
27
28
29
30
31
32
0-15 15-30 >30
Soil
mo
istu
re (
%)
Depth (cm)
Sole maize CONV
Sole maize CA
27
28
29
30
31
32
0-15 15-30 >30
Soil
mo
istu
re (
%)
Depth (cm)
Sole maize CONV
Maize-Bean CA
6.5 ± 1.2 t ha-1 6.5 ± 1.5 t ha-1 8.6 ± 2.2 t ha-1
Adaptation
(Re)Design
Scaling out
Evalu
ation
Tra
inin
g,
know
ledge
sharing
Plot
Farm
Landscape
Community
Iterative, multi-scale approach
Conclusion
Towards a more client-based approach?
Focus on processes, not on technologies
Combination of technologies: holistic, multi-scale approach
Pathway, ladder approach