MALAWI: SOIL FERTILITY ISSUES AND OPTIONS

Transcription

1 MALAWI: SOIL FERTILITY ISSUES AND OPTIONS A discussion paper 1 May 1998 Some could, some could not, shake off misery, The Sinister Spirit sneered: It had to be! And again the Spirit of Pity whispered, Why? Thomas Hardy 1 This paper draws on detailed position papers prepared by Todd Benson, Anne Conroy, Rob Gilbert, George Kanyama-Phiri, John Kumwenda, Charles Mann, Spider Mughogho, and Alexander Phiri. Malcolm Blackie coordinated the effort and produced the initial draft precis. These were reviewed by the group and amended as agreed. Inputs from Stephen Carr, Andrew Dorward, Jonathan Kydd, and Ken Giller were used and are duly acknowledged in the text. Stephen Waddington was instrumental in developing the initial scenarios reported towards the end of Section II. Stephen Carr, Ken Giller, and Stephen Waddington commented on earlier versions of this paper. This document reflects the views of the primary authors who accept responsibility for errors of interpretation or fact. 1

2 Table of Contents EXECUTIVE SUMMARY...3 TECHNOLOGY...3 POLICY...5 IMPROVING ACCESS TO THE IMPROVED MAIZE SEED AND FERTILISER TECHNOLOGY...6 INCREASING THE ATTRACTIVENESS OF N-FIXING GRAIN LEGUMES...7 CLOSING COMMENTS...8 SECTION I: TECHNOLOGY...10 SMALLHOLDER AGRICULTURE IN MALAWI...10 SMALLHOLDER AGRICULTURAL PRODUCTIVITY TRENDS IN MALAWI...10 AGGREGATE DATA AND THE ILLUSION OF SUCCESS...11 ECONOMIC AND POLITICAL LIBERALISATION...14 THE ECONOMICS OF MAIZE PRODUCTION, SUBSIDIES, AND INFLATION...14 AGRICULTURAL TECHNOLOGY CHOICES: 1960S-1990S...15 TRENDS IN SOIL ORGANIC MATTER LEVELS...16 TECHNOLOGY OPTIONS FOR THE FUTURE...17 OVERVIEW...17 IMMEDIATE TECHNICAL CHOICES FOR CHANGE...18 LONGER TERM AND MORE DIFFICULT OPTIONS FOR IMPROVING SOIL FERTILITY...27 CONCLUSIONS...30 SECTION II: POLICY - BREAKING FREE...33 LAYING THE FOUNDATION FOR GROWTH...33 A COMPREHENSIVE SMALLHOLDER STRATEGY...33 THE POLICY FRAMEWORK...33 THE FOOD SECURITY CRISIS...34 POLICY OPTIONS...35 SUSTAINABILITY, LIBERALISATION, AND SURVIVAL ARE THEY COMPATIBLE IN THE CONTEXT OF MALAWI SMALLHOLDER AGRICULTURE?...35 IMPROVING ACCESS TO THE IMPROVED MAIZE SEED AND FERTILISER TECHNOLOGY...38 BEST BET STARTER PACKS FOR ALL SMALLHOLDERS...38 COMPLEMENTARY OPEN MARKET SMALL INPUTS PACK PROGRAMME...40 FERTILISER FOR WORK...42 REVIEW...43 SECTION III: POLICY - BUILDING SUSTAINABILITY...46 INCREASING THE ATTRACTIVENESS OF N-FIXING GRAIN LEGUMES...46 MPTF VERIFICATION/DEMONSTRATION OF MAIZE/GRAIN LEGUME ROTATIONS:...46 IMPROVED SMALLHOLDER MARKETING SERVICES, ESPECIALLY FOR GRAIN LEGUMES:...47 CONCLUDING THOUGHTS...49 INSTITUTIONAL CHANGE IN RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT INSTITUTIONS...50 SUMMARY...51 BIBLIOGRAPHY

3 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY TECHNOLOGY Maize is a very efficient converter of carbon dioxide to carbohydrate and thus has a high yield potential. Maize is well suited to the climate of the high southern Africa plateau of Malawi, western Mozambique, Zambia and Zimbabwe. It has been a highly reliable crop and has suffered few catastrophic crop failures, and is not widely attacked by pests and diseases, especially birds (a major source of grain loss from other cereals in the field). Nevertheless, there is a strong indication of a decline in Malawian maize yields over the last 20 years. Despite a national maize surplus until the early 1980s and the highest per capita maize consumption in the world, household food security has declined, as indicated by widespread and pervasive malnutrition, and one of the highest levels of child mortality in the world. In the early 1980 s, Malawi was one of the showcases of economic growth in Africa, fueled by rapid growth in tobacco production by the estate sector and by the introduction of fertilised hybrid maize in the smallholder sector. The promising overall agricultural sector performance, with the growth rate in agricultural GDP averaging 4.7 percent annually over the decade, was primarily export growth in which smallholders played a minor role. Agricultural growth in Malawi requires widespread adoption by smallholders of improved production technologies, particularly for maize. The economic basis of improved maize seed and fertiliser technology has been undermined by the escalation in input prices and by the inability of the consumer to pay more for staple foods. Pricing grain at a level that makes fertiliser economically attractive to use at Malawian smallholder levels of productivity means that many consumers (who are likely to be smallholders as well as town dwellers) cannot afford to purchase it. If the majority of food-deficit smallholders have to pay the full undistorted cost of fertiliser as delivered to their farms, then fertiliser use on the staple food crop is simply not an option to a large majority of them. Under these same circumstances, they will find that they cannot afford to buy the food necessary to fill in the gap between their inadequate harvests. The end point is, at best, a steady decline in already unsatisfactory nutrition and living standards; at worst, the result is widespread starvation. The success of the germplasm-led Green Revolution in Asia, under very different conditions and with more fertile and uniform soils, has biased the research agenda in Africa away from crop nutrition studies towards tempting but illusory gains from plant breeding. These gains will remain illusory until the fundamental issues of providing the plant with adequate nutrients (soil fertility management) are properly addressed. The data are clear that poor soil fertility, dominated by nitrogen deficiency, is the major constraint to maize productivity in Malawi. There are effectively only three sources for supplying the key nutrient nitrogen in arable farming: organic sources recycled from within the cropped area or concentrated from a larger area, biological N-fixation, or mineral (inorganic) nitrogen fertilisers. 3

4 There are no quick fix solutions to maintenance of soil fertility. The conundrum is that all restorative technologies for the improvement of soil fertility involve either import of organic materials from surrounding land or the allocation of land to produce organic materials. In the most densely populated areas, land scarcity prohibits the devotion of land to the restoration of soil fertility. In such regions practical soil fertility interventions (as opposed to wishful thinking) will be hard to find, at least in the short term, without either: some additional source of income generation or short term assistance to buy inorganic fertilisers, direct assistance to compensate for loss of agricultural production, or, continuing food aid. For the remainder of this century and beyond, on present trends, population growth will exceed growth in food production by one percent or more annually. Maize seed and fertiliser technology is essential to the survival of most Malawians into the foreseeable future. Farmers still receive a good response if they apply inorganic-nitrogen. This is not wholly to discount organic strategies. Observations of farmer management practices lead most observers to conclude that organic matter contents in the soil are declining. Inputs of organic soil matter will reverse this trend. Nitrogen may also be added to the soil through the growing of an N-fixing legume in association with the maize crop. However, not all legumes fix significant amounts of nitrogen, and not all produce sufficient cash or calories to compensate for the maize which is displaced. Grain legumes potentially have the advantage of both adding nitrogen to the soil, and providing the farmer with an alternative food or cash crop to maize. Grain legume rotations have been shown to be successful under Malawian conditions, although the variability of performance is high (reducing their attractiveness to risk averse smallholders). The rotation of maize with grain legumes such as promiscuous soyabean, groundnut or Bambara groundnut is one of the more promising technological options available for Malawian farmers. Intercropping with pigeonpea is also attractive. There may be a decline in N-use efficiencies caused by nutrient losses that could be mitigated by increasing soil organic matter. But the evident and serious decline in unfertilised maize yields simply cannot be reversed by an organic strategy alone. The constraints to adoption, and the limitations in terms of crop response to feasible widespread exclusively organic options are simply too great. Without a reliable supply of adequate soil nutrients, preferably from a combination of modest amounts of inorganic nitrogen and organic sources of nutrients, both the food security of many farming households and of the nation as a whole will remain at considerable and increasing risk. Importantly, there is an immediate and short term soil fertility crisis which needs swift action. The technical options are few and each season that passes without concerted, coherent, and widespread action to address the critical issues narrows further the choices for change. The technology elements of a soil fertility strategy are: the widespread deployment of inorganic nitrogen fertiliser and improved maize seed, and, 4

5 increasing the grain legume component in maize based cropping systems through rotations or pigeonpea intercropping. POLICY Malawi needs urgently to implement a strategy for broad-based income growth to capitalise on the promise of the technology that Malawian farmers are desperate to implement. It is not enough to keep the poor alive - Malawi itself needs a safety net. The only realistic hope for Malawi to break out of its current downward spiral is to restart vigorous economic growth in a non-inflationary environment. The best way to do this is to get hybrid seed and fertiliser into the hands of all of Malawi s farmers. Nothing would help quell inflation and dispel the current state of gloom and insecurity like a bumper maize harvest shared by all of Malawi s farmers, and delivered to the consumers at lower and reasonably predictable maize prices. The liberalisation upon which Malawi s future growth depends is being tarnished in people s minds by the high prices they face in the market and the enormous rents conspicuously being extracted by private traders. The economy is experiencing all the downside effects of liberalisation, but is deprived of many of its benefits. Malawi s deteriorating food security situation threatens to undo completely the impressive progress made in laying the policy framework for growth. Despite real substantial technological promise in food production, events are spiraling downwards. The only realistic and practical way to reverse this spiral and simultaneously to restart economic growth is to use the promise of the best bet technology Malawi s scientists have established to jump-start maize production for all smallholders. This would simultaneously improve the food security of all food-deficit smallholder households, and sharply increase the marketed surplus available to urban consumers. Previous policy focused, quite logically, on intensifying maize production. The policy was undoubtedly popular with farmers. Under the circumstances pertaining, those that were able to adopt the necessary technologies did so. Those that were unable to do so universally expressed a desire for the key components of seed and fertiliser. But adoption came at the cost of major distortions to the economy, distortions which Malawi was unable to fund from its own resources. Once these distortions were removed and a largely liberalised economy established, the use of the improved maize seed and fertiliser technology was no longer financially viable for many smallholders. The outcome has been tragic. After the 1996/97 season, in spite of relatively good rains, marketed maize fell precipitously, the village level purchase price of maize quadrupled, and there was widespread hardship amongst the majority poor section of the population. It is evident that, in the peculiar circumstances of Malawi, the pursuance of a strict policy of non-intervention in the market comes at an unacceptably high cost. In the longer term, prices may rise to allow greater investment at the farm level and thus to increased productivity. Yet it is quite possible that many Malawians will not survive to benefit from these changes. This is not a stable or sustainable situation. The strategies required must primarily be concerned with the immediate survival of rural households, and especially children, while longer term policies are developed to meet the needs of Malawi into the next century. As with the technical options, the choices are few: 5

6 Subsidies: Subsidies on inputs and on credit are discredited. Even were the subsidy somehow limited only to fertiliser applied to maize, the only effect on production would come from the marginal increase in fertiliser purchases. While the shortage of cash with which to purchase inputs is a dominant constraint on their widespread use, credit schemes aimed at funding inputs for food crop production in Africa have almost universally failed. Malawi is developing a viable commercial credit system to support cash crop production; this initiative would be inevitably and seriously undermined by the introduction of a parallel credit system for food crops which accepted a higher level of default. Increasing smallholder access to credit, for most households, has only marginally beneficial effects on household annual income. Increasing cash crop production: Even at generous estimates of involvement in cash crop production, only some 20 percent of the farming population will be affected. Despite the real progress that has been made in recent years to promote cash cropping amongst smallholders, it will remain a minority occupation for the next decade at least. Many primarily subsistenceoriented producers justifiably remain unwilling to accept the risks involved in depending on the market for a significant part of their subsistence. Thus it seems unwise to rely solely on the cash generated by cash crops to produce the volume of maize necessary for national food security. Changing the food staple: Maize has become dominant in the high plateau of southern Africa, not because it has been promoted by the authorities at the expense of other choices, but because it is an excellent choice for the environment. Existing proposals to change the food staple (as opposed to adding some modest diversity to the farming system) are seriously compromised by technical flaws and misconceptions. Regardless of the staple food crop, continuous cropping without adding nutrients will lead to reduced soil fertility, declining yields, and increased food insecurity for Malawi. Improving the productivity of smallholder maize based cropping systems: The preceding technical review has shown that, in the immediate future, there are only two real options; increasing access to the improved maize seed and fertiliser technology, and, diversifying the cropping system through the adoption of grain legume rotations. These are complementary to one another and have the prospect of being widely adoptable. Improving access to the improved maize seed and fertiliser technology This strategy has several components: providing all smallholders with small starter packs of improved seed and fertiliser with which they can learn, on their own fields, how to use the new area-specific recommendations provided by the work of the MPTF, insuring that supplies of improved seed and fertiliser are available for purchase in all rural markets in small bags (1-3 kg) at a price which is comparable, per kilogram, to those of existing large bags, providing opportunities for able-bodied individuals to increase their purchasing power for seed and fertiliser through a structured fertiliser (and seed) for work programme, and, rebuilding an effective savings club movement tied to the purchase of agricultural inputs along the lines of that which has proved so successful in Zimbabwe. 6

7 Extending the reach of the improved maize seed and fertiliser technology is absolutely essential to establishing conditions for productive economic growth. Without securing the food supply, all other efforts at poverty alleviation - job creation, education reform, expanded health services - will come to naught. This is not a programme for recovering from drought. It is a programme to lay a solid foundation for long-term growth. All smallholder farmers need the chance to have in their own hands the new technology packages long enough for real learning and experimentation to take place, and to develop confidence in the package over different weather and market conditions. The most feasible growth strategy for Malawi is one that centers on increasing the productivity of the smallholder, especially in maize production. The starter pack programme proposed here could put an extra bag of maize in every smallholder household. Combine that with the other three initiatives and the return could quickly be affordable maize prices to the urban poor and middle classes. The strategy as a whole could help stem the tide of inflation and stagnation. It could help win support for liberalisation and stimulate the private sector, both directly through increased demand for inputs and indirectly by reducing wage pressures. Given the resources, such a programme can be done quickly and on a large enough scale to change the national mood of despair over the deteriorating food situation. Increasing the attractiveness of N-fixing grain legumes There are disturbing signs of an unsustainable smallholder farming system as soils erode, the diversity of the farming system declines, and household diets become reliant on an inadequate supply of a single calorie rich crop. Maize/grain legume rotations (groundnuts and promiscuous soyabean) and, where livestock do not graze extensively after the maize harvest (as in the south of the country), maize/pigeonpea intercropping are the only other promising technologies that: look to be at a stage suitable for large scale adoptions, and, are competitive with unfertilised local maize in terms of calories and cash, and, start to address, in part, the genuine concerns regarding sustainability, soil erosion, and soil degradation that form an important component of discussions on Malawi smallholder agriculture. The MPTF has shown that, with good leadership and organisation, it is possible swiftly to develop area-specific recommendations for smallholder fertility management technologies. The achievement in producing area-specific fertiliser recommendations efficiently and with the use of existing resources is considerable. This experience should be built upon and expanded for grain legume technologies. Required also is a policy environment which is conducive to the adoption of improved technologies. Farmers need reliable markets in which to buy inputs and other goods and to sell their produce, such as these promising grain legumes. These markets need to operate efficiently and consistently. Innovation is needed to create an appropriate market infrastructure and to bring into the market a greater proportion of those farmers currently excluded from it. This is more than simply liberalising markets. The low purchasing power 7

8 of most Malawi smallholders, combined with the overall poverty of the country, means that more must and can be done to improve marketing services. Marketing cooperatives, as opposed to producer cooperatives, have worked well, and proved popular and successful with farmers, in a wide range of agricultural economies. In the developed world, they have become major businesses in their own right. Cooperatives provide the chance for smallholders to sell and buy in bulk and thus have greater market power. In Malawi, VEZA International, an NGO, has been active in setting up farmer cooperatives with very poor smallholders and there is growing interest in this approach. Several other NGOs have recently agreed to adopt the VEZA model and to extend the cooperative marketing option to a wider area. There is already a substantial trade in legumes - ICRISAT report some 30,000 tons of pigeonpea are exported annually. This trade offers real potential for development. Cooperatives also allow the introduction of innovations such as forward contracting - which provides a pre-planting guarantee of price. They can act as an intermediary in the credit system since they are legal entities with collateral. Both the risks and the rewards of marketing are spread, which provides a more benevolent environment through which smallholders can make the transition from subsistence to commercial production. CLOSING COMMENTS Particular attention needs to be paid to the agricultural production problems of the poorest farmers. Their numbers may be substantial (as high as 40 percent of the smallholder population in Malawi) and it certainly is a group that is growing. These are typically farmers who do not reliably feed themselves and their families year on year. Thus their highest priority will be to secure their family's food supply. A food crop productivity strategy will be the starting point, but not the total answer. The poverty trap faced by the poorest families precludes their active participation, under present circumstances, in a market economy (except as distress sellers of labour and, sometimes, food). Cash crops can play an important role in priming the soil fertility input pump, by bringing extra income to the farmer. But, in Malawi, most smallholders are desperately short of cash, cannot afford the luxury of experimentation, and often lack the confidence and the ability to deal, unaided, with many aspects of modern, market-centered society. It is unrealistic to expect sophisticated and possibly risky cash cropping to provide them with the first step to a better life. Credit is often proposed as a solution, but credit is only of value to individuals who are periodically short of cash to purchase inputs. For those farmers who are chronically short of cash, other alternatives will need to be sought. Savings rather than credit, therefore, provide the mechanism for introducing cash poor smallholders to improved technologies. The successful implementation of the technology development and transfer processes outlined in this paper will require commitment of substantial resources over extended periods. The agricultural technology development and dissemination system in Malawi is not well adapted to comprehending and responding to the long term problems of the country. Field level personnel, particularly the Field Assistants, bear the burden of successfully implementing any new agricultural extension initiatives with few additional resources. Institutional memories are poor, inadequate budgets (and the poor use of the funds that are available) lead to short lived, disparate project-orientated research and extension efforts which rarely are able to "follow through" to the farmer. 8

9 The donors, likewise, exhibit a frightening lack of consistency and long term institutional memory. Given that so much of what actually happens in Malawi is the result of donor pressure and priorities, the absence of consensus and a long term strategy amongst the donor community is as much a problem as is the much vaunted lack of commitment amongst nationals. It is imperative that the donor community engage with the public and private sectors of Malawi in a concerted effort to prevent an imminent food crisis in the country. We request immediate support for the following activities: best-bet technology starter packs for all smallholders. ensuring the availability of small (1 to 3 kg) bags of improved seed and fertilizer for purchase by smallholders. a structured fertilizer-for-work programme. the establishment of rural savings clubs. Maize Productivity Task Force efforts to demonstrate and multiply grain legumes. the development of marketing cooperatives, with a particular focus on building market demand for grain legumes. We believe that support of these activities, which are outlined in this document, will greatly improve the fertility of Malawi s arable land and the food security of Malawi s smallholder farmers who take their subsistence from that land. 9

10 SECTION I: TECHNOLOGY SMALLHOLDER AGRICULTURE IN MALAWI Malawi smallholder agriculture is based on maize as the dominant cereal, with small grains and cassava adding diversity. In the wetter parts of the country, the cereal crop is interplanted with common bean (Phaseolus) - in the drier, pigeonpea. Groundnuts are typically rotated with maize (and have been an important cash crop). The reasons for the preference for maize are not difficult to find. Maize is a very efficient converter of carbon dioxide to carbohydrate and thus has a high yield potential. Maize is well suited to the climate of the high southern Africa plateau of Malawi, western Mozambique, Zambia and Zimbabwe. Relative to other crops, the labour demands of producing and processing maize are lower. It has been a highly reliable crop and has suffered few catastrophic crop failures, and is not widely attacked by pests and diseases, especially birds (a major source of grain loss for sorghum and millets in the field). SMALLHOLDER AGRICULTURAL PRODUCTIVITY TRENDS IN MALAWI The poverty of most smallholder farming households in Malawi on smaller and smaller landholdings prevents most from adequately investing in the fertility of the soils they crop to safeguard its future productivity. Yields decline and food security through subsistence production is less and less often assured for increasing numbers of households. Figure 1 presents data from available on-farm nutrient response trials in Malawi from 1972 to the present time. 2 The data suggest a continuing decline in unfertilised maize yields over time. Excluding the 1960 data (which were based on local maize and observation of farmer yields) the trend is downwards. This trend may be somewhat less dramatic than shown here because the unfertilised maize yields of the 1970s seem unusually high. Nevertheless, there is a strong indication of a decline in maize yields over the last 20 years. Unlike some neighbouring countries such as Zimbabwe, these declines are associated with a deteriorating resource base rather than the result of expansion into drier zones. This diminution has occurred due to declining soil fertility. This despite the fact that the yield potential of the improved maize germplasm used in these trials over this period has risen. Potential yield gains from plant breeding will be largely illusory until the soil fertility decline in smallholder cropping systems is addressed. Other data support this hypothesis. Maize has become increasingly dominant in the farming system as farm households seek to maintain their calorie production under declining soil fertility and land holdings. The crop now occupies around 85 percent of smallholder cropland. Rotation crops and intercrops have declined in importance, or, in many cases, disappeared. Despite a national maize surplus until the early 1980s, household food security declined, as indicated by widespread and pervasive malnutrition, and one of the highest levels of child mortality in the world. 2 The data come from a range of sources within Malawi and are not fully consistent in terms of fertiliser source, maize variety, trial design or objectives. Some trials were not replicated, and the data are not disaggregated according to agroecological zone, or by rainfall season (although a preliminary analysis did not show obvious differences between good and bad years). No results were available for the 1980s. 10

11 Figure 1: Mean maize yields at 0 kg N/ha from nutrient response research trials in Malawi, by year This data on maize yield when no nitrogen is applied to the crop is taken from on-farm trials, most of which were researcher-managed. The gaps in the record represent years in which no or very few on-farm nutrient response research trials were implemented. Farmer's unfertilized maize yields would be significantly lower. Maize yield (kg/ha) ca /72 72/73 73/74 74/75 76/77 77/78 78/79 92/93 95/96 Season Aggregate data and the illusion of success In the early 1980 s, Malawi was one of the showcases of economic growth in Africa, fueled by rapid growth in tobacco production by the estate sector and by the introduction of fertilised hybrid maize in the smallholder sector. However, the promising overall agricultural sector performance of the previous years, with the growth rate in agricultural GDP averaging 4.7 percent annually over the decade, was primarily export growth in which smallholders played a minor role (see Figure 2 and Table 1). Figure 2: Percentage growth in agricultural GDP in Malawi Estates Smallholders Total Agriculture Source: World Bank,

12 Table 1: Malawi smallholder maize production statistics, 1984/ /92. Maize area ('000 ha) Yields ('000 kg/ha) Season Local Hybrid Local Hybrid 84/ / / / / / / / Fertiliser nitrogen Output and sales ('000MT) supplied ('000 MT) Output Sales Total supplied Paid for 84/ / / / / / / / Source: Ministry of Agriculture and Livestock Development; Whiteside and Carr, 1997 Exporting maize to its neighbours, Malawi built the state-of-the-art maize silo complex at Kanengo to store the accumulating maize surpluses. When the costs of carrying these large stocks brought ADMARC to the brink of financial collapse, Government took them over as the Strategic Grain Reserve. The critical food policy problem then was how to prevent the maize price from collapsing under an avalanche of hybrid maize. No one then was imagining the conditions experienced in early 1998: ADMARC markets without maize; people queuing overnight to buy food; the widespread theft of maize cobs from farmers fields; and a household s accustomed monthly maize consumption costing the equivalent of 40 days wages. From Table 1, it is evident that, in the smallholder sector, neither improved nor unimproved maize showed any clear increase in yields per hectare in the period from Figure 3 shows that that the smaller the holding size the greater the proportion of land planted to maize and other food crops. There are two main reasons for this phenomenon: High priority is given by each household to securing its food consumption requirements, largely calories through maize, before venturing to produce other commodities. Smallholders were excluded from the production of lucrative cash crops (primarily burley tobacco). In 1986, courageous researchers presented to a reluctant Government compelling evidence that outside the well-stocked ADMARC markets, tens of thousands of Malawian households were too poor to buy this maize. In the face of the national surpluses, chronic malnutrition afflicted nearly half of Malawian children. Three other crises exacerbated the situation. The cassava mealy bug decimated the staple crop of Malawi s northern lakeshore population; 3 Subsequent years data suggest that unimproved maize yields were trending downwards towards around 800 kg/ha, with improved maize yields to around 2500 kg/ha. The very low figures for 1991/2 are the result of a particularly bad drought in that season. The area planted to new hybrid seed has been declining since 1992/3. 12

13 Figure 3: Cropping pattern in Malawi, by size of household farm holding Percent of area planted Maize Other food Tobacco Cotton Source: World Bank, < Farm size group (ha) drought ravaged the Shire Valley; and Malawi became a safe haven for large numbers of Mozambicans fleeing a devastating civil war. Initially, draw-downs from the Strategic Grain Reserve (SGR) masked the seriousness of the mounting food crisis. Viewed initially as a temporary measure to offset a transient food shortage, Government requested the donor community to provide food aid. However, as the intensity of the war in Mozambique increased, the refugees became a flood, numbering eventually over a million: equivalent to about 12 percent of Malawi s total population. They swelled the demand for food, shelter, firewood, water, and health care. With high praise for the hospitality and refuge provided by Malawi, the donor community effectively mobilised large quantities of food aid, but in the meantime, relief purchases from the SGR had exhausted Malawi s own national reserves. Long accustomed to finding maize in ADMARC markets in the hunger season, in the early 1990s Malawians suddenly found themselves queuing for rationed supplies. The free market price of maize in the seasons following 1996 soared to quadruple the ADMARC price. With maize weighted heavily in the consumer price index, inflationary pressures mounted. This set the stage for the long and continuing slide in the value of the Malawi kwacha and made more difficult and painful the opening of the economy to market forces. 13

14 Economic and political liberalisation The Malawi Government has long recognised throughout that economic growth is essential to the nation s future - which explicitly requires making efficient use of the country s scarce resources, particularly through open and liberalised markets. More recently it has also moved to a more conventionally democratic political system. One casualty of this political restructuring has been the farmer credit clubs that delivered subsidised seed and fertiliser to the larger smallholders. Closely integrated into the structure of the previous ruling party, this credit system has not survived its demise. The impressive repayment record that sustained the clubs rested heavily on the coercive power of the party to enforce repayment. The debt repayment relief granted in the great drought of further undermined repayment incentives. The post-drought credit expansion that boosted fertilised hybrid maize to new records also brought in new and less credit-worthy borrowers. What was intended to be an expanded credit programme in reality became a large free inputs programme for the final round of credit recipients. Figure 4 illustrates the growth in the use of fertiliser that was not paid for as the fertiliser subsidies were withdrawn. While Government and donors seek to implement a sustainable credit system, rebuilding credit for maize production will be a long and slow process. The economics of maize production, subsidies, and inflation Even when the improved maize seed and fertiliser technology was widely used in the late 1980s and early 1990s, per hectare yields of smallholder maize remained well below attainable levels. Widespread poverty and chronic lack of cash explain this phenomenon. Only 33 percent of the rural population have surplus maize to sell - part of which is transferred to food-deficit rural households, the poorest of whom pay for maize by selling their labour (known locally as ganyu labour). Most maize producing households therefore rely on the market (as ganyu or for cash) for an important part of their consumption. Since Figure 4: Nutrients used by smallholders on maize in Malawi: 1987/ / Nutrients paid for Nutrients given free Metric tons /88 88/89 89/90 90/91 91/92 92/93 93/94 94/95 95/96 96/97 Year Source: Whiteside and Carr,

15 Table 2: Smallholder nitrogen fertiliser subsidies in Malawi, 1991/ /95 Percentage subsidy on final price. Fertiliser 1991/2 1992/3 1993/4 1994/5 CAN :21:0+4S Urea Source: Malawi Government (1993) their income levels are so small, purchases of food leave little to spare for other things - housing, education, or farm inputs. Even with the subsidies provided (see Table 2) and an overvalued currency, fertiliser use was uneconomic for many households (Conroy, 1993, and Kumwenda et al, 1995). Essential to the economic restructuring needed to support a more dynamic growth process is a realistic valuation of the kwacha to stimulate exports and reflect the true cost of imports. Failure to restrain inflation has brought the value of the kwacha from its pre-election level of about MK 4.00 to the US dollar to the current level of around MK 25. While there is much farmer and political talk about the phase-out of seed and fertiliser subsidies,, this was a relatively minor event relative to the impact of devaluation. The devaluation caused a four-fold increase in fertiliser prices, whereas the subsidy at its highest never accounted for more than 20 percent of the fertiliser cost. Retaining the subsidy would only increase the incomes of those already able to pay cash for fertiliser. It would not substantially expand fertiliser use within the smallholder sector. Agricultural technology choices: 1960s-1990s Separate studies carried out by national analysts, donors, and international research agencies came to common conclusions. Agricultural change in Malawi required widespread adoption of improved resource efficient production technologies, particularly for maize. With respect to maize, the initial diagnosis focused mainly on deficiencies in the maize germplasm available - partly because there was more national and international expertise in crop breeding, and partly because of a reluctance to recognise the implications of a more comprehensive review of smallholder development needs. The improved maize varieties available in the 1970s and 1980s did not suit the circumstances of the majority of smallholders. The grain type was too soft for household processing and allowed the harvest to become quickly infested with weevils. With donor support, and technical input from CIMMYT, two improved maize hybrids (MH17 and MH18) were released to the farming community in These hybrids had a semi-flint grain with good storage and household processing characteristics. Their yield was as good as other locally available hybrids, although their advantages were quickly lost if the farmer recycled the seed. In the mid-1990s a wider range of maize varieties became available as the maize seed market was opened up. But, as shown earlier, aggregate maize yields showed no upward trend. 15

16 Promotion of the associated fertiliser technology over most of this period was unhelpful. Farmers know that the yield response to fertiliser is broadly linear, additive, and closely related to soil type and to available soil moisture, as well as a range of other exogenous factors such as weeds, or previous farming practice. National fertiliser policy ignored these facts, although it was the subject of numerous discussions, workshops, and agronomic research 4. It was not until 1995 that Kumwenda et al (1995), through a comprehensive analysis of on-farm fertiliser response rates, confirmed that the blanket recommended level of fertiliser use was too high to be sufficiently profitable for widespread adoption. By 1995, the subsidies to fertiliser and credit for smallholders that had apparently facilitated the adoption of hybrids and fertiliser in the early 1990s had been eliminated. Unsurprisingly, the upward trend in the use of the improved maize seed and fertiliser technology disappeared. The economic basis of the maize seed and fertiliser technology was undermined by the escalation in input prices and by the inability of consumers to pay more for staple foods. Pricing grain at a level that makes fertiliser economically attractive to use at Malawian smallholder levels of productivity means that many consumers (who are likely to be the 80 percent of smallholders who are routinely food deficit, as well as town dwellers) cannot afford to purchase it. If the majority of food-deficit smallholders have to pay the full undistorted cost of fertiliser as delivered to their farms, then fertiliser use on the staple food crop is simply not an option to a large majority of them (Carr, 1996). Under these same circumstances, they will find that they cannot afford to buy the food necessary to fill in the gap between their inadequate harvests. The end point is, at best, a steady decline in already unsatisfactory nutrition and living standards, and, at worst, widespread starvation. Trends in Soil Organic Matter levels Much of the debate regarding the importance of organic fertility sources (particularly longer term interventions) revolves around the need to build up and maintain soil organic matter (SOM) in the soil, since declining SOM typically results in soils with lower nutrient holding capacities and lower levels of available plant nutrients. The difficulties of achieving this objective in the tropics are well presented in Giller et al, Their conclusion is clear - long term fallowing, whether natural or planted, is the only way to enhance the SOM capital store of the critical nutrient nitrogen. Only repeated additions of high quality organic residues and/or inorganic fertilisers will produce an adequate yield response on a field scale. There is much anecdotal evidence that SOM levels have declined in Malawi. The data are equivocal. Benson (1998) reviewed data sets of Organic Carbon analyses of soil samples collected under two separate programmes 5. The first came from the Mass Soil Analysis programme carried out by the Soil Fertility Unit at Chitedze in the 1970s, with most of the data from The second source was the nation-wide soil sampling exercise carried out in the early 1990s by the extension staff in each ADD on behalf of the Soils Commodity Team. Comparable data sets from both programmes could only be compiled for Blantyre, Kasungu, and Lilongwe ADDs. In both cases, samples were collected from the top 15 cm of the soil profile. 4 There was some evidence (although subject to considerable controversy) that, on the most fertile soils, the use of improved maize seed, without applying fertiliser, was sufficiently attractive for adoption by smallholders. 5 There is a direct relationship between the Organic Carbon content of the soil and the Soil Organic Matter (SOM) content the percent SOM is typically calculated as being 1.75 times the percent Organic Carbon content of the soil. 16

17 Table 3: Organic Carbon data for three ADDs in Malawi BLADD KADD LADD data set: 1970s 1990s 1970s 1990s 1970s 1990s Mean Organic Carbon (%) number of samples significance of t-test comparing differences of means samples (%) characterised as sandy (S or LS) samples (%) characterised as loamy (SCL or SL) <0.001 < Although it needs to be interpreted with caution, Table 3 does provide some evidence for a decline in SOM: 6 Only in Blantyre ADD is there not a statistically significant difference in the mean Organic Carbon values for the two data sets. 7 Considering the soil texture characteristics of the two sets, the later data set has a higher proportion of loamy samples. On the basis of texture alone, one would expect the 1990s samples to have a higher Organic Carbon content. The opposite is the case, indicating that the decline in Organic Carbon levels may be somewhat greater than is indicated. However, although the trend is cause for concern, the mean Organic Carbon values are not extremely low yet. The Soils Team at Chitedze uses a critical value for Organic Carbon of 0.90 percent to define a sample with low organic matter. The means from both periods are well above this level. The Organic Carbon values for 10 percent of the samples examined from the 1970s and 20 percent from the 1990s are below this critical value. TECHNOLOGY OPTIONS FOR THE FUTURE 8 Overview The evidence is clear that varietal maize improvement has had a transitory impact on smallholder farming in Malawi unless farmers address widespread declines in soil fertility. Without such technology, the productivity of smallholder maize-based farming systems in Malawi will fail to improve. Further evidence for this position (using examples from elsewhere in southern Africa) is reported in Kumwenda et al, (1995) 6 Bias in the collection of samples cannot be ruled out. It is quite conceivable that soils were collected, particularly in the 1970s, from progressive farmers those who have considerable contact with the extension service and who likely manage their soils well. Moreover, laboratory analysis procedures may have differed between the two data sets. 7 This spatial pattern is reasonable if one considers that demographic pressures in BLADD were such that already in the 1970s rotations, long-term fallows, and other SOM maintenance strategies were becoming difficult to practice. Hence, declines of SOM in BLADD are not as pronounced. It has only been in the past two decades that these pressures have especially been felt in the other two ADDs, with a resultant loss of SOM. 8 See Buresh R., Sanchez P., and Calhoun, F., eds. (1997) Replenishing soil fertility in Africa, Madison: Soil Science Society of America for an accessible, detailed and comprehensive review of the choices. Chapter 7 by Giller et al, Building soil nitrogen capital is especially pertinent. 17

18 Immediate technical choices for change The success of the germplasm led Green Revolution in Asia, under very different conditions and with more fertile and uniform soils, has biased the research agenda in Africa away from crop nutrition studies towards tempting but illusory gains from plant breeding. These gains will remain illusory until the fundamental issues of providing the plant with adequate nutrients (soil fertility management) are properly addressed. There are effectively only three sources for supplying the key nutrient nitrogen in arable farming: organic sources recycled from within the cropped area or concentrated from a larger area, biological N-fixation, or, mineral (inorganic) nitrogen fertilisers. Giller et al, 1997, in a comprehensive review of the options for building soil nitrogen capital in African soils, discuss the potential for the restoration of soil nitrogen capital in relation to potential sources of nitrogen, management methods, and the ability of soils to store and supply nitrogen for crop growth: The most striking conclusion is inevitably that there are no quick-fix solutions to maintenance of all forms of N capital, or SOM [soil organic matter]. Any proposed interventions must generate cropping systems that are productive, sustainable, and economically attractive for smallholder subsistence farmers. The conundrum is that all restorative technologies for improvement of soil fertility without the use of mineral fertilisers involve either import of organic materials from surrounding land or allocation of land to produce organic materials. In the most densely populated areas, land scarcity prohibits the devotion of land to restoration of soil fertility. In such regions methods for replenishment of the short-term capital N store in soils will be hard to find without either some other form of income generation or shortterm assistance to buy fertilisers or direct assistance to compensate for loss of agricultural production, at least in the short term (p.153). Inorganic fertiliser For most households in Malawi, the cash requirement needed to buy inorganic fertiliser far exceeds their total annual cash income (HIID, 1994a). Fertiliser will remain a high cost item for Malawi farmers for the foreseeable future even if more efficient delivery methods are found. As noted earlier, it is not profitable to use on maize in Malawi in many instances. In Malawi, value:cost ratios in 1995 averaged just 1.8 for fertiliser use on hybrid maize and 1.3 for unimproved maize (Conroy and Kumwenda, 1995). A recent economic analysis of fertiliser policy in Malawi (see HIID, 1994a) suggested that improvements in fertiliser use efficiency could substantially outweigh feasible price changes in either fertiliser or maize in making fertiliser economically attractive to smallholders. Nitrogen is the most important limiting nutrient for maize production in Malawi. Table 4 presents the analysis from available on-farm nutrient response trials in Malawi over the last 30 years. The N- 18

19 Table 4: Average N-use efficiency and unfertilised maize yields from nutrient response trials in Malawi, by year. Average N-use efficiency (kg maize per kg N)* Average unfertilised maize yield (kg/ha) number of Source Year trials Brown & Young ca unknown Bennett 1971/ Bennett 1972/ Bennett 1973/ Maize Team 1974/ Maize Team 1976/ Maize Team 1977/ Maize Team 1978/ FAO fertiliser trials 1992/ Fertiliser Verification Trial 1995/ * These N-use efficiencies were calculated using the lowest rate of nitrogen applied in each trial programme - between 35 and 60 kg N/ha -and represent efficiencies under on-farm trial conditions, rather than responses farmers should expect. N- use efficiencies are generally highest at the lowest rates of application. N-use efficiencies on farmers fields, under farmer management, and using higher rates of nitrogen will be lower. The yields from the 1995/96 Fertiliser Verification Trial, adjusted downwards to reflect potential on-farm yields and over all levels of N-application (ranging from 35 to 96 kg N/ha), gave a national mean N-use efficiency of 18.7 kg grain/kg N-applied. use efficiency data are equivocal. There may be a decline over the period but this is contradicted by the most recent and comprehensive data set - the fertiliser verification trial 9. This last trial shows (over the full range of agro-ecologies in Malawi) N-use efficiency estimates remain within the expected range and that good physical returns from fertiliser use can be expected. The trial was implemented to a generally high standard by Ministry of Agriculture field staff on farmers fields. Addressing micronutrient deficiencies can make some extra gains but virtually all maize in Malawi will respond well to nitrogen. Also, the chance of a low response to nitrogen due to drought is much lower than in some neighbouring countries. Overall, there is a good grain return to applied nitrogen. Fertiliser composition: Although nitrogen is the dominant limiting nutrient, N-use efficiency is affected by the availability of other nutrients, particularly phosphorus (P) and sulphur (S). The introduction of high analysis fertilisers after 1990 (which do not include sulphur) may be exacerbating sulphur deficiencies. Sulphur deficiency in maize has been reported by Lungu (1974), MacColl (1984), and Matabwa and Wendt (1993). The maize fertiliser verification trials, conducted at some 2000 sites, (Benson, Kumwenda, and Gilbert, 1997) have shown that the application of the new compound basal fertiliser 23:21:0+4S, which supplied sulphur at 4 kg ha -1 gave mean yield increases of between 4-13 percent over DAP and urea. The response of maize to additional phosphorus is only economically significant in some areas of the country (Matabwa and Wendt, 1993). Benson (1997) cites studies reporting deficiencies of boron, zinc, molybdenum, copper, magnesium and manganese in addition to sulphur (Brown, 9 In the 1995/96 season, 2000 maize fertiliser verification trials were conducted on-farm to develop area specific fertiliser recommendations for smallholders under the aegis of the Maize Productivity Task Force. 19

20 1962; Bolton and Bennett, 1975; Silanpaa; 1982; Matabwa and Wendt, 1993). Such deficiencies are probably locally significant. Timing of fertiliser application: Malawi data show that splitting nitrogen fertiliser application in Malawi is most effective on the lighter soils (Ngwira and Nhlane, 1986; Saka and Chisenga, 1990). Many smallholders delay applying the basal fertiliser until some weeks after planting 10. This has serious effects on fertiliser use efficiency (Ngwira and Nhlane, 1986; Kabambe and Kumwenda, 1995; Kumwenda, 1994). Research conducted on farmer s fields by Kabambe and Kumwenda (1995) showed a reduction in maize yield of 700 to 1500 kg ha -1 when the basal dressing fertiliser containing nitrogen and phosphorus was applied 2 weeks after planting. Preliminary data from 157 on-farm trials by Sakala (1998) in the 1994/95 season indicate that farmers can lose from 1000 to 1500 kg ha -1 of the maize grain by delaying the basal dressing fertiliser by 4 weeks after planting. Weeding: The interaction between crop yield and weed management is high. Weeds compete with crops for soil nutrients, soil water and light, reducing maize yields by more than 50 percent (Kumwenda, and Kabambe, 1995). Many smallholders in southern Africa use animal draft power to control weeds - but few Malawi farmers own cattle 11. Thus most weeding is done by hand - a hard and time consuming operation where timing is critical to success. Weeding twice, but at the appropriate times, will give as high a yield of maize on half the fertiliser, than weeding once and using the full recommendation (see Figure 5 and Table 5) (Kabambe and Kumwenda, 1995). Grain legume rotations The rotation of maize with grain legumes such as soyabean, groundnut or Bambara groundnut is one of the more promising technological options to improve soil fertility for Malawian farmers. Brown (1958) compared several rotations involving maize and groundnuts at Chitedze, Thuchila and Mbawa. Maize yields following groundnuts were 8 to 78 percent higher than continuous maize. Groundnut yields after maize were 18 to 156 percent higher than continuous groundnut yields. MacColl (1988) examined residual nitrogen left for maize following legume crops of groundnuts, soyabean, lab-lab and pigeonpea near Bunda in central Malawi. The nitrogen left for the maize varied from 0 to 52 kg N ha -1 depending on previous species, soil type and precipitation. MacColl found that a higher nitrogen harvest index in the legume led to a decreasing soil fertility benefit for the subsequent maize. This is now translated into a general rule that the less high yield potential (low harvest index) legumes are the ones with the greater benefit in terms of soil fertility. 10 If only modest amounts of fertiliser are used, then the best response is obtained if it is applied just after maize emergence. 11 The expansion of cropping into the grazing area is a major factor in the decline of livestock holdings in Malawi. 20

21 Figure 5: Weeding by fertiliser management in maize Maize yield (kg/ha) Nitrogen applied (kg/ha) Source: Kabambe & Kumwenda, 1995 W1 W2 W3 Weeding Regime W4 W1 = no weeding. W2 = weeded 21 days after planting. W3 = weeded 21 & 45 days after planting. W4 = weeded 21, 45, & 54 days after planting. Table 5: An economic analysis of grain yields of the weeding by fertiliser management demonstration from 118 on-farm sites in Malawi, 1996/97 season. Trt 1 Trt 2 Trt 3 Trt 4 Weeding regime and fertiliser rate applied weed x 1, half rate weed x 2, half rate weed x 1, full rate weed x 2, full rate Mean yield (kg/ha) MK2.00/kg MK 4914 MK 5784 MK 6206 MK 7408 Cost of fertiliser 1 MK 975 MK 975 MK 1950 MK 1950 Cost of weeding 2 MK 400 MK 800 MK 400 MK 800 Net benefits MK 3539 MK 4009 MK 3856 MK The cost of the fertiliser is 1.25 times the ADMARC price. The additional charges cover transport and the opportunity cost of credit. 2 The cost of weeding assumes a ganyu labour charge of MK20/day and 20 man-days to weed a hectare, for a per hectare weeding cost of MK 400. Source: Action Group I - MPTF, In the Midwestern US, a legume-derived fertiliser credit of 0.2 kg N kg -1 harvested soyabean seed has been estimated (Karlen and Sharpley, 1994). This benefit is likely to be higher when using a freely nodulating, promiscuous soyabean variety such as Magoye. The promiscuity of Magoye allows it to form symbiotic associations with native soil rhizobia; thus it is able to fix atmospheric N 2 in a wide variety of agro-ecosystems without rhizobial inoculation. In addition, it has a low nitrogen harvest index, and its leaves stay green longer than traditional soyabean varieties, indicating a greater residual soil fertility benefit. Magoye has a seed yield potential of 3000 kg ha -1 and has produced yields > 2000 kg ha -1 in Zambian soils low in nitrogen (Javaheri, 1996). Zimbabwe data indicate that potentially Magoye soyabean can add some 20 kg of nitrogen per hectare, although the availability to the following crop may be compromised by the high lignin content of the residues (Mpepereki, 1998). 21

22 It is unlikely that any grain legume will be adopted solely for a soil fertility benefit alone. The legume also must have a nutritional and/or economic value. In the 1996/97 growing season, Action Group I of the Maize Productivity Task Force planted a grain legume at 300 on-farm sites of the 1995/96 area-specific fertiliser verification trial. The goal of this trial was to determine the effect of residual phosphorus added in 1995/96 on legume growth and yield in 1996/97. In addition, Action Group I wanted to compare the benefits of a maizelegume rotation to continuous unfertilised maize. The preliminary results of this trial have been extremely encouraging. Figure 6 shows yield data for 132 Magoye soyabean sites and 39 CG7 groundnut sites. The absolute yield of the legume crop was considerably higher than continuous unfertilised maize for both species. Mean soyabean yields ranged from kg ha -1 across treatments, compared to 1090 kg ha -1 for maize. Mean groundnut yields were kg ha -1, compared with 1170 kg ha -1 for maize. Also note the increase in legume yield with increased residual phosphorus. This residual effect from hybrid maize fertilisation provides an important corollary benefit to maize-grain legume rotations. These grain legume yields are from on-farm plots following fertilised maize, planted on time, using improved varieties at optimal plant populations. Farmers who plant legumes late using local varieties and sparse populations will obtain much lower yields 12. An ICRISAT groundnut trial in 1996/97 at 19 locations in Lilongwe ADD found that the yield gap between CG7 and the farmer variety (Chalimbana) was 40 percent. When recommended agronomic practices were combined with CG7, the yield improvement over farmer variety and farmer management was 95 percent. Since the heavy rainfall in the 1996/97 season favoured the farmer s traditional long-season variety, the researchers state that this is the minimum yield gain that would be achieved by CG7 using improved agronomic practices (Snapp and Boughton, personal communication). CG7 yields on-station in Malawi averaged 1700 kg ha -1 from , and on-farm trial yields were 1400 kg ha -1, 71 and 117 percent higher than Chalimbana during the same period (ICRISAT, 1997). Grain legume yields obtained will depend on variety, management, soil and climate. 12 Groundnuts are often planted after maize and at low plant populations. Late planting is, at least in part, due to the need to plant the main food staple first. Low populations are to optimise yield per seed planted (as seed is expensive and scarce), rather than yield per unit area. It will be difficult to increase seed yields and soil fertility benefits under these constraints. Smallholder legume seed multiplication (such as the work of Action Group II of the Maize Productivity Task Force) is a crucial step to relieve seed constraints and enable smallholder farmers to achieve the full benefits of grain legume rotations. 22

23 Figure 6: Grain legume yields in rotation with maize, with unfertilised maize control 2500 SOYABEAN 2000 MAIZE Grain yield (kg/ha) Treatment (P 2 O 5 added in , kg/ha) 2500 GROUNDNUT 2000 MAIZE Grain yield (kg/ha) Treatment (P 2 O 5 added in , kg/ha) Even with these qualifications, grain legume rotations, particularly with CG7 groundnut and Magoye soyabean, are competitive with continuous unfertilised maize in terms of both cash and calories. The large amount of protein and energy (in the form of oils) in grain legumes provides an important nutritional benefit to the relatively carbohydrate-rich Malawian maizebased diet. Figure 7, calculated from the same yield data, shows the clear superiority of the grain legume rotation to continuous maize in terms of calories and protein generated. Protein 23

24 Figure 7: Grain legume rotation: estimated calorie and protein yields Soyabean Calories Protein Kilocalories ha Protein (kg ha -1 ) Treatment (P 2 O 5 added in , kg ha -1 ) Maize Groundnut Calories Protein Kilocalories ha Protein (kg ha -1 ) Treatment (P 2 O 5 added in , kg ha -1 Maize ) 0 produced was over four-fold higher in the leguminous cropping systems. Legumes such as soyabean and groundnut have an important role to play in establishing household food security in Malawi. The grain legume rotations also compare favourably in terms of economic net benefit (on a cash basis). After subtracting for fertiliser and legume seed costs, the groundnut rotation is 24

25 Table 6: Economic net benefits in Malawi (on a cash basis) of a maize-soyabean rotation (132 sites) and a maize-groundnut rotation (39 sites), 1997 market prices. SOYABEAN Treatment (N:P 2 O 5 :S added in 95/96) Maize 1995/96 Yield (kg/ha) Soyabean 1996/97 Yield (kg/ha) 1995/96 Adjusted Yield* 1996/97 Adjusted Yield* 1995/96 Output (MK/ha) 1996/97 Output (MK/ha) Seed Costs (MK/ha) Fertiliser Cost 95/96 (MK/ha) Two-year Economic Net Benefit (MK/ha) 1. (96:40:0) (35:0:0) (35:10:2) (69:21:4) (92:21:4) (0-Maize) GROUNDNUT Treatment (N:P 2 O 5 :S added in 95/96) Maize 1995/96 Yield (kg/ha) Groundnut 1996/97 Yield (kg/ha) 1995/96 Adjusted Yield* 1996/97 Adjusted Yield* 1995/96 Output (MK/ha) 1996/97 Output (MK/ha) Seed Costs (MK/ha) Fertiliser Cost 95/96 (MK/ha) Two-year Economic Net Benefit (MK/ha) 1. (96:40:0) (35:0:0) (35:10:2) (69:21:4) (92:21:4) (0-Maize) * Yields adjusted downward by 20 percent for small plot size and extension agent management. 25

26 still 96 to 157 percent more profitable using this criterion: the soyabean rotation is 44 to 80 percent higher (Table 6). Bambara groundnut returns (not shown) were 134 to 173 percent higher. The constraints to increased farmer adoption of grain legumes include: Groundnut has a low seed multiplication factor, and seed storage and planting costs tend to be high. It also has significantly higher labour demands than many alternative crops. Seed of promising varieties, such as CG7, is often scarce at planting time and difficult to find 13. Few farmers know about the new varieties and their characteristics. The promotion of CG7 and other new groundnut varieties should be a priority activity for organisations such as the Maize Productivity Task Force. While soyabean has a higher seed multiplication factor than groundnut, the local market price for soyabean is low relative to groundnuts. The economic analysis (Table 6) was done using the median 1996/97 soyabean price of MK 2.50 per kg. If the goal for adoption of a new technology is to have double the net benefits of unfertilised maize, then the soyabean rotation does not meet this criterion at present soyabean prices. In order to have all soyabean treatments meet this goal, either soyabean yield or soyabean prices must increase by percent over 1996/97, depending on treatment. Additionally, the MK 2.50 price is one-quarter the price that farmers obtained after the 1995/96 season. Farmer adoption rates of soyabean would be benefited greatly by stable market prices. In addition, soyabean value and utilisation is constrained by unfamiliarity with processing procedures. Grain legume intercrops Common bean or cowpea are often intercropped with maize and provide a useful supplement to family diet and possibly income. But they are unlikely candidates as rotation crops, and, as traditionally grown in intercrop, contribute little to soil fertility amendment. Pests and diseases often render cowpea growth and yield negligible in Malawi. While bean is common in higher altitude regions of Malawi, it is a poor fixer of atmospheric nitrogen. Yields are low, and CIAT has found that soil N-deficiency is the most common constraint to bean production in southern Africa. The soil fertility benefit in grain legume rotation systems is often reduced by poor leguminous residue incorporation. The residues, which are much richer in nitrogen than maize residues, need to be put back into the soil to provide nitrogen for the subsequent maize crop. Often, farmers take grain legumes such as soyabean and groundnut home for threshing, and the residues never make it back to the field. Early incorporation of residues is important if the soil fertility benefits of residues are to be realised. 13 Action Group II of the Maize Productivity Task Force is multiplying 33 ha of CG7 seed via their smallholder seed multiplication programme during the 1997/98 season. Assuming a seed multiplication rate of 20:1 this will generate 50 tons of CG7 seed. If all the seed were replanted, 1000 tons would be available at the end of the 1998/99 season, and 20,000 tons at the end of 1999/2000. Clearly, it will take several years of concerted effort before enough CG7 seed is available for the 1.6 million farming households of Malawi. 26

27 Long-duration pigeonpea is the one legume which has considerable potential to improve soil fertility when grown as an intercrop 14. Pigeonpea is widely intercropped with maize in southern Malawi. It sheds its leaves in the field as it matures, leaving the N-rich biomass it produces. Although checked in the early part of the season by vigorous maize growth, it continues to grow after the maize harvest and to produce large quantities of biomass (Sakala, 1994). MacColl (1988) examined residual nitrogen left for maize following pigeonpea near Bunda and found it varied from 0 to 52 kg N ha -1 depending on species, soil type and precipitation. Pigeonpea grown for two years left between 24 and 107 kg N ha -1 for maize. Sakala (1994) reported that pigeonpea (variety ICP9145) intercropped in maize gave a dry matter yield of 3 t ha -1 from leaf litter and flowers, which accumulated 27 kg N ha -1. Data from the 1996/7 season indicate that leaves falling under pigeonpea in a maize/pigeonpea intercrop can add 70 to 90 kg N/ha to the soil (Sakala, 1998). Pigeonpea grows very slowly, and has a deep tap root which acts as a biological plough to penetrate the soil impedance layer just below the ridge. It matures on residual moisture after maize harvest, and is noncompetitive with maize. Since pigeonpea/maize systems exhibit such an excellent temporal and spatial complementarity, pigeonpea should be promoted exclusively for intercropping systems with maize. The principal constraint to its use is that long season pigeonpea, suitable for such intercropping, yields poorly in areas where livestock roam the fields freely after the maize harvest, since it is readily browsed before it has time to mature. Longer term and more difficult options for improving soil fertility Undersown green manures Intercropping, where two or more crops are grown mixed together on the same ground for all or much of their life cycle is a widespread age-old practice in traditional African food agriculture (Andrews, 1989). However, with the exception of long-duration pigeonpea, the soil fertility benefits of most common intercrops are limited. Only small amounts of nitrogen are returned to the soil by intercropped legumes when they are shaded by the associated cereals (Dalal, 1974; Manson et al., 1985). Under smallholder management in Malawi, the potential for soil fertility enhancement is even more modest. Legume intercrops produce very little biomass (and consequently little nitrogen) because they are planted at low populations and suffer from competition from the maize crop and from weeds (Kumwenda, Kabambe and Sakala, 1993; Kumwenda, 1995) (see Table 7). However, on the fertile soils of Chitedze Research Station, Crotalaria (sunnhemp) did improve maize yields of the subsequent crop by 1.1 t ha -1 as compared with continuous maize without fertiliser. However, cropping systems based on intercropping green manure species such as Mucuna pruriens, Tephrosia vogelii or Crotalaria juncea (sunnhemp) into maize could potentially increase soil fertility and maize yields in Malawi (Davy, 1925). Sunnhemp was used extensively as a green manure in Zimbabwe until the 1950s (Rattray and Ellis, 1952) - but not as an intercrop. The challenge in these systems is to produce enough green manure biomass 14 The shorter season varieties of pigeonpea do not compete well with the companion maize crop and yields are reduced. Insect damage and difficulty in procuring seed also limit the potential of these varieties. At present only the long-season varieties of pigeonpea in intercrops are seen as offering a promising, adoptable agricultural technology. 27

28 Table 7: Effects of intercropping maize and legume crops on dry matter production and nitrogen content (kg/ha) of legumes at Chitedze Research Station in Malawi Treatment Dry matter N-content Maize/pigeonpea intercrop Maize/sunnhemp intercrop Sole pigeonpea Sole sunnhemp Pigeonpea and sunnhemp were planted on the same day as maize and sampled 12 weeks after planting. to have a large effect on subsequent maize yields without being overly competitive with the intercropped maize. Several studies have been undertaken looking at different ways of intercropping green manures with maize. Preliminary results after one season of growth indicate that Tephrosia, Crotalaria and Mucuna, when undersown early, can produce significant amounts of biomass (> 2000 kg ha -1 ) when intercropped with maize at low -fertility sites in Malawi (Gilbert, 1997). Crotalaria matures quickly and thus it is difficult to manage the synchrony of its nutrient release with maize nutrient uptake. Mucuna reduces maize yields through being strongly competitive unless carefully managed. Tephrosia undersown at two weeks after planting maize was the most promising treatment studied. Tephrosia, like pigeonpea, matures on residual moisture and exhibits a strong temporal complementarity with maize. Tephrosia planted simultaneously with maize has shown promising growth at 300 Malawi Agroforestry Extension Project demonstration sites. Late maturing green manures such as Tephrosia are ready when farmers find it easiest to incorporate - during the mid dry season re-ridging, rather than at the end of the rains when incorporation needs an additional operation. This adds to their value as a soil fertility enhancer since there is a large time of incorporation effect on soil fertility benefits from legume materials. While Tephrosia/maize systems appear promising, the evaluation of maize yields in these systems is in its infancy. Research and demonstration efforts involving green manures should continue, but in the clear recognition that the time is not yet ripe for large-scale development efforts or policy reforms regarding their use. Leaf biomass transfer Some species found near farmers fields produce large amounts of high quality leaf prunings that, when applied to maize, can raise maize yields. The most promising of these are Tithonia spp.. These species are worth encouraging on an opportunistic basis - but none will be available in sufficient amounts to make a difference on its own. In combination with other inputs, they may prove of value on a local scale. Animal manures and composts As pressure for arable land rises, cropping encroaches into areas previously used for grazing. Agricultural intensification can be associated with a decline in the availability of animal manures 28

29 as livestock are squeezed out 15. For example, manure from cattle and other animals is very important for most farmers in Zimbabwe, less so in Zambia, but is rarely available in Malawi. Even in the best areas, its supply (and, as importantly, its quality) is inadequate to maintain soil fertility on its own. Leaf litter from trees can make significant contributions in areas close to woodlands - but deforestation associated with the demand for arable land and for building and firewood work against this option as population rises. Composted crop residues are used in wetter areas and where crop biomass production is relatively high - but composts are rarely sufficient for more than a modest part of the cultivated area 16. These technologies require a substantial labour commitment on the part of farmers, and the availability of water to facilitate breakdown of woody material. Organic manures alone will only rarely provide the productivity boost needed by smallholders. They will need to be combined with the judicious use of chemical fertilisers, improved pest and weed management techniques, and high yielding crop varieties. Crop residue management Crop residues available in Malawi after harvest include cereal stover, weeds, and legume residues. In southern Malawi, smallholder farmers incorporate some residues into the soil, or leave some on the soil surface 17. In most parts of the Central and Northern Regions, the burning or removal of crop residues is common to release nutrients quickly (although nitrogen and sulphur are lost into the atmosphere), to ease land preparation, and to reduce pests and diseases. Low quality (low nitrogen) crop residues incorporated into the soil reduce yields of subsequent crops through N-immobilisation (Giller et al, 1997). Research at Chitedze on residue management showed that burning of maize stover gave a significant increase in maize yield over removal, incorporation, or leaving on the surface as mulch (Department of Agriculture, 1957, 1962, 1967). (See Table 8.) To use the low quality cereal crop residues available in most smallholder fields in Malawi to improve soil nutrient status, without affecting crop yields requires careful management (Giller et al., 1997). Practical considerations rule this out under smallholder conditions. Options include the addition of large quantities of inorganic N-fertilisers, legume green manures or residues rich in nitrogen, or other high nitrogen organic sources to overcome the nutrient immobilisation potential of poor quality residues (Giller et al., 1997; MacColl, 1988); composting; or feeding to livestock to create manure. As shown previously, there are major difficulties for Malawi smallholders to adopt such practices on a widespread scale. 15 This is more of a problem in the mono-modal rainfall areas of southern Africa - where the long dry season makes zero grazing techniques difficult or impossible for smallholders - than in the bi-modal rainfall areas of eastern Africa. 16 And, like manures, quality is often poor. 17 However, much of the woody part is burned as domestic fuel, leaving only the leaves and light trash for incorporation. 29

30 Table 8: Response of maize to various methods of field preparation, Chitedze, 1956/57 Treatment Yield (kg/ha) Ridges split 2480 Ridges rebuilt 2715 Stover burned 3085 Stover buried 2770 Stover left as mulch 2315 Stover removed 2545 Mean 2665 LSD (0.05) 535 CV (%) 13.7 Minimum tillage Soil losses under low productivity cropping on sloping land can be high. As noted previously, labour for land preparation and weeding is short, especially under the hand hoe systems practiced in Malawi. There are vocal advocates for zero or minimum tillage systems which are promoted to reduce soil erosion and reduce the labour required for weeding. While such systems may have potential merits, as they are not adequately proven, their promotion should be tempered with caution under low fertility situations such as Malawi. They are only suitable for improving soil fertility in situations where large amounts of organic residues are produced, and where inorganic nitrogen fertiliser can be added to overcome the N- immobilisation caused by the low quality residues. Conclusions For the remainder of this century and beyond, on present trends, population growth will exceed growth in food production by 1 percent or more annually. Kumwenda et al reckoned that in 1995 there was a structural food-deficit in Malawi of some 300,000 tons of maize - which, if present productivity trends were continued, led to a deficit of some 2 million tons by the year The improved maize seed and fertiliser technology is essential to the survival of most Malawians into the foreseeable future. Carr (1998) estimates that, on conservative productivity and adoption figures, some 19,000 tons of improved maize seed and 78,000 tons of urea equivalent would provide a generous national food self sufficiency. This compares with the present use of about 3,000 tons of seed and 25,000 tons of urea equivalent. The incremental cost of providing this seed and fertiliser at present prices is about US$30m per year. Inorganic fertiliser is central to closing this food gap. Farmers still receive a good response if they apply inorganic-nitrogen. The data are clear that soil infertility, dominated by N- deficiencies (see the Fertiliser Verification Trial), is the major constraint to maize productivity. There may be an associated decline in N-use efficiencies caused by nutrient losses that could be mitigated by increasing soil organic matter (see Figure 8). But the evident and serious decline in unfertilised maize yields simply cannot be reversed by an organic strategy alone. 30

31 Figure 8: Mean N-use efficiencies in maize from nutrient response research trials in Malawi, by year The N-use efficiency represents the units of maize grain harvested per unit of nitrogen applied. The efficiencies reported here are for nitrogen applications of below 60 kg/ha. These data are taken from on-farm trials, most of which were researcher-managed. The gaps in the record represent years in which no or very few on-farm nutrient response research trials were run N-use efficiency ca.60 71/72 72/73 73/74 74/75 76/77 77/78 78/79 92/93 95/96 Season The constraints to adoption, and the limitations of an exclusively organic strategy in terms of crop response to feasible widespread options are simply too great. This is not wholly to discount organic strategies. At present in Malawi, farmers do not have enough cash to afford sufficient fertiliser, nor enough land to supply sufficient high-quality organic materials to boost maize yields high enough to ensure food self-sufficiency. However by combining the small amounts of inorganic and organic materials they can acquire, they may be able to significantly increase their maize productivity. Moreover, anecdotal evidence of farmer management practices leads most observers to conclude that organic matter content in the soil is declining. Table 3 provides some qualified evidence for this. Without a supply of nutrients to these soils, preferably from a combination of inorganic and organic sources, both the food security of many farming households and of the nation as a whole will remain at considerable and increasing risk. The Maize Productivity Task Force is planning, for the 1998/99 cropping season, a largescale research and demonstration exercise comparing soil fertility amelioration options such as area-specific fertiliser recommendations, grain legume rotations, maize-pigeonpea intercrops and undersown green manures. This effort will serve to evaluate, on a widespread basis, the available basket of best bet soil fertility options. The results should be valuable in: helping farmers choose, in terms of their own situation, the best option for their needs, and, providing a sound basis, as already undertaken for inorganic fertilisers, for area-specific recommendations for organic matter technologies. 31

32 There are other medium and long term changes and investigations that should be commenced and /or strengthened without delay. However, as the following section will outline, there is an immediate and short term soil fertility crisis which needs swift action. As the preceding review has indicated, the technical options are few - each season that passes without concerted, coherent, and widespread action to address the critical issues narrows further the choices for change. 32

33 SECTION II: POLICY - BREAKING FREE LAYING THE FOUNDATION FOR GROWTH A comprehensive smallholder strategy Malawi needs urgently to implement a strategy for broad-based income growth; a strategy to capitalise on the promise of the technology that Malawian farmers are desperate to implement. In present circumstances and disillusionment, there is a risk that donors will lose sight of Malawi s growth potential and invest mainly in targeted programmes that leave untouched those whose productivity is essential to national food security. It is not enough to keep the poor alive as the nation itself is sinking. It is not just the poor who need a safety net. Malawi itself needs a safety net. The only realistic hope for Malawi to break out of its current downward spiral is to restart vigorous economic growth in a non-inflationary environment. The best way to do this is to get hybrid seed and fertiliser into the hands of all of Malawi s farmers. Nothing would help quell inflation and dispel the current state of gloom and insecurity like a bumper maize harvest shared by all of Malawi s farmers, and delivered to the consumers as lower and reasonably predictable maize prices. The policy framework National policy makers and donors have set a high priority on protecting food security as agricultural marketing is transformed from dominance by ADMARC to a more dynamic private trading system. Prices of all crops except maize have been fully liberalised. Private traders are now free to buy and sell maize at prices dictated primarily by market conditions, with the maize price band system operated by government. The system is designed to damp out extreme variation (largely driven by growing season weather conditions) in maize availability and prices. This price band system has four objectives: to encourage use of purchased farm inputs by assuring farmers a market for their maize at harvest time at an assured producer floor price; to protect consumers of maize by releasing maize from the SGR (Strategic Grain Reserve) into the market at a target ceiling price to assure that maize is available at reasonable prices; to provide enough scope between the floor and ceiling prices so that private traders can profitably buy maize at harvest time and store it properly for sale in the hungry season; to operate the band system in a way that facilitates maximum opportunity for the private sector to participate in government purchase and sale activity. Under circumstances foreseen when the band was designed, Malawi was expected to range from surplus maize production in bumper crop years such as to maize deficits in years of poor weather. Because of the long transportation distances to international maize markets, the difference between import and export parity prices is great. Price swings of that magnitude between surplus and deficit years would make it risky for producers to invest in hybrid seed and fertiliser and would place consumers at risk of not being able to afford the staple food crop in a shortfall year. Therefore, the band is narrower than the difference 33

34 between export and import parity prices. SGR purchases and sales are to stabilise prices with the band representing the target floor and ceiling prices. The food security crisis Neither Government nor donors anticipated how fundamentally the twin events of the collapse of the credit system and the increased cost of fertiliser would cripple maize production in Malawi. The real impact was obscured for several years by emergency distributions of free hybrid seed and fertiliser, combined with some of the best production weather ever experienced in the region. A price band system was introduced in the 1995/6 season, with ADMARC intervening directly in the market to defend the price floor. The private sector purchased around tons of maize in that season. In the 1996/7 season, ADMARC continued to intervene to defend the price band through its access to the SGR when necessary. There was marked growth in private sector maize marketing. In 1997/98, maize offered for sale to marketing agencies fell precipitously and Malawi was exposed to the full adverse impact of the productivity collapse. People began queuing at ADMARC in August to buy maize, a phenomenon normally expected following years of dire drought. Private traders paid linestanders to buy rationed ADMARC maize for MK 3.90/kg to resell it outside ADMARC s gates at prices as high as MK 10/kg. The Malawi government responded to the crisis by releasing tons of maize from the SGR, and sought maize on the international market using its own funds. It also sought, with modest success, support for further imports from the donor community. Despite the release of SGR maize and the importation of a further tons of maize, the consumer price of maize in some markets rose from MK8 to MK10 per kilogram. The imported maize had to be sold below its import price; a subsidy that diverted yet more funds away from priority areas. Nearly half the imported maize arrived after the new harvest had started to come in due to delays in mobilising resources and the time taken in transport. The liberalisation upon which Malawi s future growth depends is being tarnished in people s minds by the high prices they face in the market and the enormous rents conspicuously being extracted by private traders 18. At the same time as consumers are facing high prices, the uncertainty caused by the erratic management of the price band and maize imports undercuts the potential incentive effect of such prices for producers. There is no certainty that the current crop can be sold at harvest time at prices to cover the costs of purchased inputs. The economy is experiencing all the downside effects of liberalisation, but is deprived of many of its benefits. Implementation of the price band system has been mixed, while maize production has collapsed. For the first time that many can remember, Malawians are queuing and paying dearly for maize bran. The Cabinet Committee on the Economy has recognised that the price band cannot be defended in the absence of adequate physical or financial resources to operate the SGR. It has recommended that sufficient funds be made available for this (including a financial reserve of US$8m to enable swift action on maize imports when necessary). 18 These are not profits received for the services of assembling, storing and marketing the crop, but rents from successfully competing with consumers for ADMARC maize. 34

35 As the rains ended this year, small and large growers alike reported massive theft of green maize despite extraordinary security measures. Large commercial producers and those smallholders who are growing maize productively jointly say that the theft losses undermine the textbook profits that the outside observer sees in today s high maize prices. The incentives promised under the economist s ceteris paribus market conditions do not apply. They can only be restored with some minimum of food security for all Malawian households. It is essential to increase the food production on all smallholder farms, not just to increase the production of the surplus producers. Malawi s deteriorating food security situation threatens to undo completely the impressive progress made in laying the policy framework for growth. High maize prices create powerful inflationary pressures, compromise household food security, promote labour unrest and fuel demands for higher wages. Emergency maize imports have contributed to Government s runaway expenditure that further feeds inflation. Interest rates rise and the kwacha falls further, undercutting productive investment and further driving up the cost of fertiliser for the next crop. With farmers using little hybrid maize and fertiliser, the current crop is likely to fall far short of initial estimates. As was the case last year, early estimates tend to take more account of good weather than of limited use of the key inputs of seed and fertiliser. The shortfalls show up only in the final crop estimates when the maize is harvested and weighed. Under this year s crisis conditions (high consumer prices for maize meal and large scale theft of drying maize from fields), households are eating an unusually high proportion of the crop as green maize - with consequently less available for next year s consumption. A short crop and empty silos will reinforce inflation, the continued erosion in the value of the kwacha, and the continued rise in fertiliser prices. The only realistic and practical way to break this cycle and simultaneously to restart economic growth is to use the promise of the best bet technology Malawi s scientists have established to jump-start maize production for all smallholders 19. This would simultaneously improve the food security of all food-deficit smallholder households, and sharply increase the marketed surplus available to urban consumers. POLICY OPTIONS Sustainability, liberalisation, and survival Are they compatible in the context of Malawi smallholder agriculture? 20 Malawi is unique in sub-saharan Africa in combining a high human population density, mono-modal rainfall, and poor soils. Other areas on the continent, with similar human populations have substantially better rainfall and soils, allowing at least 2 crops per year. Malawi, with some 80 percent of its population living in the rural areas has: 19 For the purposes of this paper, a best-bet technology is defined as a well-tested short-term solution to ameliorating soil fertility at the smallholder level. These technologies include area-specific fertiliser recommendations, grain legume rotations and maize/pigeonpea intercrops. However, there are some longer-term best-bet soil fertility options being evaluated by MoAI, such as Mucuna rotations and Tephrosia intercrops, which are worthy of research support but are not considered well enough established for immediate large-scale development exercises. 20 This section is condensed from a paper of the same title presented by Stephen Carr at the IDEAA Inaugural Meeting, Lilongwe, March

36 72 percent of rural households on plots of less than 1 hectare 80 percent with no formal cash crop, maize dominating the cropping pattern, and, most families unable to feed themselves throughout the year. Previous policy, as outlined in earlier sections, focused, quite logically, on intensifying maize production. The policy was undoubtedly popular with farmers. Under the circumstances pertaining, those that were able to adopt the necessary technologies did so. Those that were unable to do so universally expressed a desire for the key components of seed and fertiliser. But adoption came at the cost of major distortions to the economy, distortions which Malawi was unable to fund from its own resources. Once these distortions were removed and a largely liberalised economy established, the use of the improved maize seed and fertiliser technology was no longer financially viable for many smallholders. The outcome has been tragic. The 1996/7 supply of marketed maize (after a good growing season) fell precipitously, the village level purchase price of maize quadrupled, and there was widespread hardship amongst the majority poor section of the population. It is evident that, in the peculiar circumstances of Malawi, the pursuance of a strict policy of non-intervention in the market comes at an unacceptably high cost. In the longer term, prices may rise to allow greater investment at the farm level and thus to increased productivity. Yet it is quite possible that many Malawians will not survive to benefit from these changes. This is not a stable or sustainable situation. The strategies required must primarily be concerned with the immediate survival of rural households, and especially children, while longer term policies are developed to meet the needs of Malawi into the next century. As with the technical options, the choices are few: Subsidies: Subsidies on inputs and on credit are discredited. Those that benefit directly from an input subsidy are mainly farmers who already purchase the fertiliser and seed. There are not many farmers who cannot afford fertiliser at price x, but who will be able to buy at price x minus 10 or 20 percent. Since most of the fertiliser purchased goes onto tobacco, much of the subsidy will accrue to tobacco growers. (Even in the highly controlled previous smallholder fertiliser subsidy programme, much of the fertiliser ended up on tobacco, and in a liberalised market, far more would do so, no matter the intent.) Even were the subsidy somehow limited only to fertiliser applied to maize, the only effect on production comes from the marginal increase in fertiliser purchases. The subsidy on seed and fertiliser that would have been purchased anyway increases the income of the user, but does not add any production. In short, there will not be much production response to a subsidy and virtually all of the direct benefits will go to the larger growers who can raise cash or credit. As did the previous smallholder programme, it will leave the lower 75 percent virtually untouched. While the shortage of cash with which to purchase inputs is a dominant constraint on their widespread use, credit schemes aimed at funding inputs for food crop production in Africa have almost universally failed. As indicated earlier, Malawi s earlier success with rural credit was reliant on a particular political environment which allowed for the rigorous collection of debts. Currently Malawi is developing a viable commercial credit system to support cash crop production - an initiative which would inevitably and seriously be undermined by the introduction of a parallel credit system for food crops that accepted a higher level of default. 36

37 Diagne (1997), in probably the most comprehensive study of smallholder credit in Malawi to date, shows that increasing access to credit, for most households, has only marginally beneficial effects on household annual income. The effect is still too small, except for households who are actively involved in cash cropping, to create an significant difference in per capita incomes, food security, and nutritional status between credit programme members and those of non-members 21. Increasing cash crop production: Increased income from the sale of cash crops could enable smallholders to purchase the necessary inputs for maize. There is good evidence that the successful smallholder burley initiative has been linked to improved maize production on the farms involved (although it may also have served unintentionally to compromise national food security). Other cash crops - cotton, chilies, paprika - may serve a similar purpose. But even at generous estimates of involvement in cash crop production, only some 20 percent of the farming population will be affected. Despite the real progress that has been made in recent years to promote cash cropping amongst smallholders, it will remain a minority occupation for the next decade at least. Many primarily subsistence-oriented producers justifiably remain unwilling to accept the risks involved in depending on the market for part of their subsistence. Thus it seems unwise to rely solely on the cash generated by cash crops to produce the volume of maize necessary for national food security. Changing the food staple: There are sensible reasons for Malawi to reduce its reliance on a single food staple but the challenges to achieving this are considerable. Firstly, as indicated earlier, maize has become dominant in the high plateau of southern Africa, not because it has been promoted by the authorities at the expense of other choices, but because it is an excellent choice for the environment. Farmers have increased the proportion of unimproved maize in their cropping system because it is a reliable and relatively easy crop to grow. Other food staples, to be competitive with maize, have to be reliably more productive at lower cost and less risk than the preferred technology of improved maize and fertiliser. Existing proposals to change the food staple (as opposed to adding some modest diversity to the farming system) are seriously compromised by both by technical flaws on the performance of the proposed alternative staple crops and misconceptions about the agronomic and socioeconomic suitability of the alternative crops relative to maize. Moreover, regardless of the staple food crop, continuous cropping without adding nutrients will lead to reduced soil fertility, declining yields, and increased food insecurity for Malawi. Improving the productivity of smallholder maize based cropping systems: the preceding technical review has shown that, in the immediate future, there are only two real options: increasing access to the improved maize seed and fertiliser technology, and, diversifying the cropping system through the adoption of locally suitable combinations with grain legumes, principally as rotations. 21 Diagne notes that, in the longer term, credit programme members may establish a wider difference between themselves and others. However, he emphasises that this is most likely to occur where the farmer is borrowing for a cash crop rather than for maize. He also observes that it is those farmers on small holdings who are least likely to benefit from access to credit. 37

38 These are complementary to one another and have the prospect of being widely adoptable. The following sections add substance as to how these may be developed in a policy context. IMPROVING ACCESS TO THE IMPROVED MAIZE SEED AND FERTILISER TECHNOLOGY This strategy has several components: providing all smallholders with small packs of improved seed and fertiliser. These they can use to learn (and appropriately modify for their own circumstances), on their own fields, the new area-specific recommendations from the work of the Maize Productivity Task Force (MPTF). They can also learn improved management techniques to realize yield, cash, and soil fertility benefits from legume rotations. ensuring that supplies of improved seed and fertiliser are readily available for purchase in all rural markets in small bags of 1-3 kg at a price which is comparable, per kilogram, to those of existing large bags, and providing opportunities for able-bodied individuals to increase their purchasing power for seed and fertiliser through a structured fertiliser (and seed) for work programme implemented during the dry season. Best bet starter packs for all smallholders By way of a concrete proposal, the starter pack would be a specially packaged 2.5 kg packet of hybrid seed and the fertiliser recommended for that quantity of seed when grown for home consumption. This will plant 0.1 of a hectare. If it yields 1,800 kg/ha on average and replaces local unfertilised maize yielding 800 kg, then the household will gain an extra 100 kg of maize on the 0.1 ha of fertilised hybrid maize. This incremental production will feed a household for more than a month in the hungry season. Its hungry season market value this year would be at least MK500, which is more cash income that a poor family would see in a year. It is a meaningful contribution to family welfare at the household level. At the national level, 1.8 million households producing 100 kg more per household provides incremental national production of 180,000 tons. The programme provides all smallholders the means to test for themselves improved maize seed and fertiliser technology under their own conditions, without the risk inherent in purchasing the necessary inputs. It is a technology testing and demonstration programme for a small part of each farm, facilitating experimentation by farmers of promising but not yet widely adopted technologies. This programme is a long-term development effort and requires the security of at least a five-year time horizon. A starter pack programme will result in more production than an equivalent subsidy since it goes directly to people who have no hope of purchasing inputs - all inputs thus generating incremental production. It would also be more robust than a credit programme for the poor and reinforces the effective operation of the liberalised market. Food aid interventions have a far greater potential to undermine motivation, emerging market structures, and initiative since the benefit is the same no matter how much or how little effort was expended to produce food. The vast majority of the smallholders are so short of cash that they presently represent no market for hybrid seed or fertiliser. Giving these a starter pack will not displace any commercial purchases. If the package is small, it will stimulate, not diminish the incentive to 38

39 purchase more inputs 22. Even with such a small package of high productivity inputs, there are large rewards to good husbandry, especially to timeliness of planting, fertilising, and weeding. There is a strong incentive and reward for using effectively any inputs provided. Familiarity and confidence with this recommended technology should help to expand its use. As farmers accumulate experience with hybrid seed and fertiliser, it is reasonable to expect them to start buying small supplementary quantities on their own. Thus the programme should stimulate, not substitute for, market demand. From several hundred applied research trials and two thousand farmer verification sites, Malawi s Maize Productivity Task Force has developed recommendations for the use of improved seed and fertiliser for maize production according to agroclimatic zone and farmers economic circumstances. For the nation, the investment in the research and trials programme has virtually eliminated the risk of failure inherent in the universal implementation of these recommendations. For individual farmers, especially first-time users, there remain risks with the technology. From a national point of view, introducing the improved maize seed and fertiliser technology into all zones and to all smallholder farmers will have a high payoff. The wider and more comprehensive the programme, the less is the risk and the higher is the payoff to the nation. While, in the first instance, the recommended focus is on improved maize seed and fertiliser, the strategy can be developed and modified to encourage the introduction of new and more diverse cropping systems as proven options become available. Malawi s current national food security problem arises because even the rich smallholders cannot raise the cash to buy fertiliser and hybrid seed. Thus, for this programme, the target population is the smallholder population 23. Excluding larger smallholders omits from the programme many of the most promising farmers, community leaders, and innovative elements. If starter packs are intended for all, it is far more likely that all will receive them. In any large scale programme, there is always some problem of leakage and diversion. However, based on experience with the most recent supplemental inputs programme, such losses can be kept modest through careful household level registration and requiring personal collection of the package. The poor will be a bit better off with this programme, but still will be poor. Thus this effort is complementary, and does not substitute for, ongoing activities. The poverty alleviation programme will still be needed. A national fertiliser for work programme as proposed in a subsequent section would allow many smallholders to fertilise all their maize. Sustaining the steady increase in food production that is fundamental to Malawi s growth will require an effectively functioning credit and savings programme to finance both the purchase of inputs and storage of the crop. The large swings in production due to variable weather will require some variation of the price band arrangement to accumulate maize in surplus years and inject it into the market in short years. 22 The package should be of a size that can be carried away easily by an individual on foot. Consistent with the starter concept, they should not contain inputs for more than 0.1 hectare. The package needs to be small enough, at a household scale, that it really is a starter pack, but yet adequate, on a national scale, to create a significant production difference when distributed to 1.8 million households. 23 Only 12 percent of smallholder households have more than 2 hectares. In the survey of all smallholders in the target EPAs of the most recent drought inputs program, the top income quartile had an annual cash income of around MK600. Only in a relative sense are they rich compared to the bottom quartile with annual cash incomes of around MK40. 39

40 The indicative cost (in US$) of a representative pack is estimated roughly in Table 9. This illustrative pack also includes a grain legume 24. Since there is not enough soyabean or groundnut seed in the country for anything like 0.1 ha per smallholder, only a small amount of such seed could be included in early years. For this, an allowance is shown without details. The fertiliser provided, if applied to 0.1 ha, represents a per hectare rate of application of 69:21:0+4S (kg of N:P 2 O 5 :K+S). This corresponds to the predominant area-specific fertiliser recommendation nationally when growing maize for home consumption 25. Table 9: Estimated cost of a representative best-bet starter pack 2.5 kg hybrid $1.00/kg US $ kg S basal $0.50/kg $ kg Urea top-dressing $0.50/kg $ 5.00 Sachet of $0.20 $ 0.20 Allowance for rotation and intercrop planting materials 26 $ 2.80 Instructional materials and packaging $ 2.50 Total US $18.00 If the cost were US $18 per household, this would make a total direct annual programme cost of $32.4 million. Assuming that the benefits from the rotation and intercrops roughly offset the programme administration costs, if the value of the incremental maize is in excess of $180/tonne, the programme would more than offset its cost 27. Complementary open market small inputs pack programme Farmers are interested in income, and income is affected by the price of both inputs and outputs, as well as by the physical ratio of input to output. In Section I of this paper, the focus was on addressing the technological options for improving the ratio of input to output for smallholder maize in Malawi. It is also apparent from previous discussion that the price of one of the most important inputs to maize production in Malawi, nitrogen, has increased markedly in recent years. This is despite the fact that, internationally, the price of fertiliser has been trending downwards (Donovan, 1996). Two main factors account for this: failure to constrain inflation in the Malawi economy, and a doubling in transport costs in getting fertiliser from the supplier to the Malawi farmer. 24 In the example which follows, the starter pack also includes a grain legume rotation component. This would be an ideal starter pack. However, the availability of adequate quantities of suitable grain legume seed in the immediate future make it unlikely that such a complete pack could be offered on a nationwide scale. 25 A single size fertiliser package is offered to facilitate pack assembly. Information will be provided with the pack on how the rate of application should be modified to provide the greatest benefits to the farmer, given his or her location, resources, and production aim, as well as the soil texture of the maize field. 26 Soyabean $0.25/kg; seeding rate of kg/ha. $0.50/kg; seeding rate of kg/ha. $0.25/kg; seeding rate of 6 kg/ha. 27 If this program cost exceeds what can be financed, then the package could be reduced as needed, or introduced more gradually starting with areas where highest benefits are expected. A starter pack as small as one kg of hybrid seed and accompanying fertiliser distributed to all smallholders would accomplish many of the program s objectives, although with less immediate impact on national production. 40

41 As noted in the preceding section, one major factor in reducing inflation would be a productive smallholder sector and a reliable supply of maize at a price which is affordable to Malawi s majority poor. Reducing the cost of the key input, fertiliser, would do much to improve smallholder maize productivity in Malawi. Malawi s market infrastructure Malawi, partly as a consequence of population density and partly as a result of deliberate policy (through ADMARC), has a surprisingly active and accessible system of periodic and local markets. Smallholders use these markets extensively. Commodities of all kinds (including fertilisers) are broken down in these markets and sold in small amounts to whoever wishes to purchase them. Along the better roads, there is active trading to supply the urban centers, especially with vegetables. There are local stores which stock modest supplies of household essentials and cheap consumer goods. Despite all this market activity, price differentials between markets are high and much trading, outside the ADMARC stores, is under-capitalized and dependent on the cash flow of the trader. Farmers desperate for cash in the hungry season will bring produce for sale at whatever price they can realise. Petty traders will use expensive and unreliable transport to bring consumer goods from town and sell them at an inevitably high mark up. Many stores are only open for a few months around harvest time since, at other times, no one has money to buy. The private agricultural market sector in Malawi consists mainly of these poorly capitalised and scattered rural operations and a few larger firms mainly dealing with estates. Market liberalisation has provided opportunities to private firms to expand into the area previously monopolised by various government agencies, but the reality is that these firms will inevitably deal with the small numbers of farmers who have access to credit and who are marketing cash crops. Earlier discussion indicated that, for the immediate future, such farmers will remain a small, if important, minority. The place to reach smallholders, therefore, is to stimulate and develop the existing infrastructure of small rural trading centers and periodic markets. These operate by catering to the needs of the very poor. Mainly through making commodities available in small quantities, they enable the poor to gain at least some access to items that would otherwise be outside their grasp. Marketing fertiliser in small bags ADMARC plans to make fertiliser available in bags of 25 kg as from the 1998/99 season. However, even this amount is too expensive and too risky for most smallholders. The agency has, in the past, experimented with selling fertiliser in any amount from bags opened in its main markets but problems of stock control and theft made the programme unworkable. In Western Kenya, an NGO called Sustainable Community Orientated Development Programme (SCODP) 28 has been experimenting with the commercial marketing of fertiliser in small bags to smallholders. It operates a central store where fertiliser is packed into bags of 28 SCODP is supported by USAID and the Rockefeller Foundation, and has informal credit with a major commercial fertiliser supplier in the form of fertiliser on a 90-day credit basis 41

42 between 1 and 3 kg and then either sells these bags through its own stores, or through existing trading outlets. Their market research showed that these bag sizes would be most attractive to farmers and that farmers would travel 1-2 km on foot in order to buy them. This information has been borne out in practice, with the greatest demand being for bags of 1-3 kg, even though bag sizes of up to 50 kg were available at SCODP stores. Their results have been encouraging. Their first store opened with a stock of 30 tons of fertiliser in July By the end of September, the supplier was paid in full and an additional 24 tons had to be purchased to meet demand. A new store opened in a neighbouring district in 1997 sold 2.5 tons in the first month of opening. Sales through another store, this time an existing operation, also showed a similar pattern. A strategy for developing a market for fertiliser in Malawi s smallholder areas could revolve around dividing the country as follows: Remote and very low income areas: these correspond to those in which the SCODP programme is operating in Western Kenya. There are few viable stores and markets (except in a seasonal basis) and the demand for fertiliser is minimal (if it exists at all). The SCODP experience shows that fertiliser demand can be awakened quickly, but the effort required is intensive, time consuming, and unprofitable in the short term at least. It is unlikely territory for private sector involvement but lends itself to a coordinated NGO effort. The donor community can assist through start up resources, such as providing the initial cash to set up a revolving fund to purchase the fertiliser. The fertiliser industry might, at a minimum, provide a line of credit (say, 90 days) plus some modest resources (bag sealers, a start up fund of fertiliser). In the longer term, through NGO and other efforts, community based commercial organisations could take over the operation. Commercially viable markets: such areas lie along the main roads and in the more prosperous farming areas. There are stores which are open most of the year and which sell a variety of consumer items already. Selling farm inputs would expand the range of items sold from these stores (but it is unlikely that there would be sufficient sales to enable a solely agricultural inputs business to operate in the first instance). Store owners would need to be helped to understand how to store agricultural inputs in a general store without causing health risks to customers. In return for providing them with a revolving line of credit (say, 90 days) plus some capital items such a bag sealers, traders would be required to sell their bags at an agreed price which was not excessively above the price per kilogram of fertiliser in 50 kg bags 29. SCODP has developed several innovative marketing techniques, such as minipacks (fertiliser in g bags which can be sold to farmers to experiment with at very low cost), information posters, and promotion methods, which help quickly build up the local fertiliser business. Fertiliser for work 30 In 1995, an impressive free inputs programme was implemented to address a previous food crisis following a drought year. This programme reached some families and resulted in a maize crop sufficient to stabilise grain prices for a year - which is indicative of the 29 Small lots of fertiliser sold in rural markets are around 3-4 times more expensive per kilogram than the large bags. 30 This section is drawn from Sustainability, liberalisation, and survival: are they compatible in the Malawian smallholder sector?, a paper presented by Stephen Carr at the inaugural IDEAA meeting in March,

43 effectiveness of the approach. Through the programme, free seed and fertiliser were provided to the worst affected areas of the country (the programme was targeted in a geographical basis, not by separating out the poorest families in any one area). There are two main problems with such an effort: the allocation of inputs is inevitably subject to strong political forces and can engender serious jealousy both within and between communities, and, the large scale distribution of explicitly free inputs interferes with efforts to develop an efficient market economy. By linking fertiliser and seed distribution to work for the benefit of the local community, both these disadvantages can be minimised, if not entirely eliminated. There is a desperate need for local infrastructure which a large force of local people could help develop. However, it would require substantial planning and preparation in advance in order to mobilise hundreds of thousands of people for two to three months in the dry season. There would also be significant implications for the national budget which need to be kept in mind. Pilot projects have been tried out by NGOs but there has been little analytical work on the implications and requirements of a national programme. The actual details of what quantities of fertiliser and seed would be distributed through such a programme remain to be worked out. A reasonable target would be to provide participating households with sufficient fertiliser and seed for between 0.1 and 0.3 ha. It is imperative that private input suppliers are involved in the operation of such a programme, possibly through a voucher system whereby participants would be issued vouchers for seed and fertiliser in exchange for their labour. These vouchers would be redeemed through local private input suppliers. If linked to the two previous initiatives, the strategy would increase the throughput of private sector suppliers, help increase their reach and effectiveness, and build future demand for their inputs as farmers become confident that they can use fertiliser and improved seed profitably. Review Government and the donor community are agreed that the most feasible growth strategy for Malawi is one that centers on increasing the productivity of the smallholder, especially on maize production (HIID, 1994b). Government, donors, and the farmers themselves know how to increase maize production. Unless they can work together to make this happen and soon, no combination of other interventions will stop the downward economic spiral. There will be increasing disillusion with liberalisation, and growing desperation of the poor. The starter pack programme proposed here could put an extra bag of maize in every smallholder household. Combine that with the other three initiatives and the return could quickly be affordable maize prices to the urban poor and middle classes. These programs could help stem the tide of inflation and stagnation. They could help win support for liberalisation and stimulate the private sector, both directly through increased demand for inputs and indirectly by reducing wage pressures. As competing uses for this amount of donor and Government funds are reviewed, the benefits that would accrue from this programme should be the standard by which those other options are judged. Given the resources, such a programme can be done quickly and on a large enough scale to change the national mood of despair over the deteriorating food situation. 43

44 Figure 9 shows the results of a preliminary analysis of the potential effects of such an effort that combines the three soil fertility interventions of the starter pack, small input pack marketing, and fertiliser for work programmes. The methodology used was that reported in Kumwenda et al (1995), with the assumptions, based on that prior example, as laid out in Figure 9. Four national maize production trend scenarios result from the additive implementation of the three soil fertility interventions. 31. Scenario 1: this is a simple continuation of current smallholder productivity performance. The depth of Malawi s food crisis is indicated. Continuing reliance on low productivity food staples (all of which will yield, at best, +/-1000kgs/ha) results in an impossible food deficit situation. Scenario 2: this assumes implementation of the starter pack programme in the 1998/99 season with all smallholder households participating. The pack is sufficient for 0.1 ha. The starter pack programme has the potential to have an immediate major impact on national food supply, as well as contributing to household food security for the majority of poor households who cannot be reached by conventional credit and market systems. Scenario 3: in this scenario, the starter pack is supplemented by households buying matching amounts of fertiliser. Twenty-five percent of households purchase small packs sufficient for 0.1ha in the 1999/2000 season, 50 percent in 2000/2001, 75 percent in 2001/2002,and all households in 2002/2003. This brings the total fertilised maize per household by the end of 2003 to 0.2ha. Scenario 4: Here the effect of fertiliser for work is added to those of the previous two scenarios. The model assumptions include a programme reaching 50,000 households starting in 1999/2000, which enables these households to plant 0.3ha each. One hundred thousand households participate in the second year, 300,000 in the third, and 600,000 in the fourth. After that date, there is no increase in the programme. This last effort shows the capacity of the fertiliser for work programme to bring in the quantities of nutrients need to address the long term soil fertility crisis. Figure 9: Scenarios for maize productivity improvement Current trends Starter pack National maize surplus/deficit (t) Starter pack & small input pack marketing Starter pack, small input packs, & fertilizer for work Assumptions: Maize area: 1,400,000 ha. Initially 10 percent planted to improved seed with a yield of 2.5 t/ha. Yield of unimproved is 1.0 t/ha. Initial population is 10 million in 1.8 million households. Increases by 3.2 percent per annum. Per capita annual maize consumption of 200 kg. Starter pack: All households receive sufficient hybrid/fert to plant 0.1 ha. Small input pack marketing: 25% of households purchase inputs for 0.1 ha of improved maize in 1999/2000; 50% following year; 75% in 01/02; 31 and 100% of households purchase enough for 0.1 The numbers used in scenarios 2 to 4 are illustrative. They are intended to be ha suitably in all following conservative. years. Although the scenarios are projected through to 2010, the immediate purpose is to demonstrate Fertilizer that a for feasibly work: Improved implementable maize on 0.3 ha per hh involved. 50,000 hh in 98/99; 100,000 next programme can have a noticeable impact on the current food crisis situation without disrupting the developing market year; 300,000 in 00/01; and 600,000 in all later forces. Harvest Year 44

45 In all four scenarios, the dominating effect of population growth is evident. Although this paper is unable to deal with population issues, it is evident that immediate steps are needed to address this area. Through the thousands of trials and verification plots run by the MPTF, the pilot work already has been done for a national technology adoption programme. The technology is known; the need is urgent. The programme can be implemented quickly and in a way that will support and encourage a liberalised market and dynamic private sector. As USAID s Food Security Analysis (Brown, Thompson, and Reutlinger, 1996) concluded, liberalisation alone cannot empower Malawi s poor to buy inputs. The effort recommended here falls short of the cash income transfer recommended for the poorest in that report. But starter packs for all smallholders, small input packs, fertiliser for work, and savings mobilisation together can empower all to participate in a shared process of economic growth, improved household and national welfare. This strategy represents the Best Bet to restart the economic growth that has so far eluded the newly democratic Malawi. Liberalisation and safety nets alone will omit the only currently available engine of growth: the Maize Productivity Task Force s Best Bet technologies for all of Malawi. 45

46 SECTION III: POLICY - BUILDING SUSTAINABILITY INCREASING THE ATTRACTIVENESS OF N-FIXING GRAIN LEGUMES Improved maize seed and fertiliser is unquestionably needed to give the productivity boost necessary to lift Malawi from its present situation. However, as noted in Section I, there are disturbing signs of an unsustainable smallholder farming system as soils erode, the diversity of the farming system declines, and household diets become reliant on an inadequate supply of a single calorie rich crop. Maize/grain legume rotations (groundnuts and promiscuous soyabean) and, where livestock do not graze extensively after the maize harvest (as in the south of the country), maize/pigeonpea intercropping are the only other promising technologies that: look to be at a stage suitable for large scale adoption, and, are competitive with unfertilised local maize in terms of calories and cash, and, Address, in part, the genuine concerns regarding sustainability, soil erosion, and soil degradation that form an important component of the discussion on Malawi smallholder agriculture. This is not to discount the very many other, but local, options that should also be explored. Green manures, agroforestry, improved fallows, the expanded use of composts, improved household gardens all form a component of the matrix of better farming methods which should be encouraged in Malawi. But, as described in detail in Section I, the widespread applicability of these efforts is compromised by the need for further testing, the absence of key components (such as widespread livestock ownership or adequate water supplies), or simply by their unsuitability for the situation in which most poor smallholders in Malawi find themselves. MPTF verification/demonstration of maize/grain legume rotations 32 : The MPTF has shown that, with good leadership and organisation, it is possible swiftly to develop area-specific recommendations for smallholder fertility management technologies. The achievement in producing area-specific fertiliser recommendations efficiently and with the use of existing resources is considerable. This experience should be built upon and expanded. As reported in Section I, preliminary results after one season of growth indicate that Tephrosia, Crotalaria and Mucuna, when undersown early, can produce significant amounts of biomass (> 2000 kg ha -1 ) when intercropped with maize at low-fertility sites in Malawi (Gilbert, 1997). Sole crop green manures on sandy soils can give substantial improvements in subsequent maize yields. Action Group 1 of the MPTF has been studying, in a subset of their large scale verification effort, the effect of residual fertiliser on the growth of legumes. The results from this effort are encouraging although another year is required before the effect of the legume on subsequent maize yields will be available. These research and demonstration efforts involving green manures and other legumes should continue, but in the clear 32 Large parts of this section were written by Malcolm Blackie. This is not to claim credit, but to avoid any suggestion that members of the MPTF, who have also been major contributors to this document, were using this opportunity to push their own agenda. 46

47 recognition that the time is not yet ripe for large-scale development efforts or policy reforms regarding their use. The work of the MPTF should be given greater priority and a higher and more effective profile within the development efforts of the Ministry of Agriculture and Irrigation. Future verification/demonstration work should have a greater component of farmer participation in the design and implementation of the effort so as steadily to alter the historically top down approach of the Ministry. As new technologies become available, the approach adopted by Action Group 1 in extending its messages should become a more standard process. In the developed world, farmers were guided in the use of new and expensive technologies by carefully formulated farm management advice. Such counsel is not available to Malawi smallholders. While clearly the cost of having highly qualified farm management advisors readily available to all smallholders is prohibitive, so too are the costs (both social and economic) of accepting the continuing decline in smallholder farm productivity. It is practical to look, through joint ventures with donors and with private sector input suppliers, at making good quality farm management advice more readily available to those farmers already using modern inputs and to those whose efficiency can be readily improved so as to make the use of modern inputs profitable. The emphasis moves from making inputs "affordable" 33 to making them profitable. It also moves from the diagnostic (typified by efforts in Farming Systems Research and various forms of rapid rural appraisal) and the prescriptive (from top down extension efforts to the training and visit (T+V) system favoured by the World Bank) to a problem solving format in which the farmer is actively involved. It provides a framework for effective research/extension linkages and facilitates the evolution of a demand driven technology development process by smallholders. Malawian farmers need to know how to blend and mix various technologies and management factors to suit their particular circumstances. This requires decision tree type guidance which is more complex to develop and deliver than the conventional message based extension. Action Group1 have set a useful standard in the implementation of decision tree guided recommendations, and in the incorporation of basic farm management information (primarily prices of inputs and outputs) into advice given to smallholders. This promising start should be expanded and developed into a more general methodology for use within the Ministry of Agriculture and Irrigation, and by others concerned with smallholder agricultural development. Improved smallholder marketing services, especially for grain legumes: Required also is a policy environment which is conducive to the adoption of improved technologies. Farmers need reliable markets to buy inputs and other goods and to sell their produce, such as the promising grain legumes. These markets need to operate efficiently and consistently. Innovation is needed to create an appropriate market infrastructure and to bring into the market a greater proportion of those farmers currently excluded from it. As indicated in earlier parts of this section, this is more than simply liberalising markets. The low purchasing power of most Malawi smallholders, combined with the overall poverty of the country, means that more must and can be done to improve marketing services. 33 By which is typically meant affordable in a subsidised form (with all the inherent problems and contradictions). 47

48 The technical interventions which have dominated the discussion in earlier sections of this paper need to be supported by short term economic and institutional measures that have an immediate impact, as well as longer term policies which address the underlying institutional and economic constraints to marketed maize and other crop production and access 34. Malawi, in common with many smallholder dominated economies, is characterised by institutional failure, especially in market services to smallholders (see Rukuni, 1995, for a graphic description of smallholder institutional failure in Zimbabwe). Dorward and Kydd (1997) suggest one of the most promising ways to address this failure in terms of improving access to input and output markets is to look at the interlocking of finance, input supply and crop markets. Interlocking transactions have recently been examined in competitive and semicompetitive liberalised markets and in conjunction with farmer groups. A variety of (perhaps complementary) approaches to developing interlocking institutions might be considered: the establishment of local (district or ADD) commercial monopolies, the involvement of input suppliers (fertiliser importers or seed companies) and grain users (millers) in these commercial operations, support to small traders to enable them to trade actively in farm input and output markets, support to farmer organisations to enable them to participate more effectively in the market, and the development of systems for inventory credit to allow farmers to hold maize and other crop stocks for longer periods after harvest so as to be able to benefit from higher prices later in the season. The development of local market centers for fertiliser sales can, without a great leap of imagination, be expanded to incorporate better purchasing services for smallholder outputs. There needs to be active support to rural traders to enable them to service smallholders better. The Zimbabwe experience with cotton may be relevant here, with its emphasis on quality and quick payment. Smallholders, who are paid quickly and who receive a reliable and adequate premium for quality, respond fast to the incentives. Smallholders are now the biggest producers of cotton, without impairing quality, in Zimbabwe. It is important to note that the value attributed to the grain legumes for the contribution they can make in slowing the decline in soil fertility in Malawi stems from an agronomic assessment of their role in smallholder cropping systems. However, farmers principally grow grain legumes for the immediate economic benefits which they can derive from so doing, and not, at least in the first instance, the soil fertility benefits. Consequently, in order to derive the greatest soil fertility benefit for the nation, it is absolutely vital that the economic benefits which farmers can derive from growing grain legumes be maximized. Groundnuts are a crop which could readily be sold, at least regionally, for higher prices, if there was a reliable quality crop available. In the longer term, the overseas market for confectionery nuts might be regained. Soyabean and pigeonpea are probably less open to a quality premium. But processing could be done in country instead of exporting the raw 34 Andrew Dorward and Jonathan Kydd shared a draft research proposal Policies for fertilisers, food security and agricultural productivity in Malawi: a research agenda. Their contribution forms the core of this and several subsequent paragraphs. 48

49 material. There is a regional shortage of cooking oils and Malawi could be well placed to compete for this market. There appears already to be a significant trade in beans and pigeonpea. ICRISAT report some 30,000 tons of pigeonpea exports in 1997 (Jones, 1998) and there is a substantial roadside trade in beans, especially in border areas. Farmers need up to date, easily accessible information on prices and price trends. This information is currently available, but often late, in the major newspapers and some government publications. The adoption of new crops and technologies would be enhanced if regular market information was made available to smallholders, and they were assisted in making their cropping decisions based on this information. CONCLUDING THOUGHTS Particular attention needs to be paid to the agricultural production problems of the large numbers of the poorest farmers. This group is analogous to the long term unemployed who occupy the welfare rolls of the developed world (and who remain an intractable problem for those better endowed countries). It will include the old, the work shy, the handicapped, and many single mothers and widows. Their numbers may be substantial (as high as 40 percent of the smallholder population in Malawi) and it certainly is a group that is growing. These are typically farmers who do not reliably feed themselves and their families year on year. Thus their highest priority will be to secure their family's food supply. A food crop productivity strategy will be the starting point, but not the total answer. The poverty trap faced by the poorest families precludes their active participation, under present circumstances, in a market economy (except as distress sellers of labour and, sometimes, food). Both equity and reason indicate that they should not be ignored - which, in fact, they are by the conventional technology development and extension process. Cash crops can play an important role in priming the soil fertility input pump, by bringing extra income to the farmer. In Malawi, for example, burley tobacco may be the only viable crop that can generate sufficient income for smallholders from their tiny land holdings to significantly improve cash availability (Carr, 1994). But in many situations it is unrealistic to expect sophisticated and possibly risky cash cropping to provide the first step to a better life for this group of farmers. They are desperately short of cash, cannot afford the luxury of experimentation, and often lack the confidence and the ability to deal, unaided, with many aspects of modern, market-centered society. Moreover, cash cropping depends on reliable and honest markets for the inputs and outputs, and targeted production advice on a new commodity is essential for farmers. Credit is often proposed as a solution but credit is only of value to individuals who are periodically short of cash to purchase inputs. For those farmers who are chronically short of cash, other alternatives will need to be sought. In some countries, notably Zimbabwe, the informal financial sector, which commonly includes such groups as Savings Clubs, and Rotating Savings and Credit Associations, can be quite large. These clubs are often designed and operated by smallholders themselves to meet their special needs for financial services and are thus more responsive to peoples needs. In Malawi, where individual savings are minute, an innovative effort using a combination of start up grants and savings mobilization has been remarkably successful in reaching the poorest farmers. It has introduced them to improved maize technologies, quickly moving them to financial viability. Savings rather than credit, therefore, provides the mechanism for introducing cash poor smallholders to improved technologies. The conventional wisdom holds that most households in 49

50 the smallholder sector have a low marginal propensity to save, and therefore are not able to invest from savings. Experience has shown that the capacity to save is rather larger than typically assumed - which gives an important leverage point when dealing with rural poverty. Institutional change in research and development institutions The successful implementation of the technology development and transfer processes outlined in this paper will require commitment of substantial resources over extended periods. While the private sector and the NGO community will be essential partners to this effort, high quality public sector research and extension will remain a critical element to the process (see Blackie, 1994 for discussion on the role of the private sector). The poor funding base of many Malawi public sector institutions means that these institutions face high staff turnovers and low morale - due to both poor financial incentives and the lack of resources with which to undertake research. National agricultural service institutions, on their own, are ill equipped to take on the difficult task of maintaining institutional memory without additional support. The agricultural technology development system in Malawi is not well adapted to comprehending and responding to the long term problems of the country. Institutional memories are poor, inadequate budgets (and the poor use of the funds that are available) lead to short lived, disparate project-orientated research which rarely is able to "follow through" to the farmer. The donors, likewise, exhibit a frightening lack of consistency and long term institutional memory. Given that so much of what actually happens in a small, poor country like Malawi is the result of donor pressure and priorities, the absence of consensus and a long term strategy amongst the donor community is as much a problem as the much vaunted lack of commitment amongst nationals. It is imperative that the donor community engage with the public and private sectors of Malawi in a concerted effort to prevent an imminent food crisis in the country. We request immediate support for the following activities: best-bet technology starter packs for all smallholders. ensuring the availability of small (1 to 3 kg) bags of improved seed and fertilizer for purchase by smallholders. a structured fertilizer-for-work programme. the establishment of rural savings clubs. Maize Productivity Task Force efforts to demonstrate and multiply grain legumes. the development of marketing cooperatives, with a particular focus on building market demand for grain legumes. We believe that support of these activities, which are outlined in this document, will greatly improve the fertility of Malawi s arable land and the food security of Malawi s smallholder farmers who take their subsistence from that land. The management issues which are essential to a successful soil fertility implementation programme are necessarily very location specific and do not lend themselves to the kind of broad brush support that has proved so useful in crop breeding. The initial successes of the Green Revolution in Asia were led by improved germplasm, with broad adaptability, that could be taken up and incorporated into an improved productivity package by national scientists. In Malawi, 50

51 ignoring management factors is avoiding the core problem. The continuing under-investment in long term support for high quality crop management technology development has compromised the ability of the research community to answer the real problems facing the Malawi smallholder. Crop management research is typically reported in a highly distilled format in the form of farmer recommendations. Such recommendations suffer from two important flaws. Firstly, as has been well documented in the literature, they frequently fail to take adequately into account the diversity of farmer circumstances. Secondly, which is significant with respect to this discussion, because of their highly distilled nature, they are not a good repository for long term information. The data from which the recommendations are derived may be lost long before the recommendation itself becomes outdated. Progress in soil fertility management will require that information can be retrieved and shared efficiently amongst those concerned with the promotion and development of improved technologies. To get the needed impacts from soil fertility work will require a long term commitment to research and extension by interdisciplinary, inter-institutional and inter-country groups of staff that not only include technical scientists but also social scientists, extensionists, the private sector, and NGO staff. Opportunities need to be created for such staff to work closer together on common topics and trials in a climate of mutual review and criticism. Financial constraints mean no one country or institution can bring sufficient resources to bear on these widespread, complex issues. There is a clear need for more continuity in resources focused on soil fertility improvement, and efficiencies to be gained from regional cooperation in the use of those resources. Summary The dominant smallholder cropping system of Malawi is based on maize. Increasing human population density and declining land availability have made obsolete shifting cultivation. Maize is now grown in continuous cultivation rather than as part of a fallow which traditionally used to restore soil fertility and reduce the build up of pests and diseases. The soil resource base is now being degraded with a consequent reduction in yield. There have been notable successes in the development and adoption by smallholder farmers of high yielding maize germplasm with good resistance to a wide range of pests and diseases. There is little evidence of an overall increase in maize productivity. Mineral nutrient losses from soil generally exceed nutrient inputs. The question that needs to be addressed is how to build up and maintain soil fertility under the income and other constraints faced by smallholders. Inorganic fertilisers are expensive and their use, without carefully specified recommendations, is not very profitable. For farmers that can afford fertiliser, there is an urgent need to increase the profitability of this expensive input by better targeted recommendations and improved fertiliser management techniques that are appropriate for smallholders reliant on human labour. For many households the cash requirement needed to buy inorganic fertiliser far exceeds their total annual cash income. The lack of cash that dominates decision making at the household level needs to remain central in the development of technologies. These households are often forced to sell their labour in return for food or cash which in turn compromises their own 51

52 agricultural efforts. For this group inorganic fertiliser, combined, as soon as practical, with proper legume based crop rotations, is the best strategy for increased fertility. Legumes are not new to farming systems. Grain legumes, intercropping, rotations, green manures, improved fallowing, agroforestry, cereal residues and animal manures are all technologies that can enhance soil fertility and sustain the resource base. However, in broad terms, the larger the likely soil fertility benefit from a legume technology, the larger the initial investment required in labour and land, and the fewer short term food benefits it has. The potential of such technologies is rarely realised on farmers fields. Two essential components are missing from much soil fertility enhancement work: Basic research to understand better soil fertility processes on African farms so that technology can be effective, and, an integrated process of follow-through from basic research, through to adaptive research and extension work with farmers and other clients. Process-based research provides the foundation for extrapolating from site-specific trials, to agronomic recommendations for specific agro-ecozones and farmer groups. Past crop husbandry research is often neglected because the results are distilled into a few recommendations that ignore the important interactions in the system and fail to address the widespread diversity that exists. Greater attention needs to be given to integrating crop management research with other disciplines such as crop breeding and holistic farm management as there is no single route to improved maize productivity. Emphasis needs to move away from the rigid and prescriptive to a flexible problem solving format. This will facilitate the evolution of a demand driven technology development process by smallholders. Linkages are inadequate to integrate farmers, NGOs, extension services, policy makers and the private sector. Without concerted action the consequences are all too clear; a rapidly declining standard of living leading to a degraded natural resource base with a consequent loss of dignity for smallholder farmers. Carefully targeted and appropriate action including an emphasis on soil fertility can continue to improve living standards for rural people reliant on agriculture. 52

53 BIBLIOGRAPHY Action Group I - MPTF The 1996/97 weeding by fertiliser management demonstration. The 1997/98 Maize Fertiliser Recommendations Demonstration Newsletter. 3: 2-3. Andrews, D Intercropping in low-resource agriculture in Africa. OTA. technical Paper Series. University of Nebraska. Benson, T.D Annotated bibliography of the work on area-specific fertiliser recommendations for maize in Malawi. Maize Commodity Team Annual Report for the year 1995/96. Chitedze Agricultural Research Station, Malawi. mimeo. Benson, T.D Historical trends in Soil Organic Matter in Malawi. unpublished report. Benson, T.D., J.D.T. Kumwenda, and R.A. Gilbert The 1995/96 Maize Fertiliser Verification Trials-Malawi Hybrid maize yields by treatment. Ministry of Agriculture and Irrigation, Chitedze Research Station, Lilongwe, Malawi. mimeo. Blackie, M.J Maize productivity for the 21st century: the African challenge. Outlook on Agriculture. 23: Bolton, A. and A.J. Bennett ODM research project R2415: Maize Breeding and Agronomy, Malawi, 1971 to 1994 General report. mimeo. Brown, P The results of some short-term rotation experiments in Nyasaland. Rhodesian Agricultural Journal. 54: Brown, P Maize growing in Nyasaland (Malawi), II. Fertiliser requirements. Experimental Agriculture. 2: Buresh, R., P. Sanchez, and F. Calhoun (eds.) Replenishing soil fertility in Africa. SSSA special pub. no. 51. Soil Science Society of America, Madison, Wisconsin. Carr, S The unique challenge of Malawi s smallholder agricultural sector. mimeo. Carr, S personal communication Carr, S Sustainability, liberalisation, and survival are they compatible in the context of Malawi smallholder agriculture?. Paper presented at the inaugural IDEAA meeting, Lilongwe, Malawi. mimeo. Conroy, A The economics of smallholder maize production in Malawi with reference to the market for seed and fertiliser. PhD thesis. University of Manchester, UK. Conroy, A. and J.D.T. Kumwenda Risks associated with the adoption of hybrid seed and fertiliser by smallholder farmers in Malawi. In: D. Jewell, S. Waddington, J. Ransom, and K. Pixley (eds.) Maize research for stress environments. CIMMYT, Harare, Zimbabwe. Dalal, R Effects of intercropping maize with pigeonpea on grain yield and nutrient uptake. Experimental Agriculture. 10: Davy, E Crops for green manuring and soil protection. Nyasaland Protectorate Department Bulletin. 3:1-4. Department of Agriculture Annual Report of the Department of Agriculture for the year 1956/7. The Government Printer, Zomba, Nyasaland (Malawi). 53

54 Department of Agriculture Annual Report of the Department of Agriculture for the year 1961/62. The Government Printer, Zomba, Nyasaland (Malawi). Department of Agriculture Annual Report of the Department of Agriculture for the year 1966/67. The Government Printer, Zomba, Malawi. Diagne, A Impact of access to credit on income and food security in Malawi. Paper presented at the IAAE XXIII meeting, August 10-16, Sacramento, California. Dorward, A. and J. Kydd The revival of smallholder cash crops in Africa: public and public roles in the provision of finance. Paper presented at the ESRC conference on the role of the public sector. Reading, UK. Gilbert, R Undersowing green manures for soil fertility enhancement in maize-based cropping systems of Malawi. In publication. Giller, K., G. Cadish, C. Ehaliotis, E. Adams, W. Sakala, and P. Mafongoya Building soil capital in Africa. In: R. Buresh, P. Sanchez, and F. Calhoun (eds.). Replenishing soil fertility in Africa. SSSA special pub. no. 51. Soil Science Society of America, Madison, Wisconsin. HIID. 1994a. Fertiliser policy study: Market structure, prices and fertiliser use by smallholder farmers. Harvard Institute for International Development and the Office of the President and Cabinet, Government of Malawi, Lilongwe, Malawi. mimeo HIID. 1994b. Trickle-Up Growth: A development strategy for poverty reduction in Malawi. Harvard Institute for International Development. mimeo ICRISAT - Southern and Eastern Africa Region Highlights ICRISAT, Bulawayo, Zimbabwe. Javaheri, F Naturally nodulating (promiscuous) soybean varieties for smallholder maize farmers: the Zambian experience. In: S. Mpepereki, K. Giller, and F. Makonese (eds.). Soybean in Smallholder Cropping Systems of Zimbabwe: Potential Contributions from Biological Nitrogen Fixation. Proceedings of a Preparatory Workshop, 8-9 February University of Zimbabwe with SFNET. Harare, Zimbabwe. pp Jones, R.B Personal communication. Kabambe, V.H. and J.D.T. Kumwenda Weed management and nitrogen rate effects on maize yield in Malawi. In: D. Jewell, S. Waddington, J. Ransom, and K. Pixley (eds.) Maize research for stress environments. CIMMYT, Harare, Zimbabwe. Karlen, D. and A. Sharpley Management strategies for sustainable soil fertility. In: Hatfield and Karlen (eds.) Sustainable Agricultural Systems. Boca Raton, FL: Lewis. Kumwenda, J.D.T Fertiliser time of application (on-farm). Maize agronomy annual report for 1993/4. Chitedze Agricultural Research Station, Lilongwe, Malawi. mimeo. Kumwenda, J.D.T., V.H. Kabambe, and W.D. Sakala Maize-soyabean and maizebean intercropping experiments. Maize agronomy annual report for 1992/3. Chitedze Agricultural Research Station, Lilongwe, Malawi. mimeo. Kumwenda, J.D.T., S.R. Waddington, S.S. Snapp, R.B. Jones, and M.J. Blackie Soil fertility management in southern Africa. In: D. Byerlee and C. Eicher (eds.). Africa's Emerging Maize Revolution. Lynne Rienner, London. 54

55 Lungu, N Cereals research in Malawi. In: Proceedings of the 5th Eastern African Cereals Research Conference. Lilongwe, Malawi. mimeo. MacColl, D Mineral deficiency symptoms and responses to fertilisers shown by maize on soils previously cropped by smallholder farmers. Bunda College Bulletin. 12: MacColl D Studies on maize at Bunda, Malawi. II. Yield in short rotations with legumes. Experimental Agriculture 25: Malawi Government Study on agricultural inputs for the Japanese Grant-Aid Programme. Ministry of Agriculture and Livestock Production. mimeo. Manson, S., D. Leighner, and J. Vorst Cassava-cowpea and cassava-peanut intercropping. III. Nutrient concentration and removal. Agron. Journal. 78: Matabwa, C.J., and J. Wendt Soil fertility management: present knowledge and prospects. In: D. Munthali, J.D.T. Kumwenda, and F. Kisyombe (eds.) Proceedings of the conference on agricultural research for development. Department of Agricultural Research and Chancellor College, Zomba, Malawi. mimeo. Mpepereki, S personal communication. Ngwira, L., and W.G. Nhlane Maize research in Malawi. In: J. Maida (ed.). Research highlights and constraints to crop production, Proceedings of the Research and Extension Workshop. Mangochi, Malawi. pp Rattray, A. and B. Ellis Maize and green manuring in southern Rhodesia. Rhodesia Agricultural Journal 49: Rukuni, M Report of the commission of enquiry into land tenure systems in Zimbabwe. Government Printer and Stationer, Harare, Zimbabwe. Saka A. and J. Chisenga Nitrogen and water management under rainfed and irrigated conditions. In: Nitrogen and Phosphorous Management of Field Crops in Malawi. The Hebrew University of Jerusalem / Malawi Government. Sakala W.D Crop management interventions in traditional maize pigeonpea intercropping systems in Malawi. MSc thesis. Bunda College of Agriculture, University of Malawi, Lilongwe, Malawi. Sakala W.D PhD thesis. In preparation. Sillanpaa M Micronutrients and the nutrient status of soils: A global study. FAO Soils Bulletin 48. Rome: FAO. Whiteside M. and S. Carr Services and policies needed to support sustainable smallholder agriculture in Malawi. Report to the Overseas Development Administration, UK. mimeo World Bank Malawi: agricultural sector memorandum. Southern Africa Department, Agriculture and Environment Division, World Bank, Washington. World Bank Malawi human resources and poverty. Southern Africa Department, Human Resources Division, World Bank, Washington. 55