Chisanga. K, Kafwamfwa. N, Hamazakaza. P, Mwila. M, Sinyangwe. J and Lungu. O

Transcription

1 Developing Conservation Agriculture in Maize Legume Systems for Smallholder farmers in Zambia, Malawi and Mozambique A Beneficiary Perspective in Zambia Chisanga. K, Kafwamfwa. N, Hamazakaza. P, Mwila. M, Sinyangwe. J and Lungu. O Presentation Made at the Joint Pan-African Grain Legume and World Conference Livingstone, Zambia 29 th February 2016

2 Presentation Outline Introduction Objectives Methodology Data Collection Results and Discussion Preliminary Conclusions

3 Introduction Poor soil fertility and land degradation are major limitations to food security in sub-saharan Africa Rural poverty and the environment in developing countries have been linked as a downward spiral by many, with population growth, economic marginalization, and more recently climatic variability and change leading to environmental degradation The rural poor, who depend on agriculture for their livelihood and food security are particularly vulnerable to such a downward spiral as they have limited access to inputs to improve soil productivity

4 Introduction Conti... Although Conservation Agriculture was introduced to some of the Southern African countries a couple of decades ago, its adoption in smallholder agriculture in the region as a whole package has been low Mozambique, Malawi and Zambia are witnessing severe degradation to its farmlands Inclusion of a legume in crop rotation has been reported a major challenge in Malawi (Ngwira et al., 2014), in Mozambique insufficient ground cover, inappropriate weed control and drought have been major challenge (Thierfelder, 2012) while spreading of crop residues as soil surface mulch is a challenge in Zambia (Umar et al., 2011).

5 Introduction Conti... To change this situation, improved cereals and legume cropping systems design under better resource allocation and management conditions in Conservation Agriculture systems was tested across environments of Malawi, Mozambique and Zambia This was done through on-station experiments and participatory on-farm research aiming to identify best bet resource allocation strategies that can make cropping systems more attractive to poor resource farmers involved in Conservation Agriculture

6 Objectives To develop and validate best CA practices that will reduce risk in smallholder farming systems To build capacity of farmers, extension workers and other partners in implementing CA oriented technologies

7 Methodology Survey: The research started with data collection through a baseline survey in target provinces A standard questionnaire was prepared by the research team to be used in all the three countries The survey form was designed to cover 300 farmers within each country

8 Methodology Conti... Soil sampling: Soil samples were collected at all farmers experimental sites and analysed for physical, chemical and biological parameters Physical, chemical and biological analysis (sand, clay, ph, SOM, P and exchangeable bases) - To be done every year for the entire period of the research work

9 Methodology Conti... Field Experiments: 18 field experiments for maize intercropped or in rotation with, soybean, cowpea and pigeon pea and groundnuts was established across three provinces; southern, copperbelt and eastern Zambia. 6 sites were installed in each region Sites were characterized with a 0-20cm depth composite sample per block and analysed for sand, clay, ph, SOM, P and exchangeable bases Main reduced tillage options being tried: ripping

10 Methodology Conti... Main soil cover options: Maize stover Rotations/Intercropping; intercropping/rotating maize with adapted legumes for each proposed project location/site

11 Plot Monze Site Mpongwe Site Chipata Site T1 T2 T3 Pigeon pea + Maize +Recommended fertilizer (intercropped) Pigeon pea + Maize + D Compound fertilizer only (intercropped); Pigeon pea + Maize + Half rate recommended fertilizer (intercropped); T4 Cowpea + Maize + Recommended fertilizer (intercropped); T5 T6 Table 1: Treatment Combination across Trial Sites Cowpea + Maize + D Compound fertilizer only (intercropped); Cowpea + Maize + Half rate recommended fertilizer (intercropped); Pigeon pea + Maize +Recommended fertilizer (intercropped) Pigeon pea + Maize + D Compound fertilizer only (intercropped); Pigeon pea + Maize + Half rate recommended fertilizer (intercropped); Soybeans + Maize + Recommended fertilizer (intercropped); Soybeans + Maize + D Compound fertilizer only (intercropped); Soybeans + Maize + Half rate recommended fertilizer (intercropped); Pigeon pea + Maize +Recommended fertilizer (intercropped) Pigeon pea + Maize + D Compound fertilizer only (intercropped); Pigeon pea + Maize + Half rate recommended fertilizer (intercropped); Groundnuts + Maize + Recommended fertilizer (intercropped); Groundnuts + Maize + D Compound fertilizer only (intercropped); Groundnuts + Maize + Half rate recommended fertilizer (intercropped); T7 Maize/cowpea (rotation) Maize/Soybeans (rotation) Maize/Groundnuts (rotation) T8 Farmer practice Farmer practice Farmer practice Note: In Zambia fertilizer recommendation is 200kg/ha basal and 200kg/ha Top dressing

12 Data Collection and Analysis Maize Grain Yield Maize grain obtained from both on-farm and on-station trials in line with the research objectives/research questions Grain from net plots was weighed using a digital scale and moisture content measured immediately to correct the yield to 12.5% moisture

13 Data Collection and Analysis Conti... Economic analysis: Revenue per hectare from maize grown under conservation agriculture and conventional tillage (CT) systems was based on yield from on-farm trials conducted in the proposed communities The net return per hectare was estimated for each maize yield observation (kg ha -1 ) produced by each treatment, based on the domestic maize price series and the variable costs of each treatment

14 Results and Discussion

15 Table 2: Baseline Soil Analysis Results in the Trial Sites Site Number Chipata Site ph P-ppm % Org. C Ca-ppm Mg-ppm N-ppm K-ppm CEC % N Depth (cm) cm cm cm cm < cm cm Mpongwe Site cm cm cm cm cm cm Monze Site cm cm cm cm cm Guide to soil test data interpretations N (%) < 0.1 very low P (%) < 10 very low K (%) < 15 very low Soil ph < 4.5 strongly acid

16 Rainfall Performance during the Trial Period across the Research sites Cummulative Rainfall From 1st July, 2014 to 31st December, 2015 # Kalabo Mongu # Senanga # Shang'ombo Mwinilunga Kaoma # Sesheke # # Kabwe Choma Gwembe # Kazungula Kalomo Chiengi Kaputa Mpulungu Nchelenge Mbala Nakonde # Mporokoso Kawambwa Mungwi # # # Isoka Mwense Luwingu Kasama # Mansa # Solwezi Chingola Lufwanyama Kitwe Ndola Chavuma Kabompo # # Masaiti Zambezi # Mpongwe Mufumbwe Kasempa Kapiri Mposhi Lukulu Samfya Milenge # Chilubi Serenje Mumbwa Chibombo Lusaka # Chongwe Itezhi-tezhi Kafue Luangwa Namwala Mazabuka Monze Siavonga Livingstone Sinazongwe # # Mpika Chinsali # Mambwe # Chipata Chama Lundazi Mkushi Katete # Chadiza Nyimba Petauke Rainfall in mm >400 Fig 1: Monze and Mpongwe sites received cumulative rainfall ranging between mm by 31 st December 2014 while Chipata site received rainfall in the range of 0-200mm Fig 2: By 31 st January 2015 Monze had accumulated rainfall in the range of 0-400mm while Mpongwe and Chipata the rainfall received during the same period ranged from mm

17 Rainfall Performance during the Trial Period across the Research sites Conti Rainfall Departure Map From 1st July, 2014 to 10th March, 2015 Kalabo Mongu Senanga Shang'ombo Mwinilunga Kaoma Sesheke Choma Gwembe Kazungula Kalomo Sinazongwe Chiengi Kaputa Mpulungu Nchelenge Mbala Nakonde Kawambwa Mporokoso Mungwi Isoka Mwense Luwingu Kasama Mansa Solwezi Chililabombwe Chingola Lufwanyama Kitwe Ndola Chavuma Kabompo Masaiti Zambezi Mpongwe Mufumbwe Kasempa Kapiri Mposhi Lukulu Kabwe Chilubi Samfya Milenge Mumbwa Chibombo Lusaka Chongwe Itezhi-tezhi Kafue Luangwa Namwala Mazabuka Monze Siavonga Livingstone Serenje Mpika Chinsali Chama Lundazi Mambwe Chipata Mkushi Katete Chadiza Nyimba Petauke Below Normal Normal Cummulative Rainfall From 1st July, 2014 to 10th March, 2015 Kalabo Mongu Senanga Shang'ombo Mwinilunga Kaoma Sesheke Choma Gwembe Kazungula Kalomo Sinazongwe Chiengi Kaputa Mpulungu Nchelenge Mbala Nakonde Mporokoso Kawambwa Mungwi Isoka Mwense Luwingu Kasama Mansa Solwezi Chililabombwe Chingola Lufwanyama Kitwe Ndola Chavuma Kabompo Masaiti Zambezi Mpongwe Mufumbwe Kasempa Kapiri Mposhi Lukulu Kabwe Chilubi Samfya Milenge Mumbwa Chibombo Lusaka Chongwe Itezhi-tezhi Kafue Luangwa Namwala Mazabuka Monze Siavonga Livingstone Serenje Mpika Chinsali Chama Lundazi Mambwe Chipata Mkushi Katete Chadiza Nyimba Petauke Rainfall in mm >850 Fig 3: First dekad of March 2015, Monze site received below normal rainfall Fig 4: Mpongwe and Chipata during the same period received normal rainfall. The cumulative rainfall in the period ranged from mm

18 Rainfall Performance during the Trial Period across the Research sites Conti Fig 5: By 31 st January 2015 Monze site had satisfactory moisture levels (50-90%) to support crop growth while Mpongwe and Chipata site recorded sufficient moisture levels (60-100%) Fig 6: By 10 th March 2015, soil water index for Monze and Chipata sites show that the trials were stressed with water levels being 10-50% in comparison to Mpongwe which had satisfactory moisture levels of 50-90%

19 TABLE 3: MONZE SITE YIELD RESULTS TREATMENTS MAIZE YIELD KG/HA STOVER YIELD CORE YIELD KG/HA KG/HA (T1) PP + M + FRF (T2) PP + M + D Comp (T3) PP + M + HRF (T4) CP + M + FRF (T5) CP + M + D Comp (T6) CP + M + HRF (T7) M/CP ROT (T8) FP MEAN C.V LSD (0.05) Note: PP Pigeon pea; FRF Full rate fertilizer; M Maize; D Comp D Compound; HRF Half rate fertilizer; CP Cowpea; GN Groundnut; ROT Rotation, SB Soybeans

20 Fig 7: GRAPHICAL PRESENTATION OF MAIZE, STOVER AND CORE YIELD KG/HA IN MONZE Yield kg/ha (T1) PP + M + FRF (T2) PP + M + D Comp (T3) PP + M + HRF (T4) CP + M + FRF (T5) CP + M + D Comp (T6) CP + M + HRF (T7) M/CP ROT Maize Stover Core (T8) FP

21 TABLE 4: CHIPATA SITE YIELD RESULTS TREATMENTS MAIZE YIELD KG/HA STOVER YIELD CORE YIELD KG/HA KG/HA (T1) PP + M + FRF (T2) PP + M + D Comp (T3) PP + M + HRF (T4) GN + M + FRF (T5) GN + M + D Comp (T6) GN + M + HRF (T7) M/GN ROT (T8) FP MEAN C.V LSD (0.05) Note: PP Pigeon pea; FRF Full rate fertilizer; M Maize; D Comp D Compound; HRF Half rate fertilizer; CP Cowpea; GN Groundnut; ROT Rotation, SB Soybeans

22 FIG 8: GRAPHICAL PRESENTATION OF MAIZE, STOVER AND CORE YIELD KG/HA IN CHIPATA Yield Kg/ha (T1) PP + M + FRF (T2) PP + M + D Comp (T3) PP + M + HRF (T4) GN + M + FRF (T5) GN + M + D Comp (T6) GN + M + HRF (T7) M/GN ROT Maize Stover Core (T8) FP

23 TABLE 5: MPONGWE SITE YIELD RESULTS TREATMENTS MAIZE YIELD KG/HA STOVER YIELD KG/HA CORE YIELD KG/HA (T1) PP + M + FRF (T2) PP + M + D Comp (T3) PP + M + HRF (T4) SB + M + FRF (T5) SB + M + D Comp (T6) SB + M + HRF (T7) M/SB ROT (T8) FP MEAN C.V LSD (0.05) Note: PP Pigeon pea; FRF Full rate fertilizer; M Maize; D Comp D Compound; HRF Half rate fertilizer; CP Cowpea; GN Groundnut; ROT Rotation, SB Soybeans

24 4500 FIG 9: GRAPHICAL PRESENTATION OF MAIZE, STOVER AND CORE YIELD KG/HA IN MPONGWE Yield Kg/ha (T1) PP + M + FRF (T2) PP + M + D Comp (T3) PP + M + HRF (T4) SB + M + FRF (T5) SB + M + D Comp (T6) SB + M + HRF (T7) M/SB ROT Maize Stover Core (T8) FP

25 Table 6: Gross Margins Analysis for Monze Site Treatment Maize Grain Yield (kgha-1) Gross Benefits (USD) Fertilizer Cost (USD) Seed Cost (USD) Labour Cost (USD) Maize Net Income Maize grain yield response kg/kg fertilizer applied (T1) Pigeon pea + Maize +Recommended fertilizer (intercropped) (T2) Pigeon pea + Maize + D Compound fertilizer only (intercropped) (T3) Pigeon pea + Maize + Half rate recommended fertilizer (intercropped) (T4) Cowpea + Maize + Recommended fertilizer (intercropped) (T5) Cowpea + Maize + D Compound fertilizer only (intercropped) (T6) Cowpea + Maize + Half rate recommended fertilizer (intercropped) (T7) Maize/cowpea (rotation) (T8) practice Farmer

26 Treatment (T1) Pigeon pea + Maize +Recommended fertilizer (intercropped) (T2) Pigeon pea + Maize + D Compound fertilizer only (intercropped) (T3) Pigeon pea + Maize + Half rate recommended fertilizer (intercropped) (T4) Soybeans + Maize + Recommended fertilizer (intercropped) (T5) Soybeans + Maize + D Compound fertilizer only (intercropped) (T6) Soybeans + Maize + Half rate recommended fertilizer (intercropped) (T7) Maize/Soybeans (rotation) Table: 7 Gross Margins Analysis for Mpongwe Site Maize Grain Yield (kgha-1) Gross Benefits (USD) Fertilizer Cost (USD) Seed Cost (USD) Labour Cost (USD) Maize Net Income Maize grain yield response kg/kg fertilizer applied (T8) practice Farmer

27 Treatment Table: 8 Gross Margins Analysis for Chipata Site Maize Grain Yield (kgha-1) Gross Benefits (USD) Fertilizer Cost (USD) Seed Cost (USD) Labour Cost (USD) Maize Net Income Maize grain yield response kg/kg fertilizer applied (T1) Pigeon pea + Maize +Recommended fertilizer (intercropped) (T2) Pigeon pea + Maize + D Compound fertilizer only (intercropped) (T3) Pigeon pea + Maize + Half rate recommended fertilizer (intercropped) (T4) Groundnuts + Maize + Recommended fertilizer (intercropped) (T5) Groundnuts + Maize + D Compound fertilizer only (intercropped) (T6) Groundnuts + Maize + Half rate recommended fertilizer (intercropped) (T7) Maize/Groundnuts (rotation) (T8) practice Farmer

28 TABLE 9:COWPEA, SOYBEANS AND GROUNDNUTS YIELDS ACROSS RESEARCH SITES Treatments Cowpea yield kg/ha (Monze) Soybeans yield kg/ha (Mpongwe) Groundnut yield kg/ha (Chipata) (T4) CP + M + FRF (T5) CP + M + D Comp (T6) CP + M + HRF (T7) M/CP ROT (T4) SB + M + FRF 4512 (T5) SB + M + D 4638 Comp (T6) SB + M + HRF 4365 (T7) M/SB ROT 4665 (T4) GN + M + FRF 229 (T5) GN + M + D 285 Comp (T6) GN + M + HRF 355 (T7) M/GN ROT 733 MEAN C.V LSD (0.05)

29 Gender and Youth/s Involvement In this research work, mainstreaming of gender/addressing women/men/youth specific issues is being done by ensuring that 30% of the participants are women as enshrined in the Zambia Gender Policy Document. E.g during the baseline survey this aspect was applied during sampling for household interviews In-terms of Gender concerns in the development and dissemination of the technology, this is being addressed by ensuring that some host farmers of the demonstrations or validation trials are lead by women In addition there is also promotion of the development of technologies aimed at reducing the workload of women and girls i.e promotion of appropriate technologies for on farm demonstrations This is hoped to spur interest from other women groups and get involved

30 Lessons Learnt Technical Learnings based on the experiences of beneficiaries which could be critical to policy development point to the fact that: Intercropping is beneficial especially where land pressure is an issue, reduces weed pressure, one can harvest two crops from the same piece of land Farmers also noted that they were not practicing intercropping as at one time they were only encouraged to grow pure stands of Maize by extension department implying that institutional collaboration is key amongst organizations promoting CA practices to ensure same message is received by the beneficiaries

31 Lessons Learnt Conti Intercropping can help replenish nutrients in the soil especially if legumes are rotated regularly Farmers want to understand the management of pigeon pea tree legume as they perceive that the shrub would interfere with the maize crop development Aspects of food security at small holder level is associated with availability of maize in Zambia, the staple food, thus introducing any technology which excludes maize may not be feasible

32 Conclusions: Key messages for research, development and Policy Preliminary results in this trial have revealed that intercropping of maize and cowpea with application of basal 200kg/ha produced better maize yields (4.5t/ha) than with groundnuts and soybeans (1.6t/ha and 3.2t/ha respectively) We preliminary note that for CA oriented technologies to be taken up by farmers in Zambia there is need to strengthen the research, extension and farmer linkages through information sharing and involvement of partners throughout the research implementation

33 Conclusions: Key messages for research, development and Policy Conti In addition involvement of allied departments like Meteorology in weather information would be key for farmers to make informed decision as to when they would plant their crops based on accessed weather information Possibly the weather information could also be translated in local language for easy understanding and assimilation of the prevailing weather pattern

34 RESEARCH ACTIVITIES IN PICTURES

35 Research Staff discussing sites to host Trials

36 Monitoring of Trials in Monze Site Jan 2015

37 Discussing Trial Performance with host farmers during Monitoring Visits Monze Site Jan 2015

38 Stakeholder engagement in Monitoring Mpongwe Site February 2015

39 Collecting Harvest Data Chipata Site May 2015

40 Research staff and farmers organizing the Groundnuts harvest material Chipata Site May 2015

41 Farmers participate in harvesting May 2015

42 Harvested Samples of Maize and Legumes May 2015

43 THANK YOU!