Maize stover retained on farmers field (GERBA LETA)

Crop Residue Management (Ethiopia)

Hafte Midhani

Description

Crop residue management involves leaving stover and other trash from cereal crops (including tef, wheat and maize), as well as haulms of legumes, in the field. Crop residues keep the soil covered, retain organic matter and moisture in the soil, and help to ensure better production.

Crop residue management involves leaving stover and other trash from cereal crops (including tef, wheat and maize), as well as haulms of legumes, in the field. Crop residue (CR) management is integral to soil health: it yields multiple benefits such as mitigating the risks of soil loss to water erosion, reducing the decomposition of organic matter and storing extra carbon. It also increases the fertility status of degraded soils and helps to improve soil structure and moisture properties. Degraded soils are at risk of tillage, water, and wind erosion. Soils degrade quickly when not covered and when no effort is made to increase organic matter levels or improve soil structure. Crop residue management plays an important role in arresting soil degradation and improving soil properties, and eventually increasing crop production. Therefore, it has positive economic and ecological functions. The aim of applying this technology is to improve soil fertility, reduce soil acidity and demands for synthetic fertilizers. Overall, crop residue management allows land users to sustainably use their land over a long period without losing its productive potential. In this part of Ethiopia, land users used to leave maize and millet stover in the fields but this is challenged by the prevalence of free (open access) grazing. Thus, controlling grazing is one prerequisite to ensuring adoption of the technology. Monocropping also reduces biomass production. Land users appreciate the extra grain yields from crop residue-rich farms. CR management also retains moisture and enables early tillage operations. In summary, the application of appropriate CR management provides multiple benefits. It mitigates the risks of erosion, reduces excessive mining of CR, reduces the rate of decomposition of organic matter, increases the fertility status of degraded soils, and increases crop production and sustainable productivity.

Location

Location: Oromia, Ethiopia

No. of Technology sites analysed: 10-100 sites

Geo-reference of selected sites
  • 36.33893, 8.50204

Spread of the Technology: evenly spread over an area (approx. 0.1-1 km2)

In a permanently protected area?: Nee

Date of implementation: 2015; less than 10 years ago (recently)

Type of introduction
Tef straw harvested 30 cm high to retain crop residue on the farm. (GERBA LETA)

Classification of the Technology

Main purpose
  • improve production
  • reduce, prevent, restore land degradation
  • conserve ecosystem
  • protect a watershed/ downstream areas – in combination with other Technologies
  • preserve/ improve biodiversity
  • reduce risk of disasters
  • adapt to climate change/ extremes and its impacts
  • mitigate climate change and its impacts
  • create beneficial economic impact
  • create beneficial social impact
Land use
Land use mixed within the same land unit: Nee

  • Cropland
    • Annual cropping: cereals - wheat (spring), cereals - maize, cereals - millet, cereals - Tef
    Number of growing seasons per year: 1
    Is intercropping practiced? Nee
    Is crop rotation practiced? Ja
Water supply
  • rainfed
  • mixed rainfed-irrigated
  • full irrigation

Purpose related to land degradation
  • prevent land degradation
  • reduce land degradation
  • restore/ rehabilitate severely degraded land
  • adapt to land degradation
  • not applicable
Degradation addressed
  • soil erosion by water - Wt: loss of topsoil/ surface erosion
  • chemical soil deterioration - Cn: fertility decline and reduced organic matter content (not caused by erosion), Ca: acidification
  • physical soil deterioration - Pc: compaction, Ps: subsidence of organic soils, settling of soil
  • biological degradation - Bc: reduction of vegetation cover, Bq: quantity/ biomass decline, Bs: quality and species composition/ diversity decline, Bl: loss of soil life
SLM group
  • integrated crop-livestock management
  • improved ground/ vegetation cover
  • integrated soil fertility management
SLM measures
  • agronomic measures - A2: Organic matter/ soil fertility, A3: Soil surface treatment (A 3.3: Full tillage (< 30% soil cover)), A6: Residue management (A 6.4: retained), A7: Others
  • management measures - M2: Change of management/ intensity level

Technical drawing

Technical specifications

Establishment and maintenance: activities, inputs and costs

Calculation of inputs and costs
  • Costs are calculated: per Technology area (size and area unit: 4 sanga; conversion factor to one hectare: 1 ha = 1ha)
  • Currency used for cost calculation: ETB
  • Exchange rate (to USD): 1 USD = 53.12 ETB
  • Average wage cost of hired labour per day: n.a
Most important factors affecting the costs
Change of the cost is related to the inflation and economic instability.
Establishment activities
  1. Mowing the crop by leaving some proportion on the ground. (Timing/ frequency: Harvesting)
  2. Keep of livestock grazing (Timing/ frequency: Dry season)
  3. Plow over the crop residue early on. (Timing/ frequency: Late in the dry season.)
Maintenance activities
  1. Keep the farm with crop residue intact from livestock (Timing/ frequency: During off-season.)
Total maintenance costs (estimation)
2500.0

Natural environment

Average annual rainfall
  • < 250 mm
  • 251-500 mm
  • 501-750 mm
  • 751-1,000 mm
  • 1,001-1,500 mm
  • 1,501-2,000 mm
  • 2,001-3,000 mm
  • 3,001-4,000 mm
  • > 4,000 mm
Agro-climatic zone
  • humid
  • sub-humid
  • semi-arid
  • arid
Specifications on climate
Average annual rainfall in mm: 1947.0
The area received summer maximum rainfall.
Name of the meteorological station: Bedele
The uniform distribution of rainfall is helpful to incorporate the residue in time.
Slope
  • flat (0-2%)
  • gentle (3-5%)
  • moderate (6-10%)
  • rolling (11-15%)
  • hilly (16-30%)
  • steep (31-60%)
  • very steep (>60%)
Landforms
  • plateau/plains
  • ridges
  • mountain slopes
  • hill slopes
  • footslopes
  • valley floors
Altitude
  • 0-100 m a.s.l.
  • 101-500 m a.s.l.
  • 501-1,000 m a.s.l.
  • 1,001-1,500 m a.s.l.
  • 1,501-2,000 m a.s.l.
  • 2,001-2,500 m a.s.l.
  • 2,501-3,000 m a.s.l.
  • 3,001-4,000 m a.s.l.
  • > 4,000 m a.s.l.
Technology is applied in
  • convex situations
  • concave situations
  • not relevant
Soil depth
  • very shallow (0-20 cm)
  • shallow (21-50 cm)
  • moderately deep (51-80 cm)
  • deep (81-120 cm)
  • very deep (> 120 cm)
Soil texture (topsoil)
  • coarse/ light (sandy)
  • medium (loamy, silty)
  • fine/ heavy (clay)
Soil texture (> 20 cm below surface)
  • coarse/ light (sandy)
  • medium (loamy, silty)
  • fine/ heavy (clay)
Topsoil organic matter content
  • high (>3%)
  • medium (1-3%)
  • low (<1%)
Groundwater table
  • on surface
  • < 5 m
  • 5-50 m
  • > 50 m
Availability of surface water
  • excess
  • good
  • medium
  • poor/ none
Water quality (untreated)
  • good drinking water
  • poor drinking water (treatment required)
  • for agricultural use only (irrigation)
  • unusable
Water quality refers to: surface water
Is salinity a problem?
  • Ja
  • Nee

Occurrence of flooding
  • Ja
  • Nee
Species diversity
  • high
  • medium
  • low
Habitat diversity
  • high
  • medium
  • low

Characteristics of land users applying the Technology

Market orientation
  • subsistence (self-supply)
  • mixed (subsistence/ commercial)
  • commercial/ market
Off-farm income
  • less than 10% of all income
  • 10-50% of all income
  • > 50% of all income
Relative level of wealth
  • very poor
  • poor
  • average
  • rich
  • very rich
Level of mechanization
  • manual work
  • animal traction
  • mechanized/ motorized
Sedentary or nomadic
  • Sedentary
  • Semi-nomadic
  • Nomadic
Individuals or groups
  • individual/ household
  • groups/ community
  • cooperative
  • employee (company, government)
Gender
  • women
  • men
Age
  • children
  • youth
  • middle-aged
  • elderly
Area used per household
  • < 0.5 ha
  • 0.5-1 ha
  • 1-2 ha
  • 2-5 ha
  • 5-15 ha
  • 15-50 ha
  • 50-100 ha
  • 100-500 ha
  • 500-1,000 ha
  • 1,000-10,000 ha
  • > 10,000 ha
Scale
  • small-scale
  • medium-scale
  • large-scale
Land ownership
  • state
  • company
  • communal/ village
  • group
  • individual, not titled
  • individual, titled
Land use rights
  • open access (unorganized)
  • communal (organized)
  • leased
  • individual
Water use rights
  • open access (unorganized)
  • communal (organized)
  • leased
  • individual
Access to services and infrastructure
health

poor
x
good
education

poor
x
good
technical assistance

poor
x
good
employment (e.g. off-farm)

poor
x
good
markets

poor
x
good
energy

poor
x
good
roads and transport

poor
x
good
drinking water and sanitation

poor
x
good
financial services

poor
x
good
Comments

Land users are benefited from various financial institutions to access credit and other services. Various credit institutions and revolving funds were mentioned my the land users.

Impacts

Socio-economic impacts
Crop production
decreased
x
increased

crop quality
decreased
x
increased

fodder production
decreased
x
increased


The purpose is to use less of crop residue for soil amendment than as fodder.

fodder quality
decreased
x
increased


The purpose is to reduces

animal production
decreased
x
increased

risk of production failure
increased
x
decreased


As it improves soil structure, moisture retention capacity, etc., the practice reduces risks of crop failure.

product diversity
decreased
x
increased

production area (new land under cultivation/ use)
decreased
x
increased

land management
hindered
x
simplified

drinking water availability
decreased
x
increased

drinking water quality
decreased
x
increased

expenses on agricultural inputs
increased
x
decreased

farm income
decreased
x
increased

diversity of income sources
decreased
x
increased

Socio-cultural impacts
food security/ self-sufficiency
reduced
x
improved

health situation
worsened
x
improved


The health condition is convergent with considerable harvest and food security.

SLM/ land degradation knowledge
reduced
x
improved

Ecological impacts
water quantity
decreased
x
increased

water quality
decreased
x
increased

surface runoff
increased
x
decreased

excess water drainage
reduced
x
improved

groundwater table/ aquifer
lowered
x
recharge


The health condition is convergent with considerable harvest and food security.

evaporation
increased
x
decreased


The ground cover by crop residues inevitably contributes to the reduction of evaporation.

soil moisture
decreased
x
increased

soil cover
reduced
x
improved

soil loss
increased
x
decreased

soil accumulation
decreased
x
increased

soil crusting/ sealing
increased
x
reduced

soil compaction
increased
x
reduced

nutrient cycling/ recharge
decreased
x
increased


Improves on a gradual basis.

soil organic matter/ below ground C
decreased
x
increased

acidity
increased
x
reduced

vegetation cover
decreased
x
increased

biomass/ above ground C
decreased
x
increased

beneficial species (predators, earthworms, pollinators)
decreased
x
increased

habitat diversity
decreased
x
increased

pest/ disease control
decreased
x
increased


Crop residue may host some insects but obstruct the movement of others.

drought impacts
increased
x
decreased


Increasing the moisture retention capacity of the soil improves crops' resilience to droughts and other adversity.

emission of carbon and greenhouse gases
increased
x
decreased


Accumulation of crop residue increases carbon storage via the reduction of emissions.

Off-site impacts
water availability (groundwater, springs)
decreased
x
increased


No facts are available to support the allegation. Besides, it needs long-term observation and documentation.

reliable and stable stream flows in dry season (incl. low flows)
reduced
x
increased

downstream flooding (undesired)
increased
x
reduced

downstream siltation
increased
x
decreased

impact of greenhouse gases
increased
x
reduced


Impact of greenhouse gases reduced with accumulation of crop residues.

Cost-benefit analysis

Benefits compared with establishment costs
Benefits compared with maintenance costs
Short-term returns
very negative
x
very positive

Long-term returns
very negative
x
very positive

Actually, the technology demands only labor costs for the protection of the farmland from grazing the leftover and to avoid illegal burning of crop residues.

Climate change

Gradual climate change
annual temperature increase

not well at all
x
very well
seasonal temperature increase

not well at all
x
very well
Season: dry season
annual rainfall decrease

not well at all
x
very well
Climate-related extremes (disasters)
epidemic diseases

not well at all
very well
Answer: not known
insect/ worm infestation

not well at all
x
very well
Other climate-related consequences
extended growing period

not well at all
x
very well
reduced growing period

not well at all
x
very well

Adoption and adaptation

Percentage of land users in the area who have adopted the Technology
  • single cases/ experimental
  • 1-10%
  • 11-50%
  • > 50%
Of all those who have adopted the Technology, how many have done so without receiving material incentives?
  • 0-10%
  • 11-50%
  • 51-90%
  • 91-100%
Has the Technology been modified recently to adapt to changing conditions?
  • Ja
  • Nee
To which changing conditions?
  • climatic change/ extremes
  • changing markets
  • labour availability (e.g. due to migration)

Conclusions and lessons learnt

Strengths: land user's view
  • It improves soil fertility on gradual basis.
  • It assists to reduce soil acidity.
  • Increases production and productivity.
Strengths: compiler’s or other key resource person’s view
  • Absorbs and retain soil moisture for the crop to rely on for growth and grain filling as a coping mechanism to the unpredictable distribution of rainfall.
  • It reduces soil temperature and smother the weeds.
  • Sequesters carbon, a beneficial for climate change/variability.
Weaknesses/ disadvantages/ risks: land user's viewhow to overcome
  • Create tillage inconvenience as mechanization is less common among smallholders. Using the excessive residue as trash line support the purpose of soil and water conservation.
  • Free grazing system and multiple uses of crop residue challenges retention of crop residue. Institutionalizing controlled grazing system is of paramount important.
Weaknesses/ disadvantages/ risks: compiler’s or other key resource person’s viewhow to overcome
  • Less fodder available for the livestock and other multiple uses of crop residues. Limit the amount of crop residue to be retained on the farm to 15 to 30 percent of the total non-grain biomass produced in the farm.

References

Compiler
  • GERBA LETA
Editors
  • Noel Templer
  • Julia Doldt
  • Kidist Yilma
  • Tabitha Nekesa
  • Ahmadou Gaye
  • Siagbé Golli
Reviewer
  • William Critchley
  • Rima Mekdaschi Studer
  • Sally Bunning
Date of documentation: Feb. 6, 2023
Last update: April 23, 2024
Resource persons
Full description in the WOCAT database
Linked SLM data
Documentation was faciliated by
Institution Project
Key references
  • Renard, C. 1997. Crop Residues in Sustainable Mixed Crop/Livestock Farming Systems. CAB International, Walingford. ISBN 0 851991777: https://core.ac.uk › download ›
  • IIRR and ACT. 2005. Conservation Agriculture. A manual for farmers and extension workers in Africa. International Institute of Rural Agriculture, Nairobi; African Conservation Tillage Network, Harare.: http://www.act-africa.org ›
Links to relevant information which is available online
This work is licensed under Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareaAlike 4.0 International