1.2 Contact details of resource persons and institutions involved in the assessment and documentation of the Technology

Name of the institution(s) which facilitated the documentation/ evaluation of the Technology (if relevant)

Biovision Foundation (Biovision Foundation) - Switzerland

Name of the institution(s) which facilitated the documentation/ evaluation of the Technology (if relevant)

International Centre of Insect Physiology & Ecology (ICIPE) - Kenya

1.3 Conditions regarding the use of data documented through WOCAT

The compiler and key resource person(s) accept the conditions regarding the use of data documented through WOCAT:

Ja

2.1 Short description of the Technology

Definition of the Technology:

“Push-Pull” is a technology to efficiently control pests and progressively improves soil fertility.

2.2 Detailed description of the Technology

Description:

In the Lake Victoria region - like in many other parts of sub-Saharan Africa – stemborer pests, striga weeds and poor soil fertility are the main constraints to efficient production of cereals. In combination they often lead to complete crop failure. The “Push-Pull” technology efficiently controls the pests and progressively improves soil fertility. It involves intercropping maize with a repellent plant, such as desmodium (“push”); an attractant trap plant, such as napier grass (Pennisetum purpureum) is planted as a border crop around this intercrop (“pull”). The stemborer moths are attracted to volatile compounds emitted by the napier grass which at the same time serves as a haven for the borers' natural enemies. When moths lay eggs on napier grass a sticky substance secreted by the grass physically traps the moths’ larvae. Napier is also an important carbohydrate-rich fodder grass. Desmodium, a perennial cover crop, produces repellent volatile chemicals that push away the moths, and the plant effectively suppresses striga weeds through its root exudates. Furthermore, desmodium fixes nitrogen, conserves soil moisture, enhances arthropod abundance and diversity and improves soil organic matter, thereby making cereal cropping systems more resilient and adaptable to climate change. Being a low-growing plant it does not interfere with the crops' growth. Push-pull simultaneously improves cereal productivity; enables production of year-round quality fodder - thereby allowing for integration with livestock husbandry; diversifies income streams and enables smallholders to enter into the cash economy. It also improves soil fertility; protects fragile soils from erosion and enables a minimum tillage system. The technology is appropriate to resource-poor smallholder farmers as it is based on locally available plants, affordable external inputs, and fits well with traditional mixed cropping systems practiced in SSA.

2.3 Photos of the Technology

2.5 Country/ region/ locations where the Technology has been applied and which are covered by this assessment

2.6 Date of implementation

If precise year is not known, indicate approximate date:

• 10-50 years ago

2.7 Introduction of the Technology

Specify how the Technology was introduced:

• during experiments/ research

3.1 Main purpose(s) of the Technology

• adapt to climate change/ extremes and its impacts
• create beneficial economic impact

3.2 Current land use type(s) where the Technology is applied

Comments:

Major land use problems (land users’ perception): Cereal pests and diseases, decline of soil organic matter and fertility

3.3 Further information about land use

Water supply for the land on which the Technology is applied:

• rainfed

3.4 SLM group to which the Technology belongs

• integrated soil fertility management
• improved plant varieties/ animal breeds

3.5 Spread of the Technology

Comments:

Total area covered by the SLM Technology is 76000 m2.

3.6 SLM measures comprising the Technology

Comments:

Main measures: vegetative measures

Type of agronomic measures: mixed cropping / intercropping, contour planting / strip cropping, retaining more vegetation cover

Type of vegetative measures: aligned: -along boundary, aligned: -linear

3.7 Main types of land degradation addressed by the Technology

Comments:

Main type of degradation addressed: Cn: fertility decline and reduced organic matter content, Bh: loss of habitats, Bp: increase of pests / diseases, loss of predators

3.8 Prevention, reduction, or restoration of land degradation

Specify the goal of the Technology with regard to land degradation:

• prevent land degradation
• reduce land degradation

4.1 Technical drawing of the Technology

4.2 Technical specifications/ explanations of technical drawing

Layout of push-pull plot with1 m spacing between napier border and maize field

Technical knowledge required for field staff / advisors: moderate

Technical knowledge required for land users: low

Main technical functions: increase in organic matter, increase in nutrient availability (supply, recycling,…), promotion of vegetation species and varieties (quality, eg palatable fodder), pest control

Mixed cropping / intercropping
Material/ species: Desmodium as a perennial intercrop
Remarks: Desmodium is drilled in between maize rows at 75 cm row to row distance

Contour planting / strip cropping
Material/ species: napier grass (Pennisetum purpureum)
Remarks: Spacing of napier plants should be 75 cm between rows and 50 cm between plants within a row

Aligned: -along boundary
Vegetative material: G : grass
Spacing between rows / strips / blocks (m): 75.00
Vertical interval within rows / strips / blocks (m): 50.00

Aligned: -linear
Vegetative material: C : perennial crops
Spacing between rows / strips / blocks (m): 75.00

Perennial crops species: Desmodium

Grass species: Napier grass (Pennisetum purpureum)

4.3 General information regarding the calculation of inputs and costs

Specify currency used for cost calculations:

• US Dollars

4.4 Establishment activities

	Activity	Type of measure	Timing
1.	Plant 3 consecutive rows of napier grass (Bana variety) around the plot: make planting holes, apply fertilizer (or manure), place 3-node canes or root splits, cover with soil (before rains)	Vegetative
2.	Land preparation for desmodium: plough and harrow the land (to get fine soil), make furrows between the rows where the maize will be planted (using strong pointed stick; before rains)	Vegetative
3.	Mix desmodium seed with super phosphate fertilizer (ratio 1:2), or alternatively with fine soil. Sow into the furrows and cover with soil (onset of rains)	Vegetative
4.	Plant maize./ Weeding of maize, desmodium and Napier grass	Vegetative	3 and 5-6 weeks after planting maize
5.	Manage napier grass: 1st harvest after 3 months (plants are 1-1,5 m high), leave stem height of 10 cm for quick regrow, start with inner row	Vegetative	1st harvest after 3 months

4.5 Costs and inputs needed for establishment

	Specify input	Unit	Quantity	Costs per Unit	Total costs per input	% of costs borne by land users
Labour	Plant 3 consecutive rows of napier grass	Persons/day	8.0	1.25	10.0
Plant material	Napier	pieces	1200.0	0.1666666	200.0
Plant material	Desmodium seeds	kg	0.5	18.9	9.45
Fertilizers and biocides	Fertilizer	kg	47.0	0.6808	32.0
Total costs for establishment of the Technology					251.45

4.6 Maintenance/ recurrent activities

	Activity	Type of measure	Timing/ frequency
1.	Land preparation for maize: carefully dig/plough between desmodium lines not to disturb / uproot the desmodium (it is a perennial crop!)	Vegetative
2.	Plant maize	Vegetative
3.	Trim the desmodium so that it does not overgrow in between the maize plants	Vegetative	after 3 and 6 weeks
4.	Repeat activities 5.-7. listed under establishment	Vegetative

4.7 Costs and inputs needed for maintenance/ recurrent activities (per year)

	Specify input	Unit	Quantity	Costs per Unit	Total costs per input	% of costs borne by land users
Labour	Land preparation for maize	Persons/day	6.0	1.166666	7.0	100.0
Fertilizers and biocides	Fertilizer for maiz	kg	47.0	0.6808	32.0	100.0
Total costs for maintenance of the Technology					39.0

Comments:

Machinery/ tools: planting stick / hoe

Size of push-pull plot for the cost calculations above = 0.25 ha.

4.8 Most important factors affecting the costs

Describe the most determinate factors affecting the costs:

Input prices (in US$):
1 Person-day = 1.2 US$.
1 napier root split / cane = 0.14 US$.;
1 kg desmodium seeds = 18.9 US$.;
1 kg superphosphate fertilizer = 0.68US$

5.1 Climate

5.2 Topography

Comments and further specifications on topography:

Slopes on average: Also flat (0-2%)

Landforms: Also plateau / plains

Altitudinal zone: 1200-1250 m.a.s.l.

5.3 Soils

If available, attach full soil description or specify the available information, e.g. soil type, soil PH/ acidity, Cation Exchange Capacity, nitrogen, salinity etc.

Soil texture: Also coasre/light but texture is mostly loamy clay, partly sandy

Soil fertility is low

Soil drainage / infiltration is medium

5.6 Characteristics of land users applying the Technology

Indicate other relevant characteristics of the land users:

Land users applying the Technology are mainly disadvantaged land users

Difference in the involvement of women and men: some organized in informal groups

Population density: > 500 persons/km2

Market orientation of production system: commercialization is just starting

5.7 Average area of land owned or leased by land users applying the Technology

5.8 Land ownership, land use rights, and water use rights

Comments:

Land ownership: state, communal / village, individual, not titled, individual, titled

6.1 On-site impacts the Technology has shown

Socio-economic impacts

Production

Income and costs

Socio-cultural impacts

Ecological impacts

Soil

Climate and disaster risk reduction

6.3 Exposure and sensitivity of the Technology to gradual climate change and climate-related extremes/ disasters (as perceived by land users)

Comments:

Technology is tolerant to climatic extremes.

6.4 Cost-benefit analysis

How do the benefits compare with the establishment costs (from land users’ perspective)?

How do the benefits compare with the maintenance/ recurrent costs (from land users' perspective)?

6.5 Adoption of the Technology

Of all those who have adopted the Technology, how many have did so spontaneously, i.e. without receiving any material incentives/ payments?

• 0-10%

Comments:

100% of land user families have adopted the Technology without any external material support

There is a strong trend towards spontaneous adoption of the Technology

Comments on adoption trend: To date it has been adopted by over 29,000 smallholder farmers in East Africa, mostly without incentives. Where the technology is being introduced for the first time, farmers only need demonstration and technology information

6.7 Strengths/ advantages/ opportunities of the Technology

Strengths/ advantages/ opportunities in the compiler’s or other key resource person’s view
Improves cereal productivity
Enables production of year-round quality fodder - thereby allowing for integration with livestock husbandry
Diversifies income streams and enables smallholders to enter into the cash economy
Improves soil fertility; protects fragile soils from erosion and enables a minimum tillage system
The technology is appropriate to resource-poor smallholder farmers as it is based on locally available plants, affordable external inputs, and fits well with traditional mixed cropping systems practiced in SSA.

6.8 Weaknesses/ disadvantages/ risks of the Technology and ways of overcoming them

Weaknesses/ disadvantages/ risks in the land user’s view	How can they be overcome?
Napier grass is an aggressive plant that spreads through rhizomes under the ground	regular control and weeding.
The older napier stems and leaves are less palatable for livestock	regularly cut young, tender leaves and stems.
Minor adjustment of the smallholder farming system to introduce desmodium in traditional maize-bean intercrops	desmodium (fodder crop) and beans (food crop, important protein source) can both be intercropped with maize. In areas where striga weed is not a problem, farmers can plant desmodium after every 3 or 5 rows of maize, and use the other rows for beans. Stemborers will still be repelled

7.2 References to available publications

Title, author, year, ISBN:

Prof. Zeyaur R. Khan (Principal Scientist and Programme Leader) and Jimmy Pittchar, Push-pull Programme, International Centre of Insect Physiology & Ecology (ICIPE), Mbita Point, Kenya; zkhan@mbita.mimcom.net; jpittchar@mbita.mimcom.net; jpittchar@icipe.org