Technologies

Coffee Agroforestry [Kenya]

Coffee Agroforetry

technologies_1212 - Kenya

Completeness: 78%

1. General information

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

Key resource person(s)

SLM specialist:
SLM specialist:

Gathenya Mwangi

Jomo Kenyatta University of Agriculture and Technology

Kenya

SLM specialist:

Home Patrick

Jomo Kenyatta University of Agriculture and Technology

Kenya

SLM specialist:

Chege Timothy

Jomo Kenyatta University of Agriculture and Technology

Kenya

SLM specialist:

Omwange Abamba

Jomo Kenyatta University of Agriculture and Technology

Kenya

SLM specialist:

Kimengich Baobab

Jomo Kenyatta University of Agriculture and Technology

Kenya

SLM specialist:

Wamuongo Jane

Kenya Agricultural Research Institute

Kenya

SLM specialist:

Karanja Andrew

Kenya Agricultural Research Institute

Kenya

SLM specialist:

Namirembe Sara

World Agroforestry Centre

Kenya

Name of the institution(s) which facilitated the documentation/ evaluation of the Technology (if relevant)
Jomo Kenyatta University (Jomo Kenyatta University) - Kenya
Name of the institution(s) which facilitated the documentation/ evaluation of the Technology (if relevant)
KARI Headquarters (KARI Headquarters) - Kenya
Name of the institution(s) which facilitated the documentation/ evaluation of the Technology (if relevant)
International Centre for Research in Agroforestry (ICRAF) - 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

1.4 Declaration on sustainability of the described Technology

Is the Technology described here problematic with regard to land degradation, so that it cannot be declared a sustainable land management technology?

Nee

2. Description of the SLM Technology

2.1 Short description of the Technology

Definition of the Technology:

Land use management system in which coffee is grown around or among crops or pastureland. It combines agricultural and forestry technologies to create more diverse, productive, profitable, healthy, and sustainable land-use systems.

2.2 Detailed description of the Technology

Description:

The success of coffee agro-forestry depends on efficient use of available water and effective strategies to limit tree/crop competition and maximize productivity. On hillsides, planting improved tree/coffee fallows on the degraded upper section of bench terraces is a recommended practice to improve soil fertility while cropping continues on the lower terrace to maintain food production.

Purpose of the Technology: Fewer inputs and less labor required. Shade trees reduce alternate productions, thereby ensuring a more balanced income for coffee farmers. Timber and firewood production improves coffee farmer incomes. By spreading income over several crops, these systems are economically less risky than coffee
monoculture. Financial incentives for pilot projects helping to preserve biodiversity, soils and water quality can be applied, Bonuses are being considered for carbon sequestration in coffee plantations converted from a monoculture to an agroforestry system. The erosion of fragile mountain soils is reduced. Soil fertility is conserved. Exploitation of natural forest reserves is limited. Biological and faunistic diversity is safeguarded.

Establishment / maintenance activities and inputs: Agricultural intensification, moving along the gradient from agroforests grown with a diverse and dense shade canopy to those agroforests with only a few coffee trees to monocultures with only one crop species or cattle pastures, by definition includes a reduction in the planned biodiversity. Agricultural intensification also results in a loss of associated biodiversity. The following key studies in a range of agroforest types and other agricultural systems document losses in associated biodiversity (relative to nearby forest fragments) with increasing agricultural intensification.
Regular maintenance of the terraces through mulching to reduce erosion effects

Natural / human environment: In this technology, there is great intensive extension services through encouraging farmers to adopt it especially in open fields.

2.3 Photos of the Technology

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

Country:

Kenya

Region/ State/ Province:

Eastern

Further specification of location:

Embu North

Specify the spread of the Technology:
  • evenly spread over an area
If precise area is not known, indicate approximate area covered:
  • 1-10 km2
Comments:

Most farmers are nor practicing Coffee Agro-forestry and the few practicing it are getting help of specialized people in the same and the agricultural extension officers fro Ministry of Agriculture (MoA)

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:
  • through land users' innovation

3. Classification of the SLM Technology

3.1 Main purpose(s) of the Technology

  • improve production
  • reduce, prevent, restore land degradation
  • conserve ecosystem
  • adapt to climate change/ extremes and its impacts
  • create beneficial economic impact

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

Land use mixed within the same land unit:

Ja

Specify mixed land use (crops/ grazing/ trees):
  • Agroforestry

Cropland

Cropland

  • Annual cropping
  • Tree and shrub cropping
Tree and shrub cropping - Specify crops:
  • coffee, shade grown
Number of growing seasons per year:
  • 1
Forest/ woodlands

Forest/ woodlands

Type of tree:
  • Grevillea robusta
Products and services:
  • Timber
  • Fuelwood
Comments:

Major land use problems (compiler’s opinion): The effective soil conservation around the agricultural fields brought about by the coffee trees greatly improved land productivity.
Major land use problems (land users’ perception): There is increased yields because of better conservation practices
Future (final) land use (after implementation of SLM Technology): Cropland: Ca: Annual cropping

3.3 Has land use changed due to the implementation of the Technology?

Has land use changed due to the implementation of the Technology?
  • Yes (Please fill out the questions below with regard to the land use before implementation of the Technology)
Cropland

Cropland

  • Perennial (non-woody) cropping

3.4 Water supply

Water supply for the land on which the Technology is applied:
  • mixed rainfed-irrigated

3.5 SLM group to which the Technology belongs

  • agroforestry

3.6 SLM measures comprising the Technology

agronomic measures

agronomic measures

  • A7: Others
structural measures

structural measures

  • S2: Bunds, banks
Comments:

Specification of other agronomic measures: Coffee and Agroforestry trees
Type of agronomic measures: contour planting / strip cropping, mineral (inorganic) fertilizers, zero tillage / no-till

3.7 Main types of land degradation addressed by the Technology

soil erosion by water

soil erosion by water

  • Wt: loss of topsoil/ surface erosion
Comments:

Main causes of degradation: soil management, Heavy / extreme rainfall (intensity/amounts), land tenure, labour availability

3.8 Prevention, reduction, or restoration of land degradation

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

4. Technical specifications, implementation activities, inputs, and costs

4.1 Technical drawing of the Technology

Technical specifications (related to technical drawing):

The technical drawing on the left hand side shows a stand of coffee trees planted with agro-forestry trees

Location: Embu. Eastern Province
Date: 13.12.2013

Technical knowledge required for field staff / advisors: moderate (In order to implement this technology, the farmers to contact the front line agricultural extension officers to assist in the correct spacing and planting of the coffee trees in the fields)
Technical knowledge required for land users: high (The planting of coffee trees requires a certain alignment, to avoid blocking of the young and growing crops.)

Main technical functions: control of raindrop splash
Secondary technical functions: reduction in wind speed

Author:

Paul Kahiga, 8444-00300 Nairobi - Kenya

4.3 Establishment activities

Activity Timing (season)
1. Land preparation
Comments:

Life span of the land preparation: 3 years

4.4 Costs and inputs needed for establishment

Specify input Unit Quantity Costs per Unit Total costs per input % of costs borne by land users
Labour Land preparation ha 1.0 50.0 50.0 100.0
Equipment Tools ha 1.0 70.0 70.0 100.0
Plant material Seedlings ha 1.0 500.0 500.0 100.0
Fertilizers and biocides Fertilizer ha 1.0 400.0 400.0 100.0
Total costs for establishment of the Technology 1020.0
Total costs for establishment of the Technology in USD 1020.0

4.5 Maintenance/ recurrent activities

Activity Timing/ frequency
1. Buying of seedlings once
2. Digging of holes once
3. Planting once
4. Prunning often
5. Weeding twice

4.6 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 Digging, planting, prunning and weeding ha 1.0 80.0 80.0 100.0
Equipment Tools ha 1.0 50.0 50.0 100.0
Plant material Seedlings ha 1.0 30.0 30.0 100.0
Fertilizers and biocides Fertilizer ha 1.0 50.0 50.0 100.0
Total costs for maintenance of the Technology 210.0
Total costs for maintenance of the Technology in USD 210.0

4.7 Most important factors affecting the costs

Describe the most determinate factors affecting the costs:

labour

5. Natural and human environment

5.1 Climate

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
  • sub-humid

Thermal climate class: tropics

5.2 Topography

Slopes on average:
  • 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
Altitudinal zone:
  • 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.

5.3 Soils

Soil depth on average:
  • 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):
  • medium (loamy, silty)
Topsoil organic matter:
  • medium (1-3%)
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 fertility: Medium
Soil drainage/infiltration: Good
Soil water storage capacity: Medium

5.4 Water availability and quality

Ground water table:

5-50 m

Availability of surface water:

good

Water quality (untreated):

good drinking water

5.5 Biodiversity

Species diversity:
  • medium

5.6 Characteristics of land users applying the Technology

Market orientation of production system:
  • mixed (subsistence/ commercial)
Off-farm income:
  • 10-50% of all income
Relative level of wealth:
  • average
Individuals or groups:
  • individual/ household
Level of mechanization:
  • manual work
Gender:
  • women
  • men
Indicate other relevant characteristics of the land users:

Land users applying the Technology are mainly common / average land users
Population density: 10-50 persons/km2
Annual population growth: 0.5% - 1%

5.7 Average area of land used by land users applying the Technology

  • < 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
Is this considered small-, medium- or large-scale (referring to local context)?
  • medium-scale

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

Land ownership:
  • individual, titled
Land use rights:
  • individual
Water use rights:
  • individual

5.9 Access to services and infrastructure

health:
  • poor
  • moderate
  • good
education:
  • poor
  • moderate
  • good

6. Impacts and concluding statements

6.1 On-site impacts the Technology has shown

Socio-economic impacts

Production

wood production

decreased
increased

risk of production failure

increased
decreased

product diversity

decreased
increased

land management

hindered
simplified
Income and costs

farm income

decreased
increased

Socio-cultural impacts

SLM/ land degradation knowledge

reduced
improved

Improved livelihoods and human well-being

decreased
increased

Ecological impacts

Water cycle/ runoff

evaporation

increased
decreased
Soil

soil cover

reduced
improved
Other ecological impacts

Competition

decreased
increased

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

Gradual climate change

Gradual climate change
Season increase or decrease How does the Technology cope with it?
annual temperature increase well

6.4 Cost-benefit analysis

How do the benefits compare with the establishment costs (from land users’ perspective)?
Short-term returns:

positive

Long-term returns:

positive

How do the benefits compare with the maintenance/ recurrent costs (from land users' perspective)?
Short-term returns:

positive

Long-term returns:

positive

6.5 Adoption of the Technology

Comments:

There is a moderate trend towards spontaneous adoption of the Technology

6.7 Strengths/ advantages/ opportunities of the Technology

Strengths/ advantages/ opportunities in the compiler’s or other key resource person’s view
Timber and firewood production improves coffee farmer incomes.
Exploitation of natural forest reserves is limited.
Agro-forestry trees create a microclimate propitious to quality coffee production.

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

Weaknesses/ disadvantages/ risks in the compiler’s or other key resource person’s view How can they be overcome?
According to Pacific Island Agro-forestry, coffee grown in the shade takes longer to bear fruit. Periodic pruning to reduce excessive shading
According to ICRAF, shade-based coffee farms produce up to 50 percent less per acre than coffee grown in the open. Periodic pruning to reduce excessive shading
Excessive shading can promote growth of fungal diseases. Periodic pruning to reduce excessive shading

7. References and links

7.1 Methods/ sources of information

  • field visits, field surveys
  • interviews with land users
When were the data compiled (in the field)?

18/09/2012

Links and modules

Expand all Collapse all

Modules