Technologies

Conservation Agriculture [Kenya]

Conservation Agriculture

technologies_1323 - Kenya

Completeness: 80%

1. معلومات عامة

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:

Abamba Omwange

Jomo Kenyatta University of Agriculture and Technology

Kenya

SLM specialist:

Baobab Kimengich

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 (ICRAF)

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)
Jomo Kenyatta University (Jomo Kenyatta University) - 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:

نعم

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?

لا

2. Description of the SLM Technology

2.1 Short description of the Technology

Definition of the Technology:

Conservation Agriculture is a concept for resource-saving agricultural crop production that strives to achieve acceptable profits together with high and sustained production levels while concurrently conserving the environment.

2.2 Detailed description of the Technology

Description:

Conservation Agriculture (CA) is an approach to managing agro-ecosystems for improved and sustained productivity, increased profits and food security while preserving and enhancing the resource base and the environment. Conventional "arable" agriculture is normally based on soil tillage as the main operation. The technology is mainly practiced in the dry areas of Mbeere District where farmers experience very dry spells in most times of the year.

Purpose of the Technology: Conservation agriculture (CA) aims to achieve sustainable and profitable agriculture and subsequently aimes at improved livelihoods of farmers through the application of the three CA principles: minimal soil disturbance, permanent soil cover and crop rotations. CA holds tremendous potential for all sizes of farms and agro-ecological systems, but its adoption is perhaps most urgently required by smallholder farmers, especially those facing acute labour shortages. It is a way to combine profitable agricultural production with environmental concerns and sustainability and it has been proven to work in a variety of agroecological zones and farming systems.

Establishment / maintenance activities and inputs: The first key principle in CA is practicing minimum mechanical soil disturbance which is essential to maintaining minerals within the soil, stopping erosion, and preventing water loss from occurring within the soil.The second key principle in CA is much like the first in dealing with protecting the soil. The principle of managing the top soil to create a permanent organic soil cover can allow for growth of organisms within the soil structure. This growth will break down the mulch that is left on the soil surface. The breaking down of this mulch will produce a high organic matter level which will act as a fertilizer for the soil surface.The third principle is the practice of crop rotation with more than two species.Crop rotation can also help build up soil infrastructure. Establishing crops in a rotation allows for an extensive buildup of rooting zones which will allow for better water infiltration.

Natural / human environment: CA principles are universally applicable to all agricultural landscapes and land uses with locally adapted practices. CA enhances biodiversity and natural biological processes above and below the ground surface. Soil interventions such as mechanical soil disturbance are reduced to an absolute minimum or avoided, and external inputs such as agrochemicals and plant nutrients of mineral or organic origin are applied optimally and in ways and quantities that do not interfere with, or disrupt, the biological processes.

2.3 Photos of the Technology

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

بلد:

Kenya

Region/ State/ Province:

Eastern Province

Further specification of location:

Mbere South District

Specify the spread of the Technology:
  • evenly spread over an area
If precise area is not known, indicate approximate area covered:
  • < 0.1 km2 (10 ha)

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
  • create beneficial economic impact

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

الأراضي الزراعية

الأراضي الزراعية

  • Annual cropping
Annual cropping - Specify crops:
  • cereals - maize
  • legumes and pulses - beans
Number of growing seasons per year:
  • 1
حددها:

Longest growing period in days: 360

Is crop rotation practiced?

نعم

Comments:

Major land use problems (compiler’s opinion): High moisture loss from the soil due to evaporation
Major land use problems (land users’ perception): Low crop production
Future (final) land use (after implementation of SLM Technology): Cropland: Ca: Annual cropping

Livestock density: < 1 LU/km2

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)
الأراضي الزراعية

الأراضي الزراعية

  • Tree and shrub cropping

3.4 Water supply

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

3.5 SLM group to which the Technology belongs

  • rotational systems (crop rotation, fallows, shifting cultivation)
  • improved ground/ vegetation cover
  • minimal soil disturbance

3.6 SLM measures comprising the Technology

agronomic measures

agronomic measures

  • A2: Organic matter/ soil fertility
  • A3: Soil surface treatment
A3: Differentiate tillage systems:

A 3.1: No tillage

Comments:

Type of agronomic measures: mulching, manure / compost / residues, zero tillage / no-till

3.7 Main types of land degradation addressed by the Technology

biological degradation

biological degradation

  • Bq: quantity/ biomass decline
Comments:

Main causes of degradation: soil management

3.8 Prevention, reduction, or restoration of land degradation

Specify the goal of the Technology with regard to land degradation:
  • prevent land degradation
  • restore/ rehabilitate severely degraded land

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 side shows rows of newly planted maize crops alternated by trumps of previous rows of old harvested crop. The previous crop residues are either collected and used as animal feeds or put on rows along the contours to supplement the earth or stone bunds.

Location: Mbeere South District. Eastern Province
Date: 02/09/2012

Technical knowledge required for field staff / advisors: moderate
Technical knowledge required for land users: moderate

Main technical functions: control of raindrop splash, control of dispersed runoff: retain / trap, improvement of ground cover, increase of surface roughness

Author:

Paul Kahiga, 62000-00200 Nairobi

4.2 General information regarding the calculation of inputs and costs

other/ national currency (specify):

Kshs

If relevant, indicate exchange rate from USD to local currency (e.g. 1 USD = 79.9 Brazilian Real): 1 USD =:

100,0

Indicate average wage cost of hired labour per day:

5.00

4.3 Establishment activities

Activity Timing (season)
1. Purchase Seeds
2. Purchase Panga
3. Purchase Hoe
Comments:

Life span of seeds: 1 year
Life span of panga: 2 years
Life span of hoe: 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 Labour ha 1,0 50,0 50,0 100,0
Equipment Tools ha 1,0 15,0 15,0 100,0
Plant material Seeds ha 1,0 50,0 50,0 100,0
Fertilizers and biocides Biocides ha 1,0 20,0 20,0 100,0
Total costs for establishment of the Technology 135,0
Total costs for establishment of the Technology in USD 1,35
Comments:

Duration of establishment phase: 6 month(s)

4.5 Maintenance/ recurrent activities

Activity Timing/ frequency
1. weeding 2
2. harvesting 1

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 Labour ha 1,0 30,0 30,0 100,0
Equipment Tools ha 1,0 50,0 50,0 100,0
Plant material Seeds ha 1,0 20,0 20,0 100,0
Fertilizers and biocides Biocides ha 1,0 20,0 20,0 100,0
Total costs for maintenance of the Technology 120,0
Total costs for maintenance of the Technology in USD 1,2

4.7 Most important factors affecting the costs

Describe the most determinate factors affecting the costs:

Labour is the most determinate factor affecting the costs.

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
  • semi-arid

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: Medium
Soil water storage capacity: Medium

5.4 Water availability and quality

Ground water table:

5-50 m

Availability of surface water:

medium

Water quality (untreated):

poor drinking water (treatment required)

5.5 Biodiversity

Species diversity:
  • low

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
  • animal traction
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 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)?
  • small-scale

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

Land ownership:
  • state
  • 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
technical assistance:
  • poor
  • moderate
  • good

6. Impacts and concluding statements

6.1 On-site impacts the Technology has shown

Socio-economic impacts

Production

crop production

decreased
increased

fodder production

decreased
increased

risk of production failure

increased
decreased

land management

hindered
simplified
Income and costs

farm income

decreased
increased

diversity of income sources

decreased
increased

Socio-cultural impacts

SLM/ land degradation knowledge

reduced
improved

Improved livelihoods and human well-being

decreased
increased

Ecological impacts

Water cycle/ runoff

surface runoff

increased
decreased
Soil

soil moisture

decreased
increased

soil cover

reduced
improved

soil organic matter/ below ground C

decreased
increased

6.2 Off-site impacts the Technology has shown

buffering/ filtering capacity

reduced
improved

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

Climate-related extremes (disasters)

Climatological disasters
How does the Technology cope with it?
drought 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
Improves soil structure and protects the soil against erosion and nutrient losses by maintaining a permanent soil cover and minimizing soil disturbance.
Enhance soil organic matter (SOM) levels and nutrient availability by utilizing the previous crop residues
Soil nutrient supplies and cycling are enhanced by the biochemical decomposition of organic crop residues at the soil surface that are also vital for feeding the soil microbes

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?
Contamination of water ecosystems by herbicides Use the right doses of herbicides and follow instructions of the manufacturer
Reduced fodder production as some of the crop residuals that are supposed to be fed to the animals are used as soil cover materials Use of other crop residuals to supplement cover materials

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)?

19/09/2012

Links and modules

Expand all Collapse all

Modules