Approaches

Subsoiling [China]

approaches_2401 - China

Completeness: 81%

1. General information

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

Key resource person(s)

SLM specialist:
Name of the institution(s) which facilitated the documentation/ evaluation of the Approach (if relevant)
Institute of Agricultural Resources and Regional Planning of Chinese Academy of Agricultural Sciences (CAAS) - China

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:

Yes

2. Description of the SLM Approach

2.1 Short description of the Approach

Subsoiling with mulching is one of the conservative tillage using subsoiling plough to loose subsoils with surface soil undisturbed.

2.2 Detailed description of the Approach

Detailed description of the Approach:

Sustainable agriculture in the dry and semidry region in the North China, especially o the slope farmland is searching always based on the ecological balance. Conservative tillage such as subsoiling, zero and reduced tillage are important to keep soil fertility. Mulching is also a way to improve the soil organic matter. So subsoiling with mulching is an approach to do this. Subsoiling using subsoiling plough is to loose subsoils let all rainfall in the soils and avoid runoff occur.

2.3 Photos of the Approach

2.5 Country/ region/ locations where the Approach has been applied

Country:

China

Region/ State/ Province:

Henan

2.6 Dates of initiation and termination of the Approach

Indicate year of initiation:

1995

Year of termination (if Approach is no longer applied):

2003

2.7 Type of Approach

  • project/ programme based

2.8 Main aims/ objectives of the Approach

The main objectives of the approach is to change the traditional multi-till farming to conservation tillage for sustainable agricultural development.
The SLM Approach addressed the following problems: Traditional multi-tillage farming system with little return of organic matters to soils results in soil fertility decline and nutrient loss as well as yield decrease. This approach is designed to change the traditional pattern to conservation tillage.

2.9 Conditions enabling or hindering implementation of the Technology/ Technologies applied under the Approach

availability/ access to financial resources and services
  • hindering

Lack of fund to buy till machines
Treatment through the SLM Approach: subsidy

legal framework (land tenure, land and water use rights)
  • enabling

The existing land ownership, land use rights / water rights helped a little the approach implementation: Because land ownership belongs to state.

3. Participation and roles of stakeholders involved

3.1 Stakeholders involved in the Approach and their roles

  • local land users/ local communities

work equally divided between men and women (Because of expensive input for buying tools, usually several households can jointly buy one set, so they generally work as a group)

  • national government (planners, decision-makers)
3.2 Involvement of local land users/ local communities in the different phases of the Approach
Involvement of local land users/ local communities Specify who was involved and describe activities
initiation/ motivation passive interviews/questionnaires; Generally local and/or village committee call land users who involved in the SWC project together and illustrate the purpose and obligation.
planning interactive rapid/participatory rural appraisal
implementation interactive responsibility for minor steps; Each step and procedures are guided and checked for implementation.
monitoring/ evaluation interactive measurements/observations; Mainly done by the researchers and local government staffs not by local land users.
Research passive on-station; The effect and impacts of the SWC technology on the soil and environment are investigated and studied on experimental station and on farm.

3.4 Decision-making on the selection of SLM Technology/ Technologies

Specify who decided on the selection of the Technology/ Technologies to be implemented:
  • mainly SLM specialists, following consultation with land users
Explain:

Decisions on the choice of SLM Technology were made directive (top-down).
Decisions on the method of implementing the SLM Technology were made by mainly by SLM specialists with consultation of land users.

4. Technical support, capacity building, and knowledge management

4.1 Capacity building/ training

Was training provided to land users/ other stakeholders?

Yes

Specify who was trained:
  • land users
  • SWC specialists, extensionists/trainers
Form of training:
  • farmer-to-farmer
  • demonstration areas
  • public meetings
  • courses
Subjects covered:

Teaching them how to operate tractors/tillage with residuals and soil & water conservation knowledge, etc.

4.2 Advisory service

Do land users have access to an advisory service?

Yes

Specify whether advisory service is provided:
  • on land users' fields
Describe/ comments:

Name of method used for advisory service: In situ demonstration and training; Key elements: Demonstration, Introduction, Training; 1) Mainly: projects own extension structure and agents Partly: partly: government's existing extension system 2) Mainly: projects own extension structure and agents Partly: partly: government's existing extension system; Extension staff: mainly government employees 3) Target groups for extension: land users; Activities: Demonstration, training
Advisory service is quite adequate to ensure the continuation of land conservation activities; There is a nation-wide top-down agricultural technology extension service system which can support the activity.

4.3 Institution strengthening (organizational development)

Have institutions been established or strengthened through the Approach?
  • yes, greatly
Specify the level(s) at which institutions have been strengthened or established:
  • local
Specify type of support:
  • financial
  • capacity building/ training
  • equipment

4.4 Monitoring and evaluation

Is monitoring and evaluation part of the Approach?

Yes

Comments:

bio-physical aspects were regular monitored through observations
economic / production aspects were regular monitored through measurements
area treated aspects were regular monitored through observations
land users involved aspects were ad hoc monitored through measurements
management of Approach aspects were ad hoc monitored through observations
There were few changes in the Approach as a result of monitoring and evaluation

4.5 Research

Was research part of the Approach?

Yes

Specify topics:
  • ecology
  • technology
Give further details and indicate who did the research:

The successful results of the SWC study obtained by the SWC approach are widely applied to the control of the dust devil, and ecological recover. Research was carried out both on station and on-farm

5. Financing and external material support

5.1 Annual budget for the SLM component of the Approach

If precise annual budget is not known, indicate range:
  • 100,000-1,000,000
Comments (e.g. main sources of funding/ major donors):

Approach costs were met by the following donors: government (national - Central government): 60.0%; international (NGO): 5.0%; local community / land user(s) (Luoyang): 30.0%; other (-): 5.0%

5.3 Subsidies for specific inputs (including labour)

  • equipment
Specify which inputs were subsidised To which extent Specify subsidies
machinery partly financed
  • agricultural
Specify which inputs were subsidised To which extent Specify subsidies
fertilizers partly financed
  • infrastructure
Specify which inputs were subsidised To which extent Specify subsidies
community infrastructure partly financed
If labour by land users was a substantial input, was it:
  • voluntary
Comments:

The labour war voluntary, paid in cash and rewarded with other material support.
In the past(before 1980's), SWC activities are mainly done by community members through obligation. Nowadays under the conditions of economic market, people unwill to do this voluntary, they concern return of their input for SWC.

5.4 Credit

Was credit provided under the Approach for SLM activities?

Yes

Specify conditions (interest rate, payback, etc.):

Interest rate charged: 2.3%; repayment conditions: After 2 to 5 years when SWC produces benefits, loaner should repay.
Interest was lower than market rate.

6. Impact analysis and concluding statements

6.1 Impacts of the Approach

Did the Approach help land users to implement and maintain SLM Technologies?
  • No
  • Yes, little
  • Yes, moderately
  • Yes, greatly

Soil & water loss reduced much and soil fertility is improved greatly with increase in yield

Did the Approach improve issues of land tenure/ user rights that hindered implementation of SLM Technologies?
  • No
  • Yes, little
  • Yes, moderately
  • Yes, greatly

Subdivision and lease of the land would hinder SWC implementation. The problem is likely to be overcome in the near future. Farmers worry that their land would transfer to others

Did other land users / projects adopt the Approach?
  • No
  • Yes, little
  • Yes, moderately
  • Yes, greatly

6.3 Sustainability of Approach activities

Can the land users sustain what has been implemented through the Approach (without external support)?
  • yes

6.4 Strengths/ advantages of the Approach

Strengths/ advantages/ opportunities in the land user’s view
Easy to operate in the field (How to sustain/ enhance this strength: better subsoiling plough quality)
Strengths/ advantages/ opportunities in the compiler’s or other key resource person’s view
Increase in soil moisture and decrease runoff occur (How to sustain/ enhance this strength: Trying best to maintain soil moisture.)
Increase in soil fertility (How to sustain/ enhance this strength: Leaving as higher straw as possible when harvest)
Raising yield and farmer's income (How to sustain/ enhance this strength: Demonstration and Widely extension should be enhanced.)
Yield increased (How to sustain/ enhance this strength: Planting much more cash crops if possible)

6.5 Weaknesses/ disadvantages of the Approach and ways of overcoming them

Weaknesses/ disadvantages/ risks in the land user’s view How can they be overcome?
Too expensive input at the beginning of the SWC implementation It is needed to financial aid for buying tillage plough and tractor
Weaknesses/ disadvantages/ risks in the compiler’s or other key resource person’s view How can they be overcome?
Quality of subsoiling machine is poor Improving the tillage tool quality.

7. References and links

7.1 Methods/ sources of information

  • field visits, field surveys
  • interviews with land users

7.2 References to available publications

Title, author, year, ISBN:

Report of ninth-Five plan project on Dryland Farming, 2002

Available from where? Costs?

internal materials

Title, author, year, ISBN:

Introduction of Luoayng physicography, 2000

Available from where? Costs?

unpublished reference

Title, author, year, ISBN:

No-till farming for sustainable rural development, 2002

Available from where? Costs?

World Bank

Title, author, year, ISBN:

A road map from conventional to no-till farming, 2002

Available from where? Costs?

World Bank

Title, author, year, ISBN:

Conservation agriculture, 2001

Available from where? Costs?

FAO

Links and modules

Expand all Collapse all

Modules