Participartory approach in soil conservation [Tanzania, United Republic of]

Mbinu shirikishi za kuhifadhi udongo

approaches_2546 - Tanzania, United Republic of

Completeness: 78%

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:

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:


2. Description of the SLM Approach

2.1 Short description of the Approach

SWC using participatory approach in conservation agriculture application of crop rotation, crop residues, covercrops and intercropping by conducting demonstrations, conducting field schools/days and training

2.2 Detailed description of the Approach

Detailed description of the Approach:

Aims / objectives: To introduce farmer groups to sustainable land use practices namely conservation agriculture and evaluate management technologies with farmers in order to come up with best practices that farmer can use. (ii) To demonstrate conservation agriculture technology (iii) To conduct economic analysis of the different patterns of cropping system involvedn i conservatio n agriculture (iv) To prepare work plan for conservation agriculture activities.

Methods: i)Baseline survey conducted consisted of structured questionnaires to gather information demographic socio-economic data of the villages in the study structure and size of the family, age, education of household members, available land and resource endowment (ii) Participatory Rapid Rural Appraisal (PRA) tools were used to collect information from villages in the study area (iii) Both purposive and random sampling techniques were used the villages were purposively sampled and householdswere randomly selected for questionnaire interviews.Pair wise scoring and ranking enabled the analysis of problems hindering adoption land management technologies. (iv) Semi structured interviews were used to get information to key informants Forty plots were established to demonstrate conservation agriculture

Stages of implementation: a)Collecting base line information in eight villages b)Participatory rural appraisal in eight villages to identify problems and gather information on soil conservation techniques. c) Selecting participating farmersd) Setting demonstration plots and planting crops in farmers field e) Conducting training/ field days/ and schools.f).Evaluating the agriculture conservation technology.

Role of stakeholders: a)Farmers/land users set demonstration plots on CA in their own fieldsb)Researchers and Extension staff assisted farmers in setting demonstration plots and follow up of activities

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


Tanzania, United Republic of

Region/ State/ Province:

Coast Region

Further specification of location:

Mkuranga & Bagamoyo

2.6 Dates of initiation and termination of the Approach

Indicate year of initiation:


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


2.7 Type of Approach

  • project/ programme based

2.8 Main aims/ objectives of the Approach

The Approach focused on SLM only (crop roration, cover crop, mulch, crop residues)

i.To disseminate conservation agriculture in the tree based farming systems of coastal area in Tanzania. ii.To evaluate soil management practices used by small holders iii.To conduct economic analysis of the different patterns of cropping system involved in conservation agriculture

The SLM Approach addressed the following problems: Low agricultural productivity,Lack of technical knowledge, Lack of cash to invest in SLM, and poverty

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

social/ cultural/ religious norms and values
  • hindering

few women participants in the project

Treatment through the SLM Approach: education compaigns to involve more women in the project

availability/ access to financial resources and services
  • hindering

Land user lack funds to invest in conservation agriculture

Treatment through the SLM Approach: advise to join saving society schemes/cooperatives

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

Most land is owned by farmers either bought or inherinted

knowledge about SLM, access to technical support
  • hindering

lack of technology in SWC

Treatment through the SLM Approach: introduce appropriate management in SWC to farmers

3. Participation and roles of stakeholders involved

3.1 Stakeholders involved in the Approach and their roles

  • local land users/ local communities

Farmer groups

40 farmers, 10 farmer groups.
In one of districts the number of women was higher than another district. Religous believes women are supposed to stay at home

  • SLM specialists/ agricultural advisers
  • researchers

Research and extension staff

  • local government

District Council Village authority

  • national government (planners, decision-makers)

Mikocheni Agriculture Research Institute Ministry of Agriculture Tanzania

  • international organization

Center for Development and Environment University of Berne Switzerland

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 self-mobilization researchers,extension staff and farmers. Informal meetingsconducted to discuss land issues problemsurveys, questionnaires.carried out to gather various information, soil conservation practices......
planning interactive researchers,extension staff and farmers.Results from.questionaires gave guidance in planning,planting materials,size of plots,inputs
implementation self-mobilization researchers,extension staff were involved in supervision of activities setting demonstration plots,conducting farmer.field days, exchange visits Farmers managed.their plots.
monitoring/ evaluation interactive researchers,extension staff and farmers. visited the..plots.regurally. . to minitor progress. at different growth stage
Research none

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

land users consists of small holder farmers included various groups from young to old, females and males, poor to middle income farmers. Organised meeting.with villagers

Decisions on the method of implementing the SLM Technology were made by mainly by land users supported by SLM specialists. Farmers.and extension staff. Farmers formed groups with help of extension staff. .The Farmer groups composed women, men from young to old people female headed households

4. Technical support, capacity building, and knowledge management

4.1 Capacity building/ training

Was training provided to land users/ other stakeholders?


Specify who was trained:
  • land users
  • field staff/ advisers
  • politicians
If relevant, specify gender, age, status, ethnicity, etc.

training included variety of small scale farmers of all categories

Form of training:
  • farmer-to-farmer
  • demonstration areas
  • public meetings
Subjects covered:

Soil water conservation practices more emphasis was in conservation griculture techniques ( cover cropping, rotation mulching and crop residues.

4.2 Advisory service

Do land users have access to an advisory service?


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

Name of method used for advisory service: Field days and field schools; Key elements: crop rotation, cover cropping,rentention of crop /plant residues in the field and much , Types of cover crops

Advisory service is inadequate to ensure the continuation of land conservation activities; Lack of extension staff and transport. Lack of funds by local government

4.3 Institution strengthening (organizational development)

Have institutions been established or strengthened through the Approach?
  • yes, a little
Specify the level(s) at which institutions have been strengthened or established:
  • local
Specify type of support:
  • capacity building/ training
Give further details:

workshop and visits

4.5 Research

Was research part of the Approach?


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

By farmers, reseacher and extension staff through PRA and on farm demonstration plots

Research was carried out 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:
  • < 2,000
Comments (e.g. main sources of funding/ major donors):

Approach costs were met by the following donors: international (implementation of approach): 80.0%; government (Supervision of approach): 20.0%

5.2 Financial/ material support provided to land users

Did land users receive financial/ material support for implementing the Technology/ Technologies?


5.3 Subsidies for specific inputs (including labour)

  • agricultural
Specify which inputs were subsidised To which extent Specify subsidies
seeds fully financed
fertilizers fully financed
If labour by land users was a substantial input, was it:
  • voluntary

Labour was voluntary.

5.4 Credit

Was credit provided under the Approach for SLM activities?


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

farmers obtained appropriate informantion/knowledge and management of conservation agriculture type of seeds of cover crops

Did the Approach empower socially and economically disadvantaged groups?
  • No
  • Yes, little
  • Yes, moderately
  • Yes, greatly

Women farmers were impowered with CA technology applied in their plots and recorded improved yields in CA plots compared to traditional system because of goodmanagement

The problem is unlikely to be overcome in the near future. Farmers had their own fields so the activities were not affected during implementation phase

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

not at present may be later

Did the Approach lead to improved livelihoods / human well-being?
  • No
  • Yes, little
  • Yes, moderately
  • Yes, greatly

in short term increase in yield and food security

Did the Approach help to alleviate poverty?
  • No
  • Yes, little
  • Yes, moderately
  • Yes, greatly

not assessed

6.2 Main motivation of land users to implement SLM

  • increased production

increased crop yield

  • increased profit(ability), improved cost-benefit-ratio

increase in come

  • reduced workload

reduced no. of weedings and fertilizer

6.3 Sustainability of Approach activities

Can the land users sustain what has been implemented through the Approach (without external support)?
  • no
If no or uncertain, specify and comment:

As an individual farmer may continue but as a group activity could be difficulty as funds is a limiting factor

6.4 Strengths/ advantages of the Approach

Strengths/ advantages/ opportunities in the land user’s view
1)Presence of effective District council authority 2)Presence of Research Institution 3).Presence of Credit Saving Soceities (How to sustain/ enhance this strength: 1)Involvement .of farmer groups in planning of .development activities at all stages 2)Work closely with district councils.and village authorities in issues of land management programme 3)Farmers to join Credit society to secure loans for their farms 4)inorder to expand .impoved practices of CA)
Strengths/ advantages/ opportunities in the compiler’s or other key resource person’s view
1)Ample land for agriculture in the two district is an incentive for expansion in CA 2).Willingness.of farmers to adopt CA is high 3)Formal education of farmers is enough to enable to them to follow up technical issues with help of research and extension staff (How to sustain/ enhance this strength: 1)Strengthening advisory services on CA 2)Have more training programes in CA to all stakeholders. 3)participation in agricultural shows exhibitions and field schools )

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?
1.Poverty 2.In adequate marketing facility 3.Men and youths not fully engaged in agriculture. 1. Provide input subsidies (seeds, fertilizer, machinery) 2. Goverment provide market facility 3. Education on gender issues
Weaknesses/ disadvantages/ risks in the compiler’s or other key resource person’s view How can they be overcome?
1.lack of CA knowledge 2.In adequate .facility, funds to implement CA 3.inadequate marketing facilty. 3. 1.Conduct. training .programme to. extension staff, framers, policy makers 2. Governments and donor should avail more funds for CA programmes 3.Government .to assist. local. authority construction of mark-ert.facility

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:

Project no. Q 701 promoting conservation agriculture for sustained productivity of tree based farming system incoastal belt of Tanzania, Mikocheni Agriculture Research.InstituteDar es Salaam Tanzania

Available from where? Costs?

Tanzania /300 usdollar

Links and modules

Expand all Collapse all