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

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

Book project: where people and their land are safer - A Compendium of Good Practices in Disaster Risk Reduction (DRR) (where people and their land are safer)

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

HEKS (Hilfswerk der Evangelischen Kirchen Schweiz) (HEKS (Hilfswerk der Evangelischen Kirchen Schweiz)) - Switzerland

1.3 Conditions regarding the use of data documented through WOCAT

When were the data compiled (in the field)?

12/10/2016

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

Yes

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?

No

1.5 Reference to Questionnaire(s) on SLM Approaches

2.1 Short description of the Technology

Definition of the Technology:

The improved cowpea variety (IT90k372-1-2) has a short cycle, multiple resistance and is adapted to the tropical agro-ecological zone.

2.2 Detailed description of the Technology

Description:

As in all of Niger, the department of Mayahi in the southern central part of the country is characterized by a harsh natural environment with low precipitation, which is variable in space and time, and high temperatures, with a tendency to increase even more due to the effects of climate change, increasing the aridity of the region. With 3,1%, the population is growth is very high. The pressure on the natural resources has also strongly increased, and the chronic food insecurity regularly affects the majority of the population.
Millet and cowpea are the main agricultural products of the region, but due to the demographic pressure, the arable land is practically entirely in use. Consequently, food security can only be achieved through an increased production.

The cowpea variety IT90K-372-1-2 is of an inbred line nature and was developed in 1990 by the International Institute of Tropical Agriculture (IIAT) based in Ibadan in Nigeria. It has a growth cycle of 60 to 70 days with a semi-erect bearing and a spread bloom. The potential yield of IT90K-372-1-2 is 1.2 to 1.5 tonnes per ha. The grains are white-coloured with a red-coloured eye. This variety is resistant to drought (isohyet 300-600 mm), tolerant to aphids, but sensitive to striga, thrips and beetles. It grows as well on fertile land as on degraded land. Its growth cycle is well adapted to the rainfall, especially in regions with a chronic rainfall deficit. Through its capacity for symbiotic nitrogen fixation, integrating cowpea in the crop rotation enables to fulfill the requirements for nitrogen fertiliser of the subsequent crops (Bationo et al., 1990). This variety was registered in the catalog of improved varieties of Niger in 2010 by the National Agronomic Research Institute of Niger (INRAN).
The recommended period for seeding are the first fifteen days in the month of July. The field should be well ploughed to promote the root development. In the zones with more fragile zones prone to erosion, it is recommended to adopt minimum tillage or no-tillage. Three grains must be sown in each pocket, and thinned out to two plants per stem two weeks after seeding. The latter is done in a pit of 2,5 to 5 cm depth in the soil ridges, or in the surface, depending on the type of soil preparation. Approximately 20 kg/ha of grains of IT90K-372-1-2 are used with a spacing of 75 cm x 20 cm. This variety does not require so much nitrogen fertiliser because, like any variety of cowpea, it fixes nitrogen from the atmosphere by the nodules contained between its roots. Nevertheless it is essential to apply it in small quantities (around 15 kg/ha of nitrogen) when starting on poor soils. A nitrogen excess leads to a low grain production and a strong vegetative growth. Around 30 kg of P/ha is recommended in the form of Supa for the production of cowpea in order to support the crop to nodulate to fix atmospheric nitrogen. Weeding with a hoe is the most frequently used method by the farmers; it is done for a first time two weeks after seeding and a second time 4-5 weeks after seeding to keep the field clean of weed.
Cowpea contributes for a substantial part to meeting the food requirements of the population in tropical countries (Bressani 1997). The variety IT90K372-1-2 is appreciated by the producers because of the size of its grains (large), the colour of the grains (white) and the taste.

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

Indicate year of implementation:

2014

2.7 Introduction of the Technology

Specify how the Technology was introduced:

• during experiments/ research
• through projects/ external interventions

Comments (type of project, etc.):

This is a research and development project coordinated by a teacher-researcher.

3.1 Main purpose(s) of the Technology

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

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

3.3 Further information about land use

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

• rainfed

Number of growing seasons per year:

• 1

3.4 SLM group to which the Technology belongs

• integrated soil fertility management
• integrated pest and disease management (incl. organic agriculture)
• improved plant varieties/ animal breeds

3.5 Spread of the Technology

Specify the spread of the Technology:

• evenly spread over an area

If the Technology is evenly spread over an area, indicate approximate area covered:

• 0.1-1 km2

Comments:

The technology was brought to 20 villages with 8 farmers per village and 0.5 ha per producer.

3.6 SLM measures comprising the Technology

3.7 Main types of land degradation addressed by the Technology

Comments:

Through its capacity for symbiotic nitrogen fixation, integrating cowpea in the crop rotation enables to fulfill the requirements for nitrogen fertiliser of the subsequent crops (Bationo et al., 1990).

3.8 Prevention, reduction, or restoration of land degradation

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

• reduce land degradation
• restore/ rehabilitate severely degraded land

4.1 Technical drawing of the Technology

4.2 Technical specifications/ explanations of technical drawing

This is a semi-erect variety with a spacing of 0.7 m between the lines and 0.5 m between the pockets, or a density of 28.000 pockets/hectare. The seed quantity for sowing one hectare is 20 kg. The growth cycle is 60 to 70 days with a potential yield of 1.2 to 1.5 tonnes/hectare.

4.3 General information regarding the calculation of inputs and costs

Specify how costs and inputs were calculated:

• per Technology area

other/ national currency (specify):

CFA franc

Indicate exchange rate from USD to local currency (if relevant): 1 USD =:

617.0

4.4 Establishment activities

	Activity	Type of measure	Timing
1.	Soil preparation	Agronomic	May
2.	Seedbed	Agronomic	July
3.	Maintenance	Agronomic	July
4.	Phytosanitary treatment (neem seed)	Agronomic	August
5.	Harvest	Agronomic	September
6.	Stocking	Management	October

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	from sowing to harvest	person-days	20.0	1250.0	25000.0	100.0
Plant material	seed	kg	15.0	500.0	7500.0
Fertilizers and biocides	organic manure	cart	40.0	200.0	8000.0	100.0
Fertilizers and biocides	fungicide	bag	1.0	500.0	500.0	100.0
Fertilizers and biocides	fertiliser	kg	75.0	300.0	22500.0	100.0
Total costs for establishment of the Technology					63500.0

If land user bore less than 100% of costs, indicate who covered the remaining costs:

The project has financed the cost of seed and the management.

4.6 Maintenance/ recurrent activities

	Activity	Type of measure	Timing/ frequency
1.	Soil preparation	Agronomic	May
2.	Seedbed	Agronomic	July
3.	Maintenance	Agronomic	July
4.	Phytosanitary treatment (neem seed)	Agronomic	August
5.	Harvest	Agronomic	September
6.	Stocking	Management	October

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	from sowing to harvest	person-days	20.0	1250.0	25000.0	100.0
Plant material	seed	kg	15.0	500.0	7500.0
Fertilizers and biocides	organic manure	cart	40.0	200.0	8000.0	100.0
Fertilizers and biocides	fungicide	bag	1.0	500.0	500.0	100.0
Fertilizers and biocides	fertiliser	kg	75.0	300.0	22500.0	100.0
Total costs for maintenance of the Technology					63500.0

4.8 Most important factors affecting the costs

Describe the most determinate factors affecting the costs:

The cost of the technology is most influenced by the chemical fertiliser.

5.1 Climate

5.2 Topography

Indicate if the Technology is specifically applied in:

• not relevant

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.

The groundwater table is at more than 50 m depth.

5.4 Water availability and quality

Is water salinity a problem?

No

Is flooding of the area occurring?

No

5.5 Biodiversity

5.6 Characteristics of land users applying the Technology

Indicate other relevant characteristics of the land users:

The heads of the agricultural enterprises are on average 48 years old (+- 12 years). Land is predominantly acquired through inheritance and purchase. Renting, chopping right, donation and subtenancy are less frequent. Cereals are firstly intended for own consumption, and the residues (straw and stubble) are kept for the animals.

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

Land ownership:

• individual, not titled

Land use rights:

• individual

Water use rights:

• communal (organized)

5.9 Access to services and infrastructure

6.1 On-site impacts the Technology has shown

Socio-economic impacts

Production

Income and costs

Socio-cultural impacts

Ecological impacts

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)

Gradual climate change

Gradual climate change

	Season	Type of climatic change/ extreme	How does the Technology cope with it?
seasonal temperature	dry season	increase	well
other gradual climate change	variability of rainfall (increase of extreme precipitation, anomalies between the seasons)	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)?

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

6.5 Adoption of the Technology

• 10-50%

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

• 10-50%

6.6 Adaptation

Has the Technology been modified recently to adapt to changing conditions?

No

6.7 Strengths/ advantages/ opportunities of the Technology

Strengths/ advantages/ opportunities in the land user’s view
Productivity
The short cycle of the technology
Resistance to multiple factors (drought, aphid)
Food security

Strengths/ advantages/ opportunities in the compiler’s or other key resource person’s view
Earliness
Resistance to pests
Increased yield
Tolerance to low soil fertility

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?
Cost of seed	Support from NGOs and projects
Sensitive to striga	Weeding
Monitoring requirements

Weaknesses/ disadvantages/ risks in the compiler’s or other key resource person’s view	How can they be overcome?
Cost of inputs (fertiliser and seed)	Subsidies on inputs from the government

7.1 Methods/ sources of information

7.2 References to available publications

Title, author, year, ISBN:

Magah I.M., (s.d) La culture du niébé au Sahel. INRAN / Niger, 5 p.