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)

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

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

Comments:

Farmers who have implemented the technology have recorded good harvests from their farms. The product of manure has improved their soils.

1.5 Reference to Questionnaire(s) on SLM Approaches (documented using WOCAT)

Community Resource Persons (CRP) in agricultural extension [Kenya]

Community Resource Persons (CRP) form a farmer-to-farmer learning approach that bridges the gap in agricultural extension, increases farmers' access to agricultural information (SLM knowledge), and increases the adoption of SLM practices.

• Compiler: William Akwanyi
• 03/15/2023 2:31 p.m.

2.1 Short description of the Technology

Definition of the Technology:

Composting with on-farm organic solid waste management improves the soil sustainably and raises crop yields.

2.2 Detailed description of the Technology

Description:

Composting is a natural process of converting organic materials such as plant leaves, and food remains into a nutrient-rich soil-enhancing amendment called compost (if mainly from vegetative matter) or manure (if mainly from animal dung). It involves breaking organic matter down into humus/ compost by aerobic microorganisms - with by-products of water, heat, ammonia (NH3), and carbon dioxide (CO2). Humus is a dark and crumbly natural form of fertilizer applied to the soil to improve crop production. Composting is cost-effective since it can be made from locally available materials such as leaves, plant residues, food remains, cow dung, poultry droppings, animal urine, soil, etc. Composting is thus an on-farm solid waste management measure. When made correctly it can improve carbon sequestration in the soil (compost is carbon-rich) and prevent methane emissions (a greenhouse gas) since methane-producing microbes become inactive in aerobic conditions (in the presence of oxygen).

There are many ways of preparing compost. This method involves three key stages; mixing brown organic materials, such as twigs, and green materials, such as fresh leaves that are nitrogen-rich and moist. In the first stage, brown and green materials are layered, beginning with a 30 cm layer of twigs at the bottom, followed by a 30 cm layer of dry matter, such as maize straw chopped to a maximum of 7.5 cm. This is followed by a 30 cm layer of dry grass and dry leaves covered by a 7.5 cm – 15 cm layer of fresh cow dung. The fresh cow dung is covered by a 15 cm layer of fresh tithonia (an exotic plant) that is completely covered by a layer of ash and sprayed uniformly using 10 litres of animal urine and finally completely covered by a layer of soil or manure. All the above inputs except urine are sprayed with 10 – 20 litres of water. The pile is then completely covered with a black polythene sheet to help absorb heat, prevent the entry of rainwater, and prevent volatilization of nitrogen, i.e., the conversion of ammonium into ammonia gas, and left to decompose for 21 to 30 days.
The second stage involves mixing and transferring all the material except the twigs, to another space. The heap is again completely covered with a black polythene sheet to help absorb heat, prevent rainwater entry, and prevent nitrogen volatilization. It is again left to decompose for another 21 to 30 days. The third stage, like the second stage, involves completely mixing and transferring all the material from the second stage to another space and completely covering the heap with a black polythene sheet to help absorb heat and prevent the entry of rainwater. The contents are allowed to decompose for another 21 to 30 days, after which they are ready-to-use compost. The compost is stored under shade and covered with a black polythene sheet again to prevent nitrogen volatilization.

One heap of compost (first stage: 1.5 m by 1.5 m by 1.5 m) produces about 5 tonnes of ready-to-use compost. Composting takes about 90 days; hence, provided that all inputs are available, a farmer can produce compost 4 times each year from the same heaping point, i.e., about 20 tonnes. Normally, a 0.4-hectare farm requires about 20 tonnes of this compost. However, the amount varies from farm to farm depending on the conditions of the soil and the crop(s) to be grown. It is important that soil testing is done to determine the conditions of the soil to ensure that the compost is being used in the most effective manner.

Compost is carried to the farm on wheelbarrows and in buckets and is applied at the farm during planting time where a handful of compost is applied in the planting hole and mixed with soil before planting. It is again applied around the base of the crop and completely covered with soil. Preparation of compost in conservation agriculture situations could pose the problem of competition for plant material since plant material is used in conservation agriculture to cover the soil. To manage this, a farmer implementing both composting and conservation agriculture may have to acquire plant material for composting from other sources such as purchasing stover from other farmer who are not implementing conservation agriculture. In addition, the farmer could also use hedge trimmings as plant material for composting, especially if the farmer has a live fence.

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:

Kakamega County in western Kenya

Further specification of location:

Elang'ata Village, Bulanda Sub-location, Imanga Location, Marama Central Ward, Butere Sub-county

Specify the spread of the Technology:

• applied at specific points/ concentrated on a small area

Is/are the technology site(s) located in a permanently protected area?

No

Comments:

The farm where the technology is implemented is not in a protected area.

Map

×

2.6 Date of implementation

Indicate year of implementation:

2018

2.7 Introduction of the Technology

Specify how the Technology was introduced:

• through land users' innovation
• as part of a traditional system (> 50 years)
• through projects/ external interventions

Comments (type of project, etc.):

For years, the farmer has been converting farm wastes into manure. However, the Soil Protection and Rehabilitation of Degraded Soil for Food Security (ProSoil) project came in and taught them an improved method of composting that takes a shorter time compared with the traditional method, and prevents loss of nutrients during composting.

3.1 Main purpose(s) of the Technology

• improve production
• reduce, prevent, restore land degradation
• adapt to climate change/ extremes and its impacts
• mitigate climate change 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:

Yes

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

• Agro-silvopastoralism

Cropland

• Annual cropping
• Perennial (non-woody) cropping
• Tree and shrub cropping

Annual cropping - Specify crops:

• fodder crops - grasses
• cereals - maize
• vegetables - other
• legumes and pulses - beans
• root/tuber crops - cassava

Annual cropping system:

Maize/sorghum/millet intercropped with legume

Perennial (non-woody) cropping - Specify crops:

• banana/plantain/abaca

Tree and shrub cropping - Specify crops:

• avocado
• fruits, other
• mango, mangosteen, guava
• papaya

Number of growing seasons per year:

• 2

Specify:

Long and short rain seasons

Is intercropping practiced?

Yes

If yes, specify which crops are intercropped:

Maize and beans

Is crop rotation practiced?

Yes

If yes, specify:

Some sections of the farm are left fallow during the short rains to allow for soil regeneration.

Grazing land

Intensive grazing/ fodder production:

• Cut-and-carry/ zero grazing
• Improved pastures

Animal type:

• cattle - dairy
• cattle - dairy and beef (e.g. zebu)
• poultry

Is integrated crop-livestock management practiced?

Yes

If yes, specify:

Cattle dung and poultry droppings are used as inputs in composting. Compost is applied on soil where livestock fodder is planted.

Products and services:

• economic security, investment prestige
• milk
• manure as fertilizer/ energy production
• eggs
• meat

Species:

cattle - dairy

Count:

2

Species:

cattle - dairy and beef (e.g. zebu)

Count:

3

Species:

poultry

Count:

10

Comments:

There are assorted trees on the farm, and these provide litter which is an input in composting.

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

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

• No (Continue with question 3.4)

3.4 Water supply

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

• rainfed

Comments:

Crops are planted only during the rainy seasons since there is no irrigation.

3.5 SLM group to which the Technology belongs

• integrated crop-livestock management
• integrated soil fertility management
• waste management/ waste water management

3.6 SLM measures comprising the Technology

agronomic measures

• A2: Organic matter/ soil fertility
• A6: Residue management

A6: Specify residue management:

A 6.3: collected

Comments:

Plant residues, especially leaves and soft branches are collected and used as input in composting. However, some plant matter is retained in the farm to naturally decompose and turn into manure at the farm. The farmer does not collect plant residues from protected areas. He has planted tithonia at some sections of the hedges at his farm; this provides the main source of tithonia. However, he sometimes harvests tithonia from his neighbours' hedges upon request.

3.7 Main types of land degradation addressed by the Technology

chemical soil deterioration

• Cn: fertility decline and reduced organic matter content (not caused by erosion)
• Ca: acidification
• Cp: soil pollution

Comments:

Covering of compost-making materials and the final compost reduces loss of nitrogen through volatilization of ammonium into ammonia gas. Compost raises the pH of soils when applied at the farm. Compost contains living organisms (bacteria and fungi) that degrade soil pollutants into non-toxic substances.

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

Comments:

Compost improves soil structure and porosity. Compost balances soil pH.

4.1 Technical drawing of the Technology

4.2 General information regarding the calculation of inputs and costs

Specify how costs and inputs were calculated:

• per Technology unit

other/ national currency (specify):

KES

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

122.95

4.3 Establishment activities

Comments:

Composting takes about 3 months; hence, the farmer should have the structures for composting at least 3 months before the planting time. A farmer can produce 20 tonnes of compost from 1 heap (1.5 m by 1.5 m by 1.5 m).

4.4 Costs and inputs needed for establishment

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

ProSoil project

Comments:

The ProSoil project through Welthungerhilfe provided hoes, fork hoes, wheelbarrows, and spades to the farmers. The costs of these implements are KES 400/- for a hoe, KES 350/- for a fork hoe, KES 4,000/- for a wheelbarrow, KES 450/- for a spade, KES 500/- for a hummer, and KES 1,000/- for a handsaw. It is assumed that the farmer will be able to use the hoe, fork hoe, spade, hummer, and handsaw over a period of 5 years, and a wheelbarrow over a period of 10 years before these implements will have depreciated to a point where they will not be useable. The cost is thus spread over the years when the farmer will be able to use the implement.

4.5 Maintenance/ recurrent activities

Comments:

Turning involves complete mixing and transfer of the inputs from one stage to the next. Compost is applied at the farm during planting time where a handful of compost is applied in the planting hole and mixed with soil before planting. It is again applied around the base of the crop and completely covered with soil.

4.6 Costs and inputs needed for maintenance/ recurrent activities (per year)

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

ProSoil project

Comments:

The hoes, fork hoes, wheelbarrows, and spades provided by the ProSoil project through Welthungerhilfe are fixed assets and are used for years by the farmer before they can wear out. The farmer can use these implements for other work at the farm. The costs of these implements are KES 400/- for a hoe, KES 350/- for a fork hoe, KES 4,000/- for a wheelbarrow, and KES 450/- for a spade. It is assumed that the farmer will be able to use the hoe, fork hoe, and spade over a period of 5 years, and a wheelbarrow over a period of 10 years before these implements will have depreciated to a point where they will not be useable. The cost is thus spread over the years when the farmer will be able to use the implement. The twigs are reused during the refilling process since they take long to decompose.

4.7 Most important factors affecting the costs

Describe the most determinate factors affecting the costs:

Rate of man-days vary from one place to another. It is not easy to attach monetary value to some of the input e.g., animal urine, cow dung, and water.

Exchange rate for January 2023, source: European Commission/ InfoEuro online at https://commission.europa.eu/funding-tenders/procedures-guidelines-tenders/information-contractors-and-beneficiaries/exchange-rate-inforeuro_en

5.1 Climate

5.2 Topography

Indicate if the Technology is specifically applied in:

• not relevant

Comments and further specifications on topography:

The farm is located at an area that is higher in altitude compared to other areas in the larger area. The average altitude for the area is 1,350m above sea level but the farm is at 1,401m above sea level.

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.

Soil pH of most farms in the area ranges from moderately acid (5.50) to moderately alkaline (7.80).

5.4 Water availability and quality

Is water salinity a problem?

No

Is flooding of the area occurring?

No

Comments and further specifications on water quality and quantity:

There are several boreholes in the area and according to interviews with some borehole owners, the depts are not more than 50 metres.

5.5 Biodiversity

Comments and further specifications on biodiversity:

The area has high agrobiodiversity since most farms are under crops and trees.

5.6 Characteristics of land users applying the Technology

Indicate other relevant characteristics of the land users:

The farmer uses the land together with his other family members.

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

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

Land ownership:

• individual, not titled
• individual, titled

Land use rights:

• leased
• individual

Water use rights:

• open access (unorganized)
• individual

Are land use rights based on a traditional legal system?

No

Specify:

Each landowner has full control of the way he/ she wants to use his/ her land.

Comments:

The farmer has an official ownership title for his piece of land. He also leases other people's pieces of land for farming. Water in the streams and springs is freely accessed without restrictions. There is a borehole in the neighbourhood, and the managers of this borehole have set rules for accessing the water thereat.

5.9 Access to services and infrastructure

Comments:

The above rating varies from one village to the other.

6.1 On-site impacts the Technology has shown

Socio-economic impacts

Production

Income and costs

Socio-cultural impacts

Ecological impacts

Soil

Biodiversity: vegetation, animals

Specify assessment of on-site impacts (measurements):

No recorded data is available for reference. All are estimates based on the farmer's explanation or as given by him.

6.2 Off-site impacts the Technology has shown

Specify assessment of off-site impacts (measurements):

No recorded data is available for reference. All are estimates based on the farmer's explanation or as given by him.

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

Climate-related extremes (disasters)

Climatological disasters

Comments:

Flammable plant residues are used as inputs in composting and, thus, the risk of fire is reduced.

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)?

Comments:

Use of compost reduces the dependence on inorganic fertilizers.

6.5 Adoption of the Technology

• 11-50%

If available, quantify (no. of households and/ or area covered):

The project was implemented in the entire ward. Most farmers are preparing compost as advised in the ProSoil project.

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

• 91-100%

Comments:

Most farmers are able to implement since the investment cost is not very high.

6.6 Adaptation

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

No

6.7 Strengths/ advantages/ opportunities of the Technology

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

7.1 Methods/ sources of information

7.2 References to available publications

Title, author, year, ISBN:

Comparative effectiveness of different composting methods on the stabilization, maturation and sanitization of municipal organic solid wastes and dried faecal sludge mixtures, Mengistu, T., Gebrekidan, H., Kibret, K. et al., 2018, Environ Syst Res 6, 5 (2018)

Available from where? Costs?

Free download at https://doi.org/10.1186/s40068-017-0079-4

7.3 Links to relevant online information

Title/ description:

Composting Recycling Naturally: Simple Steps for Starting at Home

URL:

https://scdhec.gov/sites/default/files/Library/OR-1705.pdf

7.4 General comments

1. Provide a function to be able to link the documented SLM to similar work that has been documented in other databases e.g., LandPortal, UNCCD, etc.
2. Some of the impacts (section 6) cannot be quantified.