1.2 Coordonnées des personnes-ressources et des institutions impliquées dans l'évaluation et la documentation de la Technologie

Nom du ou des institutions qui ont facilité la documentation/ l'évaluation de la Technologie (si pertinent)

Golden Valley agricultural research trust (Golden Valley agricultural research trust) - Zambie

1.3 Conditions relatives à l'utilisation par WOCAT des données documentées

Quand les données ont-elles été compilées (sur le terrain)?

14/01/2013

Le compilateur et la(les) personne(s) ressource(s) acceptent les conditions relatives à l'utilisation par WOCAT des données documentées:

Oui

1.5 Référence au(x) questionnaire(s) sur les Approches de GDT

2.1 Courte description de la Technologie

Définition de la Technologie:

Strip Tillage Conservation Farming is an animal draft reduced tillage method that involves loosening a strip of soil with a strip tillage tool so as to reduce soil disturbance and improve soil and water conservation.

2.2 Description détaillée de la Technologie

Description:

The strip tillage tool is an adaptation of a Magoye Ripper but is meant to be used in moist soil. In the strip tillage tool, sub-surface wings are attached to the ripper tine to increase the width of soil disruption which the ripper will be unable to achieve in moist soil. The sub-surface wings loosen the soil by lifting it slightly and letting it fall in place without inverting it. In this way, a strip of soil with a width of around 20cm is tilled up to 20cm deep and this is where the crop will be planted. The region between the strips is maintained as a no-till region for soil and water conservation.

Purpose of the Technology: The strip tillage tool is meant to be a transitional technology for farmers intending to adopt Conservation Agriculture (CA) in degraded soils. These soils will need routine loosening while the biological activities allow the soil structure to recover sufficiently until tillage is no longer required. Strip tillage is able to achieve deeper soil loosening with much less draft force, wear of tines and soil disturbance than ripping. The untilled region between the strips enables the benefits of soil cover such as improved infiltration, soil water storage and increased soil organic matter. Soil loosening by strip tillage does not produce large clods like ripping does but instead produces a fine seedbed that enables uniform emergence of the crop, and this together with the deep penetration results in early plant vigour. The strip tillage implement is also designed to allow the attachment of a planter unit to enable tillage and planting in one operation.

Establishment / maintenance activities and inputs: The establishment of strip tillage based conservation agriculture mainly involves the purchase of the strip tillage implement and the replaceable tines. Liming acidic soils (low pH soils) followed by a final ploughing will be required to correct the soil PH which otherwise will be difficult to correct once conservation tillage has been established. Maintenance activities include strip-tilling the soil which may or may not include planting and fertilizing in the same operation. Weeding should preferably include the use of herbicides, implying that the major operations will include spraying. In addition to the normal conventional inputs, herbicides will also become a major input and cost.

Natural / human environment: The strip tillage technology is most suited to the bigger small-scale farmers with a capacity of 5ha to about 20ha. The strip tillage tool together with the planter will require a relatively substantial investment and only the bigger farmers will fully utilize its capacity. The strip tillage action will not be very effective in wet soils especially in the heavier soils, soil disruption is best achieved when the soil is slightly moist but not too dry as to require to high draft forces. Strip tillage is useful in soil with poor structure that will require routine loosening to maintain yields while the soil is being rehabilitated.

2.3 Photos de la Technologie

2.5 Pays/ région/ lieux où la Technologie a été appliquée et qui sont couverts par cette évaluation

2.6 Date de mise en œuvre de la Technologie

Si l'année précise est inconnue, indiquez la date approximative: :

• il y a moins de 10 ans (récemment)

2.7 Introduction de la Technologie

Spécifiez comment la Technologie a été introduite: :

• au cours d'expérimentations / de recherches

Commentaires (type de projet, etc.) :

Development of the strip tillage technology began in 2008 in response to farmers’ feedback from the promotion of another conservation agricultural technology, the Magoye Ripper. The technology was introduced to the farmers in 2011.

3.1 Principal(aux) objectif(s) de la Technologie

• réduire, prévenir, restaurer les terres dégradées

3.2 Type(s) actuel(s) d'utilisation des terres, là où la Technologie est appliquée

Commentaires:

Principaux problèmes d'utilisation des sols (opinion du compilateur): perte de structure du sol et perte de fertilité du sol

Principaux problèmes d'utilisation des terres (perception des utilisateurs fonciers): sécheresses et périodes de sécheresse

L'élevage pèche sur les résidus de récoltes

3.3 Informations complémentaires sur l'utilisation des terres

Approvisionnement en eau des terres sur lesquelles est appliquée la Technologie:

• pluvial

Nombre de période de croissance par an: :

• 1

Précisez:

Longest growing period in days: 135; Longest growing period from month to month: Mid November to end of March

Densité d'élevage/ chargement (si pertinent):

1-10 LU /km2

3.4 Groupe de GDT auquel appartient la Technologie

• perturbation minimale du sol

3.5 Diffusion de la Technologie

Spécifiez la diffusion de la Technologie:

• répartie uniformément sur une zone

Si la Technologie est uniformément répartie sur une zone, indiquez la superficie couverte approximative:

• 0,1-1 km2

Commentaires:

The strip tillage technology is only in its second year of promotion and 7 farmers had adopted the technology in the 2011/12 season. The field sizes range from 1ha to 30ha.

3.6 Mesures de GDT constituant la Technologie

Commentaires:

Specification of other agronomic measures: Zero till, Crop Residue

Type of agronomic measures: early planting, mulching, manure / compost / residues, mineral (inorganic) fertilizers, soil conditioners (lime, gypsum), rotations / fallows, breaking compacted topsoil, minimum tillage, non-inversion tillage, breaking compacted subsoil

3.7 Principaux types de dégradation des terres traités par la Technologie

Commentaires:

Secondary types of degradation addressed: Wt: loss of topsoil / surface erosion

Main causes of degradation: soil management (over ploughing, soil nutrient mining), crop management (annual, perennial, tree/shrub) (Monocropping of Maize), overgrazing (overgrazing of crop residues), poverty / wealth (Charcoal burning, under application of fertilizer)

Secondary causes of degradation: deforestation / removal of natural vegetation (incl. forest fires) (charcoal burning, openning up new land for agriculture), Heavy / extreme rainfall (intensity/amounts) (high intensity storms resulting in soil erosion and leaching), land tenure (over-exploitation of communal land), governance / institutional (lack of credit facilities)

3.8 Prévention, réduction de la dégradation ou réhabilitation des terres dégradées

Spécifiez l'objectif de la Technologie au regard de la dégradation des terres:

• réduire la dégradation des terres
• restaurer/ réhabiliter des terres sévèrement dégradées

Commentaires:

Secondary goals: prevention of land degradation

4.1 Dessin technique de la Technologie

4.2 Spécification/ explications techniques du dessin technique

Planting lines are done at a depth of 15-20cm with inter row of 75 or 90cm. The width of the open furrow is 5-10cm wide. Planting rows are done across the slope to reduce runoff, these planting rows may be made in the dry season or during the rainy season when the soil is moist.

Location: Magoye. Mazabuka/Southern Province/Zambia

Date: 2014-06-29

Technical knowledge required for field staff / advisors: high (must be able to troubleshoot and advise the farmers on how to adapt the technology to fit into their production systems.)

Technical knowledge required for land users: moderate (knowledge of soil health management required when adopting the practice)

Main technical functions: control of raindrop splash, improvement of ground cover, improvement of topsoil structure (compaction), improvement of subsoil structure (hardpan), increase in organic matter, increase of infiltration, increase / maintain water stored in soil

Secondary technical functions: improvement of surface structure (crusting, sealing), increase in nutrient availability (supply, recycling,…), increase of groundwater level / recharge of groundwater, water harvesting / increase water supply

Early planting
Material/ species: Maize, Cotton
Quantity/ density: 44,000 pla
Remarks: 25cm intra row x 75cm

Mulching
Material/ species: Crop residues
Quantity/ density: 3ton/ha
Remarks: Uniformly spread

Manure / compost / residues
Material/ species: crop residues
Quantity/ density: 3ton/ha
Remarks: uniformly spread

Mineral (inorganic) fertilizers
Material/ species: basal and top dressing
Quantity/ density: 800kg/ha
Remarks: spot application

Soil conditioners (lime, gypsum)
Material/ species: lime
Quantity/ density: 1ton/ha
Remarks: every 2-3 years

Rotations / fallows
Material/ species: rotations of maize, cotton, cowpeas

Breaking compacted topsoil
Material/ species: strip tillage
Quantity/ density: 20cm deep

Minimum tillage
Material/ species: strip tillage

Non-inversion tillage
Material/ species: strip tillage

Breaking compacted subsoil
Material/ species: strip tillage

4.3 Informations générales sur le calcul des intrants et des coûts

Indiquez la monnaie utilisée pour le calcul des coûts:

• dollars US

4.4 Activités de mise en place/ d'établissement

	Activité	Type de mesures	Calendrier
1.	Strip Tillage implement
2.	Knapsack Sprayer

4.5 Coûts et intrants nécessaires à la mise en place

	Spécifiez les intrants	Unité	Quantité	Coûts par unité	Coût total par intrant	% des coût supporté par les exploitants des terres
Equipements	Strip Tillage implement	pieces	1,0	500,0	500,0	100,0
Equipements	Knapsack Sprayer	pieces	1,0	80,0	80,0	100,0
Coût total de mise en place de la Technologie					580,0

Commentaires:

Duration of establishment phase: 2 month(s)

4.6 Activités d'entretien/ récurrentes

	Activité	Type de mesures	Calendrier/ fréquence
1.	Slashing and spreading crop residues	Agronomique	May-June yearly after harvest
2.	Liming soil	Agronomique	Nov-Dec every 3 years
3.	strip tillage, planting and fertilizing	Agronomique	Nov-Dec at onset of rain
4.	Chemical weeding	Agronomique	3 times per season
5.	Harvesting	Agronomique	April-May

4.7 Coûts et intrants nécessaires aux activités d'entretien/ récurrentes (par an)

	Spécifiez les intrants	Unité	Quantité	Coûts par unité	Coût total par intrant	% des coût supporté par les exploitants des terres
Main d'œuvre	Slashing and spreading crop residues	persons/day/ha	8,0	2,5	20,0	100,0
Main d'œuvre	Liming soil	persons/day/ha	2,0	2,5	5,0	100,0
Main d'œuvre	Strip tillage, planting and fertilizing	persons/day/ha	4,0	2,5	10,0	100,0
Main d'œuvre	Chemical weeding (sprayers)	persons/day/ha	24,0	1,0	24,0	100,0
Equipements	Animal traction	ha	1,0	40,0	40,0	100,0
Matériel végétal	Seeds	kg/ha	20,0	2,5	50,0	100,0
Engrais et biocides	Fertilizer	kg/ha	400,0	0,8	320,0	100,0
Engrais et biocides	Herbicides	l/ha	5,0	6,0	30,0	100,0
Matériaux de construction	Lime	kg	1000,0	0,042	42,0	100,0
Autre	Labour: Chemical weeding (sprayers)	persons/day/ha	10,0	4,0	40,0	100,0
Autre	Labour: Harvesting	persons/day/ha	10,0	4,0	40,0	100,0
Coût total d'entretien de la Technologie					621,0

Commentaires:

Machinery/ tools: Strip tillage planter

Calculations are for 1 ha of maize under strip tillage based conservation tillage and costs are for the Zambia situation in Magoye as of August 2012.

4.8 Facteurs les plus importants affectant les coûts

Décrivez les facteurs les plus importants affectant les coûts :

The weed control method employed is the main determinate factor depending on whether the farmer uses hand hoe or herbicides for weeding. Weed densities are higher in unploughed fields increasing the labour requirements/costs by a factor of about 5 if hand weeding is used instead of herbicides. Another major recurrent cost is that of fertilizer which makes up about half the cost hence the total cost will vary significantly depending on fertilizer cost.

5.1 Climat

5.2 Topographie

5.3 Sols

Si disponible, joignez une description complète du sol ou précisez les informations disponibles, par ex., type de sol, pH/ acidité du sol, capacité d'échange cationique, azote, salinité, etc.

Soil fertility is low - medium and low fertility caused mainly by poor soil management practices, otherwise soils are inherently fertile.

Topsoil organic matter: Due to excessive ploughing and under fertilization

Soil drainage / infiltration is good - medium. Soils are naturally well drained but become less so after compaction due to ploughing

Soil water storage capacity is medium. Soils mostly loam to sandy loam with medium storage capacity

5.4 Disponibilité et qualité de l'eau

Commentaires et précisions supplémentaires sur la qualité et la quantité d'eau:

Ground water table: Hand wells are <20m but reliable boreholes are > 50m

Availability of surface water: Mostly seasonal streams and dams

Water quality (untreated):Good when from communal hand-pumps and poor when from hand-dug wells.

5.5 Biodiversité

5.6 Caractéristiques des exploitants des terres appliquant la Technologie

Indiquez toute autre caractéristique pertinente des exploitants des terres:

Land users applying the Technology are mainly common / average land users

Difference in the involvement of women and men: The technology is applied mostly by men since most households are headed males and animal traction operation are reserved for men. Planting and weeding operations are the domain of women and children

Population density: 10-50 persons/km2

Annual population growth: 3% - 4%

8% of the land users are rich and own 15% of the land (own more than 10 cattle).
8% of the land users are average wealthy and own 15% of the land (own 5 - 10 cattle).
16% of the land users are poor and own 20% of the land (less than 5 cattle).
68% of the land users are poor and own 40% of the land (do not own cattle).

Off-farm income specification: sale of rainfed crops makes up about half of their income, the remainder coming from sale of livestock, petty trading, hiring out labour and remittances

Market orientation of production system: Livestock, maize and legumes for home consumption/subsistence and sale of excess maize and cotton, dairy products (mixed).

Level of mechanization: Manual labour only for small backyard fields. Families without cattle borrow or hire

5.7 Superficie moyenne des terres détenues ou louées par les exploitants appliquant la Technologie

5.8 Propriété foncière, droits d’utilisation des terres et de l'eau

Propriété foncière:

• communauté/ village
• individu, sans titre de propriété

Droits d’utilisation des terres:

• accès libre (non organisé)
• individuel

• Apportioned by traditional rulers

Droits d’utilisation de l’eau:

• accès libre (non organisé)

• Apportioned by traditional rulers

5.9 Accès aux services et aux infrastructures

6.1 Impacts sur site que la Technologie a montrés

Impacts socio-économiques

Production

Revenus et coûts

Impacts socioculturels

Impacts écologiques

Cycle de l'eau/ ruissellement

Sols

Biodiversité: végétale, animale

Réduction des risques de catastrophe et des risques climatiques

Autres impacts écologiques

6.2 Impacts hors site que la Technologie a montrés

6.3 Exposition et sensibilité de la Technologie aux changements progressifs et aux évènements extrêmes/catastrophes liés au climat (telles que perçues par les exploitants des terres)

Changements climatiques progressifs

Changements climatiques progressifs

	Saison	Type de changements/ extrêmes climatiques	Comment la Technologie fait-elle face à cela?
températures annuelles		augmente	pas connu

Extrêmes climatiques (catastrophes)

Catastrophes météorologiques

	Comment la Technologie fait-elle face à cela?
pluie torrentielle locale	bien
tempête de vent locale	pas connu

Catastrophes climatiques

	Comment la Technologie fait-elle face à cela?
sécheresse	bien

Catastrophes hydrologiques

	Comment la Technologie fait-elle face à cela?
inondation générale (rivière)	pas bien

Autres conséquences liées au climat

Autres conséquences liées au climat

	Comment la Technologie fait-elle face à cela?
réduction de la période de croissance	pas connu

6.4 Analyse coûts-bénéfices

Quels sont les bénéfices comparativement aux coûts de mise en place (du point de vue des exploitants des terres)?

Quels sont les bénéfices comparativement aux coûts d'entretien récurrents (du point de vue des exploitants des terres)?

Commentaires:

Timely and quicker planting enables larger areas to be planted and with less labour in the short term. Improved soil structure and soil fertility leads to higher yields and better resilience to droughts in the long term.

6.5 Adoption de la Technologie

• plus de 50%

Si disponible, quantifiez (nombre de ménages et/ou superficie couverte):

7 households in an area of 0.1 - 1 km2 (field size 1 ha - 30 ha)

Parmi tous ceux qui ont adopté la Technologie, combien d'entre eux l'ont fait spontanément, à savoir sans recevoir aucune incitation matérielle ou aucun paiement?

• 90-100%

Commentaires:

7 land user families have adopted the Technology without any external material support

Comments on spontaneous adoption: These farmers heard of the technology by word of mouth and solicited for the technology even before it could be officially promoted

There is a strong trend towards spontaneous adoption of the Technology

Comments on adoption trend: Even before promotion, inquiries to purchase the strip planter have been overwhelming. This is most likely due to the ability to till, plant and fertilizer in one operation.

6.7 Points forts/ avantages/ possibilités de la Technologie

Points forts/ avantages/ possibilités du point de vue de l'exploitant des terres
Enables early planting How can they be sustained / enhanced? acquire more than one strip tillage implement
Quicker planting enables planting of larger areas How can they be sustained / enhanced? Plant the seed and apply the fertilizer in one opperation
Lighter to pull enabling deeper penetration of the tillage tool increasing the rooting depth How can they be sustained / enhanced? Use in moist soils

Points forts/ avantages/ possibilités du point de vue du compilateur ou d'une autre personne ressource clé
Enables early planting How can they be sustained / enhanced? Plant with the first heavy rain in November
Quicker planting enables planting of larger areas How can they be sustained / enhanced? Use herbicides because without them, the capacity to weed will limit the production capacity
Preserves soil cover and reduces soil disturbance How can they be sustained / enhanced? Training in residue management (No Burning) and use of zero tillage implement

6.8 Faiblesses/ inconvénients/ risques de la Technologie et moyens de les surmonter

Faiblesses/ inconvénients/ risques du point de vue de l’exploitant des terres	Comment peuvent-ils être surmontés?
The purchase price of the strip tillage planter	subsidizing the strip tillage implement
Excessive weeds and lack of information on herbicide use	More training on herbicide use

Faiblesses/ inconvénients/ risques du point de vue du compilateur ou d'une autre personne ressource clé	Comment peuvent-ils être surmontés?
The purchase price is high making it affordable only to the larger small-scale farmers	It is already by far the cheapest planter available but mass production can lead to significant reduction in purchase price
Benefits are more evident on a scale larger than many farmers capacity especially when used in combination with herbicides	Support farmers to increase capacity
Difficult to control weeds in the absence of herbicides	make herbicides more available at a lower cost

7.2 Références des publications disponibles

Titre, auteur, année, ISBN:

Social-economic analysis of conservation agriculture in southern Africa, FAO, 2011

Disponible à partir d'où? Coût?

FAO

Titre, auteur, année, ISBN:

Conservation farming in Zambia, Steven Haggblade, Gelson Tembo, October 2003

Disponible à partir d'où? Coût?

INDABA project, Michigan State University

7.3 Liens vers les informations pertinentes disponibles en ligne

Titre/ description:

Conservation farming in Zambia, Conservation farming unit (CFU), 2011

URL:

cfu@zamnet.zm