• Share
  • Email
  • Embed
  • Like
  • Save
  • Private Content
TSBF Institute of CIAT: Sustainable Land Management for Eco-efficient Agriculture in the Tropics

TSBF Institute of CIAT: Sustainable Land Management for Eco-efficient Agriculture in the Tropics



Presentation by Jeroen Huising for the CIAT KSW 2009

Presentation by Jeroen Huising for the CIAT KSW 2009



Total Views
Views on SlideShare
Embed Views



1 Embed 4

http://www.slideshare.net 4



Upload Details

Uploaded via as Microsoft PowerPoint

Usage Rights

CC Attribution-NonCommercial LicenseCC Attribution-NonCommercial License

Report content

Flagged as inappropriate Flag as inappropriate
Flag as inappropriate

Select your reason for flagging this presentation as inappropriate.

  • Full Name Full Name Comment goes here.
    Are you sure you want to
    Your message goes here
Post Comment
Edit your comment

    TSBF Institute of CIAT: Sustainable Land Management for Eco-efficient Agriculture in the Tropics TSBF Institute of CIAT: Sustainable Land Management for Eco-efficient Agriculture in the Tropics Presentation Transcript

    • TSBF INSTITUTE of CIAT Program TS2: Sustainable Land Management for Eco-efficient Agriculture in the Tropics
    • Objectives of the TS2 program
      • To enhance knowledge and understanding of soil ecological functions that sustain a productive agriculture and maintains or improves biodiversity and ecosystem services
      • To utilize targeting of land use and soil management interventions to better reverse erosion of the soil resource base;
      • To enhance the production of ecosystem services through sustainable agricultural production and payments for ecosystem services.
      Goal Rationale Outputs Institutional
    • Why is there a need for an area-wide approach? Goal Rationale Outputs Institutional Various interventions at the sentinel site in southern Malawi, may not necessarily be well integrated Functional landscapes?
    • Should CIAT invest in research in Conservation Agriculture in SA region? What are the expected benefits? Need for better analyses and diagnosis to target interventions for sustainable agricultural production in multi-use landscapes Conservation Agriculture field trials in Mozambique; Innovation platforms to link research to development. Goal Rationale Outputs Institutional
    • Targeting production and land use systems; arguments for an area-wide approach
      • Atkinson & Wilkins (2004) and Entz et al. (2005) both suggested that an area-wide approach may be appropriate for improving nutrient management and forage supply. Atkinson & Wilkins (2004) proposed linkage between specialist farms with the contract transfer of, particularly, manure between farms specializing in intensive animal production and specialist crop producers.
      Eco-efficiency can be increased by altering (i) the method of production of individual crops or animals and (ii) the land-use system. An area-wide approach is clearly needed for preventing soil deterioration [and salinization] and for remediation when damage has already occurred, owing to the many factors operating over the whole catchment [which will influence water tables, the movement of solutes and effects on production]. Powell et al. (2004): the evolution of crop–livestock integration begins with separate crop and livestock production (in subsistence farming), followed in sequence by integration (mixed farming), specialization and finally integration on an area-wide basis. Goal Rationale Outputs Institutional
    • Eco-efficient agriculture
      • Five key attributes:
      • it uses resources efficiently and makes the maximum use of renewable inputs,
      • it is neither locally polluting nor does it transfer pollution to elsewhere
      • it provides a predictable output ,
      • It conserves functional biodiversity in relation to strengthening ecological processes , reducing greenhouse gas emission and pollution generally and limiting soil erosion, and
      • it is capable of responding rapidly to changes in the social, economic and physical environment . (It is also crucial that eco-efficient farming satisfies economic criteria in relation to farm profitability).
      Goal Rationale Outputs Institutional
    • What about non-responsive soils? N+P N+manure Multiple seasons of application of manure (>10 t/ ha) required to restore productivity Pathways to restoration of non-responsive fields (Courtesy Zingore) (Vanlauwe et al., accepted for publication) Where do OM resources come from ? Goal Rationale Outputs Institutional
    • Role of soil biota in provision of soil-ecosystem goods and services (concept of functional groups) Goal Rationale Outputs Institutional Food and fibre Water quality & supply Pollutant attenuation & degradation Non-agricultural pest & disease control Biodiversity conservation Erosion control AGRICULTURAL GOODS
      • C transformations
      • Soil structure maintenance
      • Biological population regulation
      • Nutrient cycling
      • Decomposers
        • fungi
        • bacteria
        • microbivores
        • detritivores
      • Nutrient transformers
        • decomposers
        • element transformers
        • N-fixers
        • mycorrhizae
      • Ecosystem engineers
        • megafauna
        • macrofauna
        • fungi
        • bacteria
      • Bio-controllers
        • predators
        • microbivores
        • hyperparasites
      FUNCTIONAL ASSEMBLAGES NON-AGRICULTURAL SERVICES Atmospheric composition & climate regulation Nutrient capture & cycling SOM dynamics Soil structure maintenance Biological population regulation Soil structure maintenance Decomposition Nutrient cycling Soil structure maintenance Biological population regulation Biological population regulation Habitat provision OM input decomposition SOM dynamics Nutrient cycling SOIL-BASED DELIVERY PROCESSES SOIL-BASED DELIVERY PROCESSES Maize Legume
    • SLM Impact Zones Goal Rationale Outputs Institutional Hillsides Savannas Forest margins Figure 1: Impact zones for the ISFM Program. Information on total area and population and major cropping systems is included.
    • Goal Rationale Outputs Institutional
      • 4A – Promoting integrated land, water and forest management at landscape level
      • 1. Develop analytical methods and tools for the management of multiple use landscapes with a focus on sustainable productivity enhancement
      • Enhance the management of landscapes through changing stakeholder awareness and capacity for socio-ecological planning at landscape and farm levels
      • 4D - promoting sustainable agro-ecological intensification in low- and high-potential areas
      • To improve understanding of degradation threshold and irreversibility and the conditions necessary for success in low productivity areas
      • Identify domains of potential adoption and improvement of technologies for improving soil productivity, preventing degradation and for the rehabilitation of degraded lands
      • To improve soil quality to sustain increases in productivity , stability and environmental services through greater understanding of processes that govern soil quality and trends in soil quality in intensive systems
    • Sustainable Agric. Production Landscapes Soil Resource Base Markets (PES) Env. Health Social welfare Policy Adaptive SRM Consumption (food, water, shelter) National and World Trade Policies Market Opportunity Env. Regulations Social policies Prod. Syst. Resources allocation Goal Rationale Outputs Institutional Framework for the strategy on Sustainable Land Management Income generation Human & Social cap. Labour Investment Phys. & finan capital
      • Output 1: Eco-efficient land and soil management practices evaluated for landscape levels
      • Output 2: Options for interventions to enhance and sustain agricultural production and ecosystem services, regenerate of ecosystem function and adaptation to climate change developed
      Goal Rationale Outputs Institutional
    • Decision support framework for evidence-based and spatially-explicit soil and land management recommendations Regional level National/intermediate level Local level Problem domain/ Application domain/ Intervention domain Problem domain/ Application domain/ Intervention domain PD/ AD/ ID Goal Rationale Outputs Institutional Intervention domain (user context) Problem domain Application domain technologies/ mngt options Case Large scale Small scale Spatial Extent Regional scales Intermediate scales Local scales Farmers National Community & District level Regional bodies& Government policies Scale of interventions TARGET BENEFICIARIES ID PD AD CD ID’ PD’ AD’ CD’ ID” PD” AD” CD”
    • Characterisation and Diagnosis: Soil Health problems Goal Rationale Outputs Institutional
      • Tools and techniques for describing and characterisation of landscapes are available
      • Socio-economic
      • Landscape and land use pattern
      • Biodiversity (incl. soil biodiversity)
      • Ecosystem services (soil quality)
        • C sequestration
        • Hydrologic features
        • Soil Fertility
        • Soil borne pest and diseases
    • BGBD Mexico Benchmark site “Los Tuxtlas” Soil Biological QI Earthworms Soil Chemical QI Soil Phys QI Soil OM QI (Velasquez et. al) Variation in soil quality with position in the landscape (window) Goal Rationale Outputs Institutional F1(54.2%) F2(15.9%) P<0.01 LM SF VC -2.8 3.6 -3 5 F2(20.3%) F1(34.1%) LM SF VC -3.3 3.8 -3 3.8 P<0.01 F1(42.3%) F2(15.8%) P<0.01 LM SF VC -2.7 2.9 -4.9 2.9 F1(17.3%) F2(14.6%) SF VC -3.9 6.9 -8.5 2.9 LM P<0.01
    • Soil Phys QI BGBD Mexico “Los Tuxtlas” F1(42.3%) F2(15.8%) M -2.9 2.9 -4.9 2.9 P F A P<0.01 Soil OM QI Soil Biological QI Earthworms Goal Rationale Outputs Institutional Characterisation and diagnoses: Variation in Soil Quality per Land Use (Velasquez et. al) F A M -3.4 4 -3.2 4 P P<0.01 F2(20.3%) F1(34.1%) F M -3.5 4 -3.5 5.5 A P F1(54.2%) F2(15.9%) P<0.02 Soil Chemical QI F1(17.3%) F2(14.6%) F M -3.9 6.9 -8.5 2.6 P A P<0.01
    • Characterization and diagnosis: Carbon deficits (SOC measured against local reference value), Mali (Land Degradation project) Low resolution-wider coverage High resolution-local coverage (courtesy Tor Vagen, ICRAF) Goal Rationale Outputs Institutional
    • Chemical Physical Biological Land degradation LUI &Agric intensification Knowledge and information gaps Population growth Poverty – lack of econ development Policies (agric & land use) Weak institutions Lack of R & D Climate change Factors driving soil degradation in agricultural systems, expressed in its chemical, physical and biological properties Theme I: Effect of climate change, land use change on soil health; Interrelated processes of soil biological, physical, chemical and SOM degradation Theme 2: Improved targeting of soil and land use management interventions Soil Goal Rationale Outputs Institutional
    • Effects of spatio-temporal variability in soil fertility on crop productivity Goal Rationale Outputs Institutional (Courtesy Zingore)
    • Understanding landscape level social dynamics
      • Response to pressures
      • State of natural and social system
      • Phase in dynamic process
      • Impact pathways
      Pathways are important and rarely linear! Different social groups likely experience different pressures Goal Rationale Outputs
    • Intervention domains Mapping of social, economic, cultural, policy constraints Goal Rationale Outputs Institutional
    • Development domains: Uganda (Ruecker et al, 2003, ZEF) Population density Elevation Agricultural potential Market access Scale of the intervention domains (targeting Legume Cover Crops) Goal Rationale Outputs Institutional (Delve et al., 2007)
    • Identification and Characterisation of Intervention Domains Goal Rationale Outputs Institutional Zona Atlantica, Costa Rica)
    • Intervention Options for Sustainable intensification of low-medium external input agricultural systems through biological intervention and integrated soil fertility management Goal Rationale Outputs Institutional Fertility Soil Biology TSBF CBD 2001 Agricultural Intensification Shifting Cultivation Fallow Rotation Agroforestry Intercrops Rotations Monoculture Optimal Biological Intervention ? Organic Inputs Human Energy Biodiversity Petro-Chemical Energy Purchased Inputs 50 kg/ha fertilizer
    • Evidence-based soil management recommendations Soil OM amendments Farmers’ field trials Goal Rationale Outputs Institutional
    • Outcome 1 Validated alternative Technologies and Systems (alternative solutions) Outcome 2 Improved diagnoses and problem identification (creates awareness of Problems) Outcome 3 Improved targeting and decision making reduces risk and increased returns on investment (adoption, action preparedness) Outcome 4 Successful interventions implementation Of alt. technologies, informs policy development (enhanced capacities) Impact Improved Land productivity, Rehabilitated land, Prevented land Degradation (monitor) Enabling environment: infrastructure/ partnerships / policies & institutions/ support functions Impact pathways Goal Rationale Outputs Institutional
    • Regional program SSA_wide projects (AfSIS) ISFM program SLM program SA regional office Platform for TSBF Malawi - Stakeholder platform Zimbabwe - Innovation platform Mozambique - Innovation platform SA regional office Platform for TSBF SA regional office Platform for TSBF TSBF - SSA TSBF - LAC Individual country projects Goal Rationale Outputs Institutional Tropical Soil Biology and Fertility