CFU experiences and lessons on Conservation Agriculture

1. By Peter Aagaard

2. No Farmers no Future
Conservation Farming Unit
CFU established in Zambia in 1996 – conservationagriculture.org
WELCOME
1
By Peter Aagaard

3. What farmers want?
African farmers aspirations are no different from farmers
the world over. They want to:
 Feed their families
 Drive down costs labour inputs, increase yields, make more money.
 Survive adverse climatic conditions
 Ride out the crests and troughs of market turbulence
 Have ready access to sound technical advice
 Be linked to input supplies, markets and other farming services
 Benefit from stable agricultural policies
1A

4. The early enthusiasts
Ron Landless A Zambian commercial farmer with a social conscience
Brian Oldreive Pioneer of Min-till systems for small-scale hoe farmers in Zimbabwe
Henry Elwell Years of research on the effects of conventional tillage on soils - Zimbabwe
Richard Winkfield ART Farm Zimbabwe – Mechanized Zero Till Research
Isiah Nyangumbo Professor of Agriculture University of Zimbabwe
Stephen Muliokela GART Farm Golden Valley Zambia
Ed Voss EU Crucial early support to get our ideas together
Chaim Helman IDA Knocked on Norwegian, Swedish and Finnish doors to get funding
George Grey Former Executive Director of the ZNFU
Ben Kapita Former President of the ZNFU
Ginty Melville Executive Director Lonrho Cotton
James Burke’s – TV program showed how various discoveries and technological
breakthroughs were built from one another successively in an interconnected and
often informal way
‘CONNECTIONS’ – THE BIRTH OF THE CFU
2

5. Some Early Milestones:
April 1996
Meeting convened by the ZNFU where we made our pitch to Norad, Sida, Finnida to
support a small, tightknit and highly focused organization to promote CF among
small-scale farmers in Zambia
May 1996
CFU registered as an independent entity associated with the ZNFU
1996/7 Planting Season
Launch of small demonstration program based on Hoe Min-Till and rotations – 6 staff
August 1999
Ministry of Agriculture embed the promotion of CF in national extension policy.
By 2000/2001
800 demonstrations and 150 on-farm trials
By 2002/3
No more demonstrations necessary and program funded by Norway alone
3

6. Acknowledging the pioneers of No-till
From the devastating experience of the Dust Bowl, the principles and practices of CF
gradually emerged and to this day are the subject of continuous refinement. 4

7. We must all recognize the invaluable contributions of the
No-till pioneers:
Hugh Bennett of Dust Bowl fame, Edward Faulkner, Albert Howard, Walter Lowdermilk, George
McKibben, Shirley Phillips, Herbert Bartz, John Landers, Rolph Derpsh, Ademir Calegari and many
others who have dedicated their lives to the development of what we call CF.
Also ICI, Monsanto, John Deere one of the first manufacturers of Zero Till planters and many other
companies and manufacturers.
Min-Till Pioneer
In 1962 Haywood County farmer
John Kirkpatrick used this
homemade unit to prepare a narrow,
tilled zone which was later followed
with a regular planter. Erosion
control on a steep slope was a major
goal.
The obvious is seldom seen until expressed simply.
5

8. At the CFU we have never tried
to ‘be something’ - what we have
always tried is to ‘do something’
We don’t work for an
organization we work on an idea,
we work for farmers
6

9.  Who funds us, where do we operate now, what is the scope of our programs?
 What are the agro-ecological settings within the countries and regions we operate?
 Conventional Farming practices – what are they, what are the disadvantages with them?
 Min-till and Zero till based CF practices - what is MT,CT, RT, CF, CA, CSA, what are the advantages?
 What practices do we recommend for hoe, ox and mechanized farmers ? Can it work anywhere or not?
 How do we deliver training and knowledge to farmers?
 How do we encourage farmer to farmer service provision as a business and what services are provided?
 How do we measure the impact of our programs? Adoption numbers, areas of adoption what exactly is
being adopted and what are the socioeconomic benefits – M&E & Research?
 If CF is so good then why isn’t everybody doing it?
 What other technologies/practices do we promote alongside CF/CA ? Agro-forestry, food security crops?
 How do we engage with the private sector to ensure farmers can access the equipment and inputs they
require to convert?
 What is our position on GMO’s?
 What is the national agricultural policy setting in Zambia and how does it differ in other ESA countries?
 What are they major constraints confronting the promotion and adoption of CF/CSA in ESA?
The dilemma - what to talk about?
7

10. Starting From 2006/7 Significant Scale up
Zambia
Conservation Agriculture Programme (CAPI) 2006 - 2010
Zambia
Conservation Agriculture Programme (CAPII) 2011 - 2015
Uganda, Kenya, Malawi, Tanzania
Conservation Agriculture Regional Programme (CARP) 2011 -2015
Indirect Support Services
Madagascar, Senegal, Ghana
Sponsored by the Norwegian Government,
implemented by the CFU 8

11. Region 111
Rainfall 1000-1200mm
Miombo woodland
Region 11a
Rainfall 800-850mm
Maize Production Belt
Zambia’s plateau’s
Region 11b
Rainfall 800-900mm
Zambezi floodplains
Region 1
Rainfall 700-750mm
Low altitude river valleys
Rainfall Mono-modal
Late Nov to Mid March
9

12. CAP Areas : 4 Administrative Regions – 16 Districts out of 73
Western Region
Southern Region
Central Region
Eastern Region
Mongu, Mkuski and Lundazi
Sub-Regions
Most of Agro-ecological Region IIa &
part of IIb
Mainly Zambia’s Maize & Cotton belts
509,000 farm households (+-)
10

13. 10a

14. Comparison of Crop Yields
World Bank 2008
African Agriculture – The Backdrop
11

15. Between 2000/2008, 25% to 40% of the Maize planted by smallholders
was abandoned .
Over these 8 years, smallholders abandoned 1,700,000 hectares of Maize
that was planted .
Average yields on area committed to Maize ranged from 1.0 to 1.5 tons
per hectare.
73% of small-scale growers didn’t sell any maize at all.
67% of small-scale farmers didn’t use fertiliser.
80% of surplus SSF production came from 10% of farmers.
Source MACO/CSO/FSRP 2000-2008 analysis
Some Extraordinary Statistics Relating to SSF Maize
Production in Zambia
12

16. 13
About 3 decades ago something changed?
Farming and agriculture became boring and we entered a
brave new world driven by impenetrable jargon
Community mobilization, community coordination groups,
safety net management capacities, focus group
assessment, positive deviance enquiry, trigger indicators,
strategic incrementalism, livelihood frameworks etc.
‘Finance like other forms of human behaviour underwent a change,
a break with commonsense, a turn toward abstractionism and
notions that couldn’t be explained in workaday English: John
Lanchester –Whoops

17. The rationalisation of nonsense
Often researchers propose that much ‘local adaptation’ will be
required if CF is to take off in different agro-regions and countries,
that blanket recommendations are dangerous and much more
research is needed.
This idea confuses ‘tillage’ with ‘cropping’. ‘On the ground’ must be
separated from ‘above the ground’. Ploughing, harrowing, overall
digging and ridge-splitting are the conventions that reflect what the
vast majority of smallholders do to establish their crops.
Min Till and Zero-Till are the ‘non negotiables’ on which CF/CA is
built and they provide a foundation that can accommodate a wide
range of agronomic practices, planting configurations, crops and
cropping systems suited to local conditions including rotations,
inter-crops, relays, and agro-forestry trees.
14

18. Conservation Farming is a system.
 If you can’t describe it you can’t define it.
 If you can’t define it you can’t distinguish it from other
farming systems.
 If you can’t distinguish if from other farming systems you
can’t compare its performance with them.
 If you can’t compare performance you can’t establish
program goals, objectives and expected results.
Conservation Farming definitions - why they are
important
15

19. Some well known Definitions of CA
“A concept for resource-saving agricultural crop production that
strives to achieve acceptable profits together with high and
sustained production levels while concurrently conserving the
environment”.
Embodies general principles that do not provide a sufficiently
precise basis for comparative evaluation
“CA promotes the concept of optimizing yields and profits while
ensuring provision of local and global environmental benefits and
services”.
A sweeping declaration of aims that is equally unhelpful
16

20. The common agronomic definition of CA is equally
unhelpful:
‘Minimum tillage, permanent ground cover and 30% of
cropped area occupied by legumes in rotation’.
 Sets standards that are nigh impossible in areas of mono-modal
rainfall (e.g. permanent ground cover).
 Ignores economic considerations such as fluctuating commodity
prices and market opportunities which drive the proportion of
different crops grown by farmers.
 Eliminates all farmers who may have adopted highly significant
and beneficial components of CF but not all of them.
17

21. 19

22. 20

23. Conventional farming - the common denominator
Continuous and unnecessary overall soil
disturbance by hoes, ox ploughs and ridgers,
tractor ploughs and harrows
The universal and everlasting turning and
churning of soil
The destructive practice that links all
conventional farming systems:-
21

24. Conventional Farming Practice
22

25. Africa – Active Fire Detections February and August 2004
23

26. Owned
24

27. 25

28. Hired
26

29. Ridging with Plough
27

30. Hired
28

31. 29

32. 30

33. 31

34. 32

35. 33

36. 34

37. 35

38. 36

39. Annual soil movement
300 tons/ha
Total in Malawi > 540
million tons
17 million km of ridges
built up annually
Farming Families 2.5m?
Annual Dry Season Ridge Splitting
36

40. 38

41. 39

42. 40

43. CF Basins show significant benefit in seasons with difficult early rains
CF Basins Ridges
2,769 1,291

44. 34

45. 35

46. 36

47. 37

48. Low Yields
 Soil erosion, nutrient depletion, acidification
 Soil compaction, poor root development
 Excessive crop stress in dry spells
 Water logging in wet spells
 Late planting
 Waste of purchased and on-farm resources
 Poor crop emergence & low plant populations
 Excessive weed competition
 Food insecurity
 Deforestation
 Land degradation
 Migration
Negative effects of conventional farming practices
38

49. Example - Maize Production Losses
Causes Losses 4.0 tons Expected Yield
Partially degraded soils. Acidic, compacted, oxidised. 10%
Inaccurate application and loss of nutrients. 5%
Loss of rainwater. Intermittent moisture stress. 10% TOTAL LOSS 65%
Planting 15 days after 1st opportunity.
20%
Inaccurate seeding. Poor plant populations. 5%
Weed Competition.
15% 1.4 tons Actual Yield
Note: Fairly skilled farmer AER IIA - Adequate rainfall - Hybrid Seed + fert
The escalator to disillusionment
The proportion of specific losses will vary considerably depending
on numerous local circumstances
41

51. Conservation Farming Practice

52. Hoe MT

68. H

69. If the technologies work so well why isn’t everybody doing it
 In Zambia Government incentivises farmers to mono-crop Maize with costly and
inefficient input and marketing subsidies. No incentive to improve efficiency.
 No differentiation between agriculture and social welfare. NGO handouts and
Govt subsidies undermine growth of private sector driven services to SSA.
 Govt extension staff focus on numerous services not related to extension &
training
 Stop start interventions by donors. Lack of coordination, fragmentation and
confusion.
 Inadequate focus on farming and farmers. Endless top down strategic planning
and dialogue among institutions. Insufficient penetration of knowhow to grass
roots.
 Programmes overloaded with peripheral add-ons to satisfy political imperatives of
donors.
 Shallow knowledge of CF/CA among promoters. Very few experienced
agriculturalists anywhere.
 Dumbing down, oversimplification and distortion of CF/CA.

70. Reasons for not attending training

71. Digging of
CF basins is
too labour
intensive
Do not have
access to CF
implements
Do not
receive
inputsto
make CF
practice
more
beneficial
No accessto
information
and
knowledge
about CF
Not
convinced
about its
benefits in
improving
yields
Not
interested in
changing
farming
practices
Only apply
mechanised
farming
methods of
ridging
and/or
ploughing
Ripping of
soilstoo
difficult to
manage
Unableto
control
weedsin
ripped fields
or dug with
basins
HIGH 17.4 18.2 11.2 31.8 5.8 9.3 0.0 1.6 4.7
MEDIUM 15.1 16.0 6.9 39.1 9.6 8.7 0.2 0.7 3.6
LOW 11.7 8.7 5.3 58.9 7.4 4.2 0.5 0.9 2.4
0.0
10.0
20.0
30.0
40.0
50.0
60.0
70.0
Chart 10: Main Reasons given for notAdopting CF (%)
If its so good why isn’t everybody doing it?

75. 40 CFU Trials under Mature Trees for 4 seasons
Maize outside
tree
Maize Under
tree
4 Crops. All plots Zero Fertiliser & CF basins

76. Maize yields under and outside Mature Faidherbia - 4 seasons means
Zero Fertilizer