Advertisement
Advertisement

More Related Content

Similar to Biomass pressures in mixed farms: Implications for livelihoods and ecosystems services in South Asia & Sub-Saharan Africa(20)

More from ILRI(20)

Advertisement

Recently uploaded(20)

Biomass pressures in mixed farms: Implications for livelihoods and ecosystems services in South Asia & Sub-Saharan Africa

  1. Biomass pressures in mixed farms Implications for livelihoods and ecosystems services in South Asia & Sub-Saharan Africa Planet Under Pressure, March 26th, 2012 London, UK Session: Food Security Diego Valbuena, Olaf Erenstein, Sabine Homann-Kee Tui, Tahirou Abdoulaye, Alan Duncan, Bruno Gérard, Nils Teufel
  2. Mixed systems represent the livelihood of a large population of the developing world Population developing world: 3.773’200.000 Population developing world: 5.309’500.000 Source: Herrero et al. 2009
  3. Crop residue are major resources for smallholder farmers Uses: feed, fuel, construction, cash and mulch/compost. Trade-offs of residue use? −animal feed: short-term household needs (animal traction, manure, food, savings, cash, culture), nutrient recycling −soil conservation (mulching): mid/long-term agricultural production, water efficiency, nutrient recycling (C storage)
  4. Opening message In smallholder mixed farms resources are often limited, creating pressure on biomass (residues). How to improve residue use, enhancing livelihoods now and ensuring long-term sustainability?
  5. Site & village selection Selection criteria site: intensification & market village: market & road households: land & livestock Niger-1, Fakara Malawi, Mzimba Niger-2, Maradi Mozambique, Changara Nigeria, Kano Zimbabwe, Nykayi Ethiopia-1, Kobo India-1, Haryana Ethiopia-2, Nekemte India-2, Udaipur Kenya, Kakamega Bangladesh, Dinajpur
  6. To consider: • Dynamic systems but not always • Pressure residues farm: a. demand b. production • Options: intensification, market & co.
  7. 1. Mixed systems are dynamic Population density Urbanization % total population people/km2 Cereal yields Livestock production % relative to 1999-2001 kg cereal/ha SLP-CR Regions* South Asia Sources: http://esa.un.org/unup/; http://fao.org * Southern Africa Weighted average of SLP selected countries East Africa West Africa
  8. 2a. Potential demand for residues is diverse India-1 High Bangladesh Kenya Ethiopia-2 Ethiopia-1 Medium India-2 Zimbabwe Niger-2 Mozambique Nigeria Malawi Low Niger-1 source: Valbuena et al. in press
  9. 2a. This demand is reflected in different residue use: cereal multiple uses mostly fed 100% 80% mulch 60% construction fuel 40% 20% other (fuel, burnt, const) traded left/mulch 0% animal feed source: Valbuena et al. in press
  10. 2a. Demand and use of residues is diverse: legume Nigeria Niger-1 Niger-2 Kenya Residue use depend also on % sold quality, market and culture. % fed % other* * cooking, left in the soil
  11. 2b. Intensification of crop production is related to potential demand High production: L-NG H-I1 H-B water access, market L-N2 inputs, H-K mechanisation M-E2 L-MW M-I2 L-N1 Limited production: often rainfed, variable access inputs & market, low L-Z mechanisation M-E1 L-MZ
  12. 2b. Production and development pathways offer different options for rural regions Non-agricultural livelihood India-2 Mozambiqu e Market-oriented Keny a Niger-1 agriculture Nigeria Zimbabwe Ethiopia-1 Bangladesh Niger-2 India-1 Ethiopia-2 Malawi Subsistence farming
  13. 2. Pressure on feed depends on crop production and communal resources high quality feed < 3 months 3 – 6 months > 6 months * based one farmers’ perceptions. Feed sources include grazing, green and dry fodder
  14. 2. Pressure on residues depend on both production and demand Potential Crop Agricultural Communal Feed Residue Pressure Sites demand production intensification resources shortages use mulch India-1, Kenya +++ +++ +++ - + burn Bangladesh Low + ++ ++ + + mulch Malawi Mozambique Medium + + + + ++ grazed Zimbabwe ++ +/++ +/++ - +++ fed, fuel Ethiopia, India-2 High + + + + (far) +++ fed, fuel Niger, Nigeria
  15. 3. Options: pressure on residues Potential: > soil conservation by mulching Needed: changes residue management Potential Crop Agricultural Communal Feed Residue Pressure Sites demand production intensification resources shortages use mulch India-1, Kenya +++ +++ +++ - + burn Bangladesh Low + ++ ++ + + mulch Malawi Mozambique Medium + + + + ++ grazed Zimbabwe ++ +/++ +/++ - +++ fed, fuel Ethiopia, India-2 High + + + + (far) +++ fed, fuel Niger, Nigeria Needed: Needed: - Better use of communal land - More biomass - More biomass (seasonal) - Soil conservation
  16. 3. Options need to go beyond biomass production Farm expansion Better link to markets Equity (land) Integration crop-livestock Water efficiency Intensification livestock Potential Crop Agricultural Communal Feed Residue Pressure Sites demand production intensification resources shortages use mulch India-1, Kenya +++ +++ +++ - + burn Bangladesh Low + ++ ++ + + mulch Malawi Mozambique Medium + + + + ++ grazed Zimbabwe ++ +/++ +/++ - +++ fed, fuel Ethiopia, India-2 High + + + + (far) +++ fed, fuel Niger, Nigeria Better link to markets Intensification crop-livestock Integration crop-livestock Better link to markets Intensification crop-livestock Off-farm options Destocking
  17. Closing message Meta-analysis help to identify promising options and trajectories for better residue use in specific sites. Still, more participatory, integrated & coordinate action- research is needed to implement options and fulfil short and long term objectives for both livelihoods & ecosystem services.
  18. SLP project: an on-going progress Stakeholder involvement (R&D): engaging stakeholders in looking at the challenges & options Household diversity: improved targeting of potential options Targeting action-oriented research: linking these diagnostics with impact oriented research
Advertisement