Successfully reported this slideshow.
We use your LinkedIn profile and activity data to personalize ads and to show you more relevant ads. You can change your ad preferences anytime.

Enabling communities to regenerate mountain landscapes in the African Highlands


Published on

Presented by Tilahun Amede at the Stakeholders’ Workshop on Enhancing Communities’ Adaptive Capacity to Climate Change Induced Water Scarcity in Kabe Watershed, South Wollo Zone, Wollo University, Dessie, Ethiopia, 24-25 November 2011.

Published in: Technology
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

Enabling communities to regenerate mountain landscapes in the African Highlands

  1. 1. Enabling Communities to Regenerate Mountain Landscapes in African Highlands Tilahun Amede and TeamStakeholders’ Workshop on Enhancing Communities’ Adaptive Capacity to Climate Change Induced Water Scarcity in Kabe Watershed, South Wollo Zone Wollo University, Dessie, Ethiopia, 24-25 November 2011
  2. 2. ILRI It works at the crossroads of livestock and poverty, bringing high-quality science and capacity-building to bear on poverty reduction and sustainable development. It has its headquarters in Nairobi, Kenya, and a principal campus in Addis Ababa, Ethiopia.(i) Sustainable Intensification of smallholder mixed crop-livestock systems; and(ii) Reducing Vulnerability of livestock-dependent households in marginal systems
  3. 3. CPWF Consortium Members AREO
  4. 4. Phase 2
  5. 5. Characteristics of the Nile Basin Nine Riparian countries ; Catchment area over 3 million km2, about 6,671 km long; longest river in the world; Average flow of the Nile is about 84 km3/year, but extreme values of 120 and 42 km3/year, showing wide fluctuations in flow; Fluctuations are likely to be exacerbated with climate change and variability.
  6. 6. Nile Basin faced with these major challenges:o Fragile landscapes, unproductive water loss, decline in soil fertility, low productivity and seasonal water shortage;o Under-utilized potential of local people to manage their resources sustainably and to articulate their demands; Collective action???o Conventional research approaches that are not addressing complexity of NRM and the real demands arising from local levels;o Limited capacity of researchers and their organizations to avail technological options;o Weak institutional capacity to design supportive policies and/or implement them and respond to complex development challenges;
  7. 7. Nile Basin Development Challenge (NBDC) • NBDC research focuses on the Ethiopian highlands and will examine the interrelated issues of rainwater management at Landscape and Sub- basin scales; • Understanding causes and its consequences of low rainwater productivity; • Innovations for improving rainwater management systems; addressing poverty, vulnerability and resources degradation in the basin. o Managing rainfall variability; increased water storage; o Crop and livestock water productivity; o Minimizing land degradation and downstream siltation of water storage infrastructure, increased biomass; o Resilient communities and systems that will manage climatic and market shocks
  8. 8. LinkagesSub- Impact Nile 1.regional Inventory Learning and synthesis Nile 2. Nile 4. Nile 5. Innovations, Consequences CoordinationLand- Linkages , impact, , platforms technologiesscape tradeoffs , practices Nile 3. Mapping, targeting. Up-scalingFarmlevel Linkages Communication
  9. 9. AHI Benchmark Locations AHI Benchmark Locations o o Ginchi Areka o o o Benchmark Kakamega-Maseno Embu Elevation > 1200 m Kabale 2 Population dens. >200 p/km o Lushoto o Antsirabe o Fianarantsoa
  10. 10. AHI’s Approach Use a mixture of participatory action and empiricalresearch at pilot sites while findings and experiences are systematized atregional level Approaches and methods are defined on the basis ofdemonstrated local impact & promoted through strategic partnerships & multi-disciplinary teams with combination of research & developmentmembers Work directly with communities on their issues & aim tobuild local capacity combining local and scientific knowledge throughcommunity participation Integrate social, biophysical and policy dimensions at different levels (plot, farm, landscape) with systems &multiple stakeholder perspectives
  11. 11. Approach to Watershed Management• Participatory  defined around landscape-levelNRM issues of interest to local residents only;• Integrates livelihood / production andconservation concerns of farmers;• Flexible boundaries  encompasses largersocial, institutional and biophysical issues requiredto address watershed issues ;• Small-scale  5 to 10 villages
  12. 12. Expanding the base: institutionalizing approaches Process Steps for within R&D organizations achieving integrated Links / advocacy between watershed management groups & district, resource sources and services Linkages between farmer groups Scaling up Setting up monitoring & Monitoring & review systems documentation Implementation participatory R&D & policy reforms Strengthening collective action Methodology Participatory diagnosis development & planning (action research) Group formation & mobilization Understanding community institutionsContact & rapport Skill buildingbuilding Stroud 2001
  13. 13. Creating common understanding; Creating confidence and managing change through negotiations 1. Joint Problem identification Owner (private good) 2. Local consultationsOn priorities and potential Spring (public interventions good) 3. Mobilization of local 4. Encouragement 5. Community elders of owners to negotiations & enter negotiations concessions
  14. 14. PRA tools to prioritize local constraints Central highlands South-west highlands (Dendi woreda) (Bolloso Sorre woreda) Shortage of oxen  Unpredictable weather Loss of seeds and fertilizers  Soil erosion Soil fertility decline  Rising fertilizer price Lack of fodder and fuel wood  Soil fertility decline Water shortage for livestock  Shortage of oxen
  15. 15. INRM in Watershed Management Immediate need for Maximization• Properties of densely settled highland landscapes in E. Africa The need to get multiple returns from small areas of land (fuel, fodder, food, income) Tightly coupled interactions among system components (tree, crop, soil, livestock, water) and users Maximization for food security but ?? Long term interest for Optimization• Improving resilience of production systems Offers ecosystem services for sustainable use; Provides opportunities through which social and biophysical trade-offs can be captured and managed
  16. 16. Facilitating Integrated Watershed Management
  17. 17. Collective Action for WSM; ByelawsCollective Action in Watershed Management To regulate rights & responsibilities & increase investment in public goods To manage biophysical processes that do not respect farm boundaries (pests, nutrient & water flows, boundary effects) To negotiate joint investments and technological innovations for ↑ productivity To regulate benefits and equity Negotiating benefits between FRG members and the WS community
  18. 18. Integrating insitu water harvesting technologies to maximize productivityIncreased water infiltrationConcentration of resources Year 1 (OM, nutrients, water) Year 2 Year 3
  19. 19. Micro dose
  20. 20. Zai pits 8 0 7 0 6 0 Fm a C r 5 0 4 0 3 0 4 Tuberyield(t/ha) 3 2 1 0 2 4 2 1 1 8 Fm a B r 1 5 1 2 4 Tuberyield(t/ha) 3 2 1 8 0 0 7 0 6 0 Fm a A r 5 0 4 0 Tuberyield(t/ha) 1 2 8 4 0 30NN 30NN 30NN 60N 60N 60N 0 0 0 C to W otZ W Z o rl n ihu a t i ih a t i
  21. 21. Rehabilitated gullies; changing landscapes
  22. 22. Improved technologies to reach to more communities
  23. 23. Low Crop yields constrained by soil fertility and water availability in the Blue Nile basin (Erkosa, 2010) Yield (t ha-1) % Biomass in Water productivitySoil fertility reference to (kg m-3) Biomass Grain well well Biomass Grain watered fertilizedPoor 7.5 2.5 100 39 5.1 1.7Near optimal 14.3 6.4 100 75 5.3 2.4Non limiting 19.2 9.2 100 100 5.4 2.6
  24. 24. Unproductive water loss in our Landscapes Kuhar Michael - all cropland Lenche Dima - all cropland 1800 3000 1600 2500 1400 flows per HH (m3)flows per HH (m3) 1200 2000 1000 livestock livestock 1500 crops 800 crops 1000 600 400 500 200 0 0 evaporation transpiration percolation runoff percolation evaporation transpiration runoff deep deep
  25. 25. Most of the Livestock feed is used for survival; little for productive use Kuhar Michael - energy requirements Lenche Dima - energy requirements 6% 0% 1% 6% 11% maintenance 3% maintenance 0% feeding 5% feeding lactation3% 1% lactation pregnancy4% 3% draught power pregnancy 3% transport draught power 4% walking transport growth walking 73% 77% growth
  26. 26. Optimized land allocation for an improved human nutrition in Ginchi Highlands, Ethiopia Enset Kale Potato Wheat Barely Current land use Suggested Faba bean land use Amede, Stroud & Aune, 2004
  27. 27. Local institutions for NRMFunctions/ local Areka (Ethiopia) Ginchi (Ethiopia) Lushotoinstitution (Tanzania)Land institutions Sharecropping, Yekul - contracting and rentingLivestock Kota, Missa–kotta, Ulo – As in Areka Rotational livestockinstitutions kottaa, Hara and Gatuwa groups (kopa ng’ombe, lipa ng’ombe)Labor institution Debo and Zaye Debo Kiwili, NgemoMutual assistance Iddir, Iqube, and Meskel Iddir kube, Kibatiinstitutions Banking SenbeteTraditional leaders - Jabir, Gadu, Zumbe Qaalluu, Qaallitti Council of eldersRecreation Mahiber Mahber Traditional dances, Kidembwa (kitchen Parties (women on), sportsConflict resolution Council of elders Jabir, Gadu, Zumbe, council of Qaalluu, council elders of elders
  28. 28. Evolution of adoption of NRM technologiesEvolution of adoption –1) Elephant grass (cultivars from ILRI selected by farmers) planted on conservation bunds  feeds more cattle in dry season  more income and more milk2) Causes farmers to put in more bunds along the slopes more conservation, more fodder, more organic matter3) Farmers combine & add other technologies on the bunds (fruit trees, fodder trees, etc.) more food, more income
  29. 29. Matching resource endowments with niches to improve resource management Endowment Category Niche for Intensification Low input labor; legumes &POOREST: Limited land, wage MTPs; higher value cash croplaborers, less diversified, no (CBD coffee)livestock, no inputsMIDDLE: More land, own Livestock feed system, intensifylabour but limiting, some cash manure use, increase diversificationcrops, some livestock, some - range of options (inorganic x organic,trading legume covers, improved crop management)MOST: Excess land & rent, hire Wood lots, experiment on behalf oflabor, large livestock, buy inputs, others; pay higher wage rates?,well diversified micro-enterprise development, livestock feed system, S&W conservation (soil bunds with grass & compost)
  30. 30. Expanding Adoption and Integration of Soil FertilityTechnologies: Using Farmer Experimentation & Exchange1) Start with entry points: “best bets” Separate pathways for different social groups emerge  “poor” select varieties & bunds  “better off” select varieties2) Farmer experimentation expands as change agent catalyzes greater experimentation  “poor” select multipurpose trees, CBD coffee  “medium” select organic x inorganic combinations, legume cover crops, crop management  “better off” select compost, bunds with fodder grasses3) Farmers start to share through farmer groups & exchanges  move towards integrating many options
  31. 31. A model from plot to watershed management Entry points and evolution of INM in Areka benchmark site Variety trial Soil bunds Variety trial Variety trial Forage trial Soil bunds Variety trialtrial Fertilizer WI W II W III &IV W III &IV Researcher - farmer linkage Researcher -Farmer Linkage phase -•LCCs •Multipurpose trees Compost•Residue management •CBD resistant coffee Soil bunds with forages•Organic-Inorganic •Small enterprises Conservation farming . Integrated soil fertility management Integrated soil fertility management B (commodities + management) D E Integrated Watershed Mangnt (new components) C Amede etal, 2004
  32. 32. Decision guide for integration of legumes into systems Own livestock Don’t own livestock Fertile land Fertile land Large/small farm Small land size Good market Good/ poor market Food & feed Food legumes legumes Non-fertile land Non-fertile land Large farm size Small land size Good market Poor market Food & feed Cover crops legumes, cover crops Amede, Delve & Kirkby, 2002
  33. 33. Reaching more farmers and Communities throughfield days, cross site visits, community meetings. (Photo Courtesy Gebre Medhin, 2005).
  34. 34. Building the capacity of extension agents andCommunities (A case in Alaba, Southern Ethiopia)
  35. 35. Regional/global organizationsSCA National organizations and institutionsLING Local organizations and institutionsUPMore communities More communities Scaling out (horizontal)
  36. 36. Scaling up: From Bottom Up …to Bottom (Scaling down) Decision-makers Tools and methods better informed to extensively used help farmers to facilitate Tested and collectively scaling-up verified manage landscapes across the AFRICA community ooo o and beyond oUGANDA oTechnologies,Tools & o o omethods o odeveloped o o
  37. 37. Implications for climate change adaptation More protected soils, minimized risks Increased water budgets; improved water storage Increased biomass cover, more food, more feed, resilient systems Increased organic matter, more C-sequestration Collective action, improved planning of watersheds, niches for investments
  38. 38. Scaling up good technologies and practices• Availability of technological options;• Development of convincing approaches;• Financial capacity of the users / risk;• Functional partnership;• Supportive policy;• Supportive infrastructure;• Attractive market opportunities
  39. 39. Challenges ...b Moving into non-conventional INRM research frontiersb Maintaining & forming partnershipb Dealing with diversity & complexityb Farm communities taking charge slowlyb Complex Institutional arrangementsb Weal Institutional Capacity to promote NRM agendab Scaling-up beyond learning sites
  40. 40. Our Joint Project: Enhancing Communities’ AdaptiveCapacity to Climate Change in Drought- prone Hotspots of the Blue Nile basin (Kabe, Ethiopia)(Wollo University, ILRI, UNEP, ARARI)
  41. 41. This book documents a decade ofresearch, methodological innovation and lessonslearned in an eco-regional research-for-developmentprogram operating in the eastern African highlands, theAfrican Highlands Initiative. It does this throughreflections of the protagonists themselves - AHI siteteams and partners applying an action researchorientation to development innovation as a means toenhance the impact orientation of research. Itsummarizes the experiences of farmers, research anddevelopment workers, policy and decision makers whohave interacted within an innovation system aiming tooperationalize an approach to Integrated NaturalResource Management in the humid highlands. Thebook demonstrates the crucial importance of approachin the outcomes derived from research anddevelopment work, and distills lessons learnt on whatworks, where and why. It is enriched with examplesand case studies from five benchmark sites inEthiopia, Uganda and Kenya, whose variability providesthe reader with an in-depth knowledge of thecomplexities of NRM in agroecosystems that play animportant role in the rural economy of the region. It isshown that the struggle to achieve sustainableagricultural development in challenging environments isa difficult one, and can only be effectively achievedthrough combined efforts and commitment ofindividuals and institutions with complementary roles.
  42. 42. Acknowledgement• ARARI• SARI, Areka research centre• EIAR, Holleta ARC• KARI-Kenya• DRD-Tanzania• NARO-Uganda• MOAs in the respective countries• Donors: SDC, Netherlands Govnt, EU, DFID
  43. 43. Thank you !