ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
This poster is made possible by the support of the American
People provided to the Feed the Future Innovation Lab for
Sustainable Intensification through the United States Agency for
International Development (USAID). The contents are the sole
responsibility of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the
views of USAID or the United States Government. Program
activities are funded by USAID under Cooperative Agreement
No.AID-OAA-L-14-00006.
Utilization of SI Assessment Framework for Systems Analyses – Burkina Faso
INTRODUCTION
CONCLUSIONS
• Farmers’ resource endowment or wealth level differs
enormously and hence the degree of intensification of their
farming systems. Essentially, farmers are on different steps on
the ladder of intensification.
• SI Assessment Framework is used to analyze the existing
intensification practices in mixed crop-livestock systems in
Seno andYatenga provinces of Burkina Faso because the
project does not have data that cover all the SI domains for a
given project technology or intervention.
• Three levels of external input use (degree of intensification)
were identified from the baseline surveys to characterize the
existing mixed crop-livestock systems in the study sites (see
Table 1for explanation).
• More use of external inputs (fertilizer, improved crop
varieties etc) is one of the pathways of sustainable
intensification for smallholder farming systems.
SYNERGIES ANDTRADEOFFS
Indicators were identified for each of the five domains of the
Sustainable Intensification based on the available data from the
baseline surveys. The results are presented in the radar chart
for the two study sites.The synergies and tradeoffs for different
indicators are explained per SI domain.
• Productivity:The indicators used were millet and sorghum
grain yields, and milk offtake. Increased use of external inputs
led to increased millet and sorghum grain yields which was
expected.The millet and sorghum varieties were local. There
was no baseline data on crop residue biomass to assess the
effect of the increased use of external inputs.The milk offtake
(l/cow/day) was generally low for all the levels of external
input use. InYatenga province, this was zero for no and low
external inputs.This could be attributed to tradition of not
milking cow by the dominant Mossi ethnic group in the
province as milk is not part of their diet. Given this cultural
barrier, intervention to improve milk yield is not advisable in
the province.
• Increased use of external inputs led to increased crop productivity,
household net income from livestock and crop, improved soil total
phosphorus and household food security.
• It is necessary to target different intensification technologies given
different levels of external input use by farmers.
• The existing mixed crop livestock systems in the study sites can be
improved through more and efficient use of external inputs.
• Enabling environments in terms of policies that facilitate better
access to external inputs such as fertilizer, feed supplements etc.
and credit will transform smallholder farming systems in the Sahel.
• Economic: We used net income from livestock and from crop as
indicators. In both study sites, income from livestock (mainly sale of
live animals) formed an important source of revenue fr the
households. Income from livestock was at least three times that
from crop.This reaffirms the role of livestock as means of saving to
meet household cash needs.
• Environment:We used soil pH and soil total phosphorus as
indicators. In the Sahel, phosphorus is the most limiting nutrient for
crop production. Soils in both study sites were slightly acidic
irrespective of the level of external input used. Phosphorus content
increased with more external input which shows that external
input such as fertilizer is essential to avoid soil mining which is a
common problem in the Sahel.
• Human condition: Months of food security and dietary diversity
score increased with more use of external inputs.This is expected
with increased crop productivity.
• Social condition:We used proportion of women with access to
credit as indicator which was generally low in both study sites
irrespective of the level of the external input use.
International Livestock Research Institute (ILRI); Institut de l’Environnement et de Recherches Agricoles (INERA), Burkina Faso; University ofWisconsin, Madison;The
International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN), Central and West Africa Program; Fédération Nationale des Groupements Naam (FNGN), Burkina Faso; and
l'Association pour la Promotion de l’Elevage en Savane et au Sahel (APESS), Burkina Faso
Yield (Millet) kg/ha min=100
max=1500
Yield (Sorghum) kg/ha
min=150 max=1750
Milk offtake l/cow/day min=0
max=4
Net income (livestock)
$/household/year min=15
max=1881
Net income (crop)
$/household/year min=2
max=364
Soil pH Scale min=5 max=7
Soil P total mg/kg min=69
max=208
Months of food security
Months min=3 max=12
Dietary diversity score Score
min=2 max=12
Women's access to credit %
min=0 max=100
No External Input
Low External Input
Modest External Input
Yield (Millet) kg/ha min=115
max=1500
Yield (Sorghum) kg/ha min=100
max=1750
Milk offtake l/cow/day min=0 max=2
Net income (livestock)
$/household/year min=18 max=1900
Net income (crop) $/household/year
min=14 max=500
Soil pH Scale min=5 max=7
Soil P total mg/kg min=69 max=425
Months of food security Months
min=3 max=12
Dietary diversity score Score min=2
max=12
Women's access to credit % min=0
max=100
Sustainable intensification indicators for different levels of
external input use in existing mixed crop-livestock systems in
Seno Province, Burkina Faso
Sustainable intensification indicators for different
levels of external input use in existing mixed crop-
livestock systems in Yatenga Province, Burkina Faso
Level of
external input
usea
Description of level of external input
use
No of household
Seno Yatenga
No external
input
No external input but farmers practiced
water harvesting (zai or tied ridge) and
manure application
98 58
Low external
input
Water harvesting, manure application,
and occasional fertilizer application
74 124
Modest
external input
Water harvesting, manure application,
frequent application of fertilizer,
occasional use of improved crop
varieties, use of animal traction and
feed supplement for sheep fattening
and dairy cows
28 18
High external
input
Manure application, frequent
application of fertilizer, regular use of
improved crop varieties, use of tractor,
concentrate feeds for sheep fattening
and for dairy cows
0 0
Table 1. Level of external input use in mixed crop-livestock systems of the surveyed households
in Seno (n=200) and Yatenga (n=200) provinces in Burkina Faso (baseline data 2016)
aCharacterization of level of external input use was according to the farmers
324.7
920
1041.9
455.5
547
683.5
0
200
400
600
800
1000
1200
1400
Control SWC+Manure SWC+Manure+NPK
Grainyield(kgDM/ha)
Sorghum grain yield with imroved varieties under different
intensification options
Seno Yatenga