Downloaded 151 times
Uploaded byWorld Resources Institute (WRI)
Role of Integrated Soil Fertility Management to Increasing Agricultural Productivity
The document outlines the critical role of Integrated Soil Fertility Management (ISFM) in enhancing agricultural productivity across sub-Saharan Africa, emphasizing the necessity of optimizing fertilizer and organic resource use to combat low productivity and poor soil fertility. It highlights the importance of participatory learning and the development of local knowledge centers for successful ISFM implementation and scaling out its benefits among farmers. The text also underscores the commitment needed from various stakeholders, including governments and organizations, to ensure sustainable agricultural practices and improved food security in the region.
More Related Content
Similar to Role of Integrated Soil Fertility Management to Increasing Agricultural Productivity
More from World Resources Institute (WRI)
Role of Integrated Soil Fertility Management to Increasing Agricultural Productivity
- 1. IFDC The Role ofIntegrated Soil Fertility Management in Increasing Agricultural Productivity A. Mando and D. Hellums IFDC
- 2. IFDC Agriculture in Africa:challenges Poor soil fertility, drought Low productivity Fertilizer use: lowest in the world High transport costs Small markets Food imports (SSA, bln $) 240 million people live on less than US$ 1 per day; vast majority active in agriculture
- 3. IFDC Where are thedrylands? Aridity index < 0.65 RF < 800, CV 25%
- 4. IFDC And fertilizer usein the region remains low (kg nutrients/ha)
- 5. IFDC This has resultedin nutrient mining on agricultural lands 1995–97 2002–04
- 6. IFDC 0.00 0.50 1.00 1.50 2.00 2.50 3.00 3.50 4.00 4.50 1962 1965 1968 1971 1974 1977 1980 1983 1986 1989 1992 1995 1998 2001 2004 Mt/Ha Cereal Yields (Mt/Ha) Developed Countries Asia Developing LatinAmerica & Carribean Sub-Saharan Africa Cereal yields (Mt/ha) in different regions
- 7. IFDC SSA has chieflyrelied on area expansion to achieve gains in production
- 8. IFDC Changes in TropicalSoil Fertility Management Paradigms over the Past Five Decades Period Approach Role of Fertilizer Role of Organic Resources Lessons 1960- 1997 External input Major focus Minimal - Low adoption - Soil degradation 1980 Organic input Little focus Key source of nutrients - Low adoption - Soil degradation 1990 Combined use of fertilizer and Organic Resources Fertilizer to top organic input - Localized adaption - Intensification not reached 2000 Integrated Soil Fertility Management (ISFM) Major entry point Increase fertilize use efficiency - Goal of large- scale adoption - Prospect of sustainable management
- 9. IFDC Now: Integrated SoilFertility Management A set of soil fertility management practices that necessarily include the use of fertilizer, organic inputs, targeted interventions to improve soil “hospitability” (drought, acidity) and improved germplasm combined with the knowledge on how to adapt these practices to local conditions, aiming at optimizing agronomic use efficiency of the applied nutrients and improving crop productivity. All inputs need to be managed following sound agronomic and economic principles.
- 10. IFDC Integrated Soil FertilityManagement (ISFM) Optimal use of: Soil nutrients Locally available soil amendments Mineral fertilizers Improve soil “hospitability” Improve crop productivity, while maintaining or improving soil fertility
- 11. IFDC Participatory Learning /TrainingSite Specific Fertilizer Recommendation Plots N P K 0N, +P, +K 0 + + 0P, +N, +K + 0 + 0K, +N, +P + + 0 +N, +P, +K + + +
- 12. IFDC Environmental Benefits Improved Agronomic efficiency Improved Resource Useefficiency Modify Release Mechanism - Polycoating, Reactive layer, Absorbed technology Nano-material Inhibitors - Urease (NBTPT - Agrotain), Nitrification (DCD, Neem, DMPP) Site Specific Improved NUE Slow Mineralization Urea formaldehydes, Urea Polymers, Nitamin, NFusion LowHangingFruits Methods&Management New and Modified Nutrient Sources Fertilizer-Sphere - bio-coating - nutrient retention Improved Internal Use Efficiency - more grain/nutrient uptake, better nutrient partitioning High Nutrient Density Grain New Application Tools -LCC, Green Seeker Site and Crop Specific Application UDP: -Machinery - Multi-nutrient Integrated Management - Cropping Systems - Amendments New Plant Type for Maximum Uptake -more rooting & uptake - reduced losses Improved Yields Increased Income Improved Nutrition, Health, and Education Organic /Biofertilizers BNF Promoters - Soil based, Foliar (TWINN) PlantTypes Benefits Improved Livelihood Microbiology Rhizosphere Chemistry Smart Fertilizers - Host specific -Climate-driven Improved knowledge
- 13.
- 14. IFDC ISFM works formaize-based systems 5.6 3.3 3.2 0 2000 4000 6000 Kasaï Kuleni BH140 Grainyield(kgha -1 ) without fertilizer with fertilizer SED* (variety effect) SED** (fertilizer) 5.6 3.3 3.2 0 2000 4000 6000 Kasaï Kuleni BH140 BH5 Grainyield(kgha -1 ) without fertilizer with fertilizer SED* (variety effect) SED** (fertilizer) Maize yield in East DR Congo Local Improved ISFM is technically sound
- 15. IFDC Pearl Millet TotalDMY vs. Management Practices, Sadore, Niger Source: Bationo, 1998. ISFM is technically sound
- 16. IFDC Sorghum Grain Yieldas Affected by Mineral Fertilizers and Manure in the Sudanian Zone of West Africa Source: Sedogo, 1993.
- 17. IFDC Fertilizer N application(kg ha-1) 0 20 40 60 80 100 Maizegrainyield(tha-1) 0 1 2 3 4 5 infields outfields www.ifdc.org Added benefits obtained on infields and outfields, northern Togo, 2001
- 18. IFDC Mais en associationavec Acacia auriculiformis Années 0 1 2 3 Rendementdemais(tha-1) 0 1 2 3 No fert. No trees Fert. No trees Fert. Trees No fert. Trees www.ifdc.org Effect of Acacia litter and mineral fertilizer on maize yield, Benin
- 19. IFDC Select Options Test Evaluate Development andDissemination of ISFM Diagnose
- 20. IFDC DEVELOPMENT AND DISSEMINATION OFISFM Testing of soil fertility management options Testing organizational arrangements to facilitate access to input, collective work for GRN and output markets Villages become learning and ultimately knowledge centers Farmer to farmer training
- 21. IFDC Farmers are describingtheir crops Results Grounding ISFM Within Knowledge Centers Through Participatory Learning
- 22. IFDC K deficiency in K deficiencyin P N deficiency Grounding ISFM Within Knowledge Centers Good field Some Indicators of Maize Performance
- 23. IFDC Grounding ISFM WithinKnowledge Centers Evaluation by the Learning Group
- 24. IFDC www.ifdc.org Farmer – to– Farmer Extension Pilot village Neighboring village Neighboring village Neighboring village First generation innovations Adaptations by other farmers Comments Scaling out through farmer-to- farmer
- 25. IFDC Scaling out throughInnovation Platform Policy NGOs FBO CBO Industries Input markets ExtensionFarmers Output markets Research Innovation is the outcome of networking and interactions among many actors to make things happen
- 26. IFDC Public Evaluation ofISFM (Knowledge sharing) Good Farm Bad Farm – K Deficiency
- 27. IFDC Farmers led ruralworkshop on ISFM – Southern Togo 400 participants Scaling Up Through Knowledge Sharing with all stakholders
- 28. IFDC Number of HouseholdsReached From 2006 to 2010 West Africa—SAADA Source: IFDC, 2011
- 29. IFDC Changes in Yieldof Four Major Crops From 2006 to 2010 West Africa—SAADA Source: IFDC, 2011.
- 30. IFDC Revenue Generated byFour Major Crops Per Hectare, 2006-2010 West Africa—SAADA Source: IFDC, 2011.
- 31. IFDC Additional Land AreaUnder Sustainable Use, 2006-2010 (in hectares) West Africa—SAADA Source: IFDC, 2011.
- 32. IFDC Trend of AnnualAdditional Agricultural Production in Cereal Equivalents (mt) West Africa—SAADA Source: IFDC, 2011.
- 33. IFDC Farmer Cluster Participationand ISFM Adoption by Country and Year Central Africa—CATALIST Source: IFDC, 2012.
- 34. IFDC Summary of YieldIncreases by Hectare (ha) Per Harvest Central Africa—CATALIST Source: IFDC, 2012.
- 35. IFDC Strong commitment atvarious level for action on Soil Health Abuja Declaration on the Uniquely African Green Revolution and on Inputs NEPAD and its CAADP, offers a framework for consensual policies and priorities for all stakeholders. National and Regional Investment programs Various conventional and non conventional donors commitment to soil health 2008 food crisis This commitment needs to be backed with science based principles www.ifdc.org Concluding Remarks
- 36. IFDC For ISFM tofulfill the promises in SSA the following are essential: Innovation systems, extensions tools and systems to be established Increased farmers access to inputs (fertilizer, seed, organic resources, etc.…) Capacity building of R&D staff and institutions to address diversity, complexity and emerging global issues Technological and processes innovations to improve nutrient use and water use Concluding Remarks
- 37.