This document summarizes a study on factors affecting the adoption of conservation agriculture in Malawi. The study was conducted in Salima District, where agriculture is the main economic driver but yields are low. Conservation agriculture promotes minimum soil disturbance, continuous soil cover, and crop rotation/associations. The study found that male-headed households and farmers who attended conservation agriculture training were more likely to adopt it. Adoption was also correlated with owning a larger farm size and making a personal financial investment in initial inputs. Reasons for stopping or never adopting conservation agriculture included high costs, lack of grants or inputs, and lack of training opportunities. The conclusion recommends improving farmer training, group mobilization, and demonstrating conservation agriculture requires low external inputs.

1. Factors Affecting Adoption of
Conservation Agriculture in Malawi
James L. Mlamba
WCCA
27 September 2011
Brisbane, Australia

2. Outline
 Introduction
 Study area
 Data collection
 Sampling procedure
 Results
 Conclusion/Recommendations

3. Introduction
 Agriculture is the single most
important sector of Malawi’s economy
 It employs about 80% of the
workforce,
 It contributes over 80% of foreign
exchange earnings
 It also contributes significantly to
national and household food security

4. Introduction
 It is characterised by low and stagnant
yields and production of crops relies
heavily on rainfall
 Crop production is mainly dominated
by maize and that is estimated to
cover 70% of the arable land
 The sector is facing some
environmental challenges, which
include soil erosion, low soil organic
matter, nutrient deficiency and water

5. Introduction
 To counteract these problems different
technologies are being promoted
among which is Conservation
Agriculture (CA)
 CA is based on the three principles of
minimum soil disturbance, continuous
soil cover and crop
rotation/associations
 Despite the efforts being employed
and benefits that CA has over
conventional land management

6. Introduction
 This study therefore was carried out to
determine factors affecting/restricting
adoption of conservation agriculture
and draw recommendations that may
help in the up-scaling of the
technology

7. Study Area
 The study was carried
out in Salima District
 It is Rift Valley
Escarpment
Physiographic region
(600-1000 masl)
Salima
 Rainfall: 800-1200mm
but most areas receive
less than 1000 mm.
 Rainy season lasts 3-4
months

8. Data Collection
• Farmer interviews were used through
administration of semi-structured
questionnaire
• Another questionnaire was also
administered to field staff

9. Sampling Procedure
 The study involved 60 farmers
 They were divided into three sub groups
-Farmers practicing CA for a minimum of
three years,
-farmers who once practiced the CA but
were no longer doing it,
-farmers who had never tried the CA
 The respondents were selected.

10. Results
• The results support the idea that male-
headed households were more likely
to adopt CA than females headed
ones
• No relationship was found between
age of the respondents and adoption
of CA
• No statistical correlation was found
between household size and CA
adoption

11. Results
 No overall correlation was found between
the adoption of CA and the household
head's level of education - probably
because less than 20% of all respondents
had actually attended school to secondary
level
 The study found no statistical correlation
between farm size and adoption of CA, but
most who did not practice CA (60%) owned
less than 2ha, while most who did practice it
(65%) owned more than 2 ha

12. Results
 A significant difference in levels of
income was observed between
farmers practicing the CA and those
who had stopped
 There was a positive correlation
between maintaining CA and having
made a personal financial outlay to
acquire the initial inputs

13. Farmer Group Membership among
Respondents
Response Practicing No longer Never
CA Practicing Practiced
CA CA
Yes 85% 30% 30%
No 15% 70% 70%

14. Results
Response Practicing No longer Never
CA Practicing Practiced
CA CA
Attended CA 100% 85% 40%
Training
Never 0% 15% 60%
attended CA
Training

15. Results
First input acquisition method
Response Practicing No longer
CA Practicing CA
Bought with own 75% 40%
cash
Loan 5% 0%
Grant 50% 60%

16. Results
Reasons for Participating in CA
Reason %
Soil and water conservation 45
Soil fertility improvement 60%
More yielding 40%
Low labour demanding 70%

17. Results
Reasons for stopping Practicing CA
Reason %
Expensive 60
Grants stopped 35
High labour demanding 10
Input scarcity 5

18. Results
Reasons for never participating in CA
Reason %
Not selected by the extension 30
worker
Expensive 30
Not Interested 15
Never been trained 20
Never heard of it 5

19. Conclusion/Recommendation
s
• Mobilising farmers to find their own
start-up inputs would enhance
adoption
• There is need to demonstrate that CA
is not synonymous with herbicide
application
• Farmer trainings in CA and mobilizing
famers into groups need to be given
more emphasis

20. Mulching after harvest Soybean crop
A legume after maize harvest A section of participants at a field
day
Thanks for the