Three lead papers were presented on this theme. 

The first, by Soza, Violic, and Haag, highlighted successes achieved with no-till in Latin America and Ghana. The effects of continued use of conventional plough-based tillage practices on erosion run-off, soil organic matter, available water capacity, crop yields, weed competition etc. had proven disastrous. A dramatic immediate change to no-tillage in Africa through training of farmers, extensionists and researchers was needed. Constraints do exist, especially those associated with maintaining adequate soil cover as a result of livestock needs, lack of capital, weed competition and drought, and addressing these requires further investigation. Technologies falling short of no-till such as land levelling, terracing, contour planting, tied ridges are considered wasteful and time consuming. 

The second paper by I. Nyagumbo focused on experiences and constraints to the adoption of conservation tillage practices in the southern and eastern African region. The paper cites inadequate access to draught power; lack of appropriate implements, capital, and access to credit; poor weed control due to insufficient labour; lack of farmer awareness and management capabilities as some of the major constraints. Technologies considered promising include no-till, tied ridging, tied furrows, mulch ripping or mulch tillage, ripping without residues or clean ripping, hand hoeing and no-till strip cropping. These technologies are used in combination with mechanical conservation structures such as contour ridges, infiltration pits, fanya juus as well as biological barriers such as vetiver strips etc. 

The third paper by Brunner and Mariki presents available conservation tillage technologies which both large-scale commercial and small-scale subsistence farmers can adopt. Four mulch/tillage based options, namely reduced tillage by chisel plough, ripping between rows, seed furrow opening and direct seeding, are described, all more appropriate to better mechanised commercial farmers. Tied ridges and tied furrows are also described as suitable alternatives where mulch residues are not available, technologies particularly suited to small-holder farmers. Some critical steps during the transition to conservation tillage such as sub-soiling and good weed management are also highlighted. 

Conservation Tillage is generally defined as any tillage sequence whose object is to minimise or reduce soil and water loss and which results in the presence of at least 30 % or more mulch or crop residue cover on the surface at or after planting. In Africa, however, the term has been loosely used to refer to any tillage system whose objective is to conserve or reduce soil, water or nutrient loss, or which reduces tillage or draught power requirements for crop production. 

Thus the first paper dealt almost exclusively with no-till, while the two African papers considered also technologies falling short of the threshold 30% mulch cover. 

After the lead paper presentations, participants were asked to put up on cards two key issues with regard to conservation tillage technologies which they felt needed attention in order for conservation tillage to spread. After clustering the cards five main areas of discussion were identified, and participants were split into five groups, viz. 

Group 1: Soil Cover 

Group 2: Weed management 

Group 3: Development of Appropriate Technologies 

Group 4: Availability of implements 

Group 5: Soil & Water Conservation 

4.1.1 Summary of group findings 

The groups identified a wide range of major constraints such as inappropriate and inadequate dissemination of technologies; lack of capital; high risk associated with conservation tillage practices; labour and draught power shortages; insufficient managerial skills; insecure land tenure; and weed control as hindering the spread of conservation tillage. Conservation was not a top priority to farmers although they continued to experience declining yields. Benefits of conservation tillage also tended to be long term and could not be easily visualized by farmers. 

Strategies to overcome these constraints were also diverse but included the use of cover crops to increase biomass levels; awareness campaigns; generation of appropriate technologies through participatory technology development; improving support services through agri-business entrepreneurs; land tenure policy reviews; and other miscellaneous issues. 

Strong feelings were expressed during group discussions that the transition from conventional practices to true conservation tillage could not be achieved overnight. Participants from the region generally felt all reduced, minimum or no-till tillage practices which addressed the problems of soil erosion, run-off and nutrient losses as well as reduced draft power requirements had to be considered conservation tillage even if they did not maintain mulch cover levels of the threshold limit of 30%. Whilst 30% mulch cover was highly desirable it was not practically feasible to any large extent with the current agricultural systems in the region. It is noteworthy however that discussions throughout this theme did not focus much on the technicalities of the technologies themselves but rather more on issues related to their adoption. 

Major issues identified during the group discussions included: 

A) Broadening knowledge of Conservation tillage 

Lack of awareness of the value of conservation tillage systems in soil protection and sustainability of crop production was identified as a constraint by all five groups. It was felt farmers were often reluctant to adopt conservation tillage practices due to poor or misinformation or perceptions. Strategies which could be utilised to address these problems included: 

Awareness campaigns 

Creating farmer awareness of the potential benefits of conservation tillage and the need to preserve mulch. Community focused campaigns needed to expound the basic principles and relationships of soil erosion processes, and their effects on productivity and downstream impacts on the environment. The role of conservation tillage practices in addressing this problem could then be put into context. 

Improvement of information flow to farmers and the public in general was advocated, and could be achieved through various forums such as radio and television programmes, newsletters, etc. The development of farmer kept reference or self-study material was also recommended. Such reference materials could include guidelines for selection of conservation tillage technologies based on physical and socio-economic criteria for various farmer circumstances. Schools curricula and other training institutions could also integrate conservation tillage courses so as to ensure the principles are understood from earliest years. 

Training 

Extensive training in conservation tillage technologies was considered essential for all stakeholders including researchers, extensionists, farmers, and Non Governmental Organisations and agri-business managers and workers. In particular the correct and safe use of herbicides was pointed out as a critical element which could reduce their effects on the environment and ensure applications were cost effective. Effective partnerships between farmers, researchers, extensionists and industry should also be established. 

Information exchange 

Information exchange between stakeholders could be facilitated through the setting up of regional or sub-regional networks. This could help to share experiences and advances in technology as well as avoid the wastage of resources by not ‘re-inventing the wheel’. 

B) Strengthening farmer participation 

Three groups identified lack of farmer participation as the main reason for the generation of inappropriate and unaffordable technologies and implements. It was generally felt and recommended that the use of participatory technology development methods could assist ensure technologies addressed farmer needs and were client driven. Technologies have to be appropriate, realistic and practical even if they do not conform to the international definition of conservation tillage practices. Empowerment of community based organisations (CBOs) was also considered desirable as a means for strengthening the farmer-extension-research linkage and ensuring technologies were generated in line with farmer circumstances. The lack of appropriate implements was attributed to weak researcher-farmer-extension-industry linkages. 

C) Improvement of Farmer Management Skills 

Two groups emphasised the need for the improvement of farmer management skills. Time management and planning on the part of small-holders was generally poor. Planting and weed control were often not performed timeously and resulted in low yields. The use of conservation tillage techniques requires a high level of management and conservation tillage was consequently perceived by farmers to be a high risk technology which they were reluctant to adopt. 

Management skill required also related to the scale and nature of the operation. Some participants believed commercially orientated small scale farmers tended to manage their farms more efficiently than their subsistence counterparts. It was accepted, however, that 'commercial' did not necessarily mean 'high external input'. Some participants believed low external input agriculture often perpetuated poverty, while others argued that the risks incurred when borrowing money for dry-land cropping in drought prone environments were often unacceptable. 

D) Facilitating access to credit. 

Issues pertaining to access to credit were raised in four groups. Most small-holder farmers in the region are poorly resourced and have a limited capital base. Technologies which require substantial capital for equipment or inputs are not easily adopted unless they offer high immediate returns. The drought-prone situation of most small-holders in the region makes them uncreditworthy. 

Implements, herbicides, spraying equipment, fertilizers and crop protectants required for classical conservation tillage practices all require money. Where it was believed sustainable systems could result from loan finance, the groups recommended the mobilization of support from donors, governments, NGOs and industry as well as the setting up of rural credit and finance institutions. The use of farmer groups and the establishment of group lending schemes were considered as viable options. Using this approach some equipment could be purchased and shared by the group members. 

E) Development of entrepreneurship and effective support services 

Lack of adequate support services and poor marketing infrastructure were identified as constraints affecting the timeliness of operations. Development of effective support services for the provision of suitable implements, input supplies and marketing infrastructure was considered highly desirable. Rural workshops could be used to foster agri-business entrepreneurship for effective commercialization of agricultural sectors particularly in the smallholder farming sector in the region. The provision of these workshops and the availability of rural credit and finance could contribute to making implements and inputs more affordable to farmers. The introduction of draught power service providers was also seen as a possible solution to draught power problems. Policies facilitating infrastructural development through the promotion of agri-business entrepreneurs and reduction in import taxes were also considered, although all possible effects of governmental intervention required extremely careful consideration before introduction. 

Participants also believed more intensive collaboration and networking among stakeholders on the provision of appropriate and affordable implements and inputs was needed. 

F) Reform of Land tenure systems and Policies 

The absence of free-hold land tenure systems in many areas of most countries in the region were recognised as major constraints to the establishment of effective soil cover, as were the communal grazing practices and the lack of fences around arable fields which so often occurred in those areas. 

Possible remedies included: 

• Changing the land tenure systems such that farmers have title to their land and so have a greater stake in its up-keep.
• Cropping systems need to consider provision of supplementary livestock feed through fodder banks and „Fodder for livestock and food crops for humans".

• Fencing, utilising naturally occurring materials such as branches or thorns, traditional or introduced 'living' fences of uni- or preferably multi(fodder, fruit, firewood, medicine etc)-purpose plants, or wire, could enable the retention of mulch over the dry winter months characteristic of this region.

In short the opportunities for success in achieving adequate soil cover have to be centred around solving the complexities associated with managing communally shared resources. 

The need for reviewing land tenure policies is therefore of paramount importance to the adoption of conservation tillage practices particularly where soil cover is the objective. 

Other policy issues which may need to be addressed included: 

• Decentralization of research and extension services to district or province level for planning purposes;
• Soil and water conservation policies;
• Incentives e.g. low interest rates on loans for conservation tillage equipment, reduction in import duty.

Enactment of enabling policies by governments could help to facilitate the adoption of conservation tillage. Pressure groups on conservation tillage could take the role of lobbying governments to put in place such policies. 

G) General Comments 

It is noteworthy that discussions focused more on dissemination strategies than on the technologies themselves. This could be interpreted as an indication that technologies were considered adequate and less important than transfer issues, but the groups were tasked to address (and in the main discussed) the constraints hindering the spread of, not the limitations within, conservation tillage technology. In fact throughout the workshop participants expressed the feeling that conservation tillage techniques appropriate to specific situations could best be identified by the pooling of the indigenous knowledge of local farmers with the external learnings and experiences of extensionists and researchers, and that appropriate technologies for a specific situation may be unique to that locality and requirement. Thus plenary discussions also focused on the need to implement demonstrations and on-farm research trials. 

Differences in perceptions were mainly to do with commercial versus low input subsistence farming. Another issue was that of top-down versus bottom-up approaches, and the extent to which farmers could be involved in technology generation. The top-down group felt technologies available were adequate and simply needed vigorous promotion as a package. The bottom-up advocates tended to prefer a flexible step by step offer of alternatives where the technology users played an equal or dominant role in technique selection. The majority believed the diverse nature of farming conditions in the region makes it imperative that the latter approach be used.