4.5 Some observations on workgroup conclusions 

Three days of workgroup sessions with one excursion day to breath was a tough programme. The given themes tended to link and overlap, and the following major issues are noted here for consideration in further action plans in the countries and region. 

Technologies 

Discussions on purely technological issues were rare, despite this being the theme of the first day’s workgroups. Insufficient attention was also given to the definition of conservation tillage. 

It could be assumed from this that conservation tillage technologies are developed and available and need no further discussion. It could also be an indication that technologies were considered adequate and less important than transfer and dissemination strategies. Caution, however, needs be taken in drawing this conclusion, as the discussion groups were tasked to address the question of constraints hindering the spread of conservation tillage and strategies that could be used to overcome them. Groups may simply have focused their minds on the constraints associated with ‘spreading’ the technology, as opposed to the technologies themselves. 

Input level 

Differences in perceptions were mainly to do with high input commercial versus low input subsistence farming. Little or no discussion took place on the possible merits of low input commercial, low input being considered by some as a technology which would merely perpetuate poverty. It is important to recognise that poverty is relative and should be considered in material, mental and spiritual terms as well as financial. Also that significant often highly successful (even in the comparatively restricted financial sense) groups of farmers in, for example, Asia, Europe and North America could be termed 'low input commercial' farmers, dependent as many of them are on animals for traction and fertilizer. As many African and South American farmers have proved, conservation tillage can be a LEISA (Low External Input Sustainable Agriculture) technology, and a full range of strategies need to be considered at all times, without prejudice. 

Approach 

Another bone of contention was the issue of 'top-down' versus 'bottom-up', or the extent to which farmers can contribute to technology identification and development. The 'top-down' group felt technologies available were adequate and simply needed pushing ahead as a package. The 'bottom-up' thinkers tended to prefer a flexible step by step offer of alternatives where the technology users played a significant role in the selection process. Given the plethora of farming conditions and farmer circumstances in this region, as well as the general failure of 'teacher tell' strategies, the latter approach appears to have a greater chance of success, especially in the long term. 

Attitudes 

Despite the above, all participants appeared to consider the use of an holistic participatory approach to the promotion of conservation tillage farming as the only way to true participation and partnership. This would indicate that participants use the same terms but with different meanings. The drawings below illustrate how differently participation can be interpreted by different people. 
 

Land tenure 

Although perceived as a major constraint by many groups it is important that land tenure does not become a 'killer' constraint, as there are many conservation tillage measures which can and are being practised in for example communal ownership systems. Primary concerns in these systems stem from the insecurity of tenure and hence reluctance to invest in land improvement measures (such as fertility, fencing or irrigation) which may be lost when the land user is forced to leave. Possible strategies under such conditions include the use of compost, inexpensive 'living' or thorn branch fences, and adapted dryland crops or cultivars; the removal of the crop residue mulch by the communal herd, in which instance cover crops or crops less palatable to the predominant livestock species could be grown. 

Policy Requirements 

The experience of countries where conservation tillage is most widely adopted would seem to suggest the need for the right policies to be put in place. The Brazilian experience, however, seems to be as firmly rooted in the empowerment of the (especially small scale) farmers to take control of their own future, to innovate and implement as they believe best. Of concern, however, is that without one or both of these components, conservation tillage adoption in the Southern and Eastern African region may have very limited adoption, especially in the small-holder farming sectors. 

Also worth noting from these discussions was the fact that no mention was made of how the required policy changes would be effected, and what mechanisms could be used to achieve changes in attitudes, policies or practices by governments. Unfortunately this issue was not adequately addressed in the workshop.