Call for examples and good practices on investments for healthy food systems
The Committee on World Food Security invites you to share experiences and examples to help identify lessons learned and good practices on investments promoting healthy food systems, including those implemented through south-south and triangular exchanges.
Taking stock of existing country-level experiences and lessons learnt on how to improve nutrition is a powerful way to stimulate stakeholders to adopt, adapt and scale up proven and effective practices that are both country- and context- specific.
The results of this exercise will inform CFS policy development work on nutrition to align CFS efforts to foster global policy convergence with identified gaps, country needs and realities, and contribute effectively to the UN Decade of Action on Nutrition.
A selection of the submitted experiences and examples will be compiled in a background document for discussion in the CFS 44th Plenary meeting (CFS44) in Rome on 10 October 2017.
In the selection process, we will consider diversity in terms of geography, actors and perspectives, food systems, investments and nutrition issues addressed. We will also consider the lessons learnt in terms of their relevance for policy making, the evidence of how nutrition outcomes changed or are expected to change alongside the extent to which the examples present lessons (positive and negative) that could inform future investments. Examples jointly submitted by stakeholders are encouraged.
To make your contributions as relevant as possible, we would like to invite you to focus on:
- Food systems: describe the food system your example belongs to, the nutrition challenges and inter-linkages and complementarities among the system’s components;
- Nutrition: describe how the example addresses nutrition issues in the context of the food system considered;
- Investments: describe the investments and their objectives, as well as their intended and unintended outcomes, on nutrition in particular;
- Inclusiveness: describe to which extent the investment considered was developed through a multi-stakeholder and participatory approach;
- Learning: describe the lessons (positive and negative) that can be learned from your case and whether these could be replicable in contexts having the same/similar characteristics and how gaps, obstacles and any other adverse conditions were addressed;
- Diversity: describe the geographic scope and the different stakeholders involved in your example;
- South-south or triangular collaboration: If applicable, describe whether the example has benefitted from a south-south or triangular cooperation approach.
The deadline for submissions is 19 May 2017.
Please use the submission form to share your examples and experiences.
You can download it here: http://bit.ly/2nAitb1
You can upload the completed form below or send it via email to [email protected].
For more information on CFS’ engagement in advancing nutrition please see: http://www.fao.org/3/a-mr186e
The Committee on World Food Security (CFS) is the foremost inclusive international and intergovernmental platform for all stakeholders to work together to ensure food security and nutrition for all. The Committee reports to the UN General Assembly and to FAO Conference. With a membership of 135 countries and using a multi-stakeholder, inclusive approach, CFS develops and endorses evidence-based policy recommendations and guidance on a wide range of food security and nutrition topics. CFS holds an annual plenary session every October in FAO, Rome.
Topics
- Read 37 contributions
Proponent
Tetra Laval Food for Development Office
Katarina Eriksson, Senior Project and Partnership Development Manager
Date/Timeframe and location
Project name: Dairy Hub and Dairy Academy Development in Bangladesh
Timeframe: 2011 and onwards. From 2014, donor funding has co-funded the development of 3 dairy hubs (no 3,4,5) in a 3.5 year partnership project.
Location: Bangladesh
Main responsible entity
PRAN Dairy in Bangladesh (part of PRAN-RFL Group)
Nutrition context
The Dairy Hub model, as implemented in Bangladesh, was developed by Tetra Pak and its Food for Development Office together with Tetra Pak’s sister company DeLaval. The Dairy Hub project in Bangladesh started as a private sector initiative in 2011 as a response to the dairy processor’s need to source more locally produced milk for processing.
In 2008, as a response to the food crisis, when prices of globally traded milk powder more than doubled, and when Tetra Pak realised that many dairy processing customers in developing countries had problems to cope with these cost increases, Tetra Pak took the initiative to develop the “Dairy Hub model” as a way to help customers in developing countries get access to more locally produced milk and better quality milk.
The model rests upon the idea of linking smallholder farmers to a dedicated dairy processor in a selected area, and providing hands-on practical knowledge transfer. By setting up sufficient infrastructure with appropriate technology and cooling facilities, providing knowledge transfer, and offering the farmers advisory services, the supply of locally produced quality milk will increase and the dairy processor can establish a more stable supply chain.
In Bangladesh, the market for safe, nutritious and affordable dairy products is increasing and milk, being a very nutritious food, should be made available to all consumers. This project links smallholder dairy farmers in Bangladesh to the dairy industry. Small holders increase volumes and quality of locally produced milk and the dairy processor puts safe, nutritious dairy products on the market at affordable prices. Dependence on imported milk powder is reduced and milk is available and affordable also to consumers with low incomes.
In addition to milk being available to more consumers, farmers benefitting from the project increase their incomes and invest some of their additional income on improving their diet. Safe, affordable milk can now also be made available for school feeding and other social programs.
Key characteristics of the food system(s) considered
- Bangladesh is a country depending on import of milk and dairy products. The demand for milk and dairy products is increasing. This project has reduced the need for imported milk powder and made more products based on locally produced milk available in the market.
The introduction of milk in aseptic packaging has made it possible to distribute milk without the need for cooling. Safe milk and dairy products are now available to more consumers, not only through retail but also through “traditional trade”, i.e local markets and kiosks etc.
Key characteristics of the investment made
A Dairy Hub project requires investments in:
- Pre-project assessments of milk production potential, identification of strategic locations for collection centers, project feasibility etc
- Infrastructure such as collection/cooling centers, milk quality control and milk transporting equipment/vehicles
- Milk reception, processing and packaging equipment
- Farmer and staff training in milk production incl. animal health and breeding, milk quality, feed production and feeding, farm management etc
- Farmer services such as veterinary services, input supplies etc
- Project management
All investments in “hard ware” are made by the private sector. Some of the investments in training and project management has been co-funded by donor funds (Sida) in a 3.5-year Private Public Development Partnership project implemented by Unido.
Key actors and stakeholders involved (including through south-south/triangular exchanges, if any)
- PRAN Dairy in Bangladesh
- Tetra Pak Bangladesh
- Tetra Laval Food for Development Office
- Swedish International Development Cooperation Agency (Sida)
- Unido (implementer of partnership co-financed by Sida)
Ministry of Fisheries and Livestock- Department of Livestock Services
Key changes (intended and unintended) as a result of the investment/s
The middle men that used to buy farmer’s milk on irregular basis are no longer involved. The milk reaches the dairy faster and with better quality. Farmers benefit from a secure market for all milk they produce and get a fair price. Farmers’ incomes increase.
Examples of impact after 60 months (Dairy Hub no 1):
- Average milk yield per cow per day increased from 4.45 to 10.8 litres (+143%)
- Average income per smallholder farmer (2006 farmers) increased from USD 100 to USD 244 (+144%)
- Daily milk collection in Dairy Hub 1 area increased from 2,000 litres to 41,000 litres
When the five Dairy Hubs are completed and fully operational, more than 10,000 farmers will be covered by the project.
Challenges faced
- Staff trained by the project is attractive on the labor market and many leave for other employment.
- Partnership projects are complex and stakeholders different internal processes sometimes lead to delays.
Lessons/Key messages
- Smallholders can be effectively integrated into formal industrial value chains.
- Project results and impact must be carefully monitored, in this case on a per cow and per farm basis.
- Project feasibility should be demonstrated by private sector first, and donor funding used to scale up and increase outreach.
The PRAN Dairy Hub case is described in HYSTRA’s report “Smallholder farmers and business” “http://hystra.com/smallholder/
Proponent
Dr. Ray-yu Yang, Nutritionist, World Vegetable Center
Date/Timeframe and location
Years: 2014-2015
Countries: Bhutan, Burkina Faso, Indonesia, Nepal
Main responsible entity
Vegetables Go to School (VGtS) is a multidisciplinary, school-based project developed and overseen by a team of international researchers from The World Vegetable Center, Swiss Tropical and Public Health Institute, Freiburg University, and members from each countries’ Ministries of Agriculture, Education, and Health. It is funded by Swiss Agency for Development and Cooperation
Nutrition context
Food security and nutrition are basic human rights and fundamental to a healthy and productive life, yet critical hunger and malnutrition persists in developing countries1. Enhancing children’s education is one of the key investments that can contribute to breaking the vicious cycle of poverty and malnutrition and bring positive social in the next generation. The VGtS project used multi-intervention school garden programs that incorporates agriculture, nutrition and WASH (water, sanitation and hygiene) education, and community outreach to improve community food security and nutrition.
Key characteristics of the food system(s) considered
A school garden program is an educational tool used to teach students on agriculture, nutrition and health to equip them with the critical and holistic thinking to face today and future challenges in environmental changes, and food security and nutrition. The school garden program serves as an entry point for children to learn about food systems, as well as an entry point for interactions between students, parents, teachers, and community members.
A school garden can be regarded as a small food system; and a healthy garden can include the production of plant and animal food and be designed to address biodiversity, healthy diets and eco-friendly environments. A healthy garden can produce fruits and vegetables that can be consumed by students and their families through school meals or the distribution to children to bring home to their families.
Key characteristics of the investment made
Pre-intervention:
Training of Trainers on School Garden Program for four country project teams, and in-country training of teachers on implementation of school garden program and data collection in four countries
Interventions at schools:
Implementation of School Garden Program:
- School garden curriculum integrating agriculture, nutrition and WASH concepts and practices
- School garden setup and management for handson learning
- School garden demonstration and promotion events for intergenerational learning, community outreach and encouraging the linkage with other food, nutrition and health initiatives at schools
Key actors and stakeholders involved (including through south-south/triangular exchanges, if any)
The inclusion of project country team members from multiple government ministries (Ministry of Agriculture, Education, and Health) promoted coordination within government and ensures government ownership. South-South Coordination was done by exchanging knowledge and technology through regular team meeting and study tours.
VGtS involves school administrators, teachers, and agriculture extension workers in building school gardens, and cooperates with existing programs already in place. For instance, In Bhutan VGtS partnered with National School Agriculture Programme to enrich the curriculum and activities by incorporating nutrition and WASH principles, and involved local parents. The beneficiaries were primary school children and parents. Although the analysis only targeted children, improving children’s education and diet would also have influences on their parents and household.
Key changes (intended and unintended) as a result of the investment/s
The project used randomized control trials (RCT) and measured the program’s nutritional impact on school children in developing countries. The data from school children for two years showed that the program significantly increased students2-5:
- Agriculture, nutrition and WASH knowledge
- Fruits and vegetable awareness
- Healthy food and snack, and fruits and vegetables preferences
- Likelihood to consume vegetables
Challenges faced
The challenges VGtS school garden program faced include:
- Lack of resources in developing countries. Ex) WASH practices in Burkina Faso were constrained by lack of WASH facilities and latrines.
- Sustainability and success is reliant on financial motivation for agriculture extension workers, school administration, and teachers for continuous monitoring.
- Proper fencing is required for preventing wild animals from destroying gardens in Bhutan
- Environmental factors such as low water availability in Nepal, Indonesia, and Burkina Faso affected gardens
Lessons/Key messages
The success of the VGtS school garden program in improving students’ nutritional behavior and influencing household food security is largely due to multi-ministry participation, government support, international partnerships, comprehensive teaching curriculum and garden demonstrations, and motivated communities.
Recommendations
Form the evidence and experiences learnt from the VGtS project, we recommend
- Investment in a multi-intervention school garden program with (a) school garden, (b) agriculture, nutrition and WASH education and practices, and (c) community outreach in schools with access to water and latrines.
- Incorporate the school garden program in the national curriculum to ensure program quality and sustainability.
National Government Recommendations:
- Increase financial and technical support to implement school garden programs in schools with access to water and latrines, for monitoring and evaluation, training of teachers, teacher incentives, program materials, and promotional activities.
- Collaborate with ministries of agriculture, education and health in implementing and supervising the program to ensure government ownership and pulling resources from different ministries for the school garden program.
School Garden Program Implementation:
- Incorporate agriculture, nutrition and WASH education, inter-generational learning and community outreach in school garden programs to effectively achieve food and nutrition goals.
- Link school garden programs with home and community garden or food production programs to improve household food security and nutrition. Government support for agricultural extension and training for home gardeners is needed.
- Combine school garden program with a school-feeding program to more effectively increase students’ intake of nutritious fruits and vegetables and balanced meals.
- Give incentives to school staff to motivate their participation in the school garden program. Teachers in the school garden program are important resource persons for training other teachers and parents on agriculture, nutrition and WASH.
Provide quality seeds, stable water sources or water-saving technologies to ensure school garden operation
Dear FSN Forum,
Find below my contribution on the lessons and good practiceson investments for healthy food systems.
Best regards
Elizabeth
Proponent
Strengthening small holder farmers’ local initiatives on good practices on investments for health food systems through agro-ecology and food sovereignty in Zimbabwe rural areas.
Date/Timeframe and location
July 2017-July 2018 and Located in Shashe Area, Masvingo Province
Main responsible entity
Zimbabwe Small Holder Farmers’ Forum (ZIMSOFF)
Nutrition context
Since 2002, when it was formed ZIMSOFF has over the years been practicing food sovereignty and agro-ecology as well promoting production of small grains (Pulses) such as ground nuts, round nuts, cow peas, rapoko, sweet potatoes, pumpkins, sesame, millet and sorghum including agro-forestry of fruit trees. This has been practiced in Shashe area In Masvingo and other areas in Matebeleland North, Mashonaland and Manicaland province. This provides a diversified nutrition system and small grains have proved to be highly nutritious to improve dietary concerns of rural small holder farmers especially women. At the forefront of this local initiative is Mrs Elizabeth Mpofu from Shashe and resulted in United Nations Food and Agricultural Organisation (FAO) recognizing her role in promotion of Pulses and appointing her the Special Ambassador for Pulses in Africa in August 2016.
Key characteristics of the food system(s) considered
- Food sovereignty: a concept that recognizes the right of local peoples to healthy and culturally appropriate food produced through sustainable methods and their right to define their own food and agriculture systems.
- Prioritizes local food production and consumption giving a country the right to protect its local producers from cheap imports and to control production.
- Agro-Ecology: the practice of applying ecological concepts and principles to the design and management of sustainable production systems (agro-ecosystems).
- Agro-ecology and production of small grains is the best agricultural practice that rural people can adopt to adapt and be resilient to harsh climatic conditions and have a stable nutrition system and provides diversified and sustainable nutrition systems as compared to conventional type of agricultural systems.
Key characteristics of the investment made
- Establishment of the Shashe Agro-Ecology School that promotes farmer to farmer training or extension services whereby farmers visit the school, share experiences and learn from each other on agro-ecology. It is referred to as farmer-to-farmer training or extension services on agro-ecology and food sovereignty and sustainable nutrition practices.
- It is part of the La Via Campesina’s network of over 40 Agro-ecology schools around the world, and promotes the exchange of experiences through horizontal learning, to disseminate agro-ecological and sustainable peasant agriculture practices
- Examples include organic farming, diversified crop rotations, biological pest control, extensive agro-pastoral systems and agroforestry.
- Investments in climate change resilient practices such as sustainable land and water management through building of earth dams, pit holes, contours, veet grass that holds moistures and mulching and organic farming through use of manure, compost and conservation agriculture. One ZIMSOFF member, Mr Mawara from Murowa has won an award for good water harvesting practices in light of uncertainties in rainfall patterns in Zimbabwe.
- Local seed multiplication of small grains and seed banking for future use by farmers including exchanging and selling among themselves in promotion of food sovereignty and production of small grains.
- Construction of grain storages in each home stead, drying places and processing centers for value addition including packaging to prevent post-harvest losses.
Key actors and stakeholders involved (including through south-south/triangular exchanges, if any)
- ZIMSOFF cluster members around the country organized into small holder farmers’ organisations at household levels, district and national levels.
- ZIMSOFF local network members such as PELUM Zimbabwe and regional members such La Via Campesina (an international movement which brings together millions of peasants, small and medium-size farmers, landless people, women farmers, indigenous people, migrants and agricultural workers from around the world. It defends small-scale sustainable agriculture as a way to promote social justice and dignity), Eastern and Southern Africa Small Scale Farmers (ZIMSOFF being one of the founding member of this regional network), Alliance for Food Sovereignty in Africa (AFSA), Third World Network and African Centre for Biodiversity (ACB) all these organisations promoting agro-ecology and food sovereignty and local small holder farmer initiatives on sustainable agricultural practices that promote a diversified nutrition in the region and South-South cooperation.
- ZIMSOFF also works with the Ministry of Agriculture and local extension services as well as other international organisations such FAO, Action and Oxfam.
Key changes (intended and unintended) as a result of the investment/s
Some of the intended key changes include a diversified food and nutrition system among ZIMSOFF members, scaling up of agro-ecology and food sovereignty among ZIMSOFF members around the country, climate change resilient agricultural practices, sustainable water and soil management practices and strengthening leadership skills among women farmers and their engagement with policy makers through learning from the Shashe school. This has also resulted in improved income generation from farming practices by selling to other communities and the entire nation and other peoples from the South-South cooperation initiatives. The other changes are turning once a non-productive land that was reserved for cattle ranching into productive land for food production and also ensuring that international organisations such as FAO to have a buy in and promote production of small grains (Pulses).
Some of the unintended changes include some backlashes from seed companies competing with small holders for seed supply as farmers exchanging and selling their seed among themselves. Other changes include criticisms from some sections of the society who claim that indigenous seeds are not productive ignoring that the seeds are resilient to harsh climate conditions and are freely available within communities. Some sections of society allege that agro-ecology is expensive for small holder farmers ignoring that agro-ecology is based on use of available ecological resources and that it conserves the available ecological resources as compared to conventional agricultural practices.
Challenges faced
- The Agro-ecology school is located in agro ecological region IV that a very dry area receiving an average of 400mm of rainfall per year. Dry land agriculture has failed sometimes due to the current droughts.
- One of the goals of ZIMSOFF is to scale up the agro-ecology schools and build more school around the country to meet the high demand of farmer to farmer training but funding constraints have hampered this and ZIMSOFF hope that this award will help in scaling up the practices.
- Conventional agriculture is the more dominant and powerful alternative to food production at this stage, it is pushing for an industrial agricultural approach, which over the years has vested more and more power and profit into the hands of fewer and fewer corporations
- Of recent the Government of Zimbabwe has committed to implementing the Comprehensive African Agricultural Development program (CAADP), the 2014 Malabo Declaration and the SADC Regional Agricultural Policy of 2014 and its Investment Plans which are a threat to local solutions towards food sovereignty. These policies and programmes promote conventional forms of agriculture and do not recognize the importance of food sovereignty and agro-ecology that have been the backbone of sustainable nutrition practices by small holder farmers in rural areas especially women farmers.
Lessons/Key messages
- Some of the lessons learnt so far include the following:
- The need for national and regional policy makers to support local farmers’ initiatives in food and nutrition by promoting agro-ecology, food sovereignty and production of small grains (Pulses).
- Need for a policy on agro-ecology and food sovereignty.
- Farmer to farmer training is the best way of extension services as farmers learn from each other and coping and scaling up the knowledge gained in other communities and neighboring countries.
- There is need to upscale initiatives by farmers in seed multiplication and seed banking and retain seeds for future use that are climate change resilient.
Dear FSN Forum,
Last year, the Private Sector Mechanism hosted a Partnership Forum on Nutrition where a diversity of examples and case-studies on Investments for Healthy Food Systems were made. I would like to share the final report of this Forum in which all the case-studies are summarized. I hope this collection will be helpful.
Best regards,
Morgane
Proponent
Christoph Lindinger
Date/Timeframe and location
23/04/2014 up to date
Choma District, Southern Province , Zambia
Main responsible entity
Yumi Milling Ltd
PO Box 630683, Choma, Zambia
Nutrition context
Yumi Milling Ltd aims to develop an agricultural cluster in a rural community in Southern Zambia. Built around the milling of maize, we aim to integrate as many local farmers and their families into our value chains. We promote crop diversification and we aim to increase the availability and affordability of nutritious food products to schools and private persons.
We aim to help small scale farmer to venture in more profitable agricultural value chains, such as poultry and dairy, which will also help to ensure food security and the nutritional standard of the surrounding community.
Key characteristics of the food system(s) considered
The core of our food system is the integration of smallholder farmers into our value chains, therefore increasing their income and their nutrition.
The by-products of the processing of maize and oil seeds will ensure affordable feed and short distances will ensure optimum efficiency.
We plan to implement a community feedlot which will work similar to a warehouse receipt system. Farmers will be given the opportunity to access short term loans for farming inputs.
Key characteristics of the investment made
Our efforts are so far financed solely privately. We haven´t received any support form NGO´s or other institutions.
We are currently in the process of applying for a grant from Innovations Against Poverty (IAP) since we reached a stage where we would need support to grow YUMI and serve even more farmers in the community.
Key actors and stakeholders involved (including through south-south/triangular exchanges, if any
Christoph Lindinger (German) – Founding Director
Nickson Ndawa (Zambian) – Director and Administrator
Enock Siankwilimba (Zambian) – Advisor, MUSIKA
Key changes (intended and unintended) as a result of the investment/s
Dairy farmers can access affordable local feed and increase their milk output. Poultry businesses are thriving in the surrounding.
Challenges faced
Working capital is very expensive in Zambia. We are competing with some big milling companies and we do not have the financial muscle to stock up enough maize during the marketing season. In order to grow sustainably and reach more farmers we will need to come up with solutions to buy enough maize between June and November in order to work throughout the rainy season.
Lessons/Key messages
Private investments can start development initiatives in the food sector, but any company faces a point where it needs external sources in order to exploit given growth opportunities. Food processing is capital intense and it needs to be supported.
Dr. Amanullah, The University of Agriculture Peshawar, Pakistan
21.04.2017
Proponent
Phosphorus and zinc fertilization improve food and feed nutrition under rice-wheat cropping system
Dr. Amanullah* (Associate Professor Agronomy, The University of Agriculture Peshawar) &
Dr. Inamullah (Agriculture Officer, Department Agriculture Extension, Batkhela, Malakand)
Date/Timeframe and location
Two years: 2011-2012 (year one) & 2012-2013 (year two). Conducted on smallholder field at Batkhela, Malakand (Khyber Pakhtunkhwa) in Northwest Pakistan.
Main responsible entity
Three factors experiments under rice-wheat cropping system:
Factor A: Three Genotypes:
G1 = Basmati-385 (fine)
G2 = Fakhr-e-Malakand (coarse)
G3 = Pukhraj (coarse)
Factor B: P levels (kg P/ha):
P0 = 0
P1 = 40
P2 = 80
P3 = 120
Factor C: Zn Levels (kg Zn/ha):
Zn0 = 0
Zn1 = 5
Zn2 = 10
Zn3 = 15
Subsequent wheat crop = (cv. Siren-2010)
Cropping System: Rice-Wheat Cropping System
Nutrition context
Food (grains) and feed (straw) quality improve i.e. zinc concentration in rice and wheat grains (human food in Asia) and rice & wheat straw (animal feed in Asia) increase significantly with proper P and Zn nutrition under the dominant rice-wheat cropping system in Asia. Significant increase in Zn concentration in both grains and straw was recorded with higher zinc rates (10 or 15 kg Zn/ha) as compared with lower rate (5 kg Zn/ha) and control (Zn not applied).
Significant variation among rice genotypes i.e. Pukhraj (coarse hybrid rice), Fakhre-Malakand (coarse rice) and Basmati-385 (fine rice) was also observed. Interaction between years and rice genotypes (Y x G) indicated that Zn concentration in grain and straw of all three rice genotypes was higher in year two than year one of the experiment. The increase in Zn concentration was more in case of coarse rice genotypes (Pukhraj & F-Malakand) than fine rice genotype (B-385).
Interaction between phosphorus and zinc (P x Zn) indicated that increase in Zn level increased both grain and fodder quality (with higher Zn concentration) in plots having higher phosphorus level in the soil. The increase in phosphorus level reduced zinc concentration in both grain and straw with a correspondence decrease in Zn level in the soil.
The two higher rates of phosphorus (80 and 120 kg P/ha) and zinc (10 and 15 kg Zn/ha) application in combination had significantly improved crop productivity, profitability, food (grain) and feed (straw) quality as compared to the control plots (where no P and Zn applied) under rice-wheat cropping system.
Key characteristics of the food system(s) considered
Zinc content is low in food (grains) and feed (straw) of rice and wheat crops in Asia especially under rice-wheat cropping system. As the rice-wheat cropping system has been in practice in Asia for more than 1000 years. Therefore, the continuous cropping of rice-wheat system for several decades has resulted in depletion of plants nutrients (major and micro nutrients) which have negative effect not only on crop yield but also on grain (food) and straw quality (feed).
Key characteristics of the investment made
Integrated nutrients management under rice-wheat cropping system in Asia is key to improve food and feed quality. Our two years field experiments confirmed that proper phosphorus and zinc fertilization under rice-wheat cropping system improve crop productivity and its quality as well as growers income under cereal based cropping systems.
Key actors and stakeholders involved (including through south-south/triangular exchanges, if any)
University (faculty & students)
Agriculture Extension (officers & field assistants)
Smallholders (growers, farmers)
Key changes (intended and unintended) as a result of the investment/s
Rice yield is very low (2000 kg/ha) in northwest Pakistan. Growing hybrid rice and proper nutrients management not only improve rice yield (more than 6000 kg/ha) and its quality but also improve yield of subsequent wheat crop under rice-wheat cropping system. The rice growers in the area appreciated our efforts and like to grow rice hybrid rice than the old low yielding rice cultivars in the area.
Challenges faced
Growers or smallholders in the area are very poor.
Unavailability of chemical fertilizers.
High cost of chemical fertilizers & farmers can’t purchase.
Unavailability of good quality and high yielding rice hybrids/cultivars.
Farmers do not accept the modern production technology of field crops due to lack of eduction.
Small land holding and high population.
Transport & Market problems (dominant middle man).
Government polices?
Lessons/Key messages
The donor agencies like FAO and others must focus on the smallholders in developing countries of Asia and Africa. Big or small, long- or short-term projects need to be sponsored by the donor agencies in the backward area. Most of the international and national experts are not ready to go and train the smallholders in these areas. The local experts from universities, research system and agriculture extension department need funding to disseminate the modern production technology of field crops cultivation in these areas, thanks.
Dr. Amanullah
Associate Professor of Agronomy
The University of Agriculture Peshawar-Pakistan
Proponent
Date/Timeframe and location
1980–2012, Burkina Faso, Mali, Niger and Nigeria
Main responsible entity
National governments, International Fund for Agricultural Development’s (IFAD) , Nigerian Forestry Department, National Agricultural Research Institute of Niger, Maradi Integrated Development Project, Aguie Desert Community Initiative and others
Nutrition context
High undernourishment in dryland farming systems due to limited agricultural productivity, on-going land degradation, highly variable climate and lack of enabling institutional environment to improve nutrition conditions
Key characteristics of the food system(s) considered
Smallholder farming systems in the drylands of western Africa where land degradation and severely limits agricultural productivity and remoteness from decision-making challenges sustainable food production. Food systems are highly vulnerable to climate variability/change and price fluctuations demanding urgent action to improve local production of nutritious food through soil and water conservation.
Key characteristics of the investment made
- Direct investments and food-for-work based initiatives to improve soil and water conservation as a key strategy for improved food and nutrition security.
- Multi-stakeholder and participatory approaches used to design and implement soil and water conservation practices
Key actors and stakeholders involved (including through south-south/triangular exchanges, if any)
Multi-stakeholder process involving local smallholder farmers, NGOs, national governments, international development agencies.
Key changes (intended and unintended) as a result of the investment/s
Soil fertility improved, erosion controlled, agroforestry systems established
Challenges faced
- Partially limited continuity of investments.
- Local natural resources, agro-ecology, institutions and market impacts often not differentiates according to pronounced diversity of local farming contexts. However soil and water conservation depends largely on the suitability of specific practices in a given biophysical and socio-economic context. Limited knowledge of biophysical and institutional pre-conditions has restricted comparative analysis on agricultural intensification.
- It remains largely unknown/under-investigated in which ways farmers creatively fine-tune and combine trade-offs in space and time to find the best possible way of integrating the high variability in natural resources, markets and institutions with the scarce resources they have available.
- The perceived importance of particular factors that facilitate soil and water conservation can vary significantly between farmers, extension staff and other stakeholders.
Lessons/Key messages
Four principles are proposed to advance future implementation and research on soil and water conservation as a land-based adaptation strategy:
- Assess socio-ecological drivers of soil and water conservation: The fundamentally interwoven biophysical and socio-economic drivers need to be fully captured to improve our understanding of soil and water conservation. Scale issues and critical thresholds need to receive particular attention.
- Investigate farmers’ management of resource variability: Due consideration needs to be given to assessing the ways in which farmers manage biophysical and socio-economic variability in the context of soil and water conservation and how they balance trade-offs in the input of labour, organic material and other scarce resources, based on their local knowledge. This requires an in-depth understanding of the relation between local and scientific knowledge.
- Understand the key dynamics of soil and water conservation: In framing soil and water conservation as a dynamic process, major efforts are required to go beyond static assessments of factors that drive the uptake of particular practices. Gaining insight into the motivation, rate and time of intensification, modification, abandonment and replacement would provide the missing links in order to better understand crucial dynamics in soil and water conservation.
- Test and integrate diverse research methods: It is imperative for future studies to systematically test the role of different methods of analysis, including quantitative and qualitative approaches, in determining the dynamic socio- ecological drivers of soil and water conservation. Besides statistical methods such as Tobit models, which offer valuable opportunities to account for the intensity of adoption, configurational comparative methods such as Qualitative Comparative Analysis should be explored more systematically to support the assessment of conjunctural causation and other complex causal relations.
Reference: Sietz, D. and Van Dijk, H. (2015) Land-based adaptation to global change: What drives soil and water conservation in western Africa? Global Environmental Change 33: 131-141.
This activity is now closed. Please contact [email protected] for any further information.