Promotion of conservation agriculture in Zimbabwe ( OSRO /ZIM/907/ ec )

1. FAO harare 29 November 2013 Promotion of conservation agriculture in Zimbabwe (OSRO/ZIM/907/ec) Christopher Nyakanda

2. OUTLINE • Background • Who was consulted • Challenges Encountered During the Review • Major findings • Missed opportunities • Lessons Learnt • Conclusions • Key recommendations

3. Background Overall objective: • To create conditions leading to the reduction of the dependency of vulnerable rural households on humanitarian assistance and improvements to household livelihood outcomes, Specific objectives: • strengthening and rationalizing coordination mechanisms at all levels (implementing agencies and beneficiaries) aimed at improving resource utilization. • improvements to overall livelihoods of smallholder farmers achieved through the adoption of CA practices.

4. Background/2 • Funded by the European Commission • Main grantee FAO • Principal Collaborator: AGRITEX (GoZ) • Project Implementation Period: Jan 2012 through to December 2013 • Sub-grantees • 7 IPs • Technical Partners • International Research Organizations

5. External Review Terms of Reference • Assess • extent to which expected outputs were achieved • effectiveness of approaches used to implement project activities • Review trends in CA adoption and major contributing factors. • Explore level and effectiveness of capacity building • Draw critical lessons learnt for designing related future projects • Provide recommendations to ensure sustainability of the investment made

6. Who was consulted? • Implementing Partners, 4 out of 7 • Mash East (1. Murehwa) Manicaland (2. Chimanimani), Masvingo (3. Zaka, 4. Chivi), Mat South (5. Umzingwane), Mat North (6. Bubi) • AGRITEX • Department of Mechanization • Department of Livestock Productivity • ICRISAT • CIMMYT • Foundations for Farming

7. Study challenges • Programme Extensive, hence demands substantial review time

8. Study Findings

9. Quality of Intervention logic • Re-configured Traditional CA model • Combined the CA three-component package with high management techniques (timeliness, precision, efficiency). • National Average Yields Achieved: CA: 1.77 t/ha, Conventional: 1.24 t/ha • High management techniques largely attributed with extensive yield increases reported in early stages before CA mechanisms kick in. • High management techniques not CA principles, hence need ‘Upgrade’ • Proposes 4th CA component: ‘Management Intensification’

10. Quality of Intervention logic/..2 • Wide range of variables in intervention logic: weakness-difficult to identify attribution • CA principles • High management • Production inputs • However, program highly effective in achieving outputs, outcomes (target outputs, yields) • Intervention logic • Snowball peer training model (ToT, lead farmer, mentored farmer) • Implementation strategy: 7 IPs • Coordination (FAO, AGRITEX, ZIMCAN)

11. Mechanization • Strategy to Access both imports and locally manufactured equipment commendable • Facilitated learning, adaptation • Efficiency: Reduced waiting; some imports good- e.g. li planter • Exploration wide: manual, animal traction hence good; • Appropriate at all endowment levels • Reduced labor

12. Mechanization/...2 However: • Diverted attention from Best Practices • Focus on land expansion vs gaining CA skills • Put further pressure on adequacy of mulch cover • Mixed Strategy: extensive experimentation with prototypes & promotion • Development costly for start-up private sector • Ok at experimentation; Not to be repeated during up-scaling • Adopters reject both equip & technology if equip fails • Farmer Access to Equipment • Central arrangements delaying planting, disburse to farmers by some mechanism • Low demand, hence low distribution to outlets by private sector

13. Coordination and Implementation Performance • Implementation Strategy Effective • Executed via 7 IPs • Leveraged strengths • Built on past progress, targeting, skills build-up, spread risks, • Achieved output targets • Problems: tight schedules, focus on targets, sometimes missed training schedules, distribution targets, coordination

14. Coordination and Implementation Performance/...2 • Suggested Improvements/…1 • Could have restricted IP role to administrative and logistical functions • Extend AGRITEX role; Involvement of Training Branch, longer term sustainability • Linkages with provincial structure at ZIMCAN level weak (not at ACWG;quarterly meetings) • ZIMCAN performance • Terms of reference, wide representation • Outputs: High, yet ‘enigmatic’ • Structure: communication sub-committee • Links with other ACWG Sub-groups; can be strengthened

15. Input Support: Role in CA Promotion and Adoption • Reasons • ‘An incentive for lead farmers to mentor’ • ‘Encourage (mentored) farmers to practice CA principles • Problems • Inflated responses for inclusion in program • Disruptive to adoption-dropouts with input suspension even when beneficiaries experience CA benefits • Recommendations • Consider suspension, except for central facilities, demos

16. Trends in Adoption: factors influencing • Failure to Embrace all three-component CA • Proportion of farmers applying full set: 40%, 23%, 11% (lead, mentored, non-beneficiary) • Mashonaland West, 27% less farmers mulching than opening planting basins • Problems: effects of 3-components additive, hence higher risk of technology failure • Definition for CA practice: Be Sticklers to 3-component CA, define anything less by other terms • Other factors influencing adoption • Disappointing results for first-time adopters • Location in relation to homesteads/ • Technical backup, Bubi example • Farmer competitions

17. Opportunities for Adoption Maize stooking practices must stop, with CA practice

18. Threats to adoption Extensive use of brushwood: e.g. Chivi and Chikwakwa (74%) Consider bye-laws

19. Addressing Threats to Adoption Live fencing: diverse species; However address socio-economic barriers

20. Capacity building • Snowball Peer Training model • Addressed project ambitious targets • Amplifies unintended maladjustments, hence requires close supervision. Where there any maladjustments? • Maladjustments mitigated by having several IPs • Chose appropriately skilled technical partners • However, follow-up from primary-tier trainers absent • Lead farmer Approach: gave advantages • Costs, peer goodwill, high outputs, reverse-consolidation

21. Capacity building/...2 • Demonstration Plots • Appropriate training tool • Incidences of Weak ownership • Some dissonance with CA core principles • Restrict treatments, keep most relevant to CA

22. Capacity building/...3 • Training Manuals • 1st edition (2009); 2nd Edition (2012), ZIMCAN prolificacy • Strong technical resource • Comprehensive coverage • However, pictures not faithful to best practice (incl. Some posters) • Consider structure that projects CA’s three components

23. Advocacy and Institutionalization • Adoption of CA by ministry: bold and rewarding result • Up-scaling framework • College syllabus • National Coordinator, national budget allocation • However, not enforceable legislation, hence further evidence gathering to support enactment of Act • Posters (and pamphlets) • Visible in many locations: high achievement • Some depictation in graphics not abiding to best practice

24. MAIN LESSONS LEARNT

25. Key Lessons Learnt • The Limited body of local research findings on CA had significant effect on implementation of CA (Intervention Logic) • Equipment Access Arrangements leading to delays in planting, no owning up on equip. maintenance of equipment (Mechanization). • Overlapping multi-dimensional processes (research, development, validation, piloting) may dent credibility to farmers, a likely disincentive to adoption (coordination/implementation performance)

26. Key Lessons Learnt/...2 • Input support extensively draws mixed crowds (those interested in tech, those interested in inputs) hence other instruments to separate the cheats (Input support) • Potential adopters shy away from perceived high labor technology so all efforts have to be applied to reduce labor requirements, including emphasis on in-situ use of mulch (adoption trends) • It is critical that all AGRITEX staff are conversant with CA skills including mechanization since they are the first line responders when farmers get stuck (capacity building)

27. MAIN RECOMMENDATIONS

28. Recommendations • Consider a four-component CA approach in Zimbabwe, by introducing a 4th core principle, management intensification, to embody the best management practices that contributed significantly to early CA yield benefits. • Confine technical recommendations to those supported by irrefutable evidence during CA promotional activities to meet best practice guidelines, protect credibility of promoters, and prevent resistance build-up among farmers. • Incorporate basic facilitation skills and apply some basic accreditation processes to test adequacy of knowledge skills before lead farmers assume responsibility for a ‘mentored’ group, which will improve facilitation skills and raise the standard of skills transfer among lead farmers.

29. Recommendations/...2 • Make it obligatory that farmers apply all three CA core principles in practice, to qualify as CA practitioners, since effects of CA principles are additive and the selective application of CA principles increases the risk of technical failure in the CA innovation which acts as a deterrent to the adoption of CA. To this end, farmers must be encouraged to maintaining plot sizes that are feasible for full CA practice • Include herbicide promotion programmes with mechanization, to ensure that farmers cope with upsurge in weeds associated with early stages of reduced tillage practices under CA. • Ensure that all posters used in the promotion of CA in Zimbabwe convey clear, accurate and consistent messages as reflected in both the text content and graphics whilst retaining existing strengths of visual boldness, focus on single messaging, good sequencing and sparing usage of text.

30. Thank you Dressed The End