This guide is the product of 6 years of action-research in Kenya with more than a thousand smallholder farmers. The action-research that led to the production of this guide was carried out by the World Agroforestry Centre (ICRAF). The World Agroforestry Centre (ICRAF) is a centre of scientific excellence that harnesses the benefits of trees for people and the environment. Leveraging the world’s largest repository of agroforestry science and information, ICRAF develops knowledge practices, from farmers’ fields to the global sphere, to ensure food security and environmental sustainability.
Tag: household
Sustainable woodfuel (charcoal and firewood) systems in Tanzania: A grassroots training manual
Nutritious Food Portfolios for targeting year-round food harvest and nutrient gaps – Mwingi West
Marketing of edible insects in Lake Victoria basin: the case of Uganda and Burundi
A quantitative performance assessment of improved cooking stoves and traditional three-stone-fire stoves using a two-pot test design in Chamwino, Dodoma, Tanzania
Intensification benefit index: How much can rural households benefit from agricultural intensification?
Sustainable intensification (SI) of agriculture is the predominant objective for agricultural research and extension worldwide. Researchers and policymakers consider SI to be essential to avoid global hunger, improve human nutrition and reduce rural poverty while avoiding all manner of environmental disasters. To achieve these global public goods requires a large number of rural households – ‘small farmers’ – in less developed countries to improve their agriculture. Household size and farm size from 11,789 households in 15 countries from sub-Saharan Africa were used to calculate an intensification benefit index (IBI) that reflects how much a household will benefit if intensification occurs. IBI is defined as the increase in personal daily income (cents/person/day) as returns to land (dollars/hectare/year) increase. Actual net farm income from 160 rural households in each of three countries was compared with their IBI values to explore the gap between potential intensification and current smallholder farm performance. Fifty percent of all households had IBI values less than 0.075 cents/dollar, 70% less than 0.125 cents/dollar and 90% less than 0.225 cents/dollar. Returns of $1000/ha/year would result in fewer than 15% of households crossing a $2/person/day poverty line; $2500/ha/year would be required to lift 50% of the sample above the line; and even with $4000/ha/year, more than 30% of households would remain below the line. Since mean net returns from three sub-sampled sites were only $78, $83 and $424/ha/year the gap between potential- and actual performance is large but, theoretically, amenable to closure through adoption of improved technologies. However, surveys have shown that the available technologies would struggle to bridge the gap completely for rural households with small farms. For many small farms, the gains from adopting improved technologies are unlikely by themselves to lift them out of poverty and so might not be as attractive as scientists would wish.
A Participatory Approach to Assessing the Climate-Smartness of Agricultural Interventions: The Lushoto Case
The concept of climate-smart agriculture (CSA) is gaining momentum across the globe. However, it is not specific on what should be covered under its three pillars—productivity, resilience and mitigation. Consequently, CSA encompasses many different agricultural practices/technologies, making it difficult to prioritise CSA objectives. Firstly, there is a lack of clear and workable criteria as well as methods for assessing the climate-smartness of interventions. Secondly, little information exists about the impact of the various interventions already promoted as CSA, especially in the developing world. Finally, CSA prioritisation does not take into account stakeholders’ perspectives to ensure that the interventions are applicable, suitable and of high adoption-potential. Here, we describe a new participatory protocol for assessing the climate-smartness of agricultural interventions in smallholder practices. This identifies farm-level indicators (and indices) for the food security and adaptation pillars of CSA. It also supports the participatory scoring of indicators, enabling baseline and future assessments of climate-smartness to be made. The protocol was tested among 72 farmers implementing a variety of CSA interventions in the climate-smart village of Lushoto, Tanzania. Farmers especially valued interventions that improved soil fertility and structure, reduced surface runoff, and reclaimed degraded land due to the positive impacts on yield and off-season crop agriculture. Mostly, the CSA interventions increased animal production, food production, consumption and income. The protocol is easy to adapt to different regions and farming systems and allows for the better prioritisation of interventions. But we recommend that CSA is adopted as part of a monitoring, evaluation and learning process.
Do Farm Characteristics Explain Differences in Tree Species Diversity among Western Kenyan Farms?
With the objective of planning diversification of on-farm tree species composition, a survey was conducted in western Kenya involving a complete tree census (trees were defined as all woody or ligneous plants, including shrubs and lianas) and collection of ethnobotanical information on 201 farms. Differences between farms in diversity of the 12 most frequent use-groups were analysed by species richness, Shannon, Simpson and Berger-Parker diversity indices, and Shannon evenness and equitability. A large range of values was detected among farms and use-groups. Multiple linear regression of diversity statistics on household characteristics indicated significant relationships. However, these relationships generally explained low percentages of variation (ranging 2-44%). The connection between household characteristics and use-group diversity allows targeting specific household types with lower diversity. Farm size had a positive relationship with diversity of most use-groups. However, accumulation curves revealed that the same area carried a larger abundance and diversity when it was composed of a greater number of smaller farms. If the pattern of further subdivision of farmland in the survey area continues and the same differences between smaller and larger farms prevail, then larger diversity per unit area can be expected. Because smaller farms contain smaller diversity, however, diversification with the aim of enhancing or stabilising productivity of individual farms may become an important priority in the survey area. The results presented allow for the identification of individual farms, use-groups, and household types for which diversification is more relevant, and at the same time allow for impact monitoring.
Capturing gender-specific understanding of landscape functions through participatory GIS
Geographic information system (GIS) is a computer application that can create, store, manipulate, visualize and analyse spatial and temporal information. GIS can capture the social and institutional dimensions in space and time by involving local stakeholders in the generation of information included in the analysis—an approach we call participatory GIS (PGIS). PGIS has been applied in a wide range of contexts, including urban planning, conflict management over natural resources and land boundaries, and land use and natural resource planning and management. In Manupali watershed, southern Philippines, we used participatory GIS to capture spatially explicit gendered understanding of landscapes and their linkages to environmental services and livelihoods, and gendered access and control over resources.
Fruit tree diversity and its contribution to food security of smallholder farm households in Western Kenya
Cultivation of fruit trees on farms can contribute to household food security especially during non-harvesting seasons and when crops have failed. Fruit tree cultivation provides nutrient-rich foods for increased dietary diversity and also diversifies farm income generation options. However, there is insufficient data on diversity of fruit trees on farms and their contribution to food security in Kenya. This information is needed for designing and implementing suitable, location-specific interventions on increasing production and consumption of fruits. Objectives of the study: (a) Document fruit tree richness and abundance on farms in Western Kenya. (b) Assess food security levels on the same farms and identify relationships between food security and fruit tree species richness and abundance (if any).