Adoption of improved fallows in the Nyando basin and lessons from eastern Kenya

Approaches to improved fallows and N-fixing herbaceous and fodder species in the Nyando Basin have been disappointing. Short-term fallows might therefore be inadequate to rehabilitate the severely degraded soils in Nyando. Indeed, there is no difference in maize yields from 4 years of sequential improved fallows and from a control maize crop, and projections show a declining trend, implying that coppicing fallows are a better option (Girma et al). But Gacheru and Noordin aver that maize inter-planted with mixed fallows performs better than maize alone. However, it is not easy to show the effect of improved fallows on yields because of other factors leading to controversies around improved fallows. Also, the effect of fallows on striga was difficult to capture because of poor establishment as a result erratic rainfall, browsing of the fallows by livestock, and pests and diseases. We therefore need a multidisciplinary approach to address issues such as how to assess impacts and yield, who does this assessment, identify the best way forward with improved fallows, and what baskets of options/technologies can be offered to farmers for different objectives. The analysis/synthesis should also include a candid and objective self-appraisal on the basis of scientific measures of the costs (labor included) and benefits of improved fallows. Agroforestry may not be or is not a panacea for all places and more knowledge is needed on different fanning systems. To help inform this debate more, work by Walsh, Hailu and Verchot on effects of tree legume fallows on maize yields in Eastern and Southern Africa should be appropriately documented. The ARIDSAK project success in Eastern Kenya is due to an integrated, collaborative, multi-disciplinary, participatory, and inclusive approach, and incorporation of training and field visits (farmer-to-fanner challenges). Drawbacks include wildlife and roaming livestock, unfavorable climate conditions, inadequate staff, resource poverty of farmers and socio-cultural factors. The field visit to Kibwezi was a revelation to ICRAF staff working in western Kenya, and it exposed them to different ways of doing things (presenting baskets of options/processes to farmers, flexible and adaptive implementation approaches and good researcher-farmer linkages. A key lesson was the breakthrough transformation of the formerly pastoral Maasai to adopt live fences, fodder trees, seeds, and vegetables production. This approach is useful and can be applied to lead Nyando farmers away from unprofitable maize to activities that are more productive. Participants found the meeting very constructive as a first forum for critical assessment of improved fallows, with open discussion of pertinent questions and issues, including negative aspects. We need an integrated approach because cunently we are only dealing with one aspect (improved fallows) YET farmers are multi-objective. As researchers, we can bonow a leaf from the farmers and think more broadly, work as a team, and investigate and remove the research -extension disconnects. This should lead to design and delivery of appropriate basket(s) of options to farmers, covering various aspects such as soil fertility, fodder, firewood and erosion control. Before the TransVic Project Second Phase, we need to discern /determine: 1) what works; 2) where it works; 3) what can or should be done; and 4) especially; do we need more research Transvic project could be more effective in Nyando if the project incorporates farmer perspectives and integrated production approaches, as is the case with ARIDSAK project.

---

• View source