Designing and disseminating conservation agriculture accordingDesigning and disseminating conservation agriculture according g g g g gto context features: theory and practicesto context features: theory and practices.y p

Balarabe O (1) Husson O (2) Chabanne A (2) Séguy L (3)Balarabe O. (1), Husson O.(2), Chabanne A. (2), Séguy L. (3)1 IRAD/SODECOTON BP 302 Garoua Cameroun obalarabe@yahoo fr1 IRAD/SODECOTON BP 302 Garoua Cameroun, obalarabe@yahoo.fr2 CIRAD-PERSYST UR SIA Avenue Agropolis 34398 Montpellier2 CIRAD-PERSYST, UR SIA, Avenue Agropolis, 34398 Montpellier3 AGROECORIZ France3 AGROECORIZ, France

IntroductionIntroductionConservation Agriculture (CA) dissemination efforts around the world brought out different trajectories in adoption (Derpsch, 2007; Napier and Camboni, 1993; Nowak, 1987). Focusing only ong ( ) g j p ( p , ; p , ; , ) g yagronomic key factors in designing CA technologies failed in providing suitable solutions for their final adoption and extension, whatever the context (Erenstein 2003; Giller et al., 2009). This paperprovides a theoretical framework to identify the main features of each agricultural context. Based on four case studies within different soil conservation projects funded by the French DevelopmentAgency including Cameroon, Madagascar, Mato grosso in Brazil and France. The paper finally defines a practical framework to organize soil conservation interventions, developing theoreticalb i f i iti i CA d i i l t ff t ibasics for priorities in CA designing or complementary efforts programming.Institutional principles for designing and implementing conservation agriculture are proposed to complete basic agronomic principles adopted by international organizations on conservationInstitutional principles for designing and implementing conservation agriculture are proposed to complete basic agronomic principles adopted by international organizations on conservationagriculture A detailed approach is proposed with key monitoring factors especially for small-scale agricultureagriculture. A detailed approach is proposed with key monitoring factors, especially for small-scale agriculture.

Material and methodsTo facilitate the emergence of a theory of designing and implementing system’s innovation in conservation agriculture, a qualitative approach in innovation adoption has been used, mainly through

l h d t di Th ti l b i f th th d l b d f M k t l (2006) D (1997) d Ei h dt (1989) P l h iprocessual approach and case studies. Theoretical basis of the methodology was borrowed from Mukamurera et al. (2006), Dawson (1997) and Eisenhardt (1989). Processual approach inqualitative research relies on an iterative methodology to derive context impact on CA adoption It is based on different case studies each one characterized by specific features The first step of thequalitative research relies on an iterative methodology to derive context impact on CA adoption. It is based on different case studies, each one characterized by specific features. The first step of thestudy consisted in identifying key factors influencing CA designing and adoption among different CA extension programs A conceptual framework based on the three identified factors (agronomicstudy consisted in identifying key factors influencing CA designing and adoption among different CA extension programs. A conceptual framework based on the three identified factors (agronomicconstraints market imperfections and property rights definition failure) was used to verify the impact of these factors on a wide sample of Countries from Derpsch (2007) and thereafter developedconstraints, market imperfections and property rights definition failure) was used to verify the impact of these factors on a wide sample of Countries from Derpsch (2007) and, thereafter, developedon four relevant case studies in different agro-economic contexts. Case studies were then considered in each of the three contexts distinguished by FAO, adding progressively new constraints (figureon four relevant case studies in different agro economic contexts. Case studies were then considered in each of the three contexts distinguished by FAO, adding progressively new constraints (figure1). Case studies included Brazil and France for the first class of modern intensified agriculture, Madagascar for small-scale agriculture with market imperfections class (both with or without failure in) g g g p (property rights definition), and finally Northern Cameroon for small-scale marked by both market imperfections and property rights definition failure.

Farm ResultsTh t d fi th t l t il t i d i i f CA i tit ti l d t ti i

household scale: market The study confirms that complementarily to agronomic designing of CA, institutional adaptation is necessary

and should be based on certain key institutional factors among which market failures and property rights

scale: market failures

Farm  and should be based on certain key institutional factors among which market failures and property rightsdefinition Market imperfections include failure of providing certain facilities like access to credit agricultural

household decision definition. Market imperfections include failure of providing certain facilities like access to credit, agricultural

inputs or information which in certain conditions of financial constraints of farm units may influencePlot scale: Agronomic

Technical l ti inputs, or information, which, in certain conditions of financial constraints of farm units, may influence

farmers’ ability to invest in soil conservation (Erenstein 2003; Scoones & Toulmin, 1999). Property rightsVillage collective 

i

Agronomic constraints

solution

farmers ability to invest in soil conservation (Erenstein 2003; Scoones & Toulmin, 1999). Property rightsaddresses different types of rights to soil (access and withdrawal, management, exclusion) and alienation

action

yp g ( , g , )and the way soil conservation investments may be captured by the investor (Schlager and Ostrom, 1992).Community 

l l . level: Property i htrights failure

Institutional Technical innovation:

G hi 1 C ti A i lt t t d innovation

Graphic 1: Conservation Agriculture, a two-component and th l i ti

1 C t d 1 B il d i lt ith littl b idithree-scale innovation

1. Case study 1: Brazil, modern agriculture with little subsidiesModern intensified agricultures of Northern Countries (Europe and

Plot scale (agronomic constraints)

Plot scale (agronomic constraints)Modern intensified agricultures of Northern Countries (Europe and

America) and South America Because they provide necessaryFarm unit scale (market failure)C ll ti ti (P t

Farm unit scale (market failure)

America) and South America. Because they provide necessaryincentives they represent the most suitable environment for CA

Collective action (Property rights)

Collective action (Property rights)incentives, they represent the most suitable environment for CA

extension. In this context, efforts on CA designing consist of agronomic, g g ginnovations according to soil conservation guidelines, since littleg ginstitutional constraints (market imperfections and property rights failure)do exist (Seguy et al. 1996). The three key agronomic principles of CA( t il i i il di t b d i t

Graphic 2: Brazil, no collective Graphic 3: France: farm unit (permanent soil cover, minimum soil disturbance and appropriate croprotations) hen properl implemented are often s fficient to ens re

action needed , but farm and p

rationale, related to agricultural rotations), when properly implemented, are often sufficient to ensureemergence of efficient and thus profitable technologies with economic

plot management issues to , g

subsidies affecting CA adoptionemergence of efficient and thus profitable technologies, with economicefficiency being the key for acceptance (farm level decision)

adressg p

efficiency being the key for acceptance (farm level decision).

2 Case study 2: Modern agriculture with high level subsidies in agriculture2. Case study 2: Modern agriculture with high level subsidies in agricultureIn addition to agronomic constraints modern intensified agriculture may also be subject toIn addition to agronomic constraints, modern intensified agriculture, may also be subject tomarket failure, specifically due to different forms of agriculture subsidies. In this case,Plot scale (agronomic

constraints) market failure, specifically due to different forms of agriculture subsidies. In this case,constraints in adoption are linked to the high level of subsidies, which create market failure

constraints)Farm unit scale (market failure) p g ,

between different technologic options or crop selection, and thus making certain technicalCollective action (Property rights)

alternatives less attractive, according to their relative profitability. In France, subsidies infallows, and maize production for example makes it less attractive to invest in soil

ti b d l hi i b idi l t d t f ll i i d ticonservation based on mulching, since subsidies related to fallowing or maize productionmay be partly lost These issues can be addressed including Conservation Agriculture impactGraphic 4: Northern Cameroon and Madagascar, with may be partly lost. These issues can be addressed including Conservation Agriculture impacton the environment as public good contribution and thus providing consequent economic

Graphic 4: Northern Cameroon and Madagascar, with additional focus on collective action and market on the environment as public good contribution, and thus providing consequent economic

incitation for adopting CA The appropriate intervention scale is the farm household scaleadditional focus on collective action and market imperfections to adapt the context, in addition to incitation for adopting CA. The appropriate intervention scale is the farm household scale,

through appropriate public policies.imperfections to adapt the context, in addition to agronomic issues on CA g pp p p p

3 Case study 3: Small scale agriculture with poorly defined property rightsagronomic issues on CA

Conclusion3. Case study 3: Small scale agriculture with poorly defined property rightsand several market imperfections (Cameroon and Madagascar) Conclusion

Five general principles necessary to tackle CA adoption constraints:and several market imperfections (Cameroon and Madagascar)3 1 Market failures or imperfections which include access to credit access to specific Five general principles necessary to tackle CA adoption constraints:

1)Taking into consideration that system innovation is by definition concerned3.1 Market failures or imperfections, which include access to credit, access to specificagricultural inputs, and access to information. In this specific context, technical innovations ) g y y

with both technical and institutional dimension of innovative process;agricultural inputs, and access to information. In this specific context, technical innovationsmay fail to disseminate, due to their entry cost within financial constraints for farmers. It

2)Providing diversified CA technologies and flexibility of the agronomicy , y

therefore often appears more profitable for agricultural producers to invest in other shortalternatives based on the three key agronomic principles. These alternativesh ld l i i t i t ibl dd th

run alternatives than in soil conservation. Projects in Madagascar dealing with thisshould release as many socio-economic constraints as possible, address theplot scale objectives and farm unit preferences on time and reduce the risk;

constraint therefore focused on low-input systems and/or included an institutional supportt f ilit t t dit i t d i f ti Th i t i t ti l i plot scale objectives and farm unit preferences on time and reduce the risk;

3)Providing a global support (both technical and market supply) to make itto facilitate access to credits, inputs, and information. The appropriate intervention scale isthe farm household scale 3)Providing a global support (both technical and market supply) to make it

possible for the farm unit to switch to a more favorable environment for soilthe farm household scale.3 2 Poorly defined property rights are mainly found in context were common property free possible for the farm unit to switch to a more favorable environment for soil

conservation investment;3.2 Poorly defined property rights are mainly found in context were common property, freeaccess rules on land and land products are practiced Property rights definition failure is of ;

4)Identifying appropriate scale for property rights comprehension and facilitatingaccess rules on land and land products are practiced. Property rights definition failure is ofcrucial importance in soil conservation because it determines the way upcoming returns of

Projet) y g pp p p p y g p g

local collective actions to derive suitable rules and collective incentives for soilcrucial importance in soil conservation because it determines the way upcoming returns ofconservation may be captured or divided by different stakeholders. In this case, CA Projet

Eau Sol Arbreconservation;5)I th f th th t i t l l dd i b th b

y p ydesigning and implementation must therefore include: i) technical support by designing CA Eau Sol Arbre5)In the presence of the three constraints levels, addressing both by

i f ll ti t i di id l t i t d l f i t tisystems taking into account agronomic and socio-economic constraints, ii) different typesf f ) progressing from collective to individual constraints and scales of intervention.of institutional support, in relevance with market imperfections and iii) collective actionhi h bl f ffi i t t i htwhich may enables emergence of efficient property rights.

Selected referencesSelected referencesChauveau J P Cormier-Salem M C Mollard E 1999 L'innovation en agriculture: questions de méthodes et terrains d'observation IRD ParisChauveau J. P., Cormier Salem M.C., Mollard E. 1999. L innovation en agriculture: questions de méthodes et terrains d observation, IRD, Paris.Derpsch D. C. 2007 No tillage and conservation agriculture: a progress report In: Doddart T, Zoebisch M., Gan Y., Ellis W., Watson A., Sombatpanit S., (Eds) No-till farmingDerpsch D. C. 2007 No tillage and conservation agriculture: a progress report In: Doddart T, Zoebisch M., Gan Y., Ellis W., Watson A., Sombatpanit S., (Eds) No till farming systems. World association of soil and water conservation, Special publication III, Bangkok, Thailand, pp 7-39y , p p , g , , ppEisenhardt K. M. 1989. Building theories from case studies, The academy of management review, vol 14.Erenstein O. 2003. Smallholder conservation farming in the tropics and subtropics: a guide to the development and dissemination of mulching with crop residues and cover crops. Agriculture Ecosystem and Environment. 100, 17-37Gill K E Witt E C b l M Titt ll P 2009 C ti i lt d llh ld f i i Af i th h ti ’ i Fi ld R hGiller K. E., Witter E., Corbeels M., Tittonell P. 2009. Conservation agriculture and smallholder farming in Africa: the heretic’s view, Field crop Research. Giller K E Corbeels M Nyamangara J Triomphe B Affholder F Scopel E Tittonell P 2011 A research agenda to explore Conservation agriculture in African smallholderGiller K. E., Corbeels M., Nyamangara J., Triomphe B, Affholder F., Scopel E., Tittonell P., 2011. A research agenda to explore Conservation agriculture in African smallholder farming system Field crop researchfarming system, Field crop research.Napier T. L. and Camboni S. M. 1993. Use of conventional and conservation practices among farmers in the Scioto River Basin of Ohio. Journal of Soil and waterNapier T. L. and Camboni S. M. 1993. Use of conventional and conservation practices among farmers in the Scioto River Basin of Ohio. Journal of Soil and water conservation, 48 (3), 231-237., ( ),Nowak, P.J. 1987. The adoption of agricultural conservation technologies: economic and diffusion explanations. Rural sociology 52 (2) 208-220.Schlager E., Ostrom E., 1992. Property-rights regimes and natural resources : A conceptual analysis, Land economics, Vol 68, No 3, pp 249-262. Seguy L., Bouzinac S., Trentini A., Cortez N. A. 1996. L’agriculture brésilienne des fronts pionniers. Agriculture et Développement 12, 2-61