Improving recommendations resulting from on-farm research: agroforestry, risk, profitability and vulnerability in southern Malawi

Abstract

Leguminous agroforestry (AF) species have been investigated and promoted in Malawi as a means to improve soil quality and maize (Zea mays) yields. Our objective was to determine whether AF systems' recommendations that solely consider impacts on average maize yields differ from those that include an analysis of production risk, profitability among different wealth groups and socioeconomic vulnerability. Employing participatory quantitative and qualitative on-farm research techniques, we investigated three AF-based maize/legume relay-cropping practices in southern Malawi. The perennial legumes included Sesbania sesban, Tephrosia vogelii and Cajanus cajan (pigeonpea). We found that AF species recommendations did diverge from those based solely on maximizing maize yields when incorporating risk, profitability and socioeconomic vulnerability as additional variables. For instance, the highest yielding system (the S. sesban/maize relay crop) was never recommended for the most vulnerable farmers based on the vulnerability analysis, and the cropping systems were often more profitable for the least vulnerable farmers than they were for the most vulnerable farmers. Cropping system recommendations based solely on obtaining the highest average maize yields would also have generally overlooked the economic and nutritional importance of pigeonpea, and the difficulty for the most vulnerable farmers to profit from fertilizers, potentially placing these farmers at greater risk.

Sustainable Intensification with Cereal-Legume Intercropping in Eastern and Southern Africa

“…Overall, these results indicate that farmers are better off planting pigeonpea in their maize fields, wherever it is suitable, than simply growing sole maize with the recommended fertilizer rate. In contrast with the emphasis on cereal monocultures generally by some development agencies, our results, and those of the growing body of literature [8,17,[38][39][40], suggest that intercropping can play a central role in the efforts to achieve climate-smart agriculture. For example, in Malawi and Mozambique, maize-pigeonpea intercropping without fertilizer application has been demonstrated to reduce the risk of crop failure and improve profitability [8,17,38,39].…”

“…For example, in central Malawi, intercropping maize with pigeonpea had consistently positive returns across all farmer resource groups [38]. Similarly, the most vulnerable households in southern Malawi are better off intercropping pigeonpea with maize than growing sole maize with the recommended fertilizer [39]. This can lead to higher productivity, as is evident from our study as well, which could in turn reduce the unit cost of production.…”

Comments on Coe Et Al. (2019)–‘loading the Dice in Favour of the Farmer . . .’

“…As such risk (R) is a function of the vulnerability (V) of the system and the severity of hazard (H), hence R = f (H, V). Therefore, not only is the approach used in Coe et al (2019) inappropriate for assessing risks but the results also contradict earlier analysis done in Malawi (Kamanga et al, 2010;Sirrine et al, 2010;Snapp et al, 2014) and Zambia (e.g. Ajayi et al, 2009).…”

“…Indeed, maize intercropped with pigeon pea was found to be the least risky technology for all resource groups (Kamanga et al, 2010). Similarly, Sirrine et al, 2010) found that the most vulnerable households in southern Malawi are better of intercropping pigeon pea or Tephrosia with maize than growing maize with the recommended fertilizer. Using historical rainfall records and simulated yield in northern Malawi, Snapp et al (2013) also showed that pigeon pea-maize intercropping can meet the household food needs (calories and proteins) in 73-100% of the years across variable rainfall patterns, while fully fertilized maize can achieve this in only half the households.…”

Food first! Theorising assets and actors in agroforestry: risk evaders, opportunity seekers and ‘the food imperative’ in sub-Saharan Africa

“…Judgements about risks are often irrelevant compared to actual risks, because even the most promising investment may, in the end, be associated with unacceptable risks of failure (Slovic 1987). As mentioned, many farmers are thus inclined to practise a risk-minimisation strategy and those who are subject to high vulnerability often have to favour short-term and low-risk options with meagre returns at the cost of postponing or forgoing important options with potential long-term benefits (Sirrine et al 2010). There are many risk examples in our data:…”