Policy Integration and Coherence for Conservation Agriculture Initiatives in Malawi

Abstract

In sub-Saharan Africa, development and dissemination of perceived new agricultural innovations dominate the development agenda yet hunger and poverty remain widespread. A conducive policy environment is essential to support these efforts. Despite that national policies are a critical component in the functioning of an agricultural innovation system, studies have often overlooked their relevance in farmers" adoption of agricultural innovations. There is an urgent need to enhance understanding of how policies affect long-term adoption of agricultural innovations aimed at increasing productivity and incomes of smallholder farmers. This study utilises thematic content analysis to examine the extent of integration of Conservation Agriculture (CA) and coherence in Malawi"s national agricultural policies, and their implication for CA adoption among smallholder farmers.Results indicate that inadequate integration of CA in the National Agricultural Policy (NAP), coupled with a lack of coherence of agricultural department policies, undermines farmers" CA adoption. While inadequate integration constrains resource allocation for supporting CA activities, lack of coherence of agricultural policies radiates conflicting and confusing agricultural extension messages to smallholder farmers. We argue that inadequate CA integration and incoherence of policies are institutional constraints which prevent farmers" sustained adoption. To facilitate long-term adoption of CA among smallholders, there is need to: (1) strengthen CA integration in agricultural policies; (2) improve departmental coordination to enhance coherence of agricultural strategies and extension messages disseminated to farmers; and (3) strengthen government"s role in supporting multi-disciplinary research to generate and disseminate best practices capable of sustaining CA adoption.

Why do smallholder farmers dis‐adopt conservation agriculture? Insights from Malawi

“…Increased incidences of pests and diseases attributed to application of mulch and manure precipitated disenchantment and eroded farmers' interest in CA. These findings support calls for collaborative research to address such technological challenges, including specialised equipment to aid CA continued implementation (Chinseu et al, 2018;Dougill et al, 2017;Kassam et al, 2012;Lahmah et al, 2012). Rogers (2003) argued that if an innovation is perceived to be complex, the amount of how-to knowledge for its continued adoption is much greater than less complex technologies, and if insufficient knowledge is obtained, the likely result is dis-adoption.…”

“…Because agricultural technology disseminators are mostly interested in determining the rate of adoption/diffusion (Rogers, 2003), potential impact (Glover et al, 2016), or beneficiary-targeting (Chinseu, Stringer, & Dougill, 2018), much of the existing agricultural technology adoption studies emphasise linking farm and household characteristics to adoption decisions (e.g., Nyanga, 2012;Pedzisa et al, 2015;Wendland & Sills, 2008). This however provides a poor understanding of how smallholder farming households and their production systems function (Andersson & D'Souza, 2014).…”

Strengthening Conservation Agriculture innovation systems in sub-Saharan Africa: lessons from a stakeholder analysis

“…AIS has been widely applied in agricultural research and development, such as (1) guiding the identification of relevant stakeholders, policies or institutions within the agricultural system (e.g. Chinseu et al, 2018;Kaluzi et al, 2017); (2) guiding the diagnosis of components in the innovation system to determine those that are lacking or in need of improving (e.g. Dougill et al, 2017;Gunter et al, 2017) and; (3) examining structures, operations and processes that govern the relevant agricultural systems (e.g.…”

An Empirically Derived Conceptual Framework to Assess Dis-Adoption of Conservation Agriculture: Multiple Drivers and Institutional Deficiencies

“…Lack of regular knowledge reinforcement means that farmers have poor 'know-how' to effectively practise and benefit from CA, thus leading to frustration. In addition, delivery of mixed extension messages, largely due to incoherent agricultural policies (see Chinseu, Stringer & Dougill, 2018), confuses CA farmers, prompting many to revert to conventional tillage practices perceived to be less complex.…”