Which Options Fit Best? Operationalizing the Socio-Ecological Niche Concept

Abstract

SUMMARYThe large diversity of farms and farming systems in sub-Saharan Africa calls for agricultural improvement options that are adapted to the context in which smallholder farmers operate. The socio-ecological niche concept incorporates the agro-ecological, socio-cultural, economic and institutional dimensions and the multiple levels of this context in order to identify which options fit best. In this paper, we illustrate how farming systems analysis, following the DEED cycle of Describe, Explain, Explore and Design, and embedding co-learning amongst researchers, farmers and other stakeholders, helps to operationalize the socio-ecological niche concept. Examples illustrate how farm typologies, detailed farm characterization and on-farm experimental work, in combination with modelling and participatory approaches inform the matching of options to the context at regional, village, farm and field level. Recommendation domains at these gradually finer levels form the basis for gradually more detailed baskets of options from which farmers and other stakeholders may choose, test and adjust to their specific needs. Tailored options identified through the DEED cycle proof to be more relevant, feasible and performant as compared to blanket recommendations in terms of both researcher and farmer-identified criteria. As part of DEED, on-farm experiments are particularly useful in revealing constraints and risks faced by farmers. We show that targeting options to the niches in which they perform best, helps to reduce this risk. Whereas the conclusions of our work about the potential for improving smallholders' livelihoods are often sobering, farming systems analysis allows substantiating the limitations of technological options, thus highlighting the need for enabling policies and institutions that may improve the larger-scale context and increase the uptake potential of options.

Nested archetypes of vulnerability in African drylands: where lies potential for sustainable agricultural intensification?

“…The broad archetypes reflected the empirical findings only partly. With regard to implementation, attention needs to be given to socio-ecological synergies and trade-offs (Sendzimir et al 2011, Lahmar et al 2012, Descheemaeker et al 2016, as well as key dynamics pertaining to the uptake, modification, abandonment and replacement of intensification strategies (Sietz and Van Dijk 2015). These finer-scale interactions remain beyond the scope of a continental assessment due to the lack of appropriate data, yet they are important for mainstreaming sustainable intensification and climate adaptation in policy planning (Sietz et al 2011b, Wright et al 2014.…”

How Feasible Is the Scaling-Out of Livelihood and Food System Adaptation in Asia-Pacific Islands?

“…To address the effects of social-ecological heterogeneity, we developed resource use typologies in NTB and WNB. In sub-Saharan Africa, failure of the pipeline model of technological innovation and diffusion has been attributed to the diversity of agro-ecological, cultural, economic and institutional factors, plus the geographically-specific manifestations of climate change (Descheemaeker et al, 2016). Tools to overcome these constraints have included the definition of local social-ecological "niches" (Ojiem et al, 2006;Franke et al, 2014), and participatory farming systems analysis (Descheemaeker et al, 2016).…”

“…In sub-Saharan Africa, failure of the pipeline model of technological innovation and diffusion has been attributed to the diversity of agro-ecological, cultural, economic and institutional factors, plus the geographically-specific manifestations of climate change (Descheemaeker et al, 2016). Tools to overcome these constraints have included the definition of local social-ecological "niches" (Ojiem et al, 2006;Franke et al, 2014), and participatory farming systems analysis (Descheemaeker et al, 2016). Our typologies aimed to address this challenge by assessing ecosystem goods and services utilised by communities at the sub-district scale; however, unlike Ojiem et al's (2006) niches we could not account for the intricate socio-cultural dimensions of livelihoods overlaying the resource base due to a lack of suitable information .…”

“…This paradigm has been referred to as the linear "pipeline" model of technology innovation and diffusion (Biggs, 2007). However, there are growing concerns that blanket recommendations lead to low adoption amongst smallholders, and hence there are no "silver bullets" that can generate transformations in climate adaptation and resource efficiency (Giller et al, 2009;Biermann et al, 2012;Descheemaeker et al, 2016).…”

Plant diversity in traditional fruit gardens (munaans) of Benuaq and Tunjung Dayaks tribes of West Kutai, East Kalimantan, Indonesia

“…Ecosystem services research suggests that the social benefits that agrosystems provide generally transcend those related to production services (Porter et al 2009;Sandhu et al 2010). Moreover, these age-old traditional systems are evolving rapidly in response to changes in the socioeconomic, socio-ecological and biophysical environment (Descheemaeker et al 2016;Mellisse et al 2017).…”