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

Abstract

International donors and advisory bodies, governments, and nongovernmental organisations are actively promoting conservation agriculture (CA) to improve agricultural productivity and resilience to climate change impacts. However, many smallholder farmers continue to dis‐adopt (abandon) the technology. Reasons for dis‐adoption are not well known. This article examines farmers' lived experiences and perceptions of CA to understand why smallholder farmers dis‐adopt CA in Malawi. Improving understanding of dis‐adoption of this seemingly appropriate intervention is important to achieve sustained adoption and for ensuring long‐lasting impacts of agricultural development project interventions. A mixed methods approach was used, involving household questionnaire survey and focus group discussions with smallholder farmers. Findings reveal that although drivers of dis‐adoption are multidimensional and multilayered, they are rooted in shortfalls of CA promoters' implementation arrangements. Although CA proponents market CA as a time‐saving, labour‐saving, and yield‐improving technology, respondents report contrary experiences. Our findings show that farmers lack sufficient technical support and encounter technological, social, institutional, and economic challenges. These, coupled with unfulfilled expectations, undermine ownership of CA projects and lead to dis‐adoption. This highlights a need to (a) collaboratively design projects to better suit local needs and context with inclusive implementation arrangements; (b) emphasise climate resilience benefits of CA rather than economic benefits to manage farmers' expectations; (c) intensify multidisciplinary research that incorporates farmers' knowledge and experiences to develop suitable, flexible, and low‐input CA packages; and (d) provide regular hands‐on technical extension support to farmers.

The Ability of Conservation Agriculture to Conserve Soil Organic Carbon and the Subsequent Impact on Soil Physical, Chemical, and Biological Properties and Yield

“…Policy initiatives to subsidize or incentivize NT, for example by increasing access to credit and the farm machinery required for NT operations (e.g., rental schemes, custom hire) can increase adoption (Bhan and Behera, 2014;Abdulai, 2016;Carlisle, 2016). However, ongoing support and the removal of larger institutional barriers to adoption are essential for farmers to continue with CA once initial incentives have been removed (Andersson and D'Souza, 2014;Brown et al, 2017;Chinse et al, 2019). Indeed, until institutional and/or social barriers are able to be overcome, CA is unlikely to be a successful system of sustainable intensification.…”

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

“…This suggests that CA promoters fail to actively and genuinely engage with local communities to properly contextualise CA interventions. To illustrate this point, our findings indicate that vernacular translation CA as 'mtayakhasu' (abandon the hoe), in communities with tillage culture where the hoe is a valued symbol of a 'hard working farmer' (Chinseu et al, 2019), weakens the support of traditional leaders and general buy-in from the wider community. As people generally endeavour to conform to norms of society (Rogers, 2003) and avoid being labelled mlesi (lazy), farmers practise no-till only on small portions of their farmland (just to be part of the CA project) while the rest is under conventional tillage (Mazvimavi & Twomlow, 2009).…”

“…Nyanga, 2012). Hence, extension officers spend very little time interacting face to face with farmers to reinforce CA knowledge and skills, despite many requiring more intensive extension support (Chinseu et al, 2019). While enrolment of lead farmers (Note 1) is generally regarded as a remedy for problems of acute extension shortages, the strategy is not suited to CA promotion.…”

“…Responses to these questions can provide insights into processes and mechanisms that need to improve to sustain adoption of project-based interventions and their impacts more broadly. Literature is growing on analyses of why dis-adoption occurs (see Chinseu, Dougill & Stringer, 2019;Oladele, 2005;Moser & Barrett, 2003;Neill & Lee, 2001), but the question of 'how dis-adoption occurs' is paramount and needs more adequate conceptualisation. Answering the question 'how does dis-adoption occur and how can it be conceptually illustrated?'…”

Bridging the disciplinary gap in conservation agriculture research, in Malawi. A review

“…However, a number of recent studies (e.g. Dougill et al 2017;Chinseu et al 2019) have highlighted institutional and socio-cultural reasons for the low levels of CA adoption.…”