Thanks to the original PPT. Good learning here.

1. Initiating Sustainable Agricultural
Systems Through Conservation
Agriculture in Mozambique: Preliminary
Experiences from SIMLESA
Dias, D.J1, Nyagumbo, I2* and Nhantumbo, N.S3, Tomo, A4
Instituto de Investigação Agrária de Moçambique (IIAM) djosedias@gmail.com
CIMMYT, International Maize and Wheat Improvement Centre, Box MP163, Mt.
Pleasant, Harare, Zimbabwe, i.nyagumbo@cgiar.org;
Instituto Superior Politécnico de Manica, Faculdade de Agricultura,
tonhantumbo@ispm.ac.mz

3. Contents of the presentation
• Introduction
• Materials and Methods
• Results and Discussions
- Implementation
- Challenges encountered
- Future Outlook

4. 1. Introduction
• Mozambique is a Southern African country with an
estimated population of 21 million people
• Poverty levels are high and literacy levels are
estimated to be around 48 % (AGRA-JIMAT, 2010)
• On average only 4.9 % of arable land area (36
million ha) is cultivated
• Major crops are maize (78% households), cassava
(34.3%), groundnut (22%) , pigeon pea (18.9%) and
cowpea (10.9% households)

5. Introduction
•Mozambique has almost 85% of the rural
population practicing low external input
subsistence agricultural systems
•The use of conservation agriculture and adoption
of best practices has a strong potential to boost
yields and sustain food security.
•CA promoted in Mozambique since the late
1990s by Sassakawa Global 2000 and others but
still a long way to go for meaningful adoption.

6. Contd.
• CIMMYT, IIAM and other partners since August 2010, have
been implementing SIMLESA, a research initiative aimed at
promoting a sustainable intensification of maize–legume
cropping systems for food security in Eastern and Southern
Africa.
• Objective of this paper is to highlight experiences gathered
during this first season of implementation focussing on the
successes, challenges, lessons learnt and insights on the
future.

7. Materials and Methods
Exploratory CA trials were established in 6 communities
distributed within three provinces (Manica, Tete and
Sofala) of Mozambique (see map). A criteria for selection
was based on attributes such as:
1. Agro-ecology,
2. Accessibility,
3. Potential to boost yields using CA,
4. Potential for maize legume systems
5. Availability of secondary data including meteorological
data.

8. Testing sites
Angonia (R10)
Angonia (R10)
(Communities of
(Communities of
Ciphole and
Ciphole and
Cabango)
Cabango)
Gorongoza (R4)
Gorongoza (R4)
Community of
Community of
Canda-sede))
Canda-sede
Manica (R10&R4)
Community of
Chinhadombwe)
Sussundenga (R4)
Community of
Sussundeng-sede
R10: Community of
Rotanda

9. The process
• 1 week CA training for ext
staff on CA concepts and
principles
• Community awareness
meetings
• Election of 6 trial host
farmers per community using
secret ballots after agreeing
on key attributes for hosts
• CA initiatives were supervised
and monitored by the local
extension staff.

10. The process Contd……..
• Farmers consulted on
maize-legume
treatments in each
community during
community awareness
meetings
• Small survey carried out
to profile host farmers
in July/Aug 2011.

11. Results and Discussions

12. Perceptions of host farmers regarding what they
think were reasons for being selected to host trials
Reason for being selected Frequency Percent
hard worker 18 51
ability to run trials and experience from other 8 23
trials
s/he is trustworthy 2 6
very active/ willing to learn/ good fields 7 20

13. Previous experience hosting other
trials
28.6 % have never participated in any
research trials before
71.4 % have hosted other research/
extension trials before

14. Table 2. Key attributes of trial host farmers
Variable Mean Standard
deviation
Period of residence in the community 35.1 17.5
(yrs)
Family size ( no. of persons) 8 3.4
Age of household head (years) 45.5 12.7
No. of years in school (years) 6 3.3
Contribution of labour in own farm 84.3 31.2
Land size (ha) 4.8 3.6

15. Gender characteristics of hosts
• The selection to host trials differed from site
to site and depended very much on cultural
habits with some gender biases.
• In Manica and Tete sites, the process was
more supportive of women with one to three
women being selected to host trials per site
and an average of two women participating in
CA committees (Table 3).

16. Table 3: Gender characteristics of CA trial host farmers and research
committees by community
Province/District Farmers selected to Farmers in Local Total
host trials by Research
community Committees
Male Female Male Female
Sofala: Gorongosa- 6 0 5 0 11
Canda
Manica: Chinhadombwe 5 1 3 2 11
Manica: Sussundenga 5 1 3 2 11
Sede
Manica: Sussundenga- 5 1 2 3 11
Rotanda
Tete: Angonia-Cabango 3 3 3 2 11
Tete:Angonia-Chiphole 5 1 2 3 11

17. Contd.
• In contrast, in Gorongosa no women featured
on any role!
• Although meant to ensure ownership and
identification with the project the approach in
some situations e.g. Gorongosa, led to
selection of the same people already hosting
trials from other initiatives.

18. Contd.
• This problem only corrected after lengthy
discussions.
• Research committees selected to manage the
trials were also completely dysfunctional in
some communities but very instrumental in
others.

19. Contd.
• Farmers were motivated by the resources
availed to them through the project such as
inputs and equipment (Jab planters, direct
seeders) which they considered as very useful
tools due to their ability to make the sowing
easier and less time consuming.
• There were complaints over bad functionality,
unavailability on the local market and the high
cost of the equipment were major constraints
to famers interested in adopting the initiatives

20. Implementation:
The initiative found that success on implementation starkly
depended on:
1. Motivation of the local extension worker as well as the
interest of the local farmers.
2. The quality of CA implemented, highly depended on the
extension workers knowledge, motivation, resources put at
their disposal and their workload or commitment to other
initiatives .
3. The existence of other projects with different approaches
also led to confusion among both the extension staff and
farmers.

21. Quality of CA management
% applying
residues by Weed Maize Quality of
No. of flowering management by average Extension
Site farmers stage mid Season yield (kg/ha) support
1 excellent, 2
Chiphole 6 100 good; 3 average 3371 Very good
1 very good; 3
good; 1 average; 1
Kabango 6 83 poor 4384 Very good
3 excellent; 2
Sussunden average, 1 late
ga 6 83 planted 1997 Very good
2 good, 3 average,
Rotanda 6 100 1 late planted 2458 average
Gorongos 2 good, 2 average,
a 6 83 2 very bad 1075 average
1 excellent, 4 very

22. Exploratory trials achievements so far
Community Trials established Trials harvested % Success rate
Manica 6 5 80%
Sussundenga 6 6 100%
Rotanda 6 6 100%
Gorongosa 6 6 100 %
Kabango 6 5 80%
Chiphole 6 6 100%
• Rainfall: Rainfall recording erratic in most situations.
•Generally legumes were lost in most communities
•Socio-economic data poorly collected eg labour,

23. Challenges encountered:
The first six months of implementation revealed complex
challenges:
1. The unavailability of residues
1. Termite infestation was also a deterrent to residue
application for example in Manica.
2. Weed management also proved a serious challenge
with some farmers calling for the use of pre-
emergence herbicides in addition to glyphosate while
others avoided hand/hoe weeding on plots treated
with herbicides.

24. Contd.
1. Jab planters and direct seeders were considered
very useful tools provided they were properly
manufactured.
2. Training of extension agents/ farmers was also
another challenge with some lacking hands-on
practical experience.

25. Future Outlook
1. Extension agents should be very well trained to
understand the concepts and practices of CA.
2. The project should also consider using farmers from
previous projects that succeeded in using CA to train
other farmers.
3. Exchange visits were an effective dissemination and
training tool equipping them with practical skills based on
‘seeing is believing’.
4. Efforts to be taken to reach more farmers by working
with other partner organizations through Innov Plats.
5. Improve regular monitoring and assistance to frontline
implementation teams

26. Summary
• SIMLESA has made a good start in Moambique and
there is potential to move forward as we build on
previous experience from the farmers
• Lessons learnt from the first season on gender
imbalances and other key drivers for success will be
used to inform future programming of activities in
the next season and beyond.
• The SIMLESA framework could provide an effective
framework for scaling up technologies