The winning poster from World Water Week, by CIAT and it's partners:"Improving the efficiency of rain water use on hillsides in the sub-humid tropics: environmental & agrocultural benefits of the Quesungual system."

1. QSMAS is an integrated land use management strategy embracing
principles of conservation agriculture that contribute to its
superior performance in terms of productivity, sustainability and
resilience.
QSMAS management practices leads towards efficient nutrient
cycling, improved crop water productivity, and increased and QSMAS plot: soybean (Glycine max
L.) production managed by women
sustained C assimilation and accumulation in a resilient production
system, thereby enhancing support for livelihoods in rural areas.
Under experimental conditions, QSMAS is equally effective as SB
system for the production of maize and more efficient to produce
common bean. The more dramatic effect is the increased
productivity of water in the later part of the bimodal rainy season,
A. Castro1, M. Rivera1, O. Ferreira1, J. Pavón2, E. García1, E. Amézquita3, M. when rainfall is usually irregular (dry spells on key stages of crop
Ayarza3, E. Barrios4, M. Rondón5, N. Pauli6, M.E. Baltodano1, B. Mendoza7, L.A. development) or inadequate (shorter rainy season).
Wélchez8, N. Johnson9, J. Rubiano10, S. Cook10 and I.M. Rao1 Consortium for the Integrated Management of
Soils in Central America
High natural variation in QSMAS plots (i.e. predominant vegetation,
(1)CIAT; (2) Instituto Nicaragüense de Tecnología Agropecuaria (INTA), Nicaragua; (3)Corporación
80
Slash
0 .1 4
L S D 0 .0 5 = 0 . 0 1 5
40
LSD
DMS 0.05 = 6.2
0 .6
QSMAS <2 Maize
soil properties) and marked differences on their management (e.g.
Nicaraguan farmers being trained
Runoff (mm h-1)
S la s h a n d B u rn
crop residues) demonstrates that the implementation of its
and Burn LSD 0.05 = 0.14
Colombiana de Investigación Agropecuaria (CORPOICA), Colombia; (4)EMBRAPA, Brazil; (5)IDRC, Canada;
70 QSMAS
C ro p w a te r p ro d u c tiv ity (k g m -3 )
30
A vailable w ater content (m 3 m -3 )
S e c o n d a ry F o re s t 0 .5 Bean
60 2007 – LSD= ns LSD0.05 = 0.10
by Honduran farmers on the
(6)University of Western Australia; (7)Universidad Nacional de Agricultura (UNA), Nicaragua; (8) FAO-
principles strongly relies on criteria of individual farmers that are
0 .1 2 20 Slash &
2006 – LSD= 1.08 Burn
S o il lo s s (t h a )
establishment of QSMAS plots
-1
0 .4 QSMAS 5-7
50 2005 – LSD= 6.59
Honduras; (9) ILRI, Kenya; (10)CPWF-Basin Focal Project Coordination, Colombia
10
40
0 .1 0
0 0 .3 QSMAS >10 influenced by current and future needs of the householders.
Infiltration (mm h-1)
30 -1 0
Driving forces behind QSMAS adoption are multiple and articulated.
0 .2
20 -2 0
0 .0 8
QSMAS
The success of the system in Honduras and Nicaragua is a reflection
0 .1
10 Secondary
The knowledge generated in Honduras (Central America) by a CPWF
-3 0
Forest DMS 0.05 = 6.6
LSD
0 -4 0 0 .0
of a community-based learning process in which local people and
0 .0 0
funded Project indicated that the Quesungual Slash and Mulch Erosion: QSMAS protects soil by markedly Soil water: QSMAS improves dry season adaptation of crops through Productivity: QSMAS improves
Agroforestry System (QSMAS) can be a model production system for reducing soil losses (~7.5 times in two higher soil water availability together with reduced runoff and crop water productivity extension service providers share ideas and learn together.
years) compared to SB system. increased infiltration compared to SB. compared to SB.
implementing conservation agriculture principles to achieve sustainable food security and other 0 .5
QSMAS benefits should be increased through intensification and
ecosystem services in drought-prone areas of hillsides in the sub-humid tropics in the face of land 320
0 .4
diversification with high value components (livestock and fruit crop
C h a n g e in n u trie n t s ta tu s (m g k g )
-1
280 T o ta l N 0 .3
degradation and climate change. As a suitable option to replace the slash and burn agriculture, QSMAS options).
A v a ila b le P 0 .2
240
Slash 1 .2 3 .0
C h a n g e in S O M (% )
0 .1 and Burn
200
= SED +F L S D 0 .0 5 = 0 .2 2 +F L S D 0 .0 5 = N S
can improve smallholder livelihoods through eco-efficient use and conservation of natural resources.
0 .0
-0 .1 QSMAS Secondary 1 .0 2 .5
160
-0 .2 Forest
Participatory validation activities in Nicaragua and Colombia suggest that the principles embedded in
120
-0 .3
0 .8 2 .0
80 -0 .4
Slash = SED
QSMAS can be readily accepted by resource-poor farmers and local authorities in similar agroecosystems.
-0 .5
and Burn
Research for development activities support the recommendation of
40
-0 .6 S la s h a n d B u rn 0 .6 1 .5
0 -0 .7 QSMAS
QSMAS Secondary
QSMAS (or the application of its principles) as an option to achieve a
-0 .8 S e c o n d a ry F o re s t
-4 0 Forest 0 .4 1 .0
-0 .9
)
Soil quality: QSMAS improves soil nutrient status and soil organic
-1
number of social, agricultural and environmental benefits in rainfed
C r o p y ie ld s ( t h a
)
-1
0 .2 0 .5
C r o p y ie ld ( t h a
matter (SOM) content (0-20 cm soil depth) compared to SB system
Slash and burn (SB, Fig. 1) is a traditional form of agriculture practiced (after one year).
0 .0
1 .2
L S D 0 .0 5 = N S
3
0 .0 systems of the sub-humid tropics.
-F -F L S D 0 .0 5 = N S
by small-scale farmers in around 20% of the tropical land area (Dixon et
2005 2005
Policy implications for achieving wider impacts include enabling:
1 .0 2 .5
2006 2006
50000
Landscape in the region of Honduras
2007 2007
al., 2001). Despite the short-term benefits obtained from its use (i.e. A v e ra g e A v e ra g e
•Regional–national-local goals to protect the sustainability of
y )
S la s h a n d B u rn 0 .8 2 .0
-1
where QSMAS is practiced
QSMAS
-1
40000
source of firewood, source of nutrients for crop development, and
S e c o n d a ry F o re s t
G W P (k g C O 2 e q u iv a le n ts h a
0 .6 1 .5
agroecosystems while enhancing their functionality.
(1) Establishment of a slash and burn reduction in incidence of pests and diseases), it is recognized as an
30000
plot: cutting of forests and burning
0 .4 1 .0
•Local agricultural and developmental extension systems.
of the resulting biomass
environmentally unfriendly practice that does not guarantee food 20000
0 .2 0 .5
•Incentives to communities to adopt more sustainable and
security and may lead to a rapid resource degradation. Unfortunately, 10000
0 .0 0 .0
environmentally friendly production practices.
there are not many alternatives to SB agriculture, especially for small- 0
Honduras (2005-07): Average productivity of QSMAS is similar of •Financial mechanisms to facilitate adoption of proposed changes.
scale farmers usually forced to produce on marginal soils on sloping GHG emission: QSMAS reduces the risk (42%) for higher than in SB system (+F and -F = fertilizer and no
global warming potential (GWP) compared to
•Physical infrastructure to sustain productivity gains.
lands. fertilizer, respectively).
slash and burn (SB) system (20 year scenario). •Benefit sharing mechanisms such as the payment for environmental
In southwest Honduras, in the early 1990s experts from FAO identified services (PES).
native farming practices and worked together with farmers to develop a Estimated value of In synthesis:
production system suitable to replace the SB system in that eco-region. environmental services
• Soil-plant-atmosphere continuum: Reduced runoff, erosion, water turbidity and