This document describes the Conservation Agriculture-Based Applied Research and Delivery Hub (HUB) approach used by CIMMYT to develop and disseminate conservation agriculture technologies to farmers. The HUB approach involves multi-stakeholder collaboration through adaptive research platform trials and farmer module trials. The platform trials allow for testing and refinement of technologies through research on various components. Farmer module trials then test and demonstrate technologies in farmers' fields. Long-term strategic research trials also provide data on technology impacts. The HUB model facilitates participatory development and adoption of comprehensive conservation agriculture systems tailored to local conditions.

1. CIMMYT®
IInntteerrnnaattiioonnaall MMaaiizzee aanndd WWhheeaatt IImmpprroovveemmeenntt CCeenntteerr
Strategies to Develop and
Extend Conservation
Agriculture-Based Crop
Management Practices to
Farmers
CA-based Applied Research and
Delivery HUB
Ken Sayre – Consultant with the CIMMYT Conservation Agriculture Program

2. HOW CAN CONSERVATION
AGRICULTURE BASED TECHNOLOGIES
BE DEVELOPED AND DELIVERED TO
FARMERS TO CONTRIBUTE TO
SOLVING THEIR PROBLEMS
AND
WHY MUST FARMERS PARTICIPATE
IN THIS PROCESS?

3. Normal Research and Development Systems are Linear
• However, the linear flow of knowledge illustrated below which
has commonly been used by researchers and extension agents may
work for delivery of single component technologies like a new
variety or a new herbicide etc.
• But it does not easily lead to the transfer and farmer adoption
• of more comprehensive, integrated, more knowledge intensive
technologies like CA-based technologies because farmers are not
involved during the technology development process. They
usually become involved too late in the process to provide needed
imputs.
Researchers conducting formal research in
established institutions
Basic
research
Strategic
research
Applied
research
Figure 3. A representation of the linear model of technology and knowledge development in
agriculture. Based on Ekboir, 2002.
Researchers
Extensión
agencies
Farmers
Technology
transfer
Adoption
Knowledge flow

4. The Research and Development System that is Best suited
for CA-based technologies is integrated and provides a
structure for collaboration by all the essential partners
• Sound innovation systems
involve multiple agents
(especially including
farmers), each registering
their expectations and
contributing their own
comparative advantage
towards resolving the
problems associate with
the development of
functional CA systems.
Innovative
Farmers
Input
Suppliers
Extension
(Change)
Agents
NARS, NGOs,
Private Sector
Partners
Machinery
Manufacturers
Researchers

5. In Mexico, CIMMYT has developed the
concept of the
CA-based Applied Research and Delivery HUB or
(In Some Places Called an “Innovation Platform”
instead of HUB)
approach to effectively involve researchers
working in a multi-disciplinary manner
together with farmers, agriculture leaders,
private sector members and other needed
partners to insure the development, testing,
fine-tuning and delivery of suitable CA-based
technologies to farmers.

6. What Does “HUB” Mean?
It is based on the 3 parts of a wagon wheel
Wheel HUB = Platform Trials
Wheel Rim = Areas
of Extension
Wheel Spokes = Module
Farmers

7. Why Call the Strategy Being Followed a “CA-based
Applied Research and Delivery HUB”??
• A wheel is made up of 3 main parts – the Hub in the
Center that supports and allows the Spokes and the
Wheel Rim to function.
• The Spokes and the Wheel Rim cannot function without
the HUB and the Hub serves no function without the
Spokes and the Wheel Rim – the Hub is key
None of the Components of the Wheel nor the Components
of the CA-based Hub can function alone – all must work
together

8. The Concept of the CA-based Applied Research
and Delivery “HUB” Also is Comprised of
Three Main Components
• Platform Trials
• Simple Adaptive Research and Delivery Platform Trials
• More Complex Strategic Research and Development Platform
Trials as Needed to Complement the Adaptive Research and
Delivery Platform Trials
• Farmer Module Trials in Farmer Fields
• Extension Areas of Neighboring Farmers
Surrounding the Farmer Module Trials

9. CA-BASED ADAPTIVE RESEARCH AND DELIVERY HUB or
Adaptive Research and Delivery Platform for
Multi-disciplinary Adaptive Research, Testing
FARMERS FARMERS
FARMERS
FARMERS
Soils and
Agronomy
Component
Technology
Studies
FARMERS
Breeding and
Testing of
different
Cultivars
FARMERS
Innovation Platform
Demonstration and Training
FARMERS
Weed ,disease and Pest
Management
Component
Technology Studies
Farmer Field
Adaptive Research
and Demonstration
Modules
Farmer Field
Adaptive Research
and Demonstration
Modules
Farmer Field
Adaptive Research
and Demonstration
Modules
CA-based Agricultural
Machinery Development
FARMERS
Farmer Field
Adaptive Research
and Demonstration
Modules
Socio-economic
Evaluations
FARMERS
NARS/Private
Sector/NGO
Involvement FARMERS
Farmer
Practices
1-3
Practices
Potential
Best Bet
CA-Based
Practices
2-4
Practices
Plots
Reserved
for
Future
CA-Based
Practices

10. Once a Defined Area has been Selected and an Initial
Rapid Survey has been Conducted to Describe the Most
Important Farming System to Develop Appropriate CA-Based
Technologies
Depending upon the defined area’s agro-climatic and
farmer characteristics, an initial decision must be made to:
•Initially emphasize the identification of interested farmers to begin to
test the “Best Bet” CA-based Technologies in Modules in farmer fields
before starting a platform trial
OR
•Initially establish an applied research and delivery platform frial if
good, “Best Bet” CA-based Technologies are not well defined before
initiating Modules on farmer fields
OR
•If Conditions and Resources Allow, Immediately Initiate Both
Activities Simultanerously

11. Southern Sonora
Irrigated
(Arid Conditions)
39 masl
CIMMYT Headquarters
El Batán
Mainly Rainfed
Low Rainfall (350-600mm)
2249 masl
Mexico
City
Toluca
Rainfed
High Rainfall
(700-1200mm)
2640 masl
Locations of 5 Current CA-based
HUBs in Mexico
(3 more HUBs are being established)
MMeexxiiccoo
El Bajio
Mainly
Irrigated:
Some Rainfed
(600-900mm)
1500 masl
Chiapas
Tropical, mainly
Rainfed
High Rainfall
(900-1800mm)
Variable Altitude

12. The Applied Research and Delivery Platform Trial
Provides the Setting for Multi-disciplinary Research
Activities that Provides the Opportunity for All
Stakeholders to Participate in:
•The testing and fine-tuning of new CA-based technologies
and the associated agronomic component technologies
•The understanding of the potential effects/benefits of these
new CA technologies to enhance sustainable production in
comparison with the common, prevailing farmer practices
•The determination of the potential economic benefits of
the new CA technologies compared to the common farmer
practices

13. Focus of Collaborative, Multi-disciplinary/Multi-stakeholder/
Farmer Participatory Activities in a Applied
Research and Delivery Platform Trial
Appropriate
Fertilizer
Management
Selection of
Appropriate
Cultivars
Appropriate
Irrigation
Management
Other
Relevant
Crop
Management
Components
Appropriate
Weed
Control
Practices
Appropriate
Crop Residue
Management
Appropriate
Pest and
Disease
Management
Appropriate
Seeders/other
Implements
Dramatic
Reduction
The Foundation for Developing Suitable and Sustainable Conservation
Agriculture-Based Crop Management Technologies
s
In Tillage
Retention of
Adequate
Levels of
Residues
on the Soil
Economically
Viable
Diversificati
on of Crop
Rotations
Farmer
Perception
of sustainability
and profitability
by adoption
Assessment of
Relevant Socio-
Economic
Factors
Application of
Precision
Agriculture
Tools and
Strategies

14. CA-BASED ADDAPTIVE RESEARCH AND DELIVERY HUB
THE ADAPTIVE RESEARCH AND DELIVERU Y PLATFORM TRIAL PROVIDES A
LOCATION FOR MULTI-STKEHOLD COLLLABORQTIVE ACTIVITIES
Adaptive Research and Delivery Platform Trial for
Multi-disciplinary Adaptive Research, Testing
FARMERS FARMERS
NARS/Private
Sector/NGO
Involvement FARMERS
FARMERS
FARMERS
Soils and
Agronomy
Component
Technology
Studies
FARMERS
Breeding and
Testing of different
Cultivars
FARMERS
FARMERS
Weed ,disease and Pest
Management
Component
Technology Studies
Farmer Field
Adaptive Research
and Demonstration
Modules
Farmer Field
Adaptive Research
and Demonstration
Modules
Farmer Field
Adaptive Research
and Demonstration
Modules
CA-based Agricultural
Machinery Development
FARMERS
Farmer Field
Adaptive
Research and
Demonstration
Modules
FARMERS
Socio-economic
Evaluations
Demonstration and Training
Farmer
Practices
1-3
Practices
Potential
Best Bet
CA-Based
Practices
2-4
Practices
Plots
Reserved
for
Future
CA-Based
Practices

15. Common Activities Carried
Out in an Adaptive Research
and Delivery Platform Trial in
the HUBs in Mexico

16. Implement Testing and Development
Development of the Multi-Crop/Multi-Use Prototype CA Implement
Planting Wheat and banding basal
fertilizer
Configured for Maize Planting
Side-dress banded N application for
Wheat
Side-dress banded N application for
Maize

17. Using the Adaptive Research Platform and Delivery Trial
to Compare Different Technology Components Like the
Comparison of Tillage/Residue Levels in Permanent Beds
Without Residue With Residue

18. Using the CA-Based Adaptive Research and
Delivery Platform Trial to Compare Weed
Control Strategies
Conventional Till Maize; No Residue Zero Till Maize; With Residues

19. Wide versus Narrow Permanent
Beds for Rainfed Conditions

20. Comparison of the Efficiency of Rain Water Use for
Conventional Farm Practices versus Conservation
Agriculture Practices in Year with “Normal Rainfall”
Conventional Tillage with Crop
Residues Removed
Zero Tillage with Crop Residues
Retained

21. Comparison of the Efficiency of Rain Water Use for
Conventional Farm Practices versus Conservation
Agriculture Practices in Year with “Very Low Rainfall”
Conventional Tillage with Crop
Residues Removed
Zero Tillage with Crop
Residues Retained

22. Using the CA-Based Strategic Research Platform Long
Term Trials for Multidisciplinary Research
Student thesis Research On-going Project Research

23. Long-Term Strategic Research and Development
Platform Trial Supporting the Rainfed HUB in
the Central Highlands of Mexico

24. The Long-Term Strategic Research and
Development Platform Trials that are Part of Some
of the CA-based Research and Delivery Hubs in
Mexico When Needed and When Needed
Resources are Available have
Provided Opportunities for Multidisciplinary Research that
has Provided Needed Long-Term Yield Comparisons
between Farmer Practices and New, CA-based Practices and
Generated Revelant Information Concerning Sustainability
Topics Including Soil Health Issues Related to Soil
Physical, Biological and Chemical Properties

25. Comparison of Rainfed Maize Yield for Different Tillage, Rotation and Residue Management
7000
6000
5000
4000
3000
2000
1000
0
Practices over 10 Years in Central Mexico
1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005
Grain Yield (kg/ha)
Maize-Wheat; Zero Till Seeding; All Residues Retained
Continuous Maize, Conv. Till Seeding; All Residues Removed (Farmer Practice)
Maize-Wheat; Zero Till Seeding; All Residues Removed

27. Comparison of Rainfed Wheat Yields for Contrasting Tillage and Residue
8500
7500
6500
5500
4500
3500
2500
1500
Management Practices over 11 Years in Central Mexico
1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006
Grain Yield (kg/ha)
Wheat-Maize; Zero Till - All Residues Retained (Best CA-based Practice)
Wheat-Maize; Conv. Till; - All Residues Removed (Farmer Practice)
Wheat-Maize; Zero Till - All Residues Removed

29. Effect of tillage and residue management over fifteen
years on wheat grain yields in the Yaqui Valley, Sonora,
Mexico - Irrigated Production Systems
8500
8000
7500
7000
6500
6000
5500
5000
4500
19 93 19 95 19 97 19 99 2001 20 03 20 05 20 07
Grain Yield (kg/ha)
Conventional till beds - residues incorporated
Permanent beds - residues burned
Permanent beds - residues retained

30. Effect of tillage and crop residue management (averaged over four Nitrogen
treatments) on % organic matter for soil samples (0-20 cm) taken in 2003 for
a long-term trial initiated in 1993 at CIANO, Cd Obregon, Sonora
% Organic matter Conventional till beds; all straw incorporated
1.10
1.05
1.15
1.24
1.30
1.25
1.20
1.15
1.10
1.05
1.00
Permanent beds; all straw burned
Permanent beds; aprox. 60-70% straw removed for fodder
Permanent beds; all straw retained

31. Effect of tillage and crop residue management (averaged over four Nitrogen
treatments) on Na content for soil samples (0-20 cm) taken in 2003 for a
long-term trial initiated in 1993 at CIANO, Cd Obregon, Sonora
655
836
671
LSD (0.05) = 81 ppm
596
900
850
800
750
700
650
600
550
500
Na content (ppm)
Conventional till beds; all straw incorporated
Permanent beds; all straw burned
Permanent beds; aprox. 60-70% straw removed for fodder
Permanent beds; all straw retained

32. Effect of tillage and crop residue management on soil wet aggregates
(Mean Weight Diameter = MWD) for soil samples (0-10cm) taken in 2004
for a long-term trial initiated in 1993 at CIANO, Cd Obregon, Sonora
LSD (0.05) = 0.333
Soil Wet Aggregates (MWD) Conventional till beds; straw incorporated
1.121
1.421
1.957
1.262
2.000
1.800
1.600
1.400
1.200
1.000
Permanent beds; straw burned
Permanent beds; aprox. 60-70% straw removed for fodder
Permanent beds; straw retained

33. Effect of tillage and crop residue management (averaged over four Nitrogen
treatments) on soil microbial biomass C content for soil samples (0-7 cm)
taken in 2002 for a long-term trial initiated in 1993 at CIANO, Cd Obregon,
Sonora
LSD (0.05) = 133 mg C/kg soil
464 465
588
600
650
600
550
500
450
400
Soil microbial biomass C content mg C/kg soil
Conventional till beds; straw incorporated
Permanent beds; straw burned
Permanent beds; aprox. 60-70% straw removed for fodder
Permanent beds; straw retained

34. Effect of tillage and crop residue management (averaged over four Nitrogen
treatments) on soil microbial biomass N content for soil samples (0-7 cm)
taken on a long-term trial initiated in 1993 at CIANO, Cd Obregon, Sonora
LSD (0.05) = 1.6 mg N/kg soil
4.88
4.46
6.92
9.06
10.50
9.50
8.50
7.50
6.50
5.50
4.50
3.50
Soil microbial biomass N content mg N/kg soil
Conventional till beds; straw incorporated
Permanent beds; straw burned
Permanent beds; aprox. 60-70% straw removed for fodder
Permanent beds; straw retained

38. Comparing Genotypes with and without
Tillage

39. Performance of Wheat Lines Developed by Parallel Selected by Zero and
Conventional Tillage
Effects of Cross, Tillage and Selection Systems on Grain Yield
Averaged over 2005, 2006, 2005
6500
6000
ha)
kg/(5500
yield Grain 5000
4500
SERI/..BERKUT SW94.../PBW65 FILIN./Cross PASTOR MILAN./PASTOR PFAU../AMAD PB, S-ZT
PB, S-CT
CB, S-ZT
CB, S-CT

40. Using the CA-Based Research Platform Trials to
Train Technicians, Scientists and Farmers
Farmer Training Visiting Scientist Training

41. CA-BASED APPLIED RESEARCH AND DELIVERY HUB
THE MODULES IN FARMER FIELDS ALLOW COMPARISONS OF BEST BET CA-BASED
TECHNOLOGOES WITH THE COMMON FARMER PRACTICES
FARMERS
FARMERS
NARS/Private
Sector/NGO FARMERS
FARMERS
Adaptive Research and Delivery Platform
for Multi-disciplinary Adaptive Research,
Testing Demonstration and Training
FARMERS
Soils and
FARMERS Agronomy
Breeding FARMERS
FARMERS
Weed ,disease and
Pest Management
Farmer Field
Adaptive Research
and Demonstration
Modules
Farmer Field
Adaptive Research
and Demonstration
Modules
Farmer Field
Adaptive Research
and Demonstration
Modules
CA-based Agricultural
Machinery Development
FARMERS
Farmer Field
Adaptive Research
and Demonstration
Modules
Farmer
Practices
1-3
Practices
FARMERS
Socio-economics
Potential
Best Bet
CA-Based
Practices
2-4
Practices
Plots
Reserved
for
Future
CA-Based
Practices

42. THE FARMER MODULES IN FARMER FIELDS
PROVIDE THE VENUE TO:
•Compare One or Two Best Bet CA-based Crop Management
Technologies Side-by-side versus the Farmer’s Conventional
Practices in the Farmer’s Fields
•Fine-tune these CA-based Technologies as Needed in the Farmers’
Fields with Active Farmer Participation Using Simple
Superimposed Side-by-Side Comparisons of Weed Control,
Cultivars, Rertilizer Management etc as Needed
•Organize Regular Field Visits for Surrounding, Neighbor Farmers
to Visit the Modules in Farmer Fields and to Observe Different
Management Steps for the CA-based Technologies
•Allow the Module Farmers to Help Organize and Be the
Spokesmen to Explain the New CA-based to Neighboring Farmers
•Utilize the Modules in the Farmer Fields for Field Days to
Demonstrate the New CA-based technologies to Farmers from the
Surrounding Areas and to Facilitate their Potential Adoption of the
Technologies

43. Meeting with Neighboring Farmers at a Farmer’s Module
to Identify Other Farmers From the surrounding
Extension Ares Who Are Interested in Cooperating

44. Using the Comparisons of Farmer Practices and the Best
Bet CA-based Technologies in Farmer Modules for
Training Technicians, Scientists and Farmers

45. Farmer/Service Provider Training in the
Operation of CA-based Seeders in a Farmer
Module

46. Using the Comparisons of Farmer Practices and the Best
Bet CA-based Technologies in a Farmer’s Module for
Farmer Training in Seeding
CA-based Technology Farmer Practice

47. Comparing Farmer Practices with the Best Bet CA-based
Technologies for Irrigated Wheat in a Farmer Mudule
Farmer Practice with Tilled Beds CA-based Permanent Beds

48. Comparing Farmer Practices with the Best Bet CA-based
Technologies for Grain Sorghum in a Farmer Module
Irrigated Sorghum on Tilled Raised
Beds (Farmer Practice)
Best Bet CA- Irrigated Sorghum
on Permanent Raised Beds

49. Farmer Field Day at Harvest to Compare Farmer Practice
and the CA-Based Technology Managed by the Farmer in
a Farmer Module

51. Comparison of CA-based Practices versus Farmer
Practices in Farmer Modules Farmer Fields in the
Central Highlands of Mexico
Cropping
System
Number of
Modules in
Farmer
Fields
CA-based
Practices
Average
Maize
Yield
(kg/ha)
Farmer
Practice
Average
Maize
Yield
kg/ha
CA-based
Practices
Returns
Above
Variable
Costs
(Mexican
Pesos)
Farmer
Practice
Returns
Above
Variable
Costs
(Mexican
Pesos)
Irrigated Maize 19 8830 6950 17,154 11,926
Rainfed Maize 29 4830 3000 5566 1853
1US Dollar = 13.5 Mexican Pesos

52. Comparison of Rainfed Maize under Farmer Practice
versus CA-based Practices in a Farmer’s Module
Farmer Practice CA-based Practice