Presentation during IITA R4D week 2015 (23 - 27 Nov. 2015). By: Vanlauwe, Haertel, Nziguheba, Njukwe, Baars, Huising and Adewopo.

1. www.iita.orgA member of CGIAR consortium
Natural Resource Management Strategy
Vanlauwe, Haertel, Nziguheba, Njukwe, Baars, Huising and
Adewopo
24th November 2015
(R4D Week 2015)

2. Vanlauwe, Haertel, Nziguheba,
Njukwe, Baars, Huising,
Adewopo, et al
Natural Resource
Management Strategy…
…preparing for phase 2
Phase 1: 2012-2014  Strategy, resources
Phase 2: 2014-2017  Implementation
Phase 3: 2018-2020  Assessments

3. ‘To lift over 11.6 million
Africans out of poverty and
turn 7.5 million ha of land
into sustainable use’
Refreshed Strategy 2012-2020

4. Phase 1 (2011-2014)
Strategy development, CRP
alignment, and resource mobilization
 NRM strategy

5. ‘Sustainable Intensification
of smallholder farming
systems in sub-Saharan
Africa:
New Science to Tackle
Persistent Problems’
NRM Strategy 2012-2020

6. Papers related to NRM
 Technical dimension
 Increased productivity (per unit area of land)
 Increased resilience
 Provision of other ecosystem service

7. Densely populated areas
 No realistic alternatives in densely populated areas
Kenya

8. Cropyield
Time (or degradation status)
Time
Soilfertilitystatus
Time
Nutrient imbalances
Other degradation
Degradation processes

9. Pillar 1: Integrated Soil Fertility Mgt
Vanlauwe et al,
SOIL, 2015

10. Pillar 2: Sustainable land mgt

11. Pillar 3: Climate change adapt./mitig.

12. Intensification for forest conservation
DR Congo

13. Phase 1 (2011-2014)
Strategy development, CRP
alignment, and resource mobilization
 Investments and resources

14. On-going NRM-related initiatives
 Direct impact of large
NRM-related projects (most
finishing before 2020): 1.5
million HHs with 0.5 ha of
land = 750k ha
 Embed NRM/SLU in
new initiatives aiming at
scale (e.g., AfDB, WBank)
 Indirect impact through
policy engagement,
influencing scaling partners

15. Financial resources
USD

16. Phase 1 (2011-2014)
Strategy development, CRP
alignment, and resource mobilization
 Science progress

17. Households and targeting
Authors Content
Van Asten, Mashingaidze, Taulya,
Bekunda, Larbi, Nielsen, Klapwijk
Household analyses and consequences
for ISFM, targeting interventions, etc
Kreye, Hauser, Kokou, Uzokwe,
Nhamo, Yomeni, Nabahungu
Progress with cassava agronomy
Coyne, Thuita, Aziz, Masso,
Roobroeck, Dianda
Soil (micro)biology, including aspects of
rhizobiology, nematodes, bean root rot, etc
Ampadu-Boakye, Baijukya,
Kanampiu, Sangodele, Kamai,
Kamara, , Adjei-Nsiah, Ebanyat
Progress with legume intensification
Asare, Jassogne, Wairegi, Van
Asten, Yemefack, Kehbila,
Matungulu
Cocoa and coffee intensification (with link
to conservation)

18.  Novel models for dissemination
Phase 2 (2015-2017)
Strategy implementation, delivery
and consolidation

19. T. asperellumControl
Rhizobiology
Fig. Progressive improvement of batch quality through successive carrier processing
options (Fev- Mar. 015; 2 different bags /batch sampled after curing for assessment)
Cellspergraminoculant(logCFU)

20. Youth as service providers
http://populationpyramid.net/nigeria/2050/

21. Public-private partnerships
www.N2Africa.org

22. Extension partner
facilitating an active
dissemination network
Placing research within development
……
…Extension agents 
Farming
households 
Extension partner with
need for agronomic
information 
African Cassava
Agronomy Initiative
ACAI R4D team 
Demand for
cassava
agronomy
information
Development of tools
and applications for
scaling agronomy
recommendations
(a)
(b)
(c)

23. ACA-I
Responding to demands
 Applicable to most cassava farmers, limited
investment needs from farmers
1. Best planting practice tool for extension agents/farmers
2. Cassava intercropping tool for extension agents
 Operates within value chains, focus on production
3. Cassava fertilizer blending tool for the fertilizer sector
4. Fertilizer recommendation tool for extension agents
 Operates within value chains, focus on supply
5. Staggered planting tool for the processing sector
6. A tool advising on the optimum practices for highest
starch

24. Decision support tools

25. Soil Health Platform
 Data and information management
 Network of laboratory services
 Networking and partnership
 Communication and Information Services
 Etc
Jeroen Huising
j.huising@cgiar.org

26.  Novel science approaches
Phase 2 (2015-2017)
Strategy implementation, delivery
and consolidation

27.  Fertilizer application to beans in Rwanda
Agronomy science
350

28.  Fertilizer application to beans in Rwanda
Agronomy science
350

29. GIS science
 Allocating sampling points
RESULT THREE
(Probability Raster)
for manually selected LGA
clipped by Protected Areas
input GIS output Balanced and weighted sampling
points

30. Phase 3 (2018-2020)
Strategy evaluation, successes,
failures, and impact

31. Assessing the SLU-KPI
•Improved crop varieties
•Good agronomy (planting
density, time, weeding)
•Fertilizer application
•Manure or compost application
•Crop residue incorporation
•Mulch application
•Legume integration
•Reduced tillage
•Soil conservation structure
•Crop yield
•Nutrient balance
•Soil C
•Acidity
•Nutrient and water use
efficiency
•Erosion
•Soil structure
•Infiltration
= f ( )
Indicators
Practices
 Linking practices to indicators

32. Linking practices to indicators
Revised
Universal
Soil Loss
Equation
(Rahman et
al, 2009)
Soil C
capacity
(Hassink et
al., 1997)
Soil pH
Soil
pH
critical
value
of 5.5
Nutrients
added to
farm plots
Nutrients
removed
from plots
Critical
value
20 t/ha
Critical
deficit
25%
Critical
values
-20, -5,-
20
Kg/ha/
crop
Soil
erosion
Soil C
deficit
Soil
acidity
Partial
nutrient
budget
Adaptedfrom
VitalSigns
Type/amount of
Fertilizer &
organic inputs
Crop harvest
Residue removal
Type/amount of
fertilizer
Organic input type
Lime
Soil cover
Soil conservation
Tillage practices
Practices
for SLU
Soil erosion
Partial N, P,
K budget
Indicator
values
Soil C –
topsoil
Indicator
Indicator
Critical
level
f(Cadded-
Cmin)
Century
model
(Proton
balance, pH
buffer
capacity)

33. CIALCA impact study
DR Congo Rwanda
 Percentage of households who were using the technology

34. Ex-ante
TodayBefore 2020
Focus on outcomes,
not impact (too short
a time frame)
Focus on impact

35. Thank you!