concept note · web viewcrop growth and yield variables including germination percentage, plant...

Intensification of maize-legume based systems in the semi-arid areas of Tanzania (Kongwa and Kiteto Districts)

to increase farm productivity and improve farming natural resource base

Africa RISING-ESA Project Proposal 2015/16

International Crops Research Institute for the Semi-Arid Tropics (ICRISAT)

December 2014

Organization: International Crops Research Institute for the Semi-Arid Tropics (ICRISAT)Mailing Address: ICRISAT, Patancheru 502 324, Andhra Pradesh, India

Contact Person: Joanna Kane-PotakaDirector, Strategic Marketing & CommunicationICRISATPatancheru 502 324Tel: +91 40 3071 3227Fax: +91 40 3071 3074Email: [email protected]

Country Tanzania – Kongwa and Kiteto Districts

Principal Investigator Patrick Okori, Principal Scientist (Plant Breeding), ICRISAT-Malawi

Research Team compositionName Gender Institution Disciplinary expertise Highest

qualificationProject role

Elirehema Swai

M ARI- Hombolo Soil Scientist/ Agronomy

PhD Co-PI

Anthony Kimaro

M ICRAF Forestry & Soil Fertility

PhD Co-PI

Dan Makumbi M CIMMYT Plant Breeder Co-PIGangaRao, NVPR

M ICRISAT Plant Breeder PhD Co-PI

Anitha Seetha F ICRISAT Molecular Diagnosis PhD ScientistMonica Lyimo F SUA Nutrition expert PhD ScientistYasinta Muzanilla

F SUA Nutrition expert PhD/Prof Scientist

Omari Mponda

M ARI Nalendele Plant Breeder PhD Scientist

Chrispinus Rubanza

M University of Dodoma

Forage Scientist PhD Scientist

Rashid Msangi M Pasture Research

Forage Scientist PhD Scientist

Martha Swamila

F ICRAF Agriculture Economist M.Sc. Scientific Assistant

Mathew Mpanda

M ICRAF Forestry/Nursery techniques

M.Sc. Associate Researcher

Bekele Hundie Kotu

M IITA Agricultural Economist

PhD Researcher

Research Proposal 2

Table of Contents1 PROJECT SUMMARY...........................................................................................................4

2 RESEARCH PROBLEM AND JUSTIFICATION...........................................................................42.1 STATE OF THE ART AND PROGRESS ALONG THE RESEARCH TO IMPACT TRAJECTORY..............................42.2 PROGRESS ALONG THE RESEARCH TO IMPACT TRAJECTORY..............................................................5

3 REQUIREMENTS TO MATURE TECHNOLOGIES.....................................................................63.1 2014-2015 RESEARCH OBJECTIVES...........................................................................................6

4 METHODOLOGY FOR MATURATION OF TECHNOLOGIES......................................................84.1 THEMATIC AREA 1: TECHNOLOGY PACKAGES FOR GENETIC INTENSIFICATION.....................................84.2 THEMATIC AREA 2: INTEGRATED CROP, SOIL HEALTH AND LIVESTOCK TECHNOLOGIES FOR ECOLOGICAL INTENSIFICATION.............................................................................................................................134.3 THEMATIC AREA 3. AFLATOXIN MITIGATION TO IMPROVE NUTRITION, SAFETY AND MARKET COMPETITIVENESS...........................................................................................................................224.4 THEMATIC AREA 4: SOCIO-ECONOMIC INTENSIFICATION THROUGH INNOVATION PLATFORMS.............25

5 LESSON LEARNING AND MANAGEMENT............................................................................30

6 EXPECTED OUTCOMES AND IMPACTS...............................................................................316.1 DEVELOPMENT IMPACTS.......................................................................................................31

6.1.1 Development impacts.................................................................................................316.1.2 Intermediate development outcomes (IDOs)..............................................................31

6.2 RESEARCH OUTPUTS AND OUTCOMES......................................................................................326.2.1 Main research outputs...............................................................................................326.2.2 Research outcomes....................................................................................................32

7 COMMUNICATION AND DISSEMINATION STRATEGIES......................................................327.1 DISSEMINATION STRATEGY....................................................................................................327.2 COMMUNICATION STRATEGY.................................................................................................33

8 MONITORING AND EVALUATIONS.....................................................................................33

9 PROJECT BUDGET..............................................................................................................34

10 APPENDICES....................................................................................................................3510.1 APPENDIX 1. PROJECT THEORY OF CHANGE..............................................................................3510.2 APPENDIX 2. LOGICAL FRAME WORK.......................................................................................3610.3 APPENDIX 2. FEED THE FUTURE INDICATOR PROJECTION MATRIX FOR 2014-2015..........................4510.4 APPENDIX 4. DETAILED BUDGET BROKEN DOWN BY THEMATIC AREAS AND ACTIVITIES.......................46

Research Proposal 3

Box 1: Main achievements from the 2013-2014cropping season1. Improving productivity and closing the yield gap. Maize, sorghum and pearl millet are the staple cereals with a yield gap

of over 50%. In 2014, we identified newa. Quality protein maize lines with fivefold higher yield potential (i.e. 2.03 tons/ha for T283-34 compared to

KILIMAQH06 with 0.41 tons/ha). b. Sorghum and pearl millet lines that produce up to 53% more grain under stressful conditions.c. Groundnut and pigeonpea with yield advantage of up to 122% were validated. Bambara nut had a 126% yield

advantage over local land races.2. Relevance and adaptability of technologies. Participatory variety selection involving 1,217 farmer (40% being female)

identified crop varieties that meet their home and market needs; i.e. groundnuts ICGV -SM 05650 and ICGV-SM 02724, ICGV-SM 03519 were confirmed; Pigeonpea- ICEAP 00557, ICEAP 00554and ICEAP 00040; Maize- CML141/ and CML141/CML395,LISHE_H2; pearl millet- ICMV-91450 and ICMV-221;, sorghum- Gadam, ICSMV 111 IN and Kari Mtama.

3. Integrated soil fertility management. The 2013 results that show that farmers could increase productivity at lower rates of for maize at 15 kg P ha-1. Different crop arrangements were also tested to inform the intensification strategy.

4. Improving soil moisture. In situ water harvesting technologies such as the ox-ripper and ox-ridger tillage increased grain yield by 25% % and 30 % respectively were validated. Control of erosion a major challenge in this area revealed the dual benefit of insitu water harvesting technologies.

5. Nutrition, food safety and security. We have mapped the hot spots for aflatoxin contamination in both districts as well as studied the contamination profile for grain (legume and cereals) form field to storage and markets.

6. Crop-livestock interaction. Locally adapted browse species rich in crude protein content (>120g/kg DM), above the threshold level for high quality feed have been identified. The silviculture and integration of these species is the focus of our 2014-15 studies livestock quality.

1 Project SummaryThe aim of this project, now in the third year of implementation, is to provide a scientific basis for sustainably intensifying agricultural production in semi-arid areas of central Tanzania. The project will implement activities packaged under 4 thematic areas that address three critical elements of sustainable intensification, i.e. genetic, ecological and socio-economic intensification technologies. The scope of activities being implemented include: Final packaging of new legume and cereal varieties with over 120% yield advantage, packaging and validation of integrated productivity enhancing technologies for cereals, legumes, legume trees and soil health technologies, food safety primarily to reduce aflatoxin contamination and integration of livestock into the cropping systems. In the 2013-2014 season, we reached out to about 1217 farmers Kongwa and Kiteto. This year we plan to reach out to about 1500 new farmers. Innovation Platforms established this year (2014), will remain essential for informing R4D priority, processes and impact pathways in 2015. The project team remains the same with ICRISAT leading implementation. The total budget for this year is 485,000 USD.

2 Research Problem and Justification2.1 State of the art and progress along the research to impact trajectoryThe research was launched in the 2012-2013 cropping season to improve resilience and productivity of maize-legume based farming systems in Kongwa and Kiteto. The rationale for these investments is still valid i.e.

1. Low productivity of crop and livestock systems and fragile production to market systems1. 2. High vulnerability of communities to weather, natural disasters and nutritional deficiency (IFAD2,

2001).3. High levels of food poverty line at 35.5% and up to 51.4% based on expenditures3.

In 2013-2014 cropping season, the project registered a number of achievements (Box 1).

1Rural Livelihoods Development Company (RLDC), 2011-2012 Annual Report. 2IFAD, 2001. Rural Poverty in Tanzania. International Fund for Agricultural Development. 3Mkenda, A.F., Luvanda, E.G., Rutasitara, L. and Naho, A. 2004. Poverty in Tanzania: Comparisons across administrative regions. Interim report.

Research Proposal 4

In the 2012-2014 cropping season, this research for development (R4D) team undertook activities tooth validate promising technologies as well as generate new approaches for sustainably intensifying agricultural productivity of agro-pastoral communities in Kongwa and Kiteto. The main success points of the work such as, (i) identification of new high yielding maize, other cereals and legumes as part of genetic intensification; (ii) validation of low resource use efficient technologies for soil fertility and water management; (iii) characterization of new locally adapted legume browse species for integration into the agro pastoral rangeland and erosion management; (iv) testing of appropriate crop combinations as part of the ecological intensification; (v) characterisation of crop to market chains for aflatoxin contamination points; (vi) establishment of an innovation platform to inform the R4D process as well as provide scaffold for scaling up and out of innovation. Thus in 2014-2015 season, the aim will be to focus investments on a selected technology combinations to form “intensification research streams” for testing, validation and promotion at appropriate scale (Figure 1). These issues will be investigated in year three and four in an integrated and incremental manner.

Figure 1. Conceptual diagram illustrating the implementation framework being used to ensure, focus and relevance, integration of appropriate technologies, lesson learning and effective adoption strategies for sustainable intensification in line with Hypothesis 4 of the Programme framework.

2.2 Progress along the research to impact trajectory

This project has been designed along the Africa RISING principles of; (i) targeting investments and activities at the farm household scale in line with farm typology differences, (ii) Applying innovations that sustainably increase output from the same land area, while reducing negative environmental impacts, increasing contributions to natural capital and the flow of environmental services; and (iii) evaluating different options of innovations to generate options for intensification in semi-arid zones; (iv) location and design of interventions to identify and test key elements of development domains for the target districts; and (v) engaging R&D partners in innovation to improve relevance and adoption. Using these principles, our project is designed to experiment/evaluate diverse options for sustainable intensification of crop and livestock productivity in Kongwa and Kiteto. The project is using a three-pronged strategy that deploys the three key elements of sustainable intensification i.e. genetic ecological and socio-economic approaches (Montpellier Panel, 2013)4. The new varieties supply genetic improvement inputs i.e., crop and livestock management to assure ecological relevance and fitting, whilst the innovation platform and socioeconomic studies address questions relevant for adoption and scaling out of technologies.

4Montpellier Panel, 2013. Sustainable Intensification: A new paradigm for African Agriculture, London.

Research Proposal 5

These three essentials of agroecological intensification are being implemented using an integrated approach involving diverse R&D specialties to generate suites of technologies relevant for the target districts and other semi-arid agroecologies. After two years of experimentation, the suites of technology packages to support intensification being refined include (i) New cereal and legume varieties with yield advantage of 60 to 100% and their deployment options; (ii) Soil health and management (including water management) for effective crop management; (iii) mycotoxin management to unlock market and nutrition opportunities. The Innovation Platform will be used to inform, support learning and forge new partnerships (Figure 2). The work is being done in partnership with NARS and development agencies such as Tuboreshe Chakula and NAFAKA. This way, our R4D approach will evaluate the Africa RISING approach and provide key lessons for semi-arid savannahs of Tanzania.

Figure 2. Africa RISING impact pathway on a time scale. This research being conducted in Kongwa and Kiteto, now in its third year, is focusing on testing of integrated technology options and their scaling out approaches in agro pastoral communities of Manyara (Kongwa and Kiteto).

3 Requirements to mature technologies3.1 2014-2015 research objectivesThe ultimate goal of this project is to provide suites of technologies that will increase productivity of maize, associated cereals and legumes in the agro-pastoral communities of Kongwa and Kiteto. These technologies will increase output per unit input of deployed by farmers, increasing net benefits to farmers of the two environments. The technology packages will be validated for increasing production with more efficient use of all inputs on a durable basis, while reducing environmental damage and building resilience, natural capital and the flow of environmental services.5Models for scaling out will equally be tested to inform the next phase of the project i.e. the up and out scaling of proven technologies. The entire project is testing Africa RISING’s R&D hypothesis 4. However, project objectives 1-3 are also testing programme hypothesis 2 on integration, while objective 5 is testing Programme hypothesis 1 with an RO2 focus. A brief description of each project objective this year (2014-2015) is provided below.

5FAO, 2012. Food and Agriculture Organization. Coping with water scarcity: an action framework of agriculture and food security. FAO Water Reports 38. Rome, Italy.

Research Proposal 6

1. Testing and validation of technology packages for genetic intensification. A central research entry point for this team is the testing and deployment of new higher yielding and resilient crop varieties in these semi-arid zones. Genetic intensification in this case embodies technologies that will increase crop productivity, improve nutritive value, enable nitrogen uptake and fixation and enhance resilience to pests and diseases. The success of genetic intensification requires that we get clarity on the traditional genotype (variety differences) by environment (agroecological information) interaction information. But, given the variation in typology of farmers and farming practices, the role of management actually influences performance and stability. Thus clarity on genotype x environment by management will inform (i) stability of material in the relatively drier cropping systems of Kongwa compared to millet with over 53% yield advantage (Box 1 for major results). These materials will be tested for both mono and multiple cropping systems as is common in the target areas. The role of genotype x environment x management interactions on productivity of the target varieties in the mono and multiple cropping systems will be studied. This will be done to identify and or validate the most promising technology packages for the relatively stressed environments of Kongwa compared to Kiteto. This objective will elucidate the effects of management options on crop productivity ultimately, but specifically to plant resilience to water and heat stress and competition for nutrients. The effects of sequential planting, effects multiple cropping on pest and disease as well as productivity and resilience to weather will be tested. This output will contribute to outcome 1 of our intervention (increased crop productivity) and objective 1 of the Africa RISING Programme. In the ESA log frame this activity will contribute to output five on “Innovations that increase resilience and productivity of farming systems deployed.”

2. Testing and validation of crop, soils technology packages for ecological intensification. In 2014 we tested a number of promising crop management options to support sustainable intensification in terms of providing farmers with technology packages that will improve nutrient use efficiency, soil moister capture and use as well as land management particularly erosion (Box 1 for highlights for major results). This objective will include activities that clarify and validate technology packages for up and out-scaling in terms mixed cropping to maximise yield potential and nutrient and water use; agroforestry for natural resource use (especially erosion), as well as soil and water management for increased productivity in these semi-arid zones.

3. Integration of crops, livestock and poultry for enhanced productivity and resilience. In 2013-2014 studies we identified locally adapted browse species rich in crude protein content (Box 1) and in year 2 characterised the grazing systems. In 2014-2015, the focus will be to start implementing design of Sylvo- pasture systems to support the agro-pastoral communities by supplying browse and soil nutrients and erosion control in the target communities. Under this activity limited work on poultry production especially feeds and management will also be implemented to improve household nutrition and incomes. This objective will contribute to objective 2 and 3 of the programme and to output 5 of the ESA log frame.

4. Improving nutrition, safety and market competitiveness through aflatoxin mitigation. Over the past two years of experimentation we have been able to map infection hotspots from the field to the store and markets. We have also mapped diversity of the pathogen Aspergillus flavus). A diagnostic lab is also being established at Sokoine University of Agriculture. ICRISAT has trained the staff on analytics but will continue to backstop SUA during the life of the project In 2014-2015, the focus shall be to test the functionality of a more comprehensive mitigation process that build on results from the past two years of research. Validation of mitigation efforts that prevent infection on the field, reduce initial inoculum under storage and for processing and marketing will be used. In the case of groundnut initial efforts to find alternative uses of contaminated nuts as an incentive to attract sorting and other preventive measures will be done. This objective will contribute to improving household food and nutrition security among households especially women and children. This objective will contribute to objective 2 of Africa RISING and ESA log frame output 7.

Research Proposal 7

5. Supporting socioeconomic intensification through Innovation Platforms. In 2014 we established Innovation Platforms to inform our R4D and support catalysis of adoption. In 2014-2015, we will use this objective to explore opportunities for deepening our understanding of output 2 of Africa RISING as well as community level institution strengthening for adoption. Through this objective that will also interphase with other objectives, we will also test scaling up and out models building on the mother baby trial approach, community seed production and other farmer based knowledge management approaches. The Innovation Platforms will elucidate socioeconomic contexts of innovation process, challenges to value functionality and technology adoption issues in target communities. These Innovation Platforms will inform output 4 of the ESA log frame. Cost effectiveness of technologies will also be undertaken to inform scaling up and out. This activity will contribute to objective 2 and 3 of Africa RISING programme. In the ESA log frame this activity will contribute to output five on “Crop-nutrition and water efficient innovations introduced, evaluated and adapted.”

4 Methodology for maturation of technologiesThis year all activities have been designed to validate and or underpin integration and scaling up and out. We will still address the three key elements of sustainable intensification i.e. ecological, genetic and sociological intensification6. In line with the agreed proposal framework, research activities have been presented in four thematic areas that are mutually interacting and collectively contribute to sustainable intensification i.e.

Theme 1: Appropriate technology packaging for genetic intensification

Theme 2: Integrated crop, soil health and livestock technologies for ecological intensification

Theme 3: Aflatoxin mitigation to improve nutrition, safety and market competitiveness

Theme 4. Socio-economic intensification through innovation platforms

Theme 1 aims at assuring genetic intensification through provision of highly resilient and productive crop varieties; Theme 2addresses ecological intensification by harnessing intercropping and crop-tree livestock and water management systems to conserve water and soils, increase mutual benefits between crops livestock and the other components of the ecosystem. Theme 3 focuses on management of aflatoxin to realize the benefits of increased grain productivity from household to markets. Theme 4 will provide quality assurance for our research in terms of relevance. All thematic areas are being implemented to assure mutual benefits to all components of the project.

4.1 Thematic area 1: Technology packages for genetic intensification

Theme number 1 Event period: October 2014 to September 2015

6The Montpellier Panel, 2013. Sustainable Intensification: A New Paradigm for African Agriculture. London: Agriculture for Impact.

Research Proposal 8

Title Technology packages for genetic intensificationActivity Type Action research, on-farm + on-station researchTarget areas (Districts- Villages)

Kongwa-Chitego

Kongwa-Laikala Kongwa-Mlali

Kongwa-Moleti Kiteto-Njoro

Leader ICRISATPartners ARI-

HomboloNAFAKA CIMMYT ARI-Naliendele ARI-Selian

Budget 93,600

Relevant Africa RISING Research Output (RO2): Integrated systems improvementKey intervention areas: In 2012-2013 season we showed that the yield gap for selected crops was about 50%. To date we have found material with up to 122% yield advantage. These varieties of groundnuts (ICGV -SM 05650 and ICGV-SM 02724, ICGV-SM 03519), pigeonpea, (ICEAP 00557, ICEAP 00 554 and ICEAP 00040), maize (CML141/ and CML141/CML395), sorghum (Gadam, ICSMV 111 IN and Kari Mtama) and pearl millet (ICMV-91450 and ICMV-221) are thus the core of our genetic intensification strategy. During the 2014/2015cropping season, we will seek to define the contextual placement of the new high yielding varieties in the appropriate ecological and management options. The cropping system effects including (genotype) x environment x management interactions will help to clarify the most promising technology packages suited for particular domains (varied household contexts and endowments of resources- land and gender) in the relatively stressed environments of Kongwa compared to agriculturally richer Kiteto farmlands. The impacts on environment (water and heat stress and nutrient) and management options on productivity as is common practice will provide opportunities to inform scaling up efforts. A farmer research network approach that uses farmers (baby trials) to capture the complexity versus controlled on station/ site managed trials will be used. Other management efforts such as the effects of sequential planting, effects of multiple cropping on pest and disease, productivity and resilience to will be tested. In the second set of experiments, we will complete the process to place the new lines into the release process so that these materials provide a new suite of technologies in subsequent years. As appropriate, a participatory variety selection (PVS) for (Bambara nuts, sorghum and pearl millet) will be conducted to inform wider adoption, variety release and or promotion, requirement for variety release. Overall these new materials are being harnessed as a key driver for intensification because crop genetic potential invariably influences yield and productivity.

Description of work

Research questions/hypotheses1. Performance of the selected cereal and legume new crop varieties are influenced by genotype

by environment and management interactions2. What are the most effective and efficient multiple legume-cereal cropping systems designs

suitable for semi-arid zones of central Tanzania?3. Farmers in the semi-arid zones of central Tanzania have an understanding of agro-ecological

needs of their region and can therefore select the best crop varieties suitable cropping and farming systems.

Task 1. Genotype x environment x management studiesThe performance of a crop (P) (yield and quality) is determined by the crop type and variety (genotype G) that is grown, the environment (E) in which the crop is grown, and by the crop management (M)7. Productivity among smallholder farmers is generally lower than expected and is

7Windhausen, V.S., S. Wagener, C. Magorokosho, D. Makumbi, B. Vivek, H.-P. Piepho, A.E. Melchinger, and G.N. Atlin. 2012. Strategies to Subdivide a Target Population of Environments: Results from the CIMMYT-Led Maize Hybrid Testing Programs in Africa. Crop Sci. 52: 2143–2152.

Research Proposal 9

highly varied. To improve targeting of genotype deployment, there is need to gain deeper understanding of the impacts of the generally stratified farming/cropping systems and management options on performance of the target crops. In this study we will seek to clarify especially the most suitable environment and management options for monoculture, mixed cropping and sequential planting by farmers in the two districts. A farmer research network an experimentation approach that is underpinned by several on farm testing of performance under farmer management options will be used to gain deeper understanding on the performance (P= GxExM) of crop varieties. It is basically a modification of the mother-baby trial approach in which additional data on management attributes are used to inform crop performance.

Subtask 1.1. Mono culture experiments In the 2012-2013 cropping season we reported that that farmers in these districts generally produce maize, groundnuts, sorghum and pearl millet as a monocrop and in some cases as a dual crop 8. Farmers in both districts vary in endowments with those in Kiteto having relatively larger land holding than those in Kongwa. Kongwa is also relatively dryer receiving an average of 400-600 mm of precipitation compared to Kongwa that may receive higher amounts. The soils fertility gradient is also variable (Kimaro 2014 unpublished results9). Two control experiments (legumes and cereals) will be set up at ARI Hombolo containing the three best varieties from the 2013-2014 experiments. These experiments will be provided the best treatments i.e. timely planting and crop management and data taken on crop performance and plant performance (Yield and its various components, pest and disease incidence and severity, stay green measured using a chlorophyll meter – for drought, root structure, days to flowering etc. Onfarm, farmers will be selected to represent at least three typologies; i) Poor farmers with limited access to resources –land, fertilizers labour etc.); ii) Medium endowed smallholder farmers and iii) well-endowed farmers. Within each group at least 5-10 farmers will be identified depending on seed availability. Farmers will be provided with seed and allowed to manage the crop using their standard practice. The three farmer typologies and two districts will reflect different environments as supported by weather data that will be collected. Each district will have one complete set of this experiment comprising 45- 90 farmers. The data will be used to predict crop yield as a function of (environmental data such as (weather), soil conditions, crop management scenarios and genetic coefficients. These experiments will be performed using maize, groundnut and sorghum and or pearl millet (depending on seed availability).

Subtask 1.2. Mixed cropping experiments Farmers will be provided with at least two crops a legume and cereal. Two approaches will be tested i.e. intercrop and sequential cropping (planting one crop after another has already been planted not necessarily in the same field). The same set up used to establish the mono crop experiments will be used. Similar data sets will be collected but in addition, data will be used to compute the Land Equivalent Ratio (LER) and the Income Equivalent Ratio (IER) - The ratio of the area needed under sole cropping to produce the same gross income as is obtained from 1 ha of intercropping at the same management level. The double up legume approach for crops will be tested building on lessons learnt from Malawi. For both subtasks, additional socio-economic data will be compiled for each of the test farm sites to inform especially the IER computations

Task 2. Validation of new cereal experiments The first task is selection of experimental sites that will be arranged using the mother baby trial approach. Farmers (at least 60% women) willing to provide land for PVS trials, large scale demonstrations and community based seed production will be selected with help of village extension officers, village leadership, NAFAKA, DAICOs and ARI Hombolo. Care will be taken to capture the most common farm typologies (size in ha), production orientation (subsistence or market and gender land ownership) and income sources (on and/or off farm10). Gender dimensions affecting adoption of new

8Okori et al. 2013. Africa RISING Quarter 2 report. Submitted to IITA Africa RISING Project.9This is part of the project outputs from year 2 that is being compiled. The information will be used to inform placement of experiments in Kongwa and Kiteto.10Carl Timler, Mirja Michalscheck, Charlotte Klapwijk, Nester Mashingaidze, Mary Ollenburger, Gatien Falconnier, Katja

Research Proposal 10

varieties and use of new varieties will be elucidated. The focus on QDS is to ultimately support sufficient supply of grain to improve incomes of communities.

Subtask 2.1. Maize. Promising lines tolerant to MLNThe outbreak and rapid spread of Maize Lethal Necrosis (MLN) disease in some parts of Tanzania has emerged as a new challenge to maize production and food security. MLN is caused by double infection by Maize chlorotic mottle virus (MCMV11, in combination with any of the cereal viruses in the family Potyviridae, such as Sugarcane mosaic virus (SCMV), Maize dwarf mosaic virus (MDMV) or Wheat streak mosaic virus (WSMV) (Brandes 192012; Pemberton and Charpentier 196913). In the 2013-2014 season, candidate maize hybrids tolerant to MLN were identified in Babati under natural infestation. Babati is one of the high disease hot spots. Considering that the disease is spreading rapidly in Tanzania and across east Africa in general, there is need to deploy MLN resistant varieties in Kongwa and Kiteto, in order to secure maize harvests. The purpose of this activity is test adaptability of these candidate hybrids in Kongwa and Kiteto to inform variety release and deployment.

Subtask 2.2. Drought tolerant maize. Ten stress tolerant experimental hybrids (Table 1identified in on-station trials will be tested in demonstration trials designed as mother baby trials, in eight villages in Kongwa and Kiteto using Alpha lattice experimental design under improved agronomic, soil & water management practices as a sole crop and intercropping with a legume crop (beans and pigeon peas). The varieties for legumes will be determined later in consultation with the institutions dealing with legumes as necessary. ARI Selian and Ari Ilonga will be engaged to support the pigeonpea research, ARI Selian is already part of the Africa RISING community. Similarly the agronomic, soil & water management practices will be implemented as proposed in thematic area 1 and 2. The baby trials will follow a model where a subset of entries (1 or 2 hybrids) is picked and grown by a farmer under their own management practices. Data to be collected will include yield tha -1 (for both mother and baby trials), grain moisture, plant stand, plant and ear aspect and lodging (for the mother trial only). Other partners involved in agronomic, soil and water management practices work will collect other data on improved agronomics and legume crops. Farmer field days will be organized at around grain feeling stage for the farmers to appreciate potential the new hybrids.

Table 1. Candidate stress tolerant experimental hybrids under evaluation for deployment in Kongwa, Kiteto and Babati.

((P43SRC9FS100-1-1-8#1/TZEESRW1-B1/EECOMP./Katumani/KATUMANI45-4-1/ECA-EE-POP1)-B-B-6/CML445)-B-8-1-1-1-4-2//CML539/CML442((P43SRC9FS100-1-1-8#1/TZEESRW1-B1/EECOMP./Katumani/KATUMANI45-4-1/ECA-EE-POP1)-B-B-6/CML445)-B-8-1-1-3-1-4//CML505/CML509((P43SRC9FS100-1-1-8#1/TZEESRW1-B1/EECOMP./Katumani/KATUMANI45-4-1/ECA-EE-POP1)-B-B-6/CML445)-B-8-1-1-2-1-2//CML505/CML509((P43SRC9FS100-1-1-8#1/TZEESRW1-B1/EECOMP./Katumani/KATUMANI45-4-1/ECA-EE-POP1)-B-B-6/CML445)-B-8-1-1-3-1-2//CML505/CML509

Kuivanen, Katrien Descheemaeker, Jeroen Groot 2014. Characterization of farming systems in Africa RISING intervention sites in Malawi, Tanzania, Ghana and Mali. Report submitted to Africa RISING Secretariat.11Nault, L. R., W. E. Styer, M. E. Coffey, D. T. Gordon, L. S. Negi, and C. L. Niblett. 1978.Transmission of maize chlorotic mottle virus by Chrysomelid beetles. Phytopathology 68: 1071–1074. 12Brandes, E.W. 1920. Artificial and insect transmission of sugarcane mosaic. Journal of Agricultural Research 19: 131-138.13Pemberton, C.E., L.J. Charpentier. 1969. Insect vectors of sugarcane virus diseases. In: Pests of Sugarcane. (Eds. Williams JR, Metcalfe JR, Mungomery RW, Mathers R), pp. 411-425.


((P43SRC9FS100-1-1-8#1/TZEESRW1-B1/EECOMP./Katumani/KATUMANI45-4-1/ECA-EE-POP1)-B-B-6/CML445)-B-8-1-1-2-1-1//CML505/CML509((P43SRC9FS100-1-1-8#1/TZEESRW1-B1/EECOMP./Katumani/KATUMANI45-4-1/ECA-EE-POP1)-B-B-6/CML445)-B-8-1-1-3-1-1//CML505/CML509((P43SRC9FS100-1-1-8#1/TZEESRW1-B1/EECOMP./Katumani/KATUMANI45-4-1/ECA-EE-POP1)-B-B-6/CML445)-B-8-1-1-1-1-4//CML505/CML509((8721SR-34G-3-3sb-#1/TZEESRW1-B1/EECOMP./Katumani/KATUMANI38-11-1/ECA-EE-POP1)-B-B-4/CML445)-B-4-2-1-5-1-4//CML505/CML509((P43SRC9FS100-1-1-8#1/TZEESRW1-B1/EECOMP./Katumani/KATUMANI45-4-1/ECA-EE-POP1)-B-B-6/CML445)-B-8-1-1-3-1-4//CML539/CML442((8721SR-34G-3-3sb-#1/TZEESRW1-B1/EECOMP./Katumani/KATUMANI38-11-1/ECA-EE-POP1)-B-B-4/CML445)-B-4-2-1-5-1-1//CML505/CML509

Subtask 2.3. QPM. Improving nutrient density using QPM has been used to address dietary concerns of maize dependent communities14. QPM varieties have been released in Tanzania. However, farmers in the target area have not been exposed to these varieties. This experiment aims to validate QPM selected by farmers in season 1. i.e. (CLQRCWQ50/CML312SR, LISHE_H2; CML491/CZL083/Syn01f2/CML511 and CML491/CZL083/CZL083/CZL066/, CML511, T283-34 and T283-31) prioritized in the different villages. Trials will be superimposed on experiments in 2.1 using same stress tolerant experimental hybrids, same experimental design and same agronomic, soil and water management practices. Similarly, this experiment will also be applied to QPM hybrids in objective 4 under QPM validation trials using same experimental designs and same agronomic, soil and water management practices.

Sub-task 2.4. Sorghum and pearl millet. During the 2013-2014 cropping season, we identified sorghum (Gadam, ICSMV 111 IN and Kari Mtama) and pearl millet (ICMV-91450 and ICMV-221)with up to 53% yield advantage compared to the land races. Whereas some are known varieties in the region (outside of Tanzania), they are not necessarily released in Tanzania. To underpin their availability during scaling up, this season we will generate the mandatory second season data. The work will be done in conjunction with ARI- Hombolo responsible for dryer areas. Replicated trials wills be established on farm and on station in both Kongwa and Kiteto in at least two sites per district This way the project will assure that farmers have a new suite of technologies for scaling up in the out-scaling phase of the project.

Task 3. Validation of new legumes Sub-task3.1Pigeonpea. In 2012-2013) using participatory variety selection (PVS) we identified two pigeonpea genotypes ICEAPs 00554 and 00557 as the highest yielding and most preferred material by farmers in Kongwa and Kiteto. Subsequently in 2013-2014 we expanded the variety portfolio and found that additionally ICEAP 00040, ICEAP 00936, ICEAP 00932, ICEAP 00933 had up to 156% higher yield and performed better than the two candidates. The aim thus is to further conduct stability analysis to generate data for variety release in Tanzania. This process will provide additional data needed to release materials in subsequent years. Due to high pest incidences on pigeonpea, a farmer and extension training on integrated crop management practices such as pest management and quality seed production will be done to complement research efforts.

Sub-task 1.3.2. Groundnuts. The best performers (ICGV-SM 02724, ICGV-SM 99568, ICGV-SM 03519, and ICGV-SM 05650) from the first cycle of PVS will be validated to generate data for variety release in Tanzania. This process will provide additional data needed to release materials in subsequent years starting in 2015-2016 season. The focus will be on groundnut varieties with over 100% yield

14 Ouma, J.O., Bett, C. and Githaigah, T. 2010. Market Access, Approaches and Opportunities for QPM based products. Paper presented during the Joint 3rd African Association of Agricultural Economists and 48th Agricultural Economists Association of South Africa Conference, Cape Town, South Africa, September 19-23, 2010.


advantage. Both on station and On farm evaluation will be done as required by law. This will complement the GxExM experiments. The entries will be evaluated using randomized complete block designs and the data collected and used to inform adoption and promotion strategies for the promising improved groundnut varieties. Strategic partnerships with NAFAKA farmers will be used in adoption studies.

Sub-task 1.3.3. Bambara nuts. Orphan crops such as Bambara are generally not part of the commercial seed systems, compounding access; not with the fact that legumes in general, are also not common in commercial seed production. Thus to gain deeper understanding of farmer perspective as well as explore scaling up models for this orphan crop, the best performing bambara nut varieties (Nalbam 3-2013, Nalbam 4-2013, Nalbam 2, Nalbam 6-2013)identified in 2013-14 will be included in a typical mother and baby trial designed experiment. Deliverables for 2015There are five deliverables for 2013-2014 i.e. that build on progress in 2012-2013.

1. Variety release data for groundnuts, pigeonpea, maize and pearl millet generated and used to support release applications as part of the strategy to avail farmers with new improved material adapted for the semi-arid zones of Tanzania.

2. Data sets to inform deployment of integrated cereal legume technology packages generated.3. New adapted QPM maize and MLN tolerant maize varieties identified and characterised for

adaptability.4. Critical factors affecting adoption of improved legumes especially orphan crops in the semi-

arid areas elucidated.5. Farmers and extension staff trained on IPM in all the selected crops.

4.2 Thematic area 2: Integrated crop, soil health and livestock technologies for ecological intensification


Activity cluster 1 Integrated crop management technologies for semi-arid zones of TanzaniaActivity cluster 2 Integrated rangeland and crop productivity enhancementActivity cluster 3 Integrated crop and land management technologiesActivity cluster 4 Livestock crop integrationActivity Type Action research, R&T participatory and promotional actionTarget areas (Districts- Villages)

Kongwa-Chitego


Kongwa-Moleti

Kiteto-Njoro

Leader ICRAFPartners ARI-

HomboloUDOM SUA DAICOS CIMMYT ARI-

SelianBudget 114,000

Relevant Africa RISING Research Output: RO 2 on Integrated Systems ImprovementKey intervention areas: This thematic area will focus on three main issues critical for intensification of legumes and cereals in semi-arid areas of Tanzania:

1. Development of scenarios for sustainable production of cereals and pigeonpea varieties identified in the 2012/13/14 growing season.

2. Validate and disseminate best-bet management packages around the most promising new crop varieties and integrated soil fertility management technologies suited to widely representative agro-ecologies.

3. Resource conservation. Protect land and water resources and foster agricultural biodiversity through the introduction and management of physical and biological measures.


Activity cluster1:Integrated crop management technologies for semi-arid zones of TanzaniaDescription of work

Research questions What are the most effective and efficient strategies for micro-dose applications of fertilizer in

cereal-legume cropping systems of semi-arid zones of Tanzania? How best can multiple legume-cereal cropping systems be deployed to assure increased

productivity of crops and land in semi-arid environments of central Tanzania? What are the design and deployment options of doubled-up legume-tree and crop production

systems that are suitable for maize based farming systems of semi-arid zones of central Tanzania?

Task 1. Micro-dosing to enhance fertilizer use efficiency and sustain crop yield Our work in 2013 and 2014 growing seasons concluded that site specific P and N application rates for Kongwa and Kiteto districts are 30kg P ha -1 and 60kg N ha-1, respectively (Okori et al. 201415). Accordingly, the optimum P rate is close to the 20-30kg P ha -1 as recommended in the NAFAKA soil survey report (Massawe, 201216). This suggests that the developed fertilizer recommendations are appropriate for a wider range of sites in semiarid central Tanzania. Crops yields associated with the recommended N and P rates averaged 4.4 mg ha -1. With P, additions of 15kg P ha-1 also gave yield similar to that obtained by 30kg P/ha, suggesting that farmers may reduce inputs by 50% without little or no loss of crops yields. These results underscore the need to develop strategies for better use of fertilisers to increase use efficiency and lower costs so as to make this technology more affordable and environmentally friendly. Therefore, the focus this year will be to develop strategies for improving crop use efficiency and reducing production costs by using the fertilizer microdosing technique.

Fertilizer micro dosing involves application of small doses of fertilizer 5-6 kg P ha -1 (2-4g/hill as NPK) at sowing or shortly after germination instead of spreading fertilizers evenly across the field (Tabo et al. 200517). In dry and semiarid areas crops are sown at a relatively wider spacing as an adjustment to the limited soil moisture. Hence it takes time for crop roots to grow out widely across the field to capture added nutrients. Thus localized application of small fertilizer doses can increase crops yields by up to 120% (Ibro et al 201318).

Although micro dose technology has been widely used for sorghum and millet production in the west Africa Sahel region, little or no work has been done on these crops and other cereals such as maize and in eastern Africa. We therefore propose to expand this technology in Kongwa and Kiteto districts as a strategy to refine the developed site-specific agronomic rates to provide more efficient and economical/affordable guidelines for the semiarid agro-ecologies. The micro dosing experiments will be integrated with deployment of selected high yielding and drought resistant quality protein maize varieties (CML141/CML395), pigeonpea ICEAP 0040 and sorghum and pearl millet (Okori et al., 2014).

Micro dosing by its nature is labour intensive especially when applied at large scale as is expected for these large farms in Kiteto and Kongwa. However equipment with appropriate metering devises for fertilizer application under micro-dose regimes have been developed and tested in west Africa by NARS in Burkina Faso (INERA) and Mali (IER). The Africa RISING work in Mali has been testing this

15Okori et al. 2014. Third Quarter Technical Report for Kongwa Kiteto submitted to IITA Africa RISING project, 15 th

September, 201416Massawe et al., 2012. Soil survey report for NAFAKA sites in Dodoma and Manyara Regions.17Tabo R, Bationo A, Diallo Maimouna K, Hassane O and Koala S. 2005. Fertilizer micro-dosing for the prosperity of small-scale farmers in the Sahel: Final report. International Crops Research Institute for the Semi-Arid Tropics, Niamey, Niger. 28pp.18Ibro M. A., Baco, M.N., Badiori, O., Sogodogo, D., Mahaman S., Akponipè I.B. P, Derek, P., Kimaro A. and Koala S. 2014. Fertilizer micro-dosing: a profitable innovation for Sahelian women Micro-dose outcome story. CIFSRF-IDRC. http://www.idrc.ca/EN/Documents/Fertilizer-micro-dosing-a-profitable-innovation-for-Sahelian-women.pdf


equipment. In our region, (ESA), deployment of such equipment will be in phases. The focus of the micro-dose technology in this phase is to test the effectiveness of the technology in these semi-arid zones. Subsequently, we will test appropriateness of micro-dose fertilizer applicators including local manufacture to address issues of mass production during scaling up and out.

Experimental design, treatments and management: Two experiments integrating Micro-dosing and improved maize variety (QPM) or other cereals will be established concurrently at Mlali and Njoro sites using the randomized complete block design (RCBD) with the three replications. Treatments will include N (0, 30 and 60kgha-1) and P (0, 7.5, 15, and 30kg P ha-1) in a factorial combination and the 12 treatment combinations will be allocated randomly to block. The test crop will be maize and pigeonpea planted in monoculture and intercropping arrangements. Maize will be planted at 90cm x 60cm and pigeon pea intercropped in alternate arrangements with also spacing of 90 cm x 60cm.

Data collection: Data to be collected include biomass yield and nutrient up take at the active growth period of maize and pigeonpea, grain yields of maize and pigeonpea at physiological maturity, diameter and height of pigeonpea at grain harvesting to estimate wood yields. The analysis of Variance (ANOVA) will be carried out on data collected using SAS at 5% level of significance after checking for normality and homoscedasticity of residues. Following ANOVA, significant treatment means will be separated using Turkey’s studentized range test.

Task 2 Spatial integration of pigeonpea in maize-based systems In the 2014 cropping seasons we established the trials to evaluate various options for integrating pigeonpea in farming systems in Kongwa and Kiteto districts as this crop is relatively new to these sites and there is little information on its local adaptability and agronomics under both monoculture and intercropping planting arrangements to guide sustainable intensification initiatives. Specific objectives were to evaluate the effects of maize and pigeonpea intercropping under different spatial cropping arrangements on grain yields and wood supply; and to identify the spatial cropping arrangement for optimizing farm (grain and wood yields) productivity under semiarid conditions. The ultimate goal is test and validate suitability of pigeonpea as an integral component of farming systems in these agro-ecologies to diversify production options (food and fuel) and ecosystems services such as soil fertility replenishments. Preliminary results suggests relative yields of individual component, such as maize, may be reduced in mixture by up to 40% but potential exists to offset this apparent loss when farm level productivity of both components are considered. This trial will be repeated this year for validation and to account for seasonal variations so as to provide farmers with reliable information for intercropping maize and pigeonpea in their areas.

Experimental design, treatments and management: Trials will be established at Mlali and Chitego villages during the 2014 growing season as one of the integration activities following a RCBD with three replications. Treatments will include: spatial integration of pigeonpea and maize under various intercropping arrangements: Pure stand, alternate rows of maize and Pigeonpea (1:1), one row of maize and two rows of pigeonpea (1:2), two rows of maize and one row of pigeonpea (2:1). Maize will be planted at 60cm by 90cm for intra-and inter-row spacing respectively. Spacing of pigeonpea will be at 30cm x 120cm (in pure stands) and 30 cm intra-row spacing for intercropped plots. The inter-row spacing of pigeonpea under intercropping depended on the row arrangements. The pigeonpea variety to be used, ICEAP 0040, was selected by farmers based on the superior growth and grain yield in the 2013-14 crop growing season. This variety will be used again with high yielding drought resistant QPM selected by farmers.

Task 3 Double-legume for forage crop integrationThe long-term (over a decade) trials of intercropping Gliricidia sepium, pigeonpea and maize in Makoka, Malawi show that this double-up legume system can sustain crops production and provide ecosystem services like carbon sequestration, soil fertility replenishment and reducing nutrient leaching to the sub-soil (Makumba et al. 200619). Thus we established this kind of the system at Chitego in the 2014 growing season to provide farmers with options for crop diversification while


providing ecosystem services and products like food, fodder and fuel from maize, pigeonpea and G. sepium. Preliminary results on maize grain yield from this double-up system indicated no difference in grain yield for various tree-pigeonpea-maize combinations tested, reflecting limited interactions between the components as the tree seedlings at this establishment season were too young to produce any effects on companion crops. Thus the trial will continue this year to understand how crop interactions in this system will vary in time and space.

Experimental design treatments and management: The experiment will be laid out following in a RCBD with three replications and the following treatments: Pure stand of maize and pigeonpea, maize intercropped with pigeonpea or G. sepium, and intercropping of maize, pigeonpea and G. sepium. Plot size will be 9 m x 9 m and separated with the 2-m unplanted buffer strips. G. sepium will be planted at a spacing of 3 x 3 m and maize intercropped at a spacing of 60 cm x 75 cm (intra and inter row spacing). Pigeonpea was planted at a spacing of 30 cm x 120 cm for pure stands and in alternate rows with maize for intercropping trials.

Data collection: Data to be collected from the spatial and double-legume trials include biomass yield and nutrient up take at the active growth period of maize and pigeonpea, grain yields of maize and pigeonpea at physiological maturity, diameter and height of pigeonpea at grain harvesting to estimate wood yields. The analysis of Variance (ANOVA) will be carried out on data collected using SAS at 5% level of significance after checking for normality and homoscedasticity of residues. Following ANOVA, significant treatment means were separated using Turkey’s studentized range test.Deliverables for cluster 1: Integrated crop management

1. Site-specific agronomic rates refined to develop the more agronomic efficient and affordable micro-dose rates for maize production in semiarid conditions.

2. Spatial arrangements of pigeonpea and maize intercropping in the action sites tested to provide guidelines on appropriate cropping arrangement for optimize crops yields.

3. On-farm fuel wood supply from pigeonpea determined and used to estimate the potential for offsetting cooking energy scarcity in the study sites.

4. Train two graduate students on micro-dose and pigeonpea spatial integration trials.

5. Cost benefits analysis of each technology is reported under thematic area for purposes of packaging. These studies will however be conducted on the promising technologies under theme 4.

Activity cluster 2. Integrated rangeland and crop productivity enhancement

Task 1. Shelterbelt, boundary tree and fodder bank planting

Shelterbelt and boundary tree planting were established in the 2014-growing season as landscape-based agroforestry technologies for addressing the problems of soil erosion, fodder, fuel wood and timber supply in action sites. If widely adopted, these technologies also hold high potential to minimize the land degradation problem due to windy and water erosion and nutrient mining through crop residue harvesting for livestock fodder and cooking energy noted in the action sites. The survival rate of G. sepium and Grevillea robusta at the beginning of the dry season (July 2014) was 84.8% and 55%, respectively. This year, we shall expand the areas covered by shelterbelts and boundary trees and widen the species planted to include a high quality fodder and timber species like Melia azedarach. Farmers in Moleti, where fuel wood scarcity and windy erosion is rampant have shown high interest to plant trees in shelterbelts and farm boundaries.

Experimental layout and management: Shelterbelts will be established as 200-m long strips of tree rows to cover the entire field in Moleti village. There are three strips planted at 100-m intervals. Each

19Makumba, W., Jassen, B., Oenema, O., Akinnifesi, F.K., Mweta, D., Kwesiga, F., 2006. The long-term effects of a gliricidia-maize intercropping system in Southern Malawi, on gliricidia and maize yields, and soil properties. Agric. Ecosyst. Environ. 116: 85–92


strip will consists of two boarder rows of G. sepium and a row of G. robusta in the middle of a strip. G. sepium trees were planted at 2-m between rows and 1 m within a row while G. robusta will be planted at intra-row spacing of 3m. G. sepium has multiple stems, it is less palatable when fresh and thus may withstand browsing pressure and effectively reducing wind erosion in sub-sequent years when established in the fields. ICRAF’s work in Morogoro and Tabora regions in Tanzania (Kimaro et al., 200820) and Malawi (Makumba et al. 2006) indicate that this species is compatible with associated crops even after 5-12 years of continuous growing in the field. Thus minimum belowground effect on companion crops is expected close to the shelterbelt strips.

Data collection: Pruning regimes will be developed in subsequent years to allow production of fodder and fuel wood and maintenance of the shelterbelts. During the tree establishment phase, root collar diameter, diameter at breast height (dbh), height, and survival of trees will be measured to allow estimation of wood and foliage (fodder) biomass yields from shelterbelts and boundary planted trees. Soil samples will be collected for initial site characterization within 1-2 years after shelterbelt establishment from micro-plots of 2 m x 2 m at 2 m, 6 m, 10 m, 20 m, 30 m, and 40 m from each shelterbelt strip. In future, these plots will be reference points for assessing crop yield responses with distance from the strip. The strips will be maintained for long-term monitoring and data collection since some beneficial or negative tree-crop interactions are anticipated to be significant after 3 years

Task2 Sustainable tree seeds and seedlings supply system.Availability and access to tree germplasm has been the most single important factor that determines success to tree planting in the rural settings. Sustainable supply of tree seeds and seedling supply systems is thus a key to the success of tree-based interventions in this proposal. In 2013/14 seasons, ICRAF led the acquisition of tree seeds and production of tree seedlings in central and satellite nurseries while building local capacity of extension officers and farmers to produce these planting materials locally. The central nurseries operate at district headquarters to cater for supporting technical and material backstopping to the satellite nurseries that are located in the implementation sites and run by farmer groups. In the 2014/15 seasons, ICRAF will focus training on the most successful farmer groups, which have reliable sources of water and showed better results last year. These will receive training and support to produce seedlings needed for the proposed study and extension. Along with this training, a survey will be conducted to determine the pathways of germplasm production and distributions for tree species (fodder, fruits, shade etc.) in Kongwa and Kiteto to guide plans for developing sustainable systems to underpin agroforestry-based intervention for sustainable intensification of farming systems in this area.

Deliverables for cluster 2: Integrated rangeland and crop productivity enhancement1. Integration options for trees on farm for fodder and wood supply, wind erosion control, and

soil fertility improvement developed.

2. Survival and fodder and wood yields of trees in shelterbelts and farm boundaries determined to assess the potential to meet household demand for fodder supplements and cooking energy.

3. The potential and associated benefits for the seed and seedlings supply and production guidelines for tree nurseries for management to meet production, ecological and household needs in Kongwa and Kiteto developed.

Cluster 3: Integrated crop and land management technologies

Task 1 Fast tracking adoption and integration of soil erosion control measures in cropping and land management systems in Kongwa District

The land degradation notably soil erosion in Kiteto and Kongwa is mainly caused by poor tillage and crop management practices, extensive grazing system widely adopted in the area and lack of knowledge on control of soil erosion among others. During 2013/2014 cropping season, farming

20Kimaro, A.A, Timmer, V.R., Chamshama, S.O.A, Mugasha, A.G and Kimaro, D.A. 2008. Differential response to tree fallows in rotational woodlot systems: Post-fallow maize yield, nutrient uptake, and soil nutrients. Agric. Ecosyst. Environ. 125: 73- 83


communities in Kongwa district were trained on contour and terrace laying, using approaches such as fanya juu/fanya chini among others. Additionally, the project and participants created a local vigilante group called “MIKUO” to develop and promote erosion control structure sin Mlali village. MIKUO can be literally translated as let us work together for the work task ahead of us in Kaguru language common in the area. The “MIKUO” group has now become a role model and champion of best bet initiatives for controlling soil erosion in steep areas of Mlali village using fanya juu/fanya chini mechanical control measures.

In 2014-2015 cropping, trained lead farmers i.e. MIKUO group will become a key resource persons for testing scalability of such efforts in these districts. The project team in collaborate on with trained extension staff will do technical backstopping. Specifically, the study during 2013/2014 cropping season will popularize contour bunds (fanya juu and fanya chini) from mid-November to end of December 2014 through formation of more soil erosion control group and construction of fanya juu/fanya chini terraces. At the onset of rain season (2014/2015) farming communities will be introduced on establishment of fodder trees on contours as strategies to minimize soil loss through surface runoff. This activity will be conducted using an iterative action research approach to test acceptability and efficacy of these control measures, working with communities to discuss, prioritize and experiment on erosion control measures.

Sub-task 1.1 Application of physical and biological barriers for erosion control in agro-pastoral communities. In the 2013-2014 cropping season farmers visited experimental sites testing the effectiveness of mechanical soil erosion control measures (-contour bunds (fanya-juu and fanya-chini, appropriate ploughing across the slope), and biological soil erosion control measures (-introduction of fodder tree and fodder bands)in Mlali. Farmers and researchers identified controlled erosion and trapping of water as important for their ecologies. Due to differences in soil types, slope and management options available to farmers, this study season (204-2015), we plan to test these technologies in land types and farm typologies in order to test the efficacy and acceptability of this task across the landscape.

Sub-task 1.2 Assessing the efficiency of physical barriers for erosion control

The study on the efficiency of physical barriers for controlling soil water erosion in Kongwa district during 2013/2014 cropping season revealed that the lowest and highest runoff were 18.9 mm for tie ridging and 102.3 for conventional oxen drawn ploughing tillage system. The ox-ripping tillage technique generated 85.6 mm of runoff (Okori et al. 2014). On the other hand, the percentages of rainfall lost through runoff were respectively 36.4%; 30% and 6.7% for conventional ox ploughing, ox ripping and ox-ridging. Runoff generation in ridged treatments was generally lower than in oxen drawn ploughing tillage method. This could partly be attributed to the ability of tied-ridging to allow ponding of water, as opposed to other treatments namely ox-ploughing and ox-ripping tillage technique. The plan this year (2014-2015) is to validate these results while integrating new crops under multiple cropping systems. The experiments will be conducted using the runoff collection system established during 2013/2014 cropping season at Mlali village. A field day will be conducted involving farmers from Kiteto and Kongwa given the focus of the research activity in Kongwa.

Data collection: Runoff measurements data will be recorded and calibrated as follows:

RO = Q/CA;

Where RO = Runoff, in mm; Q = Runoff volume, in l and CA = catchment in m2.

Sub-task 1.1.3 Popularization of In situ water harvesting technologies.In semi-arid zones of Tanzania crop production is threatened by unpredictable soil water supply, high temperature, high evaporation and limited growing season length (3-4 months) (Hatibu et al. 199521).


Moreover, whenever it rains, the limited soil cover and poor land management systems enhance erosion through runoff (Swai et al. 200722). Climate change prediction models estimate that areas with uni-modal rainfall patterns in Tanzania will experience decreased rainfall of 5% to 15%. Thus over dependence on agriculture, low and unreliable rainfall, poverty and high livestock numbers, justify the considerations of Rainwater Harvesting (RWH) in the semi-arid areas of Tanzania (Senkondo et al. 200423). Our results obtained in Kiteto and Kongwa district during 2013/2014 cropping season, showed that use of oxen drawn ripping system and ridging insitu rainwater harvesting technique significantly increased maize grain yield by 64%, and 107% respectively over conventional animal traction of using oxen drawn ox-plough (Okori et al., 2014). During 2014/2015 cropping season, we will validate these results and test the combined benefits of efficient fertilizer use and multiple cropping systems (see cluster 1 and 2 under this theme).

Experimental design. The experiment will be carried out using mother and baby plot approach. The mother plots will consist of complete sets of treatments arranged following a randomized complete block design and replicated three times, with two mother plots per participating village. Each village shall have at least one mother plot giving a total of five per district, one for each village. Baby plots will be farmer-selected technologies following their own prioritization done during the sensitization meetings. Each baby plot will be considered as a replication and will represent preferably different farmer typologies (resource endowments and land/ farming practice used).

Treatments for investigation will vary from locations (i.e. Kiteto and Kongwa) mainly due to the sources of farm power used in land preparation. In Kiteto, we will evaluate effects of tractor driven ripper (ripping tillage) versus traditional tillage method of using disc ploughing. During 2014/2015 cropping season insitu rainwater harvesting technologies will be integrated with promising improved maize elite materials. Two types of ripping will be done depending on the source of traction (diesel tractors or oxen). In Kiteto, land preparation will involve the use of tractor-driven ripper whereas in Kongwa sites, land will be prepared using oxen drawn ploughing, ripping and ridging and evaluated for impacts on soil water storage at vegetative, reproductive, grain filling and maturity stages. These technologies were studied in 2013-2014 and found to support highest productivity.

Data to be collected. Data will be collected across soil erosion control measures and insitu rainwater harvesting technologies encompasses soil hydrological/physical properties of soil and crop growth as well as yield components. Data on hydrological properties of soils such as soil moisture, run-off, soil loss. Physical properties of soil namely bulk density will be determined. Crop growth and yield variables including germination percentage, plant height measurements, leaf area index, dry matter yields and kernel weight will be recorded. All data will be subjected to analysis of variation and other appropriate statistical analysis including non-parametric methods.Deliverables: Integrated crop and land management technologies

1. Soil water erosion control measures and benefits under both mono and integrated crop production systems validated for scaling up and out.

2. Best bet soil water conservation technologies identified and packaged for promotion in drought areas of Kiteto and Kongwa district.

3. Soil water erosion control measures validated in erosion prone areas of Mlali village.

Cluster 4: Livestock - crop integrationTask 1. Improving poultry genetics and feeding for enhanced productivity and nutrition In the 2014, the following activities under this task were initiated: (i) characterization of phenotypic

21Hatibu, N; Mahoo, H.F., Kayombo, B; Mbiha, E; Senkondo, E.M; Mwaseba, D and Ussiri, D.A.1995. Soil and Water Management in semi-arid Tanzania Research Project. Research News, DRPS, SUA. 5 : 13-15.22Swai, E.Y and Rwehumbiza, F., and Chambo H. 2007. Effect of residual tie ridging on soil hydrological properties and crop performance in Central semi-arid Areas of Tanzania. Pp 325 – 336. In: 2nd Scientific Symposium on Opportunity for increasing Water Use Efficiency in agriculture in semi-Arid and Arid areas of SADC Region. 20 -22 February 2007. The Grand Palm Hotel, Gaborone, Botswana.23Senkondo,E. M. M., Msangi, A. S. K. Xavery, P., Lazaro, E. A. and Hatibu, N.2004.Profitability of Rainwater Harvesting for Agricultural Production in Selected Semi-Arid Areas of Tanzania. Journal of Applied Irrigation Science 39: 65 – 81.


genetic diversity of free range chicken to guide selection of superior strains for further studies and (ii) building the capacity of farmers on appropriate poultry management based on best practices in order to identify farmers with interest to participate in this study. The focus in 2015 will be to establish feeding trials to improve nutrition and growth and yield of the selected chicken strains using locally made feeds. The focus on local feed formulation is to harness the locally available feed ingredients in the communities to improve poultry productivity. Such a system would reduce waste and support a renewable use of would be agricultural waste and plant material. Thus locally available feed resources such as maize bran/ homing meal; supplemented with fishmeal, vegetable wastes and Medicago sativa leaves will be used to make the formulations for this study. Chicken from selected superior strains of chicken (‘Kuchi’, ‘Mbuni’, ‘Sasamala’ and necked- neck gene) will be studied under free range and confined individual pens for each strain and receive treatment diets indicated below throughout the nine (9) experimental periods.

Experimental design, treatments and management: The experiment will focus on evaluating growth performance and meat productivity of selected promising local breeds of chicken in response to protein and energy supplementation. A completely randomised design experiment will be conducted whereby the four treatment diets will be allocated to each of the 60 chicken – four groups replicated four times. Treatments will be experimental diets that chicken will be fed. These include:

Treatment 1: 0% inclusion of Medicago sativa (Lucerne) leaf meal (MLM); Treatment 2: 10 % + MLM Treatment 3: 20 % + MLM Treatment 4: 30 % + MLM

Recommended levels of crashed maize, maize bran/homing meal that constitutes an energy source will be offered uniformly among all the experimental groups. The maize grains will be crushed through 5 mm screen. Homing meal will be obtained locally from cereal millers. Fishmeal will be applied at 5% of the diet so as to diversify protein source. Fishmeal will be compounded from locally sold sardine fish or ‘small fish’ locally known as “dagaa”. Sardine fish are easily available from local markets. The sardines will be milled to pass through a 5mm mesh size. Farmer will be trained on feed/ ration formulation. Farmers will also be encouraged to use supplementary feeding on fishmeal. Vitamins, minerals (especially calcium) and water will be provided as per standard recommendations.

A minimum of 60 hens for each treatment for each of the three (3) most promising local breeds of meat chicken ecotypes and 60 hens of one local breeds of chicken regarded of low productivity, to be used as a control, will be evaluated to make a total of 260 chickens (240 hens and 20 cocks per replication). The experiment will be replicated four times to give a total of 1040 chickens (960 hens plus 80 cocks in a ratio of 1:12 cock to hens for appropriate chicken breeding purposes).

Appropriate housing for the chicken will be used following clarifications with communities. The chickens will be housed in-group pens and will be fed throughout the nine (9) month experimental duration. The experimental chickens will be divided into four groups based on strains attributes/ characteristics. Each group of 60 chickens will be provided with 5 cocks to make a recommended ration of 1:12 cock to hens.

Data collection: For each farmer, breeds of similar size and age will be chosen and initial weight recorded prior to the commencement of the experiment so as to account for differences in initial body weight during the measurements. The experimental breeds of chicken will be assessed for growth performance in terms of growth rate, body weight, and carcass weight as well as other carcass quality attributes such as dressing out percentage and meat quality attributes (colour, percentage of fats).


Task 2. Effect of Acacia tortilis dry pods and Melia azedarach leaf meal on growth performance of Eastern African goats fed on maize stover during the dry season

Ruminant productivity including cattle goats during dry season is limited by low protein or crude protein of the basal forages. In the tropics bulky feed resources is characterised by poor quality hay (i.e., standing hay, straw and stover) that are limited by their lower levels of CP of 30-50g/kg of dry matter (DM) than the minimum dietary CP requirement of 80 g/kg DM. Standing hay and maize stover represent available bulky feed resource during dry seasons with farmers in Kongwa district relying solely on maize stover during dry season. Farmers in Kiteto district have an opportunity to feed their stock on both standing hay especially in traditional silvopastoral based systems locally known as ‘Alali’, a system which is highly intensified in drier areas of northern parts of Kiteto district. Preliminary results on characterisation of ruminant feed resources in the two districts (Rubanza et al. 201324) demonstrated as low as 50 to 60g CP/kg DM for maize stover as well as 30-50g CP/kg DM for standing hay forages. On the other hand, the latter report shows high CP of most browse tree foliage with as high as 120-250g/kg DM. Evaluation of the test material such as A. tortilis – the dry pods had the following nutrient composition (CP; 140-160g/kg DM), whilst M. azedarach leaf meal contained about 220g/kg DM Nutritive potential of both A. tortilis dry pods (and other browse tree foliage) and M. azedarach is further supported by their high concentration of both macro and micro minerals. Filed observation show goats and sheep struggling for M. azedarach tree foliage partly suggesting its high palatability. The rich nutritive value of A. tortilis pods has similarly been demonstrated in semi-arid areas of the neighbouring Mpwapwa district (Shayo and Udén, 1999).

However, information is lacking on animal performance fed on A. tortilis pods and M. azedrach leaf meal under farmers’ conditions in the two districts during dry season. During the 2015/16 period, efforts will be undertaken to determine effect of A. tortilis pods and M. azedarach leaf supplementation on growth performance in goats. Main focus for 2015/16 will be on-farm testing and validation research based work through protein supplementation from different sources to goats. Pods from A. tortilis represent highly abundant bulky protein source in most semi-arid districts including Kongwa and Kiteto districts. M. azedarach is abundantly found in the study area in the two districts as trees on farms, boundary trees and in many other agroforestry systems. Tree foliage for the planned work will be obtained from selected farmer’ plots as well as from NARCO (National Ranching Company) where there is a good stand of the M. azedarach tree resource. Maize stover will be harvested from farmers’ fields after maize harvest for the 2015/16 cropping season. Utilisation of stover as feed resource will be carried out in tandem with biomass assessment from maize stover as part of efforts to determine nutrient removal from farmlands when stover are either grazed or removed for home stead livestock feeding under the typical ‘carry and carry’ or zero livestock feeding systems.

Experimental design. A completely randomised design will be adopted. A total of 24 local male goats aged from two months will be randomly grouped according to age into four treatment groups. The goats will be randomised using calculator built in random numbers. The animals in the four groups will receive four dietary treatments, with treatment 1 (T1), a control diet, constituting maize stover without supplementation; treatment 2 (T2) recommended protein from M. azedarach; treatment 3 (T3) being recommended protein allowance from A. tortilis pods (ATP); and treatment 4 (T4) representing combination of recommended levels of two protein sources from A. tortilis and M. azedarach leaf meal (AMM). The four dietary treatments will be randomised to the animals in the four groups using random numbers.

Animal management. The goats will be dewormed before commencement of the trial. The animals will be will be supplemented with similar levels of maize bran (MB) to meet maintenance requirement of growing goats. The animals will be supplied with minerals as per standard recommended requirements. Each of the animals will be housed in individual pens and will be fed in individual feed

24Rubanza et al., 2014; poster on local institutions presented at the WAC 2014 in India and reprinted for the Arusha meeting in September


troughs. The animals will be supplied with water ad libitum in individual water troughs as well. Dietary treatments will be offered twice a day at 08:00h and 15:00h daily to reflect commonly applied feeding intervals.

Experimental duration. The experiment will be preceded by a two weeks (14 days) preliminary period to adjust the animals to the experimental premises, dietary and feeding routine. Actual data collection will be for a total for 12 weeks. The animals will be evaluated for growth. Live weight of each of the animal in the four groups will be assessed on weekly basis. The animals will be weighed at 0.01 accuracy level using a sensitive scale. The animals will be weighed early in the morning (from 06:00h) before having access to neither food nor water. Water and food troughs will be withdrawn from the animal pens at 20:00h preceding a day for weighing.

Data management. Data on growth performance will be analysed into means and standard errors using analysis of variance (ANOVA) based on SAS statistical package based on statistical model:

Yij= µij + Ti + eij

Where Yij is the general animal response; µij is a common observation common to all experimental animals; Ti is the ith treatment effect on growth performance; and eij is the random error term.

Deliverables for cluster 4: Livestock crop integration1. Local institutions, regulations and practices for suitable grazing land management

documented to underpin SI efforts in areas with free grazing systems. 2. Better options for improving nutrition and productivity poultry evaluated3. Better options for improving nutrition and productivity of goats based on local browse

supplementation. 4. Capacity of farmers in poultry management, nutrient and strain selection strengthened

through training and involvement in feeding trials.

4.3 Thematic area 3.Aflatoxin mitigation to improve nutrition, safety and market competitiveness


Activity cluster 1 Integrated crop management technologies for semi-arid zones of TanzaniaActivity cluster 2 October, 2013 to September 2014Activity Type Sustainable intensification approaches to improve food and nutrition security Target areas (Districts- Villages)

Kongwa-Chitego


Kongwa-Moleti

Kiteto-Njoro

Leader ICRISATPartners IITA Tuboreshe

ChakulaSUA ILRI-

A4NHSUA NAFAKA

Budget 46,000

Relevant Africa RISING Research Output RO2on Integrated systems improvementKey intervention areas:

Household nutrition and food safety. Improve household nutrition, food safety and security among the most vulnerable households and their members, especially women and children.

Gender empowerment. Realize the special opportunities available to women farmers as technological innovators, resource managers and homemakers.

Description of work Over the past two years of research we have confirmed that indeed over 50% of rural communities in


Dodoma and central semi-arid zones of Tanzania are food insecure, with limited access to sufficient, safe and nutritious food needed to maintain healthy and active lives25 (Okori et al., 201426). In such communities, consumption of dry land cereals, the main source of basal energy and protein, is less than 200kg per year2728 due to large yield gaps of about 50%29 (Okori et al. 2014). Over the past year we have also noted that grain crops (cereals and legumes) are all contaminated with aflatoxins, the oil crops being more affected by cereals). In oil crops for example AfB1 levels of up to 4000ppb have been found in groundnuts compared to 20ppb in cereals at harvest (Okori et al. 2014). We have also mapped the incidence of toxigenic versus atoxigenic forms of Aspergillus species in both Kongwa and Kiteto paving way for more informed deployment of management options. Interestingly we found that Chitego in Kongwa and Njoro in Kiteto had the highest frequencies of toxigenic Aspergillus sp perhaps due to relatively higher moisture and more diversified cropping systems. We also found that sunflower has relatively similar levels of contamination (high at > 20ppb experimental data shows 300 ppb at harvest and up to 3000ppb after storage) (Okori et al., 2014). Freshly harvested crops in general had less contamination on average 7-10 fold less than stored samples suggesting that the focus of management should be on both pre and post harvest control strategies. Contamination of sunflower brings in new dimensions of exposure to aflatoxins by livestock via feeds since sunflower cake is a common source of protein and energy in feeds stock in Tanzania and animal feeds (Mlayet al., 200530). The objective of this theme therefore is to test management and mitigation options for the reduction of aflatoxin contamination of cereals and oil crops in Kongwa and Kiteto as part of sociological- and ecological intensification efforts by Africa RISING. This theme will contribute to the completion of three key elements of sustainable intensification31 (genetic, ecological and sociological), being implemented by this project

Research questions1. Sunflower cake available in Kongwa and Kiteto may be contaminated with aflatoxin and this

increases risk of indirect exposure of wider public to the toxin via feed products fed to livestock.

2. Post-harvest losses in cereals can be effectively managed through deployment of improved storage and handling technologies

3. Deployment of pre-harvest handling procedures and simple mechanical sorting post harvest can minimize infection by aflatoxigenic fungi, thereby reducing aflatoxin contamination levels to 4 <20 ppb the acceptable levels in stored legumes and cereals.

4. Women play essential roles in reproductive (home management) and community activities that can be harnessed to improve food safety and nutrition outcomes of families.

Task 1.Assess levels of aflatoxin contamination of sunflower oil press cake and its feeds value chain.

In the 2013-2014 studies, we have shown that indeed sunflower and cereal products including maize are contaminated variously with aflatoxins. Processing waste from these crops i.e. bran for maize and oil press cake for sunflower, are major sources of energy and protein in livestock feeds. Consumption

25World Bank 2009. Accelerated food security programof the United Republic of Tanzania under the global food crisis response program. Report No: 48549-TZ. 26 Okori et al. 2014. Third Quarter Technical Report for Kongwa Kiteto submitted to IITA Africa RISING project, 15 th

September, 2014.27 Ouma, J.O., Bett, C. and Githaigah, T. 2010. Market Access, Approaches and Opportunities for QPM based products. Paper presented during the Joint 3rd African Association of Agricultural Economists and 48th Agricultural Economists Association of South Africa Conference, Cape Town, South Africa, September 19-23, 2010.28Jan de Graaff, Aad Kessler and Jan Willem Nibbering, 2011. Agriculture and food security in selected countriesin Sub-Saharan Africa: diversity in trends and opportunities. Food Security 2011 3:195–213.29 Kongwa Kiteto team progress report Quarter 3 2013. 30 Mlay, P. S., Pereka, A. E., Balthazary, S.T., Phiri, E. C. J. , Hvelplund, T., Weisbjerg, M.R. and J Madsen, J. 2005.The effect of maize bran or maize bran mixed with sunflower cake on the performance of smallholder dairycowsin urban and peri-urban area in Morogoro, Tanzania. Livestock research and Development 17 (1) 2005.31The Montpellier Panel, 2013. Sustainable Intensification: A New Paradigm for African Agriculture. London: Agriculture for Impact.


of these contaminated feeds by poultry and livestock provide a secondary pathway for entry of aflatoxins into food chains of humans. Eggs, milk and to an extent meat may be contaminated, spreading the risk to unsuspecting consumers. This has been noted as an area of health concern in Africa (PACA, 201332). The United States Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has established contamination levels for food and feeds at 20 and 300ppb respectively (FDA, 2000 33). The aim of this task will be to assess the extent of the problem with tracing contamination with a focus on sunflower seedcake within the feeds industry in the Manyara Region. Samples will be taken to capture contamination levels from factory deliveries (seed, post processing, storage and use in feeds). A combination of ELISA and HPLC will be used. Appropriate non-parametric statistics and modelling of contamination points will be done. The information generated will inform intervention.

Task 2. Improving food safety by mitigating aflatoxin contamination. In our 2012-2014, studies, we have found that cereals and oil crops all had high levels of aflatoxin. Yet these crops are the food security crops of these dry lands. In the 2014-2015 season, we will investigate mitigation strategies to reduce exposure to aflatoxins. We will experiment on a number of activities jointly implemented with the Babati team, built around three principles: (i) minimize contamination of grain (pre and post harvest), (ii) reduce contamination using a combination of diagnostic and management options (iii) awareness creation and deployment of simple mitigation approaches.

1. Conduct community action research to learn and promote mitigation efforts in communities. Key activities will include training women-farmers and traders on simple post-harvest management practices to reduce contamination, including proper drying, grading and storage. Using different storage bags, grading and sorting grain, grain moisture management and storage.

2. The diagnostic platform put in place by the project is at SUA in Morogoro. In 2013-14 we have trained technicians from ARI Hombolo and SUA to support diagnostic activities in the region. We will also leverage a field based diagnostic kit developed by Okori’s lab in ICRISAT Malawi (Seetha et al. 2014 unpublished) to test contamination. The plan is to test the use of a field based and lab based assays to minimize the entry of contaminated grain into value chains. This will provide the diagnostics for efficacy of management option being deployed by various partners including this project.

3. Testing remediation technologies for contaminated food and feeds products to remove aflatoxins.

4. Use appropriate communication media to disseminate messages on aflatoxin. IITA, ICRISAT and Government of Tanzania will do this in combination with on-going efforts.

These tasks (4.1 and 4.2) will be done in partnership with the Tanzania Food and Drug Authority and other relevant other associate partners.

Task 3 Improving nutrition. We will complete the study initiated in 2013 to improve dietary availability, consumption and food safety. Prof Muzanila, a nutrition expert from SUA, will lead this activity. The methodology described below will still be used:

1. Increasing consumption of legumes as protein sources. The activity aims at improving consumption of these legumes as complementary sources of protein. Our studies show that in Kongwa and Kiteto legumes are the major source of dietary proteins, with Bambara nuts playing a critical role in ensuring year round availability. These legumes however show high levels of contamination (70% of groundnut samples had up to 4000 ppb; whilst 43% of

32PACA. (2013) PACA Strategy 2013–2022. Partnership for Aflatoxin Control in Africa, African Union Commission, Addis Ababa, Ethiopia33FDA 2000. United States Food and Drug Administration. Guidance for Industry: Action levels for poisonous and or deleterious substances in human food and animal feeds August 2000.


Bambara nuts had up to 411ppb) and may thus contribute to poor health of communities. Aflatoxins among others also compound bioavailability nutrients. In this activity, three legumes will be used i.e. groundnuts, pigeon peas and Bambara nuts. We will study nutritional benefits of combined use of cereals and legumes being investigated to underpin up-and out-scaling.

2. Improving child growth through safe food consumption. Children (below five years) will be fed complementary food based on groundnuts, Bambara nuts and pigeonpea developed by the project. We will work in the Tuboreshe Chakula targeted areas to complement their activities and access families they are working with as well as their expertise. Prior to feeding the children, aflatoxin levels in grain will be analysed. The project team with the assistance of the Ward/Village medical personnel will establish baselines on height and weight of the study cohort children. Mothers will be taught how to prepare complementary legume and cereal based foods and requested to feed the children with the prepared food in their homes. Three different cohorts will be used for each of the legume being investigated. Measurements of height and weight will be recorded in prepared cards and continue taken on a monthly basis for a year by ward/village medical personnel. Collected data will be used to calculate Weight for Age Z-Score (WAZ), Height for Age Z-Score (HAZ) and Weight for Height (WHZ) which are determinants of the nutritional status of children. This activity will be done in partnership with Tuboreshe Chakula. The aim is to ramp-up demand by increasing consumption of aflatoxin free legumes.

Deliverables 1. A new cohort of key farmer leaders per village trained on post-harvest management of grains

to minimize aflatoxin contamination.2. Preliminary results for approaches to mitigate food losses, and aflatoxin contamination.3. Capacity of diagnosis deployed to support mitigation efforts in Manyara Dodoma and

Morogoro regions that includes Kongwa and Kiteto districts. 4. Aflatoxin contamination points in the feeds value chains mapped for targeted intervention. 5. A network of partners to support aflatoxin mitigation in the two regions strengthened.6. Effect of weather changes on Aspergillus population and aflatoxin contamination in various

crop documented at least for 2 seasons (2013-2014 and 2014-2015).

4.4 Thematic area 4: Socio-economic intensification through innovation platforms


Title R4Ddeployed to inform targets and processesActivity Type Action research, capacity building for farmers and extension staffTarget areas (Districts- Villages)

Kongwa-Chitego

Kongwa-Laikala Kongwa-Mlali Kongwa-Moleti Kiteto-Njoro


Leader ICRISAT and ICRAF Partners ARI-Hombolo UD CIMMYT ICRAF ARI-

Naliendele PRI-Kongwa

Budget 41,000

Relevant Africa Rising Objective 2: Integrated systems improvementKey intervention areas. The Africa RISING Research Framework proposes that R4D/Innovation Platforms be used to identify critical value chains and engage actors to refine and support technology development and dissemination. In February 2014, we created the Kongwa-Kiteto Innovation Platform to achieve the above purposes. One of the achievements of the Innovation Platform was the prioritization of research agenda for Kongwa and Kiteto. The Innovation Platform will meet at the end of October 2014 to map out action points for the prioritized intervention areas as guided by the guiding principles set out in the Africa RISING Research Framework and IAR4D34 principles. During the course of the season, we will use the Innovation Platform to further elucidate contexts (R4D entry points, draw lessons and partnership opportunities) of innovation and adoption processes. Equally important under this theme is the need to gain clarity on the cost-benefit of proposed technologies. This particular activity will be coordinated by ICRAF and supported by ICRISAT.

Description of work

Research hypothesis1. Farmers and allied stakeholders in the semi-arid zones of central Tanzania have an

understanding of agro-ecological and value chain needs of their region that could be targeted through R4D for productivity and value chain functionality enhancement.

2. Nutrition outcomes require targeted interventions that enhance social (participatory processes and gender concerns) and human capital assets of communities.

3. The technologies under development vary in their benefits and this can affect adoption and scaling up and out activities.

Task 1 Harnessing Innovation Platforms.This activity will be a continuation of the 2013-2014 activity. It’s underpinned by the fact that within the Africa RISING context, agricultural innovations include combinations of technological innovations, social and or institutional innovations that increase productivity along value chains. The generation of these innovations ultimately requires multi-stakeholder participatory processes that involve communities35. It will inform the scaling up of technologies36 generated by improving understanding of community socio-economic contexts of agricultural innovation during and after the research process (Montpellier Panel, 2013)37. The schema below is still valid and will guide framing of research questions and conversation with Innovation platform members in Kongwa and Kiteto (Figure 3).

34Adekunle, A.A. and Fatunbi, A.O. 2012. Approaches for Setting-up Multi-Stakeholder Platforms for Agricultural Research and Development. World Applied Sciences Journal 16: 981-98835 Africa Rising Programme Document. IITA, Ibadan.36Per Hillbur, 2013. Research on institutional innovation and scaling issues in Africa RISING. Consultancy report submitted to Africa RISING Secretariat37Montpellier Panel, 2013. Sustainable Intensification: A new paradigm for African Agriculture, London.


Figure 3. Sustainable intensification requires deployment of superior genotypes (varieties) (number 1 under direct inputs), whose potential can only be realised when appropriate management options are used (-ecological intensification2). Adoption and benefits of these technologies can only be realised when the cost effective direct inputs are deployed in a manner that assures easy access, adoption and ultimately competitiveness of interventions (socioeconomic intensification considerations). The outcomes of direct and indirect inputs are by and large affected by society level concerns such as land tenure, gender and power relationships, resource endowments and rural innovation ability. The figure is modified from Montpellier Panel (2013).

During 2014 the under listed areas were prioritised for intervention:

1. Testing and deployment of resilient varieties fora) Better adaptability to changing rainfall pattern;b) Increased productivity and adaptability to pests and diseases;c) Improve resource use efficiency reducing costs but increasing productivity.

2. Testing and deployment of resource efficient agronomy technologies. 3. Improving access to agricultural inputs especially improved seed at community level. 4. Unlocking the potential for markets, food, nutrition and safety of key crop products. 5. Improving pasture quantity and quality.

A brief write-up of the design of interventions using the Innovation Platform is provided below.

Subtask 1.1. Strengthening productivity of selected value chains via Innovation Platforms. This Innovation Platform will seek to clarify issues needed to improve productivity of maize, groundnut


and pigeonpea value chains, and how they are linked to agro-pastoral production systems of Kongwa and Kiteto. The focus will be on priorities 1, 2 3 and 5 above. The Platform will inform on-farm research by clarifying priorities and opportunities for implementation. During this year the Platform will be used to engage communities in the two districts in action research around prioritized areas. During the October 2014-2015 cropping season planning, we will clarify on the how to engage with communities from test site to landscape levels. Key outcomes of each learning cycle will be agreed upon and the level of investments by all actors. The meeting will also identify platform facilitators from both districts. Capacity building of facilitators will be done with the help of a Consultant (Per Hillibur)and or a Facilitating Consultancy firm with track record.

Subtask 1.2. Establishment of the nutrition and food safety Innovation Platforms . This will focus on priority 4 issues. We will use the Innovation Platform approach to understudy how best to improve household nutrition and food safety (socio-economic) intensification efforts, particularly, child and maternal nutrition38. The food safety work shall focus on how to reduce aflatoxin contamination in food products at all levels including households. The nutrition work will focus on use of complementary feeding based on aflatoxin free cereals and legumes. We shall establish one platform for both districts but with R4D activities in both districts at pilot villages that are also Tuboreshe Chakula and NAFAKA sites. R4D and capacity strengthening activities will be undertaken but informed by outcomes from the Innovation Platforms. In order improve potential for R4D impact and lesson learning. This platform will be managed by ICRISAT in partnership with Sokoine University of Agriculture and Tuboreshe Chakula. Key activities to be implemented under this task will include but are not limited to the following:

1. Elaboration of critical dietary entry points for R4D interventions via learning meetings. At least two meetings will be held involving critical stakeholders annually. This particular activity will build on efforts by Tuboreshe Chakula that is working in both districts. Initial membership will include partners already engaged by Tuboreshe Chakula.

2. Together with NAFAKA elaborate on key intervention for management of Aflatoxin especially in grain value chains of cereals legumes and selected complementary farming systems crops such as sunflower.

3. Building capacity of facilitators who will manage the Innovation Platform at district level.

4. As an additional support, the project will also train community level leaders who will lead activities within their communities in terms of training, and supporting R4D work on nutrition and food safety.

Task 2. Appraising the maturing technology (i.e., conducting socio-economic evaluation). Technologies are promoted because they have advantages over the existing ones. The advantages of technologies can be seen from biophysical point of view and socio-economic point of view. While these approaches have their own distinct features and analytical tools, they help to generate pieces of information, which are complementary in nature regarding the performance of improved agricultural technologies. Several trials have been conducted within the Africa RISING program in East and Southern Africa with the aim of identifying technologies with higher bio-physical advantages than existing farmers’ practices. The trials include crop variety trials, agronomic trials, varieties & agronomic trials combined, crop-livestock integrated trials, soil and water management trials, post-

38Berti, P.R. Julia Krasevec, J. and FitzGerald, S. 2004. A review of the effectiveness of agriculture interventions in improving nutrition outcomes. Public Health Nutrition: 7: 599–609.


harvest crop management trials, and food safety and nutrition. However, the socio-economic information about the technologies is missing as no socio-economic studies have been conducted. Therefore, the purpose of this study is to fill this gap.

Objective: The overall objective is to evaluate the selected technologies from the socio-economic point of view. Specifically, the study will• Evaluate and compare profitability of technologies, • Analyse how the proposed technologies fit into household’s current conditions (labour requirements, timing of labour requirements, social acceptability of technologies, gender, cash requirements etc.).• Monitor how the technologies are being taken up by the farmers

Method: These objectives will be addressed in two steps. The first objective will be addressed in the coming year (2015) for all relevant ongoing trials, whereas the other two objectives will be addressed in the following year. The study will partly depend on the data generated during the previous trials. Additional data will be collected as a part of the respective trials discussed in this document. The data to be collected from the bio-physical trials will constitute, among others, uses of commercial inputs (fertilizer, chemicals, seeds), labour input, draft-power input (oxen or tractor), land characteristics, outputs (grain and non-grain) and physical materials used. These data will be collected for all treatments to be included in the protocol including the control. Moreover, secondary sources will be explored to collect data on product prices, input prices, wage rates, land use of the area, features of farm lands, demographic characteristics, and maps of different types and scales. During the second phase of this research process, FGDs and interviews will be arranged with farmers to collect opinions about the technologies, understand local resource conditions, and understand how those who have applied them so far are taking up the technologies.

Analysis: Cost benefit analysis (i.e. cost benefit ratio, CBA) will be conducted separately for each technology under consideration. This analysis aims at assessing the economic rationale for farmers to invest in these technologies. Literature recommends cost benefit analysis as the key decision-support tool (Keating and Handmer 201139). This analysis will employ the production function framework according to Keating et al (201240). Keating breaks optimum outputs into three points. These are Risk adjusted optimum, Economic optimum and biological optimum points. The best bet technologies are those that attain the economic optimum point. At this point, the maximum yields are obtained with the lowest possible cost combination of inputs.

Along with cost benefit analysis, monte carlo simulation model will be employed to assess risks associated with the technologies. In a similar vein, this assessment guides the decision making process (decision on the type(s) of technology to recommend to farmers i.e. identification of the best bets technologies and upscale). This will involve the identification of potential risks and assign the probabilities of their occurrence in future by studying the past trend. These risks might be market risks including change in consumer taste and preference, inflation, pest and diseases outbreaks, environmental and climate related risks such as occurrence of dry spell periods and natural hazards.

Task 3 Predicting and monitoring adoption as well as gender dynamicsThe adoption study will be conducted to gather relevant information which will help to: (1) predict adoption peak level of technologies and likely time for reaching that peak adoption rate and (2) asses factors driving adoption of technologies. The well-established adoption theory and literature explain the importance of studying and predicting adoption in the early stage of the project in fostering a

39 Keating A, Handmer J (2011) Options for assessing the cost of climate change for adaptation policy in Victoria. Working Paper 2, Centre for Risk and Community Safety and VCCCAR, Victoria.40Keaing B., Carberry, P., Thomas, S., and Clark J., 2012. Eco-Efficient Agriculture and Climate Change: Conceptual Foundations and Frameworks. http://ciat.cgiar.org/wp-content/uploads/2012/12/chapter_2_eco_efficiency.pdf.


more complete understanding of the attributes of technologies and how they influence adoption and diffusion. This helps to allow the attributes of the technologies or the extension strategy to be modified so that levels of adoption and diffusion can be improved (Pannel, 200641; Marshall et al. 2006).Some of the information that will be collected based on farmers’ perception of technologies will include complexibility, observability, Trainability, learnability, easiness and convenience and risk minimization potential. Factors affecting adoption will be studied within four main categories i.e.(1) characteristics of technologies, (2) characteristics of the population, (3) actual advantage of using the technologies, and (4) learning of the actual advantage of the technologies.

Along with the adoption study data will be collected on continuous basis to monitor adoption of technologies over time and to study the diffusion process. This is important in informing revision of implementation strategies (example extension approach) in order to address any deviation from the plan/project goals. The adoption study will employ the conceptual framework developed by Marshall et al. (2006)42 to predict the adoption peak level and asses factors underlying adoption (Figure 4). This study will be conducted starting in 2013-204 but with extension into 2015-16. The framework has four quadrants, which correspond to various factors for technology adoption. The top left quadrant is about considering the population-specific influences on the ability to learn about the technology. Adoption involves a learning process where farmers gather information, reassess their beliefs about the technology under consideration and review their decision whether to adopt or not. This quadrant is about learning of the benefits or the relative advantage provided by the technology. The bottom left quadrant is on learning characteristics of technology. This quadrant explains about the technology-specific influences on the ability to learn about the technology. The top right quadrant on relative advantage of the technology for population is about establishing whether the advantage potentially gained from adopting the technology is a sufficient motivation to shift the population towards adoption of the technology. The bottom right quadrant on relative advantage of technology. It is the part of relative advantage that is derived from the technology’s characteristics and not related to the population’s perception of the technology’s characteristics.

Figure 5: Conceptual framework of adoption study

41Pannell et al. (2006). "Understanding and promoting adoption of conservation technologies by rural landholders." Australian Journal of Experimental Agriculture 46: 1407—1424.42Marshall, et al., 2000. The impact of agricultural extension on adoption and diffusion of lupins as a new crop in Western Australia." Australian Journal of Experimental Agriculture 40 : 571—583.


Deliverables There are four deliverables for 2013-2014 i.e. that build on progress in 2012-2013.

1. Intervention points R4D and other support interventions for targeted legume, cereal and livestock value chains identified.

2. Critical areas of intervention such as issues of equity, entry points, scaling up and out)identified via the Innovation Platforms to inform integration efforts for crops and livestock.

3. Initial lessons learnt on the underpinnings for integration of technologies under SI efforts for semi-arid tropical environments.

4. Improved practices and technologies potentially increasing farmers’ net income identified and potential adoption assessed.

5. Lesson learning and managementEvent period October 2014 to September

2015Title Lesson learning, networking and coordinationActivity Type Action research type, participatory and promotional actionTarget areas (Districts- Villages Kongwa

ChitegoKongwa Laikala

Kongwa Mlali

Kongwa Moleti

Kiteto Njoro

Leader ICRISATPartners All PartnersTotal budget (USD) 10,000

Relevant Africa Rising Objective: Objective 4 on Monitoring and EvaluationKey intervention areas: This activity will speak to the management, coordination, as well as lesson capture during implementation for up and out scaling purposes.

Description of work

Task 1 Communication of project activities to wider stakeholders The communication dissemination studies conducted in 2014 will be used to inform the design of a dissemination strategy that will be developed with engagement of the Innovation Platform.

Task 2 Networking and coordination. The project will be coordinated by ICRISAT but respective leaders will lead all activities. The action is underpinned by the need to share lessons across the partners in implementing districts and with other Africa RISING programme actors. Through this activity we will work with the other partners to develop an online repository for information, publications and documents form the project. The site will establish links with other relevant sites across the Africa RISING programme. In addition, publications and other outputs from this Action will be made available through the site. A discussion platform and information interphase will also be established to improve information.

Task. 3 Lessons learning. A lesson learning workshop involving project partners will be held at the end of the year to identify lessons, and emerging issues from the project and how to sustain the key findings and partnerships built during the development and implementation of the project. It is estimated that about 25 participants will attend the workshop. Deliverables (brief description and month of delivery)

1. Complete and tested dissemination framework to guide out-scaling activities.


2. Lessons learning workshops held to inform project thrusts for the next year.

3. Diverse communication products developed and used to communicate to various project stakeholders.

5 Expected outcomes and impacts5.1 Development impacts

5.1.1 Development impacts

1. Improved resilience and productivity of agricultural systems. The outcomes of our intervention will in the long run improve overall farm and land productivity (greater returns to investments, labour productivity and per unit outputs) in target areas of operation leading to more resilient and robust agro-ecologies.

2. Improved food and nutrition security. Improvement in food and nutrition security in target areas thus improving prospects for higher quality of life and in general improved livelihoods. Project outputs will contribute to reduced food contamination by aflatoxin and improve access to micronutrients and overall protein budget leading to healthier communities.

3. Improved household incomes. By adopting these legumes, farm households will expand their scope for income generation through sales of farm produce. This will be used to support other livelihood strategies of farm households.

4. Impacts on gender. In general women produce up to 80 % of basic food for household consumption and sale in most areas of sub- Saharan Africa. Gender inequalities in access to agricultural inputs disadvantage women. Additionally, women routinely have less access to agricultural extension than their male counterparts. We will address these issues and others by targeting interventions to women and other disadvantaged groups. Our aim is to improve access to new knowledge and innovations/ technologies by women by at least 45% as a minimum threshold in target areas. A gender analysis of the status quo will guide project R4D.

5. Environment sustainability. This project aims at reducing the negative consequences of poor land use in agriculture. The project will address this via innovations that reduce soil erosion, improve soil fertility management, and improve land use by the agro-pastoral communities through promotion of local but robust pastures. This way the project will secure in the medium to long term improved crop and animal productivity while minimizing the negative effects of poor agricultural practices.

5.1.2 Intermediate development outcomes (IDOs)These IDOs will be delivered within the medium term (3-5 years) strengthening R4D systems and laying a foundation for sustainable intensification such as:

1. Research systems strengthened. This project involves a team of scientists drawn from international and national agencies working with local development agencies to test a number of sustainable productivity enhancing innovations. Through this approach, the capacity of Semi-arid research organisations in Tanzania will be enhanced for undertaking R4D that sustainable increased productivity of their very vulnerable communities.

2. Sustainable intensification innovations made available. The team will generate a number of innovation packages tested and ready for up and out scaling to increase productivity of semi-arid zones in Tanzania and or similar agro-ecologies.


5.2 Research outputs and outcomes

5.2.1 Main research outputs

1. Capacity development of communities. We have engaged three graduate students but will include others as the project develops. Farm households have in year one been taught seed production but more will be trained in subsequent years. Farmers will also be trained on post harvest management, aflatoxin and agronomy of legumes and cereals. We will also build capacity of ARI Hombolo and Selian ARI in diagnostics for long-term management of aflatoxin.

2. R4D team engaged. In year 1, we established collaboration with DAICOs, and community leaderships in Kongwa and Kiteto. We also established partnerships with relevant FtF projects such as NAFAKA, Tuboreshe Chakula. We also engaged strategic partners such as Sokoine University and Pasture Research Institute as well as University of Dodoma to support our R&D efforts. We have also partnered with IITA Aflatoxin team operating in Babati. These partnerships will continue in 2013-2016.

3. Knowledge generated and shared. This project is entering year 2 of implementation. We generated data that has informed planning for further experimentation. This year we envisage the drafting of at least 3 manuscripts at the end of the 2013-2014.

4. R4D capacity strengthened. In 2012-2013 season, we bought rain gauges for monitoring of precipitation. Other equipment we plan to buy this year (2013-2014) includes ELISA readers, centrifuges and other equipment for aflatoxin detection to be based at ARI- Hombolo. ARI- Hombolo as well as DAICO staff where trained in management of participatory variety selection trials in year 1. In year 2, we will further train these staff and others in new techniques and R&D approaches.

5.2.2 Research outcomes

i) Outcome 1. Increased and stable crop productivity. Innovations that can increase crop and stabilize yields of maize and dry land cereals by at least 50% for cereals and 40% for legumes in semi-arid zones of Tanzania developed and promoted. This will lead to enhanced opportunities to address food security, nutrition and poverty challenges. This outcome will contribute to the programme objective 2 on integrated systems improvement.

ii) Outcome 2. Improved land productivity. This will mainly include greater returns to investments, labour productivity and per unit outputs in target areas of operation leading to more resilient, robust agro-ecologies and productive farming and crop systems of communities in semi-arid zones of Tanzania. This outcome will contribute to the programme objective 2 and 3 on integrated systems improvement and Scaling and delivery respectively.

6 Communication and Dissemination Strategies6.1 Dissemination strategy

Using the tested communication study being conducted, we will develop a dissemination strategy for various promising technologies and community contexts. The strategy will use a multi-pronged approach including the use of formal interest groups- developmental groups and support groups. A rural growth network model may be used especially where the beneficiaries could be organized into certain type of groupings for collective action by the project. The grouping will be organized at a more strategic level (Innovation platform) and at direct beneficiary level (farmer groups and or associations.


6.2 Communication strategyA communication strategy developed, as part of project is being tested for efficacy. It is testing the use of both traditional extension as well as electronic communication messages via especially radio. This activity will be done with support of Africa RISING Communication Officer.

7 Monitoring and evaluationsThe monitoring and evaluation strategy (M&E) will address issues of compliance, progress monitoring and learning within the project and with other actors. The project theory of change has been developed to guide M&E and learning processes (Appendix 1). Additionally the project log frame will be used for compliance monitoring through the life of the project (Appendix 2). Specifically, the M&E framework will assure, (i) Continued project relevance to outcomes, (ii) Project quality by assessing adaptive competencies and resulting outcomes of performance, (iii) Capacity building for better M&E and learning, (iv) Sustainability by reviewing project continuity and impact logical flow pathways. The M&E strategy will include: (i) an overall results framework that describes various levels of project results and processes from inputs to outcome level; (ii) the M&E procedure for various components of the results framework such as indicators, tools and approaches, data collection and sequencing (annual, mid-term and end of project reviews), information management (iii) Data analysis and qualitative assessments; (iv) Team guidance and mentoring. M&E will be performed by project management team or and IFPRI for evaluations. Participatory M&E will form part of the knowledge management strategy of the project in which partners will reflect on project execution and draw lessons for redesign and steering.


8 Project BudgetTable 1. Summary Budget.For details see detailed budget below in appendix 5.Budget line Cost line summaries Cost USD

1. Research

Thematic 1 Technology packages for genetic intensification 93,600

Thematic area 2 Integrated crop management technologies 114,000

Thematic area 3 Aflatoxin mitigation for nutrition, safety & markets 46,000

Thematic area 4 Socio-economic intensification through Innovation Platforms 41,000

Project Management Lesson learning and coordination 10,000

Total 304,600

2. Staffing costs 98,848

3. Travels 14,000

4. Overheads

1. ICRISAT 15%+ 5% pass through on ICRAF and ARI-Hombolo 36,967

2. ICRAF 15% 19,125

3. CIMMYT 15% 8,100

4. ARI- Hombolo 7% 3,360

Subtotal 67,552

Grand total 485,000

Table 2. Distribution of funds among partners and by project thrusts

Institution Research, coordination, travel

Human resource Total Overhead Grand

total%

DistributionICRISAT 144,100 43,848 187,948 36,967 224,915 46

ICRAF 99,000 28,500 127,500 19,125 146,625 30

CIMMYT 36,500 17,500 54,000 8,100 62,100 13 ARI Hombolo 39,000 9,000 48,000 3,360 51,360 11

Totals 318,600 98,848 417,448 67,552 485,000 100

ICRISATDirect 15% & pass-through(5%) on ICRAF and ARI-Hombolo. 187,948 36,967 224,915

ICRAF Direct 15% 127,500 19,125 146,625 ARI Hombolo Direct 7% 48,000 3,360 51,360 CIMMYT Direct 15% 54,000 8,100 62,100

417,448 67,552 485,000


9 Appendices9.1 Appendix 1. Project Theory of Change


9.2 Appendix 2. Logical frame workObjectives-hierarchy Objectively Verifiable Indicators Means/Source of Verification Important AssumptionsProvide pathways out of hunger and poverty for small holder families through sustainably intensified farming systems that sufficiently improve food, nutrition, and income security, particularly for women and children, and conserve or enhance the natural resource base.

1. Agriculture value added per person Programme and project monitoring reports

Political stability

2. Incomes of rural households disaggregated by sex and income quintile

Adequate country ownership of Africa RISING

3. Prevalence of stunted children Programme ex-post evaluation report Land tenure allows for interventions at landscape level4. Prevalence of wasted children

5. Prevalence of underweight women. National Poverty Monitoring Surveys The Government of Tanzania continues to prioritize investments in Agriculture

6. Yield per unit area of crop planted. Famine Early Warning System monitoring reports

7. Incomes generated per household. National household expenditure surveys

8. Innovations adopted as packages or singly for increasing productivity.

National population and health services survey reports

Project outputs ESA log frame outputs OVIs MOV

Objective 1: Testing and validation of technology packages for genetic intensification.

ESA level output 5- Innovations that increase resilience and productivity of farming systems deployed

ESA level Output 8: Innovations that address emerging agricultural production challenges deployed

% of farmers growing at least one new variety or type of crop in each intervention site by Sept. 2016

Candidate maize hybrids that can be used in the MLND disease management identified for release and deployment in in target zones of influence in Tanzania

Programme M&E reports, project reports, national reports of performance of the agriculture sector for central Tanzania.

Adoption rates for any innovation (combinations of technologies and management practices and knowledge) are enhanced by targeting on-demand from stakeholders and capacities of potential adopters.

Objective 2: Testing and validation of crop, soils technology packages for ecological intensification

ESA level Output 6: Crop-nutrition and water efficient innovations introduced, evaluated and adapted

1. Acreage under new ecologically and economically sound practices per intervention site by Sept. 2016

2. % of farmers using ecologically and economically sound livestock husbandry practices where, by in target action sites


of Tanzania3. Inventory of improved land

and water conservation practices used by farmers per action site at the end of the project phase

Objective 3. Integration of crops, livestock and poultry for enhanced productivity and resilience

ESA level output 5- Innovations that increase resilience and productivity of farming systems deployed

Integrated crop livestock innovations increase production and / or improve productivity by at least 25% in a sustainable manner for targeted households at the Africa RISING research sites by December 2016.

Objective 4. Improving nutrition, safety and market competitiveness through aflatoxin mitigation

ESA level output 7: Innovations that increase availability and consumption of safe and nutritious food products deployed

% of farmers using new/improved postharvest technologies to store produce and reduce pest infestation and losses in Tanzania by 2016

Inventory of mycotoxins mitigation technologies used by farmers in Tanzania by Sept. 2016

% of farmers growing QPM per intervention site by Sept. 2016

Objective 5: To supporting socioeconomic intensification through innovation platforms.

ESA level output 4.R4D and Innovation platforms influencing stakeholder practices established

Wider adoption of innovations identified and tested by the programme’s outputs within the Africa RISING action research sites enhances livelihoods through increased agricultural output 30-50% yield increase), income diversity (various legumes and cereals livestock produced and sold), reduced vulnerability to adverse environmental and economic challenges and improved nutrition and welfare (improved child growth indices); especially of young children and mothers by December 2017.

1. The adoption of innovations that lead to SI is affected by the sequence in which the component technologies, practices and knowledge are integrated and applied.

2. Effective targeting of innovations also reduces the negative impacts of trade-offs between farm productivity and environmental sustainability and helps to identify potential “win-win” options for SI.


The development community initiates programmes, based on the knowledge tools and innovations developed and promoted by Africa RISING, that are directed at developmental goals that are consistent with the Africa RISING programme purpose.

5. A research approach based on targeting and evaluating SI-related innovations, in context, increases the relevance of findings from action research sites and enhances their scalability to similar strata elsewhere (i.e. to similar development domains and households typologies in other locations).

Milestones Activity 1. Socio-economic and Biophysical baseline studies undertaken at Programme and Project levels to characterise agro-ecologies, farming systems and production resources and households of target communities by December 2013.

ESA level output 2: Farm households characterized and typologies in intervention sites determined

1.1 Baselines on the level and sources of post harvest losses and food safety contamination along selected crop market/value chains by end of by December 2013.

IFPRI programme wide baseline report, Farming Systems Analysis Report at Programme level, Kongwa- Kiteto Project progress reports for the 2012-2013

Government budget and policy support for agriculture remains supportive

ESA level output 1: Intervention sites identified at an appropriate level, and characterized.

1.2 Biophysical characterisation of action sites to underpin R&D interventions by December 2013.

1.3 Development domains of both districts appropriately mapped to guide location of the intervention and the innovation platform by December 2013.

1.4 Farming systems characterized to guide development of intensification approaches by December 2013.

1.5 Community and selected commodity value chains analysis and baselines completed by December 2013.

Region remains political stable and safe to conduct research with communities

Communities remain supportive of development efforts and continue to engage with development partners


Activity 2. Evaluate and identify cereals and legume varieties that meet farmer and market needs through on-farm and market participatory methods for genetic intensification by December 2015

2.1 At least 10 varieties crop varieties for cereals (maize, sorghum) and legumes (groundnuts, pigeonpea and Bambara nuts) evaluated on-farm in both districts annually for first two years of project life (2012-2015).

Kongwa-Kiteto-Project progress, Partner annual reports for the 2012-2013

Other complementary development agencies and partner continue to invest and operate at appropriate levels that support agriculture led growth of the economies of target countries

2.2 At least two best adapted farmer-preferred groundnuts varieties identified and validated for Kongwa and Kiteto by December 2014.

Research publications from the project and project annual and quarterly progress reports

Communities remain receptive of new innovations and engage with R&D teams in innovation processes

2.3 At least two best adapted farmer-preferred pigeonpea varieties identified and validated for Kongwa and Kiteto by December 2014.

Agro-ecological and meteorological conditions remain conducive for appropriate testing.

2.4 At least two adapted farmer-preferred maize varieties identified and validated for Kongwa and Kiteto by December 2015.

National partners continue providing adequate country ownership and support for smooth implementation of Africa RISING interventions.

2.5 At least two adapted farmer-preferred sorghum varieties identified and validated for Kongwa and Kiteto by December 2015.2.6 At least two adapted farmer-preferred Bambara nut varieties identified and validated for Kongwa and Kiteto by December 2015.2.7 Adoption variables for targeted technologies identified and tested by Dec 2016

Activity 3. Evaluation of soil fertility and water management options for integrated soil erosion, fertility and water management to support ecological intensification

3.1 Experiments to test appropriate application rates of N&P fertilizers and cattle manure initiated and validated by December 2015.

Kongwa Kiteto-Project progress, Partner annual reports for the 2012-2013

Communities remain receptive of new innovations and engage with R&D teams in innovation processes.

3.2 Testing of options for spatial integration of legumes and cereals to improve soil fertility and crops yields initiated by December 2015.

Research publications from the project and quarterly and annual progress reports.


3.3 Soil and water conservation technologies tested in both districts by December 2013.3.4 Nutritional quality of indigenous forage and pasture species determined to guide the selection of appropriate species for integrated crop and pasture management systems established by December 2013.3.5 Validated options for integration of promising technologies to develop guidelines for inorganic fertilizer and cattle manure application by farmers completed by December 2015 for up scaling purposes in subsequent years. 3.6 Validated options for spatial integration of pigeonpea and maize to improve soil fertility and crops yields completed by December 2014. Other legumes to be considered in subsequent years based on IP contexts.

Agro-ecological and meteorological conditions remain conducive for appropriate testing

3.7 Options for integration of soil and water conservation technologies validated for up-and out scaling by December 2015. 3.8 Capacity of farmers in livestock and poultry feeds management strengthened to support farming system integration and increased productivity by December 2015.3.9 Appropriate fodder trees and shrubs and their crop/pasture integration options for maize-based farming systems identified and validated by December 2015 for up- scaling in subsequent years

National partners continue providing adequate country ownership and support for smooth implementation of Africa Rising interventions

3.10. Guidelines on appropriate


sources and use of P for maize and pigeonpea production in targeted sites evaluated and promoted for scaling up and out by December 2015.

Activity 4. Integrated livestock and poultry management for productivity enhancement

4.1. Quantity and quality of the grazing land pasture resources determined to guide research targeting for improved management completed by December 2013.


Agro-ecological and meteorological conditions remain conducive for appropriate testing

4.2 Local institutions and their roles in grazing land management documented to guide future interventions for development of appropriate community based grazing systems by December 2014.

Research publications from the project Communities remain receptive of new innovations and engage with R&D teams in innovation processes

4.3 A costed framework for up scaling evaluated technologies generated and used to guide up-and out scaling efforts in subsequent years completed by December 2015.

Farmer organisations and institutions are functional and committed to the project action

4.4 Option for improving free-range poultry production tested and validated by December 2014 for up and out scaling in subsequent years.

Activity 5. Improve food and nutrition for home and market needs

5.1. Aflatoxin prevalence in selected cereal and legume value chains mapped to guide interventions by October 2014.

Kongwa Kiteto-Project progress, Partner annual reports for the 2012-2013 and subsequent years

Farmer organisations and institutions are functional and committed to the project actions

5.2 Effect of weather changes on Aspergillus populations and aflatoxin contamination in targeted crops documented for 2 seasons (2013-2014 and 2014-2015 to guide design of management options in subsequent years.


5.3

5.5 A gender based analysis of agricultural enterprise in at least two villages of each district to inform gender based implementation nutrition and food security conducted.5.6 Approaches to mitigate food losses, and aflatoxin contamination at households tested and validated for scaling up and out in subsequent years by December 2014.5.7 Aflatoxin hot spots area mapped for targeted intervention by December 2014.

Research publications from the project National partners continue providing adequate country ownership and support for smooth implementation of Africa Rising interventions

5.8 50-80 new farm families in study sites engaged annually in nutrition and food safety drives.

Communities remain receptive of new innovations and engage with R&D teams in innovation processes

5.9 Appropriate legume/cereal complementary feeding strategies for child and maternal health tested and up scaling by December 2014.6.0 Appropriate legume processing technologies for household levels tested and validated for promotion by December 2014 for up scaling in subsequent years.5.9 At least 10 key farmer leaders per village of target districts trained on post-harvest management of grain to minimize aflatoxin contamination.

5.10 A network of partners to support aflatoxin mitigation efforts in the two regions engaged by


December 2014.5.11 Critical partners trained (NAFAKA, Tuboreshe Chakula and ARI Hombolo staff) on aflatoxin management and detection by December 2014.5.12 Resident capacity developed in Tanzania at ARI Hombolo and Selian Research Institute to detect aflatoxin in various crops by December 2015.

Activity 6. Innovation Platforms created in target districts for Commodity and nutrition intensification activities by December 2014 and used in subsequent years of the project to support socio-economic intensification

6.1 Intervention points for R4D and other support interventions for targeted legume, cereal and livestock value chains identified


Communities remain supportive of development efforts and continue to engage with development partners

6.2 Innovative community learning and action research based systems initiated for testing and evaluation of various technologies in Kongwa and Kiteto by December 2014 and used in subsequent years.

Research publications from the project Government budget and policy support for agriculture remains supportive

6.3 Results from year 1 and 2 and two shared with IP members By October 2014 and the learning points at IP level used to redesign year 3 of research (2015).

National partners continue providing adequate country ownership and support for smooth implementation of Africa Rising interventions


9.3 Appendix 2. Feed the Future indicator projection matrix for 2014-2015Level of Indicator Indicator name FtF indicator number 2014-2015 projectionsSub-Intermediate Result 1.1: Enhanced Human and Institutional Capacity Development for Increased Sustainable Agriculture Sector Productivity

Number of farmers and others who have applied improved technologies or management practices as a result of USG assistance

4.5.2-5 200-300

Number of individuals who have received USG supported short-term agricultural sector productivity or food security training

4.5.2-7 100

Number of members of producer organizations and community based organizations receiving USG assistance

4.5.2-27 10

Sub-Intermediate Result 1.2: Enhanced Technology Development, Dissemination, Management, and Innovation

Number of hectares under improved technologies or management practices as a result of USG assistance

4.5.2-2 20-30

Number of new technologies or management practices in one of the following phases of development: ...in Phase I: under research as a result of USG assistance

4.5.2-39 4

...in Phase II: under field testing as a result of USG assistance

5

...in Phase III: made available for transfer as a result of USG assistance

3

Intermediate results Result 6: Improved Access to Diverse and Quality Foods

Women’s Dietary Diversity: Mean number of food groups consumed by women of reproductive age

3.1.9.1-2 3


9.4 Appendix 4. Detailed budget broken down by thematic areas and activitiesBudget Research Activities

Thematic area Summary of activities Budgeted Cost (USD)

Thematic area 1 Technology packages for genetic intensification Task 1 Genotype x environment x management studies Task 1.1.1 Mono culture experiments 9,000 Task 1.1.2 Mixed cropping trials 9,100 Task 2. Validation of new cereal experiments Task 1.2.1 Maize MLN 10,000 Task 1.2.2 Maize DTMA 11,500 Task 1.2.3 Maize QPM 13,000

Task 1.2.4 Sorghum and pearl millet 12,000

Task 3 Validation of new legumes Task 1.3.1 Pigeonpea 9,000 Task 1.3.2 Bambara nuts 8,000

Task 1.3.3 Groundnuts 12,000 Subtotal 93,600

Thematic area 2 Integrated crop management technologies for semi-arid zones of Tanzania

Task 2.1 Micro-dosing to enhance efficiency and yield 12,000

Task 2.2 Spatial integration of pigeonpea in maize-based systems 12,000

Task 2.3 Double-legume for forage crop integration 8,000

Integrated rangeland and crop productivity enhancement

Task 2.4 Shelterbelt, boundary tree and fodder bank planting 8,000

Task 2.5 Sustainable tree seeds and seedlings supply system. 8,000

Integrated crop and land management technologies

Task 2.6 Fast tracking technology adoption and integration 10,000

Task 2.6.1 Erosion control (Physical barriers) 12,000

Task 2.6.2 Assessing the efficiency of physical barriers 8,000

Task 2.6.3 Popularization of In situ water harvesting 7,000

Livestock crop integration

Task 2.7 Improving poultry genetics and feeding 12,000

Task 2.8 Feeding trials (legumes on ruminants) 12,000

Task 2.9 Role of local institutions in grazing land management 5,000 Subtotal 114,000

Thematic area 3 Aflatoxin mitigation for nutrition, safety & markets

Task 3.1 Aflatoxin contamination in sunflower cake 12,000

Task 3.2 Aflatoxin mitigation studies 12,000

Task 3.3 Improving nutrition Task 3.3.1 Improving protein consumption 10,000

Task 3.3.3 Improving child growth 12,000 Subtotal 46,000

Thematic area 4 Socio-economic intensification through innovation platforms


Task 4.1 Harnessing innovation platforms

Task 4.1.1 Strengthening productivity of selected value chains 10,000

Task 4.1.2 Strengthening nutrition and food safety 12,000

Task 4.2 Appraising promising technologies 11,000

Task 4.3. Predicting and monitoring adoption 8,000

Subtotal 41,000 Project Coordination Lesson learning and coordination

Task 5.1 Communication 2,000

Task 5.2 Networking and coordination 4,000

Task 5.3 Lesson learning 4,000

Subtotal 10,000

Grand sub-total 304,600

Total Research Activities 304,600

2. Personnel Costs 2.1 Senior scientists Staff-Time Coordinator Coordination 18,000

Staff-Time ICRISAT Research activities 13,500

Staff-Time CIMMYT Research Activities 13,500

Staff-Time ICRAF Research Activities 13,500

Staff Time UDOM Research Activities 9,000

Partner ARI- Hombolo Research Activities 9,000

Subtotal (A) 76,500

2.2 Support staff Field Research Officer 5,000

Research Assistants Theme 1 & 3 1 4,000

Theme 2 2 6,000

Theme 4 1 4,000

Driver 1 3,348

Subtotal (B) 22,348

Total Personnel 98,848

3 Travels 3.2 Travel regional 4,000

3.3 Travel


International3.3.1 ICRISAT 3,000

3.3.2 ICRAF 3,000

3.3.3 CIMMYT 2,000

3.3.4 Ari Hombolo 2,000

Subtotal 14,000

4. Overheads ICRISAT 15%+5% pass through on ICRAF and ARI-Hombolo 36,967

ICRAF 15% 19,125

CIMMYT 15% 8,100

ARI- Hombolo 7% 3,360

Subtotal 67,552

Grand total 485,000
