Indigenous Knowledge and Development
Monitor, March 2001 Indigenous Knowledge and Development
Monitor, March 2001
Contents IK Monitor (9-1) | IKDM Homepage | Suggestions to: ikdm@nuffic.nl | © copyright Nuffic-CIRAN and contributors 2001.
Micah Lyle Rosenblum, Lyle Jaffe, Joseph C. Scheerens
Setting up farmers' research agendas in Lesotho
After presenting an analytical description of traditional farming practices in the highlands of Lesotho, the authors explore a methodology to help farmers build upon indigenous knowledge as they develop a community research agenda aimed at improving crop production. They conclude that the resulting farmer-led research and training yields a primary product of high value: knowledge. The degree to which that knowledge is shared is a key indicator of the relevance of the research agenda.
During 1997-1998, an agronomic ethnography of farming households in the highlands of Lesotho was developed. By characterizing and analyzing key aspects of the local cropping systems, the farmers were able to draw up a research agenda which builds upon indigenous knowledge. This agenda was then used in the implementation of an ongoing farmer research program. Through combined research and training activities, farmers identified and adopted appropriate innovations designed to improve local crop production.
In the highlands of Lesotho, farms are rarely self-sufficient in grains. Households that rely upon agriculture for their livelihoods are among the poorest in Lesotho (Gay & Hall 1994: 72). Agricultural improvements in the highlands have been impeded by the lack of effective research and training activities to promote conservation and intensification practices. The aim of this study was to characterize key aspects of the local cropping systems in such a way that they can be used to guide farmer-based research and training activities, the ultimate objective of which is to conserve agricultural resources and intensify production in Lesotho's highlands.
Setting and approach
The study was conducted at farms in the Mateanong, Linots'ing, and Molika-liko
chieftaincies of Mokhotlong (see map). Mateanong and Linots'ing are
adjacent areas in the Mokhotlong River Valley, while Molika-liko lies in the
Khubelu River Valley. Both valleys are inhabited by isolated villages of
smallholder farmers, who produce crops on steep slopes 2000-2450 m above
sea-level, mainly for home consumption (see photo 1). These farmers are
served by crop research and extension programmes implemented by GROW, a
Lesotho-registered non-governmental organization based in Mokhotlong.
During February 1997, the primary investigator conducted a survey of agronomic practices at farms in the Molika-liko chieftaincy, and established objectives and methodologies for the current study (Rosenblum 1997). In February 1998, GROW field officers carried out surveys of cropping systems at 55 farms throughout the study area. In the following two years, similar surveys and farmer research projects were conducted to investigate and monitor agricultural practices. During the surveys, farm sampling took place in an 'accidental' fashion as described by Shaner et al. (1982: 305). Farmer participation in the sample was voluntary. At each participating farm, the enumerator and the farmer-owner observed all stands of growing crops; cropland areas were estimated with meter-wheel measurements. Interviews were conducted whereby farmer-owners explained their cropping objectives, practices and resources. Farmers participated in seminars to analyze the survey results and work out a research agenda. Concurrently, innovative farmers and GROW implemented small-scale agronomic experiments and trained other farmers.
Land, labour and crops
In the study area, all arable land was already allocated, so that opportunities
for households to cultivate new land were negligible. Men, women and teenagers
shared responsibility for crop production operations in the study area. The mean
number of farm labourers per household was 4 adults (s.d. ± 2 adults), while
the mean total area of cropland was 8,829 m2 (s.d. ± 4,916 m2) per household.
Of the 95% of households with multiple fields, most had their cropland
distributed over parcels at different locations throughout their respective
chieftaincy. This traditional distribution scheme had at least two major
benefits in highland villages: first, it enabled households to share scarce
pockets of fertile soil and, second, it reduced the risk of total crop failures
for an individual household due to a localized catastrophic event. Farmers also
explained that, despite the inconvenience involved in reaching their most
distant cropland parcels, the management of crops at these locations facilitated
co-operation and bonding among members of their extended family residing in the
chieftaincy. None of the cultivated areas were protected with maintained
terraces or surface drainage schemes. Deep erosion gullies were observed
dissecting most of the cropland parcels. Where farmers implemented water
diversion furrows, outlets often initiated and exacerbated gullies in fields
below.
Among the entire sample, eight different crops were sown in the 1997/98 season. Table 1 shows the percentage of households that cultivated specific crops and how cropland was utilized. The low percentage (3%) of the cropland held by households which was left uncultivated reflects the intense demand on cropland in Mokhotlong District, where only about 3% of all land is arable (Lesotho Government 1993: 3). Lack of seed and a shortage of draft animals were the main reasons for farmers to leave cropland uncultivated. These problems pointed to a need to increase efficiencies during land preparation and sowing. Altitude was an even more important geographic consideration than soil type in allocating a crop to a particular field. For example, farmers prioritized maize and bean for warmer conditions at their low altitude fields. This finding also reflects the scarcity of soils and the severity of conditions on the cultivated slopes in Mokhotlong.
From one to eight different crops were cultivated, with an average of three crops per household. This estimate of crop diversity did not account for varietal diversity, which was high for local wheat (Rosenblum et al. 1999). Low crop diversity and high varietal diversity suggest that the farmers' primary objectives were to produce staple grains for household consumption and seed for sowing future crops. Unfortunately, at the household level, low crop diversity contributed to monotonous diets and left farms vulnerable to single risk factors. Farmers highlighted a risk avoidance strategy when they explained their preference for crops like maize and pea, which can be eaten before the grains are fully ripe.
Extra hands and seeds
Because farmers generally lacked cash and access to credit, there were few
inputs to the cropping systems in Mokhotlong. No households utilized inorganic
fertilizers, agro-chemicals, fencing, irrigation or motorized equipment to
produce crops. Plowing was performed with cattle and weeding and harvesting
operations were carried out by hand. While 13% of the households hired laborers
to assist with weeding or harvesting, most farmers made use of extended family
and other households to perform these tasks, a tradition referred to as letsema
(see photo 2). This strategy helps households overcome labor and
input deficits at critical points for crop management.
On 95% of their cropland, households sowed local seeds, often saved from their previous harvests. Rosenblum et al. (1999) made a similar observation, reporting that Mokhotlong farmers had systematic selection criteria for most local seeds, but not for potato and bean. These seeds were most often procured from external sources because farmers' knowledge and capacities to produce adequate yields were insufficient for a reliable supply of local seeds. Hardon and de Boef (1993: 67) explain that once farmers adopt crops and cycle seeds, local varieties eventually emerge with high genetic variation and adaptation within the cropping system. Though seed cycling and the resulting durable crop genotypes were germane to the cropping system, farmers demonstrated their interest in increasing the production of new crops - especially potato - and varieties.
Cropping patterns
Summer rainfall and a narrow frost-free period delimited the cropping patterns
in Mokhotlong, so that crops were sown mainly in spring and harvested during
late summer and autumn. Double cropping in a single season was practiced only
for barley, which was sown in September for seed and later in January for fodder.
For other crops, farmers felt that double cropping was impractical. First,
frequent frost dissuaded farmers from sowing crops at the extremities of their
respective sowing windows. Second, mid-season weeding operations consumed
available labor and prevented households from harvesting crops in time to sow
succeeding crops. Finally, by December, cattle owners sent their herds to graze
distant open pastures and, when herds returned to villages in May, strays
presented a threat to late ripening crops. Consequently, there was no draft
power available for sowing operations.
In 1998, approximately 80% of the observed cropland was under successive cereal crops. However, most farmers practiced rotation to manage pests in their three major crops. Farmers rotated their maize with wheat to control populations of stalkborer (Pyrousta nubilalis), which overwinter in maize stubble. Farmers rotated their wheat, which was broadcast, with row-sown maize to control populations of wild oats (Avena fatua). Like broadcast wheat, dense stands of pea limited farmers' field access, and therefore demanded regular rotation with other row-sown crops to control weeds.
In 1998, approximately 1% of the cropland was sown with polycultures. One field was mixed with lentil and common bean, and three other fields had maize intercropped with bean, sorghum or potato. Some households cultivated sunflower (Helianthus annuus) and squashes (Cucurbita spp.), which usually occurred sporadically in the borders of the maize stands. Because crop management operations were performed by hand, local households did not face mechanical dilemmas when practicing intercropping. Farmers explained that their inexperience with polyculture systems dissuaded them from intercropping. In view of the advantageous land equivalency ratio associated with polycultures - for example, wheat/lentil systems (Carr et al. 1995) - the predominance of monocultures represented a potential shortcoming in the Mokhotlong cropping system.
Farmers' research and training
An awareness of options for cropping system components is a major factor in
farmer research and innovation (Sumberg & Okali 1997: 102). GROW presented
the results from our surveys of cropping systems to farmers and government
officials at a series of village-based workshops, where farmers analyzed the
strengths and weaknesses of their cropping system and targeted strategic
knowledge to be expanded through research. Table 2 summarizes the research
agenda of Mokhotlong farmers. Subsequently, GROW worked with volunteer farmers
to develop and implement on-farm agronomic experiments. Treatments were
replicated in plots throughout the study area and, in some cases, over multiple
growing seasons. GROW trained volunteer farmers to make observations concerning
the growing season and sample yield data at harvest. These farmers trained other
farmers during field days at the research plots and end-of-season seminars.
Positive results from some of the research treatments - like wheat-lentil
intercrops and manure-ash fertilized potatoes - generated extensive discussions
among farmers, and ultimately led to innovative changes. For example, over the
study period, the number of households practicing intercropping increased from 9
to 31 percent. In a manner similar to letsema, farmers initiated potato interest
groups that supported farmer-to-farmer training for new potato growers, and
worked together to fertilize potato ground with manures and wood ashes. Several
participating farmers reported having had commercial success with their potatoes
at the farm gate, demonstrating the economic impact of a new crop. Over the
study period, the cropland allocated to potato increased from 1 to 6 percent and
the households producing potato increased from 9 to 41 percent.
Such innovations were achieved through combined research and training, building upon indigenous knowledge among farmers. The rapid pace of change reflected a high degree of farmer-to-farmer training. Following the 2000 growing season, more than half of the farmers working with GROW had trained other farmers in crop rotation, manure application, intercropping, or potato production. The research-based development initiative underway in Mokhotlong evokes the traditional Basotho saying, 'metsi a lekoa ka lere' which translates literally to, '[while crossing a river] test water with a stick,' and figuratively means, 'step cautiously towards the future.'
Conclusions
The methodologies used to develop community research agendas are appropriate for
replication by research and training institutions, as a means of improving and
intensifying crop production. These methodologies:
Research generated by community research agendas should consider the social implications of change. For example, in Mokhotlong, traditional cropping practices that promote social bonding within the farming community, like cultivating at multiple sites and letsema, should be encouraged, in order to complement farmer-led research and training programmes.
By conducting research and training activities at farm sites, agricultural development programmes create opportunities for gender-balanced participation and benefits.
The primary product flowing from farmer-led research and training is knowledge. The widespread sharing of knowledge is one of the most important direct indicators that the research agenda is relevant and the resulting knowledge is useful.
Micah Lyle Rosenblum
GROW/Near East Foundation
P.O. Box 74
Mokhotlong, 500
Lesotho
Tel. / fax:+266-920 205
E-mail: grow@ilesotho.com
Mr Lyle Jaffe
GROW/Near East Foundation
See above address
Dr Joseph C. Scheerens
Department of Horticulture and Crop Sciences
The Ohio State University
1680 Madison Avenue
Wooster, Ohio
44691 USA
Tel.: +1-330-263 3826
E-mail: scheerens.1@osu.edu
References
Carr, P., J. Gardner, B. Schatz, S. Zwinger, and S. Guldan (1995) 'Grain yield
and weed biomass of a wheat lentil intercrop', Agronomy Journal Vol. 87:
574-579.
Gay, J., and D. Hall (1994) Poverty in Lesotho: a mapping exercise. Maseru, Lesotho: Sechaba Consultants.
Hardon, J., and W. de Boef (1993) 'Linking farmers and plant breeders in local crop development', pp. 64-71 in W. de Boef, K. Amanor, K. Wellard, and A.Bebbington (eds) Cultivating knowledge: genetic diversity, farmer experimentation and crop research. London, UK: Intermediate Technology Publications.
Lesotho Government (1993) Lesotho statistical yearbook 1993. Maseru: Lesotho Bureau of Statistics.
Rosenblum, M. (1997) 'Survey of cropping systems and lentil culture in Molika-liko, Lesotho', An approach towards improving lentil production in the highlands of Lesotho. Columbus, Ohio: The Ohio State University.
Rosenblum, M., J. Ts'iu, and M. Moletsane (1999) 'Farmers' wheat (Triticum aestevum) varieties in the highlands of Lesotho', Proceedings of the 33rd conference of the South African Society for Agricultural Extension entitled 'Participation and partnership in extension and rural development'. Bloemfontein, RSA: President Hotel.
Shaner, W., P. Philipp, W. Schmehl (1982) 'Appendix 5-V: Sampling', Farming systems research and development: guidelines for developing countries. Boulder, Colorado: Westview Press.
Sumberg, J., and C. Okali (1997) Farmers' experiments: creating local knowledge. Boulder, Colorado, USA : Lynne Rienner Publishers.
Websites that may interest readers of this article.
Back to: top of the page | Contents
IK Monitor (9-1) | IKDM Homepage
Suggestions to: ikdm@nuffic.nl
© copyright Nuffic-CIRAN and contributors 2001.