Your second point seems to relate more to the research methodology and not
to the technology itself. You certainly have a point, that the hedgerows
should be evaluated from the other perspectives besides simply soil
amendment. In fact, by addressing these other benefits one increases the
chances of farmer adoption. I also share your viewpoint in favor of
stepwise adoption of technology. As an agronomist, my concern about
planting the hedgerows at the borders of fields would be 1.) whether the
amount of biomass would be adequate to sustain production at a reasonable
level and 2.) whether farmers would actually apply the hedgerow prunings to
the fields given the added labor of transporting the prunings from the edges
to the center of the field. When the hedgerows are 4-5 m apart on the
contour, pruning operations are facilitated because farmers do not have to
carry the prunings. Erosion control is another benefit that would be partly
lost in border plantings. In Haiti, where farmers in the past refused to
plant that close, we are now seeing more acceptance, at least in the South,
as they are also seeing the yield benefits from alley cropping.
You will be interested to know that the Alley Farming Network for Africa
(AFNETA), the network that promotes alley cropping research in West and
Central Africa, is now taking a very broad view of alley cropping not
limited to the standard 4-5 m alleys you described above, and are
encouraging farmers participating in their on-farm trials to be innovative
in modifying the technology to fit their local conditions.
Donald Voth wrote:
>I want to thank Dennis Shannon again for his discussionn of sub-tropical
>African soils. I have only two qualifications to what Shannon said.
>First, in the areas where I have a little bit of experience, Rwanda and
>Burundi, there is a historical pattern of integrating animals into
>farming systems, even cattle. There are complicated cultural
>implications of this, implications that are not unrelated to the current
>violence in these countries. However, for this discussion that is not
>relevant. The point is that the value of animal manure is appreciated,
>that it is used, but mostly for the highest valued food crops right
>around the dwelling (partly because of theft). When we were doing
>surveys and asked for the reason for having animals, manure was
>frequently given as the first reason. My second qualification concerns
>alley cropping. We did find some versions of alley cropping very
>beneficial, but we found the rigidity of most alley cropping advocates to
>be a serious detriment to acceptance. Farmers simply would not,
>initially, divide their fields into 4-5 meter strips, but they certainly
>would consider using the recommended hedges at the borders. Much as we
>tried, we almost always failed to get the scientists who advocate alley
>cropping to be willing to consider, conceptually at least, taking alley
>cropping apart, and looking at its various potential contributions
>(nitrogen fixing, provision of organic matter, soil erosion control,
>provision of bean poles, etc.) separately, and trying to design
>applications that farmers actually could implement in a progressive
>manner. And, this was a Farming Systems Research and Extension (FSR/E)
>project!
>
>
Dennis A. Shannon
Department of Agronomy and Soils
202 Funchess Hall
Auburn University, Alabama 36849-5412
Telephone: 334-844-3963
Facsimile: 334-844-3945
E-mail: dshannon@ag.auburn.edu