No abstract

Leguminous agroforestry (AF) species have been investigated and promoted in Malawi as a means to improve soil quality and maize (Zea mays) yields. Our objective was to determine whether AF systems' recommendations that solely consider impacts on average maize yields differ from those that include an analysis of production risk, profitability among different wealth groups and socioeconomic vulnerability. Employing participatory quantitative and qualitative on-farm research techniques, we investigated three AF-based maize/legume relay-cropping practices in southern Malawi. The perennial legumes included Sesbania sesban, Tephrosia vogelii and Cajanus cajan (pigeonpea). We found that AF species recommendations did diverge from those based solely on maximizing maize yields when incorporating risk, profitability and socioeconomic vulnerability as additional variables. For instance, the highest yielding system (the S. sesban/maize relay crop) was never recommended for the most vulnerable farmers based on the vulnerability analysis, and the cropping systems were often more profitable for the least vulnerable farmers than they were for the most vulnerable farmers. Cropping system recommendations based solely on obtaining the highest average maize yields would also have generally overlooked the economic and nutritional importance of pigeonpea, and the difficulty for the most vulnerable farmers to profit from fertilizers, potentially placing these farmers at greater risk.

Agroforestry (AF) systems have been the focus of numerous research and development projects in southern Africa, yet their adoption rate generally remains low. Employing on-farm, participatory research techniques in southern Malawi, we compared the suitability of three AF-based systems that relay crop the dominant staple, maize (Zea mays), with the perennial legumes Sesbania sesban, Tephrosia vogelii, and Cajanus cajan (pigeonpea). Our secondary objective was to compare two methodologies employed to investigate AF adoption: farming systems based ex ante adoption potential and ex post adoption analysis. Nineteen percent of farmers preferred S. sesban, 26% T. vogelii, and 55% pigeonpea. Between 2001 and 2003, S. sesban adoption ranged from 3 to 6%, T. vogelii from 16 to 20%, and pigeonpea from 76 to 100%. Pigeonpea and T. vogelii were primarily preferred and adopted for their immediate livelihood benefits-a secondary food source in the case of pigeonpea and a fish poison in the case of T. vogelii. Though S. sesban was the most promising in terms of biophysical impacts, many farmers found it labor intensive and its lack of immediate livelihood benefits was a deterrent to adoption. With food insecurity a pervasive hardship in the region, farmers will likely continue to focus on satisfying immediate livelihood needs before prioritizing longer-term soil-quality improvement techniques. Both ex ante adoption potential and ex post adoption analysis contributed distinct and valuable data, and relying on either exclusively would have limited our understanding of the AF systems.

No abstract