July 2007


Empowerment of the Community: Key to Project Sustainability

Most of the things I put here are personal opinions based on my experiences while conducting the Community-Based Watershed Project in Talibon, Bohol. As part of the big BSWM group working in the watershed project, I tried to collect the lesson learned and summarized those things gained during the conduct of the project with the intention of sharing the lessons to other doing the same kind of work.

To start with, I want to give a brief background that upland degradation by rapid deforestation and agricultural expansion had become a critical environmental concern in the Philippines. Rapid deforestation and agricultural expansion practices contributed to the ailing problem of soil degradation resulting to soil erosion, low yield and income reduction. The problem rooted from traditional method of cultivating the land without the provision of conservation practices. These happen, primarily, because of the lack of awareness or the lack of knowledge of the developed technologies that can be used. On this premise, concerned agencies fully realized urgent measures should be done to address the issue and a community-based watershed management approach is a key to prevent further ecological imbalance.

Looking back, it is very easy to see that several measures has been done already to address the problem, like for example, various thematic maps (topography, slope, land use, etc.,) are already available to the various stakeholders, information education materials (IEC) were already distributed and several farmers trainings were already conducted.

But quite clearly, there is a pressing need to increase farmer awareness on the depressing effect of conventional farming methods, extra measures need to be done to effectively share and communicate the matured soil and water technologies to the concern groups, encourage them to improve existing technologies and build what they have in terms of soil and water conservation technologies, and provide the farmers livelihood opportunities. All these desire triggered the birth of Community-based Watershed Management Project. Before hand, its worth mentioning that this undertaking is an output of several levels of focused group discussions (FGD).

In Talibon. Bohol, at the very start, I would like to emphasize that we focus on community participation through empowerment (that is authorizing, making them able and allowing them to manage their own resources) and developing the capacity of local people to lead their own development efforts. We believed that empowerment offers technological approaches which address broader natural resource management and household economic concerns – not just pursuing production or yield maximization. It fully addresses identified local priorities and needs, but on one side, it still combines ‘outside’ technical knowledge and practice-based farmer experience (indigenous technical knowledge, or ITK).

Why community participation?

From the knowledge gained from my training at 11RR, we felt that there is pressing need to do something to efficiently share matured soil and water technologies to the stakeholders; because from experience, “previous extension efforts were not responsive to many rural communities, especially in the upland or other marginalized areas.”; because of the “recognition that rural and agricultural development efforts must be based on the needs and priorities of the local people.” We realized that there is “shrinking public sector budget and resource available to support agricultural research & extension”, because of the “changing contexts and opportunities, especially the multiple source of innovations.” And finally, we believe with what James Yen has said, for us to build the gap between “technical people and the farmers” we need to “start with what they know, build on what they have” and we need to “plan with them and work with them”

A unique approach in the community-based project, we did in Bohol is- we threat that the techno-demo site we set up to serve as field laboratory that provides a hands-on ground for the farmers; where everybody including visiting farmers and students can acquire first hand knowledge about conservation farming. It also caters a training ground for additional livelihood opportunities. In terms of partnership, we threat farmers as partners and they assume the lead-role in the implementation, and we as technical people take the role of facilitator. In all the activities we carried out, there is active participation of farmers that we believe is a key to enhance sharing of technologies.

Overall, I think, the community-based watershed project in Talibon, Bohol is in the right track. There are several elements worth sharing for its initial success. One is the good networking, coordination and linkages. Good networking allows dialogue with the different local government units and various stakeholders. It also gives more rooms for discussion and feed backs. One very good example for this is during the time, we drafted the methodology of the project, there were discussions done in different levels, from individual farmers, among farmers, with the community and in the watershed. This was followed by a discussion in the local government unit and then to the national key officials.

Second essential element is the conduct of pparticipatory rural appraisal or PRA’s (Vehn Diagram, SWOT, FGD, etc.,). PRA helps our group, the Technical Team in identifying the problems, existing livelihood, weaknesses, threats and even opportunities in the site. It helps us in prioritizing livelihood activities and selecting appropriate soil and water conservation technologies that we thought worth sharing to the community. The PRA approaches we did in the community also help in breaking the barrier between the community and our group.

Another very important element is the participatory planning. In here, the community participated in a systematic manner thus ensuring the wide acceptance and dissemination of any information we shared. The process also guarantees participation of the concern groups. By participatory planning, we were able to focused on the concerned groups. When I say concerned groups, these are the people in the watershed who can be directly affected by whatever change that will happen in the watershed. Because of participation, the training modules design catered to the farmers’ level of knowledge and trainings conducted are well represented by the various participants bringing the right mix of information’s.

One very critical element in the watershed project initial success in Talibon, Bohol is the sharing of funds by the LGU in the implementation. The LGU fully realized that government fund is rapidly dwindling and sharing or counter parting is inevitable. Their action provides mutual relationship, insure wide participation of the community, and the community by-heart realized conservation farming is necessary. Overall, sharing of funds gears toward smooth implementation of the project.

From the onset of the implementation, we adopted “bottom up approach”. This means that the community decides on their own guided by the set of criteria, rather than relegated as observer, the community relies on their inherent capabilities plus inputs coming from the partner agencies. Farmers appreciate the activity. It helps in the appreciation of topography, soils, water, forest products, property regimes, land use, ecosystem, etc., it helps the community members identify, locate and classify resources and features, revealing their importance and usefulness from their point of view. It also gives them the idea how to monitor changes in resources and pattern and use this idea later to improve resource management strategies or design new system. More importantly, it bridged the gap between the technical people and the community. It sort of removed the “barrier” between our group and the community.

Another element worth mentioning is the periodic community consultation. Through this process, the vision, mission and objectives are clear in all the parties involved. Participating agencies fully realized that the local government unit is ready to assume key role in a partnership. Both parties work together for common good; the agencies providing the technical assistance, while the community provides the role of stewards- the day to day activities. The consultation also gives a clear idea of the counter parting and assurance that no-activities will be left out.

Coupled with the periodic community consultation, we adopted the participatory implementation. Doing this, provided farmers hands-on exercises on the different soil conservation technologies. It gives everybody a good opportunity to monitor the progress of the project. We also provided a short-segment training design that provides the necessary topics which match with whatever activities scheduled in the Project. In so doing, farmers develop deeper interest in all the activities, and the spirits of collaboration within them were maintained rather than when having one-time training. Additionally, all participating unit were provided with the necessary updates and when problems occurred, these were immediately addressed by the concern group or set in the table for further discussion.

The above are the essential elements that help us in attaining the initial success in the implementation of our community-based watershed project in Talibon, Bohol. Still, we dream of forming a monitoring team/watershed committee that will keep track of the progress of the different activities, ensure that information’s and progress will reach the target group more efficiently, Encourage everybody to continue with the collaboration and cooperation started. More importantly technologies can be assessed and monitored at different stages to identify those that “worked well” and “didn’t work” so the succeeding plans could easily be modified.

Looking ahead, community participation is very promising and could be a key element in the sustainability of the project; however, I see a lot of challenges ahead. It involves considerable investment in the development of human resources and local institutions (continuous training, sharing, monitoring) – slow process with delayed impact. Even if human resources and institutional conditions are in place, financial constraints still exist; the local government still needs outside source of funds. It is very difficult to have rigorous assessments (evaluations) of costs and benefits of the scheme. We still observe the reluctance of few farmers to share their knowledge and skills with others.

We see a lot of challenges ahead…

For more info: Call: Dr. Gavino Isagani P. Urriza At: (02) 923-04-59 Or email us a gurriza258@yahoo.com or visit us at: conservationist.wordpress.com

 

The use of cover crop

A cover crop can be sown between cropping operations or as a companion crop during the early stages of crop development. An example of a cover crop system used in the Philippines is sowing mungbean with maize. The mungbean are either sowed at the same time with maize as intercrop or as relay cropping or a crop after maize (crop rotation). There is however some difficulties in the use of cover crops. One is competition for soil moisture and sunlight with the cash crop.

Maintaining ground cover either as an intercrop, relay, or crop in rotation is critical in reducing the effects of raindrop impact and soil aggregate disintegration. Ground cover prevents raindrops from directly striking the soil surface and allows rainfall to slowly penetrate the soil surface. Thus, reducing the amount of rainfall that goes to runoff and make more water available for plant growth.

There are a number of options to maintain vegetation or cover during and between cropping operations. One is stubbles retention; retaining surface stubble provides ground cover and organic matter during fallow periods and successive crops. Advantages of stubble include no competition with the crop in terms of moisture and reduced herbicide use. However, there could be some difficulties in sowing seeds directly to the crop stubbles specially ion thick-stubbles. These difficulties with tillage and sowing through the stubble may be overcome by finely chopping the stubble before sowing and modifying direct drilling equipment.

Employing direct seeding (Minimum Tillage)

Direct seeding into crop residues, reduces tillage and cultivation costs, increases organic matter inputs, increases ground cover, and reduces time and labor. Direct seeding is appropriate for all soil types provided it is well managed with respect to soil moisture, stubble preparation and appropriate use of machinery. The success of direct seeding is largely determined by the amount of organic matter which can be incorporated into the surface soils. Under good management, the natural soil tilth of the surface layers should improve with the increased organic matter levels.

Addition of organic matter

Soil organic matter is important for good crop production and preventing erosion. Organic matter binds individual soil particles into large stable aggregates which resist erosion. Soils with stable aggregates are able to withstand the forces of raindrop impact and dispersion and have more and better connected pore spaces which transmit water from the soil surface reducing runoff.

Erosion may be prevented by adopting cropping systems which either prevent the loss of organic matter, or return organic inputs back into the soil. Organic matter is lost from the soil by oxidation during tillage and cultivation operations. Means to minimize organic matter loss include; direct seeding, reduced use of powered tillage implements, reduced cultivation, appropriate herbicide use and longer fallows.

Inclusion of green manure crops in the cropping system

Organic matter may be returned to the soil by incorporating green manure crops into cropping rotations. Green manure crops are turned back into the soil to be broken down into organic matter. As well as returning organic matter to the soil, green manure crops provide cover against erosion, biological ripping to improve soil structure, suppress weeds and fix atmospheric nitrogen (legumes). The amount of organic matter returned to the soil depends on the amount of vegetative material, soil biological activity and climate factors. Typically a green manure of 6 t/ha dry matter returned to the soil, about 25% would be converted to organic matter, resulting in a return of 1.5t/ha organic matter or 0.075% increase in organic matter to a 20cm thick topsoil.

For more info: Call: Dr. Gavino Isagani P. Urriza At: (02) 923-04-59 Or email us a gurriza258@yahoo.com or visit us at: conservationist.wordpress.com

 

Soil Cover as a Component of Conservation Agriculture (CA)

Conservation Agriculture (CA) as defined by FAO aims to conserve, improve and make more efficient use of natural resources through integrated management of available soil, water and biological resources combined with external inputs. It contributes to environmental conservation as well as to enhanced and sustained agricultural production. It can also be referred to as resource efficient or resource effective agriculture.

CA encompasses the sustainable agricultural production need that all humankind obviously wishes to achieve. But this term is often not distinguished from conservation tillage. FAO mentions in its CA website that “Conservation tillage is a set of practices that leave crop residues on the surface which increases water infiltration and reduces erosion”.

Farmers seldom see soil erosion a consequence of land degradation as a problem and are, therefore, very unlikely to adopt practices unless the practices address their main concern which are increased and regular production. Soil cover (either the use of live crop or dead mulch) can achieve regular and increased production. Soil cover protects the soil surface from the impact of raindrops (dispersion and compaction), reduced soil-moisture losses (through evaporation), prevents excessive high temperatures, suppresses weeds, and increases biological activity. By conserving soil moisture for use by the plant roots and providing suitable condition for the soil organisms, cover crop improves the soil quality (structure, aggregation and porosity). Agricultural production subsequently improves because soil cover both promotes and maintains soil in optimum condition for water infiltration (water availability) and plant growth (nutrients).

Soil surface cover, be it living crop or dead mulch, is the best single factor for protecting the soil surface from degradation (rain splash), and are therefore, reducing erosion. Soil cover near the ground surface dissipates the erosive energy of raindrops by breaking them up into smaller raindrops. Rain droplets have insufficient energy to splash soil particles or to cause surface soil compaction. Even if water droplets coalesce in the leaf surface and forms bigger raindrops, these also have less energy and are normally less damaging than raindrops coming from about 8 meter high.

For more info: Call: Dr. Gavino Isagani P. Urriza At: (02) 923-04-59 Or email us a gurriza258@yahoo.com or visit us at: conservationist.wordpress.com

 

 

During the year 2004 and 2005, our group headed by the late Dr. Jose D. Rondal of the Soil Conservation, Management Division of the Bureau of Soils and Water management was invited by the Department of Agrarian Reform to provide lectures to the farmers cultivating sloping marginal areas. Most of these farmers are Agrarian Reform Beneficiaries. We provided lectures on the following topics: Watershed Management, Soil Erosion and Consequences, Agro-forestry, Soil Fertility Management, Soil Conservation Practices, Cropping Pattern and Cropping System, Economics of Soil Conservation and provide hands-on in Farm Planning and Soil Analysis. We conducted lectures in Leyte, Abra, Zambales, Isabela, Bukidnon, Davao, Bicol and Aklan. There are about 25 farmers in each batch of training giving us a total of 200 trained farmers.

While, almost all farmers knew their lands were declining in fertility, very few of them, in fact, in some location, nobody associated the decline in soil fertility due to soil erosion. Most of the farmer’s participants during the training were not seriously concerned about soil erosion even though they are aware of a decline in soil fertility and productivity due to continuous farming of the same land. One time, I asked them to define soil erosion; they associate it with mass movement (land slide) and formation of gullies (more than 300 mm depth). They are aware of gullies but not soil erosion. Most of the problems they brought out when I asked them “what are the problems they consider that restrict productivity” include: pest and diseases, water or moisture problem, weeds and declining soil fertility but not erosion.

Farmer’s lack of concern about soil erosion is partly obtained by the fact that many of the farmers in sloping marginal lands do not recognize that soil erosion is occurring. In addition, actual yields are determined more by the quality of soil remaining in-situ than the amount of soil lost. Furthermore, changes in climate, particularly rainfall can mask any impact of soil loss in the subsequent yields. Farmer’s tendency not to identify soil erosion as a problem probably is the main reason why adoption of soil conservation technologies is very poor. Farmers seldom see soil erosion a consequence of land degradation as a problem and are, therefore, very unlikely to adopt practices unless the practices address their main concern which are increased and regular production.

For more info: Call: Dr. Gavino Isagani P. Urriza At: (02) 923-04-59 Or email us a gurriza258@yahoo.com or visit us at: conservationist.wordpress.com

 

During the last Conservation Agriculture Workshop held at the Bureau of Soils and Water Management, Department of Agriculture, Quezon City, Philippines, all the presentations of the invited Speakers highlighted that soil quality deterioration and soil erosion as a consequence of land degradation are becoming a problem especially in the sloping marginal areas. Speakers noted that to address these land degradation, farmers should be encouraged to adopt practices that:

  • Produce biomass by utilizing suitable crops, appropriate varieties, proper crop rotations and high planting densities
  • Maximize the percentage cover of the soil surface through the use of live cover crops or mulch (non-removal of residues from the field, no burning and no-grazing of animals)
  • Promote biological activity with the addition of organic residues
  • Promote nutrient recycling

As a soil scientist working in marginal areas, I observed that many farmers in remote areas have poor infrastructure and market access and it is often uneconomical for them to use high level external inputs. The alternative is the use of low-external-inputs; however, low-external-inputs are labor-intensive which could be a constraint on their adoption. The challenge, therefore, is to develop low-external-input technologies that boost labor and land productivity. In this context, the simplest and probably most appropriate practices that can be used are the following:

  • Use of cover crops and leave plant residues on the soil surface
  • Zero tillage or minimum tillage, in combination with soil cover
  • Proper crop rotation
  • Longer fallow period
  • Use of organic fertilizers

When the above practices are used singly or in-combination, these can give positive effects on the soil such as the following:

  • More biological activity in the soil
  • Better soil aggregation and porosity
  • Good downward water movement (infiltration) thus reducing the occurrence of runoff
  • Prevention of excessive high temperatures
  • Lesser weeds occurrence
  • Reduction in the loss of soil moisture and due to evaporation
  • Increased availability of plant nutrients
  • Less pest and diseases problems
  • Increased in the amount of organic matter

For more info: Call: Dr. Gavino Isagani P. Urriza At: (02) 923-04-59 Or email us a gurriza258@yahoo.com or visit us at: conservationist.wordpress.com