A Model of Conversion

to

Sustainable Organic Agriculture

among

Small-Scale Farmers in Southern Africa

a resource for project implementers, funders and researchers

who seek to promote sustainable agriculture in low-income countries,

especially in Southern Africa

based on the project

Conversion to Organic Agriculture by Small Scale Farmers in Zambia

Implemented by: Kasisi Agricultural Training Centre (KATC) of Zambia

Supported by: Canadian Jesuits International (CJI) of Canada

Project duration: 1 June 2012 – 31 August 2015

Funded by: Global Affairs Canada (GAC) and Canadian Jesuits International (CJI)

Kasisi Agricultural Training Centre of Zambia

Canadian Jesuits International

February 2016

2

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Page

3 A. Introduction

1. A Model of Conversion to Sustainable Organic Agriculture

2. Project Profile

4 B. Project Description

1. Context and Rationale

2. Structure

3. Scope of Impact

7 C. Project Results

1. Agricultural Income

2. Agricultural Output

3. Organic Conversion

4. Food Security

5. Gender Equality

6. Public Education and Policy Advocacy

13 D. Project Template

1. Project Design Overview

2. Production Overview

22 E. Project Steps

34 F. Farmer Case Studies

43 G. Annexes 1. Operational Challenges and Remedial Actions

2. Gender Equality Results

3. Agricultural Results in Detail

3

A. Introduction

This section introduces this information resource, then profiles the project that inspired it.

A.1 A Model of Conversion to Sustainable Organic Agriculture

This is a resource for project implementers, funders and researchers who seek to promote

sustainable agriculture in low-income countries, especially in Southern Africa. This document

shares information and perspective on a project that effectively supported small-scale farmers

in rural Zambia in converting from conventional to organic agriculture over three years (June

2012 through August 2015). Others who wish to support conversion to organic agriculture may

benefit in their work from learning about this experience.

Featured sections include a project template, project steps, and farmer case studies.

Supplemental information is provided in several subsequent sections, with photographs, data on

project results, a discussion of gender equality, and a review of challenges and responses.

A.2 Project Profile

This three-year project was undertaken to enable 100 small-scale farmers in the Chongwe

District of Zambia to convert to organic agricultural production and end reliance on expensive

and environmentally damaging external inputs such as chemical fertilizers and pesticides. This

project was implemented by Kasisi Agricultural Training Centre (KATC) of Zambia, supported

by Canadian Jesuits International (CJI) and funded primarily by Global Affairs Canada (GAC),

a ministry of the Government of Canada. During project implementation, the funder was named

the Department of Foreign Affairs, Trade and Development (DFATD), and during project

approval and start-up, the Canadian International Development Agency (CIDA).

Supervised organic production on standardized plots under Centre Pivot Irrigation (CPI) on

KATC land was fully compliant with organic rules according to IFOAM regulations and set the

standard of practice for project farmers. Over three years, significant advances were made in

conversion to organic farming methods in project farmers’ home gardens and rain fed fields.

While advancing sustainable land use among small-scale farmers, the project successfully

increased their agricultural productivity and improved their household nutrition. Food

availability and diversity improved within the households of project farmers. The consumption

of vegetables was dramatically increased in volume and diversity. The amount of harvested

food retained for domestic consumption significantly increased.

4

The economic position of project farmers was substantially improved through major increases

in agricultural production and income from sales at market. KATC’s efforts contributed to the

efficacy of farmers’ associations, which continue to promote organic agriculture among

members and on communal lands. This project also empowered women (60% of direct

beneficiaries) economically and socially, promoted gender equity, and contributed to

improvement in gender relations in the project area.

B. Project Description

This agricultural project in Zambia improved land-use sustainability and resilience to climate

change factors, increased agricultural productivity and food quality, and modeled organic

conversion for Zambia’s small-scale farmers.

This project also created substantial direct benefits for participating farmers and their respective

households. Project benefits included increased household income from larger volumes of

higher-value agricultural products sold at market; increased household food security, including

improved nutritional status due to greater volumes of higher-quality foods consumed at home; a

stronger base of agricultural and organizational knowledge and capabilities; and improved

gender relations, including greater equity and cooperation between men and women.

5

This project also raised great awareness in growing vegetables organically among neighboring

farmers.

B.1 Context and Rationale

Non-sustainable methods of agricultural production predominate in many low-income countries,

including Zambia, much as they do in high-income countries such as Canada, the USA and

European countries. National policies and programs that direct poor rural farmers into reliance

upon synthetic inputs expose them to high financial burdens and health risks from toxic

chemicals while producing less nutritious food and undermining soil fertility and land

sustainability. However, interest in sustainable food production and organic food products is

rapidly expanding on a worldwide basis.

Small-scale farmers in the immediate project environment – like the wider southern African

environment – lacked access to many of the training, technical, organizational and capital

supports that are necessary for full organic conversion. Even farmers who are keen to convert to

sustainable agriculture are typically very constrained in their ability to initiate and complete the

conversion process. This may require 3-4 years of concerted effort, including labour inputs that

are in the initial conversion stages, typically greater than required by non-sustainable methods.

Knowledge, time and commitment are required to maximize the superior process and results of

organic agriculture.

B.2 Structure

The project featured (i) year-round production of vegetables irrigated in the dry season under a

Centre Pivot Irrigation (CPI) system, and (ii) rain-fed crops in the rainy season and iii) home

gardens for approximately half the project farmers who had sufficient access to water to

cultivate home gardens. CPI production took place on KATC lands under KATC supervision:

modeling strict organic compliance for project farmers, each of whom cultivated a CPI plot of

standard size. On farmer-owned lands (rain fed fields and home gardens) KATC intensively

supported farmers’ adoption of sustainable agriculture techniques and discontinuation of non-

sustainable techniques. A key element of this transition was replacing synthetic (chemical)

fertilizers with compost, including manure from small-animal rearing.

To ensure success, the project provided participating farmers with access to infrastructural

supports, specialized training concentrated in Year 1, organic inputs, frequent extension visits to

all production sites throughout the project, and the facilitation of farmer organization and access

to markets (notably in the nearby capital city of Lusaka). One of the project’s operational goals

was the self-regulating organization of participating farmers. Each farmer joined one of two

local farmer cooperatives (also called farmer associations) initiated and supported by the project.

These organizations provided effective platforms for farmer coordination and mutual support

regarding farming technique, production workload and product marketing.

6

B.3 Scope of Impact

KATC addressed issues of non-sustainable practices and unequal access to productive resources

at the local level. The project created farmer access to a carefully shaped combination of

specialized training, infrastructural supports, including irrigation, organic inputs, frequent

extension visits, farmer organization, and access to markets for the sale of food products. Thus

the project made it possible and likely for motivated small-scale farmers to convert from non-

sustainable to sustainable forms of agricultural production, while increasing their incomes, food

security, health status and socio-economic capacity, including greater gender equality.

This project also had impact at the national level in Zambia: a country heavily invested in non-

sustainable approaches to agricultural production, including subsidies and other supports for the

application of synthetic fertilizers, pesticides and herbicides. As an established actor for

sustainable agriculture in the country, KATC was able to leverage this project to initiate multi-

stakeholder discussions about securing national government support for sustainable agriculture.

This is a remarkable impact for a production project of this modest size. It was achieved by

profiling the project’s operational success through an ambitious mix of technical presentations,

policy-oriented contributions, community farm demonstrations, public education, including

coverage of sustainable agriculture programmes on local radio, and 11 instances of national

media coverage, including television and radio broadcasts on ZNBC and Muvi TV.

7

Notwithstanding this success, a decisive shift in Zambia’s national agricultural policy – in

favour of sustainable agriculture, and away from the non-sustainable methods the country has

invested in for decades – will require further public education, technical information and policy

contributions, from many small scale farmers, local, national and international actors working in

concert.

Appropriately, this project concludes with the dissemination of KATC’s Model of Conversion to

Sustainable Organic Agriculture, which systematizes the project’s approach for the benefit of

prospective project adopters, policy researchers, decision-makers, sustainability advocates, and

agriculture students. KATC will re-purpose the model for use by small-scale farmers.

C. Project Results This section provides a summary of project results in six key areas: (1) agricultural income,

(2) agricultural output, (3) organic conversion, (4) food security, (5) gender equity, and

(6) public education and policy advocacy. Detailed results in the first five areas are annexed.

C.1 Agricultural Income

This project posted spectacular gains in the agricultural income of its direct beneficiaries,

exceeding the modest target of 20%.

All project farmers cultivated year-round on standardized plots under KATC’s Centre Pivot

Irrigation (CPI). All project farmers also cultivated their own rain fed fields during the rainy

season (November through May). Those with sufficient home access to water (about half of all

project farmers) also cultivated gardens around their homes, mainly during the dry (‘off-crop’)

season (June through October). Thus farmers with gardens seasonally alternated their efforts; in

all project periods they produced and earned substantially more than farmers without gardens.

By project end, the average income from all crops sold by farmers without home gardens had

increased from baseline by 1036% for women and 794% for men (using Zambian currency). By

project end, the average income from all crops sold by farmers with home gardens had increased

from baseline by 908% for women and 905% for men (using Zambian currency).

C.2 Agricultural Output

The harvested weight of all crops produced increased about 4-5 times from baseline to project

end. The largest gains were posted in Year 2.

Overall, the project’s gains in cash value substantially exceeded its considerable gains in

production by harvested weight. Over the life of the project, cash value increased 8-9 times

overall, compared with production increases of 4-5 times overall. Farmers without gardens

achieved the lower rates, while farmers with gardens achieved the higher rates cited above.

8

The project’s economic performance reflects success in agribusiness. Participating farmers

progressively shifted their crop mix and relative focus on different production types (CPI,

garden and rain fed) to achieve greater returns at market. Moderate price increases in some crops

represent a supportive factor.

C.3 Organic Conversion

The project developed effective means of tracking participants’ conversion to organic

agriculture, and the results are summarized below for each of home gardens and rain fed fields.

Conversion in Home Gardens The mode of farming in home gardens – cultivated by about half

of all project farmers – progressed steadily toward full organic production during the project.

Only 15% of home gardens were purely organic at baseline, but fully 76% were purely organic

by project end. Then only 3 gardens (6%) were purely conventional, down from 13 (27%) at

baseline. Women gardeners moved steadily toward organic production, while progress by their

male counterparts was more sudden, and concentrated in Year 3. Male progress was also

somewhat less complete, with 70% pure organic at project end vs. 81% among women.

Supporting the progress in organic conversion were training in and use of sustainable

agricultural techniques among project farmers. These techniques included use of green manure,

use of animal manure, composting, biological pest control/management, utilization of botanical

pesticides, crop rotation, using crop cover, intercropping, no burning of crop residues, mulching,

and crop diversification.

Male gardeners progressed from 26% utilization of sustainable agriculture techniques at baseline

to 82% at project end. Similarly, female gardeners progressed from 21% utilization of

sustainable techniques at baseline to 76% at project end. The gender-aggregated progression is

from 23% to 79% utilization of sustainable techniques over the project’s life. Thus the project’s

gardeners (about half of all project farmers) were predominantly successful in migrating to

organic production.

Garden soils grew progressively richer and more capable of producing food as conversion to

organic cultivation progressed. At baseline, only 24% of gardeners deemed their soils ‘good’.

However, this figure increased to 60% by project end. At baseline 31% of gardeners deemed

their soils ‘poor’, and figure decreased to 10% by project end.

Conversion in Rain fed Fields The mode of farming in rain fed fields – cultivated by all

project farmers during the rainy season – progressed with only moderate success toward full

organic production during the project. Only 4% of all rain fed fields were purely organic at

baseline, while 45% were purely organic by project end. A somewhat greater proportion of men

(53%) attained pure organic production than women (40%). By project end, only 11 rain fed

fields (12%) were purely conventional, down from 42 fields (42%) at baseline. The gender

proportions of pure conventional farming were about the same at project end (11% men, 13%

9

women), while a greater proportion of women (47%) than men (36%) using mixed organic and

conventional practices.

Male farmers progressed from 19% utilization of sustainable agriculture techniques in rain fed

fields at baseline to 69% at project end. Similarly, female farmers progressed from 19%

utilization in rain fed fields at baseline to 59% at project end. The gender-aggregated

progression is from 19% to 63%. Thus the project was substantially – but not fully – successful

in shifting rain fed production to sustainable techniques.

As project farmers increased their use of sustainable practices, and reduced the use of depleting

and toxic synthetic inputs, the self-assessed quality of their rain fed soils improved. At baseline,

only 19% of all farmers deemed their soils ‘good’; this figure increased modestly to 34% by

project end. At baseline 34% of all farmers deemed their soils ‘poor’. This figure decreased to

13% by project end.

Judith Mwale (project farmer) in her organic maize and groundnut rain fed field

Conversion in Home Gardens vs. Rain fed Fields A comparison of conversion results for

home gardens and rain fed fields shows that project farmers advanced substantially further in

converting their home gardens to organic production. This is because forces promoting

conventional non-sustainable agriculture are more focused on rain fed agriculture than on home

gardens. The national government subsidizes and otherwise supports the use of non-sustainable

synthetic inputs, while providing no support for sustainable techniques in rain fed

agriculture. However, in home gardens, where there is no subsidy on inputs, the project found a

freer and more open environment in which to promote sustainable agriculture and achieve fuller

results.

10

Despite incomplete results in organic conversion, the project nevertheless achieved dramatic

gains in the agricultural production and income of participating farmers (per C.1 and C.2

above) and substantially improved the food security of their households (per C.4 below).

C.4 Food Security

The quality, quantity, variety and nutritional value of household food were assessed by all

project farmers on an annual basis. In aggregate these household food assessments comprise the

project’s primary indicator of food security.

By project end, fully 90% of project farmers (vs. 56% at baseline) indicated excellent or good

for household food values in aggregate: a 61% increase in their positive assessments of the

quality, quantity, variety and nutritional value of food in their households. Similarly, by project

end only 9% of project farmers (vs. 44% at baseline) indicated fair or poor for household food

values: an 80% drop in their negative assessments of the quality, quantity, variety and nutritional

value of food in their households. Results for male and female farmers are closely comparable.

On an overall basis, the project substantially improved food security in project households.

The project did not directly measure the nutrition of participants or their dependents, but

performance on this target is reliably indicated by the cash value of food produced and retained

for home consumption. By project end, the average cash value of food retained by farmers

without gardens had increased from baseline by 2.58 times (158%) overall (176% for women

and 141% for men). By project end, the average cash value of crops retained by farmers with

gardens had increased by 377% (387% for women and 367% for men).

These results indicate that the project achieved large sustainable increases in family food

consumption. This conclusion is corroborated by large increases in agricultural cash income.

Not only did project household retain and consume more of the food they produced, they also

had more funds to buy food produced elsewhere. Project produce for sale is shown below:

Organic project produce was sold in local supermarkets.

11

C.5 Gender Equality

Gender equality was a priority for all the institutional partners to this project, who know the

critical importance of women’s empowerment to socio-economic development in Sub-Saharan

Africa. The proportion of female farmers remained steady around 60%, even through attrition in

Year 1 from 100 to 91 farmers (due to dropouts and expulsions). Project design and

management ensured that women had equal access to project services, resources and benefits.

Large and increasing majorities of male and female participants confirmed women’s equality of

access, participation and benefit through annual gender perception surveys. Women’s

participation in associations was proactively enabled, and near parity in leadership and decision-

making was achieved. Women’s confidence increased and male-female relations became more

cooperative. KATC found that female participants tended to be more dedicated as farmers, and

in Year 3, women’s average agricultural output exceeded men’s by about 20%.

Patricia Mulenga (left) and Collins Kabaso (right) loading vegetables onto a van

C.6 Public Education and Policy Advocacy

12

Reaching the wider community about organic farming was an integral part of this project. When

it began, there was limited belief among people in surrounding villages that vegetables could be

grown without synthetic fertilizers and sprays. However, now many local non-project farmers

buy farmyard manure from commercial farmers for application to their soil. Through

information and demonstration effect from the project, neighbouring farmers have learned that

they can grow better vegetables using organic methods instead of poisonous and synthetic

chemicals.

Similarly, follow-up projects should make – or be linked to – efforts to provide information and

recommendations to national government and international stakeholders: with a view to making

agricultural policies and systems more responsive to humanity’s escalating need to restore food

and land sustainability and adapt to and mitigate against climate change.

As an established actor for sustainable agriculture in the country, KATC was able to leverage

this project to initiate multi-stakeholder discussions about winning national government support

for sustainable agriculture. The project’s operational success was profiled through an ambitious

mix of technical presentations, policy-oriented contributions, community farm demonstrations,

public education, including coverage of sustainable agriculture programmes on local radio, and

11 instances of national media coverage, including television and radio broadcasts on ZNBC and

Muvi TV. Although KATC did not develop quantitative measures of impact in public education

and policy advocacy, it is certain that the project made significant contributions in these areas.

D. Project Template This section provides a structural overview of the project Conversion to Organic

Agriculture by Small Scale Farmers in Zambia. The tables on the following pages are

intended to enable a clear understanding of (a) how the project was conceived and designed

(first one-page table), and (b) how it implemented agricultural production (second set of

tables on four pages).

The first table is comprehensive in scope, whereas the second set of tables provides more

detail about production only.

No group seeking to replicate or adapt this project will have the same farming population,

agricultural conditions, or mix of capabilities and resources as KATC’s project. Therefore

we know that no group could successfully replicate this project simply by repeating

KATC’s project design and action steps.

Rather, other organizations interested in adapting some of KATC’s approaches may benefit

from understanding the project’s key principles, how they were implemented, and how

they combined for successful results. It may not be realistic to offer a formula for

converting small-scale farmers in southern Africa to organic production. However, it is

possible to present a template derived from this relatively successful project.

It’s important when reviewing this material to pay attention to how different project

elements complement one another. The success of KATC’s project owes much to its

strategy of providing support to farmers in different categories of activities, and carefully

linking them. This strategy enabled synergy among farming modalities (CPI, home

gardens, rain fed fields), success in organic conversion, and strong results in production,

marketing and food and nutrition security while improving the resource base.

For example, the substantial technical training of farmers at KATC was complemented

with a high intensity of extension services in the field, and this combination effectively

supported steady progress toward full conversion. Similarly, project-affiliated farmer

associations provided a suitable platform to build cooperation and continued learning

among farmers, but also served as a locus for problem solving, product marketing and

promoting gender equality.

14

Finally, project farmers applied organic principles under standardized conditions on

supervised adjoining plots: on land owned and irrigated by KATC, the project

implementer. At the same time, project farmers applied organic principles on their own

lands: rain fed crop fields by 100% of farmers, and home vegetable gardens by 50% of

farmers. Combining a standardized and supervised organic incubator on the implementing

organization’s land with independent application on privately owned land (supported by

extension services and facilitation of farmer associations and product marketing) proved to

be a winning strategy.

Photo: Mr. Mike Fundi (project farmer)

explaining the use of tea manure

15

PROJECT DESIGN OVERVIEW Table 1 of 2

MANDATE CRITICAL ISSUES SUCCESS INDICATORS

MANAGEMENT Design, launch and

manage a feasible

project to convert small

farmers to organic

production.

Lead group must organize access to material inputs and essential

services, especially those in shortage. Knowledge, skills and

associative capacity of farmers must be developed.

All necessary inputs,

services, and market linkages

are accessible to farmers.

They convert and succeed at

market.

Planning and

Resourcing

Data Collection,

Management, and

Interpretation

Track inputs,

conversion, outputs,

income, household

food security and

consumption.

Data collection, synthesis and interpretation are critical to

establishing agricultural, economic and household food results.

Interpretation of interim data can improve insight into trends and

problems. Baseline data is valuable but often difficult to obtain at

startup. Data proficiency is required over entire project cycle.

Data is accurate, complete

and consistent across

periods. Presentation is

coherent, credible, and

compelling.

HUMAN

RESOURCES

Inclusion,

empowerment, and

capacity building.

Interest in project may be low at outset when benefits are less

understood. Consider establishing farmer commitments to

conversion at start.

Commitment and

understanding grow as

conversion progresses and

benefits begin to materialize.

Farmer Selection Assemble motivated

farmers who are likely

to remain committed

and succeed with

support.

Gender equality in selection promotes social development.

De-selection of defaulting participants may be required over time.

Triggers include stealing from other farmers’ plots, side-selling,

and lack of cooperation and commitment at co-op and project level.

Farmer group is mainly

stable and progressively

successful.

Farmer Training Re-orient to organic

production. Impart key

knowledge and skills.

Training expertise in several related topics and a conducive

learning context are required. Training by KATC may be an option.

Farmers acquire the formal

knowledge and skills needed

to convert.

Farmer Micro-

Finance

Enable acquisition of

basic tools.

Capital required should be affordable. A sound and sustainable

mechanism of financing is crucial, as is beneficiaries’ clear

understanding of the financing mechanism.

Early acquisition of basic

tools that farmers could not

otherwise afford.

Extension Support In-field monitoring and

technical support on an

ongoing basis.

Extension workers must be well versed in organic principles and

practices. Farmers will need intensive extension support.

Farmer compliance with

organic methods is rapidly

achieved.

Farmer Associations

Build shared capacity

and mutual assistance.

Stabilize cooperation.

Sound constitution and bylaws to be established at outset.

Executive leaders chosen freely and fairly regardless of gender. All

members enjoy freedom of speech at meetings. All decisions made

in consultation with all members regardless of gender or age.

Members cooperate to improve the association and realize its goals.

Cooperatives enable mutual

cooperation, problem solving

and market success.

16

PROJECT DESIGN OVERVIEW Table 2 of 2

MANDATE CRITICAL ISSUES SUCCESS INDICATORS

Gender Equality Equalize women’s

access to resources.

Make relations between

women and men more

equitable and

cooperative.

Women may initially be reluctant to speak and assume lead

roles in mixed groups. However, this can change with their

increased involvement, agricultural success and experience

in associations. Encouragement, exposure and positive

feedback are critical.

Involvement, benefits and

leadership participation are

roughly equal between male and

female farmers

MATERIAL

SUPPLY

Plan and provide

services that support

farmers in accessing the

various inputs and tools

that are essential for

conversion to viable

organic production.

Constraints include money, access to resources, inputs,

management.

All inputs adequately supplied.

Water Supply Water is key limiter of output volume! Dry season

availability.

Output unconstrained by water.

Manure Supply Manure is a key limiter of conversion! Produce, through

integration of livestock, AND procure.

Rapid weaning from synthetics.

Seed Supply Access to organic seed. Consider nurseries for self-

sufficiency.

Full access to planned crops.

Animal Supply

Animal Housing

Animal housing and health. Re-orient farmers to manure.

Animal housing is necessary to enable manure collection

(e.g. avoiding animals spending the night in trees).

Safe healthy animals.

Reduced mortality. Manure

collection and application.

Tool Supply Tools: appropriate, simple, light, affordable, farmer owned.

Micro-financed.

Farmers adequately equipped.

Soil Augmentation Address soil infertility & build soil quality. Some expertise

needed.

High volume, quality and

resilience of crops.

Natural Pesticides

Knowledge and availability of natural alternatives required.

Speed & efficacy during infestation reduces synthetic

response.

Rapid weaning from synthetics.

Infestations countered naturally.

PRODUCT

MARKETING

Market access required

to sell products and

achieve income goals.

Emerging markets for organic food products that are

accessible to the project area are essential for marketing

success.

Most organic food products are

sold fresh at premium prices.

Buyer Identification Small-scale farmers may

need enabling supports

(including associations)

to market well.

Identification of organized buyers (chain stores, hotels,

restaurants) may be needed in emerging markets. KATC was

able to facilitate this.

Discerning organic buyers are

satisfied and buy regularly,

spread the word and demand

increases.

Market Linkages

Transport to Market Shared motor transport most viable solution for non-local

sales.

Delivery to market is reliable,

fast and cheap.

17

PRODUCTION OVERVIEW Table 1 of 5 Supervised Vegetable Production at CPI Center Pivot Irrigation on Adjoining Plots

Targeted

Methods

Farmer

Labour

Extension

Support

Inputs Outputs Success

Criteria Vegetables

produced on 12.5 ha

under Centre Pivot

Irrigation (CPI).

Each farmer

allocated one

40x30m plot; some

added on/ enlarged

due to farmer

attrition.

Farmers provided

with tools, untreated

seeds, manure,

security, extension

services, storage

facility, transport,

and CPI irrigation.

Farmers organised

into four groups,

each producing a

different mix of

vegetables: to allow

continuous supply

of all kinds of

vegetables to

market.

On average 3 people

could work on a plot

from 8 am to 5 pm,

Monday through

Friday.

Work included

weeding, harvesting,

planting, ferrying

and applying

compost, tilling

land, making beds.

Farmer tools

included hoe, hula

hoe, spade, shovel,

compost fork, wheel

barrow, sprayer, 210

litre drum, seedlings

tray, and bicycle.

Other

contributors:

Extension officers

(2)

Irrigators (2)

Supervisor

Project Coordinator

Driver

Security personnel

CPI plot inspection

Pests scouting

Daily supervision

Market search

Market linkages

Production

planning

Input acquisition

Record keeping

Financial review

Harvest records

Harvest data

analysis

Post-harvest

meetings

Meetings on

Participatory

Guarantee System

(PGS)

Ensuring organic

Compliance

Water

The Centre Pivot Irrigation (CPI) facility could irrigate the

entire 12.5ha area in 12hrs, twice weekly, releasing 27mm

of water. (Centre Pivot in 5th gear.)

Seeds Every year at CPI the following quantities of seed

were distributed among project farmers (96 in Year 2 and

91 in Year 3):

rape 4kg, amaranthus 300g, cabbage 820g, egg plant 1.2kg,

solanum 1kg, mustard 3.6kg, white rob 600g, tomato 640g,

onion 3.9kg, pumpkin seeds 22kg, baby marrow 600g,

sweet corn 400g, spring onion 2.6kg, fresh maize 25kg,

green beans 72kgs, beet root 1.76kg, squash 1.65kg,

cauliflower 610g, origarnum 250g , mint 250g, okra 3.4kg,

sweet potato vines 625kg, lumanda 600g, kale 600g,

hot chili 300g, cloeme 500g, garlic 50kg, ginger 100kg,

rosemary 250g, broccoli 9.6kg, Irish potatoes 360kg,

basil 250g, cucumber 2.3kg, peas 14kg, lettuce 600g,

spinach 1kg, green pepper 1kg, carrot 6.7kg,

Chinese cabbage 6.3kg, leek 210g, thyme 250g.

Manure

The average use of manure over 2 years on a 40x30m plot

was 18tons of chicken manure and 2.8 tons of cattle manure

per project farmer. Cattle manure was used as basal

fertilizer while chicken manure was used as top dressing

fertilizer due to its high urea content.

Pesticides

Natural pesticides were made from chilli and snake beans

(and some other wild plants less commonly used). Herbs

including basil, rosemary and oregano were planted as

hedge rows to control pests. Common pests included

hornworms, aphids, rats, birds, nematodes. Most of these

pests were controlled by spraying botanical pesticides and

crop inter-planting (with onion or garlic).

Vegetables produced

at Centre Pivot

Irrigation in full

organic compliance:

tomato

rape

onion

pumpkin leaves

sweet potato leaves

Chinese cabbage

carrot

spring onion

peas

eggplant

lettuce

spinach

beet root

cucumber

baby marrow

Irish potatoes

green pepper

sweet corn

lumanda

amarunthus

mustard

green beans

broccoli

cauliflower

garlic

kale

cloeme

Availability and

quality of inputs,

including:

Skilled labour

Extension services

Supervision

Seed – untreated

Manure

Market Access

Pest Management

Water

Security

Production tools

Cleaning and

grading shed

Storage containers

Transport

18

PRODUCTION OVERVIEW Table 2 of 5 Farmer Rain fed Fields

Targeted Methods Farmer Labour Extension Inputs Outputs Success Criteria

Rain fed farming is

seasonal, taking advantage

of the natural water supply

afforded by the rainy

season. In the project area,

the rainy season commences

October - December and

ends the following March -

April.

Project farmers cultivated

their own rain fed fields.

These had an average area

of 4ha per household.

Most family members (average of

11 per household) contributed to

rain fed cultivation, typically

working from 5 am to 3 pm

through the rainy season.

Work included land preparation,

planting, weeding, application of

manure, harvesting, shelling,

grading, bagging, and

transportation to market.

Commonly used tools include

plough, hoes, hula hoes, ripper,

and ox cart.

Other contributors:

2 extension officers

Project coordinator

Production supervisor

Driver

Security

Farm visits

checked on:

organic compliance

project compliance

record keeping

Extension workers

provided:

advice on pests

advice on fertility

and organic matter

record keeping

Extension workers

monitored:

crop production

and

diversification

project impacts

on farmers

Extension workers

enabled:

meetings for

Participatory

Guarantee

System (PGS)

Seeds

Manure

The average use of manure per

farmer over 3 years was:

cattle manure 5 metric tons

compost 11 metric tons

For green manure, each farmer was

provided with 20kg of velvet bean

seeds and 4kg of black sunhemp

seeds.

Farmers produced

the following crops

in their rain fed

fields:

maize

shelled groundnuts

sweet potatoes

soya beans

cassava

pigeon peas

sorghum

cow peas

pop corn

millet

Adequate rainfall

Timely farm operations

and management

Labour appropriately

applied to land

preparation, planting,

weeding, harvesting,

fertilizer application

Availability of seed for

crops and seed for green

manure

Availability of manure

Access to market

Favorable market prices

Pest control. Birds were

common pests in rain fed

fields. Insects were not

common pests with the

notable exception of

armyworms in the 2013-

2014 rainy season.

19

PRODUCTION OVERVIEW Table 3 of 5 Farmer Home Gardens

Targeted Methods Farmer Labour Extension Inputs Outputs Success Criteria

Some 50 (approximately

half of all) project

farmers cultivated

gardens at home. The

average garden area was

60x70m = 0.42 ha.

The cultivation of home

gardens depended

primarily on access to

water, especially during

the dry season. Project

farmers with home

gardens realized

significantly greater

gains in production and

income than project

farmers without home

gardens.

On average, 3 people (same as at

CPI for twice the CPI land size)

could work on a home garden from

8am to 3pm on weekdays (5 days

weekly).

Work included making beds,

tilling, applying manure, planting,

watering, weeding, ferrying

manure, harvesting,

Common tools include hoes,

sprayer, watering buckets, water

engine/pump and pipes, plough

and animals

Other contributors:

2 extension officers

Project coordinator

Driver

Extension

workers

conducted:

Garden inspection

Scouting for pests

Market search

Market linkages

Harvest data

analysis

PGS meetings

Financial review

Revolving fund

follow up

Seeds

Each home gardener purchased and

planted seeds in his or her home garden,

per season, as follows:

rape 1.2kg, Chinese cabbage 1kg,

pumpkin leaves 12kg, green beans 2kg,

sweet potato vines 20kg, onion 0.5kg,

tomato 0.25kg, carrots 0.3kg,

cabbage 0.25kg, solanum 0.25kg,

mustard 0.3kg.

Manure

Project farmers could apply manure from

small animals housed in structures on

their respective farms. On average,

project farmers with home gardens

collected 11 tons of manure annually

from their small animals. Manure could

also be purchased from nearby farms for

ZMK4.00 per 50kg bag.

Water

Different methods of watering home

gardens were linked to different levels of

watering. Farmers using buckets could

apply 13 litres of water per square meter

per day, while farmers using water pumps

could apply 20 litres of water per square

meter per day.

Natural pesticides were used, as in

Table 1.

Home gardens

produced:

rape

Chinese cabbage

pumpkin leaves

mustard

green beans

sweet potato

leaves

onion

tomato

carrots

cabbage

solanum

Access to affordable

land

Availability of water

Availability of manure

Access to market

Access to seed

Household labour

20

Targeted Methods Farmer

Labour

Extension Inputs Outputs Success Criteria

PRODUCTION OVERVIEW Table 4 of 5 Common Small Animals A small animal village on KATC land, using

intensive rearing and feeding practices, had the

collection of manure for CPI production as its

primary purpose. The village approach enabled

improved accessibility and security, and

improved conditions for manure collection.

Initially project farmers acted on the immediate

food value of small animals, and did not

appreciate the importance of manure collection

to building soil fertility. The small animal

village provided an alternative to project

reliance on individual farmers’ small animal

practices.

The small animal village served as a training

model for project farmers as well as a manure

source.

At project close, the small animal village had 68

chickens, 41 ducks, 26 guinea fowls and 63

rabbits.

Workers at the

small animal

village included:

Small animal

caretaker

Livestock

supervisor

Structure

rehabilitator

Security guard

Project

Coordinator

Extension workers:

Encouraged the rearing of

small animals by project

farmers and their

integration into organic

farming.

Fed animals. Cleaned and

changed water in duck

ponds. Conducted animal

health assessments.

Repaired and maintained

structures. Updated

inventories.

Maintained security at the

small animal village.

Primary threats to small

animals were theft, attack

by predators, and disease.

Feed

The main types of feed

for small animals were

maize bran and fish

dust.

Disease Control

Botanical disease

control measures were

used at the small animal

village (e.g. adding aloe

vera and chili to

animals’ drinking

water). Bird mortality

was high during the

rainy season due to

avian new castle

disease.

An average of 3.2

metric tons of

manure was

collected from the

small animal village

every 6 months.

Farmer awareness,

knowledge and practice

regarding the role of

small animals in

producing manure for

organic fertilizer.

Intensive rearing and

feeding of small animals.

Their species, number

and size impacts the

scale manure collected.

Sufficient and

appropriate feed for

small animals.

Improved housing

structures and area

fencing for the safety,

security and enclosure of

small animals.

Environmentally

sustainable disease

control measures,

consistently applied.

Most project farmers (about 90%) raised their

own small animals near their own homes.

Farmers typically reared goats, chickens, ducks,

guinea fowls, pigs, cattle and rabbits.

Farmer production of manure from small

animals improved over the course of the project

as awareness and knowledge increased.

Small-animal

rearing by

individual farmers

was semi-

intensive.

Maximum time

spent on

providing feed

and drinking

water was 0.75

hours per day.

Extension workers:

Animal stock follow-ups

during regular farm visits.

Disease control measures

as at right.

Feed

Most animals raised by

individual farmers were

free-range, and could

only spend time in

structures at night.

Disease Control

As above.

Eggs: consumed

Meat: consumed

Chickens: sold

Farmers collected

from their small

own animals.

Additional manure

was out-sourced.

21

Targeted Methods Farmer Labour Extension Inputs Outputs Success Criteria

PRODUCTION OVERVIEW Table 5 of 5 Cooperative Fields

Both project-affiliated farmer

cooperatives (associations) cultivated

sweet potatoes and soya beans on an

average of 4 ha. These plots served as

demonstration sites for the project and

yielded income for the associations.

Every project farmer was a member of

one of the two cooperatives.

Cooperative members

worked on cooperative

land from 8 am to noon

for 2 days weekly during

the rainy season (4

months).

Work included ploughing,

planting, weeding,

manure application,

harvesting, bagging and

selling.

Extension workers:

Farm visits

PGS meetings

Cooperative meetings

Marketing meetings

20kg of soya beans seeds

were planted in association

fields, and 400kg of sweet

potato vines were used. This

profile allowed crop

rotation.

Fertilizer was animal

manure: about 5 metric tons

per association field.

Over the entire project

duration, the two farmer

associations altogether

produced:

sweet potatoes 11,850 kg

(237 x 50kg bags)

soya beans 750 kg

(15 x 50kg bags)

Effective leadership

Group ownership

Member

commitment

Consistent

participation

22

E. Project Steps This section outlines project actions in a chronological sequence. This is not intended as a

recipe for exactly replicating the original project, but simply to present a more detailed

picture of it, and in particular how it was advanced on a practical level.

Groups and organizations interested in launching a similar project will likely need to do

some things differently, depending on their context and existing situation on the ground.

Nevertheless, some detailed information about this project’s implementation may contribute

to well-informed choices by the proponents of similar initiatives.

23

E.1 List of Project Steps

Project steps are listed on this and the following page, and then described in some detail

thereafter.

No. Step Year/Period

1 Informing government and other organized stakeholders about the project baseline

2 Introducing the project on community radio baseline

3 Introducing the project to traditional local leaders baseline

4 Introducing the project in local communities baseline

5

Project awareness meetings and registration of prospective participants

among small scale farmers baseline

6 Development of a Gender Equality Strategy Year 1, 2

7 Meetings with prospective participants (309 men and women) Year 1

8

Selection of project farmers in collaboration with key community

informants Year 1

9 Meetings and agreements with 100 selected farmers Year 1

10 Conducting a baseline survey to establish measurement parameters Year 1

11 Formation and registration of two organic farmer associations Years 1-2

12 Electing executive committees for farmer associations Year 1-3

13 Land preparation, demarcation, numbering and allocation of plots at CPI Year 1

14 Identifying rain fed and garden plots for conversion to organic production Year 1

15

Addressing manure shortages with complementary soil improvement

measures, including distributing green manure seeds to participants,

livestock integration Year 1-2

16 Distributing green manure seeds to project participants Year 1

17 Expanding and rehabilitating KATC’s small animal village Year 1

18 Procurement of capital assets and farmer production tools Year 1

19

Technical training of project farmers Years 1-3

20 Conducting the market survey Year 1

21 Liming of plots under CPI Year 1

24

22

Awareness creation among and sharing of information with relevant

authorities and policy makers Year 1

23

Planting green manure on plots under CPI Year 1

24 Development of a production plan Year 1

25 Procuring chicken and cattle manure to fertilize soil on CPI lands Year 1-2

26

Procurement of untreated seeds Year 1

27 Raising of vegetable nurseries at CPI Year 1-2

28 Establishing market linkages Year 1

29 Producing and selling organic vegetables from plots under CPI Year 1-3

30 Training farmers in small animal rearing Year 1

31 Establishing demonstration plots on farmer association lands Year 1

32 Erection of a security fence Year 2

33

Procurement of storage containers to separate organic and conventional

tools Year 2

34 Establishment of the Participatory Guarantee System (PGS) Year 2

35

Collecting soil samples in project farmers’ rain fed fields and home

gardens Year 2

36

Providing farmers with opportunities to visit farms and (organic) food

stores Years 2-3

37 Identification, involvement and capacity building of lead farmers Year 2-3

38 Establishing Internal Control System (ICS) Year 2

39 Field Day Event with National Media Coverage Year 2

40 Assignment of two donkeys and a donkey cart to each project farmer Year 2

41 Follow-up soil sampling Year 3

42 Follow-up survey to measure project success against baseline Year 3

25

E.2 Descriptions of Project Steps

Brief descriptions of each project step are provided below.

Step 1 Informing government and other stakeholders about the project

KATC’s initial briefings about the new project reached 2 government agencies and 7 agricultural

organizations and NGOs. Presentations were well received by decision makers in Zambia’s

Ministry of Agriculture and Livestock (MAL). KATC also briefed relevant personnel in

stakeholder Chongwe Organic Producers and Processors Association (CHOPPA), Organic

Producers and Processors Association of Zambia (OPPAZ), the Swedish Cooperative Centre

(SCC), Zambia Climate Change Network (ZCCN), University of Zambia (UNZA) and Radio

Yatsani. KATC had also briefed identified market stakeholders – potential outlets for organic food

products – about the project, and the potential for collaboration. This early step contributed to later

marketing success.

Step 2 Introducing the project on regional/community radio

KATC presented the new project on its weekly radio program on sustainable organic agriculture

on Radio Yatsani, a regional/community broadcaster. This episode featured presentations and

discussion by the project coordinator and two extension staff. Topics included project

implementation plans and milestones, community response, and the anticipated benefits of the

project to the people of Chongwe.

Step 3 Introducing the project to traditional local leaders

To introduce the project to the headmen and committees of local villages, KATC project staff held

two meetings in 19 nearby villages. All the headmen welcomed the project and agreed to help

maintain organic compliance among participants from their respective villages: for example, no

burning of crop residues on participants’ farms or in their communities.

Step 4 Introducing the project in local villages

The project was introduced in 19 villages of Chongwe District, one of Lusaka province’s five

Districts. Chongwe District is about 10,500 square kilometers in area. The basic enumeration area

was Nkomeshya farming block under chieftains Nkomeshya. Meetings to introduce the project

were held in the following villages: Mwambula, Chinkanchila, Kalimansenga, Kasenga A,

Chipokolo, Kabulongo, Mwalubemba, Chasha, Ndeke, Powanga, Chinchili, Mutamino,

Chipanama, Kacha, Chitete, Muyanga, Mwashinango, Kanchubwi and Chipyela. (The project was

later implemented in the communities of Chipokolo, Chihili, Mwalubemba, Powanga, Kacha,

Mwambula, Kasenga, Kalimansenga, Chitete, Kabulongo, Mutamino, Chasha, Ndeke,

Chikanchila, Chipanama, and Chipyela.)

Step 5 Outreach and registration of prospective participating farmers

KATC held various community meetings to introduce the project to the communities. At these

outreach meetings, small-scale farmers (SSFs) who wished to participate registered as candidates

at the end of each meeting. A total number of 309 small-scale farmers registered from 19 villages

in Chongwe District.

26

Step 6 Development of Gender Equality Strategy

The project’s Gender Equality Strategy aimed to respond constructively to traditional gender roles

in the Chongwe farming community through the economic empowerment of women, lessening

drudgery in female-dominated agricultural tasks, making farming inputs in particular and benefits

in general more easily accessible to women, promoting women’s participation, leadership and

decision-making in the project and the farmer associations, and taking a household approach

(engaging the spouses of project farmers) to agricultural extension services. KATC closely

monitored gender progress on the project. All project data was collected on a gender-disaggregated

basis, allowing all key parameters to be tracked and assessed by gender on a periodic basis over

the project’s life. Moreover, gender-focused indicators were designed into the monitoring system

in order to enrich the base of information about changes in gender relations on the project. The

interpretation of data from participant surveys and project results was further enhanced by a report

by a Gender Specialist hired for a short-term consultancy in Year 2. The consultant’s report

highlighted additional strategies to promote women’s participation and empowerment that were

implemented in Year 3 of the project.

The pattern of effective responses by the project to challenges facing participants extends to the

gender domain. This success is validated by gender-disaggregated results achieved on project

objectives, including organic conversion, production volumes, agricultural income, household food

security, leadership participation, and promoting sustainable organic agriculture. In summary,

project data demonstrate that women performed as well or better than men on most project

parameters. Since women farmers comprised 60% of direct beneficiaries, as individuals (vs. farm

households) they, as a group, also received somewhat more benefit from the project than male

farmers.

The project powerfully supported women farmers in contributing to household income and food

security. This in turn helped to re-position women from being perceived (including by themselves)

as less capable than and dependent on men. Project efforts to ensure enhanced positive perception

of women’s equal ability, access to and uptake of leadership and decision-making positions in

farmer associations resulted in near-equal representation from an early stage. This contributed over

time to progressively equal participation in association meetings and decision-making. Women’s

classroom participation during KATC training also increased over time. KATC believes that the

social and economic empowerment of women can positively impact social problems, including

domestic violence and alcoholism.

Step 7 Meetings with prospective participants

Project staff then held another set of meetings to explain the project in more detail to the 309 local

farmers (123 men and 186 women) that registered as prospective participants. In retrospect, the

gender balance within this group closely corresponds to the gender balance among actual

participants.

Step 8 Selection of project farmers

Project staff, in consultation with key community stakeholders, screened the 309 registered

potential participants and selected 100 participants (57 women and 43 men). The screening process

entailed consultations with key informants i.e., community leaders, government agriculture

extension officers working in the area, and non-project KATC extension officers. Participant

27

selection was based on assessments of economic need and demonstrated interest and commitment.

Police clearance was an additional acceptance requirement. KATC held follow up meetings to

identify low income small-scale farmers who had expressed interest and qualified for project

participation. These follow up meetings were held with key informants who lived in the

communities and knew the households of prospective participants. These meetings helped the

organization come up with the final list of project participants from the initial self-registration list

obtained after the first two meetings

Step 9 Meetings and agreements with selected farmers

Two meetings were held with the 100 selected farmers to outline project objectives, modalities,

activities, and the respective roles and responsibilities of KATC and the farmers. At the end of

these meetings, farmers reaffirmed their commitment to participating in the project. Project

extension workers then followed up via interviews with each participant, soliciting background

information to confirm that each participant owned land and was a decision-maker on that land. A

Memorandum of Understanding was signed between KATC and each individual farmer selected

for project participation.

Step 10 Conducting a baseline survey

A baseline survey was conducted to establish benchmarks for selected variables among the target

population in the project area: some 100 small-scale farmers within 12 kilometers of KATC.

Variables included household food security, income, agricultural practices and farming methods,

knowledge of sustainable organic agriculture, association participation, access to markets and

financial services and gender equality. KATC’s project team subsequently followed up by

interviewing each project participant to solicit information to monitor project progress and provide

insight into participants' needs.

Step 11 Formation and registration of two organic farmer associations

The project always sought to bring farmers together through farmer associations. The aims were to

realize a structural basis for cooperation and mutual learning and support among farmers, foster

opportunities for consensus and leadership among farmers, disseminate information on organic

agriculture, and jointly identify and respond to market trends and opportunities. Initially the

project aimed to work with an existing organic producers’ cooperative in one project area, and

form a twin cooperative in the other project area, where no cooperative existed. Hence the project

began working with the existing Small Holder Organic Producers and Processors (SHOPP)

cooperative, while enabling the formation of a new cooperative named Tufwambe. Collaboration

with SHOPP did not work well, as most project participants wanted to have their own leadership

and be independent. Female participants did not have a say in SHOPP, and its management was

personalized. Hence the project enabled the formation of another new cooperative, named Tione.

Tufwambe Organic Association was formed with a membership of 54 farmers (31 men and 23

women), and Tione Organic Association was formed with a membership of 46 farmers (12 men

and 34 women).

Step 12 Electing executive committees for farmer associations

Executive committee members were elected by members of farmer associations each year of the

project. Over the course of this project, women occupied half (10 of 20) of the leadership positions

on the two association committees.

28

Step 13 Land preparation, demarcation, numbering and allocation of plots at CPI

One 15 ha area of land under CPI at KATC’s farm was set aside, to enable each of 100 project

farmers to produce organic vegetables on a plot of .15ha (30 x 50m). Within the project’s first six

months, this area was reduced by 17% to 12.5 ha, for individual plots of .125 ha (approx. 30 x

40m). This was because participants found the original plot size too large for effective

management by one farmer.

Organic vegetable production at the CPI area

Step 14 Identifying rain fed and garden plots for conversion to organic production

Home gardens were entirely re-allocated for organic production. By contrast, one hectare of rain

fed fields on each participant’s farm was identified for conversion. Allocations were based on

slope and the need to take into account the permitted distance from conventional fields. Organic

rain fed fields were demarcated to enable placement of buffer zone and hedgerows, and to support

crop rotation.

Step 15 Addressing manure shortages with complementary soil improvement measures

KATC observed that conversion proceeded faster in farmers’ home gardens than their rain fed

fields. This was due to the greater quantity of manure required to fertilize large rain fed plots, with

their average size of 1 ha under organic cultivation. By contrast, home gardens were much smaller

(with an average plot size of .42 ha) and so required more modest quantities of manure. To address

constraints in manure supply for rain-fed crop fields, the project promoted complementary

sustainable soil improvement practices. These included the use of green manures, mulching, inter-

cropping, inter-planting, crop rotation and minimum tillage.

Step 16 Distributing green manure seeds to project participants

Seeds to grow green manure to fertilize fields were procured and then distributed to all project

farmers through their associations. Each farmer received 4kgs of black sun hemp and 20kgs of

29

velvet beans to plant as green manure before the maize crop on 1-hectare rain fed fields. To

facilitate renewable green manure seed provision, each farmer paid back 1 kg to his or her

respective association for each 1 kg previously received. This plan was reflected in the

memorandum of understanding between project farmers and KATC.

Step 17 Expanding and rehabilitating KATC’s small animal village

Small animal rearing was designed into the project to boost the manure supply for compost making

at plots under CPI. KATC rehabilitated and expanded its small animal village from 22 October

2012 through 16 August 2015. The area was expanded from 28x21m to 50x30m with the aim of

decongesting, improving conditions and accommodating more animals. Animal stock was enlarged

through the purchase of 19 chickens, 15 ducks and 20 rabbits, above baseline stock of 17 chickens,

13 guinea fowls, 11 ducks and 34 rabbits. Improvements included the erection of a proper fence;

the addition of four new structures (for chickens and their brooders, guinea fowls, rabbits and

ducks); the creation of a 2.5x2m duck pond; and the planting of two umbrella trees for shade and

protection against flying predators. Pre-project, the mortality rate among small animals at KATC

had been high due to easy penetration of aging structures by predators. The expansion and

improvement of KATC’s small animal village was to reduce the problem of predators, increase

animal numbers, and improve manure accumulation and collection.

Step 18 Procurement of capital assets and farmer production tools

The project procured a new Nissan hard-body single cab pick-up truck for project administration

activities, extension work, and delivery of vegetables to market. A laptop computer was procured

for use by the project coordinator. Purchase and distribution of bicycles, hula hoes, spades,

compost forks, shovels, wheelbarrows, knapsack sprayers, drums, vegetable crates, and nursery

trays (2 per farmer) was conducted in February 2013. Farmers signed a memorandum of

understanding addressing their acquisition and use of tools and paying back into to the loan fund.

Step 19 Technical training of project farmers

Project farmers participated in training by KATC in sustainable agriculture, agribusiness,

cooperative management, biological pest management, small animal rearing, donkey utilization,

and organic vegetable production. Other trainings included participatory guarantee system (PGS)

and food processing. Gender and HIV/AIDS were topics in all training courses. Training was

complemented by practical sessions and field visits to other farmers practicing organic farming.

Participant feedback corroborated KATC’s assessment that farmers assimilated the concept and

principles of organic farming, acquired knowledge of organic production, and became familiar

with the rights and responsibilities of cooperative membership.

Step 20 Conducting the market survey

Potential markets for organic vegetables were identified before production commenced. The

project coordinator and two members of each cooperative made contact with hotels, lodges,

supermarkets and restaurants, to learn about the types and quantities of vegetables they required.

This enabled the planning of crop plantings and rotations such that production more closely

matched market demand.

Step 21 Liming of plots under CPI

Before the project start, KATC tested the pH of the soils under CPI. The results showed high

levels of acidity too high for the successful cultivation of vegetables. KATC limed the soil to

increase alkalinity and bring soil pH into a more suitable range.

30

Step 22 Awareness creation and information sharing with authorities and policy makers

During project implementation, KATC had close working links with a number of state and non-

state actors focused on environmental protection and conservation. These included the Ministry of

Agriculture and Livestock (MAL), the Organic Producers and Processors’ Association of Zambia

(OPPAZ), Chongwe Organic Producers and Processors’ Association (CHOPPA), and the Zambia

National Farmers’ Union (ZNFU). Many other national and international organizations visited the

project and/or attended presentations and discussions about the project in the context of advancing

sustainable organic agriculture in Zambia.

Project farmers explain the importance of hedgerows to a Catholic Movement team at the CPI area

Step 23 Planting green manure on plots under CPI

Soil fertility on the 12.5ha was poor, and nematodes posed a problem. To address this, KATC

planted velvet beans in the area. 256 tons of cattle manure and 72 tons of chicken manure were

procured to fertilize the green manure crop, with basal application used for the first vegetable

planting. Farmers came to understand the negative effects of synthetic fertilizers and chemical

herbicides, and gradually embraced the conversion to more sustainable inputs.

Step 24 Development of a production plan

With information from the market survey, and drawing on past KATC experience in organic

production, production plans were developed to align production and supply with identified market

demand. For the purposes of organizing production, farmers were assigned to one of four

production groups.

Step 25 Procuring chicken and cattle manure to fertilize soil on CPI lands

Chicken and cattle manure was procured some weeks before participants started producing organic

vegetables in order to allow the manure to be composted. In total, 1,393 tons of chicken and 256

tons of cattle manure were purchased for project participants for use on CPI plots over the course

of the project.

31

Step 26 Procurement of untreated seeds

Initial procurement of seeds followed the project’s initial market research, to ensure that the

species selected for cultivation matched market demand. The first seeds included basil 250g,

cabbage 200g, long red pepper 300g, oreganum 250g, beetroot 360g, cucumber 1kg, pepper 300g,

leek 60g, kale 60g, cauliflower 60g, garlic 50kg, and ginger 100kg. The project was unable to

access organic seeds for lettuce, butternut, sweet corn, amaranthus, cleome, Irish potato and garden

eggs from local Zambian seed suppliers, so these were subsequently sought from other sources.

Step 27 Raising of nurseries at CPI

The first nursery was raised as a group nursery under the supervision of project staff, featuring

rape, tomato, onion, oregano, Chinese cabbage and basil. Participating farmers were invited to

plant these seeds in a nursery at KATC near the 12.5ha where they managed the nursery as a

group. Project farmers who managed the nurseries as part of their training, under the supervision

of KATC’s Production Unit, planted these seeds in the nurseries. Then farmers began raising

nurseries on their own CPI plots under close monitoring. Each farmer could receive seeds at least

once a month, depending on the type of vegetable and planting group.

Step 28 Establishing market linkages

Only some of all the potential buyers identified by the project became actual buyers of its organic

vegetables. Customers in the nearby capital city of Lusaka included Food Lovers’ Market (2

stores), Cresta Golf View Hotel, Kalundu Study Center, Spar supermarket (6 stores), Palmwood

Lodge, Courtyard Hotel, Green shop and café, Sharka’s Grill. Closer to the project area, Kasisi

Mission, Kasisi Girls Secondary School, Kasisi Retreat Center and KATC’s training section also

bought organic vegetables. Individual buyers with light trucks could also come and buy directly

from the farm. On average, four light trucks could be filled to capacity in a day. On-farm buyers

paid a lower price than city buyers who received deliveries.

Step 29 Producing and selling organic vegetables from plots under CPI

Vegetable production commenced in April 2013. The identified 12.5 ha piece of land under the

centre pivot was disked and plots were demarcated, each farmer getting a 40 meter by 30 meter

plot. Some of the vegetables were raised as group nursery and others were planted directly in the

individual plots. Chilli was used with other wild trees such as snake beans to make natural

pesticides. Herbs such as basil, rosemary and oregano were used as hedge rows to control pests.

Step 30 Training in small animal rearing High mortality rate among small animals reared by

the farmers was observed. This constrained the farmers’ supply of manure for home gardens and

rain fed fields. Inadequate shelter for small animals on family farms led to farmers preferring

chickens to spend the night in trees, which further inhibited manure collection. These

circumstances prompted the project to provide farmers with training in small animal rearing.

Training topics included the importance of rearing/integrating small animals, appropriate

management systems, record keeping, marketing, shelter/animal structures, breeding, feeding, and

natural remedies for diseases. This response proved successful; by project end all farmers with

small animals provided adequate shelter for their animals and collected their manure on a regular

basis.

Step 31 Establishing demonstration plots on Association fields

Through their associations, project farmers promoted sustainable organic agriculture in their

communities through local demonstrations of organic agriculture. In the project’s first year, each

32

farmer association established two organic fields to showcase organic agricultural practices,

starting with the use of green manures. Tufwambe Organic Association and Tione Organic

Association each established four demonstration plots on organic agriculture in their respective

areas.

Step 32 Erection of a security fence

A security fence was erected in Year 2 of the project in order to dissuade thieves from removing

produce from CPI plots.

Step 33 Procuring storage containers to separate organic and conventional production

To help maintain adherence to organic certification standards, the project procured two 20-foot

storage containers. Each cooperative was assigned one container to store vegetable crates,

production tools and the cooperative records. The primary purpose was to prevent farmers from

taking the tools home and possibly using the same tools in both conventional and organic fields, by

insisting that organic production tools be stored in the containers and not taken to their homes,

which included conventional sites and sites in the process of conversion.

Step 34 Establishing a Participatory Guarantee System (PGS)

Organic certification of farmer gardens and rain fed fields began by training project farmers in the

Participatory Guarantee System (PGS), a community/stakeholder-based inspection and

certification scheme. Organic producers come together to monitor and certify that their individual

production adheres to organic principles and practices, as provided for under the organic standards.

Inspection/Monitoring and Certification under the PGS is ongoing and is much less expensive than

third-party external certification. After training each association was to set up a PGS by bringing

together the different stakeholders and initiating the group inspections and conducting them on a

routine basis. The associations were to spearhead this process and ensure its continuation.

However, the PGS was not effectively established.

Step 35 Collecting soil samples in project farmers’ rain fed fields and home gardens

Soil sampling was carried out on selected farmers’ plots. Soils were tested for organic matter

content; nitrogen, phosphorous and potassium (NPK) content; and pH levels. The purpose was

to provide a baseline against which progress in soil fertility could be tracked. Farmers were

grouped into 7 corresponding clusters, each with 14 farmers; sites for soil testing were then

selected randomly. Some 44 samples from rain fed fields and 18 samples from home gardens

were collected from lands in 7 villages.

Step 36 Providing farmers with opportunities to visit farms and (organic) food stores

Project farmers visited food stores and organic production sites before commencing their own

production under the project. At food stores they saw how vegetables are graded, cleaned, bundled,

labeled and displayed on shelves. Farmers also enjoyed opportunities to speak with store

managers, who emphasized the importance of quality and timeliness and consistency in vegetables

delivered. Project farmers were also taken for site visits to the Kafue Riverside Farm Institute

(focused on vegetables, fruits, and cash crops), the Old Orchard Organic Farm (which additionally

integrates pigs and chickens in the farm system) and the Chiansi project, where farmers work as a

cooperative.

Step 37 Identification of lead farmers

In year 2 of the project implementation, the associations selected 8 lead farmers in each

association. These lead farmers were selected based on commitment, knowledge and skills in

33

organic farming, Lead farmers served as spokespeople for the project and advocates for organic

farming in the wider community and at special events organized by KATC.

Step 38 Establishing ICS

KATC used both a Participatory Guarantee System (PGS) and Internal Control Systems (ICS) for

this project. ICS is a part of quality assurance system for organic standards. It is a system that

guides compliance practices and provides a mechanism to check compliance with organic

regulations and guidelines. This system of recording keeping generates evidence that production

follows organic principles and practices.

It guides the practice of sustainable agriculture practices, including crop rotation, no burning,

leaving crop residues in the fields, and minimum tillage (pot holing) to prepare fields under

conversion. ICS was established among all 100 original project farmers, and subsequently

followed up annually (each November) to ensure that in fields under conversion, the practices

were conforming to laid down organic regulations and practices in line with certification

requirements. ICS includes updating crop diaries and documenting what crops farmers intend to

grow in the next planting season, in order to promote and ensure crop rotation and other

sustainable agricultural practices.

Step 39 Field Day Event with National Media Coverage

KATC conducted a project Field Day at the centre pivot irrigated (CPI) area with the objective of

showcasing organic conversion and deepening market linkages. Invitees included a wide range of

media outlets, public-sector organizations, including the Ministry of Agriculture, educational

institutions, NGOs, local service organizations, and produce customers. This event was recorded

and televised on two local stations, Muvi TV and Zambia National Broadcasting Corporation

(ZNBC). Muvi TV televised its coverage on prime-time news at 19:00 hrs, and three times on its

business segment. ZNBC televised its Field Day coverage on its agricultural program (Lima Time)

in five different local languages (Bemba, Lozi, Tonga, Nyanja and Soli). This coverage included

interviews with five project farmers and the Project Coordinator. Audio coverage of the Field Day

was also aired by ZNBC on Radio 1 and Radio 2 for two weeks running.

Step 40 Assignment of two donkeys and a donkey cart to each project farmer

KATC also held meetings to introduce the use of donkeys for transportation, traction and manure

collection, and to explain their effective use and efficient care and maintenance. The first group to

receive donkeys comprised 20 male and 44 female farmers, with selection based on demonstrated

performance and commitment. At these meetings, farmers made many suggestions, and asserted

their preference for harnesses and donkey rippers instead of the planned donkey carts. This was

mostly supported by male farmers. Female farmers preferred donkey carts. After a number of

meetings, farmers agreed to be given donkey carts as most of the women considered them valuable

for transporting firewood, water, manure and harvests (produce). The Donkey Memorandum of

Understanding was reviewed and interpreted into a local language, ensuring that every farmer with

donkeys understands it. At the end of these meetings, the farmers reaffirmed their commitment and

agreed to the terms.

Step 41 Follow-up soil samples

Soil samples were collected in Year 3 to establish soil changes since baseline (project start), with

respect to organic matter content; nitrogen, phosphorous and potassium (NPK) content; and pH

levels. The goal was to ascertain and quantify increases to soil fertility on organically farmed plots.

34

Step 42 Follow-up survey to gather data and participant feedback against baseline

At the end of each year a follow up survey was conducted. Similarly in the final months of the

project, the Project Coordinator and extension workers collected and analyzed data on organic

production and farmer income, and surveyed participants on changes in household food security,

gender equality and conversion practices on farmers’ own lands. This data informed the

development of this Model of Conversion to Sustainable Organic Agriculture. In general,

participant surveys are powerful ways to measure longer-term changes attributable to project

specific interventions.

F. Farmer Case Studies

Two farmer case studies are presented on the following pages.

35

Farmer Case Studies – First of Two

Hervent Silwindi

Mrs. Hervent Silwindi is a married woman who resides in Mwalubemba Village of

Chongwe District. She is aged 39, has 5 children and counts 7 dependents, including 3

grandchildren. Hervent dropped out of school in grade 9, due to financial challenges facing

her parents, and married at age 15. Since then agriculture has been her main source of

income. Her husband is not fully employed, but survives on irregular piecework, making

Hervent the household’s primary income earner.

Awakening to Organic Farming

Hervent was a conventional mono-cropping maize farmer, without animals or garden, from

the early 1990s until project start. She did not recognize the value of cultivating a garden,

since vegetable prices were very low and transporting vegetables to market in town (a 25km

distance) was a major challenge. Moreover, the soils in her area were poor.

Before joining the project in 2012, Hervent had heard about organic farming from KATC

extension staff but never received any training. Upon joining the project, Hervent was trained

(along with all other project farmers) in sustainable agriculture, organic vegetable production,

cooperative management, agri-business, biological pest management, food processing and

preservation, small animal production, animal traction and donkey utilization, and

Participatory Guarantee System (PGS).

Hervent in her home garden in 2015

36

Baseline Status

Feeding her family was a major challenge for Hervent before the project, when she could only

afford two meals per day (lunch and supper). At baseline, Hervent could annually produce

only nine (9) 50kg bags of maize, which was sufficient to last her household 8 months. The

inevitable food shortages sometimes came earlier than she expected. At baseline, Hervent

rated the nutritional quality, variety, amount and availability of her household’s food

throughout the year as poor.

Hervent’s family rarely consumed any organic products, and when they did this was due to

availability rather than knowledge of nutritive value or any health or environmental

concern.

Gender Roles in a Farming Family

All farming roles and responsibilities (including ploughing, planting, weeding, harvesting,

shelling and bagging) were assumed by Hervent and her children, while selling was done

by Hervent’s husband. This changed after Hervent completed agribusiness training, when

she also became involved in selling the family’s agricultural produce. Change also

occurred in the perception of roles and rights within the marriage. At baseline, Hervent did

not consider herself a primary household decision-maker, and believed her husband owned

everything in the house and all the household resources. According to her responses in

Year 3 of the project, Hervent now considers herself a joint decision-maker together with

her husband, and that they own household resources jointly since they are married.

Project Experience

By Year 3, Hervent cultivated a home garden, including rape, pumpkin leaves, onion,

tomato, amaranthus, green pepper, kale, carrot, and cabbage. For the past three years, she

has been practicing crop rotation in her rain fed field, including maize, soya beans, sweet

potatoes, green manures (velvet beans and black sunhemp), cow peas, and cassava.

These improvements have helped Hervent to avoid food shortages throughout the year. Her

ratings of nutritional quality, variety, amount and availability of food throughout the year

progressed from ‘poor’ at baseline, through ‘good’ in Year 2, to ‘excellent’ in Year 3.

Hervent was one of the women who declined to accept an executive position (as Treasurer)

in Tione Organic Cooperative when she was nominated in Year 1. She even suggested that

a male take up that position, although another female farmer actually became Treasurer.

Hervent was one of the many women farmers who could not express herself in meetings

even on issues that affected her. Her peers were thus pleasantly surprised when she later

expressed her intention to contest the forthcoming elections in December 2015. Hervent

said she was inspired by the election of a woman farmer as the Vice-Chairperson of

Tufwambe Organic Cooperative and her performance. But, before then, she did not believe

that women could contribute to associations as men’s equals. Furthermore, she strongly

37

disagreed that women should have equal access to agricultural training, extension services,

inputs, market information, and markets.

Hervent now supplements her income from garden and rain fed crops by hiring out her

donkeys (for fetching firewood and water, transporting harvests, and ripping fields). Her

annual income in Year 3 was ZMK41,000: over four times higher than when the baseline

survey was conducted at the beginning of the project.

Project Benefits

Hervent considers that the project has changed her life in many valuable ways. Areas of

personal benefit include self-confidence, leadership, family relationships, nutrition and

financial position. Areas of vocational benefit include perspective on agriculture,

knowledge and skill in practicing organic agriculture, collaboration with other farmers,

participation in markets, and interest and capacity in gardening and animal rearing.

From the money that she earned from her CPI production, Hervent was able to send her

children and other dependents to school, build a new house, rent a garden plot beside a

stream (the new plot), buy a water pump and pipes to irrigate her garden, and buy for her

household solar panels, a radio, bed and chairs. The twinned photos below demonstrate the

change in Hervent’s housing.

Hervent Thanks Global Affairs Canada and Canadian Jesuits International

Hervent wishes she could be recorded on video to express her gratitude to GAC and

CJI. She asks God to continue blessing the people of Canada, and thanks GAC and

CJI for their financial and technical assistance to farmers in Africa.

Hervent also thanks KATC management for making available 12.5 hectares of its

land under Centre Pivot Irrigation for use by small-scale farmers, rather than

reserving those resources for its own production and gain. Hervent wishes the

project could continue so that more farmers could experience what she has

experienced. Finally, Hervent expresses gratitude for the visit of Ms. Marie

Nyiramana (GAC’s Director of Food Security and Environment Sustainability) and

hopes that Marie was happy with what she saw.

38

Increased agricultural income means improved housing for Hervent Silwindi.

Hervent’s house before she joined the project

Hervent’s current house, built after she joined the project

39

Farmer Case Studies – Second of Two

Robert Lungu

Mr. Robert Lungu is a married man who resides in Chipokolo village of Chongwe District.

He is aged 55, has 7 children and 3 grandchildren, and counts 3 dependents. His livelihood

depends entirely on agriculture. Robert worked for an employer for 12 years, but due to low

wages he chose to leave paid employment and focus on farming.

Robert’s passion for farming was frustrated by the high cost of synthetic fertilizers and

pesticides. He could typically produce 14 x 50 Kg bags of maize on his 3 hectare field;

yielding less than 5 (50kg) bags per hectare. That yield was sufficient for home

consumption only, and left him with no production to sell at market and no income.

Robert Lungu in his rain fed field in 2015

Robert heard about organic farming from his wife. He wanted to go for training at KATC

but did not have enough money to pay for course tuition. It was a prayer answered for

Robert when he learnt that KATC was recruiting farmers for the GAC-funded project. At

that time he resolved to join the project and be trained in organic farming. Due to his high

level of interest and other qualities sought by KATC, Robert was selected as a project

farmer. He subsequently became the Secretary for Tione Organic Cooperative.

Prior to Project

Before the project, Robert was a full time conventional farmer, producing maize and

sorghum (primarily) and sweet potatoes (secondarily). Although he was unfamiliar with

40

sustainable agriculture, Robert did practice minimum tillage on his farm due to its lower

labour requirement (and not because for environmental reasons). Feeding his family

sufficient quantity of food was not so much a problem, but the quality of food was a

problem. Robert could provide three meals in a day, but most of them comprised only

carbohydrates: not balanced among the food groups/types, and micro-nutrient deficient.

Robert had no vegetable garden due to water insufficiency. He did rear 6 chickens, but

without suitable housing he reared them free-range, which inhibited manure collection.

Market demand for his products was not a problem, but transporting his products was a

problem, as it was for many other farmers like him. This constraint further discouraged

starting a vegetable garden.

Robert lived in a grass-thatched house, and covered long distances to fetch water for home

use. He prepared his land with a hand hoe before the first rains.

Robert Lungu and his wife in their rain fed maize field in 2015

Ready for Gender Equality

During the farmer selection process, Robert impressed KATC with his attitude towards

gender relations at home. He works with his wife, regards her as sharing ownership of

family assets, and includes her in making decisions about the farm and the household.

Similarly he believes in working with his children without gender-based discrimination.

When he joined the project, Robert belonged to Chibula Cooperative, where he found that

women were not treated as men’s equals. According to him, members could only meet when

it was time to register and receive synthetic fertilizers. Robert observed that women

(members of associations and in general) had less participation in decision-making, and did

not enjoy equal access to agricultural training, extension, or markets. Robert was critical of

this pattern and ready for renewal in gender relations.

41

Robert Lungu in his sweet potato rain fed field in 2015

Baseline Status

The soil in Robert’s field was very poor, with low levels of organic matter due to burning

crop residues. He had never used green manures in his fields before joining the project. The

entire farm was conventional, featuring the use of synthetic fertilizers. At baseline his yields

were at 14 x 50kg bags of maize from his 3 hectare field. This had increased to 17 x 50 kg

bags at the point of reporting.

Robert’s household could afford to eat 3 meals per day. Nevertheless, his rating of

nutritional quality, variety and availability of food in the household was poor; only the

amount of food was rated as good. The only organic products that Robert’s household could

consume were sweet potatoes, and this occurred due to availability. Robert’s household

could experience food shortage for short periods of time. The family’s incidence of sickness

was high at baseline.

Project Benefits

Robert’s annual income in Year 3 was ZMK66,000, which is over four times greater than at

baseline, when he reported an agricultural income of ZMK16,000. These large financial

gains enabled Robert to build a larger and better house for his family, and to buy 3 extra

donkeys in addition to the two donkeys he received from the project.

Feeding his family, and educating his children and grandchildren are no longer challenging.

Robert now eats four meals per day, and each of the meals is well balanced. In Year 3, he

42

rated the nutritional quality, variety, amount and availability of food in his household as

excellent; and the family’s incidence of illness has been reduced.

Robert (at right) with family members in front of their new house under construction.

Robert appreciates the knowledge and skills of organic agriculture that he gained through

the project. He also reports that the fertility of his soil has greatly improved.

When production under CPI came to an end, Robert immediately started a home garden that

gets water from a shallow well. In addition to chickens, he now rears goats and ducks along

with his five donkeys. All animals now have structures to live in, and he collects manure

from them for his garden and rain fed fields.

Robert Thanks Global Affairs Canada and Canadian Jesuits International

Robert appreciates the opportunity to be part of this project. From it he has learnt that

organic agriculture preserves the environment and builds and sustains the fertility of the

soil. He wishes the project could continue, and also wished that his wife could be part of the

project. He thanks GAC and CJI for donating such generous sums of money for the benefit

of small-scale farmers in Zambia. He also thanks KATC for their effort in training and

mentoring him. Finally, Robert thanks all the stakeholders for opening his eyes to the

desirability and feasibility of converting his farm from conventional to sustainable organic

practices.

43

G. Annexes

1. Operational Challenges and Remedial Actions

2. Gender Equality Results

3. Agricultural Results in Detail

44

G.1 Operational Challenges and Remedial Actions

The project successfully managed its risks and met its operational challenges, as tabled below.

Operational Challenge Remedial Action

During Semester 6, project farmers concentrated

on rain fed fields, diverting effort from their

CPI plots.

KATC extension staff followed up,

encouraging farmers to continue to tend their

CPI plots. CPI output increased in Year 3 on

a quarterly basis.

Low and declining work at CPI by some male

project farmers in Year 3.

KATC invited spouses of disengaged male

farmers to continue working the CPI plots

with other household members. They

enthusiastically agreed.

Low and irregular rainfall adversely affected

most rain fed crops over the life of the project.

Farmers not affected because they had

adopted pot holing as a water conservation

measure.

The water in the Kasisi Dam reached a very low

level in late 2014. In addition, due to low

voltage in power supply and third-party damage

to water pump scheduled irrigation was

disrupted. The temporary disruption to CPI

irrigation caused seedling loss, and adversely

affecting planting schedules. Supply to market

was stopped for 3 weeks.

KATC advised farmers to replant while it

resolved water-supply problems. Zambia

Electrical Supply Corporation rectified

power-supply deficiencies (low voltage) at

KATC’s request.

Adequate water for home gardens remained a

challenge in most of the villages associated with

the project, constraining vegetable production in

many home gardens. This challenge grew more

pressing in Semester 5 when wells dried up in

September.

Measures to augment water supply to farmer

lands were investigated and evaluated.

Organic associations proposed using loan

repayment funds to (i) acquire local land to

sink boreholes and (ii) supply water tanks.

Solutions are in progress.

Armyworm infestation and Avian Newcastle

disease adversely affected crops and fowl

(respectively) in Semester 5.

Botanical disease control measures were

successfully applied at the small animal

village and in crop fields. Farmers trapped

armyworm moths at night.

Continued attacks by predators on small animals

at the small animal village. Grass thatch roof

was leaking.

Rehabilitation of small animal structures,

including replacement of grass thatch roof

and perimeter wire.

Manure supply for CPI plots became

constrained when other local farms began

buying from KATC’s vendor, thus increasing

demand and prices.

The project began sourcing manure from an

alternate supplier.

Side-selling by some project farmers of organic

vegetables from CPI adversely affected the

tracking of harvest records, sales, income and

loan repayments.

Farmer associations decided to expel any

farmer found to be side selling. Expulsions

were made during the first half of the

project.

45

G.2 Gender Equality Results

The project’s success in promoting gender equality is objectively demonstrated by its gender-

disaggregated data on agricultural and economic results, as well as by the proportion of women

on farmer-association executives. Participant, both male and female, perceptions of gender

equality – rigorously captured and quantified – provide subjective indicators that complement

objective results.

KATC annually surveyed all project farmers on 9 standardized elements of gender equality. This

section reports survey results in 3 thematic clusters: women’s participation, women’s equal

access to agricultural services and resources, and women’s equal agricultural benefit.

G.2.i Women’s Participation

Every year each project farmer was asked to agree or disagree with 3 standardized positive

statements about the participation of women farmers. The 3 statements were:

Women are accepted and encouraged to take on decision-making roles within farmers’

associations.

Women’s contributions in farmer associations are important.

Women’s participation in farmer associations is equal to that of men’s.

By project end, 69% of male farmers (down from 77% at baseline) and 87% of female farmers

(up dramatically from 44% at baseline) agreed that “women are accepted and encouraged to take

on decision-making roles”. By project end, 92% of male farmers (up from 74% at baseline) and

93% of female farmers (up dramatically from 58% at baseline) agreed that “women’s

contributions in farmer associations are important”. By project end, 97% of male farmers (up

from 81% at baseline) and 89% of female farmers (up from 80% at baseline) agreed that

“women’s participation in farmer associations is equal to that of men’s”.

At all intervals, a large majority of male and female farmers confirmed women’s participation.

Two other trends are evident here. First, more farmers of both sexes confirmed the participation

of women – in fact, importance, and equality – as their project experience progressed. Second,

men were more likely than women to confirm women’s participation at project start. However,

by project end, male and female perceptions of equality had become more closely matched.

G.2.ii Women’s Equal Access to Agricultural Services and Resources

Every year each project farmer was asked to agree or disagree with 5 standardized positive

statements about women’s equality of access to the project’s agricultural services and resources.

The 5 statements were:

Women have equal access to agricultural training.

Women have equal access to extension services.

Women have equal access to market information and to markets.

46

Women have equal access to credit.

Women have equal access to agricultural inputs.

At project baseline, the range of agreement to these 5 statements was 60-72% among male

farmers and 49-63% among female farmers. (The female low of 49% at baseline was agreement

with the statement about access to extension services.) By Year 2, the range of agreement to

these 5 statements increased to 75-89% among men and 69-84% among women. By Year 3, the

range of agreement to these 5 statements had further increased to 86-100% among men and 85%-

98% among women.

Two trends are evident here. First, more male and female farmers perceived equality of access as

their project experience progressed. Second, men were more likely than women to perceive

women’s equality of access at project start. However, by project end male and female perceptions

of equality were closely matched.

By project end, 86% of male farmers (up from 60% at baseline) and 91% of female farmers (up

dramatically from 55% at baseline) agreed that “women have equal access to agricultural

training”. By project end, 92% of male farmers (up from 67% at baseline) and 87% of female

farmers (up dramatically from 49% at baseline) agreed that “women have equal access to

extension services”. By project end, 89% of male farmers (up from 72% at baseline) and 93% of

female farmers (up dramatically from 53% at baseline) agreed that “women have equal access to

market information and to markets”. By project end, 97% of male farmers (up from 67% at

baseline) and 98% of female farmers (up dramatically from 63% at baseline) agreed that

“Women have equal access to credit”. By project end, 100% of male farmers (up dramatically

from 67% at baseline) and 85% of female farmers (up substantially from 57% at baseline) agreed

that “Women have equal access to agricultural inputs”.

G.2.iii Women’s Equal Agricultural Benefit

Every year each project farmer was asked to agree or disagree with this single positive statement:

Women share equally in the project’s agricultural benefits.

A clear majority of male and female farmers agreed with this statement in each period, with the

single exception of women’s responses at baseline. At baseline, 81% of male farmers but only

39% of female farmers agreed with this statement. By Year 2, 97% of men and 76% of women

agreed. By Year 3, men’s agreement remained at 97% and women’s agreement increased further

to 87%.

These results suggest that many women farmers entered the project believing that they couldn’t

or wouldn’t receive agricultural benefit equal to men’s, but their experience on the project

progressively shifted their perceptions toward equality of agricultural benefit by gender. Men’s

perceptions shifted in a similar though less dramatic way. By project end, male and female

perceptions were similar. Participants’ confirmation of equal agricultural benefit among men and

women is substantiated by the project’s gender-disaggregated data on crop production, cash value

of crops, and cash income from crops actually sold.

47

G.2.iv Implementation of the Gender Equality Strategy

The following chart tracks the implementation of the project’s Gender Equality Strategy,

identifying best practices and lessons learned over project implementation.

Gender Equality Strategy Implementation Encouraging women to be representatives in

CPI sub-groups, issuing and collecting tools,

etc., hence encouraging them to be the liaison

between the group and the project supervisor,

increasing their visibility within the project

leadership.

Out of 8 participating farmers selected to record

harvests and inspect the quality of vegetables

harvested, 6 are women and 2 are male.

Observing differences in how women and men

express themselves and respond to different

situations, and adjusting the project approach

and communications accordingly.

Women’s participation in meetings, and

freedom of expression about issues affecting

them, have increased. Due to their

trustworthiness and interest in social welfare,

women are taking up more roles and

responsibilities related to handling funds and

farmer mobilization for common causes.

Exploring the most effective ways to track and

analyze gender equality indicators and gender-

disaggregated data.

All project data was gender-disaggregated.

KATC hired an external gender consultant to

improve gender equality results by assessing

current gender equality strategies and

recommending strategies to improve gender

mainstreaming.

Actively encouraging women to take on

leadership roles and decision-making roles,

based on their commitment and active

participation in the project, and following up

with them afterwards.

Women’s participation in project activities has

markedly improved. This is seen during

association meetings, where women intervene

to air their views and suggestions. Often, other

participants of both sexes support a woman’s

intervention, and the meeting adopts it.

Including a module on gender mainstreaming

in all training workshops. It includes discussion

of gender roles and responsibilities, and the

synergetic effects of working together.

In every training workshop, gender, HIV/AIDS

and environmental issues are considered cross-

cutting issues, and included in all training

materials.

Allocating tasks to both men and women

during workshop facilitation. At the end of

each session, each person’s performance is

assessed by the group. As group assessments

begin to show that women perform equally,

recognition of women’s ability and their

willingness to fully participate will increase,

along with their self-confidence.

From the first to the 20th workshop, there has

been a significant increase of women’s

participation in class activities and

responsibilities. This includes women serving as

class representatives and group representatives

for class presentations, and contributing ideas

during training sessions.

Using a household approach to involve the

spouses of project farmers, male and female.

This approach improves access to inputs,

markets and other services and facilities.

KATC has made it clear to participants that

family members are allowed to help in their

plots, provided they understand the project and

observe organic rules.

48

Gender Equality Strategy CONTINUED Implementation

Building on women’s recognized role in

attending to the welfare of others, assign high

profile jobs such as association treasurer to

women.

Both associations had women serving as

treasurers and vice-chair persons. Tione

association has a female vice chairperson and

secretary. A woman was always present on the

team that went to market the vegetables.

Recognizing women (like all project

participants) for effectively completing tasks

and fulfilling responsibilities, in order to build

confidence.

Female farmers have increasingly challenged

male farmers to include them in project

activities that men think they must do alone, and

vice versa.

Conducting project activities in the community

where possible, in order to give women easier

access to activities: e.g. on-farm training,

buyers’ meetings.

Women contributed more than men to

marketing and selling organic vegetables

produced in the CPI area. Women objected to

this at an association meeting, and afterwards

there was a marked improvement in men’s

participation.

G.2.v Observations on Women’s Participation from KATC Staff

“The project’s efforts and strategies to encourage women to speak out have had a profound impact.

At the beginning of the project, female participants were very shy, lacked confidence, would sit in a

corner, and would not contribute much to discussions and decision-making. They would even

decline leadership positions when elected. Today the picture is totally different, and for the better.

Women are no longer shy; they still sit together, but not so far away from the men. They speak out

on all matters being discussed and decisions taken, especially on matters affecting them, their

households and the community. They actively participate in finding solutions to household and

group challenges and decision making, and they are willing to take up leadership positions.”

“Women’s empowerment as organic producers has had a positive impact on women’s lives outside

the project. They are much more present, involved, visible and audible than they were at the

beginning of the project. They have more confidence in themselves, and male and female peers

have even more confidence in them than before. In households, gender relations have definitely

improved; there is more consultation, shared decision-making and ownership, and fuller joint use of

productive assets.”

“Overt emphasis on empowering women (in contrast to subtle efforts to encourage women) strongly

impacted women’s buy-in over the course of the project. Women participants became aware of their

abilities (‘discovered themselves’) by developing a more positive perception of their self-worth.

Earning an income of their own and/or decisively contributing to household income inspired this.

Women farmers’ acquisition of powerful knowledge and skills has triggered self-confidence; they

have found their voice, and they have been heard by their female peers and their male folks.”

49

G.3 Agricultural Results in Detail

This annex tables actual project results in detail. Each type of result is presented on an integrated

basis, such that cumulative and all yearly results can be reviewed and compared simultaneously.

The principle result categories are (i) production and income, (ii) conversion to organic agriculture,

and (iii) food and nutrition security.

50

G.3.i.a Agricultural Production and Income – Actual Results

Cumulative Income Results Dis-aggregated by Gender The proportional changes shown in the right-hand columns above are for

male and female farmers combined. By project end, the average income from all crops sold by women farmers without gardens had

increased from baseline by 11.36 times (= 1036%) and 8.94 times (= 794%) for male farmers without gardens (using Zambian

currency). By project end, the average income from all crops sold by women farmers with gardens had increased from baseline by

10.08 times (=908%) and 10.05 times (= 905%) for male farmers with gardens (using Zambian currency).

Garden production declined in Year 3 for several reasons. First, several new gardens were started then: 6 in the 5th semester (up from

39 to 45) and 5 more in the 6th semester (up again from 45 to 50). Lower productivity in new gardens reduced gardening averages in

Year 3. Second, the streams and shallow wells that many gardeners relied upon dried up earlier in Year 3 than in previous years. Third,

vegetables grown at CPI under KATC supervision tended to have better quality, preferred market access and higher prices. This

eventually motivated project gardeners to shift the balance of their vegetable production efforts in favour of CPI. Fourth, CPI plots

were better protected from animal incursions (due to superior fencing) than home gardens, which translated into improved yields. Fifth,

project-affiliated farmer cooperatives required a cumulative minimum CPI output of ZMK 3,000 by end of Year 3 for farmer inclusion

in their post-project sustainability plans, which may have motivated some gardeners to divert efforts from home gardens to CPI.

AVERAGE INCOME from CROPS SOLD per Project Farmer in Zambian (ZMW)

MALE Farmers

FEMALE Farmers

Type

MALE + FEMALE Farmers

BL Yr 1 Yr 2 Yr 3 BL Yr 1 Yr 2 Yr 3 ZMW BL Yr 1 Yr 2 Yr 3 Yr 3

÷BL

Yr 3

÷Yr

1

Yr 3

÷Yr

2

7807 6240 4796 5829 7392 6914 5311 8230 Rain fed 7599 6577 5053 7030 0.93 1.07 1.39

0 9505 79405 63984 0 13782 83860 75727 CPI 0 11643 81633 69855 n/a 6.00 0.86

7807 15745 84201 69813 7392 20695 89171 83957 All Farm. 7599 18220 86686 76885 10.12 4.22 0.89

4670 19240 83323 55586 4731 17256 54477 38240 Gardens 4701 18248 68900 46913 9.98 2.57 0.68

12477 34985 167524 125399 12123 37951 143648 122197 Gardeners 12300 36468 155586 123798 10.06 3.39 0.80

51

G.3.i.b Food Crops Retained for Home Consumption

Not all food produced through the project was sold at market. A lesser share (typically minor) of crops from each type of production

was retained for consumption in household meals. Using the measure of cash value of crops retained, the table below demonstrates that

food retained for home consumption increased by 5 times from baseline to project end. Increases were concentrated in Year 2 and

leveled off in Year 3. In contrast to the overall trend, the cash value of vegetables consumed at home increased 18 times (for home

gardens from baseline) and 21 times (for CPI from startup in Year 1). These major increases in fresh vegetable consumption enabled

major nutritional gains – through micro-nutrient intake – in non-gardening households as well as gardening households.

Cumulative Food-Retained Results Dis-aggregated by Gender The proportional changes shown in the right-hand column above are for

male and female farmers combined. By project end, the average cash value of crops retained for home consumption by female farmers

without gardens had increased from baseline by 2.76 times (= 176%) and 2.41 times (= 141%) for male farmers without gardens (using

Zambian currency). By project end, the average cash value of crops retained for home consumption by women farmers with gardens had

increased from baseline by 4.87 times (= 387%) and 4.67 times (= 367%) for male farmers with gardens.

AVERAGE VALUE of CROPS RETAINED for Household Consumption per Project Farmer in Zambian (ZMW)

MALE Farmers FEMALE Farmers Type

MALE + FEMALE Farmers

BL Yr 1 Yr 2 Yr 3 BL Yr 1 Yr 2 Yr 3 ZMW BL Yr 1 Yr 2 Yr 3 Yr 3

÷BL

Yr 3

÷Yr 1

Yr 3

÷Yr 2

2433 1502 3860 3742 2371 2764 2934 3969 Rain fed 2402 2133 3397 3855 1.60 1.81 1.13 0 124 1135 2116 0 95 956 2585 CPI 0 110 1046 2350 n/a 21.43 2.25

2433 1626 4995 5857 2371 2859 3891 6554 All Farm. 2402 2243 4443 6205 2.58 2.77 1.40 352 1635 8503 7151 398 1568 7762 6926 Gardens 375 1602 8132 7039 18.77 4.39 0.87

2785 3261 13498 13008 2769 4427 11652 13480 Gardeners 2777 3844 12575 13244 4.77 3.45 1.05

52

G.3.i.c Cash Value of All Crops Produced

Summing average agricultural income and the average cash value of crops retained for home consumption yields a monetary indicator of

overall agricultural production, which complements agricultural output by harvested weight. The table below demonstrates that the sum

of average cash value of all crops increased about 8-9 times in Zambian currency from baseline to project end. Gains were concentrated

in Year 2, with a general leveling off in Year 3.

However, results from rain fed crops are disappointing, with only 9% growth over the project’s life on a gender-aggregated basis. Rain

fed crops were undermined by low precipitation, a serious infestation of armyworms (declared a national emergency in Zambia), and

mediocre attainment in organic conversion by project farmers as a whole. (The armyworm infestation contributed to poor rain fed

conversion, since some rain fed farmers felt forced – before their organic commitment was consolidated – to protect their crops with

chemical pesticides.)

By contrast, results from production at CPI and home gardens were impressive. Both areas posted spectacular gains in Year 2. Gardens

achieved much fuller organic conversion than rain fed fields. CPI was wholly organic (under KATC supervision) from project start.

SUM of AVERAGE VALUE of CROPS SOLD + RETAINED per Project Farmer in Zambian (ZMW)

MALE Farmers FEMALE Farmers Type

MALE + FEMALE Farmers

BL Yr 1 Yr 2 Yr 3 BL Yr 1 Yr 2 Yr 3 ZMW BL Yr 1 Yr 2 Yr 3 Yr 3

÷BL

Yr 3

÷Yr 1

Yr 3

÷Yr 2

10240 7742 8656 9571 9763 9678 8245 12199 Rain fed 10001 8710 8450 10885 1.09 1.25 1.29

0 9629 80541 66100 0 13877 84817 78312 CPI 0 11753 82679 72206 n/a 6.14 0.87

10240 17371 89196 75671 9763 23555 93062 90510 All Farm. 10001 20463 91129 83090 8.31 4.06 0.91 5022 20876 91825 62737 5130 18824 62239 45167 Gardens 5076 19850 77032 53952 10.63 2.72 0.70

15262 38247 181022 138408 14893 42378 155301 135677 Gardeners 15077 40313 168161 137042 9.09 3.40 0.81

53

The table below presents (at right) an adjusted version of the original data (at left) from the preceding page. In Year 3, CPI production

was concluded after 9 months (vs. 12 months in other years). To accurately reflect quarterly results, the right side of this table adjusts

CPI Year 3 data so that it is equivalent on a time basis to the data from Years 1 and 2.

This adjustment demonstrates that – quarter by quarter – the sum of average cash value of crops increased from Year 2 to Year 3 by 16%

at CPI and 29% in rain fed fields. Although the contraction of gardening remains unaffected by this operation, the overall trend from

Year 2 to Year 3 changes from a modest decline to approximately no change.

However, this adjustment also increases cumulative progress from baseline to project end: by 17% (from an increase of 9.09 times =

809% to 10.68 times = 968%). The right-hand portion of the table below (annualized CPI Year 3) provides a more accurate reflection of

project performance than the left-hand portion (prior to annualization).

Cumulative Results on Sum of Cash Value Dis-aggregated by Gender By project end, the sum of average cash value for all

crops sold at market AND retained for home consumption by farmers without gardens had increased from baseline by 9.27 times

(= 827%) for women and 7.39 times (= 639%) for men (using Zambian currency). By project end, the sum of average cash value

for all crops sold at market AND retained for home consumption by farmers with gardens had increased from baseline by 9.11

times (= 811%) for women and 9.07 (= 807%) times for men (using Zambian currency).

SUM of AVERAGE VALUE of CROPS SOLD + RETAINED – Annualizing Year 3 CPI per Project Farmer in Zambian (ZMW) Gender-Aggregated

In Year 3, CPI production was concluded after 9 months: 3 months less than Years 1 and 2. To reveal the actual rates of project progress per quarter, this

table annualizes Yr3 CPI average values: multiplying them by 1.333 (9 months x 1.333 = 12 months) to accurately state annual equivalents. Data on the

left side of this table reproduces the preceding table’s data. Data on the right side of this table shows the contrasting results of annualizing CPI in Year 3.

Sum of Average Value of Crops Sold + Retained

WITHOUT Annualizing Yr3 CPI Type

Sum of Average Value of Crops Sold + Retained

ANNUALIZING Yr3 CPI

BL Yr 1 Yr 2 Yr 3 Yr 3

÷BL

Yr 3

÷Yr1

1

Yr 3

÷Yr

2

ZMW BL Yr 1 Yr 2 Yr 3 Yr 3

÷BL

Yr 3

÷Yr 1

Yr 3

÷Yr 2

10001 8710 8450 10885 1.09 1.25 1.29 Rain fed 10001 8710 8450 10885 1.09 1.25 1.29

0 11753 82679 72206 n/a 6.14 0.87 CPI 0 11753 82679 96250 n/a 8.19 1.16

10001 20463 91129 83090 8.31 4.06 0.91 All Farmers 10001 20463 91129 107135 10.71 5.24 1.18 5076 19850 77032 53952 10.63 2.72 0.70 Gardens 5076 19850 77032 53952 10.63 2.72 0.70

15077 40313 16816

1

137042 9.09 3.40 0.81 Gardeners 15077 40313 16816

1

161087 10.68 4.00 0.96

54

G.3.i.d Average Crop Production

While the tables above provide monetary indications of agricultural performance, the table below states harvested weights: a more direct

measure of agricultural output.

All rain fed crops were counted in 50 Kg bags. All garden crops were counted in 50 Kg bags except onions by pouch and tomatoes by

crate. All CPI crops were counted in Kg (later converted to 50Kg units) with the exception of tomatoes (by crate), lettuce (by head) and

sweet corn (by cob).

The table below indicates that the harvested weight of all crops produced increased about 4-5 times from baseline to project end: with the

lower figure realized by farmers without gardens, and the higher figure realized by farmers with gardens. The largest gains were posted in

Year 2. Although Year 3 appears to level off, time period adjustment for CPI in Year 3 (as in the table above) demonstrate modest

annual growth from Year 2 to Year 3 for all project farmers (combining rain fed and CPI).

Garden output in Year 3 contracted by about 25% from Year 2, for reasons cited in the Agricultural Income section. Nevertheless,

gardening posted the largest output gains of any production type over the project’s life: increasing by 5.88 times (= 488%) versus 4.12 (=

312%) times for CPI (from startup in Yr1) and a modest 1.07 times (7%) for rain fed production (from baseline).

SUM OF AVERAGE CROP PRODUCTION 50 Kg Units per Project Farmer in 50 Kg Units

MALE Farmers FEMALE Farmers Type

MALE + FEMALE Farmers

BL Yr 1 Yr 2 Yr 3 BL Yr 1 Yr 2 Yr 3 BL Yr 1 Yr 2 Yr 3 Yr 3

÷BL

Yr 3

÷Yr 1

Yr 3

÷Yr 2

190 158 170 182 188 183 161 223 Rain fed 189 171 166 203 1.07 1.19 1.22

0 124 622 486 0 139 583 598 CPI 0 132 603 542 n/a 4.12 0.90

190 282 792 668 188 322 744 821 All Farm. 189 302 768 745 3.94 2.47 0.97

187 597 1673 1014 188 518 1598 1192 Gardens 188 558 1636 1103 5.88 1.98 0.67

377 879 2465 1682 376 840 2342 2013 Gardeners 377 860 2404 1848 4.91 2.15 0.77

55

Cumulative Production Results Dis-aggregated by Gender By project end, the sum of average crop production (by weight) by

female farmers without gardens had increased from baseline by 4.37 times (= 337%) and 3.52 times (= 252%) for male farmers

without gardens. The sum of average crop production (by weight) by female farmers with gardens had increased from baseline

5.35 times (= 435%) for and 4.46 times (= 346%) for male farmers with gardens.

G.3.i.e Results by Cash Value vs. Production

Overall, the project’s gains in cash value substantially exceeded its considerable gains in production by harvested weight. Over

the life of the project, cash value increased 8-9 times overall, while production increased 4-5 times overall.

The project’s economic performance has therefore doubled its agricultural performance. This difference reflects success in

agribusiness. Participating farmers progressively shifted their crop mix and relative focus on different production types (CPI,

garden and rain fed) to achieve greater returns at market. Moderate price increases in some crops represent a supportive factor.

56

G.3.ii Conversion to Organic Agriculture – Actual Results

Project farmers grew vegetables on an all-organic basis under KATC supervision, on KATC lands irrigated by Center Pivot Irrigation

(CPI). At the same time, they cultivated home gardens and rain fed fields on their own lands, where progress in organic conversion

followed their variable choices and actions. In the project’s final semester, home gardens were cultivated by 50 of 91 project farmers

(55%) with sufficient access to water (comprising 27 female and 23 men, and rain fed fields were cultivated by all 91 project farmers

(comprising 55 women and 36 men).

G.3.ii.a Organic Conversion in Home Gardens

Mode of Farming in Home Gardens progressed steadily toward full organic production during the project. Only 15% of home gardens

were purely organic at baseline, but fully 76% were purely organic by project end. Then only 3 gardens (6%) were purely conventional,

down from 13 (27% at baseline). Women gardeners moved steadily toward organic production, while progress by their male counterparts

was more sudden, and concentrated in Year 3. Male progress was also somewhat less complete, with 70% pure organic at project end vs.

81% among women.

ORGANIC CONVERSION Mode of Farming in HOME GARDENS

MALE Gardeners

FEMALE Gardeners Mode of Farming

ALL GARDENERS c. 50% of project farmers

BL End

Yr1

End

Yr2

End

Yr3 BL

End

Yr1

End

Yr2

End

Yr3 BL

End

Yr1

End

Yr2

End

Yr3

1 1 3 16 6 6 9 22 Pure Organic 7 7 12 38

5% 8% 23% 70% 22% 26% 47% 81% % total respondents 15% 19% 38% 76%

7 4 2 1 6 6 4 2 Pure Conventional 13 10 6 3

33% 31% 15% 4% 22% 26% 21% 7% % total respondents 27% 28% 19% 6%

13 8 8 6 15 11 6 3 Organic and Conventional 28 19 14 9

62% 62% 62% 26% 56% 48% 32% 11% % total respondents 58% 53% 44% 18%

21 13 13 23 27 23 19 27 Sum of Responses 48 36 32 50

21 13 13 23 28 23 26 27 Total # Gardeners 49 36 39 50

100% 100% 100% 100% 96% 100% 73% 100% Rate of Response 98% 100% 82% 100%

57

The data above are corroborated by data below on the use of sustainable techniques in home gardens. In particular, the attainment of 76%

pure-organic gardens corresponds closely to the 79% Average Net Response confirming the use of 13 identified sustainable techniques. Increased use of sustainable techniques in home gardens is quantified in the table below. This final report introduces (on the bottom

line) a superior conversion indicator (Avg Net Response) that accounts for semester-to-semester changes in the number of gardeners.

Prior reports relied on Avg Gross Response, which did not take account of those changes, but is included here for reference.

The bottom line in the table below shows that male gardeners progressed from 26% utilization of sustainable agriculture techniques at

baseline to 82% at project end. Similarly, female gardeners progressed from 21% utilization of sustainable techniques at baseline to 76%

at project end.

The gender-aggregated progression is from 23% to 79% utilization of sustainable techniques over the project’s life. Thus the project’s

gardeners (about half of all project farmers) were predominantly successful in migrating to organic production, as tabled above.

ORGANIC CONVERSION SUSTAINABLE Agriculture Techniques in HOME GARDENS

MALE Gardeners FEMALE Gardeners Sustainable

Technique Used

ALL Gardeners

BL End

Yr1

End

Yr2

End

Yr3 BL

End

Yr1

End

Yr2

End

Yr3 BL

End

Yr1

End

Yr2

End

Yr3

4 12 14 19 5 14 18 21 1. Green manure 9 26 32 40

22 6 11 23 17 14 15 27 2. Animal manure 39 20 26 50

2 6 8 14 4 9 11 17 3. Compost 6 15 19 31

0 0 5 14 4 2 5 11 4. Manure + leaf extracts 4 2 10 25

0 0 16 19 0 0 19 21 5. Biological pest control 0 0 35 40

2 11 11 23 2 9 19 27 6. Botanical pesticides 4 20 30 50

1 1 6 13 3 3 9 12 7. Disease & pest resistant varieties 4 4 15 25

13 17 17 23 9 19 22 27 8. Crop rotation 22 36 39 50

1 5 9 19 1 4 12 21 9. Crop cover 2 9 21 40

3 11 14 16 7 9 23 18 10. Inter-cropping 10 20 37 34

20 17 18 23 20 19 24 27 11. No burning 40 36 42 50

2 11 12 16 2 8 13 13 12. Mulching 4 19 25 29

2 9 13 23 1 7 11 25 13. Crop diversification 3 16 24 48

6 8 12 19 6 9 15 21 AVERAGE GROSS RESPONSE 11 17 27 39

72 106 154 245 75 117 201 267 Sum of Responses 147 223 355 512

21 13 13 23 28 23 26 27 Total # Gardeners (T#G) 49 36 39 50

273 169 169 299 364 299 338 351 T#G x 13 (for changing pop. size) 637 468 507 650

26% 63% 91% 82% 21% 39% 59% 76% AVERAGE NET RESPONSE 23% 48% 70% 79%

58

AVG GROSS RESPONSE = Sum of Responses ÷ 13 Techniques AVG NET RESPONSE = Sum of Responses ÷ (Total # Gardeners x 13 Techniques)

Factors limiting the adoption of sustainable techniques in home gardens include (in order of estimated impact) constraints on:

(1) animal manure supply (related to small numbers of animals owned, and lack of enclosures comprising accumulation and collection);

(2) supply of water to make compost (supply inadequate or source too distant); (3) supply of organic seed; and (4) lack of premium price

for home garden products.

Reduced use of non-sustainable techniques in home gardens is quantified in the table below, which documents the utilization of

synthetic inputs. Average Net Response (bottom line) accounts for semester-to-semester changes in the number of gardeners; it shows

that male gardeners progressed from 46% utilization of non-sustainable agriculture techniques at baseline to 9% at project end.

Similarly, female gardeners progressed from 21% utilization of non-sustainable techniques at baseline to 7% at project end. The gender-

aggregated progression is from 32% to 8%. Therefore the project was largely – but not entirely – successful in eliminating all use of non-

sustainable agriculture techniques in home gardens.

AVG. GROSS RESPONSE = Sum of Responses ÷ 3 Techniques AVG. NET RESPONSE = Sum of Responses ÷ (Total # Gardeners x 3 Techniques)

Factors prolonging the utilization of non-sustainable techniques in home gardens include, in order of their estimated impact:

(1) promotion of synthetic (chemical) inputs by other actors; and (2) relatively easy use and lower labour requirement of synthetic

inputs.

ORGANIC CONVERSION NON-SUSTAINABLE Agriculture Techniques in HOME GARDENS

MALE Gardeners

FEMALE Gardeners Non-Sustainable

Technique Used

ALL Gardeners

BL End

Yr1

End

Yr2

End

Yr3 BL

End

Yr1

End

Yr2

End

Yr3 BL

End

Yr1

End

Yr2

End

Yr3

22 11 9 3 11 8 7 3 1. Synthetic fertilizers 33 19 16 6

0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 2. Herbicides 1 0 0 0

7 6 6 3 6 7 5 3 3. Pesticides 13 13 11 6

10 6 5 2 6 5 4 2 AVERAGE GROSS RESPONSE 16 11 9 4

29 17 15 6 18 15 12 6 Sum of Responses 47 32 27 12

21 13 13 23 28 23 26 27 Total # Gardeners (T#G) 49 36 39 50

63 39 39 69 84 69 78 81 T#G x 3 (for changing pop. size) 147 108 117 150

46% 44% 38% 9% 21% 22% 15% 7% AVERAGE NET RESPONSE 32% 30% 23% 8%

59

Increasing fertility of home garden soils is documented in the table below. As project gardeners advanced in their application of

sustainable practices, and weaned themselves off depleting and toxic synthetic inputs, the self-assessed quality of their soil

improved. During the project farmers began investing in soil improvement by buying manure for their own lands from their CPI

earnings, which provides a good indication of growing understanding and commitment.

At baseline, only 24% of gardeners deemed their soils ‘good’, but this figure increased to 60% by project end. At baseline 31% of

gardeners deemed their soils ‘poor’, but this figure decreased to 10% by project end. The same soils grew progressively richer and

more capable of producing food as conversion to organic cultivation progressed. The soil ratings of male and female gardeners were

similar until Year 3, when women largely abandoned ‘average’ ratings in favour of ‘good’, while men were more evenly split. This

difference relates to the fact that proportionately more women (81%) attained pure organic gardens by project end than men (70%), as

shown in the first table in this section.

ORGANIC CONVERSION Farmer Rating of Soil Fertility in HOME GARDENS

MALE Gardeners

FEMALE Gardeners

Soil Fertility

Rating

ALL GARDENERS

c. 50% of project farmers

BL End

Yr1

End

Yr2

End

Yr3 BL

End

Yr1

End

Yr2

End

Yr3 BL

End

Yr1

End

Yr2

End

Yr3

6 4 2 2 9 3 6 3 POOR 15 7 8 5

29% 31% 13% 9% 32% 16% 22% 11% % total respondents 31% 22% 19% 10%

9 7 8 10 13 11 13 5 AVERAGE 22 18 21 15

43% 54% 50% 43% 46% 58% 48% 19% % total respondents 45% 56% 49% 30%

6 2 6 11 6 5 8 19 GOOD 12 7 14 30

29% 15% 38% 48% 21% 26% 30% 70% % total respondents 24% 22% 33% 60%

21 13 16 23 28 19 27 27 Sum of Responses 49 32 43 50

21 13 13 23 28 23 26 27 Total # Gardeners 49 36 39 50

100% 100% 123% 100% 100% 83% 104% 100% Rate of Response 100% 89% 110% 100%

60

G.3.ii.b Organic Conversion in Rain fed Fields

Mode of Farming in Rain fed Fields progressed with only moderate success toward full organic production during the project.

All project farmers cultivated their own rain fed fields in the rainy season of each project year. Only 4% of all rain fed fields were

purely organic at baseline, while 45% were purely organic by project end. Then only 11 rain fed fields (12%) were purely

conventional, down from 42 fields (42%) at baseline.

A somewhat greater proportion of men (53%) attained pure organic production than women (40%). Proportions of pure

conventional farming were about the same at project end (11% male, 13% female), while a greater proportion of women (47%)

than men (36%) mixed organic and conventional.

ORGANIC CONVERSION Mode of Farming in RAIN FED FIELDS

MALE Rain fed Farmers FEMALE Rain fed Farmers Mode of Farming

ALL RAIN FED FARMERS 100% of project farmers

BL End

Yr1

End

Yr2

End

Yr3 BL

End

Yr1

End

Yr2

End

Yr3 BL

End

Yr1

End

Yr2

End

Yr3

1 1 7 19 3 3 12 22 Pure Organic 4 4 19 41

2% 3% 19% 53% 5% 6% 22% 40% % total respondents 4% 4% 21% 45%

7 9 7 4 35 33 21 7 Pure Conventional 42 42 28 11

16% 23% 19% 11% 61% 62% 38% 13% % total respondents 42% 45% 31% 12%

35 30 22 13 19 17 22 26 Organic and Conventional 54 47 44 39

81% 75% 61% 36% 33% 32% 40% 47% % total respondents 54% 51% 48% 43%

43 40 36 36 57 53 55 55 Sum of Responses 100 93 91 91

43 40 36 36 57 56 55 55 Total # Rain fed Farmers 100 96 91 91

100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 95% 100% 100% Rate of Response 100% 97% 100% 100%

61

Increased use of sustainable techniques in rain fed fields is quantified in the table below. Average Net Response (bottom line)

accounts for semester-to-semester changes in the number of rain fed farmers; it shows that male farmers progressed from 19% utilization

in rain fed fields at baseline to 69% at project end. Similarly, female farmers progressed from 19% utilization in rain fed fields at

baseline to 59% at project end. In general male utilization was somewhat greater than female utilization. The gender-aggregated

progression is from 19% to 63%. Thus the project was substantially – but not fully – successful in shifting rain fed production to

sustainable techniques. The reasons for this qualified success are considered below.

AVG GROSS RESPONSE = Sum of Responses ÷ 13 Techniques AVG NET RESPONSE = Sum of Responses ÷ (Total # Rain fed Farmers x 13 Techniques)

ORGANIC CONVERSION SUSTAINABLE Agriculture Techniques in RAIN FED FIELDS

MALE Rain fed Farmers

FEMALE Rain fed Farmers Sustainable

Technique Used

ALL Rain fed Farmers

BL End

Yr1

End

Yr2

End

Yr3 BL

End

Yr1

End

Yr2

End

Yr3 BL

End

Yr1

End

Yr2

End

Yr3

2 16 24 31 6 18 38 42 1. Green manure 8 34 62 73

7 5 12 23 11 9 21 27 2. Animal manure 18 14 33 50

11 10 11 16 21 21 23 25 3. Compost 32 31 34 41

14 9 11 16 12 7 9 13 4. Manure + leaf extracts 26 16 20 29

0 0 24 31 0 0 45 42 5. Biological pest control 0 0 69 73

5 11 12 17 7 9 9 13 6. Botanical pesticides 12 20 21 30

6 13 15 29 15 13 18 39 7. Disease & pest resistant varieties 21 26 33 68

12 5 33 34 3 12 41 52 8. Crop rotation 15 17 74 86

10 10 24 31 14 14 38 31 9. Crop cover 24 24 62 62

2 22 24 26 11 41 38 43 10. Inter-cropping 13 63 62 69

31 37 36 36 30 49 49 55 11. No burning 61 86 85 91

3 12 14 9 7 9 9 11 12. Mulching 10 21 23 20

6 13 12 23 6 9 13 27 13. Crop diversification 12 22 25 50

8 13 19 25 11 16 27 32 AVERAGE GROSS RESPONSE 19 29 46 57

109 163 252 322 143 211 351 420 Sum of Responses 252 374 603 742

43 40 36 36 57 56 55 55 Total # Rain fed Farmers (T#RF) 100 96 91 91

559 520 468 468 741 728 715 715 T#RF x 13 for changing pop size 1300 1248 1183 1183

19% 31% 54% 69% 19% 29% 49% 59% AVERAGE NET RESPONSE 19% 30% 51% 63%

62

Factors limiting the adoption of sustainable techniques in farmers’ rain fed fields include, in order of estimated impact:

(1) insufficient manure to cover larger rain fed fields; (2) insufficient land to allow for pure crop stands for green manure (in view of

pressure to produce food and cash crops); (3) lack of market sales for green manures.

Decreased use of non-sustainable techniques in rain fed fields is quantified in the table below, which documents the utilization of

synthetic inputs. Average Net Response (bottom line) accounts for semester-to-semester changes in the number of rain fed farmers; it

shows (on the bottom line) that male rain fed farmers progressed from 34% utilization of synthetic inputs at baseline to 11% at project

end (peaking at 35% at the end of Year 1). By contrast, female rain fed farmers moved from 5% utilization of synthetic inputs at baseline

to 12% at project end (peaking at 27% at the end of Year 1). Women’s trend-line was wavy and men’s was a stable progression.

However, overall women used non-sustainable methods less than men. (This contrasts with men’s somewhat greater use of sustainable

methods, tabled above).

The gender-aggregated reduction in use of non-sustainable techniques is from 18% at baseline to 12% at project end. Thus the project

had only limited success in eliminating the use of non-sustainable agriculture techniques among farmers in their rain fed fields.

ORGANIC CONVERSION NON-SUSTAINABLE Agriculture Techniques in RAIN FED FIELDS

MALE Rain fed Farmers

FEMALE Rain fed Farmers Non-Sustainable

Technique Used

ALL Rain fed Farmers

BL End

Yr1

End

Yr2

End

Yr3 BL

End

Yr1

End

Yr2

End

Yr3 BL

End

Yr1

End

Yr2

End

Yr3

33 21 11 9 9 19 14 11 1. Synthetic fertilizers 42 40 25 20

1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2. Herbicides 1 0 0 0

10 21 11 3 0 27 16 9 3. Pesticides 10 48 27 12

15 14 7 4 3 15 10 7 AVERAGE GROSS RESPONSE 18 29 17 11

44 42 22 12 9 46 30 20 Sum of Responses 53 88 52 32

43 40 36 36 57 56 55 55 Total # Rain fed Farmers (T#RF) 100 96 91 91

129 120 108 108 171 168 165 165 T#RF x 3 (for changing pop. size) 300 288 273 273

34% 35% 20% 11% 5% 27% 18% 12% AVERAGE NET RESPONSE 18% 31% 19% 12%

AVG GROSS RESPONSE = Sum of Responses ÷ 3 Techniques AVG NET RESPONSE = Sum of Responses ÷ (Total # Rain fed Farmers x 3 Techniques)

63

Factors prolonging the utilization of non-sustainable techniques in farmers’ rain fed fields include, in order of estimated impact:

(1) relatively easy use and lower labour requirement of synthetic inputs, (2) availability of synthetic inputs through government’s

Farmer Input Support Programme (FISP), and (3) extension messages favouring conventional farming from some actors, including

government.

Many factors militate against the adoption of sustainable agriculture techniques in rain fed fields. In general, there is greater support

for non-sustainable approaches to rain fed cultivation than there is for home gardens.

Increasing soil fertility of rain fed fields is documented in the table below. As project farmers increased their use of sustainable

practices, and reduced the use of depleting and toxic synthetic inputs, the self-assessed quality of their soils improved. At baseline, only

19% of all farmers deemed their soils ‘good’. This figure increased modestly to 34% by project end. At baseline 34% of all farmers

deemed their soils ‘poor’, and this figure decreased to 13% by project end. The same soils grew richer and more capable of producing

food as conversion to organic cultivation progressed. Nevertheless, the degree of improvement is disappointing and (as in other data

sets) does not compare well with results for home gardens.

Male and female farmers ratings of their soils’ fertility were similar throughout the project. Almost all of the gender-disaggregated

entries approximate their corresponding gender-aggregated entries.

ORGANIC CONVERSION Farmer Rating of Soil Fertility in RAIN FED FIELDS

MALE Rain fed Farmers FEMALE Rain fed Farmers

Soil Fertility

Rating

ALL RAIN FED

FARMERS 100% of project farmers

BL End

Yr1

End

Yr2

End

Yr3 BL

End

Yr1

End

Yr2

End

Yr3 BL

End

Yr1

End

Yr2

End

Yr3

14 9 8 5 20 12 11 7 POOR 34 21 19 12

33% 25% 22% 14% 35% 22% 20% 13% % total respondents 34% 23% 21% 13%

19 16 26 19 27 27 31 29 AVERAGE 46 43 57 48

45% 44% 72% 53% 47% 49% 56% 53% % total respondents 46% 47% 63% 53%

9 11 2 12 10 16 13 19 GOOD 19 27 15 31

21% 31% 6% 33% 18% 29% 24% 35% % total respondents 19% 30% 16% 34%

42 36 36 36 57 55 55 55 Sum of Responses 99 91 91 91

43 40 36 36 57 56 55 55 Total # Rain fed Farmers 100 96 91 91

98% 90% 100% 100% 100% 98% 100% 100% Rate of Response 99% 95% 100% 100%

64

Treatment of Harvested Crops to Prevent Storage Losses

This data set provides another window onto organic conversion. It pertains primarily to the storage of harvests from rain fed fields.

Overall, farmers’ reliance on chemical (synthetic) crop storage treatments declined from 89% at baseline to 23% at project end.

Conversely, the sum of botanical, biological and no crop storage treatments increased from 11% at baseline to 77% at project end.

Farmers favoured botanical treatments among the alternatives to synthetic treatments. Patterns among male and female farmers are

broadly similar.

These results correspond approximately to the degree of conversion exhibited in home gardens, and provide further corroboration

of the project’s substantial – but not total – success in facilitating conversion to sustainable organic agriculture by small-scale

farmers.

ORGANIC CONVERSION Treatment of Harvested Crops to Prevent Storage Losses

MALE Farmers FEMALE Farmers

Type of

Crop Treatment

ALL FARMERS 100% of project farmers

BL End

Yr1

End

Yr2

End

Yr3 BL

End

Yr1

End

Yr2

End

Yr3 BL

End

Yr1

End

Yr2

End

Yr3

39 27 18 6 50 23 30 15 1. Chemical (synthetic) 89 50 48 21

91% 75% 55% 17% 88% 49% 60% 27% % total respondents 89% 60% 58% 23%

1 4 6 17 6 21 10 23 2. Botanical 7 25 16 40

2% 11% 18% 47% 11% 45% 20% 42% % total respondents 7% 30% 19% 44%

0 0 2 6 0 0 3 8 3. Biological 0 0 5 14

0% 0% 6% 17% 0% 0% 6% 15% % total respondents 0% 0% 6% 15%

3 5 7 7 1 3 7 9 4. No Treatment 4 8 14 16

7% 14% 21% 19% 2% 6% 14% 16% % total respondents 4% 10% 17% 18%

43 36 33 36 57 47 50 55 Sum of Responses 100 83 83 91

43 40 36 36 57 56 55 55 All Project Farmers 100 96 91 91

100% 90% 92% 100% 100% 84% 91% 100% Rate of Response 100% 86% 91% 100%

65

G.3.ii.c Comparison of Conversion in Home Gardens vs. Rain fed Fields

A comparison of conversion results for home gardens and rain fed fields shows that project farmers advanced substantially further in

converting their home gardens to organic production. This is because forces promoting conventional non-sustainable agriculture are

more focused on rain fed agriculture than on home gardens. Therefore, in home gardens the project found a freer and more open space

in which to promote sustainable agriculture and achieve fuller results.

In general, a larger number of more influential actors work with farmers on rain fed agriculture, and the majority of them promote

conventional agriculture. The national government subsidizes and otherwise supports the use of non-sustainable synthetic inputs, while

providing no support for sustainable techniques in rain fed agriculture. Large rain fed fields require a high volume of sustainable

agriculture inputs (notably manure) which are not readily available. Finally, sustainable agriculture practices require more labour than

non-sustainable agriculture practices over the first few years.

Rain fed fields are cultivated during the rainy season (November through May). Project farmers with gardens tended to focus on their

gardens during the dry (‘off-crop’) season (June through October). Thus project farmers with gardens alternated their agricultural

efforts between rain fed and garden production on a seasonal basis.

66

G.3.iii Food Security – Actual Results

Project results in the food security of participating farmers and their households are conveyed by five indicators, all presented and

discussed in this section. Four of these indicators are clustered under Household Food Values (which are summarized in a fifth table

providing their aggregate response pattern). The fifth indicator is Number of Meals Eaten Daily by project farmers.

Household Food Values

Project farmers were surveyed about four distinct values of the food consumed in their respective households. Standardized questions –

about food quality, variety, quantity and availability – were asked at baseline and the end of each subsequent year.

Food Quality

The table below provides the data on household food quality. Poor and fair assessments of food quality decreased in proportion

progressively from baseline, while good and excellent assessments increased in proportion progressively from baseline. On a gender-

aggregated basis, indications of excellent were fully 43% at project end vs. only 9% at baseline. Indications of good were 43% at

project end vs. 38% at baseline. Indications of fair were only 13% at project end vs. fully 42% at baseline. This data set clearly

demonstrates the steady and substantial improvement of household food quality over the life of the project. By project end, fully 86%

of project farmers indicated excellent or good food quality in their households, vs. 47% at baseline.

HOUSEHOLD FOOD Table 1 of 5 FOOD QUALITY

MALE Farmers FEMALE Farmers Farmer Assessment

of Household Food

QUALITY

ALL FARMERS 100% of project farmers

BL End

Yr1

End

Yr2

End

Yr3 BL

End

Yr1

End

Yr2

End

Yr3 BL

End

Yr1

End

Yr2

End

Yr3

4 3 2 1 6 3 2 0 POOR 10 6 4 1

9% 8% 6% 3% 11% 5% 4% 0% % total respondents 10% 6% 4% 1%

18 13 11 7 24 24 12 5 FAIR 42 37 23 12

42% 33% 31% 19% 43% 43% 22% 9% % total respondents 42% 39% 25% 13%

18 21 11 11 20 20 23 28 GOOD 38 41 34 39

42% 54% 31% 31% 36% 36% 42% 51% % total respondents 38% 43% 37% 43%

3 2 12 17 6 9 18 22 EXCELLENT 9 11 30 39

7% 5% 33% 47% 11% 16% 33% 40% % total respondents 9% 12% 33% 43%

43 39 36 36 56 56 55 55 Sum of Responses 99 95 91 91

43 40 36 36 57 56 55 55 All Project Farmers 100 96 91 91

100% 98% 100% 100% 98% 100% 100% 100% Rate of Response 99% 99% 100% 100%

67

Food Variety

The table below provides the data on household food variety. Poor and fair assessments of food variety decreased in proportion

progressively from baseline, while good and excellent assessments increased in proportion progressively from baseline. On a gender-

aggregated basis, indications of excellent were fully 54% at project end vs. only 6% at baseline. Indications of good were 46% at

project end vs. a similar 42% at baseline. However, indications of fair were nil (0%) at project end vs. fully 41% at baseline. Similarly,

indications of poor were nil (0%) at project end vs. 11% at baseline.

This data set clearly demonstrates a dramatic improvement of food variety in the households of participating farmers over the life of the

project. By project end, 100% of project farmers indicated excellent or good food variety in their households, vs. 48% at baseline.

HOUSEHOLD FOOD Table 2 of 5 FOOD VARIETY

MALE Farmers FEMALE Farmers

Farmer Assessment

of Household Food

VARIETY

ALL FARMERS 100% of project farmers

BL End

Yr1

End

Yr2

End

Yr3 BL

End

Yr1

End

Yr2

End

Yr3 BL

End

Yr1

End

Yr2

End

Yr3

4 2 0 0 7 4 0 0 POOR 11 6 0 0

9% 5% 0% 0% 12% 7% 0% 0% % total respondents 11% 6% 0% 0%

13 8 0 0 28 22 0 0 FAIR 41 30 0 0

30% 20% 0% 0% 49% 39% 0% 0% % total respondents 41% 31% 0% 0%

22 24 12 19 20 23 19 23 GOOD 42 47 31 42

51% 60% 33% 53% 35% 41% 35% 42% % total respondents 42% 49% 34% 46%

4 6 24 17 2 7 36 32 EXCELLENT 6 13 60 49

9% 15% 67% 47% 4% 13% 65% 58% % total respondents 6% 14% 66% 54%

43 40 36 36 57 56 55 55 Sum of Responses 100 96 91 91

43 40 36 36 57 56 55 55 All Project Farmers 100 96 91 91

100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% Rate of Response 100% 100% 100% 100%

68

Food Quantity

The table below provides the data on household food quantity. Poor and fair assessments of food quantity decreased in proportion

progressively from baseline, while good assessments increased in proportion progressively from baseline.

On a gender-aggregated basis, indications of excellent quantity remained similar on a proportional basis (about 30%) throughout the

project. Indications of good food quantity were 66% at project end vs. 48% at baseline. Indications of fair food quantity were 5% at

project end vs. 17% at baseline. Similarly, indications of poor food quality were nil (0%) at project end vs. 4% at baseline. By project

end, fully 95% of project farmers indicated excellent or good food availability in their households, vs. 79% at baseline.

This data set demonstrates increased food quantity in project households in the assessment of participating farmers. Although these

gains are significant, they are moderate in degree relative to the three other indicators of household food value. This difference appears

to be due to the higher baseline status of food quantity.

Nevertheless, gains in food quantity in project households are objectively indicated by other data sets, i.e. by the progressively

increasing production volumes and cash value of crops retained for home consumption, from all three production areas.

HOUSEHOLD FOOD Table 3 of 5 FOOD QUANTITY

Farmer Assessment

of Household Food

QUANTITY

BL End

Yr1

End

Yr2

End

Yr3 BL

End

Yr1

End

Yr2

End

Yr3 BL

End

Yr1

End

Yr2

End

Yr3

2 3 0 0 2 1 0 0 POOR 4 4 0 0

5% 8% 0% 0% 4% 2% 0% 0% % total respondents 4% 4% 0% 0%

7 5 2 2 10 8 1 3 FAIR 17 13 3 5

16% 13% 6% 6% 18% 14% 2% 5% % total respondents 17% 14% 3% 5%

22 23 23 27 26 27 38 33 GOOD 48 50 61 60

51% 58% 64% 75% 46% 48% 69% 60% % total respondents 48% 52% 67% 66%

12 9 11 7 19 20 16 19 EXCELLENT 31 29 27 26

28% 23% 31% 19% 33% 36% 29% 35% % total respondents 31% 30% 30% 29%

43 40 36 36 57 56 55 55 Sum of Responses 100 96 91 91

43 40 36 36 57 56 55 55 All Project Farmers 100 96 91 91

100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% Rate of Response 100% 100% 100% 100%

69

Food Availability

The table below provides the data on household food availability. Poor and fair assessments of food availability decreased in

proportion progressively from baseline, while good and excellent assessments increased in proportion progressively from baseline.

On a gender-aggregated basis, indications of excellent availability were 40% at project end vs. only 7% at baseline. Indications of good

food availability were 41% at project end vs. a similar 42% at baseline. However, indications of fair food availability were only 15% at

project end vs. 47% at baseline. Indications of poor food availability fluctuated under 10% over the life of the project.

This data set demonstrates progressively improved food availability in project households in the assessment of participating farmers.

By project end, fully 81% of project farmers indicated excellent or good food availability in their households, vs. 49% at baseline.

HOUSEHOLD FOOD Table 4 of 5 FOOD AVAILABILITY

MALE Farmers FEMALE Farmers Farmer Assessment

of Household Food

AVAILABILITY

ALL FARMERS 100% of project farmers

BL End

Yr1

End

Yr2

End

Yr3 BL

End

Yr1

End

Yr2

End

Yr3 BL

End

Yr1

End

Yr2

End

Yr3

3 1 3 0 1 1 5 3 POOR 4 2 8 3

7% 3% 8% 0% 2% 2% 9% 5% % total respondents 4% 2% 9% 4%

19 9 4 4 23 17 18 9 FAIR 42 26 22 13

44% 23% 11% 13% 50% 37% 33% 16% % total respondents 47% 30% 24% 15%

16 22 17 14 21 26 18 21 GOOD 37 48 35 35

37% 55% 47% 47% 46% 57% 33% 38% % total respondents 42% 56% 38% 41%

5 8 12 12 1 2 14 22 EXCELLENT 6 10 26 34

12% 20% 33% 40% 2% 4% 25% 40% % total respondents 7% 12% 29% 40%

43 40 36 30 46 46 55 55 Sum of Responses 89 86 91 85

43 40 36 36 57 56 55 55 All Project Farmers 100 96 91 91

100% 100% 100% 83% 81% 82% 100% 100% Rate of Response 89% 90% 100% 93%

70

Household Food Values: Aggregate Response Pattern

The table below aggregates data from the preceding four tables in order to provide a single over-arching indicator. This measure,

although more abstract, reliably and usefully quantifies the overall trend of data for Household Food Values.

By project end, fully 90% of project farmers indicated excellent or good for household food values, vs. 56% at baseline. Similarly, by

project end only 9% of project farmers indicated fair or poor for household food values, vs. 44% at baseline.

Overall, the aggregate response pattern demonstrates significant annual advancement in food values among project households in the

assessment of participating farmers.

HOUSEHOLD FOOD Table 5 of 5 AGGREGATE RESPONSE PATTERN 4 FOOD VALUES

MALE Farmers FEMALE Farmers Aggregation of Farmer

Assessments of Food

Quality, Variety,

Quantity & Availability

ALL FARMERS 100% of project farmers

BL End

Yr1

End

Yr2

End

Yr3 BL

End

Yr1

End

Yr2

End

Yr3 BL

End

Yr1

End

Yr2

End

Yr3

13 9 5 1 16 9 7 3 POOR 29 18 12 4

8% 6% 3% 1% 7% 4% 3% 1% % total respondents 7% 5% 3% 1%

57 35 17 13 85 71 31 17 FAIR 142 106 48 30

33% 22% 12% 9% 39% 33% 14% 8% % total respondents 37% 28% 13% 8%

78 90 63 71 87 96 98 105 GOOD 165 186 161 176

45% 57% 44% 51% 40% 45% 45% 48% % total respondents 43% 50% 44% 49%

24 25 59 53 28 38 84 95 EXCELLENT 52 63 143 148

14% 16% 41% 38% 13% 18% 38% 43% % total respondents 13% 17% 39% 41%

172 159 144 138 216 214 220 220 Sum of Responses 388 373 364 358

172 160 144 144 228 224 220 220 All Project Farmers x 4 400 384 364 364

100% 99% 100% 100% 95% 96% 100% 100% Rate of Response 97% 97% 100% 98%

71

Number of Meals Eaten Daily by Project Farmers

The table below provides the self-reports of project farmers on the number of meals eaten daily by themselves. On a gender-aggregated

basis, the proportion of farmers eating only 1-2 meals daily was 2% at project end, down from 23% at baseline. The proportion of

farmers eating 3 meals daily fluctuated between 56% and 70% over the life of the project (with wider variance among men than

women). The proportion of farmers eating 4-5 meals daily was fully 42% at project end, up from 20% at baseline.

Gender-disaggregated results are summarized here. By project end, 6% of male farmers (down from 26% at baseline) and 0% of female

farmers (down from 21% at baseline) ate 1-2 meals per day. By project end, 47% of male farmers (up from 16% at baseline) and 38%

of female farmers (up from 13% at baseline) ate 4-5 meals per day. By project end, 47% of male farmers (down from 58% at baseline)

and 62% of female farmers (up from 56% at baseline) ate 3 meals per day.

This data set clearly demonstrates progressively increased meal consumption by project farmers.

FARMER MEALS NUMBER OF MEALS EATEN DAILY

MALE Farmers FEMALE Farmers Number of Meals

Eaten Daily by Farmer

(self-reported)

ALL FARMERS 100% of project farmers

BL End

Yr1

End

Yr2

End

Yr3 BL

End

Yr1

End

Yr2

End

Yr3 BL

End

Yr1

End

Yr2

End

Yr3

3 2 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 MEAL 3 3 1 0

7% 5% 3% 0% 0% 2% 0% 0% % total respondents 3% 3% 1% 0%

8 6 4 2 12 10 5 0 2 MEALS 20 16 9 2

19% 15% 11% 6% 21% 18% 9% 0% % total respondents 20% 17% 10% 2%

25 28 15 17 32 38 30 34 3 MEALS 57 66 45 51

58% 72% 42% 47% 56% 68% 55% 62% % total respondents 57% 70% 49% 56%

4 2 12 10 7 5 9 10 4 MEALS 11 7 21 20

9% 5% 33% 28% 12% 9% 16% 18% % total respondents 11% 7% 23% 22%

3 1 4 7 6 2 11 11 5 MEALS 9 3 15 18

7% 3% 11% 19% 11% 4% 20% 20% % total respondents 9% 3% 16% 20%

43 39 36 36 57 56 55 55 Sum of Responses 100 95 91 91

43 40 36 36 57 56 55 55 All Project Farmers 100 96 91 91

100% 98% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% Rate of Response 100% 99% 100% 100%

72