Far-reaching impact of technology and innovation: Saving time, boosting income and reducing household conflict in Zimbabwe and beyond
Simple agricultural innovations, such as soil probes to detect water and salinity levels at different depths, have not only helped smallholder farmers conserve scarce resources, they’ve reduced conflict within communities and fostered harmony in families. Interventions in Zimbabwe have demonstrated that returns on investment in R&D go far beyond increased yields and productivity.
The emerging language from Europe uses the term responsible research and innovation. These three words convey a vital message relevant to all of us working in this arena. It separates research – the pursuit of new technologies, from innovation – the process of developing better ways to do things while embedding technologies into functional socio-ecological systems. Responsible, suggests that we ethically engage in this process. In the words of Professor Jamie Pittock of the Australian National University, our lead partner in the Transforming Irrigation in Southern Africa (TISA) project, “Do no harm.”
In complex systems such as irrigated agriculture, where interventions in one place may have unexpected outcomes in others, the TISA team kept a sensitive finger on the rhythm of activities in the target irrigation schemes. Regular focus group discussions linked the project team and support services with farmers. Farmers, in this case, have a healthy representation of dedicated and hard-working women.
The project introduced the Chameleon, a handheld instrument that measures soil moisture using three probes planted at different depths (close to the soil surface, within the crop’s root zone and beyond the rootzone). The tool’s exceptional value lies in its simple user interface. Three LEDs (one for each depth) emitting either red, green, or blue light provides irrigators with immediate information on whether the soil is dry, moist or wet at the different levels. Irrigators can also measure soil moisture after irrigation events to assess how deep the water has penetrated.
This information is further enriched by using a pair of Fullstops – wetting front detectors – established within and beyond the root zone. A flag pops up when the water reaches and fills the funnel at the instrument’s bottom, allowing irrigators to extract a water sample from each depth to determine nitrates and salinity.
A high nitrate level within the root zone is the goal, while an increased nitrate level beyond the root zone indicates that expensive nutrients are leached beyond the crop’s reach. Together, these instruments provide vital information to improve decision making regarding irrigation water and nutrient management. Farmers can now experiment and learn, strengthening their mental models of the relationship between irrigation frequency (and amount) and nutrient losses.
In one of the intervention locations Silalatshani, based on their own initiative, farmers retained nutrients in the root zone by reducing irrigation frequency, reducing the number of siphons used and the duration of each irrigation event. Consequently, water productivity increased by more than 100%. Farmer-to-farmer learning resulted in more farmers reducing irrigation frequency than the number of farmers who had tools installed in their fields. At the beginning of the project farmers in Silalatshani irrigated their crops an average of 20 times during the growth cycle. By the end of the project’s first phase, both farmers with and without tools reduced irrigation events to less than nine times per season.
“Earlier, I used to always irrigate whenever water was flowing in the canals. I would not miss the opportunity to utilize the water as I always thought more water translates to higher yields,” said Mr Sergeant Nkomo, a farmer at the Landela block at Silalatshani.
Yields increased significantly, as did income because the innovation platforms working in the region also linked farmers to markets. In short, irrigators reduced their time spent in backbreaking work, while increasing yields and income. Many women farmers indicated that they invested the time saved into spending more time with children, engaging in other social activities, and increasing off-farm income from various other activities. A particular case is Ms Sihle Sibanda, who significantly increased yields and income during the project to support her daughter to complete a Bachelor’s degree in Commerce at the National University of Science and Technology.
A completely unexpected outcome raised by farmers during focus group discussions and verified during the end-of-project survey was reductions in conflict from within the household, between farmers within an irrigation block, all the way to between the scheme and other water users. Reductions in conflict within the family are significant for women. They suggested that they have more access to income and do not have to quarrel with spouses for resources to purchase food and pay school fees!
“In the past we used to have so many arguments with irrigators downstream of our block as water would mainly be utilized by our block, which is closer to the supply dam,” said Ms Sibanda, who is also Chairperson of the Landela Block Irrigation Management Committee. “However, with the introduction of the tools, we are now using water sparingly and downstream users are surprised if we are using the water at all as they are receiving enough supplies for their irrigation.”
About the authors:
Dr André van Rooyen
Principal Scientist, Crop-Livestock Systems
Eastern and Southern Africa
Dr Martin Moyo
Mr Thabani Dube
Eastern and Southern Africa