They were all very impressed with the difference, and noted that we hadn’t even implemented the techniques as well as we could have. We met delays because at planting time the group members were running around preparing their family’s fields first, and then there were a couple funerals that pushed back our meetings as well. So the techniques weren’t implemented at the ideal times, and towards the end we were a bit rushed and didn’t do them as well as we should have (for instance, we were supposed to do five mounds and only did 3). The men realized that if they had implemented them by the book, the difference would have been even bigger.
That’s the good news. The bad news is that, even after seeing the difference, they said they probably would not implement the techniques on their fields. The biggest reason being that they do not own their fields. They rent them from year to year; that is, the parcel of land they planted on last year could be in the hands of someone else the next year. It’s not worth it to them to do these techniques that require so much labor to improve the land when they aren't sure they'll be able to reap the benefits the next year. Plus, many of these techniques improve the land over the long-term, 3-4 years down the line, and the lack of certainty that they will be planting on the same land is a big disincentive. In other words, the land tenure system in Northern Cameroon is fucked up, and discourages investments for improving the quality of the land.
They had other concerns- for instance, the techniques we taught are relatively labor-intensive. Usually, they just stick in the seeds. We were asking them to mark the contours of the land, dig individual holes for each seed, give each seed its own pile of manure, etc. This added labor is a problem because these farmers own many small pieces of land that are spread very far apart from one another. The soil is so poor that they can’t get enough harvest from one piece of land. They have to cobble together a harvest from many little pieces of land. We are trying to get them to change that mentality. By putting lots of time and investment into one piece of land, you can improve its quality so that you get the same harvest you would from many little plots. But since they barely have the manpower to eek out a harvest from the land they have already, they are worried about exerting extra time and energy on one plot. We tried explaining to them that many of the techniques can be done during the dry season, before the busy planting time, when they have nothing to do. But they didn’t seem convinced.
Another concern is that they don’t have sufficient quantities of manure in their village. We had to bring sacks of manure in on motos for the demo plot. We noticed that in town, there’s lots of excess manure. People who own animals don’t always use the manure and they’ll even just dump it in the street. So in theory, you could get a lot of free or cheap manure in town. But our farmers rarely go into town, and when they do they mostly bike, so it would take many trips and a big physical effort.
None of these problems are insurmountable. We already discussed a couple solutions. For example, CADEPI has land contracts that renter and landowner can sign to ensure that farmers have their land for longer periods, 5-10 years. They need to start the techniques earlier so they don’t conflict with planting time.
I was surprised though because I had thought that as soon as they had visible proof, right their before their eyes, that these techniques would make a huge difference in their harvest, they would be sold and determined to figure out a way to implement the techniques on their own fields next season. Instead, their reaction was “That’s really cool! buuuut we’re probably not going to do it ourselves.” And it was a ton of work just to get to that point!
It was the first time CADEPI tried doing a “field school,” so we want to sit down and have more discussions with the farmers we worked with to get their opinion on whether the “field school” as a way of promoting these techniques is effective, then write a report on what we did, in case CADEPI wants to replicate the project.
But my counterpart and I are still figuring out what the next step is in terms of working with this group of farmers. We talked with Philippe, the leader of the group, but he had to bug people so much to get them to come out to the field school meetings that he’s reluctant to start another community project. He doesn’t think people are motivated enough. Should we continue the same kind of work with a different approach, or try a totally new project? Or should we find a new group of farmers who actually own their land? It's a work in progress.
traditional to the left, agroforestry methods to the right
traditional in the foreground, agroforestry side is the wall of green in the background
the grassy strip in between rows is one of the anti-erosion barriers
:))
No comments:
Post a Comment