By Onesmus Kitonyo, Evans Chimoita, Timothy Kamanu, Felister Nzuve, Esther Muindi, Alfred Micheni, James Muthomi, Vincent Kathumo, Grace Mureithi, George Chemining’wa, Ivan Adolwa, and James Mutegi
There is need to rethink the process of conducting on-farm research to better foster knowledge transfer and innovation. Through a participatory on-farm experimentation (OFE) approach, this study was carried out to validate a package of soil moisture and fertilizer nitrogen management practices, and to track farmer adoption of better agronomic practices. The OFE process facilitated quick adoption and testing of technologies by farmers. At the onset of the third experimentation season, farmers had began to experiment on a range of practices, especially mulching and optimal plant density.
Interests in co-creation and transfer of agricultural knowledge has led to re-orientation of conventional farmer-participatory research to an on-farm experimentation (OFE) approach (Lacoste et al., 2022). OFE embodies approaches in agricultural research and innovation that enable the researcher and the farmer to operate under real-world farm management to efficiently transfer knowledge and foster innovation (Lacoste et al., 2022). The approach generates feedback loops from all stakeholders that facilitate co-creation and design of experiments to validate technologies.
Researchers have traditionally used on-farm experiments to generate data, but without the involvement of the farmer for experimental design, data collection, or interpretation of the results (Kummer et al., 2017). Often, these experiments produce data and information that is not readily useful to the farmer. It is important to rethink the way experiments are conducted to bridge the gap in knowledge generation and transfer, and promote innovation by both researchers and farmers.
OFE offers a platform to develop locally relevant and actionable knowledge. However, this platform is not restricted to researchers and farmers as its co-learning environment provides valuable support for extension services, input providers, government agents, and policy makers working towards a set of shared goals (Richardson et al., 2022).
Apart from embodying multi-stakeholder involvement in co-creation of knowledge, OFE creates value for all participants. The value proposition of OFE fundamentally distinguishes it from other participatory approaches in research. Value arises from farmers being able to access information they can trust (Lacoste et al., 2022). Despite enormous investment in research to improve the productivity of maize systems of Embu County, Kenya, farmers hardly adopt high yielding agronomic practices. Low adoption could partly be attributed to the research process. In an effort to accelerate farmer experimentation and innovation, this study co-designed experiments with farmers and stakeholders to validate water and nitrogen (N) management practices in these maize systems in Embu County.
Experimental design
OFE experiments were carried out in two environments in the maize-growing region of Embu County, in eastern Kenya. The OFE sites were established in upper midland (UM) zone (UM3 and UM4), and lower midland (LM) zone (LM3 and LM4).
Prior to the establishment of trials, farmers prioritized relevant and actionable nutrient and water management practices. Two best management practices were thereafter co-designed based on the outcomes of the researcher-farmer dialogue. The two co-designed (farmer/researcher) treatments were compared with farmer business-as-usual operations. In the first experimentation season, the first best management practice (BMP1) included a soil conditioner (hydrogel) and a slow-release N source (KynoPlus S®), while the second best management practice (BMP2) applied 3 t/ha crop residue as mulch plus calcium ammonium nitrate (CAN) as the N source. Additionally, based on learnings from the first experimental cycle, treatments were adjusted during the second season to include a uniform application of 5 t/ha of manure in both BMP1 and BMP2. Also, BMP1 was adjusted to include crop residue mulch. The farmer continued their business-as-usual operations but integrated their approach with learnings from the researcher plots.
Data were collected in both researcher and farmer managed plots. Prior to harvest, host farmers, neighbours, and stakeholders were invited to evaluate the performance of the experiments. Participants selected preferred treatment plots based on their own criteria. Three categories of choice per treatment plot were given: poor performance, average performance, or best performing treatment. The selection exercise was followed by focus discussions to document the criteria applied and perception about the demonstrated management practices.
Farmer prioritization of water and nutrient management practices
Figure 1 presents farmer prioritization of management practices that had potential to increase the yield of maize. Soil fertility and moisture management, and the need for better advisory services ranked highly among both men and women. The need for soil testing services ranked highly among male farmers.
Grain yield and farmer evaluations
The farmer-researcher co-designed BMP treatment combinations had higher maize grain yield compared with farmer practices (Fig. 2). During the first experiment cycle in lower midland zones (Fig. 2a), BMP2 out-yielded BMP1. However, from the second season onwards, yield differences between the two treatment combinations declined significantly after mulch was added to BMP1 plots.
Similar trends were observed in the in wet and cool upper midland zones as BMP2 significantly out-performed BMP1 during the first season (Fig. 2b). Across the two environments, yields exceeded the average farm yield in the region, which is estimated at 1 t/ha. Results of the farmer evaluation of experimental plots mirrored yield performance. Overall, farmer plots were least preferred by the respondents, and BMP1 was frequently voted better than BMP2.
Learnings and evolution of farmer practice
Evolution of farmer learning from business-as-usual operations to the implementation of better management practices for improved water and N management was impressive (Fig. 3). Farmers provided diverse feedback on their learnings, and presented a range of practices they were willing to test and implement in their plots. At the on-set of the third experimentation season (2023 short rains), a majority of farmers implemented at least one practice learned from the project.
This experimentation process was built around a co-learning environment between the farmers and researchers, as described by Lacoste et al. (2022). In this environment, researchers were able to better understand farmers’ socio-economic constraints and their decision-making processes, particularly those related to choice of management practices. For example, during the first pre-harvest stakeholder dialogue, both parties prioritized the need to use manure during the succeeding seasons. Typically, farmers apply low amounts of manure due to unavailability on-farm and lack of resources to purchase the input (Laub et al., 2023). However, while most farmers in Embu County produce manure on-farm, this input is reserved for high value crops such as banana and khat (miraa) (Mwaura et al., 2021).
The two researcher-managed plots optimized crop management practices unlike in the farmer plots where there were occasional delays in weeding, fertilizer application, and pest control. Nevertheless, farmer practices improved significantly during the five experiment cycles, which demonstrated knowledge transfer.
The lack of significant differences between BMP1 and BMP2 implied that hydrogel and mulch were equally effective in conserving soil moisture. Similarly, the application of CAN or the slow-release N fertilizer formulation did not show differences in maize yield. However, based on the unit price of N in each formulation, gross margin analyses (not shown) pointed to significantly higher returns per unit area with the use of slow-release fertilizer compared with CAN. Even so, either of the fertilizer formulation ought to be applied at an optimal rate, at the right stage of the crop, and placed near the root zone to maximize plant uptake (Bruulsema, 2022).
Adoption of residue retention among smallholder farmers, and especially those in mixed crop-livestock systems of Embu, is constrained by the competing uses of crop residue (Jaleta et al., 2012; Baudron et al., 2014). In Embu, crop residues are primarily used as animal feed or sold to improve household income. However, through this OFE process farmers discovered the benefits of mulch in improving maize yield, which was an outcome that fundamentally changed the farmers’ mindset. In addition, farmers learnt the importance of better agronomic practices to improve maize yield. Chiefly, they experimented with early planting, optimal plant density, early weeding, optimal fertilization based on the weather forecast, and the use of manure.
Conclusion
The aim of this research was to co-design experiments to validate water and N management practices, and to document the evolution of practice change in maize systems of Embu County, Kenya. The OFE approach created an open forum for farmers and researchers to foster knowledge creation and accelerate practice change by farmers. This was exemplified in the ability of farmers to take only two seasons of experimentation to start to adopt and test improved management practices such as mulching soils with crop residue. This challenged the status quo where farmers remove crop residue for livestock feed or sale.
Dr. Kitonyo (e-mail: kitonyo@uonbi.ac.ke) is with the Dept. of Plant Science and Crop Protection, Univ. of Nairobi, Nairobi, Kenya, Dr. Chimoita is with the Dept of Agricultural Economics, Univ. of Nairobi. Dr. Kamanu is with the Dept. of Mathematics, Univ. of Nairobi. Dr. Nzuve is with the Dept of Plant Science and Crop Protection, Univ. of Nairobi. Dr. Muindi is with the Dept. of Crop Sciences, Pwani Univ., Kilifi, Kenya. Dr. Micheni is the Kenya Agricultural and Livestock Research Organization, Embu, Kenya. Dr. Muthomi is with the Dept. of Plant Science and Crop Protection, Univ. of Nairobi. Dr. Kathumo is with Mount Kenya Univ., Thika, Kenya. Ms. Mureithi is with BRITS Agribusiness and Farmers Call Centre, Nairobi, Kenya. Dr. Chemining’wa is with the Dept. of Plant Science and Crop Protection, Univ. of Nairobi, Dr. Adolwa is with the African Plant Nutrition Institute (APNI), Nairobi, Kenya, Dr. Mutegi, is with APNI, Nairobi, Kenya.
Acknowledgement
This research was funded by African Plant Nutrition Institute through a grant under African Plant Nutrition Research Fund (APNRF). We are grateful to farmers who hosted the trial sites, as well as farmers and stakeholders who participated in the project. We acknowledge the Department of Agriculture of Embu County Government for supporting the project.
Cite this article
Kitonyo, O., Chimoita, E., Kamanu, T., Nzuve, F., Muindi, E., Micheni, A., Muthomi, J., Kathumo, V., Mureithi, G., Chemining’wa, G., Adolwa, I., Mutegi, J. 2025. On-farm Experimentation Process Triggers Kenyan Farmers’ Zeal to Test Technologies in Maize Systems. Growing Africa 4(1):19-23. https://doi.org/10.55693/ga41.VGCQ9010
REFERENCES
Baudron, F., et al. 2014. Conservation agriculture in African mixed crop-livestock systems: expanding the niche. Agric., Ecosys & Env., 187:171-182.
Bruulsema, T. 2022. Nutrient stewardship: Taking 4R further. Crops & Soils 55(1), 34-40.
Jaleta, M., et al. 2013. Tradeoffs in crop residue utilization in mixed crop–livestock systems and implications for conservation agriculture. Agric. Sys., 121:96-105.
Kummer, S., et al. 2017. Farmers’ own research: Organic farmers’ experiments in Austria and implications for agricultural innovation systems. Sustain. Agric. Res., 6(526-2017-2663).
Lacoste, M., et al. 2022. On-Farm Experimentation to transform global agriculture. Nature Food 3(1):11-18.
Laub, M., et al. 2023. Combining manure with mineral N fertilizer maintains maize yields: Evidence from four long-term experiments in Kenya. Field Crops Res.,291:108788.
Mwaura, G.G., et al. 2021. Adoption intensity of selected organic-based soil fertility management technologies in the Central Highlands of Kenya. Front. Sus. Food Sys., 4:570190.
Richardson, M., et al. 2022. Farmer research networks in principle and practice. Intl. J. Agric. Sus., 20(3):247-264.
Toffolini, Q., M. Jeuffroy. 2022. On-farm experimentation practices and associated farmer-researcher relationships: a systematic literature review. Agron. Sus. Dev., 42(144):1-16.
