Improving agricultural productivity in

the rural-urban interface: Lessons for

Soil fertility research at IITA

Olufunke Cofie (PhD)

Candidate for the position of Soil Fertility Specialist

Outline

• Soil fertility & agricultural productivity in SSA

• SSA Agriculture - the rural-urban interface

• Nutrient recycling in peri-urban agriculture

• Lessons for IITA Soils Research

• Conclusions

Low agricultural productivity in SSA• Low inherent fertility

• Nutrient depletion

• Low per capital fertilizer use

• Low yieldLow

Investments

Low yieldLow

Income

…a cycle

The low performance of agriculture is the main

cause of its slow economic growth

It is the only region of the world where per capita

food production has been declining for the past

three decades

Cereal Yields in Developing Regions 1960-2005

0.0

0.5

1.0

1.5

2.0

2.5

3.0

3.5

4.0

1960 1965 1970 1975 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000 2005

Sub-Saharan Africa

South AsiaLatin America

East and Southeast Asia

Source: FAOSTAT.

mt/

ha

Nutrient Mining of Agricultural Land in Africa

(kg/ha/yr)1995-97 2002-04

Source:

IFDC

- Africa loses $4billion/yr in soil nutrients

Netherlands

Vietnam

Japan

UK

China

France

Brazil

USA

India

South Africa

Cuba

Benin

Malawi

Ethiopia

Mali

Burkina Faso

Nigeria

Tanzania

Mozambique

Guinea

Ghana

Uganda

Source: FAOSTAT, from Borlaug, 2004

100 200 300 400

Fertilizer nutrient consumption per hectare of arable land in selected countries, 2002

(kg/ha)

50060

0

Increasing food demand…

• Population growth

– Natural growth

– Rural urban migration

0

50

100

150

200

250

300

350

400

450

1930 1940 1950 1960 1970 1980 1990 2000 2010 2020

Total

Population

Urban

Population

Rural

Population

Urbanization in West Africa

(in millions)

Urban population is becoming as large as the rural.

Agriculture in the rural-urban interface

• contributes to inner-urban food supply,

• compensates for missing cool transport and

storage (required for perishable crops),

• provides jobs, income and livelihoods.

• provides opportunity for closing rural-urban

nutrient flows

Contribution of UPA to urban food supply

0

20

40

60

80

100

UA PUA RA UA PUA RA UA PUA RA

Accra Kumasi Ouagadougou

City and source of food

% c

on

trib

uti

on

to s

pec

ific

food

ite

m

Pineapple Cabbage Lettuce Spring onion Garden egg Tomatoes

Urban centres are nutrient sink

• Provides opportunity for nutrient

recycling

• Closing the nutrient loop

• Enhance intensive agriculture in the

peri-urban

The fertilization equivalent of untreated organic solid waste

Nutrient Contribution in kg / cap

year

Nitrogen (as N) 0.55 – 1.1

Phosphorus (as P) 0.2 – 0.4

Potassium (as K) 0.55

Carbon (as C) 16 – 22

Resources in excreta

Nutrient in kg / cap year

Nutrient In urine

(500 l/year)

In faeces

(50 l/year)

Total Required for

250 kg of cereals 1

Nitrogen (as N) 4.0 0.5 4.5 5.6

Phosphorus (as P) 0.4 0.2 0.6 0.7

Potassium (as K) 0.9 0.3 1.2 1.2

Carbon (as C) 2 2.9 8.8 11.7

1 = the yearly food equivalent required for one person

2 = indicative of the potential for soil conditioning, normally not designated a nu-

trient

Nutrient value of Excreta is high enough to produce

food BUT with health risks !!!

Recycling Process

Focus– Mixing ratio

– Pathogen inactivation

– Nutrient quality

Adequate processing reduce health risk

Dynamics of Ascaris eggs viability reduction during co-composing of faecal

sludge and organic solids waste

COMLIZER development

- excreta based compost with minimum

fertilizer

Quality

parameter

(Unit)

Concentration

N (g/kg) 11.9 2.3

P (g/kg) 16.2 4.8

K (g/kg) 17.0 4.7

Ca (g/kg) 35.1 8.7

Mg (g/kg) 7.9 2.0

Pb (mg/kg) 28 28

Cd (mg/kg) 0.4 0.1

•Free from toxic heavy metals

Co-compost

cumulative inflitration -Tuu tengli

10.07.2003

y = 8.3846Ln(x) - 7.1975

y = 2.6036Ln(x) - 3.3556

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

0 20 40 60 80 100 120

time (minutes)

dep

th

(cm

)

Faecal Sludge treatment control

Comparison of economic benefits between users’ and non-users’ of excreta

application on farmlands in Krobo District, Ghana

Variable Users Cost/ ha ($) Non-users Cost / ha ($)

Total revenue 918.56 606.54

Land Preparation 72.38 54.64

Hired labour 178.83 189.42

Seeds 10.32 7.71

Excreta / Fertilizer1 18.79 51.23

Chemicals 34.00 19.74

Total Variable Cost 314.32 322.74

Gross Margin 604.24 283.80

Fixed Cost 0.00 0.00

Depreciation 7.65 7.87

Family labour 112.21 80.37

Rent on land 70.90 48.22

Total Fixed cost 190.76 136.46

Net Income 413.47 147.35

1 Excreta apply to users whilst fertilizer apply to nonusers. The cost incurred on

excreta is for transporting the excreta to farm site. Source: Cofie et al 2007

Communicating results

• Publications in several outlets

– Refereed journals

– International conferences

– Book chapters

– Newsletters

Capacity building

Co-supervision

• Eight M.Sc

• Two PhDs

Several interns

Working with Donors

• French Ministry of Foreign Affairs

• SDC

• DGIS

• IDRC

• EC

Partnerships

• ARI – EAWAG, NRI, IHE-UNESCO

• NARES – Ghana, Nigeria and Sierra Leone

• Policy makers

• Farmer organisations

• NGOs

• Private Sector

Networking

• International Network of Resource Centres

on urban agriculture and food security-

Regional Coordinator

• SWITCH consortium – Chair

• SWISS NCCR – Senior member

Paradigm Shift Required

• From management of part of soil resource base

- Nutrient Cycle Management.

• From single use of resources

- Recycling and Integrated organo-mineral cum

cultural management practices

• From disregard of soil resource base

- fertility-sensitive farming practices

Lessons for IITA Soils Research

Involving other stakeholders

• Involving the necessary people through multi-stakeholder processes and platforms:– Government Agency/Ministry– Funding Agency – Metropolitan Authorities– NGO’s – The private sector– Media– User Groups/associations– Emerging initiatives – AGRA etc

• Coupled with social processes to move sustainable resource management across the research-policy-implementation interfaces

Given these experiences, it should possible to

transform the soil fertility research for

development in IITA.

Conclusion

Thanks for your attention

Associated constraints

• Lack of enabling policy environment

• Single approach – mono sectoral

• Too much focus on basic science – too

abstract for field application

• Relevant stakeholders are often left out