User:Africa RISING ESAScience&RevImpact meeting

Africa RISING ESA Project Science Outcomes and Impacts Review Meeting
24-25 August 2022
Dodoma, Tanzania

Participants

1. A. Kimaro, ICRAF
2. B. Zemadim, ICRISAT
3. C. Thierfelder, CIMMYT
4. D. Mgalla, IITA
5. E. Swai, TARI-Hombolo
6. F. Kizito, IITA
7. F. Muthoni, IITA
8. G. Fischer, IITA
9. J. Kihara, Bioversity-CIAT
10. J. Manda, IITA
11. J. Odhong, IITA
12. L. Claessens, IITA
13. M. Bekunda, IITA
14. M. Mutenje, IITA (consultant)
15. P. Okori, ICRISAT
16. R. Chikowo, MSU
17. E. Temu, ICRAF
18. M. Mulundu, ZARI
19. M. Shitindi, SUA
20. H. Beliyou, IFPRI
21. E. Temu, ICRAF
22. j. Mwololo, ICRISAT-ZW
23. Y. Muzila, SUA
24. W. Mhango
25. F. Michael, IITA
26. E. Mwambo, IITA
27. G. Wanjiku, ICRISAT-MW

Objective

• Present and critically assess the major research and development outputs and deliverables of the project.
• Explore opportunities for further scaling of project outputs and outcomes beyond Africa RISING

---

File:ESA ppt Antony Kimaro.pptx - Dr. Antony Kimaro (ICRAF)

---

• Day ONE [24 August 2022]

Welcome & Opening remarks

• B. Mateete.

• In his opening remarks, Mateete refers to the event as a reunion of the Africa RISING team at the end of the program. At the same time, looking forward to continuing benefits to farmers even after the project phases out.
• He explained the purpose of the meeting was to review the research work and achievements. The meeting output would contribute to developing the end of phase two final report.

• F. Kizito.Among the things that Kizito talked about during the opening remarks focused on the significance of the partnership; according to him, even though the project was ending, a partnership built along the way would ensure the sustainability of the good work done by the project.

• He, therefore, referred to the ending stages as a transition stage, whereby partners are taking over.
• Fred pointed out that more than 15 Africa RISING team members have been a part of the Africa RISING NAFAKA partnership. Through Africa NAFAKA, more than 20 thousand farmers in the Southern Highlands and Babati are reached.

• H. Irmgard

• In her opening remarks, Irmgard appreciated the work by the new Africa RISING management.

She expressed happiness in participating in the meeting and had a chance to meet with the team again. I am grateful to have the opportunity to meet you again because I felt sad when I left in December 2021 without meeting you again". Irmgard physically met the Africa RISING ESA team in March 2019. Due to COVID-19 restrictions, she has been meeting the program team virtually. According to her, virtual meetings missed the personal touch. Speaking about the progress of Africa RISING in 11 years, Irmgard noted that 11 years of the Africa RISING Program was possible through generosity by the donor long length of funding of the program." I don't know another program that has run for so long with such support from the donors marked Irmgard. She explained even with the up and downs, such as the financial crisis in 2017, the donor stretched for support and was highly engaged in overcoming the situation and ensuring the continuity of the program and referred to the support of Jerry Glover, the project activity leader from USAID. "This was proof of confidence in Africa RISING that something good is going on and something useful will be coming out of this program. This is what I am most grateful for during my leadership in Africa RISING. Also, having met nice colleagues and had good professional and personal interaction with everybody, explained Irmgard. According to her, the review meeting was significant since it provided an opportunity to review the project's results, achievements, and overall process. "The results from the meeting will contribute to developing the final report to the donor. The donor needs to learn lessons from the Africa RISING Program and get the assurance they have invested their money very well for so long in such initiatives, she noted. Irmgard explained that it was essential to take stock of what went well and what did not go so well and referred to the failures as lessons and would support other new initiatives in sustainable intensification. In a nutshell, she appreciated the efforts and commitment of the Africa RISING project team and scaling partners. She noted though there are some failures, the project team needs to understand that those failures are actual results, and nobody should have felt bad about it. "…it is not because we are personally failed. It is because maybe the technology did not work, and this is the role of science to find this out. "I am looking forward to this review, to refresh my memory and be able to reflect more critically and conclude that maybe in future how we could do it differently," she noted. "Thank you very much for coming to this meeting and having this opportunity to meet you all again and say bye in three days," concluded Irmgard while opening remarks on the first day of the Africa RISING ESA project science review meeting.

Timeline presentation of Africa RISING, specific focus on ESA – F. Kizito, Project Manager

• Please download the PPT slides from the Link below.

[[File:|Timeline: The long walk to completion of Africa RISING ESA]] -F. Kizito (IITA) ---

• The shelters effect was more compared with the main screen and maize crop underneath. There are not many cropping seasons by drought in terms of yield productivity, but there was comparative control in each of the shelters where there are no trees. The presence of trees will be checked by the monoculture with and without trees to understand if it would cause positive or negative effects on maize alone treatments and with other treatments.

• Christian. Okay, may you please elaborate on how long and time when you put the shelter?

• Antony. We introduced before the tackling, and overall, at 50% tackling, and this was the onset of active group period on each of the seasons. In terms of precisely the month, it was mid-March, about six to eight weeks.

• Mateete.Drought performing better than ambient, needs some more explanation?

• Antony.Thanks, Mateete. In 2020, it was the year of an evenly distributed large amount of rainfall from mid of October towards the end of April/mid-May. The drought created favorable conditions for the varieties adapted to semi-arid areas compared to the ambient. Therefore, I would associate it with better performance in the drought treatments in 2020 compared to the trying year of 2019.

• Fredy.Comment. Thank you, Antony, the increased productivity is excellent. It would be a good study if carried out for more than two years and assess yield stability in the context of resilience.
• Jumbo.Comment. The design of experiments in terms of center size is something you need to pay attention to because of how the study was designed. It might be challenging to explain if the control of other factors has not been well accounted for. So, just two seasons may not be enough. That is why it seems there are speculations on performance. Other external factors should be accounted for. We need another season to see the consistency of the results.

File:ESA ppt Elirehema Swai.pptx - Mr. Elirehema Swai (TARI-Hombolo)

---

• Download presentation from link in the title above.

Discussion

• Shitindi. Swai, was there control fertilizer use under baby trials?

• Swai.Yes, Shitindi. On the calories and protein production attribute to the water shortage. Both mother and baby trials have the same treatments at the same level. And all received the same amount of fertilizers at planting and before flowering.

• Shitindi. Thanks, Swai, how about the issue of moistures, the difference in crop performance substitute to terms of texture between mother plots with clay soils, and most baby plots with another type of soil. Under normal conditions, I expected the clay soil to have higher moisture retention than the other type of soil. If the two kinds of soil receive the same amount of rain, the expectation is that the clay soil would retain more moisture for crop use.

• Swai. We conducted the study across the season; it was impossible to obtain the data from a single event. During the experiment time, there was not enough soil moisture to allow the wetting of the soil under the clay. Where there is inadequate wetting, the impact of soil water impact would be difficult. Also, there was no water held between the replanting during the season, which would make the difference. But also, the experience from the semi-arid shows when there is limited soil moisture supply in the very wet season, farmers could get something under a semi clay soil compare to typical clay soil.

• Mulundu. In the two years that the study was undertaken, was the normal rainfall attended for the study site? If not, are there are possibilities of having extra rainfall in the season, for example, if the study site can attend something in a range of at least 600-700 mm, has it been a thought that probably if the rainfall were higher, in that case, the performance of the two treatments would have different performance?

• Swai. Thanks, Mulundu, We carried the study in a semi-arid area. Usually, there is an average rainfall of around 550-600 mm of rain per season. Because of the research and project time limit, it is difficult to conduct another study. Another study will require three seasons consequently to quantify the result.

• Mateete.Comment. The first season which is entirely wet, is a good blessing in the study and should show that the technologies do not work all the time and everywhere, this should be stressed in this reporting.
• Regis. Swai, during the introduction, you talked about the hardpan due to livestock tractors, etc. to reinforce the ideas under that aspect, it would be nice to show the existence of the hardpans through empirical data from the landscape, which would strengthen your arguments by reinforcing the paper with such kind of data.

• Swai. Thanks, Regis. It is unfortunate. We did not conduct such type of study.

• Regis. Noted, Swai. Also, there are concerns that there are limiting issues when it comes to infiltration, and sometimes it may lead to rainfall intensity above a certain threshold, and you turn to have a runoff. So probably we need to get data on how much moisture was infiltrated and how much was run off under certain rainfall conditions. I hope that kind of data is available.

• Swai. Well, Regis, my study was confined to cumulative infiltration as such. But, I will look at it if we can go further working on your idea. We had no automatic rain weather station that could follow in terms of rainfall intensity. Besides, we had only the standard ranges to measure the rainfall amount and other paraments. The rainfall intensity was not difficult to measure.

• Regis.Okay, How about the runoff? It would be essential to show because it is a proxy for infiltration if you could measure runoff. Do you have ideas about that, or was your study based on soil moisture only?

• Swai. In phase one of the Africa RISING, another study was undertaken in the Kongwa Kiteto district and involved many parameters (runoff, soil loss, soil water content). Also, there was rip tillage using the oxen-drawn implement. In that study, we measured the runoff, and the impact was very evident. The rip tillage compares to conventional farmer tillage has less runoff. Tied ridge had low runoff, and traditional tillage of farmers had high runoff.