The role of crops in sustainable agriculture: what prospects for SEA Uplands?

Pascal Lienhard, Jean‐Christophe Castella, Florent Tivet et al.

ECHO Asia Agriculture and Community Development Conference, October 3‐6 2017, Chiang Mai, Thailand Outline

• Role of legume crops in sustainable agriculture • Main constraints for larger adoption • Windows for action for an increased integration of legume crops into traditional smallholders farming systems (SEA Uplands) • Role of legume crops in soil fertility maintenance

‒ Symbiotic Nitrogen (N) fixation

N Eq. value* Legume species (kg ha‐1 year‐1) (USD ha‐1 year‐1) (Glycine max) 17 ‐ 369 21 ‐ 465 ( unguiculata) 73 ‐ 240 92 ‐ 302 , (Vigna sp) 63 – 345 79 ‐ 435 (Cajanus cajan) 41 ‐ 90 52 ‐ 113

(adapted from Calegari et al., 1993) * Mean equivalent value of 1.26 USD/ kg of N considering urea (46% N) mean price in Vientiane market, Laos (580 USD Mg-1 in Jan 2017) • Role of legume crops in soil fertility maintenance

Nitrogen economy due to inclusion of pulses in sequential cropping (Subbarao, 1988) • Role of legume crops in soil fertility maintenance

‒ also play a role in freeing soil‐bound P (solubilization of soil phosphates through root exudates), thus making it available for the companion or subsequent crops ‒ Deep rooting of some legume species contributes to efficient nutrient utilization (recycling, notably micronutrients) ‒ Positive impact on soil biological functioning (soil microbial biomass and diversity) • Role of legume crops in soil fertility maintenance ‒ Biomass production / residues restitution (SOM maintenance)

Rice bean residue: >5 T DM/ha

Pigeon pea: >25 T DM/ha (after 2 years) • Contribution of legume crops to security and nutrition

‒ Legumes provide a good source of protein (19 to 24%), fiber, vitamins (e.g., B vitamins) and minerals (e.g. iron, potassium, magnesium and zinc) ‒ Pulses (edible seeds of legumes) have a low fat content, no cholesterol, as well as a low glycemic index (GI) • Contribution of legume crops to income improvement

Grain yield Regional trading Gross income2 Crop (Mg ha‐1) Price (USD Mg‐1)1 (USD ha‐1) Soybean 0.8 – 3.0 500 ‐ 1000 400 ‐ 3000 (Glycine max) Red rice bean 0.7 – 1.8 700 ‐ 1350 490 ‐ 2400 (Vigna umbellata) Green mung bean 0.5 – 1.4 1100 ‐ 1500 550 ‐ 2100 (Vigna radiata) Black cowpea 1.0 – 2.5 600 ‐ 1000 600 ‐ 2500 (Vigna unguiculata) White common bean 1.0 – 2.5 600 ‐ 1000 600 ‐ 2500 () Pigeon pea 0.6 – 1.8 650 ‐ 750 390 ‐ 1350 (Cajanus cajan) 1 free on board (FOB) prices for at least 24 Mg (www.alibaba.com, checked on Jan. 2017) 2 Grain yield x trading price • Contribution of legume crops to income improvement ‒ Legumes by‐products e.g. stick lac production on pigeon pea stem: 100‐200 kg dry/ha, 2 to 4 USD/kg) • Contribution of legume crops to climate change adaptation and mitigation

‒ Contribute to SOM build‐up (buffer capacity) ‒ Withstand drought (low water requirements) ‒ Low dependence on external inputs (like fertilizers) hence contribute to reduce the amount of greenhouse gases released in the atmosphere ‒ Protect soil against erosion ‒ Diversification of farming systems as basis of resilience to external shocks (climate change, economic shocks) • Despite their potential contribution to food security, nutrition and income generation, the use of legume crops is still limited in current smallholders farming systems in SEA Uplands (except in Myanmar)

‒ Most legume crops belong to the NUS (Neglected and Underutilized Species) category ‒ They are mostly marginalized or even forgotten by researchers, breeders and policy makers • Economic constraints: lack of value chains for legume crops (and related inputs)

“We can produce anything provided there is a market for it!” (Farmer from Kham district, Xieng Khouang Province, Laos)

“There is a demand for but I don’t want send a truck for 2 or 3 tons of product” (Trader from Xieng Khouang, Laos) “The quality of the grains farmers proposed me was poor: there were broken seeds, some grains had rust spots or were eaten by insects; some bags even contained soil” (Trader from Sayabouri Province, Laos) • Economic/logistic constraints: access to seeds and suitable storing/conservation technics and facilities

‒ Many legume crops (e.g. legume forages, cover crops) are difficult to find locally ‒Farmers lack of technics and facilities to protect legume seeds from pest (e.g. weevils) and humidity (lower germination rate capacity) • Agronomic/technical constraints: farmers fear of crop competition and yield losses when legumes are cultivated in association with their main crop

‒ Direct competition for nutrients, water, and light? ‒ Indirectly, through increased damage risk from birds or rodents? • Traditions: animal free roaming

‒ Communal grazing after crops harvest is a widespread traditional territory management rule in SEA rainfed areas ‒ Animal free roaming is a major constraint to the adoption of diversified cropping systems, e.g. need to protect relay crops and crop residues from animals in multi‐cropping systems • Overall trend in agriculture: intensification and simplication / uniformisation of agricultural systems along with market integration (and cash crop booming)

‒ 2000: diversity of upland crops (rice, , chili, banana etc.) and cropping Sayabouri itineraries (fallow period lengths x land preparation x varieties x cycles etc.) Boom  ‒ 2010: 90% of hybrid maize monocropping cultivated

Maize production (t) under tillage, (heavy) use of Xiengkhouang herbicide and reduced 1995 2000 2005 2010 cultivated biodiversity (1‐2 hybrids) • Windows for action: enabling environment [1] (regional) value chain studies to assess market opportunities and support the development of legume‐ based value chains ‒ FAO Regional Initiative (Zero Hunger Challenge) on Creating Enabling Environments for Nutrition‐Sensitive Food and Agriculture to Address Malnutrition (in collaboration with ICARDA and ICRISAT) ‒ Started in 2017 ‒ 4 countries (Lao PDR, Myanmar, and Cambodia) ‒ Different NUS including legumes (vigna spp) • Windows for action: enabling environment [2] innovative institutional arrangements Public‐Private Partnerships to facilitate: ‒ Input supplies: o Access to seeds: combining Gov and private institutions (e.g. ECHO Asia) for genetic resources preservation (seed banks), farmers networks development for large‐scale legume seeds production and distribution o Access to other inputs e.g. seeds inoculants, agricultural machinery ‒ Access to credit (low interest rates for legume‐prone investments) and financial incentives (premium) ‒ Promotion (awareness raising campaigns) and capacity building on legume‐based agricultural systems (innovation platforms putting together NGOs, Gov agencies and traders) • Windows for action: enabling environment [2] innovative institutional arrangements • Exploring new institutional arrangements between stakeholders of the maize sector with role playing games (XKH)

Multi‐criteria assessment Engage village communities into methods and tools to assess the participatory land‐use planning sustainability of alternative (focus on crop‐livestock cropping systems integration)

Addressing technical‐ecological constraints Addressing organizational constraints

Enhanced coordination and information‐sharing between stakeholders to move forward more efficiently on the different issues (technical, organizational, market)

Evaluate the potential for Experiment innovative approaches development of value chains for to facilitate communication and different commodities (e.g. negotiation processes (e.g. legume crops, cattle‐forages) serious simulation games) Addressing market constraints Addressing organizational constraints • Windows for action: identify the best opportunity windows for legume adoption by farmers ‒ Within Nutrition sensitive/ One Health initiatives ‒ Niche market for legume‐based organic products (pulses) ‒ Cash crops production areas where farmers are engaged in distress diversification

Boom  Bust  • Windows for action: engaging village communities into [1] participatory landscape management of their territories • Windows for action: engaging village communities into [2] on‐farm experiments

‒ Farmers learn about the best adaptation options through (1) learning by doing, (2) learning by copying ‒ Any activity supporting a collective learning process is therefore welcome (FFS, model HHs, peer‐to‐peer exchange etc.) • Conclusions

‒ Enabling environment: support to legume‐based value chain development, promotion of public‐private partnerships to support inputs supply, sensitization and capacity building, changes in diets and cooking habits, ‒Identify opportunity windows for legume adoption by farmers (distress diversification, nutrition‐sensitive initiatives, organic pulses) ‒ Engage village communities into participatory landscape management of their territories (animal roaming control, on‐ farm experiments at village landscape level) Thank you for your attention! For more information: www.eficas‐laos.net