Decision support toolsTypes and uses

ASHC team…

Outline1. Types of decisions made and decision making process2. Need for Decision Support (DS) tools (knowledge gaps)3. Existing (common) DS tools4. Reasons for lack of use of DS tools5. Characteristics of good DS tools6. DS tools for SSA

i) Some constraints identified in the region.ii) Suggested DS tools required

-overview-DS tool for Rock Phosphate (PRDSS)- Use of nutrient concentration norms (simple tool-excel sheet)-Using a complex tool (QUEFTS) to derive simple paper tool

7. Way forward

Decision making process

Decision making process (Farmer)

Protein maize

Pigeon pea

Hybrid maize

Pigeon pea

Owned land Communal land

Soil inputs:

Mazao Fertilizer

FYM (?)

Land

preparation

Planting:

Intra-row

intercropping

Pesticide

use

Harvesting Home consumption

and sale

Post-harvest

practices

Weeding:

Manual

herbicide

Decision making process (Hai Region)

Non-agricultural

Prioritize use of resources

Agricultural

Crops Livestock

Cropping systemsOwned land Communal

Management practices

ISFM-inorganic fertilizer

-organic inputs

-Rock phosphate

-Deep tillage

Management practices

ISFM-inorganic fertilizer

-organic fertilizer*

Picture- landscape with many farms

FArm-scale Resource Management

SIMulator (FARMSIM) – Giller et al.,

Climate

Market

Common land

Off-farm

HouseholdObjectives & decisions

Investment, allocation & expenditure

Labour availability

CropPotential,

H2O - & nutrient-limited yields

Weed competition

SoilSoil C dynamics

Water, N, P & K

availability

LIVSIMFeed supply & demand

Meat, milk, traction, manure

HEAPSIMManure collection,

storage & quality

Field

Farmsim

Need for DS tools: Knowledge gaps

Farmers

ResearchersExtensionists,

etc

All

Definitions

Examples of DS tools

End-user

Leaf colour charts

Soil quality indicators**

QUEFTS***

Cropping calendars*

Complex

Moderately complex

simple

DSSAT***

Phosphate Rock DSS***Slightly complex

Tool

Researchers

All

All

All

Researchers

Researchers

Complexity

Reasons for lack of use

• Require use of computers: lack of a computer base among the population

• Complex to learn and use

• use of inputs which are unavailable or inconvenient or difficult to collect

• failure to show cost benefits (Parker and Campion, 1997)

•Sometimes “ideal” DS tools lacking

Characteristics of “good” decision

support tools

-Clear objectives -topic relevant to farmers-issues farmers are finding difficult to think through and solve-easy to use- simple, quick to use-simple-easy to learn-information needed to use the tool should be easy to get, not immense

Problems identified

Summary of problems/opportunities identified in Rwanda, DR Congo, Tanzania and Kenya

● Nutrient deficiencies (e.g. N, P, K)

● Fertilizers are expensive, unavailable, quality?, price unrelated to nutrient content

● Poor yields and unreliable markets

● Erratic/inadequate rainfall

● Plant population and arrangement

● Pests, diseases, striga.

Possible tools

Cropping calendarhttp://www.fao.org/agriculture/seed/cropcalendar/welcome.do

To inoculate or not

Choice of crops

Plant population &

arrangement

Types/ amounts of

fertilizers

Identify the “best” fertilizer options

Timing of activities

Decision Tool/ Description of tool

Comparison of different cropping systems

Comparison inoculated vs non-inoculated

Identify “best” plant population and arrangement

Examples of indicator plants

Couch grass

(Cynodon dactylon)

Bracken fern

(Pteridophyte spp.)

Striga hermonthica

Phosphate Rock DSS: source- Singh 2005

Relative Agronomic Effectiveness

(Maize)Cost ratio of TSP/MPR

Minimum inputs: RP-source, soil pH, Crop,...

Compositional Nutrient Diagnosis (CND)

norms

Insert figure – nutrient conventration vs yield

Compositional Nutrient Diagnosis (CND)

norms

sample

Foliar nutrient concentrations

(%)

filling

value geom

row-centered log

ratios indices

N P K Ca Mg Rd G VN VP VK VCa VMg VRd IN IP IK ICa IMg IRd

1 2.29 0.22 3.88 1.62 0.60 91.39 2.36 -0.03 -2.39 0.50 -0.37 -1.37 3.66 -2.16 -0.42 -0.65 1.68 0.89 -1.74

2 3.15 0.18 3.88 0.98 0.61 91.20 2.21 0.35 -2.53 0.56 -0.81 -1.29 3.72 0.34 -1.25 -0.27 0.15 1.29 -1.03

3 3.15 0.20 3.03 1.21 0.50 91.92 2.17 0.37 -2.41 0.34 -0.58 -1.47 3.75 0.47 -0.55 -1.62 0.96 0.40 -0.71

Want to show excel sheet (tool for lab )

(will improve on this!!)

From QUEFTS to paper tools

Parameters Possible sources of info/data

Indigenous soil

supply NPK

On-going nutrient omission trials

Publications, databases

Potential yields Trials, farmers, databases, publications

NUE Trials, databases, publications

Recovery fractions Trials, databases, publications

Economic benefits Input/output markets, farmers

QUEFTS-Janssen et al., 1990)

Qs:

1. Can tools developed in one

region be used in another region?

2. what tools are possible?

3. Are there tools in shelves?

Last slide and sign off

To be done! Will look for pic of happy farmers

ASHC is supported by the Bill and Melinda Gates foundation