Milestone 7 Final Report

Download PDF
© 2017 The Association for Water and Rural Development
RESILIM-O:
Resilience in the Limpopo Basin
ProgramOlifants
MILESTONE 7: Final Report
Under the
Lower Olifants catchment
Agricultural Support Initiative
(AgriSI)
30/11/2017
MILESTONE 7: FINAL REPORT
| 2
Acknowledgements
The USAID: RESILIM-O project is funded by the U.S. Agency for International Development under
USAID/Southern Africa RESILIENCE IN THE LIMPOPO BASIN PROGRAM (RESILIM). The RESILIM-O project is
implemented by the Association for Water and Rural Development (AWARD), in collaboration with
partners. Cooperative Agreement nr AID-674-A-13-00008.
© Association for Water and Rural Development (AWARD)
P O Box 1919
Hoedspruit 1380
Limpopo, South Africa
T 015-793 0503
W award.org.za
Company Reg. No. 98/03011/08
Non-profit org. Reg. No. 006 821
MILESTONE 7: FINAL REPORT
| 3
ABOUT USAID: RESILIM
USAID’s Resilience in the Limpopo River Basin (RESILIM) program addresses ongoing degradation in the
Limpopo River Basin in southern Africa, where people face water shortages, increased floods, and declines
in crop productivity as climate change further stresses an already water limited region.
There are two components to the program; one operating at a basin-scale (RESILIM-B, which is
implemented by USA-based Chemonics and addresses similar issues at the scale of the four SADC member
states that share the Limpopo Basin (South Africa, Botswana, Zimbabwe and Mozambique) and a
catchment-scale project (RESILIM-O) thatIt is being implemented by the Association for Water andRural
Development (AWARD). Both projects share the same overall objectives. You can find out more
information on the RESILIM projects on www.usaid.gov websiteand www.award.org.za.
The USAID’s RESILIM-O focusses on the Olifants catchment. The program aims to reduce the vulnerability
of people and ecosystems in the Olifants Catchment specifically, by improving how transboundary natural
resources are managed. By understanding the systemic causes of vulnerability, including climate
vulnerability, it is promoting new ways of thinking and acting to promote integrated water and
biodiversity management.
ABOUT AWARD
At AWARD, we recognize that the natural world’s resources are limited, and undergoing rapid depletion
and transformation. We know current practicesof use and management are inadequate to deal with the
changes and challenges we are facing. We design practical interventions to address the vulnerability of
people and ecosystems, and merge considerations from both environmental and social perspectives. Our
approach involves thinking across disciplines, boundaries and systems.
We are working with diverse people and institutions in the water and biodiversity sectors in the Olifants
River Catchment to understand the multiple vulnerabilities to change, including climate change. Along
with quality scientific contributions, our engagement in the socio-political context of the Olifants River
Catchment allows us begin to begin to institutionalize integrated, resilience-based practices, providing a
foundation for robust development policy and practice in the in this river catchment, and beyond.
The Olifants Catchment: An overview
The Olifants River Catchment falls within the Limpopo River Basin, which is part of an international
drainage basin that stretches across South Africa, Mozambique, Zimbabwe and Botswana. In fact, the
Olifants River contributes nearly 40% of the water that flows in the Limpopo River making it an important
catchment in the system as a whole.
MILESTONE 7: FINAL REPORT
| 4
At the heart of this catchment isthe Olifants River, a vital artery that flows for 560 kilometres through
South Africa and into Mozambique, where it is known as the Rio dos Elefantes in Mozambique.
This mighty river originates in South Africa’s Mpumalanga Highveld, flowing northwards before curving in
an easterly direction through the Kruger National Park and into Mozambique, finally finding rest in the
salty water of the Indian Ocean near Xai Xai, just north of Maputo.
The main tributaries of the Olifants River are the Wilge, Elands, Ga-Selati, Klein Olifants, Steelpoort,
Blyde, Klaserie and Timbavati Rivers.
Along with its tributaries, it is one of the six major Lowveld river systems, occupying an area just short of
55 000 square kilometres. It traverses three provinces in South Africa; Gauteng, Mpumalanga and Limpopo.
About 3.5 million people live on the South African side of the catchment. In Mozambique, it flows through
Gaza Province, which is home to about 700 000 people.
A system under change
Our catchment is the foundation of our livelihoods and development. Yet the river and associated natural
resources in the Olifants Catchment are under threat...
Unchecked pollution, inappropriate land resource use, weak and poorly enforced policies and regulations
and poor protection of habitats and biodiversity are degrading the Olifants at an alarming rate. What’s
more, the area is however under threat from factors such as mining for heavy metals, inappropriate land
management, rural sprawl and unsustainable use of natural resources. This affects the level of goods and
services provided by the ecosystem.
The diverse population groups living in the Olifants Catchment all have one thing in common; they rely on
the river and the catchment’s natural biodiversity for their livelihoods. This reliancecan be direct or
indirect. Rural communities rely on it for things such as traditional medicine, grazing and browse, fuel,
food and housing materials. Some people in river-side communities harvest reeds, collect water from the
river for washing and drinking and use it for recreational and spiritual practices. Subsistence farmers in
MILESTONE 7: FINAL REPORT
| 5
Mozambique rely heavily on the catchment’s flood plains. There are also large mines and associated
industries, large scale agriculture and the wildlife economy, which all rely on a healthy, functioning river
system. Often people forget that what they do upstream affects people down stream, sometimes with dire
consequences.
The catchment is our home and it is worth investing in its future. The work reported here is part of the
ongoing activities of the RESILIM- O project under the grant from USAID: Southern Africa.
MILESTONE 7: FINAL REPORT
| 6
Project partners
Mahlatini Development Foundation (MDF) is a small public benefit non-profit organization consisting of
rural development practitioners who specialize in participatory learning and action processes, sustainable
natural resource management and low external input farming systems, including a focus on rain water
harvesting, conservation agriculture, intensive homestead food production, food security, micro finance
and enterprise development.
MDF designs and implements rural development programmes and training processes providing learning
processes for adults all the way from semi-literate farmers to post graduate university level. We work in
partnership with government and non-government organisations alike. We are sensitive to and mainstream
where possible gender, disability and people living with HIV/AIDs
MILESTONE 7: FINAL REPORT
| 7
Contents
Table of Contents
1 Executive Summary .........................................................................................................9
1.1 Progress for the reporting period...................................................................................9
2 Project Objectives ..........................................................................................................9
2.1 Overview of RESILIM-O Project objectives.........................................................................9
2.2 Sub-grant Project Objectives ...................................................................................... 10
3 Milestone Description..................................................................................................... 10
3.1 Definition of milestone and purpose.............................................................................. 10
4 Approach/ Process/ Activities.......................................................................................... 12
4.1 Summary of activities ............................................................................................... 12
4.2 Progress and Results.................................................................................................12
4.2.1 Learning and mentoring....................................................................................... 12
4.2.2 Innovations and Experimentation........................................................................... 16
4.2.3 Collaborative work............................................................................................. 20
4.2.4 Networking ...................................................................................................... 23
4.3 Success and Challenges in meeting milestone. .................................................................23
4.4 MERL.................................................................................................................... 23
4.4.1 Indicators: Assessment November 2017.................................................................... 23
4.4.2 Project Life Change Questions:.............................................................................. 25
4.4.3 Work Plan for 2018............................................................................................. 26
4.5 Other activities....................................................................................................... 27
5 Overall Progress of Project.............................................................................................. 27
5.1 Integration of milestone status.................................................................................... 27
5.2 Project risk and mitigation summary............................................................................. 28
5.2.1 Implementation risks and mitigation....................................................................... 28
5.2.2 Financial risks and mitigation................................................................................ 29
6 Conclusion and Recommendations..................................................................................... 29
7 Appendices................................................................................................................. 30
7.1 Appendix 1: DICLAD Modules 2 & 3 with AgriSI stakeholders in the Lower Olifants 24th to 26th Oct
2017 ......................................................................................................................... 30
Overallpurpose....................................................................................................... 30
Expected outcomes.................................................................................................. 30
7.1.1 Participants...................................................................................................... 30
MILESTONE 7: FINAL REPORT
| 8
7.1.2 Recap of concepts covered in DICLAD Module 1.......................................................... 30
7.1.3 Outlining impacts............................................................................................... 32
7.1.4 Botshabelo CSA practices..................................................................................... 32
7.1.5 Lepelle, Oaks and Finale CSA practices.................................................................... 34
7.1.6 Sedawa CSA practices......................................................................................... 36
7.1.7 Learnings......................................................................................................... 38
7.1.8 Future CC actions.............................................................................................. 38
7.1.9 Planning for DICLAD-AgriSI Module 3 (2018)............................................................... 39
7.2 Appendix 2: Garden Monitoring narrative report; April-November 2017................................... 41
7.2.1 Botshabelo....................................................................................................... 42
7.2.2 Lepelle ........................................................................................................... 43
7.2.3 Oaks/Finale...................................................................................................... 44
7.2.4 Willows........................................................................................................... 45
7.2.5Sedawa ........................................................................................................... 46
MILESTONE 7: FINAL REPORT
| 9
1Executive Summary
1.1Progress for the reporting period
During this quarter focus was given to:
The distribution of 17 drip kits to participants with the 3 (1 x 5m) trench beds and mentoring in
installation of these
Initiation of a new learning group in Sedawa-extension (Turkey); Baseline discussions, climate
change adaptation introduction.
Initiation of 2 village savings and loan associations, upon request from participants (Botshabelo,
Sedawa)
Re-introducing Conservation Agriculture to a larger group of participants, including cover crops
sunflower, millet/sorghum and cowpeas.
Natural pest and disease control workshops with all learning groups to consolidate and expand
knowledge and options.
DICLAD (Module 2-3) workshops have been held for exploration of Climate Change impacts and adaptation
for all 6 villages (3workshops). In addition, in collaboration with Lima RDF, the DICLAD process has been
introduced to a village in Sekororo, upon their request, to introduce the concepts of climate smart
agricultural practices into their food security programme.
Further learning workshops have been run for all 6 villages, to provide an overview of all thepractices
introduced thus far, setting up of more drip kits (17)and a re-introduction of Conservation Agriculture
trial process for the coming planting season including; intercropping; maize-beans and cowpeas, bird
resistant seed (sorghum, millet), cover crops (sunflower, sun hemp) and mulching options. An animal
drawn planter (Knapik) is to be loaned to some participants working in bigger fields to test.
Attention has been given to support the local facilitators in their processes of providing advice and
support to participants and in completion of the garden monitoring forms. A total of 101 have been
translated and analysed (April-Nov 2017).
Informal discussions have been held with learning groups toelucidate their continued intervention and
learning needs and broad action plans have been put in place, in anticipation of continuation of the
process into 2018. In this respect 2 Village Savings and Loan Associations have been initiated (Botshabelo,
Sedawa), fodder production options for livestock have been introduced and an initial exploration into
poultry production (both broilers and layers) has been undertaken (Botshabelo). Two new learning groups
have been set up in the Sedawa-Mametje villages upon request form participants.
PARTICIPANTS THIS PERIOD
SEEDS OF LIGHT: Trygive Nxumalo
MAHLATHINI: Erna Kruger, Sylvester Selala, Nozipho Zwane (Intern)
AWARD: Cryton Zazu, Bigboy Mkhabela,
2Project Objectives
2.1Overview of RESILIM-O Project objectives
RESILIM-O is large multi-faceted, multi-stakeholder, cross-boundary programmeto reduce vulnerability to
climate change through building improved transboundary water and biodiversity governance and
MILESTONE 7: FINAL REPORT
| 10
management of the Olifants Basin through the adoption of science-based strategies that enhance the
resilience of its people and ecosystems through systemic and social learning approaches. The programme
has been running for four years and is being implemented byAWARD (The Association for Water and Rural
Development) with funding from USAID.
The Agricultural Support Initiative (AgriSI) was initiated as a sub-grant process within the larger
programmed towards the end of 2016. This initiative works specifically with climate change adaptation
processes with smallholder communities in the lower Olifants River basin. It is being implemented jointly
by Mahlathini Development Foundation and AWARD.
The Agricultural Support Initiative (AgriSI) addresses two of the RESILIM-O programme objectives directly:
i. To institutionalize systemic, collaborative planning and action for resilience of ecosystems and
associated livelihoods through enhancing the capacity of stakeholders to sustainably manage natural
resources of the Olifants River Basin under different scenarios
ii. To reduce vulnerability to climate change and other factors by supporting collective action, informed
adaptation strategies and practices and tenable institutional arrangements.
2.2Sub-grant Project Objectives
Sound agro-ecological practices for soil and water conservation (SWC) and the ability to self-organise and
act collectively are regarded as fundamental for building adaptive capacity and resilienceto climate
change. Not only do agro-ecological farming approaches require minimum external inputs which may be
expensive and increase dependency if subsidised – but they foster farmers’ sensethat they can build
sustainable futures from local inputs and efforts. With knowledge about the potential impacts of climate
change included in the learning journey, farmers can make purposeful decisions around practices such as
seed and crop-type. This approach supports livelihood diversification also fundamental for increased
resilience – through ‘value-added’ associated activities such as seedling production, tree nurseries and
bee-keeping.
The overall aim of the Agricultural Support Initiative is to enhance the resilience of the people and
ecosystems in selected villages (5-6) in the Lower Olifants River basin, using a systemic social learning
approach, exploring the question: What are you learning about the socio-economic and biophysical
characteristics of your environment and how these are changing and how are you able to respond to that?
The overarching objective of this work is to provide support for increased adaptive capacity and resilience
to the effects of climate change for households involved in agriculture in select communities of the
Olifants River Catchment through:
-Improved soil and water conservation and agro-ecological practices for increased food security
-Livelihood diversification and supplementation through alternative climate resistant production;
-Increased community empowerment as a result of self-organisation and collective action.
-
3Milestone Description
3.1Definition of milestone and purpose
MILESTONE 7: FINAL REPORT
| 11
Each milestone and progress report indicate activities under the broad themes of learning and mentoring,
introduction to innovations and experimentation, collaborative work and networking undertaken during
the reporting period.
The table below summarises these activities against the milestone and indicate achievement of these
milestones.
Table 1: Summary of deliverable completion under Milestone 7: October-December 2017
Completed?
Expected
outcomes
Completed?
Verification
documenta
tion
Completed?
Reference
Learning &
Mentoring:
In all 6
communitie
s each 2
days
C
-LF’s provide training
and mentoring
alongside field team
-LF’s undertake garden
mentoring and
monitoring with
farmers (3-4 days
each), supported by
field team
-Learning groups;
learning sessions
overview of practices-
incl Conservation
Agriculture, review and
planning for coming
season
C
C
C
Progress report on
outcomes
including the
following
documentation:
1. Photos & photo
diaries
2. Farmer work
plans
3. Garden
monitoring
4. Monthly
assessments
5. Cluster activity
records
6. Event
materials,
attendance
registers
C
1. Photos in
reports andAll
photos saved in
directories and
kept by Erna
2.Farmer work
plans are
recorded in the
garden monitoring
forms
3. 44 Garden
monitoring forms
across six villages
4. In this report
5.Appended to
this report
6.Appended to
this report
Intro to
innovations
and
experiment
ation: In all
6
communitie
s each 2
days
C
- Garden monitoring
including trainers and
LFs- all participants
visited at least once by
LFs and a garden
monitoring form
completed
C
C
Collaborativ
e work: In
all 6
communitie
s each 2
days
C
-Distribution and
construction of drip
kits (x17) for
participants with the
three 1x5m trench
beds.
C
C
Networking:
1. Local
facilitator
networking
2. Open
days, cross
visits
C
- 3 DICLAD workshops
exploring CC
adaptation options,
practices and future
activities
C
NC
C
MILESTONE 7: FINAL REPORT
| 12
3. Review
and
planning
sessions
-Cross visits and open
days
- Recap of learning,
introduction of topics
requested for coming
season
C
4Approach/ Process/ Activities
4.1Summary of activities
This section gives an indication of activities undertaken during the reporting period to achieve the
outcomes for this period, time spent and people involved.
Table 2: Summary of activities for the reporting period October- December 2017.
DATE
DESCRIPTIONOF ACTIVITY
Time
WHO WAS
INVOLVED
2017/10/02-04
Working with new intern Nozipho Zwane to set up
database for garden monitoring forms
2 days
Erna
2017/10/03-05
Write up of learning events for groups
2 days
Sylvester
2017/10/20
Preparation for DICLAD modules 2,3
1 day
Erna
2017/10/23-27
DICLAD workshops x 3, including team planning and
reflection
5 days
Erna, Sylvester
2017/10/30-
11/05
Delivery of drip kits mentoring in construction, garden
monitoring progress, introduction of CA for farmer trials
in 3 villages (Willows, Botshabelo, Sedawa)
7days
Sylvester
2017/10/30
Meeting with INR to discuss social enterprise options,
Planning with Lima head office team for DICLAD
collaboration in Sekororo
1 day
Erna
2017/10/02-
11/30
Part-time work on garden monitoring database
10
days/month
Nozipho
2017/11/09-11
Write up of monthly activities and reports
3 days
Sylvester
2017/11/20-24
Compilation of final report, database analysis
5 days
Erna
2017/11/26-
12/02
Travel to Limpopo, Team preparation and conducting 2
DICLDA processes (2 days ea) for new groups; Sedawa
Ext and Sekororo. Introduction of savings groups, poultry
production
7 days
Erna, Sylvester,
Mazwi,
Temakholo,
Karabo
2017/12/04-08
Finalisation of CA trial set- up for participants
5 days
Sylvester
2017/12/11-15
Set up of quantitative measurement tools; weather
station, chameleon probes, run-off and taking of
gravimetric soil samples
6 days
Sylvester
Sylvester: 35 days, Erna: 20 days
4.2Progress and Results
4.2.1Learning and mentoring
As new participants join in every workshop, this latest round of training was meant to provide an overview
of practices introduced thus far. For this participants in the group spoke to what they have learnt and
gave descriptions of the practices.
MILESTONE 7: FINAL REPORT
| 13
As an example, in Willows the following practices were discussed:The snapshot covered soil water
movement (use of line level in design of furrows, diversion ditches), soil testing (bottle test), conservation
agriculture (no till and intercropping), soil fertility (trench beds, eco-circles, shallow trenches, liquid
manure), crop management (mixed cropping, mulching, natural pest and disease control), water
management (RWH, use of grey water) and seeds (bird resistant sorghum, millet and other seeds). Due to
time constraints, after thediscussion of these practice participants chose to focus on water management
and natural pestand disease control.
Greywater management options are important in these villages as there are times that this is the only
water available to participants- albeit very little (ave 25l/day). Thus, tower gardens were introduced now
in all the villages. These are upright beds, with a high ash content in the soil mix to bind the soaps in the
greywater as well as a central column of small stones for filtration.
Above left and right: Sylvester demonstrates the planting of spinach seedlings into the sides of the tower garden in
Willows. And participants mix the soil, manure and ash for placing into the tower garden in Botshabelo
In other learning review workshops, such as Botshabelo, topics were covered that participants still do not
feel too confident in; in this case they chose; five finger principles, liquid manureand natural pest and
disease control. This was also covered again in some more detail in Sedawa.
Above left and right: Multipurpose plants that assist with pest and disease control were introduced; e.g. num-num,
aloes, lemon grass, rosemary, borage, chilies, parsley and coriander. And pest control brews using onions, chilli,
green bar sunlight soap and paraffin were demonstrated. Those few participants who have already been using these
remedies feel they work very well for the common pests they have.
MILESTONE 7: FINAL REPORT
| 14
4.2.1.1Summary of Learning and mentoring and Future Activities
These have been summarised for the four villages where the learning review was conducted.
Table 3: Summary of planning for continued activitiesin four villages
WILLOWS
BOTSHABELO
FINALE
SEDAWA
Group expansion
LF's to go to new
individuals and
mentor them
through the
gardening practices
Mametje would like to be a
learning group by
themselves. There are many
participants
More training
sessions to be run
covering the whole
range of practices
Another expansion group is
to be started in Sedawa-
closer to the main road
(Turkey).
More in-depth
information on some
of the topics
Future activities
Cross visit to Sedawa
to see and learn
about the
underground RWH
tanks
Reintroduce line level and
way to make diversion
furrows as well as planting -
as it has worked well for
some. Most cannot
remember how
Mixed cropping works well
and will be expanded. Herbs
are resistant to pests and
diseases and are more heat
tolerant than the vegetable
crops - so are a good idea,
but use is limited
Incorporate cover
crops in field
cropping - for
livestock fodder
Reintroduce CA and include
cowpea, millet and sorghum
Marketing options for herbs
to be explored (coriander,
parsley, garlic chives,
rosemary, fennel).
Discussed herb stands in
town and local farmers
markets
Grow fodder and
store for winter; e.g.
Lucerne
Potential to start chicken
projects
CA re- introduction
and working on
bigger fields- animal
traction options-
introduce animal
drawn planter -
Knapik
With shallow and sandy soil
and use of salty water,
participants believe
techniques such as mulching
work to some extent
Saving for increased water
supply. They have
approached the chief to
make a small dam in the
stream bed. Participants are
saving towards this (R20-
R200/month for the pipes)
Making trench beds difficult
but worth it,
Setting up a savings group
MILESTONE 7: FINAL REPORT
| 15
Based on the observations
made during the cross visit
to Sedawa, participants
believe tunnels might have a
good potential to improving
their vegetable production.
Planting cover crops in the
bigger fields outside the
homestead and also
exploring other fodder
production options
Requests/ issues
People lose a lot of
cattle during the
winter. They want to
know of options for
increasing water and
food supply for
livestock
Options for helping
participants to
remember
information: The
local facilitator could
try things with
individuals during
household visits
Mulch attracts the
homesteads or the
neighbourschickens to the
garden, and they destroy
their vegetables.
Assistance from MDF,
AWARD, to also work with
Municipality for increased
water supply and to find
ways to raise funds to do
this at community level.
Plant and seed
samples brought to
the workshops are
not enough for
everyone- is it
possible for MDF to
supply more
Participants could
have monthly
meetings where they
discuss some of the
innovations
introduced (how the
work for each
individual and why
they do not work for
others)
Participants’ willingness to
try a new innovation is
depended on how well that
innovation does. But how
well this does depends on
several factors which
include, success of the
demonstration and the
maintenance afterwards
Access to manure is a
challenge in Sedawa;
chicken projects now charge
for chicken litter and
demand is big where they
have access to the dip tanks
for example.
Can the LFs be
trained to run the
same workshops at
the same level as
MDF - At the moment
the information they
provide is a little
limited.
Having revision
workshops every once
in a while
Advice on where to find
markets for herbs. Many
grow well in these
conditions but participants
have limited use for them
Growing fodder species -
more livestock owners have
joined the group and
interest is considerable
mainly in fields, with
supplementary irrigation
options
Sepedi notes
(farmers handouts)
Anything to do with digging
(trench beds, double
digging, eco circle,
diversions furrows) is almost
impossible in the
community, with the top
soil of about 10 to 15 cm in
depth (where the digging
has been done the
production is better)
MILESTONE 7: FINAL REPORT
| 16
Suggestions
Putting storage
containers closer to
where kids discard
water after taking a
bath (this will help
them remember to
pour the greywater
into the container)
Participants requested that
we make a diagram with
pictures of all practices and
how they are linked
together. Some of the
information is only required
when one is faced with a
particular problem (e.g.
pest control), therefore it
would be useful for us to
have something to remind
ourselves.
Need pictures and notes to
be able to remember
practices- especially the
pest and disease control
remedies, liquid manures
and mixed cropping
In addition to the above-mentioned ideas MDF is keen to also explore the following options in future
activities with the groups:
Seed saving
Value adding and food preparation
Seed varieties suitable for a changing climate (including planting calendars)
Experimentation with decisions support tools for choice and combinations of CSA practices
Livestock integration
Erosion control strategies in and around villages to augment gardening activities
Communities of Practice of all relevant stakeholders to explore increased access to water and
more efficient use of available water
Fruit production options
4.2.2Innovations and Experimentation
Garden monitoring has continued in this quarter. Summaries have again been made of local innovations
and introduced innovations being practiced by participants
MILESTONE 7: FINAL REPORT
| 17
Figure 1: Implementation of new innovations for the periods of April -July 2017 and Aug-Nov 2017
Thus far garden monitoring has been compiled for different individuals over time, rather than repeat
monitoring sessions for the same individuals. The above two figures thus represent an overview of
practices implemented and can show some trends of increase in uptake of certain practices.
RWH storage has increased substantially in this last quarter- but is to be expected as the rainy season has
commenced. Along with this, participants have now dug out contour ditches (furrows and ridges) for
cropping and worked with cut off drains and diversion ditches. These are also activities related to
implementation in the rainy season. More participants have been actively undertaking experimentation
Figure 2: Implementation for local good practice for the periods April-July 2017 and Aug-Nov 2017
55%
8%
74%
79%
16%
74%
95%
82%
11%
39%
39%
18%
18%
8%
58%
Cut off drains/diversion…
Contours, line levels
Stone bunds
Trench beds
Eco circles
Mixed cropping
Seed and seedlings
Mulching
Liquid manure
Nat P&D control
CA
Bucket filters/ drip kits
Tunnel
RWH storage
Experimentation
% Implementation of new
innovations (n=38); April-
July 2017
%
68
82
41
77
2
52
66
75
2
43
2
11
11
86
73
Cut off drains/diversion…
Contours, line levels
Stone bunds
trench beds
Eco circles
Mixed cropping
Seed and seedlings
mulching
Liquid manure
Nat P&D control
CA
Bucket filters/ drip kits
Tunnel
RWH storage
Experimentation
% Implementation of new
innovations (N=44); Aug-Nov
2017
No. of participants
19
32
21
9
10
26
29
0
32
Furrows and ridges
Multipurpose…
Legumes
RWH
Grey water use
Nursery
Seed saving
banana basins
Farming income
Implementation of local good
practice (N=44); Aug-Nov 2017
No. of participants
27
34
17
36
24
10
26
14
23
2,3
Furrows and ridges
Multipurpose…
Legumes
RWH
Grey water use
Nursery
Seed saving
Farming income
Food (x/wk)
Implementation of local good
practice (N=38); April- July 2017
AverageNo of participants
MILESTONE 7: FINAL REPORT
| 18
For the implementation of local good practices, the trends for the two seasons (quarters) have remained
reasonably constant. In this instance the reduction in implementation in the more recent periodof furrows
and ridges and RWH denote a greater uptake in the improved versions of these practices (asshown in the
two small graphs above these) rather than a reduction of implementation of the practices per se.
Overall, the following summaries of implementation of practices and innovations can be made for this
intervention
Figure 3: Overall implementation of adaptive practices in the Mametje area for April=November 2017
The graph above indicates the overall uptake of practices across the six villages in Mametje where these
were introduced through training, demonstrations and farmer experimentation. Uptake of practices to
improve soil fertility, water holding capacity and soil and water conservation have been well received and
more than 70% of participants have implemented these ideas over the two growing seasons of this process.
This is in fact an extremely high level of uptake and denotes a high level of motivation from participants.
A few practices did not “stick” despite our efforts of introduction and re-introduction of these ideas.
These include making and using of liquid manure and eco-circles, which uses a bottle drip system. The use
of natural pest and disease control and conservation agriculture for field crops can also still be improved.
For the latter two practices- review and farmer experimentation processes have been done very recently
(Nov-Dec 2017)
Appendix 2 (7.2) provides a narrative report for each of the six villages showing indications of their
assessment of implementation of practices using the traffic light idea of red, yellow and green.
A concerted effort to assist these participants financially and technically to improve upon their rainwater
harvesting processes and infrastructure is suggested. Considerable funding will be required for this, but
not major strides in increased production can be expected without such interventions.
55
51
51
76
9
61
72
72
12
37
16
13
12
41
61
Cut off drains/diversion ditches
Contours, line levels
Stone bunds
Trench beds
Eco circles
Mixed cropping
Seed and seedlings
Mulching
Liquid manure
Nat P&D control
CA
Bucket filters/ drip kits
Tunnel
RWH storage
Experimentation
% Implementation of New ideas and innovations
April-Nov 2017 (N=100)
MILESTONE 7: FINAL REPORT
| 19
Figure 4: Summary of uptake of innovations for the learning group members.
The diagram above summarises the overall implementation of good practices, both introduced and
local/traditional good practice. Local good practices such as seed saving, furrows and ridges, multipurpose
plants, propagation and nurseries and use of grey water is used by around 40-60% of the participants.
MILESTONE 7: FINAL REPORT
| 20
About 40% of participants are able to produce enough food from their gardens to eat from these 2x/week
on average and consuming an average of 2 different types of vegetablesper week. In addition, 46% of
participants are making supplementary incomes from their vegetable production. These incomes range
between R80-R2400/ month. The most common level of income is around R200/month. The average
income from vegetable production is R700/ month. This is indeed an impressive achievement given the
small plots under production and the numerous production constraints that these participants face.
4.2.2.1Individual experimentation
As farmer experimentation is the main learning avenue of this farmer innovation process, individual
experimentation has been promoted at all learning workshops as well as through the local facilitators.
Participants were initially a bit slow on the uptake of this, but they have now learnt that this is a great
way to find out things and make decisions for themselves.A total of 61% of participants have undertaken
experimentation in their gardens and fields.
Below is a summary of the practices that participants have experimented with. This information was
gleaned from garden monitoring forms compiled for July-November 2017. It can be seen that working with
trench beds, mulching and mixed cropping have been the most popular practices for experimentation.
Figure 5: Individual experimentation with different practices among learning group participants.
4.2.3Collaborative work
A number of learning group participants (17 in total) has made their 3 1x5m trench beds in anticipation of
receiving tunnels. Most of these participants only finalised their trench beds after the initial round of
48%
51%
34%
10%
3%
3% 2%
2%
3% 3%
Individual experiementation (N=61)
Trench beds
Mulching
Mixed cropping
Tunnel
Stonelines
Furrows and ridges
diversion ditches
manure
MILESTONE 7: FINAL REPORT
| 21
supply of tunnels, where 10 tunnels had been installed in addition to the 2 tunnels constructed as group
efforts.
It was however not possible to supply tunnels to all the prospective participants and an agreement was
reached with the learning groups that these participants would be supplied with drip kits (2 ea), some of
which were offered by the initial tunnel recipients who had also received drip kits. This was seen as a
compromise solution for all and a more equitable distribution of the resources offered through this
project.
The list of recipients of drip kits is shown in the small table below
Table 4: List of recipients of drip kits
Finala
Sedawa
Sedawa Cont
Lepelle
Sophina Mashila
Lina Malepe
Sophia Molefe
Anna Seotlo
Norah Morapane
Koko Maphori
Thina Mashinye
Edina Molebela
Mpelesi Sekgobola
Rebecca Morema
Sarah Myathi
Lema Malepe
Winnie Mametja
Julia Monareng
Mareta Moloto
Meisie Mokwena
Norah Malepe
Above left and right: Participants in Sedawa who had prepared trench beds in anticipation of tunnels, have made
good use of them in the meantime, planting a selection of crops. They have now received drip kits to irrigate these
beds
The initial 2 tunnels constructed by the learning groups were used for joint experimentation by group
members for one growing season (3-6months). These two tunnels have now been taken over by individuals;
Christina Thobejane (in Sedawa) and Mr Lewelle (in The Oaks). In all cases tunnels have been planted to
an interesting selection of mixed crops; including maize, kale, cabbage, carrots, morogo, spinach,
tomatoes, marigolds, okra and peppers
MILESTONE 7: FINAL REPORT
| 22
Above Left to right: Christina Thobejane’s tunnel (Sedawa), now placed inside her yard; filled with a large variety of
crops (peppers, spinach, radish, marigolds, kale, maize and okra shown here) and Mariam Malepe’s tunnel
(Botshabelo) also planted to a range of crops. These tunnels were constructed by the participants themselves.
4.2.3.1Summary of Collaborative work
12 tunnels (4x6m) have been constructed across 3 villages (the Oaks, Sedawa, Botshabelo)
39 drip kits have been set up (20l bucket for 1x5m bed)
across 4 villages (Sedawa, Botshabelo, Finala and Lepelle)
3 x 25 000l underground RWH tanks have been constructed
in Botshabelo and Sedawa
In all cases participants have been centrally involved in learning
and working together to construct these ‘structures”. There is a
high level of interest in the tunnels and RHH tanks and a good
indication for the tunnels that productivity and resilience is
increased quite dramatically. For the RWH tanks, participants are
already adapting the use of these tanks to also filling them with
water, pumped or carried form nearby sources to augment the
rainwater stored. All three tanks are now fully operational.
Right: A monitoring and maintenance visit to Mariam Malepe’s tank, where
the inlet pipe filter was cleaned and secured more firmly. The diversion
ditch carrying water into the tank is visible a row of bananas flanks this
ditch.
4.2.3.2Future
Given the high interest in tunnels, attempts will be made to secure funding and resources to
continue with the supply of these structures to learning group members
Experimentation with cropping options in tunnels is to continue; this will be augmented by water
productivity measurements and different irrigation practices
MILESTONE 7: FINAL REPORT
| 23
Village savings and loan associations have been initiated, to enable participants to save for these
structures (both tunnels and RWH tanks)
Options for hand and or foot pumps for the underground RWH tanks are to be explored, as
participants are not too keen to take the water out using buckets.
A big push for further support for underground RWH storage is very important in this region.
4.2.4 Networking
Networking has been undertaken at a number of levels.
At village and community level networking has been undertaken and some group participants as well as all
local facilitators have undertaken cross visits to other villages in the implementation cluster. The
intention here has been for participants to showcase their work to each other and learn from each other’s
implementation of practices. This has also led, among other things, to the initiation of a new learning
group in an extension of Sedawa, at a village called Turkey (Zone 2).
NGO’s active in the area; Seeds of Light and Lima RDF have been drawn in to ensure collaborative work
and coherent implementation on the ground. In the case of Lima RDF an arrangement has been reached
where the DICLAD process has been introduced in Sekororo with the groups they are working with there. It
was felt that an analysis of climate change impacts and an exploration of potential adaptive measure
could be very useful for the Lima programme in food security (supported by Wesbank and the Frist rand
Foundation). Lima facilitators also supported this process in the new village, Turkey, where joint
implementation is planned. Lima has also offered access to their revolving loan fund (Jobs Fund), for
individuals venturing into commercial production.
Government and municipal stakeholders have been engaged for the open days held to outline and
showcase the CC adaptation work undertaken by the learning groups. It would be important in the future
to bring these stakeholder on board and work much more closely with them.
4.3Success and Challenges in meeting milestone.
4.4 MERL.
4.4.1Indicators: Assessment November2017
Figures in the table reflect numbers for the period of reporting, in this case October-December 2017.
A combined team meeting to review this assessment sheet has not been conducted in the reporting
period. Figures have been summarised from field reports and discussions with the field team.
Table 5: Summary of indicators assessments for the duration of the AgriSi project
Indicator
Overall
target
Actual_
Nov
2016
Actual_ Jun
2017
Actual_ Sept
2017
Actual_ Dec
2017
No of participants in
learning groups
100
108
73 (Open day,
Soil fertility
and natural
P&D control
workshops)
46,43 (DICLAD
workshops), 55
household
visits, garden
monitoring, 60
13,23,36 (DICLAD
workshops), 17
drip kits,
learning
workshops
MILESTONE 7: FINAL REPORT
| 24
(30,12,8,31) new
groups (28, )
No of learning groups
5
5
5
5
7
No of local facilitators
5
7
10
8
Percentage of
participants engaged
in CC adaptation
responses
1-2
(45%)
2-3
(25%)
>3 (10-
15%)
1-2 (10%)
1-2 (67%)
2-3 (15%) for
this time period
OVERALL:
1-2 (60%)
2-3(15%)
1-2(75%)
2-3 (20%)
>3 (10%)
This time period
OVERALL
1-2 (65%)
2-3 (20%)
>3 (10%)
OVERALL
1-2 (74%)
2-3 (62%)
>3 (39%)
No of participants
experimenting with
new innovations
-local
-co-designed
15
45
5
5
50
20
60
34
64
No of participants
showing increased
knowledge
80
73
89
76
Percentage of
participants engaged
in collaborative
activities
45%
-
14%- individual
implementation
of tunnels and
drip kits- 10
Underground
RWH tanks - 4
12% individual
implementation
of tunnels and
drip kits- 10
Underground
RWH tanks - 3
28% - individual
implementation
of tunnels (10)
and drip kits (27)
Underground
RWH tanks - 3
Percentage of
participants with
improved livelihoods
-increased availability
of food
-increased income
-increased diversity of
activities and
livelihoods options
40%
5%
5%
-
-
-
(summarised
from garden
monitoring
-15%
-
-
(Summarised
from garden
monitoring)
-25%
-15%
(Summarised
from garden
monitoring)
- 40%
- 46% (small
incomes) ~R700/
Month
-16%
Qualitative
assessments;
-stakeholder
engagement
-Increased
understanding and
agency to act towards
increased resilience
- Adaptation and
innovations into local
context
-Potential for
increased resilience
-Social engagement
Stories,
case
studies,
photos,
cluster
activity
records,
group
session
minutes,
Stories:
-Open day
-Underground
storage tanks
implementation
- garden
monitoring
Stories: Local
facilitators-
progress
Building of RWH
storage tanks
Implementation
of construction
of individual
tunnels
Case studies:
WRC- AgriSI
project
implementation
Stories:
-DICLAD; impact
of practices
- Adaptations and
innovations into
local context….
Understanding: Examples of
people showing an increased
understanding of CCA
adaptation
-Through the DICLAD workshops many people have shown a
coherent understanding of the impacts of CC and the value of
their activities in SWC and gardening in dealing with these(80%).
There is however also a sense that this is not enough and that
peoples’ livelihood options are steadily deteriorating. There is a
general feeling that more people in the community need to
appreciate these problems better and that youth need to be
educated. There is a request for support for larger production
MILESTONE 7: FINAL REPORT
| 25
efforts (field based), for support in RWH storage infrastructure
and a call for support for saving the natural environment
(grazing, indigenous trees, water) -
Actions:
Examples of people showing
an increased agency towards
increasing their resilience
-There are many examples of individuals increasing and
diversifying their food production efforts and their soil and
water control practices across all six villages
-In two of the villages there is a definite move towards
broadening the reach of these activities by involving the local
and traditional authorities and the will to work towards
improved management systems for allocation and management
of water sources in the villages, management of natural and
riverine vegetation, management of cutting of firewood and also
for constructive engagement with the municipal structures
around access to water (Botshabelo, Sedawa).
Examples of increased
potential towards resilience
-There is a strong push towards diversification of livelihood
activities (from gardening to field cropping, fodder production
for livestock, small livestock enterprises, grazing management
and planting and supply of indigenous trees. Participants feel
that if they can engage in all of the above activities that they
will be a lot more resilient. There is a request in Lepelle to bring
more people onboard into commercial fruit production and to
increase the management efficiency of these practices
4.4.2Project Life Change Questions:
1. Do we have examples or stories of how we or others are in the process of adaptive management
related to CC? (adapt, reflect and respond to….) and examples of what this adaptive
management is?
oThis is evident in a number of small changes and improvements made by participants in
the gardening practices: including mulching in traditional furrows and ridges, making
trench beds, mixed cropping, collecting grass and leaves for mulching, use of greywater,
making diversion ditches to channel water and planting in and on these, seedling
production and diversification of crops in vegetable gardens.
oLearning inputs are being tailored by the facilitation team to also be more appropriate for
field cropping as participants are finding applying the principles from gardening into their
fields a difficult task. They requested assistance with this.
oParticipants are making small intensive gardens to accommodate for the lack of water.
oSome participants have attempted to manage their microclimates, by making windbreaks
with grass and feedbags around their small gardens.
oThe shade cloth tunnels introduced show a huge potential to increase production and all
participants with tunnels are using them actively. They are selling small quantities of
produce form these tunnels.
oA few individuals have volunteered to build their own underground RWH storage tanks to
have access to water.
oIn Mametje learning group participants have formed small subgroups in their localities who
meet regularly to discuss issues, exchange ideas and ensure that they know how to
implement the new practices.
2. Do we have stories that show innovation or lack of innovation towards positive change? What
insights have we gained into how innovation can lead to positive change?(INCREASED RESILIENCE)
About 65% of participants have tried out some of the new innovationsintroduced and are able to
clearly articulate the potential benefits of these practices. For many however the cost of water
does not justify the outcomes of their gardening activities. They feel that what they produce does
help with food, but does not help them with increasing their incomes and they still spend more on
MILESTONE 7: FINAL REPORT
| 26
production than they make. Many of the older female participants believe that having fresh food
available locally outweighs the cost issues and will continue to try and improve their gardening to
be able to make a small income from this. For the younger participants- their feeling is more that
they are not even prepared to try unless it looks like they will make reasonable amounts of
money.
3. Do we have stories that show evidence of, or an interest in self organisation towards collective
action? What insights have we gained into how self organisation can lead to collective action?
Local facilitators are already playing an important role in bringing people together and providing
for collective action, albeit on the level of working in the gardens. They are dealing with conflict
in the groups and supporting individuals in their implementation. They are coordinating some
collective action in the villages. New members have been joining in the last three months in most
of the villages and in a few groups are meeting by themselves to learn and implement together.
4. Do we have stories to show that learning together is happening or that there is an interest in
learning together? What insights have wegained about how to learn together?
The LFs who have grasped the concept to learning with the participants and working with
experimentation as an idea to promote implementation have been very successful notable
Sedawa, Mametje and Botshabelo. Those who have worked within a model of being in charge of
the groups and ‘ensuring’ that they do the right thing have in fact seen their groups dwindle to
almost nothing- Willows, The Oaks and Lepelle.
Participants feel that learning in the groups vastly outweighs what they can learn on their own and
have set up ways in which they work together. They also feel however that the LFs may not know
enough about these new techniques and still value the input of the facilitation team higher than
that of the LFs.
5. Do we have stories of how we and or others are able to think systemically? What insights have we
gained?
The DICLAD workshops have pointed to a remarkable capacity in the community members to make
the linkages and realise the larger impacts of actions. It is however hard for them to translate this
into ideas about how collective action can change the systemic interactions- or more precisely
they do not feel that they can work together on these issues without assistance from the outside.
6. Do we have stories of how we and or others are able to be inclusive and democratic? What
insights have we gained about how this can be achieved? (STAKEHOLDER ENGAGEMENT).
Some advances have been made in stakeholder interaction in working with other NGOs active in
the area towards working together and limited sharing of implementation budgets. Cementing the
process around climate change and adaptation has assisted stakeholders to more clearly
understand the needs for this cooperation. Lima RDF has agreed to share the learning and training
processes and to augment the process where they have specific strengths. They have agreed to be
party to the CC adaptation approach and to frame their interventions and discussions in this way
and also to support beneficiaries with small grants for provision of more tunnels and drip kits.
4.4.3Work Plan for 2018.
Continuation of activities depends largely on a renewal contract into 2018. Limited activity is possible
from a different grant within MDF under the auspices of the Water Research Commission:
1. Negotiation for continuation of the process through AWARD for the coming year
2. Negotiation of a partnership with the WRC project on community level adaptation to ensure
continuation and co-funding of the process going forward (2-3 years) albeit on a much reduced
level of implementation
MILESTONE 7: FINAL REPORT
| 27
3. Collaboration with Lima RDFin combining activities across the two programmes-their food
security and small business initiative and AgriSI. Training of facilitators in climate sensitive
facilitation and implementation of best options for good practices will be undertaken.
4. Continuation of garden monitoring and support for Local Facilitatorsand learning groups
5. Introduction of new facets such a VSLAs (Village Savings and Loan Associations) and small
livestock production activities
6. Introduction of fodder production and management options for livestock.
7. Limited support for afocus on fruit tree production, notably in Lepelle and Willows where
participants have requested trees.
8. Monitoring processes are to be put in place for management of the tunnels constructed and also
the 3 underground RWH tanks, alongside continued garden monitoring processes. Quantitative
measurements are to be undertaken to assess water productivity of some of the CSA practices
9. Village level cross visits for all participants to explore and interrogate the options for tunnels
and RWH storage, as well as other innovations introduced.
10. Use of participatory video as a tool to build agency in the villagesfor CCA activities and
communicate successes and issues with relevant stakeholders
4.5Other activities
The second round of DICLDA workshops were conducted between 24-26 October 2017. The participants
groups were: Botshabelo (13), Oaks, Finalie, Lepelle (23) and Sedawa, Mametje, Willows (36)
A summary report for these activities is provided below in Appendix 1(7.1).
5Overall Progress of Project
5.1Integration of milestone status.
The table below indicates overall completion of activities according to milestones. Activitiesare all well on
track for completion in December 2017
Table 6: Milestone target completion October-December 2017.
MILESTONE 7: FINAL REPORT
| 28
5.2Project risk and mitigation summary.
5.2.1Implementation risks and mitigation
Stability and continuity of learning groups: It is clear now that the local facilitators have had a
major impact on the learning groups; in some cases they have grown substantially and interest has
increased and in other they have dwindled quitedramatically. This was unforeseen as the
intention of the LFs was more to assist individual gardeners with their implementation and do
garden monitoring. A strategy has been put in place to manage the impact of the LFs on the
groups. In some villages another process of expansion of groups is required. This will be managed
MAHLATHINI
MILESTONE COMPLETION: target completion to date % (in black) vs actual (in red)
Key activities /
Milestones
MILESTONE
1
MILESTONE
2
MILESTONE
3
MILESTONE 4
MILESTONE 5
MILESTONE 6
MILESTONE 7
Inception report
100% /
100%
Setting the
scene
67% / 65%
100% / 80%
100% / 90%
100% / 100%
less
coverage,
more
villages
visioning +
final LFs
outstanding
Some
visioning + 2
LFs
outstanding
LF selection
and training
complete.
Additional
visioning in
Lepelle
Learning and
mentoring
10% / 15%
30%/ 40%
50%/65%
70%/85%
90%/95%
100%/100%
6 villages
not 4
6 villages
Some
garden mon
+ LF
outstanding
6 villages;
continuation
with learning
schedule;
LFs elected
in 3 villages
6 villages;
continuation
with learning
schedule; soil
fertility and
P&d control.
Mentoring and
garden
monitoring by
LFs
6 villages;
review
learning
sessions
including
tower
gardens P&D
control and
CA
6 villages;
planning for
coming
season,
introduction
of specialist
topics
requested
Experimentation
& intro to
innovations
25%
25% / 50%
50%/75%
75%/85%
90%/90%
100%/100%
for all 6
villages
6 villages
not 4
6 villages
For all 6
villages
For all 6
villages
For all 6
villages
Collaborative
work
25%/40%
6 villages:
Introduction
to drip kits
and tunnels;
3 villages
RWH and
erosion
control
options
50%/65%
6 villages;
tunnels, drip
kits,
greywater
management,
RWH and
erosion
control
options
75%/100%
10 tunnels
with drip
kits
constructed,
3
underground
RWH tanks
(24m3)
constructed
100%/100%
Networking and
cross visits
25%/25%
cluster based
workshop in
good farming
practices
50%/50%
Open day:
cross visit of
all learning
groups. World
biodiversity
day workshop
75%/75%
LF visits to
other
villages, 2
DICLAD
workshops
100%/100%
3 DICLAD (2)
workshops,
introduction
of new
learning
group
MILESTONE 7: FINAL REPORT
| 29
through the facilitation team and minimising the influcne of the LFS. In the other cases, where
positive change has been noted, LFs will be supported to expand their work
Extreme water shortages brought about by the continued dry and hot conditions and further
collapse of some of the municipal water provision schemes has put extreme pressure on
productive activities. In cases where participants now have to buy water, they have not been able
to afford buying of water for gardening, only household necessities. An increased focus on
greywater use and management will provide a small ambit of relief. In addition the focus on RWH
storage and also on water conservation has shown to be advantageousfor those individuals who
have some access to water. The larger issues of water supply in these villages through government
processes are however outside of the scope of this project
High levels of poverty and food insecurity in the villages have made the introduction of self
motivated action a challenge. There is a huge cry for external support from community members.
Many lose interest the moment they realise that free inputs are not forthcoming. In this social
climate the response from the individuals in the learning groups has been remarkable and a
number of participants have taken on the challenge of improving their lives even under these
difficult circumstances. They are to be commended for their courage and hard work.
5.2.2Financial risks and mitigation
6Conclusion and Recommendations
In conclusion, the project is on track to fulfil all deliverable requirements and also to be able to continue
and expand into the future.
MILESTONE 7: FINAL REPORT
| 30
7 Appendices
7.1Appendix 1: DICLAD Modules 2 & 3with AgriSI
stakeholders in the Lower Olifants 24th to 26th Oct 2017
OVERALLPURPOSE
To build climate change literacy among stakeholders with regards to climate change adaptation options
related to small scale agriculture.
EXPECTED OUTCOMES
Re-enforced understanding of climate change impactspertaining to small scale farming in the
Lower Olifants.
Identification of tenable adaptation options to some of these impacts, particularly those that can
be further supported through the AgriSI project and other RESILIM-O projects.
7.1.1 Participants
Botshabelo (13)
Oaks, Finalie, Lepelle (23)
Sedawa, Mametje, Willows (36)
7.1.2Recap of concepts covered in DICLAD Module 1
Participants were walked through the concepts covered in the 1st Module
Climate change concepts were expressed using temperature and rainfall seasonality charts. Concepts can
be summarised as:
Increased temperatures throughout the year- high certainty
Overall similar amount of rainfall but over a shorter period of time and more variability (intense
rainfall events storms, floods, droughts) less certainty.
Participants also went through the five fingers concepts of themes for good agricultural practices and
examples of practices for each theme were elucidated. Examples given were:
Water management: diversion furrows, contour ditches, greywater management, small dams, drip
irrigation, stone lines, garden beds
Control soil movement: reducing run-off, furrows and ridges and planting on ridges (aloes, sweet potatoes)
Soil health/fertility management: trench beds, eco-circles
Crop management: mixed cropping, mulching, shade for crops, natural pest control, increased organic
matter, close spacing, tunnels
Indigenous plants: less burning, planting and propagation of indigenous trees, multipurpose plants
(windbreaks, fruit, medicine), careful cutting/ pruning for firewood, rather than chopping down whole
trees,
At Botshabelo, the workshop was held at the Local facilitator’s home (Meriam Makgoba) and thus we could
do a walk through the garden to review some the practices. This added to the examples participants were
giving.
MILESTONE 7: FINAL REPORT
| 31
Above left to right: Tunnel with mixed cropping in beds for water soil health and crop management;
tower garden for greywater management, soil fertility and mixed cropping; Diversion furrow with sweet
potatoes, planted on ridges and bananas and paw-paws planted in the furrow for water management and
soil erosion control; and an eco-circle with mulching planted to herbs for water management, soil
fertility and pest control. Herbs include lemons balm, parsley, mint, rosemary and thyme.
Left: Inlet furrow, silt trap (where Ancois and Sylvester are standing) and
underground RWH tank circular structure with roof.
One of the main points that came form discussing these CSA practices is
that most of them cover a number of the fiver fingers e.g.:
Underground RWH tanks; deal with water management and soil erosion
control
Tunnels: deal with water management by reducing evaporation and
temperatures as well as increasing soil water holding capacity, with erosion
control by having paths laid out on contour and deep organic beds, with soil
fertility through the trench beds and with crop management through
providing windbreaks, pest control.
Tower gardens:deal with water management, soil fertility and crop
management (mixed cropping, intensive planting, pest control)
Furrows and ridges with cross ties: Should also have mulching. Deals with
water management by increasing infiltration and reducing run-off, soil erosion control and soil fertility-
through incorporating organic matter in the ridges, and adding manure, leaves and mulch to both ridges
and furrows.
Participants were then divided into small groups to continue with strengthening their understanding of
impact of climate change and to begin to outline potential adaptations that could be implemented.
Activities in small groups:
Outline impacts
Choose goals (around 5) of priority changes or adaptation strategies
Then look at actions/practices to achieve these goals and for those ones we have already tried
think about how well they have worked
MILESTONE 7: FINAL REPORT
| 32
7.1.3Outlining impacts
Here cards were used from the mind maps created in the first
workshop and the small groups briefly reconstructed a mind
map, discussing in detail the potential linkages and
importance of the issues
Right: A mind map of CC issues reconstructed by one of the
small groups from Okas, Finale and Lepelle.
Water is the over -riding constraint in all cases. Although all
participants save some rainwater,mostly in 210l drums or
large basins, they feel this is not nearly enough and it doesn’t
last long. In all three sessions the participants felt that
storage of large quantities of rainwater was about their only
option for having a reliable supply of water, especially if
rainfall decreases further. Municipal systems are unreliable
and intermittent at best and individual boreholes are too expensive for most and there are already cases
of boreholes drying out or salinizing. Greywater is used extensively, butnot all participants were aware of
options for ‘cleaning’ greywater prior to use.
Some mention was made also of community members working together and working more cooperatively
with Municipalities to increase the efficiency of water supply in their villages. Examples include:
SUGGESTIONS:
1. Discussions were held also about improving spring protection in the mountains, that people rely
on, as a matter of priority making small dams with pipes for gravity fed systems, exclusion of
livestock and making proper livestock watering facilities.
2. A major priority is rainwater harvesting. Present options give too little water and are expensive
(basins, drums, Jojo’s..)
3. Using the underground RWH storage tanks, or Jo-Jo tanks, to store water provided by
municipalities, to allow for intermittent provision. Also storage of water collected by hand form
the river
4. Participants felt that they had no way to access water from the river. They did not seem aware
that they could in fact not be allowed to, but were talking more about pumps and pipes.
5. In Sedawa however , participants suggested committees need to be formed to work with
allocation of water from the river ( a smaller riverbed- dry for most of the year but with water
access in the sand y riverbed) and also the municipality.
6. Some groups discussed natural resource management in conjunction with the water management
judicious cutting of trees, saving of riverine vegetation, preventing veld fires and communal
management of water infrastructure. They felt that the K2C facilitators could also assist in this
process along with traditional structures linked to the learning groups
7. Tunnels featured centrally as helping a lot, as did trench beds and mulching.
7.1.4Botshabelo CSA practices
ACTION
CONSTRAINTS
HAS IT WORKED
FUTURE; NEXT STEPS
GOAL: Improve water use efficiency and increase access to water
Grey water
White soap build
up on soil level,
crusting
Yes; works well with
trees, but not
tomatoes and ibece,
where the plants
-More grey water management
practices like loosening soil,
tower gardens
MILESTONE 7: FINAL REPORT
| 33
become more prone to
diseases
Experiment with different
kinds of soaps and their effect
on plants
-try out moringa seed to clean
water
Mulching
If it’s too dry
mulching doesn’t
work
Hard to find
enough material
Yes; retains soil
moisture and crops
look better
-Infiltration pits,
-Making compost
RWH :
Underground
tanks
Not done: lots of
labour
Expensive
Yes (for few
demonstrations). Now
it is possible to use
multiple sources of
water for the tank
rain, river and
municipal)
-We should save towards these
tanks and maybe implement in
a step by step way over time to
make them more affordable
-On slopes can have gravity fed
systems that can also irrigate
by gravity
-Allows for planning for off
season when there is no rain
RWH: 201l
drums, basins
Yes; but the water is
little and does not last
long
Spring
protection
Yes, but only few
individuals and limited
attempts
-Need to store a bit of water at
the springs to feed the pipes
-Need water and social
management structures to deal
with pipes and taps and rules
Boreholes
Too expensive
Yes-some ‘richer’
individuals- but some
are drying up and
water yield is
sometimes too low to
justify costs
Not an individual homestead
solution
Farm smaller
areas
Yes; participants
adapt the size of land
they use to the
amount of water they
are likely to have
available.
GOAL: decrease dry, hot soil
Trench beds
Hard to find
enough organic
matter
Yes, many have tried
this. Provides for
excellent growth of
crops and very good
moisture retention,
-Planning to do more trenches
-Collect the materials when
they are available to pack the
trenches later
Tower gardens
Need shade cloth
and many
participants still
unaware of this
process
Yes; good growth,
good use of greywater
and easy to do
Buy a big roll of shade cloth
together to make it cheaper-
making the net available will
allow for participants to try
this out.
Tunnels/shade
cloth structures
Some participants
have dug the
trenches as
requested
(3x5x1m) but have
not received the
tunnel kits
Yes; work very well
for crop growth,
cooling of soil, water
retention,
windbreaks, and pest
control
-supply more kits as promised
-participants can save together
to buy the kits which are quite
cheap
-Train each other in how to
construct as there are small
MILESTONE 7: FINAL REPORT
| 34
teams in each village who know
how
-Perhaps set up a system where
participants contribute 50% of
finances and MDF or support
organisation contributes the
other 50%
Soil fertility
Yes; increase organic
matter, trenches,
tower gardens,
furrows and ridges,
using more manure
Continue with soil fertility
improvement
GOAL: Improve crop productivity
Growing trees
for shade
Yes; a few
participants
Plan for afternoon shade as
temperatures increase
Liquid manure
Most participants
are somehow
unaware of the
liquid manure.
Thought you could
not do it without
bananas
Drought
tolerant crops
Indigenous fruit
trees take too long
to fruit and are no
longer eaten on a
daily basis
Mangos are more
heat tolerant but
need to be well
fenced-
Yes; tried the bird
resistant sorghum and
millet in the CA plots-
worked well and
participants harvested
seed. Indigenous crops
and trees such as
Marula work well
Plant mangos in furrows to
ensure enough water supply as
it gets hotter
Want more seed of bird
resistant sorghum and millet
Pest control;
traditional
practices (apply
powder of dried
insects), natural
pest control
brews, pest
repellent plants
and mixed
cropping
Yes- traditional
practices work
adequately
Marigolds are pretty
and work against
nematodes and wilting
problems in
vegetables
With mixed cropping
see fewer pests and
fewer holes in spinach
plants for example
Continue with traditional
practices
Increased mixed cropping
Using natural pest control
brews in the tunnels this is
enough do not need chemicals.
7.1.5Lepelle, Oaks and Finale CSA practices
ACTION
CONSTRAINTS
HAS IT WORKED
FUTURE; NEXT STEPS
GOAL: Improve water use efficiency and increase access to water
RWH : Jo-jo’s,
210ldrums,
basins
Building bigger
concrete tanks-
Not done: lots of
labour
Expensive
Yes; short time, too
little water
Find types of tanks that use
local labour for construction to
make it cheaper
Store more water
Find partners to assist
MILESTONE 7: FINAL REPORT
| 35
Mulching
Yes; doesn’t work
when it’s too hot –
still need water to
break down the mulch
Methods of incorporation of
organic matter into soil may
work better than mulch
Greywater; drip
kits, ash
Yes; but not on food
crops. Helps with
pests in the soil
Bucket filter clogs up
over time
-Methods for cleaning
greywater
Spring
protection
Not for access for
everyone- used for
religious purposes
N/A
Boreholes;
communal and
home
Too expensive
Irrigation water in
Finale is salty. In
Lepelle water quality
is good
This is an expensive option, but
is easy and reliable
Information about how to deal
with borehole water of bad
quality for irrigation
Minimum tillage
Plough smaller and
manageable areas
It works well, it saves
water, but might not
work without some
shading plants still
wilt at some point
Timing, tunnels, decisions to
be made by observation
GOAL: soil management
Increase organic
matter;
incorporate
leaves, crops,
ash, manure
Trench beds
Yes, but will want to
see also how these
perform under optimal
conditions
Set up these with drip
irrigation
Erosion control;
contour bunds,
diversion
furrows
Yes; requires regular
maintenance-
sometimes they get
blocked
Combine this with some of the
water and crop management
techniques
GOAL: Livestock/ grazing management
Reduce
livestock
numbers and
plant fodder
We are going to
need water
Planting fodder works
well under irrigation -
good idea as it feeds
both animals and
people
Find ways to harvest the seed
of the fodder species so as to
plant again
The fodder radish is good for
people (morogo) and animals-
grows quickly can be a good
idea.
GOAL: Improve crop productivity
Mixed cropping-
vegetables and
herbs
Yes, fewer pests
where mixed cropping
was tried
Heat tolerant crops:
parsley, millet,
watermelon,
butternut, different
types of greens- e.g.
the kale introduced
Bird resistant sorghum
quite good.
Find better ways (and more) to
do mixed cropping
Do experiments with different
heat tolerant crops to check
Cross visits to other learning
groups to see what they have
planted and what is possible
Three plantings per year of
different greens to have
continuity in production
Pest control;
traditional
practices (apply
powder of dried
Do not have access
to the plants; chilli
and garlic
Yes- only a few people
tried, but for those it
worked well
Learn more pest control
remedies
Continue with traditional
practices
MILESTONE 7: FINAL REPORT
| 36
insects), natural
pest control
brews, pest
repellent plants
Increased mixed cropping
Using natural pest control
brews in the tunnels this is
enough do not need chemicals.
This exercise was followed by doing an “Impact matrix “ where we asked the question “How do you
decide whether a practices is working, what criteria do you use? And then discussed the overall question
of how well did these practices work using those criteria.
Summary of criteria from the three workshops
Botshabelo
Oaks, Finale, Lepelle
Sedawa
Water efficient
Good water management
Increased soil fertility/
organic matter
Better soil fertility
Better growth/health of crops
Better growth
Increased yield
More food
Cheap
Easy/labour efficient
Easy to do
Knowledge
Oaks, Finale, Lepelle: Impact of CSA practices
SCALE: 1=low; 2 = medium, 3= high (agreement between participants)
CRITERIA
PRACTICES
Eas
y to
do
Mor
e
food
Better
growt
h
Good
water
man
Better
soil
fertilit
y
Scor
e
Rank
COMMENTS
trench beds
1
3
3
3
3
13
5
Very good for growth,
soil health and water
management.The best
practice- but difficult
to dig
mulching
3
3
3
3
3
15
2
Less irrigation
providing more food
furrows
2
2
3
3
3
13
4
more moisture, better
growth, carries some
fertility in the water
rock bunds
2
3
3
3
3
14
3
deep irrigation,
catches more fertile
soil
adding
organic
matter to
the soil
3
3
3
3
3
15
1
easier than trench beds
Crop
varieties
1
1
1
1
1
5
7
we do not have the
knowledge-but will be
easy once we know
Planting
times
2
1
1
1
1
6
6
would be nice to have
a calendar to
remember.
Participants commented on the scores and ranking and suggested that these could be used to decide what
practices to start with such as mulching, adding organic matter to the soil as the quickest and easiest,
then moving on to rock bund, furrows and trench beds, and so on.
7.1.6Sedawa CSA practices
MILESTONE 7: FINAL REPORT
| 37
ACTION
CONSTRAINTS
HAS IT WORKED
FUTURE; NEXT STEPS
GOAL: Improve water use efficiency and increase access to water
RWH : Jo-jo’s,
210l drums,
basins, small
dams,
underground
tanks
Jojos are easy but
expensive in
digging for dams
labour does not
cost so that could
help
Increases
mosquitos
Yes; Small dams have
been dug by few- if
not lined they lose a
lot of water.
Water in Jojo only
lasts about 1 month-
so it is not enough for
gardening
Plan to do roof structures and
gutters properly
If we do joint saving we can
work together to buy Jojos
There are some challenges
with savings groups, but we are
used to them from burial
societies etc
We can harvest water form the
road for the underground tanks
Keep riverine
vegetation
People are still
chopping down
trees next to the
river for firewood
There is knowledge
about pruning trees
rather than chopping
whole trees
Need to work with traditional
authority to ensure we keep
riverine vegetation
Prevent veld
fires
No
Can work with the traditional
authorities and spread the
word through our learning
groups
Infiltration
pits/areas/
reconstructing
wetlands
NO
We can get some
reeds form other
wetlands to get the
process going
These are joint activities
through community meetings-
but there is now more cohesion
through the learning groups, so
it can be possible
Water
infrastructure
management
No
Would like to set up an
awareness campaign in the
area, so that all community
members take care of
infrastructure
Planting in
beds with
Mulching
Trench beds
Yes; reduces watering
form every day to
every 2-3 days.
Contributes also to
soil fertility, carrots
grow nice and straight
Provide shade for these beds
potentially using maize stover
to keep them cool.
Greywater; drip
kits, ash
No- more a
supplementary
activity when there
is no other water
Yes; works at
household level in
gardens if you use ash
to clear the water.
The ash residue with
soap then goes into
the toilet to reduce
smells
-Impact not that great, but
worth doing.
Irrigation
methods
Timing- am or pm to
save water
This is a standard practice
GOAL: soil management
Increase organic
matter;
incorporate
leaves, crops,
ash, manure
Trench beds,
eco-circles
Yes, The new bed
types hold water for a
very long time if you
can start by saturating
them. Eco-circles are
easier than trench
beds and work just as
well
Plan for continuity in different
circumstances
MILESTONE 7: FINAL REPORT
| 38
Erosion control;
stone lines
contours,
diversion
furrows
No- not aware of
line levels and how
to measure
contours
Yes; plant just below
the stone lines or
furrows as there is
more water and
fertility there.
Diversion furrows are
good, but difficult to
dig.
-If you add infiltration pits
below the stone lines it works
very well can plant in that.
-It is easier to make furrows
and ridges in the garden than
diversion ditches
-Continue with improved
furrows and ridges- on contour,
with mulching and planting
various crops.
GOAL: Crop management
Trees in the
garden
Yes afternoon shade
is important
Close spacing
linked to
minimum tillage
(CA)
No- not many
participants are
aware yet of this
option
Yes; close spacing in
field crops gives quick
canopy cover cooler
and wetter, it also
helps with erosions
control and there is
still enough air
movement
Include bird resistant sorghum
and millet as good harvests can
be realised from these drought
resistant crops. Cowpeas can
be harvested twice in a seons.
7.1.7 Learnings
These are summarised in point form below:
-Planting trees for shading crops
-Some trees help with pest control
-We are realizing how most of the things MDF has covered fits into CCA-for example the tunnels
-Some of the practices such as mixed cropping are good; one can see the results you are working
towards
-There are good ideas in terms of practices for CC and extreme temperatures- but it is not enough
-We learnt about heat tolerant crops from each other, and also when to plant.
-We learnt about promoting pest predators- lizard hotel
-We learnt about the erosion control furrows and what to plant now
-We learnt about planning according to quick wins (from the matrix that was done)
-Water saving techniques including tower gardens
-Harvesting water from the road using diversion ditches
-Garden refuse as mulch rather than burning it
7.1.8Future CC actions
-More focus on access to water (all three workshops)
-More CSA techniques and deepening the implementation of the present ones(in all three
workshops)
-Tunnels and trench beds have worked particularly well (All three workshops)
-Can grow the dryland crops in summer, but need water in winter for vegetable production
-Can try layers; but cost of feed is an issue and access to clean water. Sunflowers and sorghum can
be grown for the chickens. Indigenous chickens are no longer kept - as they are not very
productive and destroy crops
-For broilers there are already a number of projects in the area, but can still do this competitively
can do chicken pieces as a value add.
-Need also to deal with livestock - the effects of CC on livestock production
-We shouldn’t end here. We tried these ideas under the worst situations (drought) they may do a
lot better now in a better year
MILESTONE 7: FINAL REPORT
| 39
-One of the highlights has been the cost-benefit analysis in our learning sessions; where more
inputs could mean a much better yield- rather than low inputs and low yields.
-Savings can be introduced
-Planting calendars: CC based crop choice calendars(all three workshops)
--Make a committee to continue to explore options for spring protection and efficient management
of water from them.
-Need now to implement the improved erosion control measures that have been introduced.
-Once water is sorted there needs to be more focus on commercial production
-Bulk buying for Jojo tanks- MDF to find potential discount options
-Bring DRD representatives on board with the NGOs already working in these areas (Sedawa)to see
if more things can be brought.
-Also work with the municipality improve the relationship with the councillors and then set up a
joint strategy with community and NGOs working together
-NGOs must make sure they keep their promises as community members cannot trust them
otherwise
-NGOs need to take more care to help support local produce when catering and also local caterers.
7.1.9Planning for DICLAD-AgriSI Module 3 (2018)
The following themes were suggested for Module 3.
oPlanting calendars, and how climate change could change these (e.g. should we stop growing
maize or look at ways to assist the growth of maize?)
oIntroducing new varieties of crops that are more resilient to the expected impacts of climate
change
oConsider the option of livestock grazing although this would require a long-term intervention
oConsider the option of poultry production
We should include in the design of the process the farmers’ own knowledge, namely, changes that they
have observed that confirm the reports from the scientists. Information is needed from both sides.
The following questions were raised which will determine the framing of the project within climate
change.
oWe need to consider the following two focus points to guide our activities for 2018.
How is climate change changing what we can do, i.e. what options / alternatives we have?
versus
How is climate change impacting what we are currentlydoing, i.e. vegetable gardening?
oSpecifically for DICLAD, we need to consider its role.
Is DICLAD used for integration? Then, how can we use it to integrate the science into what we
are doing?
Or
Are we using DICLAD as a “planning tool”?
oOverall, we (DICLAD team, AgriSI project manager and Mahlathini) will have to engage in further
discussions to clarify the roles and responsibilities of each entity. For example, it was proposed
for Mahlathini to focus on implementation at the local level, for the DICLAD team to open up
conversations with climate change as the focus point, and for the AgriSI Manager to take on an
oversight role and link these two. This still requires further discussion.
It was proposed to develop learning materials on climate change for farmers something tangible we
can give them. DICLAD has an allocated budget for this. We can consider developing a process next year
to design such materials with inputs from the farming communities. The process should be fun and in
their preferred local language.
MILESTONE 7: FINAL REPORT
| 40
There was some discussion questioning the usefulness of providing planting calendars to farmers, as
these often just re-affirm what they already know. Perhaps the real question is how climate change
could impact these planting seasons, and then the repercussion for planning. Also, we need to ask what
do farmers exactly mean when they ask for calendars. Would farmers still plant high value crops even
when conditions become too unsuitable? What approach should we follow when farmers for example
choose to grow irrigated GMO maize which has short-term benefits but in the long-term has challenges
with high heat and limited water resources?
We also discussed the usefulness of sharing technical information on maps related toclimate change,
e.g. shifts in the geographical areas where maize can be planted. Seasonal forecasts can also be
considered, but these are more relevant for dry-land crops and not vegetable gardens (which always
require water).
We must encourage and improve information sharing within the clusters. (Reference here was made to
the use of bird-resistant millet seed which Mahlathini introduced.)
We can start by introducing drought-resistant crops. (Mahlathini hasused a round-robin process in
previous projects to introduce seeds for fruit, vegetables and medicinal plants.)
We also need to create awareness of resource management at the landscape level, e.g. considering our
rivers and trees. This would require the involvement of local Indunas.
MILESTONE 7: FINAL REPORT
| 41
7.2Appendix 2: Garden Monitoring narrative report; April-
November 2017
A total of 101 garden monitoring forms were completed and analysed from across 6 villages in Mametja
(Botshabelo, Lepelle, Oaks, Finale, Willows, Sedawa/MabinsA) by the Local Facilitators since April-
November 2017.
An analysis of the garden monitoring forms was conducted according to the number of participants who
have implemented various practices; including local good practices, new interventions (new ideas around
gardening and S&WC introduced through learning sessions), new innovations (such as tunnels, drip kits and
underground RWH storage tanks) and those who have done farmer experiments. Furthermore, an analysis
was done according to the five finger principles that is inclusive of water management, soil management,
crop management, soil health and, indigenous plants. Each practice is rated according to the traffic lights;
green
1
, yellow
2
, and red
3
as to how the participants have gone about implementing the introduced
practices.
Figure 1 implementation of new ideas and innovation Figure 2 implementation of local good practices
The diagram above illustrates the percentages of participants who have implemented different practices
within their homestead gardens, as well as the percentage of local good practices being implemented.
Among the new ideas and innovative practices implemented between April and November, from the 100
participants, the majority (76%) of participants made trench beds, followed by mulching, planting from
seed and production of seedling at 72%. Individual experiments were undertaken by 61% of the
participants. However, some practices were not implemented by that many participants; eco circles (9%),
liquid manure (12%), tunnels (12%), bucket filter (13%), drip kit, and CA (16%) were the least (below 20%)
implemented practices.
1
Green traffic light indicates that the participant has engaged and implemented the practice and is doing well with it.
2
Yellow traffic light indicates that the participant has tried in implementing the practice but is still not doing well with
it.
3
Red traffic light indicates that the participant has not implemented the practice.
55
51
51
76
9
61
72
72
12
37
16
13
12
41
61
Cut off drains/diversion…
Contours, line levels
Stone bunds
Trench beds
Eco circles
Mixed cropping
Seed and seedlings
Mulching
Liquid manure
Nat P&D control
CA
Bucket filters/ drip kits
Tunnel
RWH storage
Experimentation
% Implementation of New
ideas and innovations April-
Nov 2017 (N=100)
58
66
39
45
37
37
68
46
40
2
Furrows and ridges
Multipurpose…
Legumes
RWH
Grey water use
Nursery
Seed saving
Farming income (ave…
Food (x/wk)
% Implementation of local
good practices April-Nov
2017. N=100
Average Participants
MILESTONE 7: FINAL REPORT
| 42
Local good practices are being implemented by a somewhat smaller number of participants than the new
innovations introduced; Seed saving (68%), multipurpose plants (66%), greywater use (37%), planting of
legumes (39%) and small nurseries (37%). On average the participants would eat 2 types of vegetables
twice a week from their gardens and 46% of participants make a small income from their produce.
Below an analysis is provided of the specific practices within principles of good management (the five
fingers), for each village and learning group. Variations exist in the villages for implementation and
uptake of different practices.
Figure 3 percentage of participants in Botshabeloadopted practices, rated in traffic lights
7.2.1 Botshabelo
In Botshabelo 90% of the introduced practices were implemented by the participants. Reported as a green
traffic light, 90% (9 of 10) participants have good infiltration and less run-off with no crusting, and 50% of
the participants use organic matter. All participants harvest rain water and store in 210 litre drums, this is
a very popular and well adapted practice that has always been used in the village. However only 10% (1 of
10) participants have drip irrigation, this is because the drip irrigation is a now technology not so many
participants are familiar with it, they use buckets to irrigate their gardens. Indigenous plants and fruits
are very much popular in Botshabelo as majority of the participants have; they also serve as medicinal
plants. Nine of the participants (90%) have stone lines and 3 (30%) made contours/diversion ditches to
control soil and water movement during erosion. None (100% on red traffic light) of the participants
reported to have bee fodder as their pest and control disease species; however they make use of the
natural pest and control disease remedies such as crushed aloe, onion, black jack and sunlight bar in
water. See figure 1 above for more detailed information.
90
50
70
100
40
10
30
90
60
40
70
40
60
30
60
20
50
80
100
50
0
0
40 10
0
20 80
20
0
0
60 0
10
0
0
10
20
10
0
0
0
0
10 10 20
0
40
10
50
10
40
0
30
50 40
70
30
60
40
20
0
50
100
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
inflitration/run off/crusting
OM
greywater
RWH storage
Mulching
Drip irrigation
Contours/Diversion ditches
stonelines
furrows
Bed design/trench beds
compost/improved manure
Mixed cropping
Crop rotation
seed saving
nursery/propagation
continuity seedling
Natural P&D control
Indigenous or medicinal plants
Indigenous fruit
windbreaks,hedges
Bee fodder, P&D control species
Water ManagementSoil MovementSoil
Health
Crop ManagementIndigenous Plants
Botshabelo (N=10)
% Red
%Yellow
% Green
MILESTONE 7: FINAL REPORT
| 43
Figure 4 percentage of participants in Lepelleadopted practices, rated in traffic lights
7.2.2 Lepelle
Implementation of practices in Lepelle are indicated to be much lower than in Botshabelo. In managing
their water, 88% of the participants have good infiltration as they’ve made use of stone lines (50%),
furrows (73%) and banana circles to control erosion. Around 58% of participants use organic matter, trench
beds (50%), legumes and plant residues to improve soil fertility (58%), and crop rotation (85%).
Due to the availability of water supply inthe Lepelle area majority of the participants do not make use of
grey water and do not see the importance of storing rain water. 85% of the participants use buckets and
pipes to irrigate because they are not so familiar with the new technology of using drip irrigation.
Participants often save seeds and buy others hence why 73% reported more yellow meaning they try to
save seed, 65% (17 of the 26 participants) reported red which means they are not engaged in seed saving
and seedling production.
88
58
12 27 42
0
38 50
73
50 58 42
85
19 27 15 31 42 31
8
31
12
23
4
50 31
85
50 23
23
42 35
12
0
73
23
19
38
46 58
38
35
0
19
85
23 27 15 12 27
48 8
46
15 8
50 65
31
12 12
54
35
0
20
40
60
80
100
120
inflitration/run off/crusting
OM
greywater
RWH storage
Mulching
Drip irrigation
Contours/Diversion ditches
stonelines
furrows
Bed design/trench beds
compost/improved manure
Mixed cropping
Crop rotation
seed saving
nursery/propagation
continuity seedling
Natural P&D control
Indigenous or medicinal plants
Indigenous fruit
windbreaks,hedges
Bee fodder, P&D control species
Water ManagementSoil MovementSoil
Health
Crop ManagementIndigenous Plants
Lepelle (N=26)
% Red
%Yellow
% Green
MILESTONE 7: FINAL REPORT
| 44
Figure 5 percentage of participants in Oaks/Finaleadopted practices, rated in traffic lights
7.2.3 Oaks/Finale
In the Oaks and Finale village, only 5 of the 11 participants have adapted the practices introduced to
them, this is illustrated by the green on the above diagram. Due to the water shortage in the area 73% of
the participants practice rain water harvesting. The leading practices reported on the green are; the
management of indigenous plants (73%), trench beds (64%), crop rotation (64%), infiltration and furrows
(both reported at 55% on green) implemented by 55% of the participants. Mulching, improved manure,
seed saving, and indigenous/medicinal plants are all fairly implemented by 45% of the participants and
have been reported on green.
91% of participants here do not use OM and around 9% have made some attempts to include organic matter
in the soil. The use of stone lines and planting of species for bee fodder and natural pest and disease
control are also low.
Implementation of practices such as mulching, trench beds, furrows and crop rotation is reasonable at
around 50-60%
55
0
27
73
45
18
55
9
55 64
45
18
64
45
27 36 36 45
73
45
9
18
9
0
18
055
18
0
18
27
0
18
18
18
0
0 0
27
18
27
0
27
91
73
9
55
27 27
91
27
9
55 64
18
36
73 64 64
27
9
27
91
0
20
40
60
80
100
120
inflitration/run off/crusting
OM
greywater
RWH storage
Mulching
Drip irrigation
Contours/Diversion ditches
stonelines
furrows
Bed design/trench beds
compost/improved manure
Mixed cropping
Crop rotation
seed saving
nursery/propagation
continuity seedling
Natural P&D control
Indigenous or medicinal plants
Indigenous fruit
windbreaks,hedges
Bee fodder, P&D control species
Water ManagementSoil
Movement
Soil
Health
Crop ManagementIndigenous Plants
Oaks/Finale (N=11)
% Red
%Yellow
% Green
MILESTONE 7: FINAL REPORT
| 45
Figure 6 percentage of participants in Willowsadopted practices, rated in traffic lights
7.2.4 Willows
The chart for Willows for the 22 participants where monitoring was conducted shows a large overall
percentage of practices tried by participants. All participants have valued their indigenous medicinal
plants as 100% of them have reported as green, followed by the indigenous fruits at 91%. The practices
that more than 80% of the participants reported on green and have been implemented successfully in
Willows include; infiltration/ less run-off/ no-crusting (86%), rain water harvest storage (82%), stone lines
(86%), and windbreaks (86%). Those practices that 50% - 79% of participants reported on green include;
greywater use (68%), contours and diversion ditches (59%), trench beds (50%), improved manure (68%),
crop rotation (64%), seed saving (77%), nursery/ propagation (73%), and continuity seedling (77%).
When compared to the practices reported as red (73%) the bee fodder, P& D control species participants
are still new to the practice and have not implemented any bee fodders. As well the natural P&D control
were 59% of the participants reported as red, possibility because they do not have much pests and
diseases in their fields.
86
36
68 82
45
0
59
86
36 50
68
27
64 77 73 77
32
100 91 86
9
14
45
5
18
995
32
14
18
18
23
14
14
14 14 14
9
059
18
0
18 27
0
45
590
45 32
9
59
23 914 9
59
05 5
73
0
20
40
60
80
100
120
inflitration/run off/crusting
OM
greywater
RWH storage
Mulching
Drip irrigation
Contours/Diversion ditches
stonelines
furrows
Bed design/trench beds
compost/improved manure
Mixed cropping
Crop rotation
seed saving
nursery/propagation
continuity seedling
Natural P&D control
Indigenous or medicinal plants
Indigenous fruit
windbreaks,hedges
Bee fodder, P&D control species
Water ManagementSoil
Movement
Soil
Health
Crop ManagementIndigenous Plants
Willows (N=22)
% Red
%Yellow
% Green
MILESTONE 7: FINAL REPORT
| 46
7.2.5 Sedawa
In Sedawa participation and engagement with the practices is much higher than all villages with 32
participants. Those practices that more than 50% of participants reported as green include; rain water
harvest storage (72%), mulching (50%), trench beds (53%), improved manure (69%), and indigenous fruits
(50%).
Those practices which a smaller percentage of participants have implemented 3-19% were reported on
yellow as an indication that they have tried, include; greywater (3%), furrows (6%), improved manure (9%),
drip irrigation (16%), indigenous/medicinal plants(16%), mulching (16%). Stone lines (19%),
nursery/propagation (19%), continuity seedling (19%), and bee fodder P&D control species (9%).
These charts provide an idea for each village of how participants see or judge their implementation of
practices. It is thus a qualitative indication of how well they think they are doing, rather than an
indication of overall implementation.
The value of these assessments lies in being able to pin point areas where further work and mentoring
could be required and where further support from the local facilitators may be useful.
41 41
25
72
50
6
47
16
41 53
69
41 38 38 44 31 34 25
50
34
16
34 28
3
19
16
16
28
19
6
22
9
25 22 28 19
19 13
16
22
28
9
25 31
72
9
34
78
25
66 53
25 22 34 41 34 38 50 53 59
28 38
75
0
20
40
60
80
100
120
inflitration/run off/crusting
OM
greywater
RWH storage
Mulching
Drip irrigation
Contours/Diversion ditches
stonelines
furrows
Bed design/trench beds
compost/improved manure
Mixed cropping
Crop rotation
seed saving
nursery/propagation
continuity seedling
Natural P&D control
Indigenous or medicinal plants
Indigenous fruit
windbreaks,hedges
Bee fodder, P&D control species
Water ManagementSoil
Movement
Soil
Health
Crop ManagementIndigenous Plants
Sedawa/MabinsA(N=32)
% Red
%Yellow
% Green