Reversing Agro-Based Land Degradation through Conservation Agriculture: Emerging Experiences from Zambia’s Smallholder Farming Sector
Bibliographic record
Abstract
<p>This study reports on the land degradation minimizing effects of Conservation Agriculture (CA) as promoted among smallholder Zambian farmers. It found no evidence of CA associated improvements in soil fertility after five years of CA practice, most probably because crop residues were removed from the fields. The study reports high phosphorus (15.53 mg kg<sup>-1</sup>) and potassium (0.75 cmol kg<sup>-1</sup>) levels, low nitrogen (0.12 %) and organic carbon (1.19 %) levels, and no plough/hoe pans in soils from both CA and conventionally (CV) managed fields. This is in part contrary to the dominant land degradation narratives which have been the basis for promoting CA in the study areas. <em>Faidherbia albida</em>, a leguminous tree promoted as part of the CA package in Zambia, is associated with significantly higher levels of nitrogen, organic carbon and potassium under its canopy. Its planting by CA farmers is linked to the incentives provided by CA promoters. Average maize yields of 3.8 t ha<sup>-1</sup> and 2.8 t ha<sup>-1 </sup>were reported under CA and CV systems respectively. Government subsidies for mineral fertilizer and hybrid seed promote maize mono-cropping and remain unsupportive of CA. It is concluded that the dominant land degradation narrative, which posits population induced land degradation, may not hold in this case. Instead, the removal of crop residues and low levels of mineral fertilizer and manure amendments may better explain the soil fertility status of the study areas. More nutrient replacement strategies are required if the benefits of CA on soil fertility are to be actualized in the immediate future.</p>
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".