Action Research into a Flood Resilient Value Chain – Biochar-Based Organic Fertilizer Doubles Productivity of Pea in Udayapur, Nepal
Abstract
Green growth and flood resilient value chain development have been foremost in the minds of vegetable growers in six villages of Udayapur District when they agreed to join pea field trials for a self-made biochar based organic fertilizer. Like so many Nepalese women and men who depend on farming for their livelihoods their top concern was getting high crop yields while lowering their input costs. Farmers of six villages (240 migrant workers' families) are now showing how boosting agriculture productivity and saving costs at the farm level can go hand in hand with national climate change strategies particularly in replacing chemical fertilizers in tropical soils of Nepal, an Action Research project result revealed. The results demonstrated that the biochar based organic fertilizer has enhanced the nutrient efficiency by increasing yields of at least four vegetable crops (peas, bottle gourd, cauliflower, and tomato) in the study area, and this technology was found more resilient to adverse climate (flood and drought) conditions. The trials have further investigated that the combination of biochar and cow urine, a source of nutrients readily available to farmers, have increased fresh pea yields double folds from (3 to 7) t · ha–1 in off season (end of Dec. to Mar.). With this learning, a flood resilient pea value chain was developed, where farmers could get increase in income from 9.92 % (traditional value chain) to 44.32 % (upgraded value chain). Further benefits of biochar based organic fertilizer have been recorded with increase of soil organic matter content in the root zone of crops and soil moisture content.
References
[1] Federal Democratic Republic of Nepal. Agriculture development strategy of Nepal. Kathmandu: Ministry of Agriculture Development; 2015.
[2] Schmidt H, Pandit B, Martinsen V, Cornelissen G, Conte P, Kammann C. Fourfold increase in pumpkin yield in response to low-dosage root zone application of urineenhanced biochar to a fertile tropical soil. Agriculture 2015;5(3):723–741.
[3] Biederman LA, Harpole WS. Biochar and its effects on plant productivity and nutrient cycling: A meta-analysis. GCB Bioenergy 2013;5(2):202–214.
[4] Cornelissen G, Pandit NR, Taylor P, Pandit BH, Sparrevik M, Schmidt HP. Emissions and char quality of flame-curtain “Kon Tiki” kilns for farmer-scale charcoal/biochar production. PLoS One 2016;11(5):e0154617.
[5] Hoermann B, Choudhary D, Choudhury D, Kollmair M. Integrated value chain development as a tool for poverty alleviation in rural mountain areas: An analytical and strategic framework. Kathmandu: International Centre for Integrated Mountain Development; 2010.
[6] Joshi SR, Rasul G, Shrestha AJ. Pro-poor and climate resilient value chain development: operational guidelines for the Hindu Kush Himalayas: ICIMOD Working Paper 2016/1. Kathmandu: International Centre for Integrated Mountain Development; 2016.
[7] Gathorne-Hardy A, Knight J, Woods J. Biochar as a soil amendment positively interacts with nitrogen fertiliser to improve barley yields in the UK. IOP Conference Series Earth Environmental Science 2009;6(37):372052.
[8] Steiner C, Teixeira WG, Lehmann J, Nehls T, de Macêdo JLV, Blum WEH, et al. Long term effects of manure, charcoal and mineral fertilization on crop production and fertility on a highly weathered Central Amazonian upland soil. Plant Soil 2007;291(1):275–290.
[9] Schmidt HP, Kammann C, Niggli C, Evangelou MWH, Mackie KA, Abiven S. Biochar and biochar-compost as soil amendments to a vineyard soil: Influences on plant growth, nutrient uptake, plant health and grape quality. Agriculture Ecosystem Environmental 2014;191:117–123.
[10] International Biochar Initiative. What is Biochar [Online] from http://www.biocharinternational.org/biochar -2017. [Acessed on 5 April 2017].
[11] World Agroforestry Centre (ICRAF). Report on commodity selection matrix. Bogor: World Agroforestry Centre; 2014.
[12] Riisgaard L, Bolwig S, Ponte S, A du Toit, Halberg N, Matose F. Integrating poverty and environmental concerns into value-chain analysis: A strategic framework and practical guide. Development Policy Review, 2010;28(2):195–216.
[13] Schmidt HP, Taylor P. Kon-Tiki flame cap pyrolysis for the democratization of biochar production. The Biochar Journal; 2014:14–24.
[14] Open Sourcee Ecology. Kon Tiki Klin [Online] from http://www .opensourceecology.org/wiki/Kon-Tiki_Kiln-2017 [Acessed on 30 April 2017]
[15] Babatola LA, Ojo DO, Lawal IO. Influence of storage conditions on quality and shelf life of stored peas. Journal of Biological Sciences 2008;8(2):446–450.
[16] Jokanović MR, Jovićević D, Tepić AN, Vujicić BL. Suitability of some green pea (Pisum sativum L.) varieties for processing. Acta Periodica Technologica 2006;37:13–20.
[17] Sidhu RS, Sidhu MS, Singh JM. Marketing efficiency of green peas under different supply chains in Punjab. Agricultural Economics Research Review 2011;24(2): 267–273.
[18] Martinsen V, Mulder J, Shitumbanuma V, Sparrevik M, Børresen T, Cornelissen G. Farmer-led maize biochar trials: Effect on crop yield and soil nutrients under conservation farming. Journal of Soil Science and Plant Nutrition 2014;177(5):681– 695.
[19] Singla R, Chahal SS, Kataria P. Economics of production of green peas (Pisum sativum) in Punjab. Agric Econ Res Rev 2006;19:237–250.
[20] Kammann CI, Schmidt HP, Messerschmidt N, Linsel S, Steffens D, Müller C, et al. Plant growth improvement mediated by nitrate capture in co-composted biochar. Science Report 2015; 5: 11080.
[21] Jeffery S, Abalos D, Spokas KA, Verheijen GA. Biochar effects on grop yield. In: Lehmann J, Joseph S (Eds). Biochar for environmental management. London: Earthscan; 2015. p. 301–326.