Socio-Economic and Environmental Drivers of
Adoption of Fertilizer Trees and Implications for Food Security in
Malawi
Jeanne Coulibaly, Godfrey Kundhlande, Tebila Nakelse and Brian Chiputwa
Beating Famine Southern Africa Conference, 14-17 April 2015
Malawi, a country with severe livelihood challenges
Soil degradation
Low use of inputs
Population pressure
Poor agricultural
practices
Climate change
Food insecurity
2015 Flood in BlantyrePicture credit: Andrew Kruczkiewicz
Agroforestry, very effective as a climate smart technology
Fertilizer trees intercropped with maize results in significant
improvement of maize yield (50%-500%)
Improved source of income
Research Design• Research question: What
is the potential for Fertilizer trees to contribute to food security and adaptation to climate change?
• Quasi-experimental design: experiments and controls
• Stratified sampling design
• 340 households selected
Main species adopted: Faidherbia, Gliricidia, Tephrosia
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
KARONGA KASUNGU MULANJE MZIMBA SALIMA THYOLO
Pe
rce
nta
ge o
f h
ou
seh
old
s
Albiza Lebbeck
Acaciapolycantha
Khayn spp
Tephrosia spp
Cajanus cajan
Sesbaniasesban
Gliricidiasepium
Senna spp
FaiderbiaAlbida
Lucaenea spp
Eucalyptus
60.4139.59
Non-adoptersAdopters
Two groups different in many socio-economic characteristics
Variables Adopters Non-adopters
Food productivity 563.6** 466.1
Age 47 48
Farm size 4.08 3.90
Secondary Education 0.46** 0.33
Gender of household head 0.69 0.70
Farm asset index 0.36*** 0.25
Fully engaged in farm work 2.78 2.68
Training on agroforestry practices 0.65 0.48
Perception change in rainfall 0.97 0.95
Perception change in temperature 0.87 0.87
Distance to government extension services 8.76 8.24
Land degradation 0.77** 0.65
Socio-economic factors influencing adoption of fertilizer trees
Variable Adoption decision
Age square -0.000606*
Aged development ratio 0.0687**
Sex of household head 0.296
Number of livestock 0.00337
Farmers' occupation -0.619***
Farm asset 0.178***
Agroforestry training 0.454***
Perception of change in rainfall 0.156
Perception of change in temperature -0.191
Maize NPK 0.000496
Land degradation 0.433**
Cooking fuel from forest 0.349
Distance extension agents 0.0168***
Impact of fertilizer trees on food security
Decision stage ImpactTreatment Effect
Percentage treatmentEffect
Sub-sample To adopt Not to adopt
Farm household that adopted fertilizer trees
(a) 448.23 (c)235.86 212.37*** 90%
Farm household that did not adopt fertilizer trees
(d) 333.26 (b) 348.03 -14.77*** - 4%
Results confirmed by perception
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
Constructionmaterial
Better soilfertility
Food foranimals
Source offuelwood
Source offood
Source ofincome
Vegetativecover
Helpshydrological
cycle
Per
cen
tage
of
ho
use
ho
lds
Perceived benefit
Main Highlights
• Farm and knowledge capital important for adoption of fertilizer trees
• Positive and significant impact on adopters
• Evidence that adoption of fertilizer trees has the potential to double productivity and therefore provide adaptation benefits and food security
• Promotion of fertilizer trees should be part of an inclusive approach to improve farm productivity and livelihood