563
5.2 Integration Process
Sustainable and effective integration would require development of appropriate
methods of integration. Certainly different organic sources for organic fertilizer
contain different quantities of nutrients (Chilimba et al. 2005; Ngwira et al. 2013b).
The appropriate combination rates of inorganic fertilizer with organic inputs such as
compost manure, farmyard manure, green manure, agroforestry prunings, or other
organic sources are not known. Smallholder farmers do not have the required technical know-how to effectively and efficiently adopt the integration of inorganic and
organic fertilizer. Snapp et al. (2014) therefore recommended investments in agronomy to develop site-specific recommended rates for integration. This should be built
on the site-specific inorganic fertilizer application rates developed by the Government
of Malawi (2012). Providing farmers with proper knowledge of preparation and
integration is paramount to having a good quality of integrated inorganic and
organic inputs.
The next phase is to invest in agricultural extension services to train farmers in
organic fertilizer preparation (Ngwira et al. 2013b). In addition, farmers should be
made aware of potential short-term, medium-term, and long-term benefits of these
technologies including the integration of organic and inorganic fertilizer (Munthali
(2007). Such vital information should accompany the implementation of FISP to
allow farmers to adopt relevant agronomic technologies besides adopting inorganic
fertilizer (Munthali 2007; Snapp et al. 2014). Agricultural extension services should
ensure that farmers appropriately follow agronomic recommendations on applying
the integration of organic and inorganic fertilizer.
The implementation strategy of FISP should abandon the current farmer-based
targeting system and provide the subsidies to all farmers who adopt CSA. That is,
targeting the soil and not the farmer. This targeting will ensure that farmers adopt
CSA first before accessing subsidized inorganic fertilizer. This will allow targeting
of inorganic fertilizer application on soils that are of good quality to achieve high
nitrogen and water use efficiency and subsequent increase in maize production and
productivity. Due to budget constraints, the program should maintain the target of
0.4 ha of land for maize production. Thus, identification of FISP beneficiaries
should follow those farmers that have appropriately adopted CSA technologies for
a minimum of 0.4 ha of land. Agricultural extension officers should closely follow
up with beneficiaries to allow proper exit from FISP.
6 Conclusion
The Farm Input Subsidy Program remains the strategic agriculture policy tool for
Malawi in the near future. There is no doubt that the program has increased access
to and use of inorganic fertilizer with modest impact on maize productivity. The
current implementation strategy where soil fertility issues are grossly ignored and
Impact of Farm Input Subsidies Vis-à-Vis Climate-Smart Technologies on Maize…
5.2 Integration Process
Sustainable and effective integration would require development of appropriate
methods of integration. Certainly different organic sources for organic fertilizer
contain different quantities of nutrients (Chilimba et al. 2005; Ngwira et al. 2013b).
The appropriate combination rates of inorganic fertilizer with organic inputs such as
compost manure, farmyard manure, green manure, agroforestry prunings, or other
organic sources are not known. Smallholder farmers do not have the required technical know-how to effectively and efficiently adopt the integration of inorganic and
organic fertilizer. Snapp et al. (2014) therefore recommended investments in agronomy to develop site-specific recommended rates for integration. This should be built
on the site-specific inorganic fertilizer application rates developed by the Government
of Malawi (2012). Providing farmers with proper knowledge of preparation and
integration is paramount to having a good quality of integrated inorganic and
organic inputs.
The next phase is to invest in agricultural extension services to train farmers in
organic fertilizer preparation (Ngwira et al. 2013b). In addition, farmers should be
made aware of potential short-term, medium-term, and long-term benefits of these
technologies including the integration of organic and inorganic fertilizer (Munthali
(2007). Such vital information should accompany the implementation of FISP to
allow farmers to adopt relevant agronomic technologies besides adopting inorganic
fertilizer (Munthali 2007; Snapp et al. 2014). Agricultural extension services should
ensure that farmers appropriately follow agronomic recommendations on applying
the integration of organic and inorganic fertilizer.
The implementation strategy of FISP should abandon the current farmer-based
targeting system and provide the subsidies to all farmers who adopt CSA. That is,
targeting the soil and not the farmer. This targeting will ensure that farmers adopt
CSA first before accessing subsidized inorganic fertilizer. This will allow targeting
of inorganic fertilizer application on soils that are of good quality to achieve high
nitrogen and water use efficiency and subsequent increase in maize production and
productivity. Due to budget constraints, the program should maintain the target of
0.4 ha of land for maize production. Thus, identification of FISP beneficiaries
should follow those farmers that have appropriately adopted CSA technologies for
a minimum of 0.4 ha of land. Agricultural extension officers should closely follow
up with beneficiaries to allow proper exit from FISP.
6 Conclusion
The Farm Input Subsidy Program remains the strategic agriculture policy tool for
Malawi in the near future. There is no doubt that the program has increased access
to and use of inorganic fertilizer with modest impact on maize productivity. The
current implementation strategy where soil fertility issues are grossly ignored and
Impact of Farm Input Subsidies Vis-à-Vis Climate-Smart Technologies on Maize…