Skip to main content

Modelling farm behaviour on soil fertility with the policy variable: a case from Africa

Abstract

This paper describes a new approach to make predictions on the behaviour of farms in Africa related to soil fertility management. Not only sectorial factors, but also the larger socio-economic context including policies influence the behaviour of small-scale farms. Science does not yet understand this context due to its vast heterogeneity, contingencies and complexity. We collected and processed qualitative data and sociological parameters to transform them into numbers. The model we constructed is based on probabilistic estimates of behaviour of farm classes under two scenarios in Mali (Mafèya) and Zambia (Chipata). We propose seven distinct farm classes to simulate the likeliness for a change from one class to another under defined policy regimes and other social conditions. In real life, network of actors, institutions and other social formations couple and decouple farmer’s identities and farms in highly dynamic social and ecological processes. We constructed a simplified model based on selected social theories, interpretative sociological inquiry and Markov chains in order to allow simulations under the two policy scenarios “as-is” and “to-be”. Our simulations result in significantly different outcomes per locality and scenario. This approach allows practical simulations of farm, food and agriculture systems and comparative research. We expect a better understanding of the dynamics of farms, faster adoption of innovations and a better base for a research-led dialogue of practitioners and policy makers. The paper demonstrates the primordial role of policies, influencing directly farmers’ behaviour, rural and labour markets as well as food systems and rural development.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution.

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3

Data availability

The detailed data can be obtained from the authors.

Notes

  1. 1.

    Unfortunately often divided instead of unified.

  2. 2.

    This term would need more clarification. Based on White (2008; p.8) we see “disciplines” as self-constituting conveners of social action, built around commitment of identities and centered on processes rather than structure. Examples of disciplines are farmer cooperatives (interface), a national government (council) or a research department (arena).

  3. 3.

    Alternative concept than behaviour: farm trajectories (Falconnier et al. 2015)

  4. 4.

    A function of social constellations like rights, connectivity to networks and resources provided by disciplines. We will not enter here in more details. The debate started with the origins of the new discipline “Sociology of Agriculture (Newby 1983)

  5. 5.

    To note that income has not only an economic, but as well a social dimension. We look here on the latter.

  6. 6.

    We could, with White (2008) define organic agriculture as a style, or a particular social formation, in which the social is strongly intertwined with the cultural and economic.

  7. 7.

    As a farm decides from year to year based on the context rather than in a fixed historic or traditional pattern.

  8. 8.

    See here: www.amadeus.ecs.umass.edu/mie373/excelMarkovChain.xls

  9. 9.

    Defined as a rule telling the decision makers what to do

  10. 10.

    Including here interface, arenas and councils (White 2008)

  11. 11.

    This corresponds to the calculations of Falconnier et al. (2015), who analyzed the trajectories of farms around Koutiala (Mali) between 1994 and 010: SQ (“hanging”) =70%, A (“stepping-up”) =17% and R (“falling-down”) =13%

  12. 12.

    We do not use here the term “society”, as this is rather a mirage, or at least a shortcut term and not fruitful for a scientific contextualization covering processes from individual/person to global level.

References

  1. Alrøe HF, Noe E (2014) Second-order science of interdisciplinary research: a polyocular framework for wicked problems. Constructivist Foundations 10(1):65–76

    Google Scholar 

  2. Austin EJ, Willock J, Deary IJ, Gibson GJ, Dent JB, Edwards-Jones G, Morgan O, Grieve R, Sutherland A (1998) Empirical models of farmer behaviour using psychological, social and economic variables. Part I: linear modelling. Agric Syst 58(2):203–224. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0308-521X(98)00066-3

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Bailey LH (1905) Some present problems in agriculture. Science 21(540):681–689. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.21.540.681

    CAS  Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Banson KE, Nguyen NC, Bosch OJH, Nguyen TV (2015) A systems thinking approach to address the complexity of agribusiness for sustainable development in Africa: a case study in Ghana. Syst Res Behav Sci 32(6):672–688. https://doi.org/10.1002/sres.2270

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Bellman, R. E. (1957 (2003). Dynamic programming: Dover Publications

  6. Berlin, I. (2000). The Power of Ideas: Princeton University Press

  7. Boyd Orr, J., & Lubbock, D. (1953 ). The White Man's Dilemma (G. A. a. U. Ltd Ed. First ed.). London

  8. Chayanov A (Ed.) (1923) The Theory of Peasant Economy (Daniel Thorner et al ed.): The American Economic Association

  9. Collins R (1994) Why the social sciences won't become high-consensus, rapid-discovery science. Sociol Forum 9(2):155–177. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01476360

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Darnhofer I, Gibbon D, Dedieu B (2012) Farming systems research: an approach to inquiry. In: Darnhofer I, Gibbon D, Dedieu B (eds) Farming systems research into the 21st century: the new dynamic. Springer Netherlands, Dordrecht, pp 3–31

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  11. Deleuze, G., & Hurley, R. (1988). Spinoza: Practical Philosophy: City Lights Publishers

  12. Dreyfus S (2002) Richard Bellman on the birth of dynamic programming. Oper Res 50(1):48–51. https://doi.org/10.1287/opre.50.1.48.17791

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Falconnier GN, Descheemaeker K, Van Mourik TA, Sanogo OM, Giller KE (2015) Understanding farm trajectories and development pathways: two decades of change in southern Mali. Agric Syst 139:210–222. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.agsy.2015.07.005

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Farnworth CR, Colverson KE (2015) Building a gender-transformative extension and advisory facilitation system in Sub-Saharan Africa. Journal of Gender, Agriculture and Food Security 1(1):20–39

    Google Scholar 

  15. Folke C, Biggs R, Norström AV, Reyers B, Rockström J (2016) Social-ecological resilience and biosphere-based sustainability science. Ecol Soc 21(3). https://doi.org/10.5751/ES-08748-210341

  16. Gallerani V, Gomez y Paloma S, Raggi M, Viaggi D (2008) Modelling the effect of EU policy reforms on farm investment behaviour. Paper presented at the Poster Paper. http://ageconsearch.umn.edu/record/6444/files/pp08ga19.pdf

  17. Giller KE, Tittonell P, Rufino MC, van Wijk MT, Zingore S, Mapfumo P et al (2011) Communicating complexity: integrated assessment of trade-offs concerning soil fertility management within African farming systems to support innovation and development. Agricultural Systems 104(2):191–203. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.agsy.2010.07.002

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Glaser B (2004) Remodeling grounded theory. Forum Qual Soc Res 5(2)

  19. Guattari, F. (2018). Qu'est-ce que l'écosophie? Textes présentés et agencés par Stéphane Nadaud.: lignes / imec

  20. Hirsch Hadorn G (Ed.) (2007). Handbook of Transdisciplinary Research: Springer

  21. IPCC (2020) Climate Change and Land. An IPCC Special Report on climate change, desertification, land degradation, sustainable land management, food security, and greenhouse gas fluxes in terrestrial ecosystems. Summary for Policymakers. Retrieved from

  22. Latour B (2005) Reassembling the Social: An Introduction to Actor-Network-Theory: OUP Oxford

  23. Liu J, Dietz T, Carpenter SR, Alberti M, Folke C, Moran E, Pell AN, Deadman P, Kratz T, Lubchenco J, Ostrom E, Ouyang Z, Provencher W, Redman CL, Schneider SH, Taylor WW (2007) Complexity of coupled human and natural systems. Science 317(5844):1513–1516. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1144004

    CAS  Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Luhmann, N. (1995). Social systems: Stanford University Press

  25. McMichael P (1997) Rethinking globalization: the agrarian question revisited. Rev Int Polit Econ 4(4):630–662. https://doi.org/10.2307/4177246

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. Merton, R. K., & Nisbet, R. A. (1976). Contemporary social problems: Harcourt Brace Jovanovich

  27. NAIP. (2013). National Agriculture Investment Plan (2014–2018) under the Comprehensive Africa Agriculture Development Programme (CAADP) Lusaka

    Google Scholar 

  28. Newby H (1983) The sociology of agriculture: toward a new rural sociology. Annu Rev Sociol 9:67–81

    Article  Google Scholar 

  29. Nicolay G (2016 b). Theory-based Innovation Platform management. A contribution of sociology to agriculture research and development. Paper presented at the 12th European IFSA Symposium, 2016. Theme 2: Methodology and frameworks of farming systems transformation. http://www.harper-adams.ac.uk/events/ifsa-conference/papers/2/2.5%20nicolay.pdf

  30. Nicolay G (2019) Understanding and changing farming, food & fiber systems. The organic cotton case in Mali and West Africa Open Agriculture (Vol. 4, pp. 86)

  31. Ostrom E (2009) A general framework for analyzing sustainability of social-ecological systems. Science 325(5939):419–422. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1172133

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  32. Spedicato G (2017). The markovchain package: a package for easily handling discrete Markov chains in R. Retrieved from

  33. Spinoza B, Morgan ML, Shirley S (2002). Spinoza: complete works: Hackett Publishing Company, Incorporated

  34. Spurk C, Asule P, Baah-Ofori R, Chikopela L, Diarra B, Koch C (2019) The status of perception, information exposure and knowledge of soil fertility among small-scale farmers in Ghana, Kenya, Mali and Zambia. The Journal of Agricultural Education and Extension:1–21. https://doi.org/10.1080/1389224X.2019.1656089

  35. Vavilov NI (1992 (1932)). The present state of worldwide agriculture and agricultural sciences. From: Origin and Geography of Cultivated Plants (translated from Russian by D. Löve). Published articles in Zvezda, no.4, pp.119–132 (pp. 286–304): Cambridge University Press

  36. Weber M (Ed.) (1922). Wirtschaft und Gesellschaft. Grundlagen der verstehenden Soziologie

  37. White HC (1995) Social networks can resolve actor paradoxes in economics and in psychology. Journal of Institutional and Theoretical Economics (JITE) / Zeitschrift für die gesamte Staatswissenschaft 151(1):58–74

    Google Scholar 

  38. White HC (2008) Identity and control: how social formations emerge: Princeton University Press

  39. Willer HL, Lernoud J (2020) The World of Organic Agriculture. Statistics and Emerging Trends 2020: Research Institute of Organic Agriculture (FiBL), Frick, and IFOAM – Organics International, Bonn

  40. Zougmoré RB, Partey ST, Totin E, Ouédraogo M, Thornton P, Karbo N, Sogoba B, Dieye B, Campbell BM (2019) Science-policy interfaces for sustainable climate-smart agriculture uptake: lessons learnt from national science-policy dialogue platforms in West Africa. Int J Agric Sustain 17(5):367–382. https://doi.org/10.1080/14735903.2019.1670934

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

Without the commitment of the many enumerators collecting the impressive data sets and the patient and grateful farmers from Mali and Zambia in 2016, the survey as base of this paper would not have served its purpose.

Funding

This research paper became possible because of the ORM4Soil project funded by the Swiss National Science Foundation and Swiss Agency for Development and Cooperation (SDC) under the Swiss Program for Research on Global Issues for Development.

Author information

Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Gian L. Nicolay.

Additional information

Publisher’s note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Nicolay, G.L., Chikopela, L., Diarra, B. et al. Modelling farm behaviour on soil fertility with the policy variable: a case from Africa. Org. Agr. 10, 43–56 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1007/s13165-020-00293-4

Download citation

Keywords

  • Soil fertility management
  • Smallholder farm behaviour
  • Social networks
  • Policies
  • Africa
  • Research technology
  • Modelling
  • Predictions