Farmers’ Response and their Adaptation Strategies to
Climate Change in Mafeteng District, Lesotho

RESEARCH PAPER

No. 26

ATPS (2013): Farmers’ Response and their Adaptation Strategies to Climate Change in Mafeteng District, Lesotho. ATPS Research Paper No. 26

1

ATPS (2013): Farmers’ Response and their Adaptation Strategies to Climate Change in Mafeteng District, Lesotho. ATPS Research Paper No. 26

2

Farmers’ Response and their Adaptation
Strategies to Climate Change in Mafeteng
District, Lesotho

Sekaleli T.S.T
Khoele Civil and Plant Hire, Lesotho
Sebusi K.
Red Cross Lesotho	
  ATPS (2013): Farmers’ Response and their Adaptation Strategies to Climate Change in Mafeteng District, Lesotho. ATPS Research Paper No. 26

3This paper should should be cited as:
African Technology Policy Studies, ATPS 2013: Farmers’ Response and their Adaptation
Strategies to Climate Change in Mafeteng District, Lesotho, [Sekaleli T.S.T, Sebusi K.] ATPS
Research Paper No. 26© 2013Published by the African Technology Policy Studies Network

ISBN: 978-9966-030-70-2

ATPS (2013): Farmers’ Response and their Adaptation Strategies to Climate Change in Mafeteng District, Lesotho. ATPS Research Paper No. 26

4

Table of Contents
Acknowledgements						

6Abstract								

7

1Introduction						

8

2Literature Review						

10

3Methodology						

14

4Results and Analysis					

15

5Conclusion and Recommendations				19

References							

20ATPS (2013): Farmers’ Response and their Adaptation Strategies to Climate Change in Mafeteng District, Lesotho. ATPS Research Paper No. 26

5

Acknowledgement
This report was produced as part of the implementation of the African Technology Policy
Studies Network (ATPS) Phase VI Strategic Plan, 2008 – 2012 funded by ATPS Donors
including the Ministerie van Buitenlandse Zaken (DGIS) the Netherlands, amongst others.
The authors hereby thank the ATPS for the financial and technical support during theimplementation of the program. The Authors specially thank Prof. Kevin Chika Urama, the
ATPS Executive Director for his visionary leadership as Program Director; Prof. Atieno
Ndede-Amadi, Program Coordinator; Dr. Nicholas Ozor, Senior Research Officer, ATPS;
Mr. Ernest Nti Acheampong, ATPS Research Officer and the ATPS Team for the technicalsupport during the research process

ATPS (2013): Farmers’ Response and their Adaptation Strategies to Climate Change in Mafeteng District, Lesotho. ATPS Research Paper No. 26

6Abstract
Climate change has moved from being a hypothesis to being a reality. Changes in climaticconditions have resulted in profound impacts on agricultural production (crop yield andquality) and general livelihoods. This study assessed the response of farmers to climatechange and its impact to their livelihoods and the potential of the three agricultural systems:
viz. agro-forestry, conservation agriculture and conventional agriculture in Ts’akholo and Kolo
communities in Mafeteng District as adaptation strategies to climate change. A representative
sample was selected using a stratified sampling wherein members of a group were grouped
into relatively homogeneous groups. The first stratum comprised of farmers that practice
conventional farming and the second included farmers that practiced conservation agriculture
and the third was farmers who practiced agro-forestry. A total of 120 farmers were selected
for this study. Soil fertility analysis (Available P, Total N, Organic C, K, and Cation Exchange
Capacity (CEC)) of the three agricultural systems were conducted. The results revealed that
farmers in Ts’akholo and Kolo reported experiencing drought, sporadic and heavy rainfall
periods, soil erosion, declining yield, pests and disease infestation, and short growing season
and this has led to them developing their own adaptation/coping strategies to climate change.
Some of the adaptation strategies include water harvesting technologies, conservation tillage,
use of keyhole and trench gardens, agro-forestry and application of traditional medicine tocontrol pests and diseases. The results indicated that soil fertility was found to be more inConservation Agriculture than in Agroforestry and least in Conventional Agriculture. Farmers
in the two areas have an urgent need for support from either the government or local NGO’sin terms of improved seeds, inputs subsidies, trainings, information and knowledge sharing.
This study has contributed to knowledge in the field of global environmental change and its
relationship with agriculture, food security and general livelihoods, especially for the farmerin the two case-study areas as well as for policy makers in Lesotho.

ATPS (2013): Farmers’ Response and their Adaptation Strategies to Climate Change in Mafeteng District, Lesotho. ATPS Research Paper No. 26

7

1. Introduction
1.1 Background
Climate change in Sub-Saharan Africa is already impacting negatively on rain-fed agriculture
and livestock systems. Kenya is already experiencing a number of hazards of climate change
and climate variability (CVC) including more frequent droughts, prolonged dry spells, intense
rainfall and flush floods, increased heat stress and disease outbreaks (IPCC, 2007). These
climatic hazards are accompanied with more changes in the productivity of rain-fed crops andforage, reduced water availability and more widespread water shortages, changing severity
and distribution of important human, livestock and crop diseases.
Dairy farming is a key component of livestock industry in Kenya and is dominated by Bostaurus dairy breeds/genotypes (DBG) comprising Friesian, Ayrshire, Guernsey, Jersey
and crosses amongst themselves (Muriuki et al., 2004). The DBG are raised in different
agro-ecological zones under diverse production environments (PEDs) and are classified asvulnerable to poor feeding, heat load and disease incidences, which are projected to increasein frequency, intensity and magnitude with the increasing climate variability and change. The
PEDs thus has both direct and indirect climate effects on DBG, which will adversely impact
on the DBG performance and therefore limit their potential for providing food, nutrition, andincome and job securities to the farmer (Muriuki et al., 2004). This does raise concerns of
securing livelihoods for the farmer, creating the necessity to identify options and strategies
for CVC adaptation by poor dairy farmers. Intervention measures are needed to contributetowards building adaptive capacity and resilience to climate variability in the short-term andclimate change in the long-term, but are currently deficient in Kenya.
One approach to this problem is to characterize the PEDs in which a breed has been kept
over time. Several technology practices and strategies have been suggested for mitigation
and adaptation to CVC stress. However, breeding strategies targeted at improving theirproductivity have been applied uniformly disregarding the adaptability level of DBG. Thereis an urgent need for detailed performance assessment of DBGs under PEDs to guide theidentification of appropriate breeding strategies that can help dairy farmers mitigate CVC andimprove productivity and adaptation for secured livelihoods to the poor.
1.2 Cause and Effects
Increasing hazards of CVC are already being experienced and the increased scientific evidence
for CVC has significantly raised the level of uncertainty about future climate conditions. The
DBG are vulnerable to increasing hazards of CVC already being experienced in Kenya.
The CVC hazards are accompanied with changes in disease outbreaks, forage productivity
and, reduced water quantity and quality. These changes are projected to increase and DBG
raised in diverse PEDs will likely suffer some impacts of increasing CVC since they are themost vulnerable to climate stresses and yet least adapted compared to Bos-indicus. These
impacts of climatic stress on DBG performance have not been assessed and adaptations tooffset these impacts have not been assessed in detail. Nevertheless, appropriate breeding
strategies that can help dairy farmers stabilize production under changing CVC are unknown.
1.3 Objectives
1. To characterize the diverse production environments (PED) for dairy production bydegree of vulnerability to climate variability (CVC).
ATPS (2013): Farmers’ Response and their Adaptation Strategies to Climate Change in Mafeteng District, Lesotho. ATPS Research Paper No. 26

82. To rank vulnerability of the dairy breeds/genotypes (DBG) to CVC in the identified PEDs
based on farmers’ experience.
3. To identify adaptive traits of importance to stresses of CVC in the specific PEDS.
4. To identify breeding strategies for DBG to CVC for improved productivity and adaptation.
1.4 Rationale
Comprehensive information on the PEDs of the DBG will; (a) facilitate better understandingof the potential impacts and consequences of CVC, (b) Increase industry capability to
manage the implications of CVC, (c) Inform and engage industry stakeholders to improveunderstanding of CVC issues, (d) Facilitate better understanding of the likely impacts
and opportunities associated with reducing and/or offsetting CVC for the dairy industry (e)enhance understanding needed of the likely impacts of CVC on the vulnerability of the DBG
and (f) facilitate understanding of the resilience to current CVC and (g) enables the risks
associated with longer-term CVC to be gauged, and appropriate actions set in place toincrease or restore resilience where this is threatened. All these action combined contributeto securing livelihood assets for the poor.

ATPS (2013): Farmers’ Response and their Adaptation Strategies to Climate Change in Mafeteng District, Lesotho. ATPS Research Paper No. 26

92. Literature Review
2.1 The Concept of Climate Change
Climate change has moved from being a hypothesis to being a reality. This is substantiated by
the fact that the global average surface temperature of the earth has increased by 0.6±0.20C
since 1900 and it is likely that the rate and duration of the warming are greater than at any
time in the past 1000 years (Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), 2001a).
Climate change has been defined by IPCC (2007) as a change in the state of the climatethat can be identified (e.g. using statistical tests) by changes in the mean and/or thevariability of its properties, and that persists for an extended period, typically decades or
longer. Climate change may be due to natural internal processes or external forces, or topersistent anthropogenic changes in the composition of the atmosphere or in land use. The
UNFCCC (1992), on the other hand, defines climate change as a change of climate which
is attributed directly or indirectly to human activity that alters the composition of the global
atmosphere, and which is an addition to natural variability that has been observed overcomparable time periods. Climate, however, is only one factor within the dynamic earthsystem. Changes in the physical and biogeochemical environment, either caused naturally or
influenced by human activities such as deforestation, fossil fuel consumption, urbanization,
land reclamation, agricultural intensification, freshwater extraction, fisheries over-exploitation
and waste production, contribute to global environmental change (GEC), (CCAFS, 2009).
Furthermore, CCAFS report of 2009 concludes that climate change on its own represents animmediate and unprecedented threat to the food security of hundreds of millions of people
who depend on small-scale agriculture for their livelihoods. Food security is achieved when
all people, at all times, have physical and economic access to sufficient, safe, and nutritious
food to meet their dietary needs and food preferences for an active and healthy life, (FAO,
1996). Changing climatic conditions are projected to affect food security from the local to
global level. It is predicted that patterns of rainy season will be reduced, and the frequency
and intensity of severe weather events such as floods, cyclones and hurricanes will increase.
There will also be prolonged drought in some regions; and water shortages; and changes in
the location and incidence of pest and disease outbreaks, (FAO, 2009).
2.2 Impacts of Climate change on farming and livelihoods in Lesotho
Climate change is taking place at a time of increasing demand for food, feed, fiber and fuel,and has the potential to irreversibly damage the natural resource base on which agriculture
depends, (IAASTD, undated). Changes in carbon dioxide concentrations, temperature andrainfall will have an impact on plant cover and land use which will, in turn, substantially affectthe behavior of water when it falls as rain, (Muller, 2007). Due to reduced adaptive capacity
and higher climate vulnerability smallholder and subsistence farmers in developing countries
may not be able to cope with climate change effectively and such conditions pressure tocultivate marginal land or adopt unsustainable cultivation practices is likely and may increase
land degradation, water scarcity and endanger biodiversity. Degraded lands in the southernlowlands of Lesotho are more susceptible to climate change impacts such as increased
temperature and more severe drought, (Ministry of Natural resources, 2000). Recorded landdegradation problems in Lesotho include massive soil erosion that leads to gully formation
and abandonment of land, loss of biodiversity, severe loss of vegetation and low agricultural
production and productivity, (Ministry of Agriculture and Bureau of statistics, 1994). According
to Mekbib et al, (2011) Lesotho is heavily influenced by a variety of competing weather
ATPS (2013): Farmers’ Response and their Adaptation Strategies to Climate Change in Mafeteng District, Lesotho. ATPS Research Paper No. 26

10systems, leaving the country prone to natural disasters, drought and desertification, lossof biological diversity and land degradation. In accordance with article 4 of the UNFCCC,
2000, these conditions indicate Lesotho as a country highly vulnerable to climate change.
UNDP (2007) asserts that climate change threatens food security, livelihoods and economic
prosperity with emphasis on the vulnerable members of the community (including the poor,
HIV/AIDS patients and orphans).
2.3 Farmers Adaptation Strategies to Climate Change in Mafeteng, Lesotho
According to FAO (2009) climate change adaptation strategies are now a matter of urgency.
It is necessary that climate change adaptation is not separated from other priorities but is
integrated into development planning, programs and projects (World Bank, 2008). Responses
aimed at adapting to climate change may, however, have negative consequences for foodsecurity, just as measures taken to increase food security may exacerbate climate change,(CCAFS, 2009).
2.3.1 Conservation Agriculture
Among the emerging adaptation strategies in Mafeteng district of Lesotho is the use ofconservation agriculture system of farming, (International Federation of Red Cross and Red
Crescent Societies, (2006)). As stated by Dumanski et al (2006) Conservation Agriculture isan application of modern agricultural technologies to improve production while concurrently
protecting and enhancing the land resources on which production depends. Application ofConservation Agriculture promotes the concept of optimizing yields and profits while ensuringprovision of local and global environmental benefits and services. Zero tillage, along withother soil conservation practices, is the cornerstone of Conservation Agriculture. In Mafeteng
District, NGOs together with the Ministry of Agriculture and Food Security are promoting
conservation agriculture for the purposes of minimizing soil erosion and increasing crop yield(International Federation of Red Cross and Red Crescent Societies (2006).
2.3.2 Agroforestry
The term agroforestry is often perceived in the narrow sense of intercropping food plants
and trees. In a broader sense, it signifies any system that includes food, and/or fodder andwood production, (Ahlback, 1995). Agroforestry has also emerged as an important strategy
to adapt to climate change in Mafeteng, (UNDP, 2011). It provides many opportunities forvalue added production and is also used as living contour hedges for erosion control, toconserve and enhance biodiversity, Dumanski et al, (2006). Agroforestry systems, even if
not primarily designed for carbon sequestration, present a unique opportunity to sequester
carbon from the atmosphere, (Verchot et al, undated). Carbon sequestration has been
defined by the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC), (2010)
as the process of removing carbon from the atmosphere and depositing it in a reservoir. In
this process atmospheric carbon dioxide is taken up by trees, grasses, and other plants
through photosynthesis and stored as carbon in biomass (trunks, branches, foliage, androots) and soils, (Center for Integrated Natural Resources and Agricultural Management
and the Commonwealth Project, 2007). In essence, agroforestry core concerns include
ecological and economic sustainability – resilience of environment and diversity of income. It
is a system that blends production (food and income security at household- and communitylevel) with ecosystem services, (Jama, 2005).
2.3.3 Crop diversification
Crop diversity is large in the district (UNDP, 2010). It is well known amongst farmers that
greater crop diversity and mixed farming (crops and livestock) offer considerable protection
against farming risk, including climatic-related risk (FAO, 2011). In order to prevent total
loss of crop production larger farming enterprises with a range of different crop types, oreven cultivars of the same crop with differing drought or pest resistance traits are being
implemented in Mafeteng District (International Federation of Red Cross and Red CrescentSocieties, 2006).
ATPS (2013): Farmers’ Response and their Adaptation Strategies to Climate Change in Mafeteng District, Lesotho. ATPS Research Paper No. 26

11

2.3.4 Keyhole and Trench gardens
Moreover, keyhole and trench gardens are fast growing adaptation strategies to climatechange in Mafeteng, (International Federation of Red Cross and Red Crescent Societies,
2006). The two systems were introduced to Lesotho by Care Lesotho, a local nongovernmental organization. Keyhole and trench gardens have proven an effective way togrow vegetables year round in semi-arid climates because they nourish the soil and help
it retain moisture (Weimer, 2008). The gardens reduce the labor required to produce foodfor the household (Weimer, 2008). This in turn helps households affected by chronic illness
and HIV, and households headed by children or the elderly, which often have limited labor
capacity. This is a good example of a low-cost adaptation practice which is also supported by
local government and can be up-scaled to the national level (UNDP, 2010).

	
  Figure 1: Keyhole garden
Keyhole gardens are easy to construct and advocate for use of locally available materials/
resources which include, among others; wood ash, manure, and aloe.
A lot of material are required for construction of Keyhole gardens but once constructed they
are easy to maintain.

Figure 2: Trench garden
Trench gardens are dug into the ground (60 to 70cm deep) in the 1m x 2m space. Then alayer of aloe leaves, branches, cardboard or tin cans are placed at the bottom and the soil
added on top. Dried grass or leaves are then added; lastly, a thin layer of soil is added andthen a thick layer of manure.
2.4 Climate Change and Policy Formulation in Lesotho
Policy formulation for climate change poses a great challenge because it presents a problem
of decision-making under uncertainty (Webster, 2002). Continued basic research on the
climate system to reduce uncertainties is essential; however, policy-makers also need away to assess the possible consequences of different decisions, including taking no action,
ATPS (2013): Farmers’ Response and their Adaptation Strategies to Climate Change in Mafeteng District, Lesotho. ATPS Research Paper No. 26

12within the context of known uncertainties, (Webster, 2003). While members of the scientificcommunity and policy-makers are particularly concerned about adaptation to climate change,(Olmos, 2001) Bohle et al. (1994), on the other hand, believe that full understanding of current
vulnerability is necessary for developing strategies to coping with future climate change.
Policy reform in Lesotho is dated as far back as the 1970s and early 1980s, although notdirectly related to climate change such policy reforms have been found to have a bearing
on both mitigation and adaptation strategies. Such strategies include the promotion ofrenewable energies, the introduction of biogas projects, the introduction of an afforestation
programme, water development, sanitation improvement, the formulation of new agricultural
policies, environmental regulation, (Lesotho Meteorological Services, 2001). In developing
countries such as Lesotho the youth and the vulnerable members of the community are more
susceptible to the impacts of climate change and this condition is extreme among the poorest
people, (IPCC, 2001).

ATPS (2013): Farmers’ Response and their Adaptation Strategies to Climate Change in Mafeteng District, Lesotho. ATPS Research Paper No. 26

13

3. Methodology
3.1 Population and Sample Selection
The target population for this study was all farmers in the two areas of Ts’akholo and Kolo
in Mafeteng District. The areas were chosen for two reasons. Firstly, the areas are hardest
hit by the impacts of global climate change in the district in terms of drought, soil erosion,and reduced crop yield. Secondly, the areas are conveniently accessible to the researchers.
A representative sample was selected using a stratified sampling wherein members of agroup were grouped into relatively homogeneous groups. The first stratum comprised offarmers that practice conventional farming and the second included farmers that practiced
conservation agriculture and the third was farmers who practice agro-forestry. The total
number of farmers who participated in the study was 120 farmers. Each village had 60
farmers and this comprised of 20 farmers for conventional, conservation and agroforestry,
respectively.
3.2 Data Collection
Face to face interviews were conducted with individual farmers using a structured
questionnaire. The interviews were conducted to determine the farmers’ perceptions
regarding impact of climate change on agricultural production and the technologies used by
the farmers to adapt to climate change. For the purposes of validating the perceptions andviews of farmers with scientific results/proof laboratory analysis of soil samples is mandatory.
Soil samples were randomly selected across the fields of selected individual farmers. The
soil samples at varying depths of about 0-10cm, 10-20cm, and 20-30cm were collected using
auger. At each point, soil samples were collected into labeled plastic bags and then taken to
the laboratory for analysis (Organic carbon, Available Phosphorus, Total Nitrogen, Potassium(K), Soil pH, Cation Exchange Capacity (CEC), and Textural class).
3.3 Data Analysis
Data were analyzed using Statistical Package for Social Sciences (SPSS) plus 10 version.
The Table below indicates aspect of data, data analysis and rationale:
Table 1: Data parameters
Aspect of Data

Statistics Used for
Analysis

Rationale

Farmers’
perceptions

Descriptive Statistics

Determine farmers’ perceptions regarding impact of climatechange on agricultural production and the technologies usedby farmers to adapt to climate change.

Soil Properties

ANOVA

To determine if there were significant differences in soil
properties of soil samples collected from field of farmers
that practiced different farming techniques which include
agroforestry, conservation agriculture and conventional
agriculture

ATPS (2013): Farmers’ Response and their Adaptation Strategies to Climate Change in Mafeteng District, Lesotho. ATPS Research Paper No. 26

14

4. Results and Discussion
4.1 Demographic Characteristics of Farmers in the Study Area
Demographic characteristics considered in this study include, level of education, primarysource of livelihood and the types of farming system used. These were used to get an
overview of farmers’ response with respect to their different social strata.
4.2 Climate Change Awareness
When asked whether they were aware of climate change and its impacts on both theiragricultural production and livelihoods in general, almost all the respondents (93%) said yes(fig.3). This is an indication that climate change has indeed moved from being a hypothesis tobeing a reality. About half of them (50%) pointed out that media (especially radio) contributed
to their awareness of climate change and its impacts. However, 29% of the responding
farmers claim that their awareness is rooted in their own observation of the impacts of climatechange, especially in their farming endeavor. It must be noted that the highest educationlevel of respondents is high school and that their understanding of climate change is limited
to their daily experiences and information from radio broadcast, hence, the need that media
outreach through radio is enhanced so that more farmers can be reached and informed
about climate change, its causes, consequences, mitigation and adaptive measures. When
asked what they think should be done to spread climate change awareness, participants
pointed out that both workshops and “pitsos” (public gatherings) can be organized to share
information and knowledge between farmers and researchers (through extension services).

Figure 3: Climate Change Awareness to Farmers at Ts’akholo and Kolo
4.3 Impacts of Climate Change as reported by Farmers in Ts’akholo and Kolo
Interviewed farmers in both Ts’akholo and Kolo made it clear during the focus group discussion
with the researchers that climate change affects them in their agricultural production. About
40% of them claimed reduction of crop yields as a result of climate change. Observation
ATPS (2013): Farmers’ Response and their Adaptation Strategies to Climate Change in Mafeteng District, Lesotho. ATPS Research Paper No. 26

15

from farmers’ fields at both Ts’akholo and Kolo revealed existing conditions of sheet and rill
erosion. In this regard, 17% of the responding farmers in the two areas pointed out that soil
erosion removed fertile surface soil resulting in soil fertility decline and consequently reduced
crop yields. Some farmers (23%) said that they received below normal yields due to theimpact of prolonged drought and heavy rainfall. This claim is supported by a vast amountof literature (examples include, Obioha, (2010) and, Ministry of Natural Resources, (2000)).
Furthermore, the quality of the yield has been on the decline according to approximately
16% of the respondents at Ts’akholo and Kolo. The decline is attributed to low soil fertility,
scorching sun on their crops, pests, drought, high variation and excessive rainfall. Lastly, asmall portion of respondent (4%) claimed that climate change impact has resulted in shortened
growing season. Through discussions with the farmers, it was revealed that famers receive
late rainfall into the growing season and experience prolonged drought which hamper themfrom starting their cultivation ventures in time and by the time they start the growing season
is already shortened. Figure 4 below gives a summary of climate change impacts based on
the interviewed farmers at Ts’akholo and Kolo in Mafeteng District.

Figure 4: Impacts of Climate Change on Ts’akholo and Kolo
4.4 Farmers’ Climate Change Adaptation Strategies in Ts’akholo and Kolo, Mafeteng
The majority of participating farmers’ main source of livelihood is agriculture in one formor the other. About 60% of the respondents rely on crop production, 17% on both cropand livestock while only 3% rear livestock for their livelihoods. Only 12% and 8% had a fulltime job and remittances, respectively, which formed the basis of their livelihoods. In orderto maintain their livelihoods in these unfavorable climatic conditions responding farmers
at Ts’akholo and Kolo have come up with a number of adaptation strategies. One of thedominant adaptation strategies in the two areas is trench and keyhole gardens which the
respondents said they adopted from World Vision Lesotho and Lesotho Red Cross Society(both are Non-governmental Organizations (NGO’s)). The two NGO’s conducted ‘’pitsos’’(community gatherings) where they shared their knowledge with community members andthen conducted trainings for the local farmers and those who adopted the innovation weregenerously assisted and provided with essential resources such as shade nets and seeds.
Tree planting has become another adaptation strategy for farmers. When asked how trees
were an adaptation strategy, respondents said that they use trees to rehabilitate gullies andintegrate them with crops in their fields. Farmers said that fruit trees in their fields provided
fruits for consumption and helped in controlling soil erosion (by providing ground cover with
their canopy and leaves) and improve soil fertility through falling leaves. In addition, some
farmers from Kolo diversified crops in order to counteract the effects of climate change.
Their common practice is to plant maize, beans and pumpkins together or mix a variety ofvegetables in their backyard.
ATPS (2013): Farmers’ Response and their Adaptation Strategies to Climate Change in Mafeteng District, Lesotho. ATPS Research Paper No. 26

16

Other farmers in the two areas said they apply their indigenous knowledge of traditional
medicine to control pests and diseases while others adjusted their planting time in order toavoid some pests. They plant early August to overcome cut-worm or plant in the month ofDecember when there is adequate rainfall. Those farmers who have livestock, especiallycattle, use cow-dung instead of inorganic fertilizers when they plant to add fertility to the soil.
Being drought prone areas, respondents from the two areas made use of roof water
harvesting technology to collect water and store it in stone built-tanks next to their houses
while others practiced conservation agriculture which preserves moisture in their fields.
The most fundamental principle of conservation agriculture is to till the soil to the minimum,
maintain soil cover in the form of organic matter and to practice crop rotation. Some of the
farmers said the practice helps not only in soil and water conservation but also in adding
fertility to the soil. Fig. 5 shows adaptation strategies for Ts’akholo and Kolo farmers.

Figure 5: Ts’akholo and Kolo Farmers’ Adaptation Strategies
4.5 Comparison between the three Agricultural Systems
Participants were asked which agricultural system between agroforestry, conventional andconservation agriculture performed best in terms of yield. They acknowledged high yield fromconservation agriculture and conventional agriculture. However, their response showed thatthey prefer conventional agriculture to agroforestry and conservation agriculture. Their mainconcern with agroforestry is that trees take a long time to grow. They claim that conservation
agriculture, on the other hand, is labour intensive since they do not have its special equipmentused for tilling the soil. Respondents are aware of the fact that conventional agriculture posesa risk of soil erosion and soil fertility decline. However, respondents were skeptical about
shifting away from conventional agriculture due to its deep rooted entrenchment in theircultural practice.
Agroforestry system in Ts’akholo and Kolo is limited to fruit trees integration with crops inalley cropping pattern. There is no tree fallow (where trees are planted on a fallow field
to enhance soil fertility and rehabilitate the soil) or other agroforestry systems that include
livestock component such as in silvi-pasture. Those farmers that have already establishedagroforestry system said it has helped in harnessing soil erosion on their fields. Farmers
seem not to have understanding or lack proper training on both agroforestry and conservation
ATPS (2013): Farmers’ Response and their Adaptation Strategies to Climate Change in Mafeteng District, Lesotho. ATPS Research Paper No. 26

17

agriculture hence why the systems have not been practice adopted on a large scale like other
innovations that have been brought by local NGO’s.
4.6 Soil Physicochemical Properties
In terms of soil fertility status for the three agricultural systems the following was analyzed: soil
pH, organic carbon, available phosphorus, total nitrogen, exchangeable cations (potassium,
sodium) and cation exchange capacity. Refer to Table 2 for full results of each agricultural
system.
Table 2 : Mean separation of selected chemical characteristics for the three Agricultural
Systems
Land Use

pH (H20) pH (KCl) Org C
Av P(%)
Mg/100g)

NH4
ppm

K

Na

CEC
cmol/kg

Agro-forestry 5.36

4.58

0.49

1.78

2.14

1.95

5.62

0.33

Convention
Agriculture

5.57

4.68

0.51

1.60

2.15

2.02

17.2

0.38

Conservation
Agriculture
5.73

4.93

1.54

1.93

2.08

4.86

8.64

0.40

Av P: Available Phosphorus, Org C: Organic Carbon, NH4: Ammonium Nitrate; CEC: Cation Exchange Capacity,
Na: Sodium, K: Potassium

Soils in the three land uses recorded an acidic pH which is not ideal for some crops. Organiccarbon was highest under conservation agriculture (1.54) when compared to convention
agriculture (0.51) and agro-forestry (0.49). The cause for the high organic carbon underconservation agriculture is as a result of incorporating organic matter into the soil (which
has been left over the soil after harvesting) or leaving it to cover the soil and not removing it.
Organic carbon increases the fertility status of the soil. High amounts of available phosphorus
were found under conservation agriculture (1.93) followed by agroforestry (1.78) and thenconventional agriculture (1.60). Phosphorus is a nutrient highly essential to plants for their
growth. Soils under conventional agriculture showed higher amounts of total nitrogen (2.15)
and this can be attributed to fertilizer application. Agroforestry had (2.14) amounts of total
nitrogen and conventional agriculture (2.08). Potassium was found to be in large quantities
under conservation agriculture when compared to other agricultural systems. Furthermore,high amounts of salts (example, sodium (17.2)) were recorded in conventional agriculture
and these results in sodic soils (this can be identified by sealing of soil pores and cracking
soils). Overall, the order of nutrient content in the three systems is conservation agriculture>
agroforestry>conventional agriculture.

5. Conclusion and Recommendations

ATPS (2013): Farmers’ Response and their Adaptation Strategies to Climate Change in Mafeteng District, Lesotho. ATPS Research Paper No. 26

18

Global climate change is a real phenomenon in Mafeteng district and this can be seen by
a diverse number of climatic disasters that have hit the district in the past years and suchinclude heavy rains leading to floods, strong winds that blow away buildings, droughts anddesertification. Land degradation in the form of soil erosion and soil fertility decline is rampant
in the district. However, land degradation has been exacerbated by bad practices such as
burning of cow-dung and crop residues for energy as well as monoculture practices that result
in declining soil fertility. Farmers in Ts’akholo and Kolo have experienced yield decline as aresult of impacts of climate change. Given the growing extent of land degradation, drought
and scarcity of rainfall in Mafeteng district and the low returns from agriculture clearly calls
for more productive and robust methods to agriculture. Ts’akholo and Kolo areas have moreundulating slopes than flat terrain and this means that conventional methods of agriculture(which tills the soil completely) will promote soil erosion, especially if terraces are not properly
constructed and planting not done along the contour. On the contrary, agroforestry andconservation agriculture are well suited to all terrains because they promote soil cover anddiscourage easy movement of soil particles. The results from this study also indicate that soil
fertility is high under conservation agriculture and agro-forestry than conventional agriculture
and this automatically gives the two systems upper-hand over conventional agriculture. In
addition, in-depth research needs to be done on the integration of conservation agriculture
to agroforestry as adaptation strategy to climate change and then policy formulated out ofsuch a study.
It can be recommended that farmers be given more support from both local NGO’s and thegovernment in terms of trainings, information and knowledge sharing, and other fundamental
resources that they need in their farming systems. There is a need for policy formulationout of systems that promote ecosystem services such as agroforestry and conservation
agriculture (such ecosystem services include harnessing soil erosion and promoting soil
fertility). Farmers who practice environmentally friendly adaptation strategies can be paid orcompensated (payment for ecosystem services, such as, carbon trading) for their initiative as
a way of encouraging other farmers to do the same or they can be assisted with high-breed
seeds (tolerant to drought and fast growing) and subsidized agricultural inputs from NGO’sand the government.

References

ATPS (2013): Farmers’ Response and their Adaptation Strategies to Climate Change in Mafeteng District, Lesotho. ATPS Research Paper No. 26

19

Ahlback, A.J. (1995) Mobilizing Rural People in Tanzania to Tree Planting: Why and How.
Royal Swedish Academy of Sciences.
Bartlett S. (2008) “Climate Change and Urban Children: Impacts and Implications for
Adaptation in Low- and Middle Income Countries.” Environment and Urbanization, Vol 20,
No 2.
Bohle, H.G, T.E Downing and M.J Watts. (1994) Climate Change and Social Vulnerability:
The Sociology and Geography of Food Insecurity. Global Environmental Change 4: 37-48.
Center for Integrated Natural Resources and Agricultural Management and the CommonWealth
Project (2007) A Landowner’s Guide to Carbon Sequestration Credits.
CCAFS. (2009) Provisional Medium Term Plan: 2010-2012 Challenge Program on Climate
Change, Agriculture and Food Security (CCAFS). Frederiksberg.
Chakela, Q.K, (1999) Statement of the Environmental in Lesotho. Department of Environment,
Lesotho.
Chagutah T and M. Mutasa (2007) “SADC braces for Climate Change Challenge”. SADC
Today. Vol. 10. No.3
Dumanski, J., R. Peiretti, J. Benetis, D. McGarry, and C. Pieri. (2006) The Paradigm ofConservation Tillage. Proc. World Assoc. Soil and Water Conserv., P1: 58-64.
FAO. (2011) Strengthening Capacity for Climate Change Adaptation in Agriculture: Experienceand Lessons from Lesotho. Sales and Marketing Group - Communication Division Food andAgriculture Organization of the United Nations Viale delle Terme di Caracalla - 00153 Rome.
FAO (2009) Coping with a Changing Climate: Considerations for Adaptation and Mitigationin Agriculture. Rome.
FAO (2008) Climate Change Adaptation and Mitigation: Challenges and Opportunities for
Food Security. Rome.
FAO (1996) Report of the World Food Summit. FAO, Rome.
FAO (undated) Report on Children and Youth.
Forum for Food Security in Southern Africa, (undated) Lesotho Food Security Issue Paper.
IAASTD, (undated) Executive Summary of the Synthesis Report of the International
Assessment of Agricultural Knowledge, Science and Technology for Development (IAASTD).
IPCC. (2001a). Climate Change 2001: The Scientific Basis. Technical summary from Working
Group I. Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, Geneva.
IPCC. (2001). Climate Change (2001) Impacts, Adaptation Vulnerability. Contribution of
ATPS (2013): Farmers’ Response and their Adaptation Strategies to Climate Change in Mafeteng District, Lesotho. ATPS Research Paper No. 26

20

Working Group II to the Third Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate
Change. Geneva: UNEP/WMO.
IPCC (2007). Summary for Policymakers. In: Climate Change (2007) Impacts, Adaptation
and Vulnerability. Contribution of Working Group II to the Fourth Assessment Report of theIntergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, M.L. Parry, O.F. Canziani, J.P. Palutikof, P.J.
van der Linden and C.E. Hanson, Eds., Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK, 7-22.
International Federation of Red Cross and Red Crescent Societies (2006). Vulnerability
Capacity Assessment Communities: Matefeng and Quthing, IFRC, Geneva, Switzerland.
Internation Service for National Agricultural Research (1989) Review of Lesotho’s Agricultural
Systems. Hugue, Netherlands.
Jama B and Zeila A. 2005. Agroforestry in the drylands of eastern Africa: a call to action.
ICRAF Working Paper – no. 1. Nairobi: World Agroforestry Centre.
Lesotho Meteorological Services. (2001) Climate Change in Lesotho: A Handbook for
Practitioners.
Ministry of Natural resources. (undated) Supporting Integrated and Comprehensive
Approaches to Climate Change Adaptation in Lesotho.
Ministry of Natural Resources. (2000) National Report on Climate Change. First National
Communication to the Conference of the Parties to the United Nations Framework Convention
on Climate Change. Lesotho
Ministry of Agriculture and Bureau of statistics. (1994) Lesotho situation report 1967/771991/92
		Mosenene C, (1999) “Soil-water and conservation tillage practices in Lesotho: Experiencesof SWACAP”. Conservation Tillage with Animal Traction Network for Eastern and Southern
Africa (ATNESA), Harare Zimbabwe.
Muller M, (2007). “Adapting to Climate Change: Water Management for Urban Resilience”.
Environment and Urbanization.
Obioha E.E (2010) Climate Variability and Food Production Nexus in Lesotho, 2001-2007. J
Hum Ecol, 32(3): 149-160.
Olawoye J.E, O.Okoye and A. Eleri. (2010) Gender and Climate Change Toolkit For
Policymakers and Programme Developers. International Centre for Energy and Environment.
Olmos, S. (2001) Vulnerability and Adaptation to Climate Change: Concepts, Issues,
Assessment Methods. Climate Change Knowledge Network
Stocking M and Murnaghan N. (2001) Handbook for Field Assessment of Land degradation.
Earthscan Publication Limited, London, Stering, UK.
UNFCCC, (2010) Glossary of climate change acronyms.
UNFCC. (1992) United Nations Framework on Climate Change: Article 1. FCCC/
INFORMAL/84/GE.05-62220 (E) 200705.
UNDP. (2005) Impact of Climate Change on Land Degradation.
ATPS (2013): Farmers’ Response and their Adaptation Strategies to Climate Change in Mafeteng District, Lesotho. ATPS Research Paper No. 26

21

UNDP. (2007) Human Development Report 2007/2008. Fighting climate change: Humansolidarity in a divided world.
UNDP. (2010) Report: MDG 7-Caring for the Earth. UNDP, Lesotho.
Verchot L. V, M. Noordwijk, T. Tomich, C Ong, A. Albrecht, C. Bantilan, K. Anupama and C.
Palm. (undated) Opportunities for linking adaptation and mitigation in agroforestry systems:
Expected climate change impacts on resilience and productivity of agro-ecosystems
Weimer, A. (2008) Homestead Gardening: A manual Program For Managers, Implementers
and Practitioners. Catholic Relief Services. USA.
Webster M. D, C Forest, J Reilly, M Babiker, D Kicklighter, M Mayer, R Prinn, M Sarofim, A
Sokolov, P Stone and C Wang. (2003) Uncertainty Analysis of Climate Change and Policy
Response. Kluwer Academic Publishers, Netherlands.
Webster, M. D. (2002) ‘The Curious Role of “Learning” in Climate Policy: Should We Wait forMore Data?, Energy J. 23(2), 97–119.
Wilbanks T, P. R Lankao, M Bao, F Berkhout, S Cairncross, J Ceron, M Kapshe, R MuirWood and R Zapata-Marti (2007) “Industry, settlement and society”, Chapter 7 in Parry M,
O Canziani, J Palutikof, P Linden and C Hanson (editors), Climate Change 2007: Impacts,
Adaptation and Vulnerability, Contribution of Working Group II to the Fourth Assessment
Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, Cambridge University Press,
Cambridge and New York, pages 357–390
World Bank, (2008) Climate Change Adaptation and Mitigation in Development Programmes:
A Practical Guide

ATPS (2013): Farmers’ Response and their Adaptation Strategies to Climate Change in Mafeteng District, Lesotho. ATPS Research Paper No. 26

22

ATPS (2013): Farmers’ Response and their Adaptation Strategies to Climate Change in Mafeteng District, Lesotho. ATPS Research Paper No. 26

23

ISBN: 978-9966-030-70-2

ATPS (2013): Farmers’ Response and their Adaptation Strategies to Climate Change in Mafeteng District, Lesotho. ATPS Research Paper No. 26

24