Agronomic and economic benefits of coffee-banana intercropping in Uganda's smallholder farming systems
Coffee and banana are major cash and food crops, respectively, for many smallholders in the East African highlands. Uganda is the largest banana producer and 2nd largest coffee producer in Africa. Both crops are predominantly grown as monocultures. However, coffee-banana intercropping is common in densely populated areas. This study assessed the profitability of intercropped coffee-banana systems compared to mono-cropped systems in regions growing Arabica (Mt. Elgon) and Robusta (south and west) coffee in Uganda. The study was carried out in 152 plots in 2006/2007. Data were collected through structured farmer interviews, field measurements and observations. Coffee yields did not differ significantly (P [less-than-or-equals, slant] 0.05) between mono-crops and intercrops. Arabica coffee yields were 1.23 and 1.18 t ha-1 year-1 of green beans in mono-cropped and intercropped plots, respectively. Robusta yields averaged 1.25 and 1.09 t ha-1 year-1 of green beans in mono-crops and intercrops, respectively. Banana yields were significantly higher (P [less-than-or-equals, slant] 0.05) in intercrops (20.19 t ha-1 year-1) compared with mono-crops (14.82 t ha-1 year-1) in Arabica growing region. In Robusta growing region, banana yields were significantly lower (P [less-than-or-equals, slant] 0.05) in intercrops (8.89 t ha-1 year-1) compared with mono-crops (15.04 t ha-1 year-1). Marginal rate of returns of adding banana to mono-cropped coffee was 911% and 200% in Arabica and Robusta growing regions, respectively. Fluctuations in coffee prices are not likely to affect the acceptability of intercrops when compared with coffee mono-crops in both regions, but an increase in wage rates by 100% can make intercropping unacceptable in Robusta growing region. This study showed that coffee-banana intercropping is much more beneficial than banana or coffee mono-cropping and that agricultural intensification of food and cash crops in African smallholder systems should not solely depend on the mono-crop pathway.
If you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.
As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to look for a different version under "Related research" (further below) or search for a different version of it.
Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.:
- Lufafa, A. & Tenywa, M. M. & Isabirye, M. & Majaliwa, M. J. G. & Woomer, P. L., 2003. "Prediction of soil erosion in a Lake Victoria basin catchment using a GIS-based Universal Soil Loss model," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 76(3), pages 883-894, June.
When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:agisys:v:104:y:2011:i:4:p:326-334. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Dana Niculescu)
If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.
If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.
If the full references list an item that is present in RePEc, but the system did not link to it, you can help with this form.
If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.
Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.