Summer is going too fast. It seems like just yesterday Lebron
James was being a sore loser, body slamming and stepping over people – and getting
rewarded for it by the NBA. Apart from that, one interesting experience this
summer was getting to visit some very different maize (corn) fields within a few
weeks in July. First, I was in Kenya and Uganda at some field sites, and then I
was visiting some farms in Iowa.
When talking maize, it’s hard to get much different than
East Africa and East Iowa. As a national average, Kenya produces a bit less
than 4 million tons of maize on 2 million ha, for a yield of about 1.75 t/ha. Iowa has
about seven times higher yield (12.5 t/ha), and produces nearly twenty times
more maize grain. The pictures below give a sense of a typical field in each
place (Kenya on the left).
Lots of things are obviously different between the two
areas. There are also some things that people might think are different but
really aren’t. For example, looking at annual rainfall or summer temperatures,
they are pretty similar for the two areas (figures from www.climatemps.com, note different scales):
But there are also things that are less obviously different.
Earlier this year I read this interesting report trying to estimate soil water
holding capacity in Africa, and I’ve also been working a bunch with soil datasets
in the U.S. from the USDA. Below shows the total capacity
of the soil to store water in the root zone (in mm) for the two areas, plotted
on the same scale.
It’s common for people to talk about the “deep” soils of the
Corn Belt, but I don’t think people typically realize just how much better they
are at storing water than many other places. There’s virtually no overlap
between the distribution of root zone storage in the two areas, and on average
Kenya soils have about half the capacity of Iowa’s.
How much difference can this one factor make? As a quick
thought experiment I ran some APSIM-maize simulations for a typical management
and weather setup in Iowa, varying only the root zone storage capacity between
150 and 330mm. Simulated yields by year are shown below, with dashed lines
showing the mean for each soil.
This suggests that having half the storage
capacity translates to roughly half the average yields, with much bigger relative
drops in hot or dry years like 1988 or 2012. And this assumes that management
is identical, when a rational farmer would surely respond by applying much less
inputs to the worse soils.
Just something to keep in mind when thinking about the
potential for productivity growth in Africa. There’s certainly room for growth,
and I saw a lot of promising trends. But just like when it comes to the NBA officials, there's a lot going on under the surface, and I wouldn’t expect too much.
No comments:
Post a Comment