Premium
More people, more erosion? Land use, soil erosion and soil productivity in Murang'a district, Kenya
Author(s) -
Ovuka M.
Publication year - 2000
Publication title -
land degradation and development
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 1.403
H-Index - 81
eISSN - 1099-145X
pISSN - 1085-3278
DOI - 10.1002/(sici)1099-145x(200003/04)11:2<111::aid-ldr371>3.0.co;2-i
Subject(s) - livelihood , land degradation , agroforestry , soil conservation , geography , soil retrogression and degradation , productivity , land use , edaphology , erosion , sustainability , agriculture , environmental science , soil fertility , agricultural economics , no till farming , soil water , soil science , economics , ecology , economic growth , paleontology , archaeology , biology
Intensification of land use can become a threat to agricultural sustainability if they lead to increased soil erosion. This study examines land‐use changes, soil and water conservation, soil erosion and soil productivity in the Highlands of Kenya. In addition, it examines farmers' perception of livelihood changes. Land‐use changes were determined from interpretations of aerial photographs taken in 1960 and 1996. Additional information on land use, soil and water conservation and livelihood changes were obtained from discussions and interviews with farmers, as well as from field verifications of the most recent aerial photographs. Soil samples were analysed and soil erosion assessed according to the PLUS classification scheme. The results indicate that substantial changes in land use, such as introduction of coffee and high‐yielding maize, and fragmentation of land holdings have taken place. Less land was conserved in 1996 as compared to 1960. Moreover, SWC practices have changed from fanya chini terraces and shifting cultivation to bench terraces and permanent cultivation. Rates of soil nutrients (organic C, N and K) and maize‐yield levels decreased significantly with increasing erosion. Farmers' perception of livelihood changes was differentiated according to farmers' off‐farm resource 60 per cent of the farmers depended on income from the land and thought livelihoods were better in the 1960s. It is concluded that more efforts to decrease soil erosion and investments in land and labour are necessary to sustain soil productivity and hence secure rural livelihoods. Copyright © 2000 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.