Indigenous farmers’ knowledge and perception of desertification and soil erosion in Jigawa State, Nigeria

doi:10.21203/rs.3.rs-4876751/v1

Download PDF

Research Article

Indigenous farmers’ knowledge and perception of desertification and soil erosion in Jigawa State, Nigeria

https://doi.org/10.21203/rs.3.rs-4876751/v1

This work is licensed under a CC BY 4.0 License

You are reading this latest preprint version

Desertification and soil erosion are major agro-environmental issues in Northern Nigeria. This study assessed farmers’ knowledge and perception of these phenomena in Dutse, Jigawa State, Nigeria. Data for the study was obtained through a questionnaire survey of 500 farmers, using random sampling techniques, and in-depth key informant interviews. Of the 500 distributed questionnaires, 383 were completed, representing a response rate of 76.6%. Most (86.9%) respondents were male and within the age group 35–50 years of age. Most respondents (48.6%) had 11–15 years of farming experience, with 70.5% of respondents having a large family (6–11 members) and an annual family income of < N151,000 (USD 130.77). All interviewees were aware of desertification, and most (80.2%) perceived desertification as a problem on their farm. The majority (88.3%) perceived that soil erosion had increased desertification problems and identified sand dune deposition (40.2%) and decreased crop yields (20.9%) as the main indicators of soil erosion on their farms. Most respondents identified changes in soil colour as the main indicator of soil fertility depletion. The main (56.4%) identified soil colour was reddish yellow (Munsell Colour Notation 7.5YR/8/6). The major soil conservation practise employed by respondents is tree planting (52.0%) and crop rotation (26.6%). Many of the trees (62.1%) were planted as windbreaks. The main planted tree species were date palm (Phoenix dactylifera) (65.8%) and gum Arabic (Acacia senegal) (29.2%). In summary, this study provides useful information upon which local policymakers can aid and advise local farmers to control soil erosion and reduce the rate of desertification. In addition, it also adds to our knowledge and understanding of these issues in relation to similar data obtained in other states in Northern Nigeria and other countries within the Sahelian region of Africa.

Desertification

Soil erosion

Farmers’ perception

Socio-economic

Soil conservation

Impact

Land degradation and desertification are economic, social, and environmental issues of global concern. Land degradation in drylands can be defined as desertification, which results from both climate variation and human activities [1]. Desertification is the process by which productive land is transformed into desert, and predominantly occurs in drylands [2]. Drylands are particularly at risk of degradation because they are characterized by water scarcity, have insufficient vegetation cover and are therefore extremely vulnerable to wind erosion. The global area of desertification ‘hotspots’ has increased to 9.2% (± 0.5%) of drylands, affecting 500 million (m) (± 120 m) people [3]. People living within or near such regions are more likely to experience high levels of economic hardship, due to lower soil productivity and increased erosion [4, 5]. In 2017, ~ 821 m people were defined as being food insecure, with 63% resident in Asia, 31% in Africa and 5% in Latin America and the Caribbean [6]. In 2020 the global increase in food insecure people equaled that of the previous five years combined (2014–2019) [7]. Nearly one-in-three people (2.37 billion) lacked access to adequate food in 2020 [7]. A combination of climate change and deficient climate resilience has been suggested as the main reasons for the rapid increase in this issue [6].

Both climate change and human activities influence desertification [8]. The rate of desertification in a particular locality is affected by temperature, rainfall, and wind. Increased temperatures, wind speeds and decreased rainfall all result in decreased vegetation cover [9, 10]. Human disturbance can also intensify desertification [8]. Disturbance activities include overgrazing, overcultivation, excessive collection of firewood and unsustainable water use. Desertification is a major concern for the international community, given the many environmental problems associated with it, including soil degradation, soil salinization, silting and frequent dust storms [11]. In addition, desertification can lead to significant socio-economic problems, including food shortages, poverty, and health issues (e.g., malnutrition and respiratory problems) [4, 5, 12, 13].

Nigeria is a large country (total area 910,770 km²) with a substantial portion extending into the Sudano-Sahelian belt and Northern Guinea savanna. Together, these constitute the drylands of the country [14, 15]. The current population of Nigeria is ~ 229, 176, 375 million and the country is ranked number 6 in list of countries by population globally in 2024 [16], which thereby places severe pressure on arable land, particularly in marginal areas, resulting in desertification. Over the past 100 years, several droughts in this region of Africa have caused famine, leading to the deaths of both people and livestock [14]. These include the droughts of 1903 and 1911–1914 [17], and those of both 2007 and 2011 [18]. The climatic and vegetational zones of Nigeria strongly influence the prevailing soil types [19]. In some areas, including the Sahel savanna belt, soils experience prolonged periods of drought, which results in extremely low soil moisture contents. Consequently, Nigeria loses an estimated ~ 350,000 ha of arable land to soil erosion and desertification per annum, encroaching southwards from the north [14]. This process of desertification has led to demographic displacements across 15 states in Northern Nigeria and Jigawa is one of the most severely affected states in the country [15].

The agricultural systems utilized in Jigawa, include crop rotation, mixed cropping and single cropping. Agro-forestry systems are also practiced, where both crops and trees are cultivated on the same land. Local people are mainly small-scale subsistence farmers who generally use simple farming technologies. Thus, they are unable to counter the threats posed by increasing aridity and desert encroachment. Desert encroachment has negatively reduced agricultural productivity and income in these areas and neighboring states for several decades. For example, 65% of Sokoto State is severely affected by desertification, whilst 55% of Borno State is also affected [15, 19]. In some areas, sand dunes have inundated vast areas of farmland, rendering agriculture in these locations impossible [20]. Despite international, national, and local policies to control desertification, its impact persists and threatens the attainment of food security and related UN Strategic Development Goals (SDGs). The environmental and social problems caused by desertification are key factors preventing sustainable development in arid, semi-arid and sub-humid areas [13, 21, 22]. Recognizing the potential impacts of desertification on the economy, environment, and society, combatting desertification it is one of the SDGs of the ‘2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development “Item 15 Target 15.3” [11].

The importance of understanding desertification and soil erosion phenomena from farmers’ perception cannot be over emphasized. As stated by [23, 24] it is an important aspect and mechanism for the formulation of land degradation control policies. The commitments and responsibilities required for the success of such policies depend on the knowledge and perception of the problem by local farmers. To identify changes that occurred on farms, it is vital to gain an understanding of the awareness of the physical processes and the changes of soil management systems. Therefore, understanding desertification, soil erosion and conservation measures from the farmers’ perception remains of paramount important because farmers are often more highly aware of the condition of their land [25]. [25] further stated that farmers have a detailed understanding of the biophysical characteristics of their land than is sometimes does by an expert. The current study focused on desertification and problems associated with soil erosion in Jigawa State, Northern Nigeria. The specific objectives of the study were: 1) to understand farmers’ perception and knowledge of desertification and soil erosion, using the experience of local farmers and staff of the National Institute of Oil Palm Research (NIFOR) Dutse; 2) to assess the effect of planting gum Arabic (Acacia senegal) and date palm (Phoenix dactylifera) in the study area; 3) to recommend viable soil conservation measures for the drylands of Northern Nigeria.

2.1. Description of the study area

Jigawa State is one of the thirty-six states of the Federal Republic of Nigeria. It is in north-western region of Nigeria. The State has 27 Local Government Areas (LGAs) including Dutse, where the current study was conducted (Fig. 1). The study area is situated at latitude 11⁰ 42’ 04” N and longitude. 9⁰ 20’ 31” E has an estimated population of 246,143 inhabitants [26]. This region is characterized by both flat and undulating topography, and sand dunes of various sizes, spanning several kilometers in parts of the State. The economy of Jigawa State is largely characterized by informal sector activities with agriculture as the major economic activity. Majority of the population are engaged in subsistence farming and animal husbandry. The study area has abundant sunshine and intermittent rainfall, with an extended rainy season and a dry season [19]. According to the metrological data between 2003–2022 collected from Nigerian Institute of Oil Palm Research Dutse, the study area is characterized by a Uni-modal rainfall pattern with annual highest rainfall of 1031.30 mm received in 2019 between 2003–2022 (Figure II). The maximum temperature of 41.15°C and minimum annual temperatures of 25.54°C were recorded both in 2011 between 2003–2022. Soil in the study area is characterized as exhibiting a slightly acidic to neutral pH, high temperature, low moisture content, and a low total nitrogen content (TN). These soils are also highly susceptible to erosion and desertification, especially if vegetation cover is deficient [27]. Scarcity of arable land within the state has become increasingly challenging in recent years, with arable farmland increasingly vulnerable to the prevalent of climate change. Due to both natural and human factors, forest cover is being depleted, destroyed making the area highly vulnerable to desert encroachment. Jigawa State is struggling with desertification, soil erosion and timber cutting contributing to the destruction of trees and soils. Low timber output rates lead to socioeconomic problems and endanger the survival of important and beneficial trees species.

Figure. I. Location map of the study area with sample sites (12 wards)

Figure. II. Annual average precipitation, maximum and minimum temperature

2.1.1. Participant consent Information

The informed consent to participate was obtained from all the participants. Written consent was gained from participants before the commencement of the research. While oral consent was also obtained from the participants that struggled with literacy. The research information was written in English and Hausa (local language) and detailed the research activities, and the importance of the study. This was translated by the researcher as bilingual speaker of English and Hausa. How the data from the study will be used was also explained to the participants. All data for the study will comply with the UK Data Protection Act (1998) and will not be stored for more than five years. Lastly, there was a mobile number for the project phone in case of any issue that can arise, or in case participant wanted their data removed from the survey data set.

2.1.2. Ethical Approval

This study was approved by the University of Wolverhampton Faculty of Science and Engineering Ethics Committee (FSEEC) on 21 April 2021. We certify that the study was performed in accordance with the ethical standards as laid down in the University of Wolverhampton 2023–2025 handbook for ethical review and approval.

2.2. Method

This research used mixed methods approached to collect data for the study. These methods combine quantitative and qualitative data collection [28]. The reason to employ these methods was to obtain more information on the research topic and to increase the validity and reliability of data obtained so that to best understand the impact of land degradation on farmer’s farm.

2.2.1. Sampling technique

The selection of the sampling area within the 12 wards of Dutse LGA, was performed in consultation with members of the local farmers association and staff employed at the Nigerian Institute for Oil Palm Research (NIFOR), Dutse Chapter (Fig. 1). The study was conducted in association with the local government in Dutse, who provided transportation for the field visits. A field reconnaissance survey was conducted between 2022 and 2023 to check the suitability of the selected areas, and to verify the information acquired from NIFOR staff and members of the farmers’ association. From each of the selected sample areas, farming households were selected for participation in the survey, using systematic, random sampling.

2.2.2. Source of data

The study employed the use of two data sources, namely primary and secondary data sources. The primary data was collected using field observations, the questionnaire, and key informant interviews. The secondary data was collected from published sources. This included information regarding the agricultural systems used in the locality, local methods for soil conservation, land degradation, demography etc. Climate/weather records were sourced from a metrological station based at NIFOR. The detailed information and procedure used for the primary data collection was as described below.

2.3. Field observations

Field transacts walk and observation are being used in recent time as a research method [29]. The essence of the observation method were to better understand the socio-economic characteristics of the farmers, and perceptions toward soil degradation, as well as their soil conservation practices. For the field observations, the research team consisted of the lead author (PhD researcher), one member of the NIFOR staff and two local farmers. During the field work, different indicators of land degradation such as soil erosion, deforestation, overgrazing and local soil conservation methods were observed at the field level. Photographs were taken by the researcher to illustrate the findings of the research. Therefore, knowledge gained through observation was used to redefining the scope of the study, identifying major information gaps and sampling process. The information gathered was triangulated with the KII and household survey during results analysis and discussion.

2.4. Key informant interviews

In depth Key Informant Interview and a combination of purposive and random sampling were used to gather most of the qualitative data for this study. We chose these sampling methods for several reasons, and these sampling methods are common in social science and environmental inform research. Purposive sampling involves the matching of sample and participants to the study aims and objectives. This, it has been argued, can improve the rigor of the study and the quality of data and findings [30]. This is important and key in the present study as local farmers have the wider knowledge of the situation on their farm. Therefore, farmers with the long years of farming experience were located with the help of NIFOR staff.

For the Key Informant Interview (KIIs), participants were selected from members of the local Farmers’ Association and NIFOR staffs. Random sampling was used to select the participant from the list provided by farmer association while NIFOR staffs were selected by the officer in charge. Before the interview, prior contact and a rapport were established between the researcher and the interviewees, so that they felt at ease and fully understood the objective of the study and the interview. Open-ended questions were used in the interviews, that allowed the interviewees to speak in-depth on the impact of desertification, soil erosion and the effect of planting date palm and gum Arabic trees as a coping strategy to reduce further environmental degradation. All genders, ages, background and ethnicities were included in the sample.

Twenty (20) individuals were interview who were on the farmers list and 10 individuals in NIFOR. This gives a total number of 30 individuals that participated in the KII. The interview was conducted face to face with the participants at various location including offices. All interviews were in English and Hausa depending on the interviewees preference and were audio recorded, and notes were taken at the same time by the researcher. The recordings were later transcribed, translated and analyzed using a thematic analysis. Transcript and notes were read several times by the researcher to identify themes and subthemes and the analysis was performed using Microsoft word and Excel. The objective of the KIIs was to obtain additional information/data about the severity of desertification, soil erosion, and its causes in the study area.

2.5. Questionnaire Survey design

A structured questionnaire survey design was employed to collect relevant information from sampled household in the study area. This sampling method was chosen because is a common and sophisticated method used mostly in social science research. [25] mentioned that questionnaires are the most important tool for gathering primary research data. It is widely used to gained information about certain condition, opinions, attitude and practices of an individual or group [28]. Indigenous farmers knowledge and perception of desertification and soil erosion is the main aspects of the questionnaire. Supporting questions were asked about the respondents preferred use of desert plants (date palm and gum Arabic) for soil conservation. The questionnaire contained different types of questions including, open-ended questions which seek respondents’ opinion (subjective/opinion questions), closed-ended questions which seek respondents predetermined responses, (pre-coded questions), and factual questions seek to obtain fact, including quantities (outputs) and years (age) [31].

2.5.1. Questionnaire sampling procedure

The questionnaire was developed and pre-tested using 48 randomly selected farmers from the 12 wards present in Dutse Local Government. Some minor revisions to the flow of the questionnaire were performed based on the feedback obtained from the pre-screening. The questionnaire comprised of two sections: (1) household socio-economic status, and (2) farmers perceptions of desertification, soil erosion, and their effects upon crop yield; indicators of soil erosion and the effect of gum Arabic and date palm on soil conservation. The questionnaire survey was administered to the participants face-to-face by employing trained graduates and NIFOR staff as field enumerators under close supervision from the researcher (lead author) to ensure collection of good quality data. Orientation was given to all enumerators on how to translate the questionnaire from English into the local language (Hausa). The involvement of the local community (farmers, villagers, and township officials) was crucial for the incorporation of ‘end users’ in the research programmed and for promoting subsequent ‘bottom-up’ agricultural extension [32]. A multi-stage sampling method was used in this study. The sampling techniques were undertaken in stages: (a) selection of Local Government Area (LGA); (b) selection of the study districts; (c) selection of the individual farmers.

Firstly, Dutse was selected out of the 27 LGA that are in Jigawa State (Fig. 1). From the second stage 18 districts were selected for the purpose of conducting the survey. A total of 500 farming households were selected from within the study area out of which 383 questionnaires (76.6%) were successfully completed and retrieved from the respondents. According to [31, 33] a sample size of 383 taken from a local population were considered appropriate to represent a giving population and allow the findings to be generalized to the wider population.

2.6. Data Analysis

The research used qualitative description to interpret and present data obtained from interviews. Descriptive statistics modules of the Statistical Package for the Social Sciences software (SPSS) version 28 were used to analyze the questionnaire data. The analysis method used by descriptive statistics is primarily frequencies and percentages. To test the significant relationships between farmers knowledge and perception, on desertification and soil erosion. A regression analysis was used to examine the association between farmers knowledge and perception on erosion and desertification. Munsell Soil Color Chart (MSCC) (2009 revised edition) was used on farmers farm to describe on-farm soil colors. Procedures used for the MSCC soil characterization, were as described in the United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) Handbook (2018) and the Australian Soil and Land Survey Field Handbook [34].

3.1. Socio-economic characteristics of farmers

The results for farmers’ socio-economic and demographic profile were presented in Table I. Land degradation (Desertification and soil erosion) is highly influence by several demographic and socio-economic factors [11]. Some of these factors include age, educational status, income level and farmland size. Age is important in farmers farming activities in that physical ability, productivity and agility depend on age [7, 5]. Most (51.7%) respondents were within the category of 17–35 years of age group. Most (86.9%) were male, while (13.1%) were female. In addition, 90.3% of the farmers interviewed were married, the majority of whom (61.1%) had non-formal education, 11.2% primary, 18.0% secondary and 9.7% post-secondary education. This indicated that the educational level of farmers in the study area is extremely low, which could negatively influence their ability to accept changes to their agricultural practices to combat desertification and adopt modern soil conservation techniques [35]. Most respondents (70.5%) had a large family of between 6–11 members and earn < N151,000 (USD ~ 92.61) annually. Most of the farmers (52.0%) had relatively small farms (< 5 hectares, ha) and had been farming for 11–15 years (48.6%). The years of experience in agriculture plays a major role in increasing productivity and the use of conservation measures. In the absence of experience, there can be resultant low production and income for farming families [36].

Table I: Socio-economic characteristics of farmers interviewed (383 interviews).

Socio-economic characteristic

Variable

Age of respondent

17–35

35–50

> 50

123

198

32.1

51.7

16.2

Gender of respondent

Female

Male

333

13.1

86.9

Marital status of respondent

Married

Unmarried

Divorced/widower

346

90.3

7.3

2.3

Household size

< 5

6–11

> 12

270

18.8

70.5

10.7

Educational status

Non-formal education

Primary

Secondary

Post-secondary education

234

61.1

11.2

18.0

9.7

Are you a full-time farmer?

Yes

302

78.9

21.1

Farmers farm size (ha)

< 5

6–10

11–15

> 16

199

52.0

20.1

12.5

15.4

Farming experience (years)

< 5

6—10

11–15

> 16

106

186

8.6

27.7

48.6

15.1

Faming income

(in thousand Naira)

N1–50

N51–100

N101—150

N151–200

>N200

165

9.4

13.6

43.1

21.8

12.8

3.2. Farmers’ knowledge and perceptions of desertification in the study area

Farmers were asked whether they were aware of desertification as a problem on their farm and invited to give their perceptions. All respondent farmers were aware of desertification, and most (80.2%) perceived desertification as a problem has caused soil degradation and constrained crop production on their farms (Table II). They often observed desertification on their farms, as some plots were left uncultivated and were covered by aeolian sand dunes. The main factor (75.5%) farmers cited contributing to desertification is human activity, while 24.5% considered climate variability as another major contributory factor. These data agree with several investigations [3, 15, 37, 38]. Most farmers (82.5%) indicated that the problem of desertification is increasing, while on the other hand 11.7% and 5.7% indicated no change and a decrease in desertification, respectively. The perception on the decreased in desertification severity by farmers was described through the implementation of some practices such as application of organic and inorganic fertilizer, crop residues, minimum tillage or non-tillage.

Table II: Farmers’ local-knowledge and perceptions of desertification in the study area (383 interviews).

Variables

Are you aware of desertification?

Yes

383

100.0

Is desertification a problem on your farm?

Yes

307

80.2

19.8

Main factor causing desertification

Climate

Human activities

289

24.5

75.5

What is the trend of desertification over time?

Decreasing

Increasing

No change

316

5.7

82.5

11.7

Based on observation, factors contributing to the impact of desertification in the study area include sand dune deposition by wind erosion, drying up of water bodies due to drought, over-grazing on young plants by livestock, and fuelwood harvesting by locals. Plate I-IV illustrated most of the factors that increase desertification and soil erosion in the study area. All these factors that accelerate desertification has negative consequence on agriculture and livelihood [39].

Plate I: Aeolian dust storm at Dutse on 21 July 2023 covering major roads, drainage, and causes low visibility and respiratory tract infection in the study area. Source: Author

Plate II: Artificial dam created at Dutse Buji town to conserve water for irrigation and domestic uses dry due to excessive drought. Source: Author

Plate III: Loss of vegetation through camel grazing on acacia tree plantation in Dutse. Source: Author

Plate IV: Cutting of vegetation by local people for firewood and building. The logs were transported to the town using cow cart Source: Author

3.3. Farmers’ knowledge and perception of soil erosion and its impacts on desertification

This section presents the views of the farmers with regards to the causes and indicators of soil erosion and the effects and consequences of wind erosion on their agricultural land. Table III shows farmers’ knowledge and the perceived causes of soil erosion and its magnitude. The indicators of soil erosion by wind, in order of the preferences indicated by the respondents are sand dune deposition (40.2%), changes in soil color (21.9%) and decreased crop yields (20.9%). Stunted plant growth (11.2%) and when plant roots began to be exposed (5.7%) were regarded as the least important indicators. Similar results have been reported by [40, 41, 42] in that farmers tend to look for physical signs on their farmland as the main indicators of soil erosion. Most farmers (88.3%) indicated that soil erosion increased the problem of desertification on their farms. Some 57.7% and 26.1% of farmers believed that the magnitude of wind erosion is severe or moderate, respectively. Other farmers (12.8% and 3.4%) indicated minor and no erosion risk, respectively. A farmer in the KII interview group stated “in many cases, wind erosion is the first step that starts the irreversible transformation of the landscape into an unfertile area. Grain by grain, sand and dirt is picked up by wind from mismanaged lands and pushed further and further into new areas, gradually swallowing remaining vegetation and turning the area into a desert.”

Table III: Farmers knowledge and perception of the main cause and indicators of soil erosion (383 interviews).

Variables

Does soil erosion cause desertification in the study area?

Yes

338

88.3

11.7

What is the magnitude of wind erosion on your farm?

Severe

Moderate

Minor

No erosion risk

221

100

57.7

26.1

12.8

3.4

Farmers main indicator of soil erosion

Sand dune deposit

Decreased crop yield

When plants root began to be exposed

When soil colour changes

Poor crop and grass growth (stunted growth)

154

40.2

20.9

5.7

21.9

11.2

As recognized in the KII discussions, farmers perceived wind erosion to be most severe during both winter (November-February) and summer (May-September) months (locally called ‘rani’ and ‘bazara’), respectively, which causes aeolian desertification. Thus, wind erosion is the dominant form of soil erosion throughout the year. These findings agree with [43, 44] that desertification is strongly associated with aeolian processes. Sand dust blown by wind in the study area was observed by the lead author to cover infrastructure (roads, drainage systems and waterways), impede the visibility of moving vehicles and cause respiratory difficulties in both people and livestock. Local wind erosion, especially from neighboring agricultural lands, can markedly increase the volume of respirable dust, thus increasing both respiratory distress and mortality [45]. In addition, drought and dust storms have been linked to incidences of Meningococcal meningitides, a respiratory disease caused by bacteria in sub-Saharan Africa [39, 45]. Another example are strains of Escherichia coli that can cause significant food poisoning in humans, observed both in airborne and settled dust in Mexico City [45].

3.4. Perception of farmers with regards to the effects and consequences of soil erosion

Table IV shows that a high proportion of interviewees (40.2%) observed that their farm size had decreased due to soil erosion. In addition, 29.8% and 12.3% indicated decreasing crop yields and buried fertile land, respectively. These data demonstrate that quite understandably, most respondents perceived the reduction of arable land as their main concern in terms of the effects of soil erosion [46]. Informal discussions with farmers confirmed that both decreased rainfall and increased temperatures are impeding agricultural productivity. [17] recorded comparable results and attributed the situation to both drought and climate change. Most farmers indicated that changes in soil color are indicative of dramatic decreases in soil fertility, to such a level that during the planting season, organic or inorganic fertilizer must be added to replenish soil nutrients. The main soil color reported by the farmers was reddish yellow (56.4%), followed by very pale brown (18.5%), pale brown (17.8%) and yellowish brown (7.3%), respectively. Similar results were recorded by [42, 47] and agreed that soil color is the most frequent soil health indicator cited by farmers. In the KII, farmers stated that “reddish soil was perceived to be a bad soil and unproductive, while brown and pale brown soil was perceived to be good and healthy.” Thus, as observed during the survey, most farmlands had added farmyard manure to increase crop yields. This is part of the farmers’ soil conservation strategies to improve soil productivity.

Table IV: Farmers perception of the effects of soil erosion and fertility depletion (383 interviews).

Variable

Farmers observed effects of soil erosion

Reduction of arable land

Decreased crop yields

Reduction in the fallow period

Airborne dust pollution

Buried fertile land

154

114

40.2

29.8

9.1

8.6

12.3

Farmers’ soil colour due to fertility depletion

Pale brown (10YR/6/3)

Yellowish brown (10YR/5/8)

Very pale brown (10YR/7/4)

Reddish yellow (7.5YR/8/6)

216

17.8

7.3

18.5

56.4

3.5. Soil conservation practices used to combat desertification and wind erosion

Desertification has necessitated farmers to improve their understanding of appropriate soil conservation practices. Conservation agriculture can improve soil quality, increase soil fertility, and help mitigate the impacts of climate change [47, 48]. Therefore, understanding farmers’ soil conservation strategies to combat desertification is crucial in analyzing the sustainability of farming systems [48]. Several soil conservation practices are employed by farmers to combat desertification (Table V). Tree planting (52.0%) and crop rotation (26.6%) are the main soil conservation techniques. Irrigation (6.8%), contour ploughing (6.5%), mulching (6.0%) and fencing (2.1%) are relatively minor adopted soil conservation techniques. The information gathered through the KIIs confirm that all farmers believed that soil conservation measures have significant impacts and are therefore useful in decreasing desertification and wind erosion. One farmer stated that “we planted trees on our farms to stabilize sand dunes and protect our crops from wind and we see tree planting as the cheapest means of soil conservation, due to our financial constraints.” Other soil conservation practices widely discussed by farmers in the KIIs included the use of cover crops to increase soil nutrients, planting of drought resistant trees, mulching, intercropping and the addition of organic and mineral fertilizers.

From an agronomic perspective, the uptake and use of soil conservation practices both increases crop yields and decreases soil degradation [49, 50, 51, 52]. However, the impacts of their adoption may also be subject to it applicability, as crop yields can decrease under some soil and water conservation techniques [53]. On the other hand, the use of agronomic soil and water conservation practices (e.g., intercropping, organic soil amendments and composting increased crop yields [49, 50, 51, 52].

Table V: Farmers main soil conservation practices for combating desertification (383 interviews).

Farmers main soil conservation practises

Crop rotation

Mulching

Tree planting

Fencing

Contour ploughing

irrigation

102

199

26.6

6.5

52.0

2.1

6.0

6.8

3.6 Farmers’ perceptions of the effect of planting gum Arabic and date palm in the study area

Due to the challenging climatic variation and continues human activities in the environment today. It is not new that farmers seek to implement soil conservation measures on their farm to arrest the threat posed by climate change. Mostly in developing countries of the world, planting trees for soil conservation method were commonly practices. However not all trees adopt to desert environment. [54] mentioned that perennial trees and shrubs are the hardest adaptations that can survive long period of drought and heat because of their ability to decrease transpiration and evaporation. In the current study, two plant species of economic, social, and ecological importance were assessed in terms of their performance in combating desertification and soil erosion in the study area. These plants are date palm (Phoenix dactylifera) and gum Arabic (Acacia senegal). [12] mentioned that date palm is a perennial plant cultivated for its high productivity and nutrient value, for conserving ecosystems threatened by desertification and creating appropriate microclimates for dryland agriculture. Also, gum Arabic is a dominant shrub or small tree in arid and semi-arid regions of Sahelian Africa which can grow in saline soils and resist both drought and high ambient temperatures [54, 55]. Most farmers in the study area plant date palm (65.8%), while 29.2% plant gum Arabic and 5.0% plant both gum Arabic and date palm on their farms (Table VI).

Most farmers view date palm and gum Arabic trees as indigenous, drought-resistant cash crops that can withstand the Sahelian environment. This finding agrees with the result of [54, 56] that desert plant help to decrease wind velocity, wind erosion, deforestation, desertification, global warming, climate variability and encourage agroforestry. [54, 57] posit that these desert plant have adapted their morphology and tissues to infertile soils with poor nutrients and high salinity. Most artificially planted trees struggle to survive once irrigation is stopped due to their high-water consumption depending on the size, a typical tree consumes several liters of water per day. [48, 54] mentioned that the most important factor for plant development and growth is precipitation and nature of the soil. In the KIIs, farmers stated that “a period usually corresponding to the rainy season, from July or August to the end of October, helps them to plant date palm and gum Arabic trees. When there is insufficient rainfall, as is often the case, seedlings receive additional water before and after planting, so that the tap root can reach the layer of residual moisture in the soil more quickly and the plant can become established.”

Farmers indicated that soil stabilization (37.6%) and income generation (29.8%) were the main reasons for planting date palms. Most farmers indicated increased soil nutrients (35.0%) and soil stabilization (31.1%) as the main reasons for planting gum Arabic (Table 6). These results corroborate with the findings of [58] who found the adoption of agroforestry decreased soil erosion and increased smallholder incomes in Ethiopia. Farmers in Dutse combined trees and crops (agroforestry) to increase soil cover through canopy cover and contribute litter to topsoil. Planting of trees in combination with crops creates physical and biological structural barriers that reduce losses of water, soil and related nutrients compared with single crop cultivation [59, 60, 61]. The combination of tree and crop components also increases soil organic carbon (SOC) stocks and carbon sequestration, by adding higher quantities of aboveground and belowground biomass [62, 63]. The increase of this biomass improves soils by providing nutrients and modifying soil physical properties, which in turn can help to increase tree and crop yields [64].

Table VI: Farmer’s perception on the effect of planting gum Arabic (Acacia senegal) and date palm (Phoenix dactylifera) in the study area (383 interviews).

Variable

Respondent choice of tree for cultivation

Gum Arabic

Date palm

Gum Arabic and date palm

112

252

29.2

65.8

5.0

Main reason you plant trees on your farm?

Shelterbelt

Windbreaks

Shelterbelt and windbreaks

127

238

33.2

62.1

4.7

Farmers main reason for cultivating gum Arabic

Increase soil nutrients

Source of income

Drought resistant

Soil stabilization

134

119

35.0

13.6

20.4

31.1

Farmers main reason for cultivating date palm

Increase soil nutrients

Source of income

Drought resistant

Soil stabilization

114

144

23.0

29.8

9.7

37.6

Most farmers plant trees as windbreaks (62.1%), as shelterbelts (33.2%) and 4.7% plant these trees as both windbreaks and shelterbelts. The impact of soil erosion and desertification in affected areas of Nigeria prompted the establishment of windbreaks and shelterbelts in the 1960s [65]. Similar shelterbelt and windbreak program were established in many countries (e.g., National Plant Protection Action Plan, Hungary; National Windbreak Programmed, Australia, and the Shelter Forest Systems Program, P.R. China) [66]. The primary aims of these programs are to reduce wind velocity and damage, decrease soil erosion, more likely to increase transpiration rates and evaporation rates and offer alternative habitats for certain wildlife [67, 68].

3.7. Regression analysis of knowledge and perception on erosion and desertification

The result shows that the independent variable is significantly related to the dependent variable since the p-value 0.01 is < 0.05 level of significant. Table VII shows that the p-value is 0.01 which is < 0.05 level of significant, this measures the overall quality of the model. Thus, it can be concluded that the independent variable (erosion and desertification) affects the dependent variable (knowledge and perception). Table IX shows the correlation or strength of relationships between the dependent variable and independent variable. The correlation result was 0.132, which implies a direct positive relationship and implies that as knowledge and perception increases, awareness about erosion and desertification also increases. Therefore, as farmers’ level of knowledge and perception increases, the level of awareness about erosion and desertification also increases. However, the knowledge and perception does not significantly influence farmers’ decision to increase the level of adoption in soil conservation measures in the study area.

Table VII and VIII: show the model used for the analysis of regression to find the significance difference between dependent variables and independent variables.

Table VII: Effect of Perception and knowledge on Erosion and Desertification
Model		Unstandardized Coefficients			t	Sig.
		B	Std. Error	Beta
1	(constant)	1.298	.076		16.995	.000
	Erosion Desertification Variable	.107	.041	.132	2.598	.010
Dependent Variable: Perception _Knowledge

Table VIII: Effect of Perception and Knowledge on Erosion and Desertification
Model		Sum of Square	df	Mean Square	F	Sig.
1	Regression	1.244	1	1.244	6.751	.010a
	Residual	70.203	381	.184
	Total	71.447	382
Predictors: (constant), Erosion _Desertification _Variable
Dependent Variable: Perception _Knowledge

Table IX: Correlation of Effect of Perception and knowledge on Erosion and Desertification
		Perception_ Knowledge	Erosion_ Desertification
Perception _Knowledge Variable	Pearson Correlation	1	.132**
	Sig. (2-tailed)		.010
	N	383	383
Erosion _Desertification _Variable	Pearson Correlation	.132**	1
	Sig. (2-tailed)	.010
	N	383	383

**. Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed).

Y = BO + B1 X1 + Et

Y is the dependent variable while x is the independent variable.

Y = 1.298 + 0.107 X1 + Et, X1 is the error terms.

One of the main challenges of desertification and soil erosion is the encroachment of moving sands, which can have devastating environmental and socio-economic impacts. The current study of farmers’ perception of desertification and soil erosion problems in Dutse, Northern Nigeria, showed that most farmers are highly dependent on agriculture and very aware of desertification. The study found that soil erosion facilitated the increase in severity of desertification. Moreover, evidence suggests that soil erosion decreased both the available arable land area and resultant crop yields. Respondents identified changes in soil color as the main indicator of decreased soil fertility, as evidenced by increased Munsell Color Notation values on eroded soil. Most respondents had low annual income from their farm despite several years of farming experience. Most farmers preferred to cultivate date palm trees rather than gum Arabic for soil stabilization and income sources and mainly planted trees as windbreaks to impede wind erosion.

Regression analysis shows that the independent variable (erosion and desertification) is significantly related to the dependent variable (knowledge and perception) since the p-value 0.01 is < 0.05 level of significant. The correlation of 0.132 implies a direct positive relationship and implies that as knowledge and perception increase, awareness about erosion and desertification also increases.

Key Informant Interviews suggested that desertification is triggered by wind erosion and unsustainable farming practices. Photographic evidence showed the key factors (drought, soil erosion, overgrazing and deforestation) that increases land degradation in the study area. However, this research cannot be used to generalize or to make statements about the global impact of land degradation more generally due to sampling technique and size. But, like most social science research, the study takes an in-depth understanding on indigenous farmers perception on desertification and soil erosion and their soil conservation practices in the study area. Therefore, future research in this area should address the impact of land use and changing vegetation patterns using Geographical Information System (GIS) and remote sensing technique.

Finally, the need of this research is because of the severity of land degradation couple with climate change that post significant threat to the local farmers and that necessitate a comprehensive understanding of farmers perception and knowledge on desertification and soil erosion and effective adaptation strategies and resilience measures. The findings of the study have important practical implications, as it highlights the vulnerability of farmers to the increasing trend of land degradation and its direct impacts on agricultural activities. This study provides empirical evidence on the factors influencing land degradation and the strategies for minimizing those factors, therefore the current study contributes to the body of knowledge on how local farmers notice decrease in soil fertility through changing of soil color and farmers used of indigenous plants, date palm and gum Arabic as the key factor for reforestation and soil reclamation.

Moreover, given the significant spatial variations in Jigawa state physical environments, socioeconomic circumstances, and cultural practices, such local-scale studies are critical to the design of regionally and nationally appropriate soil conservation and economic development strategies. Therefore, the data of this research are particularly important for stakeholders, policymakers (governmental and non-governmental organizations) and urban planners on controlling soil degradation and in selecting best plants that can withstand harsh environment for afforestation and reforestation project.

4.1. Recommendations

The study recommends farmers to embrace integrated farming practices that promote vegetation cover, including agroforestry systems. These will provide cover to protect soils against erosion, increase agricultural productivity per unit land area and diversify farmers' sources of income, resulting in benefits for agricultural production. Practices that promote organic matter addition to soils, such as mulching and addition of organic manure, can benefit both agricultural production and decrease the extent and severity of land degradation. The establishment of woodlots reduces the rate of deforestation and enables farmers to harvest firewood and wood for building. Coppicing assists in the process. The Nigerian Institute for Oil palm Research (NIFOR) should develop improved crop varieties that mature quickly, are drought-resistant and are available and affordable to farmers. Irrigation systems, through establishing a network of tube-wells that optimize water resource abstraction. Such networks should be based on careful local hydrological surveys of water resources. This will help household’s dependent on farming to cultivate and harvest crops during drought or insufficient rainfall. Livestock grazing patterns should be controlled by pastoralists and herders. Managing livestock feeding habits is a key solution to overgrazing. Government should encourage the use of agricultural extension programs and advisory services (e.g., field demonstration) to the farmers. This will create economic activities that generate agricultural employment to reduce the impact of desertification on households.

Conflict of interest

The authors have read and agreed to the policy on declaration of interests and declare that there is no conflict of interest related to this paper, legal bonds, or copyrights.

Funding:

Not applicable

Author Contribution

Author contributions A. Gambo design and conceptualized the study and outlined the methodology. T. Baldwin and M. Fullen contributed to the editing, drafting, revising and finalization of the paper. All authors reviewed the manuscript

Acknowledgements

The authors thank all participants involved in the study. We thank Mr. Abdul-Rahman (Officer in charge of the NIFOR Date Palm Substation) Dutse, his assistant Mr. Mal Magaji Abdullahi and the entire staff for their enthusiastic and much appreciated support and assistance.

Data Availability

The raw data of this research will be made available by the author on request. The data are not publicly available due to confidentiality and privacy.

UNCCD, ‘United Nations Convention to Combat Desertification’, in United Nations Convention to Combat Desertification in those Countries Experiencing Serious Drought and/or Desertification, Particularly in Africa, Bonn (Germany): UNCCD, 2012, pp. 1–54. Accessed: Apr. 14, 2023. [Online]. Available: https://library.unccd.int/Details/books/936
M. A. E. AbdelRahman, ‘An overview of land degradation, desertification and sustainable land management using GIS and remote sensing applications’, Rendiconti Lincei Sci. Fis. E Nat., vol. 34, no. 3, pp. 767–808, Sep. 2023, Doi: 10.1007/s12210-023-01155-3.
Z. Yang, X. Gao, J. Lei, X. Meng, N. Zhou, ‘Analysis of spatiotemporal changes and driving factors of desertification in the Africa Sahel’, CATENA, vol. 213, p. 106213, Jun. 2022, Doi: 10.1016/j.catena.2022.106213.
Chaplin-Kramer, R., Sharp, R. P., Weil, C., Bennett, E. M., Pascual, U., Arkema, K. K., Brauman, K. A., Bryant, B. P., Guerry, A. D., Haddad, N. M., Hamann, M., Hamel, P., Johnson, J. A., Mandle, L., Pereira, H. M., Polasky, S., Ruckelshaus, M., Shaw, M. R., Silver, J. M. Daily, G. C. ‘Global modeling of nature’s contributions to people’, Science, vol. 366, no. 6462, pp. 255–258, Oct. 2019, Doi: 10.1126/science.aaw3372.
R. Jangra, S. P. Kaushik, S. S. Saini, ‘An analysis of tourist’s perceptions toward tourism development: Study of cold desert destination, India’, Geogr. Sustain., vol. 2, no. 1, pp. 48–58, Mar. 2021, Doi: 10.1016/j.geosus.2021.02.004.
FAO, Ed., Building climate resilience for food security and nutrition. In the state of food security and nutrition in the world, no. 2018. Rome: FAO, 2018.
FAO, IFAD, UNICEF, WFP, WHO, The State of Food Security and Nutrition in the World (2018). Building climate resilience for food security and nutrition. Rome, 2018.
Lyu, Y., Shi, P., Han, G., Liu, L., Guo, L., Hu, X. Zhang, G. ‘Desertification Control Practices in China’, Sustainability, vol. 12, no. 8, p. 3258, Apr. 2020, Doi: 10.3390/su12083258.
H. T. Oo, W. W. Zin, C. C. Thin Kyi, ‘Assessment of Future Climate Change Projections Using Multiple Global Climate Models’, Civ. Eng. J., vol. 5, no. 10, pp. 2152–2166, Oct. 2019, Doi: 10.28991/cej-2019-03091401.
G. S. Solangi, A. A. Siyal, P. Siyal, ‘Spatiotemporal Dynamics of Land Surface Temperature and Its Impact on the Vegetation’, Civ. Eng. J., vol. 5, no. 8, pp. 1753–1763, Aug. 2019, Doi: 10.28991/cej-2019-03091368.
United Nation, (UN), United Nation, 2015. Accessed: Mar. 11, 2023. [Online]. Available: https://sdgs.un.org/publications/transforming-our-world-2030-agenda-sustainable-development-17981
El-Zein, A., Jabbour, S., Tekce, B., Zurayk, H., Nuwayhid, I., Khawaja, M., Tell, T., Mooji, Y. Al., De-Jong, J., Yassin, N. Hogan, D. ‘Health and ecological sustainability in the Arab world: a matter of survival’, The Lancet, vol. 383, no. 9915, pp. 458–476, Feb. 2014, Doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(13)62338-7.
H. Wang, Y. Liu, Y. Wang, Y. Yao, C. Wang, ‘Land cover change in global drylands: A review’, Sci. Total Environ., vol. 863, p. 160943, Mar. 2023, Doi: 10.1016/j.scitotenv.2022.160943.
S. D. Abubakar, N. B. Eniolorunda, ‘Effect of Desertification on Some Selected Soil Properties in a Semi-Arid Part of Northwestern Nigeria’, J. Geosci. Environ. Prot., vol. 04, no. 07, pp. 111–123, 2016, Doi: 10.4236/gep.2016.47012.
T. E. Olagunju, ‘Drought, desertification and the Nigerian environment: A review’, J. Ecol. Nat. Environ., vol. 7, no. 7, pp. 196–209, Jul. 2015, Doi: 10.5897/JENE2015.0523.
Worldometers.info, ‘Worldometers.info. 2024. Estimates from the United Nations, Department of Economic and Social Affairs’, pp. 1–4, 2024.
M. Shiru, S. Shahid, N. Alias, E.-S. Chung, ‘Trend Analysis of Droughts during Crop Growing Seasons of Nigeria’, Sustainability, vol. 10, no. 3, p. 871, Mar. 2018, Doi: 10.3390/su10030871.
I. B. Abaje, Ati, Iguisi, Jidauna, O. F,. E. O. &. G. G., ‘Droughts in the Sudano-Sahelian Ecological Zone of Nigeria: Implications for Agriculture and Water Resources Development’, Global Journal of Human Social Science Geography, Geo-Sciences & Environmental, vol. 13, no. 2, pp. 1–11, 2013.
A. K. Usman, Ahmed, Salisu, Ibrahim M.,. &. A. A., ‘The Imperative of Sand Dune Stabilization in Semi-Arid Zone with Focus on Jigawa State, Nigeria’, Zaria Geographer, vol. 21, no. 1, pp. 132–142, 2014.
I. M. Azare, M. S. Abdullahi, A. A. Adebayo, I. J. Dantata, T. Duala, ‘Deforestation, desert encroachment, climate change and agricultural production in the Sudano-Sahelian Region of Nigeria’, J. Appl. Sci. Environ. Manag., vol. 24, no. 1, p. 127, Feb. 2020, Doi: 10.4314/jasem.v24i1.18.
U. Helldén, C. Tottrup, ‘Regional desertification: A global synthesis’, Glob. Planet. Change, vol. 64, no. 3–4, pp. 169–176, Dec. 2008, Doi: 10.1016/j.gloplacha.2008.10.006.
Q. Li, C. Zhang, Y. Shen, W. Jia, J. Li, ‘Quantitative assessment of the relative roles of climate change and human activities in desertification processes on the Qinghai-Tibet Plateau based on net primary productivity’, CATENA, vol. 147, pp. 789–796, Dec. 2016, Doi: 10.1016/j.catena.2016.09.005.
W. Bewket, G. Sterk, ‘Farmers’ participation in soil and water conservation activities in the Chemoga Watershed, Blue Nile basin, Ethiopia’, Land Degrad. Dev., vol. 13, no. 3, pp. 189–200, May 2002, Doi: 10.1002/ldr.492.
T. J. Dalton, I. Yahaya, J. Naab, ‘Perceptions and performance of conservation agriculture practices in northwestern Ghana’, Agric. Ecosyst. Environ., vol. 187, pp. 65–71, Apr. 2014, Doi: 10.1016/j.agee.2013.11.015.
S. M. Ndiaye, A. J. Sofranko, ‘Farmers’ perceptions of resource problems and adoption of conservation practices in a densely populated area’, Agric. Ecosyst. Environ., vol. 48, no. 1, pp. 35–47, Feb. 1994, Doi: 10.1016/0167-8809(94)90073-6.
S. Usman, Nabayi, Bassey A. and M. B., ‘Assessment and Classification of Soils and Parent Rocks in Dutse, Jigawa State Nigeria’, FUDMA Journal of Agriculture and Agricultural Technology, vol. 4, no. 1, pp. 11–23, 2018.
V. O. Onokebhagbe, A. Mukhtar, S. D. Kazeem, J. Abdullahi, ‘Effects of Selected Properties of Semi-Arid Soil of Dutse, Jigawa State on Adsorption of Pb and Cd Ions’, UMYU Sci., vol. 2, no. 4, pp. 92–101, Dec. 2023, Doi: 10.56919/usci.2324.011.
S. Roopa, M. Rani, ‘Questionnaire Designing for a Survey’, J. Indian Orthod. Soc., vol. 46, pp. 273–277, Oct. 2012, Doi: 10.5005/jp-journals-10021-1104.
N. Raulet-Croset, A. Borzeix, ‘Researching spatial practices through Commentated Walks: “on the move” and “walking with”’, J. Organ. Ethnogr., vol. 3, no. 1, pp. 27–42, Apr. 2014, Doi: 10.1108/JOE-11-2012-0046.
S. Campbell et al., ‘Purposive sampling: complex or simple? Research case examples’, J. Res. Nurs., vol. 25, no. 8, pp. 652–661, Dec. 2020, Doi: 10.1177/1744987120927206.
R. B. Dell, S. Holleran, R. Ramakrishnan, ‘Sample Size Determination’, ILAR J., vol. 43, no. 4, pp. 207–213, Jan. 2002, Doi: 10.1093/ilar.43.4.207.
M. A. Fullen, C. A. Booth, M. Panomtaranichagul, M. Subedi, L. Y. Mei, ‘Agro-Environmental Lessons from the “Sustainable Highland Agriculture in South-East Asia” (SHASEA) Project. J. Environ. Eng. Landsc. Manag., vol. 19, no. 1, pp. 101–113, Apr. 2011, Doi: 10.3846/16486897.2011.557476.
R. C. MacCallum, M. W. Browne, H. M. Sugawara, ‘Power analysis and determination of sample size for covariance structure modeling.’, Psychol. Methods, vol. 1, no. 2, pp. 130–149, Jun. 1996, Doi: 10.1037/1082-989X.1.2.130.
S. S. Nodi, M. Paul, N. Robinson, L. Wang, S. U. Rehman, ‘Determination of Munsell Soil Colour Using Smartphones’, Sensors, vol. 23, no. 6, p. 3181, Mar. 2023, Doi: 10.3390/s23063181.
A. Ladele, Adewale, Terry, O. A. A., ‘Bridging the Communication Gap between Scientists and Farmers in Katsina State of Nigeria A review of the activities of the Information and Communication Support for Agricultural Growth in Nigeria (ICS-Nigeria) Project in Katsina State of Nigeria’, Journal of Agricultural Extension, vol. 13, no. 3, pp. 45–65, 2005.
B. G. Saulawa, J. Atlhopheng, M. B. K. Darkoh, B. Mosetlhi, ‘Impact of Desertification on Livelihoods in Katsina State, Nigeria’, J. Agric. Life Sci., vol. 5, no. 1, 2018, doi: 10.30845/jals.v5n1a5.
E. Elijah, Ikusemoran, Nyanganji, Mshelisa, M.,. K. J. H. U., ‘Detecting and Monitoring Desertification Indicators in Yobe State, Nigeria’, Environmental Science, Geography, vol. 7, no. 1, pp. 23–31, 2017.
Liang, X., Li, P., Wang, J., Shun Chan, F. K., Togtokh, C., Ochir, A. Davaasuren, D. ‘Research Progress of Desertification and Its Prevention in Mongolia’, Sustainability, vol. 13, no. 12, p. 6861, Jun. 2021, Doi: 10.3390/su13126861.
S. Doso, ‘Land degradation and agriculture in the Sahel of Africa: causes, impacts and recommendations’, J. Agric. Sci. Appl., vol. 03, no. 03, pp. 67–73, Sep. 2014, Doi: 10.14511/jasa.2014.030303.
L. Cheng, Q. Lu, B. Wu, C. Yin, Y. Bao, L. Gong, ‘Estimation of the Costs of Desertification in China: A Critical Review’, Land Degrad. Dev., vol. 29, no. 4, pp. 975–983, Apr. 2018, Doi: 10.1002/ldr.2562.
H. Abdelrefea Magboul Mohamed, A. Abdel Aziz Salih, Y. Hassan Eltayeb, ‘Socioeconomic impact of drought and desertification on rural livelihoods in the area between Omdurman and west White Nile State, Sudan’, Int. J. Res. Publ., vol. 62, no. 1, Oct. 2020, Doi: 10.47119/IJRP1006211020201471.
S. Eze, A. J. Dougill, S. A. Banwart, S. M. Sallu, R. N. Mgohele, C. J. Senkoro, ‘Assessing soil system changes under climate-smart agriculture via farmers’ observations and conventional soil testing’, Land Degrad. Dev., vol. 33, no. 14, pp. 2635–2646, Aug. 2022, Doi: 10.1002/ldr.4339.
D. J. Mitchell, M. A. Fullen, I. C. Trueman, W. Fearnehough, ‘Sustainability of reclaimed desertified land in Ningxia, China’, J. Arid Environ., vol. 39, no. 2, pp. 239–251, Jun. 1998, Doi: 10.1006/jare.1998.0396.
T. Wang, X. Xue, L. Zhou, J. Guo, ‘Combating Aeolian Desertification in Northern China’, Land Degrad. Dev., vol. 26, no. 2, pp. 118–132, Feb. 2015, Doi: 10.1002/ldr.2190.
Ravi, S., D’Odorico, P., Breshears, D.D., Field, J.P., Goudie, A.S., Huxman, T. E., Li, J., Okin, G. S., Swap, R.J., Thomas, A. D., Van Pelt, S., Whicker, J.J. Zobeck, T. M. ‘Aeolian Processes and the Biosphere’, Rev. Geophys., vol. 49, no. 3, p. 2010RG000328, Sep. 2011, Doi: 10.1029/2010RG000328.
J. N. A. C. Okoli, Ifeakor, ‘An Overview of Climate Change and Food Security: Adaptation Strategies and Mitigation Measures in Nigeria’, Journal of Education and Practice, vol. 5, no. 1, pp. 13–19, 2014.
J. Jian, X. Du, R. D. Stewart, ‘A database for global soil health assessment’, Sci. Data, vol. 7, no. 1, p. 16, Jan. 2020, Doi: 10.1038/s41597-020-0356-3.
R. Lal, ‘Restoring Soil Quality to Mitigate Soil Degradation’, Sustainability, vol. 7, no. 5, pp. 5875–5895, May 2015, Doi: 10.3390/su7055875.
M. R. Nunes, H. M. Van Es, R. Schindelbeck, A. J. Ristow, M. Ryan, ‘No-till and cropping system diversification improve soil health and crop yield’, Geoderma, vol. 328, pp. 30–43, Oct. 2018, doi: 10.1016/j.geoderma.2018.04.031.
M. Xiong, R. Sun, L. Chen, ‘Effects of soil conservation techniques on water erosion control: A global analysis’, Sci. Total Environ., vol. 645, pp. 753–760, Dec. 2018, Doi: 10.1016/j.scitotenv.2018.07.124.
I. S. Adolwa, S. Schwarze, A. Buerkert, ‘Impacts of integrated soil fertility management on yield and household income: The case of Tamale (Ghana) and Kakamega (Kenya)’, Ecol. Econ., vol. 161, pp. 186–192, Jul. 2019, Doi: 10.1016/j.ecolecon.2019.03.023.
Adams, A. M. Adam W. Gillespie, G. S. Dhillon, G. K. C., Minielly, S. K. B., Ouattara, A. A., Kimaro, A., Bationo, J. J. Schoenau, D. Peak. ‘Long-term effects of integrated soil fertility management practices on soil chemical properties in the Sahel’, Geoderma, vol. 366, p. 114207, May 2020, Doi: 10.1016/j.geoderma.2020.114207.
Z. Adimassu, S. Langan, R. Johnston, W. Mekuria, T. Amede, ‘Impacts of Soil and Water Conservation Practices on Crop Yield, Run-off, Soil Loss and Nutrient Loss in Ethiopia: Review and Synthesis’, Environ. Manage., vol. 59, no. 1, pp. 87–101, Jan. 2017, Doi: 10.1007/s00267-016-0776-1.
I. Blilou, H. Hirt, ‘Desert plants to stop desertification: To succeed, reforestation projects to reclaim once fertile lands need to consider the local abiotic, biotic, and social factors’, EMBO Rep., vol. 24, no. 2, p. e56687, Feb. 2023, Doi: 10.15252/embr.202256687.
B. Timothy, ‘Gum Arabic: Past, Present and Future’, in Recent Progress in Medicinal Plants, vol. VIII, USA: Sci. Tech, 2003, pp. 403–410. Accessed: Sep. 12, 2022. [Online]. Available: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/267024437_Gum_Arabic_Past_Present_and_Future
A. Miri, D. Dragovich, Z. Dong, ‘Vegetation morphologic and aerodynamic characteristics reduce aeolian erosion’, Sci. Rep., vol. 7, no. 1, p. 12831, Oct. 2017, Doi: 10.1038/s41598-017-13084-x.
A. Miri, R. Davidson-Arnott, ‘The effectiveness of a single Tamarix tree in reducing aeolian erosion in an arid region’, Agric. For. Meteorol., vol. 300, p. 108324, Apr. 2021, Doi: 10.1016/j.agrformet.2021.108324.
D. Hörner, M. Wollni, ‘Integrated soil fertility management and household welfare in Ethiopia’, Food Policy, vol. 100, p. 102022, Apr. 2021, doi: 10.1016/j.foodpol.2020.102022.
P. K. R. Nair, ‘Alain Atangana, Damase Khasa, Scott Chang, Ann Degrande: Tropical agroforestry: Springer, 2014, ISBN 978-94-007-7722-4, DOI 10.1007/978-94-007-7723-1’, Agrofor. Syst., vol. 88, no. 2, pp. 385–385, Apr. 2014, doi: 10.1007/s10457-013-9668-z.
M. N. Muchane, G. W. Sileshi, S. Gripenberg, M. Jonsson, L. Pumariño, E. Barrios, ‘Agroforestry boosts soil health in the humid and sub-humid tropics: A meta-analysis’, Agric. Ecosyst. Environ., vol. 295, p. 106899, Jun. 2020, doi: 10.1016/j.agee.2020.106899.
Zhu, X., Liu, W., Chen, J., Bruijnzeel, L.A., Mao, Z., Yang, X., Cardinael, R., Meng, F.R., Sidle, R., Seitz, S., Nair, V.D., Nanko, K., Zou, X., Chen, C. Jiang, X.J. ‘Reductions in water, soil and nutrient losses and pesticide pollution in agroforestry practices: a review of evidence and processes’, Plant Soil, vol. 453, no. 1–2, pp. 45–86, Aug. 2020, doi: 10.1007/s11104-019-04377-3.
N. Chatterjee, P. K. Ramachandran. Nair, S. Chakraborty, V. D. Nair, ‘Changes in soil carbon stocks across the Forest-Agroforest-Agriculture/Pasture continuum in various agroecological regions: A meta-analysis’, Agric. Ecosyst. Environ., vol. 266, pp. 55–67, Nov. 2018, doi: 10.1016/j.agee.2018.07.014.
M. R. Hoosbeek, R. P. Remme, G. M. Rusch, ‘Trees enhance soil carbon sequestration and nutrient cycling in a silvopastoral system in south-western Nicaragua’, Agrofor. Syst., Nov. 2016, doi: 10.1007/s10457-016-0049-2.
J. Dollinger, S. Jose, ‘Agroforestry for soil health’, Agrofor. Syst., vol. 92, no. 2, pp. 213–219, Apr. 2018, Doi: 10.1007/s10457-018-0223-9.
F. Federal Government of Nigeria, (FGN), ‘National Strategic Action Plan for the Implementation of the Great Green Wall for the Sahara and the Sahel Initiative. Federal Ministry of the Environment, Abuja, Nigeria’. 2012. Accessed: May 22, 2022. [Online]. Available: Great Green Wall for the Sahara and Sahel Initiative National Strategic Action Plan_1661859111 (1).pdf
Suresh Ramanan S., Manoj Kumar S., A. Arunachalam, A.K. Handa, V. Priyanka, ‘Conceptual analysis of “windbreaks” and “shelterbelts” in agroforestry’, vol. 24, no. 2, pp. 39–45, 2022.
Chang, X., Sun, L., Yu, X., Liu, Z., Jia, G., Wang, Y. Zhu, X. ‘Windbreak efficiency in controlling wind erosion and particulate matter concentrations from farmlands’, Agric. Ecosyst. Environ., vol. 308, p. 107269, Mar. 2021, Doi: 10.1016/j.agee.2020.107269.
M. Veste, T. Littmann, A. Kunneke, B. D. Toit, T. Seifert, ‘Windbreaks as part of climate-smart landscapes reduce evapotranspiration in vineyards, Western Cape Province, South Africa’, Plant Soil Environ., vol. 66, no. 3, pp. 119–127, Mar. 2020, Doi: 10.17221/616/2019-PSE.

Plate 1 to 4 are available in the Supplementary Files section.

No competing interests reported.

floatimage2.jpeg
Plate I: Aeolian dust storm at Dutse on 21 July 2023 covering major roads, drainage, and causes low visibility and respiratory tract infection in the study area. Source: Author
floatimage3.jpeg
Plate II: Artificial dam created at Dutse Buji town to conserve water for irrigation and domestic uses dry due to excessive drought. Source: Author
floatimage4.jpeg
Plate III: Loss of vegetation through camel grazing on acacia tree plantation in Dutse. Source: Author
floatimage5.jpeg
Plate IV: Cutting of vegetation by local people for firewood and building. The logs were transported to the town using cow cart Source: Author

Download PDF

Editorial decision: Revision requested
28 Oct, 2024
Reviews received at journal
28 Oct, 2024
Reviews received at journal
20 Oct, 2024
Reviewers agreed at journal
18 Oct, 2024
Reviews received at journal
30 Sep, 2024
Reviewers agreed at journal
30 Sep, 2024
Reviewers agreed at journal
30 Sep, 2024
Reviewers agreed at journal
28 Sep, 2024
Reviewers invited by journal
28 Aug, 2024
Editor assigned by journal
23 Aug, 2024
Submission checks completed at journal
22 Aug, 2024
First submitted to journal
07 Aug, 2024

You are reading this latest preprint version

Indigenous farmers’ knowledge and perception of desertification and soil erosion in Jigawa State, Nigeria

Status:

Version 1

Abstract

Figures

1. Introduction

2. Materials and Methods

2.1. Description of the study area

2.1.1. Participant consent Information

2.1.2. Ethical Approval

2.2. Method

2.2.1. Sampling technique

2.2.2. Source of data

2.3. Field observations

2.4. Key informant interviews

2.5. Questionnaire Survey design

2.5.1. Questionnaire sampling procedure

2.6. Data Analysis

3. Results and discussion

3.1. Socio-economic characteristics of farmers

3.2. Farmers’ knowledge and perceptions of desertification in the study area

3.3. Farmers’ knowledge and perception of soil erosion and its impacts on desertification

3.4. Perception of farmers with regards to the effects and consequences of soil erosion

3.5. Soil conservation practices used to combat desertification and wind erosion

3.7. Regression analysis of knowledge and perception on erosion and desertification

4. Conclusion and recommendations

4.1. Recommendations

Declarations

Conflict of interest

Funding:

Author Contribution

Acknowledgements

Data Availability

References

Plate

Additional Declarations

Supplementary Files

Status:

Version 1