Couëdel, A., de Dieu Mbarushimana, J., Nyombayire, A. et al. Maize-bean row intercropping in Rwanda: labor constraints limit application despite nutritional and economic benefits. Agron. Sustain. Dev. 46, 39 (2026).
doi.org/10.1007/s135...
#StripIntercropping #Mbili-Mbili #Cereal–legumeIntercropping
Rapid population growth in sub-Saharan Africa is intensifying pressure on food security and reinforcing the need for sustainable agricultural intensification. Maize–bean intercropping presents an opportunity to enhance and stabilize crop productivity in this region. Row intercropping—an arrangement in which two or more crops are planted in intentional row patterns—has been promoted as an efficient alternative to sole crops and traditional mixed intercropping. Yet, evidence of its performance across diverse soils and climates remains limited. This study evaluates the multicriteria performance of maize–bean row intercropping compared with sole cropping and mixed intercropping under contrasting farm conditions. We conducted a large-scale, multiseason on-farm study with 382 trials across a wide range of environments in Rwanda. A novel aspect of this study is to move beyond yield-focused intercropping assessments by jointly considering productivity, nutritional outcomes, labor requirements, economic returns, and farmers’ preferences, while uniquely monitoring application rates 4 years after the trials. These dimensions were assessed across a wide range of soil, climate, and socioeconomic farm conditions. Overall, row intercropping had better land use efficiency and higher energy yield and profitability than sole and mixed intercropping systems. It achieved higher land use efficiency in less favorable environments, while its yield stability was comparable to the other cropping systems tested. However, its higher labor requirements, especially at planting, when labor demand peaks, led to only moderate farmer preference. Four years after the trials, application remained limited, with only 30% of participating farmers continuing to use row intercropping despite its higher yields. To enhance adoption, we recommend developing flexible guidelines that allow farmers to adapt practices to their specific needs, introducing labor-saving innovations to reduce the workload at planting, and targeting dissemination to fields with biophysical conditions where row intercropping is expected to deliver the strongest performance.