Selective Weeding
Acceso promotes selective weed management and spot treatment, using plants already growing on the plot as living and dead ground cover.
Acceso promotes selective weed management and spot treatment, using plants already growing on the plot as living and dead ground cover.
Colombia
Fruit Trees
Improved Soil Health
Impact Highlights
~70
~70
~70
Farmers adopting
3 yrs
3 yrs
3 yrs
Practice promoted by Acceso
8 months
8 months
8 months
Without weeding, per one farmer
Summary
Practice snapshot
Practice
Selective weed management and spot treatment — uses plants already growing on the plot to provide living and dead ground cover, protecting the soil from degradation and increasing its water-retention capacity.
Implemention Organization
Acceso
Geography
Colombia
Crops / Value Chain
Fruit Trees
Adoption & outcomes
Farmers Adoption
~70
out of a larger group exposed to the training; Acceso has promoted the practice for about 3 years
Core Outcomes
Improved Soil Health
Land Tenure
Land Tenure
Mostly landowners — plantain's long growth cycle makes it an unattractive choice for renters
Gender Participation
Gender Participation
An estimated 70% male, 30% female — in line with Acceso's general farmer base
Date Submitted
September 2026
How to Adopt
Set a baseline
Set a baseline
Record current weed-management practices on the plot before making any changes.
Record current weed-management practices on the plot before making any changes.
Survey the plot
Survey the plot
Identify which areas have the highest weed presence.
Identify which areas have the highest weed presence.
Flag priority areas
Flag priority areas
Decide which of those areas actually need intervention.
Decide which of those areas actually need intervention.
Control manually first
Control manually first
Remove unwanted plants by hand, machete, or bush cutter rather than reaching for herbicide.
Remove unwanted plants by hand, machete, or bush cutter rather than reaching for herbicide.
Spot-treat only where needed
Spot-treat only where needed
Reserve chemical control for hard-to-control or highly competitive weeds.
Reserve chemical control for hard-to-control or highly competitive weeds.
Monitor and repeat
Monitor and repeat
Check at least monthly and repeat control based on weed growth and rainfall — more often in the rainy season, less in the dry season.
Check at least monthly and repeat control based on weed growth and rainfall — more often in the rainy season, less in the dry season.
Key Takeaways
Recommendations
Promote the practice after trust has been established - multi-year commercial relationships with farmers create an enabling environment for practice implementation.
Bring soil data, not just advice — showing farmers their own soil-test results is highly convincing.
Work with what's already growing — using existing beneficial plants lowers the barrier versus asking farmers to plant a new cover crop.
Change behavior in small steps — frame it as selective management, not a wholesale switch from clean fields to no weeding.
Reinforce in-person training digitally — low-cost WhatsApp messages keep the practice top of mind between visits.
Pitfalls to avoid
Underestimating how deep-rooted the "clean field" mindset is (a ‘good’ farmer’s field has no weeds), and how much evidence, trust, and rapport it takes to shift it.
Ignoring the added labor burden in areas where labor is already scarce and costly due to out-migration.
Skipping plant-identification training—removing or keeping the wrong plants can hurt crop growth and create conditions hospitable to pests and disease.
Start with a pilot to generate evidence and data - having clear evidence from the region you are working in will greatly aid implementation.
Overlooking the social cost: neighboring farmers can judge a "messy" field, which discourages adoption.
Farmer Perspective
“
We have made it 8 months without doing crop management, or weeding.
Participating farmer, Acceso
“
It is a big step or a big leap for somebody to change a practice, whereas this is really an easy one to implement.
Acceso team
The complete, detailed story behind this practice
The complete, detailed story behind this practice
Full Case Study
Full Case Study
Problem & Baseline
Targeted Agricultural Problem
Soil degradation, loss of soil biological activity, erosion, and loss of soil moisture in plantain systems in Colombia.
Baseline Farm Conditions and Practices
Complete eradication of weeds or unwanted vegetation through indiscriminate chemical control of weeds and/or burning.
Historical System Barriers to Adoption
Knowledge and mindset: in conventional agriculture, farmers believe soil should be kept free of weeds to ensure proper crop development and yield optimization. Labor: the cost of labor and its actual availability in the area, reduced by rural out-migration to cities and to the U.S.
Regen Practice Design & Delivery
Practice Design
Practice Overview and Implementation Method
This traditional crop management practice originated with producers and was refined through a co-learning process between Acceso and farmers. It prioritizes manual or mechanical control — by hand, shovel, or machete — over widespread herbicide use, reserving chemical spot treatment for weeds that are hard to control or compete significantly with the crop (e.g., mata plátano). Acceso selected this practice because it's easy to implement, requires little additional investment, is highly scalable, and serves as an accessible starting point before layering on more demanding regenerative practices. It works best alongside dead mulch, planting other beneficial cover crops, and applying organic matter and beneficial microorganisms.
Frequency is not fixed: control follows weed growth and its competition with the crop — more often in the rainy season, less in the dry season — with monitoring and control at least once a month.
1
Survey and identify areas with the highest weed presence.
2
Determine which areas require intervention.
3
Manually control weeds using a machete, bush cutter, or other available tool.
4
Apply spot treatment only where necessary.
5
Monitor to determine the need for further intervention.
Required Implementation Resources
Labor
A machete and/or bush cutter
Personal protective equipment (PPE)
Key weeds and ground covers
Weeds to eliminate | English name | Scientific name |
|---|---|---|
Falso marihuana | Santa Maria feverfew | Parthenium hysterophorus |
Bejuco abraza palos | Monstera lechleriana | Monstera cf. lechleriana Schott |
Mata puerco | Pig-killer / dumbcane | Dieffenbachia maculata (Lodd.) G. Don |
Falsa ilusión (Pasto) | Lovegrass | Panicum laxum Sw. |
Mata plátano | Colombian wild petunia | Ruellia sp. aff. colombiana |
Lengua de suegra | Snake plant | Dracaena trifasciata |
Alambrillo | Blue panicgrass | Panicum cf. antidotale Retz. |
Ground covers to keep | English name | Scientific name |
|---|---|---|
Colchón de pobre | Running clubmoss | Selaginella sp. |
Oreja de ratón | Groundcover geophila | Geophila repens (L.) Johnston |
Calisia / Coneja | Inch plant | Callisia cordifolia (Sw.) E.S. Anders & Woods |
Celedonia | Shiny bush | Peperomia pellucida |
Practice Delivery
Organizational Role
Acceso's role centers on three touchpoints:
Training + digital reinforcement. In-person group training on "Conserving Soil and Water" and "Crop Nutrition" touches on this practice; each training is followed by short WhatsApp reinforcement videos.
Visits. Farmers receive personalized monthly technician visits to assess field conditions and support implementation.
Production offtake. Acceso purchases the farmer's harvest, which builds the rapport that supports adoption of recommended practices.
Training materials: a technician-facing infographic from Acceso's Soil Health training manual, and a short Soil Health digital-reinforcement video sent by WhatsApp. Both promote soil health broadly and don't name "selective weed management" specifically.
Farmer Engagement and Training Strategy
In-person group training
Personalized monthly technician visits
Digital reinforcement via WhatsApp
Financial incentives, in some cases (a donor-funded pilot project)
Farmers are not trained to lead their own farmer groups.
Gender and Social Equity Integration
Not currently. Acceso's overall farmer base is roughly 70% male and 30% female, which tracks the general population rather than a deliberate gender strategy. Acceso doesn't yet have data on whether adoption of this specific practice differs by gender.
Enabling Conditions
Key Enabling Conditions
Farmer interest and commitment from the outset. Labor availability and basic tools, since transitioning away from predominantly chemical management can initially increase labor requirements. Technical assistance and training, so farmers understand the goal is selective management — not bare soil.
Land Tenure Dynamics and Impact on Adoption
Most farmers implementing the practice are landowners, but Acceso attributes this to the crop rather than the practice: plantain has a long growth cycle, which makes it an unattractive choice for renters, so land tenure filters who grows plantain in the first place rather than who can adopt selective weeding. The practice delivers soil-protection benefits within a single growing cycle, so it would also work for renters growing other crops — though renters would miss out on the multi-year soil-health gains that accrue to longer-tenured landowners.
Results of Intervention
Environmental
Increased soil biological activity (measured by earthworm counts); improved soil health, evidenced by soil analysis in the pilot subgroup; reduced soil degradation (erosion, moisture loss).
Social
Not formally measured for this specific practice. Acceso reports the practice could raise farmer incomes through the combined effect of improved production and lower costs: healthier soil supports healthier crops, which can sell for better prices, while reduced herbicide and labor use over time lowers the cost of weed control.
Climate
Soil with high biological activity is more resilient to adverse weather. During drought, it retains water more effectively and helps sustain plant activity; during heavy rainfall, it improves water infiltration and reduces erosion. This makes the production system more stable and less vulnerable to climate change.
Results Timeline
The practice delivers soil-protection benefits within a single growing cycle, though multi-year implementation is preferable for soil-health gains. A farmer testimony shows wide-ranging benefits after 2 years of implementation, including improved production, soil health, and reduced input and labor costs for weed management. Soil changes in the 2026 pilot subgroup are tracked monthly.
Formal Documentation of Outcomes
Monthly soil sampling and analysis is underway in a pilot subgroup, but the direct link between soil-health improvements and yield increases is not yet formally quantified, and no peer-reviewed or third-party research is available.
What worked, and what changed
What Worked Well
Regen Practice Implementation Successes
Working with plants already present on the plot rather than planting a new cover crop from scratch. Getting farmers to plant cover crops is difficult, so letting existing beneficial plants spread is a lower-effort alternative that farmers found easier to adopt.
Supply Chain and Systems-Level Successes
Not specifically covered, beyond the technical-support package (training plus monthly visits) that builds farmer trust.
Primary Drivers of Farmer Adoption
Multi-year commercial and technical relationships — farmers who had worked with Acceso for two to three years or more were more open to adopting the practice. Trust in technicians, reinforced by monthly visits, mattered too. Most recently, soil-analysis data has let Acceso show farmers real, measured changes underground, which farmers find highly convincing.
Effective Operational and Partnership Models
The combination of in-person training, monthly technician visits, and Acceso's role as offtaker created a durable, trust-based relationship that supported adoption. The practice is also self-reinforcing and highly scalable: it starts in small areas, and beneficial plants disperse and crowd out noxious weeds on their own.
Challenges & Pivots
Implementation Challenges
Unlearning the belief that groundcover harms the crop (for example, causing yellowing), and absorbing the added manual labor the practice requires.
Programmatic Pivots and Modifications
Acceso shifted from a narrowly production-focused framing to one that also incorporates soil health and its underlying mechanisms, with deeper training on plant metabolism and soil health introduced in 2026. The practice itself was reframed from "manual control of weeds" to "manual control of weeds and reparcheo y redistribución" (spot treatment and redistribution of ground cover) — a more positive framing that also captures spreading beneficial plants and reincorporating plant residue. The digital-extension approach is being refined to directly reinforce in-person training, using the same language and visuals.
Emerging Implementation Barriers
Farmer mindset and resistance to a "messy" field; the cost and availability of labor, worsened by rural out-migration; the risk of misidentifying weeds, which can create conditions hospitable to pests and diseases; a lack of data connecting the practice to yield, which limited its persuasiveness before soil testing began; and social judgment from neighboring farmers over "messy" fields.
Economics & Financing
Implementation Organization Economics
Key financial metrics
Intervention Financing and Capital Structure
Acceso covers its technical assistance through its standard financing model. Digital extension is highly cost-effective via the WhatsApp Business API — about $0.01 per template message in Colombia, or roughly $500 for an entire cohort's reinforcement messages. Soil testing is being covered as part of a pilot project financed with donor funds.
Farmer Economics
Net Income Impact and Percentage Gains Over Baseline
Farmers report improved production anecdotally, through farmer testimony. Formal income or yield increases have not been disaggregated for this practice specifically.
Drivers and Realization Timeline of Farmer Income Gains
One farmer testimony reports improved production, soil health, and reduced input and labor costs for weed management after 2 years of implementation.
Price Premiums, Yield Increases and/or Input Cost Reductions
Farmers report reduced input costs (less herbicide and, over time, less labor). Effects on pricing are not covered.
Reasons for Absence of Farmer Income Gains
Not applicable — some income gains are reported. However, Acceso cannot attribute them to this practice alone, as income gains reflect the impact of Acceso’s broader model.
Scalability & Replicability
Enabling Conditions for Smallholder Scaling
Farmer willingness and basic tools and labor; ongoing technical assistance so farmers understand the goal is selective management rather than bare soil; and low-cost digital channels like WhatsApp to extend reach cost-effectively. The practice is applicable to all crop types.
Scaling Constraints
Labor availability and cost, worsened by rural out-migration; the time it takes to build farmer trust; and the current lack of hard data connecting the practice to yield.
Scaling Partnerships
Acceso's own field and technician network; and, for the current soil-testing pilot, donor-funded partnerships that made monthly soil sampling possible.
Key Risks
Primary Implementation Risks
Farmer mental block and resistance to changing a "clean field" mindset. Labor constraints, as selective weeding requires more labor and rural out-migration drives shortages and higher costs. Improper execution — misidentifying "good" versus "bad" weeds, or poor timing (e.g., heavy rain leading to rot) — can create conditions hospitable to pests and diseases. Social judgment: peers may judge farmers for "messy" fields that run counter to conventional norms.
Data Gaps and Information Limitations
A direct, quantified link between soil-health improvements and yield increases is not yet available; current buy-in relies more on trust and anecdote than hard evidence.
Priorities for Testing and Validation for Replication
Whether the soil-health gains seen in this pilot translate into measurable yield or income increases over multiple seasons, and whether adoption and impact differ across farmer segments, including by gender — not yet tracked by Acceso.
Farmer Perspective
“
One winning aspect of the process is that the producer takes advantage of the material, the plants or the weeds, as we call them, already on their own land. One challenge is getting a producer to plant a new ground cover. So implementing something they already have within their crop is much easier, and they are more open to adopting the practice.
Acceso technician
“
What we used to call 'trash' is actually a source of organic material to the soil. [...] Here you can see, the plants are absorbing the minerals that I give them with the organic material. Here 'weeds' will no longer grow. And you can see we have worms. Worms are what give us the ability to regenerate the soil.
Participating farmer, Acceso (testimony video)
“
These soils were degraded; this land was used for livestock. Today we are transforming these soils and adding more organic material.
Participating farmer, Acceso (testimony video)
“
Sometimes it's just a mentality block. The way [farmers have] been raised is that you remove everything that's not the plant you're growing for money. It's difficult to change that mindset, especially when you don't have good evidence, which we're now working to collect. But without the evidence, the majority of farmers just don't trust and don't want to change. And even though it is a low-tech practice, it still requires additional manual labor. Not everybody is willing or able to invest that extra effort for results that are still fairly uncertain.
Acceso team
“
One winning aspect of the process is that the producer takes advantage of the material, the plants or the weeds, as we call them, already on their own land. One challenge is getting a producer to plant a new ground cover. So implementing something they already have within their crop is much easier, and they are more open to adopting the practice.
Acceso technician
“
What we used to call 'trash' is actually a source of organic material to the soil. [...] Here you can see, the plants are absorbing the minerals that I give them with the organic material. Here 'weeds' will no longer grow. And you can see we have worms. Worms are what give us the ability to regenerate the soil.
Participating farmer, Acceso (testimony video)
“
These soils were degraded; this land was used for livestock. Today we are transforming these soils and adding more organic material.
Participating farmer, Acceso (testimony video)
“
Sometimes it's just a mentality block. The way [farmers have] been raised is that you remove everything that's not the plant you're growing for money. It's difficult to change that mindset, especially when you don't have good evidence, which we're now working to collect. But without the evidence, the majority of farmers just don't trust and don't want to change. And even though it is a low-tech practice, it still requires additional manual labor. Not everybody is willing or able to invest that extra effort for results that are still fairly uncertain.
Acceso team
“
One winning aspect of the process is that the producer takes advantage of the material, the plants or the weeds, as we call them, already on their own land. One challenge is getting a producer to plant a new ground cover. So implementing something they already have within their crop is much easier, and they are more open to adopting the practice.
Acceso technician
“
These soils were degraded; this land was used for livestock. Today we are transforming these soils and adding more organic material.
Participating farmer, Acceso (testimony video)
“
What we used to call 'trash' is actually a source of organic material to the soil. [...] Here you can see, the plants are absorbing the minerals that I give them with the organic material. Here 'weeds' will no longer grow. And you can see we have worms. Worms are what give us the ability to regenerate the soil.
Participating farmer, Acceso (testimony video)
“
Sometimes it's just a mentality block. The way [farmers have] been raised is that you remove everything that's not the plant you're growing for money. It's difficult to change that mindset, especially when you don't have good evidence, which we're now working to collect. But without the evidence, the majority of farmers just don't trust and don't want to change. And even though it is a low-tech practice, it still requires additional manual labor. Not everybody is willing or able to invest that extra effort for results that are still fairly uncertain.
Acceso team
Resources & Media
Videos
▶
Acceso farmer testimony
▶
Soil Health digital-reinforcement video
Gallery
More case studies.
More case studies.
Regenerative and climate-smart practices, direct from practitioners working with smallholders.
Regenerative and climate-smart practices,
direct from practitioners working with smallholders.
Regenerative and climate-smart practices, direct from practitioners working with smallholders.
See case study
→
Manual Pump Irrigation
KickStart International helps smallholder farmers across Sub-Saharan Africa irrigate high-value crops year-round with its fuel-free MoneyMaker manual pumps.
Sub-Saharan Africa
Horticulture Crops
Increased Farmer Income
See case study
→
Super Pearl Fish Amino Acid Fertilizer
Proximity Designs brings Super Pearl, a locally fermented fish amino acid liquid fertilizer, to smallholder farmers in Myanmar as an affordable alternative to synthetic nitrogen fertilizer.
Myanmar
Grains & Cereals
Increased Farmer Income
© 2026 CASH Coalition
All rights reserved.
Climate Action for Smallholders (CASH) Coalition Inc. is registered as a 501(c)(3) organization in the United States.
© 2026 CASH Coalition
All rights reserved.
Climate Action for Smallholders (CASH) Coalition Inc. is registered as a 501(c)(3) organization in the United States.
© 2026 CASH Coalition
All rights reserved.
Climate Action for Smallholders (CASH) Coalition Inc. is registered as a 501(c)(3) organization in the United States.