Acknowledgments - ACIAR | Australian Centre for...

Final report

Small research and development activity

project

Informing policies for removing barriers to scaling conservation agriculture based sustainable intensification in the Eastern Gangetic Plains

project number

CSE/2016/112

date published

4 October 2017

prepared by

TP Tiwari, Mahesh Gathala and Sofina Maharjan

co-authors/ contributors/ collaborators

BARI, RDRS, DAE (Bangladesh); NARC, DoA (Nepal); UBKV, DoA (West Bengal); ICAR, BAU; and CSIRO, UQ and CU (Australia)

approved by

John Dixon/Eric Huttner

final report number

FR2017/24

ISBN

978-1-925746-00-6

published by

ACIAR

GPO Box 1571

Canberra ACT 2601

Australia

This publication is published by ACIAR ABN 34 864 955 427. Care is taken to ensure the accuracy of the information contained in this publication. However, ACIAR cannot accept responsibility for the accuracy or completeness of the information or opinions contained in the publication. You should make your own enquiries before making decisions concerning your interests.

Australian Centre for International Agricultural Research (ACIAR) XXXX - This work is copyright. Apart from any use as permitted under the Copyright Act 1968, no part may be reproduced by any process without prior written permission from ACIAR, GPO Box 1571, Canberra ACT 2601, Australia, [email protected].

6

Contents

1Acknowledgments3

2Executive summary4

3Introduction5

4Working session on scaling CASI and policy and institutional barriers6

5Two short stories/cases of typical policy and institutional barriers constraining to scale high impact CASI technologies.7

6Vision of widespread scaling in the EGP potentially reaching a substantial proportion of EGP farmers8

7Identify M&E&L systems and implementation modalities for evaluating pilot scaling out of CASI to benefit 1.5 million households9

8Identified and mapped EGP farming systems and potential scaling areas by type of CASI practices, with spatial data, maps and report10

9Elaborated policy and institutional barriers to improve ground water management, strengthen mechanisation services, strengthen IPs, expand entrepreneurship by farmers and micro-entrepreneurs, and related evidence base15

10Prepare consolidated proposal for SRFSI II in consultation with key stakeholders with integration and functional linkages to the USA/IFPRI/CIMMYT policy proposal16

11Conclusions and recommendations17

11.1Conclusions17

11.2Recommendations18

12References20

12.1References cited in report (not appropriately listed also not in proper order order)20

12.2List of publications produced by project22

13Appendixes23

Appendix 1: Pathways to Impact for SRFSI23

Appendix 2. Case stories for typical and institutional (ground level) barriers constraining to scale high impact CASI Technologies29

Appendix 3: Vision of widespread scaling in the EGP potentially reaching a substantial proportion of EGP farmers32

Appendix 4. Farming systems zones with major characteristics, technological/policy interventions and potential area for scaling39

Appendix 5. Elaborated policy and institutional barriers47

Final report: Informing policies for removing barriers to scaling conservation agriculture based sustainable intensification in the Eastern Gangetic Plains


Page iv

Page 63

Acknowledgments

Assistance received from DAE, BARI and RADRS in Bangladesh; ICAR, BAU, UBKV, DoA-WB, Shakhi and JEEViKA in India, NARC and DoA in Nepal and community based organizations (CBOs), and their associated staff are thankfully acknowledged. We thank the farmers of EGPs for their co-operation and inputs in running on-farm trials. Thanks are also due to ACIAR and DFAT for the support of CASI technology development and delivery in the EGPs. This report is an output from a short research and development activity funded by the Australian Centre for International Agricultural Research (ACIAR) and the Department of Foreign Affair and Trade (DFAT) for the benefit of developing countries (CSE/2016/112). The views expressed are not necessarily those of these institutions or organizations.

Executive summary

Despite the worlds highest concentration of rural poverty and a strong dependence on agriculture for food security and livelihoods, the EGP has the potential to become a major contributor to South Asia regional food security. This is because the region has fertile soils, and abundant groundwater resources (except few locations), and sufficient rainfall during summer. The productivity of major cereals, specifically rice and wheat remain low and diversification is limited because of poorly developed markets and infrastructure, sparse agricultural knowledge and service networks, and inadequate development of available water resources and sustainable production practices. Gradually the region started experiencing labour shortages due to migration and higher wages. These factors lead to smallholder vulnerability to climate and market risks that constraint farmer and private sector investments in high impact and face changing technologies. To address these issues, a regional project entitled Sustainable Resilient Farming Systems Intensification (SRFSI) a collaborative venture launched in May 2014 is led by CIMMYT and implemented through national and international multi-partnership with ACIAR/DFAT funding. The aim of this project is to sustainably reduce the poverty, especially womens, in the Eastern Gangetic Plains (EGPs).

Conservation agriculture for sustainable intensification (CASI) has shown great promise at small scale, but there are barriers in scaling up across the region. Evidences so far suggests that lack of access to finance to utilise improved technologies and farm machineries, capacity building, weak extension system, and poorly developed agro-processing and marketing/supply chains, are the key limiting factors hindering wider scale adoption of new technologies thereby poverty reduction. Further, there appear to be socio-economic and institutional constraints that inhibit farmers to realise the benefit from CASI technologies that contribute to food security sustainably while safeguarding environment.

This report summarises the underlying policy and institutional drivers operating across EGPs. Further, the variation 3 emphasising impact pathways in general and capacity building of relevant stakeholders in particular. Additionally, a potential policy project led by University of South Australia (USA) will collaborate with decision makers in both the public and private sectors to develop options that unlock the potential of agriculture and food systems in the EGP, which is expected to facilitate wider scale adoption of CASI technologies and approaches in the EGPs by:

designing strategies and local implementation modalities to ensure widespread scaling out and up of CASI in the EGP

identifying and map farming systems for targeting the scaling of CASI in the EGP

analysis and documenting of policy and institutional constraints to CASI in the EGP with a particular focus on the research areas of SRFSI

Implementation of variation 3 and policy project will provide convincing evidences on Food, Energy and Water nexus that would create an enabling environment for scaling CASI in the EGP.

Based on partners feedback and knowledge/experiences gathered over the years, existing nodes have been characterized for each district focussing where comparative advantage lies -meaning the scaling out efforts will be emphasised only in A and B nodes. Therefore, relying on impact pathways and synergistic effects of the variation 3 along with the impacts and benefits of the policy project (led by USA with IFPRI and CIMMYT collaboration) would lead to 1.5 million farming households adopting at least one or more high impact CASI technologies/practices, which are more sustainable than current practices that improves farmer livelihoods and reduces poverty.

Introduction

The EGP, spanning Nepal, Bangladesh and India has the worlds highest concentration of rural poverty currently some 40% of global poverty. Future population growth is predicted to lead South-Asia to inter-related crises, with food supply increasingly lagging behind demand (already, 0.5 billion people in South Asia are hungry), fresh water resources diminishing and a burgeoning demand for energy. Rice, wheat and pulse productivity remain low and diversification is limited because of poorly developed markets, limited development of small businesses, sparse agricultural knowledge and service networks, inefficient use of water resources and unsustainable production practices. This problem is strongly exasperated by policy limitations, the impact of climate change, labor shortages and land fragmentation. The sub-optimal production presents an opportunity to increase regional agricultural productivity by establishing enabling policy, introducing innovations that more efficiently use land, water and energy and strengthening markets and entrepreneurial activities. This project aligns with the priorities of the governments of Bangladesh, India and Nepal. The Conservation Agriculture for Sustainable Intensification (CASI) and diversification of climate-resilient farming systems sought through this project clearly addresses issues on these areas.

ACIARs priorities, under the Australian Governments Sustainable Development Investment Portfolio (SDIP) for South Asia policy are met by the strong focus on food, energy and water nexus and women and youth that will continue to underpin this work. A full proposal has been formulated by detailing key thematic areas, clarifying on methodological aspects of partner engagement emphasising capacity building of all relevant stakeholder including women, youth and private sector. Similarly, as part of SRFSI II, a separate proposal is being formulated in addressing policy barriers collaboratively with the University of South Australia (USA), IFPRI and CIMMYT that is expected to facilitate wider scale adoption of CASI technologies and approaches in the EGPs.The SRFSI II is an important part of the DFAT-led SDIP Phase 2 program, which seeks to improve regional cooperation across the food, energy and water sectors in order to reduce poverty and increase food security. Therefore, the envisioned objectives of variation 3 (emphasizing on capacity building) will not be achieved unless barriers for wider scale dissemination and adoption of CASI practices are addressed.

While developing a full variation 3 proposal, among others the following key aspects of the sustainable intensification have been accomplished under this SRA:

Working session on scaling CASI and policy and institutional barriers,

Two short stories/cases of typical policy and institutional barriers constraining to scale high impact CASI technologies,

Vision of widespread scaling in the EGP potentially reaching a substantial proportion of EGP farmers,

Identify ME&L systems and implementation modalities for evaluating pilot scaling out of CASI to benefit 1.5 million households,

Identified and mapped EGP farming systems and potential scaling areas by type of CASI practices, with spatial data, maps and report,

Elaborated policy and institutional barriers to improve ground water management, strengthen mechanisation services, strengthen IPs, expand entrepreneurship by farmers and micro-entrepreneurs, and related evidence base, and

Prepare consolidated proposal for SRFSI II in consultation with key stakeholders with integration and functional linkages to the USA/IFPRI/CIMMYT policy proposal

These aspects have been summarised separately below.

Working session on scaling CASI and policy and institutional barriers

A three-day high level meeting with SRFSI partners including policy makers and private sector representatives was organised from 16-18 November 2016 in Delhi (Hotel Lemon Tree Premier). There were 25 participants in both the meetings. The first day meeting was focussed on SRFSI out-scaling variation proposal, which was led by Dr Peter Brown to consider inputs into re-writing the SRFSI Scaling Variation for consideration by CIMMYT and ACIAR. The key challenges for Scaling Variation project identified were i) the impact pathways of partners use CASI technologies benefit 1.5 million households in the EGP by 2020/21 principally through horizontally out scaling methods, including direct benefit to at least 30% women, and ii) to consider the approaches and methods that are needed to catalyse substantial local small-scale private sector engagement and attract the necessary private investment to the EGP.

This meeting was facilitated through a series of short presentations relating to needs to be done for supporting scaling out in the EGP focussing on agronomy, social and economic perspectives, government schemes, policy, gender, private sector, business skills and universities. This was followed by general discussion and then detailed planning through modifying an existing activities plan to consider relevant methods and approaches to achieve scaling out. The presentations and subsequent planning was highly rigorous in clarifying thinking and potential approaches to enable scaling out to occur.

Peter wrote the SRFSI Scaling Variation based on those inputs to be submitted to CIMMYT thereby ACIAR, which became a foundation for the SRFSI variation 3. In a practical sense, it will not be possible for project staff to shake the hands of 1.5 million households individually given the available resources and timeframe. Therefore, relying on synergistic effects of the Variation 3 along with the impacts and benefits of the policy project (led by USA with IFPRI and CIMMYT collaboration) would facilitate scaling process. The evidence based pathways would be adopted (Appendix 1) emphasising more on capacity building that would lead to 1.5 million farming households adopting at least one or more high impact CASI technologies that improves farmer livelihoods, reduces poverty (SRFSI Variation 3). The target group for this livelihoods improvement is smallholders in EGP, including women and youth.

Dr Eric Kueneman and Judee Fisher led next two-days meeting for designing the SRFSI Phase II policy support project. The challenges to design the project are: i) to provide the Phase II project evidence-based guidance to enable governments and their stakeholder partners to develop effective strategies and support policies for scaling-up adoption of CASI innovations that have been pilot-tested in EGP, ii) to collaborate with government programs/schemes and create enabling environments for expanded private sector engagements in CASI technologies and approaches, iii) the approaches and methods to catalyse more effective synergies between research projects on biophysical, social/policy constraints and investment-grade government-created projects that are scale-up oriented and iv) a policy-focused project, catalyse regional strategies and policies around the nexus of food, water and energy, while considering the needs and opportunities that exists in the EGPs.

A series of presentations followed by detailed group discussions and reporting back to build some detailed information to use in writing the project document. Outline of project objectives, activities and milestones were developed. Eric put all relevant information into the development of a proposal, which is now has been merged and became a foundation of a policy project that would be led by University of South Australia (USA) and co-led by IFPRI, and CIMMYT will be a key partner.

Two short stories/cases of typical policy and institutional barriers constraining to scale high impact CASI technologies.

Two stories related with field policy and institutional issues and barriers were documented from Madhubani district of Bihar, India and Rangpur, Bangladesh. A synthesised stories based on information received from ICAR (for Madhubani) and RDRS (for Rangpur) representing India and Bangladesh are presented in Appendix 2.

The major impediments for CASI promotion found to be the lack of access of machines and services that promotes CASI, weed management since CASI technologies are based on three main crop production principles (less soil disturbance, rational use of residues and sustainable crop rotation) and new seeds farmers will not realise the full benefit of CASI without new seeds of crop varieties that they prefer. However, there are opportunities in the study areas to promote CASI, if issues are addressed. The other institutional barrier that needs to be resolved for scaling CASI technologies are promotion of knowledge about benefits of CA technologies that could be achieved through training NARES personnel, agri-machinery agents/dealers, service providers and farmers. Beside addressing policy issues, more advocacy program from Government side is also needed to encourage/motivate private sector to come forward to invest with a service motive (earning while serving) on CASI technologies and marketing.

Vision of widespread scaling in the EGP potentially reaching a substantial proportion of EGP farmers

The SRFSI has made a tremendous progress since last three years in understanding farmers bio-physical and socio-economic circumstances in the EGPs, generating quality data, and syntheses reports on gender, socio-economic and CASI. Also strengthened business models for service provision and local seed value chain involving women and youth for generating employment and income. This was clearly highlighted during mid-term review meeting (MTR) in February 2017. As a result of collaborative efforts, we have been able to reach over 50,000 farm families (30% are women) with one or more of the CASI technologies and farmers are experiencing higher yield and economic benefits. Recommendation of MTR and the Project Steering Committee (PSC) also suggested focusing more on consolidation of results, priorities field activities and working where comparative advantage lies.

Based on partners feedback, lesson learned, and knowledge/experiences gained over the years, working nodes have been characterized for each SRFSI districts like A, B and C. In addition to MTR feedback, and PSC meeting guidance, we also considered available timeframe and resources while making decision that scaling efforts should be made in A and B category nodes, which are outlined in Appendix 3. Activities, as strategic demonstrations using various CASI technologies and opportunity trials, capacity building/trainings (ToTs, LSPs, Farmers, etc.), quality seed production and strengthen market linkages, gender mainstreaming, etc. will be priority activities for variation 3 that are clearly reflected in the proposal.

Identify M&E&L systems and implementation modalities for evaluating pilot scaling out of CASI to benefit 1.5 million households

Over three years of experiences and learnings suggest that a single-factor solution is not effective in addressing multi-facets problems of farmers associated with food, energy and water. The SRFSI - through its partnership and participatory approaches has been validating and promoting CASI technologies and practices that benefits poor and marginal farmers and are more resilience to adverse climate situation. Together with partners, the SRFSI has been able to identify technologies that are efficient in energy and water uses (SRFSI Annual Report, 2017). However, the benefit of such technologies is limited to targeted geographical locations. Therefore, it requires collective and concerted efforts based on a combination of public and private engagements to reach out millions of needy farmers with basket of CASI technological options. A vision for widespread scaling and pathways to impact 1.5 million households have been described in section 4 and 6 and Appendices 1 and 2, respectively.

Identified and mapped EGP farming systems and potential scaling areas by type of CASI practices, with spatial data, maps and report

The EGPs in South Asia is spread over 180 districts of three countries. Which include major part of Bangladesh, Terai of Nepal, and Bihar, Eastern UP, West Bengal and Assam of India. It is a house of 451 m people with a population density of slightly over 1000 per square Km. Majority of the rural population is small and marginal (70-90%), where approximately 44 million labor depending on agriculture. It covers approximately 30 m ha land with 173 percent cropping intensity, which is characterized by low crop productivity, exposed to climatic vulnerability such as frequent floods, storms, erratic rainfall, long spell of drought and high pressure of abiotic (salinity, acidity, soil erosion etc.) and biotic (weed, pest and diseases) stresses. The EGP is dominated by rice based farming systems covering maximum area under rice-rice (6.51 m ha) followed by rice-wheat (6.22 m ha), rice-maize (1.0 m ha) and rice - lentil (0.7 m ha) systems. The reasons for low productivity, apart from climate shocks are lack of new technological intervention coupled with poor quality inputs, increased land fragmentations with domination of small and marginal farm households, low risk bearing capacity, poor market and institutional infrastructure e.g. road connectivity. In addition, very high resource intensive cropping systems having poor mechanization services, high cost of irrigation, seasonal labor scarcity and poor capacity building infrastructure leads to high production costs.

It has been evidenced that among the EGP districts, there is huge variability in terms of social structure, farm typologies, farming and cropping systems, land topography, crop yields, infrastructure, market networks, local policies and governance. To characterize farming systems zones, the secondary data were extracted from different sources e.g. govt. statistics. The variables included for farming systems zones characterization are percentage farm household types, cropping intensity, cropping systems, crop yields, irrigation accessibility, available mechanization services, and livestock per household. Based on this information, the EGP farming systems have been broadly grouped into six different farming systems zones. A cluster analysis using R software was performed to group zones (Figure 1) and districts were mapped using QGIS software (Figure 2) and individual zones were further characterized for major features for technological and policy intervention, and estimation for a potential scaling area. Meaning that one set of technological validation/intervention approach and addressing policy issues designed for one specific zone or farming systems might not necessarily work for the others, which means different approach and strategy for technology targeting and addressing policy issues for a wider-scale dissemination of CASI technologies for each zones would be required to have a meaningful CASI intervention (Appendix 4).

Based on the evidences and experiences from SRFSI domains, this study attempted to identify potential area for scaling targeted CASI technologies, and technological and policy intervention for each farming systems zones in EGPs.

Zone 1: 37 districts from Nepal, Eastern UP, and Bihar (Jhapa, Morang, Sunsari, Saptari, Siraha, Dhanusha, Mohottari, Sarlahi, Rautahat, Bara, Parsa, Nawalparashi, Rupendehi, Bardiya, Chitwan, Azamgarh, Behraich, Ballia, Basti, Deoria, Fiazabad, Ghazipur, Gonda, Gorakhpur, Jaunpur, Kushinagara, Maharagunj, Mau, Pratapgarh, Sultanpur, St. Kabir Nagar, Vanarashi, Jehanabad, Lakhisarai, Paschim Champaran) are under this zone. Of the total cultivable area (5.38 m ha), Rice-Wheat system covers 54%, which is a dominant cropping system. The major characteristics of this zone are poor soil and land management, poor network of road, lack of availability of quality inputs and output markets, low intervention thereby adoption of modern technologies and practices and has 73% small and marginal farm households with fragmented land holdings and very poor coordination and linkages among institutions/ organizations. Though 84% area is irrigated, irrigation is costly due to diesel pumping. Preliminary analysis show, around 2.9 m ha of rice-wheat systems and 1.0 m ha lentil/pulses productivity could be enhanced by advanced planting through ZT technology, better bet agronomy and improved irrigation scheduling by supplementary irrigation in existing systems. At least 15% net sown area (0.8 m ha) can be brought under diversification and intensification with maize and short duration crops like pulses where assured irrigation is available. It has a great scope of crop intensification by converting summer fallow provided that alternate irrigation infrastructure is developed (e.g. electrification, solar energy) thereby improving systems productivity. Equally important is to consider and improve institutional and infrastructure arrangements, capacity building and agricultural knowledge access to farm communities especially young and women farmers.

Zone 2: 46 districts from Nepal, Eastern UP, Bangladesh and West Bengal (Kapilvastu, Dang, Bankee, Balrampur, Sravasti, Sidarthnagar, Comilla, Noakhali, Lakshimpur, Faridpur, Jamalpur, Mymensingh, Narsandhi, Netrokona, Rajbari, Sherpur, Tangail, Natore, Nawanganj, Noagoan, Pabna, Rajshai, Dinajpur, Gaibandha, Kurigram, Lalmonirhat, Nilphamari, Panchagar, Rangpur, Thakurgaon, Alipurdwar, Burdwan, Birbum, Cooch behar, Kolkata, Dinajpur (N), Dinajpur (s), Howrah, Malda, Medinipur (E), Medinipur (W), Araria, Saharsa, Samistipur, Supal, Kishangarh) are under this zone.

It has the highest cultivable area i.e. 8.67 m ha. Rice-rice (Boro rice) is a dominant cropping system covering 47% net sown area, followed by rice-wheat (16%) and new emerging rice-maize system (9%). Though cropping intensity is 191% only, 55% net cultivated area is under irrigation. The major characteristics of this zone are 90% farm households are small and marginal farmers. Late rice transplanting is general phenomenon because of reliance on monsoon rains. This zone is fairly mechanized with 2-wheel and 4-wheel tractors but has poor local infrastructure for other agricultural machinery services and poor value chain and marketing networks. Nearly 30-40% area is affected by frequent flash floods. This Zone has good presence of NGOs, public and private sectors.

Approximately 2.0 m ha area is under boro rice that could be brought under improved irrigation scheduling through alternate wetting and drying, mechanized rice transplanting and Direct Seeded Rice (DSR) and at least 1 m ha of area under Aman rice can be targeted for DSR.

To greater extent, policy on integrated biological stress management practices such as weed, diseases and insects and pests, and proper knowledge and information sharing can address the issue of biotic stresses. It has a potential to use existing network of local NGOs for scaling the CASI technologies.

Zone 3: 35 districts from Bangladesh, Assam and West Bengal (Chandpur, Brahmanbaria, Sunamgonj, Hobigonj, Dhaka, Gazipur, Gopalgunj, Kishoerganj, Madaripur, Munshiganj, Naryanganj, Sariatpur, Perojpur, Bagerhat, Khulna, Satkhira, Darrang, Dhurbi, Golapara, Golaghat, Hailkandi, Kamrup (rural), Kamrup (Metro), Karbi (analog), Karimgunj, Kokrajhar, Lakhimpur, Morigoan, Nogaon, Sonitpur, Udalgari, South 24 Parganas, North 24 Parganas, Bankura, Jalpaiguri, Calcutta) are under this zone. It has 4.8 m ha cultivable area. Like Zone 2, Rice-Boro rice is the dominant cropping system. The major characteristics of this zone are low lying catchment of Brahmaputra and Megna rivers in Bangladesh and Assam, which is severely affected by climatic variations, low mechanization due to poor connectivity and infrastructure, less scope for cropping intensification as excess moisture is major issue for non-rice crop planting during winter season and has poor irrigation facility due to deep floods and excess moisture. However, it has a good coverage of short duration oilseed crops. 80% of farming households are under small and marginal category and suffering from poor market infrastructures.

Fish and rice farming system, promotion of improved/hybrid high yielding varieties and deep water tolerant varieties, and suitable short duration oilseed and pulses are the potential interventions that could significantly improve food security and livelihoods of Zone 3 farmers.

The policy intervention could be on disaster and salinity managements in relation to agricultural production, especially in the southern Bangladesh.

Zone 4: This is the zone with highest cropping intensity i.e. 237% and highest yield of rice, wheat and maize. It includes 12 districts (Manikganj, Chaudanga, Jessore, Jhenaidah, Kushtia, Magura, Meherpur, Narail, Bogra, Joypurhat, Pabna, Sirajang) from Bangladesh and 3 districts (Hooghly, Murshidabad, Nadia) from West Bengal and has 2.29 m ha cultivable land.

64% of net sown area is dominated by rice-rice system followed by 11% under rice-wheat system. This zone is fairly well mechanized with developed markets and 69% area under irrigation but has arsenic problems. Of the total, 1.3 m ha of boro rice area could be brought under mechanized services like, mechanized transplanting, 0.3 m ha and 0.2 m ha area could be utilized for CASI technologies for wheat and maize, respectively.

Zone 5: It has 2.23 m ha cultivable land. Out of 17 districts under this zone, 12 districts are from Assam (Barpeta, Baksa, Bongigaon, Cachar, Chirang, Dhemaj, Dilbugarh, Dima Hassaon (N. C. hills), Jorhat, Nalbari, Sabsagar, Tinsukia) and 5 districts from Bangladesh (Barguna, Barisal, Bhola, Jhalakhati, Patuakhali). It covers coastal areas of Bangladesh and foot hills of Assam.

This is the zone with low cropping intensity i.e. 143%, low crop yields, low mechanization and poor market networks. Kharif rice and low input pulses and oilseeds are predominantly grown. This zone is highly vulnerable to climatic variations and follows rainfed agriculture. Only 10% cultivated area is under irrigation. However, it has good balance of small and medium farm households. 14% cultivable land is fallow and of which 0.31 m ha could be converted to crop land with mechanization and introduction of pulses and oilseeds and 0.7 m ha of rice-fallow systems could be intensified with Rabi crops like, maize and wheat. It has good potential to use surface water irrigation.

The policy to efficiently use surface water for irrigation, improve market infrastructure and flood resistance crop can increase the cropping intensity.

Zone 6: 28 districts of Bihar (Arwal, Arungabad, Banka, Begusarai, Bhagalpur, Bhojpur, Buxar, Darbanga, Gaya, Gopalgunj, Kaimur (Bhabua), Katihar, Khagara, Madhepura, Madhubani, Munger, Muzaffarpur, Nalanda, Nawada, Patna, Purbi Champaran, Purnia, Rohtas, Saran, Sheikhpur, Siwan, Vaishali, Jumai), and 2 districts of Eastern UP (Mirzapur, Chandauli) fall in this zone. It has 5.5 m ha cultivable land. Rice-wheat is the major cropping system that cover 41% of net sown area but has low wheat productivity due to late sowing, poor mechanization and land fragmentation. Rice-maize is emerging system. 56% area has irrigation facility, but access is uncertain and costly. Majority of farm households are poor and mostly practice share cropping and farming decision is taken by land owner. Due to this there is a poor land management especially soil acidity. It has complex social structure and poor coordination among the institutions and government schemes. This zone is well mechanized for tillage which is very resource intensive. However, in other agricultural operations use of machines are low.

For scaling, 1.9 m ha area under rice-wheat can be improved by advance planting through CASI technologies, 1.0 m ha fallow land and 0.3 m ha maize area can be brought under cultivation through improved irrigation systems and CASI technologies. 1.1 m ha land can be improved by lime application which will improve the land productivity. The yield of oilseed and pulses covering approximate 0.9 m ha area can be enhanced by better agronomy and CASI.

In this zone due to poor access to market, farmers do not get right price and farmers are unable to sell their produce even at minimum support price. Therefore, policy to support market network, improved institutional arrangement for better coordination and implementation, soil fertility and nutrient management can enhance productivity of this zone. Better drainage system should be developed to reduce flood risk in the region.


In all the zone capacity and knowledge building of farm communities especially young women farmers and youth, and improved institutional arrangements is essential for scaling CASI technologies.

Page iv

Figure1. Farming systems zones map

Figure 2 Cluster analysis for identifying farming systems zones

Elaborated policy and institutional barriers to improve ground water management, strengthen mechanisation services, strengthen IPs, expand entrepreneurship by farmers and micro-entrepreneurs, and related evidence base

This would basically come from a policy project led by University of South Australia (USA) and co-led by IFPRI. It would complement SRFSI variation 3 by removing barriers constraining widespread scaling of CASI technologies and approaches.

Efforts were made to capture a few major barriers of CASI technology dissemination and adoption from Bihar, India, Nepal and Bangladesh, which are briefly mentioned below and elaborative form of the existing policies are included in Appendices 5.1, 5.2 and 5.3, respectively.

Major policy barriers for out-scaling of CASI technologies:

Bihar, India

1. Land fragmentation and land tenure system

2. Lack of irrigation facility

3. Lack of appropriate infrastructure like unreliable electricity supply, market, trained government official on CSAI, unavailability of quality inputs with affordable price, and poor information network and extension services.

Nepal

1. Fragmented and small land holding

2. Lack of irrigation facility and market connectivity and infrastructure

3. Unavailability of quality seeds and inputs (fertilizers, herbicides, etc.)

4. Inadequate policy focus on agricultural mechanization

5. Unavailability of modern agriculture implements and machinery custom hire centre and lack of enabling policy to attract local service provider as entrepreneurs.

6. Lack of access to institutional loan for custom hire centre

7. High import duty on machinery parts and raw materials

Bangladesh

1. Lack of proper dissemination of information

2. Inadequate extension personnel

3. Lack of machinery and repairing facility

4. Unavailability of quality seeds and herbicides

5. Lack of credit at reasonable rate

6. Poor market infrastructure

Prepare consolidated proposal for SRFSI II in consultation with key stakeholders with integration and functional linkages to the USA/IFPRI/CIMMYT policy proposal

The SRFSI variation 3 as part of Scaling variation as part of SDIP I has been submitted to ACIAR/DFAT for approval, which is an expansion of ongoing SRFSI objective 4 with emphasis on capacity buildings. Policy project to complement the SRFSI variation 3, is being developed under SDIP II by the University of South Australia (USA) in collaboration with CIMMYT and IFPRI. The policy proposal is expected to be in place by January 2018. Both SRFSI variation 3 and Policy project will complement each other and will have strong synergy effect to address issues around food, energy and water nexus. Therefore, there will be a close working collaboration between them.

Conclusions and recommendationsConclusions

The SRFSI has made a tremendous progress within a short span of time in understanding farmers bio-physical and socio-economic circumstances in the EGPs, generating quality data, syntheses report on gender, socio-economic, CASI and so forth. This was clearly reflected during mid-term review meeting (MTR). As a result of a collaborative venture, we have been able to reach over 50,000 farm families (30% are women) with one or more of the CASI technologies, by adopting these farmers are experiencing higher yield and economic benefits.

Activities, as a strategic demonstration system and opportunity trials, quality seed production and marketing, capacity building/trainings (ToTs, LSPs, Farmers, etc.), gender mainstreaming, etc. will be priority activities for variation 3. Based on partners feedback and knowledge/experiences gathered over the years, working nodes have been characterized for each district like A, B and C. Considering the feedback of partners and MTR meeting and resources, scaling efforts will be focused on A and B nodes where competitive advantage lies. To identify potential area for scaling CASI technologies, and technological and policy intervention in EGP, six farming system zones (FSZs) were identified. For scaling of targeted CASI in each FSZs, capacity and knowledge building of farm communities especially young women farmers and youth, and iimproved institutional arrangements are essential.

Across EGP, quality inputs at right time and enough quantity (seeds, fertilizers, herbicides, etc.), limited access to institutional credit, small and fragmented land holding, non-availability of CASI technology service providers, poor network of manufacturer and spare parts and repair centre of CASI implements, lack of information and training to service providers, challenge in maintaining crop residue due to its alternative use as livestock feed and firewood, unfair price of product, insufficient investment in research, poorly developed market and high cost of irrigation are the major barriers for scaling high impact CASI technologies across EGPs. Policies such as subsidy, access to inputs, attracting private sectors, etc. are different for different countries. Bangladesh for example, has come up with different policies for promoting agriculture sector and they are favourable for promotion of CASI technologies as is also focussing on crop rotation, legume integration, better quality seeds, nutrient management, integrated pest management etc., but implementation as well as awareness are serious problems. For instance, the rate of subsidy on agri. Machineries is 30% to promote rural mechanization but farmers are not aware about it and there is no effective mechanism to create awareness, hence farmers are deprived from the benefit. Unlike Bangladesh, Nepal and India has restrictive agriculture machinery import policy from China due to which cheap and small farm machinery are not available in the market. Compare to India and Bangladesh, agricultural mechanization is very slow in Nepal because, mechanization was not in the priority list in five-year Agricultural plan. Nepal got its 1st rural and agricultural mechanization policy only on 2015. India spends lots on agricultural research and has progressive policies that favours spread and manufacturing of CASI technologies similar policies can be implemented in Nepal and Bangladesh to attract manufacturer and service provider in the business.

In Bangladesh and Nepal policy focuses mainly on rice. India is slowly moving its focus from rice, wheat to maize and pulses. Though agricultural policy in all three countries are slowly shifting focus from rice to other crops, resources and capacity still needs to be developed to impart knowledge and make input available to farmers.

Technologies validated and identified suitable for certain biophysical and socio-economic environment will not perform equally everywhere in the EGP. Therefore, farming system zones based on bio-physical environment have been defined for technology targeting. In practical sense, it will not be possible for project staff to shake the hands of 1.5 million households individually given the available resources and timeframe. Therefore, relying on synergistic effects of the Variation 3 along with the impacts and benefits of the policy project (led by USA with IFPRI and CIMMYT collaboration) will facilitate scaling process. The evidence based pathways will be adopted Appendix 1) focussing more on capacity building of NARES for convergence with Govt. programs/schemes that would lead to 1.5 million farming households adopting at least one or more highly effective CASI technologies that improves farmer livelihoods, reduces poverty and is more sustainable than current practices. The target group for this livelihoods improvement is smallholders, including youth and women. Not only that the expertise developed under capacity building objective under the existing SRFSI Objective 4 will remain in the country, which will - to some extent guarantee the sustainability.

Recommendations

Policies to develop legal framework for leasing land can increase investment in improving the quality of soil, adoption of CASI technologies and enhanced productivity. Provision for providing institutional agricultural credit with low interest and no mortgage will address the liquidity crisis of farmers, which can encourage adoption of CASI technologies as well as it will enable farmers to buy inputs on time.

CASI technologies/practices are knowledge intensive hence capacity building of farmers including youth and women to come up as service provider, increase knowledge on better bet agronomic practices could scale adoption of CASI technologies and practices as out migration of men is leading to feminization of agriculture in EGP. In addition, the use of ICT services to provide information on CASI practices and other agricultural related information can help farmer to take action on time.

In all three countries government relies much on subsidies and less on incentives to rely on policy goals. Nevertheless, most of the subsidies are distortionary and poorly targeted. Rationalizing subsidies in food, energy, water and mechanized equipment sector is essential to promote sustainable intensification.

EGP depends heavily on diesel for irrigation resulting to high irrigation cost due to poor irrigation infrastructure. Therefore, focus should be on developing the surface and ground water irrigation infrastructure. Recently, all three countries are focussing on renewable energy source such as solar and electricity for irrigation but the policy to promote solar power in agriculture needs to shift its focus from high capital subsidies to better access to credit and innovative financing mechanism for cost sharing between farmers and companies as even after subsidy it is difficult for farmers to arrange rest of the amount required to install solar pump.

Both input and output market in EGP is distorted, hence initiative like JEEViKA and DeHaat in Purnea, Bihar are required to address inefficient value chains and enhance small and marginal farmers bargaining power. Satmile and Sabuji farmers club model for youth and women entrepreneurship for custom hire services and mat rice seedlings growing, Bidyanandapur and Kalinagar farmers club for seed production models should be replicated in other regions.

In the transition phase from conventional/traditional to CASI, misconceptions and uncertainties regarding the performance of CASI technologies needs to be addressed. For this farmer participatory trails and demonstration plots could play a vital role in clearing the misconception about the technology thereby changing mind-set. The SRFSI has been playing a role as a catalyst and lobbying for ensuring minimum returns through risk-hedging, which is expected to speed up adoption.

Convergence into different government programs such as BGERI, NFSM, ATMA in India, Small Irrigation Program, PMAMP etc. in Nepal can scale up CASI practices. It is taking place in West Bengal and to some extent in Bangladesh but in Nepal Terai and Bihar this link seems to be missing. Hence, SRFSI needs to focus on how to create linkage for out scaling of CASI technologies in Bihar and Nepal.

Use and strengthening of existing platforms for formation of innovation platform, can fasten scaling of CASI technologies and solving farmers agriculture related problems and use resources in other capacity development activities.

For strengthening scaling out CASI technologies for sustainable and inclusive livelihoods, SRFSI should advocate and implement:

Training of Trainers (ToT) on CASI, monitoring and evaluation.

Rapid ICT- based communication between IPs and extension and development agencies for agricultural related information like pest and disease outbreaks via photographs

Establish CASI demonstration plots in a strategic location for a demonstration effect

Organise training locally, arrange field days in villages (rather research stations),

Strengthen custom hiring service as one-stop-advise & service-shops

Continue developing linkages among and between machines dealers, resource and service centres, credit providers and communities

Look for better synergy and convergence opportunities

ReferencesReferences cited in report (not appropriately listed also not in proper order order)

Adhikary, S. K. (2003). Nepal Country Report. In Country Paper Technical Advisory Committee ( Tac ) And Governing Board Meeting Of Asia And The Pacific Centre For Agricultural (Pp. 132). Country Paper Technical Advisory Committee ( Tac ) And Governing Board Meeting Of Asia And The Pacific Centre For Agricultural (APCAEM), Beijing, China

Agriculture Credit Subsidy Guidelines 2014, Ministry of Agriculture, Nepal Policy Division, 2013.

Agriculture Census, 2011

Annual Report, 2017: SRFSI

Aryal, J. P., Bhatia, M., Jat, M., & Sidhu, H. (2015). Impacts of Laser Land Leveling in Rice-Wheat System of the North-western Indo-Gangetic Plains of India. Food Security, 114. Bangladesh Agriculture Year Book 2015

Erenstein, O., & Farooq, U. (2009a). A Survey of factors Associated with the adoption of Zero Tillage Wheat in the Irrigated Plains of South Asia. Experimental Agriculture, 45(2), 133147.

Erenstein, O., & Farooq, U. (2009b). Factors affecting the adoption of zero tillage wheat in the rice-wheat systems of India and Pakistan. Outlook on Agriculture, 38(4), 367373. http://doi.org/10.5367/000000009790422124

Erenstein, O., Malik, R. K., & Singh, S. (2007). Adoption and Impacts of Zero-Tillage in the Rice-Wheat Zone of Irrigated Haryana , India. New-Delhi.

Feder, G., & OMara, G. T. (1981). Farm size and the diffusion of green revolution technology. Economic Development and Cultural Change, 30(1), 5976.

Giller, K. E., Witter, M., Corbeels, M., & Tittonell, P. (2009). Conservation agriculture and smallholder farming in Africa: The heretics view. Field Crops Research, 114, 2334.

Gisselquist, D., Nash, J., & Pray, C. (2002). Deregulating the Transfer of Agricultural Technology: Lessons from Bangladesh , 17 (2), 237265.

htmlhttp://www.fao.org/fileadmin/templates/rap/files/meetings/2016/160801_BGD-SurveyCalendar_Expectations_from_Ag_Census_by_DAE.pdf

IFPRI. (2017). Machine Reforms For Sustainable Intensification of Agriculture in South Asia. In Machine Reforms For Sustainable Intensification of Agriculture in South Asia (pp. 14). New Delhi: International Foof Policy Research Institute (IFPRI).

Indian Council of Agricultural Research (ICAR) Research complex for Eastern Region. (2016). Production and Technological Gaps in Middle Indo-Gangetic Plains ICAR Research Complex for Eastern Region. The Director, ICAR-Research Complex for Eastern Region, Patna, Bihar, India.

Jehangir, W. A., Masih, I., Ahmed, S., Gill, M. A., Ahmad, M., Mann, R. A., Turral, H. (2007). Sustaining Crop Water Productivity in Rice-Wheat Systems of South Asia: A Case Study from the (No. IWMI Working Paper 115). Colombo, Sri Lanka.

Joshi, K. D., Conroy, C., & Witcombe, J. R. (2012). Agriculture, seed, and innovation in Nepal: Industry and policy issues for the future. International Food Policy Research Institute.

Joshi, P. ., Khan, T., & Kishore, A. (2017). Policies for Sustainable Intensification of Agriculture in Eastern Gangetic Plains (EGP). Submitted to Australian Centre for International Agricultural Research (ACIAR), International Food Policy Research Institue (IFPRI), New Delhi.

K.G, S. (1998). Conserving natural resources and enhancing food security by adopting no-tillage- An assessmnet of the potential for soil-conserving production systems in various agro-ecological zones of Africa. Eschborn: TOEB/GTZ.

Kienzle, J., Ashburner, J. E., & Sims, B. G. (2013). Mechanization for Rural Development: A review of patterns and progress. Integrated Crop Management Vol. 20-2013 (Vol. 20).

Marongwe, L. S., Nyagumbo, I., Kwazira, K., Kassam, A., & Friedrich, T. (2012). Conservation Agriculture and Sustainable Crop Intensification: A Zimbabwe Case Study. Integrated Crop Management (Vol. 17). Plant Production and Protection Division, Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, Rome: FAO.

Ministry of Agriculture Development Department, Nepal, Collection of Agriculture Related Policies, 1-336

Agricultural policy 2004

Irrigation policy 2060

Fertilizer Policy

National Seed Policy 1999

Ministry of Population and Environment, 2016. Renewable Energy Subsidy Policy. Government of Nepal.

Mondal, M. H. (2010). Crop Agriculture of Bangladesh: Challenges and Opportunities. Bangladesh Journal of Agricultural Research, 35(2), 235245. http://doi.org/10.3329/bjar.v35i2.5886

Mottaleb, K. A., Krupnik, T. J., & Erenstein, O. (2016). Factors associated with small-scale agricultural machinery adoption in Bangladesh: Census findings. Journal of Rural Studies, 46, 155168. http://doi.org/http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jrurstud.2016.06.012

National Agricultural Policy 2010 (Draft) Ministry of Agriculture, Government of the Peoples Republic of Bangladesh

National Agricultural Policy 2013 Ministry of Agriculture, Government of the Peoples Republic of Bangladesh

National Agricultural Extension Policy 2012 (Draft) Ministry of Agriculture, Government of the Peoples Republic of Bangladesh

Pingali, P. (2007). Chapter 54 Agricultural Mechanization: Adoption Patterns and Economic Impact. Handbook of Agricultural Economics, 3(August), 27792805. http://doi.org/10.1016/S1574-0072(06)03054-4

Place, F., & Dewees, P. (1999). Policies and incentives for the adoption of improved fallows. Agroforestry Systems, 47, 323343.

Seventh Five Year Plan FY2016-2020 (7FYP) Ministry of Agriculture (Agriculture Sub-sector: crops and horticulture), Government of the Peoples Republic of Bangladesh

Tahir, M. A., & Younas, M. (2004). Feasibility of dry sowing technology of wheat in cotton growing districts and impact evaluation of zero tillage technology in rice growing districts. Publication No. 364. Lahore: Punjab Economic Research Institute (PERI), 364.

The Kathmandu Post. (2016, November 14). Government Implements Farm Modernization Project. The Kathmandu Post. Kathmandu, Nepal. Retrieved from http://kathmandupost.ekantipur.com/news/2016-11-14/govt-implements-farm-modernisation-project.

List of publications produced by project

Enter text

AppendixesAppendix 1: Pathways to Impact for SRFSI

To improve farmer livelihoods and produce resilient and adaptable farming households and communities on a large scale requires more than the traditional, linear and uni-directional transfer of information and new technologies by government extension services. Consequently, this scaling proposal is based on the business model training and development of innovation systems as multi-stakeholder vehicles with multi-directional information exchange to stimulate technological and institutional change leading to livelihood improvements for vulnerable farming households. This targeted business skills training of local entrepreneurs, input suppliers and service providers to enhance an enabling environment to create demand for inputs and services. This will then be transferred to neighbouring communities and Districts (Figure 3) and are outlined in Table 1.

Figure 3. Plan for enabling scaling out to occur through establishing activities with groups of farmers, input dealers and service providers, then replicating this in new areas (Nodes or Districts).

Table 1. Pathways to Impact for SRFSI.

Pathways

Activities/Means

Results in

Promoting partnership (PPP) and participatory approaches

Enhance togetherness, mutual trust, listening, respecting each others efforts/knowledge, shared responsibilities, promoting joint decision making process & eventually sharing the credit (either success or failure).

Science-driven & impacts-oriented initiative with a diverse set of partners from public & private sector is key to success.

Strengthen existing & develop new partnership representing research, development & educational sectors to exploit synergies from a unique strength of each partner.

Create enabling environment to influence institutional level decision making to help in integration of activities into their regular program.

Private sector engagement: Improved markets (inputs/outputs) & services for smallholder producers & micro & small enterprises is key value chains envisioned in the SRFSI project.

Identify few key points where private sector engagement can catalyze wider investments: (a) improving technologies, business competencies & services in key production inputs; (b) strengthening technical & financial services for smallholder producers in different agricultural systems taking into account for diversification, & the highly dynamic market opportunities; & (c) giving farmers access to market means linking smallholder producers to inputs market as well as higher value chain markets through improved product development, organizational capacities & new partnerships with private sector investors.

Engaging private sectors who have national & regional level presence to stimulate their investments in planning process.

Organise interface meeting between public & private sectors.

Partners take the ownership of initiatives and technology/ies.

Integration of SRFSI promoted activities in NARES regular program that would result in reaching thousands of farmers with sustainable more productive and profitable technology/ies.

Private sector would be attracted to invest more on services and delivery

Improved policy and institutional support

Facilitate in removing policy bottlenecks that are constraining the adoption of farmers preferred technology/ies by lobbying with GOs & I/NGOs who are experiencing such bottlenecks.

Policy briefs prepared would be helpful to convince research & development leaders including policy makers.

Organize meeting with research & development leaders including policy makers to make them aware about development bottleneck.

Lobbying with IFPRI, GOs & I/NGOs to influence on policy decisions related with agricultural inputs & machineries.

Enabling environment would be created that permits farmers to access essential inputs and services locally possibly with affordable prices.

Access to new technologies

Stakeholders (farmers, private sectors, GO/NGOs are offered technological options (CA-based practices like ZT/ST multi-crop planters, laser land leveller, new seeds, site specific nutrient management, efficient irrigation, DSR, mechanization in rice etc.) to choose which is/are more suited to their bio-physical & socio-economic circumstances & environments.

Expand validation & demonstrations of matured technologies that are sustainably profitable (e.g. CA-based crop management like ZT/Strip till, maize + vegetables intercropping, diversification & intensification with inclusion of short duration new crops, improved varieties/hybrids, laser land leveler, new seeds of adapted varieties, etc.) through existing & new partners (GOs/NGOs) in strategic locations in new areas while continue focusing with the existing locations & partners.

Farmers would be able to select and adopt the best technology/ies from a basket of choices.

Private sector would be attracted to expand their business

Capacity building

Training (academic like PhD/MSc through linkages), & professional trainings for scientists /development workers, training to trainers, training to service providers, agro-inputs dealers & field level training to farmers).

Equipment & infrastructure supports, etc. to build capacity of partners for smooth implementation of field activities.

NARES partners learn a robust on-farm participatory research & development approaches, which will improve their ability to analyse qualitative (e.g. farmer perceptions) & quantitative data/information & recommend technologies for dissemination.

Targeted approach to offer more benefit to the weaker section/s of the community like, women & poor. Agri. machineries that reduces drudgery (particularly for women) like reapers, mechanical rice trans-planters, etc. & herbicides.

Women focused training events would be organised so that the productivity of their efforts is increased. Household seed security, machine operators training to enhance their operation & entrepreneurial skills are few examples.

Reduce knowledge gaps, internalise and take ownership of the activities by partners that would be eventually reflected into their regular program, which is key to have a sustained change/impact.

Women will be encouraged to come forward as service provider

Capacity will remain there even after project is over

Change in attitude and mind-set

Achieved through multi-pronged approach: by organising participatory & evidence based demonstrations, mentoring research & development leaders with project success stories about best-bet practices & services; conducting field days, farm walks, FGDs, Exchange visits because seeing is believing.

The data generated from long-term conservation agriculture (CA) based system trials & demonstrations established in different strategic locations.

Make them realize that the system thinking demands time & we must try for the system productivity enhancement rather than focusing only on component yield, which undoubtedly demands a TEAM spirit/working culture to promote sustainable & resilient system.

Seeing is believing

Produce a convincing evidence that CA works well under the circumstances they are working in

Create awareness and demand of new high yielding varieties, technologies and mechanization

Innovation Platform (IP)

Organize multi-stakeholders consultations & coordination by involving partners not only SRFSI, but also from outside.

Use lead farmers as resources person to communicate technological information to other farmers in same & other new locations, because information communicated by farmers have greater impact than those coming from researchers or extension agents.

Facilitate public & private sectors partners & farmer-to-farmer knowledge sharing using IPs.

Engage a wide range of partners in IPs, like private-sector company representatives involved in the supply & marketing of agri inputs & services, equipment manufacturers/dealers, credit providers, public-sector research & extension agencies, universities, cooperatives, NGOs, & farmer groups that may be locally important to overcome bottlenecks in the principal local agricultural value chains.

Use UBKV model of serving farmers through local club/s presented (Appendix 1, Fig 2) to replicate to other similar locations.

Positive responses about the approach are coming in

NARES would adopt this approach to serve the unserved.

Provide a common platform for sharing their knowledge, experiences and overcome to small key issues and also explore for linkages with inputs and outputs markets

Linkage development with other ACIAR funded and CIMMYT regional projects

Organize knowledge sharing events like joint & exchange visits.

Participate in the review & planning meetings organised for different projects.

Learnings from SRFSI innovation platforms would be taken to CSISA locations

Training modules for CA & associated technologies targeted to public/private sectors (training modules for service providers & agro-dealers) developed by CSISA & other projects would be shared with SRFSI partners for use to train service providers, farmers, etc.

Consortium Supported Research Programs (CRPs) like CCAFS, etc. & national Seed Systems will give more opportunity to expand areas under each SRFSI supported technology

SRFSI proactively collaborate with Sustainable Development Investment Portfolio (SDIP) projects supported under food, water & energy under DFAT in the region.

Rationalization of resources

Results in better synergy

Cover more beneficiaries

Publication and communication

Organize training events, participate & present outcomes in various workshops, seminars, fairs, linkage events, which will receive news coverage in various local newspapers, local television, radio, etc. in both English & local languages.

Simple recommendations, bulletins, success stories, etc. would be produced & distributed to various formal & informal events.

Seek opportunities to work closely with partners (GOs/NGOs including private sectors) for farmer knowledge & information sharing using modern Information & Communication Technologies (ICTs), like mobile based information dissemination (e.g. SMSs).

Attainable yield prediction/estimation model & web based nutrient management recommendations for different ecologies for use by farmers/stakeholders.

Increased visibility

Increased the adoption of more profitable technology/ies

Note: The SRFSI is clear that there should be a well-defined strategy to enhance impacts. Impact doesnt occur only by addressing one pathway or only through the dissemination of good technologies; achieving impact along these pathways which are summarised above requires a careful networking and investment of resources in a range of activities designed to translate outputs to outcome and outcomes to impact. Therefore, these pathways are very much interlinked with each other, hence inseparable. During the course of implementation, we will access what worked well and what didnt and will go on correcting/modifying pathways as we move on based on those learnings.

The variation 3 explicitly adopts strategies to capacity building of collaborative partnerships between private-sector companies involved in the supply and marketing of agricultural inputs and services, processing facilities, equipment manufacturers, credit providers, public-sector research and extension agencies, universities, cooperatives, water management associations, NGOs, and farmer groups, as well as others that may be locally important to overcome constraints in agricultural value chains. Strategic partnerships anchored in innovation systems, multi-stakeholder forums, targeted business skills training and support of input dealers and service providers, can achieve collective impacts that substantially exceed the impacts of the partners operating alone.

The scaling effort intends to build innovation institutions capable of persisting without external funding and hand-holding on the basis that developing trust and harnessing comparative advantages dramatically mitigate the transaction costs that limit cooperation. This investment in building relationships between organisations, scales and sectors should yield long-lasting returns.

This choice of impact pathway rests, of course, on assumptions or pre-requisites that include:

the appropriate type and range of partners must participate in the innovation systems - the identification of appropriate partners is in part a research question, and in part an engagement process;

the partners must be brought together, and the necessary trust building and co-learning actively facilitated by skilled staff;

the process of forming the innovation systems must clearly identify the needs, interests and concerns of each of the partners, and ensure that appropriate incentives for participation are identified, and eventually provided, for each partner;

close vertical linkages should be formed between innovation systems at the different scales; as well as horizontal linkages between innovation systems at the same scale;

successful innovation systems (multi-stakeholder forums) will build social capital among their members;

involvement of appropriate entrepreneurs and leading farmers on business skills training, and their willingness to assist in training of others to build capacity across the community and in neighbouring communities.

The pathway to reach 1.5 million households by 2021 is outlined in Figure 4. This approach relies on reaching many famers early in the project through a range of pathways/strategies and activities. Through business development training, supporting innovation systems and other support (field demonstrations, field days/fairs and cross visits), and utilising a ToT approach, this will lead to multiplicative benefits to catalyse communities to adopt CASI technologies.

Figure 4. Model for scaling out to reach 1.5 million households by 2021 (derived from Roy Murray-Prior adoption curve, presented at SRFSI Annual Meeting, Darjeeling, September 2016).

Appendix 2. Case stories for typical and institutional (ground level) barriers constraining to scale high impact CASI Technologies

a. Madhubani, Bihar

Madhubani district consists of 21 Development Blocks with total of 1110 number of villages, which fairly represents the centre of the territory once known as Mithila, and has maintained a distinct individuality of its own. Madhubani ranks 4th in terms of population and 5th in terms of area in the state of Bihar. In terms of population per sq.km. Madhubani is the12th densely populated district in the state with 1,282 persons per sq.km as against the states 1,106. It consists of a rich alluvial plain intersected by numerous rivers and streams issuing from the Nepal hills and running almost parallel to each other from north to south. Rice is the major Kharif crop which occupies nearly 78 % of Kharif area. Wheat, mustard and lentil are major Rabi crops. All the selected nodes are severely to moderately affected by the disease, insect-pest or weeds and their occurrence are frequent in nature. Among the social and technical factors, non-availability of manpower (especially, during peak period demand) and machinery are the most limiting factors for achieving desired level of yield.

Barrier

Drought during different stages of crop growth, flood, and heat stress are thought to be moderately affecting the farming practices which are more or less recurrent in Madhubani. Farmers are sometimes affected by erratic weather condition, which is mild to moderate in nature. Agriculture in the district is affected by drought as well as seasonal flooding. Water management is a key issue for agricultural development in the district. Ground water utilization is less than 30%. Mostly diesel operated pumps are used for lifting water, hence irrigation is costly. In Mauahi and Khairi nodes, tenant and part tenants mostly hire pumps (custom hiring) for pumping out water. The hiring cost of pumping varies from INR100/ to 120/hr. Sometimes, they even dont apply water during critical crop growth stages reason being either not available or costly, resulting lower yield.

No. of tractors and power tillers are increasing in the district over the years (data not shown). During the year 2015-16, 31 zero till drills were sold in the district, however none of the farmers owns any CA based machine (Laser Land Leveler, Bed planter, Seed cumferti. drills, etc) in any of the selected SRFSI nodes ( Khairi, Nanore, Mauahi, Korahia and Sukhet) of Madhubani district. Scattered and small plots also restrict adoption of such machine in this area. Lack of machinery banks or custom hiring centers is another constraint to out-scale CASI technologies. There is no viable successful business model for custom hiring centers in the district.

Presently, establishment of Innovation Platform (IP) is hypothetical unless evidence based institutionalized platform is established. There is already an institutionalized agency, called Agricultural Technology Management Agency (ATMA) for dealing diverse problems of agricultural development. It is a society of key stakeholders responsible for technology dissemination at district level. Due to limited involvement of different stakeholders it (ATMA) plays limited role towards achieving a desired goal.

Professional training for entrepreneurs is lacking in the district. There is limited institutional and financial support for establishment of small and medium enterprises (SMEs). Except Makhana crop (Euryale ferox) and to some extent - fishes, there is no marketable and commercial agricultural produce for processing.

b. Ranpur, Bangladesh

In Bangladesh, Boro cultivation covers large area in Rangpur, which requires frequent pumped irrigations (even more than 30 pumping per boro cycle), as a result ground water depletion has become the major concern for winter crops production in this region. The need for water use efficiency (WUE) forms a strong rationale for CA adoption in this area. The Barind Multipurpose Development Authority (BMDA), is encouraging WUE via metering, promoting less water intensive crop and associated technologies like, CASI on wheat, maize, legumes, etc. However, these motivations have not yet been harnessed via strong linkages among agricultural agencies and pundits of CASI. BARI, DAE and RDRS in Bangladesh are working together very recently on the promotion of CASI, however, the out-scaling is not as per expectation. There are many organizations involved in agricultural technology dissemination and promoting agriculture, only few of them are engaged in promoting CASI technologies.

The major constraints for adoption of CA are weed control and inferior quality of machines. Different organizations are implementing CASI technologies indecently. Many farmer organizations exist under DAE and RDRS but activities are mostly depended on external funding. The government organizations mostly depend on research activities but DAE is involved slightly in out scaling activities. There is no direct communication and coordination system that exists between farmer and private sectors. CASI technology depends on specialized farm machineries but Bangladesh has only two major agricultural machinery firms that have expertise in manufacturing CA machinery.

The information have been collected using FGDs and KII with Deputy Director of DAE, Upazilla Agricultural Officer, Sub- Assistant Agriculture Officer, Scientist of BARI and WRC, NGO representative, private sectors and we also reviewed some reports and government policy.

Major constraints

1. Difficult to control weed

2. Inferior quality of machinery

3. Lack of communication and coordination between farmer and private sectors

4. Limited number of CASI machinery manufacturer

5. Lack of knowledge on benefits of CA among farmers

6. Inadequate farm household to Sub-Assistant Agricultural Officer (SSAO)

7. Lack of promotion of CA in policy level

1. Difficult to control weed

Weed control is perceived as difficult under CASI. Until farmers see weed controlled under CASI trials, out scaling of CASI would be difficult.

2. Inferior quality of machinery

The CA machinery available in Bangladesh is of inferior quality and low capacity: 2 to 2.5 acre/day. There is frequent breakdown of machinery and parts are not easily available as there are only two CA machinery manufacturers in Bangladesh who manufacture on demand.

3. Lack of communication and coordination between farmer and private sectors

There are different public, civic, and private players working in Bangladesh for reducing poverty via increasing productivity of agriculture but there is not much coordination among them and only few are working on CASI technologies. Private sectors (herbicide and pesticide) have either no or very limited coordination among the CA farmers and other implementing organizations. Farmers are not aware about the suitable herbicide and pesticide. Farmers mostly depend on dealer and retailer for the information of their farming as a result farmers are deprived from the expected result. In case of seed, it is fully controlled by a strong syndicate where the marginal farmer has to pay higher price for purchasing the quality seed.

4. Limited number of CASI machinery manufacturer

There are only two CA machinery manufacturers in Bangladesh at Dinajpur district who manufacture on demand. As they manufacture manually the quality is not good and there is frequent break down of machinery and parts are also not easily available. And for repair owner has to travel to the manufacturer. Moreover, less coordination exists among onfarm research, research organizations and private sectors (machine importer and manufacturers).

5. Lack of knowledge on benefits of CA among farmers

Farmers in Rangpur are not much aware of CASI technologies and even the SRFSI farmers have not learnt to manage the farm under CASI solely on their own. CASI adoption is knowledge intensive; hence farmers still lack the confidence to transfer the knowledge to others on benefits of CASI.

6. Inadequate farm household to Sub-Assistant Agricultural Officer (SSAO)

The Department of Agricultural Extension (DAE) is a central actor but has not formed a view on CA and training in the use of new agri-machinery is very limited. DAE has formed more than 500 Integrated Crop Management (ICM) farmer clubs that is managed by the Sub-Assistant Agricultural Officer (SSAO) but gets dissolved after the program. The farming household allocation for each SSAO is 1: 2,000- 2,500, which is high. Farmers get visit from SSAO hardly once a month.

7. Lack of promotion of CA in policy level

The National Agricultural Policy (MOA 1999) suggests that the use of machinery in tilling and seeding needs to be extended further, so that efficiency of production can be achieved with increased production and reduced cost. However, activities and policies are not focusing in promotion of CA. Minimum tillage establishment for Aman rice is a particular challenge for CA in Bangladesh but promising technologies (such as direct seeding, aerobic rice, raised beds, un-puddled transplanting) have been developed elsewhere and are under evaluation in Bangladesh (Haque et al. 2010)

Appendix 3: Vision of widespread scaling in the EGP potentially reaching a substantial proportion of EGP farmers

Background

West Bengal

As an impact of CASI in both Malda and Coochbehar district of West Bengal, strong network for custom hiring centre for CASI machinery (ZT machinery/ rice transplanter) have been established. They are using different business models for providing services. Some of them are as follows:

Satmile Saitash club in Coochbehar is covering 3 SRFSI nodes: Falimari, Ghughumari and Patchhara. After being associated with SRFSI, it started providing custom hiring services for CASI technologies and approaches. From 2015, it provided a single window services and since then expanding their services by creating small clubs in different other villages. Apart from providing machinery services for ZT services, it also provides post-harvest processing of crops. Additionally, it is also involved in seed system and is a dealer for machineries (threshers, ZT multi-crop planters, rice transplanters, mini combine and reapers etc.). This club has been promoted as Producer Organization Promoting Institute (POPI) and has become one of the major platform for promoting government schemes in Coochbehar.

Sabuji Mitra Farmers Club at Dinhahta node was involved in organic farming and was not working commercially. After being associated with SRFSI in 2014, it started providing a single window custom hiring services for machinery and other inputs for maize, wheat, lentil and paddy. They have two models to provide services i) take 60 days responsibility of crop, from sowing until crop is 60 days old, which includes seeding by ZT drill, seed, fertilizer, pre and post emergence herbicides application and irrigation by charging reasonable amount, and ii) Custom hiring services for machinery. In this node Rice-Rice system is now slowly being replaced with Rice- Maize system. This club has become the platform for implementing government schemes and there is a good convergence of SRFSI and government schemes such as Bringing Green Revolution in Eastern India (BGERI) and the National Food Security Mission (NFSM).

Anwesha horticulture society is an NGO at Mansai Node. It was involved in working with tribal community for their economic and social upliftment. After being connected with the project it also started providing custom hiring services for machinery.

In the nodes of Malda the farmer clubs apart from providing custom hiring services are also engaged in seed production. The Kalinagar node has become a major hub for lentil seed production and Bidyananandpur node for wheat and lentil. All seed are being produced with ZT technology. In Bidyananandapur node farmers club has started micro entrepreneurship for seed business. In all the nodes of Malda there is a good convergence with national and state plans and schemes such as BGERI, Agriculture Technology Management Agency (ATMA), NFSM, Sub-Mission on Agricultural Mechanization (SMAM). In Gourangapur Node, Rice-Rice cropping system is being replaced with either by Rice-Wheat or Rice-Maize which is very encouraging.

In Coochbehar farmers club are well established and are actively involved in custom hiring services whereas in Malda community model is working well. In total there are there are 21 farmers club in Coochbehar and 7 in Malda. Innovation platform is working as a platform that has brought farmers together for seed production business in Malda.

In total there are 21 farmers clubs in Coochbhear out of which 5 are the major ones. In total it covers 670 ha and 1250 farmers whereas in Malda there are 7 farmers club, out of which 5 are major. These 7 clubs cover 966 ha with 3307 farmers. West Bengal is a good example for convergence with government programs. We could already see the impact of SRFSI in these areas and are expanding outside SRFSI nodes but they are still in need of some technical support as they are in beginner phase and fragile and is also expressed by the farmers and club members. Additional support for few more years will act as stepping stone for achieving the dream of 1.5 million farmers.

Bihar

In Purnea, Maize is one of the major cash crop. There is a good potential for growing maize with ZT. JEEViKa is the major NGO who is helping farmers across the value chain from providing seed to the marketing of produce. It has formed a women self-help groups and providing custom hire services. Through Jeevika female farmers are being able to sell their maize in National Commodity exchange Market. A private player named Dehat has initiated 360 degree service in Purnea. Unlike West Bengal there is no farmers club who is providing custom hiring service. There are some individual service providers who is providing rotavator, electric pumps, cultivators on hire but none for the CASI technology. Additional support for building technical capacity of Innovation platform is required to set up custom hire service at the community level.

In Udayanagar, Kathaili, Tikapati, and Purani Garel node CASI technology is well accepted hence there is a good scope for expansion of CASI on Rabi crop especially maize. Purnea has small and marginal farmers and women farmers who are well incorporated in the project through JEEViKA. Through JEEViKA and Dehaat farmers are getting single window service from seed to market but to reach more farmers in other districts of Bihar such as Madhubani some technical and financial support is required.

Madhubani has a complex social system. Share croppers are more in numbers and soil is highly acidic. In Shukhet and Khairi, Nananur, Mauahi nodes significant improvement can be seen and farmers have accepted CASI technologies but service providers for the CASI technology is either unavailable or limited in number. A NGO called SAKHI is providing services but is not being able to reach maximum number. To see the impacts of the project long term investment is required.

Nepal

In Dhanusha, situation is similar with that of Madhubani, complex social system and difficult to manage soil. There is lack of tractor operator and service providers, irrigation is costly for winter crops and has huge out migration of youth. Though farmers are willing to participate in Giddha, Sinorjora and Lalgarh, in Raghunathpur and Phulgama farmers are not cooperative and mobility is difficult due to poor road connectivity. Long term investment is required to see the impacts.

In Sunsari, Farmers have accepted CASI technologies and DADO (District Agricultural Development Offices) is also actively promoting them. In 2016-17 Rabi DADO made it compulsory for the farmers to go for ZT- Wheat for availing wheat seed on subsidy. Farmers are innovative in this node. In Salbani node they have experimented ZT with Kidney beans and Sunflower and is performing well. Though SRFSI has placed ZT seed drill with community, except Kaptangunj and Bokhara, field technician have to arrange for tractor on hire so availability of machine on custom hire centre is the constrain. In Bhaluwa node women engagement is impressive. They even operate mechanical rice transplanter but being low lying area it is difficult to run machineries in anchored residue. One of the important issue that need immediate attention is, unavailability of harvester resulting to delay in sowing of Rabi crops. Nodes in these districts has good potential for producing field evidences to inform policy around FEW nexus. Especially in Bhaluwa, validation and dissemination of CASI technologies is not as per expectation. Innovation platform is coming up as centre for machinery hiring, agrovet and agro advisory services and demonstration of CASI technologies.

Bangladesh

In all the nodes of Rangpur, farmers have accepted the CASI technologies except Durgapur node. Aside from, in all the nodes custom hiring of machinery is available. Lakhitari node has lack of access to mechanization and market due to Teesta River. Innovation Platform in all the nodes is actively working in solving the farmers problem and coming up as machinery hire center. Mohanpur node in Dinajpur district is the leading example of successful innovation platform which has initiated agro clinic and advisory services to help farmers and have good coordination among stakeholders. All the nodes of Rangpur have fair gender participation. Impact of SRFSI can be well observed in Lakhitari node. Before SRFSI it was isolated. It did not use to get any agro advisory service from DAE and use to grow single crop, with SRFSI intervention farmers are getting technical support and advisory services and are growing more than one crop in a year.

In Bhaduria, Dharampur, Bijoynagar nodes of Rajshahi district, CASI technologies have got good response from farmers and have access to service. Due to active participation of DAE, farmers are aware of benefits of CASI technologies. However, Nabinnagar and Lakshimpur nodes have poor response from farmers and have limited access to water for irrigation, machineries.

Impact on women

In all the areas women are actively involved in SRFSI activities through participatory trails, field visits, training etc. However, one of the distinctive feature of Satmile Satish club in Coochbehar district of West Bengal is, it is involving community women in growing rice seedlings for mechanical rice transplanters due to which women who were displaced from agriculture due to mechanization is getting alternative employment opportunities that is less drudgeries. It organizes training for the community women to build their knowledgebase on growing rice seedlings, which is the direct spillover effect of SRFSI that utilized the existing knowledge base and existing work division of the society. Similar initiative can be implemented in Bangladesh, Bihar and Nepal as it will provide additional employment opportunities for displaced women labourers and the communities where women do not work in the field will also get aligned with the project activities which in turn will economically empower women and uplift the family from the poverty.

SRFSI has made a tremendous progress slightly over three years in understanding farmers bio-physical and socio-economic circumstances in the EGPs, generating quality data, syntheses report on gender, socio-economic, CASI and so forth. This was clearly reflected during mid-term review meeting (MTR). As a result of a collaborative venture, we have been able to reach over 50,000 farm families (30% are women) with one or more of the CASI technologies, as a result farmers are experiencing higher yield and economic benefits. Recommendation of Mid-term review and the Project Steering Meeting also suggest focusing more on consolidation of results and priorities field activities and working where comparative advantage lies. Based on partners feedback and knowledge/experiences gathered over the years, working nodes have been characterized for each districts like A, B and C. Considering, MTR feedback, PSC meeting guidance, available timeframe and resources, it has been decided that the scaling efforts should be placed only to A and B nodes. Activities, as a strategic demonstration system and opportunity trials, quality seed production and marketing, capacity building/trainings (ToTs, LSPs, Farmers, etc.), gender mainstreaming, etc. will be priority activities for variation 3. List of the potential nodes/locations are mentioned below (Table 2).

Table 2. Potential nodes and suggested scaling technologies

Nodes

Scaling hub - local. Potential for local scaling, with notes on which aspect (innovation) of CASI, and which local organization would drive scaling

Scaling hub - EGP. Potential for scaling across EGP, with notes on which aspect (innovation) of CASI and which target farming system in EGP

West Bengal

Coochbehar

Mansai (Tufanganj) =B

Rice-maize would be the most adapted and profitable system. Intercropping of leafy vegetables with maize also has potential. DoAWB with the support of UBKV can promote new high impact CASI and build the capacity of local clubs/ NGO (Anwesha).

It displays good evidence of why and how boro rice is being replaced by maize

Durganagar (Dinhata) =A

Farmers club act as a micro-entrepreneur for sustainability by involving and ownership of local communities. In Innovation platform, there is engagement of relevant stakeholders. Rice-Maize would be the most adapted and profitable systems. Intercropping of leafy vegetables with maize also has potential. DoAWB with the support of UBKV can promote high impact CASI technologies and experiment with other crops such as jute and oilseeds.

Active participation of women and youth in growing rice seedlings, as field technician, agro advisory services, post-harvest operation, and custom hire services can be further developed.

Satmile club and Sabuj Mitra club (Durganagar) have good business model that can be replicated to other parts of EGPs (single window services). Micro-entrepreneurship and convergence with government of programs. Potential to scale out CASI and CASI b

Acknowledgments - ACIAR | Australian Centre for...

Documents

Transcript of Acknowledgments - ACIAR | Australian Centre for...