EVALUATION OF THE SYSTEM OF RICE

INTENSIFICATION IN BANGLADESH

  Prof. A. M. Muazzam Husain

BRAC University, Dhaka, Bangladesh 

WRRC, Tokyo-Tsukuba, JapanNovember 4-7, 2004

A system of irrigated rice crop management to significantly increase production through changes and integration of the management of rice plants, soil, water and nutrients.

• Does not depend upon high-cost modern inputs• Reduces farmers’ costs of production• Helps make crop production more sustainable

and is environment friendly• Easily accessible to resource-poor farmers• Enhancement of food security

What is SRI?What is SRI?

Rice is main staple crop – 75% of cropped area High density of population – small farm size,

majority of farmers resource-poor HYV adoption increased production – but yield

growth has leveled out, with reduced profitability Hybrid rice and biotechnology may increase

productivity but dependent on high- cost inputs Biotech is still a debatable technology, with

possible health and environmental risk

Relevance to BangladeshRelevance to Bangladesh

Rice Sector Needs of BangladeshRice Sector Needs of Bangladesh

Substantial & sustainable increase in yields – to release land for high-value crops

Reduction in cost of production & increase in profitability for farmers

Reduced requirement for high-cost inputs like fertilizer, irrigation water, and insecticides

Environment- friendly sustainable agriculture SRI has shown the potential to meet all of

these needs of the BD agricultural sector

SRI Trials in BangladeshSRI Trials in Bangladesh

Started in 1999 after Bellagio Conference paper on SRI reached BD

Dept. of Agric. Extension (DAE) and NGOs conducted initial trials in farmers’ fields

BRRI conducted on-station trials Trials in farmers’ fields gave encouraging

results but BRRI on–station trials did not Need for systematic evaluation -- PETRRA

funded 3 sub-projects carried out over two consecutive Boro season trials (2002 – 2004)

Findings from PETRRA evaluationsFindings from PETRRA evaluations

Sub-Project 36 02

Implemented by 3 NGOs (BRAC, SAFE, POSD) and a private company (Syngenta BD Ltd.)

Participatory trials conducted in farmers’ fields in 4 districts, 8 sub–districts (upazila): in 2002-03, N = 487 farmers; in 2003-04, N = 791 farmers (plus 237)

Results for both seasons were found encouraging:• Number of participating farmers increased by

62% (111%) during second year• Area under SRI increased by 91%

AGRONOMIC FINDINGSAGRONOMIC FINDINGS

Tillers per hill were 95% higher during 1st season and 60% higher during 2nd season than under FP

Effective tillers were 94% and 122% higher during the 2 seasons respectively

Length of panicle 11% higher in both seasons

Weight of 1000 grains 14% – 18% higher

Fig. 1: SRI yield gains, 2002 - 03

6.3

4 7.0

3

6.1

5.9

5.2

5 5.9

4.7

8.1

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

BRAC POSD SAFE Syngenta

Yie

ld (

t/h

a)

SRI Farmers' practice

Fig. 2: SRI yield gains, 2003 - 04

8.6

9

6.5

7 7.5

2

6.36

.71

5.2

4 6.1

2

5.1

0

2

4

6

8

10

BRAC POSD SAFE Syngenta

Yie

ld (

t/h

a)

SRI Farmers' practice

Table 1. Yield gains of SRI over FP

Partners SRI yield gains 2002-03

(%)

SRI yield gains 2003-04

(%)

BRAC 37 30

POSD 21 25

SAFE 19 23

Syngenta 30 24

4526

2

3825

7

4210

0

2776

5

2486

3

2412

0 3186

5

1665

5

0

10000

20000

30000

40000

50000

BRAC POSD SAFE Syngenta

Net

retu

rn (T

k/ha

)

SRI Farmers' practice

Fig. 3: Comparative net returns, 2002 - 03Fig. 3: Comparative net returns, 2002 - 03

ECONOMIC EVALUATIONECONOMIC EVALUATION

Because of reductions in the cost of production while yield increased, farmers’ net returns were increased – more than 50% on average

Fig. 4: Comparative net returns, 2003 - 04

4477

2

3980

1 5155

7

2823

8

2593

9

2458

4

3812

4

1898

8

0

10000

20000

30000

40000

50000

60000

BRAC POSD SAFE Syngenta

Net

ret

urn

(Tk/

ha)

SRI Farmers' practice

Table 2: Profitability increase with SRITable 2: Profitability increase with SRI

2002-03 2003-04

Partner organisations

Profitability gain with SRI

(%)

Profitability gain with SRI

(%)

BRAC 82 73

POSD 59 62

SAFE 32 35

Syngenta 67 59

Perceptions of farmers on SRIPerceptions of farmers on SRI

No. of farmers and area under SRI increased Farmers confirmed increased yield from SRI Did not face any major pest/insect problems Thought that healthier SRI plants were more

resistant to pests/insects Larger no. of farmers used organic manure –

but needed training on preparing compost Faced irrigation management problems –

these need community approach to solve

More perceptions of farmers on SRIMore perceptions of farmers on SRI

Partial SRI adoption was favored by many farmers in some areas – accepting easier practices such as early transplantation with reduced no. of seedlings and wider spacing

Difficult practices included:

- applying compost or organic manure

- alternate drying and wetting of fields However, even partial adoption had definite

positive effect on yield and profitability

Findings from Sub-Project 34 02Findings from Sub-Project 34 02

Implemented by BD Rice Research Institute (BRRI) with local NGO partner

Trials were conducted in farmers’ fields in one district (N = 20 farmers, then 35)

Results for both seasons were positive – no detailed data on 2nd season

SRI results were found to be better than both FP and BRRI practices

Table 3: Agronomic performanceTable 3: Agronomic performance

Agronomic features

SRI BRRI FP

Panicles (m2)

296 270 226

Filled grains per panicle

78 65 52

Grain wt per 1000 grains

No significant difference

Table 4: Comparative yields, returns, Table 4: Comparative yields, returns, and BCR of SRI, BRRI and FPand BCR of SRI, BRRI and FP

Indicator SRI BRRI FP

Yield (t.ha-1) 6.03 5.79 4.06

Net returns (Tk ha-1)

51,255 49,215 34,510

Benefit-cost ratio (BCR)

1.9 1.8 1.3

SOCIO-ECONOMIC PERFORMANCESOCIO-ECONOMIC PERFORMANCE

SRI yields and net returns were 49% higher than FP and 4% higher than BRRI

Farmers’ perceptions in the area toward SRI were positive; also many farmers started their own partial adoption of SRI

SRI was considered as specially suitable for resource-poor farmers

Findings from Sub-Project 35 02Findings from Sub-Project 35 02

Implemented by BRRI with NGO partner in three districts Trials were conducted both on research station and in farmers’ fields (N = 32 farmers, and then 39 farmers) SRI yields in one district were 17.5% higher than under FP during 1st seasonIn 2nd season, SRI yields were 13% to 20% greater

Further Findings from Sub-Project 35 02Further Findings from Sub-Project 35 02

In the two other districts, 1st season SRI yields were less than FP, but then they were higher during the 2nd season SRI costs were higher than FP in these trials:

- Labour costs 19% higher

- Irrigation cost 33% higher

Summary of SP 35 02 FindingsSummary of SP 35 02 Findings

Average net returns from SRI were similar to FP Many of the SRI practices were followed incorrectly,

which affected the results Farmers’ perception of SRI was reported to be mixed However, farmer opinion was said to be universal in

favour of ‘improved practices’ (modified SRI) DAE and other extension organizations working with

project are showing interest to disseminate SRI Many local farmers have already started partial

adoption of SRI Report recommends further field verification of SRI

SRI NATIONAL WORKSHOP, 2003SRI NATIONAL WORKSHOP, 2003

Seven papers presented - 3 by BRRI staff, and 4 by NGO/ DAE extension specialists

Two BRRI papers did not have much positive to report, but the 3rd was highly encouraging

NGO/ DAE papers found encouraging results Gap between views of scientists and extension

specialists was apparent The farmers present expressed firmly positive

views on SRI

WORKSHOP RECOMMENDATIONSWORKSHOP RECOMMENDATIONS

Initiate integrated and coordinated approach to evaluation and extension involving farmers, scientists and extension workers ( GO/NGO)

Conduct further trials and experiments on SRI to determine its potential in BD

Seek donor assistance for the above

Some Limitations of SRI and EvaluationSome Limitations of SRI and Evaluation

Trials were conducted for a short period Lack of proper understanding of SRI In some cases, faulty application was

made of SRI practices Lack of organic manure Problems faced in irrigation management Proper weeding not done to save costs Cost-effectiveness required in weeding

OVERALL FINDINGS ON SRI IN BDOVERALL FINDINGS ON SRI IN BD

Overall experience shows encouraging picture Agronomic findings are favourable – with more tillers,

effective tillers, larger panicles, more filled grain, etc. Grain quality was also found to be better Yield increases were significant in most cases, up to

49% higher than yields with FP Profitability was much higher, up to 82% more Farmers’ perception was highly positive; many also

have adopted partial SRI on their own Extension personnel (GO/NGO) have positive attitude Some scientists have taken a positive attitude, some

others are still skeptical – no consensus

CONCLUSIONCONCLUSION

SRI has shown its potential for improving yield and profits of farmers in Bangladesh

Gap still persists between results of researchers on-station and farmers’ fields

Further trials and experimentation on various aspects of SRI are needed

Government and donor support for more SRI trials can be well justified

GO/NGO collaboration is also needed

THANK YOUTHANK YOU