IRFU DrSCUSSiON PAPER SERIES NO.

15

- - -- - -- - ----

-----

Impact of 'arming sysfemsresearch

E.dite'd by: N.F.C. Ranaweera

IRRI

I mtERN ATlON AL RICE RESEA ReI-[ IN'51ITlITE

- -- -

Impact ,of farmin, systems rese,larch

PROC.iEIED'1 NGS OF THIE FlIN.Al. WOIRKSHOP ON I~MPA.crASSESSMENT OF FARIMI~NG SYSTEMS R:ESIEA.RCIH

Kan,d'y., Sri Lalnka

'9".13 Oeoo mber 1991

Ed!itedby: N.EC .. Ranawee:ra

1996

IRRI

~1>,ttE:It"'lAT~QNl!iL R.[cE R!!S~i\I!.CH lN5ilTltm P.o. 180x 9.33. M~~I'llII'i1l,lOO9. P,niUIPP~fl!\l'S

Welcome add ress

S.P.R. Weerasinghe

(Director of Agriculasre, Sri. 'l.an:k:a.)

Opening comments

vii

F. A. Bernardo

DepUI)1 Director Gc.;neraJmnf,(!ma~~ona,1 Rice Research lns:tilI.Ue)

lflurmluctm address

lx

lion .R, M. Dharrn ad,a.· a Banda

(Minisu:r ur Agrh:uI rural Development and Research. Sri Lanke)

XI,U

N. F.C. Ranaweera

ivis] JI1 of AgrWcu,lturifil Ee nomic and .)?[anni,ng. Department of Agrlcunure,

Peradenlva "

F'I,1I1Imng systems research and il.S impact on farm families in two sel,eCl.ed], ites in Bim,glade~;;;h--M. R.'idd~CIU.:i. M. R. I lam, N. P. Mager, N. U. Ahmed ..

and A. H., :Khan

impact or 'farm[ng ystcms research on selected ~ armers in Nepal: a cas 2.8

~mdy of Purndi Bhumd:i~~S.B. M,gtbcma, K..D. Joshi, J. KC ..

Assessment of rice-Ish farming svstem in Indenesia-M. O. Adnyan:a,. 59

D. K.S.'wasti'ka •. nd W.udanil

The impact of farmin ~ system, research in haihu:1:dI-lB. Sbinawatara, '!iH

C. ukapong, P. WnodtikarnP, Deundao, P' .. Padermcnai, and B. Onnram

'Impm":l assessment of farmiug : ystems research-based b::clulo,l'o'gies 129'

in [he Plrilippinesc the Issbela experience-RrR. Gonzaga C. V. C .. Barba.

N. P. Gonloncitle. and N. I:;, C.- Raeaweera

Instinnionallzmg the farmilllg SYSUHrIS research approach ]52

in lnd china-A. d. Mandac

lmpact us. es meru of fartning systems research arrd development H55

at the f. rm ,'cvc~: I[he case Oo,j' KABSA.KA technology in Iloilo, Pl'lm,ppine8-

: . T. V illa neio, C. H. M analo ,. M.. V. I. Rebulansn, A. So~omi~"

and N. f. C. Ranaweera

Impact - r f. rming sy terns re earch n the research and extension U~5

system: ihe ease of '[he Phmpp~:nes-- V. T. Vlllancio, A. PiIJ.n.1.a~an, C. Hina,

and V.R. Carangs I.

. iii.

Assess ment of the impiu:;t ota -rarming-sys~/em:s hued 'tec:lmo~o,gy 197

she ill Srl Lanka-N, f. C.RfInB'weera. P. A. SaDH111',altmga"

J. M. K. P. Jayas:iughe. and G., K. :R,enuka

Impect a!ss:ess~nent of farUlli,ng ,sys~:ems,resea:rch and develepmentat 226

the: farm h~ve~: the doe.=walccIlTnelon, cropping system in P,angjl.

Laguna-V. 1'. Vmauci:o, C. H, Mana~o. M. L. Rebu~anan, A. A. Ar~sgado.. f. L. MatieB!O" and N.f. C. Ranaweera

, iscussion and reccmmendations 242

P,arl ici paints 254

Appenclix,: AC[lonyms, 257

~ i,v -

Introductory Address

- r- - -)- . d '8·· .IJ

HOD" R, M,., I ,1lIi annm,· asa ,ancJ a-

The Ministry of Agricultural Development and Research hascollaborated w~th the International Rice Research institute for over]O yr on a. number uf research programs and exchanges of scientists, As a, result of this, collaboration, Sri Lanka. has developed a number of rice technolegies that, in no small 'way, have contributed to increased rice production and near seU-'U:mCiein~ in rice. [11 addition, we have

c ., llab eared to develop technclogie for 'CfOP diversification through 'the farming syste:rns program.

In a slrniktr manner, the Department of Agriculture In Sri Lanka bas been closely assoeiated with the international, Development Research Centre (IDRe) of

anada, lDRe haw made major contributions to" the development of ou r farming

syste~~ pro~ra~l f(~r.~eU over __ ~o ~ecatlcs',~i~ ~tl.ldy on ~ .• ~ t~1p~cc~off~rmjng-

.. sterns research W.1:s furtded by .DRe. IDRC has also provided leadership to develop technol . ,gi,es to improve grain legumes develop oil seeds, and improve our library fa,c:ilities"

This work: hop dlseusses the results nt a 3-yr program and assesses-the Impact of some new rechnnlogies used by farmers, Asia has; the largest number of people associated with agriculture, This agrarian pcpulation in Asia face' many problems, both in dealing with the nvallablllty of landper unit of household arul in lhe availability of labor . 'or cultivating [he land.

The inereuse in population in most Asian countries combined with the decrease in land available ~fo:r ,fl~ricuhure, h~lS resulted in,,'1.1. decrease in the ratio of _

~ n nd to p~op le, In 198 7 ~ t his rano W,lS O. 1 I m Sr.I, Lan ka; n is exp ected to d ecrease to 0..09 by the year 2.00U.In. Pakistan, d1i.l,rlng this same period, the ratio wH~ decrease fHJ'n:1 O. HJ Ito fU4. in the Philippines from O.li4 to 0.10, in Tha.Hond from O.J.S toO.3]~ ani in Bangladesh from 0.09 [0 0.00.

nis redu lion in the ratio of land to pel .. ple results ina larger number of smallholders ha\,.jnb small' parcels of land. Therefore, the pmenti,all income-earning apacity of a farmer is reduced because uf the limited productive capacity of the. land. Cnnscquenrly, it :i. more dim-cult fnrthe farmer tomove ahead economlcatly, lt is-in this context that current strategies and techeelogies must he assessed

Nevertheless, overall pcrfonnanee In the agricultnral sector in Asia .IU~5 been good. For example, du ring the past: l 5 yr. Sri L ... anka hasmade remarkable achievements in ~I.HJ I crop production, Rice production h::15 increased from about L5 million t in JY75 to 2 .. 5 millien t in ]Q9n--an increase of 67% in 15 yr. This was mainly due I!U a 59'* lncrease in yield (from 2.3 to 3.4 t/ha). The area under rice

San ··W·· ..- • - ~ 'h J

_. ~.Ii"'. __ eC,r3,S~.n&· e

This ism. historicoccasicn. It is thefirsr. timea serlous attempt has been madeto eva~uate the b enef ts aeerul ngto te ell no ,. .d,eN,e;]oped wmthw n a farmJng sys~.ems. perspective, Tbepresence of the Honora, 'R. M..D]],a,FlJmdasa BandaJ [[1 inister of A,g:ri:cu~,tur~~ Developmentand Research, and his Secreta,ry Mr. Dixoa NHaweera;]s a, eleaerecognition of the Irnportaaeeattaetred 10 fannmg sYS[lems research, It is also it sign of appreei arlen totheefforts efscientists who contr:i bute ~o the enbaneement ofa~:d(:u][ur~~d producHvwty, Their research has a direcr i.n~,'uen:ce on the farmers who a re the prav I ders of6oociCor GMf people, We, are alse pn.v!~.I.e~ed[O have wlth us

·D. '. 11;;: '" ·0.; , '. .,;' . ·1, ,~, ·11. ,- 'I" , .. I '" ,~ t 1 ~ ~ • -" • ~I· l' Int -. 'I" .. , .. -l p-- ... ,- ,- .~--., 'f-~ 't ~,- .' ,-,." . ,- I

,r, r .01"',., D ern arc 0, LU::PU':Y u tree _fl.m" ge.m!ra~ o~.. n re rnancnai ~ rograms, m erna nona

Rice Research Institute (1:RRU, Dr. V .. R. Can al, 'Cioonliual!or-of the: Asian

Fa,rm~n1l. Systen,ls Research Netwerkat U~RII, Dr. John Graham and Dr. John

Hardle fronJ the International Development Research Centre ODR C)~ whi en pn)videdthe-n!1:cessary fund's W make this farmi]1g system activhy,n reality.

These stud [('lS\VOLI ld not h ave come to. fru h~o n we re il not for the eoacerted effort and dedication of seientlsts frnm the natienal pregrams l~nSou.th and Southeast Aslaand fr:om the international centers .. 1"ihf:s\!iI1o.rkshop is; an opponunity to critically review the .i.m.pac~ of furlll.ing ~ysl~ell1s research, '[0 [de~ui.fythe advances and weak nesses, if a.ny ~and to make reeonnnendarieos to enabl e natlenal agr:ic'ul.LLual research systems 'lo ili'eOri~,e.lIilt future 'prog:[~llIn!:!.

WHhin the context of di~n.ini:5hi:rgg arable lawu] per capita and dedi nl ng lncomesfrom farmII1& esp ectally from rice, th ls woriksh op i s mo~t ti nll~]y. A.I fhough science and tech no]~ogy have made rapwdad'vaJ:loes in ~ he past few decades, the application oifnew~e,clmolog~,es in dIDffer,ern farm[ng situath:'H:1S has no~ had the desired effects on .. agr[cu[u.ukd prodtJ(:::tku::l~lnd farmineame,

A~,[~Ul fanners, have adopted a f~u.m ing syste m that hHS gone t hrnu gila. process of evol iJt:~CJ~. The goals of (]'a ese farmers we re su bsistenee for thei rfarnil ies and prevention of land clegrudatio:n. Scientistshave taken time to comprehend the as pi rill ~:u rrs uf farme f,f';) but Iqu,cst~o nsmust beas ked a hnut 1 he. ways thatadvanees in science and technology have been translated tn farmers.

Fu;rnlin;g systerns researcl; shou-ld not beconfined hJ the deve~.op.'.m~,rol ,of technolegy I?tlckages[o ~ncre,a~e produ1ctlnn .. Trade. postharvest handlIng and processi ng,l npuJ sllIpp.ly and market i ng, and mn.ny 01 her factorsare 'i n~e gml:~o farmi:n~ $ystein~s. research and can he adnpted by farmers tcincrease I.he product.~on poee nn al of thei r resou roe, base. These areas have not bee n included m systems resea rch tot he des] red extent, but they are 'Of p~uamuu nti m p 0 rtance to t he farmer ..

.A farmer .. canincrease producti.o.ru.,. but ~f the.farmer does nothavethe ca!pacIty to bandle thispro d uctien ~an.d cannot obtain reasonable p,rj,Ce:lii ~or t~e outP:lJ~S:I' . frusrranon withthe new N~:C'hnoIoID' will resul tand the farme It will revertto the traditiona~systero..

Agricu ~tuil"a~' scientistshavea lri?;mendollJ's las It ahead 'of t hem .. TheYn1lus~ orieu[Earming systems resea reh toe nsure. :~hat 1m applicadou byiarmeIs wi]~. result ~n Q. sustainable j nerease in prod uctlcnaad iacomes, A[ th e same ~j me! however, ~hey mast ensure that~he:.'i.e~edmo.logleg are in harmony with the ,envwfOnmenturnd ~ha:t Ul ey do not cOmltdblneto i.~s degradation.

increased as welt, but only marginally •. A:s a result of '~his, signiflcam increase, Sri Lanka wasable to reduce import, of riceand wheai ftour from about 500;000 f/yr [0 below 300 1000 l/yr. Imp rts of wheal (J,Qur we're kept constant. while average per capita calorie con' umption wag maintained at. the reeemmended level IOf 2.200' calories pe r person. Credi t for thi s ae hievernent n'1,US[ go ~C1 our farmers and

researcher. -

Duril1lg the 1,:3I.}t decade, advances, have abo, heen made ill otherfield crops, Average yields .or maize have risen from less than J to 1,.4 t/ha, and total annual product len hasl nereased f rom 30,000 to 40.000 t, Yields of cowpea and green gram have i mproved frem 0 .,6 ~J ha:. to more til an O. S tlha,average yield s of s weet potato [rom 2 .. .5 [07 it/ha and yields of cassava from 3 'no, 10 luha. These increeses have provided the population with more food at a. relatively [ow price. Research in both riceand other crops has, el1::1!hlccI fanners to '0(0.[3.]11 these higher yields, An

associated phenomenon hac been the increased use of fertilizerand other inputs, which has provided the ba is fOIf increased intensities of cultivation, This phenomenon is seen around the work!..

This workshop looks at the impact of rec;hllology development from the.peint of view of its effects en the farmer. Despite all the production success" S()llIct,hing, stm appear '~O' bel eking. The' farming population today is by and large. poor, debt ridden, and malnourished. The incidence of poverty is very high to the point of be'ing pol:i'~]c3iJly unsattslaetory ... Fanners have ,aJways complained about their 'lack of access to inputs and, as .3 result, their inability to real ize the potential of the new technologies. Ihisi a seriou: problem" Some 'of the difficulties faced by the farmers are water ,av,aHabil'i[y~, input supply, and adequate market facili.des at reasonable prices, Some of these issues may be beyond the purview of this workshop, bur the,y af~ect farmers ill most A ian countries .. Farmers ar alsoawarethat some of the services. that are provided , ire poor .. that the timeli IPS and availability of inputs are un rel iable, ami that serv ice :~ s not centl n ueus. n hi not in frequent for farmers to be associated \' WI de clop m . n t. p r grams lila t g enerate new techno log y that is abandoned after some time either because of termins Ii n of funding or transfer .of personnel, Such situations must be looked at carefully,

Sri Lank. has given the hlghe it priority to, program that invest in human resources, The people are provided with direct access to resources with the aim of transrorming the passive .. ihe Inert, andthe excluded population 'imo pr-oductive creators. and owners of as er s, The aim of tnt ba ic poliey is growth with equity. Over the past decade, the agrjcultural 'po]i.cy ,of Sri. Lanka, was directed lowrurd achieving self-rel i nee in the basic requi rernents of food and increa ing farmer income. 'This two-pronged strategy focused Ion de' v clop,ing ]argc-scale lrrigaied settlements and commodity-oriemed development programs that emphasized rice and a few' other crops. The real i zatien that farm ~ 11 comes areneed ed to be ,en haneed has Wed to new policies to divrif: rural it tivltie .. and to provide farmers with more opportunities to optimize the use of their resources and thereby maximize incomes.

Our nauona: policie h. ve bee n focu ed primarily on increasing rhe supply of food and 'i mproving lile standard of Jiving, particularly of the rural population, through agricultural and rural development, Developing and transferring technol.ogy 00 regionally appr priate r 'p's and cropping. and farming systems and the provision

-.~ -

I~lr produerlon Inpetsatreasnnable priQ~, ;Vere a:sp~dS tha~ lie()ei~e~: attention. TIds enabled the fa.rllll,erSLOI.ncr,cas;e p.rociu C:hv] [y per u ru t area. of ]~lnd. T'DI supportand sustain ~his, process, the govemluent continued to str .!enthe rurrigatwon syst!em of the cou n~r)': A,ddi! iOI1;a~ w~,ter resources, wer~ deveh . ... . the exi sti ng lH~ge~, and " small-tan k irngauon syste ms were renova!ted~re habi .1 t~H~d! and m~u ntained; shallow and deep groun,dwater reS'OUfCC,,"I wereharnessedthrough agro~\illl'el~ls. andtube wells; farmers and farmer organizations were trained lnwater management; and ~he .irrIg~Hwoninfrastru,cn.an;~ was mai ntained m maxi rni ze t he uS!e of th [$ searee 1I"~9iOUf1ce. Creati on of an i nsdtu ti onal base 'If} bu He]! a v~ brant a [ld well-srtlcu lated people's organ [zaNo nwasfol ~'~)!wedby s trongpol ~cy.

Al though rn arketl ng and prices for agri cultural prod uce have bee n ] eft

latge i:y '[0 market fOl,ces,. t llegoveni1llnen~ has ensured a reasons ble price tofar.lners through a. floor-prlee scheme, The government also facinta~es the marketing of agricu Itural preduee to ensure thatfarmers are P roteeted,

Toanaln sustafnable erowth with equity through a eerrtjnuouspreeess of de'l,!'~]npm.ent, a conscious ,efG'xl"t has been nrmde by the government (:0 decentralize ad m 1.111 lstrative powe r [0 'l he loy.!est POKS i ble eperati onnl level and to bl end po~i tieal leadership and admlnistra.tion t.o. make decisions on resource alloeatien, n1.()!n~to:rinjg p'I"iO~in'a.ms,~ an rl .i III r~],e:mentat ion .. Pr ams have also b eenai rned ~u environmental pretectionand p (1lv,erLy 21.[ leviat ian, , ' e;xamp'~.e., in au r ~,e;ad preject i( the J3.nasav~ya)j. the pov,erty~a:~I.evjat[on p'rngrnillU seeks to investin the poo;r and equip

~ hewn to movie aw~~y frnm the poverty trap andto beenrne p~ rtners ] n deve~opmem .. We .h~we reoDgnb~ed U,Thll any prograrn designed for those groups nnrst necessarilyhe ,e;l1JV~ ronme ma Ily 51iJSUll nahle,

Despite these ,e.ffort~. the. p.ace. 0'r developrnent, p'an~,c~~]afl.y in the; a~fmrian sector, has bee n be I ow expecrat urns, .. ~ s ~ h.1 she muse $;0 me ·of·~ h.e ~echl1lo I og~ es ~ ha~ have been ]uo:vided 10 the fanners are om ap~ropri..ne 10 the social, C.c:O]lOB'lW'Ct and

j-_ 1':1 <~, '_ '~'V~ 1-:-1' ~ , ~,-.' .-.1)' ,"j; ',--" -·I~'. " '1", 1', I' I~, , .. ~ I' ,'-, "II "i •. " I ,'j ~. "H;' " --"._ I ~ ~~'~ ~,~

cultur .II en I ro nm eIII[. Ofle.]l ~ rese arch er s, po u::y O'M ke rs, andadmin rstr .:IJDrS d.u m

that theteehnol ogles that have been de.v,e~'rJpe:d are snceessful and dull the farme rs have benefited. Br)"w,evler~~f the etfeets are ,cnf,e:fllIl]y alr.1n.1yZied, .rea.~~ily i.sfa.r from this situation,

In view of uheillixed results ,o,f P;j]S[ pollcles, Sd Lanka is emlil~~rking on an. lnnovadve fnrnl:;:~,rd~looking, aggressiv,e pofi,cy ~.n agrieultursl development, The nverridlng go~d of agrkuhura~ development will continue to be directed [award ach[e.v[ng self-sufficiency infood (pf~ni.cul;r]y rice). 111e principalalm ,nfngrkul rural develcpmeutprograms will he to contribute to increase mrul househeld ineomes to levels enmparahle wlth thosle.of fHmll~es in [~i~h.er S,eClO.fS of the ec,onomy. The main instruments will he theuse (),f modern production and marketing techniques,

,~[ versiflcat io n of ~ hie portfoHo of crops" aad expans lon o,f off-fa rm g(n~Lrc:eg ()if Income.

The chal le n,ges of prov:id [.rlg:u:l:e'q unh3 fooda ndan irn provedll~vi ng stand ard 60'rlhef.ru,r:mingp()pui~,t~on must be eonsldered seriou:~;;]y .. A conflict in the agricnltural sector is the dtfficrulty of providi.ng food to the people ata reasonable price 'l.vhii,e: ,en:m:r~ng a h:~gb quality of life for the farmers .. High consumer prices .m~y

.. "f;t~ ,.,

[,e$u]l ~nbiill!:,h il'aJcom es foli' fa;r;l11ie;rS'j b<u~ this lsnot alW1I:.ys. an acceptable· o~tionfol consumers, However!! cheal, food ~ unless accompanied by vefY high prod uetioa ~eve~s~ eanoct ieerease farmer income.

~ .xil -

N. F'. C. .R:m naweera J

Aprku'~tur~l research in. UU~ past had ltleluxMry 1 hat nCO()U~,l tab il l ly . to 1 he !1u\jorlily chentele., nn:mely ~he fa,rl1'l!ers" was not a high prior[ty In the research agenda .. M,ore recently, because of thegreater demand for teehunlogies lba~. are relevant to the immediate eicolog:ical and s'odoeconomk env[r,onmen~:s, p,rognl,ms ,ha,ve focused

thei raUent~()IJ on the needs or' farme rs, Th is has been, parti ell. I.ar~y U'IIJ e in theesse <D,f tech r1iQ,~ogwes developed w~ thi n ~hefr:ain1lewor k of ra.rmi',g, systems research (F-S~R). in w'Mch theconc~pt o~ thew~o,~e :ra,~m and .3 ~yst,em!; perspective to the researeh has beenadopted.

rr,esem~day agricultural research seeks to develop techunlogles that are

su stainable over ti me, envi runmentall» safe" and a I low farmers to i Here ase t hei r income!'! to achieve a better ,quaHty o(tife, whichever W<'I.yiJ :~na'y be measured .. During ~he last decade, pressures were placed on I'UH [0 1"1 alIJ)ll'ograms, to. conduct agricultural ~esea.rch ani:! deve~opme:mpro,gr21ms klcrnificc:, ~H~FSR. Internationel donnra,ge ncies tended to' piOv~de finances fOor rese arch only I f ~ l was eons I dered within sucha perspective,

Theadopdon ofFSR and the resulting teebnolngles have resulted ~n signif:icantinCN!aSeS of food preducnon and in benefits '[0 rhe research ,cmnmllJllity. I ~ bas provided knowledge on e ffectiv,e .n1elhodol.ogie sand appsoaches ro research, provided epportunities for more qualified human tcsoun::es" ~.hrou,gh both fornl~d and o'n~tbe-jot1' lrnjn~ngs! and developed improved tec.hnolo,gies.

WHY STUDYIMIlACI?

With, them~lMJ.ri,ng ofthes.~ program~ and incr~3sedemJ]l1as[s qn strengthening, farming systerus ~es~.ardl mdey~eloptDg ,c?u~tnesj a. va~!d quesnon IS whe~h~rthe .' new tech nol ogy h as had [h e desired effects 1]1. terms of overall. foodp red u cno 111 and, more s~gn~fkanU.Y·I· real beneflts to farmers. The question [l'i, then asked: why study the~nlpa.cl of .unyp'fOgram? This could be done for a number of reascns

There are researcbers who look at theimpact orany program purdy from. thepoim {)fv~·e:w of inquisltiveness. They want to know. in generalthe effects oif the new

tech n o~ogy.

"Divi!;,],n'lIil of Agr:~cu]u]m.~ Eeennmicsand Planning. Department of Agrku lture, I;lel!'~~deniyu.

USLllal~, i.rrv,e,sto'r"~ are hneresred '~n~he outcom:~. o.f a.[],e,w technolo!1~l1ldits,.i.mp!act en van OU S ,pararne ~e:rs[h a trange frO[Jl.l pruductwv J ty m utcomes, This isparueu ~ar ly true run the ease of large-seale devel,opm,enl progurams d1.3L make g,i:g:lliJic.llIlnt inv,estments [~n i[he ,agriculture S,CCUlf., In these ~.I1s~aIJOeSrulit only the d[r,ectbe,rilIef~I'Ii are oif in;~ere;\;t. but al sethel Il.din;::,c~' sodal and othermul tip'Her be nefits,

])ono.u thm fund r:es~arcb and deve ment proa;r~ms 3!c.C?ften ~nter~s~ed i~~:he

[ina] ] mp'actof thelfilIDves;tmJe]ilts. Th rel1,ect,eiil Ul ".todl.c reviews by p'roJe,c't

,e;v,alu.ation tea.ms.~hatgo to, the field to understand- ., efits ~hllt farmers have.

lobt3~nedfro;mthe n~w te;cbnoIOID'.~~1Q1wever!, these ,c~n;ory visits do notadequately provide the mfornlauon. An 3:ss,ess.ment of the be~dl~s.that the la .' g:roup of

farmers have oot.;urI!ed from a pa.rhcu.la:r pmgra.m IS {lif lnterest to nors,

WI~ hin .3, r-esearch com.p.~~ext the greatest b eRefidary of an Impact study wi U be the resesscbersthemselees .. Theybenefit by (lhtainh~g,a better app reelanon of the benefits. or Iaek ()if beuefitslIf:rmn tbeperspecUv:e. offlne farmers. This is not usually done beeaase, inmost :i nstaneea.researehers ere satisfied with the. k Ilow~edge that thei r research effortsare bei ng practiced b~ farmers, M aernstatisties that i:.ndi,.ca,le overall increases j n p:fiodu,euio.n do not reflect the real pletu we ~n~erms of diffe-rentia.l ] mpacts across d iff:er,em If: nvlronments, Of acress d ifferen ~ farmer ,gTlOUpS and

farml s)'~'jte,ms. Thisi.n[o:rrnat~'~lll 'ClUJ be ebtatne d only from ['111 .in~,d.ept.h~m~a,c~

stUl~y . analyzes the causes andi effects of the use of a. tech nology ~ n a part tcu lar

,crruvwronmemt

rMPAcr ON\VH.AT?

Gener:aUy.eoonn mi stsiltv()~ved in a.gr.i,cuhu ral research eend W look: at be nefits frm:n new t~chr.lo~ogies. that refle,c~ ,eomponen ts ofecol:u::n:uic deve~:upment The~ssue~ cam be c2l.~egorized W nto m ~Jcim3nd mac ro issues,

These issuesare rela ted mceeto direet effects in ~e rms of ineeeases in pn:u:ludivlty" .r·eaJI~n,coQ:J,r~.s,a:nd purchasing power of the farmers. These benef ts ~!;I.re - re:f]e Cled :i.n. terms of a greater a.nd move e:fficient :tlseof inputs tha.t furtherinerease producllVUy. lnereasesin the aeeu mulatio:n ,0,[ cap,rutnl assets". bot h farm and nonfarm • and, from a.

- xiv···

mstritional aspect, cbangesm food huake thata.re reflectedin better nutr:itiOiil of the farm~alnny arealso exam ined,

These issues general ~y relate to whethe r ~ du ri ngthe process of adoptl on of the new tech no] ogyt there has been an ef'Cect en e mp I oymen[~ edu cation" and capi[a.~f1 ows. Assoelared q1lJest[ons are whether sup'portil1gins(ituliuns! s~dil as ,e;,:[.ens,i(Jn,cr,edi~~ rna.rket[og, and Input supplies, have responded to the demands of the new techn.o].ogy~and to what extent, ~f a[ly~ll~V'e agdcu]ul.r:ad pol[,d,e.s (particularly pd,cjrag)lieen ~[fe"cted. In etlrer words, have the advell$,e -soci~d and economic envlronmems fadng the farmer beenreduced or eliminated through the pmvislon of the support services thatare .rJiorrnaHy needed for successful farmpllFfH:'IlJIldi.o'n'?

The influence 'Ilfagr.icuhural researeh on the overall development process [8 usua'l]y limited to p,.roviding onlyfhe[edil.no~,ogy. Other support services and agricultural po]icie~ donot necessarily go In tandem \\\r](h il1e ~.echra()h:Jgy requlr~ments. Thls often Jeadsma large degree 'of nouadoptlon of the new

tech n 0 ~(lgy.

AhbtJug]-a researchers portray .fSR asa st:m.u:gy~o,r agricultural. development, does iureaUy provide the neceS$ary answerstothe multifaceted questions ~h2!:.t are l1e.i.ng [aced at 1 he level (l,f .[);at.ior.nia.I.~lgficu IlU ral develep men f? Research is concerned wi.~ h esplari ug I he _'UJ ncertai 'fl .. If the probleni ~~ su cc,~ssful~y solve d. the pmbab~Hty of disseminating ~.he" research results ~n their e1<3'C! form islowand ehe ~ha n~e5 of. prov[din~ a positive effe et on. cleve ~o prnen t wi til lh e ,equ i tygo~lds

I den lined is u nee r Lai n •.

Has. the FSR ~~p'Pn.'H:li.ch provided adequate justification to beusedto spearheadag ricul tural developrrsenr pro~r.:~ms,tha t will provide farmers wit h 3d.~qu~lte incomes m Improve their quah~y of ]ife? Wh.;;1t this essentlally asks is: what i mp:act. hasthe FSR. a,fJprmH,;h h~ld on the way of] i Fe uf farme rs frDm a . d evelopm em persp!ectwve? The ultimate alm of any improvedagrictrltural s_ys[,em [3, toincrease the quality eflife and improve the weU-i1e~l"Ig of the farn1[ng community.

An l~ mpaet sru.dy of FSR~ech no.i.ob'')I' c{)uJdide fit. i fy 'l he. stro I'lg and weak compo nents of th e tech no]ogy itsel f. hel p make bette r resou rce-a I ,I ocati on decisi n ns (pr~ rticu htrly fo r research m~1lnnge rs), prov ide a] te mate eh o:~ceS~f},r lh e. researeb p~:an11Li ng process, and iden ti fy the snpport servicesand po i icy m easures thu.~ are needed to obtslnreal heneflts from the [,e;chno~~.s,~. A,n .l:~nalysi~ oftheinterplay of _ farm resources with eonsumpnon and other ~lcliv~ln,es can provide Insights to the real

impact ~he new technology has had ,on fanners. .

WORKSHOP' OBJECTIVES

'This, w{HI'k:shop is 'the culmlnation of 3, 3~year study :in. s,lx Asian cou:n:trI~ '~Baflg.~adesht In~onesia!, Nepal'jPhmppines,. Sri ul1t.a" and Thailand) t.ha:t LnViest,lga.ted the Impact of .FSR on their narional programs, The purpose of the workshep was to present individual countryexperlenees, understand the extentto w,h;,~;ch p o~ icy p,ersplec~ivle,s have been ~ ncorpora tied intJij; FS R activ hies, andprcvide gu:udehnes for fum re ] mpaet stud ~Ias.

FARM.lNG SYSTEMS RES,EARCH .A D~.TS IMPACT ONIFAlFtM'AM~.l.lES IN T'WO SELEcrED srrsstx DANG.LADESH

M.It. Sh::!I.(nqu,ii,! M"lt ~sh'lm~ N.'. M3.go.r~ N. U. All1rned" .and A. H. Khan'

The studywas cendu eted to determine the extent of adoptlen of rice cmpp:I ng s-yste ms technologies suitable to lowland rainfed areas, its i mpaet onrle;SOln rce use, produet ivhy ~ a.ndiracome~exp~nd iture p.Huernso~ ~ele,cted farmers intv.ro si~es· in Ba.~g1 adesh, The s~tes. are Kanla.[ganJm the nonheas,tand Suaku:nd m the: southeast, The KHn]a.~g3:rlj site which hag. .. rice surplus produces lnfrHstrllct1!.lra] facilities, Ahhough Sltakund has access '(:Ot .major markets and off-farm emp]o:yme,nt, [lis deficit in rice. Ninety farm. families we[e.random.~:y drawn from 6~7 v.i llages In each site, Crop production per. SeaSI(H'l ;and wee.~dy ineume expe.ndi.ture data, wer,ecol],e;c:ted. Critical crop product ion factors such as planting rl me. varietal sequence, lmen shy l(llf eropping, and .fert.il~zer dosage were: used in determining technolo~ ·(uloptio.n. A~grlegaLed scores; ofal] these factors were d ivided into three class ~ ntervals and the farmers we re div ide d in to [OW~ medium, ~md hi.gJa. ad opters, Results showed t ha t the, far rners ado pted the technology . The prod u,cti:v[ty of the lan d and other resou Fees varie d posi t ive"ly in relatien to. the extent of ad opt ionPeor'

.f ..• ··~., . r .. -m ... ers. (0." .. n.lh.· •.. e .b.-a .. ~.s.'i.s. .. Of f .. ~.~.rm.: ... - s}:z .... e ... ) .w.e. fe. h.iS.h il.- ... d.,.nip't.er~ o.'.f ll]e ... c ... r.o. p. pil1,g._. systems technolegy and have invested more on required inputs. T.1.lIc

exte nt of resou rce use in the; prcdncrion proce-ss was. al most the same atboth sites. 'But the yi.eld was lower at Sh.a.kunc compared with that in Kamalgan] due 1O. variations :~n natural faetors, The adoption 'of cmppl.ng.s,ystems ~ec~l:no]oglles has generated moreemplo.ynlent oppo rtu n tnes .. The study suggests that infras tructu fa I development .(1'[ '[ he ini tial stage and d i ven.i.fy in sources of ] n come are esse ntial in malntalnlng and im:pmving[he standard ofij'i,~i:nl.~ of the farming communlttes In the study areas,

Ba nglade'shi s primarjly H n agricultu ral count ry, More. dum 90% ofi [8 popu lation is ru ral .and a h om 75 ro of in; ~ota"l labor force is engaged in agriculture, Agdcu ItM:n~J conu'~bure:~ appm:umalely ~6% of, the gross. d.omestl~ product {G Df) and p~ovldes a number of tbe raw materials required by the industrial sector, Although agriculture is the must important econamicactivityin the >CDUnJry~ Bangladesh. does not produce enough food for Us large population nor earn sufficient 'foreign c,xchange toallow lmportati on. Q f the n ee,[k~:a food . Prodactivity per un it are a of eu it. lvated la nd i low ~7~ayse of the .u,se of traditional p~oducti.on system~ (e.g •• use of l:ncal~~Jtivar5)..

U11.S 1$ a major constramtto atrauung food sle.l.f-sum.c~.e.ru::.y (lioque [978).

Rke is, '~l::Ie major food c'r,o~ and dietary staple in Bangladesh. Of ~he

13, .. .5 mimQiJl ha of cui H va[,edarea~ riee ooven about 10. ('5 [FlU] iura: ha and ~ s the 01]] y

scurceofcash for , .s (BRR], ~9g9). Resea.rchflnd deNelopm.en'l. .0,(

a,ppmpriail:e rice ogies are needed to fl~ the le:;(I~ling farmlrlg sy SteIl1!S,. improve

the nutri Hemal s~aums; oflililepopu]a~ion, I' prev ide economic welfare tOI'fa:rm. fam:vl~nesl and meet thenatinnal food demand, Teaehieve these dbjectives.,. the Bangladesh Rice Research .lnstil1u~e (BRR1) was ,estab]ish~ed on I Oct 1970 asa semiaincnemous body,.

The .BRRI Cmpp~nl Syste,ms p]iO~ ram focuses Oil, .~ n.c.reas.ing agriculusral proo uction hl major agroecologicat envirenments l[hl:Miugh :[l1i€ efficient use of a.v1il.i:~able farn;:n, resources aed the ,,,,!loFtior!. of improved cropping systems technologl1e5.. Parmerparticipatory research in the vi Hages has been the main8pp:ro~.ch of the program,

The program has addressed the follow i n;g agroeco:J'(Jg[caJ env iron I[lent:!!: ramfed upland ~ r,lll"i nfed Iowl,i[l1Id, upl.and .~rrigated. lowland, d ryland faemi ng, tlnd deepw.at.errke,a.rea ... Attempts have; been made to eva1 uare ex i g~ililg cropping

pau:e:rIFlS ~n terms of pr:,oducuiv~ty J stalbility,!. and p.rofiJ:a.bili tf. Conooqnen.lly ~ hnpreved cropping, pruu:emsand components. of irechlul:[(lgJ.C'S ha ve been design.ed and tested, mer reeom me.nd:il:U~O~18 have been lluld!e~ar grearuer S(klpHon.

TECHNOLOGY FOR THE RA]Nfl5D> LOWLAND ENV~RONMENT

In .Bangl.adeih.~ rice is cultivated underiulga:tled, ra.infed! and deepwater cenditions in four d lstinct rice seasons, Theseare aus, tr:ansp]alliued aman, broadcast or deepwater aman I' ,and boro, Aus~o:1 ~owed by transplanted anum rice is a. major cr~f'pi rngsystc!"i n therainfed lowland ,~nvi ronment, 'cov,e~il'lg .:lll11 est] mated 3,

mtl ]ton ha..R'll n fa]] and. topographyareunpormftl'lmctOir'S that Ul fluence tbe adoption and productivity ,of thi s cropping sy:sremi n ,tber,a] nfed. lowland ernviron.roent.. -.Aut) rice iSp:.notiOperioo.-tnsensitive and generaUYIj!;n)ws under rainfed coaditions eitheras broadcast or transplsn led crops from jli,!blrclTh ~O' Sepb~mber.. Aman rice is tt.ams[I'1alltlfld from Ill]Y to September in areas. where water depth does netexceed 0.5 m..'

Based en .. lts ex:~e'n S] vie rnu.~'mOCa~l]On tria~js ~if L T) j' the BRR~ RloeFarmJrng, SystelTl.5 Division has demareatedjbe land Ithat can be used for this c;rop'P~:n' sys~en1

(aus ~oihJ·wed by u·,aWl.spJ.([nl led doe il1lamarn)· ~mo t h ree majorr target areas ( 1).

The onset and IU~6 duration of w,ei[ (2.00 m IWl rn~n per month) and cool season s, soil '~ex ture, sui tabi] i.:ty of the ICroP. for the: wi mer season~,and socioecouom it fac tors

in nucn:ce the choice ,of vaiiruetarn comb i nation S within 3. targetarea, The field duration and. the establishmem date oftheaus crop, and theperlod between iUS andaman, determine the date on which the aman rice crop can be ~.mil1spi~'I11 ted. Withi n any single yearl the establishment of the aus c]"{)P may be spread overa period of 4-8 wk. U'rain. starns ]a,~e~ the estabHshn~ent of the .2IUS crop w]~l be del.B.)M:!d, which forces the amancrop to roe pl.a.nted in September. Socioeeonomic factors"insuffitien~

labor, capital, and draft powerspread the harvesting of aus and. transplant in g, of am an oyer several weeks,

The sod oeco:nornUc CODS[raJm:s :~ imi t the a:dopd:(H1. of :~ he BR 1 ~ BR 1 ] trop'p~ng pattern by fanners. The aman !crop is v,ery sensitive 1'0 the; date: of establishment and [Q moisture stress. If theBR 1 v,arietyi snet Ira nspl anted by 2S M,a;y (eitneroe,cause ,0,[ the delayed onset ,~fw,et season ,O'f soeioeeoaomje faC:~Q:[s). the crof'" ping pauern BR 1 .~. BR 11 m,ay not be adcpred inthe ce nrral and eastern p,a:r18 0,' :i3arig~~,ade:sh. This feedltu.t!ck provided sc .. fbr furtber refinement ,of the

technology and led to the esta blishment of cut- da res for the various tar.~et aress .•

A.coo.rd.ir(g]y~ eat-off dates were sugge!i;ted~()r the no rtheiflSl. area (target area I) based ona predictive model,(M,agor er ,a~ 1990) and for the southeast area based on observations (fig. 1) .. Al:h~.rnative ,c[opp.i.:ng petterns wereoffered 1,0 farrners who fa.Hed to establ ish their auscrop by the ·cu'~~l'j,ff date ,(Table ill).

THE PROBLEM

ORR I. ~ilS reenmme nded 26 h i:gh-yi eldi []~ If.i eli': varieties sui ttl b le a ll over Bangladesh for specific seasons, The tecbnologles generatedby the Rice Fa.r.llIl~ng Systems Division have been [jested and proven 10 be p,mducdve and have been adopted in many target areas, For-example, in Jamalpcr, HJO% and 85'% of the; farmers adoptedmodern rice varieties ~n the born and transplanted arnan seasons, " .. reg.pec(:]vle]y('l"Joque etal 198~). Farmers. 'D,f~hollnl!. V~~lage in [be Gaz~>ur .D i:st.r] Cl adopted recommendedcropping systems teehnologies tn rnore ~ha.n (HJ ~o of d:1>t311f land and nbtained 1 Vila IT1LOtle; peryear [ban the nonadopters. Similar:3Jdoption studies .were reponed byAsaduzZf],man (ill 9(9). Herdt and Garda (19&2)j Hossainet a~ (~984)j D,a]ry~ple ([9S'~). and Hossain ,(]9~:7). AU these s,wdicsin~es['~&i:ued nnl.y the wale of adopuon of agncu l[u ral teehnolegies and t he factors [h at co J1 tributed 10 the adop,t i on, process, None attempted 'W delle rrnl ne the impact ,of adoptie non income. consumpeion.and other expenditure patterns,

Th is study at tempted to determ ine t he extent of ado P~] on of the farm ing systems technology and lIS tmpact on tneome, eonsumptlouand lot her e,xpendim.re parte rns IFe lated to pro duel lOI'JI.l n {he [armi ng eommu nity. The resu 1 ts we re ,expected to provide bastcinfermarlon dun would guide researchers and poli,cymal:re:rs iatae ,efm!c:ie;nl (:I.~ location ,of research resou rces,

OEJ.ECllVES

The specific obj,ect[ves of the study are to deterrniae (he estern of {;~doplion ,~}f imp.r(ll~e:d 'crop'p'~ng systemsby farme~s!u)1 evaluate the :i~]P~Cl of~mpr.o:ved cropping systems on resource us:e~ndprodm:::'Uvny; and 10, assess [he ~Jmp:actohmproved ereppi ng systems on farm ~ nco me. consumpt ion,a.:nd Odl e r expend lture panerns.

~ n view of the pro b le rns and obje,clives of the sludy, the foll owing hypotlhes,es we retested: most farmersare adopters of imp:mved C reppl ng s,ys terns; the exte nt of

resource use and pn.n;lucfivity vades according to the: ~evle~ ofadoptiol'l;a:ll'ild ineoroe, eonsu mpit~.Oin! and otherexpe nd.~ tu re patterns vary accoli'di rig UJi the exte nt ·of

adoption. "".

METHODOLOGY

Thi~ W~;~ :an ex Po;s,telval.l.:lm.Uon 9[ ,cf9Ppin:g syslelllls researc~1 in. Bal:1g~,adesh ..• ~t was ~le~]gHed "~ocom;pan~ fa~mers ~'I ~ ~ drffer,en[ ~I~v,e]s.?~ 3d?pU~n a nd to measu ~e the ~mplact of cropping s'ys[:ems ~c,clilno,~ogy on producl~lv.lly of reseurees, farmers

] ncorne~andexpe nd II u re patterns.

Twosites (Kull'luJg;JIuj and Shakul1d) were selected (or [he study .. At Kamalgan], croppi ng systems research was eondu C ted; wh U e ar Si taku nd, mulri ]ocat~ion test i:l1g was ,eondu,cted,.At both sites, small-scale ptlot production programs bad been

la tlnen ed and we re plwductjv(::, Both sHe s have 200 m rn or more rai :~l[a~ I. per mn,[llh from. May [0 September" sandy loam to ,day loam .\\oill!nnnd~fre·e zone (Le ... , a max[mum level .of 30 em of water after he.i:I,vy rainfall), and double-rice cropping system pr!ev~{Ju:s.iy domi nated bi)' localvarieties,

Kc'tn'wlganj s lie .. A su rveywas co mdu cted in 13 vi llages wit 11 i nft. radiu s of.5 km from the Kama]ganj ba.z:aar~[o collect information on nom.ling, land holdlngs, and OOcllj'pla.l[iona~ structure of all househo:l:d$. V~~.lages prone ~m fkHlding were omitted, The relna!ning se-ven v~n~ges had sim~l~rlandi [ypes~ Households whos: m.,ljor sauree of mcemewas a~ncult.nre were ~,nduded In the.sar:l'lple . .l?rop~mlomlh!: rH,ndo m sa 111p I es were 01 ra wn f romeach of 1 he seve WI V] i I ages to 0 btai n 90

respond em is.

Si:takund Site .. A household survey was conducted in ,]6 villages .. The v~U~e!i w~ere :l:hgr.i ell: ltu re W~"iI1!O( L11 e mrnJo! nc.cupat i on were excl uded, Sill; vil lages were selected for [he study .. Fromthese six Vd~.<;lges. 901 households were selected based on PH)P'lHltlo.na'te random sampl i ng.

Several factors sffeet the recorumendariens rOIL rulnfed lowland rice cropping :sys.~em5.F.act.ms such as ~.iming, varietal sequence, intensity (single or double

croppi ng), and n it m~e~ and phOlSphoru:;;, applieation h~VE ls each constitutes. part of [hie recennnendation For ~his reason, a. scoriog system that ~ncorporated these parameters was developed on a.IP.I.m basis and then cumulated for each farmer,.

'Tim"lng .. in normal y,ears 1(200 mm ,r.n,r more rain in May},. tarmersareadvised IjO grow, moder 11 vari eties on heavy. tex UI red sollsln bot h :l he aus and aman seasons. Del ays rn the ofilse ~ i[)if the wet seasonan d constraints I'll 1.8 bcr or d :mfE power mean Ih~s recomrnendarion must be a:djusteduJ ~",dude a. cornblnatlon of modern and local varieties and si:n~le: cropping, Adtef,nativ,e varietal sequences have been recommended 10 adjust to these constramts I(T.ab]e n. The recommended sequence for a given rra nspbllrl,[ i rig d3U~ fora particular p],()il: was given a score of U)O. Whol e~ fa rm scores were welgh'le,cI by area and expressed asa percentage.

Vlu'ietal sequeuce. Irrespective of timj~,g> a. weighted sCore was ,given tothe cornhi run ion cfvarieties (Table 2). A farmer who grew a modern variety inaus followed hy amode rn va rl ely ina-man o I'iIi iii. part i cu Jar plot reeei veda score of 100.

Fertilizer rase . Based on anintensive shl.dy of farm variety aed fertilizer

re span se, I he N~) K ie rt i ~ f zer reeom me ndation is 6iO :40:20~()r amodern rice va rte ty and 40:20:0~nlr a local variety, Onl.y N[erti~.izerwas scoredand calculated 01.1 the bas isq.~ plo~~ pleIiOe,n[~lg~a~Orn!j ngto the varieta I. seque nee. Reccrmnendedl e~el s oif N fertilizer are shown in Table 2. For example .. a farmer who grew a. modern nee variery in aus follcwed by a modern variet.y lnaman and used a. tala] of ~2fl kg N/ba would receive a score of 100 Cor level of N [ert.illilier, SimiLar1y. for the faUow - local rice variety pattern in aman, a, [a,nner who used 50 kg Nlha would eeceivea score of 100 for N level, However, a farmer could receive a score of more than 100' for a given plot by using more than the reccmmended leve] e}f' input, Scores were then cumulated urn awhole-farm hash; and weighted according to extent,

. ..rr~reg:me Scores. D i KCeH! n t studies showed t ba t va rietal seq uence, croppi Jil(l i~~l~,ens~w; and fertilizer nne are the uloslimpQrtaru factors resp{lnsib]~e.for ;~:rn.nllar (~rop Y'I~dd ple.r hectare (H.oqllle and Hobbs 1981) .. The correlation mamces rn Tables 3 and 4, show similar telatlonshlps between total prcduction and otherfaetors such ~.~s varietal sequence, ,(imppint! intensity, and N~ennizer. '~~~owevew. the relar .. lonshlp between total prfld.Uf1iUl]al]clNf,erlil.izerwCl.:S !1?t s.ignific<mt. Th~s might be due 10

l h e ~ ow nne of fertillze r use d by fa rmers, To ealcu late the adop [MJn score I eq ual l;;\reighlswere given to these three faeaors and the data were aggregated on H peryear as well asper farm basis, Two crop years were includedin tbe stuu.y and an average score over 2 yr was used 10 MfOU:fJ the farmers .ac(1o,rciing ,'to the extent of adoption. At KmnaJganJ! the hlghesraverage score .t'or :2 yr was 288 and the lowest was 15,6.

I nd I vi d u a Ish a vi ng a n aggregate score of ~_ 200. ;:. 200 to .!£. 2!~4! and :;,. 2.~4 were defined as low. mediumand high adopters, respectively, The same scoring

tech n i q ue wasappli edat Sdim k u nd.

ReB!'"c SS[O!lU na]:ysi:s . was done o~ 1 he house ho~ d; su rvey data IO'lde:ntUy the extent 'to IN h I ell scooecononuc factors affected I he dec 15] ('Jill ioadopr modern nee

teehn elegies, Themodel used was:

ADSC ~. F' (FSmZE. POWER,. AGE. EDUC, .EXFA. PDLND. IECONOM.nc)

where .ADSC = a.ggrega.wdadioption scone (%); .FSIZE ~~a,:rm size (ha);

POWEml = number .of nlll~m3.l,s usedfor power per hmlselllolid Dr p~r hecH3!re;, AGE

.~ '. age of ~ he n onde n,~ '(yea.rs)~ IE: DUe = edu cation allevel of respondenr (ye,ars of

~lcho()lim1g);" E __ ._ .... ~. experiencein farm~ng (y~nrs;)I; f.Ot.:ND ,= percentage ~f rent

1111 land: and ECONOM ~c ~ number of effective :r~lmlly members per household or per hectare, The ordina.ry least squ~m,~ (OL:S)~echn.[que was used and the best-fit m:ode [ wa~ sel eeted on the basis of the sign a nd sign ifieance of t be cQif':[fici:ents..

The enterprise b:ud~e~in~ technique was usedto ~~mdyze~he extent of resource use and prodLU::dvh:y. Aus, amarr, and nus and amen wereconsidered as. [n.div~du.a] enterprlsesaecoed in,g m the extent ni adQPliQ:U1 ... The budg,eling, ~e,chn~.que was, used because it is relatively easy to understand .. A farmluyou[ oftheindividual households. was drawn and the s:ize of the plots '[enUlr~H~ :St;.<UMS, andtypes of land were recorded, Croll' production data on v~I.r.i·eluJ: sequences, dates ()ral~. operations, blbufl animal power. and orherlnputs (e.g., fert.iUzen and insecticides) were recorded for each p.lot Dam on the use '~Jif familyand hired labor were classified

u nd e rmale, ie rnale, and eh i ld re n .. Crop' pr(')dliJ.ct~on d 3tH were, cnllected n.lOSUy from. a male ad ult ,(pfe~e:nlb~y the head of fheh ouse hold), Dally wage, rate and wel€:k~:! market p rices of ~: np u tsand nut p L:I.u~ W~nl int he project a rea were .a]sQ recorded. Data on p.hyslc~llp'ar.mne~efs sueh as :ral nfH]~. and temperature were also recorded .. Data. on crop y~,eJdw.ete collected from farmers and vuJidaled using crop-cut estimates, Differem effidency C~ ~h:Ti~;!, wereculeu luted on a per hectare basis using current

prices, .

Because rural heuseho I dis do notke ep reco rds of 1 he i r activit ies. it is d iffieu II fLO, estimate activirles done on a. self~emplloyn:'1eillu basis and expenditures that do. 1110'[ requ ire cash tmnsactions, Income and expenditure data were eclleeeed on aweekly basis (0 redacet h e degre e of! naceu racy. In k lnd Ira nsacuens were val u eel usi ng the prev.aHing market price, Girls received in cashor in kind were considered as income, Do nat ions were c.:Qns~der~,tI as expendl ~ II res. Con s umpt ion from. p. P1Liu cuon .~dS . regarded ascash inflow (1111"::011116) as well tt"l cash outflow (expendhure) .e Vuhchned irrcorneandespendlm-e da~a were' aggreg"nedi'(N:l a year.iybasis. Comparisons were made ona per farmas well as ona per hectare basis U) standardize for land area and family members, .~especUv,e~y ...

number ,of active fa m i Iy mem h ers per fa m ily and the Dum he r of anl mals pet :EamHy were s[gn[fkaru]y and posH'ively associated with '(be adoption of modem riee t1edlnofogics at both sires, However. ~here was an. ~r:rverse re~Blt:ion~hlp between farm ~if~e ,an.d ,ado~lkm of' m;rJd,eru li)c~,vil]··i.,~t[es" Tbl~,' 'W~s:alSIO:~ou~~ out ].'n '[,h~ ~l~di~s of lM.Mllherg,er (1960)~.J~:Jln[:1O (1'967). ~op.p and $]]1,( 1.9'63J, .Fe]~c];ano ,( 19'68)" Madlgnn o.9'6S)." Guzman I( ] 913).! Islam (l986l. and Hossain (1987),

Enterprise budgeting places informationabout production and inpm in a common 'f,m:m~~7r~~. ltp:r_ov~d,~'~ :in~i,~ht_~,irrtDth,e ~ffi:i,ency ~:fi~pu'[ u,s~ ,and Its ~~plaCt, ~~~ prcduetivhy. Al both sues, aus fo]~oWE:d by aman was the m,~jlur cmppm.g s,ystem.

In I. 989'~ the average rice yield in Kamalganj was 2" 396, .kg/ha. in, 3.us.2!.5u'1 in a~n;ni and ~,9~7 in ausandaman (Ta~le 8). Group compa~i~onss,:I'IOi~",ed that. the dlrf,erence.ln yldd between Low and high adopters was 5Jg,l[l'Ii'l'c' IU. High adopters obtained 1,127 kg more 'fice/ha Jper 'ye.a.r than low adopters (Table 9). In 1990. lhe average dee yield was 2J;'23 kg/ha in aus, 2'19~7 ~n oman. and 5S70 in aus and arnan, Results of the g:roup' ccmparisonsshowed dUll the yield d[ffer,el1lce between ]0\'1 and h:i,gh ,adopt,e:r~ ~a~, ,signi:fic~u'lt" H'i~Jn, ;~'~upu:::r.~ 1~)b[ai.IiL,ed ~.10S kg ~ore. ricc/l.nl. than ~,I'}W' adopters ( Iahle 9)., Increase m Yield n1Il,g:i1t be due 10 adoptmn of the nee lechno[ogy and favorable weather condltlons in both years,

Average riee vields in 1~)89 ttl: Sitakund were 1,([..:5 kg/hi! in aus, 2,639 in . aman, anti 2,1639 In "I.US andaman (Table ,8). Yield dwrferenoe between ,low and hi:gh adopters was signifkanLB!igh adopters obtained 1;.440 kg m re rice/ha per year than low ad iprers (Table 9).

[I n- IlJ,o[r ~ ~""~ r<fi n .... ri "'_." 'i! ~.'" iI- i ·'1 i'J 'j'l'" .. "" ., ,p ""1 \''''1 ~ 'I 'Q 'II ~ ku/ '~,~, .] ... 3 5· ~ n- 'il .... I"'j ri ',i r]' I

_ .. .7U1• !I,<Ii .......... !!.,IJj~ly .lLl~W i~"""'~1U I~ (11 -'" ~I.,;(,IIl.~Ii...I~, 'rhl',,~~, L",!!,~,},Ut~ '-n' IU~,',llali 1.,"'11.. I~ U~.U"'UIII' U.IL"IU

3,,251 in "Ji.USLlJl,d .:.1[I1:1an (Table 8). Group comparisons showed dun. yield difference hetwee n low and high adopters was s.]gnjJk~U'it. High adopters obtained

]',.293 kg mo e rice/ha than low adopters.

AI Sltakunu, '1989 dee yIeld w:, low compared with yi,el[d :in 1990 'because of the drought at [he beginning or lhe aus gleason and insect infc"'mio:n during, the aman season.

1[1 the ~lUS and aman seasonsin ] Y89" the ~m.el1si[:y of using hu man labor, animal draftpower, and fertilizers were highe t :ibr t,heliLigh adopters followed by medium and low udopters (Table l 0). MO~1 of the high and medium adopeers were smallholders who cultivated their land more intenslvely using famil,y labor, Sitakund farm,cr" used m rc hired laborand ~ni?_lal power ,~om.P'a:icd \Yil~ Kalllalg~nj fa~mer5, because the oppo.rtumt~: or off-farm cmploy.men~ IS rngher at Su",kund. ~daku.nd farmers may have liiuhstnuted fa:mdy ~,abor with hired labor nd engaged 'Ul nonfarm activities . Farmer: 8l bOoth sites used less fertilizer than the recommended nne

i\(liOlh sites, more lhu~17J.% of the total expeuditure W~t!\ ~pent on

housebc ld req u.i rente n M~ ~!ind the rest was Slit m on V\1lllm:l, resou recs (Ta:i"ll,e 14). Farmers incurred the highest farm expenditure on hired labor and inputs,

Ex,pe:.nd itu re on i np u~, use was d f reet I.y Fe hlteiJ[O the udopt to n of teen nO~Qgy. SUukund farmers spentmere fJln hired labor because [he wage: ratewas hig,herdue to partial ~ nd us u riu.Hz:~~~i on. of t he site, The h i,gh,c 5:i1 h()usen(JI~d, expenditure was for purchfls i rig dec. T:n hi Vii as i n;~en;e]y rel H te d . to [he~d()iPt~ (ltln of 'tedmn~ugy ,(~ala O(?t s hown )., At ~,')nl h S~ t.s~" ~,u::loJ),t.~ ~)'I:'I o~ nee te ch noh~lgy, helpe d 1 he: farme rs ana.] n pa rua~ self-sufficiency i 11 ricaIn Kamal.g~lnj., Iess emphasis was given till educ.ati.o.m. .

med k~i ne.and a ill i: m(i~ I p rote ill. Bu 1 au S i tak undo h {gil adopte rs spe nt more on education, medicine, and al"lim~~11 prnte[.Il. fo]h:.W\i'lcd hy medium and low adopters Simil!af patterns o·f income and expe.l1ldi.mrit! were ohs..ervcd in 1990..

Annual 1l100meS and expenditures are presented in Table 14,. Average results OV'~ r 2 ye:~ rs ~ nd i cat ed 1 ha~, cash hal a nee at both s~ res was d i reetly rel ated to the adoption or [Cclliuw:l]ogy except in (he case of medium adop[er\~ ~n Ka'Wl,1HJganj. b genera], tlds indicates lhat farming ~s ~l profitable acti'V'ilY a,

Ad upl iJ~n ill f ICroPP in¥ sy~ lie n1S te chl~;ol ogles Imd, a su hSl um j a I .il1t1 pact Q III th e econo my oJ the y~ llages, S mu I~ IMn]de:r::;, we re hi g.hildopt e rs uf 1 he crl~llpp'm$. ~y~te m~ tecnno logy. 1, he IluS~,1 .~dn pt e rs did [1(H a.ppi,y ~ he, reeomme nde d d ose • o~ f e rn ~ i ztlr_.The I:lO~l ~e 11:0 I d :sur~~y IH~I~~tcd lhi;u~rrHlHlandho!dc,rs ha~ low ,. urdasm~: power .. rhe pmvls~on of crcdl~: facl!lltlcsw(luld enable' fU:f[he~iw:.l(1tp'[~(Hl 0 modern nee technologies,

Ahho:u,~h [he ~xl~m or resource us-e, ~n[heproduc[[onJllm~,c."'~wrtl~~ almost the same at both sues .. the '\!.I·eJd was lowerat SI[;lkund because ·of vartanons In natural facters, Even under Untt~~"'{IrHble: c(Jtndl~t[ons duri rn.g l'9B'9'-90 'in SitakL~.nd. the recu.m.rm:~[~ded tec]u1()~ogy OU(p~,·.rfo,~'m .. red the traditio,nul Jlrncllcc;~. Tne suady SI.1~)\.vedl that hl~b~adopt,en; used more hiredlabor U!ii well .'~:S lumily ~ .• d,1ur tn the prodtH:uon process .. H ired blbnn:r!\ are the landless or the: small lundholders. Thereterc.un ~,tl:empl, should he made 10 improve the adoption of modern rice technologies t.hnJugh [he exte nsion .... crvices, This \;villgcnerate more employment opportu~it.ie~ and l: nett use 1 he: Ill.] Fe h'1S~ rig P( )Wle'.r of l he taJ.nu l~,es::; an u til C smal ~ ho Ide I'S.

. .u .' AI ~I]:uu gbJ. f~H? farm ~ n~ sy:-\t e ms i ndu.ded c r()HS, I i vestock. hcrnesread-f or~5UJ.

a nd offjaH'~ Hen \1 ~ uc~. [he n C(;!ii~ctur ~"'as 1 he d om m~'1 nt cmnpnne n fin Ihe J"tudy areas, Ihe nee cropping sysrem .~~,~ubject 10 natural bazards, ,1rhcrer,~re" anenuon m'ustbe ~ivel1 ro other sources of iinco:me (e.~,~in~e~l~~ve .sn·l;'i.II;-~caie vegcu,Db~e ~u~a~alioJ~. g(HH rea;ri,I11L~. and pOI'l~1 cU!~[RJn?; :of [,iSh)1 dUIIC.oU Id SH~hn. i:~c and increase Inomne. Thepotemial tor Inoriag,ncuHural. mcome mast also he explored.

At Ka rna ~ gu uj, there were ~1 n rice p rneessi ng cen ters .. Far me rs we re force 1I 1(1 se H l h~~ r gra i .1' II.> deal crs at lowe r pricesat [hc[ imc ,('!I'~ burves t t om ee t III rg(;: n tcash needs. The development of small-scale I()c~~~! pru(.;c:;.~i~1g centers :~nay strengthen the :positi'D'lI1 or the farmer.

• 10-

REFERENCES CITED

BBS-Bangh:lide:s,h BLII:F>eau {If Swti:sUcs (1980) Bangladesh statlstical year book, D ha k'l.B~ ng]m:dc~,h.

BRR~~~Ba:nglacillesh Riee Researeh Institute ,( m'989) Abou~ B,RRl Gazipur.j Bangl adesh,

Cepp J H" Si III M L ,( D1968) The function. of lnforma tion seu rces ~ r:: [he [ann. practi ees adopt i on proee ss •. R ural So clot J. :23: 14,G~ lAn,"

D.I.'I,~l)'m."p. l.iC, D 9.' (l.9S6).~\e,·.velo. p.'inenl,.and, '. :spre,a.d, of. high~y~el,d. [~Ig rice v, r a:r:i,e~, iesin. develapiagecuntries, Unlled Stales, Agency lor ln~emauona.1 Developmem"

Wii~~hi.l1llgton~ D. c.

De-Guzman A M (19'13)1 .. Com]an rice farmers' responsetcehange hi croppin~ patterns: a case study, (mimeogs.)

F,d iciano G D. (1968)_ CO;f_rel~'[e~, ef pro~uc~i~:i.~¥ a'!'ong ~(}b:(l,CC~' f~} rmers In Jsubela.

Ph D dissertatioa, U:m\i\er-sny of the fhn.li.ppU'les. Los Bano!S,! Co]i.eg,e~ La,gUI13, Ph u ip'P'ines.

Herdt R W, Garcia L(19B2) Ado~(ion of~nodern ri,oetecilnol and tenure in Bangia.desh. ~m:efna~lon.al Riee Rese.arch '933, Man i la!F'l, n i.PP,lnes.( mimeogr.)

: the ,In~act~ of s~ze ,itute.P,Q. Box

Hoque M z.··. (}. 9.',1 ... 8) .• A.· pmp'D!ll;;;I~ .. ·~."(Irfhe .ex.·, [e.nS.IO.n, of tho _e," B~ngl,adeSh Rice Re5~arc~ Cmpp~ rng SyslenHi Projects, Pr'oJ,ec[ proposal submhted to the h]l)e.rn.auQrnal

Deve loprne III Ce n [reo Ci:l.n~.da.

Hoque M Z.~-I:nbb~ fiR (l98l) Rainfedcmpping systems repo.no[ research f~nding~~u, Bhogrn village, 1975~79 .. Bangl.adesh Rice Research Institute, Gazipur, Bangladesh,

Hoque,M Z. Nasiruddin M, c;:J~~)w,dhu.ry N ll~i~los~a[H: M (1985). Adoption a~d .'

I m P~1(:[ 0] rnn de rn van e~ ies OD nee p'fodtu:uon In Bangiadesh. Proceedings of [he workshop on experienceswirh modern w:i<C.le cultivation In Bailg~.a.desh~

B,,, ngl adesh !~ ice 'R esea r'C~1 Ins [ itute, Ba ng'~~~desb.

~. n-

.I-lossaln A M. Nur~E~E~;ah~~ NazrulI M M (1984:) Farmes adoption smdy of recomm~ml~e;d rai:nlJ~dmoder.n double r,i,oe. cFO'pping palJler~. tec;hnology ~ nder .eX.H.i U ng f~rm~ n. _g systems, Ba I1!gl adesh .R.llice Research Institute,

J oydebpur, Gazi pu r,

Nossain M (1987 )F;alrm size, ten angt, a nd la nd produ ct~vi ty:. an ~na]ysi s of fam1 level data In Bangl adesh agrku ltu re .. Ba ng 1 adesh Dev, Stud. 5(3 ):285 ~348.

ISI~:a.m M .R 09g6) Effic2U;~i ,of deep-well pumplrrlganon sysrem In impruv:ing r:~ce-b'as!ed farming in N IJ eva Ecija .. MS ~hes~s, Ce lilt ra I luzon State Universi (Y, Ph [1iIJP~Il,e5.

Juliano C P, Jr. (ISH)?) The relationship between some characteristics of rice farm opera to rs and adoptio n fI;t some recomme nded pract ice s in rice prodla.ction .i n. seventeen barrios of Laguna, MS thesis" University ofthe PhiUpp[nes College of Agriculture, College, Laguna~PhiJi.ppines. ..

Licaberger Hf (19160) .. Adoption of new [de~ru; and practices .. Iewa State Univer&.i[.y Press, Ames, ~A.

~ AI ",. ,:1"1 fJI"" R 114' .0:( '~1'(~6 0) T~ h '" farm c ers .,,,-, ~d· no 'U' []I .C' ~1Cl' 'D'C-

u(-,w:!I;.'Ii,U 'b,U.~"1 .~Ir· '__ ,'L~ ::1-', ' (), ,I~!i: Jill, 1 "- .:l! ill,iJ,I~· ~Jlli" '_ If - .1:'\'_ ,-.~,

Magar N P', Siddiqui .M R.. Ahme~ N U. Miah N l,AminR (1990) Creating computeriaed fa rm plans, Paper prese me d at the 1990 AS.i an Fa rmi rag Sysll~:ms Research and Ex[ensio[]Sympmdum. ~.9-22 Nov 1990 .. Burn .. g.kok, Thailand.

MagorNP (1986) Proceedings of high"y.i.e.l.ding variety w'{)rkshop. Bangladesh Rice Research lr1l:stimle, (] azipur, Banglade-sh.

Miah SA,. Ma.nn.an. M Po. (.1.989) modern r~>Q~ technulog~ and ps contrih~uion to Bang~.adesh economy .. Bang]adeshR Ice Re::B~ arch ~ nsntu te, G ~lZI pu r,

Sa ngl.ad.esh.

Tab le 1. Croppi.rngpattern. reoommendationsfor .rahllfed l.owlan.d elllv~roin:mentsw~th heavy

textu red sods based on tfue!ll!us tra[Jsp~anil:]IIIg ,cut~off dates. -

Austr,1BJI1H!ip[and.n:~, cUI.-off d.aR:

C~Op"pjn,gpmltern

Aus T. aman.

30 May

B.Rlmm.Rm

Remarks

BRl

20 May- 30 Jun

eu sho[l't~ dJUJ[.ilIiI::ion local 'V.ar:~e~y

BRIHIUUO

(2), shandU.rill~ioo. modern var.le~y

Aller 20 Ian

{ill). faUow

BRIm/BRIO

(2) modem Alills

Refined o['igirnI!lI recommended p~uem

AmaLn 'tra.nsp~andrng m be oo:n1p~eted wHI-~in. At.mg.ru.s~.

Amain rransf'l~antl~g Is expec~ed totake place in Se]]J!t.e:rnber

Tn'lnsph["dng~obe com.p]e[~d w ~~hln July

Table 2, Crcp v,ari~[:a~ ~eq:ue:rruoe! SCOli€; w~~h. i[,eC1)mmeooea lotali N and P'(Qir each seq'Ue:nce.

AlDan.

Recommended :fel1:Uller~e:v,eda (kg N/ha)

lnter.mity score

Modem Moder,n Local .Fa,Uow Modem Local Local:

Fallcw

Modem Local Modern Modern. .F~.now Locel Fa,Uow Local

100 ,810 ,gO 60 60 4f.1 20 20

120 Ion 100

60. 60 810 40 40

100 :100 lOO

50 50 100 :50 50

aEf ;at [,ecQmmendedl.f:enU lzer ]eve~ ~ .NFE'Rl' (mlrogenfenmzer)' per-oe,l]Itage score fo~r tile ~ndividt:l3j] plet ~s: 1.00.

"fable 3, CQR,elaU,Of)u!la.tr:ix used toscore adolllt1:oill aJ;! K_1l_m.a~gaJlj ~l1Ildiy siie. B3JJg~adesbJ (l9g:9~90~I.

bue-n~~ty sequence

fertilizer (N)

,1989

[I:l[:enslty

N ferrHizer

..!(Ii",OCU::l'i

TOli11 ipFoduct1:0n. per h.ectare

~O.OO,g1

0..4749**

0.55'1113**

0.1872

In:tens~ty

N feniUz.er

-O.O~.2:9

o.un

0.11:54

Toud producda;c perbeetaee

-O.I036

0,1886

Table 4. Correlation matrix used to score adoption a~ S !,~akiLlnd. study si'~e. Biang~ades:h (19891~9;Q).

blterosity sequence

FertUizer eN)

0.7364**

In[ens~ty

N tertillzer

..JO .. 3S26*> -0.23,12,

0..6923*'"

0,1699

0.15>89

loUd, produetiou per hectare

-0.'031@o*

'~1.n01

1991J

·'{.t3M:8

0.5549**

N fertilizer

0.0721

T'o~al p[OdUCnOfl Per iilec~ale

0.'1]1160

Table .:)'. D~s;t]"ibudo.n of hou seholds aocQ,rding ~o extent of adop't~onm two rainfed

sires" Ba.ngladesh (] 989~90)'.. -

Bxtent of ,aJdopUon

Kan~al,gan.j

Sitamnd

No. of b.ou.seho:ld:s

% of total lu:rusehdds

NO'. of households

% 'of(Q[al houselilo.~d:s

Total

IS 47 23 88

10 30 14 54,

1.8 56 26

100

L.ow

M.edimn

High

moo

.~ 17 -

0 00' ~
- r- e- ~
- ., a
,0( ..._ ~' '~ 0 0 M M Vc """",""J
4"'l M V ,,,,g §:~
.c Q.j
,~
'!U
't:iI
I~ 0., 0< ~,
- .J!::i
00 V t.n ~
,~ OIl :E!
't!:i nl_" \0 !.l"l M 0 0 ,~ ~ oodi"' '!l"""llili
m p:: .,... .-, . ,I!:
'U ~
~ ,~
IV:;! B
,~
~~ ,~
!ZI ,~ a 0 0 t"
.""",
TI CI) :l t'"- 0. '0;:1
,J:'! "'~ I~
tl '0 ,!,- ~ '~ C'\, 0 \0 00 ~ ~ =:
Ill< '0;;1- - N - , &:
~ '~ 0.;
,..
! C"1I C~ E:-
re ::::: 0 rCQ (J;:i I
~ Q 0. OQ '0' M. '!"=i! ~ ~ ,""' .... a
.2 ..J 10 I'~ I
.... 0.;
:Q"
.0
'C
':'G'
' ....
0 \ii'":i, 0 e
ii.;;o;.iI' 0\ 0 f';:I
~ :;: e s
,~ \0 ViI v r--. - t~ r:--. ~ ~
~ ~ ='! ill M c
tlJ p.;
:9
tJ!l 1m· 0 ~
. ~ .:J:::i 00' ,!--!!. ~
'0 '~ s
~ +;p;;;o!f "-0 "n V':I OC) Q \,0 M 00 ~
0 .~ ::::J::: v r......-! ~,i-il
...
U ~ ~,
Q .!!l
~
~ ~
TI E 8 e- I
'OJ ~ ~, 0
~ ~ =:! 0\, 0 ~,
.,~ " el
~, '0 \Q 'n '-.Jf "0 0 'f""l 0 0'; '..-I, ....
~ I1i) ~,,,,,,,,,,,
=:I: '~ ~ ,r"'l, ~ ,:"'J
0 p."
'..=
"-
OJ >.
~ 0 0
~ ~, 'F'!J 0'1 ~
., . ·,8
t; a '~ In -::t 00 - N 00 0 Q
, C ..J ..r "!"""""!
~ ~
~
L.o
~
~
'U
.~
i9 ,.-... ~
Q >..
:J;::; 0 ~ ._", ....-... ..-.
0 c . ~ ,_
Q .,1;"",1, ~ 0
0 .- "-" '~ e: ~ =
10 ~; ~ ~
0 .. '~ ~ ~ ~ ~ .",,_....
0 ~' -0: U'jJ 4i
Ii::: FO .'~ ~ e th '""
':r.J '!""'!' r.:ii ,~ ...." 8: '-' s
a J~ ~ ~ 'I:i 01 Q
10 ~ bii W ~ ~,
0 .;j",,;! i~ :=; Q. -- S ~ b,
~ .!. r...'l en ~- , E ~: e 0
...... c: i: "(;i3 S 0 v ~ - """' Q, ~,
g 0; """" t'\l , ~,~I
~ ~ ,.. ~ ~ '1'1:1 ... ~
'<0 ~' '!""'Ii ~
P' .e- lI'"'"'! ~ ~ ,~ s; ...... ~ ,..,
, u ;:;:I 0 0 ';0 :::II ,n,) ~I
u 0'1 0 ~ E
~ ~ s::::, e ~ '~ Q
::c c:Q ~'o RI ~ C 0, !ilJ iJ.;;.;." EP .~ ;::::I,
0'\ rei ~ 0 ~ re ~ ru ,~
',~ 0 ... ' Oi;l: 0 (1!:! ~ = j ''IO!
~ ~ ,t'.,!!] 'TI l1., U ~' < ll. ~ -e UJ
...... Table 7. Ord.hmr)' least squares es~m~al~es: of :t:acto,rs infllUi€nc~: . the decisi.an.

~o soap't modem rice: tedmo,logles in. lWO' Ia~n6ed sites, Ba:n.~· (I'9i89~

90) ..

lH11'(U**'" (U)I,383,)

.,i0 .. 09'1 **oti ,(O.O~.6)

4 .. 0'5811'* ~1 .. 02J,** (5.406),

Q,lOllins (0.1'90')

250 .. 062~*1fjI (l4.24i7),

~O. 220i* ~ '" ('0.045)

J, .. '662~'** 5.2.28>f¢ (3.288,)

:ECO'J1iOm lc unit/tis. An]ma~ po,werlba

E . inf . ()

.~ -I '" = I -,- .-,: ._-, ' ,-;- '" (:,-- :,-.---;- ,-, I ' .~-

. X\piI![.lence u] .. arming yr

.. 0.,14'105 i((]i.28m)

4.56l* (3.573)

~O.040ns (0..166)

0 .. 2.09** (0.10.:0

0.13

0.38

Frario

D .. F.

4.84

7.47

>l\"'*sigrn:ifican~ .a~ < 1 % !l?robabHiLyleveL .us1gm.ficalWt at <5% probab.Hi.ty level, *sign~fican:t at 10% probability level. ns=net sigruficau-rut. pjgUlres in. ~be: pa:renUu::se:s l:ndica'~e s:tamcfa.rd er.I1"o·JrS.

T,3i:b~e S. Ex:t-efl!t of adioptioiD and .!tl!v~rage .F~ce yield (kg/ha) in two rahued s~~eth Bangladesh (1.989.190)."

Bx~el'[t ef adorp(~on

Aug

Total.

Aman

Aman.

Low

1989
2066 2344 44\W 1023
2,286 2596 4882. 1600
2877 2660 5537 :n01
2396 256m 4957 1625
199'0
2199 3024 5223 1721
24173 2859 5332 1722
32tH 30fi.7 632.8 2.080
J623 2947 ,5..570 I 816 Med.wUlll

High

AI~

Medium

FUgh.

An

79'1

1147

615 .U52& lS66

1435

U!14

3254 .2:639

2402 3350

32S1

Tabie 9. Bxtent,of !!Idoptinn nod oon~parjson (Jf y~eh:l dliJ[:erenoes at two rainfed. sites, BaIligladesh (1989-90}.

Ex~e'nt of ad('jp~i.onl ciompaj',lS!on

Kama[ganj

Aus

Aman

Au!;

Anum

1989'

Bet.we~n Iowa:ncill. medium

Between

d" )1 'I.' 'I).

men.1m ano u~g~ t

Between

low and. hIgh

591** 64 ns 655*'* 50.1* 12] ns

199'0

Between

~ow andmedium

- 5111:$

Between

medium and high

788** 2f}8 ns 996** 358 [1$

~. 61 as

297 DS

Between

~ow and high

W62** 43 ns l105u 353 ns

., 2:1 ~.

THible 10. Resource use and lProdlU:~iv~ty .acco:ril.i:ng to ,extent: ofado:jliti:on i:n. twomhlied. slte~! Blang:l!ad~8h.,.3!II!l:s + aman {1989).

Rescarce usel p[.()dlllcUv~~y measure

LAbor 0],) Family Hired

An£mal (I~) fa.m.ily Hi.red

f'e:r[i.~i.ze:r ,(kg) N

1"2"°5

Yie]d (,kg)'

G~oss rcewm (taka) To,tiiI cost .(~d:.a) Full OOSi[

Ca.sh cost

Production oos~ (rlJi:lcaJk_g) FuU OQS~

Cash. cos~.

Ne't [[,etum, (~3jta) Pulloost

Casfu ccOst

Relnrm to (~aka) F.amily ]abor Hired. labcr AiIllmi:'l] drn[~ rnabor .Ma,te:dal inputs

Kam,dganj S.~.~abJnd
Low Medium. m~]1 Low M~ium. Hi h
_'_lg~
1 ,330. 1 .417 2,012: :1 .285 m .980 2.201
~ .04,8 m ~139 1/'148 1,.0·41 1 ;642 m .6:25
282. 278 324 244 338 582
5.38 515 623 m9S .J06 292
524 504 606 no 365 Ul9
14 2l ri 5".1 41 Ul'3 29 54 7,15 38 72 9"1·
1.4 23 3 t 4 6 9
4Al(!l 4~B82 5,537 ] tSl4 2.~{)27 3~2:54
25.mS 27,692 31,206 ~3.269 18.209 2!O~.548 10~67~ 2,,2.81

121,000 3,28m

mO~4177 2,688

15,572. 3.,~.96

16,,2{U 3.552

IS.U4 ,6~~.S2

2,.41 0.:51

2 •. 415 [1'.67

2 .. 81 0.57

5.77 104'8

(i:~6 Ll5

5.56 0.89

14.347 22~'i3I

1:5,.692 24~4U

lS.,.6i34 28,010

2,792- illO.581

2.00B lli4.,647

2~U4 m4,096

3.74 U.1.8 5.44 19 .. 09

3 ... 75 ~2.2'9' 5 .. 9'8. 9'.89

2..19 10.65, 5,[8 [l350

1..70 .5.00 21.1'9 11.08

1.07 3.24 16.35 6.1~

1 . .53 2 .. 25 3 .. 28 4".34

"fable m 1. Resource use allidprrodudiv~[y according to extent ofadopt~on i.n hvo rainfed

s ites .Ra ngl :ilides:h t iii]] S + an~an (l 990). .

Rescurceuse/ pifoduc~i vit}' measure

:Lni:I(Jf (h) FamIly Hired

A:n.~nla] (b) Pa.mi,ly Hired

fen~lize;lr (kg) N

P''JO~,

_-J

Yield (kg)

Total, ciOsl(n~klll) l'uU cost

Cash ,COSl

Prod! c;ost (raka!~g) FuH cost

Cash cost

Net return (ta.ka) fu]~ C(l~1.

Ci;jJsh Clost

Returns to (ta.ka) Fa,mHy labor

II ired 11BJ:Dor Anima~ draf[ ](.I1')Or Material inpu.ts

Kama~ganj S ~ul.I;.'U:l],d
Low MecUum High Low Medj.um Higb
] ,393 1 ,522 :2 ,145 1 ,348 2,. 165 2. t53
I .,048 1 j 139 1 ,748 1 ,Ml 1 ,,64,2 m ,6;2,5
345 3£m 397 307 .523 528
534 524 6108 l78 3,30 296,
524 502 606 1 36, 265 1 88
to 20 2 42 6:'3 1 (liS 33 56 89 5 1 7.5 lOI
9' 23 2:4 16 10 ~ 5
.5 ~223 .5 ,,332 16,32:8 2.40tl 3,350 3 ,,646
32.,3001 32,804 38.686 1'9.316 2.4.964 26. 130 10.854 :2.~65

ml.793 3.177

m6,02m 3,64,'],

m2!8:~a 3,809

20.381 5.,628

20,22:1 6,.4066,

2.07 2 ?, 1 '2 .53 .5 .315 6.08 5 .5~
0.47 'IJ .. 59 0 .. 57 1 .58 1 .68. 1 .77 2],446 29 .. 835

It,.om 1 29.627

21.,665 35.045

6,485 1:5,,56,7

4,5,83 m 9' .. 3.36

5.'909 19~·6M

.) .. (l9 ll3.42 7.68 .32.58

4.12 11.94 I.BO 1'9.53

3.59 12.413 7.2,1 14.79

2.24 4 .. 64 4.:22 8Jl8

1.83. 3.30 2.,84 7.3,9

m,.90 3.63 304:>0. 6.88

-23 .~.

'" -l:'

* * ~ '* '* c: ~IO';""

{'i! It"i 00 ("1 0>.. ~~ \O,t'CIN

!!L 'fl.

{'1 C'<ll

....,1 :~

NIl-iii a. Ir-- ,..-I

~~'~l""~,~

~i:'

* .~ ,~ * ill' !=i Ol~r«""l'''''-I"'',"", ,....-::Jr'("i"l

~ II

t"'I'C"':!,

~ ~ ~ C b:' 't::! NON 10 ,~" r"1 ~.'~'O~

~ .~

,(ii,

It! :!.<l ...... ~. ~

"If' 'n .;...; N~I'l~ N'-Ov

..... i!' 'I

'NN

~I

* ~ '* *' 1=i <D~N '0'> e-t t--

'oo:~~"'n

,.....J'~

Ul ~ «. ,~:c:;:

NG'\,t'ii !F"'i'~~ 'lf1, ~ M

,;0, ...

~l'~

,~, "* *"* ~ "*'Ai C

o I.C~,

0."00 61 In- M'il'\

..;",,;

~.

~, * ~ *' "* c 00 ,,_,,, r'-.

00 Cn:o -_U'I. N~ \:Cv-

~. ~ ~ -;(> t:! _

'o::T 0'1 ~n f"'.N~'

\Or ro:,. en"

N'='-

~.~ ~

Of"'lm M M\:o

~ '~~~ N ,C"'~

,

'It

*. ~ !.o!l * "'" ~:

b~~

~ r--. ,M,

'>6 M"N7

'iii *' ,~ * .'l;) .. *' .* ;!c"'l r- ~.

M F"l-' In '<,0 0\

,"'* r<'"I

.~ ~I

*. ~

~~ ~ ~, .,;- !f:- ,~ -'<0'11"1 ~'NNi'~~

-I!- iF- i!"-

'I.QN ~'

-~ 1;),

-lI1 v:- ~,

-:+ ,;.:, ~"

OO\ON '>OQ\Ir--. \0 \0 0'\

...:i "';"-i

00'* <A'

C1>J; ~

0\ 0'>0'

r-o,C""'I,

(":I .q~--:.

~'~I I

L~ ~ ~I 00000 r- a. '>C O~r-'~

.~ ~l I

~ *'

: ~ ;S

CQO\O'> ~NO '00 {., F"i

~ .. ,_ ...

\¢ 'It' N

~. <4 00 * :~ ~ 1,O'f"-.,~

00'0,0 ,..,; ('"F)"";'N

~in"~

*-

:: ~ ~

NOO~ OO~!!f':I OO.~\O

In~"'"

'is ~

II

~I,\ble 13, S!!Imma:ry of whole-farm, cashf1o,w accord ing to ext:ent of adopt ion ,in two rainfed sites, Bangladesh (1'989-90)"

Income/ expenses

Kama~ganj

Si'takund

Low Me,tUum High

Low Medium. High

'rota] income (taka) Faern income Non,farm income

Total expenses (taka Farm expenses

Hou ehold expenses

Cash baWance (taka)

Total 'incClme(~3ik.a) Farm income Nonfarm income

otal expenses ,. u!Ji,ka.) Farm expenses Householdexpenses

4$,056, 26~,201j 18.849

44.{j(l9

4.627 39,982

447

42.668 21,666 21,,002

41,.951

1',22] 34,.7.310

717

Ca, h balance (198'9 + .~, 990, 1,. l64

45,,303 24,6,5[6 20,,647

44,,7.80

5,97,6 38,804

523,

19'89

39,393 41,876 45;,665

24.911 16,,08] 2.5,511

I4,482 3l,1'95 20. mS4

3'7 .. 678 45,92 33,0186

3,6,,:523 40.312 4.3'99' 11,0.13 32.l2:4 29',,299

~n.;(HO 210.38<'9 20,62:~

31,71-6

7,,287 24,42:9

9',2.94

1990
39,755 40,,390 43,3,:2:0 3,8,994 3S~3mS
23,.569 24;266 ~8.648 22,.821 15 .899'
•
106.186 16,124 24.612 16,,173 19.416
40.,151 j4,,999 43,9'69' 34.441 3;2.3,8,1
4.714- 3.432 5-,.6:04 16.1'71 4.:569
35,431 .3~ .• 56,1 38.365 27.610 27,812
,_, 3'96 5,39'1 - 649 4,553 2.9:M
- 127 7.Hl6 10,704 9',,906 12:,228 l"~b]e] 4: Sllm1na~y .of perhectarecash flOWillccordirrug to exmn~ of ad.opi~.io.n. in two rainfed sues, O,ang~ad!ecsh ('1989'-90).

Income} expenses

S.i.la.kuud

LQW Medium High.

TO~3Jl i ncome (taka:) Fanninccme

T'otalexpe:mses' '(~:3Jka) .F~r,[J.~ expenses

H.ouse~ho.ld. expenses

Total ~nClame (tata) farm. runoonwe

N'onfarm. income

To[alexpense.s (taka)1 Ferm expenses

HousdlO~d expenses

4'0.959 23c!,s?41 (58%)

17~13.5 (42%)

.:!IOtS53 4,2:(1(3, (10'%)1 3,6 .. 347 (90%)

406

417.,686 25;,953 (54%) 21~733 (46%)

4\7.B6 6.290 (13%) 40,846 (88%)

550

47,461 30,013 (63'%) 11,448 (37'%)

45.,394 5,.532 (~2%)

39.862 (~~M~l,%)

2,061

198:9'

46,482 15 ,.6~J, 04%)

30,i8i69 (66%),

35,459 4,271 (12%)

:n.UJ8 (88%)

n,023

65 ... 23·6 36,444 (59%)1 28,192

(41%)

57,589 15.733 (21%)

41.856 (73~)

1,6417

83.6:94 41 .. 6HJt {50%)1

42.084

,(50%)

64,727 M,811 (23%)

49',8516 (77%)

18,967

.19§m

38,783 41 •. 13,46 48.662 42,058 5:5.706 72,071

19~6~6 (s:m%)

1'9.092. (49%),

38".136

6.564 (17%)' 3t,572 ,(83%)

24.809' (59%) ID7,(07 (4U. %)

42,,:264 4c;962 (11%) 31.3'(~2 (B9%)

291,23'6 (60%)

19.426 (40%)

~2~M66 4,134 (09%) 38,.032 (9] %)

18.H1S (43%)

23.953 (57%)

.32,60:2 (5'9%) 23.104 (4]%)

.St44J (13%) ;;·1,247 (87%)

'9,6"73 (20'%) 39,528 (80%)

32.447 (45'%) 3,9'!!$24 (55%)

66.084 9.325 (141%) 56,159 (86%)

- 418 6.496 - 630 6,50:5· 5.988

132 :8,563 lO.393 1~.I.S2 24.'955

1, Ta :lIman)..

t area delineation. of ralnfed ]o\v]:andsf:or two [ice c:r(lfl'pirng s,ysl~ems (aus-it. glade.sh ..

,·'}.7 •.

IMP'ACT OF IFABM.ING .s~YSTEMS RESEARCH ON SEl"ECTE,I!)IFA.1tMERS IN MID:"] LLS OF NIfrIP'AL: A CASIE STUDY OFPUMD~BlllUM[U

The ,fhumci:i.Bhumd,i farmi rig sys~ems research swte has be en. In opera.tionfof a jrumbe r of ~Y'ears .~.nd has. developed s~gnlfican~, tech nio'l,og~es~ort he farmers In [be are,a.Exte,n~ive use of the tech n!alogy bas 'bee n deeumen red du d ns, 1 he !.3St: 15 yr. The study to me~rs[lJ~" ~he .in;'EQ,ct .of thefanni.ng systems, program on~he p:mdll ell Vlt)' of d,1 tfen,'lHt farm en lerpnse's.~,nd fa rmers' Income, attbe !iii te lIiev,ea] ed that i nterven ing farmers adopted recom mend ations both i n ~he upl and as well as the lowland areasand ove rallrhere has bee n a posItive lmpaer, partlcularlyl n re],at~on (,0 nut rit ion aspects, T1:1!e ed1lJca[wo nal profHe of the en [I d re n 81. the she ~s also e I1lCOU rag,i ng,

To ~mp~ementa systems approach, .~he. ~epa~tment of Agricu!,ture, (DOA),iniliaLed

a cr!JPP I . eems )gr~m (C~P).:~ n . ] 977 with su pport fmnl~~he I ruegra ted Cereals

Projiect ( fu by the Un i ted Stases Age;ncy fer ~ n te rnat mnu I Deve Lopment.

(US.A~. D), The obi eetive ofthe CSP was to eval uate sun icn-ge aerate d tech nologies ~ 11 terms ofagrcnomic and soeloeee nomic pe rforma nee a rul 10 develop,

modi fi.calions under spe ci fh:: prodnction systems. U sed by farmers in 1 he h:~ Us a 1101

rerai, .,

To lnregrate different components ef Nepalese farmin systems mn[O en-farm research, the Fanning Systems Research and Developmen ~ vision (FSRDD) was established in 19'85 under dru,'!, National Agricultural Research and Services Centre I(NA:R~~). To give .einp,l"las~~ tohill agriculture, ]~fU CSP sites (indudinll:'umcU Bhurndl) were retalned by the .iFS.RDDand farm~ng systems research O'SR) was carried out at. these si tes, In] 990.t be fSR D D wasre named the Central Farrn ing Sysl,ems and Outreach Research Division (CFSORD), and given the mandate to

di . . " ,I" I '~ .

co or II ilia te stall on -ma nagC!Ji Oil treacn re sea rc ~ t,

Ul tle at tent i on had prc1v[OUS ~y bee n given to measu r~ ng (he I mpacl of research programs (i~cludi:n,g. fSR) on e arieuharal deve~'~)I)mem. This study

auempted to dete]"m~.ne the Impact «I'll selected hil farmers, TI.1Je research

'Yasc(}ndu,c~.e~ ~M the Pumdi ~humd[ FS.R~ile by the Central S0cio-E,conom~c R.e~H:: arch DlVJS!(~ n (CSE.R D) m eo l.1 abnratlon wu h rh e CFS o.R n.

1 Centrsl Soelo- Econom i c ResearchDiv i sio n, Nepal.

20,,::mm~, FHrm.ing Sy$tem~ and Outreach Research Division, Nepal.

The ub}ect~VeGif ttl [S study was H)' me asure the .~ mpaet of ~ he fa rrni n.g systeolS prognrum JFSP) u:,~, .the pro~~'~1.ivity o~ ~lif~e:r.ent. farm enrerprtses ~nd on Iarm .

I ncomesm PUIl1,(h Bh u.md~. 1 hie spec I f:lC objec~,I.ve.s were to descnbe uheethno.I.1ISt:ory and I he existing siru ali on at the Pu rod i, Bhu mdi FSR site; eva luare theadoption of the reeam mended ES R tee h nolcgles by fa rmerstassess ~he ru mp~lC[ of the fSR recommended practices on ,crop yte~ds~ foriJ.ge .and fodde:r pro,au.Cti.o,n~ andmilk produc'([on; evaluatethe ,ehtlnges in nutritionaland ,edu!cBtio:n;l aspects of tbe

moni to red [ann fami lies; suidy rhe role ,()if agr.h::u ltural supper ( seretees ~ u the transfer offSR recammended technology to farmers;, determinethe links between [he agr.i.c:ulluraJ SlJllpPQr~ services, fa.rmer;!i, and tne FSR site ,coordi.inator;.Bndi Identify constraints toadopticn of recommended FSR ieehnelcgies.

JUSTIFICATION

M~ny researchers, admini<;tr.ator$, and polieymakers argue thatin spite of he:u.\fY

i nve .. s.'· n~;]. e.ll.l.,.~n a~riclJ ~,tu. fe.,.,. t..h .. e re .... ,h.'.n. s I.Je:e n . u .. t.·.l.Je[ l.l!,pUC. L.· on far~e.:rs. A.' re:.w. r,.e .... searchers have attempted to .measure the lmpact of the FSR program, but they have

concentratedonly I:n the Terai H':g~,on.

Technology transfer from one sire 10 another in the h~lls is. U ,challenge because of the enormous vudnbl~lhy in agroecological and soc:ioec:onomicco:llul.]tions ·[)if line farmers. Because of the heterogeneity of the farming systems ln the. hills, ~echno~ogy has had an ~rn~act only i 11 same uli"e~s. ~~Iowever, asy,;esSI~1~rn of the

l mpa,c'[ ·of tech [Iolog.y on 1111.11. fauna rs has been VI rt UiilHy neg leered ... TI1l!i s study attempted to determine the degree of adoption of recommended fSR Ije:cJmoJo,g:~es by the h ~II farrne rs of Pu mdi Bl1 u md i,

METHODOLOGY

To achievethese objectives, [he ~Uldy conducted a before and after survey and. moni rored six t nterve ned and slx on n t rol fa rrne rs, The eriter i a fot selection of these farms included repeesentanveness within ehe farm-size class. but with the provision l hu.t rni l~ ki n.g bu ffa 1.0 sh nuld he prese n l on the Iarm.

Extensive farm monitoring on a whole-farm has~s was carried OU] IrJI ]984 at the fUl1:uJi B.hu.mdi.fSR site, Tbis site wasproposed for the irnpact study for SI6;venli[ reasens.Pirst, when the ('Sf began in [977, cropping systems research (CSR) was iuitiatedat this site .. The csr was [oUtlwedby the FSR. approach. ]1:1 1985. Therefore, on-farm research had been conducted oum:fn'u()usiym this site fu'r the last 13 yr. Second, Pumdi Bhumdi wu!'. representative ,of the western midbills of Nepal .. Tbird, second:i;lry data were available ~ro.r the site from the previoul'liw,ork. of the C:SP and

ne'y,i information collected. during FSR work. Fou.nh,Purndi Bhumdl wasaccessible by roadat al I t~ mes of the year.

Be~for:eI'[H:Hli.tori~.g~ 1 S represenrarlve [armers were selected pri ncipaUy on the basis of~hei.r~.andl1!old[n,g (from O .. Slla to 2.5 hal. The smallest farms ( <'0.5 hal and the

I argest (:> 2.5 hal' we re €xc] uded to ensure (.ha~ 1 he fa rms best re presented ccnditioas at Pumdi. Bbamdi, Of the 18 :farmers" 12 farmers were selected to optirr1izereso,l'I~c~ usc. and focus on 'lhecmp~:li.~ecslO~~~,C:liv:i[:ies 0.111 thefarm, !he.se f:arme:lIs we re d~VH;k~d ~ n ~o ~wo g.rmJ ps. The .FS R a.cuv:~ue:s were concentratedin SIX fa.r:ms andil1JJ<,:luded detailed monitoring of e)listin:ll :fa.rming activities, The n;:,mai.ning, .~ix farms .\~er~,~()n~ymonll()red for ~~lelr existln.g farmlngactiv~Ues,a:nd included no..

:1 ntervern 1011: The ~rou1? .of ,farms wru~ h . FSR. ,a.eMVI nes was .~ he mte rve ned group and the grow p Wlth notarm mguuervennon wasthe contra l group.

The mai n eriteria used to select re presentative farme rs ill each group we re representativeness (l,f the farm-size class; representative pereentage of Jowlands and up]a.mh;; 10. he able to select. fa rms wit h mixed ] and types (at least 20.% of each land

type): preseneeef kh'~'1'bari re land) 0111 whichto plant fodder trees;

represe ntative nu mher of rn ~ .' ~. an i mats (fel'!llde buffaloes or cows); representative number of fHmjI)'n:'e.mbers.~l]vo~lIedin .f~m~t[me 3,gri.cul[llIre;and represenranve number of [hos:e: wl~lllng. to coeperate with the ,FSR program.

The imervened farmers p~nk~pa[,ed and collaborated i .. n the ?,n~furm trials of t he FS R. progra m at the :sne; w]lere~1."i, 1 he 'com rol fa rmers neither participat.ed nor collaboratedin the on-farm trials;

The In[ervenecl farmers were provided withfreeinputs (e .. ~., i.mp'fOived seeds, chemical fen il i zers, i nseetleldes, and pest i ci d es) for 1 he tri a I s conducted 'by thefSR program. Tile performance of these trials was closely monitored and supervised by the.fSR s~::,~ff. These trials. were mainly m.nnaged by the

resea rehe rs wit h the assistance ofthe inte rvened farmers, The control farmers d~d not have access to fre e lnputs f r.o rn the FSR program and their cx:isti rig fu rmi ng act i\d tieswe re roo nizored wit boutanyIn te rve ntion,

The intervened farmers. were prov.ided withtechnical services, training, and advi,ee on lmproved farl'l[i ng pract ices, The con tro I farmers d id not have access to these inputs, They learnedaboutimprovednrethods of. cu:~t~vat~on and ether FSR reeommended cempenents (i,e .. seeds and rechnical services) from thel r ne lghbo rs.

III The intervened farmers were :appma:.che:d fr~que-ru.Uy by lhe;IFS.:IK .staff; w.be;r<%H3,! the- c9utro1 f~]I'm~:rs.we]l'_e, appmach.e~ .~ICCas ional]y by the .FSR staff ntere .. ~y tomomtor ~ heir eXI sn ng farm mgactrsmes,

Although S'CD.me da.m. Hnd~nfD'nualion wen: U3\ken fnJ'[nprev~(lus. s~'tldie.sl ~f ~he ~SP. most of the data were eoll ected from farm, SUI rv·eys. and mon 1[0 n ng aenvn IfS. SIR lrnervened farnlf;rs and six. 'CO:r1I:lf1o~ futll]e,rs were interviewed ~n detail w determine the degree ofudopdon of FS~R recommended teehnologies, Site deserlpslcns were based on s(:,co.mda.ry data !O(}~, lectedfnnn various sources,

A number of var r a bles were use d (0 me as u re the i m pact of .fS :Ra! Pu n"ld i [lhu md L To cempare the before and after situations, cropping puucrns., crop prodcction,

I ivesu )ck e nterprises fodder andfe rage produ clio Il,V e.gerab le- hused croppi ng patterns, and n utritional aspects we re co nside red. Howeve r, n n spe eiflc a na I ~tica I technlque wasused because of [he limited sample size .. The collected datawere compiled, and Dvera~es and percentages were computed,

£Xhit~~ng sinunion: P~:m:di Bhu:mdi is located in the western midhills ahout 2fJH krn west or' Kathmandu (Fi.g. ].) e. I~ lies on. the side ofa hiU whose elevation varies fmnll 750 tl? r271~ m .. A"emg~ anrrual rain[~~H a:~. the site is 4l.0[)O ~m. Cru'.l~are damaged by had dUfU.1g both spnng and fj;lU. TIle mwl, area of I?~uuch Bhumdl Hi approximately 2.5QOha. and the. cultivated areais about ~.,O l2 ha .. The total population in 1990 was 5,6W. There are approxirnately 1,{W7 families and an averagehoaseho I d has 5-6 ram i Iy me m be rs wh 0 su hsist on a 1:10 U [ O. H7!, a of cultivated land .. A famny has an average .[l·f three members availahlefnr farm labor.

The exisung farming syslelTls and the interactions between different farm enterprises are shown i III Figure 2 .. This figure' shows that crops and livestock are an ~ntegral past of fm·I'R~ng and lhEIl off-farm factorsplay an inrportant role i n supporting farm~ng activities, The major cropp~n:g patterns d,t!ring '1979 are ~]~8'O shown •. In 1 he I. owl and a rea .rice-basc,d eroppi ng put re rrrs were l he must com rno n ~ whereas, in the upland area, maize-based cropping patterns were predominant ..

- .

The su rvey resu Its s howed that the fe rt i le up I andare as have 't h is predominant crOrJ[JI]ng panern: maize intercropped with soyhean fp~~u".ved bya reJay 'FOp of f~,nger milletandawinter crop ofwhec:l.t;nlu:Slall'd. or harley .. The .sawrv,e:y also sh()\~,re.dthat 3] % of theup~mnd area ",,:a£ devoted to tripJecmpping. 43% to double crop. p. U1iP. and .only 2% to sl~glecm.·. P!mlg. ~n Icn:mra~a,?)% ohhe lowland areas are devoted to a sIngle crop or nee and 2·4% to maize - nce+- wheat (Do.A l'9~:U.1)I •.. An

a verage fa.rniJy owns seve n heads of Iivesteck, Theaverage number of li vesmek pel!' fami ~y was 1.7 bu fllil:oes, 0.6 bul locks. 0.] cows" 0.8 cu~ves,~ ].6 sheep and goats, 2.4, poultry, and CU, p,~~~, CDOA 19:80). A signlflcant enaraeterisuc of Pumdl .Bhumdi ws ~he 11 igh pe fee mage of farmerswho donot ewn I:Hl: llceks wn ich exp I ai as 1 he power eonsrraint faced by farmers daring land preparation .

.E.thnohis{,(1)' a/the site. The settlement site was originrdlYi;t dense forest. The si~e ~asinha.bhed by d,iffer,ent ethnlc ~,r,oups. The Brahminswere numerical]), t~:'Ie domman~ caste, Other castes who resided m the area were the GunHl~'i1 Dacma.u~s,~ and Ka,mis. These castes migrated [0 this area manyye,ars:",_go. Ag.riculn!re was the main oCJCup,ationarruo I~ivelihood of the people. The primary objectives ,oi[ fa,rmi,n,8 were to provide adequate food £0;1' subsistence and to save some seed for thenext season,

Farmers at the she fnced various prcblems. h was, reported that there were hailstormsin 194:8, 19491,1979. and ~991. The WutiLstoneswere .~;S hig as, pears. As a, result, famineand diseases spread dur.i:lIlg these years .. Farmers were compelled to borrow Inone:ya[ ,higJ! nues of interest,

Th e migrat ionrate seeme d 10 be big he rth an 1 he :~ m 111 igra rion rate, few peop.l€l~ le$,peda! Iy l~OiSc:l o~ ~()wer castes from the dis!!ie~s of SyanW.H al1i~li Bag~ung. immigrated to the village rn search of tn:lploymeuu. BecRLHH'! or vanous ~ nternal r~aSOInS (e.,g~, land problems ~nd [h,e e~~uLUsd0.n o~ na(lJJrair.e.~ources)', mosi oftbe villagers nll~rawd to the ter~~ (mDllil~YI~the districts of C!ll'lw~m! Banke: and N9J,,:\la.1 paras 1)1" Tbeexternal f:!l,ct:ors thOl !,nHuenced nugranon Irern thevillages were better employment epportunltles avaHable in ierai, cheaper land, and beuer facilities for educatioe, CO In ITl:U nieation, tr:~Hsporhniol1l" and! other infrastructure.

, ., Bef9relheFSR pro¥nun W,:lS ~nhiate~~ U~e CSR prognmfl w~laun.ch(:d in , lli977~ 78 10 Impmv,e the socieeconomleeonditlons of the fall'lil'u~n;,.l he mam ro]'e: of lh e CSf was tu,i nerease [he yie I d or va riou s crops hy intrn duci ng, i mproved vade des and new te,cb no~og ies a t, (he local leve L The CS,R ,i ntrod ueed some i: m proved croip vaneties (e.g~l' tbe TaIch~urn~-l7~! Cf.~-4S!and Khumal-J varieties u~ r:i;ce;: the AFun~2 and Klua.mal Y,eHow vaneues of mane: the R.R~2] and UP 262 vanenes 0'[ \.vheal~ and the Kufri JYQti varieties of pC'H,aw). Thecultural prect ices introduced were mainly improved methodsof making ridges, efficient ways of weeding, line phIIld[l~~ appllcation of chemical fertiljzer, and mu iching.

During rhe csr pedod.lripl,e~cmpp'[,l1ig or rice -wheat- maize(R-'W:M) was

introduced In lowland areaswhere farmers iced rice ~ lullow - fallow (R-F~F}.

MO~l.rH.rme,:rs. w n b oiln gmu ps repo.W'led, tharr " art ell 110 use, ehem i ca~. fen [I~zers only after CSP was il~,trm:lu()ed. Afrer CSP wus terminated, FSR. began in 1925. In

31"". dd [I i, o"n,l, to, .c, r, 0, ',,'<1 PI" a, ,m'i.elie.s" , ttl. e,·' ,F,S, J,l 1'" r, ",og.HI"m" " i, n, 1 .. ' rOdtl,' e,', ~d, ,n,c.,w ,l, 'e,' c, h~, 0" ]og" tC,S for oth er eompunerrts of the farmmg sys[ems. (e.g., vegerables, forage, :lmd ~~odder).

The i 111 rod uced varieties i nel uded Kh u rna 1- 3 (1985). Kh Ulna 1-4 (1985 )., Kbumal-S (l'986), Khurnal-? (]987) .. and Khurnal-f (],9S7) varieties cd rice; ,Arun-4 " '~ 985), M a naka mana- I, (llil d 2 (] 987) vu rie ties of ma [Zle ~ HS·94, .('~ (85). So nd

.. 32 ~

Annapurna-I (l981 ) varieties of wheat; and Cardinal, a. poiato vartery, In addltlon, the kitchen gardening program was initiated and farmers were convlnced to estub:l~sh 1ear~rom:u:l kl~chen gardens near their houses. Other activities inrrndueed by fSP wereImproved metbcds or eom posti ngj• application of pesticides, storage of seeds in. ~mpn}v,ecl metal hins, and storage or potato in locallymaee barnbon baskets,

D ·sCliplicm. of f(Jrmers~ The per. '( nal cnaraererlsrlcs of the inc rvened and control Farmer. ar~e given ~11 Tables I and _. The .age of lmervened Iarmers ranged from 35 11063 yr. Two of 'the farmer had attended sehool Ior 6 and 10' f. Avesage famiOly siae was 8. and the number of adults washetween l and :5 per hausebold, Of the 6 :furmers. 2 were owners-cum-tenant .. and 4 were owners,

The ages of the control farmer. were between 36 and 50 yr. and one had S. yr of schooling .. Family size ranged frurn ,~ to 8: with an average f 1 members. The number of adults was between ~I and 2 per household. or (he 6 farmers, 2 were owners-cum-tenants and 4 were owners,

Farm d!tlru.ct.eri;}ri,:~'. The farm charaereru tics of intervened and control farms u~re _pr,es~,~H~,d i~ Tables ~ and 4. The ~l\;.~rage ~~~ of la~~ ow_~,ed by _both groups of rarme.rs wa , nearly the same (0 .. 96 na intervened; Lo.S hacomrol), I .. lowever, the average area. of cultivated land owned by the contrul farmers wa slli:g,hdy higher (0.'90112 compared with 0.77 ha) The average 'Size of lowland area owned and cultivated hy both groups of farmers was higher than that ofthe upland area. A limited a.re.' •. of pasture landwa .. l;. owned by both groups. The average number of parcels pier farm for both ~roups ... as similar (9,. 1/ anti: J 7). The average pared size of intervened farmer. was higher than that rlo Ii eontrol farmers (0.39 ha compared with n.12 hal,

.FSR!lCl'iviiif!:fi introduced in (he: area. The fcllowi ng recommendations made

h [~eFS~ pr(~gra;~l at Pumdi Bhumcl were based mail!l~' OH [he results of a.ctiv~tiie; carried ut in 'the fields of intervened farmer" from [98.':) [.01('90.

!!II r, }P~.' n the basis,! problems identified by res earchers, farmers, and

extension 'worker' ;1'1 the she. cornponent-based trials were conducted. These included varietal trials, fertilizer trials, and other management studies uf various ercps in farm fi.eJd.:S. Componems that ~i~v·e prumi.,t_ng results were recommended for lise by farmer .. These prormsrng eompunents WI,m!

rnoni toted on. the: basi .. efhiolegicul and socioeconomic factors ,(,e:.g. improvements in. variety, fertilizelf nne" and cultural practices),

• Livestock. Oats No;!p~er forage gr:a. se ., and ipil-·jpil fodder trees were introduced and studied for their adapsability [11 the area, S]mi1ar~y., [he performance o:i' some ether indigetlDu+ fr dder tree specie was studied.

- 33-

• Horticulture. T:O have a more regulae supply o:f vegetables throughout the lI:ear, ,3, study of vegetable prod ucti on in a kitchen garden was conducted at

the ,F'S R slte, -

• Trainin,g ,pro~J1ia~. T'~' familiarize farmen with FSR tedmoi~gsel and. research methcdelogies, regular trammg wa conducted at the FSR sua

lMPAcr Off'ARMI G SYST',EMS RESEA.RCH

In 1984-851, the predominant cropping patterns in the lowland were rice- fallow - fanow (61 and 50% of '[he aggregated total area of the intervened and control farms, respectively), rice - w he ~I'~ - rna i ze (13 a nd 21 %). rice ~. faJlow - 11113 ize (Wand 14%)" and other patterns {less than HJ%·)I (l:"Jawkins eral 1'981). In 1'988.=89" afte,r the implementation ,of the fSR program at Pumdi Bhurndi, the cropping panerns used were d~f:ferem ..

I,n the lowland area, the p.redon1in,U~l ercpping pattems of the imervened fa.rmers wer,e rice - whea t ., maize, rice- fa][ow = fa now I' and doe ., badey - fallew, On the. control farms •. t~,epredom~nan:E cropplng patterns "",er~ rice - wheat - m~i2e. rice - faUow - fallow, and nee -jnustard ,- maize (Table S) .. Jn the upland areas, the peedemtnam cmpplngpauerns w,ere maize/ringler millet - wheat (71 and 13%),

ina ~ze lfi n~er mi Uet - m ustard (.20 and 8%)1" and maize I fi nger m illet .~ potato (5 and ~6~o) in 1'98.4.-.85. These patterns were c~ang~d. into ~:Iaizelnl1ger millet ~. wheat, maize + vegetables ~ vegetables and :nlnuze/fmger millet - rnu tard for both the

i . ntervened and eonrrnl farms, .

SR has p.lnyed a. positive role in changing the croppingpatterns from rice ~ fallow - faltow to nee - wheat - maize in the lowland areas a.nd from maize/finger millet - P(~wtl (0' maize + vegetabtes - vegetables lin the upland ar~a,. ~hanges i:~

'[ hecropping parte rns :['0 r th e intervened and com roo I farme rs were identical both m the upland areas and the lowland areas, ~nds is because ehe changes used by 'the

i nte rve n ed farmers were fo] lowed l ater by '[ he eontro I. farme rs,

Produetlon

Tableo precut [he farm practicesand annual productlon of the different crops ill the lowland and upland area wn 19:84u'I'ld [he productivity of the FSR-.r,ecommended technologies in i985~90. Table 7 present the crop yie]d obtained by the farmers in ~.'9g8=B9." A cornpanson of the average crop yldds of imervenedand control farmers shows a substantial increase in yiekl Ior rice and maize as 3. result 'of therecommended practice .. The increase i~ ric-e yield of_ intervened farme~s was 43,% more.and that of c.cmtroI. farmerswas :>9% more. The vieldwas only 30% more than the rice yield in ~984 .. In the C~L-;e of maize, the increase in yield was 55%

-.34 -

more fhr intervened farmers and, 46 %moFe for control farrne rs, The yi!e~d was 54'% more than (he yi,e~d of maizein the-lowland areas In 1'984 .. The yield potential of improved maize vaeieties under wen-managed ci)[Iditions,e.x.ceeds 5 tJha . Gi.ven this potential the average yi.~ld of ~ITI:prr-0ved maize varieties obtai ned by th~,co:num~!_ farmers (4.8 tlha) wasaeceptable. ,~n '[he case {)if whe.tll, '[here was no difference. In mustard, the d ifferenee in p:mdlilctivi~y W:;,l!S very s mal ~. A comparlson between the ['1;\10 gliOups w:asrHH: pos:.si bkrbr 1 he, other crop,s, because e ach grou p was g:r()wi rig

eh her the reeomme ode d varieties oir ].0 ealvarieties,

In the upland area, improved varieties performed better than '~cca!, varieties, The average ~leld _of the. loc3.l vad~ty of maise wa~hi~1ter than t~a~ of the recommended vanety, The y~.ei.d difference between [he two vaneues of mustard was not su bstantial,

The differences in p,mduC'tlvit1 were not reflected in the overall pmductM1Y of intervened farms compared with contrel farms. The reasons ferthis lad of differ,enJoe appeared ,to be II~e, ,paqial adopt[onofh~p"rov~d.pl'?cd(,:,e~bycontm~

fa rrne rs and. ~ he ua UJlra.i vannu on be tween tbe Ja.rrl,1S I .. n eachearego ry ..

Both intervened and control farmen, adopted impro,ved crop varieties (Table 8). Intervened farmers adoptedthree different improved dee varieties (K11.uma'~-3. Kt:n:lm:~.~-4~ a:ntdKhumal~2:)~ whereas, control farmers adopted two Improved

varie ties of rice (Kfu.u ma]-3 and Kbuma.I.-2 )1.1 urervened fa.rm~:rs cu II ivated KIu'] m al- 2' ona 0.38 ha land, Klli1um,a]~30fl a 0.13 ha and Khumal 4 om: {),20 t:m. The eontrel farmers p].a~led Khun1a.~-2 on 0.10 ha and Kbumal-J 0.111 0.40 ha,

The dom~na:~u improved m:i;l.lzevari,e[~e5 the farmers used were Khumal Panhe[o, Manakamana-], and Arun-2. Intervened farmers planted Khumal Pa.nheio on a. 0.25 ha land, Mandkamana~l on 0.301::1'::1, and Arun~2 0.0 O.lliO ha .. The control farmers planted Klmmal Panhele on. 0.23.ha."Marnakamana-l on 0.13 ha, Arun-2on .oj}] ha.and Ganesh-Z on O.OGha. In the case of wheat, bethintervened and control farmers adopted only RR 2:1, which was cultivated on 0 a. 7 ha and 0..4 hal respectively,

Two varlerles of ~mpro'ved mus~an:J! Thule Tori and Chirwan local. were-each plumed 'D,n 0.].3 ba. by intervened fa.rme_rs: whereas, only Chitwan local was planted by 1 be com ro~ fa rmers ('),rl ClJ)3 ha .. The mterve ned farmers obtamed seeds of different crup varieties from the Pumdi ,BhtuJiI1dii FSR site while; the control farmers obtai ned imp roved seed varieti es frern dl ei r ndgh bo rs (~nterve ne d farme rs), r riends, a ndrelatives,

Despite the better performance o.fimproved Variel[e.~ under 'well~m~naged ,eond.iJi.ons" the farmers in Pumdi Bhurndi d~dno~ extend their areas under improved varieties .for~wo main reasons: theh ~g.he,r risk (If crop 105S, because of ha.i.lstorm:s (improved varieties require morei,nputs,there£b,re losses would be hi.gher);,and

i.mp:r.O.'v .... ·~.d .. '. v.ar.[e,,~.ies. 11.".eqUl.r.,e ...•. ~.,~.g.h.'.,.,.e .. ,'.r lev.e ... l.s,o.'.f .•. l.n. p.:.,u.ts" ',We hi.C .•. h a. H.far,m.".,ce.r: .. s could not a,fCo,rd. Bot h m puts andcredit were nm aceessi ble [0 local farmers.

The number ofl ]vesto ck, owned by the mon ltered farmers is shown in Ta.ble9,. Both iate evened and oQ.ntro,i farmsowned a h~ghei. nu mber of female buff'a~o tha.n other

an [mal species, These buffaJo were often- gold ~ exehan or lent w.hem they were

p: ,' .• ~ Qir had young calves", Between 19'84\~8Sa]ld '~ the number oifbuffa[o

, , sheep an and bullocks W ncreased. Thea num bel of female

buffalo, ma[eo alo, and 'cows were a bout the, same! and allfarmers raised local breeds.

, ,.' , .. ", .Mi]~.pm~u~Ho,n/~,PYI~dlB~,u_n~d! _f~r~s]~ a.n.imJ?on~n[,s~~ro:~f income. Be t we e n 1994·~8) and 19B5-89, the Oil ver ageamount ,()if nu lk sold pe r y,ea.r of

in terveaed farmers .1 ncreasedfrom 781 to 927 liters, wM le corstrol farme rs from 8()~ to ,8"",,5 lltees ('Tab~l,e UJ)..Be,Catl.se of 'this ~ncfe,ase in milk sales, rhe average income of inte rvened farme rs i ncreased by 7~ % and control f armers by 28%.

1'0 reduce the deficit ofanimalfeeds during the: dry season. FSPintrod1lJce:d several

~fes off:ora.ge and fodder (e.g, .• oats, Napier grass, ,a, ipU. tree's) at PUmdi

~·.,umtH. Oats were tested in the crop'ping. patiem ~11 the land ar,ea.,snd Napier

grass and ipil-ipil fodder trees were planted on terrace edge's and pasture landis.

Table till shows tha t eats we ire. not p~amed ~ n the a rea before 1985. In lli 98.8- 89" intervened fa,rmen; planted oats on a 0.03 ha land whHe conrrol farmers to a O.ill Iha..FSR staff condiicted the: study DEI oat cuU[va;Uon only in the fields of

i.nte rvened farmers. :However, file ,contro]fa.r:n:u~rs ebserved the better perfoemance .of oats and approached the lives:wck Farm in la.me:pat}ln"Pokhara" and intervened farmers for oat seeds, Oats have been reported to yield 7~81 green fodderJha. and '~JFl.{I t ~eedslha~arnd: feed~~g trials have ]ndkaled lIlH.! milk pmdudio~can .be increased by 0.35 ~O,.s hllerJ di f ,6~8 kg fresh oat grass/ dis addedto the di et ($1. ngh

and Gautam 19fMj). ..

Farmers in P'UIud i Bhumdi grow :i'illuny varieties offodder, A number of fodder sap~inlg~, were distributed after the. Implementation of :f.SP. Table 12 compares thenumber of tre es and saplings before FSP an d num be r of treesand saplings after .PSP,. There was an increase inthe number of fodder trees after the implementation of fSP.

- 36·

mpH -ipil seedli ngs were dist:ri.b!..ilted~o both grou ps of farmers at the Purnd i B~lundi lFSR site by the Livestock Farm in Lamepatan, .Po'kJl]ara, with the help, of FSR slaffan-.sire .. These seedlings were di:s~r[bul:ed to bothgroups not f~r trials bu~ as a service tc the farmen., Techno]og.ies for ip;j],-i,pH 'cult~va:lioo' were pr-ovi,de(i, by the fSR. .sl2l.ff to theimerveaed farmers ol11iy and performance was, d:osely

men itoired.

Plantati,a:ns, of ipil-ipil seOO,l~ng, gave mi,x.oo results in Pumdi Bhul1Ii1dw. ~piiHpiI plantedi I:l pasture land showed min]lnaJ g:r,o~llh ~altho'Ugh itaperfermance on

terrace ' . encouraging. .l.euc'treflG le.uGw.cephaia could "'01 begrown

S1i,JOC wn the area. LeU'caeU(l diversif,uJi(,l was tested in 1987 and found ~:O' give

goed resu~ .,c. The general problems faced by farmers who grew ipH -~pH and Nai.pi,er grass :a'ioong ~he terrace edges were shading of crops and reduced soU ferdUty rr.tllble

]3). - . .

Before FSP', farm en usuaUy grew vcge'tab]esin small areas during the winrerseason and a few cUC!JJ rbi rs ] n me malzectops, A. fter FSP was i ntred uced ,ki tchen gardening became weH established and the fttrm·ers had a regujar s,upp,ly of vegetables [hrOllghnul the y~r. The H'lOS( common veg.ew.bh!s were sponge gou",d, bean s,

pum pki n. boule gourd, chi] ~ y, cau I·~ n ower, nUJ st(_ud. rad lsh, ecwpeas, snake gourd ~ potatc, earrct bri oj al, eucumber tgarlic ~ and peas .. The most com m om vegeta:blebased pauerns were maize!vegetabJes.- vege'tab~.esamd maize + vegetables ~, vegetables (Ta.b]e. ] 4). Since the introducticn of FSP. [hie area under vegettl:])]es, had also, i nereased .. Tine, town of Pokhara ]s close W Pum d i. Shu mid i; therefore, some farmers started to set I green v,e:getab I es hl the market to generate cash :i ncome,

A lli me rve ned and control fanners grew vegetables Inain ~.Y' for home oonsumptk:m. Because of the consumption ,of vegetables, most fanners had nutritious die~s. Furthermore, a. few of the farmers had increased thenumber of bunalo, which

i nereased [he .q uaati t.yo'fmi 11k and ghee, Those farrners who had .11Iilo~e m ilk and ghee.consumed mUkand milk products, which further Improved [heirm~tnli('Jnal status ..

The ed.uca:t ionaJI picture 0 f Pu rndi B,h umdi is ,enOQIlI ragi ng. Although farmers ~adl. no schecling, many ofthem give prierity to edueatien. Most Ichndrel'l of tlhese farmers are finl slli ng seoQndary school and n1m]ji are anendi ng oo11e.ge.However, most farmers with higher educaticn [migrate tothetewnsend ci'lteS~Qr other employmenr (ros.~er 1990).

,·31-

The types of the tra[ning provided to the farmersand their reactions to the tra.i]1.irl,g are .shown in Table 15. The intervened ~roup offarmers attended more

t rai ]ling programs conducted by lheFSP'~han theeontrelfarmers,

~06 tfar~ne~s .,~ both. p~o]j ps . sald that ~:hey h~d, creflacedt!let.radjd',on~l. tec~rl:o[ogy ... itb the Impnl, ed tC';ch~o.logy intreduced by the .FSP. Accordul,g to the farmers,

know]edgeabolU ~ the ,adopti,o,n .of chemical fert iHzers,. Improvedsee,ds~[nllproved ~odde,~ t:r~,e;g,and.[9ra.~e grasses u}ok pl[ac.e()n~~ af~ei l~e eSl.a~].LshmJ1Je]]t of the FSR m their slte.Parttclpation ,of both gmups in vanous FSR. acnvmes (e.g.,pmgra.m p,Ia.[1[:Bjng an~ de~9jsi(J]lm~kjng!. ~e]·e.cUon ,oif :p'articipant farmers, ,arnd. Ui~!iniu~) w~n~

reeorred ""n 1'- .. ).·'gI:.1Iv _"'''~·''''·f''''t'ob\'c Farm ..... '" .n- 1..>") ..... (j· .. " ... ·n ... t,..~ t, .(,1..."., .• ·be"r "'UC iJlJ"'s't"''''n'~

,I'!;,;o,t','l.!! , 1:.._ ~:u, ~,"'1Ll!1 IILJ~. Ja~:.-.u., ~,~, ~'fl .••.. i;I' .0;1''''',0.,' '.' •. r <01.,,, !""."~'~ .~ .. J '.'"'. '.' ••• uJ_~ .9.JJ !!i..I~u .. 'r'" .~."'~~ ,~,UH, '~. L" '~J~.' ~I.- ~.~. _'Ii..,', '. '~~' .. .;:)

and OP'I mons tn solving the prob ems encountered during implemenration '(l,t work p'l~n.sa:U1:d selection of the recemmendedte chnol ogi!es were wei] consid ered 'by the FS.P.

~~lowev·e.r. both groups of farmers were not satisfied with the supply of inputs.

Three of the six intervenedfurmers and two of the st.,,; controlfanners 'reponed [ha~ suppl ies of ~nputs by the concerned agency were tnsufHci.ent and untimely,

ROLE Of OT.HER. SUfPORl'~SERVICE INSTll'unONS IN TIlE TRANS.FER os FSR-~DENT~HED TECHNOLOGY

The .FSR and the AgrIculture Development Office (ADO)hu:ve separate mandates and targets. From [985 to '[990 there was 'no extensicnagent assigned by ~l1e ADO in t h ~ ~um.(U Bh~ ~dIa.rea.. The U n kas~be ~w,e~n researc:hand extension was good btu .. limited [0 trarmng programs" pa.nlc'lpanOn]n Samuhik Bhraman (m.uitidiSJcip]inali)' teani visits), aui:! worKin~ group meetings,

Cash was:. a. Hmiting factor for inputs (e.g., se,e~.~er[[Lizer$~and p:e~~i,ddes)' required to adop'~ Improved ted.l",o~.ogy,.Hlowevier~ ered II tcfa rmers was ~. in.ln.ed. a ndthe process was so comptlcated that fanners C01!Jld not take a;dvanmge of this .Eac:U[ty.. The Agriculture Developmenr Bank (AD.B)' at Pokhara p,tOvided loans fa,r agriculmral activities accordieg to reeornrnendatinns made by the ADO, Pekhara,

·38-

The ,t.\g~clUl'M.lra] lnpnt Co~ri1l~]on ,(AIC)?la:s respo.r1Isiblefor8I.1ppl~Ing inputs ttl

the dlSU1C~ headquarten while the cooperanve socienes and A,.rn.C dealees were :~e-spol1lgi,b~e for~he vi]!.ages,. However,. timely. supply of~herequlroo amountand [ype:s, of seoos!fertil ]2)e:rs, and pesticides was al ways difficalt, Pumdi Bhu mdi was 0:0' ex -'no There: was one A~C dealer (0' sen the ]npiut:s for cash, but irregular :a:n,d, insu _u;::~ent suprp~ly 'Df inputs was ecmmon,

M.a I'ket in.g

There was n(I' established marketing system foragricu.ltural products in the area, HQiwever, the go,ve:mlllenHJwnOO Oair,:! Development Ccrporaticn has a. milk eellectien center B.t Pumd i Shu mdi, Therefore. farmers can sell thei r fresh milk dir,ectly to thi s center for cash. The fanners have 1.0' find their own markers far other cemmodities,

The Ifl$P atP'Umdi.lBhunrld.~ sDugb~ to' develop Slf'onglinks W.i.lhiil:s line agencies at tile di s~r]c~ :~eve] to prov:ide PSR. -based 'lechni!ca1 suppon, Tal'),~ e li 6 SU III mari zes the ] inks between the Pumdi Btl umd i fSR site and the A DO. the Liy,estock Research Farm, the H(lfticti~Jure 'R:e&ea.rch Farm, the Distlr~c(, Forest Office (DPO)., Ann, A~C~ the LumleAgrlcultore Research Center (LA.RC).a.nd the coeperattve,

Tille ADO provided resource person S [0 trai u the fanners,.!part.tci paled in working g~o[Jpmeet]ngs ,8;'IllG the Samuhik Bhraman (luulUdlsc,i.p~.kla]'y team visits), and sharedme r,espons:ibfllty of disseminati ng FS R~based tech nologi es to (HIler areas of the. district. The livesteekand ~'1Qrticu]tt!re research farms 'had strong oQ(udinatIon with tile,fSR. program, at Pun'lidiBhullld~ in the area, of tedmlcal support. They provided test materials fot on-fum research in livestock, fodder, fomge:s.,. andvegetables.

The D FO, ADS" and tile cooperatives had weak: links VI i th the Pu md i.

Bh U mdi FSll site, The; i.nv'ol vement of A.] Ci n the FSR was .~ i. In i ted to thesuppl y or inputs through a dealer in the area, Coordiuatien wi.lh LAR.C was maintained by the exchange efirrformation on research t1ndin~s, ~:mC;e'lings:, and visits .

. l'h[:;fSR slleoiffic_e w~sact~ve in ld~ll,Hfyin~ farm prob~!e-mstln~i~ sQ'1;.:in_g these t h ]'Iough close coerdm anon with 'lhe di fferenti nSI! t unons l]l the d 1 strict (lable 17). Among the :i nsti tut ion s, .ADOacted as the extension caralysrberweea farmers and the. fSR. program. The [in ka~e betwee III the. A DO a.~dlhe farmers was close because the. ,AD 0 is respon si b le for di ssemi nanen of FS R: -based tech n()l ogies, ,As. an

- 39-

extensionagency ~ n the disu~,C~, the ADO played avital role in stre ngnD:ening~he FSR program and was aware ofthe lmpenance or on-farm research.

The livestock services center at PUM.1Idi Bhu mal was re:spons[b Ie fOf'the supply olE fodder sa:pHngs, forage seeds.and pdma.ry healthcare for tbe animals In these l:Ereas,~her:e was giood ulI'fdersla.nd[ng ,a~mong the farmers, the llvestcck service centes.and the :FSR site eoordtnator,

FinaUy. the PSR. site ,-con]!] nater and. the farmers deve loped a dose worki ng rela ti.onshrup and ,effecdve li nks and col ~abo:ra:Uo;n .. These factors eoetributed to the poshive. lmpaer of tile FSR"recommended. technologies on farmers ~n Pumdl Bhurndi,

Tille major problems ~n the adoption ofFSR~recommerndedtech,nnlog,i.es were '[he

rnn;:~~~W~~lt~ ~8~ o~~~:e~~~b~~ '?!~:t:'d~~~~~~~:o~! ht~~~Y~~~~~~C~i~:,d~~e~UJOP~

[he recommendedcrcpplng panemssnd cultural practices; the laie matnrhy and low pal ata biJwty ()if the recommended va.r~eti.es, (especiaJIy maize ),;n1,Qre seed was req uiredfor the lmproved varieties ~han for tile loeat varlet ies; and the re were more diseasesand insectpeoblems during; storage (especiaHy maize and potatoes).

, . The majority ofthe control farmersrepo~'Eed that they di.d no;t have enough teebnical .knowledge of the recemmended pr:ac:uoes because (bey had. no ready access to the ]nfp.rma~ion: :roac9-uire~ore ,~n,owledge on the recomril:endecl technology, t hey had to V1SIJ the FSR. srte office .. However. because of inadequate

ti me d u ri ng the peak periods, they d ld not have the 1] me to visit t 1."H3 FSR. site off ee,

Some other constraintside.ntifi.ed at the site were:

.1 The ma.i n eli malic co nStrH:l n t s to i nereased eropp i ng in tensi ty were occasional drought and frequent hail storms.

!III Li sn [ted ~elchnol.ogy was av,a:i lahle for most of'~ he crops (e.g., hi 11. crops, grai n legume,s" [ruhs, and vegetables) for on .. farm testing wh],ch limited the alternatives available to the farmers,

.' C]i~la~iC'_,cullstmjnts (hall and druu~M) have made a~ricphure r[sky I.fllhfs region; therefore, farmers were hesitant to makelarger mvestmentsm crops, ('e:.g., use, chemical fertil izers or pesuckles),

~ 40-

• Wea.~r,ese~:I'Ch~'CKtension l:ink~ges ,a~~! poor s,u~:P0rl services (avaUabiHty v,f eredltand Inpu~s.a:nd mad::eun,g fac:di'~Y £Oli azrlcuhur,a~ :productS)1 have limited 'tffil:e transfer of t[ecl:molo,gy and i~s, BdopHo,:n. by farmers.

~ b13.dequate facHi.t ies (e.g, labor andphysi:c3JfacHides)~o[[ the .FSR prograrn was a constraint in diss.emin.atin.g the t.ech:na1ogyto tlJ.e farmers in, the area,

CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS

The results of 'th~s stu~Y' are encouraging because ~he'y indka'lle that larervened farmen,adopte_d _FSR-:reco,m:mi?nde,d ~[\opp~ngFau'~rn.s beth in ,the 'Upland 3ind. , lowland areas: MOiS t Iarmers adopte~ I[m.pmved varset res ofmaJlorcmp,sandth.clf euttu ral practices" Vegeta blecultiva non became very popu laramoag mtero,ene,d farmers, and. they devoted land to grow vanous types ,of vegetables. Farmers improved their nutritional StU!U5, by consuming v,e.g,€tabtes and generated cash income from vegetable sale. Farmers also adopted FS~~:re.commended sp,ecl~s of fodder trees and grasses, The pnJdu.cuon and sale of milk increased substamially because of the increase in the number of anlimals, due to the avanabn:i~y of suitable liv,es~ockfodder. Some centrel farmers have also, adopted improved varieties of crops and foddeli trees, These farmers have adopted fbe ma lze +- vegetable ,_ vegetables croppIng; pIa ttern, These fIndi ngs,~mph~ the su ~tabi~ tty of the fSR approach in similar environtnentsin the country,

Based on the results of this, study, the following recornmendatiens are proposed 'to improve the economlc ,conditions of hi~l farmers:

•

An FSR approach. :sbould be stressed ;in the deveiopm.ent of all the major compo.ne:nrt:S offar:m:inj· ... systems (e.g., crops, liv,gsto>ckl, herdcalmre, and off-

- . . .. .' :-,' ~. - -_ ,- - . -,' .. . .. .,. .

!'""~ ~-, ---I .-- L ' " .'11 'I -I ,_ , I, -1":-' "j 1'" ""'1-"", '1' ~._.,. '.r:,~'_ -:-: :tr1~1':"_·,'

farm emp]oym,ernt)l. A. rocus on on.l:y one compon.en~ will cause .I,.mba.l.ances.

There is a need ~o develop lntercommodity and jnterd:is~'ilP~inary links within the research s.ytern to mtegrate differem components within FSR ..

l!!!I

Research and extension should have Joint responsibility to achieve ahe targets

·of fSP to make the impact of FSR more effective, .

III

Agrieulneral inputs (,e.g .•. improved seed,chemica~.fer'l:mzer, credh, and extension services] must be made available OIl ~ime._a~ the properIeeations, and in s:uffident quantities 'to [ensure the adoption of improved ~e:chnology.

C~O\!le _H.nkage.s a~ong r,ese~r.dll. ext.enS'ion. and other related [n titutions . should be estahli hed for effective 'transfer of FSR~r,eoornmended ~edmology 'to the farmers ..

·,4'1-

II!!

Exrenslon and other preducuon-suppon services fe.g.~ Inputs and crediE.) :sho~u ld be orie nted Imw~nll t II e P remction efa farm i ng sys U: ms appeoachte ngncu ltu raj deve lepme n L

II!!

~roducdomprogra:ms with FSR - based .ue,c:~noilo&y shou h1 he l~nSOIl ra~led, ~nd ~mpl emented Tlliley shoul d be started m hJ llyare as where the dlssemlnarion of recem mCIIde:dlechno.l.ogy is both fea:.'i.:i ble a ndacceptable to, farmers.

•

An.· .. ·; rume.gr.trt, e.dP~c.k~g.e(.'.),f ;prt.u':llc,e,s for pi.~, ·m.ing. ~f~lVesti .. rng.a~d, rJYI, a,r,~,.!eting, is also ne eded fur major f ru its and vegetabl es ~denu f led for cultivation Inthe hills,

•

~,nc. rC,~a.',.ge . .:..s,' in,' .. ~ . Ive .. S[Q,i,C.- .. '~ .. p .. , rO.-'.dU:Cl.t.i,O,ra. a,-nd, p .. 'w.u.du, C.t.I.I.:,V .. :i,tY.', ·,d.epe. -.n.,-.eI.- pr. im.ar.iIY.·- .. O." .. ',t.h. e enhancement of feed and fodder supply, Large .. scale pl.!nlmg and pwper

maimenance 'of~o:dder trees and good pasture m,anagiemelili~ areneeded. S[al]·-fe~ding sholJ~jd be ellJ.cQ:ura.ge:dand free-gsaznrg should be cenerolled, Farm manure i~ requlred ~n burg.e 'quanthiesto :~ncrease 1!1e productivity ,of cerealand horuclUj~u:ralcrops,. bUI ~IS supply depends en increased

p roductten of fodder .i n hUI areas,

Some censtraims identifiedat the site (e.g .. , limitedtechnol for hiH crops,

.Iac:k of~:nlr.ltM!UctlWre. a poor mput-supply sl's~em.and lack .[r~~gation) must be ov~~come If fSR pm,gra ms (tile 10 be fU Hy adopted and 1 hell r J mpact magnIJ~,c,d ..

REfERENCES CITED

DOA,--Depanm.enr. ofAgricu]wre. (~9S0)1. CroppingSY~lem:s andIivesteek survey .

Divisioa of AgrOr:lomy~ Department of Agrku[tun::" Nepal. (unpublished).

Ha,wkins R C et al (1987) 'farm. menhoring jn Pumdi Bburndi; sum.:rrnary and oonclusimn;. ofu farming :iiystemsm-;~earch strategy, Farmir:lg SysLems Resea reb Hl1Id Development Dlv is ion, N epal,

Singh :18 K. Gautarn Y r I{ ]9816) Oat cultivationand its use as a green fodder for inereasjng buffalomilk production .. Pages 463-477 in Proceeding,sof the 2nd Mornimri.ng Tour of Crop-Livestock SJstem~R,eseu'lIch, N epaland Indonesia, Internatinnal Rice Research hJ.sl~nne. MHn~!a,. Ph~~ lppfnes,

- 42 -

+ ~l

!.tl i!"l i.!f'l, '.i(), ,...i

.~
.
~. ~ ....... .~ <:)
~ :Z
""'
I ~ '0' 01 -
,~, ~ Z;, Z ~
'~: :~ >;I) .
, :>. bi), ..,._.... ...,,_..,..' ~ .:;, ~
;j;",,;,!1 ~. ~ '5 Z ~
U} ~ ~I .:~ ...
c: ~, G :~ I~ "01 ~ 'I'l:I
,.c =- ....
Q!)I -.~ d) 0 r~1 ('Ill ~ Vl
~J - ''C ~'i!-.i >:.. 'C u ~
{oJ! ~ ~ ~ '8
f'<1: 0 filii ~ :SI
b- 0 U ~ .!t ('i;I e
~i ~L ft' !:I e e ii'~
~j en ~ coal ~ U ~ '0l.1
U '< ~ ~ :;Z ~ u H '~

~
.
~ ~ ~ '10 II!}
V"l , __
~ . Z ,,.c,
"C 0
Z ~ .~ ~i
,~ U '113 ''''''''-'
~,~: Q I~- ~ . !l: 0 '<.0:1' ~ ...... ,
S ~
~i "5 Z .2 ;;.
00 ... ~,
.,- lall' ,_ '''i ~ £9 ~
!-i :~ S' I~
~; ":::II ' ,
'~ 'iU 0. ~ 'rll< ~
~ ~I '0 !,~ "t:ll Qj '~ e 8
u := L""""'!, C'i:l1
a 0 C'l:I, '!-iii!!
'0, G al m 'D :Ii ~
~ ~, 'c.. ;!I -a ~ '"","",",' I:::: ~
~ ~ :e; tiE ~ ,QJ
U :; u:.. i~ 0
~" '!J' 0. -

fFI, - f"I

Qed

0, \Q ";;'j Q

o

~ ~

!it'l f'":j

0' d

\0'

d

_',

~.

.~

-

E

,,-, «I,

e;

'0

'~

....

I~

~ ~~ '!
,. Ul
't':i
~; 8: """'" d.'i ;S,
~ A
~~ E J;l I!'il}
;S ;:ii,
+ 8: ~. '~ u' S
CilI . .I
.~. - .5
IStti I~~ (ii:[i ~, ~'
Q!') ~ 0\, iU I~i ~ > ~
00 ~ I :::;j,
I~ IG!l 0'\ '~ r..Ltl E ~ + Itl-i
1..0 ~: 0""'1' .... ,b[I '.....:
U ~ I IQJ 'd!li' ~
<::: dJ (I), (U l!'i<l t:3J al-
j5, """'i ~. I.~
~ U a, Q ,mil ~I'
~ 0, iI'~ ~: L.~ :i ::; + ,~
0.. U ~ ,~
'00
'Ci'>
....-!
~
i
a .
en
~'
'tt:l """,
Pot ~ + ~
i1:l .2 ~ ""
1; J.:! j!
,Ja s ~ a ~, ~ I~
~ 'c.. .~ ,~ ~ :::I
~ :;l' .B ~ U s
.~ 01 ~= ~ be,
>.
!t'l t;;O, ~r ~'
'00 ,b;b_ ,~ ~ 2 >, :E
II, i Gr.,
ott m ,110:1
00 ! I~ .0 i!l., + ~
'00 '~ a.. - -....
Q'I I , '!l!) ~ e;; ~' ru .B
....-! e -- ~ ~ .,~I .B
I::;;i d.'i CJ! Q ~: ~ m
"'~ a ~ ii i:i :2' :2 :t
'1:lI ~
S
::;I
.l:;
Icc:I -. ~
'I'~ ,_ '~. ..-. aJ
v * * ~
e .-... 'f'FI ,00 '0
.~ 'fi:II
::I .~ .~ C ~J -
~ 0, ;m 'E '-' GJ
0. Y':i ~ LI~ ItIl 0 10.0
~ i:;l,' ....." a ~ ~ L~ >tl.f
,.,~ 1m:; QJ ,~, Qi;I ;>.
f! Sc- ~ = ~ 5 L~
0 Ii
~ ~:&j: ,~ !!!=. 0.
e 11' i ~ rn ~. .
.'~ ~ '00
. ~ .2 :;' 2 ,'Q::i"
m =:~ ~ ".... i .--. ,.-... .~
. ~ 0. 0'\ '1llI ~. ,ga ~ ~ ~ Q,j, ~ .- ;> .
~ ~ ~: ItJl !I ,..,. 'u .'<:t' - ~ ~ 0' '~ ~. ~,
-
~ =~ ~: ~ tl iii: ,,...o! ~ C [3, '~ '=:
..... 0< ...,_;,. ...... ,~:
~ 0' ~7
"C ,Q!)I
.-.
U ....
•. I"""'!i
.9 5
.....
Q 1-0
i('C ,w'
iO-i t:4I
:0., S
".,.,.., ~
~ ~
e f"l ~ II~
.u ~ 0 'E
c ~ ~ .~ ".i...i!' e¢ ,9 ':e
~ ~ u _. '~
~ .i!9 tiiS SI b.;
'tm '!!""""1l ~ $i ~ '0'
'>0 ,~ jlIt 51
c E!: +;; ~ ~
. ,i:t ~, .~
~ ~ a 0
'0. 0 ~ ~ :E piiiiiIj
'P' ~ ,j;",,;I!1 i,
...... bfI..-... ,~ j: p:., [.J:.., ""
u '~ I~I : .._ .... --. 1111
~OQ 'l;j 5J;. I~ QJI l!tl IlJ
~.~ ' ... 'lti ,.~ 1!'i<I lSI
. I~ 8 8 J;b,
V> .s 'it;! .... "';J
~'OO .s eaI 'till
'illjl >.0\ '~. ;ii ~ Sii :m :a :! 'aul
:0 :~~ ,t':l ... ~
!i!";"'" ,~
~: !.Jj ~, 0
f-< !b:i :z
.~. 1:1 ..., 0'> 11'1 ~ '..tl
0: 0.. ci 'n ..., '" a-. "1"1
:s ~
~
~
0
c.. ~ _j
......
~ f'9. ~ 0 co;J
..., .5 ~
00 Q. i7"- ~ I!"~ ~! <1"1 !.I"I
;>~" 0. e < !""I a::: - ''E: d :it
.... 1 ~I IC;1
~l ~ i:l!i; !"l ...
W "r :E
'" c U
g U
~ ~
~ .c
:=.
''g 9;j "'~ ~. 0 7d 0 ~. 0
i9 'C!. r-;, ,,_ ("'~ ~ - - L1:;I M N ":l .....
~ a: 51 d 0 <;;I' 0 o;.l Q y
"s:. - .. '''-; .5' ._ :3 .,;--;u .s c
ii v .,.. ~ IQ !".!
5 = '"
E ,I':'
._,
0 ,~
D
~
... ~
~ - -
- 0 .d 0 ~ 0 ~ 0
Vl ~ l"- N .., I"'~ 1I'I w:. IN ~ ~ ~ .~ \'!
u. :: ~ ~ G iii ~
"'f V ~ f'"\ ,q ¢I a '1""'1 c ..... Q
U ~ '~ """ :::iE, "Oil' :2:: ~ -a "!:I"' 0 ~ 10
f'.1 C'7 9- l"- e: !""~ 1"',. ~j Flo ~
~ ..0 ~ 0 '7 2 cJ rn Q! 0 ",1
..e -( "T ,:c::: ~
~ "i't
~ T ..,.
!! CIQ ""I 1ii '1lj
0- 9- 9-
b :c. F~ ..J o· f'"l 5 0 E 0
='" 'Q -0 a
"'ll ,..., ... "'l !:! -c:l ::I I;C
"CI ~.,....." U s2 2!
fi a
~
IJi"J ~
,~ ..,..
"1:1 v
t'i 1:) r~l
~ >~ 1ii 9-
.... c. ~ ,..J 1"" ~ '"'
C!. 2 0< @ ,.J a 0 0 15:: C
e !::: ._ - :;2 ;Q
-a; u
:til ... ;;;2
u, QO ,~ ~ ,.... 2l .-.
~ ~ 0::
~ ..... .e .2 .!2
E r~ " ~
,~ ~ E ~ ~ ~ ~
e ~ ti:l
c=: ~ oS .... . .J:;;i ~~
~ , Q. , G- • -a i!:L.
~ ftS c Z ~ ~ Z 'i.j, Z
Co. U ~ ._. 0 "'I:l - !j "e
~. 'il ... :aJ ]! ,.....,. .... ...
'f;IIj j 3i -~
,13 's, .~ ~,
~, .. >. ._, ~ .... > • e-, ~
'~ , ii , a:; I ... . _.
~ t;;: ~, I=:i ~-:: ~ 'E ~ c .~
.~ '~ b; ~ .jii .ii:l '@ it,
0 ~ ,... a ,,~ ~
1:' ~ (;} 'i;2 .,. Qi! '"' ~
l;l' ;;.- ~ Cl :;::.. U. e::: 0 >
.s 1"-. ~ >t;
.,. !iI"I ~ - '0

~M

.., ..

o ::;-c

- 46 -

"C
t~ I~ I~ ~ ~ i~ ~ ~
L15 2
... e ~ I~! ~ 10 - It It ill'
~ '~
8 oS
.=
II)
r.~
~,
:>-
1\l
u "=II
.9 ~ ~
Ci '~ INI '01 I~ C'! ~
0::1' ; di
l ~ M '''¢' 0 - ~. .'
~ I
,;,;,;;i,! • ....
S
"ii:I,
t:::
<Iil.
a
~
'1:11
J!l: ...
C ~ ~ "C! r: '00 r>!: 0Ci'
j -,
~ '"' - IN !I""'ii! 't"i ill' lIt· S ~, *
, g ~
,~ 8
..,
'I:i
~
:;..
rs '0
~ ~
. ·it It;: !I"""!i! ~ <@' ~ N 0:), -
5; ~ W! ci M
'!XI .... r:. 8 ~ ~ ~I '!it ~I ,. •
• 0
QO a ~
0::.
0. ~
~
'iE,
.~ '~
z ~ ~
., -j ~; OCI' e ~ ~ L~ ~ N ~
:Ej~ 8 ~ MI cl ~ M
; M N 'II' • 'II' 0< ,- iii' .. * e-
~, ~
I=: ,~
::I 8 .....
~. '13
11 '~
"'"
~: ] Vi
(;5' ~ e ~
5 '''1 ~I 1.0 q: ~ 'M '~ 't:! ~
... ~ 6 -!' . ,
~I if:: ~ '!!""""!l ('F! '!"""'I~ I~ P'I .* ,~ •• '" * 'iI. * N <.0
....
s s
t~ ~
~i ~
I~ 5
.s: i'
'~
~ ,,3 'tl
6;
~ .n ,~ rCi\ 00
~ := I~ t; I!:"':; q 1Cfi!. '!in '~ OJ· '~ M
0 ,I:) 0 e
'-::;I ,~: '" .~ ~ ('>1 Q .- 'Qr ""l ,Ii; .' '. * ill' ,~ Ii' ""
~ 19 ,~
'iE, 00 ~
!>'l '5i u
ip.
8 :;;0
.~ ~i
'15 0::],
:0-
'd) @: 11
..
~ ...
~ ~ ... I:'"; ~ t; '0>- iI1I t""iI ~ ~ ~
~ iC! ilJ Q} ~ ,
""'" I~ t ~, M fi":!1 ~ _, ~ •. '01 '!!"""'! It ;II 00 ~*' :11 ill '!!
~ i:.!
'0 i!
>..
_-
~>
~~
U
::I
'0
0
...
~ s
~ ti;i' ~ ..... ~ ';it ~ ,..., .~. ~~ ~ ~. § ~ ''2' ~
~ .~ ~ rnI 'I'!:!
~ e € S, i ~ s, -§ 'S ~ ~ '$ .:E: s
... ..:0' ,~ - ..... ~ c
~ ~ ~ 'i:lI .._.,. ...:_"., ~ ...., ~ "'-'" ~
::;;. ~ ~ .~ 'C :g "Ci ~ ~ ~ 'Ci' '~ ''1:1 'l:i :2 ~I 'CI ~'
-<: d)
'S .~ ~ '~ r.;.. Ji 1a '.....-! ~ 'il: '8 "[i --
I~ ~~ ,a) lIll' ~i! ·~I ,Q]I
~ $. i~ .:::' ';;' ..... ' 'I>. ~~ ,'" ! ~~, ..", !';~ : .... .~ .~ ';::;' ... ';;' 'S;
'i: 'e::: ,~ m ,~ 3:: ,~ Ill:! :~ !l.i' ~ !!: ~ '~ a: 0 ... i ,I ~: G;l, ,~ ~.
~ III '!:I' ... J ~I
fI s '~ f "~ ~ ... ~! O"!I 1 S: a <Ill .~
i a.;;; .~ ~ '"' i! ] ~ ... ·s ~ ~ l~ ... cr '"'
c .iii c .ei!! 10 . .,. :!' e 00 0 IJ:.o ~ Q ... m ~ i:io E-o C I~ ~ 10 I~
f-o ~ I~ !7,l' .... ...
0 ~ ......
,~ ,0 3t F. Ittl - I.e '0 \01 ~ .,0 '>0 'V I"l \D' -e '0' >;0 ..0
01 ..,c,
~ z ",", "'-'
.;: ~
m
>
,..-.., -s
u ~
0. .3 ::;. J::
:i C 01
,~ 0 Q "fj: c ~
~ 0< 1) c' Q
0'1 ~'ii 'ii, ~ -fa -
n.~ e e 0 .~ ~ c.-a ~. 0 S: .... ,~
.... i: ,",' ~
ti ... '~ c' 1ij. .", i:l
':;;:i 0' , .... fa. u ~ c:., 'U u
:;.., l=Io>t.OI':I t.OI':I I~ 0 :C' Cl;; ,.., ~, '[;,l .,:,
,~ dol "5 1 :;; '" .~
~ Q 0 C 0 Cl 'iii ~ Q 'Q 0 '0 'il ,~
z .. ... a ii.i 'fa i ~ Ii :iij ,Ii iii
e ~ .~ ~ C!I
Z :::E It:) ;a ~ 0 8
:;. v.I, tn Cor.! C'.JI (;!'l' Vl ~ ~ ~
'ifj
'13 .c
-u'
:::! '"'
&: =
~ ClI
~'
~ i:i::
'1l:ll -s
;:I' :0-.. 0 W'
Ie.. ._. u Q., "" n. c, ~ ~, ~ Il.., il. ~ \. ~ ~> i!l. ~ c.. =- "'"
u ,~ 11., ~. r;!" 2
._ .~ 'IC >;" ,~ It:ZI ct:!. V:I ct:! (I), ron 1Zl' II'l ~ ,t) ~I Ul ,ct:! Co<:II !V"l' r;n .~
.a r.r:I < 'a
~ ~ e ~ V I:!. W ~ IJ." U I:l;. Po U u:; u;, U Il. lJ;., U ti,;; U
e ;:.- ...:l (.I
,~ ~i .t:
~ ~
,<
It!! ~
~I i.!
~ QI
'2 """- 'I.. ~ ...J
Q ~
Ie' :~ u .~ II
~ ;0 M: '<t ..a 'iii'"! M \Q M, _. IN Ie I~ ;0 '<0 ~ ~ .c
0' 01 0 Z
tJ :z "'" ..5'
!;III c2
"'0 -e
;;3 I~' ...J
i!»
~ .~ --
~ i.'I:I !i:I
:;..
~ .~
~ r2
~,
Q) Ol' ~; I!XII t'"i ,0 in CI C 10. I"'iI ~ 0 10 Co
- -- r"I I~ I""'l E"I C ,~
,S; ~ u· "'= C'"I ~ oN N r"I ~ Iii"- - -e r-: '..:1' .( N - Q .~ "Ilr 10 0( "lI
.C!;., ... .c. d d d 0 0. d 0 ci ci -. ci -. 8
~ is; -e ....",..,. Q 10 0' .~ 2, '0 Z ,0 '0 z ~
.t::J ~ 'i
~ ~
a e;g
I':
i:t) '6.
,M CO
'd:i ~-
or,;;;.
,0; ...
Y
'ill ~ ~: .... ' I~ ~I 'a II
'ii ~ . ~ .
It;: .0 «I. .s: ~, .s
:ii Iii: ~ C' ii:l.
.J !!;l "E:: 11 c:zl to')
I>
,~ ..... ~ M "'ii" ;;;." ;: 0. ~ 'r"I ,- ::>;, ~ ~ . U
I' '8 i ~ &- , • ~
.,. c;l "li3 .~ :; Gi "a 'ii3 "\;!
'!l.! ~ N ~ ~, j M ..Il:: ~
'E: ~ E' 8 ! IS I ,I .... :.' 0 ~~ '" a e 8 .D, '" - ~ '~ U
i'iI E ~ IN ::; -:; c:; ~ d::i ,~ f'";1 U
... ~: ~ ~ 1 :~ . .., :ij ::II ~ ::! .::1 2 iii e::: .... "R .~
1'1:1, ~ .~ ~ .!:: F ~ g '"' E2 . .:= .;.::
'Cl. Z : ~::S u' 10 S2. '~ < ~ ~ 'U 0
o Ih.
'I;;;. '-'II'
U E
..; S:! ~
Q. !ill'
'0 .....
:~ .-:I,
U ~ ~ r~
.~ e::I
C ~ :0-
.-
.~ e :~ ~: r!;j
.... '0 13 .. ] 'E ~
.eo '" .~ ~ .~ ~ r=
c., 0 ... ~ ... 'ie ~J
.1;; 0 'Oil .~ '" ao e ~ ~ '"
ee ~ 11.1 Q ~ C n :::l Il III
,t: ~ ~ :!, ,,", 2! ~ :E
C) U J:.t. ~ ~ ~ D." <
D e e VII Z
'l'Ql .5 u r.t"
!3 I;,li "<; fI:!. C C 00 I!'I 1,t'I, ~ In
5 ,~ ~ '" r':l ~ -e l"'" - OJ' < -e
&- NI d 0 0 :;t, M - ,_ Z Z ~ ,~,
,.8 C""l
tl '~ + +
~ 'N N 'f'l':I
ai:l' lUI + + +
,~ FOI
;:J ,c:Q - .... ,,....; ....-I - ..... "*' If"l '!':!
~ N N 100
. .....tJ It'll""Jl ..... ....-!i ("Ii ....-II '10 *' ,~
l!:j +
,~ ~ m, m
~ + + + +
r7J ~,
:J _, - i;' .... ,_ ~ ....01 * .....
~
~
1-0
,~
s II
'I"
~. r"'I
o:c ',_ 0
0 ~ ...... ~ .... ;; ,_ ~. en,
!U '3 m ,Il:! ~ mil C
!1;:; :3 u ~ y u g ,~
'~ .s .3 :3 c;
Po e ~ ,...:I ,(0- .:c:
?: ~ u
;t;j '>0::
a 'ilil
- ..... 1
Ja
III
IGLj -- ,M
bli h,
ell'! ,~ 8 m IN t'- e- §'
... !-; 0
!l!l' 5 .
;> ~ .-;I M * ~I ,_ (",I - '* 1~1F"!l
« ::;i, ~
I:j: g,
e
;:I'
!
0
u
,~ .
:8 ~
.....
In '01, .0
0 ~I .c::: ~
j,\I(l ~ ....
a 1-0, -I;
0' ,~ 0 ~'
i: ~ ~ OQ , ;>
:i .... L'l;
~ 't:! III
~ ~ 1tL....i1 .c ~ u ~ ~ ,_
0 0 :::"i 0 (iii ~ .-.! 0
0 .c ,.,!l i:J !!J e I:
00 '~ 8 It' ::§, 'e. 'fj
iU QJ 0' ~ ~
'!U ~ ~: u \U ~ • ..",;1,
~ - - u ':21 ~
~ "-"I ~ ~,
>.. ~ ~ Q.ill 0 :::l, ::I .= '13 ~ 0
i- ~, U LOOJ al' Ct-:l' U 0 !:::Ii *- - 419-

.~ 50-

oo,~

~~ QQ

M Q

0*

\0 '.-.I' 0-'

-,.. .,

QQ'

M Iif"'l
bI) !C:- f'\! r-. If') 1!ii"":l1
~~
C ~ ""'" * .
't: i" !.f"l * *' 01, V '>0 ~ * * * II!(') 0>0, -..0 ("!"'l,
_,
~ tn
"C
'C
aJ to:"
'Q
"i iVl
I~
~
~
.£::l
8 ill ~ In
::I :a -,
Z ~ C"l t"'l * N * I~ ~- Vl o::J. !:!"'l, * i!Ii- '* it,'; * *
~ 11"1 Nt-.!rlN

""". \£l,\:O M ,~* NI \,Q

~ 51 -

i.It'":l, V'iI In

'~,N N r--

,~ "'" r"': '* V -,t- - ..¢ INt

' ......

01:1: •

'C 0 W?

~""'"

. 52-

~ '''I:!!, ~, ~ bill
~ .' ~ :c U"I
,~ !.... ,b ;;0... ~ .~~ +~: ~;
~ Q - I!iIii;,;!' I~ ... C.
<:U ~ 'QJ "-' U .!!:
'0 ,= M ~ U 0;
u .t:: '~ u ,~~ '~I ~;: 0 ~E! 00 'rnl '"" 0'
.0 dJ il'!:I 12 l~ ~ ~ U (It!
~ lit) ~ I!IJ I,o,!
ti:I =:I :.- j Qj ,;.. C' '!Ii.!! ;;., Q, :;;0. I"; ;..- !:";,JI
m ~t; ,0, ,~ I~
"0 ;~ 'B M ~, ~ !""!Il Cl '<::I 0' ~: 'it:iI ~ 'C
U Q'l liiIl '!CI '~I ~ II) CJI ~i laJ 001 ~! ~
;;.. a ",,"' Ul = ;.., ~ C I~I :> >.. :;> ~ ....
'0' S ~ , I!;E.I' '~ ~ ~I~
('.) Q. 0 ~ v ~e 0 "'" e ,~ 0 ~l
~ IQj ~ ~ I~ ~
"'"' :8 13 ~ 0' ~ e iJI-ij ~' ~
c.. 0., ',mil U Q b!l. ~ ~ Q ~ ~ WI '~ e- ,,] s
8 _0 s I...,... .= ,Il:! ~ 8 !.o'} <U '0 oS
~ ,~ '~ I4..i ;::;:I E' ii;:,o
'W ~, ~ Ii::: ~. a ~ P 't:: 'b.(), C
,- I~ - """" ..... 1 ""'" ~ ~I!o-! .

O:f.l 'IIJ

>+

:E

.

~, u

> + :!

,tt') V'I \0 0\ f'":j ~
g - ~, V "101 N ~ . a '~I e:I ~ ~
. 'C- c' 0 0, 0 >0 ,0 0 0 ,0
" d d .
0 0 0, 0 Q, 0 0 Q Q '0 , + ~.b cil
Q.G ~ c.o 0:0 i')J~ bh bil
!;I<!)I ,~' .Qll' il:l~ ~I ~, 'Q.:i' ~ QJ'
U ,Qj' ;> :> ~ 'D ~, :> > >- :>
>- ::> II ;> ;..- I ~ 'II ,
:E I 'I' ~
:E :E ~' ~ f ~ :2 ,;l ::E
tl.; ~ t:I. ~, t:,t.; tJ;.; u", i;L; p... ~
~ -, - '_ ..... ;:;;. ~ -..." -....; --- ._,
~ :& ::! ~ ~
* :2l ,~. ::E , ::E "E ~ , -
1! I 9 ..c .9 9
~, ~ bb . ,r:!
:c ~::;! ,~ + .s Iii-< '::! i!l .l:!:: ~
'0 m ..14 ,m t.J! ci ,S ~
m ~ ~ ,~ ~, a ~a.'! 'u 'U I~ = ~ !U .
U 10111 ~ ~ ~ ~ :;> ;;:: :::: f 8 ~ ~, 'G!! ,0' - w
.c, ,I!) :!I "t:I1 [.Il ~ ~ ~ u ~ c., ,Q. 'Q., ~ 'IU
e i3 till: ~ "10, i;i bO ,~ ;i:i
~ = ~ ~ ~ ~ ~I U 1'.0 B ~ ~ ;p;. ~
'pi ~ >. ~l ~: "E, ~ ~ ,m .$ '13 i;::i I~ 'E 'E 1: u ~
alJl Ci., ~ ~ '8 ;&l, ~ ,CifI u'
~ ..5 i3 ;::::I !E:! v ~ I~
:::I ~ ~ ~ ~, S W I~ ~ :;I, C'!S ~ ,O;;j :;;;j IU
:.a ~ ~ en ':::I ;::::i: Q:., ~ <U t; L~, ,~
0 ~ 0 :::::1 !lU' a ~ :Ej ~ 0, 5 ~ ~ 0' ... ' '~
~. 'bi ... U t:;(~ '!::L., t::.!\I ~ ::::I, Cli'iI
;M (;) 0. 0> >, 0 ... 10 'E e ~ ~ ;>
U r .. ~ ,J:! Q, I!:J' r ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ '~ OJ :::1 !Ii) .!IJ 1..0
00 '0. 1:> '~ !C ~ blcI :e d) Oi [II!!"",!' ~ .c tl:J') ~ S! e 0 !;:.f.I :8 1it1
~ '8 .~~ m~ c: b~ ~I L~ .I~ ,~ .~ ~ ,> . L~ • ,b a a
...... ~ ~ ::::1 15! ~: :::Ii '= ~ ' ...... ~i E
0 .,~ 'i:! ;::I ~, 0 '2: ~ 'Q a 'bo =:! ~ '0 ,mi. 0>
.::1 (>:l ~I ~J;: ':~
I~ .= U ~ W ~I C- o 'i U :~ E .~ 4J = E ..!l; .Jil ~ :::i
~ II::i.. U !.3i U ,.c, 00" ~. ~ .0 VI ~ U C. !:.lJ1 I~ -

II :~

'fable t5. Tra.lI:Jii.ng uJldergone by the famlJersand 'lhetrf.ating o:f irs userulne:ss,J?umdi. :Ohumd~, Nepal (1990).

Types of tr.al,ntn:gQ'

Intervened! f!llrm.e[S (FH),

U"-~.I - -.b ",e·i.l.II .. lIless

COrllt[o1 Jed t:ilIrnl.er.s (FE)

.~ :2 3 4 :5

1

1

5

2

1

1

3 2

3

'C!l_ k itehen . garderli~~g;.2- cr~op mlilnage~~nt;;. 3-] ~ves~eCck. ~el~'1l~g. fo~d~It I ~nd .~e~lCh manageluen'[; 4- mushreem ell I[] va~ ~on; and 5 ~·pou~~ry bird .. m~1]age.m.enl. 1- very usern,~; .2- u:s~fru1; B.lJdl

3- not usefu.~. No®e~ fH ·-frecruuency ,or[ bouseoo'ids. -

~
:= Iltl
~ ..::::l ~ ~ ,~
,~ ~ '1JJ
.'!""'ii ,~ '~ ~ E =
~ it: c .'~ I~I
0 U i>l:i ':Q. 'i::! - --
~ ~. -
>" ti: 13 ~. .0 - ._..
= ~ ~, ~ ,~ vi
C. ~ ;>-, rJ'J1 tI'i
''CI b:I) "101 'QJ 'C 'U 1: ''l;!, 't:I
'0- "C ''ell E: - ~I :~ .- 1m 10 ~, 'GJ
;:::i 0. .s ..... . -.
~ ,£ N, tU - 0 ....,j iU "I ~ U
v.l' ~I u.. ........ i:I) ~ c 00 ...._... ,U) Vl --
"" I;j)
~ ~
0
,"""" -
0 ~
v:l 'i'i"3!i
'i:: 0
'Q ,i:i;I
C 'birl '~
."""" I..
~ 0 ...........
t!.
~ -'='
0 ~
> u ~
U 'I;;II;J' .-..
l:2 QJ N ~
'"' -
~
E
~ U
iOoo
~ .c j
u
'0 u =
.... ~ ~~
''''l li!il 0 c:c
!U 'M . ......"
""
;,.. 0 tI. ~
~I ~' ':c 0 ,<
- Role to strengU::U.'l~n PS.R

Effect~veness of I l:I:rukag,:e and co\rnm.unica:t[oil1l

Agrk;u~·tll:lre- Devtdopflru!n~ Yes

Office (ADO)

No

Livestock Se:I:vicc: CeI.uer Yes

Yes

EffecHv·e

PSR Site Coo:rdin~t()ir Yes

Yes

Very

Table 18 ,. Prob~emsfBlCjed by Lm:I!wc::rven.ed find ,con~roHed farmers in. ~heado[Ddo:l1I ,of the' ~m!p[Qved technology teClommeDidedby tile FSR p~Clgran~, Pu:n1.di B:.bumdi,. Nepa~ ,( 1990~~n )"a

m,terv,e:ned farmers

CQ]]JLToHed farmen

1, 2. 3,. 51

1. 2. 3 • .4 1,,2.3, ,4,7,8:

1.2. 1,4, .5

1. 2. 3, 4. 6

t, 2. 4,.

2., :; 1,,5 2.,:3

2.3,4 1, .:5 2.3,4

a 1. :::::;. maek: of i.n'.i.g.a[~olf'l. faeil ity; 2 = una.v,aihlbU h .. y and uDUme~y supply

off agr~clll]:m.ral ID$lu~:s; 3 = lack of money to purd:rulIDseilSJ]c;ultuml inpu:~s ~ 4-~:ack: of teelmica lknewledge: .5 ~more '~;abo'r required;

,6 = decUne m soil f'ettW1 ity;. 7= disease and. insect probLems if stored for a kmgeime ~ 8 = imfmved varieties destroyed by wild animals because of~ah'~ maw ri1ty; 9 = less sml:w and peertasterand ill Q ::;:: ~equ~resm.me seed ~llilan local varieties.

.

E

.x

I~

._

w z

wn N

o \0.

_.'

r" ..

r" ) ....

. v

./

.. ' '~

l ~ I

I .~.

~. ~'

.J ~.

'C" '

. ~,

"',-

" i

.J ._.

_( ; ~

.J ", C1 ...

'.' ~. ~ l! - w :

( " '. U' 'I:! . /'

\. ) ~" l'\J

1(;' . e, ...... ,V' \

"l~. .

l ~ .... ', I

'J.L. '

• )' I) ./

["'.

.F1

,."..F

r~".. I

". ._ 1." . '.' ~ .'. '

t ~ .i

~ .. '. L.)"'"'\.' ... .) . I

"" . I. t S' ,,'

~, ., V .it' \..." ........ · __ (')1

.......... ".. .I>'.!. ~ .. '_.' . .

~ 'T ...... '."

... " ....... :0... '.~" '"

1 .'

'."\..,.,,~

~ { '~ • .'
\' l Ji'
~' Ii 'iii
'Q
'"
.>- ~
'!l;;"" I~
CJ W
V ...
;>.
c. ' .... in
~I 0 >.' E
0' 'Q b, m'
..a' Ib, e -~
:J ~I Ill'
'0 Q c: :;... ~
n :I' fn' I~
It: "u
0 0' Cl'
'; c! . .0 i: E
c: ....
~ .2 'ei E '5..
g c '!-.
D' C C
... iLL
-=: Iil:: NI ! U ..

....

-:51 ,_

[

.1 '

I

fIlS J. U!FIE LAfiiD (~hlrb~rl ~

.~

·oodl !li'nDg,Ulllb,d1 ttlil'l!.lrl'

nl.lJJU I 1,I!IGElUl.IS

4--~~-~

Judi.

1 Ill''''

'On~rARJIII

2. Exi8~i:ng :farming sysrC'll11s .IUW imeractions bet ween d w fferen:t f~rtm ,ent.erprises a'l .PUlnlldi Bhnmdi.

- :5a. -

'M" . '0" ·A· A'EII' '!.I'''''' '.. :1['10, '1£ 't:' 'C" •• "" • ." •. ". ka 31- 'n·.1 W- ·c .".1 """31 1

:, '~I " __ 'ill .• U ,J!!LII!J.I~I~., U'~I LB'~I QI~I I;J!"I"~,~" ... -J", __ ,11111;1I1 ' I~I klll ... lu~.II.,._

~lth _ .the .~hangwns .~tra;tegy of the Govermnenr o~, lndonesi.3, ,'to dlverSlfyt~e agnctl]~n.:lra1 development pr,e'gramfrom a sn1!~le

,commodity ,of rice, the loc:bino, ofrice~f:isb was lntrodueed

p'rirnarily In W,est Java. Sab(mg _, 'let took the ~eaders.hi,]J in this

t:ec'hno]ogy with ktr~e J1u.mbers offnrl!1ers a.dop~1ng .t]d~ new fa,rming ~~ys tern. A S~1(],dy of tbe .l rup~(:t Of, this t.ec.hno]ogy l]1l,(bcated greater ,effi,d,ency tn jnput use, Increased rice y~dds and farm ,incomes" ~ nereased '. eonsmnptlon .off.ish.~ us we ll , as :incr~ased .~ap~lal accumulation among the farmers, Based on. tbe potential of th,lS new ~e,chnolObl1)l', sn operado'l1.a~actlol1s mu Sf be taken all he narieaal ll,evel and researc ' eUor~ to .further imp reve the 'l,eclmology mu st be co ntinu ed.

The Government of bu;i onesia has changed Hl,e strategy of futu re agrtculiurul development from a si ngle-com nlodhy approach to a mOore d]vers.ified approach 1(1 sustain doe self-sufflciencyand lncrease Ya.rmincome .. Rice-fish farm]ng syst!el1l1 is an improved pr.acr:i,ceHJ:a.t makes lJfl,o:re effi,ciJe]l:'l use ,~)f a.gr,icltllnlr,a:~ resources in lowland rk:e areas,

The rice-fish farming s~cStiem (RfFS) has been tradil[onally practiced ill Indonesia since the m.iddl.e of the 19th c~ntury .. U was started with some trials conducted by students in. die Ciaojur and S,in.gapama Districes of West Ja.va .. The students tried ro use ~he remaining water in the ricefields by rea:ringf:i:silnher nile wet season (WS) rice was ha rveste d .. TheY,impfOv,ed the farming system from deefallow to rice - fi~h. Af~~1' they .~i~duaued, th~y intreduced the" rice-fish fa:r.mi.n~ system and the nee 'T flshfar:nm.ng system [rice-cum-flsh] 10 their respecnve villages.

Fish produ ct [o.n, from ricetields rose from ]l9.082( in W968 to 2'9IJ20 [ in ~979!, andto 87,414 1 in 1987 (CBS 1976-89), As shown in Table t, '[he aOintribut~on of rice ~,fish to to ta I fish production has increased annual~y.~n .li9g7~ REFS accouaeed for 47.3% of tout! freshwater fish production ..

The RfFS is considered relevant: to future agricultural develepmeat pro.~Ta:nug of lndoaesla because it sustains land p:md~ctJvily"il11cr,ea:ses Iarmineemes, mu]irnprorves[he quality of [?od of rural ~eople(F'ag~et a.l. W9g5~) .. An imp:ac~ skldy on.R.F.[· S was, conducted atBinong Sub-District, Wes! Java .. This sm.dy eXUl1111]led the cffic~:ency of use of inputs in rice production, labor allocaaion, rice: yk~lds~ farm inenme, food and lUJnfood espendituees, and pmd1lJ.ctive and nonpreduetive

uccu m LII lati on of assets, .

1 Agency for Agricultural Research and Developmera (BORl.F), Bogart tndonesia ..

BACKGROUND

fish production in the RiFFS deereased from 1974 to lli'980., butmereased from 19'81 to 1990. e. This wasmal n~,y due to the de'ilelopme;n~ of Road ng nets 31: t he Sa.gu ~.i:ng~

Ci rata. and J at llu hu r Dams for the grow~h :of large-slzed,fi.ng,ed ing~. ,Th.ese fingemll~ngs can be reared In rioe~f~eld:s~ e~iduil.r togetherwith rice orafter rice harvest. Tab~c 2 shows the; pI"Oducdol1l of freshwater fish and the share of fish, produced from ricefleldsin West Java, from ]974 to 198:9.

In 19'90, the 1P:rov~ncia~ Government of Wes:l Java t.arge~ed20~OQO ha of

i :r:ri~,a~ed land for RFFS., Cred i t of lR'So.~OOO I]] a, in add iiHD[i~o the!1lIDl:OU mU allocated fo r rice ell ~ti vaUon~ was provided to farme rs 'iillfiO were "IN i]~, ingto deve ~o]J R:FFS., In ]991. the targeted area was ~lJcrea;sed to 22,000 ha, Fony~,e,iglu percent ,of the NltaJ ttl rgeted area. was coeeentratedi n We:s u Java, The success ,of the riee - f~is:h fU.I"'1:m1.ing iU1[ensificadon progrsm in West J ava encouraged the government to make

R.fFS alB imas p:r m at the aationa I I evel, The t~.rgeu:!d ru rea of rice ·~f:is]] fa,rming

in, th~ dry season ( S) of 199'] andthe WS of 19'91~92, was. 46!OOO ha and covered 14 provlna~s.

In West Ja.va. alone, this program required about l million fingerl .. lngs over two seasons ~ n 14 dis t ricts, Tas i krnal aya requi lied about 225,OOQfi ngerl i Ilgg and Ciuf1I:jur 200~mlO. These are about 50.% of the W[a.~. number of fingertlngs needed for th~;~FfS d~ve~lop~entp~?rora~. '~e,st~J1~3!V~~S '[ar,ge~~ .. ~ LO have abonl.22.,(100 ]]a.,of we~ land or 48% (11[ the WUllI ... area of RFFS inIndonesia .

. 13 i~Mmg Su bdistriet has a popu .. la l ion of 91.658, a nd more 1 han SH% of ~t V\lork.i n the ~.lg.·.·. '.ri cu II n.'.I, ra. ~: . .%~c.', 10 r.·' The :~O\v'~aJl. d, ,a r. ,ea. : [s: '.[ he. :m.,,}IS t .p, rOd!l:~t.i v~a,' ,~i. c. [I. ,1[, ura..1 .1 and In

\IV est j a.va .a It ]s located m thecoasta larea of S u bang Dis mel. 1 here are about

1~,92~1 h~l of agricuhurui.lan;d and themajorjty nq,291 ha)]s irri.ga,{ed. Subaug

D I stn ct ]S 0 ne of 1 he m 3.1 Jil nee- produci I1g regions In West Java,

in ]978~'79. [he ,cultivafiml of f.ish in rieefields was l~nLrm:1jlllCied., This fa.rming syste.m consisted of three subsystems: fish grown with dee (rice-cum-ftsh), f~sh between rice erops, and [ish grown after the rice (mt3r~on,nl [ish). The .mo~~ wideJy developed subsystem was rouJ!tion~;d fish. The praetlce of running-water aquaculnsre also .grad!lJaHy :incre~sed. 1~lowever,. [be, supply ,o·f finger~ing:; from. ehe rotational, Hsh farm Ill.g sys~:e m wasi nadequate and there was a co ns( a ntgap bel wee n demaudand

supp~y ()if fingerlings. . .

To su pport [he developm ent of ths R :fF.s,~ pHn'~'cu .~arly t:i n u·erl:i ngs, a vi llage exte n sion mode ~I was developed in 1.981 ~82 a~. Cicadas. Bi no ng SLij-;- District .

Runni ng-water aquaeul tusewas praeueed slmu ~ta.li:eous]y. wh i cha lso req u ired large-

- 6U-

sized fing,er H n,S (50 .. 100 g/£w'sh). There._[ore"the :l1l11gedL nduc~d in tbe, RF.FS

had ma,ny oip~lon:al market chan[l'e,]s. Farmers who p:fl:oaung-netfish c:ultu.re often came. to .Binorng to plJr,ebi31lle fi.n!6[Ungs (inri the harvest season, This

era"oou.raged thefa,nners tit Bil:long~o p'factwcedue .By 19:89. the RFFS had.

rapidly ~ ncreased in Suba.ng (Table 3).

The Sukamaadi Research Institatefer food Crops, (SURJf) and tile Re;sea~,c)l Institutefor Freshwater-Fish (RIFF) in, Bogo.1i oonducved experlmems on the .: R..fFs.~eChno~ogy components and. conducted on-farm researcbto imp.m.ve, the

~~'i;hnology .. 'T. tli;'fe.s:ear~h ile~ .. on~u:~~ed .. ~~a:t .. r!?~~fis~, c. uI[~r.e .had.ipcrea.~e;~ d~! nd , YIelds. The RfFS abo~eduoed trlp~~,sup~Ii]Jhos,pbate (TS.P)~ use lof belb,Lcldesand

in:se,cticide~s,[tnd labor [or nand weed~.ng .. Results were consistenr in experimental

stations and on-faem trials, .

Til ree cemponents of tile RfFS pracdeed In the st lldy area areas fol lows:

Ili!Rlce~c1iJ.m-fjjsh or rice + fish: fry ,orfingerrH.r1gs are raised together with rice for about 4045 d depending on the use of fish ..

II! Sequential fish or fish.!:n between; f~sh are cultivated after the harvest o,f WS riceand harvested before the DS rice isplanted, Ttl is system is usually used to faus]]! thefin.gedirngs bef(!lred~ey are cultivated in the rlce-cum-fish system duri ng the fi rst DS.

• Rotationalfish culture. (fts has palawija): a,U·,er the harvest of :OSdce1• the

fie] d ls submerged to make til! fish pond. This is u$umJ~.y done as a:n alternatlve to third-seasonctnps (palawija erops), fish are raised for about 2-31110.

If farmers w.ho grow two crops of rice are consi de red. four farming system models are praeticed over a period ·o:f one year in the study area. These farming s.~st!e,msare . rice - rice, -falloW; rice .~ rice ~·f[sh,. rice + fish .. - dee + fi:sThl -flsh, and rice + fish~· fish ~·rice +- fish ~fi s h.

The most commonly practlced rlee -fish farm i.ng, models are rice - dee .~ flis.h and rice + fish -fish - rice +~fish-, fishThechoice ofw.rmi.ng model depends on the

~va.i. ~~;tn.l ilY.· .of i~ riga tio .. n ~3[er:R[o7 -.ri~ -. fallow ~ru~ .~;ti~. I. the ~[Ijor _cro.pp.iJ,~g P.~ ttern, 'The r~ce·~ .,cum -flsh sys[:em offers berterpeospeets m terms, oh!o1a[.erav~uldbl~IJy ..

Ro tat ional fish eul ture depends on the Vila re r coaserved by [he J au lu h ur .Reserv'Gu and the Clm~cam Darn In this study~ dar~e farming. models are. eval!Jated H) dete'~!]li]l.e~heimI?HC[ o.f the REFS: ,rice,.+ f~sh - rice -II- fish ·~t1s1iJ, O~S 1); rice: -zice - ms]] (FS U);and nee- nee - fallow (.1'5 lU).

~ 6m _.

OBJECTIVES

Th:~ specific obj,ec'[~ves, o.f the study. were, to _e~valruat,e[heh~sw:rI~-al :profile of RFf'S . ~nd. t.o pre~~:mt~ts status I n IDd(JIles~a H_Od! W ~S~ Ja:y,a~.~o detierm]~e the role ofcer~atD ~nsntu~lmts in the developm.e.nt of .RFFS.;~o .~de-[lt~:fy the new~ech l'lology deve ~oped

within. the~armJng syste;m framework and the extent ~owhIch thetiechnol" -

~eenad:IJP~ed; to. {J;e'-tce;r:mill~ the degr-e~Lo whi,cllil t.l1Ieadop:~:iof'l of the RFf I

increased tbe efiic',ie:ncy (Jf taputuse, nee pr(lduct~:I).n! aeemeerae of tb~fa.r.m. households, and ~he.i.r pu rch Ising . to measure the degree w whkh the pUfichasirn~ p{I,w'e:r had impr(l,ve~ e qua.liwof ~lu~ ~onsumptionpau.ernand ~he aecumalarlon of 'pmducdv,e assets. by the farm. househo~.ds;. and to~de~ndfythe

_.. 'l ~ ;~. . . I: .1' ~

potennar tor, allu ,oonst:ral uts to, lllllllllre y,ev,e~O'Pm.ent ..

M:ETHODOLOGY

Stral~fi.ed. r2l.l'I.do.r:n s:ail'l:lpli rig was. usedtu, ide nt~fy 2!0 fa.r:m.e:r~cOOiPe,ra.uors from each of the three farm[ng system models ,( .fSt FSn" and PSU]). SIil:l.y fal1":m~rs, were in~e.ns~.ve.ly monitored for 2 yr.

Data. co:Ueet.iolill

~ap'ld nJra]~pp.r~is::.d JRRA) was used toerrun[lQnnado~ ,~'n the ~ nS~:!~tltio]'lal

~.mpa.c~ of FSR .. Imerv~ews were eonducte related .key m~orm.arns [l.!e.,

fe~~a.l"chers .fr.om SUR.IF.3;nd the.Fr~sh~8te-~FIsbe ry Resl~ar-ch ln~dlul:a~. R:eg~on .. al '9ffu~e. o:f A~ncuhu ral. Ml n Istry! ProYI aeial fJsh.ery J?x~e[lSlOn Sen.'lc:e,~ Pttl;lillnC~a~ frItens~f~tat Lon Coordula tor (Blw;m;)~ and ]Dlstru;t Fis he ry EKle:nSH)n S@:rv:lce,and a. few farmers and tradersa t ]3.] n· West Java].. Re levant sec'{)l1cary daea were also

~~~~~1'~~~e~:~fSS~~~~i~!'i~ irCBS.)1 ~a~;~~~[j[~~~~p~~~an%,~·a~:;~r(~,~~~,~Cl:td from. rhe

_ _DarLa were collected on the h]s~:ory .of RFfS, the progr,e~s.al1ld present status ofRFFSj,shalu~. of RFF~, to fres,bwater~ish pm:ducqon. the .. marketl I1g sys~emj' the

S.:U~~OI~s;~steWl1 •. ,~oR~tra:l~ts~ . ~:~~~m~e ~~il~_sU~~t,ml~~S U~ ,~FFoS~~~d~~her n~],ale~ m:6o.r.wBuon.01l] farm da.ta were collected each d usingan intenswe record

11., -m ' _ ". _',l..-:'~-. - .. £ i" ,- ,-., •.. .;I ·f~2· .-, .. ~ '11)-" ,".-' ...• . .• ,.~.\. • '~'-" '. "··.:I·,d.·I•

!l\.eepmg le,ciilmqu,e 10.1" a. penal! o. . yr. .ata recor mg tne nrst yea.r Inc u_eu .

•. il1lp:ut.-output., f?od-{:Q[I:sumpit~O[l pauern, nonfbnd eXp'en~wtu res. (e.,g.~ ;educadoIh health, recreanon.arnd elothes), produ,cti.ve assets (e~.' .• llvesteek, ,flgrlcultural equ~p'.men.t:. a.Dd b]cyci~s )" and n:ri,np.mdu..cdveasse'ls ••• e.:Il:"~ r,adios and u"!levis:i:oif:l)..hl . t.he second year, .aJ)~r;ruo(hc .reoord-,lI;;e,~p.mgmetnod (our nmes per season) was used ~ClIr productlen aenvmes,

~ 62···

Da,t a a.na,lysis

Fi,nanc,j al. anal,ysi:s and econemetrlc prneedureswere 'Used to measu re the impact of

the REFS. '

IMPAC! ON FARMER \V.ELIFAR,E

!o,evalume the i,n'lpac~of_the.develo'p[nern ofRFFS Inth~st~dy area, the

~ecb no.~logy used .. ] WI .each farmmg .s¥,~i'~em was eval u,a ted, TIl.I.s d~scussmn, . focused on. the inputs used and the outputs achieved (i.e .. , p,rod~cdon of rice and nsbt net lncome earned bythefarmer, and food and nonfood espenditure patterns),

!h._,e j ... np.· .. l1~~ (.'.0. I.:n.,e.'r. ·.Ill. an .. _ .•. IG],~? r .. ) u. s.e;d .. in e.: ad] ~ar. m. [.fl. g. '.,~.SY.,:S,tem .~.nodeJ. ,at. rep.r ... ie,s~nte~d in fable 4. Ihere were s],bjlufu::antdl"ffer,ences In the Ievels .ofinputs used (TSP

fertilizer, herbicides, andinsecticides) in both the OS andWS .. lesser smounrs of TSP~e re u~ed in rs ~. and FS U :tl1a n ;In ~9 Ul'This ] nd icated dun the ing_l)rJmratlo.n of fish. p:nrucu]ady til tntereropptng, s]gmbcant[Yl'ie,duc~d the amoun! of TSP

appJru'ed. ..

, The~ fing~.:-rU:l'J!g ,~en~.[[y and rat,e,., of TSf .aP.··.R].[,cado.n. reccmmended b.Y the

so kamand ~ Research I nsntu te for Food Cs. (S U .RJ .f)£ur RFFS were 2,000 fry I h a '(w~igh.l of 109/fry) and 7S kgTSP,/ha. TheSP appllcatioa rate reccsnmeaded by [he ci:d!e'fI~ionservice wa,,]5Q ha, A]tl1ough theteehnique ,ofttencb. comnruction

"vas adopted, farmers did not aeopt the amount oFTSP or the. [i.: ing density

recommended by SURI:F. However, they had adopted the rate :> recnrn-

mended by the extension service.wh ieh 'was twice 'tbe. rate reeomme aded by the research institute, In the ease of f~ngerlin.gs. the density ranged frnm 5'69 to 1,128 fry I ha or about 2,9~4~56 . .4 0/0, of the recornme nded rate,

The production of fish ranged from .321~o 4,64 k;g/ ha '('eQuivalent nee)

whe re as, the producti o rID of fish at "th e on- farm research siteaveraged ]],,500. kg/h.a .e Therefore, the transfer of techno.l.ogy from the research instlmte to the farmers need is to be intensi fJect

The RFfS. alse reduced the a.mijumofHqu~d insecticideand herbicide used infS .~. and FS Ilin both wet and dry seasons (Tables) .. Forinstance, in1989-190, RFfS reduced the application of herbicide almost 10 zero In FS J and F'S Il 'C(Jn,.l~ar.e~ w[.th. rs m, h~ w~[Cb aboul~.S ~,'it:e,rlb~ w~re applied du:r.iJl.g., ~th. e WS and DS. TIl] s; ind teates that tbeIacorporetion of fish m nee- based 'farull.ngsy:nems reduced. insect infestaticn and weed zrowth. However, further research Isrequired to evaluate the real .. impa.ct of fIshcnLlMn! on rice product~onl,]).ii.lJrl[.cuJ.arly in relatien to che mica] :i ],[PULS.

- 63·

Labor requ~.r,el1nen[s (men and 'W:Olne:n) :for each ;activity wifhin the 3 f:arming syst!em models are presented rn n Tabl es 5 and 6. In genera.], Uile total nurnbercf hours

requi red pier hectare In .PSI du ri rig the WS and DS w,a.'S re I aUve ly higher than that required byFSmandFS nt

. Men worked jn tl.lmostaU.acUvides,'I pank.ularl~rwn land ]Jr,epa,ratio~. r~u hunting, ehemical spr3.y~n~! weedlrlj;~, and harvesting, Wml1e:n performed nee plantl lIllg" weed ing. andh arves ti ng, They spen t more time ~n these activit les than men.

land preparation flOr rice farmi ng and rice-fish farm i . .i!1,g was ml1sUy done using hand traerers, wMch CiO~'[ I RP4'9"OOOII.'1:fllin 19189-90 and IRP,63,OOO/ha ~n 1990- 91. Howeve r, Ina nual labor was aislo' used, particularly re hoe the eerner plots of rice and 10 repair di kesand canals.

hu m98:9~90. the use of labor 60r land preparati,on W,~5 reduced; T.Ms, indicated that clJlU~valion of fish during [he third season (after two doe: seasons) made land preparatl on. e asle r.

The average land size per famUy ~11 FS I and FSU was 0.7 ha, while in FSIII was

1 .. m ha .. Al~: yiel.ds, and ~r.comes were oonverted. into hectares except ~n the case of fish in the second DS. The fermula usedwas

The rice y.i,e;ld and total equivalent rice yleld in FS I~ were higherthan the yields ] n FS Jl] and .FS Ill. Thws result was consistent :i n 1'989~90 and -1990~91. The ~l(lldi[ionall yield from dee ·~flsh farmJng resulted from both fish productlonand cultlvatton of rice. frodu,ction .f~gun~s.fO:r FS II FS II, and .FS III are given ~n Table 7.

The increase ~n rice yield In.PS .~ .. and ,Fsn in. theWS. may be due to the residual effectof~hi.[d~'se.aSOll fish cu~:t[vated in both farming sysl,C:riI:1S" Furthennore, the h~gh y ie ld of dee .i n FS :1 m.ay be d ueto ! he, bio~ogica'~ com rol 0 fweed and insect infestation. MOiSt of the, .RFFS areas were relatively less vulnerable to insect infestation and weed problems during '[he crop years 1'989~91 and 1990-'91. This was. evi dent frolTItile],owe r levels of insecticide, herbid:de-, and ]abor used ![or weedi ng, and chemical appJkado.n, compared Wllh fS III h~ the DSj.FSI also p'roduced~.be h:ighes~ rice y.i eld, However, thei i[iC rease 0 f32 % compared w~th .FS ~.~ ~ 1.1l! ] 98:9~90 was reduced to 23 % ~ n 1990.:9 L

In LenTIS of yield equivalent to rice.jn ] 9g9~9ifJ. the total annual yield ll:1 fS .~ ~\1US 13,{HO kg/tuland in FS n was I ]..704\. About Sl% and 27% higher tha.n the annual yield ofFS lU (9;2.13 kgl~u.t). A sim~~a.r situation was oh~erVedin 1990-Sn. The .uddl.Uonul yie]d.produced In fS.I and .FS II was contributed by []shll'roduction, particularly infS .1. in which f~sh culture was practiced three times ,a year, Fish

cl~hivatinnm:ay also have anindirect impact on soil: ferti][l:;{.. .

The Udoplion of in(emdveRFFS affected the ·i,ev·eJ of farruincnme by reducing lhe level. of inputs. (e.g., insecricide, berbleide, TSP,. and labor forweeding), increasing rice ~rie Ids" andge nerat ingaddi ti onal i [I. co me from fish cul (U re, The] ow level of input use reduced productinncosts, whereas, the increase in the prncluction.o:f rice an d fish i ncre ased gross retu rn and s ubsequ en t]y net i. ncome.The inco rnes of th e three farming system. models are presented In t!:lble it

D.aIH. on food a~HJ nonfood expenditure patterns werecollected during the first year ol this sw.dy fl989~90), using an intensiee record-keeping technique .. Food and nonfood expenditure patterns permonthand the monthly expendltures on fresh fish are presented in Tables 9, lQ, and 1 L The :foud and ncnfoodexpe nd itu re.patterns were ,c~(}~ely related to to'lw income per farm fam.ily .. On-farm i ncnrne is one of 1 he sources of income that determines total income .. On-farm income isnot 0I1iy

determi III ed by farm.ingi[l[cn:;;ity but by land size. .

. .Fn rmers ,i 1:1: FS .~. [II pie r c:ap:i ta ,c'xpcn d iture () n food {I R P lS.H 77) wasi he

h~ghc~t a.mrJ.ng the three tarming system models although they practiced H less

i nte nsive [arm i 11~ sys te n1I. (ri co ~. -ri ce -Ja ll ow). About. 4~r.3% (IR [;i6,.:!&4) of t he pc r capita expendi~ure on food is allocated to purchase rice, 15.3% (IRP2,~94)rur dry fish, and '15.2% (I RP2.877), l:or vegetables. Si.mRariy. the per capita eX~;H~ nditure or: uonfcod items ORPIH,026} by families inFS HI was also 'the highest among the

l hue e fa rm i ng mode Is.

Farming tntens[ty increased per capita food and nonfood expenditures per m.ont~' •. Forexample, the average n10[Hhly per capHa expenditure ofthe farm

rami.1 ies helnng.i~lg ~J) FS ,I URPI N.n9) was higher than that of FS II (l'RP'H, L23). A :-.:t mil a r s i l U at [0 nwas obse rved In th e nonfood expe ndi ttl re pane rn, Til eaver rnunthly per capita cxpenditu re onnonfood jterns in FS I (1.R.P14.00 I) wa. hig ier than the expenditureshy families iI1FSn (I RP] 0.374) .. In other words. the

i fHrud uct ion of fish cuhu re in fS rn (rice 4" fish .a rice -:I- fish - fish) i ncreased [he pl~rc.···.haS.i.l1.g p:?We r F .of its farm families in relation to farm famines belonging to.FS n {nce ~ nce ~11t';h).

~ n re lalioll1 10 COUSU IT!I pi ion of fresh fl ~h,! he ave rage mont hlly per-capita expenditure of families in FS I OR.P 1,220) was the highestamo:rng [he three farming

system nlodJeI~. Th:is ind icau~d~:hlrut the h~gh e.r~:i:eld of Ii s]~ .~ n 1;:"£, ] (C1i.l .. I.i~iv.ated three nmes ill year) increased IDontMy per caprta f~:sh O()inStlmp~uJn (Table ] 1).,

Asset aeeumula tinn ls the" valu e of all goods owned by farmers. Assets are ~:a~egodz~d as, ag[icul~tural, equi pme~nt (e.g., tT~CtOrs1 bQeS'la~lcl motQrcycle~)~ lives tock,. nonproductive assets (radil.o.s~ televisions, and :fll.rm~ure), and savings (Jewe1 IiY and cash),

.BUDGETING STAGES

Tille proposed m!ode:l assu rnes tha ~.COI1 sume rs Eo-Uow a. nnsltistage budge~ing, precess, Consu.1l_lersare ass umed.to . f1 est allocate .theIr w ncome b~twe~n sa vi ngs and current

,"'''''1'11"'''''' ..l1·1·· .. ·r .. " {".." ... e: II' m'~l' 'L'O' n'\' TI"I'" ,~"'" [I,'" '1'" "" <,:".' model ed .,'" t-' L,,, ''''[ udv I'" "'11C'" ""·".n n' d ~lhii'!io,I:'~I~.~I\,lI.,IIL~'~~\",",Y'~~o"'Ii,!L·"··l'~iL"'. )'~' ,·",,~·i!i'!i1i~~e¥'.Jil! IfJI,YI~ .. IIJ, __ UJ'~,~ L~Jla .. '_h~J~_,IbJI" J'!!. M ~.,'"""-,,,""'!!i;r'V .. ,

stage.ccnsumers are assumed to a~, locate the ir total current expend itu re to two, eategorses: food mild non food com mod ides .. The third Mage involve;sthe aUocadon o~ the total food e~pend.~lUil'e ~o nine s1I],bglloupi$. The fourth stage involves the

a] h:1.o31 ~.on of nO.I1ILEo,od expe nd itu re to nine su bgroups,

The Linear Appimxima.r:e Almost Edea.~ Demand System (l.A/AJDS) was used to model bud~e~ alloeatlon. Following Deaton (m988)~_the MarshaH.ia.n demand

e ('1'1"'["11"""''' 'In share If'''''r-m,-·- fF1F the l A·I· A- I D' -8 demand svstem "I-re

IIr. ". n, ,I~II.JI~I~, "'1,,1, ,;:)IL~~' '!;;.I L~.~., J 'I' I~.~., 1.",1 '-~\'.' ._,,' ,y .. '~I._LYI"'~'Y ;a;li.1! ,y, __ g,. :_'_

whe;reW~~s th~~ budget sbare.of the ith commodh.;y. Pj is. the 1I.Inh price of the jth ,co:mmc":i:l~y.,. Y is time total expendirure, and P is Stone's price index, Le.,

r2]

A dem.]o_g:l"nptiic vairi.ai:Me (famUy s.~ze)w'tsi.n~[1odu:cedi[lt:o equation I[ 1]1 by

trans I. ill ing the hrute~ce:p~ [erm. H was sssumed UilJaJm .

ilI~ = aio + I;( ail Dt for ru = .~ .• 2~ .. +" r

The relevant theorerical restrlctlons that can be hllpos~d on this demand sys~em are (lik:i,en and Pompe]~li, ,~989i)

l., 2, .... , r)

I-I omoge neity: iiiij= 0;. (i. = l , 2, .". r)

The daHl!. 01111, foud and non I.:oad eensumption !'f'OIU U1C hllpact study on .. f SR in B i nang_ dUl'll1g the cro]) year 1989-90 were used in til isanaly sis, . Data wen! mairra lned for lWO rice seasonsand (I, third season of crops and fish pro~ucl.h>n within ~. yea r. nart3JWel~e collected d ~ rectly 1:lom the selected hou seltolds .nnforn,lal ionon indi vidual household coasumprionwas eooverted i,n!EG per capIta consumption per month. The ~grgregr~i~ed dau1 were dlvi.dedl byfam.Hy size m obtain per capita c:onsunlptlrarn.

A Uexpen(Jt nnes were classified into lWO nruljo:li g IUUpS (food and m'lnrood nerns), Becauseecenomic l~eQ.ryp:mi\i'lcles no guici.arnoe on. tbe composition of food gl"Oups. [he ci:ec:isi:CHllis usuallymade on auad hoc basls by [he researcher. In [his snidy, the' prorm&ied ~~st of foodgroups and nonfood groups depended on I(he; abilit}! of farmers fmd . COI]JSU mers to reC1" II the irems, they had. consumed.

Wi th regard to pe~i capita expenditure of the selected houscnotd s, toodi terns were c.l~ssif:ied into nine subgroaps: rice: 11l1caJro;.fresh ris[~.; dry nsh~ eggs; vegetables: sp ices; cooki ng ('I U ~ and sugar, [em, a.r'lid coffee. There 'we re also nine :subgroup's ()f nonfoodl items: 'firewood ~m:d kerosene: S:OCip and (oQI[h paste: electrlcity; cducm ion ~ clothes.: taxes and other ohligillti.ons.: healLh~ sccialacti v i Lies and cultural ceremony: and asset accumalat ion,

. Uni~ prices [or all items were obtained by d~vi(Hng the repoeted expenditure: ~y the number ufunits. Some of theunit pdces were ,corilputedHS weigbtsd prices, F 0] ~owi ngf~ e i en ancl~ompeUi (1 989)~ a set of ;;UIX iH,ary regressions, whj,ch H ~k;ed UV:UI ~.ub],eRnces toa set of du mm.y variables and 10 espe nd ttu re, was used to unpute rn I sg~, ng pnces,

To express all 1JJ1'i~ prices irsthe .samematris, bOit:h food and nlQllJood prices were sealed by d~vidingea,cln,'~Y its ,corr~sporndili1g m,~an,. v,a]~e._ Inaddlt ion,., ,a~~, scaled, IIlJn!'[ prices were transformed into ]ogan.lhms W obtainthe lieear form of rhe demaml model,

EMPHUCAL R.ESUL TS

T.his discusshm emphasizes the resulrsof the economlc ana.~ysis .oiE the. dee-fish

fa rm [ng systems and its i mpaet on consu mpl.ioll. patterns, the bM.dge t al located ro,r 'each hem, and the magnitude of e]astlclt[e:s.

tn general, fS .~. farmers had hi.gher levels of per capiraconsumptinn than rs 11 farmers, l-~owe;ver~ per capita consumption by FS I farmers was lower ~hCl.1:l

consu mptl on by 'FS U] fa rrne rs, Th ls di fie rencei s ,evh;lenUy due' to the fact that the ave rage -I a nd h old i ng of t:ll e farme rs in FS II f was. 1. l. ha compared w]th am ave rage .orO.7 ha ~n the other h~lo'gnmps. Th6t,ohl~percar· ita expenditureofthe farmers [11 FS I was abou.l33.6% higher than farmers in FS'~ ~. hut about 12 . .5% lewer than for f~u:rnerg in FS III.

The 'bu.d~e[ share for food Items in fS I (54.6%) is a, little [owe:rllhan .iu .Fsn (56.7%). B(ywev,er, thelowest share was lnFSlU' (49:.2:0)'" l'he- highes'[ budget sbare fernonfood items.was :infS· HI (50.8 %) fellowed byFS I (45 .. 4%) and FS 11

(43 . .3 %)1 (Ta h,! e 13).

There fo re, [he poore r farmers in FS ~. and f'S .~~' spent mere [.han 50% .of thei r .1 neome 0 n food Items, 'On to e ,conH:ary t farmers ~ n fS [U j.who had higher lncemes, spent. less than 50% of their income on foodconsumption. Therefore, the impact of rice-fish fuming systems w!~!1 'be most effective ~fil is developed an1loug

smal I -scale Farmers under exis ting coud itions, -

A summary of theexpenditure pattern for food and the budget shareef each food item ar~ presented III Tabl.e IS. In ~.~.I.furming system grmt,Ps,d~~ largest part (}fth.~e expenditure on fondwas spent on nee, The second and third highesr shares weretor

. (~-

d~l1s~ and vegetables, respectively, The consumption ofmeat was relatively ]o<w in

all three farming gronps. .

W.ith reaard to the direct impact of the rice-fish farming systems on consumption ofh'esh fish. farmers in :fS I consumed more fish (790) than fanners in .FS :n (6%) andfS U] (·1%)., Other food items showed varied budget shares among the three farming system groups.. --

Non foo d expend U U res

A su mmary oft be. nonfood expe nd itures and 1 he budget share of eaeh . nonfaadi te m are presented :i":.l'ab]e is, Wkh.in t~e non6omj c~l~ego~, the;"_ighestamourn was sp,enl;~ on 'edt! eau ou_, .1'~e_m,lpaJct,~}fflSh Cl~~ture o~ qta.'~hty of ]rf~ ~yas(~uu farm:erso. spent more on educatlon .. For example; farmers In FS 1 and PSi II spent about 2i6 ;ro and .39% of their Wt.H~ nonfood expenditures on education cornparedwith Ff Ill

far men who spen t 12.%.. Hnweve r j FS U~ farme rs spe n t m ore on taxes and assets

1 han fa rmersi l~ FS 1 and .rS I I .

. I:n relation toexpendinsres on social activities ,( e+g~.cu.'!turnl ceremony, recreation.and donations). there is a remarkable difference between farmers in FS ~ ~lndFsmul though 1 hey ha.vet.he same so.cia.l SUlUllI:S. W h h 1 heincreased income from. fish, FS I (fish cultivated three times ill. year], farmers spent more; on social activities IhH,r1,F.S II fanners. However, FS II] farmers spent the highest budget share un social actrvrues ..

Si.g n ifi can [ di m::~·re u ceswere al so ohse rved in expe ml i tures onbeal t h . se rviees {e.g .. , v~~jting rural lfae~.h]] services and famlly planning) between fa.r.mers in FS I and FS U .. fnrmers . in .fS lU spent the highest budge;! share enhealth services,

A s,umruuuj~ [)f pric~ and inco~e elasticities for all' bud~et categorles is ,ujrven. i U1 .... Tables ~6. ]7, and LS, These figures were cnmpared U$UJg the e~w:nm~d paramaters of the .l.A/AIDS model. 'There W~I!'i. vari~~t)':~iity in H1C elasticitiesin all gmup.t:. 0'£

CfU1 su mer\S ..

The de mand far load it nd non food grou ps appears 10 be unit price ·i ne last ic tn all fa~min~ groups r~a.b],e U5), Hewever, farmers in FS. II l are relative.]y more! . responstve (i.e., a ,e()e[fl.CIl':lnt of -0.664 for food and -0.748 for nonfood)!. MeanwJn~.e., the demandfor food and nonfood cups appears 10. be income elastic in aU farming

groups exce pi for .~o odin FS ~. (0. and 1.00'1).

~M ..

Prlccei'aslic.iry .. TIle de mand foraH fnodi te rns appears ~Q be price ine lastic In all farming groups .. The demand for rice ~s the most important in terms of food poUe)' in I~bi studyarea, Among alllfnotliih::mS,U1C demand for rice is relatively more responsive to priee variabiUIY irral! [farmIng group's 'H1390inf'S I,. -0 .. 403 in .FS~~l' and -0 .. 306 i:rnFS III). Furthermore, the demand for fresh rush in fS m is. the n~o51 p~ i ce Ii ne I,as~ic ~~.n~'ong t 11~ lh r~e farm i ng g~oups;. I~- o,:05? !cofl:lpa~ed~ wil~ -~.~7 for FS II and -0.89 [or .FS U]), Thls m.ty he due ro the high degree of subslstenee on.

1. he~r own prod II et ion oif f rest! Iis h.

1m::m'm!! elasticities. The d em a nd for fu od 1 terns among a U farming grou ps . is mO~lly :income etasue «loe:ff~de]'u:s{)f elasticities almost 1.Oe.x,cept for some food items for whtch ellsdcily ]s "reater t~ant.n) .. Forexample, the demand formeat ira. FS Lis i neorue e last ic (f.B26j,. The. demand f(]lr~Qtod co mrnoditybu nd ~,e:s (e .. g., eggs and sugar, lea. and coffee ~ n.FS III and sugar.tea, and coffee in .FS U)arei ncome elasric. In other words, the demand for Ih6·!'ie food ~lerns. ls Hke1y ~.O be determined by the farmers' income.

No Iiil food sector

Price dw:ticilY.· Demand in the nonfood sector is mostly priceinelastic in all Farming gronps fuc health services .. The demand for health services in FS 11 andlFS 1.1 Jis pri ce e I as tic (C{H!W den rs ·of ~'~ .314 and ~ 1, J125 , re;.~pecm iVle:lly). Th e d~;mand for assf~ls .. is the nl0IS1.priCle_e,i~;~st~c.i.nHi~.f~r~i.]1g.WOup'S (coe;firidems ·uf·~]..377 iii! FS ~.a l.7)] In FS II, and ~ l. 7":) 1 In .FS lU). This indicates that fanners wonl.d lessen then' demand for assets (a~rlcuUum1asse[s. and savings) ~f~be~r price increases, These assets include nenprcduetlveassets SIJ.ch asradios and televisions,

Income elusliclty. The demand for fkew('lod and kerosene, education, social activities and don~lr~O~S~, an~ assets isincome 'ehJSl;ie in all br~[~g .arollps~_Th~ . ' .. demalld for asse ts t$ h Ig,h]y .1 neo rnee lasuc {coeffkl!,emls of 3 .. 2)2 I n F S t 4.)" 3 til FS rn l~a.nd 2.S3.Jin 'fS ~ ~ ~).. Social activitiesand donations showed H similar pattern,

Researchers and extension speclalists can play a major role in hnpreving the . oondl~ tion s .of smal ~-scai!e farrne rsand en CO~i r.ng] ng pol ky. The techno I.ogy deve lOoped by these r-esearch pmje~ls have ~)e~n uansferr~d dlfOU~$b mulli,lo,,:~',ui9ntest~ng; fl,eJd da~ys attended by extensron specialists, researchers" policymakers, and farmer groups; seminars and workshops: pub~icaltions;, and other media (radio and

te levtsi OIfJ.).

CONCLUSION

Rice-fish faroojng sysH.~ro:s have belen practiced since the: middle of the 19~h century. H owever , this fa .. rm ~ ngsy~~em was. tradi [i(H1UHy practi ce d without ap'Ptopi~a~e_ lechno!~!oID'. particularly without the construcnon ,of trenches . Farmers believed th:a~. trench construcdonwcu ld reduce the y~eM of rice, Til is study sh Oi~V!'>\ ~ha[ trenches have no adverse effe,el on the pruductlon of rice.

Afte r the llUmd:ucti on of [he n ew techn0:~ogy. farmers e d [be tech n [que

of uencill construcuon but oaid little attentinn to the amount of P or Ii nger~i,l1ig

densi~y. The. nnge-rHng den .' farmers used was S6:9~m,,128 fry/ha. The production of fish ranged from 321 to 464 k&/I1.a (equivalelu rice), This pr6ductionis much lower than the level obtained under research condltlons (average l .500 kg/lila ,eqtdvale:"nl.t doe). Therefore, transfer of technology fromthe research institute to the farmers !\.i1nu]d be imensif.i.ed. This could be done by strengthening [he links iHl]Ong researcher, extension specialists and farmers thr();l!~h on-farm research ...

. " .fish c~u_hur~ in r.,ic~~fIsh farml rli.g .~~ws[.ems has several advau[ug,esl increased

efficiency of I, Sf\ herbicide, and pe5iu.c~,de use and better lise of labor tor weeding anu :->p:rnying; increased dee and equivalent Floe y~.eid. increased net income; increased eonsu mption ,of fre-sh fish; undincreased accumulationotassets,

The annual ~,vie~.d [,).f rl~!ce.'ii.I,n:d e.([uivnl~[I,[,· rio,e p.er he.ct<.ue .in .. ~[.: ~l.nd. fS n were h . r t:h~1I1.1~ F~ Urn. The an~ua] n~l m~o"ll~e,E~r ~ec~ar~ In ~989~90 of FS'~ WHS 89 ... % and of FS. n was 60% 11Igher than an ~S III. Whde m 199~]·91, rs I was H75% ~~ndFS '~m was 50 .. 8% hi.gher than. i:nFS .~ll

Becau~e FS ~. farmers in the irrigated areas cuhivated fishthn~e times a year, their per capita coasnmption offish was relatively higher than [he cOnSUmlJ,[Jon of FS II f'l:rrners.whocultivHl~cl [ish once a.yea~. There w~re sigll'~ficant chang~:s i,n. expe nd I HJ, res 0 n food. p\art~lc~lllarly fres~l f~sh ,I n 3 ~ I farm.~ ~g ~y~a~n1:1 ~rou ps. S~,~n i ficant change~were alse Obgiep!~d.:m exp~~ .. ditures on :nonfood uems, The sh~re'o:hood ." .... expenditure to total exp-elildl:mr,elsl'ngher than nonfood,expenduur€cli In FS 1 and FS 1 I. .~-Iuweve r, l he opposi te I~S, tru e for co n~ u me rs in FS In.

j\. sign~I.:I!can( variabil ily in price and income elasticities of demand for food and nonfood h~m~ W~!S found inall ftlr.mlng sy~[el'l1 g~o~lp~.The: d~mand for commodities within the food t~u[egory IS prrce inelasric 1l!1. a~ I fnrmil~g groups, buttbe dema nd fo r no n fond items va de s .. F or examp le, 1 he derna nd for ed U CUl ]on, be alrh services, and asse rs lin rs I is less el ast ic 1 haa in FS Uan d FSm.

Rice-fish f~UJm,~nghas [he potential ff~~~ large-scaie dev,e.~<]p'.merrn.l ~n Indonesia ..

Itean be •. t;.-'~lppO. r.[ed ~y ,go.\."e.rnmem.p .. 'oJlcY! external 8up·p()rt,:[arm~t participaU0r1;. and t.e>C~lI~ology deve~o1?mem.; In sprte of the pn?sp,e.cn; '~()r RFfS~ there are o~n~l:n .. constraints. These are mcoossstent supply of :~r:rlgaUf.l:n\-'lI:a.ter.j. inadequate ava.l.labdu.y

o~·f:inger~.i.~~.:, n~(.ur,a] ~.azard.Sl: f~. ndlack Of. ~.pp'r. 0.' .pri~lte pmoessiDg and .m~rkedng syste rns () I f sh. r 0 overcom e these probl ems, Iocal ~ove rnme 11 ts (prov.1 ncial ana

district fishery extension services) and researchers must exert effort to. ~m]Jrovethe [.,echnoWogy.,

:Based on [be potemlal, prospects, and eonstratnts In the development ,oif riceHsl'!. farming, systems. Appropriate actions are needed at the national level, These include the continuous .mp.rove.rnem, of the technology for hatdl:jngand rearing fry., extensicnand guidance 'or farmer groups credit facilities, andimproved marketing sySb:::,~~s.loc~l ~ov?nunents ma,~ be' n~ede~ to pro~Ide support services su,eh as provruswon of ~mgfillon water and eredtt rOll' hatcheries.

REFERENCES CITED

CBS--Cent ral B u reau of Stads~h:s (1976~'] 988) Statistical yearbook: ofbldonesia.., Jakarta.

Fagi A M. Suryapermana S, Sya:ms'iah I (1'989)1 Rice-fish farming sy.l,emin lowland

. ,are?!!>.', 'the ~W,es.t J,i1,~',1, case" Paper presented ~al theAsian Regional~Vod!~.shop on Rice-Fish Research and Develeprnent, Central Luzon State Unl,versJty, N ue va Eeija, Phili p pines,

Heien D. Pompelli 0 (:1'989), The demand for a~coho~ic beverages: economic and demograpjue effects, South. 16~o:l1", J. Agency for Agrlcultaral Research and Development, Boger, Indone ra,

-n-

~~-C~~.C=~~NM~~~~"~~~~

~~~ci~~~~~~~ci~~~~~~~~~~

NN~MNN~MMNN~.~~~~W_~~~

O~~OO~~~OONO~N-CNC~~~N ~~N.G~DOO~~O~~ooooon~~~_ -n-~-~~ •• N~M~~~~O~~_N

~ ~ .

m 0 _ __

....

-13 -

-s .F-iti.

o

'tj'\

I

"f"

S

- "-"

v r- \0, e- O ~ !!!""""!i ~ V"l .C'I'iI -.:::t 0'1 00' 0'1 U'l. 0 0 \0
19; l"'<iJ 'N, NI 'N N N N N N ~ ,~ Nl M N M ,fij 'NI
.2 d . 0 . Q d
0, 0 0 Q C e el' " 0 Q 0 0 01
~ ''t:! t:'>I 0 v 8
=: ....., Q i Q'\
0< - N C'1, -
- .. ' ~
~, ~ 'IiC ~ Q\
, '~ "'Idi' M, ~ 00 0 ,~ 'NI -e- ~ Vl N .... 't!"I \01 'I!I"\ 0'1 00 .... \0 t'i"I
~ 00 N \0 It- :~ ~, 00 co 0 0 0 !""""'!i QC o¢ - a.
~ ~ ~ e- 10> '0 o:-~ '\0, ...-I Q N Il-~ 00 Q ,.,.; 1.0 ~, 0
--
"'"-"" ..0 ..; d -~ ~ - . ~ ,. "'. p p a.."
~ \Q ...... 01 'M t'- C"1 t- f""I .~ \C w.- 0 t"I
~ ~ - ' ..... .... ..-.!! '"!""",,,,!I '~I ..-.I ,'""" ..... £"oil ,NJ 'r<Q N ~ rrl - I Ir--., ("i'l QO 'C'I 00 ~, N ~,
N e- o::t ~ ,0\, '1;"1 V':i ''If
'<:'!l:" !I"I 11"1 ~ M V 0.0 v' II *

v-N\o OOi<> ...... - ~ ...... \Oo

"";M"o:i

iI!J'
OJ\)
;,;;:,
'I-< V !n \C r- oo ,0\ '0 ~ M r"':I ~ !J'l \0 ,~ co Q. ~
I~ e- e- e- r-.. s ~ '00 ,00 00 00, 00 00 00 ,00 00 QOI Q.j'
!!J CI'I 0'1 0'\ 0'> ~ ,0\ Q\ 0\, Q\ Q\ Q'> C'I 'et\. 0\ ;;>.
>- ""'" - ""'" '!"""'!! ~ ...... .... !!"""'1 - - _ ,_ - ..",.; - - <: II 0;. It-- In It'"l 00 v ,~ \0
00 0\ ,_ I!'!"'""!i a V:I '0 NI
M e- \Q ';0 r"'l ~ N ,tf"j
,~ p ~ p ,~ ,~
"¢ V':I Vl ~ it'I 1t'1 it"'i Vl ~ + !.(') f"-. ~ !!"""""II ~. ,0. 00' .~
'U ~ M ~ 00 '10 ~' il"'--' \iC N
'0 0 bl.l 10 r-. 0> II"'-- QO ~I 00 I.('j
.!o:!f
P ~ ....., ,..~ ~. ~ - ... ~.
I~ ,~ '00 ...... ''It ~ w-. C"l I'!")
0< M ~ 00 ~ 00 t--
N "¢' ¢ I!,,- e- I!lj, ~ f"1
~
'!""""!!
i 0 0 8 \\0, 0 0 0 g
.2 c.b:' ~ Q 0 'M 0' 8 V':l
NI '00 ~ ~~ 0 t-- ~
iIi-!' ~ C ~ .~ r - ~ ~ ~
~ IC '0 0. 0' (;) ~ Vl f"'I 0
.... ' '~ e- ~' CO 00 00 ~
c: ~ IN ,t;""! , "" \,Q "'" "0
. 'Si
;6,;1'
'~
"
"C
,0'
"'" Ii::
~ ~ 'e laJ 01 ...c V) ~ 01, II"l If"I V
Ic:p" !o-!I ~
'00 ~ u -OIl! I;i""l, ,~ 00, C\ ~. V M r---
~ 1m' ~ 0. 1!f"'"'!'!1 Q' a. 1,0 Vl '00 V':I
,N ~ 43 ~ ~. iI'!' ~ ..; n ,~ ,~
00 ..0, f"-. '-0' ~ ('i"l ~ ~
0.. ~ ~
-
'-'"
~
"~
~ ,;; \0 ,e,
i'!"""J !n ~ I~ 00 V) f;"'j
-
0< u :u: ....,_.,. 00 0 Q\, ("'l c;" M 00 Iil)
U
'-0: U 'I if ,.....j C\ c Q'I V;j i,Q ,~ 0.
~: ~ 8 cr ~ ~. ~ ,~ ~ ~ 100
..... J ~ ,- N V 00 I~
~ :;! N N C"'I M 00 M lOi, to')
C!.I) U 0:;:1"
~
,,.!:II
:::1,
Co?
~ V e- iO 0 !.f"I t- ~ I~
's: ........
~ .c:= m: ~ . "
s (5 ~ ~I ~ 0 M !!""""i! ~ 'e:"') 100
:~ :C~ M, DO 00 a.. .... Q g lCO
Ii;:;) ~ 00 ,~ !T'i 00 0 r--. ' - -
;:.,.
Vll- ,I!"'"'ii ,_.;j I!_if N ~ 'N ,~
t:;I)
.~
El: ~
62: 0
~; ~ Vl C'1I ~~ t- ,~ 0
.8 ~ -- d . r.:
'.=: ~ CiS fI"'l, a... 0 !t'l 8 i.t":I
~ ~
~, !~ 'tC ~ ~ 0 ~ 00 10 r--
~. S -' ~ \.;0 V "D __ ,
.- .""""" ,~ ~ ~ =0 ~
'QCi' p:;
9 ~
1-;, e
Il"""'!' or(
c;;
'p ~ it::::
~: Q1i
1::::' Qj "2' QQ 0;;) QQ' I,., 0 t- rt'I 00
..c ~ d . .
'0 v.l e I>I'"l ~ 0 ~, : In '""'
"B 'ti: 'Ql CQ C"\ 0'> ~ ~ Ifl
':;! £)
"l!;I,
e
'0. ,,.t::::
~ ,0 til ~ ~ 00 C'i! 0 C-i'"l In e-
e I~ "2- .
Cd, U Ik ~ ~ ~ 00 l""l Q g ......
,(!:i ~ is C M M r- oo '>G ..,0
U ~ '- '!""'Ii! '!""'Ii! N N N f""l M
~ u ~
«
M
Q 10-0 ~ ('t"l V ~, "" r-.. QO a.
.,c, ~ 00' 00 00' 00' 00 QO 00 00
',~ J!lj "" Pt 0\ 0\ Q'\ 0\. C\; 0-.
r-o' ~ >= ~ ~ ~, ~ ~ """ - ~. '75-

Table 41 •. lL.eve~ of inputs used in. each FS M()de~. Bin.ong. lndunesia (] 989-90 to 1990~91).

Wet season ,Dry season
lnputs FS J fS II FS In FS I: FS .II FS ill
1989~91
Rice seed (kg), 27 28 19 ].9 33 29
Pi ngerl ing (fish) 1.1.28 0 0 LIt5 0 0
.Fe~d (k_g) H.i' 0 0 7.5 0 0
Urea tkg} 175 191 rTf 210 218 ]98
TSP (kg) 153 .~.37 225 ~54 160 207
KCL {kg) u 28 1:5 45 3,6 4,9
ZA (kg), 0 ,0 7.0 I) 0 6,4
Liquid fertilizer (L}, 0.06 0.'[2 0.05 '11.f1Q 0.00 0.18
C;;l.rbo:Fu ram (kg) 2.3 1.7 6 .. 8. 10.4 18.7 15.5
I Ierbicide ,([.) 0 . .05 0.03 0..58 0.20 0.08 0.48
Rodl;mtJC ide (g) 1.0 0,2 0.1 '~1.9 2 .. 6 3.2
Insec Lie ide {l) 0.1 (1,8 ]..3 0.9 1.1 1.4-
Land area (ha) (0,,7) (0.2) O.U (0.7) (l17) (LI"
l'99D..:~n
.R~ce seed (kg) .2,9 29 19 341 31 33
FiDgerlmg '(fisb) 723 0 0 569 0 0
Feed O;:gl 5 .. 2 0 0. 1.8, 0 0
Urea ,(kg) gil 228 161 195 102 209'
TSP (,kg), 148 l82 lS9 146 1'97 172
KCL (kg) 55 22 70 55 62 85
ZA (kg) 5.8 5.5 ,65.0 1.6 42.0 3'9.0
Liqu.id fertilizer (Ll c.n OJJO 0,70 0.00 0.00 2.62
C arbofuran O;:.g)' 8 .. ~ 6.4 15.5 13.~ rz. D.6
Herbicice (LJ 0.19 0.29 0.40 (L17 0.33 0.14
Rod.en.l lc lde (g) .1,225.0 1.6~U.O 2,591.0 2.322.0 2,524 .. 0 ~.,.288.0
Insecticide (L) 1.2 1.4 1.6 LO Ll 1.6
Land size (ha) (0,.7) ~O.7) (1.'1 ) (0.8) lO.7) (Ll} ill') 0. ,1t"I '-O·,o·~ oo'!.f) 0 ffl 0 \D N 0 ~N'M~'<;I'eMIQ\ ~Q - tc"'O

!>"I e'I 'M~

if<'I 00 '<:T

~ 10 0 0 0 10 10 O,·c;., 0> 0 '0 ~:!:5

f"r! MO

M t-i d

on U"i'~

o ~oct.oo~ "'" o,a,i1"'IO~O. ,'.

on !iI'"I {"'\.<I) 0

~ N ~'M

""'i M

~.~~ ;::o~q::n3°~fj.';~~8

......,. ~ 110 Q

0."' 0- M

,~~.~ ~ o:f;; ~:gg' 0 a ~ t'"l~: s

,~~ .~ MI C\ t-:,

00 f"-;:Ir

0' 0 '0 ~ 0 o·~ til'~ E< ~ N ~g

-=i!. fr"i'I~i,

Ir--· M

~~'~~~~~~~,~~-~g

'NI '- ~ 0'> V;, e'0- V

~'-"., ••. O 0 Q 0 Q"~ 0 0 00 0< 0 9 8 :5 c,o

0: C;'

",!,>l;r

.0 ~·oc-eQQJ;J·f'- Q,O-OXIO

I~ C"'I,~ 0

M N ""'"Qr~

t<'I

""

§~ 000 0 C Q O'Q< 00 0 'O~.~,

'f'!'l. ~.(:'I

\0, ..0' \0

0'0 0 ~ 0 0, r-.:2 0. c ~ 2 ~ 9

I~ N ~QI

iN

'D ~

~ .~ ~ ~ ;0 ;;; a ~. 'Ol ~, r:::; .• ~: f;!. ~. --,I N OQq

\0 M

~'~~I~OV~~ 00 ~N

MINI'!""""!!OO' ~~IO (!";j,&"l!~

~. I!!"""'II •

~g

~~ ~

I~

,~

00 (#,~ e- 0 \O!; ~ 10 ~,::'~ g

~, "'I '.:;:I~

(OJ, ~

~. ~,-,'

~O

o:::! Q\ II!"l

· ....

=

.... .....

~.:6

!)Or-: (". tr:J <::r

§ 0 oe 0 00 10 0 0 0 C 3.§

c' :::l'o~

'7 PJ""<t"

C00t"100~ oo.oV~"d'

~ II"j ..... -:;\r<"i

1""1"""'"

co:

~,~~~ Q ;;!~~ ~'C~ ::rl~ ~ ~ \lOr"!.

:b

r"1

Q 0000- 0 0 V't"'j OOI,jCJ '1"1\0 ~

l"- "'I" 0-.."...0

1""1 -r cc

,....., .... ,

~,~ ~ "'i' ~ ~ ~~'!! '118~;:~

<"'L - r'1 a- I-; in. c"T'

OOC::'cOOO

~

>:::!' "!!'

ccO'c:;:o

oS

r;; ~j "':t-t

010 0 -("-1 0 I"~.c r- CD '0!"1 <::'" f"'~'"

W"',' -r C I""l I"'";

r~ -r r-

OO 1""1

"".,0 ~ "f"l"-O> V'iI 0 - .... C' C-,... '":r

o ('"J M "'.' M N r"'J r- N M

r"l >,Q q

Ii"'-

- 71-1 .,

,;;~ s a= ~ ~ go ~! ~I i§

~ r.J

"'"'

a.c -0 ,.....-II ,,,

-c r"\ 'n

OOOOCCOOOo

o 0 0 ~ 0 0 ('j :;:: 0.

:!;gg

~~ Ile ..,

C 0 C ~' ,..~ C r-- ~ 1"1 0 IF, N :8 2 ..... "'l ~. ~

~

~ ;;; ::a ~ 'Ii s;: ~ ~ !2 ~ 2:5 C'> ~ g

N "'" II'"-IrI

fn

"'1

Table 7. Rice and equivalent rice ylddfrom rice-fish .fuming1Binong, Indonesia (19891590 and 1 '990-91).

WS'

nee

(kg)

DS!

e'qu ru.valent rice (kg)

DS II Total

dee iequ~'Va~:e:llt rice.Equivalent rice Total '(k~) - (kg) - (kg)1 (kId

J989·91 lFSI

'~3~1 464 5)4!9 32] 1635 U.910
(US%) (132%)1 051%)
5,874 .0 41,892 0 938 U~704
(Ul%) (125%) (127%)
5305 0 1!9018 0 0 9.2B
•
(100.%) ,(100%) (100.%) FSU

FSU~

rs I

16~S71\1t 4W.9 5~]62_ 413 1674 [4.54.2;
(12]0/0) 0.23%) (147%)1
6'1,467 0 ,4925 a. 981 1.2.373
)
(113%) ([17%) ( 1.21%)
.170Z 0 4,2:04 (] 0 9,9,(l6
,
1(100%) (mOO%) (HJU%) FS II

FSIII

Note; J\v~r",ge !ice price: \VS= RP2301kg; DS I = Rr28nl/kg~ DS II = RPJ20!kg. Average fish price: WS;;:;·RP:2.1 OO/kg;, 'oS n & DS U ~ RP2,200/kg.

Fi t.~.res in pare nrheses > percentage. of dee yield compared wit h rs nt

Q.£QOO~~ r;.'ill N rr-.. 11"\1

~t1. ..,~~ro

~~ IP.. """"

,..~ r,-;I

c C '~ M .~ f",. ~

~ ,~:~~~Ltl~~

~ g~'rn~~

!fR ~ ~~IT"-

~,

Q ~!f!!l.~.

~ at ~ L~ .,Q"';nI"...j

;t) .... ~ ~

il">1

Q i

.F'"I' ~

N ,~'

~ ~'

~. Ii9

~i ~,

kf'i!

Og'jg:~~:I§::;g

~>Q t-t-~

....;....:..::;'~.;d"

.,...,. ~ ~. ~~

I!"\..n Lf."t.1 ~,~

1'!l{J

.5

~ ':= o 0

8

0\ f"'l ,~, e- QI, ";01 ,...., 'O'!. Ilt":I

'oQ'~'N

..... NI ....,

'In, NO, 0. 00 00 \l:) II'- ~

'",f ~ ...;

-

N Vl, Vl M '0. CI'; Q\ !!h 00

M~~~

o '00 .... M'O In

"'! \.O~ '1.0

,_ .....

,~

rNJ 0, N
en .... ..0
r--- 0 In 'r- It- '\Q

1('1"'1 --' v

~'~ .. '~,;..

~ IN t"""'I

t'"'I Ilii"'l -
QO co 00
'1"-. ._ C"'i!
~
-
0""'1 00 \iC'
M ,r- It-
..... r- ~~
N N ~I
M ~ \0
M ~ ,0-,
Q(i f'""l
....
~ QO 0>.
M ('!"'I 0
e- M M
F
....
't- 8 0
,N it"J
It;. II'} t'--p
~
1U""i] t'"- "<t ~ :::!; ~ oo~ t-:, 'C! 00 t"-- 0 ..-4 N ......

IoCr-M 1,0 ...... v

00_ ~ 'V~

"'""" N"'"

0'1 \0 F'l
00 t-- C!'I
r~1 OF N
<"3
~,f'l V V
~ !rl !!""""!I
f<"l a;,
~ ~
- N
I'"'"- 0 ~
II"- (rIO C
00 lfl M
~ ~
C"I, ~ ~ ~. r- 00 0.-('.1

c<t ~~ IN~ ",I "i\t. ."". ,

...0 00 ~ r- """"i '00 ~M'

~ _.;j

(!'ivO 0'1. r- ID 00 ~~ M

~

~ Vi 11"'\ 00' "* ['-.

~~~q \0, Ir--., f""lI

.... ' 81 e e E E
~
~ ~I ::::I ::I: U :::;)1 ::li U. ~ ~
It;; F.:J:) en e a 0.0 a e I:: (;II) 8 E
'ij CIS 1=1 ~. ,~
IS ~ .;;: ~a ."'" .;c :s !-. !!"ioo-i .!
'B - ~ u - u ee
~ ~ ~ tLl > ~ 1Zl' :> ~ i
I tI., e < ~ ~ ,< :s ::E ~ -e ~ ~ N ''"''''"''
N N
00 N !:I"'l
~
''''; .- t-- !M
0 001 -.0
,~ ~~ 0'1
'. ~
V' 'NI
~ Vr
!XI 00' 0
f"-., N 0
t-, 0.; ~
r ~
I~I 'V'
V \rl s
Vl f'>.
"¢~ In -
~
"""'! e
~
M '!!""""ii Y":I
'00 r-- ,N
-.0 <.Q ....
~ r-:
""' ,..-I' In 00 OMOO

MI _.. LP"""'i!

!" nJ

,'""" V

a ~: S

Gl~.:. ~~ m, r- ....

0, c'q. t"1; QO M ~, t-;_ o~ N; ~' ,,.,.

~I """, 0 I~ Vl, (""l

~~ '~""

~ IN

'V '0>. 0 t"-, r-l 0 M tr" v

o~~~ ~, N

~8 :~

f-.r--

M

V'l ~ 0' 0.;, ~ ,0,

e'M ....-I' ..... ,~~

ifiMIf'I ~t-M 00' 0-. ~'

N'

0, 0 .... U"l v r-(;'>l~ .....

~'v-i'M

e- C tOOl 'i1 01 I~O~~

F'I 1:!1'11,

t'-vVr QQ 0 V V"lr"l ,f"'!

~

.....

"if' 0.0 00 '~N N Q~ ~~ It"l

~J ,~

.... .....

1~-<l""J1 \01

I~

t"-"f'0I. o cn,O>,

~ ~~ v .. ~, m '"'"'

II

,~

o

2;,

Table 1 I. Monthly consumption pattern (IRPlperson) off£es'h, fish byfann ram.ilies, in. each farmin,g system model. Bmo.rig, Indonesia 1(198,9..:90).,

Montb PS I :P$ n PeS m
November 651 396 360
December 1,5,68 1!041 ,653
January 1,.1'95 93,1 51 1
February 880 1.424 630
March m .,60:S S;74 535
Ap,rH :m.~574 911 1.318
May 1,331 63S. ,837
June 861 63.1 83
Ju1y 1;201 608 U4
August SOl 55'9 889
September 1,474- 1,241 Ijl96
October lA88 1;021 9'8,9
Average 1,220 8.32 616
Maximum :1,608 1;.4241 1.31.8
M.~n~R'lru:Jm 6,51 396 8.3, Table 12. The \I',;d1JJC of assets ORP x lhousand) owned by farm famiities in each FS Model, Binong. Indonesii~ {1990-9Th )1.

1989'·90 1'990-91
FSI FSU FS 01 FSI FS II FS m
Agricultural assets 108 l76 181 96 ,38 49
Livestot:k 68 66 8-2 194 265 19.3
N onprod uc ti ve agSe1s 168 3'9 ]24 ~.B8 936 ~ ,30]
Savings 219 183 601 348 i550 496
Tota~ 563 466 988 1.776 1.394 2,041 Table ~ 3 . MOn'uhlyfood and nonfood expenditures (lRP/penon)1 and budget share of farm famines ineach farming system model. Binong, Indonesia {1 989'-90),

Food Nonfood Total
FS I 1.8.,27rfl 15. L64 33.434
(54,6) (45.4) (100)
FS II 14,182 m.840 25,0.22
(56.1) (43.3) HlO)
FSm 18.8017 19,414 38,221
(49.2) (50.8) (l00) QVa]ut:s in parentheses are the budge'[ shares. USD1 = IRP] ,925.

Tab le 14. Food £xpefld iture panem and! budget share of farm ram Hies: Ln. each ' armiing syso:m model, Bino]]g. lilldones~a. U 989-<90).,

rs I

rs n

FS III

6.326'1 (_.5,

804 (4),

1.220 7

.5,121 ,40)

734 (5)

83,2, (6)

Rice

SLII~a:ricoffeeitea

732- (5)

456 (3)

'950 (7)

6',,484 (3,S)

8.93 (5)

616 (4)

2,,8:94- 15)

1.,033 (5)

.... 877 (15)

~A95 ,(8)

otal cod

2,922 (16)

86·8 (5,),

2.693 (15),

1.043 (6)

459 (2)

1.843 00)

18270 (100)

2.l31 {15

783 (5)

D'ry fish

Vegetables

~.j837 (13)

Spices

COOklUg oil

589 (3)

14.lS2 (lmn

11866, (10)

18.,807 (l00),

~ 85-

firewood/kerosene

fS I FS n FS m:
1.37Sa 1.034 1,339
(9) (9~1 0)
707 587 669'
(5)1 (5) ,(.3)
2A2!O 1,381' 2,507
(13)1 (1.3)
3~903, 4,250 2.3:93
(25.7) (39 .. 2) 02 ")
. , ..• .J
1,301 875 1.,664
(8) (8) (9)
1,6'63 1,095 2,,667
(1 ].) (UJ) ,~ 14),
1,454 3~H 3.870
(10) !(4) (20)
1~17B 749 31.317
( 12) 1(7) ( 11)
5,63 466 98S
(4) (4,) (5)
15, M4 m.84 0 ['9A 14
(100) ( tOO) ,( 100) El.ec~:ri:cH.y (16)

Education

Clothes