sustainability
Article
Evaluation of Automatic Irrigation System for Rice Cultivation
and Sustainable Agriculture Water Management
Jaenam Lee
Citation: Lee, J. Evaluation of
Automatic Irrigation System for Rice
Cultivation and Sustainable
Agriculture Water Management.
Sustainability 2022, 14, 11044.
https://doi.org/10.3390/
su141711044
Academic Editors: Martina
Zeleňáková, Abdelazim Negm,
Mahmoud Nasr,
Katarzyna Kubiak-Wójcicka and
Mahmoud F. Mubarak
Received: 18 July 2022
Accepted: 1 September 2022
Published: 4 September 2022
Publisher’s Note: MDPI stays neutral
with regard to jurisdictional claims in
published maps and institutional affil-
iations.
Copyright: © 2022 by the author.
Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland.
This article is an open access article
distributed under the terms and
conditions of the Creative Commons
Attribution (CC BY) license (https://
creativecommons.org/licenses/by/
4.0/).
Sustainability 2022, 14, 11044. https://doi.org/10.3390/su141711044
Rural Research Institute, Korea Rural Community Corporation, Naju 58321, Korea; jnlee@ekr.or.kr
Abstract: The water-resource policy of South Korea has been changing from that of securing water to
that of saving water through sustainable water management. Moreover, population aging in rural
areas is leading to agricultural water-management problems. In this study, an automatic irrigation
system for rice crops was investigated and compared with conventional irrigation, and changes in
water productivity and required labor power were quantified. The effect of the proposed system on
economic feasibility was verified on farmland by monitoring irrigation water and rice yields for three
years. Under the automatic irrigation system, on-site water productivity improved by an average of
12.7% and the labor power required for paddy water management decreased by an average of 21.8%
compared to the conventional irrigation system. The internal rate of return was 8.6% higher than the
discount rate of 4.5%. The net present value was 406,411 KRW, and the benefit-cost ratio was 1.23.
The results can serve as a reference for the on-site introduction of irrigation water-supply automation
for sustainable water management and are expected to benefit farmers in saving water and reducing
labor demands through sustainable agricultural activities.
Keywords: agricultural water; automatic irrigation; water productivity; on-site technology; sustain-
able water management
1. Introduction
The implementation of water-saving irrigation and efficient use of existing water
resources are necessary for the sustainable utilization of agricultural water resources [1].
Because the demand for food is expected to increase with global population growth, food
productivity must be increased [2]. Rice, a subtropical crop, is the main food source for half
of the world’s population [3], and 90% of the total rice cultivation occurs in Asia [4]. As
South Korea is a major rice-producing country, efforts are being made to provide a stable
water supply for rice farming.
The global weather patterns have become increasingly unpredictable and extreme due
to the phenomenon of climate change [5]. Extreme weather events are considered to increase
or decrease the average values of climate factors, such as temperature and precipitation [6].
Abnormal climate phenomena, which have not occurred in the past, have recently been
observed in the Korean Peninsula [7]. For example, in 2015, the amount of precipitation
received in the Han River and Geum River Basins was, respectively, the lowest and the
second lowest since 1966. Consequently, the water level in the Boryeong Dam was observed
to be the lowest since its construction in 1998. Furthermore, in June 2017, the amount of
precipitation received was the third lowest, although localized torrential rains were frequent
for a short period, and in the summer of 2018, the highest average temperature was recorded
due to a heat wave, which occurs every year. Moreover, it is becoming evident that the heat
wave intensity is strengthening and its frequency is increasing.
Rice yield is decreasing due to climate change [8], stimulating a growing interest in
irrigation technology. Water-saving methods for increasing water-use efficiency are re-
quired to help farmers with irrigation water management on rice paddy fields [9]. Various
experimental studies regarding the conservation of agricultural water have been conducted.
https://www.mdpi.com/journal/sustainability
Sustainability 2022, 14, 11044 2 of 12

Tarlera et al. [10] studied the methods of alternate wet and dry irrigation for three irrigation
seasons and reported that the water productivity increased only in two seasons. Mishra
et al. [11] conducted an experimental study for three years by varying the paddy heights
from 6 cm to 30 cm with a 4 cm increase interval and reported that the yield was not signifi-
cantly affected by varying the paddy heights. Tabbal et al. [12] employed an intermittent
irrigation method in a farm experiment in the Philippines, and the yield of wet-seeded rice
increased by 6% to 36%. Belder et al. [13] conducted field experiments on the water use of
alternately submerged and non-submerged irrigation systems. The irrigation water input
was 15% to 18% lower under the alternately submerged and non-submerged systems than
that under the continuously submerged system; however, this result was only significant in
one experiment. Sohn et al. [14] studied the water-saving effect of three treatments for pond-
ing depth management, and it was confirmed that shallow-pond and very shallow-pond
irrigation methods saved approximately 18% and 26% more than the conventional deep-
irrigation method, respectively. Park et al. [15] conducted an experimental study to examine
the feasibility of applying the rice-intensification irrigation method and reported that water
use reduced by 55.6% compared to the conventional method, which is effective in saving
water resources. Humphreys et al. [16] argued that water productivity could be improved
through technologies such as automated irrigation systems. However, the aforementioned
studies focused on the effects of irrigation methods, and there is insufficient evaluation of
the adoption of on-site technologies adopted to implement irrigation methods.
Sustainable paddy water management must account for a potential reduction in rural
population while aiming to save water. The agricultural sector is facing a shortage of
labor [17]. With the aging of farmers in rural areas, there is a need to introduce technology
that can automate water management in rice fields. The population of farm households in
Korea was 2,245,000 in 2019, which is 84.4% less than the population of 14,422,000 in 1970.
The proportion of the population aged 65 and above in the total farm household population
increased by 41.7%, that is, from 4.9% in 1970 to 46.6% in 2019 [18]. The aging problem
in rural areas can be linked to the problem of labor required for water management in
paddy fields. In particular, agricultural water in Korea is provided free of charge, and
the efforts made by farmers to save water are insufficient. Moreover, the increase in labor
wages for agricultural activities negatively affects farmer income [19]. For sustainable
irrigation water supply practices in rural areas, a system for supplying agricultural water
is being automated using Internet of things (IoT) sensors and images. Research has been
conducted on irrigation systems for various crops [20–27]. The automation of irrigation
systems is a water-saving technology [28]. However, few studies [29,30] have reported
on automated irrigation systems for rice cultivation. In the future, a business model that
can automate paddy water management will be required to counteract the aging problem
of farmers. Therefore, it is necessary to examine case studies in the field of paddy-water
management automation facilities considering water productivity. We hypothesize that
using an automatic irrigation system for paddy rice crops in the field would save water
and reduce labor demands, leading to economic benefits.
The purpose of this study was to evaluate the field introduction of an automatic
irrigation system in terms of water productivity, the water management labor force, and the
economic feasibility of water management for rice crops. To this end, water productivity
and labor power were investigated by installing an on-site automatic irrigation system,
which is a nonconventional water management method. The results were compared to
those of the conventional water management method wherein farmers directly manage
water by employing labor power. Based on the field data, an economic analysis of the
automatic irrigation system was performed to examine the possibility of introducing
sustainable paddy water management in rural areas.
 Sustainability 2022, 14, x FOR PEER REVIEW 3 of 12
Sustainability 2022, 14, 11044 3 of 12

2. Materials and Methods

2. Materials and Methods
2.1. Study
2.1. Study Site
Site
The site (Figure 1)
The site (Figure 1) used
used for
for the
the study
study was
was an
an irrigation
irrigation area
area inin Hwaseong
Hwaseong City,City, located
lo-
cated in central Korea. The main crop in this region is rice and the soil texture at the site
in central Korea. The main crop in this region is rice and the soil texture at the site is silt
is silt loam. We conducted experiments for three years (2017 to 2019) in two test fields;
loam. We conducted experiments for three years (2017 to 2019) in two test fields; each had
each had an area of 4000 m2. The rice variety selected was Koshihikari, which is the main
an area of 4000 m2 . The rice variety selected was Koshihikari, which is the main cultivated
cultivated variety at the site. Irrigation water was supplied via an open canal from the
variety at the site. Irrigation water was supplied via an open canal from the reservoir to the
reservoir to the test site. The site is in the monsoon climate zone, with 78.8% of the annual
test site. The site is in the monsoon climate zone, with 78.8% of the annual precipitation
precipitation occurring during the irrigation period (April to September). Furthermore,
occurring during the irrigation period (April to September). Furthermore, this area has
this area has exhibited an annual average precipitation of 1 320.3 mm, average tempera- ◦
exhibited an annual average precipitation of 1 320.3 mm, average temperature of 12.5 C,
ture of 12.5 °C, average relative humidity of 68.3%, average wind speed of 1.7 m/s, and
average relative humidity
average solar irradiation of of
time 68.3%, average
6.1 h/day wind
as the speed
average of 1.7values
climate m/s, and average
for the past 30solar
irradiation
years (1991 to 2020). During the field experiment, the precipitation varied at 0.6% (1991
time of 6.1 h/day as the average climate values for the past 30 years and to
2020). During the field experiment, the precipitation varied at 0.6%
−2.1% in 2017 and 2018, respectively, compared to the average climate value, and approx- and − 2.1% in 2017
and
imately 31% less rainfall was received in 2019. Conversely, the average temperature less
2018, respectively, compared to the average climate value, and approximately 31%
rainfall
showedwas received
a gradually in 2019. trend,
increasing Conversely, the average
and in 2019, it was 13.2temperature showed
°C, that is, 0.8 a gradually
°C higher than
increasing trend, and
the corresponding in 2019,
average climate 13.2 ◦The
it wasvalue. C, that ◦ C higher than the corresponding
is, 0.8humidity
average in 2019 was approxi-
average
mately 3% climate
highervalue. Theinaverage
than that 2017 andhumidity
2018. The in 2019 was
average solarapproximately
irradiation time3% washigher
higherthan
that in 2017 and 2018. The average solar irradiation time was higher than
than its average climate value, and it was 6.8 h/day in 2019 and 7.1 h/day in 2017 and 2018. its average climate
value, and it was 6.8 h/day in 2019 and 7.1 h/day in 2017 and 2018.
However, the average wind speed was the same as its average climate value during the However, the average
wind
entirespeed was the same as its average climate value during the entire experiment.
experiment.

Figure 1. Map
Figure Mapofofthe thestudy sitesite
study with twotwo
with test fields. Yellow
test fields. circle symbol
Yellow indicates
circle symbol the location
indicates the location
(37°8′
◦ 0 N, 126°49′
◦ 0E) in South Korea for field experiment.
(37 8 N, 126 49 E) in South Korea for field experiment.

2.2. Automatic
2.2. Automatic Irrigation
IrrigationSystem
System
An automatic
automatic irrigation
irrigationsystem
systemwas wasinstalled to to
installed evaluate
evaluatethethe
benefits of the
benefits on-site
of the on-site
introduction of water-conserving techniques in paddy fields. Figure 2 shows
introduction of water-conserving techniques in paddy fields. Figure 2 shows the layout the layout of of
this system and photographs of its on-site installation. The system comprised
this system and photographs of its on-site installation. The system comprised a ponding- a ponding-
depth sensor,
depth sensor, an
an intake
intakegate,
gate,aacontroller,
controller,and
anda drive motor.
a drive motor.TheTheinlet device
inlet for supplying
device for supplying
water to the paddy fields had a sluice-type gate design. This system automatically
water to the paddy fields had a sluice-type gate design. This system automatically supplied sup-
plied water from the canal to the paddy field by using the ponding-depth
water from the canal to the paddy field by using the ponding-depth sensor. Furthermore, sensor. Further-
more,
an an option
option to operate
to operate the gate
the sluice sluice gate manually
manually was enabled
was enabled in the system.
in the system. We
We combined
a Thalimedes encoder with this system to monitor the irrigation characteristics in the
test field.
 Sustainability 2022,
Sustainability 2022, 14,
14, xx FOR
FORPEER
PEERREVIEW
REVIEW 4 of4 12
of 12

Sustainability 2022, 14, 11044 4 of 12

combined
combinedaaThalimedes
Thalimedesencoder
encoderwith
withthis system
this to to
system monitor thethe
monitor irrigation characteristics
irrigation characteristics
in the test field.
in the test field.

Figure
Figure 2.
2.Schematic
Schematicofofthe
theautomatic
automaticirrigation system
irrigation (a) (a)
system andand
an on-site photograph
an on-site of theofinstalled
photograph the installed
Figure(b).
system 2. Schematic of the automatic irrigation system (a) and an on-site photograph of the installed
system (b).
system (b).
2.3.
2.3. Design
DesignofofField
FieldExperiments
Experiments
2.3. Design
In of Field Experiments
In this
thisstudy,
study,we weapplied
appliedtwo
twomethods
methods forfor
paddy
paddywater management:
water management: conventional
conventional
and In this
automatic study, we
irrigationapplied two
systems. methods
Figure 3 for
shows paddy
the water
layout of management:
the field conventional
experiments
and automatic irrigation systems. Figure 3 shows the layout of the field experiments for for
operating
and the
automatic irrigation systems.
irrigation
operating the irrigation systems. systems. Figure 3 shows the layout of the field experiments for
operating the irrigation systems.

Figure 3. Layout of field experiments for the operation of the irrigation systems (a), conventional
irrigation in Test Field 1 (b) and automatic irrigation in Test Field 2 (c).
Figure 3. Layout
Figure 3. Layout of of field
field experiments for the
experiments for the operation
operation of
of the
the irrigation
irrigationsystems
systems(a),
(a),conventional
conventional
irrigation in
In Test
irrigation in Test
Field
Test Field
1, a11farmer
Field (b)
(b) and automatic
andmanually irrigationwater
automaticsupplied Field 2the
in Testusing (c).conventional irrigation
system, wherein the ponding depth did not exceed 80 mm. In Test Field 2, water was
In
In Test
supplied Test Field
the 1,
Field
using 1, aa farmer
farmer
proposed manually supplied
manuallyirrigation
automatic water ausing
suppliedsystem,
water using the conventional
the conventional
nonconventional irrigation
irrigation
system. For
system,
system, wherein
wherein the
the ponding depth did
ponding depth did not
not exceed
exceed 80
80 mm.
mm. InInTest
TestField
Field2,2,water
waterwaswas
supplied
supplied using
using the
the proposed
proposed automatic irrigation system,
automatic irrigation system,aanonconventional
nonconventionalsystem.
system.For
For
the automatic irrigation system, the ponding depth in the test field was designed to
maintain a water level at half of the ponding depth for the conventional irrigation system.
To evaluate the feasibility of the automatic irrigation system, we monitored the water
Sustainability 2022, 14, 11044 5 of 12

consumption and labor required in water management in each test field. In the harvest
season, the threshed rice crops from each test field were dried, and the amount of white
rice produced was weighed.

2.4. Field Applicability Evaluation

We analyzed the water productivity, labor power, and economic feasibility to evaluate
the applicability of the proposed technology. Water productivity and labor power were
compared before and after the application of the automatic irrigation system. Water
productivity (WP) is a measure of crop growth per unit of water consumption and can be
expressed using Equation (1), where Production denotes the weight of the produced crops
and Water consumption denotes the volume of the on-site irrigation water [31].
 
kg Production(Kg)
WP = . (1)
m3 Water consumption(m3 )

To compare the labor power required for water management with and without the
automatic irrigation system, we analyzed the irrigation frequency. The labor power was
calculated using the irrigation-monitoring information expressed in Equation (2), where
LP represents the total number of irrigation days during an irrigation period and Rx is
a representative number; Rx = 1 if irrigation is performed on a given day and Rx = 0 if
irrigation is not performed on a given day.

LP (day) = ∑ Rx f or irrigation period. (2)

To evaluate the on-site introduction of the proposed technology, we analyzed the

following economic evaluation indices: the internal rate of return (IRR), net present value
(NPV), and benefit-cost ratio (BCR). IRR is the discount rate that makes the NPV of a
project equal zero using Equation (3). NPV is the total benefit on present value minus the
total cost on present value. An investment is considered economically feasible when IRR
is greater than the discount rate. The BCR is the ratio of the present value of the benefit
streams generated by an investment divided by the present value of the cost streams, as
expressed in Equation (4). An investment is considered economically feasible when the
BCR is greater than 1 [32–34]. The economic evaluation indices were calculated based on the
experience data of on-site installation and operation of an automatic irrigation system. Here,
a social discount rate was used as the most important input data for economic analysis [35].
A social discount rate is generally applied to calculate the value of funds for social public
investment projects carried out by the government. Adjustment of the social discount
rate was reviewed considering the changes in the economic and social conditions [36]. In
addition, the results of the rice production-cost survey were used to calculate the cost of
labor. According to the Statistical Act, a rice production cost survey is conducted annually
for the purpose of providing basic data for the use of agricultural policies, such as the
improvement of agricultural management and enhancement of competitiveness [37]. This
survey is conducted by extracting paddy rice from farmlands with an area greater than
1980 m2 , and the survey items are divided into direct and indirect production costs. Direct
production costs include labor, seedling, and fertilizer costs whereas the indirect production
cost includes land service and capital service costs.
n
Bt − Ct
NPV = ∑ (1 + r ) t , (3)
t =0

Bt
∑nt=0 (1+r ) t
BCR = C
, (4)
∑nt=0 (1+tr)t

where Bt represents the present value of benefit, Ct represents the present value of cost,
and r is the discount rate.
Sustainability 2022, 14, 11044 6 of 12

3. Results
3.1. Water Productivity from Irrigation Methods
Table 1 lists the irrigation water consumption, rice yield, and water productivity
values obtained using the conventional and automatic irrigation methods from 2017 to
2019. With the conventional irrigation system, irrigation water consumption was 428.9 mm,
699.0 mm, and 708.1 mm in 2017, 2018, and 2019, respectively. Furthermore, the rice
yields per thousand square meters ranged from 717.2 kg to 858.9 kg, and the average value
was 810.3 kg. With the automatic irrigation system, the water consumption reduced by
16.8%, 10.4%, and 14.7% in 2017, 2018, and 2019, respectively, compared to those with
the conventional irrigation system. However, the rice yield was decreased by 1.2%, 2.3%,
and 6.5% in 2017, 2018, and 2019, respectively, compared to those with the conventional
irrigation system. The average irrigation water saved using the automatic irrigation system
was 14.2% higher than the conventional irrigation system. This indicates that the decrease
in irrigation water consumption is higher than the decrease in rice production when the
automatic irrigation technique is employed for rice cultivation. During the three years of
this study, the water productivity obtained by the automatic irrigation system was higher
than that obtained by the conventional irrigation system. Only considering irrigation water,
the water productivity was 1.99 kg/m3 , 1.35 kg/m3 , and 1.32 kg/m3 with the automatic
irrigation system, and its average value was 12.7% higher than that with the conventional
irrigation system. This implies that every cubic meter of water consumed produced
approximately 1.99 kg, 1.35 kg, and 1.32 kg of rice. The water productivity with rainfall
showed a tendency to decrease when high precipitation during the irrigation period was
considered. Mainuddin et al. [38] investigated the water productivity of 420 farmlands of
rice cultivation from 2015 to 2017; the average water productivity was between 0.64 kg/m3
and 0.67 kg/m3 when rainfall was considered and between 0.8 kg/m3 and 0.95 kg/m3
when only irrigation water was considered. Water productivity of our test fields was
lesser than or similar to that reported by Mainuddin et al. when rainfall was considered.
However, in this study, the water productivity with only irrigation water was relatively
higher, because the same amount of irrigation water was used more efficiently.

Table 1. Comparison of irrigation water, rice yield, and water productivity for automatic and
conventional irrigation methods during the irrigation period.

Irrigation Rainfall Irrigation Rice Yield Water Productivity (kg/m3 )

Year (kg/103 m2 )
Method (mm) Water (mm) (IW) 1 (IW + R) 2
Conventional 428.9 717.2 1.67 0.46
2017 1120.4
Automatic 356.9 708.7 1.99 0.48
Conventional 699.0 858.9 1.23 0.57
2018 806.4
Automatic 621.5 839.1 1.35 0.59
Conventional 708.1 854.9 1.21 0.65
2019 606.2
Automatic 604.1 799.2 1.32 0.66
1 (IW) denotes irrigation water. 2 (IW + R) denotes irrigation water with rainfall.

3.2. Labor Power for Paddy Water Management by Irrigation Methods

Figure 4 shows the labor-power characteristics of the water management for the ir-
rigation methods employed in this study from 2017 to 2019. Over those three years, the
number of days required to irrigate the paddy field using the conventional irrigation sys-
tem was 94 days, 78 days, and 53 days, respectively, whereas that using the automatic
irrigation system was 76 days, 61 days, and 40 days, respectively. The labor power with the
automatic irrigation system was reduced by a minimum of 19.1%, a maximum of 24.5%,
and an average of 21.8%, compared to those with the conventional irrigation system. By
applying the proposed automatic irrigation technology, the number of days for irrigation
is markedly reduced when compared to the conventional irrigation system. This implies
 system was 94 days, 78 days, and 53 days, respectively, whereas that using the automatic
irrigation system was 76 days, 61 days, and 40 days, respectively. The labor power with
the automatic irrigation system was reduced by a minimum of 19.1%, a maximum of
Sustainability 2022, 14, 11044 24.5%, and an average of 21.8%, compared to those with the conventional irrigation sys- 7 of 12

tem. By applying the proposed automatic irrigation technology, the number of days for
irrigation is markedly reduced when compared to the conventional irrigation system. This
implies
that that the automatic
the automatic irrigation irrigation
system cansystem can the
reduce reduce
laborthe laborfor
power power
paddy for water
paddymanage-
water
management,
ment, compared compared to the manual
to the manual irrigation
irrigation management
management system system
employedemployed by farm-In
by farmers.
ers. In addition,
addition, thepower
the labor labor power for irrigation
for irrigation was required
was required moremore frequently
frequently in the in years
the years
with
with precipitation
high high precipitation and showed
and showed a tendency
a tendency to decrease
to decrease in theinyears
the years
withwith
low low precipi-
precipitation.
tation. However,
However, in the
in the years years
with with aamount
a higher higher amount of precipitation,
of precipitation, the laborthe laborfor
power power for
irrigation
irrigation increased,
increased, but the
but the amount of amount
irrigation ofwater
irrigation
usedwater used was
was small. In thesmall.
yearsInwiththe years with
low precipi-
low precipitation,
tation, the labor
the labor power power decreased,
decreased, but the total butamount
the totalofamount
irrigationof irrigation
water used water usedto
tended
tended toTo
increase. increase. To avoid
avoid drought drought
damage damage
caused causedshortage,
by water by wateritshortage,
is necessary it isto
necessary to
induce local
induce local
residents residentswater
to practice to practice
savingwater
[39]. saving [39]. Customarily,
Customarily, farmers practice farmers practice
to save waterto save
when
water when
rainfall rainfall is insufficient.
is insufficient. At the government
At the government level, farmers level, farmers education
education for water
for water saving has
saving
been has been implemented
implemented since 2016 assince 2016 as a comprehensive
a comprehensive measure to cope measure to copeinwith
with drought rural
drought
areas [40].inFurthermore,
rural areas [40]. Furthermore,
farmers showed an farmers
interestshowed an interest
in water-saving in water-saving
awareness through
awareness and
education, through
mosteducation, and most
farmers agreed farmers
to save water agreed to save waterin
[41]. Accordingly, [41].
theAccordingly,
case of a year
in theinsufficient
with case of a year with insufficient
precipitation, precipitation,
it is judged that the labor it is force
judged forthat
waterthesupply
labor force for
decreases
water
to savesupply
water. decreases to save water.

Figure 4.
Figure 4. Comparison
Comparisonof
ofirrigation
irrigationfrequency
frequencybetween
between conventional
conventional and
and automatic
automatic irrigation
irrigation sys-
systems.
tems.
3.3. Economic Analysis of Automatic Irrigation Technology
3.3. Economic
Figure 5 Analysis
shows the of Automatic
cumulative Irrigation
cash flows Technology
with the on-site introduction of the auto-
maticFigure
irrigation system. The cost of automatic irrigation
5 shows the cumulative cash flows with the on-site technology includes
introduction theauto-
of the initial
investment and maintenance costs, and the benefit includes labor reduction
matic irrigation system. The cost of automatic irrigation technology includes the initial and increase
in yield. Its and
investment initial investmentcosts,
maintenance cost is approximately
and 1,360,000
the benefit includes KRW,
labor and theand
reduction durability
increaseis
15
in years. The
yield. Its durability
initial of thecost
investment automatic irrigation1,360,000
is approximately technology KRW,wasandcalculated based is
the durability on
the average
15 years. Thedurability
durabilityvalues
of theof the reservoir
automatic concrete
irrigation structures
technology was[42] considered
calculated based in on
this
study, because
the average the automatic
durability values irrigation systemconcrete
of the reservoir can be operated
structuresuntil
[42] the irrigation
considered in canal
this
renovation project is completed. The maintenance cost is considered
study, because the automatic irrigation system can be operated until the irrigation canal to be 40,800 KRW
based on theproject
renovation experience of the trial-operation
is completed. The maintenance period.costTheislabor cost could
considered to bebe40,800
187,653KRW KRW
based on a rice production-cost survey from 2021 [37], considering a labor-power
based on the experience of the trial-operation period. The labor cost could be 187,653 KRW reduction
of 21.8%
based onaccording to the resultssurvey
a rice production-cost of thefrom
on-site operation.
2021 The rice ayield
[37], considering benefit could
labor-power reduc-be
1,293,998 KRW,
tion of 21.8% and the increase
according in riceofyield
to the results is considered
the on-site to beThe
operation. 12.7%
ricebased
yield on the increase
benefit could
in
bewater productivity.
1,293,998 KRW, andThe the IRR was 8.6%
increase in ricehigher
yield than the discount
is considered to berate
12.7%of 4.5%,
basedbased
on the on
the discount
increase rate productivity.
in water The 𝐼𝑅𝑅
for public project evaluation
was 8.6% [43].
higher NPVthe
The than was 406,411rate
discount KRW, which
of 4.5%,
converted to revenue after eight years of device installation. In addition, the BCR was 1.23,
which is greater than 1. Therefore, the automatic systems could achieve a break-even point
based on the economic analysis results, suggesting that the introduction of this technology
is economically satisfactory.
 based on the discount rate for public project evaluation [43]. The 𝑁𝑃𝑉 was 406,411 KRW,
which converted to revenue after eight years of device installation. In addition, the 𝐵𝐶𝑅
was 1.23, which is greater than 1. Therefore, the automatic systems could achieve a break-
Sustainability 2022, 14, 11044 8 of 12
even point based on the economic analysis results, suggesting that the introduction of this
technology is economically satisfactory.

Figure 5.
Figure 5. Cumulative
Cumulative cash
cash flows
flowswith
withthe
theon-site
on-siteintroduction
introductionofofthe
theautomatic
automaticirrigation
irrigationsystem.
system.

4. Discussion
4. Discussion
To apply
apply the theproposed
proposedautomatic
automaticirrigation
irrigationtechnology
technologytotorice ricefields
fieldsandand totomonitor
monitor the
water-saving effect to realize sustainable irrigation water
the water-saving effect to realize sustainable irrigation water management, our experi- management, our experiments
were
mentsset up in
were setaupshallow paddy paddy
in a shallow field. We determined
field. We determined that thethatautomatic irrigation
the automatic method
irrigation
reduced water usage
method reduced waterby an average
usage by an average of 14.2% compared
of 14.2% comparedto thetoconventional
the conventional irrigation
irri-
method. Wang Wang
gation method. et al. [44]
et al.conducted
[44] conducted a two-year
a two-year fieldfield
experiment
experiment using shallow
using shallowwet irri-
wet
gation
irrigationand andshallow
shallow humidity-regulated
humidity-regulatedirrigation irrigation methods,
methods, and and the thewater-saving
water-savingrates rates
were 33.7% and 43% 43% lower
lower than than thosethoseusing
usingthe theconventional
conventionalirrigation
irrigationmethod,
method, respec-
respec-
tively. They
They reported
reportedthat thatshallow
shallowirrigation
irrigation is more advantageous than
is more advantageous than deep irrigation in deep irrigation
in terms
terms of water
of water saving
saving andand can can be realized
be realized using using automatic
automatic irrigation
irrigation technology.
technology. The ap-The
application of the proposed technology enhanced water
plication of the proposed technology enhanced water management in the paddy field with management in the paddy field
with automatic
automatic irrigation
irrigation that employed
that employed a sensora sensor to estimate
to estimate the paddy the paddy
ponding ponding
depth. depth.
Kuo
Kuo [45]analyzed
[45] also also analyzed the relationship
the relationship between between
water savingwater andsaving and production
production based onbasedirriga-on
irrigation
tion schedulingscheduling
through through field experiments
field experiments in Taiwan in Taiwan
and reportedand reported
that 7-day thatand7-day
15-dayand
15-day
irrigationirrigation
schedules schedules
reducedreduced water requirements
water requirements by 14.6% by and
14.6% and 27.3%,
27.3%, respectively,
respectively, and
and
cropcrop
yields yields decreased
decreased by 7% byand7% 15%, and 15%, respectively.
respectively. This indicates
This indicates that thethatproposed
the proposedau-
automatic irrigation technology is necessary for shallow
tomatic irrigation technology is necessary for shallow irrigation and can increase water irrigation and can increase water
productivity.
productivity. The water-saving
water-saving effect effect of ofthe
theproposed
proposedmethod methodisisrelatively
relativelyhigher higherthanthanthethe
decrease in in rice
rice yield,
yield, which
whichcan canhelp helprealize
realizesustainable
sustainablewater watermanagement
managementininpreparationprepara-
for
tionwater shortages.
for water shortages.
irrigation system
The irrigation systemin inKorea
Koreagenerally
generallysuppliessupplieswaterwaterfrom froma areservoir
reservoirtotoa apaddy
paddy
field through an an irrigation
irrigation canal.canal.The Theproposed
proposedsystem systemcan canhelp
helpautomate
automatethe theirrigation
irrigation
system because
becauseofofits itsadvantages,
advantages, that
that is, is,
it canit can be easily
be easily and anddirectly directly installed
installed in thein the
irri-
irrigation canals and can use the supplied water directly from
gation canals and can use the supplied water directly from the irrigation canal. However, the irrigation canal. However,
it has a disadvantage,
disadvantage, that that is,is, itit cannot
cannotbe becontrolled
controlledremotely.
remotely.To Tocompensate
compensatefor forthese
these
shortcomings,
shortcomings, aa study study thatthat integrates
integratesaasmart smartphone phonecapable
capableofofremote remotecontrol
controlwithwiththe the
proposed
proposed systemsystemwill willbebeconducted
conductedininthe future.
the future. Taris
Tariset al.
et [46] studied
al. [46] an IoT-based
studied an IoT-based smart
irrigation system
smart irrigation with awith
system smart phone
a smart for rice
phone forfields that supplied
rice fields that supplied water fromfrom
water a reservoir
a res-
to a rice
ervoir to afield
rice through
field througha valve. a valve.However,
However, thisthis
is different
is different fromfrom thethe proposed
proposeddevice devicein
terms
in termsof using
of using an additional
an additional pump pump andand usingusinga smart phone
a smart to remotely
phone to remotely control the water
control the
supply. Parthasarathi et al. [47] studied a drip-irrigation system on upland rice, which
was interesting because it provides an understanding of different water-supply systems
for paddy rice in Korea. The drip-irrigation system is advantageous in terms of reducing
water consumption; however, water supply for rice crops in Korea comprises a supply
system for continuous irrigation using water canals. Sharma and Kumar [29] proposed
an irrigation system for paddy crops using IoT, which supplied water via a water pump
Sustainability 2022, 14, 11044 9 of 12

based on soil moisture. Barkunan et al. [30] proposed an automatic drip-irrigation system
using a smart sensor for paddy cultivation. This system also supplied water based on soil
moisture. However, the above-mentioned systems are different from the system proposed
in this study because they used soil-moisture sensors for the water management of rice
crops, and in Korea, water management is based on the ponding depth for the cultivation
of rice crops. Therefore, the system proposed in this study utilized a ponding-depth sensor,
as it is more advantageous than using a soil moisture sensor for rice cultivation in South
Korea. The study findings indicate that for sustainable irrigation water management,
on-site technology suitable for local characteristics should be applied.
In paddy fields, water management requires considerable labor. The proposed system
makes it possible to reduce the labor power by 21.8% based on the data from the ponding-
depth sensor compared to the conventional irrigation system. By using the automatic
irrigation technology, the water supply was reduced compared to the conventional irriga-
tion system. The proposed technology can maintain sustainable water management to cope
with a decrease in labor power. Al Mamun et al. [48] proposed a prototype of an automatic
smart irrigation model that operates a pump with a moisture sensor and presented the same
opinion that an automatic irrigation system can solve the labor-power problem. As the
labor supply on farmlands decreases, the importance of automation technology increases.
Spencer et al. [49] reported that using automatic irrigation based on soil moisture on corn
crops improved profitability.
The economic feasibility of the application of automation technology for rice culti-
vation is another important factor. Mdemu et al. [50] conducted a study to estimate the
labor and water input for rice production and determine the water productivity in large
rice-irrigation schemes. However, no economic analysis was conducted in terms of the
applicability of irrigation technology that can be compared to our study results. Masseroni
et al. [51] evaluated an automatic irrigation system for rice cultivation in Europe. Although
this study did not have significant results for reduced water conservation or increased yield,
it did report that the time spent by workers could be significantly reduced via automation.
They also reported that the technology produced an investment effect according to the
economic evaluation of NPV, and the NPV for 20 years was a positive value. Their result
is similar to that of the economic evaluation of the proposed automatic irrigation system
in this study, where the NPV index was evaluated to be a positive value while consider-
ing whether the field application of the technology is realistic for sustainable agricultural
water management.

5. Conclusions
Owing to the limited availability of water resources, interests in sustainable man-
agement of agricultural water is increasing. In particular, agricultural water in Korea is
provided free of charge, and the efforts to save water are insufficient. Furthermore, labor
power for water management has potentially decreased due to the aging problem in rural
areas. Therefore, the on-site introduction of an automatic irrigation system that improves
the water productivity required for crop production by saving water and solving the labor
problem for water management can be an important social alternative. In this social dimen-
sion, to implement sustainable irrigation water supply practices in rural areas, it is also
necessary to consider the economic aspect of whether farmers can expand the automatic
irrigation system to the field. In this study, changes in water productivity and the labor
force were evaluated through a case study of an automatic irrigation system to practice
sustainable paddy water management, and the economic feasibility of paddy expansion
was analyzed. Under an automatic irrigation system, on-site water productivity improved
by an average of 12.7% compared to that under the conventional irrigation system, whereas
the labor power for paddy water management decreased by an average of 21.8%. Auto-
matic irrigation in paddy fields proved to be advantageous because the technique prevents
excess water supply. In addition, a reduction of labor power was observed while using the
automatic irrigation system for paddy water management. The field introduction of this
Sustainability 2022, 14, 11044 10 of 12

technology was found to be economically satisfactory based on an IRR of 8.6% (greater

than the discount rate of 4.5%), an NPV of 406,411 KRW (>0), and a BCR of 1.23 (>1). Com-
prehensively, the on-site introduction of the automatic irrigation technology was sufficient
based on the water productivity, labor power, and economic indicators. Therefore, to ensure
the sustainable practice of agricultural water management, an automatic irrigation system
can be used as a business model to automate paddy water management, which is expected
to address the issue of the aging farm households. The results of this study are expected to
help farmers decide whether to introduce an automated irrigation water supply system for
rice cultivation. Moreover, an automatic irrigation system could be beneficial to farmers in
saving water, reducing labor costs, and practicing sustainable agriculture.

Funding: This study was partly supported by the Institute of Planning and Evaluation for Technology
in Food, Agriculture, and Forestry (IPET), grant number [321071032HD030].
Institutional Review Board Statement: Not applicable.
Informed Consent Statement: Not applicable.
Data Availability Statement: The data presented in this study are available on request from the
corresponding author.
Conflicts of Interest: The author declares no conflict of interest. The funder had no role in the design
of the study; in the collection, analyses, or interpretation of data; in the writing of the manuscript, or
in the decision to publish the results.

References
1. Yu, Y.; Xu, J.; Zhang, P.; Meng, Y.; Xiong, Y. Controlled Irrigation and Drainage Reduce Rainfall Runoff and Nitrogen Loss in
Paddy Fields. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2021, 18, 3348. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
2. FAO. The State of the World’s Land and Water Resources for Food and Agriculture (SOLAW): Managing Systems at Risk; Food and
Agriculture Organization of the United Nations: London, UK, 2011.
3. Doliente, S.S.; Samsatli, S. Integrated Production of Food, Energy, Fuels and Chemicals from Rice Crops: Multi-objective
Optimisation for Efficient and Sustainable Value Chains. J. Clean. Prod. 2021, 285, 124900. [CrossRef]
4. Chauhan, B.S.; Jabran, K.; Mahajan, G. Rice Production Worldwide; Springer: Cham, Switzerland, 2017.
5. WMO. State of the Global Climate 2021; World Meteorological Association: Geneva, Switzerland, 2022.
6. WMO. WMO Guidelines on the Calculation of Climate Normal; World Meteorological Association: Geneva, Switzerland, 2017.
7. Korea Meteorological Administration Climate Information Portal. Available online: http://climate.go.kr (accessed on 31 May 2022).
8. Peng, S.; Huang, J.; Sheehy, J.E.; Laza, R.C.; Visperas, R.M.; Zhong, X.; Centeno, G.S.; Khush, G.S.; Cassman, K.G. Rice Yields
Decline with Higher Night Temperature from Global Warming. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 2004, 101, 9971–9975. [CrossRef]
[PubMed]
9. Yadav, S.; Li, T.; Humphreys, E.; Gill, G.; Kukal, S.S. Evaluation and Application of ORYZA2000 for Irrigation Scheduling of
Puddled Transplanted Rice in North West India. Field Crops Res. 2011, 122, 104–117. [CrossRef]
10. Tarlera, S.; Capurro, M.C.; Irisarri, P.; Scavino, A.F.; Cantou, G.; Roel, A. Yield-Scaled Global Warming Potential of Two Irrigation
Management Systems in a Highly Productive Rice System. Sci. Agric. 2016, 73, 43–50. [CrossRef]
11. Mishra, A.; Ghorai, A.K.; Singh, S.R. Rainwater, Soil and Nutrient Conservation in Rainfed Rice Lands in Eastern India. Agric.
Water Manag. 1998, 38, 45–57. [CrossRef]
12. Tabbal, D.F.; Bouman, B.A.M.; Bhuiyan, S.I.; Sibayan, E.B.; Sattar, M.A. On-Farm Strategies for Reducing Water Input in Irrigated
Rice; Case Studies in the Philippines. Agric. Water Manag. 2002, 56, 93–112. [CrossRef]
13. Belder, P.; Bouman, B.A.M.; Cabangon, R.; Guoan, L.; Quilang, E.J.P.; Yuanhua, L.; Spiertz, J.H.J.; Tuong, T.P. Effect of Water-Saving
Irrigation on Rice Yield and Water Use in Typical Lowland Conditions in Asia. Agric. Water Manag. 2004, 65, 193–210. [CrossRef]
14. Sohn, S.H.; Park, K.J.; Chung, S.O. Analysis of Water Balance for Pending Depth Treatment in Paddy Fields. J. Korean Soc. Agric.
Eng. 2004, 46, 13–21. [CrossRef]
15. Park, W.J.; Choi, Y.H.; Shin, M.H.; Won, C.H.; Park, K.; Choi, J.D. Evaluation on Feasibility of System of Rice Intensification (SRI)
for Reduction of Irrigation Water in South Korea. J. Korean Soc. Agric. Eng. 2011, 53, 49–57. [CrossRef]
16. Humphreys, E.; Lewin, L.G.; Khan, S.; Beecher, H.G.; Lacy, J.M.; Thompson, J.A.; Batten, G.D.; Brown, A.; Russell, C.A.; Christen,
E.W.; et al. Integration of Approaches to Increasing Water Use Efficiency in Rice-Based Systems in Southeast Australia. Field Crops
Res. 2006, 97, 19–33. [CrossRef]
17. Shen, S.H.; Yang, S.B.; Zhao, Y.X.; Xu, Y.L.; Zhao, X.Y.; Wang, Z.Y.; Liu, J.; Zhang, W.W.; Zhang, W. Simulating the Rice Yield
Change in the Middle and Lower Reaches of the Yangtze River Under SRES B2 Scenario. Acta Ecol. Sin. 2011, 31, 40–48. [CrossRef]
18. Census of Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries in 2020. Available online: http://www.affcensus.go.kr (accessed on 31 March 2022).
Sustainability 2022, 14, 11044 11 of 12

19. Revathi, N.; Sengottuvelan, P. Iot and Big Data Framework for Paddy Cultivation. Int. J. Recent Technol. Eng. 2019, 8, 6341–6348.
[CrossRef]
20. Zhao, F.; Yoshida, H.; Goto, E.; Hikosaka, S. Development of an Automatic Irrigation Method Using an Image-Based Irrigation
System for High-Quality Tomato Production. Agronomy 2022, 12, 106. [CrossRef]
21. Vaddevolu, U.B.P.; Lester, J.; Jia, X.; Scherer, T.F.; Lee, C.W. Tomato and Watermelon Production with Mulches and Automatic
Drip Irrigation in North Dakota. Water 2021, 13, 1991. [CrossRef]
22. Stafford, J.V. Precision Agriculture ’19; Wageningen Academic Publishers: Wageningen, The Netherlands, 2019.
23. Nasution, I.S.; Munawar, A.A.; Satriyo, P.; Gunawan, H.G.; Yunus, Y. Precision Agriculture: Automated Irrigation System in
Tandem with Solar Panels for Melon Farming Cultivation. IOP Conf. Ser. Earth Environ. Sci. 2021, 644, 012084. [CrossRef]
24. Panigrahi, P.; Raychaudhuri, S.; Thakur, A.K.; Nayak, A.K.; Sahu, P.; Ambast, S.K. Automatic Drip Irrigation Scheduling Effects
on Yield and Water Productivity of Banana. Sci. Hortic. 2019, 257, 108677. [CrossRef]
25. El-Gizawy, A.M.; Abou El-Yazied, A.; Tawfik, A.A.; El-Kaddour, A.A. Effect of Gibberellic Acid (GA3) on Enhancing Flowering
and Fruit Setting in Selected Potato Cultivars. Ann. Agric. Sci. 2006, 51, 173–189.
26. Moustafa, A.K.; El-Behairy, U.A.; El-Bagoury, K.F.; El-Gindy, A.M. Automatic Irrigation by Using Soil Moisture Sensor in Vertical
Closed System for Lettuce Production. Arab Univ. J. Agric. Sci. 2019, 27, 77–82. [CrossRef]
27. Liao, R.; Zhang, S.; Zhang, X.; Wang, M.; Wu, H.; Zhangzhong, L. Development of Smart Irrigation Systems Based on Real-Time
Soil Moisture Data in a Greenhouse: Proof of Concept. Agric. Water Manag. 2021, 245, 106632. [CrossRef]
28. Koech, R.; Langat, P. Improving Irrigation Water Use Efficiency: A Review of Advances, Challenges and Opportunities in the
Australian Context. Water 2018, 10, 1771. [CrossRef]
29. Sharma, B.B.; Kumar, N. IoT-Based Intelligent Irrigation System for Paddy Crop Using an Internet-Controlled Water Pump. Int. J.
Agric. Environ. Inf. Syst. 2021, 12, 21–36. [CrossRef]
30. Barkunan, S.R.; Bhanumathi, V.; Sethuram, J. Smart Sensor for Automatic Drip Irrigation System for Paddy Cultivation. Comput.
Electr. Eng. 2019, 73, 180–193. [CrossRef]
31. Najmuddin, O.; Rasul, G.; Hussain, A.; Molden, D.; Wahid, S.; Debnath, B. Low Water Productivity for Rice in Bihar, India—A
Critical Analysis. Water 2018, 10, 1082. [CrossRef]
32. Ross, T.T.; Alim, M.A.; Rahman, A. Community-Scale Rural Drinking Water Supply Systems Based on Harvested Rainwater: A
Case Study of Australia and Vietnam. Water 2022, 14, 1763. [CrossRef]
33. Ninson, J.; Egyir, I.S.; Mensah-Bonsu, A.; Onumah, E.E. Financial Analysis of the Use of Land: Agriculture or Woodlot. Land 2022,
11, 642. [CrossRef]
34. Kingphadung, K.; Kurdkaew, P.; Siriwongwilaichat, P.; Kwonpongsagoon, S. Comparison of Performance and Economic Efficiency
for Greenhouse Solar Versus Hot Air Drying: A Case of Crispy Mango Production. Processes 2022, 10, 311. [CrossRef]
35. Lopez, H. The Social Discount Rate: Estimates for Nine Latin American Countries; Policy Research Working Paper 4639; World Bank:
Washington, DC, USA, 2008.
36. Korean Law Information Center. Available online: https://www.law.go.kr (accessed on 31 May 2022).
37. Statistics Korea. Available online: https://kostat.go.kr (accessed on 31 March 2022).
38. Mainuddin, M.; Maniruzzaman, M.; Alam, M.M.; Mojid, M.A.; Schmidt, E.J.; Islam, M.T.; Scobie, M. Water Usage and Productivity
of Boro Rice at the Field Level and their Impacts on the Sustainable Groundwater Irrigation in the North-West Bangladesh. Agric.
Water Manag. 2020, 240, 106294. [CrossRef]
39. Kwon, M.; Park, D.; Jun, K.; Kim, T. Probabilistic Prediction of Reservoir Storage Considering the Uncertainty of Dam Inflow. J.
Korea Water Resour. Assoc. 2016, 49, 7. [CrossRef]
40. Lee, S.G.; Choi, K.S. Survey of Farmers’ Perception and Behavior for Agricultural Water Saving—Applying to Irrigation Facility
Monitors in Pohang and Yeongdeok Areas. J. Korean Soc. Rural Plan. 2020, 26, 39–47. [CrossRef]
41. Lee, S.G.; Choi, K.S. A Study of Qualitative Effects of Agricultural Water-Saving Education of Farmers. J. Korean Soc. Rural Plan.
2022, 28, 71–79. [CrossRef]
42. Korea Rural Community Corporation. A Study on Water Saving Methods of Agricultural Canal Management against Water Shortage;
Rural Research Institute: Ansan, Korea, 2004.
43. Bae, E.Y.; Hong, J.; Bae, S.; Hahn, S.; An, H.; Hwang, E.J.; Lee, S.M.; Lee, T.J.; Lee, T.J. Korean Guidelines for Pharmacoeconomic
Evaluations: Updates in the Third Version. Appl. Health Econ. Health Policy 2022, 20, 467–477. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
44. Wang, C.; Wang, S.; Chen, H.; Wang, J.; Tao, Y.; Liu, J. Evaluation of Water-Storage and Water-Saving Potential for Paddy Fields in
Gaoyou, China. Water 2018, 10, 1176. [CrossRef]
45. Kuo, S.F. Evaluation of Irrigation Water Requirements and Crop Yields with Different Irrigation Schedules for Paddy Fields in
ChiaNan Irrigated Area, Taiwan. Paddy Water Environ. 2014, 12, 71–78. [CrossRef]
46. Taris, L.; Cahyadi, A.; Nurmala, N.; Jaya, H.; Shalihah, A. IoT-Based Smart Irrigation System for Rice Fields. Res. Sq. 2022.
submitted. [CrossRef]
47. Parthasarathi, T.; Vanitha, K.; Mohandass, S.; Vered, E. Evaluation of Drip Irrigation System for Water Productivity and Yield of
Rice. Agron. J. 2018, 110, 2378–2389. [CrossRef]
48. Al Mamun, M.R.; Soeb, M.J.A.; Mia, M.S.; Rabbi, M.R.I.; Azmir, M.N. Design and Development of an Automatic Prototype Smart
Irrigation Model. Aust. J. Eng. Innov. Technol. 2021, 3, 119–127. [CrossRef]
Sustainability 2022, 14, 11044 12 of 12

49. Spencer, G.D.; Krutz, L.J.; Falconer, L.L.; Henry, W.B.; Henry, C.G.; Larson, E.J.; Pringle, H.C., III; Bryant, C.J.; Atwill, R.L.
Irrigation Water Management Technologies for Furrow-Irrigated Corn That Decrease Water Use and Improve Yield and On-Farm
Profitability. Crop Forage Turfgrass Manag. 2019, 5, 1. [CrossRef]
50. Mdemu, M.V.; Francis, T.; Wurbs, R. Productivity of Water in Large Rice (Paddy) Irrigation Schemes in the Upper Catchment of
the Great Ruaha River Basin, Tanzania. In Water Resources Planning, Development and Management; InTech: Rijeka, Croatia, 2013;
pp. 117–142. [CrossRef]
51. Masseroni, D.; Moller, P.; Tyrell, R.; Romani, M.; Lasagna, A.; Sali, G.; Facchi, A.; Gandolfi, C.; Gandolfi, C. Evaluating
Performances of the First Automatic System for Paddy Irrigation in Europe. Agric. Water Manag. 2018, 201, 58–69. [CrossRef]