Ce diaporama a bien été signalé.
Nous utilisons votre profil LinkedIn et vos données d’activité pour vous proposer des publicités personnalisées et pertinentes. Vous pouvez changer vos préférences de publicités à tout moment.

Hemantha Kumar Pamarthy MEL study in Laos

26 vues

Publié le

Hemantha Kumar Pamarthy - MEL study in Laos

Publié dans : Sciences
  • Soyez le premier à commenter

  • Soyez le premier à aimer ceci

Hemantha Kumar Pamarthy MEL study in Laos

  1. 1. Monitoring, Evaluation and Learning (MEL) Study for understanding the pattern of change resulting from SRI capacity building interventions in Laos PDR Hemantha Kumar Pamarthy Independent Development Consultant, Chennai, INDIA SRI-LMB REGIONAL WORKSHOP Bangkok, 01-02 November, 2018 Sustaining and Enhancing the Momentum for Innovation and Learning around the System of Rice Intensification (SRI) in the Lower Mekong River Basin (SRI-LMB)
  2. 2. Document, analyse and understand; • how SRI-guided crop management practices will potentially affect crop performance / cropping systems including both direct effects on the crop itself (yield, maturity and tolerance of abiotic and biotic stresses) and indirect effects on environment • the pattern of change among different groups of farmers (FPAR, non-FPAR and Control Groups) due to direct and indirect effects of FPARs • the patterns of change geographically and by Social Groups Objectives of the MEL Study in Laos
  3. 3. Geographical Locations of the Study Savannakhet Vientiane Khammouane
  4. 4. Province Districts Number of Village/s Savannakhet 3 Districts (FPAR & NFPAR) 9 Villages 1 District (Control Group) 2 Villages Xonnabuly 1 Champhone 4 Songkhone 4 Xaybuly (Control Group) 2 Khammouane 3 Districts (FPAR & NFPAR) 11 Villages 1 District (Control Group) 1 Village Mahaxai 4 Gnommalath 2 Nakai 5 Thakhek 1 Vientiane 3 Districts (FPAR & NFPAR) 14 Villages 1 District (Control Group) 1 Village Vang Vieng 9 Feuang 3 Meun 2 Phon Hong 1 Geographical Locations of the Study
  5. 5. Category-wise Farmer Respondents Farmers responded included; 138 Women and 140 Men 259 from Laotai, 16 Hmong and 3 from Bor Communities. Farmer Samples for the Study Farmer (sample) Category Responses (Women/Men) Practicing FPAR group farmers 75 Non Practicing FPAR group farmers 54 NFPAR and others 92 Control Groups 57 Total 278 (138 W / 140 M)
  6. 6. Average Landholding Province Average Landholding by farmers (Based on study samples) FPAR/SRI NFPAR/NSRI Control Groups Savannakhet 2,556 Sqm (14.61% / 16.18%) 1.75 ha 1.58 ha Khammouane 1,902 Sqm (11.39% / 5.83%) 1.67 ha 3.26 ha Vientiane 5,239 Sqm (43.66 % / 34.93%) 1.20 ha 1.50 ha Total Average of Study Area 3,232 Sqm (26.71% / 15.32% 1.21 ha 2.11 ha
  7. 7. Most farmers follow; • Transplanting (96%), • Direct Seeding (13%) and • a handful farmers do Broad Casting (5%) 125 (47%) farmers use Seeds - 51-100 Kgs/ha Only 35 (28%) farmers among them are FPAR / SRI Farmers Some farmers do a combination and hence the variance in the percentage Usage of Seeds
  8. 8. Usage of Seeds – By FPAR / SRI Farmers Province Seeds Used for Transplanting (by FPAR / SRI Farmers) Total In Kgs/ha < 25 26-50 51-100 101-150 >150 Farmers Savannakhet 1 6 15 5 2 29 Khammouane ---- 6 13 3 1 23 Vientiane 6 6 7 2 2 23 Total 7 (9%) 18 (24%) 35 (47%) 10 (13%) 5 (7%) 75
  9. 9. • 248 (89%) farmers are totally Rain-dependent and claim Not to be irrigating their farms • 6 (2%) farmers irrigated 1-2 times • 1 (< 1%) farmer irrigated 3-4 times • 23 (8.27%) farmers irrigated more than 5 times 65 FPAR / SRI farmers are totally rain-dependent Normal / Above Normal rainfall – Previous Season Irrigation
  10. 10. Irrigation Status Province Irrigating Status by FPAR / SRI Farmers Total FarmersFrequency None 1-2 Times 3-4 Times > 5 times Savannakhet 28 ---- ---- 1 29 Khammouane 14 2 ---- 7 23 Vientiane 23 ---- ---- ---- 23 Total 65 (87%) 2 (3%) ---- 8 (10%) 75
  11. 11. Usage of Fertilisers Use of Fertilisers FPAR / SRI Farmers NFPAR / NSRI Farmers Control Group Farmers Total Farmers None 20 40 10 70 Only Organic Manure 7 24 12 43 Both Chemical & Organic 9 20 19 48 Only Chemicals 39 62 16 117 Total 75 146 57 278
  12. 12. Only 2 farmers, both of NFPAR, out of 278 farmers ever used pesticides One in Songkhone district of Savannakhet Province and One in Nakai district of Khammouane Province seems to have tried pesticides. 4 farmers, 2 of FPAR / SRI and 2 of NFPAR, out of 278 seem to be trying herbicides like the brands CARATOP, FIPRONIL 80% WG and GOADI (Sulfonylurea / Pyrazosulfuron-Ethyl) All four are from Meun district, Vientiane Province. Use of Pesticides and Herbicides
  13. 13. • Most SRI farms being comparatively smaller, most farmers use only family labour. In rare cases they hire outside help at times like harvesting • It is understood that Labour costs for NSRI farms could be as higher as 200% than those for SRI farms Labour in Rice Cultivation
  14. 14. Average Tillers Per Sq. M. Farmer Category / Tillers / Sqm FPAR / SRI NFPAR / NSRI Control Group Total Farmers < 150 2 4 6 12 151-200 30 54 17 101 201-250 17 49 13 79 251-300 14 27 9 50 > 300 12 8 10 30 No Idea / No Comments ----- 4 2 6 Total 75 146 57 278
  15. 15. Rice Yield / ha A Comparison among Farmer Categories 42 18 12 7 12 9 32 21 12 11 7 18 19 16 9 17 9 29 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 < 2.0 t/h 2.1-2.5 t/h 2.6-3.0 t/h 3.1-3.5 t/h 3.6-4.0 t/h > 4.0 t/h Comparison of Rice Yield by Farmers (in %age) Control Group NFPAR/NSRI FPAR/SRI
  16. 16. Yield / ha by SRI method of Cultivation 6 6 2 14 5 5 2 12 4 0 3 7 4 6 3 13 2 5 0 7 8 1 13 22 0 5 10 15 20 25 Savannakhet Khammouane Vientiane Total SRI Area District-wise Rice Yields by SRI Method < 2 t/h 2.1-2.5 t/h 2.6-3.0 t/h 3.1-3.5 t/h 3.6-4.0 t/h > 4.0 t/h
  17. 17. Economic Returns for farmers (Profit / Loss) 33 67 60 40 62 38 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 Made Profit Made Loss Profit / Loss made by Farmers (in %) Control Group NFPAR / NSRI FPAR / SRI
  18. 18. Household Gains by following SRI Gain YES NO No Comment Total Farmers Knowledge 73 1 1 75 Time 74 1 ----- 75 Improving Relationships 70 4 1 75
  19. 19. • “Being asymmetric and mostly mountainous, land is not really suitable for SRI” • “SRI is labour oriented - getting timely labour and the expenses make it difficult” • “Since SRI follows single-seed method, many a time snails and crabs eat away the seeds that are sown for transplantation” Mind-Sets for not Scaling up SRI much
  20. 20. Due to above normal rainfall and other disastrous climatic conditions this crop season, the Laos government is taking several steps to ensure food security for the people. SRI Methodology could be the ideal answer, for such conditions in future. But mind-sets need to be overcome. • To expand SRI to other districts of existing Provinces and also taking up in new provinces • Capacity Building, especially, in Crop Economics and Commercial Farming and Marketing • Continuous / regular hand-holding with linkages to knowledge and markets • Incentivise through Awards and perhaps some feasible / reasonable subsidies Some Suggestions for Way Forward
  21. 21. SRI-LMB-MEL Study in Laos Thank you!

×