Farm practicing the System of Rice Intensification technology (Engr. Jemar G. Raquid (Bureau of Soils and Water Management))

Organic-Based System of Rice Intensification (SRI) (Philippines)

Description

Intensifying the irrigated rice production while at the same time reducing farm inputs including seeds, fertilizer, and water.

The Organic-based system of rice intensification modifies the usual rice farming system in terms of seedling condition, planting distance, irrigation time and water requirement, and with the incorporation of organic fertilization scheme. Furthermore, integration of rice duck is carried out. This makes the farming system reduce its farm inputs leading to a lower production cost. With the utilization of organic fertilizers and natural concoctions, soil fertility and soil structure is improved. It was also observed that rice grown under SRI can tolerate strong winds. This type of rice production management is currently part of the Caritas Foundation’s project, a non-government organization, called Sustainable Learning Agricultural Farm which promotes diversified-integrated organic farming systems. With this, other practices (i.e. rice-duck farming) are being integrated in some SRI areas. Integration of ducks helps in the weeding since it eats weeds as well as harmful insects. In addition, its droplets/manure served as organic fertilizer in the rice field.

Purpose of the Technology: The purpose of this technology is to promote better soil management as well as more efficient water management.

Establishment / maintenance activities and inputs: Under SRI, the following practices were implemented: In the land preparation stage, 25cm x 25cm plant spacing is made using the man-made implement.

Intermittent irrigation is applied up to the panicle initiation stage with the following irrigation schedule: (1) 3 days after transplanting, (2) 9 days after transplanting, (3) 14 days after transplanting, and (4) 19 days after transplanting. The field is irrigated up to 5-cm water depth level per schedule.

Fertilizer application includes compost and natural organic concoctions. This is applied on different crop stages.

Natural / human environment: The existing project sites are located in Samar experiencing Type IV climate wherein rainfall is more or less evenly distributed throughout the year. Most of the farmer practitioners of this technology belongs to the small scale and average type of land user.

Location

Location: Marabut, Samar, Philippines

No. of Technology sites analysed:

Geo-reference of selected sites
  • 125.1917, 11.19803

Spread of the Technology: evenly spread over an area (approx. < 0.1 km2 (10 ha))

In a permanently protected area?:

Date of implementation: less than 10 years ago (recently)

Type of introduction
Rice duck integration in the SRI technology ((Bureau of Soils and Water Management))

Classification of the Technology

Main purpose
  • improve production
  • reduce, prevent, restore land degradation
  • conserve ecosystem
  • protect a watershed/ downstream areas – in combination with other Technologies
  • preserve/ improve biodiversity
  • reduce risk of disasters
  • adapt to climate change/ extremes and its impacts
  • mitigate climate change and its impacts
  • create beneficial economic impact
  • create beneficial social impact
Land use

  • Cropland
    • Annual cropping
    Number of growing seasons per year: 2
Water supply
  • rainfed
  • mixed rainfed-irrigated
  • full irrigation

Purpose related to land degradation
  • prevent land degradation
  • reduce land degradation
  • restore/ rehabilitate severely degraded land
  • adapt to land degradation
  • not applicable
Degradation addressed
  • chemical soil deterioration - Cn: fertility decline and reduced organic matter content (not caused by erosion), Ca: acidification
  • water degradation - Hs: change in quantity of surface water
SLM group
  • integrated soil fertility management
  • Crop intesification
SLM measures
  • agronomic measures - A2: Organic matter/ soil fertility
  • management measures - M4: Major change in timing of activities

Technical drawing

Technical specifications

Establishment and maintenance: activities, inputs and costs

Calculation of inputs and costs
  • Costs are calculated:
  • Currency used for cost calculation: USD
  • Exchange rate (to USD): 1 USD = n.a
  • Average wage cost of hired labour per day: 6.6666
Most important factors affecting the costs
n.a.
Establishment activities
  1. Planting of rice seeds (Timing/ frequency: -)
  2. Duck raising (Timing/ frequency: -)
Establishment inputs and costs
Specify input Unit Quantity Costs per Unit (USD) Total costs per input (USD) % of costs borne by land users
Plant material
Rice seeds rice seeds kg 24.0 0.7779 18.67 100.0
Fertilizers and biocides
Ducks animal 80.0 2.22225 177.78 100.0
Total costs for establishment of the Technology 196.45
Total costs for establishment of the Technology in USD 196.45
Maintenance activities
  1. clearing (Timing/ frequency: before land preparation)
  2. organic fertilizer application (Timing/ frequency: after clearing)
  3. first plowing (Timing/ frequency: 10 days after clearing)
  4. second plowing (Timing/ frequency: 8-10 days after first plowing)
  5. transplanting (Timing/ frequency: 18-25 days after first plowing)
  6. weeding (Timing/ frequency: 15 days after transplanting)
  7. fertilizer application (compost) (Timing/ frequency: after weeding)
  8. weeding (Timing/ frequency: 9-10 days after 1st weeding)
  9. spraying of natural concoctions (Timing/ frequency: at the start of pannicle iniation unitl 2 weeks up to flowering)
  10. harvesting (Timing/ frequency: None)
Maintenance inputs and costs
Specify input Unit Quantity Costs per Unit (USD) Total costs per input (USD) % of costs borne by land users
Labour
clearing Person/day 8.0 11.1125 88.9 100.0
Fertilizer Application/Plowing/weeding Person/day 10.0 6.6666 66.67 100.0
Equipment
Machine day 4.0 33.3333 133.33 100.0
Labour: Transplanting/Spraying/harvesting Person/day 26.0 2.22222 57.78 100.0
Fertilizers and biocides
Fertilizer kg 700.0 0.13334 93.34 100.0
Total costs for maintenance of the Technology 440.02
Total costs for maintenance of the Technology in USD 440.02

Natural environment

Average annual rainfall
  • < 250 mm
  • 251-500 mm
  • 501-750 mm
  • 751-1,000 mm
  • 1,001-1,500 mm
  • 1,501-2,000 mm
  • 2,001-3,000 mm
  • 3,001-4,000 mm
  • > 4,000 mm
Agro-climatic zone
  • humid
  • sub-humid
  • semi-arid
  • arid
Specifications on climate
Thermal climate class: tropics
Slope
  • flat (0-2%)
  • gentle (3-5%)
  • moderate (6-10%)
  • rolling (11-15%)
  • hilly (16-30%)
  • steep (31-60%)
  • very steep (>60%)
Landforms
  • plateau/plains
  • ridges
  • mountain slopes
  • hill slopes
  • footslopes
  • valley floors
Altitude
  • 0-100 m a.s.l.
  • 101-500 m a.s.l.
  • 501-1,000 m a.s.l.
  • 1,001-1,500 m a.s.l.
  • 1,501-2,000 m a.s.l.
  • 2,001-2,500 m a.s.l.
  • 2,501-3,000 m a.s.l.
  • 3,001-4,000 m a.s.l.
  • > 4,000 m a.s.l.
Technology is applied in
  • convex situations
  • concave situations
  • not relevant
Soil depth
  • very shallow (0-20 cm)
  • shallow (21-50 cm)
  • moderately deep (51-80 cm)
  • deep (81-120 cm)
  • very deep (> 120 cm)
Soil texture (topsoil)
  • coarse/ light (sandy)
  • medium (loamy, silty)
  • fine/ heavy (clay)
Soil texture (> 20 cm below surface)
  • coarse/ light (sandy)
  • medium (loamy, silty)
  • fine/ heavy (clay)
Topsoil organic matter content
  • high (>3%)
  • medium (1-3%)
  • low (<1%)
Groundwater table
  • on surface
  • < 5 m
  • 5-50 m
  • > 50 m
Availability of surface water
  • excess
  • good
  • medium
  • poor/ none
Water quality (untreated)
  • good drinking water
  • poor drinking water (treatment required)
  • for agricultural use only (irrigation)
  • unusable
Water quality refers to:
Is salinity a problem?
  • Ja
  • Nee

Occurrence of flooding
  • Ja
  • Nee
Species diversity
  • high
  • medium
  • low
Habitat diversity
  • high
  • medium
  • low

Characteristics of land users applying the Technology

Market orientation
  • subsistence (self-supply)
  • mixed (subsistence/ commercial)
  • commercial/ market
Off-farm income
  • less than 10% of all income
  • 10-50% of all income
  • > 50% of all income
Relative level of wealth
  • very poor
  • poor
  • average
  • rich
  • very rich
Level of mechanization
  • manual work
  • animal traction
  • mechanized/ motorized
Sedentary or nomadic
  • Sedentary
  • Semi-nomadic
  • Nomadic
Individuals or groups
  • individual/ household
  • groups/ community
  • cooperative
  • employee (company, government)
Gender
  • women
  • men
Age
  • children
  • youth
  • middle-aged
  • elderly
Area used per household
  • < 0.5 ha
  • 0.5-1 ha
  • 1-2 ha
  • 2-5 ha
  • 5-15 ha
  • 15-50 ha
  • 50-100 ha
  • 100-500 ha
  • 500-1,000 ha
  • 1,000-10,000 ha
  • > 10,000 ha
Scale
  • small-scale
  • medium-scale
  • large-scale
Land ownership
  • state
  • company
  • communal/ village
  • group
  • individual, not titled
  • individual, titled
Land use rights
  • open access (unorganized)
  • communal (organized)
  • leased
  • individual
Water use rights
  • open access (unorganized)
  • communal (organized)
  • leased
  • individual
Access to services and infrastructure
education

poor
x
good
technical assistance

poor
x
good
employment (e.g. off-farm)

poor
x
good
roads and transport

poor
x
good
drinking water and sanitation

poor
x
good

Impacts

Socio-economic impacts
Crop production
decreased
x
increased

risk of production failure
increased
x
decreased

water availability for livestock
decreased
x
increased

water quality for livestock
decreased
x
increased

demand for irrigation water
increased
x
decreased

expenses on agricultural inputs
increased
x
decreased

farm income
decreased
x
increased

diversity of income sources
decreased
x
increased

workload
increased
x
decreased

Socio-cultural impacts
food security/ self-sufficiency
reduced
x
improved

community institutions
weakened
x
strengthened

conflict mitigation
worsened
x
improved

Ecological impacts
excess water drainage
reduced
x
improved

evaporation
increased
x
decreased

soil compaction
increased
x
reduced

salinity
increased
x
decreased

soil organic matter/ below ground C
decreased
x
increased

beneficial species (predators, earthworms, pollinators)
decreased
x
increased

Off-site impacts

Cost-benefit analysis

Benefits compared with establishment costs
Short-term returns
very negative
x
very positive

Long-term returns
very negative
x
very positive

Benefits compared with maintenance costs
Short-term returns
very negative
x
very positive

Long-term returns
very negative
x
very positive

Climate change

Climate-related extremes (disasters)
general (river) flood

not well at all
x
very well
Other climate-related consequences
strong winds

not well at all
x
very well

Adoption and adaptation

Percentage of land users in the area who have adopted the Technology
  • single cases/ experimental
  • 1-10%
  • 11-50%
  • > 50%
Of all those who have adopted the Technology, how many have done so without receiving material incentives?
  • 0-10%
  • 11-50%
  • 51-90%
  • 91-100%
Has the Technology been modified recently to adapt to changing conditions?
  • Ja
  • Nee
To which changing conditions?
  • climatic change/ extremes
  • changing markets
  • labour availability (e.g. due to migration)

Conclusions and lessons learnt

Strengths: land user's view
Strengths: compiler’s or other key resource person’s view
  • Increase production yield

    How can they be sustained / enhanced? Intensify their Sustainable Learning Agricultural Farm program
  • Improvement in crop growth and development
  • Soil fertility improvement
  • Ease on weed management
Weaknesses/ disadvantages/ risks: land user's viewhow to overcome
Weaknesses/ disadvantages/ risks: compiler’s or other key resource person’s viewhow to overcome
  • Need for an adequate supply of organic inputs Sustainable production of organic inputs through composting methods

References

Compiler
  • Philippine Overview of Conservation Approaches and Technologies
Editors
Reviewer
  • David Streiff
  • Alexandra Gavilano
Date of documentation: Maart 26, 2016
Last update: Junie 13, 2019
Resource persons
Full description in the WOCAT database
Linked SLM data
Documentation was faciliated by
Institution Project
This work is licensed under Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareaAlike 4.0 International