Spreading of ricestraw in the ricefield (Flora V. Clariza)

Modified Rapid Composting (Philippines)

Description

Modified Rapid Composting is the in situ decomposition of rice straw using compost fungus activator, Trichoderma harzianum or Effective Microorganism, that helps in utilizing the residual Nitrogen-Phosphorus-Potassium (NPK) from the decomposed rice straw.

In search of reducing the vulnerability of the small farmers to the uncontrolled price of chemical fertilizer as well as the dependency on the usage of it, the Department of Agriculture through Bureau of Soils and Water Management (BSWM) developed a fertilizer cost reduction strategy by introducing a new composting technology that will produce organic compost as substitute and eventually decrease the utilization of chemical fertilizer. This is called Modified Rapid Composting.

It incorporates a farm residue management wherein the rice straw is scattered evenly in the field as compost material with the aid of fungus activator that hastens the decomposition process as compared to the traditional composting method. The compost fungus activators used are Trichoderma harzianum and/or Effective Microorganism. Eventually, this compost is mixed into the soil during land preparation. When decayed, it increases the supply of nutrients and improves soil structure.

Purpose of the Technology: This technology aimed to establish a cost-efficient, competitive and sustainable agricultural production system. It addresses the concern of soil fertility deterioration through organic based fertilization scheme. Further, it reduces vulnerability of small farmers to the uncontrolled prices of chemical fertilizers. It also prevent the unfavorable farmer’s practice of burning the rice straw. This also serves as a promotional tool for the gradual conversion of rice land from conventional to organic-based farming system.

Establishment / maintenance activities and inputs: Primarily, this technology is applied and incorporated as part of the land preparation activity. Shallow plowing/rotavating is done to flatten down rice stubbles. The rice straw is then scattered in the field. Irrigation is applied at about 2-3cm depth. Soak the rice straw in the field approximately for 12 hours. Drain excess water. Spray Trichoderma harzianum solution prepared by dissolving 3 packs/knapsack sprayer (20 packs/hectare) in early morning or late in the afternoon. Effective Microorganism solution can also be used aside from Trichoderma harzianum. Broadcast at least 12 kg urea to hasten decomposition. Maintain sufficient moisture in the rice paddies during the decomposition period (15-20 days). Proceed with the usual land preparation. Apply 10 bags of vermicast/chicken dung at last harrowing as basal application.

Natural / human environment: It is introduced and currently practiced in the irrigated plain rice production areas in the Philippines such as in Talavera, Nueva Ecija. The soil type in Talavera is clay loam. Mostly, farmer associations, with an average farm size of 1.50 ha, comprising of small-scale to medium-scale land users are engaged to apply this technology in their rice areas during wet (May to October) and dry (December to April) season. The average rainfall ranged from 1500-2000 mm.

Location

Location: Talavera, Nueva Ecija, Philippines

No. of Technology sites analysed:

Geo-reference of selected sites
  • 120.9167, 15.6167

Spread of the Technology: evenly spread over an area (approx. 0.1-1 km2)

In a permanently protected area?:

Date of implementation: 10-50 years ago

Type of introduction
Spraying of trichoderma (Flora V. Clariza (Municipal Agriculturist Office, Local Government Unit of Talavera, Nueva Ecija))

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
SLM group
  • integrated soil fertility management
SLM measures
  • agronomic measures - A2: Organic matter/ soil fertility

Technical drawing

Technical specifications
Spreading of rice straw in the rice field.

Location: Talavera, Nueva Ecija

Date: July 23, 2016

Technical knowledge required for field staff / advisors: moderate

Technical knowledge required for land users: moderate

Main technical functions: increase in nutrient availability (supply, recycling,…)

Secondary technical functions: increase in organic matter

Manure / compost / residues
Material/ species: rice straw
Remarks: scattered in the field
Author: Patricio A. Yambot, Department of Agriculture-Bureau of Soils and Water Management

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: 2.22
Most important factors affecting the costs
n.a.
Establishment activities
n.a.
Maintenance activities
  1. scattering of rice straw (Timing/ frequency: before land preparation)
  2. spraying of Effective Microorganism solution (Timing/ frequency: after scattering of rice straw)
Maintenance inputs and costs
Specify input Unit Quantity Costs per Unit (USD) Total costs per input (USD) % of costs borne by land users
Labour
Scattering of rice Straw Person/day 10.0 2.22 22.2 100.0
spraying of Effective Microorganism solution Person/day 2.0 2.22 4.44 100.0
Fertilizers and biocides
Effective Microorganism solution Liters 6.0 2.222 13.33
Total costs for maintenance of the Technology 39.97
Total costs for maintenance of the Technology in USD 39.97

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
health

poor
x
good
education

poor
x
good
technical assistance

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

poor
x
good
markets

poor
x
good
energy

poor
x
good
roads and transport

poor
x
good
drinking water and sanitation

poor
x
good
financial services

poor
x
good

Impacts

Socio-economic impacts
Crop production
decreased
x
increased

expenses on agricultural inputs
increased
x
decreased

farm income
decreased
x
increased

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

community institutions
weakened
x
strengthened

conflict mitigation
worsened
x
improved

Ecological impacts
nutrient cycling/ recharge
decreased
x
increased

soil organic matter/ below ground C
decreased
x
increased

pest/ disease control
decreased
x
increased

emission of carbon and greenhouse gases
increased
x
decreased

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)
drought

not well at all
x
very well
general (river) flood

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%
Number of households and/ or area covered
100 household and the area was around 0.1-1km^2
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
  • Environment-friendly since it prevent the farmers from burning the rice straw

    How can they be sustained / enhanced? Increase advocacy campaign
Strengths: compiler’s or other key resource person’s view
  • Positive impact/feedback from the farmers on the reduction and elimination on the use of chemical fertilizers. Less inorganic fertilizer usage resulted to decreased in the production costs since inorganic fertilizer are very much expensive. It also enhanced the characteristics of the soil according to the farmer’s observation.

    How can they be sustained / enhanced? Boost awareness of the farmers on the benefits of organic-based farming
  • Educate the farmers to become resourceful in terms of utilizing organic materials as fertilizer instead of depending on the commercially available in the market

    How can they be sustained / enhanced? Intensify or strengthening the campaign of not burning rice straw
Weaknesses/ disadvantages/ risks: land user's viewhow to overcome
Weaknesses/ disadvantages/ risks: compiler’s or other key resource person’s viewhow to overcome
  • Additional farm labor particularly in the scattering of rice straw and spraying of compost fungus activator so some farmers still opt to burn the rice straw. Increase advocacy campaign

References

Compiler
  • Philippine Overview of Conservation Approaches and Technologies
Editors
Reviewer
  • David Streiff
  • Alexandra Gavilano
Date of documentation: Feb. 29, 2016
Last update: Junie 14, 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