1.2 Contact details of resource persons and institutions involved in the assessment and documentation of the Technology

Name of the institution(s) which facilitated the documentation/ evaluation of the Technology (if relevant)

Name of the institution(s) which facilitated the documentation/ evaluation of the Technology (if relevant)

1.3 Conditions regarding the use of data documented through WOCAT

The compiler and key resource person(s) accept the conditions regarding the use of data documented through WOCAT:

Ja

2.1 Short description of the Technology

Definition of the Technology:

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.

2.2 Detailed description of the Technology

Description:

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.

2.3 Photos of the Technology

2.5 Country/ region/ locations where the Technology has been applied and which are covered by this assessment

Country:

Philippines

Region/ State/ Province:

Talavera, Nueva Ecija

Specify the spread of the Technology:

• evenly spread over an area

If precise area is not known, indicate approximate area covered:

• 0.1-1 km2

Comments:

The practice of MRC is mostly practiced in the irrigated ricefields in Nueva Ecija.

Map

×

2.6 Date of implementation

If precise year is not known, indicate approximate date:

• 10-50 years ago

2.7 Introduction of the Technology

Specify how the Technology was introduced:

• through projects/ external interventions

3.2 Current land use type(s) where the Technology is applied

Cropland

• Annual cropping

• rice

Number of growing seasons per year:

• 2

Comments:

Main cash crop: rice
Major food crop: rice

Major land use problems (compiler’s opinion): soil fertility deterioration

Major land use problems (land users’ perception): soil fertility deterioration

3.4 Water supply

Water supply for the land on which the Technology is applied:

• full irrigation

Comments:

Also Water supply: mixed rainfed - irrigated

3.5 SLM group to which the Technology belongs

• integrated soil fertility management

3.6 SLM measures comprising the Technology

agronomic measures

• A2: Organic matter/ soil fertility

Comments:

Main measures: agronomic measures

Type of agronomic measures: manure / compost / residues

3.7 Main types of land degradation addressed by the Technology

chemical soil deterioration

• Cn: fertility decline and reduced organic matter content (not caused by erosion)
• Ca: acidification

Comments:

Main type of degradation addressed: Cn: fertility decline and reduced organic matter content

Secondary types of degradation addressed: Ca: acidification

Main causes of degradation: soil management (heavy application of chemical fertlizers), poverty / wealth (increase farm income)

3.8 Prevention, reduction, or restoration of land degradation

Specify the goal of the Technology with regard to land degradation:

• reduce land degradation

Comments:

Main goals: mitigation / reduction of land degradation

4.1 Technical drawing of the Technology

Technical specifications (related to technical drawing):

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

4.2 General information regarding the calculation of inputs and costs

Specify currency used for cost calculations:

• USD

4.5 Maintenance/ recurrent activities

4.6 Costs and inputs needed for maintenance/ recurrent activities (per year)

5.1 Climate

5.2 Topography

Indicate if the Technology is specifically applied in:

• not relevant

5.3 Soils

5.4 Water availability and quality

5.5 Biodiversity

5.6 Characteristics of land users applying the Technology

Indicate other relevant characteristics of the land users:

Land users applying the Technology are mainly common / average land users

Population density: > 500 persons/km2

Annual population growth: 1% - 2%

5.7 Average area of land used by land users applying the Technology

5.8 Land ownership, land use rights, and water use rights

Land ownership:

• individual, titled

Land use rights:

• open access (unorganized)

5.9 Access to services and infrastructure

6.1 On-site impacts the Technology has shown

Socio-economic impacts

Production

Income and costs

Socio-cultural impacts

Ecological impacts

Soil

Biodiversity: vegetation, animals

Climate and disaster risk reduction

6.3 Exposure and sensitivity of the Technology to gradual climate change and climate-related extremes/ disasters (as perceived by land users)

Climate-related extremes (disasters)

Climatological disasters

Hydrological disasters

6.4 Cost-benefit analysis

How do the benefits compare with the establishment costs (from land users’ perspective)?

How do the benefits compare with the maintenance/ recurrent costs (from land users' perspective)?

6.5 Adoption of the Technology

• > 50%

If available, quantify (no. of households and/ or area covered):

100 household and the area was around 0.1-1km^2

Of all those who have adopted the Technology, how many did so spontaneously, i.e. without receiving any material incentives/ payments?

• 11-50%

Comments:

76% of land user families have adopted the Technology with external material support

Comments on acceptance with external material support: Since the technology is introduced as a project of the government, the farmer-beneficiaries obtained external material support

24% of land user families have adopted the Technology without any external material support

There is a moderate trend towards spontaneous adoption of the Technology

6.7 Strengths/ advantages/ opportunities of the Technology

6.8 Weaknesses/ disadvantages/ risks of the Technology and ways of overcoming them

7.1 Methods/ sources of information