Technologies

Application of balanced fertiliser to improve soil productivity [Bangladesh]

Shusomo shar babohar

technologies_3852 - Bangladesh

Completeness: 92%

1. معلومات عامة

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

Key resource person(s)

land user:

Alam Khorshed

Bangladesh

land user:

Jainul Abedin

Bangladesh

SLM specialist:

Md Zahid Ameer

Soil Resource Development Institute

Bangladesh

SLM specialist:

Razzaque Abdur

Department of Agriculture Extension

Bangladesh

SLM specialist:

Islam Md Nurul

soil resoiurce development institute

Bangladesh

SLM specialist:

Tazrian Sarwat

CEGIS

Bangladesh

SLM specialist:

Islam A.T.M. Rafiqul

BMDA

Bangladesh

Name of the institution(s) which facilitated the documentation/ evaluation of the Technology (if relevant)
Soil Resource Development Institute (SRDI) (Soil Resource Development Institute (SRDI)) - Bangladesh
Name of the institution(s) which facilitated the documentation/ evaluation of the Technology (if relevant)
BANCAT (BANCAT) - Bangladesh
Name of the institution(s) which facilitated the documentation/ evaluation of the Technology (if relevant)
Institue of forestry and Environmental Sciences (Institue of forestry and Environmental Sciences) - Bangladesh

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:

نعم

1.4 Declaration on sustainability of the described Technology

Is the Technology described here problematic with regard to land degradation, so that it cannot be declared a sustainable land management technology?

لا

Comments:

The technology is perfectly suitable for mitigating land degradation as well as it conserves soil health in a highly populated country like Bangladesh.

2. Description of the SLM Technology

2.1 Short description of the Technology

Definition of the Technology:

Balanced fertiliser use( Shusomo shar babohar) technology is absolutely suitable for reducing land degradation as well as increasing crop productivity,

2.2 Detailed description of the Technology

Description:

Land degradation is one of the major concern of the globe. Land degradation means loss in the capacity of a given land to support growth of useful plants on a sustained basis (Singh,1994). It results from many factors or/and combination of factors which damage the soil, water and vegetation resources and restrict their use or production capacity. Considering its impact on food security and environment, it is being important in many corners of the world. The productivity of some lands has declined by 50% due to soil erosion, fertility decline and desertification of the world. Like other countries, Bangladesh is not exception in facing threat of land degradation. Due to different types of land degradation, Bangladesh lost a substantial amount of production which in terms of hundreds of billion taka in every year (BARC, 1999). It is high time to be conscious to minimize the land degradation in Bangladesh, a small country with 1, 47,570 sq. km and about 140 million people. The ever-increasing growth rates (1.48%) caused a spurt in all round consumption level. To meet up the demand of the present and forthcoming generation it is essential to sustain soil fertility and increase crop productivity.
Considering the presentation land degradation scenario of Bangladesh, the farmers of Manikgong have adopted the SLM technology named ' balanced fertiliser use to minimise land degradation as well as increase crop productivity'. The technology has been approached by DAE personnel under "Farmers' advisory services program" in Manikgong district of Bangladesh. The balanced fertiliser recommendation has been made according to the suggestion of soil resource development institute. The SLM specialists have compiled database regarding the technology from Dhalla union of Singair upazila under Manikgong district. The technology included applying different types of fertiliser like compost, Urea( Nitrogen), TSP
( phosphorus), MOP( potassium), Zypsum( sulphur), Zinc Sulphate( zinc+ sulphur) etc. Compost, Urea, TSP, MOP, Zypsum and Zinc Sulphate are applied at the rate of 5 ton, 265kg/ha, 90kg/ha, 145 kg/ha, 100 kg/ha and 8.5 kg respectively. The main purpose of the technology was to improve soil nutrient status by using balanced fertiliser along with organic farming. The technology provides multidimensional advantages for the stakeholders. It prevents nutrient mining decline, improves soil physical ,chemical and biological conditions,increase water holding capacity of the soil, increase crop productivity and improve socio-economic conditions of the land users. Overall, it conserves soil health. The farmers community have accepted the well established methods of balanced fertiliser use. Because they are absolutely benefitted by this technology, crop yield has increased manifolds, soil fertility increrased, land cover also increased. As the farm income has increased, the socio-economic condition of the land user has changed dramatically and in the long run it wIll mitigate the climate change impacts by reducing land degradation problem throughout the country.

2.3 Photos of the Technology

General remarks regarding photos:

SLM Specialist are investigating different beneficial aspects of line sowing.

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

بلد:

Bangladesh

Region/ State/ Province:

Manikgong

Further specification of location:

Its a region

Specify the spread of the Technology:
  • evenly spread over an area
If the Technology is evenly spread over an area, specify area covered (in km2):

100,0

Is/are the technology site(s) located in a permanently protected area?

لا

2.6 Date of implementation

Indicate year of implementation:

1900

If precise year is not known, indicate approximate date:
  • less than 10 years ago (recently)

2.7 Introduction of the Technology

  • Advisory services of DAE
Comments (type of project, etc.):

SFFP project of DAE

3. Classification of the SLM Technology

3.1 Main purpose(s) of the Technology

  • improve production
  • reduce, prevent, restore land degradation
  • conserve ecosystem
  • preserve/ improve biodiversity
  • adapt to climate change/ extremes and its impacts
  • create beneficial social impact

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

Cropland

Cropland

  • Annual cropping
Number of growing seasons per year:
  • 3
Specify:

Rabi vegetables-irrigated rice- Rain fed rice AMAN

Is intercropping practiced?

لا

Is crop rotation practiced?

نعم

If yes, specify:

dry season vegetables- rainfed rice

3.3 Has land use changed due to the implementation of the Technology?

Has land use changed due to the implementation of the Technology?
  • No (Continue with question 3.4)

3.4 Water supply

Water supply for the land on which the Technology is applied:
  • mixed rainfed-irrigated

3.5 SLM group to which the Technology belongs

  • integrated soil fertility management

3.6 SLM measures comprising the Technology

management measures

management measures

  • M2: Change of management/ intensity level

3.7 Main types of land degradation addressed by the Technology

chemical soil deterioration

chemical soil deterioration

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

3.8 Prevention, reduction, or restoration of land degradation

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

4. Technical specifications, implementation activities, inputs, and costs

4.1 Technical drawing of the Technology

Technical specifications (related to technical drawing):

The land users cultivate paddy following the technology called "line sowing". Distance between line to line 10 centimetre and spacing between plant to plant 5 centimetre. The farmers use
recommended dose of phosphorus,potash, sulphur and zinc at the final stage of land preparation . on the contrary, nitrogen fertiliser is used in three splits. 1st split after 7-10 days of transplanting, 2nd split, after 40-50 days of transplanting and 3rd split, just 5-7 days before starting reproductive stage. nitrogen fertiliser is always applied through broadcasting system.

Author:

Md Babul Hossain

Date:

24/03/2018

4.2 General information regarding the calculation of inputs and costs

Specify how costs and inputs were calculated:
  • per Technology unit
Specify unit:

1 hectare

If relevant, indicate exchange rate from USD to local currency (e.g. 1 USD = 79.9 Brazilian Real): 1 USD =:

83,0

Indicate average wage cost of hired labour per day:

500 TAKA

4.3 Establishment activities

Activity Timing (season)
1. seed bed preparation rice seed bed in the month of july.
2. Main land preparation for rice cultivation at the starting of rainy season( july-august)
3. Balanced fertilisers like compost,urea, TSP, MOP, Zypsu and ,Zinc sulphate fertiliser application After final land preparation TSP,MOP, sulphur and zinc sulphate fertilisers were used. Again, urea was broadcast at the age of 30 days of transplanted crop.
4. Broadcasting of Urea After 30 days of transplanting
5. Weeding september
6. 2nd and 3rd split of nitrogen application september and last of october
7. Harvesting of rice November
8. bed preparation for vegetable cultivation in dry season December
9. fertiliser application december
10. Harvesting last of january onward

4.4 Costs and inputs needed for establishment

Specify input Unit Quantity Costs per Unit Total costs per input % of costs borne by land users
Labour land preparation person per day 5,0 500,0 2500,0 100,0
Labour seed bed preparation persons-per day 2,0 500,0 1000,0 100,0
Labour rice transplanting persons-per day 10,0 500,0 5000,0 100,0
Labour fertiliser application persons-per day 3,0 500,0 1500,0 100,0
Equipment weeding persons-per day 4,0 500,0 2000,0 100,0
Equipment pesticide application persons-per day 2,0 500,0 1000,0 100,0
Equipment harvesting, winnowing, drying persons-per day 5,0 500,0 2500,0 100,0
Plant material urea kg/ha 70,0 16,0 1120,0 100,0
Fertilizers and biocides compost Kg/ha 160,0 5,0 800,0 100,0
Fertilizers and biocides TSP Kg/ha 70,0 22,0 1540,0 100,0
Fertilizers and biocides MOP Kg/ha 100,0 30,0 3000,0 100,0
Fertilizers and biocides Zypsum Kg/ha 70,0 15,0 1050,0 100,0
Fertilizers and biocides Zinc sulphate Kg/ha 8,5 150,0 1275,0 100,0
Fertilizers and biocides pesticides tk/ha 2,0 200,0 400,0 100,0
Total costs for establishment of the Technology 24685,0
Total costs for establishment of the Technology in USD 297,41
If land user bore less than 100% of costs, indicate who covered the remaining costs:

Agricultural Extension department as government subsidy for input cost

4.5 Maintenance/ recurrent activities

Activity Timing/ frequency
1. Weeding During vegetative stage/3
2. Broad casting fertiliser 3
3. watering 3
4. pesticide application if necessary

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

Specify input Unit Quantity Costs per Unit Total costs per input % of costs borne by land users
Labour weeding person -per day 3,0 500,0 1500,0 100,0
Labour Broadcasting nitrogen fertiliser person -per day 3,0 500,0 1500,0 100,0
Labour irrigation person -per day 2,0 500,0 1000,0 100,0
Labour pesticide application persons per day 2,0 500,0 1000,0 100,0
Fertilizers and biocides Urea broadcasting KG/HA 140,0 16,0 2240,0 100,0
Other Watering litre/hectare 3000,0 3,0 9000,0 100,0
Other pesticide kg/ha 3,0 200,0 600,0 100,0
Total costs for maintenance of the Technology 16840,0
Total costs for maintenance of the Technology in USD 202,89

4.7 Most important factors affecting the costs

Describe the most determinate factors affecting the costs:

Labour cost is very high. but other input cost is also increasing day by day.

5. Natural and human environment

5.1 Climate

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
Specify average annual rainfall (if known), in mm:

1900,00

Indicate the name of the reference meteorological station considered:

Dhaka

Agro-climatic zone
  • sub-humid

5.2 Topography

Slopes on average:
  • 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
Altitudinal zone:
  • 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.
Indicate if the Technology is specifically applied in:
  • not relevant

5.3 Soils

Soil depth on average:
  • 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):
  • medium (loamy, silty)
Soil texture (> 20 cm below surface):
  • medium (loamy, silty)
Topsoil organic matter:
  • low (<1%)
If available, attach full soil description or specify the available information, e.g. soil type, soil PH/ acidity, Cation Exchange Capacity, nitrogen, salinity etc.

Medium high land, silt loam, silmondi soil series, soil ph-6.6, organic matter -0.88, CEC-0.25,Nitrogen-0.13%

5.4 Water availability and quality

Ground water table:

5-50 m

Availability of surface water:

poor/ none

Water quality (untreated):

good drinking water

Water quality refers to:

both ground and surface water

Is water salinity a problem?

لا

Is flooding of the area occurring?

نعم

Comments and further specifications on water quality and quantity:

episodically

5.5 Biodiversity

Species diversity:
  • medium
Habitat diversity:
  • medium

5.6 Characteristics of land users applying the Technology

Sedentary or nomadic:
  • Sedentary
Market orientation of production system:
  • mixed (subsistence/ commercial)
Off-farm income:
  • 10-50% of all income
Relative level of wealth:
  • average
Individuals or groups:
  • individual/ household
Level of mechanization:
  • manual work
Gender:
  • men
Age of land users:
  • middle-aged
  • elderly

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

  • < 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
Is this considered small-, medium- or large-scale (referring to local context)?
  • small-scale

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

Land ownership:
  • individual, not titled
  • individual, titled
Land use rights:
  • individual
Water use rights:
  • individual
Are land use rights based on a traditional legal system?

نعم

5.9 Access to services and infrastructure

health:
  • poor
  • moderate
  • good
education:
  • poor
  • moderate
  • good
technical assistance:
  • poor
  • moderate
  • good
employment (e.g. off-farm):
  • poor
  • moderate
  • good
markets:
  • poor
  • moderate
  • good
energy:
  • poor
  • moderate
  • good
roads and transport:
  • poor
  • moderate
  • good
drinking water and sanitation:
  • poor
  • moderate
  • good
financial services:
  • poor
  • moderate
  • good

6. Impacts and concluding statements

6.1 On-site impacts the Technology has shown

Socio-economic impacts

Production

crop production

decreased
increased

crop quality

decreased
increased

land management

hindered
simplified
Water availability and quality

drinking water availability

decreased
increased

drinking water quality

decreased
increased

water availability for livestock

decreased
increased

water quality for livestock

decreased
increased

irrigation water availability

decreased
increased

irrigation water quality

decreased
increased

demand for irrigation water

increased
decreased
Income and costs

expenses on agricultural inputs

increased
decreased

farm income

decreased
increased

diversity of income sources

decreased
increased

Socio-cultural impacts

food security/ self-sufficiency

reduced
improved

health situation

worsened
improved

land use/ water rights

worsened
improved

cultural opportunities

reduced
improved

recreational opportunities

reduced
improved

community institutions

weakened
strengthened

national institutions

weakened
strengthened

SLM/ land degradation knowledge

reduced
improved

situation of socially and economically disadvantaged groups

worsened
improved

Ecological impacts

Water cycle/ runoff

water quantity

decreased
increased
Soil

soil moisture

decreased
increased

soil cover

reduced
improved

soil loss

increased
decreased

soil accumulation

decreased
increased

soil crusting/ sealing

increased
reduced

soil compaction

increased
reduced

nutrient cycling/ recharge

decreased
increased

salinity

increased
decreased
Quantity before SLM:

not relevant

soil organic matter/ below ground C

decreased
increased

acidity

increased
reduced
Biodiversity: vegetation, animals

Vegetation cover

decreased
increased

biomass/ above ground C

decreased
increased

plant diversity

decreased
increased

invasive alien species

increased
reduced

animal diversity

decreased
increased

beneficial species

decreased
increased

habitat diversity

decreased
increased

pest/ disease control

decreased
increased
Climate and disaster risk reduction

flood impacts

increased
decreased

drought impacts

increased
decreased

emission of carbon and greenhouse gases

increased
decreased

micro-climate

worsened
improved
Other ecological impacts

6.2 Off-site impacts the Technology has shown

water availability

decreased
increased

groundwater/ river pollution

increased
reduced

impact of greenhouse gases

increased
reduced

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

Gradual climate change

Gradual climate change
Season increase or decrease How does the Technology cope with it?
annual temperature decrease moderately

Climate-related extremes (disasters)

Climatological disasters
How does the Technology cope with it?
drought well
Biological disasters
How does the Technology cope with it?
epidemic diseases very well
insect/ worm infestation very well

6.4 Cost-benefit analysis

How do the benefits compare with the establishment costs (from land users’ perspective)?
Short-term returns:

very positive

Long-term returns:

positive

How do the benefits compare with the maintenance/ recurrent costs (from land users' perspective)?
Short-term returns:

positive

Long-term returns:

positive

6.5 Adoption of the Technology

  • > 50%
Of all those who have adopted the Technology, how many did so spontaneously, i.e. without receiving any material incentives/ payments?
  • 11-50%

6.6 Adaptation

Has the Technology been modified recently to adapt to changing conditions?

لا

6.7 Strengths/ advantages/ opportunities of the Technology

Strengths/ advantages/ opportunities in the land user’s view
It reduces soil nutrient mining
Production cost decreased
Crop production increased more than two times
Soil moisture holding capacity increased
Strengths/ advantages/ opportunities in the compiler’s or other key resource person’s view
Sustainable soil management technology developed
Soil health improved
judicious use of natural resources

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

Weaknesses/ disadvantages/ risks in the land user’s view How can they be overcome?
labour cost very high farmers borrow money from rich people or from financial institute
Poor marketing facilities land owners try to sell their products in wholesale markets
Weaknesses/ disadvantages/ risks in the compiler’s or other key resource person’s view How can they be overcome?
ever increasing pressure on land due to fulfillment of the food demand of huge population. Research institutes are investigating high yielding variety and already some variety developed.

7. References and links

7.1 Methods/ sources of information

  • field visits, field surveys

50 local people

  • interviews with land users

Twenty land users

  • interviews with SLM specialists/ experts

5

When were the data compiled (in the field)?

15/05/2018

7.2 References to available publications

Title, author, year, ISBN:

Rahman, M. R. 1990. Country report, Bangladesh. In: Problem Soils of Asia and the Pacific. Report of the Expert Consultation of the Asian Network on Problem soils. Bangkok, Thailand, 29 August-1 September 1989

7.3 Links to relevant online information

Title/ description:

Impact of land degradation in Bangladesh: changing scenario in agricultural land use [2001]

URL:

http://www.fao.org/library/library-home/en/

7.4 General comments

The database may be considered as a useful tool for planners with a view to sustainable land management.

Links and modules

Expand all Collapse all

Modules