SLM specialists monitoring the vegetables farming in a farmer's field. (Supranee Sritumboon)

Pumping groundwater for vegetable irrigation to prevent salination (Thailand)

Description

The approach is to develop a simple groundwater pumping model for irrigation, on the basis of cooperation and knowledge sharing between government agencies and farmers, that addresses the risk and prevention of off-site salination.

The objective of groundwater pumping for irrigation is to lower the groundwater level in the recharge zone which in turn decreases soil salinity lower down in the discharge area. The extension and promotion of the approach has been done through the learning and training center. The goal is better understanding and public awareness of preventive measure against salinity, through the use of salt-tolerant crops, combined with mechanical measures of accessing groundwater for irrigation. This has been achieved in close cooperation among researchers, SLM specialists, local administration, and community volunteers on soil improvement. A group of farmers started this activity in 1996 under the Land Development Department (LDD)’s Project on Promotion of Integrated Salt-Affected Soil Management of Small Watershed Areas. The approach aims at scaling-out the model to farmers in the recharge areas with the objectives of sharing benefits that are to (a) persuade other land users to change their land use from rice which is a high water-use crop to low water-use crops such as vegetables, (b) prevent further off-site salination, (c) increase land users’ income, and (d) provide knowledge about integrated salinity management. Researchers and SLM specialists work closely with farmers in monitoring and evaluating the recharge area to prevent extensive salination in the discharge zone - as well as the use of groundwater for irrigation. This plan has been formulated to stimulate further promotion and extension to other areas with a similar environment, through training and public relations. The four stages were: first, the expert and agriculturalist of the LDD’s Regional Office 5 (LDDRO5) cooperated with the volunteer soil doctor and farmers in the community to design and plan the project; second, the officers of LDDRO5 set up a forum for exchange of knowledge and experiences between farmers who have been successful in producing vegetables through using shallow groundwater for agriculture, and are not affected by a salinity. Thirdly, the officers of LDDRO5 collaborated with the government office in the district to train farmers who had an interest in vegetable production. Fourthly, LDDRO5 created incentives for farmers to change areas that are not suitable for planting paddy rice to grow vegetables by supporting shallow groundwater well through pumping with solar energy. The stakeholders include the LDD, SLM specialists and researchers, local administrators, and community volunteers on soil improvement and land users. Land users like the project activities because they receive higher incomes – partially because they do not lose land to digging ponds, but instead irrigate from these deep wells from which they can irrigate all year round. The LDD has supported borehole drilling wells – but farmers are not so happy when they have to wait for over a year to get LDD’s borehole drilling due to budget limitations.

Location

Location: Ban Kaonoi, Khon Kaen, Thailand

Geo-reference of selected sites
  • 102.68953, 15.96547

Initiation date: 2007

Year of termination: n.a.

Type of Approach
The vegetables from using water pumped in recharge areas. (Supranee Sritumboon)
Agricultural produce from land use change. (Supranee Sritumboon)

Approach aims and enabling environment

Main aims / objectives of the approach
The objectives of the approach are to persuade land users in the recharge zone to change their land use to low-water use such as vegetable cultivation, to prevent further off-site salination, to increase land users’ income and provide knowledge of integrated salinity management.
Conditions enabling the implementation of the Technology/ ies applied under the Approach
  • Social/ cultural/ religious norms and values: Farmers' community
  • Availability/ access to financial resources and services: Farmers get higher income from vegetables.
  • Collaboration/ coordination of actors: Researchers, SLM specialists and farmers are working together to implement the project.
  • Knowledge about SLM, access to technical support: Provide knowledge of integrated salinity management to farmers.
  • Markets (to purchase inputs, sell products) and prices: Farmers can produce plants according to market demand.
Conditions hindering the implementation of the Technology/ ies applied under the Approach

Participation and roles of stakeholders involved

Stakeholders involved in the Approach and their roles
What stakeholders / implementing bodies were involved in the Approach? Specify stakeholders Describe roles of stakeholders
local land users/ local communities Farmers Vegetable cultivation
SLM specialists/ agricultural advisers Government officers Support knowledge and technology
local government Subdistrict Administration Organization Support information
community volunteer on soil Community volunteers on soil and successful farmers Share knowledge and experience
Lead agency
Land Development Department Regional Office 5
Involvement of local land users/ local communities in the different phases of the Approach
none
passive
external support
interactive
self-mobilization
initiation/ motivation
Farmers had developed knowledge and technology by themselves
planning
Cultivation planning by farmers
implementation
Farmers had implemented by themselves and were supported by the government
monitoring/ evaluation
The government officers are monitoring and evaluating after the project was implemented
Flow chart

The flowchart presents project implementation.

Decision-making on the selection of SLM Technology

Decisions were taken by

  • land users alone (self-initiative)
  • mainly land users, supported by SLM specialists
  • all relevant actors, as part of a participatory approach
  • mainly SLM specialists, following consultation with land users
  • SLM specialists alone
  • politicians/ leaders

Decisions were made based on

  • evaluation of well-documented SLM knowledge (evidence-based decision-making)
  • research findings
  • personal experience and opinions (undocumented)

Technical support, capacity building, and knowledge management

The following activities or services have been part of the approach
Capacity building/ training
Training was provided to the following stakeholders
  • land users
  • field staff/ advisers
Form of training
  • on-the-job
  • farmer-to-farmer
  • demonstration areas
  • public meetings
  • courses
Subjects covered

Promotion of integrated salt-affected soil management of the small watershed area.

Institution strengthening
Institutions have been strengthened / established
  • no
  • yes, a little
  • yes, moderately
  • yes, greatly
at the following level
  • local
  • regional
  • national
Describe institution, roles and responsibilities, members, etc.
The learning and transferring center of land development technology was set up in the community to be used as a training facility, meeting, discussion, and sharing knowledge among farmers and officials.
Type of support
  • financial
  • capacity building/ training
  • equipment
Further details
Monitoring and evaluation
Government officers, community volunteers on soil improvement and farmers.

Financing and external material support

Annual budget in USD for the SLM component
  • < 2,000
  • 2,000-10,000
  • 10,000-100,000
  • 100,000-1,000,000
  • > 1,000,000
Precise annual budget: n.a.
The following services or incentives have been provided to land users
  • Financial/ material support provided to land users
  • Subsidies for specific inputs
  • Credit
  • Other incentives or instruments
partly financed
fully financed
equipment: tools

Land Development Department Regional Office 5 supported water pump using solar energy.

Labour by land users was

Impact analysis and concluding statements

Impacts of the Approach
No
Yes, little
Yes, moderately
Yes, greatly
Did the Approach empower local land users, improve stakeholder participation?

Cooperation between the government and farmers.

Did the Approach help land users to implement and maintain SLM Technologies?

Farmers have a better understanding of the technology and willing to maintain it due to the good result.

Did the Approach improve knowledge and capacities of land users to implement SLM?

Farmers have adopted the technology to suit their own area.

Did the Approach improve knowledge and capacities of other stakeholders?

The approach presented the efficient technology to develop salination for the stakeholders.

Did the Approach lead to improved food security/ improved nutrition?

Different types of vegetables leads to better food security.

Did the Approach improve access to markets?

Higher productivity draws merchants into the project area.

Did the Approach lead to employment, income opportunities?

The higher productivity and the wider area used for such technology cause more labour demand resulting in higher employment of people in the area.

Main motivation of land users to implement SLM
  • increased production
  • increased profit(ability), improved cost-benefit-ratio
  • reduced land degradation
  • reduced risk of disasters
  • reduced workload
  • payments/ subsidies
  • rules and regulations (fines)/ enforcement
  • prestige, social pressure/ social cohesion
  • affiliation to movement/ project/ group/ networks
  • environmental consciousness
  • customs and beliefs, morals
  • enhanced SLM knowledge and skills
  • aesthetic improvement
  • conflict mitigation
Sustainability of Approach activities
Can the land users sustain what hat been implemented through the Approach (without external support)?
  • no
  • yes
  • uncertain

Farmers have a better understanding of off-site salination and they can develop the technology by themselves.

Conclusions and lessons learnt

Strengths: land user's view
  • Farmers get higher income from vegetable cultivation.
  • Land users have water to use for agriculture all year round.
Strengths: compiler’s or other key resource person’s view
  • Increase the varieties of agricultural products.
  • Lower the groundwater level and control the salinity that might spread toward the discharge area.
Weaknesses/ disadvantages/ risks: land user's viewhow to overcome
  • Farmers wait for more than one year to get help from LDD for borehole drilling due to limited budget. Increase more government budget or farmers have to invest by themselves.
Weaknesses/ disadvantages/ risks: compiler’s or other key resource person’s viewhow to overcome
  • High initial implementation cost if the farmers do not receive government support. Farmers have to search for funds to invest by themselves.

References

Compiler
  • supranee sritumboon
Editors
Reviewer
  • Rima Mekdaschi Studer
  • Pitayakon Limtong
  • William Critchley
Date of documentation: Jan. 6, 2019
Last update: Jan. 6, 2021
Resource persons
Full description in the WOCAT database
Linked SLM data
Documentation was faciliated by
Institution Project
Key references
  • Land Development Department: http://www.ldd.go.th/
Links to relevant information which is available online
This work is licensed under Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareaAlike 4.0 International