This is an outdated, inactive version of this case. Go to the current version.
Technologies
Inactive

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

technologies_1302 - Philippines

Completeness: 73%

1. General information

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

Key resource person(s)

SLM specialist:

Dinamling Djolly Ma

DA-BSWM

Philippines

SLM specialist:

Raquid Jemar G.

DA-BSWM

Philippines

SLM specialist:

Manguerra Jose D.

DA-BSWM

Philippines

SLM specialist:

Ventigan Filipina Z.

DA-BSWM

Philippines

SLM specialist:

Poliquit Juanito F.

VSU

Philippines

SLM specialist:

Rapis Thelma

DA-8

Philippines

SLM specialist:

Garcia Pastor

VSU

Philippines

Name of the institution(s) which facilitated the documentation/ evaluation of the Technology (if relevant)
Bureau of Soils and Water Management (Bureau of Soils and Water Management) - Philippines
Name of the institution(s) which facilitated the documentation/ evaluation of the Technology (if relevant)
Visayas State University (VSU) - Philippines
Name of the institution(s) which facilitated the documentation/ evaluation of the Technology (if relevant)
Department of Agriculture-Region VIII (DA-8) - Philippines

1.3 Conditions regarding the use of data documented through WOCAT

When were the data compiled (in the field)?

17/03/2016

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

Yes

2. Description of the SLM Technology

2.1 Short description of the Technology

Definition of the Technology:

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

2.2 Detailed description of the Technology

Description:

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.

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:

Marabut, Samar

2.6 Date of implementation

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

2.7 Introduction of the Technology

Specify how the Technology was introduced:
  • through projects/ external interventions

3. Classification of the SLM Technology

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

Cropland

Cropland

  • Annual cropping
Main crops (cash and food crops):

major cash crop: rice
major food crop: rice

Comments:

Major land use problems (compiler’s opinion): soil fertility deterioration, water-use management

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

3.3 Further information about land use

Water supply for the land on which the Technology is applied:
  • mixed rainfed-irrigated
Number of growing seasons per year:
  • 2

3.4 SLM group to which the Technology belongs

  • integrated soil fertility management
  • Crop intesification

3.5 Spread of the Technology

Specify the spread of the Technology:
  • evenly spread over an area
If the Technology is evenly spread over an area, indicate approximate area covered:
  • < 0.1 km2 (10 ha)

3.6 SLM measures comprising the Technology

agronomic measures

agronomic measures

  • A2: Organic matter/ soil fertility
management measures

management measures

  • M4: Major change in timing of activities
Comments:

Main measures: agronomic measures, management measures

Type of agronomic measures: manure / compost / residues

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)
  • Ca: acidification
water degradation

water degradation

  • Hs: change in quantity of surface water
Comments:

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

Secondary types of degradation addressed: Ca: acidification, Hs: change in quantity of surface water

Main causes of degradation: soil management (dependency on chemical fertilizers), population pressure

3.8 Prevention, reduction, or restoration of land degradation

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

Main goals: prevention of land degradation

Secondary goals: mitigation / reduction of land degradation

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

4.1 Technical drawing of the Technology

Author:

Patricio A. Yambot, Bureau of Soils and Water Management

4.2 Technical specifications/ explanations of technical drawing

System of rice intensification for lowland rice growing.

Technical knowledge required for field staff / advisors: high

Technical knowledge required for land users: high

Main technical functions: increase in organic matter, increase / maintain water stored in soil

Secondary technical functions: improvement of ground cover, improvement of surface structure (crusting, sealing), improvement of topsoil structure (compaction)

Manure / compost / residues
Material/ species: compost, natural concoctions

Major change in timing of activities: irrigation schedule

4.3 General information regarding the calculation of inputs and costs

Specify currency used for cost calculations:
  • US Dollars
Indicate average wage cost of hired labour per day:

6.6666

4.4 Establishment activities

Activity Type of measure Timing
1. Planting of rice seeds Agronomic -
2. Duck raising Agronomic -

4.5 Costs and inputs needed for establishment

Specify input Unit Quantity Costs per Unit Total costs per input % 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

4.6 Maintenance/ recurrent activities

Activity Type of measure Timing/ frequency
1. clearing Agronomic before land preparation
2. organic fertilizer application Agronomic after clearing
3. first plowing Agronomic 10 days after clearing
4. second plowing Agronomic 8-10 days after first plowing
5. transplanting Agronomic 18-25 days after first plowing
6. weeding Agronomic 15 days after transplanting
7. fertilizer application (compost) Agronomic after weeding
8. weeding Agronomic 9-10 days after 1st weeding
9. spraying of natural concoctions Agronomic at the start of pannicle iniation unitl 2 weeks up to flowering
10. harvesting Agronomic

4.7 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 clearing Person/day 8.0 11.1125 88.9 100.0
Labour 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
Equipment 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
Comments:

Machinery/ tools: tractor

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
Agro-climatic zone
  • humid

Thermal climate class: tropics

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)
Topsoil organic matter:
  • medium (1-3%)

5.4 Water availability and quality

Ground water table:

5-50 m

Availability of surface water:

good

Water quality (untreated):

good drinking water

5.5 Biodiversity

Species diversity:
  • high

5.6 Characteristics of land users applying the Technology

Market orientation of production system:
  • mixed (subsistence/ commercial
Off-farm income:
  • 10-50% of all income
Relative level of wealth:
  • average
Individuals or groups:
  • groups/ community
Level of mechanization:
  • manual work
  • animal traction
Gender:
  • women
  • men
Indicate other relevant characteristics of the land users:

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

Population density: 10-50 persons/km2

Annual population growth: 1% - 2%

Level of mechanization: All were selected and perceived as equal important

5.7 Average area of land owned or leased 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, titled
Water use rights:
  • communal (organized)

5.9 Access to services and infrastructure

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

risk of production failure

increased
decreased
Water availability and quality

water availability for livestock

decreased
increased

water quality for livestock

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

workload

increased
decreased

Socio-cultural impacts

food security/ self-sufficiency

reduced
improved

community institutions

weakened
strengthened

conflict mitigation

worsened
improved

Ecological impacts

Water cycle/ runoff

excess water drainage

reduced
improved

evaporation

increased
decreased
Soil

soil compaction

increased
reduced

salinity

increased
decreased

soil organic matter/ below ground C

decreased
increased
Biodiversity: vegetation, animals

beneficial species

decreased
increased

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)

Hydrological disasters
How does the Technology cope with it?
general (river) flood well

Other climate-related consequences

Other climate-related consequences
How does the Technology cope with it?
strong winds well

6.4 Cost-benefit analysis

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

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

  • single cases/ experimental
Comments:


There is a little trend towards spontaneous adoption of the Technology

6.7 Strengths/ advantages/ opportunities of the Technology

Strengths/ advantages/ opportunities in the 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

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

Weaknesses/ disadvantages/ risks in the compiler’s or other key resource person’s view How can they be overcome?
Need for an adequate supply of organic inputs Sustainable production of organic inputs through composting methods

Links and modules

Expand all Collapse all

Modules