Technologies

Residue Incorporation (Corn) [Philippines]

"Palugdang", "Palata"

technologies_1104 - Philippines

View sections

Expand all Collapse all
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:
{'additional_translations': {}, 'value': 'Henry Apolinares', 'user_id': '349', 'unknown_user': False, 'template': 'raw'}
SLM specialist:

Pava Herminio D.

Central Mindanao University, Musuan, Bukidnon, Philippines

Philippines

SLM specialist:

Rondal Jose

Bureau of Soils and Water Management

Philippines

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:

Yes

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?

No

2. Description of the SLM Technology

2.1 Short description of the Technology

Definition of the Technology:

Incorporation of corn stalks during land preparation for the succeeding crop.

2.2 Detailed description of the Technology

Description:

The technology is practiced in corn farm. It involves the incorporation of stalks and leaves, usually chopped, during the land preparation for the suceeding crop. Corn ears are harvested manually. After harvesting, the stalks are cut and spread on the farm. This provides surface protection to the soil during the turn-around period when erosive rainfall events can occur. After a 2-3 weeks turn-around period, land preparation for the succeeding crop starts. Land preparation can either be by machine or animal. The crop residues are incorporated during plowing which is done twice. The technology is intended to increase organic matter and other nutrients through recycling, improve soil structure and porosity and increase soil water holding capacity. The more common practice done in the past in disposing crop residue is by burning. Residue incorporation has added benefits in that it lessens the emission of gases, particularly carbon dioxide which contributes to global warming.

2.3 Photos of the Technology

Media Gallery

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

Country:

Philippines

Region/ State/ Province:

Bukidnon

Further specification of location:

Bukidnon

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):

10.0

If precise area is not known, indicate approximate area covered:
  • 10-100 km2
Comments:

Total area covered by the SLM Technology is 10 km2.
The technology is also being practiced in other provinces in Mindanao, although not as popular as in Bukidnon which is the subject of this report

Map preview

2.6 Date of implementation

If precise year is not known, indicate approximate date:
  • more than 50 years ago (traditional)

2.7 Introduction of the Technology

Specify how the Technology was introduced:
  • through projects/ external interventions
Comments (type of project, etc.):

Traditionally practiced by the farmers themselves.

3. Classification of the SLM Technology

3.1 Main purpose(s) of the Technology

  • reduce, prevent, restore land degradation

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

Cropland

Cropland

  • Annual cropping
Annual cropping - Specify crops:
  • cereals - maize
Number of growing seasons per year:
  • 2
Specify:

Longest growing period in days: 250, Longest growing period from month to month: Apr - Nov; Second longest growing period in days: 220, Second longest growing period from month to month: May - Oct

Comments:

Major land use problems (compiler’s opinion): Soil acidification, soil mining and fertility decline. Increasing soil erosion problem due to the culitvation of land with steep slope.
Major land use problems (land users’ perception): Increasing inputs to maintain yield.

3.4 Water supply

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

3.5 SLM group to which the Technology belongs

  • improved ground/ vegetation cover

3.6 SLM measures comprising the Technology

agronomic measures

agronomic measures

  • A1: Vegetation/ soil cover
Comments:

Type of agronomic measures: mulching, manure / compost / residues, minimum tillage, contour tillage

3.7 Main types of land degradation addressed by the Technology

soil erosion by water

soil erosion by water

  • Wt: loss of topsoil/ surface erosion
chemical soil deterioration

chemical soil deterioration

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

water degradation

  • Ha: aridification

3.8 Prevention, reduction, or restoration of land degradation

Specify the goal of the Technology with regard to land degradation:
  • restore/ rehabilitate severely degraded land

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

4.1 Technical drawing of the Technology

{'additional_translations': {}, 'content_type': None, 'preview_image': '', 'key': 'Technical drawing', 'value': None, 'template': 'raw'}
Technical specifications (related to technical drawing):

Technical knowledge required for field staff / advisors: moderate
Technical knowledge required for land users: low
Main technical functions: increase in soil fertility
Secondary technical functions: control of dispersed runoff: impede / retard, increase in organic matter

Mulching
Material/ species: corn stalks
Quantity/ density: 4000-5000
Remarks: spread evenly

Manure / compost / residues
Material/ species: corn stalks
Quantity/ density: 4000-5000
Remarks: spread evenly

4.2 General information regarding the calculation of inputs and costs

other/ national currency (specify):

Peso

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

50.0

Indicate average wage cost of hired labour per day:

2.00

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
Equipment animal traction ha 1.0 27.8 27.8 100.0
Plant material seeds ha 1.0 13.3 13.3 100.0
Fertilizers and biocides fertilizer ha 1.0 75.0 75.0 100.0
Fertilizers and biocides biocides ha 1.0 74.0 74.0 100.0
Other planting (hours) ha 1.0 20.75 20.75 100.0
Other harvesting (hours) ha 1.0 30.0 30.0 100.0
Other maintenance (hours) ha 1.0 41.5 41.5 100.0
Total costs for establishment of the Technology 282.35
Total costs for establishment of the Technology in USD 5.65

4.5 Maintenance/ recurrent activities

Activity Timing/ frequency
1. Cutting/chopping of corn stalks after harvest / once
2. Plowing/incorporation of crop residue before planting / 2-3 times
3. Planting / 2-3 times/yr

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

Comments:

The cost is calculated starting from residue incorporation (plowing), crop establishment, maintenance (spraying, weeding) and harvesting.

4.7 Most important factors affecting the costs

Describe the most determinate factors affecting the costs:

Labor and material inputs (seeds, fertilizers, chemicals) are the main costs involve

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.

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):
  • fine/ heavy (clay)
Topsoil organic matter:
  • low (<1%)

5.6 Characteristics of land users applying the Technology

Market orientation of production system:
  • mixed (subsistence/ commercial)
  • commercial/ market
Off-farm income:
  • 10-50% of all income
Relative level of wealth:
  • poor
  • average
Level of mechanization:
  • animal traction
  • mechanized/ motorized
Indicate other relevant characteristics of the land users:

Population density: 10-50 persons/km2
Annual population growth: 2% - 3%
10% of the land users are very rich and own 25% of the land.
20% of the land users are rich and own 10% of the land.
55% of the land users are average wealthy and own 50% of the land.
10% of the land users are poor and own 5% of the land.
5% of the land users are poor.
Off-farm income specification: Carpentry, trading, temporary employment (e.g. construction

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

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

Land ownership:
  • state
  • individual, titled
Land use rights:
  • leased
  • individual

6. Impacts and concluding statements

6.1 On-site impacts the Technology has shown

Socio-economic impacts

Production

crop production

decreased
increased
Comments/ specify:

more nutrient are added

land management

hindered
simplified
Comments/ specify:

scattered corn stalks hinder plowing

Income and costs

farm income

decreased
increased
Comments/ specify:

contingent on product prices

workload

increased
decreased
Comments/ specify:

reduced cost (no need to haul or burn crop residues)

Socio-cultural impacts

SLM/ land degradation knowledge

reduced
improved
Comments/ specify:

proof is rapid adoption of the technology by farmers

Ecological impacts

Water cycle/ runoff

surface runoff

increased
decreased
Quantity before SLM:

60

Quantity after SLM:

40

Soil

soil moisture

decreased
increased
Comments/ specify:

better water holding capacity

soil cover

reduced
improved
Comments/ specify:

more vigorous growth of crops

soil loss

increased
decreased
Quantity before SLM:

20

Quantity after SLM:

10

soil compaction

increased
reduced
Comments/ specify:

long term processs

Other ecological impacts

Soil fertility

decreased
increased
Comments/ specify:

long term processs

6.2 Off-site impacts the Technology has shown

downstream flooding

increased
reduced
Comments/ specify:

increase infiltration

downstream siltation

increased
decreased
Comments/ specify:

reduced runoff

wind transported sediments

increased
reduced
Comments/ specify:

no blown ash due to burning

smoke emission

increased
decreased
Comments/ specify:

no more burning

6.4 Cost-benefit analysis

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

slightly positive

Long-term returns:

very 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

Of all those who have adopted the Technology, how many did so spontaneously, i.e. without receiving any material incentives/ payments?
  • 91-100%
Comments:

90% of land user families have adopted the Technology without any external material support
900 land user families have adopted the Technology without any external material support
There is a moderate trend towards spontaneous adoption of the Technology. Due to the escalating cost of commercial inorganic fertilizer, farmers are now inclined to used other alternatives/sources of soil nutrients

6.7 Strengths/ advantages/ opportunities of the Technology

Strengths/ advantages/ opportunities in the land user’s view
Increase soil fertility
Less labor cost during land preparation (no need to haul residue)
Strengths/ advantages/ opportunities in the compiler’s or other key resource person’s view
Low cost method of improving soil physical/chemical properties
Increased soil infiltration capacity

How can they be sustained / enhanced? Sustained information education campaign (IEC)
Prevent smoke emission which contributes to global warming
Reduced soil erosion

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?
Difficult to incorporate (residues) using animal drawn plow Mechanization/chopping of stalks into shorter pieces
Weaknesses/ disadvantages/ risks in the compiler’s or other key resource person’s view How can they be overcome?
Nutrient immobilization during the process of decomposition Incorporate residue at least one month before the suceeding crop

7. References and links

7.1 Methods/ sources of information

  • field visits, field surveys
  • interviews with land users
When were the data compiled (in the field)?

15/08/2001

7.2 References to available publications

Title, author, year, ISBN:

Mindanao Upland Stabilization and Utilization Through Proper Agroforestry Networking (MUSUAN) Program

Available from where? Costs?

Central Mindanao University, Musuan, Bukidnon, Philippines

Title, author, year, ISBN:

Sloping Agricultural Technology (SALT)

Available from where? Costs?

Central Mindanao University, Musuan, Bukidnon, Philippines

Links and modules

Expand all Collapse all

Modules