Agricultural Development:  What Comes After  'Modern Agriculture'?  College of Humanities & Development CAU, Beijing, Marc...
‘ Modern Agriculture’ <ul><li>Developed during 20 th  century has been the most  successful  system of production in histo...
Question:   How advisable is it to continue along our  present technological path ? <ul><li>--  doing essentially  more of...
 
‘ Modern Agriculture’ <ul><li>as developed during the 20th century began in the  first half  of the century with the  indu...
‘ Modern Agriculture’ <ul><li>accelerated in the  latter half  of 20th century being increasingly shaped according to  sci...
‘ Modern Agriculture’ <ul><li>was widely expected to ‘ feed the world ’ –  to avoid famine and promote development </li></...
Basic features of ‘Modern Agriculture’ <ul><li>MECHANIZATION   – land-extensive strategy, monoculture, capital- and energy...
‘ Post-Modern Agriculture’ <ul><li>Responds to new and changing set of  real-world conditions </li></ul><ul><li>Will  ‘re-...
New 21st Century Realities: <ul><li>Reduced  per capita availability  of  land & water   for agricultural sector </li></ul...
New 21st Century Realities: <ul><li>Energy  costs   are  increasing , and are unlikely to return to 20th century levels </...
World Grain Production and Fertilizer Use,  and Cumulative Increases by Decades  Year Grain produc-tion ( mmt) Increase in...
<ul><li>Fortunately, there are new production opportunities that are  breaking the rules  of the ‘Green Revolution’  – exa...
MADAGASCAR: SRI field, traditional variety, 2003
Cambodian farmer in Takeo Province, with rice plant grown  from single seed using SRI methods with traditional variety
Nepali farmer in Morang District, with SRI plant from single seed
Tribal farmer in Jharkhand state of India, with a  ‘ rainfed’ SRI  plant with 65 tillers (110-day variety)
SRI NON-SRI Punjabi farmer in India showing difference between rice plant phenotypes with SRI and non-SRI practices
Vietnamese farmer in D ông Trù village, Hanoi Province, holding up SRI & regular rice plants in front of their fields – af...
47.9% 34.7% “ Non-Flooding Rice Farming Technology in Irrigated Paddy Field” Dr. Tao Longxing, China National Rice Researc...
How are these changes achieved? <ul><li>By  different management practices  for: </li></ul><ul><li>Plants  –  transplant  ...
Conoweeder used in Sri Lanka
Rotary-hoe weeding of  SRI rice  paddies in  Madagascar
Careful transplanting of single, young seedlings, widely spaced SRI CAN BE MECHANIZED: Costa Rican SRI  with mechanized tr...
SRI practices usually result in: <ul><li>Higher   yields  by 50-100%, or more </li></ul><ul><li>Water reductions  of 25-50...
I ndonesian  farmer in Lombok  Province comparing rice plants
Evaluation of SRI in Indonesia: <ul><li>Supervised by Nippon Koei TA team,  over 9 seasons and across 3 provinces </li></u...
What  requirements/constraints ? <ul><li>Water control  – need for best results; may not be possible in some places; impro...
Alternative PARADIGMS of Production  <ul><li>‘ GREEN REVOLUTION’   was based on: </li></ul><ul><li>(a)  Changing the  gene...
SWI wheat crop in Poland before going into winter dormancy
Finger millet in India:  on right:   local variety and traditional mgmt; center:  improved variety with same mgmt;  on lef...
Reported yields of  125-235 t/ha  compared with usual 65 t/ha SRI concepts and methods adapted to sugar cane (left) in And...
Extensions of SRI to Other Crops: Uttarakhand / Himachal Pradesh, India  Rajma (kidney beans) Manduwa (millet) Crop No. of...
Agroecological ‘secret’ can be found in the  roots  and in  soil organisms <ul><li>Rice roots that are  continuously flood...
IRAN:   SRI roots and normal (flooded) roots: note difference in  color  as well as  size
Cuba – Two plants of the same age (52 DAP) and same variety (VN 2084)
Regression relationship between N uptake and grain yield for SRI and  conventional methods (Barison, 2003) – same relation...
Soil biota  are not visible like roots <ul><li>But they provide  many valuable services : </li></ul><ul><li>Improved  soil...
‘ Ascending Migration of Endophytic Rhizobia,  from Roots and Leaves, inside Rice Plants and Assessment of Benefits to Ric...
Economic Evaluation (US$/ha)  Tamil Nadu Agric. Univ.  (N=100) Conventional practices SRI practices Income from grain  (Rs...
Incidence of Diseases and Pests Average of trial data (8 provinces) from  Vietnam National IPM Program, 2005-2006 * Insect...
Sri Lanka rice fields: same variety, same irrigation system, and  same drought  : standard methods (left), SRI (right)
Agroecological Strategy:   <ul><li>Smaller-scale intensive operations </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Achieve greater resource-effic...
Agroecological Alternatives   <ul><li>Make greater use of  organic inputs  to maintain soil fertility </li></ul><ul><ul><l...
THANK YOU E-mail address: [email_address] SRI home page: http://ciifad.cornell.edu/sri/
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in …5
×

0906 Agricultural Development: What Comes After 'Modern Agriculture'?

3,089 views

Published on

Norman Uphoff

COHD, China Agriculture University, Beijing, China

Published in: Technology, Business
0 Comments
5 Likes
Statistics
Notes
  • Be the first to comment

No Downloads
Views
Total views
3,089
On SlideShare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
12
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
268
Comments
0
Likes
5
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide
  • Presentation prepared for seminar at Foundation for Advanced Studies on International Development, Tokyo, February 25, 2008
  • This discussion of ‘post-modern agriculture’ is adapted from 2 nd Hugh Bunting Memorial Lecture given at the University of Reading, UK, for the Tropical Agriculture Association, June 4, 2007.
  • Graph prepared by Uphoff for monograph by Louise Buck, David Lee, Thomas Gavin and himself on EcoAgriculture (CIIFAD, 2004; for SANREM CRSP). Sources are from Worldwatch Institute’s data archives.
  • SRI was developed in Madagascar about 20 years ago as discussed in the next slide. This is a summary of the effects of changing the management of plants, soil, water and nutrients according to the insights brought together in SRI. The figures are based on over a dozen evaluations, including ones by IWMI, GTZ, Tamil Nadu Agricultural University, China Agricultural University, Nippon Koei and other institutions.
  • SRI was developed in Madagascar about 20 years ago as discussed in the next slide. This is a summary of the effects of changing the management of plants, soil, water and nutrients according to the insights brought together in SRI. The figures are based on over a dozen evaluations, including ones by IWMI, GTZ, Tamil Nadu Agricultural University, China Agricultural University, Nippon Koei and other institutions.
  • Also adapted from Buck et al. (2004).
  • This field was harvested in March 2004 with representatives from the Department of Agriculture present to measure the yield. Picture provided by George Rakotondrabe, Landscape Development Interventions project, which has worked with Association Tefy Saina in spreading the use of SRI to reduce land pressures on the remaining rainforest areas. The Ministry of Agriculture technician who measured the yield reported this as 17 t/ha.
  • Picture provided by Dr. Koma Yang Saing, director, Cambodian Center for the Study and Development of Agriculture (CEDAC), September 2004. Dr. Koma himself tried SRI methods in 1999, and once satisfied that they worked, got 28 farmers in 2000 to try them. From there the numbers have increased each year, to 400, then 2100, then 9100, then almost 17,000. Over 50,000 farmers are expecting to be using SRI in 2005. Ms. Sarim previously produced 2-3 t/ha on her field. In 2004, some parts of this field reached a yield of 11 t/ha, where the soil was most ‘biologized’ from SRI practices.
  • Picture provided by Rajendra Uprety, District Agricultural Development Office, Morang District, Nepal. Again, this is a single SRI plant grown from a single seed.
  • Picture sent by Prativa Sundaray, staff member with the NGO PRADAN which is introducing SRI in poor communities, especially tribal ones in Orissa, Jhakhand and West Bengal, even where there is no irrigation, adapting SRI concepts to rainfed conditions.
  • Picture presented to show contrasting phenotypes with SRI and conventional methods.
  • Figures from a paper presented by Dr. Tao to international rice conference organized by the China National Rice Research Institute for the International Year of Rice and World Food Day, held in Hangzhou, October 15-17, 2004. Dr. Tao has been doing research on SRI since 2001 to evaluate its effects in physiological terms.
  • This is the most simple description of what SRI entails. Transplanting is not necessary since direct seeding, with the other SRI practices, also produces similarly good results. The principle of SRI is that if transplanting is done , very young seedling should be used, and there should be little or no trauma to the young plant roots. These are often ‘abused’ in transplanting process, being allowed to dry out (desiccate), or are knocked to remove soil, etc.
  • Here the seedlings are being set into the soil, very shallow (only 1-2 cm deep). The transplanted seedlings are barely visible at the intersections of the lines. This operation proceeds very quickly once the transplanters have gained some skill and confidence in the method. As noted already, these seedling set out with two leaves can already have a third leaf by the next day.
  • Picture provided by Mr. Shichi Sato, project leader for DISIMP project in Eastern Indonesia (S. Sulawasi and W. Nusa Tenggara), where &gt; 1800 farmers using SRI on &gt;1300 ha have had 7.6 t/ha average SRI yield (dried, unhusked paddy, 14% moisture content), 84% more than the control plots, with 40% reduction in water use, and 25% reduction in the costs of production.
  • For more details on this evaluation, see: S. Sato and N. Uphoff, Raising factor productivity in irrigated rice production: Opportunities with the System of Rice Intensification, Review of Agriculture, Veterinary Science, Nutrition and Natural Resources , Commonwealth Agricultural Bureau International, Wallingford, UK, 2007.
  • SRI is often hard to accept because it does not depend on either of the two main strategies that made the Green Revolution possible. It does not require any change in the rice variety used (genotype) or an increase in external inputs. Indeed, the latter can be reduced. SRI methods improve the yields of all rice varieties evaluated so far – modern and traditional, improved and local. The highest yields have been attained with HYVs and hybrid varieties (all SRI yields &gt;15 t/ha), but ‘unimproved’ varieties can give yields in the 6-12 t/ha range when soil has been improved through SRI methods, so give the higher market price for these latter varieties, growing them can be more profitable for farmers.
  • This picture was sent by Thadeusz Niesiobedzki in Poland, of his winter wheat crop that is being grown with single seedlings, wide spacing, use of organic matter, etc. approximating SRI. He hit upon these practices by accident (a long story) and also discovered the SRI internet web page, and saw the similarities between his practices and SRI, thereafter contacting Cornell by email to open up dialogue.
  • SRI is often hard to accept because it does not depend on either of the two main strategies that made the Green Revolution possible. It does not require any change in the rice variety used (genotype) or an increase in external inputs. Indeed, the latter can be reduced. SRI methods improve the yields of all rice varieties evaluated so far – modern and traditional, improved and local. The highest yields have been attained with HYVs and hybrid varieties (all SRI yields &gt;15 t/ha), but ‘unimproved’ varieties can give yields in the 6-12 t/ha range when soil has been improved through SRI methods, so give the higher market price for these latter varieties, growing them can be more profitable for farmers.
  • Picture provided by Dr. Rena Perez. These two rice plants are ‘twins’ in that they were planted on the same day in the same nursery from the same seed bag. The one on the right was taken out at 9 days and transplanted into an SRI environment. The one on the left was kept in the flooded nursery until its 52 nd day, when it was taken out for transplanting (in Cuba, transplanting of commonly done between 50 and 55 DAP). The difference in root growth and tillering (5 vs. 42) is spectacular. We think this difference is at least in part attributable to the contributions of soil microorganisms producing phytohormones in the rhizosphere that benefit plant growth and performance.
  • From MS thesis for Cornell University Department of Crop and Soil Sciences, based on field research in Madagascar in 2000-2001. QUEFTS model was used to assess relation between uptake of nutrients (N, P, and K analyses were all essentially the same) and grain production. The higher conversion rate of N uptake to grain output could be due to greater uptake also of micronutrients – through the larger, better functioning root system of SRI plants, so that the plants can better utilize macronutrients in grain production.
  • SRI is often hard to accept because it does not depend on either of the two main strategies that made the Green Revolution possible. It does not require any change in the rice variety used (genotype) or an increase in external inputs. Indeed, the latter can be reduced. SRI methods improve the yields of all rice varieties evaluated so far – modern and traditional, improved and local. The highest yields have been attained with HYVs and hybrid varieties (all SRI yields &gt;15 t/ha), but ‘unimproved’ varieties can give yields in the 6-12 t/ha range when soil has been improved through SRI methods, so give the higher market price for these latter varieties, growing them can be more profitable for farmers.
  • Data are from same TNAU evaluation as the previous slide
  • From report of National IPM Program to Vietnamese Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Development, April 2007, on the basis of which MARD designated SRI as a ‘technology advance’ and has begun supporting research and extension with SRI. Yield increases were lower in Vietnam than most other countries, 10-20%, but with cost saving, water saving, seed saving and more resistance to biotic and abiotic stresses, SRI was considered an improved method for rice production.
  • This picture from Sri Lanka shows two fields having the same soil, climate and irrigation access, during a drought period. On the left, the rice grown with conventional practices, with continuous flooding from the time of transplanting, has a shallower root system that cannot withstand water stress. On the right, SRI rice receiving less water during its growth has deeper rooting, and thus it can continue to thrive during the drought. Farmers in Sri Lanka are coming to accept SRI in part because it reduces their risk of crop failure during drought.
  • SRI is often hard to accept because it does not depend on either of the two main strategies that made the Green Revolution possible. It does not require any change in the rice variety used (genotype) or an increase in external inputs. Indeed, the latter can be reduced. SRI methods improve the yields of all rice varieties evaluated so far – modern and traditional, improved and local. The highest yields have been attained with HYVs and hybrid varieties (all SRI yields &gt;15 t/ha), but ‘unimproved’ varieties can give yields in the 6-12 t/ha range when soil has been improved through SRI methods, so give the higher market price for these latter varieties, growing them can be more profitable for farmers.
  • SRI is often hard to accept because it does not depend on either of the two main strategies that made the Green Revolution possible. It does not require any change in the rice variety used (genotype) or an increase in external inputs. Indeed, the latter can be reduced. SRI methods improve the yields of all rice varieties evaluated so far – modern and traditional, improved and local. The highest yields have been attained with HYVs and hybrid varieties (all SRI yields &gt;15 t/ha), but ‘unimproved’ varieties can give yields in the 6-12 t/ha range when soil has been improved through SRI methods, so give the higher market price for these latter varieties, growing them can be more profitable for farmers.
  • 0906 Agricultural Development: What Comes After 'Modern Agriculture'?

    1. 1. Agricultural Development: What Comes After 'Modern Agriculture'? College of Humanities & Development CAU, Beijing, March 6, 2009 Norman Uphoff, CIIFAD
    2. 2. ‘ Modern Agriculture’ <ul><li>Developed during 20 th century has been the most successful system of production in history. However, it is also the most stressful for natural resources – for soil, water and air </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Between 1961 and 2001, when the world’s population grew by 100% , our total food production was increased by 180% </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>During this period, cereal production went up by 130% , averting major food shortfalls </li></ul></ul>
    3. 3. Question: How advisable is it to continue along our present technological path ? <ul><li>-- doing essentially more of the same ? </li></ul><ul><li>Or should we move in other directions ? </li></ul><ul><li>‘ Modern agriculture’ as developed and practiced in latter third of 20th century culminated in ‘ Green Revolution ’ </li></ul><ul><li>Should it be extended , even intensified ? </li></ul><ul><li>-- are there other, better alternatives ? </li></ul><ul><li>The Green Revolution is losing momentum; so consider agroecological alternatives </li></ul>
    4. 5. ‘ Modern Agriculture’ <ul><li>as developed during the 20th century began in the first half of the century with the industrialization of agriculture: </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Standardization of operations according to the best available scientific knowledge </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Mechanization of operations, making larger scale of production possible, linked with </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Labor-saving technologies that raised labor productivity and reduced the need for labor </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Use of chemical inputs to enhance soil fertility, achieve weed control & crop protection – agriculture as mechanical process </li></ul></ul>
    5. 6. ‘ Modern Agriculture’ <ul><li>accelerated in the latter half of 20th century being increasingly shaped according to scientific formulations of agriculture: </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Genetic potentials were more emphasized; although there was a focus on breeding in the 1st phase, this became major thrust , along with </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Input-dependence -- as breeding enhanced the input-responsiveness of genotypes -- also </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Energy-intensity was greatly increased, and </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Capital-intensity became greater with the continuing substitution of capital for labor  leading to ever larger-scale operations </li></ul></ul>
    6. 7. ‘ Modern Agriculture’ <ul><li>was widely expected to ‘ feed the world ’ – to avoid famine and promote development </li></ul><ul><li>Fixation on yield took precedence over either efficiency or sustainability in resource use </li></ul><ul><li>Total factor productivity was valued, but yield has been main yardstick of success, fixated on total production </li></ul><ul><li>Low prices were desired for political and poverty-reduction reasons, but these are disincentives for producers </li></ul>
    7. 8. Basic features of ‘Modern Agriculture’ <ul><li>MECHANIZATION – land-extensive strategy, monoculture, capital- and energy-intensive, plus labor-saving </li></ul><ul><li>RELIANCE ON EXOGENOUS INPUTS input-intensive, agrochemical solutions </li></ul><ul><li>GENETIC ENHANCEMENT – focus on genetic modification and biotechnology </li></ul><ul><li>GLOBALIZATION – intl. division of labor, driven by market forces; large production units; capital becomes the dominant factor of production > land </li></ul>
    8. 9. ‘ Post-Modern Agriculture’ <ul><li>Responds to new and changing set of real-world conditions </li></ul><ul><li>Will ‘re-biologize’ agriculture, giving more emphasis to ecological perspectives and microbiological knowledge </li></ul><ul><li>Will be more participatory , less expert-driven, with more concern for the environment </li></ul>
    9. 10. New 21st Century Realities: <ul><li>Reduced per capita availability of land & water for agricultural sector </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Population continues to grow, esp. in LDCs </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Land degradation and urban expansion are diminishing our area of arable land </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Competing demands for water are growing from industries and domestic consumption </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Precipitation and surface flows of WATER are jeopardized by climate change – both amount and predictability of water are at risk </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Must improve land & water productivity ! </li></ul></ul>
    10. 11. New 21st Century Realities: <ul><li>Energy costs are increasing , and are unlikely to return to 20th century levels </li></ul><ul><li>Diminishing returns to inputs are more and more evident, e.g., N use in China </li></ul><ul><li>Agrochemical ‘treadmill’ presents an uncertain future </li></ul><ul><li>Environmental quality ↓ -- soil, water, air </li></ul><ul><li>Yield stagnation with Green Revolution </li></ul><ul><li>Millions of poor households are still currently by-passed by GR technology </li></ul><ul><li>These not matters of opinion – REAL TRENDS </li></ul>
    11. 12. World Grain Production and Fertilizer Use, and Cumulative Increases by Decades Year Grain produc-tion ( mmt) Increase in production by decade Fertili-zer use (mmt) Increase in fertilizer use by decade 1950 631 -- 14 -- 1961 805 +174 (28%) 31 +17 (121%) 1969-71 1,116 +311 (39%) 68 +37 (113%) 1979-81 1,442 +326 (29%) 116 +48 (70%) 1989-91 1,732 +290 (20%) 140 +24 (21%) 1999-01 1,885 +153 (9%) 138 -2 (-1.4%)
    12. 13. <ul><li>Fortunately, there are new production opportunities that are breaking the rules of the ‘Green Revolution’ – example of the System of Rice Intensification (SRI) </li></ul><ul><li>SRI capitalizes upon what are referred to as GxE interactions ( genetic potential x environment ) that result in phenotypes </li></ul><ul><li>By changing management of plants, soil, water and nutrients , SRI methods give better phenotypes from any genotype </li></ul><ul><li>Agroecological approach reduces chemical inputs, with no need to modify genes </li></ul>
    13. 14. MADAGASCAR: SRI field, traditional variety, 2003
    14. 15. Cambodian farmer in Takeo Province, with rice plant grown from single seed using SRI methods with traditional variety
    15. 16. Nepali farmer in Morang District, with SRI plant from single seed
    16. 17. Tribal farmer in Jharkhand state of India, with a ‘ rainfed’ SRI plant with 65 tillers (110-day variety)
    17. 18. SRI NON-SRI Punjabi farmer in India showing difference between rice plant phenotypes with SRI and non-SRI practices
    18. 19. Vietnamese farmer in D ông Trù village, Hanoi Province, holding up SRI & regular rice plants in front of their fields – after typhoon has passed
    19. 20. 47.9% 34.7% “ Non-Flooding Rice Farming Technology in Irrigated Paddy Field” Dr. Tao Longxing, China National Rice Research Institute, 2004
    20. 21. How are these changes achieved? <ul><li>By different management practices for: </li></ul><ul><li>Plants – transplant very young seedlings 8-15 days old; singly -- 1 per hill, not more; quickly, gently, shallow; and widely spaced in square pattern , 25x25 cm apart or wider </li></ul><ul><li>Water – no continuous flooding of fields -- apply minimum or alternate wetting/drying </li></ul><ul><li>Soil – good leveling for water distribution; plus both passive and active soil aeration – use rotary hoe to control weeds, aerate soil </li></ul><ul><li>Nutrients – application of as much compost as possible, any biomass or organic matter </li></ul>
    21. 22. Conoweeder used in Sri Lanka
    22. 23. Rotary-hoe weeding of SRI rice paddies in Madagascar
    23. 24. Careful transplanting of single, young seedlings, widely spaced SRI CAN BE MECHANIZED: Costa Rican SRI with mechanized transplanting and harvesting -- 8 t/ha yield in first season
    24. 25. SRI practices usually result in: <ul><li>Higher yields by 50-100%, or more </li></ul><ul><li>Water reductions of 25-50% </li></ul><ul><li>No need for capital expenditure </li></ul><ul><li>No reliance on agrochemical inputs </li></ul><ul><li>Pest and disease resistance </li></ul><ul><li>Drought and lodging tolerance </li></ul><ul><li>Better grain quality </li></ul><ul><li>Lower costs of production by10-20% </li></ul>
    25. 26. I ndonesian farmer in Lombok Province comparing rice plants
    26. 27. Evaluation of SRI in Indonesia: <ul><li>Supervised by Nippon Koei TA team, over 9 seasons and across 3 provinces </li></ul><ul><li>Monitoring of on-farm comparison trials (N=12,133) on total of 9,429.1 ha </li></ul><ul><li>Average SRI yield = 7.61 t/ha vs. 4.27 t/ha (3.34 tons = 78% > farmer methods) </li></ul><ul><li>Water saving = 40% </li></ul><ul><li>Fertilizer applications reduced by 50% </li></ul><ul><li>Costs of production reduced by 20% </li></ul><ul><li>Net income: 6.2 m vs. 1.2 m Rupiahs/ha </li></ul>
    27. 28. What requirements/constraints ? <ul><li>Water control – need for best results; may not be possible in some places; improve with investment & organization </li></ul><ul><li>More labor during the learning phase; but SRI can even become labor-saving </li></ul><ul><li>Farmer skill and motivation – expect experimentation and adaptation; improve human capital; need extension system, but can spread farmer-to-farmer </li></ul><ul><li>Biomass supply – but can use fertilizer </li></ul><ul><li>Crop protection – may be necessary </li></ul>
    28. 29. Alternative PARADIGMS of Production <ul><li>‘ GREEN REVOLUTION’ was based on: </li></ul><ul><li>(a) Changing the genetic potential of plants, and </li></ul><ul><li>(b) Increasing the use of external inputs -- more water, fertilizer, insecticides, etc. </li></ul><ul><li>AGROECOLOGY (SRI) changes the way that plants, soil, water and nutrients are managed: </li></ul><ul><ul><li>(a) Promoting the growth of root systems and </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>(b) Enhancing the abundance and diversity of soil organisms to better enlist their benefits </li></ul></ul><ul><li>These changes give better PHENOTYPES – also with other crops in addition to rice </li></ul>
    29. 30. SWI wheat crop in Poland before going into winter dormancy
    30. 31. Finger millet in India: on right: local variety and traditional mgmt; center: improved variety with same mgmt; on left: improved variety with SRI mgmt
    31. 32. Reported yields of 125-235 t/ha compared with usual 65 t/ha SRI concepts and methods adapted to sugar cane (left) in Andhra Pradesh, India
    32. 33. Extensions of SRI to Other Crops: Uttarakhand / Himachal Pradesh, India Rajma (kidney beans) Manduwa (millet) Crop No. of Farmers Area (ha) Grain Yield (t/ha) % Incr. 2006 Conv. SRI Rajma 5 0.4 1.4 2.0 43 Manduwa 5 0.4 1.8 2.4 33 Wheat Resear-ch Farm 5.0 1.6 2.2 38 2007 Rajma 113 2.26 1.8 3.0 67 Manduwa 43 0.8 1.5 2.4 60 Wheat (Irrig.) 25 0.23 2.2 4.3 95 Wheat (Unirrig.) 25 0.09 1.6 2.6 63
    33. 34. Agroecological ‘secret’ can be found in the roots and in soil organisms <ul><li>Rice roots that are continuously flooded (growing in anaerobic soil conditions) are 78% degenerated by flowering phase (start of reproduction) (Kar et al., 1974) </li></ul><ul><li>Also, roots of flooded rice remain mostly in top 10-20 cm (Kronzucker et al., 1997) </li></ul><ul><li>Roots growing in unflooded, aerobic soil grow larger, deeper and retain their healthy white coloration – black or brown color is indicative of necrosis (dying back) </li></ul>
    34. 35. IRAN: SRI roots and normal (flooded) roots: note difference in color as well as size
    35. 36. Cuba – Two plants of the same age (52 DAP) and same variety (VN 2084)
    36. 37. Regression relationship between N uptake and grain yield for SRI and conventional methods (Barison, 2003) – same relation for P and K
    37. 38. Soil biota are not visible like roots <ul><li>But they provide many valuable services : </li></ul><ul><li>Improved soil structure/function – worms, etc. </li></ul><ul><li>Nitrogen fixation and phosphorus solubilization various kinds of bacteria (Turner/Haygarth, 2001) </li></ul><ul><li>Nutrient cycling , especially N – microbes, protozoa and nematodes (Bonkowski, 2004) </li></ul><ul><li>Acquisition of water and P – mycorrhizal fungi </li></ul><ul><li>Phytohormone production – bacterial, fungi </li></ul><ul><li>Induced systemic resistance – many microbes </li></ul>
    38. 39. ‘ Ascending Migration of Endophytic Rhizobia, from Roots and Leaves, inside Rice Plants and Assessment of Benefits to Rice Growth Physiology’ Feng Chi et al., Applied and Envir. Microbiology , 71 (2005), 7271-7278 Rhizob-ium test strain Total plant root volume/ pot (cm 3 ) Shoot dry weight/ pot (g) Net photo-synthetic rate (μmol -2 s -1 ) Water utilization efficiency Area (cm 2 ) of flag leaf Grain yield/ pot (g) Ac-ORS571 210 ± 36 A 63 ± 2 A 16.42 ± 1.39 A 3.62 ± 0.17 BC 17.64 ± 4.94 ABC 86 ± 5 A SM-1021 180 ± 26 A 67 ± 5 A 14.99 ± 1.64 B 4.02 ± 0.19 AB 20.03 ± 3.92 A 86 ± 4 A SM-1002 168 ± 8 AB 52 ± 4 BC 13.70 ± 0.73 B 4.15 ± 0.32 A 19.58 ± 4.47 AB 61 ± 4 B R1-2370 175 ± 23 A 61 ± 8 AB 13.85 ± 0.38 B 3.36 ± 0.41 C 18.98 ± 4.49 AB 64 ± 9 B Mh-93 193 ± 16 A 67 ± 4 A 13.86 ± 0.76 B 3.18 ± 0.25 CD 16.79 ± 3.43 BC 77 ± 5 A Control 130 ± 10 B 47 ± 6 C 10.23 ± 1.03 C 2.77 ± 0.69 D 15.24 ± 4.0 C 51 ± 4 C
    39. 40. Economic Evaluation (US$/ha) Tamil Nadu Agric. Univ. (N=100) Conventional practices SRI practices Income from grain (Rs. 5.00 / kg) $ 659 $ 870 I ncome from straw (Rs. 0.25 / kg) $ 49 $ 63 Gross return $ 708 $ 933 - minus costs of cultivation - $ 466 - $ 414 Net return/ha $ 242 $ 519 Water saving -- 40-50%
    40. 41. Incidence of Diseases and Pests Average of trial data (8 provinces) from Vietnam National IPM Program, 2005-2006 * Insects/m 2 Spring season Summer season SRI Plots Farmer Plots Differ-ence SRI Plots Farmer Plots Differ-ence Sheath blight 6.7% 18.1% 63.0% 5.2% 19.8% 73.7% Leaf blight -- -- -- 8.6% 36.3% 76.5% Small leaf folder* 63.4* 107.7* 41.1% 61.8* 122.3* 49.5% Brown plant hopper* 542* 1,440* 62.4% 545* 3,214* 83.0% AVERAGE 55.5% 70.7%
    41. 42. Sri Lanka rice fields: same variety, same irrigation system, and same drought : standard methods (left), SRI (right)
    42. 43. Agroecological Strategy: <ul><li>Smaller-scale intensive operations </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Achieve greater resource-efficiency </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Energy-saving and energy-efficiency </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Capitalize on synergies and symbioses </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Mobilize endogenous biological processes and potential in plants and soil </li></ul><ul><li>Foster greater resistance to biotic and abiotic stresses as new strategy </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Seek to “ climate-proof ” our agriculture </li></ul></ul>
    43. 44. Agroecological Alternatives <ul><li>Make greater use of organic inputs to maintain soil fertility </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Don’t feed the plant -- feed the soil, and get the soil to feed the plant </li></ul></ul><ul><li>More emphasis on local production and consumption </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Reduce energy requirements </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Generate local purchasing power </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Support health of soil, plants, people </li></ul>
    44. 45. THANK YOU E-mail address: [email_address] SRI home page: http://ciifad.cornell.edu/sri/

    ×