Farming System Approach For FoodSecurity And Sustained Rural Economy Speaker - Sandeep Singh
INDIAN agriculture has challenge of providing national as well as household food and nutritional security to its teeming millions in a scenario of plateauing genetic potential in all major crops. declining productivity in vast tracts of rainfed/ dryland areas constituting approximately 44.2% of net cultivated area. Wide-spread occurrence of ill-effects of green revolutiontechnologies in all intensively cultivated areas is threatening thesustainability of the important agricultural production systems andnational food security..
The human population of India has increased to 1210.2million at a growth rate of 1.76 per cent in 2011 and isestimated to increase further to 1530 million by 2030.On the other hand our national food grain production for past3-4 years is hovering around 234 million tonnes.There are projections that demand for food grains wouldincrease from 234 million tonnes to 345 million tonnes in2030.The average size of the landholding has declined to 1.21 haduring 2009-10 from 2.30 ha in 1970-71.
Declining size of landholdings without any alternativeincome augmenting opportunity is resulting in fall offarm income and causing agrarian distress.To meet the multiple objectives of poverty reduction,food security, competitiveness and sustainability,several researchers have recommended the farmingsystems approach to research and development.
Farming systemFarming system is the scientificintegration of different interdependentand interacting farm enterprises for theefficient use of land, labour and otherresources of a farm family whichprovide year round income to thefarmers specially located in thehandicapped zone.
What is itFarming system approach envisages theintegration of agroforestry, horticulture, dairy,sheep and goat rearing, fishery, poultry, pigeon,biogas, mushroom, sericulture and by-productutilization of crops with the main goal ofincreasing the income and standard of living ofsmall and marginal farmers.
Role of Farming System Food security Provide balanced food Quality food basketHigh productivity and enhanced farm income Effective recycling of resources Minimizing environmental pollution Employment generation
Role of Farming System Food security: Food security is defined as the balanced food supply and effective demand for food. Ensuring food security to the individual wards off the gender- based intra-household discrimination. Thus food security needs to be redefined as “livelihood security for the household and all members within, which ensures both physical and economic asses to balanced diet, safe drinking water, environmental sanitation, primary education and basic health care.
Table 1: Per capita availability and deficit of different componentsFood Items Per capita ICMR dietary Per capita deficit Availability guidelines for IndiansMilk 216 grams/day 300 milli litre/day 34 grams/dayEgg 30 eggs/annum 180 eggs/annum 150 eggs/annumMeat 3.24 kg/annum 10.95 kg/annum 7.71 kg/annumFood grains 444 g/day - - GOI 2003
Economic and ecological access to food could be onlyensured by adopting farming system approach consisting of: Change from commodity-based to resource- based planning. Integrated use and management of land, water and human resources to maximize income and employment.
Provides Balanced FoodThere is need of farming system which has severalcomponents like dairy, poultry, goatry, fisheries etc. alongwith crop production.In this way, farming system would not meet the food for butalso cater the need of protein, fat, vitamins and mineralsrequired for good health.Conjunction of horticulture and agroforestry with croppingwould ensure the seasonal access to fruits, fuel, fodderand fibre.
Quality food basket As the living status is improved the requirement of cereals will be decreased and supplemented by other items viz. milk, egg, meat, fruit etc. Integration of allied enterprises with cropping increase the nutritive value of the products. Cropping with pigeon+fish+mushroom founds to have the highest protein of 1963 kg. Integration of cropping with fish + mushroom and pigeon/poultry could result in 31 to 52 % higher protein yield than cropping alone.
Higher productivity and enhanced farm income• Integration of fish in rice system decreasing the rice grain yield due to presence of fish trenches occupying 10% of the rice area, however, additional income increased.• The profit can be increased more when fish, vegetable system and livestock include in rice – rice farming system.
Table 2: Economics of rice-poultry-fish-mushroom system of Integrated Farming SystemComponent Integrated farming system Conventional cropping system Additional (0.40 ha) (0.40 ha) net income from IFS over CCS Gross Cost of Net Gross Cost of Net (Rs) income production income income production income (Rs) (Rs) (Rs) (Rs) (Rs) (Rs)Crop 19076 11398 7678 13536 7202 6334 1344Poultry 2861 1944 917 - - - 917Fisheries 3568 1486 2082 - - - 2082mushroom 6156 5078 1078 - - - 1078Total 31661 19906 11755 13536 7202 6334 5421 Tamil Nadu Rangasamy et al. 1996
Table 3: Productivity (rice equivalent yield) and profitability of different components under integrated farming systemTreatments Productivity kg-1 Cost of Net returns (Rs) B:C ratio Area(ha) ha-1year) Cultivation (Rs)Integrated farming systemRice-rice system 0.33 2175 8683 7387 1.84Hybrid maize- 0.20 908 3697 3540 1.96sunflowerVegetables 0.20 2136 4712 3673 2.00Fodder + goat 0.21 1339 6289 7060 2.75Fish 0.06 203 515 926 2.23Poultry (0.005) 327 2145 300 1.13Total 1.00 7088 18225 22887 1.97Conventional 1.00 5611 25503 17293 1.64Rice-rice Karnataka Channabasavanna et al. 2009
Effective recycling of resourcesThe effective recycling of farm resources is possible byadoption of farming system research.Crop by-product is utilized as fodder for animals, andanimal by-product i.e. milk, and dung may be utilized forincreasing income and soil fertility, respectively.
Resource recycling with productivity linkages in lowland farming systems
Table 4: Nutrient value of recycled poultry manureParticulars Content ( per cent ) Nutrient added (kg) N P K N P KRaw poultry manure 4.81 3.06 1.44 33.7 21.4 10.1Settled silt of the pond in 3.52 1.38 1.06 158.4 62.1 47.7which poultry dropping isused as source of fish feedIntegration of poultry + fish + mushroom + cropping appliedwith recycled poultry manure sustained the productivity of soilthrough addition of bio-resource residue with better NPKnutrient supply potential. Tamil Nadu Rangasamy (1996)
Poultry and fish in lowland of Tamil Nadu
Resource flow in crop+dairy+biogas+spawn+siliviculture in integrated farming system
Minimize environmental pollution • In Punjab, Haryana and western Utter Pradesh, burning of rice residue is common practice, which increased the concentration of green house gases in atmosphere, in addition to huge amount of nutrient loss. • Such situation could be avoided by introduction of some more enterprises like animal husbandry on the farm. • Rice straw may be used as animal feed.
Employment generation• Since crop based agriculture is highly season specific and time bond, the intensity of labour requirement increases during sowing and harvesting time of crops.• For rest of the time farmers sitting idle if they do not have off-farm activities. This leisure time could be utilized effectively by adoption of farming system, which keeps the whole family busy throughout the year.
Table 5 : Cost return and employment potential under different mixed farming (MF) system Gross Net EmploymentFarming system Expenditure income returns man days (Rs. ha-1) (Rs. ha-1) year-1Arable 14,171 38,264 24,093 257MF with 2 cows 34,972 72,640 37,668 374MF with 2 buffalo 47,257 71,545 24,288 390MF with 2 cow + fish 35,170 76,064 40,894 374MF with 2 buffaloes +fish 47,455 74,969 27,514 390MF with 2 cows + 15 goats +10 43,311 88,222 44,911 380poultry + 10 ducks + fishMF with 2 buffaloes +15 goats + 55,596 87,127 31,531 39610 poultry + 10 ducks + fish Madhya Pradesh MF= Mixed Farming Tiwari et al. 1998
Farming System ResearchFarming System Concept was developed in 1970.It is designed to understand farmer priorities, strategies and resourceallocation decisions.Used in conjunction with on-farm research to identify and adopttechnologies useful to location specific problems of farmers.Farming systems research and development approach associated withsmall farmers and focuses on their conditions and aspirations.Its goal to develop sustainable land use system which will optimizeresource use and increase income and employment for farm families.
Farming System Research For Different Agro Climatic Zones In India • Pastures with forestry, goats,High altitude cold rabbits, and settled agricultural deserts crops like millets, wheat, barley, and fodders. • Animal husbandry with the camels, Arid and desert sheep and goats, and growing with region fodder and field crops. • Horticultural crops as a major Western and component and agriculture mainlycentral Himalayas on the hill terraces and slopes with maize, rice, wheat, pulses and fodder crops.
• Primitive crop husbandry with rice, Eastern millets, pulses etc. Agro forestry Himalayas system are also common. Piggery and poultry are the chief livestock activity. • Intensive crop husbandry like rice-Indo-Gangetic wheat-maize/mustard/pulses and Plains livestock, dairy, cattle and buffaloes. Central And • Cotton-sorghum-millets/pulses with Southern dairy cattle, sheep and goats and Highlands poultry are the secondary livestock and animal husbandry enterprises.
• Major activity on plantation crops, cultivating rice and pulses are the secondary agricultural activity. Cattle, Western Ghats sheep and goats are the livestock components which in most parts, are maintained as large herds. • Rice cultivation with other enterprisesDelta And Coastal like fishery, poultry and piggery, etc., Plains capture fisheries of marine ecosystem is a specialized enterprise.
Table-6. Economics of different components of F.S.R. unit Total labour Total Gross return Net return Return per (man days) expenditure (Rs. ha-1) (Rs. ha-1) rupee Components (Rs) invested (Rs)Field crops 98.2 3,315 8,954 5,638 2.70Multi-storeyed cropping 87.0 3,831 12,920 9,089 3.37Pomology 18.4 900 2,366 1,466 2.63Olericulture 96.4 3,812 12,114 8,302 3.18Floriculture 4.0 125 225 100 1.80Pisciculture 31.0 3,722 20,325 16603 5.46Poultry 23.0 9,240 10,221 981 1.11Duckery 23.0 5,387 6,100 713 1.13Mushroom 180.0 18,184 31,040 12,856 1.70Apiary 1.0 170 1,350 1,180 7.94Biogas 11.0 600 2031 1,431 3.38Total 573.0 49,286 107,646 58,360 2.18 Bhubaneshwar Behera and Mahapatra (1999)
Table 7: Major zone and livelihood production systems in the Himachal Pradesh Zones Climate Altitude Livelihood production Himachal Pradesh (m amsl) system Zone I Sub-tropical Agri- Livestock Una,Bilaspur,Hamirpur, 200-800 Fish-Horticulture And parts ofSubordinate Sirmaur,Kangra Solanand low hills and Chamba district Zone II Sub-humid Agri-horti-Livestock- Tehsils of Palampur and 801-1800 fishery Kangra of Kangra Mid-Hills District, Rampur tehsil of Shimla District and parts of Mandi ,Solan,Kullu,Chamba,Sir maur and Shimla Districts Zone III Temperate Hort. -Livestock-pasture- Shimla district(except 1801-2200 agriculture- fishery Rampur tehsil)and parts High hills of Kullu,Solan,Chamba,Man di,Kangra and Sirmaur districts Zone IV Dry Temperate - Alpine, Livestock-silvipasture- Kinnaur,Lahaul and >2200 agriculture- hort. Spiti,and pangi andVery high hills Bharmour tehsils of Chamba district
Integrated farming system• Integrated Farming Systems a component of farming system research introduces a change in farming techniques for maximum production in a cropping pattern and take care of optimal utilization of resources.• It focused round a few selected, inter-dependent, inter-related and often inter-linking production systems based on few crops, animals and related subsidiary professions.
Different component of Integrated Farming System Field crops Crop production Vegetables Fruit cultivation Poultry farming Livestock integration Duckery Aquaculture Agroforestry Bee- keeping Mushroom cultivation Bio-gas plant
Integrated approach in wetland situation• Rice based cropping with poultry-cum-fish culture• Crop-poultry-fishery• Cropping with dairy• Cropping with goat rearing• Cropping with aquaculture
Integrated farming systems forirrigated areasCropping with dairy, biogas andsilivicultureIntegrated farming system forrainfed areasCropping with goat and silivpastureIntegrated farming systems forhill regionsMajority of the farmers in the regionare maintaining fruit tree like apple,dairy cattle and the major source ofgreen fodder comes from lopping ofthe fodder trees and locally availablegrasses.
Objectives of Integrated farming systemsTo identify existing farming systems in specific area and assesstheir relative viability.To formulate farming system models involving main and alliedenterprises for different farming situations.To ensure optional utilization and conservation of availableresources and effective recycling of farm residues within system.To maintain sustainable production system without damagingresources base environment.To raise overall profitability of farm household by complementingmain allied enterprises with each other.
Analysis of existing farming systems in terms of resource useefficiency, production and productivity, income, employmentand sustainability across different agro-climatic zones.Evaluation and identification of farming system throughparticipatory approach that ensures threshold level of incomefor the livelihood security.Developing appropriate institutional and market linkageincluding value addition for enhancing sustainability.Imparting training and capacity building of variousstakeholders on IFS.
Goal of Integrated Farming Systems Maximization of yield of all component enterprises Provide steady and stable In-come Rejuvenation of system’s productivity Achieve agro-ecological equilibrium
Advantages of Integrated Farming System• Increased Productivity• Profitability• Sustainability• Balanced Food• Environmental safety• Recycling of resources• Income round the Year
Adoption of New Technology Meeting fodder crisis Solving Fuel and Timber crisis Employment generation Improves literacy Increasing the standard of living of the farmer
Integrated crop-livestock farming system Key aspects Integrated Crop- Livestock Farming System
Table 8: Income and employment generation under different farming systemsFarming system Human Net returns Additional Additional net labour (Rs.) employment returns over (MWDs) over agriculture agriculture (Rs.) (MWDs)Agriculture + 521 35293 359 27842dairyAgriculture + 528 26830 366 19379poultryAgriculture+ 486 14665 324 7214sheep rearingAgriculture alone 162 7451 - - Telengana MWD: man working day Radha et al. ( 2000)
Table 9: System productivity (sorghum grain-equivalent yield), employment generation and economic in integrated farming systemsFarming system Productivity Employment Cost of t/ha Man days/ha System Net productio product returns n ivity (× 2000-01 2001-02 2000-01 2001-02 (103Rs/ha 3/ha) t/ha 10 )FS1 cropping alone 0.69 1.84 28 32 1.27 5.520 1.17FS2 crop +pigeon+ goat+ 4.23 5.21 110 116 4.72 18.90 1.49 agroforestry + farm pond FS3 crop+pigeon+Buffalo 11.20 10.79 140 142 10.99 43.65 22.67 +agroforestry+farm pondFS4 crop+pigeon+goat+ Buffalo+agroforestry 12.18 12.59 160 166 12.39 52.85 21.82 +farm pond Tamil Nadu Shekinah and Sankaran (2007)
Table 10: Gross and net income from different IFS modelsIFS model Gross income Net income B:C ratio Employment (Rs. ha-1) (Rs. ha-1) generation (man days year-1)Crop Alone 28,196 6,171 1.28 185Crop + Goat+ Poultry 51,771 24,821 1.92 297Crop + Goat+ Poultry + Dairy 1,02,083 42,625 1.72 343Crop +Goat+ Poultry + Sheep 67,776 21,796 1.47 343Crop +Goat+ Poultry +Sheep +Dairy 1,22,921 52,794 1.75 389Mean 74,549 29,641 1.63 311Sd± 38,116 18,305 0.25 78CV% 51.1 61.8 15.5 25 Kovilpatti U.Solaiappan et al. 2007
Table 11: Productivity, profitability and employment generation in integrated farming system Gross Expenditure Net returns Employment System income (Rs ha-1) (Rs ha-1) generated (Rs ha-1) (man days)Crops + Cattle +Poultry + Fish 5,75,214 1,34,049 4,41,165 346Crop CultivationAlone 4,53,819 96,053 3,57,766 225Additional Benefit 1,21,395 - 83,399 121 Andaman and Nicobar Ravisankar et al. (2007)
Table 12: Fodder, fuel-wood and protein yields of tree species in sole and agroforestry system during different years treatment Fodder Fuel-wood Crude protein ( dry weight, kg/ha) (dry weight, kg/ha) (kg/ha) 1999- 2000- 2001-02 1999- 2000-01 2001-02 1999- 2000-01 2001-02 2000 01 2000 2000 Agroforestry Albizia Lebbeck + chickpea 21 159 158 17 213 324 5.0 30.0 28.2 Azadirachta indica + chickpea 32 299 310 47 361 428 5.4 39.5 52.0 Dalbergia sisso + chickpea 242 358 446 377 743 1104 41.6 54.8 69.0 Acacia nilotica + chickpea 241 302 423 1044 1361 1724 35.9 39.9 70.3 SOLE TREES Albizia lebbeck 31 203 249 47 109 487 7.1 40.6 44.8 Azadirachta indica 46 198 185 104 255 298 7.4 25.7 31.0 Dalbergia sisso 191 191 455 559 313 942 1112 33.6 68.3 Acacia nilotica 139 390 494 676 1761 1894 20.3 50.7 80.6 CD (p = 0.05) 74 171 244 207 410 516 13.1 26.2 36.3 Uttar Pradesh Prasad et al. 2008
Table 13: Benefit : cost ratio, net present worth (NPW) and pay back period (PBP) of various systemsTreatment At 12 % discount rate At 18 % discount rate NPV B:C PBP NPV B:C PBP (x 103 Rs) ratio (years) (x 103 Rs) ratio (years)AgroforestryAlbizia lebbeck 27.24 1.42 1 20.34 1.40 1Azadirachta 26.46 1.40 1 19.48 1.38 1indicaDalbergia sisso 35.40 1.55 1 25.86 1.50 1Acacia nilotica 37.34 1.58 1 28.38 1.55 1Sole crop 48.68 1.99 36.88 1.95SOLE TREESAlbizia lebbeck 4.62 1.46 7 1.68 1.20 10Azadirachta 4.53 1.38 8 1.27 1.12 10indicaDalbergia sisso 15.62 2.31 6 9.28 1.92 6Acacia nilotica 23.43 3.17 5 15.17 2.81 5 Uttar Pradesh Prasad et al. 2008
Constraints and Opportunities • Lack of appropriate technology1. • Lack of farmers participatory research2. • Inadequate Training3. • Lack of rural infrastructure4.
Future research thrust Need to study the sustainability of the identified systems under different topographical situations in the long run including high value crops. Need to study the nutrient dynamics of soil with continuous cropping and recycling of manurial resources with different systems over time. Modeling of the identified farming system options to suit a given agro-climatic and socio-economic situation. Need to identify the constraints in adoption of identified farming systems by the farmers for further refinement.
ConclusionEfficient utilization of scarce and costly resources is the need of the hour tomake crop production a viable proposition in the present day competitivescenario.Following the concept of Integrated farming systems through supplementationof allied agro-enterprises by recycling the waste of one enterprise in another isa right step in this direction.It provides alternate and sustainable avocation to marginal and sub-marginalfarmers. Fruit, mushroom, apiary, animal production and poultry have beenmore viable with them.
The crop residues and biomass available in plenty in the cropproduction system need to be properly managed to harness fullbenefits.Improving the integrated approach not only enhances farmincome but also overcomes environmental pollution.A better planning and utilization of the available resources willusher in bright prospects for the farm economy as a whole.