1. EVALUATION OF
THE SYSTEM OF RICE
INTENSIFICATION
IN BANGLADESH
Prof. A. M. Muazzam Husain
BRAC University, Dhaka, Bangladesh
WRRC, Tokyo-Tsukuba, Japan
November 4-7, 2004

2. What is SRI?
A system of irrigated rice crop management
to significantly increase production through
changes and integration of the management
of rice plants, soil, water and nutrients.
• Does not depend upon high-cost modern inputs
• Reduces farmers’ costs of production
• Helps make crop production more sustainable
and is environment friendly
• Easily accessible to resource-poor farmers
• Enhancement of food security

3. Relevance to Bangladesh
 Rice is main staple crop – 75% of cropped area
 High density of population – small farm size,
majority of farmers resource-poor
 HYV adoption increased production – but yield
growth has leveled out, with reduced profitability
 Hybrid rice and biotechnology may increase
productivity but dependent on high- cost inputs
 Biotech is still a debatable technology, with
possible health and environmental risk

4. Rice Sector Needs of Bangladesh
 Substantial & sustainable increase in yields –
to release land for high-value crops
 Reduction in cost of production & increase
in profitability for farmers
 Reduced requirement for high-cost inputs like
fertilizer, irrigation water, and insecticides
 Environment- friendly sustainable agriculture
 SRI has shown the potential to meet all of
these needs of the BD agricultural sector

5. SRI Trials in Bangladesh
 Started in 1999 after Bellagio Conference
paper on SRI reached BD
 Dept. of Agric. Extension (DAE) and NGOs
conducted initial trials in farmers’ fields
 BRRI conducted on-station trials
 Trials in farmers’ fields gave encouraging
results but BRRI on–station trials did not
 Need for systematic evaluation -- PETRRA
funded 3 sub-projects carried out over two
consecutive Boro season trials (2002 – 2004)

6. Findings from PETRRA evaluations
Sub-Project 36 02
 Implemented by 3 NGOs (BRAC, SAFE, POSD) and
a private company (Syngenta BD Ltd.)
 Participatory trials conducted in farmers’ fields in
4 districts, 8 sub–districts (upazila): in 2002-03, N =
487 farmers; in 2003-04, N = 791 farmers (plus 237)
 Results for both seasons were found encouraging:
• Number of participating farmers increased by
62% (111%) during second year
• Area under SRI increased by 91%

7. AGRONOMIC FINDINGS
 Tillersper hill were 95% higher during 1st
season and 60% higher during 2nd
season than under FP
 Effective tillers were 94% and 122%
higher during the 2 seasons respectively
 Length of panicle 11% higher in both
seasons
 Weight of 1000 grains 14% – 18% higher

8. Fig. 1: SRI yield gains, 2002 - 03
SRI Farmers' practice
10
9 8.1
8
7.03
6.34
7
6.1
5.9
5.9
5.25
6
Yield (t/ha)
4.7
5
4
3
2
1
0
BRAC POSD SAFE Syngenta

9. Fig. 2: SRI yield gains, 2003 - 04
10 SRI Farmers' practice
8.69
7.52
8
6.71
6.57
6.12
6.3
5.24
6
Yield (t/ha)
5.1
4
2
0
BRAC POSD SAFE Syngenta

10. Table 1. Yield gains of SRI over FP
Partners SRI yield gains SRI yield gains
2002-03 2003-04
(%) (%)
BRAC 37 30
POSD 21 25
SAFE 19 23
Syngenta 30 24

11. Fig. 3: Comparative net returns, 2002 - 03
SRI Farmers' practice
45262
42100
50000
38257
31865
40000
27765
24863
Net return (Tk/ha)
24120
30000
16655
20000
10000
0
BRAC POSD SAFE Syngenta

12. ECONOMIC EVALUATION
 Because of reductions in the cost of
production while yield increased,
farmers’ net returns were increased –
more than 50% on average

13. Fig. 4: Comparative net returns, 2003 - 04
SRI Farmers' practice
51557
60000
44772
39801
50000
38124
Net return (Tk/ha)
40000
28238
25939
24584
18988
30000
20000
10000
0
BRAC POSD SAFE Syngenta

14. Table 2: Profitability increase with SRI
2002-03 2003-04
Partner Profitability Profitability
organisations gain with SRI gain with SRI
(%) (%)
BRAC 82 73
POSD 59 62
SAFE 32 35
Syngenta 67 59

15. Perceptions of farmers on SRI
 No. of farmers and area under SRI increased
 Farmers confirmed increased yield from SRI
 Did not face any major pest/insect problems
 Thought that healthier SRI plants were more
resistant to pests/insects
 Larger no. of farmers used organic manure –
but needed training on preparing compost
 Faced irrigation management problems –
these need community approach to solve

16. More perceptions of farmers on SRI
 Partial SRI adoption was favored by many
farmers in some areas – accepting easier
practices such as early transplantation with
reduced no. of seedlings and wider spacing
 Difficult practices included:
- applying compost or organic manure
- alternate drying and wetting of fields
 However, even partial adoption had definite
positive effect on yield and profitability

17. Findings from Sub-Project 34 02
Implemented by BD Rice Research
Institute (BRRI) with local NGO partner
 Trials were conducted in farmers’ fields
in one district (N = 20 farmers, then 35)
 Results for both seasons were positive
– no detailed data on 2nd season
 SRI results were found to be better
than both FP and BRRI practices

18. Table 3: Agronomic performance
Agronomic SRI BRRI FP
features
Panicles (m2) 296 270 226
Filled grains 78 65 52
per panicle
Grain wt per No significant difference
1000 grains

19. Table 4: Comparative yields, returns,
and BCR of SRI, BRRI and FP
Indicator SRI BRRI FP
Yield (t.ha-1) 6.03 5.79 4.06
Net returns (Tk 51,255 49,215 34,510
ha-1)
Benefit-cost 1.9 1.8 1.3
ratio (BCR)

20. SOCIO-ECONOMIC PERFORMANCE
 SRI yields and net returns were 49%
higher than FP and 4% higher than BRRI
 Farmers’ perceptions in the area toward
SRI were positive; also many farmers
started their own partial adoption of SRI
 SRI was considered as specially suitable
for resource-poor farmers

21. Findings from Sub-Project 35 02
Implemented by BRRI with NGO partner
in three districts
 Trials were conducted both on
research station and in farmers’ fields
(N = 32 farmers, and then 39 farmers)
 SRI yields in one district were 17.5%
higher than under FP during 1st season
In 2nd season, SRI yields were 13% to
20% greater

22. Further Findings from Sub-Project 35 02
 In the two other districts, 1st season
SRI yields were less than FP, but then
they were higher during the 2nd season
 SRI costs were higher than FP in these
trials:
- Labour costs 19% higher
- Irrigation cost 33% higher

23. Summary of SP 35 02 Findings
 Average net returns from SRI were similar to FP
 Many of the SRI practices were followed incorrectly,
which affected the results
 Farmers’ perception of SRI was reported to be mixed
 However, farmer opinion was said to be universal in
favour of ‘improved practices’ (modified SRI)
 DAE and other extension organizations working with
project are showing interest to disseminate SRI
 Many local farmers have already started partial
adoption of SRI
 Report recommends further field verification of SRI

24. SRI NATIONAL WORKSHOP, 2003
 Seven papers presented - 3 by BRRI staff, and
4 by NGO/ DAE extension specialists
 Two BRRI papers did not have much positive
to report, but the 3rd was highly encouraging
 NGO/ DAE papers found encouraging results
 Gap between views of scientists and extension
specialists was apparent
 The farmers present expressed firmly positive
views on SRI

25. WORKSHOP RECOMMENDATIONS
 Initiateintegrated and coordinated
approach to evaluation and extension
involving farmers, scientists and
extension workers ( GO/NGO)
 Conduct further trials and experiments
on SRI to determine its potential in BD
 Seek donor assistance for the above

26. Some Limitations of SRI and Evaluation
 Trials were conducted for a short period
 Lack of proper understanding of SRI
 In some cases, faulty application was
made of SRI practices
 Lack of organic manure
 Problems faced in irrigation management
 Proper weeding not done to save costs
 Cost-effectiveness required in weeding

27. OVERALL FINDINGS ON SRI IN BD
 Overall experience shows encouraging picture
 Agronomic findings are favourable – with more tillers,
effective tillers, larger panicles, more filled grain, etc.
 Grain quality was also found to be better
 Yield increases were significant in most cases, up to
49% higher than yields with FP
 Profitability was much higher, up to 82% more
 Farmers’ perception was highly positive; many also
have adopted partial SRI on their own
 Extension personnel (GO/NGO) have positive attitude
 Some scientists have taken a positive attitude, some
others are still skeptical – no consensus

28. CONCLUSION
 SRI has shown its potential for improving
yield and profits of farmers in Bangladesh
 Gap still persists between results of
researchers on-station and farmers’ fields
 Further trials and experimentation on various
aspects of SRI are needed
 Government and donor support for more SRI
trials can be well justified
 GO/NGO collaboration is also needed

29. THANK YOU