This picture was provided by Association Tefy Saina, showing Fr. de Laulanie the year before his death in 1995, at age 75.
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.
Tefy Saina is more comfortable communicating in French language, but it can communicate in English and reads English very well. CIIFAD maintains worldwide contacts on SRI through the internet. Queries are invited, directed to CIIFAD generally or to Norman Uphoff specifically. The SRI web page maintained by CIIFAD in cooperation with Tefy Saina has recent information on SRI experience in countries around the world.
0911 The System of Rice Intensification (SRI): The Improbable Journey of Norman Uphoff, CIIFAD
The System of Rice Intensification (SRI): The Improbable Journey of Norman Uphoff, CIIFAD
Origins of SRI Where does this innovation come from? How did I happen to get involved with SRI? What were my initial reactions to SRI?
Reservations What were my initial reservations about SRI? What led me to overcome these reservations?
Introduction of SRI to Asia Asia is the rice basket of the world, with centuries-old traditions surrounding the cultivation of this crop. What made me think that the Madagascar successes could be replicated there?
E-mail from Roland Bunch, 5/13/2003: Dear Norman, I am in Siem Reap, Cambodia, right now, visiting the ADRA program here. Yesterday, they gave us a report, according to which about a hundred farmers here tried out SRI last year. People were so afraid to try it (because of the small seedlings) that ADRA promised to replace any rice that a farmer lost as a result of trying it, i.e., anything less than the 1.0 t/ha that is the traditional average yield here.
The average yield for all the farmers trying out SRI was 2.5 t/ha! A 150% improvement! And not one single farmer claimed his yield insurance. i.e., not one got below 1.0 t/ha. And this in an area where virtually no one can control the amount of water in his/her paddy field. Now, every single member of the groups in which at least one farmer tried SRI last year has stated he/she wants to try SRI next year -- well over 500 people. Norman, this already IS a revolution! Sincerely, Roland Bunch
Status of SRI: As of 1999 Known and practiced only in Madagascar
SRI benefits have been demonstrated in 34 countries in Asia, Africa, and Latin America Before 1999: Madagascar 1999-2000: China, Indonesia 2000-01: Bangladesh, Cuba Cambodia, Gambia, India, Laos, Myanmar, Nepal, Philippines, Sierra Leone, Sri Lanka, Thailand 2002-03: Benin, Guinea, Mozambique, Peru 2004-05: Senegal, Mali, Pakistan, Vietnam 2006: Burkina Faso, Bhutan, Iran, Iraq, Zambia 2007: Afghanistan, Brazil 2008: Egypt, Rwanda, Congo, Ecuador, Costa Rica, Ghana > 1 million farmers/acres Now in 2009, SRI benefits have been validated in 36 countries of Asia, Africa, and Latin America
AFGHANISTAN : SRI field in Baghlan Province, supported by Aga Khan Foundation Natural Resource Management program
Costs of rice production & net returns in real terms (kg ha -1 ), 2002-2004 [Both costs of production and yields are expressed in same physical terms: kg of rice] Year (N) Production cost (kg ha -1 ) Rice yield (kg ha -1 ) Net income (kg ha -1 ) Before FFS After FFS % Change Before FFS After FFS Before FFS After FFS Incre-ment 2002 202 1,865 1,791 -4.0 2,084 4,271 219 2,480 2,261 2003 198 1,713 1,797 4.9 1,882 4,078 169 2,281 2,112 2004 212 1,794 1,798 0.2 2,249 4,764 455 2,966 2,511 Mean 612 1,791 1,795 0.2 2,076 4,379 285 2,584 2,299
What Else Can SRI Do for Poor Households? <ul><li>Greater protection against : </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Biotic stresses : pests/diseases </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Abiotic stresses : drought, storm damage, extreme temperatures </li></ul></ul><ul><li>More net food production: about ~15% higher milling outturn </li></ul><ul><li>Shorter time to maturity – 1-3 wks </li></ul>
Farmer Perceptions Even in areas where SRI is being practiced, farmers often only adopt SRI on a portion of their fields. What are the main obstacles that farmers see to adopting SRI and what can be done to address these?
Main Obstacles 1. Water control 2. Biomass for compost 3. Enough labor & time to learn 4. Farmer skill and motivation 5. Pest control (sometimes) 6. ∆ Mental preconceptions – e.g., perception that SRI is too risky
Going from an NGO-based Initiative to a National Program NGOs , including Oxfam America, have played a leadership role in the introduction of SRI methods in several countries. Governments are now expressing an interest in using SRI as part of their development efforts. What challenges are associated with this transition ?
1: Establish SRI ‘alliances’ or ‘coalitions’ (Orissa, Cambodia, Vietnam) 2: Avoid converting SRI into a ‘technology’ (technology transfer) 3: Keep SRI flexible, always learning, and farmer-centered 4: Improve the scientific basis 5: Reorient agricultural sector-- ‘post-modern agriculture’
Scaling-Up What additional investments will be needed for SRI to become a dominant paradigm for agricultural intensification in main rice-growing regions of the developing world?
THANK YOU <ul><li>SRI website: http://ciifad.cornell.edu/sri/ </li></ul><ul><li>Email: [email_address] or [email_address] or </li></ul><ul><li>Email: [email_address] </li></ul>