1. The System of Rice Intensification (SRI) is a resource-saving, high-yielding rice farming method that can meet the needs of increased land and water productivity, accessibility for poor farmers, environmental friendliness, pest and drought resistance, and profitability for farmers. 2. SRI practices such as young seedlings, wider spacing, and intermittent flooding have been shown to increase yields by 50-100% with 25-50% less water and 10-20% lower costs of production compared to conventional methods across multiple countries. 3. SRI also provides benefits like reduced methane emissions, greater pest and disease resistance, stronger resistance to stresses like lodging and drought, and improved grain quality.

1. The System of Rice Intensification (SRI): Understanding this Resource-Saving, High-Yielding Rice Farming System and Its Implications for Agricultural Science Kyoto University, February 22, 2008 Norman Uphoff Cornell International Institute for Food, Agriculture and Development (CIIFAD) in cooperation with Nippon Koei

7. Cambodia, Takeo Province: rice plant grown from single seed, with SRI methods and trad. variety

8. Nepal, Morang District: Single rice plant grown with SRI methods

9. SRI NON-SRI India: Punjabi farmer showing difference in rice phenotypes

10. INDONESIA: Dried rice plants in Nippon Koei office, Jakarta

11. India, Maruteru Research Station, AP: roots of a single rice plant (MTU 1071)

12. Cuba: Two plants, same variety (VN 2084) and same age (52 DAP)

13. Microbial populations in rice rhizosphere as measured in TNAU analysis Micro-organisms Conventional rhizospheres SRI practice rhizospheres Total bacteria 88 x 10 6 105 x 10 6 Azospirillum 8 x 10 5 31 x 10 5 Azotobacter 39 x 10 3 66 x 10 3 Phospho-bacteria 33 x 10 3 59 x 10 3

15. 47.9% 34.7% “ Non-Flooding Rice Farming Technology in Irrigated Paddy Field” Dr. Tao Longxing, China National Rice Research Institute, 2004

17. Average super-rice YIELDS (kg ha -1 ) with new rice management (SRI) vs. standard rice management at different plant densities ha -1

18. Comparison of rice plant roots in North Bharat Chandra Nagar, Rajnagar Subdistrict, Tripura State Conventional rice plants (3) on left; and SRI rice plant (1) on left

19. 1. INCREASED YIELD Data from Department of Agriculture, State of Tripura, Rajnagar Subdistrict Office Area under paddy (ha) Paddy production (mt) Ave. yield (mt/ha) Area under SRI (ha) SRI production (mt) Ave. SRI yield (mt/ha) No. of fami-lies 2005-06 15,613 49,976 3.009 24.5 170.08 6.942 122 2006-07 15,632 50,976 3.261 2,300 15,669.9 6.813 5,335

20. Indonesia, Lombok Province: Rice plants same variety, same age

23. Trend in Decreasing Water Table Level in Punjab Statistics of DOA Punjab Year Affected area Depth of water level (in feet) 1973-74 3% 30 2005-06 30% 70 2023 Whole of Punjab? 160

26. INDIA: South Tripura District, Rajnagar Subdivision: Dimatali -- all tribal village, 21/78 farmers using SRI -- 6.5 t/ha SRI yield vs. 2.5 t/ha conventional -- two years earlier not even doing row planting

27. Socially Marginal Villages Visited in Teliamura Agricultural Sub-Division, West Tripura District, India Data from Tripura State Dept. of Agriculture G.P. Area Population Culti-vators SRI Culti-vators Paddy Area (ha) SRI Area (ha) North Maharanipur 1800 (90% STs) 632 143 (79%) 180 100 (56%) Maiganga 3648 (70% SCs) 822 200 (24%) 248 100 (40%) East Howaibari 1832 (40% SCs, 20% STs) 270 92 (34%) 85 54 (64%)

28. Paddy Yield by Socially Marginal Villages, Teliamura Sub-Division, by season, 2006-07

31. Incidence of Diseases and Pests Vietnam National IPM Program: average of data from trials in 8 provinces, 2005-06: 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 *Insects/ m 2 55.5% 70.7%

32. Pest abundance in nursery (TNAU) Figures in parentheses are transformed values ** Significant difference (P<0.001) Insects (damage or population size) SRI cultivation (mean ± SE) Conventional cultivation (mean ± SE) t value (difference) (SRI reduction) Cut worm (% damaged leaves per seedling) 0.0 ± 0.0 (0.0) 20.4 ± 4.8 (19.1) 16.1** ( ∞ ) Thrips (per seedling) 0.5 ± 0.2 (0.9) 6.1 ± 0.5 (2.5) 19.3** ( 92% ) Green leaf hopper (per seedling) 0.1 ± 0.0 (0.8) 0.4 ± 0.1 (0.9) 14.8** ( 75% ) BPH (per seedling) 0.0 ± 0.0 (0.0) 0.2 ± 0.0 (0.8) 11.5** ( ∞ ) Whorl maggot (% damaged leaves per seedling) 0.8 ± 0.2 (0.9) 9.3 ± 2.6 (9.1) 12.5** ( 91% )

33. Pest abundance in main field (TNAU) Figures in parentheses are transformed values ** significant difference (P<0.001) Insects (damage or Population size) SRI cultivation (mean ± SE) Conventional cultivation (mean ± SE) t value (difference) (SRI reduction) Whorl maggot (% damaged leaves per hill) 17.9 ± 1.9 (18.0) 23.2 ± 2.0 (19.1) 6.6** ( 23% ) Thrips (per hill) 6.6 ± 0.1 (2.2) 20.2 ± 2.0 (4.1) 12.2** ( 67% ) Green leaf hopper (per hill) 0.6 ± 0.1 (1.0) 1.1 ± 0.2 (1.2) 10.7** ( 45% ) BPH (per hill) 1.1 ± 0.2 (1.2) 2.7 ± 0.2 (1.8) 14.4** ( 60% ) Whorl maggot (% truncated leaves per hill) 5.6 ± 1.8 (5.9) 8.8 ± 1.4 (9.1) 4.5** ( 36% )

35. India, Tamil Nadu: rice plot in foreground is normal rice; no lodging on SRI plot in center

36. Vietnam: FFS farmer in D ông Trù village, Hanoi Province – after typhoon

37. Sri Lanka: rice fields of same variety, same irrigation system, and same drought -- left, conventional methods; right, SRI

39. Measured Differences in Grain Quality Conventional SRI Methods Characteristic Methods (3 spacings) Difference Paper by Prof. Ma Jun, Sichuan Agricultural University, presented at 10th conference on Theory and Practice for High-Quality, High-Yielding Rice in China, Haerbin, 8/2004 Chalky kernels (%) 39.89 – 41.07 23.62 – 32.47 ↓ 30.7% General chalkiness (%) 6.74 – 7.17 1.02 – 4.04 ↓ 65.7% Milled rice outturn (%) 41.54 – 51.46 53.58 – 54.41 ↑ 16.1% Head milled rice (%) 38.87 – 39.99 41.81 – 50.84 ↑ 17.5%

40. 8. HIGHER PROFITABILITY INCREASED PRODUCTION + LOWER COSTS OF PRODUCTION = MORE NET INCOME FOR FARMERS Average cost reduction/ha across 10 evaluations in 8 countries = 25% On-farm comparisons: N = 4,214

42. Country Evaluation by/for: Yield Increase Water-Saving Cost Reduction Increase in Net Income Comments BANGLADESH On-farm Evaluations (N=1,073) BRAC/SAFEBRRI/Syng-enta BD Ltd (Husain et al., 2004) 24% n.d. 7% 59% (32-82%) On-farm evaluations funded by IRRI under its PETRRA project with DFID CAM-BODIA National Survey (N=500) GTZ (Anthofer et al., 2004) 41% Flooding at TP reduced 96.3%->2.5% 56% 74% Survey of SRI and non-SRI users randomly sampled in 5 provinces; SRI use has grown to >70,000 farmers in 5 years Long-term Users (N=120) CEDAC (Tech, 2004) 105% 50% 44% 89% Small farmers who had used SRI methods consecutively for 3 years CHINA Village Study (N=82) China Agric. University (Li et al., 2005) 29% 44% 7.4% [ext. service promoting fertilizer & new seeds] 64% SRI use in village had gone from 7 in 2003, to 398 in 2004; farmers considered labor-saving main benefit (N=82)

43. Country Evaluation by/for: Yield Increase Water-Saving Cost Reduction Increase in Net Income Comments INDIA Tamil Nadu (N=100) Tamil Nadu Agric. Univ. (Thiyaga-rajan et al., 2004) 28% 40-50% 11% 112% On-farm comparisons in Tamiraparani Basin, supervised by TNAU and extension service Andhra Pradesh (N=1,535) Andhra Pradesh Agric. Univ. (Satyanara-yana, 2005) 38% 40% NA NA On-farm trials supervised by ANGRAU and State extension service centers West Bengal (N=108) IWMI-India (Sinha and Talati, 2005) 32% Rainfed version of SRI 35% 67% SRI use in villages had gone from 4 farmers to 150 in 3 seasons; now > 6,500 INDO-NESIA (N=1,849) Nippon Koei (Sato, 2006) 84% 40% 24% 412% 3 years of evaluation in Eastern. Indonesia; trials conducted on 1,363 ha

44. Country Evaluation by/for: Yield Increase Water-Saving Cost Reduction Increase in Net Income Com-ments NEPAL (N=412) Morang District Agr. Dev. Office (Uprety, 2005) 82% 43% 2.2% [rotary hoes not widely available] 163% Morang district users from 1 in 2003 to >1,400 in 2005, and > 2,000 in 2006 SRI LANKA District Surveys (N=120) Intl. Water Managemt Institute (IWMI) (Namara et al., 2004) 44% 24% 11.9-13.3% 90-117% Survey of SRI users and non-users who were randomly sampled in 2 districts , 60 farmers in each, half SRI, half non-SRI VIET-NAM FFS (N=60) National IPM Program (Dông Trù village) 21% 60% 24% 65% Record-keeping by Farmer Field School alumni on SRI results AVER-AGE 52% 44% 25% 128%

50. System of Finger Millet Intensification on left; regular management of improved variety and of traditional variety on right, picture courtesy of PRADAN, Jharkand

51. Winter wheat in Poland before going into winter dormancy

52. Liu Zhibin, seed multiplication farm, Meishan, Sichuan planting on raised beds with zero-tillage – 13.4 t/ha yield

53. SRI crop of G. Moghanraj Yadhav, Nagipattanam district, Tamil Nadu

55. Ascending Migration of Endophytic Rhizobia, from Roots and Leave, inside Rice Plants and Assessment of Benefits to Rice Growth Physiology Feng Chi et al., Applied and Envir. Microbiology , 71 (2005), 7271-7278 Rhizobium test strain Total plant root vol/pot (cm 3 ) Shoot dry wt/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

56. “ Productivity is increased [with SRI], and at the same time the environment is saved. . . . I want to urge everybody, starting with the Minister of Agriculture and everyone else -- let us support this SRI method with our maximum capacity.” -- Pres. S. B. Yudhoyono speaking at SRI Harvest Festival, Cianjur, July 30, 2007

59. FACTORIAL RESULTS (t/ha), ANJOMAKELY, 2001 [N=240] CONVENTIONAL Clay Loam Average Addition SS/20/3/NPK 3.00 (6) 2.04 (6) 2.52 (12) 1 SRI Practice SS/ 20 / 3 / C 3.71 (6) 2.03 (6) SS/20/ 1 /NPK 5.04 (6) 2.78 (6) SS/ 8 /3/NPK 7.16 (6) 3.89 (6) AS /20/3/NPK 5.08 (6) 2.60 (6) 5.25 (24) 2.83 (24) 4.04 (48) +1.52 2 SRI Practices SS/20/ 1 / C 4.50 (6) 2.44 (6) SS / 8 / 3 / C 6.86 (6) 3.61 (6) AS /20/ 1 /NPK 6.07 (6) 3.15 (6) AS /20/ 3 / C 6.72 (6) 3.41 (6) SS/ 8 / 1 /NPK 8.13 (6) 4.36 (6) AS / 8 /3/NPK 8.15 (6) 4.44 (6) 6.74 (36) 3.57 (36) 5.16 (72) +1.12 3 SRI Practices SS/ 8 / 1 / C 7.70 (6) 4.07 (6) AS /20/ 1 / C 7.45 (6) 4.10 (6) AS / 8 / 3 / C 9.32 (6) 5.17 (6) AS / 8 / 1 /NPK 8.77 (6) 5.00 (6) 8.31 (24) 4.59 (24) 6.45 (48) +1.29 ALL SRI PRAC TICES AS / 8 / 1 / C 10.35 (6) 6.39 (6) 8.37 (12) +1.92

60. FACTORIAL RESULTS (t/ha), MORONDAVA, 2000 [N=288] CONVENTIONAL HYV Traditional Average Addition SS/16/3/NPK 2.84 (6) 2.11 (6) 2.48 (12) 1 SRI Practice SS/ 16 / 3 / C 2.69 (6) 2.67 (6) SS/16/ 1 /NPK 2.74 (6) 2.28 (6) SS/ 8 /3/NPK 4.08 (6) 3.09 (6) AS /16/3/NPK 4.04 (6) 2.64 (6) 3.34 (24)(.021) 2.67 (24)(.007) 3.01 (48) + 0.53 2 SRI Practices SS/16/ 1 / C 2.73 (6) 2.47 (6) SS / 8 / 3 / C 3.35 (6) 4.33 (6) AS /16/ 1 /NPK 4.10 (6) 2.89 (6) AS /16/ 3 / C 4.18 (6) 3.10 (6) SS/ 8 / 1 /NPK 5.00 (6) 3.65 (6) AS / 8 /3/NPK 5.75 (6) 3.34 (6) 4.28 (36)(.000) 3.24 (36)(.000) 3.78 (72) + 0.77 3 SRI Practices SS/ 8 / 1 / C 3.85 (6) 5.18 (6) AS /16/ 1 / C 3.82 (6) 2.87 (6) AS / 8 / 3 / C 4.49 (6) 4.78 (6) AS / 8 / 1 /NPK 6.62 (6) 4.29 (6) 4.69 (24)(.000) 4.28 (24)(.000) 4.48 (48) + 0.70 ALL SRI PRACTICES AS / 8 / 1 / C 6.83 (6)(.000) 5.96 (6)(.000) 6.40 (12) +1.92