Farming System Approach

Farming System Approach

• 1.
  HPAU, Palampur, Himachal Pradesh
• 2.
  Farming System ApproachFor Food Security And Sustained Rural Economy Speaker - Sandeep Singh
• 3.
  Introduction
• 4.
   INDIAN agriculturehas 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 revolution technologies in all intensively cultivated areas is threatening the sustainability of the important agricultural production systems and national food security. .
• 5.
  The human populationof India has increased to 1210.2 million at a growth rate of 1.76 per cent in 2011 and is estimated to increase further to 1530 million by 2030. On the other hand our national food grain production for past 3-4 years is hovering around 234 million tonnes. There are projections that demand for food grains would increase from 234 million tonnes to 345 million tonnes in 2030. The average size of the landholding has declined to 1.21 ha during 2009-10 from 2.30 ha in 1970-71.
• 6.
  Declining size oflandholdings without any alternative income augmenting opportunity is resulting in fall of farm income and causing agrarian distress. To meet the multiple objectives of poverty reduction, food security, competitiveness and sustainability, several researchers have recommended the farming systems approach to research and development.
• 7.
  Farming system Farming system is the scientific integration of different interdependent and interacting farm enterprises for the efficient use of land, labour and other resources of a farm family which provide year round income to the farmers specially located in the handicapped zone.
• 8.
  What is it Farmingsystem approach envisages the integration of agroforestry, horticulture, dairy, sheep and goat rearing, fishery, poultry, pigeon, biogas, mushroom, sericulture and by-product utilization of crops with the main goal of increasing the income and standard of living of small and marginal farmers.
• 9.
  Role of FarmingSystem Food security Provide balanced food Quality food basket High productivity and enhanced farm income Effective recycling of resources Minimizing environmental pollution Employment generation
• 10.
  Role of FarmingSystem 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.
• 11.
  Table 1: Percapita availability and deficit of different components Food Items Per capita ICMR dietary Per capita deficit Availability guidelines for Indians Milk 216 grams/day 300 milli litre/day 34 grams/day Egg 30 eggs/annum 180 eggs/annum 150 eggs/annum Meat 3.24 kg/annum 10.95 kg/annum 7.71 kg/annum Food grains 444 g/day - - GOI 2003
• 12.
  Economic and ecologicalaccess to food could be only ensured 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.
• 13.
  Provides Balanced Food Thereis need of farming system which has several components like dairy, poultry, goatry, fisheries etc. along with crop production. In this way, farming system would not meet the food for but also cater the need of protein, fat, vitamins and minerals required for good health. Conjunction of horticulture and agroforestry with cropping would ensure the seasonal access to fruits, fuel, fodder and fibre.
• 14.
  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.
• 15.
  Higher productivity andenhanced 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.
• 16.
  Table 2: Economicsof rice-poultry-fish-mushroom system of Integrated Farming System Component 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 1344 Poultry 2861 1944 917 - - - 917 Fisheries 3568 1486 2082 - - - 2082 mushroom 6156 5078 1078 - - - 1078 Total 31661 19906 11755 13536 7202 6334 5421 Tamil Nadu Rangasamy et al. 1996
• 17.
  Table 3: Productivity(rice equivalent yield) and profitability of different components under integrated farming system Treatments Productivity kg-1 Cost of Net returns (Rs) B:C ratio Area(ha) ha-1year) Cultivation (Rs) Integrated farming system Rice-rice system 0.33 2175 8683 7387 1.84 Hybrid maize- 0.20 908 3697 3540 1.96 sunflower Vegetables 0.20 2136 4712 3673 2.00 Fodder + goat 0.21 1339 6289 7060 2.75 Fish 0.06 203 515 926 2.23 Poultry (0.005) 327 2145 300 1.13 Total 1.00 7088 18225 22887 1.97 Conventional 1.00 5611 25503 17293 1.64 Rice-rice Karnataka Channabasavanna et al. 2009
• 18.
  Effective recycling ofresources The effective recycling of farm resources is possible by adoption of farming system research. Crop by-product is utilized as fodder for animals, and animal by-product i.e. milk, and dung may be utilized for increasing income and soil fertility, respectively.
• 19.
  Resource recycling withproductivity linkages in lowland farming systems
• 20.
  Table 4: Nutrientvalue of recycled poultry manure Particulars Content ( per cent ) Nutrient added (kg) N P K N P K Raw poultry manure 4.81 3.06 1.44 33.7 21.4 10.1 Settled silt of the pond in 3.52 1.38 1.06 158.4 62.1 47.7 which poultry dropping is used as source of fish feed Integration of poultry + fish + mushroom + cropping applied with recycled poultry manure sustained the productivity of soil through addition of bio-resource residue with better NPK nutrient supply potential. Tamil Nadu Rangasamy (1996)
• 21.
  Poultry and fishin lowland of Tamil Nadu
• 22.
  Resource flow incrop+dairy+biogas+spawn+siliviculture in integrated farming system
• 23.
  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.
• 24.
  Employment generation • Sincecrop 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.
• 25.
  Table 5 :Cost return and employment potential under different mixed farming (MF) system Gross Net Employment Farming system Expenditure income returns man days (Rs. ha-1) (Rs. ha-1) year-1 Arable 14,171 38,264 24,093 257 MF with 2 cows 34,972 72,640 37,668 374 MF with 2 buffalo 47,257 71,545 24,288 390 MF with 2 cow + fish 35,170 76,064 40,894 374 MF with 2 buffaloes +fish 47,455 74,969 27,514 390 MF with 2 cows + 15 goats +10 43,311 88,222 44,911 380 poultry + 10 ducks + fish MF with 2 buffaloes +15 goats + 55,596 87,127 31,531 396 10 poultry + 10 ducks + fish Madhya Pradesh MF= Mixed Farming Tiwari et al. 1998
• 26.
  Farming System Research FarmingSystem Concept was developed in 1970. It is designed to understand farmer priorities, strategies and resource allocation decisions. Used in conjunction with on-farm research to identify and adopt technologies useful to location specific problems of farmers. Farming systems research and development approach associated with small farmers and focuses on their conditions and aspirations. Its goal to develop sustainable land use system which will optimize resource use and increase income and employment for farm families.
• 27.
  Farming System ResearchFor 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 mainly central Himalayas on the hill terraces and slopes with maize, rice, wheat, pulses and fodder crops.
• 28.
  • Primitive crophusbandry 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.
• 29.
  • Major activityon 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 enterprises Delta And Coastal like fishery, poultry and piggery, etc., Plains capture fisheries of marine ecosystem is a specialized enterprise.
• 30.
  Table-6. Economics ofdifferent 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 2.70 Multi-storeyed cropping 87.0 3,831 12,920 9,089 3.37 Pomology 18.4 900 2,366 1,466 2.63 Olericulture 96.4 3,812 12,114 8,302 3.18 Floriculture 4.0 125 225 100 1.80 Pisciculture 31.0 3,722 20,325 16603 5.46 Poultry 23.0 9,240 10,221 981 1.11 Duckery 23.0 5,387 6,100 713 1.13 Mushroom 180.0 18,184 31,040 12,856 1.70 Apiary 1.0 170 1,350 1,180 7.94 Biogas 11.0 600 2031 1,431 3.38 Total 573.0 49,286 107,646 58,360 2.18 Bhubaneshwar Behera and Mahapatra (1999)
• 31.
  Table 7: Majorzone 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 of Subordinate Sirmaur,Kangra Solan and 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 and Very high hills Bharmour tehsils of Chamba district
• 32.
  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.
• 33.
  Different component ofIntegrated Farming System Field crops Crop production Vegetables Fruit cultivation Poultry farming Livestock integration Duckery Aquaculture Agroforestry Bee- keeping Mushroom cultivation Bio-gas plant
• 34.
  Integrated approach inwetland situation • Rice based cropping with poultry-cum-fish culture • Crop-poultry-fishery • Cropping with dairy • Cropping with goat rearing • Cropping with aquaculture
• 35.
  Integrated farming systemsfor irrigated areas Cropping with dairy, biogas and siliviculture Integrated farming system for rainfed areas Cropping with goat and silivpasture Integrated farming systems for hill regions Majority of the farmers in the region are maintaining fruit tree like apple, dairy cattle and the major source of green fodder comes from lopping of the fodder trees and locally available grasses.
• 36.
  Objectives of Integratedfarming systems To identify existing farming systems in specific area and assess their relative viability. To formulate farming system models involving main and allied enterprises for different farming situations. To ensure optional utilization and conservation of available resources and effective recycling of farm residues within system. To maintain sustainable production system without damaging resources base environment. To raise overall profitability of farm household by complementing main allied enterprises with each other.
• 37.
  Analysis of existingfarming systems in terms of resource use efficiency, production and productivity, income, employment and sustainability across different agro-climatic zones. Evaluation and identification of farming system through participatory approach that ensures threshold level of income for the livelihood security. Developing appropriate institutional and market linkage including value addition for enhancing sustainability. Imparting training and capacity building of various stakeholders on IFS.
• 38.
  Goal of IntegratedFarming Systems Maximization of yield of all component enterprises Provide steady and stable In-come Rejuvenation of system’s productivity Achieve agro-ecological equilibrium
• 39.
  Advantages of IntegratedFarming System • Increased Productivity • Profitability • Sustainability • Balanced Food • Environmental safety • Recycling of resources • Income round the Year
• 40.
   Adoption ofNew Technology  Meeting fodder crisis  Solving Fuel and Timber crisis  Employment generation  Improves literacy  Increasing the standard of living of the farmer
• 41.
  Integrated crop-livestock farmingsystem Key aspects Integrated Crop- Livestock Farming System
• 42.
  Table 8: Incomeand employment generation under different farming systems Farming system Human Net returns Additional Additional net labour (Rs.) employment returns over (MWDs) over agriculture agriculture (Rs.) (MWDs) Agriculture + 521 35293 359 27842 dairy Agriculture + 528 26830 366 19379 poultry Agriculture+ 486 14665 324 7214 sheep rearing Agriculture alone 162 7451 - - Telengana MWD: man working day Radha et al. ( 2000)
• 43.
  Table 9: Systemproductivity (sorghum grain-equivalent yield), employment generation and economic in integrated farming systems Farming 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 1.17 FS2 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 pond FS4 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)
• 44.
  Table 10: Grossand net income from different IFS models IFS 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 1.28 185 Crop + Goat+ Poultry 51,771 24,821 1.92 297 Crop + Goat+ Poultry + Dairy 1,02,083 42,625 1.72 343 Crop +Goat+ Poultry + Sheep 67,776 21,796 1.47 343 Crop +Goat+ Poultry +Sheep +Dairy 1,22,921 52,794 1.75 389 Mean 74,549 29,641 1.63 311 Sd± 38,116 18,305 0.25 78 CV% 51.1 61.8 15.5 25 Kovilpatti U.Solaiappan et al. 2007
• 45.
  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 4,41,165 346 Crop Cultivation Alone 4,53,819 96,053 3,57,766 225 Additional Benefit 1,21,395 - 83,399 121 Andaman and Nicobar Ravisankar et al. (2007)
• 46.
  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
• 47.
  Table 13: Benefit: cost ratio, net present worth (NPW) and pay back period (PBP) of various systems Treatment 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) Agroforestry Albizia lebbeck 27.24 1.42 1 20.34 1.40 1 Azadirachta 26.46 1.40 1 19.48 1.38 1 indica Dalbergia sisso 35.40 1.55 1 25.86 1.50 1 Acacia nilotica 37.34 1.58 1 28.38 1.55 1 Sole crop 48.68 1.99 36.88 1.95 SOLE TREES Albizia lebbeck 4.62 1.46 7 1.68 1.20 10 Azadirachta 4.53 1.38 8 1.27 1.12 10 indica Dalbergia sisso 15.62 2.31 6 9.28 1.92 6 Acacia nilotica 23.43 3.17 5 15.17 2.81 5 Uttar Pradesh Prasad et al. 2008
• 48.
  Constraints and Opportunities • Lack of appropriate technology 1. • Lack of farmers participatory research 2. • Inadequate Training 3. • Lack of rural infrastructure 4.
• 49.
  • Policy implication 5. • Inadvertent avoidance of farm women 6. • Socio-economic constraints 7. • Inadequate institutional support 8.
• 50.
  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.
• 51.
  Conclusion Efficient utilization ofscarce and costly resources is the need of the hour to make crop production a viable proposition in the present day competitive scenario. Following the concept of Integrated farming systems through supplementation of allied agro-enterprises by recycling the waste of one enterprise in another is a right step in this direction. It provides alternate and sustainable avocation to marginal and sub-marginal farmers. Fruit, mushroom, apiary, animal production and poultry have been more viable with them.
• 52.
  The crop residuesand biomass available in plenty in the crop production system need to be properly managed to harness full benefits. Improving the integrated approach not only enhances farm income but also overcomes environmental pollution. A better planning and utilization of the available resources will usher in bright prospects for the farm economy as a whole.