The document discusses the application of the System of Rice Intensification (SRI) in Vietnam, particularly in the Thuy Lam commune, highlighting its benefits over conventional rice cultivation methods. Key advantages include increased yields, reduced pesticide use, and improved economic efficiency, along with strategies for further expansion and farmer engagement. Additionally, it identifies the need for collaboration among communities and institutions to enhance SRI adoption and address limitations such as resource availability.

1. SRI applicationSRI application in Vietnamin Vietnam
Farmer group in Thuy Lam Commune, Dong Anh District, Hanoi,
applying SRI methods to production of traditional sticky rice
Ngo Tien Dung,
Deputy Director General – Plant Protection
Department (PPD), MARD

2. - Rice cultivation: 7.4 millions ha/year
- Rice production: 38.9 mill tons of
paddy rice/year
- Corn area: 1.14 million ha
- Vegetable area: 720,000 ha
- Coffee area: 525,100 ha
- Sugarcane area: 270,000 ha
VIETNAM
VIETNAM

3. There are several existing problems in
rice cultivation:
• Overuse of pesticides
• Overuse of chemical fertilizers
(especially nitrogen)
• High transplanting density
BackgroundBackground

4. BackgroundBackground
Causing problems:
• Rice crop is susceptible
to pests, resulting in
decreased yield, less
economic efficiency, and
deteriorating
environmental quality.
• Pesticides kill natural
enemies, causing pest
outbreaks
• Overuse of chemicals
(fertilizer, pesticide, etc.)
will pollute the
environment, affecting
environmental health.
Hopper burn

5. • In 2003, National IPM Program Vietnam introduced SRI to
the farmers for experimental application.
• From 2003 to 2004, farmer groups under IPM/BUCAP
auspices applied SRI under various practice conditions
• In years 2005 and 2006, SRI was applied in demonstration
plots of 2-5 ha that showed SRI having any advantages in
comparison with conventional practice (DANIDA support)
• In 2007, Vietnam conducted a pilot model of “community-
based SRI application” on the large scale of 170 ha in Ha
Tay (supported by OXFAM America)
• On 15 Oct. 2007, the Ministry of Agriculture and Rural
Development (MARD) issued a decision acknowledging
SRI as an ‘advanced technology’
BackgroundBackground

6. • From Sept. 2007, OXFAM America launched a
3-year program “Advancing Small Farmers in
Mekong Region with SRI” (VIE 034/07) to assist
Vietnam for scaling up the SRI utilization
• Programme has been conducted in collaboration
of the Government and NGOs in Vietnam: the
Plant Protection Department under MARD;
Oxfam Quebec; and Centre for Sustainable
Rural Development (SRD), as well as Oxfam
America
BackgroundBackground

7. Background: Project since 2003Background: Project since 2003
Implementing
agency:
Plant Protection Department, MARD
Partners: SEARICE, Oxfam America, Oxfam Quebec, Center
for Sustainable Rural (SRD), Oxfam Belgium,
Hanoi Agriculture University, Thai Nguyen
University, Women’s Unions, Farmers’ Union,
Japan International Volunteer Center (JVC), World
Vision, FAO regional Vegetable IPM Programme
Donors: Oxfam America, Denmark (DANIDA)
Trainers active: 294 government; 43 farmers
2010 SRI area 286,053
Farmers applyFarmers applyinging
SRISRI in 2010:in 2010:
781,282781,282 (( 7171 % female)% female)
Main crops: Rice, potato, soybean

8. • Community-based Farmer Field SchoolsCommunity-based Farmer Field Schools
(FFS)(FFS)
Approach:Approach:
IPM farmerIPM farmer
study group instudy group in
Dong HoiDong Hoi
Commune,Commune,
Dong AnhDong Anh
District, HanoiDistrict, Hanoi
study on SRIstudy on SRI

9. • Community-based Farmer Field SchoolCommunity-based Farmer Field School
(FFS)(FFS)
Approach:Approach:
Purposes:
• Strengthen farmers’ capability with self-developing
mechanisms to manage their resources.
• Institutionalize SRI applications in the commune level

10. Develop-
ment of
SRI
should
go
through a
series of
stages
Steps to utilize SRI:
Farmer group in Hoa Binh Province doing observations
in their study field

11. Steps to utilize SRI:
Full draining of the field
1st stage (first season activities): study the
principles of SRI through the Farmer Field
School (FFS) process with farmers managing
together a trial/demonstration field
Young seedlings

12. 2nd stage (2nd and 3rd season activities):
practicing the utilization on SRI in a larger
scale (within 5 ha)
Steps to utilize SRI:
Making the beds 2 meters wide Canal made between two beds

13. 3rd stage (after two or three seasons):
extension of SRI in the whole community
Steps to utilize SRI:
SRI applied in
50 ha of
traditional sticky
rice in Thuy
Lam Commune,
Dong Anh
District, Hanoi,
in summer crop
season, 2010

14. • 4th stage: farmer groups will continue to
improve SRI techniques and improve
cultivation practice in order to have better
production and better market access.
(Stage 4 can be incorporated in stage 3)
Steps to utilize SRI:

15. Burning straw and
stubble might kill
natural enemies and
harm the soil ecology;
also health hazard

16. Farmers develop minimum tillageFarmers develop minimum tillage
with potato productionwith potato production
Basal fertilizer application
Mulching
Farmers observe agro-ecosystem

17. Farmers develop minimum tillageFarmers develop minimum tillage
with potato productionwith potato production
In comparison with conventional
practice, these new practices:
- Reduce soil preparation labor by 40%
- Reduce harvest labor by 70%
- Increase yield by 8.3-20%
- Increase profits by 31%

18. Develop rice production in compliance
with VietGAP standard
SRI FFS Alumni in Dong Phu Commune, Chuong My
District, Hanoi, cooperate with a private company to
develop rice production in compliance with VietGAP
(Good Agricultural Practice) standard

19. s SRI Conventional
Comparison of SRI and ConventionalComparison of SRI and Conventional
Seedling age 2 – 2,5 leaf age 4 – 5 leaf age
Seedling/hill 1 seedling/hill 3 – 5 seedlings/hill
Seedlings/m2
11 – 32 / m2
80 – 150 seedlings/m2
Water management Soil aeration Keep standing water
Fertilizer Nutrient management Technical package

20. Same variety as with SR
Rice was lodged becau
strong wind
Sheath blight disease w
SRI field in Dong Anh, Hanoi:SRI field in Dong Anh, Hanoi:
- Stems are strong, no lodgingStems are strong, no lodging
- Sheath blight disease <5%Sheath blight disease <5%
- Stems are more strong- Stems are more strong
- Pest and disease is low- Pest and disease is low
SRI fieldSRI field Conventional fieldConventional fieldSRI tolerant toSRI tolerant to
lodginglodging

21. SRI tolerant to pestsSRI tolerant to pests
Table 4: Number of sprayings per season, by province, 2005-2006
Province Number of sprays/season
SRI Farmer Difference
Yen Bai 1 3 2
Hanoi 1 2 1
Ha Tay 0.5 1.5 1
Hai Dương 1 2.5 1.5
Hung Yen 2 5 3
Thai Binh 1 2 1
Hai Phong 2 4 2
Ha Nam 2 4 2
Ninh Binh 1 1.5 0.5
Averge 1.25 2.75 1.5

22. SRI tolerant to pestsSRI tolerant to pests
Table 5: Level of sheath blight infestation, different provinces, 2005-2006
Province Spring season Summer season
SRI Farmer Difference SRI Farmer Difference
Yen Bai - - - 8.3 45.5 82%
Ha Tay 2.6 15.5 83% 11.2 25.7 56%
Hai Phong - - - 1.2 18.5 94%
Thai Binh 5.2 12.5 58% 2.9 18.6 84%
Hai Duong 8.5 18.8 54% 7.0 14.6 52%
Hung Yen 9.8 27.5 64% 3.2 19.5 84%
Ha Nam 9.6 25.6 6e% 3.8 14.5 74%
Nam Dinh 4.9 6.2 21% 2.1 10.3 80%
Ninh Binh 2.6 9.6 73% 4.7 10.8 57%
Average 6.7 18.1 63% 5.2 19.8 74%

23. SRI tolerant to pestsSRI tolerant to pests
Table 6: Leaf blight, different provinces, summer season, 2005-2006
Province SRI Farmer Difference
Yen Bai 0.5 32.5 98%
Ha Tay 0.3 52.7 99%
Thai Binh 33.1 51.3 36%
Ha Nam 5.7 20.8 73%
Nam Dinh 7.0 21.7 68%
Ninh Binh 4.7 39.0 88%
Average 8.55 36.3 77%

24. SRI tolerant to pestsSRI tolerant to pests
Table 7: Small leaf folder , different provinces, 2005-2006 (insects/m2
)
Province Spring season Summer season
SRI Farmer Difference SRI Farmer Difference
Hai Duong 13.2 26.2 49% 9.6 23.0 58%
Hung Yen 57.0 108.0 47% 140.0 252.0 44%
Thai Binh 53.0 74.0 28% 39.5 60.0 35%
Ha Nam 90.0 135.0 43% 60.0 120.6 50%
Nam Dinh 68.2 123.0 44% 62.5 122.1 49%
Ninh Binh 99.0 180.0 45% 59.5 156.8 62%
Average 63.4 107.7 41% 61.8 122.3 49%

25. SRI tolerant to pestsSRI tolerant to pests
Table 8: Brown plant hopper, different provinces, 2005-2006 (insects/m2
)
Province Spring season Summer season
SRI Farmer Difference SRI Farmer Difference
Ha Tay 1,020 3,200 68% 1,900 4,230 55%
Hai Duong 387 1,413 79% 471 3,115 85%
Hung Yen 525 1,352 61% 300 8,000 96%
Hai Phong - - - 428 1,960 78%
Thai Binh 290 940 69% 400 1,238 68%
Ha Nam 508 1,060 45% 81 3,090 99%
Nam Dinh 490 1,050 53% 710 2,125 67%
Ninh Binh 580 1,060 45% 71 1,950 96.%
Average 542 1,440 62% 545 3,214 83%

26. Increased Rice YieldIncreased Rice Yield
Table 12: Rice yield, different, 2006 (tons/ha)
Province Spring season Summer season
SRI Farmer Difference SRI Farmer Difference
Yen Bai - - 6.8 6.5 4.6%
Ha Tay 5.9 5.3 10.9% 5.8 5.1 13.7%
Ha Nam - - - 6.5 6.0 8.3%
Nam Dinh 7.5 7.3 2.7% 7.0 6.7 4.5%
Ninh Binh 7.0 6.6 6.1% 6.6 5.1 29.4%
Hung Yen 6.4 6.0 6.7% 6.0 5.0 20.0%
Hai Duong 6.8 5.7 19.3% 6.8 5.6 21.4%
Hai Phong - - - 6.3 5.2 21.1%
Thai Binh 7.0 6.1 14.8% 6.9 6.3 30.2%
Average 6.8 6.2 9.7% 6.5 5.7 14.0%

27. Economic EfficiencyEconomic Efficiency
Table 13: Economic efficiency of SRI application
Province Increase in profit between SRI and farmer fields
(1000 VND)
Spring season Summer season Average
Ha Tay 3,598 3,185 3,391
Ha Nam - 2,587 2,587
Nam Dinh 782 1,736 1,259
Ninh Binh 2,301 2,527 2,414
Hung Yen 1,845 2,411 2,128
Hai Duong 1,804 2,339 2,071
Hai Phong - 2,611 2,611
Thai Binh 1,920 2,108 2,014
Average 2,042 2,438 2,240

28. Reduced Cost of ProductionReduced Cost of Production
per kilogram pf paddyper kilogram pf paddy
Table 14: Per kilogram cost of paddy production, different provinces (VND)
Province Spring season Summer season
SRI Farmer Difference SRI Farmer Difference
Yen Bai - - - 772 1,016 244
Ha Tay 1,228 1,623 395 1,264 1,893 629
Ha Nam - - - 1,976 2,390 414
Nam Dinh 1,270 1,447 177 1,373 1,585 212
Ninh Binh 1,084 1,360 276 1,506 2,112 606
Hung Yen 1,178 1,578 400 1,466 2,349 883
Hai Duong 1,367 1,575 207 1,462 1,774 312
Hai Phong - - - 1,595 2,276 681
Thai Binh 1,307 1,904 597 1,402 2,103 701
Average 1,239 1,581 342 1,424 1,944 520

29. SRI Application andSRI Application and
Water SavingWater Saving
Summer seasons 2005
& 2006
Summer season 2008
Farmers saved about
30% of water volume
Reduced irrigation cost
by 33% to 40-50%

30. LimitationsLimitations
• SRI irrigation management needs a
strong collaboration among the
community
• Financial support for expansion is still
limited
• Organic manure resources are limited;
need to make better use of straw and
other biomass to reduce fertilizer need

31. Strategy:Strategy:
• Strengthen collaboration with Cooperatives,
Mass Organizations (Farmers’ Unions,
Women’s Unions, Youth Unions…) for
better support of farmer groups to develop
SRI in their localities
• Priority is given to women’s participation in
the learning process to improve their
knowledge and skills needed to identify
problems and find solutions to solve
problems.

32. Strategy:Strategy:
• Diversify the communication work in order
to disseminate and share better the
experiences and achievements of SRI
among communities and to advocate the
policy support for SRI expansion
• Build up the core farmers as resource
persons in each commune
• Study the potential and conditions for
market access of SRI produce (higher
quality)

33. • Develop weeding and aeration tools for
local conditions, and improve their supply
• Improve soil ecology: minimum tillage,
inter-cropping with beans, adding green
manure crop
Strategy:Strategy:

34. Thank you for your attentionThank you for your attention