By Kong Kea Project Management Unit, Cambodia

1. SUSTAINING AND ENHANCING THE MOMENTUM
FOR INNOVATION AND LEARNING AROUND THE
SYSTEM OF RICE INTENSIFICATION (SRI) IN THE
LOWER MEKONG RIVER BASIN
01-02 November 2018, Bangkok, Thailand
Kong Kea,
Project Management Unit
Final Workshop

2. Content
1. Overall Objective
2. Organization structure of SRI-LMB in Cambodia
3. Target areas
4. Major activities planned and implemented in 2014,
2015 and 2016/2017 for FPAR
5. Yield gains and cost-benefit analysis across the
FPARs
6. What are the areas where inputs costs were
reduced/increased (e.g. seed, water, labour,
chemical, manure, etc.)
7. Key learnings and trends and sharing to other
project
8. Recommendation for future activities

3. 1. Overall Objective
• To develop common understanding among participants about the
concept and principles of System of Rice Intensification (SRI), and
relevance rice production in rain-fed ecosystem;
• To develop practical understanding of setting field
experiments, observation of the key indicators, develop data
formats and data analysis from actual field;
• To understand FPAR process and it concepts and discuss the
curricula and session plan for the upcoming FPAR;
• To discuss and integrate genders aspect into learning curricula and
practice of FPAR process;
• To learn about Monitoring, Evaluation and Learning (MEL)
aspects to support FPAR works

4. 2. Organization Structure
General Directorate of Agriculture
National IPM Programme
Training Expert
PMU & FAO-IPM
Provincial Department
of Agriculture
(LMU coordinator)
Provincial Department
of Agriculture
(LMU coordinator)
Provincial Department
of Agriculture
(LMU coordinator)
District Agricultural Office District Agricultural Office District Agricultural Office
Local NGOsAcademic School

5. 3. Target areas
• There are 3 provinces, Takeo, Kampot and
Kampong Speu province.
• In each province, three districts were selected
for implementation the project.
• In each district, four target communes were
selected for implementation.

6. SRI target area in Cambodia
SRI target

7. 11/19/2018 7
SRI target in Kampong Speu Province

8. SRI target in Takeo Province

9. SRI target in Kampot Province

10. 4. Major activities and
outputs from 2014 to 2017

11. 4.1 Inception workshop
• In 2014 one National Inception and Planning
Workshop was organized is to kick start by informing
larger audience about the project, its goal and
objectives, revisit the project defenition , goals,
overall workpla for Cambodia;
• There were 44 participants (9 women) invited from
Regional FAO-IPM, Regional Coordinator SRI-LMB
project, FAOR,​​ Oxfam, HEKS, Srer Khmer,​
CENTDOR, ​RUA, PDA, PMU, LMU, and Farmer
Trainers from Takeo, Kampot and Kampong Speu
province.

12. • Three mini-TOT on Farmer Participatory Action
Research (FPAR) and SRI were conducted from 28 June
2014 until 28 November 2014 at Central Farmer
Participatory Action Research (CFPAR).
• 81 participants (23 women) to train Farmer Trainers to
understand about the project, its goals, objectives, work
plans and carry out FPAR on SRI and assist farmers set
up participatory action research by themselves in their
respective province.
4.2 Mini ToT

13. • CFPAR Field Day was held on 28th November 2014
involving 107 participants ( 29 women).
• The main objective of Field Day is to bring participants
and guests to participate in the evaluation of experiments
conducted at CFPAR, show result from season-long ToT,
and get impression and advice from donor and General
Directorate of Agriculture (GDA).

14. 4.3 Farmer Training
Year
FPAR Post-FPAR
No.
FPAR
Total
farmers
Women No.
FPAR
Total
farmers
Women
2014 36 1032 634 (61.4%) 0 0 0
2015 36 1024 663 (64.7) 36 879 622 (71%)
2016 45 1337 764 (57.1%) 36 859 579 (67.4%)
2017 10 150 89 (59.3%)
Grand total 127 3543 2150(60.68) 72 1738 1201 (69.1%)

15. 4.4 FPAR and post-FPAR activities

16. • 7 Field Day were conducted with 680
participants (349 women).
• The Field Days were conducted for
sharing the achievement of FPAR
implementation to other farmers,
officers and other related stakeholders.
4.5 FPAR Field Day

17. • Six LMU Workshops were conducted at all
target Provinces.
• 192 participants (49 women) including
Regional Coordinator SRI-LMB project,
PMU, Oxfam, Srer Khmer, RUA, LMU, and
Farmer Trainers from Takeo, Kampot and
Kampong Speu province.
4.6- LMU workshop

18. • LMU Workshop were organized to
reflect on last year FPAR
implementation and reviewing
project planning in order to inform
the initiating of the next FPAR, and
to discuss about learning,
innovation and challenging which
could inform policy advocacy and
communication option and strategy
formulation.

19. 4.7- National review and planning workshop
• In November 2017, two days National
Reviewing and Planning workshop
was organized by Project
Management Unit (PMU) and FAO-
IPM involving 50 participants (14
female) including Regional
Coordinator SRI-LMB project,
• This workshop aims to reviewing
project planning and show results of
project implementation

20. 4.8- Farmer exchange visit
• A Farmer Exchange Visit was made to
Thailand in November 2014
involving 10 participants (2 women)
including NTE, LMU, District and
Farmer Trainers.
• The objective of the Farmer Exchange
Visit was to strengthen the capacity of
Farmer and District Trainers for
designing, conducting, evaluating,
and managing experiments .

21. 5. Yield gains, and cost-benefit
analysis across the FPARs

22. Comparison on yield and net return between SRI and
FP plot using transplanting method

23. Comparison on yield and net return between SRI and
FP plot using direct seeding method

24. Comparison on the effect of using different
seed rate/ha

25. Comparison on the effect of transplanting different number of seedling/hil

26. Comparison on the effect of planting with different
spacing

27. 6. What are the areas where inputs
costs were reduced/increased

28. Diagram above illustrates 23% of FPAR used seed rate by transplanting from 25 to
50Kg/ha,10% used seed rate from 51 to 100 Kg/ha, 5% applied seed rate less than 25Kg/ha
and only 1% of them used seed rate from 101 to 150Kg/ha. In contrast mostly of Non-FPAR
and Control used seed rate from 51 to 100Kg/ha, 11 to 12% used seed rate from 25 to
50Kg/ha, around 10% used seed less than 25Kg/ha and 2% of Control farmers used seed from
101 to 150Kg/ha.
0.00
5.00
10.00
15.00
20.00
25.00
30.00
Less than 25kg 25-50kg 51-100kg 101-150kg more than 150kg
Percent
Seed rate for transplanting
FPAR
NFPAR
Control

29. Diagram above presents 27 to 44% of three farmer groups ( FPAR, Non-FPAR and Control)
used seed rate by direct seeding from 51 to 100Kg/ha, 7 to 17% used seed rate from 101 to 150
Kg/ha, 6 to 12% applied from 25 to 50Kg/ha and small amount of them from 1 to 5% used
seed rate more than 150Kg/ha.
0.0
5.0
10.0
15.0
20.0
25.0
30.0
35.0
40.0
45.0
50.0
Less than 25kg 25-50kg 51-100kg 101-150kg More than 150kg
Percent
Seed rate for Direct seedling
FPAR
NFPAR
Control

30. Diagram above shows the Non-FPAR and Control farmers got rice yield less
than 2t and 2.1 to 2.5t/ha more than FPAR farmer. In contrast the FPAR farmers
got rice yield from 2.6 to more than 4tons per ha more than Non-FPAR and
Control farmer. In general, the FPAR farmer got more rice yield than Non-
FPAR and Control farmer.
0.0
5.0
10.0
15.0
20.0
25.0
30.0
35.0
40.0
45.0
50.0
<= 2tons 2.1 to 2.5t 2.6 to 3 t 3.1 to 3.5 t 3.6 to 4 t > 4 tons
Percent
Rice Yield (t/ha)
FPAR
N-FPAR
Control

31. Diagram above illustrates mostly farmer ( 35 to 41%)of three studied group
(FPAR, Non-FPAR and Control) expended 301 to 400$/ha, while 25 to 28% of
them paid more than 400$/ha. However, small amount of farmer from 14 to
18% expended less than 250$/ha. In general the FPAR expended the production
lower than Non- FPAR and Control farmer.
0.0
5.0
10.0
15.0
20.0
25.0
30.0
35.0
40.0
45.0
Less than 250$ 251-300$ 301$-400$ >400$
Percent Rice Production Expenditure ($) FPAR
Non-FPAR
Control

32. Diagram above presents the constrain of SRI adaptation of FPAR farmer. 40%
and 25% of them identified the lack of labour and lack of water are the main
constrain of SRI technique adaptation. However, 8% of FPAR farmer explained
that SRI is difficult to apply.
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
45
No labor No water Difficult Lack variety Just train
Percent Constrain of SRI Adaptation

33. Diagram above shows four farmer suggestions. High price rice and low cost of
chemical material were suggested by mostly farmer followed by water access
New technique in crop production and new variety.
0
10
20
30
40
New tech High price
rice, Low cost
Chemical
Water Access New Variety
Percent
Farmer Suggestion
FPAR
N-FPAR
Control

34. • Amount of seed reduced from about 40-60kg/ha
• The amount of organic fertilizers put for rice
production increased.
• Pesticide application reduced since they know
about rice ecosystem.
• The labor for production increase for
transplanting and taking care of their rice field
such as manual weeding and land preparation.
•

35. 6- Lesson Learnt
• The quality of FPAR is depending on the facilitation skills
and technical knowledge of SRI Trainers, and frequently
monitor by PMU officer and LMU.
• The successfulness of field experiment is depending on
the site selection, the activeness of cooperator farmer, and
often follow up from SRI Team.
• Farmers believed that they can plant the traditional rice
variety in September and early of October when they
faced problem with drought for long time.
• Lack of labor is the main constrain for promoting SRI.
• SRI principle especially transplanting in row and sigle
seedling applied in rice seed production and some of
FPAR alumni were contracted by Food Bossting
Programme.

36. 7- Conclusion
• In the condition of rain-fed low land, it is very hard to
apply all of SRI principles because of many reasons such
as climate condition, economic situation, household labor,
paddy field condition, irrigation scheme etc.
• Even some SRI practices applied, rice yield and economic
efficiency be increased either transplanting and direct
seeding methods,
• Applying SRI farmers need consume more labor and time
for transplanting and taking care of their field as
compared with conventional practices,
• However through FPAR farmers have been built the skills
of observing the field and can set up the experiments in
their field.
• Specific cultivation practices at specific location would
make farmers interested rather than all principle together.

37. CFPAR Field Day activities

38. CFPAR Field Day activities

39. FPAR and post-FPAR activities

40. FPAR and post-FPAR activities

41. FPAR and post-FPAR activities

42. 8. Recommendation for future activities
• Continue doing researches and development technologies to
be smarter, and easier adopted by farmers and less affect to
environment.
• Expanding researches on SRI activities in the upland
provinces and
• To encourage sustainable and conservation agriculture and
promote organic and safe product to market to get premium
price of their product.
• Scaling up and scaling out participatory action researches by
linkage with research institutes and academic institutes.