|
|
TOPICS |
SPEAKERS |
|
Harro Maat
Knowledge, Technology
and Innovation (KTI) Group, Wageningen University, Wageningen, the
Netherlands
|
|
Sabarmatee Tiki,
Knowledge, Technology
and Innovation Group, Wageningen University, Netherlands
|
|
Debashish Sen
Peoples Science
Institute (PSI) |
|
A. Ravindra and Rob
Schipper
WASSAN and Wageningen University |
|
Pratyaya Jagannath,
Hemant Pullabhotla, and Norman Uphoff
|
|
Norman Uphoff,
SRI-Rice, Cornell
University, USA |
|
Shiva Dhar, A K Vyas and
B C Barah
IARI, New Delhi |
|
Janice Thies
Department of Crop and Soil Sciences,
Cornell University, USA
|
|
Abha Mishra
Asian Institute of
Technology (AIT), Thailand |
|
Amod Kumar Thakur; Rajeeb
Kumar Mohanty; Ashwani Kumar,
Directorate of Water
Management (ICAR) |
|
Robert Schipper,
Sabarmatee, Debashish Sen, Ravindra A., Ezra Berkhout
Wageningen University
|
|
D. Narasimha Reddy & M.
Venkatanarayana
National Institute of Rural Development (NIRD), Hyderabad |
|
Dr. K.R. Karunakaran,
Professor
(Agricultural Economics), TNAU |
|
Rob Schipper, Ezra
Berkhout, Sabarmatee, Debashish Sen, A. Ravindra
|
|
B.C. Barah, NABARD
Chair Professor,
Narendranath, PRADAN,
Shipra Singh and Amit
Kumar |
|
Willem A. Stoop
Wageningen University |
|
R Mahender Kumar, K.
Surekha , Ch Padmavathi , B.Sreedevi , B.Gangaiah, N. Somashekar ,
M.S.Prasad, V.Ravindra Babu, P. Raghuveer Rao, P.C. Latha,L.V.
Subba Rao, B.Sailaja , Sudhakara. T.M. Santhappa. D, P.Muthuraman,
Shaik. N.Meera, B. Nirmala and B.C. Viraktamath
Directorate of Rice
Research (DRR) |
|
Shiva Dhar, Principal
Scientist, Division of Agronomy, Indian Agricultural Research
Institute, B C Barah, NABARD Chair Professor, Indian
Agricultural Research Institute, New Delhi and A K Vyas,
Assistant Director General (HR), Indian Council of Agricultural
Research
|
|
Dominic Glover
Research Fellow,
Institute of Development Studies at the University of Sussex,
Falmer, Brighton BN1 9RE, United Kingdom |
|
C. Shambu Prasad,
XIMB, Bhubaneswar |
|
|
|
Shifting intensification: Findings from Socio-technical research on
SRI in India
Harro Maat, Knowledge, Technology and Innovation (KTI)
Group, Wageningen University, Wageningen, the Netherlands
The paper presents results of the four-year
research programme investigating the System of Rice Intensification
(SRI) in India as a socio-technical movement. Social movements are
commonly defined as collectives or organizations which focus on
specific political or social issues in order to instigate, resist or
undo social change. The social issue the SRI movement addresses fits
the overall development agenda to resist and undo growing
social-economic inequalities, in particular inequalities between
farmers in the rural areas of India. Calling SRI a socio-technical
movement highlights the role of material factors in social change.
This also implies that a focus on socio-technical collectives and
organisations, rather than the opportunity for the individual farmer
to grow more rice with less external inputs. The introduction of SRI
caused a rearrangement of rice farming as a socio-technical practice
through a reconfiguration of task groups, inputs, seasonal calendars
and cultural institutions. These rearrangements go beyond the fields
where SRI is practiced and have an impact on the entire farming
community, the various ways in which rice is cultivated, cropping
patterns, additional agricultural activities and off-farm income
sources. The socio-technical movement character further expresses in
the challenges SRI poses to wider institutional arrangements, for
example irrigation system management, agricultural research or markets
for inputs and agricultural commodities. These changes lead to various
patterns of intensification, the major ones being labour
intensification to rice, input intensification to rice and distributed
labour intensification. It is concluded that in order to reach its
goals in undoing social-economic inequalities, SRI as a
socio-technical movement requires further flexibility and
experimentation to serve the various patterns of intensification.
|
|
Understanding dynamics of labour in System of Rice Intensification
(SRI): Insights from grassroots experiences in Odisha, India
Ms. Sabarmatee Tiki, PhD student,
Knowledge, Technology and Innovation Group, Wageningen University,
Netherlands
Rice culture and agriculture is a function of
coordinated efforts of men and women, having diverse relations where
their division of work depends largely upon embedded social
prescriptions, terrain characteristics and technological options. When
a technology changes, it is likely that the technology impacts
end-users, that is men and women labourers, in turn, they also impact
the technology. Around 2000, a new agro-production technology called
System of Rice Intensification (SRI) that evolved in Madagascar
entered into the rice landscapes in India. SRI prescribes major
modifications in practices like transplantation, weeding and water
management for yield enhancement which require a new set of skills
that challenge the age old rice-growing methods leading to different
gender ramifications. In this situation labour plays a crucial role in
implementation of SRI which is diverse, heterogeneous and complex in
nature.
In the initial stage after introduction of SRI,
like many other production strategies, focus centred on yield and
adoption. Until now, scholarly articulation on SRI focuses mostly on
biophysical aspects of rice-growing and socio-economic aspects of cost
and adoption dynamics where issues like labour-technology interactions
from gender perspectives is inadequately addressed. Wherever it is
addressed, labour is mostly treated like economic unit instead of
social entity. This paper attempts to understand the interaction
between labour and technology from a gender perspective taking the
weeding and skilling as examples. It elucidates the gendered
dimensions of weeding and weeder use, and the process of skilling, in
the new equilibrium.
Multiple parallel case study design is adopted for
the overall study. Three villages were selected purposively in Odisha
in India having diverse agro-ecology, ethnicity, labour and wage
systems, rice-growing practices, extension architecture and SRI
history. General observations of rice-growing practices were done in
2011-12 and 20 households from each village were selected randomly
(from SRI farmers list of 2011) for intensive observation in 2012 who
cultivated rice in 545 plots during Kharif (June-December) season. A
combination of tools like Focus Group Discussion, individual
interviews, story-telling, field-level observations including taking
weights and measurements of materials and spacing, photography and
Rapid Comparative Pain Assessment method were used for data collection
which informed various aspects of labour.
Varied weeding patterns emerging from
recommendation of frequent weeding with mechanical weeders in SRI pose
new challenges to traditional gender roles and bodies of labourers.
Introduction of specific models of weeders enabled both genders to
undertake mechanical weeding, mainly in family farms. This change,
however, could not yet influence deep-rooted gender-specific wage
asymmetries although both do equal work and ensure men’s participation
in manual weeding. Degree of participation of men and women in
mechanical weeding and pursuit of weeding schedules depend upon
factors like natural environment, extension strategies,
household-level gender roles, negotiations among household members,
age of the labourer, livelihood strategies, ownership, availability,
accessability and adequacy of weeders. Not only users, women’s groups
also emerged as managers of weeders where it is consciously
facilitated by the extension agencies. Reduction in work time, change
in posture and participation of men produce different bodily
experiences for men and women. Bodily experiences play a determining
role in use/rejection/acceptance of models of weeders.
Extension agencies arrange some modicum of
training for the farmers where number and proportion of men and women
depends upon the extension strategies. But next to nothing is
available for agricultural labourers although smallholders are also
labourers. Often sending farmers for exposure visits to SRI fields or
conducting training programs is equated with skilling and agricultural
labourers, mostly women, are generally excluded from even such a
semblance of skilling through exposure. It was found that social
learning and individual learning is continuous and integrated in the
lives of the labourers and hardly any mechanism is there to facilitate
this.
This study emphasises that weeding schedules,
gender-wise work participation and bodies are affected by agricultural
technologies in their social-material context which also affect
technologies in turn. The study suggests integrating gender and
physical issues with interdisciplinary approach in agricultural
technology evaluation, for involving men and women in choice,
design/development and application of gender-sensitive technologies,
and for steering innovative extension and scaling-up strategies for
better organisation of labour.
|
|
User
Adaptations in Rice Farms of Uttarakhand: Landscape and Farm Level
Interactions
Debashish Sen, Peoples
Science Institute (PSI)
System of Rice
Intensification (SRI) is said to have been evolved by farmers of
Madagascar during 1980s. In spite of the persisting scientific debate,
the system is claimed to have spread in more than 50 countries. Past
studies have not paid much attention to the meanings that farmers have
given to the system in different agro-ecological contexts. Adherence
or deviations from recommended practices and mixed performance of the
system have been reported, overlooking farm diversity and dynamics of
human relations. My research therefore explored how farm households
adapt SRI according to local bio-physical and socio-cultural context.
This paper in particular presents farmers’ strategies in crop
establishment and water management practices by exploring farm and
landscape interactions, and social organizations around rice farming.
The study was conducted
over three rice seasons (2011 to 2013) and focused on three
contrasting villages situated in Bhilangana sub-basin of Uttarakhand,
India. The study followed an ethnographic approach using a mix of
tools: participant observations of all rice plots of 30 randomly
selected farmers (10 from each village), focus group discussions, and
semi-structured interviews with key informants. All SRI plots with
transplanting patterns were mapped for two seasons. Study of
transplanting groups, plot level measurements of transplanting
characteristics and daily water depths of randomly selected SRI and
non-SRI plots along with semi-structured interviews clarified farmers’
strategies.
Scattered layout of
irregular small sized plots, varying soil conditions and elevations,
diverse cropping patterns, a predominantly cascade irrigation system,
and limited labour and draft made it difficult to practice SRI as a
standard package. Hybridization of existing practices and SRI elements
led to emergence of array of rice cropping systems across farms.
Technological adaptations were accompanied and complemented by
institutional reconfigurations in task groups undertaking specific
activities, along with changes in socio-cultural norms guiding rice
farming. Farmers preferred to follow SRI in middle reach of perennial
canals with early transplanting of young seedlings and reduced
planting density. Water depth was increased gradually from crop
establishment to flowering upto grain filling, but was kept
considerably less than for existing methods. Farmers with an
unreliable water supply used old seedlings, permitting the common
flooding practice, though plant spacing was still widened.
The study highlights that
socio-technical assemblages around crop management are contextual,
complex, contingent and negotiable. Their meaning varies across space
and time. A standard package of agricultural practices as in SRI
therefore may not be workable for all farm households. Yet, farmers
might benefit from individual components of SRI such as wide plant
spacing. Reduced water depths as under SRI also indicates a large
potential of water saving. Based on our research the relevance of the
standard concepts of “adoption-disadoption – non-adoption” that are
popular in the agricultural development sector, could be questioned.
In the past, quick and superficial assessments done soon after SRI’s
introduction have bypassed important features of progressive adoption
of SRI practices also occurring in existing rice systems. The study
thus calls for collaborations between agronomy, irrigation engineering
and social sciences to arrive at viable crop management options.
|
|
Groundwater Irrigated Rice: A Techno - Economic Exploration of the
possibilities of producing "More Rice with Less Water"
A. Ravindra, WASSAN and Rob Schipper, Wageningen University
Purpose: Rice cultivation has been
expanding into water-scarce semi-arid areas. An absence of
water-pricing and policies that supply electricity at free or flat
rates leave little incentive for farmers to save water and constrain
scaling-up of water-saving measures such as Alternate Wetting and
Drying (AWD). Using tools developed for ‘safe-AWD’ by IRRI, the
present on-farm research makes comparisons of System of Rice
Intensification (SRI) and conventional rice cultivation. It explores
whether SRI integrated with ‘safe-AWD’ can provide a better incentive
to farmers for practicing water-saving measures, i.e. ‘producing more
rice with less water’.
Approach and methods: A random sample of 41
paired rice plots (SRI and conventional methods)studied within 7
villages in two semi-arid districts of Andhra Pradesh, India provided
the data. Daily water level observations from AWD- ‘field water tubes’
installed in the farmers’ plots were used to develop aMean Daily
Inundation Index (MDI), as an indicator for irrigation water use.
Agronomic and yield data were collected from field samples and
structured surveys provided data on input use. Descriptive
statistics,Cluster Analysis, Principal Component Analysis, and Linear
Regression models were used in the data analysis.
Key results: In spite of serious water
scarcities, farmers could maintain water level in the fields just at
saturation levels. Comparison of MDI against the safe-AWD standard of
-15 cm indicated potential water savings ranging from -3 to -6 cm MDI.
Paired sample differences showed a statistically significant yield
advantage with SRI at 12% (6.5 q per ha) over conventional practice,
while cluster analysis showed a yield advantage of SRI with square
planting over conventional methods at 22%. Regression results
confirmed the positive influence of SRI in explaining yield variation
and insignificance of MDI at vegetative and reproductive phases in
explaining yield variation.
Synthesis and application: The results
point towards potential reduction in water use while achieving a yield
increase ranging from 12 to 22% in the study areas. Integration of
safe-AWD tools with SRI principles can potentially provide a policy
lever for effective scaling-up of water-saving measures. Synchronising
water and energy policies with the promotion of ‘safe-AWD integrated
SRI’ will be much more effective.
|
|
Evaluating Water Use, Water Savings, and Water Use Efficiency in
Irrigated Rice Production with SRI vs Standard Management
Pratyaya Jagannath,
Hemant Pullabhotla, and Norman Uphoff
A meta-analysis was done
of data from 29 published studies comparing SRI and non-SRI methods of
irrigated rice production that gave results from a total of 251
comparison trials. The purpose was to assess differences in total and
irrigation water use associated with SRI vs. non-SRI rice crop
management practices, evaluating water savings achieved with SRI
management and calibrating differences in water use efficiency.
A SRI characterization
matrix was used to assess the degree to which specific trials
represented SRI or non-SRI management, based on the number and extent
of specified agronomic practices used. This avoided purely nominal
classification.
Descriptive statistical
analysis showed a clear advantage in water use and water productivity
for SRI management compared to use of more standard cultivation
methods. The mean water use with SRI management reported from the
studies was 12.03 million liters ha-1, compared to 15.33 million
liters ha-1 when more conventional non-SRI methods were used with
continuous flooding of rice paddies. This represents a 22% average
total water savings of about 3.3 million liters of water ha-1.
Since the average paddy
yield per hectare with SRI methods in these trials was 5.9 tons
compared to 5.3 tons using more conventional practices, the higher
yield was achieved with less input of water. As the rainfall was
similar for both methods of management in all trials, the water
savings in terms of irrigation water applied were relatively even
higher with SRI methods. Analysis of trial results showed an average
reduction of 35% in irrigation water applications associated with the
higher grain yield.
Total water use efficiency
(TWUE) was found to be 52% greater with SRI methods since the mean
productivity for SRI across the various trials was 0.6 gram of grain
per liter of water, compared to the 0.39 gram of grain per liter
produced with non-SRI methods. In terms of irrigation water use
efficiency (IWUE), SRI trials had an even greater advantage as these
methods produced on average 1.23 grams of grain per liter of
irrigation water, compared to 0.69 gram of grain per liter produced
with non-SRI crop management, an advantage of 78%.
Further analysis showed
that these advantages of water saving and water productivity with SRI
management were manifested across different contextual conditions for
rice production, considering variations in cropping season, in
climate, in soil texture and pH, and in rice variety planted (length
of crop cycle). These improvements were confirmed by multivariate
regression analysis.
Many interests will be
served by being able to reduce water requirements for paddy
cultivation. SRI is an innovation presently available at little or
reduced cost that can benefit producers, consumers and the environment
by enhancing food production and the economic returns to farmers at
the same time that it reduces demand for water in the rice sector.
|
|
Revising agronomic and socio-economic paradigms for crop improvement:
Findings from SRI research globally
Norman Uphoff,
SRI-Rice, Cornell University, USA
Most agricultural research
aims at making incremental additions to the body of scientific
knowledge. From time to time, however, an accumulation of new
knowledge first challenges and then changes the way that phenomena,
natural or social, are understood and get acted upon, in what is
characterized as a paradigm shift. This builds upon incremental
research findings, but it requires most importantly some new vision
and re-conceptualization. Progress in science depends more upon such
shifts than upon piecemeal accretions of knowledge. Indeed, these
additions are themselves conditioned (and constrained) by whatever
constitute the prevailing paradigms. These depend upon simplifying
assumptions that screen in some information and screen out other
information; further, they are limited and even biased by the
methodologies and measurements that they prescribe.
We are seeing that after
15 years of research and over 400 published articles (http://sri.ciifad.cornell.edu/research/index.html),
and with demonstrations of efficacy now in over 50 countries (http://sri.ciifad.cornell.edu/countries/index.html),
the ideas and methods of the System of Rice Intensification (SRI) --
and its derived/expanded version, the System of Crop Intensification
(SCI) – have been taken up by >10 million farmers on as many as 4
million hectares in over 50 countries.
This spread has been
fueled by higher crop yields that are achieved with reduced inputs and
with lower costs of production, plus there are also enhanced
resistance to biotic and abiotic stresses and other advantages which
make SRI/SCI attractive. These features derive from making SRI/SCI
changes in the management of plants, soil, water and nutrients.
Researchers and farmers
have not expected that it would be possible to ‘produce more with
less,’ because the prevailing paradigm for agricultural research and
application has assumed that higher yields require new varieties
(better genotypes) and more inputs: higher seed rates, more
fertilizer, more water, more agrochemical protection. This thinking
does not take into account, however, the dynamic biological factors of
(a) root growth and functioning and (b) positive contributions
from the plant-soil microbiome. It is these factors that make
it possible for SRI management to produce ‘more with less.’ Although
the Green Revolution paradigm enjoyed considerable success in the
1960s, 70s and 80s, particularly in India, its progress and its
productivity plateaued in succeeding decades as the paradigm has
encountered diminishing returns.
This paper reviews
research findings that support the proposition that existing crop
genotypes, for rice but also for some other crops, have more
productive potential, i.e., can produce better phenotypes, than
are now achieved with standard plant, soil, water and nutrient
management practices. The SRI approach to agriculture has succeeded
not only because it has worked outside the ‘box’ of the current
agronomic paradigm, but also because it has shifted the prevailing
paradigm for research and extension, which privileges formal
scientific knowledge and training over farmer observation and
experimentation.
SRI introduces a more
farmer-centered strategy for making further agricultural improvements.
This will not displace or derogate more formal science-based research.
But its emergence suggests that a new synthesis should be sought
between formal and farmer knowledge/activity, especially to cope with
the hard-core challenges of continuing hunger and poverty, on
the one hand, and adverse climatic changes, on the other.
|
|
Comparative performance of System of Wheat Intensification (SWI) and
other methods of wheat cultivation in north western plain zone of
India
Shiva Dhar, Principal
Scientist, Division of Agronomy, Indian Agricultural Research
Institute, B C Barah, NABARD Chair Professor, Indian Agricultural
Research Institute, New Delhi and A K Vyas, Assistant Director General
(HR), Indian Council of Agricultural Research
A field experiment was
conducted during winter season of 2011-12 to 2012-13 at Indian
Agricultural Research Institute, New Delhi in randomised block design
(RBD) with three replications using wheat variety ‘HD 2967’ to know
the performance of different methods of wheat cultivation. The
experiment consists of six treatments, viz., Conventional Improved
Practices (CIP), Furrow Irrigated Raised Bed System (FIRBS), System of
Wheat Intensification (SWI)-direct seeded (SWI-D), SWI- transplanted (SWI-T),
modified CIP with irrigation as scheduled in SWI (MCIP-I) and Modified
CIP with 20x10 cm spacing (MCIP-II). The wheat yield was found to vary
from 4.07 t ha-1 for SWI-T to 7.93 t ha-1 for SWI-D in 2011-12. In the
repeat trial, the results was identical, wherein yield ranged from
3.68 t ha-1 for SWI-T to 6.94 t ha-1 for SWI-D in 2012-13, which was
less favorable year for wheat. The reduction in grain yield of SWI-D
was to the extent of 12.5% attributed to impact of climatic variation,
while it is more being 22% for CIP and 31.4 % in MCIP-I. Along with
grain yield, production of total biomass yield was also high (20.46
and 18.03 t ha-1) in SWI-D during 2011-12 and 2012-13, respectively.
There was general reduction in yields ranged from 9.6 to 31.4 % due to
weather effect in 2012-13, but SWI performed best during both the
years as compared to other treatments indicating that SWI-D is
reasonably resilient to weather aberrations. The yield attributing
characters like number of spiklets earhead-1, grains earhead-1 and
1000 grain weight were significantly superior in SWI-D, however,
number of effective tillers were significantly higher only during
favourable year of 2011-12.The higher root length and root volume were
also recorded from the SWI-D as compared to other treatments. Soil
test values after harvest of crop show a higher build-up of N, P and K
in SWI-D. The available nitrogen increased in the range of 25-41%,
phosphorous by 2.9-4.9%, and potash more than 9.0- 9.3 % in SWI-T
followed by SWI-D and other conventional methods. In the contrast, the
nutrients level depleted for all other conventional treatments. Mean
Net returns Rs. 83.0 thousand ha-1 were obtained from SWI-D as against
Rs. 61.2 thousand ha-1 from the CIP. The findings showed that SWI
outperformed the conventional improved methods on the basis of growth,
yield, soil nutrient status and net returns. Thus, the System of Wheat
Intensification (SWI-D) is a promising innovation having the in-built
capability of productivity-enhancing as well as climate-resilience.
|
|
Interpreting Changes in Soil Quality and Root Health in the System of
Rice Intensification
Janice Thies, Department of Crop and Soil
Sciences, Cornell University, USA
The demand for food to feed the growing world
population is increasing rapidly, while the land and water resources
needed for crop production are decreasing globally. These realities
motivate the current focus on ‘sustainable intensification’ of crop
production; that is, growing more food on the same or less land, while
also conserving system resources. The principles underpinning the
System of Rice Intensification are aimed at helping farmers produce
more rice using less water and other inputs. When transitioning to
SRI, we must understand that changes in soil redox potential that
accompany changes in water use patterns will lead to important changes
in soil biogeochemistry that will affect root health, soil quality and
how carbon, nutrient elements and metals are cycled and sequestered by
soil microorganisms. Changes in water management will also change
fluxes of greenhouse gases and the associated loss of nutrient
elements from these systems. Some of these changes are predictable, in
part, based on current knowledge. However, specific interactions
between soil factors at a site will determine which nutrients or
chemical conditions will be limiting when water availability changes.
We also need to keep in mind that, as soils drain, indigenous
populations of pathogens held at bay by flooded conditions may become
active. Root-feeding nematodes and fungal pathogens are both
stimulated by more aerobic conditions. It is not yet practical to
predict if or what types of pathogens will constrain production at a
given site. It is safe to say that findings from one soil type or site
are unlikely to be successfully applied to another soil type or site
unless there is a mechanistic understanding of the rice genotype by
environment (GxE) interactions possible. Soil quality and root health
‘indicators’ are a means to begin to understand potential site
constraints so that they can be addressed more explicitly and in a
more integrated way in rice producing systems. Examining the ‘health’
of roots grown in site soils under the intended moisture regimes is a
critical first step. Frameworks have been developed and used
successfully to monitor changes in soil quality in temperate cropping
systems. Research is needed in rice cropping systems in order to
develop means to address the constraints imposed by pathogenic soil
biota and likely changes in nutrient cycling under SRI management to
assure long-term soil fertility and sustained rice production
globally.
|
|
Developing Location - Specific Management Practices for Agricultural
Resource Conservation and for 'Climate Proofing' of Rice Cultivation
using SRI
Abha Mishra, Asian
Center of Innovation for Sustainable Agriculture Intensification (ACISAI),
Asian Institute of Technology (AIT), Thailand
The purpose of this study
was to explore the avenue for sustainable intensification of rice
using system of Rice Intensification (SRI) principle under rainfed
condition involving smallholder farmers who face food insecurity along
with degraded natural resource base and climate change variability.
Participatory action
research study was established in three provinces of Thailand for
three years involving farmers, researchers, traders, government and
nongovernment organizations. Using conventional management practices,
indigenous knowledge and SRI principle, different types of innovative
agronomic crop management (IACM) practices were defined and tested to
address the location-specific challenges. Working through an inclusive
process of dialogue, observation and diagnosis, participants made a
thorough analysis of the current management practices and various
tested IACM practices for their productivity and profitability along
with reduced input use.
The results of three
seasons and from all three provinces confirmed the potential of IACM
practices in enhancing crop and water productivity along with soil
fertility in relation to existing crop management practices under
rainfed condition. It was also evident that significant increases in
yield and higher net farm income could be realized with relatively low
inputs (seed, water, and fertilizers) using IACM practices. However,
factors that include: (1) the age of the farmers and (2) off farm
employment opportunity and (3) lack of incentive for good management
practices and (4) lack of effective marketing linkages are the key
drives that affect the crop management decision making process.
As a part of
recommendation, it was suggested that exploration of value added
production alternatives; favorable policy along with effective
marketing linkages are required to sustain environmentally friendly
IACM management practices that can benefit farmers, consumers and the
environment with reduced climate forcing.
These positive results at
plot scale studies and emerging scenario for dealing with climate
change and food security issue of Asian rice farmers created impetus
for scaling up the SRI action at the regional level involving various
international, regional, national, local, government and
non-government organizations. A regional effort in the Lower Mekong
River Basin countries, i.e., in Thailand, Cambodia, Laos and Vietnam
is underway to develop further knowledge and understanding on low cost
alternative crop management practices that reduces input use and
carbon footprint and contributes towards the food security.
|
|
Integrated System of Rice Intensification (ISRI) for enhancing Crop
and Water Productivity under Changing Climate
Amod Kumar Thakur; Rajeeb Kumar Mohanty;
Ashwani Kumar, Directorate of Water
Management (ICAR)
Enhancing crop production under increasing water
constraints and greater climatic variability is a major challenge in
agriculture. In many rice-growing areas, cultivation depends mainly on
seasonal rainfall and unreliable rainfall distribution results in
either flooding or long dry spells, causing environmental stress and
low productivity. Therefore, climate-resilient upland rice production
systems are needed under which the productivity of both land and water
can be enhanced. The critical plant morphological factors that stand
out in this respect are the roots and root systems of individual
plants.
A 2-year field experiment was conducted in Odisha,
India, evaluating four alternative rice cultivation systems: (i)
conventional rice cultivation methods under rainfed conditions, (ii)
System of Rice Intensification (SRI) methods adapted to rainfed
conditions, (iii) rainfed SRI methods with supplementary
pump-irrigation and drainage, and (iv) SRI methods utilizing harvested
rainwater for aquaculture and horticulture crops, also providing
supplementary irrigation for the rice crop during dry spells.
Compared with conventional rainfed rice
cultivation, adaptations of SRI practices like younger seedling
(12-days) with low planting density (single seedling, 20x20 cm
spacing) resulted into significant improvements in the morpho-physiological
characteristics of rice plants. Phenotypic improvements included:
plant height, greater tillering, more number of leaves, and expanded
root systems. These changes were accompanied by improvements in
physiological functions like greater xylem exudation rate, higher
light interception by the canopy, more chlorophyll content, greater
light utilization, and higher photosynthetic rates in the leaves
during flowering. These factors were responsible for improvement in
yield-contributing characteristics and for higher grain yield (53%)
compared with conventional production methods. The profuse, deeper,
and more functional root-systems of SRI plants are able to cope with
flooding/drought stresses. All of these features along with grain
yield and water productivity further improved by providing drainage
and supplementary irrigation to the crop. Further, integrating
aquaculture and horticulture with SRI management, utilizing harvested
rainwater, increased rice productivity, net water productivity and net
income per unit of water used.
Reduced plant densities under SRI, leading to
remarkable increases in root development, are seen to alleviate the
risks of unreliable rainfall, while leading to increased grain yields.
Utilization of harvested rainwater for aquaculture and horticulture
and for SRI rice crop though supplementary irrigation looks promising
for improving food security under unreliable and erratic rainfall
conditions.
|
|
The
System of Rice Intensification in India: Results of a survey in 62
villages in Andhra Pradesh, Odisha and Uttarakhand
Robert A. Schipper,
Development Economics Group, Wageningen University, Sabarmatee,
Bhubaneswar, Odisha, India, Debashish Sen, People Science Institute,
Deradun, Uttarakhand, Ravindra A., WASSAN, Hyderabad, Andhra Pradesh
and Ezra Berkhout, Development Economics Group, Wageningen University
In the framework of the
research project ‘The System of Rice Intensification as a
socio-economic and technical movement in India’, a survey was held in
2012 in 62 villages in a number of districts and sub-districts in the
states of Andhra Pradesh (Mahabubnagar & Warangal districts), Odisha (Ganjam,
Kandhamal & Koraput districts) and Uttarakhand (Tehri Garwal
district). The aim of this Rapid Rural Appraisal (RRA) was to study
the spread and performance of the System of Rice Intensification
(SRI). The chosen districts were seen as relevant for the conditions
in each state regarding the way rice cultivation is cultivated and the
occurrence of SRI. Furthermore, villages in each sub-district were
stratified into SRI and Non-SRI villages; from these strata the
villages to be surveyed were selected. Each of the selected villages
was visited by a small team of at least two researchers; during the
visit group interviews were held about general themes related to
location and accessibility of the village, population and households,
types and availability of lands, distribution of land holdings over
households, water use and availability, land use and crops,
institutions and facilities. However, the major emphasis was placed on
different ways of rice cultivation. Such group interviews during a RRA
can give a general picture of a village. However, it does not give
insight into the differences between households within a village.
Therefore, at a later date the village survey was followed up with a
survey of 10 farm households in each of the selected villages; results
of this survey will be reported in a separate paper.
The paper presents village
descriptive results under the headings of general data, land
characteristics, rice cultivation practices, institutions and
facilities. Due to the large differences between the three states, all
results are presented per state. After the descriptive results,
different ‘forms’ of SRI as they are observed in the survey are shown.
Is it possible to define the most common ones and contrast these with
an ideal type of SRI? Furthermore, it is attempted to explain the
occurrence of (different forms of) SRI in each state, followed by a
discussion of problems encountered in rice cultivation in general and
in SRI in particular. Finally, to the extend the data permit, the
yield performance of SRI in comparison to conventional rice
cultivation is evaluated.
|
|
SRI
Cultivation in Andhra Pradesh: Positive Evidence on Yield and GHGs
Effects but Problems of Adoption
D. Narasimha Reddy and
M. Venkatanarayana, National Institute of Rural Development (NIRD),
Hyderabad
Rice is one of the most
intensive staple food-grains and also by far the most irrigation –
intensive crop. It is increasingly being extended to groundwater based
irrigation areas raising concerns of water use efficiency and emission
of greenhouse gases (GHGs) in the context of climate change. While
concerns of food security require attention to methods that would
reduce costs and increase productivity, the challenges of GHGs call
for new methods and technologies that would reduce energy use and
mitigate the adverse effects associated with rice production. The
System of Rice Intensification (SRI) is widely advocated as one such
emerging method of rice cultivation that would answer these concerns.
As a part of the efforts to gather scientific evidence from different
parts of the rice growing world, a study was undertaken in some parts
of India to examine the GHGs effects of SRI and the extent of adoption
of the method. The first part of the paper presents evidence on costs,
yield and GHGs effect of the SRI in Andhra Pradesh, and the second
part discusses the efforts made towards the extension of the area
under SRI in the state. The results based on a field survey of SRI in
Andhra Pradesh, with the conventional HYV as a control group, show
that SRI uses less of water, less of labour, generates less CO2,
involves lower costs, and brings higher yields. The soil derived
Methane (CH4) generated per tonne of rice is much lower in the case of
SRI, but the Nitrous Oxide (N2O) produced is much higher.
Andhra Pradesh is one of
the states that initiated the adoption of SRI cultivation more than
ten years ago. Efforts to promote SRI cultivation in the state were
made by public agencies like NABARD, Krishi Vignan Kendras (KVKs),
Community Managed Sustainable Agriculture (CMSA), research
institutions like Acharya Ranga Agricultural University and ICRISAT,
civil society organizations like Centre for Sustainable Agriculture
and WASSAN, and several progressive farmers. These efforts were based
on the evidence from farmers’ field experience of better yield, early
maturation, better cyclone and flood withstanding capacity, and better
quality of grain of SRI method compared to traditional practices of
rice cultivation. Many farmers in the state also contributed to
promote SRI practice by improving the tools for weeding and marking.
Yet the progress in the adoption of SRI in the state has been very
low. The paper analyses some of the reasons for the slow adoption rate
and suggests possible ways which could help in the spread of SRI over
a wider area.
|
|
SRI:
An Analysis of Adoption Levels Across 13 States, India
Dr. K.R. Karunakaran,
Professor (Agricultural Economics), TNAU
A macro level study
covering 13 major rice growing states was undertaken during 2010-11 to
analyse mainly the adoption level of the SRI components. The results
indicate that fields with SRI have higher average yield of 8.5
quintals per ha (q/ha) or 22%, than the average yield of 37.9 q/ha of
non-SRI fields. Out of the four core SRI components typically
recommended, 41% adopted one component (low adopters), 39% adopted two
to three components (partial adopters) and only 20% adopted all the
components (full adopters). Full adopters recorded the highest yield
increase (31%) compared to yield increase under partial (25%) and low
adopters (15%). Thus, 80% are doing only the modified SRI practices
with yields higher than their conventional practices. The SRI and
modified SRI fields had a higher gross margin (Rs 7000/ha) and lower
production cost (Rs 178/q) compared to non-SRI fields. The transaction
(managerial) cost, even though accounted for only an additional 2-3 %
of the total operational cost is reported as the key constraint for
adopting SRI and modified SRI practices, where non-availability of
skilled labourers at crucial times of operations, poor water control
and poor soils are the other major constraints. The drivers of
adoption of SRI and modified SRI practices are: a) Selection of
appropriate SRI components to suit the region, b) geo-mapping of the
potential regions with suitable soils, crop seasons and irrigation
sources, c) introduction of machine transplantation, d) availability
of user friendly conoweeders to farmers at affordable price, and e)
intensification of capacity building programs to farmers on selective
SRI components.
|
|
Patterns of the System of Rice Intensification in India: Results from
RRA Village studies in Andhra Pradesh, Odisha and Uttarkhand
Rob Schipper, Ezra Berkhout, Sabarmatee,
Debashish Sen, A. Ravindra
|
|
System of Rice Intensification (SRI) and Household Food Security : An
analysis of dynamics of adoption and disadoption process of SRI in
Rainfed areas in eastern India
B C Barah, Narendranath (PRADAN), Shipra Singh
and Amit Kumar
The System of Rice
Intensification (SRI) is an agroecological innovation, appropriate for
small and marginal farmers. It has gained more popularity and wider
acceptance among the farmers and other stakeholders due to increasing
production potentiality with lesser inputs, reduced cost and climate
resilience properties. In order to understand the dynamics of adoption
process, a carefully designed longitudinal farm survey was conducted
during 2011-12, 2012-13 among the 715 SRI farmers in selected SRI
districts in Bihar, Odisha, Chhattisgarh and Jharkhand. The farmers
were selected using stratified random sampling procedure representing
three distinct groups, viz, practicing SRI farmers including new
adopters (SRI farmers including old SRI farmers as well as newly
adopted farmers), farmers discontinued SRI at a point time (Disadopter)
and farmers who never practiced SRI (Non SRI farmers as control). A
specifically prepared questionnaire schedule was propagated in the
door to door interview. The farmers’ perception on SRI was also
elicited and FGD conducted. The finding of survey is interesting.
Survey clearly brings out that the adoption of SRI appears faster
within a short span of time as compared to that in case of green
revolution technology. The survey reveals that the major factors
encouraging farmers to adopt SRI, are increase in productivity,
reduced cost and improved food security. Almost all farmers are
satisfied with SRI and experienced more availability of home grown
food. As high as 43% farmers reported 9 to 12 months of additional
food availability of food due to SRI. More farmers experienced 3 to 8
months of additional food availability. The input saving such as seed,
water, fertilizer and labour has attracted more adoption. Survey also
ring out tremendous dynamism in gender participation due to SRI.
However, a small stint of disadoption was observed. The extent of
disadoption was found to be in the range of disadoption was 6-13 per
cent during the period. The farmers unanimously reported that the
disadoption of the type is not voluntary in nature as it occurred
mainly due to external factors, such as unfavourable weather
conditions like droughts and ocassionally flood within crop season.
For instance, Bihar and Jharkhand experienced severe droughts in a row
in previous two years and Odisha had drought (weather failure got the
highest Garret rank of 99% followed by inadequate availability of
inputs, lack of knowledge and labour issue). A small proportion of
farmers expressed inability to perform operations due to personal
health, family problem and lack of handholding. Therefore, provision
of protective life-saving irrigation for enhancing climate resilience
emerged as the effective policy need. Interestingly, farmers observed
that even in unfavourable weather, SRI performs well as compared to
conventional method of cultivation, albeit there is generally
reduction in production. The farmers also emphasized the need for
access to technological knowledge. As the SRI is a knowledge
innovation, proper information of practices and processes including
initial handholding assistance and supply of newer implements, is
needed for innovating farming. Evidences derived in the study provide
a powerful basis for deriving strong institutional architecture and
proper advocacy mechanism that suits the local conditions for wider up
scaling.
|
|
Modern intensified agriculture: a product of public-private
collaboration - Some insights based on the “System of Rice
Intensification”
Willem A. Stoop
For many years, starting
from the 1950/60s, agricultural research and the development
recommendations based on it, have focused on mostly technocratic
approaches in combination with introducing new, fertilizer-responsive,
crop cultivars emanating from centralised (national and international)
crop breeding programs. This has constituted the basis of the “Green
Revolution” and the modern industrialised forms of agriculture. In
that context a general “intensification” doctrine has evolved, that is
widely taught at universities and that is at the basis of many (modelling)
efforts to formulate productive and profitable crop systems. These
systems are mainly based on packages of the following bio-technical
components: 1) new, high-yielding, short-statured varieties (improved
seeds), 2) high seed rates / high plant densities, 3) liberal use of
mineral fertilisers, nitrogen in particular, 4) optimised soil water
regimes through irrigation/drainage, and 5) use of crop protection
chemicals to control diseases, pests and weeds. Notably absent from
this intensification package are major factors such as: soils, roots,
root systems and soil biota.
The conventional –best
practice—technological packages depend in many critical ways on
external inputs that are provided by the private sector
agro-industries and that at global scales represent huge commercial
interests.
Starting in the late 1990s
the “system of rice intensification (SRI)” –largely a grassroots
development—has progressively and increasingly been providing
fundamental challenges to this mainstream intensification approach.
The often spectacular results of SRI in many rice growing areas of the
world support the notion that grain yields (not only for rice) can be
raised substantially through relatively simple agronomic practices
suitable for any type of farmer; simultaneously expenditures on
external inputs (seeds and chemicals) are considerably reduced.
Notably, it shows that seed rates could be reduced to 1/5th even
1/10th of the conventionally recommended rates.
The paper explores various
ramifications of the SRI findings for agricultural research in general
and the complex set of factors (bio-technical, commercial, political
and psychological) that are fundamentally affecting the scaling-up
processes for SRI (see also abstract for policy workshop).
|
|
System of Rice Intensification (SRI) Evaluation for its potential to
enhance the productivity of rice (Oryzea sativa L.) and its impact in
different agro-ecological situations in India
R Mahender Kumar, , K. Surekha , Ch
Padmavathi , B.Sreedevi , B.Gangaiah, N. Somashekar , M.S.Prasad,
V.Ravindra Babu, P. Raghuveer Rao, P.C. Latha,L.V. Subba Rao,
B.Sailaja , Sudhakara. T.M. Santhappa. D, P.Muthuraman, Shaik. N.Meera,
B. Nirmala and B.C. Viraktamat, Directorate of
Rice Research (DRR), ICAR
System of Rice
Intensification (SRI), developed in Madagascar, a systems approach to
increasing rice productivity with less reliance on expensive external
inputs, is gaining momentum all over the world including India which
needs to be evaluated in Indian conditions. Directorate of Rice
Research under AICRIP has conducted a total of 147 experiences across
India from 2005 till 2013 to evaluate SRI methods, assessing their
potential and the effects of individual SRI principles for enhancing
productivity under different agro-ecological conditions compared to
standard normal transplanting methods.
SRI recorded
significantly higher grain yield (6.22 t ha-1) followed by
integrated crop management (ICM) (6.07 t ha-1), standard practice of
transplanting (5.60 t ha-1), and direct seeding with drum seeder (5.13
t ha-1). Further, hybrids registered significantly higher
grain yield with SRI methods (6.77 t ha-1) followed by
medium-duration and long-duration genotypes (6.24 and 5.97 t ha-1,
respectively).
There was no significant difference in
grain yield overall between transplanting 10-day and 15- day old
seedlings with SRI practices; however, 10-day seedlings recorded
higher yield during kharif (5.9 t ha-1), while 15-day seedlings gave
higher yield in rabi (5.04 t ha-1). Among the crop establishment
methods tested, SRI @ 25x25 spacing recorded 5% and 14% more yield,
compared with ICM @ 20x20 cm and standard transplanting @ 20x10 cm,
respectively, irrespective of time of transplanting.
The effect of
cono-weedings indicated the superiority of 4 times cono weeding (@
10, 20, 30 and 40 DAT) followed by 2 times cono weeding (5.7% less)
and herbicide application (11.8% less) during kharif season.
Application of 50% inorganic + 50% organic N was comparable with 150%
and 100% of recommended dose of fertilizer (RDF) and recorded with
grain yield increase of 37 %, 39 % and 43 % respectively over
control indicating saving of N with organic fertilizers.
By taking in to
account all the factors that determine the adoption of SRI such as
proper locations, soil conditions, water control facilities etc., it
may be possible to cover about 10% as total rice area i.e., about 4.0
m ha which can bring about tremendous benefits for the country.
There could be enormous saving in seed as we require only 5 kg seed
per hectare as compared to 25 kg/ha in the traditional system, saving
80,000 tonnes of seeds annually which means saving of RS.200 crores
per season. Additional yield of 1.0 – 1.5 t/ha will add another 4 – 6
in tones of rice to our food basket and meet the challenges of
enhancing the rice production. The system also helps us to save about
30% water which is equivalent to 2200 million m3. Besides, soil
health improvement which would be a biggest bonus in adopting SRI.
Based on
multi-location testing over a decade, indicated that SRI has the
potential to enhance the productivity of the rice with reduced inputs
and significant impact in different agro-ecological situation and soil
types across the country. |
|
Comparative performance of rice varieties grown under System of Rice
Intensification (SRI) and traditional puddlled transplanted at the
experimental station
S S Parihar, B C Barah, Ravinder
Kaur, Radha Prasanna, Nivedita Jain, Manol Khanna, Pankaj Singh,
Dinesh Kumar, Subhash Chandra, Bishan Dev, Indian Agricultural
Research Institute, New Delhi- 110 012
Experiment was conducted during kharif/rainy
season of 2013-14 at the Indian Agricultural Research Institute, New
Delhi. The aim is to evaluate the relative performances of various
improved varieties with alternative methods of rice cultivation viz,
SRI innovation and conventional improved method (CMP) and to validate
the principles of SRI. Five improved IARI varieties viz, Pusa 44, Pusa
834, Pusa 1401, Pusa 1509, PRH-10 were tested in split plot design
with three replications. The experiment was aimed to examine the
inter-varietal comparative performance under both methods. An
innovative experimental design protocol has been developed in
consultation using innovative participatory approach. Various
stakeholders including research leaders, policy makers, civil society
organization and farmers are involved. Quality seed is selected with
Brine method. Before nursery sowing the seed is inoculated with
Pseudomonas fluorescens. Raised wet bed nursery (10 cm above
the ground level, 1 meter wide and length as required) with channels
all around was formed. Before the sowing of seed, soil was mixed with
vermin compost or well decomposed manure @1kg/sq meter and level the
surface (preferably the 2:1 ratio of soil and compost). Transplanting
of single seedling per hill was done with plant to plant square
pattern spacing of 25x25cm. Results were encouraging. The yield of
rice under conventional method was found to vary from 6.81 ton/ha of
Pusa 44, 5.94 ton for Pusa 834, 6.05 ton for Pusa 1401, 5.76 ton in
Pusa 1509 and 6.69 ton for PRH-10. The corresponding yield under SRI
was 7.48 ton, 6.42, 6.41 ton, 6.13 ton and 7.40 ton respectively. It
gives a clear yield advantage of SRI to the extent of five to six
quintal for all the five varieties. The yield could have been even
better if rainfall would have been normal. There was excess rainfall
above the normal uniformly throughout the season by week by week. The
normal rainfall for the season in IARI farm has been 708mm, while
actual total rainfall was1565 mm. Thus, water management could not be
done properly for SRI. The other yield attributes such number of
tillers per hill and plant height is also measured after 62 days of
sowing and found significant difference under two methods as
summarized in the table below.
Growth of number of tillers per hill in
growth stages for 62 DAS for selected varieties |
|
Pusa 44 |
Pusa 1509 |
|
# tillers |
Plant height(cm) |
# tillers |
Plant height (cm) |
SRI |
71 |
92 |
63 |
93 |
CMP |
21 |
90 |
18 |
91 |
Another significant finding is that the
SRI substantially reduced infestation of nematodes. The population of
rice root nematode Hirschmanniella oryzae was high in
conventional method compared to SRI. Amongst varieties there was
difference in nematode population and Variety P-1401 showed the least
infestation compared to others.
Infestation of Hirschmanniella oryzae
(Nematodes population(#) per 200 cc soil,
study by Dr. Pankaj) |
|
Pusa 44 |
Pusa 834 |
Pusa 1401 |
Pusa 1509 |
PRH-10 |
SRI |
220 |
165 |
102 |
252 |
466 |
CMP |
371 |
855 |
180 |
461 |
505 |
The weed population
is also found almost negligible in SRI plots on account of large
volume of root inter-locking the space. Similarly, water use pattern
also showed encouraging results. Irrigation water was measured using
volumetric meter and found that water saving to the extent of 31-35%
reduction in water use in SRI as compared to the conventional fields.
The quantity of Irrigation varied from 1288 mm to 1370 mm under CMP,
while same for SRI varied from 845-940 mm.
Treatment |
Gross Irrigation (mm) |
Water saving (%)
|
SRI |
CMP |
Pusa 44 |
940 |
1370 |
31.4 |
Pusa 834 |
867 |
1315 |
34.1 |
Pusa 1401 |
890 |
1320 |
32.6 |
Pusa 1509 |
845 |
1288 |
34.4 |
PRH 10 |
910 |
1330 |
31.6 |
Economic returns also suggested that
SRI across the varieties varied from Rs. 63.0 thousand ha-1 for Pusa
1509 to Rs. 85.2 thousand ha-1for Pusa 44. The corresponding figures
under CMP varied from Rs.59.0 thousand ha-1 to Rs.60.8
thousand ha-1 having gain in yield in the percentage
difference of 40-42% of SRI over the CMP method.
Net return and
cost (RS./ha) |
|
Gross revenue Rs./ha |
Return Rs/ha |
% Diff.
|
|
CMP |
SRI |
CMP |
SRI |
over SRI
|
Pusa 44 |
98521 |
117316 |
60856 |
85160 |
40% |
Pusa 834 |
85934 |
100481 |
48269 |
68325 |
42% |
Pusa 1401 |
87553 |
100976 |
49888 |
68820 |
37% |
Pusa 1509 |
83372 |
96026 |
45707 |
63869 |
39% |
PRH10 |
96710 |
116102 |
59045 |
83946 |
42% |
|
Output price: Rs.1250/qtl
|
|
|
The findings
showed that SRI outperformed the conventional improved methods on the
basis of growth, yield, yield attributes, saving in input such as seed
(nearly 80%), water saving, less agro chemical, etc., reduction of
pest and disease and water saving including nematodes and net returns.
Thus, the System of Rice Intensification (SRI) is a promising
innovation having the in-built capability of productivity-enhancing as
well as climate-resilience.
|
|
The
System of Rice Intensification (SRI) in India: Historical Antecedents
and Future Perspectives
Dr. Dominic Glover, Research Fellow,
Institute of Development Studies at the University of Sussex, Falmer,
Brighton BN1 9RE, United Kingdom
The System of Rice Intensification (SRI) is
generally reported to have been discovered or invented in Madagascar
quite suddenly in the early 1980s, developed there during the ensuing
decade, and spread from there to other rice-producing areas of the
world since the mid-1990s. The conventional story of SRI also says
that agronomic principles of SRI were developed out of a chance
discovery made by a French Jesuit missionary and agronomist, based on
his attentive observation of both rice plants and paddy farmers. This
style of inductive, experiential, field-level agronomy is usually
contrasted favourably with the top-down, abstract, deductive methods
of formal rice science.
This paper presents newly uncovered historical
evidence which establishes that this traditional story is incomplete
and partly inaccurate. Documentary material shows that rice
cultivation methods very similar to modern SRI – with respect to both
individual techniques and whole systems that closely resembled SRI –
were practised by farmers, investigated scientifically by agronomists,
and promoted by agriculture officials in various locations across
South and Southeast Asia during several decades before the Green
Revolution, in some cases more than 100 years ago.
This historical record shows that SRI stands on a
firm foundation based on farmers’ practices and scientific knowledge.
Both the direct lineage of the SRI methodology, as well as the
existence of several close analogues from different times and places,
reveal extensive interactions and exchanges of knowledge and practice
between colonial agricultural science, extensionists and farmers’
practices. There have been repeated historical episodes in which
certain characteristic growth habits of rice and other grain crops
were noticed, generating considerable excitement about how their
potential could be exploited by rice farmers to improve and increase
rice production. Each time, agronomists and farmers grappled with
similar challenges in developing and applying cultivation methods that
were practical and affordable.
The fact that SRI is less a new discovery than a
re-emergence of older methods makes the system even more intriguing
than if it were genuinely unprecedented. How and why did these
cultivation principles come to be overlooked or forgotten? Where did
they go? And why have they reappeared in recent times? SRI appears to
reflect a revival of the way rice cultivation used to be thought about
and practised, as well the kinds of scientific approaches and
experiments that used to be pursued by researchers. These approaches
may have been marginalised and neglected by the juggernaut of the
Green Revolution, but may now be re-emerging because of contemporary
ecological and rural crises, such as water scarcity and migration from
rural to urban areas.
|
|
Uprooting Rice Science to building a Research Community: Research
Policy Challenges and Prospects of SRI in India
C. Shambu Prasad, XIMB
This paper provides an overview of the scientific
controversies around SRI at three levels. First, it traces the
different phases of the SRI controversy indicating the changes in the
nature of the discussions over the years. Using a science and
technology studies perspective wherein controversies have been studied
extensively in the global production of knowledge, we show how
different actors involved in the controversies have followed different
strategies over the course of the controversy. Only some of it is
represented in journals where this battle has been fought with
knowledge being promoted and contested in other forums beyond
specialised journals, which too have been asymmetric in their handling
of the controversy. We show how Indian journals and researchers have
played an important, though under-appreciated, role in providing a
different perspective on the controversy on SRI from within science,
even as networks of researcher- civil society collaborations have
broadened the understanding of the controversy outside formal research
spaces.
An analysis of the journal articles on SRI
indicates Indian researchers leading the world in contributions even
as this leadership is not reflected in research programmes or policy
on agroecology in India. The paper provides an analysis of SRI
journals in India from 2002-2013 and avoids a strictly scientometric
study. We suggest how newer tools like GIS can be used for research
planning purposes and engaging and building a research community of
practice on SRI. A few recommendations to strengthen the emerging
research network and its policy implications are suggested. We show
that there is indeed a potential of transforming rice science as often
suggested through the writings in the scientific controversies.
However, this requires a shift towards following the controversy to
building a research community as newer possibilities and prospects of
a different rice science emerge the research of a large number of
researchers on SRI who, prima facie, even in India are not
sufficiently aware of each other’s works. Pursuing research that is
inter-disciplinary, not crop-specific, that allows for farmer and
civil society experimentation is indeed possible as some of the SRI
experiences in India show, but institutional rigidities seem to
prevent the emergence of a vibrant community of practice.
|
|