Date post: | 28-Jan-2015 |
Category: |
Technology |
Upload: | sri-rice-international-programs-cals-cornell-university |
View: | 116 times |
Download: | 4 times |
Meshing mechanization with SRI methods for rice cultivation in Nepal
Presented in
3rd International Rice Congress 20108-12 November 2010, Hanoi, Vietnam
Rajendra UpretySenior Agriculture Development Officer
Department of AgricultureNepal
Rice Cultivation in Nepal
Problems of rice cultivation in Nepal
Low yields
High production costs
Labor shortages
Water shortages for irrigation
Manual/bullock-based cultivation
To solve some of the above mentioned problems, the System of Rice Intensification (SRI) has been introduced to raise factor productivity and reduce water requirements. But even though SRI raises
labor productivity, its labor requirements often limit its adoption.
Mechanization of rice farming Mechanization is being introduced in Morang
district of eastern Nepal in conjunction with SRI practices.
In the first year, 27 farmers participated with 24 ha area under mechanized rice farming
Machines were used for land preparation, transplanting, and harvesting work.
Machines were provided by Buddha Air, but all cost has calculated, and a fixed rent for these machines was paid by farmer users
Average cost distribution of rice farming in 2009
Seed cost5%
Nursery preparation
9%
Land preparation
18%
Transplanting13%Weed
management11%
Fertilizer15%
Harvesting+threshing29%
Average cost distribution of Mechanize rice farming
Average cost for different activities of rice farming, 2009
0
50
100
150
200
250
300
350
Co
st (
US
$/h
a)
Work of rice farming
Cost comparision of conventional and mechanized rice farming
Mechanize
Conventional
Average cost differences of conventional and mechanized rice cultivation
Work Conventional Mechanical Difference (%)
Seed 17.7 12 32.2
Nursery 17 20 -17.6
Land Prep. 80.7 40.3 50.1
Transplanting 46.4 32.3 30.4
Fertilizers 31.9 31.9 00
Weeding 29.7 22.2 25.3
Harvesting 90.4 62.8 30.5
Total 313 226 27.8
Yield distribution of conventional and mechanized rice farming
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
<3.0 3.0-4.0 4.0-5.0 5.0-6.0 >6.0
Nu
mb
ers
of f
arm
ers
Yield (t/ha)
Yield distribution of different rice farmers
Mechanized rice farming
Conventional rice farming
Conventional- 4.2 t/ha
Mechanical- 4.8 t/ha
Yield and production costs of rice farming by different weed management practices
3168N =
Type of weeding
no-w eedingManualMechanical
Prod
uctio
n co
st b
y m
echa
nize
met
hod
(US$
/ha)
400
300
200
100
15
3168N =
Type of weeding
no-w eedingManualMechanical
Crop
yie
ld w
ith m
echa
niza
tion
(t/ha
)
8
7
6
5
4
3
2
1
Ave. 5.83 4.48 2.73
Ave. 224 235 188
US$/hat / ha
Cost and profit situation
0
100
200
300
400
500
600
700
800
900
Production cost (US$/ha) Profit (US$/ha)
US
$/h
a
Cost and Profit
Cost and profit of rice farming in Morang, Nepal, 2009 Conventional
Mechanical
-27 % +35.7%
Labor required for conventional and mechanical rice farming in Morang, 2009
Work Conv. Mech. Saving
Nursery Preparation 8 10 +2
Land Preparation 24 10 14
Transplanting 35 7 28
Weeding 24 16 8
Fertilization 2 2 0
Irrigation 2 2 0
Harvesting + Threshing 44 10 34
Total 137 55 82
Conclusions
Mechanization of rice farming can reduced labor requirements and production costs, and it will be a good solution for Nepalese rice farmers who are faced with labor shortages and high costs of production
Mechanization can reduce the costs of land preparation, transplanting, and harvesting.
Farmers can cut down on their labor costs for weeding if and when they have access to appropriate weeders at an affordable cost.
Conclusions (continued)
Those farmers who are familiar with SRI methods were able to scale-up their SRI practice with some modification.
The results show that a combination of mechanization and SRI can increase production and further enhance farmer income by reducing production cost.
Besides this, Nepalese farmers who can save valuable time by mechanization then can take on other additional work for bettering their livelihoods.