October 12, 2012

2012: Highlight # 7

SRI promises significantly improved yields at much reduced costs. Is that too good to be true? Palanisami et. al. present results from ITP field studies in 13 Indian states...

Impact of the System of Rice Intensification (SRI)

Analysis of SRI practices in 13 states of India

K. Palanisami, K.R. Karunakaran and Upali Amarasinghe

The System of Rice Intensification (SRI) - a package of practices designed to grow more rice with less water - is being widely promoted by governments and NGOs in India. In 2010-11, IWMI-Tata Program, in collaboration with local partners, undertook a study covering 2234 rice farmers in 13 major rice growing states to analyze the adoption level and impact of various SRI practices. The results confirm that SRI adopters, on the whole, displayed comparatively higher yield, higher gross margin and lower production costs. However, most ‘SRI farmers’ in the study sample did not adopt the full package of practices due to several constraints. In fact, only 20 percent could be classified as ‘full adopters’ while the rest were ‘low adopters’ or ‘partial adopters’.

This highlight argues that a targeted approach that offers farmers flexibility in adopting a sub-set of SRI practices in accordance with the local resources conditions can have a significant impact on paddy productivity.

1 comment:

  1. "Average yield in SRI parcels in all states is 8.5 quintals/ha (0.85 tonnes/ha)or 22 percent higher than the non-SRI fields (Table 2)."

    Is this correct? How could yield be so low (0.85 tons/ha)? This number does not match with those in table 2. Table2 is also not clear. Gross Margin (column 2) of what? I was looking forward to this highlight, but it is hard to make sense, specially the yield and cost comparisons between SRI and non-SRI paddy.