DISSEMINATION AND REGIONAL POLICY DIALOUGE ... - EDF Voices [PDF]

DISSEMINATION AND REGIONAL POLICY DIALOUGE WORKSHOP ON LOW EMISSIONS AND SUSTAINABLE RICE CULTIVATION Vietnam Low Carbon Rice Project (Supported by the Australian Government)

Kien Giang, 15 April 2014

81

82

SUMMARY REPORT OF THE VIETNAM LOW CARBON RICE PROJECT- VLCRP PRIMARY ACHIEVEMENTS AND RESULTS AFTER 11 CROP PRODUCTION IN AN GIANG AND KIEN GIANG PROVINCES PERIOD OF NOVEMBER 2012- DECEMBER 2014 Tran Thu Ha1, Nguyen Van Sanh2, Joseph Rudek1, Huynh Quang Tin2, Nguyen Hong Tin2, Tran Kim Tinh3, Tran Quang Cui4, Doan Ngoc Pha5, Hoang Trung Kien4, Huynh Hiep Thanh5, Richie Ahuja1 ABSTRACT The Vietnam Low Carbon Rice Project - VLCRP is a pioneering community-based low carbon rice farming project that creates the practical and measurable changes for the rice production in the Mekong Delta. These changes have been documented through their on-farm research and intervention activities for 11 crops in Phu Thuong Co-op, Phu Tan district of An Giang province and Kenh 7b Co-op, Tan Hiep district of Kien Giang province. With the Participatory Technical Development approach, the VLCRP’s low carbon rice farming protocol namely 1Must 6 Reductions (1M6R) has been piloted, and more than 500 farmer households have been trained to cultivate rice on an area of 540 hectares, for 3 crops per year. Over the two communities were VLCRP has worked, rice farmers that have adopted 1M6R have reduced their seed density by 50%, fertilizer by 30-40%, water irrigation by 40-50%, pesticide by 30%, and labor costs by 20% while increasing their yield from 5-10% resulting in an increase their net profit by 10% to as much as 60%. The project also has implemented its community development package with affirmative gender and women empowerment activities targeting the improvement of women’s livelihood, market linkages and rice value chain improvements. All crop results were communicated with local governments at the commune, district and province as well as policy makers at national level to support policy changes. The scientific data are presented in 3 research reports which accompany this Summary Report.

1. Background context Vietnam has a largely agriculturally based economy, ranked 2 nd for rice export, providing 16% of the total rice export commodity (FAO, 2008). The Mekong Delta (MD) is the country’s main rice bowl with approximately 3.9 million hectare of cultivation areas; in which about 1.85 million hectares are in rice cultivation. In 2013, MD rice export reached 25 million tons which accounted for approximately 77% of the total rice production of Vietnam and contributed 90% of Vietnam’s rice export (GSO, 2014). The rice production sector is the main livelihood for more than 70% of rural populations and contributes substantially to the export

1

Environmental Defense Fund Mekong Research Development Institute, Can Tho University 3 Advanced Laboratory, Can Tho University 4 Department of Agriculture and Rural Development, Kien Giang province 5 Department of Agriculture and Rural Development, An Giang province 2

83

turnover and the GDP. Vietnam’s agricultural strategic development plans for 2030 recognizes the MD as the strategic area for ensuring the national food security. In recent years, the rice production and livelihood of rice farmers has been facing numerous challenges. Rice prices have dropped while input costs have increased. It has been estimated that more than 1,140,000 farmer households’ livelihood are threatening due to the very low income from agriculture. Rice farmers have overused fertilizer and other inputs by approximately 30% and face adverse weather conditions including drought, flooding, salinity increases and soil erosion. Other problems include limited knowledge and poor farming techniques, increased soil pollution, and small-scale production with little or no linkage to the market. The mandates to increase the income of farmers and foster rural development are major targets of the Vietnamese Government. These mandates are driving the national policy framework for restructuring and modernizing Vietnam’s Agriculture, and achieving sustainable rural development. Given this context, applied research and wide-scale application of an advanced rice farming technique is needed to increase economic effectiveness while reducing the negative environmental impacts. 2. Objectives, project size and location of the VLCRP With the support of the Australian Government under the Community-based Climate Change Action Grants, the Environmental Defense Fund (EDF) collaborated with the Mekong Research Development Institute (MDI) and the Advanced Laboratory of Can Tho University; the Department of Agriculture and Rural Development of An Giang and Kien Giang and their Extension Centers to pilot the community-based project entitled “Vietnam Low Carbon Rice Project – VLCRP” during the period of 2012 – 2014. This pilot project was designed to achieve the 3 main objectives: 1. Improve community livelihoods by training small-holder rice farmers in agricultural practices that decrease production costs, maintain or improve yields, provide environmental co-benefits, and create additional income streams from sales of carbon credits. 2. Demonstrate a community level climate smart agriculture pilot that (i) trains small-holder rice farmers to document changes in agricultural practices that reduce GHG emissions and (ii) facilitate the higher income generation from better rice quality, market linkages and potential to sell the resulting carbon credits on the voluntary carbon market and (iii) promotes community development with gender mainstreaming for empowering women and the marginalized members of the community. 3.

Build stakeholder and community capacity for scaling up the project and for transitioning to a broader array of sustainable funding sources over time. This includes the dissemination of project results by stakeholder advocates to policy makers for broader adoption of the approach.

VLCRP worked and built up capacity for the DARD and their Extension System as well as more than 500 small farmer households in the 540 ha paddies in Phu Thuong Co-op, Phu Tan district, An Giang province and Kenh7b Co-op, Tan Hiep district, Kien Giang province. Over the period of 2.5 years, VLCRP completed a total of 11 crops in the two Co-ops. 3. Major results and achievements 84

The 1M6R low carbon rice farming protocol is built on and further refined from the 1 Must 5 Reductions farming techniques. (1 Must means must use certified seed; 5 reductions include the reduction of seed density, fertilizer, pesticide, water irrigation and post-harvest lost.) VLCRP has tested, piloted and applied a comprehensive farming package to the 1M5R techniques, including a crop-specific alternate wet dry water irrigation scheme and appropriate fertilizer application rates that have produced positive economic and environmental co-benefits. As such, the resulting VLCRP low carbon rice farming protocol has achieved a 6th reduction – a reduction of environmental pollution that includes green house gas emissions and thus has been renamed “1 Must 6 Reduction” low carbon rice farming technique. Since 2010, the 1M6R techniques have been further refined to prove its efficacy in terms of economic, environment and social development.Based upon the encouraging results and achievements from the last 2.5 years, the Department of Agriculture and Rural Development of Kien Giang and An Giang have extended and scaled up the application of VLCRP’s 1M6R low carbon farming techniques to over 1,000 ha since the Winter-Spring crop of 2015, in their Large Scale Rice Production Model. They are also promoting the adoption of the 1M6R technique in other communes and districts of Tan Hiep and Phu Tan of Kien Giang and An Giang provinces. 3.1. Major results Over the last 11 crops in both An Giang and Kien Giang, the application of the 1M6R farming protocol have continuously delivered the triple wins of economic, environment and social development. These aspects are measured, verified and reported as following: a) Economic development and livelihood improvement for rice farmers Farmer’s incomes have increase from 5-60% through the reductions of input costs by reduce 50% seeds, 15-30% fertilizer, 30-40% chemical pesticide/herbicide, 40-50% water irrigation and 20% labor cost. On average, rice yield increase from 10% and net profit increase from 1015% per hectare as compared to the farmer’s conventional practices. b) Environment and Food Safety; Protection of Public Health, Water Resources and Ecological System By reducing chemical pesticide use, not only is production cost reduced, but this practice has helped to improve the quality and safety of the rice. VLCRP has collected rice samples randomly from its 1M6R model and the conventional practice model for laboratory test to measure the heavy metal and chemical residues. Results have showed that the rice from 1M6Rs met the WHO.standard food safety. The nitrate was found to be 4.97 -6.76mg/kg which is far lower than the allowed nitrate residues from fresh vegetable, drinking water and food for infant and mother in accordance with the WHO standard. Concentrations of Propiconazole, Tryciclazone, Acetamiprid, lead (Pb) and cadmium (Cd) were below detectable levels. When apply the 1M6R farming protocol, rice farmers have better opportunities to reduce their health risk hazard by reducing direct interactions with toxic chemical, and protect their ecological system including the useful insects and fish. Many farmers in the VLCRP project areas reported to the mid-term independent reviewers commissioned by the Australian Government that after 3 crops of reduced chemical pesticide use, they have witnessed the return of fishes/shrimp in their canal and paddies. While farmers’ perceptions have not been measured to date, VLCRP is considering the possibility of documenting water quality benefits in its next project phase. 85

To measure the on-farm green house gas emissions, VLCRP applied the US Department of Agriculture’s GraceNet protocol for measuring the emissions of methane (CH4) and nitrous oxide (N2O) greenhouse gases for each crop. Results show significant reductions in greenhouse gas emissions in 7 out of 8 crop seasons where good data was collected over the 2 year project duration. As a result of reductions in overall green house gases emissions, there is the potential for an additional new income source for farmers from the sale of Certificate of Emission Reductions – CERs. c) Social development with Gender and Women Empowerment Integration VLCRP designed a participatory approach for raising awareness and building up a community’s capacity which is important for the community’s desire and ability to voluntarily adopt and practice the low carbon rice farming technique. VCLRP worked with local authorities and Co-ops to organize and divide each project site into 5 Production Groups. The field-based extension workers, farmer Group Leaders, and Women’s Union leaders were provided with a series of Training of Trainer courses which provided a range of subject matter from primary to advanced level on the low carbon rice farming protocol, and planning and leadership skills. Farmers and their Group Leaders are thus taking charge of their own crop planning and management and share successful experiences and practices through their regular group meetings held 7 times per crop season in accordance with the physical development stages of the rice. This approach ensures that all farmer households including the poor, near poor, single women-head of households, disabled and other types of the marginalized community members have equal opportunities to access to learn advanced rice farming techniques, equal access to extension services and equal ability to air their opinions and concerns. During the group meetings, farmers’ Diaries were updated and used to calculate the profitability at the end of each crop. As a self-help group with the farmers supporting farmers approach, VLCRP created a sustainable community system for effective application of 1M6R protocol. Personalized extension services were provided to the most vulnerable groups of the poor, near poor, single women-head of households, disabled and other types of the marginalized community members. Through training and coaching, their knowledge of low carbon rice farming and household economic management was enhanced, and women and other members of vulnerable groups were empowered so their voices couldbe heard in either family or community crop planning and decision making processes. At the same time, VLCRP collaborated with the Women’s Union to design a user friendly guidebook of 1M6R farming techniques and integrated its contents to the Women Union’s curriculum for women meetings at commune, district and provincial level. Baseline data showed that less than 4% and 12% of women in the community in An Giang and Kien Giang, respectively, participated in community meeting before VLCRP. After the project intervention, M&E data showed that 86% of women attended and participated 1M6R training and Production Group meetings. To date, more than 1,200 women have participated in the 1M6R training and group meetings. The local authorities at the commune, district and provincial level actively monitored, advocated and promoted the voluntary adoption of 1M6R protocol and provided matching funds to improve the infrastructure. 3.2. Major achievements In addition to the economic, social and environment development results, VLCRP was also able to address the rural development priorities of Vietnam Government and Australian Government for their international aid program for Vietnam. These are: 86

a) Policy Dialogue to facilitate the Modernized and Sustainable Agriculture Rice cultivation reform during this critical transition period requires that advanced farming techniques can increase profitability and sustainability. The successful training in the techniques of the low carbon rice farming protocol is key to encouraging farmers’ voluntarily adoption and self-replicate on wide scale. This is a conditional foundation to be sure that the Agriculture Re-structuring Plan and Rice Reform Plan targeting 2020 be achieved. Given VLCRP’s encouraging results and achievements, in September 2014, under the direct support and execution of the Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Development (MARD), VLCRP successfully held the first national level Policy Dialogue Forum on Low Emission Agriculture with the participation of relevant technical divisions of MARD, DARD, Agriculture Research and Policy Strategy agencies, and international organizations including SNV, ADB, JICA, AgResults and others. As results of this national Policy Dialogue Forum, the International Cooperation Division (ICD) of MARD updated EDF that the proposals and recommendations of the dialogue have been used as inputs for rice sector restructuring strategy which MARD commissions IRRI to undertake. MARD also was able to mobilize the support from the Vietnam Forest and Delta (VFD) – a USAID funded project to conduct a national-level review of the implementation of all low-emission agriculture projects in Vietnam. And the ADB through the TA-REG 8163 Implementing the GMS Core Agriculture Support Program, Phase 2 have agreed to support MARD to organize a policy dialogue on the low-carbon rice farming to share experiences with GMS countries aiming at promoting the low carbon farming practices in the region. In addition, VLCRP Project Management Board actively contributed and shared methodologies, best practices, lessons learnt and technical expertise on crop management, irrigation, on-farm greenhouse gas emissions measurement with national counterparts including Ha Noi and Hue University, Cuu Long Rice Research Institute and international development partners such as ADB, IRRI, Winrock International, USAID/USDA and the World Bank. b) Improvement of Rice Value Chain: creation of Bio-rice and formulation of the PPP business model DARD of An Giang and Kien Giang provinces and their Extension Centers supported the business promotion among the Co-ops and the Rice Trading Companies. Prior to each crop, the business contracts were negotiated for a favorable purchase price of rice from VLCRP Coops; often from 100 – 300 dong/kg higher as compared to the market price. In addition, rice farmers also benefited from a no-interest credit offer of 5 million dong/ha or $240/ha from the Rice Trading Company upon signature of the business contract. These are significant sources of additional income to rice farmers practicing 1M6R. Moreover, rice farmers did not have to deal separately with the middle men who often offer lower prices or result in other problems. There has been a serious proposal from rice trading companies to have a strategic business plan with VLCRP for improving the rice value chain and developing a bio-rice trade mark for rice produced from VLCRP’s farming model. c) Improvement of Livelihood and Empowerment for Women through integrated community development In the Mekong Delta, rice farming is the main livelihood and farming decision are often made by the men. VLCRP baseline data documented this; and although women participated in all 14 major farming activities, from land preparation to the sale of rice at the harvest, male farmers pre-dominantly made the decisions and the female farmers followed. Through the 87

integrated community development activities and with close collaboration from the existing Women Union system, VLCRP had built up the knowledge and capacity for more than 1,200 women including single women-head of households for adopting the advanced farming technique, gender equity in agriculture production and household economic management. As a result, women were able to better track records of crop inputs and farm labor used; and reported they are being consulted more for farm planning in their households. On average, women-headed households saved 2 million dong (90 USD) of input cost per hectare, increasing their net profit by 1.6 million dong (about 80 USD) per hectare and had their yield increased by 1.35 tons/ha. Mrs Tran Thi Dao, Head of Women’s Union of K7A hamlet said: After learning the 1M6Rs, I now understand that the rice does not always required water and that the alternate wet dry scheme helps the rice to grow better while reducing the greenhouse gas emissions. In the summer-fall crop of 2014, I will convince my husband to use less seed and fertilizer and apply the AWD. Of course I will also advocate and convince other women to apply 1M6R. A full gender aggregated database with measured progress from women participation to VLCRP community development activities and application of 1M6R was created, analyzed and disseminated to relevant audience including local authorities, Women’s Union, DARD, Extension Centre and community leaders to strengthen women’s roles in adopting the contemporary farming techniques and their roles in their communities. Specific results from women livelihood improvement can be referenced from the case study of Mrs Nguyen Thi Ngoc Huong, a single woman-head of household in K7b Coop, Tan Hiep district of Kien Giang province (attached). 4. Lesson learned: major challenges and solutions The low carbon rice farming protocol requires certain infrastructure conditions, operational and management mechanisms and agricultural policies to ensure that the large scale rice production that results from small households can apply consistent crop management practices in order to generate and optimize the economic, social and environmental benefits. After a total 11 crops in An Giang and Kien Giang, the following major challenges were faced and addressed by VLCRP. 4.1. Challenges from the Farmers and their Community o Farmers often worry about losing their yield and income when the 1M6R protocol reduced seeds, and fertilizer and implemented alternate wet dry water management. o There are conflicts between husband’s and wife’s for changing from conventional to 1M6R farming practices o There are a lack of “farmer leaders” who can be peer educators to their communities o Few households disagree with the community’s crop plan o Farmers are dependent on the private suppliers’ credit and thus dependent on the recommended quantity o Farmers often have to use credit to purchase their materials at the local shop. Thus they must purchase whatever materials are available and often, the quality of those materials were not of high quality. 4.2. Challenges from external conditions

88

o Adverse weather: prolonged heat, strong rain, whirlwinds, storms, and floods occurred in most of the crops and during the key development stages of the rice or just before the harvest. o Lack of access to quality materials (seeds, fertilizer, pesticide) o Ineffective irrigation infrastructure o Uneven topography of the paddies To address these fundamental challenges, VLCRP collaborated with relevant partners and local authorities to execute the technical solutions and management mechanism as following: 1. Designed and maintained the “demonstration paddies” in the area of each Production Group to allow farmers’ observation and evaluation. Farmer Field School and Group Meetings are used to raise awareness and capacity of farmers for adopting the 1M6R farming protocol. 2. The 1M6R protocol is specifically designed for each cropping season to ensure its suitability with the specific cropping features, irrigation system, water irrigation procedures, capacity of the extension workers and the ability of farmers for adoption. 3. Organized and trained the field-based extension team for supporting each of the Production Groups in terms of crop management (fertilizer application, water management, pest management, farmer’s Diaries updates). The Group Leaders and advanced farmers lead the community to follow their best practices. 4. DARD and local authorities provided relevant technical support and matching funds for paddy management, infrastructure improvements including irrigation system and paddy topography leveling by laser equipment. 5. Last but not least, the direct management and execution from DARD and their Extension Centers play key roles in transferring direct technical support to farmers during the entire crop, from selection of high quality seeds, fertilizer to market linkage support, creation of relevant policy support and coordination of support from technical agencies (irrigation, plant protection, local authorities). The DARD of An Giang and Kien Giang also mobilized and provided matching funds and relevant development projects to generate synergies and build storage facilities and laser equipment for land leveling. 5. Conclusions and recommendations 1. The low carbon rice farming protocol has proven itself as an advanced technique that has delivered multi-benefits in terms of economic development, poverty reduction for rural farmers and environmental protection including the reduction of greenhouse gas emissions and soil and water pollution in the Mekong Delta which contribute effectively to the realization of the Agriculture Restructuring Plan of Vietnam. An Giang and Kien Giang provinces have long been the two top advanced and productive rice production provinces; however the application of 1M6R has increased their yield and profitability from 5-60%. Hypothetically, if the 1M6R tehcniques are applied across the 1.85 million ha of rice in the MD, the cost savings for materials is 7,400 billion dong (equivalent to 352.3 million USD) annually and the water saved is approximately 2.4 billion m3. As such, the facilitation and promotion of adoption of the 1M6R in the large scale rice production model for improving the quality and comparative advantages for the rice is recommended. 89

2. VLCRP’s research data showed the close relationships between the economic and environmental co-benefits versus the crop management practices, water irrigation and ecological zones. For the 1M6R to optimize its efficacy, the replication and research activities should continue in the five remaining ecological zones and geographical areas of intensive rice cultivation in the MD. 3. The continuation of experience sharing and learning with other low carbon rice/agriculture projects is a pivotal activity to standardize and document the optimum low carbon rice farming protocol for widescale adoption. 4. Research and hands-on field experience on low carbon rice farming at the community level should be used for evidence-based rice production planning at the provincial level and policy recommendations at national level. At the community level, policy recommendations should be focused on the modality and mechanism to support the improvement of the rice value chain and the engagement for a win-win partnership among farmers, scientist, government and private sector. At the national level, as the VLCRP policy dialogues are being undertaken, policy recommendations should be proposed for enhancing the effective coordination among the 3 key technical agencies of Crop Production, Plant Protection and Water Resources Irrigation Department for supporting the low carbon agriculture practices from the grass-root level and up. These policy changes will support and accelerate the process of realization of the Rice Restructuring Plan in particular; and the overall economic and social development in general. 5. The low carbon rice farming protocol proves its feasibilities in promoting women’s capacity and capability in adopting and mastering the contemporary advanced farming technique as an innovative livelihood improvement for women. Further investigations and interventions for gender empowerment in modern agriculture activities should be continued at community and provincial level to facilitate the Women Union’s roles and responsibilities in gender-focused livelihood improvements. The restructuring of Agriculture toward modernization, increasing the competative advantages and profitability in agriculture in an environmental-friendly style has been one of the top priorities in the social economic development strategy of the Government of Vietnam. The low carbon rice farming is an advanced contemporary farming technique has been developed and applied in large scale of over 530 ha/each crop by VLCRP and their partners in An Giang and Kien Giang provinces. The application and wide-adoption of 1M6R farming protocol has delivered meaningful outcomes for economic, social and environment development that are aligned with the development priorities of the agriculture sector and Vietnam as a whole.

90

Annex 1: Summary of Preliminary Results of VLCRP Location/Season (Kien Giang province = KG; An Giang province = AG

AG (Crop 1: Dec 12- Mar 13)

AG (Crop 2: April - July 13)

AG (Crop 3: AugNov 13)

Preliminary Results of GHG emissions reductions Model

GHG CH4 N2O Combined emissions Yield % Profit emissions emissions CO2e Reduction (ton/ha) - Increase (million (CO2e (CO2e ton/ha (CO2e Dry in Yield VND/ha) ton/ha) ton/ha) ton/ha)

Control

6.2

AWD

6.6

Control

3.5

0.1

3.7

AWD

1.1

0.5

1.6

Control

2.2

0.5

2.7

AWD

1.2

1.1

2.6

Control

5.3

0.11

5.4

AG (Crop 4: Dec 13-Apr 14)

AWD

2.9

0.18

3.1

AG (Crop 5: MayAug 14)

Control

10.9

0.14

11

4.9

0.25

5.2

AWD

KG (Crop 1: Nov 12- Feb 13)

6.7

No reduction

6.5

2.3

9.4

5.8**

AWD

AWD Control

KG (Crop 4: Nov 13 - Mar 14)

AWD

KG (Crop 5: Mar June 14)

Control AWD

1.1

0.2

0.18

0.4

22.4

0.4

25.5

7.2

0.2

8.2

26.8

0.11

26.9

9.3

0.13

9.4

32.2

0.09

32.2

7.5

0.12

7.5

14

8

27.3

15

5.3

16

9.6

8

5.6

22.6

20.8

60

52

31

12.9 7

20.4

58

11.1 10

17.3

56

34 17

4.9 24.7**

28.7

15.9

8.2 17.5

32

10.8

4.8 17.3***

42

17.9

6.7

6.3

37.1 20.7

5.9 0.7**

16

26.1

5.8

7.2 0.15

36.4

8.2

AWD 1

7

6

6.7

Control KG (Crop 3: JulOct 13)

2.1*

% Increase in Profit

31.4

5.9

Control

Control KG (Crop 2: MarJun 13)

Preliminary Results of Profit in terms of Yield and Net Profit for farmers

45.7

34

11.6 13

19.3

40

91

Annex 2: Case study of Mrs Nguyen Thi Ngoc Huong Prior to the launch of VLCRP in Kenh 7b ward, Thanh Dong A commune, Tan Hiep district of Kien Giang province, rice farmers harvested two crops of rice per year. On average the net income per hectare from rice cultivation was about 14.5 million VND/hectare. During times when the crop was not productive, farmers were not able to pay for their input costs. A widow since 2008 and nursing five children, Mrs. Nguyen Thi Ngoc Huong’s main income source is from Rice production. Mrs. Huong has participated in the VLCRP project since November 2012 and practiced VLCRP’s farming model, 1 Must 6 Reductions, over her three hectares of land. To date, six crops have been harvested. A full data set of farming practices of Mrs. Huong’s family prior to joining VLCRP project and during the last 6 crops is available in VLCRP’s Baseline study and Crop Evaluation database and shown below.

In 2012, I was encouraged to join the Vietnam Low Carbon Rice Project. At first and during the entire crop one (the Winter-Spring crop 2012-2013), I was very nervous because the project’s farming technique reduced 50% of the seeds, 30% of fertilizer, reduced the water and minimize the herbicide spray as much as possible. During the crop, I was trained to count the panicles and tillers, and witnessed that even if I used much less seeds and fertilizer, the total rice panicles and tillers in my paddy are about the same but even stronger than the paddies with much higher seed density and fertilizer application. The results of the first crop were very positive. Thus I have been practicing 1M6Rs since that. The last Winter-Spring crop of 2013-2014, with three hectares of land for rice cultivation, our family earned more than 100 million Dong after subtracting the input costs. I am no longer nervous when following the project’s farming technique; and am very happy now that I can pay back my debt, cover the living cost and pay for tuition fees for my sons and my daughters. Joining this project, I learned a lot from the regular community meetings and the on-farm support from our Group Leaders, Extension Workers and Teachers from Can Tho University. Our lives are a lot easier and happier. I am also joining the Women Union’s regular meetings in my commune, and I shared with many other women about the 1M6Rs farming practices to help them to increase their family income.

92

Farm and Economic Data for Mrs. Nguyen Thi Ngoc Huong 1. Rice farming practices prior to joining VLCRP Prior to joining VLCRP (baseline data)

Upon joining VLCRP (Data source: Farmer Diary Records) Winter-Spring crop 2013-2014

Winter-Spring crop 2010-2011 Seed (kg/ha) Net Nitrogen (kg/ha) P2O5 (kg/ha) K2O (kg/ha) Yield (ton/ha) Summer-Autumn Crop 2011 Seed (kg/ha) Net Nitrogen (kg/ha) P2O5 (kg/ha) K2O (kg/ha) Yield (ton/ha)

210.0 120.0 76.0 65.0 8.15 230.0 110.0 75.0 62.0 5.53

Autumn-Winter crop 2011 The Co-op and farmers only do two crops per year before the Vietnam Low Carbon Rice Project arrives; thus there was no Autumn-Winter crop data.

Seed (kg/ha) Net Nitrogen (kg/ha) P2O5 (kg/ha) K2O (kg/ha) Yield (ton/ha)

120.0 80.0 61.0 50.0 10.4

Summer-Autumn Crop 2013 Seed (kg/ha) 120.00 Net Nitrogen (kg/ha) 78.00 P2O5 (kg/ha) 65.00 K2O (kg/ha) 50.00 Yield (t/ha) 7.15 Autumn-Winter crop 2013 Seed (kg/ha) Net Nitrogen (kg/ha) P2O5 (kg/ha) K2O (kg/ha) Yield (ton/ha)

120.00 79.00 62.00 50.00 6.91

Summer-Autumn Crop 2014 Seed (kg/ha) Net Nitrogen (kg/ha) P2O5 (kg/ha) K2O (kg/ha) Yield (t/ha)

120.00 85.00 46.00 46.00 6.40

Autumn-Winter crop 2014 Seed (kg/ha) Net Nitrogen (kg/ha) P2O5 (kg/ha) K2O (kg/ha) Yield (t/ha)

120.00 77.80 46.00 42.00 6.00

93

2. The economic effectiveness of the Winter-Spring crop before and after joining the VLCRP Prior to joining VLCRP (baseline data) Upon joining VLCRP Winter-Spring crop 2010-2011 Winter-Spring crop 2012-2013 Input costs VND/ha Input costs VND/ha (thousand) (thousand) Land preparation 1,440 Land preparation 1,540 Seed 2,625 Seed 1,680 Fertilizer 4,950 Fertilizer 5,213 Pesticide/herbicide 3,100 Pesticide/herbicide 5,726 Water 1,215 Water 633 Harvest cost 1,590 Harvest cost 2,000 Labor cost 3,200 Labor cost 3,530 Total input cost 18,120 Total input cost 20,288 Total Revenue 45,640 Total Revenue 44,149 Net Income 27,520 Net Income 23,861 3. The economic effectiveness of Summer-Autumn crops upon joining the VLCRP Upon joining VLCRP Upon joining VLCRP Summer-Autumn crop 2011 Summer-Autumn crop 2013 Input costs VND/ha (thousand) Input costs VND/ha (thousand) Land preparation 1,650 Land preparation 1,800 Seed 1,800 Seed 1,320 Fertilizer 5,320 Fertilizer 3,890 Pesticide/herbicide 3,600 Pesticide/herbicide 2,322 Water 560 Water 368 Harvest cost 2,200 Harvest cost 2,500 Labor cost 3,200 Labor cost 2,733 Total input cost 18,330 Total input cost 14,934 Total Revenue 29,110 Total Revenue 34,335 Net Income 10,780 Net Income 19,401 4. The economic effectiveness of the 2 Autumn-Winter crops upon joining the VLCRP Upon joining VLCRP Upon joining VLCRP Autumn-Winter crop 2013 Autumn-Winter crop 2014 VND/ha Input costs Input costs VND/ha (thousand) (thousand) Land preparation 1,540 Land preparation 1,370 Seed 1,230 Seed 1,440 Fertilizer 3,928 Fertilizer 2,785 Pesticide/herbicide 2,468 Pesticide/herbicide 1,596 Water 560 Water 566 Harvest cost 2,800 Harvest cost 1,800 Labor cost 2,216 Labor cost 1,474 Total input cost 14,742 Total input cost 11,031 Total Revenue 30,225 Total Revenue 28,800 94

Net Income 15,483 Net Income 17,768 5. The economic effectiveness of the Winter-Spring crop before and after joining the VLCRP Prior to joining VLCRP (baseline data) Winter-Spring crop 2010-2011 Input costs Land preparation Seed Fertilizer Pesticide/herbicid e Water Harvest cost Labor cost Total input cost Total Revenue Net Income

VND/ha (thousand) 1,440 2,625 4,950 3,100 1,215 1,590 3,200 18,120 45,640 27,520

Upon joining VLCRP Winter-Spring crop 2013-2014 Input costs Land preparation Seed Fertilizer Pesticide/herbicide Water Harvest cost Labor cost Total input cost Total Revenue Net Income

VND/ha (thousand) 940 1,416 3,99 2,850 633 1,340 2,218 13,392 54,600 41,207

6. The economic effectiveness of the Summer-Autumn crop before and after joining the VLCRP Upon joining VLCRP Summer-Autumn crop 2011 VND/ha Input costs (thousand) Land preparation 1,650 Seed 1,800 Fertilizer 5,320 Pesticide/herbicide 3,600 Water 560 Harvest cost 2,200 Labor cost 3,200 Total input cost 18,330 Total Revenue 29,110 Net Income 10,780

Upon joining VLCRP Summer-Autumn crop 2014 Input costs Land preparation Seed Fertilizer Pesticide/herbicide Water Harvest cost Labor cost Total input cost Total Revenue Net Income

VND/ha (thousand) 2,040 1,440 3,460 1,875 153 2,000 2,090 13,058 30,080 17,022

95

STUDY ON AGRONOMIC CHARACTERISTICS AND ECONOMIC EFFICIENCY OF 1 MUST – 6 REDUCTIONS MODEL IN AN GIANG AND KIEN GIANG PROVINCES Huynh Quang Tin1, Nguyen Van Sanh1, Tran Thu Ha2 Doan Ngoc Pha3, Tran Quang Cui4 Abstract The “Vietnam low carbon rice project - VLCRP" has been implemented at Kenh 7B cooperative, Tân Hiep, Kien Giang province and Phu Thuong cooperative, Phu Tan, An Giang province for improving rice cultivation of 1 Must – 5 Reductions model (1M – 5R) to 1 Must 6 Reductions model that resulting higher households’ income and green products – low carbon emission. The experiment had been carried out since the winter-spring crop 12–13 until autumn-winter crop 2014 with 3 models: 1) 1 Must 6 Reductions, 1M6R+Tricoderma (TRI) and traditional practice as Control (CON). The results from 11 rice crops show that application of 1P6G+AWD could reduce 47% of seed rate; 24% of nitrogen, 32% of pesticide application; 48% of water for production; 30% of losses during production and increase about 12% of average rice yield and 50% of profit in comparing to CON model. The results indicate that the model of 1P6G-AWD benefits higher economic efficiency, improving environment conditions; and it is also a potential technical model for poverty alleviation for poor farm households towards green agriculture in the Mekong Delta. Keywords: 1 must – 6 reductions, alternative wetting and drying, yield, economic efficiency, rice

1. Introduction Rice is the main food crop of almost all Asian countries and around the world; thus, rice is cultivated with a large area. The estimation of the amount of water used in rice cultivation is about2,700 billion m3/year of the total amount of water used globallyof about 3.800 billion m3/year(Pham Thi Thanh Hoa, 2013). In the context of global climate change such asdrought, floods, saltwater intrusion, etc., the efficiency of water management in agricultural production is a major concern of agricultural countries, especially the Mekong Delta, Vietnam. Many research have proven that there is an emission of methane (CH4) during the period of rice cultivation; this gas is one of the major gases directly affecting to the global warming.The practices of continuous wetting, high seed rate, too much fertilizer (nitrogen), etc.have been the main cause of greenhouse gases emission (GHG). The emission in Vietnam is 150.9 Tg CO2 (1 Tg = 1 million tons); in which, the GHG emission of agriculture sector is 65.09 Tg CO2accounting for 43.1% of the total GHG emission of the country. In the agriculture sector, wet rice cultivation accounts for 57.5% the GHG emission of whole sector(VSC, 2010).

1

Mekong Delta Development and Research Institute (MDI) Environment al Defense Fund (EDF) – Vietnam 3 Department of Agriculture and Rural Development, An Giang province 4 Department of Agriculture and Rural Development, Kien Giang province Support group: Nguyen Van Nhat, Nguyen Thanh Liem (MDI), Trinh Minh Thao, Le Huyen Linh, Duong Phu Hau (EC- AG) Nguyen Thi Xuan Huong, Nguyen Ngoc Huyen, Nguyen Van Huynh, Pham Viet Nam (EC-KG) 2

96

The reduction of water for irrigation (drained out) few times during a rice crop could decrease about 50% of methane emission (Khosa et al., 2011; Elena Sanchis et al., 2012). In order to save water and reduce GHG emission in rice production along with improving farm household’s income, many new advanced practices which could reduce production costs and increase rice yield such as 3 reductions – 3 gains (Heong et al., 2010); 1 must 5 reductions (Truong Thi Ngoc Chi et al., 2013), System of rice intensification – SRI (WWF-ICRISAT, 2010), and 1 must 6 reductions (1M6R) - “1M5R” integrating with alternative wetting and drying method (Huynh Quang Tin, 2014) are introduced in Vietnam. However, many farm households are not applying the model of 1M5Rimproperly causing low production efficiency and low income (Nguyen Ngoc Son et al., 2013).Thus, the pilot of VLCRP aims to standardize farming practice and determines the impacts of alternative wetting and drying technique to rice yield and economic efficiency in rice production at Phu Thuong, An Giang andKenh 7B, Kien Giang from 11/2012-12/2014 providing a reference for recommendations in production in the Mekong Delta, Vietnam. 2. Materials and methodology 2.1.Materials and methodology -

The rice varieties used for experiments at Kenh 7B and Phu Thuong have the growth duration of about 95 - 105 days (depending on different variety/crop) and the quality level is Certified seed provided by Extension center (provincial or district). The list of rice varieties is shown in Table 2.1.

Table2.1: List of rice varieties for experiments through out seasons at Kenh 7B and Phu Thuong Crop 1. WS12-13 2. SA 2014 3. AW 2014 4. WS13-14 5. SA 2014 6. AW 2014

-

Kenh 7B, KG Jasmine 85 (105 days cycle) OM5451 OM5451 Jasmine 85 OM5451 OM5451

Phu Thuong, AG CK 92 CK 92 CK 92 CK 2003 CK 2003

Fertilizers: the agreed fertilizers to be used in 3 models are as follow: o Urea: Phu My, Vietnam (46% N) o DAP: Philippines (18–46) o Kali: Canada (60% K2O) – applied by households practice 1P6G-AWD o NKP (16-16-8) applied by households practice CON model at Phu Thuong

-

Plastic tubes 150 mm (diameter) x 400mm (long) are used for monitoring water level.

-

Plastic frame is used for monitoring agronomic characteristics (height, number of tillers, etc.).

-

Plastic canvas is used for preventing water leakage between experiment fields of 1M6R-AWD and CON. 97

-

Water pump and necessary tools are used for measuring the amount of water pumped into the field.

-

Grain moisture meter, electric scaleand tool for measuring stem characteristics are used for calculating rice yield and stem-internodes characteristic.

2.2. Methodology 2.2.1. Experiment establishment 

Experiment including 3 treatments (model): 1P6G-AWD, 1P6G-TRI and CONwere carried out in 3 seasons at K7B, KG and PT, AG (WS12-13 to AW2013)



Experiment including 2 treatments: 1M6R-AWD and CONwere carried out in 3 seasons (WS13-4 to AW 2014) at Kenh 7B and 2 seasons at Phu Thuong



Experiment establishment: The 3 models were arranged randomly with 3 repetitions. The total rice fields were 9 (3 treatments); 1 rice field (household) was a repetition of each treatment. The area of each rice field was 1 ha.



Technical variable: sowing rate, fertilizer formula based on the baseline study conducted before the implementation of the project and the model of 1 Must 6 Reductions based on the recommendation of 1 Must 5 Reductions with modifications which were applied at Kenh 7B and Phu Thuong as following:

Table 2.2: Fertilizer formulas applied in experimental models at K7B and PT by crops Kenh 7B Crop

1M6RAWD

1M6RAWD+TRI*

1 2 3 4 5 6

100-60-50 78-46-46 67-35-46 100-60-50 85-46-46 67-35-46

100-60-50 70-46-46 60-35-46

Phu Thuong Control 130-80-60 106-71-69 88-71-69 145-80-40 105-71-69 88-72-69

1M6RAWD

1M6RAWD+TRI*

110-60-60 110-60-60 110-60-60 110-60-60 110-60-60

110-60-60 100-60-60 100-60-60

Control 140-74-100 143-74-26 143-74-42 140-74-100 143-74-26

Note: * applied Desela 30kg/ha 2.2.2. Practices

98



Land preparation: after harvesting, the rice field was turned up and fallowed around 12 weeks, then harrowed and leveled for sowing. For the model using rice straw, Trichoderma was buried down 2 weeks before sowing preventing poisoned.



Fertilizer application: Amount and timing for fertilizer application in all models was arranged at the same time for all sites, as following:

Table 2.3: Amount and timing of fertilizer application for research models at K7B and PT 1M6R-AWD

N (%)

P (%)

K (%)

1 (8-10DAS)

20

50

0

2 (20-21 DAS)

40

50

0

3 (40-45DAS)

30

0

50

4 (70-75DAS)

10

0

50

CON Model

N (%)

P (%)

K (%)

1 (8-10DAS)

21

50

0

2 (20-22DAS)

40

50

0

3 (40-45DAS)

29

0

50

4 (70-75DAS)

10

0

50



Water management: o The process of 1M6R-AWD was stimulated and applied as shown in the figure below, timing for controlling water level in the rice field was recommended accordingly to period before fertilizer application and at the end of tillering stage to decimate the non-productive tillers and easy for harvesting. o The CON model was applied the traditional practice of the areas. The water level in this model is followed the schedule of irrigation group and cooperative which included drain-out twice (at the mid-season and 10 days before harvesting). The process of AWD was designed for the 2 project areas as following:

Figure 2.1a: Water management in research models at Kenh 7B 99

Figure 2.1b: Water management in research models at Phu Thuong 2.2.3. Data collection on agronomic characteristics The variables of height, tiller development, lodging, growth duration, panicle and rice yield were monitored periodically and followed the growth stages of the rice plant based on the Standard Evaluation System for Rice (IRRI, 1988). Rice roots: Rice roots were randomly collected 10 rice plant/field in different times of 14, 21, 28, 35, 42, 56, 6 DAS for evaluating the development of rice roots in each treatment. The rice roots were cleaned up and measured for average after dis-rooting. Stem – internodes: Internodes diameter: 10 days before harvest, 20 – 30 rice plants were randomly selected in each field, main stem of each bush was picked for measurement as follow: o Internodes length: the 3rd, 4th and 5th internodes (from top goes down) were selected for measuring the length (from 2nd ends of each internodes) and average length of each internodes. o Internodes diameter: the 3rd, 4th and 5th internodes were selected for measuring diameter at the middle point of each internodes using technical tool and calculating the average. o Thickness of internodes: Cutting at the central part of each internodes 3, 4, 5; using technical tools to measure thickness in mm and calculate average thickness. 2.2.4. Yield components

100



Panicles/m2: counting the number of panicles of 3 frames on each field. The total panicles of 3 frames (50 cm x 50 cm = 0.25 m2) was calculated into panicle/m2.



Full grains/panicle: randomly seelcting 10 panicles for counting the total full grains and unfilled grains. The average full grains/panicle was calculatedfor each frame.



Weight of 1,000 grains: selecting 1,000 full grains of each frame and weighting using electric scale. The results of weight (g) and moisture (14%) were recorded.



Actual yield: The grain was harvested from 3 distinct frames, 10m 2/frame, and then the threshing was carried out. Cleaning, weighing and measuring moisture content were recorded. All of the data related to grain weight were measured with the standard moisture of 14% applying the follow formula: Weight (14%) =

Wo x (100-Ho) -----------------86

In which: Wo: weight of grains (harvesting 5 frames or 10m2) Ho: moisture content when weighting (%) Rice yield calculation: Yield (ton/ha) was calculated by the weight of average weight of frames (10m2). 2.2.5. Economic efficiency Each project farmer was provided a "household note" and be trained to record the cost of production including costs of materials, fertilizer, fuel materials and equipments, the cost of hiring labor and services and analyzing production efficiency of each model. Economic efficiency was calculated as follow: 

Total cost (1 ha) = materials + labors o Material costs o Labor cost = hired labors + household’s labors



Total income (ha) = Yield (kg) x Selling price (VND/kg)



Profit /1 ha = Total income – Total cost

2.2.6. Data analysis The data was input by using Microsoft Excel and analysed by using the SPSS software with the T-test tool for study the difference of average between models in term of agronomic characteristics, yield,costs, profit and net profit. 3. Results The study on agronomic characteristics and economic efficiency was conducted at Kenh 7B and Phu Thuong through 11 rice crops with positive results which could prove the advantages of 1M6R-AWD model as following: 3.1. Impact of water management on rice growth 

Growth duration:

At Kenh 7B: Jasmine variety was used during winter-spring crop and OM5451 variety was used in the remaining rice crops. Figure 2.2 shows that the growth duration of rice in 1M6RAWD model is 1-3 days longer than those in CON model. At Phu Thuong: CK92 variety was used in 3 rice crops from WS12-13 to AW2013 and CK2003 variety was used in the last 2 rice crops. The results show a change in growth duration throughout seasons, the duration in WS crop was longer than AW crop. During

101

WS13-14, due to cold weather condition, the growth duration was prolonged up to 7 days. The model of 1M6R-AWD had a longer duration than CON model from 1-2 days.

Figure 2.2: Growth cycle (days) of rice varieties through 11 rice crops at K7B and PT 

Height: This characteristic is affected by cultivation conditions, in which water management is one of the important factors. During the period of water drained-out, the rice height was developed slowly and those in 1M6R-AWD model seem to be lower than those in the CON model (Figure 2.3). This result is confirmed by the research of Tuonget al. (2005), when water is drained-out, the rice roots develop deeper into the soil searching for water; however, due to high rain fall in AW crop and appropriate water management, there is no significant different between the 2 models.



Length of panicle: The length of panicle (Table 2.4) in the model of 1M6R-AWD is always longer than those in the CON model about 2cm and this is significantly different. The result could be due to low sowing rate and appropriate fertilizer application and water management of 1M6R-AWD model, the rice plants could develop a longer root system contributing to better nutrient absorption, bigger panicles and increasing in length resulting higher yield.

Figure 2.3: Plant height average of rice plant throughout 11 crops at K7B and PT 

Figure 2.4: Length of panicle between 2 models throughout 11 crops at K7B and PT

Development of tillers The weekly data shows that the maximum number of tillers was reached at 21-28 DAS in WS crop and SA crop; and 28-35 DAS in AW crop. With a high sowing rate, the

102

maximum number of tillers of CON model is always higher with low productive tillers (50-60%) as compared to 1M6R-AWD model. 

Internodes: Figure 2.5 shows that the characteristic of the 4 th internodes is significantly different between the two models. Water drained-out resulted shorter internodes with bigger internodes diameter and higher thickness in 1M6R-AWD model comparing to CON model. These traits contribute to a strong stem for rice plants lowering lodging rate comparing to CON model; and this result is also corresponded to the study of Vu Anh Phap (2013).

Figure 2.5: Averaged length, diameter and thickness of 4th internodes in the experiments at K7B and PT Note: characteristic of 4th internodes of 1M6R is significantly different with CON at 1% 3.2. Yield components and rice yield Figure 2.6 shows that averagenumber of panicle/m2in1M6R-AWD model is less than CON model of about 100 panicles/m2 and is significantly different with CON model at Kenh 7B and Phu Thuong. The reason for this difference is the high sowing rate of CON model. Number of panicle/m2in 1M6R-AWD model is low, but the length of panicle is longer and number of full grains/panicle is higher (12 grains/panicle) significantly comparing to CON model. The significant difference in number of full grains/panicle contributes to higher yield of 1M6R-AWD model. The results indicate that low sowing rate with appropriate fertilizer application contribute to less pest/diseases, stronger stem and high ratio of full grains. The weight of rice/sticky rice grain in the experiments is note significantly different between the models due to the characteristics of the varieties. Thus, grain weight is not an important factor contributing to higher yield in the experimental models.

103

Figure 2.6: Panicles/m2 and fulfilled grains/panicle of models by 11 crops at K7B and PT Rice yield(Figure 2.7) is high during WS crop and reaches the lowest number during AW crop. The model of 1M6R-AWDalways has a higher yield about 11% and is significantly different to CON model. During the 3 experiment crops (WS12-13 to SA 2013), 1M6RAWD+TRI model had reached the rice yield equivalent to 1M6R-AWD model and higher than CON model about 0.5 ton/ha comparing to CON at K7B and PT.

Note: V1: F=6.001**; V2: F=4.141*; V3: F=12.121**; V4; T=7.438**; V5: T=3.095** ; V6 : T=2.032*

Note: V1: F=1.032ns; V2: F=3.282*; V3:F=5.316*; V4: T=4.456*; V5: T=4.148** Figure 2.7: Grain yields of experimental models throughout 11 crops at K7B and Phu Thuong

104

3.3. The efficiency of 1M-6R model The situation of pest/diseases and application of plant protection chemicals: The situation was happened unfavorable for the experimental models at Kenh 7B and Phu Thuong. Brown plant hopper, rice leaf folder and blast leaf, viruses happened several times every rice crop with different level of damages and farmers applied chemicals to solve the problem. In general, farmers applied chemicals about 3 – 4 times in 1M6R-AWD model and less than CON model (Figure 2.8). Application of “alternative wetting and drying” technique: the data shows that the amount water used in 1M6R-AWD model was significantly decreased – average of 1,296 m3 (43%) at Kenh 7B and 3,518 m3 (48%) at Phu Thuong. Application of AWD has greatly reduced the amount of water used (Figure 2.9) with no decreasing in rice yield. This result indicates that 1M6R-AWD model will be a potential model for rice production in the future to cope with water scarcity.

Figure 2.8: Average of chemical application times in each rice crop at K7B and PT

Figure 2.9: Average of amount of water used per rice crop at Kenh 7B and Phu Thuong

Economic efficiency analysis between 1M6R+AWD andCONmodel (Table2.4) shows a decreasing of seed rate by47%; fertilizer by24-28% (nitrogen and phosphate), chemical application by32%; losses during harvesting by 31%, and saving water about 45% of water comparing to CON model. The result indicates that 1M6R+AWD model brings higher economic benefits and environment friendly. Table2.4: Comparison (% reduction) between 1M6R+AWD and CON model throughout rice crops at Kenh 7B and Phu Thuong (11 crops) Costs

 

Reduction 1 – Seed Reduction 2 – Fertilizer P2O5

N

K2O Reduction 3 – Chemical applications Reduction 4 - Water Time of pumping Reduction 5 – Losses

Kenh 7B

Phu Thuong

Average

50 25 37 28

43 23 19 -27

47 24 28 0

37 43 37 30

27 48 16 30

32 45 27 30 105

3.4. Economic efficiency 

Investment costs (5 Reductions)

In all experimental models (Figure 2.10), input costs of CON model include seed, fertilizer and chemicals accounting for a high proportion (44%) of total costs; Application of “1M6R-AWD”:farm households could reduce the costs of seed, fertilizer, chemicals with the average of about 9.7 million VND/ha (37%) comparing to CON model. Comparing of investment costs between 2 project sites shows that the production costs of households (1M6R-AWD and CON) at Phu Thuong is higher about 3-10 million VND/ha than those at Kenh 7B. The cost of irrigation and harvesting are similar in each project site because the existing management mechanism requests all farmers to share equally the total pumping cost to their Co-ops; thus there is no difference in cost reductions between models.

Figure 2.10: Production costs of 1P6R-AWD and CON through 11 crops at Kenh 7B and PT 

Financial efficiency

The average data of 6 rice crops at Kenh 7B – Kien Giang and 5 rice crops at Phu Thuong – AG (Figure 2.11) show that the total investment in CON model is higher about 19% (KG) and 37% (AG) comparing to 1M6R-AWD; however, the total income and profit at Phu Thuong, AG is higher than those at Kenh 7B. There is not significant difference in average profit between 1M6R-AWD and 1M6RAWD+TRI at K7B and PT. However, 1M6R-AWD model earns higher profit about 7 - 8 million VND/ha at Kenh 7B and Phu Thuong comparing to CON model. The higher profit of 1M6R+AWD model is due to: 1) reducing cost of seeds, fertilizer and chemicals, and 2) higher rice yield of 11.5% contributing to higher profit. The profit of 1M6R-AWD model at Phu Thuong is higher than Kenh 7B due to higher selling price of sticky rice (Phu Thuong) than paddy rice (Kenh 7B) during the first 3 rice crops of the project. In addition, there is occasion of rain at the harvest time of AW cropat Kenh 7B affecting to selling price and profit of the models.

106

Note: V1: F=10.319**; V2: F=27.849**; V3: F=12.691**; V4: T=4.506*; V5: T=3.996* ; V6 : T=4.509*

Note: V1: F=1.724ns; V2: F=11.063**; V3: F=19.261**; V4: T=7.475**; V5: T=7.727** Figure 2.11: Returns form models throughout 11 rice crops at Kenh 7B and Phu Thuong

In general, 1M6R+AWD and 1M6R-TRI model earn higher financial efficiency significantly in statistical analysisto CON model. The profit is stable at Kenh 7B with 20 million VND/ha/rice crop; especially, the 4th rice crop (WS13-14),the highest profit was reached with 45 million VND/ha due to high rice yield and high selling price. At Phu Thuong (AG), the profit has gradually reduced since the beginning of the project due to the fluctuation of paddy rice and sticky rice selling price on the market, the highest profit were achieved in the 1st and 2nd rice crop with about 37 million VND/ha. 3.5. Problems in the study Pests/diseases During the implementation of experiment and developing of 1M6R-AWD model, many occasions of pests/diseases had happened directly affecting to the rice growth and development such as brown plant-hopper, rice leaf folder,stem borer; blast disease, bacteria diseases. Infection of pests/diseases contributed to higher production costs of households; however, those applied 1M6R model could reduce 2 chemical 107

application/rice crop which reduced production costs and contributed to the improvement of environment. Weather conditions -

During the last 2 years, all of experiments have been affected by unfavorable weather conditions causing difficulties from sowing until harvesting.

-

In SA 2013 crop, high rainfall and strong winds happening during the harvest times caused high damage to all the project sites at Kenh 7B. In addition, occasion of rain happened during sowing time causing flood and low productive of rice plant contributing to higher production cost for re-sowing and transplanting.

-

On the other hand, high rainfall also affected greatly to the water management at Kenh 7B and Phu Thuong (Figure 2.12), especially during SA and AW crop there was high probability of rainy days and high rainfall. Thus, period of water control could not be done properly according to the process and sometimes needed to drain-out (AW crop).

Figure 2.12: Rainfall regime affecting to water management at Kenh 7B and PT, SA2014 -

Although affected by unfavorable weather conditions, the project farmers have applied the process quite well crop by crop resulting the decreasing of water pumping about 23 times in the 1M6R model and the water level in the rice field is also lower and saving of about 45% of water comparing to CON model.

Infrastructure for water management: There is a dyke system and irrigation system in the project area which could provide enough water even during the AW rice crop (Phu Thuong). However, at Kenh 7B, there is usually rainy days during the AW crop which causes difficulty for water controlling. Although the process of 1M6R shows high economic efficiency, there are difficulties in wide spreading the process to other farm households in the project areas: 108

-

At Phu Thuong: Farmers have to follow the schedule of irrigation of “1 time pumping/every 10 days” agreed by members of the cooperative; thus, the water control of participated households sometimes could not be managed in full accordance with the recommended process.

-

At Kenh 7B: The water management is totally dependent on the water pumping substations and the mechanism of cooperation between groups in term of timing (due to differences in investment: water pumping station and pumper) and cost. Although there are advantages in the system, it also affects the unification in water management. Moreover, due to the dimension of the rice field, it requires time to level the water in the field causing unequal flooded plot in the field.

Techniques -

The combined technique of using rice straw with Trichoderma could increase the soil fertile and reduce fertilizer application in rice production. However, it requires time for rice straw to be decomposed ensuring low emission of CH4.

-

During the autumn-winter rice crop, there are high probability of rainy days and high rainfall causing flood in the rice field. These conditions limited the development and growth of rice plant causing low productivity and rice yield. Other techniques such as fertilizer formula, timing for fertilizer application and sowing rate should have been further studied in order to help farm households improving their households’ income.

4. Conclusions and recommendations 4.1. Conclusions Based on the collected agronomic data and production costs of 11 experimental rice crops for the model of 1M6R-AWD at Kenh 7B and Phu Thuong, the following conclusions are made: 

The model of 1M6R-AWD including several water control periods had contributed to a shorter rice stem – stronger stem, bigger internodes – more thickness of internodes and longer panicles (1cm) comparing to CON model.



The number of full grains/panicle in the model of 1M6R-AWD is higher about 12 grains/panicle (31%) and is also an important factor resulting higher rice yield and is significantly different to CON model.



The application of 1M6R-AWD model has reduced 47% of seeds, 24% of nitrogen fertilizer, 48% of water, 32% of chemical applications comparing to CON model.



The average rice yield of 11 rice crop of 1M6R-AWD model is higher about 11.5% and 50% of higher profit than traditional practices.



The model of 1M6R-AWD is effective and suitable for wide application in rice production inKien Giangand An Giang province. 1M6R-AWD model is a potentially technical model for increasing rice yield and product value and green agriculture.

4.2.Recommendations With the positive results from 11 experimental rice crops, 1M6R model is very potential for wide introduction and application; however, the following recommendations are made for better results of application: -

Continue to standardize the technical process of 1M6R model and alternative wetting and drying for different ecological systems in the Mekong Delta. 109

-

Further study is required for better understanding the relationship between the ratio of rice straw and emission in order to make suggestions for wide adaptation contributing to the development of sustainable and green agriculture.

-

Further study about fertilizer formula, timing of fertilizer application and appropriate cultivation technique are required in order to increase rice yield and profit during the autumn-winter rice crop.

-

Selecting and better support for core farmers are needed in order to demonstrate the technique, transfer and widespread the model of 1M6R to farmers in the Mekong Delta.

References

1. Elena Sanchis, Marta Ferrer, Antonio G. Torres, Maria Cambra-Lopez, and Salvador Calvet, 2012. Effect of water and straw management practices on methane emisiion from rice fields: A review through a meta-analysis. Environmental Engineering Science. 29 (12): 1053-1062 2. Huỳnh Quang Tín, 2014. Báo cáo kỹ thuật Nông học và Hiệu quả tài chính Mô hình 1 Phải 6 Giảm, Dự án VLCRP – EDF. 3. IRRI, 1988. Standard Evaluation System for Rice (3rd Edition, June 1988) 4. Khosa M.K., Sidhu B.S., Benbi D.K., 2011. J Environ Biol. 32 (2): 169-72. PubMed 5. Phạm Thị Thanh Hoa và Nguyễn Đức Vinh, 2013.Nước và An ninh lương thực:Vấn đề toàn cầu và Việt Nam. http://nawapi.gov.vn/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=1397:nuocva-an-ninh-luong-thuc-van-de-toan-cau-va-viet-nam&catid=3:tin-trongnuoc&Itemid=6 6. Trương Thị Ngọc Chi, Trần Thị Thúy Anh, Trần Quang Tuyến, Florencia Palis, Grant Singleton, Nguyễn Văn Toàn, 2013. OMONRICE 19: 273-249 7. Tuong T.P, Bouman B.A.M and Martin Mortimer, 2005. More Rice, Less Water – Integrated Approaches for Increasing Water Productivity in Irrigated Rice – Based Systems in Asia. Plant Prod Sci 8 (3): 231 – 241 8. Vietnam Second Communication (VSC), 2010. Vietnam Second Communication to UNFCCC, Ministry of Natural Resources and Environment, 2010. Thông báo Quốc gia lần 2 của Việt Nam cho Công ước khung của Liên hiệp quốc về biến đổi khí hậu năm 2010 9. Vũ Anh Pháp, 2013. Đánh giá khả năng chống chịu đổ ngã của một số giống lúa cao sản triển vọng. Tạp chí Khoa học Trường Đại học Cần Thơ, số 25: 67-74 10. WWF-ICRISAT, 2010. More rice for people – More water for the planet. Africare, Oxfarm, WWF.

110

STUDY ON CULTURAL PRACTICES FOR INCREASING INCOME OF AUTUMN-WINTER RICE CROP IN TAN HIEP, KIEN GIANG PROVINCE Huynh Quang Tin1, Nguyen Van Nhat1, Nguyen Cong Uan2, Tran Thu Ha3 Abstract The study on technical intervention for increasing income during autumn-winter rice crop inTan HiepKien Giangprovince was conducted with 03 treatments: (1) sowing rate, (2) nitrogen fertilizer formula, and (3) timing of fertilizer application. The experiment was arranged with 3 repetitions and the data of rice yield andproduction costs were collected for analysis to find out the differences between the treatments. The results show that: high profit could be achieved with the sowing rate of 80-120 kg/ha; the treatment of applying no fertilizer had the rice yield which was not different to the treatment of nitrogen fertilizer formula of 80-35-45kg/ha and achieved equal profit with CON model; 1 time of fertilizer application (8 DAS or 40 DAS) could achieve high economic efficiency but was not significantly different to none fertilizer application and CON; applying appropriate technical interventions could earn high economic efficiency with the sowing rate of 120kg/ha andapplying no fertilizer. The autumn-winter rice crop atKenh 7B, Thanh Dong A, Tan Hiep,Kien Giangprovince with the application of none-fertilizer treatment could be a model for green rice production with high income. However, further study is required for the autumn-winter rice cop 2015 in order to confirm the result for recommendation into production. Keywords: yield, economic efficiency, fertilizer application, sowing rate, rice

1. Introduction There is an increasing trend of rice production during the 3 rd (autumn-winter) rice crop in the Mekong Delta around 832,000ha (CTT, 2015) in order to ensure the national productivity and create job for farmers. However, during the AW crop, there is high probability to encounter unfavorable weather conditions and is difficult to apply technical interventions causing lower profit than SA rice crop about 17-19% with similar inputs and selling price (Pham Le Thong et al., 2010). Currently, rice production during AW crop is usually affected by unfavorable conditions causing low rice yield (less than 5 tan/ha) (Nguyen Ngoc Son et al., 2013). Based on the surveyed and practical data of AW rice crop ofVLCRP at Thanh Dong A commune, Tan Hiep, Kien Giang province, it shows that the rice crop completely happens during the wet season (July – October). This reason has significant impacts on sowing, water control and efficiency of fertilizer application which has causedhigh production costs, low rice yield (about 4 ton/ha), and low profit or loss. Beside from creating jobs for farmers, increasing income and rice productivity, 3 rice crops production also cause low nutrient contents in the soil, low rate of organic matters and reducing rice yield (Tan et al., 1995; Tan, 1997; Lai et al., 1997; Hoa et al., 1998; Phung et al., 1998; quoted by Huynh Dao Nguyen, 2008). In order to find out the appropriate intervention for farmers to improve their households’ income, the experiment of technical 1

Mekong Delta Development Research Institute (MDI) Agricultural Seed Center of Hau Giang province 3 Envirenmental Defense Fund – Hanoi (EDF) 2

111

interventions during the AW rice crop was conducted during the AW crop 2014 at Tan Hiep, Kien Giang province. 2. Materials&methodology In order to achieve good result for analyzing major factors and comparison of profit, 3 distinct experiments had been conducted from 7-10/2014 at Thanh Dong A commune, Tan Hiep, Kien Giang province. The materials and experiment establishment are listed below: 2.1. Materials OM5451 variety was used for experiment; the fertilizers were the same for all experiments; plastic canvas, and other necessary tools for experiments. 2.2.Experiment establishment Experiment on sowing rates: Five treatments (80, 120, 160, 200 và 240 kg/ha) were laid out in the randomly complete design with three replications. Area of each plot was 100 m 2. Fertilizer formula was 65N35P2O5-45K2O kg/ha. Experiment on nitrogen fertilizer formula: The experiment included 06 treatments arranged completely random block with 03 repetitions (76 m2/ replication).In which, the CON treatment was applied no fertilizer andtreatment 6 was applied traditional practice (90-70-70). The other treatments were set a fix amount of phosphate (P) andpotassium (K) as 35% K2O and 45% P2O5;the amount of nitrogen fertilizer in experiments were 30%, 45%, 65% and 80%. The sowing rate for broadcasting method was 120 kg/ha. The timing for fertilizer application was: 1st timeat 08 DAS (32% nitrogen and 50% phosphate); 2nd timeat 20 DAS (28% nitrogen, 50% phosphate and 34% potassium) and3rd timeat 40 DAS (40% nitrogen and 66% potassium). Experiment on the timing for fertilizer application: The experiment included 07 treatments of 08-20-00; 00-00-40; 08-00-40; 00-20-40; 08-00-00; 08-20-40 (Đ/C) and 00-00-00 arranged randomly, with 03 repetitions(50 m2/repetition).The sowing rate was 120 kg/ha. The based fertilizer formula was 65-35-45. There were 03 fixed period of fertilizer application as1st time: 08 DAS (32% nitrogen and 50% phosphate); 2nd time: 20 DAS (28% nitrogen, 50% phosphate and 34% potassium) and3rd time: 40 DAS (40% nitrogen and 66% potassium). The total amount fertilizer was different between the treatments. 2.3.Data collection Rice yield: The rice yield was applied accordingly to the Standard Evaluation System for Rice (IRRI, 2014) Production costs: Each household which participated in the study was provided a “Household note” and was trained to record details from sowing to harvest such as: input costs, fertilizer, fuel and equipments, labor and calculating economic efficiency at the end of the crop for each model. 2.4.Data analysis Analysis of variance (ANOVA) with DUNCAN test was applied to find out the difference of rice yield and economic efficiency between treatments of each experiment. 112

3. Results 3.1. Water management During the AW crop 2014, there were 45 days of rain with the total rainfall of 832mm. Raining in the sowing period had affected the experimental field (seeds were engulfed deep into the soil) and slow growth of rice seed during the first week. In the AW crop 2014, there was only 1 period of completely drained out the water (3342DAS) overlapping the period of no rainfall. However, rainfall caused great impacts on the water control during the period of 0-30 DAS affecting the field in continuous flooding which required pumping-out at 20-25 DAS for 2nd time of fertilizer application. During the period from the 3rd time of fertilizer application (40 DAS) to harvest, the water level in the rice field was around 5-20cm; especially, rainfall happened during flowering stage directly affecting the rice yield. The water level was high during the period from flowering stage to ripening stage due to seasonal flood. In general, the water control process could not be done properly during the AW rice crop.

Figure3.1: Rainfall and water management in the experiments,AW 2014atKenh 7B 3.2. Results on rice yield Experiment on sowing rates There was only 1 time of water control (completely drained out) in the mid-season causing flooding in the experimental treatments and affecting the development of tillers. Figure3.2 113

shows that the rice yields of the sowing rate of 80-120kg/ha was highest and is significantly different to other treatments. According to farmers, high sowing rate could not achieve a good development of tillers as of low sowing rateand the similar situation happens to the number of grain/panicle; thus, the number of full grains/panicle in low sowing rate is the important factor contributing to the increasing in rice yield.

Figure3.2: Rice yield in the experiments on sowing rateat Kenh 7B, AW-2014 Note: On top of each column, similar letter means nto significant different; T-value and * mean significant different at 5%.

Experiment on nitrogen fertilizer formula Figure3.3 indicates that high rice yield could be achieved with high amount of fertilizer and continuous flooding method; however, it would cause high production costs and high lodging rate in treatment 5 and 6. The actual rice yield is gradually increasing and is directly proportional to the amount of nitrogen fertilizer used. However, only the CON treatment (9070-70) achieved high rice yield and was significantly different at 5% comparing to the rest. In the treatment of none application of fertilizer,the rice leaf is quite shorter and light yellow in color but the stem is strong and less infected by pest/diseases and the yield of the treatment was 4.2t/ha and was not significantly different to other treatments (up to 80-34-45kg/ha). The results indicate that the capacity of nutrient absorption of rice plant was low due to high level of water in the rice field; thus, intensive fertilizer application during AW crop is not an appropriate technique for sustainable increasing of rice yield.

114

Figure3.3: Rice yield in treatments on nitrogen fertilizer formulas atKenh 7B, AW-2014 Note: On top of each column, similar letter means nto significant different; T-value and * mean significant different at 5%.

Experiment on the timing for fertilizer application Applying similar water control method with the reduction in fertilizer amount and time pf application, the result shows that the rice yield is increasing accordingly to the increasing in the amount of nitrogen fertilizer used(Figure3.4). The highest amount of fertilizer used was of CON treatment (65-35-45) with 3 applications achieving highest yield (4.6t/ha) and was significantly different to other treatments. There are some similarities to experiment on nitrogen fertilizer formula; however, in treatment 2 and 3, there was only one time fertilizer application with a great reduction in the amount and it could achieve quite high rice yield with no significant difference to CON. This result indicates that treatment 2 and 3 could reduce production costs and pollution in comparing to CON (treatment 7). In the treatment of none fertilizer application, although the rice plant grew weakly, the rice stem was strong and low lodging rate and low rice yield with no significant difference to treatments with 1 to 2 applications (excluding CON). This will be compared in the section of economic efficiency; however, the rice yield of 3.8t/ha is acceptable for green rice production with great impacts to environment and no losses.

Figure3.4: Rice yields in experiment on times of fertilizer application atKenh 7B, AW-2014 - On top of each column, similar letter means nto significant different;* mean significant different at 5% - Row below the column means the treatments – timing for application; - within ( ) is the corresponded fertilizer formulas.

4.3 Economic efficiency Experiment on sowing rates Table3.1 shows that high sowing rate caused high production cost in CON treatment (240 kg/ha) which is higher about 1.2 timethan the treatment of 80 kg/ha and is significantly different to other treatments.

115

Income and profit of the treatment of 80-120 kg/ha is highand significantly different to other high sowing rates. The profit of the sowing rate of 80 kg/ha is higher than the sowing rate of 240 kg/ha (CON) about 5.57 million VND/ha (increasing 42%). The treatment of 80kg/ha also has the highest profit ratio of 1.9. Table3.1: Economic efficiency of experiments on sowing rates atKenh 7 B, AW- 2014 (dried rice; million VND) Kenh 7B Total income Total costs Profit

120 kg/ha

160 kg/ha

200 kg/ha

240 kg/ha

28,502b

27,401ab

24,988a

24,988a

25,145a

3,296ns 0,027

9,887a

10,367b

11,140c

11,620d

12,100e

0,000** 0,000

18,615b

17,034b

13,848a

13,368a

13,045a

7,589** 0,000

1,88b

1,63b

1,27a

1,17a

80 kg/ha

P/C

F

Sig.

1,10a 14,948** 0,000

Note: Within a row, numbers followed by the same letter is not significantly different at 5%; Rice yield is not significantly different; ** different at 1% Experiment on nitrogen fertilizer formulas The higher amount of nitrogen fertilizer is used, the higher income is earned;however, income between treatments was not much different, only the treatment of 90-70-70 is significantly different to no-fertilizer treatment. Treatments which were applied much nitrogen fertilizer had higher production costs causing many impacts such as water pollution, high labor cost, health, etc. Interestingly, although the production cost was high, the profit per area unit was not significantly different in all fertilizer formula including none fertilizer application treatment(Table3.2). The results show that the treatment of none fertilizer application and high amount of nitrogen (CON) could earn higher economic efficiency than other treatments. The reason could be due to the characteristic of AW rice crop which are intensive application of fertilizer (because of low capacity of nutrient absorption of rice plant during this period) or great reduction of fertilizer application. In other treatments, although the production cost was low, the low capacity of nutrient absorption of rice plant caused low rice yield and profit. Thus, the treatment of none fertilizer application has the highest efficiency (0.2). Table3.2: Economic efficiency in experiments of nitrogen fertilizer formulas atKenh 7B, AW2014 (dried rice; million VND) Kenh 7B Total income Total costs Profit 116

00-00-00 30-35-45 45-35-45 65-35-45 80-35-45

90-70-70 (CON)

F

Sig.

23,936a 25,472ab 24,800ab 26,240ab 28,560bc

30,960c

3,839**

0,008

20,039a

22,066b

22,765c

24,821d

25,801e

27,114f

0,000**

0,000

3,897

3,406

2,035

1,419

2,759

3,846

0,567ns

0,724

P/C

0,18

0,17

0,08

0,07

0,12

0,15

0,670ns

0,649

Note: Within a row, numbers followed by the same letter is not significantly different at 5%; Rice yield is not significantly different; ** different at 1%

Experiment on the timing of fertilizer application Table3.3 shows a difference between the treatments;higher number of fertilizer application comes along with high production cost. Treatment of 03 applications/crop had higher cost than the treatment of none fertilizer application about 5.101 million VND/ha (44%). The total income is significantly different at 5% between CON treatment and none-fertilizer application treatment (Table 2.3). However, the treatment of 1-2 fertilizer application/crop (not including 2nd application) also has high income but it is not significantly different to other treatments. Table3.3: Economic efficiency in experiments on the timing of fertilizer application atKenh 7 B, AW- 2014 (dried rice; million VND) 00-00-00 Total income

00-00-40 08-00-00 00-20-40 08-00-40 08-20-00 08-20-40 (21-00-30) (23-17-00) (42-17-45) (44-17-30) (45-35-15) (65-35-45)

F

Sig.

22,051a

24,558ab

24,816ab

24,831ab

24,988ab

22,403a

27,417b

2,352* 0,052

Total costs

6,607a

7,528c

7,433b

10,821f

10,595d

10,732e

11,708g

-

Profit

15,443b

17,030b

17,383b

14,011ab

14,393ab

11,671a

15,709b

2,783* 0,026

2,34b

2,26b

2,34b

1,29a

1,36a

1,09a

P/C

-

1,34a 15,941** 0,000

Note: Within a row, numbers followed by the same letter is not significantly different at 5%; Rice yield is not significantly different; ** different at 1%

In term of profit, the treatment of 2 fertilizer applications/crop which did not include the one at 40 DAS could bring the lowest profit and it is significantly different to others. The first two fertilizer application period (8 and 20 DAS) with high amount of Urea and DAP fertilizer causes high production cost with no difference in the rice yield. This could be the reason for the low profit of the treatment of 2-3 fertilizer application/crop. Highest efficiency is recorded from the treatment of 01 fertilizer application/crop with the profit of 17.030–17.383 million VND/ha but it is not significantly different to none-fertilizer application or 3 applications/crop (CON). The treatment of none-fertilizer application and 1 application/crop have higher economic efficiency and is significantly different to the treatment of 2-3 applications/crop.. 5. Conclusion and recommendations 5.1.Conclusions

117

Based on the collected data and analysis of experimental models during AW crop 2014 at Kenh 7B with flooding condition and 1 period of water drained-out (30-40 DAS), the following conclusions are made: -

The sowing rate of 80-120 kg/ha could earn high profit.

-

The treatment of none-fertilizer application achieved the rice yield which is not significantly different to other treatments with the formula up to 80-35-45kg/ha and earned similar profit ofCON (3.8 million VND/ha),

-

01 time of fertilizer application (8 DAS or 40 DAS) could bring high economic efficiency but is not significantly different to none-fertilizer application and CON.

-

Application of suitable technical interventions could bring higher economic efficiency to farm households during AW crop. In general, the best practices namely applying the sowing rate of 80-120kg/ha with none-fertilizer application could earn the highest economic efficiency with the highest ratio of 2.34.

-

Application of none-fertilizer application treatment during the AW crop could greatly reduce lodging rate in harvesting,production cost and increase profit and green products.

5.2.Recommendations 

The mentioned results indicate that low amount of fertilizer is a potential intervention for rice production during AW rice crop. However, further study in AW rice crop 2015 (1. none fertilizer; 2. 1 time at 8-10 DAS; 3. 1 time at 20 DAS, 4. 1 time at 40-45 DAS and 5) traditional practice) is necessary to confirm the results for better recommendation.



During the AW rice crop, the dry condition could be maintained during the period from 020 DAS for better growth of the rice plant and reducing organic poisoning. The upgrading of irrigation should be more concerned especially in the wet season.

REFERENCE 1. Huỳnh Đào Nguyên. 2008. Hiện trạng canh tác và biên pháp cải thiện độ phì nhiêu đất, năng suất lúa canh tác ba vụ trong đê bao tại huyện Chợ Mới, tỉnh An Giang.Luận văn thạc sĩ khoa học nông nghiệp. Trường Đại học Cần Thơ. 2. IRRI, 2014. Standard Evaluation System fr Rice. 5th edition, June 2014 3. Nguyễn Ngọc Sơn, Nguyễn Hồng Tín và Nguyễn Văn Sánh. 2013. Thâm canh lúa & áp dụng 1 phải 5 giảm (1P5G): hiện trạng về sử dụng lượng giống, phân và các yếu tố ảnh hưởng đến lợi nhuận, năng suất lúa ở cấp độ nông hộ. Tạp chí khoa học Trường Đại học Cần Thơ. 4. Phạm Lê Thông, Huỳnh Thị Đan Xuân và Trần Thị Thu Duyên. 2010. So sánh hiệu quả kinh tế của vụ lúa Hè Thu và Thu Đông ở ĐBSCL. Tạp chí Khoa học 2011:18a 267-276. Trường Đại học Cần Thơ.

118

MONITORING AND EVALUATING OF THE APPLICATION OF LOW CARBON RICE PRODUCTION TECHNOLOGIES 1M6R AND ITS IMPACTS IN KIEN GIANG AND AN GIANG PROVINCES Nguyen Hong Tin1, Tran Thu Ha2, Chau My Duyen1, Nguyen Van Sanh1 Abstract The Vietnam Low Carbon Rice Project (VLCRP)’s technologies were designed and developed from the advanced rice farming technique namely “one must - five reductions” combines with the smart application of Alternate Wetting and Drying (AWD) water management and precise fertilizers application for optimizing the economic, social and environmental impacts. Since 2010, VLCRP has piloted and further refined their low carbon rice production technologies for improving production efficiency and protecting environment that including the reduction of green house gas emissions. As such, VLCRP’s low carbon rice farming technology has been named as one must do, six reductions (1M6Rs), in which, the sixth reduction the Greenhouse gas emission and negative impacts on environment. The VLCRP project’s 1M6Rs was demonstrated and extended over 11 crops in Kenh 7B cooperative, in Thanh Dong A commune, Tan Hiep district, Kien Giang province and Phu Thuong cooperative, in Phu Thanh commune, Phu Tan district, An Giang province. In Kien Giang, the project was undertaken on the rice fields of 265.63ha corresponding to 167 households (farmers). Similarly, in An Giang the project was conducted on the rice fields of 274.81ha corresponding to 254 households. The project’s Monitoring and Evaluation system were designed to monitor the application, evaluate the impacts and provide timely feedback during each and all crops to the communities, farmers, local authorities, DARD and Extension system. Key monitoring and evaluation indicators include (i) diffusion and expansion of 1M6Rs application in the project areas, impacts and technical effectiveness of the 1M6Rs through visual indicators encompassing rice yield, total revenue, total production costs and farmers’ farming practices, (ii) advantages and disadvantages in 1M6Rs application and desirable measures to support farmers, (iii) socio-economic changes and environmental impacts through integrated gender empowerment in rice production. As such, all project activities and its impacts are closely monitored and fully evaluated by each and all crops vis a vis the reduction of production costs, seeds density, fertilizers and pesticides application while increasing rice production efficiency to improve farmers’ livelihoods; as well as project impacts on socio-economic changes and gender equity support the community’s sustainable development. Household farming diaries and questionnaires were used to collect data on technical (practice) and financial (cost) effectiveness including land preparation, seeding, pesticides and fertilizers application, rice caring, and harvesting. Furthermore, GPS and GIS tools were employed to determine positions of farmers (land parcel) applying the 1M6Rs technology in the field and on digital map. Study results show that number of households (farmers) and land areas applied the 1M6Rs technology increases significantly over cropping seasons in both project regions, Kien Giang and An Giang. 1M6Rs technology helped farmers to sustain and increase their rice yield, reduce total 1 2

Mekong Delta Development Research Institute EDF organization in Hanoi 119

production costs whilst achieving significant co-benefits of social, economic and environmental improvements as compared to pre-project intervention. The project has developed the appropriate and effective tools to monitor, manage and evaluate the farmers’ adoption and application of 1M6Rs rice production technology in An Giang and Kien Giang provinces. Key words: 1M6Rs expansion, water saving, project monitoring and evaluation, technical efficiency.

1. Introduction The VLCRP has been undertaken since 2010 in the Mekong Delta. Kien Giang and An Giang provinces are the two ffrontiers in applying the advanced rice cultivation techniques to increase rice production effectiveness. VLCRP’s overarching goal is to increase income and improve livelihoods for rice farmers and their communities by applying the project’s introduced 1Must 6 Reductions (1M6Rs) technology. In Kien Giang, the project was implemented on the rice fields of 265.63ha covering 167 households which were organized into 5 Production Groups numbered Group 1, 3, 5, 7, and 9 (Statistical data at the Kenh 7B Hamlet Committee, 2013). Similarly, in An Giang the project was conducted on the rice fields of 274.81ha corresponding 254 households grouping into 5 such as 1, 2, 3, 4, and 5, that located in Phu Thanh commune, Phu Tan district, An Giang province (Statistical data at the Phu Thuong Cooperative, 2013). VLCRP designed the demonstration plots to assist on-farm observation and learning for farmers. Farmers in project areas were organized into relevant Production Groups for learning and exchanging their best practices for applying the 1M6Rs technology every crops. Monitoring and evaluating 1M6Rs application in rice production of rice community, particularly priority groups such as women, poor and nearly poor farmers, landless farmers to have reasonably supportive technical solutions is an important activity of the project. This M&E study is designed to monitor, evaluate and provide feedback for each crop on the following key results. (i) The rate of the diffusion and expansion of 1M6Rs application in the project areas, its impacts and the technical effectiveness through the visual indicators encompassing rice yield, total revenue, total production costs and farmers’ cultivating practices; (ii) The aadvantages and disadvantages of 1M6Rs application and desirable measures to support farmers in 1M6Rs application; (iii) The socio-economic changes and environmental impacts through gender-oriented activities in rice production. Through its M&E system, VLCRP project activities and impacts are monitored and evaluated fully and effectively for every crops, particular in reducing production costs, seeds application, fertilizers and pesticides use while increasing rice production efficiency to improve farmers’ livelihoods; as well as project impacts on socio-economic changes and gender balance for a sustainable community development. 2. Research methods 2.1 Materials − Household Farming Diary (HFD) was designed to include items correlative witheach rice cultivation process, such as land preparation, seeding, fertilizer and pesticide

120

application, caring and harvesting. Farmers were trained on using the HFD to collect data according to the rice growth duration, 7 times per crop on average. − GPS tool, GIS and GoogleEarth softwares were employed to identify land plots (farmers’ land parcels) applying 1M6Rs technology on the field and on digital maps. − Excel and SPSS softwares were used to input, process and analyze collected data. − Semi-structured questionnaires were used to collect baseline data, and post-project intervention on both farmer groups inside and outside project areas. 2.2.Methodology 2.2.1.Time and locations - Research time: the study was conducted from Summer-Autumn season (HT) in2013 to Autumn-Winter in 2014 in intensive rice areas (3-crop per year) in the Kenh 7B cooperative (Kien Giang) and the Phu Thuong Cooperative (An Giang). 2.2.2 Research process − HFD design: the HFDwas designed based on required data to evaluate their benefitsand the effectivenessof applying 1M6Rs in rice production. The HFD was given to farmers for their comments and suggestions, edited by local technicians and experts before formally used; and appraised at the end of each crop for appropriate update to suit farmer’s literacy. − Seasonally, farmerswhom apply 1M6Rs technology are documented and registered; then a community meeting is organized to plan project activities (including HFD recording) with participation and support of stakeholders and experts from various organizations such as Mekong Delta Development Research Institute-MDI (Can Tho University), An Giang and Kien Giang Departments of Agriculture and Rural Development (DARDs), Advanced Laboratory, technical experts and farmers; − Distributing and training for group leaders and farmers on HFD recording; − Updating data in the HFD (participants were MDI staff, local technicians, project leader groups and farmers) according to various rice growth stages; − Supplementing and finalizing data on technical and financial effectiveness of 1M6Rs at every community meeting based on the meeting schedule planned by the local project management unit (PMU); − Analyzing and comparing technical indicators and economic effectiveness; − For 1M6Rs development content (Land ID)using GPS and GIS o Digitalizing the project regional maps o Identifying farmers’ land positions where 1M6Rs technology is applied in the field(using GPS) o Updating1M6Rs household locations on the map o Updating attribute data o Converting data in GIS to Google Earth and building thematic maps using MapInfoand ArcGIS softwares.

121

− Besides, rice samples in control rice fields (using traditional practice) and project fields (1M6Rs application) were randomly collected to analyze rice quality indicators including rice milling quality, nitrate content and pesticide residues in milled rice. − There are 3 types of farmers in this research. o Core farmers are farmers whom participated in research sites o Non-core farmers (early adopters) are farmers who learn 1M6Rs technology from core-farmers and apply based on their rice cultivating conditions o Control farmers are farmers whom cultivate rice based on their experience and habits. 2.2.3.Data analysis 1M6Rs technology development: households, land areas applied 1M6Rs were analysed each crop Comparison in technical and economic effectiveness indicators: rice production effectiveness including technical and financial efficiencies were evaluated and compared between 3 farmer groups as mentioned above. 3. Research study 3.1. 1M6Rs technology development 3.1.1.Kenh 7B cooperative project area (Kien Giang) Over 5 crops expanding 1M6Rs application, the number of households and rice land areas applied the technology have been increased remarkebly, especially in the first 3 crops(Table 4.1 and Figure 4.1).Up to the fifth crop, the registered area that apply the 1M6Rs technology was expanded beyond the project areas. Table 4.1: Area and households registered to apply 1M6Rs technology in Kien Giang over 5 crops Crops3

Registered land areas

Registered households

Areas (ha)

Ratio (%)

Households

Ratio (%)

HT-2013 (1)

96.89

36.48

51

30.54

TĐ-2013 (2)

233.48

87.90

122

73.05

ĐX-13-14 (3)

286.27

107.77

143

85.63

HT 2014 (4)

284.3

107.03

133

79.64

TĐ 2014 (5)

294.95

111.04

133

79.64

Whole project areas

265.63

100.00

167

100.00

3

ĐX, ĐôngXuân is Winter-Spring crop, HT, Hè Thu is Summer-Autumn crop, TĐ, Thu Đông is Autumn-Winter crop 122

Figure4.1: Areas and households applied 1M6Rs technology in Kien Giang over 5 crops Over 5 crops, 1M6Rs was developed widely through project capacity building activities such as trainings, workshops, community and farmers’ field day. Besides, those activities help to upgrade knowledge, skills and capacity, and raise awareness of farmers in the project areas. Farmers gradually change their cultivation habits; now that they can record, monitor and evaluate well technical and economic collected data. At the beginning, 1M6Rs technology application faced several challenges in the Kenh 7B cooperative. Among these challenges, the big problem is changing farmers’ behavior from overusing input materials such as fertilizers, pesticides and water to 1M6Rs technology which requires a standard cultivation process. Fortunately, 1M6Rs technology gives visual benefits over continuous crops,which makes farmers change their mind and action in rice practicing. Up to crop TĐ-2014 (the fifth crop), data analysis results show that there are 65.24% rice land areas in the project areas applied 1M6Rs in rice production (Table 4.1). This proves that the project has intensive impacts on changing farmers’ rice cultivation behavior; in particular, farmers change from knowledge and awareness to action with the application of 1M6Rs in their rice production (Figure 4.2).

123

Figure 4.2: VLCRP project land plots (households) at 7B Cooperative (Kien Giang)

3.1.2. Phu Thuong Cooperative project area (An Giang) Similar to the Kenh 7B Cooperative (Kien Giang), the area and household number registered to apply 1M6Rs in rice production at the PhuThuong cooperative increased significantly over 4 crops (Table 4.2 and Figure 4.3). Many farmers participated in the project activities voluntarily due to their motivation of reducing production costs. Firstly, farmers actively observe and participate in the project activities (e.g. on-farm trials, meeting, farmers’ days, workshops). When farmers recognize that 1M6Rs technology gives benefits to rice producers, they apply 1M6Rs on their fields. This reveals the true nature of farmers which is learning and accepting new technologies by observation and action. These results confirm that the project has used suitable approaches in terms of transferring new technologies from theory and pilot study to real-life application. Noticeablyly, there are many farmers who are not included in the project areas still involve in the project activities and apply1M6Rs technology (Figure 4.4). During the recording ofHFD, farmers in Phu Thuongcooperative also face several problems because they are illiterate, unfamiliar to jobs like writing data in books, while others are so old and couldn’t remember how many input materials they have used in rice production. Fortunately, thanks to the project participatory approaches, in which farmers help farmers, and advanced farmers help and support new project farmers, only after 4 crops, most farmers are fimilarwiththe project activities.

124

254

Whole project areas 130

HT-14 (4) 104

ĐX13-14 (3) 84 76

TĐ-13 (2)

275

159

121 Households

Areas (ha)

16 14

HT-13 (1) 0

50

100

150

200

250

300

Figure 4.3: Areas and households applied 1M6Rs technology in An Giang over 4 crops

Figure 4.4: VLCRP project land plots (households) in An Giang

125

Table 4.2: Areas, households registered to applied 1M6Rs technology in Phu Thuong cooperative over 4 crops Crops HT-2013 (1) TĐ-2013 (2) ĐX-13-14 (3) HT 2014 (4) Whole project areas

Registered rice land areas Areas (ha) Ratio (%) 15.65 5.69 46.30 16.85 129.85 47.25 282.2 102.67 274.81 100

Registered households Areas (ha) Ratio (%) 20 7.87 36 14.17 93 36.61 149 58.66 254 100

3.2.The organization of HFD recording and community meetings Data on technical and economic efficiencies are collected using the HFD. This activity is integrated to and organized at community meetings with the participation of stakeholders such as MDI staff, local technicians, project farmer group leaders, pilot farmers and early adopters. Seasonally, a community meeting is organized to plan project activities and to train farmers how to use HFD to collect data. HFD is printed and provided to farmers every season to collect data 7 times per crop. Approximately 7-10 days after rice harvesting, a brief survey to update and evaluate data collection is carried out. After that, collected data are processed and analyzed to get feedbacks from farmers at the community meetings in the next crops. Here, farmers can learn and have experience based on results of data analysis in previous crops. Data in Table 4.3 present households and farmers ratio participated in community meetings over crops. In general, in both project areas (Kien Giang and An Giang), the ratio of meeting participation is more than 70% compared to that of 1M6Rs registered farmers. In particular, this ratio is very high in An Giang project areas. Frequent participation in community meetings helps farmers to work well in data collection and 1M6Rs cultivation process. The main goal of the project and its activities are to help farmers in particular and rice community in general to increase their capacity and income through the improvement of rice production. Over 9 crops expanding 1M6Rs technology in Kien Giang and An Giang, rice areas and farmers accept this technique increase considerably. This result will help improving rice production through technical and economic features. Table 4.3: Households and farmers ratio participated in community meeting over crops Crops

Kenh 7B cooperative

PhuThuong cooperative

HT-2013 TĐ-2013 ĐX-13-14 HT 2014 TĐ 2014

Households 36 94 102 73 91

Average ratio (%) 70.59 77.28 71.53 54.89 68.05

Households 17 90 122 112 -

Average ratio (%) 89.47 88.97 87.14 75 -

Average

79.2

68.468

85.25

85.145

126

3.3 Project technical efficiency Tables 4.4and 4.5 compares the technical efficiency between models ofcore farmers (pilot), non-core farmers (early adopters), and control farmers. Accordingly, standard model delivers the best efficiency in terms of technology, followed by early adopters. These results reveal that the ratio of farmers using certified seeds in rice production increases more than 60% in Kien Giang and 75% in An Giang. By contrast, rice sowing density declines 70kg/ha and 50kg/ha in Kien Giang and An Giang respectively. Furthermore, fertilizers quantity and pesticides application also reduced. Table 4.4: Technical effectiveness between pilot, early adopters and control models in Kien Giang Techniques (kg/ha)

Pilot

Early adopters

Before project*

Farmers using certified seeds (%)

100

100

38.3

61.7



Sowing density (kg/ha)

120

150.5

218.8

68.3



Net N quantity used (kg/ha)

81.67

94.2

103.8

9.6



Pesticides application (times/crop)

4.33

5.8

7

1.2



Water management style

AWD

AWD

Traditional

7.1

5.9

5.8

Yield (ton/ha)

Change**

 0.1



Note: * not apply 1M6Rs yet; ** change between before and after project intervention; AWD: Alternate Wetting and Drying technique

Prior to the project intervention, concept “Alternate Wetting and Drying-AWD” is completely new to farmers in the project areas. More than 90% of farmers have traditional water management style (not drying rice fields occasionally in a season). Currently, farmers in the project areas clearly understand the benefits of, and apply AWD technique in rice production. By this way, production costs have been declined and therefore financial effectiveness of rice production increases. Data in Tables 4.5 and 4.6 reveal that farmers who apply 1M6Rs technology have higher technical efficiency compared to control farmers (using conventional practice) at specific times. In both Kien Giang and An Giang, seeds quantity, fertilizers and pesticides application in the project site are lower than those of non-project areas through T-test analysis. This is an obvious and meaningful achievement in improving rice production benefits to enhance rice farmers and community livelihoods. Table 4.5: Technical efficiency between pilot, early adopters and control models in An Giang Techniques (kg/ha) Farmers using certified seeds (%) Sowing density (kg/ha) Net N quantity used (kg/ha) Pesticides application (times/crop) Water management style Yield (ton/ha)

Pilot 100 120 111.7 3.8 AWD 7.6

Early adopter 100 149.7 142.2 5.3 AWD 6.8

Before project* 25.4 202.5 149.9 6.5 Traditional 6.5

Change** 74.6 52.8 7.7 1.2 0.3

     

Note: * not apply 1M6Rs yet; ** change between before and after project intervention; AWD: Alternate Wetting and Drying technique 127

Table 4.6: Technical efficiency in rice production between project and non-project farmers in Kien Giang Unit: kg/ha Reduced items Seeds quantity Net N quantity K2O quantity P2O5 quantity Pesticides application (time/crop) Yield (ton/ha)

Inside project

Outside project

T-test

146.12 95.98 45.44 62.40 5.15

234.93 134.21 59.18 85.97 7.17

* * * * *

5.77

5.78

ns

Table 4.7: Technical efficiency in rice production between project and non-project farmers in An Giang Unit: kg/ha Reduced items Seeds quantity Net N quantity K2O quantity P2O5 quantity Pesticides application (time/crop) Yield (ton/ha)

Inside project

Outside project

T-test

149.35 150.55 44.28 74.15 5.25

232.40 178.15 61.79 89.04 7.50

* * * * *

6.74

6.58

ns

Notes: * difference at statistical significance α =5%; ns=non significance

In general, after 9 crops of 1M6Rs technology expansion in Kien Giang and An Giang, technical efficiency in rice production is improved clearly. Input factors such as fertilizers, seeds, pesticides were used efficiently compared to those before the project is implemented. Farmers not only use lower amounts of inputs, but they also know when to apply. Moreover, farmers in the project areas have better efficiency in using input factors inputs compared to that of farmers outside the project areas. It proves that the project has positive impacts and great contribution to technical efficiency in rice farming. Besides technical factors, 1M6Rs technology also improves rice quality in comparison to the traditional practice. Table 4.8 shows that some quality indicators such as white rice and perfect kernel rates cultivated by 1M6Rs technology were better than the conventional technique under the same seasonal crop and variety. This result can help to improve market price as well as enlarging consumption markets for project products.

128

Table 4.8: Comparing rice quality indicators between the AWD and CON farming practices No

1 2 3 4 5 7 8 9 10

Indicators

Rate of unpolished rice (%) Rate of white rice (%) Rate of perfect kernel (%) Length of white grain (mm) Width of white grain (mm) Vitreousness (%) Gel consistency (mm) Amylose content (%) Gelatinization temperature (level)

1M6Rs model

CON model

Significance (α=5%)

Mean

SD

Mean

SD

ns

77.83 62.82 54.92 6.11 2.08 52.49 96.67 2.5 5

0.4 0.7 5.0 0.1 0.1 2.9 1.5

77.85 62.72 50.83 6.21 2.10 52.84 91.67 2.5 5

0.2 0.2 4.5 0.1 0.1 2.1 5.7

ns ** ** ns ns ns ns ns ns

Note:: ns=non-significant, **=significant at α5%; 1M6Rs=applied model of 1M6R/AWD from VLCRP, CON=traditional practice

3.4.Economic efficiency of the project Technical and economic efficiencies of the project are presented in Figures 4.5 and 4.6. Accordingly, the pilot model has lowest total production costs and production costs per kg, following is early adopters. In contrast, the pilot model and early adopters have higher profits and investment efficiency compared to control model respectively. In terms of production costs, control farmers invest 20-22 Mil.VND/ha/crop while early adopters invest only 15-18 million VND/ha/crop. Totally, the project helps farmers decrease production costs from 3,500-3,700 VND/kg of rice to 2,760 VND/kg.

Figure 4.5: Economic efficiency in rice production between three models in Kien Giang

129

Figure 4.6: Economic efficiency in rice production between three models in An Giang Likely, Tables 4.9 and 4.10 compares economic efficiency in rice production between two farmer groups, inside and outside project areas. It is shown that the total returns between two groups are not significantly different by T-test. However, input factors such as costs for seeds, fertilizers and pesticides are different. As a result, profits, investment efficiency and cost benefits ratio in rice production of farmers inside are higher than outside project areas. In addition, rice production costs of farmers inside are lower than outside project area that results in competitive advantage to project farmers. The 1M6Rs helps rice farmers in Kien Giang improve profits instantaneously declining production costs. These benefits bring more farmers to involve in project activities. Over 9 expansion crops, the 1M6Rs have been adopted and applied well to increase early adopters’ technical and economic efficiencies. However, this achievement is lower than pilot farmers; it means the pilot model is the oriented goal to early adopters. Table4.9: Economic efficiency in rice production between farmers inside and outside project areas in Kien Giang Unit: million VND/ha

Parameters 1. Costs Seed cost Fertilizer cost Pesticide cost Irrigation cost Harvest cost 2. Total costs 3. Total returns 4. Profits 5. Capital efficiency 6. Investment efficiency 7. Production costs (VND/kg) 130

Inside project

Outside project

T-test

1.73 3.95 2.73 0.62 1.85 14.59 33.88 19.29 1.38 3.40 2607.30

2.21 5.55 3.69 0.71 2.32 19.32 32.87 13.56 .75 2.51 3506.98

* * * * * * ns * * * *

Table 4.10:Economic efficiency in rice production between farmers inside and outside project areas in An Giang Unit: million VND/ha

Parameters 1. Costs Seed cost Fertilizer cost Pesticide cost Pumping cost Harvest cost 2. Total costs 3. Total returns 4. Profits 5. Capital efficiency 6. Investment efficiency 7. Production costs (VND/kg)

Inside project

Outside project

T-test

1.77 5.34 3.20 1.17 2.46 17.92 36.24 18.32 1.07 3.26 2695.78

1.84 7.09 4.11 1.04 2.61 21.94 35.60 13.65 0.71 2.14 3401.69

ns * * * * * ns * * * *

3.5.Social impacts 3.5.1. Women participation in project activities and household economic development Community capacity buildings including gender equality and empowerment for vulnerability groups are one of key objectives of VCLRP. Activities regarding technology and household economic management through group meetings have attracted women participation, and the participatory rate has increased over crops (Tables 4.11 and 4.12). Table 4.11: Women participation in project community meetings in Kien Giang Items HT-13 Women participation in regular meetings 77 (times) Participation ratio(%) 23 Involving 1M6Rstopic in other women 0 meetings (times/crop) Total times of participants (times) 0

TĐ-13 ĐX-13-14 HT-14 TĐ-14 76 94 75 139 18 3

19 2

17 3

26 3

74

48

50

52

Table 4.12: Women participation in project community meetings in An Giang HT-13

TĐ-13

ĐX-13-14

HT 2014

Women participation in regular meetings (times) 45 Participation ratio (%) 11.78 Involving 1M6Rs topic in other women 1 meetings (times/crop) Total times of participants (times) 28

114 16.06 1

210 25.77 4

163 20.71 4

33

135

142

Items

131

During women participation in the project, women were provided the required knowledge and trained skills on rice farming. They have a chance to interact with others in a new environment, communicate with extension workers to express their problems and difficulties on rice cultivation. Therefore, their capacity and roles are enhanced, and they assert their important position in their families. Figure 4.7 and 4.8 shows a remarkable change of women participation to advanced farming and community meetings after participating in the project. Women whom are members of the project groups/clubs have an opportunity to participate in trainings as well as rice cultivation activities. 120

Before project

100

After project intervention

87.5

100

79.8

80 60 40

21.2 20

12.1

11.7

0 Be trained on rice production

Participation in rice production

Association members

Figure 4.7: Women participation ratio in project activities in Kien Giang 120

Before project

100

After project intervention

100

87.6

85.7

80 60 40 20

3.3

3.3

10

0 Be trained on rice production

Participation in rice production

Association members

Figure 4.8: Women participation ratio in project activities in An Giang Women participation in the project has a positive relationship with the improvement of economic efficiency in rice production. Table 4.13 shows that significant improvement occurs at both sites of the project in An Giang and Kien Giang. Cost reduction, profit increase, capital efficiency improvement can be observed after the project is implemented. This proves that the project activities have provided an opportunity for women to improve their livelihoods. 132

Table 4.13: Economic efficiency of women rice farming in project areas An Giang Items Total costs Total returns Profits Capital efficiency Yield (ton/ha)

Pre- project 21.28 35.67 14.40 0.69 6.55

Post- project 18.42 38.18 19.76 1.10 7.08

Kien Giang Pre- project 18.20 36.20 17.99 0.99 6.84

Post- project 16.65 36.24 19.58 1.18 8.15

Women’s roles and capacity buildings on rice farming are necessary. Through series of project activities, knowledge and economic condition of women groups are improved. Moreover, the project helps women to change their perception and raise their roles and positions in the society. Remarkable results from An Giang and Kien Giang prove to be worthy development and imply the potential for scaling up. 3.5.2. Impacts on the poor and the landless There are three groups of farmers participated in both project sites at Kenh 7B cooperative and Phu Thuong cooperative: farmers with more than 2 ha of land, farmers with 1-2 ha, and poor/landless farmers with less than 1 ha. Farmers with more than 2 ha are better-off group; therefore, they are more likely to apply new technology in cultivation than the poor or landless farmers. However, through suitable approaches such as participatory extension and community development of the project, all three groups have equal chance to participate (Figures 4.9 and 4.10). In particular,the ratio of farmers in An Giang with less than 1 ha of land who applied advanced technology from the project accounts for 65-80% over the crops.

Figure 4.9: Farmers participated in project by land size, Canal 7B cooperative 133

Figure 4.10: Farmers participated in project by land size, Phu Thuong cooperative

One of the key objectives of the project is to enhance the adoption rate of 1M6Rs technology for the poor and landless. The project always encouraged and supported the poor and landless in all activities, particularly trainings, field workshops and club meetings. 3.6. Environmental impacts Environmental efficiency could be considered not only at present but also in the future when chemical fertilizers and pesticides decreased considerably. The project helps farmers reduce pesticide application both times and quantity application, on average farmers decline 10 pesticides kg/ha/crop. This reduction, associated with suitable fertilizers management make better enviromental conditions. Besides, the ADW technique prevents chemicals discharginginto water in the rivers, canals. Therefore, water environment is cleaner, biodiversity in canal and river networks is improved. More importantly, reduction in pesticides and fertilizers use improve farmers’ health and produce safe rice products to consumers. Table 4.14 shows that rice grains produced under 1M6Rs technology did not content toxic chemicals for consumers according to current standard, especially 3 chemicals such as Propiconazole, Tricyclazole andAcetamiprid. They are high sensitive chemicals to quality standard for rice and other agricultural products. Besides, heavy metals such as Pb and Cd were not detected either. Nitrate content was also below safe threshold. According to WHO and EC standards, nitrate content is limited to 50 mg/l for drinking water, 300 mg/kg for fresh vegetable, and 200 mg/kg for foods (The European Commission (EC), 2006).

134

Table 4.14: Contents of heavy metals and pesticide residues in 1M6Rs rice samples in An Giang No 1 2 3 5 6 7

Parameters Propiconazole (mg/kg) LOD=0.01 Tricyclazole (mg/kg) LOD=0.01 Acetamiprid (mg/kg) LOD=0.01 Nitrate (mg/kg) Pb (µg/kg) LOD=1.63 Cd (µg/kg) LOD=0.09

Mesurable value Not detected Not detected Not detected 4.97-6.76 Not detected Not detected

Ghichú: LOD (limit of detection)

4. Conclusion and suggestion The VLCRP project activities meet rice farmers’ objectives and needs in the project areas. The monitoring and evaluation process indicates below conclusions -

The 1M6Rs is accepted, adpoted, and applied in An Giang and Kien Giang rice farming areas that is presented through increasing in areas and farmers applied.

-

The 1M6Rs helps farmers improve the use efficiency of input factors such as seeds, fertilizers, pesticides, as well as produces safe rice products.

-

The project 1M6Rs helps project farmers have higher benefits thanks to improving technical and economic efficiencies in rice production. Conspicuously, low production costs, high investment efficiency and returns, are examples.

-

The project has great contribution to rice farmers and community socio-economic development through the capacity building, particiaption and livelihood imporvement to women, the poor and landless.

-

Beside technological and socio-economic achivements, the project also contributes to the envronmental improvement by reducing ferrtilizers and pesticides application, producing rice products without pesticide residues.

-

The project applies suitable tools to monitor and evaluate effeciency and development of project 1M6Rs technology.

-

The project produces a smart agricultural process which is accepted by the rice community.As a result, it is easy to be scaled up to produce high quality, and environmentally friendly rice products. This is a suitable measure to deal with climate change impacts as well as generating competitive advantage and trade mark for Vietnamese rice products.

The project has remarkable achievements. Obviously, it is nevessary to transfer these results as well as systematizing the project products to locally application. Therefore, monitoring the development of 1M6Rs technology and study on its environmental improvement, is needed to be continued.

135

Acknowledgement This report could not be completed without the support from MDI, Kien Giang and An Giang DARDs. The authors would like to thank Nguyễn Ngọc Sơn4, Trịnh Minh Thảo5, Lê Huyền Linh6, Lê Huyên6, Nguyễn Xuân Hương7, Nguyễn Ngọc Huyền6, Huỳnh Hiệp Thành5 và Huỳnh Đào Nguyên5 for their supports.

Reference GSO (General Statistics Office). 2014. Statistical Yearbook 2013. Statistical Publishing House-Hà Nội 2014. GSO. (General Statistics Office). 2012. Results of rural, agricultural and fishery census in 2011. Statistical Publishing House-2012.

Annex Calculation regulation Production cost/crop includes costs that farmers invest for their rice production/crop, without opportunity cost such as land Yield: total harvest production/total planted areas Total return = Productionx Price and Profit = Total return – Total costs Production cost in practice (Ztt) TCtt Ztt = W Of which:  Ztt: Production cost in practice for 1 kg of rice (VND/kg)  TCtt: Total cost in practice for production area (million VND)  W: Total harvest productionin practice (ton) Input efficiency (Total return)-Total costs minus cost of factor a Input efficiency for factor a = ----------------------------------------------------------Cost of factor a

4

Former MDI staff Department of Plant Protection in Phu Tan, An Giang 6 Center for Agricultural Extension in An Giang 7 Center for Agricultural Extension in Kien Giang 5

136

FINAL PROJECT REPORT ON GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS MEASUREMENT IN AN GIANG AND KIEN GIANG PROVINCES Joseph Rudek1 and Tran Kim Tinh2

1. Introduction The Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Development of Viet Nam formally approved and recommends rice farmers follow an advanced farming technique named “1M5R” which is shorthand for 1Must, 5 Reductions. Farmers “Must” use certified seed and seek “Reductions” in fertilizer, pesticide, water use, and harvest losses as well as sow a lower density of seed. VLCRP extends that set of practices to 1M6R by adding a reduction in methane emissions, a potent greenhouse gas (GHG). Greenhouse gas emission reduction can be achieved by careful planning of water management in the rice paddy. By allowing the soil to dry out during certain periods of rice production, the soil will become aerobic.Anaerobic bacteria which produce methane, stop doing so when the soil becomes aerobic thus reducing methane (CH4) emissions relative to tradition flooded rice techniques.However, aerobic soil conditions activate another set of bacteria which can release nitrous oxide (N 2O), an even more potent GHG. But reductions in nitrogen (N) fertilizer application rates (which are part of 1M6R) can moderate N2O emission reductions as this is where the N in N2O originates. 2. Materials and Method 2.1 Experimental design Experimental design variables are shown in Table 5.1. As there are 3 crops a year, the experimental conditions for crops 1 – 3 were repeated in the second year. The third crop was not repeated in AG as this is traditionally fallowed. Fertilizer application rates varied in KG by season to accommodate variable crop yields by season. VLCRP measured GHG emissions on 3 farms using the traditional techniques and 3 farms using 1M6R in two provinces of the Mekong Delta (An Giang - AG and Kien Giang -KG) over a 2 year period. 2.2 Water management Designing the water management regime was a critical component to the experimental design. Extensive meetings with farmers groups were necessary to reach an agreement on the traditional water management regime for use as the Control treatment. The Alternate Wet and Dry (AWD) Experimental treatment water regime was formulated based on the agricultural expertise within the VLCRP. Examples of planned and actual water management regimes are shown in Figure 5.1a and 5.1b.

1 2

Lead Senior Scientist, EDF Advanced Lab, Can Tho University 137

Table 5.1: Details on experimental variables for GHG emission measurement studies. 1M6R is the experimental treatment. Control is the traditional practice. DX=winter – spring crop season; HT= spring – summer crop season; TD = summer – autumn crop season. The three numbers in the Fertilizer row indicate the nitrogen, phosphorus and potassium content. AWD = Alternate Wet and Dry water management. KG = Kien Giang; AG = An Giang.

2.3 Greenhouse gas sampling and measurements The USDA GraceNet3 protocol was used to establish the measurement procedure. A sampling chamber with a dimension of 70 cm in diameter and 100 cm height was used to take gas sample. Two chambers were placed on fixed basement structures in each field and gases were withdrawn with a syringe through a sample port in the top of the chamber at zero, 10 and 20 minutes. Gas samples were stored in evacuated vials for transport from the field to the Advance Lab. Greenhouse gases were measured on Gas Chromatographs at the Advanced Laboratory at Can Tho University. An ECD detector was used for N2O determination and FID detector was used for CH4 determination. 3. Results The amount of methane emitted in An Giang in the experimental plot was significantly lower than the Control in 3 out of 4 crop seasons (Table 5.2). (During the first crop season in both AG and KG, the AWD water management regime was not followed in Experimental crop fields so no experimental treatment was available). Nitrous oxide emissions, while generally higher in the AWD experimental fields, as expected, were not significantly higher relative to the control. Methane and nitrous oxide emissions were converted to CO2 equivalents and added to get total GHG emissions for each treatment (Figure 5.2). The reduction in total GHG emissions in the experimental treatment relative to the control were significant in 3 out of 4 and 4 out of 4 crop seasons in An Giang and Kien Giang, respectively. The average annual GHG reduction in An Giang was 7.7 metric tons CO2e/ha.

3

http://www.ars.usda.gov/research/programs/programs.htm?np_code=212&docid=21223

138

The GHG emission data from KG (Figure 5.2) are still under review. The emission values were exceptionally high as were GHG emission reductions as a result of the experimental treatment. In order to verify the results from these experiments, it will be necessary to perform duplicate sampling and measurement in coordination with an independent laboratory. This verification is planned in the second phase of the VLCRP work. The KG results are shown in Figure 2 in this report in the chance that others might also have found such exceptionally high rates in research conducted in nearby areas. The GHG emission results from KG should not be considered final results and should not be cited beyond this report.

Figure 5.2: Chamber, basement and bridge were constructed for GHG sampling

4. Conclusions Methane emissions from the rice fields in the AG and KG are quite high but the 1M6R set of management practices are able to significantly reduce these emissions. Nitrous oxide emissions are not high but can be an important relative contributor to total GHG emissions when CH4 emissions are low. The AWD water management regime and low N fertilizer additions (relative to the traditional management) are important to controlling GHG emissions from rice field. Agronomic data collected by VLCRP and discussed in other sections of this report show that the 1M6R set of practices also increase yields and farmer revenue, a critical factor to the proliferation of the 1M6R set of practices to other areas. Future plans include modeling the GHG emission to allow extrapolation of the results of these measurements to other fields using 1M6R.

139

a

b

Figure 5.1a and 5.1b: An example of water management in (a) An Giang Province and (b) Kien Giang Province. Control is the traditional practice. AWD = Alternate Wet and Dry water management.A water level measurement was made next to each of the 2 chambers in each field.

140

Figure 5.2: Combined (methane + nitrous oxide) greenhouse gas emissions for the Control and 1M6R (experimental) treatments as well as significant reductions in total emissions in the experimental treatment relative to the control. Methane and nitrous oxide emissions are converted to CO2 equivalents (CO2e) by multiplying by their global warming potential factor (28 for CH4 and 298 for N2O). Kien Giang results are preliminary and should not be quoted from this report. Table 5.2: Methane and Nitrous Oxide flux from 5 crop seasons in An Giang. C-AWD = the reduction in methane emissions as a result of the experimental treatment. * = Significant at the P