Abstract. Introduction

Transcription

1 A FARMER-PARTICIPATORY APPROACH IN THE ADAPTATION AND ADOPTION OF CONTROLLED IRRIGATION FOR SAVING WATER: A CASE STUDY IN CANAREM, VICTORIA, TARLAC, PHILIPPINES F. G. Palis 1, P.A. A. Cenas 1*, B. A. M. Bouman 2, R. M. Lampayan 2, A.T. Lactaoen 3, T. M. Norte 3, V. R.. Vicmudo 3, M. Hossain 1 and G. T. Castillo 4 1 Social sciences Division, 2 Crop Soil and Water Division, International Rice Research Institute (IRRI), DAPO Box 7777, Metro Manila, Philippines and 3 National Irrigation Administration, Groundwater, Irrigation System Reactivation Project, Tarlac, Philippines 4 Consultant, IRRI Published in: Palis, F.G., P.A.A. Cenas, B.A.M. Bouman, M. Hossain, R.M. Lampayan, A.T. Lactaoen, T.M. Norte, V.R. Vicmudo, G. T. Castillo, Farmer adoption of controlled irrigation in rice: a case study in Canarem, Victoria, Tarlac. Philippine Journal of Crop Science, 29(3): Abstract With the current problem of water scarcity, a water saving technology called controlled irrigation was tested for farmers adaptation and eventual adoption using a farmer participatory approach. This technology can increase irrigation efficiency, water distribution equity, and farmers income through the reduction of irrigation costs. The study was conducted in in Canarem, Victoria Tarlac among members of the P38 deep well Irrigation Service Cooperative to explore factors that would facilitate adoption of this water saving technology. After two years of experimenting and demonstration with farmer-cooperators, farmers perceive that CI gives the same yield as the usual farmers practice, that it saves water, time and labor, and that it reduces the costs of rice production. Actual measurements form the farmers fields showed that CI had the same yield as farmers practice, and that on average it saved 16-24% water and 20-25% costs. Group factors identified for successful collective action to facilitate CI s adoption are: group size, service area, profitability, high level of excludability, enhancement of existing social capital, strong leadership to deal with free riders, and close linkages with local governments and NIA. Introduction Rice (Oryza sativa L.) is the staple food of Asia, which is approximately half of the world s population (Maclean et al. 2002). About 75% of global rice is produced under irrigated conditions, 18% in rainfed areas while, only 3% in deep water rice and tidal wetlands. In all these environments, water plays a major role in rice cultivation. In the irrigated environment, the use of irrigation is highly associated with the other major sources of agricultural growth i.e., fertilizer, improved seed, and integrated pest management. However, rice is a thirsty crop and the production of 1 ton of rice requires on average some 3000 liters of water (Tuong and Bouman, 2003). An inadequate supply 1

2 of water during crop establishment or during the vegetative or reproductive stages of the crop generally leads to a significant yield reduction (Wopereis et al 1996, Bouman and Tuong, 2001). The supply of water, however, is increasingly getting scarce because of the increasing world s population that brings along multiple competing demands i.e., for agriculture, industry, domestic use, safe drinking water and sanitation (Bouman and Tuong, 2001). Also, climatic changes such as the El Niño phenomenon exacerbate the water scarcity situation (IRRI, 1995). The increasing water scarcity not only threatens general food security in Asia, but also increases the costs of irrigation development and operation. Where these costs are borne by farmers, such as in pump-operated irrigation systems, this consequently threatens the livelihood of these farmers as well. In order to meet the food demands of Asian consumers and producers, efficient water management practices are needed that maintain rice yields and production at a high level. To address the problem of water scarcity, researchers have been developing water-saving irrigation technologies, such as direct dry or wet seeding, land leveling, and alternate wetting and drying (in the Philippines called Controlled Irrigation) (Bhuiyan et al 1995, Bouman and Tuong 2001, Li 2001, Tabbal et al. 2002). Of these techniques, Controlled Irrigation (CI) has been most intensively researched and has been demonstrated to reduce water requirements while maintaining high yields when implemented appropriately (Bouman and Tuong 2001, Belder et al. 2004). CI entails an irrigation schedule where, contrary of the normal practice of continuous flooding, water is applied to the field a number of days after disappearance of ponded water (TTWS, 2001a). Although CI is massively and effectively used by farmers in China (Li 2001), it has not been extended to farmers in water-scarce areas in other countries of Asia. In the Philippines, some 61% of the 3.4 million ha of rice is under irrigation, with the majority of the production coming from the rice granary of the country - Central Luzon (Maclean et al. 2002). Irrigation is through gravity system, and shallow and deep tube wells. Water availability has declined in the last decades (Pingali et al. 1997, NIA, 1996) which prompted the country s National Irrigation Administration (NIA) to enhance irrigation water availability by infrastructure development and maintenance, and by the promotion of water-saving technologies (NIA, 1996). In response to NIA s needs, IRRI initiated in 2001 the project "Technology Transfer for Water Savings" (TTWS), in collaboration with NIA and PhilRice (Bouman et al. 2002, Lampayan et al. 2002). The project aims to facilitate farmers adaptation and eventually adoption of water-saving technologies. The technology of CI was piloted among farmers using irrigation water drawn form deep well systems in Tarlac and from shallow groundwater tubes in Nueva Ecija. The deep wells are maintained and operated by farmers irrigation service cooperatives (ISC) whereas the shallow tubewells are privately owned. The successful adoption of a new technology not only depends on the suitability and profitability of that technology, but also on social factors such as farmers perceptions. Where irrigation water use is organized in a communal way, the organizational structure and functioning plays a key role as well. The objectives of this paper are 1) to determine farmers perceptions of CI as an effective water-saving technology in rice production, and 2) to explore success factors for collective action in an organized irrigation management system that would facilitate and insure eventual farmers adoption. We focus our study on the case of the deep well P-38 of the TTWS project, a reactivated system in Canarem, Victoria, Tarlac. 2

3 Conceptual Framework The adoption of CI in a deep well system requires successful collective action among the members of the ISC running it. This is because CI entails a systematic scheduling of water, and therefore its adoption would greatly depend on a close cooperation among members and a successful management of the irrigation system through the ISC. Collective action is defined as an action taken by a group, either directly or on its behalf through an organization, like the ISC of P-38, in pursuit of members perceived shared interests (Marshall 1998). Hence, successful management of a groundwater irrigation system such as P-38 requires successful collective action among ISC members and strong partnerships with NIA and local governments. The P-38 infrastructure (well, pump, canals) is considered a common property resource (CRP), which is based on a system of shared costs and resources among members. Shared costs entail fuel and oil, cash cost for maintenance, transaction costs, and shared labor for building ditches, cleaning fields, etc. Other characteristics of the SCI are member equity and cooperative membership, and comparable benefits such as rice yield, income from rice, and assurance of rice supply for home consumption. In any CRP, a free rider is always a threat. A free rider is one who receives benefits from the system but dos not share in the costs. Part of the success of any CRP is in how it handles free riders. Farmers of an ISC would cooperate, adapt and adopt a water-saving technology such as CI and follow the rules of the irrigation management system if they perceive that the benefits of the technology are greater than the costs of implementation. But farmers would likely not adopt the technology it if they perceive that the benefit would be less than the costs. Hence, aside from successful collective action in managing irrigation water, farmers perceptions on the effectiveness of CI largely influences adoption. But perceptual soundness about CI is attained only when knowledge is gained about the technology from experiential learning through actual experimentation of CI. Learning by doing would enable farmers to adapt and fit the technology to their situation, which would promote its adoption. Since P-38 is a common property resource, farmers experimentation with CI would require concerted coordination and cooperation among the members of the ISC. It is hypothesized therefore that farmers water management practice would change once they perceive positively the technological effectiveness of CI through actual experimentation and successful collective action. Success factors for collective action would likewise serve as a theoretical support for the policy of handing over the management of groundwater irrigation systems from state agencies to the groups of local beneficiaries, i.e. the ISCs. Materials and method The study was conducted in Canarem, about 70 km north of Manila, situated in the municipality of Victoria in the Province of Tarlac. At the start of the TTWS project in 2001, a Needs and Opportunities Assessment (NOA) was conducted to characterize the village and identify constraints and opportunities for development (TTWS, 2001b). 3

4 Canarem is divided into four distinct zones: Karayaan or river, Lubog or lowland, Pinak the midland, and Turod or Kabalayan the upland or residential area. The main sources of income are derived from farming, livestock raising and fishing (fresh water fish) as large portion of the Lubog area is submerged during wet season. Most farmers plant rice in both the dry (DS) and the wet season (WS). In the WS, however, large portions of their total area (Lubog) are flooded so that rice planting is not possible. Instead, farmers fish in these flooded areas to sustain their food supply while waiting for the water to recede. The WS relies on rainfall for rice cropping and runs from June to October, whereas the DS needs irrigation water and runs from December to April. The P-38 in Canarem is one of the reactivated deep groundwater systems of the Tarlac Groundwater Irrigation System Reactivation Project (TGISRP). In 1998, NIA started reactivating old and dysfunctional deep well systems or installing new ones. These systems draw water from some m depth and service areas of typically ha. P-38 was constructed in 1972 when the United Nation Development Program undertook a well-drilling operation for groundwater exploration. However, its operation stopped when the project was terminated. Like in other TGISRP deep well systems, P-38 has one irrigators service cooperative (ISC) consisting of farmers whose farms are covered by the irrigation system. The ISC consists currently of 63 farmers. NIA helped to organize the farmers by conducting trainings and seminars so as form a strong farmer s association that could undertake management responsibilities in the operation and maintenance of the system. NIA plans to gradually turn over the current total of 20 ground water systems to the ISCs between 2003 and The TTWS introduced the CI technology at P-38 in the dry seasons of 2002 and It used a farmer-participatory research and development approach with the participation of different stakeholders such as scientists, irrigation engineers, extension agents, and farmers (Bouman et al. 2002, Lampayan et al. 2003). After a series of popular seminars on water management and the water-saving technology CI in 2002, 11 volunteer farmers were selected to experiment with and demonstrate the CI technology. In the following 2003 DS, 12 farmers participated. The selection of farmers was based on motivation and willingness to participate, and on site criteria like accessibility, spread of farmers across the site, position on the toposequence, and distance from the pump. Each farmer participant contributed two (neighboring) plots with a size of m 2 each, one representing the current farmers practice (FP) and one the CI technology. The water management of the CI plots was a joint affair between all project members and aimed at site-specific optimization of the technology (in terms of irrigation rotation, depth of application, number of days without ponded water, etc). All activities and farm inputs and output of these participating farmers were closely monitored in both seasons (Table 1). An input-output survey of rice production for all the 63 farmers was done in 2003 DS using a semi-structured questionnaire (Table 1). For our purpose of deriving farmers perceptions on CI, insight in the functioning of the ISC, and success factors for adoption of CI, key informant interviews were conducted in the DS of 2003 with various people and groups such as the ISC chairman, secretary, treasurer and auditor, and NIA staff and IRRI water scientists. Beside these interviews, records of ISC meetings and general functioning were kept throughout the dry season. 4

5 Results and Discussion Farmers Perceptions of CI The majority of the farmer cooperators had positive feedback about the effectiveness of CI as a water-saving technology (Table 2). Below, we review the perceptions in more detail. Note that we do not give scientific explanations or scientifically diverging insights, but present farmers perception as they were recorded. We only compare farmers perceptions with actually measured data from our 12 cooperators where possible. No yield difference compared with Farmers Practice (FP) Farmers generally perceived that yield in the FP plots was similar to that in the CI plots, regardless of less water being used in CI plots. This perception agrees with the yields obtained from crop cut samples of 2 x 2.5 m 2 areas as indicated in Table 1. In both 2002 and 2003, there was no significant difference between the yield under FP and CI.. Yields were higher in 2003 than in 2002, which may have been caused by a variety of reasons beyond the usual effects of differences in weather. In 2003, farmers used more fertilizers (Table 1), they were better instructed in overall good crop management practices through cooperation in the project (see Learned how to manage other inputs better as well below), and because of the use of different varieties. In 2003, many farmers in the lower portions of the area used the variety Apo that yielded higher than PSBRC-28, the variety used commonly by farmers in the high and middle elevations. Nakita namin ang epekto sa ani, na hindi pala bumaba ang ani ng palay kahit kaunti lang ang tubig na gagamitin, said farmer Mang Anton. The mean yield 4.6 t ha -1 of the all 63 members in 2003 was much lower than the 6.2 t ha -1 (FP) and 6.1 t ha -1 (CI) of our farmer cooperators. This is a quite common phenomenon, reflecting the fact that usually farmers who are willing to try out new technologies and participate in research are farmers who are among the best producing farmers in the area. Moreover, their cooperation in the project increased their farming skills (see below). Saves water Farmers recognized that CI saves water. Aside from alternate wetting and drying of the paddy field, CI maintains only a 2 cm-depth of standing water in contrast to the usual farmers practice of maintaining a 5-8-cm water depth. On average, the (measured) amount of water saved in CI compared with FP was 16% in 2002 and 24 % in 2003 (Figures 1 and 2). The largest water savings were 24% in 2002 and 33% in The higher savings in 2003 reflect the effects of the learning process: at this time, farmers were already confident about the performance of CI and willing to take more risk iin saving more water. Farmers said that, once the technology is adopted, more water will be saved, more rice farms can be irrigated, and more houses can be supplied with water now available for domestic use. At present, only fifty households receive water from the overhead tank attached to the P-38. Other households get water from shallow tube wells (STW) for their domestic use. STWs have been the source of domestic water supply for many years, but 5

6 this form of water supply is erratic especially in March-May when shallow groundwater tables are at their lowest level and STWs run dry. Some 73% of the respondents said that irrigation water delivery by P-38 to ISC member farmers could be substantially improved with respect to timeliness, reliability, and equity of water distribution if all members of the ISC would adopt CI. The rotation interval of irrigation water delivery to farmers is currently 10 to 14 days, though most farmers prefer a 7-day interval The adoption of CI could lead to shorter rotation intervals. Saves time, labor and expenses All farmer cooperators acknowledged that CI saves time, labor and expenses. It reduced costs by using 20-25% less fuel and oil (Table 1). It reduced labor as farmers spent less hours in irrigation (depending on the distance). Moreover, the ISC could abolish water delivery during night time. However, farmers also observed that straight planting is used in CI plots and that this needs more people (labor) than in their usual practice in planting (Note: the straight planting was advocated by the TTWS team as general recommendation and is not a characteristic of CI). Better grain quality Farmers observed that rice grains from CI plots were heavier, bigger and in good shape because of soil aeration ( nakakahinga ang lupa ). Whereas in FP, rice grains are lighter and slender, sometimes unfilled, because of the absence of soil aeration. In 2002, members of the TTWS project took grain samples from CI and FP plots for some quality analysis. The results show there are no significant difference between CI and FP grains in the milling indicators percent head and broken rice, percent brewers, percent bran, percent chalky and immature, percent discoloration, and percent damaged (Table 3). More tillers Farmers perceived that there were more tillers in CI plots than in FP plots. Since CI provides improved aeration to the plants, it thereby makes space available for more tillers to grow. The continuous flooding and maintenance of high water level in FP suppressed the growth of tillers. Less insect pests and diseases One farmer observed that when the soil dries up, insect pests would not stay long and thus there were fewer incidences of pests and diseases. Less yield when water delivery is too late One farmer reported that his crop was not able to cope with the water stress under CI because his soil is sandy and the water delivery interval was too long (10-14 days). This observation was made in 2002, especially when the pump operation was stopped for a few days because of non-payment of operation and maintenance costs by some/most members. Learned how to manage other inputs better as well Some 73% of the farmers said that their participation in the CI experimentation enabled them to gain new knowledge on fertilizer management (i.e., time to apply and amount 6

7 required), on when to spray pesticides, and on how to obtain pure seeds (It should be noted that problems on these crop management issues appeared during the NOA of 2001 and that brief trainings on these issues were organized by the TTWS project). Moreover, they learned how to save water at times when it was needed most. ISC functioning and impact of CI The ISC of P-38 was organized in 1998 before the reconstruction of the pump under the TGISRP was completed. The cooperative was composed of a chairman, a board of directors, officers, committees and staff. It started with 45 members and grew to 63 at present (Table 4). It operated on a loan granted by NIA specifically for operation and maintenance (O&M), which amounted to P60, 000 and was payable in 5 years. Together with the increase in membership, the size of the irrigation service area increased as well (Table 4). Consequently, the rotation interval of water delivery to farmers fields increased. Starting with a interval of 7 days, it increased to days during the years of the TTWS project. Over the years, the general operation scheme remained the same. The farmers are organized into groups based on geographic vicinity. Groups near to the pump will receive water first, then, followed by the next group. Each group has a leader who is responsible for allocation of water to each member with a specific time interval. NIA provides the fuel for operation which is paid back by the farmers. At the start of the TTWS project, tensions about water use were rising because of the increase in membership size of the ISC and because of subsequent increases in service area size and the lengthening of the interval of water delivery. The introduction of the concept of CI added to the tension because farmers were apprehensive of looking at their rice fields with dry land, especially when they saw the cracking of the soil. Many farmers doubted that CI would give them the same or higher yields as their usual practice. At that time, some farmers started stealing water by placing holes underneath their paddy dikes and hidden from other farmers eyes. Conflicts were resolved through the intercession of village officials, particularly the village security officers. Also at that time, many farmers stopped settling their dues for the costs for fuel and maintenance, so that they could not pay back their loans to NIA. At the height of this crisis, in 2002, the ISC officers headed by the chairman passed a resolution that no one could avail of water unless he/she had fully paid back their obligations. The irrigation operation was temporarily stopped for two days. This meant that farmers who were originally scheduled to receive their share of water those days did not receive anything and had to wait 7 days for their next turn for water. Fortunately, with this strong measure, most/all farmers settled their bills within two days and water deliveries were resumed. The quick payment of bills may have been motivated by the fact that water deliveries were stopped when the crop was close to the flowering stage where water is really much wanted. Another decision the ISC took was to no longer avail of NIA s credit for the fuel and oil. The ruling for having access to water was changed from using NIA s fuel and oil supply to individual supply. Each farmer needs to bring his/her own fuel and oil to the pump for irrigation of their fields. In passing this resolution, the free rider problem was also resolved. After this resolution, there was a remarkable 40% decrease in the total amount of fuel and oil used. This is expected because during the time when the 7

8 cooperative was using fuel provided by NIA, farmers were quite luxurious in their use, but they were very prudent in their use when individually provided. After two years, the experiences with CI also contributed to the easing of tensions of water use. Farmers were no longer apprehensive of not having ponded water on their fields for some days as they had experienced that this did not reduce yields. Thus, they were more confident in waiting their turn for water delivery. Cohesive interaction among farmers also increased during the experimentation because everyone was curious about the performance of CI. And when farmers saw the effectiveness and viability of CI, many were convinced that CI could reduce their water consumption. Since CI reduced water consumption, CI became a significant factor in solving the operation problem and induced the willingness of farmers to cooperate i.e., with the fuel scheme of bringing one s own fuel and oil, and to be a continuing member of the deep well system. Success factors for collective action and adoption of CI Collective action is the basic foundation for facilitating adoption of CI in a deep well irrigation system. Below are the identified factors affecting the success of collective action. Group size Groups should be small to minimize transaction costs, but cannot be too small or else the ISC won t be able to cover the costs of operation and maintenance of the system. Relatively small group sizes are generally associated with homogeneity among members, and also communication between members takes less time and effort. In the experience of P-38, communication and management (particularly in terms of payment) was easier with less than 50 members. Service area size The size of the area serviced by the deep well system should be small, just large enough to maintain a water delivery schedule that would not create water stress to rice plants. At P-38, when the service area increased from 45 to 78 ha, the interval between water deliveries increased to accommodate all the fields. A long time interval is not acceptable to most members, and they prefer a 7-day interval rather than 12- to 14-day intervals. Profitability Relative profitability of adopting CI should be high enough to make collective action profitable. Based on the experiments in 2002 and 2003, the amount of water used in CI is lower than in the usual farmer practice (Fig 1), and hence irrigation costs are lower as well. There was an average savings of water of 16-24% (Fig 2), and an average saving in costs of 20-25% (Table 1). Strong Leadership- strict enforcement of rules to resolve free-rider problem In the first four years of operation, fuel and oil was supplied by NIA a part of a loan. Records show that ISC members used fuel excessively, probably because the payment was the same for each member and because payments were not immediate but made only after harvest. The chairman, imbibing the Filipino values of pakikisama, or smooth 8

9 interpersonal relationship and hiya, or sense of shame, was not so strict in enforcing the policies and regulations, particularly those related to paying dues to the ISC. But with the strict enforcement of ruling on payment (that had resulted in halting the operation of P-38 for two days) and access to water (bring own fuel), everyone was careful and watchful (for fear of stealing) in irrigating their fields, and frugal in the amount of fuel use. These new policies and the use of CI reduced the total fuel consumption by 40%. Excludability Excludability (i.e. the degree to which entitled users can keep out free riders) is an important factor in effective operation of an ISC. There is a high excludability in P-38 as witnessed by the temporary suspension of operations in 2002 and by the rule of providing own fuel and oil without which one does not have access to water. Identification and enhancement of social capital Social capital refers to resources derived from social relations like networks and trust that facilitate collective action (Palis 2002). Many of the members of the ISC of P-38 are either related by blood or by ritual (consanguineal and fictive), which promotes and enforces collective action and group cooperation in the management of the deep well. As indicated by Palis (2002), the probability that farm neighbors are kin related is very high because land is normally distributed equally among siblings in a family. Likewise, the fictional kinship through kumpadres, is strong especially in the rural areas. Fueled by hiya, farmers that are kumpadres are more likely to cooperate with one another. In this case, when the payment regulation was strictly enforced, the value of hiya contributed much to cooperation. Institutional linkages Partnership with local government is necessary. It reinforces cooperation and discipline as experienced by members where the village security officers intervened in resolving conflicts related to the stealing of water. Moreover, through close monitoring and mentoring by NIA of the ISC s operation and maintenance of the system, farmers were able to receive guidance and technical support that helped the P-38 ISC to be a stronger cooperative. Summary and Conclusion The problem of water scarcity calls for the development of water-saving technologies in rice production. Controlled Irrigation (CI) was tested through farmer participatory research and development, and found to be a viable technology for farmers use as demonstrated by P-38 ISC members. Farmers perceive that CI saves significant amounts of water, time, labor, and cash, and thereby reducing the costs of rice production. Aside from reduction of inputs, particularly water, CI gives the same yield, and is perceived to produce more tillers and bigger and heavier grains with good shape. Scientific evidence has corroborated the farmers perceptions on water savings and yield performance. As measured in the dry seasons of 2002 and 2003 in farmers fields, CI saved on average 16-24% water, with a maximum savings of 33%. Likewise, irrigation cost were 9

10 on average reduced by 20-25%. There was no significant yield difference between CI and FP plots. Though CI is suitable for adoption by farmers based on their positive perceptions, good functioning and cooperation among members of an ISC seems another requirement for adoption of CI in groundwater irrigation systems. Factors identified for successful collective action to facilitate CI s implementation are: group size, service area, profitability, high level of excludability, enhancement of existing social capital, strong leadership to deal with free riders, and close linkages with local governments and NIA. 10

11 References Belder, P., Bouman, B.A.M., Cabangon, R., Lu, G., Quilang, E.J.P., Li, Y., Spiertz, J.H.J., Tuong, T.P., 2004 Effect of water-saving irrigation on rice yield and water use in typical lowland conditions in Asia. Agric Water Management 65(3): Bhuiyan, S.I., Sattar, M.A., Khan, M.A.K., Improving water use efficiency in rice irrigation through wet seeding. Irrigation Science 16(1):1 8 Bouman, B.A.M., Tuong T.P., Field water management to save water and increase its productivity in irrigated lowland rice. Agricultural Water Management 49: Bouman, B.A.M., D.F. Tabbal, R.A. Lampayan, R.V. Cuyno, M.B. Quiamco, V.R. Vicmudo, T. M. Norte, A.T. Lactaoen, E.J.P. Quilang and J.L. de Dios, Knowledge Transfer for Water Savings Technologies in Rice Production in the Philippines. Proceedings of the 52nd Philippine Agricultural Engineering Annual National Convention, April 22-26, 2002, Puerto Princessa City, Palawan, Phlippines. Pp IRRI [International Rice Research Institute] Water: A Looming Crisis. Program Report. IRRI, Los Baños, Philippines. Lampayan RM, Bouman BAM, de Dios JL, Lactaoen AT, Quilang EJP, Tabbal DF, Llorca LP, Norte T. M., Soriano J, Corpuz AA, Espiritu AJ, Malasa RB, Vicmudo VR, Technology Transfer for Water Savings (TTWS) in Central Luzon, Philippines: Results and Implications. Proceedings of the 53 rd Philippine Agricultural Engineering Annual National Convention, April 21-25, 2003, Waterfront Insular Hotel Davao, Davao, Philippines. Pp Li., Y.H., Research and practice of water saving irrigation for rice in China. In: Barker, R., Loeve, R., Li, Y., Tuong, T.P., (eds.), Water-saving irrigation for rice. Proceedings of an International Workshop March, 2001, Wuhan, China Maclean, J.L., Dawe, D.C., Hardy, B., Hettel, G.P., Rice almanac (third edition). IRRI, Los Baños, Philippines. 253 pp NIA [National Irrigation Administration], Annual report NIA, Manila, Philippines. 46 pp Palis, F.G., S.Morin, and M Hossain. Social Capital and IPM Diffusion: A Case study in Central Luzon, Philippines. Paper presented at the CG Systemwide Conference for Non-Economist Social Science, Sept 4-11, Cali, Columbia. Pingali, P.L., Hossain, M., Gerpacio, R.V., Asian rice bowls; the returning crisis? CAB International, Oxon, UK (in association with IRRI, Los Baños, Philippines). 341 pp. Tabbal, D.F., Bouman, B.A.M., Bhuiyan, S.I., Sibayan, E.B., Sattar, M.A., Onfarm strategies for reducing water input in irrigated rice; case studies in the Philippines. Agric. Water management 56: TTWS [Technology Transfer for Water Savings], 2001a.Controlled Irrigation: Isang Pamaraan ng Pagtitipid ng Tubig Para sa Lipat-tanim na Palay. TTWS Bulletin No. 2. Jointly published by the Department of Agriculture-Philippine Rice 11

12 Research Center (DA-PhilRice), Department of Agriculture-National Irrigation Administration (DA-NIA) and International Rice Research Institute (IRRI) TTWS [Technology Transfer for Water Savings], 2001b. Participatory Needs and Opportunities Assessment, Canarem, Victoria, Tarlac. Report prepared by NIA- TGISRP, in collaboration with PhilRice and IRRI. August 8-10, 2001 Tuong, T.P., Bouman, B.A.M., Rice production in water-scarce environments. In: Kijne, J.W, Barker, R., Molden, D. (Eds), Water Productivity in Agriculture: Limits and Opportunities for Improvement. CABI Publishing, UK. Pp Wopereis, M.C.S., Kropff, M.J., Maligaya, A.R., Tuong, T.P., Drought-stress responses of two lowland rice cultivars to soil water status. Field crops res. 46:

13 Table 1: Average yield, costs and returns of rice grown under two water management practices for demonstration farmers in Canarem, Victoria, Tarlac, for dry season 2002 and 2003 respectively. Last column gives mean data for 2003 of all 63 farmers. FP = farmers practice; CI = Controlled irrigation; n = number of farmers Dry season 2003 dry season All farmers Item PF C I PF C I P-38 ISC n = 11 n = 12 n = 63 Yield Kg/ha Gross Returns (pesos/ha) Costs (pesos/ha) Materials Seed F ertilizers Pesticides Fuel and Oil Others Labor Land preparation Crop establishment Crop care Post harvest labor Permanent labor 5488 Total Production cost Net profit (pesos/ha)

14 Table 2. Farmers Perceptions about CI as a water-saving technology. Perceptions about CI ( n = 15) Frequency Percent 1. Less time, less expensive and saves labor It save a lot of water No yield difference compared to farmers practice I learned a lot of new technique in modern rice production such as fertilizer application, selection of pure seeds, when to spray, how to save water during irrigation, etc. 5. If CI would be adopted to all members in P-38 ISC water rotation interval would be improved in regard to timelines, reliability and equity of water distribution from one field to another Grains in CI plots are rounded and more heavier FP plots could not produce more tillers due to continuous flooding I observed that in modern rice production technique, straight planting needs more people Others 3 20 Others: 1. Crop stand in both FP and CI are the same 2. CI plots have no diseases 14

15 Table 3. Average grain milling quality of rice harvested in CI and FP plots in Canarem, dry season 2002 Indicator CI FP Difference % purity % milled rice % head rice % broken rice % brewers % bran % chalky and immature % discolored % damaged

16 Figure 1. Total amount of water used (mm) at controlled irrigation (CI) and farmer practice (FP) plots in Canarem, Victoria, Tarlac for 2002 and 2003 dry season, based on data from farmers 16

17 High Middle Low Average High Middle Low Average % savings P 38, Canarem 2002 Dry Season 2003 Dry Season Figure. 2 Average water savings (%) in controlled irrigation over farmers practice in Canarem, Victoria, Tarlac for 2002 and 2003 dry season, based on data from farmers. 17

18 Table 4. Historical description of P-38 Year Description Membership Area Water delivery Operation Scheme Comments (#) (ha) interval (days) 1998 reactivated By area and group, NIA s fuel Went well By area and group, NIA s fuel Went well By area and group, NIA s fuel Went well; start of domestic use additional members By area and group, NIA s fuel Problematic Start of CI; Increased length of rotation interval because of increase in members did not plant * By area and individual, farmers fuel service area Went well 40% fueluel reduction * Farmers observed that the efficiency of the motor pump to discharge water has declined due to low water level. 18