3 rd Party Evaluation of Rashtriya Krishi Vikas Yojana (RKVY) : Community Managed Organic Farming implemented by SERP

Transcription

1 3 rd Party Evaluation of Rashtriya Krishi Vikas Yojana (RKVY) : Community Managed Organic Farming implemented by SERP Evaluation Team Prof. R. Ratnakar, Director Dr. M. Surya Mani, Professor EXTENSION EDUCATION INSTITUTE (Southern Region) Ministry of Agriculture, Govt. of India ANGR Agricultural University, Rajendranagar, Hyderabad

2 3 rd Party Evaluation of Rashtriya Krishi Vikas Yojana (RKVY) : Community Managed Organic Farming implemented by SERP Evaluation Report (October, 2010) Evaluation Team Prof. R. Ratnakar, Director Dr. M. Surya Mani, Professor EXTENSION EDUCATION INSTITUTE (Southern Region) Ministry of Agriculture, Govt. of India ANGR Agricultural University, Rajendranagar, Hyderabad

3 Content S.No. Title Page No 1. Introduction Methodology Results and Discussion Observations and Success Stories Summary, Recommendations and Conclusions Annexure I. Strategies for operationalisation of programme I - VIII II. List of NPM villages in Andhra Pradesh ( ) IX

4 List of Tables Table No Particulars Profile of sample respondents in different district of Andhra Pradesh Targets and achievement of different interventions implemented under the programme in different districts Categorization of farmers who have undergone training and exposure visits Institutional support in terms of members of group in the project area Seed Bank Establishment as expressed by the sample respondents Awareness and knowledge of sample respondents about major interventions initiated under the project Extent of Adoption of Beneficiaries of various activities promoted through the project Perception of respondents about organic farming in Rain Fed areas District wise data showing reduction of costs of pesticides and fertilizer as well as Increase in yields due to organic farming interventions Average reduction in costs and net additional income for different crops Problems as perceived by the stake holders and the respondents Suggestions as perceived by the stakeholders and respondents Page No

5 Abbreviations APM : Assistant Project Manager CA : Cluster Activist DPM : District Project Manager DRDA : District Rural Development Authority EGS : Employment Guarantee Scheme FFS : Farmer Field School FGD : Focus Group Discussions GDP : Gross Domestic Product NDC : National Development Council NPM : Natural Pesticide Management NRM : Natural Resource Management RKVY : Rashtriya Krishi Vikas Yojana SOF : Sustainable Organic Farming SOFS : Sustainable Organic Farming Systems SREP : Society of Elimination of Rural Poverty VA : Village Activist

6 1.0 Preamble CHAPTER-I Introduction India is striding ahead to face the gigantic triple challenges of sustainable increased agriculture productivity, environmental sustainability and poverty alleviation which are further aggravated by climate charge, global competition and rapidly advancing technologies. In order to meet these challenges, research and extension systems have to be structured and the client system has to be organized. Andhra Pradesh is India`s one of the largest states with about percent of population engaged in Agriculture comprising of 80 percent small and marginal farmers. The productivity and production from various crops is very low. Farmers are not able to organize themselves to get access to credit and marketing the research, extension and farmer linkages are also relatively week. The agricultural development depends on development on appropriate technologies which has to be decided by technology management system comprising of all the stakeholders namely; research, extension, farmers, markets etc., The current system of extension is based on the linear transfer of technology model which need to be made more response to the local situation and community needs. Therefore the shift should focus on providing integrated range of services and to make the grass root workers work more on the location specific problems and be accountable to the community. The new approach also calls for organizing farmers into commodity interest groups / farmers interest groups and federations so that these institutions become the platforms to deliver the integrated range of services from production to marketing. The above interventions calls for preparing plans from the village level with convergence and in a participatory manner involving all 1

7 stakeholders, similarly, the technology should be emerging from location specific needs and practices as well as the transfer should be through multimedia and multi-agencies extension approaches. Hence, the community managed sustainable agriculture need to be promoted in order to meet the challenges. 1.1 The Rashtriya Krishi Vikas Yojana (RKVY) Agricultural sector showed a growth rate of 3.16 percent GDP during to These trends caused a serious concerned and this happened due to the fact that agricultural productivity in most of the states was quite low as it were, and the potential for the growth of agriculture was high, concerned by the slow growth in the agriculture and allied sectors, the National Development Council (NDC), constituted various groups to search for the probable causes of such stagnation. These reports were reviewed the Ministry of Agriculture and subsequently NDC in its meeting held on 29 May, 2007 resolved that a special additional Central Assistance Scheme (RKVY) was launched. The theme was to rejuvenate the agricultural sector with a booster dose of investment, across board and correct the planning process at the substate level. Objectives of RKVY The RKVY aims at achieving 4% annual growth in the agriculture sector during the XI plan period, by ensuring a holistic development of Agriculture and allied sectors. The main objectives of the scheme are: 1. To provide incentives to the states as to increase public investment in Agriculture and allied sectors. 2. To provide flexibility and autonomy to states in the process of planning and executing Agriculture and allied sector schemes. 3. To ensure the preparation of agriculture plans for the districts and the states based on agro-climatic conditions, availability of technology and natural resources. 4. To ensure that the local needs/crops/priorities are better reflected in the agricultural plans of the states. 2

8 5. To achieve the goal of reducing the yield gaps in important crops, through focused interventions. 6. To maximize returns to the farmers in Agriculture and allied sectors 7. To bring about quantifiable changes in the production and productivity of various components of Agriculture and allied sectors by addressing them in a holistic manner. To realize the objectives, RKVY scheme in Agriculture sector was launched in Andhra Pradesh focusing mainly on three components, Farm mechanization, Seed management and soil Health Management. The soil health management is a prime concern. It is supposed to be achieved through convergence of various departments to save top soil and to develop and consume soil nutrients. Encouraging the farmers to use organic farming and also to lead them in sustainable agricultural development path is the major thust The Project The project for 3 rd party evaluation is the community managed organic farming in Rain Fed Areas under RKVY mainly aims at Soil Health and Plant Health Management. It was implemented by Society for Elimination of Rural Poverty (SERP), through DRDA in 18 District of Andhra Pradesh. (i) The project goals 1. To establish sustainable agriculture on a large scale with a focus on organic farming Rain Fed areas to improve the productive efficiency of the natural resources and provide better and more livelihoods options to farmers and agriculture workers. 2. To Establish Seed Banks in the villages 3. To build the capacities of the community based organization of rural poor women, representing small producers to manage, sustain and promote sustainable agriculture. 4. To establish appropriate support systems and enabling institutional systems 5. To improve market access to small producers adopting sustainable agriculture. 6. Placement of village quality control cell for post harvest operations 3

9 To sustain and improve agriculture and agriculture based livelihoods by establishing efficient local resource based agriculture, with farmers gaining more control over the production resources and managing the support systems. In the first year ( ) the program would be implemented in about 150,000 ha and expanded to 1,000,000 ha in five years, which covers about 10% of the agro-ecological zones of the state. The project has mainly the following components Evolving organic farming system plans at village level Capacity Building Development of sustainable cropping system Establishing Community Seed Banks Non pesticides management Improving Soil Health and Productivity (ii) Implementation arrangements The project is implemented by SERP through DRDA, Government of Andhra Pradesh at district Level. In each District there is District Project Manager (NPM). He is supported by the State Level Consultant and community resource person. DPM is assisted by APM at district level and there will be Cluster Activists (CAs) who are in charge of 5 Gram Panchayats and supported community Response Person (CRP) and each Gram Panchayat has a Village Activist (VA). The VA is implementing the programme through groups (Sasya Mitra Groups) following Farmer Field School approach (Organic Farm Schools Sendriya Polambadi). The strategies and details of the project is given in Annex I 1.3. Objectives of the Evaluation / Study are : 1. To study the socio-economic profile and situational factors of farmers participated in the Sustainable Organic Farming Systems (SOFS) Programme. 2. To examine the Sustainable Organic System interventions initiated by SERP under RKVY on terms of targets and achievements. 3. To study the extent of Participation in capacity building programmes by the sample respondents promoted through SOFS. 4

10 4. To find out the institutional support systems in terms groups, seed banks, organic shops etc., promoted through the programme and its functioning. 5. To unearth the awareness, knowledge and extent of adoption of different practices of NPM, Natural Resources and Cropping System in Rain Fed Sustainable Agriculture. 6. To find out the reduction in costs and maximization of profits by adopting SOF interventions in major crops. 7. To find out the improvements in incomes, nutritional status and livelihoods of beneficiaries. 8. To document the success stories and best practices which can be useful for the replication 9. To suggest the strategies for future improvement in the operation of SOFS programme Reference Period The reference period for evaluation is Limitations The data base of the districts is very week as such the organisation has to struggle hard in contacts and communication to obtain secondary data. To cover about 3200 sample respondents spread over 18 districts was a major bottleneck in a short period. Despite of limitations more directed efforts were put forth to quantify and bring this report Presentation of report This report has five chapters. The first is introductory chapter while the second chapter covers the methodology, the results and discussions are presented in third chapter. The fourth chapter covers district wise observations and case studies (success stories) and the fifth chapter depicts the summary of the findings and recommendations. 5

11 CHAPTER II Methodology The evaluation study was conducted in 18 districts of Andhra Pradesh following the methodology described below. The sampling procedure and methods and tools used for data collection and analysis are mainly given in this chapter. 2.1 Sampling Procedure i) Selection of mandals, clusters and villages The community managed organic farming in Rain Fed areas with support from Rastriya Krishi Vikas Yojana (RKVY) is being implemented in 18 districts covering 240 mandals 625 clusters and 3171 villages of Andhra Pradesh ( The list of NPM villages for is given in Annexure II). The study was undertaken in all the 18 Districts of Andhra Pradesh. However, for the purpose of the study 10% of randomly selected mandals (24), clusters (62) and (320) villages were selected. Proportionate random sample methodology was used for this purpose. ii) Selection of Sample Respondents From 320 villages selected for the study, 3200 respondents i.e., ten farmers from each village were interviewed. In addition, the team also captured qualitative data by using participatory methods ie. Focus Group Discussions etc. Thus the total sample was about 3200 farmers, farm women and key stakeholders Monitoring and Evaluation A two members team and Extension Professional namely (1) Dr. R. Ratnakar, Director, (2) Dr. M. Suryamani Professor, Extension Education Institution, Ministry of Agriculture, Government of India, ANGR Agricultural University, Rajendranagar, Hyderabad, Andhra Pradesh constituted the third party Evaluation team. Placement and training of data collectors The team was supported by two professional data collectors from each district. They were trained and oriented on various aspects of RKVY - Community Management Organic farming system and the methodologies. Accordingly the data teams gathered information from the beneficiaries and stakeholders. 6

12 2.3. Data Collection Methods and Tools Preparation of Interview Schedule Based on the input of consultation process and outputs to be achieved under the terms of reference, an interview schedule was prepared covering the following broad areas / variables. Basic information and socio economic profile of respondents Sustainable organic farming system interventions Capacity building and awareness creation Institutional support systems Costs and net returns on major crops / interventions Knowledge, skills, adoption and opinion Natural resource management Non pesticide management Suggestions and views of stakeholders The interview schedule was pretested and used for the study. Interview method was one of the prominent methods employed for data collection Focus Group Discussions (FGD) and Participatory tools An interview guide and check lists were prepared for FGDs. It was mainly centered on awareness knowledge, skills, adoption, opinion, implementation process and constraints, sustainability and follow-up strategies. In addition, other participatory techniques like transact walk, problem analysis etc were used. The highlights of the study FGDs were used not only by the data collectors but primarily by the team of monitoring and evaluation expert staff of EEI to generate additional data as well as to cross check the validity of data collected through questionnaires Field Visits and Objectives The evaluation team also visited the farmers fields to have the firsthand knowledge about the field condition due to sustainable organic farming system interventions. During this process it was done possible to compare the fields with farmer practices and discuss with non-beneficiaries. 7

13 Secondary Data The data for some of the variables is captured through secondary data obtained from districts, mandals and villages Documentation of success Stories and Best Practices This was done in consultation with all stakeholders Statistical Tools The statistical tools like frequency and percentages were used to interpret the data. 8

14 1. Socio Economic Profile CHAPTER-III Results and Discussion The following table indicates the profile of sample respondents in different districts of Andhra Pradesh. Table 1. Profile of Sample Respondents in the different districts S.No. Districts Average Land holding Education (%) Age (%) (Acres) Literates Illiterates Young (upto 30) Year Middle (31-50) Years Old (51 and above) 1. Srikakulam Vizianagaram Visakhapatnam Guntur Nellore Kurnool Ananthapur Chittoor Kadapa Rangareddy Nizamabad Medak Mahaboobnagar Nalgonda Warangal Khammam Karimnagar Adilabad N = 3200 It is observed from the table that majority of the respondents are literates, following in middle level age groups (40 to 50) and operating small land holdings ranging from 2-4 acres. This finding is on par with the project objectives. 9

15 2. Targets and Achievements Table 2. Targets and achievement of different interventions implemented under the programme in different districts. SRI paddy 36 X 36 model NADEP Compost NPM shops Custom hiring centers Farm ponds/ Azola Cattle shed lining T A T A T A T A T A T A T A 1 Srikakulam Vizianagaram Adilabad Karimnagar Ananthapur Kurnool Kadapa Warangal Nalgonda Nizamabad Rangareddy Mahabubnagar Guntur Khammam Chittoor Nellore Vizag Total Percentage (%) * Note. In few districts data is not available on targets. Therefore, achievements are also not included in totals for those districts 10

16 The following interventions were initiated and implemented under the programme. i. SRI Paddy ii. Crop models iii. Vegetable Mini Kit iv. Crop Modules v. NADEP Compost vi. NPM shops vii. Custom hiring centers viii. Bio gas plants ix. Tank silt application x. Farm ponds/ Azola xi. Compost pit under EGS xii. Cattle shed lining xiii. Neem pulvarisers However, more emphasis was laid on promoting SRI paddy, crop models, vegetable mini kits, 36x36 model, Nadap compost, cattle shed living, NPH shops, and NPM practices. In addition custom hire centres, biogas plants, tank silt application and farm pounds also targeted but achievements are not as anticipated since most of this works are in progress. Although crop models and vegetable mini kits were taken up extensively the data on targets and achievements was not available. As per the table 2. percentage of targets were achieved under SRI / Line Paddy, are 90 percent where as in the case of 36x36 crop model and NADAP compost only 50% of the targets were achieved. The establishment of NPM input shops and custom hiring centres shows about 60% of achievement. The lowest achievement was recorded in farm ponds. Regarding other interventions the reporting of target achievements could not be made due to in adequate data base at district level. 11

17 3. Capacity Building Table 3. Categorization of farmers who have undergone training and exposure visits Training Exposure Visits F % F % High (2-3) Medium (1-2 Low ( N = 2200 From the table it is clear that 25% of the respondent fall under high group having received 3 training programmes on different topics mostly SRI, compost and NPM practices. However, 32% of the respondents have undergone 2 training programmes. Majority (53%) have not received institutional training. A large majority of them have learnt the technologies through FFS. Regarding the exposure visits, 28 percent of respondents have participated in 3 exposure visits and 36% two visits. The exposure visits were mostly conducted at mandal level covering vegetable, compost, poly crops intercropping, preparation of organic pesticides and fertilizers. Basing on the field visits and available data it is suggested to undertake more capacity building programmes and also encourage the trained farmers to be the facilitators to spread appropriate technologies to the neighboring farmers by farmer to farmer extension. 12

18 4. Institutional Support Systems a) Groups Table 4. Institutional support in terms of members of group in the project area S.No. Districts Member in group Members federated at village level 1. Srikakulam Vizianagaram Visakhapatnam Guntur Nellore Kurnool Ananthapur Chittoor Kadapa Rangareddy Nizamabad Medak Mahaboobnagar Nalgonda Warangal Khammam Karimnagar Aliabad Total N = One of the important objectives of the programme is promoting institutional building in terms of groups, federations and net works in order to manage the activities in community basis. Towards this end the project has facilitated number of informal groups, built their capacities and federated at village level. In some of the mandals the groups were federated from village level. In some of the mandals the groups were federated from village level to mandal levels forming mandal Samakya. The groups are called Sasya Mitra Groups and each group is named after the beneficiary insects 13

19 and after other popular names depicting the theme of sustainable agriculture and organic farming. The group members also participated in FFS and other extension activities designed to promote organic farming systems in Rain Fed areas. The table no 4 shows the number of members participating in groups among the sample respondents. From the data it is clear that 78% of sample respondent are the members of the group promoted under the project. The rest of them reported that they also participated in project activities independently. About 96% of the members also reported they are also members in the federation at village level. These findings reveal that the project has made good effort in terms of institutional support by way of group formation and federation at various levels, paving way for community managed sustainable agriculture. However, more efforts are required in further strengthen the groups on knowledge and skills on post harvest technologies and marketing. b) Seed banks Table 5. Seed Bank Establishment as expressed by the sample respondents S.No 1) 2) 3) 4) Seed bank established Contribution for Seed Bank Training on Seed Production Visit to seed variety demonstration Yes No F % F % % % % % 5. Generated income % N = 3200 In the sample villages, majority (60%) of the farmers expressed that seed banks were established in their villages. About 55% of the sample farmers were contributing to the seed banks. Neverthereless about 25% of the farmers were trained on seed production and 30% of the farmers have visited seed varieties demonstrations and obtained the know how through the demonstrating farmers. The idea of the seed bank is to produce and procure quality seed which can be available to the farmers of the same village or neighboring villages with affordable prices. Seed banks are good institutional support to sustainable agriculture 14

20 development programmes. In most of the project villages paddy seed banks were promoted and established, since many farmers can easily produce quality paddy seed. The same effort can also be extended to other important and major crops in Rain Fed areas. c) NPM / input shops The project also aimed at establishing NPM input shops for availability of NPM inputs such as Panchagavya, Neam products, Gana Jeevamruthan, Drava Jeevamrutham, Brahmasthram, Pachapatra Kasayam, Botanical Pesticides etc., it is important that such input shops are managed and owned at commity level as income generating activity for the groups and federations. It has been observed in some of the villages a small scale NPM input shops are available. It is recommended that the NPM inputs are standardized and shops are commercialized and established at cluster and mandal levels. 5. Awareness, Knowledge, Adoption and Perception The data for this section was obtained through interview schedule and focus group discussions. a) Awareness and Knowledge Table 6. Awareness and knowledge of sample respondents about major interventions initiated under the project High Medium Low Knowledge % Knowledge % Knowledge % SRI / Line Planting 10% 60% 20% Compost 50% 30% 20% Vegetables 15% 70% 15% Crop Models 5% 35% 60% Bio Mass Nurseries 8% 30% 62% NPM input shops 5% 20% 75% NPM Practices 25% 60% 15% N=3200 The table 6 shows that majority of the respondents were having medium range of knowledge regarding the selected interventions. However, with respect to crop models, biomass nurseries, NPM input shops more than 60% awareness / knowledge of respondents was low. Only in the case of compost about 50% had good knowledge. 15

21 Therefore, there is need for creating more awareness on NPM input shops, biomass nurseries and crop models. Similarly, knowledge base concerning SRI / line planting and NPM practices need to be improved, since these two practices are widely propagated and implemented under the project. Furthermore, during focus group discussion it was revealed farmers are not confident with the rational behind the use of the technologies and also their application for different cropping situations, pest management, soil health management etc.,. More directed efforts have to be put by the project authorities to empower farmers on `how` & `why` of technologies. b) Adoption Table 7. Extent of Adoption of Beneficiaries of various activities promoted through the project Adopted Non Adopted Reasons SRI / Line 65% 35% Lack of training in Nursery Management Planting Non availability of labour Difficulty in operating Roto weeder Less germination of seedlings in winter season Climatic variations Compost 40% 60% Non availability of Dung and raw materials Not able to realize the benefits. Vegetable 70% 30% Marketing technologies Crop Models 12% 88% Difficulty in adoption. Non availability of different seed material Inadequate training Biomass 10% 90% Lack of capacity and resources nurseries NPM input shops NPM inputs and technologies 12% 88% Lack of public awareness Lack of confidence on technologies 60% 40% Attitude and confidence. Lack of technical expertise. Time consuming for preparation. Non availability of raw material N=3200 The table 7 on the extent of adoption reveals that about 65 percent of sample respondents adopted SRI / line planting & 40% compost preparation, 70% vegetable growing technologies & 60% NPM technologies. The crop models, biomass nurseries, were adopted by 10-12% farmers where as 12% of the sample respondents have reported that they have established NPM input shops. 16

22 There are various reasons reasons reported for non adoption as revealed by focus group discussions. Regarding SRI / line planting the major reasons for non adoption were lack of proper training in nursery management, non availability of labour and difficulty in operating roto weeder. Incase of cropping and biomass nurseries, the nonavailability of seed material and other resources as well as in adequate training were the reason reported for non adoption. Regarding NPM practices lack of confidence, technical expertise, non availability of raw material and time consuming process for preparation were the reasons reported for non-adoption. Lack of public awareness was the reason for low establishment of NPM input shops. ( c ) Perception Table 8. Perception of respondents about organic farming in Rain Fed areas. S.No 1. Organic Farming in rain fed areas is a profitable enterprise 2. NPM practices are resource intensive and therefore difficult to adopt 3. There will be yield reduction due to organic practices 4. Soil and plant health will be improved by following NPM practices 5. Crop models introduced with the project are difficult in convincing the farmers 6. NPM shops are not profitable since many farmers don t prefer to buy organic manures and pesticides and fertilizes Favorable Not favorable Undecided 40% 40% 20% 58% 32% 18% 65% 25% 10% 40% 40% 20% 35% 25% 40% 60% 20% 20% N = 1200 During the focus group discussions about 1200 respondents were asked for knowing differential perceptions about organic farming, which reflects their opinion. About 40% of the respondents endorsed favorably about organic farming as profitable enterprise. Similarly, about 65% felt there will be yield reduction due to organic production. However, about 40% said that soil and plant health will be improved by following NPM practices. Majority was not favourable with crop models and felt 17

23 NPM shops and crop models were not profitable. In addition about 58% did support the statement that NPM practices are resource intensive therefore difficult to adopt. From the over view of the table 8 it is clear that about 50% were favourably disposed about organic farming. Therefore, there is need for change the attitude of the other farmers for adopting organic farming and NPM practices. Intensive public awareness campaigns at various levels are advocated. 18

24 6. Reduction of Costs and yield data Table 9. District wise data showing reduction of costs of pesticides and fertilizer as well as Increase in yields due to organic farming interventions. S. District Crop Reduct Reduction Net NPM Net Yield / Increas No ion in in amount Amount acre ed in Pestici chemical saved of saved / ac yield des 1. Kadapa Paddy 100% 50% Chittor Paddy 100% 50% Nellore Paddy 100% 50% Vizag Paddy 100% 50% Maize 100% 50% Guntur Paddy 100% 50% Maize 100% 50% Medak Paddy 100% 50% Maize 100% 50% Jower 100% 50% Karimnagar Paddy 100% 50% Cotton 100% 50% Nizamabad Paddy 100% 50% Khammam Paddy 100% 50% Chilies 100% 50% Adilabad Paddy 100% 50% Vizianagaram Paddy 100% 50% Srikakulam Paddy 100% 50% Kurnool Paddy 100% 50% Ananthapur Paddy 100% 50% Groundnut 100% 50% Ranga Reddy Paddy 100% 50% Mahaboobnagar Paddy 100% 50% Nalgonda Paddy 100% 50% Warangal Paddy 100% 50% Cotton 100% 50% In the present study the reduction in pesticides and chemical fertilizers costs were reported. From the finding its is clear that there was 100% reduction in costs due to non spraying of chemical pesticides. Similarly, it was reported that there was reduction in the use of chemical fertilizers to the extent of 50% which was substituted by locally produced fertilizer and manures such as compost panchakavya, daskavya, gana jeevamrutha, drava jeevamrutham. Similarly, NPM practices were adopted with 19

25 use of neem extracts, panchapatra kashayam, bhrahmasthram, agniastram etc.,. On an average Rs. 2200/- was the reduction in costs in the cost of paddy, Rs. 2600/- in chilles, Rs. 2100/- in groundnut and Rs.3300/- vegetables. Besides there was yield increase of about 1-2 q / acre in the case of paddy, 1 q in cotton groundnut and maize. 7. Improvements in income, nutritional status and livelihoods of beneficiaries a) Net additional income and benefits Table 10 - Average reduction in costs and net additional income for different crops Reduction in cost due to NPM (Amount in Rs.) Reduction in costs due to use of organic fertilizers / manures (Amount in Rs.) Net Additional Income (Amount in Rs.) Paddy Maize Cotton Chillies Ground Nut Vegetables As per the table 10 the net additional income generated per acre due to NPM and other organic farming interventions was Rs.5000/- incase of paddy, Rs.4500/- in maize, Rs.7000/- in cotton, Rs.8500/- in chillies, Rs.5500/- in groundnut and Rs.5,800/- in vegetables. Thus the net income gains are substantial. In addition farmers also reported several benefits such as improvement in soil, plant and human health as well as environment. b) Nutritional Status During the interview with farmers, it was revealed that due to 36 x 36 models and poly crop models, farmers were able to cultivate organic vegetables and fruits which are partly consumed almost daily and the rest are marketed. Due to it, many women farmers said they do not have malnutrition and deficiency diseases. Thus the program has contributed for enhancing the nutritional status and income generation for small and marginal farmers. 20

26 c) Livelihood improvement The higher net incomes and improved nutritional status as well as by undertaking the income generation activities, the small & marginal farmers socio economic status has improved. Thus the livelihoods have substantially improved. 8. Convergence The convergence under the project was mainly with Horticulture Department, Agricultural department, DRDA and NAREGA. Especially in the areas of compost preparations, NPM, SRI Paddy, vegetables and farm mechanization. The convergence has helped mostly to procure inputs on subsidy basis only. It is desirable that convergence initiatives are forged with different departments including Animal husbandry and women & child welfare through a formal MOU wherever it has not happened incorporating the roles of each player. There is ample scope to get technical advice and guidance for the project from the state concerned departments. This will also help to upscale the project interventions in future. 9. Problems and Suggestions a) The problems (table11) and suggestions(table 12) were received through interviews and focus group discussions of different stake holders (NGOs, project staff, beneficiaries, non beneficiaries, department of agriculture allied sectors, non officials and mandal & district level officials. Table 11. Problems as perceived by the stake holders and the respondents SNo Problems F % 1 Lack of awareness about organic(npm) practices among farmers in different villages Less technical competencies among field functionaries Lack of good market linkages except local markets for the organic produce Inadequate crushing machinery of botanicals Less awareness of NPM products among farmers and other stake holders Lack of formalized convergence initiatives at the district level Less confidence about organic farming systems among beneficiaries & Non beneficiaries The difficulties and costs in certification of NPM produce

27 From the table 11, it is revealed that 82% of the stakeholders felt that marketing of organic produce is a problem since farmers are not getting more price for the produce. Similarly respondents (95%) also expressed that lack of awareness about NPM products among the farmers as it reduces cost of production also available locally. 50% of them said that farmers are not confident about NPM technology and most of the respondents in higher cadres expressed that lack of technical competencies among the project staff is the main problem and also convergence at district level. Table 12. Suggestions as perceived by the stakeholders and respondents SNo Suggestions F % 1 Need for creation of public awareness on organic practices and products through multimedia at various levels in a campaign mode More emphasis in the project for capacity building at different levels Strengthening of convergence initiatives with different agriculture and allied departments, ATMA, KVKs and other development departments Need for certification and ensuring better price and markets for organic produce Need for standardization by R&D process for different organic products promoted through project More efforts need for getting machinery for procuring of inputs and produce It is observed from the table 12 that 95% felt that the project staff need to be improved in technical competencies besides 92% suggested for strengthening convergence initiatives with agriculture, allied departments, ATMA, KVKs and other development departments. They also suggested that 80% public awareness on organic practices through multimedia at various levels in a campaign mode is very much important. Further, the stakeholder also suggested that need for input preparation machinery (70%) better market prices for organically produced products (70%). More than half (56%) of the stakeholders expressed that need for standardization by R&D processes for different organic products promoted through the project. 22

28 CHAPTER-IV Observations and Success Stories The team of experts visited fields with organic farming for sustainable agriculture interventions taken up under the project in several villages of all the districts and interacted with about 60 farmers and other stakeholders in each district to primarily generate the data & views to supplement and complement with the data collected through Participatory tools were mostly used for this purpose. The outcome of the visits and interactions are prescribed below as observations. a) General observations 1) It is observed that community managed organic farming plots approach adopted a new methodology of Farmer Field Schools. In General 6-8 sessions conducted on specific crops i.e., rice, groundnut, chilly, cotton, maize etc.,. These sessions were conducted each week in a different farmers plots of the FFS farmers to satisfy all the farmers instead of single farmer/collaborator field. The observations made are carried out by all the FFS farmers, but each farmer school has limited farmers maximum. 2) In every district interventions such as (i) modified SRI paddy, (ii) crop models, (iii) 36 x 36 model(phalekar model), (iv) NPM practices, (v) NPM shops, (vi) NADEP compost are visible, however Bio-gas plants, compost pits, mulching cattle shed lining etc are not observed in any district. 3) The crops viz. paddy, chilly, cotton, groundnut, maize, redgram and vegetables are healthy and very impressive and respondents felt happy about the quality of the produce. 4) In few districts, farmers expressed that due to adoption of NPM practices, they are getting reduced yields but quality of the produce is good and they were working to get better market price and they want to continue in future. 5) Regarding the sustainability of the NPM practices, majority of the farmers felt that preparation of NPM products are cumbersome and time consuming. Therefore it is difficult to continue in future though the products are good. 6) Almost all the districts, SRI method of cultivation was observed with modifications. It is also observed that majority of the farmers were not confident about the system of Rice Intensification Principles. 23

29 7) The knowledge about NPM products of sample farmers were comparatively good, but they were lacking skills in preparation of NPM products and also what stage which product to be used and for which pest what botanical, etc.,. 8) Most of the sample farmers did not know the specificity of botanicals to be used for different pest incidences. Farmers were spraying neem leaf extract, panchapatra kashayam frequently, if the pest incidence is severe they were spraying brahmastram and so on. 9) Though the training was given on NPM to cluster activists(cas) and village activists(vas) the confidence levels were less in case of non-agricultural professionals. FFS activities are good in case of the VAs & CAs who has either agriculture polytechnic or agriculture background as compared to other VAs & CAs. 10) Technical competencies were less in project staff in general and field staff in particular. 11) Initially NGOs are placed for formation and capacity building of groups/sasyamitra groups and gradually they were withdrawn by handing over to the Village Organisations. It was observed that wherever NGOs are still with them, the NPM farmers are more in number practicing NPM practices, to some extent. 12) Spread effect was comparatively very less. Even in the project covered villages also neighboring farmers are not practicing NPM practices. 13) Number of success stories on NPM Practicing farmers published in Nagali besides NPM principles and different components of NPM products, preparations. Other literature also printed on Phalker model/seven stage models in addition to NPM products preparations. 14) Majority of the stakeholders and line departments were not happy with the convergence initiatives with the project. They felt that with the project approach, the project authorities are implementing these activities in isolation. Therefore they felt necessity for forging convergence in planning & implementation from grass root level. 15) Neither the project staff nor beneficiaries known about the organic farming system plans developed based on location specific problems at village level. 24

30 b) District wise observations 1. Chittoor Team visited Thumbakur village of Narayanavanam mandal, Thirthakatta and Laxambapuram of Tirupathi mandal, Thottambedu & Kanchanpalle of Kalahastri mandal 1) Farmers were mobilized through Kala Jathara Gramasabha & slogans about NPM practices. 2) Groundnut growing sample farmers expressed that groundnut cost of cultivation reduced to Rs.1500/- due to NPM Practices, particularly summer ploughing, application of FYM, Neem cake and dravajeevamrutham, etc.,. 3) Regarding cropping system instead of sole crop of groundnut, inter cropping with greengram, housegram, maize and onion has yielded good returns to the farmers. 4) Incase of POP activities, beneficiaries earned upto Rs.40,000/- from ½ acre groundnut, ¼ acre vegetables(brinjal/bhendi/tomato) and ¼ acre Chilly. Besides this multiple crops and seven stage models were also given better results to the farmers. Mrs Anuradha, W/o M. Subrahmanyam 5) In eight(8) mandals, due to RFSA activities farm lands developed and in convergence with horticulture, forestry and Animal husbandry departments were taken up different activities in the beneficiary farmers fields. 6) It was reported by the farmers that they were not exposed to multi storied cropping system either by exposure visits or study tours in this district. 7) Though multiple crops grown by few farmers particularly POP farmers, recommended practices were not observed in the fields and no proper marketing linkages were developed. 25

31 2. Nellore In Nellore, the team visited Uchakuntapalem and Ulavapalli Village of dagadarthi mandal, Choudarypalem and Lingamkunta of Kavali mandal, Brahmanakakra of Jaladanthi mandal. 1) It is observed that farmers are not properly oriented about soil and water conservation practices. Therefore beneficiaries of RFSA felt that instead of soil and water conservation structures bores are more useful to them. 2) The farmers tried different cropping systems such as housegram, greengram as inter crops in groundnut fields and maize as border crop rather than sole groundnut crop. 3) Regarding Rain Fed farming for Suitable Agriculture(RFSA) activities, the team observed quality works particularly trenches, farm pond, compost pit, dead furrow and the cropping pattern with fruit trees, perennial castor, redgram and drum stick, vegetables and gourds, etc.,. 4) The integrated farming systems spread with literature etc., is not aptly developed in many villages. 3. Nizamabad The team visited Rajkhampet of Laxmiravulapalle mandal, Rajkhambitch and Chukkapur of Machareddy mandal and Upperpalle of Domakonda mandal. 1) It was observed that modified SRI cultivation and partial NPM practices were followed. In all SRI paddy fields, Azola is used apart from some NPM practices used and also farmers expressed that they have reduced nitrogenous fertilizers. 2) In the cropping systems, inter crops used are Redgram, greengram & bengalgram in Maize fields and horsegram in castor fields were observed. 26

32 3) NPM practices adopted in paddy, castor, maize crops and farmers felt that costs reduced and reaped quality produce. 4) It was noticed that lack of technical competencies in field staff who conducted FFS and facilitated NPM practices and RFSA activities. 5) Lack of integration of other systems like Livestock / poultry / fisheries / sheep etc., along with agriculture was observed. 6) Farmers were not oriented in production of seed banks or bio mass nursaries for their fields, therefore they were not visible in the sample villages. 4. YSR Kadapa The team visited Chermarajupalle, chemalapenta of Pallevani Mandal, Ummanampalle Gandi Villages of Vempalle mandal, Lankireddypalle and chinnasipalle of Chennamdeda mandal. 1) It is observed that Sasyamitra sangas conducting meetings regularly and maintaining books regarding their activities. 2) FFS activities conducted in village Activist fields on NPM practices where these village activists needs skills to be upgraded in NPM technologies. 3) Regarding RFSA activities wherever the works are completed, farmers cultivated different crops like redgram, horsegram and blackgram etc along with some border crops. 4) Farmers who practiced phalekar models felt happy for the benefits derived from the fields. 5) The spread effect was very less even the neighboring farmers not adopted simple NPM practices. 27

33 6) The lands allocated to poorest of the poor were enthusiastic to cultivate SRI and other NPM practices. 5. Ananthapur Team visited Melavari village of Mandakasira Mandal, Jakkepalle, popsanipalle of Mandakasira Mandal 1) In Groundnut, ragi & maize crops were adopted along with NPM practices. It is observed that the cost of production was reduced from Rs.1200/- to Rs. 1500/- and with marginal increase on yields with new NPM fields. 2) In the sample villages wherever POP strategies adopted farmers were satisfied with the SRI paddy and NPM practices in vegetables. 3) Some of the sample village through NPM shops farmers were earning Rs.1000/- per month during the crop season 4) It was reported by the farmers that in the beginning the response was relatively less, later these practices adopted by more than 50% of the farmers. 28

34 5) Some of the crops like sunflower and horse gram seed setting were good with NPM practices and organic manures. 6) In some of the villages crop models (Phalekar Model) were very much impressive and found that majority of the farmers meeting their nutritional security besides some earnings. 6. Kurnool The team visited Ghosanpalle and Kocheruvu of Dharmavaram Mandal, Obulapuram of Dhone mandals. 1) In this district cropping system introduced by the project staff were visible and adopted inter crop with redgram, groundnut, & redgram, castor in 7:4 ratio. 2) It was observed that farmers reduced their cost of cultivation by Rs.1500/- to Rs.2000/- through NPM practices. They are sure of getting quality produce and higher rate for the produce. 3) FFS farmers practicing AESA and decision making based on field observations and developed ITC market tie ups, for different farm produce. 4) There was no integration of other farming systems like live stock, horticulture, forestry, etc. 5) It was also observed that convergence at the district level of different line departments also not encouraging. 7. Guntur 29

35 7. Medak The Evaluation Team visited Nandigram, Ramayampet, Kanapur, Narsapur, Ibrahimbad villages in Medak district. 1. The team observed available impracticable convergence of SERP & NABARD sensitizing the farmers towards SRI technology of paddy along with NPM practices. 2. The team did not find seed banks strength and Farmer Interest Groups to take up community storing, marketing and other activities. 3. Custom hiring Centres are to be established in the districts. This is only the way out to make Farm Mechanization accessible and profitable to majority farmers in the village and neighboring community. 4. Enthusiastic and innovative men and women farmers initiated production and sale of bio-pesticide which has become support to their livelihoods. Convergence with other development department is need of the hour. 5. For more percolation and dissemination of NPM technologies a massive propaganda and demonstrations are required in the district. 6. Exposure visits for the district beneficiary farmers need to be conducted to the fields of successful model farms available in the districts. 8. Guntur Team visited Padamaddur(Amaravathi mandal), Thadakampalle(kallure mandal), Loddipalle(Orvakal mandal), Peddavattapudi and Ananthavaram (Mangalagiri mandal) 1) There is no change in the cropping system adopted by the farmers. 2) Very few farmers in the project implemented villages were opting NPM practices in maize, paddy & vegetables. They were not adopting in chilly and cotton crops. 3) Farmer expressed that they were getting little less yields through NPM practices rather than normal practices (non NPM Practices). 4) Nearby farmers also not adopting either NPM practices or any crop models. It was observed that the sample farmers did not have confidence on NPM practices. 30

36 5) Some of the chilly growing farmers fields staff introduced inter cropping with cucumber, bengalgram etc., 6) Organically produced chillies were good in quality, but farmers got reduced yields 7) Modified SRI practices were observed in few farmer fields. 8) In this district, Multistep models polycrop models confined to backyard farms. It was reported by the farmers that instead of keeping backyard farm vacant, it was really good for them to grow vegetables and meet the nutritional security of the individual families. 9. Nalgonda Team visited Sunikisala, Puligilla, Rayapalle, Siddapuram of Velgonda Mandal, Kapparayapalle of Atmakur mandal and Bujilapuram of Mothkur mandal 1) It was observed that Rain Fed farming of sustainable agriculture (RFSA) activities initiated in few mandals. In half of the targeted villages, compost pits, farm pond, channels and dead furums were completed. On the buds fruit trees were planted and on plain lands, vegetable cultivation started. 2) It was also observed that beneficiaries were not confident about different cropping systems to be followed in the dry lands by them. 3) The field functionaries (CAs & VAs) were taken for the exposure visits where as farmers were shown video films on different cropping systems to be followed in the fields under RFSA. 31

37 4) The sample farmers were taken up few NPM practices in the bajra, redgram, castor, greengram, horsegram fields. 5) Crop models (Phalekar model) adopted by the beneficiaries expressed that the produce (fruit & vegetables) not only using for household requirement, but also earning Rs.6000/- to Rs.8000/- from an acre due to marketing besides using for household nutritional requirement. By this process it is observed that nutritional security is addressed. 6) NGO facilitated villages through FFS, farmers adopting most of the NPM practices and deriving benefits out the quality produce 7) It is also observed that farmers are not willing to practice NPM practices since its preparations are cumbersome. 8) Wall writings for publicizing the NPM practices and inputs were not observed in most of the villages visited by the team. 10. Adilabad The team visited Tharoda, pendalawada and Jainat village of Jainat mandal, Venguvapet of Nirmal mandal, Thimmapur of Bainsa mandal. 1) The beneficiaries of Rain Fed Farming for Suitable Agriculture (RFSA) were supplied with horticulture kits, perennial red gram and castor besides guiding them to use NPM practices through FFS. 2) The works in RFSA are comparatively very good including Trencher, Farm Pond, dead furrows, silt application and 36 x 36 model of cultivation. 3) It was observed that there was a lot of demand for fruit tree nursaries and bio mass nursaries in the district. 32

38 4) Redgram introduced as an inter crop in Soya bean fields and also adopted NPM practices due to which beneficiary organisms observed in the ecosystem by the practicing farmers. 5) Regarding SRI cultivation farmers followed appropriate techniques in transplantation, maintaining plant population, use of botanical & bio fertilizers besides, NPM practices. Crop stand was impressive. 6) There is need for NPM shops as majority of the beneficiaries expressed that preparation of NPM products were time consuming and cumbersome. 11. Karimnagar The Evaluation Team visited Mirzampet, Boorugupalli, Mangapet, Manthani, Potharam, Kankula Kondapur, Bejjanki villages in Karimnagar district. 1. It was observed that NPM practices were practiced by a few model farmers following all the concepts. 2. Large scale demonstrations and Exposure visits would help the farmers of other villages to learn the lessons and adopt the practices. 3. SRI technology of paddy adoption was not upto the mark. The field extension staff and practicing farmers need capacity building and exposure to the technology. 4. RFSA concepts and practices need to be understood by the target farmers for its sustenance. 5. The machinery and equipment need to be kept accessible to the target farmers for preparation of bio-pesticides. 33

39 6. Supply of quality Bio-agents to the farming community is the need of the hour. 7. Seed banks need to be established by mobilizing farmers towards Seed security. 8. Evaluation Team found motivated and committed field staff. Capacity building of the field staff on farm technologies would enhance dissemination of quality information and technologies. 12. Visakhapatnam The team visited three mandals and four villages. They are Padmanabham mandal(korala), V. Madugula mandal (Chintalore & M.Koderu) and Chodavaram mandal (Narsapur). 1) There are different cropping systems observed in this district. Viz. are onion intercrop in banana orchards, modified SRI cultivation and multiple Vegetable cultivation. The farmers undergone trainings through Farmer Field Schools and adopted different NPM practices. 2) Regarding RFSA activities farmers were satisfied. They need training for intensive use of their lands and deriving benefits from them. 3) The efforts which are made for popularization of IPM technologies are very good, particularly wall writings and information materials were very much impressive. 4) Many NPM villages were encouraged with NADEP compost by trainings in its preparations. This compost is being used by farmers in paddy field and also in vegetable cultivations. 5) FFS were conducted for Sasyamitra groups, so as the group members following the Eco-system analysis based decisions in their fields for different crops. 34

40 13. Warangal The Evaluation Team visited Chinna Ramancherla, Kasireddipalli of Bachannapet mandal, Jangaon in Warangal district. 1. The Evaluation Team observed crop diversification and NPM practices in the villages visited. The target farmers are clear about the practices and adoption rate is high. 2. Group formation, strengthening and community mobilization has been observed and are the strong points to take forward the NPM movement. 3. The district is known for seed production, the project need to facilitate village seed banks on the basis of seed village concept. 4. The multi-step model poly crop confined to backyard farms. It needs to be propagated among the farming community to take up in their agricultural fields. 5. Use of bio-pesticides clearly evident in the villages visited. The farmers in these villages are totally convinced and the pesticides are produced locally. 6. More efforts are needed to produce the bio-pesticides on a large scale facilitating the market network. 7. Women groups are highly encouraged in this direction and initiated production of bio-pesticides which have become a support to their livelihoods. 8. Organically produced vegetables were observed in the villages, the consumers appreciate the quality. 9. Modified seed practices were observed in the farmer fields. 10. Azolla is being produced locally by many farmers and used in the paddy fields and also feeding the milch animals. 14. Vizianagaram The team visited Labba, Gohid and Bellamwada of Kothur Mandal 1) Jattu, an NGO for community managed sustainable agriculture working in cooperation & coordination with NPM projecti and putting efforts to popularize 35

41 NPM practices as well as phalekar models through trainings and also bringing publications. 2) One of the IPM village farmer cultivated partial /modified model of Phalekar model and earned Rs.30000/- per acre. 3) It is observed that wherever agriculture polytechniques or BSc Agriculture professionals are working as project staff in the villages the quality of services are good. The farmers had confidence about the NPM and other practices imparted by these professionals. 4) Farmer Field Schools approaches, methodology and sessions curriculum needs to be strengthened. 5) It was observed that convergence activities at different level were not encouraging. 15. Srikakulam The group met NPM farmers at Keshavaraopet (Etcherla Mandal) Laxmipeta(Pondur) Arjunavalasa(Ranasthalam). 1) It is observed that majority of the farmers growing poly crops i.e., different types of vegetables and earning net income of Rs.8000/- to Rs.12000/- from an acre by following NPM practices. 2) Through Technology Training Development Centre (TTDC) proving hands on training to the farmers on phalekar model and NPM practices. 3) Regarding RFSA activities beneficiaries expressed that they want to cultivate different crops. Being the members, they have taken up jowar, groundnut, redgram, greengram crops and subabul neelagiri and glyriceda, etc., were planted on bunds. 36

42 4) In these villages, the project teams conducted meetings and shown vedia films on NPM and Phalekar model to the farmers 5) They were raising biomass nursaries of Neem, drumstick, teak, curryleaf, papaya, etc.,. 6) Number of wall writings about NPM benefits and their preparations were observed in this district. 7) Information materials about NPM practices are very good, publications covered lot of success stories of different districts. Wall writings about NPM principles and preparation of products were presented with picture were impressive. 16. Mahaboobnagar The Evaluation Team visited Ragadi Chilkamarri, Kundurg mandal, Lalapeta, Bairampalli, Appaipalli, Jayanna Thirumalapur, Mozerla, Kambalapur villages in Mahaboobnagar district. 1. The Evaluation Team has observed a viable and highly practicable convergence between SERF and ICRISAT. 2. Village seed banks are quite evident in the villages of convergence activity. 3. Increase of farmer income in the seed villages is observed due to market networks. 4. Village seed bank committees were observed and are being capacitated with farm technology back up. 5. It is observed that wherever agriculture polytechnics for B.Sc.(Ag.) professionals are working as project staffs in the villages, the quality of 37

43 services are good. The farmers had confident about the NPM and other practices imparted by these professionals. 6. Being a draught prone district of Andhra Pradesh it needs special attention and massive campaign to take up the mission of NPM. 7. Convergence of other development departments to address various needs of the farming community is the need of hour. 8. The NPM activity could also address the needs of animal husbandry sector. 17. Rangareddy The team visited Chintabatla, Yellammathada of Yacharam mandal. 1) It was observed that RFSA activities were taken up in assigned lands. Majority of the sample farms were not yet initiated growing of crops. 2) The project people working with Sashyamitra sangas and the groups were regularly meeting to discuss different activities along with NPM practices. 3) Though the send banks established on paddy to some extent in the district, but no other crop seed varieties were included in these banks. 4) Farmers had knowledge of different NPM products, panchakavya daskam, Agni Asthra, Brahmasthra, Panchapatra kashayam. 18. Khammam The team visited Sairampuram village of Mulakalapalle mandal, Mulakalapalle (Vill & M), Rachurupalle village of Dammapeta mandal and Sangam village of Palvancha mandal. 1) Regarding RFSA activities, beneficiaries were not happy with the crop models advocated by the project, as they were not suitable to their sandy soil and also lot of land left unutilized due to trenches and dead furrows. 2) It was observed that NPM practices were adopted partly, due to lack of awareness about the usage of these practices and also in proper technical support. 3) NPM shops observed on small scale which are meeting the needs of local as well as neighbouring villages. 38

44 4) Project staff were successful in convincing some beneficiaries to grow intercropping with maize and redgram (4:1), cotton and redgram (2:1 or 4:1 rows) and poly crop in their backyard farms. 5) It was observed that SRI paddy cultivation was not followed by the sample farmers fully except lone planting and water management. 6) Integration of other systems with agriculture particularly agro forestry, live stock interventions were not observed. 7) Establishment of seed banks and compost preparation are very few and not well maintained by the respondents. 8) Majority of the beneficiaries shifted from mono cropping to mixed farming, growing maize, redgram, vegetables, etc., but they were not known the technicalities of mixed farming systems. 39

45 c) Success Stories Age is not bar for Innovations Effort, interest and dedication are the key factors for success. Mr. Sukkabatla Laxmanna Pendalwada Village of Jainait Mandal, Adilabad District, developed backyard farm into orchard with self initiation. There is a drinking water tank near by his house, wherein all the residents of the village collects water from a public tap connected to the water tank. By this process lot of water wasted and standing in low laying area nearby his house. Mr. Laxmanna made a channel to his backyard and started growing vegetables. Later he added fruit trees. He planted seasonal vegetables and leafy vegetables and vines such as bottle guard, bitter guard, cuccumber, etc.,. NPM cluster activist and village activist met Mr. Laxmanna and encouraged him to grow 36 x 36 model and oriented and shown NPM practices on his backyard farm. Now Mr. Laxmanna spraying only leaf extracts (Vavilaku & Neem) and using Ganajeevamrutham, Dhravajeevamrutham and Compost. He added some of the fruits like amla, pomegranate, ramphal, custard apple and sweet orange besides grapes. In small areas he also cultivating onions, garlic and potato. With full satisfaction he said that he is getting Rs.100/- to 200/- per day from vegetables, Rs.3200/- from grapes and Rs.3000/- from other fruits. 40

46 He does not have neither bore nor well or even power supply, still he is successfully growing fruits and vegetables by utilizing his backyard farm and getting an income of Rs.25,000/- per annum after fulfilling their household fruits and vegetable requirement. SERP Field Staff needs capacity building on farm technologies The evaluation team visit to Kankullakondapur village in Karimnagar district surprised to know misinterprets of farm technologies on the field neither the staff not the practicing farmers are aware of the method of SRI cultivation of paddy. Interacting with the practicing farmer Ms. M. Renuka, found that she does not understand the concept and methodology of SRI cultivation its clearly observed all the field that 3-5 seed links per heal were transplanted in a totally unleveled water stagnated paddy field, seed that used was also of high quantity. When enquired the field staff they are also not cleared on the practices of SRI method of cultivation. To avoid quality dissemination of technology and demonstration on the field misleads farming community there is an urgent need to build the capacities of NPM, SREP field staffs on various farm technologies for effective transfer of technology to the field more exposure visits need to be organize to realize the effects of need based and efficient technologies to the field staff and also the practicing farmers. Rangu Swaroopa, a successful NPM farmer Rangu Swaroopa, w/o Rangu Srinivas an enterprising farmer of Burugupally, hamlet of Mangapet village, Kalva Srirampur mandal of Karimnagar district attracted towards NPM through the sensitization programmes of NPM, especially by the motivation of Ms. Nirmala, cluster activist. She cultivated two acres of cotton plus red gram in 5:1 ratio, taking of anumu (beans) crop on the boarders. Before harvest of the cotton crop she has sown bobbara and green gram in the cotton field and harvested a good crop of pulses using available soil moisture. She proudly says that I am a NPM farmer, never use chemical pesticide. Neem oil and other bio pesticides are used to control or prevent pest and disease on my field. Recalling the past Swaroopa said, I am in agriculture for the past 15 years, used only chemical fertilizer and pesticide spoiling our soil health and texture leading to health problems of the consumers. 41

47 NABARD, SERP convergence: SRI paddy in L R Pally Namilikonda Rajaiah a NPM farmer cultivates paddy by following SRI methodology in Laxmi Rao Pally village of Machareddy mandal, Nizamabad district. SRI method of paddy cultivation initiated with the help and advice of NABARD and NPM practices with the motivation of SERP. Narrating the initiation and practices being adopted, Mr. Rajaiah said, cow dung, gomootra and matti for seed treatment, provision of drainage line on the borders, production of Azolla to add nitrogen, regular weed control with weeders provided by NABARD, bird perches, yellow and white plates. For control of mogi purugu (stem borer) he uses agni astram. Mr Rajaiah is willing to reduce the use of chemical fertilizers, confessed that till now he could reduce it to 50% and harvested 13 quintal of paddy from half an acre. Mint Mints money: Mr. Samuel, a farmer, Medak Mr. Samuel (54) a village activist and a practicing farmer holding 5 acres of land sensitizing by the NPM programs of SREP took up multi crops in 36X36 plot. An innovative farmer Mr.Samuel cultivates many crops in a small plot which fetches him yearlong income. This small plot is filled up with the crops such as onion, potato, chamma, sweet potato, bitter guard, rinch guard, bottle guard, chillies, brinjal, cluster bean, tomato, a leafy vegetables mint, thotta kura, chukka kura, palk kura, methi kura. Apart from the vegetables he has planted pomegranate (6 plants), amla (1 plant), guava (1 plant), drumstick (3 plants), papaya (2 plants), custard apple (2 plants), mango (4 plants) on the same field. Conversation with Mr. Samuel revealed that he has held Rs. 8,000/- in a span of nine months from the mint plants planted on the same field. He proudly says mint mints money and would like to extend it to five more guntas of land immediately. He also earned another Rs.8,000/- from the other vegetables cultivated on the 36X36 plot. This adventurous cultivation attracting many farmers from the village and the neighboring it s a lesson to a many practicing farmers of the area. The evaluation team wishes Mr. Samuel all the best. 42

48 Kondamma a model for other women In Ulavalli village of Dagadanthi mandal, Nellore district the team met G. Kondamma, W/o Kondaiah, aged 39 years with three children has become a member in sasyamitra group. The non pesticide management Cluster Activist(CA) and Village Activist(VA) approached the group and explained about the benefits of NPM principles and practices. The group members are very active and shown interest in new technology which yield better results to them. First Kondamma came forward and tried the NPM practices. Mrs. Kondamma tried in 10 cents SRI paddy and followed all the NPM practices of alleys, spraying of Neemastram, azola, compost fertilizer, ganajeevamrutham and dravajeevamrutham. She said that for ¼ acre she spent Rs.1200/- and got returns of Rs. 8000/- Impressed by the NPM principles, she also adopted phaleka model (multiple crops) wherein she has cultivated leafy vegetables such as palak, amaranthus, vegetables like okra, beans, chilly, cucumber, bottle guard etc.,. She also bought a cow for milk and utilized dung for preparation of compost. She said she is very happy with the practices apart from nutritional security she is also earning Rs. 6000/- to Rs.8000/- from that small piece of land. Now the other women in the group also expressed that they are also practicing SRI and multiple vegetable crops in their lands. 43