Sei sulla pagina 1di 85

ORGANIC AGRICULTURAL TECHNOLOGY PRACTICES AMONG ANSOFT-NETWORKED RURAL DEVELOPMENT INSTITUTIONS IN THE PHILIPPINES: ACCENT ON HOLISTIC APPROACHES TO CROP

PRODUCTION
Rodelio B. Carating and Silvino Q. Tejada Bureau of Soils and Water Management Elliptical Road, Diliman, Quezon City, PHILIPPINES Paper to be presented during the Workshop on Asian Network for Sustainable Organic Farming Technology (ANSOFT), 26-28 September 2011, RDA, Suwon, Republic of Korea INTRODUCTION The Asian Network for Sustainable Organic Farming Technology (ANSOFT) The Asian Food and Agriculture Cooperation Initiative (AFACI) was launched in November, 2009 as an agricultural cooperation network in Asia to share technology and experiences and contribute to sustainable agriculture and food security in the region. There are twelve member nations Korea, Bangladesh, Cambodia, Indonesia, Laos, Mongolia, Nepal, the Philippines, Sri Lanka, Thailand, Uzbekistan, and Vietnam. AFACIs research projects and activities involve two Pan-Asian Projects, one regional project, twelve country projects, workshops and training courses, and meetings. The two Pan-Asian Projects are (1) the Establishment of Agricultural Technology Information Network in Asia which in the Philippines has the Bureau of Agricultural Research (BAR) as the principal investigator, and (2) the Construction of the Asian Network for Sustainable Organic Farming Technology (ANSOFT) with the Bureau of Soils and Water Management (BSWM) as the principal investigator. The objective of this paper is to report on the ANSOFT implementation in the Philippines. ANSOFT recognizes that organic agriculture is environment friendly but needs to be protected from the multi-national agro-chemical industry because the Asian traditional and small-sized farms face many obstacles as they pursue organic farming methods. There is a need to share information and experiences among ANSOFT member countries for strategic development and promotion of organic agriculture within the region. As against their European and American counterparts, Asian policy makers need to look into extensive versus intensive farming (big farms as against small farms), reliance on machinery versus labor intensive practices, different education levels among farmers, and different marketing and certification system. Organic farming remains a major factor in the Asian agricultural scene considering the adherents claim for higher productivity with less external inputs, more sustainable and safe environment, and healthier option for the farmers and the consumers alike. ANSOFT therefore considers that the development and promotion of organic agriculture in Asia is a mission of both government agencies and private institutions. At country level, a networking for sustainable organic farming technology is established among government, non-government organizations,

and civil societies pursuing organic agriculture in rural development work to share and exchange farming technology and information. The Mindanao Network on Sustainable Organic Farming Systems (MINSOFS) The Mindanao Network on Sustainable Organic Farming Systems (MINSOFS) was organized as part of the Asian-organic agriculture alliance, called the Asian Network for Sustainable Organic Farming Technology (ANSOFT), which is the second the two Pan-Asia Projects of the Asian Food and Agriculture Cooperation Initiative (AFACI), a Korean-based twelve member country agricultural alliance. The ANSOFT networking in the Philippines focuses on Mindanao island because it has the largest organic agriculture sector in the country. The organization of the network is timely and comes at a time when the Philippine Legislature enacted the Republic Act 100681 known as the Organic Agriculture Law. The law was crafted as response for the country to be globally competitive by addressing appropriate, effective, and efficient use of organic agricultural practices and the production and processing of organic products by farmers, manufacturers, and producers. The law is envisioned to encourage stakeholders to adhere to international standards and practices for the countrys organic products to be globally competitive. The MINSOFS Inception Workshop was held on 27-28 April 2011 at the Southeast Asia rural Social Leadership Institute (SEARSOLIN) of the Jesuit-run Xavier University College of Agriculture, in Mandela Campus, Cagayan de Oro City.. MINSOFS is a network of networked members. Some of the members are actually network of organic agriculture practitioners themselves. MINSOFS represents the link to ANSOFT with which to pursue and accomplish ANSOFT goals of technology and information sharing. A Governing Council was established, as follows: Chair: Co-chair: Secretariat: Vic Tagupa, Sustainable Agriculture Centre, Xavier University (SAC- XUCA) Sansen Ramos Maglinte, Sibol ng Agham at Teknolohiya (SIBAT) Rodelio Carating, Bureau of Soils and Water Management

Members: Magsasaka at Siyentipiko Para sa Pag-unland ng Agrikultura (MASIPAG) Southeast Asia Regional Initiatives for Community Empowerment (SEARICE) Department of Agriculture Regional Field Unix X Focal on Organic Agriculture Bureau of Soils and Water Management Current Roster of Members Government: Bureau of Soils and Water Management Local Government Unit of Dumingag, Zamboanga del Sur Department of Agriculture, Regional Field Unit X City Agriculture Office, Valencia City, Bukidnon

Academe: Xavier University College of Agriculture/Sustainable Agriculture Centre (SAC-XUCA) University of Southern Mindanao

Non-Government Organizations/Civil Society Sibol ng Agham at Teknolohiya (SIBAT) Magsasaka at Siyentipiko Para sa Pag-unland ng Agrikultura (MASIPAG) Southeast Asia Regional Initiatives for Community Empowerment (SEARICE) Social Enhancing Restoring Values for Integral Community Empowerment (SERVICE) Kalitungan Upland Sustainable Farming Stewardship Association (KUSSA) Tongantongan Organic Farming Society on Sustainable Agriculture (TOFFSSA) Organic Agriculture Agri-Enterprise Eco-Agri Development Foundation Centre for Natural Farming Initiatives Religious Organization Sustainable Agriculture Ministry, Cagayan de Oro City BACKGROUND AND ACTIVITIES OF THE NOTABLE ORGANIC AGRICULTURE NETWORK MEMBERS WITH NATIONAL/INTERNATIONAL NETWORK Since four of the MINSOFS members were mentioned by the International Federation of Organic Agriculture Movements (IFOAM) in its website to be instrumental in the development of organic agriculture in the Philippines, we will discuss these four institutions: One of the pioneers in the sustainable organic agriculture movement in the Philippines. Magsasaka at Siyentipiko Para sa Pag-unland ng Agrikultura (MASIPAG) which can be translated as Farmers and Scientists Partnership for Agricultural Development started in 1984 as a partnership project to encourage small rice farmers adapt or develop their own appropriate farming technologies, practice farmer-to-farmer extension, and have access and control over production resources such as seeds and technology through seed banks. It was in the 1990s when other farmer organizations and non-government organizations (NGOs) actively emerged and engaged in the development of alternative farming technologies, three of which SIBAT, SAC-XU, and SEARICE are members of MINSOFS. MASIPAG has a total of 635 base peoples organizations (POs), 60 Non-Government Organizations (NGOs), and 15 people in its pool of scientists, 67 farmer rice breeders, 21 corn breeders, and 200 farmer trainers. The Secretariat is based in Los Baos, Laguna. It has a Regional Project Management Team (RPMT) in major regions of the country that spearhead program implementation in Luzon, Visayas, and Mindanao. A major effort is the collection, identification, multiplication, maintenance, and evaluation of fast disappearing biodiversity in the country. MASIPAG is known for its rice selections being

promoted to various farmer groups. It is also involved in corn and livestock breeding by farmers themselves with 67 farmer-breeders and 273 rice crosses developed. It has collected a total of 1,090 traditional rice varieties, 1,274 MASIPAG bred lines and farmer-bred lines, and 75 native corn varieties. As of 2006, it has 81 farmer-managed trial farms in Luzon, 81 in Visayas, and 61 in Mindanao, covering 47 provinces. MASIPAG has also engaged in the retrieval, reaffirmation, systematization, and practical use of knowledge relating to traditional agricultural practices and as they are improved by the farmers. The MASIPAG rice cultural management practices proved to have long-lasting positive impact on farmers practice of organic agriculture in the Philippines. Among the notable and cheap organic farming techniques are: - Use of sea water for seed treatment (disinfection) - Development of carabao-driven rotary for rice farming - Use of pangi leaves as botanical pest control - Use of urine and banana sap as foliar spray MASIPAGs website is http://www.masipag.org/cms/

The national sustainable agriculture network member. Sibol ng Agham at Teknolohiya (SIBAT) can be translated as the Wellspring of Science and Technology. SIBAT advocates for and develops groundbreaking technologies using science and technology that are appropriate for community development work. This network believes that Appropriate Technology (AT) application should directly respond to the needs of the poor communities; thus, uplifts the peoples day-to-day living while preserving their natural environment. One of its main instrument to achieve its mission is Community-Based Sustainable Agriculture (CBSA) with different NGOs and POs that pursue development work in the Philippines. Currently, it promotes community-based Village-Level Sustainable Development (VLSD) model that integrates AT applications with sustainable agriculture programs based on community-crafted plans. SIBAT also does research and development on sustainable agriculture and renewable energy to continuously improve its current competencies by working closely with poor communities in making technologies relevant and responsive to community needs. They have programs on organic farming, irrigation, infrastructure development for drinking water, nonconventional energy sources for rural electrification. Diversified and Integrated Farming System (DIFS) constitutes the core technological approach to sustainable food production in their model. Their experiences showed that DIFS proceeds even in rigorous resource-scarce conditions. It flexibly proceeds in five stages or phases towards maturation, relying on organizational cohesion and individual resolve at every stage. Figure 1 presents the phases of DIFS and the various activities under each phase. It is worth mentioning some of the sustainable agriculture technologies that they introduced to the communities:

1. Integrated community seedbanking. Among the activities are germination tests for traditional rice varieties and organic rice breeding training for farmers. They also conduct organic rice varietal trials. 2. Alternative pest management. 3. Soil fertility management 4. Farm design based on farm appraisal and planning 5. Soil conservation and management for erosion control 6. Sloping agricultural land technology 7. Organic vegetable production 8. Organic rice production 9. Urban food production 10. Gravity-fed water system installation 11. 15kW Micro Hydro Power for rice milling 12. Solar water pumping for vegetable gardens

Figure 1. Phases of Diversified and Integrated Farming System, SIBAT A number of the technologies that SIBAT promotes are available as published materials some of which are in vernacular or Tagalog. It is quite interesting that when asked to formally submit an organic agriculture technology report for the annual ANSOFT workshop, instead of

submitting one of their publications, they opted to present Koreas Natural Farming as espoused by Dr. Han-kyu Cho. This shows their familiarity and reliance on Natural Farming methods and approaches in many of their community projects and programs relating to sustainable agriculture. It is quite obvious that without getting a copy of their publications such as those relating to pest control or livestock production, the underlying philosophy is hinged on Natural Farming principles. SIBAT partners with local NGOs, faith-based groups and local government agencies that have shown commitment to genuinely serve communities through capacity building by recognizing the local resource potential, and enhancement of local knowledge and culture. Their project sites cover practically the whole country. SIBAT website is http://sibat.org/index.shtml The international sustainable agriculture network member. The Southeast Asia Regional Initiatives for Community Empowerment (SEARICE) is a Philippine-based regional NonGovernment Organization (NGO) that focuses on community-based conservation, development, and sustainable use of plant genetic resources. Aside from the Philippines, its areas of operation cover Bhutan, Laos, Vietnam, and Thailand. Among its battle cry is Conservation through sustainable use of plant genetic resources. SEARICE considers agriculture as the backbone of the economy and that food is a basic need of man. But agriculture today is threatened by various issues and concerns such as loss of biodiversity, pollution of our fragile agro-ecosystems, to cite some of those that need attention. For sustainable development, SEARICE considers a sustainable agriculture as vital. We need to combine environmental concerns with development goals. SEARICE philosophy considers three types of agricultural tenancy: (1) the land tenancy where the farmers do not own the land they till, (2) the market tenancy where the price of the product is determined by market forces, which would have impact on farmer decisions on what to plant; and (3) technological tenancy where farmers are not part of research and development but are mere recipients of technology. SEARICE focuses its operations on addressing the technological tenancy by bridging farmer science with formal science and empowering the farmers with practical knowledge and skills to address their problems, assist in organizing them into groups, dialogue with policy makers for support, and develop a network of farmers to improve their access to agricultural resources. Of course, SEARICE also tries to contribute to address the market and land tenancy. As most Asian countries are parties to or in the process of acceding to several international treaties and agreements that have important implications to agriculture, particularly seeds, and since Asia is among the centres of origin and diversity of many important food crops, including rice, SEARICE emphasizes seeds in its program of activities. This regional NGO asserts that as much as 95% of human nutrition is derived from no more than 30 plants, of which three crops wheat, maize, and rice account for 75% of our cereal consumption and a mere 20 vegetable species are used in field cultivation.

A major issue is the loss of biodiversity and genetic erosion because of breeding programs, agricultural policies such as those relating to the promotion of a single variety, and land conversion. In the Philippines, of more than 3,500 traditional rice varieties were replaced by only 8 modern rice varieties planted in more than 80% of rice lands. In 1994, about 91% of post IR8 varieties can be traced to Cina, the Chinese parent material. There has been increased incidence of pest resistance and resurgence of diseases due to crop and genetic uniformity. SEARICE asserts that in 1970, there were only around 50 known crop pests but by 1999, there are more than 500 known pests. Furthermore, it is noted that there is deteriorating state of soil fertility due to intensive and massive use of chemical inputs. We now have decreasing yields in intensively cultivated areas and deterioration of water quality and depletion of water sources. Despite investments on characterization, evaluation, and documentation by gene banks, many of these collections were not fully used by local breeding programs because countries do not use their genetic resources but favoured existing cultivars to generate new ones due to the pressure to have immediate results. The preference is adaptation through selection rather than generation of new variability or maintenance of adaptability. This translates to loss in utilizing the rich genetic resources and narrower genetic base increasing the risk of crop vulnerability to a host of pests and diseases. We also have to consider Intellectual Property Right (IPR) or the monopolistic rights over seeds which is traditionally a common property resource confounded by increasing privatization of national seed systems and the growing role of private companies over research, and the supply and distribution of seeds. In fact, IPR is now a pre-condition for WTO accession or as part of Bilateral Trade Agreements. Intellectual property regimes do not recognize or protect the rights of informal innovators such as farmers over their genetic resources and knowledge. This contradicts traditional seed exchange system of farmers which has been the source of diversity for ages. The Bohol, Philippines and the Mekong Delta research results show that farmers rice seed materials are comparable if not better than the certified seeds in terms of seed health, germination, and purity. SEARICE looks at the important role of farmers to conserve seeds through continuous planting or conservation by utilization as well as through establishment of farmer gene banks in the form of home gardens. Continuous crop improvement can come in the form of selection from stable varieties, by creating composite population through mixing several varieties to form one variety, or by selection from segregating materials. With actual breeding, SEARICE reported that 239 newly developed varieties were made by farmers in Mindanao and Bohol islands of which 124 varieties were through crossing and another 115 varieties were through off-type selections. SEARICE advocates for the important role of farmers in plant genetic resource conservation, development. They maintained that the farmers were the first plant breeders. The opening of the Global Seed Vault in Svalbard, Norway which has duplicate of seeds held in gene banks worldwide is considered an important development because at present, its collection is accessible only to depositing seed banks. Furthermore, the farmers role in breeding is enshrined in international treaties like the FAO Global Action for Plant Genetic Resources for Food and Agriculture (PGRFA) and the International Treaty on PGRFA (ITPGRFA).

In addition to strengthening the control of farming and indigenous communities over agricultural resources and technologies, SEARICE also works towards policy and structural reforms to ensure the conservation of biodiversity in agriculture; strengthen community organizing work and facilitate the establishment of self-reliant grassroot organizations through education, training, and linkages. An important approach is the Farmers Field School (FFS) which includes field studies, field exercises, discussion of special topics, and farmers field day. In coordination with the local government, the three-season-long FFS on Corn Breeding for example, builds the farmers skills on integrated pest management, participatory corn breeding, integrated nutrient management with emphasis on the Korean natural farming and vermiculture. Additional topics by SEARICE include agro-biodiversity, genetics and heritability, agriculture policies, variety development, variety maintenance, postharvest and household-based seed keeping. SEARICE website is: http://www.searice.org.ph/ . The academic-based sustainable agriculture network member. The Sustainable Agriculture Centre is one of the extension arms of the Xavier University College of Agriculture (XUCA), the Cagayan de Oro campus of the network of Jesuit-run Ateneo Universities in the Philippines which for decades, prides itself as the only Catholic-managed university in the country to have a College of Agriculture until the acquisition recently by the De LaSalle University of the Gregorio Araneta University Foundations College of Agriculture. Founded in 1990, the SA Centre has generated valuable knowledge and experiences from the interplay of its research, education, and information and extension activities in partnership with farmers, parishes, non-government organizations, academe, and the local government units. Among its core program is the Community Base Sustainable Agriculture Development Program in Tongantongan, Valencia City with a sub-program on marginal uplands hinged on asset base philosophy. Addressing watershed degradation with watershed conservation techniques does not necessarily solve the problem specially if the root cause goes deeper than cultivation practices. For instance, it is difficult to motivate farmers with improved profitability through soil conservation strategies if land tenure is a major concern. In such a situation, investing in perennials such as fruit-bearing trees and forestry species the farmer will find rather impractical in spite of its positive impact in the environment and income. Watershed management should therefore be holistic and should consider the whole gamut of the farm system and the production processes. It is holistic in the sense that it has a general overview of the farming situation prevailing in the highland community and integrates the different concerns of the system as a whole. It is essential to understand the real causes of the problem so that the mitigation efforts can be directed towards the causes rather than the symptoms.

The Asset Base Sustainable Agriculture and Community Development Concept has a more positive approach than conventional model of analyzing problems, needs and deficiencies of communities. It focuses on various existing resources or assets that can and need to be enhanced, enriched and developed by the target group or communities.

Its principles and philosophy rests on reiterative planning process that involves the different sectors of the community as well as the stakeholders in mobilizing the different available assetsbiophysical, institutional, available technologies, and even human resources in order to positively act on issues and concerns (Figure 2). It recognizes the complex interactions of assets in bringing about sustainable agriculture and sound watershed management practices (Figure 3).
B u s in e s s E n te r p ris e s 5 S c ie n c e 6 T e c h n o lo g y PEOPLE 1 NATURE 4 C u ltu ra l In s titu tio n s 2 3 P o litic a l S tru c tu r e s

In d iv id u a l

In n e r E c o lo g y 1 E c o lo g ic a lly S o u n d 2 E c o n o m ic a lly v ia b le / A s s o c ia tiv e E c o n o m ic s 3 S o c ia lly J u s t / E q u ita b le 4 C u ltu ra lly A p p r o p r ia te

5 H o lis tic S c ie n c e 6 A p p r o p r ia te T e c h n o lo g y 7 D e v e lo p m e n t o f H u m a n P o te n tia l

Figure 2. Diagram of principles of assets mobilization and sustainable agriculture.

HUMAN BEING

Sustainable Agriculture Including food security

Society Polity Culture

Economy

Agriculture NATURE

Figure 3. Complex interactions of assets through TSP for sustainable agriculture and community development.

The framework recognizes six types of participation by the farmers or the community as a whole, ranging from passive at the lowest level to self-mobilization and connectedness at the highest level (Table 1). Table 1. Typology of participation.
TYPOLOGY Passive participation CHARACTERISTIC OF EACH TYPE People participate by being told what has been decided or has already happened. Information being shared belongs only to external professionals. People participate by being consulted or by answering questions. Process does not concede any share in decision-making, and professionals are under no obligation to take on board peoples views. People participate in return for food, cash, or other material incentives. Local people have no stake in prolonging technologies or practices when the incentives end. Participation seen by external agencies as a means to achieve their goals, especially reduced costs. People participate by forming groups to meet predetermined objectives. People participate in joint analysis, development of action plans, and formation or strengthening of local groups or institutions. Learning methodologies used to seek multiple perspectives, and groups determine how available resources are used. People participate by taking initiatives independently to change systems. They develop contacts with external institutions for resources and technical advice they need, but retain control over how resources are used.

Participation by consultation

Bought participation

Functional participation

Interactive participation

Self-mobilization and connectedness

But as a consequence of holistic approach to soil conservation practices, there is a shift in emphasis from treating individual farms to managing total watersheds. The concept of integrated watershed management is being rapidly accepted as a useful tool in soil conservation extension. Because the living environment is poor, any watershed work must include activities that improve the human condition in order to be successful. While the principle of integrated watershed management is sound and acceptable, challenges and problems do exist in practice. And thus, the Sustainable Agriculture Centres community development concept harnesses the local populace to make the most of the available resources as an essential element of participatory watershed development. It would certainly be a difficult path to motivate farmers in the area to transcend their level of participation from passive type to the self-mobilization and connectedness type. But development of value transformation technique is the SACs expertise. The Asset Base and Sustainable Land Use in Marginal Upland in the sub-community of Tongantongan, Valencia City is located in the marginal uplands inhabited by 34 farming

households with 53 families of mix culture including Indigenous Peoples. The Xavier University College of Agriculture homepage with a section on the SA Centre activities is: http://aggies.xu.edu.ph/index.php?option=com_frontpage&Itemid=1

BACKGROUND AND ACTIVITIES OF THE SELECTED LOCAL-BASED ORGANIC AGRICULTURE NETWORK MEMBERS From those with national and international tie-ups, let us move to locally-based network members and see the kind of programs and activities they promote relating to organic agriculture among their project beneficiaries. We would focus on two, SERVICE and the Municiaplity of Dumingag. Local-based NGO. Social Enhancing Restoring Values for Integral Community Empowerment, Inc. (SERVICE) is working in the communities within the reach of Ozamis City. This NGO reaches out to empower the poor and subsistence farmers towards food and income security without compromising the integrity of the environment. Their community development program involves capability enhancement through education and transfer of appropriate technology as well as farming base livelihood development and advocacies. SERVICE is also a network of networks and has tie-ups with POs such as the Misamis Occidental Sustainable Agriculture Practioners Aggrupation, Inc. (MOSAPA). Among the major programs that they pursue is the Diversified Integrated Organic Farming System (DIOFS) which would engage farmers in multiple home production level integrated (crop-livestock-fisheries) farming systems. Basic is the philosophy of producing primarily for home consumption or attaining food security for the family and only secondarily for the market. With less production pressure and less capital requirement, the diversified farming approach provides consideration for the ecological and environmental needs of the community. SERVICE pursues their own organic fertilizer processing which includes the promotion of vermicomposting, alternative pest management, contour farming (also known as the Sloping Agricultural Land Technology 1 to 4), System of Rice Intensification, Natural Farming Systems, and Bio-dynamic System. Their member beneficiaries are encouraged to undertake backyard gardening, adopting the principles and philosophies of Food Always in the Home (FAITH Garden). Their members are taught on various plant propagation techniques, livestock production and management, herbal production and processing for locally produced health concoctions such as cough syrup, and also massage and reflexology. A key to their program implementation is active and dynamic interface with farmers and community organization work. Local government unit. The MINSOFS Inception Meeting was certainly rocked and shocked by presence of Mayor Nacianceno M. Pacalioga, Jr. of the Municipality of Dumingag, Zamboanga del Sur. The mayor himself presented the Dumingag experience on the implementation of Sustainable Organic Agriculture in his municipality. It was unique because rarely has a politician develops a political platform for his constituents based on the concepts of sustainable agriculture. He described the municipality to be composed of farmers of which about 84% have no sufficient production and income to support the basic needs of their family. Considering that it is a poor and landlocked municipality whose people mainly rely on

agriculture, he believes that a genuine peoples agenda is a product of collective discussion between the constituents and the leadership to come up with a comprehensive program of government, solution to challenges, right direction, and assurance of better future for the people. Mayor Pacaliogas economic agenda focuses on the implementation of sustainable organic agriculture program, a household approach farming rather than corporate farming, and people empowerment through capacity building and peoples participation in decision making and governance. He envisions to make the municipality as the Organic Capital of the Philippines. An Organic Farming Team was tasked to lead in the implementation of organic farming program and undertake education and advocacy. A Barangay Livelihood Coordinator was trained as farmer technician on organic agriculture. The barangay is the smallest political unit in the Philippines. The organic farming practitioners were organized into an association to have greater access to various private and government services such as agricultural loans. The mayor has also concluded partnerships with various organic agriculture movements for research, and technodemonstrations, including membership in the IFOAM. They have sent three delegates to the Republic of Korea for three month training on Natural Farming Systems. Through the mayors leadership, the municipal master plan on organic agriculture program was crafted by various sectors and assisted by Sustainable Agriculture Centre. The municipality has inaugurated the Dumingag Institute of Sustainable Agriculture to train the youth on ladderized courses relating to organic farming principles and technology. The accent on organic production extends to the promotion of alternative medicines. The mayor prides that from less than 20 farmers practicing organic agriculture when he assumed office in 2007, the number has increased to 438 by the time of the MINSOFS Inception Meeting and is still counting. They generate their own seeds, established vermicomposting facilities, introduced rice-duck farming system, identified their organic vegetable basket for farmer training and production support, institutionalized inland fisheries, promoted organically raised chickens, grow organic cassava, developed plantations for abaca (fiber crop)-rubberfalcata, and worked out marketing schemes with various corporations. The major problem the mayor faced is the proposal for large scale mining within his municipality which they are vehemently against. As he is battling a multi-national group, it is really a formidable task ahead of him.

RESULTS AND DISCUSSIONS Table 2 presents the summary of the study, the details are presented as Annexes. It is quite interesting to note that despite the more notable and pioneering organic programs they have, most of the MINSOFS members opted to submit the common ones; maybe there is apprehension that the practice would be subjected to international scrutiny during the ANSOFT annual workshop. We would prefer to see for example the Hole Method for Growing Cassava (also known as the Cerilles Method) by the Municipality of Dumingag or the Palm Method to determine when to plant as practiced by the indigenous tribal people presented during the

Inception Meeting by the Diocese of Cagayan de Oro. Because of the time constraint and deadline to prepare the paper, we were quite limited to request for supplemental submissions. The big network members (those with national and international network) also preferred to submit specific organic technique as requested by ANSOFT rather than the major organic program that they pursue for which they are well known and recognized by the public as their niche in the organic agriculture world. The principal investigator therefore opted to summarize these major organic agriculture programs based on their web sites as part of this study while retaining their original submissions. Table 2. Summary of selected organic techniques promoted by MINSOFS members.
NAME OF ORGANIC TECHNIQUE 1-MASIPAG Rice Production Technology 2-Participatory Vegetable Breeding Selection 3-Asset Base Sustainable Agriculture 4-System of Rice Intensification 5-Natural Farming/Nutritive Cycle Theory 5a-Indigenous Microorganisms (IMO) 5b-Fermented Plant Juice (PFJ) 5c-Fermented Fruit Juice (FFJ) 5d-Carbonized Rice Hull (CRH) 5e-Others: Guso Extract 5f-Others: Urine and Banana Sap 6-Vermicomposting 7-Pelletized Feeds by Multi-functional Machine 8-Sea Water for Seed Treatment 9-Varietal Adaptability Trial NATURE Crop production system Crop production system Community development program Crop production system Soil fertilization program Soil fertilization program Soil fertilization program Soil fertilization program Soil fertilization program Soil fertilization program Soil fertilization program Soil fertilization program Livestock (pig) feed and nutrition Seed treatment Seed selection and evaluation NETWORK CONTRIBUTOR MASIPAG SEARICE SAC-XUCA SIBAT SIBAT SEARICE Municipality of Dumingag Municipality of Dumingag SEARICE SERVICE MASIPAG Municipality of Dumingag SAC-XUCA MASIPAG SIBAT

Summary of findings for the national and international network members. A major finding of the study is that the MINSOFS network members who operate at international and national levels do not practice nor espouse a single organic agricultural production technique nor methodology but embraces a holistic organic and sustainable approach to crop production. These would include emphasis on selection of seed cultivars with a focus on the development of farmer-produced seed varieties by capacitating them on participatory breeding principles and liberating them from dependencies on multi-national or commercial seed producers. Additional practices would include integrated pest management and integrated soil fertility management. There is much reliance on Koreas Natural Farming methods as espoused by Mr. Han-kyu Cho and his Janong Natural Farming Research Institute. This shows familiarity by national and international network members on Mr. Chos philosophical framework for which much of their research and development efforts are geared on adaptation. What is important to emphasize is that these developed crop production systems or organic agricultural programs are not just the combination or sum total of the various organic agricultural technologies and techniques but rather, the synergy arising from the combination. There is nothing spectacular if we just talk of the organic technique that they promote because these are usually adoptions and adaptations from various established organic production philosophies.

They stood out from among their contemporary organic movements because of the synergy effect from the combinations of organic practices they promote and pursue. These nationally and internationally-operating MINSOFS members are network themselves and part of their core activities are community organization and advocacies on multiple and complex issues interlinking with their organic agriculture efforts the issues on multi-national investments on the Philippine agro-chemical industry, seed production and genetic engineering, and a host of other social, economic, and cultural concerns relating to agriculture for the total development of their farmer beneficiaries into well informed if not environmentally militant citizenry. They have the resources to mobilize their farmer members to be politically active in national issues and debates, especially those relating to farmer labour issues, land reform, genetically modified organisms (GMOs), organic certification, multi-national control of the agricultural production system, and other volatile topics. As network of networks, they can also mobilize their partner farmer organizations for the adoption/adaption of emerging organic agriculture technologies and have the resources for nation-wide research and technology demonstration. Due to the holistic approach of the nationally and internationally networked members, they found some difficulty answering the questionnaire set required by ANSOFT because they are not promoting nor endorsing a single organic agricultural technique but a whole range of production system philosophy that starts from seed varietal selection and breeding down to postharvest activities and national agro-economic policy advocacies. For instance, while it is true that SEARICE is focused on participatory plant breeding (PPB) based on traditional varieties and other locally available improved varieties using Mendellian principles and not based on genetic engineering, its farmer capacity building through its Farmer Field School includes topics on integrated pest management and integrated soil fertility management adapting to local conditions Korea's Natural Farming philosophy. But since they were asked to submit a report on a single organic agricultural technique, they opted to introduce Indigenous Microorganisms (IMO) and Carbonized Rice Hull (CRH) which would not be relevant if we consider the purpose for which SEARICE was established and known for their work in the Southeast Asian region. IMO and CRH are neither pioneering nor outstanding for an organization with such an international level of operation and calibre. The way ANSOFT would have wanted their organic agriculture researches and programs reported is like taking a text out of context which could be looked at as nothing spectacular and subject to several interpretations not relevant to the networked members' mission and vision. But if they report on their plant breeding trainings, there is nothing organic about this activity unless we contrast it with genetic engineering and GMOs. The success of SEARICE, as well as those of other organic movements, is not in finding the right combination of organic techniques to promote, but in the synergistic effects of the holistic approach that they pursue. By isolating the organic technique, the magic is lost because it is not just the sum total of the organic practices but in the synergy. The principal investigator therefore, opted to retain SEARICE submitted report but under the Natural Farming techniques adapted to local conditions; and prepared a separate report highlighting PPB as the major contribution of SEARICE in the organic agriculture movement. The same holds true for MASIPAG with its development of the so-called MASIPAG Rice

Production Technology and with SIBAT with its promotion of Community-Based Sustainable Agriculture Program. The Sustainable Agriculture Centre focuses its research and development activities on Asset-Base Community Sustainable Agriculture Program. We would like to reiterate that these are not just organic agricultural techniques but holistic sustainable agricultural production systems and crop production protocols consisting of a set of a synergistic mix of uniquely developed as well as adapted organic agricultural technologies for which no two dynamic communities would be alike despite unifying approaches and philosophies. It would be axiomatic to say that at the national and international level, the various organic agriculture movements and network of movements are pursuing holistic rather than reductionist approach for organic agriculture to be competitive against conventional agricultural methods. The low yield claimed for organically produced crops because the nitrogen content of organic fertilizers is certainly limiting, is compensated by premium selling price, integrated farming to include livestock-fisheries-and-other crops for diversified farmer income sources and approximation of a mature and thus stable ecosystem, accent on soil biology for enhanced crop nutrient uptake, focus on home food sufficiency rather than on commercial level of production but with provisions for surplus, and independence from the so-called yoke of bondage by the multi-national agro-chemical and seed industry. More than the technological innovations, these organic agriculture movements are deep into farmer value formation to transcend profit motive and replace conventional farming with environment-safe and human-health promoting agricultural production systems that focus more on self-sufficiency and science-based return to or adaptation of traditional and indigenous practices that enabled the country to feed its people in the past centuries. Without the value formation that accompanies the capacity building on organic agricultural technologies and the set of production protocols, there is no way to advance the cause of organic farming in the Philippines. For these organic agriculture movements, organic agriculture as opposed to conventional farming, is a way of life. It is not just a crop production system. Summary of findings on the local-based network members. The local-based organic agriculture movements are certainly convinced of the need to return to the basics, especially those agricultural production systems thrown away in favour of modern or conventional farming. There is no doubt about it. There are three routes for these local movements, either (1) they join a particular organic agriculture philosophical bandwagon; or (2) adopt and adapt a gamut of relevant practices and technologies suited to their local conditions which includes indigenous or traditional farming systems and practices slowly being forgotten by the community and previously dismissed as nothing more than folk traditions and superstition; or (3) for the more innovative and dynamic communities, they consider both by welcoming diverse ideas of various organic movements but could remain attached to a particular organic philosophy as base for development of set of organic-based production systems. This is quite evident based on the submissions of their reports for the ANSOFT workshop. They were either among the first or among the last to comply with the requirements. But since they are local organic agriculture movements, the philosophical framework for some of the organic technologies they submitted were lacking in depth in their discussions. It is not that they do not understand the philosophy behind what they were promoting but they expectedly lack elucidation because their program coverage is limited to within the community and perhaps with their neighbouring communities. Much of the details as requested by ANSOFT were

supplemented by the principal investigator. A national or international organic movement would have a more panoramic viewpoint in terms of community dynamics and variations of farming conditions. For instance, most of the network members were unable to fill up the "Cost" set of questionnaire. Obviously, because we are dealing with home-level production, the raw material sources were freely and abundantly available in the community and labour is equally cheap and free because they are provided by the project beneficiaries. Valuation for things easily and cheaply available is not that easy for those who do not have agro-economic background. In contrast, SEARICE has come up with a book on valuation of participatory plant breeding. As an international organic agriculture movement, they have attained that level of sophistication. Since the MINSOFS members are not also into law, and their produce are for home and community consumption only and not for commercial sale, there was no conscious recognition that for trade purposes, many of these concoctions would require licensing from the Fertilizer and Pesticide Administration. This regulation is actually not applicable for the project beneficiaries because even the original organic technology developer never intended such for commercial production. Again, the principal investigator supplied these data. The same is true for the farmer-bred seeds. Because it was intended for home and community level type of production and not for commercial trade, the seed production regulatory body the National Seed Industry Council, was hardly mentioned in their original report.

SUMMARY AND CONCLUSION The MINSOFS members had difficulty filling up the ANSOFT questionnaire set that focuses on a particular organic technique because their program implementation is based on holistic approach and synergistic effects of the combination of the various organic techniques. There is a recognition for instance that organic fertilizer would not have sufficient nitrogen to meet crop needs; and therefore, the focus is on the use of supplemental biological strategies to enhance nutrient uptake by crops, diversification and integration for multiple income sources, use of solar energy and indigenous and abundantly available and locally sourced raw materials, among other strategies. Thus, a single organic technique would not reflect the organizations mission and vision to promote organic agriculture. Although almost all of the consortium members practice holistic approaches, it is in the mission and vision that makes one organic movement distinctly different than the other. The principal investigator thinks it is important to reflect this in the submission to ANSOFT and made additional report for the network members with national and international linkages by highlighting their major work and contribution to the organic movement. Secondly, while it is true that the practices and the underlying philosophical framework are based on established organic agriculture principles such as Natural Farming or Bio-dynamic Agriculture, for which the submitted organic technique may not be that extra-ordinary nor pioneering for information sharing at international level, there are already adaptations in terms of procedures or raw materials used. Most of the reporters who prepared the submissions assumed that the other network members, whether local or international, are aware of Natural Farming,

Bio-dynamic Agriculture and other organic agriculture philosophies and principles and preferred to submit these rather common ones. On the other hand, the principal investigator thinks that perhaps what ANSOFT members would consider as uniquely and indigenously and locally developed organic technique is rather too common for the network members to recognize such that they fail to appreciate and report these organic techniques and did not report. Maybe we need to supplement current information sharing efforts. Way forward. MINSOFS will have a general assembly meeting after IFOAM and will organize an organic agriculture trade fair by first quarter of next year, to be hosted by the Municipality of Dumingag. MINSOFS has just participated in the Mindanao-island wide Vermiculture Congress in Cagayan de Oro and initiated a seminar on the provisions of the Implementing Rules and Regulations of the Organic Agriculture Act not only for its members but for all those attending the Vermiculture Congress. Acknowledgement. The principal investigator thanks the MINSOFS members for their submissions and cooperation and the ANSOFT organizers for this opportunity to share organic agricultural techniques as practiced in the Philippines with those of AFACI member countries.

Annex 1 Name of organic technique: MASIPAG RICE PRODUCTION

TECHNOLOGY
<General>
Name of technique Purpose of use
Masipag Rice Production Technology A rice production system that does not use chemicals and pesticides Chemical-based farming is not the only option for farmers in the Philippines. A more sustainable rice production technology is available without compromising the integrity of the environment, improve the quality of farmers economic well being and consideration of social equity, and look at development planning that includes the quality of farm life. Farmers are usually trained on the MASIPAG methods of rice culture which focuses on bringing back traditional rice varieties, improving these varieties, and minimizing the cost of production.

Outline & Principles


The technology training can be divided into its component programs: Collection, identification, maintenance, multiplication, and evaluation of rice varieties Breeding (rice, corn, livestock) Soil fertility management Diversified-Integrated Farming Systems for ecological stability Alternative pest management Usually, the training also involved farmer-developed/adapted technology, network strengthening, local processing and marketing Control of pests and diseases without compromising environment and health of farm workers Reduction of soil acidity Multiple-income sources Control of farming resources Increased family income Rice The whole farming system which could include a synergistic effects with other farming components like livestocks and other crops because of diversified farming philosophy The MASIPAG rice varieties are known for adaptation to various conditions such as saltwater tolerance, pest-disease resistance, low fertility soils, tillering and rationing properties, etc.

Main Effects

Target Crops and Application Period Scale of application Other Uses

<Technical issue & problems>


Name of technique
Masipag Rice Production Technology Rice varieties released for commercial production is generally approved by the National Seed Industry Council, also known before as the Philippine Seed Board (PSB) which is based with the Bureau of Plant Industry. Republic Act 7308 also known as the Seed Industry Development Act of 1992 makes PSB as the responsible office in the approval and registration of crop varieties. This Its website is: http://bpi.da.gov.ph/NSIC/index.php . government agency is involved with certification of seed growers for the commercial sale of breeer seed, foundation seed, registered seed, certified seed, and good seed.

Organic regulation and criteria

It should be noted that MASIPAG is dealing with farmer-produced seeds which are not for commercial sale; and that the farmer himself is taught on breeding technologies so that he could produce his own seed requirement rather than being beholden to multi-nationals; and is therefore assumed that MASIPAG rice lines the local farmers produced are not registered with the National Seed Industry Council. Soil fertility amendments are regulated by the Fertilizer and Pesticide Administration (FPA) for licensing prior to commercial sale. But again, since these are produced by farmers for their own use, the locally produced fertilizers and home-made pesticide concoctions do not pass through FPA regulations. Better health because the farmers are not exposed on the hazards of agricultural chemicals Better income for farmers because of reduced production costs since he is in better control of farm resources such as seeds, fertilizers, and pesticides. Current social and human resources: 635 Peoples Organizations (Pos) 60 Non-government Organizations 15 Scientists 67 farmer rice breeders 21 corn breeders 200 farmer trainors Research and support facilities: 226 PO-managed trial farms + 10 back up 9 PO managed chicken gene pools

Effect on human body Social issue

Knowledge transfer

Manufacturing, packing, application Other issues

None Organic farmers had difficulty with the certification requirements because despite their efforts to be 100% organic, they are affected by aerial sprays (via airplane) of neighboring commercial plantations.

<Cost>
Name of technique
Masipag Rice Production Technology MASIPAG Full Organic (PhP) Conventional (PhP) -1,119.00 5,291.00 -981.00 252.00 -10,453.00 1,529.00 -1,529.00 455.00

Equipment and maintenance Material costs (seed, fertilizer, pesticide, livestock) labour (cost) Disposal of waste matter Other costs: land rental Other costs: irrigation fee Source:

2009 study conducted by Dr. Lorenz Backman, et.al.

Household balance:
MASIPAG Full Organic Conventional -4,992.00 -10,893.00 3,868.00

Mean Poorest quartile Richest quartile

4,749.00 -3,366.00 11,134.00

Additional note: Comparative net agricultural income for MASIPAG and conventional rice production technology is available as slide in http://icss2010.net/download/documents/24JUNE/panel-2_People%20to%20Science-to-People-experiences-from-civil-society/1_C-PMedina.pdf

<Source of information>
Name of technique
Masipag Rice Production Technology

Photos/sources

Source: MASIPAG

Developer of technique MASIPAG


MASIPAG web site: http://www.masipag.org/index.html Video production on success stories is available at: http://www.miragepro.net/masipag.htm Democratizing Sustainability Science C. P. Medina, National Coordinator for Development http://icss2010.net/download/documents/24-JUNE/panel2_People%20to%20Science-to-People-experiences-from-civil-society/1_CP-Medina.pdf IFOAM web site on MASIPAG and history of organic agriculture in the Philippines http://www.ifoam.org/growing_organic/2_policy/case_studies/philippines_e arly_development.php

Data sources

Others

<Other effects>
Name of technique Positive environmental effects Negative environmental effects Farm responses (positive) Farm responses (negative) Opinion of neighbor farm Other effects
Masipag Rice Production Technology No environmental contamination of inorganic fertilizers and toxic agricultural pesticides and insecticides None Greater income and liberation from dependence on expensive multinational agro-chemicals to grow rice None When entering a pilot community, it is usual experience that the target number of participants is often exceeded by more than 50% Farmers learned to look at what are locally available bio-resources to produce crops

Network Contributor: Magsasaka at Siyentipiko para sa Pag-unlad ng Agrikultura (MASIPAG) Mindanao Officer's Village, Zone 5, Bulua, Cagayan De Oro City,Philippines

ANNEX 2 Name of organic technique: PARTICIPATORY VEGETABLE

BREEDING AND SELECTION


<General>
Name of technique Purpose of use
Participatory Vegetable Breeding and Selection To help vegetable growers increase their production while reducing their use of pesticides and other chemical inputs The Farmer Field School is based on field study or physical set-up which farmers observe (material), field exercises or activities which farmers conducting using the field set-up (action/experience) and special topic which supplements the discussions and process the field exercise (concept). The training covers the following topics: Sustainable agriculture Soil fertility management Natural farming system Plant morphology and growth stages Genetics and heritability Breeding Selection Agricultural policies affecting farmers Post-harvest handling Household-based seed keeping There are practical exercises on conducting field trials on varieties of eggplants, tomato, okra, ampalaya, string beans, and squash. Each farmer conducted practical breeding for each crop using predetermined breeding criteria. They were taught how to use organic fertilizer from vermicast Difference between conventional plant breeding (supply driven) and participatory plant breeding (demand-driven): Conventional PB Selection of new varieties Variety release Production of certified seed Adoption Participatory PB Selection of new varieties Adoption Variety release Production of certified seed

Outline & Principles

Commonalities: Molecular breeding is one of those technologies which is not incompatible with participatory plant breeding because of the following reasons 1. Use of Market Assisted Selection (MAS) can help create the gene combinations chosen byfarmers more effectively and more rapidly; 2. It can facilitate the acceleration of generations (double

Main Effects Target Crops and Application Period Scale of application

haploids) of the genetic materials; 3. Because of its focus on mapping, it can make up for the limited genetic knowledge of farmers and enhance farmer participation in the identification of important traits to them; 4. It can facilitate the fingerprinting of farmers varieties, i.e. the characterization of population for official release. Greater crop diversity specially those suitable for stressed environments All economically important crops Seed production phase, but the technology covers the whole crop production system Produces same quality and quantity of data as the conventional plant breeding methods and in addition, generates information on farmers preferences. Increases crop biodiversity, promotes the use of landraces and wild relatives, and is ideal for organic conditions. It is possible to make improvements on more than one crop at the same time. Facilitates quick response to agronomic and/or climatic changes.

Other Uses

<Technical issue & problems>


Name of technique
Participatory Vegetable Breeding and Selection Seeds, including vegetable seeds, released for commercial production is generally approved by the National Seed Industry Council, also known before as the Philippine Seed Board (PSB) which is based with the Bureau of Plant Industry. Republic Act 7308 also known as the Seed Industry Development Act of 1992 makes PSB as the responsible office in the approval and registration of crop varieties. Its website is: http://bpi.da.gov.ph/NSIC/index.php . This government agency is involved with certification of seed growers for the commercial sale of breeer seed, foundation seed, registered seed, certified seed, and good seed.

Organic regulation and criteria

It should be noted that SEARICE is dealing with farmer-produced seeds which are not for commercial sale; and that the farmer himself is taught on breeding technologies so that he could produce his own seed requirement rather than being beholden to multi-nationals; and is therefore assumed that SEARICE varieties that the local farmers produced are not registered with the National Seed Industry Council. However, efforts to commercialize these seeds may have to pass through the National Seed Industry Council Soil fertility amendments are regulated by the Fertilizer and Pesticide Administration (FPA) for licensing prior to commercial sale. But again, since these are produced by farmers for their own use, the locally produced fertilizers and home-made pesticide concoctions do not pass through FPA regulations.

Effect on human body

None Farmers are just as good as scientists or other groups of seed growers.

Social issue

The evolution of breeding in participatory plant breeding ensures continued adaptation under changing farming and market systems as well as changing climates. There is a need to supply community groups with relevant and needed diversity for local selection. SEARICE has several publications, videos, technical reports, and proceedings which they share freely in the internet. An example is Pathways to Participatory Farmer Plant Breeding: Stories and Reflections of the Community Biodiversity Development Program and available at: http://www.searice.org.ph/index.php?option=com_content&view=categ ory&layout=blog&id=36&Itemid=44 Most of the technology packages as well as position papers and advocacies are produced as books and brochures. Pedagogy of participatory plant breeding. This refers to the activities of educating or instructing or to activities that impart knowledge or skills. The term is generally associated with child learning while andragogy defines the way adults learn. Adherents of participatory plant breeding agree that pedagogy is more widely used in reference to educational and empowerment processes. The issues that emerged were: (1) changing mindsets; (2) maintaining the quality of educational processes, and (3) building communities commitment to participatory plant breeding Market and economic considerations in participatory plant breeding. Government regulations that makes it illegal for farmers to reproduce seeds results with some farmers keeping their surplus seeds and reporting lower than actual production volumes. Agricultural liberalization to some extent benefits participatory plant breeders but fraught with challenges and risks.

Knowledge transfer

Manufacturing, packing, application

Other issues

<Cost>
Name of technique
Participatory Vegetable Breeding and Selection

Equipment and maintenance None


As farmers are trained on plant reproduction, isolation, and purity of assessment, farmers recognize the importance of having a seed plot. Most of these are done in the Participatory Varietal Selection (PVS) plots where seed production techniques and practiced. As such, material costs such as initial seed materials and relevant production costs are shared among farmer participants Assumed to be free and contributed by the farmers themselves

Material costs

labour (cost)

Disposal of waste matter

No harmful laboratory wastes nor dangerous crop genetic materials None. Note: SEARICE has come up with book on the valuation of participatory plant breeding: Valuing Participatory Plant Breeding: A Review of Tools and Methods http://www.searice.org.ph/index.php?view=article&catid=47%3Anewbooks&id=91%3Avaluing-participatory-plant-breeding-a-review-oftools-and-methods&format=pdf&option=com_content&Itemid=66

Other costs:

<Source of information>
Name of technique
Participatory Vegetable Breeding and Selection

Photos/sources

Photo source:
http://www.searice.org.ph/index.php?option=com_content&view=section&l ayout=blog&id=4&Itemid=19

Developer of technique SEARICE


The SEARICE website: http://www.searice.org.ph/

Data sources

Others

Revisiting the streams of participatory plant breeding: Insights from a meeting among friends http://www.searice.org.ph/images/stories/pdf_files/Revisiting_the_streams_ of_PPB.pdf Please access their websites for wealth of materials on their various programs and activities. Some of these materials concern a subcomponent of the whole crop production process like fertility management or a specific policy advocacy. The website has also a section on several videos relating to these various programs.

<Other effects>
Name of technique Positive environmental effects Negative environmental effects Farm responses (positive) Farm responses (negative) Opinion of neighbor farm Other effects
Participatory Vegetable Breeding and Selection Farmers are able to adjust their crop responses to adverse environmental conditions None. The practitioners are not involved in genetic manipulation but use conventional Mendellian principles. Farmers have become aware of vigilant of their control of basic agricultural resources such as seeds. They are against introduction of genetically modified crops (GMOs). Certainly requires new set of social values to be able to appreciate Quite impressed The approach is holistic and therefore the total crop production system should be looked into, not just the varietal selection process.

Network Contributor: Southeast Asia Regional Initiatives for Community Empowerment (SEARICE) Brgy. Poblacion, President Roxas, North Cotabato, Philippines

ANNEX 3 Name of organic technique: ASSET BASE SUSTAINABLE

AGRICULTURE PROGRAM
<General>
Name of technique
Asset Base Sustainable Agriculture Program Reiterative planning process that mobilizes different available assets biophysical, institutional, available technologies, and even human resources to bring about sustainable agriculture and sound watershed management practices. The Asset Base Sustainable Agriculture and Community Development Concept has a more positive approach than conventional model of analyzing problems, needs and deficiencies of communities. It focuses on various existing resources or assets that can and need to be enhanced, enriched and developed by the target group or communities. Its principles and philosophy rests on reiterative planning process that involves the different sectors of the community as well as the stakeholders in mobilizing the different available assets biophysical, institutional, available technologies, and even human resources in order to positively act on issues and concerns (Figure 1). It recognizes the complex interactions of assets in bringing about sustainable agriculture and sound watershed management practices (Figure 2).

Purpose of use

B usiness E nterprises 5 Science PE O P LE 1 Technology N ATU R E 4 C ultural Institutions 2 3 P olitical S tructures

Outline & Principles


6

Individual

Inner Ecology 1 Ecologically S ound 2 Econom ically viable/ Associative E conom ics 3 Socially Just / E quitable 4 C ulturally Appropriate

5 H olistic S cience 6 A ppropriate Technology 7 D evelopm ent of H um an P otential

Figure 2. Diagram of principles of assets mobilization and sustainable agriculture

HUMAN BEING

Sustainable Agriculture Including food security

Society Polity Culture

Economy

Agriculture NATURE

Figure 3. Complex interactions of assets through TSP for sustainable agriculture and community development.

Table 1. Typology of Participation


TYPOLOGY Passive participation CHARACTERISTIC OF EACH TYPE People participate by being told what has been decided or has already happened. Information being shared belongs only to external professionals. People participate by being consulted or by answering questions. Process does not concede any share in decision-making, and professionals are under no obligation to take on board peoples views. People participate in return for food, cash, or other material incentives. Local people have no stake in prolonging technologies or practices when the incentives end. Participation seen by external agencies as a means to achieve their goals, especially reduced costs. People participate by forming groups to meet predetermined objectives. People participate in joint analysis, development of action plans, and formation or strengthening of local groups or institutions. Learning methodologies used to seek multiple perspectives, and groups determine how available resources are used. People participate by taking initiatives independently to change systems. They develop contacts with external institutions for resources and technical advice they need, but retain control over how resources are used.

Participation by consultation

Bought participation

Functional participation

Interactive participation

Self-mobilization and connectedness

Main Effects Target Crops and Application Period Scale of application Other Uses

Inward community initiatives to adopt organic agricultural technologies All economically important crops This is more of value formation to adopt and adapt sustainable agricultural practices and organic agricultural systems Good principle and philosophical framework for community organization

<Technical issue & problems>


Name of technique Organic regulation and criteria Effect on human body Social issue Knowledge transfer Manufacturing, packing, application Other issues
Asset Base Sustainable Agriculture Program Actually there is no government regulation on community organization work but efforts to organize farmers into cooperatives must comply with the Republic Act 9520 or the Philippine Cooperative Code of 2008 This is more of transformations of human values The core value is for the farmers themselves to throw the yoke of bondage to multi-national agro-chemical industry by taking initiatives themselves to change the system and control how their community resources are used. This is a community development program and would require living or constant interaction with community members to address value formation. None None. Generally, only organic agricultural practices are promoted although community initiatives later on may address social and political issues for which community action is sought.

<Cost>
Name of technique
Asset Base Sustainable Agriculture Program

Equipment and maintenance None


Depends on the type of organic technology being implemented. Material costs (seed, But additional cost is incurred for slope stabilization using vegetative fertilizer, pesticide, livestock) techniques

Labour (cost) Disposal of waste matter Other costs:

This is usually the counterpart of the program beneficiaries and therefore considered free. Farm wastes are normally converted to compost For the farmers, maybe we have to value their time spent with the program proponents

<Source of information>
Name of technique
Asset Base Sustainable Agriculture Program

Rapid rural appraisal with researchers interviewing farmers.

Photos/sources

Before and after introduction of soil conservation techniques

Director Tagupa conducting field work and workshop

Photo source:
BSWM based on collaborative watershed project with SAC-XUCA

Developer of technique Sustainable Agriculture Center - XUCA Data sources Others


Director Vic Tagupa None

<Other effects>
Name of technique Positive environmental effects Negative environmental effects Farm responses (positive) Farm responses (negative) Opinion of neighbor farm Other effects
Asset Base Sustainable Agriculture Program Well informed and vigilant farmers taking hold and control of their communitys destiny with regards to utilization of their resources None Farmers are happy to be equipped with the necessary tools to address their own problems as they recognize that the solutions are within their hands. Requires investment in time and value formation Would like to participate also They are able to utilize the same principles and tools to address their non-agricultural concerns.

Network contributor: Sustainable Agriculture Center College of Agriculture, Xavier University, Cagayan de Oro, Philippines

ANNEX 4 Name of organic technique: SYSTEM OF RICE INTENSIFICATION (SRI) <General>


Name of technique Purpose of use
System of Rice Intensification (SRI) Efficient rice cropping technology and better water management Basic SRI Management Practices Rice plants -- Seedlings are transplanted: very young -- usually just 8-12 days old, with just two small leaves carefully and quickly to have minimum trauma to the roots singly, only one per hill instead of 3-4 together to avoid root competition widely spaced to encourage greater root and canopy growth in a square grid pattern, 25x25 cm or wider in good quality soil Some farmers are experimenting with direct-seeding adaptations of SRI principles, and even with mechanized transplanting. So these recommendations concern how to transplant rice most productively if transplanting is done. SRI is not a recipe of precise things to do, but rather a menu for bringing out rice plants potential. Soil -- This is kept moist but well-drained and aerobic, with good structure and enough organic matter to support increased biological activity. The quality and health of the soil is the key to best production.

Outline & Principles

Water -- Only a minimum of water is applied during the vegetative growth period, and thereafter only a thin layer of water is maintained on the field during flowering and grain-filling. Alternatively, to save labor time, some farmers flood and drain (dry) their fields in 3-5 day cycles with good results. Best water management practices depend on soil type, labor availability and other factors, so farmers should experiment on how best to apply the principle of having moist but well-drained soil while their rice plants are growing. Nutrients -- Soil nutrient supplies should be augmented, preferably with compost, made from any available biomass. Better quality compost such as with manure can give additional yield advantages. Chemical fertilizer can be used and gives better results than with no nutrient amendments, but it does not enhance soil structure and microbial communities in the rhizosphere as applying organic matter accomplishes. At least initially, nutrient amendments may not be necessary to achieve higher yields with the other SRI practices, but it is desirable to build up soil fertility over time. Root exudation, greater with SRI, enhances soil fertility. Weeds -- Since weeds become a problem in fields that are not kept flooded, weeding is necessary several times, starting 10-12 days after transplanting, and if possible, every 10-12 days until before the

Main Effects

canopy closes. Using a rotary hoe -- a simple, inexpensive, mechanical push-weeder -- has the advantage of aerating the soil at the same time that weeds are eliminated. (They are left in the soil to decompose so their nutrients are not lost.) Additional weedings beyond two can increase yield more than enough under most conditions to more than justify the added labor costs. Young seedlings recover better from trauma Wider distances minimize competition Unflooded conditions create better aeration, more soil organisms and healthier roots Rice is not an aquatic plant Involves some changes in rice management practices Does not require special varieties; works with any variety Reduces cost of seeds, inputs and water Increases yields by 50-100% Does not need chemical fertilizers or pesticides Early transplanting: 8-12 days, before the third leaf appears; transplant carefully Wider distances (25x25 cm, up to 45x45cm, or even more); one seedling per hill Fields should not be flooded continuously: 1) keep soil moist; or 2) alternate wetting and drying Use a mechanical weeder every 10-14 days for weed control and soil aeration Use compost, not inorganic fertilizers, for best results In the Philippines, SRI yields ranged from 3.3 12 tons/ha both from farmers fields and experimental plots. Compared with existing practices, farmers report 50 100% yield increase plus lower cost of production and lower water use.

Target Crops and Application Period Scale of application Other Uses

Rice from planting to harvesting Involves the whole rice production system, from seedling propagation stage to harvesting. Not known

<Technical issue & problems>


Name of technique Organic regulation and criteria
System of Rice Intensification (SRI) None. Since the Department of Agriculture has its own set of rice production protocols to avail of government incentives, farmers practicing SRI may not be able to get such incentives. There are efforts, however, by non-government organizations, to bring SRI as acceptable conventional practice. None Refusal to change from comfort zone and feeling of uncertainty by farmers to try unfamiliar system of growing rice.

Effect on human body Social issue

Knowledge transfer Manufacturing, packing, application Other issues

NGOs propagating the technology usually use farmer-participatory approach to capacitate the farmers on SRI Not applicable. There are no products being promoted, but a whole production system being practiced. Usual oppositors to organic farming are not convinced of the technology and question those who promote SRI in scientific fora and symposia, which is expected.

<Cost>
Name of technique
System of Rice Intensification (SRI)

the wider planting distance, a weeder is a must to assure Equipment and maintenance With weed-free crop environment.

Material costs

Labour (cost)

Disposal of waste matter Other costs

Compared with traditional rice growing system, no additional material costs but reduce inputs in terms of seeds, fertilizers, water. The claim is that SRI does not require more labor although there are some undocumented reports that it requires more. It is possible that these are the plant and harvest type of farmers who do not devote much time to their rice farms in between the planting and harvesting. The active role of the farmer practicing SRI is certainly a must. None None Based on the paper: System of Rice Intensification (SRI): Practices and Results in the Philippines by Roberto S. Verzola, Coordinator, SRI-Pilipinas (undated, possibly 2004 based on literature citations): Rene Jaranilla, for instance, estimated that his costs of production with conventional methods was P12,310/ha giving a negative net income of P3,310 with ROI of -27%; with SRI, his costs were only P7,510/ha with a net income of P9,890 (ROI = 132%). In addition to SRI, Jaranilla practices nature farming through the use of indigenous microorganisms which helps him reduce expenses of his farm. SRI as practiced by three farmer field school groups with with the National Irrigation Administration (NIA) had SRI costs per hectare nearly three times the conventional costs (P30,945 SRI vs. P10,948), but their SRI profitability was nonetheless more than three times greater than the conventional approach (P24,054 vs. P7,592). The ROI with SRI was 78% while the conventional approach had an ROI of 69%.

Cost-benefit ratio

<Source of information>
Name of technique
System of Rice Intensification (SRI)

Photo Source: http://www.flickr.com/photos/nadukuppam/134031240/

Photos/sources

Developer of technique

Photo Source: http://prrmnuevaecija.blogspot.com/2011/02/system-of-riceintensification.html The System of Rice Intensification (SRI) is a method of increasing the yield of rice developed in 1983 by the French Jesuit Father Henri de Laulanie in Madagascar. It began as early as 1960s when Fr. De Laulanie observed 'positive-deviant' farmer practices, starting with planting single seedlings instead of multiple seedlings in a clump, and not keeping irrigated paddy fields flooded during the rice plants' vegetative growth stage. Planting with wider spacing in a square pattern, rather than randomly or in rows, followed, as did controlling weed growth by use of a soil-aerating push-weeder (rotating hoe). SRI Pilipinas was established in 2002 as a consortium of farmer groups and civil societies, academics, and government with series of workshops hosted by the Philippine Movement for Rural Reconstruction (PRRM) to promote SRI nationwide. This is available in the internet. The website is http://sri.ciifad.cornell.edu/index.html . It has pages devoted to its applications to various parts of the world with a specific page for the Philippines: http://sri.ciifad.cornell.edu/countries/philippines/index.html . Various reports and articles, powerpoint presentations and other documentation on SRI application in the Philippines can be found at the Philippine sub-page. The CIIFAD-Cornell website has also a page on SRI application in the Philippines: http://ciifad.cornell.edu/sri/countries/philippines/index.html

Data sources

Others

<Other effects>
Name of technique Positive environmental effects Negative environmental effects
System of Rice Intensification (SRI) With less crop density, there is lower methane emission None reported Farmers report the following observations: Yield increases by 50-100% or even more Works with any variety; does not restrict farmers to a few varieties Fewer seeds needed (5-10 kg/ha, not 40 kg/ha) Uses 40-60% less water; good performance against El Nino; Better yields with compost; does not rely on chemical fertilizers, fossil fuels Healthier, sturdier plants, more resistant to floods, droughts Profuse tillering: 30, 50, 80 or even more instead of only 1020 tillers Healthy root growth, which can support more tillers More panicles, more grains per panicle The documentation and the monitoring of plant growth is quite tedious. Positive response. Neighboring farmers observed that the crop on SRI grow and adapt well even in drought conditions. Farmers are encouraged to switch to SRI from conventional rice production technology.

Farm responses (positive)

Farm responses (negative) Opinion of neighbor farm Other effects

Network Contributor: Sibol Ng Agham At Teknolohiya (SIBAT)


40 Matulungin St. Brgy. Central Diliman, Quezon City,Philippines

ANNEX 5 Name of organic technique: KOREAN NATURAL FARMING THE NUTRITIVE CYCLE THEORY <General>
Name of technique Purpose of use
Korean Natural Farming The Nutritive Cycle Theory Fertilization technique or crop nutrition supplement The Nutritive Cycle Theory: The growth of crops is determined by the Nutritive Cycle; not by the amount of fertilizer input applied. Optimum growth is achieved by giving the soil the optimum amount of the correct kind of nutrients at the correct time. The correct kind of nutrient varies according to the stage of the plants life cycle. 1. Crops also have morning sickness . Like humans, crops also have growth stages such as infancy, childhood, adolescence, adulthood and old age. Likewise, suffering from morning sickness is not confined to women. Both animals and plants also experience a similar phenomenon when they are procreating. Like women favor sour foods and make unusual additions to their diet, so too do plants and animals require particular nutrients at this stage. Conventional farming does not pay attention to this fact. 2. Different crop stages require different nutrients. In Natural Farming, the growth stages of crops are precisely understood. At each stage of growth; vegetative growth, flowering, fruiting, coloring and maturity the correct diagnosis is made and the appropriate action taken. The principles of the growth cycle are understood and the cause of any abnormality searched for. The growth and development stages of crops have qualitative and physiological differences. The required nutrients and their amount differ at each stage. By applying Nutritive Cycle theory, Natural Farming understands the crops, what they need and how much they need, their condition and what kind of environmental conditions are conducive to their growth. Natural Farming is not the crude practice of randomly dumping organic compost for plant consumption. Defining the changeover period and concluding that plants will have special nutrient requirements during a period corresponding to morning sickness in humans is unprecedented. The results coming out of this approach seems convincing.

Outline & Principles

3. The four nutrient types. Natural Farming identifies four different nutrient conditions for plants. This classification was first introduced by American Scientist Guross Gureville. Type 1 has a lot of water and nitrogen. Carbohydrate is minimal. The plant has weak vegetative growth and there is no floral differentiation. Type 2 has a relatively large amount of water and nitrogen. It also has enough C for active vegetative growth. However floral differentiation is so weak that even if it does flower there will be no fruit. Type 3 has a relatively low amounts of water and nitrogen. Production of C decreases compared to type 2, but floral differentiation is strong and the fruit is good. Type 4 has

little water and nitrogen. No vegetative growth and no fruiting. Perceiving the nutrient type of your crop and leading it to the right condition at the right stage is the crux of nutritive cycle theory. The nutritive cycle will be different for each crop and animal. 4. A key component is the use of locally produced and low cost biomass resources to rebuild and maintain soil productivity. An increased diversity and activity of beneficial microorganisms in the soil can stimulate decomposition processes, providing a constant supply of nutrients from the soil organic matter enhancing nutrient uptake by plants and increasing plant resistance to pathogens and herbivorous insects. 5. The first of these consist of Indigenous Micro-Organisms (UMOs) collected from the immediate environment surrounding the farm. 6. The second consists of commercial preparations of effective micro-organisms (EM) that contain a mixture of phototropic bacteria, lactic acid bacteria, fermenting yeasts, actinomycetes, and other types of organisms. 7. The success of micro-organisms in improving crop health and crop yields is linked to overall agroecosystem management. In general, beneficial micro-organisms require a stable environment in terms of moisture, nutrient supply, and pH. The choice of microbial inoculum is important as it will be competing with the existing soil microbial population before it can be established. The use of beneficial micro-organisms can also take the form of providing conditions for enhancing the growth conditions for the naturally occurring soil biota or taking measures to restore the microbial community in degraded ecosystems. The Fermented Preparations: Indigenous Micro-organisms (IMO) Fermented Plant Juice (FPJ) Fermented Fruit JU\uice (FFJ) Fish Amino Acid (FAA) (note snails not fish is used) Calcium Carbonate preparations from snail shells Oriental Herbal Nutrients For specific procedures, please access: Nature Farming Manual adapted to locally available materials and needs in the Western Visayas Region of the Philippines by Helen Jensen, Leopoldo Guilaran, Rene Jaranilla, and Jerry Garingalao, available in the internet from the website: www.reapcanada.com/online_library/IntDev/id_bokashi/Bokashi%20Nature%20Far ming%20Manual%20(2006).pdf 1) lower cost to the farmer (by as much as 60%) 2) more desirable crops 3) stronger, healthier and more nutritious plants 4) the inputs are made from natural materials, which are not only safe for the environment, but actually invigorate and rehabilitate the ecology. 5) higher yield 6) better quality 7) farmer friendly zero waste emission The other basic theories of Natural Farming include:

Main Effects

1) Use the historic nutirient of seeds 2) Use the indigenous microorganisms (IMOs) 3)Maximize the inborn potential 4) Do not use chemical fertilizers 5) Do not till the land 6) Zero emission of livestock wastewater 7) Sow less, yield more

Target Crops and Application Period Scale of application Other Uses

All crops Vegetative parts of the crop, can be applied in the whole farm Can be used on the livestock and poultry

<Technical issue & problems>


Name of technique Organic regulation and criteria Effect on human body Social issue
Korean Natural Farming The Nutritive Cycle Theory These preparations are designed for household (domestic) and community use only. Any attempt for commercial-level production and sale will be regulated by the Fertilizer and Pesticide Administration (FPA). These are beneficial organisms and not pathogenic. There are no known adverse impacts on humans especially in the preparations and handling. There are no known social issues. The developer of the technique, Dr. Han Kyu Cho, has his website and Janong Natural Farming Research Institute to train farmers in Cheongan-myeon, Goesan-gun, Chungbuk, Republic of Korea. Relatively easy but as a set of organic techniques, needs a lot of practice to master the various techniques. He has trained over 18,000 people at the Institute. There are books and publications to package the organic technique and understand the theory behind. None, so far.

Knowledge transfer

Manufacturing, packing, application Other issues

<Cost>
Name of technique
Korean Natural Farming The Nutritive Cycle Theory

Equipment and maintenance Since this is not meant to be commercialized, the equipment needed
are improvised or locally fabricated.

Material costs

Focus is on those locally available and hence abundant and cheap, and microbes that are indigenous to the locality and cultured in simple containers, mixed with the soil, and cultured again. There is

no need to import special microbial strains.

Labour (cost) Disposal of waste matter Other costs

Household labor only. Nothing of significant None

<Source of information>
Name of technique Photos/sources
Koreas Dr. Han Kyu Cho founded Natural Farming in 1960, at a time when the environment was not even an issue yet. He published the book Koreas Natural Farming Handbook. He is president of the Natural Farming Institute. Korean Natural Farming The Nutritive Cycle Theory

Developer of technique

In the Philippines, the Nature Farming approach was first advocated by the Japanese philosopher Mokichi Okada in 1935. The system promotes holistic and sustainable approach to agriculture similar to those advocated by Rudolf Steniner in 1924 when he laid the foundations of biodynamic agriculture. Nature Farming Manual adapted to locally available materials and needs in the Western Visayas Region of the Philippines by Helen Jensen, Leopoldo Guilaran, Rene Jaranilla, and Jerry Garingalao www.reapcanada.com/online_library/IntDev/id_bokashi/Bokashi%20Nature%2 0Farming%20Manual%20(2006).pdf Natural Farming website: http://www.janonglove.com/janong/bbs/board.php?bo_table=e_JN1 The search engine has many significant websites on Natural Farming methods some of which include: http://www.kalapanaorganics.com/natural-farming

Data sources

Others

None

<Other effects>
Name of technique Positive environmental effects Negative environmental effects
Korean Natural Farming The Nutritive Cycle Theory Balance the micro-ecosystem with enhancing the beneficial microorganisms population in the soil None

Farm responses (positive) Farm responses (negative) Opinion of neighbor farm Other effects

Cheap and effective Laborious and needs a lot of practice No comment No comment

Network Contributor: Sibol Ng Agham At Teknolohiya (SIBAT)


40 Matulungin St. Brgy. Central Diliman, Quezon City,Philippines

ANNEX 5a Name of organic technique: INDIGENOUS MICROORGANISMS (IMO) <General>


Name of technique Purpose of use
Indigenous Microorganisms (IMO) As soil conditioner and fertility enhancer In order to practically apply Natural Farming, it is most important to achieve the right soil conditions, i.e. invigorating the life of the soil. For this, the optimal living environment for microbes and other small animals must be provided for them to live and prosper. It is the goal of Natural Farming to revitalize the earth that is growing increasingly desolate by reinstating these organisms back to their original design. Natural farming with IMO is a distinctive approach to organic farming practiced in many countries. It is unique in that it is not meant to be commercialized but rather practiced by individual farmers with cheap, easily available ingredients and microbes or mycorrhizae indigenous to each locale or farm. Very simply, it is the propagation of mycorrhizae, along with protocol for adding specific inputs during the nutritive cycle of the plant. Mycorrhizae are fungus roots and act as an interface between plants and soil. They grow into the roots of crops and out into the soil, increasing the root system many thousands of times over. They act symbiotically, converting with enzymes the nutrients of the soil into food the plants can use and taking carbohydrates from the plants and turning it into nutrients the soil can use: sequestering carbon in the soil for later use. Miles of fungal filaments can be present in an ounce of healthy soil. Mycorrhizal inoculation of soil increases the accumulation of carbon by depositing glomalin, which in turn increases soil structure by binding organic matter to mineral particles in the soil. It is glomalin that gives soil its tilth, its texture and rich feel, its buoyancy and ability to hold water. A way to anchor or feed mycorrhizae in the soil is by adding charcoal, specifically charcoal made without fossil fuels. Charcoal provides shelter for the mycorrhizae to live in with its myriad, tiny holes. This biochar was used in the Amazon Basin 6,000 years ago, and samples of this ancient soil are impressively fertile still today. The organisms are: Cultured in a simple wooden box of rice; Mixed with brown sugar and stored in a crock; Further propagated on rice bran or wheat mill run; Mixed with soil and cultured again The result is then mixed with compost, added to potting soil, or spread on beds before planting. The entire process takes three to four weeks. Other inputs and sprays are made from fermented plant juices, made

Outline & Principles

from the tips of growing plants mixed with brown sugar. There are also recipes for water soluble calcium made from eggshells, fish amino acid made from fish waste, lactic acid bacteria, and insect attractants made from rice wine. There is also water-soluble calcium phosphate made from animal bones and vinegar and a seed soak solution. There are half dozen more inputs that can be made simply and easily at home, which are used according to the nutritive/growth cycle of the plants. Many of these inputs are made from things that would otherwise just be thrown away, which I love. We get fish waste from the local fish market, which the market would have to pay to dispose of otherwise. The fish amino acids are simply fresh fish waste, de-boned and packed into a container with brown sugar and fermented for a few months. Characteristics of Indigenous Microorganisms IMO purify the soil water and provide various nutrients. IMO have the following characteristics: Ability to decompose When complex organic materials such as plants, animals, excrements, and organic fertilizers enter the soil, IMO break these down into simpler compounds or elements that can undergo ionic interactions. Even the diverse inorganic matters decomposed by IMO increase in their effectiveness, and are converted to a form readily absorbable by plants. Catalysis of chemical processes in the soil Microorganisms produce numerous enzymes, antibiotics, organic acids and various complexes. The majority of chemical reactions in the soil and plants are reliant on the enzymes which are catalysts. Revitalization of the ecosystem When the soil environment is revitalized through the use of IMO, various bacteria and fungi appear first, followed by nematodes, earthworms, mole crickets, moles, etc. The use of IMO brings the ecosystem back to life in this manner. Suppression of diseases by circulating naturally active materials IMO have the ability to convert weak soil into healthy soil by solubilizing trace minerals and enhancing the circulation of nutrients. IMO bring diversity back to soil in which the balance among the microbial population has been broken due to the abuse of chemicals. IMO are strong survivors that cannot be languid even in extreme conditions. The recovered diversity of microbes can, then, reduce the occurrence of diseases rapidly.

Main Effects

Target Crops and Application Period Scale of application Other Uses

Usually applied to rice crops during the vegetative stage. Also used for other crops 1L of extract usually diluted to 16L of water Not known

<Technical issue & problems>


Name of technique Organic regulation and criteria Effect on human body Social issue Knowledge transfer Manufacturing, packing, application Other issues
Indigenous Microorganisms (IMO) This is intended for domestic and community use only. Not for commercial sale. Efforts to commercialize production will require license from the Fertilizer and Pesticide Administration This is non-toxic if accidentally taken orally. None Project proponent conducts farmer training None. This is for domestic and community use and consumption only. Efforts to commercialize would require license from the Fertilizer and Pesticide Administration

<Cost>
Name of technique
Indigenous Microorganisms (IMO)

Equipment and maintenance None Material costs Labour (cost) Disposal of waste matter Other costs
Locally produced and assumes availability and abundant supply or surplus raw materials. Assumes project beneficiaries provide the labour, and hence, no cost. No toxic waste materials to dispose Household containers should suffice. No assumed other costs

<Source of information>
Name of technique
Indigenous Microorganisms (IMO)

Photos/sources

Developer of technique

The developer of the technique, Dr. Han Kyu Cho, has his website and Janong Natural Farming Research Institute to train farmers in Cheongan-myeon, Goesan-gun, Chungbuk, Republic of Korea. Relatively easy but as a set of organic techniques, needs a lot of practice to master the various techniques. He has trained over 18,000 people at the Institute. Advocated by the Japanese philosopher Mokichi Okada in 1935. Natural farming with Indigenous Microorganisms http://www.acresusa.com/toolbox/reprints/Jan10_Prell.pdf Nature Farming Manual adapted to locally available materials and needs in the Western Visayas Region of the Philippines by Helen Jensen, Leopoldo Guilaran, Rene Jaranilla, and Jerry Garingalao, available in the internet from the website: www.reapcanada.com/online_library/IntDev/id_bokashi/Bokashi%20Nature%2 0Farming%20Manual%20(2006).pdf The Natural Farming Way http://www.thenaturalfarmingway.com/recipes/indigenousmicroorganisms-imo/imo-introduction

Data sources

Others

<Other effects>

Name of technique Positive environmental effects Negative environmental effects Farm responses (positive) Farm responses (negative) Opinion of neighbor farm Other effects Southeast (SEARICE) Asia

Indigenous Microorganisms (IMO) No toxic chemicals, healthy foods for the environment, it improves soil structure and most of all environment friendly None Highly responsive because it is a good substitute for chemicals Quite laborious to perform Quite impressed None

Regional

Initiatives

for

Community

Empowerment

Brgy. Poblacion, President Roxas, North Cotabato, Philippines

ANNEX 5b Name of organic technique: <General>


Name of technique Purpose of use
Use of Fermented Plant Juice as Foliar Spray Foliar Fertilizer Fermented plant juice (FPJ) is made from any plant leaves. It is also made from thinned crop plants such as auxiliary buds and young fruits. With crude sugar (molasses or brown sugar), the juice of the plant is extracted and fermented. The liquid is applied to soil, plant leaves, and animal bedding to fortify microbial activities. Materials 1 kg Basella alba/Ipomea aquatica/Musa spp./Sweet potato leaves 1 kg. Crude sugar Clay pot Manila paper Rubber band Chopping board Knife Weighing scale Methodology 1. Chop 1 kg of either Basella alba/Ipomea aquatica/Musa spp./ Sweet potato leaves 2. Add and mix 1 kg of crude sugar. (Set aside 1/8 part of crude sugar for topping) 3. Place the mixture inside the clay pot and press slightly the mixture and add the remaining 1/8 part of crude sugar as toppings. 4. Cover the clay pot with manila paper and tie it with rubber band. 5. Store the clay pot in the shaded area for 5-7 days. 6. Harvest the juice and keep it in a tinted bottle Foliar sprays are fermented plant extracts and used as source of soluble nutrients to stimulate plant growth, suppress diseases, and in biodynamic gardening (which considers planetary and astrological influences), is considered as carriers of cosmic and earthly force. Foliar sprays are also considered as immune building plant extracts, plant tonics, biotic substances, and biostimulants. All type of crops Application: 1. For every 1 Liter of water, mix 2 tbsp of FP juice. 2. Spray at the plant at 4:00 pm in the afternoon and onwards. 3. Do this every 7-10 days to newly grown / transplanted plants up to its reproductive stage. Usage: Rice: 7 days from planting/transplanting up to reproductive stage Corn: 7 days from planting up to ear formation Vegetables: 10 days from planting up to flowering Fruits: every 10 days For every 1 Liter of water, mix 2 tbsp of FPJ, apply to vegetative parts of the crop. (2) USE OF FERMENTED PLANT JUICE (FPJ)

AS FOLIAR SPRAY

Outline & Principles

Main Effects

Target Crops and Application Period

Scale of application

Other Uses

For antibiotic to livestock and poultry the same scale of application

<Technical issue & problems>


Name of technique
Use of Fermented Plant Juice as Foliar Spray Production, sale, and use of FPJ for domestic consumption is not regulated in the Philippines. Usually produced in backyard and cottage industry scale, there are no trademark infringements to consider, no competing sales volume threatening commercial foliar sprays registered with the Philippine Fertilizer and Pesticide Administration (FPA). However, any efforts to commercialize production will have to go through licensing from the FPA. There are some claims that FPJ when used as a beverage is effective in the treatment of constipation, arthritis, and liver diseases. There are claims that it restores body energy and enhances bodys activity threshold. None so far. Base materials assume those commonly grown in the area and does not compete with food (surplus production). There are many materials available in the internet, also published materials from various sources. Should be stored in dark or tinted bottle containers to avoid oxidation or sunlight. Efficacy is within a month and thus, should be consumed within this period. Use clay pot or wooden container (preferably made of cedar wood). Avoid using stainless steel, aluminum pots, iron pots, or plastics.

Organic regulation and criteria

Effect on human body Social issue Knowledge transfer Manufacturing, packing, application Other issues

<Cost>
Name of technique
Use of Fermented Plant Juice as Foliar Spray Since this was developed for home-level production, there are no sophisticated equipment such as those relating to distillation or pasteurization. Use home blenders to facilitate chopping in lieu of manual chopping. The raw materials (plants) are expected to be freely collected from the backyard or available at cheap cost in the local market..Plantresident yeasts (usually lactic acid bacteria) are used for fermentation and no need to purchase commercially-available yeasts. Since this is home-level production, only home labor is used. Only rubber band to secure container top is considered non-biodegradable and disposed of in normal manner for non-recycled trash. For those serious to secure the regular availability of raw materials (plants), the cost of planting material may be added cost. Otherwise, none.

Equipment and maintenance

Material costs Labour (cost) Disposal of waste matter Other costs

<Source of information>
Name of technique
Use of Fermented Plant Juice as Foliar Spray Commonly used plants for juice extraction and fermentation:

Photos/sources

Basella alba

Ipomea aquatic

Musa spp.

Ipomea batatas Photos submitted by: Municipality of Dumingag, Zamboanga del Sur This is an indigenous technology documented and propagated in the community by the Dumingag Institute of Organic Agriculture. . http://nfe.localgarden.us/index.php?title=Fermented_Plant_Juices The internet has also various fermented plant juice sources depending on the specific plant being fermented such as tobacco leaves for nicotine and use as insecticidal spray. The fermentation technology for plant juice is rather commonly available. Related to use of fermented plant juices as foliar spray are those used for human consumption. There are also available materials in the internet using search engines.

Developer of technique

Data sources

Others

<Other effects>
Name of technique Positive environmental effects Negative environmental effects
Use of Fermented Plant Juice as Foliar Spray Fast growing species rich in growth hormones are used. One could focus on weed species as part of environmental clean-up and in a sense, waste management. None, unless one considers for example bamboo shoots or lateral buds of other economically important crops for fermenting which could affect or threaten their propagation or use as food.

Farm responses (positive) Farm responses (negative) Opinion of neighbor farms Other effects

This is farmer-friendly technology and quite popular to farmers. None. Positive to respond and adopt. None

Network contributor: Local Government of of Dumingag Dumingag Municipal Hall, Zamboanga Del Sur, Philippines

ANNEX 5c Name of organic technique:


(3) USE OF FERMENTED FRUIT JUICE (FFJ) AS FOLIAR SPRAY

<General>
Name of technique Purpose of use
Use of Fermented Fruit Juice as Foliar Spray Foliar Spray The preparation and production of fermented fruit juice is not as easy as the plant juice and quite a pretty involved process. First thing to do is prepare the yeast. Start off with a brand-new package. Rehydrate it in a glass of water and cover with plastic wrap. This will take you about 15 minutes. Once the yeast has been rehydrated, throw in with the must leaving some head space at the top of the container. Next put on the fermentation lock or use plastic wrap over top of the lid and seal it with a rubber band tightly. As the fermentation process begins, yeast will eventually fall out of the solution and form a liar on the bottom of the vessel. This is the time to begin racking the concoction. The first racking is always the most important, but it should not be done too often so as not to remove too much liquid. When the fermentation process is finally stopped the yeast will begin to fall out of the solution. As time passes, the solution should become clear. If this does not naturally happen, use a clearing agent or gelatin to clear the liquid. This is not a necessity for one not worried about appearances. Procedures: 1. Chop ripe fruits such as banana, papaya and squash 2. Mix with crude sugar or molasses (3 kg chopped fruits:1 kg sugar) 3. Pour the mixture in a net bag, place inside a glass container or plastic pail and put weight 4. Cover the container with paper or cloth and store in a cool, dark place for 5-7 days 5. Collect the fermented juice, pour in a glass container and cover with paper or cloth 6. Use as foliar spray at 0.5 to 1 tsp/liter of water once a week during flowering and fruit setting. As in fermented plant juice foliar spray, fruit juice foliar spray is very rich in energy absorbed by the leaves and gives potassium for the sweetening of fruits. Gives additional resistance to plants and helps the soil and plants to be healthier. 1. For every 1 Liter of water, mix 2 tbsp of Fermented fruit juice. 2. Spray at the plant at 4:00 pm in the afternoon and onwards. 3. Do this every 7-10 days from flowering up to its maturity stage RICE : From reproductive stage up to1 week before harvest. BANANA : From emergence of bananas heart up to 1 week before harvest CORN: From emergence of corn ear up to 1 week before harvest Apply to vegetative parts of the crop.

Outline & Principles

Main Effects

Target Crops and Application Period

Scale of application

Other Uses

Fermented fruit juice is also consumed as a beverage for humans; can also be used for livestocks.

<Technical issue & problems>


Name of technique
Use of Fermented Fruit Juice as Foliar Spray There is no regulation, specially on labeling since fermented fruit juice can also be taken also as a human beverage. As we are aware, the complex chemical reactions during the fermentation process convert the fruit sugar to alcohol which eventually kills the yeast at high concentration. If the juice is exposed to air, microbes will use the alcohol as energy source and change it to acetic acid or vinegar. For domestic or local community level consumption, there are no regulations on alcohol percentage when fermented fruit juice is used as foliar spray, or percentage vinegar contamination for that matter. However, it should be noted that foliar spray for commercial production will have to pass through Fertilizer and Pesticide Administration (FPA) in which case we have to specify if the fermented fruit juice is either alcohol or vinegar and assure product purity. No hazards analysis have been done but we assume none because these fermented fruit juices are also consumed by humans. Fruits of course are consumed as human food. How much of fruit production can be utilized to produce foliar spray? We assume that surplus or non-attractive fresh fruits commonly grown in the area are utilized. The process of fermenting fruit juice is rather commonly available despite the intricate processes for an ordinary household. The proponent utilizes the Dumingag Institute of Organic Agriculture to capacitate farmers and their families on production techniques. These are for household consumption and not intended for commercial production. Otherwise, it would have to pass through the FPA for efficacy tests before commercial production and sale. There are concerns on the possible harmful effects of minute alcohol on the plant and on the soil. Since this is also consumable, the other issue is food vs. use as foliar spray.

Organic regulation and criteria

Effect on human body Social issue

Knowledge transfer

Manufacturing, packing, application Other issues

<Cost>
Name of technique
Use of Fermented Fruit Juice as Foliar Spray No expensive equipment required. Since we are dealing with

Equipment and maintenance household-level production, the use of kitchen blender or juicer can
facilitate juice extraction. We are dealing with surplus produce (non-attractive and outsized) also recently fallen fruits. Damaged, and over ripe could be harboring undesirable organisms and could not be utilized. At any rate, these are not prime table fruits and should be cheap or freely available within the farming community.

Material costs

Labour (cost) Disposal of waste matter Other costs

Only household labor is utilized. Fruit peelings could be chopped and converted to compost. Cost of yeast.

<Source of information>
Name of technique
Use of Fermented Fruit Juice as Foliar Spray Commonly available ripe fruits in the area:

Mango

Papaya

Pineapple

Photos/sources

Banana Photos supplied by: Municipality of Dumingag, Zamboanga del Sur

Developer of technique

Data sources Others

The use of fermented fruit juice as foliar spray is being promoted by the Municipality of Dumingag. However, the fermentation of fruit juice is an old technology and known even during ancient times even way back to the Babylonian and Egyptian civilizations. The technology ranging from home production level to industrial production level is freely available in the internet and in many published IEC materials. None

<Other effects>
Name of technique
Use of Fermented Fruit Juice as Foliar Spray

Positive environmental effects Negative environmental effects Farm responses (positive) Farm responses (negative) Opinion of neighbor farm Other effects

Utilization of otherwise surplus fruit production. None, unless one considers the impact of minute alcohol on the environment which is also biodegradable. This is farmer-friendly technology and quite popular to farmers. None. Positive to respond and adopt. None

Network contributor: Local Government of of Dumingag Dumingag Municipal Hall, Zamboanga Del Sur, Philippines

ANNEX 5d Name of organic technique: CARBONIZED RICE HULL (CRH) <General>


Name of technique
Carbonized Rice Hull (CRH) As soil conditioner. A hydrophilic material made from the incomplete or partial burning of rice hull, CRH contains potassium, phosphorus, calcium, magnesium, and other microelements needed for growing crops.

Purpose of use

As soil conditioner, CRH replenishes air and retains water in the soil. Because of the heat it undergoes, it is sterile and thus, free from pathogens. As such, it makes an excellent host for beneficial microorganisms, and an ingredient for bioorganic fertilizer. As a substrate to organic fertilizer, CRH can be mixed with other organic materials. Raw rice hull is burned without air so that it will not turn into ash. CRH is sterile and is free from disease organisms. Materials needed: Rice hull Open type carbonizer 200L oil drum Long-handled spade/shovel Match to start fire Dried woods/recycled papers Sprinkler GI sheet for base How to make CRH 1. Produce fire using pieces of wood, dried leaves and used papers or newspapers. 2. Cover fire with an open carbonizer. 3. Place 12-14 sacks of rice hull around the carbonizer or until it reaches the chimney at 1 meter high. This is to maximize burning time and effort to make more CRH during carbonization than putting a minimum of 3 sacks rice hull arund the carbonizer per batch. 4. After 20-30 minutes of if the rice hull on top of the mound is burning, move the rice hull from bottom to the top of burning mound. Avoid getting too close to the mound while its hot. Use protective gadgets. 5. When the mound turns completely black, put the CRH in 200L oil durms, then slightly sprinkle it with water (at most 1L) using a sprinkler or a knapsack sprayer with fine nozzles to extinguish the smoke and lower the temperature. Do not overburn the rice hull as it will become ash. 6. Allow the freshly-made CRH to cool completely. The following day, bag, seal, and stock it in a safe and dry place.

Outline & Principles

Main Effects

Appropriate quantity of carbonized rice hull when combined with organic fertilizer or compost can be applied to a hectare of land preparation. This will make the land not only more porous for better plant growth, it will also enable the soil to retain the moisture much longer which is advantageous when there is a prolong dry season. It produces more profuse tillers, more stems of rice will bear fruit and that means higher yield. Rice is the target crop but can be used for other crops as well. As seedbed: Incorporate 10-15 bags (10 kg/bag) of organic fertilizer with CRH into 20 plots of seedbed at 1m x 20 m each plot. This will be good for a hectare. It is used in seedbed for bulk seedlings to be transplanted later on. Easy to pull out without damaging the roots which can be adoptable in the field readily during the transplantation process. As a layer in seedbeds, CRH makes pulling out of the seedlings for transplanting virtually effortless. Because the seedlings' roots are not harmed or damaged during the pulling out process from the seedbeds, the seedlings naturally get settled in the field more easily. It has also been proven, over the course of several planting seasons, that CRH-enriched fields produce a high yield of healthy crops which means an equally high revenue for the growers. As organic fertilizer base: During the preparation of land for rice planting, about 20 bags of CRH mixed with compost or organic fertilizer may be plowed in two-and-a-half acres of land. This will make the land more permeable and allow the soil to keep its moisture for a longer period. This is especially important in case of an unusually long rainless or dry period. Normally used for seedling production stage to make the pulling of the rice seedlings easier. Also used as base for organic fertilizers. As water purifier / waste water filter. Activated carbon from CRH filters the dirty particles in water, making it effective in purifying household drinking water. CRH is als effective in treating waste water for recycling. CRH can also be used as base material for making microbial inoculants, usually 30-50% CRH is mixed with the inoculants like rhizobia. As pest control agent. With its natural black color, CRH retains heat from the sun. It also contains silica that irritates the snail that infest rice fields. When applied after leveling, snails are forced to come out, making handpicking faster and easier. As charcoal for fuel, charcoal briquettes from CRH are good alternative fuel source for cooking. As deodorizer/odor suppressant, CRH cleanses and deodorizes bad air small through its activated carbon that absorbs foul odor in the air. This can be used in the refrigerator, or as mulch bed in animal pen and poultry houses to reduce foul smell from urine and feces. CRH minimizes disease contamination. CRH readily absorbs the moisture in the manure so the litter does not get moist and not attractive to flies.

Target Crops and Application Period

Scale of application

Other Uses

<Technical issue & problems>


Name of technique Organic regulation and criteria Effect on human body
Carbonized Rice Hull (CRH) Unless commercialized, none. For commercial packaging and sale, the producer has to pass through the licensing regulations of the Fertilizer and Pesticide Authority. None. Rice hull is generally rich in silica and when taken accidentally, our body uses natural silica for maintaining and promoting good health. Carbonized rice hull competes with rice husk ash which is used in the cement industries and known to strengthen concrete and minimize corrosion by deceasing its permeability. Because of the so many possible uses of rice hull, it may not be as easily and freely available. Information is freely available in the internet. Since this is for household or community use, no special packing and distribution outlets necessary. However, if to be sold commercially, there is a need to secure clearance from the Fertilizer and Pesticide Authority. There are now studies on the liquid rice hull smoke and the possible anti-inflammatory effect.

Social issue

Knowledge transfer

Manufacturing, packing, application Other issues

<Cost and Returns for Producing 9 tons of CRH>


Based on OFUAIs experience within 28-working days, figures were for 2005.

Name of technique

Carbonized Rice Hull (CRH) Open type carbonizer PhP 400-500/unit promoted by Philippine

Equipment and maintenance Rice Research Institute and available from Patricia S. Sagun, Material costs Labour (cost) Disposal of waste matter Other costs Benefit-Cost Ratio
Lupao, Nueva Ecija. Rice hull Dried woods Sacks for packaging Labour Equipment depreciation 3.45 455.35 PhP3,461.54 140.00 4,500.00 4,500.00

<Source of information>
Name of technique
Carbonized Rice Hull (CRH)

Photos/sources

Photo source: http://www.agaclar.net/forum/showthread.php?t=20654&page=4

Photo source: http://www.pinoyecofarmer.com/2010/06/02/carbonized-rice-hull/

Developer of technique Data sources

Others

There are several fabricators of the carbonizer in the Philippines. In Mindanao where the ANSOFT/MINSOFS network is based, a source is Roberto Pactao, Mabuhay, Pres. Roxas, Cotabato PHILRICE ISSN 0117-9799- Carbonized Rice Hull available in http://www.scribd.com/doc/18790334/TB47-Carbonized-Rice-Hull There are several studies conducted on CRH, some of which are: http://www.agribusinessweek.com/carbonized-rice-hull-has-importantuses/ http://www.pinoyecofarmer.com/2010/06/02/carbonized-rice-hull/

<Other effects>
Name of technique Positive environmental effects Negative environmental effects Farm responses (positive) Farm responses (negative) Opinion of neighbor farm
Carbonized Rice Hull (CRH) Because it is burning in the absence of oxygen, it does not contribute to air pollution. None. The farmers are enthusiastic to address farm waste and convert it to more useful product. Farmers find CRH production quite laborious Cheap, we have safe food, soil becomes less acidic, and we are able to address farm waste (pollution-free). Herewith, are some other beneficial uses of carbonized rice hull: *** It produces more profuse tillers, more stems of rice will bear fruit and that means higher yield.

Other effects

*** It can be very useful in growing high value vegetables, herbs even they are grown in containers. *** It is also useful in ornamental horticulture industry because it minimizes fungal infection that has plagued the industry.

Network Contributor: Southeast Asia Regional Initiatives for Community Empowerment (SEARICE) Brgy. Poblacion, President Roxas, North Cotabato, Philippines

ANNEX 5e Name of organic technique: (1) APPLICATION OF GUSO EXTRACT AS


FOLIAR SPRAY AND SOIL CONDITIONER

<General>
Name of technique
Application of Guso (Sargassum sp.) Extract as Foliar Fertilizer and Soil Conditioner Foliar Fertilizer Soil conditioner Seaweed or guso has plenty of major and minor plant nutrients including traces of minerals; alginic acids; at least two gibberellins; vitamins; and antibiotics. The alginic acids are soil conditioners which improves water- holding characteristics of soil and help the formation of crumb structure; hence, it helps in retaining soil moisture consistently; while the rest are plant conditioners. Materials:

Purpose of use

kilo guso

liter rainwater or chlorine-free

Outline & Principles

30-40 liters rainwater or chlorine-free Preparation: 1. Put kgs. Seaweed into the pot.

claypot

2. Add liter rainwater

3.

Heat mixture at low flame without boiling.

4.

Cool mixture for 1 night

5. The following day, transfer the seaweeds to a pail of 30-40 liters of rainwater.

6.

After diluting, the extract is ready to use as foliar spray. a. Promotes rapid growth of plant and improves the speed of photosynthesis b. Longer flowering season c. Improves fruit rate and quality d. Improves soil fertility e. Protect the plants to resist drought and diseases All types of plants. 1. Spray to the plant before 7 AM and after 4 PM 2. Spray the leaves every 7-10 days , 3-5 times during growing season

Main Effects

Target Crops and Application Period Scale of application Other Uses

Add 1 to 2 tbsp. of foliar seaweed extract every 1 liter of water. Apply to vegetative parts of the crop. As a seaweed, guso has many other uses such as food. Seaweed is a natural product obtains from the sea which has plenty of nutrients and traces of minerals necessary for keeping both plants and human healthy.

<Technical issue & problems: Production and Supply>


Name of technique
Application of Guso Extract as Foliar Fertilizer and Soil Conditioner Currently no regulation but propagation and harvesting technologies are available to guso farmers to ensure production supply. It used to be harvested from the wild but systematic planting and harvesting is now being introduced. Guso can be purchased directly from fisherfolks who engaged guso culture or in the wet market at anytime of the year. There are currently no regulations since the use of guso extract as foliar fertilizer and soil conditioner is considered an indigenous and local-based organic agriculture practice and produced for home level or local community level consumption. Note that for any commercial level sale of guso extract as foliar fertilizer will need licencing from the Fertilizer and Pesticide Authority. Seaweed extract can be used as food supplement to supply mineral requirements of the human body; it can be used also for skin care such as facial care. The government is looking into participatory or community-based management of coastal resources to ensure supply. With about 6,500 Filipinos directly employed in seaweed farming, there are now efforts to develop the necessary tools and systematic approach to seaweed farming. The Technology Resource Center has publication on propagation of guso. There are also training modules on guso production eg.: http://www.wmsu.edu.ph/rdec/PDF/Seaweeds%20Production.pdf . Guso extract is easy to prepare and does not need sophisticated equipments or packaging in its production or manufacturing processes. Guso can be purchased directly from fisherfolks who engaged guso culture or in the wet market at anytime of the year. Note that there is a Cebu-based commercial producer and distributor of seaweed extract used as organic fertilizer under the trade name of Vegegrow. Guso is more commercially traded as carrageenan and used in various industries such as fat and foam stabilizer and enhancer in milk products, creams and desserts; emulsifier and food thickener in sauces, salad dressings, and soups; and binder to retain food quality such as freshness in poultry and meat products. Carrageenan is also used as foam stabilizer and thickener that produce a smooth silky texture in lotions, creams, and shampoos. Note further that the local use of guso as foliar spray fertilizer and soil conditioner is hinged on its being locally and cheaply available in the community.

Organic regulation and criteria

Effect on human body

Social issue

Knowledge transfer

Manufacturing, packing, application

Other issues

<Cost>
Name of technique
Application of Guso Extract as Foliar Fertilizer and Soil Conditioner Guso extract is easy to prepare and does not need sophisticated processes. The use of clay pot is essential.

Equipment and maintenance equipments or packaging in its production or manufacturing

Material costs

Labour (cost) Disposal of waste matter

Rainwater, or in its absence, chlorine free (distilled) water is needed. Fuel for boiling is needed which is secured freely in the vicinities. We would also need containers for the final product. It is assumed that guso is either freely or cheaply available in the vicinities. A kilo is about PhP7.50. Household labor is used since this is an indigenous practice and normally not produced on commercial scale by the practitioners. Guso extract processing has no waste by products. There are no other costs such as packaging and labeling because this is homemade technology for backyard or small scale farming operation. A kilo of guso which costs P 7.50 can make 30-40 liters of diluted extract ready for use as foliar spray or applied directly to the plant root.

Other costs

<Source of information>
Name of technique
Application of Guso Extract as Foliar Fertilizer and Soil Conditioner

Photo Source: www.flickr.com/photos/wantet/120131299/

Photos/sources
Photo Source: www.asiafinest.com/forum/lofiversion/index.php/t127550-100.html

Photo Source: laceytravels.blogspot.com/2008/09/paje-beachzanzibar.html

Developer of technique Data sources Others

Photos on the materials and methodology by: Social Enhancing Restoring Values for Integral Community Empowerment or SERVICE, Inc. This is indigenous organic agriculture technology being promoted by SERVICE, Inc. and freely available in the internet. Introduced to the members of SERVICE, Inc. by the Sustainable Agriculture Center, Xavier University-College of Agriculture, Cagayan de Oro City. Madhumitta Shivade (Published 2/2/2010); http://www.buzzle.com.articles/seaweed-extract

<Other effects> Name of technique


Application of Guso Extract as Foliar Fertilizer and Soil Conditioner As stated above, Guso extract is a soil conditioner which can help retaining moisture in the soil. It will assist the soil develop into crumble structure which may help prevent soil erosion. The extract applied directly to soil assist in fast decomposition of matters, hence, it helps in improving the soil fertility. None. This is completely biodegradable and will not leave any harmful residues. Farmers using guso extract noticed that their plants become sturdy and not easily damaged by pests. It bears plenty of fruits which are big and shiny; their farm soil has improved its fertility None Neighbouring farmers are convinced of the positive effects of guso extract and have been motivated to apply the same to their farms. They bought guso extract from the farmers. a. Guso extract helps the farmers minimize their expenses on fertilizers; b. Provides safe food supply for the family and community;

Positive environmental effects Negative environmental effects Farm responses (positive) Farm responses (negative) Opinion of neighbor farm

Other effects

c. Provides the farmers with additional income by selling


the extract to other farmers for at least P300-450/liter.

Network Contributor: Social Enhancing Restoring Values for Integral Community Empowerment (SERVICE)
Jun Ocampos Residence Compound, 29 Baadero, Ozamis City 7200, Philippines

ANNEX 5f Name of organic technique: FOLIAR FERTILIZER FROM URINE AND

BANANA SAP
<General>
Name of technique Purpose of use
Foliar Fertilizer from Urine and Banana Sap Organic foliar fertilizer Banana Sap is known to have high content of potassium and other micronutrient while urine especially human urine has urea. These elements are very important to plant growth and development. The fermentation process with table sugar helps breakdown organic compounds making it readily available for the plant nutrient uptake. Methods: 1. Banana saps were collected from the pseudostem left in the ground after harvesting the banana. This is done by making a hole in the center of the basal portion of the pseudostem of banana. After making a hole it will be covered with plastic or cellophane and left overnight (make sure that the cover will prevent the entry of different contaminants like insects and other liquids). The following morning banana sap that was deposited in the hole shall be collected. 2. 1 liter of animal/human urine and 1kg of muscuvado or brown sugar will be added to every 4 liters of banana sap. The resulting mixture will be placed in a clay pot, tightly covered with clean cloth or clean banana leaves then will be placed in cool dry placed to allow fermentation for 10 days. 3. Alter 10 days the resulting solution is now ready for use. 16 liters of water will be added to every liter of the resulting solution for foliar fertilization. Note: At least 6 liters of the resulting solution is enough for 1 hectare in one application Enhance crop growth and efficiency of grain filling, increases yield and tolerance of rice crop to poor soil Rice : Can be applied during the early vegetative stage, flowering and milk stage of the crop Fertilization can be done 3 times per cropping season or as need arises None

Outline & Principles

Main Effects Target Crops and Application Period Scale of application Other Uses

<Technical issue & problems>


Name of technique Organic regulation and criteria Effect on human body Social issue Knowledge transfer Manufacturing, packing, application Other issues
Foliar Fertilizer from Urine and Banana Sap Prohibition on the utilization of human urine as fertilizer, this technique could not be commercialized None Urine is considered human waste and there is general perception that it should be disposed of rather than utilized

Can easily be adopted because the materials used were readily available in the farm
Prolonged storage of these product might result to production of strong alcohol that might damage the plant None

<Cost>
Name of technique
Foliar Fertilizer from Urine and Banana Sap

Equipment and maintenance None Material costs (seed, The assumption is that these are locally available and abundant and fertilizer, pesticide, livestock) therefore, minimal cost for the raw materials. Labour (cost) Disposal of waste matter Other costs:
This is for domestic and household production and no outsourced labour is required. None None

<Source of information>
Name of technique Photos/sources
Foliar Fertilizer from Urine and Banana Sap

No photos

Mr. Eduardo Bombeo Developer of technique MASIPAG Farmer trainer BSAGFA (Balagatasa Sustainable Agriculture Farmers Association) Balagatasa, Maigo Lanao del Norte
Presented during the Farmers and Scientist forum , September 2-3, 2009 at MASIPAG Biodiversity Center Maluko Manolo Fortich Bukidnon Published by MASIPAG in Kinaugalingong Pamaagi sa Pagpangume vol. 4.

Data sources

Others

None

<Other effects>
Name of technique Positive environmental effects Negative environmental effects Farm responses (positive) Farm responses (negative) Opinion of neighbor farm Other effects
Foliar Fertilizer from Urine and Banana Sap Increased earthworm population None Accepted by some MASIPAG farmers Negative perception on urine. This technique is adopted by the neighbours of Mr. Bombeo and some MASIPAG farmers None

Network contributor: Magsasaka at Siyentipiko para sa Pag-unlad ng Agrikultura (MASIPAG) Mindanao Officer's Village, Zone 5, Bulua, Cagayan De Oro City,Philippines

ANNEX 6 Name of organic technique: (4) VERMICOMPOSTING <General>


Name of technique
Vermicomposting Vermicomposting uses earthworms to turn organic wastes into compost and considered faster than traditional composting, requires less space, and creates little odor. The vermicompost consists mostly of worm casts (poop) plus some decayed organic matter. The worm casts contain micro-organisms favorable to crop growth as the pathogenic ones are killed in the worms gut. The worm casts also contain essential elements like nitrogen, phosphorus, and potassium.

Purpose of use

Importance of Vermi or Earthworms Dispose organic waste efficiently without burdening the landfills Provide plants with free vermitea as liquid fertilizer and nutritious vermicasts Improve soil texture, tilth and structure Increase the water holding capacity of the soil Re-establish natural worm populations in the soil that were decreased by use of toxic agricultural inputs. Basically, the methodology involves making a worm bin stocked with composting worms and feeding them with farm and household wastes or plant scraps. The worm bin is needed to house the compost worms. The system can be as simple as a stack of plastic food storage containers or as complex as an automated unit capable of processing hundreds of kilograms of organic matter daily. Worms need also bedding in addition to food. Shredded paper or newspaper, coconut coir, and shredded cardboard are good bedding materials. Spread 1-2 inch layer of damp bedding on the bottom of the top bin (middle bin is empty). Add compost worm to the bedding. Add small amount of food scraps to the bin, Cover the scraps with another layer of damp bedding. Replace the lid. Remove excess liquid from the lower bin as it accumulates. When worms work through organic matter, they leave rich organic worm compost. Keep the 3Ds damp, dark, and dinner. Another style is to do ordinary composting but instead of using compost fungus activators, we use earthworms. Stack pile the compost materials and add the worms. There are two possible outputs the vermitea and the vermicasts. The worm tea is extract from the worm bed and also teeming with beneficial micro-organisms and important crop nutrients. It can be

Outline & Principles

Main Effects Target Crops and Application Period Scale of application Other Uses

used as foliar spray (applied on the leaves of the plant) or as fertilizer (applied on the soil). Vermicasts are normally put in sacks when harvested and used as organic fertilizers. The use of vermicomposts improve soil structure, enhance soil fertility, and increase crop yield. Rice: Basal application.( 15 ton20 bags per hectare) Banana: side dress application ( 500 gram per hill Corn: Basal application ( 15 to 20 bag per hectare) Vegetable: 200 grams per hill Coconut: 5 kilos per hill Vermicasts are used as fertilizers and applied in the soil. The amount varies depending on the crop. There are many studies on the optimum levels for the specific crop. Vermicomposting is considered not only for managing farm wastes but also for managing urban wastes.

<Technical issue & problems>


Name of technique
Vermicomposting No need for regulation if just for household or local community use (unbranded). However, for commercial sale as vermitea or vermicast, one has to secure license from the Fertilizer and Pesticide Administration (FPA). There are many vermiteas and vermicasts commercially available in the market. Not to be taken orally. When used as foliar spray, there is no known toxic effect. If vermicomposting is so good to manage urban wastes, why not being implemented on large-scale? Waste segregation is the major issue. Despite efforts to segregate wastes, currently in the Philippines, only those that can be resold as scraps are given special attention. There are no large scale efforts and investments to compost biodegradable domestic wastes. The knowledge is freely available in the internet but of course, requires capability building for the adherents. The Dumingag Institute of Organic Agriculture is being utilized to promote vermiculture. Since this is for household and community use only, there is no need for special packing and distribution outlet. However, for efforts to commercialize production and sale, a license should be procured from the FPA. Vermicomposting certainly requires considerable effort to maintain. The bin could smell bad; attract flies, ants, and centipedes; worms die or crawl away; there is excess mold in the bin; or the bin is drying out or its opposite with excessive water. This is not for those not willing to devote time.

Organic regulation and criteria Effect on human body

Social issue

Knowledge transfer

Manufacturing, packing, application

Other issues

<Cost>
Name of technique
Vermicomposting

For household level of production, simple knife or blender could chop the organic wastes. However, for community level production, even at local consumption and not for commercial scale production level, one would need a shredder and a place for vermibeds. There are Equipment and more sophisticated and certainly expensive equipment available for mid to large commercial scale production for which a considerable maintenance capital is needed. Generally, the Bureau of Soils and Water Management provides equipment grant in the form of shredder and vermiculture facilities to deserving farmer groups under its Organic Fertilizer Production Program. An important consideration is availability or investment on land by project proponents to locate the worm beds. Farm and household wastes are generally free. However, nowadays, Material costs because of the demand for animal manure such as poultry feces, these are already being sold by the sacks in Luzon. Because we are dealing with household and community-level production, the labor is free and provided by the project beneficiaries. Labour (cost) However, once it changes to commercial scale production, this would require regular work force and could present a major expense in the production cost. Vermicomposting is technology to organically process waste and Disposal of waste matter therefore, its waste is the main product used as fertilizer. Hence, there is no waste material that needs to be disposed. None, unless one would opt to go to commercial scale production for Other costs which additional costs would involve packaging and marketing. Based on 2008 article by Rafael D. Guerrero Vermicomposting Improves Farm Economics published by the CBS Interactive Business Network: With the cost of producing VC at PhP 2 to 3 (US $0.04 to 0.07)/kg and market prices of PhP 5 to 8 (US $0.11 to 0.17)/kg for VC in the country, vermicomposting is commercially viable. Farmers producing their own VC using available farm wastes can reduce their production costs for chemical fertilizers, which have skyrocketed in price, while minimizing environmental pollution and promoting soil/water conservation. Source: http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_7471/is_200808/ai_n32290878/

Cost-benefit ratio

<Source of information>
Name of technique
Vermicomposting

Photos/sources

Developer of technique

Photos submitted by: Municipality of Dumingag, Zamboanga del Sur and Dumingag Institute of Organic Agriculture FAO has conducted vermicomposting in the Philippines as early as 1980 using various worm species - Lumbricus rubellus (red worm) and Eisenia foetida are thermo-tolerant and so particularly useful. Field worms (Allolobophora caliginosa) and night crawlers (Lumbricus terrestris) attack organic matter from below but the latter do not thrive during active composting, being killed more easily than the others at high temperature. European night crawlers (Dendrabaena veneta or Eisenia hortensis) are produced commercially and have been used successfully in most climates. These night crawlers grow to about 10-20 cm. The African night crawler (Eudrilus eugeniae), is a large, tropical worm species. It tolerates higher temperatures than Eisenia foetida does, provided there is ample humidity. However, it has a narrow temperature tolerance range, and it cannot survive at temperatures below 7 C. Vermicomposting in the Philippines began in the 1970s with studies conducted by researchers of the Central Luzon State University in Munoz, Nueva Ecija but didnt take off as expected. It was not until Dr. Rafael D. Guerrero III, then director of the Philippine Council for Aquatic and Marine Research and Development, took a second look at the technology that vermicomposting gained popularity. He introduced it in the country in 1982. He favored from among the several earthworms the African night crawler ((Eudrilus eugeniae) that remains popular to this day. For the next ten years, he refined vermicomposting technology and spread its use among agriculturists.

Data sources Others

Commercially, it started when some members of the San Miguel Multi-purpose Cooperative in Bohol learned of vermicomposting. We have other groups initiating Aquatic Biosystems in Bay, Laguna which pioneered the technology and exported vermicompost to Hongkong. We have many other groups but the biggest vermicompost producer is Alex Amor of Sibulan, Negros Oriental who produces 10-15 tons of vermicompost per day. Vermicomposting and relevant information like its history in the Philippines is available in the internet. Dr. Rafael Guerrero III organized the Philippine Vermi Society and he was the lead convener of the 2005 International SymposiumWorkshop on Vermi Technologies for Developing Countries

<Other effects>
Name of technique Positive environmental effects Negative environmental effects Farm responses (positive) Farm responses (negative) Opinion of neighbor farm Other effects
Vermicomposting We have less trash, improves the soil, increases crop yield, amd acts as waste disinfectant by containing pathogenic microorganisms. None known so far. They find vermicast to be good fertilizer and improve crop yield. They have favorable view of vermiculture. None Positive and willing to participate in the community-based vermiculture. Farmers notice extended life of the plant and considers the use of vermicast as season extender; also there is a remarkable improvement in the taste and sweetness of fruits and vegetables.

Network contributor: Local Government of of Dumingag Dumingag Municipal Hall, Zamboanga Del Sur, Philippines

ANNEX 7 Name of organic technique: PELLETIZED LOCAL FEEDS FOR PIGS BY


MULTI-FUNCTIONAL MACHINE

<General>
Name of technique Purpose of use
Pelletized Local Feeds for Pigs by Multi-functional Machine Local feeds production for livestock and poultry Local microenterprise for farmers association The cost of feed represents the highest cost in pig production, about 70 to 80%. It is important that feed is given particular attention. There are 3 types of feeds available in the market the starter feed, the grower feed, and the finisher feed. Feed quality is important for livestock growers. It is important to ensure that the feed is not stale, rancid, or moldy. No feed ingredient contains all the nutrients required for a complete diet. The various feed sources complement each other for a complete feed. Pelletized feed is a mash that is held together with a binder and then heat treated, extruded, and cut into smaller pieces. Because of the complex nature and expense, a community-operated pelletized local feeds by a multi-functional machine is developed to produce quality feeds. Being singly owned by a farmer is not a remote possibility. The procedures in pelletizing pig feeds is as follows: Weighing of ingredients Chamber mixing with Filtered Liquid Sludge + NPs + local minerals, Vegetable powder First Pelletizing Curing at 50 -60 oC Final pelletizing Air Drying Reduction of feed costs by 50%-100% Pigs - During feeding 5 sows; 2 boars; 23 piglets Pelletized Vermicast-based Fertilizer (PCVF) Vermicast separator Grinder/feed mill

Outline & Principles

Main Effects Target Livestock and Application Period Scale of application Other Uses

<Technical issue & problems>


Name of technique
Pelletized Local Feeds for Pigs by Multi-functional Machine In the Philippines, the feed control program has three phases laws, regulations, and administrative procedures. The Bureau of Animal Industry (BAI) is in-charge of implementing the following laws and regulations: 1. R.A. 1556 as amended known as the Livestock and Poultry Feeds Act and its implementing rules and regulations 2. R.A. 3720 as amended by Executive Order No. 175 known as the Food, Drugs, and Devises and Cosmetics Act and its implementing rules and regulations. 3. R.A. 6675 otherwise known as the Generics Acts of 1988. BAI has its Animal Feed Standards Division that oversees the manufacture, importation, distribution, advertisement, and sale of livestock, poultry, aqua, and specialty feeds, veterinary drugs, and chemical feed additives.

Organic regulation and To closely monitor and observe the activities of the concerned parties in the criteria
compound feed industry, the laws require all feed and veterinary drug manufacturers and dealers to register with BAI. Violators of the provisions of the law are prosecuted. Laws regulating the compound of the feed industry are as vibrant and dynamic as the industry itself.

Source of information: http://www.pcarrd.dost.gov.ph/infocenter/hosted%20sites/philsan/chapter9.h tm As animal feed in pellet form for domestic and community use only, the outputs are not expected to go through the licensing and regulatory action of the Bureau of Animal Industry through its Animal Feed Standards Division. Should the community decides to market the produce, they have to pass through requlatory requirements before any form of product sale. These are locally produced and non-marketed animal feeds for community

Effect on human body use; not expected to contain growth hormones and other chemicals that
could affect human lives if ingested. The rural agricultural community has changed and there is a marked structural shift towards concentrated feeds, especially in the swine industry. The swine industry now includes small independent niche operators who market organic pork to local markets in addition to traditional independent operators and large corporations. In the US, confinement environment on swine producers were found to suffer from respiratory diseases including bronchitis, mucus membrane irritation, ashtma-like syndrome, and acute respiratory distress syndrome. Environmental assessments of air quality inside livestock buildings reveal unhealthful concentrations of hydrogen sulfide, ammonia, inhalable particulate matter, and endotoxin. Most significant of the social impact is the disruption of quality life for neighboring residents. More than the unpleasant odor, the smell can have dramatic consequences for rural communities where lives are rooted in enjoying the outdoors. For the Philippines, there are yet no similar studies conducted. Source of information: Community Health and Socioeconomic Issues Surrounding Concentrated Animal Feeding Operations by Donham, et.al. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1817697/

Social issue

The Xavier University College of Agriculture conducts capacity building not only for its students enrolled in the academic program but the College has also several community outreach programs that focus on technology extension.

Knowledge transfer

Manufacturing, packing, application

Other issues

The pelletized feeds is the latest of its small-scale agricultural technology offering to assist organic swine producers and accelerate their entrepreneurial activities. While not yet included in their website on the list of training offerings, its promotion and capacity building is expected to gain momentum in the years to come. The fabrication and production of the multi-functional machine for pelletizing local feeds rests with the Appropriate Technology Center of the Xavier University College of Agriculture. The Sustainable Agriculture Centre (SAC) of the Xavier University College of Agriculture, as an academic-based development organization, promotes sustainable use of agricultural resources through partnerships with the local government, non-government organizations, and church institutions. Much of their activities are focused on participatory and asset-based philosophy on community organization. While endeavor towards entrepreneurial activity is ultimately aimed for farmers association to liberate them from poverty, SAC provides the catalytic role to generate matured technologies but leaves it to the farmers to organize towards commercial production in which case, the farmers themselves will have to comply with government regulations for decisions to elevate their production level from domestic and community-level to commercial level.

<Cost>
Name of technique
Pelletized Local Feeds for Pigs by Multi-functional Machine

Equipment and maintenance PhP50,000


Communities organized by SAC were established on the framework of community assets. Hence, raw materials for utilization as feed are locally produced and locally sourced for which SAC assistance comes in the form of helping farmers locally processing these raw materials. Hence, feed materials are expected to be what is abundant and locally available in the farming community. Change towards commercial production could change this scenery to assure uninterrupted production and supply of raw materials. These are not commercial production level and hence, labor cost is provided by the project beneficiaries. However, changing to commercial level of production could incur additional labor costs. No waste material of serious concern. Fuel cost may have to be factored in the production cost. Although they are now in technology promotion phase, no cost-benefit ratio figures were released to show the economics of using the technology.

Material costs

Labour (cost) Disposal of waste matter Other costs

<Source of information>
Name of technique
Pelletized Local Feeds by Multi-functional Machine for Pigs

Photos/sources

Photo source: Sustainable Agriculture Centre, Xavier Univ-CA The Appropriate Technology Center (ATC) of the Xavier University College of Agriculture founded in January 14, 1983, was said to be the first such full scale center in the Philippines and was the culmination of the earlier work of the late Fr. William Masterson, S.J. as continued by Cagayan De Oro's Archbishop Antonio Ledesma, S.J. The center involves the fabrication of steel and metal with its fabrication shop intended for small scale publications and it also has agro-cultural post-harvest facilities.

Developer of technique

ATC also promotes the MEDAS Farm or Model Energy Demonstartion and Sustainable Farm-a one-hectare farm integrated with different components especially vegetation, farm house, duckery and other livestock raising. ATC concerns on the appropriate technologies of harnessing the sun, plant and animal wastes, wind and water power. Consequently, they establish more on the solar power. MEDAS has two solar panels which are only good for bulblights that cater the poultry and livestock. It also has heat efficient house with roof insulation, skylighting and improved cooking area. Sustainable Agriculture Centre, Xavier University College of Agriculture, Cagayan de Oro City None

Data sources Others

<Other effects>
Name of technique Positive environmental effects Negative environmental effects Farm responses (positive) Farm responses (negative) Opinion of neighbor farm Other effects
Pelletized Local Feeds for Pigs by Multi-functional Machine Less feed waste We may have to look at the enthalpy to determine net energy gain or loss during the operation. These are currently worked out prior to full scale promotion. Farmers trying the machine are quite happy and satisfied. None received so far. Quite enthusiastic to see and try the equipment. Still being studied.

Network Contributor: Sustainable Agriculture Center College of Agriculture, Xavier University, Cagayan de Oro, Philippines

ANNEX 8 Name of organic technique: USE OF SEA WATER FOR CORN SEED

TREATMENT
<General>
Name of technique Purpose of use
Use of Sea Water for Corn Seed Treatment Seed treatment to prevent attack of Insect pest at sowing and uni form crop establishment Soaking the seed with sea water before planting provide equal op portunity for the seeds to imbibe water prior to germination, helpi ng this seeds ready to germinate. On the other hand the strong t aste of sea water will inhibit insect attacks (like ants) in the field after sowing. Method: Soak the corn seed with sea water for at most 12 hours, alter soaking the seeds will be air dried for 6 hours and now ready for planting. Note: Just soak seeds that is enough for a day planting

Outline & Principles

Main Effects Target Crops and Application Period Scale of application Other Uses

Help uniform crop establishment especially during the dry season and insect repellent during sowing Corn. Seed treatment shall be done night before planting

This is a pre-planting step. Can also be use in other orthodox seeds for the same purpose and this method can be used for seed storage (as long as the seed moisture content after air drying is right for storage) to prevent storage insect attacks.

<Technical issue & problems>


Name of technique Organic regulation and criteria Effect on human body Social issue Knowledge transfer
Use of Sea Water for Corn Seed Treatment None Sea water can also be used to disinfect human wounds. None This is common knowledge but applicable to communities near the sea. A possibility is to explore the use of table salt solutions but this is added expense

Manufacturing, packing, application Other issues

None We may have to consider salt tolerances of crops. Seeds that were already soaked (not in MC for storage) and were not planted will germinate in storage.

<Cost>
Name of technique
Use of Sea Water for Corn Seed Treatment

Equipment and maintenance None Material costs (seed, None fertilizer, pesticide, livestock) Home labour only. Labour (cost) Disposal of waste matter Other costs:
To prevent salinization of the soil, should be returned back to the sea None

<Source of information>
Name of technique Photos/sources
Use of Sea Water for Corn Seed Treatment None

Mr. Edwin Jorquia MASIPAG Farmer trainer Developer of technique Supported by SUBANG Foundation MAUFFO (Mamali United Fisherfolk and Farmers Organization) Mamali, Lupon, Davao Oriental Presented during the Farmers and Scientist forum , November 22-26 at MASIPAG Biodiversity Center Maluko Manolo Fortich Bukidnon MASIPAG Mindanao. 2009. Kinaugalingong Pamaagi sa Pagpanguma vol. 3. Bulua CDO City, pp 10 -11.

Data sources

Others

None

<Other effects>
Name of technique Positive environmental effects Negative environmental effects Farm responses (positive) Farm responses (negative) Opinion of neighbor farm Other effects
Use of Sea Water for Corn Seed Treatment No need to purchase expensive and toxic chemicals for seed disinfection Proper waste disposal so as not to make the soil salty This is quite cheap and easy especially for those living in the coastal areas Not so practical for those quite a distance from the sea This technique is adopted by the neighbours of Mr. Edwin Jorquia and other MASIPAG Farmers in coastal areas None

Network contributor: Magsasaka at Siyentipiko para sa Pag-unlad ng Agrikultura (MASIPAG) Mindanao Officer's Village, Zone 5, Bulua, Cagayan De Oro City,Philippines

ANNEX 9 Name of organic technique: INTEGRATED COMMUNITY SEEDBANK

(ICSB) VARIETAL ADAPTABILITY TRIAL


<General>
Name of technique Purpose of use
Varietal Adaptability Trial Build the local seed system of the community Integrated Community Seedbank or ICSB is one vital means to achieve genetic resource conservation at the community level within the framework of sustainable agriculture. As such, the ICSB serves as the core activity around which all other SA activities or endeavors revolve. It is an improvement over the old concept of a seedbank being a mere storage or retrieval mechanism and structure. ICSB includes in situ seed conservation, selection and adaptability trials, dissemination, and maintenance strategies of traditional and improved plant cultivars. A major focus is on food crops and secondarily on other agroforest crops. ICSB planning and implementation mechanisms combine the elements of food crops productivity and security alongside genetic conservation and ecological considerations. As a crucial service of SIBAT, partner farmer groups and organizations learn ICSB concepts through trainings on: Seed Technology (selection, production, propagation, breeding, etc.) Seed Characterization Seed Adaptability Trials Seed Processing and Storage ICSB Policy Guidelines Formulation

Outline & Principles

The seed adaptability trials is conducted through participatory research. Methodology: Collected seeds from other communities and are tested across season. Data are documented and analyzed with the farmers. Increase collection of seed resources in the community which are adapted to the local conditions Rice, corn and vegetables (done every cropping season) Community-wide Varietal selection and documentation

Main Effects Target Crops and Application Period Scale of application Other Uses

<Technical issue & problems>


Name of technique Organic regulation and criteria Effect on human body Social issue Knowledge transfer Manufacturing, packing, application Other issues
Varietal Adaptability Trial This are for community use only and efforts to commercialize will have to go through regulations of the National Seed Board. None Varieties could be site specific but there is no regulation on sharing the findings with other communities Formal training on how varietal adaptability trials are conducted and how the data are analyzed. The capacity building uses the participatory approach. Since this is community research, none. Storage of promising varieties

<Cost>
Name of technique
Varietal Adaptability Trial

Equipment and maintenance None Material costs (seed, fertilizer, pesticide, livestock) Labour (cost) Disposal of waste matter Other costs:
We assume locally available seed materials and no expense to purchase commercial varieties Shared community labor None This will only hold true if the community desires to look into promising commercially produced seeds for local adaption

<Source of information>
Name of technique
Varietal Adaptability Trial

Indigenous seed storage method

Photos/sources
Indigenous rice seed storage

Seed selection process Photo source: http://www.sibat.org/ps_sa_ics.htm Sibol ng Agham at Teknolohiya, Inc. (SIBAT) 40 Matulungin St., Brgy. Central, Diliman, Quezon City, Philippines 1100 Developer of technique E-mail: sibat01@pldtdsl.net, sibat_02@pldtdsl.net Telefax: (632) 928-8316 Tel. No.: (632) 926-8971 Sibat web site Data sources http://www.sibat.org/ps_sa_ics.htm

Others

None

<Other effects>
Name of technique Positive environmental effects Negative environmental effects Farm responses (positive) Farm responses (negative) Opinion of neighbor farm Other effects
Varietal Adaptability Trial Increase the genetic pool of the community None Able to liberate themselves from dependence on multi-national seed producers Needs to learn new things Happy with the technique Can be used for non-crops such as ornamentals and perennials

Network contributor: Sibol Ng Agham At Teknolohiya (SIBAT) 40 Matulungin St. Brgy. Central Diliman, Quezon City,Philippines