Pattern of rice variety adoption and potential impact of improved variety in GSR target countries

Huaiyu Wang Sushil Pandey Orlee Velarde June 22, 2012

GSR
What is GSR?
The improved lines are expected to be stress-tolerant and high yielding. It is anticipated that the efficiency of chemical inputs will be increased when these stress tolerant varieties become widely adopted (Zhang 2007).

What is GSR project?

Green Super Rice for the Resource Poor of Asia and Africa (GSR) funded by Gates foundation

IRRI: South Asia and Southeast Asia My study: Cambodia, Sri Lanka and Pakistan

Objectives of this study

1. To analyze the patterns of adoption and diffusion of existing improved varieties, and identify constraints to adoption; 2. To analyze the economics of rice production and farmer livelihood strategies and understand the gender roles in rice production and womens participation in decision making; 3. To estimate the potential impact of improved varieties being developed under the project on rice production, farmer income and poverty reduction; 4. To draw implications for technology development, targeting and policy reforms. 5. To build capacity for socio-economic analysis of technology.

Outline
Background Objective Methodology Key findings Study on specific issue Summary and implications

Methodology
Data:
Secondary data Focus group discussion (FGD) Household baseline survey

Analytical framework:
Secondary data and household level analysis Descriptive statistics and econometric analysis

KEY FINDINGS

Rough rice area, yield and production, GSR countries, Asia (2008-2010)
Area (million ha) SE Asia Cambodia S Asia Sri Lanka Pakistan 0.9 2.7 3.9 6.2 4.4 2.3 2.7 7.7 2.9 Production (million ton) Yield (t/ha)

Data source: FAOSTAT and national statistics.

Main features of rice production ecosystem

Countries Production environment Market orientation Yield level

SE Asia Cambodia Mostly rainfed Increasing export potential Low

S Asia Sri Lanka Pakistan Mostly irrigated Mostly irrigated Self-sufficient An important rice export country; High quality rice (Basmati etc.) High Low

Figure 1. Rice yield trend in 1980-2009 (t/ha)

4.00 3.50 3.00 2.50

Sri Lanka Pakistan

2.00
1.50

Cambodia

1.00
0.50 0.00 1980 1981 1982 1983 1984 1985 1986 1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009

Data source: FAOSTAT.

Poverty in GSR countries

National poverty (%) SE Asia Cambodia 30.1 34.5 Rural poverty (%) Number of rural poor people (million) 35.1 4.0

S Asia
Sri Lanka Pakistan 15.2 22.3 15.7 27.0

83.2
2.7 29.1

Data source: World Bank database

Farm level analysis

Sample design
Sample Key size stresses
SE Asia Battambang, Pursat, Kampong Thom, Kampot, Prey Veng, Takeo

Surveyed districts

Institutions Collaborator

Cambodia

607

D/Sub/Sal

SME

Sam Bona; Piset Mease

S Asia Sri Lanka 404 D/Sub/Sal Kurunegala, Kalutara, Puttalam Sindh, Panjab RRDI, SEPDC UAF Nimal Dissanayake Abedullah Anjum

Pakistan

210

D/Sub/Sal

Characteristics of farm households

Farm size (ha/hh) Rice yield (t/ha)
% of rice Irrigation Crop income in total of paddy intensity household (%) (%) income

Country

SE Asia
Cambodia S Asia Sri Lanka 1.2 2.6 11 40 150 187 1.8 2.8 44 23

113

Pakistan

5.5

3.6

16

90

Major varieties grown in the countries

Variety name Cambodia 504 (IR 50404-57-2-2-3) IR 66 TV varieties Pakistan IRRI-6 IRRI-9 Pukhraj (hybrid) % area 21 13 59 56 12 11 Yield (t/ha) Released year

4.1 2.7
2.3 3.5 3.7 4.9 1.9 2.6 3.1 2.4

1990 1990
1971 1999 1987 1992 1999

Super Basmati
Sri Lanka BG300 BG352 BG358

10
62 13 7

Data source: Household survey in GSR project 2010.

Key results for variety adoption

Adoption of improved varieties generally high but adoption in stressed environments characterized by patchiness. One or two major varieties accounting for a large area (or mega varieties) Adopted varieties are generally older, with limited adoption of newly-released varieties in the main wet season. Average yields are low despite high incidence of adoption of improved varieties.

Economics of rice production

1000

Gross income 900

Cost and net return (USD/ha) 800 Cash cost Net return above cash cost

932
821

700
600 500 400
329 535

505 464

300 200 100 0

Cambodia

Pakistan

Sri Lanka

Structure and sources of household income

Cambodia Pakistan Sri Lanka 11

% rice
% non rice % animal sale % off-farm income % nonfarm income

44
1 13 2 40

16
38 1

10
17 1 61 3,475

9
36 3,075 1.35

Total income (in USD)

Per capita income (in USD)

1,688
0.94

2.44

Gender analysis
Objective Gender roles play an important role on rice farming and households decision-making process. Gender roles and responses vary across and within cultures. Taking Cambodia and Sri Lanka as examples, the objective of this study is to compare the women farmers empowerment and gender roles in rice farming systems between subsistence- and market-oriented rice farmers.

Sri Lanka

Cambodia
% rice % non rice
10%
40% 17% 44%

11%

% animal sale % off-farm income % non-farm income

61%

1%

13%

2%
2%

100

100

80

49

80
54 Labor inputs (%) 79 60 77 75

73
Nonfarm income (%) 60

40

40

20 27 0 Sri Lanka

51

20 21 0 23

46 25

Cambodia

WS

DS

WS

DS Cambodia

Men

Women

Sri Lanka

Women empowerment index (WEI)

Sri Lanka Cambodia

Rice farming decisions 1. What rice variety(ies) to grow 2. Adoption of technology in rice production 3. What farm implements to purchase 4. Who and number of farm labor to hire 5. Whether to sell or consume the harvested crop 6. Quantity of output to sell and consume 7. When and where to sell the harvested crop 8. What price to sell the output Income and expenditure 9. Allocation of farm income 10. Allocation of household income 11. What types of food to consume in times of crisis 12. Where to borrow Childcare 13. Childrens education 14. Number of children to raise Others 15. Participation in voting/politics 16. Whether to sell or slaughter the animal Average WEI

2.1 2.2 2.2 2.2 2.4 2.5 2.3 2.3 2.5 2.7 2.8 2.7 3.0 -2.5 -2.5

3.0 2.8 2.8 3.2 3.4 3.4 3.4 3.4 3.4 3.5 3.6 3.2 3.2 3.2 3.1 2.9 3.2

OLS regression model of the factors contributing to women empowerment

Dependent variable is WEI Distance to market (km) Sri Lanka 0.00178 Cambodia 0.0435***

Years of education of wife

Age of wife Dummy for wife with non-farm primary occupation Percentage of females in the households

0.0373**
0.0112*** -0.123 0.00619**

0.0143
0.00746*** 0.0309 0.00273*

Farm size (ha)

Percentage contribution to non-farm income of female Percentage contribution to non-farm income of male Dummy for husband who attended a training Dummy for wife who attended a training Constant N

-0.00755
0.00318* 0.00105 -0.196* 0.435*** 1.088*** 378

-0.0542***
0.0000825 -0.00197*** -0.195*** 0.154*** 2.713*** 593

Key results for gender analysis

Women in Cambodia have higher women empowerment index (WEI) compared to Sri Lanka. Women are involved in more diverse rice farming activities in Cambodia than in Sri Lanka. In both countries, women exposure to training has positive significant effect on women empowerment and the effect of training on husband is negatively significant. In Sri Lanka, education levels of wives and their contribution to nonfarm income increase the women empowerment index significantly.

Ex-ante impact assessment

Periods:
Short term (3-5 years) and Long term (6-10 years)

Assumptions:
the size of the potential yield gain: 10% the adoption rate: 10% and 20%

A simple pragmatic approach

Rice farmers being lifted out of poverty: (Rice farmers*rural poverty ratio) * % poor lifted out of poverty in the survey Additional people meeting food requirement: Target area * Yield gain * Price/Consumption

Ex-ante impact assessment (1)

Number of poor rice farmers lifted out of poverty in the short (3-5 years) and medium (6-10 years) term
35 30 (000 persons) 25 20 30.2 short term (3-5 years) long term (6-10 years)

15
10

15.1 11.8 5.8 5.9

5 0

2.9

Cambodia

Sri Lanka

Pakistan

Ex-ante impact assessment (2)

Additional number of people who can meet the food requirement in short and medium term
1.0 0.9 0.8 short term (3-5 years) long term (6-10 years)

0.82

0.74

(million persons)

0.7

0.70

0.6
0.5 0.4 0.3 0.2 0.37 0.41

0.35

0.1
0.0

Cambodia

Sri Lanka

Pakistan

Summary and implications

 The three countries analysed represent a diversity of rice production environments, technology levels and the institutional set up. Yield levels in all countries are low, especially in areas that are stress-prone. Efforts to develop improved rice varieties that are tolerant to such stresses are thus very important.

Implications
Germplasm development strategy
Grain quality characteristics: The new lines and /or varieties to be developed should go through the proper grain quality test and evaluation or whatever is needed to make sure these are the traits that farmers desired, especially the quality issues for hybrid rice. Mega varieties and Breeding strategy: The dominance of mega varieties basically indicates that breeding strategy may build on the existing materials and include some additional desirable traits to facilitate rapid dissemination. Grain quality could be such an additional consideration as farmers did rank grain quality as second most important trait after the yield.

Implications
Targeting
Poverty reduction: In terms of the potential impact on rural poverty, it would be desirable to consider environments with abiotic stress as the primary target of GSR varieties given the high incidence of poverty in such environments and the low current average yield.
Rice farmers: Farm-level impact of adoption of GSR varieties in terms of the incremental income is higher for those farmer categories (or locations) for whom rice accounts for a larger share of total household income. Hence, it is desirable to have a dissemination strategy (at least at the initial stages) that is targeted to such farmers/locations. Training: To provide training on women farmers would be helpful to improve women empowerment in the family decision.

Implications
Dissemination
Availability and access to quality seeds: In poor rainfed areas, limited access to quality seeds of improved varieties remains a problem due to a number of institutional constraints. Increased investments in extension and participation of local agencies and NGOs will be needed for accelerating the process of technology diffusion.

Nonfarm income and technical efficiency in Sri Lanka

 One-stage stochastic frontier analysis (SFA) regression (Battese and Coelli,1995) Cobb-Douglas production function
ln Y j j ln X ij V j U j
i 1 n

Technical efficiency model

U j j Z ij
i 1 n

Variables
Production function Seeds Organic fertilizer Chemical fertilizer Pesticides Herbicides Power (Animal, tractor, thresher, harvester) Labor Inefficiency model Age Education Household size Farm size

Nonfarm income share

Square of nonfarm income share

Characteristics of farmers
Variables Age of respondent (years) Education of respondent (years) Household size (persons/hh) Farm size (ha/hh) Household income (US$/hh) Nonfarm income share (%) Share of rice income (%) Mean 53 8.5 3.8 1.3 3267 52 11 Std. Dev. 12 2.8 1.1 0.9 3328 38 26 Min 24 0 1 Max 88 13 8

0.23
123 0 0

4
17100 100 100

10

20

30

.2

.4 .6 Share of nonfarm income

.8

Figure 2. Distribution of technical efficiency

20 0 5 10 15

.2

.4 .6 Technical efficiency

.8

TE mean value = 0.63

Determinants of household technical inefficiency

Coefficient Age of respondent (years) Education of respondent (years) Household size (persons/hh) Farm size (ha/hh) Share of nonfarm income (%) Square of share of nonfarm income Rice intensity 0.007 0.029 -0.047 0.224* -3.567** 4.187** 0.521* Standard error (0.009) (0.035) (0.076) (0.127) (1.556) (1.701) (0.294)

Constant
N
Standard errors in parentheses * p < 0.10, ** p < 0.05, *** p < 0.01

-1.148
120

(1.145)

Conclusion
The livelihood strategy of rice farmers in Sri Lanka is oriented more towards nonfarm income. There is substantial potential to improve farmers practices (TE=63%). The effect of nonfarm income is kind of U-shape effect.

 Adoption is measured using two indicators: incidence of adoption and intensity of adoption. For analyzing the incidence of adoption, a farmer is considered to be either an adopter or a non-adopter Probit model The extent/ intensity of adoption is measured as the proportion of area under improved varieties Tobit Model

Modelling
The decision problem for a farmer involves the choice of two possible varietal categories, namely, modern varieties (MV) and traditional varieties (TV and iTV). Variations could be influenced by demographic characteristics, landholdings, access to market and variety, cropping pattern and location

Description of covariates
Description of variables Dependent variable Adopt Farmer grew modern varieties. 0= no, 1=yes PMVarea Share of modern variety area in total rice area (%) Explanatory variables Age Age of respondent (years) Dummy variable of the gender of respondent. 0=male, Dfemale 1=female Hhsize Household size (persons) Farm size Farm size (ha/hh) Plowarea Percentage of lower field in the farm size (%) Pmidarea Percentage of middle area in the farm size (%) Pirrigarea Percentage of area irrigated (%) Tborder Dummy of location. 1= border with ; 0= border with Inland Market Dummy of location. 1= inland; 0= otherwise Distance from nearest market (km) Expected effect on adoption

+ ? + + + + + -

Comparison on characteristics of non-adopters and adopters of different varieties

Non-adopter (TV & iTV) Hhsize (persons) Labor (persons) 4.84 2.78 MV adopter 4.98 2.91 All 4.90 2.83

Respondent dummy (1= female)

Age (years) Average education (years) Market distance (km)

0.67
45.81 5.56 4.04

0.50
44.55 5.36 3.78

0.60
45.28 5.47 3.93

Farm size (ha/hh)

Lower field area (ha/hh) Middle field area (ha/hh) Area irrigated (ha/hh)

1.45
0.76 1.29 0.56

2.19
1.16 1.07 1.80

1.77
0.93 1.15 1.09

Rice area (ha/hh)

MV rice area (ha/hh) Rice production (ton/hh) Rice yield (t/ha)

1.39
0.00 2.84 2.09

2.69
1.88 8.75 3.36

1.94
0.80 5.37 2.63

% of rice production sold

24.71

55.45

37.83

Factors affecting the incidence and intensity of modern variety adoption

Incidence of adoption Intensity of adoption

Probit
Household size Age of respondent 0.0132 -0.0061

Tobit
1.108 -0.255

Respondent gender (1=female, otherwise 0)

Farm size Share of lower field Share of middle field Share of irrigated area Region dummy (Thailand border) Region dummy (Inland province) market N

-0.1900
0.2120*** 0.0096*** 0.0045* 0.0108*** -2.1900*** -3.3900*** -0.0470* 607

-3.655
5.280*** 0.435*** 0.254*** 0.595*** -83.76*** -150.9*** -1.270 607