* International Rice ResearchInstitute (IRRI), MCPO 3127, 1271 Makati, Philippines.1. INTRODUCTION
More than 250 million farm families cultivate rice in Asia(Hossain and Pingali 1998). In the past three decades, they produced 2.5 percentmore rice each year to meet the growing food demand (Hossain and Fischer, 1995).This tremendous achievement was possible due to the development and use of highyielding rice varieties, provision of assured water supply, liberal applicationof fertilizers and pesticides, and focused institutional and policy support forrice crop intensification. According to Hossain (IRRI, 1998-1999), making cheaprice available to millions of poor consumers is the single most importantcontribution that IRRI has made in the Asia-Pacific Region.
However, it appears that we have exhausted the potential ofthe green revolution strategies, as we witness declining riceproductivity in many countries. In the next 3 decades, farmers need newapproaches and technologies to produce 50 to 60 percent more rice on existing orless land and water with limiting and/or expensive inputs. The three factorsthat could contribute to increased rice productivity are: (a) developing newrice varieties including hybrids with higher yield potential; (b) minimizing theyield gap between what is currently harvested by farmers and the achievablehighest on-farm yield of varieties they grow; and (c) reducing the post-harvestlosses and improving grain quality to enhance profitability. This paperelaborates on rice yield, profit and knowledge gaps, with brief discussion onyield ceiling to provide a complete scenario.
2. DEVELOPING RICE VARIETIES WITH HIGHER YIELDPOTENTIAL
The potential yield is 10 t ha-1 for presentlyavailable semi-dwarf indica rice varieties. An additional 10 to 15percent increase in rice yields can be expected with the development of tropicalrice hybrids (Virmani et al., 1991) which are currently being introduced to manyAsian countries. New Plant Type (NPT) lines are being developed to furtherincrease the potential yield of rice varieties.
2.1 New Plant Types
IRRI-developed NPT lines, popularly termed by the media assuper rice, are expected to yield 12.5 t ha-1.Development of hybrids using NPT could increase the yield further to 14-15 tha-1. Research is ongoing to incorporate resistance/tolerance tomajor insect pests and diseases and to improve grain quality. Fully developedNPT lines will become available for testing in farmers fields by the year2001-2002.
2.2 Hybrid Rice Technology
Hybrid rice technology is complex in terms of production ofquality seed and crop management. Virmani and Sharma (1994) have developed amanual for producing hybrid seeds in the tropics. The Directorate of RiceResearch, Hyderabad, India, has developed a production package for hybrid rice(DRR, 1998): nursery seeding rate of 10-20 g m-2; 1-2 seedlings perhill; herbicide + one hand weeding; 150 kg N ha-1 with adequate P, K,Zn, and S; continuous (5 cm water depth) or cyclic submergence; and adequateplant protection.
Proper choice and improvement of parental lines for resistanceto pests and diseases as well as better grain quality, development of 2-linehybrids, maintenance of genetic purity of parental lines of popular hybrids, andrefinement of a seed production package may enhance the spread of hybrid rice intropical Asia (Paroda, 1998). Hybrid rice technology should only be promoted inareas best suited for its cultivation. Private sector seed companies have acritical role to play in the supply of quality hybrid seeds to farmers ataffordable prices.
3. TYPES OF RICE YIELD GAPS
There are different types of yield gaps: gap between geneticpotential and biologically attainable yields, variability in rice yields indifferent regions, gap between research station and farmers yields, andyield differences among farmers in a given hom*ogenous environment.
3.1 Gap between Potential and AttainableYields
As discussed above, the potential yield of semi-dwarfindica varieties is 10 t ha-1. However, under the bestmanagement conditions, farmers can reap 80 to 85 percent of the potential yieldof varieties. The difference between genetic potential yield at the experimentstation and the highest attainable yield in farmers fields is the yieldgap due to environmental differences and non-transferable technology, and thusit cannot be bridged. If the potential yield of rice varieties is increasedbeyond 10 t ha-1 by developing hybrids and New Plant Types, farmerscan attain correspondingly higher yields when they use those varieties. This isthe reason why rice breeders are trying to increase the potentialyields.
3.2 Variability in Rice Yields in Different Countries andRegions
High variability exists in rice yields across countries andregions as shown in Table 1. This type of yield gap is due to differences inbiophysical (climate, length of growing season, soil, water, pest pressure,etc.) and socio-economic factors, crop management, and access to and use ofknowledge and technologies. For example, the high rice yield in Australia is dueto:
· Favourableclimate: high solar radiation, cloudless long growing season (150-180 days),optimum temperature.· Precision crop management(crop rotation, single rice crop per year, smooth and level soil surface, use ofregistered pure seed every season, precise control of water level, high plantdensity, need-based/timely/balanced fertilizer application, high qualitypost-harvest management.
· Enlightened farmers andexcellent technical support (Beecher, 1999).
Table 1. Mean Rice Yields (t ha-1) inDifferent Countries and Regions (1994)
| Country/Region | Area 000 ha | HYV coverage | Yield | Yield gap |
Countries | ||||
Australia | 122 | 100 | 8.3 | -- |
Egypt | 579 | -- | 7.9 | 4.8 |
USA | 1,366 | 100 | 6.7 | 19.3 |
2,212 | 100 | 6.8 | 18.1 | |
Spain | 63 | 100 | 6.2 | 25.3 |
S. Korea | 1,160 | 100 | 6.1 | 26.5 |
China | 30,373 | 100 | 5.9 | 28.9 |
Regions | ||||
612 | 100 | 5.2 | 37.3 | |
Asia | 134,560 | 2-91 | 3.8 | 54.2 |
Latin America and Caribbean | 5,723 | 47-100 | 3.2 | 61.4 |
Africa | 7,929 | -- | 2.2 | 73.5 |
World | 150,305 | -- | 3.7 | 55.4 |
The generally high yields obtained in temperate regions(record yields can go up to 14-15 t ha-1) is mainly due to low nighttemperature, especially at the reproductive stage. We cannot modify the climaticregime and certain biophysical factors, but we can certainly improve the cropmanagement of and technical support to rice farmers to improve rice productivityin Asia, Latin America and Africa.
The national mean, irrigated, and potential rice yields ofselected countries of Asia are given in Table 2 (Pingali et al., 1997). The gapsbetween the potential and irrigated yields are small compared with gaps betweenthe potential and the national average yields. Low yields of rainfed lowland andupland rice ecosystems bring down the national average yields. In such cases,the yields of rainfed lowland rice have to be improved by developinglocation-specific varieties and production technologies. The major targets forcreating impact in rainfed lowland rice systems are: (a) developing varietalresistance to abiotic stress related to uncertain water supply, (b) improvingdry seeding methods, (c) maintaining natural resilience of ecosystem to pests,and (d) incorporating micronutrients in rice (Fischer and Cordova,1998).
Table 2. The National Mean, Irrigated, and Potential RiceYields of Selected Countries (Adapted from: Pingali et al., 1997)
| Country | National | Irrigated | Potential | Gap Between | Gap Between |
Bangladesh | 2.6 | 4.6 | 5.4 | 14.8 | 51.9 |
China | 5.7 | 5.9 | 7.6 | 22.4 | 25.0 |
India | 2.6 | 3.6 | 5.9 | 39.0 | 55.9 |
Indonesia | 4.4 | 5.3 | 6.4 | 17.2 | 31.3 |
Nepal | 2.5 | 4.2 | 5.0 | 16.0 | 50.0 |
Myanmar | 2.7 | 4.2 | 5.1 | 17.6 | 47.1 |
Philippines | 2.8 | 3.4 | 6.3 | 46.0 | 55.6 |
Thailand | 2.0 | 4.0 | 5.3 | 24.5 | 62.3 |
Vietnam | 3.1 | 4.3 | 6.1 | 29.5 | 49.2 |
3.3 Gaps between Maximum Attainable and EconomicallyExploitable Yields
Rice yields of experimental plots represent the maximumattainable yields with no physical, biological and economic constraints. Theyalso reflect the knowledge frontier and best known management practices at anygiven point in time (Pingali et al., 1997). When the target is to maximizeprofits, the yields obtained are lower than maximum attainable yields (Herdt,1988). This is termed as the economically exploitable yields. Farmers tend tomaximize profits, but consistent with high economically exploitable yields.Exploitable yields are slightly higher in research plots than in farmersfields as observed in the Philippines (Otai, 1997) - Table 3. The gap inexploitable yields between on-farm research plots and farmer cooperatorsfields is less than 6 percent in both seasons. This means that farmercooperators have learned the improved farming techniques by continuousinteraction with researchers and observations of the crop management activitiesand yield superiority in research plots located in their own fields. On thecontrary, the yield gap between on-farm research plots and non-cooperators is 14percent during the wet season and as high as 39 percent in the dry season. Thissignifies that farmer non-cooperators operate at low efficiency, for they haveyet to learn more about the improved crop management practices either from theirneighbours or from research/extension staff.
Table 3. Mean Fertilizer Inputs and Rice Yields inOn-farm Research Trials, Farmer Cooperators Fields, andNon-cooperators Fields, Maligaya, Central Luzon, Philippines,1996-97
| Particulars | No. of | Mean N-P-K, | Mean Yield, | Yield gap, |
1996 Wet Season (July to October) | ||||
On-farm trials | 17 | 61-20-26 | 4.16 (1.01)* | -- |
Farmer cooperators | 28 | 102-16-23 | 3.96 (1.31) | 4.8 |
Farmer non cooperators | 39 | 117-7-11 | 3.56 (0.83) | 14.4 |
1997 Dry Season (January-April) | ||||
On-farm trials | 17 | 94-12-31 | 6.92 (0.90) | -- |
Farmer cooperators | 28 | 130-11-27 | 6.52 (1.02) | 5.8 |
Farmer non-cooperators | 39 | 145-7-13 | 4.25 (1.23) | 38.6 |
Source: Otai, 1997.A reverse case from Guyana is illustrated in Table 4. Someprogressive farmers obtain much higher yields in their fields than thoseharvested at the research station in Guyana. The mean rice yield in research(breeding) plots is 31.9 percent lower than that of progressive farmers for thesame variety Rustic during the spring season of 1999 (Shrivastava et al., 1999).The main limiting factor appears to be the level of N fertilizer application(Figure 1). The variety Rustic is highly susceptible to blast, and its potentialyield is not realized even in the research station due to low N application.Other blast-resistant varieties have now been developed (e.g. Diwani) that givehigh yields using high N levels (Table 4).
* Figures in brackets are standard deviation of themean.
Figure 1. Relationship betweengrain yield and rate of N application in rice by progressive farmers of Guyana,Spring 1999
Table 4. Mean Yields of Current Commercial Rice Varietiesin Breeding Experiments and on Farmers Fields, Guyana, Spring 1999(adapted from Shrivastava et al., 1999)
| Farmer/Research | Area, | Variety | N-P-K, | Yield, | Yield Gap, |
S. Yaap | 2.0 | BR 240 | 80-16-0 | 6.55 | |
P. Lall | 2.4 | G 95-4 | 86-17-0 | 6.51 | |
B. Ramnarine | 3.8 | Rustic | 54-8-0 | 6.12 | |
A. Aiyad | 2.0 | Rustic | 70-16-0 | 6.02 | |
Heeralal | 1.0 | Rustic | 52-12-0 | 6.19 | |
S. Seecharan | 5.2 | Rustic | 101-10-0 | 6.93 | |
Chaitram | 5.2 | Rustic | 60-21-0 | 6.40 | |
Sesnarine | 2.0 | Rustic | 80-16-0 | 7.68 | |
P. Buddhoo | 2.0 | Rustic | 52-12-0 | 5.49 | |
A. Mohammed | 1.5 | BR 444 | 26-12-0 | 5.49 | |
C. Singh | 81.2 | BR 240 | 28-5-8 | 5.49 | |
I. Alladin | 24.2 | F7-10 | 39-6-0 | 4.71 | |
| Farmers mean | 21.2 | Rustic | 67-14-0 | 6.45 | -- |
Breeding | -- do -- | BR 444 | 5.71 | ||
Breeding | -- do -- | Diwani | 6.37 | ||
Breeding | -- do -- | F7-10 | 5.22 |
3.4 Rice Yield Differences among Farmers in a hom*ogenousRegion
All farmers do not operate at the same efficiency level. In asurvey of rice farmers in Maligaya, Central Luzon, Philippines, Otai (1997)found that there were significant differences in rice yields of on-farm trials,farmer cooperators, and non-cooperators during the 1996 wet season and the 1997dry season (Table 3). PhilRice has estimated that only 40 percent of the farmersare as efficient as the best farmers and obtain high yields. About 50 percent ofthe farmers obtain 3.0 t ha-1 or less and 70 percent of the farmers 4t ha-1 or less. The average national rice yield is 3.3 tha-1. This average yield can be increased to 5.0 t ha-1with currently available technologies. Additional data in Table 4 demonstratethe differences in rice yields among farmers in Guyana. Significant yielddifferences among rice farmers do exist in other countries as well.
Certain factors (Figure 2) are responsible for yield gapsamong farmers: biological (soil, water, seed quality, pests); socioeconomic(social/economic status, family size, household income/expenses/investment);farmer knowledge (education level) and experience; farmers managementskills; farmers decision making (attitude, objectives, capability,behavior); and institutional/policy support (rural development &infrastructure, land tenure, irrigation, price, tax, crop insurance, etc.). Allthese factors should be addressed to reduce the yield gaps amongfarmers.
Figure 2. Yield gaps andconstraint research model (Source: De Datta et al 1978)
Progressive farmers differ from other farmers in adapting theknowledge and technologies to their own conditions to attain high yields intheir region. We have to identify the set of best farmers practices thatcan be transferred to other farmers so as to improve their efficiency infarming.
4. CROP MANAGEMENT TECHNOLOGY OPTIONS FOR REDUCING YIELDGAP
Rice production is coming under increasing pressure in Asiadue to population growth and changing socio-economic factors. Land, water andlabor resources are increasingly less available for rice production, while atthe same time, the demand for rice and for improved grain quality is increasing.To meet the challenges, technologies within the production and post-productionchains are changing (Table 5). The extent of the relevance of technologicaloptions depends in large part on the scales of production and the availabilityof resources. Improved technology options available for rice farmers are listedbelow:
· LandPreparation and Leveling: laser-aided precision leveling; herbicide-basedminimum tillage; dry shallow tillage prior to puddling; shallow tillage soonafter harvest to incorporate crop residues and improve soil N supply;hydrotiller, hand tractor, 4-wheel tractor.· Crop Establishment:transplanting machine; seedling broadcast; drum seeder, tiller-seeder-plankingattachment for hand-tractor, and seed-cum-fertilizer drill.
· Water Harvesting andManagement: farm pond; dry seeding; drought-tolerant varieties; improvedirrigation & drainage channels; saturated water condition for wet-seededrice; cyclic/intermittent irrigation (wetting and drying).
· Integrated NutrientManagement (INM): organic + chemical fertilizers; balanced, field-specificfertilizer recommendation; K in two splits; soil-test based S, Zn; real time Nmanagement with chlorophyll meter & leaf color chart; deep placement of ureabriquette; coated controlled release urea.
· Integrated Weed Management(IWM): cultural practices to minimize weed problem; row seeding + conoweeder package; timely and judicious herbicide use.
· Integrated Pest Management(IPM): no early spraying against leaf folders and thrips; pheromone trapsfor yellow stem borer; active barrier system for rat control; deployment ofpest-resistant varieties; silica application for blast control; timely andjudicious use of bio and/or chemical pesticides.
· Post-harvestTechnologies: improved serrated sickle; reaper; thresher; stripperharvester; combine; dryer; cleaner; improved mills; micro rice mill.
· By-productsUtilization: rice hull stove, rice hull briquette; rice bran oil extractor;rice hull ash + cement for hollow blocks; rice hull mulch for cut flower gardensand mushroom culture; rice puff machine; rice wine making.
Table 5. Shifts in Factors and Technologies and theirImplications
| Factors | Shift | Implications | |
| Positive | Needs & Concerns | ||
| Production Factors | |||
| Land preparation | Manual and hand tractor to 4 wheel tractor | Improved land preparation, Timeliness | Mobility and improved drainage required |
| Variety | Traditional to modern HYVs | Higher yield potential | Meeting grain quality and demands of markets |
| Seed quality | Poor/ordinary seed to improved, quality seed | Increased yield, reduced seed-borne pests, less weeds | Farmer training on benefits and production of quality seeds; source, storage conditions, seedling vigor |
| Crop establishment | Manual transplanting to machine trans-planting and direct seeding (wet & dry) | Reduced labor, less drudgery, improved timeliness | DSR: Weed pressures (red rice); need for better land leveling & improved water management |
| Pest management | From manual to chemical From calendar based application to integrated pest management (IPM) | IPM utilizes benefits of different forms of control and reduces reliance on chemicals. | With chemical control - selection of quality product, use of correct dose, uniformity of application; safety for the user and the environment, quality of products |
| Water management | Less available water- Better maintenance of irrigation & drainage structure; Shifts to low water levels, cyclic irrigation | Less water use, more area irrigated, higher water use efficiency | Cost of maintenance, community decision making in sharing water, pricing water, and weed problems |
| Nutrient management | Shift from blanket to site-specific, need-based nutrient management (chlorophyll meter, color chart); balanced NPK and other nutrients, INM | Less fertilizer cost, same or higher yields, less pests/diseases, less lodging, better quality water and soil. | Labor for adoption of certain techniques, cost of tools, quality assurance in decision tools, fertilizer quality |
| Post-production Factors | |||
| Harvesting and threshing | Manual to reaper/thresher to combine | Low labour requirement timely harvest and therefore better quality grain | Mobility - water management and field layouts required for larger equipment |
| Drying | Sun-drying to mechanical dryers | Timely drying, less spoilage and better quality grain | Cost of dryers, energy source and cost, utilization time, market incentive for dry grains |
| Cleaning | No or little cleaning (e.g., winnowing) to mechanical | Reduced pest and debris load; higher quality grain, less spoilage in storage | Cost of grain cleaners, power sources, market incentive for clean grains |
| Storage | Bag to bulk | Centralized, modern storage facilities; maintenance of better grain quality | Moisture content management, Spoilage from discoloration and insects, if not adequately treated and/or dried; not farm level |
| Milling | Hand pounding to steel huller to modified steel huller to rubber roll | Better quality grain Higher head rice yields | Adequate moisture content, maintenance of parts |
| Grain quality | Quantity to quality | Higher price and profitability | Production and post production management |
| Socio-economic Factors | |||
| Marketing | Subsistence to cooperative to commercial | Farmers obtain higher incomes through direct marketing | Organization and management skills; procurement of facilities |
| Credit | From money lenders to cooperatives and banks | Credit at low interest, inputs, and technical advice | Organization, collateral requirement, delay in credit delivery |
| Knowledge transfer | Alternate partners: NGOs, Cooperatives, Private sector | More choice and may be better and timely service; client-oriented | Profit motive of POs; less technical knowledge of NGOs |
5. PROFIT GAPS DUE TO POST-HARVEST LOSSES
About 20 to 25 percent of the harvested rice is lost before itreaches the consumers table. The post-harvest losses in both quantity andquality lead to substantial profit gaps among farmers. Improved processing,storage, and direct marketing will help farmers to increase their profits.Effective farmer organizations such as cooperatives can assist farmers inpost-harvest processing and marketing.
For better grain quality and higher head-rice yield,production and post-production practices have to be improved. Harvesting,threshing, cleaning, drying, and parboiling/drying are labour intensiveoperations in developing Asian countries. These operations must be carried outat the right time to minimize losses and to ensure good grain quality.Improvement and appropriate mechanization of these operations will depend on themarket demand and price incentive for quality rice. The level of processing,i.e., at farm, village or mill level, will determine the type of equipmentneeded. Most post-harvest equipment will require some minimum economy of scalefor their profitable operation. Organization of user groups is vital tosuccessfully introduce such equipment (D. de Padua, Consultant to IRRI AED,IRRI, Philippines, 1998, personal communication).
Harvesting
Farmers must harvest the crop at optimum maturity when 80 to85 percent of the grains are straw-coloured and the grain moisture content (MC)is 20 to 25 percent. A good indicator is that the grains will be firm but notbrittle at optimum maturity. Harvested crops will dry at 1 to 2 percent moistureper day. Harvesting of very dry crops will increase shattering losses andbreakage of grains at threshing and milling. Machines available for harvestingand cleaning are: reaper harvester, stripper gatherer, thresher, combineharvester, and cleaner.
Threshing
Harvested crops should be threshed soon; otherwise, the grainquality will deteriorate with longer waiting between harvesting and threshing.Machine threshing is normally done immediately after harvesting when the grainMC is 20 to 25 percent. If the grain MC is < 20 percent or > 25 percent,grain damage will occur at machine threshing. Hand threshing is normally doneone to two days of field drying after harvest, when the grains reach 20 percentMC. If the grain MC is > 25 percent, it will be difficult to thresh andseparate the grains from panicles by manual threshing.
Drying
Rice grains are dried to 14 percent MC before storage. Sundrying is the most common method used by farmers in Asia. If properly done, themoisture will be reduced from 20 to 14 percent in one day. Grain damage byrains, wind, or by birds is common in open drying floors. Different types ofdryers are available for drying wet rice: low cost in-store dryer (SRR) (1-2tonnes/60-70 h), flat bed dryer (4-6 tonnes/8 h), columnar batch recirculatingdryer (1-2 tonnes/6-8 h), etc. The grain quality is good and the germinationpercent is high with machine-dried rice.
Milling and Grain Quality
In rural areas, small mills (0.25 to 0.50 tph) are common.Grain quality is poor in these mills due to the use of Engleberg type steelhullers for dehusking and polishing in one pass. Small-scale commercial millswith 1-2 tph capacity use rubber rollers to improve grain quality.
Millers and traders maintain high grain quality for exportrice. The quality criteria differ for different markets and types of rice. Theprivate rice industry has developed many post-harvest procedures to meet thequality standards of various markets. They are mostly kept as trade secrets. Forexample, the processing of quality long grain rice involves:
· Dry to 13 percentmoisture just before milling.6. BRIDGING KNOWLEDGE GAPS BETWEEN RESEARCHERS, EXTENSIONSTAFF AND FARMERS· Use cream coloured, softrubber rollers for dehusking, with both rollers adjusted exactly parallel toeach other.
· Adopt 4-5 passes forpolishing, tempering the grains for 6-8 hours between passes.
· Use water polishing for shinygrains.
· Adopt lens grading for removalof smalls and brokens.
There are considerable knowledge gaps between researchers,extension agents, and farmers. We need to train the (government, non-government,private sector) extension staff and equip them with adequate tools so that theycan educate their farmer-clients. Farmers need adequate training and technicalsupport to improve their decision-making capacity.
6.1 Farmers Knowledge vs. ResearchersInsights
Farmers experience or indigenous knowledge (IK) isaccumulated over generations. Scientists technical knowledge issynthesized from years of research. These two systems of knowledge should beintegrated for the benefit of both and to enhance mutual learning to reduceknowledge gaps between farmers and researchers.
6.2 Knowledge gap between researchers and extensionstaff
The new knowledge and technologies are not reaching most ofthe farmers due to poor extension efforts in this area. The extension service inmany countries is very poorly trained and equipped to handle delivery of newknowledge from researchers to farmers. This lacuna should be urgentlyaddressed.
The technology delivery system should be re-oriented to handlechanging circ*mstances and to deliver complex, knowledge-intensive technologiesto farmers. We need to explore private sector extension agencies in commercialfarming areas and other service-oriented agencies (NGOs) in food crop areas toextend new knowledge and technologies to farmers. All of them should be properlytrained and equipped to promote new technologies. The effectiveness of differentcombinations of public, private, cooperative and NGO extension agencies is beingevaluated.
6.3 Farmer Education
Continuous farmer education is necessary to make themunderstand scientific principles of crop and resource management; adjust variousinputs to temporal and spatial variability of rice fields; adopt integratednutrient, water, weed, and pest management; and increase farm income throughefficient post-harvest processing and utilization of byproducts. For example, weare adapting simple decision tools such as the chlorophyll meter and leaf colourchart (LCC) to enhance their knowledge in need-based N management of ricecrops.
We can use different ways to transfer the knowledge tofarmers: farmer field school (FFS), farmer participatory research (FPR), privateadvisory groups, etc. FFS imparts systematic experience learning to farmers sothat they can effectively adapt and use the technologies. Through appropriateFPR, we can equip farmers with scientific principles of crop and resourcemanagement that they can use to adapt/refine new technologies to their owncirc*mstances and needs. The new knowledge should be couched in farmersfamiliar terms and allow them to experiment and evaluate it in their own waytill they get convinced. This will facilitate the incorporation of new knowledgeinto farmers own knowledge base.
6.4 Communication Strategies
Successfully evaluated technologies should be disseminated tofarmers in a large area to have a wider impact. We are evaluating effectivecommunication technologies such as radio and television (mostly one-way, largeaudience, time lag); two-way radio and telephone (two-way, timely, need-based,interactive); and internet/web-based communication (distance learning/teaching)for disseminating knowledge and technologies. We can use the GIS, crop models,and systems approaches to replicate successful outcomes in space andtime.
6.5 Institutional/Policy Support
Adequate rural infrastructure such as farmer traininginstitutions, various groups of extension/technology delivery agencies, farmcredit organizations, inputs/machinery suppliers, marketing outlets and traders,road, transport and communication networks and product quality and gradingcentres should be present to encourage farmers to produce food efficiently.Policy support in terms of pricing of inputs and outputs, incentives for farmersto encourage food production, land tenure, tax, crop insurance, etc., willoptimize farmers productivity.
6.6 Crop and Resource Management Network(CREMNET)
Field evaluation and delivery of the new knowledge andtechnologies to farmers are vital to achieve impact on productivity. We at IRRI,have developed a network to deal with the diffusion of information, knowledge,and technologies to rice farmers. This is called CREMNET, the Crop and ResourceManagement Network.
This network acts as a bridge between two groups of R and Dpartners: those who generate new research findings and technologies at the oneend and those who evaluate, adapt, and promote the technologies for use byfarmers at the other end. CREMNET encourages the two-way flow of information andfeedback between these two groups to improve the efficiency of both.
In the network mode of operation, we serve as a catalyst tonational R and D organizations to promote the applied, adaptive, and farmerparticipatory research on potential crop and resource management technologiessuitable for their regions. In this process, we also help in strengthening thenational R and D institutions through sharing of information, knowledge,techniques, tools, and methods, as well as by training collaborators. Ourultimate aim is to bridge the knowledge systems gaps of rice scientists andfarmers to maximize mutual benefits.
7. CONCLUSIONS
There is high variability in rice yields among countries andregions as well as among farmers even in hom*ogeneous domains. Profit gaps arisedue to post-harvest losses in quantity and quality of rice grain. Biophysical,socio-economic, management, institutional, and policy factors are responsiblefor yield and profit gaps. Identification of problems/causes for such gaps anddevelopment of possible mitigation measures can only be considered the first ofa two step process. The second and equally important step is to minimize theknowledge gap between researchers, extension staff and farmers by developing andusing viable mechanisms to transfer new knowledge and techniques fromresearchers to farmers and collect feedback to re-orient research on issuescritical to farmers.
An integrated crop management approach (water, soilfertility/nutrients, weeds/pests/diseases, and post-harvest processing) is vitalto maximize the productivity and profitability of rice farmers. All technologiesand practices should be used synergistically to help farmers increase and/ormaintain grain yields at the same or reduced cost. Improving the quality ofmilled rice and increasing the recovery of head-rice will enhance farmersprofitability.
We need to train the (government, non-government, privatesector) extension staff and equip them with adequate tools so that they caneducate their farmer-clients on modern rice farming. Farmers need adequatetraining and technical support to improve their decision-making capacity andproperly utilize the new techniques.
REFERENCES
Beecher, H.G. 1999. Rice production in temperate Australia.Paper presented at the International symposium on mechanized rice production andmarketing: present global status and prospects for the future, Guyana,13-17 September 1999.
DRR (Directorate of Rice Research), 1998. Progress Report,1997. Vol. 3: Agronomy, Soil Science and Physiology, pp 4.3 and 4.91-4.96. AllIndia Coordinated Rice Improvement Program (ICAR). Directorate of Rice Research,Rajendra Nagar, Hyderabad 500 030, A.P., India.
Fischer, K.S. and Cordova, V.G. 1998. Impact of IRRI on ricescience and production. Pages 27-50 In: Pingali, P.L. and Hossain, M.(eds.) Impact of Rice Research. Thailand Development Research Institute,Bangkok, Thailand, and International Rice Research Institute (IRRI), MCPO box3217, Makati 1271, Philippines.
Herdt, R.W. 1988. Increasing crop yields in developingcountries. Proc. 1988 Meeting of the American Agricultural EconomicsAssociation, 30 July - 3 August, Knoxville, Tennessee, USA.
Hossain, M. and Fischer, K.S. 1995. Rice research for foodsecurity and sustainable agricultural development in Asia. GeoJournal 35 (3):286-298
IRRI (International Rice Research Institute), 1998-1999. Rice:Hunger or Hope? IRRI, MCPO box 3217, Makati 1271, Philippines.
Otai, Ocilaje Michael. 1997. Utilization of theknowledge-intensive technologies chlorophyll meter (SPAD meter) and leaf colourchart (LCC) by lowland rice farmer cooperators in three communities in CentralLuzon, 1997. An M.S. Thesis submitted to the Faculty of the Graduate School,University of the Philippines at Los Banos, Philippines.
Paroda, R.S. 1998. Rice research and development status andfuture directions. Inaugural address given at the Directorate of Rice Research33rd All India Rice Research Group Meeting, Punjab AgriculturalUniversity, Ludhiana, Punjab, 16-18 April 1998, Mimeo p 9.
Pingali, P.L., Hossain, M. and Gerpacio, R.V. The Asian ricebowls: The returning crisis? CAB International, London, and IRRI, MCPO box 3217,Makati 1271, Philippines.
Shrivastava, M.N., Persaud, M., Ramsaran, P., Khan, F. andGouveia. G. 1999. Improving production potential of rice varieties formechanized cultivation under flooded conditions in Guyana. Paper presented atthe International symposium on mechanized rice production and marketing: presentglobal status and prospects for the future, Guyana, 13-17 September1999.
Virmani, S.S. and Sharma, H.L. 1994. Manual for hybrid riceseed production. International Rice Research Institute (IRRI), MCPO box 3217,Makati 1271, Philippines.
Virmani, S.S., Young, J.B., Moon, H.P., Kumar, I. and Flinn,J.C. 1991. Increasing rice yield through exploitation of heterosis.International Rice Research Institute (IRRI), MCPO box 3217, Makati 1271,Philippines.
