0949 the epidemiology of sri: high hopes and falling trees

The Epidemiology of SRI:

High Hopes and Falling Trees

Roundtable on System of Rice Intensification IDS, University of Sussex

December 17, 2009

Norman Uphoff, CIIFAD

This subject can be framed by a

pop song and a philosophical query• ‘High hopes’ have animated SRI

efforts• Like little old ants and silly old rams?• Ambitious objectives plus persistence

•If a tree falls and nobody hears it?... We have tried to get ‘trees’ to fall all over the world -- whether or not the scientific community was listening•Bottom-up approach - ‘boots on ground’

•‘Put not your faith in princes’ (Psalm 146:3)

Started with an understanding that SRI is

not a technology something different, many

things• Epistemological orientation:• Inductive, and not reductionist

• Ontological assumptions:•Dialectical (Heraclitean), both materialist & non-materialist•This is not an ‘either/or’ world

•Pluralist post-modern outlook

Inductive semantic realizations

• ‘SRI’ is better understood as an adjective than as a noun

• ‘SRI’ is more a matter of degree than of kind

These understandings have not been widely shared, however

Many things have been SRI-inspired rather than being ‘SRI’

Rice scientists ask: What is SRI?

This is not a problem for farmers & practitioners

working with them• Reports are generated from the field - week after week, season after season

• SRI is an example of where practice has preceded the science that explains it• Previous example of the airplane

(Ruttan)• This challenges the ‘linear model’ that

has been dominant throughout the 20th century: researcher extension farmer/adopter

• SRI favors the ‘triangular model’ (ISNAR)

‘Rice Aplenty in Aceh

(Indonesia)’

CARITAS NEWSSpring 2009

SRI methods were introduced in Aceh in 2005 by CARITAS Australia after tsunami had devastated the area – new methods raised local rice yields from 2 t/ha to 8.5

t/ha: “Using less rice seed, less water and organic compost, farmers in Aceh have

quadrupled their crop production.”

2009 Report from Aga Khan

Foundation: Baghlan Province,

Afghanistan

2008: 6 farmers got SRI yields of 10.1 t/ha vs. 5.4 t/ha regular2009: 42 farmers got SRI yields of 9.3 t/ha vs. 5.6 t/ha regular

2nd year SRI farmers got 13.3 t/ha vs. 5.6 t/ha1st year SRI farmers got 8.7 t/ha vs. 5.5 t/ha

AFGHANISTAN: SRI field in Baghlan Province, supported by Aga Khan Foundation Natural Resource Management

program

AKF technician making field visit in Baghlan Province

SRI field at 30 days

SRI plant with 133 tillers @

72 days after transplanting

11.56 t/ha

IRAQ: Comparison trials at Al-Mishkhab Rice Research Station, Najaf

From Report on SRI in Deorali Geog, Bhutan, 2009

Sangay Dorji, Jr. Extension Agent, Deorali Georg, Dagana

SRI @ 25x25cm 9.5 t/ha SRI random spacing 6.0 t/ha

SRI @ 30x30cm 10.0 t/ha Standard practice 3.6 t/ha

Mechanized Systems of Crop Intensification

(MSCI)

1 KM Defence Road, Bhobatian Chowk, Raiwind Road, Lahore, Pakistan

Tel: +92 (042) 532 2205 Fax: +92 (042) 532 1509

info@farmalltechnology.comwww.farmalltechnology.com

Solutions Provider in Farm Sector

Pakistan: Private-sector applications of SRI principles; mechanized rice production (8 ha) was 13 t/ha;

applications are being made to wheat, sugar cane, potatoes, onions, etc.

Mechanical weeder for raised beds --for spacing 9x9 inch

(22.5x22.5 cm) – gives very good soil aeration

SRI is best understood as being

a ‘civil society’ innovation• But with a broad understanding

of civil society – including state agencies, research institutions, private sector

• Originated from the life’s work of Henri de Laulanié, SJ, in Madagascar, working with small/poor farmers, observing, experimenting, plus some serendipity

• Farmer knowledge is not always right!

• SRI has proceeded in a non-hierarchical, voluntary, opportunistic, non-formal manner

IRRI has characterized SRI as a movement – WU study• But this is only one aspect of SRI• SRI is manifested in three domains:

• Biophysical innovation – new ways to manage plants, soil, water and nutrients in order to produce better phenotypes

• Social network – focus of concern here, will consider alternative ways to perceive

• Paradigm shift – operating in the realm of ideas – change our understanding of world

• These interdependent realms interact

Status of SRI: As of 1999

Known and practiced only in Madagascar

Before 1999: Madagascar1999-2000: China, Indonesia2000-01: Bangladesh, Cuba Cambodia, Gambia, India, Laos, Myanmar, Nepal, Philippines, Sierra Leone, Sri Lanka, Thailand 2002-03: Benin, Guinea, Mozambique, Peru

2004-05: Senegal, Mali, Pakistan, Vietnam2006: Burkina Faso, Bhutan, Iran, Iraq, Zambia2007: Afghanistan, Brazil 2008: Rwanda, Costa Rica, Ecuador, Egypt, Ghana2009: Timor Leste, Malaysia

2009: SRI benefits have now been validated in

37 countries of Asia, Africa, and Latin America

SRI as been likened to an infection – a benign virus?

• Its spread is trackable between and within countries

• SRI contagion can be rapid or slow and it can induce a kind of ‘fever’

• Metaphor is immediately recognized and embraced by most in the ‘movement’

* * * *Quantitative analysis of listing of 240

persons with significant roles in the spread of SRI around the world

Approximate Regional Distribution of SRI Network, by

Roles(N) Africa LAC ME&NA So Asia SE Asia E Asia Europe U.S.

Transnat’l. Movers

17 1 1 3 3 8

Support Staff 8 1 2 5

Country Leaders

43 6 4 4 15 10 3 1 0

Initiators 44 10 3 0 16 14 2 1 0

Enablers 45 3 0 1 12 6 5 9 9

Evaluators 31 7 2 0 7 3 4 2 6

Sages 16 2 1 0 2 2 2 2 5

Well-wishers 25 3 1 0 2 4 2 8 5

Angels 12 0 1 0 2 5 0 1 3

Totals 242 31 13 5 59 47 18 27 41

Approximate Sectoral Distribution of SRI Network, by

Roles(N)

Govt.Bodies NGO

Res. Insts.

Univer-sities

Priv. Sector

Grass-roots

Intl. Orgs. Other

Transnat’l. Movers

17 0 4 2 6 1 0 3 1

Support Staff

8 0 2 0 4 0 0 0 2

Country Leaders

44 7 12 7 11 2 2 1 2

Initiators 44 7 12 2 7 3 5 3 6Enablers 45 8 12 2 4 4 1 11 3Evaluators 33 2 0 6 21 0 0 4 0

Sages/ Adv. 16 1 4 4 5 0 0 1 1Well-wishrs 25 3 3 3 5 2 0 6 3Angels/ Fin. 12 1 2 0 0 4 1 0 4

245 29 51 26 63 16 9 29 22

Cornell Connections of SRI Network Participants, by Roles

(N) Men WomenCornell Faculty/

Stud/Staff

Cornell Programs

Cornell Contacts

SRI Info Cornell

Transnational Movers

17 12 5 3 1 5 7

Support Staff 8 2 6 4 0 0 4

Country Leaders

44 38 6 4 3 11 26

Initiators 44 35 9 5 3 6 31

Enablers 46 38 8 7 5 10 24

Evaluators 33 26 7 10 3 9 11

Sages/ Advisors 16 13 3 3 4 6 3

Well-wishers 25 20 5 3 5 8 9

Angels 10 9 1 0 1 0 9

243 192 50 39 25 55 124

How to Understand Dynamics?

SRI is unprecedented: both (a) as an agricultural innovation (less more) and (b) as a social movement (email/ internet have changed many dynamics)

Still, there are some interesting ‘precedents’ in history and fiction

Following thoughts are musings more than explanations --

• Need to consider two kinds of causation

• Mechanism vs. process causation?

Some Historical and Fictional Precedents? …

MusingsMy role in all this can be overestimated as easily as it may be underestimated… Perspective is unavoidably egocentric…

1.Apostolic Movement?2.Challenge to Orthodoxy?3.Long and Difficult Quest?Main conclusion so far is that we should: Avoid orthodoxy!

Precedent from Previous Work in Development: Gal

OyaTransformation of most run-down irrigation system in Sri Lanka – through Institutional Organizers and Farmer Organization network – how achieved?

1.Ideas2.Ideals3.FriendshipThese 3 factors drive ‘SRI movement’

SRI-Inspired Phenomena

• Rainfed SRI – 7 t/ha average• Other crops – wheat, sugar cane, finger millet, teff, etc.• Diversified smallholder farming systems (Cambodia)• Appreciation of plant-microbial interactions and of epigenetics

System of Finger Millet I ntensificationon lef t; regular management of improved

variety and of traditional variety on right

ICRISAT-WWF Sugarcane

Initiative: at least 20% more cane

yield, with: • 30% reduction in water, and • 25% reduction in chemical inputs

‘The inspiration for putting this package together is from the successful approach of SRI – System of Rice Intensification.’

Extensions of SRI to Other Crops: Extensions of SRI to Other Crops: Uttarakhand / Himachal Pradesh, India Uttarakhand / Himachal Pradesh, India

Crop No. of Farmers

Area (ha)

Grain Yield (t/ha)

%Incr.

2006 Conv. SRI

Rajma 5 0.4 1.4 2.0 43Manduwa 5 0.4 1.8 2.4 33Wheat Research

Farm5.0 1.6 2.2 38

2007

Rajma 113 2.26 1.8 3.0 67Manduwa 43 0.8 1.5 2.4 60Wheat (Irrig.)

25 0.23 2.2 4.3 95

Wheat (Unirrig.)

25 0.09 1.6 2.6 63

Rajma (kidney beans)

Manduwa (millet)

Comparison of SRI and usual rice plants –

Miyatty Jannah, Crawuk village,

Ngawi, E. Java

THANK YOU

• Check out SRI website: http://ciifad.cornell.edu/sri/

• Email: ciifad@cornell.edu

• or ntu1@cornell.edu