Exploring ‘Agro-ecological Intensification’ through Participatory

Action Research: Is lesson learned elsewhere could benefit farmers of

Bihar1?

Prabhat Kumar2 & Abha Mishra3

Discliamer: Views expressed in this paper may or may not subscribe to the affiliated institutions.
1
Paper to be presented in the Scientific Foresight 2007; S. K. Memorial Hall, Patna, Bihar 22-24 December 2007.

2
Prabhat Kumar works as Assistant Professor at RAU, Pusa and also as a Regional IPM Expert Consultant of the FAO Inter-Country Programme to
Strengthen IPM Training and Sustain IPM Practices among Vegetable Farmers in South and Southeast Asia. He has published several scientific papers
in leading international journals and actively involved with the dual cause of ‘farmers education/learning” and Entomological Science in the Asian
region. He can be contacted over email: pkipm@yahoo.com or P.Kumar@aol.in .
3
Abha Mishra works as Assistant Professor at RAU, Pusa and currently engaged with her PhD research at Asian Institute of Technology. As a part of
her PhD, she is actively engaged with Rice farmers in the Cambodia and in the NE Thailand to explore the scientific and social basis for the sustainable
rice production and other alternative, notably SRI (System of Rice Intensification). She has recently published several research papers in international
journals and is recipient of Asia Rice Foundation USA award for the year 2005 and could be contacted over email: Abha.Mishra@ait.ac.th.
Abstract:

Agriculture dominates socio-economic and political life of 130 millions peoples in Bihar - spread to the
vast scratches of river plains in the north to the Chhotanagpur plateau in the south. Low productivity of
major cereal crops resulting into the chronic shortage of food and partial to complete starvation situation
was addressed through large scale adoption of ‘input driven’ green revolution in 1970s with astounding
success. After two decades or so of adoption of ‘green revolution’ , truth is out - that only a proportion of
resource rich farmers were benefited; yields are torpid if not declining; diversity of crops are reducing;
insect-pest and disease outbreaks has increased etc. etc.

Given the challenges of ever increasing population and decreasing production base in the state, need for
an alternative ‘research-extension’ system is crucial for sustainable agriculture production in Bihar.
“Agro-ecological intensification” based PAR /participatory action research), could be successfully used to
address technological as well as farmers education challenges. This approach brings collaborative inquiry
into the farm problem for sustainable eco- agriculture intensification in order to innovate/adopt/adapt
knowledge-intensive technologies that enhance scientifically sound decision making at the field level.
Often, physical technology e.g. equipment and crop varieties or knowledge change in farmers are
embedded in this approach (like IPM, ICM etc.).

In support of the idea, several examples of this approach, those were funded by FAO / CGIAR will be
provided and lessons learned from these experiences and their impact will be presented here. Followed to
that a short summary and possible action points (including policy implications) will be enlisted in this
regard.

2
1. Introduction:

1.1 Bio-physio-social condition of Bihar and production trends

The state of Bihar was reorganized on the 15th November, 2000 with 38 districts of erstwhile

undivided Bihar. The state has an area of 94,163 Square Km. and a population of 82.88 millions

according to 2001 census (now 130 millions approximately). The population of the State constitutes 8.07

percent of that of the country with about 3 percent of the area thereof. This adverse land-man ratio is

reflected in the high density of population which is 880 per sq. km. The decadal rate of growth of

population for 1991-2001 has been 28.43 percent which is the highest in the country. The literacy rate in

the state has been 47.53 per cent according to 2001 census as against 38.50 percent in 1991 census4. More

than 80% of the total population is, directly or indirectly, dependent on agriculture. Almost two third of

the area of the state consists of flood prone alluvial plain of the Kosi Gandak, Sone and other rivers while

the rest one third is constituted by drought prone and Tal-diara areas. The state has achieved self-

sufficiency in food grain productions (see Fig. 1 for recent production trends) but we still need to go

ahead in improving the productivity in order to cater the future needs and to improve per capita income

(Anno.2007). Bihar is among the least developed states of India and has a per capita income of $155 a

year against India's average of $255. A total of 30.6% live below the poverty line against India's average

of 22.15% (Annon., 2007a).

40 40

2005-06 2005-06
2006-07 2006-07
Produciton (Lakh Metric Tonnes)

30 30
Area (Lakh Hectare)

20 20

10 10

0 0
Rice Wheat Maize Pulses Rice Wheat Maize Pulses

Major Crops Grown Major Crops Grown

Fig. 1. Recent agriculture production statistics of Bihar, Kharif 2007

4
Information presented here are compiled form the Planning and Development Department of Bihar Government and is available at their website:

3
1.2. Green revolution and its impact

The large scale adoptions of “Green Revolution” technologies in Bihar and elsewhere in India in

70s not only brought with it the bounty of wheat and rice but also probably saved millions from partial

and/or complete starvation. The agricultural sorority in country rightly needs appreciation of its hard work

and dedicated effort to reach out to those farmers who could afford the input-driven model for research

and extension. But with the more grains and better economy for a part of peasantry, green revolution saw

agro-chemicals e.g. fertilizers and pesticides aggressively introduced on a large scale throughout the India

and much of developing world of Asia, and these introductions are not always based on ‘informed needs’

of the community. On another side, the “package of practice’ approach, where a suit of agronomic

practices were introduced along with selected varieties of crops, and its massive impact on grain

production astounded almost everyone. Furthermore, the creation of new research stations; agriculture

university in collusion with the agri-industry become the new temple of hope for millions. The HYVs

(high yielding varieties) have definitely, without question raised productivity many fold, however, the

associated input of synthetic fertilizers and insecticides have without question led to a progressive

deterioration of soil fertility, water quality and human and environmental health along with biodiversity

(Whitten and Settle 1998). In addition, these changes in agricultural scene in Bihar and elsewhere in India

brought benefits of specialization those are based on "economies of scale" where mechanization,

specialized know-how and marketing (often through state or central trading corporation or private

corporation e.g. Wheat and Rice procurement by FCI (Food corporation of India) or state trading

corporations) are involved and on exploiting comparative advantages of the local production situation.

The resulting change from a diverse farming to large scale monocultures simplification has a pronounced

effect on field and farm-level diversity and environmental side effects (pollution and loss of

environmental services). Environmental resources and indigenous knowledge have been disrupted and

today, agricultural practices can hardly be defined as sustainable in the state. This situation compelled to

introduce the term/ideas “Agro-ecological intensification” (Srivastava et al. 1996). Now the question

arises - is it possible to intensify agriculture while enhancing biodiversity? The pursuit of sustainable eco-

agriculture intensification require substantial increases in knowledge-intensive technologies that enhance

scientifically sound decision making at the field level. This can be embedded in physical technology (for

example, equipment and crop varieties) or in humans (for example, integrated pest management, ICM,

SRI, INM etc.), but both are essential. However, the challenges of disseminating information on new

4
technologies or on efficient input use and management are enormous, especially in cases where extension

programmes are ineffective or completely lacking. The earlier paradigm of science being developed at the

international or perhaps national level and then disseminated to farmers using some extension tool as

practiced under T & V system.

A closer examination of T & V system will reveal that they act more as a virtual/real conduit for

“external inputs” and hardly focus on “internal resources” such as knowledge, skill and ecological

understanding needed for sustainable agro-ecological intensification. The new paradigm and ‘both-and’

demands an active exchange of information among scientists and farmers. Therefore, participatory and

group-based approaches, which focus on learning and empowerment, have been increasingly gaining in

importance (e.g., Pannell 2006, Mishra et al., 2007) for realizing research for sustainable development.

Even in the recent reports progressive decay and ineffectiveness of this extension is highlighted (see

Anderson, 2007 more details).

In this paper, we brief the ecological dimension of agriculture and present some case studies

carried out under auspices of FAO (Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations) and by

other agencies like CGIAR (Consultative Group of International Agriculture Research) and Non-

governmental organizations (NGOs) for Integrated Crop and Pest Management (IPM) for rice and

vegetables in some South and SE Asian countries that holds much promises for inching towards

‘Ecological Agricultural Intensification. We also discuss the relevance of participatory action research

approach for sustainable eco- agricultural intensification in Bihar.

5
2.1. The ecological dimension of Agriculture

The flow of energy (that involves biological and non-biological agents) drives the carbon,

oxygen, nitrogen and phosphorus cycles. Nutrients are pumped through the system by the action of

photosynthesis and are again made available for recycling by the action of decomposers. Nutrients are

constantly being removed or added; adding more natural substances or synthetic materials than the

ecosystem is able to handle upsets bio-geochemical cycles.

For example, the nitrogen cycle is characterized by fixation of atmospheric nitrogen by nitrogen-

fixing plants, largely legumes (i.e. symbiotic bacteria living in association with leguminous), root-

noduled non-leguminous plants, free-living aerobic bacteria, and blue-green algae. In agricultural

ecosystems, the nodulated legumes of approximately 200 species are the pre-eminent nitrogen fixers. In

non-agricultural systems, some 12 000 species are responsible for nitrogen fixation.

Environmental services and microorganisms: that are vital to agriculture include:

Soil forming and conditioning. A substantial amount of invertebrates (earthworms, millipedes, termites,

mites, nematodes, etc.) play a role in the development of upper soil layers through decomposition of plant

litter, making organic matter more readily available, and creating structural conditions that allow oxygen,

food and water to circulate.

For example, the amount of soil worked over by earthworms is tremendous: 4-36 tons of soil passes

through alimentary tracts of the total earthworm population living on an acre in a year! Termites are the

only larger soil inhabitants that are able to break down the cellulose of wood. Termites play a major role

in tropical soils where there are also soil churners; they move as much as 5 000 tons of soil per acre in

constructing their complex mounds (allowing better rain penetration in soil).

Waste disposal. A succession of micro-organisms occurs in the detritus, involving namely bacteria and

fungi as well as detritus-feeding invertebrates, until organic material is finally reduced to elemental

nutrients. Ecosystems recycle, detoxify and purify themselves, provided that their carrying capacity is not

exceeded by excessive amounts of waste and by the introduction of persistent (synthetic) contaminants.

For example, the nutrient-filtering function of mangroves can be compared to that of oxidation ponds of

conventional wastewater treatment plants.

Pest control. Predation is not just the transfer of energy whereby one organism feeds on another organism

but also complex interactions among predator-prey populations. If a portion of the prey is not available

6
because of environmental discontinuities (a typical case in agriculture), the self-regulating balance will be

dampened. Inter-specific competition keeps more pests in check than we ever could by using pesticides.

Biodiversity. An ecosystem stability (or instability) depends on the results of the competition between

different species for food and space. Predation ameliorates the intensity of competition for space and

increases species diversity. The nature of inter-specific competition and its effects on the species involved

is one of the least known and most controversial areas of ecology.

Beneficial associations. Symbiosis of plant roots with mycorrhizal fungi plays a most important role in

temperate and tropical forests in absorbing nutrients, transferring energy and reducing pathogen

invasions. Parasitism is used in the biological control of insects. Other symbiotic combinations include

animal/fish/tree species (e.g. agro forestry, varietal diversification).

Pollination. 220 000 out of 240 000 species of flowering plants are pollinated by insects.

Carbon sequestration. The capacity of biomass in sequestrating carbon is receiving an increased attention

with the aim of reducing (in the long term) climate change. Where no tillage is practiced, soil contributes

to retaining carbon. As organic agriculture favors minimum tillage (for better retention of water, nutrients,

and biodiversity), the carbon retention potential of soils is becoming an important issue.

Habitat. Although by definition, habitats provide shelter and food, many ecosystems have functions often

discounted. For example, hedgerows around a field provide habitat for over-wintering of beneficial

arthropods.

2.2 Integrated Pest Management: Evolution of a concept

The label ‘Integrated Pest Management’ has enjoyed different definitions and meanings over the last four
decades and has considerably evolved. FAO, through it’s Rome based Crop Protection Service (AGPP)
and its Panel of International IPM Expert, played a leadership role in the evolution of the concept
between 1960 and 1980. Within FAO the concept of IPM has evolved from a strictly crop protection
related concept to a much more holistic and ecological approach to crop production and protection. And
the evolution of the concept hasn’t stopped since. Through the more recent pioneering work of the FAO
IPM Programmes in Asia and a range of international and local development organization partners, IPM
has become synonymous with education and human resource development programs. These programs
often had (and continue to have) farmer training in crop protection and reduction of chemical pesticides
as entry points but have subsequently broadened to include overall crop production. The more recent term
“Integrated Production and Pest Management (IPPM)”, widely used in FAO IPM training programs,
especially on the African continent, more appropriately describes the curriculum content of IPM training
programs. And, equally important, the training curriculum also addresses social issues and community

7
development aspects. Thus, the ‘IPM’ label has evolved from a strictly technical to a much more holistic
approach to crop production, human resource- and rural development. The nature of this new meaning
can be gauged for example by reference to material posted on the website (www.communityipm.org) and
the recent 2002 FAO publication titled “From Farmer Field Schools to Community IPM: Ten Years of
IPM Training in Asia“ (FAO, 2002a) {adopted from (Ketelaar and Kumar, 2002)}

2. Bringing science to society through Participatory Action Research – Some relevant examples
from Asia

Now, let’s discuss some of the examples to pursuit the agro-ecological intensification and conservation

agriculture through Participatory Action Research (PAR). We would like to present here 3 case studies

from three different Asian countries, where we believe that sustainable productions were achieved using

IPM/ICM concept.

2.1 Case Study: Reduced Pesticide Applications by IPM Expert Farmers in Eggplant Production in
Bangladesh

Brinjal (eggplant) is widely grown in Bangladesh as it is one of the most preferred vegetables

by local consumers. Brinjal receives the maximum amount and frequency of insecticides applications

compared to all other vegetable crops in Bangladesh owing to the susceptibility of the crop to damage

caused by a range of insect pests and diseases (see Table 1; please note that these problems are common

here in Bihar too). The abusive use of pesticides was confirmed by a baseline survey conducted by the

Department of Agriculture Extension (DoAE) at the beginning of the Phase I of the FAO Regional

vegetable IPM program in 1996-7. This survey showed that farmers apply insecticides up to 80 times per

season with Fruit and Shoot Borer (FSB) (Leucinodes orbonalis) as the main target. The evident overuse

of pesticides in eggplants called for a major IPM training intervention in order to allow eggplant farmers

to reduce use of pesticides. Two season-long Vegetable IPM Training of Trainers Courses were held in

Bangladesh throughout the life-time of the FAO Phase I Vegetable IPM Programme. These TOTs were

followed by Farmers’ Field School (FFSs) and action research programs, with a special focus on allowing

farmers to understand the ecology and management of FSB.

8
Table 1: Common Crop Protection Problems Associated with Eggplant Cultivation in Bangladesh

Diseases
Insect pests Virus diseases Nematode
(Fugal and bacterial)
Root Knot
Bacterial wilt Little leaf disease
Fruit and Shoot Borer nematode
(Ralstonia (Mycoplasma like
(Leucinodes orbonalis Guenée) (Meloidogy
solanacearum) organisms)
ne sp.)
Phomopsis
Thrips (Thrips palmi Karny) tobacco rattle virus
rot (Phomopsis vexans)
Red Spider mite (Tetranychus
cucumber mosaic virus
cinnabarinus Boisduval)
Green Jassids (Empoasca sp.) tomato ringspot virus
Epilachna beetle (Epilachna
vigintioctopunctata Fabricius)

Through weekly Agro-ecosystem Analysis (AESA), FFS-farmers learnt about crop ecology, which
allowed them to make informed decisions on crop management. Life cycles of important pest problems
and their natural enemies were explored through on-site rearing and experimentation. Farmers studied the
important concept of crop compensation through ‘crop compensation studies’. These studies allowed
farmers to understand that healthy crops can compensate for FSB damage, especially during the
vegetative growth stage. This new understanding enabled farmers to become confident that not all FSB
damage results into crop loss. IPM farmers then significantly reduced insecticide applications for FSB
early in the crop growth cycle.

Pupae Young larvae

Life Cycle (24-25 Days)

Eggs (singly laid)

Larvae inside Fruit

Female & Male FSB

Fig. 2. Life cycle and various development stages of Fruit and Shoot Borer5

5
Source of these photographs: ( http://www.avrdc.org/LC/eggplant/rear_efsb/04life.html). Accessed on 6 December 2007

9
Management options that allowed farmers to further reduce the number of insecticide application for Fruit
and Shoot Borer included:
• Thorough cleaning of seedlings before transplanting to remove eggs and other immature stages;
• Regular observation of the crop during the vegetative stage and removal of the FSB infested
twigs;
• FSB management based on weekly crop ecosystem analysis;
• Improved crop hygiene by sweeping dead leaf and crop debris to remove the pupae of FSB;
• Keeping the field surface clean and remove crop residues;
• Removal and sanitation of the FSB infested fruits from the field at the time of harvesting.

As a result of this new IPM knowledge acquired through participation in FFSs, IPM farmers were able to
reduce the number of applications of insecticide from 60-80 sprays per season to 15 sprays per season.
These results are confirmed by more recent impact analysis studies of IPM FFSs training programs
implemented in collaboration with other partner organizations in Bangladesh (see table 2).

Table 2: FFS Impact Evaluation on Farmers Cultivating Brinjal in Bangladesh6

Parameters Benchmark (before IPM-trained Untrained % Difference

(mean of FFSs training) farmers farmers (after training)
evaluated)
Winter 2000/01 (49 FFSs):
Sprays/farmer 14.46 2.23 12.81 -84.6
Granular 0.41 0.07 0.36 -83.4
application per
farmer
Pesticide cost 7,131 1,414 6,777 -80.2
(taka/ha)
Yield (kg/ha) 16,737 19,370 16,887 +15.7
Summer 2001 (46 FFSs):
Sprays/farmer 16.27 3.31 14.62 -79.6
Granular 0.45 0.09 0.34 -80.1
application per
farmer
Pesticide cost 7,648 1,710 6,935 -77.7
(taka/ha)
Yield (kg/ha) 22,129 23,875 19,768 +7.9

Encouraged by these initial successes in pesticide reductions, IPM farmers formed ‘farmers
clubs’. In the Jessore region of southern Bangladesh, one of the major objectives of these clubs was to
further enhance the knowledge base of the farmers on wider aspects of eggplant cultivation, including
proper seed bed management and better fertilizer and water management. The IPM Farmer Clubs also
explored and evaluated novel options for FSB management. For example, insect-killing nematodes
(Steinernema carpocapsae) were imported from Thailand for field experimentation purposes by the IPM
Farmer Clubs. IPM farmers learned that these nematodes could kill the FSB larvae by locating the host

6
Table taken from Lim & Ooi, 2002, adapted from DAE-DANIDA SPPS, 2001; Larsen, 2001. One FFS represents 25-30 men and
women farmers, who have undergone season long training.

10
deep inside the eggplant branches and fruits. They also learnt that this species of the nematode would not
work if local temperatures would exceed 35°C. Consequently, another more heat-tolerant strain, S.
riobrave, was imported from Australia for experimentation purposes. Some enthusiastic IPM farmers also
learnt that these nematodes could be mass-produced in the homestead. Some of these farmers started
experimenting with rearing the nematodes albeit without much success owing to poor hygiene and
contamination of the culture. The promising and novel option of FSB control with entomopathogenic
nematodes deserves further attention in action research programs that involve IPM farmers.

The FAO Programme assisted other IPM FFSs programs (e.g. implemented by DANIDA-SPPS,
CARE-Bangladesh and local NGO Proshika) in staff training to share the innovative brinjal IPM
experiences. These FFSs programs continue to develop eggplant growers into IPM experts using the FFS-
training approach. Clearly, IPM Expert farmers are able to considerably reduce use of pesticides, increase
yield and make eggplant production more profitable (table 3).

2.2 Case Study: Participatory Action Research on increasing water use efficiency in Rice using
principles of System of Rice Intensification (SRI and green mulch in NE Thailand7

Under a CPWF (Challenge Programme for Water and Food; www.waterandfood.org/ ) small

grant to the Asian Institute of Technology (AIT; www.ait.ac.th) from CGIAR’s (www.cgair.org) CPWF,

a collaborative enquiry into the water productivity and weed problem issues of the transplanted rice under

the ambient of SRI (System of rice intensification) were carried out with a group of farmers, NGO and

GO personnel in Ban Chaeng, District, At Samart, Roi-Et, Thailand using. PAR. In addition to the action

research, weekly FFSs were conducted for 18 weeks and each week, one or more topics related to water

use in rice were discussed with participating farmers and non-formal education trainees. Two experiments

were carried out during first season in Wet season 2006 and in experiment 1- where the two water

regimes i.e. Just moist (JM) was compared with the farmers practice (flooding), no significant difference

in crop yields were noticed and the JM produced similar rice yield per unit area with less supplementary

irrigation. Similarly in experiment 2 –where different legumes were intercropped as cover crop in order to

suppress weed, SRI (see Stoop et al., 2002 for details) and Mung Bean combination was proved to be best

among all other tested bean intercropping, thereby providing high foliage and ground cover as green

mulch to the rice crop grown under SRI system of management. Similar experiments were repeated in the

dry season 2007 with more or less similar trends of reduced water use and increased productivity of rice.

7
More information can be requested from the authors, who were Principle Investigators of the project. Some of the reports of this
project and a 5 minute VDO film of this project (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b31LgNMu-hg ) are available on the Cornell’s
University SRI homepage http://ciifad.cornell.edu/sri/countries/thailand/index.html.

11
 The results for both seasons of experiments are shown in fig 1- 4. The results clearly show that higher

water productivity and rice yield obtained under SRI + green mulch (e.g. Mung bean) management

performed better than any existing farmer’s practice. Yield and water use efficiency advantages of SRI

management compared to farmer’s practice have been reported repeatedly (Koma, 2002, Satynarayana et

al., 2006) from various countries in South and SE Asia.

700 600
b b
600
Rice yield at harvest (Kilogram/Rai)

Rice yield at harvest (Kilogram/Rai)

500 a
a 531.0 kg
500
597.0 Kg 400
400 477.0 Kg 456.0 kg
300
300

200
200

100 100

0 0
30 Days Old 14 Days Old 30 Days Old 14 Days Old

Fig. 1 (left). Rice Yield per rai at Just Moist (JM) condition. 14 days old seedling performed better over 30 days old
seedling under similar water and other management conditions. Bars sharing same small case letters are not
significant F = 12.33; df = 1, 5 ;P <0.0248), (Tukey’s test [SAS Institute 1999]). Fig.2 (right). Rice Yield per rai at
flooding condition. 14 days old seedling performed better over 30 days old seedling under similar water and other
management conditions. Bars sharing same small case letters are not significant (F = 18.33, df = 1, 5, P <0.0123),
(Tukey’s test [SAS Institute 1999]).

Water Productivity under Flooding (FL)

and Just Moist (JM) for two seedling age 12 D and 30 D
Supplementary irrigation water use per rai (cubic meter)

700 3.0

600
Rice Kg/meter3 of water used

3 2.5
645 m
500
2.0
400
The water use is presented here in per rai basis.
It does not include the precipitation. 1.5
300

1.0
200
3
219 m
100 0.5

0 0.0
Flooding Just Moist
14D JM 30D JM 14D FL 30D FL

Fig.3 (Left) Total volume of supplementary irrigation water used under just moist and flooded rice cultivation
system. Please note that this information is compiled to show the difference of water use in two systems of rice;
flooding (traditional system) and Just moist (SRI method). Also, no precipitation amount is calculated in this graph,
and amount of water used is calculated on per rai basis. Fig. 4. Water productivity for two tested conditions of water
regime with farmers in the Ban Chaeng, Roi-Et. Please note that the 30 days seedling and flooding (30 D FL) are
simulated farming practice used in the experiment for comparison purposes.

12
 1000 1000 b

b a
Rice yield at harvest (Kilogram/Rai)

Rice yield at harvest (Kilogram/Rai)

800 800
a 847.20 Kg.
967.60 Kg.

600 600
748.20 Kg 853.40 Kg.

400 400

200 200

0 0
30 Days Old 12 Days Old 30 Days Old 12 Days Old

Fig. 4 (left). Rice Yield per rai at flooding condition. 12 days old seedling performed better over 30 days old seedling
under similar water and other management conditions. Bars sharing same small case letters are not significant (F =
45.12, df = 1, 9, P <0.002), (Tukey’s test [SAS Institute 1999]). Fig. 5. (right). Rice Yield per rai at Just Moist
condition. 12 days old seedling performed better over 30 days old seedling under similar water and other
management conditions. Bars sharing same small case letters are not significant (F = 68.96, df = 1, 9, P <0.001),
(Tukey’s test [SAS Institute 1999]).

Fig.6. Farmers engaged in the action research during dry season 2007, Ban Chaeng, Roi-Et Province, North East
Thailand. (Photo: authors)

13
 Apart from the direct results obtained and their adoption at farmers household and possibly at

their neighborhoods, the skills, developed during season-long FFS training provided opportunity to them

to do adaptive research to test and refine technology and/or management practices under prevailing

condition and added to the ideals of sustainable agriculture in general and water use efficiency in

particular. In present study, bringing SRI practice through FFS approach in a collaborative trial was an

attempt to understand underlying philosophies of linking Science and societies by engaging farmers,

researcher and other stakeholders to scientific research and development.

In this trial, the farmers group learnt ecosystem principles using “Agro-ecosystem Analysis”

(AESA) - a useful training design, that focuses on field observation and data collection of plant and its

micro-environment, analysis of data and its preparation for display and finally summary and group

presentation, at different growth stage of crop.

The success of such collaboration also encourages for paradigm shift needed for applied research

in small farms of Asia where there is still wide gap between potential farm yield and actual farm yield and

where farmers have greater control over their internal resources to manipulate them for realizing higher

yield (Mishra et al. 2006).

2.3. Integrated Production and Pest Management of Tomato Yellow Leaf Curl Virus and its Vector
Bemisia tabaci – a case study form the North Philippines

Tomato yellow leaf curl virus (TYLCV), which is vectored by Bemisia tabaci (whitefly) is a

serious limiting factor for tomato production worldwide. Farmers growing commercial tomato for

Northern Food Company in the Philippines were losing yield and income up to the extent of 80% due to

this problem since past 4-5 years. In response to their request, FAO Vegetable IPM programme began an

intensive training course to train farmers and trainers on this aspect. Followed to that; an action research

was initiated involving the Northern Food Company, tomato farmers, IPM trainers, local and FAO

scientists and others to find ways and means to reduce the virus and vector problem.

Following two tier non-chmical based management strategy were planned:

1. Minimizing virus acquisition in nursery (by introducing low-cost covered nursery)

2. Delaying virus infection in field crop using mulches and mineral oil combination

14
 Fig.7. IPPM training to the trainers and farmers, Dec. 2006, Ilocos Norte, the Philippines

Fig. 8. Weekly cumulative Tomato Yellow Leaf Curl Infected tomato plants expressing disease symptoms in pot
studies, where seedlings are either grown inside protected Nursery or in Open Field (control) (F = 11.35; df = 1,5; P =
0.0281).

15
 50 cm

Abbreviations used:
OM = Mineral oil OM ML0 B ML3 ML0

NOM = No Mineral Oil (Control)

ML 0 = NO Mulch (Control) 50 cm

ML 1 = Mulch type 1 ML2 ML1 ML2

ML 2 = Mulch type 2
ML 3 = Mulch type 3
ML1 ML0 ML3

A ML3 ML2 ML1 1m

NOM
ML0 ML2 ML0

ML2 ML3 ML1

ML1 ML0 ML3

28

C
26
ML3 ML1 ML2
% reflection of UV light

24

22

20

18

16
0 500 1000 1500 2000 2500 3000

Wavelength, nm (nano meter)

Fig.9. A. The field photo of the experiments. B. the layout, C. Percent reflection of UV light by one of the reflective
mulch.

40

a. Yield
30
Fruit Yield (Tons/ha)

20

10

0
WMO-WH WMO-YE WMO-SL WMO-NONE MO-WH MO-YE MO-SL MO-NONE

Treatments (WMO = no mineral oil; MO = Mineral Oil)

WH = White Mulch ; YE = Yellow Mulch ; SL = Silver Mulch
None = either no mulch or no mineral oil

16
b. Brix 6

NATURAL TOMATO SOLUBLE SOLIDS, 0BRIX

5

0
WMO-WH WMO-YE WMO-SL WMO-NONE MO-WH MO-YE MO-SL MO-NONE
Mean (+SE) Whitefly / Yellow Sticky Trap (3 March 2007

20
c. whitefly Average of 3 traps per treatment
18
16
14
12
10
8
6
4
2
0
WMO-WH WMO-YE WMO-SL WMO-NONE MO-WH MO-YE MO-SL MO-NONE

Treatments (WMO = no mineral oil; MO = Mineral Oil)

WH = White Mulch ; YE = Yellow Mulch ; SL = Silver Mulch
None = either no mulch or no mineral oil
35
Average of 3 traps per treatment
Mean (+SE) Whitefly / Yellow Sticky Trap

30
d. whitefly
on yellow sticky 25
traps
20

15

10

0
WMO-WH WMO-YE WMO-SL WMO-NONE MO-WH MO-YE MO-SL MO-NONE

Fig.10 (a-c) some results form the action research

17
Clearly the farmers were winner and owners of knowledge in this collaborative process. Their fruit yield

increased, virus and vectors decreased and net income increased. Moreover, the success will depend on

the constant evolution of partnership and collaborative technological innovation in this case.

3. Discussion & Summary

As stated above, the need to grow more crops per unit land with ecological sensitivity (judicious

and prudent use of natural resources etc.) would be most critical aspect of agriculture in coming years.

Changing social order and consumption pattern, new market economical realities, need of farm families

in global-village environment, depleting natural resource base and increasing cost of production would

need a matching and massive change in the existing paradigm of agriculture ‘research and extension’ in

Bihar and elsewhere in India. These changing environments necessitates change in the farmer’s

knowledge and require development of partnership of new kind – a win-win situation where scientists and

farmers help to preserve natural resource and at the same time feeds the ever growing population.

The significance of collaborative approach that links science and societies is increasingly being

recognized for mitigating these challenges. Action Research programs and associated philosophy

provides good base and opportunity to address these concerns in an integrated manner. Involving

empowered farmers in such collaborative approach could help to explore all aspects of local farm

problems, mindful of local agronomic conditions and taking care of ecosystem for sustainable production

The lessons we can learn from the presented case studies above could have following policy implications:

Farmer’s education process, which addresses, farmers’ education and empowerment, is only a first step in

the direction of sustainable research-extension continuum. The ever-increasing demand of location-

specific and need-based technology at the local level and environment-friendly technology at the global

level requires collaborative approach making balance between technological and integrated social

approach.

18
The experiences presented above entails the viability of such approach for successful intervention at farm

level without compromising local as well as global need. The model could be equally useful for other

crops and commodities as well.

• The existing KVKs/ Regional Research institutions/Agriculture universities/college in the

state could well provide interface for research and extension. This would not only insure

better and timely location-specific extension services to the farmers but also act as

complementary technology generation institution within communities.

• The human resource development angle in the form of empowered trainers and farmers

could well be another positive outcome of such collaboration. In addition, these empowered

farmers having solid understanding of natural resources environment could well become

partners in formulating farmers’ friendly and environmental friendly policies.

• One of the aspects that help sustain learnt knowledge in farmers is the economic benefit.

Action research as principle actively supports the idea that farmers should well link with

markets, financial institution to produce high quality marketable produce and their products

to derive benefit. On another fronts farmers’ cooperatives could be formed to produce high

quality agri products for economic sustainability at larger scale. The ‘green payment’ (a

payment to farmers who adopt sustainable agriculture practices) might be another option to

provide incentive to the farmers engaged in eco-friendly agriculture.

• Finally, there is a need of sensitization of research institute and scientists to the value of

participatory action research.

Acknowledgements

The authors are grateful to the many organizations especially Food and Agriculture Organization of the
United Nations (FAO) and its Regional IPM programme for South and SE Asia, where the first author
spend his time since 1997, and to the CGIAR, which funded Thai rice project through CPWF mentioned
in the paper. Also we would like to thank several colleagues notably Max Whitten, Ex Chief Technical
Advisor of FAO IPM; to Prof. Norman Upoff of Cornell University, US; to Jan Willem Ketelaar present
CTA of the FAO Regional vegetable program and to Prof. V. M. Salokhe of Asian Institute of
Technology.

19
Reference cited:

Annon. a. 2007. Economy. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bihar. Assessed on 29 November 2007.

Annon. b. 2007. http://planning.bih.nic.in/web/annualplan/ann200203/Agri_3.htm. Assessed on 29
November 2007
Anderson, J. R. 2007. Agricultural Advisory Services. Background Paper For The World Development
Report 2008. Available at site:
http://siteresources.worldbank.org/INTWDR2008/Resources/2795087-
191427986785/Anderson_AdvisoryServices.pdf
Bunch, R. 1982. Dos Mazorcas de Maiz: una guia para el mejoramiento agricola orientado hacia la gente.
Oklahoma City: World Neighbors. In, Nelson, C. K. (1994),
DAE (Department of Agricultural Extension)-DANIDA SPPS, 2001. Farmer field schools: Impact of
IPM activities in vegetables during the winter 2000/2001 season in Bangladesh. SPPS 56.
Department of Agricultural Extension-DANIDA Strengthening Plant Protection Services
Project, Bangladesh. 10 pp.
Mishra, A; Whitten, M; Ketelaar,J. W.and Salokhe, V.M. (2006). ‘The system of rice intensification
(SRI): a challenge for science, and an opportunity for farmer empowerment towards sustainable
agriculture'. International Journal of Agricultural Sustainability. 4(3): 193-212.
Pannell, D. (2006), “Adoption of conservation practices by rural landholders: Implications for research
and extension” Pannell Discussions No. 86, 23 October, at
http://cyllene.uwa.edu.au/~dpannell/pd/pd0086.htm
Ketelaar, J. W. and Kumar, P. 2002. Vegetable Integrated Production and Pest Management: the case
for farmers as IPM Expert – Experiences form Regional FAO IPM Work in South and SE Asia;
International Conference on Vegetables, ITC Hotel Windsor Sheraton and Towers, Bangalore,
India, 11-14 November 2002
Jha, T. N. and Viswanathan, K. U. 1999. Problems and Prospects of Agricultural Development in
Bihar. National Bank for Agriculture and Rural Development, Mumbai, India.
Larsen, E. W. 2001. Farmer field schools: Impact of IPM activities in vegetables during the summer
2001 season in Bangladesh. SPPS 64. Department of Agricultural Extension-DANIDA
Strengthening Plant Protection Services Project, Bangladesh. 11 pp.
Srivastava, J. P., N. J. H. Smith, et al. (1996). Biodiversity and Agricultural Intensification. Washington
D.C., The World Bank.
Satyanarayana, A., Thiyagarajan, T. N., Uphoff, N. 2006. Opportunities for water saving with higher
yield from the system of rice intensification. Irrigation Science, DOI 10.1007/s00271-006-0038-
8 (In press).
Stoop, W. A., Uphoff, N., and Kassam, A. H. (2002). A review of agricultural research issues raised by
the system of rice intensification (SRI) from Madagascar: opportunities for improving farming
systems for resource-poor farmers. Agricultural Systems 71, 249-274.

Vandermeer, J. and I. Perfecto (1995). Breakfast of Biodiversity. Oakland, CA, Institute for food and
development policy.
Whitten, M.J. and Settle, W.H. (1998) The role of the small-scale farmer in preserving the link between
biodiversity and sustainable agriculture (pp. 187–207). In C.H. Chou and Kwang-Tsao Shao
(eds) Frontiers in Biology: The Challenges of Biodiversity, Biotechnology and Sustainable
Agriculture. Proceedings of 26th AGM, International Union of Biological Sciences, Taiwan, 17–
23 November 1997, Academia Sinica, Taipei.

20