Improving crop production for food security and improved livelihoods on the East India Plateau II. Crop options, alternative cropping systems and capacity building

Agricultural Systems 137 (2015) 180–190

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Agricultural Systems j o u r n a l h o m e p a g e : w w w. e l s e v i e r. c o m / l o c a t e / a g s y

Improving crop production for food security and improved livelihoods on the East India Plateau II. Crop options, alternative cropping systems and capacity building Peter S. Cornish a,*, Avijit Choudhury b,1, Ashok Kumar b,2, Sudipta Das b,3, Kuntalika Kumbakhar b,1, Shane Norrish a,4, Shivendra Kumar c a

University of Western Sydney, Hawkesbury Campus, Locked Bag 1797, Penrith, NSW, Australia Professional Assistance for Development Action, Nilkuthi Danga, Purulia, West Bengal, India c Indian Council for Agricultural Research Regional Centre for Eastern Region, Ranchi Centre, Plandu, Ranchi, Jharkhand, India b

A R T I C L E

I N F O

Article history: Received 26 August 2014 Received in revised form 28 January 2015 Accepted 24 February 2015 Available online 1 April 2015 Keywords: Purulia District West Bengal Crop intensification Climate risk Aerobic rice Participatory on-farm research

A B S T R A C T

Rainfed transplanted rice (Oryza sativa) is the staple crop of the East India Plateau, with >80% grown in a rice-fallow on terraced and bunded hill-slopes (‘medium-upland’) where it is low yielding and droughtprone despite high rainfall (>1200 mm). Paper I attributed this to inadequate ponding for transplanted rice whilst identifying the potential for risk-free alternative kharif (monsoon period) crops, including directseeded rice grown without ponding (‘aerobic’ rice), and for second-cropping with little or no irrigation. Paper II reports research with Tribal smallholders in Purulia District, West Bengal that aimed to evaluate these cropping options using a participatory process that further aimed to ‘improve the situation’ of participating families. The feasibility of short-duration aerobic rice was confirmed experimentally in 2007 and 2008 and in wider adoption by farmers in 2010 when conventional rice could not be transplanted. Best yields in each year were >4 t ha−1. Mustard (Brassica juncea) and wheat (Triticum aestivum) planted after medium-duration rice yielded up to 0.95 t ha−1 and 2.6 t ha−1 with one irrigation of 40–50 mm for establishment; but modelling suggests there is enough residual soil water after short-duration (earlymaturing) rice to exceed these yields in most years, even without irrigation. Significant P-fertiliser was required with these crops to correct acute deficiency. Rainfed vegetables were grown in the kharif and then adapted by farmers to pre-kharif cropping, and to the rabi (winter) if they had some access to irrigation. Monitoring land-use revealed rapid, sustained adoption of more diverse and intensive cropping, with significant social and economic benefits. We attributed adoption to the participatory process used, that strengthened farmer’s capacity to innovate. The systems implemented by farmers needed no expenditure on new water resources, suggesting that comprehensive watershed development (WSD) is not a prerequisite to replacing the rigid rice-fallow with safer climate-responsive systems, although investment in small water harvesting structures may be needed for rabi vegetable crops. The technology evaluated, plus the process of intervention that built capacity, together provide a foundation for wider adoption of less risky cropping systems with greater water productivity. © 2015 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

1. Introduction

* Corresponding author. Tel.:+61 2 4573 1663; fax: +61 2 4573 1663. E-mail address: [email protected] (P.S. Cornish). 1 Present address: Professional Assistance for Development Action (PRADAN), E 1/A, KaIlash Colony, New DelhI 110048. 2 Present address: Professional Assistance for Development Action (PRADAN), 3rd Floor, Rukmini Tower, Harmu Road, Ranchi, Jharkhand, India. 3 Present address: Collectives for Integrated Livelihood Initiative (CInI), Jamshedpur, Jharkhand, India. 4 Present address: Landcare Australia Ltd. 1/ 6 Help St, Chatswood, NSW 2067, Australia. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.agsy.2015.02.011 0308-521X/© 2015 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Transplanted rainfed rice is the most important crop in Eastern India, but yield improvements have not matched the gains in irrigated rice achieved elsewhere in India since the 1960s (Anon, 2010). Drought is said to be a major factor in low yields, despite high rainfall (1100–1600 mm) and the use of modern rice varieties (Pandey et al., 2012). Watershed development (WSD) has been promoted to take advantage of the high precipitation in order to address the drought risk and raise overall agricultural productivity (e.g. Sikka et al., 2009). WSD is a cornerstone government programme for rural development in rainfed areas, but its implementation is constrained by funding and human capacity and it may

P.S. Cornish et al./Agricultural Systems 137 (2015) 180–190

not insure against drought in the driest years (Joy et al., 2004), making it necessary to use existing water resources more effectively. This study relates to the East India Plateau (EIP) comprising Jharkhand and Chhattisgarh and parts of West Bengal, Bihar and Odisha, where poverty has been linked to serious social unrest (Bonnerjee and Koehler, 2010; Dixit, 2010). There are significant Tribal communities who have no long-term culture of agriculture (Verma, 2007). Land holdings are small (<1 ha) and fragmented (Pandey et al., 2012). Rice has been grown in the kharif (monsoon) season on lowlands along drainage lines for generations, but population pressure has forced production onto terraced hill-slopes (‘medium-uplands’) where most rice is now grown in a monocrop rice-fallow system. The first paper in this series (Cornish et al., 2015) used soil water balance modelling to show that rice on medium-uplands suffers from delayed transplanting and/or periodic or premature draining of fields in most years, and that ponding duration in rice fields is much more variable than rainfall. Although most farmers use modern shorterduration rice varieties for medium-uplands, this is insufficient to make transplanted rice a safe, high-yielding option. Cornish et al. (2015) also showed that WSD is unlikely to deliver food security from transplanted rice in the driest years as there is little water available for ‘rescue irrigation’. Whilst modelling revealed an excess of water in most years that could be captured through WSD and made available for irrigation, their analysis suggested that if priority is given to using existing water resources more effectively, then the immediate need for food security and increased cash income can be met, whilst providing the agronomic foundation to further improve agricultural production once WSD has been implemented. Modelling suggested there was enough rain every year for nonflooded crops, underlying a case for food security to be based on alternatives to transplanted rice in ‘medium-upland’ (Cornish et al., 2015). Many warm-season crops might achieve this, but as rice is the staple crop we evaluated ‘aerobic’ rice which is direct-seeded without puddling and grown as any field crop (Hobbs et al., 2000; Sridhara et al., 2012). It has been studied as a resource and labour saving technology, but our primary interest was in managing climate risk by eliminating the need for ponding. There is no published research on rainfed aerobic rice on the EIP, but research on irrigated crops elsewhere suggests that with good management of weeds, pests, diseases and nutrition, yields may be comparable to transplanted rice (Bouman and Tuong, 2001; Farooq et al., 2011; Hobbs et al., 2000; Kato et al., 2009; Sridhara et al., 2012). Beyond rice-based food security, Cornish et al. (2015) suggested there were opportunities to increase cash incomes with little or no irrigation when more intensive systems were based on shortduration rice that facilitates planting of a second crop. Although WSD is limited and few families have major irrigation capacity, many have or could easily construct, small water-harvesting structures such as the ‘5% pit’ (Pangare and Karmakar, 2003). This paper reports participatory on-farm research in Amagara watershed in Purulia District, West Bengal. Primary aims were to evaluate alternative ways of growing rice on medium-upland and suitable uplands to provide a foundation for rice-based food security, and to evaluate options to intensify and diversify cropping and provide a basis for climate-responsive rice-based cropping systems for small-holders with little or no irrigation. The focus was on evaluating the practicality of the opportunities identified by Cornish et al. (2015), rather than optimising production packages. A further aim was to provide a foundation for wider adoption of the findings through capacity building. For farmers, capacity building included new agronomic skills and knowledge, as well as new beliefs about their resources, their capacity as farmers, and the capacity of their resources to provide a livelihood for their families. For the development organisation PRADAN, capacity building addressed the processes used to create locally-relevant technical

181

knowledge and for engaging with communities for more effective intervention. Given this aim, the research was based on principles of adult learning (Kolb, 1984). Hence the research process was experiential, participatory, action-learning (Argyris and Schön, 1989) that aimed to improve the situation of farmers (Dick, 1993) and generate knowledge of the rural development process as well as the technology (Lawrence et al., 2006). Agronomic results from 2006 to 2008 are presented together with the results of a longitudinal study of land-use from 2006 to 2012 that documented the adoption of new cropping systems during and after intervention in Amagara. The socio-economic ‘situation improvement’ arising from these interventions was examined by monitoring land use change and agricultural incomes of 18 families over 6 years, and through detailed family case studies and focus group discussions. 2. Materials and methods The research was part of a larger development programme in Purulia District, West Bengal, aimed initially at developing cropping systems to accompany WSD. Following analysis by Cornish et al. (2015), the programme was re-focused on laying foundations for year-round cropping systems on medium-uplands and suitable uplands, through effective use of rainfall and only limited irrigation. As such the results apply to poor smallholders who have limited or no irrigation capacity and whose main land holdings are mediumuplands or uplands. PRADAN commenced out-scaling major findings through their Purulia Team of eight professionals in 2010 under the guidance of one of the present authors (AC). Out-scaling is referred to in the present paper but not described in detail. 2.1. The Plateau landscape The EIP rises south from the eastern Indo-Gangetic Plain and west from the coastal plain of the Bay of Bengal. It comprises a series of plateaus, hills and valleys with average elevation ~500 m. Drainage lines and low-lying areas near streams comprise lowlands which rise to nearby uplands with local topographic relief typically <30 m. Much of the original hillslope area has been terraced and bunded over time to create medium-lowlands and medium-uplands for rice (Fig. 1). The generally acid and infertile soils are developed mainly on gneiss or granite parent materials and are mainly Alfisols and Inceptisols (Agarwal et al., 2010), or more precisely Anthroposols because of the soil moved in association with terracing and further modified by wet tillage for rice production. Seasons comprise the summer (March to May/June), monsoon (June to September/October) and winter (November to February). Warm-season crops are grown in the kharif (monsoon) season. Coolseason crops are grown in the rabi (winter) but often mature into the hot summer. 2.2. Focus watershed Experiments were at Amagara watershed (1 km2, 148 tribal families) in Purulia District (West Bengal) on the eastern fall of the Plateau at an elevation of ~380 m. Soils were based on gneiss (Sahu and Dey, unpublished data). Medium-uplands comprised ~80% of the total rice area in the watershed. Almost all farmers practised monoculture rainfed rice, although in addition to open wells there were many small privately-owned water bodies capturing local runoff or seepage that could have been used for limited irrigation. The occurrence of apparently under-utilised water bodies was similar to Pogro watershed (Cornish et al., 2015) and other locations where outscaling commenced in 2010. Amagara had previously undergone partial WSD that provided a large community-owned pond that was used for domestic purposes and to irrigate a small area of winter

182

P.S. Cornish et al./Agricultural Systems 137 (2015) 180–190

Recharge zone

Upland

Runoff

Medium upland Terraced/bunded uplands & hillslopes

Drainage

Medium lowland Terraced & bunded foot-slopes Lowland

Seasonally-recharged shallow ground water

Variable discharge

Discharge zone

Fig. 1. Landscape schematic. In Amagara, medium-uplands comprise ~80% of the total rice area and about 65% of the watershed.

rice in some years. Most farmers grew small areas of vegetables for home consumption. 2.3. Weather, soils and fertiliser-use Rainfall was manually recorded intermittently at Amagara, but an automatic weather station at nearby Pogro recorded daily weather for the period June 2006–November 2011. Annual rainfall for this period ranged from 723 mm to 1774 mm, covering the range of expectations from the long-term frequency distribution of rainfall for the surrounding area based on the 0.5 × 0.5 degree gridded data from the Indian Meteorology Department (Fig. 2). Rainfall in 2006 was about average, 2007 was wet, and 2008 was moderately dry with an early end to the monsoon (Fig. 2 and Cornish et al., 2015). Outscaling commenced in 2010, one of the driest years on record. Experimental fields were sampled for pH and major nutrients as part of watershed-wide survey of soil fertility (Cornish et al., 2010). Fields were sampled from 0 to 10 cm from 3 locations per field, and bulked before air-drying and analysis for pH (1:5 water), available P (Bray), mineral N, exchangeable K and organic C. Analyses were mostly by the Indian Institute for Soil Science, Bhopal and the Ranchi

Fig. 2. Annual rainfall exceedance curves for the Pogro study site. Long-term data (1971–2005) are from the Indian Meteorology Department gridded dataset. Crosses denote annual rainfall (mm) at Pogro in each of the project years. Median longterm rainfall was 1240 mm, and for the project years 1146 mm.

laboratory of the Indian Council for Agricultural Research. Because of low soil pH, single superphosphate (SSP) and urea were used as non-acidifying sources of P and N (Helyar and Porter, 1987), rather than the more common but acidifying di-ammonium phosphate (DAP). This also allowed N and P rates to be varied independently. SSP also provides S, and can be applied in bands below seeds to increase its effectiveness without affecting germination. 2.4. The participatory approach Participatory action research was used to simultaneously advance scientific insight and facilitate complex changes in the way farmers understand and manage their resources. Farmer participation also enabled meaningful research in a region with little research infrastructure and security issues that sometimes restricted movement by the research team. ‘Participation’ was at the deepest level described by Pretty (1995), with farmers actively involved at all stages including formulating research questions, designing treatments, choosing sites and collecting and interpreting data. Women traditionally do much of the farm work, but they are not perceived as farmers and their participation in agricultural decision-making is limited (Kumbakhar, unpublished data; Pandey et al., 2012). Thus care was taken to engage women as farmers and joint decisionmakers. Workshops addressed their self-perceptions and, following project learning in 2006, the overall process from planning through to execution was overseen by women from self-help groups. All stakeholders evaluated issues before formulating an action plan. Planning initiated a cycle of planning–doing–observing and reflecting, a derivation of the Kolb learning cycle (Kolb, 1984). After reflection, a new action plan is made with the intention of ‘improving the situation’ (Dick, 1993), and so the cycle of learning continues. The research did not, and could not develop an optimal package of practices for all fields. Rather, the premise underlying the research approach was that a farmer identifying an opportunity through sound experience will have gained the capacity to initiate any further learning needed to optimise production methods (after Pretty, 1995). Researchers engaged with farmers for an initial two-year colearning period and then continued to monitor changes in land useover time whilst providing no more support than is normally provided by a PRADAN professional. Farmers undertook all crop cultural activities and kept the produce. They received no subsidies except for the first occasion during the co-learning period in which a new, unfamiliar input was required. Treatments and management details resulted from negotiation between researchers and farmers and reflected the practical knowledge and concerns of farmers but also drew on the scientific knowledge of the researchers including extensive soil testing and simple participatory fertiliser

P.S. Cornish et al./Agricultural Systems 137 (2015) 180–190

experiments in 2006 (Cornish et al., 2010). This approach aimed to strengthen local ‘ownership’ of the research, improve relevance, and provide opportunities for farmers to learn new skills and knowledge, but it also limited the research to simple designs and it sometimes compromised treatments, for example by limiting inputs to sub-optimal levels. Fields were chosen by negotiation, but generally avoided sites that had obvious potential to introduce error. Every activity required a research question, but the questions may have differed amongst stakeholders. Similarly, interpretation of data may have led to different conclusions for different stakeholders, but it was important that all participants have the opportunity to make their own meaning of the results. Workshops were held on methods for data collection and agronomic management of crops, including fertilisers and safe, effective pesticide use. Farmers received ongoing support and were urged but not coerced to manage their own fields as required. To conclude each cropping season, all families were invited to a meeting to share experiences and draw out learning. These meetings informed conduct of the project and gave insight into problems farmers faced and reasons for their actions. Within this participatory framework, experiments used a randomised complete block design, generally with individual fields comprising a block. Occasionally, experiments were not implemented as planned and regression analysis became the most appropriate analytical tool. Analysis of variance used S-Plus 6 and linear regression used Excel. Duncan’s Multiple Range Test was used for comparisons between means (Steel and Torrie, 1980). 2.5. The crops evaluated Aerobic rice was evaluated as a technique for managing rainfallrelated risk. A short-list of other crops was developed with farmers to provide options for cropping systems in both the kharif and rabi, including vegetables as a kharif cash crop. None of these other crops was new in the region, but except for small vegetable plots for home consumption, all were confined to isolated non-Tribal villages with generally better-off farmers, a stronger culture of agriculture, and access to irrigation. 2.5.1. Aerobic rice At Amagara, 5 farmers in 2007 and 12 farmers in 2008 volunteered to experiment with short-duration (75–90 days) upland rice, direct-seeded without puddling and mandatory ponding. Four ultimately carried out their intention in 2007 (thus 4 blocks), and all 12 in 2008 (12 blocks, with varying efficacy of plant protection). Fields were in uplands or medium-uplands judged by farmers to be at-risk of failure in a ‘poor’ monsoon. They were sandier and drained more readily than other medium-uplands, even when puddled. It was impractical to compare aerobic and transplanted rice in a single experiment with treatments designed to optimise the performance of both systems. In 2007, the experiment was a factorial design with main plots of N (20 or 40 kg ha−1) split for P (0, 10 or 20 kg ha−1). In 2008, P was the only variable (10, 20 kg ha−1). Minimum sub-plot size in both years was 35 m2. The change in fertiliser treatments in 2008 reflected growing confidence amongst farmers based on their 2007 experiments on aerobic rice, as well as concurrent soil surveys and fertiliser experiments (Cornish et al., 2010). First, farmers agreed that significant urea, with which they were familiar on rice, would be needed to provide N. They agreed that urea could be used without much risk of losing money. This was important, as in 2008 the project provided no subsidies and most farmers borrowed money to grow the crops. Their confidence extended only to a rate of 40 kg N ha−1, which was less than would be needed to achieve potential yields (based on a fertiliser experiment in 2006). Second, farmers agreed that P-fertiliser would be needed in most fields, based on soil surveys and other fertiliser experiments, but as the use of single

183

superphosphate was new, they and the researchers were unsure of the amount needed. So the zero P rate used in 2007 was dropped but other rates were retained. N was broadcast in two post-emergence applications. P was banded beneath the seed at planting. K was broadcast pre-planting at 40 kg K ha−1on all plots. Fields were ploughed to ~10 cm and levelled using bullock-drawn implements as soon after onset of the monsoon as practicable. Seed of the short-duration (75–90 days) varieties Bankura-1, Vandana or Khandogiri was sown at ~50 kg ha−1 in rows at ~20 cm spacing, either behind the plough or in handmade furrows. The use of quick-maturing varieties was intended to further reduce climate-risk and facilitate planting of a second crop. Crops in 2007 were planted from 16th to 29th June and harvested from 6th Sept. to 11th Oct. In 2008, planting was from 16th to 27th June and harvest from 6th Sept. to 1st Oct. Pest management and manual weeding aimed for adequate plant protection but implementation of plans varied between farmers, especially in 2008. Yield of sun-dried paddy (husk retained) was determined by cutting five randomly placed, one-metre square quadrats in each plot. Comparative yields for transplanted rice were obtained from crop monitoring in each year, as described by Cornish et al. (2010). 2.5.2. Vegetables Research with vegetables in the 2006 kharif focused on extension processes and adoption of new technology, rather than development of production technology per se. The aim was to introduce farmers to vegetable production for market through a structured ‘co-learning experience’ when prices were high (as kharif vegetable production can be difficult with high rainfall). This colearning experience aimed to build technical knowledge and skills and challenge farmers’ perceptions about the value of certain land and self-perceptions as farmers. Eight farmers selected crops of interest to them from a short-list. Fields that farmers regarded as risky for rice (sandy upland or medium-upland) but researchers thought would suit vegetables were chosen. Initial technical training was provided, and further support as required. Farmers were provided with seeds and crop protection chemicals, but they provided all labour and kept the produce. No subsidies were provided for later vegetable crops, although PRADAN staff were available to provide technical assistance if requested. This paper reports the outcomes of the co-learning experience – the adoption of vegetables as cash crops in Amagara and their integration into more intensive cropping systems. 2.5.3. Rabi crops following rice Wheat and mustard were evaluated at Amagara in two seasons, 2006/07 and 2007/08. Farmers also adopted vegetable production in the rabi on their own initiative, and this was monitored. 2.5.3.1. General methods for all rabi crops. Each farmer’s field was a replicate with factorial combinations of irrigation and P fertiliser. The broad question posed for irrigation was whether crops should be fully or partially irrigated or even rainfed, bearing in mind that rice may leave significant residual water, and that any irrigation capacity farmers have will be very limited. The focus on P arose from soil surveys (Cornish et al., 2010) that had revealed P deficiency in many fields. Although N was also deficient it was not included as a variable because it was easier to estimate N fertiliser requirement than P. As a foundation for second-cropping, Cornish et al. (2015) suggested that short-duration rice varieties that mature in late September to early October would allow rabi crops to be planted into wet soil and rarely require irrigation for establishment. However, at project inception, the medium-duration rice being grown was harvested in November. So all experimental rabi crops in these fields were necessarily sown about a month late, into soils that had partly

184

P.S. Cornish et al./Agricultural Systems 137 (2015) 180–190

dried through drainage and evaporation. With no prospect of further rainfall, irrigation was required to establish the experiments. Treatments with a single irrigation were meant to simulate rainfed crops sown into moist soil. Soil moisture was determined before planting from 3 holes per field (0–10, 10–30, 30–60 and 60–90 cm depths) that were bulked for oven-drying at 105 °C. Gravimetric water content was converted to volumetric using bulk densities from Cornish et al. (2015). Some fields were sampled for water after harvest but this was generally difficult in the dry and often stony soils. 2.5.3.2. Mustard. In 2006/07, mustard was evaluated by 5 farmers (replicates). Main plots were assigned to irrigation treatments (1, 2 or 3 irrigations, each nominally 40 mm, plus a treatment of the farmer’s choice). These were bunded to retain irrigation water and split for P rate (0, 10, 20, 50 kg P ha−1). Minimum sub-plot size was 4 m2. All plots received 40 kg K ha−1 and 30 kg N ha−1, broadcast before planting. An additional 30 kg N ha−1 was applied at each irrigation (after the first), thus N rate varied with irrigation amount and yield potential. This confounded irrigation and N, but the intention was for N not to limit response to irrigation. A high rate of N applied to all plots before planting would have risked poor germination, and applying N later to non-irrigated plots would have been ineffective and incomprehensible to farmers who helped design the experiment. Fields were ploughed as soon as possible after rice harvest. Mustard variety B9 was line-sown at 8 kg ha−1 either behind the plough or in hand-made furrows, from 13th to 28th Nov., and irrigated for establishment. Plants were later thinned to 100 m−2. Weeds, pests and diseases were few, and controlled as required except for severe competition from self-sown rice in one field that was excluded from the analysis. Harvest was late Feb. to mid-Mar. 2007. Yields of sun-dried seed were determined from 5 × 0.5 m2 quadrats per plot. Irrigation was provided via a traditional ‘bucket’, the volume of which was measured so that farmers could apply the required irrigation amount by counting the number of buckets. In 2007/08, 14 farmers grew mustard in 15 fields that were stratified into 5 blocks (replicates) based on the time of rice harvest and consequently the planting time of mustard. Later rice tends to be in wetter fields that benefit from seepage and may respond less to irrigation. Fields in each block were assigned at random to one of 3 irrigation treatment (1, 2 or 3 irrigations, each ~50 mm, the first for establishment) and split for P rate (0, 10, 20 and 50 kg P ha−1). Not all fields in a block were planted on the same day, so actual planting dates were noted. Sowing was from 8 Nov. to 20 Dec. 2007, the last sowing almost a month later than in 2006. Land preparation, variety and rates for seed, N and K were as for 2006/07. Poorly controlled weeds were a significant problem in a few fields. Aphids were also a problem, but mostly controlled satisfactorily. Irrigation in 2007/08 was applied by calibrated diesel pump, so irrigation amount could be controlled by farmers observing pumping duration. 2.5.3.3. Wheat. Wheat was evaluated by 2 farmers in 2006/07, providing 2 replicates (blocks) with the same design as for mustard, except for irrigation number (1, 2, 3, or 4, each nominally 40 mm). P rates were 0, 10, 20, 50 kg P ha−1. The superseded variety ‘Sonalika’ (the only locally-available seed) was line-planted by hand at 90 kg ha−1 (~160 plants m−2), with the P-fertiliser, on 16–17th Nov. and irrigated for establishment. Basal N and K were broadcast before planting at 30 kg N ha−1 and 40 kg K ha−1, with a further 30 kg N ha−1 applied with subsequent irrigations. Harvest was on 29th Mar. In 2007/08, wheat was evaluated by 6 farmers, providing 2 blocks (replicates) each with 3 irrigation treatments (50, 100 or 150 mm) assigned to whole fields that were split for P. Other details were as for wheat in 2006/07. Crops were planted from 11 to 20 Dec. 2007 and harvested from 27 Mar. to 1 Apr. 2008.

2.6. Monitoring adoption of new crop options and farming systems – changing land use A record was made of any non-rice crop occupying every field in Amagara in each cropping season from the 2006 kharif to the 2011/12 rabi, including a pre-kharif season created by farmers as they brought forward kharif cropping under their own initiative. Land ownership was identified so the numbers of families intensifying or diversifying their cropping systems could be quantified. To document socioeconomic impacts, 18 families were chosen at project inception from across the spectrum of land ownership and socioeconomic circumstance, and monitored from the 2006 kharif to the 2011/12 rabi. Four of these families had participated in the initial vegetable or field crop research. Income data were included with the land-occupancy data described above. Production from any leased land was included. In addition, 9 independent but similarly diverse families provided case studies based on semistructured interviews in 2008/09, to document impacts on families according to 3 themes: learning through the participatory research, changed perceptions of land and self, and changed income and/or impacts on quality of life. Not all case-study families had participated in project activities. The age of the ‘household head’ varied from young (with a one-year-old child) to ‘old’. Case studies with three dis-adopters were repeated in Nov. 2011. Near the conclusion of the project, focus group meetings with members of women’s self-help groups documented technical and socioeconomic outcomes. Groups comprised 10–15 women farmers, a facilitator who kept discussion to topic, and a recorder. 3. Results and discussion 3.1. Aerobic rice In 2007, a good year for transplanted rice (Cornish et al., 2015), mean yield of the short-duration (75–90 day) aerobic rice was 3.62 t ha−1 (Table 1), with no response to P or the higher rate of N (P > 0.05). The block (i.e. field) effect was significant (P < 0.05), with the two best fields averaging 4.64 t ha−1 and the two worst fields 2.77 t ha−1. The field effect was unrelated to observed weed, pest and disease incidence, or to soil N and P measured before planting. The best yields were comparable to the average of 4.38 t ha−1 for mediumduration (125-day) transplanted rice surveyed in medium-uplands (unpublished data). The result with aerobic rice was obtained despite using short-duration varieties and farmers having no experience with this method of production. Transplanted medium-duration rice in a separate fertiliser experiment yielded 6.34 t ha−1 with 100 kg N ha−1 (unpublished data), indicating potential for much higher yields with high N in a good year. The absence of fertiliser responses was surprising given widespread nutrient deficiency (Cornish et al., 2010). The mean Bray P for experimental fields was 7 mg kg−1 (range 3–12 mg kg−1), with only one field approaching the 12–15 mg kg−1 threshold for P sufficiency in non-flooded crops including upland rice (Dodd and Mallarino, 2004; Sahrawat et al., 1997). Some of the fields had previously grown transplanted rice that results in low drainage rates and waterlogging,

Table 1 Yield (kg ha−1) of aerobic rice in response to N and P fertiliser, Amagara 2007. N rate (kg ha−1) 20 40 P means

P rate (kg ha−1)

N means

0

10

20

3598 3595 3597

3325 3435 3380

3780 3827 3804

3506 3681

There were no significant treatment effects, but the block (field) effect was significant (P < 0.01).

P.S. Cornish et al./Agricultural Systems 137 (2015) 180–190

possibly leading periodically to reducing soil conditions which can increase P availability (Willett et al., 1978). Regarding N, the lowest rate of N applied (20 kg ha−1) may have been sufficient for the shortduration variety used, although this seems unlikely. Absence of N-fertiliser response may simply mean that yield was below the potential owing to other unrecognised constraints. In 2008, a drier year (Fig. 2) with an early end to the monsoon and rated ‘moderately bad’ for transplanted rice (Cornish et al., 2015), the mean yield of aerobic rice was 2.34 t ha−1 with significant (P < 0.001) differences between the 12 fields (range 1.19–4.56 t ha−1). A paired t-test showed no response to the additional 10 kg ha−1 applied P (2.32 versus 2.36 t ha−1). There were no failures in aerobic rice, which was significant because there were 2 failures with transplanted rice amongst 7 monitored fields in medium-upland (mean yield of 5 harvested fields was 2.30 t ha−1). There was little uptake of aerobic rice until after it was included in out-scaling activities in 2010, which was one of the driest years on record (Fig. 2) with widespread failure of transplanted rice in medium-uplands and some lowlands. In villages with outscaling activities, aerobic rice was the only rice harvested in mediumuplands in 2010, with yields of ~2–4 t ha−1 (PRADAN, unpublished). 3.2. Rabi crops 3.2.1. Mustard Mean yield in 2006/07 was 963 kg ha−1 with the best treatments >1.5 t ha−1 (Table 2), comparing favourably with State averages of 0.77 t ha−1 in West Bengal and 0.84 t ha−1 in Bihar (Aggarwal et al., 2008). Main effects of P-fertiliser and irrigation were significant (P < 0.01). The interaction was not significant (P > 0.05) although there was a response to P in the absence of irrigation after establishment but no response to irrigation without added P (Table 2). The yield average for treatments with adequate P (20, 50 kg P ha−1) and no irrigation after establishment was 950 kg ha−1. In 2007/08, mean and best yields of 410 kg ha−1 and 702 kg ha−1 (Table 3) were below 2006/07, and only the response to P was significant (P < 0.01). There was no obvious explanation for lower yields and the lack of a significant response to irrigation in 2007/08, which followed a dry monsoon (Fig. 2). Sowing commenced 5 days earlier than in 2006/07, but extended over a much longer period and ended 22 days later. To examine the effect of delayed sowing, yields were regressed against the time elapsed (days) after the first field was sown, for treatments with 20 and 50 kg P ha−1 (to avoid confounding by P deficiency). Variation in planting time accounted for almost half the variation in yield (P < 0.01, Fig. 3), with some early-sown fields approaching 2006/07 yields. Contrary to expectations based on hydrology, the later-sown and harvested and possibly wetter fields yielded the least. Further research on sowing time is needed, and this may help to explain the lack of irrigation response in some years.

185

Table 3 Mustard yield response to P fertiliser and irrigation at Amagara 2007/08. P applied (kg ha−1)

0 10 20 50 Irrigation means Experiment mean

Irrigation after establishment (mm)1 01

50

100

43ab 280bc 369cd 585d 319a

77ab 540cd 608d 508cd 433a

30a 494cd 683d 702d 477a

410

All treatments were established with 50 mm irrigation. The main effect of P was significant (P < 0.01), but irrigation and the P × irrigation interaction were not significant (P > 0.05). Means with a common superscript letter when compared within main effects or within P × irrigation are not significantly different (P > 0.05).

There were no experiments in 2008/09, but 14 monitored farmer fields averaged 1.27 t ha−1, with a gross margin of Rs 8727 for the average field area of 334 m2. These received limited or no irrigation. 3.2.1.1. Fertiliser-P requirements. In both years, P responses up to 20 kg ha−1 were statistically significant regardless of irrigation amount (Tables 2, 3). There were consistent responses beyond 20 kg P ha−1 in the higher-yielding 2006/07 but they were not significant (P > 0.05) (Table 2). 3.2.1.2. Irrigation efficiency (IE) and the value of residual water. IE and the value of residual soil water were estimated by regressing yield from plots with adequate P (20, 50 kg ha−1) against the amount of irrigation (including for establishment):

y = 622 + 7.8 × (R 2 = 0.76; coefficients for intercept and slope, P < 0.05) . IE is given by the slope of the regression (7.8 kg ha−1 mm−1). The yield derived from residual water is inferred from the intercept (622 kg ha−1). The water-use efficiency for the residual water is given by the yield (622 kg ha−1) divided by the water used. Residual water-use of 50 mm was estimated from the mean total water of 130 mm measured at planting minus the lower limit of extraction of 80 mm in this sandy soil (Cornish et al., 2015). Thus the WUE for residual water was 12.4 kg ha−1 mm−1 which exceeded IE, presumably because most of the residual soil water would have been transpired, whereas some of the irrigation water would have been lost to soil evaporation.

1400

0 10 20 50 Irrigation means Experiment mean 1

Irrigation after establishment (mm)1 01

40

80

Farmer2

200a 550ab 840ab 1060bc 663a

120a 840ab 1160bc 1270bc 848a

210a 1270bc 1360bc 1790cd 1158bc

200a 1080bc 1650cd 1890d 1205c

P means

183a 935b 1253bc 1503c 963

All treatments were established with 40 mm irrigation. 2 Farmers selected their own irrigation, but it was generally around 120 mm. The main effects of P and irrigation were significant (P < 0.01), but the P × irrigation interaction was not significant (P > 0.05). Means with a common superscript letter when compared within main effects or within P × irrigation are not significantly different (P > 0.05).

Yield (kg ha-1)

P rate (kg ha−1)

50a 438b 553b 598b

1

1200

Table 2 Mustard yield response to P fertiliser and irrigation, Amagara 2006/07.

P means

y = 1042-18.7x R² = 0.43, P<0.01)

1000 800 600 400 200 0

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

Delay in planting (days after 8 Nov) Fig. 3. Mustard yield response to a delay in planting in 2007/08. Includes plots receiving 20 or 50 kg P ha−1 in 15 medium-upland fields comprising 5 blocks of 3 irrigation treatments. (The effect of irrigation was not significant.)

186

P.S. Cornish et al./Agricultural Systems 137 (2015) 180–190

The IE of 7.8 kg ha−1 mm−1 compares favourably with water-use efficiencies of 6–9 kg ha−1 mm−1 for well-irrigated mustard crops in India (Singh et al., 1991). IE was not estimated in 2007/08 because the irrigation response was not significant (P > 0.05) (Table 3). The WUE of residual water (12.4 kg ha−1 mm−1) applies to a situation where soil evaporation is negligible. It may be compared to the slope of 8–15 kg ha−1 mm−1 for the regression of transpiration (assumed) against yield for rainfed crops of Canola (Brassica napus) in Australia (see Fig. 3d in Robertson and Kirkegaard, 2005). These estimates of IE and WUE may be useful when considering crop and irrigation options, but they are based on limited data and should be regarded as indicative. More research is needed to develop reliable local benchmarks for IE and WUE. 3.2.1.3. Yield potential for rainfed mustard. Plots with 20 and 50 kg P ha−1 yielded an average of 950 kg ha−1 with a total of 90 mm water, comprising 40 mm irrigation for establishment (Table 2) and 50 mm estimated residual soil water. The resultant water-use efficiency of 10.5 kg ha −1 mm −1 is lower than the WUE for residual water (12.4 kg ha−1 mm−1) but greater than the IE (7.8 kg ha−1 mm−1), as expected for crops relying on both residual water and irrigation. A minimum of 90 mm available water should be present at planting of a rabi crop following short-duration (90-day) rice, according to findings over a 6-year period at nearby Pogro (Cornish et al., 2015). Therefore the 950 kg ha−1 achieved on 90 mm of water-use provides a guide to the minimum yield to expect over the longerterm with early planting after short-duration rice and no irrigation. The average planting water at Pogro, estimated by Cornish et al. (2015), was ~160 mm following 90-day rice, suggesting longerterm yields of around 1.6 t ha−1 in a system based on 90-day rice, assuming WUE of 10.5 kg ha−1 mm−1 and good agronomy. This estimation also assumes that most of the residual water is used by the crop with no significant losses to drainage. Sowing a rabi crop without irrigation should be possible every year after a 90-day kharif crop, based either on high residual soil water and/or October rainfall (Cornish et al., 2015). Where the rabi crop follows a medium-duration (125-day) rice or other kharif crop, the probability of planting a second crop without irrigation, and the yield expectations, are both much lower. 3.2.2. Wheat In 2006/07 the average and best treatment yields were 2.1 t ha−1 and 4.1 t ha−1 (Table 4). Responses to P and irrigation were significant (P < 0.01). In 2007/08 sowing was a month later and mean and best yields were only 0.93 t ha−1 and 2.1 t ha−1, but responses to P and irrigation were again significant (P < 0.01, Table 5). The interaction between P and irrigation was not significant in either year (P > 0.05), although as with mustard there were significant responses to P even in the absence of irrigation, but no significant responses to irrigation without added P.

Table 4 Wheat yield response to P fertiliser and irrigation at Amagara in 2006/07. P applied (kg ha−1)

Irrigation after establishment (mm)1 01

0 10 20 50 Irrigation means Experiment mean 1

40 a

560 980ab 1180ab 2620cd 1335a

80

120

720ab

1040ab

1800bc 1960bc 3320de 1950b

2260cd 3036de 4100e 2609b

1260ab 1720bc 3240de 4040e 2565b

P means

895a 1690b 2354b 3520c 2115

All treatments were established with 40 mm irrigation. Main effects were significant (P < 0.01) but not their interaction (P > 0.05). Means with a common superscript letter when compared within main effects or within P × irrigation are not significantly different (P > 0.05).

Table 5 Wheat yield response to P fertiliser and irrigation at Amagara in 2007/08. P applied (kg ha−1)

0 10 20 50 Irrigation means Experiment mean

Irrigation after establishment (mm)1 01

50

100

436a 804b 889bc 836bc 741a

367a 798b 979bc 834bc 744a

432a 1184c 1555d 2094e 1316b

P means

411a 929b 1141b 1255b 934

1

All treatments were established with 50 mm irrigation. Main effects were significant (P < 0.01) but not their interaction (P > 0.05). Means with a common superscript letter when compared within main effects or within P × irrigation are not significantly different (P > 0.05).

3.2.2.1. Fertiliser-P requirement. Responses were statistically significant up to 50 kg P ha−1 in 2006/07, but only up to 20 kg P ha−1 in the lower-yielding 2007/08. In both years, P-responses were significant regardless of irrigation amount (Tables 4, 5). 3.2.2.2. Water-use efficiency and expected rainfed yields. Because the data for wheat were more limited than for mustard, regression analysis to derive IE and WUE for residual water was not undertaken. Rather, the WUE for wheat with adequate P (50 kg P ha−1) was estimated only from the mean plot yield of 2620 kg ha−1 (Table 4) and water-use of 150 mm, which comprised a single irrigation for establishment (40 mm) and residual water (~110 mm) that was estimated from measured soil water of 231 mm minus the lower limit of extraction of 120 mm in these fields. On this basis, the WUE for wheat with adequate P and using mostly residual water was 17.5 kg ha −1 mm −1 . The comparable figure for mustard was 10.5 kg ha−1 mm−1. This estimate of WUE (based on very limited data) is in line with high-end expectations of rainfed crops in Australia growing mainly on soil water rather than current rainfall (Hochman et al., 2009). With a WUE of 17.5 kg ha−1 mm−1, rainfed yields of ~2.8 t ha−1 might be expected over the longer-term from the average of ~160 mm of residual water left by 90-day rice (Cornish et al., 2015), assuming good agronomy and that the residual water is used by the crop and not lost to drainage. 3.3. Monitoring change in cropping diversity and intensity and its impact on families Vegetables as cash crops were introduced in the kharif of 2006 in a study of extension processes (see Section 2.5.2), and mustard and wheat were grown for the first time by farmers in Amagara in the rabi of 2006/07. Prior to 2006, vegetables were only grown for home consumption in small areas near homesteads and the area of any second-crop was negligible. This section explores adoption of these ‘new’ crops and their integration into cropping systems. 3.3.1. Intensification – the number of new crops The longitudinal study of crop occupancy in each field from project inception revealed rapid uptake of vegetables in the kharif and both vegetables and field crops in the rabi (Fig. 4). Nine new crops were being grown in the 2011 kharif and 12 in the 2011/12 rabi, including many not introduced by the project. The project had no vegetable work in the rabi, so this was an initiative of the farmers. Most case-study families in 2008/09 grew mustard for home consumption which generated no cash income, but it saved significant cash outlay as all families use mustard oil in cooking. Areas sown to wheat earlier in the project had largely given way to more profitable vegetables by 2011/12.

P.S. Cornish et al./Agricultural Systems 137 (2015) 180–190

187

Fig. 4. The uptake of new crops in Amagara from 2006 to 2012. New crops include vegetables in both seasons and field crops in the rabi. The 8 farmers growing new crops in 2006 were participants in the vegetable research.

3.3.2. Intensification – the area under new crops The area of new crops rose quickly, reaching a peak in the kharif of 2009 and for the rabi in 2011/12. In the 2011 kharif, >5% of the area of Amagara watershed was under vegetables, mostly in uplands and areas of sandy medium-upland that farmers had previously regarded as poor for rice. Four of the 9 case-study families said that increased rice yields resulting from improved management (a project spill-over effect) had led to either a rice surplus for sale or, significantly, had allowed them to take some land out of rice for vegetables. By the 2011/12 rabi, >10% of the watershed area was secondcropped (equivalent to ~20% of the rice area), mostly to vegetables in areas that could receive at least some irrigation. The year 2010 was amongst the driest on record (Fig. 2), yet the area of vegetables in the kharif declined only slightly from 2009 (Fig. 4), appearing to confirm the assertion that rainfed crops can be grown in the kharif in the driest of years (Cornish et al., 2015). There was a further small decline in 2011, when very high rainfall created difficulties for vegetable production, providing a reminder that farmers need strategies to deal with risks associated with both low and high rainfall. Overall, the area cropped to vegetables in the kharif remained relatively stable despite rainfall variation. Because of low rainfall in 2010, Amagara entered the 2010/11 rabi with dry soil and little water for irrigation, so crop area fell sharply (Fig. 4), but it recovered in 2011/12. 3.3.3. Intensification – numbers of participating families Of the 148 families in Amagara, the number growing crops for market (mainly vegetables) grew rapidly to ~80 in the kharif and to >100 in the rabi (Fig. 4). By 2012, three-quarters of the families had moved away from traditional mono-crop rice, yet most had had no direct project engagement. This occurred without subsidies, as no material support was provided after the 2006 kharif and 2006/07 rabi. Having started to diversify and intensify cropping, most families appear to have sustained their engagement. The steady numbers of families participating from 2008 (Fig. 4), suggests that the numbers of dis-adopters, if any, were balanced by new adopters. 3.3.4. Impacts on families of intensification/diversification The economic impact in Amagara was first quantified informally at a village meeting in 2008, at which 80 farmers who had developed new cropping systems agreed amongst themselves that on average they had received additional income of about Rs 15,000 that year (USD 300). In the 2008/09 family case studies, the

additional annual income was from Rs 50,000. For the 18 families whose land-use and net income were monitored throughout the project, the average increase was almost Rs 11,000 per year (Table 6), approximately doubling household income. Drought in 2010 reduced income from non-rice cropping for the 12 months from July 2010 to June 2011, but the 18 monitored families still earned an average additional Rs 5302, revealing that the area of vegetables planted in the 2010 kharif (Fig. 4) delivered useful returns. The income derived from crop intensification recovered in 2011/12 as families resumed intensive agriculture, confirming the resilience seen in areas cropped in the 2011/12 rabi (Fig. 4). The family case studies reveal a complex story of improved food security based on increasing rice yields and crop intensification. Before intervention, food security (rice sufficiency) averaged only 6–7 months, with one landless family depending almost totally on migration and wage labour. All but one family needed to migrate or take wage labour beyond the village prior to the project. By 2008/ 09 all nine families had 12 months food security and dependency on migration and wage labour was said to be greatly reduced. A middle-aged husband noted: “Earlier my ignorance about other cropping options forced me and my wife to work as daily wage labourers outside our village once the kharif season was over, for most of the year, but the introduction of vegetable cultivation has changed all that”. An elderly wife noted: “Earlier it was difficult to meet ends depending on paddy cultivation only but with the introduction of vegetable cultivation we could arrange for our food throughout the year”.

Table 6 Average additional (non-rice) net income for 18 monitored families at Amagara.

Income own land (Rs) Income other land (Rs) (leased, sharecropped) Total additional income (Rs) a

2010/11a

2011/12 incomplete

7270

3344

3921

3364

3927

2304

3053

10,873

10,706

5302

6794b

2008/09

2009/10

8257

2011/12 adjusted

10,976c

Drought year. Most of this income was derived from rainfed kharif vegetables. The total recorded for 2011/12 is incomplete as it excludes unharvested rabi crops and income from 2 farmers who had discontinued farming since 2010/11. c Adjusted total for 2011/12 includes estimated income from all crops, including unharvested rabi crops and estimates for 2 discontinued farmers (based on 2008 to 2010 data). b

188

P.S. Cornish et al./Agricultural Systems 137 (2015) 180–190

A young wife said: “My vegetable produce has spared me from going out of the village to work … now I can spend some time at home”. Significantly, leasing land and share-cropping became important components of crop intensification (Table 6), giving landless and marginal farmers an unprecedented opportunity to improve livelihoods through agriculture and reduce dependency on off-farm income (day wage labour and migration). In focus group discussions in late 2011, participants agreed “Many landless members of the community are leasing land to cultivate” and “now nearly everyone in the community is involved with agriculture” (i.e. crops other than rice). Increased cropping intensity and diversity also brought other benefits. Several case-study families reported increased diet diversity with home consumption of vegetables. Some talked about having enough money for improved medical care. Most spoke about using their income for equipment, home improvements, insurance, savings (for seed, fertiliser etc.) and ‘family matters’. Younger farmers talked about having money for their children’s education. One said: “… I recently separated from my family and started living on my own with my wife and two children, which had a negative impact on my land holding as a result of land division. My paddy yield is inadequate for our sustenance so we depend on vegetable cultivation as our main source of livelihood … we send our sons to private school to provide better education”. A young wife reported: “My son has just started going to school and my daughter is merely one year old. I can take them to doctors or nearby hospital and purchase medicines whenever they fall ill which was earlier impossible”. In three of the case studies, lease arrangements were terminated after 2008/09. One could not or would not pay increased rent demanded for the land which by then had proven its real value, one said he was the victim of ‘jealousy’, and one lost the lease for unspecified reasons. All these families made new arrangements. One took up a new share-farming arrangement and was ‘thriving’ at the time of the interview, one had taken a job as an agricultural input salesman (despite illiteracy) and was ‘happy’ (but less well off), and one landless person had reverted to local wage labour and selling ‘rice beer’, although still growing vegetables on their homestead land.

4. General discussion and conclusions 4.1. Alternative ways of growing rice This research verifies the feasibility of growing rice in mediumuplands in a way that should not fail in dry years nor unacceptably reduce yields in wetter years, as proposed by Cornish et al. (2015). Short-duration (75 to 90-day) aerobic rice with good management in a wet year (2007) yielded as well as the average for mediumduration (125-day) transplanted rice in the same land class. However, this comparison with transplanted rice confounded the method of production with crop duration. Short duration varieties like Bankura-1 or Khandogiri are unlikely to yield as well as a 125-day variety in a good year with superior management, whether transplanted or not. Further research is needed to quantify any tradeoff between food security in drier years and yield in wetter years with well-managed crops. The varietal development needed for aerobic production (Sridhara et al., 2012) should include direct comparison of transplanted and aerobic rice over a range of durations in years with different rainfall. This would be done most easily on a research station and complemented by crop modelling, but research is recommended also under farm conditions, where soils are often poorer and inputs lower than on a research station. The absence of P response in rice was surprising given the low soil P in Amagara and elsewhere on the EIP (Cornish et al., 2010). Further research on P is needed, and also on N which is widely deficient in rice crops at Amagara (unpublished data). Research is also

needed to improve weed management, as this was arduous and explained some of the lower-yielding fields of aerobic rice. In 2011, 533 families planned to grow short-duration directsown rice in Purulia (PRADAN, unpublished data). These intentions at least signify a shift in thinking about how to reduce climate risk in rainfed rice on risky medium-uplands. 4.2. Rabi crops Rabi crops were planted too late because medium-duration rice was being grown at project inception. Nevertheless, with only the single irrigation required for establishment, mustard yield was ~1 t ha−1 and wheat >2 t ha−1. Irrigation should not be required for establishment with shorter-duration rice that enables earlier sowing on wetter soil profiles (Cornish et al., 2015). From the estimates of residual water after short-duration rice derived from water balance modelling (Cornish et al., 2015), yields of ~1 t ha−1 and >2 t ha−1 for mustard and wheat are the minimum to expect for well-managed crops sown after short-duration rice. The expected average yields with no irrigation following a short-duration kharif crop are ~1.6 t ha−1 and 2.8 t ha−1 for mustard and wheat, respectively, assuming all of the residual water is used by the crop and not lost to drainage. Experiments with early sown crops and crop modelling are needed to test these yield estimates. The large P-responses in the present experiments and the results of extensive soil testing (Cornish et al., 2010) establish the critical need for P-fertiliser, in the range of 20–50 kg P ha−1 for wheat and mustard, and presumably for other rabi crops as well. Given the field variability discussed in Section 3.1.1, the only general recommendation is that significant P is required. More research would be needed to establish a reliable P-response function from which to estimate P-requirement from soil tests, but given the lack of infrastructure for soil testing and the costs involved, it might be more appropriate for farmers to undertake their own simple field tests to establish P-requirement. The application rates suggested will exceed P uptake, but any residual P should be available to the following rice, especially if soils are temporarily waterlogged (Willett et al., 1978). These systems considerations require research. Also, for rabi crops that are grown without irrigation after establishment, the possibility that dry surface soils may limit P uptake, water-use and yield (Cornish, 2010) requires investigation. Adequate P (and N) together with early planting were the most important agronomic measures to ensure satisfactory yields of wheat and mustard. Achieving timely operations was not easy, so it needs a focus in any extension. Plant protection was not a big issue, possibly because famers received adequate training. Without irrigation, weeds did not germinate once the soil surface had dried after rice, so they were not a major issue if controlled before sowing. Vegetables were adopted as a rabi crop by most families in Amagara on their own initiative, following project work with only 8 farmers in the kharif of 2006 (Fig. 4). Most rabi vegetables were irrigated from a community pond or small water-harvesting structures that any farmer with suitable land could construct for their private benefit (e.g. the ‘5% pit’, Pangare and Karmakar, 2003). 4.3. New cropping systems Short duration aerobic rice provides a foundation for less risky and more productive cropping systems, first because the risk to rice is reduced and second because early maturity allows a second field crop with minimal or no irrigation. Short duration may reduce rice yield in some years, but this is potentially outweighed by the overall system benefits of reduced risk with rice and increased production through multiple cropping. This needs further investigation.

P.S. Cornish et al./Agricultural Systems 137 (2015) 180–190

Cropping system

M

J

J

A

S

O

189

N

D

J

F

M

A

Transplanted rice (125-day), fallow (Current) Transplanted rice (90-day), mustard 75d, rainfed Opportunistic pre-monsoon legume then 125day 'aerobic' rice (or shorter duration)

Options with little or no irrigation capacity 90-day aerobic rice, then: mustard rainfed, 60 d or green chickpea, or mustard one irrigation or wheat two irrigations

Then … …

or or

Options with greater irrigation capacity 90-day rice then multiple crops e.g. Chickpeas green, rainfed, then vegetables irrigated Multiple vegetables in succession, rainfed in monsoon then irrigated Fig. 5. Cropping calendar commencing with pre-monsoon showers in May, showing rainfed and partial or fully irrigated options for intensifying and diversifying cropping systems on medium-uplands based on short-duration transplanted rice or aerobic rice (the safer rice option). Transplanted rice in the current rice-fallow or hypothetical rice-mustard system is subject to great variation in actual transplanting date and therefore harvest date, and is prone to periodic draining of ponds.

Three-quarters of Amagara families adopted more intensive and diverse systems, although researchers made no prescriptions. Farmers developed their own unique systems, apparently reflecting a new capacity to innovate. They initiated experimentation with new crop types, created a new ‘pre-kharif’ season for rainfed vegetables, drained paddy fields to enable rainfed vegetables to replace rice, and developed cooperative arrangements for seedling production in nurseries. Some emerging systems are shown in Fig. 5. None of these is rigid, as the choice of crop at any time depends on the land and water resources available, as well as the personal preferences of the farmer that may be dictated by labour resources, risk aversion or other considerations. Farmers with access to limited irrigation will decide if it is better to settle for modest yields based on early planting of non-irrigated field crops like mustard, and invest their irrigation water in higher value crops (e.g. vegetables), or to invest their water in higheryielding field crops. According to the case studies in 2008/09, whilst most families by then were growing mustard for home consumption, most irrigation water was reserved for higher-value vegetables. With wheat, although farmers said they were ‘happy’ with their yields, early adopters soon favoured higher-value vegetable crops. There is no local market for wheat and it is not commonly eaten in the area, so until there is a market it will remain a crop of last resort for when rice fails. Early-sown rainfed rabi crops could potentially make a major contribution to improved water productivity, by forcing crops to use residual soil water after the kharif crop. Yet the area of rainfed rabi crops was small. Most of the remaining medium-upland should suit rainfed or minimally-irrigated field crops, and represents significant potential for future development. The amount of residual water varies from year to year and field to field (Cornish et al., 2015). Over the long-term, short duration rabi crop varieties may give lower but more stable rainfed yields than the longer varieties used in this research. Alternatively, farmers could adapt to climate variability by not planting rainfed rabi crops at all when low monsoon rainfall has left the soil relatively dry in early October, which can be simply observed by digging a hole. Or they could vary rabi crop duration according to residual water and any expected rainfall or available irrigation. Such flexibility is the key to increasing crop production without increasing risk. However, if a crop is to be grown, planting close to the end of the monsoon will be critical to maximise the use of residual water before losing it through drainage and soil evaporation (Cornish et al., 2015).

4.4. Capacity building Farmers increased their knowledge and skills either directly from the project or from other farmers, as one young case-study farmer remarked: “I’m happy … yield has improved by using phosphate, potash and urea, learned through ACIAR experimentation. Earlier I used high yielding varieties but could not get satisfying results due to insufficient knowledge about fertilizers and pesticides”. Another said: “… I cultivated cucumber, cowpea and ladyfinger so efficiently I not only got good returns for my produce but it motivated others of this village to take up cucumber and lady finger cultivation … our living standard has improved with a marked change in the family’s food habit”. More importantly, the research appears to have enhanced farmer’s capacity to act more independently, by managing their own learning. All case-study farmers reported ‘experimenting’ with kharif vegetables, although only four had participated in formal project activities, suggesting increased capacity for self-directed learning. For all families, rabi vegetables were an ‘experiment’. Deep change arising from the participatory approach is reflected in individual farmers who are readily adapting technology to their own needs; and in the community, by new technology spreading beyond farmers who were directly engaged in the project. Examples of adapting technology include farmers growing vegetables in all seasons, and the spread of vegetables beyond uplands to partially replace rice in medium-uplands. Rapid uptake was associated with changing perceptions of the value of land and self-perceptions as farmers. The focus groups in 2011 revealed a major change when farmers referred to uplands as their most valuable land. Many case study farmers referred to what may be called a new ‘culture of agriculture’, to new perceptions about themselves, the potential of uplands and mediumuplands, and the potential to derive a livelihood from agriculture: “… [past] failures in vegetable cultivation made me cynical about the future of vegetable cultivation in Amagara but the successful trial of tomato, cabbage and cauliflower (on uplands) dispelled the myth surrounding vegetable cultivation.” “Nowadays my sons are performing agricultural activities and taking keen interest in vegetable cultivation.” “My elder son has returned from Jamshedpur to cultivate his own fields.” 4.5. Constraints to further intensification Crop area and income plateaued by 2009/10 (Fig. 4, Table 6). Further development may have been constrained by a shortage of

190

P.S. Cornish et al./Agricultural Systems 137 (2015) 180–190

labour or marketing issues, but none of the case studies or focus groups raised these as constraints. It was unclear if continued expansion of rabi vegetables was constrained by the availability of irrigation water that was being drawn from existing water bodies not previously used for irrigation. If water was the constraint, the question of why rainfed rabi crops were not adopted more widely arises. Had incomes increased sufficiently without further development? Were farmers who had never grown rainfed rabi field crops sceptical that crops could be grown without irrigation? Had low adoption of quick-maturing rice varieties inhibited second cropping? These questions warrant further research to underpin strategies for increasing the area of second cropping in villages where water resources are presently more constrained than in Amagara, and where rainfed field cropping in the rabi may offer the best possibility for increasing family income, in addition to rainfed vegetables in the kharif. It will also be important in further research to learn if this level of intensification and increased income is sufficient to reduce demand for cash from other sources over the longer-term. Acknowledgements Research funding was provided by the Australian Centre for International Agricultural Research (Project number LWR/2002/ 100), whose Program Managers are thanked for their support. We thank senior staff of PRADAN for their willing support and commitment of resources, and the entire PRADAN Purulia Team for each of their contributions to the project. Buddheswar Mahato, a Tribal farmer and village resource person for PRADAN, contributed much to the success of the research. The Indian Council for Agricultural Research also committed resources to this project, and we particularly thank Dr Pradip Dey for contributions to the soil science. We also thank Prof Bill Bellotti for helpful comments on the project and Dr Murray Unkovich for comments on the manuscript. Dr Gavin Ramsay supported focus group discussions at the conclusion of the project. Finally, many farmers participated in the research, and without their ideas and dedicated work the project would not have been possible. References Agarwal, B.K., Kumar, R., Shahi, D.K., 2010. Soil resource inventory of Jharkhand: problem and solution. (accessed 13.10.10.). Aggarwal, P.K., Hebbar, K.B., Venugopalan, M.V., Rani, S., Bala, A., Biswal, A., et al., 2008. Quantification of yield gaps in rainfed rice, wheat, cotton, and mustard in India. Global Theme on Agroecosystems Report No. 43. Patancheru 502 324, Andhra Pradesh, India: International Crops Research Institute for the Semi-Arid Tropics. 36 pp. Anon, 2010. World Rice Statistics. International Rice Research Institute, Los Baños, Philippines. Argyris, C., Schön, D.A., 1989. Participatory action research and action science compared. Am. Behav. Sci. 32, 612–623. Bonnerjee, A., Koehler, G., 2010. Hunger: The true growth story of India. International Development Economics Associates. (accessed 12.04.12.).

Bouman, B.A.M., Tuong, T.P., 2001. Field water management to save water and increase its productivity in irrigated lowland rice. Agric. Water Manage. 49, 11–30. Cornish, P.S., 2010. Donald Oration. In: Dove, H., Culvenor, R.A. (Eds.), Food Security from Sustainable Agriculture. Proc. 15th Australian Agronomy Conference, Lincoln New Zealand, 15–18th November, 2010. Cornish, P.S., Kumar, A., Khan, M.A., 2010. East India Plateau – basket case or food basket? In: Dove, H., Culvenor, R.A. (Eds.), Food Security from Sustainable Agriculture. Proc. 15th Australian Agronomy Conference, Lincoln New Zealand, 15–18th November, 2010. Cornish, P.S., Karmakar, D., Kumar, A., Das, S., Croke, B., 2015. Improving crop production for food security on the East India Plateau. I. Rainfall-related risks in rice and opportunities for improved cropping systems. Agric. Syst, In Press. doi:10.1016/j.agsy.2015.01.008. Dick, B. 1993. You want to do an action research thesis? (accessed 15.03.14.). Dixit, R., 2010. Naxalite movement in India: the State’s response. J. Def. Stud. 4 (2). Dodd, J.R., Mallarino, A.P., 2004. Soil-test phosphorus and crop grain yield responses to long-term phosphorus fertilization for corn-soybean rotations. Soil Sci. Soc. Am. J. 69, 1118–1128. Farooq, M., Siddique, K.H.M., Reham, H., Aziz, T., Lee, D.-J., Wahid, A., 2011. Rice direct seeding: experiences, challenges and opportunities. Soil Tillage Res. 111, 87–98. Helyar, K.R., Porter, W.M., 1987. Soil acidification, its measurement and the processes involved. In: Robson, A.D., Yeates, J.S., Porter, W.M. (Eds.), Soil Acidity and Plant Growth. Academic Press, Australia, pp. 61–102. Hobbs, P.R., Gupta, R.K., Ladha, J.K., Balasubramanian, V., 2000. Crop establishment and management: New opportunities. International Workshop on Developing an Action Program for Farm-Level Impact on Rice-Wheat Systems of the IndoGangetic Plains. 25–27 September 2000. New Delhi, India. Hochman, Z., Holzworth, D., Hunt, J.R., 2009. Potential to improve on-farm yield and WUE in Australia. Crop Pasture Sci. 60, 708–716. Joy, K.J., Kirankumar, A.K., Lele, R., Adagale, R., 2004. Watershed development review: issues and impacts. Centre for Interdisciplinary Studies in Environment and Development, Bangalore, India. 146 pp. Kato, Y., Okami, M., Katsura, K., 2009. Yield potential and water use efficiency of aerobic rice (Oryza sativa L.) in Japan. Field Crops Res. 113, 328–334. Kolb, D.A., 1984. Experiential Learning: Experience as the Source of Learning and Development. Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs, NJ. Lawrence, D., Dey, P., Karmakar, D., Cornish, P.S., 2006. Participation – for improved adoption, research, or both: two case studies. In: Turner, N.C., Acuna, T., Johnson, R.C. (Eds.), Ground-breaking Stuff. Proc. 13th Australian Agronomy Conference, Perth, Western Australia. 10–14 September 2006. Pandey, S., Gauchan, D., Malabayabas, M., Bool-Emerick, M., Hardy, B., 2012. Patterns of Adoption of Improved Rice Varieties and Farm-Level Impacts in Stress-Prone Rainfed Areas in South Asia. International Rice Research Institute, Los Baños, Philippines. 318 pp. Pangare, V., Karmakar, D., 2003. “Impact on livelihoods: PRADAN’s collaboration Study of the 5% technology Purulia, West Bengal, India”. Poverty-focused smallholder water management: an IWMI research project supported by DFID. Final Report Document 3 of 9. International Water Management Institute, India. 83 pp. Pretty, J.N., 1995. Participatory learning for sustainable agriculture. World Dev. 23, 1247–1263. Robertson, M.J., Kirkegaard, J.A., 2005. Water-use efficiency of dryland canola in an equi-seasonal rainfall environment. Aust. J. Agric. Res. 56, 1373–1386. Sahrawat, K.L., Jones, M.P., Diatta, S., 1997. Extractable phosphorus and rice yield in an Ultisol of the humid forest zone in West Africa. Commun. Soil Sci. Plant Anal. 28, 711–716. Sikka, A.K., Kumar, A., Upadhyaya, A., Kundu, D.K., Dey, P., Sarkar, A.K., et al., 2009. Development and policy issues for optimum use of soil and water in Eastern India. Bull. Indian Soc. Soil Sci. 26, 55–68. Singh, P.K., Mishra, A.K., Imtiyaz, M.I., 1991. Moisture stress and the water use efficiency of mustard. Agric. Water Manage. 20, 245–253. Sridhara, C.J., Shashidhar, H.E., Gurumurthy, K.T., Ramachandrappa, B.K., 2012. Effect of genotypes and method of establishment on root traits, growth and yield of aerobic rice. Agric. Sci. Digest 32, 13–17. Steel, R.G.D., Torrie, J.H., 1980. Principles and Procedures of Statistics, 2nd ed. McGraw-Hill, New York. Verma, S., 2007. Rethinking Tribal development: water management strategies for revitalizing Tribal agriculture in Central India. International Water Management Institute, Colombo, Sri Lanka. Water Policy Briefing 27: 8 pp. Willett, I.R., Muirhead, W.A., Higgins, M.L., 1978. The effect of rice growing on soil phosphorus immobilization. Aust. J. Exp. Agric. 18, 270–275.