Philippine Journal of Crop Science 2002, 27(3): 53-58 Copyright 2004, Crop Science Society of the Philippines Released

December 2004

SOCIAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT OF RICE HULL-BURNING & STALE-SEEDBED TECHNIQUE OF IPM-CRSP

SM ROGUEL,1 RB MALASA2 & IR TANZO 3
1 Professor,

Central Luzon State University, Science City of Muoz, Nueva Ecija, Philippines. 2 Science Research

Specialist, Philippine Rice Research Institute (PhilRice), Maligaya, Science City of Muoz, Nueva Ecija, Philippines. 3 Senior Science Research Specialist, PhilRice

The study assessed the possible social impacts of advocating weed management techniques, specifically rice hull-burning (RHB) and stale-seedbed technique (SST) in two barangays in two towns of Nueva Ecija: Palestina in San Jose City and Kaingin in Bongabon, using Krawetz SIA Model. The study made use of comparative analysis since the farmers in San Jose are already known to practice RHB as one of the essential components in their control of weeds during the onion season, while the farmers in Bongabon do not utilize this practice. In both study areas, there is heavy application of herbicide, which can be a source of health problems. Thus, the social variables assessed in this study included: income, health and safety, household, social relations, community structure and processes, community resources, and support services. Results showed that RHB offers many advantages. The researchers suggest that further studies be conducted to verify its effect on health and the environment. Rice-hull supply and road accessibility are two other factors to consider in RHB adoption or adoption. Concerning SST, the researchers found that the technology is socially acceptable. CRSP researchers should disseminate it among farmers and inform and train the DA technicians on how to apply the method. Demonstration farms or plots can be established in different barangays to further expedite the spread of the SST technology among farmers. Keywords health problems, Krawetz SIA model, rice hull-burning, social impact of technology, stale-seedbed technique, weed control

INTRODUCTION
Researchers have always assumed apriori that the new technologies that they are introducing are the ones needed by a given community. However, the question that remains is why a certain technology is still not being adopted despite the higher economic gains it promises its beneficiaries. At present, cultural practices, beliefs, traditions, and other social factors are being considered to determine if a technology being introduced is suited to the community. It is surmised that it is easier to transfer technologies once they are perceived to be socially acceptable. For the purposes of this study, the researchers tried to assess the possible social impacts of rice hullburning (RHB) and stale-seedbed techniques (SST), which are being studied by the Integrated Pest Management Collaborative Research Support Program (IPM-CRSP) at the

Philippine Rice Research Institute for future adoption. The impact of RHB and SST on factors like income, health and safety, household, social relations, community structure and processes, community resources, and support services are to be considered before these weed control strategies are advocated on a wider scale. RHB has been observed to be a common weed control practice among farmers producing Yellow Granex and bulb onions in some areas of Nueva Ecija. Verification of the practice through research showed that the method worked and provided more benefits (Gergon et al 2000). The experiments revealed that weed growth in unburned plots was 55% higher compared to that of the burned plots. RHB has likewise effectively reduced microbial population specifically the root-knot nematode (Meloidogyne graminicola), thus decreasing the incidence and severity of pink

root diseases in onions. Furthermore, their studies have shown that the thicker the rice hull burned in the field, the more P and K contents would be present in the soil. This can promote increase in bulb weight and diameter of Yellow Granex. Onion yields were observed to be as much as 4 times greater in fields subjected to RHB as compared to fields without RHB. Similarly, onion plots subjected to SST of tillage during fallow periods between rice and onion crops had significantly lowered the population of Cyperus rotundus resulting in higher yields over controlled farmers practice and unweeded plots. With lesser number of handweeding and herbicide applications, the researchers indicated that there was increase in the profits gained by farmers (Baltazar et al 2000). Considering that some farmers are already utilizing these technologies and that research results showed that these are promising technologies for dissemination, social impact assessment (SIA) has to be conducted. Thus, the objectives of the study were as follows: 1. To determine the communities perception on the use/adoption of RHB and SST. 2. To identify and assess the possible social effects and impacts of RHB and SST on the community. 3. To formulate and suggest mitigation and enhancement measures for the negative impacts of RHB and SST to properly suit the needs of the community/

MATERIALS & METHODS

A combination of research techniques such as focus group discussion (FGD), documentary analysis, and key informant interviews were used for the SIA of RHB and SST. The SIA model of Krawetz (1991) was employed in the technology assessment of RHB and SST. This model has the major steps of projecting, assessing and evaluating, and mitigating, enhancing and stating residual impacts of an introduced technology. In projecting, the researcher describes the anticipated social environment in the future with the proposed technology. Effects that are significant are called impacts. The researcher then suggests means of reducing or ridding the technology of its negative impacts and at the same time enhancing its positive impacts. Kaingin in Bongabon, Nueva Ecija is one of the experimental sites of IPM-CRSP where farmers do not practice RHB. Their onion 54

production practices were compared with the farmers in Palestina, San Jose City, Nueva Ecija who utilize RHB. A comparative analysis of the two barangays was made so that the researchers can approximate the possible impact if and when a community adopts RHB technology. Comparative analysis was not employed on the SST because it was assumed to be a new technology and both communities do not practice it yet. The researchers, however, compared and contrasted the weed control methods that farmers employed relative to SST so that they can approximate the changes that would take place if and when it adopts the SST technology. A focus group discussion (FGD) was used to obtain the current practices of farmers on onion production, particularly on weed management. The assistance of the agricultural technicians assigned in the barangays was solicited in identifying the respondents. Three FGDs were conducted; one in Kaingin where the distinction was made between farmers who planted both red and yellow onions and those who only planted yellow onions. Ten respondents were involved in the FGD, 9 male and 1 female. Two FGDs were conducted in Palestina with two kinds of farmers: those utilizing RHB (10 participants, all male) and those who were not (also 10 participants, all male). The groups were also divided into two: those who planted both red and yellow onions and those who solely planted yellow onion. Farmers planting the same varieties were seated together during the FGD. After the farmers presented their practices, the IPM CRSP technologies were then introduced as well as the benefits they could possibly get from these technologies with the aide of the technical researchers. The researchers also inquired what possible reasons as to why the given technology may or may not suit their farming practices. The researchers also gathered secondary data to substantiate and validate the claims made during the FGD and to assess the acceptability and suitability of the technologies to both barangays. The SIA was conducted in August 2001.

RESULTS & DISCUSSION Rice hull-burning

Palestina, San Jose City, Nueva Ecija The economic analysis done by Francisco & Norton (1999) with data obtained in Social Impact Of Rice hull-burning

Palestina from farmers practicing RHB, revealed that the economic benefit from RHB ranges from P 77, 867 or $1,557.34 up to P 116,797 or $ 2,335.94. Profit largely depends on how thick is the rice hull applied on the field (15-30 cm), where the thicker the rice hull burned, the higher the income. During the FGD, farmers stated that if they planted the Yellow Granex variety, they needed more or less P 40,000 or $800 as capital. With this, their approximate profit is P 72,500 or $ 1,450, which was not very far from the results of the study of Francisco. It is interesting to note that the farmers only placed 15-cm-thick layer of rice hull on their field. In the case of red onion, they needed a capital of not less than P 30,000 or $ 600 and had an approximate net incremental benefit of more or less P 50,000 or $ 1,000. The researchers also found out that most of the farmers were knowledgeable as to why they practiced RHB. The primary reason they cited was that it was a valuable method for controlling weeds. They also noted that the onion bulbs they harvested were much bigger and they attributed this to the soil being loose. The onions they produced then commanded better prices in the market since they could qualify for export. Gergon & Miller (2000) obtained similar results in their study. RHB significantly reduced the population of M. graminicola and the bulbs produced were bigger and heavier. The ash of the burned rice hull served as fertilizer and increased the P and K content of the soil. The researchers got interested when they found that there were also farmers in Palestina who did not practice RHB. These farmers preferred to plant bulb onions since these were more competitive against weeds than varieties grown through seeds. Furthermore, they mentioned that when they planted yellow onions in their fields, they noted that the bulbs would be relatively smaller yet heavier than the ones that were planted with RHB. They attributed this to the fact that onions which were planted in a field with RHB absorbed more water, which was then mostly stored in the bulb and made them bigger. The onions they produced without RHB were more compact even though they were not as big. Upon further inquiry, the farmers stated that inaccessibility of their farm to land transportation was the major constraint why they could not order rice hull to be dumped on their fields. Another factor was the distance. Thus they believed that the transportation SM Roguel, RM Malasa & IR Tanzo

cost was too high for their purposes. Farmers practicing RHB also stated some negative effects brought about by the activity in relation to their community. They cited that during the peak of the onion season, sometimes conflicts arose because the supply of rice hull was not enough and there was a high demand for it. Due to this, a stiff competition for the rice hull would develop among farmers. Another problem was the smoke coming from the burning rice hull, which was another source of hostility around the neighborhood. According to them, the smoke was one of the causes for cough/cold and other allergies experienced by the children. Some of them speculated that RHB must be the cause of one of the recent diseases of onion in which the leaves twisted (farmers referred to it as twister). Researchers, on the other hand, refer to the disease as anthracnose of onion, which is caused by soil or airborne pathogens (Colletotrichum gloeosporioides). They also mentioned that the storing capacity of their RHB harvest was not as long as that of their non-RHB harvest. A new city ordinance was formulated in San Jose, which prohibited burning rice hull in ricefields, although such ordinance had not yet been implemented. The practice was widespread and the farmers were aware of the RHBs benefits. The community seemed to be tolerant of the practice. RHB also favors the rice millers. Rice hull disposal has always been a big problem among the millers. RHB provides them two benefits: (1) they are able to dispose the rice hull at no expense, and (2) they get additional income while the problem is being solved for them. Millers are able to sell it for P 70 - P 100 per truckload depending on the demand. Where the rice hull was not utilized for RHB, the millers dumped and burned it by the roadside. In this case, that caused some problems to the environment. Consequently, some researchers advocate that it would be better if the rice hull is burned in the farmers fields where it is beneficial. Kaingin, Bongabon, Nueva Ecija Most farmers in Kaingin planted Red Creole and Yellow Granex onion cultivars. They were aware of the economic and agricultural benefits that can be derived from RHB. When the researchers asked them why they did not utilize the technology, the major constraint they mentioned was the lack of supply of rice hull since there were only a few 55

millers in their area. The other reason was road inaccessibility in some areas. Big trucks hauling rice hull cannot reach some farmers fields. One concern of the researchers was that where farmers accepted the technology, this would help widen the gap between social layers. With RHB as estimated by Francisco (2000) as already cited, the economic benefit is P 116,797 or $ 2,335.94 per growing season. That is a tremendous amount of money locally considered. People who have better access to the rice hull supply are those living along the highway and provincial roads where transportation is accessible. In the meantime, the children within the locality may also get sick due to continuous smoke inhalation from the rice hull-burning. Interviews with environmental experts revealed that burning rice hulls can contribute to the greenhouse gases (GHG) being released to the atmosphere, specifically carbon dioxide (CO2). To what extent is subject to verification.

Stale-Seedbed Technique

The researchers have assumed that SST is a new technology that has yet to be disseminated to farmers in order to control weeds, specifically the purple nutsedge. As indicated by Baltazar et al (2000), this method can reduce the number of handweeding and herbicide application to one in a single onion cropping. As we listened to the farmers recitation of their practices, however, we learned that SST was basically the method that they employed when planting bulb onions. One farmer in San Jose even pointed out that this was actually their practice before but abandoned it when they learned about the benefits of RHB. During the study, the researchers noted that the SST as conceived by the CRSP and that practiced by the farmers differed. Farmers preferred to employ 2-3 herbicide applications and 2-3 handweedings in one cropping. The researchers also noted that farmers tended to prepare a cocktail of the different herbicides in order to save on labor, mixing fluazifop-p-butyl with oxyflourfen. The researchers would not advocate this practice since the combining of herbicides into one solution might produce chemical reactions that might be lethal not only to the weeds or the soil but even to the onion itself. In any case, since the CRSP-SST technology is similar to the farmers practice (especially with bulb onions); the researchers

surmise that the technology will be very easy for the farmers to adopt. The only problem would be its proper implementation because the farmers are spending too much for handweeding (especially the latter part of the season) for fear that the weeds may still affect their yield. A seminar on how they can manage their weeds efficiently can be sponsored by IPM-CRSP. The possible negative impact of the CRSPSST is reduction of labor. Several men, women and children might receive lesser income since the number of handweedings will be reduced. With regard to farmers who were planting red onions in Bongabon and also rice, they could not properly implement the two harrowings with a two-week interval between each operation because of the short fallow periods between cropping seasons. They stressed that they needed to prepare their land for less than a month so that they can have one cropping season for onion within the year. Except for them, the researchers believe that there will be no major difficulty for the farmers to adopt this technology. A summary of the impacts of SST and the mitigations/recommendations postulated by the researchers is shown in Table 1.

CONCLUSIONS & RECOMMENDATIONS

Based on economic analysis and mitigations to lessen the negative impacts on several social factors, the following conclusions and recommendations are presented: 1) RHB and SST are effective weed management strategies, however, they both have positive and negative impacts. 2) The positive impact of RHB seemingly outweighs its negative effects. It offers many advantages including increased yield and reduced pesticide use, thus contributing to higher income of farmers. 3) Further studies must be conducted to verify the impact of RHB on the environment and health. 4) Rice hull availability and road accessibility play a crucial role in the adoption of RHB. If these two factors were present, farmers would tend to adopt and practice RHB. 5) Information campaigns must be conducted on the advantages and disadvantages of RHB to aid farmers in decision-making. It is possible that they can offer insights to mitigate the negative effects of RHB. Social Impact Of Rice hull-burning

56

Table 1. Impacts, constraints and mitigations for RHB Positive Impact Farmers find it useful for controlling weeds Negative Impact/Constraint Smoke from the rice hull being burned contribute to health problems: coughing and cold (children are the ones mostly affected); it is possible that the smoke could also lead to other lung problems Conflicts arise among neighboring farmers due to the smoke Mitigation/Recommendations Verify if synchronous burning is possible to avoid conflicts brought about by the smoke Obtain records from municipal health officer with regard to the incidence of respiratory problems during RHB period to quantify possible negative impact on health Hold information campaigns with regard to the advantages and disadvantages of rice-hull burning to aid farmers in decision making (It is possible that they can offer more insights on mitigating the negative effects of the RHB) Verify applicability of PhilRice gasifier to suit needs for RHB to manage direction of smoke Cost of onion production is reduced since number of handweeding, herbicide and fertilizer application is reduced Lessen possible intoxication of farmers due to reduced application of herbicides Soil fertility is enhanced Biodiversity is affected Release GHG to the atmosphere which contribute to global warming Quantify effect on biodiversity to verify impact of RHB Conduct soil analysis to check for soil presence of soil borne pathogens Possible displacement of labor for hand weeding Need to introduce supplementary work for male and female

Higher profit because Yellow Granex onion qualify the grade for export Extra income for millers Millers find it a beneficial way of disposing rice hulls rather than the just burning it along the road side

Storing capacity for Yellow Granex becomes shorter Road damages due to the size of trucks, specifically in Bongabon, where roads are not in good condition as well as some barangay roads in San Jose City Conflict/competition among neighbors arise if supply of rice hull is limited CRSP should establish link with LGUs and inform policy makers of the advantages of RHB and the importance of road accessibility for its utilization Greater social stratification due to road inaccessibility and unequal distribution of rice hull

6) The advantages of SST far outweigh its negative effects, so the researchers find it a socially acceptable technology. SST should be disseminated to rice-onion farmers and extension workers to expedite its utilization. Demonstration farms

should be established in different barangays in cooperation with local government units or with farmers organization for possible adaptation of the technology.

Acknowledgement
We would like to thank the Integrated Pest Management Collaborative Support Program (IPM-CRSP) of the Philippine Rice Research Institute (PhilRice) for funding this study.

SM Roguel, RM Malasa & IR Tanzo

57

LITERATURE CITED
Baltazar AM et al. 2000. Reducing the herbicide use with agronomic practices in onions (Allium cepa) grown after rice (Oryza sativa). The Philippine Agricultural Scientist 83 (1): 34-44. Francisco SR & GW Norton. 1999. Economic impacts of IPM practices in rice-vegetable systems. Sixth IPM CRSP Annual Report, Virginia Tech, VA. Gergon EB & SA Miller. 2000. Effect of rice hull burning and deep plowing on the rice root knot nematode in rice-onion cropping system with supplemental nematode control using soil amendments. Seventh Annual Report IPM CRSP, Virginia Tech., Blacksburg, VA. Krawetz Natalia M. 1991. Social impact assessment: an introductory handbook. Environmental Management in Indonesia Project, Jakarta

58

Social Impact Of Rice hull-burning