The 1st Rajamangala Surin International Conference
“Academic Network Bridge through Research”
Analyze the Local Adaptation Methods of Rice Farmer Households to
Introduction
Rice farming is the main livelihood for most of the rural population in Cambodia [1]. In 2014, around 78% of the Cambodian population lived in rural areas, and approximately 45% of the total labor force was directly engaged in the agriculture sector [2]. Rice production is considered one of the major crops which largely contributes to national food security and poverty alleviation [3]. Other major crops such as maize, cassava, soybeans, peanuts, and rubber have remained sources of income, supporting the livelihood development of rural Cambodians [4]. Japan-Cambodia Cooperation Initiative (JCCI) has stated that agriculture is a crucial component of Cambodia’s economy and way of life. Changing weather and increasing temperature has an immediate and negative impact on farmers’ ability to sustain their families’ food security [5]. In Cambodia, exposure to natural hazards, especially drought poses the highest risk to rural households who mainly depended on rain-fed agriculture [6].
Cambodia is a developing country affected by climate change. Changes in the climate influence and impact communities who depend on and derive a living from the agriculture sectors [3]. Increasing drought frequencies have damaged paddy rice fields in provinces around Cambodia.
Drought leads to the shortage of water and damages rice production. Recently, 3 main provinces have frequently been experiencing drought and have been identified as the most affected provinces, namely Kampong Spu, Takeo and Battambong [7]. Takeo province was selected to be studied due to its higher occurrence of droughts compared to other provinces in Cambodia and the delay of rainfall in 2011 which affected 300 hectares of land [8]. While climate change is a global concern, sustainable agriculture has been highlighted as an effective adaptation measure. In fact, adaptation has played a vital role in dealing and coping with present and expected future impacts of climate change [9]. Adaptation methods have been developed at regional, national and local levels. Recently, climate change has been drawing more attention and more action is being taken to reduce vulnerabilities by governments and organizations, though communal planning processes. There are many agencies working to reduce environmental impacts attributed to climate change [1]; [10]. Adapting to climate change is still very challenging, however, due to lack of adaptive capacity [11]. This research was important to document whether farmers can adapt to climatic threats, local adaptation techniques, and the educational level of the farmers.
Aim and Objectives
This study aimed to analyze the adaptation strategies adopted during drought events by rice farmers. This study will fill knowledge gaps and contribute to improving government policy;
informing the work of NGOs; and influence other decision makers to use adaptation strategies to initiate planning processes to approach the climate change problem. To analyze the local adaptative strategies of rice farmers in response to drought hazards my study focused on:
Describing the socioeconomic demography of rice farmers at selected study sites;
Identifying and exploring local adaption strategies adopted by rice farmers affected by drought; and
Analyzing the external and internal factors which have influence on adaptative capacity of rice farmers
Research Questions
The study conducted at Tramkak district, Takeo Province employed the following key research questions:
What is the socio-demography of rice farmer households?
How do rice farmers perceive drought hazards?
What are the existing local adaption strategies being used when drought events occur?
What decisions have been adapted to handle drought and why?
The 1st Rajamangala Surin International Conference
“Academic Network Bridge through Research”
Figure 1: Map of Study Areas
Source: Author, 2015
Materials and Methods
Geographic Information
Takeo Province, is one of 25 provinces in Cambodia, containing the typical plain wet areas and covered by rice fields and another agricultural plantation1. Takeo Province consists of ten districts, accounting to 100 communes, and 1,116 villages. Tramkak District specifically has been selected to be studied, comprising of 15 communes with a total of 39,877 families and a total population of 186,275 people, including 96,433 women [12]. The average temperature is approximately 38 0C and the average precipitation level is around 1,235 mm per year [13]. Trapeang Kronhoung and Trapeang Tom Khangchourng are 2communes among the total 15 in the District where people derive a living in both agriculture and non-agricultural sectors. These two communes are home to 571 families of whom 1,416 are males and 1,322 are females [12].
Sample Size and Sampling Procedure
The purposive sampling approach was applied to select the district level; this district was selected according to recommendations made by the Provincial Department of Agriculture in Takeo Province and based on the impacts of climate change. The area has been affected harshly by drought and shortage of water in the rice production area; additionally, the areas hit with drought are conveniently accessible to researchers. This study applied the Yamane formula, then, target household samples were randomly selected based on a household list, obtained through the village chiefs.
Table 1: Number of Household Sample in Each Target Village
Communes Villages Households Male Female Sample Size Trapeang
Kranhoung
Trapeange Chak 104 253 232 21
Trapeange Robang 143 355 297 30
Trapeang Thom Khang Cheunge
Prey Kdouch 69 151 168 14
Prey Ta Lei 75 166 167 15
Total 4 391 925 864 80
Source: Compiled by authors, 2015 Data Collection Methods and Analysis
The primary objective of this study was to analyze the adaptation strategies employed by rice farmer households to cope with drought events based on the 2015 rice production year in
1
http://www.stat.go.jp/info/meetings/cambodia/pdf/ec_pr21.pdf
Tramkak District, Takeo Province. The data collection for this study included both primary and secondary data to answer to research questions. The secondary data was collected after the writer beganthe design of the research proposal and plan. Secondary data was gathered from relevant reports and publications related to agricultural production; meteorology patterns (over 10 years of climatological data records) from the Department of Meteorology; water resources in Takeo province; agricultural district and commune reports from the last 5 years; and other relevant reports from other relevant institutions. Sources of information included MAFF, MOE, UNDP, UN, ADB, FAO, CDRI, IDRC, IFAD, EESPEA, World bank, IPCC and CDM as well as other relevant departments.
The primary data was collected through interviews with rice farming households according to the above described objectives and key questions. Additionally, interviews to collect key information from the Head of Agricultural Department and the head of the Meteorology department in Cambodia were conducted using pre-prepared questionnaires. Primary quantitative data was analyzed using Statistical Package for Social Science (SPSS). Initially, SPSS was used to clear missing data and any data errors. Descriptive and frequency-based tools were applied to analyze demographic information (i.e., gender, age group, education level, household Heads, primary occupation. The results were then organized into figures and tables using Microsoft Excel.
Significant s central tendency trends such as Mean, Mode, Median, and Standard Deviation.
Results
Household Characteristics in Research Areas
In two research locations, 80 rice farmers were interviewed. Among interviewed households, the number of male-headed households head was larger than female-headed households, as shown in Table 2. Specifically, approximately 80.0% of households are headed by males while the proportion of households headed by female is closer to 20.0%. In the research locations, households are more likely to be led by males rather than females. On average there are four family members in each household. Findings show that the average family size in this area is significantly smaller than the national figure, which is 7 family members per household [2]
Conversely, the proportion of female-headed households in the study area is significantly higher than the national average which was roughly 13% in 2010 (NIS, 2010).
Table 2: Household characteristic at research locations
Sex of Household N %
Male 64 80.0
Female 16 20.0
Source: Compiled by authors, 2015 Education Attained by Family Head
This section discusses the highest standard education received under any structured educational system within in the research area. This information aided in understanding the local capacity to progress up the economic ladder. Most respondents in the study area could read and write, as most had completed primary school. Only a few respondents had completed high school. The proportion of household heads who had never attended school, was over one-third (34.0%). Most household heads (45.0%) were found to have attended primary school, while only 6.0% had finished high school. These education rates are illustrated in Table 3. Accordingly, the number of household heads who had completed high school was around 6.0% while the data who had completed secondary school was account for 12.0% respectively. This indicates that the education level of the household heads in the study locations are relatively poorer than at the national level.
This issue highlights constraints to local capacity building in the study locations.
The 1st Rajamangala Surin International Conference
“Academic Network Bridge through Research”
Figure 2: Household Occupation in Research Areas
100 53
8 10
31 13
0 20 40 60 80 100 120
Rice Growing Animal Raising Crop Planting Gavernment Officer Garment Factories Construction Workforce
Percentage (%) Non Agriculture Sector Agriculture Sector Table 3: Household education level in research locations
Indicators N %
Illiterate 27 34.0
Primary School 38 48.0
Secondary School 10 12.0
High School 5 6.0
Source: Compiled by authors, 2015 Household Livelihood Options
Famers living in the study area earn their income in both the agricultural sector and non-agricultural sector. The figure 2 indicates that rice cultivation and raising animals are considered the primary sources of income among interviewed farmers, with 100% and 53% respectively.
Comparatively, farmers who migrated to work in garment factories responded that this labor contributes to 31% of their annual income. Therefore, creating the opportunity for increased local economic growth through agricultural production and the non-agricultural sector would contribute to enhanced livelihoods among studied households which could lead to building adaptive capacity to drought impacts.
Source: Compiled by authors, 2015 Household Properties
Household properties have played an important role in determining local adaptive capacity. To understand the economic status and living standards of the household, information on household properties were obtained by asking each of the respondents about the materials and equipment owned along with their worth. During interviews, it was noticed that the respondents had access to electricity, televisions, phones, cattle, mottos, and bicycles. Water jars were also owned by most households (over 50.0%). Furthermore, for those household farmers who had water jars account for 90.16% while farmers had pond (23.33%) and pumping machine (22.38%).
Average Rice Paddy Size
Agricultural land holdings and the size of cultivated area were the main sources of income that significantly contributed to the livelihood capacity of farmers, particularly those who depend mainly on rice production. Figure 3 illustrates that the average size of a rice cultivation area was calculated to be 0.60 hectares (ha) per household. Most of the households interviewed had cultivated a rain-fed rice on 0.8 ha of land, while only 0.4 ha were used for the growth of dry season rice. It is indicated that most farmers depend heavily on rice crops to sustain their families.
Table 4 shows that around 40% of landholders own less than one hectare of agricultural land.
0.6
0.81
0.36
0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9
Size in Average Rain-fed Area Dry Season
%
According to the Cambodia Socio-Economic Survey (CSE) in 2009, the average size of parcels owned by households in Cambodia were 1.6 ha. This indicates that the landholding of rice farmers in the research areas were less than the average size. The small size of the land owned by rice farmers poses a limitation to improving the livelihoods of studied households.
Figure 1 Size of Land for Rice Farming in Research Areas (ha)
Source: Compiled by authors, 2015 Rice Yields (Kg/ha)
As the head of department of agriculture in Takeo Province mentioned, the average rice yield was approximately 3 ton per Ha in rain-fed area while the average of rice yield in the dry season was around 4.8 ton per Ha. Drought frequently occurred in the middle of the raining season, which typically starts from June to July, and can contribute to the destruction of seed transplanting as well as decrease agricultural productivities. As reported from the rice households in research areas, drought is one of a disaster risks and a main factor that restricts rice yield production. This study found that the rice yield obtained by the households was calculated to be on average of 1,850 kg per Ha. Due to the impacts of drought, rice yield in both communes was significantly lower than national average rice yield of 3,100 kg per year (NIS, 2014). This finding demonstrates that the limitations of irrigation system resulted in the low yield of rice production.
Table 4: Rice Yield (Kg/ha)
Indicator Mean Low High Test Value Mean Different T df
Rice Yield 1850 1686 2138 3100 -1188.09 -10.60 80
Sig. (2-tailed) .000
Source: Compiled by authors, 2015
The Opinion of Household on Rice Yields Situation
The figure 4 depicts the perception of rice farmers of the research areas were divided into three categorizations. The three options included whether they believed that their yield would be less than before, more than before or the same as before. In general, around 79% of the household responded that their rice yield was more likely to decrease and be less than the previous years, while the amount of rice farmers received yield as previous year was only account for 9%.
However, the proportion of rice farmers responded that their rice yield was higher than previous year 12%.
The 1st Rajamangala Surin International Conference
“Academic Network Bridge through Research”
Figure 2: The Opinion of Household on Rice Yields
79%
9% 12%
Less than before Still the same More than before
95 84
23
48
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100
%
Figure 3: Causes of Rice Yield Decreasing Causes for Rice Yield Loss
In the previous year, household farmers had grown rice twice. They started planting rice between June or July annually. Rice farmer households responded that they had faced drought in 2015.
There were many reasons that caused the decrease in rice yield such as water shortage, lack of labor force, soil fertility, pests and disease. The figure 3 below illustrates that the water shortage was most influential in decreasing the rice yields. Rice farmers responded that there were three main causes and reasons including water shortage (95.0%), lack of workforce (84.0%), pest (48.0%) and diseases (23.0%) while lack of soil fertility just only 23.0%.
Source: Compiled by authors, 2015
Adaption Strategies Adopted by Rice Farmers Affected by Drought Drought Occurrence
The total reservoir capacity of the study area amounted to 93 distinct natural reservoirs, which translates to 13,729 ha in total. These irrigation and sub-irrigation lines function to transfer water from main reservoir to rice fields of the farmers. The Irrigation line has about 272 lines which is 1,442 km in length. Whereas the sub-irrigation line has about 276 lines which is 770 km in length.
According to interview conducted with head of Provincial Department of Water Resources and Meteorology (PDWRAM), rice farmers had experienced with drought hazard in 2014 and 2015, when there was insufficient water for consumption and growing rice. Most of the rice farmers in these two areas responded that their small pond and community pond were dried out.
Water Supply and Irrigation Systems
The interview with the head of Water Management Committee revealed that the Khbop Trabek reservoir was established on 25/05/2005 and officially registered at PDWRAM in 2009. This reservoir has played an important role in enabling rice farmers to get water and for climate change adaptation. Khbop Trabek reservoir has the capacity to maintain water levels at around 33 million cubic meters per year to supply rice farmers in four communes such as Trapeangtom Khang Chourng, Trapeangtom Khang Thbougn, Cheangtong and Tapam Communes. Tramkak District.
However, this water was enough to supply and use even though in the Trapeangtom Khang Chourng Commune is the nearest compared to the other communes. It is of note that there are some irrigation schemes in the district, but they are inadequate to meet the needs of the farmers.
Rice farmers mentioned that rice households could not access the irrigation schemes in their commune, water sources which were flowing from irrigation systems that were completely inadequate to meet the needs of rice households even though their rice fields were close to the irrigation system. The reason is because the reservoirs have enough capacity to harvest rainfall,
Figure 2: Rice Varieties Figure 5: Seeding Calendar
but the amount of water was not enough for all the households in the commune. Moreover, it is hard to release the water over such far distances to reach the furthest rice fields.
Local Adapted Strategies to Cope with the Drought Hazard Shifting Planting Rice Calendar
Generally, when rice farmer households face with drought, their action is based on their experience and is typically not to wait for intervention from the government. Rice farmers have found their own simple ways to cope with drought. In 2015, due to the delay of rainfall resulted in dying of seedlings. As a result, farmer households have changed their planting calendar and cropping calendar, and their rice variety from intermediate-maturing variety to mid-maturing variety, from long term to medium term. Figure 7 below reveals that 68% of the rice farmers used IR504 variety, 52 % used Jasmin variety and 36% used Pka Romeat. As supported from government agencies, 10 rice varieties were released by Cambodian Agricultural Research and Development Institute (CARDI) including Chulsa, IR66, Sen Pidoa, Phka Rumduol, Phka Rumdeng, Phka Romeat, Phka Chan Sensar, Riang Chey, Car4 and Car6. Out of the 10-rice varieties with rice variety used by farmers, most of them favored using IR504 and only 36% of rice farmers used Phka Romeat.
Seedling Calendars of Rice Farmer Households
Some of the interviewed rice farmers started growing rice in early August, and some rice grower started planting at the end of September and shifted from transplanting to sowing. However, some rice farmers carried on planting the old rice varieties, that they usually used. According to the chart below the seedling calendar of rice farmers in both communes in 2015 is begins in July to August. A shift was noted that the seedling calendar started in June or July and was moved to July or August. there was a higher amount, except transplanting seedling time in August to September.
The data can be grouped into three groups, including transplanting from June to July, from July to August, and the last group from August to September. Figure 5 clearly seen that the transplanting started in July to August over 50.0% and under 34% transplanting in June-July.
Source: Compiled by authors, 2015
External and Internal Factors Influencing the Adaptive Capacity of Rice Farmer
Both communes were frequently affected by drought in the early stages of rice production. They were also affected by irregular rain patterns, and inadequate water supply to the rice fields. Other issues confirmed in relation to the management of available water resource and adaptive capacity included the lack of skills, technique and new technologies that are also required in the distribution of water to rice field. Moreover, addressing these challenges in the context of impact of drought, requires adaptive learning processes in the technical aspects of water management.
Technical support from the government agencies to reduce the vulnerability and improve the adaptive capacity in the communes would also be helpful. The influencing factors of Rice production increase or decrease are land holding size, household income, education and
68
52
36
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80
IR504 Jasmin Phka Romeat
34
51
15
0 10 20 30 40 50 60
Jun-July Jul-Aug Aug-Sep
Number
The 1st Rajamangala Surin International Conference
“Academic Network Bridge through Research”
27
63 28
58
83
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90
Village to Village Knowledge Base Speaker in Commune Radio Television
Percentage
Sources of information
Figure 6: Climate Electrical Information about Drought Hazard
infrastructure (irrigation system) which are internal factors that can also influence to rice farmers’
adaptive capacity.
Sources of Information about Drought Hazard
Access to electronic climate and sharing information about drought hazard were broadcasted through formal and informal institution and social networking. These comprise of television, radio, speaker in communes, collecting knowledge from and village to village. Figure 8 below indicates that the sources information about the drought hazard are often gathered from televisions, radios, and general local knowledge. Regarding the data mentioned in the graph, 83%
of rice farmers households responded that they got information from televisions. On the other hand, there were around 58% and 63% of rice farmer household that got information from the radio and local information sharing. However, all the sources information has not reached to all the rice farmers concerned. As the evidence demonstrates less number got their information from villagers to villagers as well as the speaker in the communes. Since the data of sending information from village to village and speaker in the commune were below 50% this shows that there is poor connection within in the community., Approximately 31.0% reported that rice variety is kept from the previous season and this data is higher than rice farmers who bought seed from the market, or those who received from the NGOs and Government. 27.0% bought rice from the market while 19.0% and 7.0% received from NGOs and Government.
Source: Compiled by authors, 2015
Interventions from Government and NGOs to Cope with Drought Hazard
As previously stated by rice household farmers, interventions from government, NGOs and Network was a crucial part in dealing with drought. However, the finding show that the Government and NGOs were still questionable. Rice farmers responded that when facing drought, they did not wait for interventions from the government or NGOs. They adopted adaptation practices through their previous experience account for 53.73% and obtained the method to cope with drought through farmer to farmer account for 40.0% respectively. While the number of interventions from government and NGOs just followed by 23.75% and 15%. In addition, farmers determined that information sharing from the Government, Water Group Committee and NGOs were inadequate which was followed 23.75%, 18.75% and 15% respectively. Local innovations such as new agricultural technologies and climate-smart agriculture technology that are adaptable to drought impacts were already taking place but the enabling environment to support innovative development was still only partially established. Existing climate information and agricultural knowledge sharing mechanisms were limited although many channels of sharing were found.