Mechanization of rice farming (Part 3) Good news... and not-so-good news

recipient farmers to put up a counterpart of 15% will probably help but not much. It cannot be business as usual. We need more imagination.

Take the case of hand tractors of which we have already a million units all over the country. Since about 40% of rice land preparation is already mechanized, we will probably need another million units to attain 80% mechanization. These hand tractors cost as much as brand new motorcycles of which we have millions in the countryside. Therefore lack of farmer awareness and lack of funds may not be the major factors constraining further adoption. The program of giving away an additional 33,000 hand tractors over a six-year period will add little impact to the 1,000,000 units we already have.

We should study in more detail how the 1,000,000 hand tractors already in operation were acquired, how and by whom, and how they are operated and maintained. Most of the tractors are probably concentrated in irrigated rice areas. If so, how do we make the tractors more accessible in rain-fed rice areas? Note, however, that the key benefit from hand tractors in rainfed areas is the possibility of a second crop or even a third crop provided there is sufficient water. Shallow tube wells and small water pumps therefore should go hand-inhand with hand tractors. The hand tractor program should be designed accordingly.

Consider that a good number of these hand tractors are owned by more affluent farmers/landowners for their own use but who rent them out to their neighbors. Perhaps the strategy ought to be NOT GIVING AWAY HAND TRACTORS but providing incentives to enterprising farmers to acquire more hand tractors and/or bigger 4-wheel tractors to undertake custom land preparation service as a separate business.

Perhaps we should also analyze how motorcycle dealers are aggressively marketing their machines in the countryside. Brand-new hand tractors and motorcycles cost almost the same. Motorcycles with sidecars are very popular for local transport. Motorcycles can be acquired on credit at nominal down payments with the machines as chattel mortgage plus affordable monthly amortizations. Why can’t we do the same for hand tractors.

Enterprising farmers and individuals can also make a living off renting out hand tractors as custom service providers just like tricycle drivers and operators. We should encourage the tractor dealers/distributors to adopt parallel business models. With the machine as chattel mortgage, plus coverage of the agriculture guarantee loan fund and equipment insurance with PCIC, the risks to both tractor owners and machine dealers are manageable.

Rice combines are expensive and relatively sophisticated machines which small farmers obviously cannot afford to buy nor maintain. By now we should have about 4,500 rice combines concentrated in Isabela, Nueva Ecija and Pangasinan. Giving away these expensive machines to farmers all over the country is too simplistic an approach and potentially wasteful.

A thorough study of the circumstances of the growing acceptance of these machines in these three provinces should provide clues on how best to deploy our limited budget resources.

Who are buying the machines? Their sources of credit? Who are providing maintenance and after sales service? Which models are most popular and why? What’s happening with the displaced landless laborers?

Popularization of mechanical rice transplanters requires more deliberation. They are likewise relatively more sophisticated and expensive. Although mechanical rice transplanters are overwhelmingly popular in Japan, South Korea and Taiwan, their adoption in Southeast Asia is still relatively limited. Thailand and Vietnam have introduced rice transplanters but most of their rice is established by direct seeding.

Transplanting requires about 22 man-days per hectare. This is about a third of the average 69 man-days to grow a hectare of rice. The alternative — manual direct seeding — requires only 2-3 man-days. Also inexpensive mechanical drum seeders are at various stages of development.

Direct-seeded rice need well-prepared fields and good control of water. Moreover, the time of sowing among the farmers should be synchronized to share the risks from bird and rat damage. These are highly location-specific practices and would require a lot of trial-and-error and demonstration of feasibility at the community level. These technical problems are not unique to us. Thailand, Vietnam and parts of India have worked out their problems and are all-out in direct seeding. These technical and social glitches are not insurmountable. We should persevere and solve them. This lack of attention to direct seeding as a cost-effective substitute to manual and mechanical transplanting is apparent in the rice mechanization program. Generating Employment

for Displaced Labor An Asian regional consultation on farm mechanization convened by the International Rice Research Institute (IRRI) in 2012 came up with the following conclusion/caution:

Mechanization in agriculture largely takes place against the background of broad-based economic growth; socio-demographic changes in flows of labor, and policies that result in foreign investment and transfer of technology and management know-how into the manufacturing sector, and NOT something singularly pursued as a policy objective absent other pre-conditions.

The primary driver for farm mechanization in the developed Asian economies (Japan, South Korea, Taiwan and many parts of China) was the exodus of labor from the farms to the factories in the cities. This has yet to happen in a big way in our country.

Our ambition (and hope) is that the above economic structural transformation comes to pass in our country soon. However, the stark reality is that the pre-conditions are being increasingly felt only around Metro Manila, Cebu and some provinces but certainly not yet in the rest of the country.

We must mechanize our farms in order to compete. But our mechanization program should be more deliberate and nuanced as far as the kinds of machines to adopt, their placement and timing. We can learn a lot from our neighbors in Asia.

The policy objective of rice farm mechanization should be balanced with programs of creating additional employment to absorb displaced rural labor. The displacement of labor is very real and we should understand and appreciate how the displaced labor are coping in Isabela, Nueva Ecija and Pangasinan, where farm mechanization is most advanced.

As far as the rural sector is concerned the following come to mind:

•Intensive multiple cropping of rice with high-value crops like vegetables, fruits and ornamentals,

•More food and beverage processing in the countryside,

•More commercial and semicommercial poultry, livestock raising and aquaculture, and •Agri-ecotourism. We will take on these challenges in future columns.

*** Dr. Emil Q. Javier is a Member of the National Academy of Science and Technology (NAST) and also Chair of the Coalition for Agriculture Modernization in the Philippines (CAMP).

For any feedback, email eqjavier@yahoo.com.