Farming systems improvement of rice-based farms in Huay Khan Lean Sub-district, Ang Thong Province, Thailand

Vol. 24 NO. 1 Page 53-63

http://kasetsartjournal.ku.ac.th/kuj_files/2008/A080404155248.pdf

อังกฤษ

E20-การบริหาร/ธุรกิจเกษตร

Farming system;Rice-based farm;Socio-economic characteristics;Thai farmer

The objectives of this research were to study the socio-economic characteristics of rice-based farm households, to study current main agricultural production systems of rice-based farming systems, and to identify selected bio-physical factors and socio-economic factors related to farm household income. The data was collected by using interview schedules from 116 representatives of farm households in Huay Khan Lean Sub-district, who had practiced rice farming integrating with other types of farming. The farm households were selected by purposive sampling methods. Data analyses were done by using various statistical measures. The findings revealed that there were 2 main types of rice-based farming systems in the study site. The major type of rice-based farming systems was rice-livestock farming systems (50.0%). The types of livestock raised were chicken (37.9%), swine (29.3%), frog (24.1%), duck (5.2%), beef cattle (1.7%) and chicken and swine (1.7%). The second major type was rice-fruit (mango) farming systems (24.1%). In agricultural production systems, rice farming was similarly practiced in rice-livestock and rice-fruit farming systems. On the average, farm households held 25.3 rai (rice-livestock) and 31.5 rai (rice-fruit) land, and had 2.5 persons in farm labor. Irrigation were well facilitated, however, most of them cultivated both highyield varieties and local varieties. Rice was directly seeded on rice fields with chemical applications. Harvested rice was sold to local markets, provincial markets and agricultural cooperatives at the farm gate price of 3.15-3.96 baht/kg. The amount of production was 14,175 kg/year (rice-livestock) and 17,942 kg/year (ricefruit). In livestock raising, all types of livestock are local breeds. Drug and vaccine were treated by most farm households. Livestock were mainly sold to local merchants. In fruit farming, mango planting areas accounted for 3.6 rai. Chemicals were also used. Mango was mainly sold to local merchants and local markets at the farm gate price of 24.2 baht/kg. The amount of production was 860 kg/year. Rice-livestock farm households gained a net income of 272,698 baht/year while rice-fruit farm households gained a net income of 70,875 baht/year. Hypothesis testing indicated that in the bio-physical factors, there was a significant relationship between rice varieties and farm household income. In addition, in the socio-economic factors, there were a significant relationship between age, occupational experience, farmer organizations' membership and financial sources, and farm household income. Based on the study, following recommendations are suggested: Firstly, implementation guidelines of agricultural diversification program and sustainable agriculture should be developed in the provincial level with regular monitoring and evaluating the activities. Secondly, effort should be made to make farmer organizations attractive to be able to encourage membership among farm households by participatory management approach. Thirdly, farm households need to be informed through workshops, discussions and demonstrations on available resources to be sustainable. Fourthly, a network of the different organizations including farmers' organization, the district agricultural office and the agricultural technology transfer center should be developed to improve farming process. Lastly, farmers' capacity building should be done by using model farms and giving awards to outstanding producers in terms of maximum utilization of resources through integrated farming systems.

[1] Yuki Morita (Kasetsart University, Bangkok (Thailand). Faculty of Agriculture. Department of Agricultural Extension and Communication)
[2] Kesinee Payanun (Kasetsart University, Bangkok (Thailand). Faculty of Agriculture. Department of Agricultural Extension and Communication)
[3] Buncha Somboonsuke (Prince of Songkla University, Songkla (Thailand). Faculty of Natural Resources. Department of Agricultural Development)
[4] Praderm Chumjai (Kasetsart University, Bangkok (Thailand). Faculty of Agriculture. Department of Agricultural Extension and Communication)