AGRICULTURE GLOBAL PRACTICE DISCUSSION PAPER 11 A PORTFOLIO REVIEW OF WORLD BANK RICE PROJECTS: FISCAL YEARS 1984–2011 WORLD BANK GROUP REPORT NUMBER 102399-GLB FEBRUARY 2016 AGRICULTURE GLOBAL PRACTICE DISCUSSION PAPER 11 A PORTFOLIO REVIEW OF WORLD BANK RICE PROJECTS: FISCAL YEARS 1984–2011 Andrea Pape-Christiansen and Ademola Braimoh © 2016 World Bank Group 1818 H Street NW Washington, DC 20433 Telephone: 202-473-1000 Internet: www.worldbank.org Email: feedback@worldbank.org February 2016 This volume is a product of the staff of the International Bank for Reconstruction and Development/The World Bank. The findings, interpretations, and conclusions expressed in this paper do not necessarily reflect the views of the Executive Directors of The World Bank or the governments they represent. The World Bank does not guarantee the accuracy of the data included in this work. The boundaries, colors, denominations, and other information shown on any map in this work do not imply any judgment on the part of The World Bank concerning the legal status of any territory or the endorsement or acceptance of such boundaries. Rights and Permissions The material in this publication is copyrighted. Copying and/or transmitting portions or all of this work without permission may be a violation of applicable law. The International Bank for Reconstruction and Development/The World Bank encourages dissemination of its work and will normally grant permission to reproduce portions of the work promptly. For permission to photocopy or reprint any part of this work, please send a request with complete information to the Copyright Clearance Center, Inc., 222 Rosewood Drive, Danvers, MA 01923, USA, telephone 978-750-8400, fax 978-750-4470, http://www .copyright.com/. All other queries on rights and licenses, including subsidiary rights, should be addressed to the Office of the Publisher, The World Bank, 1818 H Street NW, Washington, DC 20433, USA, fax 202-522-2422, e-mail pubrights@worldbank.org. Cover photos: Top Left: Harvesting rice-fields in a White Thai village in Mai Chau, Hoa Binh province, northern Vietnam. Photo: © Tran Thi Hoa/ World Bank. Top Right: Landscape of fields and homes. Indonesia. Photo: © Curt Carnemark/World Bank. Bottom: Harvesting irrigated fields. Indonesia. Photo: © Curt Carnemark/World Bank. CONTENTS Acknowledgments v Acronyms and Abbreviations vii Executive Summary ix A Portfolio Review of World Bank Rice Projects: Fiscal Years 1984–2011 1 Background and Scope of Work 1 Methodology 1 Characteristics of the Cohort of Projects 2 Rice Farming Systems Targeted by the Projects 4 Sustainable Rice Production Principles Promoted in the Portfolio 4 Other Rice-Related Project Interventions: Input Use 10 Rice-Growing Areas Affected by the Projects and Rice Yield Development as a Result of Project Interventions 11 Economic Descriptors—ERR, Income, and Production Volume Increase 13 Gender Considerations in the Rice Portfolio 13 The Role of Extension in Disseminating Sustainable Rice-Management Practices 14 Performance Analysis 14 Final Remarks and Expert Comments 15 References 17 Appendix A: List of the 172 Projects Included in the Review—Sorted by Region and Country 19 Appendix B: Sustainable Rice Production Concepts Used in the Portfolio 25 Appendix C: List of 19 Projects That Include Core Sustainable Rice Production Practices 29 Appendix D: Comparison of Project Ratings between “All Bank” and Agriculture Global Practice Projects 31 BOXES Box 1.1: The SRI Experience in Madagascar 7 Box 1.2: Examples of Projects That Quantified Income Benefits 13 FIGURES Figure 1.1: Number of Rice-Related Projects per Approval Period 2 Figure 1.2: Regional Distribution of Rice-Related Projects 2 Figure 1.3: Rice Portfolio Lending Amount (US$ Million) 1984–2011, by Region 3 Figure 1.4: Size of Projects Included in the Review 3 Figure 1.5: Lending Instruments Used in the Portfolio 3 Figure 1.6: Types of Projects Sorted into Four Broad Categories Based on Main Interventions 4 Figure 1.7: Rice Systems Targeted by the Projects 4 Figure 1.8: Inclusion of Sustainable Rice Production Practices 5 A Portfolio Review of World Bank Rice Projects: Fiscal Years 1984–2011 iii Figure 1.9: Types of Seed Sector Interventions 10 Figure 1.10: Organic Fertilizer Use in Rice Production 11 Figure 1.11: Rice-Growing Area Affected by the Project (Number of Projects per Category) 11 Figure 1.12: Yield Increase of Rice Projects (Tons per Ha) 12 TABLES Table 1.1: Sustainable Rice Production Practices—Comparing the Approaches 5 Table 1.2: Sustainable Rice Production Practices Found in the Portfolio 6 Table 1.3: Discussion of Climate Cobenefits in the 172 ICRs Reviewed 9 Table 1.4: Rice Projects with Expected Climate Cobenefits Currently under Implementation 9 Table 1.5: Inorganic Fertilizer Interventions Included in the Rice Portfolio 10 Table 1.6: Pesticide-Related Information Presented in the ICRs 10 Table 1.7: Rice Yields in Irrigated and Rain-Fed Systems 12 Table 1.8: Regional Rice Yield Differences 12 Table 1.9: Economic Descriptors Used in the ICRs 13 Table 1.10: Outcome Ratings of the Rice Portfolio Compared with Other Agriculture Global Practice Projects 14 Table 1.11: Ratings of the 19 Good Practice Projects 14 Table 1.12: IEG Ratings of the 19 Good Practice Projects 15 iv Agriculture Global Practice Discussion Paper ACKNOWLEDGMENTS This portfolio review was prepared by Andrea Pape-Christiansen with inputs and guidance from Ademola Braimoh. We thank Sanjiva Cooke and Yuxuan Zhao for their generous help in generating the databases for the review. We also thank reviewers Rita Cestti, Ana Elisa Bucher, Xiaoyue Hou, Kazuhiro Yoshida, and Gunnar Larson for their thoughtful comments. The report also benefited from the inputs and insights of Willem Janssen, Chris Jackson, and Eija Pehu. We also thank Jim Cantrell, Beaulah Noble, and Sarian Akibo-Betts for their invaluable support. Special thanks go to Erika Styger of Cornell University for sharing her expert knowledge on the System of Rice Intensification. A Portfolio Review of World Bank Rice Projects: Fiscal Years 1984–2011 v ACRONYMS AND ABBREVIATIONS 1M+5R 1 Must and 5 Reductions ICR Implementation completion report ADJ Adjustment Loans IDA International Development Association AFR Africa (World Bank regional vice presidency) IEG Independent Evaluation Group APL Adaptable Program Loans IPM Integrated pest management ARD SB Agriculture and Rural Development Sector IRRI International Rice Research Institute Board LAC Latin America and the Caribbean (World Bank AWD Alternate Wetting and Drying regional vice presidency) CGIAR Consultative Group on International LIL Learning and Innovation Loans Agricultural Research MNA Middle East and North Africa (World Bank DPL Development Policy Lending regional vice presidency) EAP East Asia and Pacific (World Bank regional vice MOA Ministry of Agriculture presidency) N Nitrogen ECA Europe and Central Asia (World Bank regional vice presidency) NAMA Nationally Appropriate Mitigation Actions ERL Emergency Recovery Lending NRM Natural resource management ERR Economic rate of return PES Payment for environmental services FAO Food and Agriculture Organization (U.N.) SAR South Asia (World Bank regional vice presidency) FY Fiscal year SIL Specific Investment Load GHG Greenhouse gas SIM Sector Investment and Maintenance Loans GP Global Practice SRI System of Rice Intensification ha Hectare SSIA Sustainable System of Irrigated Agriculture HYV High yielding variety t Ton IBRD International Bank for Reconstruction and TA Technical Assistance Loans Development VnSAT Vietnam Sustainable Agriculture Transformation ICM Integrated Crop Management project All dollar amounts are U.S. dollars unless otherwise indicated. A Portfolio Review of World Bank Rice Projects: Fiscal Years 1984–2011 vii EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Rice is the world’s most heavily consumed staple crop. Its production requires enormous volumes of water and emits large quantities of atmospheric methane, a greenhouse gas some many times more powerful than carbon dioxide—particularly during a medium term period of about seven years. In a global context of growing population, increasingly scarce water resources, and climate change, more produc- tive, sustainable, and efficient rice production warrants clear priority. The incidence of droughts associated with climate change is projected to increase in rain-fed rice- growing areas, and may very well extend further into water-scarce irrigated areas. A variety of climate-smart practices and technologies are available that can move rice production toward a triple-win scenario that entails increased productivity, enhanced resilience, and improved greenhouse gas mitigation. These generally entail some com- bination of lower inputs of water, inorganic fertilizer, and pesticides; improved soil and water management; and the controlled use of organic fertilizers—all while increasing yields. Adapted specifically to local conditions, this agro-ecological intensification carries a number of names, including the System of Rice Intensification (SRI), the “1 Must and 5 Reductions” (1M+5R), Integrated Crop Management (ICM) in rice cultivation, and the Sustainable System of Irrigated Agriculture (SSIA), among others. Although this review of World Bank projects does not limit itself to those that incor- porate these labels, it does focus on the application of sustainable principles in rice production in 172 Bank projects that were approved between 1984 and 2011. These had a total lending volume of $10.9 billion. Their development outcomes are gauged based on the projects’ implementation completion reports, which also document les- sons learned and results in greater detail. The projects are grouped into dedicated rice projects, in which rice was the main focus of the intervention, and nondedicated rice projects, in which rice-related activities were not the primary concentration. Thirty-seven (22 percent) of the 172 projects were dedicated rice projects, and the remaining 135 were classified as nondedicated. The Africa Region had the largest number of rice-related projects with 78, followed by 42 in East Asia and the Pacific, and 29 in South Asia. Rice projects in East Asia and the Pacific had the largest proportion of lending at 37 percent. Madagascar had A Portfolio Review of World Bank Rice Projects: Fiscal Years 1984–2011 ix the largest number of rice projects with five, the latest of The most common sustainable rice production interven- which was approved in 1997. Overall, the outcomes of tion is the use of organic fertilizer and nonchemical pest these interventions were positive in terms of higher yields management. Other interventions such as alternate wet- and incomes. Water control issues often emerged during ting and drying, early single seeding, and transplanting earlier phases of the projects, but most appear to have were introduced in relatively few projects. The experience been resolved in subsequent phases. of the projects that incorporated sustainable rice intensi- fication points to the importance of a number of issues, A number of crop production and soil management prin- including the following: ciples are essential for sustainable rice production. These » How farmers control the water supply is the key include intermittent irrigation, reduced seed rate, early to sustainable water management systems, and transplanting, wider spacing of seedlings, and applications all other sustainable rice production practices are of organic fertilizer. The effects on producers’ income predicated on it. come about as a result of savings achieved through the » There is a need for ministry of agriculture or other lower costs associated with reduced seed, fertilizer, pes- government support in scaling up sustainable prac- ticide, and water inputs as well as through higher yields. tices through demonstrations, field days, and public This dynamic of producing more with less relies heavily endorsements, as well as the need to avoid sending on adaptation of the practices to suit the specific condi- producers conflicting messages about subjects such tions in which they are applied. Production techniques as fertilizer and pesticide use. that apply crop residues in lieu of nitrogen fertilizers can » The knowledge intensiveness of sustainable rice reduce levels of both methane and nitrous oxide emissions intensification practices increases the need to from rice fields compared with regular irrigated produc- upgrade farmers’ skills through training and exten- tion. Increased rice grain and straw yield, root biomass, sion. Building the capacity of advisory services and soil organic matter, in part through applications of and farmer organizations should take place early green manure and mulch, generate climate change miti- on during implementation, when projects are well gation benefits in which rice production sequesters sub- advised to avoid overfocusing on technical changes. stantially more carbon. Adaptation benefits are generated In many contexts, farmer field schools were recog- by producing more climate-resilient and disease-resistant nized as potentially effective means for reaching plants. farmers, though questions about their cost effec- tiveness were raised as well. Two issues emerged as being particularly critical to » The effects of introducing sustainable rice produc- success: tion on the demand for labor warrant careful up- 1. Anticipating the demand for labor, particularly front attention. The availability and cost of labor during the initial two years, when the practices need to be weighed against the income effects of involved in introducing new organic fertilizer and reduced costs for other inputs and higher yields. the amount of time required for weeding both Again, the time required for weeding and apply- increase the need for labor ing organic fertilizers is likely to increase at certain 2. Controlling the use of irrigation water, as the new times. In the very large number of cases in which practices entail using less water but applying it at this consists mainly of female labor, this carries more frequent intervals gender-related implications that need to be care- fully monitored. Among the projects that did not entail any principles of sustainable production, improvements to infrastructure Climate change adaptation and mitigation benefits were were the most prevalent type of intervention, often in mentioned in the implementation completion reports combination with improved variety and fertilizer pack- of 10 projects, and most of these related to alternative ages and new policies. Nineteen of the projects reviewed practices to slash-and-burn agriculture. Actual reduc- introduced some principle of sustainable production. tions in greenhouse gas emissions that were attributed to x Agriculture Global Practice Discussion Paper improved rice production were mentioned in two projects, slash-and-burn practices removed farmers from high- one in Indonesia and one in Vietnam. land rice production, and this affected women farmers in particular. The yield results reported by the rice projects varied sig- nificantly. The average yield achieved in irrigated systems The overall Outcome rating for the group of 19 projects was almost twice as high as in rain-fed systems. Average with sustainability-related components was quite favora- yield increases over the course of a project were also more ble. Two-thirds received a Likely rating. A lower share of moderate in rain-fed systems, with 0.7 tons per hectare these projects received favorable Sustainability and Insti- versus 1 ton in irrigated systems. Interpreting the correla- tutional Development ratings. Because most of the projects tion of the yield responses to the types of interventions, involved a variety of interventions and focused on more and especially to the sustainable rice-growing practices than one crop, it cannot be determined what role the sus- presents a mixed picture. Substantial yield increases tainable practices they introduced played in their gener- can be achieved through improvements to irrigation ally favorable rating. infrastructure without sustainable rice intensification. The introduction of salt-resistant varieties and irriga- The economic rate of return (ERR) to investments was tion improvements in Senegal, for example, increased calculated and reported by 72 of the projects. The value yield from an already fairly high 4.5 tons per hectare to of the ERR ranged between 3 and 100 percent. The aver- 5.9 tons (Project Number P002343, 1988). No principles age ERR for projects in the Agriculture Global Practice is of sustainable production appear to have been applied 34 percent—compared with 22 percent for all Bank pro- in that project. In an irrigated system in Tanzania, yields jects. The average ERR of the 72 rice-related projects is increased from a moderate 1.1 tons per hectare to 1.7 tons 25 percent. No correlation or differences could be found with the application of several sustainable rice-growing between the ERR and the type of intervention, region, practices (Project Number P067103, 2003). In Madagas- or age of the projects. However, among these 72 projects car, different combinations of sustainable practices and were two operations that had explicitly followed SRI improved rice varieties, although improving the extension principles, and their ERRs were calculated as 44 and service, led to yield increases between 43 and 188 percent 47 percent. in five projects between 1989 and 1997. Because sustainable rice production practices are gener- All of the implementation completion reports that made ally scalable, and farmers can experiment with them on reference to gender issues and the role of women in rice small plots of their land before introducing them more systems described projects in the Africa Region. In Mali, broadly, the practices effectively limit overall risk. And Côte d’Ivoire, Madagascar, Mauretania, and Guinea Bis- because some sustainable practices are already in place sau, rice was referred to as a woman’s crop. Projects in in many areas, project planning may begin by looking Madagascar, Mauritania, and Côte d’Ivoire reacted to for these existing practices and the producers who are this by targeting female farmers, in part by increasing already experimenting with or using them. These can the number of female extension agents. In Madagascar, become effective partners in adapting new practices 50 percent of newly appointed extension agents were to local conditions and scaling them up. Many pro- women and they quickly became involved in the wet- jects included the introduction of new varieties, with- ting and drying demonstration plots in farmers’ fields. out exploring the potential additional yield effect of In Mali, crop diversification encouraging farmers to rely also introducing rice intensification practices—a missed proportionately less on cotton and more on rice similarly opportunity to increase not only yield and incomes, but emphasized women farmers. In Guinea Bissau, banning also climate cobenefits. A Portfolio Review of World Bank Rice Projects: Fiscal Years 1984–2011 xi A PORTFOLIO REVIEW OF WORLD BANK RICE PROJECTS: FISCAL YEARS 1984–2011 BACKGROUND AND SCOPE OF WORK Rice, wheat, and maize together supply more than 50 percent of all plant-derived calo- ries consumed by the world’s population. Of these three, rice is by far the most impor- tant food crop for people in low- and lower-middle-income countries. Asia produces and consumes about 90 percent of the world’s rice. But rice is also a staple food in Latin America and the Caribbean, and over the past 30 years demand for rice in West Africa has grown at an annual rate of 6 percent, replacing traditional cereals (Mohanty 2013). The intensity and frequency of droughts are projected to increase with the effects of climate change, particularly in rain-fed areas and very likely in water-scarce irrigated areas as well. By 2050, rice yields may experience losses of between 10 and 15 percent, whereas rice commodity prices are likely to increase by a third. The production of rice emits large quantities of methane, in addition to consuming large amounts of water. More sustainable rice production can be achieved through better water, plant, soil, and nutrient management. Those practices that are instrumental in achieving a triple win in terms of productivity, resilience, and greenhouse gas mitigation are referred to here as being “climate smart.” These represent a departure from conventional measures to intensify rice production in that climate-smart practices pursue higher yields with substantially lower inputs of seed, water, fertilizer, and pesticides. They also assign considerable preference to organic over inorganic fertilizers, purposefully using inputs such as crop residues and green manures as sources of rice crop nutrients. METHODOLOGY The report is based on a review of implementation completion reports (ICRs) of the 172 World Bank projects that included rice-related interventions that were approved between 1984 and 2011.1 Implementation completion reports are the principal means 1 In two cases the Implementation Completion Report Review had to be used because the ICR was unavailable. A Portfolio Review of World Bank Rice Projects: Fiscal Years 1984–2011 1 of rating and documenting the outcomes of Bank proj- the decade. A number of dedicated Development Policy ects in terms of how well the development objectives Lending (DPL) and Emergency Recovery Lending (ERL) that were set out for the projects at their appraisal were projects focused on measures to mitigate rice price hikes achieved. ICRs also document more detailed results in beginning in 2007. Since 2011, there have been 38 new terms of lessons learned and financial indicators such as approvals of projects with rice-related content that are economic rates of return. The major characteristics of currently under implementation but outside the purview the rice-related interventions and outcomes were coded of this review. and recorded using an Excel database and the data and findings are summarized herein. Rice-related projects are spread across 53 countries in all six regions of the Bank. The total International Develop- CHARACTERISTICS OF THE ment Association (IDA)/International Bank for Recon- struction and Development (IBRD) lending volume of COHORT OF PROJECTS the rice portfolio is US$10.9 billion. The majority of Among the cohort of projects reviewed, the relative share dedicated and nondedicated projects are found in Africa of lending toward specifically rice-related activities var- (AFR) (n = 78), followed by East Asia and Pacific (EAP) ied, making it useful to distinguish between dedicated and (n = 42) and South Asia (SAR) (n = 29) (figure 1.2). A nondedicated rice projects. In dedicated rice projects, rice much higher share of the dedicated projects is found in was the main crop or the main focus of the interventions. AFR than in other regions, because of the large number In nondedicated rice projects, rice-related interventions of ERLs in the late 2000s focusing on rice and other sta- made up a relatively smaller portion of overall activities, ples during the food price crisis. Two-thirds of the projects and rice was often one of a number of other crops. The in AFR were approved after fiscal 2000. cohort consisted of 37 dedicated and 135 nondedicated rice projects. The country focus of the rice portfolio matches those countries with the largest rice production area and highest The 1990s saw the largest number of rice-related pro- per capita consumption—India (13 projects), China (12), jects, reflecting a push to keep pace with population Indonesia (11), and Bangladesh (7). Countries such as and growth in demand, mainly in Asia, and mainly Vietnam and the Philippines, also among the world’s top through higher yield varieties rather than area under 10 rice producers, had comparatively few rice projects (4 cultivation (figure 1.1) (Calpe 2006). Fewer than half and 5, respectively), during the 27 years that were covered as many rice-related projects were approved the follow- by the review. Several African countries (led by Madagas- ing decade, though the share of dedicated rice projects car with 8 projects, Mali with 6) saw more rice-related increased significantly after 2000, which may be related to the increase in commodity prices, particularly late in FIGURE 1.2. REGIONAL DISTRIBUTION OF RICE-RELATED PROJECTS FIGURE 1.1. NUMBER OF RICE-RELATED Dedicated projects Non-dedicated projects PROJECTS PER APPROVAL PERIOD Dedicated projects Non-dedicated projects 57 33 87 1 24 1 21 17 24 2 2 9 5 5 2 19 5 14 16 AFR EAP ECA LAC MNA SAR 1984–1989 1990–1999 2000–2009 2010–2011 Note: ECA = Europe and Central Asia; MNA = Middle East and North Africa. 2 Agriculture Global Practice Discussion Paper projects than Vietnam and the Philippines. The lending projects were under ARD SB. Specific Investment Loans figures show that EAP is leading the regional distribu- (SILs) were the main lending instrument; also of note is tion (37 percent of lending), followed by AFR and SAR the relatively large number of dedicated ERLs, helping (23 percent each), and Latin America and the Caribbean rice-growing countries recover their main staple crop after (LAC) (16 percent) (figure 1.3). natural disasters such as storms and counterbalancing world market price hikes (figure 1.5). The number of rice Nondedicated projects show a disproportionately high sector dedicated DPLs with objectives to improve import share of projects above $100 million and a relatively low price policies and tariffs to protect the rice sector in those share of small projects under $10 million (figure 1.4). countries are also noteworthy. The largest share of projects falls in the $20 to $50 mil- lion bracket. The average size of a dedicated rice project Projects were classified into four categories, based on the is $45 million; nondedicated projects are comparatively type and focus of the rice-related interventions: larger with an average lending volume of $69 million. » Services (mainly improvements to the research and Projects in EAP and in SAR have on average about extension system through restructuring and capac- three times the lending volume compared with projects ity building, breeding and seed supply efforts, mar- in AFR. ket information) » Infrastructure (usually irrigation and drainage The lending volume of the 37 dedicated projects amounts related; some grain market/storage infrastructure) to $1.66 billion. Thirty of the 37 dedicated projects are » Policies (price liberalization, tariffs and import pol- under the Agriculture and Rural Development (ARD) icy, privatization) Sector Board (many of the older projects have not been » Natural resource management (NRM) (watershed retrofitted to the new Global Practices yet, so the Sector development, resource conservation, marshland Board categorization was kept here). Overall, 150 of the and sodic lands rehabilitation) Many projects included a mix of components; in that FIGURE 1.3. RICE PORTFOLIO LENDING case, the main component was used to define the category AMOUNT (US$ MILLION) (figure 1.6). The services projects were the most numer- 1984–2011, BY REGION ous among both the nondedicated and the dedicated rice $3,988 projects. Infrastructure projects formed the second largest group and almost all were nondedicated projects. Among $2,508 $2,508 the dedicated projects, rice policy interventions were the $1,721 second most common. Less than 6 percent of rice projects $39 $140 had an NRM focus. AFR EAP ECA LAC MNA SAR FIGURE 1.4. SIZE OF PROJECTS INCLUDED FIGURE 1.5. LENDING INSTRUMENTS USED IN THE REVIEW IN THE PORTFOLIO Dedicated projects Non-dedicated projects Dedicated projects Non-dedicated projects 120 100 No. of projects 80 100 $39 60 $29 40 $29 $9 $18 $11 $2 20 $13 4 3 $9 18 1 1 1 1 $4 $4 $5 8 11 7 7 7 2 1 0 0–5$m >5–10$m >10–20$m >20–50$m >50–100$m >100$m SIL ERL SIM DPL APL ADJ LIL TA A Portfolio Review of World Bank Rice Projects: Fiscal Years 1984–2011 3 FIGURE 1.6. TYPES OF PROJECTS FIGURE 1.7. RICE SYSTEMS TARGETED BY SORTED INTO FOUR BROAD THE PROJECTS Rainfed/upland rice CATEGORIES BASED ON MAIN Rice sector projects—not INTERVENTIONS system specific 20% 22% NRM 6% Wet and dry season rice 3% Policies 5% 16% Swamp/mangrove/flood recession rice 50% Services Infrastructure 54% 24% Lowland/irrigated rice Dr. Erika Styger from the Cornell-based SRI Network and Resource Center, “it does not matter what you call it, what matters is that the combination and adaptation of princi- ples works in your context.” The experiences reported by the advocates that have been applying variations of this RICE FARMING SYSTEMS approach all point to significant income effects through TARGETED BY THE PROJECTS yield increases and savings from input reductions (reduced expenses for seed, fertilizer, pesticides, water)—doing more The main rice system targeted by just over half of all with less. The two potentially critical issues that need to be dedicated and nondedicated rice projects was lowland/ addressed to ensure the success of the approach are irrigated rice, followed by sectorwide, not system-specific 1. anticipating the labor demand—sometimes it is types of projects, and upland/rain-fed systems (figure 1.7). reported to be higher, at least during the first two In 17 percent of cases, projects were implemented in sev- years, because of new organic fertilizer practices eral regions of a country targeting more than one rice and additional labor demand for weeding, and farming system. 2. the importance of irrigation water control—less water is needed, but at more frequent intervals SUSTAINABLE RICE (WRI 2014). PRODUCTION PRINCIPLES Table 1.1 lists the most common practices and compares PROMOTED IN THE their inclusion in the different approaches—based on a PORTFOLIO review of the sources listed in appendix B. The practices A number of crop production and soil management prin- are interrelated and have to be adapted to local condi- ciples are generally considered essential for sustainable tions. Adaptation of the techniques are often undertaken rice production. Some specific approaches and acronyms to accommodate the local climate and soil conditions, coined in different countries by governments and interna- labor availability, water sources and control, and access tional agencies are referred to in the portfolio—they all to organic inputs. There are additional practices that are include a core set of these principles (for example, SRI, optional and are not “ticked” for SRI because it first has ICM in Indonesia, SSIA in the Philippines, 1 Must and 5 to be determined whether the practice makes sense in the Reductions in Vietnam—see appendix B for details and country and farming system context. The other approaches links to the sources). Other projects were found to describe are specific to country contexts (SSIA in the Philippines, good, regionally adapted sustainable agronomic practices 1M+5R in Vietnam, ICM in Indonesia); therefore, they without referring to a specific approach. According to require additional practices based on the local experience. 4 Agriculture Global Practice Discussion Paper TABLE 1.1. SUSTAINABLE RICE PRODUCTION PRACTICES—COMPARING THE APPROACHES Management Practices SRI SSIA 1M+5R ICM Potential Risks Core practices Intermittent irrigation/ x x x x The schedule of drying and wetting depends on local conditions; AWD control over the water source, or good cooperation among irrigation users, is key. Reduced seed rate/single x x x Will be adopted if farmers are confident that water management seeding transplantation is reliable and under their control. Early transplanting x x x Avoids root competition and ensures strong plant establishment with multiple tillers and quick and early plant establishment. Wider spacing of seedlings x x Will be adopted if farmers are confident that water management is reliable and under their control. Also depends on tilling of the variety used. Spacing depends on soil quality. Encourages root and canopy growth. Organic fertilizer x x x Often this is traditionally practiced for other crops, but not application usually for rice. Traditions have to be overcome. Additional/optional practices Reduced N fertilizer x x If enough organic fertilizer is applied, then the application of N application can be reduced. Use of certified seeds/HYV x x The principles have positive yield effects regardless whether local varieties or HYV are used. It depends on the characteristics of the varieties currently used if a change is beneficial (tilling, length of growth cycle). IPM—reduced use of x x Depending on the climate, cropping cycles, and predominant pesticides pest problems, this may be a priority. Rotary weeding and x x When fields are not continuously irrigated, more weeds grow mulching of weeds that need to be controlled; incorporating them into the soil acts like green manure, and aerates the soil. Mechanization is still a challenge—labor demand may be an issue. Note: AWD = Alternate Wetting and Drying; HYV = high yielding variety; IPM = integrated pest management; N = nitrogen. Especially in Asian countries, with long traditions of grow- FIGURE 1.8. INCLUSION OF SUSTAINABLE ing rice, changing farmers’ practices (for example, apply- RICE PRODUCTION PRACTICES Dedicated projects Non-dedicated projects ing organic fertilizer, lower seed rate, and wider spacing) is more challenging than perhaps it is in AFR. Comparing project interventions with the list of practices in table 1.1 revealed that half of the 172 projects did not No. of projects include any of the sustainable rice production practices 69 66 (listed in tables 1.1 and 1.2). The main interventions pro- moted by these projects were infrastructure improvements, often combined with improved variety and fertilizer pack- ages, as well as policy interventions. The share of dedicated projects was very similar in both groups (20 percent and 17 20 23 percent, respectively) (figure 1.8). The other half of the projects included at least one of the typical manage- No sustainable rice Some sustainable rice intensification practices intensification practices ment practices that are considered core to sustainable rice included included A Portfolio Review of World Bank Rice Projects: Fiscal Years 1984–2011 5 TABLE 1.2. SUSTAINABLE RICE PRODUCTION PRACTICES FOUND IN THE PORTFOLIO Sustainable Rice Production Practices No. of Nondedicated No. of Dedicated Introduced in the Portfolio Projects Including Projects Including (more than one practice may have introduced) the Practices the Practices – Increased use of organic fertilizer/soil fertility practices 44 16 – IPM and bio-pesticide use 22 8 – Soil amelioration practices 15 4 – Soil conservation measures including direct seeding and leveling 15 8 – Spacing and single seedling planting 5 5 – Earlier transplanting time of rice seedlings 2 3 – Intermittent water application instead of continuous flood irrigation 1 6 – Rotary weeding to control weeds and to promote soil aeration 2 2 production. Many projects did not have much of an in- Promising project examples. There were 19 projects that com- depth agriculture technology dimension and were designed bined one or more of the key sustainable rice production around infrastructure and irrigation, or the distribution of practices (as defined in table 1.2): reduced and controlled technology packages of seed and fertilizer. One could argue water application, reduced seed rate, wider spacing, early that there were a number of missed opportunities of not transplanting, and the use of organic fertilizer, or projects including a pilot of sustainable rice production principles in that specifically mentioned the System of Rice Intensifica- some of these projects—at least in the younger projects that tion, even if the practices were not described in detail in the were approved after 2007, when the evidence of the poten- ICR (the 19 projects are listed in appendix C). More than tial of the approach was being more widely published. half of these projects are in AFR (11), 5 in EAP and 3 in However, it is important to be aware that there are many SAR. The yield increase of these 19 projects shows mixed other ways that can be applied to improve production. Not results: it varied between 0 and 188 percent;2 the aver- having an agriculture technology dimension is not neces- age increase was 48 percent. The highest yield increases sarily a problem: technology may not have been the limit- were achieved in the three projects in Madagascar, and in ing factor in the country context at the time of the project. Rwanda, where the intensification principles were applied to several crops, including rice. These projects may not Table 1.2 lists the main sustainable rice production prac- be good practice examples per se—they experimented tices that were described in the portfolio, summarized into with the approach, and a review of their lessons learned eight categories. The most commonly included interven- can help inform future efforts of task teams who consider tion is the use of organic fertilizer and nonchemical pest investing in rice intensification practices: management. The core principles of SRI such as alter- » The importance of the support by the government/ nate wetting and drying, early and single seeding trans- Ministry of Agriculture (MOA) for upscaling the planting, and spacing are introduced in very few projects. approach (by supporting demonstrations and field Eight projects specifically refer to the SRI, CMI, or SSIA days, public endorsement), and in avoiding con- approaches, from as early as 1995 (Madagascar Project flicting messages to farmers (for example, on pesti- Numbers P001537, P001563, P001522) to a project in cide and fertilizer use). Indonesia from 2010 (Project Number P120313). Sustain- » The knowledge intensiveness of the approach able rice production does not necessarily require the appli- and the critical role of extension and training in cation of all principles in every project; the combination spreading the approach and in skills upgrading is location specific and requires an analysis of the local conditions. Although each one has a potential positive yield 2 India UP Sodic Lands (Project Number P009961 from 1993) saw no yield effect, experts of the different approaches agree that a com- increase—the yield stabilizing effect in the Sodic Lands projects was seen as a bination of key elements (table 1.1) leads to greater success. positive because the decline in yields was halted. 6 Agriculture Global Practice Discussion Paper among farmers have been identified by several » A sustainable water management system is key to projects. The need to program and build capacity the success of the other sustainable rice produc- for advisory services and support to farmer organi- tion practices; control of water supply by farmers zations and farmer training early in the program is crucial. was recommended, instead of focusing only on the technical interventions. In this context, the role of The experience in Madagascar is probably the best docu- Farmer Field School (FFS) as an effective extension mented of all countries in the ICRs—of the eight rice- tool in reaching farmers was recognized, although related projects found in Madagascar five supported the questions of its cost-effectiveness also were raised. SRI approach between 1990 and 1997. However, the » The effect of introducing sustainable rice produc- description of these projects shows the potential for sig- tion principles on labor demand needs to be eva- nificant yield increases and income gains, but points to the luated—organic fertilizer application and weeding need for controlled water management for the success of may require more labor at certain times, labor avail- the SRI approach (see box 1.1). ability and labor cost need to be weighed against the income effects through reduced costs for other Although the lessons included in the ICRs are an impor- inputs and higher yields. In particular, the effect on tant source of learning for potential future operations in female labor needs to be carefully monitored. the same countries, the SRI-Rice network and resource BOX 1.1. THE SRI EXPERIENCE IN MADAGASCAR Madagascar, where the SRI approach was developed in the disseminated included . . . Intensive Rice Production System 1980s, saw five projects in the 1990s that included SRI prin- (SRI) technology, which is one of the most promising tech- ciples. The yield results were significant, but the ICRs iden- nologies for irrigated rice (it increases rice yields five-fold), was tified water management as a crucial factor. The following widely promoted. One drawback, though, is that SRI is very ICR excerpts document the experience. After 1997, the World labor intensive and requires a strong and sustainable water Bank apparently no longer invested in SRI interventions in management system, which was not a given in many cases. Madagascar. According to Erika Styger of SRI-RICE, the The most widely adopted technologies were new plant vari- approach is very widespread in Madagascar today; the water eties; planting husbandry (early planting of seedlings at less management issue and initial labor demand implications have than 25 days of age versus more than 60 days, in line versus been overcome by careful local adaptations and were in the random, lower number of seedling per hole); and integrated end not a main obstacle to the spreading of the SRI approach. nutrient management, which focuses on an agro-biological http://sri.cals.cornell.edu/countries/madagascar/index.html. approach.” The project also noted that “extension agents are too old, uneducated and unmotivated.” In 1990, about 3,000 on-farm demonstration plots showed the potential of SRI to increase yields and incomes (Mada- According to Madagascar, 2nd Irrigation Rehabilitation, Proj- gascar Extension Pilot Project Number P01521, 1990): “rice ect Number P01522, 1995), “experiments were conducted to yields on some 1,700 demonstration plots in farmers’ fields, demonstrate how to increase rice yields with the application with good water control, increased to nearly twice the yields of organic manure in rice fields. These demonstrations made on control plots using traditional techniques. On more than clear that with simple tools . . . , lowland rice production 1,350 separate demonstration plots, for early transplanting of increased to 11–14 tons per hectare, upland rice yield could seedlings (without improved water management), yields were increase by 600%, and variability of yields could decrease by 53 percent higher than on control plots. In both cases, these 300%. The number of farmers adopting the recommended results were achieved without any cash investment, through technology was very low because the new technology required use of techniques adopted directly by the farmers. The more cash (up to 300% more) and more labor (around 35% gross margins generated by application of these techniques more) as compared to more traditional practices.” amounted to an equivalent of approximately US$300 and “Some effective but knowledge-intensive technologies did not $125 per hectare, respectively.” lend themselves well for spontaneous replication, e.g. inten- According to the Madagascar Extension Program, Project sive rice systems which require precise water management” Number P01563 of 1995, “Instructional messages that were (Madagascar, 1997, Project Number P01537). A Portfolio Review of World Bank Rice Projects: Fiscal Years 1984–2011 7 center at Cornell has the most comprehensive collection produced by SRI-RICE.6 Climate cobenefits were rarely of resources and experiences from all over the world, and mentioned or quantified in the ICRs. It is expected that can serve as a source of information on practices, condi- more recent projects will pay more explicit attention to tions, and lessons learned, and can link to resource per- these climate cobenefits because of the increased aware- sons in many countries.3 The e-learning tool developed by ness and attention to these effects in recent years. the World Bank also provides a how-to guide on the appli- cation of SRI practices for farmers and audio interviews The Vietnam Ag. Competitiveness project (Project Num- with a number of stakeholders discussing their experience ber P108885) achieved greenhouse gas emissions reduc- with the approach.4 tion of up to 19 tons per hectare) (t/ha) (a 95 percent reduction compared with the control) and reduced water Adoption rate of sustainable production principles. Two projects use by over 40 percent per ha through its application of in Madagascar are the only projects found in the review sustainable rice intensification principles (World Bank to explicitly discuss the adoption rate of rice intensifica- 2014).7 Vietnam’s government is fully supporting the tion principles. The Second Irrigation Rehabilitation approach, closely involving its research and extension ser- project (Project Number P001522, from 1995) reports an vices in further adapting the “1 Must and 5 Reductions” adoption rate of 53 percent of SRI principles, and the principles. The Sustainable Agriculture Transformation National Ag Research project (Project Number P001546, Project will build on the pilot and expand the approach from 1989) reports a 40 percent adoption rate for an early to other provinces.8 This project was an exception in this transplanting age. Climate cobenefits and the potential for triple-win outcomes. Sus- 6 http://sri.ciifad.cornell.edu/conferences/IRC2014/booth/SRI_climate_smart_rice _production_%20handout_2014.pdf. tainable rice production practices that champion alternate 7 See page 40: http://documents.worldbank.org/curated/en/2014/11/20467615 wetting and drying production techniques use less water /vietnam-agriculture-competitiveness-project. Several sources report on the success and lower amounts of nitrogen fertilizers, and incorpo- of the project and its principles: rated crop residues create higher climate benefits than IRRI Closing Rice Yield Gaps in Asia (CORIGAP) online article: http://corigap.irri.org/countries/vietnam/activities-in-vietnam/1 regular irrigated rice production by reducing the level -must-do-5-reductions; of methane and nitrous oxide emissions from rice fields. World Bank blog: http://blogs.worldbank.org/voices/slogan-sustainable Other mitigation benefits include increased carbon sinks -agriculture-mot-phai-nam-giam-rice-production; through more rice grain and straw yield and root bio- CGIAR, Research program on Climate Change Agriculture and Food Security: Putting alternate wetting and drying on the map globally and mass, more soil organic matter, as well as green manure nationally; online publication: and mulch applications. Moreover, the sustainable pro- https://ccafs.cgiar.org/research/results/putting-alternate-wetting-and duction principles create adaptation benefits by produc- -drying-awd-map-globally-and-nationally-0#.VfKAdhGqqkp. ing more climate-resilient and disease-resistant plants. 8 Several sources report on the success of the project and its principles: IRRI Closing Rice Yield Gaps in Asia (CORIGAP) online article: Increased productivity of water, seed, and labor contrib- http://corigap.irri.org/countries/vietnam/activities-in-vietnam/1 ute to higher returns per hectare and farm incomes. The -must-do-5-reductions; World Bank lists these and other principles in its typology World Bank blog: http://blogs.worldbank.org/voices/slogan-sustainable of climate adaptation and mitigation benefits, referring -agriculture-mot-phai-nam-giam-rice-production; CGIAR, Research program on Climate Change Agriculture and Food to specific crop production and irrigation and drainage Security: Putting alternate wetting and drying on the map globally and practices, many of which are reflected in the sustainable nationally; online publication: rice production principles.5 The climate adaptation and https://ccafs.cgiar.org/research/results/putting-alternate-wetting-and mitigation cobenefits of SRI are summarized in a flyer -drying-awd-map-globally-and-nationally-0#.VfKAdhGqqkp; https://www.google.com/?gws_rd=ssl#q=1M5R+vietnam; http://corigap.irri.org/countries/vietnam/activities-in-vietnam/1 3 For more information see the SRI Cornell website: http://sri.cals.cornell -must-do-5-reductions; .edu/. http://blogs.worldbank.org/voices/slogan-sustainable-agriculture 4 You can find the tool here: http://info.worldbank.org/etools/docs/library -mot-phai-nam-giam-rice-production; /245848/. https://ccafs.cgiar.org/research/results/putting-alternate-wetting-and 5 http://www.worldbank.org/content/dam/Worldbank/document/Typology.pdf. -drying-awd-map-globally-and-nationally-0#.VfKAdhGqqkp. 8 Agriculture Global Practice Discussion Paper review—there rarely was an explicit discussion of cli- and Climate Field Schools in eight provinces—no further mate cobenefits of the rice production interventions in details on the component were included in the ICR. The the ICRs—only 10 of the 172 reviewed ICRs (less than most frequently mentioned climate benefit was reduced 6 percent) mentioned this aspect (table 1.3). The Indo- emissions from the reduction/elimination of slash-and- nesia Climate Change DPL included SRI production burn land-clearing practice associated with lowland irri- gated areas. TABLE 1.3. DISCUSSION OF CLIMATE The discussion of climate cobenefits of agricultural inter- COBENEFITS IN THE 172 ICRS ventions has intensified in recent years, and since 2012 World Bank projects are expected to include the percent- REVIEWED age of lending that will have climate adaptation or miti- Discussion of Climate Cobenefits Frequency gation benefits. From 2012 until August 2015, another 38 in the ICRs of Contents projects were approved that contain rice-related interven- – Ecological control of methane emissions 2 tions. Of these, 10 projects—more than a quarter—are from irrigated rice expected to bring substantial climate cobenefits (mitiga- – Reduced water use in irrigation 1 tion or adaptation benefits) (table 1.4). It can be expected – Reduced emissions from slash-and-burn 5 that the ICRs of these projects will describe and meas- practice – Climate resilient agricultural practices* 2 ure the climate cobenefits of sustainable rice production interventions in more detail than the cohort of projects *Both these projects promote SRI principles (Indonesia—Climate Change reviewed for this report. An analysis of this cohort of 38 Development Policy Loan, P120313, FY2003; Vietnam Ag. Competitiveness project, P108885, FY2009). interventions currently under implementation is not part TABLE 1.4. RICE PROJECTS WITH EXPECTED CLIMATE COBENEFITS CURRENTLY UNDER IMPLEMENTATION Adaptation Mitigation IBRD/IDA Cobenefits Cobenefits Commit (US$, FY Region Project ID Name (US$, millions) (US$, millions) millions) FY2014 AFR P147514 Madagascar Emergency Food 5.5 3.3 52.0 Security and Social Protection FY2014 AFR P125024 Gambia Commercial Agriculture 9.8 0.0 13.9 and Value Chain Management FY2013 AFR P094183 AFCC2/RI Ag Productivity 9.2 5.1 73.8 Program FY2013 EAP P117243 Indonesia Sustain Management of 1.3 12.2 64.0 Ag Res and Technology FY2015 EAP P147629 Myanmar Agricultural Development 50.0 18.9 90.0 Support FY2015 EAP P145055 Vietnam Sustainable Agriculture 2.5 87.4 171.4 Transformation FY2014 EAP P130014 Vietnam Irrigated Ag Improvement 165.9 19.2 174.6 FY2014 EAP P125496 China Integrated Modern Ag Dev 179.0 11.5 192.0 FY2014 LAC P131013 Peru National Agricultural Innovation 12.8 0.0 38.8 FY2014 SAR P120583 Bangladesh Modern Food Storage 81.9 0.0 81.9 Facilities Note: FY = fiscal year. A Portfolio Review of World Bank Rice Projects: Fiscal Years 1984–2011 9 of this review because no completion reports are cur- conducted fertilizer research and quality improvement. rently available. Fertilizer recommendations were most common in SAR and EAP (38 and 36 percent of projects, respectively) OTHER RICE-RELATED compared with 28 percent of projects in AFR. In all three regions, when a project expressed fertilizer recom- PROJECT INTERVENTIONS: mendations these were more likely advocating a higher INPUT USE dose of inorganic fertilizer than recommending lower, Rice varieties and seed. Rice seed and variety related inter- split, or “exact” dosage: six projects in AFR, five projects ventions were included in 83 projects. The single most in SAR, and four projects in EAP recommended higher frequently included intervention was the breeding and inorganic fertilizer dosage. Decreased/exact or split fer- the introduction of high-yielding or otherwise improved tilizer dosage was suggested in four AFR projects and in rice varieties; such activities are described in 56 proj- two projects in Asia. ects (figure 1.9). Forty projects included postharvest rice interventions such as milling, threshing, seed stor- Pesticide use. There were 35 projects that commented on pes- age, drying, and shelling. Often the variety interventions ticide use. Most of the recommendations advocated IPM come in combination with one or more of the aforemen- practices and the use of bio-pesticides; there were a few tioned sustainable rice production interventions; how- projects (in China, Burundi, Guinea Bissau, and Madagas- ever, in 18 projects variety improvement or introduction car) that complained about the role of the extension service was the only rice-related intervention. Very few specific in advocating extensive pesticide use (table 1.6). Regional breeding efforts for drought, salt, or disease resistance were described—most of these were found in SAR. Also, TABLE 1.5. INORGANIC FERTILIZER seed multiplication through specialized farmers and on research stations was a major focus—especially in INTERVENTIONS INCLUDED IN EAP and in AFR and promoted by 34 projects. Hybrid THE RICE PORTFOLIO varieties were introduced in Vietnam, India, and the Rice-Related Inorganic No. of Philippines. Fertilizer Use Projects – “Fertilizer recommendations” mentioned—no 18 Inorganic fertilizer use. About a quarter of the projects detail (n = 45) provided some information on fertilizer-related – Increased fertilizer dose recommended 15 recommendations (table 1.5). Often, no detail on the – Decreased or split fertilizer dose recommended 6 type of fertilizer recommendation was given. More fre- – Fertilizer quality improvements and research 7 quently an increased dosage was recommended rather than a reduction in use. There was no quantitative information given on the composition, type, or dosage TABLE 1.6. PESTICIDE-RELATED of fertilizer in the ICRs. A small number of projects INFORMATION PRESENTED IN THE ICRS FIGURE 1.9. TYPES OF SEED SECTOR Pesticide-Related Information No. of INTERVENTIONS Included in the ICRs Projects Breeding for salt tolerance – Advocated the use of IPM and “bio-pesticides,” 30 Introduction of hybrid seeds low-residue pesticides Seed marketing, distribution, exchange – Found pesticides were too expensive for 5 Breeding for disease resistance Breeding for drought tolerance farmers to use Seed multiplication – Felt that too much was used because of 4 Post-harvest interventions extension service advocating it Breeding ‘improved’ varieties – Not enough was used because of the absence 1 0 20 40 60 of a distribution network Frequency of mention 10 Agriculture Global Practice Discussion Paper FIGURE 1.10. ORGANIC FERTILIZER USE IN FIGURE 1.11. RICE-GROWING AREA RICE PRODUCTION AFFECTED BY THE PROJECT Crop residue, straw, green, manure use (NUMBER OF PROJECTS PER 7% Manure and compost use CATEGORY) 8% Undefined organic 9 7% fertilizer use No organic 7 7 fertilizer use 4 78% 1 >250 ha to >1,000 ha to >5,000 ha to >20,000 ha to >100,000 ha 1,000 ha 5,000 ha 20,000 ha 100,000 ha differences exist: whereas in AFR and SAR less than 18 per- One project in India claimed that it affected an area of cent of projects included a reference to pesticide use, 36 per- 2 million ha of no till technology under wheat/rice sys- cent of projects in EAP referred to it, and almost without tems (Project Number P010561, National Agriculture exception these mentioned the introduction of IPM. Technology project from 1989). Only 20 percent of all reviewed projects (n = 28 projects) quantified the area Organic fertilizer use in rice production was promoted by affected. Of the dedicated rice projects, only 16 percent one-fifth of the rice-related projects (in 36 projects)—the (n = 6) quantified the area affected by the interventions. amounts or frequencies of application, however, were not The average area affected by projects in AFR was about a mentioned in the ICRs (figure 1.10). One-third of the third compared with the area in EAP. dedicated rice projects included the use of organic ferti- lizer (n = 12)—only one-fifth of the nondedicated projects Just over one-third of all ICRs (61 projects) provided rice discussed the use of organic fertilizer. Regional differences yield data (sometimes before and after or with and without exist: whereas 28 percent of projects in SAR applied project yield data; sometimes just the incremental increase organic fertilizer, only 17 and 19 percent of projects in was mentioned). In some cases, projects provided data for AFR and EAP, respectively, included this practice. The two different rice-growing systems. Three projects reported application of organic fertilizer is considered a climate- a yield decline over the course of the project, citing bad Smart practice, mitigating greenhouse gas emissions. This weather patterns or the absence of suitable varieties as rea- positive effect, however, was not mentioned in the ICRs. sons (Project Numbers P000818, P002772, and P001518). The majority of projects reported yield increases between 0.5 t and 1 t per hectare over the course of the project RICE-GROWING AREAS (figure 1.12). The highest reported yield increase was 3.7 t AFFECTED BY THE per ha (from 1.8 t before to 5.5 t at the end of the project; PROJECTS AND RICE YIELD Office du Niger, Project Number P001718, from 1988). In DEVELOPMENT AS A RESULT some projects, yield stabilization was already seen as a suc- cess, for example, where the project managed to stem or OF PROJECT INTERVENTIONS reverse the effects of salinization (for example, India UP The rice-growing area directly affected by the projects Sodic Lands, Project Number P009961). ranged widely—between 250 ha (Burundi, Myunga Ag Dev Project Number P000195) and 364,000 ha (Nigeria The yield results reported by projects varied signifi- Multistate Ag Dev, Project Number P002062) (figure 1.11). cantly—one determining factor is the farming system. The A Portfolio Review of World Bank Rice Projects: Fiscal Years 1984–2011 11 FIGURE 1.12. YIELD INCREASE OF RICE intensification practices. The introduction of salt-resistant PROJECTS (TONS PER HA) varieties and irrigation improvements in Senegal, for 21 example, increased the yield from an already fairly high 19 level of 4.5 t to 5.9 t per ha (Project Number P002343 from 1988), although apparently none of the sustainable production principles were applied in that project. At the No. of projects 11 same time in Tanzania, also in an irrigated system, yields increased from a moderate 1.1 t to 1.7 t per ha with the 5 5 application of several sustainable rice-growing practices (Project Number P067103, 2003). In Madagascar, a host –0.55 to 0 >0 to 0.5 >0.5 to 1 >1 to 2 >2 of projects, including different combinations of sustain- able rice production practices and improved varieties combined with an emphasis on improving the extension average yield achieved in irrigated systems is almost twice service, achieved yield increases between 43 and 188 as high as in rain-fed systems (table 1.7). And whereas the percent in five projects over time (P001521, P001522, lower end of the range of achieved yields of 1 t per ha is P001537, P001546, P001563 between 1989 and 1997). the same for both systems, irrigated rice achieved up to 9.6 t per ha, but rain-fed systems reached less than half The relative yield increase in rain-fed systems appears to that amount. Average yield increases over the course of a be greater than for irrigated systems. The average irrigated project were also more moderate in rain-fed systems, with rice yield increase achieved in AFR compared with EAP 0.7 t per ha versus 1 t per ha in irrigated systems. Inter- was significantly higher—starting from the same before preting the correlation of the yield responses to the types project average (table 1.8). The database for the statistics, of interventions, and especially to the sustainable rice- however, is weak and interpretations have to be made growing practices, presents a mixed picture—substantial cautiously, especially because yearly yield fluctuations— yield increases can be gained through irrigation infra- usually greater in rain-fed systems—are masked by the structure improvements in the absence of sustainable rice average changes over the life span of the projects that are TABLE 1.7. RICE YIELDS IN IRRIGATED AND RAIN-FED SYSTEMS Rice Yield Results at End of Project (t/ha) Rain-Fed Rice Systems (n = 18) Irrigated Rice Systems (n = 41) Average rice yield 2.2 t 4.0 t Yields achieved at end of project 1 t to 4.4 t 1 t to 9.6 t Average rice yield increase 0.7 t 1t TABLE 1.8. REGIONAL RICE YIELD DIFFERENCES Rain-Fed Rice Systems Irrigated Rice Systems Yield Average Average Yield Avg. % Yield Yield Average Average Yield Avg. % Yield N Before Project Increase Change N Before Project Increase Change AFR 9 1.6 0.6 65 13 3.9 1.2 53 EAP 1 2.0 1.0 100 15 3.9 0.8 31 SAR 2 2.3 0.6 32 6 3.6 1.0 51 LAC 1 4.1 1.9 89 1 2.2 0.7 43 MNA - - - - 1 3.9 2.4 159 12 Agriculture Global Practice Discussion Paper usually reported in the ICRs. A major gap in interpreting 30 percent (52 projects) included economic descriptors, the yield results is the role of the reduction in water use the information was most often qualitative. Less than caused by sustainable rice production practices. None of half of the projects that mentioned a rice production vol- the seven projects that practiced AWD included yield data ume increase (n = 23) actually quantified the incremental in the ICRs. increase. The production increase ranged from 126 t to 642,000 t. ECONOMIC DESCRIPTORS— Box 1.2 lists the five projects that had quantified income ERR, INCOME, AND benefits. Two of these projects explicitly refer to SRI prin- PRODUCTION VOLUME ciples being applied. INCREASE GENDER CONSIDERATIONS IN The economic rate of return to investments was calculated THE RICE PORTFOLIO and reported by only 72 of the projects (table 1.9). The All ICRs were systematically tracked for references to the value of the ERR ranged between 3 percent and 100 per- role of women in rice systems. The inclusion of gender cent. The average ERR for projects in the Agriculture issues that were found were all from countries in AFR. Global Practice is 34 percent—compared with 22 percent In Mali, Côte d’Ivoire, Madagascar, Mauretania, and for all Bank projects (appendix D). The average ERR of Guinea Bissau rice was referred to as a woman’s crop. the 72 projects is 25 percent. No correlation or differences Projects in Madagascar, Mauritania, and Côte d’Ivoire could be found between the ERR and the type of inter- reacted to this by focusing the rice interventions on female vention, region, or age of the projects. However, among farmers, and by increasing the number of female exten- these 72 projects were two operations that had explicitly sion agents in the hope to better reach them (Madagascar: followed SRI principles; these had calculated the ERR Project Number P001521, Mauretania: Project Number to be 44 percent and 47 percent, respectively. Of the 72 P001864, Côte d’Ivoire: Project Number P001193, Proj- projects that reported an ERR, 50 reported the ERR at ect Number P037588). In Mali, the crop diversification appraisal as well as the ERR at evaluation. For 28 of them, theme away from cotton and rice therefore especially the ERR was corrected downward at evaluation; for 22 of them the ERR was higher at evaluation (three of these had explicitly included SRI principles). Other economic BOX 1.2. EXAMPLES OF PROJECTS THAT descriptors used in the ICRs were higher farm incomes QUANTIFIED INCOME BENEFITS and higher returns per hectare through reduced input » Madagascar Ag Extension Pilot Project (1990, costs and increased rice production volume. Although $3.7 million, P001521): $400 per ha increase of net farm income because of SRI principles applied. » Cambodia Ag Productivity Improvement Project TABLE 1.9. ECONOMIC DESCRIPTORS USED (1997, $27 million, P004033): 13% more income per IN THE ICRS ha mainly through reduced pesticide cost (SRI prin- ciples were applied). Economic Descriptors Used Number of » Philippines, Second Irrigation Operations Project in ICRs Projects (1991, $53 million, P004589): 13% more income per – Economic rate of return 72 ha because less was spent on pesticides. – Production volume increase 49 » Indonesia Upland Area Development Project (1991, – Household or per ha income increase 9 $15 million, P003912): net return doubled from Rp – Increased cropping intensity 8 730 to Rp 1,455 per ha rice. » Nigeria, Fadama I (1992, $67 million, P002148): – Reduced input costs for fertilizer and 3 497% higher return per ha because of irrigation pesticides improvements. – Higher price achieved for quality seeds 2 produced Note: Rp = rupiah. A Portfolio Review of World Bank Rice Projects: Fiscal Years 1984–2011 13 targeted female farmers (Project Number P001744, potential of sustainable rice intensifications was not fully 1990). In Guinea Bissau, the banning of slash-and-burn realized because the outreach to farmers was lacking (in practices displaced women farmers from their highland scope or quality) or came too late. Overall, 25 projects com- rice production (Project Number P083453, 2005). Gen- ment on the importance of extension outreach to achieve der issues in relation to rice production were mentioned the goals of the project—in 16 cases these comments were only in Madagascar, where 50 percent of newly appointed negative, blaming the absence of extension for a low level extension agents were women and involved in the wet- of success of project interventions. A sentiment that was ting and drying demonstration plots in farmers’ fields often shared in the review comments was that extension (P001521). Eija Pehu cautions that one needs to care- and training should have been a focus of the projects ear- fully look at the labor implications of the sustainable rice lier on, and that the quality of staff, and the reach of the production practices. In particular, the organic fertilizer extension system were criticized for being low. This proj- production and application, and the alternate wetting and ect comment sums up these sentiments: “Some effective drying practices and resulting additional weed manage- but knowledge-intensive technologies did not lend them- ment needs could become female tasks.9 selves well for spontaneous replication, e.g., direct sowing or intensive rice systems which require precise water man- THE ROLE OF EXTENSION agement” (Madagascar, Project Number P01537, 1997). IN DISSEMINATING PERFORMANCE ANALYSIS SUSTAINABLE RICE- The ratings for project Outcome, Sustainability, and Insti- MANAGEMENT PRACTICES tutional Development Impact of the rice portfolio were The crucial role of extension and training in explaining slightly higher than the long-term average for the Agri- and disseminating the complexity of sustainable rice prac- culture Global Practice (table 1.10) (see appendix D for tices to farmers was commented on in six projects—in details on the database). three cases these were positive comments, recognizing that project success was due to an early and close integration The overall Outcome rating for the “good practice” of extension services with technical project interventions. group of 19 projects is quite favorable (table 1.11); two- In the other three cases the comment was negative—the thirds received a Likely rating. However, a lower share TABLE 1.10. OUTCOME RATINGS OF THE RICE PORTFOLIO COMPARED WITH OTHER AGRICULTURE GLOBAL PRACTICE PROJECTS Number of Percentage Rated Percentage of Agriculture GP Indicator Projects Rated Likely/Substantial Projects Rated Likely/Substantial Outcome 160 73 68 Sustainability 107 51 51 Inst. development impact 111 45 43 TABLE 1.11. RATINGS OF THE 19 GOOD PRACTICE PROJECTS Projects Rated Likely/ Projects Rated Not Indicator Substantial Likely/Substantial Not Rated Outcome 15 4 0 Sustainability 3 8 8 Institutional Development Impact 4 7 8 9 Personal communication. 14 Agriculture Global Practice Discussion Paper TABLE 1.12. IEG RATINGS OF THE 19 GOOD The experts consulted in the preparation of this report PRACTICE PROJECTS proved to be rich sources of insight that is not necessarily found in the formal accounts of implementation completion Dedicated Nondedicated IEG Rating Projects Projects reports. Chris Jackson, who served as the task team leader of the Agriculture Competitiveness Project in Vietnam (Project HS 1 0 Number P108885), stressed the need for government buy-in S 3 2 and support, community efforts, and the role of extension in MS 5 5 promoting adoption of the new approach to rice cultivation. MU 1 1 “In order to apply alternate wetting and drying practices for U 0 1 rice production it was necessary to build community confi- Total 10 9 dence by working with collective farmer groups—each farm Note: HS = highly satisfactory, S = satisfactory, MS = moderately satisfactory, with an average size of 0.6 hectares—to take part in the new MU = moderately unsatisfactory, U = unsatisfactory. rice production technique.”10 Jackson also noted the impor- tance of outreach to famer cooperatives to create commu- of these projects received favorable Sustainability and nity-level awareness of good water management techniques, Institutional Development Impact ratings. It cannot be and the usefulness of “Seeing Is Believing” demonstrations concluded, however, whether the favorable ratings are at farmer field schools in disseminating previously unfamil- directly related to the sustainable practices advocated by iar practices. the project because most projects included a variety of interventions and focused on more than one crop. For World Bank Lead Agricultural Specialist Willem Based on Independent Evaluation Group (IEG) reviews, Janssen, who has been following the spread of SRI princi- 84 percent of projects that combined one or more of the ples since the beginning and successfully applied them in key sustainable rice production practices achieved a mod- Tamil Nadu and other states in India, the key point of sus- erately satisfactory rating of Better. Table 1.12 shows the tainable rice intensification is that it focuses on agronomy. review of the different ratings of the projects as reported This is also its key challenge, because agronomic changes in the IEG reviews. are much more location specific and much more knowl- edge and management intensive, making them more dif- ficult to prescribe. He suggests that SRI needs to be linked FINAL REMARKS with strengthening of advisory services and with farmer AND EXPERT COMMENTS training programs. “That makes it a more laborious system The adaptability and scalability of sustainable rice pro- at farmer level and at project level. We should however not duction practices are major advantages over more con- shy away from those complications because they resem- ventional practices on which the Bank and its partners ble completely how climate smart agriculture will pan out: are well placed to capitalize. The adoption of new man- substituting inputs with knowledge and management.”11 agement principles within these institutions has similarly SRI breaks away from and transcends the productivity marked a departure from traditional ways of doing busi- paradigm and emphasis on germplasm that has character- ness in supporting rice intensification. Strong farmer ized so much agricultural research in rice. That focus on organizations that are well served by effective extension overall productivity relied on the homogeneity of flooded, services and responsive agricultural research are likewise irrigation rice systems to facilitate the dissemination of well placed to facilitate the necessary change in mind-set improved varieties over very large areas, Jannsen notes, among their member producers. The experience of these whereas SRI starts from a soil management perspective. rice-related projects that promote the adoption of sustain- “It is building an alternative productivity pathway. Those able practices has also shed considerable light on the type paradigms are not necessarily incompatible, but they of policies that are most useful in establishing contexts that encourage the scaling up of demonstrably successful 10 Chris Jackson (personal communication). sustainable practices. 11 Willem Janssen (personal communication). A Portfolio Review of World Bank Rice Projects: Fiscal Years 1984–2011 15 compete for funding, scientific attention and require rather World Bank task teams and project implementers are different support systems. And at least until recently, SRI often encouraged to partner or consult with Consultative was a new paradigm that was less researched, and by defi- Group on International Agricultural Research (CGIAR) nition more location specific and variable in its outcomes, centers when the center’s research relates to project and therefore vulnerable to criticism.”12 objectives. Two such centers in particular, the Interna- tional Rice Research Institute (IRRI) and the Africa Rice Erika Styger at the SRI International Networking and Center (“AfricaRice”), have regional mandates that make Resource Center at Cornell University cautions that project them natural partners for task teams working on rice planners should not lapse into prescriptive steps and fixed projects that seek to incorporate SRI or other principles regimes, because doing so limits farmers’ learning and adap- of sustainability. The centers’ mandates tend to revolve tations.13 Such a lapse can jeopardize the scalability of sus- more narrowly around advances in rice germplasm than tainable rice practices, which in turn would undermine the the broader perspective that proponents of SRI and built-in risk management of farmers being able to experiment similar approaches subscribe to, although certain prac- with the new practices on designated plots before introduc- tices such as wetting and drying are the focus of both.15 ing them more widely. Project design and planning should According to Styger, “this is sometimes making it unnec- also incorporate an element of reconnaissance to identify essarily challenging for the national partners who in some any existing uses of sustainable rice production that are cases establish separate trials for germplasm improve- already in place in local contexts. Styger notes that in China, ment and for plant and water management principles for instance, SRI principles were adopted by the national such as SRI, because of the different research partners research system and were incorporated into their work in and their philosophies, rather than being able to combine the mid-2000s. SRI-RICE compiled evidence from more research efforts.”16 The World Bank can facilitate a fur- than 50 countries on the positive yield effects of sustainable ther convergence of these research efforts in the interest rice intensification practices.14 Many projects included the of common food security and poverty reduction develop- introduction of new varieties without exploring the potential ment objectives. Planned World Bank projects with sus- additional yield effect of also introducing rice intensification tainable rice intensification components in West Africa, practices. This represents a missed opportunity to increase India (Tamil Nadu and Bihar), and Vietnam present such not only yield and incomes but also climate cobenefits. opportunities. 12 Ibid. 15 IRRI 2014. Overview of AWD. Brochure; it can be found here: http://irri 13 Styger personal communication. .org/resources/publications/brochures/overview-of-awd. 14 For more on the program: http://sri.cals.cornell.edu/index.html. 16 Erika Styger (personal communication). 16 Agriculture Global Practice Discussion Paper REFERENCES Calpe, C. 2006. “Rice International Commodity Profile.” FAO Markets and Trade Division. http://www.fao.org/fileadmin/templates/est/COMM_MARKETS _MONITORING/Rice/Documents/Rice_Profile_Dec-06.pdf. Mohanty, S. 2013. “Trends in Global Rice Consumption.” Rice Today, January–March 2013, p. 45. International Rice Research Institute. Tapan, K., Lindquist, B., and Searchinger, T. 2014. “Wetting and Drying: Reducing Greenhouse Gas Emissions and Saving Water from Rice Production.” Working paper. World Research Institute. http://www.wri.org/sites/default/files/wetting -drying-reducing-greenhouse-gas-emissions-saving-water-rice-production.pdf. World Bank. 2014. “Vietnam—Agriculture Competitiveness Project.” Washington, DC: World Bank Group. A Portfolio Review of World Bank Rice Projects: Fiscal Years 1984–2011 17 APPENDIX A LIST OF THE 172 PROJECTS INCLUDED IN THE REVIEW—SORTED BY REGION AND COUNTRY Project US$, ID Document Name Region FY Practice SB Millions P113374 Benin—Benin: Emergency Food Security Support AFR 2009 AGR ARD 9.0 P120052 Benin—Emergency Support To Enhance Food Security AFR 2010 AGR ARD 9.6 P000274 Burkina Faso—Agricultural Research AFR 1988 NA ARD 17.9 P000295 Burkina Faso—Agricultural Sector Adjustment Credit AFR 1992 SURR ARD 28.0 P000296 Burkina Faso—2nd National Agricultural Services AFR 1998 AGR ARD 41.3 Development P000195 Burundi—Muyinga Agricultural Development AFR 1988 NA ARD 10.0 P064558 Burundi—Agricultural Rehab and Sustainable Land AFR 2005 AGR ARD 55.0 P085981 Management P113438 Burundi—Food Crisis Response Development Policy Grant AFR 2009 MEFM EP 10.0 P000468 Central African Republic—Agricultural Services AFR 1992 SURR ARD 25.8 Development P113221 Central African Republic—Food Crisis Response AFR 2009 SURR ARD 7.0 P000501 Chad—Agricultural and Livestock Services AFR 1995 AGR ARD 24.5 P000604 Comoros—Pilot Agricultural Services AFR 1997 SURR ARD 1.6 P001165 Côte d’Ivoire—Economic Recovery Credit AFR 1995 MEFM EP 100.0 P001193 Côte d’Ivoire—National Agricultural Services AFR 1994 AGR ARD 21.8 P035603 Côte d’Ivoire—Agricultural Sector Adjustment Credit AFR 1996 AGR ARD 150.0 P037588 Côte d’Ivoire—Second National Agricultural Services AFR 1999 AGR ARD 50.0 Support P000818 Gambia—Agricultural Services AFR 1993 AGR ARD 12.3 P119892 Gambia—Emergency Agriculture Production AFR 2010 AGR ARD 7.5 P000946 Ghana—Natural Resource Management AFR 1998 ENV & ENV 9.3 NR P000968 Ghana—Agricultural Services Sub sector Investment AFR 2001 AGR ARD 67.0 P039887 Ghana—Agricultural Sector Adjustment Credit AFR 1995 AGR ARD 5.0 A Portfolio Review of World Bank Rice Projects: Fiscal Years 1984–2011 19 Project US$, ID Document Name Region FY Practice SB Millions P110147 Ghana—First and Second Ag Development Policy AFR 2008 AGR ARD 50.0 P102675 Operations P122808 Ghana—Third and Fourth Ag Development Policy AFR 2011 AGR ARD 107 P122796 Operation P001049 Guinea—National Seeds AFR 1988 NA ARD 9.0 P001064 Guinea—National Agricultural Research and Extension AFR 1989 NA ARD 18.4 P001065 Guinea—National Rural Infrastructure AFR 1990 NA TRANS 40.0 P001081 Guinea—National Agricultural Services AFR 1996 AGR ARD 35.0 P113268 Guinea—Emergency Agricultural Productivity Support AFR 2009 AGR ARD 5.0 P113625 Guinea Food Crisis Response Development Policy Grant AFR 2009 Poverty PR 2.5 P049513 Guinea-Bissau—Coastal and Biodiversity Management AFR 2005 ENV & ENV 3.0 P083453 NR P113468 Guinea-Bissau—Emergency Food Security Response AFR 2009 AGR ARD 5.0 P120214 Guinea-Bissau—Emergency Food Security Support AFR 2010 AGR ARD 4.3 P112107 Liberia—Emergency Food Support for Vuln Women and AFR 2008 SURR ARD 4.0 Children P001518 Madagascar—Forest Management and Protection AFR 1988 NA ARD 7.0 P001521 Madagascar—Agricultural Extension Pilot AFR 1990 NA ARD 3.7 P001522 Madagascar—Second Irrigation Rehabilitation AFR 1995 Water ARD 21.2 P001537 Madagascar—Second Phase Environment AFR 1997 ENV & ENV 30.0 NR P001544 Madagascar—Economic Management and Social Action AFR 1989 NA FS 22.0 P001546 Madagascar—National Agricultural Research AFR 1989 SURR ARD 24.0 P001563 Madagascar—Agricultural Extension Support AFR 1995 AGR ARD 25.2 P051922 Madagascar—Rural Development Support AFR 2001 AGR ARD 89.1 P001718 Mali—Office du Niger Consolidation AFR 1988 AGR ARD 39.8 P001725 Mali—Agricultural Services AFR 1991 AGR ARD 24.4 P001738 Mali—Pilot Private Irrigation Promotion AFR 1997 SURR ARD 4.2 P001744 Mali—Agricultural Sector Adjustment/Investment AFR 1990 AGR ARD 53.0 P001751 Mali—National Agricultural Research AFR 1994 AGR ARD 20.0 P001755 Mali—Agricultural Trading and Processing Promotion AFR 1995 AGR ARD 6.0 P001837 Mauritania—Agricultural Sector Adjustment and Investment AFR 1990 NA ARD 25.0 P001864 Mauritania—Agric Services AFR 1994 AGR ARD 18.2 P044711 Mauritania—Mr Integ Dev Prog For Irrigated Agric AFR 2000 SURR ARD 38.1 P001799 Mozambique—Agricultural Sector Public Expenditure AFR 1999 SURR ARD 30.0 P001968 Niger—National Agricultural Research AFR 1990 SURR ARD 19.9 P113222 Niger—Niger: Emergency Food Security Support AFR 2009 AGR ARD 7.0 P002062 Nigeria—First Multistate Agricultural Development AFR 1986 NA ARD 162.0 P002124 Nigeria—Third Multi-State Agricultural Development AFR 1989 NA ARD 100.9 P002140 Nigeria—National Agricultural Technology Support AFR 1992 AGR ARD 42.5 P002143 Nigeria—National Seed and Quarantine AFR 1990 AGR ARD 14.0 P002148 Nigeria—National Fadama Development AFR 1992 SURR ARD 67.5 P058038 Rwanda—Agricultural and Rural Market Development AFR 2000 AGR ARD 5.0 P105176 Rwanda—Second Rural Sector Support AFR 2008 AGR ARD 35.0 P002331 Senegal—Agricultural Service AFR 1990 AGR ARD 17.1 20 Agriculture Global Practice Discussion Paper Project US$, ID Document Name Region FY Practice SB Millions P002343 Senegal—Fourth Irrigation AFR 1988 NA ARD 33.6 P002351 Senegal—Second Agricultural Research AFR 1990 NA ARD 18.5 P002356 Senegal—Agricultural Sector Adjustment AFR 1995 AGR ARD 45.0 P002402 Sierra Leone—Agriculture Sector Support AFR 1984 SURR ARD 21.5 P079335 Sierra Leone—Sierra Leone-National Social Action AFR 2003 SP SP 35.0 P113219 Sierra Leone—Sl-dpl-food Crisis Response AFR 2009 SP SP 3.0 P002772 Tanzania—National Agr and Livestock Extension Rehab AFR 1989 NA ARD 18.4 P002801 Tanzania—Agricultural Sector Management (ASMP) Projet AFR 1994 SURR ARD 24.5 P002804 Tanzania—Second Agricultural Research AFR 1998 SURR ARD 21.8 P067103 Tanzania—Participatory Ag Development and AFR 2003 AGR ARD 56.6 Empowerment P114291 Tanzania—Accelerated Food Security AFR 2009 AGR ARD 160.0 P002856 Togo—Cotton Sector Development AFR 1988 NA ARD 15.1 P002948 Uganda—Southwest Region Agricultural Rehabilitation AFR 1988 NA ARD 10.0 P044695 Uganda—National Agricultural Advisory Services AFR 2001 AGR ARD 45.0 P086513 Uganda—Millennium Science Initiative AFR 2006 EDU EDU 30.0 P105649 Uganda—Second Phase of the Ag Research and Training AFR 2008 AGR ARD 12.0 P003218 Zambia—Agricultural Sector Investment AFR 1995 SURR ARD 60.0 P004033 Cambodia—Agriculture Productivity Improvement EAP 1997 SURR ARD 27.0 P117203 Cambodia—Smallholder Ag And Social Protection Support EAP 2010 AGR ARD 5.0 P003474 China—Northern Irrigation EAP 1988 NA ARD 103.0 P003559 China—Agricultural Support Services EAP 1993 AGR ARD 115.0 P003560 China—Henan Agricultural Development EAP 1991 AGR ARD 110.0 P003561 China—Sichuan Agricultural Development EAP 1993 Water ARD 147.0 P003582 China—Irrigated Agriculture Intensification EAP 1991 Water ARD 335.0 P003593 China—Songliao Plain Adp EAP 1994 AGR ARD 205.0 P003595 China—Songliao Plain Agricultural Development EAP 1994 AGR ARD 150.0 P003627 China—Grain Distribution and Marketing EAP 1993 AGR ARD 490.0 P003638 China—Seed Sector Commercialization EAP 1996 AGR ARD 100.0 P049665 China—Anning Valley Agricultural Development EAP 1999 AGR ARD 120.0 P049700 China—Second Irrigated Agriculture Intensification EAP 1998 AGR ARD 300.0 P065463 China—Jiangxi Integrated Agricultural Modernization EAP 2004 Water ARD 100.0 P003912 Indonesia—Yogyakarta Upland Area Development EAP 1991 NA ARD 15.5 P003934 Indonesia—Agricultural Research Management EAP 1989 NA ARD 35.3 P003937 Indonesia—Integrated Swamps Development EAP 1994 SURR ARD 65.0 P003972 Indonesia—Second Agricultural Research Management EAP 1995 AGR ARD 63.0 P003981 Indonesia—Provincial Irrigated Agriculture Development EAP 1991 Water ARD 125.0 P003985 Indonesia—National Watershed Management and EAP 1994 ENV & ENV 56.5 Conservation NR P004009 Indonesia—Integrated Pest Management Training EAP 1993 AGR ARD 32.0 P004011 Indonesia—Sulawesi Agri Area EAP 1996 SURR ARD 26.8 P059930 Indonesia—Decentralized Agricultural and Forestry EAP 2000 SURR ARD 18.0 Extension P110635 Indonesia—Nias Islands Livelihoods and Economic EAP 2010 SURR Urban 8.2 Development Development A Portfolio Review of World Bank Rice Projects: Fiscal Years 1984–2011 21 Project US$, ID Document Name Region FY Practice SB Millions P120313 Indonesia—Climate Change Development Policy Loan EAP 2010 ENV & ENV 200.0 NR P004195 Laos—Upland Agriculture Development EAP 1990 AGR ARD 20.2 P059305 Laos—District Upland Development And Conservation EAP 1999 SURR ARD 2.0 P114617 Laos—Lao Pdr: Rice Productivity Improvement EAP 2009 AGR ARD 3.0 P003363 Myanmar—Grain Storage and Processing EAP 1986 NA ARD 30.0 P003364 Myanmar—Second Seed Development EAP 1985 NA ARD 14.5 P004572 Philippines—Second Communal Irrigation Development EAP 1991 Water ARD 46.2 P004589 Philippines—Second Irrigation Operations Support (IOSP II) EAP 1993 Water ARD 51.3 P037079 Philippines—Agrarian Reform Communities Development EAP 1997 SURR ARD 50.0 P058842 Philippines—Mindanao Rural Development EAP 2000 SURR ARD 27.5 P113492 Philippines—Food Crisis Response Dev Policy Operation EAP 2009 SURR SP 450.0 P120564 P070533 Timor-Leste—Agriculture Rehabilitation EAP 2000 AGR ARD 6.8 P073911 Timor-Leste—Second Agriculture Rehabilitation EAP 2002 AGR ARD 8.0 P079320 Timor Leste—Third Agriculture Rehabilitation EAP 2004 AGR ARD 3.0 P004834 Vietnam—Irrigation Rehabilitation EAP 1995 Water ARD 100.0 P004837 Viet Nam—Agricultural Rehabilitation EAP 1994 SURR ARD 96.0 P004844 Vietnam—Vn-agric. Diversification EAP 1998 AGR ARD 66.9 P108885 Vietnam—Agriculture Competitiveness EAP 2009 AGR ARD 59.8 P040544 Azerbaijan—Farm Privatization ECA 1997 SURR ARD 14.7 P049721 Kazakhstan—Agricultural Competitiveness ECA 2005 AGR ARD 24.0 P006152 Bolivia—Eastern Lowlands NRM and Ag Production LAC 1990 ENV & ENV 35.0 NR P006372 Brazil—Second Agricultural Extension LAC 1986 NA ARD 155.0 P007100 Ecuador—Lower Guayas Flood Control LAC 1991 SURR ARD 59.0 P007105 Ecuador—Irrigation Subsector Technical Assistance LAC 1994 SURR ARD 20.0 P007115 Ecuador—Rural Development LAC 1992 TRAN TRAN 84.0 P007167 El Salvador—Agricultural Sector Reform and Investment LAC 1993 AGR ARD 40.0 P095169 Multi-Country Cap-Building for Compliance with the LAC 2008 AGR ARD 4.0 Cartagena Protocol on Biosafety P007633 Mexico—Second Tropical Agricultural Development LAC 1986 NA ARD 109.0 P007682 Mexico—Agricultural Technology LAC 1992 AGR ARD 150.0 P048505 Mexico—Agricultural Productivity Improvement LAC 1999 AGR ARD 444.5 P007780 Nicaragua—Ag Technology and Land Management LAC 1994 ENV & ENV 44.0 NR P064915 Nicaragua—Ag Technology & Rural Technical Education LAC 2000 SURR ARD 23.6 P087046 Nicaragua—Second Agricultural Technology LAC 2006 AGR ARD 12.0 P007918 Paraguay—Natural Resources Management LAC 1994 SURR ARD 50.0 P008037 Peru—Irrigations Subsector LAC 1997 Water ARD 85.0 P008133 Uruguay—Second Agricultural Development LAC 1990 AGR ARD 65.0 P008173 Uruguay—NRM and Irrigation Development LAC 1994 Water ARD 41.0 P008214 Venezuela—Agricultural Sector Investment LAC 1992 SURR ARD 300.0 P112017 Djibouti—Djibouti—Food Crisis Response Dev Policy Grant MNA 2008 MEFM EP 5.0 22 Agriculture Global Practice Discussion Paper Project US$, ID Document Name Region FY Practice SB Millions P005146 Egypt—National Drainage MNA 1992 Water ARD 120.0 P049166 Egypt—East Delta Agriculture Services MNA 1998 SURR ARD 15.0 P009461 Bangladesh—BWDB System Rehabilitation SAR 1990 NA ARD 53.9 P009476 Bangladesh—Shallow Tubewell and Low-lift Pump Irr SAR 1991 NA ARD 75.0 P009484 Bangladesh—Agriculture Research Management SAR 1996 AGR ARD 50.0 P009516 Bangladesh—Agriculture Support Services SAR 1991 NA ARD 35.0 P009519 Bangladesh—Third Fisheries SAR 1990 NA ARD 44.6 P009544 Bangladesh—National Minor Irrigation Development SAR 1991 NA ARD 54.0 P112761 Bangladesh Food Crisis Development Support Credit SAR 2009 MEFM EP 130.0 P009847 India—Second National Agricultural Research SAR 1986 NA ARD 72.1 P009860 India—Integrated Watershed Development (Plains) SAR 1990 ENV & ENV 62.0 NR P009922India—Third National Seeds SAR 1989 NA ARD 150.0 P009958India—Agricultural Development —Tamil Nadu SAR 1991 AGR ARD 112.8 P009961India—Uttar Pradesh Sodic Lands Reclamation SAR 1993 AGR ARD 54.7 P010408India—Bihar Plateau Development SAR 1993 TRAN TRAN 117.0 P010522India—Assam Rural Infra SAR 1995 SURR ARD 126.0 P010529India—Orissa Water Resources Consolidation SAR 1996 Water ARD 290.9 P010561India—National Agricultural Technology SAR 1998 AGR ARD 196.8 P035824India—Diversified Agricultural Support SAR 1998 SURR ARD 129.9 P041264India—Integrated Watershed Development SAR 1999 AGR ARD 135.0 P050646India—Second Uttar Pradesh Sodic Lands Reclamation SAR 1999 Water ARD 194.1 P078550India—AF for the UT Decentr Watershed Dev, and Sust SAR 2004 AGR ARD 85.1 P112061Land, Water and Biodiv Cons, and Mangmt for Improved P124354Livelihoods in UT Watershed Sector P010348Nepal—Bhairawa Lumbini Groundwater Irrigation III SAR 1990 Water ARD 47.2 P010530Nepal—Irrigation Sector SAR 1998 Water ARD 79.8 P048026Nepal—Agri Res & Extension SAR 1998 AGR ARD 24.3 P010372Pakistan—Third On-Farm Water Management SAR 1991 NA ARD 83.6 P010377Pakistan—Second SCARP Transition SAR 1991 NA ARD 20.0 P071092Pakistan—NW Frontier Province On-Farm Water SAR 2001 Water ARD 21.4 Management P010276 Sri Lanka—Agricultural Research SAR 1987 NA ARD 18.6 P010378 Sri Lanka—National Irrigation Rehabilitation SAR 1991 Water ARD 29.6 P010398 Sri Lanka—Second Agricultural Extension SAR 1992 AGR ARD 14.3 A Portfolio Review of World Bank Rice Projects: Fiscal Years 1984–2011 23 APPENDIX B SUSTAINABLE RICE PRODUCTION CONCEPTS USED IN THE PORTFOLIO Several projects refer to specific sustainable rice management approaches, some of which are listed and described in this appendix. » System of Rice Intensification—the principles The System of Rice Intensification is a set of management practices that was developed in 1960 in Madagascar. Adapted and applied to other crops, its prin- ciples today have spread to more than 50 countries. The principles of rice inten- sifications systems promise climate cobenefits and increased production with reduced input and water use, leading to higher farm incomes. SRI presented a paradigm shift from the thinking of the Green Revolution because it does not depend on genetic change or on added inputs. It started as a bottom-up technol- ogy and is more agro-ecology based instead of input dependent. SRI is based on the principle of developing healthy large and deep root systems that can better resist drought, waterlogging, and wind damage. It consists of six key elements to better manage inputs, utilize new ways to transplant seedlings, and manage water and fertilizer application. SRI plants develop stronger stalks and more tillers, with higher yields and even better flavor qualities. SRI consists of six main elements: 1. Seed nursery—seedlings are transplanted at a much younger age, typically 8–12 days old 2. Transplanting—single seedlings are planted, instead of planting a handful of seedlings in each hill 3. Innovative transplanting—plants are spaced wider apart in a square pattern rather than in rows 4. Intermittent water application to create wet and dry soil conditions, instead of continuous flood irrigation 5. Rotary weeding to control weeds and promote soil aeration 6. Increased use of organic fertilizer to enhance soil fertility A Portfolio Review of World Bank Rice Projects: Fiscal Years 1984–2011 25 Potential benefits are higher yields, fewer broken seeds residues to reduce the level of methane and nitrous and more milled grains, reduced water use, reduced oxide emissions in the rice fields. Adopting this climate- labor demand, and reduced seed amount. smart practice required the systematic engagement of the entire community committed to draining the rice Constraints of SRI: there is an increased labor fields multiple times over a matter of weeks, something demand during the first few seasons (it actually saves traditionally rarely done. Adopting this alternate wet- labor); reliable water supply and control over irriga- ting and drying technique not only helps strengthen tion quantities is required (less water is needed but it plant roots but also reduces flooding periods, which needs to be applied more frequently). translates into reduced methane production. Challenges for SRI: a proper adaptation of the six The project promoted the government of Vietnam’s principles to local conditions is required, a well- novel 1 Must and 5 Reductions approach to rice functioning extension service and on-farm demon- production, in which producers are encouraged to strations are needed, and traditions must be overcome. use certified seed (“1 Must”); and achieve five reduc- tions (seed rate, use of fertilizer, water use through Source: http://info.worldbank.org/etools/docs/library alternate wetting and drying of the field, frequency /245848/. of pesticide application, and postharvest losses) as a » The SRI International Network and Re- means to improve the overall sustainability of rice source Center at Cornell bases its SRI meth- production. In order to apply alternate wetting and odology on four main principles that interact with drying practices for rice production it was necessary each other: to build community confidence by working with col- • Early, quick, and healthy plant establishment lective farmer groups—each farm with an average • Reduced plant density size of 0.6 hectares—to take part in the new rice • Improved soil conditions through enrichment production technique. Farmers were trained through with organic matter Farmer Field Schools taking a “Seeing Is Believing” • Reduced and controlled water application approach. Equally important was the outreach to famer cooperatives to create community-level aware- A set of management practices is then defined ness of good water management techniques. according to the local conditions and the rice sys- As a result of this behavior change, farmers’ up-front tem. Adaptations are often undertaken to accom- costs for inputs fell by 20 percent, and crop produc- modate changing weather patterns, soil conditions, tivity increased by 5 to 10 percent, improving farmer labor availability, water control, and access to organic incomes by up to one-third. In addition, the project’s inputs. training and extension services, provided directly to Source: http://sri.ciifad.cornell.edu/aboutsri/aboutus/. more than 33,000 farmers in two provinces in the Mekong Delta for three cropping seasons, allowed » “1 Must and 5 Reductions” in Vietnam the farmers to become aware of greenhouse gas emis- sions reduction achieved through the water manage- In Vietnam, a similar approach has been developed. ment techniques. The Ag Competitiveness Project in Vietnam’s Mekong Delta (Project Number P108885) promoted the gov- The World Bank Board of Directors recently ernment of Vietnam’s Mot Phai, Nam Giam (1 Must approved a new project that will scale up the impact and 5 Reductions) approach to rice production, which to cover all eight rice-growing provinces of the championed an alternate wetting and drying rice pro- Mekong Delta. By demonstrating the success of this duction technique that uses less water and reduces the kind of intervention in rice production, the new Viet- application of fertilizers and management of crop nam Sustainable Agriculture Transformation Project 26 Agriculture Global Practice Discussion Paper (VnSAT) has the potential to be expanded to other » In the Philippines, sustainable rice produc- settings (additional crop rotation from rice to nonrice tion principles are known locally as Sus- crops, crop management, use of biochar and fertilizer tainable System of Irrigated Agriculture management) to demonstrate further greenhouse gas 1. Leveling and Preparing the Field (similar to SRI) mitigation opportunities. Moreover, this project and 2. Preparing the Nursery (slightly different from SRI other evidence-based climate-smart interventions practices by using local Dapog) can bring together development and climate finance 3. Innovative Transplanting of Single Seedlings to promote the Nationally Appropriate Mitigation (similar to SRI) when they are 8–10 days old Actions (NAMA) or other interventions supporting 4. Irrigating Intermittently (similar to SRI) low emissions development in countries and enhance 5. Applying Organic Fertilizers (slightly different their commitment to reduce emissions and to pilot from SRI by emphasizing composting) payment for environmental services (PES). 6. Rotary Weeding and Tillage (similar to SRI) Source: http://blogs.worldbank.org/voices/slogan Source: http://info.worldbank.org/etools/docs/library -sustainable-agriculture-mot-phai-nam-giam-rice /245848/files/docs/topic05/Resources_SSIAPaper -production. Final.pdf. » Rice integrated crop management—Rice » One of the core principles of all the sus- ICM in Indonesia tainable intensification systems is the inter- mittent water applications, often called A term coined by the Food and Agriculture Organi- Alternate Wetting and Drying—saving water zation of the U.N. (FAO) and partners is based on the and reducing greenhouse gas (GHG) concept that rice farmers carry out numerous cultural emissions operations during the growing season. These activi- ties, separately and collectively, have an effect on all AWD is a management practice in irrigated low- the phases of crop development and ultimately deter- land rice fields that saves water and reduces GHG mine yield. Rice ICM is based on the understand- emissions while maintaining yields. The practice of ing that production limitations are closely linked. For AWD is defined by the periodic drying and reflood- example, stronger seedlings from high-quality seeds ing of the rice field. AWD and other single- or will not benefit yield if the crop is inadequately ferti- multiple-drying practices have been used for several lized. Similarly, the crop cannot respond to improved decades as water-saving practices. About 40 per- fertility if it is competing with weeds or if insufficient cent of rice farmers in China practice some form water is supplied. Many of the principles are similar of water management and short intervals of non- to the SRI approach. flooded conditions are common among rice farm- ers in northwestern India and in Japan (more than For example, for Indonesia there is a set of six 80 percent). AWD-like practices have continued to recommendations: spread. AWD has been field tested and validated by » Selection of rice varieties for high yield and seed rice farmers in Bangladesh, Indonesia, Lao PDR, the » Transplanting of young and healthy seedlings Philippines, Myanmar, and Vietnam. AWD is now » Incorporation of organic manure and basal fertil- being mainstreamed in extension efforts by formal izer into soil extension institutes and nongovermental organiza- » Intermittent irrigation tions in a number of countries in Southeast Asia. » Frequent mechanical weeding The key messages are the following: » Control of pests and diseases, based on a regular 1. AWD is a rice management practice that reduces field observations and early warning system water use by up to 30 percent and can save farm- Source: http://www.fao.org/3/a-a0869t/a0869t04.pdf. ers money on irrigation and pumping costs. A Portfolio Review of World Bank Rice Projects: Fiscal Years 1984–2011 27 2. AWD reduces methane emissions by 48 percent Sources: https://ccafs.cgiar.org/research/results/putting without reducing yield. -alternate-wetting-and-drying-awd-map-globally 3. Efficient nitrogen use and application of organic -and-nationally-0; inputs to dry soil can further reduce emissions. https://cgspace.cgiar.org/bitstream/handle 4. Incentives for adoption of AWD are higher when /10568/35402/info-note_CCAFS_AWD_final farmers pay for pump irrigation. _A4.pdf. 28 Agriculture Global Practice Discussion Paper APPENDIX C LIST OF 19 PROJECTS THAT INCLUDE CORE SUSTAINABLE RICE PRODUCTION PRACTICES A Portfolio Review of World Bank Rice Projects: Fiscal Years 1984–2011 29 30 Eight projects marked with an * specifically mention an approach. Lending IEG Lending Sector ($US, Project ID Outcome Document Name Region FY Instrument Practice Board millions) Dedicated projects P108885* MS Vietnam—Agriculture Competitiveness Project EAP 2009 SIL AGR ARD 59.8 P004033 MU Cambodia—Agriculture Productivity Improvement EAP 1997 SIL SURR ARD 27.0 P001521 S Madagascar—Agricultural Extension Pilot Project AFR 1990 SIL NA ARD 3.7 P001546 S Madagascar—National Agricultural Research AFR 1989 SIL SURR ARD 24.0 P009961 S India—Uttar Pradesh Sodic Lands Reclamation SAR 1993 SIL AGR ARD 54.7 P105176* HS Rwanda—Second Rural Sector Support Project AFR 2008 APL AGR ARD 35.0 P001563* MS Madagascar—Agricultural Extension Program AFR 1995 SIL AGR ARD 25.2 P001522* MS Madagascar—Second Irrigation Rehabilitation AFR 1995 SIL Water ARD 21.2 P113221* MS Central African Republic—Food Crisis Response AFR 2009 ERL SURR ARD 7.0 P004009 MS Indonesia—Integrated Pest Management Training EAP 1993 SIL AGR ARD 32.0 Nondedicated projects P000501 MS Chad—Agricultural and Livestock Services Project AFR 1995 SIL AGR ARD 24.5 P001537* MS Madagascar—Second Phase Environment Program AFR 1997 SIL ENRM ENV 30.0 P002351 MS Senegal—Second Agricultural Research Project AFR 1990 SIL NA ARD 18.5 P067103 MS Tanzania—Participatory Ag Dev. and Empowerment AFR 2003 SIL AGR ARD 56.6 P110635 MS Indonesia—Nias Islands Livelihoods and Ec Dev Prog EAP 2010 ERL SURR Urban 8.2 P120313* MU Indonesia—Climate Change Development Policy Loan EAP 2010 DPL ENRM ENV 200.0 P001193 S Côte d’Ivoire—National Agricultural Services Project AFR 1994 SIL AGR ARD 21.8 P009484 S Bangladesh—Agriculture Research Management SAR 1996 SIL AGR ARD 50.0 P048026* US Nepal—Agri Res & Extension SAR 1998 SIL AGR ARD 24.3 Note: HS = highly satisfactory, MS = mostly satisfactory, S = satisfactory, MU = mostly unsatisfactory, US = unsatisfactory. Agriculture Global Practice Discussion Paper APPENDIX D COMPARISON OF PROJECT RATINGS BETWEEN “ALL BANK” AND AGRICULTURE GLOBAL PRACTICE PROJECTS Project Approvals between 1981 and 2014 ALL BANK AGR GP # Projects 8,462 272 Net Commitments 569,713.6 13,176.9 Outcome % Satisfactory 70.5 68.4 RDO % Moderate or Lower 54.4 41.3 Sustainability % Likely 55.6 50.8 Inst Dev Impact % Substantial 37.9 43.3 Bank Performance at Entry % Sat 66.6 55.6 Bank Performance at Supervision % Sat 78.2 72.5 Borrower Performance at Preparation % Sat 78.3 77.5 Borrower Performance at Implementation % Sat 70.2 64.9 Borrower Performance at Compliance % Sat 70.9 68.3 ICR Quality % Sat 91.3 89.6 Net Disconnect 20.5 25.6 Average ERR at Evaluation 22.4 34.2 Average ERR at Appraisal 26.1 26.7 Bank Overall Performance % Sat 74.4 66.4 Borrower Overall Performance % Sat 71.9 64.2 A Portfolio Review of World Bank Rice Projects: Fiscal Years 1984–2011 31 A G R I C U LT U R E G L O B A L P R A C T I C E D I S C U S S I O N P A P E R 1 1 W O R L D B A N K G R O U P R E P O R T N U M B E R 102399-GLB 1818 H Street, NW Washington, D.C. 20433 USA Telephone: 202-473-1000 Internet: www.worldbank.org/agriculture Twitter: @WBG_agriculture