Laser Land Leveling in India - A Success - M.L. Jat & HS Sidhu
Laser Land Leveling in India - A Success - M.L. Jat & HS Sidhu
Laser Land Leveling in India - A Success - M.L. Jat & HS Sidhu
Global Conservation Agriculture Program (GCAP) International Maize and Wheat Improvement Centre (CIMMYT)
Outline of presentation
The 1990s of Indian Agriculture Technological advancement/solutions The LLL technology: Brief history Research results/pilots Supply chain New innovations Impacts Lessons learnt
farming unattractive
Sustainable food security is a issue New technological options- RCTs (ZT in wheat, bed planting etc) RWC (May, 1994)- Joint regional initiative of NARS and CGIAR
Traditional mindset:
How traditional land leveling contributed to that in case of ZT
Di sta nc e( m)
320.00 319.00 318.00 317.00 316.00 315.00 314.00 313.00 312.00 311.00 310.00 309.00 308.00 307.00 306.00 305.00
Every part was imported, very costly (~US$ 20K), no courage to take it to farmers
Laser Land Leveling System with First Indian Bucket- RWC Efforts (2001)
4.5
4.0
3.5
3.0
2.5
2.0
LL-rice
TL-rice
LL-wheat
TL-wheat
55
5.0
Rice
Wheat
1.2
-3
50
1.0
45
0.8
NUE (Kg kg )
-1
40
0.6
35
0.4
30
0.2
25
LL-rice
TL-rice
LL-wheat
TL-wheat
LL-rice
TL-rice
LL-wheat
TL-wheat
Interactive effect of land leveling and rice crop establishment techniques on yield and water productivity (Western UP)
Crop establishment techniques Grain yield (t ha-1) Laser CT-DSR CT-TPR 4.90 4.94 Traditional 4.18 4.49 Irrigation water use (m3 ha-1) Laser 9067 10150 Water productivity (kg m-3)
Average
4.92
4.34
9608
10286
0.51
0.42
CT-TPR to DSR under traditional leveling, water saving= 17 cm DSR (TL) to DSR (PL), further water saving= 5 cm
10.82
25.1
Haryana (N=92)
50 40
30
20
10
T im e ta k e n (h r h a -1 )
A r e a in c r e a s e (% )
Y ie ld in c r e a s e (% )
W a te r s a v in g (% )
US$ ha-1
Laser
Traditional
0.53 0.76
Conventional
Double no-till
2003-04
AE-N
15
AE-K
10 5
AE-K (kg kg -1 )
120 100
AE-P (kg kg -1 )
AE-P
Difference % Savings
25 23.8
27.5 23.9
1.67 23.7
1.84 24
Farm level benefits in RWCS of IGP ~7 % gain in crop productivity ~20 % (18 ha-cm yr-1) saving in irrigation water, US$ 113 to 175 ha-1 higher system profitability 10-13 % higher agronomic efficiency of nitrogen Source: Jat et al, 2005, 2006, 2009a,b,2011
Supply Chain
Exporters
Dealers/Agencies
Local manufacturers
Assembling
Loan
Subsidy Subsidy
Farmer
Farmer
Farmer
Make
Trimble Leica Geosystems AGL, Control panel local Topcon, Japan Hybrid (assembling) Apache Proshot, Control Panel from Pakistan MCE Futura Laser Electronics, Greece AGL Apache-Spectra Hybrids (assembling)
New Innovations
Substantial indigenization Double tyre with more efficiency Built local capacity Units available now at less cost 2WT laser
3595
Annual returns through all custom service providers at current level- ~ US$ 36 million
Lessons Learned
The efforts of RWC (CIMMYT-IRRI) have abundantly established the success of the private sector approach over the public sector push option The higher acceptance of laser has been associated with lowered cost of production through indigenization backed by a cadre of service providers- Best Example of Technology led Business Model The creation of the institutional mechanism of farmer co-operatives has brought about optimization in costs for inputs used for farming Complimentarity of technologies help adoption of either
Lessons Learned
While initial expectations from applying laser technology for leveling of land were focused on water saving as a benefit, it found higher purpose being served on account of its ability to reduce cost of production, increase yields and improve efficiency of production inputs Successful induction of the LLL helped lay the foundation for improving the performance of other technologies covered under the paradigm of CA The technology has created an investment base of USD 80 million (>90% by farmers) just on laser plus tractors- Established an example of farmer investment in technology
THANKS