Comparing productivity of rice under system of rice intensification and conventional flooding: A switching regression approach

Abstract

This paper examined the factors influencing rice productivity in Mwea Irrigation Scheme using the System of rice intensification (SRI) and conventional flooding (CF). Stratified sampling was used to obtain 364 smallholder rice farmers for interviewing. Data collection was done with the aid of a semistructured questionnaire and analyzed using the Endogenous Switching regression Model (ESRM). The results of ESRM revealed that factors such as household size, access to extension services, involvement in off-farm work, distance from the canal, farm size, labour use, access to credit services and years spent in rice farming were found to be significant in explaining variations in rice productivity. Furthermore, the gross margin analysis showed that the returns of SRI outweigh the returns of CF, thus making SRI more profitable than CF. The study therefore recommends that Kenya government should enhance engagement with development partners to pay attention to all significant factors which are important in making decisions in the two practices of rice production.

A cost benefits analysis of the adoption of system of rice intensification: Evidence from smallholder rice farmers within an innovation platform in Oluch irrigation scheme, Kenya

“…Ndiiri et al for instance undertook a benefit-cost analysis of paddy rice under the system of rice intensification in Mwea, Kenya and reported a 33% increase in yield on average over two seasons [2]. We also note conflicting findings of some Kenyan findings such as increased costs of production attributed to SRI [9], when some larger studies that report reduced costs [12].…”

“…Kaloi et al . reported a 58.3% increase in gross revenue following SRI [ 9 ]. Elsewhere, Denkiyrah has also demonstrated profitability of SRI over conventional approaches in a Ghanian setting [ 10 ].…”

“…In Kenya, Ndiiri et al compared SRI and conventional methods of rice cultivation and found a 33% increase in gross revenue from SRI yield over conventional farming yields [2]. Kaloi et al reported a 58.3% increase in gross revenue following SRI [9]. Elsewhere, Denkiyrah has also demonstrated profitability of SRI over conventional approaches in a Ghanian setting [10].…”

The influence of multi-stakeholder networks on the uptake of system of rice intensification among smallholder rice farmers in western Kenya

“…Of the several technologies for improving rice productivity proposed across Asia and Africa, the system of rice intensification (SRI) has emerged as highly favourable for Africa, especially among smallholder farmers (Kaloi et al, 2021). To date, several studies have now documented the benefits of SRI in Kenya and across SSA (Kaloi et al, 2020;Katambara et al, 2013;Mati et al, 2012;Ndiiri et al, 2013;Omwenga et al, 2014) and the constraints to its widespread adoption (Kaloi et al, 2021;. In countries such as Kenya, SRI has been shown to improve yield and gross revenue by at least 30% (Kaloi et al, 2020;Ndiiri et al, 2013) and marketing decisions among farmers .…”

“…To date, several studies have now documented the benefits of SRI in Kenya and across SSA (Kaloi et al, 2020;Katambara et al, 2013;Mati et al, 2012;Ndiiri et al, 2013;Omwenga et al, 2014) and the constraints to its widespread adoption (Kaloi et al, 2021;. In countries such as Kenya, SRI has been shown to improve yield and gross revenue by at least 30% (Kaloi et al, 2020;Ndiiri et al, 2013) and marketing decisions among farmers . Nevertheless, the country is still grappling with the adoption of such promising technologies to improve rice productivity.…”