Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-tf8b9 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-27T19:54:25.362Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

FARMERS’ PERCEPTIONS ON MECHANICAL WEEDERS FOR RICE PRODUCTION IN SUB-SAHARAN AFRICA

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  16 January 2018

JEAN-MARTIAL JOHNSON ,
JONNE RODENBURG ,
ATSUKO TANAKA ,
KALIMUTHU SENTHILKUMAR ,
KOKOU AHOUANTON ,
IBNOU DIENG ,
AGOSSOU KLOTOE ,
CYRIAQUE AKAKPO ,
ZACHARIE SEGDA  and
LOUIS P. YAMEOGO
...Show all authors
JEAN-MARTIAL JOHNSON*
Affiliation:
Africa Rice Center (AfricaRice), 01 B.P. 2551, Bouaké 01, Côted'Ivoire Institute of Crop Science and Resource Conservation (INRES), University of Bonn, D-53115 Bonn, Germany
JONNE RODENBURG
Affiliation:
Africa Rice Center (AfricaRice), 01 B.P. 2551, Bouaké 01, Côted'Ivoire Natural Resources Institute, University of Greenwich, Chatham Maritime, Kent ME4 4TB, United Kingdom
ATSUKO TANAKA
Affiliation:
Africa Rice Center (AfricaRice), 01 B.P. 2031, Cotonou, Benin
KALIMUTHU SENTHILKUMAR
Affiliation:
Africa Rice Center (AfricaRice), East and Southern Africa, P.O. Box 33581, Dar es Salaam, Tanzania
KOKOU AHOUANTON
Affiliation:
Africa Rice Center (AfricaRice), 01 B.P. 2551, Bouaké 01, Côted'Ivoire
IBNOU DIENG
Affiliation:
Africa Rice Center (AfricaRice), 01 B.P. 2551, Bouaké 01, Côted'Ivoire
AGOSSOU KLOTOE
Affiliation:
Programme Recherche Rizicole, INRAB, B.P. 226, Bohicon, Benin
CYRIAQUE AKAKPO
Affiliation:
Programme Recherche Rizicole, INRAB, B.P. 226, Bohicon, Benin
ZACHARIE SEGDA
Affiliation:
Programme Riz et Riziculture, CNRST/INERA, 01 B.P. 910, Bobo Dioulasso, Burkina Faso
LOUIS P. YAMEOGO
Affiliation:
Programme Riz et Riziculture, CNRST/INERA, 01 B.P. 910, Bobo Dioulasso, Burkina Faso
HENRI GBAKATCHETCHE
Affiliation:
Programme Riz, CNRA, B.P. 440, Man, Côte d'Ivoire
GEORGE K. ACHEAMPONG
Affiliation:
Rice Program, CSIR-Crops Research Institute (CRI), P.O. Box 3785, Fumesua-Kumasi, Ghana
RALPH K. BAM
Affiliation:
Rice Program, CSIR-Crops Research Institute (CRI), P.O. Box 3785, Fumesua-Kumasi, Ghana
OLADELE S. BAKARE
Affiliation:
Information & Documentation, National Cereals Research Institute (NCRI), Badeggi, P. M. B. 8, Bida, Niger State, Nigeria
ALAIN KALISA
Affiliation:
Rwanda Agricultural Board (RAB), P.O. Box 5016, Kigali, Rwanda
ELIE R. GASORE
Affiliation:
Rwanda Agricultural Board (RAB), P.O. Box 5016, Kigali, Rwanda
SÉKOU ANI
Affiliation:
Programme Riz, Institut Togolais de Recherche Agronomique (ITRA), B.P. 2318, Lomé, Togo
KOMLAN ABLEDE
Affiliation:
Programme Riz, Institut Togolais de Recherche Agronomique (ITRA), B.P. 2318, Lomé, Togo
KAZUKI SAITO
Affiliation:
Africa Rice Center (AfricaRice), 01 B.P. 2551, Bouaké 01, Côted'Ivoire
*
††††Corresponding author. Email: [email protected]
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Summary

Competition from weeds is one of the major biophysical constraints to rice (Oryza spp.) production in sub-Saharan Africa. Smallholder rice farmers require efficient, affordable and labour-saving weed management technologies. Mechanical weeders have shown to fit this profile. Several mechanical weeder types exist but little is known about locally specific differences in performance and farmer preference between these types. Three to six different weeder types were evaluated at 10 different sites across seven countries – i.e., Benin, Burkina Faso, Côte d'Ivoire, Ghana, Nigeria, Rwanda and Togo. A total of 310 farmers (173 male, 137 female) tested the weeders, scored them for their preference, and compared them with their own weed management practices. In a follow-up study, 186 farmers from Benin and Nigeria received the ring hoe, which was the most preferred in these two countries, to use it during the entire crop growing season. Farmers were surveyed on their experiences. The probability of the ring hoe having the highest score among the tested weeders was 71%. The probability of farmers’ preference of the ring hoe over their usual practices – i.e., herbicide, traditional hoe and hand weeding – was 52, 95 and 91%, respectively. The preference of this weeder was not related to gender, years of experience with rice cultivation, rice field size, weed infestation level, water status or soil texture. In the follow-up study, 80% of farmers who used the ring hoe indicated that weeding time was reduced by at least 31%. Of the farmers testing the ring hoe in the follow-up study, 35% used it also for other crops such as vegetables, maize, sorghum, cassava and millet. These results suggest that the ring hoe offers a gender-neutral solution for reducing labour for weeding in rice as well as other crops and that it is compatible with a wide range of environments. The implications of our findings and challenges for out-scaling of mechanical weeders are discussed.

Type
Research Article
Information
Experimental Agriculture , Volume 55 , Issue 1 , February 2019 , pp. 117 - 131
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2018 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

REFERENCES

Akaike, H. (1973). Information theory and an extension of the maximum likelihood principle. In Second International Symposium on Information Theory, 267–281 (Eds Petrov, B. N. and Csaki, F.). Budapest: Academiai Kiado.Google Scholar
Becker, M., Johnson, D. E., Wopereis, M. C. S. and Sow, A. (2003). Rice yield gaps in irrigated systems along an agro-ecological gradient in West Africa. Journal of Plant Nutrition and Soil Science 166:61–67.Google Scholar
Chauhan, B. S., Awan, T. H., Abugho, S. B., Evengelista, G. and Sudhir, Y. (2015). Effect of crop establishment methods and weed control treatments on weed management, and rice yield. Field Crops Research 172:72–84.Google Scholar
Defoer, T., Wopereis, M. C. S., Idinoba, P., Kadisha, K. L., Diack, S. and Gaye, M. (2009). Curriculum for Participatory Learning and Action Research (PLAR) for Integrated Rice Management (IRM) in Inland Valleys of Sub-Saharan Africa: Facilitator's Manual. 184. Cotonou, Benin: Africa Rice Center.Google Scholar
Diagne, A., Amovin-Assagba, E., Futakuchi, K. and Wopereis, M. C. S. (2013). Estimation of cultivated area, number of farming households and yield for major rice-growing environments in Africa. In Realizing Africa's Rice Promise, 35–45 (Eds Wopereis, M. C. S., Johnson, D. E., Ahmadi, N., Tollens, E. and Jalloh, A.). Wallingford, Oxfordshire, UK: CAB International.Google Scholar
Dingkuhn, M., Jones, M. P., Johnson, D. E. and Sow, A. (1998). Growth and yield potential of Oryza sativa and O. glaberrima upland rice cultivars and their interspecific progenies. Field Crops Research 57:57–69.Google Scholar
Gongotchame, S., Dieng, I., Ahouanton, K., Johnson, J.-M., Alognon, A. D., Tanaka, A., Atta, S. and Saito, K. (2014). Participatory evaluation of mechanical weeders in lowland rice production systems in Benin. Crop Protection 61:32–37.Google Scholar
Guthiga, P. M., Karugia, J. T. and Nyikal, R. A. (2007). Does use of draft animal power increase economic efficiency of smallholder farms in Kenya? Renewable Agriculture and Food Systems 22(4):290–296.Google Scholar
Krupnik, T. J., Shennan, C., Settle, W. H., Demont, M., Ndiaye, A. B. and Rodenburg, J. (2012). Improving irrigated rice production in the Senegal River valley through experiential learning and innovation. Agricultural Systems 109:101–112.Google Scholar
Kuivanen, K. S., Alvarez, S., Michalscheck, M., Adjei-Nsiah, S., Descheemaeker, K., Mellon-Bedi, S. and Groot, J. C. (2016). Characterizing the diversity of smallholder farming systems and their constraints and opportunities for innovation: A case study from the northern region, Ghana. NJAS-Wageningen Journal of Life Sciences 78:153–166.Google Scholar
Lodin-Bergman, J., Paulson, S. and Mugenyi, M. S. (2012). New seeds, gender norms and labor dynamics in Hoima District, Uganda. Journal of Eastern African Studies 6:405–422.Google Scholar
Ndiiri, J. A., Mati, B. M., Home, P. G., Odongo, B. and Uphoff, N. (2013). Adoption, constraints and economic returns of paddy rice under the system of rice intensification in Mwea, Kenya. Agricultural Water Management 129:44–55.Google Scholar
Niang, A., Becker, M., Ewert, F., Dieng, I., Gaiser, T., Tanaka, A., Senthilkumar, K., Rodenburg, J., Johnson, J.-M., Akakpo, C., Segda, Z., Gbakatchetche, H., Jaiteh, F., Bam, R. K., Dogbe, W., Keita, S., Kamissoko, N., Mossi, I. M., Bakare, O. S., Cissé, M., Baggie, I., Ablede, K. A. and Saito, K. (2017). Variability and determinants of yields in rice production systems of West Africa. Field Crops Research 207:1–12.Google Scholar
Ogwuike, P., Rodenburg, J., Diagne, A., Agboh-Noameshie, R. and Amovin-Assagba, E. (2014). Weed management in upland rice in sub-Saharan Africa: Impact on labor and crop productivity. Food Security 6:327–337.Google Scholar
Ollenburger, M. H., Descheemaeker, K., Crane, T. A., Sanogo, O. M. and Giller, K. E. (2016). Waking the sleeping giant: Agricultural intensification, extensification or stagnation in Mali's Guinea Savannah. Agricultural Systems 148:58–70.Google Scholar
Rickman, J., Moreira, J., Gummert, M. and Wopereis, M. C. S. (2013). Mechanizing Africa's rice sector. In Realizing Africa's Rice Promise, 332–342 (Eds Wopereis, M. C. S., Johnson, D. E., Ahmadi, N., Tollens, E., Jalloh, A.). Wallingford, UK: CAB International.Google Scholar
Rodenburg, J. and Johnson, D. E. (2009). Weed management in rice-based cropping systems in Africa. Advances in Agronomy 103:149–218.Google Scholar
Rodenburg, J., Saito, K., Irakiza, R., Makokha, D. W., Onyuka, E. A. and Senthilkumar, K. (2015). Labor-saving weed technologies for lowland rice farmers in sub-Saharan Africa. Weed Technology 29:751–757.Google Scholar
Rodenburg, J., Saito, K., Kakai, R. G., Toure, A., Mariko, M. and Kiepe, P. (2009). Weed competitiveness of the lowland rice varieties of NERICA in the southern Guinea Savanna. Field Crops Research 114:411–418.Google Scholar
Saito, K. and Futakuchi, K. (2014). Improving estimation of weed suppressive ability of upland rice varieties using substitute weeds. Field Crops Research 162:1–5.Google Scholar
Saito, K., Nelson, A., Zwart, S., Niang, A., Sow, A., Yoshida, H. and Wopereis, M. C. S. (2013). Towards a better understanding of biophysical determinants of yield gaps and the potential for expansion of the rice area in Africa. In Realizing Africa's Rice Promise, 188–203 (Eds Wopereis, M. C. S., Johnson, D. E., Ahmadi, N., Tollens, E. and Jalloh, A.). Wallingford, UK: CAB International.Google Scholar
Saito, K., Sokei, Y. and Wopereis, M. C. S. (2012). Enhancing rice productivity in West Africa through genetic enhancement. Crop Science 52:484–493.Google Scholar
Senthilkumar, K., Bindraban, P. S., Thiyagarajan, T. M., de Ridder, N. and Giller, K. E. (2008). Modified rice cultivation in Tamil Nadu, India: Yield gains and farmers’ (lack of) acceptance. Agricultural Systems 98:82–94.Google Scholar
Sims, B. and Kienzle, J. (2016). Making mechanization accessible to smallholder farmers in Sub-Saharan Africa. Environments 3(2):11.Google Scholar
Snijders, T. A. B. and Bosker, R. J. (1999). Multilevel Analysis: An Introduction to Basic and Advanced Multilevel Modeling. London: Sage Publications.Google Scholar
Swanton, C. J. and Weise, S. F. (1991). Integrated weed management—The rationale and approach. Weed Technology 5(3):657–663.Google Scholar
Supplementary material: File

Johnson et al. supplementary material

Figure S1

Download Johnson et al. supplementary material(File)
File 514.1 KB
Supplementary material: File

Johnson et al. supplementary material

Table S1

Download Johnson et al. supplementary material(File)
File 14.1 KB
Supplementary material: File

Johnson et al. supplementary material

Table S2

Download Johnson et al. supplementary material(File)
File 15 KB
Supplementary material: File

Johnson et al. supplementary material

Table S3

Download Johnson et al. supplementary material(File)
File 18.3 KB
Supplementary material: File

Johnson et al. supplementary material

Table S4

Download Johnson et al. supplementary material(File)
File 12.8 KB