4.7 Article

Economic valuation of organic and clay-based soil amendments in small-scale agriculture in Lao PDR

期刊

FIELD CROPS RESEARCH
卷 149, 期 -, 页码 379-389

出版社

ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1016/j.fcr.2013.05.026

关键词

Economic returns; Livelihood; Payback periods; Smallholders; Soil amendments; Sustainability

类别

向作者/读者索取更多资源

At a farm level, economic returns are the single most important attributes that drive farmers to adopt agricultural technologies. This study was carried out at the Naphok and Veunkham villages, Lao PDR, to evaluate the yield response of a maize mono-cropping system to soil amendments and analyze the economic return of such interventions. The amendments were rice husk biochar, bentonite clay, compost, clay-manure compost, and rice husk biochar compost, in isolation and in various combinations. Over a period of two cropping seasons (2011-2012), the enhancement of maize yield due to soil amendments ranged from 0.77 to 3.79 t ha(-1) at Naphok and from 1.21 to 5.14 t ha(-1) at Veunkham, resulting in net revenues ranging from -794 to 841 and -331 to 1391 US$ ha(-1), respectively. Soils amended with low-cost amendments such as compost, rice husk biochar, rice husk biochar compost, and clay-manure compost were economically viable within the first cropping season. In contrast, soils amended with higher-cost amendments such as bentonite clay requires up to five years to be economically viable. Such variations indicate that taking into account maize yield revenues only does not provide sufficient incentives to farmers to adopt higher-cost soil amendments. We conclude that there is a possibility to sustainably increase agricultural productivity and improve the income of smallholders using locally available low-cost soil amendments. Our findings provide important information for decision makers to promote the adoption of low-cost soil amendments, and, thereby, to contribute to productivity growth and food security through sustainable intensification. (C) 2013 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据