EFFECT OF SELECTED INSECTICIDE ON WHITEFLY (Bemisia tabaci) INFESTING BRINJAL PLANTS © 2015 Asian Economic and Social Society. All rights reserved ISSN(P): 2304-1455/ ISSN(E): 2224-4433 Volume 5(9), 202-217 202 COMPARING THE COSTS AND BENEFITS OF FLOATING RICE-BASED AND INTENSIVE RICE-BASED FARMING SYSTEMS IN THE MEKONG DELTA Van Kien Nguyen Director; Research Centre for Rural Development, An Giang University, Vietnam & Research Fellow; Luc Hoffmann Institute, Australian National University, Australia Oc Van Vo and Duc Ngoc Huynh Research Centre for Rural Development, An Giang University, Vietnam Abstract 1 This paper compares financial costs and benefits of floating rice-based and intensive rice farming systems using data from focus group discussions and household survey in four locations in the Mekong Delta. We argue that the net financial benefit per 1000m 2 of integrated floating rice-based farming systems is greater than the net financial benefit of intensive rice farming system. The total net benefit of floating rice-leeks shows the highest net benefit (VND 24.8 mil./1000 m 2 ), followed by floating rice-sweet corn- two baby corn crops and cattle systems (VND 18.5 mil./1000m 2 ), and floating rice-chili (VND 16.7-17.7 mil./1000m 2 ). If farmers cultivate monoculture of rice either two or three crops, the net benefits are ranging from VND 2.2-4.8 mil./1000m 2 respectively. Alternatively, farmers integrate vegetables; the net benefit was ranging from VND 5.6 to 11.7 mil./1000m 2 . The net benefit of the two rice crops is lowest (VND 1.3-2.3 mil./1000m 2 ). Surprisingly, if farmers convert from two intensive rice crops to two maize crops, the net benefit can reach to VND 21 million/1000m 2 . The results support the argument that the floating rice based systems allows farmers diversified into profitable upland crops, which can help farmers to improve their total income. Keywords: Financial cost, floating rice-based, Mekong Delta 1. INTRODUCTION As recently as the 1990s, nine million hectares of floating rice were cultivated in the river lower basins of the Ganges-Brahmaputra of India and Bangladesh, the Irrawaddy of Myanmar, the Mekong of Vietnam and Cambodia, and the Chao Phraya of Thailand (Catling, 1992). At that time it was a key source of nutrition for more than 100 million people in Asia, also West Africa (Kende et al., 1998). It was grown in areas which flooded to depths of 50 cm for a month or longer each year (Catling, 1992). It has extreme elongation capacity which can grow at rates of 20 to 25 cm/d when partially submerged and can reach the lengths of up to 7 m in water depths up to 4 m (Kende et al., 1998). Its yield was relatively low (average 2.0 tons/ha), it was grown largely without the addition of chemicals, but it had high nutritional value. Corresponding author’s Name: Van Kien Nguyen Email address: nv.kien@anu.edu.au Asian Journal of Agriculture and Rural Development journal homepage: http://aessweb.com/journal-detail.php?id=5005 mailto:nv.kien@anu.edu.au Asian Journal of Agriculture and Rural Development, 5(9)2015: 202-217 203 During the pre-colonial period, in the Nguyen Dynasty (18 th century) floating rice was grown in the Vietnamese Mekong delta (Quadrangle and Plains of Reeds). Floating rice varieties were a source of high quality dietary nutrition for people living in the Mekong Delta. During colonial period (1858-1954), people harvested floating rice, fished and hunted wild animals for their home consumption (Biggs, 2003). Prior to 1975, the total area of cultivated floating rice in the Mekong Delta was estimated at over 0.5 million ha, of which 50% (0.25 million ha) was grown An Giang province (Nguyễn, 1994; Võ and Matsui, 1998; Biggs et al., 2009) (figure 1). Between 1975 and 1994 cultivated floating rice areas have reduced signficantly (up to 80%) due to the Vietnamese Doi Moi policy, an export-oriented policy involving irrigation improvement based on rapid canal excavation to efficiently supply water in support of short term high yield rice intensification (Karonen, 2008). Nowadays much of these areas are given over to modern varieties which are grown inside dike compartments protected from flood water by high walls and required water, energy and irrigation systems. In An Giang province only, around 67 ha of floating rice was grown in Vinh Phuoc and Luong An Tra communes of Tri Ton district in 2012, where short term high yield rice variety are not suitable because of the presence of strongly acid soils (Nguyen et al., 2013). The reason for the rapid reduction in floating rice area was low yields and long growth period which encourage its replacement by short term high yield rice. Recently, dikes were built for intensification of rice in the Mekong delta to narrow channels for natural flood retention and reducing areas for floating rice (Nguyen, 2014). Figure 1: Planted areas of floating rice in 1960s Adapted from: Brocheux, (1995) Asian Journal of Agriculture and Rural Development, 5(9)2015: 202-217 204 The growth of rice initially depends on rainwater, providing moisture until flooding occurs in mid- August. The flood water level usually rises gradually, and the rice plants follow the rising water through stem elongation. When the water level recedes in November (lunar calendar), the rice plants lay flat on the ground and the flower during May to December following lunar cycles in lunar calendar. According to a group of floating rice growers, each rice plant can produce around four tillerrs each with two or three panicles (personal communication with farmers in Vinh Phuoc commune, Jan 2013). After harvesting floating rice in early January, farmers rotate one or two crops of upland crops such as cassava, chili, pumpkin, eggplant, leek, cucumber, maize or taro. Some farmers rotate only one cassava crop, but other can grow one chili crop and egg plant. In contrast, the growth of short term high yield rice is about 100 or 110 days. Farmers can grow up to three crops of rice a year. Mono rice farming can be seen more than 30 years in some regions of the Mekong Delta. In An Giang province, the period of rapid conversion from one crop floating rice to two crops of high yield rice occurred during 1990s, three crops of rice from 2000 up to present. In 1990, the land area for paddy was 325,000 ha but this area was 641,000 ha in 2013 because farmers shifted from one traditional rice crop to three crops of intensive rice a year. However, the mono intensive rice crops provide less profitability and diversity of income sources from small scale farmers. This paper will compare financial costs and benefits of some floating rice based farming systems in the Mekong Delta to argue for recovery of the floating rice-based farming systems will provide better income for farmers. 2. DESCRIPTION OF RESEARCH SITES 2.1. Vinh Phuoc and Luong an Tra communes – Tri Ton district of an Giang province Vinh Phuoc commune has 5,437 ha of natural land in 2013. Of which 4,669 ha (85.8%) are used for agriculture. The commune is located in the strongest acid soil areas of Long Xuyen-ha Tien Quadrangle of the Mekong Delta (Figure 2). Although the agricultural land is relatively larger than the average land size of the other communes in An Giang province, most of the lands (66.9%) are occupied by people in other communes [xâm canh]. The total cultivated rice land per year was 11,200 ha because some farmers cultivate up to 2 to 3 crops of rice using intensive high dikes, making up a total rice 2 production of 57,000 tons a year. Before 2000, floating rice was the crop mostly cultivated in this commune. However, it was replaced by short term high yield rice crops rapidly. In 2012, there were only 31.10 ha of floating rice with 10 farmers cultivating it. The average land size of this farmer group is 3.01 ha. Some farmers grew more than 01 ha of the floating rice while the other farmers cultivated up to 05 ha of floating rice. The floating rice is grown from June to December [during the flood season] each year in this village. After harvesting the floating rice, farmers rotate cassava, leeks, pumpkins, or chili on the same land from January to May, then the floating rice is rotated on the same land in this village. Similarly, there were 07 farmers growing floating rice in neighboring commune, Luong An Tra. The average land size is 4.5 ha. Some farmers own up to 10 ha, while the smallest farm size is 3.0 ha. These farmers grew floating rice and rotated by cassava in all of their lands. 2.2. My an commune – Cho Moi district of an Giang province Agricultural activities are very diversified in My An commune. The commune has 1,286 ha of natural land which is located in the Cho Moi district, between the Bassac and Hau Rivers (Figure 2). There are 954 ha of agricultural land, but only 317 ha are used for rice cultivation, mainly three intensive rice crops a year using high dikes which were built in 2002. The commune is much 2 This information refers to short term high yield rice which does not include production of floating rice Asian Journal of Agriculture and Rural Development, 5(9)2015: 202-217 205 diversified in agricultural activities by integrating cattle, and baby corn crops. In 2014, the commune has 3,778 cattle and nearly half of the areas are under upland crop cultivation. The My Loi is one of six hamlets of the my an commune which has 702 households, but less than one third (202/702 households) own agricultural lands. Over 200 households are landless whose livelihoods are relying on non-farm hired labor, handicrafts in the village and migration to Binh Duong city for work as laborers. The hamlet has 46.18 ha of upland crops and 69.81 ha of artificial bushes. Some 46.18 ha of the agricultural lands in My Loi commune are used for cultivating floating rice integrated with sweet corn, two baby corn crops and rearing cattle. It means that the natural flood events continue in this hamlet because the village dose not built high dikes. The largest land size is one ha for the households; most of them (202 households) own less than one ha of agricultural lands. Farmers have diversified into cattle rearing in recent years. The number of cattle in the hamlet has increased significantly since 2003 by integrating with baby corn production. At the present, there are 400 cattle rearing in the hamlet. 2.3. Tan long commune – Thanh Binh district of Dong Thap province Tan Long commune is located on the fertile soils nearby the Bassac River, in Thanh Binh district of Dong Thap province (Figure 2). In 2014, the commune had 4,107 households and 535 ha of rice lands, which were cultivated in three crops of winter-spring, summer-autumn and autumn-winter using high dikes. There are 362 ha of upland crops which are grown in winter –spring and summer- autumn seasons. Some 45 ha of agricultural lands are cultivated for maize, chili and mung bean on the floating rice-based lands. In 2014, 33.57 ha of floating rice (involving 52 households) were cultivated, while some of them did not grow it during the flood season (Tan Long People's Committee, 2014). The average land size of the floating rice farmers is 0.6 ha per household (min 0.2, max 1.56 ha). Floating rice farmers have continuously grown this crop for several decades. 2.4. My Phu and Thanh My Tay communes – Chau Phu district of an Giang province My Phu and Thanh My Tay communes are located in Chau Phu district of An Giang province (Figure 2). Before 1990, more than 25,000 ha of floating rice were cultivated in this district. During 1990s, the intensification of rice program has been introduced to replace by short term high yield rice. The district has 45,100 ha of natural land, comprising 39,774 ha of agricultural land. Of which, 37,900 ha of land are used for intensive rice farming. The district has 12 communes and one town. Thanh My Tay has 3,565 ha, of which 3,165 ha are using for rice intensification. Similarly, My Phu commune has 3,646 ha of natural lands, but almost 3,027 ha of lands are using for rice intensification. More than 60% of the total rice lands are used for cultivating three crops of rice using high dikes, while the remaining land areas are growing two crops of rice a year with low dikes. Since after 1990, rice has almost been a mono crop in this district. Asian Journal of Agriculture and Rural Development, 5(9)2015: 202-217 206 Figure 2: Research sites [floating rice areas] in the Mekong River Delta Source: Pham (2015) 3. RESEARCH METHODS Focus group discussion, in-depth interviews, household survey and field observations are the key techniques for this research. In each commune, we carried out from two to three focus groups discussions which includes from six to eight participants. All detailed financial costs and benefits of each farming activity were identified by group discussions. The production costs and benefits were quantified by local prices of the materials and outputs. For the net benefits, we used the farm gate to quantify the total benefit. In Vinh Phuoc and Luong An Tra communes, we carried out three focus group discussions with floating rice farmers, who grow cassava, chili and leeks separately. In My An commune, we carried out three focus groups discussions with the intensive short term high yield farmer group, and with the floating rice farmers who grow sweet corn, baby corns, and with the cattle rearing group. In Tan Long commune, we carried out two focus group discussions with floating rice farmer group who grow chili and rearing cattle. In Thanh My Tay and My Phu commune, we conducted three focus group discussions with farmers who grow two rice crops a year, those who integrate maize, mung bean, and those who rear cattle. Each focus group discussion included about eight participants. Also we carried a household survey with intensive rice farming (two crops a year) in both My Phu (16 samples) and Thanh My Tay (22 samples) communes of Chau Phu district. Also we carried out in-depth interviews with key informants (five people) in each research site, who are knowledgeable about farming system, and the history of farming in the village, and who are used to cultivating floating rice in the past and current cultivating floating rice and intensive rice crops. Asian Journal of Agriculture and Rural Development, 5(9)2015: 202-217 207 4. RESULTS AND DISCUSSIONS 4.1. Seasonal calendar for farming systems in four study sites in the Mekong Delta Traditionally, several upland crops have been cultivated in the same paddy fields after harvesting the floating rice crop. From 1986 to 1988 the Cuu Long Rice Research institute had an intensive research program for faming systems in Chau Phu district of An Giang province, Hon Dat district of Kien Giang province, and Co Do district of Hau Giang province in the Mekong Delta. Farmers grew several crops including sesame, soybean, mung bean, cucumbers, and pumpkin, etc., as part of the rice farming system (Nguyen and Dang, 1987). In the existing floating rice based farming systems, farmers rotate sticky corn, baby corn, chili, or cassava on the same land after harvesting the floating rice in December. Some farmers then grow three crops of corn. Others cultivate one chili crop and one short term leaf vegetables, or one cassava crop. Comparing to high yield intensive rice crops, floating rice farmers are more diversified in their farming activities involving upland crops. Also each family can rear up to 4 or 5 cattle using by-product from baby corn. The seasonal calendar of these crops can be seen in Table 1. Table 1: Seasonal calendar of floating rice-based farming systems Locations Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Dry months Flood months Vinh Phuoc [Tri Ton district] Leeks Chilly + pumpkin Floating rice Cassava Floating rice Tan Long [Thanh Binh district] Chilli Floating rice Rearing Cattle My An [Cho Moi district] Sticky corn Baby corns Baby corns Floating rice Rearing cattle ---------------rice--------------------------rice----------------------------rice----------------- Thanh My Tay and My Phu communes- Chau Phu district --------------Rice------------------------ ----|--------FLOOD---------------------| Rice---- 4.2. Cost-benefit analysis of floating rice-based farming systems This section presents the comparison of costs and benefits of several typical farming systems with the traditional floating rice based farming systems in the Mekong Delta. 4.3. Cost-benefit analysis of cultivating a floating rice crop in three locations Although the yield of floating rice is quite low in Vinh Phuoc commune (200-250 kg/1000 m 2 ), the net benefit of the floating rice crop is VND 3 1.2 -2.0 million/1000 m 2 . However the production cost is relatively low (VND 630,000 /1000 m 2 ) which requires less capital investment compared to the system of two or three short term intensive rice crops produced in Vietnam Mekong Delta. 3 One USD is equivalent to VND 21,500 in January 2015 Asian Journal of Agriculture and Rural Development, 5(9)2015: 202-217 208 In My An and Tan Long communes 4 , the soil is more fertile due to annual deposited sediment, where floating rice farmers can earn a net benefit of VND 3.0 million/1000 m 2 at the farm gate price of VND 10,000 /kg because the yield is much better than in acid soil areas (300 kg/1000 m 2 ) (Table 2). The total production cost of the floating rice crop is estimated at VND 625,000 /1000 m 2 . Here farmers tended to sell floating rice to local consumers in better-off social groups, who prefer to eat safe rice (no pesticide is applied to floating rice). The benefit cost ratio of the floating rice in My An is highest (3.93) because the yield is better than in Tan Long and Vinh Phuoc communes. The yield of floating rice is lowest in Vinh Phuoc due to the strongest acid sulphate soil and rat damage in the 2013 crop. Table 2: Cost-benefit analysis for floating rice crop in My An, Tan Long and Vinh Phuoc communes Indicators My An Commune Cho Moi district Tan Long Commune Thanh Binh district Vinh Phuoc Commune Tri Ton district Total costs (VND 1000 /1000 m 2 ) 670 596 630 Yields (kg/1000 m 2 ) 300 240 187 Farm gate price (VND 1000/kg) 10 10 10 By-products sold (VND1000/1000 m 2 ) 300 154 00 Total Benefits (VND 1000 /1000 m 2 ) 3,300 2,554 1,875 Net benefit (VND 1000/1000 m 2 ) 2,630 1,957 1,245 BCR 3.93 3.28 1.98 Source: Focus group discussions (FGDs) with farmers in Tan Long and my an communes in December 2014 and with farmers in Vinh Phuoc commune in March 2014. Eight participants attended each FGD 4.4. Economic analysis of upland crops on the floating rice-based lands Several upland crops are also grown in the dry season in the same land unit such as cassava, leeks, egg plants, pumpkin and chilies, baby corn, sweet corn and crop production is integrated with cattle rearing in the study sites. Cassava production in Vinh Phuoc commune is the most important cultivated upland crop in the dry season because this system requires less financial investment and is suitable for acid sulphate soil. The net financial benefit of cassava is VND 3.8 million/1000 m 2 , according to the price at the farm gate in July 2013 (Table 3). Leek is a crop with high benefit, but it requires high investment (VND 13.4 million/1000 m 2) and specialist knowledge, so few farmers grow leeks. The net benefit for leek is VND 24.3 million/1,000 m 2 . Chili is highly suitable for this soil in Vinh Phuoc commune, after floating rice has been harvested, as it brings a net benefit of VND 16,500,000/1,000 m 2 (Nguyen et al., 2013). Chili shows the highest BCR (2.75) because the investment cost is lower than leek. The net benefit for pumpkin is VND 4,850,000/1000m 2 , according to the farm gate price in March 2013. Table 3: Cost-benefit of the floating rice-based farming systems in Vinh Phuoc commune of Tri Ton district Indicators Floating rice Cassava Leeks Chili Total cost (VND1000/1000m 2 ) 630 1,820 14,157 6,000 Total benefit (VND1000/1000m 2 ) 1,875 5,000 37,807 22,500 Net benefit (VND1000/1000m 2 ) 1,245 3,180 23,650 16,500 BCR 1.98 1.74 1.67 2.75 Source: Focus group discussions with three floating rice based farmer groups in Vinh Phuoc commune in January 2013 In Thanh Binh district, after harvesting floating rice in November (earlier than in Tri Ton), farmers rotate a profitable chili crop and leaf vegetables. Some farmers use by-products of young corns for 4 The findings of this calculation is based on Focus Group discussion with 10 floating rice farmers in Cho Moi and 9 floating farmers in Thanh Binh district in December 2014 Asian Journal of Agriculture and Rural Development, 5(9)2015: 202-217 209 cattle rearing. The chili crop in Tan Long is perceived the most profitable (Table 4). The total production cost of the chilly crop is at VND 14.4 million, while the total benefit is ranging from VND 8.5 to 28.8 million which is fluctuated by the yields of 1.8 to 4.0 tons/1000 m 2 . The net benefit ranges from VND 6.0 million to 31.0 million, at farm gate price of VND 15,000/kg. The common net benefit is VND 14.4 million/1000m 2 . Yield also varies from 1.3 to 3.0 tons/1000m 2 . If farmers rear an additional cow, they would earn a net of 17.5-40.2 VND million/1000 m 2 . Table 4: Cost-benefit of the floating rice-based, chilli farming systems in Tan Long commune of Thanh Binh district Indicators Floating rice Chili Total cost (VND1000/1000m 2 ) 598 14,407 Total benefit (VND1000/1000m 2 ) 2,924 28,845 Net benefit (VND1000/1000m 2 ) 2,326 14,437 BCR 3.89 1.00 Source: FGD in Tan Long commune, 8 farmers participated in this FGD in December 2014. The lowest net benefit is VND 6.0 million, while the highest net benefit is VND 31.5 million On the other hand, farmers in Cho Moi district rotate one sweet corn crop followed by two baby corn crops and rearing cattle. The net benefit for the sweet corn is estimated at VND 4.0 – 5.0 million/1000 m 2 depending the fluctuation of the market (Table 5). With two baby corn crops, floating rice farmers can earn a net benefit of VND 3.2 to 4.0 million/1000 m 2 depending on the yield/1000m 2 . The total net benefit for production systems of floating rice-sweet corn, and two baby corn crops ranges from 10.2 to VND 12.0 million/1000 m 2 . If farmers rear cattle for selling meat using the by-product from baby corn (leaf, stems and bark), a net benefit per head of cattle aged 10-12 months is estimated at VND 6.0 – 10.0 million/10-12 months. As a result, the total net benefit of the system can reach to VND 16.2-22.0 /million/1000 m 2 /year. Cattle show the lowest BCR because the investment cost is relatively high. The floating rice shows highest BCR because the cost of production is very low comparing its benefit. Table 5: Cost-benefit of the floating rice-based farming systems in My An commune of Cho Moi district Indicators Floating rice Sweet corn Baby corn 5 Cattle* Total cost (VND1000/1000m 2 ) 670 2,275 2,965 22,467 Total benefit (VND1000/1000m 2 ) 3,300 7,500 4,550 30,000 Net benefit (VND1000/1000m 2 ) 2,630 5,225 1,585 7,532 BCR 3.93 2.30 0.53 0.25 *cost and benefit analysis is made for one cattle. Most household rears at least 3 cattle 4.5. The economic analysis of intensive rice farming systems- comparing with the floating rice crop In contrast, the net benefit for the winter-spring and summer-autumn high yielding rice crop in Vinh Phuoc commune (acid soil) is 0.9 VND and 0.0 million/1,000 m 2 respectively (Nguyen et al., 2013). When growing two crops of rice per year, the total costs for the summer-autumn high yielding rice crop are relatively high, so less profit is made by farmers. Floating rice-based farming systems in Vinh Phuoc commune has a relatively high benefit in comparison with intensively growing two short term crops of rice because the production costs are high and the benefit is low due to low price and yields. In Chau Phu district, for the first winter-spring high yielding rice crop, the total costs are estimated at VND 2.2 million/1000m 2 (Table 6). With the average yield of 800 kg/1000 m 2 , and the farm gate price at VND 4,600 /kg in March 2014, the total benefit is estimated at VND 3.6 million/1000 m 2 . 5 Farmers can grow two baby corn crops continuously. Each crop lasts for totally 55 days Asian Journal of Agriculture and Rural Development, 5(9)2015: 202-217 210 After subtracting the costs, the net benefit is VND 1.4 million/1000 m 2 for the winter-spring crop [short term high yield crop] which is less than the net benefit of the floating rice crop in Vinh Phuoc commune of Tri Ton district, My An commune of Choi Moi and Tan Long commune of Thanh Binh districts (VND 1.4 million/1000 m 2 compared to VND 1.5-3.0 million/1000 m 2 ). For the second summer-autumn rice crop, the total cost is VND 2.5 million/1000 m 2 , while the total benefit is 2.5 VND million/1000 m 2 due to low yield in the summer-autumn crop (600 kg/1000 m 2 ), and lower farm gate price (VND 4,200 /kg of rice). Table 6: Costs-benefits of a two short term high yield rice crop systems in Chau Phu district of An Giang province, 2014 Indicators My Phu – Chau Phu Thanh My Tay – Chau Phu Winter- spring Summer- Autumn Winter- spring Summer- Autumn Total costs (VND 1000/1000 m 2 ) 2,245 2,573 1,716 1,732 Yields (kg/1000 m 2 ) 800 600 1,000 577 Farm gate price (VND/kg) 4,600 4,200 3,500 3,800 Total return (VND 1000 /1000 m 2 ) 3,680 2,520 3,500 2,192 Net return (VND 1000 /1000 m 2 ) 1,435 - 53 1,783 460 BCR 0.64 - 0.02 1.04 0.27 Source: Household survey conducted in My Phu (22 samples) and Thanh My Tay (16 samples) communes, December 2014 Table 7 shows if farmers shift from one short term rice crop in Chau Phu district to maize and mung bean or double maize crops a year, the net benefits range from VND 11.0 to 21.0 million/1000 m 2 , with the BCR of 1.07 to 1.75. However, the number of farmers cultivating these crops is very small, just under five farmers in the two communes for each crop because the market is not attractive. Table 7: Costs – benefits of upland crops (maize, mung bean, and pumpkin) in Chau Phu, An Giang, 2014 Indicators Maize Mung bean Pumpkin Total costs (VND 1000/1000 m 2 ) 5,993 4,360 4,560 Total Benefits (VND 1000/1000 m 2 ) 16,500 4,900 7,700 Net Benefit (VND 1000/1000 m 2 ) 10,507 540 3,140 B/C 1.75 0.12 0.69 Source: Focus group discussions with farmers in My Phu and Thanh My Tay communes in December 2014. Eight farmers involved in each FGD 4.6. Cost-benefit analysis of intensive short-term rice farming systems [three crops of rice a year] Data from a focus group discussion with 8 key farmers in My An commune of Cho Moi district where high dikes were completely installed in 2004 for rice intensification, shows that the total cost of the first winter-spring [Dong Xuan] crop is estimated at VND 2.3 million/1000 m 2 , while the benefit is only 3.2 VND million/1000 m 2 , at the farm gate price of VND 5,300 /kg and the yield of 612 kg/1000 m 2 . The net benefit is only VND 931,100 /1000 m 2 , with a BCR of 0.39 (Table 9). The net benefit of the summer autumn crop [He Thu] is negative (VND-508,800 /1000 m 2 ) because the yield is low (441 kg/1000 m 2 ), and the low farm gate price of (VND 4,700 /kg). The total cost of the summer-autumn crop is relatively higher than the winter-spring crop (VND 2.5 million/1000 m 2 ) (Table 9). The reason for the higher cost is additional use of chemical fertilizers and pesticides and the lowest yield for the second crop. Asian Journal of Agriculture and Rural Development, 5(9)2015: 202-217 211 The autumn-winter crop [Thu–Dong] is grown during the flood season from August to November each year). The third crop was introduced after the high dikes were installed in 2004. The net return of the third crop is reported as positive, but the figure is relative small (VND 218,500 /1000 m 2 ), as the yield is low (500kg/1000 m 2 ), and the farm gate price is much better than the summer-autumn crop (VND 5,300 /kg) while the total cost is a less than that of the winter-spring’s crop (VND 2.4 million /1000 m 2 ) (Table 8). Table 8: Cost and benefit analysis of intensive rice farming systems in Cho Moi district Indicators Winter-spring crop 6 Summer- autumn crop 7 Autumn-winter crop 8 Yields (kg/1000 m 2 ) 612 441 500 Farm gate price (VND/kg) 5,300 4,700 5,300 Total cost (VND 1000/1000 m 2 ) 2,312 2,581 2,431 Total benefits (VND 1000/1000 m 2 ) 3,243 2,072 2,650 Net benefit (VND 1000 /1000 m 2 ) 931 -508 218 BCR 0.39 -0.19 0.08 Source: FGDs with 8 farmers in Cho Moi district, My An commune 4.7. Cost-benefit comparison of floating rice-based and intensive rice farming systems If the comparison between floating rice-based farming systems is made with the intensive three crops of rice per year, it the data show that the net benefit from three crops per year is relatively lower. If farmers grow three crops of rice in Chau Phu district, the net benefit is VND 4.8 million/1000m 2 /year, while the BCR is 0.71 (Table 9). If farmers cultivate only two short term rice crops a year, the net return is VND 2.2 million/1000 m2/year. However, if farmers grow two rice crops and one sesbania sesban [bông điên điển] crop or one chili crop in Chau Phu district, the total net return are VND 5.6 and 6.7 million/1000 m 2 respectively, with the BCR 0.8 and 0.5. However, if farmers grow only two rice crops a year, the net returns are the lowest (from VND 1.3 to 2.2 million/1000 m2, with the lowest BCR of 0.29 and 0.56 respectively) (Table 9). If farmers grow two short term rice crops and rear additional cattle, the BCR of the farming system reduces as the BCR for cattle is very low (Table 9). Table 9: Net benefit and BCR for intensive rice farming in Chau Phu district Locations Systems Net Benefit (VND1000/1000 m 2 ) B/C Chau Phu district-An Giang 9 Winter-Spring rice Summer – Autumn rice Autumn -Winter rice 4,827 0.71 Winter –Spring rice Summer-Autumn rice 2,243 0.65 Winter-Spring rice Summer –autumn rice – one cattle* 10,701 0.35 6 This is called the first crop 7 This is called the second crop 8 This is called the third crop 9 Secondary data analysis was collected from Chau Phu Sub Department of Agriculture and Rural Development in 2013 crops *cost-benefit analysis was carried out at the unit of one cattle Asian Journal of Agriculture and Rural Development, 5(9)2015: 202-217 212 Thanh My Tay-Chau Phu district Chili – 1 cattle* 11,761 0.31 Chili – Sesbania sesban 6,716 0.50 Winter –Spring rice Summer-Autumn rice Sesbania sesban 5,656 0.81 My Phu-Chau Phu district Winter –Spring rice Summer-Autumn rice 1,382 0.29 Winter –Spring rice Summer-Autumn rice 1 cattle* 8,015 0.28 Maize – mung bean 11,047 1.07 Mung bean – pumpkin – Autumn-Winter rice 3,627 0.32 Maize – Maize 21,014 1.75 Note: Synthesis from partial analysis More interestingly, if farmers grow floating rice plus cassava or leeks in Vinh Phuoc commune or chili or sweet corn and baby corn crops in My An commune, the BCR is improved greatly (Table 11). The system of floating rice rotated by leeks in Vinh Phuoc commune shows the greatest net benefit (VND 24.8 million/1000m 2 , the BCR of 1.68, followed by floating rice rotated by chili (net benefits of VND 16.7 to 17.7 million/1000m 2 , with the BCR of 1.1 to 2.6). The system of floating rice – cassava in Vinh Phuoc commune shows the second highest the BCR (1.81), but the net return is VND 4.4 million/1000 m 2 , due to smaller investments and smaller benefits. The system of floating rice-sweet corn - baby corn - baby corn shows a relatively high the BCR of 1.2 and high net benefit of 11.0 VND million/1000 m 2 . Table 10: Net benefit and BCR for intensive rice farming in Tri Ton, Cho Moi and Thanh Binh districts Locations Systems Net Benefit (VND1000/1000 m 2 ) B/C Vinh Phuoc- Tri Ton district One floating rice – cassava 4,425 1.81 One floating rice – leeks 24,895 1.68 One floating rice - chili 17,745 2.68 Tan Long- Thanh Binh district One floating rice - chili 16,763 1.12 My An-Cho Moi district Floating rice – green sticky corn – bay corn – baby corn – 1 cattle* 18,557 0.48 Floating rice – green sticky corn – bay corn – baby corn 11,025 1.24 Source: Focus group discussions (FGD) with farmers Vinh Phuoc commune of Tri Ton district, My An commune of Cho Moi district, and Tan Long commune of Thanh Binh district in December 2014. Eight participants involved in each FGD 5. CONCLUSIONS Floating rice based farming systems declined after the introduction of high yielding rice varieties and use of high dike systems in the Mekong Delta. Floating rice produces low yields, but provides good opportunities for diversifying into profitable upland crops when used in combination with rearing cattle. Financial benefits of several combinations of floating rice-based farming systems can provide greater financial benefits than other intensive high yielding rice crops in the Mekong Delta because intensive rice crops involve high production costs, but provide less income for farmers. Farmers can even diversify their cropping systems in the same floating rice-based land area for Asian Journal of Agriculture and Rural Development, 5(9)2015: 202-217 213 many crops and cattle year round. In particular, there are opportunities for expanding the floating rice based systems in deeply flooded areas where construction of dikes is not feasible. Secondly, the floating rice is very suitable for acid soils so this system is potential for strongest flooded acid soils in the Plains of Reeds and Long Xuyen Quadrangle. In the islands between the branches of the Mekong River, it is possible to develop this farming system to adapt to floods, while maximizing the benefits from rice straw for feeding animals and additional upland crops. There is a sign that farmers in Luong An Tra commune of Tri Ton district, My Phu commune of Chau Phu district and Hong Ngu town of Dong Thap province, are likely to return to floating rice–based farming systems in 2014 in the Mekong Delta. It is important to maintain and expand this area for sustainable agriculture. Finally, a further advantage of this floating rice-based farming system is that it presents an alternative option that obviates the need to build dikes in the Mekong Delta. Acknowledgement I would like to thank SFRT (Seed Fund for Research and Training) under SEARCA to offer this research. I also would like to thank the Research Centre for Rural Development to support a small grant to evaluate the feasibility of floating rice recovery in Chau Phu district. The results of this research are totally using information collected during 2014 and early 2015 from both research projects. I like to give special thanks to Dr Kim Alexander, adjunct senior research fellow James Cook University, Professor Eric Creswell, the visiting fellow from the Australian National University for initial English editing of the paper and Ms Julie Watson, academic skills advisor at ANU Fenner School of Environment and Society. I would like to thank my colleagues, Mr Le Thanh Phong, Mr Truong Ngoc Thuy, Mr Dang Minh Man, and Ms Tran Thi Thuan at Research Centre for Rural Development of An Giang University for data collection and input. I give special thanks to Vinh Phuoc people’s committee, my an people’s committee and Tan Long people’s committee, My Phu and Thanh My Tay people’s committee for great support. Views and opinions expressed in this study are the views and opinions of the authors, Asian Journal of Agriculture and Rural Development shall not be responsible or answerable for any loss, damage or liability etc. caused in relation to/arising out of the use of the content. References Biggs, D. (2003). Problematic Progress: Reading environmental and social change in the Mekong Delta. Journal of Southeast Asian Studies, 34, 77-96. Biggs, D., Miller, F., Chu, T. H., & Molle, F. (2009). The Delta Machine: Water management in the vietnamese Mekong Delta in historical and contemporary perspectives. In: Molle, F., Foran, T., & Karonen, M. (eds.) Contested waterscapes in the Mekong Region. London: Earthscan. Brocheux, P. (1995). The Mekong Delta: Ecology, economy and revolution USA. Madison WI: Center for Southeast Asian Studies, University of Wisconsin-Madison. Catling, D. (1992). Rice in deep water, London. The Macmillan Press Ltd. Karonen, M. (2008). Mekong Delta at the crossroads: More control or adaptation. Ambio, 37, 205- 212. Kende, H., Knaap, E. V. D., & Cho, H. T. (1998). Deepwater rice: A model plant to study stem elongation. Plant Physiol, 118, 1105-1110. Nguyễn, H. C. (1994). Former and present cropping patterns in the Mekong Delta. Southeast Asian Studies, 31, 345-384. Nguyen, M. C., & Dang, K. S. (1987). Hệ thống canh tác lúa nổi đồng bằng sông cửu long (Farming systesm of floating rice in the Mekong Delta). Ho Chi Minh, Ho Chi Minh City. Nguyen, V. K. (2014). An Economic evaluation of flood dike construction in the Mekong Delta: cost-benefit analysis of flood protection dike construction in an Giang province. Lamber Academic Publishing. Asian Journal of Agriculture and Rural Development, 5(9)2015: 202-217 214 Nguyen, V. K., Pham, X. P., Huynh, N. D., Pham, H. T. V., Dang, T. T. Q., Tran, V. H., & Nguyen, V. T. (2013). Technical report for GIZ on Assessment of current status of conservation and cultivation of floating rice – upland vegetables systems in Vinh Phuoc commune, Tri Ton district of an Giang province, Vietnam. Long Xuyen: Research Centre for Rural Development - an Giang University. Pham, D. T. (2015). Map of research sites in the Mekong Delta. Long Xuyen: An Giang University. Tan Long People's Committee (2014). Annual report of socio-economic development of the commune in 2014. Võ, T. X., & Matsui, S. (eds.) (1998). Development of farming systems in the Mekong Delta of Vietnam. Ho Chi Minh City: Ho Chi Minh City Publishing House. Asian Journal of Agriculture and Rural Development, 5(9)2015: 202-217 215 Appendixes 1: Cost-benefit analysis of floating rice crop in my an commune of Cho Moi district Indicators Unit Quantity Price Total costs land preparation VND/1000 m2 1 180,000 180,000 Seeds kg/1000 m2 10 10,000 100,000 Weeding VND/1000 m2 1 40,000 40,000 Harvesting (sickle) VND/1000 m2 1 200,000 200,000 Fertilizer VND/1000 m2 5 1,000 5,000 Threshing VND/1000 m2 1 100,000 100,000 Total costs 625,000 Yield 1 300 10,000 3,000,000 Yield 2 320 10,000 3,200,000 Yield 3 340 10,000 3,400,000 Net benefit 1 2,375,000 Net benefit 2 2,575,000 Net benefit 3 2,775,000 Note: FGDs with 8 farmers in my an commune of Cho Moi district, in January 2015 2: Cost-benefit analysis for one baby corn crop in my an commune of Cho Moi district Indicators Unit Quantity Price (VND/1000m 2 ) Total cost (VND/1000m 2 ) land preparation time 1 180,000 180,000 Seeds kg 2 150,000 300,000 Fertilizer bag (50kg) 1 420,000 420,000 DAP kg 5 - Ure kg 20 - NPK kg 25 - Irrigation days of labor 10 100,000 1,000,000 Harvesting days of labor 10 100,000 1,000,000 Pesticides bottle 1 25,000 25,000 Total costs 2,925,000 Yield 1 (kg/1000m2) 270.00 15,000 4,050,000 Yield 2 280.00 15,000 4,200,000 Yield 3 290.00 15,000 4,350,000 Yield 4 300.00 15,000 4,500,000 by-product 500,000 Total benefit 1 4,550,000 Total benefit 2 4,700,000 Total benefit 3 4,850,000 Total benefit 4 5,000,000 Net benefit 1 1,625,000 Net benefit 2 1,775,000 Net benefit 3 1,925,000 Net benefit 4 2,075,000 Note: FGDs with 8 farmers in my an commune of Cho Moi district, in January 2015 3: Cost-benefit analysis for sweet corn in my an commune Indicators Unit Quantity Price (VND) Total cost (VND/1000m 2 ) Land preparation Days of labor 5 100,000 Rice straw cleaning home labor Rice straw covering home Herbicides bottle 1 80,000 Asian Journal of Agriculture and Rural Development, 5(9)2015: 202-217 216 Seedling hrs 3 15,000 Ure VND/bag (50kg) 35 420,000 294,000 DAP VND/bag (50kg) 5 870,000 87,000 NPK VND/bag (50kg) 35 670,000 469,000 Electricity KW 20 1,600 Irrigation times/crop 7-8 Hiring labor days/1000 m2 7 100,000 700,000 Total costs 1,746,600 Yields Note: FGDs with 8 farmers in my an commune of Cho Moi district, in January 2015 4: Cost-benefit analysis for three intensive rice crops in my an commune of Cho Moi Indicators Winter- Spring Summer- Autumn Autumn- Winter Land preparation (VND/1000 m2) 260,000 260,000 260,000 Seeds (VND/1000 m2) 132,500 132,500 117,500 Sowing rice (VND/1000 m2) 30,000 30,000 30,000 Re transplanting (VND/1000 m2) 100,000 100,000 100,000 Fertilizer (VND/1000 m2) 600,000 700,000 600,000 Agricultural chemicals (VND/1000 m2) 650,000 750,000 750,000 Fertilizer labouring (VND/1000 m2) 80,000 80,000 80,000 Pesticide spraying (VND/1000 m2) 70,000 84,000 84,000 Harvesting (VND/1000 m2) 170,000 240,000 200,000 Transport (VND/1000 m2) 60,000 45,000 50,000 Irrigation - electric pump (VND/1000 m2) 160,000 160,000 160,000 Total cost (VND/1000 m2) 2,312,500 2,581,500 2,431,500 Yields (kg/1000 m2) 612 441 500 Farm gate price 5,300 4,700 5,300 Total net benefits 3,243,600 2,072,700 2,650,000 Net benefits 931,100 - 508,800 218,500 Note: FGDs with 8 farmers in My An commune of Cho Moi district, in January 2015 5: Cost-benefit analysis of two intensive rice crops a year in Chau Phu district Indicators My Phu commune Thanh My Tay Cost -benefit analysis of winter-spring crop W-S S-A W-S S-A land preparation (VND/1000 m2/crop) 158,955 176,682 113,056 163,188 Seeds (VND/1000m2/crop) 211,636 214,705 224,000 234,219 Seeds used (kg/1000 m2) 20 20 24 24 Hiring labours (VND/1000 m2/crop) 241,118 243,323 231,438 243,500 Total fertilizer and pesticides costs (VND/1000 m2/crop) 1,176,636 1,269,832 1,009,438 1,099,188 Irrigation costs (VND/1000 m2/crop) 193,955 193,955 141,125 136,125 Harvesting costs (VND/1000 m2/crop) 197,273 213,636 202,625 197,563 Transportation costs (VND/1000 m2/crop) 76,259 63,573 4,813 4,813 Total cost (VND/1000 m2/crop) 2,255,832 2,375,705 1,926,494 2,078,594 Yields (kg/1000 m2/crop) 868 679 854 634 Farm gate price (VND/kg) 4,692 4,633 4,356 4,372 Total benefits (VND/1000 m2/crop) 4,059,886 3,150,341 3,710,856 2,778,594 Net benefits (VND/1000 m2/crop) 1,804,055 774,636 1,784,363 700,000 Note: N=16, Thanh My Tay commune- Chau Phu district Note: N=22, My Phu commune- Chau Phu district Source: Household survey in My Phu and Thanh My Tay communes of Chau Phu district, in January 2015 Asian Journal of Agriculture and Rural Development, 5(9)2015: 202-217 217 6: Cost-benefit of chilli crop in Tan Long commune of Thanh Binh district Indicators Unit Quantity Price Total costs (VND/1000m 2 ) Land preparation Time/1000m 2 1 78,802 78,802 Pesticide spray Bottle/1000m 2 2 78,802 78,802 Ditch arrangement Time/1000m 2 1 home labour - Seeds Kg/1000m 2 472,813 Seed nursery VND/1000m 2 189,125 Seedling VND/1000m 2 425,532 Fertilizer and pesticides VND/1000m 2 5,516,154 Labour Home labour - Irrigation VND/1000m 2 118,203 Harvesting VND/1000m 2 7,880,221 Total cost VND/1000m 2 14,759,653 Yield 1 Kg/1000m 2 1,389 Yield 2 Kg/1000m 2 1,929 Yield 3 Kg/1000m 2 3,086 Price VND/1000m 2 15,000 Total benefit 1 VND/1000m 2 20,833,333 Total benefit 2 VND/1000m 2 28,935,185 Total benefit 3 VND/1000m 2 46,296,296 Net benefit 1 VND/1000m 2 6,073,680 Net benefit 2 VND/1000m 2 14,175,532 Net benefit 3 VND/1000m 2 31,536,643 Note: FGDs with eight participants in Tan Long commune in January 2015 7: Cost-benefit of floating rice in Tan Long commune of Cho Moi district Indicators (VND/1000m2) Land preparation 92,592.59 Seeds 154,320.99 Herbicide 15,432.10 Nutritional chemical 27,006.17 Harvesting 231,481.48 Threshing 77,160.49 Total cost 597,993.83 Yield 1 240.00 Yield 2 312.00 Yield 3 360.00 Farm gate price (VND/kg) 10,000.00 Total cost (VND/1000 m2) 775,000.00 Rice Leaf sold-by product 100,000.00 Rice straw sold-by product 100,000.00 Total benefits 1 1,825,000.00 Total benefits 2 2,545,000.00 Total benefits 3 3,025,000.00 Note: FGD with 8 participants in Tan Long commune of Thanh Binh district, in January 2015 8: Cost-benefits for rearing one cattle in a 12 month cycle in Thanh My Tay and My Phu communes – Chau Phu district, An Giang province, December 2014 Indicators My Phu – Chau Phu Thanh My Tay-Chau Phu Total costs (VND 1000/1000 m2) 23,366* 27,542* Unit of analysis 1 1 Total Benefits (VND 1000/1000 m2) 30,000 36,000 Net Benefit (VND 1000/1000 m2) 6,633 8,457 B/C 0.28 0.31 Source: Focus group discussions with farmers in My Phu and Thanh My Tay communes in December 2014. Eight farmers involved in each FGD