11.11.2014 Views

Farming Systems Design 2007 - International Environmental ...

Farming Systems Design 2007 - International Environmental ...

Farming Systems Design 2007 - International Environmental ...

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

YUMPU automatically turns print PDFs into web optimized ePapers that Google loves.

<strong>Farming</strong> <strong>Systems</strong> <strong>Design</strong> <strong>2007</strong><br />

Field-farm scale design and improvement<br />

1). The percent consumption of vegetables and fruits were 45 and 42% of production only. The<br />

supply of nutrients from fruits and vegetables of the tested model surplus the need for most of the<br />

wanting essential nutrients like Vitamin A, C, calcium and iron-previously deficient in the diet. An<br />

Ample amount of Vitamin B1, B2, protein and energy were also obtained from the supplied food of<br />

the model (Table 2).<br />

Table 1. Av. yield of vegetable, fruits, gross return, disposal pattern and cash income of integrated model.<br />

Yield family -1 Return Disposal of the produce family -1 (kg)<br />

Crops<br />

(kg) family -1<br />

(kg)<br />

Consumption Distribution Sale Cash income<br />

(Tk.)<br />

Vegetables 746 2,832 337 (45%) 105 (15%) 304 (41%) 1,143<br />

Mean family -1 day -1 2.04 8 0.92 0.29 0.83 3.13<br />

Fruits 810 8,664 334 (42%) 238 (29%) 238 (29%) 1,979<br />

Mean family -1 day -1 2.22 24 0.92 0.80 0.65 5.42<br />

Grand total (Veg. + Fruits) 1,556 11,496 671(43%) 343(22%) 542(35%) 3,122<br />

G. Mean family -1 day -1 4.26 (710 g) 31.5 1.84 0.94 1.48 8.55<br />

Total cost for the model(Tk.) - 350 - - - -<br />

Benefit cost ratio - 32.85 - - - -<br />

Table 2. Average yield of vegetables, fruits and nutrient contents of integrated model.<br />

Yield<br />

Content of nutrients<br />

Crops<br />

Carotene Vit.C Vit.B-1 Vit.B-2 Calcium Iron Energy Protein<br />

(kg) (μgm) (μgm) (μgm) (μgm) (μgm) (μgm) (kcal) (gm)<br />

Vegetables 746 14,959 320,298 1306 655 1409,927 113,322 767,412 16,861<br />

Mean family -1 day -1 2.04 41 878 4 2 3,863 310 2,102 46<br />

Fruits 810 29,597 187,588 404.9 318 82,117 21,864 397,511 6,164<br />

Mean family -1 day -1 2.22 81 514 1.11 0.87 225 60 1,089 16.89<br />

Total from both resources 4,026 122 1,392 5.11 2.87 4,088 370 3,191 6.89<br />

Daily needs family -1 * 1.5 10 260 7.0 6.3 3,000 145 14,100 284<br />

% of requirement supplied 284 1,220 535 73 46 136 255 23 22<br />

*Estimated from data provided by Haque (1985) for 6 members family<br />

Income generation and poverty reduction<br />

The average gross return was obtained Tk. 11496 per family from the model with a very little cash<br />

investment (Tk. 350 year -1 , 1 US$ = Taka 68). The average BCR on cash cost basis was over<br />

32.85. This cash is generating round the year enabling the poor cooperators to meet up immediate<br />

family needs like purchase of edible oil, lighting fuel (kerosene), pulse, salt and spices despite<br />

borrow money with high interest from land lord. Opportunity created for employment of underused<br />

women and children labors in the homestead activities. Sufficient amount of nutrients supplying<br />

from the food of the model, which is helped in crossing poverty level (23% energy, Table 2).<br />

Empowerment of women and gender equity<br />

The women members were actively participated in the program and involved in majority of the<br />

gardening activities, earned 24% of family income, and participated in different group activities,<br />

trainings and field days. Even 40% women alone made decision in different activities (data not<br />

shown). This empowerment enabled women in attaining gender equity and increase prestige in the<br />

family as well as in the society.<br />

Conclusions<br />

The vegetable production model of Pabna is a holistic and intensive system produced highest<br />

nutrients and vegetable compared to any such model tested for far in the country. It is based on<br />

traditional and natural systems, which is easily transferable in most of the under developed<br />

countries. Only change of crop species and varieties may be required to fit in the model.<br />

References<br />

Akhtar et al., Existing homestead production and utilization systems. Annual report 2000. OFRD, BARI,<br />

ARS, Pabna. Pp. 7-18.<br />

BARC, <strong>Farming</strong> <strong>Systems</strong> Agribusiness Newsletter. 1990. Vol.1 (2). Bangladesh Agril. Res. Council, Dhaka.<br />

Islam et al., Homestead vegetable production. A means of household food security and nutrition for marginal<br />

farmers in northwest Bangladesh. 1996. Symposium proceedings. 14 th <strong>International</strong> Symposium on<br />

Sustainable <strong>Farming</strong> <strong>Systems</strong>, 11-16 Nov.,1996, Colombo, Srilanka, pp. Twi/81-89.<br />

Mahmud, S.A., Introductory: Cultivation and nutritional identity of fruits and vegetables.1985. Dept. of<br />

Agricultural Extension, Khamarbari, Dhaka.<br />

Rashid, M.M., Shobji bijyan. Second edition. 1999. Rashid Publishing House. 98, DOHS, Dhaka. pp.43-51.<br />

- 16 -

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!