A century of rice improvement in Burma - IRRI books - International ...
A century of rice improvement in Burma - IRRI books - International ...
A century of rice improvement in Burma - IRRI books - International ...
- No tags were found...
You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles
YUMPU automatically turns print PDFs into web optimized ePapers that Google loves.
Table 68. Comparison <strong>of</strong> paid-out cost <strong>of</strong> traditional and new technology (percent<strong>of</strong> production).Particular 1932 1960Traditional1981NewPaid-out costHired laborHired animal laborSeedFertilizerManureLand rent8446104--405753135--283262129683305110915132Sources: Department reports, Agricultural Corporation (various years).period, a farmer needed to pay only 30% <strong>of</strong> his output as paid-out cost,enabl<strong>in</strong>g him to reta<strong>in</strong> 70% as his share.With traditional technology, 62% <strong>of</strong> these paid-out costs were used forhired labor, 6% for fertilizers, and 8% for manure; 3% covered the nom<strong>in</strong>al landtax levied by the government. The correspond<strong>in</strong>g figures for the new technologywere 51, 15, 13, and 2%, respectively. (Land rent was greatly reduced <strong>in</strong> thethird period because <strong>of</strong> the abolition <strong>of</strong> the landlord class.)In this period, farmers undoubtedly benefited from the new technology.A high percentage <strong>of</strong> produce enjoyed by hired labor showed a favorabledistribution <strong>of</strong> output among the landless farmers. The new technologyneeded more labor than did the traditional practice and subsequently, providedmore opportunities for rural employment. The <strong>in</strong>creas<strong>in</strong>g labor <strong>in</strong>put generatedgreater <strong>rice</strong> output, which was then distributed reasonably well to thelandless workers. Aside from farmers, the laborers were likewise benefited bythe new technologyImpactScience generated rapid <strong>rice</strong> production growth dur<strong>in</strong>g the period, especially<strong>in</strong> the late 1970s and early 1980s when WTRPP ga<strong>in</strong>ed momentum. Butlimitations <strong>in</strong> foreign exchange and the exist<strong>in</strong>g <strong>in</strong>frastructure—which forcedan annual <strong>in</strong>creas<strong>in</strong>g demand for fertilizer—lessened the impact. MVs replacedlocal varieties <strong>in</strong> almost all favorable areas; the adverse environmentsrequired newer MVs adaptable to the situation.The role <strong>of</strong> farmers <strong>in</strong> the country’s drive for higher agricultural productionwas widely appreciated. Unity among farmers organized under theFarmers’ Assiayones helped elevate their status <strong>in</strong> society. Many rural projectson water supply, health and sanitation education, cooperatives, and other<strong>in</strong>frastructure affirmed public recognition <strong>of</strong> their services. Introduction <strong>of</strong> thehealth and accident <strong>in</strong>surance system for draft cattle purchased under MABloans encouraged farmers to take more risks. There were some plans toRICE PRODUCTION UNDER THE SOCIALIST REPUBLIC GOVERNMENT 127