These concerns have played out in many places. Globally, intensive farming practices have resulted in over application of nutrients that cause environmental damage, such as soil toxicity from nutrient pooling and seepage, and water quality issues . There are also human health impacts from pesticide application. Rice farming in particular accounts for 48 percent of cropland greenhouse gas emissions, but only 15 percent of crop kilocalories . Double- and triple-mono-cropping of rice in Asia has also resulted in soil nutrient mining, increased pest problems, soil toxicity, and salinity issues . Impacts on the Mekong River Delta are extensive. Environmental and economic viability of triple rice cropping is highly questionable. Water quality in the Mekong River Delta has declined rapidly, with heavy metal, phosphorus potassium, and nitrate pollution above Vietnamese acceptable limits for surface waters . Simultaneously, available nitrogen, phosphorus, and potassium in the soil diminish as irrigation water is flushed through the system . In addition to and because of these environmental impacts, the triple crop burden is decreasingly economically viable in the Mekong River Delta compared to a double crop rotation . A “balanced cropping” system of two rice crops and one fallow period outperforms the triple crop environmentally and economically. Further, conventional farming practices create concentrated pockets of wealth in fewer farmers’ hands, creating a larger gap between rich and poor farmers in the MRD .Sustainable intensification is a philosophy conceived in the 1990s based on reducing environmental damage of agricultural production, while increasing yield without increasing the total land under production . SI was conceived as a middle ground to take advantage of areas already in production, 4×8 grow table with wheels while looking to fulfill future food production demands. SI increases food security and minimizes environmental damage, with the goal of “environmentalizing agricultural development” .
SI is based on the logical progression that food production must increase in the coming decades, and that this increase must be met through intensification rather than extensification of agriculture . Thus, SI has two defining characteristics. First, it focuses on production increases, rather than holistic farm level balance . And second, it is a goal, rather than a method of achieving sustainability, with an infinite number of production regimes and avenues available to achieve its end . For these reasons, it has been criticized for excluding social, political, and economic factors in production systems while privileging production . It has also been highly criticized for ignoring the distributive issues that are often the origin to food security problems, repackaging genetically modified crops as a silver bullet for SI outcomes, and failing to fund or privilege agroecological methods to achieve SI . In other words, it has been coopted by the very same entrenched powers of the Green Revolution that pushed intensification practices in the first place, such as the World Bank and United Nations branches. This case study takes a critical look at the SI policies in the MRD of Vietnam to understand the mixture of social, environmental, and economic considerations of current rice cropping guidance from the Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Development . New efforts aim to improve the social equity and justice aspects of SI as a resilience strategy . This includes understanding the cultural and biophysical limitations facing smallholders with varying degrees of intensification and diversification on their farms. This study aims to understand the barriers to SI adoption in the MRD. Sustainably intense and diverse cropping systems, such as crop-livestock and agroforestry, create emergent properties that support soil fertility, sustained and increased yields, and pest regulation .
Case studies in Vietnam have shown outstanding results for combined rice-fish culture systems , fruit tree intercropping, and vegetable strips on bunded fields . However, the majority of the time, powerful non-government organizations as well as MARD push “diversification” practices that include purchasing more drought- or flood-resistant cultivars of rice. MARD extended the Agricultural Competitiveness Program , a World Bank program, to the Mekong River Delta in November 2012. The program promotes the slogan “1 Must Do, 5 Reductions” a catchy and easy way for farmers to adopt more sustainable practices. The “1 Must” promotes use of improved seeds, certified by the distributor; while the “5 Reductions” means reducing water, fertilizer, pesticides, post harvest loss, and seed inputs. The ACP was rolled out in 2013 and adoption data indicates that 70 percent of farmers in the MRD are users . However, adoption is uneven across the delta and between genders. This case study looks at adoption of 1M5R through a variety of specific CI and SI practices.Decisions to adopt SI practices are based on access to resources and information, which is unequal between men and women. The Food and Agriculture Organization estimates that if women had equal access to productive resources, agricultural yields would rise and there would be 100 to 150 million fewer hungry people . Women are more likely to live in poverty and less likely to own land or resources, have control over production, obtain secondary school education, have institutional support, access information, maintain freedom of association, or gain positions in decision-making bodies . Women’s “triple burden” of child bearing, domestic care, and on-farm duties limit their ability to attend educational and trainings. 1M5R is the primary avenue through which men are gaining access to information and training.
Trainings on integrated pest management , alternative wetting and drying , certified seeds, and post harvest loss have been ongoing since 1992, when the “3 Reductions, 3 Gains” campaign was under way . The 3R3G campaign, 1M5R’s predecessor, pushed for reductions in seeds, pesticides, and fertilizers; and gains in yield, farmers’ health, and the environment. However, the majority of trainings consisted of male farmers . Additionally, even with the proper training, it has been shown that women often do not have the necessary time or capital to correctly implement sustainable practices . This study looks at issues of unequal access between the sexes, and relates it to SI and CI adoption rates. Men and women tend to use different strategies to deal with stresses on the farm, such as soil quality issues and increasing demands for productivity. Growers may intensify production, diversify cropping systems, or abandon their farming operations to seek wage labor . Case studies in South America demonstrate that women are more likely to intensify farming practices, such as mechanization and investment in tree crops, to reduce labor demands . Men, on the other hand, tend to perform more labor-intensive activities on the farm, or simply abandon their own land to sell their labor. However, the influence of gender on SI adoption is poorly understood in general, let alone in Vietnam. A case study in Kenya demonstrated a promising approach to evaluating gendered differences in SI adoption using a livelihood survey approach . A subsequent case study in Burkina Faso demonstrated a similar approach . This study contributes to the SI adoption literature by using this approach in Southeast Asia, as well as including “capabilities” in addition to other standard capitals included in livelihood analyses.Methods for sampling, data collection, and data analysis for this project were adopted from similar case studies of intensification and gender . The study uses a household survey designed around the five “capitals,” or the livelihoods approach. Surveys were chosen for this research project in order to gather quantitatively meaningful information to deduce statistical relationships between household capitals and farming practice adoption. The survey included gender-disaggregated plot-level management questions to understand production practice adoption . The survey consisted of a structured questionnaire designed to understand how men and women manage plot level decisions differently, grow tray stand including how remittances from household members that have migrated to urban areas impact agricultural practices. It also includes planned crop diversity, or number and abundance of species, gathered through observation and structured questionnaire, as is common in similar studies . Each survey was given to the adult head of household, if available, or their spouse if not. The preliminary survey was pilot-tested on October 25 and November 9, 2015. After both test interviews, it was heavily edited and altered according to feedback from households and extension agents.
The final surveys were eight pages, with over 350 questions, including a detailed map of the farm to illustrate resources and access to transportation infrastructure. Extension agents conducted 160 household surveys between November 10 and 13, 2015, covering 187 total plots . The majority of the questions included fixed responses, while a few open-ended questions were included to build information about types of pesticides and fertilizers, crop choices, and other such items not well known to the research team in this particular district. Again, this approach fits squarely into the livelihoods tradition of research, designed to understand how the mix of capitals in a household influence natural resource management choices. Staff at Nong Lam University in Ho Chi Minh City translated the open-ended responses.As other similar farm practice adoption studies have done, we employed a multi-stage sampling protocol for choosing study farms, using purposive sampling at the Province-, District-, and hamlet-level; and proportionate random sampling at the hamlet and sub-hamlet-level . Tien Giang was chosen for the household survey because it is within the Mekong River floodplain with a high degree of irrigation infrastructure and ample water availability, making the lands most suitable for the triple cropping system . Historically, they have a high proportion of triple rice cropping and a pattern of seasonal and permanent out-migration , making it an ideal case study illustrating the confluence of SI, gender, and mobile families.A snapshot of SI practice adoption illustrates that some are much more popular than others, regardless of gender . First, it is clear that in the hamlets sampled, reduced tillage and water-saving practices are widely adopted by the majority of farmers, with average adoption rates of 75 percent and 87 percent, respectively. IPM and composting or applying organic fertilizer are less popular, with adoption rates of 60 percent and 36 percent, respectively. Finally, intercropping and using mulch are not widely adopted, with an average of 10 percent adoption, and 7, respectively. CI practices are shown to be consistently popular, with adoption rates at 60 percent or higher in the sample population. However, pesticides, herbicides, and non-plough machinery are particularly popular amongst farmers, with average adoption rates of 86 and 88 percent, respectively; while using a plough is the least popular practice at 60 percent adoption. These popularity numbers support the conclusion that CI practices, overall, are much more popular with farmers in Tien Giang Province.Positive correlations indicate that the practices are complementary, while a negative correlation indicates that one practice may replace the other , summarized in Figure 9. The less popular practices illustrated in Figure 9 include intercropping , using compost or organic fertilizer , and using mulch . Intercropping is significantly positively correlated with composting and organic fertilizer use . Compost and organic fertilizer is significantly positively correlated with using mulch . Composting and mulch use are primarily focused on soil quality and nutrient management. Intercropping aims to diversify a farmer’s crop while also efficiently managing nutrient cycling. All three practices are linked through their common goal of recycling, reducing, and efficiently distributing nutrients. The more frequently adopted practices include reduced tillage , water-saving efforts , and integrated pest management . Reduced tillage adoption is significantly positively correlated with water-saving efforts and integrated pest management . Similarly, these more popular practices are linked in theory of water, soil, and pesticide management. CI practice correlations tell a similarly logical story, but are not correlated along popularity lines. Machinery use and plough use are negatively correlated with intercropping . This indication of non-complementarity is because of the difficulty of using machinery with varying types of crops in close proximity to one another. Machinery and plough use are highly correlated with each other, as two sides of the technology adoption coin. Improved seed use is highly correlated with reduced tillage due to the necessity to use herbicides to control weeds that crop up when using reduced tillage. Improved seeds are necessary to withstand herbicide use on these fields. Reduced tillage is highly correlated with machinery use , as is using more chemical fertilizer . This result is not intuitive to agroecology principles, as reduced tillage is usually linked with reduced machinery use as well as reduced need for fertility inputs due to increased soil quality.