This document summarizes research on the adoption of direct seeding mulch-based cropping systems (DMC), a form of conservation agriculture, by smallholder farmers in southern Sayaboury province, Lao PDR. The research found that DMC led to increased maize yields, lower production costs, higher incomes, and improved labor productivity compared to conventional tillage. Adoption of DMC increased from 6% of households in 2005 to 24% in 2008. Adoption was higher in villages with more severe soil degradation and among farmers experiencing lower yields. While some farmers experimented due to environmental issues, others expanded use of DMC due to its economic benefits. Barriers to further adoption included access to credit, mechan

1. Extension and determinants for adoption of direct seeding mulch-based
cropping systems in smallholder agriculture, LAO PDR
Frédéric Jullien1, Guillaume Lestrelin2, Hoa Tran Quoc3, Bounmy
Rattanatray4, Chantasone Khamxaykhay5 and Florent Tivet3
PCADR
PASS

2. Context
• Southern Sayaboury province went to
semi-intensify maize monocroping;
• Ploughing on very steep soil induce
erosion and soil fertility reduction;
• Yields fastly reduce;
• Production cost increase;

3. Context
 Land preparation, based on burning residues and ploughing on steep
slopes, has allowed for cultivation of large upland areas every year.
Cash crops cultivated surfaces evolution in southern
Evolution of cash crops cultivated areas in southern Xayaburi
Xayaburi)
(Kenthao, Paklay and Botene districts)
25000
20000
15000
(ha)
10000
5000
0
95
96
97
98
Area (ha)
19
99
19
00
19
01
19
02
19
03
20
04
20
05
20
06
20
20
20
(source:Xayaburi PAFO)
20

4. Context

6. Context

7. General objective for CA
development
Stop soil fertility and yields decrease in
order to maintain a sustainable maize
industry (production and export)

8. Dissemination approach
A farmer-group based approach
linking research and development

9. Dissemination approach
Research side:
• Long term implementation to adapt cropping systems to local conditions
and to generate a large range of technologies,
• Characterization for biological and physicochemical processes
• Training site : field practices intended for extension agents & field days
intended for local and national stakeholders;
Development side:
• Enabling a favorable environment to upscaling CA diffusion: Farmers
group organisation, involving traders in credit issue, mecanisation, etc.

11. CONVENTIONAL TILLAGE
NO-TILLAGE

12. CONVENTIONAL TILLAGE
NO-TILLAGE

14. F M A M J J A S O N D J F
Conventional tillage

15. “Maize Monoculture”
No-Tillage
Dry season Rainy season (6 months)
Maize direct seeded on
maize residues Maize cycle duration
4 months
Maize residues
(DM 5 t.ha-1)

16. “Maize – Vigna umbellata (rice-bean)” rotation
No-Tillage
Rainy season Dry season Rainy season
maize direct seeded on
rice-bean residues
Rice-bean
Rice-bean residues
(DM < 5 t.ha-1)
Rice-bean direct seeded on Maize residues
maize residues
(DM 5 t.ha-1)

17. Monitoring of CA adoption
• Annual monitoring on more than 2000 families from 2005 to 2008 for basic
farm characteristics;
• On farm monitoring data;
• Details questionnaires on more than 400 families in 2006 and 2008;

18. Agro – economics results
Agro-economic productivity of DMC maize monocropping and tillage-based maize monocropping systems (2007)
Note: A Mann-Whitney test highlights significantly lower production costs for DMC systems (at the 0.01 level)
DMC Tillage
Boten district Maize yield (kg/ha) 5 237 4 729
7 villages Production costs (USD/ha) 115 101
29 plots w/ DMC Net incomes (USD/ha) 633 575
17 plots w/ tillage Labour input (man/day/ha) 37 39
Labour productivity (USD/day) 19 16
Kenthao district Maize yield (kg/ha) 4 697 4 191
11 villages Production costs (USD/ha) 123 152
46 plots w/ DMC Net incomes (USD/ha) 548 447
46 plots w/ tillage Labour input (man/day/ha) 41 42
Labour productivity (USD/day) 15 11
Paklay district Maize yield (kg/ha) 6 242 6 392
10 villages Production costs (USD/ha) 122 188
46 plots w/ DMC Net incomes (USD/ha) 769 725
47 plots w/ tillage Labour input (man/day/ha) 45 50
Labour productivity (USD/day) 19 16
DMC presents clear benefits in terms of reduced production costs (-18%
in average), increased net incomes (+12% in average) and enhanced
labour productivity (+23% in average)

19. Adoption results
Adoption of DMC systems (% of households, 2005-2008)
2005 2006 2007 2008
Boten 8% 33% 35% 46%
Kenthao 13% 26% 22% 28%
Paklay 0% 4% 6% 8%
Thongmixay 0% 14% 16% 22%
Total 6% 19% 18% 24%

20. Relative distribution of the main
cropping systems (2008)
 Significant inter-village variations
 Highest levels of adoption in:
• Nongphakbong, Thanang (Boten D)
• Houaylod, Houayped (Kenthao D)
• Dane (Thongmixay D)
 Lowest levels in:
• Paklay district
• Paktom-Houaybouha axis (Kenthao D)
 The expansion of DMC occurs through
different processes

21. Determinants for adoption
Social determinants
Correlation coefficient matrix (Pearson): household capital assets, age and education
level of the household head and relative extent of DMC in household rainfed land
(2006, n=456).
Note: Underlined values represent significant correlations (at the 0.01 level). Household capital
assets were derived from household property in transportation and agricultural equipments.
% DMC Capital assets Age Education
% DMC 1 -0,078 0,004 -0,088
Capital assets -0,078 1 0,047 0,090
Age 0,004 0,047 1 -0,373
Education -0,088 0,090 -0,373 1

22. Determinants for adoption
Land tenure and labour
Correlation coefficient matrix (Pearson): household labour, rainfed land tenure and relative
extent of DMC in rainfed land (2008, n=2032).
Note: Underlined values represent significant correlations (at the 0.01 level)
% DMC Land tenure Labour
% DMC 1 0,072 0,031
Land tenure 0,072 1 0,182
Labour 0,031 0,182 1

23. Determinants for adoption
Soils types

24. Determinants for adoption
Why farmers did experimented CA

25. Determinants for adoption
Why farmers did not experimented CA

26. Determinants for adoption
Why farmers expanded their surfaces in CA

27. Constraints for adoption
Agronomist point of view…
• Access to credit
• Mechanisation and service provision
• Residue management (Livestock and
burning)
• Markets for associated/secondary crops
• Low biomass production systems did not
involves fertility improvement or good weed
control

28. Conclusions
CA can become, within a few years of research and extension, a viable and accepted
alternative to well-established tillage practices – and this, even in a context of small-
scale farming
Farmers confronted with important agroecological constraints and experiencing
significant land degradation issues are more inclined to trial and adopt CA.
Thus, environmental sensitization appears as a key aspect of dissemination
The engagement of farmers with CA is not contingent upon farm-level variables
like capital, labour, age and education.
Finally, the question of the integration of CA with the broader agricultural industry
appears also essential.

29. THANK YOU
Reference:
Lestrelin G, Tran Quoc H, Jullien F, Rattanatray B, Khamxaykhay C, Tivet F. (Forthcoming).
“Conservation agriculture in Laos: Diffusion and determinants for adoption of direct seeding mulch-
based cropping systems in smallholder agriculture”. Renewable Agriculture and Food Systems.