Advertisement

Food Security

, Volume 6, Issue 3, pp 327–337 | Cite as

Weed management in upland rice in sub-Saharan Africa: impact on labor and crop productivity

  • Philomena Ogwuike
  • Jonne RodenburgEmail author
  • Aliou Diagne
  • Afiavi R. Agboh-Noameshie
  • Eyram Amovin-Assagba
Original Paper

Abstract

Rice is one of the most important crops for food security in sub-Saharan Africa (SSA). There exists, however, a widening gap between its regional demand and supply. Competition from weeds is typically one of the major biophysical constraints in upland rice, frequently leading to significant yield losses and sometimes to complete crop failure, thereby threatening the food security of subsistence farmers. However, weed management practices that are currently employed to avoid such losses are associated with high weeding labor demands. This study examined the relationships between weeding times per farm, average time per hectare per weeding and rice yields of upland rice farmers in SSA, with the objective of estimating the impact of weeds on rural households’ economies in SSA reliant on upland rice production systems. To this end, we analyzed survey data collected from 992 farmers in four countries (Cameroon, Democratic Republic of Congo, Togo and Uganda). The counterfactual outcomes framework of modern evaluation theory was used to estimate the Average Treatment Effect (ATE) of the number of times a farm is weeded on weeding labor efficiency, as measured by the average number of hours spent per hectare at each weeding, and on crop productivity expressed as rice grain yield per hectare. A single weeding required 173 h per hectare, while weeding twice required 130 h per hectare per weeding (259 h per hectare in total) and weeding three times required 125 h per hectare per weeding (376 h per hectare in total). Correspondingly, a single weeding was associated with an average rice yield of 1.2 t ha−1, weeding twice yielded 1.7 t ha−1 and weeding three times yielded 2.2 t ha−1. Compared to the situation where the farm is weeded only once and controlling for other factors, the model estimated yield gains of a second weeding to be 0.33 t ha−1 and a third weeding to result in a gain of 0.51 t ha−1. The estimated labor gains were respectively 64.2 and 68.1 h per hectare per weeding for a second and a third weeding. We conclude that weeding an upland rice crop more than once in SSA increases weeding labor efficiency by about 37 % and rice productivity by more than 27 %. Rather than motivating farmers to increase their labor inputs for manual weeding, however, we propose that more research and development funds should be devoted to developing, testing and promoting locally adapted strategies of labor-saving weed management in rice in sub-Saharan Africa. This will result in a significant contribution to regional food security and poverty alleviation.

Keywords

Rain fed rice Hand weeding Impact assessment Average treatment effect Structural economic method Subsistence farming 

Notes

Acknowledgements

This is an output of the Japan-funded ‘Emergency Rice Project: Rice Data Systems for sub-Saharan Africa’ and the EU-IFAD-funded project entitled ‘2010 Incremental EC Contribution to CGIAR: Rice Policy and Technology Impact on Food Security and Poverty Reduction in Sub-Saharan Africa’ (Grant No. C-ECG-40-WARDA). We are grateful to the People of Japan and the European Union for supporting this study and the National Agricultural Research Systems (NARS) and the National Agricultural Statistical Services of Cameroon, Democratic Republic of Congo, Togo and Uganda for their collaboration in data collection. We especially thank Dorothy Malaa Kenyi and Pierre Nzodjo from Cameroon, Abang Olivier Kinzamba and Robert Ngonde Nsakala from DRC, Tsatsu K. Domenyo and Ezi Tsogli from Togo, Stella Adur, Bernard Odur and Mary Frances Nakakawa from Uganda and all the AfricaRice staff involved in collection and management of the data.

References

  1. Adesina, A. A., Johnson, D. E., & Heinrichs, E. A. (1994). Rice pests in the Ivory Coast, West Africa-farmers perceptions and management strategies. Int J Pest Manag, 40, 293–299.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Akobundu, I. O. (1987). Weed science in the tropics: principles and practices. Chichester: Wiley-Interscience.Google Scholar
  3. Auld, B. A., & Tisdell, C. A. (1987). Economic thresholds and response to uncertainty in weed control. Agricultural Systems, 25, 219–227.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Balasubramanian, V., Sie, M., Hijmans, R. J., & Otsuka, K. (2007). Increasing rice production in sub-Saharan Africa: challenges and opportunities. Advances in Agronomy, 94, 55–133.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Becker, M., & Johnson, D. E. (1999). The role of legume fallows in intensified upland rice-based systems of West Africa. Nutrient Cycling in Agroecosystems, 53, 71–81.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Becker, M., & Johnson, D. E. (2001). Cropping intensity effects on upland rice yield and sustainability in West Africa. Nutrient Cycling in Agroecosystems, 59, 107–117.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Beltran, J. C., White, B., Burton, M., Doole, G. J., & Pannell, D. J. (2013). Determinants of herbicide use in rice production in the Philippines. Agricultural Economics, 44, 45–55.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Bergman Lodin, J., Paulson, S., & Mugenyi, M. S. (2012). New seeds, gender norms and labor dynamics in Hoima District, Uganda. J East Afr Stud, 6, 405–422.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Berkhout, E. D., Schipper, R. A., van Keulen, H., & Coulibaly, O. (2011). Heterogeneity in farmers’ production decisions and its impact on soil nutrient use: results and implications from northern Nigeria. Agricultural Systems, 104, 63–74.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Demont, M. (2013). Reversing urban bias in African rice markets: A review of 19 National Rice Development Strategies. Glob Food Secur, 2, 172–181.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Demont, M., Jouve, P., Stessens, J., & Tollens, E. (2007). Boserup versus Malthus revisited: evolution of farming systems in northern Côte d'Ivoire. Agricultural Systems, 93, 215–228.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Demont, M., Rodenburg, J., Diagne, M., & Diallo, S. (2009). Ex ante impact assessment of herbicide resistant rice in the Sahel. Crop Protection, 28, 728–736.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Diagne, A., & Demont, M. (2007). Taking a new look at empirical models of adoption rates and their determinants. Agricultural Economics, 37, 201–210.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Dingkuhn, M., Johnson, D. E., Sow, A., & Audebert, A. Y. (1999). Relationships between upland rice canopy characteristics and weed competitiveness. Field Crops Research, 61, 79–95.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Duflo, E., Glennerster, R., & Kremer, M. (2007). Using randomization in development economics research: A toolkit. In T. P. Schultz & J. Strauss (Eds.), Handbook of development economics (Vol. 4). Amsterdam: Elsevier.Google Scholar
  16. Fofana, B., & Rauber, R. (2000). Weed suppression ability of upland rice under low-input conditions in West Africa. Weed Research, 40, 271–280.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Gianessi, L. P. (2013). The increasing importance of herbicides in worldwide crop production. Pest Management Science, 69, 1099–1105.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Gitsopoulos, T. K., & Froud-Williams, R. J. (2004). Effects of oxadiargyl on direct-seeded rice and Echinochloa crus-galli under aerobic and anaerobic conditions. Weed Research, 44(4), 329–334.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Gressel, J., & Valverde, B. E. (2009). The other, ignored HIV-highly invasive vegetation. Food Secur, 1, 463–478.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Heckman, J. J., Ichimura, H., & Todd, P. (1998). Matching as an econometric evaluation estimator. Review of Economic Studies, 65(2), 261–94.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Imbens, G. M., & Woodridge, J. M. (2009). Recent developments in the econometrics of program evaluation. Journal of Economic Literature, 47, 5–86.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Johnson, D. E., Wopereis, M. C. S., Mbodj, D., Diallo, S., Powers, S., & Haefele, S. M. (2004). Timing of weed management and yield losses due to weeds in irrigated rice in the Sahel. Field Crops Research, 85(1), 31–42.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Kumar, V., & Ladha, J. K. (2011). Direct seeding of rice: recent developments and future research needs. Advances in Agronomy, 111, 297–413.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Lee, M. J. (2005). Micro-econometrics for policy, programme and treatment effects. Advanced texts in econometrics. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Oerke, E. C., & Dehne, H. W. (2004). Safeguarding production–losses in major crops and the role of crop protection. Crop Protection, 23, 275–285.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Riemens, M. M., Groeneveld, R. M. W., Kropff, M. J. J., Lotz, L. A. P., Renes, R. J., Sukkel, W., & van der Weide, R. Y. (2010). Linking farmer weed management behavior with weed pressure: more than just technology. Weed Science, 58, 490–496.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Rodenburg, J., & Demont, M. (2009). Potential of herbicide-resistant rice technologies for sub-Saharan Africa. AgBioforum, 12(3/4), 313–325.Google Scholar
  28. Rodenburg, J., & Johnson, D. E. (2009). Weed management in rice-based cropping systems in africa. Advances in Agronomy, 103, 149–218.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Rodenburg, J., Riches, C. R., & Kayeke, J. M. (2010). Addressing current and future problems of parasitic weeds in rice. Crop Protection, 29, 210–221.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Rosenbaum, P. R., & Rubin, D. B. (1983). The central role of the propensity score in observational studies for causal effects. Biometrika, 70(1), 41–55.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. de Rouw, A. (1991). Rice weeds and shifting cultivation in a tropical rain forest. A study of vegetation dynamics. PhD thesis, Agricultural University Wageningen. Wageningen, The Netherlands.Google Scholar
  32. Rubin, D. (1974). Estimating causal effects of treatments in randomized and non-randomized studies. Journal of Educational Psychology, 66, 688–701.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Seck, P. A., Diagne, A., & Wopereis, M. C. S. (2010). Rising trends and variability of rice prices: threats and opportunities for Sub-Saharan Africa. Food Policy, 35, 403–411.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Seck, P. A., Diagne, A., Mohanty, S., & Wopereis, M. C. S. (2012). Crops that feed the world: rice. Food Secur, 4(1), 7–24.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Shave, P. A., & Avav, T. (2004). Economics of weed management in late-planted, minimum tillage rice in Benue State, Nigeria. IRRN, 29(1), 73–74.Google Scholar
  36. Stessens, J. (2002). Analyse technique et économique des systèmes de production agricole au Nord de la Côte d’Ivoire. Leuven: Katholieke Universiteit Leuven.Google Scholar
  37. Toure, A., Rodenburg, J., Saito, K., Oikeh, S., Futakuchi, K., Gumedzoe, D., & Huat, J. (2011). Cultivar and weeding effects on weeds and rice yields in a degraded upland environment of the coastal savanna. Weed Technology, 25, 322–329.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. van Heemst, H. D. J. (1985). The influence of weed competition on crop yield. Agricultural Systems, 18(2), 81–93.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Vissoh, P. V., Gbèhounou, G., Ahanchede, A., Kuyper, T. W., & Roling, N. G. (2004). Weeds as agricultural constraints to farmers in Benin: results of a diagnostic study. NJAS, 52(3/4), 305–329.Google Scholar
  40. Waddington, S. R., Li, X. Y., Dixon, J., Hyman, G., & de Vicente, M. C. (2010). Getting the focus right: production constraints for six major food crops in Asian and African farming systems. Food Secur, 2, 27–48.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Zimdahl, R. L. (2007). Fundamentals of weed science. London: Academic.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht and International Society for Plant Pathology 2014

Authors and Affiliations

  • Philomena Ogwuike
    • 1
  • Jonne Rodenburg
    • 2
    Email author
  • Aliou Diagne
    • 1
  • Afiavi R. Agboh-Noameshie
    • 1
  • Eyram Amovin-Assagba
    • 1
  1. 1.Africa Rice Center (AfricaRice)CotonouBenin
  2. 2.Africa Rice Center (AfricaRice)-East and Southern AfricaDar es SalaamTanzania

Personalised recommendations