Assessment sustainability of smallholding rubber-based farming system : application of sustainable livelihood approach in Southern Thailand | |
| Author | Onanong Longpichai |
| Call Number | AIT Diss. no.AS-11-02 |
| Subject(s) | Rubber--Thailand, Southern Rubber plants--Thailand, Southern |
| Note | A dissertation submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy in Agricultural Systems and Engineering, School of Environment, Resources and Development |
| Publisher | Asian Institute of Technology |
| Series Statement | Dissertation ; no. AS-11-02 |
| Abstract | Small-scale rubber farming in Thailand, the world-leading exporting country, represents the main form of rubber production. In spite of being important contributors to the national economy, these smallholding farmers face many operational constraints in the socio-economic front and also environmental degradation issues, which cast a serious doubt over the sustainability of livelihood of rubber-based farmers. This in turn affects the farmers‟ plans and implementation strategies in adaptation to the changing scenario. The research assessed the current rubber based farming systems and livelihoods and has focused on making a concrete measurement of the livelihood assets with the help of indicators,related to these assets,so asto compare them among thetypesof different smallholder rubber-based farming systems.Comprehensive assessment was done for existing farming systems and livelihoodoutcomesin terms of economic performances, environmental characteristics, and social attributes by making a concrete measurement through related indicators.This study examined the factors viz. problems, constraints of rubber farming systems that significantly affect rubber livelihood outcomes of rubber farmers. Moreover, the livelihood trajectories followed by rubber farmers were identified in different typesof small holder rubber-based farmingsystems under the vulnerability contexts, transformation structures and processes, and livelihood assets. Finally, the recommendations for the development of Thailand‟s smallholder rubber based farming systems were proposed so as to attain livelihood that are sustainable for farmers hailing from various rubber farming systems.This study was conducted in Songkhla province of southern Thailand as the area plays a vital role both for rubber production and marketing.This study has assessed the current rubber-based farming systems and livelihoods, on the basis of various existing farming systems in Songkhla province as classified based on cropping system into six types viz. rubber-monoculture farming system (TI); rubber-intercrop farming system: high value local vegetables and spices (e.g. peesa: Gnetum gnemon; torch ginger: Nicolaia eliator) are grown under the shade of productive rubber trees (TII) ; rubber-rice farming system (TIII); rubber-fruit tree farming system (TIV); rubber-livestock farming system (TV) ; rubber-integrated farming system, where many combinations may be observed, such as rubber-fruit tree-livestock, rubber-rice-livestock and rubber-rice-fruit tree (rubber with more than one agricultural activities) (TVI). This study was conducted making base of primary as well as secondary data. It involved 200 farmers representing various types of rubber farming system by using purposive and simple random sampling methods. Questionnaire survey was used to collect datafrom farmers, observations, group discussions as well as key informant interview from December 2009 to May2010. Descriptive statistics, correlation, multiple regression, index construction, matrix calculus and data envelopment analysis are the different analytical tools used in this study.All types of rubber farming system are found to be moderate to slightly high in natural and physical capitals and moderate in human and social capital. TII, TIII, and TVI are moderate in financial capital; however it is low for TI, TIV, and TV. Overall, Farms practicing integrated farming systems (TVI) enjoy markedly higher human, social and financial capitals than other types while the most striking feature is that farms specialized in rubber (TI) rank systematically the lowestorthe second lowest in all capitals. These results confirm households‟ capability of adoptingvarious strategiesrelated to diversification dependingon theiraccess levels for variouscapitals. On the other hand, the results reveal that natural shock such asdrought, flood, technological transfers, land degradation, climate change, and family labors‟ availability, production prices and prices forinputs are the factors primarilyaffecting rubber farming systems‟ adjustments. The livelihood outcomes were assessed in three perspectives: economic, environmental and social. The economic analysis shows that farmers in TVI earn the highest net farm income while farmers in TI earn the lowest net farm income. The measurement of farm efficiency reveals that diversified and integrated rubber-based systems are also the most efficient. Surprisingly, specialized rubber farms also show high relative efficiency. They tend to maximize both rubber production and farm income, on account of poor endowment in capitals. While assessingenvironmental sustainability, farmers informed that fertilitylevels of the soil has remained the same and has adequate nutrients, and is consistent with extension workers point of view. Farmers perceive water to be rarely insufficient in the study area. Farmers often practice natural resource conservation regarding use of organic fertilizer and saving water in agricultural activities. In term of social sustainability, the study reveals that more than half of rubber farmers accessed to supports and services thus, satisfaction with government and farmers organizations is moderate. Income equity is quite high in all types. The overall environmental, economic and social sustainability indices are in the moderate sustainable range.About 30 percent of the sampled rubber farmers in the study area have changed their existing rubber-based farming systems. The previously practiced rubber farming systems were mostly rubber-monoculture and rubber-rice farming systems.The trajectories of rubber-based farming systems were forecasted. Farming typeTI isdeclining whileTIII marching ahead to be marginal in future. TIV is poised to become a major farming strategy in future. TII and TV strategies are growingslowly, whileTVI remains stable.However, qualitative sensitivity analysis was performed toshow several mechanisms that may lead farmers to change their farming system in differentdirections, including family labor dynamism, coping with the trend of water availability, and dealing with pests and diseases infestations. These led to the shift from various activities in the rubber farming system to rubber-monoculture farming system while access to information, education and training have encouraged the rubber farmers toconvert from their existing farming systems to rubber-integrated farming system. Moreover, the study got four variables from the analysis, whicharesaving, schooling period, effectiveness of farmers‟ organization and lack of water, affecting the livelihood outcomes of rubber farmers. Data analysis highlights the parallel diversities of (1) farming systems, (2) endowment in capitals, and (3) livelihood outcomes among farming households. Further, there is a positive correlation between the levels of livelihood capitals and the level of diversification undertaken. Diversification and integration of rubber-based farming systems resultin higher livelihood outcomes. Specialization in rubber monoculture results from overall low endowment in livelihood capitals, and generates poor livelihood outcomes. Such results confirm the crucial role of livelihood capitals‟ availability and access, call for policy and support measures towards improving those, and support on-farm diversification and crop integration as a pathway to improving farmers‟ conditions, and sustain high rubber production. |
| Year | 2011 |
| Corresponding Series Added Entry | Asian Institute of Technology. Dissertation ; no. AS-11-02 |
| Type | Dissertation |
| School | School of Environment, Resources, and Development (SERD) |
| Department | Department of Food, Agriculture and Natural Resources (Former title: Department of Food Agriculture, and BioResources (DFAB)) |
| Academic Program/FoS | Agricultural and Aquatic Systems (AS) |
| Chairperson(s) | Shivakoti, Ganesh P.; |
| Examination Committee(s) | Perret, Sylvain R.:Ranamukhaarachchi, S.L.;Buncha Somboonsuke; |
| Scholarship Donor(s) | RTG Fellowship;Prince of Songkla University Fellowship; |
| Degree | Thesis (Ph.D.) - Asian Institute of Technology, 2011 |