Paper · 2000 · NJAS - Wageningen Journal of Life Sciences

An analysis of the economic values of novel cropping systems in N. E. Thailand and S. Sumatra

A.P. Whitmore; G. Cadisch; B. Toomsan; et al.

8
claims
8
verbatim quotes
24
citations
1
research areas
✓
Open access

Abstract

The use of food-crop intercropping, hedgerow intercropping and secondary or cover cropping to increase incomes of resource-poor farmers in South East Asia was investigated. Since all systems improve conservation of nutrients and most give extra marketable produce, they were expected to increase farm profitability. On upland farms in Lampung, South Sumatra, both inter- and secondary crops were found to improve yields compared with cassava monocropping and thus the income derived from growing cassava or rice with maize. These increases were equivalent to between 70 and 440 US dollars per hectare. An economic analysis of the lowland rice-producing systems in North East Thailand suggested that with the exception of growing cowpea, the use of pre-rice cover crops was not profitable despite a substantial increase in rice yield, because the additional labour cost more than the additional income was worth. A benefit of leguminous crops, however, can be the extra marketable product. Groundnut in Indonesia and cowpea in Thailand gave an attractive extra US$ 400–1150 total income increase per hectare per year (i.e. extra yield of the main food crop plus extra marketable produce from the secondary crop) even after the additional costs were deducted. Hedgerow intercropping gave smaller profit margins of about US$ 90. Although both hedgerow intercropping and secondary cropping represent a considerable investment of labour by farmers, this investment may be more feasible than paying for fertilizer on credit. On balance the most attractive option tested was the use of a leguminous secondary crop, e.g. groundnut or multipurpose cowpea, within the food crop cycle.

Abstract from the paper’s OpenAlex record, shown for indexing and research. Copyright remains with the authors or the publisher. Read at the source ↗

The text the model read, with the source record’s inline markup (italics, sub- and superscripts) rendered and its character entities decoded; quote offsets refer to the raw text.

Claims 8

Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Intercropping and secondary cropping improved yields over cassava monocropping in Lampung.

Treatment
inter- and secondary cropse0
Outcome
yieldse0
Direction
improvee0
Comparator
cassava monocroppinge0
Setting
Lampung, South Sumatrae0

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Manihot esculenta
Manihot esculenta · Taxon葉子 · CC0 · iNaturalist ↗

Verbatim

e0

“On upland farms in Lampung, South Sumatra, both inter- and secondary crops were found to improve yields compared with cassava monocropping”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 316–454 · show in text ↑
Observationobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

The yield-linked income gains ranged from 70 to 440 US dollars per hectare.

Outcome
increasese0
Value
between 70 and 440 US dollars per hectaree0

Not reportedTaxon

Verbatim

e0

“These increases were equivalent to between 70 and 440 US dollars per hectare”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 524–600 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectauthor interpretationoriginal resultnegativemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Pre-rice cover crops other than cowpea were not profitable despite greater rice yield.

Treatment
pre-rice cover cropse0
Outcome
not profitablee0
Direction
not profitablee0
Qualifier
additional labour cost more than the additional income was worthe0

Not reportedComparator

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Oryza sativa
Oryza sativa · Taxon · picture from its Wikimedia Commons categoryDesmanthus4food · CC BY-SA 3.0 us · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“with the exception of growing cowpea, the use of pre-rice cover crops was not profitable despite a substantial increase in rice yield, because the additional labour cost more than the additional income was worth”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 699–910 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Pre-rice cover cropping substantially increased rice yield.

Treatment
pre-rice cover cropse0
Outcome
rice yielde0
Direction
increasee0

Not reportedComparator

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Oryza sativa
Oryza sativa · Taxon · picture from its Wikimedia Commons categoryDesmanthus4food · CC BY-SA 3.0 us · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“the use of pre-rice cover crops was not profitable despite a substantial increase in rice yield”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 737–832 · show in text ↑
Observationobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Groundnut in Indonesia produced an attractive net total income increase.

Taxon
GroundnutArachis hypogaeae0
Outcome
total income increasee0
Direction
increasee0
Value
US$ 400–1150e0
Setting
Indonesiae0

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Arachis hypogaea
Arachis hypogaea · Taxon葉子 · CC0 · iNaturalist ↗

Verbatim

e0

“Groundnut in Indonesia and cowpea in Thailand gave an attractive extra US$ 400–1150 total income increase per hectare per year”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 989–1115 · show in text ↑
Observationobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Cowpea in Thailand produced an attractive net total income increase.

Outcome
total income increasee0
Direction
increasee0
Value
US$ 400–1150e0
Setting
Thailande0

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Vigna unguiculata
Vigna unguiculata · TaxonHeraldDesa at English Wikipedia · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“Groundnut in Indonesia and cowpea in Thailand gave an attractive extra US$ 400–1150 total income increase per hectare per year”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 989–1115 · show in text ↑
Observationobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Hedgerow intercropping yielded profit margins of about US$ 90.

Treatment
Hedgerow intercroppinge0
Outcome
profit marginse0
Direction
smallere0
Value
about US$ 90e0

Not reportedTaxon

Verbatim

e0

“Hedgerow intercropping gave smaller profit margins of about US$ 90”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1258–1324 · show in text ↑
Recommendationauthor interpretationoriginal resultpositivebasis n/a

Claim · model-written summary

A leguminous secondary crop was the most attractive tested option.

Taxon
groundnut or multipurpose cowpeae0
Outcome
the use of a leguminous secondary crope0
Direction
most attractivee0

Verbatim

e0

“the most attractive option tested was the use of a leguminous secondary crop, e.g. groundnut or multipurpose cowpea, within the food crop cycle”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1530–1673 · show in text ↑

cover crop · yield · Oryza sativa (rice)Results differ

25 papers: 17 positive, 8 negative or no effect

16 papers in the same direction as this paper · 7 in the opposite direction · 1 reporting no difference from an alternative

  1. no effect
  2. no effect
  3. negative

21 papers more in this group

See all 25 papers →

Claims are grouped by organism, treatment and what was measured or targeted. A paper counts as positive when any of its claims in the group is positive.