RICE FARMERS’ AWARENESS OF WATER POLLUTION THROUGH PESTICIDE IN
ANURADHAPURA DISTRICT
Y.K.R.T Jayasinghe University of Peradeniya
Milk
Water
Alcohol
What is most popular drink in Sri Lanka
Pesticides
Outline
• Introduction• Problem Statement and Justification• Objectives• Conceptual Framework• Methodology• Results and Discussion• Conclusions • Recommendations
Introduction
Sri Lanka – Rice is staple foodLand extent- 65610 Km2
Paddy cultivation – 0.89 million hectares Total production – 3,651,000 MtTwo monsoons- North-West South-EastTwo cultivation seasons- Maha Yala
Importation of Chemicals
0
2,000
4,000
6,000
8,000
10,000
12,000
14,000
16,000
1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002*
TimeV
alu
e (R
s.M
illio
n)
Department of Census and Statistics – Sri Lanka
Introduction cont.
Pesticide
Insecticide Weedicide Fungicide…..etc• A non-point source of pollution Leach to ground water Run-off to surface water• Pesticides are most frequent water pollutant in the world (Timothy and Macro, 2001)• Addition of foreign substances Effect on water quality Harmful to living organisms and aquatic life
Pesticide water pollution
Problem Statement and Justification
Up-Country vegetable• High rainfall• High depth of water table • High frequency of rainfall (> 2500 mm/year)• Low temperature• High assimilation capacity
Dry Zone rice • Low rainfall• Low depth of water table• Low frequency of rainfall (<1750 mm/year)• High Temperature• Low assimilation capacity
Determine level of awareness and the factors affecting to level of awareness of rice farmer regarding pesticide water pollution in Anuradhapura district
Objectives
• General Objective
To determine the level of awareness and factors affecting the level of awareness of rice farmers about pesticide water pollution in Anuradhapura district
• Specific Objectives
To determine the level of awareness of farmers about water pollution through pesticides
To find-out the internal factors affecting the level of awareness of farmers
To find-out the external factors affecting the level of awareness of farmers
Methodology
• Study Area- Anuradhapura District
22 DS Divisions 7 DS Divisions
Primary Data Collection
Key informant discussion
7 DS Divisions 4 DS DivisionsSimple Random Sampling
1.Rajanganaya2.Ippologama3.Thirappane4.Palugaswewa
Villages were selected purposivelySample Size – 60 (Simple Random Sampling )
Methodology cont..
Data Collection and Data AnalysisPrimary Data Interview schedule Key informants discussion ObservationsSecondary Data DoA reports, IWMI reports, SACR reports Books, Internet
Data Analysis Descriptive Statistic Correlation, T-test (SPSS)
Conceptual Framework
Internal factors• Level of education
• Income
• Attitude
• Other
External Environmental Factors• Extension service (DOA)
• Media (radio, TV, newspaper),
• Farmer
• Private company extension service,
• Relevant government institutes ,
Level of awareness
• Pollutants
• Ways of pollution
• Impact of pollution
Methodology cont..
•NGO
•Dealer
•Other
Results and Discussion
No Schooling Grade 5 Grade 6- 10 GCE (A/L) Higher (Diploma/
Degree)
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
Level of education
Res
pon
den
ts %
Levels of education
Mean= 9.05
Results and Discussion cont.
Annual income of the farmer
<300,000 300,000 - 600,000
>600,0000
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
45
50
Income (Rs)
Resp
onde
nts
%
Farm income
No Income <250,000 >250,0000
10
20
30
40
50
60
Income (Rs)
Resp
onde
nts %
Off-farm income
Mean=4,38,700Mean=1,76,865
Results and Discussion cont.
Awareness of the farmer
<40 40 - 50 >500
10
20
30
40
50
60
Awareness Score
Resp
onde
nts
%
Low Medium High
Mean Score=50.66
Results and Discussion cont.
36%
27%
12%
5%
5%
14%1%
Media DOA
OGI NGO
Seller Farmer
PEO
Information Source on Awareness
Attitude of farmer
< 30 30 - 40 > 400
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
Attitude Score
Resp
onde
nts
%
Low Medium High
Mean=37.5
Results and Discussion cont.
Frequency of Pesticide Application
0 1 2 >2 0 1 2 >2Maha Yala
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
Frequency of applicationRe
spon
dent
s %
Insecticide Weedicide
Mean=1.25 Mean=1.35
(t=1.137, p>0.05)
Mean=1.58 Mean=1.64
(t=1.351, p>0.05)
Results and Discussion cont.
0 1 - 3 >3 0 1 - 3 > 3Maha Yala
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
Frequency of application
Resp
onde
nts %
Pesticide amount per one acre
0 <300 300 - 500
>500 0 <300 300 - 500
>500
Maha Yala
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
Amount (ml)
Resp
onde
nts
%
0 < 300 300 - 500
>500 0 <300 300 -500
>500
Maha Yala
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
45
Amount (ml)
Resp
onde
nts %
Insecticide Weedicide
Results and Discussion cont.
Mean=181.8 Mean=243.7
(t=2.456, P<0.05)
Mean=455 Mean=609.6
(t=3.606, p<0.05)
Conclusions
The level of awareness of farmers about pesticide water pollution is good
(mean score of the awareness was 50.66 out of 60)
The mass media (radio, newspaper and television) are the highest
information dissemination source about water pollution
ARPAs and leaflet of DOA help to create awareness
Field officers of other government institutes also have some impact on
creating awareness about water pollution.
Non-government organizations, chemical sellers, and private company extension
service have very low impact on creating awareness.
Neighbor farmers have good impact on creating awareness
Majority of farmers have the attitude that they are concerned about water pollution
Conclusions and Recommendations cont.
Recommendations
Training program for ARPAs about modern agricultural practices.
Training related to pesticide residue effects on human beings
Introduce IPM and IWM for rice farmers
DOA should start advisory service especially for pesticides
DOA extension system should be oriented towards sustainable farming system
productivity development approach
Activate functions of the Authorized Officer
Maintain brand equity(enforce to advertizing with chemical name)
Develop a system for the return of the empty pesticide containers
Do what you can, with what you have, where you are
(Theodore Roosevelt)
Pesticide Act