IJERD – International Journal of Environmental and Rural Development (2013) 4-2

Research article
erdFood Security and Socio-economic Impacts of Soil
Salinization in Northeast Thailand
AUNG NAING OO
Faculty of Agriculture, Khon Kaen University, Khon Kaen, Thailand
Email: ano1972@gmail.com, chulee_b@kku.ac.th

CHULEEMAS BOONTHAI IWAI*
Faculty of Agriculture, Khon Kaen University, Khon Kaen, Thailand

PATCHAREE SAENJAN
Faculty of Agriculture, Khon Kaen University, Khon Kaen, Thailand
Received 15 December 2012

Accepted 10 June 2013(*Corresponding Author)

Abstract This study aimed to assess the impacts of soil salinity on the crop production
system and to describe the food security and social and economic conditions in the saltaffected areas of Northeast Thailand. Ban Nong Na Woaw, Ban Phon Sim, and Ban Som
Sanuk, all in the Northeast region of Thailand, were purposely selected because they had
different salinity levels and different ecosystems. Random sampling method was used to
select 90 households from the three villages and both quantitative and qualitative data
were collected from January to June 2012 using a questionnaire, semi-structured
interviews, and direct observation. Data were analyzed by means of descriptive methods.
In all studied villages, the production system of rice among the farmers was not muchdifferent. Farmers used organic fertilizers and farmyard manure to alleviate salinity in theirrice field. There were different types of agricultural and non-agricultural activities in thethree studied villages practiced by the farmers in order to improve food security of theirfamilies. The average of rice yields was very low, about 1.5 ton/ha. The main income
source was agricultural work among rural households. Domestic animals raised by mostfarm households in all villages were cattle, buffalo, pigs, chicken and crickets for homeconsumption and sale. In addition to salinity effects, periodic droughts, the heavy relianceon monsoons, lack of financial capital and low inputs uses were the other major constraints
for the farmers in all villages. This finding suggests that farmers need to be advised to use
farmyard manure and green manure in order to reduce salinity. But equally important iscorrect application and the timely use of urea fertilizer, better weeding, timely harvestingand proper threshing and winnowing. Since rice is the main source of livelihood for the
farmers, extension agencies should provide farmers with financial and technical assistancesuch as salt tolerant rice varieties, knowledge and improved technologies.
Keywords salinity, food sufficiency, livelihood

INTRODUCTION
Soil salinity has become a serious problem throughout the world and around 20% of the world's
cultivated land are affected (Sumner, 2000). In Northeast Thailand, approximately 17 % of the landis salt-affected due to salt bearing rocks (Land Development Department, 1991). mainly in Nakhon
Ratchasima, Khon Kaen, Roi Et and Mahasarakham provinces (Department of Mineral Resources,
1982). Soil salinity has been accelerated by human activities such as deforestation, irrigation, saltmaking and construction of roads and reservoirs (Mitsuchi et al., 1986). It has been one of the mostimportant issues for local farmers who live in Northeast Thailand. Decreasing soil productivity
caused by salinization has led to social tension, unemployment and reducing incomes of all socialgroups. Large-scale soil salinization affects many families in the area with small land holdings. Soil

© ISERD
76

IJERD – International Journal of Environmental and Rural Development (2013) 4-2

salinization must also be seen as a human problem rather than one concerned solely with thedestruction of ecosystems. While people are the main agents for salinization, they are also its
victims.
Northeast Thailand has about 9.3 million hectares of agricultural land, of which approximately
7.9 million hectares are used for rainfed farming (Office of Agricultural Economic, 1998). Up to
75% of this land is devoted to rice, but the planted area varies considerably from year to year,
mainly because of uneven water availability and salinity affected land (Arunin, 1984; Yuvaniyama
et al., 1996). Besides, the soils in Northeast Thailand are characterized as universally infertile
because of their light texture and low inherent nutrient contents (Jiraporncharoen, 1993). The low
fertility of sandy soils in the region coupled with frequent drought, degradation and salinity has
been accounted for the low yield (Kabaki et al., 2003) and consequently leads to the problem offood insecurity for the farmers.
Food security exists when all people, at all times, have physical and economic access to sufficient,safe and nutritious food that meets their dietary needs and food preferences for an active and healthy life
(World Food Summit, 1996). The entire livelihood system of Northeast Thailand is farm-based.
Farmers continue to make their living from manual trade and agriculture. Rice, cassava, and corn
are the main crops grown under rainfed conditions by practicing traditional cultivation system, andrice is the staple crop of most farm households in the region. Due to certain constraints, low
productivity has brought poverty leading to the lowest per capita income in this region of thecountry. Their dependency on agriculture and lack of knowledge on management might havecaused problems of salinization which has a severe effect on soil fertility and crop productivity.
Therefore, it requires an investigation in order to get a solution to this problem for a better
livelihood of future generations. Much research work has been done on the management of saltaffected soils in Northeast Thailand. However, insufficient research has been undertaken on an
evaluation of the food security and socio-economic aspects in salt-affected areas of this region. Yet
rice sufficiency is the key to survival in Northeast Thailand as rice forms the greatest portion ofdaily food consumption for subsistence farmers. Therefore, this study aimed to assess the impactsof soil salinity on the crop production system and to describe the food security and social andeconomic conditions of the salt-affected areas of Northeast Thailand.
METHODOLOGY
Site selection
This research project was conducted in villages at Khon Kaen, Kalasin and Mahasarakamprovinces in Northeast Thailand. The three selected study villages where farmers grow crops insalt-affected soils were Ban Nong Na Woaw, Khon Kaen Province; Ban Som Sanuk, Mahasarakam
Province; and Ban Phon Sim, Kalasin Province, all in the Northeast region. These study sites were
purposely selected because they have different salinity levels and different ecosystems.
Research design
Qualitative research is best known for the validity of its findings while quantitative research isstrong in reliability, and both have strengths and weaknesses (Babbie, 1999; Dawson, 2002). In thisstudy, the typical design was started out with a qualitative part including documentation and indepth interview. The information from this part helped to develop the tool, a structured
questionnaire, for the quantitative study. The quantitative cross sectional study was employed to
get information about individual cognitive behaviors and household's socio-cultural and economic
characteristics whereas the qualitative approach included in-depth interviews, focus group
discussions, and meetings. It was used to gain the in-depth understanding about the situation,
problems, causes of the problems, and needs. Therefore, both qualitative and quantitative researchmethods were used in this study and emphasis was given to the qualitative method.

© ISERD
77

IJERD – International Journal of Environmental and Rural Development (2013) 4-2

Research tools
Research methods used in this study include a small questionnaire, semi-structured interviews, anddirect observation. The small questionnaire was used in collecting quantitative data. Semistructured interviews were used in collecting qualitative data and separate guidelines for key
informants and household informants were used. This was because holding a well-preparedinterview guide in hands, semi-structured interviews are more likely to cover all sub-topics ofinterest, and thereby reducing the potential risk of missing data. Direct observations were made inorder to validate information given by informants (IFAD, 2002).
Data collection and analysis
For data collection and analysis, the interview and information collection process was used asfollows: (i) key informant interview and group interview in village level (ii) household level indepth interview and (iii) observations. Qualitative data was supported by documents and materials
relating to the topics covered by the study and the quantitative component of the study. Field notes
were converted into detailed notes each day in the field soon after completing all interview sessionsof the day. Missing or contradictory information were noted down and verified the following day.
When the entire data collection process was completed, descriptive methods were used in data
analysis. Quantitative data was analyzed by applying descriptive statistics (mean, percentage, etc)with the help of Microsoft Excel.
RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
The characteristics of the households in the three studied villages in salt-affected areas of Northeast
Thailand are shown in Table 1.
Table 1 Characteristics of the study households in the three studied villages in salt-affectedareas of Northeast Thailand
Characteristics

Ban Nong Na
Woaw(High salinity
level)
30

Ban Som Sanuk(Moderatesalinity level)

Ban Phon Sim(Lowsalinity level)

3030Sample household
Average age of respondents
56.9 (39 ; 79)(year)
Education (%)
Primary school
60
Secondary school
40
Average household size (person)
4.0 (2 ; 6)
Landless households (%)
30
Average labors (person)
2.4 (1 ; 5)
Average number of dependents
1.6 (0 ; 5)(person)Average cultivated area
2.4 (0 ; 5.8)
(hectare)Parentheses show minimum and maximum.

56.3 (35 ; 76)

52.2 (27 ; 70)6040
3.9 (2 ; 6)20
2.6 (1 ; 5)5050
4.6 (3 ; 8)26
2.6 (1 ; 5)

1.6 (0 ; 4)

2 (0 ; 4)

2.1 (0 ; 5.6)

1.8 (0 ; 5.3)

Rice production in the studied villages
As a staple food crop, rice has been grown in the three studied villages for generations. Due to thesalinization, limitation of water resources, low soil fertility, high cost of capital investment for land
preparation such as sowing, seedling, equipment, chemical fertilizer, pesticide, transportation andhigh cost of labor, the rice productivity is quite low. This situation has made the farmers face theproblem of food insecurity. The villagers mentioned that the expenses of agricultural inputs haveincreased every year, especially fertilizer and pesticide.

© ISERD
78

IJERD – International Journal of Environmental and Rural Development (2013) 4-2

In all studied villages, the production system of rice among the farmers is not much different.
However, most farmers use urea fertilizer, but most of them cannot use the recommended dosage,
50kg N/ha, plus compound fertilizer. They use different brands of compound fertilizer withdifferent organic ratio ingredients and various prices depending on the capital accessibility.
There are two varieties of rice grown in the studied villages namely Khao Dawk Mali 105(KDML 105) and Kor Khor (RD 6), which are non-sticky and sticky rice, respectively. KDML 105
is named as Jasmine rice because its natural aromatic scent is similar to that of jasmine flower.
KDML 105 is high quality rice and one of the promising economic crops for Northeast Thailand.
Its demand is very high because of its better eating and cooking quality. RD 6 is grown andconsumed in the Northeast Thailand region, especially in rural areas. In all studied villages, farmers
grow RD 6 rather than KDML 105 because they like RD 6. It was mentioned that RD 6 is forhousehold consumption, whereas KDML 105 is for sale.
Village food security
Despite the fact that Thailand produces more than enough food to meet domestic needs and is amajor food exporter, abundant food supplies do not automatically translate into abundant food forthe poorer groups of Thai society. Based on group interview in each village, there are different
types of agricultural and non-agricultural activities in the three studied villages practiced by thefarmers in order to improve food security of their families. Generally, there are different
agricultural activities such as rice, cassava, corn, eucalyptus, etc. and non-agricultural activities
such as retailer shop, daily labor, salt-making, but not all households get involved in those activities.
It was noted that most of agricultural activities in the three villages are similar.
Socio-cultural conditions
Culture, beliefs and religious activities: All villagers are Buddhists and they strongly believe in
Buddha's teachings. They value the ordination ceremony when their son or grandson becomes a
novice monk. All of the temple donations are based on agricultural income. In a year when theweather conditions are favorable for high productivity of crops, their standard of living is better sothey can use the surplus for donations. All of the families do their social, cultural and religious
activities after harvesting their cultivated crops. At that time, they can use their crop products andalso cash from selling these crops for donations. In the activities, the old persons and village
headman play an important role. Even though the village headman has full authority, he shows
respects to the old, honorable persons and follows the guidelines and suggestions from them. For
the religious activities, monks play very important role in the village. In some social and culturalproblems, monks can give the final decision for the village. Seasonal religious festivals are held
under the guidance of the monks and elder person.
Economic conditions
Crops and livestock: The major crop grown in the three study villages is rainfed rice, but some
farmers grow eucalyptus, cassava and corn. In all villages, no vegetables are grown in their fields,
but they are grown in their home garden for household consumption. In all villages, rainfed rice isgrown during the rainy season but there is no irrigated rice in the dry season. Domestic animals
raised by most farm households in all villages that are cattle, buffalo, pigs, chicken and crickets forhome consumption and sale.
Salt production: In the case of Ban Nong Na Woaw, some villagers make salt from the highly
salt-affected soil. The old villagers reported that salt production had begun in a primitive mannerfor household consumption. In this method, the white crust of salt collected from the soil surface isdissolved into water and filtered. The dissolved salt then is crystallized by boiling. This salt-making
is done in the off-farm season.
Occupation and income: The village economy is based on agriculture in all studied villages. Most

© ISERD
79

IJERD – International Journal of Environmental and Rural Development (2013) 4-2

households in all villages are farm households, and very few households do non-farm work likegovernment officials, public health workers, agricultural input retailer or small shopkeeper. The
major source of income for the farm households in all villages is the cultivation of crops andkeeping domestic animals like cattle and pigs also make a contribution to household income. Apartfrom the expenses on basic needs, household income is also spent on such social occasions as
traditional festivals. They also spend certain amount money on their children’s education, health,transportation, clothing, lightening, kitchenware, house maintenance, donation and personal use. In
most cases, farm work is done using family labor, but hired labor is common during peak seasons
like transplanting and harvesting of the crops.
Table 2 Comparison of soil salinity level, average rice yield and average household’s income
among all studied villages in the year 2011
Salinity level #Average rice yield Household’s income
Source of income(ECe, dS m-1)
(ton/ha)(US$/year)
Ban Nong Na Woaw
High (>4)
1.56
2096
Farm-based, Non-farm
Ban Phon Sim
Moderate (2-4)
1.56
1935
Farm-based
Ban Som Sanuk
Low (<2)
1.62
2258
Farm-based#
Topark-Ngarm (2010) ; ECe (Electrical conductivity of the saturation extract)
Village

According to the group discussion, in all villages, the average of rice yields is very low about
1.56 ton/ha (250 kg/rai) (Table 2), as compared to other parts of the country (average of 2.9 ton/hain the central region and 1.8 ton /ha in the Northeast region) (Office of Agricultural Economic,
1998). This low yield might be due to the salinity, low soil fertility and sandy texture soil. The
main source of household income was farm-based. This study found that the average income ofhouseholds from Ban Phon Sim village was the lowest amount when compared to other villages. In
contrast, the average income of households from Ban Nong Na Woaw was the highest. The average
income of household from Ban Nong Na Woaw was higher even this village has high salinity
levels when compared to Ban Phon Sim village which has moderate salinity level because theiraverage productive land areas are more than other villages. Besides, this village is not too far fromthe township (Ban Phai Township) and hence, farmers can access improved technology fromagricultural service and other agencies and supplement to their income also come from other nonagricultural activity such as salt-making and waged labor.
CONCLUSION
The three studied villages face enormous widespread soil salinity as a consequence of soil andwater resource degradation. Also, rising water tables resulting from deforestation have caused
water-logging problems in many areas. The collected information shows that despite difficulties,
farmers are continuing their efforts for the management of salinity to produce field crops. In order
to alleviate salinity in their rice field, they apply organic fertilizer and farmyard manure such as
cattle manure and chicken waste. However, the average of rice yields is very low about 1.5 ton/ha(250 kg/rai). In addition to salinity effect, periodic droughts, the heavy reliance on monsoons, lackof financial capital, low inputs uses are the major constraints for the farmers in all villages.
There are different types of agricultural and non-agricultural activities in the three studied
villages practiced by the farmers in order to improve food security of their families. Domestic
animals raised by most farm households in all villages are cattle, buffalo, pigs, chicken and crickets
for home consumption and sale.
This finding could suggest that farmers are advised to use farmyard manure and green manure
in order to reduce salinity, correct application of urea fertilizer, the timely use of urea fertilizer,
better weeding, timely harvesting and proper threshing and winnowing. Since rice is the main
source of livelihood system, development extension agencies should provide farmers with financial
and technical assistance to make available salt tolerant rice varieties, knowledge and improved
technologies in order to increase food sufficiency. Every project to be implemented in thesevillages should pay more attention to the most vulnerable landless and small farmer households.

© ISERD
80

IJERD – International Journal of Environmental and Rural Development (2013) 4-2

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
This study was supported by the Robert S. McNamara Fellowships Program (RSM) and research
project “Using Soil Biota for Biological Monitoring and Ecological Zoning in the Salt-Affected.
Area in Northeast Thailand”, “Problem Soil Research Group, Integrated Water Resource
Management Research and Development Center in Northeast Thailand, and Ground water research
centre, Khon Kaen University, Thailand. Many thanks go to all respondents from Ban Nong Na
Woaw, Ban Som Sanuk and Ban Phon Sim village for providing me with valuable information that
I need for this research project. The authors would like to thank Mr. Peter Martyn, Office ofInternational Agriculture, Faculty of Agriculture, Khon Kaen University, Thailand, for English
editing and suggestions for the manuscript.
REFERENCES
Arunin, S. 1984. Characteristic and management of salt-affected soils in Northeast Thailand. In: Ecology andmanagement of problem soil in Asia. Food and Fertilizer Technology Center of the Asian and PacificRegion, Taiwan, Republic of China. 336-351.
Babbie, E.R. 1999. The basics of social research. Wadsworth Publishing Company. Belmont, California,
USA.
Dawson, C. 2002. Practical research methods: A user-friendly guide to mastering research techniques andprojects. How To Books Ltd., Oxford, United Kingdom.
Department of Mineral Resources. 1982. Geologic map of Thailand. Department of Mineral Resources.
Bangkok. Thailand.
IFAD. 2002. Managing for impact in rural development: A guide for project M&E. Office of Evaluation andStudies (OE), International Fund for Agricultural Development. Rome. Italy.
Jiraporncharoen, S. 1993. The use of chemical and organic fertilizers in crop production in Thailand.
Extension Bulletin No. 370. Food and Fertilizer Technology Center, ASPAC, Thailand.
Kabaki, N., Tamura, H., Yoshihashi, T., Miura, K., Tabuchi, R., Fujumori, S., Morita, H., Wungkashart, T.,
Watanatitawas, P., Uraipong, B., Arromratana, U. and Nagara, T. 2003. Development of a sustainable
lowland cropping system in Northeast Thailand. Jircas working report No. 30.
Land Development Department. 1991. Distribution of salt affected soil in the northeast region 1:100,000 map.
Department of Land Development. Bangkok. Thailand.
Mitsuchi, M., Wichaidit, P. and Jeungnijnirund, S. 1986. Outline of soils of the Northeast Plateau. Theircharacteristics and constraints. Technical Paper No.1, 24-35. ADRC, Khon Kaen, Thailand.
Office of Agricultural Economic. 1998. Ministry of Agriculture and Co-operatives. Agricultural statistics
31/1999, Bangkok, Thailand.
Sumner, M.E. 2000. Handbook of soil science. CRC Press, Florida, USA.
Topark-Ngarm, B. 2010. Saline soil. Department of Land Resources and Environment, Faculty of Agriculture,
Khon Kaen University, Khon Kaen, Thailand, (in Thai).
World Food Summit, 1996. Rome Declaration on World Food Security. World Food Summit, November 1317, 1996. Rome, Italy.
Yuvaniyama, A., Arunin, S. and Takai, Y. 1996. Management of saline soil in the Northeast Thailand. The
Journal of Agricultural Science, 29, 1-10.

© ISERD
81