IJERD – International Journal of Environmental and Rural Development (2012) 3-1

Research article
erd

Assessment of Farmer’s  Satisfaction and Preference Using
Improved Rice Varieties in the Southern Lao PDR
INPONG SILIPHOUTHONE*
Faculty of Agriculture, Khon Kaen University, Khon Kaen, Thailand
Email: inpong007@gmail.com

YUPA HANBOONSONG AND KRAILERT TAWEEKUL
Faculty of Agriculture,Khon Kaen University, Khon Kaen, Thailand
Received 18 December 2011

Accepted 12 March 2012(*: Corresponding Author)

Abstract Since 1993, more than 21 improved rice varieties have been released to Lao
farmers.    However,  there  is  no  study  conducted  yet  on  farmer’s  satisfaction  on  the  use  of  improved rice varieties. Hence, the purposes of this study were to 1) evaluate the level offarmer’s  satisfaction  on  using  improved  rice  varieties;;  and  2)  farmer’s  preferences  on  rice  characteristics. Purposive and simple random samplings were used to select the samples.
Intervals   mean   score   was   used   to   measure   the   level   of   farmer’s   satisfaction.   The   target
population was farmers who have grown rice under irrigated and rainfed conditions in thelowland areas. A total of 118 farming households in the rice producing areas of
Savannakhet and Champasak provinces were surveyed through structured questionnaires
from March to April 2011. The study found that all rice grown under irrigation were
improved varieties. In rain-fed condition, about 96% were improved varieties and about
4% were traditional varieties. The average rice yield in irrigated areas was higher than in
rainfed conditions. Popular improved rice varieties grown in the study areas werePhonengam 3 (PNG3), followed by Thasano 3 (TSN3) and Thadokkham 1 (TDK1). The
level  of  farmer’s  satisfaction  on  using  improved  rice  varieties  ranged  from  high  to  highest
level. However, the aroma characteristic was at a medium level. High yielding
characteristic was the most preferred by farmers, followed by the grain size, early maturity,
tolerance to drought, and resistance to pest and diseases.
Keywords: improved rice variety, satisfaction, preference, southern Lao PDR

INTRODUCTION
Agriculture  is  one  of  the  most  important  sectors  in  Lao  People’s  Democratic  Republic  (Lao  PDR).  
The share of agriculture in economy accounted for 34.4 % of the Gross Domestic Product (GDP)and provided around three-quarters of the total workforce (Department of International Corporation,2011). Rice is the main staple food of the Lao people and accounted for more than 903,501 ha(80%) of the total cropped areas with a total production of 3,102,368 tons, the average rice yieldwas 3.44 t ha-1 (Department of Planning, 2009). The rice production systems in Lao PDR can beclassified into three broad ecosystems: irrigated lowland, rain-fed lowland and upland. Irrigatedand rain-fed lowland are mainly located in central and southern regions. Savannakhet andChampasak provinces are the main rice growing areas in southern region. In 1990, about 95 % ofrice grown in the lowland were traditional varieties with average yield of 2.32 t ha-1 (Linquist et al.,2006). To achieve self sufficiency at the national level the Lao-International Rice ResearchInstitute (Lao-IRRI) project was set up in 1990 to increase rice production in the country (Shrestha
et al., 2006). The main purposes of this project were the following: 1) to develop improved rice
varieties or modern rice varieties (MVs) for lowland areas in the Mekong River Valley; and 2) to
supply Lao farmers with varieties with high yield potential, resistance to the major pests anddiseases, and broad adaptability to Lao condition (Schiller et al., 2000). Since 1993, more than 21
MVs were released such as Thadokkham (TDK1 to TDK11), Phonengam (PNG1 to PNG6),Ⓒ ISERD

72

IJERD – International Journal of Environmental and Rural Development (2012) 3-1

Thasano (TSN1 to TSN5) and Namtanne (NTN1) (Inthapanya et al., 2006; Bounphanousay, 2010).
Most of these varieties were glutinous rice varieties, photoperiod non-sensitive, high yielding andfertilizer-N responsive, resistant to plant diseases such as brown plant hopper (BPH), good millingand eating quality. Since the release of MVs to farmers in 1993, no study was conducted so far toassess  farmer’s   satisfaction   level   with   improved   rice  varieties   in   the   country.   This  information  is  vital to guide rice breeders and extension workers to facilitate wider acceptance of further released
varieties. Furthermore,   the   information   on   farmer’s   preference   to   rice   characteristics   is   also  essential for the rice breeders to know the characteristics farmers need. This study aimed toevaluate   the   level   of   farmer’s   satisfaction   on   using   MVs   and   farmer’s   preferences   to   rice
characteristics.
METHODOLOGY
A purposive sampling technique was used to select the representative areas. In consultation with
the National Rice Research Program (NRRP), the study areas were selected from the two largest
rice growing provinces (Savannakhet and Champasak) in the southern parts of Lao PDR. District
with both irrigated and rain-fed rice production where the farmers had experiences in growing MVs
were selected. Face to face interviews with household heads were conducted using structured
questionnaires in 4 villages: Kor and Phaleng in Champhone district, Savannakhet province, andNakham and Tomoh in Pathoumpone district, Champasak province. Sample size was calculatedusing the Taro Yamane formula (Yamane, 1960). Out of 191 households, 118 were randomly
selected using simple random sampling technique. The questionnaire was pre-tested before theactual survey.
Farmer’s  satisfaction  level  was  evaluated  using  a  rating  scale  from  1-5, with 5 for the highest
satisfaction level, and 1 for the lowest satisfaction level (Table 1). Farmers were asked to select the
improved rice variety most planted in their rice fields. Farmers were then invited to express theirsatisfaction level base on seed, agronomic, postharvest, cooking and eating quality characteristicsof the their selected varieties (Table 3). To determine what rice characteristics were most preferred,a set of photographs were shown to farmers, and allowed them to select the image they most
preferred, and asked the reasons of their choice.
Statistical Package for Social Science (SPSS) software program was used for data analysis.
The analysis included frequency, mean, percentages and t-test.   Farmer’s   satisfaction   levels   were  determined using interval mean scores, dividing into five interval levels (Chantrasouvan, 2002).
The intervals mean score (Table 1) was calculated using Eq. (1) below. For example, using highest
score of 5, lowest score of 1, and number of interval levels of 5, the resulting interval mean score
was 0.08. Using Eq. (2), the highest point of the first level was 1.79.

Thehighest point of thefirst level = Thelowest score + intervalscore - 0.01
Intervalscore =Highest score - Lowest score
Number of intervallevel

(1)
(2)

The calculation of interval mean scores shown as follows:
Intervalscore =5 -1
 0.085(3)

Table 1 Measurement of the satisfaction levels
Description
Highest satisfaction
High satisfaction
Medium satisfaction
Low satisfaction
Lowest satisfaction

Rating score
5
4
3
2
1

Source: Chantrasouvan (2002)Ⓒ ISERD

73

Range
4.20 – 5.00
3.40 – 4.19
2.60 – 3.39
1.80 – 2.59
1.00 – 1.79

IJERD – International Journal of Environmental and Rural Development (2012) 3-1

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
Rice varieties used in Southern Lao PDR
Results of the household survey showed that 100% of the rice varieties grown in dry season(irrigated) were MVs. About 96.0% of the varieties grown in wet season (rainfed) were MVs while
only 4.0% were TVs. PNG3 was the variety most grown in the study areas which accounted for
21.6% in dry season and 15.9% in the wet season (Table 2). Other MVs widely grown in the study
areas were TSN3 and PNG6. PNG3, a high yielding and photoperiod non-sensitive glutinous rice
variety, has good eating and milling qualities and suitable to drought prone areas such as in central
and southern regions of Lao PDR. However, this variety is susceptible to low temperature, and tosome pests and diseases such as bacterial leaf blight, gall midge and brown phanthopper. The MVs
commonly grown by farmers included TDK4, TDK5, TDK6, TDK7, TDK11, PNG5, PNG6, TSN1,
TSN2, TSN4, TSN5, TSN7, RD6, and RD10, while TVs grown were Khao-teay, E-pa, E-teay, Lanard, E-dengnoi and Damdane. About 95% of the rice varieties grown were glutinous rice, and only
5% were non-glutinous rice (i.e Homsavan, KDML 105 and CR 103).
Table 2 Popular rice varieties and percent of each variety planted in the study area during
dry and wet season
Name of Rice varieties
Phonengam 3 (PNG3)
Thasano 3 (TSN3)
Thadokkham 1 (TDK1)
Phonengam 6 (PNG6)
RD10
Thadokkham 7 (TDK7)
Thadokkham 4 (TDK4)
Phonengam 5 (PNG5)
Thadokkham 5 (TDK5)
Other rice varieties
Total% of rice varieties planted underirrigated condition
21.6
19.7
12.7
11.9
8.2
6.0
0.0
4.5
3.7
11.7
100.0

% of rice varieties planted underrain-fed condition
15.9
7.0
11.4
10.0
5.5
5.0
9.5
4.0
2.2
29.5
100.0

The average yield of MVs in dry season (irrigated) was 3.08 t ha-1 and about 2.74 t ha-1 in wet
season (rain-fed). The average yield of TVs was about 2.26 t ha-1 (only in wet season). TDK8 had
the highest yield (3.63 t ha-1) under irrigated condition (dry season), while TSN3 was the highest
yield (3.39 t ha-1) under rainfed condition (wet season). Average rice yield under irrigated condition
was higher than that under rainfed condition. This is mainly attributed by good solar radiation
during dry season which is essential for good photosynthetic activities of the rice plant. Farmers
under irrigated areas (dry season) generally used higher chemical fertilizer input than in rainfed
areas. Moreover, farmers with access to irrigation water also had better control and thus less risk to
droughts and weed problem. In the wet season, flooding is a common problem of rice farmers.
Based from the survey, farmers also indicated the importance of avoiding prolong use of same
varieties in the same field. According to them, changing varieties regularly would increase rice
yield and avoid incidence of pests and diseases. Sources of MVs seed were the following: 1) rice
research center (Thasano Rice Research Center in Savannakhet province, and Phonengam Rice
Research Station in Champasak), 2) exchange with neighboring farmers, 3) support from District
Agriculture and Forestry Office (DAFO) and 4) Rice Productivity Improvement Project or RPIP.
Farmer’s  satisfaction  using  improved  rice varieties
This   study   measured   the   farmer’s   satisfaction   level   on   MVs   based   on:   seed,   agronomic,   postharvest  characteristic,  and  eating  and  cooking  quality.  Results  found  that  farmer’s  satisfaction  was  generally high and the highest level based on the characteristics evaluated by farmers (Table 3).
With respect to seed characteristics, seed germination ability of MVs was at the highest satisfactionⒸ ISERD

74

IJERD – International Journal of Environmental and Rural Development (2012) 3-1

level. According to farmers, the time needed to germinate seeds was shorter (soaking period of
MVs took only 24 hours while the TVs took 48 hours), and percentage germination was higher
compared to TVs. In terms of agronomic characteristics, the seedling growth rate of MVs was at
the highest satisfaction level, MVs seedlings can be transplanted at a younger age (about 20 daysold) compared to TVs (about 30 days old).
Farmers were also extremely satisfied (highest satisfaction level) with harvesting, yield andmilling qualities of MVs. Farmers perceived that yields of MVs were higher than TVs because of
their superior number of panicles per hill and grains per panicle. Due to their uniform plant height,
the harvesting operations of MVs were easier than TVs. MVs was also perceived as lodging
resistant especially during wet season when lodging can cause severe loss of production. In term of
milling quality, farmers reported that polished grains from MVs were more appealing to thembecause they were whiter and lower percentage broken rice. Cooking (softness) and eating qualities
of MVs were also mainly at highest level. However, the aroma of cooked rice was at a moderatesatisfaction level only. TVs have better aroma than MVs. Since most rice produced by farmers ismostly for home consumption, softness (when cooked), whiteness and aroma were very importantfor farmers. Cooking and eating qualities are affected by grain amylase content (Shiller et al., 2006).
Sall et al. (2000) indicated that amylose content is the most important chemical characteristic anddetermines the hardness of cooked rice. After cooking, rice grain with intermediate amylase
content  will  produce  “soft”  cooked  rice,  while  those  with  high  amylase  content  will  produce  “hard”  cooked rice. The majority of respondents were satisfied in PNG3 rice variety due to its agronomic
characteristics (high yield, long panicles, uniform plant height), good for eating (soft and tasty) andmilling quality (less broken rice and white polished grain).
Table 3 Percent frequency distribution of farmers according to satisfaction levels, and meanvalue of satisfaction levels with improved rice varieties
Characteristics ofimproved rice variety
I.Seed characteristic
Grain shape and size
Seed germination
II.Agronomic
characteristic
Growing
Seedling growing
Tillering ability
Leaf structure
PaniclePlant height
Pest resistanceDisease resistanceLodging resistanceMaturity
III. Post harvest
Harvesting
Grain weight
Yield
Milled rice
IV. Cooking andeating quality
Softness
Eating quality
Aroma
Overall Satisfaction

Satisfaction level
MediumLow(3)(2)

Highest
(5)

High
(4)

Lowest(1)

Mean(n=118)

S.D(±)

Meaning

36.5
50.0

40.7
39.8

18.6
10.2

4.2
0.0

0.0
0.0

4.09
4.40

0.84
0.66

High
Highest

33.9
39.8
37.3
16.1
30.5
20.3
14.4
10.2
25.6
25.4

52.5
50.8
44.9
57.6
46.6
55.1
48.3
46.6
53.0
54.2

12.7
8.5
16.9
22.0
19.5
22.9
28.8
35.6
18.8
20.3

0.8
0.8
0.8
4.2
3.4
1.7
7.6
7.6
1.7
0.0

0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.8
0.0
0.9
0.0

4.19
4.30
4.19
3.86
4.04
3.94
3.68
3.59
4.01
4.05

0.68
0.65
0.74
0.73
0.80
0.70
0.84
0.77
0.77
0.67

High
Highest
High
High
High
High
High
High
High
High

67.8
39.0
44.1
45.8

24.6
44.9
39.8
43.2

6.8
11.9
11.0
9.3

0.8
2.5
5.1
1.7

0.0
1.7
0.0
0.0

4.59
4.17
4.23
4.33

0.65
0.86
0.84
0.71

HighestHigh
HighestHighest

50.8
50.0
14.4
34.3

39.8
40.7
27.1
44.75

9.3
6.8
42.5
17.49

0.0
2.5
14.4
3.15

0.0
0.0
2.5
0.31

4.42
4.38
3.36
4.10

0.65
0.7
0.98
0.75

HighestHighestModerateHighⒸ ISERD

75

IJERD – International Journal of Environmental and Rural Development (2012) 3-1

Satisfaction levels of male and female farmers on using MVs were also compared. Among thecharacteristics considered, only those in harvesting were significantly different. Based on the meanscore of harvesting difference, the satisfaction level of the female group was higher than the malegroup because the harvesting activities were carried out mainly by the female group. According tofemale interviewees, MVs had uniform plant height, thus facilitating harvesting. The p-value ofsatisfaction between male and female farmers on MVs in term of seed characteristic, agronomic
characteristic, grain weight, milled rice, cooking and eating quality are statistically not significant.
The mean score between the two groups were also not significantly different.
Farmers’  preference  on  rice  characteristics  for  future  improvement  The   results   of   farmer’s   preference   are presented in Table 4. Varieties with high yielding
characteristics were the most preferred by farmers for they assure an abundant harvest for family
consumption, and extra income to support household expenditure. Big and long grains were alsopreferred as farmers perceived that these were indicators of good grain quality. The third
preference was early maturity characteristic of the variety. Some farmers grew more than one rice
variety in their rice field, but the lack of manual labor at peak of harvesting season was one of thepredicaments of the farmers in the study areas. So, planting a number of early maturing varieties
would facilitate better scheduling of labor during harvesting season. Farmers could harvest first the
short duration (early maturity) varieties, then medium and late duration varieties. In addition, somehouseholds usually used up their rice stock in the storages before the peak of harvesting season, so
the short duration varieties were very important for them. The fourth preference was the drought
resistant characteristic of the variety. As farmers are also facing global warming effects, whichhave caused uneven and uncertain distribution of rainfall, planting drought resistant varieties wereneeded especially in rainfed conditions. The fifth preference was on resistance to pests and disease.
According to farmers, a number of MVs are susceptible to pests and diseases, and therefore MVs to
be introduced in their areas should be resistant. The preferences and perceptions expressed by
farmers were similar to that of Manzanilla et al. (2011).
The study found that lack of water was the main problem for irrigated condition. Farmers
indicated that the water from irrigation system was not enough after transplanting due to inefficientwater delivery and unmaintained irrigation facilities and thus caused significant yield loss. In thewet season, pests and diseases problems such as rice bug, thrip, stem borer, gall midge, andgrasshopper were the main concerns.
Table 4 Farmer’s  preference  on  rice  characteristics
Characteristic of rice varieties
High yielding
Good quality of grain
Softness
Need less fertilizer
Early maturity
Resistance to drought
Tolerant to flood
Resistance to pests and diseases
Resistance to lodging
High priceCan grow in DS and WS

First
345
65
15
25
30
45
15
20
15
15
0

Score  of  farmers’  preference  *SecondThird
Fourth
96
30
12
120
69
30
48
45
16
12
24
24
52
66
22
44
42
30
4
0
8
56
30
36
24
27
42
16
12
12
0
9
4

Fifth
7
14
16
6
9
11
6
16
21
7
5

Total
score
490
298
140
91
179
172
33
158
129
62
18

Rank
1
2
6
8
3
4
10
5
7
9
11

Note: * Score for each preference: for first preference multiply total frequency by 5; for second multiply by 4; forthird multiply by 3; for fourth multiply by 2, and for fifth multiply by 1

Ⓒ ISERD

76

IJERD – International Journal of Environmental and Rural Development (2012) 3-1

CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONThis study concluded that the majority of farmers in southern region of Lao PDR have adopted
improved rice varieties. The most popular rice varieties were namely PNG3, followed by TSN3,
TDK1 and PNG6. The average rice yield in irrigated area (dry season) was higher than rainfed area
(wet  season).  The  farmer’s  satisfaction  levels  using  MVs  were  mainly  high  and  the  highest  levels.  
Characteristics with the highest satisfaction levels included seed germination, seedling growing,
harvesting, yield,  milled  rice  characteristics,  and  eating  quality.  The  level  of  farmer’s  satisfaction  for aroma characteristic was at moderate level as traditional varieties have better aroma comparedto improved varieties. This means that rice breeders should enhance the aromatic smell of the
improved  varieties  to  facilitate  higher  satisfaction  level  from  farmers.  The  farmer’s  preference  on  rice characteristic indicated that high yielding potential was most preferred by farmers, followed bysize and shape of rice grain, early maturity, resistance to biotic (pests and diseases) and abiotic(drought, flooding, lodging) stresses. Rice breeders need to consider these characteristics in theirrice breeding program to facilitate wider acceptance of improved varieties.
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
The authors are grateful to Northern Upland Rice-based Farm (NURiFaR project), Ministry ofAgriculture and Forestry, Lao PDR for supporting this research work. We also would like toacknowledge NRRP staffs and farmers in the study areas for providing their time to assist in fielddata collection.
REFERENCES
Bounphanousay, C. 2010. Interview. Deputy Director of Rice Research and Cash Crop Research Center.
National Agriculture and Forestry Research Institute. Ministry of Agriculture and Forestry. Vientiane,
Lao PDR.
Chantrasouvan, S. 2002. Statistic for social science research. Department of Social and Humanity Science,
Faculty of Humanity and Social Science, 53.
DOP. 2009. Department of Planning. Ministry of Agriculture and Forestry: Agriculture Statistics Year Book
2009. Vientiane Municipality, Lao P.D.R.
Inthapanya, P., Boualaphanh, C., Hatsadong. and Schiller J.M. 2006. The history of lowland rice variety
improvement in Laos. Rice in Laos. International Rice Research Institute. Philippines. 325-340.
Linquist, B.A., Keoboualapha, B., Sipaseuth. and Inthapanya, P. 2006. Rice production of Laos. Rice in Laos.
International Rice Research Institute. Philippines. 29-45.
Manzanilla, D.O., Paris, T.R., Vergara, G.V., Ismail, A.M., Pandey, S., Labios, R.V., Tatlonghari, G.T.,
Acda, R.D., Chi, T.T.N., Douangsila, K., Siliphouthone, I., Manikmas, M.O.A.and Mackill, D.J. 2011.
Submergence   risks   and   farmers’   preferences:   Implications   for   breeding   Sub1   Rice   in   Southeast   Asia.  
Journal of Agricultural Systems, 104, 335-347.
Sall, S., Norman, D.and Featherstone, A.M. 2000. Quantitative assessment of improved rice variety adoption:
The  farmer’s  perspective.  Journal  of  Agricultural  Systems, 66, 129-144.
Schiller, J.M., Inthapanya, P.and Hatsadong 2000. Rice variety recommendation for the wet-season lowland
environment of the Lao PDR. National Rice Research Program, National Agriculture and Forestry
Research Institute.
Shiller, J.M., Appa Rao, S., Inthapanya, P. and Hatsadong 2006. Glutinous rice in Laos. Rice in Laos.
International Rice Research Institute. Philippines. 197-214.
Shrestha, S., Boupha, T. and Khamphoukeo, K. 2006. Sowing seeds in Lab and Field: Socioeconomic
impact of the Lao-IRRI Rice Research and Training Project. Los Banos (Philippines): International Rice
Research Institute.
Yamane, T. 1960. Statistic: An Introduction Analysis. Singapore: Harper International Edition.

Ⓒ ISERD

77