IJERD – International Journal of Environmental and Rural Development (2018) 9-1

Research article
erd

A Study on Cambodian Rice Farming: Comparative
Analysis on Aromatic and Non-Aromatic Rice Farming in
Voatkor Commune, Battambang Province
SEREIROTH BUNTHAN*
Graduate School of Agriculture, Tokyo University of Agriculture, Tokyo, Japan
Email: 46616009@nodai.ac.jp

YUKI TAKAHASHI
Graduate School of Agriculture, Tokyo University of Agriculture, Tokyo, Japan

YOICHI IZUMIDA
Faculty of International Agriculture and Food Studies, Tokyo University of Agriculture,
Tokyo, Japan
Received 31 December 2017

Accepted 5 May 2018(*Corresponding Author)

Abstract Cambodian agriculture is now in midst of transition from the traditional subsistent
to modern commercial one. With respect to rice farming, more farmers are shifting from
non-aromatic to aromatic rice production. Currently, aromatic rice accounts for about 10%of total rice cultivated area, and 30% of total rice production. Furthermore, thecompetitiveness of non-aromatic rice has worsened recently. By observing this trend, thisstudy aims to grasp the differences in characteristics and profitability between non-aromaticand aromatic rice production, and to discuss the factors affecting the variety selection fromfarmers’ viewpoint. This study is based on the survey conducted in Voatkor commune,
Battambang province in 2017, one of the biggest rice producing areas in Cambodia. In thesurvey, random sampling method was applied, and 82 rice farmers were interviewed.
Among the sample, 59 farmers adopted non-aromatic rice, and 61 farmers adopted aromatic
rice, including farmers adopted both aromatic and non-aromatic. Study farmers generally
cultivated only once a year, mainly in wet season. The result of the study showed that
aromatic rice was not commonly used for home consumption, and that more than 80% of
the production was for sale, considering greater demand from international market. On theother hand, the non-aromatic rice was mainly used for home consumption and domestic
market. The costs of aromatic rice production were higher on material and labor costs, but
farmers were able obtain higher yield in comparison with the non-aromatic rice. Despite
higher production costs, aromatic rice was found to be more profitable in gross value added,
gross margin and net profit, thanks to higher yield and favorable paddy price. In addition,
this study also identified non-economic factors affecting the farmers’ decision-making on
varieties. Finally, some recommendations are offered.
Keywords aromatic rice, non-aromatic rice, production costs, profitability, Cambodia

INTRODUCTION
Rice is a staple food in Cambodia, cultivated all over the country. It contributes more than 10% to
the national GDP with more than 50% of employment. After 30-years hiatus caused by civil war,
Cambodia has been slowly recovering its status as a major rice producer and exporter. Currently,
Cambodia stands as the World 6th rice exporter and second largest exporter of Premium Jasmine
Rice (USDA, 2013).
With the achievement of rice self-sufficiency in 1990s, the Cambodian government has set a
goal to export one million tons of milled rice by 2015. For this goal, aromatic rice was strategicallyimportant, since it has a great potential for exportation pulled by the increasing demand frominternational market. As World Bank (2015) pointed out, many farmers were shifting from nonⒸ ISERD71

IJERD – International Journal of Environmental and Rural Development (2018) 9-1

aromatic to aromatic rice production. Currently it is estimated that aromatic rice accounts for about
10 percent of cultivated area, and 30% of total production. However, most farmers still stick to
non-aromatic rice farming partly due to the constraints of socio-economic factors, land condition,and partly due to the farmers’ preference. It is important to clarify the obstacles from field data,
which hinder the shift of rice production to more rational direction.
This study aims to grasp the differences in characteristics of production as well as differencesin cost and return, among several types of rice farming. Also, it aims to point out the factors
affecting the variety selection, based on interviews with rice farmers.
METHODOLOGYThis survey was conducted in Voatkor commune, Battambang province. It is one of the biggest riceproducing areas in Cambodia, also known as “Cambodian Rice Basket”. The total number of farmhousehold is around 82 households in 2017, and the total agriculture land is around 164.53 ha,which consists of 159.44ha of rice field. The water resource of this commune is provided by
Kampingpouy reservoir, and Kahout irrigation. The irrigation situation in this study area isconsiderably poor. Rice field located inside the village, cannot access to the irrigation system fully
throughout the year, and rice farming there is heavily dependent on rainfall.
This study is based mostly on primary data, collected through direct interviewing with rice
farmers in the commune. Interviewed farmers were selected by random sampling method. The
survey was conducted two times in March and September 2017. Totally 82 rice farmers wereinterviewed and they categorized into three groups: group A (21 non-aromatic rice adopter), group
B (22 aromatic rice adopter), and group C (38 farmers adopted both).
The method of analysis of this paper is mainly descriptive, but considering the wide
differences in the characteristics and economic performance of rice production among various ricecultivating systems, this paper tries to compare the above-mentioned differences not only between
aromatic and non-aromatic rice production but also among rice cultivating systems.
RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
Socio-Economic Characteristics of Aromatic and Non-Aromatic Rice Producers
Table 1 Socio-economic characteristics of aromatic and mon-aromatic rice producers
Non-aromatic
farmers
21
20
5.05
54.71
5.57
1.13
1.48

Aromatic
farmers
22
21
4.91
51.52
7.48
1.54
1.93

Farmers
adopted both1
38
38
5.37
51.89
7.89
3.01
4.05

T-test (p value)
NA & A
NA & Both

Number of household (HH)
Number of male head of HH
Average family size (person)
0.78
Average age (years old)
0.41
Year of education (years)
0.08
Average owned land per HH (ha)0.24
Average planted area per HH (ha)0.17
Source: Field survey, 2017
1: Farmers adopted both means farmers who produced both aromatic and non-aromatic rice varieties.
*Indicates statistical significance at 0.05 level

0.45
0.44
0.01
0.04
0.07

*
*

Basic features of interviewed farmers are presented in Table 1. Table 1 shows that farmers of group
C had longer career of education in comparison to farmers in group A and B. In addition, farmers
in group C had bigger size of owned and as well as planted rice area. The difference between
owned and planted land can be regarded as rented land and this was around one hectare (one thirdof total planted area) for farmers in group C. On the other hand, rented land of group A and B
farmers was not so much, suggesting they were mostly using their owned land. With respect tofamily size and age of respondents there was no significant difference among these 3 group farmers.

Ⓒ ISERD

72

IJERD – International Journal of Environmental and Rural Development (2018) 9-1

Rice Farming System in the Study Area
In Cambodia, there are many types of rice farming in accordance to seasons, land type, and watercondition. The main crop is rain-fed rice farming in rainy season, primarily harvested in November
to January, using local varieties. It should be noted that the performance of rice faming, such as
yield, cost of production, profitability and so on, are ranging widely depending on land condition,
availability of water, and variety use. Thus, before discussing the difference in production cost andreturn of rice farming, it is needed to examine the existing rice cultivation system in the study area.
Four different types of rice farming system were observed in the study area (Table 2): medium
non-aromatic rice, late non-aromatic rice, medium aromatic rice, and early aromatic rice.
Table 2 Typology of rice farming systems in the study area
Rice cultivating system bylength of maturity

Local variety
Non-aromatic
Aromatic

Early
X
MediumO
Late
O
Source; field survey 2017 by the first author
Note 1). o: Observed in studied area
x: Not observed in studied area

X
O
X

Modern variety
Non-aromatic
Aromatic
X
X
X

O
X
X

Medium non-aromatic rice farming: 29 respondents adopted this farming system. Using local
varieties, farmers started in May to June and harvest in November to December (around 6 months).
This rice system is extensive with a bag of fertilizer (50kg/bag) and only a limited insecticide andweedicide were applied. This farming is fully dependent on rainfalls, so irregular rainfalls might
damage or delay the process of farming, resulting the decreasing in the paddy yield. The average
yield per hectare is around 2.74 ton, and the purpose of this production is mainly for homeconsumption.
Medium aromatic rice faming: 45 farmers were found to adopt this farming system. The varietiesthat farmers used are local ones with 2.82 tons of average yield per hectare. The cropping period is
the same as medium non-aromatic rice. This rice system is also an extensive type with a limited use
of weedicide, insecticide, and fertilizer (commonly 1 bag). It fully depends on rainfalls, and only
shallow depth-rice field is suitable to this system. The purpose of this rice production is partiallyfor home consumption and for sale.
Late non-aromatic rice farming: 30 farmers revealed to adopt this farming system. Same as theearlier farming system, the varieties of this farming system consist of local varieties. The average
yield of adopted farmers is around 2.78 ton per hectare. The cropping period is 8 months, startingfrom May to June, and finishing in December to January. This rice system is an extensive one asmedium rice farming, and faces the same risk. The main purpose of this production is for homeconsumption as well as for sale.
Early aromatic rice farming: 34 farmers adopted this farming system. This farming system is themain practice when the irrigated water can reach to the rice field during dry season and short dry inwet season. Early aromatic rice farming is an intensive farming with high use of fertilizer (3 to 4bags) and of weedicide and insecticide. The varieties for this farming system are the modern ones,
and the yield per hectare (around 3.56 tons) is higher than the local varieties. The cropping period
for this farming system is only 3 to 4 months (around 105 to 115 days). The purpose of this type ofrice production is mainly for sale, and finally export to international market.
Total Production Cost of Rice Farming
From above analysis, it was found that in the study areas, there were four types of rice farming, andthat the system differed much in variety selection, production purpose, and input use among them.
Thus, in the analysis of cost and returns of rice farming, it is necessary that diversified aspects ofrice farming among farming systems should be fully took into the account.
Ⓒ ISERD73

IJERD – International Journal of Environmental and Rural Development (2018) 9-1

In this study two different comparison are adopted. First, comparison between medium nonaromatic and medium aromatic rice farming was compared, since those two shared the same
cropping period. Second, late non-aromatic rice farming and early aromatic rice farming wascompared. Those two types are currently the most common rice farming system in the study area.
Concerning the cost analysis, this study followed the method of World Bank (2015).
Additionally, the analysis calculated the cost not only of cash payment, but also imputed cost suchas cost of organic fertilizer, family labor costs, cost of owned land, and depreciation of farm assets.
To check the significance of difference in cost items between farming systems, T-test with twosampled assuming unequaled variances is applied in this study as well.
Table 3: Total production cost of aromatic and non-aromatic rice production

Source: Field Survey, 2017
*Indicates statistical significance at 0.05 level

Unit: USD/ha

Table 3 shows production costs (cost per ha) of four types of rice faming. The result revealed
that the total production cost of medium non-aromatic rice was 476.78 USD/ha, while the total
production cost of medium aromatic rice was 497.65 USD/ha, suggesting that production cost of
medium aromatic rice was significantly higher than that of medium non-aromatic rice due to higher
costs of seed, fertilizer, fuel, and water cost. The result also showed the total production cost ofearly aromatic rice (600.83 USD/ha) was significantly higher than total production cost of late nonaromatic rice (503.16USD/ha), resulted from higher spending in seed, fertilizer, pesticide,weedicide, fuel, service cost, and family labor. The production cost of both aromatic rice farming
systems was reported to be much higher in comparison to the non-aromatic rice farming systems.
Economic Returns of Rice Farming
Regarding economic returns, this study examined several indicators, like gross value added, grossmargin, total cash income, and net profit of rice farming in each category. Gross value added was
the deduction from gross revenue and intermediate inputs. Gross margin was obtained by deducting
gross revenue deducting intermediate inputs and hired labor. Total cash income was calculated bydeducting total cash expense from gross revenue, and finally net profit was calculated by deducting
costs of family labor, costs of owned land, and depreciation cost from gross margin. In addition, Ttest analysis with two-sampled assuming unequal variances was applied in this study as well.
Table 4 shows the comparison of cost and returns per hectare among four rice faming systemin the study in each category. The production of aromatic rice was more profitable in whatevermodel used. As the extensive farming system, both medium non-aromatic and medium aromaticⒸ ISERD

74

IJERD – International Journal of Environmental and Rural Development (2018) 9-1

rice had similarity of input used and yield. But, the result revealed that net profit of medium
aromatic rice is 90% higher and more profitable than medium non-aromatic rice in every indicator.
However, it is important to note that the net profit of medium aromatic rice was not significantly
higher than medium non-aromatic rice.
Table 4 Net profit of aromatic and non-aromatic rice production

Source: Field Survey, 2017
*Indicates statistical significance at 0.05 level

Unit: USD/ha

Concerning the comparison of cost and returns between late non-aromatic and early aromatic
rice, this analysis confirmed the significant difference in terms of production cost and yield
between two categories. It was found that early aromatic rice was significantly more profitable thanlate non-aromatic rice. Higher yield and higher paddy price resulted the higher economic
performance of aromatic rice than late non-aromatic rice. This implied that farmers who adopted
aromatic rice both medium and early rice farming system made greater profit than farmers who
adopted only non-aromatic rice. This result also realized the reasons behind the occurrence indiversities in rice farming in the study area as well.
Factors Affecting Farmers’ Decision-making
Understanding the differences in cost and returns between aromatic and non-aromatic rice farming,
it is needed to examine farmers’ socio-economic characteristics factors, affecting their decisionmaking on varieties selection.
The result of estimated probit model of factors influencing group A and B farmers on varieties
selection is presented in Table 5, which value 1 represented aromatic rice and 0 was non-aromatic
rice. This study was examined farmers by farmers, and some of the variables had significant effects
on the probability of adopting aromatic rice and some for non-aromatic rice. As result showed, theadoption of rice varieties was likely to be influenced by some factors. For instance, land condition
appeared to be the most crucial factor in adopting decision of group A and B farmers. The
significant of land condition indicated that well condition factor was likely important in increasing
aromatic rice adoption. Similar studies suggested that the endowment of land field was critical for
farmers’ decision-making on varieties adoption. Farming experiences also appeared to be anotherimportant factor affecting on farmers’ decision. The study pointed that the more experienced thefarmers is, the more likely farmers will adopt aromatic rice. Eating preference was added in themodel in order to capture the farmers’ preference on home consumption rice varieties, and theresult, on the other hand, indicated that eating preference and age of interviewed farmers showedⒸ ISERD

75

IJERD – International Journal of Environmental and Rural Development (2018) 9-1

negative significant effect on adoption of aromatic rice. This suggested that eating preference andage of respondents were more likely to influence on adoption of non-aromatic rice.
Table 5 also shows the result of estimation of probit model of factors impacting group C
farmers’ decision-making. This analysis was examined plot by plot, and it also proved that land
condition and farming experience factor showed the propensity toward adopting aromatic rice. The
result indicated that the better land condition is and the more farming experiences farmers have,group C farmers were likely to produce more aromatic rice. It was possibly explained that group C
farmers were mostly consisted of big size or farm oriented farmers, which proved that this farmers
group was more responsive toward varieties with better yield and market.
Table 5 Estimated probit model for factors affecting farmers’ varieties selection of aromatic,
farmers adopted non-aromatic, and farmers adopted both aromatic and nonaromatic rice

Source: Field survey, 2017
Significant codes: 0’***’ 0.001’**’ 0.01’*’ 0.05’.’

CONCLUSION
The result of the analysis of production cost and returns revealed that all indicators including grossvalue added, gross margin, total cash income, and net profit of medium and early aromatic rice
varieties received higher income and more profitable from economic view point in comparison to
medium and late non-aromatic rice. The result also revealed that land condition was the most
crucial factor in determining farmers’ decision, specially toward producing aromatic rice because
suitable land condition was needed in producing aromatic rice. It is indicated that in the future, thenon-aromatic rice might lose its status as the major rice production in Cambodia, and more farmers
will shift to grow more aromatic rice in the study. This study also suggested that in order toimprove the production of aromatic and non-aromatic rice, two majoring issues are needed toaddress such as reduction domestics production cost and minimizing the marketing and traderelated costs and barriers.
REFERENCES
Chwelos, P., Benbasat, I. and Dexter, A. 2001. Research report: Empirical test of an EDI adoption model.
FDA. 2010. An economic survey of rice sector in Cambodia. Report commissioned by FDA and SNEC,
Phnom Penh, 2010.
Ingye, Y. 2005. The effect of adoption of improve rice variety on the productivity of small-scale farmers inHawl, Nigeria. Department of Agricultural Economics and Extension, University of Maiduguri, Nigeria.
Kuthy Kann. 2013. Cambodia, the Rice Kingdom of “White Gold”, World Rice Conference 2013.
RGC 2011-2016. Annual report of agriculture. Department of Agriculture in Battambang, Cambodia.
Slayton, T., Mudita, C. and Munichan, K. 2015. Cambodian agriculture in transition, Opportunity and risks.
Report Commissioned by the World Bank and AusAID.
USDA. 2016. Rice, World markets and trade. Foreign Agricultural Service under USDA.
Ⓒ ISERD

76