Simple costs and returns for adopters and non-adopters were computed and compared. Eighteen farmers who adopted the system in 1989 or 1990, but who rejected use of the technology for wet season 1992 were interviewed at the end of 1992 to determine their reasons for such rejection. Some 60 interested farmers then tested the system in wet season 1990. Material costs were similar. Although adopters were enthusiastic about the higher returns to labour of the system, most adopters did not use the panudling for upland rice in wet season 1992.
Rainfall is sporadic during the cropping season.
After several dry days soils become hard and cloddy, making penetrating by the multi-bladed implement difficult. If interrow cultivation was attempted when soils were dried, deviations by the draft animal caused the panudling to cut close to crop rows and to drag clods and attached seedlings from the rows. If, on the other hand, rains came soon before scheduled operations, the heavier soils became sticky, adhering to the implement blades and causing even more bulldozing and damage than under dry conditions. Increased demand for draft power was also a problem. Penetration by panudling was very inadequate where top soils were eroded and compacted sub-surface soils were being cultivated.