Recent trends in Agriculture, Water and Environment Research
TECHNOLOGICAL FEASIBILITY OF USING COMBINE HARVESTER IN PADDY
CULTIVATION IN SRI LANKA- AN ECONOMIC AND SOCIAL PERSPECTIVE
G.C.SAMARAWEERA
DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURAL ECONOMICS, FACULTY OF AGRICULTURE,
UNIVERSITY OF RUHUNA, SRI LANKA
Abstract:
This study is to identify the Socio economic impacts of using combine harvesters on
major stakeholders, farmers and laborers. Few areas in the Hambantota district, Sri Lanka,
having the increasing potential of using combine harvesters in Paddy cultivation, were
selected as the study location. There are two types of harvesters are using in Sri Lanka, Mini
and Large. According to the findings, about 19 laborers per one acres of area are replaced by
the usage of large type combine harvesters and 15 due to Mini type. There is a significant
difference between the average production costs with machine and manual. But majority
(77%) does not like harvester as it creates labor unemployment especially for the female
labor. Majority (92%) of farmers tend to hire combine harvesters from long distances as they
cannot afford for purchasing by their own. Most of the combine harvesters operators are
foreign operators and local operators can operate only Mini harvesters. The land area is
insignificant with the usage of combine harvesters. Finally, the study suggests that the usage
of harvesters in paddy cultivation is economically and socially viable with some specific
adjustments such as introducing loan systems in purchasing harvesters, launching alternative
job opportunities for the jobless workers and initiating a special training for local operators.
Introduction:
Paddy cultivation is important in many sides for Sri Lanka. Rice is the staple food
consumed by the majority of the people in Sri Lanka. The Significant Portion of the
population is involved in paddy cultivation and related industries. Contribution of rice to the
economy is 2.6 of Gross Domestic Product (Central Bank, 2010). Paddy production is
1,993,014 Metric ton in 2010 and annual average yield was 3.8 Metric tons per ha.
(Department of Census and Statistics, 2010). Combine harvester is popularizing in harvesting
and other relevant activities in areas, which are having large paddy fields like Ampara (25%
of rice land areas of Ampara district are harvested by combine harvesters.) Although having
relatively low area under paddy cultivation, (30,030 hectares) there is a new trend of using
combine harvester in Paddy Cultivation in Hambantota District, Sri Lanka. Farm
mechanization is becoming more useful due to the reduction of skilled labor for the manual
farming practices. High wage rates, scarcity of animal power and competitiveness in
increasing agricultural production also motivate the demand for mechanization. Because of
the rapid industrialization, agricultural labourers are migrated to non-agricultural sectors
especially in developed countries. Those countries find the solution for the scarcity of
agricultural laborers through there developed technological knowledge. Therefore, there is a
rapid increment in importation of combine harvesters in recent years. In year 2003 we
imported 92 harvesters for Rs15, 863,100 (US$ 1,455,33) and in year 2010 it was 165 units
for Rs.95,659,800 (US$ 8,776,12)(Dept of Custom, 2010).
Problem statement and objective of the study:
There is a growing trend of using combine harvesters in paddy cultivation in Sri
Lanka recently. But, the technological feasibility in terms of social and economic perspective
is still questionable. Moreover, National Engineering Research and Development Institute
(NERD), the government or any other institution is not interested in producing and
© The SciTech Publishers & International Association for Teaching and Learning, 2012
61
Recent trends in Agriculture, Water and Environment Research
developing user-friendly combine harvesters. Even that is a challenging issue both socially
and economically, very few researches have been conducted on this issue so far in Sri Lanka.
The main objective of the study is to study the technological feasibility of combine harvester
usage in Sri Lanka with reference to the economical and social status of farmers and labors
engaging in paddy cultivation
Research Methodology:
Malpettawa, Hungama, Bandagiriya and Dehiaslanda are the areas in Hambantota
district selected for the survey and 30 laborers and 60 farmers (30 farmers using harvesters
and 30 farmers not using harvesters) were selected by using simple random sampling
technique to collect primary data. Pre-tested questionnaire was employed to collect these
field level data. Secondary data were extracted from journals, relevant theses (published or
Unpublished), Books, Newspapers and from the internet. Data analysis was done by using
simple descriptive methods and statistical applications such as T test and Chi-square test.
Results & Discussion:
3.1 Analysis of the socio economic impact on labourers
3.1.1 Evaluation of the replacement of laborers.
In Sri Lanka there are main two types of harvesters, Large and Mini type based on the
capacity. Large type also has two types L1 and L11
a) Large 1 type and Large 11 types combine harvesters.
No of average labour units for harvesting paddy in 1 acres of area
=6
No of average labour units for collecting paddy in 1 acres of area
= 6.066666667
No of average labour units for Winnowing and Threshing in
1 acres of area
= 7.966667
Total No of average labour units for whole harvesting activity
= 20.o333/acre
No of average labourer units demanded by the combine harvester
Replacement of labourers by the combine harvesters
= 19.13333
b) Mini type Combine harvesters
Generally winnowing is not done by Mini type combine harvesters.
No of average labourer units for Winnowing in 1 acres of area
Displacement of labourers by the combine harvesters
20.03333-5
= 15.03333
≈ 15/acres
= 0.9/acres
= 20.03333-0.9
=5
=
The above calculation proves that, considerable amount of laborers are displaced due to
combine harvesters.
3.1.2 Social status of labourers
a) Age distribution of labourers
14
12
30-40
40-50
© The SciTech Publishers & International Association for Teaching and Learning, 2012
Recent trends in Agriculture, Water and Environment Research
Figure 3.1 Distribution of the age
Figure 3.1 illustrates that 30- 50 years age range is most popular age group for harvesting
activities. It implies that mainly the young attached to the harvesting activities rather than
elders.
b) Distribution of gender
Gender Distribution
Male
20%
Female
80%
Figure 3.2. Gender distribution of the respondents
Figure 3.2 illustrates that female labourers do the significant portion of the harvesting
activities. There are 80% of the sample is female labourers in harvesting activities. Therefore,
usage of combine harvesters has significant impact on female employment.
c) Distribution of education level among the labourers.
© The SciTech Publishers & International Association for Teaching and Learning, 2012
Recent trends in Agriculture, Water and Environment Research
Education level is an important factor to determine the social states of a person. Figure 3.3
illustrates the percent distribution of the education level and the number of laborers in the
target area.
>OL
10%
>1
7%
>AL
3%
1--5
30%
5--11
50%
Figure 3.3 Distribution of education level among the laborers.
According to the results most of the laborers in the area (80%) are in low education level.
(Educate up to Grade 11 and below). This low education level limits the ability of moving
into other job opportunities. Only a few (03%) had a higher education. Therefore, after being
replaced by farm machinery, most probably majority may become jobless dependents.
3.1.3 Impact of combine harvesters on labourers
3.1.3.1 Activities of labourers with the usage of combine harvesters
PERCENTAGE
80
60
40
OL= Up to Grade 10
20
AL =Up to Grade 12
0
A
B
C
D
C
– Drying
A – Harvesting sides of the field
D – No participation
B – Winnowing
Figure 3.4 Activities with the usage of combine harvesters.
Harvesters require labor in some circumstances. Figure 3.4 represents the status of labour
requirement for the combine harvester and it reveals that most of the farmers (60%) are not
involving any activities with harvesters. Some laborers are participated in activities with the
© The SciTech Publishers & International Association for Teaching and Learning, 2012
Recent trends in Agriculture, Water and Environment Research
usage of combine harvesters and this varies with the type of harvester, mini or large. When
large types of harvesters are operated some paddy cannot be harvested in the corners of the
field. Those remaining paddy is harvested manually by farmers by themselves or sometimes
laborers are used. Mini harvesters does not facilitate for winnowing. Therefore, farmer has to
use laborers for that purpose. Any harvester does not facilitate drying. In the most of the time
farmers dry their paddy by themselves. Labor requirement is high in the fields with large
area. Mostly drying is done by the farmers by themselves. Therefore, number of laborers is
very low in that activity. Most of the laborers are participated in harvesting of sides of the
field.
3.1.3.1 View of the labourers on the usage of combine harvesters
Figure 3.5 illustrates the labourers’ view on the usage of combine harvesters and the majority
(47%) states that the introduction of combine harvester is socially and economically bad for
them.
Not bad
23%
Bad
47%
Some what bad
30%
Figure 3.5 View of the laborers on the effect of combine harvester
There are 30% of the respondents stated that the introduction of combine harvester is
somewhat bad, but not totally bad and the idea of 23% of respondents’ was the harvester is
not bad at all stating their high preference.
3.2 The working capacity of combine harvesters.
The working capacity of a machine is an important parameter of measuring the efficiency of
the machine. This can be varying according to several factors. The nature of the area of
operating the machine is one of those factors. Figure 3.9 represents the relationship between
the area and the average working capacity of combine harvesters.
WORKING CAPACITY
(Acres/day)
12
10
8
6
4
2
0
Bandagiriya
Dehigahalanda
Malpettaw a
REGION
Figure 3.6 the relationship between the area and the average working capacity of
combine harvesters.
The working capacity of Dehigahalanda area is relatively very low in this season. (6.9375
acres per day). The main reason is the flooding condition of Walawe River. In bandagiriya
area the average working capacity is about 9 acres per day. It is less than malpettawa region
due to harvesting activities are done using few mini type combine harvesters. Therefore,
Mepettawa is the best region for using the harvester with high working capacity.
© The SciTech Publishers & International Association for Teaching and Learning, 2012
Recent trends in Agriculture, Water and Environment Research
3.3 Distribution of types of combine harvesters in the area
No of farmers
10
8
6
4
2
0
Bandagiriya
Dehigahalanda
Malpettaw a
Region & the type of the machine
L1
L2
Mini
Figure 3.7 Distribution of types of combine harvesters in the area.
Figure 3.7 shows that the usage of the types of harvesters varies with the region.
3.4 Relationship between the amount of land area cultivated and the type of machine
No of machines
12
10
8
6
4
2
0
1--3
3--5
5--7
7--9
Area range and machine type
L1
L2
Figure 3.8 Amount of land area and the Type of machine
Figure 3.8 proves that the mini type of harvesters is not popularized in large land areas and
large one-type (L1) harvesters are mostly used in all the area categories in our study area.
3.5 The relationship between land area and the usage of combine harvesters
Chi square analysis proves that the land area is insignificant with the machinery usage.
3.6 Responses of the non users
a) Reasons for not using combine harveste
16
NO OF FARMERS
14
12
10
8
6
4
2
Large
bunds
Small land
area
Dropping
paddy
panicles
Availability
of manual
workers
Sloppiness
of lands
Logging
condition
Quality
losses
0
REASON
Figure 3.9 reasons for not using combine harvesters.
Thirty (30) random sampled farmers were used to find out the reasons for not using the
machine. Most of the farmers are not interested in using combine harvesters due to logging
condition of their fields. In bandagiriya area logging paddy lands cannot be seen and in
© The SciTech Publishers & International Association for Teaching and Learning, 2012
Recent trends in Agriculture, Water and Environment Research
Malpettawa region farmers tend to use manual workers due to heavy logging condition in
their fields. Limited area to operate combine harvesters, law quality of mechanized paddy
(they feel that wetness of the grain is comparatively high with the combine harvester and the
government may reject their paddy without purchasing), Sloppiness of the paddy land and the
large bunds of the fields, dropping of paddy panicles,
panicles, are among the reasons for not using
harvesters. Some farmers are able to find enough labourers easily and therefore, they don’t
need combine harvesters.
3.7 Ownership of combine harvesters
.
Using the own harvester
8%
Hiring of harvesters
92%
Figure 3.10 Ownership of the combine harvesters.
According to the figure 3.10, most of the farmers (92) are hiring harvesters. They are not
interested in buying harvesters due to high cost for large type harvesters. Among the users,
onlyy 8% of the farmers are using their own harvesters, but they are mini type harvesters.
Based on the willingness to buy a mini type combine harvester, 90% of the farmers said they
are not willing to by a mini type harvester.
3.8Area of hiring combine harves
harvesters
Most of the farmers are hiring combine harvesters outside of the region.
80
80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
24
20
6
No of farmers
Percentage
Hiring from outside of the region
Figure 3.11 area of hiring combine harvesters.
Mostly Harvesters hiring from the region are Mini type harvesters. 80 % of the harvesters are
hiring from out side of the region. Amparai, Kalmunai and akkareipattu are the regions that
these harvesters are hired.
3.9 Changing the usage of combine harvesters with the time
Figure 3.12 illustrates the changes of using harvesters with the time in Hambantota district.
Combine harvesters are introduced in 2004 to the Hambantota district and usage of
harvesters has increased in a significant manner with the time.
year 2004,
11, 37%
© The SciTech Publishers
year 2005, & International Association for Teaching and Learning, 2012
Recent trends in Agriculture, Water and Environment Research
0
10
20
Figure.3.12 Status of harvester usage in the study area
3.10 Operators of the combine harvesters
o pe ra t o r c a t o ga ry
Figure 3.13 Types of operators of combine harvesters.
According to the figure 3.13, most of the operators are foreign operators. Out of the total
number of local operators, 46.15% are operating Mini type combine harvesters. Therefore,
scarcity of operators could be seen in case of large types of harvesters. Average cost for
operators who are operating Mini type combine harvester is Rs 1000/= per 1 acres of area.
Although this is important in socio economically, the Mini types of harvesters are not
popularizing in the area.
3.11 View of farmers on retaining of organic matter in the field
In manual harvesting practices harvested paddy in an area is collected to one place and
threshing and winnowing practices are implemented. Therefore, straw remains at one place
and of the field. When combine harvesters are used harvested paddy is subjected to threshing
while operating the machine and straw is retained whole over the field. This straw act as a
valuable fertilize to the field. Figure 3.14 represents the farmers’ view on retaining of straw
in the field.
No Idea
10%
No use
3%
Go o d
23%
Excelent
64%
Figure 3.14 View of farmers on the retaining of organic matter in the field.
© The SciTech Publishers & International Association for Teaching and Learning, 2012
Recent trends in Agriculture, Water and Environment Research
Most of the farmers (64%) feel that combine harvesters are doing excellent job by retaining
straw in the field. There are 10% of farmers had no idea and 3% of the farmers said that straw
is unnecessary for them
3.12 Constrains associated with combine harvesters
25
20
15
10
5
0
Not better for Not better for
Small fields
flooded lands
Grain losses
No constrains
Figure 3.15 Constrains associated with combine harvesters
Majority (73.33%) of the farmers stated that combine harvesters are not better for small
fields. There are 63.33% of farmers stated that combine harvesters are not good under
flooded condition. Some farmers complain about grain losses with combine harvesters. Ten
percent (10%) of the population had not any complain about combine harvesters (Fig. 3.15).
3.13 Comparison of the production cost between usage of combine harvesters and
manual harvesting
Based on the farmers’ view, 73.33% of the farmers stated that cost of production can be
minimized due to combine harvesters. Rest of the farmers said that there isn’t significant
difference between manual harvesting and mechanical harvesting.
The average production cost in case of machinery harvesting is Rs 6500/= per acre and that is
for manual harvesting is about 10,500/=
T test was done to test whether there is significant relationship between the production costs
between these two methods. Production cost of two farm groups (Using harvesters and not
using harvesters) were considered.
T
DF
P
-25.39
46.5
0.0000
According to the results there is a significant deference between the production cost/acre for
manual harvesting and machine harvesting.
Conclusions:
It is more profitable of using combine harvesters other than manual harvesting for
farmers in Sri Lanka with respect to the production cost. There is a significant difference
between the average production costs of two harvesting methods, manual and machinery.
This results consistent with previous studies of Praweenwongwuthi, et al , 2010 stated that
net benefit of combine harvesting was about 30.3% higher compared to manual harvesting
and threshing. There are only mini –type harvesters in the study area and the majority (92%)
is hiring the harvesters. Based on the socio-economic status of the respondents, the usage of
combine harvesters makes bad impact on agricultural laborers, especially female labors who
are involving in manual farm operations as the replacement rate is considerably high. The
same results were recorded by Mahrouf and Rafeek,2010,
stating that the harvester
© The SciTech Publishers & International Association for Teaching and Learning, 2012
Recent trends in Agriculture, Water and Environment Research
replaces labor by about 80-85%. Mainly young generation is involving in farming activities
with low education level. Combine harvesters are difficult to operate in some paddy lands
with heavy logging conditions and in small paddy fields. In those areas manual harvesting is
commonly practiced. Although the combine harvester has given positive economic and social
benefit to farmers with respect to their production, it has not gained greater acceptance
among farmers in Sri Lanka as the cost of machine is considerably high, which is around Rs.
3.8.Million (US$ 0.3 Million). This discourages farmers investing on this technology.
However, it is possible to popularize these machines in major rice producing areas by
providing financial incentives to farmer companies/ organizations as well as conducting
appropriate training programs in order to train them for operating the machines.
Recommendations:
Improve the extension service realizing the importance and the economic viability as
well as the reliability of the harvesters among farmers
Government loan, subsidy or financial assistance system should be launched to make farmers
financially feasible of purchasing harvesters instead of hiring.
Provide special training for the farm labours in order to turn them as skillful machine
operators.
Government financed self – employment or any other type of employment structure should
be initiated in order to grasp the replaced jobless dependents.
References:
.Central Bank, (2010). Annual report, Colombo, Sri Lanka.
Department of Census and Statistics, (2010). Annual report, Colombo, Sri Lanka.
Dept of Custom, (2010). Annual Report, Custom Department of Sri Lanka, Colombo, Sri
Lanka.
Praweenwongwuthi, S., Laohasiriwong, S., and Rambo, A.T., (2010). Impacts of Rice
Combine Harvesters on Economic and Social of Farmers in a village of the Tung Kula
Ronghai Region. Research Journal of Agriculture and Biological Sciences, 6(6): 778-784.
Mahrouf, A.R.M .and Rafeek, M.I.M. (2010). Mechanization of paddy harvesting :An
economic perspective, Socio Economic and planning center, Peradeniya, Sri Lanka.
© The SciTech Publishers & International Association for Teaching and Learning, 2012
70