@article{Farquharson:305248,
      recid = {305248},
      author = {Farquharson , Robert and Pyay Thar, So and Ramilan,  Thiagarajah and Chen, Deli},
      title = {Financial imperatives for fertiliser decisions by  smallholders in Myanmar},
      address = {2020-09-16},
      pages = {15},
      year = {2020},
      abstract = {Questions of ‘improving’ smallholder decisions for farm  input use have long exercised the minds of RD&E  practitioners with ‘reducing poverty’ objectives in  developing countries. Decision Support Tools (DSTs) have  often been developed for farmers and/or extension agents  based on a ‘top-down’ or linear  Research-Development-Extension paradigm. There is evidence  that DSTs are not used by farm decision makers. Some  developers of DSTs don’t realise that smallholder farmers  must borrow money to buy fertilizer!
 In Myanmar  smallholder farmers are using Nitrogen (N) fertilizer for  cereal crop production and these decisions have been  studied to investigate whether better information can be  provided for such decisions. These smallholders are  semi-subsistence with reliance on purchased inputs and they  sell to markets for profit.
 Considering the current  situation for rice and maize production systems in the  central Dry Zone of Myanmar, how can information be  provided to relevant decision makers (farmers, extension  agents, input suppliers) leading to improved farm household  well-being? Is the development of a ‘traditional’ DST (as  described above) likely to be of value? Can an improved  decision-making framework be developed for this set of  farmers and circumstances?
 A multi-disciplinary  ACIAR-funded project in central Myanmar has investigated  rice and maize production focussing on nutrient use  efficiency and fertiliser decisions. Bio-physical work  included field trials measuring crop yield responses to  differing levels of N input (production functions) and  taking associated soil and plant measures to estimate N  uptake and use efficiency. The socio-economic component  included initial focus group workshops, two farmer field  surveys, a literature review of DSTs and an economic  analysis of the crop yield responses for ‘best’ N levels.  The project has promised to develop a DST, and the purpose  of this paper is to outline our thinking about decision  support.
 The paper draws together information from the  focus group workshops, the field surveys, the yield  responses and economic analyses. A partial budget framework  using (subjective) farmer inputs in a return on investment  (ROI) framework is outlined. An existing DST which uses  this economic framework is discussed.
 Despite our a priori  expectations that farmers in central Myanmar might not be  using fertilizer efficiently, we found that many  smallholders apply both compound (NPK) and Urea (N)  fertilizers, that the amounts of Urea are substantial, and  that they split the Urea applications as do farmers in  Australia. They seem to understand the agronomic benefits  from applying N fertilizer when the crop is growing to  improve uptake efficiency. 
 Rice and maize yield responses  to increasing N application rates generally follow a  diminishing returns pattern, despite the tyranny of site  and season associated with trials in farmer fields. Given  that their stated objectives include financial returns,  that some farmers require their income to cover input costs  and that a ROI is desirable, we apply the CIMMYT (1988)  framework to this set of results and compare the actual  farmer decisions with a ROI decision rule based on  agronomic field work results.
 We conclude that these  farmers are making fertilizer decisions that are consistent  with a profit-conscious but risk-averse paradigm. We  illustrate a DST which is based more on economic objectives  and risk preferences than traditional tools based on N  budgets or programs with soil, agronomic and socio-economic  overlays.},
      url = {http://ageconsearch.umn.edu/record/305248},
      doi = {https://doi.org/10.22004/ag.econ.305248},
}