literature review on problems faced by farmers

• Open access
• Published: 10 May 2017

Impacts of natural disasters on smallholder farmers: gaps and recommendations

• Tejendra Chapagain   ORCID: orcid.org/0000-0003-1958-9778 1 &
• Manish N. Raizada 1  

Agriculture & Food Security volume  6 , Article number:  39 ( 2017 ) Cite this article

50k Accesses

29 Citations

77 Altmetric

Metrics details

Here, we review the impacts of recent natural disasters in developing countries on rural agriculture and livelihoods with the objective of understanding gaps and providing recommendations. Lessons from these disasters demonstrate that national governments, aid agencies, and international/non-governmental organizations (I/NGOs) are effective primarily at distributing short-term products (e.g. food packages and tarpaulin) to cities. Such products are inexpensive, simple to procure, and easily quantifiable for donors. Unfortunately, the literature suggests that many national governments and foreign NGOs are ineffective at assisting rural farmers in the short and long term. Given that the global community is somewhat effective at distributing short-term products, we suggest that a similar strategy should be developed for rural areas, but focusing on products that can assist farm households. There appears to be a gap in knowledge of effective products that can target such households after a disaster. We propose an emergency sustainable agriculture kit (eSAK) framework for disaster relief in rural areas that involves a comprehensive list of products that can be combined into packages to address the needs of shelter, hunger, first aid, seeds, preservation of indigenous crop varieties, and post-disaster labour shortages. We also propose ideas on how to re-purpose relief products provided to urban areas to assist with farm needs. Products highlighted are rolls of agricultural-grade plastics, low-oxygen grain storage bags, waterproof gardening gloves, multi-use shovels, seeds of early maturing crops, fertilizers, inexpensive farming tools, temporary food support, and first-aid kits. These products are needed, inexpensive, labour efficient, compact, lightweight, available/procurable on a large scale, simple, and re- usable. Furthermore, correct use and re-purposing of the products can be explained using accompanying graphical illustrations, which is critical for rural illiterate households. As distribution to rural areas is a challenge, especially after a disaster, we propose the use of pre-existing alcohol/cigarette/snackfood distribution networks as a novel strategy for rural disaster relief. These efforts must be in partnership with local officials and grassroots organizations, with dedicated funding from governments and international aid agencies. It is hoped that global stakeholders will benefit from these recommendations to assist affected farmers after a crisis.

Earthquakes, landslides, flood, drought, fires, and hailstorms are some of the natural calamities that occur every year, at any point, and anywhere, causing threats to the livelihoods of smallholder farmers and their food security. Disasters can cause loss of human and animal life, field crops, stored seeds, agricultural equipment/materials, and their supply systems (e.g. infrastructure) as well as associated indigenous knowledge, thus disrupting not only the immediate growing season but also future seasons [ 1 , 2 ]. Rural regions of the developing world can be remote, with high concentrations of mass poverty [ 3 , 4 ], food insecurity [ 4 – 6 ], and illiteracy [ 4 , 7 ]; hence access to food, shelter, and communication related to relief and recovery is a challenge after a disaster. In rural areas, farmers strongly rely on natural resources [ 8 , 9 ] and have no alternative source of income or employment, making them more vulnerable to a crisis. Women and children, those most responsible for on-farm labour in developing countries, are most affected by post-traumatic stress after a disaster [ 10 ]. After disasters, intense media focus occurs on the cities where the images are most dramatic, whereas the needs and issues of rural farm families are often neglected [ 11 , 12 ]. Apart from disasters that occur directly in rural areas, damage to cities also impacts rural families, as urban-to-rural migration causes food shortages and the consumption of planting materials as occurred after the Haitian earthquake in 2010 [ 2 ]. All these factors may lead to a long-term disaster in rural areas as witnessed in Haiti [ 13 , 14 ]. Therefore, after a natural disaster, rural areas require emergency interventions to maintain livelihoods and food security [ 14 , 15 ], and a longer-term integrated recovery plan [ 16 ] to minimize the possibility of a secondary disaster, as inexpensively as possible given limited local financial resources.

Developing nations are especially vulnerable to rural disasters as the majority of livelihoods (50–95% of the population) are based on farming [ 4 , 17 ]. Despite highly publicized trends towards urbanization, in 2030, it is expected that over 55% of the population in developing countries will continue to live in rural areas [ 7 ]. A decline in the dollar-a-day poverty rate in rural areas has been reported in East Asia and the Pacific region; however, rural poverty is rising notably in sub-Saharan Africa and South Asia [ 18 ]. According to the United Nation’s World Food Programme, three-quarters of hungry people live in rural areas [ 19 ], of which 98% are in developing countries [ 6 ].

The current literature regarding natural disasters has not focused on coping efforts to assist farmers, but rather on the post-disaster impacts on rural livelihoods [ 12 ], household economy, food and nutritional security [ 12 , 20 – 22 ], seed systems security [ 23 , 24 ], soil fertility [ 25 ], physical and mental health [ 26 , 27 ], population displacement [ 28 ], and long-term human migration [ 29 ] from the affected regions. A few studies have discussed government and non-governmental humanitarian systems [ 30 , 31 ] and the efficiency of their distribution channels [ 32 ]. The objectives of this paper are: (1) to review recent natural disasters that have affected farmers in developing nations, as case studies; (2) propose criteria for effective interventions for farmers; (3) suggest high-priority interventions based on these criteria; and finally (4) discuss distribution and logistics strategies to reach affected rural areas, with the goal of reviving agriculture and maintaining life and livelihoods in disaster-affected areas.

Examples of recent natural disasters that impacted rural areas

Table  1 summarizes the peer-reviewed literature pertaining to recent major natural disasters in developing nations (Nepal, Haiti, Pakistan, Indonesia, Sri Lanka, Thailand, India, and Ethiopia), their impact on rural lives, aid responses by national and international communities, the outcomes of these interventions, and challenges. These disasters caused significant damage to the livelihoods and food security of smallholder farmers in each respective country:

2015 Nepal earthquake

Nepal, where more than 85% of the people in rural areas depend on agriculture [ 4 , 33 ], was hit hard by a deadly 7.8 magnitude quake that affected 8 million people in the mid- and high-hill districts. A large population was left homeless and sought shelter in makeshift tents and tarpaulin. The earthquake affected nearly one million smallholder farmers across 24 districts, of which households headed by women and the elderly suffered the most due to migration of male members to nearby cities and abroad [ 34 ]. The estimated total value of damage and loss to the agriculture sector was USD 284 million [ 35 ]. The earthquake had a serious impact on the livelihoods of rural farmers as massive damage and losses occurred to crop lands, physical infrastructure, polyhouses, livestock shelters, agricultural tools, equipment, and machinery [ 35 ]. Stored seeds were buried under the rubble. Farmers had no storage facilities for the standing spring rice and maize crops.

Aid agencies, I/NGOs, and the national government were involved in providing immediate necessities such as food, water, shelter kits, and hygiene kits to the households affected by the earthquake. However, emergency relief provisions to rural areas, already the food-deficit regions of the country [ 36 ], were appallingly inadequate due to poor road connections in the hills and/or destruction of existing infrastructure [ 37 ]. Longer-term recovery efforts for farmers were limited to regions near cities and reached only thousands of farmers [ 34 ]. These efforts focused on enhancing the production of crops, livestock, and fisheries by replacing tools and machinery, restocking of lost animal stock, reconstruction of agriculture infrastructure, and restoration of small farmer-managed irrigation systems [ 35 ]. Some farmers were supported with seeds of rice, wheat, maize, cowpea and beans, and vegetables along with grain storage bags and animal feed supplements to provide months of staple food and to ensure they did not miss the immediate planting season [ 34 , 38 ]. In addition, a small number of farmers near cities received plastic tunnels (greenhouses) and drip irrigation equipment to encourage off-season vegetable production which generated limited impact due to incomplete agricultural packages (e.g. early maturing seeds and fertilizer) and delays in their distribution. Remoteness, lack of disaster preparedness, political instability and poor leadership, bad governance, and poor coordination among international, national, and local actors hindered the relief and reconstruction efforts in the remote hills and mountains.

2010 Haitian earthquake

An earthquake measuring 7.0 on the Richter scale devastated and crippled the small, underdeveloped Caribbean nation of Haiti in 2010, impacting 25% of the national population. The majority of the devastation occurred in the capital city of Port-au-Prince, where approximately 300,000 people perished, and over 2 million were displaced and left homeless [ 39 ]. Moreover, it is estimated that 1.3 million people living in Port-au-Prince had to reside in temporary shelters or tents located throughout the city, while up to 600,000 of its residents fled to rural areas of the country [ 40 ]. The urban-to-rural migration led to food shortages and loss of biodiversity in rural areas due to the consumption of planting materials [ 2 ]. The estimated total value of damage and loss to the agriculture sector was about USD 149 million [ 41 ]. Damage to this sector included silting of irrigated plots and cracking of irrigation canals [ 42 ], as well as reported losses of seed stocks and storage facilities.

Emergency relief provisions provided by aid agencies and I/NGOs, especially necessities such as tents, potable water, food and basic health care, were mostly focused on cities. Billions of dollars were spent by international funding agencies that promoted NGOs as substitutes for the state which weakened the government [ 13 , 43 ]. Nevertheless, farmers reported receiving no support, leading to increased crime, mortality, and hunger [ 44 ]. There were limited efforts by FAO to support the Government of Haiti’s Programme of Action to rebuild the agricultural sector, improve food security, and create employment and livelihood opportunities for the rural population and internally displaced people [ 42 ]. The support included: distribution of seeds and planting materials, hand tools, fertilizers, small animals and fishing materials, promotion of fruit tree crops for soil conservation, establishment of emergency seed stocks, seed storage and conservation, and reconstruction and reinforcement of infrastructure through cash-for-work programmes. However, no or very little attention was given to improve soil fertility (e.g. hillside erosion control, legume integration, cover crops, reforestation, livestock improvement as well as subsidies for inorganic fertilizers to quickly help rebuild soil fertility) that led to chronic poverty and malnutrition [ 25 ].

2010 Pakistan floods

Similarly, a tragic and massive flood in Pakistan affected most of the country from north to south, displacing more than 20 million people, and caused rural people to be more food deficit and food insecure [ 12 ]. This disaster also posed a substantial challenge to the provision of health services as a result of damage to >500 health facilities [ 27 ]. Infrastructure such as bridges, electric poles, and telephone towers was washed away, and the resulting loss to the means of communication delayed emergency help from the authorities [ 43 ]. Rural households were more commonly impacted and slower to recover [ 12 ]. The flood severely affected agriculture with an estimated loss of USD 5.1 billion (50% of the total loss), by destroying 2.4 million hectares of soon-to-be-harvested crops (e.g. sugarcane, wheat, and rice) and livestock (mostly cows and sheep) [ 41 , 46 ]. Total loss to the livestock sector alone was estimated to be USD 570 million [ 47 ]. There was no earlier warning from authorities, and the villages quickly filled up with water at night which contributed to the massive damage to crops and livestock [ 45 ].

The need for food aid was nearly ubiquitous; however, food aid from aid agencies and I/NGOs was relatively minor. There were limited efforts by the provincial agriculture department, which included the distribution of quality seeds (wheat and vegetables), extension services, feed, and veterinary care with the objective of assisting farmers to plant the next season of crops and keep livestock alive and healthy [ 46 , 47 ]. Nevertheless, many of the most affected populations, including farmers and day labourers in rural areas, were less likely to receive aid due to the lack of effective coordination between the service providers (government, I/NGOs) [ 12 ]. In addition, there was inadequate identification and/or targeting of aid to the affected families [ 21 ].

2004 Tsunami in Southeast Asia

Southeast Asia was struck by the most devastating tsunami in modern times, caused by a 9.0 magnitude earthquake in the Indian Ocean, killing more than 250,000 people in a single day [ 48 ]. It affected more than 18 countries from Indonesia to Sri Lanka and India and left more than 1.7 million people homeless. The majority of those killed by the tsunami were poor villagers living in the most vulnerable areas along the coast of Aceh and North Sumatra in Indonesia. The coastal agriculture and fisheries sectors suffered major setbacks [ 49 ]. The estimated damage and loss to the agriculture sector in Indonesia alone was USD 225 million, while the fisheries sector suffered a loss of USD 510 million [ 50 ]. Standing rice, vegetables, plantation crops such as mangroves and tree crops, aqua farms, and livestock were severely damaged. Thousands of boats, fishing nets and gear as well as infrastructure, including ice plants and cold rooms, were damaged or destroyed.

The extent of aid distribution (i.e. food and temporary shelters) delivered by the aid agencies, governments and NGOs has been reported to be pathetic [ 51 ] despite billions of dollars generated by international communities in the aftermath of the tsunami. The Indonesian government executed a 5-year recovery programme to target the agricultural sector with a focus on addressing food security, the development of agribusiness, and enhancing the social welfare of farming communities; however, this programme was beset by challenges that included a lack of technical expertise in the reclamation and rehabilitation of saline-affected soils, resulting in reduced productivity and low farm income [ 52 ]. Furthermore, incomplete agricultural packages (e.g. seed, fertilizer, fence, hand tractor, and thresher) and poor quality seeds and/or delays in their distribution resulted in poor or no seed germination. Local farmers received little consideration in the disaster’s aftermath since the focus was given to the construction of infrastructure rather than assistance to rural farmers who were worst affected by the tsunami [ 53 ].

2001 Gujarat earthquake

In 2001, the Indian state of Gujarat was rattled by a devastating earthquake, which claimed over 20,000 lives [ 54 ]. The households affected by the earthquake were mainly marginal farmers and landless labourers belonging to the schedule castes and schedule tribes. The situation in rural areas was the most severe, as the earthquake happened after two consecutive years of drought [ 55 ]. The preliminary loss to the agriculture and livestock sectors was estimated to be USD 117 million (i.e. 5% of the total assets), nearly 80% of which was in the Kutch district [ 56 ]. The reasons why damage to agriculture and livestock was relatively low included: agriculture was largely rainfed with no perennial crops in the field; there was no/little mechanization thus a low level of capital intensity; and the disaster hit at a time of day when cattle were grazing outdoors [ 56 ]. Production losses were mainly associated with delays in harvesting of the standing crops (e.g. groundnuts, pearl millet, and cotton), labour shortages, and damage to irrigation and grain storage facilities.

The relief and rehabilitation efforts were focused on people. Emergency relief food rations consisted of fortified blended food (i.e. Indiamix), wheat flour, and lentils which were provided to nearly 300,000 people for 4 months after the disaster [ 55 ]. By contrast, agriculture and livestock management received no or inadequate attention [ 56 ]. The loss of human life and livestock could have been reduced with better preparedness, a timely response and well-designed rehabilitation efforts [ 55 , 56 ].

Ethiopian disasters

The East African nation of Ethiopia has suffered heavily from food crisis for over 50 years due to recurrent disasters such as drought, in particular the 1983–1985 famine in northern Ethiopia that led to 400,000 deaths, combined with two decades of conflicts that killed 150,000 people [ 57 ]. The combined effects of famine and internal war led to food shortages in rural areas. The situation further escalated by a weak subsistence-agriculture-based economy, depletion of assets, absence of income diversity, and a lack of alternative coping mechanisms [ 57 ]. The yields of major pulses (e.g. fava bean, lentil, field pea, chickpea, and grass pea) and cereals (e.g. barley) reduced substantially due to high temperatures and low rainfall combined with inadequate land preparation, low seed rates, inappropriate methods of sowing, and lack of weeding [ 58 ]. The heavy reliance on poor cultivars, which are susceptible to climatic extremes, pests, and diseases, also led to widespread crop failure [ 58 , 59 ].

Over 1.5 million metric tons of emergency foods were distributed at the height of the Ethiopian famine, reaching an estimated 7.1 million people, by more than 60 organizations directly working in the region [ 59 ]. However, food aid programmes were not able to meet the demand (quantity and composition) and faced major obstacles in logistics and targeting to the vulnerable rural population [ 20 ]. The crisis was further escalated by the government’s unwillingness to deal with the widespread famine, inappropriate handling of the relief materials (i.e. policy of withholding food shipment to rebel areas), and failure of the government’s relocation plan (i.e. villagization) due to insufficient water, schools, medical services, and utility supply points; this caused millions to lose their lives and millions more to be displaced from rural areas [ 57 ].

Lessons learned from the case studies

There are several common themes that emerge from the above case studies. After a disaster, international aid agencies and NGOs were primarily effective at distributing immediately needed products to cities such as tents/tarpaulins and food packages. However, often there was insufficient attention to rural agriculture after a natural disaster, as seen in Haiti [ 25 ], Nepal [ 60 , 61 ], Pakistan [ 21 ], and Indonesia [ 52 ], despite agriculture being the major source of livelihoods in rural areas. Most national governments were generally ineffective at assisting rural farmers both in the short run and in the long term. For example, in the long term there were missed opportunities to re-purpose the supported urban products, such as tarpaulin materials, for agricultural use (see below). Reasons for the insufficient response appear to include: remoteness, lack of disaster preparedness, inadequate rescue and relief infrastructure, lack of accurate and adequate early warning and information systems, and policy and implementation shortfalls. Furthermore, the above in-kind donations (e.g. food, water, tents, and clothes) or cash provided by foreign agencies and governments were sometimes not properly utilized by national governments as seen in Nepal [ 61 , 62 ]. Much food aid and money never reached the affected families, even in cities. For example, tens of thousands of tons of rice and cooking oil donated by India, Bangladesh, and China sat rotting in Kathmandu 9 months after delivery; they were finally sold on the open market by Nepali officials [ 61 ]. Issues with procurement, transport and logistical challenges for distribution happened due to complicated import and transport regulations that created roadblocks for foreign aid agencies and NGOs. Finally, the foreign I/NGOs primarily conducted the relief and rehabilitation, but these efforts sometimes weakened the state administrative capacity as seen in Haiti [ 13 ], though their intent was to assist in institution building and fight corruption. Poor coordination between foreign I/NGOs and national governments contributed to this situation. These observations underscore the need for a novel and more realistic approach to assist rural farmers after a disaster that comprehensively addresses the needs of shelter, hunger, first-aid medicines, and post-disaster labour shortages.

An emergency sustainable agriculture kit-based framework for disaster relief

The above evidence demonstrates that the interventions that primarily occur after a disaster (to cities) consist of small products (e.g. tarpaulins), likely because they are inexpensive, simple to procure and can be easily quantified for donors for impact assessment metrics. Given that the global community is somewhat effective with this strategy, we suggest that a similar strategy should be developed for rural areas, but with a focus on products that can assist farm households. Based on the above literature review, there appears to be a gap in knowledge of effective products that can target such households after a disaster. We propose that the global aid community should have a comprehensive list of such products that can be combined into packages, as well as ideas on how to re-purpose relief products provided to urban areas. We further propose that there should be strategies to permit rural distribution of these products by local governments or CBOs, or NGOs in partnership with local governments, rather than only relying on national governments or foreign NGOs. We will refer to this strategy as the emergency sustainable agriculture kit (eSAK) framework for disaster relief.

Criteria for effective product-based interventions for rural disaster relief

Within eSAK, there are several criteria for the smart selection of products that can effectively target smallholder agricultural households after a natural disaster.

An excess of unnecessary donations and/or inadequate essential donations are commonly observed after a disaster [ 48 , 63 ]. Therefore, materials that are distributed to rural households should be need-based and relevant to the local context.

Ideally products should be multi-purpose to provide flexibility since every household will have different needs (e.g. not necessarily a tent but rolls of plastic, as a tent is appropriate in cities [ 15 , 64 ] but not necessary in rural areas where farmers have access to wood to build poles).

Inexpensive

The loss of livelihoods and property caused by disasters significantly reduces the purchasing capacity of rural farmers in developing countries [ 12 , 65 ]. An individual product may be needed in large numbers, so it must be low cost. If a product is inexpensive, farmers can also afford to purchase it by themselves.

Labour efficient

Labour shortages occur after a disaster due to the loss of human life and livestock, injury, and a change in priority towards rebuilding efforts rather than farming [ 4 , 14 , 60 ]. As a result, ideally a post-disaster product should be labour efficient and possibly replace lost labour after a disaster.

Compact and light weight

Distribution of logistics is a major problem in rural areas, usually made worse after a disaster [ 32 , 66 ]. Rural hills and mountains in developing countries are places where relief efforts are especially affected by high transaction costs associated with remoteness and poor infrastructure [ 4 , 67 ]. In such areas, transportation during emergencies is often limited to dropping supplies by helicopter [ 68 ]. In addition, people in developing countries carry materials on their backs [ 4 , 12 , 65 ]; therefore, relief products are needed that are easy to transport into rural areas.

Available/procurable on a large scale

After a disaster, relief materials are required in large numbers. Ideal products are those where the materials can be purchased locally (i.e. rural products), but after a disaster, there are local price spikes of products in high demand [ 11 ]. Hence, products must be selected that can be procured and shipped in bulk from international sources rapidly. In today’s era, the Internet provides a global marketplace, such as the website, Alibaba.com [ 4 , 14 ].

Simple and amenable to illustration

In rural areas, where illiteracy prevents communication with recipients on how to use relief products beyond tents and direct food [ 14 ], it is important for a relief product to be simple to use and for its correct usage to be explainable by an accompanying graphical illustration [ 69 ]. The illustration, along with captions in the local language, will ensure that beneficiaries, including illiterate women, understand and make best use of each product.

Specific post-disaster product recommendations

Based on the above criteria, we propose that the following products may be useful in supporting disaster-affected smallholder farm families in developing countries in their efforts to maintain livelihoods. A list of products, their uses and associated costs are summarized (Table  2 ). All of these products meet all or most of the selection criteria.

Rolls of agricultural-grade plastics

Natural disasters can devastate structures (home, buildings, etc.) in both cities and rural areas, as seen in Haiti [ 40 , 64 , 70 ], Indonesia [ 48 ], and Nepal [ 14 , 37 ]. Traditionally, tarpaulin and tents are provided to cities for shelter. Here, we propose that tarpaulin or agricultural-grade plastics should be provided to rural areas for shelter (in rural areas, as noted above, people can make their own tents using local wood as poles), but also for animal shelters (Fig.  1 a), to replace collapsed roofs, and to cover food grains and long-term seed stocks. The side or roof of a tent can be modified for rainwater harvesting when water is scarce. Rather than adding to pollution, the tarpaulin/plastic distributed to rural areas but especially urban areas can later be re-purposed as plastic greenhouses (tunnels) to protect high-value vegetables against insects and extreme temperatures (Fig.  1 b). Alternatively, it may be used as a groundcover mulch to suppress weeds and conserve soil and water (Fig.  1 c). Such efforts could be enabled by distributing these products with graphical lessons. Based on the literature, it does not appear that there have been coordinated efforts to recycle tarpaulin after disasters.

Graphical illustration of post-disaster use and re-use of agricultural-grade plastic or tarpaulin: a Tent for livestock shelter; b Re-purposing into a plastic tunnel (greenhouse) to protect high-value vegetables against insects and extreme temperatures; c Re-purposing into agricultural mulch to suppress weeds (and conserve water and soil). In panels a and c , the boxed image in the upper left/top represents the challenge after a disaster. (Images courtesy of Lisa Smith, University of Guelph, can be reused under the Creative Commons BY licence)

Low-oxygen grain/seed storage bags

The monsoon rains were shown to destroy seeds after the earthquake in Nepal [ 37 , 60 ] and Haiti [ 2 ] and after the floods in Pakistan [ 21 ]. When structures are damaged and there are seasonal rains, precious seeds that are stored in homes or mud granaries may become wet, causing loss to livelihoods and generations of associated indigenous knowledge [ 2 , 14 ]. Such damage further weakens/destroys the local seed supply mechanism [ 24 ] making farmers vulnerable to seed crisis in the long term [ 23 ]. To protect precious seeds, inexpensive low-oxygen grain storage bags (also called hermetic storage bags, Fig.  2 ) that are made from soft, foldable plastic (similar to a garbage/grocery bag) can be distributed to the affected areas (e.g. GrainPro bag and Purdue Improved Cowpea Storage bag). Aside from waterproofing, each bag consists of multiple layers of thick plastic that allows oxygen to flow out, but not back in, thus preventing fungi and insects from damaging stored grain [ 14 ], which is problematic under high moisture.

Graphical illustration of the use of low-oxygen grain storage bags to suppress fungal moulds and insects. The boxed image in the left represents the challenge after a disaster. (Images courtesy of Lisa Smith, University of Guelph, can be reused under the Creative Commons BY licence)

Waterproof gardening gloves and shovel

In developing countries, post-disaster debris cleanup and building are often undertaken manually, causing hardship to men, women, children, and the elderly who are already under stress after a disaster [ 27 , 39 ]. Rural farmers mostly use their bare hands while removing brick, stone, and mud debris, which becomes even more difficult in the rain (e.g. monsoon) [ 14 ]. Debris removal may cause injury, which may lead to further infection. Simple, water-resistant gardening gloves (Fig.  3 a) and a multi-purpose military-grade shovel (Fig.  3 b) would be helpful to clear debris and can then be re-purposed to reduce hardship in agriculture [ 14 , 60 ]. Specifically, gardening gloves can be used to collect wood, remove weeds, work with a plough, etc. A military-grade shovel with a serrated edge can be used both as a shovel and as a wood saw to assist with cooking fuelwood processing, pruning, and digging holes for poles during tent construction. Such shovels are inexpensive, lightweight, fold to be compact for transport, and can be procured rapidly on a large scale.

Graphical illustration of the use of a hand gloves and a b multi-purpose military shovel. The boxed image in the upper left represents the challenge after a disaster. In each case, the use of the product for disaster cleanup is shown, followed by how it may be re-purposed for agricultural needs. (Images courtesy of Lisa Smith, University of Guelph, can be reused under the Creative Commons BY licence)

Inexpensive agricultural tool packages

Livestock are the only source of labour and fertilizers (manure) for many smallholder farmers. A shortage of labour due to death and injury of humans and livestock is frequently observed after disasters, such as after the super cyclone in Orissa, India [ 71 ]. In addition, labour is diverted to rebuilding efforts as seen in Haiti and Nepal [ 13 , 60 ]. Furthermore, existing farm tools may be lost due to building collapse, as seen in Nepal [ 60 ]. For these reasons, it is essential to support an inexpensive set of agricultural tools/equipment to reduce labour. For example, if a male member of the household is injured or dies, there may be an inability to plough the land using livestock as there are cultural taboos as well as physical constraints against women undertaking this activity. A simple, lightweight seed planter (e.g. jab planter, adjustable for various seed sizes to permit planting of grains and legumes; Fig.  4 ), and a set of local digging tools (e.g. spade or hoe, rake, sickle, along with the above military shovel) may serve to mitigate losses in farm labour [ 4 , 14 ].

Graphical illustration of the use of a jab drill planter for sowing seeds to save labour after a disaster. The boxed image at the top represents the challenge after a disaster. (Images courtesy of Lisa Smith, University of Guelph, can be re used under the Creative Commons BY licence)

Seeds of early maturing crop varieties along with fertilizers

Farmers may lose all seeds if seeds stored inside a house collapses, or if the seeds become wet [ 1 , 2 ]. In such situations, appropriate and timely distribution of seed can bring very significant improvements to agricultural production and food security [ 23 ]. Seeds of early-to-mature varieties of cereals, legumes, and vegetables can be provided to farmers for planting, to ensure they begin to produce food for themselves as early as possible to prevent hunger, and as a source of calories, protein, and critical micronutrients (vitamins and minerals) [ 14 ]. Seed support further prevents farmers from eating critical planting seeds including their indigenous varieties cultivated over generations. Providing seeds to small-scale farmers in advance of the major planting season can translate to 6 months of food supply and income [ 42 , 46 ]. In Rwanda, after the genocide and war of 1994, agricultural rebuilding efforts largely comprised of high-quality seeds, crop and variety development and conservation, and rebuilding human resource capacity as well as basic scientific facilities [ 72 ]. Unfortunately, poorly designed seed aid can actually undermine local resilience by providing untested new varieties, narrowing crop diversity, and adversely impacting local seed enterprises [ 2 , 23 ]. Therefore, care should be taken while choosing the crop varieties; they should be early maturing, diverse, and compatible with the growing season and location [ 73 – 75 ].

Along with the early maturing crops, a small bag of nitrogen fertilizer (5–10 kg per household) is likely to raise crop yields rapidly, which is a simple intervention guaranteed to have a positive impact [ 4 , 14 ]. One of the major factors contributing to chronic poverty and malnutrition in Haiti after the earthquake was no or little attention given to improve soil fertility [ 25 ].

There may be circumstances when seed is not required. Contrary to the above reports, there is limited literature which concludes that seed systems were relatively resilient to political and civil conflict (Zimbabwe and South Sudan), earthquake (Haiti), and drought (Kenya), at least in terms of meeting farmer’s planting needs for the upcoming season [ 2 , 24 ]. The authors note that factors that helped local seed systems to be resilient included: social networks (e.g. farmer-to-farmer barter exchange of seeds), recent bumper harvests, informal seed and grain markets, and local agro-dealers. Combined, these channels were claimed to have provided >80% of total seed requirements for key crops (e.g. maize, groundnut, sorghum) in Zimbabwe, South Sudan (sorghum, maize, groundnut), Haiti (bean, maize, pigeonpea), and Kenya (maize, greengram, cowpea) [ 2 ].

First-aid kit

People in both cities and rural areas often suffer illness and injuries during a disaster [ 27 ] including severe mental health problems such as post-traumatic stress [ 10 , 26 ]. Though a subset of these medical issues cannot be treated at the household level [ 27 ] including fractures of the lower limbs or other bones [ 54 ], health officials have observed that a large fraction of injuries (65%) after natural disasters consist of open wounds/superficial lacerations [ 76 ]; the latter frequently leads to infections because of poor access to medical supplies which can become damaged by a disaster, and furthermore, rural populations are often far from medical facilities. A simple first-aid kit including large and small bandages, topical antibiotics, topical alcohol cleaning pads, Dettol, anti-diarrhoea supplements, etc., along with graphical lessons on their correct usage, should prevent infections, especially to small wounds suffered during a disaster or during debris clearing. A first-aid kit does not replace access to medical care, but it is an inexpensive frontline intervention to help farmers.

Temporary food support

Food shortages are often seen in disaster hit areas [ 2 , 20 , 57 ]. The situation is made worse when a disaster happens in food insecure rural areas of developing countries [ 5 , 6 ]. In addition, as already noted, consumption of planting materials may lead to a secondary disaster [ 13 , 14 ]. Therefore, distribution of food supplements along with a set of basic household supplies (e.g. cooking and eating utensils, blankets, and inexpensive sleeping mats) should be a part of immediate relief efforts after an emergency [ 14 , 60 ]. An ideal food package would consist of precooked foods for the initial day(s) after a disaster (e.g. beaten or puffed rice, noodles, and biscuits) [ 14 ], as well as staple uncooked foods (e.g. wheat flour, rice, and corn) for the subsequent week(s). Foods should be culturally appropriate, nutritious in calories, protein and micronutrients including iron, zinc and folic acid for pregnant women and children, and fast cooking (e.g. small grains such as rice, lentils). Salt should also be distributed (which also allows faster cooking at higher altitudes). Long-term food support can be facilitated through food-for-work [ 77 ] or cash-for-work [ 65 ] programmes that also help to minimize post-crisis violence associated with food shortages. Indonesia observed very positive results from a cash-for-work programme for returning displaced populations in Aceh province after the tsunami [ 65 ]. Also in the longer term, families who lost their livestock can be supported with small livestock such as goats and piglets to maximize manure and urine collection as sources of organic fertilizer, or a brood of chickens to supply daily eggs, and possibly simple fishing supplies.

Post-disaster product distribution and logistics

Delays in delivery or relief can cost lives. Therefore, efficiency in logistics is a key success factor in a disaster response operation [ 31 ]. The basic mission of distribution or supply chain management involves the delivery of products and/or services to the needy, whose immediate- or long-term survival can depend on its efficient execution. As already noted, distribution is a major challenge to remote, rural areas after a disaster. Internationally sponsored NGOs have been criticized for being ineffective in channelling resources, as seen in Haiti [ 13 ] and Southeast Asia [ 30 ]. The reasons for their ineffectiveness have included: the donation of unnecessary goods, an uncoordinated flow of donations, a lack of efficient communication systems, unprepared staff, a poor decision-making process, a lack of cooperation among the main actors involved, and lack of central coordination of the operation [ 31 ].

Distribution channels can be improved when humanitarian activities are led by one of the actors at the scene who understands business practices and supply chain management [ 78 ]. Products are more likely to reach affected families when there is coordination with the local government and grassroots organizations (CBOs) who can identify priority/target areas and their needs in order to effectively spend foreign aid money on procurement of needed products [ 14 , 32 , 78 ]. Such coordination can also lead to effective distribution approaches. In China and Nepal, for example, the government give some support to help people who do not have enough funds to repair or rebuild their homes through a disaster relief fund [ 32 , 34 ]. This kind of support can be channelled through a rural credit cooperative system involving local governments and private financial institutions which help national government to strengthen supervision, management, and allocation of relief funds to people in need. As an alternative, the private sector can directly support rebuilding of the agriculture sector through a package of support intended to promote local agriculture.

It is noteworthy that alcohol, cigarettes, and snackfoods are available for purchase in even the most remote villages of the world, demonstrating that effective distribution networks to rural areas already pre-exist. We propose piggybacking onto these distribution networks as a good strategy to scale up relief products to rural areas after a disaster [ 14 ]. Such a strategy appears to have been untapped in previous disasters. For example, in Haiti, thousands of women known as the Madame Saras and revendeuses comprise an informal private sector distribution network between cities and farms [ 79 ].

Conclusions

Here, we have reviewed recent natural disasters in developing countries. The literature demonstrates that insufficient attention is often paid to rural agriculture after a disaster despite its importance. After a disaster, the international community and NGOs have been most effective at distributing products such as tents/tarpaulin and food packages but primarily to cities. Recognizing the success of a product-based approach, here we have proposed an eSAK framework for disaster relief in which we suggest a list of products and graphical lessons to help farmers after a disaster based on a number of criteria. As distribution of products to rural areas is a challenge, especially after a natural disaster, we have also proposed a novel distribution strategy, involving pre-existing cigarette/alcohol/snackfood distributors. Smart selection of products appropriate for the local context, as well as procurement and distribution, must involve partnerships led by local stakeholders along with dedicated funding for rural peoples from governments and international aid agencies.

This review further indicated that coordination is one of the common factors that is associated with failed and/or inefficient post-disaster relief operations. In order to improve coordination after an emergency among local and national governments, non-governmental organizations, the private sector and other stakeholders, the cluster system created by the United Nations Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs (UN-OHCA) may be appropriate [ 80 ]. Clusters are groups of humanitarian organizations (UN and non-UN) that are created to enable a response to be coherent and complementary, identifying ways to work together for better collective results. Clusters provide a clear point of contact and are accountable for adequate need-based, rather than capacity-driven, humanitarian assistance by creating partnerships between international humanitarian organizations, national and local authorities, and civil society. This approach has been repeatedly cited as having “benefits that outweigh the costs”, and although it has been criticized for a number of challenges, it is currently considered the most appropriate structure for relief coordination [ 81 ]. To conclude, we hope that this paper will stimulate more dialogue about the gaps that exist in helping rural farmers after a disaster.

Abbreviations

community-based organizations

emergency sustainable agriculture kit

Food and Agriculture Organization (of the United Nations)

gross domestic product

international/non-governmental organization

Ministry of Agricultural Development (Nepal)

World Food Programme

Sperling L. When disaster strikes: a guide to assessing seed system security. Cali: International Center for Tropical Agriculture; 2008.

Google Scholar  

McGuire S, Sperling L. Making seed systems more resilient to stress. Glob Environ Change. 2013;23:644–53.

Article   Google Scholar  

Wiggins S, Proctor S. How special are rural areas? The economic implications of location for rural development. Dev Policy Rev. 2001;19:427–36.

Chapagain T, Raizada MN. Agronomic challenges and opportunities for smallholder terrace agriculture in developing countries. Front Plant Sci. 2017;8:331. doi: 10.3389/fpls.2017.00331 .

Article   PubMed   PubMed Central   Google Scholar  

FAO [Food and Agriculture Organization]. From agriculture education to education for rural development and food security: all for education and food for all. In: From production agriculture to rural development: challenges for higher education in the new millennium. 5th European conference on higher agricultural education, University of Plymouth; 2000.

FAO [Food and Agriculture Organization]. The state of food insecurity in the world. Rome: Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations; 2014.

Atchoarena D, Gasperini L. Education for rural development: towards new policy responses. A joint study conducted by FAO and UNESCO. Rome: FAO/UNESCO; 2003. p. 35–69.

Chapagain T, Gurung GB. Effects of integrated plant nutrition management (IPNM) practices on the sustainability of maize based hill farming systems in Nepal. J Agric Sci. 2010;2(3):1–7. doi: 10.5539/jas.v2n3p26 .

Sabates-Wheeler R, Devereux S, Mitchell T, Tanner T, Davies M, Leavy J. Rural disaster risk: poverty interface. Brighton: Institute of Development Studies, University of Sussex; 2008. p. 3–19.

Pynoos RS, Goenjian A, Tashjian M, Karakashian M, Manjikian R, Manoukian G, Steinberg AM, Fairbanks LA. Post-traumatic stress reaction in children after the 1988 Armenian earthquake. Br J Psychiatry. 1993;163:239–47.

Article   CAS   PubMed   Google Scholar  

Kirsch TD, Wadhwani C, Sauer L, Doocy S, Catlett C. Impact of the 2010 Pakistan floods on rural and urban populations at six months. PLOS Curr Disasters. 2012;1. doi: 10.1371/4fdfb212d2432

Ashraf S, Iftikhar M, Shahbaz B, Ali Khan G, Luqman M. Impacts of flood on livelihoods and food security of rural communities: a case study of southern Punjab, Pakistan. Pak J Agric Sci. 2013;50:751–8.

Zanotti L. Cacophonies of aid, failed state building and NGOs in Haiti: setting the stage for disaster, envisioning the future. Third World Q. 2010;31:755–71.

Article   PubMed   Google Scholar  

Raizada MN, Chapagain T, Khadka K. Top 10 inexpensive interventions to help farmers in Nepal after the 2015 earthquake. A brief report for the Canadian department of foreign affairs, trade and development (DFATD). Guelph: University of Guelph; 2015.

Fiedrich F, Gehbauer F, Ricker U. Optimized resource allocation for emergency response after earthquake disasters. Saf Sci. 2000;35:41–57.

USGS [United States Geological Survey]. Post-earthquake USG Haiti strategy toward renewal and economic opportunity. 2015. http://www.state.gov/documents/organization/156448.pdf . Accessed 12 May 2015.

FAOSTAT. Global population dynamics. 2015. http://faostat3.fao.org/browse/O/*/E . Accessed 12 May 2015.

World Bank. Agriculture for development. World development report 2008. Washington, DC: World Bank; 2007.

Book   Google Scholar  

WFP [World Food Programme]. Who are the hungry? 2015. https://www.wfp.org/hunger/who-are . Accessed 12 May 2015.

Kaluski DN, Ophir E, Amede T. Food security and nutrition: the Ethiopian case for action. Public Health Nutr. 2002;5:373–81.

Doocy S, Leidman E, Aung T, Kirsch T. Household economic and food security after the 2010 Pakistan floods. Food Nutr Bull. 2013;34:95–103.

Hossain SMM, Talat M, Boyd E, Chowdhury SR, Soofi SB, Hussain I, Ahmed I, Salam RA, Bhutta ZA. Evaluation of nutrition surveys in flood-affected areas of Pakistan: seeing the unseen! IDS Bull. 2013;44:10–20.

Longley C, Dominguez C, Saide MA, Leonardo WJ. Do farmers need relief seeds? A methodology for assessing seed systems. Disasters. 2002;26:343–55.

Byrne KG, March J, McGuire S, Meissner L, Sperling L. The role of evidence in humanitarian assessment: the seed system security assessment and the emergency market mapping and analysis. Disasters. 2013;37:S83–104.

Bargout RN, Raizada MN. Soil nutrient management in Haiti, pre-Columbus to the present day: lessons for future agricultural interventions. Agric Food Secur. 2013;2:11.

Chadda RK, Malhotra A, Kaw N, Singh J, Sethi H. Mental health problems following the 2005 earthquake in Kashmir: findings of community-run clinics. Prehosp Disaster Med. 2007;22:541–5.

Shabir O. A summary case report on the health impacts and response to the Pakistan floods of 2010. PLOS Curr Disasters. 2013;1. doi: 10.1371/currents.dis.cc7bd532ce252c1b740c39a2a827993f

Lu X, Bengtsson L, Holme P. Predictability of population displacement after the 2010 Haiti earthquake. PNAS. 2012;109:11576–81.

Article   CAS   PubMed   PubMed Central   Google Scholar  

Mueller V, Gray C, Kosec K. Heat stress increases long-term human migration in rural Pakistan. Nat Clim Change. 2014;4:182–5.

Article   CAS   Google Scholar  

Telford J, Cosgrave J. The international humanitarian system and the 2004 Indian ocean earthquake and tsunamis. Disasters. 2007;31:1–28.

Da Costa SRA, Bandeira RAM, Mello LCBB, Campos VBG. Humanitarian supply chain: an analysis of response operations to natural disasters. Eur J Transp Infrastruct Res. 2014;14:290–310.

Yang Y, Yang ND, Wei SX, Qian JB, Ji SG. Optimization and selection of distribution channel of disaster relief fund for peasants to rebuild houses in Huaxian. In: Wang Y, Issa RR, Zhu Y, Shen Q, editors. Proceedings of 2006 international conference on construction and real estate management vol 1 and 2: collaboration and development in construction and real estate, Orlando, FL. Beijing: China Architecture and Building Press; 2006. p. 521–4.

Manandhar P. Food security: key terms and debate. In: Upreti BR, Sharma SR, Paudel SB, editors. Food security in post conflict Nepal: challenges and opportunities. Kathmandu: Department of Development Studies, School of Arts, Kathmandu University and Nepal Centre for Contemporary Research (NCCR); 2014. p. 19–46.

OXFAM. The Nepal earthquake six months on: What needs to happen now? Media briefing 25 October 2015. https://www.oxfam.org.nz/sites/default/files/reports/mb-nepal-earthquake-six-months-251015-en.pdf . Accessed 20 July 2016.

GoN/NPC. Nepal earthquake 2015: Post disaster needs assessment. Vol A: key findings. Kathmandu: Government of Nepal, National Planning Commission; 2015. p. 21–2.

MoAD [Ministry of Agricultural Development]. Country investment plan: Nepal agriculture and food security. Kathmandu: MoAD; 2010.

Dey S. A devastating disaster: a case study of Nepal earthquake and its impact on human beings. IOSR J Hum Soc Sci. 2015;20:28–34.

FAO. One year after the earthquakes. 2016. http://www.fao.org/emergencies/crisis/nepal-earthquakes/en/ . Accessed 20 July 2016.

Risler E, Kintzle S, Nackerud L. Haiti and the earthquake: examining the experience of psychological stress and trauma. Res Soc Work Pract. 2015;25:251–6.

Haitian Conference. Action plan for national recovery and development of Haiti, Government of the Republic of Haiti. 2010. http://haiticonference.org/Haiti_Action_Plan_ENG.pdf . Accessed 27 June 2016.

UN. Agriculture and disaster risk. 2015. http://www.wcdrr.org/documents/wcdrr/prepcom1/UN/ATTFONWO.pdf . Accessed 20 July 2016.

FAO. FAO and emergencies, from prevention to building back better: Haiti earthquake 2010. http://www.fao.org/emergencies/crisis/haiti-earthquake-2010/en/ . Accessed 20 July 2016.

Dupuy A. Disaster capitalism to the rescue: the international community and Haiti after the earthquake. North American Congress in Latin America (NACLA) report on the Americas. New York: NACLA. 2010.

Kolbe AR, Hutson RA, Shannon H, Trzcinski E, Miles B, Levitz N, Puccio M, James L, Noel JR, Muggah R. Mortality, crime and access to basic needs before and after the Haiti earthquake: a random survey of Port-au-Prince households. Med Confl Surviv. 2010;26:281–97.

Zulqarnain Z. Economic impact of floods on small scale farmers of Pakistan: a case study from the district Nowshera, Khyber Pukhtunkhwa province. Uppsala: Department of Urban and Rural Development; 2013. p. 7–37.

FAO. FAO and emergencies, from prevention to building back better: floods. 2015. http://www.fao.org/emergencies/emergency-types/floods/en/ . Accessed 20 July 2016.

ADB. Pakistan floods 2010: preliminary damage and needs assessment. 2015. http://www.adb.org/sites/default/files/linked-documents/44372-01-pak-oth-02.pdf . Accessed 20 July 2016.

Hyndman J. Duel disasters: humanitarian aid after the 2004 tsunami. Colorado: Lynne Rienner Publishers; 2011. ISBN 978-1-56549-336-0.

FAO. FAO and emergencies, from prevention to building back better: tsunami. 2015. http://www.fao.org/emergencies/emergency-types/tsunami/en/ . Accessed 20 July 2016.

BAPPENAS. Indonesia: preliminary damage and loss assessment, the December 26, 2004 natural disaster. 2015. http://www.unep.org/tsunami/reports/damage_assessment.pdf . Accessed 20 July 2016.

Ali MM. Tsunami’s colossal human toll, and its social, economic and political ramifications. Wash Rep Middle East Aff. 2005;24:36–7.

FAO. Report of the regional workshop on rehabilitation of agriculture in tsunami affected areas: one and a half year later, Bangkok. 29–30 June 2006.

Wai-Poi M. Financing the millennium development goals: the millennium project report. J Int Aff. 2005;58:285–90.

Phalkey R, Reinhardt JD, Marx M. Injury epidemiology after the 2001 Gujarat earthquake in India: a retrospective analysis of injuries treated at a rural hospital in the Kutch district immediately after the disaster. Glob Health Action. 2011;4:7196.

UN Disaster Management Team. UN system response to the Gujarat earthquake immediate needs and action plan. 2015. http://reliefweb.int/report/india/un-system-response-gujarat-earthquake-immediate-needs-and-action-plan . Accessed 21 July 2016.

The World Bank/ADB. Gujarat earthquake recovery program: assessment report. 2015. http://www.preventionweb.net/files/2608_fullreport.pdf . Accessed 20 July 2016.

de Waal A. Evil days: thirty years of war and famine in Ethiopia. New York: Human Rights Watch; 1991. ISBN 1-56432-038-3.

El-Beltagy A. Ethiopia: a future without famine. 2015. http://www.worldbank.org/html/cgiar/newsletter/Oct95/3ethio.htm . Accessed 20 July 2016.

USAID/Addis Ababa. Ethiopia drought/famine: final disaster report. 1985/1986. http://pdf.usaid.gov/pdf_docs/PNABG233.pdf . Accessed 20 July 2016.

Chapagain T. Save the soil. 2015. http://kathmandupost.ekantipur.com/printedition/news/2015-06-01/save-the-soil.html . Accessed 28 June 2016.

Symmes P. A year after the quake, Nepal is still a mess. 2016. http://www.outsideonline.com/2086666/aftershock . Accessed 14 July 2016.

Tayler A. Nepal’s earthquakes: one year later. 2016. http://www.theatlantic.com/photo/2016/04/nepals-earthquakes-one-year-later/479772 . Accessed 27 June 2016.

Keys A, Masterman-Smith H, Cottle D. The political economy of a natural disaster: the boxing day tsunami 2004. Antipode. 2006;38:195–204.

Versluis A. Formal and informal material aid following the 2010 Haiti earthquake as reported by camp dwellers. Disasters. 2014;38:S94–109.

Doocy S, Gabriel M, Collins S, Robinson C, Stevenson P. Implementing cash for work programmes in post-tsunami Aceh: experiences and lessons learned. Disasters. 2006;30:277–96.

Mulligan M, Nadarajah Y. Rebuilding community in the wake of disaster: lessons from the recovery from the 2004 tsunami in Sri Lanka and India. Community Dev J. 2012;47:353–68.

Ashley C, Maxwell S. Rethinking rural development. Dev Policy Rev. 2001;19:365–425.

Jordan D. Countering insurgency from the air: the postwar lessons. In: Benbow T, Thornton R, editors. Dimensions of counter insurgency: applying experience to practice. New York: Routledge (Taylor & Francis); 2013. p. 90–105. ISBN 13: 978-0-415-45037-9, 10: 0-415-45037-3.

Raizada MN, Smith L. A picture book of best practices for subsistence farmers: South Asian edition. eBook, University of Guelph Sustainable Agriculture Kit (SAK) Project, Guelph. 2016. www.saknepal.org .

Margesson R, Taft-Morales M. Haiti earthquake: Crisis and response. Washington, DC: Congressional Research Service; 2010.

Ganguli D, Chander M. Impact of natural disasters on livestock farmers: the case of Orissa supercyclone of 1999 in India. Indian J Anim Sci. 2007;77(6):504–8.

Buruchara RA, Sperling L, Ewell P, Kirkby R. The role of research institutions in seed-related disaster relief: seeds of hope experiences in Rwanda. Disasters. 2002;26:288–301.

Chapagain T, Good A. Yield and production gaps in rainfed wheat, barley, and canola in Alberta. Front Plant Sci. 2015;6:990. doi: 10.3389/fpls.2015.00990 .

Chapagain T, Riseman A. Evaluation of heirloom and commercial cultivars of small grains under low input organic systems. Am J Plant Sci. 2012;3(5):655. doi: 10.4236/ajps.2012.35080 .

Chapagain T, Super L, Riseman A. Root architecture variation in wheat and barley cultivars. Am J Exp Agric. 2014;4(7):849–56. doi: 10.9734/AJEA/2014/9462 .

Mulvey JM, Awan SW, Qadri AA, Maqsood MA. Profile of injuries arising from the 2005 Kashmir earthquake: the first 72 h. Injury. 2008;39:554–60.

Essex J. The work of hunger: security, development, and food-for-work in post crisis Jakarta. Stud Soc Justice. 2009;3:99–116.

Moore S, Daniel M, Eng E. International NGOs and the role of network controlling in humanitarian aid operation: a case study of coordination during the 2000 Mozambique floods. Disasters. 2003;27:305–18.

Rhodes L. Haitian heroines: women are the backbone of Haiti’s market system. But they need help—desperately. Int Econ. 2001;15:38–42.

UN OCHA [United Nations Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs]. Cluster coordination. http://www.unocha.org/what-we-do/coordination-tools/cluster-coordination . Accessed 27 Mar 2017.

Humphries V. Improving humanitarian coordination: common challenges and lessons learned from the cluster approach. http://sites.tufts.edu/jha/archives/1976 . Accessed 27 Mar 2017.

Shaw R, Sinha R. Towards sustainable recovery: future challenges after the Gujarat earthquake. Risk Manag. 2003;5:35–51.

Download references

Authors’ contributions

TC and MNR collaboratively designed the study, performed the literature review and analysis, and wrote and edited the manuscript. Both authors read and approved the final manuscript.

Acknowledgements

We thank Lisa Smith (University of Guelph) for creating the graphical illustrations. We thank Kamal Khadka (University of Guelph) for his helpful ideas and suggestions. We thank members of the Raizada Lab (University of Guelph) and researchers of SAKNepal, a project funded by the Canadian International Food Security Research Fund (CIFSRF), jointly sponsored by the International Development Research Centre (IDRC, Ottawa) and Global Affairs Canada (GAC).

Competing interests

Neither the authors nor the University of Guelph received payment or services from a third party for any aspect of the submitted work. No financial relationships exist with any entities that could be perceived to influence the submitted work. There are no patents or copyrights relevant to this work. There are no relationships or activities to disclose that could be perceived to have influence the submitted work.

Ethics approval and consent to participate

This study does not involve any human, animal or plant subjects, and materials. Both authors have read and agreed to its content and that the manuscript conforms to the journal’s policies.

This study was supported by a grant to MNR from the Canadian International Food Security Research Fund (CIFSRF), jointly sponsored by the International Development Research Centre (IDRC, Ottawa) and Global Affairs Canada (GAC). The funding body had no role in the design of the study or the collection, analysis, or interpretation of the data.

Publisher’s Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

Department of Plant Agriculture, University of Guelph, Guelph, ON, Canada

Tejendra Chapagain & Manish N. Raizada

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Tejendra Chapagain .

Rights and permissions

Open Access This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License ( http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ ), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver ( http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/ ) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article.

Chapagain, T., Raizada, M.N. Impacts of natural disasters on smallholder farmers: gaps and recommendations. Agric & Food Secur 6 , 39 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1186/s40066-017-0116-6

Download citation

Received : 25 August 2016

Accepted : 02 April 2017

Published : 10 May 2017

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1186/s40066-017-0116-6

Share this article

Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content:

Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article.

Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative

• Natural disaster
• Food security
• Agriculture
• Indigenous seeds

Agriculture & Food Security

ISSN: 2048-7010

• Submission enquiries: [email protected]
• General enquiries: [email protected]

• Open access
• Published: 29 March 2022

Indigenous farmers’ perceptions of problems in the rice field agroecosystems in the upper Baram, Malaysia

• Alexander Hollaus 1 ,
• Christoph Schunko 1 ,
• Rainer Weisshaidinger 2 ,
• Poline Bala 3 &
• Christian R. Vogl 1  

Journal of Ethnobiology and Ethnomedicine volume  18 , Article number:  26 ( 2022 ) Cite this article

22k Accesses

5 Citations

1 Altmetric

Metrics details

Rice field agroecosystems produce food for more than half of the world’s population and deliver important services supporting farmers’ livelihoods. However, traditional rice field agroecosystems are facing a variety of problems, including pests or markets that are hard to access. This research explored indigenous farmers’ perceptions of the problems, their causes and consequences, and the solutions applied to address them in the rice field agroecosystem. Furthermore, the study investigated how indigenous farmers related these problems to the surrounding landscape elements and to microzones in the fields.

Data were collected in two villages in the upper Baram, Sarawak using a qualitative approach that included sketch drawings and face-to-face interviews. Forty-three indigenous farmers of the Kenyah, Penan and Sa’ban ethnic groups were interviewed in their rice fields. The sketch drawings were used to identify the perceived landscape elements, while the oral interviews were employed to identify perceived microzones. Furthermore, the interviews elicited the perceived problems in the rice field agroecosystem and their relations to landscape elements and microzones.

The findings identified a total of nine environmental problems, e.g. animal disturbance, six social problems, e.g. difficult to access farm inputs, and eight agricultural technology system problems, e.g. poor soil quality, with some found to be rooted in complex causes and affecting agricultural productivity. While some problems were perceived at field level, microzones were frequently used as sub-field indicators of the problems. The surrounding landscape elements were perceived as both a source of the problems and as a means of avoiding them. To solve the problems, farmers applied preventive and reactive strategies based on traditional knowledge and scientific knowledge, resulting in a hybridisation of knowledge systems.

Conclusions

By including environmental, social, agricultural technology system problems and different spatial scales, this research contributes to addressing issues that can be overlooked when focusing on only one dimension of the problems. These results contribute to a better understanding of how indigenous farmers perceive, cope with and adapt to problems in rice field agroecosystems, which is important for landscape management.

Rice field agroecosystems (RAEs) are important man-made ecosystems that produce rice ( Oryza sativa ) as a staple food for more than half of the world’s population and support farmers’ livelihoods through subsistence, income and cultural services [ 1 , 2 ]. Farmers grow rice in a variety of agroecosystems, depending on their environmental and social settings and on the agricultural technology systems applied [ 3 ]. The International Rice Research Institute (IRRI) divides RAEs into four broad categories: rainfed upland rice, irrigated rice, rainfed lowland rice and flood-prone rice systems [ 4 , 5 ]. In RAEs cultivated by indigenous farmers, the management is based on a wide body of traditional knowledge and perceptions [ 6 , 7 , 8 , 9 , 10 ] that have been gained over a long period of continuous practice and interaction with the surrounding environment [ 11 ]. The rice terraces of Banaue, Philippines, for example, are an irrigated RAE with a sophisticated irrigation system built and traditionally managed for generations by indigenous people [ 12 , 13 ]. Another RAE that has long been rooted in the sociocultural life of indigenous peoples is rainfed upland rice, which is often grown by means of shifting cultivation techniques [ 14 , 15 ]. Owing to their lengthy experience of the surrounding environment, indigenous farmers’ traditional knowledge is rich in locally adapted information about environmental conditions that are important for landscape management, decision-making and problem-solving [ 16 , 17 , 18 ]. Porter-Bolland et al. (2012), for example, show that community-managed forests, whose management is largely based on traditional knowledge, are similarly effective at reducing deforestation as areas under protected status [ 19 ]. However, indigenous farmers’ traditional knowledge is dynamic and adaptive, and is influenced by historical, cultural and environmental factors, as well as through interaction with scientific knowledge systems [ 10 , 11 , 20 , 21 ]. As is suggested for the Tsimane’ indigenous community in Bolivia, their perception and use of the landscape may have changed as a result of their recent integration in the market economy and opening up to outsiders [ 16 ]. A change in the environmental settings, social settings and agricultural technology system of traditional managed RAEs requires indigenous farmers to adjust to new conditions, such as adopting new farming practices or engaging in the market economy, which can cause problems in the RAEs and with farmers’ livelihoods [ 7 , 12 , 14 , 21 , 22 ]. Some of the problems faced by farmers in RAEs are issues related to invasive as well as native pests [ 12 ], water shortage issues, market access difficulties [ 23 ], pesticide-related health problems [ 24 ] and the abandonment of rice fields due to farmers’ outmigration in search of employment [ 22 ]. Problems impacting traditional rice farming systems, including those classified by the FAO as Globally Important Agricultural Heritage Systems (GIAHS)[ 25 ], may be seen in Japan, where youth outmigration has resulted in the discontinuity of traditional practices and land abandonment [ 26 ], in the Hani rice terraces in China, where extreme weather events, steep slopes and abandonment of farmland contribute to landslide problems [ 27 ] and in the Philippines’ Kiangan rice terrace system, where difficulties originate from the introduction of invasive pests into rice fields and from unregulated land conversion resulting in soil erosion and water supply problems [ 28 ].

In Sarawak, Malaysia, RAEs are impacted by problems related to youth outmigration [ 14 , 29 , 30 , 31 , 32 , 33 ], loss of traditional rice farming knowledge [ 14 , 34 ] and the expansion of plantations, infrastructures and industrial logging [ 8 , 35 , 36 , 37 ]. Some of the land and labour that would have been available for rice farming has instead been diverted to logging, plantation, cash crop planting and tourist operations [ 9 , 30 , 36 ]. Aside from the socioeconomic issues, agricultural technology system problems caused by poorly levelled wet rice ponds can be the result of a lack of animal or machinery power and lead to uneven water distribution in the field [ 38 ]. Other problems are known to be associated with upland rice, an RAE that is widely found in the uplands of Sarawak, and are caused by agricultural intensification and the shortening of fallow periods. Both are factors that can contribute to environmental issues that are linked to a decrease in fertility and degradation of the soil [ 9 , 39 ]. In addition to soil-related issues, indigenous farmers in the interior of north Sarawak perceive problems in rice cultivation related to climate change issues such as droughts, floods and poor years for agriculture in general [ 40 ].

The environmental, social and agricultural technology system problems do not just occur on field level or spatially closed RAEs, but also manifest themselves in spatial sub-units within the rice fields and are impacted by the surrounding landscape. The landscape is categorised by indigenous farmers into landscape elements, often based on the principal domains of biotic and abiotic criteria, human interventions, and their potential uses and functions [ 16 , 17 ]. The landscape is therefore “an arrangement of biotic, abiotic and cultural landscape elements recognised and referred to by common nouns (generic landscape terms or categories), rather than proper nouns (place names or toponyms)” [ 41 ]. In general, landscape configuration and composition affect the ecological processes that occur in landscapes and landscape elements, such as hydrological flows and variation within catchments [ 42 ] or on the RAE’s arthropod population [ 43 ]. According to Ali et al. (2020), the landscape around rice fields influences the insect pest population, indicating that landscape structure should be considered when implementing integrated pest management [ 44 ]. Similar effects have been reported in Sungai Semanok, Sarawak, where rice farmers lack access to the same high-quality pesticides as nearby oil palm plantations, resulting in pest migration to rice fields and thus negatively affecting agricultural productivity [ 34 ].

On a smaller scale, farmers perceive ecological and agronomic processes in spatial sub-units within landscape elements that are addressed by the practices they apply [ 45 ]. These spatial sub-units or microzones are patches of homogeneous characteristics perceived and articulated by farmers [ 45 , 46 ]. For example, Mongolian farmers perceive microhabitats such as vegetation that has higher nutrient needs on marmot burrows or weeds along fences or around manure heaps [ 47 ], while the Tsimane’ divide their landscape sub-units based on the dominance of plant species [ 16 ].

The purpose of this study was to examine indigenous farmers’ perceptions of problems in the RAEs in two villages in Sarawak’s upper Baram region. Our research questions were as follows: (i) What problems do indigenous farmers perceive in their RAE? What are the underlying causes and consequences of these problems? What solutions do farmers apply to address these problems? In this study we also went beyond the field level as an analytical spatial unit and examined (ii) how problems are related to microzones in the rice fields and landscape elements surrounding the rice fields (Fig.  1 ). We examined the problems in the RAEs of dry and wet rice fields found in the upper Baram. Rainfed dry rice fields are cultivated using a shifting cultivation technique, while wet rice fields remain in their location and are situated in naturally swampy areas or are flooded by a water source, such as by irrigation or rainwater.

Spatial scales of analysis to identify problems farmers perceived in the rice field agroecosystem (Photo: A. Hollaus)

A landscape ethnoecological approach was chosen to undertake this study. Landscape ethnoecology examines how local people perceive, identify and manage their landscape [ 48 ] and “how human societies conceptualize the environments on which they depend.” [ 16 ]. Many landscape ethnoecological studies concentrate on the emic classification of landscapes, including comparisons with scientific classification, and their meaning, value, usage and management by indigenous and local people [ 16 , 41 , 49 , 50 , 51 , 52 ]. However, this study did not focus on a complete list of landscape elements or microzones perceived by indigenous people, but rather on using landscape elements and microzones as spatial analytical units to identify indigenous farmers’ perceived problems in the rice fields. Given the significance of RAEs to indigenous farmers in the upper Baram, we anticipate that the study’s findings will contribute to a better understanding of local challenges facing indigenous farmers, as well as their problem-solving strategies.

We conducted research in the upper Baram region (Fig.  2 ), in Sarawak, Malaysia, which is a landscape that has a multi-ethnic population. The upper Baram region is situated in the interior uplands of Borneo island, along the upper reaches of the Baram river. The tropical climate is characterised by a limited expression of seasonality, with a dryer period during the SW monsoon in May to September and a wetter period during the NE monsoon from November to March, mean annual precipitation of 3352 mm for Lio Mato [ 53 ] and an average temperature of 27.8 °C (derived from WorldClim.org v2 data for Long Banga [ 54 ]). The hilly area is covered by a mixed dipterocarp rainforest [ 55 ]. Dry and wet rice fields are found around the villages, as well as landscape elements that are related to the RAEs. Rice fields are cultivated by the indigenous farmers with a number of traditional but also imported dry and wet rice cultivars, including the dry rice varieties locally known as Padi Turi and Padi Pulut as well as wet rice varieties of Padi Adan and Padi Kanowit . The varieties from the two distinct rice field agroecosystems are important as they offer a variety of flavours and are used by the indigenous farmers for several different purposes.

Location of the upper Baram region in Sarawak, Malaysia, with the two research villages of Long Banga and Long Lamai

The research focused on two villages, Long Lamai (3°10′20"N, 115°23′7"E) and Long Banga (3°12′13"N, 115°23′36"E), in the upper Baram, which are approximately 4 km apart and at an altitude of approximately 440 m ASL (SRTM derived data [ 56 ]). Access to Long Banga is by a small airstrip and a logging road that connects the village to the coastal area. Long Lamai can only be accessed by a long boat or after a two-hour hike from Long Banga. The villages are inhabited by three ethnic groups: Penan, Kenyah, and Sa’ban. Long Lamai village, which has about 500 inhabitants, is home to the Penan ethnic group [ 33 ]. In Long Banga approximately 350 Sa’ban and 230 Kenyah (personal communication with the contact person in Long Banga Footnote 1 ), most of them belonging to the sub-group of Kenyah Lepo Ke’, live in the village.

The three ethnic groups are usually referred to as Orang Ulu , which translates as “those who dwell upstream or in the interior”, an expression that encompasses several ethnic groups with different languages and cultures residing in Sarawak’s uplands [ 57 , 58 ]. The Kenyah and Sa’ban are traditionally agriculturalists and migrated to the upper Baram region in the twentieth century when the Penan were already in the area [ 59 , 60 ]. The Kenyah traditionally resided in longhouses with verandas, where traditional festivals were celebrated, and rice cultivation is an important cultural element as well as essential for people’s livelihoods [ 8 , 61 , 62 ]. While the societies of the Kenyah and Sa’ban were stratified [ 62 ], the Penan, who were once nomadic hunter-gatherers, are described as an egalitarian organised group and are distinguished by their language dialects into Western Penan and Eastern Penan [ 63 , 64 ]. Most of the Penan have become sedentary and only a small number of Penan continue to live in the tropical forest as nomadic hunter-gatherers [ 60 ]. In Long Lamai, the Eastern Penan have started to settle and farm in the 1950s [ 59 , 60 ]. However, hunting and gathering in the forest has continued to be an important element of the livelihoods [ 61 , 63 ]. Nowadays, Christianity has increasingly displaced animism as the predominant religious belief system among all three ethnic groups [ 59 , 63 ]. However, continued industrialisation, modernisation and external pressures are further influencing indigenous peoples’ traditional ways of life [ 60 , 63 ].

The research population consisted of indigenous farmers who cultivate wet or dry rice fields in the two villages of Long Banga and Long Lamai because they are the traditional knowledge-holders for managing and organising the local RAEs. These villages were selected because they are representative of the region’s diverse ethnic groups and infrastructure contexts, yet share a similar natural setting due to their proximity.

We used a snowball sampling strategy [ 65 ] to identify participants and asked the two contact persons in each village, both of whom are rice farmers, for potential participants. The participants needed to meet the criterion of being a rice farmer in one of the two villages. These participants were then asked to identify additional informants for the study. Interviews were held with a total of 43 participants and covered 50 rice fields because some participants were questioned about both dry (27) and wet (23) rice fields (Table 1 ). The mean age of the participants was 52.85 years (min. 24, max. 76) and included 15 females and 28 males of the three ethnic groups (12 Kenyah, 15 Penan and 16 Sa’ban).

Data collection

Qualitative interviews.

Data were collected by the first author during a three-month field trip to Long Lamai and Long Banga in early 2020. Before conducting the qualitative interviews, the village leaders were asked for permission to conduct research in the villages, signing a letter of Free, Prior and Informant Consent. Furthermore, each interviewee was first asked to participate and to sign a written letter of consent for the data to be used. The letters were provided in English and Malay. The interviews were conducted in English with English-speaking people (n = 14). If an interview could not be held in English (n = 29), the interview was translated in situ by a local interpreter from the interviewee’s language (Penan, Sa’ban, Kenyah) or Malay into English.

Data were gathered using participatory sketch drawings (Fig.  3 ) in combination with semi-structured interviews. Sketch drawings are effective for capturing spatial knowledge and perceptions of the environment [ 66 , 67 , 68 , 69 ]. While participatory sketch drawings are effective at establishing spatial relations and representation [ 66 , 67 ], without an additional language-based approach, they may lead to the omission of important language categories [ 67 ]. Therefore, we combined the sketch drawings with oral interviews to understand problems connected to landscape elements.

Examples of sketches drawn by farmers. a : wet rice field (WR, Female, Sa’ban, 24); b : dry rice field (DR, Female, Kenyah, 42)

The sketches were drawn after providing the interviewees with a B5-size sketch book and asking them to draw their rice field. To include the surrounding area in the sketch and stimulate the drawing process, we followed up by asking what was around the rice field. Besides these two guiding questions, the participants were given free expression in their drawings and were not subjected to time constraints or other restrictions. However, if the participants just answered verbally, we invited them to draw the feature they had mentioned in the sketch. Eleven interviewees declined to draw themselves and instead instructed the interpreter on what to draw. After the participants confirmed that the drawing was complete, the relations between the rice field and the landscape elements depicted on the paper were addressed by asking farmers whether it was good or bad that the landscape element was next to their rice field and why, and whether the landscape element caused any problems. Microzones were identified by asking the farmers about perceived differences within the rice fields and why these differences occurred. To initiate a discussion of problems at field level, the farmers were asked to describe the RAE characteristics and the differences from other RAEs. By adopting this approach, it was possible in the interviews to explore the problems, their causes and consequences, as well as the solutions applied by farmers. The interviews were recorded and subsequently transcribed verbatim. For data analysis, the sketch drawings were digitised.

Data analysis

The first author conducted a qualitative content analysis of the drawings and transcripts by data-driven (inductive) and concept-driven (deductive) coding [ 70 ]. Two conceptual steps in the analysis were performed to answer our research questions in order to: (i) identify the landscape elements and microzones, and (ii) identify all the problems and their causes, consequences and solutions applied, and connect the problems to the landscape elements and microzones.

The microzones were inductively coded by identifying features at sub-field scale perceived by farmers as having different properties throughout the rice fields and as being associated with the problems. The landscape elements were derived from the inductive analysis of the sketch drawings and transcriptions concerning features around the rice field that were drawn or spoken about. The 44 features obtained from the sketch drawings and oral interviews were categorised into 16 landscape elements [see Additional file 1 ].

To perform a detailed analysis of the problems, we applied the same conceptual framework as in the interviews (problem, causes, consequences and solutions) to guide the coding. Thus, we coded all the problems mentioned in the interviews, their causes, consequences and applied solutions, and assigned the problems according to their primary cause into one of the three agroecosystem settings: environmental problems, social problems, and agricultural technology system problems [ 3 ]. If a problem was derived from or linked to a landscape element or microzone, a code was applied to link the spatial unit to the problem. In the results section, we present the findings in a table that links the problems to the causes, consequences and solutions, and to the landscape elements and microzones. Furthermore, the findings were supported by quotations from the transcriptions. We have not changed the verbatim quotations, but provide omissions, additions and translations in square brackets for a clearer understanding of the farmers’ statements. The information about the participant who provided the quotation states whether it was from a dry rice (DR) or wet rice (WR) field interview, and the participant’s ethnic affiliation, gender and age. Quotations that were translated in situ by an interpreter are marked by “VI”. The qualitative data collected from the sketch drawings and the transcription of the audio recordings were analysed using the MAXQDA program [ 71 ].

In the rice fields, we found that farmers perceived microzones (Fig.  4 ) in terms of five features: rice plants, water, microrelief, soil and weeds (Fig.  5 ). The microzones formed by rice plants are linked to indicators of broken or lodged rice plant patches, no rice plant patches, rice yield differences and rice plant growth differences. To identify problems with rice plant growth, the farmers used the properties of plant colour, plant growing, tiller quantity, yield and grain quality (Table 2 ).

Wet rice field showing microzones of patches of poor plant growth (yellowish rice plant colour), soil colour difference (reddish and black soil colour), water level differences (areas with and without water) and field level differences (higher and lower areas). The rice field in the picture was levelled using a bulldozer, often seen as a problem due to the red infertile soil beneath the fertile black topsoil being uncovered (Photo: A. Hollaus)

Overview of landscape elements, rice field agroecosystems and microzones in the rice fields

Other microzones were perceived by soil properties based on texture, hardness and colour. In dry rice fields, farmers also noticed microzones in the microrelief by slope differences. In wet rice fields, microrelief microzones were perceived in terms of field level differences of small depressions or elevations. Furthermore, differences in the wet rice field were recognised by water level differences and by different water availability in wet rice and dry rice fields. Furthermore, weed occurrences in the field formed microzones that were recognised by farmers and led to problems in the RAEs.

Landscape elements

The landscape surrounding the rice fields was composed of topographic elements (hills and valleys), natural ecosystems (primary forests, tree and vegetation patches, rivers, springs) and man-made or semi-natural ecosystems (fallow land, rice fields, gardens, bushland, grassland, fishponds), as well as artificial elements (path infrastructure, huts, villages, irrigation infrastructure) and sociocultural elements (borders, ancient graves, historical places) (Fig.  5 ). In the conception of indigenous farmers, land covers changed from unfarmed (e.g. primary forest) to farmed (e.g. rice field) and fallow land (e.g. secondary forest). Consequently, fallow land was the landscape element around rice fields mentioned most frequently, suggesting a highly farmed area. Fallow land can range from grassland to forest, encompassing the landscape elements of bushland and grassland if they used to be cultivated (Fig.  6 ). Since some of the farmers attributed certain weed-related problems to these landscape elements, we separated them from fallow land. Adjacent rice fields, which in some locations are clustered together, were frequently referred to as a landscape element. Another man-made ecosystem often mentioned was gardens, which are seen as an important component of the dry rice fields. As one farmer put it:

Always Sa’ban and Kenyah if they do the dry paddy [rice] field, they have to make small era [garden] near the [rice field]... (DR, Male, Sa’ban, 58)

In the foreground, the landscape element of grassland dominated by Imperata cylindrica ; in the background, a patchy pattern of dry rice fields and fallow land on hills (Photo: A. Hollaus)

Topographic elements were mentioned by participants in the form of valleys and hills. An artificial element in the landscape was huts that are used to store rice, equipment and materials, as well as provide shelter for relaxing or remaining in the rice field. Huts ranged in quality from a few branches to pillars and planks mainly made from local materials. Besides the artificial element of a hut, path infrastructures were important for travelling to the rice field and ranged from simple walking paths through the rainforest to concrete roads. Other artificial elements in the landscape were villages, including houses as well as the airfield in Long Banga. Furthermore, an important artificial landscape element was the irrigation infrastructure, which included pipes and dams, but also a micro-hydropower plant whose discharge water was used to irrigate wet rice fields. Water was also obtained from natural ecosystems such as rivers and springs, including salt springs. Another natural ecosystem was primary forests, which were referred to as already being a long way from the villages but with which farmers associated fertile soil. Sociocultural elements referred to by the farmers were historical village sites, borders and ancient graves.

Problems, causes, consequences and solutions in rice field agroecosystems

In the interviews, 23 problems were identified in the RAEs, of which nine, six and eight were categorised by their primary cause as environmental, social or agricultural technology system problems, respectively (Table 3 ).

Environmental problems

Animal problems.

Animal attacks and animal disturbance were the environmental problems to which the farmers referred. Animal attacks were mentioned by one farmer who stated that snakes and bears posed a health risk for farmers in rice fields further away from human activities, and required greater awareness.

In contrast, animal disturbances were significant problems for the RAEs that were frequently mentioned in the interviews. In the rice fields, animals eat or damage rice plants, thus having a detrimental impact on rice plant growth and yields. Animal disturbances were linked to rice fields further away from human activity and to individual divergent planting times. The pests most frequently mentioned in the interviews were the sambar deer ( Cervus unicolor ) and bearded pig ( Sus barbatus ) and birds. Farmers also mentioned monkeys, including pig-tailed ( Macaca nemestrina ) or long-tailed macaques ( Macaca fascicularis ), which invade rice fields and destroy the rice plants.

They [monkeys] roll over the paddy [rice plant] and the paddy is stuck in [the fur]. […]. Yeah, and then, later, on the high tree and they take [and eat the rice]. (DR, Female, Sa’ban, 57)

Other animals were wild birds and chickens that were blamed for eating the rice seeds or trampling on the young rice plants in search of worms. Furthermore, farmers mentioned various insects, such as worms, caterpillars, grasshoppers, locusts and beetles as the cause of poor rice plant growth. A relatively recent phenomenon affecting rice plant growth is the golden apple snail ( Pomacea sp.), which was introduced from an unknown source and is spreading over wet rice fields.

Farmers used a variety of methods to minimise animal disturbances. One method was to plant both types of RAEs as a precautionary step in the event that one type of rice crop fails to yield. A farmer explained why:

[...] it’s for the safety. [...] Because payau [sambar deer] come and eat the parai [rice] at the terek [dry rice field] and then they still have the taka [wet rice field] to cover [their food needs]. (DR, Male, Penan, 35, VI)

Furthermore, farmers suggested that one way to spread the risk of animal disturbance was to adhere to the community planting time, which is coordinated between the villages. Observing the community planting time and pesticide spraying were the strategies mentioned to control insect pests. Scarecrows, generally upright poles with a human scent (e.g. t-shirts) or with noisy objects (e.g. cans) hanging from them, were another possibility for minimising animal disturbances. Similarly, walking along a clearing of vegetation around the field spreads human scents that should keep animals away. Additionally, fences made of rattan or vine plant ropes are an easy way to prevent sambar deer in particular from entering the rice field. Other methods mentioned for controlling animal disturbances included installing a net to capture birds, guarding the rice field, setting animal traps and hunting for animals. Some farmers mentioned avoiding planting crops that attract animals. Attempts had been made to remove the golden apple snail, which is a problem only in wet rice fields, by draining the water. However, this method could lead to the establishment of weeds, which are also harmful to rice plant growth. Thus, farmers reported attempting to collect snails by hand or using pesticides.

Microzones indicating animal disturbance were patches of poor rice plant growth, patches of broken rice plants or patches with no rice plants. For example, one farmer explained that a patch with no rice plants was caused “ because of payau [sambar deer]” (WR, Male, Penan, 41, VI).

Landscape elements related to animal disturbances were fallow land, bushland, primary forest, hills, other rice fields, villages and path infrastructures that act as a habitat for animals and therefore as a source of the problem. Gardens also contributed to the problem by attracting animals with the crops planted there. To reduce animal disturbance, farmers favoured having their rice fields close to a path infrastructure, especially the main path, or adjacent to huts, villages or other rice fields since the presence of humans was perceived to reduce animals in the field.

Steep slopes

In dry rice fields, a steep slope poses the risk of falling, which can impact farmers’ health. One farmer described an event that occurred during the planting season:

During the nugan [planting], one, someone falls down, because it is steep like this. (DR, Male, Penan, 50, VI)

Furthermore, because of the steep slope, some farmers have difficulty working in rice fields and therefore avoid using steep land for cultivation; however, this is dependent on land availability. Nevertheless, most farmers do not consider steep slopes in a dry rice field to be an obstacle to rice agriculture. Erosion was also mentioned as a consequence of a steep slope and can be associated with poor soil quality. One farmer mentioned that the yield per area was lower in steep slopes since rice plants were planted farther away than in flatter areas. Due to the steep slope problems, some farmers stated as a remedy to choose flat land or avoid using too steep slopes to cultivate the dry rice agroecosystem. The problem is connected to microrelief microzones with slope differences and to the landscape element of a hill as a topographical factor.

Vegetation problems

The occurrence of weeds (Fig.  7 ), such as Imperata cylindrica and Dicranopteris linearis, is a major problem perceived by farmers as affecting rice plant growth through competition for nutrients and sunlight and the spread of the weed over the rice plant, and can lead to poor soil quality. Furthermore, thorny weeds pose a health risk of injuries to farmers during hand-weeding.

In an interview, a farmer explained that weeds enter the wet rice fields and cause problems for rice plant growth (Photo: A. Hollaus)

The causes of weed occurrences are often connected to other problems in the RAEs. The spread of fire during clearing and erosion create areas to which weeds can migrate. Insufficient water availability and unadjusted water levels, as well as uneven field levels in wet rice fields, lead to dry places where weeds can grow. Furthermore, poor soil quality and a lack of weeding because of insufficient time or farmers’ health issues can be a cause of weed occurrence in rice fields. Weeding is seen as difficult and time-consuming work, but necessary.

You have to clear the paddy [rice field], so the paddy [rice plant] can grow very well. When this type of grass is grown under the paddy, we have to weeding it. (DR, Male, Sa’ban, 61, VI)

Besides hand-weeding, the use of knives, machines, burning or synthetic herbicides are mentioned as forms of weed management. Furthermore, flooding of wet rice fields is regarded as a means of suppressing weeds and therefore needs to be retained. Another method mentioned by farmers for controlling weeds is by maintaining a clearing of vegetation around the field to reduce weed migration. Participants mentioned that some of their solutions to control weeds can at times be ineffective or result in even stronger weed regrowth.

Farmers mentioned weeds growing in patches in rice fields or infesting entire areas of the field. Microzones related to weed problems were connected to patches of poor rice plant growth, weed occurrence and water availability differences, and in wet rice fields also to field level and water level differences. Landscape elements, such as fallow land, garden, hill, rice fields, grassland or bushland, were a concern for rice farmers due to possible weed migration into the rice field. Farmers mentioned avoiding planting rice in weed-dominated areas, e.g. grassland, and waiting until natural succession in the fallow period produced shady areas and outcompeted the weedy plants.

Another vegetation problem mentioned as causing poor rice plant growth was the surrounding vegetation of rice fields, forming shady areas or causing branches to fall onto the rice field and managed by farmers by clearing the vegetation, such as in landscape elements of fallow land, gardens, tree and vegetation patches or hills.

Weather problems

Farmers perceived seasonal variations in the weather and stated that the agricultural year in which the interview took place had been poor for rice plant growth, resulting in reduced yields. Planting too early or too late can cause problems due to the absence of the seasonal weather conditions needed for rice growing. Weather problems were related to droughts, but also to excessive rain or hot temperatures.

Kalau dia terlampau panas pun tak bagus, kalau dia hujan selalu pun tak bagus. [If it’s too hot it’s not good, if it’s too much rain it’s also not good.] (DR, Female, Kenyah, 30)

Besides affecting the rice, heavy rain resulted in slippery conditions and hot temperatures could impact farmers’ health. To cope with hot temperatures, landscape elements of tree and vegetation patches and fallow land reduced the problem by offering shade in which farmers can rest. Furthermore, some farmers’ strategy in the event of a poor agricultural year, e.g. because of drought, was to store enough rice from one harvest to last several years.

Another weather problem was strong wind connected to high plant growth and a wet or weak rice stem resulting in lodging. Consequently, rice grains can fall into the water or onto the ground, resulting in moist grains or the grains being eaten by rats. To avoid lodging, farmers suggested reducing the risk by draining the rice field before harvest or using a rope to support the rice plant. Lodging was indicated by the microzone of lodged rice plant patches.

Social problems

Human disturbance.

Human disturbance occurs when humans walk through or along the rice field, stepping on and damaging the rice plants and consequently leading to poor rice plant growth. The problem was related to the landscape element of tree and vegetation patches where people harvest plants and cross the rice field to reach these areas. Furthermore, the landscape element of path infrastructure was linked to human disturbance of rice plants on the field edge coming onto the path and people stepping on the plants. To prevent rice plants from growing onto the path, one farmer constructed a fence-like barrier along the field edge.

Fish in rice fields are another reason for human disturbance. Although the fish themselves were not perceived to be a problem, with just one farmer mentioned fish digging into the bunds and causing damage, some people caught the fish in the wet rice field, damaging the rice plants. Apart from the field owner personally catching the fish, no action was taken. Farmers identified the landscape elements of rivers and rice fields as a source of fish migration to the rice field.

Hard to afford and lack of access to paid labour, machinery, farm inputs, tools or irrigation infrastructure

Some farmers said that they lacked the financial resources or access required to obtain tools, farm inputs and machinery such as a bulldozer for levelling, the irrigation infrastructure or labour for rice field maintenance. The causes were linked to the farmers’ lack of income or lack of support from the government or non-governmental organisations (NGO). As a consequence, farmers who do not have access to a bulldozer have to level the field manually, resulting in a slower gradual expansion of the wet rice field or cultivation of a smaller field. Paid labour was not common, but a few Sa’ban and one Penan said that they paid people to manage all or some of the tasks associated with cultivating rice fields. In the instance of farm inputs of synthetic pesticides and fertilisers, some farmers noted that the government provided those for free, but others said that they needed to purchase the inputs, which may be problematic for certain farmers. As a result, these farmers could not use pesticides and had to continue to weed by hand. A similar problem was articulated for the irrigation infrastructure, which could result in a poor water supply and lead to the continuing cultivation of dry rice fields rather than wet rice fields. Some Penan farmers indicated that they wanted to have irrigation pipes, but these were hard to access and they had insufficient funds.

If we have a pipe like others. That is the problem. We don’t have enough pipes. We want to make a taka [wet rice field] […]. We don’t have a pipe to take the water, that is the problem. (DR, Male, Penan, 60)

Solutions to this problem were asking for help in the community if the work was difficult, omitting certain tasks in the rice field or just extending the rice field more slowly. Furthermore, some people looked for work to earn money or used the support of the government or NGOs in certain agriculture projects. The problem was connected to the landscape element of irrigation infrastructure as one important source of the water supply.

Other tasks/jobs besides farming

Apart from the tasks in the rice fields, some farmers highlighted their need to have other work to earn money to support their families or afford farm inputs, tools or paid labour, reducing the amount of time available in the rice fields.

Because no money when our children go to school, no money. And that’s why we go to Miri to working. And then [earn] money for our kids to [go to] school. (DR/WR, Male, Sa’ban, 53)

There was a conflict for farmers between the need for money and the need to cultivate and manage the rice field. The first author frequently observed that rice fields were not being weeded, indicated by the microzone of weed occurrence. When asked why that was the case, the interpreter explained that the owner might be absent from the village due to employment in the city, for example. Additional employment often led farmers to neglect their activities in the rice fields, e.g. weeding or proper levelling, when there was insufficient time. However, the tasks could be completed later, but the reduced care of the rice field affected rice plant growth.

Poor access to rice fields

Poor accessibility to the rice field was related to a very long walk from the village and the condition of the path infrastructure. Farmers reported frequently choosing rice fields near the village to save on travel time and avoid long distances for rice transportation. One farmer did not cultivate his wet rice field owing to its remote location and planted a dry rice field instead that was close to a dirt road and easily accessible by vehicle or motorbike. Thus, if farmers had no land near the village, some mentioned borrowing land to have the rice field closer. Particularly for farmers in poor health, a nearby rice field was indicated as preferable.

The kind of path infrastructure (e.g. walking path or dirt road) played an important role in how to access the rice field, allowing the use of vehicles for travel and transportation. The poor condition of the path infrastructure was also an issue, making the path inaccessible for motorbikes or cars.

The landscape elements of path infrastructure and village played an important role in the rice field’s accessibility and was critical in selecting the site of rice fields, particularly dry rice fields. Rivers were still used to access rice fields and transport rice yields by boat, especially in Long Lamai where there are no roads.

Poor capability of farmers

The capability of a farmer to carry out difficult work in the rice field was often linked to the farmer’s age and health. For example, elderly farmers in poor health had difficulty accessing remote rice fields or undertaking field tasks such as field preparation or weeding. Consequently, they wanted to acquire a rice field near the village or obtain help from others, even paying them. One participant stopped dry rice farming because of her advanced age and focused only on the wet rice field. Her children took over the cultivation of the dry rice field and also assisted with difficult tasks in the wet rice field. The problem was connected to the landscape element of village and its distance from the field.

Generally, farmers stated that old taboos no longer had any power or influenced their rice cultivation practices. Nowadays they believe in God and are Christian. However, one sociocultural landscape element and natural ecosystem were related to taboos by two farmers in Long Banga: ancient graves and salt springs where rice fields should not be established. This related to the notion that spirits or ghosts inhabit the old stone graves and salt springs, and if disturbed farmers could be afflicted by sickness. Farmers addressed this problem by avoiding spiritually significant areas.

Agricultural technology system problems

Spread of fire.

Farmers reported problems of fire accidentally spreading during the burning process in a dry rice field, burning a tree or a larger area than anticipated.

During the burning season, then it is often. People don’t follow the [right] time. This is why it happened. […] Usually, if [it is] a fruit tree, we don’t want to cut it, but mostly it wouldn’t [be] saved because of the fire. (DR/WR, Male, Penan, 70)

This can result in the intrusion of weedy plants into the burnt area and rice field. A further consequence can be that the fire destroys trees and areas that are valuable for various uses (e.g. fruit trees). Therefore, landscape elements connected to the problem were tree and vegetation patches that are accidentally burnt. One Penan farmer explained that to keep the fire under control, all the neighbours of the field should be notified and the field should be burnt when the sun is not as intense and the wind direction is favourable.

Insufficient water availability

The problem of insufficient water availability resulted in poor rice plant growth and in wet rice fields led to the occurrence of weeds and hard soil conditions. One Penan farmer described plots in his wet rice field as "mulah mapeu" , referring to dry plots with dead rice plants, and led to these plots being abandoned. Insufficient water availability could be caused by dry weather conditions since most fields relied on rain for water. Therefore, planting at the appropriate time was important:

[In the wet rice field], if you plant in the dry season the paddy will die. It [...] needs water. […] if you drop the seed into the soil it needs to sit with water. You plant it if no rain, it will […] die. Seed will not grow. Hill paddy [dry rice field] [..] also needs water and rain to grow. (DR/WR, Male, Sa’ban, 60)

Another cause of insufficient water availability was an unevenly levelled wet rice field. For example, one farmer mentioned a problem where water was flowing to one side of a poorly levelled field, indicated by healthy growing plants on that side of the field and poor growing plants on the other. Another cause mentioned by farmers was the absence of an irrigation infrastructure, such as pipes, or a broken infrastructure, making the wet rice field more dependent on rain. Only a few areas in both villages had an established irrigation system, such as in Long Banga, where a pipe transports water to the rice field and then flows through the following rice fields. As the farmers explained, one advantage of pipes over other water sources was the ability to regulate the water supply to the field and thus adjust the water level. However, poor irrigation arrangements among pipe users or the blocking of the water flow through the rice fields by one of the field owners could also lead to insufficient water availability. In Long Lamai, for example, a pipe delivers water to several wet rice fields, and fields at the far end of the pipe struggle to get water if the outtake upstream is too high. One farmer solved this problem by using excess water from the neighbours’ rice field instead of the pipe. Other solutions were to grow dry rice cultivars in wet rice fields, apply weed management, re-level the field, maintain the irrigation infrastructure or abandon the wet rice field or plot. If no water was available for a wet rice field, farmers continued to cultivate dry rice fields. For dry rice fields, some farmers mentioned that maintaining a vegetation buffer space above the field should serve as a water retention area.

Microzones associated with insufficient water availability were soil texture differences, field level differences and water level differences in wet rice fields. In the dry rice field, one farmer highlighted that water availability was better down the slope than up it, and was therefore associated with slope differences. The problem could lead to patches of poor rice plant growth and yield differences in the field.

The landscape elements that contributed to insufficient water availability were grassland above rice fields, due to poor water retention, and hills, which were mentioned as having less water availability than areas in the valley. Rivers were also mentioned as producing sediment and thus blocking the irrigation pipe. Additionally, other rice fields and irrigation infrastructure were linked with the problem by the mismanagement or lack of irrigation infrastructure. Fallow land, fishponds, rivers, irrigation infrastructure, other rice fields and springs as sources of water were all linked to water availability and hence were mitigating the problem.

Lack of suitable land

A lack of suitable land was frequently mentioned as a problem by farmers as having an impact on the field’s location and the quality of the land used. If no suitable land was available, the solutions were to use the land that is available or to borrow land. With land that was borrowed, the owner had the option to tolerate but also to restrict its use, which was connected to a limitation on producing long-term crops such as fruit trees or coffee plants. The borrowing of land for rice cultivation was repeatedly mentioned by the Kenyah in Long Banga.

Actually, this is not our land. We just borrow [it], just for this year. (DR, Female, Kenyah, 30)

Land ownership was generally acquired by cultivating an unused area. To keep the land, participants took measures to assure ownership to limit the danger of land claims that could result in land conflicts. As a result, farmers returned to the land for rice cultivation or tree planting to retain ownership of the land.

Don’t let it [the land] be like this, they come slashing and they take your land for plant paddy [rice] or everything. If a long, long time didn’t come and check it, they take it long, long time; three, four, five years, then all is gone. (DR, Male, Penan, 60)

For wet rice fields, if no suitable land was available, farmers needed to continue to cultivate dry rice fields. Land availability for wet rice fields was seen as difficult since the field type needed “flat land and the water” (Sa’ban, 65, Male, WR), while interviewees saw almost no restrictions on making a dry rice field, as one participant commented: “[…] we can do it everywhere.” (DR, Female, Sa’ban, 57). One Sa’ban remarked on the difficulties of getting flat land for the wet rice field in Long Banga:

The Kenyah people they plant it because they have no land, so they plant the paddy [wet rice field] in the parit [street trench]. (WR, Male, Sa’ban, 65)

Land selected by farmers for a new rice field was assessed for soil quality by plant and soil indicators. To address the problem of poor soil quality, farmers stated that such sites are avoided during land selection. Landscape elements connected to the lack of suitable land were fallow land and its age as an important factor for the soil quality in dry rice fields. Furthermore, the valley areas were important for establishing a wet rice field and farmers tried not to use weed-dominated areas in bushland or grassland, reducing the possible area to make a rice field.

Insufficient rice yield

Another, infrequently mentioned problem was the insufficiency of rice yield for the farmer’s needs. For most respondents, their rice fields provided enough rice to meet their demands. Some even had enough rice to sell the surplus. However, one farmer said that for Long Lamai:

Now some people no paddy [rice] [..] to eat. Finish... (WR, Male, Penan, 57)

He continued by explaining that they would go to work to purchase the rice. However, farmers acknowledged that they helped each other and shared rice with others who were in need. To have enough rice, one strategy explained by a Kenyah farmer was to plant rice in sufficient quantities to store it for two years in the event of a poor harvest one year. Another strategy was to plant both rice field types to minimise the risk of a poor yield due to the failure of only one RAE.

They need both. Because they don’t know if taka [wet rice field] will live good or the terek [dry rice field] is much better... (WR, Female, Penan, 27, VI)

Poor soil quality

One problem mentioned by many farmers was poor soil quality in the rice field, resulting in weed occurrence, poor rice plant growth and a low yield. Poor soil quality also affected the usage frequency of dry rice fields on the same land area. Farmers mainly used the properties of soil colour, texture and hardness to describe soil quality. Farmers mentioned two dominant soil colours, black and red, sometimes also labelled as yellow instead of red. According to the interviews, the red soil is underneath the black soil.

Black soil is on the top on the surface of the earth and under there red soil. (DR, Male, Kenyah, 62, VI)

While the red soil was described as infertile, the black soil was perceived to be fertile and should be used for rice growing. Soil hardness was related to hard and soft soil. Hard soil is dry and provides poor water availability for rice plant growth. Farmers noted that hard soil was difficult for the rice plant roots to penetrate and caused difficulties during direct planting with a stick. In contrast, soft soil promoted rice plant growth and healthy green rice plants. Soil texture was perceived to vary between clayey, sandy or stony soils—one farmer even added loam—all of which have different effects on rice plant growth, soil moisture and water retention.

The perceived causes of poor soil quality were a short fallow period, overuse of the soil and poor fallow vegetation, insufficient water availability to make the soil soft or the topographic location of the rice field, with better soil conditions in the valley than on hills. A cause of poor soil quality in wet rice fields was poor levelling of the pond by removing the fertile black soil until the red soil appeared, especially if machines (bulldozers) were used:

Machine [for levelling] is not good for this wet paddy field. (DR, Male, Sa’ban, 58)

Another cause that farmers with dry rice fields mentioned was soil erosion, which can result in the displacement of fertile soil.

Solutions to mitigate poor soil quality were to relocate (shift) the dry rice field, check for suitable soil during land selection and longer fallow periods. A farmer said that he had reduced the size of the rice field that year since the soil quality in one section was poor, and he was just using the fertile part of the field. Thus, before moving the dry rice field to a new location, farmers decide whether another year of cultivation is possible:

If it is subur [fertile] then we will plant on it [the land], but [if] not, then we can change to others. (DR, Male, Kenyah, 59, VI)

However, the number of possible cultivations was limited by the soil’s quality and previous land cover; for example, if a farmer wanted to use grassland or bushland for a rice field, the field would be useful, according to one farmer, for no more than one cultivation cycle. Some farmers coped with poor soil quality by applying synthetic fertiliser or said that they kept a vegetation strip above the field. In wet rice fields, water was maintained to keep the soil soft, and if red soil appeared during levelling, farmers put fertile black soil back on top.

Microzones connected to poor soil quality were soil colour, soil hardness and soil texture differences. Besides using soil properties to determine soil quality, farmers also used plants as indicators. The yellow colour of the rice plant, for example, indicated poor soil quality.

This is the tanah [soil], that not good. You will see the paddy [rice plant] yellow and the soil is yellow. That is the proof that the paddy not good. (DR, Male, Kenyah, 59, VI)

One Penan farmer assessed soil quality by the appearance and type of plants found in an area.

This is Ureu Kemanen [type of grass], […], you see there many, […], if this grows many like this, you are slashing here, you grow the paddy: good. (DR, Male, Penan, 60)

A Sa’ban farmer used the soil properties as important indicators of land quality, which needed to be verified before selecting land:

We are looking for the, for the soil first. If the soil is black, the paddy is good. (DR/WR, Male, Sa’ban, 60)

However, yield differences and slope differences were also linked to soil quality. Furthermore, larger rocks in the fields were recognised as a lost area for rice planting.

The landscape element related to soil quality was fallow land, which allows the area to recover and improve soil quality. Farmers also associated primary forests with fertile soil. Furthermore, one farmer reported differences in soil quality between hill and valley areas. Valleys were thought to have better soil and to be cooler since they were closer to the river than hills, where stony soil can be found. Grassland and bushland with a dominance of weeds were also avoided because of the poor soil quality they indicated, such as hard conditions. Rivers were reported to cause erosion after heavy rain by displacing soil from the rice field or sediment onto the field. The same was mentioned by one farmer for the road above his rice field where soil run-off relocated poor quality soil to his field.

Synthetic fertiliser application

The problem mentioned by farmers in relation to synthetic fertiliser was its application. Synthetic fertilisation, according to farmers, was more harmful to the rice plant and its quality than it was beneficial, as one Sa’ban explained for avoiding synthetic fertiliser:

Because the baja [synthetic fertiliser] […] the quality of the paddy is not good. Because when the paddy [rice plant] is too big, the paddy cannot stand. It will fall down. (WR, Female, Sa’ban, 24)

In comparison with pesticides, synthetic fertiliser application had so far been quite infrequent in both villages, as farmers perceived their land to be sufficiently fertile.

Also, if the paddy [rice plant] is good, no need to use the baja [fertiliser], only need to spray [pesticides], that’s all, to kill the weed. We seldom use the baja, the fertiliser. (DR/WR, Male, Sa’ban, 60)

In Long Lamai, only one farmer said that he used synthetic fertiliser. Nevertheless, other farmers in Long Banga said that they used synthetic fertiliser only if the soil was poor quality. Although synthetic fertiliser was associated with increased rice plant growth, according to farmers it came at the expense of low seed quality and the possibility of rice plants lodging, which was related to the microzone of lodged rice plant patches. Farmers were thus trying to avoid using synthetic fertiliser. In the wet rice field, several farmers mentioned that before planting they simply chopped the grass and let it decay like a natural fertiliser. Vegetation above a rice field was considered by some farmers to be an additional source of natural fertiliser for the rice field.

Synthetic pesticide application

Synthetic pesticides were applied to control pests, but were mostly used to control weeds in rice fields, especially in dry rice fields, where farmers frequently said herbicides were used. Pesticides were applied to wet rice fields before planting and flooding, or only to the bunds.

At the terek [dry rice field], sometimes they apply the spray […] at the place there is ureu [grass], but at the taka [wet rice field], they spray the bunds (DR, Male, Penan, 50, VI)

Farmers expressed concerns about the use of pesticides, which could harm the health of the rice plants. Furthermore, they explained that certain weeds grew again or were resistant to herbicides. Pesticides, according to the respondents, caused health risks and could pollute water. Another consideration was that rice that had been treated with pesticides could not achieve a higher selling price. As a result, some farmers tried to avoid pesticide application and continued to perform weeding. Pesticide management was related to the microzones of weed occurrence, soil quality differences as well as poor rice plant growth patches, and to the landscape elements of rivers and fishponds due to the ensuing pollution of water.

Unadjusted water level

If the water level is too high, rice plants will be susceptible to lodging and, especially in the early growing stage, will drown. However, if the water level is too low this can encourage weed occurrence. One example was given by a farmer who had to lower the water level to eradicate the golden apple snail in one of his wet rice field plots, which affected rice plant growth. Furthermore, a high level of water in the wet rice fields makes harvesting difficult because of the issue of moving around and the danger of dropping the panicles into the water. Before the harvest, farmers blow the water out of the wet rice field, allowing them to move easily through it. This problem was connected to microzones of lodged rice plant patches and water level differences.

In this study, we identified the problems, causes and consequences of problems as perceived by farmers, as well as the solutions applied in the local rice field agroecosystems (RAEs) in the upper Baram, Sarawak. Since ecological processes can take place across different spatial scales [ 72 , 73 ], our study provided a broader view of perceived problems in RAEs by using the surrounding landscape elements and microzones in the rice fields as analytical units. Our study demonstrated that indigenous farmers in the research area had important information about the problems and spatial relations associated with RAEs.

The findings indicated that the indigenous farmers in Long Lamai and Long Banga not only perceived environmental problems in the RAEs, but social and agricultural technology system problems as well, often with several complex and interrelated causes. For example, insufficient water availability, mainly an agricultural technology system problem in the wet rice fields, could have underlying environmental causes, e.g. droughts, or social causes, e.g. poor irrigation organisation. In rainfed dry rice fields, the problem was mostly an environmental issue related to rain conditions. Therefore, the magnitude and severity of the problems could vary between the different RAEs. While water-related problems were major concerns in wet rice fields, farmers perceived the occurrence of weeds to be more problematic in dry rice fields. Farmers could also perceive a problem on different spatial scales. For example, insufficient water availability was connected to landscape elements, e.g. irrigation infrastructure and rivers, which supply water, or on smaller scales to microzones, such as water availability differences or water level differences in the rice fields. Furthermore, while certain problems influenced the RAEs directly, some problems led to other issues, forming a causal chain. Cramb et al. (2009) describe such causal chains by the abandonment of the shifting cultivation fields of one household, which leads to a higher pest risk for the remaining fields, which again results in a higher workload for the remaining farmer to control the pests, but also to maintaining the RAE with fewer people in the labour-exchange group, which consequently impacts their motivation to continue shifting cultivation, leading to a cycle of abandonment of rice fields [ 14 ].

Many of the problems related in the interviews, including animal disturbance, insufficient water availability, poor soil quality, vegetation problems (e.g. weed occurrence), weather problems (e.g. droughts), human disturbance and synthetic pesticide application, were perceived to have a direct impact on agricultural productivity due to their impact on rice plant growth. Similar perceptions about the negative effects on rice production have also been noticed by Thai farmers in northern Vietnam due to irrigation water scarcity [ 74 ] or in Banaue, Philippines, as a result of native and invasive pests [ 12 ]. Furthermore, in Tanzania farmers have noted animal disturbance, droughts and poor soil fertility [ 75 ] and in Rwanda water shortages, lack of inputs, rice diseases and soil fertility decline as major constraints in rice productivity [ 76 ].

In dealing with such concerns, farmers apply a range of problem-solving strategies, either before (preventive) or after (reactive) the problem has occurred. Preventive strategies aim to mitigate or influence the problem before it occurs, such as avoiding unsuitable areas for rice cultivation or spreading the risks of pests through social agreements on community planting times. Growing both wet and dry rice fields was seen as a precautionary step in case one type fails. Another preventative method was to ensure the storage of enough yield for at least two years in case there is a poor agricultural year, e.g. due to weather problems, and a poor rice harvest. Similarly, Hosen et al. (2020) state in their research, including Long Lamai and Long Banga, that farmers store rice in addition to other traditional adaptation strategies such as shifting agriculture, intercropping or forest preservation in order to cope with climate change issues [ 40 ].

Reactive solutions are intended to address the cause of an existing problem or to alleviate or mitigate the severity of its consequences, such as weeding or the use of pesticides for insect problems. In response to certain problems, farmers could abandon their rice fields, for example fields with poor accessibility that makes the journey to the rice field unattractive. Like farmers in Rumah Ranggong, Sarawak, the farmers in the research area preferred field locations next to logging roads for easier access [ 30 ]. Poor accessibility was also a major reason behind the local people in the Shexian Dryland Terrace System abandoning their fields [ 77 ].

The problem-solving strategies in the villages were firstly based on indigenous farmers’ traditional knowledge about their landscape and rice farming. For example, shifting cultivation is used to manage dry rice fields, which requires farmers to have an understanding of soil processes to determine when poor soil quality requires them to relocate the field, to know how the soil recovers best during the fallow period and how to identify a good soil quality [ 78 ]. In the research area, the farmers used their knowledge about weather phenomena to identify the right burning and planting time. Also, the Kenyah Badeng in Sarawak use their traditional knowledge to predict weather conditions to plan activities in rice fields [ 79 ]. However, the traditional knowledge also helped to deal with problems and disturbances. Hosen et al. (2020) found for Long Lamai and Long Banga that the traditional strategies for coping with environmental disturbances and uncertainties in the villages are based on adaptive management and aim to maintain ecosystem and community resilience [ 40 ]. Therefore, indigenous farmers are reacting and adapting to disturbance based on their traditional knowledge, which supports the resilience of farmers to problems and change [ 11 ]. An interesting case is the former nomadic Penan in Long Lamai, but the same is true of other Penan groups, who only started to cultivate rice shortly after they settled in the 1950s, and farming practices were introduced to them by missionaries and neighbouring ethnic groups who are traditional agriculturalists [ 59 , 80 , 81 , 82 ]. Therefore, even though the Penan already had profound knowledge of the surrounding landscape and forest resources [ 81 , 83 ], compared to the other ethnic groups, farming is quite new to them and their culture. Thus, a substantial amount of the Penan’s knowledge related to rice farming is originally based on the traditional knowledge of other ethnic groups, but has now integrated the Penan’s own experiences.

Moreover, new emerging problems in the RAEs, such as invasive weeds or the introduction of the golden apple snail, required farmers to find new problem-solving techniques, which often led indigenous farmers to integrate scientific knowledge and industrial agricultural technologies, such as the use of synthetic pesticides, in their RAE management. The use of different knowledge systems can be found also for other indigenous or local groups, which leads to hybridising indigenous and scientific knowledge [ 21 ]. Dawoe et al. (2012) demonstrate that farmers in Ghana’s Ashanti area build their soil fertility strategies on a hybrid knowledge system by integrating traditional knowledge with new ideas from outside that can replace the old traditional methods [ 84 ]. The adoption and integration of scientific knowledge systems into local agricultural practices can have a positive impact on biodiversity and ecosystem services [ 20 , 85 ]. However, through the integration of modern farming practices, the traditional knowledge systems may be eroded, with remnants of this traditional knowledge only maintained by the older generations [ 86 ].

Furthermore, the uptake of industrial agricultural technology might create new problems, some of which are also social in nature. In our research, the limited affordability of farming tools, inputs or labour is an example of the problems related to industrial agricultural technologies. The consequences of such problems are shown for the coastal region of Sarawak, where rice farmers face difficulties with buying farm inputs and machinery that affect their incomes and lead to poverty and migration to urban areas [ 34 ]. Other consequences can be that farmers are unaware of the impact of industrial agricultural technologies. Amster (2008) reported that only a few Kelabit, in the Kelabit Highlands of Sarawak, were aware of the hazardous threat posed by the pesticides frequently applied in wet rice fields [ 35 ]. As observed in the rice terraces in Banaue, Philippines, a change in traditional practices, such as not following the community planting time, can lead to a rise in pest problems [ 12 ]. In another study about the Ifugao in Banaue, the shift from traditional organic to inorganic agricultural methods was perceived to have a detrimental impact on soil and water [ 22 ]. Furthermore, agricultural intensification can have a negative influence on the landscape and ecosystem services, such as pollination and biological pest control, which might lead to additional costs for farmers to replace these services [ 73 , 87 , 88 ]. For example, farmers in Cai Be, in Vietnam’s Mekong delta, are aware that the use of pesticides in the RAE affects the surrounding areas and also drinking water quality [ 24 ].

Agricultural activities are not only perceived to have an impact on the surrounding landscape; our study also demonstrated that indigenous farmers perceived problems in the RAEs to be caused by surrounding landscape elements. For example, animal disturbance and weed occurrence were perceived to be problems that were rooted in surrounding landscape elements such as fallow land or grassland, since they were perceived to serve as habitats for pests and weedy plants. Two indigenous farmers in Long Banga also believed that disturbing landscape elements such as salt springs or ancient graves by agricultural activities could cause diseases for farmers and thus should be avoided when selecting land for a rice field. A similar former belief was demonstrated by the neighbouring Kelabit who were not allowed to enter salt lick ecosystems owing to fears of becoming sick [ 35 ]. Problems for the RAEs caused by the surrounding landscape elements are also shown in the rice terraces of Ifugao, Philippines, where the adjacent woodlots, called muyong , supply water to the rice field, but due to a change in the muyong management system, the RAE faces water availability issues [ 13 ]. Neighbouring rice fields can also cause problems of weed migration, as perceived by the indigenous farmers in Long Lamai and Long Banga. Farmers in Vietnam’s Mekong delta have observed a similar effect on rice-fish fields caused by pesticide-polluted water from adjacent rice fields, which has a detrimental effect on the fish and requires farmers to stop water inflow or maintain a buffer field around the rice-fish field, or even prevent farmers from starting rice-fish fields [ 24 ]. However, the landscape elements, besides being a source of problems, were also perceived to have a function in the mitigation of problems. For instance, path infrastructure was perceived by indigenous farmers to allow a human presence close to the rice fields to reduce animal disturbance in the rice fields. Similarly, local women in Coatitilán, Mexico, perceive that forests and trees prevent soil erosion and that vegetation plays an important role in soil water retention and landscape structure maintenance, thereby protecting agricultural land and productivity [ 89 ]. For the mitigation of problems and to compensate for ecosystem service losses, a diverse complex landscape with natural habitats [ 88 ] can benefit farmers, such as in a form of pest control [ 44 ], or by receiving water for the rice fields from woodlots [ 12 ].

At the sub-field level, we found that farmers did not perceive rice fields to be homogeneous spatial unit, but rather spatially varying microzones. The Tsimane’ in Bolivia recognise such sub-unit patches mostly by the dominance of plant species and only one kind of patch based on soil type [ 16 ]. The farmers in the upper Baram described microzones based on biotic and abiotic criteria, and used these spatial sub-units as indicators to deduce underlying problems, such as animal disturbance, weed occurrence, insufficient water availability or poor soil quality. Indicators in the rice fields are critical for making management decisions and applying solutions to problems. For instance, a rice plant’s appearance, such as microzones formed by the rice plant colour, was a key indicator of potential problems. Another important microzone indicator was the soil colour to assess the soil quality. The use of soil and plant indicators has also been documented for other ethnic groups on Borneo, as Siahaya et al. (2016) describe for the Dayak Tunjung farmers in East Borneo who use plant species indicators to monitor soil quality for rice cultivation on an annual basis and to decide whether the field need to be abandoned [ 78 ]. Also, outside Borneo, soil and plant indicators are used to assess the quality of soil, for example in Brazil [ 90 ] or Laos [ 91 ]. Farmers in Ghana’s Ashanti area regard soil colour, crop yield, water-holding capacity, foliar colour and weed occurrence as important indicators of soil fertility [ 84 ]. These indicators, along with microzones of soil texture, soil hardness and rice plant growth, were also observed in our study to evaluate the quality of the land. Farmers noted that they adapted their management to some microzone properties, for example manual weeding by pulling was only essential in weed-infested microzones of the rice field. In the Dindori district of Madhya Pradesh, Central India, indigenous farmers also perceive micro-farming situations by different soil colours, topography, crop, irrigation source and overall problems and plant native rice varieties by following location-specific strategies [ 92 ].

This study examined indigenous farmers’ perceptions of problems in local rice field agroecosystems (RAEs), their causes and consequences, and the solutions applied, and how these problems were connected to surrounding landscape elements and microzones. The use of qualitative oral interviews in combination with visual sketch drawings facilitated interviews in a multilingual context and aided with identifying landscape elements and microzones and their relationships with the RAEs.

The findings of the study showed that indigenous farmers associated problems with landscape elements and microzones, indicating the indigenous farmers’ thorough understanding of the functioning and connectivity of spatial units at various spatial scales. This understanding, which was rooted in farmers’ traditional knowledge of their environment, served as the framework for dealing with problems and disturbances. However, as demonstrated, indigenous farmers often integrated scientific knowledge and industrial agricultural technology to deal with the problems they encountered. The hybridisation of knowledge systems was the consequence of this adoption of industrial agricultural practices, which comes with a loss of traditional knowledge and might change the sociocultural life of indigenous farmers.

Our insight contributes to a better understanding of how indigenous farmers perceive, cope with and adapt to problems in the landscape, which is important for landscape and resource management. By incorporating environmental, social and agricultural technology system problems and different spatial scales, a broader perspective is presented that extends beyond the evaluation of a single dimension of problems and scales. Incorporating multiple dimensions in the research demonstrates that the investigation of just one dimension can result in a dilution of the importance of the landscape for indigenous people and in a failure to reflect its true value [ 16 ]. Future ethnoecological landscape research should place a greater emphasis on the challenges in landscapes faced by indigenous people by incorporating multiple scales and dimensions in studies. Additionally, we suggest that local problem solving needs to be supported to ensure that indigenous farmers maintain and continue to benefit from their RAEs. This may be achieved by conducting participatory workshops to identify locally preferred solutions, support the development and implementation of the solutions and upscale successful local solutions to other areas.

Availability of data and materials

The tables and text of the article contain the data that support the results. The datasets used and analysed during the current study are available from the corresponding author on reasonable request.

Estimations are 750 Sa’ban, of whom 350 are in the village and 400 outside it, and 450 Kenyah, of whom 230 are in the village and 220 outside it.

Abbreviations

Rice field agroecosystem

Wet rice field

Dry rice field

FAO. A regional rice strategy for sustainable food security in Asia and the Pacific: Final edition. Bangkok: Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations; 2014.

Garbach K, Thanh TAV, Buchori D, Boualaphanh C, Ketelaar JW, Gemmill-Herren B. The multiple goods and services of Asian rice production systems. Rome: Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations; 2014.

Google Scholar  

Marten GG. Productivity, stability, sustainability, equitability and autonomy as properties for agroecosystem assessment. Agric Syst. 1988:291–316.

Maclean JL, Dawe DC, Hettel GP. Rice almanac: Source book for the most important economic activity on earth. 3rd ed. Wallingford: CABI Pub; 2002.

Book   Google Scholar  

Greenland DJ. The sustainability of rice farming. Wallingford: Cab International; 1997.

Asmiwyati IGAAR, Mahendra MS, Arifin NHS, Ichinose T. Recognizing indigenous knowledge on agricultural landscape in Bali for micro climate and environment control. Procedia Environ Sci. 2015;28:623–9. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.proenv.2015.07.073 .

Article   Google Scholar  

Tekken V, Spangenberg JH, Burkhard B, Escalada M, Stoll-Kleemann S, Truong DT, Settele J. “Things are different now”: Farmer perceptions of cultural ecosystem services of traditional rice landscapes in Vietnam and the Philippines. Ecosyst Serv. 2017;25:153–66. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecoser.2017.04.010 .

Setyawan AD. Review: Biodiversity conservation strategy in a native perspective; Case study of shifting cultivation at the Dayaks of Kalimantan. Nus Biosci. 2010;2:97–108. https://doi.org/10.13057/nusbiosci/n020208 .

Kendawang JJ, Tanaka S, Soda R, Seman L, Wasli ME, Sakurai K. Difference of rice farming practices of the Iban in a national boundary area in Borneo and its socio-economic background. Tropics. 2005;14:295–307. https://doi.org/10.3759/tropics.14.295 .

Brosius JP, Lovelace W, Marten GG. Ethnoecology: an approach to understanding traditional agricultural knowledge. In: Marten GG, editor. Traditional agriculture in Southwest Asia: a human ecology perspective. Boulder: Westview Press; 1986. p. 187–98.

Berkes F, Colding J, Folke C. Rediscovery of traditional ecological knowledge as adaptive management. Ecol Appl. 2000;10:1251–62. https://doi.org/10.2307/2641280 .

Castonguay AC, Burkhard B, Müller F, Horgan FG, Settele J. Resilience and adaptability of rice terrace social-ecological systems: a case study of a local community’s perception in Banaue. Philippines Ecol Soc. 2016. https://doi.org/10.5751/ES-08348-210215 .

Camacho LD, Combalicer MS, Yeo-Chang Y, Combalicer EA, Carandang AP, Camacho SC, et al. Traditional forest conservation knowledge/technologies in the Cordillera, Northern Philippines. For Policy Econ. 2012;22:3–8. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.forpol.2010.06.001 .

Cramb RA, Colfer CJP, Dressler W, Laungaramsri P, Le QT, Mulyoutami E, et al. Swidden transformations and rural livelihoods in Southeast Asia. Hum Ecol. 2009;37:323–46. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10745-009-9241-6 .

Mertz O, Leisz SJ, Heinimann A, Rerkasem K, Dressler W, et al. Who counts? Demography of swidden cultivators in Southeast Asia. Hum Ecol. 2009;37:281–9. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10745-009-9249-y .

Riu-Bosoms C, Vidal-Amat T, Duane A, Fernandez-Llamazares A, Guèze M, Luz AC, et al. Exploring indigenous landscape classification across different dimensions: a case study from the Bolivian Amazon. Landsc Res. 2015;40:318–37. https://doi.org/10.1080/01426397.2013.829810 .

Article   PubMed   PubMed Central   Google Scholar  

Campos M, Velázquez A, Verdinelli GB, Priego-Santander ÁG, McCall MK, Boada M. Rural people’s knowledge and perception of landscape: a case study from the Mexican Pacific Coast. Soc Nat Resour. 2012;25:759–74.

Poderoso RA, Peroni N, Hanazaki N. Gender influences in the perception and use of the landscape in a rural community of German immigrant descendants in Brazil. J Ethnobiol. 2017;37:779–97. https://doi.org/10.2993/0278-0771-37.4.779 .

Porter-Bolland L, Ellis EA, Guariguata MR, Ruiz-Mallén I, Negrete-Yankelevich S, Reyes-García V. Community managed forests and forest protected areas: an assessment of their conservation effectiveness across the tropics. For Ecol Manag. 2012;268:6–17. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foreco.2011.05.034 .

Becker CD, Ghimire K. Synergy between traditional ecological knowledge and conservation science supports forest preservation in Ecuador. Conserv Ecol. 2003. https://doi.org/10.5751/ES-00582-080101 .

Munyua HM, Stilwell C. Three ways of knowing: agricultural knowledge systems of small-scale farmers in Africa with reference to Kenya. Libr Inf Sci Res. 2013;35:326–37. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lisr.2013.04.005 .

Camacho LD, Gevaña DT, Carandang AP, Camacho SC. Indigenous knowledge and practices for the sustainable management of Ifugao forests in Cordillera, Philippines. Int J Biodivers Sci Ecosyst Serv Manag. 2016;12:5–13. https://doi.org/10.1080/21513732.2015.1124453 .

Minh ND, Trịnh MV, Wassmann R, Hòa TD, Khải NM. Farmer’s perception and farming practices in rice production under changing climate: Case study in Quảng Nam province. VNU J Sci Earth Environ Sci. 2014;30:25–40.

Berg H, Ekman Söderholm A, Söderström A-S, Tam NT. Recognizing wetland ecosystem services for sustainable rice farming in the Mekong Delta. Vietnam Sustain Sci. 2017;12:137–54. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11625-016-0409-x .

Article   PubMed   Google Scholar  

FAO. Globally Important Agricultural Heritage Systems, Geographical Indications and Slow Food Presidia: Technical note. 2020. https://www.fao.org/3/cb1854en/cb1854en.pdf . Accessed 12 Jan 2022.

Reyes SRC, Miyazaki A, Yiu E, Saito O. Enhancing sustainability in traditional agriculture: indicators for monitoring the conservation of Globally Important Agricultural Heritage Systems (GIAHS) in Japan. Sustainability. 2020. https://doi.org/10.3390/su12145656 .

Gao X, Roder G, Jiao Y, Ding Y, Liu Z, Tarolli P. Farmers’ landslide risk perceptions and willingness for restoration and conservation of world heritage site of Honghe Hani Rice Terraces. China Landslides. 2020;17:1915–24. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10346-020-01389-4 .

Aguilar CHM, Altoveros NC, Borromeo TH, Dayo MHF, Koohafkan P. Traditional rice-based agroecosystem in Kiangan, Ifugao, Philippines: drivers of change, resilience, and potential trajectories. Agroecol Sustain Food Sys. 2021;45:296–316. https://doi.org/10.1080/21683565.2020.1813861 .

Cramb R, Sujang PS. ‘Shifting ground’: renegotiating land rights and rural livelihoods in Sarawak, Malaysia. Asia Pac Viewp. 2011;52:136–47. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8373.2011.01446.x .

Hansen TS, Mertz O. Extinction or adaptation? Three decades of change in shifting cultivation in Sarawak. Malaysia Land Degrad Dev. 2006;17:135–48. https://doi.org/10.1002/ldr.720 .

van Gevelt T, Abok H, Bennett MM, Fam SD, George F, Kulathuramaiyer N, et al. Indigenous perceptions of climate anomalies in Malaysian Borneo. Glob Environ Change. 2019. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2019.101974 .

Sakai S, Choy YK, Kishimoto-Yamada K, Takano KT, Ichikawa M, Samejima H, et al. Social and ecological factors associated with the use of non-timber forest products by people in rural Borneo. Biol Conserv. 2016;204:340–9. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biocon.2016.10.022 .

Falak S, Chiun LM, Wee AY. Sustainable rural tourism: an indigenous community perspective on positioning rural tourism. Tourism. 2016;64:311–27.

Echoh DU, Nor NM, Gapor SA, Masron T. Issues and problems faced by rural farmers in paddy cultivation: a case study of the Iban paddy cultivation in Kuala Tatau, Sarawak. J Reg Rural Dev Plann. 2017;1:174–82. https://doi.org/10.29244/jp2wd.2017.1.2.174-182 .

Amster M. Where spirit and bulldozer roam: environmental and anxiety in highland Borneo. J Study Relig Nat Cult. 2008;2:74–92. https://doi.org/10.1558/jsrnc.v2i1.74 .

Tanaka S, Wasli ME, Kendawang JJ, Sakurai K. The impacts of the alteration in agriculture on the environment and ecosystem in Sarawak, Malaysia. Kuroshio Sci. 2014;8:7–14.

Chua WP. Resisting dams and plantations: indigenous identity in Sarawak. Envirolab Asia. 2017;1:1–16. https://doi.org/10.5642/envirolabasia.20170101.08 .

Hoki M. Farming operations and labor requirement for paddy cultivation in Sarawak, East Malaysia. South East Asian Stud. 1997;15:457–71.

Filho AAR, Adams C, Murrieta RSS. The impacts of shifting cultivation on tropical forest soil: a review. Bol Mus Para Emílio Goeldi Cienc Hum. 2013;8:693–727.

Hosen N, Nakamura H, Hamzah A. Adaptation to climate change: Does traditional ecological knowledge hold the key? Sustainability. 2020. https://doi.org/10.3390/su12020676 .

Wartmann FM, Purves RS. ‘This is not the jungle, this is my barbecho’: semantics of ethnoecological landscape categories in the Bolivian Amazon. Landsc Res. 2018;43:77–94. https://doi.org/10.1080/01426397.2016.1269882 .

Liu J, Liu X, Wang Y, Li Y, Jiang Y, Fu Y, Wu J. Landscape composition or configuration: which contributes more to catchment hydrological flows and variations? Landsc Ecol. 2020;35:1531–51. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10980-020-01035-3 .

Dominik C, Seppelt R, Horgan FG, Settele J, Václavík T. Landscape composition, configuration, and trophic interactions shape arthropod communities in rice agroecosystems. J Appl Ecol. 2018;55:2461–72. https://doi.org/10.1111/1365-2664.13226 .

Ali MP, Kabir MMM, Haque SS, Afrin S, Ahmed N, Pittendrigh B, Qin X. Surrounding landscape influences the abundance of insect predators in rice field. BMC Zool. 2020. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40850-020-00059-1 .

Mariel J, Carrière SM, Penot E, Danthu P, Rafidison V, Labeyrie V. Exploring farmers’ agrobiodiversity management practices and knowledge in clove agroforests of Madagascar. People Nat. 2021;3:914–28. https://doi.org/10.1002/pan3.10238 .

Méndez VE, Lok R, Somarriba E. Interdisciplinary analysis of homegardens in Nicaragua: micro-zonation, plant use and socioeconomic importance. Agrofor Syst. 2001;51:85–96. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1010622430223 .

Gantuya B, Avar Á, Babai D, Molnár Á, Molnár Z. “A herder’s duty is to think”: landscape partitioning and folk habitats of mongolian herders in a mountain forest steppe (Khuvsugul-Murun region). J Ethnobiol Ethnomed. 2019. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13002-019-0328-x .

Molnár Z, Gellény K, Margóczi K, Biró M. Landscape ethnoecological knowledge base and management of ecosystem services in a Székely-Hungarian pre-capitalistic village system (Transylvania, Romania). J Ethnobiol Ethnomed. 2015. https://doi.org/10.1186/1746-4269-11-3 .

Menezes J, Baldauf C. Multiple perspectives on a biocultural environment: landscape ethnoecology in the Brazilian dry forest. J Arid Environ. 2021. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jaridenv.2020.104387 .

León Villalobos JM, Vázquez García V, Ojeda Trejo E, McCall MK, Hernández Hernández J, Sinha G. Mapping from spatial meaning: bridging Hñahñu (Otomi) ecological knowledge and geo-information tools. J Ethnobiol Ethnomed. 2019. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13002-019-0329-9 .

Ribeiro KV, Ribeiro KV, Albuquerque ELS, de Barros RFM. Landscape reading under “ethno” aspect: a bibliographic study. Rev Bras Geog Fis. 2020;13:1914–34. https://doi.org/10.26848/rbgf.v13.4.p1914-1934 .

Johnson LM. “A place that’s good”, Gitksan landscape perception and ethnoecology. Hum Ecol. 2000;28:301–25. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1007076221799 .

Vijith H, Dodge-Wan D. Spatial and statistical trend characteristics of rainfall erosivity (R) in Upper catchment of Baram river, Borneo. Environ Monit Assess. 2019. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10661-019-7604-z .

Fick SE, Hijmans RJ. WorldClim 2: new 1-km spatial resolution climate surfaces for global land areas. Int J Climatol. 2017;37:4302–15. https://doi.org/10.1002/joc.5086 .

MacKinnon K, Hatta G, Halim H, Mangalik A. The ecology of Kalimantan: Indonesian Borneo. Oxford: Oxford University Press; 1997.

Farr TG, Rosen PA, Caro E, Crippen R, Duren R, Hensley S, et al. The shuttle radar topography mission. Rev Geophys. 2007. https://doi.org/10.1029/2005RG000183 .

Soriente A. Studying linguistic and cultural contact in Borneo: prospects and challenges. Antropologia. 2014;1:59–81.

Jehom WJ. Ethnicity and ethnic identity in Sarawak. Akademika. 1999;55:83–98.

Egay K. Re-situating the Sa’ban ethnography: a reflection on the notion of the representation. Akademika. 2009;77:133–48.

Kanazawa K. Sedentarization and nomadism among the Penan of Sarawak. Senri Ethnol Stud. 2017;95:319–34. https://doi.org/10.15021/00008589 .

Barker G, Hunt C, Carlos J. Transitions to farming in Island Southeast Asia: archaeological, biomolecular and palaeoecological perspectives. In: Barker G, Janowski M, editors. Why cultivate?: anthropological and archaeological approaches to foraging-farming transitions in Southeast Asia. Cambridge: McDonald Institute for Archaeological Research; 2011. p. 59–71.

Anau N. A history of the Kenyah Leppo’ Ké and Nyibun in Pujungan Subdistrict. In: Eghenter C, Sellato B, Devung GS, editors. Social science research and conservation management in the interior of Borneo: unravelling past and present interactions of people and forests. Jakarta: Center for International Forestry Research; 2003. p. 153–74.

Sellato B, Sercombe PG. Introduction: Borneo, Hunter-Gatherers, and Change. In: Sercombe PG, Sellato B, editors. Beyond the green myth: hunter-gatherers of Borneo in the twenty-first century. Copenhagen: NIAS Press; 2007.

Langub J, Ishikawa N. Community, river and basin: watersheds in northern Sarawak as a social linkage. In: King VT, Ibrahim Z, Hassan NH, editors. Borneo studies in history, society and culture. Singapore: Springer; 2017. p. 365–84. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-10-0672-2 .

Chapter   Google Scholar  

Newing H, Eagle CM, Puri RK, Watson CW. Conducting research in conservation: social science methods and pracrice. London: Routledge; 2011.

Lynam T, Jong Wd, Sheil D, Kusumanto T, Evans K. A review of tools for incorporating community knowledge, preferences, and values into decision making in natural resources management. Ecol Soc. 2007;12.

Wartmann F, Purves R. What’s (not) on the map: landscape features from participatory sketch mapping differ from local categories used in language. Land. 2017. https://doi.org/10.3390/land6040079 .

Herlihy PH, Knapp G. Maps of, by, and for the peoples of Latin America. Hum Organ. 2003;62:303–14. https://doi.org/10.17730/humo.62.4.8763apjq8u053p03 .

Gilmore MP, Young JC. The use of participatory mapping in ethnobiological research, biocultural conservation, and community empowerment: a case study from the Peruvian Amazon. J Ethnobiol. 2012;32:6–29. https://doi.org/10.2993/0278-0771-32.1.6 .

Kuckartz U. Qualitative text analysis: a systematic approach. In: Kaiser G, Presmeg N, editors. Compendium for early career researchers in mathematics education. Cham: Springer; 2019. p. 181–97. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-15636-7 .

VERBI Software. MAXQDA 2020: [software]. Berlin, Germany; 2019.

Shennan C. Biotic interactions, ecological knowledge and agriculture. Phil Trans R Soc B. 2008;363:717–39. https://doi.org/10.1098/rstb.2007.2180 .

Garbach K, Milder JC, Montenegro M, Karp DS, DeClerck F. Biodiversity and ecosystem services in agroecosystems. In: van Alfen N, editor. Encyclopedia of agriculture and food systems. New York: Elsevier; 2014. p. 21–40. https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-444-52512-3.00013-9 .

Nguyen AT, Hens L. Diversified responses to contemporary pressures on sloping agricultural land: Thai farmer’s perception of mountainous landscapes in northern Vietnam. Environ Dev Sustain. 2020. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10668-020-00822-x .

Suvi WT, Shimelis H, Laing M. Farmers’ perceptions, production constraints and cariety preferences of rice in Tanzania. J Crop Improv. 2021;35:51–68. https://doi.org/10.1080/15427528.2020.1795771 .

Article   CAS   Google Scholar  

Nabahungu NL, Visser SM. Farmers’ knowledge and perception of agricultural wetland management in Rwanda. Land Degrad Dev. 2013;24:363–74. https://doi.org/10.1002/ldr.1133 .

Guo T, García-Martín M, Plieninger T. Recognizing indigenous farming practices for sustainability: a narrative analysis of key elements and drivers in a Chinese dryland terrace system. Ecosyst People. 2021;17:279–91. https://doi.org/10.1080/26395916.2021.1930169 .

Siahaya ME, Hutauruk TR, Aponno HSES, Hatulesila JW, Mardhanie AB. Traditional ecological knowledge on shifting cultivation and forest management in East Borneo, Indonesia. Int J Biodivers Sci Ecosyst Serv Manag. 2016;12:14–23. https://doi.org/10.1080/21513732.2016.1169559 .

Garay-Barayazarra G, Puri RK. Smelling the monsoon: senses and traditional weather forecasting knowledge among the Kenyah Badeng farmers of Sarawak, Malaysia. Indian J Tradit Knowl. 2011;10:21–30.

Kanazawa K. Sustainable harvesting and conservation of agarwood: a case study from the upper Baram river in Sarawak, Malaysia. Tropics. 2017;25:139–46. https://doi.org/10.3759/tropics.MS15-16 .

Janowski M, Langub J. Footprints and marks in the forest: The Penan and the Kelabit of Borneo. In: Barker G, Janowski M, editors. Why cultivate? Anthropological and archaeological approaches to foraging-farming transitions in Southeast Asia. Cambridge: McDonald Institute for Archaeological Research; 2011. p. 121–32.

Donovan D, Puri R. Learning from traditional knowledge of non-timber forest products: Penan Benalui and the autecology of Aquilaria in Indonesian Borneo. Ecol Soc. 2004;9.

Brosius JP. Between development and deforestation: negotiating citizenship in a commodified landscape. Akademika. 1993;42–43:87–104.

Dawoe EK, Quashie-Sam J, Isaac ME, Oppong SK. Exploring farmers’ local knowledge and perceptions of soil fertility and management in the Ashanti Region of Ghana. Geoderma. 2012;179–180:96–103. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.geoderma.2012.02.015 .

Settele J, Heong KL, Kühn I, Klotz S, Spangenberg JH, Arida G, et al. Rice ecosystem services in South-East Asia. Paddy Water Environ. 2018;16:211–24. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10333-018-0656-9 .

Spangenberg JH, Beaurepaire AL, Bergmeier E, Burkhard B, van Chien H, Le Cuong Q, et al. The LEGATO cross-disciplinary integrated ecosystem service research framework: an example of integrating research results from the analysis of global change impacts and the social, cultural and economic system dynamics of irrigated rice production. Paddy Water Environ. 2018;16:287–319. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10333-017-0628-5 .

Kremen C, Ostfeld RS. A call to ecologists: measuring, analyzing, and managing ecosystem services. Front Ecol Environ. 2005;3:540–8. https://doi.org/10.1890/1540-9295(2005)003[0540:ACTEMA]2.0.CO;2 .

Tscharntke T, Klein AM, Kruess A, Steffan-Dewenter I, Thies C. Landscape perspectives on agricultural intensification and biodiversity—ecosystem service management. Ecol Lett. 2005;8:857–74. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1461-0248.2005.00782.x .

Kernecker M, Vogl CR, Aguila Meléndez A. Women’s local knowledge of water resources and adaptation to landscape change in the mountains of Veracruz Mexico. Ecol Soc. 2017. https://doi.org/10.5751/ES-09787-220437 .

Lima A, Hoogmoed WB, Brussaard L, Sacco dos Anjos F. Farmers’ assessment of soil quality in rice production systems. NJAS Wageningen J Life Sci. 2011;58:31–8. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.njas.2010.08.002 .

Saito K, Linquist B, Keobualapha B, Shiraiwa T, Horie T. Farmers’ knowledge of soils in relation to cropping practices: a case study of farmers in upland rice based slash-and-burn systems of northern Laos. Geoderma. 2006;136:64–74. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.geoderma.2006.02.003 .

Singh RK, Sureja AK. Indigenous knowledge and sustainable agricultural resources management under rainfed agro-ecosystem. Indian J Tradit Knowl. 2008;7:642–54.

Download references

Acknowledgements

We would like to express our gratitude to the communities in the upper Baram, Sarawak, especially to the participants in the interviews and the local interpreters in Long Lamai and Long Banga.

The research leading to these results received funding from the University of Natural Resources and Life Sciences, Vienna (BOKU) to partially cover travel costs and research expenses. The first author received a study grant under the Austrian Student Support Act. Open access funding provided by University of Natural Resources and Life Sciences, Vienna (BOKU).

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

University of Natural Resources and Life Sciences, Vienna, Department of Sustainable Agricultural Systems, Division of Organic Farming, Gregor-Mendel-Strasse 33, 1180, Vienna, Austria

Alexander Hollaus, Christoph Schunko & Christian R. Vogl

Agroecology.AT, Consultancy on Agroecology and Sustainability of Agricultural Systems, Hauptstrasse 22, 2120, Obersdorf, Austria

Rainer Weisshaidinger

Institute of Borneo Studies, Universiti Malaysia Sarawak (UNIMAS), 94300, Kota Samarahan, Sarawak, Malaysia

Poline Bala

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Contributions

AH, CRV, CS and RW were part of the conceptualisation of the project. AH managed the project administration, developed the methodology, conducted the research, formally analysed the data and wrote the initial draft. CS and CRV took over the supervision and the reviewing and editing of the draft. PB oversaw the supervision in Sarawak and reviewed the draft. RW reviewed the draft and coordinated the project administration. The final manuscript was read and approved by all authors.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Christian R. Vogl .

Ethics declarations

Ethics approval and consent to participate.

Long Lamai and Long Banga village leaders signed a Free, Prior and Informed Consent letter, and individual interviewees signed a separate consent letter.

Consent for publication

Not applicable.

Competing interests

The authors declare that they have no competing interests.

Additional information

Publisher's note.

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Supplementary Information

Additional file 1:.

Landscape element categories. Categorisation of 44 features included in the sketch drawings and oral interviews around RAEs into 16 landscape elements. The table shows the inductively categorised landscape elements (left) based on the coded features from the sketch drawings and oral interviews (right).

Rights and permissions

Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ . The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver ( http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/ ) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated in a credit line to the data.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article.

Hollaus, A., Schunko, C., Weisshaidinger, R. et al. Indigenous farmers’ perceptions of problems in the rice field agroecosystems in the upper Baram, Malaysia. J Ethnobiology Ethnomedicine 18 , 26 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1186/s13002-022-00511-1

Download citation

Received : 23 November 2021

Accepted : 18 February 2022

Published : 29 March 2022

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1186/s13002-022-00511-1

Share this article

Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content:

Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article.

Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative

• Indigenous and local knowledge
• Landscape ethnoecology
• Spatial perceptions
• Indigenous agroecology
• Landscape management

Journal of Ethnobiology and Ethnomedicine

ISSN: 1746-4269

• General enquiries: [email protected]

An official website of the United States government

The .gov means it’s official. Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

The site is secure. The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

• Publications
• Account settings

Preview improvements coming to the PMC website in October 2024. Learn More or Try it out now .

• Advanced Search
• Journal List

Research trends in farmers’ mental health: A scoping review of mental health outcomes and interventions among farming populations worldwide

Briana n. m. hagen.

1 Department of Population Medicine, Ontario Veterinary College, University of Guelph, Guelph, Ontario, Canada

Ashley Albright

Jan sargeant.

2 Centre for Public Health and Zoonoses, University of Guelph, Guelph, Ontario, Canada

Charlotte B. Winder

Sherilee l. harper.

3 School of Public Health, University of Alberta, Edmonton, Alberta, Canada

Terri L. O’Sullivan

Andria jones-bitton, associated data.

All relevant data are within the article and its Supporting Information files.

Mental health issues among farmers are identified population health concerns. While one systematic review focused on suicide in farming populations in the United States, there have been no scoping studies examining mental health in farming communities worldwide. The objectives of this scoping review were to: provide a descriptive analysis of the literature pertaining to mental health outcomes in farming populations; describe the international scope of the research; and highlight published mental health services and interventions that have been evaluated.

Following Arksey and O’Malley’s scoping review framework, five major health and science platforms were used to identify studies examining mental health outcomes in farming populations, worldwide. Studies that met a priori inclusion criteria that were published prior to December 31, 2017 were included in this review. Data synthesis and descriptive statistics were conducted using STATA 15® software; proportions were calculated by country.

The initial literature search yielded 9,906 records. After title and abstract screening, 676 articles were reviewed in-full. Of these, 341 met a priori inclusion criteria. Studies included were conducted between 1979 and 2017; the majority (265; 77.7%) were published between 2002–2017. The most frequently measured outcomes were stress (41.9%), suicide (33.1%), and depression (32.6%). Over 70% of studies that examined stress described using quantitative research methods, most predominantly, cross-sectional designs (42.7%). Approximately 64% of studies that measured suicide reported using a quantitative approach; the largest proportion of included suicide studies (33.6%) described using cohort designs. Approximately 84% of studies that measured depression described using quantitative approaches; sixty percent of these studies reported using a cross-sectional study design. Twenty included studies described a mental health service or intervention (5.9%).

Conclusions

This scoping review provides a critical overview of the literature examining mental health outcomes in farming populations worldwide. Given the importance of farming and agriculture, this review can be used to ensure future research complements existing work, avoids unnecessary overlap, and begins to tackle the less-studied mental health outcomes amongst farmers. These results can guide researchers to identified gaps in research and services, leading to a more informed approach to future work, and ultimately, a more comprehensive understanding of mental health among farmers worldwide.

Introduction

Farmer mental health can have impacts on individual health [ 1 – 3 ], family life [ 4 ], [ 5 ], farm productivity [ 6 ], and animal health and welfare [ 7 ]. Considering that approximately one-third of individuals that contribute to the global economy through their employment do so through the agricultural industry [ 8 ], poor mental health could therefore have considerable negative impact on economic productivity, animal health, and human health worldwide. Hence, ensuring the mental health of farmers and farmworkers may be essential for global health.

It is estimated that 1 in 4 people worldwide experience issues with their mental health annually [ 9 ]. If farmers experience problems with their mental health at the same rates as the general population, this would mean that approximately 25% of farmers worldwide are struggling with their mental health every year. Globally, there are more than 570 million farms, of which approximately 550 million are family-run [ 8 ]. With a conservative estimate of 2-member families, this would mean that every year, roughly 225 million farmers worldwide may struggle with their mental health. This number is likely an underestimate when considering the evidence that farmers experience mental illness at a higher rate than the general population [ 10 ], coupled with the fact that farmworkers and other farm helpers are not included within that conservative estimate.

One recent systematic review conducted by Klingleschmidt and colleagues (2017) reported that male farmers in the United States of America (US) experience an increased risk of suicide (pooled effect size = 1.48; 95% CI: 1.30–1.68) compared to the general population [ 11 ]. Additionally, it is well established through psychological autopsy studies conducted in the US and Europe that over 90% of people who died by suicide had experienced issues with their mental health [ 12 ]. It is essential that mental illness and associated risk factors be assessed in farming populations. Highlighting which mental health outcomes and associated risk factors have previously been studied and, more specifically, how they are studied among farming populations, can inform future research and mental health intervention planning. To date, there is no comprehensive review of mental health outcomes among farming populations worldwide or any that explore mental health interventions for farming populations.

Across the globe, farmers, community groups, mental health experts, and governmental agencies have called for making farmer mental health a research and policy priority [ 8 ]. While there are a multitude of individual studies examining mental health outcomes in farming populations across the world, there are no methodological guidelines for measuring individual mental health outcomes in these populations. Such guidelines could help researchers compare findings across countries and build on previous work more efficiently.

In order to determine the breadth of the existing research and identify current gaps in knowledge, we conducted a scoping review of the literature. Scoping reviews map the existing literature, especially in areas that are rapidly evolving [ 13 ], such as farmer mental health. The objectives of the scoping review were to: (a) provide a descriptive analysis of the literature pertaining to mental health outcomes in farming populations; (b) describe the international scope of the research; and (c) highlight the mental health services and interventions that have been evaluated in the literature to help identify successes and limitations for implementing services in farming populations.

Following the guidelines set out by Arksey and O’Malley (2005) and reported according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis extension for scoping reviews (PRISMA-ScR) guidelines [ 14 ], this scoping review was designed with an analytical framework that maps the available literature, describing the study types and outcomes assessed.

Protocol and registration

Prior to conducting the search, we developed our review question, eligibility criteria, screening questions, and data extraction tool ( S1 Appendix ). There was no formal registration of a study protocol with the international systematic review database (PROSPERO).

Eligibility criteria

This review was designed to be broad in scope and range to describe the nature and extent of the literature investigating aspects of mental health among farming populations. Eligibility criteria for inclusion in the review were the following:

• The study population explicitly included farmers or agricultural workers (from any farming commodity)
• The full text of the research article was accessible in English
• The article was a primary study, a review, or governmental report
• If a primary study, studies that used primary data collection (i.e. the authors collected the data themselves in order to answer their research question) or secondary data analysis (i.e. the authors did not collect the data themselves but used an existing dataset or census data)
• The outcome(s) investigated were mental health outcome(s). This could include negative (e.g. depression, anxiety) or positive (e.g. resilience) mental health outcomes.

Information sources and electronic search

Databases searched were: Agricola (via ProQuest, 1970 to current), CABI (via CAB Direct, 1973 to current), PubMed (via NCBI, 1950 to current), Science Citation Index Expanded (via Web of Science, 1900 to current), Social Sciences Citation Index (via Web of Science, 1900 to current), Arts & Humanities Citation Index (via Web of Science, 1975 to current), Conference Proceedings Citation Index-Science (via Web of Science, 1990 to current), Conference Proceedings Citation Index–Social Science & Humanities (via Web of Science, 1990 to current), Emerging Sources Citation Index (via Web of Science, 2015 to current), Medline (via Ovid, 1950 to current), and PsycINFO. These platforms were chosen based on the breadth of their journal libraries in the databases and use in mental health scoping reviews in other populations [ 15 – 19 ].

The search strategy was developed in consultation with a library scientist at the University of Guelph to include the following concepts: mental health outcomes or mental wellness, and farming populations. The full search string is available in Table 1 . We chose to use the terms “clinical depression” and “depressive symptom” to capture studies measuring depression, as the term “depression” was considered too broad. To verify these terms were adequately sensitive, key studies were pre-selected by the primary author to ensure they were captured in the search. Additionally, studies examining positive mental health outcomes typically have the term “resilience” nested within the concept of “mental wellbeing”. When resilience was tested as an additional search term, no additional relevant records were identified; therefore, this term was removed for parsimony. One author (AA) executed the initial search strategy and a second author (BH) replicated the search. There were no timeline restrictions. The initial search was conducted in July 2017 and a second search was conducted using the same methodology in April 2018 to capture studies published in press or online before December 31, 2017.

An a priori decision was made to examine reference lists for all review articles after full-text screening to identify any potentially relevant articles not found in the electronic search. These records were then screened at the title and abstract phase for inclusion.

Study selection

The records identified by the search were exported from the platforms into Mendeley TM where duplicate articles were removed. Next, titles and abstracts were screened for eligibility for inclusion in the full-text screening. Titles and abstracts were screened independently by two authors (AA and BH) using the following questions:

• Does the study examine a mental health outcome as a primary outcome of interest?
• Does the study examine a farming population?
• Is the study available in English?

For each question, answers could have been “yes”, “no”, or “unclear”. Citations were excluded if the reviewers answered “no” to any of the screening questions. Any discrepancies in selection were discussed to achieve consensus. If consensus could not be reached, a third reviewer was used. Articles with ambiguous abstracts or abstracts that were not available online were deemed as eligible in this title and abstract phase and were evaluated using the full text.

After title and abstract screening, eligible full-text articles were imported into DistillerSR™. Full texts of all articles were retrieved through online databases or through the Rapid Access to Collections by Electronic Requesting (RACER). RACER includes all databases from all libraries that are members of the Ontario Council of University Libraries. Articles were excluded if they were inaccessible online or through RACER, or were academic theses or books.

Data charting process

Four authors (BH, AA, JS, AJB) developed a comprehensive data extraction form, which was pre-tested by two authors (BH, AA) on ten articles to ensure consistency in form completion. The data extraction was completed in DistillerSR TM by the same two authors for each article that met the inclusion criteria; any conflicts were discussed to achieve consensus ( S1 Appendix ).

Data of interest in this review included: the country of study; year of publication; the mental health outcome(s) measured; farming population studied (farm level and individual level); the methodological approach to the data (qualitative, quantitative, mixed methods, or review); whether the study used primary or secondary data or was a review article; and the specific study design.

Study demographics

Farming populations of interest included: animal farmers (swine, beef, dairy, small ruminants (meat or dairy), poultry, aquaculture, or other); plant farmers (crops and/or horticulture); migrant farm workers; permanent farm workers; farm families; not specified; or other. These items were collected as a list, where more than one data item could be selected. Where the study examined a farming population that was not an option on the data extraction form, there was an open-text box where the commodity was entered manually ( S1 Appendix ). We defined migrant and permanent farmworkers as farmworkers who left their country of origin to find agricultural employment (seasonally and permanently, respectively). Further, individual level populations of interest were identified through the “other” text-box variable, and included female farmers, male farmers, older farmers, farm managers, and farm owners.

Study characteristics

Observational studies were categorized as descriptive, hypothesis testing, or both. Descriptive studies were reported as studies that estimated the prevalence of a mental health outcome, evaluated attitudes towards mental health outcomes, or both. Hypothesis testing studies were reported as studies that evaluated an intervention, investigated risk factors, or evaluated a diagnostic criterion. Qualitative study designs were reported as phenomenology, grounded theory, ethnographic, case study, biography, or other.

Mental health services and interventions

Interventions reported could include behaviour modification, health measures, efficacy, or other. Additional data extracted for these studies included funding information, whether the service was informational or interventional, who developed the service, who delivered the service, how the service was delivered, how the service was/is funded, and whether the service has been formally evaluated in the literature. Given the limited number of intervention studies found, in addition to the formal data extraction approach taken with the mental health outcomes, we reported a more in-depth description of the mental health services and interventions. This in-depth review was conducted by the primary author.

Synthesis of results

Data synthesis and descriptive statistics (proportions) were conducted using STATA 15® data software; proportions were calculated by mental health outcome.

Studies included

The initial search conducted in July 2017 yielded a total of 9906 articles: 430 identified in Agricola, 2374 in CAB Direct, 2797 in Pubmed, 1516 in Web of Science, 494 in PsycINFO, and 2295 in Medline. Title and abstract screening resulted in 676 articles eligible for full review; of these, 341 articles were included in the data extraction ( Fig 1 ).

Overview of the data–study context

Studies were published between 1979–2017 ( Fig 2 ). A large proportion of the literature was published since the year 2000 (80.9%), and 48.1% had been published between 2010 and 2017.

Twenty-seven countries were represented in the literature ( Fig 3 ). As shown in Table 2 , the largest proportion of studies were conducted in the United States (34.6%), followed by Australia (18.8%), India (12.6%), and the United Kingdom (7.3%).

Outcomes of interest

Overall, 75.1% of the studies collected primary data to examine mental health outcome(s), while 18.5% used secondary data sources, such as data collected through census surveys or vital statistics ( S1 Table ); review articles and governmental reports accounted for 6.5% of the included studies. The majority of all studies used quantitative research methods (72.1%); qualitative research methods and mixed methods represented 14.4% and 7.0% of studies, respectively.

Mental health outcomes

Stress was the most prevalent outcome of interest, accounting for 41.9% (n = 143) of all studies ( Table 2 ). The second most common outcome was suicide (33.1% of all studies; 111/341), followed closely by depression (32.6% of all studies). Anxiety was an outcome of interest in 15.0% of studies worldwide (51/341). Resilience was studied in 5.9% (20/341) of all studies.

Stress (n = 143)

Studies that examined stress as a mental health outcome of interest were represented across the full range of publication years (1979–2017). As shown in Table 2 , four countries contributed over 75% of the literature around stress among farmers: US (41.9%), Australia (18.9%), United Kingdom (UK) (8.4)%, and Canada (7.7%). As shown in Table 3 , over 70% of this research was quantitative in nature, with 42.7% of studies using a cross-sectional study design, followed by cohort studies, which accounted for 21.0% of the included studies. Approximately 15% of studies examining stress were qualitative and 7.7% were mixed methods studies; twenty-five of these studies reported using a phenomenological approach and two studies used an ethnographic approach.

Studies may have reported on more than one mental health outcome.

Note: Studies could contribute to more than one farm type or individual level. Therefore, columns may not add to 100%.

1 More than one individual level group could be investigated within one study. Therefore, numbers will not add to 100%.

2 Other animal farmers included equine, livestock (unidentified), and worms (silk and compost).

Suicide (n = 113)

Suicide was reported as an outcome of interest in 33.1% (113/431) of included studies. As reported in Table 2 , 16 individual countries contributed studies; over a third (37.2%) of suicide studies were conducted in India, followed by approximately 17% in Australia, 9.7% in the US, and 8% in the UK.

As reported in Table 3 , nearly 64% of studies examining suicide were quantitative in nature; approximately 21% of these studies used cohort designs, 15% used cross-sectional designs, and 5.3% were case control studies. Almost 80% of studies did not specify a farming population of interest (78.8%) instead just referring to “farmers” generally. Of the studies that did identify a farming population, crop farmers were the most represented in studies that examined suicide (20.4%), followed by permanent farmworkers (15.0%).

Depression (n = 111)

Depression was reported as a mental health outcome of interest in 32.6% of included studies. Over half of the literature examining depression among farming populations was conducted in the US (53.2%). The next largest contributors were Australia, UK, and Norway, accounting for 9.9%, 7.2%, and 5.4% of the included studies, respectively.

As depicted in Table 3 , 93/111 (83.7%) of the studies that examined depression as an outcome of interest were quantitative. The majority of depression studies reported using a cross-sectional approach (60.4%). Migrant and permanent farmworker populations were the most represented farming groups and were included in 36.6% of all included studies.

Anxiety (n = 51)

Fifteen percent of included studies examined anxiety as a mental health outcome of interest (51/341). The US contributed the largest proportion of studies examining anxiety (39.2%), followed by Australia (13.7%), UK (11.8%) and Norway (9.8%) ( Table 2 ).

Quantitative research methods were reported in 84.3% of anxiety studies. These quantitative studies consisted largely of cross-sectional study designs (62.8%), while cohort study designs were reported in 13.7% of included studies. Quasi-experimental designs were reported in three studies examining anxiety (5.9%), and one randomized control trial was included (2.0%). Migrant and permanent farmworkers were the most prevalent study population of interest (37.2%), followed by farm families and female farmers (9.8% each). A large proportion of studies that examined anxiety did not report a farming population of interest (68.6%).

Resilience (n = 20)

Resilience was a mental health outcome of interest in 5.9% of the included studies (20/341) ( Table 2 ). These studies were conducted in the US (45.0%), Australia (40.0%), Canada (10.0%), and one study that was international in scope (5.0%).

Sixty percent of studies that explored resilience used a quantitative approach including one cohort study (5.0%), one scale development/validity testing study (5.0%), and ten cross-sectional studies (50.0%). Forty percent of resilience studies reported farm families as their population of interest (n = 8), while 60% of studies had no reported farm type ( Table 3 ). Resilience was the only positive mental health outcome observed in the search.

Mortality (n = 7)

Mortality studies that examined farmer mental health appeared in the literature in 2002 ( Table 3 ). Since 2002, seven studies reported on mortality from mental health struggle, which was 2.1% of the mental health literature in farming populations. As depicted in Table 2 , two of studies that reported mortality were conducted in Australia (28.6%), while India, US, New Zealand, and Norway each contributed one study.

Three mortality studies reported using quantitative methods, more specifically, a cohort study design (42.9%). Two studies reported using a phenomenological approach to qualitative data (28.6%) and two studies were literature reviews (28.6%). Four mortality studies did not report if they had a particular farming population of interest (57.1%). Among the studies that did report a population of interest, crop farmers and permanent farm workers were indicated in three studies (42.9%)

Burnout (n = 2)

Two studies reported examining burnout as a mental health outcome of interest among a farming population; one study was conducted in Canada and one in Finland. Both of these studies used a cross-sectional approach to estimate the prevalence of burnout among farming populations. The Canadian study did not specify a farming population of interest, while the Finnish study examined dairy farmers.

Non-specified mental health outcome (n = 25)

In 7.3% of studies, a specific mental health outcome was not identified, but rather, the broad construct of mental health or psychological wellness was examined. Eighty percent of these studies had a quantitative study type: 52.0% used a cross-sectional study design and 8.0% used a cohort study design to measure mental health. Qualitatively, 28.0% of studies used a phenomenological approach to exploring mental health among farmers.

Risk factors associated with mental health outcomes

As outlined in Table 4 , examined risk factors related to farmer mental health included: demographic information (19.9%) and socioeconomic status (7.6%); help-seeking (6.2%); pesticide use (5.0%); substance use (5.0%); and climate change (2.3%). Physical health was represented in approximately 15.2% of all studies.

Mental health interventions

Twenty studies described a mental health service or resource (5.9% of all studies). These were conducted between 1998 and 2016.

Australia (n = 12)

In Australia, twelve studies described or assessed mental health services (60.0%) [ 20 ]–[ 26 ]. Four of these studies focused on assessing the efficacy of increasing mental health literacy among farmers and those who work with farmers [ 21 ]–[ 23 ], [ 27 ]. One mixed-methods study, conducted by Brumby et al (2009), provided an overview of their approach to farmer physical and mental health through “The Sustainable Farm Families (SFF)” project. This comprehensive approach to health and wellness highlighted the need for focusing on the farm family as a unit and engaging families as active learners [ 22 ]. Using a workshop format, this intervention consisted of a two-day workshop, followed by a one-day workshop in years two and three of the three-year intervention. These workshops combined physical and mental health education, and both pre- and post-training data were collected by questionnaire to assess knowledge and understanding of the core topics covered. Results showed a statistically significant change in knowledge around participant’s basic understanding of rural health facts, disease processes (including risk factors), and lifestyle questions that was maintained over the 3-year project for both men (85% retention; p<0.05) and women (86% retention; p<0.05) [ 22 ].

A qualitative study conducted by Brumby and Smith (2009) showed the impact of the “Sustainable Farm Families Train the Trainer” model as a successful approach to mental health and wellness in farming populations [ 21 ]. Through this program, participants, who were service providers in the community, increased their knowledge around how mental health impacts farmers and their farm. It showed the value of engagement with farmers through a “farmer centred model of care” versus the traditional health model [ 21 ]. Women were more likely to access supports than men, and women experienced stress, in the context of their farm, differently than men [ 21 ]. Additionally, results showed that farmers maintained a “masculine” or “stoic” view of accessing mental health services, emphasizing the need for a farmer-based approach, grounded in the agricultural culture, to mental health services in agriculture [ 21 ].

A longitudinal cohort, the Australian Rural Mental Health Study, recruited participants from 2007–2009, to examine mental health outcomes and variables surrounding help-seeking for mental health issues, among farmers and non-farmers, across four time points (122). Results showed that farmers were significantly less likely than non-farmers to access services, regardless of the service accessibility within the community [ 28 ]. The authors discussed the importance of tailoring services to farmers to improve trust and improve service use.

A short report published in 2009 by Robinson and colleagues discussed the need for innovation through an initiative of the Centre for Rural and Remote Mental Health (Australia) aimed at enhancing existing models to better serve rural communities, including farmers [ 29 ]. Participating psychiatrists were surveyed to assess their level of comfort in serving farming populations by partnering with existing agencies that farmers accessed regularly (unrelated to mental health). Particularly, the authors discussed the role of partnering with farm financial advisors as a way to increase access to mental health services [ 29 ]. No data were presented in this short report.

Another short report, published in 2009, assessed the efficacy of a mental health support line for farmers in New South Wales who experienced severe draught [ 30 ]. This assessment used a mixed-methods approach, analyzing data collected by the Centre for Rural and Remote Mental health on a monthly basis, along with conducting qualitative interviews with phone line staff (n = 5). Regression analysis suggested that the number of calls was not significantly associated with the percentage of the state declared in drought. However, no data were presented and no overview of the approach to the qualitative data was discussed [ 30 ].

A qualitative study, published in 2009, explored mental health service providers’ perceptions, through oral histories, of how climate change has impacted the interdependency of political, environmental, economic, and mental health concerns in rural and remote communities that serve farmers [ 25 ].

The value of Mental Health First Aid (MHFA) training for Advisory and Extension agents working with farmers was evaluated in a pilot project conducted by Hossain et al in 2010 [ 27 ]. This study assessed the impact of MHFA training one-year post delivery. Using a mixed-methods approach, participants (n = 15) were surveyed and two focus groups were also conducted. Results showed “moderate” to “good” gains in understanding of mental health issues, “pathways to address” mental health issues, and a gain in confidence with respect to recognizing mental struggle and providing support to farmers to help them access appropriate services [ 27 ]. Participants rated MHFA as “moderately” to “quite” beneficial. The qualitative data were analyzed for themes; the specific approach to the qualitative analysis was not discussed [ 27 ].

In 2011, another Australian study provided an overview of using a community development approach to developing services, including mental health literacy training, in hopes of increasing service use by farming populations in New South Wales [ 23 ]. This region-based approach to service development allowed working groups (including industry groups, governmental agencies, and regional health and mental health service agencies) to adapt existing resources to meet the needs of their farming communities. Over the four-year project, over 3000 participants received mental health literacy training. The authors discussed the positive impact of this approach to development and delivery of mental health related services to rural areas [ 23 ]; however, no formal evaluation of the program was presented.

Farm-Link was another initiative in Australia (New South Wales) developed as a suicide prevention project [ 24 ], [ 31 ]; two studies were published. Funded from 2006–2011 through partnership between the Australian government and the University of Newcastle, this initiative aimed to promote prevention and early intervention for mental health issues, improve the care system, particularly in aiding in the coordination of multiple component parts that exist in rural areas to deliver mental health services [ 31 ]. Specifically, Farm-Link aimed to improve access to mental health services through improving linkages between existing agencies; both mental health agencies and other “trusted” agencies in the farming community (e.g. agricultural agencies and farm financial service agencies). Further, Farm-Link mapped these networks to report back to the agencies in order to facilitate relationship building and sharing of workload, and to bolster farmer engagement with available services without overlap [ 24 ], [ 31 ]. An independent evaluation was conducted on this project, using a mixed-methods approach [ 31 ]. The evaluation indicated that there was a large need for mental health resources across agencies, and that most agencies did not have the capacity to deal with these needs. Overall, all agencies increased the number of other agencies that they shared information with, but improvements to programs or mental health outcomes among program users were not tested statistically [ 31 ].

A research protocol for a clinical trial was published in 2016 by Kennedy et al [ 20 ]. This protocol was for a digital intervention aimed at reducing stigma around personal experiences with suicide among males who have lived-experience of suicide (e.g., bereaved, previous attempts, or ideation) living in Australian farming communities. This study proposed using a mixed-methods design, multi-level evaluation of a web-based intervention where participants would have access to educational materials, resource information, shared stories from peers, and a personal section for goal setting [ 20 ]. Quantitatively, perceived stigma was to be assessed using an adaptation of a validated scale, the Stigma of Suicide Scale (SOSS). Qualitatively, authors proposed to explore personal insights around stigma. This trial was registered with the Australian and New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry (ACTRN: ACTRN12416000289415). SOSS scores were to be assessed at the beginning of the trial and again, upon completion [ 20 ].

United States (n = 4)

The Farm Partners program in New York state was the first mental health intervention to be discussed in the literature, published in 1998 [ 32 ]. This program aimed to increase awareness and use of community resources by farm families in order to address the high levels of occupational stress. Results showed that over four years, this program helped to refer farmers to services for financial advice, health services, support groups, mental health professionals, social services, legal services, and more [ 32 ]. Within our search, we did not find a formal evaluation of this program’s effectiveness.

Another study explored the “Sowing the Seeds of Hope” behavioural health program, which had representation in Iowa, Kansas, Minnesota, Nebraska, North Dakota, South Dakota, and Wisconsin [ 33 ]. It highlighted the impact of creating services that were delivered by providers who have knowledge of agriculture to ensure that services are culturally acceptable, affordable, and accessible within the region they are meant to serve [ 33 ]. There was no published formal evaluation of this program returned in our search.

One experimental study sought to determine the effectiveness of music therapy aimed at decreasing depression, anxiety, and social isolation among Mexican farmworkers in the southern US [ 34 ]. The authors reported that music therapy had a “medium” but non-significant effect on decreasing depression scores (7).

In 2011, a cross-sectional study conducted through the National AgriAbility Project, highlighting the mental health services and resources that were available to farmers throughout this network, which included 21 United States Department of Agriculture-funded State and Regional Projects [ 35 ]. The most commonly provided mental health resources were speakers at workshops, with brochures, papers, or articles to share information about mental/behavioural health issues [ 35 ]. Within our search, we did not find a formal evaluation of the effectiveness of this program published.

Canada (n = 1)

In Canada, one qualitative study published in the year 2000 described the development and evaluation of a mental health service for Saskatchewan farmers intended to help farmers cope with stress [ 36 ]. Beginning with a qualitative needs-assessment, this study highlighted gaps in education (around stress management, anger management, self-esteem, and communication), support group formation and maintenance, clinical services, general information, and advocacy. Based on the results of this assessment, the author developed a program to address these needs within the health region, partnering with existing organizations to help deliver services [ 36 ]. This program included workshops on topics such as stress, anger and grief in the rural context, coping, and stress resiliency. The author emphasized the importance of trust and credibility as major factors to consider when developing mental health resources in farming communities. Once trust was established with farmers, she was able to deliver these services more effectively, and attendance improved [ 36 ]. A partial “evaluability assessment” was conducted in 1995; however, the author indicated that this evaluation was incomplete, leaving assessment of the program’s effectiveness reliant on anecdotal evidence.

United Kingdom (n = 1)

In the UK, an overview of an ongoing in-person support service delivered in farming communities by two nurses with farming backgrounds was published in 2000 [ 37 ]. This service aimed to address farming accidents, mental health, and occupational-related diseases. This review did not include any data and a follow-up report with findings was not identified.

India (n = 1)

In India, a mental health intervention was implemented in the Maharashtra region, which had experienced an increase in suicides [ 38 ]. This intervention recruited “social health activists” and trained them to use a tailored screening tool for depression among farmers. This tool was developed by psychiatrists in the region. The goal of the intervention was to detect depression among farmers and refer them for services, such as counselling and long-term treatment, more effectively [ 38 ]. No results or evaluation of this program was presented in this short report.

Africa (n = 1)

The study conducted in the Democratic Republic of Congo was unique in that the intervention the authors were evaluating was farming itself [ 39 ]. Specifically, this randomized control trial measured the impact of an intervention, Pigs for Peace, on individuals who were from regions greatly impacted by conflict. Approximately 50% of their participants identified as farmers. The study showed a statistically significant positive effect of having livestock as a moderator for good mental health, lowering overall impacts of depression and post-traumatic stress disorder [ 39 ].

This study systematically maps the literature examining mental health outcomes among farming populations, worldwide. The results of this review highlight gaps in research on farmer mental health. For example, the majority of research examining mental health outcomes focused on stress, suicide, and depression. These mental health outcomes were reported concerns in the specific regions in which they were studied, and thus may warrant further investigation globally. Further, mental health outcomes that have been less studied, including anxiety, burnout, and positive mental health outcomes, such as resilience, may warrant further investigation to determine the trends across nations.

Until recently, there have been very few studies of national scope that have examined mental health outcomes in North America beyond suicide, and these results have yet to be published in the academic literature (currently limited to conference publications) [ 40 ]. While small-scale studies contribute to localized knowledge, successful programming for farmer mental health has been supported with broader epidemiological data [ 22 ], [ 41 ]. A systematic mapping of existing research can help researchers avoid unnecessary overlap and can help identify knowledge gaps to inform the distribution of funds to where resources may be most effectual.

Beyond migrant farmworkers, other farming populations were not always explicitly identified within the literature. Overall, 36.1% of the cited literature did not specify which types of farming populations the authors were studying. While there is likely to be overlap between farming subpopulations regarding some aspects of mental health, there may be important differences to explore. For example, in a North American context, farmers are greatly impacted by changes in trade agreements, supply management, and governmental regulations that are vastly different and dependent on the specific farming commodity [ 42 ], [ 43 ]. Knowing which farming population is being examined lends more specificity to the work and can help researchers to elucidate these relationships more clearly.

Existing systematic reviews of farmer mental health are limited to one review of suicide [ 11 ]. Based on the findings of this review, it is warranted that researchers also systematically examine other outcomes; for example, depression among farming populations was measured in 109 (33.3%) of all studies included here. A limitation of this scoping review is that we did not aim to determine the number of studies that quantify the prevalence or incidence of depression; however, providing an adequate number of studies quantifying the prevalence of depression exists, conducting a systematic review and meta-analysis could provide valuable insights into establishing the global risk of experiencing depression among farmers. It could also allow for an exploration of heterogeneity among studies, which would help determine the degree of bias within and between studies. Additionally, this could provide a comprehensive analysis of the methodological rigour with which the studies were conducted. While there are many studies of depression throughout the literature, the way in which depression was investigated varied in study design, sample size, and measurement tools used. Assessing which tools (i.e. validated scales, physician diagnosis, self-report) have been used in farming populations can help inform future work and the development of standardized methodological guidelines could help make studies across the globe more comparable. For example, the Core Outcome Measurements in Effectiveness Trials (COMET) initiative has created a database of clinical studies that contribute to the development “core outcome sets (COS)” [ 44 ]. These COS inform the most appropriate measurement tools for clinical outcomes across many areas of health and wellness, to ensure data are comparable across trials. This could also serve to improve the epidemiological rigour of studying mental health outcomes in farming populations.

There were several studies that investigated “mental health” without operationalizing their definition of what this term meant within the study context. This trend has largely diminished over time, with more recent studies providing clear operational definitions that can be more easily interpreted.

With the exception of stress, depression, and suicide, other mental health outcomes were infrequently studied. Burnout, a more recent construct to be measured among farmers, was investigated in two studies [ 40 ], [ 45 ]. Given the association between burnout and employee retention generally [ 46 ], farmers experiencing burnout may have increased burdens beyond those of other occupations, given the nature of farming as an occupation, lifestyle, [ 45 ] and identity [ 47 ].

The vast majority of research focused on negative mental health outcomes (i.e. mental health pathology), to the near exclusion of positive mental health outcomes. Only one outcome identified in the present review focused on a positive outcome: resilience. While it is important to examine negative mental health outcomes, it could be argued that it is detrimental to do so to the exclusion of positive mental health outcomes like resilience, quality of life, and life satisfaction, which are outcomes commonly studied in the field of positive psychology. Positive psychology is “the scientific study of optimal human functioning [that] aims to discover and promote the factors that allow individuals and communities to thrive” [ 48 ]. Expansion of positive psychology research amongst farmers could help improve understanding on what helps enhance farmers’ well-being, and what helps some farmers thrive, even in the face of the significant stresses they face. In 2005, a literature review conducted by Fraser and colleagues concluded that more research is needed to explore resilience among farmers worldwide [ 10 ]. Give that resilience is positively associated with mental health [ 49 ], focusing research and resources on assessing how resilience can be taught and increased among farmers should be a priority for future work.

Mental health services

To date, few studies have published formal evaluations of their mental health interventions/services, with all published evaluations coming from Australia. Globally, farming populations can benefit from building on this Australian knowledge, adapting services to fit other farming contexts. Formal evaluation of the impact of these services would also help to bolster existing literature and provide statistical evidence that can be used to prioritize farmer mental health research and services and lobby for permanent funding.

Throughout the studies that aimed to assess interventions, there were common findings indicating that farmers require services that are specifically tailored to their population needs and that are delivered by service providers that have a foundational understanding of the specific pressures associated with farming, and how this may impact the mental health of farmers. For example, studies conducted in Canada [ 50 ], Australia [ 21 ], and the US [ 33 ] reported that farmers are more willing to seek help for their mental health if they know the care provider has a knowledge base of agriculture. This may impact the trust between the farmer and mental health provider, which a systematic review of barriers to help-seeking for mental health issues in young people reported as essential for help-seeking both short- and long-term [ 51 ].

Gender differences were highlighted in an Australian study examining help-seeking among farmers [ 21 ]. Women were more willing to seek help for mental health concerns than men, and this gender association was further impacted by whether or not the mental health service provider had a knowledge base of farming and agriculture.

Hence, future mental health interventions that are developed for farming populations may benefit from considering both farm-specific needs and potential gender differences when designing new mental health prevention and intervention strategies. Furthermore, existing mental health services may benefit from educating service providers around farming practices, lifestyle, and realities in the communities that they serve, increasing their credibility within the farming community, and potentially increasing the likelihood that farmers will seek help for their mental health.

Study limitations

While this review aimed to comprehensively map the existing peer-reviewed literature, it is possible that studies were not captured within the search. We aimed to reduce this risk by using comprehensive databases and checking reference lists of literature reviews that were identified in the study prior to full-text screening. As reference lists of reviews were examined prior to full-text screening, we are unable to identify the number of additional studies that were included as a result of reference checking. Further, this review excluded studies that did not explicitly state that they were examining a farming population. This may have led to the exclusion of studies labelling their population as “rural”, but included farmers. Lastly, studies that were unavailable in English, or that were part of a textbook or thesis were excluded, which may have excluded some geographical regions from the review.

This scoping review provides a critical overview of the literature examining mental health outcomes in farming populations, globally. While some geographic regions had a substantial body of literature, knowledge gaps remain including the prevalence of mental health outcomes, how they are impacted by risk and protective factors, and which intervention strategies are most impactful in farming communities. The results of this scoping review can help guide researchers to identified gaps in research and services, leading to a more informed and focused approach to future work, and ultimately a more comprehensive understanding of mental health and wellness among farmers worldwide.

Supporting information

S1 appendix, s1 checklist, funding statement.

The author(s) received no specific funding for this work.

Data Availability

Academia.edu no longer supports Internet Explorer.

To browse Academia.edu and the wider internet faster and more securely, please take a few seconds to  upgrade your browser .

Enter the email address you signed up with and we'll email you a reset link.

• We're Hiring!
• Help Center

Systematic Literature Review on Marketing Problems: the case of Coffee Farmer

The aim of this study is to identifying and minimizing the effect of factors affect farmers coffee marketing. In order to summarize the review work, five steps described by Al-Tabbaa et al ,(2019) used. Such as:-Framing questions for review, Identify relevant work, selecting sample, data coding and synthesis, summarizing the evidence and interpreting the findings. Results of the review showed that most of the factors that affect coffee marketing of farmers indicate that the problem was worldwide.

Related Papers

Asian Journal of Agriculture and Rural Development

boris kaido

Indonesia has several Arabica coffee varieties that are well known in the domestic and world markets. However, marketing challenges exist for the domestic market and few cooperatives are able to export. Arabica Coffee Kerinci, a cooperative that exports, is an exception; nevertheless, marketing challenges persist for this cooperative too. Our objectives are to examine a case study of a successful cooperative that focuses on the export market and to clarify the challenges remaining for Arabica coffee marketing. Descriptive statistics were employed to capture the complexities of these marketing challenges. Semi-structured interviews using simple random sampling were conducted with the cooperative’s leader and with 51 farmers. We find that the fundamental challenges are quality inconsistency, price fluctuations, lengthy and bureaucratic export administration, absence of bank loans, and lack of government support. We recommend the following key steps: (1) focusing on improvements in pro...

Recent Research in Science and Technology

AYODELE AKINPELU

The study assessed the market level characteristic factors influencing coffee marketing among coffee farmers in the study area. The study was carried out in Kogi State and purposive sampling technique was used to select eighty four respondents. Data were collected from the respondents with the use of structured questionnaire and the data collected were analyzed using descriptive statistics (frequency and percentages) as well as multi-variate regression analysis. Result of the descriptive analysis shows that the mean age of the farmers was 64 years while 60% of the farmers had no access to formal education. Regression analysis revealed that farm size, variety of coffee, marketing channels, trading experience, membership of association, price satisfaction and selling method constituted major characteristic marketing factors influencing coffee marketing in the study area and they all affected coffee marketing at 1% significant level. Based on the findings, the study therefore recommend...

Asian Journal of Agricultural and Horticultural Research

The study assessed the determinants of coffee production and marketing on farmers’ farms in Kogi State. Two Local Government Areas (Ijumu and Kabba-Bunu Local Government Areas) were purposively sampled. These areas are known for the production and marketing of coffee. A total sample of eighty-four respondents was randomly selected from the two Local Government Areas. Structured interview schedules were used for data collection from respondents. The data collected were analyzed using inferential statistics analysis. Cobb-Douglas functional form regression model was chosen based on the value of the R2 and the number of significant variables. The result indicated that marital status, household size, educational level, variety of coffee planted, farm size and farming experience constituted the major factors that significantly determined coffee production and marketing in the study area. The study recommended that policies should be targeted at encouraging literacy among coffee farmers t...

Lambert Academic Publishing

Megersa Nugusa

Determinants of coffee production and marketing: in case of amuru woreda, horro guduru wollega zone, oromiya regional state. By:megersa nugusa banja( MSc) ABSTRACT Coffee, Ethiopia's largest export crop is the backbone of the Ethiopian economy. However, Ethiopia has not yet fully exploited its position as the producer of some of the best coffees in the world. Coffee is one of the most important traded commodities in the world and it plays a major role to Ethiopian economy. Currently, Ethiopia is the leading Arabica coffee producer in Africa, the fifth largest and the tenth in coffee exports in the world. Currently, Ethiopian export coffee performance has decline. Due to this, the study analyzed the determinants of coffee production and marketing in the study area. The objectives of this study were: to examine the determinants of coffee production and marketing of smallholders in Amuru Woreda . Accordingly, multi stage sampling procedure was employed to select the sample households. Four parent associations were randomly selected by using random sampling method and finally, 233 sample respondents were selected from the sampling frame based on probability proportional to size (PPS). Cobb-Douglas production function was employed to analyze the determinants of coffee production, while logit model analyzed the determinants of coffee marketing. Cobb-Douglas production function result showed that: active family labor, cultivated land size, compost, pesticide and pruning of coffee plant were positive and significantly affect coffee production and age of coffee plant negative and significantly affect coffee production. The results of logistic regression indicated that: education level of household heads , access of training, access of information positive and significantly affect the participation of coffee marketing while transportation costs negative and significantly affect coffee marketing. Linkage between production and marketing of coffee is a basic activity to promote smallholder farmers. The constraints identified were poor soil fertility, coffee diseases, Short rain, fear of crop failure due to pests, lack of inputs supply and fear of market. Moreover, policy consideration has to be given by government to those significant variables which have a potential impact in determining farmer’s production and marketing of coffee.

Hanny Mulugeta

Asian Journal of Agricultural Extension, Economics &amp; Sociology

tuti gantini

Coffee is a product that continues to be in demand by the public. Indonesia is one of the coffee-producing countries, with production in 2020 amounting to 744,000 tons. Arabica coffee is the most popular type of coffee. The area of ​​Arabica coffee plantations in West Java reaches 27,757 ha. To find out the optimization strategy for coffee production, it is necessary to conduct an exploratory study related to the cultivation system and marketing channels for Arabica coffee in West Bandung Regency. The research method uses a survey with path analysis. The variables observed were the cultivation system used, the marketing channels used and the performance results of Arabica coffee farmers. The results showed that the variable cultivation system and marketing channels affect the productivity and profits of farmers with the equation Y = 0.417 X1 + 0.465 X2 + €. Partially, the cultivation system and marketing channels have an effect on performance, while correlation analysis shows that t...

International Journal of Social Sciences Perspectives

Asfaw Takele Feleke

International Journal of Applied Business and International Management

Irmayani Noer

This study aims to identify actors in collective marketing channels and analyze the collective marketing performance of coffee beans in Lampung Province, Indonesia. Research samples are 50 coffee farmers in West Lampung Regency, randomly selected from farmer groups. The analytical method used to assess the collective marketing performance was marketing margin analysis.”The results showed that many actors were involved in the marketing channel, including collectors, wholesalers, farmer groups, Federate Farmers Groups, Joint Business Groups, and exporters.”Their involvement increased the handling costs during the marketing process. There are four collective marketing channels of coffee beans identified in this research.” Based on the results of marketing margin analysis, it is known that the most efficient collective marketing channel is direct selling to Joint Business Group.”

Journal of Agri Socio-Economics and Business

Gracia Gabrienda

In Bengkulu Province, the area of coffee plantations reached 124,510 hectares spread in several districts with production reaching 60,790.08 tons per year (BPS, 2018). Most coffee production (Coffea Spp) is produced by smallholder farmers. Nearly a quarter of the coffee production was produced by Rejang Lebong Regency, namely: 13,459 tons with a total plantation area of 27,828.12 hectares of coffee plantations. Constraints in the development of coffee are in the case of coffee marketing channels that have not been maximized by farmers, transportation due to the topography of the area and the location of the factory that is far away, low marketing production, quality of coffee (quality ), and capital that influences the selling price of the coffee. This situation is certainly inseparable from the influence of the factors of the coffee industry production itself, namely in the form of capital, raw materials, labor, transportation, marketing and income of business owners that also affe...

TJPRC Publication

Karnataka state stands first among the coffee producing states by contributing 71 percent of total India's coffee production. The present investigation was carried out to study the major marketing channel and margin under coffee marketing, constraints involved in the marketing of the coffee. The study was conducted in Kodagu district of Karnataka. All three talluks of Kodagu viz Madikeri, Virajpet, and Somavarpet and one village from each talluk was selected. A sample of 60 farmers based on probability proportion to number of farmers available in each groups and six middlemen and six processing unit(curing unit) were selected to study the coffee marketing cost. There were two marketing channels. Channel-I (producer, commission agent, processing unit, consumer) and channel-II (producer, commission agent, consumer). The channel-II was found to be the best as the producer share in consumer rupee was more (74% per tonne) than in channel-I (71.27%). Net margin earned by middlemen was 7314.5 Rs /tonne in channel-I and net margin earned by processing unit was 35703.5 Rs/tonne in both channels under marketing. The major constraints faced by farmers in marketing of coffee in the study area are, the problems like inappropriate prices, lack of labour availability, transportation problems faced by producers, processor and middlemen.

RELATED PAPERS

International Journal of Engineering Sciences & Research Technology

Ijesrt Journal

Ulrich de Balbian

Mediterranean Journal of Social Sciences

Elvira Baze

Jama Psychiatry

Mark Pollack

Owen Bootman

Edna Brennand

Mauricio Pestchanker

Energy &amp; Environmental Science

Jesper Jacobsson

Radiography

Hannan Hussain

Journal of Cosmology and Astroparticle Physics

Satadru Bag

Ousmane Ndiaye

Betul Karagoz Yerdelen

Accomplie Lukombo

Indian Journal of Child Health

Nihar Ranjan Mishra

Journal of Climate

Terence O'kane

Karl Nakken

Radiation Measurements

Evaldo Simões da Fonseca

IDS Bulletin

Themba Moeti

Current Opinion in Psychiatry

Terry Keane

Journal of Pediatric Gastroenterology and Nutrition

Raffaele Minella

Mehdi Ghambarian

卡尔加里大学毕业证书办理成绩单购买 加拿大文凭办理卡尔加里大学文凭学位证书

•   We're Hiring!
•   Help Center
• Find new research papers in:
• Health Sciences
• Earth Sciences
• Cognitive Science
• Mathematics
• Computer Science
• Academia ©2024