Resource conservation technologies (RCTs) mainly concern conserving resources by minimizing tillage, protecting soil moisture and nutrients by growing cover crops and crop residues and implementing temporal and spatial crop sequencing
(Sharma et al., 2021; Kundu, 2022). Farmers have long utilized these pro-sustainable technologies and their associated behaviors, but in recent years, these practices have been undermined. Farming’s viability is at serious risk due to declining net returns and growing sustainability risks. Technologies for resource conservation, which are a part of conservation agriculture (CA), can reduce some of these negative externalities while increasing farm profitability (
Krishna, 2022). There was a significant push in all the regions of the nation to enhance the acceptance and popularity of RCTs. Yet, the policies and initiatives are insufficient and ineffectual to produce the intended results in this direction due to the lack of precise information.
(Singh et al., 2011; Saha et al., 2022).
Since, RCTs make efficient use of the resources at hand and preserve soil fertility, they seem like desirable solutions for attaining sustainable and intensive crop production in a variety of agro-ecological contexts. Though the Resource Conservation Technologies are site-specific, but large adoption of RCT is necessary. Hence, larger scale testing of these new technologies under various production systems is required. The existing cropping patterns exhibit unequal adoption of resource-conserving technology and there is a lack of trustworthy information regarding the overall adoption trend
(Ramesh et al., 2016; Swaminathan et al., 2022). Thus, it is essential to support alternative technologies that will contribute to preserving the critically important but progressively diminishing natural resources and, over time, increase productivity growth by maintaining the quality of the soil and the production environment
(Singh et al., 2011).
Within this strategy, resource-conserving technologies (RCTs) are essential for maintaining and improving crop output across a range of cropping systems at a reduced cost of production. The rolling out of RCTs is expected to benefit farmers in ways such as decreased soil erosion losses, lower energy and irrigation costs, labor input savings, enhanced productivity and water use efficiency, decreased groundwater pumping, enhanced nutrient use efficiency and the adoption of new crop rotations. Planners and policymakers find it challenging to create appropriate policies for the popularization and increasing acceptance of RCTs, even though these concerns are currently the subject of intense debate. Against this background, the current study addresses the following queries:
i. Cost-effectiveness of RCTs vis-ΰ-vis conventional technologies used in rice-wheat cropping systems and.
ii. Impact of the Resource Conservation Technologies on various economic indicators.
The present reviews’ findings will help policymakers understand how effective resource conservation technologies are on different economic indicators. This will enable the design of proper approaches to successfully implement resource conservation techniques along with traditional farming practices for a range of cropping systems.
Scenario of rice-wheat cropping system in the Indo-gangetic plains
A common agricultural pattern in the Indo-Gangetic plains of India is rice-wheat. It is the largest agricultural production system in the world, covering around 12.3 million hectares in India, with the Indo-Gangetic plains accounting for about 85 per cent
(Ladha et al., 2003; Timsina and Connor, 2001). India has a prominent pathway of foodgrain production from 87.4 million tons in 1961 to 315.7 MT in 2021-22 (
Economic Survey, 2022-23). In India, rice covers around 46.4 hectares, yielding 130.3 metric tons of production and 2,809 kg of productivity per ha. In contrast, wheat occupies 30.5 ha, produces 106.8 metric tons and yields 3,507 kg of productivity per ha (
Economic Survey, 2022-23).
According to
Ambast et al., (2006), groundwater is essential for irrigation in the rice-wheat-producing regions of India, including Punjab, Haryana and Uttar Pradesh.
Ramesh et al., (2016) and
Kumar et al., (2021) state that the sustainability of the rice-wheat cropping system is also being threatened by the existing agricultural practices, which are deteriorating the soil and water resources. The region’s agricultural sustainability is called into question due to the significant repercussions of the rice-wheat monoculture. The system of rice-wheat cropping has greatly helped to satisfy the growing number of deprived populations, but it has also brought about several sustainability problems, such as dwindling water supplies, deteriorating soil health and environmental degradation, all of which are contributing factors to stagnant or decreased land and water productivity. Therefore, alternative tillage and techniques need to be developed, tested and recommended for the sustainable development of the rice-wheat cropping system. This will improve soil health, water and land productivity and the surrounding environment, all of which will contribute to an overall improvement in the farmers’ standard of living (
Bhatt, 2016).
Resource conservation technologies used in the rice-wheat cropping system
To maintain and improve the rice-wheat system’s productivity at a lower cost of production, resource-conserving technologies, or RCTs, are important. It was reported by
Singh (2010) that these were the best short-term and long-term options for maintaining productivity. According to
Kumar et al., (2021), implementing conservation tillage techniques greatly increased the productivity of the rice-wheat system. Scientists have suggested resource-conserving solutions for this aim, including zero tillage, laser leveling, irrigation based on soil matric potential, bed planting, direct sowing, mechanized rice transplanting and crop diversification
(Bhatt et al., 2016; Kumari and Kumar, 2023). In the process of cultivating rice, RCTs included rice intensification, direct aerobic rice, direct seeded rice and cultural techniques such as brown manuring, leaf color charting, stale seedbed management, mulching and crop residue management
(Alena et al., 2022). The most effective resource-saving technique in the Indo-Gangetic Plain was zero-tillage for wheat planting following rice, especially tractor-drawn ZT seed drill (
Biswas, 2016). In the rice-wheat cropping system,
Kumar et al., (2018) investigated the adoption trend of multiple RCTs. They reported that the zero-tillage method (88.33%) was the most popular, followed by rotational tillage (38.33%) and laser land leveling (26.67%). According to
Krishna et al., (2022), there is considerable economic potential for the ZT technology in the IGP’s rice-wheat systems.
Economic efficiency of RCTs in the rice-wheat cropping system
The advantages of resource conservation technologies over traditional methods in terms of economic efficiency, including cost savings and effective input use were examined by
Singh et al., (2011). According to the findings of their investigation, the savings in the cost of cultivation of wheat in several states, including Punjab, Haryana, Uttar Pradesh and Bihar, ranged from 11% to 16%. RCT adoption reduced human and mechanical labour usage by 20-27 percent
(Singh et al., 2011) and it was responsible for 3-4% of the overall cost of wheat production. Due to its ability to reduce the need for machinery, labour and seed, RCTs-in particular zero-tillage technology-were found to be more cost-effective than conventional approaches in the rice-wheat cropping system (
Gangwar and Singh, 2015;
Kumar et al., 2017). Resources were used more efficiently and at a lower cost which saved labour, fuel, time, fertilizers, insecticides and farm energy
(Kumar et al., 2021). Zero tillage harvests benefits such as reduced planting time, fuel and water use, increased nutrient efficiency, decreased weed populations, less machinery wear and tear and a reduction in air pollution. Water was conserved and weed pressure was decreased with zero tillage
(Jat et al., 2010). According to
Rasool (2015), zero tillage saved irrigation water in the wheat crop by 20-35 per cent when compared to conventional tillage, saving roughly 6-8 percent of the total cost. The implementation of a furrow-irrigated raised-bed system (FIRBS) in wheat conserved 25-30 per cent of seed, 40-50 per cent of water and 25-30 per cent of nutrients without compromising yield (
Tiwari, 2021). Thus, by using these technologies, there was increased farm profitability and improved sustainability of agriculture in resource-poor countries (
Kumar, 2014). In wheat production, the use of resource-conserving technology (zero tillage) hasled to a 20 per cent decrease in farmers’ costs per hectare and a 28 per cent increase in net revenue
(Reeves et al., 2016).
Profitability of RCTs in the rice-wheat cropping system
Numerous research evaluated the comparative efficiency of RCTs on different economic metrics. Adoption of laser land levelers was found to increase the cultivable area by 2-3 per cent (
Kumar, 2017); rice yields were found to be 15 per cent higher than conventional practices
(Shanwad et al., 2014); and net return was found to be 80 per cent higher for adopters of RCTs in wheat than for nonadopters (
Gangwar and Singh, 2015;
Devi et al., 2013). According to
Biswas (2016) adoption of ZT was beneficial due to the notable “yield effect,” which was resulted in an average 12 per cent increase in productivity and the “cost-saving effect,” which reduced the need for conventional fertilizer (104 Rs/ha) phosphate fertilizer (1938 Rs/ha), irrigation (380 Rs/ha), seed (462 Rs/ha), nitrogen (269 Rs/ha) and land preparation (1938 Rs/ha). Farmers’ profits were reported to rise by Rs. 2,200-3,000/ha when they were practiced zero tillage
(Jat et al., 2010). According to
Kumar et al., (2021), the use of different resource conservation methods improved soil health, nutrients and water efficiency with higher sustainable yields, resulting in a sustainable improvement of RWCS. Compared to non-adopters, the RCTs improved productivity and decreased technical inefficiency by 28 per cent
(Kumar et al., 2022).
Resource conservation technologies did, however, greatly enhance the farm economy. However, RCTs must also be evaluated throughout time from a long-term viewpoint utilizing a temporal analytical framework
(Chatarjee et al., 2020). According to
Samuel et al., (2020) research, the long-term effects of RCTs on farm returns revealed that, although the treatment without conservation yielded better returns in the first three years, the treatment with conservation produced higher returns overall after three years. According to
Gupta and Seth (2017), field data also demonstrate that resource-saving technologies increased yields while consuming less water and having a less detrimental influence on the natural environment.
Constraints and problems in adoption of the RCTs
The features of the suggested technology, farmers’ assessments of its benefits and necessity and the distribution and accessibility of production inputs (land, labour/time, capital, knowledge, skills,
etc.) all were influenced the adoption of resource conservation technologies. Additional aspects included the governmental climate, institutional support and knowledge sharing and farmers’ attitudes toward risk and trials
(Drechsel et al., 2006). The methods used to raise awareness and distribute it were skewed against smallholders. To calculate the impact of social targeting of resource conserving technologies, more investigation is needed
(Krishna et al., 2022). We pinpoint the essential elements that could lead to a rise in adoption, such as access to institutional support services, education and legally protected land (
Tambo and Jonathan, 2018). Since RCTs solutions are site-specific, extensive testing of these new technologies under various production systems is necessary if they are to see widespread acceptance
(Ramesh et al., 2016). Singh and Kaur (2020) examined the growing concerns regarding the state of resource conservation technologies, farmer attitudes and the challenges associated with adopting particular technologies. According to the report, policy formulation is necessary to promote and facilitate the broader usage of these technologies. Furthermore, critical elements that favorably influenced the adoption of RCTs and improved their technical efficiency include credit availability, improved extension services and training in natural resource management
(Kumar et al., 2022). The study by
Kumari et al., (2018) identified three primary constraints related to financial, socio-psychological and extension constraints. These included the higher cost of zero-till machines (70.37%), farmers’ lack of cooperation in sharing experiences (67.30%) and farmers’ ignorance of minor machine adjustments (80.74%). According to
Singh et al., (2010), available varieties for resource conservation technology were scarce, the cost of RCT machinery was high, there was a lack of skilled agricultural labourers to operate these machines effectively and there was a lack of a complete package of resource conservation agriculture for all agro-climatic regions. Moreover, the three most important variables impacting farmers’ adoption of resource conservation technologies were their propensity for innovation, their attitude toward RCTs and their level of awareness about them.
