IPM Program Combined with “Rice Fields, Flower Banks” or BIO-IPM Program in Soc Trang Province (Vietnam)

The paper aims to present the implementation of IPM program in Soc Trang Province in two years 2015 and 2016. To evaluate the program, a lot of primary data was obtained from the farmer household survey at each phase: Baseline survey as before-project (abbreviation S1), implementation of four experimental FFS models according to the Farmer-Field-School approach (S2), survey after FFS implementation (S3), and survey after up scaling or after-project (S4). Totally 1,200 households are in consideration. The comparative methods such as the one-way ANOVA are used to examine differences in mean and variance of agricultural inputs and outputs between different groups S1, S41 and S42. The key innovation of this study includes not only the conventional measures of the IPM program but also biological measures such as “rice fields, flower banks” and green fungus. The main results are a reduction in the use of nitrogen (14.8-17.1%), and pesticides (48-51%), cost savings and higher profits for farmers and a lower environmental impact from growing rice. “Rice fields, flower banks” have not only proven themselves in rice fields but have also spread to villages. The rural landscape is becoming more beautiful in the context of the National Target Program on New Rural Development.

World's Best Rice 2019 (Note 2). This is the result of many years of research by Soc Trang scientists headed by agricultural engineer Ho Quang Cua (Note 3).

The First Attempts with IPM program in Soc Trang
The Soc Trang Plant Protection Department (PPD) is one of those units in Vietnam with many achievements in research on management of pest and disease on crops. The activities or achievements can be listed below: a) Integrated Pest Management Mrogram (IPM) has been applied in Soc Trang Province since 1993 and has been very effective for many years (Note 4). IPM is an ecosystem approach to crop production and protection that combines different management strategies and practices to grow healthy crops and minimize the use of pesticides. But in 2006-2007 nearly 100 thousand hectares of rice in the MD were infected with brown backed planthoppers (Note 5) and thousands of hectares with rice grassy stun (Note 6). There were two basic causes for pest outbreaks on a large scale and difficult to control. Firstly, on the farmer side there were three reasons: (1) tend to sow with high density seeds (spreading seeds) and use too much fertilizers and pesticides for higher yields, (2) the habit of over-spraying pesticides to planthoppers has been multiplied and persisted in the field, protecting and enriching the natural enemies, contributing greatly to the effective management of the planthopper pest (Note 8). The effectiveness of application of parasitic fungus in fields has been confirmed through the model "Application of green fungus production process at household to eradicate rice planthoppers in the Mekong Delta", which was recognized by the Soc Trang PPD.

c)
In 2009, PPD continued the IPM program and promoted the effectiveness of local biological measures. Therefore, the project "Building an integrated model of BIO-IPM application to improve crop quality" was implemented. The project aimed to expand and develop biological measures in the IPM system in order to enhance farmers' awareness of the use of chemical pesticides into biological ones and to regenerate the field ecosystem in a sustainable and environmentally friendly way.
According to Dang Thi Cuc and Huynh Thanh Binh (2010), PPD has transferred the process of producing green fungus at the household in the IPM model on rice and rice-shrimp. Specifically, experiments were conducted in 9 BIO-IPM models specializing in rice cultivation (50 ha/model), 6 models in the rice-shrimp area (20 ha/model) in 9 districts/communes with participation of 450 farmers.
The results of the BIO-IPM model were evaluated very well so that the cost of pesticides was reduced by 42%, fertilizer 9%, seed 31%, and net benefit increasing to 18%.

The Research Question
In the last decade, the IPM program is being updated with many new advances in science and technology. Therefore, farmers also need to update their knowledge accordingly. In contrast, practical applications gain new knowledge and enrich the knowledge base of the IPM program. Thus, the IPM program is developed in a closed circle between science and reality, reality and science.  Vo Thi Lang (2006) showed that with "Three reductions, Three gains" (Note 9) brought about positive results. It provided greater economic as well as environmental benefits to society in the form of input, especially pollution-related inputs (nitrogen, homestead) and of output gains (higher rice quality and net benefits).
The research question is how to achieve the main goals set out by the Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Development of Vietnam (MARD) in the project "Mekong Delta water resources management for rural development" of The World Bank (short: WB6): reducing 50% of pesticides and 10% chemical fertilizers. In which, it is necessary to use the measures of IPM program and scientific progress in rice production. Various comparison methods are used in the paper, for example "with and without", "before and after" and "inside and outside".

Data and Methods
Soc Trang PPD and M&E team of WB6 have proposed a research program, details of the program are: And the following primary data were available in four stages ( Figure 2): -Stage S1-Baseline survey as before-project: 450 households were examined in order to obtain the before-project data. A complex questionnaire was used.
-Stage S2-Implementation of four experimental FFS models each model has a small area of 2000-4000 m2 for demonstration.
-Stage S3-Survey after FFS: 450 farmers attending an IPM and FFS training course using a simple questionnaire about the practice and perceptions of farmers, and -Stage S4-Survey after upscaling: 300 households using the same complex questionnaire of S1 and divided into S41 and S42.
The survey scheme with data collection and analysis methods is shown in Figure 2. The main statistical method used in the study is to compare means and variance between different groups or times/periods/stages with or without intervention. In which, the one-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) is applied to determine whether there are any statistically significant differences between the means of two or more independent (unrelated) groups.  Table 1 shows that most of the farmers surveyed are men (76-98%) because they are the main people responsible for their families' agricultural production. The surveyed households represent the ethnic groups in Soc Trang (mostly Kinh, then Khmer and Vietnamese Chinese. Most households specialize in agriculture and have more than 10 years of farming experience. and the revised version. It is a shift from "land to the tiller" to the establishment of a "new landlord" to encourage farmers to permanently stabilize their agricultural production on a single piece of land and protect land resources. According to the statistical test method (Levene test and t-test) 4 samples S1, S3, S41, and S42 have the same variance and mean in terms of plot size.

Main Results of S2 or 4 FFS Models for Demonstration
This can be considered as a further upgrade study as outlined in section 1.2. The purpose is to demonstrate the economic and environmental effectiveness of the BIO-IPM model. Therefore, Soc Trang PPD carried out research on four real FFS models, which are described in Table 3  The main findings from this experimental study are explained below and presented in Table 4: a) Development of the sowing density: In 3 models M1, M2 and M3 such measures are used: Sowing in rows and spreading seeds, balancing the fertilizers, applying the biological methods such as "rice fields, flower banks", use green fungus to add biological agents to the fields. Thereby helping the rice to grow well and significantly reduce the number of pesticide sprays from 31-51%, contributing to environmental protection and human health.

b)
Situation of rice growth (number of shoots and tillers) (Figure 3, left picture): Due to the application of the method for reducing the seed amount, the maximum number of shoots pro square meter at the seedling stage until tillering is lower than the control field. During rice maturation, however, the number of panicles between the treatment fields had a significantly lower or nearly the same to the control field. This shows that the proper sowing combined with the use of balanced fertilizer helps the rice to shoot early and shoot healthily. The rate of effective shoots is higher than in the control field. c) The pest situation in the treatment and control fields: In SA and WS seasons, pests were relatively lower, mainly brown plant shoppers and small leaf worms. They often occur in the late tillering until the stalk formation phase. However, in the treatment fields were applied IPM measures und "rice fields, flower banks" (Figure 3, right picture), limiting the drug and especially pesticide spraying. Therefore, in the treatment fields, the density of the natural enemy is higher, and the pest density lower than in the control field. d) Rice yield: The treatment fields M1 to M3 give a higher yield (2.8-5.7%) than control field. This shows that the use of 1M5R included in the IPM program brings higher rice productivity. e) Economic efficiency: Due to a reduction of seed, fertilizer and pesticide amount per unit area, and a higher average yield, the demonstration field has lower costs and higher benefits than the control field. So that the profits of model M1 to M3 increased from 30% to 48%.  From the results of these practical models, it is possible to draw an important conclusion that the model of "rice fields, flower banks" and green fungus combined in the IPM program, also known as BIO-IPM, has brought efficiency in economy and environment, creating a premise for high yield and good and safe rice quality. Thanks to this study, it is possible to appropriately expand the model of rice-fish, rice-shrimp in the MD.

Some Results in S3
During the project implementation, many IPM trainings for farmers were organized in Soc Trang.
Usually each training course lasted several days. After visiting 4 FFS models, the participants had to fulfill the questionnaire about their perceptions and practices of using homesteads in two cases: before-project and after-training in FFS models. The analysis results are shown in Table 5. This shows a shift in farmers' perceptions of fertilizer, pest and water management as well as health protection.

Key Results in Comparison between S1, S41 and S42
In this section, a complex comparison between the stages S1, S41 and S42 is carried out to demonstrate the effectiveness of the IPM program with statistical evidence. The production inputs and outputs in paddy season SA (it means both season together SA 2014 and SA 2016) and paddy season WS (also WS 2014-15 andWS 2015-16) are compared. The comparison results can be seen in Table 6. Below are some explanations: a) Pesticide use: the number of pesticide use in SA has decreased from 9.56 times/season in S1 (before-project) to 6.31 in S41 (after-project within the project area). Outside the project area in S42, thanks to the expansion of the IPM program, the number of applications has decreased slightly to 9.22.
All dataof S1, S41 and S42are then tested by one-way ANOVA. Firstly, the homogeneity of variances is tested by ANOVA. Then, in the ANOVA analysis the mean difference between S1, S41 and S42 is tested at level of significance of 0.05 or 5%. The results in Table 7 show the differences between the groups. There is no significant difference between mean values of before-project S1 and after-projectS42 (outside the project area) because Sig. 0.054>0.05. However, there is a statistically significant difference between mean values of S1 and S41, also 9.56 and 6.31 respectively. In Table 8 there is a detailed comparison of the spray numbers against snails, weeds, pests and diseases in paddy seasons SA and WS. It can be seen that the important decrease of spraying from 29.9% in SA and 27.9% in WS. Note. * The mean difference is significant at the 0.5 level. In subsequent comparisons on fertilizers, sowing density and yield were similarly calculated and the main results are summarized as follows: b) Fertilizer use: especially in terms of nitrogen fertilizer, the amount of nitrogen fertilizer used by farmers before-project was higher than after participating in the project in crop season SA (reduced ≈16 kg (108.51-92.47) or 14%), the season WS (reduced 19 kg (111.39-92.38) or 17%). Regarding rice yield, the survey found that, thanks to the IPM program, sowing with sufficient density and balanced use of fertilizers and the use of many integrated pest control measures should support rice cultivation. Therefore, the rice yield in both S41 and S42 is higher than before-project (e.g., in SA with 6.58 and 6.74 higher than 5.81 ton/ha).

The Village Beautification as Result of the Eco-Farming
The movement "rice fields, flower banks" has gradually spread from rice fields to villages and the lives of farmers. According to Quoc Tuan (

Conclusion
The paper has provided a lot of statistical evidence and data proving the effectiveness of the IPM program implemented in Soc Trang Province in two years 2015 and 2016. In particular, Soc Trang has creatively incorporated biological measures such as "rice fields, flower banks" and green fungus which have been previously tested and now retested again in four demonstration models. Thanks to this good IPM or BIO-IPM program, farmers can save rice seeds, chemical fertilizers due to the application of balanced fertilizer programs (INM), pesticide spraying due to the application of IPM with different biological measures (IPM), sawing water for irrigation (AWD). By reducing production costs and increasing rice yield, farmers have a higher profits. The impressive numbers that mentioned above are: Reduction of chemical fertilizer use (N 14.8-17.1%, P 6.7-11%, K 5.1-9.1%); Reduction of pesticide use from 48-51% and increasing the paddy productivity from 13-14%. If compared with the research results in Zenaida (2008) and Vo Thi Lang (2006) when applying "Three Reduction Three Gains" or 3R3G in MD, these results are actually better.
Looking back at history. In the world, IPM has been the dominant crop protection paradigm promoted since the 1960s. However, its adoption by developing country farmers is surprisingly low. According to Parsa et al. (2014), there are six factors identified as important and difficult, that are weak adoption incentives, research weaknesses, outreach weaknesses, IPM weaknesses, pesticide industry interference, and farmer weaknesses. In Southeast Asia, there are two important factors that hinder the implementation of IPM: weak adoption incentives and pesticide industry interference.
In Soc Trang province, the IPM program has been applied quite early in Vietnam (Note 12) since 1993 with support of FAO, DANIDA and others, with certain results. However, after the epidemic of brown backed planthoppers in 2006-2007 due to many unfavorable factors, Soc Trang farmers did not return to application of IPM. The reasons are: "weak adoption incentives", "IPM weakness", "farmers' weakness" and "pesticide industry interference". Since the early 2000s, when the quality of exported rice was not a top priority, most of Vietnamese rice has been exported to non-standard markets such as China. That is why the farmers in MD are pursuing rice production in large quantities. As a result, the fertilizer and pesticide industry has been more active through strong advertising and promotion programs. On the other side, the IPM program is not strong enough to convince farmers. Lastly, farmers' awareness is low. According to the WB (2016), Vietnam's agriculture must transform: gaining more from less, enhancing sustainable agricultural development and exporting many high quality products on the international market. Therefore, rice production in MD has developed towards high quality and so that Soc Trang province has the best rice in the world ST24 and ST25. The efforts of the fertilizer and pesticide industry were pushed back and forced them to change their production range to produce more environmentally friendly products. This paper demonstrates with impressive figures the economic efficiency and environmental protection of the IPM program combined with ecological factors (so-called BIO-IPM program). In addition, these ecological factors also contribute to the development and renewal of the villages on MD's rivers and canals.