1

Drought and farmers coping strategies in poverty-afflicted rural China

*
Shijun Ding
1*
, Sushil Pandey
2
, Chuanbo Chen
3
, Humnath Bhandari
2
1
Zhongnan University of Economics and Law, China
*
Visiting Fellow, Institute of Development Studies, UK
2
International Rice Research Institute, the Philippines
3
Renmin University of China
Correspondence author: Dr Shijun Ding, dingsj@public.wh.hb.cn
Aims
The paper aims to understand the nature and magnitude of drought risks in southern China to estimate
economic costs of drought and explore farmers coping strategies and to suggest alternative options for
policy interventions.
Major findings
1) It is found that although drought can occur at different seasons, rice farmers are heavily suffered by
summer and autumn drought, which occurs during July and September.
2) It is found that estimated rice yield loss due to drought is about 7 - 37%, the production loss of rice is
about 9 - 64%, the production losses of wheat, cotton, maize and beans are also substantial. Percentage
loss in values for all crops at household level is 33%. These indicate that the effect of drought at
household level is widespread and can be substantial.
3) Rice farmers cope with drought by various strategies: (1) Spatial diversification: village committee
distributes land to farm household in such way that each household has a land portfolio consisting of
different qualities of land, which helps to reduce the production risk through diversification of land type.
(2) Income diversification: 39% of income is from farm cultivation, of which half is from rice 15% from
animal husbandry and 46% from a range of non-farm activities. (3) Cultivation flexibilities: farmers cope
with drought by postponing rice transplanting timing or planting other. (4) Adjustment in agricultural
input by reducing chemical use. (5) Changes in consumption: 31% of the households reduce their
consumption in food, with 18% of the rich household and 44% the poor 15% reduce expenditure on
other items, with 5% of the rich and 21% of the poor.
4) Local community may have its mechanisms, including land allocation and reallocation within the village,
manage local water bodies to better cope with drought, and providing forecasting of timing of rice pests
and fertilizing by means of local radio, television, newspaper, which helps farmers to cope with adverse
events, such as drought.
Concluding remarks
The negative effect of drought at household level is substantial. Farmers and local communities developed
various strategies to cope with it. Drought impacts among rich household and poor household are
different, with the poor bears more of the negative impact. Interventions, including agricultural
technological intervention, are needed for helping especially those who are resources poor.
*
The Rockefeller Foundation and the Natural Sciences Foundation of China provide financial support to
the research project on which this paper is based. Drs Qifa Zhang and Lijun Luo provide scientific
consultation.
2
1 Introduction
China is a country with 1.27 billion population and 9.6 million square kilometres land,
which is 21% of the world population and 7% of the world land. Agricultural production
remains one of the major productive activities. While the share of agricultural gross domestic
product had been declining from 32% in 1981 to 15% in 2003, the share of agricultural
employment remained at 50% of the overall employment and the share of population living
in rural areas was 60% in 2003.
Due to large and rapidly growing population, food security has long been a crucial issue
(Brown, 1994). Despite the increase in food production during the past decades, food
security is still a concern. In recent decades, grain production area decreased from 117
million ha in 1980 to 99 million ha in 2003. A large number of rural people, living in
marginalized rural area, such as mountainous or resource-poor areas, are still suffering from
food shortage. Food security thus will remain as an important agenda in the coming decade.
Rice remains the single largest cultivated food crop in China. It occupies about 18-27%
of the total cultivated land and accounts for 39% of the total grain output. Drought is one of
the major constraints to rice production, especially in southern China which is the main rice
production area and is characterized by mountainous terrain and limited availability of
irrigation. Most of the irrigation is dependent heavily on local rainfall, and, hence in years
with low rainfall, irrigation supply is very limited. According to Dey et al (1996), estimated
yield loss of rice due to drought is around 143-250 kg/ha in central and southern China,
respectively. Lin et al (1996) reported that the average yield loss due to drought at different
growing periods for late season rice and single season rice in China are 13% and 14% of the
total yield loss, respectively. OToole (2002) estimated that rice production loss due to
drought was 4.4 million tons, and value of loss including direct and indirect loss can be 880
million US dollars.
As rice farmers suffer frequently from drought, they have evolved various strategies to
cope with it. In drought year, farmers may adjust fertilizers input, adopt varieties that are
tolerant to drought environment, change rice to other crops that require less water, reduce
family consumption, and finally they may migrate out of such drought-prone area. However,
farmers drought risk coping strategies in China have not been adequately studied. Such
studies are needed to identify interventions that complement farmers own strategies so that
they are more efficient in managing the drought risk. For example, a drought-tolerant variety
3
or management practice that reduce water use in rice production can benefit farmers not
only directly through increased yield and production but also by reducing farmers reliance
on costly coping mechanisms, which they may have been using. Similarly, policies that
promote diversification of economic activities may be more effective in coping with risk in
some situations. However, the lack in-depth understanding of these economic aspects of risk
management by Chinese farmers makes it difficult to analyze the extent to which various
interventions complement or negate farmers coping mechanisms. This study is designed to
fill some gaps in knowledge in this area.
Chinas rural economy has experienced extensive change since 1978. Rapid rural
development has raised agricultural and non-agricultural productivity. At the same time, such
rapid changes have also accelerated the dissolution of the risk coping mechanisms
traditionally embedded in the collective economy. A study of Chinese agriculture as it is
going through a period of transition can provide a unique opportunity to generate insights
into how small farmers in the poor southern region of China are being impacted upon and
what can be done to reduce the adverse impact.
The overall goal of this research is to investigate nature of drought risk and its impact
on farmers livelihood strategies. Based on the investigation, we will highlight farmers risk-
coping mechanisms within major rice production systems and suggest options of
interventions for reducing the impact of drought risk.
2 Data and methodologies of the study
To characterise the nature and intensity of drought and the associated rice production
loss in southern China, three provinces from the southern China, which covers 16 provinces
of the countrys 31 provinces, were selected for investigation, namely Zhejiang from
southeast China, Hubei from south central China and Guangxi from southwest China. 10
counties from each of the three provinces were selected for collection of published monthly
rainfall data and annual rice production data over 20 years from 1982 to 2001.
This temporal analysis is complemented by a detailed analysis of 151 farm household
data collected through a household survey in the three provinces to understand rice farmers
perception on drought and to analyse the nature of farm-level adjustments in response to
drought and the impact of farm household livelihoods.
2.1 Analysis of rainfall and production of rice
4
A simple definition of drought based on rainfall deficit from Long-Term Average (LTA)
is used in this paper. A meteorological drought is considered to have occurred in a particular
year if rainfall deficit from LTA during the main rice-growing season is 20% or more
1
. Crop
response to moisture deficit depends not just on quantum of deficit but the timing of deficit
is also very critical. Estimates of drought probability, therefore, were also derived for four
seasons, viz., spring, summer, autumn and winter. Summer-autumn drought (June to
October) probability was also estimated for rice is most sensitive to water availability in this
period. For each period, the 20% deficit threshold was used to identify drought events.
A fixed effect model with drought as a dummy variable in a trend regression of output
was used to estimate the direct economic cost of drought on rice production. To avoid
difficulties caused by the likely stochastic dependence of rainfall
2
, only seasonal drought
events from June to October are utilized for correlating drought events with rice yield. The
coefficient of dummy variable measures the production loss associated with drought
averaged over all drought events. The fixed effect model is specified as follows:
e g b
a
+ + + =
D T P
Where P = production, T = time trend, D = drought dummy, and e = random error
term with usual OLS properties. The coefficient g measures the average effect of different
intensity of drought on production of rice.
2.2 Investigation of rice farmers coping strategies
A poverty-afflicted drought-prone county from each of the three provinces were
selected for investigation of rice farmers coping strategies. Farm households responses to
drought were derived by comparing the production practices in normal years with those in
drought years
3
.
In Zhejiang province, one village was selected, and in provinces of Hubei and Guangxi
two villages form each were selected from each, and 30 households in each of the total 5
villages were selected for detailed household survey. The farm household selection in the
1
Soil moisture-based indicators of drought would have been superior, but calculation of such indicators
requires detailed data on soil, rainfall, and evaporation at shorter time steps and at higher level of spatial
resolution for soil water modelling than employed here.
2
The limitation of this approach is that rainfall during these periods is assumed to be stochastically
independent. This is a somewhat strong assumption, especially when the adjoining periods are considered.
3
During the household survey, farmers were asked to provide information on production practices
related to normal years and the most recent drought years they experienced. Depending on the spatial
variations in rainfall patterns, normal and drought years would likely be different across the study
villages. These years for each of the villages were identified through a consultative and iterative process.
5
village followed a village wealth-ranking practise. The households were stratified into rich,
average, poor in consultation with the village cadres.
Information on household responses was collected through both participatory methods
using the tools of RRA and through the use of structured questionnaire. For structured
quantitative household survey, several basic sets of questions were asked: (1) basic
household characteristics (2) risk-relevant events or activities which affect the security of
household income or consumption (3) household production activities (4) key expenditures
on risk-relevant events, such as insurance. Follow-up interviews were also undertaken with
households who face greater risk due to drought.
3 Findings
3.1 Drought in southern China
In southern China, rice can be grown as a double crop of short duration varieties or as
a single crop of an intermediate duration. In the double-rice system, the first crop (early
season rice) is planted in February and harvested in July and the second crop (late season rice)
is planted in June and harvested in November. The single-rice system (known as single
season rice) covers the period of April to October. Four seasons can be identified in China
in terms of calendar month, in which spring is from March to May, summer is from June to
August, autumn is from September to November, and winter is from December to February.
Summer-autumn (sum-aut) period used in this paper, in particular, refers to months from
June to October, which is most sensitive to water availability during rice growing period.
Using time series monthly rainfall data from 1982-01, the probability of drought was
estimated for different months and seasons. For each period, the 20%rainfall deficit
threshold was used to identify drought events. In order to see the effect of rainfall at
different stages of rice growth as well as different production environments, the probability
is estimated at different seasons, as presented in Table 1.
Table 1 Probability of seasonal drought in southern China, 1982-01
County/Province Spring Summer Autumn Sum-Aut
Guangxi 0.15 0.30 0.25 0.15
Hubei 0.15 0.20 0.20 0.20
Zhejiang 0.25 0.15 0.30 0.10
Southern China 0.00 0.10 0.25 0.00
6
As can be seen, drought probability is the highest in summer in Guangxi (30%) and in
autumn in Zhejiang (30%), while it is the highest both in summer and autumn in Hubei
(20%). The summer-autumn drought probability is 15% in Guangxi, 20% in Hubei, and 10%
in Zhejiang. Thus, droughts during major rice growing season were frequent in the three
study provinces.
A non-covariate incidence of drought is less problematic from policy perspective than a
covariate drought as the effects of non-covariate drought are more localized. Drought events
that are spatially covariate are more destabilizing than droughts affecting small pockets. A
drought event is defined here to be covariate if it affects more than 50% of the counties at
the same time. Probability of spatial covariate drought was estimated using county-level
drought years and the result is presented in Table 2.
Table 2 Distribution and probability of spatially covariate drought, southern China, 1982-01
Guangxi Hubei Zhejiang
Years Spr Sum Aut Sum-aut Spr Sum Aut Sum-aut Spr Sum Aut Sum-aut
1984 x x
1985 x x x
1986 xx xx
1988 x x
1989 x xx x
1990 xx x xx x
1991 xx xx x xx xx x
1992 xx xx x
1994 xx
1995 xx xx
1996 x x
1997 x x xx
1998 xx xx
1999 x x xx
2000 xx x x
2001 x x xx xx x
Prob 0.10 0.25 0.30 0.20 0.10 0.10 0.25 0.20 0.20 0.20 0.30 0.10
Note: * Spatially covariate drought year, x, is defined as drought year that covered over 50% of the counties.
* xx refers to drought years that occurred over 70% of the county, which is also termed as widespread drought
year.
The summer and autumn droughts are relatively more covariate than spring droughts.
The probability of covariation of spring, summer, autumn, and summer-autumn drought at
three provinces range from 10-20%, 10-25%, 25-30%, and 10-20%, respectively. Thus, the
7
impact of the drought years with high probability of covariation is likely to be more
important than those of the non-covariate drought years. Further investigation on seasonal
covariation of drought (not presented in this paper) suggested that autumn droughts were
highly covariate followed by summer and spring drought. These results implied that drought
during summer and autumn season might have higher impact than spring season.
Overall, droughts in southern China occur mainly in summer and extend into autumn
months. Occurrence is usually from March to October although the severity is high during
July to September. For the three provinces as a whole, the probability of autumn drought is
the highest (25%). In terms of spatial distribution, the summer and autumn droughts are
relatively more covariated. Autumn droughts were highly spatially covariate followed by
summer and spring drought.
3.2 Economic losses based on rainfall and production analysis
The effect of drought on rice production is modelled using trend analysis with dummy
intercept variables specified for each of the years that experienced drought based on the 20%
rainfall deficit criteria as explained earlier. The drought years were obtained from the analysis
of monthly rainfall data. The coefficient of drought dummy is hypothesized to be negative
indicating that occurrence of drought will reduce rice production. This method provides
only the lower-bound cost of drought because the ex-ante costs of drought as a result of
some of the changes in management practices in farming (such as extra cost of managing
water harvesting structures), adoption of traditional varieties that are more tolerant to
drought, and so on, are ignored in this aggregate analysis. Since the production losses occur
mainly due to yield reduction and yield loss is mainly arising as a result of rainfall deficit
during June to October rainfall, summer-autumn drought years were used to define the
drought dummy. The ordinary least square estimates of effect of drought on rice production
are presented in Table 3.
At county level, the F-value was mostly significant (p<0.05) indicating better fit of the
model. At the province level, the F-value was significant (p<0.05) for Guangxi and Zhejiang.
Nevertheless, the coefficient of drought dummy was not significant (p<0.05) in most of the
counties (except for Tianlin of Guangxi) and not significant in any of three provinces
8
implying that drought might not result statistically significant production losses of rice at
county and province level
4
.
Table 3 Ordinary least square estimates of effect of drought dummy on rice production, by county, southern
China, 1982-01
County/ Constant Time Drought Dummy F-value
Province Coef. Sig. Coef. Sig. Coef. Sig. Coef. Sig. R Square
Bobai 342 0.00 11.1 0.00 -4.11 0.87 17.69 0.00 0.68
Fuchuan 94 0.00 0.0 0.96 -4.42 0.19 1.42 0.27 0.14
Guiping 344 0.00 8.4 0.00 -2.91 0.91 8.90 0.00 0.51
Liucheng 109 0.00 2.8 0.00 -7.09 0.38 11.13 0.00 0.57
Longzhou 33 0.00 1.0 0.00 0.11 0.97 12.06 0.00 0.59
Nandan 46 0.00 0.7 0.00 -2.96 0.18 20.19 0.00 0.70
Shangsi 61 0.00 0.8 0.07 5.15 0.34 2.22 0.14 0.21
Tengxian 224 0.00 5.6 0.00 -12.23 0.21 28.68 0.00 0.77
Tianlin 56 0.00 0.1 0.56 -4.29 0.05 2.64 0.10 0.24
Xingan 146 0.00 2.4 0.00 -6.22 0.19 34.99 0.00 0.80
Guangxi 10403 0.00 117.0 0.00 32.11 0.96 5.62 0.01 0.40
Enshi 48 0.00 0.8 0.00 2.73 0.34 7.39 0.00 0.47
Fangxian 35 0.00 0.9 0.00 -3.81 0.14 11.75 0.00 0.58
Gongan 433 0.00 5.1 0.01 26.87 0.36 4.06 0.04 0.32
Lichuan 72 0.00 3.1 0.00 2.88 0.80 8.71 0.00 0.51
Luotian 142 0.00 0.5 0.27 -0.57 0.91 0.80 0.47 0.09
Suizhou 441 0.00 14.3 0.00 7.73 0.88 6.43 0.01 0.43
Xiangyang 135 0.01 28.0 0.00 37.53 0.45 31.17 0.00 0.79
Yangxin 204 0.00 0.0 0.97 13.98 0.24 0.77 0.48 0.08
Yichang 98 0.00 0.2 0.64 4.63 0.30 0.98 0.40 0.10
Yunxian 39 0.00 0.0 0.97 5.56 0.07 2.07 0.16 0.20
Hubei
15339 0.00 62.3 0.22 804.82 0.27 2.07 0.16 0.20
Cangnan 236 0.00 -1.3 0.09 6.39 0.59 1.72 0.21 0.17
Changshan 107 0.00 -0.3 0.41 2.25 0.61 0.76 0.48 0.08
Changxing 339 0.00 -4.2 0.03 -32.37 0.20 4.15 0.03 0.33
Cixi 133 0.00 -1.6 0.02 12.85 0.18 5.43 0.01 0.39
Fuyang 215 0.00 -2.1 0.00 -7.25 0.47 7.09 0.01 0.45
Jiashan 303 0.00 -5.4 0.00 -3.85 0.77 23.83 0.00 0.74
Linhai 300 0.00 -3.5 0.01 18.73 0.22 5.77 0.01 0.40
Qingyuan 70 0.00 -0.6 0.00 -0.25 0.90 9.58 0.00 0.53
Shangyu 274 0.00 -0.2 0.85 5.33 0.75 0.11 0.90 0.01
Yiwu 250 0.00 -3.0 0.01 -21.61 0.15 5.46 0.01 0.39
Zhejiang
14608 0.00 -193.7 0.00 851.22 0.20 19.95 0.00 0.70
Note:
* Dependent variable is rice production (1000 tons).
* Drought dummy is defined as those years that have Jun-Oct rainfall less than 20% of long-term average
rainfall of the same period.
* Coef. means coefficient and sig. means level of significance.
4
The lack of evidence of loss due to drought at the aggregate level could also be due to the drought measure
and econometric model used in this study. For example, a frontier production function with drought as dummy
variable in the error term for explaining technical inefficiency might be more precise in capturing drought
effect. Such approach is going to be employed in authors further investigation.
9
3.3 Production loss at farm household level
Farmers perceptions regarding the production losses resulting from drought were
directly elicited during the survey. Nearly two third of the rice farmers in Hubei and more
than a fourth in Guangxi consider the loss in rice production to be greater than 50% (Table
4). Thus, farmers consider production losses resulting from drought to be substantial.
Table 4FrequencyandPercentagedistributionoffarmersperceptiononricelossduetodrought
Hubei Guangxi % Reduction of rice
production Farmers % Farmers Farmers % Farmers
Less than 10% 2 6.7 1 2.6
20%----30% 1 3.3 6 15.8
30%----40% 6 20.0 8 21.1
40%----50% 2 6.7 13 34.2
More than 50% 19 63.3 10 26.3
Total 30 100.0 38 100.0
Farmers also consider the increased cost of irrigation as a negative consequence of
drought. In drought years, farmers pump additional water to irrigate the field. Although
there may not be much yield loss as a result, the cost to farmers increases. This is an internal
cost incurred by farmers that is not reflected in the estimates of production loss. Hence,
increased cost of irrigation can be considered as a component of the cost of ex-ante coping
mechanism.
Crop yields are lower in drought years for almost all crops and in all locations. For rice,
the estimated yield losses are in the range 7 to 37%in the study villages depending on the
location. The production loss of rice ranges between 9% and 64% when the effect of area
loss is also taken into account. The production loss of oilseeds ranges between 33-100%.
Production losses of wheat, cotton, maize and beans are also substantial. These results
indicate that the effect of drought is widespread across crops and locations. Although the
effect on each crop may be small, the total aggregate effect on farm households and on local
agricultural output hence can be substantial. The aggregate value of production loss was
calculated by adding up the production loss of each crop and was showed in Table 5.
10
For the whole sample, production value loss was estimated to be 33%. As would be
expected, most of the losses occur in poor-irrigated and rainfed lands. These land types are
proportionately more in Hubei and Guanxi than in Zhejiang. Hence, the total value of
production loss is higher in these provinces than in Zhejiang. Variation in land endowment
thus partially explains the variation in magnitude of losses to drought across locations.
Table 5: Values of all crops per household by normal and drought year and irrigation condition
Type of land
Hubei Guangxi Zhejiang Total
Rice land 4023 1168 1351 2351
Non-rice land 1004 417 107 589 Normal Year
Total in normal year 5027 1585 1458 2940
Rice land 2147 784 1232 1423
Non-rice land 946 345 104 537
Drought Year
Total in drought year 3093 1129 1336 1959
Rice land -47 -33 -9 -39
Non-rice land -6 -17 -3 -9
Difference in %
Total difference in % -38 -29 -8 -33
The analysis of farm level data as well as discussion with farmers revealed that drought
is one of the important constraints to rice production and result substantial losses but the
analysis of rainfall and production data at provincial and county levels in the previous section
does not support such statement and the results showed that drought causes trivial loss in
rice production. The lack of evidence of drought-related losses at the aggregate level while
farmers have considered drought to be an important constraint indicates that drought effects
might be localized. At the aggregate level, these localized effects might not be visible due to
the averaging out effect.
3.4 Rice farmers coping strategies
Due to lack of efficient market-based mechanisms for diffusing risk, farmers have
developed various strategies to cope with the impact of drought. These strategies can be
classified into ex ante and ex post depending upon whether they help reduce risk or reduce the
impact of risk after the production shortfall has occurred. Ex ante strategies can be grouped
into two categories: those that reduce risk by diversification and those that do so through
11
greater flexibility. Examples of the former are spatial diversification of farms, diversification
of agricultural enterprises, and diversification from farm to non-farm activities. Maintaining
flexibility is an adaptive strategy that allows farmers to switch between activities as the
situation demands, such as using split doses of fertilizers, temporally adjusting input used to
crop conditions, and adjusting the area allocated to a crop depending on the climatic
conditions. Ex post strategies are also referred to as consumption smoothing strategies as
they help reduce fluctuations in consumption even when the income is fluctuating. These
include migration, consumption loans, asset liquidation, and reliance on charity.
Farmers who are exposed to risk use these strategies in different combinations to
ensure their survival despite all odds. Over a long period of time, some of these strategies are
incorporated into the nature of the farming system and are often not easily identifiable as
risk-coping mechanisms. Others are employed only under certain risky situations and are
easier to identify as responses to risk.
3.4.1 Diversification Strategies (Ex ante strategies)
Farmers plant various crops in separate plots or plant different varieties of the same
crop as diversified strategies in response to drought. Farmers are engaged in diversified
production activities rather than one special activity, which disperse part of the risks.
Spatial diversification
Spatial diversification refers to the extent of variation of land plots of farm households.
The geographical location, irrigation condition and soil moisture retaining capacity affect the
magnitude of drought impact. Farmers diversified their land utilization by planting different
crops at different land plots. Table 6 shows that the average number of plots per household
is 9.28. The dispersed plots allow farm households to plant various crops that have different
tolerance and resistance to adverse events.
Table 6: Average farm size and area by land type: rice land and non-rice land (ha)
Hubei Guangxi Zhejiang Total
Av. no of plots/hhs 4.8 14.8 7.4 9.3
Rice 3.5 11.5 6.7 7.3
Non rice 1.4 3.3 0.7 2.0
Av. area of plots (ha) 0.16 0.03 0.05 0.06
Rice 0.16 0.02 0.05 0.05
Non rice 0.17 0.04 0.07 0.08
12
Land fragmentation in Guangxi is much higher than in the other two provinces. Some
of these plots are rice land, others are non-rice land some are well irrigated, others are poor
irrigated, some are rainfed some are more fertile and others are less fertile. The village
collective allocates these plots to farm households ensuring that each household has a land
portfolio consisting of different qualities of land. This land allocation procedure helps to
reduce the production risk through diversification of land type. Even though production
may suffer in poorly irrigated or rainfed land, the rice land with good irrigation allocated to
the household will reduce the impact of drought on the household food supply.
Crop Diversification
Crop diversification is an important strategy used by farmers to diffuse climatic risk. If
crop yields are poorly or negatively correlated, crop diversification can result in a lower level
of risk than when only a few crops are grown. Crop diversification index for normal and
drought years were computed to examine the extent to which Chinese farmers utilize crop
diversification as a way of coping with drought risk. The estimated crop diversification
indices for normal and drought years are similar (not presented in this paper). This indicates
that rice farmers in the study area may be not using crop diversification as a drought coping
mechanism.
Income Diversification
Major sources of income in the study villages can be classified into farm income and
non-farm income. Farm income derives from crops cultivation
5
as well as animal husbandry
(mostly pigs rearing), while non-farm income comes mainly from family-based agricultural
products processing, local vending, handcrafts, local labour works, as well as migrant labour
works. Rice cultivation is one of the main crops activities in the villages, and its income is
separately investigated. Farmers income sources are showed in Table 7.
Table 7: Household income by sources in the villages, real term and percentage term
Hubei Guangxi Zhejiang Total
Real term total (US$) 974 631 931 830
All crops, % 55.8 28.2 20.3 39.4
(Rice, %) (30.3) (15.3) (13.4) (21.9)
5
The cost of family labour input in crops cultivation is not included in the income calculation. The retained
crops for own consumption is included in the income by discounting at 90% of its price.
13
Animal husbandry, % 9.9 25.2 11.4 14.8
Non-farm activities, % 34.3 46.6 68.2 45.7
Total 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0
An overall average household income is US$830. Income from farm activities,
including crop cultivation and animal husbandry, accounts for 54% of the total income,
while income from non-farm activities accounts for 46%. 68% of income in Zhejiang village
is from non-farm sources, indicating non-farm activities prevail in the village. This is a more
economically developed area and hence, non-farm income has become a major source of
income. In the other two provinces that are less economically developed, the share of non-
farm income is lower.
Cash income from crop production as share of total income is further investigated, it
can be found that rice production is more commercialised in Hubei villages, and followed by
Guangxi villages and Zhejiang villages, as showed in Table 8. As can be seen from tables 7
and 8, due to relatively low rice income shares in the study villages, when the drought affects
mostly rice yield, even if the impact is tremendous, its influence on farm households current
years income may be quite small.
Table 8: Cash income from crops as share of total income (%)
Hubei Guangxi Zhejiang
Share of crop cash income to total income 36.8 7.3 0.7
Share of rice cash income to total income 17.2 2.6 0.2
Share of rice cash income to rice income 46.1 12.1 1.0
Table 9 shows the average income from various non-farm activities and the number of
individuals participating in these activities in the study villages. As can be seen, non-farm
income sources are very broad, and few households completely relied on farming activities
to earn income.
Table 9: Number of farmers in non-farm activities and the mean income (Yuan)
Hubei Guangxi Zhejiang Total
No of Mean No of Mean No of Mean No of Mean
14
farmer income farmer income farmer income farmer income
Family enterprise 3 2633 9 2878 - 21 3729
Local vender 1 2500 9 3072 2 2850 20 2178
Agricultural labour 1 3000 2 35 2 400 9 1494
Local non-farm 3 2867 6 357 4 2470 30 1917
Migrant labour 11 3889 3 2733 8 7631 30 5866
Handcrafts 6 1517 2 3000 1 1200 11 1845
Formal sector staff 3 2750 2 650 4 5125 10 3144
Transferring - 3 533 1 7000 6 1800
Others 1 1200 1 100 18 3322 22 3322
Total per head 29 2800 37 1972 40 4070 159 3059
3.4.2 Flexibility (Ex ante coping strategies)
Maintaining flexibility is an important coping strategy, which allows farm households to
postpone or adjust timing of crop planting and usage of agricultural inputs as well as
substituting one crop for other, so as to better cope with adverse events such as drought.
Postponing rice transplanting and plant the other crops
Table 10 indicates 79% farmers postponed the transplanting due to drought. This
shows that postponing transplanting is a prevalent coping strategy. For the study villages,
about 37% farmers couldnt transplant rice seedlings due to drought, thus they substituted
other crops as an important coping strategy. The substitute crop (mainly sesame and soybean)
was different according to resource endowment of farmers and their economic conditions.
Table 10: % distribution of farmers answers to questions regarding postponing and substitution of crops
Hubei Guangxi Zhejiang Total
Do farmers postpone transplanting date because of drought
Yes 87.1 93.3 35.5 79.1
No 12.9 6.7 64.5 20.9
Do farmers plant other crops instead of rice because of drought
Yes 63.8 25.9 6.5 36.7
No 36.2 74.1 93.5 63.3
15
Methods of rice establishment and extracting weed
Farmers adjust rice production in drought year by many different means. These include
changes in crops establishment methods, in extracting weed methods, and so on. This type
of data is showed in table 11.
Table 11: Ways of extracting weed and rice establishment of farmers
Hubei Guangxi Zhejiang
Village 1 Village 2 Village 1 Village 2 Villages
Total
Methods farmers used for extracting weed
Using manual labour 6.5 6.5 33.3 23.3 22.6 18.3
Using weedicide 93.5 93.5 66.7 76.7 77.4 81.7
Rice establishment
Wet nursery 22.6 0.0 56.7 0.0 100 35.9
Two stages 67.7 74.2 33.3 0.0 0.0 35.3
Dry nursery 9.7 16.1 0.0 100.0 0.0 24.8
Others 0.0 9.7 10.0 0.0 0.0 3.9
While farm household data does not indicate any specific change in crop establishment
methods in drought years relative to normal year, there are cross sectional differences in
crop establishment method across the provinces. In Guangxi, where drought occurs more
frequently and most of the rice land is rainfed, farmers have over time adopted the dry
seeding method of crop establishment while in the other two provinces where irrigation
conditions are better, farmers use transplanting as the main method of crop establishment.
Weed extracting was previously by hand before 1970s. Rice farmers were using
weedicides widely now in China. For the study village, 82% farmers use weedicide to weed.
The use ratio of weedicide in Hubei is the highest, 94%. Rice farmers do not report
increasingly use in weedicides in drought year, but they reported they use more manual
labour in weed extracting in drought year.
Adjustment of agricultural inputs in drought year
Table 12 sums up households answers to the question Does the input of fertilizer,
pesticide and labour in drought year differ from that in normal year?
16
Table 12: % distribution of farmers adjustment in fertilizer and weed labour in drought year
Hubei Guangxi Zhejiang
Vill 1 Vill 2 Vill 1 Vill 2 Vill 1
Total
Farmers adjustments in fertilizer input in drought year (%)
Increased 16.13 12.9 20 13.33 0 12.42
Decreased 19.35 19.35 23.33 46.67 12.9 24.18
Unchanged 64.52 67.74 56.66 40 87.1 63.4
Farmers adjustment in labour input in weed extracting in drought year
Increased 32.26 22.58 40 60 9.68 32.68
Decreased 6.45 3.23 0 3.33 0 2.61
Unchanged 61.29 74.19 60 36.67 90.32 64.71
On the adjustment of fertilizer input in drought year, the majority of households do not
change the amount of fertilizer input in drought year. Farmers who increased the fertilizer
dose mentioned that the main reason for doing so is to revitalize weak seedlings as a result
of delayed transplanting. Farmers who decreased the quantity of fertilizers did so to save
the cost of inputs as they felt that lack of water reduces plants ability to absorb the nutrients
and fertilizer response during the drought year is likely to be low.
On farmers answers to Whether households increase or decrease the labour input in
weeding in drought year, 33% of households think drought will lead to the increase of
labour in weed extracting, 65% think no influence on labour input, but 3% think the labour
will be decreased. Reasons for increasing the labour input for weed extracting include: lack
of adequate quantity of water in the paddy field due to drought encourages weed growth and
herbicides are less effective due to lack of water.
3.4.3 Household adjustment to drought (Ex post strategies)
Cutting down expenditure is a common strategy taken by households to cope with risk.
It includes cutting down expenditure on food, clothes, education, medical treatment, house
construction, wedding/funeral, etc. Some expenditure such as for house construction and
wedding are large and infrequent.
Majority of the farmers did not reduce expenditure on food consumption in response
to drought in the study villages. Households who reduced food consumption mentioned
17
that they cut down on meat and other more expensive food items. The impact of drought
on the total income of farmers is relatively low in the study area, so it doesnt seem to affect
their food consumption too much. Other expenditure items such as house construction and
purchase of clothing are also not affected much by drought events. Overall, farmers are able
to absorb production losses through earning extra non-farm income so that the total income
does not fall much during the drought years.
The impact of drought for families with different financial situation is, however,
different. Rich and poor farm households may adopt different strategies to cope with
drought. Table 13 lists the expenditure changes of farm households in drought year, as
classified by their financial situation.
Table 13: Changes in consumption by households wealth ranking
Household types Rich Average Poor Total
Changes in food consumption
Decreased 18.4 29.3 43.9 31.4
Unchanged 81.6 70.7 56.1 68.6
Changes on big expenditure: house construction, health, education, wedding ceremony,
Decreased 5.1 15.8 21.1 15
Unchanged 94.9 84.2 78.9 85
Changes in consumption of new clothes purchasing
Decreased 20.51 28.07 36.84 29.41
Unchanged 56.41 29.82 29.82 36.6
Clearly, the proportion of farm households who reduced the expenditures in drought
year is higher among the poor groups. This indicates that impact of drought is heavier on
the poor farm households. Their risk coping mechanisms are less effective in preventing
consumption shortfall relative to wealthier farmers.
In addition to farm households drought risk coping strategies, local community can
play a role in preventing rice farmers from suffering. For example, as explained earlier,
village committee allocated different land types (land with good irrigation, land with poor
irrigation, rainfed and non-rice land) to individual households, which improves risk
management at the household level. The nature of land allocation in a community may
18
reflect its long-term response to drought risk. The community may also manage the local
water resources to better meet the needs of farm households. Many of local water bodies are
for multiple uses such as fishing and agriculture. In the event of drought, the local
community may decide to forgo the income from fishing and instead allocate the water for
agricultural use. Township Agricultural Technologies Extension Station and village
committee may provide forecasting of rice pests time and fertilizing time for rice farmers by
means of local radio, television, newspaper and so on.
4 Concluding remarks
Drought can occur in any time period of the year. Concerning rice production, it has
major negative impact when it occurs during summer and autumn in which rice is growing
and sensitive to water availability. The summer-autumn drought is more prominent in the
region and could result substantial damages to crops.
Aggregate production loss at province and county levels is small, but is substantial at
farm household level. The effects of drought might be more localized. In addition, rice
farmers also bear the additional cost of irrigation during drought years.
Although drought causes heavy production loss at farm household level, rice farmers
adopt various strategies to cope with it. However, drought impacts among rich household
and poor household are different, with the poor households bears more of the negative
consequences. Further study need to be done in exploring poor rice farmers coping
strategies, so as to design more comprehensive policies for helping rice farmers, especially
those who are resources poor and marginalized.
Rice farmers use various ex-ante strategies in coping with drought, including diversifying
productive activities, changing crop establishment methods, adjusting inputs use, and so on.
Some of the common drought coping strategies are not practised in the study areas and
some are frequently adopted. It would be worth exploring in further details on how different
farm households adopt different drought coping strategies, and why, so as to design policy
interventions to help rice farmers with different resource endowments in better coping with
adverse events.
As drought is widespread and persistent in southern China, where most of the places
are poverty-afflicted and the terrains are mountain-dominated, interventions such as
constructing infrastructure (for example road and irrigation facilities) may not be
19
engineeringly feasible or may be very costly, agricultural technological intervention can play a
role, for example, drought tolerant crop varieties may help farmers to better copy with
drought. Government hence should increasingly invest on agricultural research with focus
on drought-tolerance varieties.
Community-level mechanism through land and water allocation is a unique feature of
China, and need to investigate in further details. Such mechanisms may provide some
experiences for others to share with.
References
Brown, L. 1994. Who Will Feed China, World Watch, No. 9-10
Dey, M. M. and H. K. Upadhyaya. 1996. Yield loss due to drought, cold and submergence in
Asia, In Evenson, R. E., R. W. Herdt and M. Hossain (ed.). Rice research in Asia:
progress and priorities, Cab International in association with International Rice
Research Institute
Evenson, R., W. Herdt and M. Hossain. 1995. Rice research in Asia: progress and priorities,
Cab International in association with IRRI
Hamilton, P. 2001. Coping or hoping: a survey of small farmers survival strategies in rural
Kenya, Association for Better Land Husbandry, July, www.ablh.org.
Li, K. 1999. Drought disaster research and prevention in China, Henan Science &
Technology Press (In Chinese)
Lin, J. Y. and M. Shen. 1996. Rice production constraints in China, In Evenson, R. E., R. W.
Herdt and M. Hossain (ed.). Rice research in Asia: progress and priorities, Cab
International in association with International Rice Research Institute
O Toole, J., D. Delmer, J. DeVries and G. Toenniessen. 2002. Resilient crops for water-
limited environments. Area of Work Strategy Food Security, The Rockefeller
Foundation.
Pandey, S., D.D. Behura, R.Villano and D. Naik. 2000. Economic cost of drought and
farmers coping mechanisms: a study of rainfed rice systems in eastern India,
Discussion paper series no. 39. International Rice Research Institute