This document summarizes the major responsibilities and activities of Raman Sharma as the Assistant Scientist for the Cereal Systems Initiative for South Asia in Phase 1. It describes his role in conducting socioeconomic surveys, data collection and analysis to support project activities. It provides details on specific surveys conducted, technologies demonstrated, and training programs organized. It also summarizes the project's key findings on what extension approaches and technologies worked well and some challenges faced.

1. Cereal System Initiative for South Asia
Activities in Phase-1
Raman Sharma
Assistant Scientist, SSD, IRRI
Eastern U.P

2. Major Responsibilities
• To provide technical support to socio-
economic activities viz planning and
conducting various socio-economic surveys
(like Village, household, CnR, water
productivity surveys etc.) in our hub
domain.
• Designing and supervising the data
collected in prescribed format for further
economic and statistical analysis.
• Involvement in the process of various
activities from seed to harvest in different
technologies like DSR (Paddy), ZT(wheat),
Mechanical transplanting, other activities
i.e. Laser land leveling, intercropping etc.

3. Major Responsibilities
• Also actively involved in synthesizing the impact of CA
technologies and incorporating it in the training
programme by hub team.
• To work with hub team in organizing review
meetings, TWG meeting, attended training of extension
officers in various districts.
• To provide the assistance in the development of CKB
material including preparation of videos on DSR, ZT, Laser
Land Leveler, and Mechanical Transplanter.
• Involvement in the process of making hub half yearly and
annual report writing and had done adoption tracking for
farmers.

4. Socioeconomic Activities
• Conducted village survey in 18
villages (9 CSISA and 9 Non CSISA
villages) in 3 districts of hub domain.
• Nine CSISA (9) villages were selected
for focus group discussions for the
purpose to get the information about
the constraints for technology
adoption, possible pros and
cons, issues related to enabling
environment and other equity issues.
• 324 households were surveyed from
18 villages in 3 districts of EUPH.
• Gathered information about farmers’
livelihood, yield, technologies
adopted, irrigation sources, animal
assests and gender involvement etc.

5. Socioeconomic Activities
• Also coordinated the study on “Cost and return on
wheat, maize & rice production under CSISA technologies
intervention areas and their impact on farmer’s income”. So
far 15 interns have completed their internships under the
guidance during the period under the report.
• Worked as team leader in the project titled “Water
productivity study under Kharif season in Eastern U.P”.
• Now working on another round of midline household
survey and water productivity in previous sampled farmers.
• Generated the database of more than 1500 farmers from
all above surveys and it is increasing further in next coming
rounds.

6. What works
• Resource conservation and profitability.
• Risk 16%- 11%- 7% (DSR) in three years.
• ZT wheat premium with low risk.
• Laser land leveling (water saving), farmers preference, sustainable approach.
• Diversification – 300 % cropping intensity.
• Success stories- wheat yield 5.3t/ha (2009-10), 6.1t/ha (2010-11), 7.1t/ha (2011-12).
• MTUPR is new production and got large success with increase in acreage every year.
• The acceptance of DSR is slower than expected possibly because of 11% failure.
• Date of sowing in the surveyed districts has advanced from 30Nov. to 23Nov. in high yielding
long duration wheat varieties; PBW -502 is accepted by 25% of farmers as compared almost
zero in 2009.
• Terminal heat as cause of no productivity was reported by 5% ZT farmers and 17 % CT
farmers.
• The productivity of hybrid rice is 20% more than varieties as per the survey conducted for
Kharif 2010.

7. What works
• Prior trainings on questioners, data entry and statistical
analysis helps in gathering quality data which further
transform to publications and readings like…
– Guidance and technology: An assessment of project
intervention and promoted technologies.
– Constraints to cereal and animal production and
technology adoption in resource poor villages of India and
Bangladesh.
– Views of farmers on Resource Conservation technologies
Intervention: Evidence from Bihar, Eastern Uttar Pradesh
and West Bengal states of India.

8. What didn’t work
• With same number of service providers and same
number of machines the area expansion is more in
ZT (Wheat) but not in ZT (DSR). Will have to mitigate
risks from technologies if any.
• Survey period for CnR survey.