Standards for grain dryers - IRRI books - International Rice ...

ContentsForewordSession 1: Maintaining Rice Grain QualityDesign features and specifications of the PRPC recirculating batch dryerA.R. Elepaño, D.D. Alojado Jr., R.E. Manalabe, and D.B. de PaduaStandards for grain dryersD.C. Aranguren, P.S. Madamba, and A.N. ResurreccionAssessment of milled rice quality in the Philippine retail marketR.R. Bakker, E.A. Jarcia, M.C.E. Jawili, R.D. Billate, I.R. Barredo,D.B. De Padua, and C.C. MangaoangOrganic grain protection in the Philippine settingF. Caliboso, R. Caliboso, J. Dator, R. Tiongson, C. de Dios, and E. MartinezA rotary cutting mechanism for rice harvestingE.U. Bautista, M.J.C. Regalado, A.S. Juliano, S. Ishihara, and H. MonobeVarietal differences in drying rates and fissure occurrence in heated air drying of riceM.J.C. Regalado and E. BekkiSession 2: Enhancing the profitability and sustainability of the rice-processing businessFactors affecting the use of mechanical dryersA.C. Rodriguez and R.R. PazThe modern integrated rice business: a conceptF.V. BorromeoThe cooperative rice milling businessF.M. TorrizoSession 3: Institutional development through information, training, and extensionDevelopment and promotion of the Maligaya flatbed dryerE.C. Gagelonia, E.U. Bautista, M.J.C. Regalado, and R.E. AldasEvaluation of the performance of NFA farm-level grain centersR.A. MacutayThe impact of training professional managers: a case study on the performance ofprofessional managers handling cooperative-based grain-processing enterprisesR.M. Recometa, R.R. Paz, and R.S. Rapusas1

Session 1:Maintaining rice grain quality1

Design features and specifications of the PRPCrecirculating batch dryerA.R. Elepaño, D.D. Alojado Jr., R.E. Manalabe, and D.B. de PaduaThe development of the PRPC recirculating batch dryer for rough rice is one of thehardware components of the “grain drying systems” project of the Philippine RicePostproduction Consortium (PRPC). A rapid appraisal of the drying technologybeing used by farmer cooperatives was conducted to determine the advantages,problems, and constraints in using mechanical grain dryers. Most of the respondentsappreciated the importance of the mechanical grain dryers, particularly in thewet season, when solar energy is not available for drying their crops. It was learnedalso that the typical farmer cooperative has an average membership of 50 farmers,with a total aggregate farm area of 100 ha. Based on this information, the designfeatures and specifications of the PRPC recirculating batch dryer were established.Drying is the most critical postharvest operation. It isthe key method of preservation—for stabilizing andpreventing biodegradation of freshly harvestedcrops. Therefore, providing farmers with access tocrop dryers is the key to reducing postharvest losses.During the wet season, roughly 10% of palay harvestis lost because of the inability of farmers to sun-drytheir harvest on time. Mechanical drying systems notdependent on solar radiation are needed, particularlyduring the wet season, to prevent outright rotting,discoloration, and rapid grain quality deterioration.Mechanical dryers are needed for both productstabilization and to control mold infestation andaflatoxin contamination, especially in maize. Properdrying is an essential requisite for safe grain storagefor further processing and distribution.Grain drying technology is critical in the chainof rice postproduction operations (Table 1). The unitcost of mechanical drying is slightly higher than thatof sun drying. Mechanical drying systems requirecertain economies of scale and considerable skill tooperate and maintain. The engineering science forgrain drying is well understood. The problem lies inmatching the technology with the socioeconomicrequirements of small farms and the grain marketingsystem.Table 1. Rice postproduction operations and technologies.Operation Technology Capacity Usage (%) Losses (%)Harvesting Manual 240 man-h ha –1 99.8 2.0–3.0Reaper 2.4–3.8 ha d –1 nil 0.2–0.4Combine 4.5–8 ha d –1 nilThreshing Manual 0.05–0.1 t h –1 person –1 31.0 2.1–4.2Axial-flow 0.05–0.1 t h –1 69.0 0.1–1.6Drying Sundrying 24 kg m –2 86.0 1.0–5.0Flatbed 1.0–5 t batch –1 14.0 0.4–1.2Recirculating 1.2–10 t batch –1 – –Continuous 2.0–10 t h –1 – –Milling Kiskisan 0.1–0.3 t h –1 10.5 –Cono 0.5–2.0 t h –1 33.2 –Rubber roll 0.5–2.5 t h –1 56.1 –Storage Bag 14 m 3 t –1 99.0 2.0–6.0Bulk 1.5–1.7 m 3 t –1 1.0 –3

The main objectives of the Philippine RicePostproduction Consortium (PRPC) in its graindrying technology project are (1) to determine anddesign a grain dryer that matches the socioeconomicrequirement of the end-users, particularly the farmers’cooperatives; (2) to localize the design of graindryers, thus generating employment for the skilledmanpower in the manufacturing industry; and (3) toreduce grain postharvest losses by providing theright grain postharvest technology.MethodologyTo properly determine the basic features andspecifications of grain dryers that match the endusers’needs, a rapid appraisal survey (RAS) wasconducted to examine the various grain dryers beingused in the industry. The RAS team consists ofengineers, social scientists, economists, and grainpostharvest experts from the PRPC member institutions(IRRI, NFA, BPRE, PhilRice, and UPLB).Farmer cooperatives in selected areas of Luzon werethe focus of the RAS. End-users were asked whatwere the advantages, problems, and difficulties theyexperienced in using mechanical dryers.Results and discussionThe RAS indicated that end-users really need themechanical dryers, especially during the wet season,when solar energy is not available for grain drying.Most of the subject dryers were the recirculatingbatch type. Some of the major problems and difficultiesencountered were (1) lack of reliable after-salesservice for the dryers; users complained that it took aweek for the company technician to respond to theirneed for repair or troubleshooting of the dryer; (2)construction of the dryer is flimsy and users thoughtit wouldn’t last its 5-year economic life; (3) the augerfor loading wears rapidly because of the veryabrasive nature of paddy; and (4) the dryer operatorslack technical knowledge for repairs, maintenance,and troubleshooting. They also lack a thoroughunderstanding of the operating principles of thedryer. Most of the respondent farmer cooperativeshave 50 to 100 members. With this information, thedesign features and specifications of the PRPC dryerand its accessories were established as follows:Design reference of the PRPC dryerFarmer cooperative membership is 50, aggregate areais 100 ha, average yield is 5 t ha –1 , the harvestingperiod is 30 days, the daily average volume of paddyfor drying is [(100 ha) × (5 t ha –1 )]/30 days = 16.7 tday –1 , and design capacity is 8 t per batch and 2batches per day during the drying operation.Basic design features of the PRPC (recirculatingbatch) dryerDryer capacity = 8 t per batchLoading/unloading capacity = 10 t h –1 with bucketelevatorRecirculating unloader = rotary blades and beltconveyorTemperature control = adjustable drying temperatureEnergy source = burner (diesel fuel) controlled bypreset drying temperatureDrying section = LSU type with inverted V-ducts at1-t capacityComputed average moisture reduction = 1% per hourDrying airflow requirement = 6,000 cfm, staticpressure = 2 in waterComputed drying time = 8–10 h depending on initialmoisture contentDesign, fabrication, testing, and evaluation of thePRPC dryerA team of engineers and social scientists from themember agencies of the Philippine RicePostproduction Consortium was tasked to design,test, and evaluate the performance of the PRPC dryer.In addition, the Metalworking Industry Associationof the Philippines (MIAP) was identified as theprivate partner that will take charge of constructingthe dryer prototypes to be tested and thereafterconstructing and selling the PRPC dryer commercialmodels. The MIAP had assured the consortium thatits group could manufacture the PRPC dryer with thesame or better quality than the imported ones at thesame selling price or even lower. A memorandum ofagreement between MIAP and PRPC will be put inplace to this effect.The “grain drying systems” projectA consortium of engineers and social scientists fromthe primary research agencies of the country collaboratedto provide solutions to grain postproductionproblems in the Philippines. The design, fabrication,testing, and evaluation are just one of the hardwarecomponents of the “grain drying systems project.”The PRPC piloted the grain drying systems that canbe used effectively to reduce postharvest losses. Thegroup came up with the design specifications of arecirculating batch dryer (based on a rapid appraisalsurvey of farmer cooperatives in Luzon, Table 2) and4

collaborated with the MIAP to produce the dryerprototype and its auxiliary facilities.A training course was developed and conductedfor the collaborating end-users on its operation andmaintenance. The users were informed about theprinciples of proper drying to maintain grain qualityin harvesting-drying operations. They set up an aftersalesinventory network. The same course will beextended to the service technicians of dealers, localgovernments, and engineers of the Department ofAgriculture.Who will benefit from this project?The primary beneficiaries of this project are themultipurpose cooperatives of rice and maize farmersengaged in trading and primary processing. Theirbasic profile is shown in Table 2.The secondary groups who will be benefited arethe medium-scale rice millers, the local manufacturingindustry, and its skilled workers. This will alsobenefit local machinery dealers and service contractors.Consequently, consumers will get a betterquality of rice.Economic justificationThe grain drying systems project will• Minimize postharvest losses;• Improve grain quality output during the wetseason;• Obtain better prices for rough rice and milled rice;• Provide suitable, efficient, and cheaper graindryers; and• Provide local employment for skilled workers inthe manufacturing industry.What is the “system technology”?Included in the complete drying system are• Palay precleaners and a drying plant• A temporary holding bin for wet and dry paddy• Working sheds and an auxiliary weighing scale• An on-line moisture meterThe prototype dryer has an 8-t batch capacitythat has undergone technical tests. The dryer can besclaed up to higher capacity if needed.Project objectivesThe project’s objectives are• To localize the design and manufacturing of graindryers intended for farmer groups and privatemillers,• To develop the capability of target users to beable to use drying technology profitably on asustained basis, andTable 2. Basic features of grain dryer beneficiaries inLuzon.End user Capacity Type of grainbeing driedCustom 1.5–8 t delivery –1 Short to long,drying-servicing farmer –1 wet grainfarmer groupsand cooperativesFamily-owned ricemillsSmall scale – –Medium (2 t h –1 ) 10–30 t batch –1 Uses 3varietiesLarge scale (8 t h –1 ) 40–120 t batch –1 Uses 3varietiesPrimary cooperative1 t h –1 mill 1–3 t batch –1 –co-op –1• To develop an external system of support servicesfor the efficient and effective use of grain dryers.Strategic planThrough the consortium, the project will conductconsultative meetings with the government’sagricultural modernization program so that theproject will be in line with its national plans. Amultidisciplinary team was tasked to consult withpotential users of the technologies and to come upwith concepts for a drying plant.A design team from the consortium will beconstituted to work on the different components ofthe drying plant. During the design period, engineersfrom the manufacturers will facilitate the preparationof production specifications and drawings.The MIAP will make the first dryer prototype forperformance testing and evaluation. Commercialscaletesting will be done in collaboration with theprivate sector and a multidisciplinary team willconduct the socioeconomic evaluation.Features of the PRPC grain dryerA localized design of a batch recirculating mechanicaldryer (currently imported from Taiwan) wasdesigned to overcome the abrasive character of therough rice. The dryer can be reconfigured for dryingshelled maize with higher drying temperatures forsingle-pass drying.The dryer was designed for mass production toreduce fabrication costs. Other than this, the parts ofthe dryer were standardized for easy maintenance. Itwas also fitted with exhaust dust collectors.5

Many dryer types, models, drying schemes, andinstitutional arrangements have been tried in thePhilippine setting. The batch recirculating dryerseems to be the most appropriate and acceptable.Two people can load it and the rough rice is uniformlydried. The drying system runs by itself untilthe grain is dried up to 14%, after which the grain isunloaded.Features of the temporary holding binA typical cooperative would have about 50 farmhousehold members. They have an aggregate farmarea of 100 ha, with yields of 5 t ha –1 or 500 t ofrough rice harvest per season. Within a cooperative,the planting and harvesting period is about 30 days.The harvesting rate is therefore about 16 t d –1 . An 8-tbatch dryer can handle 2 to 3 loads per day or 16 to24 t d –1 . Hence, the temporary holding bin must beable to accomodate this volume.Drying plant design considerationsSite selection depends on the following: accessibility,power, water, peace and order, and the cost oflandConclusions1. The recirculating batch dryer was alreadypopularly accepted by most of the farmercooperatives that were surveyed.2. The end-users need basic training on repairs andmaintenance, and troubleshooting, and athorough knowledge of how the system operates.3. The imported recirculating batch dryers need tobe redesigned to eliminate the problemsencountered by end-users.4. An 8-t per batch capacity recirculating dryer forpaddy is appropriate to handle the averagevolume being harvested by the farmer cooperativesin the Philippines.NotesAuthors’ addresses: A.R. Elepaño, University of thePhilippines Los Baños; D.D. Alojado Jr., NationalFood Authority; R.E. Manalabe, Bureau of PostharvestResearch and Extension; D.B. de Padua, InternationalRice Research Institute.• Rice production (yield, area, and irrigation)• Economics (market demand, competitiveness,capital availability, and credit)• Cooperative (management, technical capability,labor availability)6

Standards for grain dryersD.C. Aranguren, P.S. Madamba, and A.N. ResurreccionStandard specifications for and methods for testing grain dyers were developedunder the project “Standardization of Postharvest Machinery Testing and Evaluation,which was funded by the Bureau of Postharvest Research and Extension(BPRE) and implemented by the University of the Philippines Los Baños (UPLB)through the Agricultural Machinery Testing and Evaluation Center (AMTEC).The Standard Specifications of the Heated-Air Mechanical Grain Dryer specifiesthe requirements, such as performance criteria; safety; workmanship andfinish; warranty for construction and durability; maintenance and operation; andmarking and labeling, for the heated-air mechanical grain dryer.The Standard Testing Methods for the Heated-Air Mechanical Grain Dryer specifiesthe testing methods to determine the performance characteristics of graindryers in terms of their heating system, drying system, and quality of dried grains.The standards consist of the following: general conditions for testing and inspection,test preparations, and testing procedures.The formulation of these standards followed the working procedures in thepreparation of national standards that aim to obtain and express a general consensusof expert opinion in the form of standards that are practical, realistic, andacceptable to both the industry and consumers.Standardization of postharvest machinery is a meansto attain a certain level of quality and can be appliedto specifications, methods of testing, and standardperformance criteria. Other countries have successfullydemonstrated standardization as an effectivetool of progress. This has broken trade barriersamong nations of diverging needs. With standardization,there is a greater possibility that the Philippinepostharvest industry will move forward and reach astage of development on a par with the newlyindustrialized countries.The development of standards for grain dryerswas one of the studies under the project “Standardizationof Postharvest Machinery Testing andEvaluation,” which was funded by the Bureau ofPostharvest Research and Extension (BPRE) and wasimplemented by the University of the PhilippinesLos Baños through the Agricultural MachineryTesting and Evaluation Center (AMTEC). Thegeneral objective of the project was to developstandard specifications and procedures for testingand evaluating the performance of postharvestmachinery and equipment introduced, promoted, andsold in the country.MethodologyA study team consisting of a team leader and fiveteam members from the public sector and theindustry undertook the study and was responsible forformulating the standards. A full-time staff memberof the project was responsible for gathering existingstandards developed and/or adopted by internationaland national organizations involved in the standardizationof postharvest machines and equipment. Thecomposition of the study team is shown in Annex 1.The team met monthly to deliberate on andrevise the preliminary draft standards. Upon finalizationof the draft standards, these were submitted to atechnical committee (TC) for further deliberation andconsideration.The TC consisted of the project leader ascommittee chairman, the two study leaders of theproject, and three members-at-large. The compositionof the TC is shown in Annex 2.The TC also met once a month and, after thedraft standards were finalized, these were disseminatedto the various private and government organizationsconcerned about comments and reactions.7

The project staff was responsible for receiving andcollating the responses to the draft standards. The TCacted on the comments and finalized the standards.The finalized standards were submitted to theBPRE, the funding agency of the project. Thesestandards were endorsed to the Department ofAgriculture for adoption as national standards.The flow chart in the formulation of thesestandards is shown in Figure 1.Heated-air mechanical grain dryerspecificationsThese standards specify the requirements for theheated-air mechanical grain dryer used for commercialpurposes. They do not include dryers for seeds.Fig. 1. System flow for formulation of standards.8

A. Requirements1. Performancea) The performance of heated-air mechanicalgrain dryers shall be as specified in Table 1.b) The indicated grain-holding capacity must beattained.c) The dried grain shall have no additionaldiscoloration, no traces of unburned fuel orashes on the grain surface, and no fermented ormusty smell.d) The dryer shall be provided with a thermometerto measure the actual air temperatureentering the grain mass and a pressure gaugeto measure the working static pressure in theplenum.2. Safetya) The dryer shall have adequate provision forfire control.b) It shall have adequate protection for allmoving parts. All rotating parts shall bedynamically balanced.c) It shall be provided with features for access toparts during repair, maintenance, and operation.d) The noise emitted by the heated-air mechanicalgrain dryer shall not exceed 92 decibels.e) Provision shall be made for dust control. Dustemission shall be within the acceptable limitsset by the Department of Environment andNatural Resources.B. Workmanship and finish1. The mechanical grain dryer shall be free fromdefects that may be detrimental to its use and shall befree from sharp edges and surfaces that may hurt theoperator. All metal parts should be machine-bent,pressed, and cut to avoid rough surfaces, and allrough surfaces should be machine-finished andsmoothed.2. Uniformity of parts and components for the samebrand and model must be maintained.C. Warranty for construction and durability1. The construction shall be rigid and durablewithout major breakdown of the following majorcomponents: burner, fan, bin, and conveyingequipment within one year.2. A warranty shall be provided for parts and serviceTable 1. Performance criteria for the mechanical graindryer.Criteriawithin one year after the date of acceptance of theunit by the user, except for fast-moving and easy-towearparts such as fan belts.D. Maintenance and operation1. Every heated-air mechanical grain dryer unit shallbe provided with basic tools and an operation andparts manual containing full information on methodof installation and operation. The manual shall alsocontain information regarding maintenance, replacementof minor parts, list of service centers, list andspecifications of fast-wearing parts, and safetyprecautions.2. Manufacturers/dealers shall provide after-salesservice and identify wearing parts, and shouldprovide spare parts.E. Marking and labelingBatch/continuous flowRiceEach unit of the mechanical grain dryer shall bemarked in a prominent place with the followinginformation:MaizeFinal moisture content, % w.b. 14.0 14.0Moisture gradient, %, max. 2.0 2.0Product quality aCracked grain, % increase, max. 5.0 (2.0) b 35.0Head rice, % decrease, max. 5.0 n.a.Hulled/damaged grains, % increase, max. 3.0 n.a.Broken/split kernels, % increase, max. n.a. c 7.0Spillage, %, max. 0.5 0.5Drying efficiency, % min. 75.0 75.0Heating system efficiency, % min.Petroleum-based fuel (direct-fired) 90.0 90.0(indirect-fired) 75.0 75.0Biomass fuel (direct-fired) 65.0 65.0(indirect-fired) 50.0 50.0aAllowable difference between the laboratory and machine’s performance.bFor continuous flow-type dryer only.cn.a. = not available.1. Recognized trademark of the manufacturer2. Name and address of manufacturer3. Country of manufacture/made in the Philippines4. Type: serial number5. Load capacity in tons9

6. Recommended power/voltage/frequency/phase7. Weight of dry mass in metric units8. Dimensions in metric unitsHeated-air mechanical grain dryer—methods of testingThis standard specifies the methods of testing todetermine the following performance characteristicsof grain dryers:1. Heating systema) System efficiencyb) Combustion efficiencyc) Burner/furnace efficiencyd) Fuel consumption2. Drying system performancea) Drying capacityb) Moisture reduction per hour (per pass)c) Heat used) Drying efficiencye) Drying system efficiencyf) Electric power consumption3. Quality of dried grainsa) Cracked grain (for rice and maize)b) Milling quality (for rice only)c) Hulled/damaged grain (for rice)d) Brokens/split kernels (for maize)e) Moisture content gradientf) Final moisture content4. Others (e.g., scattered grains)A. General conditions for testing and inspection1. Machine for testingThe machine for testing shall be commerciallyproduced or a prototype unit or a slightly usedmachine depending on the test objective. For testingcommercially manufactured dryers, the dryersubmitted for testing shall be sampled for acceptance,lot, routine, and type tests in accordance with“PNS 556-1991: Agricultural machinery—method ofsampling.”2. Role of manufacturer/dealer/ownerThe manufacturer/dealer/owner shall make the dryerfor testing available to an authorized testing agencytogether with its specifications and other relevantinformation. An authorized manufacturer/dealer/owner’s representative shall be appointed to repair,handle, adjust, and witness the test. It shall be theduty of the representative to make all decisions onmatters of adjustment and preparation of the machinefor testing. The manufacturer shall abide by the termsand conditions set forth by the authorized testingagency. The interested party shall provide testingmaterials and any other requirements.3. Site of testThe dryer shall be tested as installed for normaloperation but it is important for testing that the siteshould have adjacent to its premises suitable spacefor storing and turning a sufficient quantity of grainsfor drying during the test.4. Operation of the dryerDuring the test, the dryer shall be operated by themanufacturer’s representative(s) in accordance withthe manufacturer’s published instructions (publishedmanual) and verified by the testing authority. Thetesting authority shall make all measurements, whichform part of the test, and take the prescribed samples.5. Measurement of dryer holding capacityThe maximum amount of grain required to fill thedryer for proper operation shall be verified whenfilling the dryer at the beginning of the test. Theholding capacity shall be measured in terms ofweight and other accompanying information such asmoisture content and purity.6. Indication of damageSamples of grain used for the test shall be subjectedto laboratory analysis by test milling and presence ofcracked grains before and after drying. The millingtest of the samples obtained during the drying testshall be conducted at least 48 hours after the dryingtest while air-dried samples shall be milled whentheir moisture content reaches 14%.7. Suspension of testIf, during the test run, the machine stops because ofbreakdown or malfunction so as to affect themachine’s performance, the test shall be suspended.The decision to suspend or to continue the test is atthe discretion of the test engineer and is concurredby the company representative.B. Test preparation1. Materials and equipmenta) FuelThe fuel to be used shall conform to the specificationsupplied by the manufacturer.10

) GrainThe grain to be used shall be a single variety and themoisture content shall be 20% and above for rice andmaize, with the highest available moisture content tobe used in the test.c) Measuring instrumentsThe measuring instruments for performance testing,especially moisture testers, shall be calibrated by thetesting station prior to the tests.2. Preparation of the dryer for testingA check shall be made by the manufacturer andtesting authority that the dryer has been assembledand installed in accordance with the instructions ofthe manufacturer based on the installation manual.3. Test set-upThermometers shall be mounted on or inside thedryer for temperature sensing. These shall bemounted at the following locations: (1) near thedryer to sense ambient temperature, (2) at the grainplenum interface, (3) after the plenum, and (4)immediately outside the dryer to sense exhaust-airtemperature. Temperature sensors shall be partiallyshielded to minimize errors due to heat radiationeffects. A schematic diagram shall be made for thedryer, showing a numbered location for each sensor.To measure airflow and static pressure, a pitot tubeand manometer or any other suitable apparatus shallbe installed.The control of drying air conditions shall be byadjustment of the setting of an automatic controlforming part of the dryer, or by manual adjustment ofthe furnace by the manufacturer’s representative if anautomatic temperature control mechanism is notfitted. Adjustments for the purpose of maintaining asteady temperature of the drying air may be made atany time, but any adjustment of an automatic controlshall have been sanctioned by the testing center.4. Running-in and preliminary adjustmentsThe dryer shall be run-in in accordance with themanufacturer’s operating manual before the start ofthe actual test. The manufacturer may make anyadjustment during the period of run-in according tohis specifications.C. Test procedures1. Verification of specificationsa) This inspection is carried out to verify that themechanism, main dimensions, material, andaccessories of the dryer conform to the list ofspecifications submitted by the manufacturer.b) Besides the gathering of technical data on themachine, observations on the following shall bemade: quality of manufacture, adequacy ofprotection of components (e.g., bearings,shafting, belts, etc.), presence of safety controls,and presence of dust collection systems.c) The operation and maintenance manual andspare parts catalogue, and special tools requiredfor adjustments and repair, should be availableand supplied to end-users.2. Performance testa) This is carried out to test the performance of thegrain dryer.b) Duration of test. At least two test trials shall becarried out with the same operational setting.The length of the test shall be such that one fullcapacity of grain has been dried to a finalmoisture content of 14% (for rice and maize).c) The dryer shall be operated at the dryingtemperature specified by the manufacturer.d) For the continuous flow-type dryer, the dryer’sdischarge mechanism shall be set as specifiedby the manufacturer and the grains shallundergo a tempering process for at least 4 hoursbefore reloading to the dryer for another pass.For a continuous-drying operation, the minimumamount of test material to be used shall beequal to twice the rated capacity.e) Measurements. The following shall be measuredat 30-min intervals or as necessary.i) Air velocity. Air velocity shall be measuredat the air duct or at the heat exchanger,whichever is applicable.ii) Temperatures. Grain temperature, drying-airtemperature, ambient temperature, andexhaust-air wet-bulb and dry-bulb temperaturesshall be recorded.iii) Static pressure. This shall be taken at theplenum/transition duct (between the blowerand the dryer).iv) Moisture content reduction per pass. For thecontinuous-flow dryer, the percentage ofmoisture removed for each drying pass shallbe recorded.v) Sound level. This shall be measured with thedryer full of grain, operating at recommendedsettings of different components,with the burner on. (The operator’s stationwill be considered to be within 1 meter ofthe controls.)vi) Moisture content. Samples for moisture11

determination shall be taken at the bottom,middle, and top layer of the grain batchtypedryers and from the flow of grain fromthe discharge mechanism for the continuous-flowdryer.vii) Power and fuel. The power and fuel usedduring each test run shall be measured.f) Sampling. To determine grain quality, such ascracked grain, and for the milling test (in thecase of rice), samples from the input and finaloutput shall be taken during each test run.3. Ease of handling and safety featuresThe ease of loading and unloading of grain, operation,setting, and adjustment shall be observedduring the test and reported. The design from thepoint of view of safety of the operator and thedifferent machine components/assemblies shall bechecked and reported.manufacture.It is recommended that the proper authoritiesundertake steps for the approval, adoption, andimplementation of these standards.NotesAuthors’ addresses: Project leader, study leader, anddirector, respectively, Agricultural Machinery Testingand Evaluation Center (AMTEC), College of Engineeringand Agro-Industrial Technology, U.P. Los Baños,College, Laguna, Philippines.4. Laboratory analysis of dried samplesThis is carried out to have a comparative analysis ofthe grains used before and after the drying test.a) The quality of dried grain samples from thedryer shall be compared with the quality ofdried grain using shade drying.b) The grain samples taken before and after thetest shall undergo quality analysis in thelaboratory. The following shall be determined:i) Varietyii) Moisture contentiii) Purityiv) Cracked grainsv) Brokens/split kernelsvi) Immature grainsvii) Fermented grainsviii) Damaged grainsix) Foreign matterx) Weed seedsc) For rice grains, comparative analysis of themilling potential of the grain used shall beundertaken.Conclusions and recommendationsThe formulation of standards for grain dryersfollowed the working procedure in the preparation ofnational standards that aim to obtain and express agenuine consensus of expert opinion in the form ofstandards that are practical, realistic, and acceptableto both the industry and consumers. These standardswill be useful in evaluating existing grain dryerfacilities and will help improve the quality of12

Annex 1. The study teamStudy team leader:Dr. Ponciano S. MadambaAgricultural and Bio-Process DivisionInstitute of Agricultural EngineeringCollege of Engineering and Agro-IndustrialTechnology (CEAT)University of the Philippines Los Baños (UPLB)Study team members:1. Engineer Ricardo L. CachuelaBureau of Postharvest Research and Extension (BPRE)2. Engineer Placido T. AsprecNational Food Authority (NFA)3. Dr. Arnold R. ElepañoUPLB4. Engineer Teodoro EspinosaAgricultural Machinery Manufacturers and Distributors Association Foundation, Inc. (AMMDA)5. Mr. Raul M. ConsunjiMetal Industry Association of the Philippines (MIAF)Full-time project staff:Engineer Marife N. ReañoAgricultural Machinery Testing and Evaluation Center (AMTEC)Annex 2. Technical committee (TC)TC Chairman:TC Members:Engineer Darwin C. ArangurenAgricultural Machinery Testing and Evaluation Center (AMTEC)1. Dr. Ponciano S. MadambaUniversity of the Philippines Los Baños (UPLB)2. Engineer Eugenio C. Castro, Jr.International Rice Research Institute (IRRI)3. Dr. Virgilio G. GayaniloCollege of Engineering and Agro-Industrial Technology (CEAT) of UPLB4. Director Ruben E. ManalabeBureau of Postharvest Research and Extension (BPRE)5. Engineer George Q. CanapiAgricultural Machinery Manufacturers and Distributors AssociationFoundation, Inc. (AMMDA)13

Assessment of milled rice quality in thePhilippine retail marketR.R. Bakker, E.A. Jarcia, M.C.E. Jawili, R.D. Billate, I.R. Barredo, D.B. De Padua, and C.C. MangaoangAsian consumers have increasingly become more discriminating for rice quality.This provides a challenge to the postharvest sector as technologies need to beused that can handle, store, and process modern varieties while maintaining goodquality. After a preliminary study showed that most of the rice available in selectedmarkets in the Philippines was below the national standards, IRRI and the NationalFood Authority (NFA) launched a nationwide study of rice quality. The objectivesof this study were to evaluate milled quality characteristics of rice sold in thePhilippine retail market and to evaluate the use of the current grading system formilled rice. A total of 807 rice samples were taken from 279 representative retailersin 17 provinces in both the dry and wet season of 2000. Besides sampling, retailerswere asked about sales volumes, pricing practices, and consumer preferences.Estimated sales volumes indicated that rice grading is widely adopted inthe Philippines since the majority of rice is sold with a grade indicated on the label.Laboratory analysis, however, indicated that the majority of rice does not meet thestandards for the indicated grade. Key areas for quality improvement are the millingfractions (head rice, broken rice, brewers’ rice), damaged grains (chalkiness,insect damage, discolored grains), and level of impurities. Surveys indicated furtherthat retailers primarily consider whiteness of grain and whole grains, besidespurchase cost, when setting the price of rice. According to retailers, consumersselect rice primarily on the basis of whiteness and price, with volume expansionand taste as important secondary characteristics. The results of this study areused to plan and implement a variety of research, development, and training activitieswith the ultimate goal of improving rice quality in the domestic market andincreasing the profitability of the rice postharvest sector.During the past three to four decades, Asian farmershave dramatically raised rice yields by adoptinghigh-yielding varieties. At the same time, Asianconsumers have become more discriminating for ricequality. In many countries in the region, the adoptionand use of modern postharvest technologieshave not kept pace with higher grain volumes andincreased demand for high-quality rice. Inappropriatetechnologies, lack of knowledge, and unsuitablemanagement techniques during grain harvesting,drying, storage, and milling often result in qualitydeterioration and physical losses. Milled rice qualitydeterioration can be in the form of high breakage,incomplete milling, yellowing or darkening of thekernel, impurities, or undesirable odors or taste.In the Philippines, rice consumers are nowwilling to pay a higher price for the specific ricequality that they desire (Patindo1 2000). Complaints,however, are often heard that the quality of milledrice in the market is low or that the favored qualitycharacteristics sought by customers could not befound in the market. A preliminary study conductedby IRRI in 1998 (Billate et a1 1999) showed thatmost of the milled rice available in selected marketsin Manila and Laguna was below the existingnational standards for milled rice. IRRI’s exploratorystudy prompted the interest of the National FoodAuthority (NFA) and IRRI in assessing the quality ofmilled rice on a nationwide basis and characterizingconsumer preferences for rice quality. In addition, theincreased adoption of rice grades in the domesticmarket (Jarcia et al 2000) motivated an evaluation ofthe functionality of current grain standards in themarket. As stipulated by Baird (1987), a set offunctional grades and standards in the market canprovide incentives for farmers, traders, and processorsto produce higher quality rice.The specific objectives of this study were to (1)examine pricing practices and consumer preferencesin the retail market through a survey of retailers, (2)analyze common milled rice quality characteristicsthrough laboratory analysis of representative samples14

from retail outlets, and (3) assess the level of andproblems with compliance with the present nationalgrain standards. The project was undertaken underthe umbrella of the Philippine Rice PostproductionConsortium (PRPC), a collaborative program of fiveagencies involved in postproduction research andextension in the Philippines (De Padua 2000).MethodologyThis study consisted of two parts: a survey of riceretailers and sampling and laboratory analysis of ricesamples purchased directly from retailers. For thesurvey of retailers, a total of 279 respondents from 17provinces in the Philippines were interviewed. Thenationwide survey and sampling were conducted byNFA personnel, whereas processing and analysis ofdata were performed at IRRI. At the start of theproject, a training of NFA enumerators and laboratoryanalysts was conducted by a joint NFA-IRRIproject management team. At selected dates andlocations during the survey and sampling, projectteam members visited NFA personnel to indicateproblems with procedures.StratificationThe sampling areas for the survey were determinedby selecting provinces and municipalities with thefollowing considerations:(1) Provinces were selected from the three majorregions in the country: Luzon, the Visayas,and Mindanao;(2) Four provinces were selected from each of thefour major area classifications used byNFA—that is, very critical areas (negligiblerice production), less critical areas (riceproduction not sufficient to satisfy demand),self-sufficient areas (rice production more orless sufficient for demand), and surplus areas(rice production more than sufficient fordemand);(3) From each selected province, one urban andone rural municipality were selected.In addition, two cities from the National CapitalRegion (NCR) were selected at random to make up atotal of 18 urban and 16 rural municipalities. Figure1 provides a geographical overview of the sitesselected for this study.Sampling proceduresFrom a database of retailers provided by NFA, a totalnumber of rice retailers was determined for all 34selected municipalities. Retailers engaged inwholesale marketing were excluded from the total.For each municipality, the total number of retailersserved as the sampling frame. To compose thesample, 10% of the listed retailers were randomlyselected, with a minimum of three. In cases in whichsample retailers could not be located or whenretailers declined to be interviewed, substituterespondents were chosen. From each sample retailer,random samples of milled rice were obtained bypurchasing. Glutinous rice and rice that was clearlylabeled off-grade or damaged were excluded from thesampling. For retailers following the prescribedlabeling of rice grades on the price tags (Fancy,Premium, Grades 1, 2, and 3; see also Jarcia et al2000) as advocated by the Philippine Grain StandardizationProgram (PGSP), one sample was takenfrom each grade found in the store, including fancyrice. A sample of ungraded rice was also obtained ifthe retailers sold rice without a grade indicated onthe label. For retailers that did not follow theprescribed labeling of rice grades on the price tags,first a sample of fancy rice was taken (if fancy ricewas being sold). Subsequently, one sample was takenrandomly from each remaining rice variety, that is,one from the “low-priced” (below US$0.40 kg –1 ), onefrom the “medium-priced” ($0.40–0.44 kg –1 ), andone from the “high-priced” (more than $0.44 kg –1 )varieties found in the store. During the visit toretailers, the total number of rice varieties availableand the number of samples taken from each gradewere recorded. Aside from retailers, rice samples werealso purchased from supermarkets in the metropolitanareas of Manila, Cebu, and Davao. Branches ofsupermarket chains were treated as separate entities.Ten percent of the supermarkets that were registeredwith NFA were chosen.Statistical analysisIn the retailer survey, the number of retailers in themunicipality was considered in the estimation ofmeans, totals, and percentages at the municipal level.Figures from the provincial level and up wereaggregates of the corresponding municipal estimates.However, the figures for sources of milled rice andpayment terms and questions related to benefits andproblems of the PGSP are based on sample statisticsand are merely used to profile the respondents andobtain qualitative feedback for improving the PGSP.To test for differences among the preferences for ricequality traits within each area, the Friedman test wasused. Pair-wise comparisons of average ranks werecarried out when the Friedman test showed significantresults. The same tests were used for the data onvolumes purchased by consumers from the retailers.In the data from the laboratory analysis, the esti-15

16Fig. 1. Survey and sampling sites in the Philippines.

mated means and percentages at the municipal levelwere derived from the counts for each grade of riceavailable at each rice retailer and the number ofretailers per municipality. Similar to the retailersurvey, figures from the provincial level and up aremerely aggregates of the corresponding municipalestimates. To test for differences among proportions(e.g., proportion of rice whose degree of milling onthe price tag is correct), chi square-based tests wereused.Laboratory analysisFor each rice sample, a complete physical analysiswas performed at the NFA regional laboratory of theselected areas and at IRRI using standard proceduresprovided by NFA. The NFA procedures for milledrice included determination of head rice (equal to orlarger than 8/10 of whole kernel length), largebrokens (between 2/10 and 8/10 of whole kernel),brewers’ rice (less than 2/10 of whole kernel), paddycontent, foreign matter content, chalky/immaturegrains, insect- or mold-damaged grains, discoloredgrains, red-streaked grains, and red grains. Inaddition, moisture content of rice samples wasdetermined by using a calibrated moisture tester andmilling degree was determined by the alcohol-alkalistaining method. Finally, a 50-g subsample wastaken and submitted to IRRI for determination ofamylose content by the simplified iodine colorimetricprocedure. All determinations were made on totalmilled rice weight, unless stated otherwise. Forselected samples, a full analysis was repeated at IRRIfor comparison of results between different laboratories.Results and discussionRetailer surveyOf the 279 respondents interviewed nationwide, 253(90.7%) were made up of the NFA licensees themselves.The remaining 9.3% of respondents were thelicensee’s spouse, the store manager, or the keysalesperson at the retail outlet. The mean number ofyears in retailing of the respondents was 8 years, witha maximum of 40 years and a minimum of 6 months.As part of the survey, information on sources ofmilled rice and payment schedules was collected.Nationwide, almost 60% of the total retailerssurveyed obtain their rice supply from traders, 45.5%are supplied by millers, and 18.6% obtain theirsupply from the NFA. Retailers usually obtain theirrice from traders in their own area, with the exceptionof retailers in the Manila region, where the majorityof retailers obtain rice from Central Luzon. Urbanretailers rely more on the rice supplied by traders(65.9%) compared with rural retailers, who get mostof their rice directly from millers (62.0%). This isexpected since the amount of rice produced in urbanareas is lower than in rural areas. Rural retailers(26.8%) rely more on NFA-supplied rice than urbanretailers (15.9%). In areas of low rice production,such as retailers in very critical (66.0%) and lesscritical areas (74.3%), traders are the usual source ofrice for the retail market. In contrast, millers are theprevalent source of milled rice for self-sufficient(69.6%) and surplus areas (76.3%) where riceproduction is higher. A low proportion of theretailers surveyed in very critical (14.7%) and lesscritical (8.6%) areas rely on the NFA supply. Themajority of respondents in these areas are from MetroManila and Cebu City, where consumers demandhigher quality. It is believed that NFA rice, havinglower quality, does not appeal much to the discriminatingconsumers of these highly urbanized areas.The overall payment scheme in the retailbusiness is cash on delivery (COD) (58.4%), followedby terms in days (47.3%) and consignment (28.0%).COD is preferred in the rice retailing business sincegenerally only small quantities of product areinvolved. In both rural and urban areas, COD is theprevalent payment scheme (64.8% and 56.3%,respectively). In surplus areas, the consignmentscheme (71.1%) is more prevalent than COD (52.6%).In self-sufficient areas, rice retailers are more inclinedto pay by cash on delivery (64.3%).Figure 2 shows the distribution of monthly salesvolume by rice retailers classified by milling degree:well-milled, regular milled, and fancy. Fancy rice isnot subject to standard grade specifications andmilling degree, although it must satisfy generalrequirements and be sold under a specific varietyname that is certified by the National Seed IndustryCouncil. Figure 2 shows that regular milled riceconstitutes 58% of the projected national salesvolume, whereas 38% is well milled. Fancy ricemakes up 4% of the total volume. Figure 3 shows thedistribution of monthly sales volume classified bystandard grade (Premium, Grades 1–3, No Grade). Alarge percentage (55%) of the total volume is sold asordinary rice of Grades 1, 2, and 3, whereas 14% islabeled Premium rice. Rice sold without gradesindicated on the label (“ungraded”) amounts to 27%.These data show that the grading system has taken adefinite place in the Philippine retail market, as themajority of rice sold (73%) contains a grade indicationon the label.Table 1 presents the estimated mean volumes,mean prices, and price ranges in urban and rural areas17

Fig. 2. Distribution of monthly sales volumes (t mo –1 ) bydegree of milling. WMR = well-milled rice, RMR = regularmilled rice.Fig. 3. Distribution of monthly sales volumes by rice grade(grade indication according to label), dry season 2000.and the different area types. Fancy rice, which isconsidered better quality rice in terms of taste andaroma, is consumed more in urban areas (0.20 t mo –1per retailer) than in rural areas (0.04 t mo –1 ). A highermean volume of premium-labeled rice is also sold inurban areas (0.92 t mo –1 ) than in rural areas (0.35 tmo –1 ). These data clearly reflect a more pronounceddemand for high-quality rice in urban areas. For ricewith grades 1, 2, and 3, mean sales are higher in ruralareas (4.92 t mo –1 ) than in urban municipalities orcities (2.77 t mo –1 ). A higher volume of ungradedrice (rice with no grade indicated on the price tag) isbeing sold in urban markets (0.74 t mo –1 ) than inTable 1. Mean projected volumes of Philippine rice sold per retailer and prices kg –1 in the different geographic categories.Fancy Premium Grades 1–3 No grade on tagCategory Total WMR a RMR Vol. Price ($ kg –1 ) Vol. Price ($ kg –1 ) Vol. Price ($ kg –1 ) Vol. Price ($ kg –1 )(t mo –1 ) Min Max Mean (t mo –1 ) Min Max Mean (t mo –1 ) Min Max Mean (t mo –1 ) Min Max MeanOverall 3.88 1.48 2.24 0.16 0.40 1.67 0.56 0.80 0.38 0.67 0.48 3.23 0.27 0.53 0.39 0.70 0.27 0.62 0.41Rural vs urbanRural 5.15 1.87 3.25 0.04 0.40 0.76 0.55 0.35 0.38 0.56 0.47 4.92 0.27 0.44 0.37 0.56 0.27 0.56 0.40Urban 3.55 1.38 1.98 0.20 0.42 1.67 0.56 0.92 0.40 0.67 0.49 2.77 0.27 0.53 0.39 0.74 0.27 0.62 0.41Area typeVery critical 3.25 1.48 1.52 0.24 0.44 1.67 0.57 1.21 0.40 0.67 0.49 1.64 0.27 0.53 0.39 0.94 0.27 0.62 0.42Less critical 3.03 0.92 2.12 0.00 – – – 0.04 – – – 3.69 – – – 0.12 – – –Self-sufficient 3.44 0.91 2.52 0.01 0.44 0.58 0.51 0.15 0.38 0.56 0.47 4.75 0.29 0.47 0.38 0.18 0.33 0.47 0.37Surplus 8.73 2.86 5.77 0.11 0.40 0.56 0.49 0.54 0.40 0.47 0.44 7.25 0.27 0.51 0.38 0.77 0.29 0.44 0.39a WMR = well-milled rice, RMR= regular milled rice.18

ural areas (0.56 t mo –1 ). Price differences indicatethat a higher price is paid for better quality asindicated by grade label: the highest mean price isfor Fancy rice ($0.56 kg –1 ), followed by Premium rice($0.48 kg –1 ) and rice with grades 1, 2, and 3 ($0.39kg –1 ). For all types of rice, the mean price is higher invery critical and less critical areas compared withself-sufficient and surplus areas.Retailers were asked to rank some rice qualitytraits commonly preferred by consumers, with aranking scale from 1 (most important) to 7 (leastimportant). Figure 4 summarizes the responses forrural and urban areas separately. In rural areas, lowprice (2.2) and whiteness (2.9) are the top ricecharacteristics being considered by consumers,although preference for volume expansion (3.4) isnot significantly different from preference forwhiteness. Urban consumers also consider low price(2.8) and whiteness (2.6) of grain as the priority traits.Aside from volume expansion (3.8), urban consumersalso put emphasis on wholeness of grains (4.3) andtaste (4.1). Overall, the three most important ricetraits that consumers prefer according to retailers arewhiteness (2.7), cheap price (2.7), and volumeexpansion (3.7). These three traits are the samefactors considered important by consumers in asurvey conducted by Abansi et al (1992) in 1987.Retailers were also asked about factors that theyconsider in setting the price for their rice. Besides themost obvious factor in pricing (i.e., purchase cost),many retailers identified whiteness as a very importantfactor in setting the rice price (46.1%), followedby amount of whole grains or head rice (37.1%), taste(29.0%), aroma (24.3%), and volume expansion(22.5%).With the 249 retailers interviewed, 173 (69.5%)responded that the PGSP-advocated system of gradesfor milled rice benefited their business. Of the 219respondents who were aware of the grading system,30.1% considered the PGSP as a very good program,53.0% rated it as good, and only 0.5% gave it a poorrating. Further survey results indicated that 11.4%wanted the program modified and 0.9% said that itshould not continue. Although in general the systemfor milled rice grades was well accepted by theretailers, they identified several problems regardingMean ranks76Rural (n = 70) Urban (n = 207)Ecc5DbDEbCD4BCb3ABaAa21Whiteness Low price VolumeexpansionTaste Whole Age AromagrainsFig. 4. Rice characteristics in demand among consumers in urban and rural areas. Means having a common letter are notsignificantly different at 5%. For mean ranks, 1 = most important, 7 = least important.19

PGSP implementation. Most of these problemspertained to implementation of the price tag.Another important complaint by retailers was thenoncompliance of millers and traders with thelabeling and packaging rules of the PGSP.Laboratory analysisTables 2 and 3 present results of quality characteristicsfor the 16 rural and 16 urban municipalitiessampled during the dry season (324 samplesanalyzed) and wet season (365 samples analyzed),not including rice sampled at supermarkets.Both tables include overall means, andmeans classified per grade as indicated on theprice label. For rice that has no grade indicatedon the label, results are further classified per pricecategory, that is, above $0.44 kg –1 , $0.40–0.44kg –1 , and below $0.40 kg –1 . For both the dry andwet season, the selling price for graded riceincreased with a higher grade of rice.In the dry season, head rice ranges from 79%for Premium rice to 60% for rice with no gradeindicated on the price label. In the wet season,head rice ranges from 75% to 63%. In general, ahigher grade exhibits higher head rice and lowerbrokens, although there is not much differencebetween Grade 2 and Grade 3 rice. For both thedry and wet season and all samples, the amountof brewers’ rice is high (higher than 1% of milledrice), with the exception of Premium rice in thedry season and Premium rice and Grade 1 rice inthe wet season. All graded rice samples exhibit atleast 1% damaged kernels, with the exception ofPremium-labeled rice (0.52% and 0.53% damagedfor the dry and wet season, respectively).Results for discolored grains are somewhatvariable, which may be explained by the methodof determination: comparison of the samesamples by a different laboratory gave quitedifferent results, indicating that determiningdiscoloration by the naked eye is subjective, thatis, highly dependent on the person performingthe analysis.Nevertheless, data in Tables 2 and 3 showthat rice with a higher grade, or nongraded ricewith a higher price, shows less discoloration thanlower graded or lower priced rice. The percentageof red grains and red-streaked grains is generallylow (less than 0.1% for red grains and less than1% for red-streaked grains), with the exception ofGrade 2 rice in the dry season (7.83% redstreakedon average). For both graded andnongraded rice, the percentage of chalky andimmature grains is more than 5%, with theTable 2. Means and standard errors of quality parameters for premium and ordinary rice from retailers in 16 rural and 16 urban municipalities (excluding Metro Manila)classified by rice grade on price tags, dry-season sampling.Rice grades No. of Selling % Head % % % % % Red % Red- % % No. of %on tags rice price kg – ¹ rice Brokens Brewers’ Damaged Discolored grains streaked Chalky Foreign paddy Moisturesamples (US$) grains grains grains and matter kg – ¹ contentimmatureOverall 324 0.40 66.51 32.24 1.15 1.00 1.89 0.94 2.08 5.19 0.02 6.3 12.74± 0.009 ± 2.096 ± 2.019 ± 0.180 ± 0.146 ± 0.604 ± 0.104 ± 1.875 ± 0.446 ± 0.021 ± 1.64 ± 0.201Premium 34 0.46 79.34 20.28 0.40 0.52 0.36 0.04 0.43 3.90 0.00 4.8 12.29± 0.015 ± 4.077 ±3.977 ± 0.213 ± 0.225 ± 0.152 ± 0.047 ± 0.190 ± 0.631 ± 0.000 ± 2.63 ± 0.315Grade 1 61 0.40 66.84 32.09 1.07 1.26 1.57 0.05 0.71 5.07 0.03 9.0 13.09± 0.015 ± 3.723 ±3.662 ± 0.343 ± 0.367 ± 0.698 ± 0.049 ± 0.238 ± 0.917 ± 0.068 ± 4.78 ± 0.378Grade 2 88 0.38 62.16 36.36 1.56 1.00 1.45 0.10 7.83 5.21 0.01 6.4 13.15± 0.014 ± 3.649 ±3.602 ± 0.419 ± 0.276 ± 0.985 ± 0.093 ± 8.434 ± 0.903 ± 0.013 ± 3.86 ± 0.518Grade 3 25 0.35 63.21 35.75 1.04 1.09 3.93 0.02 0.40 6.03 0.00 5.1 12.51± 0.019 ± 2.958 ±2.973 ± 0.371 ± 0.308 ± 2.360 ± 0.051 ± 0.213 ± 1.260 ± 0.000 ± 1.74 ± 0.367No Grade 116 0.40 60.35 37.52 1.67 1.18 2.52 0.23 0.53 5.91 0.03 6.1 12.65± 0.018 ± 4.568 ±4.422 ± 0.423 ± 0.364 ± 1.516 ± 0.468 ± 0.326 ± 1.065 ± 0.078 ± 4.04 ± 0.505Above $0.44 16 0.49 77.38 21.83 0.78 0.94 0.47 0.30 1.10 5.91 0.00 12.6 12.70± 0.024 ± 16.744 ±16.204 ± 0.875 ± 0.636 ± 0.534 ± 0.390 ± 1.340 ± 2.563 ± 0.009 ± 11.42 ± 1.781$0.40–0.44 70 0.42 60.06 37.98 1.78 0.84 0.80 0.10 0.33 5.61 0.00 4.9 12.34± 0.008 ± 5.041 ±4.855 ± 0.633 ± 0.285 ± 0.343 ± 0.127 ± 0.198 ± 1.340 ± 0.008 ± 3.78 ± 0.469Below $0.40 30 0.35 56.56 40.72 1.73 1.75 5.56 0.39 0.69 6.34 0.07 6.3 13.11± 0.021 ± 7.282 ±7.309 ± 0.578 ± 0.782 ± 3.439 ± 1.253 ± 0.734 ± 1.998 ± 0.210 ± 8.82 ± 1.05120

Table 3. Means and standard errors of quality parameters for premium and ordinary rice from retailers in 16 rural and 16 urban municipalities (excluding Metro Manila)classified by rice grade on price tags, wet-season sampling.Rice grade No. of Selling % Head % % % % % % % % No. of % Moistureon tag rice price rice Brokens Brewers’ Damaged Discolored Red Red- Chalky Foreign paddy kg –1samples kg – ¹ grains grains grains streaked and matter(US$) grains immatureOverall 365 0.41 67.24 31.53 1.24 1.04 2.64 0.02 0.68 5.89 0.01 7.0 13.29± 0.009 ± 2.192 ± 2.090 ± 0.215 ± 0.149 ± 0.775 ± 0.013 ± 0.167 ± 0.360 ± 0.006 ± 1.65 ± 0.179Premium 53 0.46 75.60 23.91 0.49 0.53 1.37 0.03 0.72 5.05 0.01 5.9 13.19± 0.024 ± 4.967 ± 4.862 ± 0.223 ± 0.156 ± 0.371 ± 0.033 ± 0.402 ± 0.617 ± 0.012 ± 2.74 ± 0.284Grade 1 80 0.42 70.23 28.84 0.93 1.01 1.62 0.03 0.68 5.96 0.00 5.7 13.30± 0.011 ± 4.281 ± 4.190 ± 0.325 ± 0.244 ± 1.124 ± 0.034 ± 0.315 ± 0.797 ± 0.007 ± 2.82 ± 0.465Grade 2 110 0.39 62.57 36.03 1.42 1.08 1.58 0.01 0.79 6.07 0.01 8.8 13.61± 0.015 ± 3.837 ± 3.823 ± 0.558 ± 0.255 ± 0.548 ± 0.023 ± 0.349 ± 0.896 ± 0.012 ± 5.04 ± 0.439Grade 3 32 0.39 64.79 33.62 1.59 1.46 6.53 0.01 0.38 6.53 0.01 6.9 13.20± 0.015 ± 5.089 ± 4.686 ± 0.574 ± 0.531 ± 2.918 ± 0.019 ± 0.412 ± 0.797 ± 0.011 ± 3.04 ± 0.284No Grade 90 0.41 63.76 34.55 1.69 1.06 1.96 0.02 0.85 5.76 0.03 7.6 13.14± 0.012 ± 4.744 ± 4.463 ± 0.451 ± 0.238 ± 1.363 ± 0.029 ± 0.531 ± 0.772 ± 0.023 ± 4.01 ± 0.449Above $0.44 12 0.47 75.95 22.97 1.10 0.51 0.36 0.00 0.32 5.82 0.00 4.1 12.63± 0.017 ± 14.744 ± 14.261 ± 1.270 ± 0.513 ± 0.615 ± 0.000 ± 0.666 ± 3.581 ± 0.006 ± 7.70 ± 2.611$0.40–0.44 52 0.42 62.98 35.33 1.69 1.10 1.51 0.02 1.01 5.81 0.03 8.6 13.30± 0.008 ± 5.872 ± 5.498 ± 0.541 ± 0.249 ± 0.879 ± 0.037 ± 0.684 ± 0.881 ± 0.031 ± 3.84 ± 0.542Below $0.40 26 0.36 63.50 34.66 1.85 1.08 4.01 0.01 0.42 5.54 0.00 4.9 12.68± 0.019 ± 6.620 ± 6.427 ± 0.897 ± 0.683 ± 5.545 ± 0.035 ± 0.563 ± 1.767 ± 0.003 ± 13.34 ± 0.521exception of Premium-labeled rice in the dryseason (3.9% chalkiness on average). Contaminationof milled rice with foreign matter andpaddy in general is low for all samples. Finally,the moisture content of milled rice for gradedand nongraded rice is well below 14% onaverage, although standard errors are often high,indicating a wide distribution of moisturecontent within one grade. Results of a comparisonof means per grade indicated that, becauseof the spread of the data, differences betweendry- and wet-season rice quality are not significant.The exception is Premium-graded rice,which shows significantly more discolorationand higher moisture content during the wetseasonsampling period. Similarly, a comparisonof means between rural and urban areas did notreveal any significant differences, for both dryseasonand wet-season sampling. In addition, acomparison of means between the NationalCapital Region and other urban areas did notreveal significant differences among qualitycharacteristics.Analysis of quality characteristics of ricesampled in supermarkets in three cities duringthe dry season sampling period indicated that,although the sample size (n = 24) is muchsmaller than the retailer rice sample size, it isevident that head rice, chalkiness, and damagedgrains of supermarket rice are not very differentfrom those of rice sold in retail markets. This issomewhat remarkable as most rice in supermarketsis sold at a higher price. However, supermarketrice sold shows better quality in terms ofdiscolored grains, red and red-streaked grains,and foreign matter contamination.Results of laboratory milling degreeanalysis (not shown) indicated that, in the dryseason, 25% of rice is regular milled, 71% iswell milled, and 4% is either over- orundermilled. During the wet season, actualmilling degree was 22% regular milled and 77%well milled. The preference for well-milled ricein the domestic market is consistent with thepreference for whiteness as an important qualitycharacteristic.Determination of the amylose content (AC)of retail market samples indicated that, in thedry-season sampling period, all graded rice fallsin the category of intermediate amylose content(> 21% AC), whereas fancy rice generally has alower AC. In the wet-season sampling period,data show the same trend as in the dry season(e.g., all graded rice is in the intermediate AC21

ange; fancy rice is lower in AC) although thereis no apparent difference in AC among rice ofdifferent grades.Compliance with national grain (PGSP)standardsResults of quality analysis were compared tostandards for milled rice in the Philippines,which are listed in Table 4. Table 5 shows theresults of these comparisons for each qualitycharacteristic. For Premium, Grade 1, and Grade2 labeled rice, there is less than 50% compliancefor the corresponding standards of themilling fractions, that is, head rice, brokens,and brewers’ rice. Quite striking is the result forPremium rice, for which less than 5% of allsamples meet the standards for head rice (95%or more head rice; see Table 4) and brokens.For Grade 3 labeled rice, compliance is morethan 80% for head rice and brokens; however,less than half of Grade 3 samples meet thestandard for brewers’ rice (1% or less). Similarto the milling fractions, there is low complianceof Premium, Grade 1, and Grade 2 labeledsamples with the standard for damaged grains.Results for discolored grains show that there ismoderate compliance (60–80% meet nationalstandards) in discolored grains for Premiumand Grade 1 rice and high compliance (morethan 80% meet the standards) for Grade 2 andTable 4. Quality standards for milled rice (NationalFood Authority).GradespecificationsGradePremium Grade Grade Grade1 2 3Head rice (min %) 95.0 80.0 65.0 50.0Brokens (max %) 4.9 19.8 34.5 49.0Brewers’ (max %) 0.1 0.3 0.5 1.0Defectives:• Damaged grains 0 0.3 0.5 2.0(max %)• Discolored grains 0.5 2.0 4.0 8.0(max %)• Chalky and 2.0 5.0 10.0 15.0immaturegrains (max %)• Red grains 0 0.3 0.5 2.0(max %)• Red-streaked 1.0 3.0 5.0 10.0grains (max %)• Foreign matter 0 0.1 0.2 0.5(max %)Paddy (max no. kg –1 ) 1 8 10 15Moisture content 14.0 14.0 14.0 14.0(max %)Table 5. Percentage of premium and ordinary rice with grades a available at retailers meeting the Philippine Grain Standardization Program quality standards.Grades % Head % Brokens % % % % Red % Red- % % No. of %on tag rice b Brewers’ Damaged Discolored grains streaked Chalky Foreign paddy Moisturegrains grains grains and matter kg –1 contentimmaturePremiumOverall 4.37 3.90 40.74 4.49 59.08 91.23 84.64 9.18 98.09 33.95 97.64Dry 4.65 a 3.68 a 38.19 b 5.44 a 73.53 a 93.12 a 93.42 a 8.58 a 98.76 a 45.80 a 98.93 aWet 4.10 a 4.10 a 43.11 a 3.61 b 45.71 b 89.47 b 76.51 b 9.74 a 97.47 b 22.98 b 96.45 bGrade 1Overall 14.44 15.26 13.44 14.50 79.60 94.26 98.14 54.36 96.54 78.95 85.08Dry 9.24 b 9.24 b 11.45 b 21.09 a 76.58 b 96.93 a 99.55 a 69.14 a 98.22 a 84.27 a 91.82 aWet 20.38 a 22.13 a 15.71 a 6.99 b 83.05 a 91.20 b 96.54 b 37.50 b 94.63 b 72.87 b 77.39 bGrade 2Overall 44.60 47.32 26.46 28.82 91.57 95.22 99.58 95.90 97.51 78.60 84.21Dry 45.26 a 46.94 a 30.44 a 34.11 a 91.22 a 90.99 b 99.53 a 97.00 a 100.00 a 84.14 a 83.94 aWet 44.01 a 47.66 a 22.89 b 24.07 b 91.89 a 99.01 a 99.62 a 94.90 b 95.27 b 73.62 b 84.46 aGrade 3Overall 87.03 89.33 42.93 83.91 85.23 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 93.60Dry 94.59 a 94.59 a 60.40 a 91.09 a 87.12 a 100.00 c 100.00 c 100.00 c 100.00 c 100.00 c 91.62 bWet 81.61 b 85.56 b 30.41 b 78.76 b 83.87 a 100.00 c 100.00 c 100.00 c 100.00 c 100.00 c 95.02 aa With grades on price tags.b In a column for each grade, season estimates with different letters are significantly different at 5%.c In a column for each grade, no significant difference was detected becauseof zero difference in estimates.22

Grade 3 labeled rice. Overall, there is high compliance(80–100% of samples meet the standards) forred grains and red-streaked grains, but low compliancefor chalky and immature grains, in particular forPremium rice (9.2% of samples meet standards) andGrade 1 (54% meet standards).Results also show that the standards for foreignmatter and moisture content are generally met,regardless of grade indication. Table 5 providesuseful information for improving the quality ofmilled rice for each grade. In general, the higher thegrade of rice indicated on the label, the lower is thecompliance with the national standards set for thatparticular grade. For Premium and Grade 1 rice,opportunities for quality improvement are themilling fractions, damaged grains, grain discoloration,chalkiness, and amount of paddy in milled rice.For Grade 2, milling fraction and damaged grainscould be improved, whereas, for Grade 3, brewers’rice generally leads to low compliance with thenational standards.Table 5 also presents the results of comparingthe mean compliance of the 11 quality characteristicsbetween dry- and wet-season sampling. For Premiumrice, most (7 out of 11) quality characteristics showhigher compliance in the dry season than in the wetseason, with the most prominent difference inpercentage of discolored grains. For Grade 1, sevenquality characteristics likewise show higher compliancein the dry season, with the largest difference inchalkiness, damaged grains, and moisture content.For rice with Grade 2 or Grade 3 indicated on thelabel, only 5 out of 11 quality characteristics showhigher compliance in the dry season than in the wetseason and differences are generally small.Results of milling degree (MD) analysis showedthat, in the dry season, the majority (66.9%) of allsamples had the correct MD on the label andapproximately 18% had either a too high or too lowMD on the tag. In the wet season, the trends aresimilar although the percentage of samples with thecorrect MD on the tag (71.3%) is slightly higher thanin the dry season. In addition, the proportion ofPremium grade rice (89.2%) and Grade 1 rice (82.6%)with the correct MD on the label is much higher thanin the dry season.Conclusions and recommendationsOur survey indicates that 70% of the rice in thePhilippine retail market is sold with a grade indicatedon the label. This provides evidence thatstandards for milled rice are increasingly incorporatedin the domestic market. Rice retailers generallybelieve that the grading system benefits theirbusiness, as it makes it easier for customers toidentify a certain quality of rice. However, retailersindicate that millers and traders often do not provideall the required information regarding rice grade tothem, which leads to problems in displaying thecorrect grades in retail stores. The survey furtherindicated that retailers primarily consider whitenessof grain and head rice when setting the price of rice,in addition to purchase cost. According to retailers,consumers select rice primarily on the basis ofwhiteness and price, with volume expansion, aroma,and taste as important secondary quality characteristics.Consumer preferences differ somewhat betweenrural and urban municipalities, but not to a greatextent. Estimates of rice volumes sold at the municipallevel, however, indicate that there is a morepronounced demand for high-quality rice in urbanareas than in rural areas.Surveys of the retail price of rice indicate that ahigher price is paid for better quality: the highestmean price is for Fancy rice ($0.56 kg –1 ), followed byPremium rice ($0.48 kg –1 ) and rice with Grades 1, 2,and 3 ($0.39 kg –1 ). These price differences indicatethat grading of rice is functional as a marketing tool,although there is much overlap among the prices ofGrades 1, 2, and 3 rice, which constitutes themajority of rice sold in the market (55%). In general,national quality standards for graded rice are not met,in particular for head rice, large brokens, andbrewers’ rice. In addition, for rice with higher grades(Premium rice, Grade 1) indicated on the label,standards are often not met for discolored grains,chalky/immature grains, and number of paddy grainsin milled rice. Packaged rice sold in supermarkets isnot different in quality in terms of head rice andbrokens; however, supermarket rice shows fewerdamaged and discolored grains than the rice sold inmunicipal markets.The following recommendations for futureresearch and development are indicated by thisstudy:• There is a general lack of tools for grading ofrice. Developing a low-cost quality evaluationkit for millers, traders, and retailers couldimprove quality and compliance with theNational Grain Standards Program.• In general, the head rice percentage of riceproduced in the Philippines is low (67% on atotal milled rice weight basis) and the ricecontains a high percentage of small brokens(> 1%). A performance study of rice mills in thecountry could assess where opportunities existfor improving head rice recovery and reducing23

physical grain losses. The Philippine RicePostproduction Consortium has begun such astudy.• In general, the rice produced in the Philippineshas a high percentage of chalky and immaturegrains. Efforts to improve seed quality andproduction practices at the farm level couldreduce chalky and immature grains.• Discoloration or yellowing of grain and mold- orinsect-damaged grain are often observed in riceproduced and processed in the wet season.Increasing artificial drying capacity in thecountry could reduce the problem of discolorationand mold damage in milled rice.• According to retailers, consumers considercooking and eating qualities (e.g., volumeexpansion, aging, aroma) as very importantwhen choosing rice in the retail market. Researchefforts in rice standardization should begeared toward including cooking and eatingqualities in the present standards to make thenational grain standards more relevant toFilipino consumers.At the time of writing, the Philippine RicePostproduction Consortium has embarked on severalresearch activities that address some of theserecommendations.Proceedings No. 100. Canberra (Australia): AustralianCentre for International Agricultural Research.Garcia EA, Mangaoang CC, Sampang RL. 2000. Sustainingthe development of the grains industry throughstandardisation: the Philippine experience. In: JohnsonGI, Le Van To, Nguyen Duy Doc, Webb MC, editors.Quality assurance in agricultural produce. Proceedingsof the 19th ASEAN/1st APEC Seminar on PostharvestTechnology. ACIAR Proceedings No. 100. Canberra(Australia): Australian Centre for InternationalAgricultural Research.Patindol JA. 2000. Methods and standards for rice grainquality assessment in the Philippines. In: Johnson GI,Le Van To, Nguyen Duy Doc, Webb MC, editors.Quality assurance in agricultural produce. Proceedingsof the 19th ASEAN/lst APEC Seminar on PostharvestTechnology. ACIAR Proceedings No. 100. Canberra(Australia): Australian Centre for InternationalAgricultural Research.NotesAuthors’ addresses: R.R. Bakker, M.C.E. Jawili, R.D.Billate, I.R. Barredo, and D.B. De Padua, InternationalRice Research Institute, Los Baños, Philippines, DAPOBox 7777, Metro Manila, Philippines; E.A. Jarcia andC.C. Mangaoang, National Food Authority, QuezonCity, Philippines.ReferencesAbansi CL, Duff B, Lantican FA, Juliano BO. 1992.Consumer demand for rice grain quality in selectedrural and urban markets in the Philippines. In:Unnevehr LJ, Duff B, Juliano BO, editors. Consumerdemand for rice grain quality. Los Baños (Philippines):International Rice Research Institute. p 37-57.Billate RD, Barredo JR, De Padua DB, Bell MA, BakkerRR. 1999. Assessment of milled rice quality fromselected markets. Paper presented at the National FoodAuthority Grain Standardization Workshop, Manila,October 1999. Los Baños (Philippines): InternationalRice Research Institute.Baird H. 1987. Grading and maintaining grain quality instorage. In: Champ BR, Highley E, Remenyi JV,editors. Technology change in postharvest handling andtransportation of grains in the humid tropics: proceedingsof an international seminar, Bangkok, Thailand,10-12 September 1986. ACIAR Proceedings No. 19.Canberra (Australia): Australian Centre for InternationalAgricultural Research.De Padua DB. 2000. The Philippine Rice PostproductionConsortium: needs assessment of the postproductionindustry. In: Johnson GI, Le Van To, Nguyen DuyDoc, Webb MC, editors. Quality assurance inagricultural produce. Proceedings of the 19th ASEAN/lst APEC Seminar on Postharvest Technology. ACIAR24

Organic grain protection in the PhilippinesettingF. Caliboso, R. Caliboso, J. Dator, R. Tiongson, C. de Dios, and E. MartinezThe principle of airtight or hermetic storage as it applies to grain protection providesa gastight environment in which insect pests die because of a lack of oxygen.This paper discusses the development of hermetic storage in the Philippines byhighlighting the various scientific research activities conducted in the country andthe local experience in the adoption of the technology.On the basis of research findings and actual use of gastight frameless flexibleenvelopes (Volcani Cubes TM ) and weldmesh-walled silos (Mobile Silo TM ) in theoperations of government and private institutions, these plastic structures can be asafe and viable alternative to permanent structures for organic protection of riceand maize for extended periods. Flexibility, transportability, ease of installation,simplicity of operation and maintenance, and durability are distinct advantages.Scientific data also show the gastight storage technology’s potential for seed preservation.Finally, this paper outlines other applications of the airtight structure foron-site quarantine treatment of agricultural products involving carbon dioxide andvacuum fumigation.The success of a country’s food security programrelies heavily on its ability to safely store its foodandfeed-grain and seed stocks. Moisture content(MC) is the major factor determining the storagebehavior of grain (Pixton 1982). Deteriorationcaused by molds can be prevented if the MC issufficiently low. However, insect pests can stillsurvive in dry commodities and seriously damage theproduce. Therefore, periodic control measures arefrequently required, particularly in warm and humidclimates, to prevent loss of grain quality andquantity.The use of deadly pesticides to combat pests ofstored products has increasingly become unpopularbecause of health concerns and the havoc theirindiscriminate use wreaks on the environment. In thepast, traditional storage structures provided someprotection against storage losses, particularly frominsects and rodents, although annual losses, whichare estimated to be from 5% to 10%, were previouslyconsidered unavoidable. Attempts to reduce theselosses by introducing modern storage technologieshave frequently failed—being either socioeconomicallyunacceptable or inappropriate to local climaticconditions and agro-technical practices (Donahayeand Messer 1992). The approach described in thispaper involves the modification of existing structuresor the construction of new structures in theconventional style but employing modified technologiesto improve grain conservation withoutbeing too disruptive to rural life, a concept termed byGuggenheim as “invisible” technology (Navarro et al1999).The method considered in this paper for grainquality preservation is airtight storage. The substantialliterature on sealed storage technology, alsoknown as “airtight” or “hermetic” storage, has beensummarized by De Lima (1990). Its principle hasbeen employed since ancient times in undergroundpits that are still used, particularly in semiaridregions of the Mediterranean basin and Sahel(Gilman and Boxall 1974, Curride and Navon 1986).The inherent advantage of the hermetic storage ofdry grain lies in the biogeneration of an oxygendeficientand carbon dioxide-enriched intergranularatmosphere of the storage ecosystem, a conditionproduced by the aerobic metabolism of insects andmicroorganisms. Stored grain protection is enabledby the use of a hermetic seal that provides an airtightenvironment in which insect pests die or are unableto develop because of a lack of oxygen. The basicprinciple of grain protection lies in the fact that,during the time between the moment of sealing untilthe volume of oxygen in the cube is consumed bythe insects, the damage to the grain is negligible. Ifthe insect population is low, the insects may survive,25

causing minimal damage to the grains. It has beenestablished that, to obtain a complete kill, theoxygen tension should drop to 2% or below (Bailey1965).A phenomenon that discourages the use ofairtight storage in hot climates is moisture migrationand condensation; this is especially heightened inmetal silos. So far, two approaches are known toreduce the intensity of this phenomenon: equalizinggrain temperatures and insulating the roof. Coolingof the grain by aeration is limited to climates with acool season. Comparative data on the efficacy ofaeration and the effect of insulation in preventingmoisture migration in metal silos in the tropics arelacking.Earlier designs of aboveground silos (metal andconcrete) did not provide a sufficiently effective seal(De Lima 1980). The current approach to sealingexisting aboveground structures is more successful(Ripp et al 1984). Technological advances in plasticmanufacturing provided a breakthrough in thedevelopment of PVC liners that conform to prerequisitespecifications of durability to climate, gaspermeability, and physical properties that enabledthe design of storage systems that are based on thehermetic principle. Plastic structures suitable forlong-term storage as well as intermediate grainstorage for cooperatives and subsistence farmers andfor grain in bags or in bulk have been developed inIsrael (Navarro et al 1990). The influence of insulationmaterials on reducing the intensity of moisturemigration under subtropical (Israel) and tropical(Philippines) climates was investigated by Navarroand Caliboso (1996) in 1996.The design of plastic structures for storing grainwas guided by the following: (1) loss preventionmethods should not be very sophisticated and (2)capital investment for the storage structure should bekept at a minimum. Furthermore, in areas wherebumper crops are expected, extra storage spaceshould be provided close to the production site.Therefore, speedy construction and possible translocationof the storage facilities from one site toanother would be advantageous. Thus, these flexiblestorage structures were designed to provide outdoorand complementary indoor facilities for temporary,emergency, or medium- to long-term storage of grainfor use by national government agencies involved ingrain handling and storage such as the National FoodAuthority (NFA), Department of Agriculture (DA),and Department of Agrarian Reform (DAR), andfarmers’ organizations, cooperatives, village grainmerchants, and other intermediary parties wherecountryside storage forms an integral part of thenational grain reserve (Navarro and Caliboso 1996).The gastight storage structures described in thisreport provide an affordable, user-friendly, andnonpesticidal alternative for insect control andmaintenance of seed quality.Development of hermetic storage in thePhilippinesResearch phaseApplication of modified atmospheres on dry paddyand maize under plastic covers stored outdoors. Thisreport forms part of a more comprehensive study bythe Agricultural Research Organization (ARO), TheVolcani Center, Israel, and the Bureau of PostharvestResearch and Extension (BPRE). The researchproject was financed by a grant from the USAID-CDRProgram.In the Philippines, a series of laboratory andfield trials were conducted for maize and rice fromApril 1991 to May 1994. Field trials were carried outin Bukidnon using maize and in Muñoz, Nueva Ecija(BPRE compound), for rice. Both the framelessflexible envelope (Volcani Cube TM ) and theweldmesh-walled silo (Mobile Silo TM ) were fieldevaluated.For practical purposes, the followingdiscussion will focus on the field experiments alone.After the ground was leveled and cleared ofstones and sharp objects, a foundation composed of a4-cm layer of rice hulls followed by a 2-cm layer ofrice hull ash was laid down in an area correspondingto that upon which the cube or silo was erected. Thisis to protect the plastic from sharp objects, rats, andsoil-borne insects. In addition, where signs of termitepresence were evident, the soil where the cube or silowill be erected was first treated with a termiticide.The frameless flexible envelopes were designedfor stack storage in which the stack itself forms therigid structure of the system (Fig. 1). Although theFig. 1. Frameless flexible envelope known as VolcaniCube TM with 20 t of capacity and maximum storagevolume of 30 m 3 , weighing about 76 kg when empty.When not in use, the cube can be folded and placedinside the carrying bag shown in the foreground.26

cube-shaped structures were designed for use onopen ground, under rigorous field conditions, theyare also highly suitable for use inside the warehouse.The Volcani Cube consisted of two sections: a lowerfloor-wall and an upper roof-wall. The bottomsection was laid on the ground and the bags of grainwere placed directly on the tarpaulin. No pallets wererequired. Stacks were built in a pyramid shape toallow rainwater to run off immediately on the sides ofthe enclosure. After the stack had been built to therequired height, the top layer was insulated with 2–3layers of sacks containing dry rice hull. Thereafter,the top section was placed over the stack to meet thelower section halfway up the side. Both the upperand lower sections were provided with a gastightmultiple tongue and groove zipper used to zip thesections together to form a continuous envelope.The design was intended to be user-friendly withdimensions that did not require mechanical loadingor high stacking. Special tension straps situatedaround the cube were designed to take up slack inthe walls and pull the liner tight around the curve ofthe sacks at the floor level (Fig. 1). This was done toprevent rodents from gaining a tooth-hold on theslippery surface, thereby preventing damage to thehermetic seal.The cubes were intended for bag storage fromsmall to huge quantities of approximately 5, 10, 20,50, 100, and 150 t of cereal grains. The 20-t cubesused here measured 447 × 336 × 200 cm (length ×width × height), giving a maximum storage volumeof about 30 m 3 and weighing about 76 kg whenempty.The cubes were easy to erect and dismantle. Fortrucking operations, they could be transported withthe grain load and the sacks could be off-loadeddirectly into the cubes at their destination.The weldmesh-walled silos were made up of twocomponents: a weldmesh circular wall formed fromsections bolted together to provide the structuralenclosure and an inner liner made of heavy-dutyplastic tarpaulin, which is resistant to ultravioletlight and is of food-grade quality. The lining came intwo parts: the lower liner welded to form a continuousfloor-wall unit and an upper liner forming a roofcone (Fig. 2). First, the weldmesh sections werebolted into place to form a circle around a floor-wallpackage within the perimeter. The package was thenopened and the walls of the liner were tied to theweldmesh. The roof section was placed evenly overthe grain using a preattached rope to pull and unfoldthe PVC liner, which was zipped to the wall to obtaina gastight seal. The roof cone was secured to themetal weldmesh walls by ropes. The enclosures werealso provided with hooks to be fixed to the wiremesh. The silos were designed to enable bulk storageor bag storage, with mechanical loading or unloading,with the intention of providing a useful transitionphase between bag and bulk handling. The silosused in the experiments reported here had a diameterFig. 2. Schematic diagram of a 52-m 3 -capacity weldmesh-walled silo known as Mobile Silo TMfor the gastight storage of grain in bags or bulk, suitable for storage of about 35 t of paddy.27

of 5.2 m and a height of 2.2 m, with a storage volumeof 52 m 3 amd a capacity of 35–40 t (Fig. 2). Largercapacities with 250, 500, and 1,000 t are alsoavailable.Grain temperature was monitored at sevendifferent locations inside the cube and silo and gasconcentration was measured at two locations. Twomaize stacks in cubes were flushed with food-gradeCO 2at 1.5 kg t –1 with a gas applicator. The applicatorconsisted of a ball-and-socket gas tap attached to anexpansion chamber that passed through the plasticsheeting into the cube and was screwed with a gasketseal onto the tarp. Common parameters observed forboth maize and rice were moisture content, graintemperature, gas concentration, insect infestation,fungal infection, germinated kernels, seed viability,and weight loss. Additional parameters gathered formaize were aflatoxin level, moldy kernels, anddiscolored kernels. For rice, these were millingrecovery, percentage head rice, percentage brokens,and percentage of yellow kernels. Tables 1 and 2summarize the field trials using rough rice and maize,respectively.A similar pattern of temperature was observed inthe paddy (or rough rice) stacks and in the maizetrials, indicating that temperature fluctuations werereduced because of the insulating properties of thegrain mass (Navarro et al 1998a). No significantincrease in the average MC of gastight rice stackswas noted except in two stacks in which a slightincrease occurred. There was a real trend toward anincrease in MC in the two untreated control stackskept during the wet season and a decrease in MCwhen these were stored in the dry season. Thesedifferences indicate the importance of havinggastight sheets to avoid loss in weight of rice stacksas a consequence of moisture loss. Likewise, theoverall MC of rice bulk-stored under gastightconditions in the silo did not change significantlyduring the trial, suggesting that bulk storage of dryrice in a hermetic plastic silo is feasible withoutadverse effects on the MC of rice.Initial and final counts of live insects revealedno population increase in the sealed cubes, whereasin the control stacks there was a marked increase ininsect density, many of which were alive at the endof the storage period. In the silo, the initial density oflive insects declined from 10.3 to 1.3 insects kg –1 atthe end of the trial. No changes were also observedfor milling yield and quality of rice in airtight stacks.The hermetically sealed stacks also did not show anysevere discoloration as opposed to the control stacks,which exhibited pronounced yellowing during therainy-season trial.In spite of the presence of a few live insects atthe end of storage, all treatments in the trials weresuccessful. This was matched by a much lowerpercentage weight loss in the treated cubes comparedwith the control stacks. The magnitude of lossrecorded from the gastight-sealed paddy cubes wasabout 18 times lower than in the control stacks,resulting in a weight loss of 0.23% for the gastightTable 1. Summary of storage trials for rough rice.Treatment No. of structures Capacity (t) Duration of storageobserved a (d)Cube (bag) Silo (bulk) Cube SiloHermetic 8 113.43–15.06 31.86 78–183Control 3 – 5.30– 5.56 – 78–117aTotal of 6 trials with 2 replicates per treatment/trial.Table 2. Summary of storage trials for maize.Treatment No.of structures Capacity Duration ofobserved a (t) storage (d)Cube b Silo b Cube SiloCO 22 – 16.62–18.45 – 93– 97Hermetic 8 1 15.02–19.25 38.73 93–184Control 2 – 4.58– 4.75 – 93– 97aTotal of 6 trials with 1 to 2 replicates per treatment/trial.bType of handling in bags.28

cubes and 4.30% for the control stacks (Navarro et al1998a). In the gastight silos, average weight loss was0.20%.Temperatures recorded in the core of the silowith maize ranged from 28 to 30 °C, but during theday they reached 35–40 °C below the liner at the topof the silo. Grain temperatures in the sealed cubeswere lower inside the storage structures than theambient temperature. Temperatures recorded from thevarious points within the sealed stacks were alsomore uniform than in the control stacks. This couldbe the result of the insulation procedure. Themoisture content of maize held under hermetic andCO 2-enriched atmospheres did not change significantlyduring storage. At the beginning of storage,the MC ranged from 11.44% to 13.49%; at the end ofthe trial (3–6 months), the MC ranged from 11.72%to 14.25%. Condensation was evident at the top ofthe silos and the cubes when storage periods exceeded4 mo but this obviously did not affect themoisture content of the test commodity.The oxygen level in the sealed stack droppedbelow 2% within 3 to 4 wk of storage, whereas theCO 2tension in most of the Volcani Cubes rose to 12–16% and fluctuated within this range for most of thestorage period. In the CO 2-flushed stacks, theestimated decay rate of 0.21% CO 2per day indicatesthat the carbon dioxide concentration exceeded theminimum standard of 35% for 15 d of exposure toachieve complete disinfestation of the commodity.This demonstrates the high degree of gastightnessand integrity of the cube, making it highly suitablefor carbon dioxide fumigation of grain.The initial (i) and final (f) mean density of thelive insect population of eight hermetic cubes andtwo CO 2-treated stacks did not increase significantly(1.87 i–0.95 fand 0.34 i–0.17 f, respectively) afterstorage but the mean density of live insects in twocontrol stacks increased substantially (1.0 i–43 f). Inthe silo, the density of insects found at the start of thetrial was 3.0 live insects kg –1 of maize and 0.3 deadinsect kg –1 , whereas, at the end of storage, the level oflive insects was 0.7 kg –1 and dead insects was 2.7kg –1 .The growth of fungi on grains kept underhermetic storage and CO 2-treated stacks seemed to beinhibited. Aflatoxin level, on the other hand, in fourstacks kept under hermetic conditions for about 6 moremained low, with no significant increases. Furthermore,discolored kernels, which may be caused byheat damage or mold activity, did not changesignificantly in the airtight stacks. Mean initial andfinal values of discolored kernels were 7.29–7.9%,respectively, in hermetic stacks and 3.48–3.9% inCO 2-purged stacks. In contrast, control stacks showedsevere kernel discoloration, with the final % discoloredkernels more than double (9.52%) the initiallevel of 4.56% for a 3-month storage.Seed viability was likewise preserved undergastight atmosphere up to 6 mo. Finally, weight losswas effectively minimized through the gastightstorage technology. Mean weight loss averaged0.44% after 3 to 6 mo of hermetic storage, which iscomparable with that of the treated check of CO 2–purged stacks, with 0.26% loss in weight after 3 mo.In the untreated control, mean weight loss after 3 moof storage was extremely high at 5.34%. In additionto damage from insects, these (control) stacks alsosuffered from mold infection and from rodent andbird attack (Navarro et al 1998b).Self-regulated atmospheres to prevent fungaldamage in moist paddy (BPRE). The objective of thisproject was to provide a solution to the acute dryingproblem in the humid tropics, where rough rice isharvested at high moisture content during themonsoon season. The crop must then be dried rapidlyto a safe MC to prevent molding and rotting. Thetwo-stage drying procedure that is advocated byBPRE consists of rapid drying of rice to 18%, atwhich stage yeast and bacterial activity are suppressed.Following that is a second stage of slowdrying from 18% to 14% MC to prevent the developmentof storage molds. Experience shows that thelack of insufficient capacity of second-stage dryerscreates a bottleneck, especially during the peakharvest season. This project was designed to developa technology that would enable farmers to overcomethis bottleneck at the second stage of drying byproviding them with a means of storing the intermediateMC rice under tightly sealed conditions andthereby prevent spoilage for prolonged periods untildrying by sun or machine is again an availableoption.The project findings indicated that, after 1month, the quality of sealed rough rice stored withMC up to 18% had not deteriorated. However, furtherevaluations made on paddy stored hermetically for 1,3, and 6 mo under both laboratory and field conditionsconfirmed that, after the first month of storage,the quality of moist paddy (16–18% MC) deterioratedprogressively and the grain was no longeracceptable to the taste panels. These findings enableus to make the following tentative recommendationsfor duration of rough rice storage:% Moisture content Maximum period Remarksof storage18 1 mo to 2 mo (not29

17 1 mo confirmed16 Can be extended by15 Can be extended field trials)to 3 moPrevention of moisture migration in sealedgrain stacks stored in the open using reflectivecovers (BPRE). In a search to develop an alternative,inexpensive, and convenient method of insulatingthe stack from diurnal temperature fluctuations, theuse of a shade screen placed above the cube wasinvestigated. This material, described as a “knittedthermal screen,” is from aluminum-coated highdensitypolyethylene threads.Trials in Israel and the Philippines showed thatthe reflective covers had a strong attenuatinginfluence on temperature gradients and condensationat the top of the cubes if a space for the free movementof air was allowed between the cover and theplastic liner. For dry rice, it was shown that, after 5mo of storage under a reflective cover, no perceptibleincrease in moisture content was found at the top ofthe stack and the grain remained in good condition.Application of hermetic storage technology tomilled rice using the Volcani Cube (NFA). A pilottrial on the adoption of hermetic storage using theVolcani Cube for long-term quality preservation ofmilled rice was conducted by the TechnologyResource Development Division of NFA from 1999to 2000. Nine stacks, each containing 270 bags ofmilled rice, were kept in Volcani Cubes and threetreated control stacks were used as a reference. Tworeplicate gastight stacks and one control pile wereopened and sampled during each storage period of 3,6, and 11 mo. The control stacks were regularlyfumigated and sprayed in accordance with the NFAstandard pest control program.The moisture content of the sealed and controlstacks remained low, ranging from 11.43% to11.97%. A very slow decline in oxygen level wasobserved—it took 90 d (3 mo) for the oxygen todecrease to 11.4% and 180 d (6 mo) for it to reach5.4%. In the latter part of the experiment, the oxygenanalyzer became defective, preventing the researchstaff from taking readings of the oxygen level. In thelast sampling period (11th month), when a newoxygen meter was obtained, the oxygen levelregistered 3.6% in the last sealed stacks.Live insects were found on samples from thesealed stacks up to the 6th month. These werepredominantly the lesser grain borer (Rhizoperthadominica), the saw-toothed grain beetle(Oryzaephilus surinamensis), and psocids. Completedisinfestation was achieved 11 mo after storage. Itwas generally observed that a dense population ofdead psocids was found around the bottom of theplastic sheet upon opening of the covered stacks inevery sampling period. In contrast, insects in thecontrol stacks multiplied rapidly from the 3rd monthonward. Grain yellowing was not discernible ineither the sealed or control stacks. Except for twostacks that had damaged cubes, average weight losswas minimal (0.06%) in the sealed stacks kept for 3to 6 mo. No substantial rise in weight loss wasrecorded from 3 to 6 mo. On the contrary, the controlstacks lost 0.39% of their weight after 3 mo, whichincreased to 0.72% in 6 mo. This value could risesharply if the loss in weight of the experimental stackafter reconditioning (i.e., removal of mothballs andinsect-damaged rice) has been considered. Inaddition to insect pests, the commodity was alsoexposed to attack by rodents and birds. Rice qualityin terms of color, aroma, glosiness, etc., was preservedthroughout the trial as opposed to thereference stacks, which were heavily infested in 3mo.The slow depletion of oxygen can be attributedto the extremely low population of live insects at theonset of the trial. Rice imported from Vietnam wasused as the test commodity, which was fumigatedimmediately before it left Vietnam for the Philippines.This is why the insect count was nil in thebioassay data obtained from the initial samples. It issurmised that the insects that survived the fumigationwere still in the immature stages (egg, larval, andpupal stages), which were most likely inside the ricekernels. Although these atmospheres were insufficientto obtain complete mortality of insects present,particularly during the first 6 mo, the modifiedcondition retarded insect growth and development asevidenced by the weak and abnormal progenies ofthe lesser grain borer encountered. Insect feeding wasalso adveresely affected, which led to minimaldamage on the sealed stacks.It was concluded that hermetic storage using theVolcani Cube is a feasible alternative for the safestorage of milled rice for more than 6 mo; thus, itsnationwide adoption was recommended.Preservation of slightly moist milled rice usingthe Volcani Cube: a preliminary experiment (NFA).It has been the practice of commercial rice mills todry their paddy up to only 15–16% MC. They claimthat, at this point, milling recovery is at its peakcombined with a high percentage of head rice.Millers do not experience quality deteriorationbecause the newly milled rice is immediately sold.While it may be true that rough rice is less prone tobreakage when milled at 15–16% MC, the current30

practice of the NFA to store milled rice for an averageof 3–6 mo, which is inherent in its food securityprogram, essentially prevents it from adopting themillers’ practice.Encouraged by the positive results obtainedfrom the initial use of Volcani Cubes at the NFA, apreliminary experiment was conducted to determinewhether hermetic storage could preserve the qualityof milled rice kept at marginal MC for a maximum of6 mo. The trial was set up at the NFA warehouse inKoronadal, South Cotabato, from April to October2000 using one stack of newly milled moist rice at15.7% MC sealed in a 10-t-capacity Volcani Cube,which accommodated about 13 t. Another stack wasset up as a control, containing 8 t from the same lotof rice. The uncovered control stack received theusual pest control measures of fumigation andspraying in accordance with the NFA standardoperating procedures.The gastight stack was sampled 1 mo aftersealing to determine whether the experiment shouldproceed or be discontinued. The odor of the stackwas also occasionally checked by slightly opening asmall portion of the zipper on one side. Each time,the stack was immediately resealed. Since the ricequality was still good each time it was checked, theexperiment was extended up to 6 mo. Although nooxygen readings were obtained during the early partof the experiment, it was later detected that theoxygen was 0.8% in the third month. However,thesharp fall could have occurred during the first 2 wkof storage. Initial and final samples were analyzed forquality parameters in the laboratory.A faint sweet aroma came from the stack as it wasopened after 6 mo. Oxygen concentration was still0.4%. The original rice quality was retained; the ricewas still glossy and completely free from insectdamage, including mothballs. No live insects werefound. Dead insects were found on the sides of thebottom sheet. On the other hand, insect density washigh in the control stack, which was regularlyfumigated and sprayed with insecticide. A foul andmusty odor was noticeable from the samples. Inaddition, the rice turned dull, dark gray, and powdery,indicating mold and heat damage. A lot ofbroken and chalky kernels were also apparent. Thestack had to be reconditioned to remove the mothballs,which obviously will lead to physical andmonetary loss.Since the results are very encouraging, the NFAplans to pursue a full-scale trial, as this couldincrease milling yield and reduce drying costssubstantially because the last stage in the dryingprocess is the longest and therefore most costly.Commercialization phase: use of Volcani Cubes atvarious levelsGovernment agencies. Table 3 shows the variousgovernment agencies currently using the VolcaniCube.BPRE, being the proponent of this technology,was the first to acquire the commercial model of the10-t-capacity Volcani Cube in large quantities—200units. It donated 196 units to farmer cooperatives,seed growers, the NFA, and PhilRice as part of itstechnology transfer program. For a cooperative to bequalified, it must be engaged in rough rice or maizetrading, it must have a minimum marketable surplusvolume of 200 bags of rough rice or maize perseason, and it must have a sound financial standing.The technology was initially promoted widelyamong farmer groups and the NFA. The agency alsoprovided on-site training for recipients of the cube.The Department of Agriculture, through itsregional field offices, also acquired the Volcani Cubefor distribution to farmer-cooperatives and seedgrowers as an interest-free loan payable in five years.On-site training for recipients was also conducted ateach site by the local distributor, Farms, Inc. Feedbackwas almost nil except for two cooperatives thatalso produced rice seeds in Banay-banay, DavaoOriental. DORAMCOFED acquired five units andused these three times from 1998 to 2000, each timefor less than 1 mo. DOSEPCO, on the other hand,used the cube for 6 straight months from December1999 to June 2000. Although both had favorablecomments, the latter benefited more since it was ableto keep the grain for an extended period, therebyobtaining a much better price for its produce. Bothalso signified their intention to continue using thefacility.The National Food Authority is the singlebiggest user of the sealed storage technology interms of total quantity kept in cubes and aggregatecapacity of the cubes in volume. In addition to thesmall cubes donated by BPRE, the NFA has acquiredTable 3. List of government agencies using Volcani Cubes.User a Capacity Total5 t 10 t 150 tBPRE 1 4 – 5DA 50 212 – 262NFA – 20 64 84PhilRice – 2 – 2Total 51238 64 353aBPRE = Bureau of Postharvest Research and Extension, DA = Departmentof Agriculture, NFA = National Food Authority, PhilRice = Philippine RiceResearch Institute.31

64 units with 150-t capacity, 34 of which are due fordelivery. The cubes will be jointly installed by thestaff of BPRE, NFA, and FARMS, Inc., which alsoprovided the hands-on training of NFA field staff.The NFA technical staff monitored all the installedcubes for initial and final weight, quality (includingmoisture content of stocks), oxygen tension, andinsect density. The plastic cubes were also periodicallyinspected to check for possible tears or holes, oropenings along the zipper. Tension straps were alsoreadjusted at times to pull up the slack.Twenty-two cubes were filled with eitherVietnamese rice or freshly milled local rice, four withrough rice, and another four with maize. Of the 22rice cubes, 11 have been opened and the stocks sold.The length of storage ranged from 1 to 8 mo. No liveinsects were found on the samples, but many deadinsects, including psocids, lined the sides of the floorsheet. Rice quality was excellent at the end of thestorage; the rice retained its color, luster, and aroma.Weight loss ranged from 0.004% to 0.09%. Thestocks were highly preferred by retailers and customersof the NFA. For rough rice, only one stack out offour has been opened. The laboratory analysis ofsamples and other data are not available yet. Thequality of maize sealed in the cubes was likewisepreserved. Weight loss for the stack kept for 5 mowas only 0.02%. These stocks commanded a highprice when sold to feed manufacturers.The moisture content of all the stacks kept in theVolcani cubes did not change until the end ofstorage. The sharpest drop in oxygen concentrationfrom 21% to less than 2% occurred within 1 to 2 moof storage in maize, whereas the same phenomenontook 2 to 3 mo in rough rice stacks. As expected, theslowest decline in oxygen was observed in milledrice stacks, reaching about 7% in 2 mo and decreasingfurther to 2% or less in 4 mo.The Volcani cubes at PhilRice are mainly usedfor quick disinfestation of infested seeds. The cubehere serves as a portable fumigation chamber withoutthe need to build expensive concrete structures.NGOs and private organizations. Table 4 liststhe farmer-cooperatives that are recipients of the 168units of Volcani Cube from BPRE. Of the total of 168recipient cooperatives, BPRE was able to monitoronly 68 co-ops or 14% of the total beneficiaries. Ofthese, 31 used the facility, whereas 16% (11) alsoused the cube but were not able to maximize its use(Table 5). Thirty-eight percent (26) of those surveyedhave not used the cube at all. Most of the reasonscited for their failure to exploit the benefits of havingthe cube are lack of sufficient surplus volume, needfor immediate cash, bankruptcy, and cessation oftrading activity.Two seed growers who also received the cubefrom BPRE are regularly using the facility to protectseeds from pests and maintain viability. They aresatisfied with the cube’s perfomance and find ithighly relevant to their need.IRRI has likewise acquired the small cube (5-tcapacity)and the GrainSafe (1-t-capacity) for theirevaluation. The GrainSafe is a sealed granary forbulk storage of small quantities of produce.Two special users of the Volcani Cube areprivate food companies. One uses it for CO 2-fumigationof organic maize for the Japanese feed market.This type of fumigation is now widely accepted invarious countries as a quarantine treatment. Theother company uses it for organic preservation ofprocessed food ingredients used for instant mixessuch as rice, flour, peanuts, and mungbean.ConclusionsHermetic structures made of gastight plastic linerscan be a safe and viable alternative to permanentstructures for the organic protection of rice and maizeTable 4. List of Volcani Cube recipients among farmercooperatives.Region a No. of No. of % monitoredbeneficiaries monitoredcooperativesCAR 1– –I 1 3 2 5II 23 – –III 37 22 20IV 24 11 15V 1 2 8 22VI 3 3 33VII 2 2 22VIII 3 3 33X 1 9 – –XI 16 16 33XII 7 15ARMM 4 – –CARAGA 4 – –Total 168 68 14aCAR = Cordillera Administrative Region, ARMM = Autonomous Region ofMuslim Mindanao, CARAGA = name of cooperative .Table 5. Result of monitoring of Volcani Cube users,cooperative level (December 1999).Degree of use No. of cooperatives PercentageUsed 3146Underused 11 16Not used 26 38Total 68 10032

for extended periods. Flexibility, transportability,ease of erection, simplicity of operation and maintenance,and durability are distinct advantages. Theiravailability in various sizes, capacities, and formscan suit a wide range of requirements to fit severallevels of operation. They are particularly valuable forrelief operations.The gastight storage technology alsoprovides a simpler and cheaper alternative to coldstorage for seed preservation. The hermetic structurecan be used as a portable fumigation chamber, forapplication of CO 2to organically grown cereals orfor application of conventional fumigants to otheragricultural products. The feasibility of the technologyfor protecting dried fruits and controllingwax moth in honeycombs has also been established.Recent advances have led to the sealed plastic liner’sapplication in on-site vacuum fumigation of coffeeand cocoa beans.ReferencesBailey SW. 1965. Airtight storage of grain: its effect oninsect feats. IV. Rhizopertha dominica (F.) and someother coleoptera that infest stored grain. J. Stored Prod.Res. 1:25Curride DJ, Navon A. 1986. Iron Age pits and the Lahav(Tel Halif) grain storage project. In: PhD dissertation(Curride). Archaelogical investigations into the grainstorage practices of Iron Age Palestine. Chicago, Ill.(USA): University of Chicago. p 67-78.De Lima CPF. 1980. Requirements for the integration oflarge-scale hermetic storage facilities with conventionalsystems. In: Shejbal J, editor. Controlled atmospherestorage of grains. Amsterdam (Netherlands): ElsevierScientific Publishing. p 427-444De Lima CPF. 1990. Airtight storage: principle and practice.In: Calderon M, Barkai-Golan R, editors. Foodpreservation by modified atmospheres. Boca Raton,Fla. (USA): CRC Press. p 9-19.Donahaye EJ, Messer E. 1992. Reduction in grain storagelosses of small-scale farmers in tropical countries.Research Report RR-91-7. The Allan Shawn FeinsteinWorld Hunger Program, Brown University, USA.19 p.Gilmam GA, Boxall RA. 1974. The storage of food grainsin traditional underground pits. Trop. Stored Prod. Info.28:19-38.Navarro S, Donahaye E, Rindner M, Azrieli A. 1990.Airtight storage of grain in plastic structures. HassadehQuart. 1(2):85-88.Navarro S, Caliboso FM. 1996. Application of modifiedatmospheres under plastic covers for prevention oflosses in stored grain. Final Report submitted to theUnited States Agency for International Development,Cooperative Development Research (CDR) Project No.C7-053, August 1990-November 1995. 32 p.Navarro S, Donahaye EJ, Caliboso FM, Sabio GC. 1998a.Outdoor storage of corn and paddy using sealed stacksin the Philippines. In: Proceedings of the 18thAssociation of South-East Asian Nations (ASEAN)Seminar on Grains Postharvest Technology, 11-13March 1997, Manila, Philippines. p 225-236.Navarro S, Donahaye E, Ferizli AG, Rindner M, Azrieli A.1998b. A sealed granary for use by small-scale farmers.In: Proceedings of the 7th International WorkingConference on Stored Product Protection, 14-19October, Beijing, China.Navarro S, Donahaye E, Rindner M, Azrieli A, Dias R.1990. Protecting grain without pesticides at the farmlevel in the tropics. In: Johnson GI, Le Van To,Nguyen Duy Duc, Webb MC, editors. Proceedings ofthe 19th ASEAN/1st APEC Seminar on PostharvestTechnology, Ho Chi Minh City, Vietnam, 9-12 Nov.1999. ACIAR Proceedings No. 100. Canberra(Australia): ACIAR. p 353-363.Pixton SW. 1982. The importance of moisture and equilibriumrelative humidity in stored products. Trop. StoredProd. Info. 43:16-29.Ripp BE, Banks HJ, Bond EJ, Calverely DJ, Jay EG,Navarro S, editors. 1984. Controlled atmosphere andfumigation in grain storages. Developments inAgricultural Engineering 5. Amsterdam (Netherlands):Elsevier Scientific Publishing. 798 p.NotesAuthors’ addresses: F. Caliboso and R. Caliboso, FilipinasAgri-Aqua Resources Marketing and ManagementSystems (FARMS), Inc., 3E Carmel Suites, 15Chronicle St., West Triangle, Quezon City; J. Dator andR. Tiongson, Bureau of Postharvest Research andExtension, CLSU Complex, Muñoz, Nueva Ecija; C. deDios and E. Martinez, National Food Authority, 101 E.Rodriguez Sr. Ave., Quezon City, Philippines.Acknowledgments: The authors wish to express theirappreciation to Ms. Raquel Bermudo, director of theFood Protection Department, BPRE, for her cooperationand full support in preparing this paper. Thanks arealso due to Mr. Efren Regpala, also of BPRE, for hisexpert assistance. Our gratitude is likewise extended toMr. Crestituto Mangaoang for his encouragement andguidance.33

A rotary cutting mechanism for riceharvestingE.U. Bautista, M.J.C. Regalado, A.S. Juliano, S. Ishihara, and H. MonobeA design of a rice reaper for small farms based on a rotary cutting mechanism wasdeveloped as a low-cost alternative to reciprocating cutter-bar-based reapers. Thedesign employs three high-speed cutting discs rotating at 20–30 m s –1 , a set oflugged conveyor belts, and an open-type chain-sprocket transmission for machinemotion of 2.6 km h –1 . The whole machine is powered by a 4.5-kw gasoline engineattached at the rear of the open power transmission for machine motion.Field tests of a commercial model showed a comparable performance with acommercial unit having a field capacity of 2 ha d –1 and grain-shattering losses of0.1% to 1.3%, depending on the shattering resistance of the rice cultivar. Threemodels with distinct features have been developed with cooperating manufacturers.The new design could enhance the acceptability of mechanical harvesting ofrice in developing countries because it is relatively cheaper and easier to manufacture,repair, and maintain.Harvesting and related operations are one of the mostlabor-intensive activities in rice production in Asia’sdeveloping countries. Harvesting and threshing in thePhilippines consume around 60% of the total personhoursdevoted to rice compared with only 18% formechanized systems (Takahashi 1994). Harvestingcosts around 10–15% of the total farm produce.Reaping alone requires a high labor input from 10 to16 d ha –l (Juarez et al 1988) and is a monotonous andtiresome activity because of traditional systems andpractices. Losses from reaping and the correspondingpiling of reaped plants can reach 5% of the total yield(Andales 1998).In Asia, walking-type reapers were developed andintroduced as attachments to two-wheel tractors(Ezaki 1970). The design of the reaper windrower isbased on the cutter-bar assembly, composed of areciprocating triangular serrated blade placed above astationary ledger. This type of mechanism is highlysuitable for windrow operation since plants havepractically no horizontal movement after cutting andare kept standing before they are conveyed to oneside.A cutter-bar mechanism reciprocates at low speedand requires low power. However, its assembly iscritical and tolerances must be strictly followed tomaintain high performance and durability. Theserrated high-carbon steel blades have to be sharpenedafter every 25–50 ha of use. Its main disadvantageis the difficulty for small manufacturers toassemble this mechanism because of the criticaltolerance needed between the blade and ledger. It isalso an expensive mechanism for small farmers sincethe main parts are imported from developed countries.In 1980, the International Rice ResearchInstitute (IRRI) and the Chinese Academy ofAgricultural Mechanization Sciences (CAAMS)jointly developed the first reaper-windrower designedfor operation and manufacture in a developing-countrycontext. The IRRI-CAAMS reaperfeatures a cutter-bar assembly below two matchingvertical conveyors. These belt conveyors areequipped with lugs that are in contact withstarwheels in front of the machine. The starwheel ishoused beneath a protruding triangular guide plateto help hold standing plants during cutting andsubsequent conveying. Plants are cut and conveyedin an orderly manner and are released in neatwindrows at one side of the machine. The designeliminated the lugged V-belts, which are features ofearlier reapers developed in China and Japan, andsimplified the power takeoff, conveyor drive, andcutter-bar mechanism (Tiangco et al 1982).Shortly after the IRRI reaper was introduced, aJapanese company introduced to the Asian market asimilar reaper with a higher level of technology. TheKubota AR120 Rice Reaper is a sound technologyfor Filipino farmers because of its suitable featuressuch as durability, light weight, and comfortableoperation even in small muddy fields characteristicof Philippine rice paddies during wet-seasonharvesting. Although it cannot harvest lodged cropsand it requires manual reaping of field corners as well34

as the periphery of the field (which can be optionaldepending on the skill of the operator), it is the onlyalternative to manual harvesting for farmers locatedin areas where hired labor is lacking. The mainconstraint to its wide adoption, however, is its highinvestment cost, which is not acceptable for ordinaryfarmers. Despite its cost, however, it slowly replacedthe locally manufactured reaper in labor-deficientareas. At present, it is widely used in some areas ofthe Philippines and is providing custom servicesduring the peak season. Local manufacturers did notattempt to produce cheaper versions because of alack of alternative technologies that can be used toassemble the design locally, such as lightweightmaterials and die-cast components, a transmissionwith forward and reverse gears, and a drive shaft witha clutch for transmitting power from the engine to thereaper assembly. A cheaper design that can bemanufactured locally with less precision thereforebecomes important. This paper presents the newrotary reaper-windrower system developed for riceharvesting.Description of the new reapingmechanismDesign conceptThe criteria for developing a new design of awalking-type reaper are (1) simplicity of the mechanism,(2) the use of locally available materials, (3)ease of manufacture, (4) light weight, and (5) lowcost. We focused on replacing the reciprocatingcutter-bar assembly with a rotary cutting mechanismthat would require fewer blades, less manufacturingtolerance, and a simpler power train. To minimizedevelopment work, consideration was given toadapting some of the mechanisms of the IRRI-CAAMS reaper, such as the header–power tiller–engine arrangement, windrowing mechanism, andother components such as crop guides andstarwheels.The new design was expected to work intransplanted and direct-seeded rice fields during thedry and wet seasons. Because rice plots are generallysmall, maneuverability and transfer across levees areimportant, which necessitates a reverse motion forthe design. Adjustment for cutting height is necessarywith indica cultivars and because some farmersprefer variable cutting height (about 5 cm cuttingheight until about 30 cm for better thresher efficiency).To simplify manufacturing requirements, therotary reaper design has two basic features: the use ofa rotary cutter instead of a reciprocating cutter-barassembly and incorporation of easy-to-assemblestandard parts. Alternative designs for windrowingby (1) a side-delivery flat belt, which is an originalfeature of earlier designs, (2) chain and sprocket, and(3) V-belt and pulley were provided depending onthe model. Power transmission for the carriage unitused an open-case chain-sprocket mechanismconnected by V-belt and pulley from the engine tothe tiller shaft. Reverse motion, again by V-belt andpulley transmission, was also provided. The engine isplaced behind the tiller as in previous designs forbalance and easy operator access.Cutting mechanismTo assess the preliminary performance of the rotarycutter with rice and determine the proper positionand cutting zone for orderly windrows, Takahashi(1993) tried a standard Japanese grass cutter inreaping rice plants. From this trial, the desiredeffective cutting zone of the rotary cutter wasselected. In the ideal zone, there was less plant scatterand the centrifugal force and rotational direction ofthe blade facilitated the conveyance of plants to oneside. Ezaki (1970) established the design parametersfor this mechanism with optimum cutting performanceat 20–30 m s –1 . This was also confirmed in alaboratory set-up that examined the effect of operatingspeed, rake angle, type of blade, and number ofblades on cutting efficiency, power requirement, andscattering and shattering of plants.Figure 1 shows the two models of the rotaryreaper mechanism and Table 1 compares threealternative models. Two models, the Morallo and theAGAD models, are now available in the market,whereas the Lakas Kuliglig model is still beingevaluated.Field performance and economicsTable 2 shows the results of tests of the Moralloreaper model in comparison with the commercialKubota reaper. The rotary reaper is already comparablewith the Kubota reaper in performance sinceharvesting can be accomplished orderly and neatly.The main advantage of the rotary reaper is its lowercost, which is nearly one-half the cost of the importedreaper, and the ease of manufacture andmaintenance of the cutting discs. For field performance,the locally developed reaper can harvestfields that are weedy and have a soft soil conditionand crops that are shorter than 50 cm.The only remaining question about the adoptionof the rotary reaper is its durability. Several unitsalready purchased by farmer-adoptors are being35

Morallo modelAGAD modelFig. 1. Two commercial models of the PhilRice-JICA rotary reaper.Table 1. Comparison of the design of components of rotary reaper models available in the Philippines.Parameters/components Morallo model AGAD model Lakas Kuliglig modelCutting mechanism V-belt drive Chain and sprocket,Chain and sprocket,light dutylight dutyConveying mechanism Flat belt, single Chain and sprocket, V-belt, doubledoubleTraction device Combined rubber tire Combined rubber tire Combined rubber tireand cagewheel and cagewheel and cagewheelEngine type 6 hp, gear reduction 6 hp, regular speed 6 hp, regular speedStarwheel Sheet metal Vertical flat bar,Plasticspider designBlades Fabricated from high- IRRI reaper blade IRRI reaper bladecarbon steel saw bladesmade in TaiwanTiller transmission Two-stage RC 50 chain- Two-stage RC 50 One standard speed reducer,sprocket transmission chain-sprocket single-stage RC 50transmissionchain-sprocket transmissionHeight adjustment Bolt and nut in different Basic design same Two ways: (1) same as inpositions at the support as in Morallo model Morallo model and (2) byframe between tilleradjusting position ofand reaperthe cagewheel through thetiller frameCutting width (m) 1.1 1.04 1.2Total machine weight (kg) 158 168 130observed and durability and performance aspects arecontinuously being monitored. So far, the greatestconstraint to the wide acceptance of the singleconveyor model is its limitation for plants lower than50 cm (this is already addressed by the AGAD andthe LK model). PhilRice and the cooperatingmanufacturers are working on the durability aspectsof the machine in the production process.Analysis (see Table 3) has indicated that the newreaper design is more economical to use than theKubota reaper, which incur a total harvesting cost ofUS$37.18 and $44.33 ha –l , respectively. This ismainly because of the lower investment cost for thenew reaper (at $1,444 unit –l including engine andaccessories versus $3,111 unit –l for the importedmodel). In addition, the new reaper has a lowerbreakeven point at 37 ha y –l than the importedcounterpart at 83 ha y –l for a lifespan of 5 y.Yasunobo (2000) noted that the reaper should beeconomical to own when harvesting more than 4.13ha. In selected areas at present, however, farmers havegood incentives to own a reaper irrespective of thesize of the rice farm because of the income-generatingpotential of contract hiring.ConclusionsA new rice reaper-windrower design mounted in frontof an open chain-and-sprocket transmission carriageunit was developed for local manufacture and use inthe Philippines. It was developed considering thelocal field conditions and the level of skill of36

Table 2. Comparison of the rotary reaper and the KubotaAR 120 reaper.Parameter 1.1-m rotary 1.2-m ARreaper (Morallo) 120 (Kubota)Overall length (cm) 244 239Overall width (cm) 138 147Overall height (cm) n.a. 90Weight (kg) 158 116Engine (kW) 4.5 1.7Cutting width (m) 1.1 1.2Traveling speed (km h –1 ) 2.6 2.6Cutting device38 cm dia.,120 cm,rotary reciprocatingMin. cutting height (cm) 8.0 30.0Field capacity (ha h –1 ) 0.26 0.29Shattering losses (%) 0.1–1.3 1.2manufacturers and farmers who would adopt thedesign. The reaper employs high-speed rotary cuttingdiscs instead of conventional reciprocating cutter-barblades, and it has easy-to-assemble standard parts forsimplicity of manufacture and maintenance.Field tests of the reaper showed that it attainedcomplete cutting and orderly and neat windrowingsimilar to previous designs. The commercial designhas a capacity of 2 ha d –1 at a forward speed of 2.6 kmh –1 and with shattering losses of less than 2%.Economic analysis indicated that the new design iseconomical if it can operate an area of around 37 hay –1 . Owing to its simple design and ease of manufac-Table 3. Economics of using the rice reaper compared with the manual harvesting method, PhilRice, 2001.General assumptionsEstimated useful life (y) 5 Tax and insurance (% of IC) 2Salvage value (% of investment) 10 Interest on investment (% of IC) 22Repair and maintenance 10 Fuel (gasoline) cost ($ L –1 ) 0.31(% of investment cost, IC)Fresh paddy price kg –1 ($) 0.16 Oil cost ($ L –1 ) 0.93Manual custom rate, % of yield 7 Annual harvesting use (d) 50Payment of operator ($) 4.44 Paddy yield (t ha –1 ) 4.0Payment of other laborers ($) 3.33ItemHarvesting methodManual method Rotary reaper 110 Kubota AR 120Specific conditionsInvestment cost for equipment 0 1,444.44 3,111.11Labor requirement, person-days ha –1 (incl. gathering) 25 8 8Field capacity (ha d –1 ) 1 2 2.3Fuel requirement (L h –1 ) 0 1.2 1Oil requirement (L h –1 ) 0 0.018 0.018Operating labor cost (US$ ha –1 ) 0 4.44 4.44Gathering/helping labor cost (US$ ha –1 ) Incl. in harvesting 23.33 23.33Harvesting fee ha –1 (US$) 43.56 43.56 43.56Cost components for the 1st year ($)Depreciation cost 0 260.00 560.00Interest on investment 0 349.56 684.44Repair and maintenance 0 144.44 466.67 aTax and insurance 0 28.89 62.22Wage of operator 0 444.44 511.11Wage of helper/gatherer 2,178.00 2,333.33 2,683.33Fuel cost 0 149.33 124.44Oil cost 0 6.27 6.72Annual fixed cost excl. depreciation 0 522.89 1,213.33Annual variable cost 2,178.00 2,933.89 3,325.61Total harvesting cost ha –1 ($) 43.56 37.17 44.34Source of benefits ($)Harvesting fee 2,178.00 4,355.56 5,008.89Salvage value 0 144.44 311.11Benefit ha –1 (from custom fees) ($) 43.56 43.56 43.56Net cash flowYear 0 0 –1,444.44 –3,111.111 0 1,248.40 1,154.402 0 1,248.40 1,154.403 0 1,248.40 1,154.404 0 1,248.40 1,154.405 0 1,248.40 1,154.40Discounted net present value – 5,433.02 7,307.78Discounted benefit-cost ratio – 1.73 1.92Payback period (y) – 0.38 0.71Breakeven point (ha) – 37 83aAssumed to be 15% of investment cost because of higher cost of parts.37

ture and maintenance, the new reaper design has highpotential in the Philippines and in other Asiancountries where the only option for manual harvestingis an imported design.ReferencesAndales SC. 1998. Report on postharvest loss assessment.Bureau of Postharvest Research and Extension, Muñoz,Nueva Ecija, Philippines.Ezaki H. 1970. Binders and combines. Tokyo (Japan):Agricultural Books Co. (In Japanese.)IRRI (International Rice Research Institute). 1987. IRRIannual report. Los Baños (Philippines): IRRI. p 512-513.Juarez F, Te A, Duff B, Crissman L, Stickney RE,Manaligod HT, Salazar GC, Fernandez CP. 1988. Thedevelopment and impact of mechanical reapers in thePhilippines. Agricultural Economics Paper No. 88-23.Los Baños (Philippines): International Rice ResearchInstitute.Takahashi H. 1993. Report on the development of theMaligaya reaper. Rice Engineering and MechanizationDivision, PhilRice, Muñoz, Nueva Ecija, Philippines.Takahashi H. 1994. Present situation and problems of riceproduction in the Philippines. Paper presented at theWorkshop on Farming Management of Rice-BasedLowland Farms, PhilRice, Muñoz, Nueva Ecija, 5December 1994.Tiangco VM, Diestro MS, Nafziger ML. 1982. Criticaldesign parameters and development of CAAMS-IRRIreaper. Paper presented at the 32nd National Conventionof the Philippine Society of Agricultural Engineering,Manila, Philippines, 29-30 April 1982.Yasunobo K, Casiwan C, Manalili R, Francisco S. 2000.Factors influencing farm mechanization in the Philippines:socioeconomic context. Report to the JICATechnical Cooperation Project, PhilRice, Maligaya,Muñoz, Nueva Ecija, Philippines.NotesAuthors’ addresses: Scientist I, division head, scienceresearch specialist 1, and PhilRice-JICA long-termexperts, respectively, National Rice Engineering andMechanization Center, Philippine Rice ResearchInstitute (PhilRice), Maligaya, Muñoz, Nueva Ecija, e-mail: eubautista@philrice.gov.ph.Acknowledgments: We wish to acknowledge the support andsuggestions given by Dr. Santiago R. Obien and Dr.Hitoshi Takahashi in the project. The assistance ofJICA short-term experts Hiroyuki Takahashi, TatsushiTogasi, and Kunihiko Maeoka in testing and suggestingdesign modifications was crucial in successfullygenerating better designs of this mechanism.38

Varietal differences in drying rates andfissure occurrence in heated air dryingof riceM.J.C. Regalado and E. BekkiDrying rate is the common index of drying ability for a recirculating columnar graindryer. In developing this dryer, manufacturers in Japan conventionally apply a standarddrying rate, at which the upper 3% limit for heavy fissure occurrence in heatedair drying of rough rice is not exceeded. Until now, the allowable upper limit fordrying rate has been 0.8% h –1 . Recently, however, a Japanese manufacturer commercializeda new dryer with a claim that the drying rate was doubled to 1.6% h –1 .Hence, the authors carried out basic single-grain layer-drying experiments to investigatethis possibility using several rice cultivars. Results showed that varietaldifferences in grain-fissuring resistance were unexpectedly great. Of the five varietiesused, Yaeminori was the weakest, with many light fissures occurring even innatural shade drying. Koshihikari was the strongest among the medium-grainvarieties used. In drying this cultivar at 3.6% h –1 at 48 °C, the 3% heavy fissure limitwas not exceeded. The intended 1.6% h –1 rate could possibly be realized for thisvariety when this result is applied to commercial drying. For Hitomebore andTsugaruroman, the upper limits to which the rate could be raised were 1.2% h –1and 1.5% h –1 , respectively. The long-grain IR64 remarkably showed the highestfissure resistance and, for this cultivar, the standard rate may be easily doubled. Tooptimize a rice dryer’s performance, the drying rate should be easily adjusted tosuit a particular variety.The drying ability of a high-capacity grain dryerwith continuous material flow and high-temperatureheated air is indicated by the maximum allowabledrying rate in its specifications. In Japanese-madedryers, an average rate of 0.8% h –1 (on a wet weightbasis) is usually specified with the assurance of lessthan 3% heavy fissure occurrence. Heavily fissuredgrains occurring in rough rice drying and brown andwhite rice processing are listed as inspection items toassess the magnitude of damaged grains. This isindicated by an upper-limit percentage in the criteriafor quality grade set by the Japan Food Agency(1956). A 5% allowable upper limit is usuallyapplied in experimental research carried out atresearch institutes or universities. However, for newproduct development by dryer manufacturers, a 3%limit that includes safety considerations is applied.In 1999, a manufacturer placed a new dryer on themarket that was claimed to have a drying abilitytwice the usual rate. Hence, these basic laboratoryexperiments on single-grain layer, heated air dryingof rough rice were carried out to ascertain whetherthe claim is possible or not.This study also shows the results of investigatingthe relationships between the drying rate andfissure occurrences using five selected varieties.Varietal differences in the relative resistance to grainfissuring have already been described by Schmidtand Hukill (1656), Srinavas et al (1977), Srinavasand Bhashyam (1984), Juliano and Perez (1993), andLan and Kunze (1996). In Japan, two detailedexperimental studies can be cited as the representativereferences for this study. One was conducted byOkamura (1937) and the other, by Ban (1971), was aninvestigation using practical heated air dryers. Thissubject was also referred to in the reports of Teranakaand Genjyo (1967) and Takahashi et al (1973) andthe research data of the National Agriculture,Forestry and Fishery Council (1971). Moreover, thework of Nagato (1963) showed the difference amongvarious varieties in small rice grain hardness. Hisresults supported the fact that japonica varieties,which consist of a soft core inside the grains, aremore easily fissured than indica varieties, which havea hard grain core. The varieties now being cultivatedin Japan have changed markedly and now have a39

etter taste. Formal experimental data on fissureoccurrence in recently grown varieties have not beenreported yet, so this study also attempts to obtain andpresent the fissuring characteristics of these varieties.Materials and methodsExperimental procedure and apparatusA rough rice sample was taken out of the refrigeratorand its initial moisture content was measured usingan infrared-type moisture meter (Kett, model F-1A). A216-g sample was spread as a single grain layer on asteel wire mesh and put at the center of a constanttemperature and humidity chamber (Tabai, modelPR-1) having a capacity of 40 × 50 × 60 cm 3 . Foreach drying run, the sample was taken out of thedrying chamber every hour, quickly weighed usingan electric balance (Sartorius, model BP310S), andthen put back in the chamber. The changes intemperature and humidity inside the chamber owingto the opening and closing of its door were onlyminimal fluctuations.The moisture content M i(% on a wet basis) atevery hour within the drying period was calculatedusing the following equation:W 0(1 – M 0)M i= 1– (1)W iwhere W 0= initial moisture content (g), W i= moisturequantity (g) at every hour, and M 0= initialmoisture content (%, w.b.).Each drying run was stopped when the desired15% final moisture content was reached, as indicatedby the plot of calculated M ivalues with elapsed timeon a cross-section paper. The final moisture contentwas repeatedly measured after each drying run usingthe infrared moisture meter to compare the calculatedand measured moisture quantities. The differencebetween the two values was minimal.Table 1. Varieties and drying conditions.Variety Moisture Temperature Relativecontent (%) (°C) humidity(%)Initial FinalYaeminori 25.6 15.2 26 37–38(produced on 25.9 15.6 27 33–37Ishigaki Island, 25.8 15.2 28 33–37harvested 25.8 15.8 29 35–37on 13 June 25.7 15.6 30 34–371999) 26.3 14.8 36 44–46Koshihikari 27.4 14.6 30 33–40(Miyazaki 27.0 15.1 32 35–41Pref., 1 Aug.) 27.4 14.8 34 35–3527.2 15.2 36 33–3327.2 15.2 38 31–3127.3 15.2 40 29–2926.9 14.8 44 27–2926.8 14.8 48 34–3427.2 14.6 52 35–35Hitomebore 28.6 14.6 30 35–37(Chiba Pref., 29.514.8 32 34–3522 Aug.) 28.3 14.9 34 32–3328.2 15.2 36 30–3228.515.2 38 31–3128.2 15.0 40 28–3028.6 14.8 42 28–28Tsugaruroman 26.6 15.0 30 36–36(Aomori Pref., 26.6 15.4 32 32–3712 Sept.) 26.4 14.6 34 32–3226.4 15.4 36 32–3227.1 14.2 38 32–3226.2 15.6 40 30–3026.3 15.6 42 28–28IR64 26.6 15.4 30 37–37(Philippines, 26.6 14.6 32 34–3613 Sept.) 26.9 15.4 34 42–4326.7 15.4 36 30–3227.0 15.7 38 32–3226.6 15.4 40 30–3026.7 15.6 42 28–28Air temperature and humidityThe temperature inside the drying chamber was set atthe values given in Table 1. Fluctuations in temperaturereadings were about ±1% of the set temperatures.The relative humidity was difficult to regulate to lessthan 30% at the set temperature for each experiment.Most of the humidity values ranged from 30% to40%. In setting the air temperature for each variety,the occurrence of fissures during natural shadedrying was considered. Yaeminori had many fissuredgrains occurring even in natural shade drying; hence,the air temperatures were purposely set at a lowerrange of 26 to 36 °C. In both Hitomebore andTsugaruroman, a medium degree of fissure occurrencein natural drying was observed, so temperaturesranging from 30 to 42 °C were chosen. Fissureoccurrence in Koshihikari was minimal not only innatural drying but also in 40 °C heated air drying, sothe upper-limit temperature raised to 52 °C was tried.In IR64, only small fine fissures less than those foundin Koshihikari were observed, so the temperaturerange of 30 to 42 °C was chosen. This was the samerange used for Hitomebore and Tsugaruroman.VarietiesYaeminori was harvested on Ishigaki Island,Okinawa Prefecture, on the earliest date (13 June1999). A remarkably high percentage of lightlyfissured grains was observed in natural shade drying.Koshihikari was harvested in Miyazaki Prefecture on1 August. A Japan Food Agency report in 1999showed that the percentage of cultivated area for thisvariety was highest in Japan at 34.6%. Hitomeborewas harvested in Chiba Prefecture on 22 August. It40

anks second to Koshihikari, with 9.3% of the totalcultivated area. Tsugaruroman was harvested inAomori Prefecture on 13 September. It is a varietydeveloped with good taste but its cultivation islimited to only Aomori Prefecture. The four previouslymentioned varieties belong to the samecategory of medium-grain japonica. IR64 washarvested in the Philippines on 10 September. It is along-grain indica variety, very popular and widelyplanted in that country.Initial moisture content and drying rateThe drying ability of 1.6% (w.b. h –1 ), as the expressionof overall drying rate for the drying span frominitial to final moisture content, can be realized.However, to achieve this, there may be no otherrecourse but to increase the rate to 2.4% h –1 at thehigh moisture stage of 20% and more, then revert tothe usual 0.8% h –1 rate at the low moisture stage(20% or less). On this subject, Ban (1971) reportedthat, in heated air drying of rough rice, both wholeand heavy fissures increased as the initial moisturecontent increased. Hence, the procedure as mentionedmay be contrary to or disregarding Ban’sfindings. However, it would really be unavoidable torisk some extent of fissure occurrence as the dryingrate is substantially raised. To ensure high initialmoisture content for each variety, as shown in Table1, the samples were harvested earlier. Raw rough riceimmediately after harvest easily deteriorates so theharvested materials were stored in a refrigerator andthen put back after being taken out in each experiment.Airflow rateAs one of the conditions necessary for single-grainlayer drying, Hukill (1969) stated that the effect ofair velocity must be negligible. The forced aircirculating inside the drying chamber had an averagevelocity of 1.2 m s –1 about the sample. Based on thisvelocity value, the calculated specific airflow rate,33.2 m 3 s –1 100 kg –1 rough rice, was considered morethan adequate compared with the rate of 20 m 3 s –1100 kg –1 used by Ban (1971) in similar experiments.Since the changes in air temperature and humidityinside the chamber were controlled to slight fluctuationsonly, it was therefore judged that the conditionsfor single-grain layer drying have been met andwell regulated.Fissure checkTwo hundred and fifty grains of brown rice wererandomly sampled and checked for fissures in eachexperiment. On the number of grains used forchecking, Kato (1985) described that, in using 250grains, it is 95% probable that fissured kernels existwithin ±6% of the detection rate. However, consideringthat even the existence of fine fissure must bejudged with the naked eye, the authors deemed theerror of ±6% as allowable. The degree of fissure wasjudged in accordance with the criteria given by theJapan Food Agency (1956). As an improved methodfor detecting fissures, the light transmitted from ahalogen lamp through a fiber optic guide wasapplied. A heavily fissured grain was differentiatedfrom whole fissured grains as one wherein the fissureoriginating from the grain core has definitely reachedthe surface. Fissures were checked 3 d after dryingeach sample. Dried rough rice grains were manuallyhusked. The degree of fissure was expressed in termsof the percentages of light and heavy fissures foundin the brown rice kernels. Whole fissure occurrencewas expressed as the sum of both light and heavyfissure percentages.Results and discussionDrying rates and fissure occurrenceThe effects of air temperature on overall drying rateand fissure occurrence are illustrated in Figures 1 and2, respectively. The relationship between drying rateand fissure occurrence is shown in Figure 3, which isa combination of Figures 1 and 2.Yaeminori had 43% light fissures even undernatural drying conditions, which was shade drying tomoisture content of 15% in the laboratory. Of thefive varieties used, it gave the highest percentage ofwhole fissure occurrence in heated air drying.However, it had one peculiar characteristic: the lightfissures did not easily transform into heavy ones. Asshown in Figures 2 and 3, despite the very highwhole fissure percentages, the heavy fissure percentageswere relatively low.Shade-dried Koshihikari had a very low lightfissure occurrence of only 0.1%. Whole fissureoccurrence was minimal even when air heated to 42°C was used in drying. However, when air temperaturewas elevated to 52 °C, whole fissure occurrencerose to 43.6% and heavy fissure percentage increasedto 10.4%. Figure 2 shows that the 3% upper limit forheavy fissure was exceeded when the air temperaturewent beyond 48 °C. These results show thatKoshihikari had the strongest resistance to fissureoccurrence among the four medium-grain varieties.Shade-dried Hitomebore had 23% light fissureoccurrence. Nevertheless, although the drying ratesobtained for this variety were lower than those for the41

Fig. 1. The relationship between drying rate and drying air temperature. A = Yaeminori, B =Koshihikari, C = Hitomebore, D = Tsugaruroman, E = IR64 (long grain).Fig. 2. The relationship between air temperature and fissure occurrence. Solid lines showwhole fissure and broken lines show heavy fissure. A = Yaeminori, B = Koshihikari, C =Hitomebore, D = Tsugaruroman, E = IR64 (long grain).42

Fig. 3. The relationship between drying rate and fissure occurrence. Solid lines show whole fissure,broken lines show heavy fissure, and × = whole fissure after shade-drying on lab floor as a control.A = Yaeminori, B = Koshihikari, C = Hitomebore, D = Tsugaruroman, E = IR64 (long grain).other three medium-grain varieties, it appeared to beeasily fissured.For Tsugaruroman, the shade-drying rate wasabout the same as that for Hitomebore, but with aslightly lower (21%) light fissure occurrence.However, in heated air drying, it appeared to be lessresistant to fissuring than Hitomebore.IR64 was shade-dried at a low rate of 0.4% h –1with no fissures occurring. Light and heavy fissureoccurrences were also minimal in heated air drying.At the lowest level of drying rate for this variety,light fissure occurrence was only 0.8%.Possibility of elevating the allowable upper limit ofdrying rateIt was shown that fissure occurrence was remarkablydifferent among the varieties mentioned above. If theflow was continuous, heated air dryers were equippedwith function controls for material flow rate andheating quantity, which could easily be done byadjusting the heated air temperature; it was thenpossible to elevate the upper-limit drying rate. Asshown in Figure 1, for Koshihikari, a heated airtemperature of 36 °C corresponds to a drying rate of1.6% h –1 , which is twice the usual rate of 0.8% h –1 .Heavy fissure occurrence at 36 °C is minimal (Fig. 2).Accordingly, doubling the usual drying rate withminimal heavy fissuring can be realized forKoshihikari.Yaeminori showed a unique characteristic ofhaving many lightly fissured grains, although thepercentage of heavy fissure occurrence is low. In thiscase, it is questionable to decide to raise the allowableupper limit of drying rate on the sole basis ofheavy fissure occurrence. The many fine lightfissures may possibly develop into heavy fissuresowing to environmental conditions after drying.However, since the cultivated area devoted to thisvariety is small because of the limitation to a certainlocality, the drying rate for Yaeminori is likely to bekept the same as the usual rate.Although the heated air-drying rates obtainedfor Hitomebore and Tsugaruroman were verydifferent (Fig. 1), there were only small differences infissure occurrences between the two (Figs. 2 and 3).From Figure 3, the drying rates that intersect the 3%43

heavy fissure line can be read as 1.2% h –1 forHitomebore and 1.5% h –1 for Tsugaruroman. Withdue consideration of a safety factor for fissureincrease, the allowable upper-limit drying rate maybe raised to 1.2% h –1 .For the long-grain IR64, the drying rates wereintermediate among the five varieties. Whole fissureoccurrence did not exceed 1.6%, even at a highdrying rate of 3.1% h –1 ; thus, the upper-limit dryingrate can easily be doubled.Generalization of the drying processIt was not possible to have uniform initial moisturecontent for the samples of the five varieties used inthe experiments because of different harvestingconditions in the areas where they were cultivatedand obtained. Their initial moisture contents rangedfrom 26% to 28% as shown in Table 1. Generally, themoisture ratio (MR) equation, which simulatesNewton’s model, has been used to mathematicallydescribe the rice-drying process as follows:(M i– M e)MR = = exp (–kθ) (2)(M 0– M e)where M iand M 0are as defined in equation 1 and k =drying constant (1/h), q = drying time (h), and M e=equilibrium moisture content (% on a wet basis).However, the equilibrium moisture content hasto be measured through many long-duration experiments.Thus, to simplify the equation, Chinnan(1984) substituted M efor the final moisture content.In this study, however, drying was purposelydiscontinued when the final moisture content ofabout 15% was reached. At this final moisturecontent level, equilibrium with the surrounding air isnot completely attained yet. In substituting M eforthe final moisture content, it is necessary to obtainsuch final moisture content as completely equilibratedto the set air conditions of each experiment.Thus, only M i/M 0as modified MR was considered,assuming that M eis zero. Nindo et al (1995)used this simple expression, with moisture contentvalues on a percent dry basis. In this study, themoisture quantity ratio (MQR), defined as W i/W 0,was used. This has the same significance as M i/M 0because the moisture contents are expressed on apercent wet basis as measured in the experiments.MQR is the ratio of the moisture quantity, W i, at anytime to the initial moisture quantity, W 0, in a dryingprocess. This ratio was calculated by using thefollowing equation:W i = M i(1 – M 0)(3)W 0= M 0(1 – M i)where M iand M 0are as defined in equation 1.The plot of W i/W 0versus time, θ , for eachvariety is shown in Figure 4A, B, C, D, and E. Theresulting exponential W i/W 0curves at each settemperature may be expressed according to thefollowing equation:W i= a exp (–bθ) (4)W 0where parameters a and b were calculated using theleast squares method in the following linear equation:W i ln = lna + bθ (5)W 0The calculated values are shown in Table 2.Parameter b corresponds to the drying constant k inequation 2. Parameter a expresses the differenceresulting from the decrease in the standard index atthe initial moisture content, which is 1.0, after 1 hTable 2. Parameters a and b in the equationW i/W 0= a exp (bθ).Variety Air temperature a (× 10 –1 ) b (× 10 –2 , h –1 )(°C)Yaeminori 26 8.338 5.4727 8.303 5.8828 8.160 6.1127 8.261 7.4630 8.307 7.6336 8.170 10.57Koshihikari 30 8.454 5.4232 8.525 6.5634 8.471 7.8836 8.587 8.6038 8.568 9.9240 8.334 10.0344 8.228 14.5048 8.386 19.2552 7.796 18.95Hitomebore 30 8.152 4.5332 8.235 5.5234 8.324 6.5336 8.174 6.9238 8.294 7.9740 8.146 9.0542 8.253 11.03Tsugaruroman 30 8.151 7.6432 8.347 8.7034 8.069 9.1036 7.998 9.6838 7.828 10.0540 7.808 10.9842 8.815 15.45IR64 30 8.078 6.1132 8.020 6.8734 8.040 8.2636 8.020 8.2838 7.933 8.1440 8.151 12.1842 7.862 11.4244

Fig. 4. W i/W 0curves indicating the change in moisture quantity ratio (MQR) with time for each variety. A = Yaeminori, B =Koshihikari, C = Hitomebore, D = Tsugaruroman, E = IR64 (long grain).45

has elapsed from the start of drying. It is differentfrom the quantity of moisture reduction in the earlydrying stage. For Koshihikari, this difference from1.0 was generally small. This meant that for thisvariety the value of MQR is also small. In contrast,the opposite was true for Tsugaruroman. However,parameter a is generally subject to the weatherconditions during harvesting and successivehandling; thus, it is difficult to view it as a parameterexpressing varietal properties.Dependence on temperatureThe dependence of parameter b on absolute temperature,T (°K), was investigated using Arrhenius’sequation:–Bb = A exp(6)Twhere A and B are parameters expressing the respectivecharacteristics of each variety. The results ofcalculation using equation 6 are shown in Figure 5,which also shows the curves obtained for the fivevarieties.Parameter b is shown as related to the reciprocalof T in equation 6. Hence, as the drying rate increases,parameter b becomes larger and dependenceon temperature increases. It was confirmed that allthe varieties showed high drying parameter values aswell as high dependence of the drying constant k inNewton’s model on temperature.Relationship of whole fissure occurrence to dryingparameter bThe plot of whole fissure occurrence versus parameterb, as shown in Figure 6, shows remarkabledifferences in this relationship among the fivevarieties. Similar to the relationship between wholefissure occurrence and drying rate as illustrated inFigure 3, Figure 6 also shows that Yaeminori had thehighest whole fissure occurrence, followed byHitomebore and Tsugaruroman, which had approximatelythe same percentages of fissure occurrence.Koshihikari had the highest resistance to fissureoccurrence among the four medium-grain varieties,whereas the long-grain IR64 was by far the mostresistant among the five varieties. The strongresistance of long grains to fissure occurrence hasalready been reported by Srinivas et al (1977,1978a,b), Juliano and Perez (1993), and Lan andKunze (1996). The commercially available continuous-flowgrain dryer at present has no functioncontrol for drying rate corresponding to varieties andis manufactured with uniform drying ability.However, it is possible to add a function control thatFig. 5. Thermal dependence of drying parameter b.46

Fig. 6. The relationship between drying parameter b and whole fissure occurrence.A = Yaeminori, B = Koshihikari, C = Hitomebore, D = Tsugaruroman, E = IR64 (long grain).can easily change the rate of grain circulation in thedryer. Hence, a method to adjust the drying rate canbe contrived corresponding to the fissure resistanceof each variety.Conclusions and recommendationsConventional heated-air drying rates applied in therice industry can still be raised beyond the standardlimit. However, in raising the drying rate, the varietyto be dried has to be considered since varietaldifferences in fissure occurrence are great. Moreover,the drying air conditions should not be kept constantthroughout the drying process but should be easilyadjusted to suit a particular variety.It is recommended that the drying ability ofcommercial dryers not be set at a uniform rate but bemade adjustable according to the variety to be dried.It would be possible to respond to this idea byadding function controls to the dryer that can easilychange the drying rate. However, there is still theissue of taste value reduction caused by raising thegrain temperature, which needs to be considered anddiscussed, although this does not refer to the problemaddressed in this paper.ReferencesAgriculture, Forestry, Fishery Technological Council. 1971.Studies on drying and storage of raw rough rice. Res.Results 48. (In Japanese.)Ban T. 1971. Experimental studies on crack of rice inartificial drying. Natl. Agric. Mech. Inst., Tech. Rep.No. 8:13-16. (In Japanese.)Chinnan MS. 1984. Evaluation of selected mathematicalmodels for describing thin-layer drying of in-shellpecans. Trans. ASAE 27(2):610-615.Hukill WV. 1969. Drying of grain. In: Anderson JA,Alcock AW, editors. Storage of cereal grains and theirproducts. 2nd ed. American Society of AgriculturalEngineers. p 414-415.Japan Food Agency. 1956. Explanation on the standardsample of damaged grains and others concerning therice grain as domestic products. Tokyo (Japan): JapanFood Agency. p 1-11. (In Japanese.)Juliano BO, Perez CM. 1993. Critical moisture content forfissure in rough rice. Cereal Chem. 70(5):613-615.Kato K. 1985. Physical properties of agricultural productsand measuring method. 2nd ed. Tokyo (Japan):Japanese Society of Agricultural Machinery. p 253-257. (In Japanese.)Lan Y, Kunze OR. 1996. Fissure resistance of rice varieties.Appl. Eng. Agric. 12(3):365-368.47

Nagato K. 1963. Study on grain quality of rice. Part 1. Jpn.Soc. Crop Sci. 32:181-189. (In Japanese.)Nindo CI, Kudo E, Bekki E. 1995. Test model for studyingsun drying of rough rice using far-infrared radiation.Drying Technol. 13(1&2):225-238.Okamura T. 1937. Studies on fissure of rice. Ohara Agric.Inst., Agric. Sci. Res. 27:166-194. (In Japanese.)Schimdt JL, Hukill WV. 1956. Effect of artificial drying onthe yield of head rice and the germination of rice. RiceJ. 28-31.Srinivas T, Bhashyam MK. 1984. Varietal difference in thetopography of the rice grain and its influence on millingquality. J. Food Sci. 49:393-401.Srinivas T, Bhashyam MK, Mahadevappa M, DesikacharHSR. 1977. Varietal difference in crack formation dueto weathering and wetting stress in rice. Indian J. Agric.Sci. 47(1):27-31.Srinivas T, Bhashyam MK, Mahadevappa M, DesikacharHSR. 1978a. Intravarietal selection for low sheddingand crack resistance in rice. Indian J. Agric. Sci.48(12):747-751.Srinivas T, Bhashyam MK, MuneGowda MK, DesikacharHSR. 1978a. Factors affecting crack formation in ricevarieties during wetting and field stress. Indian J.Agric. Sci. 48(7):424-432.Takahashi E, Miura S, Itoh S, Takahashi T. 1973. Harvesting,drying, storage and quality taste of rice. Akita Pref.Agric. Exp. Sta. Rep. 18:107-118. (In Japanese.)Teranaka K, Genjyo T. 1967. Study on systematic analysisof fissure occurrence. Tohoku Agric. Exp. Sta., PromptRep. 7:37-43. (In Japanese.)NotesAuthors’ address: Supervising science specialist, PhilRice,Muñoz, Nueva Ecija, and retired professor, HirosakiUniversity, Hirosaki City, Japan, respectively.48

Session 2:Enhancing the profitabilityand sustainability of therice-processing business1

Factors affecting the use of mechanicaldryersA.C. Rodriguez and R.R. PazA survey was conducted to determine the factors affecting the use of mechanicaldryers by farmers’ cooperatives engaged in rice trading and milling. Sixty-ninepercent of the respondents answered positively as users of the technology and31% have either used or tried it but eventually stopped using it. The reasons forusing the technology were grouped and classified into five factors: climate, technology,socioeconomics, business, and training. Seventy-eight percent cited climateas the main factor. A majority of the respondents used the technology duringcontinuous rain only; others used it most of the time. Only a few indicated most ofthe time whenever there is wet grain. Some attributed the nonuse of mechanicaldryers to business factors and the owners themselves.Drying is the process of removing the excessmoisture of grains before storage and milling. Delayin drying grains immediately after harvest will causeserious damage to grain quality and reduce marketvalue in the process. Wet paddy left undried for 2 to3 d after harvest could result in “yellowing” ofkernels, discoloration of the hull, and/or germinationof the seed. Maize, when attacked by molds, producestoxins hazardous to human or animal health.Philippine agriculture is basically traditionaland “sun-drying” is a common practice. Farmers drytheir grains on mats, cement roads, and otherconcrete pavement. They handle relatively largevolumes so they don’t use mats. The adoption ofmechanical dryers has been rather slow despite theirbeing commercially available in the country as earlyas the 1970s.All people involved in the industry want to drytheir grains, be it farmers, traders, or millers. Dryingadds market value to the crop. Farmers and tradersnormally get P0.50 to P1.50 revenue per kilogram ifsun-drying is accomplished. Millers, on the otherhand, save the extra cost added to the buying pricefor dried grains.But sun-drying is unreliable and is a riskymethod of drying during the rainy season. Theburden of drying is being passed on from farmers tomillers. With the scarcity of “better” drying facilities,the market for wet grains is greatly affected.Drying slows down or stops when the rain becomescontinuous. Whoever has wet grains is bound toencounter losses.Mechanical dryers seem to be the logicalsolution to the drying problems of the grain industry.As early as the 1980s, big rice millers in Centraland Northern Luzon began using these machines.Common then were the continuous-flow andcolumnar batch type of dryers. The last decade alsosaw a large increase in the demand for these machines.From 1993 to 2000, the national governmentand local government units were able to assist in thedistribution of more than 1,000 units of smallcapacityrecirculating, flash, and flatbed dryers tofarmers’ cooperatives engaged in grain trading andmilling.Today, a variety of mechanical dryers exists allover the country. Some of these dryers are owned bythe private sector, a lot more by farmers’ cooperatives,and a few by local government units as servicefacilities. Surveys and monitoring of these dryershave sown very low use, despite their increasingnumber.This paper presents and describes the factorsaffecting use and nonuse of mechanical dryers byfarmers’ cooperatives, especially those engaged ingrain trading and milling.Drying practices and systemsAlmost everyone in the grain marketing systemperforms drying. Farmers, traders, and millers drytheir grains in varied styles, using different methods,and for different purposes and situations. Accounts ofdrying practices and systems from interviews offarmers, traders, and millers in some parts of southernMindanao are presented below.51

FarmersTypical farmers harvest grains from an average of1–2 ha of farmland. Given the opportunity, farmersdry the grains to maximize their income. They dosun-drying, use family labor, and preferably dodrying on roads or public pavement just to minimizedrying cost.During the rainy season, farmers may attempt todry grain, though the general practice is to dispose ofthe crop immediately after harvest. The risk fromlosses if drying is delayed is high. When the rainscome, and much as farmers would like to sell thegrains immediately, traders and millers stop buyingwet grains and/or bring down the buying prices tovery low levels.Farmers’ only hope is for the sun to shine. Wheremechanical dryers are available, farmers wouldconsider using them only to prevent further losses.Traders (small to large)Small traders at the production site have limitedcapital for procurement or, in some cases, none at all.Acting as agents for other traders or millers, theyderive income from commissions and/or margins thatthey add to prevailing farm-gate prices. Their optionto dry any wet grains passing through their tradingoperations is very attractive. In fact, they will do thisduring the dry months. On rainy days, small tradersprefer to buy only dried grains.Large traders, aside from their warehouse, havelarge investments in drying facilities. Drying is oneof their major profit-earning activities. Their dryingpavements have to be wide and have tarpaulin sheetsto cover the grains when rains occur. Large tradersmay have mechanical dryers as back-up facilities tosun-drying. The dryers provide them with a competitiveadvantage in grain procurement during rainydays.Many farmers’ cooperatives operate likelarge traders. But, unlike the latter, cooperatives areobligated to take in the farmers’ harvest, wet or dry,raining or otherwise. Some cooperatives havemechanical dryers.Big millersBig millers also engage in drying. They prefer to buywet grains so that they can dry them properly,resulting in better quality of milled products. Theirvolume of wet grain procurement is limited, however,only by their drying capacity. Big millers have semiorfully mechanized drying systems.The drying practices and systems of typicalfarmers and big millers have been summarized. Inbetween these two groups are traders and smallmillers, who face situations or conditions that definetheir needs for other drying systems, such as mechanicaldryers.Users and nonusers of mechanical dryersOne hundred forty-two cooperative respondents weresurveyed 1 by the Bureau of Postharvest Research andExtension to identify the factors affecting the use ofmechanical dryers by farmers’ cooperatives engagedin rice trading and milling. When asked whether theywere using their mechanical dryers in their ricepostharvest operations, 69% of the respondentsanswered positively as users of the technology. Theother 31% have either used or tried the machines buteventually stopped using them (Table 1).A majority of the users described their use as“seldom—during 2–3 days of continuous rain only”or “sometimes—when it rains.” Some cooperativesanswered “most of the time,” whereas only a few said“always—whenever there is wet grain.”Table 1 compares and describes the responses ofdryer owners when grouped according to their line ofbusiness. From the data, the percentage of farmers’cooperatives engaged in milling using mechanicaldryers was higher than the users among the farmers’cooperatives engaged in trading. Though thedifference is insignificant, it is also noted that themillers surveyed were not big millers. In fact, most ofTable 1. Usage of mechanical dryers by farmers’ cooperatives engaged in rough rice trading and millingbusiness, 2000.Usage Farmers’ cooperatives engaged in TotalTrading only Trading and milling Frequency %Frequency % Frequency %Users 49 68 49 70 88 69Nonusers 23 32 21 30 44 31Total 72100 70 100 1421001On-going research project: “A National Survey on the Utilization of Mechanical Dryers Among Farmers’ Cooperatives.”52

the traders had volumes comparable to those of themillers.Factors affecting the use of mechanicaldryersThe same respondents were asked why they used ordid not use the mechanical dryers. A variety ofreasons were given and identified. These reasonswere then grouped and classified, and five broadfactors were established: climate, technology,socioeconomics, business, and training (Table 2). Acomparison of factors on dryer use by type ofbusiness and by type of mechanical dryer is presentedin the following section.Dryer use by type of businessTable 2 summarizes the factors affecting the use ofmechanical dryers given by the 142 farmers’ cooperativerespondents engaged in trading only andfarmers’ cooperative respondents engaged in tradingand milling.Climate. Climate is the main factor in the use ofmechanical dryers among farmers’ cooperatives.Seventy-eight percent of the user-respondents citedclimate as their primary reason for using the dryers.The ability to dry when sun-drying is not possible isa factor that makes the respondents consider themechanical dryer as an alternative drying method tosun-drying. The data provided by those surveyedconfirm that a majority of the volume of grains driedusing the machine came from the wet-season harvest.Technology. Technology is the second importantfactor affecting the use of mechanical dryers asreported by 73% of the user-respondents. It isobvious that these respondents appreciate themechanical dryer and its advantages. Mechanicaldryers were cited as fast in drying, convenient, andeasy to operate. Some reasoned that less spillage andclean and better-quality grains are the advantages ofusing the dryers. Many farmers’ cooperative-millersrecognized that mechanically dried rough rice resultsin higher milling recovery and better-quality milledrice.Socioeconomics. Fifty percent of the respondentsregard socioeconomic factors as reasons forusing mechanical dryers. Two major issues related tothe use of mechanical dryers were identified: excessor lack of laborers and security of income throughprotection from drying losses.The users of mechanical dryers may haveproblems relating to labor used for sun-drying. Eitherthe labor force is difficult to maintain or support orthe lack of it favors the use of the drying machines.Table 2. Reasons for the use or nonuse of dryers by traderandmiller-respondents, 2000.Reasons/ Farmers’ cooperatives Totalfactorsengaged inTrading Trading and Frequency %only millingFrequency % Frequency %UsersClimate 40 8236 74 76 78Technology 39 80 33 67 7273Socio- 28 57 21 43 49 50economicsBusiness 11 22 7 14 18 18Number of 49 100 49 100 98 100usersNonusersTechnology 14 61 14 67 28 64Socio- 14 61 13 6227 61economicsClimate 7 30 10 48 17 39Business 3 13 4 19 7 16Training 29 4 19 6 14Number of 23 100 21 100 44 100nonusersThe use of mechanical dryers is not as risky assun-drying. The dryers assure users that no damagewill occur to the crop and that their income fromproduce will be guaranteed.Business. Eighteen percent of the user-respondentsattribute their use of mechanical dryers tobusiness factors. These pertain to the type and size ofbusiness that the users are engaged in. In particular, itis the volume of grains handled and the market thatthe users supply. For cooperatives, this involvescapitalization and the soundness of their businessactivities.Nonusers of mechanical dryers gave the followingreasons by factor.Technology. About 64% of the total nonuserrespondentsreported that the reason for not using themechanical dryer is related to the technology.Nonusers complained that the machine is toocomplicated to operate and that some of the unitsdelivered to them were defective. Others havedamaged units that they can repair or maintain.Socioeconomics. About 61% of the totalnonuser-respondents said that nonuse was because ofthe very high drying cost when the machines areused. At this level of costs, mechanical drying wouldbe a losing business.Climate. Thirty-nine percent of the totalnonusers preferred to sun-dry grains because of theavailable sunshiny days during harvest time.53

Business. Sixteen percent of the 44 nonusersattributed nonuse to business factors or to the ownersthemselves. Some farmers’ cooperatives wereinactive and had ceased drying operations, whereasother cooperatives had stopped their trading ormilling operations.Comparison of factors on dryer use by type ofbusinessGrain trading and milling were the two types offarmers’ cooperative businesses considered in thesurvey. Trading or “buy and sell” refers to thebusiness of buying grains from farmers at one endand selling the same grains to other large traders ormillers at the other end. Drying is done when thegrains purchased from the farmers are wet and themarket demands dried grains. Milling is the conversionof rough rice to milled rice. Millers also procurewet grains that they have to dry before milling.Traders and millers constitute the sectors of theindustry that handle wet grains in large volumes. Thefew big millers who are the market leaders in themilling industry are excluded from the analysisbecause they are already in the advanced class ofgrain processors. Besides, seldom do cooperativesfall within the leader category. Although both sectorsperform drying operations, their objectives andsystems are different.Table 2 also compares the factors of dryer usewhen the cooperatives are simply trading or engagedin milling. Both sectors made the same ranking of thefactors (as discussed above) in the user and nonusercategories. The differences in weight or percentageper factor are insignificant, which indicated that thecooperative millers more approximated the businessconditions of the traders than those of the private bigmillers with semi- or fully mechanized dryingsystems. Both sectors ranked climate as the numberonefactor, implying that cooperatives, traders, andmillers use the dryers mainly during rainy days.Dryer use by type of dryerThe 142 cooperative rough rice traders and ricemillers own 192 mechanical dryers (MDs). Of these,the flash dryers (mobile flash and rotary flash)represented the most at 114 units. The importedrecirculating dryers were 62 units and the flatbeddryers were 16 units.Sixty-eight percent of the 114 units of flashdryers were being used. On the other hand, 89% ofthe recirculating grain dryers were reported as usedand 62% for the other types of dryer.Table 3 summarizes the factors on dryer use bytype of dryer. The factors of use are enumerated andare grouped similar to those of the traders andmillers. Also, the ranking of the reason followsclosely the ranking of the reasons reported bycooperative traders and millers.Reasons of users of MDs by type. Climate or theinability to do sun-drying was the main reason thatthe flash dryer is being used. Sixty-nine percent ofthe user-respondents mentioned climate as the mainreason for using the mechanical dryer. The technologyfactor related to the attributes of the mechanicaldryer such as the ability to clean the grains andremove impurities was the second reason, reported by56% of the user-respondents. Ranking third iseconomic factors, reported by 37%. During inclementweather when sun-drying is not possible, usingthe flash dryer can prevent wet grains from furtherdeteriorating, thus reducing monetary losses.Table 3. Reasons of users/nonusers of mechanical dryers (MDs) by dryer type, 2000.Reasons/factors Flash dryer Recirculating Others a TotalFrequency % Frequency % Frequency % Frequency %UsersClimate 53 69 29 53 5 50 87 61Technology 48 62 29 53 2 20 79 56Socioeconomics 35 45 15 27 2 20 52 37Business 14 18 6 11 1 10 21 15No. of used MDs 77 100 55 100 10 100 142100NonusersSocioeconomics 25 68 4 57 6 100 35 70Technology 25 68 0 0 2 33 27 54Climate 14 38 3 43 233 19 38Business 3 8 229 3 50 8 16Training 4 11 1 14 1 17 6 12No. of unused MDs 37 100 7 100 6 100 50 10054

Both climate (53%) and technology (53%) arethe main factors enhancing the use of the recirculatingdryer. Users indicated that the recirculating dryeris fast and easy to operate. Also, fewer laborers arerequired to load and unload the grains. Economicfactors relating to the cost of drying were third(27%), suggesting that drying cost is perceived to be“lower” when this type of dryer is used comparedwith the flash dryer.Other dryers are the flatbed and reversible-flowflatbed type of mechanical dryer. Similar to the othertwo types of dryers, climate (50%) is the main factorin the use of these dryers. The other factors have asimilar weight at 20% each.Reasons of nonusers of MDs by type. The highcost of drying remains the main reason that the flashdryer is not used, as reported by 68% of the nonuserrespondents.Being a two-stage drying technologythat combines flash drying and sun-drying, thedrying cost is relatively higher than with the otherdrying technologies. Complaints about defects,being difficult to operate, and other problems relatedto technology are also reported by 68% of thenonuser-respondents. The ability to use sun-dryingranked third (38%), whereas operator’s training ondrying operations ranked as the fourth factor (11%).As with the other dryers, the high drying cost isthe number-one reason that recirculating dryers arenot being used (57%). Climate (43%) ranked second,followed by business (29%) and training (14%) ascontributing factors in the nonuse of the dryer. Nocomplaint was made about the technology.All of the nonusers of other types of dryersreported that the drying cost somehow stopped themfrom using the mechanical dryer. Discontinuance ofthe cooperative business also contributed to thenonuse of these dryers (50%).Comparison of factors on dryer use by dryertype. In general, responses by the different users showthat they are aware of the importance of the mechanicaldryer in maintaining good grain quality atharvest, particularly its effect on the quality of milledrice. Also, with the ease in operating the mechanicaldryer, particularly the recirculating grain dryers,anybody can be trained easily to operate the mechanicaldryer. A highly skilled and well-trainedoperator is not necessary for operating these mechanicaldryers because dryer operation is automaticallycontrolled.Dryer capacity matches the cooperative’s dryingrequirement. With the large volume of wet grains atharvest and during inclement weather, farmers’cooperatives can dry their procured stock at theearliest and in the fastest time to minimize qualityloss, thereby preserving grain quality, not to mentionreducing drying losses. Decreasing the possibility ofdrying losses caused by overdrying and spillage willincrease the income of both the cooperative and theindividual farmer-members.All of the nonusers of the mechanical dryer agreethat mechanical drying is costly. However, most ofthe negative comments and feedback by the nonusersof the mechanical dryer pertain to the technologydefects of the flash dryers.Summary/conclusions1. Different drying requirements define differentdrying systems. Farmers, traders, and millershandle different volumes of wet grains fordifferent purposes. Farmers will always try tomaximize income through sun-drying, whereasbig millers will always try to mechanize theirdrying operations for more stocks and qualityproducts. Farmers predictably will use mechanicaldryers to save their crop from further losses,after attempting sun-drying. The drying systemrequirements of cooperative traders and smallmillers have to be determined and clearlydefined.2. Although a majority of the dryer ownersconsider themselves as users of the technology,the degree of usage can be described as minimaland dependent on whether sun-drying ispossible or not. Obviously, mechanical dryersare considered as an alternative to sun-drying.The notion that mechanical dryers are “foremergencies only” seems a fitting description ofhow farmers, traders, and small millers perceivedryers.3. This notion is highly supported by the findingsof the survey that climate is the number-oneconsideration in using the dryers among theowners of the mechanical dryers. Second is theappreciation of convenience and high-qualityresults after mechanical drying attributable tothe technology.4. On the other hand, nonusers complain about thehigh costs of drying when using the machines.Whenever sun-drying is possible, they havedecided not to use their mechanical dryers. Otherconsiderations are of similar weight, such asproblems relating to the operation of themechanical dryers. Some of the nonusers wereinactive cooperatives with closed trading and/orbusinesses. Last among the factors was thereason that owners were not trained on how thedrying machines work.55

5. By type of mechanical dryer, the flash dryers areaccepted for their ability to dry grains quicklyduring rainy days. The recirculating dryers areappreciated for their ease in operation.BibliographyAndales S, Manebog E, Bulaong M. 1994. Food handling inthe Philippines. Nueva Ecija (Philippines): Institute forResearch and Extension.Cardino A. 1984. A socio-economic study on the utilizationof mechanical dryers. A Terminal Report. NAPHIRE,Muñoz, Nueva Ecija.NAPHIRE. 1994. Integrated rice-processing enterprise forfarmers’ cooperatives. NAPHIRE, Muñoz, NuevaEcija.NFA (National Food Authority). 1999. NFA-ITR dryerassistance program nationwide survey of the NFA-ITRmechanical grain dryers.Paz R et al. 1996. Aflatoxin in maize, Philippines (Phase II).Unpublished terminal report. NAPHIRE, Muñoz,Nueva Ecija, Philippines.Rodriguez AC. 1999. Factors affecting the continued use ofthe mobile flash dryers by farmers’ cooperatives,Nueva Ecija, Philippines. Unpublished MS thesis.Massey University, New Zealand.NotesAuthors’ address: Supervising science research specialistand director I, respectively, Bureau of PostharvestResearch and Extension, Muñoz, Nueva Ecija.56

The modern integrated rice business:a conceptF.V. BorromeoA modern integrated rice business (MIRB) was conceptualized as a profit-orientedbusiness enterprise. The enterprise operates with two basic industry functions ofrice production with postharvest processing and rice marketing. The MIRB consistsof four key components: farmer association/cooperative, modern postharvestprocessing facility, rice wholesale distributors, and agribusiness entrepreneurgroup. This concept was implemented on a 127-hectare farm developed into amodel rice farm in Victoria, Laguna, from 1983 to 1989. It was proven that a continuousand adequate supply of high-quality rice in the market can be achieved, farmerparticipants can earn a substantially increased income per hectare and can beliberated from borrowing money for farming expenses, and the integrated ricebusiness is profitable. However, the weakest link of the MIRB concept is the farmerswho are unwilling to change their traditional farming culture.In the 1960s and ’70s, I noted fundamental deficienciesthat I considered critical in the Philippine riceindustry. These were recurring seasonal supplyshortages with attendant unstable market prices andthe continuing poverty of small rice farmers who donot earn a fair share of the market value of rice.As a staple food, rice must be available in themarket throughout the year in sufficient quantities,have good quality, and have fairly stable prices. Yet,in spite of the well-known modern technologies ofrice farming and postharvest processing, the traditionalrice industry failed to maximize the use ofthese technologies to meet the needs of rice consumers.At the same time, although the Agrarian Reformmade the small rice farmers the owners of their ricefarms, thereby making them solely responsible fordeciding how to make the best use of the land, theystill failed to make the correct decisions that wouldincrease their income from rice farming. Theycontinued to produce little and to earn little.Obviously, it is in the national interest that riceshortages and poverty on rice farms be resolved,because they threaten social and economic stabilityand are a drag on national economic development.To pinpoint the problem areas in the principalsectors of the rice industry, I commissioned agraduate student of a business management school totrace the material process flow from the time the riceseed is planted on the farm to when the rice grain iscooked and consumed at the dining table. This studyguided me in undertaking my own commercial pilotproject for the purpose of developing a profitablemethod of rationalizing rice farming operations,postharvest processing, and rice marketing, whichwould increase productivity and cost efficiency onthe farm and in the postharvest plant, increase thequality of rough rice and milled rice, increase themarket value of rice, and assure continuity of the ricesupply in the market.This pilot project was carried out from 1983 to1989 in the following facilities:• A leased 127-ha rice farm in Victoria, Laguna,which developed into a productive model ricefarm.• A wholly owned modern postharvest facilityconstructed in Pagsanjan, Laguna—completewith mechanical dryers; conveyers; dried roughrice storage silos; rice milling, grading, andblending machinery; packaging equipment; anda quality control laboratory.From three separate activities in this pilotproject—farm rice production, rice postharvestprocessing, and milled rice marketing—the conceptof a modern integrated rice business evolved.Concept overviewThe integrated rice business is a business enterprisein agriculture—agribusiness—operated for profit. Itsmain purpose is to supply the rice requirements of its57

dedicated consumer market by producing its ownrough rice, which is processed into the milled ricerequired.The enterprise operates as a wholistic systemthat puts under a unified training and quality controlsupervision the two basic industry functions of ricefarming and postharvest processing, and directlymanages rice marketing. In this system, organizedgroup farmer rice production is directly linked topostharvest processing and milling operations, andboth are geared to supply the rice market of thesystem.Milled rice is the only product sold, not roughrice.Exploiting the higher market value of milledrice compared with that of rough rice, the enterprisetreats the three basic activities of the industry asexpenses and therefore as cost centers, whichtogether are deducted from the revenues of riceproduct sales to arrive at the gross margin of thebusiness. Thus, its income statement format is asfollows:• Revenues Sales of milled riceproducts• Cost of sales Expenses of riceproduction, postharvestprocessing, and milling• Gross margin Revenue minus cost ofsales• Operating expenses Expenses of administration,training, marketing,and finance• Net profit before Gross margin minusincome taxoperating expensesIn contrast, in the traditional rice industry, eachof the basic activities is generally a separate individualbusiness of the rice farmer, the miller, and thetrader. Under this setting, typical rice farmers earnonly a meager profit after deducting their farmingexpenses from sales of rough rice at farm-gate prices,which is one of the major reasons for their poverty.Concept componentsThe four key components of the modern integratedrice business are the following, with their respectivefunctional responsibilities:1. Farmer association/cooperative• A well-managed organization of selected,qualified, and trained small rice farmers whotogether pool their respective small farmsand organize them into supervised productionunits, and who work by group farminginstead of the traditional individual farmingpractice.• Implements for technically prescribedfarming methods that are market-oriented,planned, organized, scheduled, wellfinanced,budgeted, cost-controlled, andcentrally supervised with well-definedinputs of farm machinery and labor.• Contracts to produce the rough rice requirementsof the enterprise—specifications ofvolume, quality, production cost, anddelivery schedules.2. Modern postharvest processing facility• Located in the vicinity of the farm productionarea.• Is complete with machinery and equipmentto implement modern technologies ofmechanical rice drying, milling, grading,blending, and packaging of products.• Keeps sufficient inventory of dried roughrice between harvests to maintain anadequate and continuous rice supply in themarket throughout the year.• Contracts to process rough rice into therequired products of the enterprise—specifications of dried rough rice, millingyields, storage and packaging, processingcosts, and delivery schedules.3. Rice wholesale distributors• Qualified rice wholesale distributors withtheir respective network of qualified riceretailers who are the desired channels ofdistribution in the consumer market of theenterprise.• Cater to discriminating, quality-consciousrice customers who demand better ricequality for the price they pay.• Maintain adequate and continuous ricesupply in the market.• Participate in customer-oriented salespromotion programs of the enterprise.4. Agribusiness entrepreneur group• An entrepreneur organization of management,finance, marketing, and investmentinterests that sees the business opportunityin the concept and wants to implement it.• Identifies specific rice requirements of apotential dedicated rice consumer market.• Leads the establishment of the three othercomponents of the concept.• Packages the financial requirements of thefarmer association/cooperative.• Prescribes the technologies and work58

methods of rice production, postharvestprocessing, and milling operations.• Provides training and quality controlsupervision of rice production, postharvest,and milling operations.• Promotes and manages the marketing ofhigh-quality rice.• Provides overall management of theenterprise.The quality specifications for rough rice andmilled rice adopted by the enterprise are improvementsof National Food Authority (NFA) Grade IStandards for Palay and Milled Rice.Concept business management,productivity, and technology guidelinesManaging the integrated rice business enterprise isguided by the following principles:1. The supply of high-quality milled rice isdependent on the supply of high-quality roughrice.2. For a successful rice business, the critical factoris availability of a year-round adequate supplyof cost-competitive high-quality rough rice,which is totally dependent on the productionoutput of the rice farmer.3. Fundamental changes in traditional industrypractices are a prerequisite to the correction ofshortcomings on the farm, in the postharvestfacility, and in the rice market.4. The intervention of an agribusiness entrepreneurialorganization is required to make thechanges needed.The following are the productivity guidelines ofthe enterprise:I. Rough rice production goalsA. Crop harvestsper hectareB. Farm yield Per hectare—1 cropWet rough rice 5,000 kg25% moisturecontent (max)95% purity (min)II. Rough rice postharvest processing goalsA.. Dried rough rice 4,150 kg14% moisturecontent99% purity(weight correctionfactor = 0.83)(wet to dried roughrice based on aboveconditions)B. Rice milling yield per dried rough rice input• Hull 25% (4,150 kg) 1,037 kg• Brown rice 75% (4,150 kg) 3,113 kg4,150 kgC. Brown rice processing per dried rough riceinput• Bran 10% (4,150 kg) 415 kg• Milled rice 65% (4,150 kg) 2,697 kg3,113 kgIII. Milled products for sale in percent of brown rice• Grade I 70.5% 2,197 kg(extra)• Brokens 16.1% 501 kg13.3% 415 kg• Bran 3,113 kgTechnical guidelinesWith reference to commercially proven appropriatetechnologies, the enterprise prescribes technicalwork methods to achieve its goals of productivity onthe farm and in the postharvest facility. The followingelements illustrate these technical references:A. For rough rice productionElement A Rice plant stages for growth(guide to preparation oftime-activity schedule,cropping calendar—3 cropsper year—and productionbudget)Element B Programmed farming work(guide for using mechanicalfarm machinery in heavyphysical work)Element CProgrammed farming work(guide for light manualwork of individual farmers)B. For mechanical drying: to begin within 24hours after harvestingDrying curvesWet rough rice inputs at 24% and 26%moisture contentConcept conclusionsThis paper cited seasonal rice shortages and continuingpoverty of the rural small rice farmers as criticaldeficiencies in urgent need of correction. Lessonslearned from the pilot project that developed theconcept of an integrated rice business demonstratedways to correct these deficiencies.59

Operations of the business enterprise as designedprove that• A continuous and adequate rice supply inthe market can be achieved by translatingmarket requirements into year-round goalsof production on the farm and in thepostharvest facility.• Rice farmer-participants earn a substantiallyincreased monthly cash income per hectare,and furthermore are liberated from borrowingmoney for farming expenses and takingrisks of crop damage and fluctuating ricefarm-gate prices.• The integrated rice business becomesprofitable by• Selling only rice—all rough riceproduced is processed into milled rice;• Operating with economies of scale onthe farm, in the postharvest facility, andin the marketplace;• Increasing the productivity of work andthe quality of the product and reducingunit operating costs;• Using the resources of management,technology, methods engineering,finance, marketing, and trained andskilled personnel to reach the goals ofthe enterprise; and,• Altogether, satisfying customer marketneeds.To illustrate the disparity of monthly cashincome per hectare between traditional rice farmersand productive farmer-participants in the ricebusiness, two income statements are presented(Tables 1 and 2). Further information supporting thestatements in Table 2 is provided in Appendices Athrough D.Aside from the increased income benefits to therice farmers participating, the proforma incomestatement shows an attractive return to theagribusiness group, which now assumes the businessrisk, whereas the farmers are free of the burden offarming risks. Under this concept, the farmers canlook forward to a regular monthly cash income.Table 1. Isabela rice farmers’ organizations, reported net income per hectare, 1997. aItem Irrigators’ FIA-II CAMPUCO/ Pagsanggiran Triple-V IAassociation MPCI LUZON MPC Irrigators’AssociationWet rough rice yield (bags) 120 120 120 120 100per ha (50 kg bag –1 )Less: deductions (bags)Family use 20 21 20 20 20Leasehold share 15 15 12 15 18Harvester’s share – 6.5 8 9 7.5Threshing 8.4 7.5 8 8 6.5Hauling (animal) – – – 3 –Interest on other loan 10 – – 9 10Irrigation fee – 3 3 3 3Total deductions (bags) 53.4 53 51 67 65Rough rice quantity for sale (bags) 66.6 67.0 69.0 53.0 35.0Gross sales (pesos):Fresh palay sales:At P5.00 kg –1 16,650 16,750 17,250 13,250 8,750At P 7.50 kg –1 24,975 25,125 25,875 19,875 13,125Less: crop production expensesProduction loan (pesos) 10,000 – – – –Seeds – 900 1,200 1,500 1,400Land preparation 2,000 1,800 2,000 2,000 1,500Pulling (rice seedlings) 600 300 900 600 700Transplanting 1,500 1,500 1,200 1,500 1,200Fertilizer – 2,010 2,720 2,040 2,710Chemicals – 1,520 1,970 1,610 1,650Irrigation fee 1,000 – – – –Harvesting fee 2,000 – – – –Interest on loan – 1,281 – – –continued60

Table 1. continuedItem Irrigators’ FIA-II CAMPUCO/ Pagsanggiran Triple-VIAassociation MPCI LUZON MPC Irrigators’ AssociationTotal expenses (pesos)Net cash income (pesos)Per hectareAt P 5.00 kg –1 (450) 7,439 1 4,000.00 (410)At P 7.50 kg –1 7,875 15,814 15,876 10,625.00 3,965Per 2 crops ha –1 y –1At P 5.00 kg –1 (900) 14,878 14,502 8,000.00 (820)At P 7.50 kg –1 15,750 31,628 31,752 21,250.00 7,930Monthly cash income ha –1At P 5.00 kg –1 (75) 1,240 1,209 667 (68)At P 7.50 kg –1 1,313 2,636 2,646 1,771 661aFarmers interviewed did not submit documents to confirm the farm yield, sales, and farming expenses (cash or in-kind) they stated from memory. The lowcrop production expenses of P10,000 per ha are unrealistic; hence, their reported monthly cash incomes are questionable. b FIAD-II, MPCI, CAMPUCO, andLuzon MPC are names of farmers’ organizations in Isabela Province.Table 2. Modern integrated rice business, proforma income statement (amounts in Philippine pesos). aItem Per hectare—3 crops y –1AmountPercent of salesI. Sales 149,703 100.00II. Cost of sales (total farm/postharvest/packaging expenses)· 101,850 68.0• Rice production 86,730 57.9• Postharvest processing 13,626 9.1• Packaging 1,494 1.0III. Gross margin 47,853 32.0IV. Operating expenses 22,170 14.8A. Sales/administration 8,982 6.0B. Technicians-trainers/quality control supervisors (4% of sales) 5,988 4.0C. Financing cost· 7,200 4.8• Working capital (per ha—3 crops y –1 )·• Interest (per annum) (18%) 40,000V. Net margin (profit before income tax) 25,683 17.2VI. Return of working capital (per ha—3 crops y –1 ): 62.4%aBased on the operations of the pilot project. Figures are updated to reflect prevailing costs/prices in 1997 of the following items: rice selling prices, farmmaterial input costs, mechanical farming service fees, postharvest/rice milling fees, fuel/transportation costs, irrigation fees, crop insurance premiums,financing costs, and other costs.A word of caution is in order to the implementorof this concept: the weakest link in the chain of riceindustry resources is the traditional farmer, who isbogged down in an age-old, outmolded farmingculture and is reluctant to change. Putting the desirednontraditional productive farmer organization inplace is not easy. It takes expertise to search forfarmers who are likely to want to change and to train,orient, and organize them in their new role. Notwithstandingthis handicap, the modern integrated ricebusiness concept can very well be a model for themodernization of the Philippine rice industry andalleviation of rural poverty.NotesAuthor’s address: Agribusiness development consultant,Pagsanjan, Laguna.61

Appendix A. Modern integrated rice business, benchmark operating data.ItemPer hectare for 3 crops y –1 (kg)I. Farm yield 15,000Wet rough rice at 25% moisture content, 95% purityII. Postharvest processingA. Dried rough rice at 14% moisture content, 99% purity 12,450(wet rough rice to dried rough rice based onabove conditions)(weight-loss factor = 0.83)B. Milling yield (net of milling losses)Dried rough rice input: 100%·• Hull 25% (12,450 kg)· 3,111• Brown rice 75% (12,450 kg) 9,339C. Milled products for sale in percent of brown rice·• Grade I (extra) 70.5% (9,339 kg)· 6,591• Brokens (mix rice) 16.1% (9,339 kg)· 1,503• Bran 13.3% (9,339 kg) 1,245III. Projected sales (P) Retail kg –1 Wholesale kg –1 AmountGrade I (extra) 23.50 20.00 131,820Brokens (mix rice) 10.50 9.00 13,527Bran 3.50 4,356Total 149,703Appendix B. Modern integrated rice business, proforma rice production expenses.Item Per hectare—3 crops y –1Amount (P)Percent of salesA. Rice farmer association/cooperative contract fees 42,000 28.061. Farmer fees (use of farm, manual labor, 36,000 24.05crop security)2. Association/cooperative margin 6,000 4.01B. Materials input costs 20,430 13.65• Certified seeds 3,900 2.61• Fertilizers 9,120 6.09• Chemicals 7,410 4.95C. Mechanical farming service fees 16,950 11.32• Land preparation 6,600 4.41• Direct seeding 1,350 0.90• Harvest and threshing 6,750 4.51• Rough rice hauling 2,250 1.50(farm to postharvest facility)D. NIA a irrigation fees 3,600 2.40E. Crop insurance premium 3,750 2.50Total rough rice production expenses 86,730 57.93aNIA = National Irrigation Administration.62

Appendix C. Integrated rice business, proforma rice postharvest processing expenses (ref: NFA Northern Philippines GrainsComplex Fees).Item Quantity Fee Per hectare—3 crops y –1(kg)(P)Amount Percent of(P)salesA. Rough rice mechanical drying• Weighing (fresh) 15,000 0.01 kg –1 150 0.10• Drying 12,450 0.049 kg –1 6,100 4.08B. Rice milling 12,450 0.50 kg –1 6,225 4.16C. Storage• Dried rough rice 12,450 0.065 kg –1 mo –1 1,151 0.76• Bagged milled rice 8,094 0.042 kg –1 mo –1(equivalent to 3 mostorage)Total postharvest processing expenses 13,626 9.10Appendix D. Proforma packaging expenses, per hectare—3crops y –1 .Item Cost per bag Amount Percent(P) (P) of salesTotal packaging expenses 1,494 1.00• Products to bag (kg)Bran 1,245 Material 6Rice 8,094 Labor 2Total 9,339 Total 863

The cooperative rice milling businessF.M. TorrizoThis paper presents the experiences in a cooperative rice milling business of SusiFoundation Inc., established in 1989 as part of the Integrated People’s LivelihoodCooperative System. Government and private organizations planning to ventureinto a cooperative rice milling business must carefully consider the following technicaland socioeconomic realities: (1) selling dried rough rice has no advantageover selling wet rough rice, (2) pricing of rough rice should be the same for membersand nonmembers of a cooperative, (3) different places have different ricequality preferences, and (4) mechanical dryers can never be financially viable as astand-alone technology.Susi Foundation Inc. was established in 1989 as partof the Integrated People’s Livelihood CooperativeSystem (IPLCS), the precursor of the “KABISIG”program. The IPLCS is a nationwide nongovernmentorganization (NGO) movement replicating the modelof the People’s Livelihood Foundation (PLF), whichwas eventually called the Tarlac Integrated LivelihoodCooperative (TILCO) organized by BernabeBuscayno in Capas, Tarlac. It tapped the resourcesand expertise of government organizations andNGOs in planning and implementing integratedagricultural development programs involving riceproduction, postproduction, and marketing. TheIPLCS was implemented in 12 provinces andinvolved the following 13 NGOs:NGOProvince1. All Move Foundation Bulacan(All Move)2. Alay Tangkilik Nueva EcijaFoundation (ATF)3. Bikol Institute of Camarines SurDevelopmentTechnology(BIDTECH)4. Bukidnon Development BukidnonFoundation (BSDF)5. Meralco Foundation Rizal(MF/RIPPLE)6. Mt. Malasimbo Agro- BataanIndustrial DevelopmentFoundation (MMSF)7. Negros Kabisig Negros OccidentalLivelihoodFoundation(NKLF)8. Pampanga Agro- PampangaIndustrial DevelopmentFoundation (PAIDF)9. Pangasinan People’s PangasinanDevelopmentFoundation (PPDF)10. People’s Livelihood TarlacFoundation11. Susi Foundation Inc. Quezon(SUSI)12. Tarlac Agro- TarlacIndustrial DevelopmentFoundation (TILCO)13. Tinguha Foundation South Cotabato* Technical Assistance DavaoCenter for theDevelopment ofRural and Urban PoorInc. (TACDRUP)Integrated People’s LivelihoodCooperative SystemThe general objective of the IPLCS is to implementan integrated people’s livelihood program byassisting farmers and their households in developinga viable, sustainable, and effective livelihood systemthat could serve as a learning venue for othercommunities and development managers. Morespecifically, the objectives are to• Build a farmers’ organization with enoughmembership to organize and implement a viableeconomic activity,• Set up a system of cooperation among theparticipants, particularly in production activities64

that could bring about optimum gains for them,and• Establish a system in which NGOs can bepartners of government in delivering services tothe poor.The IPLCS had the following program components:• Organizational institutional support• Low-cost credit• Training and appropriate technology• Postharvest facilities• Marketing supportSusi Foundation Inc.The Susi Foundation Inc. (SUSI) is a privatelyowned, nongovernment organization operatingamong farmers and rural workers in District II ofQuezon Province. Its activities are as follows:1. Cooperatives for National TransformationProject. In this activity, SUSI seeks to catalyzethe formation, growth, and strengthening ofpeople-powered cooperatives through organization,education, and mobilization for development.Activities include the following:• Bahay Tuklasan—a seminar house withlive-in facilities for 40 participants• Bahay Sanayan—a handicraft house• Model agricultural projects2. SUSI DOST IV Pilot Project on the production ofcompost or organic fertilizer3. SUSI Ten-Hectare Reforestation Project4. SUSI Sustainable Agricultural Project5. IPLCS Project. This is a project among theTechnology Livelihood and Resource Center(TLRC), a government institution, and SUSI,which aims to improve the socioeconomic andpolitical conditions of the rice farmers ofQuezon Province by organizing them andeventually empowering them to manage the riceindustry complex from production to marketing.The project has the following components:a. Crop production loan• P8,000 ha –1 for regular rice production• P14,000 ha –1 for organic rice production• P18,000 ha –1 for organic seed production• An 18–20% interest rate per annum• Insured under PCIC (Philippine SeedBoard recommended varieties)• Payable at the end of the croppingseason/harvestb. Equipment loan• Power tillers, pumps, threshers, etc.• A 24% interest rate per annum• Payable in 1 year/2 croppingsc. Postharvest facilities service• Transportation• Mechanical dryer (40 t d –1 capacity)- 4 silos, batch type- Rice hull-powered furnace- P30 per 45 kg dry rough ricedrying fee• Rice mill (3 t rice ha –1 capacity)- 2 hullers- 2-stage whiteners- P40 per 50 kg milled rice millingfee• Warehouse (2,000 m 2 )d. Rice trading/marketinge. Seed productionf. Carabao loan• Organic rice products• An 18% interest rate per annum• Payable in 1 year/2 croppingsg. Equipment rental serviceThe project is envisioned to be owned by afederation of farmers, rice traders, and employeecooperatives in the near future.Experiences/observations in the IPLCSproject1. The crop production and equipment loans wereinitially thought of as doles just like othergovernment loans.2. Farmer-members with 1 ha of rice land or lesscan be considered a high risk for loans. One ortwo cropping errors or losses eventually makethem incapable of paying, unless they haveother sources of income.3. The 18–24% interest rate per annum for crop andequipment loans is usually thought of asexcessive. However, if the cost of money is 12%per annum and the cost of crop insurance isabout 5% per annum (two croppings), then thenet income becomes very insignificant whenconsidering the management cost.4. Loans passing through a farmers’ credit committeeresult in higher loan repayment.5. The pricing of rough rice varies from place toplace subject to the postproduction handling offarmers in the area. In Laguna, which practices aharvesting-threshing system, the price of roughrice is usually lower by 30 to 50 centavos per kg65

than in Quezon, which practices the harvestinginfielddrying-threshing system.6. The price of rough rice is dictated by theprevailing price of rice in the market. Theavailability of low-priced rice/imported ricebrings down the price of rough rice.7. For business purposes, the pricing of rough riceshould be the same for both members andnonmembers.8. In a highly competitive rice business, there is noadvantage in selling dried rough rice overselling wet rough rice. Sometimes, millers evenprefer to purchase wet rough rice, especially ifthey have dryers, as they can monitor theprocessing of the rice. Sometimes, dried roughrice is deceiving in appearance.9. Dryers are necessary. However, they can never befinancially viable by themselves.10. Sun-drying gives a higher whiteness index thanmechanical drying. Besides, it is a lot cheaperthan mechanical drying.11. Milling efficiency varies because of manyfactors. However, one of the most significant isthe brewers’ rice screen.12. Different municipalities/places have differentrice preferences. While some look for goodeating quality, others look for a lower price.13. The rice industry has no permanent customers.14. Although rough rice buying, storage, andmilling usually result in a higher margin persack, rice trading, which does not involvestorage, sometimes has the same margin consideringthe time involved.15. The IPLCS should be managed like a businesscorporation by professional managers and staff.There should be a marked delineation betweenthe business aspect and the socioeconomicaspect of the project.16. With a milling capacity of 9,000 t y –1 (180,000bags y –1 ), the SUSI-IPLCS with the recommended49 staff members, including handlers/temporary workers, is overstaffed. With itspresent staffing of 22 regular employees and 17temporary workers, it is still considered overstaffed.A study showed that a mill with thiscapacity needs only 12 regular employees and10 temporary workers.17. For SUSI-IPLCS to operate at full capacity, itneeds three times its present capitalization.ConclusionsFor a rice milling business to be successful, whetherit is owned and operated by an NGO or a privateorganization (cooperative), the interests of theindividual members should be accounted for first.Benefits should be looked at only after all processesare accomplished and costs accounted for. As thesaying goes, “In business, there are no such things asbrothers and sisters,” but the fruits of the businessshould be divided equally among all who are part ofit.NotesAuthor’s address: manager, Susi Foundation, Inc.66

Session 3:Institutional developmentthrough information,training, and extension1

Development and promotion of the Maligayaflatbed dryerE.C. Gagelonia, E.U. Bautista, M.J.C. Regalado, and R.E. AldasA high-capacity flatbed dryer developed in Vietnam using rice hulls for fuel wasmodified, evaluated, and developed under Philippine conditions. This dryer hasthree main parts: the drying bin, blower, and rice hull furnace. It was modified to suitthe needs of farmer cooperatives in the Philippines. This modified design waslocally named the Maligaya flatbed dryer.This flatbed dryer solved farmers’ problems in paddy drying. This dryer had alower drying cost than the existing dryers mainly because of the use of rice hulls asfuel, the low labor requirement and cost, the low repair/maintenance cost, and thehigher drying capacity than that of similarly priced dryers.One hundred thirteen units of the Maligaya flatbed dryer were built and are nowoperational in different regions of the Philippines. Adopters include private entrepreneurs,local government units, and farmer-cooperatives that also financed theconstruction of the dryers. The Philippine Rice Research Institute (PhilRice) providedtechnical assistance during installation, including training of operators onthe proper operation of the dryer.The adopters are successfully using the dryers on a commercial scale. Thedryers are also used to dry maize, soybean, coffee, and banana chips. According toone adopter in Solano, Nueva Vizcaya, operation of this dryer resulted in more profitin coffee and maize drying. The investment cost can be recovered in less than ayear if the dryer is used for coffee drying. For this, the annual use is 30 t with a20.5% internal rate of return. Likewise, one adopter in Muñoz, Nueva Ecija, had anet income of P40,000 from custom drying during the 1998 dry-season harvestperiod, which was one-third of his investment cost in setting up the dryer.Based on the adopters’ experiences, critical factors that should be consideredin the promotion of the dryer are management capability of the adopter, location ofthe installation with respect to the rest of the community, and the training/skills ofthe operator.Paddy drying is one of the most critical operations inthe postharvest process. This is also a problembecause of humid conditions at harvest time,particularly during the wet season and in areas thatare continuously wet or that have no distinct wet anddry seasons.In the Philippines, the moisture content of thegrain is commonly lowered by sun-drying. This isstill the predominant practice even if mechanicaldryers are available since sun-drying is cheaper, themilling quality of sun-dried paddy is believed to bebetter, and mechanical dryers have a limited capacity(Andales 1995). With the double-cropping system inmost rice production areas and with one harvestseason coinciding with the rainy period in most riceareas, mechanical dryers can maximize the value ofthe wet-season harvest.So far, the simplest mechanical dryer developedfor Philippine conditions is the flatbed dryer.Originating from the University of the Philippines atLos Baños (UPLB) and developed and promotedfurther by the International Rice Research Institute(IRRI), the flatbed dryer was introduced in the late1970s to early ’80s to rice farmers. This technologywas not widely adopted, however, because of severalconstraints, which were mainly socioeconomic ratherthan technical in nature (Sison et al 1983). Thereasons for nonadoption were the dryer’s high fuelcost/high operating cost, poor quality of processedrough rice, inconvenient drying operation, limitedcapacity, and short time of use (Cardino 1985).Vietnam’s experience with flatbed dryers,however, was in contrast with that of the Philippines.Based on the IRRI design, locally modified flatbed69

dryers along the Mekong Delta were reported to bepopular (Hien et al 1995). The dryer was modified toaccommodate a larger volume of rice to dry (withmodels having capacities of 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, and 8 tonsper batch). To reduce the operating cost, all modifieddryers used rice hull waste to heat the air. Localmaterials were also used in its construction to reducethe investment cost. Now, these dryers are usedintensively in the region for custom drying (Hien1991).ObjectivesIn 1994, PhilRice embarked on a collaborativeproject with the University of Agriculture andForestry, Ho Chi Minh City, Vietnam, to assess theadaptability and acceptability of the Vietnamdesigneddryer in the Philippines; to promote andaccelerate the adoption of mechanical rice dryers inthe country; to create awareness among seed growers,farmer-cooperatives, private entrepreneurs, and otherfinancing institutions on the technology and itsbenefits; and to ensure the quality and viability ofthe rice harvest through proper and timely drying.MethodologyData and information from previous studies on thedevelopment and promotion of the flatbed dryer weregathered. We analyzed and determined the causes ofits low adoption and failure in its promotion.Based on the previous studies, the constraints towide adoption were more socioeconomic thantechnical in nature. These include the dryer’s highfuel cost, higher labor requirement, and slow rate ofdrying (Cardino 1985). Also, one reason mentionedby users is the lack of skill in proper operation andthe incompatibility of the drying capacity with thetotal requirement (Sison 1983, NAPHIRE 1990).Existing flatbed dryers were studied andevaluated to select a simple design that could beimproved and made appropriate at the farm level.The flatbed dryer designs introduced by UPLB andIRRI during the late 1970s to early ’80s were alreadysimple and low-cost. These flatbed dryers had acapacity of 1–2 t per batch and a kerosene burner asthe heat source. Also, a rice hull furnace developedby IRRI was used as an alternative heat source. Thisfurnace was equipped with a vibrating ash grate andan inclined step feeder. However, these designs didnot gain wide acceptance because of the high dryingcost and their small capacities. A design with ahigher capacity and low drying cost that usesbiomass fuel was thus needed to fit the farmers’requirement.In Vietnam, five models of flatbed dryers weredeveloped. Of these, the SHT-6 was selected since itscapacity (6 t batch –1 ) was suited to the farmers’average production. This dryer has a design similarto that of the 2-t flatbed dryer of UPLB and IRRI. In1992, the Philippine Rice Research Institute set up a6-t-per-batch dryer based on the Vietnam design toevaluate its suitability to Philippine conditions(Gagelonia et al 1994).Results and discussionImprovement and evaluation of the Maligayaflatbed dryerModifications were made, particularly in the bin, byusing hollow blocks and cement instead of firebricksas in the original design. The IRRI rice hullfurnace was adapted to the dryer as the heat source.However, it was observed that the vibrating ash gatewas worn out after one season. This was replacedbecause it could no longer be moved, which resultedin an accumulation of ashes in the grate. The materialcould be replaced by cast iron but it is expensive.Similarly, because of the high temperature in thecombustion area, the top portion of the furnace frameexpanded. This caused breakage of the fire-brickwall.The furnace design was improved to make thefurnace durable and lessen the repair and maintenancecost. A stationary inclined grate was adoptedand an arched design in place of the flat top surfacewas used. The rice hull feed control was madesimpler by placing a metal trap in the lower end ofthe hopper, which can be opened and closed, ratherthan adjusting the metal sheet on one side of thehopper. With this improved design (Fig. 1), the gratelasted longer and it could be used even whendeformed, and the feed control is easier to use.Breakage of the fire-brick wall on top was likewiseminimized.The modified dryer, called the Maligaya flatbeddryer (Fig. 2), has the following parts:Drying bin. The drying bin was constructed fromreinforced hollow blocks (10 × 15 × 20 cm) andcement. It has a dimension of 702 × 402 × 130 cmwith a maximum grain depth of 52 cm (the distanceof the false floor from the top). It has several windowsfor grain unloading. The perforated false floor ismade of 22-gauge perforated sheets with 2.44-mmdiameterholes and is supported by 4 × 8-cm woodenframes. The plenum has two openings, one at the rear,70

Fig. 1. Modified rice hull furnace.Fig. 2. The Maligaya flatbed dryer.71

which is bolted with 2-mm galvanized iron sheetsfor cleaning purposes, and the other in front, wherethe blower is connected for air entry.Blower. The blower has a diameter of 75 cm andconsists of 10-vane axial-type blades. It runs at 1,600rpm to deliver around 0.83 m 3 s –1 t –1 of paddy at 30-mm water static pressure at a power requirement of 9kw. The output of the blower is channeled to theplenum through a round metal opening using a clothcanvas transition duct to prevent effects of fanvibration on the bin.Rice hull furnace. The step grate furnace is madeof fire-bricks and a steel frame. It is composed ofthree sections: the first serves as the combustionchamber and the other two trap ash from the heatedair before it is diverted into the duct and plenum. Thefurnace has dimensions of 110 × 89.5 × 121 cm andis designed to consume 20–50 kg h –1 of rice hulls.Testing and evaluationSeven test runs were conducted during the evaluationof the dryer. The drying tests showed thataround 5 t of paddy at initial moisture content of 22–26% could be dried to 14% in 4–6 h at drying airtemperature of 43–49 °C (Table 1). The moistureremoved ranged from 285.5 to 502.5 kg, correspondingto a mean drying rate of 1.5–2.1% moisturecontent h –1 . The moisture content difference betweenthe top and bottom layer ranged from 0.5% to 2.1%,which is almost the preferred value of 2%. Thefurnace had a rice hull consumption rate of 21.0–32.5 kg h –1 and was capable of maintaining thedrying air temperature at 41–50 °C.Table 2 shows data on the average millingquality of rough rice. The highest milling recoverywas 65.60% and the lowest was 57.14%. Millingrecovery of rough rice dried in the dryer was comparablewith that of the control (rough rice dried undera shade). Head rice recovery (HRR) was reduced at ahigh drying air temperature. Thus, the drying airtemperature affected the HRR.Table 3 presents the average paddy germinationdata at different drying air temperatures. Therelationship of the drying air temperature to germinationwas significant such that overexposure of paddyto high air temperature resulted in low germination.Wimberly (1983) had proven that, at a dryingtemperature of 45 °C, rough rice could stand the heatfor 75 min without its viability being affected. Onthe other hand, the Philippine Council for Agricul-Table 1. Results of drying tests at different grain depth, fan speed, and drying air temperature for the PhilRice-Maligayaflatbed dryer, PhilRice, 1994.ItemTest no.1 2 3 4 5 6 7Crop productionInitial MC a (%) 24.0 23.2 22.5 22.922.7 26.0 30.0Final MC (%) 15.3 14.0 14.1 13.4 13.8 14.0 14.1Initial wt. (t) 4.7 3.5 2.94.8 4.8 5.8 5.0Final wt. (t) 4.3 3.2 2.6 4.3 4.3 5.1 4.4Grain depth 27.0 24.3 19.9 29.8 29.6 35.0 31.3Ambient conditionsTemperature (°C) 31.0 33.5 32.0 31.0 33.0 31.0 30.0Relative humidity (%) 75 64 67 75 60 72 85Drying resultsDrying air temperature (°C) 43 43 41 43 51 4943Drying time (h) 5.5 5.0 5.3 5.0 4.0 6.0 10.0Drying capacity (kg h –1 ) 1,1491,053 479 853 1,076 895 1,250Top and bottom, MC (diff., %) 2.1 1.8 0.5 2.0 1.8 2.0 2.1Moisture removed (kg) 443.0 346.5 285.5 525.5 495.6 502.6 572.8Drying rate (% MC h –1 ) 1.6 1.8 1.5 1.92.2 2.0 1.6% MC reduction 8.7 9.2 8.4 9.5 8.9 12.0 15.9Rice hull consumption (kg) 145 105 137 160 130 180 300Feeding rate (kg h –1 ) 26.4 21.0 25.8 32.0 32.5 30.0 30.0Fan operationStatic pressure (mm water) 1916 15 17 20 22 22Airflow rate (m 3 s –1 m –2 ) 0.22 0.190.190.190.21 0.22 0.22Airflow (m 3 s –1 ) 6.2 5.3 5.5 5.5 6.2 6.2 6.2RPM 1,750 1,500 1,450 1,630 1,620 1,700 1,700aMC = moisture content.72

Table 2. Average milling quality of paddy at different graindepth and drying air temperature, PhilRice, 1994.Grain Drying Milling Head Brokendepth air recovery rice rice(cm) temp. (%) recovery (%)(°C) (%)19.9 41 58.7 87.6 12.124.3 43 61.7 88.2 11.627.0 43 65.6 88.5 11.229.6 51 57.1 82.3 17.229.8 43 61.1 88.2 11.531.3 43 63.5 88.1 11.935 4964.2 84.2 15.8F value a 1.72 ns 31.64** 26.69**R 2 0.51 0.95 0.94ans = not significant. ** = significant at the 1% level.Table 3. Average percentage germination of paddy atdifferent grain depths and drying air temperature,PhilRice, 1994.Grain depth (cm) Drying air temp. (°C) Germination (%)19.9 41 90.324.3 43 91.827.0 43 85.729.6 51 72.329.8 43 92.531.3 43 91.635.0 4975.8F value a 27.93R 2 0.94a** = significant at the 1% levelture, Forestry, and Natural Resources Research andDevelopment (1987) recommended a drying airtemperature of 43.3 °C for seed purposes.PromotionStrategy. During the initial promotion activities, thelargest group was the seed growers and cooperativesthat could afford the dryer and that had an incentivefor drying. In the promotion of the PhilRice-Maligaya flatbed dryer, several important aspectswere considered.Technical assistance is needed in the constructionof the furnace and in the provision of jigs andfixtures for the construction of the blower assembly.Testing of every dryer installed was part of thedissemination strategy in order to monitor theperformance of newly installed setups at the sites, aswell as assure adopters of reliability and technicalsupport.Training of operators is an important componentof dissemination that must always accompany theinstallation of new dryer setups. This hands-ontraining includes familiarization with dryingprocedures and furnace operation, an adjustmentprocedure for drying temperature, a briefing oncritical factors such as effect of temperature, andmoisture content determination. The skills of theoperator are very important in the adoption of thistechnology. The operator must be knowledgeableabout controlling the drying air temperature andfeeding the rice hulls. The operator must also have abasic knowledge about the drying process.Initial activities for disseminating informationon this drying technology included the following:• Development and dissemination of printedmaterials (bulletins, leaflets)• Television programs (in collaboration with theTechnology Livelihood Resource Center,TLRC, the dryer was featured on the national TVagricultural programs “Agrisyete” and “Agri-Link”)• Press releases (Philippine Panorama, MaridDigest, Animal Husbandry, and AgriculturalJournal)• Briefings and demonstrations (during rice seedproduction training and farmer visits toPhilRice)• Custom drying at PhilRice during the initialpromotion of the dryer to make seed growers inthe adjacent community aware of its value.For training of manufacturers, initially, interestedowners of small farm machinery repair andwelding shops were invited to participate in a 5-dhands-on training on the fabrication of the blowerassembly and furnace frame. This training alsoincluded the fabrication of jigs for the fan, a briefingon the operation of the dryer, and a visit to one of theadopters of the Maligaya flatbed dryer. Succeedingtraining included bigger manufacturers.Monitoring of adopters. At present, 113 dryerunits are installed in different regions of the Philippines.The dryer was used mostly in drying paddyand other grains such as maize and coffee. Most ofthe adopters used the dryer in drying their ownharvest and some used it for custom drying. Others,such as cooperatives, used the dryer in drying theharvest of their members at a minimal fee.For rough rice drying, a seed grower in NuevaEcija, farming 20 ha, used the dryer for his ownharvests. The dryer was also used in custom dryingthe harvest of farmers in neighboring towns. Thedrying fee charged to farmers was P25 bag –1 , includ-73

ing loading and unloading of rough rice in the dryer.Based on the actual drying operation in 1995 (Table4), the cost was only P0.23 kg –1 at an annual use of300 t y –1 .Likewise, one of the adopters in Muñoz, NuevaEcija, had a net income of P40,000 from customdrying of paddy during the 1998 dry-season harvest,which is one-third of his investment cost in settingup the dryer.A farmer organization in Isabela used the dryerto dry maize. The Diocese of Ilagan, Isabela, financedthe dryer and the foundation is being managed bythe Good Shepherds Sisters. The members could drytheir harvest and the fee collected paid for the cost ofsetting up the dryer. The foundation is now supplyingmaize for a feed mill in Zambales.For multicrop drying, an entrepreneur fromSolano, Nueva Vizcaya, was successful in his coffeeand maize trading business when the dryer wasinstalled. Before adoption, he had had large lossesbecause of the deterioration of coffee and maizeduring the wet season. From his drying operation in1997 (Table 5), the drying cost was P1.18 kg –1 at anannual use of 120 t.The dryer in Aurora, Isabela, is being hired todry commercial rough rice and maize. According tothe owner, mixing of rough rice was done during thedrying process to lessen the drying time and toaccommodate 2–3 batches of drying for 24-hoperation. With the continuous use of the dryer, thefurnace collapsed after drying 20,000 bags. In spiteof this, the investment was recovered in just twoseasons and only P1,000 was spent for repairing thefurnace.During monitoring, we found out that someadopters constructed the Maligaya flatbed dryer ontheir own without requesting assistance or thepresence of the accredited manufacturers. Thisresulted in a longer drying time, overdried paddy,and high drying air temperature. In one case, thetransition duct (canvas cloth) burned because a flameinstead of hot air was coming out of the furnace.The introduction of the Maligaya flatbed dryersolved the adopters’ problem in paddy drying. Basedon actual drying operations, the dryer was found tohave a lower drying cost than other existing mechanicaldryers, which are imported. This was mainlybecause of the following: (1) the use of rice hulls asfuel, (2) low labor requirement and cost, (3) lowrepair/maintenance cost, and (4) drying capacity ishigher than that of similarly priced dryers.During on-site evaluation of the dryer, it wasobserved that the following should be considered forthe introduction of the technology:• Management capability. For the technology tobe effective and efficient, the adopter must havethe capability to operate and manage the dryingoperation and other related activities. Forcustom operation, the adopter should have agood relationship with prospective customersand should be service-oriented.• Location of the dryer with respect to the rest ofthe community. The dryer must be installed in aplace where drying activities are not hampered,even for operations at night. Proper handlingand disposal of the rice hulls and ash must beobserved to not irritate neighbors in the community.• Training of operator. The skills of the operatorare very important in the adoption of thistechnology. The operator must know how tocontrol the temperature and to feed the ricehulls. The operator must also have a basicknowledge of the drying process.Conclusions and recommendationsBased on tests and actual operation, the Maligayaflatbed dryer was found to have a lower drying costthan that of existing mechanical dryers because ofthe use of rice hulls as a heat source. It is simple andeasy to operate, it has a low maintenance cost, it candry grains completely to 13%, it has a lower investmentcost than other dryers with the same capacity,the drying air temperature can be regulated, and itcan dry seed and rough rice for commercial purposes.However, its operation is still manual and the ashshould be removed from the dryer at regular timeintervals.The adoption of the Maligaya flatbed dryersolved the farmers’ problems of drying rough rice.The flatbed dryer can be an alternative method fordrying rough rice and other grains during the wetseason. With the increasing number of adopters, itcan be inferred that the dryer is socially acceptable.Moreover, the year-round use of the dryer even forother crops also increases its profitability. It isrecommended for use by traders, farmer-cooperatives,or seed growers. However, technical assistance andtraining of operators are necessary for the successfulintroduction of a dryer. Training of manufacturersalso facilitated dissemination of the dryer to otherparts of the country.74

Table 4. Economics of using the PhilRice-Maligaya flatbed dryer based on actual drying operation in Gapan, Nueva Ecija,PhilRice, 1995 wet season.General assumptions/actual conditionsDryer investment cost (IC) (P) 150,000 Interest on investment (%) 20Estimated useful life (y) 5 Tax and insurance (% of IC) 2Salvage value (P) 0 Drying time batch –1 (h) 5Repair and maintenance (% of IC) 10 Diesel cost (P L –1 ) 7.30Payment of operator (P) 150Specific conditionsAnnual use (t y –1 ) 50 100 150 200 300Operating days y –1 with 5 t d –1 cap. 12 20 30 40 60% Paddy recovery (by weight) after drying 90 90 90 90 90Benefit from drying (P kg –1 ) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00Fuel requirement (L h –1 ) 1.8 1.8 1.8 1.8 1.8Loading/unloading labor wage (P t –1 ) 80 80 80 80 80Drying cost (P45 kg –1 ) 30.2920.3915.44 12.97 10.49Drying cost (Pkg –1 ) 0.67 0.45 0.34 0.290.23Drying cost (% paddy value) 8.41 5.66 4.293.60 2.91Discounted net present value –105,803 –4,303.80 122,570 249,444 5,003,192Discounted benefit-cost ratio 0.63 0.99 1.38 1.73 2.32Internal rate of return (%) –94.77 14.63 36.78 44.83 51.59Return on investment (%) 8.929.6 55.5 81.3 132.9Playback period (y) 11.12 3.37 1.80 1.23 0.75Table 5. Economics of operating the PhilRice-Maligaya flatbed dryer to dry coffee in Nueva Vizcaya in 1997 (the case ofMr. Casumpang).General assumptions/actual conditionsDryer investment cost (IC) (P) 100,000 Interest on investment (%) 24Estimated useful life (y) 5 Tax and insurance (% of IC) 2Salvage value (P) 0 Drying time batch –1 36Repair and maintenance (% IC) 30 Electricity cost (P kwh –1 ) 4Payment of operator (P 8-h working day –1 ) 100 Cost of labor for loading and unloading (P60 kg –1 ) 2Specific conditionsAnnual use (t y –1 ) 30 60 90 120Operating days y –1 15 30 45 60% Coffee recovery (by wt.) after drying 22 22 22 22Benefit from drying (P kg) a 55 55 55 55Electricity requirement (kwh h –1 ) 7 7 7 7Loading/unloading labor wage (P t –1 ) 33.33 33.33 33.33 33.33Transportation cost (P kg –1 ) 0.60 0.60 0.60 0.60Drying cost (P60 kg –1 ) including transportation 137.08 93.08 78.41 71.08Drying cost (P kg –1 ) including transportation 2.28 2.28 2.28 2.28Drying cost (P batch –1 ) including transportation 13,708 9,308 7,841 7,108Discounted net present value 755,933 1,732,662 2,709,391 3,686,121Discounted benefit-cost ratio 4.17 7.76 10.8913.62Internal rate of return (%) 20.53 21.48 22.95 25.48Payback period (y) 0.32 0.15 0.10 0.07Return on investment (%) 311.65 667.30 1,022.96 1,378.60aBenefit = price of dried milled coffee (P65 kg –1 ) – cost of fresh coffee (P8 kg –1 ) – cost of milling (P1 kg –1 ).75

ReferencesAndales SC. 1995. Problems and priorities of grain dryingin the Philippines. In: Grain drying in Asia. Proceedingsof the International Conference, 17-20 October,Bangkok, Thailand. p 46-53.Cardino AG. 1985. Case studies of mechanical dryer in thePhilippines: lessons learned. In: Small farm equipmentfor developing countries. Proceedings of the InternationalConference on Small Farm Equipment. LosBaños (Philippines): International Rice ResearchInstitute. p 431-437.Gagelonia EC, Ragalado MJC, Aldas RE, Bautista EU.1994. Adaption of Vietnamese batch dryer forPhilippine conditions. Paper presented at the 44thAnnual National Convention of the Philippine Societyof Agricultural Engineers, 26-28 April, Cagayan deOro, Philippines.Hien PH. 1991. Grain dryer for the summer-autumn crop insouthern Vietnam: the case for the flatbed dryer. Paperpresented at the 14th ASEAN Seminar on Grain PostharvestTechnology, 5-8 November, Manila, Philippines.Hien PH, Tam NH, Vinh T, Loc NQ. 1995. Grain drying inVietnam: problems and priorities. In: Grain drying inAsia. Proceedings of the International Conference, 17-20 October, Bangkok, Thailand.NAPHIRE. 1990. Annual report. Muñoz, Nueva Ecija,Philippines.PCARRD. 1987. The Philippine recommendations for ricepost-production operations. Technical Bulletin SeriesNo. 63. Los Baños (Philippines): PCARRD.Sison OF, Adriano MS, del Rosario CR, del Rosario CA.1983. Technological and socio-economic dimensions ofthe transfer of agricultural engineering technologypackages to small farmers. Los Baños (Philippines):University of the Philippines Los Baños.Wimberly JE. 1983. Technical handbook for the paddy ricepostharvest industry in developing countries. LosBaños (Philippines): International Rice ResearchInstitute.NotesAuthors’ address: Senior science research specialist, chiefscience research specialist, supervising science researchspecialist, and senior science research specialist,respectively, National Rice Engineering and MechanizationCenter, Philippine Rice Research Institute,Maligaya, Science City of Muñoz, Philippines.Acknowledgments: The authors extend their thanks to Dr.Phan Hieu Hien for providing the original designs andpersonal communications that made the study successful,and to Mr. Nguyen Hung Tam for technicalassistance during testing.76

Evaluation of the performance of NFA farmlevelgrain centersR.A. MacutayThe performance of the farm-level grain centers (FLGCs) loaned to various farmers’organizations nationwide was evaluated. Lack of working capital was the dominantproblem of the FLGC beneficiaries. As a result, warehouses, rice mills, andother postharvest facilities were underused because of the small volume of producebeing handled. The beneficiaries were reluctant to get loans from governmentlending institutions because of the high interest rate and stringent loan requirements.A majority of the beneficiaries were able to settle their amortization ontime using the incentive funds set aside by the National Food Authority. The highestnet income was P569,712 while the lowest net income was negative P102,326.The national government recognizes the importanceof monitoring and evaluation in its economicdevelopment efforts. With limited resources forpublic investment, it needs to ensure the efficientand effective implementation of developmentprograms and projects. Recent development indicatesa growing demand for monitoring and evaluationinformation for decision making. Likewise, thegeneral public would like to be regularly informedabout the progress of development activitiesundertaken by government offices, including, amongothers, the National Food Authority (NFA).Monitoring and evaluation are crucial functionsin the planning and implementation of developmentprograms/projects. They are bundled together,indicating that the activities of monitoring andevaluation are interrelated. These are concerned withgathering information about performance and theeffectiveness of the program/project. Data generatedby the monitoring system help explain trends andeffects and assess the impact of the project. By meansof monitoring, significant departures from expectations,which have been identified at the start of theproject, are noted. An ongoing evaluation canexamine the assumptions and the premises on whichthe project design was based. Such a review can bevaluable to management in its decision-making andpolicy formulation functions.To be able to assess the operations and managementof the farm-level grain centers (FLGCs) thatwere loaned to farmers’ organizations, the NFA hasdesigned a monitoring and evaluation system that isimplemented nationwide to be able to detect anddiagnose potential problem areas that may requireremedial measures. A periodic review, which is doneevery 6 months, helps ensure that the targetedoutputs and necessary actions are carried outaccording to plans.The general objective of FLGC project monitoringand evaluation is to monitor and evaluate theoperations and management of the FLGC project anddetermine the effects and impact of the project on thebeneficiary farmers’ organizations (FOs) and thecommunity as well.The NFA Farm-Level Grain Center ProjectBackgroundThe National Food Authority is one of severalgovernment agencies supporting the MAKAMASAProgram, which became the Gintong Ani Program(GAP) of the Department of Agriculture, which aimsto increase and sustain rough rice and maize productionto meet the country’s needs by providingnecessary production inputs and agricultural supportservices, enhancing income and stabilizing prices atlevels equitable to both consumers and producers,and ensuring the productivity and profitability ofrice and maize farming over the long term.Under the program, the NFA is responsible forspearheading two of the seven components identified:postharvest and marketing assistance. Thepostharvest component provides access to andownership of postharvest facilities/equipment forfarmers’ organizations following the provisions ofthe magna carta for small farmers, whereas themarketing assistance component requires the NFA tointensify its regular marketing programs in providing77

food security and ensuring stabilized prices for riceand maize.The NFA concentrates its efforts on thepostharvest facilities built up through the establishmentof the FLGCs and municipal-level grain centers(MLGCs). The source of funds for these projects ispart of the proceeds of the importation of Thailandrice. In 1996, the NFA Council provided the NFA,under its special projects, with P142.0 million 1 toestablish FLGCs and MLGCs in identified key grainareas (KGAs) nationwide.The FLGC project is envisioned to enhance theexisting grain operations of small farmers’ cooperativesin the country. The project will enable them todirectly process and market their own grain produce,thus eliminating intermediaries and maximizing thereturn to their investment.FO-beneficiaries of this project will be able toexpand their own business operations by obtainingTable 1. Categories of farm-level grain centers (FLGC).FLGC Project components Project costcategoryFLGC I Warehouse (3,000-bag P2.2–2.5 millioncapacity) and its relatedstructures (dryer shed,pavement, perimeterfence, watersystem, sentry post, etc.)Lot (800–1,200 m 2 )Ancillary PHFs/equipment aPostharvest facilities(equipment)Rice mill/maize mill(platform scale)Dryer (moisture meter)Thresher (bag closer)Mechanical reaper (pallets)Maize sheller (tarpaulin)FLGC II Warehouse (5,000-bag P2.5–2.7 millioncapacity) and its relatedstructures (same as FLGC I)Lot (900–1,400 m 2 )Ancillary PHFs/equipment b(same as FLGC I)FLGC III Warehouse (10,000-bag P3.2–4.7 millioncapacity) and its relatedstructures (same asFLGC I and II)Lot (1,300–2,000 m 2 )Ancillary PHFs/equipment b(same as FLGC I and II)aPHF = postharvest facility. b The choice of one or any combination of theancillary PHFs/equipment is left to the beneficiary FOs. The PHF andequipment loan component is P800,000. Any amount in excess of theP800,000 allocated budget will be shouldered by the beneficiary FOs.1At an exchange rate of US$1 = 40 Philippine pesos (P).access to drying, warehouse, and milling facilities fortheir farmer-members and eventually for other smallfarmers in the community. Likewise, a trainingprogram on postharvest technology and cooperativeenterprise management will be provided to preparethem for the actual operations of the FLGC.Project descriptionThe FLGC is farm-based and designed to be compactand complete with postharvest facilities and equipmentcapable of servicing primarily the small grainfarmers situated in identified KGAs. Beneficiaries ofthe project are viable farmers’ organizations/cooperatives that are capable of amortizing theFLGC loan package.FLGC categoryThe FLGC is categorized as FLGC I, II, and III basedon warehouse storage capacity, warehouse-relatedstructures, project lot area, and project cost (Table 1).FLGC amortization periodThe FLGC loan packages are amortized by beneficiaryFOs within specific periods depending on theFLGC type.Monitoring and evaluation of FLGCs (July toDecember 2002)Regular monitoring and evaluation are essentialsteps in finding out the effectiveness of the program.Results of these activities are a useful tool fordetermining systematically and objectively theFLGC project relevance, efficiency, effectiveness,and impact to ensure the productivity and profitabilityof the FOs over the long term. This will also serveas a basis for designing necessary and appropriatetraining interventions to further strengthen the weakareas of the FOs.A total of 25 FLGC units were monitored fromJuly to December 2000. The general objective of theproject monitoring and evaluation activities is tomonitor and evaluate the operations and managementof the FLGC project and determine its effectsand impact on the FO-beneficiaries and the community.Specifically, the FLGC is monitored andevaluated for its effects and impact based on thefollowing aspects (see Table 2): marketing,postharvest, financial, organizational, socioeconomic,and environmental.I. MarketingA. ProcurementMonitoring results showed that the lack of working78

Table 2. Amortization of farm-level grain centers.FLGC typeAmortization periodI & IILot, warehouse, and 15 years in 30 semiannualrelated structures paymentsPHF a /equipment5 years in 10 semiannualpaymentsIIILot, warehouse, and 20 years in 40 semiannualrelated structurespaymentsPHF/equipment5 years in 10 semiannualpaymentsaPHF = postharvest facility.capital is the most dominant problem among theFLGC beneficiaries. Eight FLGCs were not able toprocure it from their members. Procurement of roughrice ranges from a low average of 1.55% or 400 bagsof its expected production to a high of 36,912 bagsper harvest season. Most FLGC beneficiary FOs werenot able to maximize their procurement activities.B. SalesMost of the rough rice stocks of FOs were sold to theNFA to accumulate Cooperative DevelopmentIncentive Funds (CDIF) for their FLGC amortizations.Rough rice gross sales revenues were P26,650to P13,868,408. Gross rice sales revenues rangedfrom P31,930 to P1,430,960. The presence ofimported rice in some areas affected rice sales.Generally, most FOs posted an increase in grossincome from July to December 2000.II. PostharvestA. WarehousingWarehouses were generally underused because of thesmall volume of stocks stored. Six FLGC warehouseswere not used. The FLGCs are located inTalimundok, Tarlac, Sta. Cruz, Marinduque, Carmen,Bohol, Ma. Asuncion, Southern Leyte, Pinabacdao,Western Samar, and Siay, Zamboanga del Sur.Warehouse use rates ranged from 0.4% to 100%.A majority of the FLGCs (16) were reportedly used atthe lower range. The reason cited was the lack ofstocks being handled by most FLGC beneficiaries.B. DryingTwelve FLGC beneficiaries used mechanical dryers(MDs) but use is also very low. Farmers were notusing their MDs because of the high cost of operatingexpenses (fuel and electricity).Results of monitoring also showed that, althoughthe drying operation is not profitable, dryingactivities contributed to the increase in milling andhead rice recovery, resulting in better-quality milledrice.C. MillingUnder the postharvest facilities/equipment loancomponent of the project, 16 beneficiaries acquired arice mill. It was noted that milling operations werevery low. Four rice mills were reported to be defective.These rice mills are used by FOs located inDumingag in Zamboanga del Sur, Alakaak inMindoro Occidental, and Ligao, Albay, and Plaridelin Misamis Oriental.Rice milling operations were not maximizedbecause of limited customers. Also, the dispersal andpresence of NFA rice in the area affected the demandfor locally milled rice.III. FinancialA. Working capitalA majority of the FLGC beneficiaries used their ownlimited funds from the Capital Build-Up (CBU) FOfunds and other fund sources to finance theiroperations. Six FLGC beneficiaries used workingcapital loans from LBP, Quedancor, and other privatelending institutions.B. IncomeThe highest quarterly net income was P569,711.94and the lowest P102,325.96. Four FLGCs incurred anaverage net loss of P34,277.99.C. AmortizationA total amortization payment of P4,411,526.94 wasreceived from 19 FLGC beneficiaries or 5.3% of thetotal P89,416,423.64 loan exposure to beneficiaryFOs under the NFA FLGC Project.Most of the beneficiary FOs were able to settlethe FLGC semiannual amortization payments usingtheir accumulated CDIFs with the NFA as payment.Some beneficiary FOs that were not able to settletheir amortizations requested a deferment of theirpayments.IV. Organizational, socioeconomic, and environmentalaspectsThere was a significant 28% average increase inmembership of most beneficiary FOs. Also, morewomen are now involved in managing their organizations.A 37% average increase in women’s participationin the overall management of their farmers’organizations was also noted. A total of 111 youngprofessionals from among the FLGC beneficiary FOs79

are now involved in the organization as eithermembers or employees.New businesses for the FOs were opened orstarted. The establishment of most FLGCs gainedpositive acceptance in the community except fortwo that were reported to have caused pollution inthe neighborhood (in Sta. Cruz, OccidentalMindoro, and Lagonoy, Camarines Sur).Considering the above observations, it could beconcluded that FLGCs are viable and beneficialprojects of the government that would assist farmers’organizations in having access to or ownership ofbasic postharvest facilities and/or expanding theirown business operations. A majority of the FLGCsincurred net profits in their marketing operations.Further, the establishment of FLGCs in variousprovinces nationwide has gained acceptance in thecommunity.The lack of working capital was also cited asthe major cause of limited operations of mostbeneficiaries. Previously, working capital was partof the FLGC Project loan package. But, because ofpolicy changes of the government and the limitedmandate of the National Food Authority, theworking capital loan component of the project wasremoved. Hence, this loan component is now beingimplemented by Quedancor. Out of the 24 beneficiaryFOs, only four were able to use the workingcapital loan from Quedancor. The reasons cited fornonuse of this loan are high interest rates andstringent requirements in the obtaining of the loan.Likewise, training on grain postharvest technologyand cooperative enterprise management amongofficers and members of beneficiary FOs by theExtension Department proved to be a great help inthe operation of their grain business enterprise.The NFA’s policy recommendations on theproblems of beneficiary FOs regarding the lack ofworking capital are as follows:1. Part of the FO’s accumulated CDIF will now beused as working capital.2. Beneficiary FOs should be encouraged to use theQuedancor working capital loan inasmuch as thefunds for this FLGC loan component areprovided by the NFA.NotesAuthor’s address: director, Extension Department, NationalFood Authority, and deputy executive director, GAP-PMG.80

The impact of training professionalmanagers: a case study on the performanceof professional managers handling cooperative-basedgrain-processing enterprisesR.M. Recometa, R.R. Paz, and R.S. RapusasA study was conducted to determine the effect of professional managers in handlingcooperative-based grain-processing enterprises. It was proven that the interventionof professional managers in the case cooperatives brought hope of financialrecovery even for those having accumulated debts almost beyond recovery.The professional managers must possess proper qualifications consisting of acombination of personality, educational background, related experience, specializedtraining, and fair salary and benefits. The professional managers must have athorough understanding of the social, cultural, and political complexities of farmers’cooperatives in the Philippines as a requisite to successful interventions.Cooperative development is not only the pursuit ofthe cooperative spirit but also the formation of strongenterprises that can carry out effective services andother functions for their members. Agriculturalcooperatives are established primarily because of feltneeds to improve the productivity and welfare offarmers.Many of the farmers’ cooperatives in thePhilippines were born in the 1970s. Farmers wereorganized into a “Samahang Nayon,” whose basicpurpose was the effective delivery of farm inputs tofarmers and the assembly of their products formarketing. Rice farmers’ groups, to maximizeproductivity, began engaging in full-scale grainprocurement, processing, and marketing of milledrice.Government or nongovernment organizationspromoted and supported the establishment ofcooperative-based grain-processing enterprises. Yet,despite these efforts, only a few flourished and manyfailed to completely achieve the desired results. Theventure of cooperative-based grain-processingenterprises was characterized by constant failures.A case study conducted by NAPHIRE in 1987on the failure of the KAISA (Kapisanan ng mgaIrrigators Associations) in Laguna, Philippines,highlighted the following reasons for failure: (1)limited education and management capability, (2)poor rural credit delivery system, (3) inadequatemarket information and support services, (4) limitedaccess to technological information, (5) lack of andinefficient postharvest facilities, (6) lack of capital,and (7) financial mismanagement.Many more studies were conducted to documentsuccess or failure stories of farmers’ cooperatives.Much information pointed to several reasons towhich failures or successes could be attributed. Manyconjectures have been expressed citing efficient andeffective management as the key factors.Farmers’ cooperatives normally handle their ownbusiness affairs. Their business managers are usuallyselected from among their members and have goodleadership qualities, high education, and experiencein business. When that ideal is not met, the enormoustask of managing the enterprise is relegated to a lessqualified member.Yet, even the most qualified manager of acooperative will find difficulties without any realexperience and formal training or background inbusiness and cooperative management. To succeed,one has to go through the long process of learningand gaining experience in the overall complexitiesof the cooperative enterprise.Professional cooperative managers are needed toturn disorganized resources of farmers, machines, andmoney into a useful cooperative enterprise. Professionalmanagers are the catalysts who (1) conceive ofthe services that the cooperative can render, (2)mobilize the required resources, (3) coordinateactivities both within the organization and outside,and (4) could inspire the farmers associated with theorganization to work for the common objectives.81

In a rice processing and trading business, theprofessional cooperative managers would be themost knowledgeable of the technologies. Theyunderstand the technology for processing the ricegrain to produce high-quality milled rice. They arethe financial analyst who can determine the economicfeasibility of projects and who can forecastprices and trends in the market. They are the strategistwho plans and actively participates in thedevelopment of the industry. Professional managersdeal with people in the organization and are theleader of the group.The Bureau of Postharvest Research andExtension, under the Gintong Ani-AgrikulturangMakamasa Program, helps develop and create a poolof professional cooperative managers. The pool shallbe available to any interested cooperative engagedin grain processing and marketing. To determine thebasis and requirements of this provision, we undertooka case study.ObjectiveThe general objective of the study was to determinethe performance of professional cooperative managersin handling cooperative-based grain-processingenterprises. Specifically, the study wished to achievethe following:1. To determine the qualifications and trainingrequirements in managerial and technical skillsneeded by professional cooperative managers tooperate a cooperative-based grain-processingenterprise.2. To evaluate the technical, financial, andmarketing performance of the grain-processingenterprises as managed by professional cooperativemanagers.3. To determine some socioeconomic factors thatmay influence the acceptance or rejection ofprofessional managers hired for farmers’ cooperatives.Methods and resultsSelection of project coordinators and sitesThree major rice-producing areas in the country wereselected as project sites: Central Luzon, WesternVisayas, and Central Mindanao. (The WesternVisayas site was later discontinued.)In each area, a list of cooperatives was securedfrom the Cooperative Development Authority (CDA),evaluated, and reduced in number according to thefollowing criteria:1. Previously or presently engaged in or planningto engage in grain procurement, processing, andmarketing of finished products.2. Has a membership of at least about 200 farmersor a service area of 300 ha per season, irrigatedwith two croppings a year.3. Has a minimum potential volume of grainprocurement of 60,000 bags per year.4. Has the basic dryer, warehouse, trucks, andmilling facilities.5. Is a cooperative duly registered by the CDA.6. Is financially stable or has a financial source forworking capital or has high potential to recoverfrom debt obligations.7. Has identified sources of working capital fortrading, credit, and production loans for itsmembers.8. The general assembly approves the project andis willing to be audited by an external auditorappointed by the project.One cooperative per area on the short list wasselected, after a short survey and business evaluationwere conducted. (The names of the real cooperativesand the professional co-op managers are withheld toobserve confidentiality.) Table 1 describes theselected case cooperatives.In a nutshell, the case cooperatives wereprimarily engaged in rough rice procurement andmilling. Because of their inability to aggresivelyopen markets for milled rice, the cooperativesresorted to selling rough rice and custom milling.Both rice mills were observed to be underused andthey needed minor repairs and maintenance.Financially, the case cooperatives were weakand on the verge of collapsing. Co-op 1 with P30million 1 and co-op 2 with P5.5 million in liabilitieshad mainly past-due loans that would be very hard torecover. The Land Bank of the Philippines (LBP) andNational Agricultural and Fishery Council (NAFC)promised support to rehabilitate co-op 1 and co-op 2,respectively.Selection of candidate managersThe project advertised in the national newspapers theneed for applicants willing to be trained and to workas professional co-op managers for agriculturalcooperatives. The qualifications of the applicantssought were1At an exchange rate of US$1 = 40 Philippine pesos (P).82

Table 1. General information about the case cooperatives, 1998.Information Case co-op 1 Case co-op 2Location Talavera, Nueva Ecija Lala, Lanao NorteType Primary FederationAge 11 y 17 yTotal service area 866 ha 1,880 haMembership 449 91Active 253 41Inactive 196 50Businesses Production loan relending Rough rice/milled rice tradingFarm input salesCustom millingRough rice/milled rice tradingGroceryMarket of milled rice Cabanatuan City LocalFacilitiesWarehouse 40,000 bags 30,000 bagsRice mill 2.5 t h –1 , multipass 1.5 t h –1 , multipass (for rehab.)Mechanical dryer 4 units, recirculating 3 units, reversible flatbed1 unit, in-store dryer1 unit, flash dryerDrying pavement 400 bags capacity 300 bags capacityTrucks 100 bags, forward 250 bags, forward470 bags, 10 wheels 100 bags, dump truckPaid-up capital (P)Common shares 2,000,000 2,500,000Paid-up capital 1,605,900 (80%) 2,024,329 (81%)Loans (P)Production loans 8,386,852 (past due) 1,364,847 (past due)Working capital loans 5,133,333 (past due) 5,000,000 (past due)Facility loan 310,000 (outstanding) 1,200,000 (past due)Others169,181 (outstanding)Financial status (1998)Net income (4,248,085) (977,810)Trading capital 2,803,000 6,000,000Current assets 16,628,336 5,669,252Fixed assets 13,768,784 2,551,280Current liabilities 29,815,933 5,498,980Members’ equity (12,521,742) (2,548,908)Financial indicators (1998)Current ratio (0.56) 1.03Equity ratio (0.35) 0.28Equity to debt ratio (0.27) 0.31Gross profit margin 0.09 0.09Sales to assets ratio (0.12) 1.561. Must be at least 30 years old.2. Must be college graduates, preferably inagriculture, agricultural engineering, agribusiness,agricultural economics, or agriculturalextension.3. Must have 2 years’ experience in organizingfarmers’ groups/cooperatives.4. Must be willing to be assigned to the indicatedproject sites.5. Must be of good moral character.Of 55 applicants, 24 took the aptitude andsupervisory examinations, 8 passed the final interview,and 3 were invited for the specialized trainingas candidate managers. Table 2 shows the profile ofthe candidate managers.The three candidate managers had little or noexposure to managing farmers’ cooperatives. Nonehad actual experience in rice milling or in tradingmilled rice. On the managerial/supervisory tests, theaverage ratings of the candidate managers were“average” to “above average.”Specialized training course for professionalcooperative managersThe main objective of the training was to strengthenthe managerial and business capabilities of thecandidate managers on cooperative-based grain-83

Table 2. Profile of candidate managers a , 1998.Profile Manager 1 Manager 2 Manager 3Personal informationHome address Laguna Iloilo BukidnonAge 34 37 30Sex Male Male FemaleCollege degree BS in agricultural AB in economics BS in businessengineering managementSchool CLSU Ateneo, Davao UPLBRelated work experience Operations officer, General manager, Farm manager,Quedancor Iloilo Hograiser LEAF farmAssociationProgram officer, PBSP Trade industry officer, DTI Operations technician,Pacific Farms Inc.Managerial/supervisory testsPlanning ability Above average High average Above averageJudgment/comprehension Above average Superior SuperiorManagerial capability Average High average High averageSupervisory ability Low average Low average Above averageEmployee relationship Average Very superior Above averageaCLSU = Central Luzon State University, UPLB = University of the Philippines Los Baños, PBSP = Philippine Business for Social Progress, DTI = Departmentof Trade and Industry.processing and marketing enterprises. The specificobjectives of the training were to1. Identify leadership qualities, values, and ethicsby understanding the sociocultural variablesassociated with farmers’ attitudes and behavior.2. Present the status of agricultural cooperatives inthe Philippines with emphasis on the problemsassociated with their organization and businessmanagement.3. Enhance knowledge of grain production andpostharvest technologies required of a cooperative-basedgrain-processing and marketingenterprise.4. Enhance knowledge of marketing managementand be able to identify and develop grainmarketing plans and strategies appropriate forfarmers’ cooperatives.5. Identify and formulate steps and procedures forfinancial planning, analysis, and control, and beable to prepare the financial aspects of a grainbusiness plan.6. Use modules to provide opportunities to thecandidate managers to interact with othermanagers and to observe the actual operations(and differences) of co-ops and private firmsengaged in grain processing and trading.The training approach was modular. The wholetraining course was divided into modules comprisingdifferent strategies in topic presentations such aslectures, testimonials, workshops, and lots of casemethods. Table 3 presents an overview of the coursemodules.Table 3. Overview of specialized training courses held atthe Bureau of Postharvest Research and Extension.Title Duration No. of subjectsValue formation and 2.5 d 5strengthening and (18.5 h)leadership seminarsFarmers’ cooperatives 4.5 d 8in the Philippines (30.5 h)and organizationand managementGrain production and 4.5 d 11postharvest (36.5 h)technologiesMarketing management 2.5 d 6(21 h)Financial management 3.5 d 6(29 h)Computer applications – –On-the-job training and 8 d –case study (64 h)Preparation of business 3 d –plan and reporting (24 h)The training was output-oriented. Before thetraining began, each candidate manager was given acase cooperative to prepare a business plan. Everymodule required specific recommendations as part ofthe business plan, to be critiqued at the end of eachmodule by the resource persons and the trainingmanagement.Each module was managed by a modulecoordinator, whose function was to facilitate all theactivities in the module. The coordinator wasexpected to orient the resource persons on theobjetives and scope of the topics to be presented.84

There was an on-the-job training and observationson actual operations of co-ops and private firmswith postharvest facilities. The trainees were asked toprepare a case analysis on the observed organizations.They also had the chance to interview managersand officials of successful and unsuccessful coops.The specialized training course was held atBPRE from 9 November to 16 December 1998. Thecourse consisted of several modules.Each module has been evaluated by the participants.They were also given pre- and posttests todetermine the change in their knowledge level. Atthe end of the course, the trainees were givenpractical questions to gauge their understanding ofsome issues related to grain-processing enterprises.They were also requested to recommend topics thatshould be added or deleted to make the design moreappropriate to professional co-op managers.In the overall evaluation, the participantsdeclared that the training was a success, that theobjectives were completely attained, and that thecontents were very relevant to them. The threecandidate managers also passed the final examinationsand became graduates of the training course.Commissioning the professional cooperativemanagersThe professional co-op managers were ready forcommissioning to their respective co-op assignments.Each manager was covered by a 1-yearrenewable service contract, with the project as theemployer. Each manager receives a P15,000 salaryper month for managing the case cooperative.The project also had a memorandum of agreementwith the case cooperatives. Some of the salientpoints in the agreement were as follows:1. The professional co-op manager will be directlyunder the full authority, control, and supervisionof the cooperative’s board of directors and theproject will not be held liable for any action ordecision made by the manager of the cooperative.2. The cooperative may at any time during theproject duration request to discontinue theservices of the commissioned co-op manager.3. The project will not intervene in the affairs ofthe cooperative, though upon request it mayprovide expert opinions or consultancy serviceson matters relative to the business enterprise.4. The cooperative will have the option to rehirethe professional manager after the project isterminated.Accomplishments and operationsThe project kept a regular monitoring record of allactivities initiated by the professional co-op manager.Regular visits by the project implementers tothe cooperatives were made to update and validatereports.In co-op 1, the professional manager was able toestablish a harmonious relationship with the board ofdirectors. He was given full authority to makechanges in the operations of the grain enterprise. TheLBP, which reneged on its earlier commitment torestructure the cooperative’s past-due loans, left coop1 with no working capital to start the businessanew.The professional manager decided to go onmilling the small stocks left at his warehouse. He wasable to encourage the members to lend their stocks tothe co-op with delayed or staggered payments untilthe milled rice was sold. With cost reductions in theoperations and even selling the scrap machineryowned by the cooperative, a measly working capitalwas raised and used in the business.Because co-op 1 had no mist polisher in its mill,the cooperative found it difficult to compete in thequality milled rice market. The manager did notcompete in the Manila market but delivered hisproducts to Laguna. The rest of the products weresold in the local market of Nueva Ecija.The professional manager assigned to co-op 2had a hard time dealing with his board of directors. Infact, the board would not support many of hisactivities in the grain enterprise. But, unlike co-op 1,which has no trading capital, co-op 2 received fromACPC (Agricultural Credit Policy Council) P5million from the rehabilitation fund. The money,however, was channeled to the local CooperativeRural Bank (CRB), which in turn immediatelydeducted all past-due loans incurred by co-op 2 inthe previous years. About P1.8 million were left,which the manager found to be too small to operatean aggressive milling/trading business.The professional manager therefore withdrew theremaining funds from the CRB and deposited themoney at LBP, where he was given a P4 millioncredit line for working capital. What the manager wasunaware of was that some of his board members werealso members of the CRB board of directors.The grain enterprise of co-op 2, meanwhile,moved according to the business plan designed bythe manager. Milled rice outlets were opened inIligan City and Maranding town. To facilitate fastdeliveries of stocks, the manager acquired a lease-toown10-wheel truck from LBP.85

The relationship of the manager to the board ofdirectors of co-op 2 was strained. The board, 8months later, requested the project to replace theprofessional manager.Table 4 summarizes the detailed activities andoutputs of the professional co-op managers in thetwo case cooperatives.Financial evaluation of the case cooperativesIn the 1 year in which the professional managersserved the cooperatives, significant changes occurredin the financial status of the grain enterprises.Co-op 1, in just over 6 months, was able togenerate an income of P861,346 from milling andmarketing operations (see Fig. 1). Having no realworking capital for procurement, co-op 1 was able todevise schemes to get the raw materials from farmers.For one, it allowed partial payment in-kind for thepast-due loans of the farmers. It also institutedincentives that encouraged farmers to accept delayedor staggered payments for their harvests. Perhaps, thekey was the business plan of co-op 1 not to continuetrading rough rice, if possible, but do full-scaleprocessing and marketing of milled rice. Theprofessional manager was able to expand his marketfor milled rice by bypassing Manila for less competitivebut more lucrative markets in Laguna.Co-op 2, after 7 months of operations, generatedan income of P271,821 (Fig. 1). This was almostdouble its income in 1998. The professional managerwas able to transform all the past-due loans of co-op2 to current accounts. The business plan that wasfollowed was to concentrate on rough rice procurementand milling rather than custom milling toclients as in the previous years. The mill that used tooperate 8 h a day in 1998 was already using a doubleshift per day. The establishment of market distributionoutlets in Iligan City and Maranding town madethe milling business more successful for co-op 2.Co-op 1 and co-op 2 were able to increase theirgross profit margins to 11% in 6 months comparedwith their 9% margins for the whole year of 1998.Performance appraisal of the managersThe cooperatives conducted a performance appraisalof the managers after 1 year of service (Table 5). Theratings were separate for the board of directors andthe management staff. On a scale of 1 to 5 or frompoor to outstanding, the activities/accomplishmentsof the professional managers were rated. The appraisalwas conducted to determine whether thecooperatives, through the board of directors and themanagement staff, were satisfied with the services ofthe professional managers.Fig. 1. Income trends of the case cooperatives before and after the commissioning of the professional managers.86

Table 4. Activities/outputs of the professional co-op managers in organizational, marketing, technical, and financialaspects of the cooperative-based grain enterprises.Issues/concerns Co-op 1 Co-op 2A. Organization and management aspectsInactive membership - Began regular site visits - Reactivated the participationand dialogues with farmof the primary co-op chairmen/cluster groupsmanagers by calling regular meetings- Launched reorientation - Assisted the other Samahang nayanand education programsmembers in converting tofor memberscooperatives- Did careful monitoringand had regular meetingswith cluster leadersConflict with board of directors - Fostered good working - Did not attend board meetingsrelationship with boardwhen his business plan- Attended board meetings was not consideredregularlyNonfunctional committees- Proposed to remove allnonfunctional committeesExcess of laborers - Divided the group into - Adopted a per-move basistwo, shifting alternatelyfor laborersevery dayOverstaffed management - Reduced staff from 9 to 7 - Reduced administrative staff- Merged staff functions - Merged functionsStaff development - Held regular meetings and - Had regular meetings/consultationsconsultations- Conducted socialization and- Defined functions and team-building activitiesresponsibilities- Installed deep well; purchasedrefrigerator, TV, and kitchen utensilsfor staff useUnimplemented policies - Strictly implemented credit - Conducted meetings withguidelinestrader-customers on new policies of- Had strict compliance with co-opinternal control systems,- Imposed strict compliance withsuch as disbursement, cashoffice proceduresdisposition, auditing, etc.- Applied first come, firstserved policyB. Technical aspectsUnsystematic procurement - Devised and implemented - Implemented a price table or indexprocedures a price table or index - Made regular survey of- Monitored prevailing prices prices of tradersof rough rice daily- Used moisture content meterDrying problems - Had dryers repaired to - Had mechanical dryers repairedimprove efficiencyand rehabilitated to minimize- Used the in-store dryer smoke emissions- Taught laborers the properand efficient way tosun-dry rough ricePoor milling efficiency - Replaced worn-out parts - Rehabilitated the rice millof the millto increase output capacity- Set regular maintenance - Acquired and installed adaynew rice hullerPoor warehousing management - Made regular inventory of - Devised and fabricated a utility cartstocksto move stocks inside warehouse- Repaired walls/roofing - Adopted a new piling system- Used pallets and - Regularly cleaned inside andLack of hauling facilitiessystematized piling- Maintained cleanliness/sanitation- Used plastic enclosuresfor seedsoutside of warehouse- Acquired a 10-wheel truck underLBP’s lease-purchase programC. Marketing aspectsLow procurement volumes/ - Offered incentives for rough rice - Procured directly from membersno capital sold with delayed or staggered and nonmemberspayments- Close coordination with clusterscontinued87

Table 4. continuedIssues/concerns Co-op 1 Co-op 2No market for milled rice - Established market outlets - Opened milled rice outlets inin Laguna on COD termsIligan City and Maranding and- Accepted 7–15-d postdated at the cooperativechecks at outlets inCabanatuan City- Maintained supply of riceto institutional buyers- Delivered directly to outletsto save expenses on agentsand middlemen- Had marketing tie-up withNOVADEC & PangasinanFederations of Co-ops- Actively participated inbidding to supply milled ricePoor-quality products - Repaired rice mill - Used mechanical dryer for good- Improved drying practices stocks procured- Proposed acquisition ofmist polisher in the futureD. Financial aspectsFund sourcing - Submitted the proposed - Used operating capital/business plans to government credit line at LBPfinancing institutions andNGOs for funding- Lobbied at LBP to approverestructuring of loansCost reduction in operations - Reduced management staff - Streamlined staff functions- Reduced number of drivers - Adopted a per-move basisto 1for laborers- Adopted a per-move basisfor laborersCollection of payables - Strict compliance with - Launched a massiveloan applications andcollection campaignpaymentsOther income - Sold all nonfunctional - Made income from sweepingsmachinery owned by theof rough rice in the warehousecooperative- Opened a “rolling” retail storeTable 5. Performance appraisal of the professional co-op managers from January to November 1999. aAspect Professional manager 1 Professional manager 2By By By By By Byboard management members board management membersstaffstaffPart I (accomplishments) 3.51 3.78 4.08 2.92 3.38 3.78Part II (skills/management) 3.34 3.48 4.18 2.44 2.91 4.05Part III (attitude) 3.75 3.92 4.07 3.22 3.88 3.11aRating scale: 5.0 and above = outstanding, 4.0–4.99 = very satisfactory, 3.0–3.99 = satisfactory, 2.0–2.99 = fair, 1.0–1.99 = poor.The general performance rating of the managersby the co-op members was very satisfactory. Themanagement staff and the personnel working for themanager rated their supervisor satisfactory. Theboard of directors of co-op 1 rated its manager betterthan the co-op 2 board rated its manager.In total, the co-op managers had a satisfactoryperformance and generally were acceptable.Summary and conclusions1. The project characterized the professional co-opmanager as a combination of personality,educational background, related experience,specialized training courses, and appropriatesalary or benefits. These factors were consideredwhen selecting managers for the project.88

Incidentally, though, the managers selected hadno or very limited experience in the fields ofcooperatives and the grain business.2. The objectives of the specialized training coursefor professional co-op managers were satisfactorilyattained, from the training evaluation of theparticipants and, more importantly, from theiractual performance with the real cooperatives.Some of the training modules, however, had tobe revised to emphasize the social, cultural, andpolitical complications of farmers’ cooperativesin the Philippines.3. The case cooperatives selected by the projectreflect the worst scenario of a cooperative-basedgrain-processing enterprise on the verge ofcollapse. The professional managers were able torehabilitate the enterprise. Co-op 1 was the caseof an enterprise with accumulated debts almostbeyond recovery. Co-op 2 had a political andinstitutional problem, with members of thefederation losing trust and confidence overinefficient services and management of theirgrain-processing enterprise.4. The intervention of the professional managers inthe case cooperatives brought hopes of financialrecovery. The professional managers (even for ashort period of time) have proven that cooperative-basedgrain-processing enterprises areviable businesses under trained professionalmanagement.5. The creation of a pool of professional managersthat can be hired by any farmers’ cooperativeshould be further studied.NotesAuthors’ addresses: R.M. Recometa, R.R. Paz, and R.S.Rapusas, supervising science research specialist,director I, and director II, respectively, Bureau ofPostharvest Research and Extension, Muñoz, NuevaEcija.89