DIAGRAM 2: Rice production systems in the Dominican Republic
 (21 Ratooning, "Mateo" and "Riso."



 1. Ratoon in the Nagua Region
 D J F M A M J J A S O N D J F
 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I

 / first / ratoon

 2. Ratoon (and second ratoon) in Mao Region
 D J F M A M J J A S O N D J F

 first ratoon second ratoon

 3. "Mateo" (Nagua Region only)
 D J F M A M J J A S O N D J F

 first mateo


 4. "Riso" (Nagua Region only)
 D J F M A MJ J A S O N D J F

 first riso





 The Official Standpoint on Rice Production Systems
 One of the major objectives of Dominican agrarian policy has
 been, and still is, to obtain self-sufficiency in national rice pro-
 duction. To reach this goal, it is considered that double cropping
 should be practised as much as possible. This is certainly the case
 in those regions where conditions make it feasible and attainable;
 that is to say, where water, machinery and credit do not form ma-
 jor impediments. As a consequence, official opposition to the ra-
 toon is considerable in these areas.
 The "riso" and "mateo" are hardly known among researchers
 and extensionists, and even less among rice policy makers. Fur-
 thermore, these production systems are practised under marginal
 conditions, and farmers would basically agree with officials that
 the growing of a second crop would be preferable.
 However, the ratoon offers much more opportunity for a con-
 flict of interests. As we have seen, a reasonable ratoon yields less
 rice, but more profits than a second crop. The conflict will be ob-
 vious: farmers are more interested in ratooning, while officials
 want them to double crop.

 Conclusions and Recommendations
 In this paper, we have discussed four rice production systems
used in the Dominican Republic. From the farmers' point of
view, there are two preferences, double cropping and ratooning,
which may be considered as substitutes. Two other systems, the
"mateo" and the "riso," are used only to obtain some extra rice
and income if a second crop or ratoon cannot be practised. That is
to say, these systems are adaptations to marginal conditions, but
are not to be considered as viable alternatives to a ratoon or a se-
cond crop.
 The official stance on rice production systems is that maximum
production should be obtained through double cropping. In this
view, the ratoon is considered anathema to the objective of max-
imum production. The fact that considerable groups of farmers


 prefer ratooning over double cropping because of higher benefits
 and less work, is overruled in the name of the national interest of
 obtaining self-sufficiency in rice production.
 As we tried to indicate in the foregoing, we think that con-
 siderations other than gross production levels should be taken in-
 to account before passing a final judgment on ratooning. Under
 specific conditions, a ratoon may be a more viable alternative
 than sowing a second crop. For instance, if the second crop will be
 sown out of season, yields may be even less than those of a ratoon
 which, because of its shorter growing cycle and the fact that no
 time is spent on land preparation, may still be harvested on time.
 Also, ratooning offers solutions for farmers whose crops may be
 affected by water shortages (although the timing in water
 management has to be more precise for a ratoon, requirements as
 far as quantity of water is concerned are less than those for a sown
 crop). Ratooning may also offer a solution for those farmers who
 see the establishing of their second crop threatened because of a
 lack of machinery for land preparation.
 At the macro level, ratooning economizes on scarce resources in
 rice production, not only on machinery and water, but also on
 funds (credit from the state run Agricultural Bank) and expensive
 imported inputs.
 Thus, the ratoon, under certain conditions, can be an attractive
 alternative to double cropping, both in micro and macro
 economic terms. We would, therefore, like to suggest that ra-
 tooning be given more consideration in rice research activities.
 Ratooning capacity could be included as a selection criteria in rice
 breeding. Also, agronomic research should be executed on such
 topics as water management, weed control and fertilization.
 Finally, considering the experience and excellent results obtained
 by some farmers in ratooning, it would seem wise to make inven-
 tory of the already existing practical knowledge on the subject.









 References
 1. Centro de Investigaciones Arroceras (CEDIA). 1980. 17 afios mejorando la
 producci6n arrocera national. Secretaria de Estado de Agricultura, Santo Domingo/-
 Juma, Bonao, Domincan Republic.
 2. Centro de Investigaciones Arroceras (CEDIA). 1984. Eclipse. Juma, Bonao,
 Domincan Republic. 1(4):2.
 3. Cordero Mora, J.M. 1978. Areas arroceras de la Rep. Dom. Departamento
 Fomento Arrocero, Secretaria de Estado de Agricultura, Juma, Bonao, Dominican
 Republic.
 4. Cuevas Perez, F. 1980. Inheritance and associations of six agronomic traits
 and stem-base carbohydrate concentration on ratooning ability in rice (Oyza sativa,
 L.) PhD. Thesis, Crop Science Department, Oregon State University, USA.
 5. Cuevas Perez, F. 1983.Informaciones sobre arroz. Institute Superior de
 Agricultural, Santiago, Dominican Republic.
 6. Cuevas PErez, F., y A. NifiezJimenez. 1981. El costo de producci6n y la efi-
 ciencia de retono del arroz en la Rep. Dom. ISA, Santiago, Dominican
 Republic/CIAT, Call, Colombia.
 7. Cuevas Perez, F., y N. Quezada. 1977. Anotaciones sobre los arroces ISA-21
e ISA-22. Listing Diario, edition of August 6th. Santo Domingo, Dominican
Republic.
 8. Doorman, F. 1983. Adopci6n y adaptaci6n en el uso de tecnologta en la pro-
duccion de arroz. Resultados del studio de casos en el cultivo de arroz entire pe-
quefios productores en la region de Nagua. Informe No. 1: Aspectos tecnol6gicos.
Version Completa.Investigaci6n Agrosociol6gica sobre Yuca y Arroz/CENDA, San-
tiago, Dominican Republic.
 9. Groot,J.P. de. 1983. C6mo evaluar el retofio en el cultivo del arroz. Centro
de Investigaciones Econ6micas y Alimenticias, Institute Superior de Agricultura,
Santiago, Dominican Republic.
 10. Scobie, Grant M., y T.R. Posada. 1977. El impact de variedades de arroz
con altos rendimientos en America Latina, con enfasis especial en Colombia. CIAT,
Call, Colombia.


 11. Secretaria de Estado de Agricultura (SEA). 1981. Program Nacional de In-
vestigaci6n en arroz, 1980-1982. Santo Domingo, Dominican Republic.


VOL. XX-PROCEEDINGS of the CARIBBEAN FOOD CROPS SOCIETY


99