AQMx Sectoral Guidance: Alternatives to Crop Residue Burning

Crop Residue Burning (CRB) or open burning of vegetation to prepare land for resowing remains a persistent issue globally. This practice is especially prevalent among farmers growing paddy, wheat, sugarcane, and maize (FAOSTAT, 2023).  Between 2003 and 2020, an average of 81 million hectares (Hall et al., 2024) of cropland area was burned annually. Deeply rooted in agricultural traditions, CRB offers a quick, convenient, and inexpensive method for Crop Residue Management (CRM).  

The factors driving CRB differ across geographies and agricultural contexts. For instance, higher rates of CRB are often associated with the cultivation of crops with short durations between harvest and sowing (World Bank, 2018), and with labor shortages (as in Bajracharya et al., 2021). Many farmers also lack access to affordable and effective alternatives for disposing of crop residue, exacerbating the issue of CRB.

Furthermore, there is often limited awareness about the harmful effects of CRB and the benefits of alternative practices, along with ongoing misconceptions about its supposed advantages, such as weed and pest control or improved soil fertility (ICIMOD, 2020). Weak enforcement of regulations designed to curb CRB allows the practice to continue largely unchecked (World Bank, 2018).  

The consequences of CRB are far-reaching, adversely affecting the climate, environment, agriculture, and ecosystems. The impact of CRB further extends to public health, infrastructure, and essential services, and the economy, particularly in the Global South.  

CRB is a major contributor to both local and transboundary air pollution.  The “Agriculture, Forestry and Other Land Use” sector (that includes CRB) contributed to 13–21% of the total anthropogenic greenhouse gas emissions between 2010 and 2019 (IPCC, 2022). Globally, CRB released 4.8Mt of PM2.5 and 5.1Mt of PM10 (EDGAR, 2022), 64.8Mt of carbon monoxide (CO) (ibid.), 38Mt of carbon dioxide (CO2)  (ClimateWatch, 2021), 4.7Mt of non-methane volatile organic compounds (NMVOCs)  (EDGAR, 2022), 2.3Mt of nitrogen oxides (NOx) (ibid.), 0.4Mt of sulfur dioxide (SO2) (ibid.), methane, and various polyaromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs), among other pollutants.  

CRB also results in a significant deposition of black carbon (BC): 0.5 Mt in 2022 (ibid.). BC is a short-lived climate pollutant that absorbs solar radiation and accelerates snow cover melting (Carmichael et al., 2013). Notably, the seasonal CRB leads to spikes in air pollution across Asia, Africa, and Latin America. In South Asia, for example, CRB leads to an increase in PM2.5 and BC concentrations by 70% and 40%, respectively (Lin and Begho, 2022). Overall, emissions attributed to CRB pose a serious threat to both air quality and the climate. 

Public health impacts

CRB emissions have serious implications for public health. Prolonged inhalation of these pollutants makes populations more susceptible to chronic illnesses and premature death. Vulnerable groups such as children, pregnant women, the elderly, and those with pre-existing health conditions are particularly at high risk. Specifically, exposure to the pollution caused by CRB may lead to a cognitive impact on children and absenteeism from school (UNICEF, 2025). Notably, between 2010 and 2018, 99,000 global deaths were annually attributed to acute exposure to fire-related (including CRB) PM2.5 (Chowdhury et al., 2024).   

Agricultural and ecosystems impacts    

CRB leads to soil degradation and harms natural ecosystems by depleting plant nutrients, organic matter, and moisture. Specifically, CRB can lead to significant losses of soil nutrients, with up to 98–100% of nitrogen and 75% of sulfur released as gases (Gelderman, 2009). Additionally, nutrients like phosphorus and potassium present in crop residue may be reduced by 21% and 35%, respectively (ibid.). CRB also results in almost complete loss of carbon stored in the residue (Arkansas Agricultural Experiment Station, 2022), which is the main source of organic matter. This depletion reduces the soil’s ability to retain water and nutrients (Tawfeeq et al., 2025). CRB adversely impacts soil microbial counts and diversity, as well as soil enzyme properties, lowering the overall soil quality (Gupta et al., 2024). Moreover, removing crop residue from the soil surface by burning makes the topsoil more susceptible to erosion, which further decreases crop productivity (Institute of Agriculture and Natural Resources, 2022). 

Economic impacts

The cumulative effect of continuous exposure not only reduces overall quality of life but also causes loss of workdays and strains healthcare systems (OECD, 2016). Physical infrastructure is also threatened by the risk of uncontrolled fires that may occur during CRB events. Reduced solar radiation due to increased atmospheric aerosols (Choudhary et al., 2025) may lead up to a 28.7% decrease in solar voltaic cell productivity, impacting electricity generation (as in Kim, 2024). In addition, intense air pollution and haze caused by CRB can force school closures (UNICEF, 2025) and delay flights affecting tourism and commerce in the region (Kulkarni et al., 2019). These combined impacts can drive migration away from polluted areas, resulting in a loss of human capital and further economic challenges (Clean Air Fund, 2019). 

Sustainable and no-burn CRM systems are vital for improving agricultural productivity while protecting the climate, environment, and public health. By curbing CRB, these systems help reduce ambient air pollution and eliminate seasonal spikes in harmful emissions caused by open burning. The reduction in pollution can lower the rates of respiratory illnesses and premature deaths. For example, recent research shows that eliminating high-intensity CRB—defined as exposure to over 100 fire events in 30 days—could save between 70,000 and 91,000 total disability-adjusted life years (DALY) in India (Singh et al., 2021). Globally, reducing open burning, including CRB, could have prevented up to 70,000 infant deaths per year since 2004 (Pullabhotla, 2023).  

No-burn CRM techniques such as mulching, soil incorporation, and in-field composting enrich the soil with organic matter and nutrients, improving water retention, microbial activity, and resilience against erosion. These improvements could boost crop yields, and reduce the need for chemical fertilizers, leading to greater farm profitability and higher agricultural incomes (Shyamsundar et al., 2019).  

Other no-burn CRM methods involve removing crop residue from fields to be used as inputs for other industries. Utilizing this residue as a low-cost input supports various industries and job creation.

Baseline assessment in presence of local data

Benchmark existing policies and regulations

It is essential to conduct a benchmark of existing policies and regulations on CRB and benchmarks of neighboring countries. Impacts of CRM policies on CRB fire events can be assessed using national satellite data and timelines of existing policies (Thailand Environment Institute Foundation, 2022;  Grantham Research Institute on Climate Change and the Environment, 2025).  

Assess cropping patterns and crop residue management practices

National Agricultural Census and Agricultural Statistics provide data on agricultural landholding type, agricultural land area, cropping patterns by season, soil preparation and CRM equipment usage, and soil inputs. These data can be leveraged to conduct baseline assessments of the cropping patterns, the extent of CRB, drivers of CRB (the need for a quick and inexpensive way to manage crop residue and prepare land for resowing, and misconceptions about the benefits of CRB), and the extent of other CRM practices  in the region. These data can shed light on how farmers respond to existing CRM policies (London School of Economics, 2024). Insights from interviews and focus groups can further inform policymakers of the farmers’ beliefs and uncertainty perceived by them (Erbaugh, 2024). 

Assess air pollution levels and emission sources

If frequent and reliable air quality data are available, baseline assessments of air pollution levels and sources can provide a snapshot of the extent of pollution that can be attributed to CRB. Specifically, if concentration data for key pollutants such as PM2.5, PM10, SOx, NOx, CO, and BC can be obtained through local air quality monitoring stations, spatial and temporal trends of these emissions can be assessed and compared for burning season and non-burning seasons. Similarly, if emissions data for PM2.5, PM10, SOx, NOx, CO, CO2, CH4, NMVOCs, and BC are available in national or local emission inventory, these can be used to assess the specific contribution of agricultural sector. However, it is important to note that emission inventory in some cases may include emissions attributed to other related sectors such as landscape fires and biomass fires. 

Evaluate the impacts of CRB on human health and wellbeing

Baseline evaluations of the effects of CRB on health and wellbeing can be estimated by combining regional emission and concentration data with country-level datasets (Singh et al., 2021). Detailed disaggregated health and wellbeing information at national and sub-national levels can be obtained from datasets such as the World Bank’s Living Standards Measurement Study and Demographic and Health Surveys. Furthermore, WHO’s AirQ+ tool can be used to quantify health burdens of air pollution. 

Baseline assessment in absence of local data:

In the absence of local data, ad-hoc baseline assessments should be conducted using alternative sources.  

Assess the extent of CRB and associated fires

The extent of CRB and associated fires can be estimated through remote sensing data from satellite sources such as VIIRS, MODIS, GOES, Sentinel, Landsat, AVHRR, and Himawari-8. Specifically, the Fire Information for Resource Management System by NASA provides near real-time active fire data using MODIS and VIIRS. Likewise, the Copernicus Atmosphere Monitoring System provides daily data on fire events and emissions using MODIS. The ADPC/SERVIR tool can be used to track fire events and air quality in Southeast Asia. This tool provides historical data, near real-time satellite observations, ground-based measurements, and forecasts.   

Identify regional agricultural practices

Baseline assessment of regional agricultural practices can be conducted using data from FAOSTAT. In addition, the Agricultural integrated survey programme implemented by FAO provides agricultural data for 12 countries in Asia and Africa. Data for an additional 14 countries in Africa will be available soon. 

Estimate emissions and concentrations using global databases

Global emissions inventory such as Emissions Database for Global Atmospheric Research (EDGAR), Community Earth-atmosphere Data System (CEDS), emissions data from FAOSTAT, agriculture emissions from ClimateWatch data; along with global AQ concentration maps such as OpenAQ and UNEP/IQAir global map can help in baseline assessment of regional and local emission levels and concentrations. Furthermore, some of these sources, like EDGAR, FAOSTAT, and ClimateWatch also provide data on yearly regional emissions attributed to CRB by country, which can be used to study linkages between emissions and existing CRM policies. Conducting a literature review of existing source apportionment studies can help estimate the contribution of CRB to overall ambient concentrations.  

AQMx Guidance on Air Quality Monitoring

AQMx Guidance on Emission Inventories

AQMx Guidance on Source Attribution

Estimate the impacts of CRB on human health

The impacts of CRB on human health can be assessed using estimates from (i) global health burden reports and studies (Chowdhury et al., 2025) focused on exposure to ambient air pollution and  to fire-related emissions such as the State of Global Air report; and data registries such as the ‘Burden of Disease Attributed to Air Pollution’ from the WHO Global Health Observatory.   

AQMx Guidance on Health Impact Assessment

Map and convene stakeholders

Conducting comprehensive stakeholder mapping involves identifying a diverse range of stakeholders engaged in CRM. These include farmers and farmer groups (co-ops and small holder farmer groups), manufacturers of no-burn CRM equipment and technology, industries that use crop residue as an input, government departments/ministries, non-governmental organizations and advocacy groups, and researchers and academics. Consultations with these stakeholders are crucial for understanding national and local needs to curb CRB. Through these convenings, the roles of each stakeholder are clarified, political commitment is garnered, and the potential composition of a task force is identified.  

Establish a dedicated task force

Establishing a multi-disciplinary and multi-departmental/ministerial task force at national and/or state/province levels, accounting for governance structures is the next step.  

At the national-level, this task force should include relevant stakeholders from key government departments or ministries:

• Agriculture and Forest (for overall issues of CRM, and extension services)
• Environment (for assessing environmental impacts)
• Health (for evaluating public health effects)
• Energy (for planning crop residue use for energy generation)
• Planning (for quantifying economic impacts and opportunities from no-burn CRM strategies). 

The task force must also include members of government commissions/agencies for air quality management and pollution control boards for aligning with air quality and emission targets. The task force should include representatives from states/provinces where CRB is prevalent to better understand local contexts.

At the state/province-level, the taskforce must include representatives from state/province-level departments/ministries such Agriculture and Forest, Health, Energy, and Planning. These task forces can also include members of state/province-level agencies that manage air quality.  

These task forces will be responsible for several key functions. These are: identifying the extent and underlying causes of CRB; reviewing existing legislation to pinpoint policy overlaps or gaps; exploring cost-effective no-burn CRM strategies that advance environmental justice; guiding the implementation of action plans; creating standard protocols for monitoring fire events; and coordinating and facilitating policy decisions to reduce CRB. Periodic convening of these taskforces in the future -- after strategy implementation -- is required for reviewing the implementation and monitoring of strategies. 

Broaden stakeholder engagement

For both national and state/province-level task forces, involving representatives from industries that use crop residue will help in understanding capacity building needed to increase the use of crop residue in these industries. Representatives from agriculture machine manufacturing industries, especially those manufacturing no-burn CRM machines, can help in determining the capacity needed to scale up machine and equipment supply. Furthermore, including subject matter experts from academia, research/knowledge institutions, NGOs, and farmer groups is essential for independent oversight and accountability. 

AQMx Guidance on Legal Framework and Policy Design

Identify suitable alternatives to crop residue burning

Begin by identifying a set of feasible no-burn CRM options and evaluating barriers and opportunities from the adoption of various no-burn CRM methods. Barriers include factors such as limited or no access to in-field soil management equipment and methods, insufficient machinery for crop residue collection, poor transportation infrastructure, and the absence of established markets for crop residue. In contrast, implementing no-burn CRM methods can improve soil quality and crop yields, enhance air quality, and create new income streams for farmers.

To ensure the most profitable and scalable strategies are chosen, strategies should be tested through pilot programs, scenario analysis, and cost-benefit studies, with input from key stakeholders. It is also important that selected strategies are equitable, addressing the needs of female farmers, smallholders, and socially vulnerable groups.

List of strategies that support viable alternatives to CRB.  

In-situ residue management strategies focus on leaving crop residue in the field to decompose naturally, improving soil health, and eliminating the need for burning. These strategies do not require farmers to change their cropping patterns. They are particularly useful when collecting, baling, and transporting residue are not feasible, and the demand for crop residue by other sectors is insufficient.   

• No-till mulching involves deploying and scaling up no-till machines such as Happy Seeders, Super Seeders, and Smart Seeders that allow farmers to sow seeds directly into the soil without removing crop residue, letting it mulch. These seeding machines are easier to implement with a few workers. This strategy is best suited for cropping systems like paddy/wheat, paddy/maize, paddy/barley, paddy/legume, and paddy/mustard (Indian Institute of Soil Science, 2018). Successful adoption depends on a strong network of equipment service providers and farmer cooperatives, especially in regions with many small and marginal farmers. Additionally, most no-burn CRM seeding machines require powerful tractors with over 55 horsepower (Erbaugh et al., 2024), and sometimes additional equipment such as Straw Management System that chop and spread residue.
• Incorporation can be promoted by deploying and scaling up machines used exclusively in incorporation of residue such as the “Incorporators” (Ramulu et al., 2023) to mix crop residue into the soil. Notably, incorporating residue can often be implemented using existing conventional farm machines such as rotovators, conventional seeders, and requires fewer workers. This approach is scalable and suitable for a wide range of crops. The main limitation is the need for a 15–20-day interval between residue incorporation and sowing new seeds, which may not fit all cropping schedules.  
• In-situ composting improves the access and availability to in-situ composting resources (Thailand Environment Institute Foundation, 2022) such as microbial solutions tested in Thailand (Winrock, 2024) and Pusa Decomposers (Balakrishnan, 2024) used in India. Composting can be implemented for residue from most varieties of crops. However, the duration between application and seeding can be at least 25 days, making it less suitable for cropping systems with short windows between harvest and sowing such as paddy/wheat in South Asia. 

Ex-situ residue management strategies involve removing crop residues from the field for offsite use, eliminating the need for burning residue. This approach is valuable when in-situ methods are not suitable or readily accepted by farmers. This strategy can be used for residue from various cropping systems.      

• Strengthening crop residue markets requires the presence of strong supply chains through efficient crop residue collection and baling systems, storage facilities for storing excess agriculture residue, and robust transportation networks (IRENA, 2023; CEEW, 2025). To encourage farmers to utilize these supply chain resources, it may also be necessary to subsidize the capital costs involved (Sandi, 2024). In addition, there is a need to create new markets and strengthen existing markets that use crop residue by empowering innovation and fostering private sector partnerships. These markets can be categorized into energy and non-energy segments (IRRI, n.d.).
  • Energy products such as fuel, heat, or electricity can be produced using crop residue through thermal, chemical, or bioprocesses. These include using crop residue to co-fire in thermal power plants; and producing biogas, bioethanol, biodiesel, briquettes, pellets, and hydrogen (IRRI, n.d.; IEA, 2017; CEEW, 2021a). These renewable fuels not only utilize excess crop residue but also reduce reliance on fossil fuels (CCAC, 2023, Self Help Africa, 2025).
  • Non-energy products that can be produced using crop residue include single-use food containers, animal feed, bedding, growing mushrooms, furniture and other wood substitute products, organic manure, and biochar (Prateep Na Talang et al., 2024; IRRI, n.d.; Tibalia et al., 2024; Akahoshi et al., 2024)   

Crop diversification strategies can help reduce the need of burning crop residue by the introduction of new practices (agroforestry) or new crops (crop switching).

• In Agroforestry systems, trees such as fruit, coffee, cocoa, and forestry trees are grown in the same plots together with other crops and/or pastures. This can help farmers diversify their agricultural production and gain income security (IDB, 2016). However, certain cash crops require a long time before they mature, resulting in delayed returns (Hands, 2021).
• Crop switching encourages farmers to switch to crops that provide opportunities for using sustainable CRM methods. For instance, crops that have a shorter duration to mature like paddy variety PR 121 and PR 126 instead of PUSA 44 (CEEW, 2021b) provide farmers with enough time between harvest and sowing of next crop to implement no-burn CRM methods. Similarly, residue from crops that generate residue with higher livestock nutritional value such as basmati rice residue containing less silica, can be used for animal feed (Downing et al., 2022). Appropriate physical, chemical, and biological treatments to improve animal feed quality are needed in conjunction (Self Help Africa, 2025). It is important to note that this strategy may not work in economies that do not have strong markets for alternative crops.  

Additional financial assistance: These can be used as a standalone strategy in the presence of viable no-burn CRM options. Alternatively, these strategies can be used to complement in-situ and ex-situ strategies for renting and purchasing equipment, transportation, and other resources, irrespective of cropping systems. Nonetheless, behavioral, logistical, and institutional barriers need to be addressed in addition to credit, to eliminate CRB. 

• Payments for ecosystem services or conditional cash transfers are used as a complementary strategy to encourage farmers to test out various no-burn CRM solutions and learn about the advantages/profitability. Such transfers, especially with upfront payments, may speed up the no-burn CRM adoption (NBER, 2022). These upfront payments could offset short-term costs and risks linked to adopting new practices that farmers face. Implementing this strategy in the long run may, however, put strain on budget for no-burn CRM. Besides requiring a large pool of funds, this strategy also depends on close monitoring for compliance.    
• Green microfinance provides formal financial assistance to help farmers and co-ops to offset high farm operating costs (Singh et al., 2022, IDB, 2017).  

Set objectives for crop residue burning events reduction

Once the strategies are chosen, it is important to set national and local targets for reducing CRB events with a clearly defined time horizon. This could be supplemented by setting targets for crop residue use as an input in other sectors such as biofuels, and co-firing in power plants, household energy, and animal feed.    

Adopt an action plan

Based on the selected set of no-burn strategies, complementary action plans for deploying the strategies must be adopted. These action plans span setting required financial assistance and related institutional networks; creating capacity and infrastructure necessary for no-burn adoption; deploying communication interventions; and checking CRB using on-ground enforcement.   

Integration into national climate and clean air strategies 

The integration of CRB mitigation strategies into national clean air and climate strategies, as well as Nationally Determined Contributions (NDCs), is critical for achieving broader climate, environment, and public health targets (WRI, 2019). This supports the alignment of national policies with international climate commitments, fostering accountability, and progress. Aligning policies with NDCs may also lead to (i) increased access to mitigation finance with sustainable development benefits for governments, (ii) broadened coalition of stakeholders supporting policy implementation, (iii) strong reporting, monitoring, and tracking of policy outcomes, and (iv) greater clarity and transparency in policies (CCAC, 2024).  

Linking the no-burn CRM policies to national laws on climate change and air quality, makes the commitments of CRB mitigation legally binding. Further, integrating CRB mitigation strategies into sectoral plans at the national level will help in developing cohesive cross-sectoral solutions.  

Integration into sustainable agriculture plans and policies  

Incorporating CRB mitigation into sustainable agriculture plans and policies promotes sustainable farming practices, enhances soil health, supports long-term agricultural productivity, and increases farm incomes. Specifically, through these integrations, countries can ensure that efforts to eliminate CRB fire events, and thereby, to reduce emissions are coordinated and effective.   

Aligning CRB mitigation targets with other sectoral plans and policies

Aligning CRB mitigation with sectoral plans supports innovation and new opportunities. For instance, integrating no-burn CRM strategies with energy generation plans encourages the use of crop residues in (a) thermal power plants; and (b) manufacturing of bioethanol and burnable pellets -- reduces the reliance on fossil fuel (CCAC, 2023).  

Policy integration at the local level

At the local level, integrating these strategies into local air quality and climate action plans helps communities address pollution sources specific to their regions, leading to cleaner air and better health outcomes.   

Standards and certification for no-burn CRM machines

Adopting national standards for performance parameters of no-burn CRM machines serves as a guideline for manufacturers, while also building confidence in the quality of these machines among farmers. A later stage performance testing of these machines can be conducted at designated government testing centers for them to receive "eligible for use" certification. These certifications can be leveraged for applying subsidies at purchase. An example is the Sub-mission On Agriculture Mechanization Scheme launched by the Government of India (Government of India, 2025). In addition, harmonizing test codes for testing no-burn CRM machinery across countries standardizes the quality of machines that are traded (ESCAP, 2023; ESCAP, 2015).  

Standards for crop residue byproducts

Use of international/national standards for products that are manufactured using crop residue such as biochar, bioethanol, biogas, biodiesel, and pellets provide quality assurance to consumers. This in turn helps in generating demand for these products. An example is the World Biochar Certificate by Carbon Standards International.  

Regulation on the use of crop residue for co-firing and biofuel blending

Policy regulations that set standards for other sectors that are end-users of crop residue can create new and strengthen existing markets for crop residue (Squire et al., 2024). For instance, setting minimum usage ratio of bio-pellets made from crop residue for co-firing in thermal power plants through mandates and subsidies encourage power plants to use more crop residue in India (Press Information Bureau, 2022).  Similarly, other renewable fuel mandates such as biofuel blending can expand the market for crop residue (IRENA, 2023).  

Renewable energy/sustainability certificates

Issuance of renewable energy or sustainability certificates for products that sufficiently use crop residue as an input helps indicate sustainability to consumers, while enabling manufacturers to claim incentives associated to emission reductions (IEA, 2025; IRENA, 2023).    

Standards for sustainable crops  

Creating a sustainable certification program for sustainably cultivated crops strengthens markets for these no-burn CRM supported crops. For example, including no-burn into Sustainable Rice Initiative can be a possible solution to create added value to biomass (CCAC, 2024). 

Farmers and extension workers: conduct information campaigns to change behaviors

For farmers, information campaigns are crucial to increase awareness, acceptance, and adoption of no-burn CRM methods. These campaigns must include information on (i) the adverse effects of CRB, (ii) feasible no-burn CRM alternatives that that farmers can switch to, (iii) availability of incentives to switch to these sustainable alternatives, and (iv) benefits of using no-burn CRM methods.  

Specific behavior-change campaigns using ‘Information, Education, and Communication’ strategies/posters, street plays in communities, and weekly talk shows can be used to encourage farmers to adopt no-burn CRM methods (Self Help Africa, 2025; Business Standard, 2025). Traditional media, social media, advisory services, extension services, and door-to-door messaging can be potential channels to disseminate information. Furthermore, sustained awareness campaigns and engagement with extension services are needed, especially in the lead-up to the CRB season. Notably, consistent messaging across all platforms is essential to avoid confusion.  

An example is the recent communication strategy adopted by the Punjab Government in India that highlighted the impacts of CRB and various feasible CRM alternatives. This campaign included organizing over 3000 village-level and around 300 block-level agricultural camps that provide information and CRM advice to farmers; publicity vans to broadcast information; door-to-door messaging; and street plays and wall paintings (posters) targeting the farming communities (Business Standard, 2025).  

Extension workers can be turned into powerful advocates for no-burn alternatives, and can engage with farmers through outreach and awareness-raising activities (Indian Institute of Soil Science, 2022).

Manufacturers of crop residue byproducts: increase demand for crop residue

Awareness campaigns targeting manufacturers of crop residue byproducts, about the monetary incentives linked to the use of crop residue can generate and increase the demand for it (IRENA, 2023). Additionally, agricultural extension services can aid in connecting potential end-users of crop residue to farmer groups.    

Policymakers: secure political commitment to mitigate CRB

Messages that emphasize investment into mitigating CRB are imperative to meet national environmental and agricultural goals, as well as commitments to the international community can help gain sustained political commitment. Additionally, communicating how bioenergy can be embedded in the “circular economy” concept can strengthen the case for implementing no-burn CRM strategies (IRENA, 2023).   

General public: generate support for no-burn policy and reduce exposure

The general public plays a vital role in supporting CRB reduction through social outcry and civil petitions, forcing governments to take action. Public engagement strategies should include the dissemination of real-time air quality data and the efficacy of the rolled-out CRM policies through health messaging and regular updates on CRB incidents to build trust in the adopted policies. Furthermore, implementing early warning systems and contingency response plans during high pollution episodes enable communities to prepare for increased pollution and reduce exposure (Ghude et al., 2024). Instilling environmental consciousness from a young age can be done by encouraging students to participate in awareness campaigns such as essay writing, debates, and other creative channels (Business Standard, 2025). 

AQMx Guidance on Public Engagement and Communications

Remove informational barriers

This involves organizing farmer camps and using media and mass-media platforms to inform farmers about the various viable alternatives to CRB, the way to access these alternatives, and the benefits from adopting these new sustainable alternatives.  

Setting up farmer helplines or a digital app run by agricultural extension services that provide farmers with solutions to adopt sustainable CRM practices is also vital for no-burn CRM adoption. Further, reduction in barriers to information—enabling farmers to measure, report, and verify the impacts of CRM strategies—will build trust and ensure the long-term success of no-burn CRM initiatives. 

Remove monetary barriers

Implementing both in-situ and ex-situ CRM strategies described in Step 3 (Planning and Design) involve systematically removing monetary barriers that hinder access to no-burn CRM technology and methods. This can be achieved by instituting timely subsidies, concessional credit, and tax incentives. Such financial support is crucial for enabling the purchase of technology and farm machinery designed exclusively for no-burn CRM strategies. Additional subsidies for women/minority-led producer groups and cooperatives can be used for improving adoption of no-burn CRM among these groups (CCAC, 2025). Assistance for renting no-burn CRM machines can help those farmers for whom buying equipment is not a feasible option (Thailand Environment Institute Foundation, 2022). Further, tax credits and purchase- guarantees provided to the manufacturers of these machines can help ease supply constraints and encourage manufacturers to invest in production (Tallis et al., 2017).  

Accountability of these strategies is strengthened by transparently identifying the beneficiaries of monetary incentives through local nodal agencies (CEEW, 2024a). It is also important to clearly specify which machines will be subsidized along with ceiling rates to maintain fairness.  

Remove institutional barriers

Cooperation among central government ministries and agencies, and with local governments to ensure policy implementation is essential for addressing institutional barriers. In addition, expanding human and financial resources for monitoring and follow-up after policies implementation is required (Akahoshi et al., 2024).  

Ensure the safety and reliability of no-burn CRM equipment

Ensuring the safety, accessibility, and reliability of no-burn CRM equipment by implementing standardization and safety regulations helps build farmers’ confidence in these technologies (ESCAP, 2023). These regulations support efficient allocation of subsidies to machines that are certified after testing. The establishment of well-equipped repair workshops for these machines ensures they remain operational during the harvest season (ibid.).

Establish robust supply chains

For regions adopting ex-situ no-burn CRM strategies, it is imperative to set up a robust crop residue supply chain. This involves creating efficient systems of collection, baling, transportation, and storage of crop residue (CEEW, 2025; IRENA, 2023). Governments can further choose to provide state-run procurements of crop residue as well. 

Create and expand markets for crop residue

In addition to creating supply chains, ex-situ no-burn CRM strategies need creation of new and expansion of existing markets for crop residue. This can be achieved through tax-breaks and credits that drive innovation in industries that use crop residue such as power plants, mushroom growers, and manufacturing units for bioethanol, biodiesel, pellets, bedding, animal feed, and compost. Additionally, governments can serve as anchor clients that buy bioenergy at a premium to kick-start the industry (IRENA, 2023) 

Encourage crop diversification

To encourage crop diversification, extension workers can help farmers identify the list of alternative crops for substituting the current crop or for adopting agroforestry. They can further use demonstration farms to train and familiarize farmers to cultivate these alternative crops (Hands, 2021). Additionally, governments can offer a minimum support price for new crops adopted by farmers, helping them hedge against initial risks.

Provide additional financial assistance

Additional financial assistance such as green microfinance, and conditional cash transfers/vouchers to farmers can be used as standalone policies or in combination with other CRM strategies. Green microfinance can be used for providing formal financial services to farmers, self-help groups, and co-ops that previously had no access to these services to rent and purchase sustainable CRM resources. The beneficiaries receive additional financial assistance in the form of micro-credits, insurance, loans, and digital payment services through microfinance institutions. Conditional cash transfers or vouchers can be provided to farmers refraining from CRB, with compliance monitored closely.

Identify model regions and pioneer farmers

A commonly used approach is to pilot the chosen strategy in a limited region with high CRB prevalence rates. These regions can then serve as the “model" regions for successful policy interventions for scaling up the strategies (Indian Institute of Soil Science, 2022). Implementing no-burn CRM strategies at local level also needs identifying pioneer farmers in these regions through local agricultural extension and nodal agencies and nudging these farmers to be the early adopters. These farmers can help their network farmers adopt these sustainable CRM methods and speed up technology diffusion. Finally, scaling up these strategies involves partnering with the private sector for research, development, and production of no-burn CRM equipment, as well as developing and strengthening end-user industries.

Total bans, partial bans, and permits

Instituting legal prohibitions, such as national or regional bans and penalties on CRB (World Bank, 2018) is the first step in enforcing no-burn CRM. However, implementing these bans, along with enforcing penalties (fines or jail time), is only reasonable and effective when farmers are provided with viable no-burn CRM alternatives (ibid.). Specifically, bans can be in the form of total blanket bans or partial bans where bans could be spatial or temporal. In case of partial bans, specific targets for fire occurrences at local or state/province levels must be set. The accompanying penalty (fee or imprisonment) must be clearly defined for transparency and accountability.   

Studies find implementing complete bans and penalties are effective in dissuading small and medium landholding farmers from burning residue, particularly when fines are substantial and bans are strictly enforced (CEEW, 2024b). These penalties also incentivize the private sector and farmers to explore profitable, no-burn CRM methods. However, it is noteworthy that there is a need for strong political will, as well as sufficient on-ground resources for enforcement.  

While they do not eliminate fire incidents, burning permits can serve as a tool to reduce them. By issuing permits for CRB, authorities can regulate when and where CRB activities occur and focus on specific types of biomass burning (Akahoshi, 2024). For instance, the Mexican Official Norm NOM-015-SEMARNAT/SAGARPA-2007 was established to issue permits for prescribed and controlled burns (SEMARNAT, 2020; Pérez-Salicrup et al., 2018). Similarly, the Government of Thailand introduced FireD and Burn Check mobile applications that help farmers to register and obtain approvals before they burn residue.  

However, the lack of awareness (Cyuma et al., 2025), complex registration methods, along with lack of access to digital resources, can make obtaining permits and registering prior to burning difficult (International Fire and Safety Journal ,2024).   

Detective measures to ensure early detection of fires 

Detective measures focus on timely detection of CRB to ensure bans are enforced. However, prior to implementation, standard protocols for monitoring fire events must be clearly defined and established. Real-time reporting of fire events can be facilitated through dedicated hotlines that record complaints and fire sightings. National and local pollution control agencies, and the national remote sensing agencies can leverage technology and expertise to identify violations efficiently (Krishna and Mkondiwa, 2023).  

Setting up and deploying enforcement agents

Additionally, deploying on-ground squads and drones for regular inspections strengthens oversight. Protocols that empower enforcing agencies are needed not only to identify violations and impose penalties, but to maintain accountability. As in the case with bans, viable alternatives to CRB must be accessible and available to farmers for these inspections to be equitable.  

Building capacity of agriculture extension services workers

Agricultural extension service workers need proper training for developing and implementing local context-specific engagement strategies with farmer groups and custom hiring service providers to increase the adoption and diffusion of no-burn CRM technologies.  

This involves conducting training workshops and generating supporting material to help extension workers understand different aspects of implemented CRM policies. These aspects include:  

• The set of promoted no-burn CRM methods.  
• The impact of policies on the environment, public health, and agriculture yields.
• Availability of subsidies and financing options for promoted crops, technologies, and/or machines that support these methods.
• The operational guidelines for the new CRM practices and technologies.  

Furthermore, extension workers require training that helps them develop and maintain positive relationships with farmers, build community support, as well as address points of concern and resistance to new no-burn CRM methods (Self Help Africa, 2025). 

Building capacity of farmers and custom hiring service providers

Sustained training and on-farm demonstrations by local extension services are crucial to build confidence of farmers and farmer groups in no-burn CRM methods and associated benefits. Training should also cover available subsidies, financing, and rental options (TerrAfrica, 2011). These efforts should also include:

• Hands-on training for farmers to implement the promoted no-burn CRM strategies through camps and demonstration fields. These include training farmers and custom hiring service providers to operate machinery that are used in in-situ and ex-situ strategies, as well as to cultivate new crops and using methods such as incorporation.   
• Empowering early adopters through training workshops to further train their network farmers (Indian Institute of Soil Science, 2022) with a particular focus on capacity-building for women and marginalized groups (CCAC, 2025). This strategy leverages social networks of farmers to nudge them to change their CRM behavior.    
• Highlighting opportunities (potential buyer lists, and access to infrastructure: residue collection, transportation, and storage) for farmers to sell crop residue to end-user companies as an additional income source (ICFA, 2018). 

Establishing dedicated national /local agencies and launching digital tools

In the long run, establishing dedicated national and local agencies, in addition to existing agricultural university systems, will further support continued education, awareness, and monitoring of crop residue burning (ibid.).  

Besides farmer helplines, the development of smart phone-based applications can facilitate connections between equipment rental services and farmers, making it easier to access no-burn machinery (ORF, 2025).  

Securing sustainable funding to support no-burn policies in the long run

Securing long-term, sustainable funding through budget allocations and dedicated funds at both national and local levels is vital for the ongoing implementation and scaling up of CRM strategies.  

Fostering partnerships

Fostering partnerships between government, knowledge institutions, and the private sector will accelerate the development and deployment of innovative no-burn CRM technologies (ASEAN, 2024). In-house research on developing self-sustaining no-burn agricultural strategies should continue at government-run or partnered institutes. This is vital for advocating to gain political commitment and funding, assessing new and sustainable solutions for CRB, and addressing unforeseen long-term challenges stemming from current policies.  

Indicators on successful deployment of no-burn strategies/implementation of CRB ban

Monitoring of CRB events: Timely monitoring of CRB events is critical for effective policy implementation. Monitoring of CRB fire events can be done using tip hotlines, satellite data (Latifah, 2015) and drones (APNIC, 2025).  

• Indicators: Number of fires.  
• Responsible Institutions: Ministry/Department of Agriculture.  

Assessment of the adoption of no-burn CRM methods by farmers: Assessing the adoption of no-burn CRM methods by farmers can be conducted using data collected through agricultural surveys and censuses (FAO, 2010).

• Indicators: Types and extent of CRM practiced—categorized by landholding size.
• Responsible Institutions: Ministry/Department of Agriculture.

Monitoring the successful disbursement of subsidies: Monitoring the timely and successful disbursement of subsidies is critical to track implementation efficiency and maintaining accountability (CEEW, 2024a).  

• Indicators: Successful payments tracked using direct transfers or credit-linked payments.
• Responsible Institutions: Ministry/Department of Finance, and Ministry/Department of Agriculture.

Health and environmental indicators (emissions, soil health, public health)

Track emissions: The effects on ambient air can be evaluated by monitoring emissions and concentrations of pollutants.  

• Indicators: Emissions and concentrations of methane, sulfur oxides, nitrogen oxides, carbon monoxide, carbon dioxide, black carbon, and particulate matter (PM2.5 and PM10), using data from air quality monitoring stations and satellite sources (CCAC, 2020) during burning seasons. It is important to note and account for factors other than CRB events that may impact air quality.  
• Responsible Institutions: Ministry/Department of Environment, and Agencies/boards for air pollution control.  

Track soil health indicators: Soil health can be tracked through regular testing integrated with GIS systems (Government of India, 2017).  

• Indicators: Soil nutrients such as nitrogen, sulfur, potassium, zinc, phosphorus, organic matter, microbial counts and diversity, and texture.
• Responsible Institutions: Ministry/Department of Environment, and Ministry/Department of Agriculture.  

Track health impacts: Impact on public health can be assessed by using data on public health (Uttajug et al., 2022).  

• Indicators: Hospital admissions for respiratory and cardiovascular diseases during burning seasons in areas impacted by air pollution attributed mainly to CRB; and estimating saved disability-adjusted life years can be the indicators of public health outcomes. It is important to note and account for other factors, besides emissions caused by CRB that may impact health outcomes.  
• Responsible Institutions: Ministry/Department of Health, and Governmental autonomous Public Health bodies. 

Economic indicators 

Track farmers’ input costs and revenue: Net benefits of the implemented CRM strategies to farmers can be computed using farmers’ input costs and revenue (Shyamsundar et al., 2019).

• Indicators: cost of farming inputs: (i) price/rent and operating costs of machinery and equipment needed for seeding, harvesting, and CRM, (ii) fertilizer costs, (iii) pest control costs, (iv) irrigation cost (v) additional labor costs, (vi) electricity cost, (vii) land rent, and (viii) other costs; and revenue factors: yield and price of agricultural output.
• Responsible Institutions: Ministry/Department of Finance, Ministry/Department of Labor, and National Agency/Commission for Economic Planning and Development. 

Engage with key stakeholders

Identifying and engaging with key stakeholders through consultations and regular interactions are minimal-cost interventions. These engagements ensure that the perspectives and needs of the stakeholders are considered in the policy-making process. Regular interactions with stakeholders also provide opportunities to address policy and regulatory issues as they emerge, ensuring that the regulatory environment remains supportive of sustainable CRM practices. The costs here include organizing these meetings and preparing the material needed for these engagements. These minimal costs can be financed using budget allocations. 

Establish a no-burn task force

The establishment of intra-governmental and inter-departmental/ministerial task forces to tackle the issue of CRB can be considered minimal cost intervention. These task forces play a crucial role in assessing existing policies, coordinating and facilitating the design of new policies, and deploying implementation and enforcement teams. By leveraging the expertise and resources already present within government structures, these task forces can also help scale up policies that have proven successful in pilot or limited settings. Regular meetings of these task forces are crucial for continually assessing the effectiveness of current policies and making timely adjustments as needed. Such meetings provide a platform for sharing insights, discussing challenges, and identifying opportunities for improvement. The costs here include organizing these meetings on a recurring basis. These minimal costs can be financed using budget allocations.

Mobilize existing extension services and networks

Another important no-cost strategy involves the mobilization of existing extension services and networks to implement social nudges aimed at changing farmer perceptions and behaviors regarding no burn CRM. By promoting awareness and encouraging the adoption of sustainable practices, these efforts can help reduce overall costs associated with policy implementation.

There are several low/medium-cost interventions that can have a significant impact on reducing CRB. Financing these interventions can be sourced from specific budget allocations (CEEW, 2024c; Akahoshi et al., 2024) partnership with private sector (Climate Policy Initiative, 2025), and revenue collected from implementing CRB fines.

On-farm demonstrations and training sessions

An effective low-medium cost intervention is organizing dedicated on-farm demonstrations and training sessions through extension services. This will include the cost of resources (creating training material – pamphlets, digital tools etc.; organizing farm camps; and preparing a demonstration farm plot) used for training extension workers, farmers, custom hiring service providers, and co-ops. Options such as budget allocations and revenue collected from implementing CRB fines can be potential ways of financing these activities.   

Communications campaign

Media and social media campaigns can be launched to disseminate information about the adverse effects of CRB and the benefits of sustainable alternatives. The associated costs are the costs of designing awareness campaign material, and the cost of deploying these campaigns (door-to-door messaging and creating and maintaining resources that deploy campaigns through in-person, media, and mass media channels). Such campaigns help to reach a broader audience and reinforce positive behavioral changes. Specific budget allocations and revenue collected from implementing CRB fines can be used to finance these initiatives. 

Incentives to crop diversification

Encouraging farmers to switch to alternative crops or to intercrop is another low-cost measure (Lan et al., 2022). This can be facilitated through subsidies or the establishment of minimum support prices for alternative crops. This additional support makes the transition more attractive and financially viable for farmers; however, it increases the cost for the governments. These can be financed using budget allocations and revenue collected from implementing CRB fines. Public-private partnerships can also be used to create secure markets for alternative crops that do not require CRB.

Deployment of on-ground enforcement officers

Another low-to-medium-cost strategy is the targeted implementation of CRB bans and penalties in a few administrative areas that are primary centers for CRB (Lan et al., 2022). To enhance enforcement, additional resources need to be allocated for deploying on-ground squads and drones capable of conducting regular inspections. These targeted actions can serve as a deterrent to CRB events. These can be financed using budget allocations and revenue collected from implementing CRB fines.

Support to research and development

To further support innovation, research, and development of alternative uses for crop residue should be incentivized through financial support and grants provided to research and knowledge centers. These can be financed using budget allocations and revenue collected from implementing CRB fines. 

While high-cost interventions require greater financial investment, they can drive systemic change and generate long-term solutions. Financing high-cost interventions requires governments to make large recurring budget allocations dedicated to CRM.  Governments may also require concessional funding, external grants, and aid.  Additional funding sources can include green bonds, guarantees, and blended finance (Climate Policy Initiative, 2025; OECD, 2025). Specifically, guarantees help share the investment risks associated with these sectors (World Bank, 2024a). Blended financing, on the other hand, can use concessional funding, loans, equity, grants, and guarantees to leverage funding to mobilize greater private finance.  Additionally, diverting incentives from polluting industries, and linking corporate social responsibility activities to no-burn CRM (ICFA, 2018; State Street, 2024) can further financially bolster government’s no-burn CRM policies. Equity consideration must be taken into account while designing these financial instruments to ensure the funded interventions are efficiently targeting women and marginalized groups (IIED, 2023). 

Subsidies, tax-credits, and concessions 

• Farmers: High-cost interventions include the provision of subsidies, tax breaks, and credits to farmers. These can be financed using recurring budget allocations, concessional funding, and external grants and aid.
• Manufacturers of no-burn machines and technology: Purchase guarantees and tax incentives for manufacturers of farm equipment, and subsidizing materials needed for in-field composting are other high-cost strategies. These can be financed using recurring budget allocations, concessional funding, external grants and aid, public-private partnerships, blended finance, guarantees, and diverting incentives from polluting industries.
• Industries using crop residue as material: Furthermore, providing subsidies and tax credits for sectors that use crop residue—such as biogas, bioethanol, animal feed, organic fertilizers, biochar, paper production, and mushroom growing can fuel the demand for crop residue and reduce the prevalence of CRB. Encouraging and partnering with the private sector to invest in and developing capacity for crop residue-based products are complementary strategies (Shyamsundar et al., 2019).Options such as green bonds (IRENA, 2023), guarantees, blended finance can be used for mitigating the risks associated with early-stage projects focusing on alternative use of crop residue like in biochar and bioenergy. Other financing options include recurring budget allocations, concessional funding, external grants and aid, diverting incentives from polluting industries, and linking corporate social responsibility activities to crop residue byproducts.  

Direct cash payments to encourage farmers to use sustainable CRM methods.  

Conditional cash transfers or vouchers for farmers offer direct financial incentives for sustainable behavior (NBER, 2022). These interventions can be particularly effective when combined with other no-burn CRM strategies. These can be financed using recurring budget allocations, concessional funding, and external grants and aid. 

Establishing and operating testing centers

Establishing and operating testing centers for farm machinery, soil health, and products made from crop residue require finance for research and innovation, setting up infrastructure, and training technicians. These can be financed using recurring budget allocations, concessional funding, external grants and aid, guarantees, and blended finance

Gender disparities in global agricultural systems

Women play a vital role in food production and rural economies. Particularly, in the Global South, women’s employment in agrifood systems is disproportionately high. For instance, in sub-Saharan Africa, 66% of working women were engaged in agrifood activities compared to 60% of men. This disparity is even more pronounced in South Asia, where 77% of working women participated in agrifood systems, while only 47% of men did so (FAO, 2023).  

Despite women’s large participation in the agrifood system, gender disparities in global agriculture remain a significant challenge. Women continue to face barriers to equal wages, land ownership, and economic empowerment.  

• On average, women in agriculture continue to earn less than men. They receive 18.4% lower wages than men for similar employment in the agricultural sector (ibid.).  
• Compared to men, a smaller share of women own their agricultural land, with less than 12.8% of agricultural landholders worldwide being women (CGIAR, 2015).  
• There is a stark gender gap in land productivity owing to the differences in access to inputs, technology, extension services, and credit. Female-managed farms of the same size as those managed by men, on average, are 24% less productive, which exacerbates women’s limited access to resources and opportunities (FAO, 2023).  

Closing the gender gap in farm productivity and wage employment in agrifood systems could increase global gross domestic product by nearly USD 1 trillion and reduce the number of food-insecure people by 45 million (ibid.). These potential gains underscore the importance of promoting gender equality in agriculture, not only as a matter of social justice but also as a strategy for achieving broader development goals such as poverty reduction and food security.  

Mainstreaming and targeted actions for gender-transformative inclusion  

Women farmers often experience social, economic, legal, and institutional barriers that limit their ability to i) make farming decisions, ii) control use of income, iii) access and own assets and credit, d) access farmer networks, and iv) make time-use decisions (IFPRI, 2015).  Lack of land ownership and credit constraints tend to make women more risk averse to testing out new farm technologies such as the no-burn CRM methods. To overcome these barriers, targeted support and inclusive policies are necessary that are gender-aware, gender-sensitive, and gender-transformative (CCAC, 2025).

Mainstreaming gender-inclusive approaches in agriculture involve several key strategies. 

Collect gender disaggregated data

Prior to policy formulation, data on farmer-level demographic and socio-economic must be collected and analyzed. By understanding the diverse pathways and mechanisms through which no-burn CRM technologies impact women and men, policymakers can design interventions that are tailored and effective (ibid.). 

Secure land-rights for women farmers

Addressing barriers to equal land rights is needed, with a specific focus on securing land rights for women farmers (ibid.). This can be done through (i) regularizing land titles, especially for women, (ii) integrating women into agriculture decision-making institutions (iii) training on land usage, ownership, and formal rights, and (iv) combining agricultural training with land rights initiatives (World Bank, 2024b). Enhanced land security enables women to exercise greater control over agricultural decisions, including the adoption of no-burn CRM methods.  

Conduct gender inclusive awareness and information campaigns

Investing in gender inclusive awareness and information campaigns ensures that women receive the knowledge and support needed to participate fully in sustainable agricultural practices (CCAC, 2025). Particularly, promoting no-burn CRM technology should emphasize its benefits, such as drudgery reduction (ESCAP, 2023) and child health improvements (ICIMOD, 2020) due to less pollution. These advantages resonate with women and can motivate a greater adoption among women farmers, who often balance agricultural work with household work, and caregiving activities. 

Develop low-barrier digital data systems

Developing low-barrier digital data systems can support women by providing accessible data and verifiable results of no-burn CRM techniques (CCAC, 2025). These systems empower women to make informed decisions to adopt sustainable practices. It is also important to ensure women’s benefit-sharing in carbon markets, where they receive fair and tangible rewards for participating in sustainable rice practices that reduce emissions (ibid.).  

In addition to the gender mainstreaming initiatives, targeted interventions that focus on women farmers are necessary for facilitating their adoption of no-burn CRM practices. 

Provide targeted learning programs

Investing in proven learning and technology diffusion techniques, specifically for women farmers, can ease adoption of no-burn technologies and build their trust in using new methods. These can include using female co-ops and female “pioneer” farmers to train and disseminate information.

Moreover, implementing new technology with a particular focus on capacity-building for women farmers is vital for long-term success (ibid.). 

Increase women’s access to no-burn machine

Increasing women’s access to no-burn CRM machine and their rental services through additional subsidies to women-farmers, women self-help groups, and women-led co-ops can help overcome credit and liquidity constraints (ibid.). Redesigning no-burn CRM equipment to meet women’s ergonomic needs also ensures that technology is accessible and usable by all, reducing physical strain and increasing efficiency (ibid.).  

Implementing inclusive no-burn CRM policies, supporting women’s access to resources and technology, and promoting equitable benefit-sharing can unlock significant economic, social, and environmental benefits.

Small-holder farmers and indigenous farmers in global agriculture

The agricultural sector engages over 800 million people globally, with 84% of all farms being less than two hectares in size (Lowder et al., 2016). The small landholding farmers, including Indigenous Peoples and local communities, are responsible for producing nearly 60-80% of the world’s food supply (Land Coalition, 2020). Like female farmers, these farmers face greater economic and social challenges compared to other large farmers. Small farmers can further lack sufficient representation in farmer unions, limiting their bargaining power (London School of Economics, 2024).  

Targeted actions

Due to risk aversion, income and credit constraints, and reliance on traditional methods, the learning and adoption pathways for these groups of farmers may vary from that of the majority. Therefore, investing in proven learning and technology diffusion techniques for different farmer groups can help speed up the technology diffusion. These can include providing multiple season support to small farmers for adopting no-burn CRM practices (3ie, 2020), as well as helping farmers to experiment so that they self-learn (Krishnapriya et al., 2024), and using demonstration farms.  These are vital steps for improving no-burn CRM adoption among these farmers.

Community involvement and targeted awareness campaigns

Community involvement and targeted awareness campaigns play a significant role in fostering the adoption of sustainable practices. Further, collaborating with indigenous farmers to choose strategies that align with their culture and historic traditions (Fonteyne et al., 2023), while leveraging their indigenous knowledge (IFAD, 2024) to develop sustainable CRM strategies ensures that interventions are efficient and well accepted.

Targeted subsidies and financial assistance

Greater access to chosen CRM technologies through targeted subsidies and financial assistance for small landholders and indigenous farmers can increase the adoption of the no-burn CRM methods among these farmers.  

Low-barrier digital data systems

Additionally, developing low-barrier digital data systems is crucial for supporting small landholders and minority groups, ensuring they have access to reliable and verifiable information about no-burn CRM techniques. Furthermore, implementing strategies that minimize traditional, controlled ignitions by indigenous farmers during fire-prone seasons can help prevent the uncontrolled spread of fire, protecting both livelihoods and ecosystems (Machado et al., 2024).