ALL INDA REPORT ON INPUT SURVEY 1996-97agcensus.nic.in/document/is2006/reports/chapter_3.pdf · All...

All India Report on Input Survey 2006-07

14

CHAPTER 3

ANALYSIS OF INPUT SURVEY DATA – ALL INDIA

DISPERSAL OF OPERATIONAL HOLDINGS

3.1 Distribution of Operational Holdings and Operated Area

3.1.1 According to Input Survey 2006-07, number of operational holdings was estimated at 100.65

million with operated area of 130.88 million hectares (excluding Institutional holdings and data from

Bihar, Jharkhand and Maharashtra where Input Survey 2006-07 could not be conducted).

3.2 Dispersal of Operational Holdings

3.2.1 An operational holding may consist of one or more than one parcel. The more the number of

parcels, the more scattered would be the operational holding. All the parcels comprising an

operational holding may lie within the village of residence of the holder or be spread over one or

more villages.

3.2.2 A parcel is defined as “all land entirely surrounded by land of other holdings or land not

forming part of any holding”. It may consist of one or more cadastral units or fields and may not be

synonymous with survey number. Three or four adjoining survey numbers could make one parcel

but two survey numbers of same village, not adjacent to each other, would make two parcels.

3.2.3 The data on number of parcels was collected by interviewing the selected operational holders

with a view to collect information about the dispersal of operational holdings in different parts of the

country. However, the outer limit for collecting the information in Input Survey was restricted to

district. Since an operational holding will have at least one parcel, the average number of parcels per

operational holding cannot be less than one. The distribution of average number of parcels, average

area per parcel and average area per holding in different size groups of holdings as per Input Survey

2006-07, may be seen in Table 3.1.

Table 3.1: Average number of parcels, average area per parcel and area per holding

Sl.

No. Size Groups

No. of parcels per

holding Area per parcel (in ha.)

Area per holding (in

ha.)

2001-02 2006-07 2001-02 2006-07 2001-02 2006-07

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8

1 Marginal (Below 1.0 ha.) 1.86 1.64 0.23 0.26 0.42 0.42

2 Small (1.0 – 1.99 ha.) 2.73 2.63 0.52 0.54 1.42 1.42

3 Semi-medium (2.0 – 3.99 ha.) 3.45 3.46 0.79 0.79 2.71 2.72

4 Medium (4.0 – 9.99 ha.) 4.50 4.46 1.28 1.30 5.74 5.78

5 Large (10.0 ha. and above) 5.96 5.61 2.61 2.78 15.57 15.57

All size groups 2.43 2.22 0.57 0.59 1.39 1.30


15

3.2.4 The average number of parcels per

holding in 2006-07 was estimated at 2.22

as compared to 2.43 in 2001-02. This

shows that the number of parcels per

holding had decreased. This may be due to

industrialization / urbanization /

consolidation of holdings. The number of

parcels per holdings for marginal, small,

semi-medium, medium and large holdings

for 2006-07 was 1.64, 2.63, 3.46, 4.46 and

5.61, respectively against corresponding

figures of 1.86, 2.73, 3.45, 4.50 and 5.96

of Input Survey 2001-02. The graphical presentation of average number of parcels per holding may

be seen in Figure 3.1(a).

3.2.5 The average area per parcel was

0.59 hectare during 2006-07 against

0.57 hectare in 2001-02. The

corresponding figures for marginal,

small, semi-medium, medium and large

holdings in 2006-07 had been found as

0.26, 0.54, 0.79, 1.30 and 2.78

respectively as compared to 0.23, 0.52,

0.79, 1.28 and 2.61 in 2001-02. The

graphical presentation is given in Figure

3.1(b).

3.2.6 The average operated area per

holding was 1.30 hectare in 2006-07

against 1.39 hectare in 2001-02, showing a

marginal decline. The graphical

presentation of average operated area may

be seen in Figure 3.1(c).


16

MULTIPLE CROPPING

3.3 Extent of Multiple Cropping

3.3.1 There are mainly two cropping seasons in the country in a year viz., Kharif and Rabi. The

Kharif season is normally spread from May to mid-October and the Rabi from mid-October to mid-

April. A cultivator may raise two crops on his operational holding during the agriculture year - one in

Kharif season and another in Rabi season. In some States during the period from May to April, more

than two crops are grown. In such cases, the cultivator is said to have cropped his land twice or more

and gross cropped area would be twice or more of the net area sown depending upon the number of

times the crops have been taken. For example, when a cultivator raises three crops during the year,

gross cropped area would be three times that of net sown area.

3.3.2 The net area sown as per Input Survey 2006-07 was 116.60 million hectares out of which

70.6 percent was cropped once, 28.5 percent was cropped twice and only 0.9 percent was cropped

more than twice. Size-groupwise distribution of net area sown may be seen in Table 3.3. In 2006-07,

47 percent of net irrigated area was cropped once while 51 percent was cropped twice. The net

irrigated area cropped more than twice accounted for only 2.0 percent (Table 3.2). Similarly, out of

the net unirrigated area of 62.10 million hectares, 91.3 percent was cropped once while remaining

8.7 percent was cropped more than once.

Table 3.2: Distribution of Net Irrigated Area according to number of crops taken

Sl. No. Size Groups Net irrigated area cropped (in '000 ha.)

Once Twice More than twice

1 2 3 4 5

1 Marginal (Below 1.0 ha.) 4479 (34.4) 8127 (62.4) 413 (3.2)

2 Small (1.0 – 1.99 ha.) 5844 (50.4) 5279 (45.6) 465 (4.0)

3 Semi-medium (2.0 – 3.99 ha.) 6823 (53.8) 5770 (45.5) 100 (0.8)

4 Medium (4.0 – 9.99 ha.) 6390 (51.4) 5971 (48.1) 62 (0.5)

5 Large (10.0 ha. and above) 2094 (43.9) 2654 (55.6) 27 (0.6)

All size groups 25629 (47.0) 27801 (51.0) 1066 (2.0)

Note: (1) Total may not tally due to rounding off. (2) Figures in brackets are percentages.

3.3.3 The percentage distribution of Net Sown Area according to cropped once, cropped twice and

cropped more than twice may be seen in Table 3.3.

Table 3.3: Distribution of Net Sown Area according to number of crops taken

Sl. No. Size Groups Net sown area (in '000 ha.)


1 2 3 4 5

1 Marginal (Below 1.0 ha.) 15025 (59.9) 9663 (38.5) 413 (1.6)

2 Small (1.0 – 1.99 ha.) 17467 (71.5) 6485 (26.6) 465 (1.9)

3 Semi-medium (2.0 – 3.99 ha.) 20521 (74.2) 7030 (25.4) 100 (0.4)


17

Sl. No. Size Groups Net sown area (in '000 ha.)


1 2 3 4 5

4 Medium (4.0 – 9.99 ha.) 19941 (73.8) 7000 (25.9) 62 (0.2)

5 Large (10.0 ha. and above) 9354 (75.3) 3046 (24.5) 27 (0.2)

All size groups 82307 (70.6) 33226 (28.5) 1066 (0.9)


3.3.4 In a total of 116.60 million hectares of net area sown, only 29 percent was utilized for

growing crops more than once while bulk of area of about 71 percent was cropped only once during

the year. The practice of cropping area more than once was more prevalent among marginal and

small holdings than in higher size class as percentage of net area sown cropped more than once for

different categories of holdings worked out to 40.1 percent for marginal, 28.5 percent for small, 25.8

percent for semi-medium, 26.1 percent for medium and 24.7 percent for large.

3.4 Cropping Intensity

3.4.1 As per Input Survey 2006-07, cropping intensity at all India level was estimated at 130.32

which matches closely with the figure of 131.72 percent estimated through Agriculture Census

2005-06. It may be noted that cropping intensity for preceding Input Survey was estimated at 128

percent.

3.5 Cropping Pattern

3.5.1 A set of crops was identified for each State/UT for collection of data on inputs in the Survey.

These crops were selected on the basis of their importance in each State depending upon the

percentage of cropped area in relation to gross cropped area. A crop which may be important in one

State may not be so for some other State and were so put under „other crops‟ in case of latter States.

Consequently, the total area of a particular crop at all India level may not reflect the factual position

owing to its possibility of having been merged under „other crops‟ in some State. Thus, the area

under a particular crop reflects the area in major growing States. With this limitation, data on major

crops, viz. Paddy, Jowar, Bajra, Maize, Wheat, Tur (Arhar), Sugarcane, Groundnut and Cotton have

been presented separately for the purpose of analysis. The area of remaining crops has been

categorized under „other crops‟. Thus the total of all these nine crops aggregated with „other crops‟

would form the total for „all crops‟.

3.5.2 From percentage distribution of gross cropped area among various crops (Table 3.4(a)), it

may be seen that about 79.0 percent of gross irrigated area and 59.0 percent of gross unirrigated area

was covered by nine principal crops. Under gross irrigated area, paddy was the most dominant crop


18

Size

Gro

ups

Irrig

ated

Unirr

igat

edIrr

igat

edUn

irrig

ated

Irrig

ated

Unirr

igat

edIrr

igat

edUn

irrig

ated

Irrig

ated

Unirr

igat

edIrr

igat

edUn

irrig

ated

Irrig

ated

Unirr

igat

edIrr

igat

edUn

irrig

ated

Irrig

ated

Unirr

igat

edIrr

igat

edUn

irrig

ated

Irrig

ated

Unirr

igat

ed

1M

argin

al81

4866

7511

259

816

481

820

012

4557

2659

314

681

872

6311

665

514

640

524

5958

9917

956

1763

3

(45.

4)(3

7.9)

(0.6

)(3

.4)

(0.9

)(4

.6)

(1.1

)(7

.1)

(31.

9)(3

.4)

(0.1

)(3

.9)

(4.9

)(0

.4)

(0.6

)(3

.7)

(0.8

)(2

.3)

(13.

7)(3

3.5)

(100

.0)

(100

.0)

2Sm

all54

1644

8799

726

191

1074

187

1164

4540

500

1848

386

322

217

1026

367

630

3515

6305

1541

316

419

(35.

1)(2

7.3)

(0.6

)(4

.4)

(1.2

)(6

.5)

(1.2

)(7

.1)

(29.

5)(3

.0)

(0.1

)(2

.9)

(5.6

)(0

.1)

(1.4

)(6

.2)

(2.4

)(3

.8)

(22.

8)(3

8.4)

(100

.0)

(100

.0)

3Se

mi-m

edium

5298

4043

113

919

287

1674

198

1261

5217

568

3455

310

4420

266

1197

577

841

3253

7518

1628

818

594

(32.

5)(2

1.7)

(0.7

)(4

.9)

(1.8

)(9

.0)

(1.2

)(6

.8)

(32.

0)(3

.1)

(0.2

)(3

.0)

(6.4

)(0

.1)

(1.6

)(6

.4)

(3.5

)(4

.5)

(20.

0)(4

0.4)

(100

.0)

(100

.0)

4M

edium

4100

2740

101

854

347

2401

177

1003

5351

505

4549

110

2312

268

935

783

847

4058

8087

1625

317

875

(25.

2)(1

5.3)

(0.6

)(4

.8)

(2.1

)(1

3.4)

(1.1

)(5

.6)

(32.

9)(2

.8)

(0.3

)(2

.7)

(6.3

)(0

.1)

(1.7

)(5

.2)

(4.8

)(4

.7)

(25.

0)(4

5.2)

(100

.0)

(100

.0)

5La

rge

1458

844

2627

018

720

2760

233

2283

188

815

513

42

9926

235

524

420

6246

3066

7188

55

(21.

9)(9

.5)

(0.4

)(3

.0)

(2.8

)(2

2.9)

(0.9

)(2

.6)

(34.

2)(2

.1)

(0.1

)(1

.7)

(2.0

)(0

.0)

(1.5

)(3

.0)

(5.3

)(2

.8)

(30.

9)(5

2.3)

(100

.0)

(100

.0)

6Al

l Size

Gro

ups

2442

018

788

450

3367

1177

7995

821

4906

2311

723

5411

923

6439

3712

096

640

7622

2829

6815

347

3243

972

581

7937

6

(33.

6)(2

3.7)

(0.6

)(4

.2)

(1.6

)(1

0.1)

(1.1

)(6

.2)

(31.

8)(3

.0)

(0.2

)(3

.0)

(5.4

)(0

.2)

(1.3

)(5

.1)

(3.1

)(3

.7)

(21.

1)(4

0.9)

(100

.0)

(100

.0)

Note

: (1)

Figu

re in

bra

cket

s ar

e pe

rcen

tage

s. (2

) Tot

al m

ay n

ot ta

lly d

ue to

roun

ding

off.

Size

Gro

ups

Irrig

ated

Unirr

igat

edIrr

igat

edUn

irrig

ated

Irrig

ated

Unirr

igat

edIrr

igat

edUn

irrig

ated

Irrig

ated

Unirr

igat

edIrr

igat

edUn

irrig

ated

Irrig

ated

Unirr

igat

edIrr

igat

edUn

irrig

ated

Irrig

ated

Unirr

igat

edIrr

igat

edUn

irrig

ated

Irrig

ated

Unirr

igat

ed

1M

argin

al81

4866

7511

259

816

481

820

012

4557

2659

314

681

872

6311

665

514

640

524

5958

9917

956

1763

3

(33.

4)(3

5.5)

(24.

8)(1

7.8)

(13.

9)(1

0.2)

(24.

4)(2

5.4)

(24.

8)(2

5.2)

(11.

5)(2

8.8)

(22.

1)(5

2.6)

(12.

0)(1

6.1)

(6.6

)(1

3.7)

(16.

0)(1

8.2)

(24.

7)(2

2.2)

2Sm

all54

1644

8799

726

191

1074

187

1164

4540

500

1848

386

322

217

1026

367

630

3515

6305

1541

316

419

(22.

2)(2

3.9)

(21.

9)(2

1.6)

(16.

2)(1

3.4)

(22.

8)(2

3.7)

(19.

6)(2

1.3)

(15.

3)(2

0.4)

(21.

9)(1

8.7)

(22.

5)(2

5.2)

(16.

5)(2

1.2)

(22.

9)(1

9.4)

(21.

2)(2

0.7)

3Se

mi-m

edium

5298

4043

113

919

287

1674

198

1261

5217

568

3455

310

4420

266

1197

577

841

3253

7518

1628

818

594

(21.

7)(2

1.5)

(25.

0)(2

7.3)

(24.

4)(2

0.9)

(24.

1)(2

5.7)

(22.

6)(2

4.1)

(28.

9)(2

3.4)

(26.

5)(1

6.8)

(27.

6)(2

9.4)

(25.

9)(2

8.3)

(21.

2)(2

3.2)

(22.

4)(2

3.4)

4M

edium

4100

2740

101

854

347

2401

177

1003

5351

505

4549

110

2312

268

935

783

847

4058

8087

1625

317

875

(16.

8)(1

4.6)

(22.

5)(2

5.4)

(29.

5)(3

0.0)

(21.

5)(2

0.4)

(23.

1)(2

1.4)

(37.

8)(2

0.8)

(26.

0)(1

0.2)

(27.

8)(2

2.9)

(35.

1)(2

8.5)

(26.

4)(2

4.9)

(22.

4)(2

2.5)

5La

rge

1458

844

2627

018

720

2760

233

2283

188

815

513

42

9926

235

524

420

6246

3066

7188

55

(6.0

)(4

.5)

(5.7

)(8

.0)

(15.

9)(2

5.4)

(7.3

)(4

.7)

(9.9

)(8

.0)

(6.6

)(6

.6)

(3.4

)(1

.7)

(10.

2)(6

.4)

(15.

9)(8

.2)

(13.

4)(1

4.3)

(9.2

)(1

1.2)

6Al

l Size

Gro

ups

2442

018

788

450

3367

1177

7995

821

4906

2311

723

5411

923

6439

3712

096

640

7622

2829

6815

347

3243

972

581

7937

6

(100

.0)

(100

.0)

(100

.0)

(100

.0)

(100

.0)

(100

.0)

(100

.0)

(100

.0)

(100

.0)

(100

.0)

(100

.0)

(100

.0)

(100

.0)

(100

.0)

(100

.0)

(100

.0)

(100

.0)

(100

.0)

(100

.0)

(100

.0)

(100

.0)

(100

.0)

Note

: (1)

Figu

re in

bra

cket

s ar

e pe

rcen

tage

s. (2

) Tot

al m

ay n

ot ta

lly d

ue to

roun

ding

off.

(Are

a in

'000

ha.

)

Tabl

e 3.

4(a)

: Sha

re o

f Maj

or C

rops

in Ir

rigat

ed a

nd U

nirr

igat

ed a

reas

for v

ario

us S

ize G

roup

of H

oldi

ngs

(Are

a in

'000

ha.

)

Sl.

No.

Padd

yJo

war

Bajra

Mai

zeW

heat

Tur (

Arha

r)Su

garc

ane

Grou

ndnu

tCo

tton

Othe

r Cro

psAl

l Cro

ps

Tabl

e 4.

4(b)

: Sha

re o

f Var

ious

Size

Gro

ups

of H

oldi

ngs

in Ir

rigat

ed a

nd U

nirr

igat

ed a

reas

und

er v

ario

us c

rops

All C

rops

Sl.

No.

Padd

yJo

war

Bajra

Mai

zeW

heat

Tur (

Arha

r)Su

garc

ane

Grou

ndnu

tCo

tton

Othe

r Cro

ps


19

having a share of 33.6 percent followed

by wheat (31.8 percent), sugarcane (5.4

percent), cotton (3.1 percent) etc. In case

of gross unirrigated area also, paddy

accounted for the highest share of 23.7

percent followed by bajra (10.1 percent),

maize (6.2 percent), groundnut (5.1

percent), jowar (4.2 percent), cotton (3.7

percent), wheat and tur (3.0 percent)

each. The percentage share of major

crops in irrigated and unirrigated areas

are given in Table 3.2(a) and Table

3.2(b) respectively.

3.5.3 In 72.58 million hectares of

gross irrigated area (all crops) in the

country (Table 3.4(b)), the share of

marginal holdings was the highest, i.e.,

24.7 percent followed by semi-medium

and medium (22.4 percent each), small (21.2 percent) and large (9.2 percent). The percentage of

gross unirrigated area was the highest for semi-medium holdings (23.4 percent) followed by medium

(22.5 percent), Marginal (22.2 percent), small (20.7 percent and large holdings (11.2 percent).

3.5.4 The graphical presentations of gross irrigated and gross unirrigated areas under various crops

in different size groups of holdings may be seen in Figures 3.3(a) to 3.3(j).


20


21

CROPWISE USE OF INPUTS

3.6 Application of Chemical Fertilizer, Farm Yard Manure and Pesticides in Irrigated and

Unirrigated Areas

3.6.1 Chemical fertilizers are used to increase agricultural production and pesticides are used to

protect the crops from insects and pests. Besides chemical fertilizers, organic manure is also used to

raise the soil fertility. The most commonly used chemical fertilizers are Urea, Di-Ammonium

Phosphate, Super Phosphate, Potash, complex fertilizers, fertilizer mixture and micronutrient

fertilizers like Ammonium Sulphate etc. On the other hand, Farm Yard Manure (FYM)/compost and

oil cakes are the most common organic manures in use by the cultivators. Input Survey data was

collected separately for both the under High Yielding Varieties (HYV) and „Others‟ and use of

fertilizers separately for different categories. Normally, the first dose of fertilizer is given at the

sowing stage and subsequently one or two more applications are given to the crop. Thus, the same

area may receive one or more application of fertilizers but for the purpose of estimation of area

fertilised, only net area under the crop in a particular season has been taken into account.

3.6.2 Input data was collected in each State and Union Territory for different crops. The crops

grown differ from State to State and not all crops are common in all the States and Union Territories.

Further area covered in selected crops in each State and Union Territory need not be the same as the

total cropped area, as other minor crops are also grown by the cultivators.

3.7 Percentage of Irrigated and Unirrigated Areas Treated with Chemical Fertilizers, Farm

Yard Manure and Pesticides

3.7.1 Table 3.5 gives percentage of irrigated and unirrigated areas treated with chemical fertilizers,

FYM and pesticides to the corresponding gross cropped area under „all crops‟ at All India level.

Table 3.5: Percentage of Irrigated and Unirrigated Areas Treated with Chemical Fertilizers, FYM and Pesticides

for ‘All Crops’

Sl.

No. Size Groups

Percentage of irrigated areas treated with Percentage of unirrigated areas treated with

Chemical

Fertilizers

Farm Yard

Manure

Pesticides Chemical

Fertilizers

Farm Yard

Manure

Pesticides

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8

1 Marginal (Below 1.0 ha.) 94.2 23.3 49.5 52.6 33.3 28.0

2 Small (1.0 – 1.99 ha.) 93.3 24.1 45.0 61.0 36.3 31.7

3 Semi-medium (2.0 – 3.99 ha.) 91.3 23.8 51.6 61.7 32.8 32.5

4 Medium (4.0 – 9.99 ha.) 89.6 19.4 57.2 55.0 26.9 30.2

5 Large (10.0 ha. and above) 87.9 15.0 65.5 35.6 22.3 22.4

All Size Groups 91.8 21.9 52.2 55.1 31.1 29.7

3.7.2 It may be seen that 91.8 percent of gross irrigated area and 55.1 percent of gross unirrigated

area were treated with different chemical fertilizers. Similarly, about 22.0 percent of gross irrigated

area and 31.1 percent of gross unirrigated area were treated with FYM. In case of pesticides 52.2

percent of gross irrigated area and 30.0 percent of gross unirrigated area were treated with pesticides.


22

3.7.3 The percentage of gross irrigated area treated with chemical fertilizers was the highest (94.2

percent) in marginal holdings and decreased with increase in size of holdings, being 87.9 percent

(lowest) in case of large holdings. The use of chemical fertilizers was much higher in irrigated area

than in unirrigated area as out of an area of 110.4 million hectare, 60.4 percent area under irrigation

and 39.6 percent without irrigation was treated with fertilizer.

3.7.4 The percentage of irrigated area treated with FYM was highest in case of small holdings

(24.1) followed by semi-medium (23.8), marginal (23.3), medium (19.4) and large (15.0). In case of

unirrigated area also, percentage of area treated with FYM for small holdings was highest (36.3

percent) followed by marginal (33.3 percent), semi-medium (32.8 percent), medium (26.9 percent)

and large (22.3 percent).

3.7.5 In case of use of pesticides, percentage of irrigated area treated with pesticides was highest

in large holdings (65.5) followed by medium (57.2), semi-medium (51.6), marginal (49.5) and small

holdings (45.0). Thus, use of pesticides in irrigated area increased with increase in size of holdings

except marginal holdings. The corresponding figure in unirrigated area was highest (32.5 percent) in

semi-medium category followed by small (31.7 percent), medium (30.2 percent), marginal (28.0

percent) and large holdings (22.4 percent).

3.8 Rate of application of Fertilizer Nutrient (N,P,K) and FYM in Irrigated and

Unirrigated Areas

All Crops

3.8.1 Table 3.6 gives break-up of rate of application of nutrients, viz., Nitrogen(N), Phosphate(P)

and Potash(K) and FYM for „all crops‟ in irrigated and unirrigated areas. The data has been

computed from estimated consumption of various types of fertilizers by operational holders, by

taking into account nutrient content in each type of fertilizer. The rate of application of nutrients, like

N,P,K and FYM has been calculated by dividing the quantity of each nutrient, i.e., N,P,K and FYM

consumed by corresponding gross irrigated and unirrigated areas treated with fertilizer/manure for

irrigated and unirrigated areas separately.

Table 3.6: Rate of Application of Fertilizer Nutrients (N,P,K) and FYM in Irrigated and Unirrigated Areas in All Crops

(Kgs/hectare)

Sl.

No.

Size Groups N P K FYM

Irrigated Unirrigated Irrigated Unirrigated Irrigated Unirrigated Irrigated Unirrigated

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

1 Marginal (Below 1.0

ha.) 134.0 86.3 53.2 42.8 25.1 19.6 6266.1 4731.7

2 Small (1.0 – 1.99

ha.) 124.1 65.2 55.3 34.7 26.6 12.2 5593.2 3631.2

3 Semi-medium (2.0 –

3.99 ha.) 114.9 57.1 45.8 32.0 17.7 9.1 5145.3 3051.7

4 Medium (4.0 – 9.99

ha.) 111.7 48.3 42.7 29.0 12.1 6.3 4217.0 2460.8


23

Sl.

No.

Size Groups N P K FYM

Irrigated Unirrigated Irrigated Unirrigated Irrigated Unirrigated Irrigated Unirrigated

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

5 Large (10.0 ha. and

above) 98.6 39.5 37.0 24.8 5.7 6.0 3367.1 1555.6

All Size Groups 119.6 61.9 48.3 33.7 19.2 11.2 5248.5 3355.8

3.8.2 The use of N for „all crops‟ at All India level was 119.6 kg./ha. in irrigated area against

61.9 kg./ha. in unirrigated area. The corresponding rate of consumption for marginal, small, semi-

medium, medium and large holdings in irrigated area were 134.0, 124.1, 114.9, 111.7 and 98.6

(kg./ha.) against 86.3, 65.2, 57.1, 48.3 and 39.5 (kg./ha.) in unirrigated area. This indicates that the

rate of application of N (kg./ha.) was uniformly higher in irrigated area as compared to unirrigated

area and also the rate of application of N in both irrigated as well as unirrigated area had declined

with increase in size of holdings, showing a negative correlation between size of holdings and rate

of consumption of Nitrogen (N).

3.8.3 The use of P at all India level in irrigated area was 48.3 kg./ha. against 33.7 kg./ha. in

unirrigated area. Its use (kg./ha.) in irrigated area was the highest (55.3) in small holdings followed

by marginal (53.2), semi-medium (45.8), medium (42.7) and large holdings (37.0). The rate of

application (kg./ha.) in unirrigated area under various categories of holdings was 42.8 (marginal),

34.7 (small), 32.0 (semi-medium), 29.0 (medium) and 24.8 (large), showing similar pattern as

observed in case of application of N.

3.8.4 The use of Potash (K) was 19.2 kg./ha. in irrigated area against 11.2 kg./ha. in unirrigated

area. The use of K in irrigated as well as unirrigated areas had decreased with increase in size of

holdings barring in irrigated area of small holdings (26.6 kg./ha.).

3.8.5 The use of FYM in irrigated area was 5248.5 kg./ha. against 3355.8 kg./ha. in unirrigated

area. The use (kg./ha.) of FYM in irrigated area over various size-groups of holdings was more than

the corresponding figures in unirrigated area. The use of FYM had decreased as size of holdings

increased in both irrigated and unirrigated areas.

3.9 Livestock

3.9.1 Distribution of livestock held by operational holders in 2006-07 may be seen in Table 3.7(a).

Total number of cattle, buffaloes, sheep, goats, horses and ponies, mules, donkeys and asses, pigs

and camels possessed by operational holders during 2006-07 were 159.62 million, 90.93 million,

60.44 million, 96.73 million, 0.47 million, 0.21 million, 0.18 million, 7.78 million and 0.47 million

respectively. The number of cattle possessed by operational holders was highest (80.51 million) in


24

marginal holdings followed by small (35.46 million), semi-medium (25.62 million), medium (14.56

million) and large (3.47 million).

Table 3.7(a): Distribution of livestock held by operational holders by Major Size Groups (in million)

Sl.

No. Size Groups Cattle Buffaloes Sheep Goats

Horses and

Ponies Mules

Donkeys

and Asses Pigs Camels

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11

1 Marginal (Below 1.0 ha.) 80.51 40.74 27.54 54.81 0.27 0.11 0.07 4.34 0.06

2 Small (1.0 – 1.99 ha.) 35.46 19.55 14.77 18.77 0.09 0.03 0.03 1.76 0.06

3 Semi-medium (2.0 – 3.99

ha.)

25.62 16.64 10.13 12.88 0.08 0.05 0.02 1.06 0.10

4 Medium (4.0 – 9.99 ha.) 14.56 11.41 5.61 7.53 0.03 0.02 0.04 0.50 0.16


above)

3.47 2.59 2.39 2.74 0.01 Neg 0.02 0.13 0.10

All Size Groups 159.62 90.93 60.44 96.73 0.47 0.21 0.18 7.78 0.47

Note: (1) Total may not tally due to rounding off. (2) Neg – negligible.

3.9.2 Number of cattle per 100 number of operational holders in marginal, small, semi-medium,

medium and large (Table 3.7 (b)) was estimated at 125, 189, 228, 273 and 346 respectively against

159 for „all size groups‟. Further, number of buffaloes per 100 of corresponding number of

operational holders at All India level in marginal, small, semi-medium, medium and large was

estimated at 63, 104, 148, 214 and 259 respectively against 90 for „all size groups‟.

Table 3.7(b): Distribution of number of livestock per 100 corresponding number of

operational holders in each Major Size Groups

Sl.

No. Size Groups Cattle Buffaloes Sheep Goats Pigs

1 2 3 4 5 6 7

1 Marginal (Below 1.0 ha.) 125.2 63.3 42.8 85.2 6.7

2 Small (1.0 – 1.99 ha.) 188.8 104.1 78.7 100.0 9.4

3 Semi-medium (2.0 – 3.99 ha.) 228.4 148.3 90.3 114.8 9.5

4 Medium (4.0 – 9.99 ha.) 272.9 213.8 105.1 141.2 9.4

5 Large (10.0 ha. and above) 345.9 258.5 238.1 273.3 12.7

All Size Groups 158.6 90.3 60.1 96.1 7.7

3.10 Agricultural Implements and Machinery

3.10.1 In Input Survey 2006-07, information relating to usage of agricultural implements/machinery

was collected. A consolidated statement on number of operational holdings using some of important

machineries during 2006-07 is given in Table 3.8. In a total of 100.65 million operational holdings

estimated by Input Survey 2006-07 in the country, holdings using different kinds of agriculture

implements/machinery were ploughs (wooden/steel) (72.6 percent), tractor drawn mould board

plough (7.6 percent), pumpsets (diesel/electric) (25.7 percent), power tiller (2.9 percent), power

tractor (31.1 percent), cane crusher (animal/power) (1.0 percent), and sprinklers (1.3 percent). The

proportion of holdings using tractor was the highest (50.2 percent) in large holdings followed by

medium (42.7 percent), semi-medium (36.1 percent), small (31.6 percent), Marginal (28.8 percent).


25

Table 3.8: Estimated number of operational holdings using agricultural implements/machinery (in „000)

Sl.

No. Size Groups

Total

number of

operational

holdings

Number of operational holdings using

Ploughs

(Wooden/

Steel)

Mould

Board

Plough

Pumpsets

(Diesel/

Electric)

Power

Tiller Tractor

Cane

Crusher

(Animal/

Power)

Sprinklers

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10


ha.)

64316 41142 2942 12001 1588 18514 428 471

(64.0) (4.6) (18.7) (2.5) (28.8) (0.7) (0.7)

2 Small (1.0 – 1.99

ha.)

18776 16582 1686 6074 559 5932 247 282

(88.3) (9.0) (32.4) (3.0) (31.6) (1.3) (1.5)


3.99 ha.)

11218 10101 1561 4616 444 4051 181 260

(90.0) (13.9) (41.1) (4.0) (36.1) (1.6) (2.3)

4 Medium (4.0 – 9.99

ha.)

5336 4547 1180 2713 256 2278 102 195

(85.2) (22.1) (50.8) (4.8) (42.7) (1.9) (3.6)


above)

1003 749 279 490 47 504 18 54

(74.7) (27.8) (48.8) (4.7) (50.2) (1.8) (5.4)

All Size Groups 100650 73121 7649 25894 2895 31279 978 1262

(72.6) (7.6) (25.7) (2.9) (31.1) (1.0) (1.3)


3.11 Institutional Credit

3.11.1 In Input Survey, data was collected on institutional credit taken by operational holders for

agricultural purposes during agriculture year 2006-07. The institutional credit categorized into short-

term, medium-term and long-term was recorded in the schedule. The percentage of operational

holders availing institutional credit for agricultural purposes from various institutions was 25.0 at All

India level with 19.6 in case of marginal, 32.8 for small, 34.5 for semi-medium, 39.4 for medium and

40.1 for large holdings (Table 3.9(a)).

Table 3.9(a): Percentage of estimated number of operational holders availing institutional credit under different

size groups

Sl.

No. Size Groups

Percentage of

operational holders

availing institutional

credit

Percentage of operational holdings availing credit from

PACS PLDB/

SLDB CBB RRBB

1 2 3 4 5 6 7


2 Small (1.0 – 1.99 ha.) 32.8 43.6 3.6 29.0 26.7

3 Semi-medium (2.0 – 3.99 ha.) 34.5 48.0 4.3 23.4 28.9

4 Medium (4.0 – 9.99 ha.) 39.4 49.6 5.2 23.6 28.9


All Size Groups 25.0 48.7 3.9 25.4 25.0 Note: Total may not tally due to rounding off.

3.11.2 The percentage of operational holdings availing agricultural credit from different sources,

viz., Primary Agricultural Credit Societies, Primary Land Development Banks, Commercial Banks

and Regional Rural Banks was 51.1, 3.5, 24.8 and 22.1 in marginal category; 43.6, 3.6, 29.0 and 26.7

in small holdings; 48.0, 4.3, 23.4 and 28.9 in semi-medium; 49.6, 5.2, 23.6 and 28.9 in medium;

53.3, 6.8, 19.9 and 32.2 in large holdings with an average of 48.7, 3.9, 25.4 and 25.0 at All India

level. It is clarified that there were some operational holders who took institutional credit from more

than one source and hence there was an overlapping in number of operational holdings availing


26

credit through above mentioned sources. The above distribution shows that Primary Agricultural

Credit Societies (48.7 percent) were main source of credit of operational holders followed by

commercial banks (25.4 percent) and regional rural banks (25.0 percent).

3.11.3 From Table 3.9(b), it may be seen that percentage of short-term, medium-term, and long-

term loans taken by operational holders at All India level was 63.7, 19.5 and 16.8 respectively with

71.0, 19.2 and 9.8 for marginal; 66.8, 20.3 and 12.9 for small; 63.0, 18.8 and 18.2 for semi-medium;

52.6, 19.7 and 27.7 for medium; and 46.7, 20.1 and 33.2 for large holdings. This distribution

indicates that percentage of short-term loan taken by operational holders was more prevalent than

medium and long-term loans, which is normally found that short-term loan is frequently borrowed to

meet requirement of seasonal agricultural operations.

Table 3.9(b): Percentage distribution of short-term, medium-term and long-term loans to

corresponding total loan in each size group

Sl. No. Size Groups Short-term Medium-term Long-term

1 2 3 4 5

1 Marginal (Below 1.0 ha.) 71.0 19.2 9.8

2 Small (1.0 – 1.99 ha.) 66.8 20.3 12.9

3 Semi-medium (2.0 – 3.99 ha.) 63.0 18.8 18.2

4 Medium (4.0 – 9.99 ha.) 52.6 19.7 27.7

5 Large (10.0 ha. and above) 46.7 20.1 33.2

All Size Groups 63.7 19.5 16.8 Note: Total may not tally due to rounding off.

3.11.4 From the table 3.9(c), it may be seen that marginal holdings availed 32.6 percent of total

agricultural credit of about ₹84796 crores against their presentation of 63.9 percent in total number

of operational holdings of 100.65 million estimated through Input Survey 2006-07. Similarly, small,

semi-medium, medium and large holdings availed 22.6 percent, 21.0 percent, 18.4 percent and 5.4

percent of total agricultural credit respectively against their proportions of 18.7 percent, 11.1 percent,

5.3 percent and 1.0 percent in total number of holdings.

Table 3.9(c): Percentage distribution of agricultural credit by size-groups

Sl.

No. Size Groups

Percentage of number

of operational

holdings

Percentage of

agricultural credit

availed

1 2 3 4

1 Marginal (Below 1.0 ha.) 63.9 32.6

2 Small (1.0 – 1.99 ha.) 18.7 22.6

3 Semi-medium (2.0 – 3.99 ha.) 11.1 21.0

4 Medium (4.0 – 9.99 ha.) 5.3 18.4

5 Large (10.0 ha. and above) 1.0 5.4

All Size Groups 100.0 100.0

Note: Total may not tally due to rounding off.


27

3.11.5 In Input Survey 2006-07, disbursement of short-term loan was collected under three

components, viz., loan used for purchasing fertilizer, loan utilized for other inputs and amount of

loan taken in cash from financial institutions. It was observed that highest share of short-term loan

was received in form of cash which constituted 80.5 percent at All India level against 16.0 percent

for purchasing fertilizer and only 3.5 percent for „other inputs‟(Table 3.9(d)).

Table 3.9(d): Percentage distribution of short-term loan according to uses

Sl.

No. Size Groups

Loan amount utilized for purchase of Loan amount received

in cash Fertilizer Other Inputs

1 2 3 4 5

1 Marginal (Below 1.0 ha.) 15.6 2.9 81.5

2 Small (1.0 – 1.99 ha.) 15.4 3.1 81.5

3 Semi-medium (2.0 – 3.99 ha.) 16.0 3.8 80.2

4 Medium (4.0 – 9.99 ha.) 17.2 4.8 78.0

5 Large (10.0 ha. and above) 18.5 5.2 76.3

All Size Groups 16.0 3.5 80.5 Note: Total may not tally due to rounding off.

3.12 Seeds

3.12.1 The estimated number of operational holdings who used improved quality seeds (certified

seeds) for agricultural purposes may be seen in Table 3.10. Out of a total of 100.65 million

operational holdings estimated for Input Survey 2006-07, 32.1 percent used certified seeds while 1.1

percent of it used seed of notified variety. Out of total operational holding, only 0.3 percent used

hybrid seeds and 5.1 percent carried out foundation programme of seeds.

Table 3.10: Estimated number of operational holdings using certified seeds for agricultural purpose

(in million)

Sl. No. Size Groups Total No. of

Operational

Holdings

No. of Holdings

using Certified

Seeds

No. of Holdings

using Notified

Seeds

No. of Holdings

using Hybrid

Seeds

No. of Holdings

who took

Foundation Prog.


2 Small (1.0 – 1.99 ha.) 18.78 6.99 0.07 0.06 1.16


ha.)

11.22 4.61 0.05 0.04 0.93

4 Medium (4.0 – 9.99 ha.) 5.34 2.27 0.03 0.02 0.60


All Size Groups 100.65 32.27 0.36 0.28 5.14

Note: Total may not tally due to founding off.

3.12.2 The crop-wise distribution of operational holdings using notified variety of certified seeds

showed that out of a total of 358755 holdings which used seed of notified variety, about 75.0 percent

holders used for paddy crop, 40.8 percent for wheat, 25.1 percent for Jowar, 26.0 percent for

groundnut, 24.5 percent for cotton, 22.8 percent for maize, about 18 percent for bajra, 16.2 percent

for sugarcane, 13.2 percent for tur (arhar) and 12.6 percent for rapeseed & mustard.

3.12.3 In a total of 280265 operational holders using hybrid seed, about 56 percent used for paddy

crop, about 28 percent each for groundnut and cotton crops, about 25 percent each for jowar and


28

wheat, 20.2 percent for bajra, 21.8 percent for maize, 18.9 percent for sugarcane, 15.4 percent for tur

(arhar) and 11.1 percent for rapeseed & mustard.

3.12.4 It was also found that Agriculture Departments of State Governments were the second

largest source from where farmers purchased certified seeds as out of estimated 32.27 million

operational holders using certified seeds, 46.3 percent purchased their seeds from Agriculture

Departments while 54.0 percent holders met their requirement from private seed dealers.

3.13 Pest Control Measures (Integrated Pest Management)

3.13.1 Traditionally, there have been a number of practices adopted by farmers as plant protection

measures. For the first time, data on practices usually followed by operational holder for protection

of his crops against insects and pests was collected in Input Survey 2001-02 under Integrated Pest

Management (IPM), keeping in view crop variety and agro-climatic conditions. The data in Input

Survey 2006-07 was collected under following types of pest control measures:

- Agronomic and Cultural Practices

- Mechanical Control

- Biological Control

- Chemical Control

- Others

- No Efforts

3.13.2 The percentage distribution of number of operational holders who adopted above mentioned

practices for plant protection by major size groups of holdings may be seen in Table 3.11(a).

Table 3.11(a): Percentage distribution of operational holdings adopting usual methods of pest control by Major Size Groups of holdings

Sl.

No. Size Groups

Total Number

of

Operational

Holdings

Number of

holdings which

adopted pest

control

Agronomic and

Cultural

Practices

Mechanical

Control

Biological

Control

Chemical

Control Others

No

Efforts

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

1 Marginal (Below 1.0 ha.) 63.9 64.5 49.4 50.4 54.1 60.4 72.8 62.5

2 Small (1.0 – 1.99 ha.) 18.7 17.9 23.2 22.3 22.6 19.9 14.6 20.4


ha.)

11.1 11.0 16.5 16.4 14.8 12.6 8.0 11.4

4 Medium (4.0 – 9.99 ha.) 5.3 5.4 9.0 9.1 7.3 6.0 3.6 5.1

5 Large (10.0 ha. and above) 1.0 1.1 1.9 1.8 1.2 1.1 1.0 0.6

All Size Groups 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0


3.13.3 The percentage of holdings adopting agronomic and cultural practices was highest (49.4) in

marginal followed by small (23.2), semi-medium (16.5), medium (9.0) and large (1.9). Marginal

holdings had highest share of 50.4 percent even for mechanical control, followed by small (22.3

percent), semi-medium (16.4 percent), medium (9.1 percent) and large (1.8 percent). In biological

methods, marginal holdings had highest share of 54.1 percent followed by small (22.6 percent),

semi-medium (14.8 percent), medium (7.3 percent) and large (1.2 percent). Under chemical methods


29

also, highest percentage of holdings belonged to marginal category (60.4) followed by small (19.9),

semi-medium (12.6), medium (6.0) and large (1.0).

3.13.4 The percentage distribution of operational holdings in each size groups of holdings by

various methods of pest control is given in Table 3.11(b).

Table 3.11(b): Percentage distribution of operational holdings in various size groups of holdings by usual methods

of pest control

Sl.

No. Size Groups

Number of

holdings which

adopted pest

control

Agronomic

and Cultural

Practices

Mechanical

Control

Biological

Control

Chemical

Control Others

No

Efforts

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9

1 Marginal (Below 1.0 ha.) 71.6 17.1 4.0 4.8 40.2 45.3 28.4

2 Small (1.0 – 1.99 ha.) 68.3 28.8 6.4 7.2 47.7 32.7 31.7

3 Semi-medium (2.0 – 3.99 ha.) 70.4 33.3 7.7 7.7 48.8 29.1 29.6

4 Medium (4.0 – 9.99 ha.) 72.3 37.3 8.7 7.8 47.5 26.9 27.7

5 Large (10.0 ha. and above) 81.6 36.4 7.9 5.9 39.7 33.7 18.4

All Size Groups 71.0 22.3 5.2 5.7 42.9 40.1 29.0

It is clarified that one operational holder may follow more than one practices to protect his crop(s)

from insects or pests.

3.13.5 It may be observed that chemical control method was most popular among various pest

control measures as 43.0 percent holdings adopted this approach followed by others (40.1 percent),

agronomic & cultural practices (22.3 percent) etc. However, 29.0 percent of total holdings did not go

for any plant protection measures.

3.14 Educational Qualification of Operational Holder

3.14.1 In Input Survey 2006-07, data was collected relating to educational qualification of selected

operational holders and an estimate was generated at different levels, like district, state and all India.

The information was collected on different educational levels, like illiterate, up to primary level,

middle, secondary, senior secondary, technical diploma below degree level and graduates and above.

3.14.2 The percentage distribution of operational holdings in each size groups by educational

status may be seen in Table 3.12. The graphical presentation is given in Figure 3.4.

Table 3.12: Percentage distribution of operational holders in each size groups by educational status

Sl.

No. Size Groups

Total No. of

Operational

Holders

Educational Qualifications of Operational Holders

Illiterate Up to

Class V Middle Secondary

Senior

Secondary

Technical

Diploma

below

Degree

Level

Graduate

& above

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10


ha.)

100.0 32.6 26.2 21.2 13.2 4.3 1.1 1.3

2 Small (1.0 – 1.99 ha.) 100.0 31.7 25.7 21.5 13.8 4.8 1.0 1.6


30

Sl.

No. Size Groups

Total No. of

Operational

Holders

Educational Qualifications of Operational Holders

Illiterate Up to

Class V Middle Secondary

Senior

Secondary

Technical

Diploma

below

Degree

Level

Graduate

& above


3.99 ha.)

100.0 31.5 25.2 21.3 13.6 5.3 1.0 2.0

4 Medium (4.0 – 9.99 ha.) 100.0 32.0 25.2 21.1 12.6 5.4 1.1 2.7


above)

100.0 34.2 25.2 18.1 12.0 5.7 1.3 3.4

All Size Groups 100.0 32.3 25.9 21.2 13.3 4.6 1.1 1.6


3.14.3 Out of a total of 100.65 million estimated operational holders for Input Survey 2006-07,

about 68.0 percent were literate, 25.9 percent studied up to class V, 21.2 percent up to middle class,

13.3 percent up to secondary, 4.6 percent up to senior secondary, 1.1 percent technical diploma

holders below degree level and rest 1.6 percent graduates and above.

3.15 Average Age of Operational Holder

3.15.1 In Input Survey 2006-07, information relating to age of sampled operational holders (in

completed years) was collected. Based on the estimated figure, the percentage distribution of number

of operational holders into pre-defined age-groups may be seen in Table 3.13. The average age of an

operational holder was estimated at 48 years while maximum number of operational holders (38.2

percent) belonged to the age group (41 – 50 ) years followed by (51 – 60) years (28.0 percent), (31 –

40) years (18.7 percent) etc., lowest being in age group – up to 30 years (3.2 percent).

Table 3.13: Percentage distribution of number of operational holders into different age groups

Sl.

No. Size Groups

Total

number of

operational

holdings

up to 30

years

31 - 40

years

41-50

years

51-60

years

61-65

years

66

years

&

above

Average

Age

(years)

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

1 Marginal (Below 1.0 ha.) 100.0 3.4 20.2 38.0 27.2 7.8 3.3 47.59

2 Small (1.0 – 1.99 ha.) 100.0 3.1 17.4 39.6 28.3 8.6 3.0 48.10

3 Semi-medium (2.0 – 3.99 ha.) 100.0 2.8 15.0 38.1 30.1 10.4 3.6 49.04

4 Medium (4.0 – 9.99 ha.) 100.0 2.6 13.2 36.7 32.0 11.3 4.2 49.75

5 Large (10.0 ha. and above) 100.0 2.2 13.0 33.6 31.8 16.0 3.3 50.45

All Size Groups 100.0 3.2 18.7 38.2 28.0 8.5 3.3 47.99

Note: (1) Total may not tally due to rounding off. (2) Figures in Col.3 to 9 are percentages.

3.16 Size of Household of Operational Holder

3.16.1 The percentage distribution of number of operational holders in each size-group of holdings

according to different size of households is given in Table 3.14. The average size of household of an

operational holder was estimated at 5.50 revealing 66.0 percent of operational holders had their

family size between 4 to 6 followed by 7 to 9 (14.3 percent), 10 to 12 (5.1 percent) etc.


31

Table 3.14: Percentage distribution of number of operational holdings by size of households

Sl.

No. Size Groups

Total

number of

operational

holdings

Size of household of operational Holder Average

Size (No.) Up to 3 4 to 6 7 to 9 10 to

12

13 to

15

16 to

19

20 &

above

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11

1 Marginal (Below 1.0 ha.) 100.0 14.3 69.1 11.6 4.0 0.6 0.2 0.1 5.26

2 Small (1.0 – 1.99 ha.) 100.0 11.5 63.8 17.0 6.0 1.1 0.4 0.2 5.70

3 Semi-medium (2.0 – 3.99 ha.) 100.0 10.7 58.8 20.1 7.7 1.7 0.6 0.4 6.03

4 Medium (4.0 – 9.99 ha.) 100.0 9.1 54.9 23.4 8.7 2.4 0.9 0.6 6.37

5 Large (10.0 ha. and above) 100.0 7.7 46.6 29.0 10.1 3.7 1.5 1.3 6.96

All Size Groups 100.0 13.0 66.0 14.3 5.1 1.0 0.3 0.2 5.50

Note: (1) Total may not tally due to rounding off. (2) Figures in Col.3 to 10 are percentages.

*******

Date post:	16-May-2018
Category:	Documents
Upload:	buinhi
View:	215 times
Download:	1 times

ALL INDA REPORT ON INPUT SURVEY 1996-97agcensus.nic.in/document/is2006/reports/chapter_3.pdf · All...

Documents