1 Baseline assessment of groundnut for Tamilnadu State in India Karunakaran, Rao GDN and Bantilan MCS. Chapter 1 Introduction Settings India is a major grower and producer of oilseeds as well as a major importer of vegetable oils ranks fourth among the countries in oilseed economy, next to USA, China and Brazil. Nearly 14 million farmers are involved in oilseed production, mostly in arid and semi arid regions of the country, whose capacity to adopt modern technology are constrained by poor resource base. This is coupled with aberration in monsoon and market economy presents a formidable challenge to make oilseed production sustainable in the long run. In order to curtail the growing vegetable oil import bills and increase the production and productivity of oilseeds, the Technology Mission on Oilseeds (TMO) was initiated in 1986 with the following objectives; (i) self-reliance in edible oils by 1990 (ii) reduce imports by 1990 almost to zero (iii) raise oilseeds production to 18 million tones (mt) by 1989-90 and 26 mt of oilseeds and produce 8 mt of vegetable oil by 2000 AD. The TMO foot forth the efforts in research, resource inputs, production, transport, trade and economic concerns etc, in the conventional indigenous oilseeds production. Besides that it attempted to introduce new crops such as sunflower, soybean, oil palm and also exploiting other sources edible oil from cotton seed, rice bran besides using oil from plants of forest origin like Maua, karanj, sal etc. Cohesive and concerted efforts made in the TMO were clearly showed a remarkable success in terms of increase in oilseeds production to 21.65 mt with an average productivity of 336 kg per acre in triennium ending (TE) 1995-96 from 11.68 mt and 251kg per acre, respectively from the base period TE 1986-87. About 38 per cent additional area brought under oilseeds cultivation by which the production and productivity were enhanced to 85 and 34 per cent, respectively in the above period. However, during the last decade, growth in the area and production of major nine oilseeds was marginally increased and it reached 67 million acres and 25.20 mt with an average productivity of 375 kg per acre during TE 2006-07. Particularly in case of groundnut, the trend was reversed. Before the initiation of TMO (TE 1986-87), the area, production and productivity of groundnut were 17.51 million acres, 5.81 mt and 322 kg per acre with almost 85 per cent groundnut area under rainfed condition. Implementation of TMO created marked improvement and shifted the area, production and
Transcript
1
Baseline assessment of groundnut for Tamilnadu State in India
Karunakaran, Rao GDN and Bantilan MCS.
Chapter 1 Introduction
Settings
India is a major grower and producer of oilseeds as well as a major importer of
vegetable oils ranks fourth among the countries in oilseed economy, next to USA, China and
Brazil. Nearly 14 million farmers are involved in oilseed production, mostly in arid and semi
arid regions of the country, whose capacity to adopt modern technology are constrained by poor
resource base. This is coupled with aberration in monsoon and market economy presents a
formidable challenge to make oilseed production sustainable in the long run. In order to curtail
the growing vegetable oil import bills and increase the production and productivity of oilseeds,
the Technology Mission on Oilseeds (TMO) was initiated in 1986 with the following
objectives; (i) self-reliance in edible oils by 1990 (ii) reduce imports by 1990 almost to zero (iii)
raise oilseeds production to 18 million tones (mt) by 1989-90 and 26 mt of oilseeds and produce
8 mt of vegetable oil by 2000 AD.
The TMO foot forth the efforts in research, resource inputs, production, transport, trade
and economic concerns etc, in the conventional indigenous oilseeds production. Besides that it
attempted to introduce new crops such as sunflower, soybean, oil palm and also exploiting other
sources edible oil from cotton seed, rice bran besides using oil from plants of forest origin like
Maua, karanj, sal etc. Cohesive and concerted efforts made in the TMO were clearly showed a
remarkable success in terms of increase in oilseeds production to 21.65 mt with an average
productivity of 336 kg per acre in triennium ending (TE) 1995-96 from 11.68 mt and 251kg per
acre, respectively from the base period TE 1986-87. About 38 per cent additional area brought
under oilseeds cultivation by which the production and productivity were enhanced to 85 and 34
per cent, respectively in the above period. However, during the last decade, growth in the area
and production of major nine oilseeds was marginally increased and it reached 67 million acres
and 25.20 mt with an average productivity of 375 kg per acre during TE 2006-07.
Particularly in case of groundnut, the trend was reversed. Before the initiation of TMO
(TE 1986-87), the area, production and productivity of groundnut were 17.51 million acres, 5.81
mt and 322 kg per acre with almost 85 per cent groundnut area under rainfed condition.
Implementation of TMO created marked improvement and shifted the area, production and
2
productivity of groundnut to 19.51 million acres, 7.84 mt and 402 kg per acre in TE 1995-96
which recorded increase of 11, 35 and 21 per cent, respectively over last decade supported by
the 19 per cent area with irrigation.
Despite impressive progress in last two decades in the area and production of groundnut,
it showed a declining trend during 2006-07 and the area was declined to 15.78 million acre and
6.53 mt and showed 19 and 16 per cent decline in the groundnut area and production,
respectively even with the three per cent increase in productivity to 414 kg per arce. The import
of vegetable oil has continuously rising and import bill touched more than Rs 10 thousand
crores to the exchequer.
The declining trend in groundnut was contributed by several constraints including biotic
and abiotic stress besides, low or no use of plant nutrients were the major factors that hinders in
increasing oilseed productivity. With hardly 17 per cent of the area under irrigation, oilseeds are
subjected to vagaries of monsoon resulting in lower yields coupled with continuous cultivation
of oilseed without crop rotation has led to the depletion in soil nutrients as well as increase in
pest and disease incidences. Low level of management adopted by small and marginal farmers,
poor post harvest technology and inadequate support besides weak technology transfer
contributed to the low level of productivity.
Objectives and Expected Output
Consequent of the above discussed factors in the oil seed production, considering the
importance of the groundnut in total oilseed production (26 per cent share), nutrient richness,
role in soil nutrient fixation, higher water use efficiency, crop diversification, present low status
of productivity, this crop is considered as one of the crop in the current project. The long term
objective of the current Tropical Legume II project is designed to increase the legume
productivity by 15 per cent, ensure the share of improved varieties to 30 per cent of the cropped
area and reaching the benefits to 57 million poor. The project also set the short term (3 years)
objectives increase the legume productivity to five per cent, improved varieties to the extend of
10 per cent of cropped area and gaining more than $ 75 million. Among selected legume,
groundnut is the selected crop in the study area in Tamil Nadu. The project has two
components; identify the best varieties to the locality for up scaling and prioritizing the breeding
work and peg mark the present status through the baseline and market survey for the groundnut
in the selected district.
The specific objectives of the baseline study are;
3
1. to identify the target population and who and where they documents the current
lively hood,
2. to study the status of target population document the how or importance of
legume in the livelihood strategy of the target population,
3. to document and characterize the production, utilization, commercialization of
legumes (groundnut), and
4. to identify the opportunities and constraints to improving the livelihood of the
target population via improved technologies and legume practices.
Hypothesis
The present study hypothesized that there is further increase in productivity and
production through intensification and expand the area of improved varieties.
Methodology
The baseline and market study for the project is essential in peg marking the present
level of groundnut production system, so as to compare the changes in economic and social
variable after completing the project.
Sampling methodology
Groundnut is cultivating in 25.48 lakh acre and producing 10.7 lakh tones of pods in
Tamil Nadu with an average productivity of 421 kg of pod per acre during 1985-86.
Considerable improvement was recorded due to the implementation of the TMO and the area
and productivity recorded 29.43 lakh acre and 15.13 lakh tones with an average productivity of
515 kg per ac during 1995-96. However, the groundnut area had drastically declined to 15.23
lakh acres but due to the increased productivity to 659 kg of pod per acre the state produced
10.05 lakh tones of pods. These declined trend in area and production in the state needs to
address through the project. The state groundnut production has to be stabilized and
significantly increased by extending irrigation facility, use of pest and disease resistant varieties,
use of certified sees, proper application of secondary and minor nutrients specially gypsum and
sulphur and application of Biofertiliser (Rhizobium), use of pseudomonas etc,. In order to trace
the different level of input use and the constraints in adoption of production technologies,
besides tracing back the preferred characters for traders, processor in groundnut the baseline and
market study was designed.
In the baseline study, the district and taluks were purposively selected based on the
maximum area under the groundnut and larger share to the state groundnut production. About
69 per cent of state groundnut area was under rainfed and producing 53.42 per cent of the state
4
production (10.7 lakh tones of pod). Based on the area, Thiruvannamalai, Erode and Namakkal
were selected in the study and considering variability in production and budget availability, only
Thiruvannamalai and Erode districts were considered in the baseline study.
5
Groundnut Production in Tamil Nadu -Districts’ Contribution
< 10, 000 ha
10,000 – 20,000 ha
20,000- 50,000 ha
50,000-1,00,000 ha
> 1,00,000
6
In the block level, Thiruvannamalai, Keelpennathur and Thandrampet blocks were
selected in Thiruvannamalai district and in Erode district, Anthiyur, Ammapet and Nambiyur
blocks were selected for the baseline survey. However, the Farmers Participatory Variety
Selection (FPVS) trails were conducted in three to four villages in each selected blocks, one
trail village was selected for the baselines survey to study the impact of the project activities on
groundnut performance and rural livelihood. In each selected trail village, 30 farmers were
selected randomly. Control villages were selected in each selected blocks which representing
the same agro-eco system of the selected trail village. In each control village, 15 farmers were
selected randomly to compare the impact of the project. Besides that the gender issues are
addressed in the project by studying the participation in farm and non farm activities, ownership
and utilization of resources.
In the market study all the market intermediaries such as village traders, wholesale
traders, commission agent, retailers and wholesalers of output and oil and cake involved in
groundnut marketing were selected from the all the selected blocks. The market study addressed
to drive the preferred characters of the cultivar by the traders, market margin, marketing cost
and problems and constraints in the groundnut marketing in the selected districts.
Data
The primary data were collected through the well designed pre tested questionnaires
from the farmers and market intermediaries. The data related to 2007-08. The cropping pattern
and crop rotation followed were collected for two to five years from the recall basis. The
farmers did not maintain any record but they were able to give necessary information which was
cross checked properly.
In the baseline survey farmer basic information, land ownership, resource endowment,
financial assets and liabilities, major source of income, consumption expenditure were collected
from the farmer. Besides that the crop specific information such as cropping pattern, history of
the groundnut crop, crop rotation, and crops performance in last five years, varietal preferences,
seed selection and storage, purchase of seed, pest and disease incidence and their strategy for
control were collected. The prefer characters in production, consumption, fodder and marketing
for the ruling and new cultivars and constraints were collected by showing the seed sample box
to guide the farmers. The pattern of utilization of output, market and price information received
and their response toward the received price information were also collected.
7
Karnataka
Kerala
Andhra Pradesh
Bay of Bengal
Scale:
8
Besides that the role of gender in groundnut cultivation, resource ownership, decision
making and utilization, preferred characters for the ruling and new cultivars, premium price
willing to pay (WTP) for the preferred characters were collected. From the market
intermediaries, details of volume of transaction, type of product handled, method of purchase
and sales, cost of marketing, market margin and problem and constraints were collected from
village brokers, commission agents, wholesale traders, process of different type such as country
Ghani, power Ghani, rotary and expeller units, oil and cake whole seller and retailers operated
in the market. The collected farm and market were tabulated and analyzed under adopted and
non-adopted village categories in each selected districts viz., Erode and Thiruvannamalai and
also under different farm size categories.
Tools of analysis
Tabular method of analysis was followed to estimate the mean value of all socio-
economic variables besides the frequency analysis.
Price spread and economic efficiency of market channel
Price spread includes various marketing costs and margin of intermediaries in the
various marketing process such as assembling, transport, wholesaling, processing, oil and cake
wholesaling and retailing. The concurrent margin method of price spread estimation was
followed in the study. The cost of processing is analyzed separately for each type of processing
per quintal of kernel under different market channel. Calkins and Weston’s (1980) economic
efficiency index (E) was estimated using the following formula;
E=1+Sum of marketing agent's margin
Sum of marketing cost
Garette Ranking Technique
The farmers were asked to rank various problems encountered by them in cultivation of
for an attribute. The per cent position was calculated for using the ranks given by the respondent
using the formula, present position= [100(Rij-0.5)]/ Nj. Where, Rij is the rank given for the ith
factor by the jth
individual and Nj is the number of factors ranked by the jth
farmer. Then the per
cent position of the rank was converted into scores by referring the table given by Garette
(1969).
9
Chapter 2
This baseline study was conducted at Erode and Thiruvannamalai districts of Tamil
Nadu. The socio-economic variables of farm and farmers were studied through the related
primary data collected from the sample farm.
Farmers’ general characteristics such as age, education farming experience, operational
size of the farm, resource endowment and other assets and liabilities details guided in
formulating the production strategies in any farming system. In this context, the above details
were analyzed from the collected primary data in adopted (in which FPVS field trails) and
control villages in the selected districts. The general crop situation, crop potentials and drought
situation are discussed in the following section.
Distribution of the Sample Farms
The distribution of farmers under different farm size was worked out and the results are
presented in the Table 1. It could be revealed from the table about 65 per cent of the framers
constituted the marginal and small size farm categories who own less than five acres. Only less
than seven per cent of farmers were under large farm size category who owned more than 10
acres of land. The distribution of farmers between adopted and control categories revealed that
the share of marginal and small farmers was more in control villages (71 per cent) than in
adopted villages (37 per cent) in Erode district, while in Thiruvannamalai district; it was 74 and
34 per cent, respectively. The share of female farmers was more (11 per cent in control village)
in Erode district (Tale 1, 2 and 3).
Age and Education
The average age of the farmers were ranged between 43 to 53 years. The average age
was 49 years in adopted and 46 years in control village farmers. The age distribution among
adopted and control villages was 51 and 46 years in Erode district and 47 and 46 years in
Thiruvannamalai district, respectively (Table 4).
The level of education under different farm size was studied from the sample farms and
the results are presented in Table 5. It could be seen from the table that the total number of
schooling years was relatively more in large farm size. In adopted village, the schooling year
was 3.88 years in marginal farmers to 8.56 years in large farmers. While in the control villages
10
it was 6.67 to 8.75 schooling years indicating that the higher the level of education in control
villages. The average schooling years between adopted and control villages was 6.36 and 6.98
years in Erode district to 5.31 and 6.16 in Thiruvannamalai district, respectively indicated
higher level of literacy in Erode district. The farmers participatory in local bodies were more in
adopted village (3.89 per cent of farmers) than in control villages (2.22 per cent). This was
comparatively high in Thiruvannamalai district (4.44 per cent) mainly from large size farms
(Table 6). In general, the age and education were more in Erode and the farmer participation in
local body was more in Thiruvannamalai.
Caste and Religion Composition
The caste composition of the sample farms in adopted and control villages under
different farm size are presented in Table 8 and 9. The results revealed that most backward class
(MBC) people were dominated in Thiruvannamalai district to the maximum of 69 per cent in
the control villages. In Erode district, backward class farmers in the adopted and control villages
constituted 90 and 100 per cent, respectively. The SC population was more in the adopted
villages in Thiruvannamalai district at 40 per cent, but this category constitutes only 6.6 per cent
of population in control villages. The SC and ST farmers were more in marginal and small size
farm categories. Among 270 sample farms, only two were Muslims in Thiruvannamalai district
who were in the control village which constitute 0.74 per cent of the total population (Table 10).
Distribution of the farmer according to the main and secondary occupation
Agriculture is main occupation of the majority of the farmers followed by the business
and service/ employment. Only four per cent of farmers supported their income mainly through
other than agriculture, which were in marginal category farm size (Table 13). Besides
agriculture as a main occupation, about 15 per cent of the farmers reported that business or
service as the secondary occupation and another 68 per cent of farmers reported the livestock as
a secondary occupation. Distribution of farmers supported by the livestock as a secondary
occupation was lesser in control village than adopted village both in Erode and
Thiruvannamalai districts (Table 14). The support of the livestock as secondary occupation was
more in small farm size 26 and 24 per cent in Erode and Thiruvannamalai districts, respectively,
which indicated its provide cushion for farm risk and support to the household in generating
employment and income.
11
Family Size and Farm workers
The average family size of the study region was 5.18 persons per family. This was
marginally high in adopted villages (5.25 per cent). There is no much different in family size
among adopted and control village and between different farms size in Thiruvannamalai district.
The average family size was 4.9 and 4.3 acres in adopted and control villages in Erode district.
However, about 68 per cent of the family members were available for farm work. As the farm
size increased to large category the family labour availability reduced from 70 per cent in
marginal farms to 62 per cent in large size farms. As said earlier, the family labour availability
was comparatively higher in control villages than adopted village in Erode and Thiruvannamalai
district (Table 16a). The availability of family labour would enhanced the timely completion of
less labour required operations such as chemical fertilizer application, seed treatments,
irrigation, watching, storing the grain and stalk, cleaning and threshing etc.
Literacy rate in adopted and control villages farmers was 42.5 and 57 per cent in Erode
district and it was relatively high in Thiruvannamalai district at 90 and 65 per cent, respectively.
There is no much variation in literacy rate between farm categories (Table 16a).
Land ownership and operational size of farms
The average size of the farm and the share of the irrigated and rainfed area, share of the
leased in lands were studied for different farm size in adopted and control villages in both Erode
and Thiruvannamalai districts. The results are presented in Table 17. It could be revealed from
the results that the operational holding size in marginal farms was 1.81 and 2.11 acre per farm
in adopted and control villages, respectively of which 80 and 54 per cent were irrigated land.
However, the average farm size for the small size farm was 4.26 and 4.11 acre in adopted and
control villages, respectively of which the share of irrigated land was 68 and 69 per cent,
respectively. The average farm size for large size farm was relatively high in adopted village
(12.37 acre) than the control village (9.75 acre) with low irrigated land share of 54 and 51 per
cent in adopted and control villages, respectively.
In Erode district, the average farm size of the marginal and small size land was relatively
high in adopted villages at 2.31 and 4.67 acre than in control villages 1.94 and 3.56 acre in the
above farm size categories, respectively. In adopted village the share of the irrigated land was
invariably more in Thiruvannamalai district 96.8, 93.3, 96.2, and 82.19 per cent among four
farms size categories, where as it was 36, 36, 56 and 47 per cent, respectively in Erode district.
The share of leased in land in the marginal and medium farmers in adopted villages was 8 and 5
12
per cent, respectively. More share of irrigated lands in Thiruvannamalai district help to go for
second crop of groundnut in Rabi and summer seasons.
Live stock population and its value
Livestock is being a second income generating enterprise next to agriculture to 70 per
cent of the farms, the distribution and its value among adopted and control villages under
different farm size categories was analyzed and the results are presented for Erode and
Thiruvannamalai districts in Table 18b and 18c, respectively. The livestock population was
comparatively high in control villages than in adopted villages both in Erode and
Thiruvannamalai districts except the population of goat and sheep in adopted villages in
Thiruvannamalai district. The average cattle population including draught animal, local cow,
improved cow, buffalos and young cattle were 3.81 and 2.8 in Erode district and it was 3.3 and
4.2 in Thiruvannamalai district among adopted and control villages, respectively. The improved
cow and sheep population was high in adopted villages which is 2.79 and 7.67 value to Rs 17.7
and Rs 7.57 thousands, respectively. Where as, the adopted village in Erode district, the average
poultry population was high at 6.81 with less value (Rs 887 per farm) which was Rs 2650 for 4
birds per farm in Thiruvannamalai district. In marginal farms in Erode, more than 70 per cent
farmers owned local/ improved cow in adopted villages while it was about 30 per cent in
Thiruvannamalai. Marginal and medium farms owned comparatively higher live stock than
other farm categories in Erode and Thiruvannamalai districts. Livestock rearing has taken as the
secondary occupation by the 72 per cent of farms in small farm size and 90 per cent in large size
farmers. Erode district, about 82 and 62 per cent for adopted and control villages farmers owned
livestock as the secondary occupation. The high level of livestock population in groundnut farm
indicates integrated farming system work well in groundnut production system for sustaining
their income and livelihood of the farm in Tamil Nadu.
Distribution of farm implements
The resource endowment of any farm is important for timely operation and success of
crop cultivation. Hence, farm size wise, adopted and control villages’ wise percentage of farms
owing different type of farm implements were calculated for both Erode and Thiruvannamalai
districts and the results are presented in Table 18 through 21.
In general, the ownership of the farm implements indicated that about 84 per cent (Tale
22) of farms were electrified their irrigation sources for lifting the water. Only 13 per cent of
framer owned bullock cart and about another seven per cent of farmers used own tractor for
13
ploughing. In adopted villages, about 14 per cent of the marginal farms owned either manual or
power operated sprayers in Thiruvannamalai district, while it was 86 per cent in the adopted
villages of Erode district. The ownership of other farm tools such as spade, crowbar were
relatively higher in small and large size category farms in Thiruvannamalai district than the
Erode district which indicating that the need of the farm tools and implements for their own
labour use in farm operations. Next to the electric motors, use of tractor with implements,
bullock cart and sprayers was more in Erode district.
The value of farm implement between adopted and control villages in both Erode and
Thiruvannamalai districts were analyzed and the results are presented in Table 24. The results
revealed that the value of the farm implements per farm was varying largely between the
adopted and control villages. The ownership of tractors and harvester costing more than three
lakhs rupees in both adopted and control villages. The cost of electric motors was higher in
adopted villages (Rs. 29000 per farm) than the control villages (Rs. 22000 per farm). However,
the present value of bullock cart was around Rs 11300 in the study area (Table 24).
Ownership of the Consumer Durables
The family wealth and social status of the farm should be reflected from the ownership
of the consumer durable and farm assets. Hence a stock of ownership of residential and farm
house, two wheelers, TV, radio, fridge, washing machine and fans were carried out and the
results are presented in Table 25 through Table 29 and similarly, the value of the consumer
durable in different categories are presented in Table 30 through Table 34.
In the study area about 94 and 93 per cent of farmers in the adopted villages and control
villages owned residential houses, respectively (Table 29). However, all the large farmers
owned the residential house in both types of villages. The per cent of residential owner was
more in adopted village in Erode district (99 per cent) Thiruvannamalai district (90 per cent).
All the medium farms in Thiruvannamalai district owned residential house. Similarly, all the
medium size farmers owned two wheelers in both types of villages in Erode; besides, more than
89 per cent of large farmers owned most of the consumer durables like residential house, farm
house, two wheelers, television set.
While in the marginal farmers, the average value of all consumer durables was Rs. 0.77
lakhs and Rs 1.06 lakhs in adopted and control villages, respectively. Among the different farm
size, the total value of the consumer durables owned by the medium and large size farmers were
14
2.79 and 1.86 lakhs per farm, both in adopted and control villages which was comparatively
higher in higher farm size categories indicating their wealth and social status (Table 32 and 33).
Financial Assets and Liabilities
The financial assets and liabilities of farms under adopted and control villages are
presented in Table 35 and Table 35a. It could be revealed from the table that almost 80 per cent
of farms availed loans for the farm operation / family maintenance. About 80 per cent of
adopted village farmers and 59 per cent control village farmer availed loans. Among the
different source of finance, nationalized banks and friend and relatives supported maximum to
the farmers. The out stating of loan from nationalized banks and friend and relatives was Rs 62
and Rs 69 thousand per farm, respectively. However, only 10 per cent of farmer benefited
through the nationalized banks and another 37 per cent availed loans from co-operatives. More
than half of the Erode farmers availed loan from cooperative banks, while it was only 44 per
cent in Thiruvannamalai district.
The loan out standing from friends and relative was still higher in Thiruvannamalai
district at Rs 86 thousand per farm and followed by the finance companies to the tune of Rs 65
thousand per farm. It is also interested to note that the loan out standing from co-operative and
nationals banks was more in Erode district at Rs 38 and Rs 130 thousand per farm compared to
the Thiruvannamalai district at Rs 29 and Rs 28 thousand per farm. In Erode district besides
loan out standing from the institutional sources, farmers availed maximum credit from money
lender to the tune of Rs 102 and 101 thousand per farm in adopted and control villages,
respectively. Higher level of lending through the institutional credit system to Erode farmers
indicated timely and adequate input application to enhance the groundnut production and
productivity.
Lending money to others in the villages was not widely observed in the study area due to
the lack of surplus money for lending, however, only six per cent of the farmers lending money
to either friends or to other farmers in the village (Table 35a). Farmer left with little option to
save money for the future expenses, but they aware of the risk against life insurances. In the
study area the saving balance was about Rs. 80 thousand in the bank deposit and Rs 16 thousand
in the insurance policy premium for their life security and these two sources were considered as
only saving in the farming community. About seven per cent of the farmers involve in the SHG
group saving, which was doubled in Erode district.
15
The average interest of the loan received from commercial bank was 12 to 14 per cent
per year where as it was 9 to 12 per cent in cooperative institution. However, in case of non-
institutional finance sources, like friends and relatives, finance companies and money lenders,
they charging a heavy interest rate at even more than 30 per cent per annual for agriculture
purpose (Table 36).
Major sources of household net income
The household dependency on the farm income was assessed by tracing the net farm
income realized from different sources like, crops, labour earning through farm and non-farm
works, livestock sales, hiring out bullocks, sale of livestock and its product and earning from
other regular salaried jobs. The results are presented in Table 37.
It could be inferred from the table that, about 62 per cent of farmers received income
from sale of crop and livestock and only 10 per cent of farmers received regular monthly salary
income through their jobs. This showed the farmers’ dependency on crop and livestock income
for subsistence of their life in the groundnut growing villages. The average household net
income was Rs. 74 and Rs. 55 thousand per farm per year in the adopted and control villages,
respectively. The crop income constitutes 61 and 49 per cent of household income followed by
income from the non-farm activities which generated the income of Rs 29 and Rs 30 thousand
per farm, respectively in the above groups. The household income was relatively high in Erode
district (Rs 101 and Rs 63 thousand per farm) than the Thiruvannamalai district (Rs 48 and Rs
47 thousand per farm) between the adopted and control villages, respectively. However, income
from the regular salaried job was comparatively more in Thiruvannamalai district which was Rs
67 and Rs 108 thousand per farm.
16
Chapter 3
Adoption and the case of ruling varieties
Cropping pattern
Groundnut is major commercial crop occupying 31 and 15 per cent of the gross cropped
area in Erode and Thiruvannamalai districts, respectively. About 78 and 68 per cent of total
groundnut area (0.41 and 1.04 lakh ha during TE 2005-06) was under rainfed in
Thiruvannamalai and Erode districts, respectively which restrict the implementation of input
intensive technology in the study area. Oilseed being energy rich crops the nutrient
requirements of oilseeds in general are high for all the nutrients and need to be supplied
adequate quantities for high yields. But, the production of oilseed can be stabilized and
significantly increased by extending irrigation facility to oilseeds. Oilseed provided highest
returns per unit of water used. The water requirement of oilseeds in general is low and they
respond remarkably to even to one or two life saving irrigations at critical stages
Besides that in the traditional areas, continuous cultivation of groundnut without crop
rotation has led to the depletion in soil nutrients as well as increase in pest and disease
incidence. In order to know the yield variability in different ruling varieties in different seasons
in both Erode and Thiruvannamalai the cropping pattern analysis was done and the results are
presented in Table 38a and 38b, respectively.
The averaged cropped area, pod and straw yield, and gross return for major varieties
cultivated under both the seasons are presented in Table 38a for Erode. It could be seen from the
table that the ruling varieties in Erode district were Co2, TMV2 and VRI2 which were
introduced before eighties. However, VRI2 was best suited for rainfed condition in adopted
villages and recorded the highest yield of 599 and 483 kg of pods per acre in both Kharif and
Rabi seasons. Variety Co2 has cultivated in 3.76 ac per farm and recorded the average yield of
607 kg of dry pod per ac in Irrigated Kharif season. VRI2 was comparatively cultivated in
higher area at 4.5 ac per farm along with red gram as intercrop and recorded the yield of 533 kg
per acre and realized the highest gross return of Rs 17,654 per ac.
In general, TMV2 has recorded the maximum productivity in irrigated sole crop at 706
kg of dry pod per acre and the realized the gross return of Rs 20 thousand per ac, while in
rainfed condition the pod yield was 345 kg per ac in Erode district.
17
The ruling variety and its yield performance under different condition for
Thiruvannamalai are presented in Table 38b. The results revealed that Pollachi red and TMV7
were the dominant varieties both in Kharif (June) and Rabi (November) season and the former
largely in both irrigated and rainfed conditions and later was cultivated mainly in irrigated
condition. The average area ranging between 1.11 in case of TMV7 to 3.88 ac in Pollachi red as
intercrop with black gram and the average yield were 661 and 495 kg of dry pod per ac in Rabi
and Kharif seasons, respectively. The maximum yield of 622 kg per ac was recorded by TMV7
in adopted village in irrigated condition as inter cropped with black gram.
Reason for growing the Groundnut
Groundnut is traditionally cultivating in Erode and Thiruvannamalai districts. Farmers
ranked various biological and economic reasons for cultivating (included in the cropping
pattern) the crop. The ranked reasons were analyzed using the Garette ranking technique
(Garette, 1969). This technique helps in identifying the most importance reason which is
independent of its number of farmers and reasons ranked. The Garette scores analysis results for
the reason given are presented in Table 40.
Farmers selected the groundnut in the cropping pattern because it realized higher income
(Garette score 53 per cent). Next to the income, best suited to their land (Garette score 32) and
to meet the fodder requirement for there livestock were the second and third most important
reasons reported by the farmers for raising the groundnut. In Thiruvannamalai and Erode, more
than 80 per cent of the farmers used the groundnut hay to feed the livestock. In Erode, the
control village farmers responded fodder requirement was the first reasons for selecting the
crops due to their higher cattle population. However, required less number of irrigations, fit well
in to the present cropping pattern, need for home consumption were the other reasons reported
by the farmers in growing the groundnut (Table 40).
Crop Rotation, Area changes and sole and inter crops
In order to understand the present status of the groundnut in the study area, crop
rotation, changes in groundnut area over years, competing crops which replaced and replacing
groundnut, sowing proportion of mixed and intercropping to averting the production and
market risk were studied. The results and discussion in the section for addressing the issues are
newly introducing varieties for this project.
The frequency of groundnut in cropping system was studied and the results are
presented in Table 41. About 94 per cent of the farmers reported that groundnut was raised
18
every year. While 12 per cent of the control village farmers in Erode district cultivate the
groundnut in every season (mostly as a rainfed crop in Kharif season and irrigated crop in
Summer / Rabi season) (Table 41). In order to understand the suitability other crops in the
groundnut rotation, crop cultivated before and after the groundnut was collected. The results are
presented in Table 42. Gingelly, sorghum, pulses and maize were the major crops cultivated
before the Rabi groundnut which was followed by 16, 16, 10, and 7 per cent of the farmer
besides groundnut as kharif crop by 18 per cent of farmers’ maize and sunflower were the other
component of the crop raised after the Kharif groundnut. Maize, pulses, tobacco and sorghum
were other crops in groundnut cropping system in Erode while, gingelly, maize, paddy and
pulses were dominated in Thiruvannamalai district. In general, lagged and current year expected
market price for groundnut and other competing crops and the timely receipt of rainfall could be
the deciding factors in selection of the crops in crop rotation.
The opinion of the farmers about the changes in the area under groundnut during last
five years was collected to reveal the present status of the groundnut cultivation in Tamil Nadu.
The results from the farmer’s opinion revealed that about 64 per cent reported that the area
under groundnut was constant over last five years and another 21 per cent of the farmers said
that the area was decreased while 15 per cent opinioned that the area was constant over last five
years. Erode farmers reported the mixed trends in change in the groundnut area as 30, 37 and 33
per cent of the farmers respond as increased, decreased and constant over last five years in,
respectively (Table 43). While at Thiruvannamalai, 95 per cent farmers reported the area under
groundnut was constant.
In order to estimate the competency of groundnut crops replaced (in case of increasing
trend in groundnut area over last five years) and the crop replacing (in case of decreasing trend)
were studied. This changes in the groundnut area in a season could be due to, onset of monsoon,
one year lagged and expected market price of groundnut and competing crops, beside the biotic
factors such as soil suitability, season suitability and resource endowment available to dispose
by the farmer for groundnut cultivation. The number and per cent of farmers raised the replaced
crop (in case of groundnut area increase) and replacing crops (in case of area decrease) in the
groundnut cropping system was analyzed and the results are presented in Table 44. The results
revealed that in both the cases, gingelly, maize and sorghum were the major corps which may
be due to the timely onset of monsoon, market price of the groundnut and competing crops,
labour scarcity at the time of sowing. In Erode district, 24 per cent of farmers in adopted
villages and 47 per cent in control villages of reported farmers raised the maize in place of
19
groundnut. Where as gingelly were the next major crops which replacing the groundnut due to
the said reasons elsewhere which was reported from 27 and 31 per cent of farmers in adopted
and control villages in Erode district.
Inter cropping is very important cropping strategy, where the total productivity of the
system could be enhanced with reduced risk and must find favour with small and marginal
farmers under rainfed condition. Thus, farmer followed he another strategy to minimize the crop
income risk by following the mixed cropping system in which farmers cultivating crops with
different duration and nutrient exhaustive nature and yield and income potential and fodder
supply so as achieve success of the at least one crop in case of risk of monsoon or market. The
results showed that only 40 per cent of groundnut farmers cultivate the crop as sole cropping
system followed by rest followed inter cropping system to minimize the risk in groundnut
cultivation. In Erode district about 59 per cent farmers raised the groundnut as sole crop and it
was 19 per cent in Thiruvannamalai district. Two third of the Thiruvannamalai farmers
cultivated groundnut as inter crop with black gram and another 27 per cent reported green gram
as inter crops. While in Erode, 32.6 per cent of the farmers reported red gram as the inter crop
with crop proportion of 10:1 ratio to maximize the crop income and manage the production risk
due to the biotic and a biotic factors. Caster and black gram also raised as inter crop in Erode
district by 10.4 and 7.4 per cent of the groundnut farmers, respectively (Table 45).
Farmers increased area under groundnut based on the receipt of rainfall at sowing,
labour availability, market price of the groundnut and competing crops and technology or new
variety availability. Farmers were asked about the best performing crop year and area under
groundnut in the last five years (2003-04 to 2007-08) and the results are presented in Table 46.
The results revealed that 2007-08 was reported as a best year and 33.7 per cent of farmers raised
groundnut under possible maximum area 2.78 ac. However, in Erode district 2004-05 and 2003-
04 were reported as maximum area allotted for groundnut to the tune of 3.58 and 2.1 ac
cultivated in the 34 and 28 per cent of the farmers, respectively.
Considering the maximum area allocation and favorable crop years, the groundnut yield
under normal/ good year, bade year and best year achieved so far were collected and the results
are presented in Tale 47. It could be revealed from the table that farmers recorded the maximum
yield of 506 kg of dry pod per acre in the rainfed kharif crop and 414 kg of dry pod per acre in
Rabi rainfed as a best yield. However, average yield of groundnut in the bad year was declined
to 244 and 178 kg of dry pod per acre in kharif and Rabi rainfed groundnut season, respectively.
Based the reported yield good years and bad years, the reduction in yield was reported to 38 per
20
cent in the rainfed groundnut in Kharif season and 43 per cent in Rabi season due to the failure
of monsoon. The maximum productivity was recorded in Control village of Thiruvannamalai
district 1025 kg of dry pod per acre under the best year in the Kharif irrigated condition and
1010 kg of dry pod per acre rainfed crop in Rabi season in adopted village. In the bad years, the
lowest yield in rainfed condition was recorded in Erode district at 170 and 132 kg per acre in the
Kharif and Rabi seasons, respectively. The huge yield variation between the normal and best
year yields expressed in both seasons from the above analysis revealed that, new cultivar must
addressed the yield reduction factors such as drought, pest and disease problems besides the
quality of pod for better demand and price in the market.
Ruling varieties in groundnut
It is important to study the present ruling varieties under different season after knowing
the changes in area, crop rotation, competing crop and average yield and yield gap due to the
biotic factors. In this context the present ruling varieties of groundnut in Erode and
Thiruvannamalai districts was studied and the results are presented in Table 48. The results
revealed that in the kharif season Co2 and VRI2 were the dominant varieties in Erode district
with an average area of three acres per farm during 2006-07. Where as, in Thiruvannamalai,
Pollachi red and TMV7 were the major groundnut varieties with an average area of 3.68 and
2.33 acres, respectively during 2006-07 kharif seasons. In the Rabi/summer season, the average
groundnut area was 3.07 and 3.25 acres in Erode district and 2.39 and 3.1 acres in
Thiruvannamalai district, respectively by the above dominant varieties. However, the average
area under groundnut was less during 2005-06 and 2004-05 (Table 48).
In order to know the diffusion of the newly introduced varieties and the area expansion
by the individual farmer, by collecting the average area of groundnut at first year of adoption
and peak year of adoption. This would also help in understand the diffusion of groundnut
varieties by the farmers. The results are presented in Table 49. The varietal adoption study
results revealed that Co2 was first practiced in 1985 (which was introduced in 1984 from
TNAU) in Thiruvannamalai and the maximum area of 2.31 acre per farm in adopted villages in
Erode district while, Pollachi red varieties of groundnut was first adopted in 1994 in Erode and
the average area of 2.7 acres per farm, however, it was widely cultivated in Thiruvannamalai
district from 1996 onwards with an average area of 2.8 acres per farm. Similarly, TMV7 was
first practiced in control villages of Thiruvannamalai district during 1992 with an average area
of 2.44 acre per farm and peak adoption during 2002 with an average area of 3.01acre per farm
in adopted village in Thiruvannamalai district (Table 49).The results revealed the average area
21
remains 2 to 3 acre per farm and groundnut is cultivating continuously. Another interesting
thing to note that the current ruling varieties were released before 1970, hence, the low
productivity realized may be due to use of uncertified / own seed continuously led to
deterioration in genetic yield potential. Since, the seed costing more than 20 per cent of the
cultivation expenses, farmers forced to avoid purchasing new or certified seed in the study area
which led to declining productivity.
22
Chapter 4
Constraints
Pest and disease incidence and its control
Pest and disease incidence are the major thread in groundnut production which causing
more than 25 per cent of yield loss. The controlling of the pest and diseases depend on the
various factors which restrict the adoption of technologies. Among the major pest and disease
identified, detail on the most serious pest and it frequency of occurrence would held in
formulating strategy for stalk holders and researcher in controlling the pest. The severity of the
incidence was collected from the farmer opinion on the loss in area and loss in yield due to
major pest and diseases affecting groundnut in the study area. The results are presented in Table
55. It could be inferred from the table that Prodenia, Red Hairy Caterpillar (RHC), leaf curling
caterpillar and leaf minor were the major pests reported by 60, 49, 48 and 40 per cent of farmers
in Tamil Nadu. In Thiruvannamalai district, all the farmers in the adopted village reported
prodenia as the major pest followed by leaf minor (76 per cent farmers). While, in the control
village farmers reported prodenia (96 per cent), leaf curling caterpillar (51 per cent) and leaf
minor (75 per cent) were the dominant pests which affect the crop in large way. In Erode
district, RHC was reported as major pest followed by leaf curling and prodenia. Incase of
disease problem in Thiruvannamalai district, Tikka leaf spot was reported as major disease by
93 per cent of farmers followed by root rot disease (26 per cent). In Erode, 98 per cent reported
that the Tikka leaf spot followed by rust (56 per cent), PYMV (27 per cent) of the farmers as
major pests.
Yield and area loss for the most prominent pest and disease problems was studied and
the results are presented in Table 55. Though the Prodenia was reported by more than 59 per
cent of the farmers but the area and yield loss was ranging 30 to 33 per cent. However, only 11
per cent of the farmers in Tamil Nadu reported drought as major problems which recorded the
maximum yield loss of 66 per cent and area loss of 67 per cent n Tamil Nadu. Area and yield
loss was comparatively more in (67 per cent) in Thiruvannamalai district followed by Erode
district with the recorded loss of 30 and 25 per cent, respectively. Similarly, heavy rain at the
time of harvest could be the major problems in Thiruvannamalai district which was reported by
the 36 per cent of farmers and caused about 51 per cent of area and yield loss.
23
Almost all the farmers in Thiruvannamalai district reported prodenia as the major pest
and causing the yield and area loss to 30 and 33 per cent, respectively. Almost 50 per cent of
Erode farmers reported RHC as a major pest and the caused the yield and area loss of 21 and 27
per cent, respectively. Tikka leaf spot was mainly reported in Erode district (76 per cent), which
affected the 10 per cent of area loss and 57 per cent of yield loss. Hence, the attempt has been
made to develop better cultivars with better resistance against RHC, prodenia and Tikka leaf
spot (Table 55).
The incidence of the pest and disease problems over year in the groundnut production
system was studied from the sample farms and the results are presented in Table 56. It could be
revealed from the results that almost 88 per cent of farmers reported that the pest and disease
problems were increased over last five years. In Thiruvannamalai, comparatively higher number
of farmers (97 per cent) reported this increasing trend of pest and disease than in Erode district
(79 per cent). Farmers in Thiruvannamalai district reported the three major reasons for the
increasing pest and disease problems which could be weather related reasons, growing the
groundnut crop as mono crop in every season, and raising alternative host crop for the
groundnut pest in the fields. The Garette score for three reasons were 46, 42 and 18 per cent,
respectively. While in Erode district, growing groundnut in every seasons, weather related
reasons and growing susceptible varieties were found to be the major reasons for the increasing
trend in the pest and disease. The Garette score was 45, 42 and 40 per cent, respectively for the
above reason (Table 57).
The Garette score analysis on farmer response in controlling the pest and disease
problem was analyzed and the results are presented in Table 58. The results indicate that
application of chemical pesticides as the most important measure with the Garette score of 52
per cent for Thiruvannamalai district farmers. In Erode district, adopting IPM and IDM
technologies and altering the sowing time were the other measures reported by the farmers with
the Garette score of 45 and 44 per cent respectively in controlling pest and a Garette score of 49
and 40 in controlling the disease problems, besides the chemicals method (Table 58).
In controlling the pest and disease, most important source from which farmers get the
information about when to apply, type of pesticides to be used and quantity and method of
mixing the chemicals reported by the farmers were collected and the Garette scores were
developed to identify the most important sources and the results are presented in Table 59.
24
Input suppliers, neighboring farmers and friends and relatives were the major sources
through which farmers get the information such as when, what, how much and how to apply
the chemicals in controlling the pest and disease both in Erode and Thiruvannamalai districts
with the Garette score of more than 45 per cent. Besides that mass media like TV, Radio and
news paper were the other important sources from which farmers get information in controlling
the pest and disease in Erode. The Garette score for these sources were ranging from 39 to 48 in
all the cases. It could be important to note that the information about when, type and quantity of
chemicals applied was mainly done by the input dealers which could be inferred from the
Garette score of more than 60 per cent in Thiruvannamalai district. It could be revealed from the
results that proper training need to be given to the input dealers about the technology, besides
strengthening the Extension service systems in the State agricultural department for proper
dissemination of the technologies to the groundnut farmers in controlling the pest and disease
(Table 59).
In order to identify the major constraints in the presently available cultivars, the Garette
ranking technique was used and the results are presented in Table 60. In Erode, Co2 and VRI2
were the major varieties cultivated by the adopted and control village groundnut farmers. The
adopted village farmers in Erode district reported in case of Co2 cultivar that the high pest and
disease incident, low yield, less shelling per cent were the major constraints with the Garette
score of 61, 57, 60 and 55 per cent, respectively and for VRI2 the Garette score were 64, 59, 59
and 53 per cent, respectively. While in control villages, small grain size and low recovery of oil
content and low shelling percentage were reported as the major constraint for Co2 with the
Garette score of 53, 55 and 47, respectively. Where as in Thiruvannamalai district, Pollachi red
and TMV7 were the major varieties presently cultivated both in adopted and control villages.
High pest and disease and poor taste were the major constraints in the Pollachi red varieties with
the Garette score of 58, 36, 12 and 6, respectively in adopted village and in control villages the
Garette score were 52, 31 and 11, respectively. However, low yield, small grain size; low
shelling per cent were the three major constraints in case of TMV7 with the Garette score of 61,
29 and 36 in adopted village and with the Garette score of 61, 22 and 16 respectively in control
villages in Thiruvannamalai district. In general, low yield, higher pest incident, low shelling per
cent, high disease incident and small grain size were the major constraints recording the Garette
score of 47, 42, 35 and 34, respectively.
Similar constraints analysis was also done for the information collected from the women
in agriculture in both the selected districts and the study results are presented in Table 78. The
25
results revealed that high pest and disease incident recorded the highest Garette score of 61 per
cent in adopted villages of Erode district, while the low yield (more than 60 %) in case of
Pollachi red and TMV7 varieties in both adopted and control villages in Thiruvannamalai
district. Besides that low yield, the small grain size, low oil recovery rate and low market price
were the other major constraints with the Garette score of 61, 35, 39 and 18 per cent by the
adopted village farmer and for control village farmers the Garette score for the above reasons
were 61, 31, 33 and 15 per cent, respectively reported by the Thiruvannamalai district farmers
especially in TMV7 varieties.
5. Preference along the value chain
Annual consumption expenditure
The family consumption expenditure study would help in understand the level of
consumption of selection crops beside knowing the share of expenditure among food and non-
food items such as education, cloths, recreation etc,. The family annual consumption
expenditure per farm was estimated from the sample farms data for both adopted and control
villages and the results are presented in Table 39a for Erode and 39b for Thiruvannamalai
district.
The results indicated that still the expenditure on food items such as rice, wheat, other
HDM=High Demand in Market.HOC: High Oil Content. n=Sample Size.
114
PART III: INPUT-OUTPUT INFORMATION MODULE
Table 84a. Input-Output Analysis
District: ERODE Crop/crop mixtures: Groundnut Proportion: Sole
Variety: CO2 Season: Kharif Average area: Adopted: 3.7; Control: 2.54
(Quantity in averages per household)
Operations
Ty
pe
Un
it
Adopted Control
Labour Use Input / Output Labour Use Input / Output
Quantity Wage rate Quantity Unit price Quantity Wage rate Quantity Unit price
1A. Land preparation (Ploughing primary and
secondary tillage)
M D 3.43 166 2.27 172
F D 2 70 1.75 78
B D 2.33 317
T HR 5.26 404 3.27 405
2. FYM/C Compost/Sheep penning/Tank silt
application
M D 2.92 155 2.11 171
F D 3.1 70 2.78 70
B D 2 250
T HR 3 169
FYM/Compost/poultry QT 65 85.91 35.625 85.42
Animal penning NO
3. Planting/Sowing M D 1.57 159 1.5 164
F D 10 73 4.67 70
4A. Seed: Crop1 B D 8.88 331 5.62 300
KG 153 48.83 116.458 57.46
4B. Seed treatment M D 1 150
115
F D
GM 100 1.5
GM
5A. Fertilizer application M D 1.65 160 1.22 160
F D 2.25 83 1.17 70
DAP KG 200 14 50 12
GYPSUM KG 813 1.91 462 3.4
POTASH KG 179 5.93 183.33 5.33
UREA KG 150 5.2 162.5 5.38
5B. Micronutrient application M D
F D
6. Intercultural M D 2.5 160 2.6 142
F D 14.65 73 8.69 70
B D
7. Weeding/ Weedicide application M D 5.33 130
F D 16.65 71 14.17 70
Type (sprayer/duster/other) SP HR
8. PlantprotectionSpraying/ Dusting/Shaking /
Hand picking pest)
M D 1.25 168 1.09 166
F D 4 71 1.73 78
B D
Type (sprayer/duster/other) SP HR 19 25 11.6 25
10. Watching (Birds, Pigs etc.,) M D 2.00 150 1.86 150
116
F D 2.83 70 2.6 75
11. Harvesting2: Crop1 M D 6.00 156 2.95 164
F D 18.64 71 15.92 72
12. Threshing Crop 1 M D 15 150 4 120
F D 9 70 8.69 71
B D
13. Marketing (including M D 1.91 153 1.24 168
transport, and storage) F D
B D 0.75 200 1.08 196
T HR 1.1 293 1.25 271
14. Fixed Cost:
Land Rent (Ac) Cash
RS
0
2500
Kind KG
Land tax (Per acre) RS 0 125 0 112.5 0 100
15. Grain Yield: Crop1 KG 1760 25.83 1354 25.68
16. Fodder yield: Crop1 QT 33.22 89.57 23.24 98.4
17. Stalk: Crop 1 QT
1 Labor input includes total labor days of family and hired labor for each operation. Specify male and female labor as well as bullock labor separately wherever necessary.
2 Estimate the labor requirement if you had given to contractor for harvesting.
3 Specify clearly the units (eg. 5 kgs, FYM - 2 qts etc).
M = Male labor, F = Female labor, B = Bullock pair labor, T = Tractor/Truck, TH = Thresher, SP = Sprayer, DU = Duster.
Table 84b. Input-Output Analysis
District: Erode Crop/crop mixtures: Groundnut Proportion: Sole
Varieties: VRI2 Season: Kharif Average area: Adopted: 3.13; Control: 2.91
10. Watching (Birds, Pigs etc.,) M D 2.00 155 1.50 175
F D 4.00 73 1.75 70
11. Harvesting2: Crop1 M D 3.91 161 2.79 171
F D 18.00 71 22.06 68
12. Threshing Crop 1 M D 8.40 150 1.00 120
119
F D 11.94 70 10.00 70
13. Marketing (including
transport, and storage)
M D 1.70 157 1.53 176
F D
B D 2.25 188 1.43 171
T HR 1.13 317 1.50 250
14. Fixed Cost: Land Rent (Ac) Cash RS 0.00 2000
Kind KG 0.00 100
Land tax (Per acre) RS 0.00 247 0.00 170
15. Grain Yield: Crop1 KG 1484 28 1238 26
16. Fodder yield: Crop1 QT 30.33 86 63.12 90
1 Labor input includes total labor days of family and hired labor for each operation. Specify male and female labor as well as bullock labor separately wherever necessary.
2 Estimate the labor requirement if you had given to contractor for harvesting.
3 Specify clearly the units (eg. 5 kgs, FYM - 2 qts etc).
M = Male labor, F = Female labor, B = Bullock pair labor, T = Tractor/Truck, TH = Thresher, SP = Sprayer, DU = Duster.
Varieties: Pollachi red Season: Rabi Average area: Adopted: 1.64
(Quantity in averages per household)
Operations
Ty
pe
Un
it
Adopted Control
Labour Use Input/Output Labour Use Input/Output
Quantity Wage rate Quantity Unit
price Quantity
Wage
rate Quantity
Unit
price
1A. Land preparation (Ploughing primary and
secondary tillage)
M D 2.00 100
F D
B D 2.50 150
T HR 1.33 600
1B. Seedbed preparation M D 2.00 100
120
(BBF/NBF/FLAT) F D
B D
T HR
2. FYM/C Compost/
Sheep penning/Tank silt application
M D
F D
B D
T HR
FYM/Compost/poultry QT 10.33 50
Animal penning NO
3. Planting/Sowing M D
F D 3.71 40
B D 3.71 150
4A. Seed: Crop1 KG 68.29 32
Crop2 KG 6.00 20
Crop3 KG
4B. Seed treatment M D
F D
GM
GM
5A. Fertilizer application M D
F D
COMPLEX KG 100.00 5
DAP KG 82.14 13
GYPSUM KG 91.67 2
MOP KG 70.00 4
UREA KG 50.00 5
5B. Micronutrient application M D
F D
KG
121
KG
6. Intercultural M D
F D
B D
7. Weeding/Weedicide application M D
F D 48.57 40
Type (sprayer/duster/other) SP HR
LT
LT
8. PlantprotectionSpraying/
Dusting/Shaking /
Hand picking pest)
M D
F D
B D
Type (sprayer/duster/other) SP HR 11.33 15 0.86 405
DU HR 0.18 690
9. Irrigation M D
F D
10. Watching (Birds, Pigs etc.,) M D
F D 15.00 30
11. Harvesting2: Crop1 M D 4.83 100
F D 17.43 40
Crop 2 M D 1.50 100
F D 6.50 40
Crop 3 M D
F D
12. Threshing Crop 1 M D
F D
B D
TH HR
122
Crop 2 M D
F D
B D
TH HR
Crop 3 M D
F D
B D
TH HR
13. Marketing (including transport, and
storage)
M D
F D
B D 1.00 250
T HR 2.00 250
14. Fixed Cost: Land Rent (Ac) Cash RS
Kind KG
Land tax (Per acre) RS
15. Grain Yield: Crop1 KG 891.43 25
Crop 2 KG 65.00 20
Crop 3 KG
16. Fodder yield: Crop1 QT 7.71 100 1 Labor input includes total labor days of family and hired labor for each operation. Specify male and female labor as well as bullock labor separately wherever necessary.
2 Estimate the labor requirement if you had given to contractor for harvesting.
3 Specify clearly the units (eg. 5 kgs, FYM - 2 qts etc).
M = Male labor, F = Female labor, B = Bullock pair labor, T = Tractor/Truck, TH = Thresher, SP = Sprayer, DU = Duster.
123
Table 84d. Input-Output Analysis
District: Thiruvannamalai Crop/crop mixtures: Groundnut Proportion: Sole
Varieties: TMV7 Season: Rabi Average area: Adopted: 2.39; Control: 2.17
16. Fodder yield: Crop1 QT 13.44 100 10.08 100 1 Labor input includes total labor days of family and hired labor for each operation. Specify male and female labor as well as bullock labor separately wherever necessary.
2 Estimate the labor requirement if you had given to contractor for harvesting.
3 Specify clearly the units (eg. 5 kgs, FYM - 2 qts etc).
M = Male labor, F = Female labor, B = Bullock pair labor, T = Tractor/Truck, TH = Thresher, SP = Sprayer, DU = Duster.
Varieties: Co2 Season: Kharif Average area: 4.13 ac
Operations
Ty
pe
Un
it Adopted Control
Labour Use Input/Output Labour Use Input/Output
Quantity Wage Quantity Unit Quantity Wage Quantity Unit
126
rate price rate price
1A. Land preparation
(Ploughing primary and
secondary tillage)
M D 2.25 150
F D 1.75 70
B D
T HR 4.38 400
1B. Seedbed preparation M D
(BBF/NBF/FLAT) F D
B D
T HR
2. FYM/C Compost/Sheep
penning/Tank silt application
M D 1.57 150
F D 2.25 70
B D
T HR 4.00 300
FYM/Compost/poultry QT 83.75 53
Animal penning NO
3. Planting/Sowing M D 1.33 150
F D 4.20 70
T D 4.75 425
B D 6.00 338
4A. Seed: Crop1 KG 228.75 43
Crop2 KG 5.75 40
Crop3 KG
4B. Seed treatment M D
F D
GM
GM
5A. Fertilizer application M D 1.38 163
F D 2.00 70
127
GYPSUM KG 575.00 2.00
MOP KG 100.00 5.50
UREA KG 106.00 5.44
KG
5B. Micronutrient application M D
F D
KG
KG
6. Interculture M D
F D 14.50 70
B D
7. Weeding/Weedicide
application
M D
F D 12.14 70
Type (sprayer/duster/other) SP HR
8.PlantprotectionSpraying/
Dusting/Shaking /
Hand picking pest)
M D
F D 5.00 70
B D
Type (sprayer/duster/other) SP HR 8.33 20 1.67 350
DU HR
9. Irrigation M D
F D
10. Watching (Birds, Pigs etc.,) M D
F D
11. Harvesting2: Crop1 M D 5.00 150
F D 18.13 70
Crop 2 M D 3.75 150
F D
12. Threshing Crop 1 M D
F D 14.38 70
128
B D
TH HR
Crop 2 M D
F D 2.00 70
B D
TH HR
13. Marketing (including M D 1.75 150
transport, and storage) F D
B D
T HR 1.50 250
14. Fixed Cost: Land Rent (Ac)
Cash
RS 0.00 2500
Kind KG
Land tax (Per
acre)
RS 0.00 100
15. Grain Yield: Crop 1 KG 2078.13 26
Crop 2 KG 221.88 37
16. Fodder yield: Crop 1 QT 49.00 76
Crop 2 QT 4.63 49 1 Labor input includes total labor days of family and hired labor for each operation. Specify male and female labor as well as bullock labor separately wherever necessary.
2 Estimate the labor requirement if you had given to contractor for harvesting.
3 Specify clearly the units (eg. 5 kgs, FYM - 2 qts etc).
M = Male labor, F = Female labor, B = Bullock pair labor, T = Tractor/Truck, TH = Thresher, SP = Sprayer, DU = Duster.
Varieties: VIR2 Season: Kharif Average area: 5.17 ac
Operations
Ty
pe
Un
it
Adopted Control
Labour Use Input/Output Labour Use Input/Output
Quantity Wage
Quantity Unit
Quantity Wage
Quantity Unit
rate price rate price
129
1A. Land preparation (Ploughing
primary and secondary tillage)
M D 4.50 175
F D 2.00 70
B D
T HR 6.33 400
1B. Seedbed preparation M D
(BBF/NBF/FLAT) F D
B D
T HR
2. FYM/C Compost/
Sheep penning/Tank silt application
M D 6.00 200
F D 4.67 70
B D
T HR
FYM/Compost/poultry QT 77.50 75
Animal penning NO
3. Planting/Sowing M D 1.00 200
F D 6.50 70
T T D 5.00 400
B D 20.00 300
4A. Seed: Crop1 KG 223.33 45
Crop2 KG 9.50 38
Crop3 KG
4B. Seed treatment M D 2.00 150
F D
GM 200.00 2
GM
5A. Fertilizer application M D 1.67 175
F D 1.00 70
GYPSUM KG 900 1.78
MOP KG 217 5.58
130
UREA KG 270 5.30
KG
5B. Micronutrient application M D
F D
KG
KG
6. Interculture M D
F D 21.83 70
B D
7. Weeding/Weedicide application M D
F D 19.00 70
Type (sprayer/duster/other) SP HR
LT
LT
8.PlantprotectionSpraying/
Dusting/Shaking /
Hand picking pest)
M D 2.00 175
F D 2.50 73
B D
Type (sprayer/duster/other) SP HR 19.00 22 1.75 400
DU HR
9. Irrigation M D
F D
10. Watching (Birds, Pigs etc.,) M D
F D
11. Harvesting2: Crop1 M D 2.75 188
F D 24.67 70
Crop 2 M D 5.00 167
F D 2.50 70
Crop 3 M D
131
F D
12. Threshing Crop 1 M D 10.00 150
F D 16.75 70
B D
TH HR 10.00 70
Crop 2 M D 2.00 150
F D
B D
TH HR
Crop 3 M D
F D
B D
TH HR
13. Marketing (including M D 1.80 170
transport, and storage) F D
B D 3.00 150
T HR 1.25 375
14. Fixed Cost: Land Rent (Ac) Cash RS 0.00 3367
Kind KG
Land tax (Per acre) RS 0.00 100
15. Grain Yield: Crop1 KG 2700 26
Crop 2 KG 250 35
Crop 3 KG
16. Fodder yield: Crop1 QT 38.33 102
Crop 2 QT 5.00 44 1 Labor input includes total labor days of family and hired labor for each operation. Specify male and female labor as well as bullock labor separately wherever necessary.
2 Estimate the labor requirement if you had given to contractor for harvesting.
3 Specify clearly the units (eg. 5 kgs, FYM - 2 qts etc).
M = Male labor, F = Female labor, B = Bullock pair labor, T = Tractor/Truck, TH = Thresher, SP = Sprayer, DU = Duster.
Crop 2 QT 4.11 49 5.25 50 1 Labor input includes total labor days of family and hired labor for each operation. Specify male and female labor as well as bullock labor separately wherever necessary.
2 Estimate the labor requirement if you had given to contractor for harvesting.
3 Specify clearly the units (eg. 5 kgs, FYM - 2 qts etc).
M = Male labor, F = Female labor, B = Bullock pair labor, T = Tractor/Truck, TH = Thresher, SP = Sprayer, DU = Duster.
Crop 2 QT 3.33 50 4.67 50 1 Labor input includes total labor days of family and hired labor for each operation. Specify male and female labor as well as bullock labor separately wherever necessary.
2 Estimate the labor requirement if you had given to contractor for harvesting.
3 Specify clearly the units (eg. 5 kgs, FYM - 2 qts etc).
M = Male labor, F = Female labor, B = Bullock pair labor, T = Tractor/Truck, TH = Thresher, SP = Sprayer, DU = Duster.
Crop 3 QT 1 Labor input includes total labor days of family and hired labor for each operation. Specify male and female labor as well as bullock labor separately wherever necessary.
2 Estimate the labor requirement if you had given to contractor for harvesting.
3 Specify clearly the units (eg. 5 kgs, FYM - 2 qts etc).
M = Male labor, F = Female labor, B = Bullock pair labor, T = Tractor/Truck, TH = Thresher, SP = Sprayer, DU = Duster.
Table 85a. Costs and Returns of Kharif Groundnut- Variety Co2 in Erode
Amount Erode
Groundnut; Season: Kharif; Variety: Co2
A C Both
Average groundnut area (ac) 3.70 2.54 3.09
Number of farmers (n) 23 25 48
1) VARIABLE COSTS (Rs): Value % Value % Value %
a) Seed 2074 16.46 2707 18.36 2404 17.53
141
b) Seed Treatment (material) 0 0.00 75 0.51 39 0.28
c) Farm Yard Manure 1586 12.59 1288 8.74 1431 10.43
