CHAPTER 3

F ARM WISE INPUT SUBSIDY

The objective of this chapter is to quantify the magnitude of the input subsidy across the

different farm-size to analyze the equity issue related to the utilisation of input subsidy.

The present chapter outlines sample design, methodology, socio-economic profile of

sample households and estimated input subsidy. It has been organised into six broad

sections namely physiographical setting of sample districts, sample design, methodology,

socio-economic features of sample households, utilisation of input subsidy and summary.

This chapter is based on a cross sectional primary survey of farmers in the state of

Haryana. For the selection of sample households, a multi stage stratified random

sampling method has been used, with district at the first stage, block at the second stage,

village at the third stage and the cultivating household at the final stage. At the first stage

three districts are selected on the basis of agro-c1imatic zone and cropping pattern. The

sample of the study covers two agro-climate zones l of Haryana i.e. eastern zone and

western zone. Three districts i.e. Bhiwani (eastern zone), Panipat and Yamunanagar

(both districts from western zone) are selected for the present study. Panipat and

Yamunanagar belong to same agro climatic zone, but have different cropping patterns.

Wheat and rice are the dominant crops of Panipat district, whereas, sugarcane along with

wheat and rice are sown in a significant proportion of area in Yamunanagar district.

3.1 PHYSIOGRAPHICAL SETTING OF SAMPLE DISTRICTS

3.1.1 Bhiwani

Bhiwani district is located in the south-western part of Haryana. Bhiwani district is

surrounded by Hissar district on the north, some parts of Jhunjunu & Churu district of

Rajasthan on the west, Mahendergarh and Jhunjunu district on the south and Rohtak on

I All-India Coordinated Research Project on Agro Meteorology (AICRPAM) of Central Research Institute for Dry land Agriculture, Hyderabad has divided Haryana into two agro-climatic zones i.e. eastern and western zone.

71

the east. Bhiwani district comprises of four sub-divisions, six tehsils and three sub-tehsils

and ten development blocks.

In the northern region of the district, there are alluvial plains and in the southern

region, there is a semi -desert with remnants of Aravali range mountains. The soil is

loamy in the north region and sandy in the south-western region of Bhiwani district. The

groundwater is mainly saline with some pockets of fresh water in south-western region of

Bhiwani. Temperature in the Bhiwani district varies from 2 °c to 45°C. Rainfall is scanty

(annual rainfall 483 mm), and mainly occurs in the months of July-August. The district

has a vast network of canals. Vegetation of this district is mainly charcterised by thorny

trees like Babool, Jandi, and Kair, along with Neem, Sheesham, and Peepal etc. Wheat,

cotton, bajra and paddy are the major crops grown in this district.

3.1.2 Panipat

Panipat is situated at a distance of 90 km from Delhi. It is bounded by Kamal in the

north, Jind in the west and Sonipat in the south and Uttar Pradesh in the east. Panipat was

part of district Kamal till 31st October, 1989. Panipat district comprises of two sub-

divisions namely Panipat and Samalkha; three tehsils namely Panipat, Israna and

Samalkha; two sub-tehsils namely Bapauli and Madlauda, and five development blocks

namely, Panipat, Israna, Madlauda, Samalkha and Bapauli.

Panipat district experIences sub-tropical continental monsoon climate, which is

charcterised by seasonal rhythm, hot summer, cool winter, unreliable rainfall and great

variations in temperature. Panipat receives most of the rainfall during the monsoon

season, with little rain is received during the winter season. Air is generally dry during

the major part of the year. Dust storms mostly occur during April and June. Dense fog

occurs for a brief period in the winter season. The temperature in the summer season is

very hot and reaches up to 42.4 °c in June. In the winter season temperature comes down

to 4.4 0c. The district has a good network of canals but the tubewell irrigation is also

common in this area. Soil is mainly loam and silty loam type. Wheat and paddy are the

major crops grown in this district.

72

CHART 3.1: SAMPLE DESIGN

HARYANA I 1 WESTERN ZONE L I EASTERN ZONE I I

/~ BHIWANI PANIPAT YAMUNANAGAR

(108) (l08) (l08)

TWO BLOCKS TWO BLOCKS TWO BLOCKS (54 from each) (54 from each) (54 from each)

FOUR VILLAGES FOUR VILLAGES FOUR VILLAGES (27 from each) (27 from each) (27 from each)

TOTAL SAMPLE (324)

SMALL FARM SIZE HOUSEHOLDS 108 MEDIUM FARM SIZE HOUSEHOLDS 108 LARGE FARM SIZE HOUSEHOLDS 108

In this study, cultivating households are classified into three categories as small (0-5

acre), medium (5-10 acre) and large (above 10 acre) according to the size of their land

holdings. Equal number of households is taken from each category for the collection of

micro level data. Each cultivating household in the village is listed in one of the three

categories. After listing all the households in their respective categories, the sample

household within each listed category is selected on the basis of random circular

sampling.

74

Table 3.1: Name of Districts, Blocks and Villages Selected for Primary Survey DISTRICT BHIWANI

BLOCK BHIWANI DADRI

VILLAGE KELANGA I KHARAK BOND KALAN I SAMASPUR

DISTRICT PANIPAT

BLOCK SAMALKHA ISRANA

VILLAGE MACHHROLI I PATTIKALYANA KARAD I BHAUPUR

DISTRICT Y AMUNANAGAR

BLOCK MUSTAFABAD CHHACHHRAULI

VILLAGE GADHAULI I AKBARPUR CHUHARPUR I MALAKPUR

3.3 METHODOLOGY

This section is divided into three sub-sections namely fertiliser, canal irrigation and

electricity subsidy. The methodology to estimate fertiliser, canal and electricity subsidy is

as follows:

3.3.1 Fertiliser Subsidy

Both primal)' and secondal)' data base is used to estimate the farm-wise and the crop-

wise fertiliser subsidy in selected districts. Per unit subsidy on different compounds of

fertiliser is taken from chapter two, which is estimated on the basis of import parity

methodology. The primal)' survey of farming households provides the information about

the quantity of different compounds of fertiliser utilised on each crop cultivated by

sample households during the reference year 2005-06. The fertiliser subsidy on each crop

is estimated by multiplying the per unit subsidy with the quantity of fertiliser consumed

on that crop. The summation of fertiliser subsidy on all the crops cultivated by a sample

household during the reference year gives the total fertiliser subsidy availed by that

sample household.

75

3.3.2 Canal Irrigation Subsidy

In the case of canal irrigation, water rate varies for different crops. For example, water

rate for wheat, bajra, and fodder crops is less than the rate prevailing for rice and

sugarcane crops. However, these rates are much lower than the cost of supply of canal

water. The canal subsidy for a crop is estimated as the difference between the per acre

cost of supply and per acre water rate for that crop. Per acre cost of canal irrigation has

been taken from chapter two, which is based on secondary data. The aggregation of the

canal subsidy over all crops cultivated by a sample household during the reference year

gives the total canal subsidy utilised by that sample household.

CHART 3.2: CANAL AND ELECTRICTY SUBSIDY

I WATER INTENSITY I ~

TUBEWELL

C-OST PER UNIT

TOTAL ELECTRIC SUBSIDY

3.3.3 Electricity Subsidy

The electricity subsidy to the agriculture sector depends on the electricity tariff, cost per

unit and unit consumed for agricultural purpose. In Haryana, there are two types of

76

electricity tariff structure for agricultural purpose: the metered and the flat rate A metered

tariff refers to a charge per unit of energy consumed, whereas, a flat rate tariff is based on

the capacity of a pumpset i.e. horsepower (HP). The data on tariff structure and cost per

unit is taken from 'Tariff Order' of the Haryana Electricity Regulatory Commission

(HERCi.

The total electrical unit consumed by a farmer to irrigate per acre land under a particular

crop is computed as given below:

• A farmer was asked about the water intensity3 of a particular crop, which he had

sown during the reference year. The number of times irrigation carried out by

canal water is subtracted from the above to arrive at the number of times land

irrigated by groundwater (tubewell). The sample household either uses own or

hired tubewell to irrigate land under that particular crop. In the case of case hired

tubewell, the applicable rent of hired tubewell is included in the cost of cultivation

of that crop.

• In the case of own tubewell, the sample household may have diesel or electrical

pumpset. If diesel pumpset is used for irrigation then total cost of diesel is

included in the cost of cultivation of that crop.

• However, if electrical pumpset is used, the tariff structure could be flat rated or

metered. On the basis of information about the horsepower (HP) of tubewell and

the number of hours taken to irrigate the land once, electricity units consumed4 in

one time irrigation is computed. This is multiplied with the number of times the

land is irrigated by electrical pumpset to give the total electricity units consumed

to irrigate the land under a particular crop during the cropping season.

• In the case of metered pumpset, electricity per acre is computed by multiplying

the total units consumed with the per unit subsidy i.e. (tariff per unit - cost per

unit). However, if flat rate tariff prevails, the flat rate is duly adjusted to compute

the electricity subsidy per acre.

2 http://herc.nic.in/ 3 Water intensity refers to the number of times water is given to a crop during the cropping season. 4 A 10 HP electrical pumpset consumed 7.46 units in one hour. Ifit takes five hour to irrigate one acre land under a particular crop then units consumed are 37.30 units. Now if water intensity (net of canal irrigation) is four, then total units consumed to irrigate one acre ofland under a particular crop is 149.20 units

77

The total electricity subsidy utilised by a sample household on a particular crop is

estimated by multiplying the per acre electricity subsidy with the total area under that

crop. The summation of the electricity subsidy over all crops cultivated by a sample

household during the reference year, gives the total electricity subsidy utilised by that

sample household.

3.4 SOCIO-ECONOMIC FEATURES OF SAMPLE HOUSEHOLDS

3;4.1 Population Details of Sample Households

Table 3.2 provides the information on population details of sample households across the

different farm size. The average size of the family in Bhiwani, Panipat and Yamunanagar

district was 6.39, 5.86 and 6.06 persons respectively. Thus, it was highest in Bhiwani

district followed by Yamunanagar and Panipat districts. For the entire sample

households, the average size of the family was 6.10 persons. Across all the selected

districts, it was highest for the small farm size group followed by the medium and the

large farm size group. Total male per household in Bhiwani, Panipat and Yamunanagar

district was 3.75, 3.26 and 3.26 respectively. Total female per household in Bhiwani,

Panipat and Yamunanagar district was 2.64, 2.60 and 2.69 respectively.

3.4.2 Educational Profile of Sample Households

Table 3.3 reveals the information on educational status of sample households across the

different farm size in selected districts of Haryana. Total literacy rate for the entire

sample households in Bhiwani, Panipat and Yamunanagar district was 84.92, 87.22 and

85.79 percent respectively. Thus, the highest literacy rate was in Panipat district followed

by Yamunanagar and Bhiwani district. For the entire three selected districts, the literacy

rate was highest for the large farm size households (89.79 percent) followed by medium

(85.81 percent) and small (82.49 percent) farm size household group. In other words, the

illiteracy rate was highest for the small farm size households.

78

Table: 3.2 POPULATION DETAILS OF SAMPLED HOUSEHOLDS

Adult A verage size Adult Male Female (15- Children Children Old Old

Farm Size offamily Total Male Total Female (15-59) 59) (Male) (Female) (male) (Female) BHIWANI

Small 6.75 3.94 2.81 2.58 1.89 0.97 0.72 0.25 0.33 Medium 6.22 3.78 2.44 2.72 1.83 0.67 0.39 0.28 0.33

Large 6.19 3.53 2.67 2.53 1.72 0.69 0.72 0.22 0.31 Total 6.39 3.75 2.64 2.61 1.81 0.78 0.61 0.25 0.32

PANIPAT Small 6.11 3.47 2.64 2.42 1.89 0.81 0.42 0.25 0.33

Medium 5.83 3.22 2.61 2.14 1.72 0.81 0.53 0.28 0.36 Large 5.64 3.08 2.56 1.92 1.72 0.83 0.61 0.25 0.31 Total 5.86 3.26 2.60 2.16 1.78 0.81 0.52 0.26 0.33

YAMUNANAGAR Small 6.28 3.53 2.75 2.58 1.97 0.69 0.56 0.25 0.22

Medium 6.14 3.33 2.81 2.75 1.89 0.44 0.58 0.11 0.36 Large 5.75 3.22 2.53 2.47 1.75 0.39 0.42 0.36 0.36 Total 6.06 3.36 2.69 2.60 1.87 0.51 0.52 0.24 0.31

All DISTRICT Small 6.38 3.65 2.73 2.53 1.92 0.82 0.56 0.25 0.30

Medium 6.06 3.44 2.62 2.54 1.81 0.64 0.50 0.22 0.35 Large 5.86 3.28 2.58 2.31 1.73 0.64 0.58 0.28 0.32 Total 6.10 3.46 2.65 2.46 1.82 0.70 0.55 0.25 0.32

Source: Primary Survey

79

At the aggregate level, the percentage of total population which attained education upto

matriculation in Bhiwani, Panipat and Yamunanagar district was 69.84, 71.80 and 72.77

percent respectively. It was highest for the small farm size household group in Bhiwani

and Yamunanagar districts. However, the percentage of population which attained

education above matriculation was highest for the large farm size household group

followed by the medium and the small farm size group. For the entire sample households,

the percentage of total population which attained education upto and above matriculation

was 71.43 and 14.51 percent respectively. In brief, highest literacy rate was prevailing

among the large farm size household group, followed by the medium and the large farm

size household groups.

Table: 3.3 EDUCATIONAL PROFILE OF SAMPLED HOUSEHOLD

(%) Farm Size Illiterate Upto Matric Above Matric Total Literate

BHIWANI Small 18.39 70.85 10.76 81.61

Medium 14.56 69.42 16.02 85.44 Large 11.94 69.15 18.91 88.06 Total 15.08 69.84 15.08 84.92

PANIPAT Small 17.62 70.47 11.92 82.38

Medium 12.31 72.31 15.38 87.69 Large 8.20 72.68 19.13 91.80 Total 12.78 71.80 15.41 87.22

YAMUNANAGAR Small 16.41 74.87 8.72 83.59

Medium 15.61 69.27 15.12 84.39 Large 10.33 74.46 15.22 89.67 Total 14.21 72.77 13.01 85.79

ALL DISTRICT Small 17.51 72.01 10.47 82.49

Medium 14.19 70.30 15.51 85.81 Large 10.21 72.01 17.78 89.79 Total 14.06 71.43 14.51 85.94

Source: Primary Survey 3.4.3 Occupational Structure

Table 3.4 presents the work participation rate and the nature of employment of the

sample households across different farm sizes in the selected districts of Haryana.

Average number of workers per household in Bhiwani, Panipat and Yamunanagar district

was 3.87, 3.24 and 3.42 respectively. Work participation rate of small, medium and large

80

Table: 3.4

OCCUPATIONAL STRUCTURE OF SAMPLED HOSUEHOLDS

Average NATURE OF EMPLOYMENT (%) Number Male Male Female Female Total Total of Worker % of Non- Farm

Farm size Per % of Workers % of Farm Workers Workers to Household to Total Population to Total Workers Total Workers Full Time Part Time Full Time Part Time Full Time Part Time

BHIWANI Small 4.33 64.20 85.90 14.10 55. I3 10.26 12.82 21.79 67.95 32.05

Medium 3.81 61.18 81.75 18.25 53.28 7.30 10.22 29.20 63.50 36.50 Large 3.47 56.09 79.20 . 20.80 52.00 15.20 7.20 25.60 59.20 40.80

All 3.87 60.57 82.54 17.46 53.59 10.77 10.29 25.36 63.88 36.12 PANIPAT

Small 3.58 58.65 79.07 20.93 48.84 14.73 9.30 27.13 58.14 41.86 Medium 3.19 54.79 73.04 26.96 53.04 13.04 9.57 24.35 62.61 37.39

Large 2.94 52.21 68.87 31.13 47.17 18.87 7.55 26.42 54.72 45.28 All 3.24 55.30 74.00 26.00 49.71 15.43 8.86 26.00 58.57 41.43

YAMUNANAGAR Small 3.97 63.25 76.22 23.78 53.85 16.08 9.09 20.98 62.94 37.06

Medium 3.28 53.38 80.51 19.49 46.61 18.64 10.17 24.58 56.78 43.22 Large 3.00 52.17 82.41 17.59 48.15 17.59 4.63 29.63 52.78 47.22 All 3.42 56.38 79.40 20.60 49.86 17.34 8.13 24.66 57.99 42.01

ALL DISTRICT Small 3.96 62.12 80.61 19.39 52.80 13.55 10.51 23.13 63.32 36.68

Medium 3.43 56.53 78.65 21.35 51.08 12.70 10.00 26.22 61.08 38.92 Large 3.14 53.56 76.99 23.01 49.26 17.11 6.49 27.14 55.75 44.25

All 3.51 57.53 78.89 21.11 51.19 14.34 9.15 25.33 60.33 39.67 Source: Primary Survey

81

fann size households in all the three districts was 62.12, 56.53 and 53.56 percellt

respectively. Work participation rate was highest for the small fann size household gmup

across the three districts. At the aggregate level, the work participation rate was highest in

Bhiwani district followed by Yamunanagar and Panipat districts. For the entire sample

households, the work participation rate was 57.53 percent. For the total sample

households, the percentage of fann workers to total workers in Bhiwani, Panipat and

Yamunanagar district was 82.54, 74.00 and 79.40 percent respectively. The percentage of

fann workers to total workers in all the selected districts was highest for the small fann

group followed by the medium and the large fann groups.

For the entire sample households, the share of full time and part time workers in the total

employment was 60.33 and 39.67 percent respectively. Compared to male workforce, the

share of female workforce in full time employment was very low in all the three districts.

However, the share of female population in part time workers was higher than the male

workers. Due to various family responsibilities, most of the women worked as part time

workers. For the total workforce, the share of full time workers to total workers was

highest for the small fann size household followed by the medium and the large farm size

households.

3.4.4 Asset Profile

Value of the total asset (per household) for the small, medium and the large fanllers in

three selected districts was Rs. 97047.69, Rs.203162.69 and Rs. 409130.00 respectively

(table 3.5). It is important to note that, 49.69 percent of total sample household owned

tractor. The percentage for the small, medium and large fann size household was 8.33,

42.59, and 98.15 percent respectively. In the case of tubewell or pumpset (diesel or

electrical), the percentage for small, medium and large farm size households which own

irrigation pumpset was 64.81, 95.37, and 100 percent respectively. The data en fann

investment structure show that the percentage share of investment in various assets made

by farmers in each fann size category is directly proportional to the fann size in all the

three selected districts of Haryana.

82

Table: 3.5 ASSET PROFILE OF SAMPLED HOUSEHOLDS

Per Tubewell/ Household Tractor Trailor/ Power Sprayer Seed Drill Thresher Pumpset

Farm Value of Harvestor/ Tiller Size Asset Harrow

Rs. Percentage of Households Owning Farm Assets in Each Category BHIWANI

Small 86363.89 5.56 8.33 8.33 22.22 5.56 5.56 47.22 Medium 203718.89 44.44 44.44 44.44 58.33 36.11 38.89 86.11

Large 447323.06 94.44 94.44 94.44 72.22 69.44 66.67 100.00 Total 245801.94 48.15 49.07 49.07 50.93 37.04 37.04 77.78

PANIPAT Small 93581.94 8.33 8.33 8.33 30.56 8.33 2.78 66.67

Medium 194152.78 36.11 36.11 41.67 66.67 33.33 22.22 100.00 Large 390263.89 100.00 75.00 100.00 86.11 63.89 69.44 100.00 Total 225999.54 48.15 39.81 50.00 61.11 35.19 31.48 88.89

YAMUNANAGAR Small 111197.22 11.11 11.11 13.89 27.78 8.33 11.11 80.56

Medium 211616.39 47.22 47.22 47.22 52.78 44.44 47.22 100.00 Large 389803.61 100.00 72.22 88.89 77.78 75.00 80.56 100.00 Total 237539.07 52.78 43.52 50.00 52.78 42.59 46.30 93.52

ALL DISTRICT Small 97047.69 8.33 9.26 10.19 26.85 7.41 6.48 64.81

Medium 203162.69 42.59 42.59 44.44 59.26 37.96 36.11 95.37 Large 409130.19 9.1)5 80.56 94.44 78.70 69.44 72.22 100.00 Total 236446.&5 49.69 44.14 49.69 54.94 38.27 38.27 86.73

Source: Pnmary Survey

3.4.5 Land Profile of Sample Households

In Bhiwani district, land owned (per household) by small, medium and large farm size

household was 3.28,7.14, and 15.08 acres respectively; whereas, the cropping intensity

was 200.00, 194.82, and 190.15 percent respectively (table 3.6). The average size of the

land holding for small, medium and large farm size groups was 3.47, 6.97 and 14.67

acres respectively. The cropping intensity and the average size of holding of the total

sample households were 192.81 percent and 8.37 acres respectively.

In case of Panipat district, the land owned by small, medium and large farmers was 2.99,

6.71 and 13.61 acres respectively; whereas, the cropping.intensity was 195.56, 193.61,

and 188.62 percent respectively. The cropping intensity and the average size of holding

of total sample households were 192.59 percent and 7.84 acres respectively.

83

Table 3.6

LAND PROFILE OF SAMPLED HOUSEHOLDS

Per Household Not cultivate

Leased Leased During survey NSA GCA Crop Farm Size Land Owned Out in Period Intensity

Acre Acre Acre Acre Acre Acre % BHIWANI

Small 3.28 0.06 0.28 0.03 3.47 6.94 200.00 Medium 7.14 0.31 0.25 0.11 6.97 13.58 194.82

Large 15.08 0.50 0.25 0.17 14.67 27.89 190.15 Total 8.50 0.29 0.26 0.10 8.37 16.14 192.81

PANIPAT Small 2.99 0.03 0.17 0.00 3.13 6.11 195.56

Medium 6.71 0.14 0.17 0.00 6.74 13.04 193.61 Large 13.61 0.06 0.19 0.08 13.67 25.78 188.62 Total 7.77 0.07 0.18 0.03 7.84 14.98 192.59

Y AMUNANAGAR Small 3.04 0.00 0.25 0.03 3.26 5.86 179.57

Medium 7.36 0.25 0.14 0.11 7.14 12.25 171.60 Large 13.26 0.36 0.08 0.14 12.85 21.44 166.92 Total 7.89 0.20 0.16 0.09 7.75 13.19 170.13

ALL DISTRICT Small 3:10 0.03 0.23 0.02 3.29 6.31 191.83

Medium 7.07 0.23 0.19 0.07 6.95 12.96 186.48 Large 13.99 0.31 0.18 0.13 13.73 25.04 182.39 Total 8.05 0.19 0.20 0.07 7.99 14.77 184.87

Source: Primary Survey

84

In Yamunanagar district, the land owned by the total sample households was 7.89 acres.

The land owned by small, medium and large farmers was 3.04, 7.36 and 13.26 acres

respectively; whereas, the cropping intensity was 179.57, 171.60, and 166.92 percent

respectively. The cropping intensity and the average size of holding of the total sample

households were 170.13 percent and 7.75 acres respectively.

In all the three districts, the average size of hmd holding of small, medium and large

farmers was 3.29, 6.95, and 13.73 acres respectively, whereas, the cropping intensity was

191.83, 186.48, and 182.39 percent respectively. The cropping intensity and the average

size of all sample households were 184.87 percent and 7.99 acres respectively. Total

lease-in area was 0.20 acres, whereas, total lease-out area was 0.198 acres.

3.4.6 Cropping Pattern

Cropping pattern refers to the proportion of area under different crops during a specific

time period. It depends on different factors such as profitability of different crops, soil,

temperature, irrigation facilities etc. Table 3.7 provides the information about the crops

grown by the sample households during the reference year.

In Bhiwani district, wheat (36.75 percent), b~ra (18.16 percent), cotton (14.97 percent),

paddy (l0.49 percent) and mustard (9.17 percent) were the principal crops grown by all

sample households. Besides these crops, sugarcane, barley, pulses, gram, vegetables and

fodder crops were also grown. The small farm size group had not sown sugarcane crop.

Only 0.80 percent of GCA was devoted by all sample households to vegetables.

The cropping pattern in Panipat district was different from Bhiwani district. Wheat (42.87

percent) and paddy (39.85 percent) were the dominant crops. Apart from these crops,

sugarcane, mustard, barley, pulses, vegetables and fodder crops were also grown during

the reference year. None of farmers opted for cotton, gram and bajra in this district. With

comparison to the medium (3.30 percent) and the large farmers (2.48 percent), the small

farmers had devoted more area to vegetables (5.68 percent). In the case of sugarcane,

85

Table 3.7

CROPPING PATTERN

(%) Farm Size Wheat Sugarcane Paddy Cotton Mustard Barley Pulse Gram Bajra Vegetables Fodder

BHIWANI Small 39.60 0.00 8.60 16.40 4.40 2.00 2.00 0.80 22.60 1.20 2.40

Medium 37.65 3.50 9.98 15.02 7.00 3.70 2.26 1.03 17.39 1.03 1.44 Large 35.61 4.08 11.21 14.59 11.40 1.29 2.09 1.10 17.43 0.60 0.60 Total 36.75 3.33 10.49 14.97 9.17 2.07 2.13 1.03 18.16 0.80 1.09

PANIPAT Small 42.27 2.27 40.91 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 5.68 8.86

Medium 44.20 3.09 41.43 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.21 0.00 0.00 3.30 7.77 Large 42.35 6.03 38.79 0.00 0.22 0.22 0.00 0.00 0.00 2.48 9.91 Total 42.87 4.67 39.85 0.00 0.12 0.12 0.06 0.00 0.00 3.15 9.15

YAMUNANAGAR Small 37.68 11.37 32.46 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 10.43 8.06

Medium 36.05 17.69 31.29 0.00 0.91 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 7.94 6.12 Large 34.72 20.60 32.25 0.00 0.26 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 6.93 5.25 Total 35.57 18.33 31.99 0.00 0.42 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 7.76 5.93

ALL DISTRICT Small 39.87 4.26 26.43 6.02 1.62 0.73 0.73 0.29 8.30 5.51 6.24

Medium 39.35 7.84 27.28 5.23 2.72 1.29 0.86 0.36 6.05 3.97 5.05 Large 37.67 9.47 26.68 5.42 4.38 0.55 0.78 0.41 6.47 3.05 5.12 Total 38.47 8.25 26.82 5.45 3.50 0.79 0.79 0.38 6.61 3.67 5.26

Source: PrImary Survey

86

large fanners (6.03 percent) had devoted more area in comparision to the medium (3.09

percent) and the small fanners (2.27 percent).

In Yamunanagar district, wheat (35.57 percent), paddy (31.99 percent) and sugarcane

(18.33 percent) were the principal crops. Compared to other districts, a significant portion

of GCA was under sugarcane and vegetables. As in the case of other districts, in

comparison to the medium (7.94 percent) and the large fann size group (6.93 percent),

the small fann size group (10.43 percent) had devoted more area to vegetables. Besides

these crops, barley and fodder crops were also cultivated.

Overall, in the above three districts, wheat (38.47 percent) and paddy (26.82 percent)

were the principal crops. However, significant portion of GCA was under sugarcane

(8.25 percent), bajra (6.61 percent), cotton (5.45 percent), fodder (5.29 percent),

vegetables (3.67 percent) and mustard (3.50 percent). As compared to the medium and

the large fanners, the small fanners had committed less area to sugarcane. In comparison

to the medium (3.97 percent) and the large farmers (3.05 percent), the small farmers (5.51

percent) had devoted more area to vegetables. The above analysis clearly shows the

dominance of wheat and paddy, which accounted for 65.29 percent ofGCA of all sample

households.

3.4.7 Productivity of Different Crops

At the aggregate level the productivity of wheat in Bhiwani, Panipat and Yamunanagar

district was 16.07, 20.15 and 18.24 qtl./acre respectively (table 3.8). Productivity of

wheat, rice, mustard and barley was higher in Panipat district in comparision to other two

districts. In the case of sugarcane, the highest yield was realised in Yamunanagar district

(352.68 qtl/acre), whereas it was lowest in Bhiwani (298.31 qtVacre) district. The yield

rate for the entire sample household in all the districts was 18.15 qtl/acre for wheat,

329.56 qtI.lacre for sugarcane, and 17.90 qtl/acre for rice crop.

Productivity of different crops also varied across the different farm sizes in all the

selected districts. For all the three districts, the productivity of wheat on small, medium

87

Table: 3.8

YIELD LEVEL OF IMPORTANT CROPS

Farm size Wheat Sugarcane Rice Cotton Mustard Pulse Joan Bajra Gram BHIWANI

Small 15.75 .... 15.89 6.52 6.07 5.25 13.50 6.17 5.00 Medium 16.59 276.00 17.04 7.15 5.41 6.17 15.75 6.20 6.83

Large 15.86 320.63 16.82 7.09 6.09 6.30 14.92 6.89 6.33 Total 16.07 298.31 16.58 6.92 5.86 5.91 14.72 6.42 6.06

PANIPAT Small 19.81 312.50 18.58 .... . ... .... .... .... . ...

Medium 20.14 348.33 18.66 .... . ... 6.50 .... .... . ... Large 20.50 352.19 18.99 .... 7.00 18.00 .... .... Total 20.15 337.67 18.74 .... 7.00 6.50 18.00 .... . ...

Y AMUNANAGAR Small 18.38 347.78 18.36 .... .... .... . ... .... . ...

Medium 17.93 357.06 18.05 .... 6.83 .... .... .... . ... Large 18.40 353.21 18.74 .... 6.50 .... .... .... . ... Total 18.24 352.68 18.38 .... 6.67 .... .... . ... . ...

ALL DISTRICT Small 17.98 330.14 17.61 6.52 6.07 5.25 13.50 6.17 5.00

Medium 18.22 327.13 17.91 7.15 6.12 6.33 15.75 6.20 6.83 Large 18.25 342.01 18.18 7.09 6.53 6.30 16.46 6.89 6.33 Total 18.15 329.56 17.90 6.92 6.51 6.20 16.36 6.42 6.06

Source: Primary Survey

88

and large categories of farm size group was 17.98, 18.22 and 18.25 qtl./acre respectively.

In the case of wheat, sugarcane, paddy, barley, and bajra, the average productivity was

highest for large farms size. For sug~rcane, the yield rate was 330.14, 327.13 and 342.01

qtl/acre for small, medium and large farm size groups respectively. For paddy, the yield

rate was 17.61, 17.91 and 18.18 qtl./acre on small, medium and large farms respectively.

Thus, the yield rates of different crops across different farm sizes and districts had shown

significant gap.

3.5 UTILISATION OF INPUT SUBSIDY

3.5.1 Farm Wise Input Subsidy (per Acre)

Table 3.9 shows the utilisation of input subsidy across different farm sizes in selected

districts of Haryana. In Bhiwani district, per acre fertiliser subsidy for small, medium,

large farm size group was Rs. 880.20, Rs.1011.56 and Rs.I034.09 respectively. In the

case of canal irrigation, the utilisation of subsidy by small, medium, large farm size group

was Rs. 281.87, Rs.268.21 and Rs.259.30 respectively. It implies that per acre canal

subsidy was highest for small farm size group. However, as in the case of fertiliser

subsidy, per acre electricity subsidy was highest for large farm size group (Rs. 228.34)

and lowest for small farm size group (Rs.80.66). It happened due to the fact that the

percentage of households, who owned electrical pumpset, was higher for the large (55.55

percent) farm size group than the medium (38.88 percent) and the small (16.66 percent)

farm size group. Per acre total input subsidy (fertiliser, canal and electricity) for small,

medium, and large farm size group was Rs. 1242.74, Rs.1412.09 and Rs.1521.73

respectively. It shows the inequality in the utilisation of subsidy across the different farm

sizes in Bhiwani district.

In Panipat district, per acre fertiliser subsidy was highest for the large farm size group

followed by the medium and the small farm size groups. The distribution of canal subsidy

was equitable across different farm size groups. As in the case of Bhiwani district, per

acre electricity subsidy in Panipat was highest for the large farm size group (Rs. 319.12)

and lowest for the small farm size group (Rs.64.97). The percentage of households, who

owned the electrical pumpset, was higher for the large (66.67 percent) farm size group

89

than the medium (61.11 percent) and the small (27.77 percent) farm size group. It shows

that the highest electrical subsidy was going to the large farm size group. Per acre total

input subsidy (fertiliser, canal and electricity) for small, medium, and large farm sizes

was Rs. 1543.58, Rs.1754.62 and Rs.1861.84 respectively. Therefore, it shows the

inequality in the utilisation of total input subsidy across different farm sizes.

Table: 3.9 FARM WISE INPUT SUBSIDY

Rs IAcre

Farm Size Fertiliser Canal E I ectri ci ty Total BHIWANI

Small 880.20 281.87 80.66 1242.74 Medium 1011.56 268.21 132.32 1412.09

Large 1034.09 259.30 228.34 1521.73 Total 1005.70 265.04 180.22 1450.95

PANIPAT Small 1192.11 286.51 64.97 1543.58

Medium 1243.87 287.04 223.71 1754.62 Large 1255.54 287.18 319.12 1861.84 Total 1243.52 287.05 256.86 1787.43

YAMUNANAGAR Small 1145.60 123.29 279.67 1548.56

Medium 1242.95 135.74 560.82 1939.51 Large 1301.07 143.22 592.03 2036.33 Total 1260.04 137.95 536.08 1934.07

ALL DISTRICTS Small 1063.20 234.23 137.25 1434.68

Medium 1162.41 232.79 298.00 1693.20 Large 1186.32 235.73 363.33 1785.37 Total 1161.80 234.65 312.04 1708.49

Source: Primary Survey

In Yamunanagar district, per acre fertiliser subsidy for small, medium and large farm size

groups was Rs. 1145.60, Rs.1242.95 and Rs.1301.07 respectively. In the case of canal

irrigation, the utilisation of subsidy by small, medium and large farm sizes was Rs.

123.29, Rs.135.74 and Rs.143.22 respectively. As in the case of fertiliser and canal

subsidy, per acre electricity subsidy was highest for large farm size group (Rs. 592.03)

and lowest for small farm group (Rs.279.67). The percentage of households, who owned

the electrical pumpset, was higher for the large (55.55 percent) farm size group than the

medium (50.00 percent) and the small (30.55 percent) farm size groups.

90

In all the above three districts, the average per acre fertiliser subsidy for small, medium

and large farm sizes was Rs. 1063.20, RS.1162.41 and Rs.l186.32 respectively. In the

case of canal irrigation, the distribution of subsidy across different farm sizes was

equitable. The utilisation of electricity subsidy by small, medium and large farm size

groups was Rs. 137.25, Rs. 298.00 and Rs. 363.33 respectively. Per acre electricity

subsidy for large farm size group was 2.64 times of the subsidy given to small farm size

group. The percentage of households, who owned the electrical pumpset, was higher for

the large (59.25 percent) farm size group than the medium (50.00 percent) and the small

(25.00 percent) farm size group. Per acre total input subsidy (fertiliser, canal and

electricity) for small, medium, and large farm size was Rs. 1434.68, Rs.1693.20 and

RS.1785.3 7 respectively. Therefore, the distribution of input subsidy across the different

farm size was inequitable during the reference year.

Per acre fertiliser and electricity subsidy given to agriculture sector was highest in

Yamunanagar district followed by Panipat and Bhiwani districts. However, per acre canal

subsidy was lowest in Yamunanagar. It is due to the fact that out of four villages selected

in Yamunanagar district, there was lack of canal water availability in two villages.

Fertiliser subsidy was lowest in Bhiwani district because coarse cereals such as bajra,

jowar were sown in a significant area as compared to the other districts and these crops

do not require heavy doses of fertilisers. In all three districts, the large farm size group

accounted for highest per acre total input subsidy followed by the medium and the small

farm size group.

3.5.2 Farm Wise Input Subsidy (Per Household)

In all the three selected districts, per household total input subsidy for small, medium and

large farm size group was Rs. 9046.47, Rs. 21941.01 and Rs. 44700.41 respectively

(table 3.10). The respective per farm GCA of small, medium and large farm size groups

in Panipat was 6.31, 12.96 and 25.04 acres. Thus, large farmers accounted for the highest

91

per farm subsidy. It is due to the fact that they received highest per acre subsidy and also

had more GCA when compared to the small and the medium farmers.

Table 3.10 FARM WISE INPUT SUBSIDY

Rs / Household GCA

Farm Size Fertiliser Canal Electricity Total (AcrelHousehold) BHIWANI

Small 6112.52 1957.44 560.16 8630.12 6.94 Medium 13740.31 3643.20 1797.33 19180.83 13.58

Large 28839.64 7231.58 6368.07 42439.29 27.89 Total 16230.82 4277.41 2908.52 23416.75 16.14

PANIPAT Small 7285.11 1750.87 397.01 9432.99 6.11

Medium 16222.15 3743.53 2917.49 22883.16 13.04 Large 32365.01 7402.75 8226.26 47994.02 25.78 Total 18624.09 4299.05 3846.92 26770.06 14.98

YAMUNANAGAR Small 6714.49 722.63 1639.19 9076.30 5.86

Medium 15226.15 1662.84 6870.04 23759.02 12.25 Large 27900.81 3071.37 12695.74 43667.93 21.44 Total 16613.81 1818.95 7068.32 25501.08 13.19

All DISTRICTS Small 6704.04 1476.98 865.45 9046.47 6.31

Medium 15062.87 3016.52 3861.62 21941.01 12.96 Large 29701.82 5901.90 9096.69 44700.41 25.04 Total 17156.24 3465.13 4607.92 25229.30 14.77

Source: Pnmary Survey

Per farm subsidy for the entire sample households was highest in Panipat district

followed by Yamunanagar and Bhiwani district. Per farm GCA in Panipat, Yamunanagar

and Bhiwani district was 19.98, 13.19 and 16.14 acres respectively. Bhiwani had highest

per household GCA, but accounted for lowest per farm subsidy. It happened due to lower

per acre subsidy in Bhiwani district (Rs. 1450.95) in comparision to Panipat (Rs.1787.43)

and Yamunanagar (Rs. 1934.07) districts. It is noteworthy that per acre subsidy was

highest in Yamunanagar but per household subsidy was highest in Panipat district. It is

due to higher per household GCA in Panipat than in Yamunanagar district. In brief,

inequality in the utilisation of subsidy was much higher, if GCA of different groups was

taken into consideration.

92

3.5.3 Composition Of Input Subsidy

Fertiliser subsidy accounted for the major share of total input subsidy across the different

farm size groups (table 3.11). The share of fertiliser subsidy in the total input subsidy in

Bhiwani, Panipat and Yamunanagar districts was 69.31, 69.57 and 65.15 percent

respectively. In Bhiwani district, across all farm sizes, fertiliser subsidy was followed by

canal and electricity subsidy. The same pattern was observed for the small and the

medium farm size groups in Panipat district as the highest share in the total input subsidy

was of fertiliser subsidy followed by canal and electricity subsidy. For the large farm size

group in Panipat district, the share of electricity subsidy (17.14 percent) was higher than

the canal irrigation subsidy (15.42 percent). The composition of input subsidy in

Yamunanagar district was different from Bhiwani and Panipat districts.

Table: 3.11

COMPOSITION OF INPUT SUBSIDY (%)

Farm Size FERTILISER IRRIGATION ELECTRICITY TOTAL BHIWANI

Small 70.83 22.68 6.49 100.00 Medium 71.64 18.99 9.37 100.00

Large 67.96 17.04 15.01 100.00 Total 69.31 18.27 12.42 100.00

PANIPAT Small 77.23 18.56 4.21 100.00

Medium 70.89 16.36 12.75 \00.00 Large 67.44 15.42 17.14 \00.00 Total 69.57 16.06 14.37 100.00

YAMUNANAGAR Small 73.98 7.96 18.06 \00.00

Medium 64.09 7.00 28.92 100.00 Large 63.89 7.03 29.07 100.00 Total 65.15 7.13 27.72 100.00

ALL DISTRICT Small 74.11 16.33 9.57 100.00

Medium 68.65 13.75 17.60 100.00 Large 66.45 13.20 20.35 100.00 Total 68.00 13.73 18.26 100.00

Source: PrImary Survey

93

In Yamunanagar district, across all farm sizes fertiliser subsidy was followed by

electricity and canal subsidy. One of the reasons for higher share of electricity in

Yamunanagar district is that out of the four selected vi lIages, two villages had no canal

irrigation facility. The share of electricity subsidy in the total input subsidy utilised by

small, medium and large farm size group was 18.06, 28.92 and 29.07 percent

respectively.

Overall for the small farm size group in all the three districts, the highest share in the total

input subsidy was of fertiliser subsidy followed by canal and electricity subsidy.

However in case of medium and large farm size group, the highest share in the total input

subsidy was of fertiliser subsidy followed by electricity and canal subsidy. For the entire

sample households in all the three districts, the major share in total input subsidy was of

fertiliser (68.00 percent) followed by electricity (18.26 percent) and canal (13.73 percent)

subsidy.

3.5.4 Farm-Wise Input Subsidy (Electrical Tubewell Owners)

Table 3.12 presents the utilisation of input subsidy by different categories of sample

households who owned electrical pumpset. In Bhiwani district, per acre fertiliser subsidy

was highest for the large farm size group and lowest for the small farm size group. In the

case of canal irrigation, the utilisation of subsidy by small, mediI. i.e farm size group

was Rs. 270.35, Rs.250.81 and Rs.250.89 respectively. Even the utilisation of per acre .. electricity subsidy was highest for small fann size group (RsA03.32) followed by large

(Rs.379.55) and medium (Rs.323.52) farm size groups. However, it is important to note

that for all the sampled households (table 3.8), irrespective of the ownership of electrical

pumpset, per acre electricity subsidy was highest in large farms (Rs. 228.34) and lowest

in the small farms (Rs.80.66). Per acre total input subsidy (fertiliser, canal and

electricity) for small, medium, and large farm sizes was Rs. 1642.95, Rs.1571.95 and

Rs.1670 .89 respectively.

In Panipat district, the distribution of canal and fertiliser subsidy was inequitable. The

utilisation of electricity subsidy by small, medium and large farmers was Rs. 242.24, Rs.

94

364.69 and Rs. 483.11 respectively. Thus per acre electricity subsidy in Panipat was

highest for the large farm size group. Per acre total input subsidy (fertiliser, canal and

electricity) for small, medium, and large farm size groups was Rs. 1777.73, Rs.1888.06

and Rs.2022.46 respectively.

Farm Size

Small Medium

Large Total

Small Medium

Large Total

Small Medium

Large Total

Small Medium

Large Total

Table: 3.12 FARM WISE INPUT SUBSIDY

(ELECTRICAL PUMPSET OWNERS)

No. of Household Own Electrical Pumpset Fertiliser Canal

6 969.28 270.35 14 997.61 250.81 20 1040.44 250.89 40 1026.25 252.01

10 1248.63 286.85 22 1236.49 286.88 24 1252.22 287.13 56 1247.28 287.04

11 1119.50 0.00 18 1239.78 0.00 20 1299.68 32.65 49 1264.22 19.35

27 1120.11 172.97 54 1171.01 184.94 64 1187.08 207.19 145 1177.91 198.54

Source: PrImary Survey

Rs IAcre

Electricity Total 403.32 1642.95 323.52 1571.95 379.55 1670.89 367.82 1646.08

242.24 1777.73 364.69 1888.06 483.11 2022.46 432.78 1967.10

880.76 2000.26 1075.31 2315.09 1057.98 2390.31 1047.16 2330.73

531.07 1824.15 580.86 1936.80 595.78 1990.05 587.09 1963.54

In Yamunanagar district, per acre fertiliser subsidy for small, medium and large farm

sizes was Rs. 1119.50, Rs.1239.78 and Rs.1299.68 respectively. In the case of canal

irrigation, the small and the medium farm size groups had not utilised canal subsidy. It

was due to the fact that out of the four villages selected, only two villages had canal

irrigation facilities. The water table in these two villages was very high and therefore

farmers of these villages usually irrigated their land by diesel pumpsets. In the other two

villages, there was no canal irrigation facility and water table was very low. In these two

villages, many farmers owned electrical pumpset. As in the case of fertiliser subsidy, per

acre electricity subsidy was highest for the large farm size group (Rs. 1047.16) and

95

lowest for the small farm size group (Rs.880.76). Per acre total input subsidy (fertiliser,

canal and electricity) for small, medium, and large farm sizes was Rs. 2000.26,

Rs.2315.09 and RS.2390.31 respectively.

In all the above three districts, the average per acre fertiliser subsidy for small, medium,

large farm sizes was Rs. 1120.11, RS.1171.01 and Rs.1187.08 respectively. Utilisation of

fertiliser subsidy by different farm size groups had shown marginal inequality. In the case

of canal irrigation, the utilisation of subsidy by small, medium, large farm size was Rs.

172.97, Rs.184.94 and Rs.207.19 respectively. The utilisation of electricity subsidy by

small, medium and large farmers was Rs. 531.07, Rs. 580.86 and Rs. 595.78 respectively.

Per acre fertiliser and electricity subsidy to the agriculture sector was highest in

Yamunanagar district followed by Panipat and Bhiwani districts. However, per acre canal

subsidy was lowest in Yamunanagar. It is due to the fact that out of the four villages

selected in Yamunanagar district, canal water was not available in two villages. In all the

three districts, large farm size group accounted for the highest per acre subsidy followed

by medium and small farm size groups.

3.5.5 Farm Wise Input Subsidy (Electrical Pumpset Owners) (per Household)

Table 3.13 presents average per household subsidy in the three selected districts of

Haryana. The large farm size group accounted for the highest per farm subsidy. It

happened due to the fact that they received highest per acre subsidy and also had more

GCA when compared to small and medium farmers. Per household subsidy for entire

sample households was highest in Bhiwani district followed by Yamunanagar and

Panipat district.

96

Farm Size

Small Medium

Large Total

Small Medium

Large Total

Small Medium

Large Total

Small Medium

Large Total

Table 3.13 FARM WISE INPUT SUBSIDY

(ELECTRICAL PUMPSET OWNERS)

Fertiliser Canal Electricity Total BHIWANI

6112.52 1957.44 560.16 8630.12 13740.31 3643.20 1797.33 19180.83 28839.64 7231.58 6368.07 42439.29 16230.82 4277.41 2908.52 23416.75

PANIPAT 7285.11 1750.87 397.01 9432.99 16222.15 3743.53 2917.49 22883.16 32365.01 7402.75 8226.26 47994.02 18624.09 4299.05 3846.92 26770.06

YAMUNANAGAR 6714.49 722.63 1639.19 9076.30 15226.15 1662.84 6870.04 23759.02 27900.81 3071.37 12695.74 43667.93 16613.81 1818.95 7068.32 25501.08

All DISTRICTS 6704.04 1476.98 865.45 9046.47 15062.87 3016.52 3861.62 21941.01 29701.82 5901.90 9096.69 44700.41 17156.24 3465.13 4607.92 25229.30

Source: Pnmary Survey

3.5.6 Composition ofInput Subsidy (Electrical Pumpset Owners)

Rs. / Household GCA

(Acre/ Household)

6.94 13.58 27.89 16.14

6.11 13.04 25.78 14.98

5.86 12.25 21.44 13.19

6.31 12.96 25.04 14.77

Fertiliser subsidy accounted for the major share of total input subsidy across the farm

sizes in all the three selected districts (table 3.14). The share of fertiliser subsidy in the

total input subsidy utilised by total sample households in Bhiwani, Panipat and

Yamunanagar district was 62.34, 63.41 and 54.24 percent respectively. In Bhiwani

district, across all the farm sizes, fertiliser subsidy was followed by electricity and canal

subsidy. The same pattern was observed for medium and large farm size groups in

Panipat district. However; for the small farm size group in Panipat district, the share of

canal subsidy (16.14 percent) was higher than electricity subsidy (13.63 percent). In

Yamunanagar district, across all farm sizes fertiliser subsidy was followed by electricity

and canal subsidy. The electricity subsidy was significantly higher than the canal subsidy

97

in Yamunanagar. The share of electricity subsidy in total input subsidy utilised by small,

medium and large farmers in Yamunanagar district was 44.03, 46.45 and 44.26 percent

respectively. For the entire sample households across different farm sizes, the highest

share in total input subsidy was of fertiliser subsidy followed by electricity and canal

subsidy.

Table: 3.14

COMPOSITION OF INPUT SUBSIDY (ELECTRICAL PUMPSET OWNERS)

Farm Size FERTILISER IRRIGATION ELECTRICTY BHIWANI

Small 59.00 16.46 24.55 Medium 63.46 15.96 20.58

Large 62.27 15.02 22.72 Total 62.34 15.31 22.35

PANIPAT Small 70.24 16.14 13.63

Medium 65.49 15.19 19.32 Large 61.92 14.20 23.89 Total 63.41 14.59 22.00

YAMUNANAGAR Small 55.97 0.00 44.03

Medium 53.55 0.00 46.45 Large 54.37 1.37 44.26 Total 54.24 0.83 44.93

ALL DISTRICT Small 61.40 9.48 29.11

Medium 60.46 9.55 29.99 Large 59.65 10.41 29.94 Total 59.99 10.11 29.90

Source: Pnmary Survey

3.6 SUMMARY

(%) TOTAL

100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00

100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00

100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00

100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00

The results have shown the inequality in the utilisation of fertiliser and electricity subsidy

across different farm size groups. Per acre fertiliser and electricity subsidy was highest

for the large farm size group followed by the medium and the small farm size groups

However at the aggregate level, the distribution of canal subsidy was equitable across the

different farm size groups. In the case of per acre total input subsidy, the utilisation

pattern had shown inequality across the different farm size group. Per acre total input

98

subsidy was highest in Yamunanagar district followed by Panipat and Bhiwani districts.

The composition of input subsidy for the entire sample households shows that the major

share in the total input subsidy was of fertiliser followed by electricity and canal subsidy.

It is worth mentioning that the share of different farm size groups in the total input

subsidy depends upon two factors namely per acre input subsidy and gross cropping area.

Above result highlights the prevalent inequality in the utilisation of per acre total input

subsidy. The inequality in the utilisation of input subsidy across different groups is much

higher, if gross crop area of different farm-size groups is taken into consideration.

99