Journal1

tqykbZ&&flrEcj] 2002
[k.M&45] vad % 2

o`Ãf"k vkbZñ ,lñ ,lñ ,uñ&&0002&&1555
July—September, 2002
Vol. XLV, No. 2
I. S. S. N.—0002—1555

foi.ku
AGRICULTURAL
MARKETING
o`Ãf"k foi.ku ij jk"Vªh; Lrj
dh frekgh if=dk
A National Level Quarterly Journal
on Agricultural Marketing

lR;eso t;rs

foi.ku ,oa fujh{k.k funs'kky;
o`Ãf"k ea=ky;
¼d`f"k ,oa lgdkfjrk foHkkx½
Hkkjr ljdkj
Directorate of Marketing & Inspection
Ministry of Agriculture
(Deptt. of Agriculture & Co-operation)
Government of India

INVESTMENT OPPORTUNITY IN STORAGE INFRASTRUCTURE

GRAMEEN BHANDARAN YOJANA
(SPONSORED BY MINISTRY OF AGRICULTURE, GOVERNMENT OF INDIA)

A COMMERCIAL PROGRAMME FOR CREATION OF COUNTRY WIDE NETWORK OF RURAL
GODOWNS FOR SCIENTIFIC STORAGE OF AGRICULTURAL COMMODITIES, PROCESSED FARM
PRODUCE, FARM INPUTS ETC.

• INCENTIVES OFFERED :
¡ LONG TERM FROM BANKS TOWARDS CAPITAL COST OF PROJECT
¡ CREDIT LINKED BACK-ENDED SUBSIDY @ 25 PER CENT OF THE CAPITAL
COST OF EACH PROJECT
¡ HIGHER SUBSIDY @ 33.33 PER CENT FOR NE STATES, HILLY AREAS ABOVE 1000
MTS MSL AND FOR ENTREPRENEURS BELONGING TO SC/ST
¡ MAXIMUM SUBSIDY AVAILABLE UPTO RS. 50 LAKHS ON EACH PROJECT
¡ BANK FACILITY OF PLEDGE FINANCING ON STOCKS AT LOWER RATES OF
INTEREST

• PERSONS ELIGIBLE :
¡ INDIVIDUALS, FARMERS, PARTNERSHIP/PROPRIETORY FIRMS
¡ COMPANIES, CORPORATIONS, COOPERATIVES
¡ AGRICULTURAL MARKETING COMMITTEES, MARKETING BOARDS
¡ AGRO-PROCESSING UNITS

• LOCATION & SIZE :
¡ ANY PLACE OUTSIDE THE LIMITS OF MUNICIPAL CORPORATION AREA
¡ ANY SIZE SUBJECT TO A MINIMUM CAPACITY OF 100 MT

• SIMPLIFIED PROCEDURE :
¡ AUTOMATIC RELEASE OF SUBSIDY THROUGH FINANCING BANKS IN TWO
INSTALMENTS viz. (i) SANCTION OF BANK LOAN and (ii) COMPLETION OF
PROJECT

• PROGRAM TARGET :
¡ NEW STORAGE CAPACITY OF 18.50 LAKH TONNES BY MARCH 31, 2003
¡ MODERNIZATION OF COOPERATIVE GODOWNS 1.50 LAKH TONNES

OPERATIONAL GUIDELINES OF THE SCHEME CAN BE OBTAINED FROM ANY COMMERCIAL
BANK/NABARD AND ITS REGIONAL OFFICES/NCDC AND THE DIRECTORATE OF MARKETING
AND INSPECTION, FARIDABAD OR ANY OF ITS BRANCH OFFICES IN STATE CAPITALS OR
AT THE WEBSITE agmarknet.nic.in OR BY E-MAIL REQUEST TO dml@fbd,nic.in

BUILDING INFRASTRUCTURE FOR FARMERS' PROSPERITY

LET

“AGRICULTURAL MARKETING”
(QUARTERLY JOURNAL)
BE
YOUR MEDIUM
OF
PUBLICITY

The Pre-payable rates are :

Period Full page Half page Quarter page

4 Issues (Yearly) Rs. 800/- Rs. 500/- Rs. 350/-
Single issue Rs. 250/- Rs. 150/- Rs. 100/-

N.B.:—The rates are increased by (i) 50% for 1st Opening page and outside back cover; and (ii) 25%
for Inside front Cover and Inside back cover for which full page advertisements are accepted.

Apply for further particulars to :—

The Controller of Publications
Civil Lines
DELHI-110 054

Telephone No. : 23812527

October—December, 2001 3

/C:/ws1/My Documents/560M&I-2002-Cover Mahabir Singh Mss No. 1

'kq)rk vkSj DokfyVh dk ,xekdZ iSekuk]
,xekdZ ftl oLrq ij gks ogh pht+ ?kj ykuk]
HkkbZ ogh pht+ ?kj ykuk

Hkkjrh; mRikn

AGMARK
AGMARK

WITH AGMARK YOU ARE SURE TO BUY BEST AND PURE

PRODUCE OF INDIA

izcU/kd] Hkkjr ljdkj eqnz.kky;] Qjhnkckn }kjk eqfnzr ,oa izdk'ku fu;a=d] fnYyh }kjk izdkf'kr 2003
Printed by the Manager, Govt. of India Press, Faridabad and published by the Controller of Publications, Delhi 2003

SHRI P.K. AGARWAL, I.A.S.
OUR NEW AGRICULTURAL MARKETING ADVISER
TO THE GOVERNMENT OF INDIA

Shri P.K. Agarwal, I.A.S. (Andhra Pradesh, 1975) is the new Agricultural
Marketing Adviser to the Govt. of India. Before taking up the present assignment on
May 14, 2001, Shri Agarwal was holding the post of Principal Secretary in the
Department of Irrigation and Command Area Development Deptt., Govt. of Andhra
Pradesh at Hyderabad. Earlier, he has served in the Govt. of Andhra Pradesh in the
capacity of Managing Director of the Andhra Pradesh Dairy Development Co-operative
Federation Ltd., Hyderabad and of Sri Vajayarama Gajapati Corporation Sugars Ltd.,
Bhimasinghi, Vijayanagar District.

During his field postings, Shri Agarwal served as Collector and District Magistrate
of Kurnool, West Godavari and Vishakhapatnam Districts and as Commissioner,
Municipal Corporation of Hyderabad.

In Govt. of India, Shri Agarwal has earlier worked as Chief Executive of the
National Co-operative Union of India at New Delhi.

October—December, 2001 5


^^,xekdZ* * Hkkjr ljdkj }kjk xq.koÙkk ds izek.ku dh ,d iz.kkyh gSA

6 Agricultural Marketing


Vol. XLV–No. 2 ISSN. 0002–1555
vk"kk<+&&vkf'ou] 1924 ¼'kd½ PAMA–116, VOL–XLV, No.–2
JULY—SEPTEMBER, 2002 500

o`Ãf"k foi.ku
AGRICULTURAL MARKETING
EDITORIAL BOARD CONTENTS Page No.
1. Hkkjr esa jch Qlyksa dk mRiknu rFkk foi.kuA . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
1. SHRI P. K. AGARWAL, —Hkkx pUnz tSu
AGRICULTURAL MARKETING
2. Economics of Apple Marketing in Kashmir Province— . . . . . . . . . 5
ADVISER TO THE GOVERNMENT Problems & Prospects.
OF INDIA. —F. A. Shaheen & S. P. Gupta
3. Promoting Agricultural Exports from India—Need of the hour. . . . . . . 14
—K. N. Ravi Kumar, Ch. Radhika Rani & K. P. C. Rao
2. DR. G. R. BHATIA, 4. Sale pattern & Marketing of Groundnut—A case study in . . . . . . .. 21
ADDL. AGRICULTURAL Andhra Pradesh.
MARKETING ADVISER. —G. Sunil Kumar Babu , S. Sri Hari Naidu and
Y. Eswara Prasad
5. Extension issues in informal marketing. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23
—G. H. Dhankar, Lallan Rai,
3. SHRI R. J. VERMA,
D. B. Bharadwaj & Dr. Nafees Ahmed.
JOINT AGRICULTURAL
6. Marketed surplus of Paddy—A regression analysis. . . . . . . . . . . 25
MARKETING ADVISER. —Virendra Kumar Chauhan & Ramesh Singh
7. Agri-Business sector in India—A SWOT Analysis. . . . . . . . . . . 2 8
—Lokesha H. Lalith Achoth, Hugar LB,
4. SHRI A. P. BHATNAGAR, Amrutha C. P. & Deshmanya J. B.
DIRECTOR (COLD STORAGE 8. A study of integration of markets for onion and potato in Karnataka . . . . 30
AND REFRIGERATION). State.
—Balappa Shivaraya & Hugar L. B.
9. Agri-Business Co-operatives in 21st Century—Challenges. . . . . . . . 33
and opportunities.
5. DR. P. K. JAISWAL,
—Sanjib Kumar Hota, B. Kishor & Vinod Sharma
DIRECTOR OF LABORATORIES.
10. HOME NEWS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 38
I. Scheme for the establishment and Administration of Raithara Santhegalu.
6. SHRI G. H. DHANKAR, II. Transport Assistance to exporters in North-Eastern Region notified for
DEPUTY AGRICULTURAL Horticulture products.
MARKETING ADVISER. III. SAARC to prepare inventory of technologies vital for the region.
IV. Export up by over 12% in June, 02 India's foreign trade data for
April-June, 2002-2003.
EDITOR V. Post Doha negotiations must conform to our development needs.
Commerce Secretary addresses IIFT Convocation.
SHRI N. K. MISRA VI. Import of sensitive items : April-June 2002.
MARKETING OFFICER
Annual Subscription :
IMPORTANT
The Journal may be had by sending subscription to the Controller of
Publications, Civil Lines, Delhi-110054 by Demand Draft of any Bank taken
Inland–Rs. 40.00
Foreign–£ 4.67 or $ 14.40 } Inclusive of
postage
in his favour. Single Copy :
Inland–Rs. 10.00
Foreign–£ 1.7 or $ 3.60 } Exclusive of
postage
ANY ARTICLE PUBLISHED IN THIS JOURNAL CAN BE REPRODUCED PROVIDED DUE ACKNOWLEDGEMENT IS MADE TO THE SOURCE.
THE VIEWS EXPRESSED IN THE ARTICLE ARE THOSE OF THE AUTHORS AND NOT NECESSARILY OF THE DIRECTORATE OF MARKETING
& INSPECTION AND THE GOVERNMENT OF INDIA.
READERS MAY SEND POPULAR ARTICLES OF TOPICAL INTEREST IN HINDI AND ENGLISH TO THE EDITOR, AGRICULTURAL
MARKETING, DIRECTORATE OF MARKETING & INSPECTION, NEW C. G. O. BUILDING, N. H. IV, FARIDABAD-121001.

Hkkjr esa jch Qlyksa dk mRiknu rFkk foi.ku
—HkkxpUnz tSu*

–kjrh; vFkZO;oLFkklk/kua d`f"k jh<+jg dh gSgM~ftlsdsykHkdkjh gSO;olk;"k
vkthfodk dk
es
cudj xbZ ]
Mh leku A oÃ`f fcgkjh cktis;h dh v/;{krk esa vuqeksfnr fd;k tk pqdk gSA o"kZ 2002
ls 'kq: gksus okyh bl iapo"khZ; ;kstuk esa ldy ?kjsyw mRikn dh o`f)
cukus ds fy;s oÃf"k mRiknu ds lkFk&lkFk oÃf"k foi.ku ij iw.kZ /;ku nsuk
` ` nj 8 izfr'kr izkIr djus dk y{; j[kk x;k gSA gekjk ns'k oÃ`f"k iz/kku
gksxkA vktdy d`f"k dk n`f"Vdks.k cktkj dh vksj gks x;k gSA vc ;g vo'; gS] fdUrq ;gka dh mRikndrk 2 ls 2-5 Vu izfr gsDVs;j gS] ftls
vko';drk eglwl dh tk jgh gS fd ,d fdlku dks ,d vPNk oÃ"kd gh ` ;kstukc) rjhdksa ls lalk/kuksa ds mfpr nksgu }kjk 3-5 ls 4 Vu rd
ugha] cfYd ,d dq'ky O;kikjh Hkh gksuk pkfg;sA d`f"k mRiknksa dks mRiUu c<+k;k tk ldrk gSA o"kZ 2001 dh tux.kuk ds vuqlkj Hkkjr dh
djuk ftruk egRoiw.kZ gksrk gS] mruk gh egRoiw.kZ mudk foØ; gksrk gSA tula[;k 102 djksM+ ls vf/kd gks pqdh gSA vkt bruh cM+h vkcknh ds
mUur rduhd ds mi;ksx ls d`f"k mRiknu esa fujarj o`f) gks jgh gS] ;g fy;s 24 djksM+ Vu [kk|kUu dh t:jr gS] tcfd o"kZ 2001&2002 esa
mRiknu esa o`f) rc lkFkZd gksxh] tc ml mRiknu dk lgh <ax ls foi.ku [kk|kUu mRiknu dk vuqeku 20-8 djksM+ Vu yxk;k x;k gSA ;g y{;
fd;k tk;sA izkIr djuk rc vklku gks ldrk gS] tcfd oÃ`f"k vknkuksa dh le; ij
oÃ`f"k ,d ekSleh O;olk; gS vkSj Qlysa izk;% ,d lkFk rS;kj gksrh miyC/krk lqfuf'pr fd;s tkus ds fy;s iz;kl fd;s tk;sa vkSj oÃ`f"k
gSa] ftlls e.Mh vkSj cktkjksa esa ,d lkFk vkod c<+ tkrh gSaA oÃ`f"k foi.ku dks oÃ`"kd mi;ksxh cuk;k tk;sA
mRiknksa dh vkod c<+ tkus ls muds cktkj Hkko de gks tkrs gSaA oÃ`f"k dSls c<+k;sa Qly mRiknu
mit dks mfpr ewY; feys rFkk fdlkuksa dks mudh dM+h esgur dk
vPNk Qy feys] blds fy;s Hk.Mkj.k O;oLFkk dks izHkkoh cukuk vko';d Hkkjrh; oÃ`f"k ekulwu ij vk/kkfjr gS] tgka [kjhQ Qlyksa dh vis{kk
gSA jk"Vªh; oÃ`f"k uhfr esa oÃ`f"k mRiknksa ds foi.ku dks lq/kkjus dk izko/kku jch Qlyksa dk {ks=Qy de gSA jch esa eq[;r% xsgw¡ puk] vylh] eVj]
fd;k x;k gS rFkk oÃ`f"k fodkl dh ok£"kd o`f) nj pkj izfr'kr fd;s elwj] jkbZ&ljlksa dh [ksrh dh tkrh gSA rkfydk&1 ls Li"V gksrk gS fd
tkus dk y{; fu/kkZfjr fd;k x;k gSA nloha iapo"khZ; ;kstuk esa oÃ`f"k o"kZ 1997&98 ls 1999&2000 rd xsgw¡] puk] jkbZ&ljlksa dk {ks=Qy
dks loksZPp izkFkfedrk nh xbZ gS] ftldk elkSnk iz/kkuea=h Jh vVy rFkk mRiknu c<+rs Øe esa jgk gSA
rkfydk&1
Hkkjr esa jch Qlyksa dk {ks=Qy] mRiknu rFkk mRikndrk
{ks=Qy ¼yk[k gsDVs;j½ mRiknu ¼yk[k Vu½ mRikndrk ¼fdyks@gsDVs-½
Qlysa
1997&98 1998&99 1999&2000 1997&98 1998&99 1999&2000 1997&98 1998&99 1999&2000
xsgw¡ 266-96 275-23 274-34 663-45 712-88 755-74 2485 2590 2755
puk 75-63 84-69 63-05 61-32 68-01 50-82 811 803 806
jkbZ&ljlksa 70-41 65-13 60-70 47-03 56-64 59-58 668 870 982
L=ksr % bafM;k] 2002
Hkkjr esa jch Qlyksa dh [ksrh dks c<+kok nsus ds fy;s fuEufyf[kr * nygu&frygu mRiknu O;oLFkk dks izHkkoh cukuk gksxk]
mik; viukus gksaxs %
* oÃ`f"k mRiknu dk lqjf{kr Hk.Mkj.k djuk gksxk]
* izkoÃ`frd lalk/kuksa dk leqfpr rjhds ls nksgu djuk gksxk]
* moZjdksa dk larqfyr :i ls mi;ksx djuk gksxk] * vPNh xq.koÙkk okys chtksa ds mi;ksx gsrq cht fcrj.k ij /;ku
* ikS/k laj{k.k gsrq lefUor uk'khtho izca/ku djuk gksxk]
nsuk gksxk]
* Hkw ty dk O;ofLFkr <ax ls mi;ksx djuk gksxk] * oÃ`f"k izlkj O;oLFkk dk lqn`<+hdj.k djuk gksxkA

*lgk;d izk/;kid ¼izoj Js.kh½] oÃ`f"k ,oa izkoÃ`frd lalk/ku vFkZ'kkL= foHkkx] laiknd—vkbZ- th- ds- Ogh- U;wt ysVj] bafnjk xka/kh oÃ`f"k fo'ofo|ky;] jk;iqj&492012 ¼NÙkhlx<+½


/C:/ws1/My Documents/560M&I-1 560 M & I/2002 Mss. 2 to 109 Page No. 1 to 53 REVISED & Pagination H. N. Mishra

[kk|kUu mRiknu vkSj Hk.Mkj.k dh tkrh gS] ftlesa e/;LFkksa }kjk ukius dk orZu fu/kkZfjr uki ls izk;%
cM+k gksrk gSA nh bdksuksfed VkbEl ls feyh tkudkjh ds vuqlkj gekjs
oÃ`f"k mRiknu c<+kus ds fy;s ljdkj }kjk fofHkUu dk;ZØe lapkfyr
ns'k ds 60 izfr'kr ,sls xkao gSa] tgka ikap fdyksehVj dh ifjf/k esa e.Mh
fd;s tk jgs gSa] tSls&fo'ks"k [kk|kUu mRiknu dk;ZØe foiqy mRiknu
;k cktkj miyC/k ugha gSaA jch Qlyksa ds foi.ku esa fuEufyf[kr leL;k;sa
dk;ZØe] jk"Vªh; nygu ,oa frygu mRiknu dk;ZØe] jk"Vªh; tyxzg.k
ck/kk igqapk jgha gSa %
{ks= fodkl dk;ZØe vkfnA bu dk;ZØeksa rFkk fdlkuksa ds vFkd
iz;klksa ls [k|kUu mRiknu esa o`f) gqbZ gS] ftlds Hk.Mkj.k gsrq Hkkjrh; * xzkeh.k {ks=ksa esa oÃ`f"k vk/kkfjr izfØ;k ¼Processing½ bdkb;ksa dh
[kk| fuxe ds dqy 744 xksnke gSa vkSj bl fuxe }kjk yxHkx 110 la[;k ux.; gSA
xksnke jkT; ljdkjksa ls fdjk;s ij fy;s gSaA dsUnzh; Hk.Mkj x`g fuxe }kjk
* jch Qlyksa dh [ksrh dk QSyko NqViqV rFkk nwj&nwj gS] ftlls
vius 142 xksnkeksa esa Hk.Mkj.k fd;k tk jgk gS rFkk jkT;ksa ds ikl 305
mRiknu de izkIr gksrk gS rFkk cktkj vfrjs; (Marketable
xksnke gSaA Hk.Mkj.k gsrq bruh la[;k esa xksnke miyC/k gSa] fQj Hkh
Surplus) cgqr de gksrk gSA cktkj ;ksX; oÃ`f"k ftUlksa dh ek=k
Hk.Mkj.k leL;k c<+rh tk jgh gSA ,slk vuqeku gS fd ,d Vu vukt
de gksus ls mls oÃ`"kd etcwjho'k LFkkuh; O;kikjh dks csp nsrs gSa
,d o"kZ rd xksnkeksa esa j[kus ij 1800 #i;s [kpZ vkrk gS] bl fglkc ls
rFkk mUgsa oÃ`f"k mRiknksa dk de ewY; fey ikrk gSA
pkj djksM+ Vu vukt ds j[k&j[kko ij 'kklu dks 7200 djksM+ #i;s ls
vf/kd dk [kpZ mBkuk iM+sxkA 'kklu }kjk 340 yk[k Vu vukt dk * losZ{k.k ls Kkr gqvk gS fd oÃ`"kdksa dks viuh mit ds miHkksDrk
Hk.Mkj.k fd;k tk pqdk gS( vukt dh [kjhnh ds ckn ;g LVkWd vkSj c<+ ewY; esa ls dsoy 40 ls 60 izfr'kr rd fgLlk izkIr gks ikrk gSA
tk;sxkA vukt Hk.Mkj.k dh leL;k dks ns[krs gq;s 'kklu }kjk ubZ Hk.Mkj.k Qy vkSj lCth okyh Qlyksa esa ;g fgLlk blls Hkh de fey
uhfr rS;kj dh tk jgh gS] ftlesa futh {ks=ksa dks 'kkfey fd;k tk;sxkA ikrk gSA
Hkkjrh; [kk| fuxe vkSj jkT;ksa dh olwyh ,tsafl;ksa ds ikl Hk.Mkj.k
lq>ko
{kerk dh deh eglwl dh tk jgh gS] ftlds dkj.k yk[kksa Vu vukt
[kqys esa j[kuk iM+ jgk gSA dsUnz ljdkj ds foi.ku losZ{k.k ds vuqlkj * lgdkjh ;k futh {ks=ksa }kjk fodkl [k.M Lrj ij oÃ`f"k izfØ;k
Hkkjr esa izfro"kZ mit dk 20 yk[k Vu [k|kUu mi;qDr Hk.Mkj.k ugha bdkb;ksa dh LFkkiuk dh tkuh pkfg;sA nygu&frygu izfØ;k
gksus ds dkj.k [kjkc gks tkrk gSA ,slk Hkh vuqeku gS fd xsgw¡] pkoy rFkk bdkb;ksa dks izksRlkgu nsus ds fy;s 'kklu }kjk ftUlksa dks
vU; ftUlksa dk mfpr Hk.Mkj.k lqfo/kk miyC/k ugha gksus ds dkj.k nks miyC/k djkuk pkfg;sA
izfr'kr Hkkx u"V gks tkrk gSA
* cktkj ;ksX; oÃ`f"k mit dh ek=k de gksus ij Hkh ;fn oÃ`"kd
leFkZu ewY; laxfBr gksdj lkewfgd :i ls oÃ`f"k mRiknksa dh fcØh djrs
fofHkUu ftUlksa ds leFkZu ewY; esa o`f) gsrq fdlkuksa }kjk ekax dh gSa&&rc mUgsa ifjogu rFkk vU; cktkj O;; de gksrk gS rFkk os
tkrh jgh gS] ftldh iw£r dsUnz vkSj jkT; ljdkj }kjk cksul jkf'k fdlh Hkh cktkj esa oÃ`f"k mRiknksa dh fcØh dj ldrs gSaA
vfrfjDr nsdj dh tkrh jgh gSA 'kklu }kjk Qlyksa dh ykxr rFkk * fdlkuksa esa ftUl laxzg.k] Hk.Mkj.k dh izo`fÙk izk;% de ik;h tkrh
miHkksDrk dks /;ku esa j[krs gq;s gj o"kZ leFkZu ewY; esa o`f) dh xbZ gSA gSA jkT; Hk.Mkj x`g fuxe vkSj oÃ`f"k mit e.Mh lfefr;ksa }kjk
Hk.Mkj.k dh lqfo/kk xzkeh.k {ks=ksa rd miyC/k djkuh pkfg;sA xzke
rkfydk 2 iapk;r Lrj ij foÙkh; laLFkkvksa }kjk oÃ`f"k mRiknksa ds Hk.Mkj.k gsrq
jch Qlyksa dk leFkZu ewY; vfxze jde iznku djuk pkfg;sA
¼#i;s izfr fDoaVy½ * fofHkUu izns'kksa esa frygu lgdkjh lfefr;ka dsoy lks;kchu] ljlksa]
lw;Zeq[kh ds foi.ku esa layXu gSa] bu lgdkjh lfefr;ksa dks lHkh
Qlysa 1995& 1996& 1997& 1998& 1999& 2000& izdkj dh frygu ftUlksa ds foi.ku dk dk;Z djuk pkfg;sA
96 &97 &98 99 2000 2001
* miHkksDrk ewY; esa ls mRiknd dks ewY; dk de fgLlk izkIr gks
xsgw¡ 360 380 510 550 575 610 ikrk gS] bl va'k dks c<+kus ds fy;s fdlku laxfBr gksa rFkk vius
puk 670 700 740 895 1015 1100 oÃ`f"k mRiknksa dh fcØh [kqys izfr;ksxh cktkj esa djsaA
jkbZ&ljlksa 830 860 890 1000 1100 1200 * ;fn fdlku laxfBr gks tkrs gSa rc mUgsa foÙkh; lqfo/kk;sa vklkuh ls
fey ldrh gSa rFkk os izfØ;k bdkb;ksa ls lEca/k LFkkfir dj foi.ku
Qlyksa ds foi.ku esa vkus okyh ck/kk;sa esa vkus okyh tksf[ke dks de dj ldrs gSaA bl rjg ds laxBu
oÃ`f"k foi.ku fofHkUu leL;kvksa ls f?kjk gqvk gS] ftlesa Hk.Mkj.k] dukZVd] egkjk"Vª vkfn jkT;ksa esa lQyrkiwoZd dk;Z dj jgs gSaA
Js.khdj.k] izek.khoÃ`r eki rFkk rkSy] e/;LFkksa }kjk 'kks"k.k dh leL;k;sa bl izdkj ds laxBuksa ls fdlku vPNs cht] laxg.k dsUnz] Js.khdj.k]
z
gSaA xzkeh.k {ks=ksa esa dgha&dgha vukt dh [kjhnh O;kikfj;ksa }kjk uki dj iSdsftax] ifjogu vkSj Fkksd&QqVdj cktkjksa dk ykHk izkIr dj

July—September, 2002 3


ldrs gSaA tSlk cksvksxs&oSlk dkVksxsA ;fn vPNk cht cks;k tkrk gS rks mldk
* ,sls Qy rFkk lCth okyh Qlyksa dks ¼ftUgsa cktkj esa rqjar cspus mRiknu Hkh vPNk feyrk gSA [ksr ls gh cktkj dh fLFkfr ij fopkj
ij½ de ewY; izkIr gksrk gS] mUgsa fdlkuksa&lCth mRikndksa ds fd;k tkrk gS vFkkZr~ cqvkbZ ls foi.ku dh j.kuhfr 'kq: gks tkrh gS]
laxBu }kjk 'khrx`g esa j[kk tk ldrk gSA laxBu }kjk 'khrx`g dh blfy;s oÃ`f"k vknkuksa dh le; ij miyC/krk lqfuf'pr dh tkuh pkfg;s
LFkkiuk Hkh dh tk ldrh gS rFkk Qy&lCth dks tYnh [kjkc vkSj foi.ku lqfo/kk;sa xkao&xkao rd igqapkus gsrq lM+d] ekxZ lq/kkj]
gksus ls cpk;k tk ldrk gSA ifjogu lk/ku fodflr djuk pkfg;sA tc oÃ`f"k foi.ku izR;{k :i ls
xkaoksa ls tqM+ tk;sxk&rc fdlkuksa dh vk£Fkd fLFkfr lqn`<+ gksxhA

ges'kk ^,xekdZ* izekf.kr oLrq,a gh [kjhnsaA



Economics of Apple Marketing in Kashmir Province—
Problems and Prospects
F. A. SHAHEEN AND S. P. GUPTA*

Introduction taken into consideration. Eight villages (4 from each tehsil)
are chosen for the study purpose. A 10 per cent sample of
A griculture is the mainstay of Indian economy and horti-
culture is a crucial component thereof. Horticulture
development has been accorded high priority during the 8th
apple growers, who cultivate and market their produce, from
these selected villages is considered for the purpose of study.
Accordingly, 57 apple growers are selected for the present
and 9th Five Year Plans. The impact of enhanced investment
study. These farmers are classified into small (less than 2.50
in horticulture has been highly encouraging in terms of vastly
ha), medium (2.51 to 5.00 ha) and large (above 5.00 ha) catego-
improved production of 96.1 million tonnes in 1990-91 to 141.00
ries, based on area allocated by them under the apple crop. A
million tonnes in 1996-97 in the country. The J&K produces
proportionate sampling is done for the different market inter-
about 1 million m.t. quantity of various fruits of which apple
mediaries and thereby 17 wholesalers and 25 retailers are se-
constitutes 0.86 million m.t. (90 per cent). Involving about half
lected for the study purpose. All the information required was
a million households, apple plays a key role in the rural
collected from these farmers, retailers and wholesalers. The
economy of the state with an average yearly turn over of Rs.
study was conducted in the year 1999-2000.
750 crores. The improvement in the production is quite
important, but marketing has also an equal importance to Results and Discussion
develop a commercial crop, which is purely produced to sell in
Land Use and Cropping Pattern
the market. Though, there have been multi-dimensional efforts
to increase the production of apple in the state but marketing Land use and cropping pattern at sampled farms have been
has not received proper attention. The market of apple is not represented in table 1 and 2 respectively. Area under apple
regulated in the state. shows a positive relationship with the total cultivated area
which varied from 54.91 per cent at small farms to 86.28 per
Objectives
cent at large farms. Apple is the main crop of the farmers as
Looking to the above facts, the present study is undertaken about 50 per cent, 78 per cent and 82 per cent of total cropped
in view of the following objectives: area is allocated under this crop by small, medium and large
farmers respectively. About 80 per cent area allocated under
(I) To examine the marketing system prevailing in the
apple orchard by medium and large farmers is clear indication
apple trade,
that these farmers have sufficient resources to manage this
(II) To estimate the marketing cost, margins and price- crop. The financial assistance rendered by commission agents
spread in the apple marketing, in this trade to these farmers may also be a reason to manage
about 80 per cent area under apple cultivation. The per farm
(III) To examine the different constraints in financing, production is observed to be as 31.80 tonnes, 131.22 tonnes
production and marketing faced by the apple pro- and 433.56 tonnes in case of small, medium and large farms
ducers and respectively. The per hectare production varies from 30 tonnes
(IV) To suggest some policy interventions to improve at small, 38.03 tonnes at medium to 44.69 tonnes at large farms.
the production and marketing. The sufficient use of required inputs by medium and large
farmers may be a reason of relatively higher per hectare pro-
Methodology duction at these farms as compared to small farms. Moreover,
the age of orchard, technological gap and other natural fac-
The J&K is purposively selected for study purpose as it
tors may also contribute the variation in per hectare produc-
has 35.92 per cent and 58.85 per cent of country's total area
tion of this crop among the categories.
and production respectively. About 30 per cent area and 60
per cent production of the state is in Barramulla district. Hence, The cropping pattern followed at sampled farms as shown
Barramulla district is selected for the study. From Barramulla in table 2 indicates that in all the categories, most of the area is
district, two tehsils, one having highest production i.e, Sopore allocated under the apple cultivation, constituting 49.76 per
and other having relatively less production i.e, Bandipore are cent at small, 77.81 per cent at medium and 82.28 per cent at
* Research Associate and Associate Professor, Department of Agricultural & Natural Resource Economics, Indira Gandhi Agricultural University,
Raipur, Chhattisgarh.



large farms to total cropped area. The percentage of area un- prices prevailed in Jammu and Sopore market, while the
der other kharif and rabi crops is decreasing as the size of marketing cost is proportionately higher in Delhi market.
holding increases. The reason behind this fact is that the Probably this may be the reason behind this phenomenon.
large farmers are purely apple growers and have allocated
Marketing channels and price spread
very less area to other crops while small farmers take more or
less every crop for their livelihood. The cropping intensity is There are seven marketing channels patronized by the ap-
computed as 110.36, 104.47 and 104.09 per cent at small, me- ple growers.
dium and large farms respectively.
These are :
Market Share Channel—I Producer—Commission agent—Whole
The category-wise, market-wise and variety-wise share of saler—Retailer—Consumer
total sale by sample orchardists is presented in table 3 and 4. Channel—II Producer—Forwarding agent—Commis-
The main variety grown by sample farmers in all three sion agent—Whole saler—Retailer—
categories is Delicious which constitute about 66 per cent of Consumer
total produce. The American, Maharaji and Bahari varieties
account for 14.60 per cent, 7.49 per cent and 11.93 per cent Channel—III Producer—Pre-harvest Contractor—
respectively of the total produce sold by sample growers. The Commission agent—Whole saler—Re-
large farmers contributed about 64 per cent of the total produce tailer—Consumer
marketed, while these figures are about 24 per cent and 12 per Channel—IV Producer—Pre-harvest contractor—For-
cent in case of medium and small farmers respectively. The warding agent—Commission agent—
markets selected by sample farmers are Sopore (local fruit Whole saler—Retailer—Consumer
market of study area), Jammu, Delhi, Calcutta and Ahmedabad.
The major share of produce sold by sample farmers is in Channel—V Producer—JKHMC—Retailer—Con-
Azadpur fruit market Delhi (54.41 per cent), followed by Sopore sumer
(26.11 per cent). Jammu and Calcutta markets constitute almost Channel—VI Producer—Retailer—Consumer
equal share of sale (about 6.5 per cent) while this figure is
least for Ahmedabad (3.09 per cent) market to total sale. Channel—VII Producer—Contractor—Processor—
Dealers—Retailers Consumers
Price, Marketing Cost and Economics of Apple Marketing
Though the channel V & VI were not identified during the
Market-wise, category-wise and variety-wise marketing
present study, however, these do exist in the study area.
cost, price and net share are shown from table 5-7. Highest
marketing cost of Rs. 134.16 per box is estimated in case of The highest percentage (51.37 per cent) of total produce is
Calcutta market followed by Ahmedabad (Rs. 114.72 per box), transacted through Channel-I followed by Channel-II (23.25
while it is minimum for Sopore (Rs. 60.51 per box). The main per cent) while channel-III and IV account for 19.75 per cent
components responsible for the variation of marketing cost and 5.63 per cent of total produce transacted by these growers
across the markets are transportation cost and commission respectively. The channel VII exists in case of culled apples.
charges. The combined expenditure on these two items varied Only 20 per cent of the total unmarketable surplus (culled
from 32.92 per cent in Sopore market to 64.00 per cent in Calcutta apples) of sample orchardists is transacted through this
market. The on farm costs, which include cost of harvesting, channel.
packaging and head load to road are same for all the markets.
The price spread and marketing margins of different
The marketing cost at different categories is almost equal
intermediaries is depicted in table 8. The price spread is
within the market. The small variation in marketing cost at
estimated only for Channel-I and III which terminate within
these categories is due to commission charges levied on
the study area. The Maharaji variety is not considered to
varying prices of product.
estimate the price-spread as it is not preferred by consumers
The average price for all four varieties was highest in in local market. The producers share in consumers rupee is
Ahmedabad market followed by Calcutta, while it was lowest found to be about 54.00 per cent for Delicious and American
in Sopore market (Table 6). The variation in average prices variety while this figure is only 33.63 per cent in case of Bahari
across the markets was maximum for American variety (Rs. varieties. The highest expenditure incurred by producer is on
163.80 per box), while it was least for Maharaji variety (Rs. packaging (about 13.00 per cent) followed by commission
72.28 per box). The large category farmers have got highest charges (about 7 per cent of the consumer price). The
price of Delicious and American variety in most of the markets marketing cost incurred by all agencies constitute about 30
with some exceptions. The net shares of Delicious, Maharaji per cent for Delicious and American varieties while it is 36.14
and Bahari varieties are less in Delhi than the net share per cent in case of Bahari varieties. The total margin made by
in Jammu and Sopore markets. The prices of these wholesalers and retailers of Bahari varieties is 31.58 per cent.
varieties are not much higher in Delhi market as compared to



Marketing Efficiency genuin. The monitoring authority are also responsible for this
Shepherd's Index of marketing efficiency for Delicious and grim situation faced by apple growers.
American varieties are same i.e. 2.16 while this figure is low for It is observed that about 65 per cent of the farmers are in
Bahari varieties (1.44) as shown in table 9. The figures clearly lack of adequate farm machinery and equipments like power
indicate that the market is relatively efficient in case of Deli- tiller, power sprayer, pumps, scissors etc. Most of the farmers
cious and American varieties as compared to Bahari varieties. in the study area are marginal and small orchardists which are
It is seen from table that the net margin made by retailers and not financially sound. It is suggested by the farmers that the
wholesalers in case of Bahari varieties is about double than government should make available these equipments on sub-
other two varieties. Being early varieties, these come early sidised rates. The financial institutions should also provide
(July-August) in the market. Due to limited supply of these loans to growers at low rate of interest in order to purchase
varieties without no other option with consumers, the price of these equipments.
these varieties goes high in the market. This is the main rea- Constraints in Marketing
son for high share of retailers and wholesalers in the price
Lack of regulated market and co-operative marketing
paid by consumers for Bahari varieties.
societies were responded positively by 96 per cent of the
These figures of costs and returns suggest the scope for farmers. Due to non-regulatory system of marketing, growers
improving the system both in the favour of growers as well as are at the mercy of middle men. Various malpractices such as
consumers. This is possible by strengthening and streamlin- deduction of more charges, payment by instalments, quoting
ing the arrangements for enforcement/and inspections to en- of lower prices than actual, deduction of undue charges etc.
sure a regulated system of open auctions, trading practices are generally followed by these middle men. Moreover, the
and margins of intermediaries. Moreover, co-operative mar- farmers consent is not being taken before selling the produce.
keting and the direct sale from producers to consumers may The market infrastructure for the fruit crop is poor in terms
improve the producers share in consumer rupee. of cold storage, transportation facility and undependable
Constraints roads. It is imperative to mention here that the failure of state
The Problems faced by the apple growers in production, government in creating the cold storage facility have added
marketing and financing are depicted in Table-10. to the crisis. Due to uncertainty of Srinagar-Jammu road, the
farmers rush their crop to terminal markets, thinking the clo-
Constraints in Production sure of road. This increase the supplies against a meagre de-
The table reveals that majority of the farmers (95 per cent) mand which results finally in less prices. Moreover, the farm-
faced the problem of irrigation water due to drought which ers are also exploited by the transporters due to non-availabil-
directly reduced the apple production as well as quality of ity of sufficient trucks at the time of peak season.
produce. The lack of extension services was responded The high state tax for export of apple is further adding to
positively by 90 per cent of the farmers. There is technological the expenses of grower as 77 per cent of growers responded
gap because of this reason as the extension wing of to this query positively. The state tax was recently increased
Department of Horticulture is not making proper and sincere to Rs. 6.80 per box during current financial year 1999-2000
efforts to disseminate the technical know-how from research which was Rs. 4.80 per box earlier.
stations to the farmers. There is also non-availability of
Constraints in Financing
improved cultivars as 63 per cent of the farmers responded to
this problem positively. Most of the apple growers in the state are marginal and
small orchardists. The rising cost of imputs for maintenance
The lack of resources is generally faced by small category of orchards have made the cultivation of the crop away from
farmers, with the result, these farmers are not able to invest for their reach. They have no capacity to invest in better produc-
better production technology. There is need for creation of tion technology. There access to financial institutions has
co-operative societies which can cater the needs of the farm- been beset with innumerable problems.
ers. The shortage of labour is another problem as 57 per cent
More than 70 per cent of the farmers have not responded
of farmers perceived it. This problem becomes more acute at
to problems related with financial aspect as the loan facility
the harvesting stage of apple when it gets synchronized with
provided by banks and other government agencies are not
the paddy harvesting. Consequently, the farmers have to pay
found popular among the farming community. High financial
higher wages in order to complete the work in time.
cost and untimely availability of loan due to lengthy proce-
At present scenario, the farmers facing with problem of dure are playing important role for this situation. Moreover,
diseases and pests like apple scab, sanjose scale, red mite etc. there is lack of finance at reasonable rate of interest as well as
which are menace to apple industry. As per the study inadequate credit as a scale of finance. The scale of finance in
conducted, the common opinion among the farmers is that the Kashmir valley has not been revised for the last 7 to 8 years
fungicides and insecticides available in the market are not due to non-existence of Technical Committees. About 23 per
effective and liable to rectify the problem. So, it is common cent of the sample growers have responded these problems
conception that the pesticides prevailing in the market are not positively.



Conclusion ply and highest & lowest prices of the various vari-
The average cultivated area is estimated at 1.77 ha, 3.24 ha eties in different terminal markets.
and 8.95 ha at small, medium and large farms respectively of • There is need for the provision of crop insurance in
which more than 50 percent area is allocated under apple crop. case of natural calamities like drought, hail storm etc.
Maximum produce (57.41 percent) sold by sample growers is • Looking to the rising costs of inputs, there is a need
in Azadpur Fruit Market, Delhi. The large farmers contributed for the revision of scale of finance, as it had not been
64 percent of the total produce sold in different markets. revised from last 7 to 8 years due to non-existence of
Delicious variety constitutes about 66 percent of total produce Technical Committees appointed by NABARD.
followed by American (14.60 percent), Bahari (11.93 percent)
and Maharaji (7.49 percent). The highest marketing cost of • Costs like packaging and transportation should be
Rs. 134.16 per box (20 kg) is estimated in case of Calcutta taken into consideration by Technical Committee
followed by Ahmedabad (Rs. 114.72 per box) market, while it while fixing the scale of finance for apple.
is least for Sopore Market (Rs. 60.51 per box). The main • The procedure of financing should be made easy
components responsible for the variation of marketing cost and convenient for the farmers in order to make it
across the markets are transportation cost and commission popular among the apple growers.
charges. The over all average per box net share is maximum in REFERENCES
Ahmedabad market (Rs. 183.07) followed by Calcutta (Rs.
154.98), Jammu (Rs. 125.55), Sopore (Rs. 113.79) and Azadpur Data Base Horticulture (1998). Ministry of Agriculture, De-
fruit market Delhi (Rs. 112.98). Seven marketing channels are partment of Agriculture and Co-operation, Krishi
prevailing in the apple trade. The producers share in consumer Bhavan, New Delhi, 110001.
rupee is found to be about 54 percent for Delicious and Digest of statistics, (1997-98). Directorate of Economic and
American varieties while this figure is only 33.63 percent in Statistics Planning and Development Department,
case of Bahari varieties. The Shepherd's Index for marketing Jammu and Kashmir.
efficiency is estimated as 2.16 for Delicious and American
Mai Chand and Chand, M. C. (1997). Constraint analysis of
varieties while it is 1.44 in case of Bahari varieties.
tribal farmers of Himachal Pradesh in adoption of im-
The problems are complex and ranged from agronomic proved apple cultivation. Research and Development
aspects to pests and disease management, post-harvest Reporter, 14(1-2) : 83-87; 2 ref.
handling, marketing and financing. For promotion of the crop,
Nagi, V. S., Prasher, R. S. and Tiwari, S. C. (1997). Marketing of
there is a need for creation and strengthening of such agency
Himachal Apples : A spatio-temporal analysis, Agricul-
which would address these problems and also train the man-
ture Economic Research Review, 10(1) : 88-94.
power for handling these constraints coming in the way of
gigantic job and full potential exploitation of this core sector Prasher, R. S. and Negi, Y. S. and Tewari, S. C. (1996). Econom-
of the economy of state. ics of apple cultivation: a case study of tribal belt on
North-Western Himalayan Region. Bihar Journal of
Policy Suggestions
Agricultural Marketing. 4(1) : 35-43; ref.
The policy suggestions which evolved during the study
Qadri, J. A. (1976). Some aspects of marketing of apple in
are as under :
Jammu and Kashmir, Indian Journal of Horticulture.
• Extension services need to be streamlined in order to 33(1) : 44-45.
disseminate the technical know-how about the crop.
Report on Horticulture development in J & K with reference to
• The government should take measures to control Kashmir valley, Paper presented to Rajya Sabha, June
the spurious fungicides/pesticides prevailing in the 1997.
market.
Saraswat, S. P. (1995). Marketing of Himachal apple at Delhi.
• Local mandies need to be established at tehsil level Agricultural-Marketing. 38(1) : 24-28.
in order to make the direct sale by apple growers
with minimum expenditure. Shah, G. H. (1999). Present status and future potential of fruit
processing industry in J & K state, "Fruit processing in
• The market infrastructure in terms of cold storage
J & K state" seminar organised by FICI New Delhi and
should be created in the state in order to over come
J & K SIDCO on 5-6-1999, at Srinagar.
the glut in the markets.
• The state govt. should revive the fruit growers co- Tripathi, R. S. (1997). Economics of production and marketing
operative marketing societies and activate the Horti- of apples in the Garhwal hills of Uttar Pradesh. Annals
culture department as well as JKHPMC in order to of Agricultural Research. 18(1) : 5-11; 2 ref.
provide better marketing facilities and also to elimi- Wani, M. H.; Mattoo, M. S. and Sofi, A. A. (1995). Resource use
nate the role of middlemen. and economic efficiency of various marketing cost com-
• There is need for strengthening and streamlining the ponents in apple. Agricultural Marketing. 37(4) : 38-40.
arrangements for enforcement and inspection to en- Wani, M. H.; Wani, S. A. and Mir, N. A. (1998). Economic
sure a regulated system of open auctions, trading analysis of different age orchards in apple. Agricul-
practices and margins of intermediaries. tural Situation in India. 48(9) : 657-660; 6 ref.
• The level of market intelligence should be increased
with adequate current information on demand, sup-



Table 1
Land use pattern at sampled farms

Area in hectares
Production in tonnes

Categories Owned Leased Leased Total Irrig. Area Farm Per ha.
land in out cult. area under prod. prod.
area apple of apple of apple

1. Small farmers 1.77 0.24 0.08 1.93 1.28 1.06 31.80 30.00
(91.97) (12.42) (4.39) (100.00) (66.25) (54.91)

2. Medium farmers 3.24 1.26 0.25 4.25 2.52 3.45 131.22 38.03
(76.18) (29.69) (5.87) (100.00) (59.44) (81.23)

3. Large farmers 8.95 2.50 0.20 11.24 6.19 9.70 433.56 44.69
(79.61) (22.23) (1.84) (100.00) (55.10) (86.28)

Aggregate 4.65 1.33 0.18 5.80 3.33 4.73 198.86 42.04
(80.14) (22.97) (3.11) (100.00) (57.39) (81.56)

Note : Figures in parentheses represent the percentage to total cultivated area.

Table 2

Cropping pattern followed by sampled farmers in the study area

CROPS Small farmers Medium farmers Large farmers
Area(ha) Prod.(q) Area(ha) Prod.(q) Area(ha) Prod.(q)

A. Kharif
Paddy 0.64 35.02 0.54 35.82 0.96 36.28
Maize + Moong 0.06 0.55 0.03 0.37 0.24 3.60
M. P. chari Neg — — — 0.05 4.91
Beans Neg — 0.03 0.26 0.08 0.96
Vegetables 0.06 5.06 0.09 9.24 0.16 30.40

Total area 0.76(35.78) 0.69(15.49) 1.49(12.76)

B. Rabi
Mustard 0.19 1.27 0.16 1.07 0.36 2.21
Oats 0.06 2.83 0.09 5.08 0.15 4.04

Total area 0.25(11.81) 0.25(5.65) 0.51(4.37)
C. Perennial crops
Apple 1.06(49.76) 1590 boxes 3.45(77.81) 6561 boxes 9.70(82.28) 21678 boxes
Pear 0.04 6 boxes 0.05 18 boxes — —
Cherry 0.02 0.25 — — — —
Walnut 2 No. 1.95 3 No. 2.5 4 No. 3.17

Total area 1.12(52.39) 3.50(78.85) 9.70(82.28)
Total cultivated area 1.93 4.25 11.24
Total cropped area 2.13(100.00) 4.44(100.00) 11.70(100.00)
Cropping intensity (%) 110.36 104.47 104.09
Note : Figures in the parentheses represent the percentage to total cropped area.



Table 3

Category-wise sale of apple in different markets

(Quantity in boxes, 1 box = 20 kg)
Sl. No. Market Small Medium Large Total
farmers farmers farmers

1. Sopore 29,040(27.37) 21,090(19.88) 55,960(52.75) 1,06,090(100.00)
(60.87) (21.43) (21.51) (26.11)

2. Jammu 2,850(10.82) 12,150(46.13) 11,340(43.05) 26,340(100.00)
(5.97) (12.35) (4.36) (6.48)

3. Delhi 12,295(5.27) 58,180(24.95) 1,62,740(69.78) 2,33,215(100.00)
(25.78) (59.11) (62.56) (57.41)

4. Calcutta 1,900(6.78) 7,000(24.96) 19,140(68.26) 28,040(100.00)
(3.98) (7.11) (7.36) (6.91)

5. Ahmedabad 1,625(12.91) — 10,960(87.09) 12,585(100.00)
(3.40) (4.21) (3.09)

Total sale 47,710(11.74) 98,420(24.23) 2,60,140(64.03) 4,06,270(100.00)
(100.00) (100.00) (100.00)

Note : Figures in the parentheses represent the percentage to total figures.

Table 4

Variety-wise and category-wise sale of apple

Varieties
Categories Delicious American Maharaji Bahari
Small 30,658 9,907 4,085 3,060
(64.26) (20.77) (8.56) (6.41)

Medium 67,365 15,550 6,965 8,540
(68.45) (15.80) (7.08) (8.67)

Large 1,70,050 33,850 19,375 36,865
(65.37) (13.01) (7.45) (14.17)

Total 2,68,073 59,307 30,425 48,465
(65.98) (14.60) (7.49) (11.93)

Note : Figures in parentheses represent the percentage to total produce by respective categories.



Table 5
Marketing cost of apple in different markets
(Rs./box, 1 box = 20 kg)
Markets
Sl.No. Particulars Sopore Jammu Delhi Ahmedabad Calcutta
1. Harvesting cost (plucking 6.43 6.43 6.43 6.43 6.43
Assembling & grading (10.63) (8.83) (6.26) (5.60) (4.79)
2. Packaging cost (cost of wooden box, 31.55 31.55 31.55 31.55 31.55
cost of nails, paddy straw, Papers, (52.14) (43.34) (30.74) (27.50) (23.52)
cost of packaging, Labelling and
stencilling Charges)
3. Head load to road 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
(1.65) (1.37) (0.98) (0.87) (0.75)
4. Transportation cost 3.33 15.84 30.38 41.15 56.67
(5.50) (21.76) (29.59) (35.87) (42.24)
5. Octroi 0.01 — — — —
(0.02)
6. State tax — — 6.80 6.80 6.80
(6.62) (5.94) (5.07)
7. Commission charges 16.59 15.86 23.72 23.82 28.94
(27.42) (21.78) (23.11) (20.76) (21.57)
8. Mandi Association fee 0.10 0.10 — 1.25 —
(0.16) (0.14) (1.09)
9. Loading and unloading charges 1.50 2.00 2.75 2.70 2.75
(2.48) (2.75) (2.68) (2.35) (2.05)
10. Communication charges 0.00 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02
(0.00) (0.03) (0.02) (0.02) (0.01)
Total marketing cost 60.51 72.80 102.65 114.72 134.16
(100.00) (100.00) (100.00) (100.00) (100.00)
Note : Figures in the parentheses represent the percentage to total figure.

Table 6
Category-wise economics of marketing of apple in different markets

Markets
Sl.No. Particulars Sopore Jammu Delhi Calcutta Ahmedabad
A. Marketing cost
Small 60.70 73.17 99.91 135.88 115.31
Medium 60.57 71.53 102.02 136.05 —
Large 60.61 73.34 103.02 133.24 112.49
Average 60.51 72.80 102.65 134.16 114.72
B. Gross price
Small 183.26 188.32 205.51 299.71 308.21
Medium 185.41 197.05 211.16 301.86 —
Large 165.48 202.26 218.00 283.44 296.25
Average 174.30 198.35 215.63 289.14 297.79
C. Net share
Small 122.56 115.15 105.60 163.83 192.90
Medium 124.84 125.52 109.14 165.81 —
Large 104.87 128.92 114.98 150.20 183.76
Average 113.79 125.55 112.98 154.98 183.07



Table 7
Price Spread, Marketing margin and producer's share for different variety of apple, Srinagar

(Rs./box, 1 bos = 20 kg)
Particular Delicious Percentage American Percentage
A. Producer
(i) Gross return 200.45 77.75 196.20 78.40 116.39 63.13
(ii) Expenses incurred by grower
— Plucking, assembling and grading 6.43 2.49 6.43 2.56 6.43 3.48
— Packing cost 31.55 12.24 31.55 12.61 31.55 17.12
— Transportation cost 4.33 1.68 4.33 1.73 4.33 2.35
— Commission of commission
agent and market charges 18.14 7.04 17.75 7.10 10.57 5.74
— Loading and unloading 1.50 0.58 1.50 0.60 1.50 0.81
— Octroi and postage 0.01 0.00 0.01 0.00 0.01 0.00
— Marketing cost 61.96 24.03 61.57 24.60 54.39 29.50
(iii) No price received by grower 138.49 53.72 134.63 53.80 62.00 33.63
B. Wholesaler
(i) Wholesale price 200.45 77.75 196.20 78.40 116.39 63.13
(ii) Expenses incurred by wholesaler/
commission agent 2.50 0.96 2.50 0.99 2.50 1.35
(iii) Market margin by wholesaler 11.45 4.44 10.00 3.99 13.23 7.18
Gross margin 13.95 5.40 12.50 4.99 15.73 8.53
C. Retailor
(i) Retailers purchase price 214.40 83.16 208.70 83.39 132.12 71.66
(ii) Expenses incurred by retailor 6.45 2.50 6.45 2.58 6.45 3.50
(iii) Retailer's loss @ 2.5% 5.36 2.08 5.21 2.08 3.30 1.79
Marketing cost 11.81 4.58 11.66 4.66 9.75 5.29
(iv) Retailer's margin 31.58 12.25 29.89 11.95 42.50 23.05
Gross margin 43.31 16.84 41.55 16.61 52.25 28.34
D. Consumers price 257.79 100.00 250.25 100.00 184.37 100.00

Table 8
Marketing efficiency for different varieties of Apple

Varieties
Particular
Delicious American Bahari
1. Net producer share (Rs./box) 138.49 134.63 62.00
2. Total marketing cost and margins 119.30 115.62 122.37
3. Consumer price (Rs./box) 257.79 250.25 184.37
4. Shephered index of marketing efficiency 2.16 2.16 1.44
5. Modified index of marketing efficiency 1.16 1.16 0.44



Table 9
Constraints in Apple Production, Marketing and Financing

Problems faced No. of respondents
Yes No No Response

(a) Production

1. Lack of latest technical know how 32 (56) 25 (44) 0 (00)

2. Lack of improved and high yielding varieties 36 (63) 13 (23) 8 (14)

3. Lack of resources 31 (54) 26 (46) 0 (00)

4. Lack of irrigation water 54 (95) 3 (05) 0 (00)

5. Shortage of labour 21 (57) 36 (63) 0 (00)

6. Lack of extension services 51 (90) 6 (10) 0 (00)

7. Prevailing of take fungicides and pesticides 47 (82) 10 (18) 0 (00)

8. Lack of equipment and machinery 37 (65) 20 (35) 0 (00)

9. Lack of servicing facilities for equipment and 22 (39) 35 (61) 0 (00)
machinery

(b) Marketing

1. Lack of market facilities 27 (47) 30 (53) 0 (00)

2. Lack of transportation and road infrastructure 31 (54) 26 (46) 0 (00)

3. Lack of regulated market and co-operative 55 (96) 2 (04) 0 (00)
marketing societies

4. Lack of awareness about market news and 7 (12) 50 (88) 0 (00)
intelligence

5. Lack of storage facilities in growing area 45 (79) 12 (21) 0 (00)

6. Malpractice in selling method 52 (91) 3 (05) 2 (4)

7. High State tax for export of apple 44 (77) 1 (02) 12 (21)

(c) Financing

1. Timely and sufficient availability of credit 5 (09) 11 (19) 41 (72)

2. Lack of finance at reasonable rate of 13 (23) 3 (05) 41 (72)
interest

3. Inadequate credit as scale of finance 13 (23) 3 (05) 41 (72)

4. Problem faced by the farmer in dealing 4 (07) 9 (16) 44 (77)
with banks
Note : Figures in parentheses represent the percentage to total number of respondents.



Promoting Agricultural Exports From India—Need of the Hour
— K. N. RAVI KUMAR*, Ch. RADHIKA RANI* AND K. P. C. RAO**

Introduction modities and growth rates of value of total agricultural ex-
ports.
W ith the changing global scenario, the Indian agri-
culture is at the cross roads. It is high time now that
India should redesign its agricultural strategies so as to be-
Though India has been importing food grains for quite
sometime after Independence, it has also been exporting the
come competitive internationally. The New Agricultural Policy primary agricultural products or the products of agro-based
encompasses four dimensions viz., commercialization, diver- industries, thereby helping the country not only to pay for
sification, value addition and export orientation. The same the food imports, but also for other imports which includes
agenda figures in World Trade Agreement (WTA) which capital goods also. The table 1 shows the contribution of
places emphasis on trade liberalisation and globalisation. It India's agricultural exports to India's total exports.
calls for introducing measures for export promotion through Table 1
devaluation, relaxation of export quotas, introduction of ex-
port subsidies etc., because export-led growth is now the most Share of agricultural exports in the total value of India's
exports (Rs. Crores)
important strategy in the free trade regime. The Government
of India has announced a number of liberalisation policies
Year Agricultural Total Exports % share
since July 1991 to boost the agricultural exports. As a collorary
Exports (A) (B) (A/B)
to this, attempts have also been made to reverse the unfa-
vourable terms of trade faced by the agricultural sector in the 1960-61 284.0 642.0 44.2
pre-liberalization period (during 1972-73 to 1988-89). In July
1991, Indian Rupee was devalued by 18 to 19 per cent against 1965-66 334.9 805.6 41.6
major currencies in the foreign exchange market. Later, the
devaluation of Rupee has been increased to 21.4 per cent and 1970-71 487.0 1535.2 31.7
the total convertibility has been introduced on trade account.
1980-81 2057.0 6710.7 30.7
All these measures were essentially taken up to boost the
exports in the international market. In this paper an attempt 1985-86 3018.0 10895.6 27.7
has been made to analyse the growth in agricultural exports
from the country, to work out commodity-wise shares of agri- 1990-91 3521.0 18143.0 19.4
cultural exports in world's exports and in India's total exports,
trade performance of Indian agriculture, export competitive- 1991-92 8228.0 44041.0 18.7
ness of agricultural commodities in the international market
1992-93 9457.0 53688.0 17.6
and to suggest suitable measures for boosting the agricul-
tural exports from the country. 1993-94 13021.0 69751.0 18.7
India's share in world trade of agricultural commodities
1994-95 13710.0 82674.0 16.6
According to an estimate (UNCTAD, 1991), although
India produced around 10 per cent of the world's agricultural 1995-96 21136.0 106353.0 19.8
output in 1989, its share in world trade of agricultural com-
1996-97 24241.0 118817.0 20.4
modities in that year was only around 0.6 per cent. These
estimates further reveal that India's share in world agricultural 1997-98 23690.0 126290.0 18.8
trade has been declining over the past 25 years (1966-1989),
whether it is compared with the world's agricultural trade or 1998-99 NA NA 18.5
India's international trade or India's Gross Domestic Product.
During the post-liberalisation period also, the expectations of CAGR (%)
increasing the agricultural exports could not be fully realised.
This is well explained in terms of the share of agricultural 1990-91 to 28.72* 28.04*
exports in the total value of India's exports, commodity-wise 1997-98
India's share in world agricultural exports, growth rates of Note: *— Significant at 1% level.
volume and value of India's agricultural exports by major com- Source: CMIE—Various Issues

* and ** : Research Associates and Principal Scientist respectively, National Academy of Agricultural Research Management (NAARM), Rajendra
Nagar, Hyderabad-500030



It is clear from the table that in terms of value, the structural reforms period has not been very satisfactory.
exports of agricultural commodities from the country has
increased from Rs. 284 crores in 1960-61 to Rs.23690 crores The export performance of Indian agricultural com-
in 1997-98. Compound growth rates were worked out to modities in terms of their share in world agricultural exports
study the trends in value of agricultural exports and total was also studied and the details are shown in table 2. A
exports from India for the period 1990-91 to 1997-88. It is close perusal of the table reveals that, there has been a
heartening to note that, both agricultural exports and total mixed trend showing both the increasing and decreasing
exports were showing increasing trend at 28.72 and 28.04 tendencies in a majority of the agricultural commodities over
per cents respectively (significant at 1% level). However, the period, 1970 to 1996. The most potential items namely
the performance of export of agricultural products can be tea, spices, tobacco and fruit and vegetables have shown
best analysed with the help of their share in total exports a declining trend. India's share in oilseeds exports has
from the country. As evident from the same table, the share increased to 0.8 and 0.7 per cent in 1990 and 1994 from 0.3
of agricultural exports in total exports during 1960-61 was per cent in 1980. However, it rose to 1.2 and 1.1 per cent in
as large as 44.2 per cent, which marginally decreased to 1995 and 1996. Similarly, the share of rice exports has steadily
41.6 per cent during 1965-66. Since then, there has been a increased from 0.6 per cent in 1970 to 18.9 per cent in 1995,
substantial fall in the proportion of agricultural exports to but declined to 12.0 per cent in 1996. On the whole, the
total exports of the country. Over the period, 1990-91 to analytical results of India's share in world agricultural exports
1998-99, the share of agricultural exports varied between indicate that it has only an insignificant position in almost
16.6 per cent (1994-95) and 20.4 per cent (1996-97). This all agricultural commodities.
reveals that the performance of agricultural exports during

Table 2
Commodity-wise India's share (Value) in World agricultural exports

(Per cent)

Commodity 1970 1980 1990 1994 1995 1996

1. Tea and mate 33.4 27.7 21.1 14.3 11.2 11.1

2. Spices 20.5 14.5 7.7 9.0 8.3 11.2

3. Tobacco & its manufacturers 3.5 4.4 0.8 0.3 0.3 0.3

4. Coffee & its substitutes 1.0 2.1 1.7 2.5 2.4 2.7

5. Meat & its preparations 0.1 0.4 0.2 0.3 0.1 0.3

6. Fish & its preparations — 2.0 1.6 2.7 2.6 2.3

7. Cereals & their prep. 0.1 0.5 0.6 0.9 0.6 1.6

8. Fruit and vegetables 1.2 1.1 0.8 1.1 1.0 1.0

9. Sugar & its prep, honey 1.0 0.3 0.1 0.1 0.2 2.0

10. Oilseeds — 0.3 0.8 0.7 1.2 1.1

11. Rice 0.6 3.7 6.4 6.4 5.3 12.0

Source : Economic Survey, 1996-97 and 1998-99.



Journal1

Recomendados

Recomendados

Mais conteúdo relacionado

Destaque

Destaque (20)

Semelhante a Journal1

Semelhante a Journal1 (17)

Último

Último (20)

Journal1