This document summarizes a study on the weedicide purchasing patterns and methodology adopted by sugarcane factories and the Cane Development Council in Andhra Pradesh, India. The study collected data through interviews with farmers, dealers, and secondary sources. It found that farmers spend 10-15% of cultivation costs on weed management, using both manual and chemical methods. Farmer satisfaction with current practices is moderate. The Cane Development Council and factories purchase herbicides based on factors like cost, effectiveness, and previous results. The study recommends that companies provide herbicides that are affordable and effective in controlling weeds like Cyperus rotundus to increase farmer satisfaction.

1. “Study and Analyze in detail the
weedicides purchasing pattern and
methodology adopted by sugarcane
factories and Cane Development
Council in A.P.”
College guide:
Dr. V.K.Jaya Raghavendra rao
Principal Scientist
NAARM, Hyderabad.
Company guide:
Mr. Firoz Ahmed
Manger (R&D)
Dhanuka Agritech Ltd., Hyderabad.
presented by :
Rudrakshi Durga Thilak
Post Graduate Diploma in Management (Agriculture)
National Academy of Agricultural Research Management, Hyderabad
(Indian Council of Agricultural Research)
1

2. Flows of Presentation
2
Objective
Study area
Methodology
Area distribution of sugarcane in India
Andhra Pradesh sugarcane scenario
Weed management practices
Satisfaction level on current practice of controlling weeds in
Sugarcane
Constraints in herbicide scenario
Cyperus rotundus intensity in sugarcane fields
Best way to educate farmers
Methodology followed in purchasing and distributing herbicides by
Cane Development Council and Sugar Factories
Factors influencing CDC and sugar factory in purchasing herbicides
Factors considered while purchasing herbicides
Suitable Approach in making the buying process acceptable to
sugar factory and CDC
Conclusions

3. OBJECTIVES:
• To arrive the correct process/methodology adopted in purchase of
weedicides by Sugar Factories&CDC.
• To list out & review the factors that are influencing in the process at
both factory level & CDC level.
• To evolve the suitable approach by the company in making the buying
process smooth & acceptable to both factories & CDC.
3

4. Study Area
4

5. Methodology
• Nature and Source of Data:
Primary data is collected from the farmers and dealers with personal
interviews.
Secondary data is collected from Department of Economics and Statistics,
Websites of Department of Industries and Commerce, Commissionerate of
Cane Development, Govt. of A.P.
5
• Sampling Procedure
Judgmental sampling procedure was followed in selection of districts and
sugar factories. Simple random sampling procedure was followed in selecting
farmers.

6. Sample Size : Sugar Factories - 07
Farmers – 2 – 3 per factory (20)
CDCs – 1 per district
Dealers – 1 – 2 per factory (05)
Data Collection:
Data collected by pre tested questionnaire which contains both open ended and
closed ended questions.
Data Analysis:
The data collected is properly decoded and used for analysis. The data was
analyzed in MS Excel.
Nov-14 6

7. Indian Sugarcane Scenario:
7
4%
4%
9%
1%
19%
0%
8%
2% 5%
2%
44%
2%
Andhra Pradesh
Gujarat
Karnataka
Madhya Pradesh
Maharashtra
Orissa
Tamil Nadu
Bihar
Haryana
Punjab
Uttar Pradesh
Uttarakhand
A CAGR of
1.24%, 0.95%
and -0.28% is
visible in area,
production and
yield
respectively
Major states are:
UP
Maharashtra
Karnataka &TN

8. Annual Growth rate in Andhra Pradesh Sugarcane
area, production and yield
8
15.00%
10.00%
5.00%
0.00%
-5.00%
-10.00%
-15.00%
-20.00%
-25.00%
40.00%
30.00%
20.00%
10.00%
0.00%
-10.00%
-20.00%
-30.00%
Area
Production
Yield
A CAGR of -0.78%, -0.97% and -0.19% is visible in area, production
and yield respectively.

9. Results and Discussion
Weed management practices:
9
Medak Nizamabad Karimnagar
Type of
Operation
No. of
times
Cost/acre (in
Rs.)
Avg
No.of
labor No. of
times
Cost/acre (in
Rs.)
Avg
No.of
labor No. of
times
Cost/acre (in
Rs.)
Avg
No.of
labor
Manual
Weeding
3 2230.2
3
3 2225..3
3
3 2233.12
3
Chemical
Weeding
1.5 1730.2
1
1.5 1708.11
1
1.5 1900.12
1
Total
(in Rs.)
3960.2 3933.44 4133.24
Farmers are paying more for manual weeding than other types.

10. Satisfaction level on current practice of controlling weeds in
Sugarcane
7.1(b) Nizamabad
33% 67%
Highly Satisfied
Moderately
Satisfied
10
67%
33%
7.1(c) Karimnagar
Highly Satisfied
Moderately
Satisfied
70%
30%
7.1(a)Medak
Highly Satisfied
Moderately
Satisfied

11. constraints in herbicide scenario:
No Effective Control
5
4.5
4
3.5
3
2.5
2
1.5
1
0.5
0
Effects soil health
Slow growth of plants
Control for less duration
Sugarcane plant dies if
herbicide come in contact
Constraints
Constraints
11
No Effective control > Effects soil health > Slow growth of plants > Sugarcane
plant dies if come in contact > Control for less duration.

12. Cyperus rotundus
• Cyperus rotundus (coco-grass, Java grass, nut grass,purple nut sedge], red nut
sedge
• Cyperus rotundus is a perennial plant, that may reach a height of up to 140 cm
(55 inches).
• The names "nut grass" and "nut sedge" – shared with the related species Cyperus
esculentus – are derived from its tubers, that somewhat resemble nuts,
although botanically they have nothing to do with nuts.
• Weed pulling in gardens usually results in breakage of roots, leaving tubers in the
ground from which new plants emerge quickly.
• Ploughing distributes the tubers in the field,
worsening the infestation
12

13. Intensity of Cyperus rotundus in sugarcane fields
40%
Moderate
40%
Low
20%
High
(a) Medak
Moderate
Low
high
Nizamabad
%80
Moderate
20%
Low
Moderate
Low
67%
Moderate
33%
Low
(c) Karimnagar
Moderate
Low
Farmers are
moderately
satisfied

14. Best Way to educate farmers:
Field demonstration
5
4.5
4
3.5
3
2.5
2
1.5
1
0.5
0
Farmer meetings
Posters and
Palmphlets
Free Samples Village campaigns
Ranking of Promotional
activities given by farmers
14

15. .
Methodology followed in purchasing and distributing
herbicides by Cane Development Council and Sugar
Factories:
Cane Development Council
Sugar Cane Factory
Farmer
CDC form Approved by Cane staff
Payment
Herbicides
H
e
r
b
i
c
i
d
e
s
CDC
Form
availed
at CDC
15

16. Political Economic Social Technological
 Government
change.
 Change in
policies and
regulations.
 Change in CDC
body.
 Change in Ex-officio
of CDC.
 New norms both
at CDC and
factory.
 Funds received.
 Budget allotted
to weedicides.
 Impact of cost
of weeding.
 Cost of
weedicide.
 Impact of
previous year
returns.
 Farmers’
adoptability to
new weedicide.
 Perception over
the brand or
company.
 Relation
between the
factory and CDC
official with the
company.
 Ethical issues
 Effectiveness of
weedicide.
 Impact of
chemical
formulation on
main crop.
 Field trail
results.
 Previous year
results.
16
Factors influencing CDC’S and sugar cane factories while
considering herbicide purchase:

17. Feasible approach By the company to evolve, in making the Buying
process smooth:
cost effective
6
5
4
3
2
1
0
dosage
usage method
Broad spectrum
Less phytotoxic
Longitivity
Factors considerd while purchasing an
herbicide
17
This chart illustrates the Low price Initiation is the main extracted
aspect

18. • Medak
• Farmer’s suggest cdc to procure an herbice which is effective control of cyperus
• Nizamabad
• Farmers suggest cdc to procure an herbiced which is cost effective
• Karimnagar
• Farmer’s suggest cdc to procure an herbice which is effective control of cyperus &
also cost effective
18

19. CONCLUSION
• 10-15% of total cost of cultivation is spent on weed management
• Farmers in all the surveyed districts follow manual, weeding along with chemical
weeding at appropriate times in sugar cane field.
• In order to avoid high labor many farmers rely more upon herbicide or chemical
control of weeds.
• Farmer satisfaction level on current weed management practices is moderate
• Farmers are ready to accept new herbicide which are beneficial to their weeding
practices and they are well acquainted to accept a product which enhances their
yield.
• In this arena of marketing to the extent of understand as the vast farmers need
the product which can be affordable .
• The move of the company is to be with low cost start up so that farmers can be
habituated with the product for a period of time.
19

20. Learnins:
• An experience to work with a giant agro-chemical
company.
• Work planning and Time management.
• How to organize an survey.
• Interaction with farmers at different locations.
• Brief knowledge on sugarcane cultivation and
procedures of weedicides supply chain.
Nov-14 20

21. 21