Production and marketing of Bajra in Jaipur District of Rajasthan

jktLFkku ds t;iqj ftys esas cktjs dk mRiknu vkSj foi.ku

Thesis

Submitted to the

Sri Karan Narendra Agriculture

University, Jobner

in partial fulfillment of the requirements

for the degree of

Master of Science

in the

Faculty of Agriculture

(Agricultural Economics)

By

Sumita Jakhar

2015

Sri Karan Narendra Agriculture University, Jobner

S.K.N. College of Agriculture, Jobner

CERTIFICATE- I

Dated :------

.2015

This is to certify that Miss. Sumitra Jakhar has

successfully completed the comprehensive examination held on

………………. as required under the regulation for Master’s

degree.

(R.C. SHARMA)

HEAD

Department of Agricultural Economics

S.K.N. College of Agriculture,

Sri Karan Narendra Agriculture University, Jobner S.K.N. College of Agriculture, Jobner

CERTIFICATE- II

Dated :------------2015

This is to certify that the thesis entitled “Production and

Marketing of Bajra in Jaipur District of Rajasthan” submitted

for the degree of Master of Science in the subject of

Agricultural Economics embodies bonafide research work

carried out by Miss. Sumitra Jakhar under my guidance and

supervision and that no part of this thesis has been submitted for

any other degree. The assistance and help received during the

course of investigation have been fully acknowledged. The draft

of the thesis was also approved by the advisory committee on

...........2014.

(R.C. SHARMA)

HEAD (Pradeep

Kumar)

Department of Agricultural Economics Major

Advisor

S.K.N. College of Agriculture,

Jobner

(G.L. KESHWA)

Dean

S.K.N. College of Agriculture,

Jobner

Sri Karan Narendra Agriculture University, Jobner S.K.N. College of Agriculture, Jobner

CERTIFICATE- III

Dated :-----------

2015

This is to certify that the thesis entitled “Production and

Marketing of Bajra in Jaipur District of Rajasthan” submitted

by Miss. Sumitra Jakhar to the Sri Karan Narendra Agriculture

University, Jobner in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the

degree of Master of Science in the subject of Agricultural

Economics after recommendation by the external examiner, was

defended by the candidate before the following members of the

advisory committee. The performance of the candidate in the oral

examination on his thesis has been found satisfactory; we

therefore, recommend that the thesis be approved.

(Pradeep Kumar) (R.C.KUMAWAT)

Major Advisor Advisor

(K.N. GUPTA)

(K.Ramkrishna)

Advisor Dean, PGS,

Nominee

(R.C. SHARMA)

HEAD (G.L.

KESHWA)

Department of Agricultural Economics Dean

S.K.N. College of Agriculture, S.K.N. College of Agriculture,

Jobner Jobner

Approved

DIRECTOR EDUCATION

Sri Karan Narendra Agriculture University, Jobner

Sri Karan Narendra Agriculture University, Jobner S.K.N. College of Agriculture, Jobner

CERTIFICATE- IV

Dated :-----------

2014

This is to certify that Miss. Sumitra Jakhar of the

Department of Agricultural Economics, S.K.N. College of

Agriculture, Jobner has made all corrections/modifications in the

thesis entitled “Production and Marketing of Bajra in Jaipur

District of Rajasthan” which were suggested by the external

examiner and the advisory committee in the oral examination held

on --------------2014. The final copies of the thesis duly bound and

corrected were submitted on --------------2014 and forwarded

herewith for approval.

(Pradeep Kumar)

Major Advisor

(R.C. SHARMA)

HEAD

Department of Agricultural

Economics

S.K.N. College of Agriculture,

Jobner

(G.L. KESHWA)

DEAN

S.K.N. College of Agriculture, Jobner

Approved

DIRECTOR EDUCATION

Sri Karan Narendra Agriculture University, Jobner

List of contents

Chapter

No.

Title Page

No.

CERTIFICATE-I …….

CERTIFICATE-II …….

CERTIFICATE-III …….

CERTIFICATE-IV …….

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS …….

LIST OF CONTENTS …….

LIST OF TABLES …….

LIST OF FIGURES …….

LIST OF APPENICES …….

Chapters-1 Introduction

1.1 Objectives …….

1.2 Plan of thesis …….

Chapter-2 Review of Literature .........

2.1 Cost of cultivation and returns …….

2.2 Marketing margins, costs and price spread

2.3 Relationship between arrivals and prices …….

2.4 Constraints …….

Chapter-3 Research Methodology

3.1 Sampling framework …….

3.1.1 Selection of Crop …….

3.1.2 Selection of the study area: …….

3.1.3 Selection of Tehsils: …….

3.1.4 Selection of Villages: …….

3.1.5 Selection of the farmers …….

3.1.6 Selection of market …….

3.2 Collection of data …….

3.3 Analysis of data: …….

3.3.1. To study the cost of cultivation of bajra …….

3.3.2 Interest on Working Capital …….

3.3.3 Rental Value of Owned Land …….

3.3.4 Depreciation - …….

3.3.5 Interest on Fixed Capital- …….

3.3.6 Operational Cost (O.C.)- …….

3.3.7 Cost of Production (per quintal)- …….

3.3.8 Farm Business Measures- …….

3.3.9 Studying of Marketing costs, Margins and Price

Spread

…….

3.3.10 Relationship between arrivals and prices of

bajra

…….

3.3.11 Problems faced by the bajra farmers …….

3.4 Limitations of the study …….

Section 4 A RESULTS AND DISCUSSION …….

4A Cost structure …….

4A.1 Cost Group …….

4A. 2 Components of Operational Cost …….

4A.2 Component of Overhead Costs …….

4A.3 Returns from cultivation of bajra crop …….

Section-B Marketing of bajra …….

4B.1 Marketing channels …….

4B.1.1 Village sale (Producer-Village trader-Wholesaler-

Retailer-Consumer).

…….

4B.1.2 Mandi sale (Producer-Wholesaler- Retailer-

Consumer)

…….

4B.1.3 Producer- consumer …….

4B.2 Marketing costs …….

(i) Transportation charges …….

(ii) Loading and unloading charges: …….

(iii) Mandi fee: …….

(iv) Commission charges: …….

4B.2 Marketing Costs Incurred In Chomu

Market By Different Agencies Are

Discussed As Under:

…….

4B.2.1 Costs of bajra marketing incurred in

channel-I (village sale) (Producer

Village trader Wholesaler Retailer)

…….

4B.2.2 Costs of bajra marketing incurred in

channel-II (Mandi sale) (Producer

Wholesaler- Retailer)

…….

4B.2.3 Costs of bajra marketing incurred in

channel-III (Producer Consumer)

…….

4B.3 Marketing costs, margins and price

spread

…….

4B.3.1 Price spread in marketing of bajra in

channel-I (Producer Village Trader

Wholesaler Retailer)

…….

4B.3.2 Price spread in marketing of bajra in …….

channel-II (Producer Wholesaler

Retailer)

4B.3.3 Price spread in marketing of bajra in

channel-III (Producer Consumer)

…….

4B.4 Marketing Costs Incurred in Renwal

market by different Agencies are

discussed as under:

…….

4B.4.1 Costs of bajra marketing incurred in

channel-I (village sale)(Producer

Village trader Wholesaler Retailer)

…….

4B.4.2 Costs of bajra marketing incurred in

channel-II (Mandi sale) (Producer

Wholesaler- Retailer)

…….

4B.4.3 Costs of bajra marketing incurred in

channel-III (Producer Consumer)

…….

4B.5 Marketing costs, margins and price

spread

…….

4B.5.1 Price spread in marketing of bajra in

channel-I (Producer Village Trader

Wholesaler Retailer)

…….

4B.5.2 Price spread in marketing of bajra in

channel-II (Producer Wholesaler

Retailer)

…….

4B.5.3 Price spread in marketing of bajra in …….

channel-III (Producer Consumer)

Section-C

Relationship between market arrivals and

prices of Bajra in Chomu and Renwal markets

…….

4C.1 Seasonal Pattern of Market Arrivals and Prices

of Bajra Crop in Chomu and Renwal Markets

…….

4C.1.a Seasonal pattern of arrivals in Chomu market …….

4C.1.b Seasonal pattern of arrivals in Renwal market …….

4C.1.c Seasonal pattern in prices of bajra in Chomu

market

…….

4C.1.d Seasonal pattern in prices of bajra in Renwal

market

…….

4C.2 Relationship between Monthly Arrivals and

Wholesale Prices of Bajra

…….

4C.3 Relationship between Yearly Arrivals and

Wholesale Prices of Bajra

…….

Section-D Problems Faced by the Bajra Producers

1 Technical problems …….

2 Infrastructural problems …….

3 Economical problems …….

4 Social problems …….

Chapter-5 Summary, Conclusions and Suggestions

5.1 Introduction …….

5.2 Methodology: …….

5.3 Results …….

5.3.1 Costs of and returns from cultivation of bajra

crop:

…….

5.3.2 Costs and margins in marketing of bajra …….

5.3.3 Market arrivals and prices of bajra …….

5.3.4 Problems faced by the bajra producers …….

5.4 Conclusions …….

5.5 Policy implication …….

BIBLIOGRAPHY …….

ABSTRACT (ENGLISH) …….

ABSTRACT (HINDI) …….

APPENDICES …….

LIST OF TABLES

Table No.

Particulars Page No.

3.1 Details of sample selection ………

4A.1 Cost of cultivation of bajra crop on sample farms

during -2012-13 ………

4A.2 Operational and overhead costs and their

components in cost of cultivation of Bajra crop on

sample farms during 2012-13

………

4A.3 Returns from cultivation of Bajra crop on sample

farms during 2012-13 ………

4B.1 Distribution of producer farmers adopting different

marketing channels ………

4B.2 Marketing charges in sale of bajra at chomu and

renwal Mandi ………

4B.2.1 Marketing cost of bajra incurred in channel-I in

Chomu teshil of Rajasthan: 2012-13 ………

4B.2.2 Marketing cost of bajra incurred in channel-II in

Chomu teshil of Rajasthan 2012-13

………

4B.3.1 Price spread in marketing of bajra in channel-I in

chomu teshil of Rajasthan 2012-13 ………

4B.3.2 Price spread in marketing of bajra in channel-II in

Chomu teshil of Rajasthan: 2012-13 ………

4B.3.3 Price spread in marketing of bajra in channel-III ………

(Producer Consumer)

4B.4.1 Marketing cost of bajra incurred in channel-I in

Renwal teshil of Rajasthan: 2012-13 ………

4B.4.2 Marketing cost of bajra incurred in channel-II in

Renwal teshil of Rajasthan: 2012-13 ………

4B.5.1 Price spread in marketing of bajra in channel-I in

Renwal teshil of Rajasthan 2012-13

………

4B.5.2 Price spread in marketing of bajra in channel-II in

Renwal teshil of Rajasthan: 2012-13 ………

4B.5.3 Price spread in marketing of bajra in channel-III

(Producer Consumer) ………

4C.1.a Pattern of market arrival of bajra in different

quarters of the year during 2005-06 to 2012-13 ………

4C.1.b Pattern of market arrival of bajra in different

quarters of the year during 2005-06 to 2012-13 ………

4C.1.c Price of bajra in different quarter of the year in

Chomu market 2005-06 to 2012-13 ………

4C. 1.d Price of bajra in different quarter of the year in

renwal market during 2005-06 to 2012-13 ………

4C.2.1 Monthly market arrivals and monthly wholesale

prices of bajra in Chomu and Renwal market

during 2005-06 to 2012-13

………

4C.2.2 Correlation Co-efficient Between Monthly Arrivals

and Wholesale Prices of Bajra during the Period

2005-06 to 2012-13

………

4C.3 Correlation co-efficient between yearly wholesale

prices and arrivals of bajra in Chomu and Renwal

market: during 2005-06 to 2009-10

………

4D.1 Technical problems in production and marketing of

bajra faced by the sample farmers

………

4D.2 Infrastructural problems in production and

marketing of Bajra faced by the sample farmers ………

4D.3 Economic problems in production and marketing of

bajra faced by the sample farmers ………

4D.4 Social problems in production and marketing of

bajra faced by the sample farmers ………

LIST OF FIGURES

Figure

No.

Particulars Page

No.

4.1 Correlation coefficient between montly arrivals and

wholesale prices of Bajra during the period 2005-

06 to 2012-13

……

4.2 Correlation coefficient between montly arrivals and

wholesale prices of Bajra during the period 2005-06 to

2012-13

……

LIST OF APPENDICES

Appendix Particulars Page

No.

I Schedule for farmer

……

II Schedule for village trader …….

III Schedule for wholesaler …….

IV Schedule for retailer …….

Chapter-1

INTRODUCTION

Bajra (Pennisetum typhoides L.) belongs to Gramineae family and

also known as pearlmillet. It is a crop grown mostly in tropical climates. It

is widely grown in Africa and Asia. The important bajra growing countries

are India, China, Nigeria, Pakistan, Sudan, Egypt, Arabia and Russia.

Bajra is considered to be a poor man’s food. Besides, being a

staple diet of about 10 per cent population of our country. It is also an

important fodder crop for animals. It is nutritionally better than many

cereals as it is a good source of protein (11.6 per cent), minerals

particularly iron (8.8 per cent), carbohydrates (67 per cent ) and fat (5

per cent). In some varieties pearlmillet grains have been reported to

contain as much as 18 to 20 percent protein which is nearly double than

that of commonly consumed cereals. However availability of bajra to the

non-farm population depends on the marketable surplus which the

farmer of different size groups would make available after meeting their

own requirement.

In India bajra is the important cereal crop next to rice and wheat.

The total food grains area in India is 126.74 million hectares with

production of about 257.4 million tonnes during the year 2011-12. The

major bajra growing states of the country are Rajasthan, Uttar Pradesh,

Maharashtra, Gujrat and Haryana. States of Rajasthan, Maharashtra,

Gujarat, Uttar Pradesh and Haryana account 87% out of the total area

and about 73% of the total production. Rajasthan occupies the first place

in area as well as production. The state produced 6.43 lakh tonnes of

bajra grain from 4.98 lakh hectares area with productivity of 1,290

kg/hectare during the year 2011-12.

In Rajasthan the important bajra growing districts are Barmer,

Jodhpur, Nagaur, Alwar,Jaipur. Barmer district occupies the first place in

area and Nagaur district occupies the first place in production of bajra.

The Jaipur district is one of the major bajra growing district of

Rajasthan. In Rajasthan reason of low yield of bajra are lack of proper

moisture throughout the growing season of the crop due to insufficient

and poor distribution of rainfall and poor fertility status of land.

In india it is one of the important millet crops which flourishes well

even under adverse condition of weather. It is most drought tolerant crop

among cereals and millets. It is also used as feed for poultry and green

fodder or dry karbi for cattle. It is tall tillering annual plant which usually

grows to a height of one three meters.

This district produced 4,94,234 tonnes of bajra grain from

3,17,293 hectares area With productivity of 1,558 kg/hac during the year

2011-12.

Thus, bajra cereals crop occupies a pivotal position in the

agricultural economy of India with prime position in Rajasthan. Any

increase or decrease in area and production of this crop will have

considerable effect on the farm economy of the state in particular.

This study will be undertaken with the objective of studying cost of

cultivation, various costs, margins & price spread in marketing of bajra

crop and the relationship between markets arrivals and prices of bajra

crop in selected district of Rajasthan state.

The study of cost of cultivation, marketing behaviour and

marketing costs and margins and price spread in marketing of bajra

gives an idea of the producer’s-share in the prices paid by the

consumers on different sized farms. The relationship between market

arrivals and prices helps to know the effect of increase in prices on their

arrivals trend.

OBJECTIVES

The following are the specific objectives of the study :

(i) To study the cost of cultivation of bajra in Jaipur district of

Rajasthan.

(ii) To study the marketing costs, margins and price spread of

bajra in Jaipur district of Rajasthan.

(iii) To study the relationship between arrivals and prices of bajra

in the selected regulated market.

(iv) To find out the constraints faced by the farmers in the

cultivation and marketing of bajra.

1.2 Plan of thesis

The text of this study runs through five chapters. The present

chapter deals with the introduction and objectives as well as plan of the

thesis. The review of literature is presented in chapter two. The third

chapter deals with the methodology adopted in the selection of area and

crop, collection of data and analysis thereof. Chapter four deals with the

results and discussion and is consisted of four sections namely; section

A, B, C, and D. Summary, conclusions and recommendations of the

study are presented in chapter five followed by bibliography, abstracts

and appendices.

Chapter- 2

REVIEW OF LITERATURE

In this chapter, an attempt has been made to review some of

the important studies related to the present investigation. The chapter

has been divided into four sections for presenting the available studies

in a scientific manner.

2.1 Cost of cultivation and returns

2.2 Marketing margins, costs and price spread

2.3 Relationship between arrivals and prices

2.4 Constraints

2.1 Cost of cultivation and returns

Mishra (1998) conducted research entitled “Economic Analysis of

Production and Marketing of Green pea in Jaipur District (Rajasthan).” It

was observed from the study that the average cost of cultivation of

Green pea was Rs. 40652.28 per hectare. This was higher than the

competing crops, grown by the farmers in the study area. Among the

competing crops, cost of cultivation ranged from Rs. 7189.40 per

hectare in taramira to Rs. 21555.24 per hectare in wheat. The cost of

production per quintal of green pea was Rs. 404.18. It ranged from Rs.

323.52 for barley to Rs. 806.63 for taramira (competing crops). The cost

of production was higher in case of gram, mustard and taramira and

lower in wheat and barley as compared to green pea.

Shah and Zala (2006) studied on “Cost-benefit analysis of Ginger

cultivation in middle Gujarat” concluded that Ginger was a highly capital

intensive crops and the average cost of cultivation estimated Rs

2,02,260 per hectare, The average cost founded as Rs 1,57,368. Seed

cost founded highest (64129 per hectare) the net profit per hectare over

cost C2 for founded as Rs 1, 80,338 and input-output ratio as 1:1.97 on

the basis of cost C2 for all the farms. The overall cost of production has

been founded as Rs 1,566 per quintal which was much lower than the

market price, 2,000-5,000 per quintal, during the study period, which

indicated that the Ginger cultivation was quite remunerative in the area

even at lowest price.

Rajur et al. (2008)” Economics of chilli production in Karnataka”

Chilli was one of the most important commercial crops of India. Studied

on the title the result showed that cost A2 accounted for 30.70 per cent in

Gulbarga, 28.81 percent in Raichur and 32.30percent in Bijapur district.

Cost B2 accounted for 47.09 percent,44.54 and 50.25 in respectived

districts In cost C3 use of family labour was more in case of Bijapur

district than Gulbarga and Raichur districts due to non-availability of

hired labour during peak period cost of cultivation per hectare was

highest in Raichur district (Rs.34955.50) followed by Gulbarga

(Rs.33870.40) and (Rs.28836.26) in Bijapur districts. Which was due to

lower cost of chilli production in Raichur district as compared to Bijapur

and Gulbarga districts?

Kanaujia et al. (2009) analysed the productivity and profitability of

agri-horti system in sub-tropical region at Khadakhar village of district

Hamirpur, Utter Pradesh in four years old aonla (Emblica Officinalis G.)

orchard. The study revealed that under agri-horti system, the highest net

return (Rs. 52,540 per hectare) with high benefit/cost ratio was found in

aonla+chickpea, followed by aonla+wheat (Rs. 43,440 per hectare) and

the lowest under aonla+mustard (Rs. 41,444 per hectare) cropping

system in third fruiting year. During first and second fruiting year, the

profitability from aonla and associated crops was lesser than sole crops

due to poor yield of aonla but during third year, economics of agri- horti

system was rapidly improved due to very high yield of aonla.

Singh and Toppo (2010) in their study “Economics of production

and marketing of tomato in kanke block of Ranchi district” found that the

average cost of cultivation per hectare of Kharif and Rabi tomato was

estimated as Rs. 26011 and Rs. 23523, respectively. The average

productivity per hectare was quintals and 96 quintals in these seasons

the cost return ratio was 1:1.65 and 1:1.86 for tomato in the two

seasons. It was further observed that in the marketing of tomato, there

were three main channels prevailing among selected farmers. The

marginal farmers prefer to sell their produce all through channel l, while

small farmers sold their produce through all of the channels However,

forty percent of them sold their produce through channels lll, thirty five

percent through channel l and twenty percent through channel ll.

Dwivedi et al. (2010) conducted a study entitled “An analytical

economics of saffron cultivation in Jammu and Kashmir”. Indian saffron

is cultivated on a large scale in Jammu and Kashmir Valley where the

cool dry climate and rich soil with excellent drainage and organic content

makes the area ideal for this spice India exported 5.5 mt of saffron, the

worlds costliest spices and the Jammu and Kashmir state enjoys a

virtual monopoly in the cultivation of saffron and contributes almost 99

per cent of the national production of saffron. Keeping this in view, an

attempt was made to analyse the cost and return structure of saffron

crop in Kashmir Valley. The overall cost of cultivation was estimated as

Rs. 263138.32 per hectare and net return was Rs 412709.83 per

hectare. Per hectare overall farm business income was estimated as Rs.

628397.81 from this crop, while family labour income was calculated as

Rs. 423836.47. The overall benefit cost ratio was 1:2.57 on sample

farms under the study.

Gate et al. (2010) in their study “Cost of cultivation of groundnut a

research study” conducted in palampur and Dessa talukas of

Banaskantha district of Gujarat state for estimating the cost of groundnut

production , using 90 farmers obtained through multistage stratified

random sampling technique. The requisite data was collected through

personal interviews with the farmers with the help of pre-tested

comprehensive schedules related to kharif groundnut crop for the year

2005-06. In the study it was found that the average cost of cultivation

and net income per hectare of groundnut crop was Rs. 22526 /- and Rs.

3581/- , respectively for the year 2005-06 . The total and gross return

over cost A, cost B, cost C and cost2 of small farmers was highest and

decreased with increase in the size of holding.

2.2 Marketing margins, costs and price spread

Mishra (1998) from his study entitled “Economics Analysis of

Production and marketing of Green pea in Jaipur District (Rajasthan).”

Concluded that the total marketing cost in sale of green gram at village

was Rs. 142.85 per quintal. The cost of marketing in Mandi sale in

different channels viz.first, second and third was Rs. 80.05, Rs.117.94

and Rs.146.19, respectively. The marketing cost has been higher in

channel-lll because of the involvement of more number of middlemen

and more loss of quantity of pea in the process of sale. Producer’s share

in the consumer’s rupee was 60.83 per cent in village sale and 69.88 to

71.78 percent in mandi sale. In mandi sale, the producer’s share was

higher in channel-l (71.78 percent) as compared to channel-ll (71.08 per

cent) and channel-lll(69.88 per cent). Producer- farmers got higher share

(9-11 per cent) in mandi sale compared to village sale.

Choudhary (2000) conducted a study entitled “Marketing of

Fennel in Tonk district of Rajasthan”. It was observed that total cost in

sale of fennel seed has been Rs 209.60 per quintal at village and Rs

207.55 per quintal at mandi. Marketing costs were higher (Rs. 2.05 per

quintal) in sale of fennel seed at village level compared to sale at mandi.

Transportation cost and cost of gunny bags were the major cost items

borne by producer-farmers in the sale of fennel seed both at village and

mandi. Among the middlemen, wholesalers accounted for a very high

share in total marketing costs of fennel seed. Marketing margins

accounted for 46.69 per cent of the consumer’s price in sale of fennel

seed through channel-I (producer farmers- village trader- wholesaler-

retailer – consumer) and 33.33 per cent of the consumer’s price in sale

through channel-II (producer farmer- wholesaler- retailer- consumer).

Retailers got higher margin in sale of fennel seed in both the channels

compared to the wholesalers. Producer’s share in consumer’s rupee

was 48.65 per cent in sale of fennel seed at village level and 62.05 per

cent at regulated market. Farmers selling their fennel seed in the

regulated market got 13.40 per cent higher share compared to village

sale.

Killedar et al. (2002) conducted study on the topic “Economics of

Production and Marketing of Ginger in Satara District of Western

Maharashtra” concluded that per quintal cost of marketing of Ginger was

estimated as Rs 402.62. While observing the item wise marketing total

charges are 402.62Rs per quintal, out of this Packing charges Rs 24.55

(6.1per cent), Octori Rs 2.00(0.5 per cent), Labour charges Rs 4.05

(1.00 per cent),Weighing charges Rs 5.88 (1.46 per cent), Market Fees

Rs 0.80 (0.20 per cent),Transportation charges Rs 49.98(12.41 per

cent), Commission charges Rs 304.64 (75.67 per cent) and others are

Rs1.0.72 (2.66 per cent) respectively , it is noticed that the highest share

(75.67 per cent)in total marketing cost was of commission charges,

followed by transport (12.41 per cent) and packaging charges (6.10 per

cent). Above eighty percent of Ginger growers sent their produce to

Mumbai and Pune markets for marketing of Ginger.

Tripathi et al. (2006) their study on marketing of ginger in Ri-

Biho district of Meghalaya observed that during the year 2003-04 the

marketable surplus was higher than marketed surplus in all production

ranged, showing that farmers sold the produce at higher prices without

keeping portion of production for seed. Marketing cost while ranged for

Rs. 357 to Rs. 519 per quintal noted to be higher in channel II.

Producer’s share in consumer’s rupees was 38.64 per cent to 60.59

per cent. The analysis revealed that the producer’s share in

consumer’s rupees was low due to exorbitant margin taken by the

village traders / commission agents.

Kaur and Singh (2010) concluded that the per quintal total

marketing cost of kinnow was estimated to be the highest when the

produce was sold through commission agent to wholesaler in the

wholesale market as compared to produce sold through other

marketing channels. As for producer’s share in consumer rupee, the

average category of kinnow orchardists had an overall average of

61.71 per cent share in the consumer’s rupee in the domestic

marketing. Channel III (producer-retailer–consumer) was the best

channel for local marketing, whereas channel I (producer- pre harvest

contractor –wholesaler –retailer – consumer) was found to be the best

channel from consumer’s point of view.

Shelke et al. (2009) studied the price spread of Groundnut in

Maharashtra state. The result revealed that producer share in

consumer‘s rupee was only 49.99 percent. The roasted incurred the

cost of Rs.240.81 per quintal of Groundnut pods. The retailers meet the

expenses of Rs. 18 per quintal of roasted Groundnut. The margin of

the roaster is Rs.105.65 per quintal where as the margin of retailers

was Rs 278.76 per quintal constituting 21.43 percent of the consumers

purchase price. The share of producer is quite low.

Changule et al.(2013) studied the marketed surplus and price

spread off maize in Aurangabad district of Maharashtra during 2010-

11. The result revealed that price paid by consumer was Rs 1010,

Rs1035 and Rs 1155 per quintal in channel I, II, III respectively in

which Producer’s share in consumer’s rupee was 94.20 percent 87.69

percent and 76.02 percent respectively. Producer ‘s share in

consumer’s rupee was highest in channel I than that of channel II, III,

net price received by producer was highest in channel III which was

Rs. 269.29 followed by 127.42 in channel II and Rs. 58.58 in channel I.

It was found that the channel I was benefited to producers.

Shah, et.al. (2010) examined the marketing margin in citrus

business in Haripur district of N.W.F.P, Pakistan during. The persent

study was conducted during the citrus production season of year 2008.

The results revealed that growers received only 35.7 percent of final

year, while rest of the 64.0 percent prices was accumulated in to the

profit basket of market functionaries. The share of various

intermediaries was, contractors got 21.3 percent, 9.8 percent of the

profit margin was taken away by the commission agents and 14.9

percent by the wholesalers, while remaining 18.4 percent profit margin

went to the retailers and other functionaries. It concluded that

producer’s share in consumer’s rupee was relatively very low except in

care of that channel where produce was sold directly by the producer

to consumer price spread analysis revealed that , various market

intermediaries were the highest beneficiaries in the marketing

channels.

Deshmukh et al. (2010) studied the marketable surplus and

price spread of Pearlmillet in Beed district ,Maharashtra during the

2008-09. The study revealed that the price paid by the consumer was

highest Rs. 920 per quintal in channel III, in which producer ‘s share in

consumer ‘s rupee was 66.21 percent . In the case of channel II the

price paid by the consumer was Rs. 775 pre quintals, in which the

producer’s share in the consumer’s rupee was 77.80 percent. In

channel I compared to that in channels II and III but the producer’s

share in the consumer’s rupee was highest, i.e. 97.66 percent as

compared to that in other channels. The net price received by the

producer Rs.610 was highest in channel III as compared to Rs. 603 per

quintal in channel II and Rs.585 per quintal in channel I. The price

spread was highest in channel III Rs.311.28 followed by Rs. 172 in

channel II and Rs.14 in channel I. It was found that channel III was

beneficial to both producer as well as intermediaries.

Sharma et al. (2013) conducted a study on Economics of

Tomato cultivation in Jaipur district of Rajasthan during 2008. The

study was on the basis of highest area and production. The result

revealed that the marketing cost in different marketing channels borne

by farmers were Rs.55.35 in channel l, Rs.53.57 in channel ll and Rs.

40 in channel lll. The shares of producer in consumer rupee were

hightest of channel ll 56.79 percent and lowest in case of channel l

52.50 percent. The price spread in different marketing channels was

47.50 percent channel l, 43.21 percent in channel ll and 43.65 percent

in channel lll.

2.3 Relationship between market arrivals and prices

Lal (1994) conducted a study on Production and Marketing of

Bajra in Jaipur district of Rajasthan. He studied the relationship between

market arrivals and wholesale prices of Bajra in Jaipur and Renwal

market of Rajasthan during 1993-94 by working out the correlation

coefficient. The correlation coefficient between wholesale prices and

arrivals of Bajra crop in corresponding months were -0.4880 and -0.3926

and between wholesale prices and arrivals of Renwal months were -

0.1655 and -0.5540 in Jaipur and Renwal markets respectively. The

negative sign indicate that the arrivals and prices were inversely related

in both the market. Further the seasonal indices of Bajra arrivals were

maximum during the period of Oct.-Dec. while the prices indices during

this period were lowest in both the markets. On other hand, the arrivals

indices were lower in lean season months of May - Aug. as against this

the prices indices in these months were higher.

Mishra (1998) from his study entitled “Economic Analysis of

Production and Marketing of Green pea in Jaipur District (Rajasthan)”,

observed that the arrivals of green pea in the mandi started from second

week of November up to the end of March. There has been continues

increase in market arrivals of green pea from November to February and

decreased there after till the end of the crop season. Arrivals of green

pea were low in the starting month of the season i.e. November (5.21per

cent). It picked up and increased thereafter. The arrivals were the

highest in February (31 per cent). The market arrivals were low in March

(17 per cent) i.e.in the last month of the marketing season. Prices has

shown continuously decreasing trend from first arrivals months

(November) to the last arrival month (March) of the marketing season.

The comparison of arrivals and prices reveals that these moved in

opposite direction i.e. prices were higher in low arrivals months and

lower in brisk arrival months of the produce. The study further revealed

that the correlation coefficient between market arrivals and prices was

negative showing there by an inverse relationship (except in February).

However the coefficients were significant only in three months

(November, December and March) out of 5 months of the marketing

season. In remaining two months, the coefficient was non- significant.

Thus, it was inferred that prices were influenced by the arrivals in three

months of the production season. The correlation coefficient based on

lagged values of arrivals were also negative during the study period

(except in February)as has been observed in the concurrent period

analysis.

Nahatkar et al. (1999) studied the market arrivals and prices of

Wheat in Sehore regulated market of Madhya Pardesh during the period

1984-85 to1994-95. He observed that market arrivals of Wheat in

Sehore market increased over time and Wheat prices in general had

shown an increasing trend. Variation in annual prices was less than the

variation in arrivals. Annual rainfall and prices of Wheat significantly

affected arrivals of Wheat. There was negative relationship between

annual arrivals and Wheat in market during most of the years. There

were positive and highly significant relationships between prices and

arrivals of Wheat during the months of December, March-August.

Hamendra et al. (2012) studied carried out to assess the trend in

market arrivals and prices of Rapeseed- Mustard in Bharatpur district of

Rajasthan. The result was found that the higher indices for arrivals were

recorded during the mount hog March to May (April) and lower from

June to February. The price index was the lowest in May and highest in

February in Bharatpur market. There was positive relationship between

farm size, total stock and previous stock.

Kasar et al. (1996) in their study entitled “Behaviour of Prices and

Arrivals of Red Chilies: A Case Study from Maharashtra” Estimated the

coefficient of correlation between arrivals and prices of red chillies in

Dohdaicha market to be 0.683 which was significant at 5 per cent level

of probability. The proportion of arrivals of red (dry) chillies was meager.

By and large, there existed a significant negative correlation between

arrivals and prices of red chillies.

Bhole (2004) studied the problems in marketing of oranges in

vidharbha. He indicated main problems such as delayed payment,

breaking contract as oranges prices slash, cut in payment of farmers in

the event of loss of fruits due to dropping, high commission changes,

high transportation, loading and unloading charges and delayed

payment of commission agents.

Kumar et al. (2006) examined the variability pattern of market

arrivals and prices of potato in four metropolitan markets. Relationship

between market arrivals and prices in those Delhi, Mumbai, Kolkata,

Babgalore & examined markets during 1999-2001 periods. The results

revealed that as regards the market arrivals in Bangalore market the

variability was higher than that in Delhi and Mumbai markets the price

variability was maximum during August-September in Delhi and

Bangalore markets, During July-October in Mumbai market and during

May-July in Kalkata market.

Thombre et al. (2013) studied the market arrivals and prices of

Pigeonpea in Marathwada region during the year 1980-81 to 2005-06.

The month wise market arrivals and prices data of Pigeonpea from

respective markets were used for analysis (1980-81 to 2005-06). The

seasonal variation in arrivals and prices was calculated by using ratio to

moving average method. The relationship between market arrivals and

prices of pigeon pea was tested with the help of simple linear regression

equation and double log modal. The results revealed that, arrivals and

prices of pieonpea had strong season effect. The results confirmed the

negative relationship between arrivals and prices in both the markets

under the study.

Vekariya et.al. (2006) studied the relationship between market

arrivals and prices of major vegetable in Ahmadabad and Mahuva

market of Gujarat during the period. the arrivals and prices of potato

increased by 5.11 and 6.34 per cent anmum, respectively in Ahmadabad

market & mahuva market , arrivals and prices of onion increased by 7.05

and 13.14 per cent respectively, the growth of market arrivals were very

high and prices were declined 4.29 per cent due to maximum arrivals in

Junagarh markets. The arrivals of Brinjal were low in Ahmadabad

market.

Singh et al. (2010) in their study “A study on behaivour of arrivals

and prices of green chillies in Punjab” the present study was conducted

in Amritsar and Patiala. Amritsar and Patiala markets were selected

purposively which have recorded highest market arrivals during last

three years it has been noticed that area under chilli crop has declined,

whereas the area under vegetable crop has increased in Punjab. The

time series analysis shows that arrivals of chilli increased over period of

time in the sample markets similarly the prices of chilli registered

increase over a period of time in Amritsar market whereas in Patiala

market it shows the declining trend. It has been found that the seasonal

nature of chilli crop creates glut in the market during the post

2.4 Constraints

Chahal et al. (2010) conducted a study on the constraints in

marketing of Maize faced by farmer, major constraints reported by

farmers were non- availability of credit, poor marketing facilities, lack of

storage facilities, non-availability of seed suitable to the local needs, late

sowing of crop etc.

Ghafoor et.al.(2010) studied the marketing problems faced by

kinnow growers of tehsil Toba Tek Singh (Pakistan). The study revealed

that lack of storage facilities and non availability of cartons appeared to

be the major problems faced by kinnow growers, late payments by the

dealers, less price of kinnow in markets monopoly of middleman,

packing and loading, high carriage and other handing charges, also

perceived to be very important factors contributing toward marketing

problems of kinnow. From the above, we can conclude that major

production and marketing constraints associated with the fruits were

high cost of inputs, lack of skilled labour, lack of storage facilities,

unavailability of quality seedlings, large numbers of middlemen,

unregulated markets, high commission charges, high cost of

transportation and lack of market information.

Guledgudda et al. (2002) conducted a study on banana cultivation

in Haveri district of Karnataka state and identified the problems faced

during production were lack of technical know-how, lack of adequate

credit facility, scarcity of water etc. The farmers in the study area also

expressed marketing problems like involvement of intermediaries, lack of

storage facilities and inadequate transportation.

Singh and Sharma (2011) conducted a study in problems and

prospects in production and marketing of mint oil in Moradabad district of

Uttar Pradesh. The results of analysis revealed that about 95 per cent of

the farmers in the study area were not getting required technical

guidance from the agencies involved in this trade. Almost all the large

farmers felt this problem very intensively. Thus, problem of inadequate

distillation infrastructure was expressed by 88 per cent of mentha

growers in the study area, as distillation of oil is an important part.

Improper storage arrangements as impediment in cultivation and

marketing of mint oil were expressed by about 82 per cent of farmers in

the study area, corrupt practices of trading was expressed by 81 per

cent of respondents in study area. High price volatility and lack of

minimum support price were the problems expressed by about 65 per

cent of the farmers.

Nazeer Ahmed et al. (2012) reported that farmers are facing lot of

problems in cultivation of aromatic plants specially their scientific

cultivation and agronomy and marketing of produce. There is lack of

standard package of practices for aromatic plants and moreover farmers

are not aware to available technologies. Aromatic crop cultivation is a

new area for the farmers and the workers and labourers are not aware

about the aromatic plants, cultivation, processing and post harvest

practices. The non-availability of the skilled labour and high-tech

cultivation harvesting and processing is the limitation.

Ram Suresh et al. (2012) conducted a study on the constraints in

production of these aromatic crops, faced by 85 per cent growers, were

lack of improved production techniques, non-availability of quality

planting material, absence of input subsidies and poor access to credit.

About 45 per cent growers reported shortage of labour during harvesting

season.

Shashikant et al. (2013) conducted a study on the constraints in

production & marketing of red gram faced by farmers was conducted in

2008-09 in Gulbarga district of Karnataka. Major constraints reported by

the farmers were inadequate availability of labour, high cost of pesticide,

inadequate availability of fertilizers and quality seeds, low output price

during post harvest period, damage due to natural calamities,

inadequate transportations facility, high market fees and charges, high

transportation cost, lack of storage facilities.

Subhash et al.(2006) conducted a study on the constraints in

pearl millet it was found that the constraints such as high price of

herbicides, fungicides and other pesticides and lack of irrigation facilities,

failures of crop due to unfavorable weather conditions and use of

untreated seeds were also very serious , and lack of knowledge

regarding the application date and dosage of fertilizers were major

constraints in marketing of produce, while unavailability of warehouses ,

distress sale due to immediate need for money, low support price of

produce, lack of cooperative organization for marketing of produce, lack

of guidance and knowledge.

Chapter-3

RESEARCH METHODOLOGY

Scientific study of any problem requires a systematic investigation

using appropriate methods and procedures in order to arrive at reliable

and practical conclusions. This chapter deals with the methods used in

present investigation as discussed below under the following sub-heads:

3.1 Sampling framework

3.2 Collection of data

3.3 Analysis of data, and

3.4 Limitations of the study

3.1.1 Selection of Crop:

Bajra crop was selected for the detailed study because this crop

has a good place among the cereal crops in Rajasthan.

3.1.2 Selection of the study area:

Jaipur district of the state of Rajasthan was selected purposively

for the study. This district is one of the major bajra growing districts of

Rajasthan.

3.1.3 Selection of Tehsils:

Jaipur district comprises fourteen tehsils, Out of which two tehsils,

namely Chomu and Renwal were selected randomly.

3.4 Selection of Villages:

A list of villages was obtained from the secretary, Krishi Upaj

Mandi Samiti, Renwal and Chomu from was which maximum farmers

have sold their produce in the market. Out of tthis, six villages namely

Rampura, Malikpura, Luniyawas, Alisar, Biharipura, Jaisinghpura were

selected randomly.

3.5 Selection of the farmers

The list of the bajra growing farmers in these six villages was

selected along with their size of operational holding were prepared with

the help of patwaries of the concerned villages. Next a combined list of

all the bajra growers was made in an ascending order of size of their

respective operational land holding. These bajra growers were

categorized into following four size groups.

(i) Small Less than 2 ha

(ii) Semi- medium 2-4 ha

(iii) Medium 4-10 ha

(iv) Large 10 ha and above

Finally, sixty Bajra growers were randomly selected in proportion to their

total number in each size of group for detailed investigation.

3.6 Selection of market

Two markets i.e. Chomu Krishi Upaj Mandi Samiti and Renwal

Krishi Upaj Mandi Samiti were selected for detail study.

3.7 Collection of data

Both primary and secondary Data were utilized in the study. The

primary data in respect of area under bajra crop and production of bajra,

sale pattern, costs incurred by the selected farmers in the sale of bajra

and sale price of the produce obtained by the farmers, costs incurred by

the wholesalers and retailers in purchase and sell of bajra, were

collected from the producers, wholesaler and retailers through the

personal interview method, with a set of well- structured schedules

specifically designed for the purpose of present study.

Secondary data in respect of monthly wholesale prices and

arrivals of bajra in the Chomu and Renwal market for the last eight years

were obtained from the records of the Krishi Upaj Mandi Samiti Chomu

and Krishi Upaj Mandi Samiti Renwal.

3.8 ANALYSIS OF DATA:

For achieving the stated objectives, following analytical procedure

was used.

3.8.1. To study the cost of cultivation of bajra

Cost concepts: The different cost concepts were worked out by

grouping the cost items as under:

Cost group Items of cost included

Cost A1 Sum of cost items 1 to 15 (From 10.8.2)

Cost A2 Cost A1 + rent paid for leased in land

Cost B1 Cost A1 + interest on fixed capital

Cost B2 Cost B1 + rent paid for leased in land + rental value of

Owned land

Cost C1 Cost B1 + value of family labour

Cost C2 Cost B2 + value of family labour

Cost C3 Cost C2 + cost of management i.e.10% of cost C2

The cost of cultivation of bajra crop was worked out by

considering the following cost items:

1. Value of hired human labour

2. Value of owned bullock labour

3. Value of hired bullock labour

4. Value of owned machine labour

5. Value of hired machine labour

6. Value of owned seed

7. Value of purchased seed

8. Value of owned farm yard manure

9. Value of purchased farm yard manure

10. Value of fertilizers and insecticides

11. Irrigation charges

12. Land revenue

13. Interest on working capital

14. Depreciation

15. Miscellaneous expenses

16. Rent paid for the leased in land

17. Interest on fixed capital

18. Rental value of owned land

19. Value of family labour

3.8.2 Interest on Working Capital

Interest on working capital was worked out for items like hired

human labour, bullock labour, machine labour, farm yard manure,

fertilizers and plant protection chemicals, seed and irrigation charges

for half the period of the crop season. Interest was charged at 12%

prevailing rates for a period of three months on the working capital.

3.8.3 Rental Value of Owned Land

It was calculated on the basis of prevailing rates in the sample

villages.

3.8.4 Depreciation -

Depreciation was computed on the items of fixed capital like farm

buildings, well & irrigation structure and machinery such as electric

motors, thresher and other items excluding tractor. Depreciation was

also be computed on minor agricultural implements used in crop

production. Depreciation on an asset was calculated using the formula ;

Purchase price of an asset – junk value

Depreciation = ---------------------------------------------------------------------

Number of useful years of life (expected life)

Total annual depreciation

Depreciation for crop ‘X’ = --------------------------- × Area under crop ‘X’

Total cropped area

3.8.5 Interest on Fixed Capital-

Interest on fixed capital was charged at 10% prevailing rates per

annum. Items on which interest was computed are the same as

included for calculation of depreciation. After calculating the total

interest, it was apportioned for the particular crop as per the method

used in apportioning of the depreciation.

3.8.6 Operational Cost (O.C.)-

It is the variable cost that varies with the level of production. It is

expressed as:

O.C. = Cost A1 – Land revenue – Depreciation + Family labour

cost

Overhead Cost (O.H.C.):-

It is the fixed cost which is incurred irrespective of the volume of

production. It is expressed as:

O.H.C. = Cost C2 – Operational cost

3.8.7 Cost of Production (per quintal)-

Cost of production was worked out with the help of following

formula:

Cost of cultivation – Value of by-product Cost of production = --------------------------------------------------- (per quintal) Quantity of main product

3.8.8 Farm Business Measures-

The various farm business measures was calculated as under

Gross Income (G.I.)-

It is the total value of main product as well as of by-

product.

G.I. = Qm × Pm + Qb × Pb

Where;

G.I. = Gross income

Qm = Quantity of main product

Pm = Price of main product

Qb = Quantity of by-product

Pb = Price of by-product

Farm Business Income (F.B.I)

The various farm business measures were calculated as under:

F.B.I. = Gross income – Cost A2

Return over variable cost = Gross income - Total variable cost

Family labour income = Gross income – Cost B2

Net income = Gross income – Total cost (Cost C2)

Return per rupee = Gross income / Total cost (Cost C2)

10.8.2 Studying of Marketing costs, Margins and Price Spread

Average Gross Margin– The average gross margin at each successive

level of marketing was worked out using the formula:

Total sale value- Total purchase value

Average gross margin = ---------------------------------------------

Quantity of the produce handled

Absolute margin - Absolute margin earned by a middleman was

calculated as:

Absolute margin = PRi - (PPi + CMi )

Where:

PRi = Total value of receipts per unit (sale price),

PPi = Total purchase value of goods per unit (purchase price),

and

CMi = Per unit cost incurred in marketing by middlemen.

Percentage margin - The percentage margin was calculated as:

PRi - (PPi + CMi )

Percentage margin = ----------------------------------------------X 100

PRi

Where:

PRi = Total value of receipts per unit (sales price),

PPi = Total purchase value of goods per unit (purchase price),

and

CMi = Cost incurred on marketing per units by middlemen.

Total cost of marketing – Total cost of marketing was calculated as

under:

C = CF + CM1 + CM2 + CM3 +CMi ................ + CMn

Where:

C = Total cost of marketing of the commodity,

CF = Cost borne by the producer-farmer from the

time at which the produce leaves the farm till

the sale of the produce,

CMi = Cost incurred by the ith middlemen in the

process of buying and selling.

Price- Spread – The breakup of costs, margin and share of the

producer- farmer and different middlemen was worked out in the

consumer’s price in simple percentage terms.

10.8.3. Relationship between arrivals and prices of bajra

The relationship between market arrivals and prices of bajra

crop in selected market were examined as under:

(1) To study the relationship between arrivals and prices.

(2) Correlation coefficient was worked out by using the formula.

XY ( X) ( Y)/N

r =

X2 – (X)2 Y2 – (Y)2

N N

Where,

r = Correlation coefficient between arrivals and prices (X) of bajra,

X = Prices in rupees per quintal,

Y= Arrivals in quintals,

N= Number of observation.

3.8.4 Problems faced by the bajra farmers

Technical, infra-structural, economics and social constraints were

studied in the study area.

(1) Technical constraints- Technical constraints means

impediments or restraints pertaining to know- how or skill in the

way of adoption of particular recommended production

technology.

(2) Infra- structural constraints- It has been defined those

impediments or restraints pertaining to organization in the way

of adopting of particular recommended production technology

and marketing operations.

(3) Economic constraints- It means the restraints pertaining to

finance, profitable operation, in the way of adopting of particular

recommended production technology and marketing operation.

(4) Social constraints- Social constraints mean the impediments

or restraints pertaining to society, habit and mental acceptance

in the way of adopting of particular recommended production

and marketing practices.

The interview schedule was specially prepared to find out the

constraints. The constraints expressed by the respondents were

categorized as technical, infra-structural, economic, social constraints on

basis of number of respondents facing particular constraints.

3.9 Limitations of the study

Though all possible efforts were made to make the study objective

and comprehensive, certain limitations did remain. The most

prominent limitations of the study are as under:

(i) The findings of the study arrived at on the basis of a particular

agricultural year 2012-13, may not stand true for the successive

years, mainly due to changes in the prices of inputs and outputs.

Hence the findings of the study depend upon the reliability of the

assumptions hypothesized in the study.

(ii) Lack of maintenance of records relating to inputs and outputs by

the farmers was another limitation. The data were collected

through survey method. The information provided by the farmers

was based entirely on their recall memory. Though, every effort

was made to elicit correct information, however, the chances of

error might be there due to forgetfulness. Hence the results of the

study are true to the extent the data are reliable.

Chapter –4

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

In this chapter, an attempt has been made to present the details

of costs and returns of bajra crop for the sample farmers of Jaipur

district. Production is normally considered the function of area and yield.

The decision regarding the choice of a crop enterprise to be taken on the

farm and the allocation of the area and the resources under it to a great

extent depends on the level of yield, price of output and the cost of

inputs used in the production of that enterprise. The cost of cultivation

/production and the returns to different factors of production help in

decision making about the selection of the enterprise, Therefore these

measures were also worked out for the bajra crop. The chapter has

been divided in to four sub-sections:

Section-4A Cost structure, and Returns from bajra cultivation

Section-4B Marketing costs, margin and price spread in marketing of

bajra crop.

Section-4C Relationship between market arrivals and prices of bajra in

Chomu and Renwal market

Section-4D Problems faced by the bajra producers.

Section 4 A

4A COST STRUCTURE

In the cultivation of bajra crop various cost are incurred. The

different cost groups and their components are presented below:

4A.1 Cost Group

Various types of costs incurred in the cultivation of bajra crop are

presented in Table 4A.1The overall cost of cultivation of bajra crop (cost

C3) was ` 10362.80 per hectare. The cost of cultivation of bajra was `.

10470.69, 10349.52, 10256.18 and 10184.35, in case of small, semi-

medium, medium and large size groups respectively. The operational

cost on small farms was higher due to more intensive use of human and

fertilizer, FYM as well as. Thus, the cost C3 was highest on small farms

followed by semi-medium, medium and large sized farms. It is clear from

the table that cost of cultivation of bajra decreased with the increase in

size of land holdings.

The operational cost exceed the overhead cost in all size groups

of farms, on an

average, the share of operational costs was 40.51 per cent of the total

cost (cost C3) for the sample farms. The operational cost was ` 3816.43

for the sample farms of the selected villages.

Overall, cost A1, A2, B1, B2, C1 and C2 were ` 3662.43, 3662.43,

4150.73, 8650.73, 4920.73 and 9420.73, respectively on the sample

farms. Cost A2 was equal to cost A1 on all the size groups of farms

because none of the sample farmers leased in any land for cultivation of

bajra in study area. Cost, A1, A2, B1 and C1 were found to decrease with

the increase in farm size.

Table 4A.1 Cost of cultivation of Bajra crop

(Rs/ ha)

Cost groups Size group

Small Semi-medium

Medium Large Overall

Operational cost

4155.81

3864.65

3424.80

3097.50

3816.43

Overhead cost

5363

5544

5899

6161

5604.30

A1 3641.81 3663.65 3702.80 3660.50 3662.43

A2 3641.81 3663.65 3702.80 3660.50 3662.43

B1 4018.81 4108.65 4323.80 4458.50 4150.73

B2 8518.81 8608.65 8823.80 8958.50 8650.73

C1 5018.81 4908.65 4823.80 4758.50 4920.73

C2 9518.81 9408.65 9323.80 9258.50 9420.73

C3 10470.69 10349.52 10256.18 10184.35 10362.80

4A. 2 Components of Operational Cost

Table 4A.2 shows various components of operational cost and

overhead cost incurred in the cultivation of bajra on sample farms of the

selected villages. It is clear from the table that human labour was an

important component of operational cost on sample farms. It accounted

for 18.79, 14.28, 9.42 and 6.24 per cent of the total cost on small, semi-

medium, medium and large farms, respectively. It was observed that the

share of human labour was maximum on small sized farms followed by

semi-medium, medium and large farms. The overall share of the human

labour was 14.35 per cent of the total cost. Its share was found to

decrease with the increase in size of land holdings.

FYM was another important component of the operational cost.

The cost of FYM was highest on small sized farms (10.27 per cent)

followed by semi-medium (8.06 per cent) followed by medium (4.99) and

large sized farms (2.70 per cent).Thus, the share of FYM was found

decrease with the increase in farm size.

Machine labour was another important component of the

operational cost. The share of machine labour in total cost ranged

between 5 to 9.85 per cent on different size group of farms. It was

observed that the share of machine labour was maximum on large farms

followed by medium farms followed by semi- medium and small farms.

The overall share of the machine labour was 6.49 per cent of the total

cost. Its share was found to increase with the increase in size of holding.

The share of fertilizer cost was 5.02 to 6.46 per cent different size

groups of farms with an average of 5.58 per cent. The fertilizer cost

showed positive relationship with the size of farms i.e. the cost of

fertilizer increase with the increase in farm size.

Table 4A.2 Operational and overhead costs and their components in cost of cultivation of Bajra crop on sample farms during 2012-13

(Rs /ha)

Costs Items Size groups Small Semi

medium Medium Large Overall

Human Labour 1789

(18.79

1344

(14.28)

878

(9.42)

578

(6.24)

1352.20

(14.35)

Machine labour 476

(5.00)

575

(6.11)

788

(8.45)

912

(9.85)

611.70

(6.49)

Seed 150

(1.58)

270

(2.87)

300

(3.22)

350

(3.78)

236.00

(2.51)

FYM 978

(10.27)

758

(8.06)

465

(4.99)

250

(2.70)

736.60

(7.82)

Fertilizer 478

(5.02)

525

(5.58)

588

(6.31)

598

(6.46)

526.10

(5.58)

Plant Protection Chemical

154

(1.62)

271

(2.88)

298

(3.20)

312

(3.37)

233.70

(2.48)

Interest on working capital

130.81

(1.37)

121.65

(1.29)

107.80

(1.16)

97.50

(1.05)

120.13

(1.28)

Total Operational costs

4155.81

(43.66)

3664.65

(41.08)

3424.80

(36.73)

3097.50

(33.46)

3816.43

(40.51)

Depreciation 456

(4.79)

569

(6.05)

748

(8.02)

833

(9.00)

586

(6.22

Rental value of owned land

4500

(47.27)

4500

(47.83)

4500

(48.26)

4500

(48.60)

4500

(47.77)

Land Revenue 30

(0.32)

30

(0.32)

30

(0.32)

30

(0.32)

30

(0.32)

Interest on fixed capital 377

(3.96)

445

(4.73)

621

(6.66)

798

(8.62)

488.30

(5.18)

Total Overhead costs 5363

(56.34)

5544

(58.92)

5899

(63.27)

6161

(66.54)

5604.30

(59.49)

Total Costs 9518.81

(100.00)

9408.65

(100.00)

9323.80

(100.00)

9258.50

(100.00)

9420.73

(100.00)

Seed was another important component of the operational cost

on sample farms. The share of seed cost in total cost was 1.58 to 3.78

per cent on different sized farms with an average of 2.51 per cent. The

seed cost was highest on large sized farms (3.78 per cent) and the

lowest on small sized farms (1.58 per cent) due to use of improved

variety of bajra seeds by large farmers.

Plant protection chemicals were another important component of

the operational cost. The share of plant protection chemical in total cost

ranged 1.62 to 3.37 per cent on different size group of farms with an

average of 2.48 per cent. The use of plant protection chemicals was

higher on large sized farms followed by medium farms followed by semi-

medium farms and small sized farms.

On an average interest on working capital accounted for 1.28 per

cent share, in the total cost. The share of interest on working capital

decreased with the increase in farm size.

4A.2 Component of Overhead Costs

The share of overhead cost components in total cost was 56.34 to

66.54 per cent on different size groups of farms with an average of 59.49

per cent. The share was highest on large size farms (66.54 per cent)

followed by medium (63.27 per cent) followed by semi-medium (58.92)

and small size farms (56.34 per cent). Thus, the share of overhead cost

increases with the increased in size of farm.

Rental value of owned land was the major component of the total

cost overall it shares was 47.77 per cent. Its share was 47.27, 47.82,

48.26 and 48.60 per cent, respectively on small, semi- medium, medium

and large farms. Thus, the share of rental value of owned land was

found to increase with the increase in farm size.

Depreciation was second important component of overhead cost

and overall it accounted for 6.22 per cent share in total cost. It showed

positive relationship with the size of farms i.e. the cost of this component

increased with the increase in the size of holding.

The overall share of interest on fixed capital in total cost was 5.18

per cent. Its shares also increased with the increase in farm size.

4A.3 Returns from cultivation of bajra crop

The per hectare returns from cultivation of bajra on different size

groups of farms have been presented in Table 4A.3

It is evident from the table that overall gross income per hectare

of bajra cultivation was ` 17967 on different size groups of farms. It was `

16025, 17490, 19875 and 23350, respectively, on small, semi- medium,

medium and large size farms. Thus, the gross income per hectare from

bajra cultivation was higher on large farms as compared to semi-

medium, medium and small sized farms. It was found to increase with

the increase in size of farms.

Farm business income is the disposable income obtained from a

crop. On an average, the farm business income from bajra cultivation

was ` 14304.57. Among different size groups of farms it varied from `

12383.19 on small farms, it to ` 19689.50 on large size farms. It was

observed that farm business income increased with increase in farm size

Table 4A.3 Returns from cultivation of Bajra crop on sample farms

during 2012-13

(In Rupees)

Particulars Size groups

Small Semi-medium

Medium Large Overall

Gross income 16025

17490

19875

23350

17967

Farm business

Income (per ha)

12383.19

13826.35

16172.20

19689.50

14304.57

Return over variable cost (per ha)

11869.19

13625.35

16450.20

20252.50

14150.57

Family labour income (per ha)

7506.19

8881.35

11051.20

14391.50

9316.27

Net income (per ha)

5554.31

7140.49

9618.82

13165.65

7604.20

Return per rupee 1.53

1.69

1.94

2.29

1.73

Cost of production (per quintal)

521.02

440.87

320.49

212.29

425.99

The overall return over variable cost per hectare of bajra

cultivation was ` 14150.57. Among different size groups of farms it was `

1186919, 13625.35, 16450.20 and 20252.50, respectively on small,

semi-medium, medium and large size farms.

The family labour income per hectare of bajra cultivation varied

from `7506.19 on small farms to ` 14391.50 on large sized farms .The

overall family labour income was worked out to be ` 9316.27 per

hectare. The family labour income per hectare increased with the

increase in the size of holding.

Net income is the pure profit per hectare of crop. This measure

was computed by deducting cost C3 (total cost) from the gross income.

The overall net income was ` 7604.20 per hectare. The net income was `

5554.31 per hectare on small size group and ` 13165.65 per hectare on

large size group. Thus, net income derived from the cultivation of bajra

increased with the increase in size of holdings.

The return per rupee was ` 1.53, 1.69, 1.94 and 2.29 on small,

semi-medium, medium and large sized groups of the farms, respectively.

On an average, return per rupee was ` 1.73. Thus return per rupee was

found to increase with the increase in the size of holdings. As per this

criterion, bajra cultivation on the sample farms of the study area was

found to be quite profitable crop enterprise.

It is revealed from the forgoing discussion that the per hectare

cost of production per quintal of bajra varied from ` 212.29 on large sized

farms to ` 521.02 on small sized farms with an overall average of `

425.99.

Human labour was important component of the operational cost

as it ranged from 6.24 to 18.79 per cent share in Overall total cost on

different sized farms was of 14.35 per cent and Overall cost A1, A2, B1,

B2, C1, and C2 were ` 3662.43, 3662.43, 4150.73, 8650.73, 4920.73 and

9420.73, per hectare, respectively.

All the costs except B2 were inversely related with the size of

holdings. The Overall production of bajra was ` 425.99 per quintal. It

ranged from ` 212.29 per quintal on large sized farms to ` 521.02 per

quintal on small sized farms. The cost of production per quintal was

found to decrease with the increase in size of farms.

The net income per hectare of bajra crop ranged from ` 5554.31

to ` 13165.65 on different sized farms. The highest returns were

obtained on large sized farms.

The return per rupee from bajra cultivation was highest (Rs 2.29)

on large sized farms and lowest on small sized farms (` 1.53) with an

average of ` 1.73. Thus bajra cultivation was found to be profitable crop

enterprise in the study area.

Section-B

Marketing of Bajra

Production of an agricultural commodity is complete only when it

reaches to the hands of those who need it, i.e., the consumers. All the

commodities may not be produced in all the areas, because of variation

in agro-climatic conditions. Hence, need arises due to for their

movement from producers to ultimate consumers. Here, an attempt

has been made to analyze the marketing channels and to estimate the

costs and margins and prices received by the various marketing

agencies and farmers involved in the marketing of bajra in the study

area.

4B.1 Marketing channels

A marketing channel is a route through which produce moves

from the producers to the ultimate consumers. The length of the channel

varies from commodity to commodity depending on the quantity of the

produce to be moved, the form of consumer demand and the degree of

regional specialization in the production. In the study area, farmers of

bajra were observed to adopt the only following channel in marketing of

bajra:

Channel-I Producer Village trader Wholesaler Retailer

Channel-II Producer Wholesaler- Retailer

Channel-III Producer Consumer

4B.2 Marketing costs

Following kinds of marketing costs were incurred by different

agencies including producer farmers engaged in the marketing of

barley in the study area:

(i) Transportation charges:

The cost of transportation was one of the major components of

the marketing costs. This cost varies with the distance between

producing point and selling point. In case of channel I (Table 4B.1),

they sold their produce to village traders at their shop who transported

it to the mandi for sale through the channel-I (i.e., producer village

trader wholesaler retailer). In this channel-I producer farmers and

village traders incurred on an average ` 8.56 and ` 15.23 per quintal on

transportation, respectively. In channel-II (i.e., producer wholesaler

retailer) the producer farmers incurred on an average ` 19.25 per

quintal brought the produce to the Krishi Upaj Mandi Chomu and

Renewal. Wholesalers and retailers the incurred on an average ` 13.58

and ` 8.90 per quintal as transportation charges, respectively. In

channel-III (i.e., producer consumer) the producer farmers sold their

produce to consumer at farm itself and the consumer incurred on

transportation charges on an average ` 33.63 per quintal.

(ii) Loading and unloading charges:

It is the payment made to the laboures for rendering services of

loading & unloading of produce. In case of channel I and II the average

loading charges paid by the village traders, wholesalers and retailers

were ` 5.00 per quintal. On an average unloading charges paid by

producer farmers, village traders, wholesalers and retailers were ` 3.75

per quintal each. Weighing charges were paid @ ` 2.5 per quintal.

(iii) Mandi fee:

It was collected by the Krishi Upaj Mandi Samiti for rendering

various services in the mandi area. The rate of mandi fee was ` 0.50

per ` 100 worth of produce and this cost was borne by the buyer.

(vi Commission charges:

In case of channel I and II commission charges were realized by

the commission agent at the rate of 2.0 per cent of the value of bajra

from the buyer of the produce.

Table: 4B.1 Marketing Charges in Sale of Bajra at Chomu and

Renewal Mandi

S.No. Particulars Unit Rate (Rs.)

Buyer by

1 Mandi fee Per 100

rupees worth of produce

0.50 Buyer

2 Commission Per 100 rupees worth of produce

2 Buyer

3 Labour charges for (a) cleaning and

filling of bags prior to sale

Per quintal 5.0 Seller

(b) Loading Per quintal 5.0 Buyer (c) Unloading Per quintal 3.75 Buyer (d) Weighing Per quintal 2.5 Buyer

4B.2 Marketing Costs Incurred In Chomu Market By Different

Agencies Are Discussed As Under:

4B.2.1 Costs of bajra marketing incurred in channel-I (village sale)

(Producer Village trader Wholesaler Retailer)

In this channel, producer sale their produce to village traders and

then to wholesalers through commission agents and finally to retailer

(Table 4B.2.1). It is obvious from the table that the total marketing costs

were ` 194.79 per quintal when producer farmers sold bajra through

channel-I (i.e., Producer farmer Village trader

WholesalerRetailer). Out of this ` 39.21 (20.13 per cent), ` 42.55

(21.84 per cent), ` 77.20 (39.63 per cent) and ` 35.83 (18.39 per cent)

were incurred by the producer farmers, village traders, wholesalers and

retailer, respectively. In this channel the wholesalers bore maximum

costs of marketing. The reason being that the commission charges, cost

of gunny bags, transportation and mandi fee were paid by wholesaler

individually, these cost items accounted for ` 19.13, ` 10, ` 13.58 and

4.78 of the total costs, respectively.

Table 4B.2.1: Marketing cost of bajra incurred in channel-I in

Chomu teshil of Rajasthan: 2012-13

(Rs/Q)

Particular of cost

Producer Village trader

Wholesaler Retailer Consumer Total marketing

cost

Transportation 8.56

(21.83) 15.23

(35.11) 13.58

(17.59) 8.90

(24.84) - 46.27

(23.75)

Loading 5.0

(12.75) 5.0

(11.75) 5.0

(6.48) 5.0

(13.59) - 20

(10.27)

Unloading 3.75

(9.56) 3.75

(8.81) 3.75

(4.86) 3.75

(10.47) - 15

(7.70)

Weighing 2.5

(6.38) 2.5

(5.88) 2.5

(3.24) 2.5

(6.98) - 10

(5.13)

Mandi fee - - 4.78

(6.19) - - 4.78

(2.45)

Commission - - 19.13

(24.78) - - 19.13

(9.82) Cost of gunny bag

5.0 (12.75)

5.0 (11.75)

10 (12.95)

-

- 20 (10.27)

Value of quantity loss

8.60 (21.93)

6.32 (14.85)

9.60 (12.44)

6.58 (18.36)

- 31.10 (15.97)

Sutli 0.5

(1.28) 0.5

(1.18) 0.5

(0.65) 0.5

(1.40) - 2.00

(1.03)

Miscellaneous 5.30

(13.52) 4.25

(9.99) 8.36

(10.83) 8.60

(24.00) - 26.51

(13.61)

Total 39.21

(14.12) 42.55

(27.01) 77.20

(45.07) 35.83

(13.79) - 194.79

(100) * Figures in parentheses are the percentages of respective column

totals.

Figures in square brackets are the percentages by total marketing

costs.

* Farmers purchased gunny bags @ ` 20/bag and sold it to the village

trader @ `15/bag and sold it to wholesaler 10/bag i.e., cost of gunny

bag borne by the farmer was `5/bag.

** Miscellaneous charges include cost of sutli, food, tea and mobile

charges

4B.2.2 Costs of bajra marketing incurred in channel-II (Mandi sale)

(Producer Wholesaler- Retailer)

This channel was the most common marketing channel adopted

by farmers in the study area. In this channel, producer farmers sold bajra

through the wholesalers of the mandi. Finally, these wholesalers stored

bajra for sale to the retailer at some later date. It was the most common

method of sale for bajra in the study area. In this channel, the producer

farmers took the produce to the Krishi Upaj Mandi Chomu and sold it to

the wholesalers through commission agents. The wholesalers sold it to

the retailer. The marketing cost incurred in movement of the produce

through this channel is presented in table 4B.2.2. Average marketing

cost was estimated at ` 164.39 per quintal when the producer farmer

sold bajra in the mandi through this channel. Out of this, ` 51.36, ` 77.20

and `35.83 were incurred by the producer farmer, wholesaler and

retailer, respectively which accounted for 31.21,46.96 and 21.80per cent

of the total costs of marketing of bajra in that order. Transportation

charges, value of quantity lost, miscellaneous charges, cost of gunny

bag and commission charges were the main items of cost for marketing

of bajra which, together accounted for 82.49 per cent of the total costs of

marketing. These cost items individually accounted for 25.38, 13.37,

13.09, 12.17 and 11.64 per cent, respectively.

Table 4B.2.2 Marketing cost of bajra incurred in channel-II in

Chomu teshil of Rajasthan: 2012-13

(Rs/Q)

Particular of cost

Producer Wholesaler Retailer Consumer Total marketing

cost

Transportation 19.25

(37.48) 13.58

(17.59) 8.90

(24.84) - 41.73

(25.38)

Loading 5.0

(9.74) 5.0

(6.48) 5.0

(13.59) - 15

(9.12)

Unloading 3.75

(7.30) 3.75

(4.86) 3.75

(10.47) - 11.25 (6.84)

Weighing 2.5

(4.87) 2.5

(3.24) 2.5

(6.98) - 7.50

(4.56)

Mandi fee 4.78

(6.19) - - 4.78

(2.91)

Commission - 19.13

(24.78) - - 19.13

(11.64) Cost of gunny bag

10.00 (19.47)

10 (12.95)

-

20 (12.17)

Value of quantity loss

5.80 (11.29)

9.60 (12.44)

6.58 (18.36) -

21.98 (13.37)

Sutli 0.5

(0.97) 0.5

(0.65) 0.5

(1.40) - 1.50

(0.91)

Miscellaneous 4.56

(8.88) 8.36

(10.83) 8.60

(24.00) - 21.75

(13.09)

Total 51.36 (100)

77.20 (100)

35.83 (100) -

164.39 (100)

* Figures in parentheses are the percentages of respective column totals.

Figures in square brackets are the percentages by total marketing costs.

* Farmers purchased gunny bags @ ` 20/bag and sold it to the wholesaler @ `10/bag i.e., cost of gunny bag borne by the farmer was `10/bag.

** Miscellaneous charges include cost of sutli, food, tea and mobile charges

4B.2.3 Costs of bajra marketing incurred in channel-III (Producer

Consumer)

In this channel barley moved from producer farmer to consumer

directly and no marketing costs were borne by producer farmer itself.

4B.3 Marketing costs, margins and price spread

Price spread refers to the difference between the price paid by

the final consumer and the price received by the producer farmer for an

equivalent quantity of farm produce. It is often known as farm retail

spread or price spread. It includes the costs incurred in moving the

produce from the point of production to the point of consumption and

profits realized in that process by different market functionaries

involved in the marketing of the product. The overall efficiency of

marketing system is judged by the extent of price spread. Price spread

in bajra in both the marketing channels is discussed below:

4B.3.1 Price spread in marketing of bajra in channel-I (Producer

Village Trader Wholesaler Retailer)

The price spread in marketing of bajra by the producer farmer at

village level to the village trader and then to the wholesaler and retailer

are presented in Table 4B.3.1. The producer's net share in consumers

rupee in the sale of bajra through the channel-I was ` 822.00 (66.66 per

cent). In this channel the village traders purchased bajra from the

producer-farmers at their own shop on an average price of ` 861.21 per

quintal. The village traders took it to the Krishi Upaj Mandi Chomu and

sold to the wholesaler through the commission agents at on average

price of ` 956.42 per quintal. In this channel of sale the producer farmers

and the village traders incurred on an average ` 39.21and ` 42.55 per

quintal as expenses, respectively. The village traders got a net margin of

` 52.66 per quintal. This accounted for 4.27 per cent of the consumer’s

price. Wholesalers purchased bajra at an average price of ` 956.42 per

quintal and sold it to the retailer at ` 1101.88 per quintals. The margin of

wholesalers in this process was ` 68.26 per quintal of bajra. Retailer

purchased bajra at an average price of ` 1101.88 per quintal and sold it

to the consumer at ` 1233.18 per quintals. The margin of retailer in this

process was ` 95.47 per quintal. Among the three market functionaries

present in channel-I retailers got the maximum margin due to sale of

bajra at high prices to the consumers in small quantity. The total

marketing costs incurred by various intermediaries constituted 15.80 per

cent of the consumer’s price. The price spread in this channel was `

411.18. Small producer farmers preferred to sell bajra in village to the

village traders because of their poor economic condition as well as small

quantity of produce available with them.

Table 4B.3.1 Price spread in marketing of bajra in channel-I in

chomu teshil of Rajasthan: 2012-13

S.No. Particulars Rs./ quintal Share in consumer’s rupee (in percentage)

1 Producer’s share 822 66.66

2 Cost incurred by - -

(a) Producer 39.21 3.18

(b) Village trader 42.00 3.45

(c) Whole sale 77.20 6.26

(d) Retailer 35.83 2.91

Total Total costs 194.79 15.80

3. Margin earned by

(a) Village trader 52.66 4.27

(b) Wholesaler 68.26 5.54

(c) Retailer 95.47 7.74

Total margin 281.00 17.55

4. Consumer’s price 1233.18 100.00

Price Spread 411.18

4B.3.2 Price spread in marketing of bajra in channel-II (Producer

Wholesaler Retailer)

The price spread in marketing of bajra in channel-II is presented

in Table 4B.3.2. In this channel; producer-farmers directly sold the

produce in the Chomu mandi to the wholesalers through commission

agents. The producer's net share in consumers rupee in the sale of

bajra through the channel-II was ` 905.06 (73.39 per cent). The

producer farmer cost incurred by the producer farmer was on an

average ` 51.36 per quintal of bajra before selling it to the wholesaler

at an average price of ` 956.42 per quintal. In this channel the

producer farmers and the wholesaler incurred on an average `51.36

and ` 77.20 per quintal as expenses, respectively. The wholesaler got

a net margin of ` 68.26 per quintal. This accounted for 5.54 per cent of

the consumer’s price. Retailer purchased bajra at an average price of `

1101.88 per quintal and sold it to the consumers at ` 1233.18 per

quintals. The margin of retailer in this process was ` 95.47 per quintal.

Among the two market functionaries present in channel-II retailers got

the maximum margin by the sale of bajra at high prices to the

consumers in small quantity. The total marketing costs incurred by

various intermediaries constituted 13.33 per cent of the consumer’s

price. The price spread in this channel was ` 328.12.

Table 4B.3.2 Price spread in marketing of bajra in channel-II in

chomu teshil of Rajasthan: 2012-13

S.No. Particulars Rs./ quintal Share in consumer’s

rupee (in percentage)

1 Producer’s share 905.06 73.39

2 Cost incurred by -

(a) Producer 51.36 4.16

(b) Wholesale 77.20 6.26

(c) Retailer 35.83 2.91

Total Total costs 164.39 13.33

3. Margin earned by

(a) Wholesaler 68.26 5.54

(b) Retailer 95.47 7.74

Total margin 163.73 13.28

4. Consumer’s price 1233.18 100

Price Spread 328.12

4B.3.3 Price spread in marketing of bajra in channel-III (Producer

Consumer)

In this channel, the consumer paid ` 855.63 per quintal of bajra

and producer got ` 855.63 per quintal, which accounted for cent per

cent of the consumer's rupee. There were no marketing costs incurred

by the producer farmer in this channel (Table 4B.3.3).

Table 4B.3.3 Price spread in marketing of barley in channel-III

(Producer Consumer)

S.No. Particulars `/quintal Share in consumer's rupee

(in percent)

1. Producer’s net share

855.63 100

2. Consumer’s price 855.63 100

4B.4 Marketing Costs Incurred In Renewal Market By Different

Agencies Are Discussed As Under:

4B.4.1 Costs of bajra marketing incurred in channel-I (village sale)

(Producer Village trader Wholesaler Retailer)

In this channel, bajra sold from producer farmers to village traders

and then to wholesalers through commission agents and finally to the

retailer (Table 4B.4.1). It is obvious from in this channel –I producer

farmer sold bajra total marketing costs were ` 189.44 per quintal. (i.e.,

Producer Village trader WholesalerRetailer). Out of this ` 34.68

(18.31 per cent), ` 47.48 (25.06 per cent), ` 75.03 (39.61 per cent) and `

32.25 (17.02 per cent) were incurred by the producer farmers, village

traders, wholesalers and retailer, respectively. In this channel the

wholesalers had borne maximum costs of marketing. The reason being

that the commission charges, cost of gunny bags, transportation and

mandi fee were paid by wholesaler individually, these cost items

accounted for ` 19.16, ` 10, ` 15.24 and 4.79 of the total costs,

respectively.

Table 4B.4.1: Marketing cost of bajra incurred in channel-I in Renewal teshil of Rajasthan: 2012-13

(Rs/Q)

Particular of cost Producer Village trader

Wholesaler Retailer Consumer Total marketing

cost

Transportation 9.12

(18.89) 18.25

(38.44) 15.24

(20.31) 9.36

(29.02) - 49.40

(26.08)

Loading 5.0

(14.42) 5.0

(10.53) 5.0

(6.66) 5.0

(15.50) - 20.00

(10.56)

Unloading 3.75

(10.81) 3.75

(7.90) 3.75

(5.00) 3.75

(11.63) - 15.00 (7.92)

Weighing 2.5

(7.21) 2.5

(5.27) 2.5

(3.33) 2.5

(7.75) - 10.00 (5.28)

Mandi fee - 4.79

(6.38) - - 4.79

(2.53)

Commission - - 19.16

(25.54) - - 19.16

(10.11)

Cost of gunny bag 5.0

(14.42) 5.0

(10.53) 10

(13.33) -

20.00 (10.56)

Value of quantity loss

4.88 (14.07)

8.23 (17.33)

7.25 (9.66)

6.58 (20.40) -

26.94 (14.22)

Sutli 0.5

(1.44) 0.5

(1.05) 0.5

(0.67) 0.5

(1.55) - 2.00

(1.06)

Miscellaneous 6.50

(18.74) 4.25

(8.95) 6.84

(9.12) 4.56

(14.14) - 22.15

(11.69)

Total 34.68

(100.00) 47.48

(100.00) 75.03

(100.00) 32.25

(100.00) - 189.44 (100)

* Figures in parentheses are the percentages of respective column totals. Figures in square brackets are the percentages by total marketing costs.

* Farmers purchased gunny bags @ ` 20/bag and sold it to the village trader @ `15/bag and sold it to wholesaler 10/bag i.e., cost of gunny bag borne by the farmer was `5/bag.

** Miscellaneous charges include cost of sutli, food, tea and mobile charges

4B.4.2 Costs of bajra marketing incurred in channel-II (Mandi sale)

(Producer Wholesaler- Retailer)

This channel was the most common marketing channel adopted

by farmers in the study area. In this channel, producer farmers sold bajra

through the wholesalers of the mandi. Finally, these wholesalers stored

bajra for sale to the retailer at some later date. It was the most common

method of sale for bajra in the study area. In this channel, the producer

farmers took the produce to the Krishi Upaj Mandi Chomu and sold it to

the wholesalers through commission agents. The wholesalers sold it to

the retailer. The marketing cost incurred in movement of the produce

through this channel is presented in table 4B.4.2. Average marketing

cost was estimated at ` 162.89 per quintal when the producer farmer

sold bajra in the mandi through this channel. Out of this, ` 55.61 ` 75.03

and `32.25 were incurred by the producer farmer, wholesaler and

retailer, respectively which accounted for 34.14, 46.06 and 19.80 per

cent of the total costs of marketing of bajra in that order. Transportation

charges, value of quantity lost, miscellaneous charges, cost of gunny

bag, commission charges and loading were the main items of the

marketing of cost bajra which, together accounted for 82.33 per cent of

the total costs of marketing. These cost items individually accounted for

25.62, 14.25, 11.52, 12.28, 11.76 and 9.21 per cent, respectively.

Table 4B.4.2 Marketing cost of bajra incurred in channel-II in

Renewal teshil of Rajasthan: 2012-13

(Rs/Q)

Particular of cost

Producer Wholesaler Retailer Consumer Total marketing

cost

Transportation 17.14

(30.82) 15.24

(20.31) 9.36

(29.02) - 41.74

(25.62)

Loading 5.0

(8.99) 5.0

(6.66) 5.0

(15.50) - 15

(9.21)

Unloading 3.75

(6.74) 3.75

(5.00) 3.75

(11.63) - 11.25 (6.91)

Weighing 2.5

(4.50) 2.5

(3.33) 2.5

(7.75) - 7.50

(4.60)

Mandi fee 4.79

(6.38) - - 4.79

(2.94)

Commission - 19.16

(25.54) - - 19.16

(11.76) Cost of gunny

bag 10.00

(17.98) 10

(13.33) -

20 (12.28)

Value of quantity loss

9.36 (16.83)

7.25 (9.66)

6.58 (20.40) -

23.19 (14.24)

Sutli 0.5

(0.90) 0.5

(0.67) 0.5

(1.55) - 1.50

(0.92)

Miscellaneous 7.36

(13.24) 6.84

(9.12) 4.56

(14.14) - 18.76

(11.52)

Total 55.61 (100)

75.03 (100.00)

32.25 (100.00) -

162.89 (100)

* Figures in parentheses are the percentages of respective column totals. Figures in square brackets are the percentages by total marketing costs. * Farmers purchased gunny bags @ ` 20/bag and sold it to the

wholesaler @ `10/bag i.e., cost of gunny bag was borne by the farmer i.e.`10/bag.

** Miscellaneous charges include cost of sutli, food, tea and mobile charges

4B.4.3 Costs of bajra marketing incurred in channel-III (Producer

Consumer)

In this channel barley moved from producer farmer to consumer

directly and no marketing costs were borne by producer farmer itself.

4B.5 Marketing costs, margins and price spread

Price spread refers to the difference between the price paid by

the final consumer and the price received by the producer farmer for an

equivalent quantity of farm produce. It is often known as farm retail

spread or price spread. It includes the costs incurred in moving the

produce from the point of production to the point of consumption and

profits realised in that process by different market functionaries

involved in the marketing of the product. The overall efficiency of

marketing system is judged by the extent of price spread. Price spread

in bajra in both the marketing channels is discussed below:

4B.5.1 Price spread in marketing of bajra in channel-I (Producer

Village Trader Wholesaler Retailer)

The price spread in marketing of bajra by the producer farmer at

village level to the village trader and then to the wholesaler and retailer

are presented in Table 4B.5.1. The producer's net share in consumers

rupee in the sale of bajra through the channel-I was ` 812 (64.47 per

cent). In this channel the village traders purchased bajra from the

producer-farmers at their own shop on an average price of ` 846.91 per

quintal. The village traders took it to the Krishi Upaj Mandi Renwal and

sold to the wholesaler through the commission agents at on average

price of ` 957.84 per quintal. In this channel of sale the producer farmers

and the village traders incurred on an average ` 34.68 and ` 47.48 per

quintal as expenses, respectively. The village traders got a net margin of

` 63.45 per quintal. This accounted for 5.04 per cent of the consumer’s

price. Wholesalers purchased bajra at an average price of ` 957.84 per

quintal and sold it to the retailer at ` 1122.32 per quintals. The margin of

wholesalers in this process was ` 89.45 per quintal of bajra. Retailer

purchased bajra at an average price of ` 1122.32 per quintal and sold it

to the consumer at ` 1259.82 per quintals. The margin of retailer in this

process was ` 105.25 per quintal. Among the three market functionaries

present in channel-I retailers got the maximum margin by the sale of

bajra at high prices to the consumers in small quantity. The total

marketing costs incurred by various intermediaries constituted 15.04 per

cent of the consumer’s price. The price spread in this channel was `

447.59. Small producer farmers preferred to sell bajra in village to the

village traders because of their poor economic condition as well as small

quantity of produce available with them.

Table 4B.5.1 Price spread in marketing of bajra in channel-I in

renewal teshil of Rajasthan: 2012-13

S.No. Particulars Rs./ quintal Share in consumer’s rupee (in percentage)

1 Producer’s share 812.23 64.47

2 Cost incurred by - -

(a) Producer 34.68 2.75

(b) Village trader 47.48 3.77

(c) Whole sale 75.03 5.96

(d) Retailer 32.25 2.56

Total Total costs 189.44 15.04

3. Margin earned by

(a) Village trader 68.45 5.04

(b) Wholesaler 89.45 7.10

(c) Retailer 105.25 8.35

Total margin 263.15 20.49

4. Consumer’s price 1259.82 100.00

Price Spread 447.59

4B.5.2 Price spread in marketing of bajra in channel-II (Producer

Wholesaler Retailer)

The price spread in marketing of bajra in channel-II is presented

in Table 4.13 In this channel of sale; producer-farmers directly sold the

produce in the Renwal mandi to the wholesalers through commission

agents. The producer's net share in consumers rupee in the sale of

bajra through the channel-II was ` 902.23 (71.62 per cent). The

producer farmer cost incurred on an average ` 55.61 per quintal of

bajra before selling it to the wholesaler at an average price of ` 957.84

per quintal. In this channel of sale the producer farmers and the

wholesaler incurred on an average `55.61 and ` 75.03 per quintal as

expenses, respectively. The wholesaler got a net margin of ` 89.45 per

quintal. This accounted for 7.10 per cent of the consumer’s price.

Retailer purchased bajra at an average price of ` 1122.32 per quintal

and sold it to the consumers at ` 1259.82 per quintals. The margin of

retailer in this process was ` 105.25 per quintal. Among the two market

functionaries present in channel-II retailers got the maximum margin

due to sale of bajra at high prices to the consumers in small quantity.

The total marketing costs incurred by various intermediaries

constituted 15.04 per cent of the consumer’s price. The price spread in

this channel was ` 357.59.

Table 4B.5.2 Price spread in marketing of bajra in channel-II in

renewal teshil of Rajasthan: 2012-13

S.No. Particulars `./ quintal Share in consumer’s

rupee (in percentage)

1 Producer’s share 902.23 71.62

2 Cost incurred by -

(a) Producer 55.61 4.41

(b) Wholesale 75.03 5.96

(c) Retailer 32.25 2.56

Total Total costs 162.89 12.93

3. Margin earned by

(a) Wholesaler 89.45 7.10

(b) Retailer 105.25 8.35

Total margin 194.70 15.45

4. Consumer’s price 1259.82 100

Price Spread 357.59

4B.5.3 Price spread in marketing of bajra in channel-III (Producer

Consumer)

In this channel, the price paied by consumer ` 843.55 per

quintal of bajra and producer got ` 843.55 per quintal, which accounted

for cent per cent of the consumer's rupee. There were no marketing

costs incurred by the producer farmer in this channel (Table 4B.5.3).

Table 4B.5.3 Price spread in marketing of barley in channel-III

(Producer Consumer)

S.No. Particulars `/quintal Share in consumer's rupee

(in percent)

1. Producer’s net share

843.55 100

2. Consumer’s price

843.55 100

From the above discussion, it could be concluded that the net

price received in the channel adopted by farmer was higher than that

realized in channel-I and channel-II and lower than channel-III.

The results presented in this sub-section are summarized as

under

1. Producer farmers adopted three channels for sale of bajra.

There was channel-I (Producer Village Trader Wholesaler

Retailer) for selling at village itself. Channel-II (Producer

Wholesaler Retialer) for selling at mandi and channel-III

(Producer Consumer) for selling the produce directly to the

consumer at farm itself.

2. The total marketing cost in selling of bajra was higher in

channel-I (` 289.14 per quintal) followed (` 264.46) in channel-II

because of involvement of intermediaries in the marketing

process. In channel-III there was no marketing cost. In case of

contract farmers it accounted to ` 89.91 per quintal.

3. Transportation charges, commission, value of quantity lost and

cost of gunny bag were the main items of costs.

4. There existed significant difference in the margins earned by

different market intermediaries. The village trader received 2.98

per cent (` 36.05 per quintal) share of the processor's rupee in

purchase of barley. The share obtained by the wholesaler was

9.86 per cent (` 118.88 per quintal). Among the functionaries,

wholesaler got the higher margin due to sale of barley at higher

prices to the processor.

5. The Produces share in the consumer’s rupee in sale of bajra at

Chomu and Renwal market has been 73.39 per cent and 71.62

per cent (Rs 905.06 per quintal and 902.23 per quintal). The

share and the net price received by the producer farmers in the

village sale is only 66.66 per cent and 64.47 per cent (Rs

822.00 per quintal and 812.23 per quintal). As such farmer got

low share in village sale process than that of Mandi sale.

Section-C

RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN MARKET ARRIVALS AND PRICES OF

BAJRA IN CHOMU AND RENEWAL MARKETS

The most important single factor responsible for wide fluctuations

in prices of agricultural commodities is the uncertainty of their supply.

The extent of variation in prices of crops brings effect on their production

and their market arrivals. In the peak season of production when arrivals

of produce in the market are high, prices generally prevail at low level.

When arrivals decreases with the advancement of the crop season,

prices of the crop ruled at high level. Both these situations affect the

farmer’s income. In the first case they get low income as major part of

the produce is disposed by the farmers in the peak production season to

meet their financial needs and also due to the poor holding capacity.

They cannot get the advantages of the second situation because the

produce available with them at this late stage is fairly in small quantity

with most of the farmers. This necessitates selecting of right time for

marketing the produce to get better prices and high income from the

crop output.

The study of behaviour of market arrivals and prices is important

to know the effect of market arrivals of the crop on prices of the crop in

different seasons of the year. Such studies are advantageous for the

producer-farmers in taking decisions regarding time of sale of their

output in the years to come. This also helps the market planners in

planning the size of the market and in creation of the necessary market

infrastructures for an efficient marketing in the area.

The relationship between market arrivals and prices of bajra in

the Chomu and Renwal market of Jaipur district has been examined

using monthly data on arrivals and prices of bajra obtained from the

records of Mandi samiti for the last 8 year i.e. 2005-06 to 2012-13.

The chapter has been divided in to three sub-selection as under:

4C.1 Pattern of market arrivals and price behaviour of bajra in Chomu

and Renwal market indifferent seasons of the year.

4C.2 Relationship between monthly arrivals and wholesale price of bajra

and

4C.3 Relationship between yearly arrivals and wholesale prices of bajra

4C.1 Seasonal Pattern of Market Arrivals and Prices of Bajra Crop

in Chomu and Renwal Markets

In this section, the intra-seasonal variations in arrivals and prices

have been examined.

4C.1.a Seasonal pattern of arrivals in Chomu market

The arrivals of bajra in different quarters of the year viz., peak,

mid, lean and off marketing seasons during the study period 2005-06

and 2012-13 in Chomu market is given in Table 4C.1.a.

About 55.88 to 74.04 per cent of total arrivals of bajra in the peak

quarter of the year during the study years. Arrivals of bajra were highest

in the peak quarter during 2009-10 (74.04 per cent) and lowest in year

2011-12 (55.88 per cent) with overall arrivals of bajra 62.72 per cent.

Arrivals ranged from 11.25 to 32.34 per cent in the second quarter (mid

season), highest arrivals were in this quarter during the year 2011-12

(32.34 per cent) and lowest arrivals in 2009-10 (11.25 per cent) with

overall arrivals of 20.47 per cent. In the lean period, arrivals ranged from

2.84 to 15.57 per cent with an overall of 8.48 per cent. In the fourth

quarter (off season), arrivals were 3.93 to 12.85 per cent of the total

arrivals with an overall of 8.32 per cent.

Table 4C.1.a Pattern of market arrival of bajra in different quarters

of the year during 2005-06 to 2012-13

(In quintals)

Year

I Quarter

(Peak)

(Oct.-Dec.)

II Quarter

(Mid)

(Jan.-Mar.)

III Quarter

(Lean)

(Apr.-Jun.)

IV Quarter

(Off)

(Jul.-Sep.)

Total

2005-06 45233

(65.64)

16294

(23.65)

3479

(5.04)

3899

(5.65)

68905

(100)

2006-07

77744

(63.15)

19415

(15.78)

11024

(8.95)

14920

(12.11)

123103

(100)

2007-08 84914

(59.99)

43870

(30.99)

6683

(4.72)

6089

(4.30)

141566

(100)

2008-09 125740

(57.78)

38523

(17.69)

25401

(11.68)

27982

(12.85)

217646

(100)

2009-10 239080

(74.04)

36356

(11.25)

9198

(2.84)

38273

(11.86)

322907

(100)

2010-11 122336

(64.71)

35007

(18.52)

21264

(11.24)

10437

(5.52)

189044

(100)

2011-12 157054

(55.88)

90898

(32.34)

22057

(7.84)

11048

(3.93)

281057

(100)

2012-13 121926

(58.45)

37606

(18.02)

32493

(15.57)

16586

(7.95)

208611

(100)

Overall 974027

(62.72)

317969

(20.47)

131599

(8.48)

129234

(8.32)

1552839

(100)

The pattern of arrivals of bajra in different quarters indicated that

about 62.72 per cent of the total arrivals were in the first quarter or peak

season i.e. immediately after the harvest of the crop within a period of 3

months. Arrivals decreased in the subsequent by season’s viz., in

second and third quarters of the year. Arrivals were less in the fourth

quarter compared to second and third quarters.

More than 83.19 per cent quantity of bajra arrived in the first two

quarters (with in six months) and only 16.81 per cent bajra arrived in the

other two quarters of the year.

4C.1.b Seasonal pattern of arrivals in Renwal market

The arrivals of bajra in different quarters of the year viz., peak,

mid, lean and off marketing seasons during the study period 2005-06

and 2012-13 in Renwal market is given in Table 4C.1.b

Arrivals of bajra were 44.86 to 70.67 per cent of total arrivals in

the peak quarters of the year during the study years. Arrivals in the peak

quarter were highest in year 2009-10 (70.67 per cent) and lowest in year

2011-12 (44.86 per cent) with overall arrivals of 52.55 per cent. Arrivals

ranged between 18.48 to 39.02 per cent in the second quarter (mid

season), highest arrivals in this quarter being in year 2010-11 (39.02 per

cent) and lowest arrivals in 2009-10 (18.48 per cent) with overall arrivals

of 27.58 per cent.

In the lean period, arrivals ranged between 2.39 to 25.13 per cent

with an overall of 13.12 per cent. In the fourth quarter (off season),

arrivals were 1.44 to 14.12 per cent of the total arrivals with an overall of

6.73 per cent.

The pattern of arrivals of bajra in different quarters indicated that

about 52.55 per cent of the total arrivals were in the first quarter or peak

season i.e. immediately after the harvest of the crop within a period of 3

months. Arrivals decreased in the subsequent by quarters viz., in second

and third quarters of the year. Arrivals were less in the fourth quarters

compared to second and third quarter.

Table 4C.1.b Pattern of market arrival of bajra in different quarters of the year during 2005-06 to 2012-13

(In quintal)

Year I Quarter (Peak) (Oct.-Dec.)

II Quarter (Mid) (Jan.-Mar.)

III Quarter (Lean) (Apr.-Jun.)

IV Quarter

(Off) (Jul.-Sep.)

Total

2005-06 76328

(59.45)

27580

(21.49)

6342

(4.94)

18128

(14.12)

128378

(100)

2006-07 63413

(70.67)

20461

(22.81)

2153

(2.39)

3700

(4.12)

89727

(100)

2007-08 52790

(44.86)

45472

(38.64)

11508

(9.78)

7897

(6.71)

117667

(100)

2008-09 99880

(51.42)

52450

(26.98)

25829

(13.28)

16280

(8.37)

194439

(100)

2009-10 33151

(51.42)

11918

(18.48)

16197

(25.13)

3200

(4.96)

64466

(100)

2010-11 97060

(56.69)

66789

(39.02)

4875

(2.84)

2465

(1.44)

171189

(100)

2011-12 124742

(47.04)

85196

(32.13)

43446

(16.38)

11773

(4.44)

265157

(100)

2012-13 115642

(50.16)

38109

(16.53)

55222

(23.95)

21547

(9.34)

230520

(100)

Overall 663006

(52.55)

347975

(27.58)

165572

(13.12)

84990

(6.73)

1261543

(100)

More than 80.13per cent quantity of bajra arrived in the first two

quarters (within six months) and only 19.87 per cent bajra arrived in the

other two quarters of the year.

4C.1.c Seasonal pattern in prices of bajra in Chomu market

The average seasonal prices and the percentage change over the

seasons have been presented in Table 4C.1.c.

The inter-seasonal variation in prices of bajra showed that prices

decreased in the second quarter (January-March) over the first quarter

(October-December) in one year and increased in seven years out of a

total of eight years study period. The increase in prices of bajra from first

to second quarter was maximum in year 2008-09 i.e. by 16.70 per cent.

Price were lowest increase from first to second quarter in year 2006-07

i.e. 1.70 per cent on the whole, prices were higher in the second quarter

over the first season by 9.70 per cent. Price was higher in the third

quarter (April to June) over the second quarter (October to December) in

three year and low in five year. The highest increase in prices from

second to the third quarter has been there in year 2010-11 by 19.40 per

cent. In five years viz., 2005-06, 2008-09, 2009-10, 2011-12 and 2012--

13 prices were lower in the third quarter over the second quarter. On the

whole, prices were lower in the third season over the second quarters by

only 4.40 per cent. Prices have shown increase in three year and

decreases in five years in the fourth quarter over the third quarter.

Table 4C.1.c Price of bajra in different quarter of the year in Chomu

market 2005-06 to 2012-13

(Rs./qtls)

Year I Quarter

(Oct.-Dec.)

II Quarter

(Jan.-Mar.)

III Quarter

(Apr.-Jun.)

IV Quarter

(Jul.-Sep.)

2005-06 716.60

713.30

(-0.4)

708.30

(-0.7)

661.30

(-6.6)

2006-07 660

671.60

(1.7)

696.60

(3.7)

666.60

(-4.3)

2007-08 586.60 625

(6.5)

650.60

(4.0)

600

(-7.7)

2008-09 663.30 758

(16.7)

646.60

(-14.6)

701

(8.4)

2009-10 870 950

(9.1)

916.60

(-3.5)

974.30

(6.2)

2010-11 731

810

(10.8)

967.60

(19.4)

993.30

(2.6)

2011-12 811 945

(16.5)

920

(-2.6)

890

(-3.2)

2012-13 1160

1333.30

(14.9)

995

(-25.3)

1175

(18.0)

Average 774.80 850.70

(9.70)

812.60

(-4.40)

832.60

(2.40)

The magnitude of increase in prices from third to fourth quarter

was (8.40) per cent in year 2008-09 in four years prices were lower in

the fourth quarter over the third quarter. From the results presented in

this section, it is in furred that farmers got 9.70 per cent higher price by

sale of bajra in the second over the sale in the post harvest quarter. The

carrying of bajra to the third and fourth quarter of the year is not

advantageous.

4C.1.d Seasonal pattern in prices of bajra in Renewal market

The average seasonal prices and the percentage change over the

quarters have been presented in Table 4C.1.d

The inter-seasonal variation in prices of bajra showed that prices

decreased in the second quarter (January-March) over the first quarter

(October-December) in one year and increased in seven years out of a

total of eight years study period. The increase in prices of bajra from first

to second quarter was maximum in year 2008-09 i.e. by 18 per cent. The

lowest increase in price from first to second quarter was in year 2006-07

i.e. 0.50 per cent on the whole, prices were higher in the second quarter

over the first quarter by 8.11 per cent. Price was higher in the third

quarter (April to June) over the second quarter (October to December) in

four year and low in four year. The highest increase in prices from

second to the third quarter has been there in year 2010-11 by 16.80 per

cent. In four years viz., 2005-06, 2008-09, 2009-10 and 2012-13 prices

were lower in the third quarter over the second quarter. On the whole,

prices were lower in the third quarter over the second quarter by only

4.80 per cent. Prices have shown increase in one year and decreases in

seven years in the fourth quarter over the third quarter. The magnitude

of increase in prices from third to fourth quarter was (13.90) per cent in

year 2012-13 in seven year prices were lower in the fourth quarter over

the third quarter. From the results presented in this section, it is in furred

that farmers got 8.11 per cent higher price by sale of bajra in the second

over the sale in the post harvest season. The carrying of bajra to the

third and fourth quarter of the year is not advantageous.

Table 4C. 1. d Price of bajra in different quarter of the year in renwal market during 2005-06 to 2012-13

(Rs./ qtls)

Year I Quarter

(Oct.-Dec.)

II Quarter

(Jan.-Mar.)

III Quarter

(Apr.-Jun.)

IV Quarter

(Jul.-Sep.)

2005-06 693.30

691.60

(-0.2)

673.60

(-2.6)

648.30

(-3.7)

2006-07 683.60 687.30

(0.5)

708.60

(3.0)

651.30

(-8.1)

2007-08 589.30 625.60

(6.1)

679

(8.5)

623.30

(-8.2)

2008-09 662 781.30

(18.0)

660.30

(-15.4)

689

(4.3)

2009-10 982 990

(0.8)

927.60

(-6.3)

913.60

(-1.5)

2010-11 740 798.60

(7.9)

933.30

(16.8)

904

(-3.1)

2011-12 796 927.60

(16.5)

928.60

(0.1)

860.30

(-7.3)

2012-13 1166.60

1323.30

(13.43)

983.30

(-25.6)

1120

(13.9)

Average 789.10 853.10

(8.11)

811.70

(-4.80)

801.20

(-1.20)

4C.2 Relationship between Monthly Arrivals and Wholesale Prices

of Bajra

The monthly arrivals and average monthly wholesale prices of

bajra during the period 2005-06 to 2012-13 is presented in Table 4C.2.1.

The monthly arrivals data showed that there has been continuous

decrease from February to August months and increase from September

till January month in the chomu and renewal market.

Arrivals were higher in chomu and renewal market in months of

September to November due to arrivals of new crop. In chomu and

renewal market prices have shown on increase during February to

August and decrease from September to December but increase in

January month. The relationship between arrivals and average monthly

wholesaler prices is depicted through figures 4C.Iand 4C. II.

Table 4C.2.1 Monthly market arrivals and monthly wholesale prices of bajra in Chomu and Renewal market during 2005-06 to 2012-13

Months Chomu Market Renewal Market

Arrivals Prices Arrivals Prices

October 37895.62 748.50 25101.00 756.12

November 53665.00 768.75 30754.37 800.70

December 30192.75 807.50 27020.37 810.50

January 17513.25 839.25 17951.87 842.75

February 12153.37 850.60 13091.62 854.50

March 10079.50 885.87 12449.62 862.37

April 7285.37 814.62 8268.62 814.00

May 5872.62 826.00 7210.25 822.00

June 3291.87 797.50 5217.62 799.50

July 3157.50 844.87 3557.37 833.87

August 1999.25 873.62 3124.75 813.37

September 10997.50 779.75 3936.00 756.50

The relationship between market arrivals and wholesale prices of

bajra in different months of the year was also examined by working out

the simple correlation coefficients. The correlation coefficients were

worked out firstly between wholesale prices and arrivals of the crop in

the corresponding months and secondly between wholesales prices and

arrivals of the crop in the subsequent months. The correlation

coefficients between average wholesale prices and market arrivals in the

corresponding months and also between the prices and arrivals in the

subsequent months has been presented in Table 4C.2.2

The value of correlation coefficient between monthly wholesale

prices and arrivals of bajra in chomu and renewal market in the

corresponding months and in the subsequent months were – 0.675, -

0.520 and -0.677,-0.490, respectively.

Table 4C.2.2 Correlation Co-efficient Between Monthly Arrivals and

Wholesale Prices of Bajra during the Period 2005-06 to

2012-13

S. No

Particulars Correlation Co-efficient (r)

Chomu Market Renewal Market

1 Correlation Co-efficient

between wholesale prices and

arrivals of bajra in the

corresponding months

-0.675* -0.520 NS

2 Correlation Co-efficient

between wholesale prices and

arrivals of bajra in the

subsequent months

-0.677* -0.490 NS

*Significant at 0.05 per cent level (2 tailed)

NS Non Significant

The negative sign of correlation coefficient between the arrivals

and wholesale prices indicated the existence of inverse relationship in

them. Further, the prices prevailing in a month in general luring effect on

the arrival of the output in the subsequent months rather than in the

same month and thus the second type of relationship is more important

in taking of decisions of timing of sale of bajra crop.

In decision making, the study of the relationship in prices and

arrivals of the crop in the subsequent months has been more useful to

the producer-farmers because farmer producer’s lake decision for the

sale of the crop based on today’s price in the market with the hope that

today’s price will prevail farm arrow also.

4C.3 Relationship between Yearly Arrivals and Wholesale Prices

of Bajra

The relationship in the monthly arrivals and prices is not a true

reflector of the relationship between the two because of the wide

variations in arrivals and prices from month to month due to the

exogenous factors i.e. temporary increase in demand or decrease in

supply of the output. The correlation coefficients between yearly prices

and arrivals of bajra during the period 2005-06 to 2012-13 for chomu

and renewal markets were presented Table-4C.3.

Table 4C.3 Correlation co-efficient between yearly wholesale prices

and arrivals of bajra in Chomu and Renwal market:

during 2005-06 to 2009-10

Years Correlation co-efficient (r)

Chomu Market Renwal Market

2005-06 0.316 0.424

2006-07 -0.518 -0.088

2007-08 -0.449 -0.535

2008-09 -0.354 -0.050

2009-10 -0.515 0.269

2010-11 -0.784 -0.873

2011-12 -0.422 -0.238

2012-13 -0.029 -0.081

Prices of bajra were negatively correlated with market arrivals in

seven years and positively correlated in one year out of the five years

study period of 2005-06 to 2012--13.

The overview of the results presented in this chapter reveals that:

1. The pattern of market arrivals of bajra in different season

indicated that 62.72 per cent in chomu and 52.55 per cent in

renewal markets arrivals were there in the first season. The

arrivals were only 20.47, 8.48 per cent in chomu and 27.58,

13.12 per cent in renewal market of the second and third

seasons. The arrivals of bajra have been almost 62.72 and

52.55 per cent of the total annual arrivals in the first peak

season. The arrivals were low in the second and third

seasons fourth season is also low in second and third

season.

2. Prices of bajra were higher in the second season by 9.70

and 8.11 per cent over the first season in the chomu and

renewal market. Prices were law by -4.40 percent, 2.40 in

the third and fourth season over the second season in

chomu market and -4.80 per cent,-1.20 per cent in renewal

market. Thus farmers got 9 per cent higher prices by sale of

bajra in the second season over the first season (post

harvest sale). It is not advantageous to early the bajra

produce to the third and fourth season of the year.

3. There existed inverse relationship between prices and

arrivals of bajra in the corresponding as well as in

subsequent months. The higher negative value of correlation

coefficient for subsequent months compared to the

corresponding months explains that the effect of prices

arrivals has been more pronemeed in the subsequent

months.

4. The correlation in yearly prices and arrivals of bajra were

negative in seven years and positive in one year. It reveals

that prices of bajra are not only affected by arrivals but are

also affected by other factors viz., demand, export potential

and seasonality of the crop etc.

Section-D

PROBLEMS FACED BY THE BAJRA PRODUCERS

In this section an attempt has been made to identify the problems

faced by bajra growers in the production and marketing of bajra in

chomu & renewal tehsils of Jaipur district. The problems responsible

were divided into the following four categories:-

1. Technical

2. Economic

3. Infrastructural

4. Social

1. Technical problems

Technical constraints are the lack of know-how or skill required

for adoption of particular recommended production and marketing

technology. The table 4D.1 shows 3 technical problems in production

and marketing of bajra. The problems faced by sample farmers were the

lack of technical knowledge about bajra cultivation reported by 60 per

cent from total farm groups. Out of which 62.50 per cent of small, 66.67

per cent semi-medium and 58.33 per cent of medium farmers faced this

problem. Large farmers did not face the problem related to cultivation of

bajra. Bajra crop is labour intensive and required both skilled and

unskilled labour. The study revealed that 100 per cent of the total

selected bajra growers were faced by this problem. Out of which 100,

100,100 and 100 per cent of small, semi-medium, medium and large

farmers, respectively faced this problem in the study area. About 58.34

per cent farmers reported that there was lack of recommended doses of

manures of bajra cultivation. Out of which 75 per cent of small farmers,

61.11per cent of semi-medium and 50 per cent of medium farmers faced

this problem.

Table 4D.1 Technical problems in production and marketing of

bajra faced by the sample farmers

S.N. Problems Number of farmers reporting the

problems

Small

N=24

Semi-

medium

N=18

Medium

N=12

Large

N=6

All

farmers

N=60

1. Lack of

technical

knowledge

about bajra

cultivation

16

(62.50)

12

(66.67)

7

(58.33)

- 35

(60.00)

2. Lack of

technical

persons

regarding

bajra

cultivation

18

(75.00)

11

(61.11)

6

(50.00)

- 35

(58.34)

3. Lack of

recommended

doses of

manures

24

(100)

18

(100)

12

(100)

6

(100)

60

(100)

Figures in parentheses are the percentage of total number of farmers

(N) in each category

2. Infrastructural problems

Infrastructural problems have been defined as problems

pertaining to organization in production and marketing of bajra. Table

4D.2 revealed 7 infrastructural problems in production and marketing of

bajra. Among these, short supply of labourers was more acute on all

size groups of farms and cent per cent farmers were affected by these

problems in the study area.

Table 4D.2 Infrastructural problems in production and marketing of

Bajra faced by the sample farmers

S.N. Problems Number of farmers reporting the problems

Small N=24

Semi-medium

N=18

Medium N=12

Large N=6

All farmers

N=60 1. Difficulties in

purchasing inputs from market and cooperative societies

11 (45.00)

10 (55.55)

5 (41.67)

- 24 (40.00)

2. Lack of improved seed in sowing time

20 (83.33)

10 (55.55)

6 (50.00)

- 36 (60.00)

3. Distance of market

6 (25.00)

- - - 6 (25.00)

4. Shortage of laboures

21 (87.51)

15 (88.88)

10 (91.66)

5 (83.34)

51 (85.00)

5. Lack of transportation means

19 (79.16)

14 (77.77)

9 (75.00)

5 (83.34)

44 (73.34)

6 Lack of road facilities

18 (75.00)

13 (72.72)

8 (66.67)

4 (66.67)

44 (73.34)

7. Lack of storage facilities

16 (66.67)

8 (44.45)

7 (58.33)

3 (50.00)

34 (56.65)

Figures in parentheses are the percentage of total number of farmers

(N) in each category

About 60 per cent farmers reported that Lack of improved seed in

sowing time. Out of these small farmers (83.33 per cent), semi-medium

(55.55 per cent) and medium (50 per cent of total selected) farmers

faced this problem. Large farmers did not face the problem related to

cultivation of bajra About 25 per cent of total small farmers in the study

area reported that market distance is too long. Semi-medium, medium

and large farmers did not face the problem related to cultivation of bajra

About 73.34 per cent farmers (79.16 per cent) small farmers,

77.77 per cent of semi- medium, 75 per cent medium and 83.34 per cent

of large reported the problem of lack of transportation means. The

problem of lack of storage facilities was reported by 56.65 per cent of

total selected (66.67 per cent of small, 44.45 per cent of semi-medium,

58.33 per cent of medium and 50 per cent of large) farmers in the study

area.

3. Economical problems

These problems related to the finance and profitable operations

were found to be 5 in numbers (Table 4D.3). Economic problems

included lack of credit facilities, cost of improved variety seed is high,

marketing cost of bajra is high, prices of bajra are low were more acute

faced by cent per cent farmers of all size groups in the study area.

Problems like lack of credit facilities reported by (63.33 per cent) 75 per

cent of small farmers, 55.55 per cent of semi-medium, 50 per cent of

medium farmers and 50 per cent of large farmers of study area.

About 100 per cent farmers reported the problem of high cost of

improved variety, high cost of transportation of bajra and price of bajra is

low. The problem of high cost of marketing of bajra was faced by 33.34

per cent farmers (out of which 33.34 per cent of small, 38.88 per cent of

semi-medium and 41.66 per cent of medium farmers).

Table 4D.3. Economic problems in production and marketing of

bajra faced by the sample farmers

S. No.

Problems Number of farmers reporting the problems

Small N=24

Semi-medium

N=18

Medium N=12

Large N=6

All farmers

N=60 1. Lack of credit

facilities

18

(75.00)

10

(55.55)

6

(50.00)

3

(50.00)

38

(63.33)

2. High cost of

improved

variety

24

(100)

18

(100.00)

12

(100.00)

6

(100.00)

60

(100.00)

3. Cost of

transportation

of bajra is

high

24

(100)

18

(100.00)

12

(100.00)

6

(100.00)

60

(100.00)

4. Marketing

cost of bajra

is high

8

(33.34)

7

(38.88)

5

(41.66)

-

20

(33.34)

5. Prices of

bajra are low

24

(100)

18

(100.00)

12

(100.00)

6

(100.00)

60

(100.00)

Figures in parentheses are the percentage of total number of farmers

(N) in each category

4. Social problems

These problems related to the social customs, habits and mental

acceptance in the production and marketing of bajra were included in

this section. Table 4D.4 revealed 2 social problems. Among these fear of

thieves and stray animals prohibits farmers to take bajra crop were more

acute and faced by cent per cent farmers of all the groups in the study

area. Low consumption tendency of bajra in study area was reported by

51.67 per cent of total selected farmers. Out of which 50 per cent of

small farmers, 55.55 per cent semi-medium farmers, 58.34 per cent of

medium farmers and 33.34 per cent of large farmers.

Table 5D.4 Social problems in production and marketing of bajra

faced by the sample farmers

S. No.

Problems Number of farmers reporting the problems

Small N=24

Semi-medium

N=18

Medium N=12

Large N=6

All farmers

N=60 1. Fear of thieves

and stray animals prohibits farmers to take bajra crop

10 (41.17)

5 (27.78)

3 (25.00)

2 (33.34)

20 (33.34)

2. Low consumption tendency of bajra in study area

12 (50.00)

10 (55.55)

7 (58.34)

2 (33.34)

31 (51.67)

Figures in parentheses are the percentage of total number of farmers

(N) in each category

Chapter–5

SUMMARY, CONCLUSIONS AND SUGGESTIONS

5.1 INTRODUCTION

Bajra (Pearlmillet) belongs to family Gramineae. It is a tropical

crop. It is widely grown in Africa and Asia. The important bajra growing

countries are India, China, Nigeria, Pakistan, Sudan, Egypt, Arabia and

Russia.

In India bajra is the important cereal crop next to rice and wheat.

The total foodgrains area in india was 126.74 million hectares with

production of about 257.4 million tonnes during the year 2011-12. The

major bajra growing states of the country are Rajasthan, Uttar Pradesh,

Maharashtra, Gujrat and Haryana. There states together account for

87% of the total area and 73% of the total production. Rajasthan

occupies first place in area as well as production. The state produced

6.43 lakh tonnes of bajra grain on 4.98 lakh hectares area with

productivity of 1,290 kg/hectare during the year 2011-12.

In Rajasthan the important bajra growing districts are Barmer,

Jodhpur, Nagaur, Alwar and Jaipur. Barmer district occupies the first

place in terms of area and Nagaur district in terms of production of bajra.

Jaipur district is one of the major bajra growing districts of

Rajasthan. This district produced 4.94 lakh tonnes of bajra grain on 3.17

lakh hectares area with productivity of 1,558 kg/ha during the year 2011-

12.

5.2 METHODOLOGY:

The study was confined to Jaipur district of Rajasthan which was

selected purposively for the study. This district was one of the major

bajra growing districts of Rajasthan.

Chomu and Renwal tehsils of Jaipur district were selected

randomly for the study. A list of villages selling bajra was obtained from

the secretaries of Krishi Upaj Mandi Samiti, Renwal and Chomu who

sold their produce in there mandies. Based on the information of

maximum production and sale of bajra, six villages namely Rampura,

Malikpura, Luniyawas, Alisar, Biharipura and Jaisinghpura were selected

randomly. Lists of bajra growing farmers of these six villages along with

their size of operational holding were prepared with the help of patwaries

of the concerned villages. Then a combined list of all the bajra growers

was prepared in an ascending order of the size of their respective

operational land holdings these were then divided to in four size group

viz., small, semi- medium, medium and large. Finally, a sample of 60

bajra growing farmers was randomly selected in proportion to their total

number in each size group. Two markets, i.e.; Chomu Krishi Upaj Mandi

Samiti and Renwal Krishi Upaj Mandi Samiti were selected for studying

the relationship between arrivals and prices of bajra.

Both primary and secondary data were used in the study. The

primary data in respect of area under bajra crop and production of bajra,

sale pattern, costs incurred by the selected farmers in the sale of bajra

and sale price of the produce obtained by the farmers, costs incurred by

the wholesalers and retailers in purchase and sell of bajra , were

collected from the producers, wholesaler and retailers through personal

interview method, with a set of well- structured schedules specifically

designed for the study.

Secondary data in respect of monthly wholesale prices and

arrivals of bajra in Chomu and Renwal markets for the last six years

were obtained from the records of the Krishi Upaj Mandi Samiti, Chomu

and Krishi Upaj Mandi Samiti, Renwal.

5.3 RESULTS

The summarized results of the study are presented under the

following sub-heads:

5.3.1 Costs of and returns from cultivation of bajra crop:

The study results revealed that the per hectare cost of cultivation

of bajra varied from Rs 10470.69 to Rs 10184.35 and that of production

per quintal from ` 212.29 on large sized farms to ` 521.02 on small sized

farms with an overall average of ` 425.99 per quintal, respectively.

Human labour was important component of the operational cost

as it ranged from 6.24 per cent to 18.79 per cent share in Overall total

cost on different sized farms was of 14.35 per cent and overall cost A1,

A2, B1, B2, C1, and C2 were ` 3662.43, 3662.43, 4150.73, 8650.73,

4920.73 and 9420.73, per hectare, respectively.

All the costs except B2 were inversely related with the size of

holdings. The overall cost of production of bajra was ` 425.99 per

quintal. It ranged from ` 212.29 per quintal on large sized farms to `

521.02 per quintal on small sized farms. The cost of production per

quintal was found to decrease with the increase in size of farms.

The net income per hectare of bajra crop ranged from ` 5554.31

to ` 13165.65 on different sized farms. The highest returns were

obtained on large sized farms.

The return per rupee from bajra cultivation was highest (Rs 2.29)

on large sized farms and lowest on small sized farms (` 1.53) with an

average of ` 1.73. Thus bajra cultivation was found to be a profitable

crop enterprise in the study area.

5.3.2 Costs and margins in marketing of bajra

The total marketing cost of bajra was higher in channel-I (`

194.79 per quintal for chomu farmers and 189.44 per quintal for

renewal farmers) followed by channel-II (` 164.39 per quintal for chomu

farmers and 162.89 per quintal for renewal farmers) because of

involvement of intermediaries in the marketing process. In channel-III

there was no marketing cost.

In channel-I adopted by bajra growing farmers chomu KUMS out

of total costs, ` 39.21 (14.12 per cent), ` 42.55 (27.01 per cent). ` 77.20

(45.07) and ` 35.83 (13.79 per cent) were incurred by the producer

farmers, village traders wholesalers and retailer, respectively. In this

channel the wholesalers bore maximum costs of marketing in chomu

market. The reason being that the commission charges and mandi fee

were paid by wholesalers.

In channel-I adopted by bajra growing farmers of renewal KUMS

out of total costs, ` 34.68 (18.31 per cent), ` 47.48 (25.06 per cent). `

75.03 (39.61) and ` 32.25 (17.02 per cent) were incurred by the

producer farmers, village traders wholesalers and retailer, respectively.

In this channel the wholesalers bore maximum costs of marketing in

renewal market. The reason being that the commission charges and

mandi fee were paid by wholesalers.

In channel-II, ` 51.36, ` 77.20 and ` 35.83 were incurred by the

producer farmer, wholesaler and the retailer, respectively which

accounted for 31.24,47.01 and 21.66 per cent of the total costs of

marketing of bajra in chomu market. Transportation charges, cost of

gunny bag , value of quantity lost and cost of gunny bag were the main

items of cost for marketing of bajra in chomu market.

In channel-II, ` 55.61, ` 75.03 and ` 35.25 were incurred by the

producer farmer, wholesaler and the retailer, respectively which

accounted for 34.14,46.06 and 19.79 per cent of the total costs of

marketing of bajra in renewal market. Transportation charges, cost of

gunny bag , value of quantity lost and cost of gunny bag were the main

items of cost for marketing of bajra in renewal market.

In the channel-III bajra moved from producer farmer to

consumer directly and no marketing costs were borne by producer

farmer itself.

There existed significant difference in the margins earned by

different market intermediaries. The village trader had 4.27 per cent (`

52.66 per quintal) share in the consumers rupee in purchase of bajra in

Chomu market. The share obtained by the wholesaler was 5.54 per

cent (` 68.26 per quintal) and that of retailer was 7.74 per cent (95.47

per quintal). Among the functionaries, retailer got the higher margin

due to sale of bajra at higher prices to the consumer.

There existed significant difference in the margins earned by

different market intermediaries. The village trader had 5.04 per cent (`

68.45 per quintal) share in the consumers rupee in purchase of bajra in

Renewal market. The share obtained by the wholesaler was 7.10 per

cent (` 89.45 per quintal) and retailer was 8.35per cent (105.25 per

quintal). Among the functionaries, retailer got the higher margin due to

sale of bajra at higher prices to the consumer.

Producers got a share of 66.66 per cent in the price paid by

consumers in the sale of bajra at village and 73.39 per cent in the sale

directly in the Chomu market. Thus, the net price received by the

producer farmers is higher by 6.73 per cent in sale of bajra in the Mandi

than at village.

Producers got a share of 64.47 per cent in the price paid by

consumers in the sale of bajra at village and 71.62 per cent in the sale

directly in Renewal market. Thus, the net price received by the producer

farmers was higher by 7.15 per cent in sale of bajra in the Mandi than at

village.

5.3.3 Market arrivals and prices of bajra

The pattern of market arrivals of bajra in different quarter

indicated that 62.72 per cent of market arrivals in Chomu and 52.55 per

cent in Renewal were there in the first quarter. The arrivals in second

and third quarter were only 20.47, 8.48 per cent in chomu and 27.58,

13.12 per cent in Renewal market, respectively. The arrivals of bajra in

Chomu and renewal mandi were maximum in the first peak season. The

arrivals were low in the subsequent season. Prices of bajra were higher

in the second quarter by 9.70 and 8.11 per cent over the first quarter in

Chomu and Renewal market. Prices were law by -4.40 percent, 2.40 in

the third and fourth quarters over the second quarter in Chomu market

and by -4.80 per cent and -1.20 per cent in Renewal market. Thus

farmers got 9 per cent higher prices by sale of bajra in the second

quarter over the first quarter (post harvest sale). It is not advantageous

to early the bajra produce to the third and fourth quarter of the year.

There existed inverse relationship between prices and arrivals of bajra in

the corresponding as well as in subsequent months. The higher negative

value of correlation coefficient for subsequent months compared to the

corresponding months explains that the effect of prices on arrivals was

more propounded in the subsequent months. The correlation in yearly

prices and arrivals of bajra were negative in seven years and positive in

one year. It reveals that prices of bajra are not only affected by arrivals

but are also affected by other factors viz., demand, export potential and

seasonality of the crop etc.

5.3.4 Problems faced by the bajra producers

Results of opinion survey under taken to know the problems

faced by the farmers in production and marketing of bajra revealed that

lack of technical knowledge about bajra cultivation, lack of technical

persons regarding bajra cultivation were the technical problems faced by

majority of sample farmers, Short supply of labourers, lack of storage

facilities, lack of improved seeds in sowing time were the infrastructural

problems faced by the farmers. High cost of improved variety seeds,

higher marketing cost of bajra, low price of bajra were the major

economic problems faced by majority of sample farmers. Fear of thieves

and stray animals prohibit farmers to take bajra crop was the social

problem faced by cent per cent sample farmers.

5.4 CONCLUSIONS

The important conclusions of the study are:

1. Bajra cultivation was a profitable entity in the study area. Net

income per hectare of bajra cultivation ranged from Rs 5554.31

to Rs 13165.65 on different sized farms. Highest return was

obtained by the large sized farms. Returns per rupee from bajra

cultivation were also very high (Rs 2.29) on large sized farms.

This increased with the increase in size of farms. The average

return was estimated at Rs 1.73 per rupee investment. Per

hectare cost of cultivation (cost C3) was Rs 10184.70 on large

sized farms and highest (Rs 10470.69) on small sized farms

with an overall average of Rs 10362.80. The average A1, A2, B1,

B2, C1 and C2 were Rs 3662.43, Rs. 3662.43, Rs. 4150.73, Rs

8650.73, Rs 4920.73 and Rs 9420.73, per hectare, respectively.

The average cost of production of bajra was Rs 425.99 per

quintal it ranged from Rs 212.29 on large sized farms to Rs

521.02 on small sized farms

2. Total marketing cost was noted to be higher channel-I (Producer

Village Trader Wholesaler retailer) it was ` 194.79 per

quintal for Chomu farmers and Rs 189.44 per quintal for

Renewal farmers. In channel-II (Producer Wholesaler

retailer) the respective marketing costs were Rs 164.39 and Rs

162.89 per quintal, respectively. because of involvement of

intermediaries in the marketing process. In channel-III (Producer

Consumer) there was no marketing cost.

3. There existed significant difference in the margins earned by

different market intermediaries. The village trader had 4.27 per

cent (` 52.66 per quintal) share in the consumer’s rupee in

Chomu market. The share obtained by the wholesaler was 5.54

per cent (` 68.26 per quintal) that of and retailer was 7.74 per

cent (Rs 95.47 per quintal). Among the functionaries, retailer got

the higher margin due to sale of bajra at higher prices to the

consumer

4. There existed significant difference in the margins earned by

different market intermediaries. The village trader had 5.04 per

cent (` 68.45 per quintal) share in the consumer’s rupee in

Renewal market. The share obtained by the wholesaler was

7.10 per cent (` 89.45 per quintal) and that of retailer was 8.35

per cent (Rs 105.25 per quintal). Among the functionaries,

retailer got the higher margin due to sale of bajra at higher

prices to the consumer.

5. The pattern of market arrivals of bajra in different quarters

indicated that 62.72 per cent of market arrivals in Chomu and

52.55 per cent in Renewal were there in the first season. The

arrivals in second and third quarter were only 20.47, 8.48 per

cent in Chomu and 27.58, 13.12 per cent in Renewal market,

respectively. The arrivals of bajra in chomu and renwal mandi

were maxiumum in the first peak season. The arrivals were low

in the subsequent season.

6. Prices of bajra were higher in the second quarter by 9.70 and

8.11 per cent over the first quarter in Chomu and Renewal

market. Prices were law by -4.40 percent, 2.40 in the third and

fourth quarter over the second quarter in Chomu market and by

-4.80 per cent and -1.20 per cent in Renewal market. Thus

farmers got 9 per cent higher prices by sale of bajra in the

second quarter over the first quarter (post harvest sale). It is not

advantageous to early the bajra produce to the third and fourth

quarter of the year.

7. There existed inverse relationship between prices and arrivals of

bajra in the corresponding as well as in subsequent months. The

higher negative value of correlation coefficient for subsequent

months compared to the corresponding months explains that the

effect of prices on arrivals was more pronounced in the

subsequent months.

8. The correlation in yearly prices and arrivals of bajra were

negative in seven years and positive in one year. It reveals that

prices of bajra are not only affected by arrivals but are also

affected by other factors viz., demand, export potential and

seasonality of the crop etc.

9. The most important problems reported by the farmers were lack

of technical knowledge about bajra cultivation, short supply of

labourer, lack of storage facilities, high cost of improved variety

seeds, high marketing cost, low price bajra and fear of thieves

and stray animals to the crop.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Ahmed, Nazeer, Kumar, R. and Sharma, O.C. (2011). “Problems and

prospects of aromatic crops of cultivation in Jammu and

Kashmir”. South Indian Horticulture, 60 : 67-74.

Chahal,S.S.,and Kataria Poonam,(2010),”Constraints in the production

and Marketing of Maize in Panjab.” Agriculture Update

;5(1/2):228-236.

Changule, R.B., and Gaikwad, G.P.,(2013), “Marketed surplus and Price

Spread in different channels of Maize marketing.” International

Journal of commerce and Business Mangement ,6(1):76-79.

Choudhary, S.N. (2000). “Marketing of Fennel in Tonk District of

Rajasthan, “Unpublished M.Sc. (Ag.) Economics. Thesis,

Rajasthan Agricultural University, Bikaner, Campus-Jobner,

pp. 125-128.

Deshmukh, Pawar,D.S., Landge .B.R., Yeware, V.V., and

P.P.(2010)”Marketed surplus and price spread in different

channels of Pearlmillet marketing.”International Journal of

Commerce and Business Mangement;3(1):41-44.

Dwivedi, Sudhaker and Singh, Tarunvir (2010). “An analytical economics

of saffron cultivation in Jammu and Kashmir”. Journal of Hill

Agriculture, vol. 1 (2):168-171.

Gate. M.R., Khodiar,M.B., Sadhu, B.R. and Shekhar Serene, (2009),

“Cost of cultivation of groundnut Banaskantha distruct of

Gujrat” International research Journal Vol-l issue ll.

Guledgudda, S.S., Vishweshwar, S. and Olekar, J.N. (2002). “Banana

cultivation in Haveri district of Karnataka state”. Indian Journal

of Agricultural Marketing. 16 (1): 51-58.

Kanaujia, V.K., Choudhary, H.P., Kumar, K. and Verma, M. (2009).

“Productivity and profitability of agri-horti system in sub-

tropical region”. Current Advances in Agricultural Science. 1

(1): 38-40.

Kasar, D.V., Pant, R.C. and Rasane, V.S. (1996). “Behavioural of prices

and arrivals of red chillies”. A case study from Maharashtra.

Indian Journal of Agricultural Marketing, 10 (3) : 78-81.

Kaur, H. and Singh, I.P. (2010). “Marketing of Kinnour is Sriganaganar

District of Rajasthan state, Indian Journal of Agricultural

Marketing, 24 (1) : pp. 141-149.

Killedar N.S., Lahor, N.S., Babar, V.S. and Ingarale, M.T. (2002).

“Economics of production and marketing of Ginger in Satara

District of Western Maharashtra” Indian Journal of Agricultural

Marketing; 16(2), pp.76-77.

Kumar Virender; Sharma, H.R. and Sharma, R.K. (2006), “Markets

Arrivals and price behaviour of potato A study of four

Metropolitan markets”. Indian Journal of Agricultural

Marketing, 20 (1) ; 78-89.

Lal, B., (1994), ”Production and marketing of Bajra in Jaipur district of

Rajasthan”. Unpublished M.Sc (Ag.). Agricultural economics

Thesis , RAU, Bikaner.

Mehta Subhash Chander, Sube Singh Hasija ,S.K., and R.C. (2006)

“Constraints in adaptation of recommended Pearlmillet

production technology in dryland farming.”Annals of Agri Bio

Research ;11(1):81-87.

Mishra, S.K.,”Economics analysis of Production and Marketing of Green

pea in Jaipur District (Rajasthan)”, Unpublished M.Sc. (Ag.)

Agricultural Economics Thesis, Rajasthan Agriculture

University, Bikaner, Campus- Jobner, 1998, pp. 108-116.

Nahatkar, S.B.,Sharma, H.O., and Chauhan, R.S.,(1999) “Analysis of

market arrivals and prices of Wheat in Sehore regulated

market of Madhya Pardesh” Agriculture marketing, 41 (4):5-8

Rajur B.C., Patel, B.L. and Basavaraj (2008). “Economics of chilli

production in Karnataka”. Karnataka Journal of Agricultural

Science, 21 (2), pp. 237-240.

Ram, S., Kumar, S., Singh, V., Ram, P., Tomar, V.K.S. and Singh, A.K.

(2012). “Economics of production to marketing of aromatic

crops in Uttar Praeesh”. Agriclrual Economics Research

Review, 25 (1) : 157-160.

Shah, S.P. and Zala, Y.C. (2006). “Cost-benefit analysis of Ginger

cultivation in middle Gujarat” Agricultural Economics Research

Review, 19 (Conf. issue) : 206.

Sharma, S.M., and Dahiya R.H. (2013), Economics of Tomato cultivation

in Jaipur District of Rajasthan . Annals of Horticulture 6(11):1-

11.

Shashikant, V.G.,Dubey,L.R. and Arpita Kotnala,(2013),”Constraints

faced by Red gram growers in Gulbarga district of Karnataka,”

Environment and Ecology,31(2):440-443.

Shelke, S.D.,Nagure,D.V.,and Patil, S.N.(2009),”Price spread and

marketing pattern of Groundnut in Maharashtra State.”

Agriculture update;4(3/4):376-378. 2 ref.

Singh and Toppo, (2010), “Economics of production and marketing of

tomato in kanke block of Ranchi District Maharashtra .” Indian

Journal of Agricultural Marketing, 24(2).

Singh, Gaganjat, S.S. Chandraj and P.Kataria , (2010),”A study on

behaivour of arrivals and prices of green chillies in Panjab”.

Indian Journal of Agricultural Marketing, 24(1).

Singh, H.,Singh, P., and Bairwa, K.C.,(2013),” To study the Trends of

Market arrivals and prices of Rapeseed- Mustard in Bharatpur

district of Rajasthan.” Annual Agriculture Research, New

Series Volume 34(3):281-285.

Singh, S.R. and Sharma, P. (2011). “Problems and prospects in

production and marketing of mint oil in Moradabad district of

Uttar Pradesh”. Indian Journal of Agricultural Marketing, 25 (1)

: 21-35.

Thombre, A.P., More, S.S.,(2013),”Market arrivals and prices of Pigeon

pea in Mahathwada region (M.S).”Agriculture

update;8(1/2):122-124. 3 ref.

Tripathi, A.K., Mandal, Subhasis, Datta, K.K. and Verma, M.R. (2006).

“A study on marketing of Ginger in Ri-Biho district of

Meghalaya” Indian Journal of Marketing, 20 (2): pp. 106-115.

Vekariya, S.B., Khant, K.A. and Gajupara, H.M. (2006). “Price behavior

of major vegetables in Gujarat State. Indian Journal of

Agicultural Marketing, 20 (1) : 28-37.

Production and Marketing of Bajra in Jaipur District of Rajasthan

Sumitra Jakhar Dr. Pradeep

Kumar

(Research Scholar) (Major Advisor)

ABSTRACT

The present investigation was carried out to study the cost

structure and returns from cultivation of bajra crop, marketing

costs, margins, price spread in marketing of bajra, relationship

between market arrivals and prices of bajra in the selected

markets and problems faced by the farmers in production and

marketing of bajra. A sample of 60 bajra cultivators was selected

for detailed study.

Post graduate student, Department of Agricultural Economics, S.K.N. College of Agriculture,

Jobner Associate Professor, Department of Agricultural Economics, S.K.N. College of Agriculture, Jobner

The state of Rajasthan occupies the eminent position in

production of bajra in the country. Bajra is grown mainly in

Barmer, Jodhpur, Nagaur, Alwar, and Jaipur districts of the state.

Primary data were collected for the agricultural year 2012-13. The

secondary data were collected from the records Krishi Upaj Mandi

Samiti Chomu and Krishi Upaj Mandi Samiti Renwal in the study

area.

In the selected farms the cost of cultivation (cost C3) per

hectare of bajra was ` 10184.35 on large sized farms and `

10470.69 on small sized farms with an overall average of `

10362.80. The various costs in cultivation viz., cost A1, A2, B1, B2,

C1 and C2 were ` 3662.43, ` 3662.43, ` 4150.73, ` 8650.73, `

4920.73 and ` 9420.73 per hectare, respectively. Human labour

cost accounted the major share (6.24 to 18.79 per cent) in total

operational costs. The other important operational cost was costs

of FYM, machine lobour, plant protection chemical, seed and

fertilizer.

The cost of production was ` 212.29 per quintal on large

sized farms ` 521.02 per quintal on small sized farms with an

overall average of ` 425.99 per quintal. Cultivation of bajra crop

has been a profitable entity in the study area. Net income in bajra

crop cultivation ranged from ` 5554.31 to ` 13165.65 per hectare

on different sized farms. Highest returns was obtained by the

large sized farms return per rupee from cultivation of bajra crop

was highest on large sized farms (`. 2.29) and lowest on small

sized farms (` 1.53) with an average of ` 1.73.

The total marketing cost of bajra was higher in channel-I (`

194.79 per quintal for Chomu farmers and 189.44 per quintal for

Renwal farmers) followed by channel-II (` 164.39 per quintal for

chomu farmers and 162.89 per quintal for Renwal farmers)

because of involvement of intermediaries in the marketing

process. In channel-III there was no marketing cost. Marketing

margins accounted to 17.55 per cent and 20.49 per cent of

consumer’s price in village sale in Chomu and Renwal farmers

and 13.28 and 15.45 per cent margins in sale of Mandi in Chomu

and Renwal farmers. Retailers got higher margins in sale of bajra

in both villages and Mandi sale compared to the wholesaler.

Producers share in consumer’s rupee was 66.66 per cent and

64.47 per cent in sale of bajra at village sale in Chomu and

Renwal farmers and 73.39 per cent and 71.62 per cent at

regulated market of Chomu and Renwal.

Sixty two percent and fifty two per cent bajra produce

arrived in the first quarter (Oct.-Dec.) of the year in Chomu and

Renwal markets. The arrivals were 20.47, 27.58, 8.48, 13.12 and

8.32, 6.73 per cent in the second, third and fourth quarters in

Chomu and Renwal markets. Farmers got 9.70 per cent and 8.11

per cent higher price by sale of bajra in the second quarter over

the post harvest quarter (Peak season) selling of bajra in the third

and fourth quarters of the year was not found advantageous.

The correlation coefficient between monthly wholesale

prices and arrivals of bajra in the corresponding months and in

the subsequent months were -0.675,-0.520 and -0.677, -0.490,

showing that there exist inverse relationship between the two and

the value of correlation coefficient has been higher for the

subsequent months than for the corresponding months. The value

of correlation coefficient between yearly arrivals and prices of

bajra were negative in six years and positive only in two years out

of the eight years study period.

Results of opinion survey showed that the major constraints were

short supply of labourers, high cost of improved variety seeds, low prices

of bajra were the most important problems faced by the farmers.

jktLFkku ds t;iqj ftys esa cktjs dk mRiknu vkSj foi.ku

lqfe=k tk[kM+ Mk¡- iznhi dqekj

¼'kks/kdÙkkZ½ ¼eq[; lykgdkj½

lkajk’k

orZeku vUos"k.k jktLFkku jkT; esa cktjsa ds ykxr lajpuk ,oa

mRiknu ls izkIr izfrQy] cktjsa dh foi.ku foi.ku esa ykxr o dher

foLrkj cktjsa dh vkod rFkk dherks ds chp lEcU/k rFkk cktjsa ds

LukrdksÙkj Nk=k] df̀"k vFkZ'kkL= foHkkx] Jh d.kZ ujsUnz df̀"k egkfo|ky;] tkscusj lgvkpk;Z] df̀"k vFkZ'kkL= foHkkx] Jh d.kZ ujsUnz df̀"k egkfo|ky;] tkscusj

mRiknu ,oa foi.ku esa d`"kdksa }kjk n`f"Vxr leL;kvksa dks Hkh tkuus gsrq

iz;Ru fd;k x;kA

foLr`r v/;;u gsrq lkB cktjk mRikndksa dk p;u fd;k x;kA

jktLFkku jkT; cktjk mRiknu dh n`f"V ls ns’k esa ,dkf/kdkj

j[krk gSA jkT; esa cktjsa dh Qly eq[;r;k ckMesj] tks/kiqj] ukxkSj]

vyoj] vkSj t;iqj ftyksa esa gksrk gSA izkFkfed }kjk d`f"k o"kZ 2012&13

ds fy, ,d= fd, x, FksA ek/;fed MsVk v/;;u ds {ks= esa fjdkMZ d`f"k

mit eaMh lfefr pkSew vkSj d`f"k mit eaMh jsuoky ls ,d= fd, x,

FksA

p;fur fdlkuksa esa cktjsa dh Qly ds d` f"kr esa dqy ykxr

¼ykxr l3½ nh/kZ tksrksa ij 10184-35 :i;s izfr gSDV;j ,oa y/kq tksrksa ij

10470-69 :i;s izfr gSDVj FkhA Qly dh vkSlr d`f"kr djus dh dqy

ykxr 10362-80 :i;s FkhA cktjs dh dqy ifjorZu ykxr v] vkyx v2]

ykxr c1] ykxr c2] ykxr l1] ,oa ykxr l2 Øe’k% 3662-43 :i;s]

3662-43 :i;s] 4150-73 :i;s 8650-73 :i;s] 4920-73 :i;s ,oa 9420-73

:i;s izfr gsDV;j ikbZ xbZA]

cktjs dh ifjorZu ykxr esa ekuo Je dh ykxr ¼6-24 ls 18-79

izfr’rk½ izeq[k FkhA ifjorZu’khy ykxr ds nqljs eq[; L=ksrksa esa xkscj dh

[kkn] ;kaf=d Je] ikS/k laj{k.k jlk;u] cht] vkSj moZjd dh ykxr gksuk

ik;k x;kA

cktjsa dh mRiknu ykxr nh?kZ tksrksa ij 212-29 :i;s izfr fDoaVy

,oa y?kq tksrsa ij 521-02 :i;s izfr fDoaVy ds e/; Fkh rFkk v/;;u {ks=

esa vkSlr ykxr 425-99 :i;s izfr fDoaVy ikbZ xbZA

v/;;u {ks= esa cktjsa mRiknu ,d ykHkizn m/ke gSA cktjsa dh

[ksrh ls fofHkUu tksr vkdkjksa ij 'kq} vk; 5554-31 :i;s ls 13165-65

:i;s izfr gSDVj ds e/; FkhA Qly ds d`f"kr djus ls vf/kdre izfrQy

nh/kZ tksrksa ij ik;k x;kA cktjk dh Qly ls izfr :i;s izfrQy

vf/kdre nh/kZ tksrksa ij ¼2-29 :i;s½ rFkk U;wure izfrQy y/kq tksrksa ij

¼1-53 :i;s½ ,oa vkSlr izfrQy 1-73 :i;s ik;k x;kA

cktjsa dk fczdh esa dqy foi.ku ykxr ¼194-79 :i;s izfr fDoaVy½

pkSew fdlkuksa ds fy, vkSj 189-44 :i;sa izfr fDoaVy jsuoky fdlkuksa ds

fy,½ esa 164-39 :i;s izfr fDoaVy pkSew fdlkuksa ds fy, vkSj 162-89 :i;s

izfr fDoaVy jsuoky fdlkuksa ds fy, f}fr; ek/;e dh Fkh tks fd izFke

ek/;e esa fcpkSfy;ksa dh Hkkxhnkjh ds dkj.k vf/kd FkhA rhljsa ek/;e esa

foi.ku ykxr ugh FkhA xzkeh.k {ks= esa foØ; djus ij ,oa e.Mh esa foØ;

djus ij e.Mh eas foØ; esa mRikndksa dks miHkksDrk dherksa esa ls izkIr

ykHkka’k Øe’k% ` 66.66, 64.47 ,oa ` 73.39, 71.62 izfr’kr pkSew ,oa

jsuoky fdlkuksa esa ik;k x;kA [kqnjk O;kikjh dks Fkksd O;kikjh dh vis{kk

xzkeh.k foØ; ,oa e.Mh foØ; djus dh nksuksa fof/k;ksa esa vf/kd foi.ku

ykHk izkIr gksrk gSA mRiknu d`"kdksa dk miHkksDrk dherksa esa va’k] xkaoksa esa

foØ; djus ij ` 17.55, 20.49 izfr’kr ,oa pkSew ,oa jsuoky+ fu;af=r e.Mh

esa foØ; djus ij ` 13.28,15.47 izfr’kr ik;k x;kA mRiknd d̀"kdksa dks

fu;af=r e.Mh esa ys tkdj vius pkoy ds mRikn dks foØ; djus ij 4-

27, 5.04 izfr’kr vf/kd ykHkka’k izkIr gksrk gSA

cktjk mRiknu dh 62 vkSj 52 izfr’kr vkod o"kZ ds igys frekgh

¼vDVqcj&* fnlEcj½ esa pkSew vkSj jsuoky cktjksa esa o`f}A nwljs] rhljs ,oa

pkSFks] frekgh esa dqy vkod dk Øe’k% 20-47] 27-58] 8-48] 13-21 rFkk

rFkk 8-32] 6-32 izfr’kr pkSew vkSj jsuoky cktjkjksa esa vkod gqbZA d`"kdksa

dks dVkbZ ds rqjUr ckn ds frekgh dh vis{kk nqljsa frekgh esa cktjsa dks

cpsus ij 9-70 ,oa 8-11 izfr’kr T;knk dher izkIr gqbZA cktjsa dh fczdh

rhljs ,oa pkSFks frekgh esa dlk ykHkizn ugh ik;k x;kA

vuq:Ik ,oa rnUrj ekg ds dherksa ,oa vkod ds ek/;e

lg&lEcU/k xq.kkad Øe’k% &0-675] &0-52 vkSj &0-677] &0-490 FkkA ;g

xq.kkad nksuksa ds e/;e +_.kkRed lEcU/k n’kkZrk gS rFkk lg&lEcU/k

xq.kkad dk eku vuq:I ekg ds ctk; rnUrj ekg esa T;knk ik;k x;kA

cktjsa dh o"kZ Hkj dh dqy vkod vkSj dherksa ds e/; lg&lEcU/k xq.kkad

vkB o"kksZ ds v/;;u dky esa ls N% o"kksZ esa xq.kkRed ,oa nks o"kksZ esa

/kukRed ik;k x;kA

losZ{k.k ds ifj.kkeksa }kjk Kkr gqvk fd Jfedksa dh iwfrZ dh deh]

xq.kkRrk fdLe ds chtksa dh mPp ykxr] cktjsa dh de dher dh vf/kd

egRoiw.kZ leL;k,a FkhA

Swami Keshwanad Rajasthan Agricultural University, Bikaner

Department Of Agriculture Economics

S.K.N College of Agriculture, Jobner

Title of Research Study : Production and Marketing of Bajra in Jaipur District of

Rajasthan

Investigator : Sumitra Jakhar

Reference Year : 2013-14

Appendix - 3.1

Schedule for farmer

1.Name of Cultivator________________________________________________

S/o Shri__________________________________________________________

2.Village_____________________________Tehsil_________________________

Distt.________________________________

3.(A) Distance of Village from KUMS_____________________________Kms.

(B) Distance of Village from Pucca Road_________________________Kms.

4. Family Composition________________________________________________

S.NO. Name Sex Age Occupation

Male Female

5. (A) Details of Operational Holding (in Hectare)

S.No. Particulars Irrigated Unirrigated Total

1 Owned

2 Rented in

3 Rented out

Total area under

Cultivation (1+2)-3

(B) land Rent/ Revenue

1. Land Revenue paid on owned land cash Rs.______________________

2. Land rent on leased out land cash Rs.__________________________

3. Land paid on leased in land cash rs.____________________________

6. Field History

Field.no. Area in Bigha Irrigated/Unirrigated soil type crop grown

7. Source of Irrigation on farm____________________Tube well/ other

source

8. Farm machinery and Building :

S.No. Particulars No. of expected Age Purchase Value (Rs.)

Present Valve (Rs.)

1 M.B.plough

2. Desi Plough

3. Pata

4 Spades

5 Sickels and Khurpi

6 Chaff Cutter

7 Bullock

8. Sprayers

9. Tube Wells

10. Threshers

11. Tractor

12 Diesel engine

13. Buildings

14. Irrigation structure

15. Others

9. Livestock

Kind of Livestock No.of Breed Age(yrs.)

Present Value

I Milch Animals

(a) Cows i) Deshi

Ii) Cross-breed

(b) Buffaloes i) Deshi

Ii) Improved II. Draft Animals

i) Bullocks

ii) Buffaloes

iii) Camels

III. Calves

IV. Heifers

V. Goat

VI. Sheep

10. Existing Cropping Pattern

S.no. Crop Area (Acres/Bighas) irrigated Unirrigated

Total

1 Rabi season A) B) Kharif season a) B) Zaid season a) b)

11. FYM………………………………………………….Cart

Load…………………………………………………………………

12. Milk

Production……………………………….Litres/day………………………………………………………

…………

13. Custom hire of Bullock Rs………………………………………………

14 Renting out of irrigation water

Rs…………………………………………………

15. Others

Rs……………………………………………………….

16. Production of Bajra:

Area under Bajra Average Productivity of Bajra Total production of Bajra (In hectare) (kg/hec) (Qtls/hec)

Appendix-3.2

Schedule for Crop Budget 1. Crop--------------------------- Variety-----------------------------------Area--------

------------------------

2. Main product(qt.)-------------------------------------By product (qt.)-----------

------------------------

3. Expenses:

(a) Input used

S.No. Particulars Quantity Rate

Amount(Rs.)

1. Seed

2. FYM 3. Fertilizers

i) ii) 4. Chemical used i)

ii) 5. Others

(b) Operations

S.No. Name of Human labour Animal labour

Machine labour

operation Family Hired Owned Hired

Owned Hired

Hrs Value Hrs Value Hrs Value Hrs Value Hrs

Value Hrs Value

1. Preparation

2. Manuring

3. Ploughing

4. Leveling/Pata

5. Ploughing after palewa

6. Fertilizer application

7. Sowing/broadcasting pf seed

8. Bed Preparation

9. Irrigation

10. Inter culture 11. Plant protection

Measures 12. Harvesting

13. Collection

14. Cleaning/Threshing

15. Transportation

4. Producers surplus of Bajra(qt.)

S.No. Particulars Quantity of

Bajra

1. Last Year’s stock

2. Production during the year, Current year

Total (1+2) = 3. Requirments for

a) Family requirements

b) Seed requirements ( Based on expected area under

the crop in next year) Total requirements (a+b) =

4. Marketable surplus

5. Quantity actually sold during the year 2011-12

6. Differnce in Marketable and Marketed surplus

7. Reasons for the differnce in two surplus

5. Disposal Pattern of the surplus Bajra

S.No. Quantity Place of Date of To whom Rate of sale Total

expenditure incurred

Sold sale sale sold ( Rs/qt.) in

marketing by the farmers

i)

ii)

iii)

iv)

Total

6. Market channels adopted in marketing of Bajra by the farmers:

Channel Quantity Percentage of total

produce sold

i) Sale to consumers

ii) Sale to village traders

iii) Sale to wholesaler through commission agent

iv) Sale to retailer

v) Sale through co- operative society

vi) Any other

Total

7. Marketing costs incurred in sale of Bajra seed crop:

S.No. Particulars of cost items Quantity (Qt.) Rate(Rs/qt.)

Amount(Rs.)

1. Cost of gunny bags

2. Transportation charges

3. Labour charges for loading on farm

4. Unloading charges in Village

5. Weighing charges

6. Commission

7. Dharmada

8. Karda

9. Cash discount

10. Any other cost

Total

8. Marketing costs incurred in sale of Bajra in Mandi:

S.No. Particulars of cost items Quantity(qt.) Rate (Rs./qt.)

Amount ( Rs.)

1. Cost of gunny bags

2. Transportation charges

3. Labour charges

4. Unloading charges in Mandi

5. Sieving and Cleaning in charges

6. Weighing charges

7. Mandi fee (1.6%) of value of

Produce

8. Commission

9. Expenditure on food etc.

Incurred during sale in KUMS Mandi

10. Loss in quantity

11. Any other cost

Total cost

9. Problems faced by the farmers during the process of marketing in

villages:

a) Low Price

b) No ready Market

c) Malpractices (Specify)

d) Any other

10. Problems faced by the farmers during the process of Marketing in

Mandi KUMS:

a) In respect to transportation of produce to the KUMS-------------------

---------------

b) In sale of produce in KUMS----------------------------------------------------

----------------

c) In getting of price information------------------------------------------------

----------------

d) Problem of staying---------------------------------------------------------------

----------------

e) Problem in weighing of produce----------------------------------------------

---------------

f) Problem in getting payment of the value of produce-------------------

---------------

g) Any other problem (Specify)---------------------------------------------------

--------------

11. Suggestions for better marketing of Bajra:

1.

2.

3.

Appendix- 3.3

Schedule for Wholesaler Date of interview------------------------------------------

1. Name of wholesaler--------------------------------- S/O------------------

---------------

2. Purchase of Bajra by the Wholesaler-----------------------------------

--------------

S.No. Name Quantity purchased(qt.) From whom purchased(Rs/qtl.)

Purchase price (Rs/Qt)

3. Costs Incurred by the Wholesaler in purchase of Bajra:

S.No. Name Quantity purchased(Rs.) Rate(Rs.)

Amount (Rs.)

1. VAT

2. Mandi fee

3. Commission

4. Brokerage

5. Weighing charges

6. Sieving and Cleaning

7. Loading charges

8. Unloading charges

9. Storage charges

10. Cost of gunny bags

11. Transportation Cost

From shop of Commission

Agent to wholesaler’s shop 12. Any other Cost

Total Cost

4.Disposal of Bajra by the Wholesaler:

Lot No. Month Date of sale Qty. sold(qt.) Rate (Rs.) Amount

(Rs.) Place of sale

4. Average net price received by the wholesaler-------------------------------------

---

Appendix-3.4

Schedule for Retailer

1. Name of Retailer----------------------------------S/O-----------------------------------

2. Name of the firm--------------------------------------KUMS---------------------------

3. Purchase of Bajra by the Retailer---------------------------------------------------

S.No. Date Place of purchase Agency from which Quantity Price (Rs./qt.) Purchased purchased

1. 2. 3. 4.

4. Cost incurred by the Retailer in purchase of Bajra:

S.No. Particulars Quantity/ Beg Rate

Amount(Rs.)

1. Transportation charges from Mandi to the shop 2. Labour charges for loading and unloading 3. Storage charges 4. Other charges (filling & stitching

bag and sutli charges etc.)

Total Costs

5. Sale of Bajra

S.No. Date of sale To whom sold Quantity (qt.) Rate(Rs.) Amount(Rs.)

1. 2. 3. 4.

6. Net price received by the Retailer------------------------------------

--------

Appendix-3.5

Schedule for Mandi 1. Date of Establishment -----------------------------------------------

2. Area commanded-------------------------------------------------------

3. Information about different agriculture products handled

by Mandi

S.No. Particulars Quantity in different

years (qtl.)

2010-11

2011-12

1. Name of different agriculture Products handled by the Mandi (A) (B) (C) (D) (E) (F)

2. Bajra handled

4. Information about middlemen in Mandi:

S.No. Category of middlemen Number of registered Number of middlemen Middlemen in Mandi dealing in Bajra during Last 2 years

1.

2.

5. Information (General information) about Mandi particularly

to Bajra

6. Prescribed charges for sale of Bajra in the KUMS:

S.No. Charges Rate By whom

payable

1. Mandi fee 2. Loading charges 3. Unloading charges 4. Sieving and cleaning Charges 5. Commission 6. Weighing charges 7. other charges (specify)

7.Information obtained from Mandi secretary (based on his experience):

(a) Comman marketing channels in marketing of Bajra---------------------

--------------------

i) : -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

ii) : ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

(b) Area from where Bajra comes for sale in the KUMS

i) :----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

ii) :-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

(c) Area to which Bajra is taken by the traders of the KUMS for further sale:

i) with in state

ii) outside the state

(d) Method of sale followed in sale of Bajra in the KUMS:

e) Method of weighing followed for Bajra ------------------------------------------------

f) Suggestions, if any (regarding improvement in marketing of Bajra):

1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6.

Appendix-4

SCHEDULE FOR PROBLEMS FACED BY THE FARMERS

S.NO Particulars

Yes/ No

A. Production constraints

Lack of technical knowledge about Bajra cultivation

Occurrence of disease

High cost of pesticides

Lack of improved seed

Inadequate or no irrigation facilities

High labour cost

Non availability of labour during peak season

Lack of finance and credit facilities

Educated member go outside

10. Others

B. Infrastructural constraints

1. Lack of processing unit

2. Lack of storage facilities

3. Others

C. Marketing constraints

1. Cost of improved variety is high

2. High fertilizer cost

3. Cost of transportation of bajra product is high

4. Marketing cost of Bajra is high

5. Non receipt of payment in time

6. Not getting remunerative price for the produce

7. Lack of market information

8. Others

D. Social costraints

1. Low consumption technology of Bajra in study area

2. Others