Your SlideShare is downloading. ×
net house cultivation of vegetables in Punjab An Economic Analysis
net house cultivation of vegetables in Punjab An Economic Analysis
net house cultivation of vegetables in Punjab An Economic Analysis
net house cultivation of vegetables in Punjab An Economic Analysis
net house cultivation of vegetables in Punjab An Economic Analysis
net house cultivation of vegetables in Punjab An Economic Analysis
net house cultivation of vegetables in Punjab An Economic Analysis
net house cultivation of vegetables in Punjab An Economic Analysis
net house cultivation of vegetables in Punjab An Economic Analysis
net house cultivation of vegetables in Punjab An Economic Analysis
net house cultivation of vegetables in Punjab An Economic Analysis
net house cultivation of vegetables in Punjab An Economic Analysis
net house cultivation of vegetables in Punjab An Economic Analysis
net house cultivation of vegetables in Punjab An Economic Analysis
net house cultivation of vegetables in Punjab An Economic Analysis
net house cultivation of vegetables in Punjab An Economic Analysis
net house cultivation of vegetables in Punjab An Economic Analysis
net house cultivation of vegetables in Punjab An Economic Analysis
net house cultivation of vegetables in Punjab An Economic Analysis
net house cultivation of vegetables in Punjab An Economic Analysis
net house cultivation of vegetables in Punjab An Economic Analysis
net house cultivation of vegetables in Punjab An Economic Analysis
net house cultivation of vegetables in Punjab An Economic Analysis
net house cultivation of vegetables in Punjab An Economic Analysis
net house cultivation of vegetables in Punjab An Economic Analysis
net house cultivation of vegetables in Punjab An Economic Analysis
net house cultivation of vegetables in Punjab An Economic Analysis
net house cultivation of vegetables in Punjab An Economic Analysis
net house cultivation of vegetables in Punjab An Economic Analysis
net house cultivation of vegetables in Punjab An Economic Analysis
net house cultivation of vegetables in Punjab An Economic Analysis
net house cultivation of vegetables in Punjab An Economic Analysis
net house cultivation of vegetables in Punjab An Economic Analysis
net house cultivation of vegetables in Punjab An Economic Analysis
net house cultivation of vegetables in Punjab An Economic Analysis
net house cultivation of vegetables in Punjab An Economic Analysis
net house cultivation of vegetables in Punjab An Economic Analysis
net house cultivation of vegetables in Punjab An Economic Analysis
net house cultivation of vegetables in Punjab An Economic Analysis
net house cultivation of vegetables in Punjab An Economic Analysis
net house cultivation of vegetables in Punjab An Economic Analysis
net house cultivation of vegetables in Punjab An Economic Analysis
net house cultivation of vegetables in Punjab An Economic Analysis
net house cultivation of vegetables in Punjab An Economic Analysis
net house cultivation of vegetables in Punjab An Economic Analysis
net house cultivation of vegetables in Punjab An Economic Analysis
net house cultivation of vegetables in Punjab An Economic Analysis
net house cultivation of vegetables in Punjab An Economic Analysis
net house cultivation of vegetables in Punjab An Economic Analysis
net house cultivation of vegetables in Punjab An Economic Analysis
net house cultivation of vegetables in Punjab An Economic Analysis
net house cultivation of vegetables in Punjab An Economic Analysis
net house cultivation of vegetables in Punjab An Economic Analysis
net house cultivation of vegetables in Punjab An Economic Analysis
net house cultivation of vegetables in Punjab An Economic Analysis
net house cultivation of vegetables in Punjab An Economic Analysis
net house cultivation of vegetables in Punjab An Economic Analysis
net house cultivation of vegetables in Punjab An Economic Analysis
net house cultivation of vegetables in Punjab An Economic Analysis
net house cultivation of vegetables in Punjab An Economic Analysis
net house cultivation of vegetables in Punjab An Economic Analysis
net house cultivation of vegetables in Punjab An Economic Analysis
net house cultivation of vegetables in Punjab An Economic Analysis
net house cultivation of vegetables in Punjab An Economic Analysis
net house cultivation of vegetables in Punjab An Economic Analysis
net house cultivation of vegetables in Punjab An Economic Analysis
net house cultivation of vegetables in Punjab An Economic Analysis
net house cultivation of vegetables in Punjab An Economic Analysis
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in...5
×

Thanks for flagging this SlideShare!

Oops! An error has occurred.

×
Saving this for later? Get the SlideShare app to save on your phone or tablet. Read anywhere, anytime – even offline.
Text the download link to your phone
Standard text messaging rates apply

net house cultivation of vegetables in Punjab An Economic Analysis

23,233

Published on

Published in: Education
3 Comments
2 Likes
Statistics
Notes
  • Please Mr. Raman tell me the author name and where it is published. ie, reference I am in great need of that
       Reply 
    Are you sure you want to  Yes  No
    Your message goes here
  • thanx for post sir,
    can u please post your questionaire/interview schedule on here.
       Reply 
    Are you sure you want to  Yes  No
    Your message goes here
  • good, thanks your post
       Reply 
    Are you sure you want to  Yes  No
    Your message goes here
No Downloads
Views
Total Views
23,233
On Slideshare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
1
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
503
Comments
3
Likes
2
Embeds 0
No embeds

Report content
Flagged as inappropriate Flag as inappropriate
Flag as inappropriate

Select your reason for flagging this presentation as inappropriate.

Cancel
No notes for slide

Transcript

  • 1. Chapter I INTRODUCTION Vegetables crops are useful in rotational system of farming to maintain the fertility of soil. Vegetables are the main source of vitamins and minerals. The vegetable crops also offer better crop diversification and crop intensification. India is the second largest vegetables producer in the world next to China; however it’s per capita per day availability is well below 92g whereas the recommended consumption is 284g. The vegetables crops in India occupy only 2.8 percent of the total cultivated land, producing 110.27 million tonnes of vegetables annually from a cropped area of 7.04 million hectares. The present production is not sufficient to meet the requirement. The target can be achieved by bringing additional area under vegetable crops, using hybrid seeds, improved agro techniques and perfection and promotion of protected cultivation of vegetables (Singh et al 1999). As majority of the population in India is vegetarian so, there is a strong need to increase production of vegetables. At the time of independence inspite of low population, the food problem was quite acute. India imported food grains every year till the mid sixties and as a result India was becoming a basket case. This puts heavy drain on foreign exchange reserves of the country. So the government of India decided to adopt agricultural policies that promoted food grain production in order to fight the problem of hunger. This objective was achieved with the ushering in green revolution in the mid sixties that resulted in substantial increase in the food grain production in the following years. Agriculture of Punjab state has undergone many changes since the advent of the green revolution. Agriculture slowly shifted from subsistence to commercialized one. Increase in production due to high yielding varieties made wheat-paddy rotation quite popular in Punjab. Secondly in order to face the food problem of growing population in India, the Govt. of India announced the minimum support price for these two crops. Due to this wheat paddy rotation further gained momentum in Punjab and these crops substituted for area under other crops, especially oilseeds, pulses and course grains. During the first few years, the economy of Punjab prospered with this rotation. But as the time passed wheat paddy rotation has resulted in various problems related to soil such as increased salinity and nutrient deficiency. Increase in incidence of insect pests and diseases have also resulted due to discriminate use of pesticides. The excessive use of fertilizers for increasing yield has also affected the natural fertility of the soil. Apart from these problems lowered the underground water table becomes the most serious problem of Punjab now a day. Due to the above said reasons both Govt. and farmers of Punjab have realized that they cannot go a long way with wheat paddy rotation. Therefore diversification of agriculture is felt as a need now days to get rid of the various problems faced by the farmers of Punjab.
  • 2. Vegetables farming seem to be a good replacement for the wheat paddy rotation, as vegetable crops give high returns per unit area as compared to rice and wheat (Sharma et al 2000). Vegetable crops are more labour intensive as compared to cereals as a result they provide more employment opportunities for hired labour as well as family labour (Singh and Bhatti 1993). By providing better employment opportunities to family labour, vegetables solve the problem of disguised unemployment of Punjab farmers. But the framers are not willing to leave the paddy-wheat rotation because the vegetable crops are more prone to attack of insects and pests; the other reason. The high-tech production of vegetables under protected conditions is the recent development in this field. Protected cultivation is capital intensive and has capacity not only to increase the productivity of vegetables by many folds but also improves the quality of vegetables (Singh et al 2008). WHAT IS PROTECTED CULTIVATION Protected cultivation means some level of control over plant microclimate to alleviate one or more of abiotic stress for optimum plant growth which can be achieved in poly house/net house. Crop yields can be several times higher than those under open field conditions, quality of produce is superior, higher input use efficiencies are achieved. Net house and poly house technology has been recommended for the cultivation of different vegetables. Production of vegetables under protected conditions involves protection of production stage of vegetables mainly from adverse environment conditions such as temperature, hails, scorching sun, heavy rains, snow and frost (Singh et al 1999). The production of off-season vegetable crops under net house conditions was evaluated for total yield, earliness and other character and incidence of insect pests (Cheema et al 2004). The cultivation of vegetables in net house can play a better role in improving quality, advancing maturity as well as increasing fruiting span and productivity. Cultivation of capsicum, brinjal and tomato is recommended in net house Protected cultivation technologies are being utilized all over the world but the level and extent of their use may be different among different countries. Therefore, it is necessary to know the status of protected structures and the crop being grown there. Punjab Agricultural University, Ludhiana has developed net house technology for the vegetables cultivation. It reduced the dependence on environment and has capacity not only to increase the productivity of vegetables by many folds but also improve the quality of vegetables by reducing the use of insecticides and pesticides. The effect of chemical and pesticides use is more harmful in vegetables as compared to other non-food crops. In recent years increasing attention has been focused on several environmentally safe methods of pest management. including net house cultivation to reduce pesticide use mainly because of growing concern over food safety issues and environmental awareness
  • 3. As the net house cultivation is new technology in Punjab agriculture, there is need to asses the impact of technology on farmer’s income and its financial viability, keeping in view the above facts. The present work concentrates on the following objectives. To study the socio-economic profile of net-house vegetables growers. To examine the yield, price, cost, and returns differentials of net house cultivation vis-à-vis open cultivation. To work out financial viability of net-house vegetables cultivation. To study the constraints of net-house vegetables cultivation. Chapter II REVIEW OF LITERATURE This chapter is devoted to review the studies closely related to the present research work. In order to have a clear and in-depth understanding of the research investigation to be carried out and to choose the suitable analytical technique, work done by the various researchers pertinent to the present study has been reviewed. The relevant studies have been reviewed in chronological order under the following sub-headings: The studies related to economics of vegetable cultivation, resource use efficiency in vegetables cultivation and protected cultivation of vegetables are reviewed. Garg and Prashad (1974) conducted a study on comparative profitability of vegetable crops in Kanpur city of Uttar Pradesh in India. The study showed that the highest net returns per hectare were obtained from tomato and lowest return from brinjal, i.e., Rs.1799.48 and Rs. 1010.24 per hectare respectively. The results further showed that the investment and labour used on vegetables were the highest for onion and lowest for' Lawki'. They also worked out returns per man' day for tomato and wheat, which were Rs.39.40 and Rs.22.80. respectively. Rathore et al (1975) in their study on resources use efficiency and returns from cultivation of commercial crops in Himachal Pradesh during 1973 -74 revealed that the average cost of cultivation and cost of production of chillies were Rs. 5,958.75 per hectare and Rs. 620.70 per quintal. Human labour and bullock labours were the important cost items which accounted 40.29 percent and 6.15 percent of the total cost. Kapila et al (1985) studied vegetable production for diversification of the farm economy". The study was conducted in Saproon valley of district Solan in Himachal Pradesh which is known for the quality of vegetables. The study emphasized that diversification towards intensive vegetable cultivation could enable farmers to get yields which are ten times higher than cereal crops per unit of land. The diversification of farming with vegetable production helps even the small farmers to earn sufficient income to make their livelihood. The results showed that gross income of more than Rs.l.15,000 per hectare and a net increase of about
  • 4. Rs. 70,000 to Rs. 90,000 per hectare per year could be obtained by producing cauliflower seeds or two crops of tomatoes in the valley. It was concluded that the farmers can earn high income annually by adopting diversification towards vegetable growing. Shukla et al (1978) examined the economics of cropping system in the hilly areas of Pauri- Garwal district of D.P. Patty Banalsuijn block of Pauri district was selected for the study. A sample of 55 farmers grouped into four categories was taken into consideration. The results indicated that potato with the least area under cultivation was the most profitable crop of the study area. Potato yielded a net profit of Rs.2895.00 per hectare and an input-output ratio of 1.88. The second most profitable crop was chilly with a net profit of Rs.1355.43 per hectare and an input-output ratio 1.73. Wheat was found to be the least profitable with a net income of only Rs.170.35 per hectare in the study area. Mishra and Saraf (1981) analyzed the economics of vegetable farming in the vicinity of Jabalpur city. The objective of study was to estimate the costs and returns from different vegetables. They also estimated the cost and returns of wheat and compared it with the cost and returns of vegetables. They further worked out the cost of cultivation per hectare of tomato crop which was maximum in small group and minimum in medium group and the returns were the highest in medium group followed by small and large farms. Mishra and Saraf (1987) conducted a study on Cost and return, labour employment and marketing of vegetable crops in Jabalpur city of Madhya Pradesh. For this study, the important vegetables (tomato, brinjal and cauliflower) were taken. The objective of the study was to work out the cost and returns of important vegetable crops and the intensity of labour employed. A sample of vegetable growers was selected at random from the villages falling within a radius of 10 km from Jabalpur city. The study showed that the intensity of cropping declined as the size of the farm increased. The net returns from tomato were the highest with Rs.2037 per acre. The producer's share in the consumer's rupee in the marketing of vegetables worked out to be 42 per cent. Warner (1991) conducted a study in the German Republic to examine the prospect for improving farm income from vegetable farming. The result showed that income from vegetable farming was much higher than the income from traditional agriculture production. Small farmers could experience the most significant increase in income by taking up vegetable farming due to their higher degree of under employment prior to taking up vegetable farming. Sharma et al. (1992) examined the resource use efficiency and profitability of vegetable farming in Himachal Pradesh. Kangra and Nagrota blocks of Kangra district were selected for the purpose. A sample of 150 farms for the study was selected by two stage random sampling technique. The study indicated that vegetable crops occupying 40.57 per cent of the total cropped area accounted for 52 per cent of the gross returns whereas cereals covering 42.48 per cent of the gross returns. This trend indicates that vegetable crops were yielding high returns than that of cereals. The regression analysis related elasticity
  • 5. coefficients for human labour was positively significant in case of all the vegetable crops with an exception to chillies. The observation of the increasing returns to scale for potato, peas, cauliflower and brinjal point towards an intensive use of inputs far obtaining higher income from the vegetable crops. Srivastava (1993) made an attempt to examine the economics of vegetable production in the sub areas of Patna and its marketing in Patna as well as in the international market. The data were collected from four villages, namely Pahari, Tulsimandi, Kasba and Karmalichak in the center of Patna town. The sample size consisted of sixty marginal and small vegetable growers. For retail sales study, 40 retailers spread over Gulzarbag Sabzimandi, Kanharbag Sabzimandi, Musllahpur Latt and Mithapur Sabzimandi were selected randomly. Study showed that the cost of cultivation per hectare was highest Rs.13,051.85 for cowpea. The highest productivity was recorded in case of cabbage and cauliflower (275.23 q/ha). Highest net returns per hectare were found in cowpea followed by sponge guard. Capital output ratio was highest for cauliflower and cabbage (1:2:84) and lowest (1:2:02) for potato. Thakur (1994) conducted a study on off-season vegetables in Kullu and Saproon valleys of Kullu and Solan districts of Himachal pradesh, respectively. The main objective of the study was to examine the cost of production, income and profit of these vegetables on per hectare basis. A total sample of 50 vegetable growers was chosen from the ten villages selected at random. Tomato, cauliflower, capsicum and peas were the vegetables considered for the study. The results indicated that total cost of production was higher for tomato followed by cauliflower, cabbage, capsicum and peas. Profits per hectare from tomatoes, cauliflower, cabbage, capsicum, peas were Rs.145961.03, Rs.73900.27, Rs.68246.92, Rs.46266.82, and Rs.44777.79, respectively. The study also highlighted that vegetable cultivation was high labour intensive. Peter (1995) reported that the cost of cultivation of chillies increased overtime due to the high cost of labour and increased use of plant protection chemicals. The hired human labour accounted for an average 20 per cent of the total cost of cultivation in Andhra Pradesh. The cost of cultivation was Rs. 13, 287 on small and Rs. 13, 762 on large sized farms with an average of Rs. 13,528 per hectare. Kumar and Srivastava (1997) studied the influence of plastic coverings on the temperature and relative humidity under low plastic tunnels in tomato field during the winter-spring season in 1990-1991 at horticultural research centre, G.B Pant university of Agriculture and Technology, Pantnagar. The minimum and maximum temperature and relative humidity were significantly increased inside the polyethylene tunnels of all gauges viz. 200, 300 and 400 as compared to no cover in all the weeks. The 300 and 400 gauge plastic always proved superior to lower gauge. The 100 perforations/ m2 always showed highest minimum temperature whereas, maximum temperature continuously from 50 perforations to 150 perforations. In most of the weeks, perforations had no significant effect on relative humidity.
  • 6. Thakur et al (1997) conducted a study of seasonal vegetable in Kullu and found that the total cost of production was higher for tomato followed by cauliflower, cabbage and capsicum. The net profits were Rs. 145961, Rs. 73900, Rs. 68246, Rs. 46266 and Rs. 44777 per hectare from tomato, cauliflower, cabbage, capsicum and pea respectively, in Himachal Pradesh Ganesam, M, (1999) found that the UV stabilized plastic film covered green house recorded higher day temperature than the open environment but relative humidity at 8 am was lower inside the green house except from May to August. The light intensity inside the green house was lower than in the open. Height of the plant, number of nodes, internodes length increase under green house conditions as compared to open field condition. The yield performance inside the green house was highest 2145g per plant and 2156g per plant in the first and second season (January to May and June to October) than the open field crops. The fruit yield inside the green house was nearly two times more than in the open field condition. Mishra and Vishwakarma (1999) conducted a study in Azamgarh district of Uttar Pradesh to work out the cost of cultivation of chillies. It was found that on an average input cost came out to be Rs. 22439.22 where as the average gross income came out to be Rs. 50957.45 per hectare. So on an average net income come out to be Rs. 28518 per hectare. Singh and Vishist (1999) made an attempt to examine the input output relationship, relative profitability and the existing marketing system of major vegetable crops. Two stage random sampling technique was used to select the sample of vegetable growers. A sample of 60 vegetable growers proportionally allocated to villages was selected. Cobb Douglas production function was used to study the input-output relationships. Results revealed that tomato was the most profitable crop in kharif season and cauliflower in rabi season. It further showed that producers’ share in terms of consumers' rupee was very low due to market intermediaries. It was found that major hurdles in the production of vegetables were lack of technical know-how and natural calamities. Sharma et al (2000) conducted a study on income and the employment from summer vegetables vis-à-vis their competing crop (paddy) in Punjab. The results show that tomato crop was most capital intensive with an expenditure of Rs.31642 per hectare against sponge gourd which was Rs.16072 per hectare. The returns over production cost were highest for tomato crop with Rs.26721 per hectare followed by capsicum and brinjal with Rs.25202 and Rs.23947 respectively. The returns over variable cost were highest for capsicum with Rs.21244 followed by tomato and brinjal with Rs.21087 and Rs.21071 per hectare respectively. Radha and Prasad (2001) made an attempt to study economics of production and marketing of vegetables in Karim Nagar district of Andhra Pradesh. The results revealed that though' the cost of cultivation was highest in tomato with Rs.28055 per hectare yet net returns were high in cauliflower with Rs.55792 per hectare followed by tomato with Rs.49758 per
  • 7. hectare. The cost benefit ratio was highest for cauliflower (1:2.90) and lowest for bhindi crop (1:0.28). Prasad (2001) conducted a farm level study to determine the vegetable production and marketing in Bihar and concluded that the vegetable crops were more profitable than other crops particularly food crops and these crops were widely cultivated by small and marginal farmers. Singh et al (2001) studied the pattern of production and marketing of fruit crops in Punjab and found that manures and fertilizer occupied major share in total cost of production. They further found that proportion of the total produce marketed was the highest for grapes (about 98%) followed by pear (95%) and guava (75%). They compared that cost of transportation accounted for more than half of the total marketing cost for all the fruits. On the basis of their study they concluded that efficient market infrastructure for horticultural crops may help the farmers in selling their produce themselves and increasing their returns Cheema et al. (2002) found that the production of off-season tomato crop under net house conditions studies was initiated at the Vegetable Research Farm, Punjab Agricultural University, Ludhiana (India). In the first year (2001-02), hybrids Avinash - 2 and Naveen and a variety CLN 2026D were evaluated for total yield, earliness/other fruit characters and incidence of insect pests. The results revealed that Naveen performed best in terms of total fruit yield (2.87 kg/plant), marketable fruit yield (2.77 kg/plant) as compared to other entries (1.76-2.08 kg/plant total yield and 1.51-1.91 kg/plant marketable fruit yield). Fruit damage by only Spodoptera litura was noticed and found lower (3.00%) in Naveen as against CLN 2026 D (9.64%). In the second year (2002-03), only hybrid Naveen was tested. The results revealed that net house cultivation has extended the fruit availability of tomato from last week of January to first week of June. Negligible fruit damage (1.43%) by S. litura was recorded after following non-insecticidal methods of control. While, incidence of Helicoverpa armigera (Hubner) and aphid, Aphis gossypii was nil which otherwise are serious pests of tomato crop in open conditions. These studies have offered the possibility of raising off-season crop of tomato and enhancing the fruit availability period by using non-chemical methods of pest control. Singh et al (2002) conducted a study on sustainable technology for peri-urban areas of northern India. Protected cultivation of vegetables provides the best way to increase the productivity and quality of vegetables especially cucurbits. The yield of some cucurbits like cucumber can be increased manifold compared to open field cultivation. Normally the economics of protected cultivation directly depends upon the initial cost of fabrication of the protected structure, its running cost and the available market for the high quality produce. Therefore, low cost protected structure, which can generally be fabricated just like naturally ventilated green houses, walk in tunnels and plastic low tunnels are very suitable for off-season cultivation of vegetables and highly economical for peri-urban areas of northern plains of India.
  • 8. Kumar and Singh (2002) studied the problems of vegetable production in Bharatpur district of Rajasthan and reported that the vegetable growers faced the problems such as non-availability of inputs at right time, poor and insufficient quality of inputs, non-availability of desired tomato varieties in the market, high cost of inputs, lack of knowledge about the correct method of their use and non- availability of subsidy. They further pointed out that these problems discouraged the vegetable growers to give boost to vegetable farming. They suggested that extensive demonstrations of improved and high yielding varieties of vegetable crops should be given; definite provisions should be made for timely supply of crucial inputs at reasonable price and in adequate quantity to sustain vegetable production on a profitable basis. Vasava and Pandya (2003) studied the extension strategy for overcoming the major problems of mango and tomato growers of tribal and non-tribal areas of South Gujarat. They reported that the growers faced problems of high price of farm yard manure (F.Y.M) and chemical fertilizers, lack of knowledge regarding plant protection measures and fertilizer application, lack of storage facilities, lack of processing units, lack of knowledge about storage and processing, lack of road facility at village level, low price of produce, problem of middlemen and quick deterioration of products. They suggested that farmers should themselves prepare farm yard manure (F.Y.M.) and reduce the cost. Farmers must establish cold storage and processing units at block level through the co-operative agricultural service societies and government should support the agro-based industries. Training regarding storage and processing should be organized by government and state agricultural universities. They further suggested that government should fix appropriate selling price and marketing should be done through co-operative agricultural service societies. Farmers should use good quality seeds of improved varieties and adopt proper post-harvest technology and use preservation materials to prevent quick deterioration of products. Joshi and Srivastava (2003) conducted experiments during winter season of 1999-2000 and 2000-01 in an unheated poly house. Six dates of sowing were tested for bitter gourd in randomized block design. They found that the plants from earliest sowing date took least time (10 days) for seed germination during both the years, which was even lesser than one third compared to the time taken by other dates of sowing. The increased time taken by successive dates of sowing was obviously due to progressive decrease in the atmospheric and soil temperatures. Sharma et al. (2004) conducted a study to know the resources contributing to shift of land from traditional crops to vegetables and the problems faced by 200 vegetable growers of Punjab. The findings reported that 90.5 percent started vegetable cultivation due to the reason of easy cash payment. Maximum area under summer and winter vegetables was 26 acres and 63 acres respectively season. More than fifty percent of the respondents were interested to increase area under cultivation, 60.5 percent faced the problem of high cost of fertilizers whereas 48.5 percent faced the problem of complexity of procedure for getting loan from banks and 97.5 percent reported that no minimum support price was fixed by Government for the produce. The problems such as vegetable glut in the market, lack of regulated market, lack of storage facilities and exploitation by commission agents were faced by 79.0, 46.0, 38.0 and 51.5 percent of respondents respectively. Further it was found that 38.5 percent, 53.0 percent and 42.0 percent of the respondents lacked technical knowledge regarding agronomic practices, plant protection measures, dose time and method of application of fertilizers and pesticides respectively. Only 27.5 percent faced the problem of non-availability of skilled labour.
  • 9. Sekhon and Kaur (2004) studied the production scenario, economics and benefit of okra cultivation. The total paid costs (cash costs) per acre were worked out as 96.32 per cent of the total cost. Picking of okra is single most important item, which accounted for 58 per cent of the total cost. Among the marketing cost the cost of transportation constitutes two per cent because the market was situated in village itself or near by. The total paid out costs were worked out to be Rs. 17,950 per acre for the year 2000. Gross returns came out to be Rs. 25000 per acre for okra and Rs. 10335 for paddy. The returns over variable cost were calculated as Rs. 7050 per acre, which is higher than its competing crop paddy with Rs. 5198 per acre. Thyagarajan and Prabu (2005) studied the recommended technologies adopted by the tomato growers of Tamil Nadu. They reported that the tomato growers faced the problems such as wide price fluctuations, lack of knowledge to identify pests and diseases, high cost of labour, inadequate water supply, non-availability of credit, exploitation by the middlemen by charging heavy rate of commission and brokerage, lack of adequate transport and market facilities and lack of storage facilities at the village level in the descending order. They suggested fixing a minimum economic price for tomato throughout the entire season, arranging intensive training programmes for tomato growers especially covering identification of pests and diseases, scientific storage and educating the farm labourers through their leaders. They further suggested arranging adequate credit facilities and strengthening the existing rural marketing facilities with cold storage to overcome the major constraints and to increase the area, production and income of tomato growers. Singh and Asrey (2005) studied the performance of tomato and sweet pepper under unheated green house. The production of tomato and sweet pepper under medium cost green house was found top the tune of 93.2 and 76.4 t/ ha respectively. It was of excellent quality as compared to outside where the crop could not survive due to prevailing low temperature. Among the three cultivars of tomato. Neveen (93.2t/ha) out yielded the other cultivars Avinash-II (71.2 t/ ha) and Akash (73.7 t/ha). Thus, the studies have indicated that cultivation of tomato and sweet pepper under green house would not only help in getting higher productivity but also fetch better returns (Rs.7-8 per m2 per season. Anonymous (2006 b) reported that Net house is necessary to produce good quality vegetables and obtain higher yields. The budget for vegetable cultivation in the net house shows that a small farmer (with capital subsidy assistance including some risk coverage) starting from 0.5acre can earn more than Rs. 1 lac per year. Punjab Agricultural University recommends the net house cultivation of Brinjal Hybrid, Capsicum- Bharat and Tomato- Naveen. Tomato crop yielded 75Q/acre normal compared with total yield of 130Q/acre from Naveen and 245Q/acre from TH-1 varieties in the open. Dixit (2007) studied the performance of leafy vegetables under protected environment and open field condition. Green house crops yield several times more than the yields obtained from outdoor cultivation depending upon the cropping system and the degree of environmental control. Because of environmental control, any crop can be grown at any time of the year and even one type of the crops can be raised round the year if needed. An experiment was conducted on leafy vegetables (Spianch, amarathus, fenugreek, and
  • 10. coriander) at horticultural research farm, Indira Gandhi Agricultural University, Raipur(C.G), to see the performance of leafy vegetables under protected environment and in open field condition. As green house cultivation is capital intensive, heavy financial investments are necessary especially in the initial years to construct and equip with adequate environmental control devices. The initial heavy financial investment must be compensated by additional crop yield and export oriented crops. The germination percentage was found 10-20% more in green house as compared to open field. The yield was found to be more as compared to open field condition. The study revealed that the green house cultivation showed superior yield and yield attributing characters as compared to open field condition. Singh and Sirohi (2008) examined that protected cultivation vegetables offers distinct advantages of quality, productivity and favourable market price to the growers. Vegetable growers can substantially increase their income by protected cultivation of vegetables in off-season as the vegetables produced during their normal season generally do not get good returns due to large availability of these vegetables in the markets. Off-season cultivation of cucurbits under low plastic tunnels is one of the most profitable technologies under northern plains of India. Walk-in tunnels are also suitable and effective to raise off-season nursery and off-season vegetable cultivation due to their low initial cost. Insect proof net houses can be used for virus free cultivation of tomato, chilli, sweet pepper and other vegetables mainly during the rainy season. These low coat structures are also suitable for growing pesticide free green vegetables. Low cost green houses can be used for high quality vegetable cultivation for long duration (6-10 months) mainly in peri-urban areas of the country to fetch commensurate prices of produces. Polytrenches have proved extremely useful for growing vegetables under cold desert condition in upper reaches of Himalayas in the country. The studies reviewed above have highlighted that the vegetables are more economical as compared to the commercial crops. The returns from the vegetables are more than that of the other crops. From the vegetables point of view the returns in tomato are maximum as compare to other crops. The present study, therefore, attempts to study the input, yield and returns of net house cultivation in comparison to the traditional cultivation of vegetables. Chapter III MATERIALS AND METHODS The quality of any research is judged on the basis of its methodological approach. It is a way to systematically solve the research problem. It explains not only the steps adopted by a researcher in studying the research problem but also the logic behind them. The methodological frame work adopted for the present study has been discussed under the following headings: 3.1 Location of work
  • 11. In order to achieve the stipulated objectives, present study was conducted in the Punjab state. Sangrur district was selected purposively as most of the net house growers belong to Sangrur district. 3.2 Sampling procedure A list of net house cultivators was prepared with the help of concerned official of KVK’s, PAU and official of horticulture department in Sangrur district. 50 net house cultivators cultivating different vegetables were selected at random. An equal number of farmers doing traditional cultivation of vegetables were also selected for the comparison purpose 3.3 Construction of Interview Schedule A comprehensive schedule was prepared for the collection of information from the respondents keeping in view the objectives of the study. Before starting the data collection work, pre testing of the schedule was done among respondents in the same study area. The questions which were undesirable, ambiguous or difficult to respond by the respondents were simplified or deleted. Certain questions which emerged during the course of pre- testing and considered important were also included in the final schedule. The primary data was collected from the respondent farmers with the help of specially designed and pre- tested schedule through personal interview method. The information data so collected related to the size of family, education level of the farmers, operational holding, area under net house, inputs used by the farmers labour used, vegetables grown under net house, price of the product, inputs prices and total output from all the vegetables in a year was recorded from the net house growers. Similar type of information related to inputs used such as seed, fertilizer, pesticides and labour etc. from traditional vegetable growers were collected. 3.4 Tabulation of data The data is tabulated on the master sheet for further processing and analyzing 3.5 Analysis of data . The data were analyzed with the help of statistical tools such as frequency, percentage and T-test was applied. Various concepts used in the study The details of the various concepts used in the study are as under: Gross returns
  • 12. Gross returns for the vegetables were worked out by multiplying the total production by its price received by the farmer either at farm level or at market level. Returns over variable cost Returns over variable cost were calculated by deducting the production variable cost as well as marketing variable cost (total variable cost) from gross returns. Variable cost The sum of all the costs incurred on seed, fertilizer and manures, plant protection measures, irrigation, farm machinery, hired labour along with miscellaneous cost and interest on the working capital constituted the production costs. Total working costs In addition to the production cost, a substantial amount on packing material such as baskets/ bags etc. is incurred to take them to the market for disposal. Apart from this, transportation costs to the market and marketing charges etc. are the other expenses a vegetable grower has to spend before the product is finally disposed off. In this way, the sum total of production variable cost along with marketing cost such as packing cost, transportation and other marketing charges constituted the total variable cost. The components of total variable cost are as follows. Seed This item included the value of purchased seed and seed treatment material at farm for vegetable grown under net house and vegetable grown in open during study period. The imputed value of owned seed produced was also accounted for at the prevailing market price. Fertilizers and manures The item included the expenses incurred on the purchase of fertilizer and farm yard manures. The farm yard manure on the farm was evaluated at the current prices prevailing in the study area Plant protection measures The variable included the expenses incurred on the purchase of insecticides, fungicides, weedicides etc. used for the various vegetable crops. Irrigation charges
  • 13. Due to implementation of free electricity for the agriculture, the irrigation charges included only the expenditure made on the diesel oil for irrigation purpose and the hiring-in of irrigation for the purpose. Machinery charges Machinery charges included the running expenditure such as diesel and mobil oil used for owned farm machinery other than irrigation. The charges paid for the hiring-in of machinery services were also included in this. Hired labour The hired labour component accounted for the wage payment made to the daily labour at the farm for vegetables production. The value of perquisites if any, were also taken into account In order to work out the human labour hours used in the production of vegetables, female and children labour hours were converted into man equivalent hours using the appropriate weightage procedure; one woman hour was considered equivalent to ¾th of the man hour and a child hour of below 15 years to ½ of a man hour, respectively. Marketing cost This term included the expenses incurred on transporting of vegetables from farm level to the market, cost on packing material, such as baskets and bags etc and other terms such as market fee, diesel oil charges, hiring-in charges, loading, unloading and other expenses for the vegetables. 3.7 Operational holdings The operational holdings of the respondents were classified according to standard classification given by Govt. of Punjab, Statistical Abstracts. Small farmers 1-2 ha Semi-medium farmers 2-4 ha Medium farmers 4-10 ha Large farmers 10 ha and above 3.8 Educational level It is the level of formal education of the head of the family unit ranging from illiterate to post-graduate
  • 14. 3.9 Economic viability of net house To evaluate the economic viability of net house the net present worth (NPW) and benefit- cost ratio (BCR), pay back period and internal rate of return (IRR) have been computed by utilizing discounted cash flow technique. NPW is the difference between the sum of the present value of benefits and that of costs for a given life period of the net house, it collates the total benefits with the total costs covering items like capital and depreciation costs of the net house. In terms of the NPW criterion, the investments on the net house can be treated as economically viable if the present value of benefits is greater than the present value of costs. BCR is also related to NPW as it is obtained just by dividing the present worth of the benefit stream with that of the cost stream. Pay back period is the length of time required for an investment to pay itself out. Pay back period is the length of time required for an investment to pay itself out. IRR is that discount rate which just makes the net present value (NPV) of cash flow equal to zero. It is also called yield of the investment. Generally if the BCR ratio is greater than one, then the investment of that project can be considered as economically viable. If BCR is greater than one then the NPW of the benefit stream is higher than that of the cost stream. The NPW, BCR and IRR can be defined as follows: NPW = ∑ (Bn-Cn)/ (1+i) n ∑ (Bn)/ (1+i) n BCR = ------------------------ ∑ (Cn)/ (1+i) n PBP = I / E IRR = ∑ (Bn-Cn) / (1+i) n = 0 i.e. NPV = 0 Where Bn = benefit in year t. Cn = cost in the year. n = project life in years. I = the initial investment.
  • 15. E = the projected net cash flows per year from the investment. i = rate of discount (or the assumed opportunity cost of the investment). Bn-Cn = cash flow in nth years. Chapter IV RESULT AND DISCUSSION Vegetables are main source of vitamins and minerals required for the human body and essential part of the balanced diet. As most of the population in India is vegetarian, therefore there is strong need to increase production of vegetables. Vegetable production is a good substitute for the wheat-paddy rotation also; but farmers in general are slow adopter of this enterprise, due to its heavy dependence on the weather. Protection technology for vegetable cultivation has been introduced called net house. In order to check the economic viability of net house cultivation of vegetable, various aspects of vegetable production were studied. This chapter mainly deals with the examination of results obtained through the analysis of the data collection; and were classified into four sections, as follows: 4.1 Socio-economic profile of net house vegetable growers. 4.2 Yield, price, cost and returns differentials of net house cultivation vis-à-vis traditional cultivation. 4.3 Financial viability of net house cultivation of vegetables 4.4 Constraints faced by the producer/farmers of net house cultivation. SECTION I 4.1 Socio-economic profile of net house and traditional vegetable growers. To discuss socio-economic profile of the respondents growing vegetables under net house and with traditional method, some features of net house had been discussed. 4.1.1 Salient features of net house growers. 4.1.1.1 Different categories of farmers according to the operational holdings. In the given table the farmers are categories in 4 different groups according to the standard classification followed by Govt. of Punjab, Statistical Abstracts. As vegetable cultivation is labour intensive enterprise, it is hypothesized that marginal and small farmers will actually participate in the adoption of this technology. It was observed from the table that higher
  • 16. adoption level of net house technology is in case of medium farmers i.e. 32 percent followed by large farmers 26 percent. In net house cultivation of vegetables farmers had operational area between 2.5-5 acres belong to small farmer’s categories. Table 4.1.1.1 Distribution of farmers according to the operational holdings (Acres) Net House cultivation Traditional cultivation Net House cultivation Traditional cultivation Average Categories Number Average Area Number Area Small farmers (2.5-5 ) 10 4.40 8 3.75 Semi-medium farmers (5-10 ) 11 7.55 11 9.00 Medium farmers (10-25) 16 16.12 15 17.60 Large farmers (25 and above) 13 49.10 16 51.15 In traditional cultivation of vegetables farmers having operational area between 2.5-5 acres belong to small farmer categories and in the given sample of 50 farmers 8 farmers belong to this group and have an average area of 3.75 acres. Farmers having operational area 5-10 acres belong to semi-medium farmers’ group and 11 farmers belong to this group have an average area of 9 acres. Farmers having operational area between 10-25 acres belong to medium farmers’ group and nearly 15 farmers belong to this group having an average area of 17.6 acres and the last is large farmer categories having operational area above 25 acres of land and to this group nearly 16 farmers are there with an average operational area of 51.15 acres. From the above table we conclude that in net house most of the farmers are medium farmers having average land of 16 acres followed by large farmers having average land of 49 acres and in open cultivation of vegetables most of the farmers are large farmers having average operational area of 51 acres followed by medium farmers having average land of 17.6 acres. 4.1.1.2 Year of installment of net house Table 4.1.1.2 Distribution of net-house vegetable growers according to period of installation Table 4.1.1.2 Distribution of net-house vegetable growers according to period of installation Table 4.1.1.2 Distribution of net-house vegetable growers according to period of installation
  • 17. Year of installing net house No. %age Before 2000 1 2.00 2000-2002 2 4.00 2003-2005 18 36.00 2006-2007 29 58.00 This table indicates the distribution of net house growers according to years in which the net house was installed. According to the figures 58 percent of the net were installed in the time period from 2006 to 2007, 36 percent of the net were installed from 2003 to 2005, 4 percent of the net were installed from 2000 to 2002 and according to the data 2 percent of the net were installed before 2000. These facts highlight the importance of protected technology, as the increase trend was observed for the adoption of this technology. 4.1.1.3 Material required for installing net house The table 4.1.1.3 shows the material required for installing a net house of different sizes. It was observed thatRs.51420 is invested in net house of I kanal followed by net house of 2 kanal, 4 kanal, and 1 acre that is Rs.98500, Rs.188550 and Rs.358045 respectively. The materials used in installment of net house are M.S pipes, G.I wires, iron angles, Round Basils, kunde and kabje, cement+sand+pebbles, paint, U.V net sheet etc. Maximum investment is in case of M.S pipes that of Rs.20000 in case of 1 kanal net followed by Rs. 38000 in 2 kanal net and nearly Rs.138000 in case of 1 acre net house followed by U.V sheets that in case of 1 kanal net house Rs. 19000 are required and in case of 2 kanal net house investment in U.V sheets is nearly 37500 rupees and iron angles which cost Rs.1500 for 1kanal net house and nearly Rs.7500 for 1 acre net house. Table 4.1.1.3 Material required for installing net house (Rs./kanal) Table 4.1.1.3 Material required for installing net house Table 4.1.1.3 Material required for installing net house Table 4.1.1.3 Material required for installing net house Table 4.1.1.3 Material required for installing net house (Rs./kanal) (Rs./kanal) (Rs./kanal) (Rs./kanal)
  • 18. Material required 1 kanal 2 kanal 4 kanal 8 kanal M.S Pipes 20000 38000 72000 138000 G.I wires 500 1200 2500 5200 Iron angles 1500 2500 4000 7500 Round Basils 150 250 450 1000 Kunde and kabje 120 250 500 945 Cement+Sand+Pebbles 1600 2800 5200 9800 Paint 550 1000 1900 3600 U.V net sheet 19000 37500 74000 140000 Labour and miscellaneous 8000 15000 28000 52000 Total 51420 98500 188550 358045 In this we have taken labour cost in miscellaneous cost that is in case of I kanal net house this cost is Rs.8000 and in case of 1 acre net house this cost is nearly 52000 rupees From the above table we conclude that 1 acre net house is more economical as compared to 1kanal, 2 kanal and 4 kanal net house as 1 acre of net house is 8 times that of 1 kanal net house but the cost of installing a 1 acre net house the cost is not 8 times than that of 1 kanal net house that is Rs.358045 but its should be 411360 rupees which about Rs.53315 costly if we have to construct 8 net houses of 1 kanal. Table 4.1.1.4 Amount of subsidy and loan taken by the farmers during that year2006-07 Average Rate of Amount of No. of Categories Amount(Rs.) Interest (%) subsidy farmers Small farmers (2.5-5 ) 79000 11 16500 5 Semi-medium farmers 16500 4 (5-10 ) 191818.2 10 Medium farmers (10-25) 516875 11 16500 6 Large farmers (25 and above) 51111.11 12 16500 5
  • 19. This table shows the credit taken by the farmers of different categories. The farmers belonging to small categories have taken an average credit amount of Rs.79000 with a rate of interest of 11 percent; the farmers belonging to semi-medium got an average credit amount of Rs.191818.2 with a rate of interest of 10 percent; the farmers belonging to medium categories have taken average credit of Rs.516875 with a rate of interest of 11percent and at the last is the large farmers those have taken an credit of amount of Rs.51111.11 with a rate of interest of 12 percent. The farmers have taken the loan from the institutions sources that are from the banks and these loans were for many purposes like for installing net house, for buying inputs etc. The farmers get Rs.16500 as subsidy and most of the medium farmers had got the subsidy and number of farmers belongs to small and large farmers are equal in number those who had got the subsidy and least number of farmers those who got the subsidy belong to semi- medium farmers. 4.1.2 Socio-economic profile of net house and Traditional vegetable growers. The data pertaining to distribution of the farmers according to their socio-personal characteristics have been presented in Table 4.1.1. The details of each of these characteristics have been described as under: 4.1.2.1 Age of the respondent The respondents/farmers were divided into two categories namely net house growers and open growers. The data given in Table 4.1.1 indicate that age of the respondents varied from 26 to above 51 years. In the first group of net house cultivation 40 percent of the respondents belonged to the age group of 36 to 50 years, 34.00 per cent belonged to the age group of 26 to 35 years and the remaining 26.00 per cent respondents were in the age group of above 50 years. In the second group of farmers 46 percent of the respondents belonged to the age group of 51 and above, 32 percent belonged to the age group of 36 to50 years and the remaining 22 percent respondents were in the group of 26 to 35 years 4.1.2.2 Education of the farmer Education is an important determinant of socio-economic conditions of the farm family; particularly the education of the head of the family. It was observed that 10 per cent of the respondents were uneducated, 4 per cent educated up to primary level, 58 per cent up to matric and senior secondary level and most of them (24%) were graduate and the remaining (4%) were post graduates. In case of traditional cultivation vegetables growers most of the respondents (50%) have education up to primary level, 22 percent of the respondents were uneducated, 16 percent of
  • 20. the respondents have education up to matric and senior secondary level, the remaining respondents (12%) were graduate and non of the respondents were postgraduate. Table 4.1.2 Socio-economic profile of net-house and traditional vegetable growers in Punjab Table 4.1.2 Socio-economic profile of net-house and traditional vegetable growers in Punjab Table 4.1.2 Socio-economic profile of net-house and traditional vegetable growers in Punjab Table 4.1.2 Socio-economic profile of net-house and traditional vegetable growers in Punjab Table 4.1.2 Socio-economic profile of net-house and traditional vegetable growers in Punjab Net-House vegetables growers Traditional vegetables growers Net-House vegetables Traditional vegetables Socio-Economic parameters growers growers Characteristics No. %age No. %age A. Age of the respondent (years) 26-35 17 34.00 11 22.00 36-50 20 40.00 16 32.00 51 and above 13 26.00 23 46.00 B. Education of the respondent Illiterate 5 10.00 11 22.00 Primary 2 4.00 25 50.00 Martic and above 29 58.00 8 16.00 Graduate 12 24.00 6 12.00 Postgraduate 2 4.00 0 0.00 C. Occupation Farming 50 100.00 50 100.00
  • 21. Others 5 10.00 10 20.00 D. Extension Contacts Visits to PAU kisan mela 31 62.00 17 34.00 Training Courses related to net house 11 22.00 3 6.00 Member of cooperative society 40 80.00 30 60.00 Member of Kisan sabha 13 26.00 8 16.00 4.1.2.3 Occupation of the respondents The figure in the table 4.1.1 indicates the occupation of net house growers and that of the traditional cultivators of vegetables. According to the figures in both the cases that are in net house and traditional cultivation the main occupation of the farmers is farming. In case of net house cultivation 10 percent of the farmers are also involved in other activities and in traditional cultivation 20 percent of the farmers are involved in other activities like sericulture and bee keeping etc. 4.1.2.4 Extension Contacts of the farmers The figure in the table 4.1.1 highlights the extension contacts of net house vegetable cultivation farmers and open farmer cultivation of vegetables. According to the figures net house farmers, 80 percent of the farmers are the members of cooperative society, 62 percent of the farmers have visited to PAU kisan mela, 26 percent of the farmers are the members of kisan sahba, and 8 percent are the members of the panchayat and nearly 22 percent of the farmers have attended the training courses. In case of traditional cultivation farmers, 60 percent of the farmers are the member of cooperative society, 34 percent of the farmers have visited to PAU kisan mela, 16 percent of the farmers are the members of kisan sahba, 2 percent are the members of panchayat and nearly 6 percent of the farmers have attended the training courses sericulture and bee keeping. 4.1.3 Area under net house
  • 22. Table 4.1.3 Distribution of net-house vegetable growers according to area under net-house Table 4.1.3 Distribution of net-house vegetable growers according to area under net-house Table 4.1.3 Distribution of net-house vegetable growers according to area under net-house Area net house cultivation No. %age 1 kanal 12 24.00 2 kanal 23 46.00 4 kanal 4 8.00 Above 4 kanal 11 22.00 This table indicates the distribution of net house vegetable growers according to area under net house. According to figures maximum (46%) of the net house have area from 1 to 2 kanals, 24 percent have area up to 1 kanal, 22 percent have area more than 4 kanals and the remaining 8 percent have area 2 kanals. 4.1.4 Operational holdings According to table 4.1.4 average operational holding of the farmer is nearly 20.35 acres, whereas average owned land is 13.15 acres, and farmer has average leased-in land 7.41 acres, and very less area has been give leased-out that is just 0.21 acres. 74.00 percent of the land has very high fertility, 26.00 percent of the land has not too high not too low fertility and none of the farmers says that their land is less fertile. Table 4.1.4 Particulars about operational holdings of net-house vegetable growers Particulars Average %age Operational Holding (acres) Owned Land 13.15 64.62 Leased-in land 7.41 36.41 Leased-out land 0.21 1.03 Operational Area 20.35
  • 23. Fertility Status of Soil No. Low 0 0.00 Medium 13 26.00 High 37 74.00 Rental value of Land 18102 Value of owned land 953846 4.1.4.3 Rental value of land The average rental value of the land is about Rs.18102 per acre and the average value of the owned land is about Rs.953846 per acre. 4.1.5 Total number of farmers and area under different vegetables in traditional and net house cultivation of vegetables. The table 4.1.5 shows the major vegetables grown by the farmers in net house and by other farmers. The vegetable pattern followed in the net house are, maximum area is under capsicum that near about 8 acres and nearly 60 percent of the farmers grows capsicum under net house followed by tomato that is area under tomato is nearly 7 acres and 28 percent of the total no of farmers grow tomato under net house and in case of chilli, peas and potato area under net house is nearly 5 acres, 3 acres and 2 acres respectively and no of farmers under net house growing chilli, peas and potato is 17, 16 and 5 farmers that is 34 percent, 32 percent and 10 percent respectively. Table 4.1.5 Total number of farmers and area under different vegetables in traditional and net house cultivation (area in acres) Table 4.1.5 Total number of farmers and area under different vegetables in traditional and net house cultivation (area in acres) Table 4.1.5 Total number of farmers and area under different vegetables in traditional and net house cultivation (area in acres) Table 4.1.5 Total number of farmers and area under different vegetables in traditional and net house cultivation (area in acres) Table 4.1.5 Total number of farmers and area under different vegetables in traditional and net house cultivation (area in acres) Table 4.1.5 Total number of farmers and area under different vegetables in traditional and net house cultivation (area in acres) Table 4.1.5 Total number of farmers and area under different vegetables in traditional and net house cultivation (area in acres) Net house cultivation Net house cultivation Net house
  • 24. cultivation Traditional cultivation Traditional cultivation Traditional cultivation no of Percentage of no of Percentage of Vegetables Area farmers farmers Area farmers farmers Tomato 7 28 56 13 10 20 Capsicum 8 30 60 9 8 16 Potato 2 5 10 74 25 50 Chilli 5 17 34 15 10 20 Peas 3 16 32 20 15 30 In case of traditional cultivation maximum area is under potato that near about 74 acres and nearly 50 percent of the farmers grows potato in open followed by peas that is area under peas is nearly 20 acres and 30 percent of the total no of farmers grow peas in traditional cultivation and in case of chilli, tomato and capsicum area under open cultivation is nearly 15 acres, 13 acres and 9 acres respectively and no of farmers in traditional cultivation growing chilli, tomato and capsicum is 10, 15 and 8 farmers that is 20 percent, 30 percent and 16 percent respectively. SECTION II 4.2 Yield, price, cost and returns differentials of net house cultivation vis-à-vis open cultivation. The input output coefficients were marked out for different vegetables separately under net house cultivation and open cultivation. The vegetables that is chilli, potato, tomato, peas and capsicum were grown by the vegetable growers. 4.2.1 Economics of Chilli Production 4.2.1.1 Cost of production The results pertaining to the magnitude and composition of production variable and the marketing cost worked out in both the case that is in net house and in open cultivation for this crop on different size categories of the farm in the study area are incorporated in the table 4.2.1. In case of net house cultivation of chilli the variable costs were worked out was Rs.31963.36/acre, 85.4 percent was the variable cost and the remaining 14.6 percent was marketing cost. The structure of the total variable cost showed that the highest proportion was spent on labour with 70.59 percent followed by seed, fertilizer and FYM, plant
  • 25. protection, machinery and irrigation charges with 9.84 percent, 9.62 percent, 6.14 percent, 2.39 percent, and 1.414 percent respectively. In case of traditional cultivation of chilli the variable cost was worked out was Rs.35356.1/acre, 86.99 percent was the variable cost and the remaining 13.01 percent was the marketing cost. The structure of the variable cost showed that the highest proportion of coat was on labour (69.33 percent) followed by fertilizer and FYM, seed plant protection, machinery and irrigation charges with 9.8 percent, 9.32 percent, 7.23 percent, 2.79 percent, and 1.58 percent respectively. The comparative analysis of cost of production of chilli in net house cultivation and traditional cultivation indicated that in traditional cultivation of chilli variable cost is Rs.3221.87 more than that cultivating chilli in net house. Table 4.2.1 Economics of net-house and traditional cultivation of chilli Table 4.2.1 Economics of net-house and traditional cultivation of chilli Table 4.2.1 Economics of net-house and traditional cultivation of chilli Table 4.2.1 Economics of net-house and traditional cultivation of chilli (Rs./ acre) (Rs./ acre) (Rs./ acre) (Rs./ acre) Particulars Net-House Traditional t-value A. Cost Structure Seed 3143.78 3294.61 1.37ns Fertilizers and FYM 3076.64 3448.53 3.58*** Labour 22564.21 24509.87 2.13** Plant Protection 1963.85 2557.13 2.69*** Irrigation 452.11 561.27 1.98** Machinery 763.37 984.69 2.29** Variable Cost 31963.36 35356.1 Marketing Cost 5468.15 5297.88 1.78* Total working cost 37432.11 40653.98 3.19*** B. Returns Structure
  • 26. Production (Qtl) 133.84 108.56 2.45** Sale Price (Rs./Qtl) 714.68 672.64 1.13ns Gross Returns 95652.77 73021.80 6.48*** Net Returns 58220.66 32367.82 7.13*** ***, **, * : significant at 1%, 5% and 10% level respectively ***, **, * : significant at 1%, 5% and 10% level respectively ***, **, * : significant at 1%, 5% and 10% level respectively ***, **, * : significant at 1%, 5% and 10% level respectively 4.2.1.2 Returns The information regarding the returns from chilli per acre basis is given in the table 4.2.1. The results revealed that in case of net house cultivation of chilli an average farmer received Rs. 95652.77 as gross returns whereas net returns come out to be Rs.58220.66/acre In case of open cultivation of vegetables an average farmer received Rs.73021.80 as gross return whereas net returns come out to be Rs.32367.98/acre. The comparison of returns from chilli under net house and traditional cultivation of chilli indicated that in traditional cultivation of chilli the production is 25.28 quintals less than the production from net house cultivation. The sale price which the farmers get Rs. 42.04/ quintals more in case of net house cultivation than from traditional cultivation of chilli. The gross returns from net house cultivation are Rs. 22630.97/acre more than from traditional cultivation of chilli. Net return from net house is Rs. 25852.84/acre more than traditional cultivation of chilli. 4.2.2 Economics of Peas Production 4.2.2.1 Cost of production The results pertaining to the magnitude and composition of production variable and the marketing cost worked out in both the case that is in net house and in traditional cultivation for this crop on different size categories of the farm in the study area are incorporated in the table 4.2.2. In case of net house cultivation of peas the variable cost was worked out to be Rs.12774.41/ acre. Out of this 67.4 percent was the variable cost and the remaining 32.6 percent was marketing cost. The structure of the variable cost showed that the highest proportion was spent on labour with 78.03 percent followed by seed, fertilizer and FYM, plant protection, machinery and irrigation charges with 10.62 percent, 5.87 percent, 1.29 percent, 2.9 percent, and 1.34 percent respectively.
  • 27. In case of traditional house cultivation of peas the variable cost was worked out to be Rs. 11486.8/acre. 67.08 percent was the variable cost and the remaining 32.92 percent was the marketing cost. The structure of the variable cost showed that the highest proportion was spent on labour with 72.16 percent followed by fertilizer and FYM, seed, plant protection, machinery and irrigation charges with 9.81 percent, 11.03 percent, 1.73 percent, 3.41 percent, and 1.86 percent respectively. If we study the comparative study of cost of production of peas in net house cultivation and open cultivation the information per acre basis indicated that in open cultivation of peas variable cost is Rs.1838.14 less than that cultivating peas in net house. Table 4.2.2 Economics of net-house and traditional cultivation of peas Table 4.2.2 Economics of net-house and traditional cultivation of peas Table 4.2.2 Economics of net-house and traditional cultivation of peas Table 4.2.2 Economics of net-house and traditional cultivation of peas (Rs./ acre) (Rs./ acre) (Rs./ acre) (Rs./ acre) Particulars Net-House Traditional t-value A. Cost Structure Seed 1356.61 1267.34 1.62ns Fertilizers and FYM 749.67 1126.91 2.19** Labour 9967.63 8288.43 2.14** Plant Protection 164.22 198.44 1.13ns Irrigation 171.47 214.19 2.01** Machinery 364.81 391.49 1.34ns Variable Cost 12774.41 11486.8 Marketing Cost 6187.64 5637.11 2.31** Total working cost 18962.05 17123.91 2.49** B. Returns Structure Production (Qtl) 45.59 40.39 2.16*** Sale Price (Rs./Qtl) 611.43 582.07 1.87*
  • 28. Gross Returns 27875.09 23509.81 4.69*** Net Returns 8913.04 6385.90 6.21*** 4.2.2.2 Returns The information regarding the returns from peas per acre basis is given in the table 4.2.2. The results revealed that in case of net house cultivation of vegetable an average farmer received Rs. 27875.09/acre as gross returns whereas net returns come out to be Rs.8913.04 In case of traditional cultivation of vegetables an average farmer received Rs.23509.81/acre as gross return whereas net returns come out to be Rs.6385.90/acre. The comparison of returns from peas under net house and traditional cultivation of peas the information per acre basis indicated that in traditional cultivation of peas the production is 5.2 quintals less than the production from net house cultivation. The sale price which the farmers get Rs. 29.36 more in case of net house cultivation than from traditional cultivation of peas. The gross returns from net house cultivation are Rs. 4365.28/acre more than from traditional cultivation of peas. Net returns from net house are Rs. 2527.14/acre more than traditional cultivation of peas. 4.2.3 Economics of Potato Production. 4.2.3.1 Cost of production The results pertaining to the magnitude and composition of production variable and the marketing cost worked out in both the case that is in net house and in open cultivation for this crop on different size categories of the farm in the study area are incorporated in the table 4.2.3. In case of net house cultivation of potato the variable cost was worked out to be Rs.14852.77/acre, 66.67 percent was the variable cost and the remaining 33.33 percent was marketing cost. The structure of the variable cost showed that the highest proportion was spent on seed with 66.55 percent followed by labour, fertilizer and FYM, plant protection, machinery and irrigation charges with 14.70 percent, 5.95 percent, 3.13 percent, 6.5 percent, and 3.17 percent respectively. In case of open house cultivation of potato the variable cost was worked out to be Rs. 14787.92/acre, 70.67 percent was the variable cost and the remaining 29.33 percent was the marketing cost. The structure of the variable cost showed that the highest proportion was spent on seed with 63.87 percent followed by fertilizer and FYM, labour, plant protection and machinery and irrigation charges with 9.58 percent, 10.97 percent, 4.72 percent, 7.38 percent and 3.48 percent respectively.
  • 29. The comparative analysis of cost of production of potato in net house cultivation and open cultivation the information per acre basis indicated that in open cultivation of potato variable cost is Rs.1351.01/acre less than that cultivating potato in net house. Table 4.2.3 Economics of net-house and Traditional cultivation of potato Table 4.2.3 Economics of net-house and Traditional cultivation of potato Table 4.2.3 Economics of net-house and Traditional cultivation of potato Table 4.2.3 Economics of net-house and Traditional cultivation of potato Rs./ acre) Rs./ acre) Rs./ acre) Rs./ acre) Particulars Net-House Traditional t-value A. Cost Structure Seed 9884.13 9445.51 2.54** Fertilizers and FYM 884.21 1416.43 3.57*** Labour 2183.84 1621.67 2.89*** Plant Protection 464.56 698.63 2.48** Irrigation 471.22 514.19 0.98ns Machinery 964.81 1091.49 0.71ns Variable cost 14852.77 14787.92 Marketing Cost 7423.78 6137.62 2.99*** Total working cost 22276.55 20925.54 1.96** B. Returns Structure Production (Qtl) 76.54 58.29 2.26** Sale Price (Rs./Qtl) 537.59 481.15 1.97** Gross Returns 41147.14 28046.23 4.91*** Net Returns 18870.59 7120.69 5.52*** ***, **, * : significant at 1%, 5% and 10% level respectively ***, **, * : significant at 1%, 5% and 10% level respectively ***, **, * : significant at 1%, 5% and 10% level respectively ***, **, * : significant at 1%, 5% and 10%
  • 30. level respectively 4.2.3.2 Returns The information regarding the returns from potato per acre basis is given in the table 4.2.3. The results revealed that in case of net house cultivation of vegetable an average farmer received Rs. 41147.14/acre as gross returns whereas net returns come out to be Rs.18870.59/acre. In case of open cultivation of vegetables an average farmer received Rs.28046.23/acre as gross return whereas net returns come out to be Rs.7120.69/acre. The comparison of returns from potato under net house and traditional cultivation of potato the information per acre basis indicated that in traditional cultivation of potato the production is 18.25 quintals less than the production from net house cultivation. The sale price which the farmers get Rs.56.44 more in case of net house cultivation than from open cultivation of potato. The gross returns from net house cultivation are Rs.13100.91/acre more than from traditional cultivation of potato. Net returns from net house are Rs.11749.9/ acre more than traditional cultivation of potato. 4.2.4 Economics of Tomato Production. 4.2.4.1 Cost of production The results pertaining to the magnitude and composition of production variable and the marketing cost worked out in both the case that is in net house and in traditional cultivation for this crop on different size categories of the farm in the study area are incorporated in the table 4.2.4. In case of net house cultivation of tomato the variable cost was worked out to be Rs.19521.63/acre, 65.18 percent was the variable cost and the remaining 34.82 percent was marketing cost. The structure of the variable cost showed that the highest proportion was spent on labour with 65.34 percent followed by seed, fertilizer and FYM, plant protection, machinery and irrigation charges with 11.9 percent, 10.8 percent, 2.45 percent, 7.12 percent and 2.32 percent respectively. In case of traditional house cultivation of tomato the variable cost was worked out to be Rs. 17803.78/acre, 66.74 percent was the variable cost and the remaining 33.26 percent was the marketing cost. The structure of the total variable cost showed that the highest proportion was spent on labour with 57.16 percent followed by fertilizer and FYM, seed, plant protection and machinery and irrigation charges with 15.99 percent, 12.12 percent, 4.33 percent, 7.57 percent and 2.83 percent respectively.
  • 31. The comparative analysis of cost of production of tomato in net house cultivation and traditional cultivation the information per acre basis indicated that in traditional cultivation of tomato variable cost is Rs.3732.93/acre less than that cultivating tomato in net house. Table 4.2.4 Economics of net-house and Traditional cultivation of tomato Table 4.2.4 Economics of net-house and Traditional cultivation of tomato Table 4.2.4 Economics of net-house and Traditional cultivation of tomato Table 4.2.4 Economics of net-house and Traditional cultivation of tomato (Rs./ acre) (Rs./ acre) (Rs./ acre) (Rs./ acre) Particulars Net-House Traditional t-value A. Cost Structure Seed 2363.52 2157.68 1.33ns Fertilizers and FYM 2149.58 2845.73 3.86*** Labour 12952.43 10177.15 3.51*** Plant Protection 484.96 771.37 3.19*** Irrigation 459.77 503.22 1.58ns Machinery 1411.37 1348.63 1.41ns Variable cost 19521.63 17803.78 Marketing Cost 10587.51 8872.43 3.16*** Total working cost 30109.14 26676.21 2.91*** B. Returns Structure Production (Qtl) 157.33 89.34 3.17*** Sale Price (Rs./Qtl) 1257.41 1033.64 2.24** Gross Returns 197828.32 92345.40 3.69*** Net Returns 167719.18 65669.19 4.21*** ***, **, * : significant at 1%, 5% and 10% level respectively ***, **, * : significan
  • 32. t at 1%, 5% and 10% level respectiv ely ***, **, * : significan t at 1%, 5% and 10% level respectiv ely 4.2.4.2 Returns The information regarding the returns from tomato per acre basis is given in the table 4.2.4. The results revealed that in case of net house cultivation of vegetable an average farmer received Rs.197828.32/acre as gross returns whereas net returns come out to be Rs.167719.18. In case of open cultivation of vegetables an average farmer received Rs. 92345.40/acre as gross return whereas net returns come out to be Rs.65669.19 If we study the comparative study of returns of tomato from net house and open cultivation of tomato the information per acre basis indicated that in open cultivation of tomato the production is 67.99 quintals less than the production from net house cultivation. The sale price which the farmers get Rs. 223.77 more in case of net house cultivation than from open cultivation of tomato. The gross returns from net house cultivation are Rs. 105482.92/acre more than from open cultivation of tomato. Net returns from net house are Rs. 101749.99/acre more than open cultivation of tomato. 4.2.5 Economics of Capsicum Production. 4.2.5.1 Cost of production The results pertaining to the magnitude and composition of production variable and the marketing cost worked out in both the case that is in net house and in open cultivation for this crop on different size categories of the farm in the study area are incorporated in the table 4.2.5. In case of net house cultivation of capsicum the variable cost was worked out to be Rs.20618.47/acre, 81.04 percent was the variable cost and the remaining 18.96 percent was marketing cost. The structure of the variable cost showed that the highest proportion was spent on labour with 41.81 percent followed by seed, fertilizer and FYM, plant protection,
  • 33. machinery and irrigation charges with 26.40 percent, 23.24 percent, 2.12 percent, 4.79 percent and 1.62 percent respectively. In case of traditional house cultivation of capsicum the variable cost was worked out to be Rs. 21492.57/acre, 82.96 percent was the variable cost and the remaining 17.04 percent was the marketing cost. The structure of the total variable cost showed that the highest proportion was spent on labour with 34.68 percent followed by fertilizer and FYM, seed, plant protection and machinery and irrigation charges with 32.40 percent, 24.02 percent, 2.75percent, 4.48 percent, 1.67 percent respectively. The comparative analysis of study of cost of production of capsicum in net house cultivation and open cultivation the information per acre basis indicated that in open cultivation of capsicum variable cost is Rs.464.68/acre more than that cultivating capsicum in net house. Table 4.2.5 Economics of net-house and Traditional cultivation of capsicum Table 4.2.5 Economics of net-house and Traditional cultivation of capsicum Table 4.2.5 Economics of net-house and Traditional cultivation of capsicum Table 4.2.5 Economics of net-house and Traditional cultivation of capsicum (Rs./ acre) (Rs./ acre) (Rs./ acre) (Rs./ acre) Particulars Net-House Traditional t-value A. Cost Structure Seed 5443.61 5162.76 1.09ns Fertilizers and FYM 4792.33 6963.87 3.75*** Labour 8621.45 7452.61 2.51** Plant Protection 437.81 591.58 2.07** Irrigation 334.62 359.31 1.02ns Machinery 988.65 962.44 0.65ns Variable cost 20618.47 21492.57 Marketing cost 4822.67 4413.25 2.37** Total working cost 25441.14 25905.82 2.56** B. Returns Structure
  • 34. Production (Qtl) 78.24 58.27 2.26** Sale Price (Rs./Qtl) 1207.59 1054.45 3.28*** Gross Returns 94481.84 61442.80 3.91*** Net Returns 69040.70 35536.98 3.52*** ***, **, * : significant at 1%, 5% and 10% level respectively ***, **, * : significant at 1%, 5% and 10% level ***, **, * : significant at 1%, 5% and 10% level respectively respectively 4.2.5.2 Returns The information regarding the returns from capsicum per acre basis is given in the table 4.2.5. The results revealed that in case of net house cultivation of vegetable an average farmer received Rs.94481.84/acre as gross returns whereas net returns come out to be Rs.69040.70/acre. In case of traditional cultivation of vegetables an average farmer received Rs. 61442.80/acre as gross return whereas net returns come out to be Rs.35536.98/acre. If we study the comparative study of returns of capsicum from net house and traditional cultivation of capsicum the information per acre basis indicated that in open cultivation of capsicum the production is 19.67 quintals less than the production from net house cultivation. The sale price which the farmers get Rs. 153.14/acre more in case of net house cultivation than from traditional cultivation of capsicum. The gross returns from net house cultivation are Rs. 33039.04/acre more than from traditional cultivation of capsicum. Net returns from net house are Rs. 33503.72/acre more than traditional cultivation of capsicum. 4.2.6 Comparative analysis of different vegetables grown under net house. 4.2.6.1 Cost structure The information regarding the composition and the total expenditure on per acre basis of different vegetables under net house is incorporated in Table 4.2.7. This would enable us to know which of the vegetables need more investment and which variable is more important. The result revealed that chilli is most expensive crop because of its highest expenditure of Rs.36980/acre on per acre basis followed by tomato (Rs.30409.14), capsicum (Rs.25441.14), potato (Rs.22276.55) and the peas was the least expensive vegetable with expenditure of Rs.18962.05 on per acre basis.
  • 35. So far as the important components of production costs are concerned, labour was most important in case of chilli and tomato, seed in case of potato and capsicum. In case of capsicum and chilli manure and fertilizer is the important component. Marketing cost was more in case of tomato followed by potato, peas, chilli and capsicum. Table 4.2.7 Economic comparisons of different vegetables grown under net house (Rs./acre) Table 4.2.7 Economic comparisons of different vegetables grown under net house Table 4.2.7 Economic comparisons of different vegetables grown under net house Table 4.2.7 Economic comparisons of different vegetables grown under net house Table 4.2.7 Economic comparisons of different vegetables grown under net house Table 4.2.7 Economic comparisons of different vegetables grown under net house (Rs./acre) (Rs./acre) (Rs./acre) (Rs./acre) (Rs./acre) Particulars Chilli Peas Potato Tomato capsicum A. Cost Structure Seed 3143.78 1356.61 9884.13 2363.52 5443.61 Fertilizers 3076.64 749.67 884.21 2149.58 4792.33 Labour 22564.21 9967.63 2183.84 12952.43 8621.45 Plant Protection 1963.85 164.22 464.56 484.96 437.81 Irrigation 452.11 171.47 471.22 459.77 334.62 Machinery 763.37 364.81 964.81 1411.37 988.65 Variable cost 31963.36 12774.41 14852.77 19821.63 20618.47 Marketing cost 5468.15 6187.64 7423.78 10587.51 4822.67 Total working cost 37432.11 18962.05 22276.55 30109.14 25441.14 B. Returns Structure Production (Qtl) 133.84 45.59 76.54 157.33 78.24
  • 36. Sale Price (Rs./Qtl) 714.68 611.43 537.59 1257.41 1207.59 Gross Returns 95652.77 27875.09 41147.14 197828.32 94481.84 Net Returns 58220.66 8913.04 18870.59 167719.18 69040.70 4.2.6.2 Returns The information regarding the various returns from the winter vegetable is incorporated in table 4.2.7. The results indicated that gross returns were highest for tomato with Rs.197828.32/acre. This was followed by chilli, potato, capsicum, peas with Rs.95652.77. Rs.41147.14, Rs.94481.84 and Rs.27875.09 respectively. The information regarding the net retruns was highest in case of tomato that is Rs.167719.18 followed by chilli, potato, capsicum, and peas with net return of Rs.58672.77, Rs.69040.70, Rs.18870.59 and Rs.8913.04 respectively. Conclusions The total cost comparison shows that in all the vegetables total cost in case net house is comparatively less than that in open cultivation of vegetables and gross returns and net returns were higher in case of net house than open cultivation of vegetables and if we compare different vegetables, maximum net returns is in case of tomato followed by capsicum, chilli, potato and least in case of peas 4.2.7 Input-output comparison of vegetables under net house and traditional cultivation of vegetables. 4.2.7.1 Cost comparison of plant protection and chemical used in net house vis-à-vis traditional cultivation of vegetables. The table 4.2.7.1 shows the cost comparison of plant protection and chemical used in net house and open cultivation of vegetables. In the case of net house cultivation on per acre basis maximum use of plant protection and chemical is in case of chilli of Rs.1963.85 that is 5.25 percent of the total cost on chilli followed by tomato (Rs.484.96), potato (Rs.464.56), capsicum (Rs.437.81) and least in case of peas of Rs.164.22 that is 0.87 percent of the total cost on peas. In case of open cultivation of vegetables on per acre basis maximum use of plant protection and chemical was also found in case of chilli of Rs.2557.13 that is 6.29 percent of the total cost on chilli followed by tomato (Rs.771.37), potato (Rs.698.63), capsicum (Rs.591.58) and least in case of peas is Rs.198.44 that is 1.16 percent of the total cost on peas.
  • 37. Table 4.2.7.1 Cost Comparison of plant protection and chemical in net house vis-à-vis traditional cultivation of vegetables (Rs/acre) Table 4.2.7.1 Cost Comparison of plant protection and chemical in net house vis-à-vis traditional cultivation of vegetables (Rs/acre) Table 4.2.7.1 Cost Comparison of plant protection and chemical in net house vis-à-vis traditional cultivation of vegetables (Rs/acre) Table 4.2.7.1 Cost Comparison of plant protection and chemical in net house vis-à-vis traditional cultivation of vegetables (Rs/acre) Table 4.2.7.1 Cost Comparison of plant protection and chemical in net house vis-à-vis traditional cultivation of vegetables (Rs/acre) Table 4.2.7.1 Cost Comparison of plant protection and chemical in net house vis-à-vis traditional cultivation of vegetables (Rs/acre) Table 4.2.7.1 Cost Comparison of plant protection and chemical in net house vis-à-vis traditional cultivation of vegetables (Rs/acre) Table 4.2.7.1 Cost Comparison of plant protection and chemical in net house vis-à-vis traditional cultivation of vegetables (Rs/acre) S a v i n g i n t h e n e t h o u s Net house Traditional Traditional cultivation e Net house cultivation Saving in the net house Vegetables Cost Percent Cost Percent Difference Percent Chilli 1963.85 5.25 2557.13 6.29 -593.28 -30.21
  • 38. Peas 164.22 0.87 198.44 1.16 -34.22 -20.83 potato 464.56 2.09 698.63 3.34 -234.07 -50.38 tomato 484.96 1.59 771.37 2.89 -286.41 -59.05 capsicum 437.81 1.72 591.58 2.28 -153.77 -35.12 If we study the cost comparative of plant protection and chemical use in vegetables in net house and traditional cultivation of vegetables, in case of net house maximum saving is in case of tomato that is 59.05 percent followed by potato (50.38 percent), peas (20.83 percent), and capsicum (35.12 percent) and in case of chilli the saving is 30.21 percent. 4.2.7.2 Cost comparison of labour used in net house vis-à-vis traditional cultivation of vegetables. This table shows the cost comparison of labour used in net house and open cultivation of vegetables. In this case of net house cultivation on per acre basis maximum use of labour is in case of chilli of Rs.22564.21 that is 60.28 percent of the total cost followed by tomato(Rs.12952.43), peas(Rs.9967.63), capsicum(Rs.8621.45) and least in case of potato of (Rs.2183.84) that is 9.80 percent of the total cost on potato. In case of traditional cultivation of vegetables on per acre basis maximum use of labour is in case of chilli of Rs.24509.87 that is 60.29 percent of the total cost on chilli followed by tomato (Rs.10177.15), peas (Rs.8288.43), capsicum (Rs.7452.61) and least in case of potato is Rs.1621.67 that is 7.75 percent of the total cost on potato. Table 4.2.7.2 Cost Comparison of labour in net house vis-à-vis traditional cultivation of vegetables (Rs./acre) Table 4.2.7.2 Cost Comparison of labour in net house vis-à-vis traditional cultivation Table 4.2.7.2 Cost Comparison of labour in net house vis-à-vis traditional cultivation Table 4.2.7.2 Cost Comparison of labour in net house vis-à-vis traditional cultivation Table 4.2.7.2 Cost Comparison of labour in net house vis-à-vis traditional cultivation Table 4.2.7.2 Cost Comparison of labour in net house vis-à-vis traditional cultivation Table 4.2.7.2 Cost Comparison of labour in net house vis-à-vis traditional cultivation Table 4.2.7.2 Cost Comparison of labour in net house vis-à-vis traditional cultivation
  • 39. of vegetables (Rs./acre) of vegetables (Rs./acre) of vegetables (Rs./acre) of vegetables (Rs./acre) of vegetables (Rs./acre) of vegetables (Rs./acre) of vegetables (Rs./acre) S a v i n g i n t h e n e t h o u Net house cultivation s Traditional Traditional cultivation e Net house cultivation cultivation Saving in the net house
  • 40. Vegetables Cost percent Cost Percent Difference Percent Chilli 22564.21 60.28 24509.87 60.29 -1945.66 -8.62 Peas 9967.63 52.57 8288.43 48.40 1679.20 16.84 potato 2183.84 9.80 1621.67 7.75 562.17 25.74 tomato 12952.43 42.59 10177.15 38.15 2775.28 21.42 capsicum 8621.45 33.89 7452.61 28.77 1168.84 13.55 If we study the cost comparative of labour use in vegetables in net house and traditional cultivation of vegetables per acre basis in case of net house maximum saving is in case of potato that is 25.74 percent followed by tomato (21.42 percent), peas (16.84 percent), capsicum (13.55 percent) and in case of chilli there is lose in labour use in net house in comparison to traditional cultivation of vegetables of 8.62 percent. 4.2.7.3 Comparison of fertilizer and manure used in net house vis-à-vis open cultivation of vegetables. The table 4.2.7.3 shows the comparison of fertilizer and manure used in case of net house and open cultivation of vegetables In the case of net house cultivation on per acre basis maximum use of fertilizer and manure was in the case of capsicum of Rs.5443.61 followed by chilli (Rs.3076.64), tomato (Rs.2363.52), potato (Rs.884.21) and least in case of peas of Rs.749.67. In case of open cultivation of vegetables on per acre basis maximum use of fertilizer and manure is in case of capsicum of Rs.5162.76 followed by chilli (Rs.3448.53), tomato (Rs.2157.69), potato (Rs.1416.43) and least in case of peas of Rs.1126.91. Table 4.2.7.3 Cost Comparison of fertilizer and manure in net house vis- à-vis traditional cultivation of vegetables (Rs./acre) Table 4.2.7.3 Cost Comparison of fertilizer and manure in net house vis- à-vis traditional cultivation of vegetables (Rs./acre) Table 4.2.7.3 Cost Comparison of fertilizer and manure in net house vis-à-vis traditional cultivation of vegetables (Rs./acre) Table 4.2.7.3 Cost Comparison of fertilizer and manure in net house vis-à-vis traditional cultivation of vegetables (Rs./acre) Table 4.2.7.3 Cost Comparison of fertilizer and manure in net house vis-à-vis traditional cultivation of vegetables (Rs./acre) Table 4.2.7.3 Cost Comparison of fertilizer and manure in net house vis-à-vis traditional cultivation of vegetables (Rs./acre) Table 4.2.7.3 Cost Comparison of fertilizer and manure in net house vis-à-vis
  • 41. traditional cultivation of vegetables (Rs./acre) Net house cultivation Traditional cultivation Net house Traditional Saving in the net house cultivation cultivation Saving in the net house Vegetables Cost Percent Cost Percent Difference Percent Chilli 3076.64 8.22 3448.53 8.48 -371.89 -12.08 Peas 749.67 3.95 1126.91 6.58 -377.24 -50.32 Potato 884.21 3.97 1416.43 6.77 -532.22 -60.19 Tomato 2363.52 7.77 2157.68 8.09 205.84 8.70 capsicum 5443.61 21.40 5162.76 19.93 280.85 5.15 If we study the cost comparative of fertilizer and manure of vegetables in net house and traditional cultivation of vegetables per acre basis maximum difference is in case of tomato i.e. in net house cultivation total cost are 8.70 percent less as compare to traditional house cultivation of vegetables followed by capsicum (5.15%) but in case of potato (60.19%) peas (50.32%) and chilli (12.08%) total cost in traditional house cultivation was less as compare to net house cultivation of vegetables. 4.2.7.4 Price comparison of vegetable in net house vis-à-vis traditional cultivation of vegetables The table 4.2.7.4 shows the price comparison of vegetables of net house and traditional cultivation of vegetables. In case of net house cultivation maximum price is in tomato (Rs. 1257.41) followed by capsicum, chilli, peas and potato that is Rs.1207.59, Rs.714.68, Rs.611.43 and Rs. 537.59 respectively. In case of traditional cultivation of vegetables maximum price in capsicum that was Rs. 1054.45 followed by tomato, chilli, peas and potato that was Rs. 1033.64, Rs.672.64, Rs.582.07 and Rs.481.15 respectively. Table 4.2.7.4 Price comparison of vegetables in net house vis-à-vis traditional cultivation. Net house Traditional Benefits in net cultivation cultivation house
  • 42. Vegetables Rs./Qtls Rs./Qtls Difference Chilli 714.68 672.64 42.04 Peas 611.43 582.07 29.36 Potato 537.59 481.15 56.44 Tomato 1257.41 1033.64 223.77 Capsicum 1207.59 1054.45 153.14 The comparative analysis of price in net house and traditional cultivation indicates that maximum difference is in tomato of Rs.223.77 per quintal and followed by capsicum, Potato, chilli that is Rs.153.14, Rs.56.44 and 42.04 respectively and minimum difference is in case of peas of Rs. 29.36 per quintal. In this we concluded that plant protection chemical is used in fewer amounts in net house than in traditional cultivation. Cost of labour in chilli was more in case of net house but in case of other vegetable the cost of labour is less in case of net house than in traditional cultivation of vegetables. Cost of fertilizer and manure in case of chilli, peas and potato is more in case of traditional cultivation than in case of net house cultivation and in case of tomato and capsicum the consumption of fertilizer and manure is more in net house than in traditional cultivation of vegetables and if we compile all the cost, the total cost in net house is more in case of peas, potato and tomato and in traditional cultivation is more in case of chilli and capsicum. The yield, gross returns and net returns in case of net house in all the vegetables is more in net house than in traditional cultivation of vegetables. So we concluded that cultivation of vegetables in net house is more economical than in traditional cultivation. Particulars R1 R2 R3 R4 R5 R6 R7 R8 No. of farmers 11 5 7 2 2 4 10 5 A. Cost Structure A. Cost Structure Seed 10950.91 5507.3 9163.74 3326.37 2546.11 5626.2 7807.13 8587.39 Fertilizers 10018.55 5226.22 7691.58 4136.56 3209.5 5852.25 6941.91 7868.97 44138.09 35516.64 31541.51 24033.04 14421.26 10090.28 21573.88 31185.66
  • 43. Labour Plant Protection 2886.62 2448.81 1086.99 3424.58 1945.69 1898.54 922.77 2401.66 Irrigation 1246.5 911.88 965.86 509.6 517.26 392.11 794.39 786.73 Machinery 3163.39 2174.74 2764.83 1545.15 2193.15 1770.43 2400.02 1752.02 Production cost 72404.06 51785.59 53214.51 36975.3 24832.97 25629.81 40440.1 52582.43 Marketing cost 20878.33 16055.66 21597.82 5602.16 10721.52 4956.68 15410.18 10290.82 Total cost 93282.39 67841.25 74812.33 42577.4 35554.48 30586.4 55850.28 62873.25 B. Returns B. Returns Structure Structure Gross Returns 387962.9 179230.8 223959.4 107177.8 100052.63 98471.52 235681.58 154895.24 Net Returns 294680.5 111389.6 149147.1 64600.4 64498.15 67885.12 179831.3 92021.99 4.2.8 Different rotations followed by the sample net house growers 4.2.8 This table shows the different rotations followed by the sample net house growers. The different rotations are as follows: R1= Tomato—chilli—capsicum R2= Tomato—chilli--chilli R3= Tomato—capsicum--peas R4= Chilli—paddy R5= Tomato—paddy R6= Capsicum—paddy
  • 44. R7= Tomato—capsicum R8= Capsicum—chilli R9= Tomato—capsicum—potato R10= Chilli—peas R11= Tomato—peas R1--Tomato—chilli—capsicum Cost of production The results pertaining to the magnitude and composition of production variable and the marketing cost worked out in case of net house of R1 rotation on the farm in the study area are incorporated in the table 4.2.8. In net house cultivation of vegetables the information on per acre basis indicated that the farmers those who choose R1 rotation spends Rs.72404.06 on the vegetables as total variable cost, 77.61 percent of the total cost and the remaining 22.38 percent was marketing cost. The structure of the total variable cost showed that the highest proportion was spent on labour with Rs.44138.09 followed by seed, fertilizer and FYM, plant protection, machinery and irrigation charges with Rs.10950.91, Rs.10018.55, Rs.2886.62, Rs.3163.39 and Rs.1246.50 respectively. Returns The information regarding the returns from R1 rotation per acre basis is given in the table. The results revealed that in case of net house cultivation of vegetable an average farmer received Rs.387962.9as gross returns whereas returns over production variable cost were Rs.315558.84 and returns over total variable cost were Rs.294680.54. R2--Tomato—chilli—chilli. Cost of production The results pertaining to the magnitude and composition of production variable and the marketing cost worked out in case of net house of R2 rotation on farm in the study area are incorporated in the table. In net house cultivation of vegetables the information on per acre basis indicated that the farmers those who choose R2 rotation spends Rs.51785.59 on the vegetables as total variable cost, 76.33 percent of the total cost and the remaining 23.67 percent was marketing cost. The structure of the total variable cost showed that the highest proportion was spent on labour with Rs.35516.64 followed by seed, fertilizer and FYM, plant protection, machinery
  • 45. and irrigation charges with Rs.5507.30, Rs.5226.22, Rs.2448.81, Rs.2174.74 and Rs.911.88 respectively. Returns The information regarding the returns from R2 rotation per acre basis is given in the table. The results revealed that in case of net house cultivation of vegetable an average farmer received Rs.179230.8 and returns over total variable cost were Rs.111389.6. R3-- Tomato—capsicum--peas Cost of production The results pertaining to the magnitude and composition of production variable and the marketing cost worked out in case of net house of R3 rotation on farm in the study area are incorporated in the table. In net house cultivation of vegetables the information on per acre basis indicated that the farmers those who choose R3 rotation spends Rs.53214.51 on the vegetables as total variable cost, 71.13 percent of the total cost and the remaining 28.87 percent was marketing cost. The structure of the total variable cost showed that the highest proportion was spent on labour with Rs. 31541.51 followed by seed, fertilizer and FYM, plant protection, machinery and irrigation charges with Rs.9163.74, Rs.7691.58, Rs.1086.99, Rs. 2764.83 and Rs.965.86 respectively Returns The information regarding the returns from R3rotation per acre basis is given in the table. The results revealed that in case of net house cultivation of vegetable an average farmer received Rs.223959.4 as gross returns and returns over total variable cost were Rs.149147.1. R4-- Chilli—paddy Cost of production The results pertaining to the magnitude and composition of production variable and the marketing cost worked out in case of net house of R4 rotation on farm in the study area are incorporated in the table. In net house cultivation of vegetables the information on per acre basis indicated that the farmers those who choose R4 rotation spends Rs.36975.3 on the vegetables as total production cost, 86.84 percent of the total cost and the remaining 13.16 percent was marketing cost. The structure of the total variable cost showed that the highest proportion was spent on labour with Rs.24033.04 followed by seed, fertilizer and FYM, plant
  • 46. protection, machinery and irrigation charges with Rs.3326.37, Rs.4136.56, Rs.3424.58, Rs.1545.15 and Rs.509.60 respectively. Returns The information regarding the returns from R4 rotation per acre basis is given in the table. The results revealed that in case of net house cultivation of vegetable an average farmer received Rs.107177.8 as gross returns and returns over total variable cost were 64600.4 rupees. R5-- Tomato—paddy Cost of production The results pertaining to the magnitude and composition of production variable and the marketing cost worked out in case of net house of R5 rotation on farm in the study area are incorporated in the table. In net house cultivation of vegetables the information on per acre basis indicated that the farmers those who choose R5 rotation spends Rs.24832.97 on the vegetables as total variable cost, 77.61 percent of the total cost and the remaining 22.38 percent was marketing cost. The structure of the total variable cost showed that the highest proportion was spent on labour with Rs.14421.26 followed by seed, fertilizer and FYM, plant protection, machinery and irrigation charges with Rs.2546.11, Rs.3209.50, Rs.1945.69, Rs.2193.15 and Rs.517.26 respectively. Returns The information regarding the returns from R5 rotation per acre basis is given in the table. The results revealed that in case of net house cultivation of vegetable an average farmer received Rs.100052.63 as gross returns and returns over total variable cost were 64498.15 rupees. R6-- Capsicum—paddy Cost of production The results pertaining to the magnitude and composition of production variable and the marketing cost worked out in case of net house of R6 rotation on farm in the study area are incorporated in the table. In net house cultivation of vegetables the information on per acre basis indicated that the farmers those who choose R6 rotation spends Rs.25629.81 on the vegetables as total variable cost, 83.79 percent of the total cost and the remaining 16.21 percent was marketing cost. The structure of the total variable cost showed that the highest proportion was spent on
  • 47. labour with Rs.10090.28 followed by seed, fertilizer and FYM, plant protection, machinery and irrigation charges with Rs.5626.20, Rs.5852.25, Rs.1898.54, Rs.1770.43 and Rs.392.11 respectively. Returns The information regarding the returns from R6 rotation per acre basis is given in the table. The results revealed that in case of net house cultivation of vegetable an average farmer received Rs.98471.52 as gross returns and returns over total variable cost were 67885.12 rupees. R7-- Tomato—capsicum Cost of production The results pertaining to the magnitude and composition of production variable and the marketing cost worked out in case of net house of R7 rotation on farm in the study area are incorporated in the table. In net house cultivation of vegetables the information on per acre basis indicated that the farmers those who choose R7 rotation spends Rs.40440.1 on the vegetables as total variable cost, 72.41 percent of the total cost and the remaining 27.59 percent was marketing cost. The structure of the total variable cost showed that the highest proportion was spent on labour with Rs.21573.88 followed by seed, fertilizer and FYM, plant protection, machinery and irrigation charges with Rs.7807.13, Rs.6941.91, Rs.922.77, Rs.2400.02 and Rs.794.39 respectively. Returns The information regarding the returns from R7 rotation per acre basis is given in the table. The results revealed that in case of net house cultivation of vegetable an average farmer received Rs.235681.58 as gross returns and returns over total variable cost were Rs.179831.3. R8-- Capsicum—chilli Cost of production The results pertaining to the magnitude and composition of production variable and the marketing cost worked out in case of net house of R8 rotation on farm in the study area are incorporated in the table. In net house cultivation of vegetables the information on per acre basis indicated that the farmers those who choose R8 rotation spends Rs.52582.43 on the vegetables as total variable cost, 83.63 percent of the total cost and the remaining 16.37 percent was marketing
  • 48. cost. The structure of the total variable cost showed that the highest proportion was spent on labour with Rs.31185.66 followed by seed, fertilizer and FYM, plant protection, machinery and irrigation charges with Rs.8587.39, Rs.7868.97, Rs.2401.66, Rs.1752.02 and Rs.786.73 respectively. Returns The information regarding the returns from R8 rotation per acre basis is given in the table. The results revealed that in case of net house cultivation of vegetable an average farmer received Rs.154895.24 as gross returns and returns over total variable cost were Rs.92021.99. R9-- Tomato—capsicum—potato Cost of production The results pertaining to the magnitude and composition of production variable and the marketing cost worked out in case of net house of R9 rotation on farm in the study area are incorporated in the table. In net house cultivation of vegetables the information on per acre basis indicated that the farmers those who choose R9 rotation spends Rs.34674.4 on the vegetables as total variable cost, 65.81 percent of the total cost and the remaining 34.19 percent was marketing cost. The structure of the total variable cost showed that the highest proportion was spent on labour with Rs.15136.27 followed by seed, fertilizer and FYM, plant protection, machinery and irrigation charges with Rs.12247.65, Rs.3033.79, Rs.949.52, Rs.2376.18 and Rs.623.58 respectively. Returns The information regarding the returns from R9 rotation per acre basis is given in the table. The results revealed that in case of net house cultivation of vegetable an average farmer received Rs.147589.21 as gross returns and returns over total variable cost were Rs.94903.52. R10-- Chilli—peas Cost of production The results pertaining to the magnitude and composition of production variable and the marketing cost worked out in case of net house of R10 rotation on farm in the study area are incorporated in the table. In net house cultivation of vegetables the information on per acre basis indicated that the farmers those who choose R10 rotation spends Rs.44738.37 on the vegetables as total
  • 49. variable cost, 79.33 percent of the total cost and the remaining 20.67 percent was marketing cost. The structure of the total variable cost showed that the highest proportion was spent on labour with Rs.32531.84 followed by seed, fertilizer and FYM, plant protection, machinery and irrigation charges with Rs.4500.39, Rs.3526.31, Rs.2128.07, Rs.1128.18 and Rs.623.58 respectively. Returns The information regarding the returns from R10 rotation per acre basis is given in the table. The results revealed that in case of net house cultivation of vegetable an average farmer received Rs.104578.27 as gross returns and returns over total variable cost were Rs.48184.11. R11-- Tomato—peas Cost of production The results pertaining to the magnitude and composition of production variable and the marketing cost worked out in case of net house of R11 rotation on farm in the study area are incorporated in the table. In net house cultivation of vegetables the information on per acre basis indicated that the farmers those who choose R11 rotation spends Rs.32596.04 on the vegetables as total variable cost, 66.02 percent of the total cost and the remaining 33.98 percent was marketing cost. The structure of the total variable cost showed that the highest proportion was spent on labour with Rs.22920.06 followed by seed, fertilizer and FYM, plant protection, machinery and irrigation charges with Rs.3720.13, Rs.2899.25, Rs.649.18, Rs.1776.18 and Rs.631.24 respectively. Returns The information regarding the returns from R11 rotation per acre basis is given in the table. The results revealed that in case of net house cultivation of vegetable an average farmer received Rs.204523.58 as gross returns and returns over total variable cost were Rs.155152. SECTION III 4.3: Financial viability of net house growers. Since net house involves fixed capital, it is necessary to take into account the income stream for the whole life span of net house. However, since it is difficult to generate the cash flows for the entire life span of net house investment in the absence of observed temporal information on benefits and costs, we need to make few assumptions so as to estimate both the cash flows and cash out flows for net house investment. These assumptions are:
  • 50. The life span of the net house is considered as 10 years. The income stream of the net house is uniform and constant over its entire life. Differential rates of discount are considered to under take the sensitivity of investment to the change in capital cost. These are assumed at 10, 12 and 15 percent as alternatives representing various opportunity costs of capital. To evaluate the new technology i.e. net house the cost benefit analysis was carried out. For studying the economics viability of the project net present worth, benefit-cost ratio, pay back period and internal rate of returns were worked out. The benefit cost ratio and net present worth was calculated only for the rotation R1 (tomato —chilli—capsicum), R2 (tomato—chilli—chilli) and R7 (tomato—capsicum) because most of the sample farmers follow these rotations. 4.3.1 The net present value, benefit cost ratio and internal rate of return of 1 kanal. The maintenance cost includes investments on net which is replaced after four years. The returns from the net house start from the first year. For rotation R2 average gross returns per acre was Rs.438000 per year and net returns Rs. 279200 per year and for rotation R7 the gross returns per acre was Rs.355200 per year and net returns per acre was Rs.288800 per year. Since the net present value (NPV) and benefit cost ratio (B-C ratio) are function of the discount rate, these measures were obtained at 10 percent 12 percent and 15 percent. These were by and large the interest rates charged by the various financial institutions providing loans. The NPV at 10 percent discount rate varies from Rs.459716 for R7 rotation andRs.934337 for rotation R2 depending upon the size of the net house. The B-C ratio was 1.27 for R7 rotation and 1.53 for R2 rotation. The pay back period for R2 rotation is 3.23 years and for R7 rotation pay back period is 4.64 years. The NPV at 12 percent discount rate varies from Rs.344973 for R7 rotation andRs.799516 for rotation R2 depending upon the size of the net house. The B-C ratio was 1.48 for R7 rotation and 1.21 for R2 rotation. The pay back period for R2 rotation was3.31 years and for R7 rotation pay back period was 4.75 years. The NPV at 15 percent discount rate varies from Rs.204709 for R7 rotation andRs.633680 for rotation R2 depending upon the size of the net house. The B-C ratio was 1.41 for R7 rotation and 1.13 for R2 rotation. The pay back period for R2 rotation was 3.43 years and for R7 rotation pay back period was 4.93 years.
  • 51. Table 4.3.1 To work out the net present value, benefit cost ratio and internal rate of return of 1 kanal. Tomato--chilli--chilli Tomato—capsicum (rotation Measure of investment (rotation R2) R7) A. Pay back period(years) Discount rate 10 percent 3.23 4.64 12 percent 3.31 4.75 15 percent 3.43 4.93 B. Benefit ratio Discount rate 10 percent 1.53 1.27 12 percent 1.48 1.21 15 percent 1.41 1.13 C. Net present worth Discount rate !0 percent 934337 459716 12 percent 799516 344973 15 percent 633680 204709 D. Internal rate of returns 67.75% 68.31% Gross returns 438000 355200 Net returns 279200 288800 Internal rate of returns (IRR) was lowest 67.75% for R2 rotation and for R7 rotation IRR is 68.31%. The profitability of net house technology was calculated with the help of different project evaluation techniques. The benefit cost ratios were more than one in all the cases. This comprises that net house investment is profitable.
  • 52. 4.3.2 The net present value, benefit cost ratio and internal rate of return of 2 kanal. For rotation R1 average gross returns per acre was Rs.503173 per years and net returns Rs. 352480 per year and for rotation R7 the gross returns per acre was Rs.363016 per year and net returns per acre was Rs.306328 per year. Since the net present value (NPV) and benefit cost ratio (B-C ratio) are function of the discount rate, these measures were obtained at 10 percent 12 percent and 15 percent. These were by and large the interest rates charged by the various financial institutions providing loans. The NPV at 10 percent discount rate varies from Rs.963180 for R7 rotation andRs.1247751.3 for rotation R1 depending upon the size of the net house. The B-C ratio was 1.76 for R7 rotation and 1.67 for R1 rotation. The pay back period for R1 rotation was 2.48 years and for R7 rotation pay back period was 2.86 years. The NPV at 12 percent discount rate varies from Rs.829832 for R7 rotation andRs.1090727.1 for rotation R1 depending upon the size of the net house. The B-C ratio was 1.68 for R7 rotation and 1.62 for R1 rotation. The pay back period for R1 rotation was 2.53 years and for R7 rotation pay back period was 2.93 years. The NPV at 15 percent discount rate varies from Rs.664831 for R7 rotation andRs.897467 for rotation R1 depending upon the size of the net house. The B-C ratio was 1.58 for R7 rotation and 1.55 for R1 rotation. The pay back period for R1 rotation is 2.15 years and for R7 rotation pay back period is 3.03 years. Table 4.3.2 To work out the net present value, benefit cost ratio and internal rate of return of more than one kanal farmer at rotation R7 and at R1. Tomato--chilli—capsicum Tomato—capsicum (rotation Measure of investment (rotation R1) R7) A. Pay back period(years) Discount rate 10 percent 2.48 2.86 12 percent 2.53 2.93 15 percent 2.15 3.03 B. Benefit ratio Discount rate
  • 53. 10 percent 1.67 1.76 12 percent 1.62 1.68 15 percent 1.55 1.58 C.Net present worth Discount rate !0 percent 1247751.3 963180 12 percent 1090727.1 829832 15 percent 897567 664831 D. Internal rate of returns 89.75% 77.73% Gross returns 503173 363016 Net retruns 352480 306328 Internal rate of returns (IRR) was lowest 89.35% for R1rotation and for R7 rotation IRR is 77.73 percent. The profitability of net house technology was calculated with the help of different project evaluation techniques. The benefit cost ratios were more than one in all the cases. This comprises that net house investment is profitable. 4.3.3 The net present value, benefit cost ratio and internal rate of return of more than 4 kanal farmers. The cost benefit analysis based on financial costs and returns from the sample farmers having net house in 4 kanal and follow the R7 (tomato—capsicum) rotation considering the life of net house structure of 10 years. On the basis of these costs and returns the cost benefit analysis had been constructed. The pay back period at 10 percent discount rate was 3.44 years for R7 rotation. Similarly, pay back periods corresponding to 12 percent and 15 percent discount rate were 3.53 years and 3.65 years respectively. The benefit cost ratio at 10 percent discount rate was 1.51; similarly, these ratios corresponding to 12 percent and 15 percent discount rate were 1.45 and 1.36 respectively. The net present worth (NPW) at 10 percent discount rate was Rs.623317. The corresponding NPW’s at 12 percent and 15 percent discount rate were Rs.520607 and 394437The internal rate of returns (IRR) was also estimated to be 64.71percent.
  • 54. The study indicates that the investment in net house technology is a profitable business from the farmer’s point of view and essential for strengthening the vegetable production in domestic market. Since technology is capital intensive, requires financial help in terms of subsidy. Marginal and small farmers can participate if the higher amount of subsidy is assured; at least 50 percent of the investment. Marginal and small farmers have advantage of surplus family labour to utilize which will further enhance their income. Table 4.3.3. To work out the net present value, benefit cost ratio and internal rate of return of more than 4 kanal farmers at rotation R7. Measure of investment Tomato—Capsicum (rotation R7) A. Pay back period(years) Discount rate 10 percent 3.44 12 percent 3.53 15 percent 3.65 B. Benefit ratio Discount rate 10 percent 1.51 12 percent 1.45 15 percent 1.36 C.Net present worth Discount rate !0 percent 623317 12 percent 520607 15 percent 394437 D. Internal rate of returns 64.71% Gross returns 298000
  • 55. Net returns 2456000 4.3.4: Disposal pattern of vegetables. Out of total production of chilli the farmers had sold 63.5 to the village market and 36.49 percent to local market. Out of the total production of peas the farmer had sold 68.4 percent to the village market and the remaining 31.59 percent in the local market. Out of the total production of potato the farmer had sold maximum of their output (72.62%) to the local market as they get good price for their produce and 27.38 percent to the village market. Out of the total production of tomato the farmer had sold 40.82 percent to the local market, 59.18 percent to the village market Out of the total production of capsicum the farmer had sold 57.33 percent to the distant market, 42.67 percent to the village market. SECTION IV 4.4 Farmer’s perception and constraints of net house cultivation. Lack of technical knowledge There is lack of technical knowledge regarding the net house that is which crop is to be grown under net house. In net house only vegetables are recommended but some farmers are cultivating paddy under net house also. Technical knowledge should be given to the farmers those who are willing to set up net house and they should be told to grow only vegetables in the net house as net house are only for growing vegetables. Capital availability in terms of subsidy It was observed during the survey that some farmers have installed net house but they haven’t got the subsidy and some of the farmers have got the subsidy but they haven’t installed the net house. While talking to respondents it was observed that some farmers installed the net house just for the sack of subsidy; they have taken the subsidy 3-4 times more for installing a single net house in the name of their family members. Proper evaluation and check should be there before giving the subsidy to the farmers that they had installed the net house or not.
  • 56. Price related constraint Farmers have not enjoyed the price benefit of net house vegetables in the market. As they get the same price as the traditional growers are getting for their vegetables, but if they sell their produce at the farm level only then they get much more price at farm level than at market level. Seed availability The given table shows that most of the farmers (76.00%) say that seed they get from the cooperative society or from any other source is very costly and only 24 percent of the farmers say that they get seed at fair price. 58 percent of the farmers say that the seed is easily available to them fro cooperative society or from commission agents. 42 percent of the farmers say that the source (cooperative society or commission agent) is near to the village. Labour The given table shows that 46 percent of the farmers say that the labour is easily available to them and 54 percent of the farmers reported that there is non availability of labour to them. Packing The given table shows that mostly packing done by the farmers (62%) is not adequate either they use old bags for packing or use low quality of bags for packing. Only 38 percent of the farmers use good quality or new bags for packing. Table:4.4.1: Marketing Constraints faced in net- house vegetable cultivation Table:4.4.1: Marketing Constraints faced in net- house vegetable cultivation Table:4.4.1: Marketing Constraints faced in net-house vegetable cultivation Constraints No. %age Seed available Costly 38 76.00 Easily Available 29 58.00 Available near village 21 42.00 Labour
  • 57. Adequate 23 46.00 Not Adequate 27 54.00 Packing Available 19 38.00 Non availability 31 62.00 Pattern of marketing Daily : Self 16 32.00 Labourer 29 58.00 Weekly : Self 8 16.00 Labourer 27 54.00 Monthly : Self 19 38.00 Labourer 34 68.00 Price Satisfactory 17 34.00 Space available in the market Adequate 19 38.00 Partially Adequate 24 48.00 Not Adequate 7 14.00 Pattern of marketing The given table shows that there are three patterns of selling the vegetables that is daily, weekly and monthly. In the daily pattern nearly 58 percent of the farmers use labour for selling their produce and 32 percent of the farmers sell their produce by themselves. In the weekly pattern 54 percent of the farmers use labour for selling their produce and 16 percent of the farmers sell their produce by themselves and in the monthly pattern 68 percent of the farmers are dependent upon labour for selling their produce and only 38 percent of the farmers sell their produce by themselves. Price
  • 58. The given table shows that 66 percent of the farmers are unsatisfied by the price that they get for their produce in market or at the farm level and 34 percent of the farmers are satisfied by the price they get from the buyers. Space availability in the market The given table shows that 48 percent of the farmers say that space available to them in the market is partially adequate, 38 percent of the farmers says they are fully satisfied with the space available to them in the market and 14 percent says that they are not satisfied with the space available to them in the market for their disposal of produce. CHAPTER IV SUMMARY AND CONCLUSION India is the second largest vegetables producer in the world next to China. With increase in population of our country the consumption has been improved. People realize the importance of vegetables in their diet. Per capita per day availability is well below 175g whereas the recommended consumption is 284g. The vegetable crops in India occupy only 2.8 percent of the total cultivated land, producing 93.9 million tonnes of vegetables annually from a cropped area of 6.3 million hectares. Also in present scenario the cultivable land area is decreasing due to rapid urbanization, industrialization and shrinking land holdings. Therefore, off- season vegetables under protected conditions is alternative to use the land and other resources more efficiently. India has a wide range of diverse agro-climatic condition, especially in northern plains, the soil are highly fertile but extremes of temperature during the year. It does not allow year round outdoor vegetable cultivation. In present scenario, protected structures are used to over come low temperature in temperate regions or high temperature in the countries having tropical climate. The need of protected structure directly depends up on the climate of the region, growing season and kind of crop to be grown. Protected cultivation technologies are being utilized all over the world but the level and extent of their use may be different in different countries. Objectives of study Keeping this in view the study entitled “Net House Cultivation of Vegetables in Punjab: An economics analysis” has been undertaken with following objectives:- To study the socio-economic profile of net-house vegetables growers. To examine the yield, price, cost, and returns differentials of net house cultivation vis-à-vis open cultivation. To work out financial viability of net-house vegetables cultivation. To study the constraints of net-house vegetables cultivation.
  • 59. Research methodology The study was undertaken in the Sangrur district of Punjab. A sample of 50 farmers was taken doing net house cultivation of vegetables and equal numbers of farmers were selected doing open cultivation of vegetables. Information regarding socio-economic profile of the farmers such as age, educational qualification, operational land holding, extension contacts, etc. To study the status of net house cultivation of vegetables such as area under net house cultivation of vegetables, types of vegetables grown, and yield of different crops, price the farmers get from their produce, gross returns and total cost and net returns. The information regarding the financial viability of the net house farmers. The information regarding the problems and constraints of the net house growers were also studied. Major findings In case of net house majority of the respondents (40 %) were belonged from the 36-45 years age group and in case of open cultivation majority (46 %) of the farmers belong to age group from 46 and above. In net house 58 percent of the respondents have education level up to matric and senior secondary and in open cultivation 50 percent of the respondents have education up to primary level. In case of net house growers majority of the respondents have farming as their occupation; in case of traditional cultivation growers all the farmers have farming as their main occupation. According to the figures in case of net house 80 percent of the farmers are the members of cooperative society, 62 percent of the farmers have visit to PAU kisan mela. In case of traditional cultivation 60 percent of the farmers are the member of cooperative society, 34 percent of the farmers have visit to PAU kisan mela. In case of net house growers nearly 22 percent of the farmers have attended the training courses and in case open cultivation growers nearly 6 percent of the farmers have attended the training courses. Regarding area under net house or size of the net house, 46.00 per cent of respondents have area between 1-2 kanal under net house cultivation and 24.00 percent of the farmers have net house under 1 kanal. In case of net house most of the farmers belong to medium farmers categories having the average operational holdings of 6.45 hectares and in case of traditional cultivation most of the 16 farmers belong to larger farmers categories having the average operational holdings of 20.46 hectares. .In this most of the net houses (58 percent) were installed in the year 2006-2007 followed by 36 percent net house in the year 2003-2005. In case of net house maximum average area is under potato that is 1.23 kanal followed by chilli that is 0.81 kanals. In case of traditional cultivation maximum average area is under
  • 60. potato that is 1.43 kanals followed by chilli that is 1.13 kanals. In this see that Rs.51420 is invested in net house of I kanal followed by followed by net house of 2 kanal, 4 kanal, and 1 acre that is Rs.98500 Rs.188550 and Rs 358045 respectively The materials used in installment of net house are M.S pipes, G.I wires, iron angles, Round Basils, kunde and kabje, cement+sand+pebbles, paint, U.V net sheet etc. Shows the disposal patterns of different vegetables by the net house cultivators. Mainly the farmers sell their produce in three different markets according to price that they get for their produce. That is village market, local market and distant market. The farmers belonging to small categories have taken an average credit amount of Rs.79000 with a interest rate of 11 percent and the large farmers those have taken an credit of amount of Rs.51111.11 with a rate of interest of 12 percent and farmers get Rs.16500 as subsidy for installing 1 kanal net house. Cost and returns from different vegetables. Chilli In case of net house cultivation of chilli an average cost incurred was Rs.37432.11 on this crop as variable cost, 85.4 percent was the production cost and the remaining 14.6 percent was marketing cost and receives Rs.95652.77 as gross returns whereas returns over production variable cost was Rs.63689.41 and returns over total variable cost was Rs.58220.66. In case of open house cultivation of chilli an average cost incurred was Rs.40653.98 on this crop as the variable cost, 86.99 percent was the production cost and the remaining 13.01 percent was the marketing cost and receives Rs.73021.80 as gross return whereas returns over production variable cost was Rs.37665.72 and returns over total variable cost was Rs.32367.82. Peas In case of net house cultivation of peas an average cost incurred was Rs.18962.05 on this crop as variable cost, 67.4 percent was the production cost and the remaining 32.6 percent was marketing cost and receives Rs.27875.09 as gross returns whereas returns over production variable cost was Rs.15100.68 and returns over total variable cost was Rs.8913.04. In case of open house cultivation of an average cost incurred was Rs. 17123.91 on this crop as the variable cost, 67.08 percent was the production cost and the remaining 32.92 percent was the marketing cost and receives Rs.23509.81 as gross return whereas returns over production variable cost was Rs.12023.01 and returns over total variable cost was Rs.6385.90. Potato In case of net house cultivation of an average cost incurred was Rs.22276.55 on this crop as variable cost, 66.67 percent was the production cost and the remaining 33.33 percent was
  • 61. marketing cost and receives Rs.41147.14 as gross returns whereas returns over production variable cost was Rs.26294.37 and returns over total variable cost was Rs.18870.59. In case of open house cultivation of potato an average cost incurred was Rs. 20925.54 on this crop as the variable cost, 70.67 percent was the production cost and the remaining 29.33 percent was the marketing cost and receives Rs.28046.23 as gross return whereas returns over production variable cost was Rs.13258.31 and returns over total variable cost was Rs.7120.69. Tomato In case of net house cultivation of tomato an average cost incurred was Rs.30409.14 on this crop as variable cost, 65.18 percent was the production cost and the remaining 34.82 percent was marketing cost and receives Rs.197828.32 as gross returns whereas returns over production variable cost was Rs.178006.69 and returns over total variable cost was Rs.167419.18. In case of open house cultivation of tomato an average cost incurred was Rs.26676.21 on this crop as the variable cost, 66.74 percent was the production cost and the remaining 33.26 percent was the marketing cost and receives Rs.92345.40 as gross return whereas returns over production variable cost was Rs.74541.62 and returns over total variable cost was Rs.65669.19. Capsicum In case of net house cultivation of capsicum an average cost incurred was Rs.25441.14 on this crop as variable cost, 81.04 percent was the production cost and the remaining 18.96 percent was marketing cost and receives Rs.94481.84 as gross returns whereas returns over production variable cost was Rs.73863.37 and returns over total variable cost was Rs.69040.70. In case of open house cultivation of capsicum an average cost incurred was Rs.25905.82 on this crop as the variable cost, 82.96 percent was the production cost and the remaining 17.04 percent was the marketing cost and receives Rs.61442.80 as gross return whereas returns over production variable cost was Rs.39950.23 and returns over total variable cost was Rs.35536.98. Input-output comparison of traditional cultivation and net house cultivation of vegetables. Plant protection chemical In this case of net house cultivation maximum use of plant protection and chemical was in case of chilli of Rs.1963.85 that is 5.25 percent of the total cost on chilli and minimum use in case of peas of Rs.164.22 that is 0.87 percent of the total cost on peas. In case of open cultivation of vegetables maximum use of plant protection and chemical is in case of chilli of Rs.2557.13 that is 6.29 percent of the total cost on chilli and least in case of peas is Rs.198.44 that is 1.16 percent of the total cost on peas. Overall the use of plant protection and chemical were higher in case of traditional cultivation than net house cultivation of vegetables.
  • 62. Labour In this case of net house cultivation maximum use of labour is in case of chilli of Rs.22564.21 that is 60.28 percent of the total and least in case of potato of (Rs.2183.84) that is 9.80 percent of the total cost on potato. In case of open cultivation of vegetables maximum use of labour is in case of chilli of Rs.24509.87 that is 60.29 percent of the total cost on chilli and least in case of potato is Rs.1621.67 that is 7.75 percent of the total cost on potato. Overall the use of labour is higher in case of net house than in traditional cultivation of vegetables. Fertilizer and manure In this case of net house cultivation maximum use of fertilizer and manure is in the case of capsicum of Rs.5443.61 and least in case of peas of Rs.749.67. In case of open cultivation of vegetables maximum use of fertilizer and manure is in case of capsicum of Rs.5162.76 and least in case of peas of Rs.1126.91. Fertilizer and manure are used in higher quantity in traditional cultivation of vegetables than in net house cultivation of vegetables. To find different rotations followed by the net house growers. The different rotations are as follows: R1--Tomato—chilli—capsicum The farmers those who choose R1 rotation cost incurred was Rs.72404.06 on the vegetables as total variable cost, 77.61 percent of the total cost and the remaining 22.38 percent was marketing cost. In case of net house cultivation of vegetable an average farmer received Rs.387962.9as gross returns and returns over total variable cost were Rs.294680.54. R2--Tomato—chilli The farmers those who choose R2 rotation cost incurred was Rs.51785.59 on the vegetables as total variable cost, 76.33 percent of the total cost and the remaining 23.67 percent was marketing cost. In case of net house cultivation of vegetable an average farmer received Rs.179230.8 and returns over total variable cost were Rs.111389.6. R3-- Tomato—capsicum--peas The farmers those who choose R3 rotation cost incurred was Rs.53214.51 on the vegetables as total variable cost, 71.13 percent of the total cost and the remaining 28.87 percent was marketing cost. In case of net house cultivation of vegetable an average farmer received Rs.223959.4 as gross returns and returns over total variable cost were Rs.149147.1. R4-- Chilli—paddy
  • 63. The farmers those who choose R4 rotation cost incurred was Rs.36975.3 on the vegetables as total production cost, 86.84 percent of the total cost and the remaining 13.16 percent was marketing cost. In case of net house cultivation of vegetable an average farmer received Rs.107177.8 as gross returns and returns over total variable cost were Rs.64600.4. R5-- Tomato—paddy The farmers those who choose R5 rotation cost incurred was Rs.24832.97 on the vegetables as total variable cost, 77.61 percent of the total cost and the remaining 22.38 percent was marketing cost. In case of net house cultivation of vegetable an average farmer received Rs.100052.63 as gross returns and returns over total variable cost were Rs.64498.15. R6-- Capsicum—paddy The farmers those who choose R6 rotation cost incurred was Rs.25629.81 on the vegetables as total variable cost, 83.79 percent of the total cost and the remaining 16.21 percent was marketing cost. In case of net house cultivation of vegetable an average farmer received Rs.98471.52 as gross returns and returns over total variable cost were Rs.67885.12. R7-- Tomato—capsicum The farmers those who choose R7 rotation cost incurred was Rs.40440.1 on the vegetables as total variable cost, 72.41 percent of the total cost and the remaining 27.59 percent was marketing cost. In case of net house cultivation of vegetable an average farmer received Rs.235681.58 as gross returns and returns over total variable cost were Rs.179831.3. R8-- Capsicum—chilli The farmers those who choose R8 rotation cost incurred was Rs.52582.43 on the vegetables as total variable cost, 83.63 percent of the total cost and the remaining 16.37 percent was marketing cost. In case of net house cultivation of vegetable an average farmer received Rs.154895.24 as gross returns and returns over total variable cost were Rs.92021.99. R9-- Tomato—capsicum—potato The farmers those who choose R9 rotation cost incurred was Rs.34674.4 on the vegetables as total variable cost, 65.81 percent of the total cost and the remaining 34.19 percent was marketing cost. An average farmer received Rs.147589.21 as gross returns and returns over total variable cost were Rs.94903.52. R10-- Chilli—peas The farmers those who choose R10 rotation cost incurred was Rs.56394.16 on the vegetables as total variable cost, 79.33 percent of the total cost and the remaining 20.67 percent was marketing cost. In case of net house cultivation of vegetable an average farmer
  • 64. received Rs.104578.27 as gross returns and returns over total variable cost were Rs.48184.11. R11-- Tomato—peas The farmers those who choose R11 rotation cost incurred was Rs.32596.04 on the vegetables as total variable cost, 66.02 percent of the total cost and the remaining 33.98 percent was marketing cost. In case of net house cultivation of vegetable an average farmer received Rs.204523.58 as gross returns and returns over total variable cost were Rs.155152.4. 5.3.16: Comparative analysis of different vegetables grown under net house Chilli is most expensive crop because of its highest expenditure of Rs.36980 on per acre basis and the peas were the least expensive vegetable with expenditure of Rs.18962.05. Gross returns were highest for tomato with Rs.197828.32.and least in case of peas with Rs.27875.09. The return over total production cost was highest in case of tomato that is Rs.167419 and least in case of peas with net return of Rs.8913.04. 5.3.17: Financial viability of net house growers. NPV at 10 percent was Rs.459716 followed by NPV at 12 percent (Rs.344973) and at 15 percent NPV was Rs.204709. Pay back period at 10 percent is 4.64 years, at 12 percent pay back period was 4.75 years and at 15 percent it was 4.93 years. BCR at 10 percent was 1.27, at 12 percent BCR was 1.21 and at15 percent BCR was 1.13 and internal rate of returns in case of R7 rotation was 68.31 percent NPV at 10 percent was Rs.934337followed by NPV at 12 percent (Rs.799516) and at 15 percent NPV was Rs.633680. Pay back period at 10 percent was 3.23years, at 12 percent pay back period is 3.31 years and at 15 percent it is 3.43years. BCR was 1.48 and at 15 percent BCR was 1.41 and internal rate of return in case of R2 rotation was 7.75 percent NPV at 10 percent was Rs.963180 followed by NPV at 12 percent (Rs.829832) and at 15 percent NPV was Rs.664831. Pay back period at 10 percent is 2.86 years, at 12 percent pay back period was 2.93 years and at 15 percent it is 3.03years. BCR at 10 percent was 1.76, at 12 percent BCR is 1.68 and at 15 percent BCR was 1.58 and internal rate of returns in case of R7 rotation was 77.73 percent. NPV at 10 percent was Rs.1247751.3followed by NPV at 12 percent (Rs.1090727.1) and at 15 percent NPV was Rs.897467. Pay back period at 10 percent was 2.48 years, at 12 percent pay back period was 2.53 years and at 15 percent it was 2.15years. BCR at 10 percent was 1.67, at 12 percent BCR is 1.62 and at15 percent BCR was 1.55and internal rate of return in case of R1 rotation was 89.35 percent 5.3.17: Constraints of net house cultivation 48 percent of the farmers say that space available to them in the market is partially adequate, 38 percent of the farmers says they are fully satisfied with the space available to
  • 65. them in the market and 14 percent says that they are not satisfied with the space available to them in the market for their disposal of produce. 76 percent of the farmers buy the seed from the cooperative society and 58 percent of the farmers buy seed from commission agents or cooperative society. 42 percent of the farmers say that the source (cooperative society or commission agent) is near to the village. The study shows that 46 percent of the farmers are satisfied by the work done by the labour at the field level, and 54 percent of the farmers are not satisfied by the work of the labour. It shows that mostly packing done by the farmers (62%) is not adequate either they use old bags for packing or use low quality of bags for packing. Only 38 percent of the farmers use good quality or new bags for packing. It shows that there are three patterns of selling the vegetable that is daily, weekly and monthly. In the daily pattern nearly 58 percent of the farmers use labour for selling their produce. In the weekly pattern 16 percent of the farmers sell their produce by themselves and in the monthly pattern 68 percent of the farmers are dependent upon labour for selling their produce. It shows that 66 percent of the farmers are unsatisfied by the price that they get for their produce in market or at the farm level and 34 percent of the farmers are satisfied by the price they get from the buyers. Conclusions It was observed that the education level of the net house grower’s was more as compared to the traditional growers. The Extension contacts of the net house growers are stronger than the traditional growers. Net house installation started in 2000 and shows the increasing trend. Area under net house varies from 1 kanal to 2 acres but higher proportion was in case of 2 kanals. Marginal farmers do not indulge in net house cultivation because net house cultivation was capital intensive. The gross returns and net returns in case of all the vegetables that is chilli, tomato, capsicum, potato and peas in net house was more as compared to traditional cultivation of vegetables. Rotations R1, R2 and R7 more economical due to higher gross and net returns and nearly 50% of the respondents also follow these rotations. As the Benefit cost ratio in all the cases is more than one so the investment in net house is beneficial. The internal rate of return varies from 63% to 90%. The life span of the net house is of 10 years. The use of fertilizer and manure was less in case of net house than in traditional cultivation of vegetables. The use of labour is more in case of net house as compared to traditional cultivation of vegetables. Due to improvement in the quality under net house, the farmers get higher price at the farm level. The farmers get Rs.16500 per kanal as subsidy for installing net house.
  • 66. REFERNCES Anonymous (2006 b) Agricultural and Rural Development of Punjab. The Punjab State Farmers Commission, Govt. of Punjab: 43-44. Bhatti J P and Singh R (1993) Change in the population of labour force and land used in Himachal Pradesh: A strategy agricultural development in hilly area. Bihar J Agric mrkt. 1: 329-38. Cheema D S, Kaur P and Kaur S (2004) vii International Symposium on Protected Cultivation in Mild winter climates: Production, Pest Management and Global Competition. ISHS Acta Horticulture. 659. Dixit A(2007) Performance of leafy vegetables under protected environment and open filed condition. The Asian Journal of Horticulture 2 (1): 197-200. Ganesan M (1999) Effect of Poly- Greenhouse on plant micro climate and fruit yield of Tomato. M S Swaminathan Research foundation, Tamilnadu. Garg J S and Prashad V (1974) Comparative profitability of vegetable crops in the vicinity of Kanpur city. IndianJ Agr Econ 29 (2): 169-70. Joshi N C and Srivastava B K (2003) Off season production of bitter gourd: Effect of date of sowing on seed germination, growth, maturity and yield in unheated poly house. Indian J Hort 60 (4): 372-75. Kapila, Morothi and Thakur. D.S (1985)Vegetable production for diversification of farm economy .Indian .JAgri.Econ. 40(1): 330 Kumar and Srivastava (1997) Influence of plastic coverings on the micro- climate under low plastic tunnels.Veg.Sci. 24(2): 83-86 Kumar R and Singh H (2002) Problems in vegetable production in Bharatpur district of Rajasthan. Rural India 65: 48-50. Mishra R S and Saraf G P (1981) Economics of vegetables farming in the vicinity of Jabalpur city. J N K V Res J 15 (1-4): 127. Mishra R Sand Saraf G P (1987) Cost and Returns, Labour Employment and Marketing of Vegetable Crops in J abalpur city of Madhya Pradesh. Indian J Agri Econ 42 (4): 462-63. Mishra J P and Vishwakarma R S (1999) Production and marketing of chillies. The Bihar. In of Agri Mktg. 7:37-43
  • 67. Peter K V (1995). Trends in Production, Cultivation, Processing and storage of chillies, Herbal and Miscellaneous Spices. Agril. Situ. India. 39:265-72. ss Prasad J (2001) Vegetables Production and Marketing in Bihar: A farm level study. The Bihar J of Agri Mktg. 3: 225-45. Radha Y and Parsad E Y (2001) Economics of production and marketing of vegetables in Karim Nagar District Andhra Pradesh. lnd Jour Agril Mktg 15: 61-65. Rathore, M.S., Bhati J P and Swarup R (1975). Resource use efficiency and returns from some commercial crops of Himachal Pradesh. Agril. Situ. India. 30: 507-09. Sekhon M K and Kaur M (2004). Production and marketing of okra in Ludhiana district of Punjab. Ind. Jour. Agril. Mktg. 2: 18-22. Sharma A, Sharma L K and Khurana G S (2002) Vegetable cultivation in Punjab Shift from traditional crops. Indian J Ext Edu 40: 87-90. Sharma AS, Oberoi and Moorti (1992) Resource use efficiency and profitability of vegetable farming in Himachal Pradesh. Indian J Agri Econ 47 (3): 505. Sharma V K, Sain I and Singh G (2000) Income and employment from summer vegetables vis-à-vis their competing crop paddy in Punjab. J Agril Develop & Policy 12: 38-43 Shukla D S Chauhan Y S Yadav S R and Singh R I (1978) Economics of cropping system in Hill Areas of Pauri Garhwal. Indian J Agric Econ 32 (3): 48-49. Singh B and Sirohi N P S (2008) protected cultivation of vegetables in India: problems and future prospects. Acta Hort.710 Singh B, Kumar M and Sirohi N P S (2002) Protected structures: A sustainable technology for peri urban areas of northern India. Acta Hort 731-36. Singh K and Vashist G D (1999) An analysis of production and marketing system of vegetable in Lambagaon block of District Kangra (H.P.). The Bihar In Agril Mktg 7: 376-89. Singh K, Grover D K, Vatta K and Kumar S (2001) Pattern of production and marketing of fruits crops in Punjab. Indian J Agril Mktg 15 (2): 8-17.
  • 68. Singh R and Asrey R (2005) Performance of tomato and sweet pepper under unheated green house. Haryana J Hort Sci. 34 (1-2) 175-175. Srivastava G C (1993). An empirical investigation into production, marketing and export potential of vegetables in Bihar. The Bihar J. Agr. Marketing. 1(3): 339-49. Thakur D, Lal S H, Thakur D R, Sharma K D, and Saini A S (1997). Market supply response and marketing problem of farmers in the hills. Ind. Jr. of Agri. Eeon. 52: 139-50. Thakur D S (1994) High Stakes for Banks in Off-season Vegetables Production and Marketing. Bihar J Agric Mgkt 2 (1): 89-95. Thyagarajan S and Prabu R (2005) Recommended technologies adopted by tomato growers. Agric. Ext. Rev. 17: 26-30. Vasava N M and Pandya R D (2003) Extension strategy for overcoming the major problems of Mango and Tomato growers of tribal and non-tribal areas. Rural India 66: 103-105. Werner R (1991). The income prospects of vegetable growing in close proximity to the market. Institute fur land Wirtschaffluche Belnelislulzre del' Universital Mohenheul7l 68: 393-403. 1

×