The document discusses the current status of agricultural mechanization in small farms in India, highlighting the challenges of low productivity and small land holdings. It examines the benefits and drawbacks of mechanization, including labor productivity, costs, and the impact on employment. Additionally, it draws comparisons with practices in other countries and emphasizes the need for context-specific mechanization solutions.

1. Appropriate
Mechanization of
small farms in India:
Current status and
learning from other
countries
Presented by : Sandeep Pawar
(143350016)
Guided by : Prof. N. G. Shah
CTARA DEPARTMENT

2. Introduction
• India: an agrarian economy though the share in GDP is low and decreasing
• Main challenge  Increasing food production to feed the growing population
• Past experience: Green Revolution (Late sixties)
• Mechanization obvious choice
• Mechanization : Both positive and negative effects especially for small farms
Solution could be – APPROPRIATE MECHANIZATION
2

3. Indian Agriculture: Current status
• Land area: ~2.4% of the world
• Population: ~17% of the world
• Water available : ~4.2% of the world
• Second largest agricultural land employing nearly 52% of
its workforce (~250 million workers)
DIVERSITY
• Major 15 climates in the world
• 46 out of 60 soil types available
CAPABLE of producing most of the food and horticulture
crops in the world
3

4. Indian Agriculture: Current status
INDIA: high in production, low in productivity
Item 1960 1980 2000 2010
Irrigated area (percent) 19 28 34 35
Cropping intensity 1.15 1.23 1.33 1.39
Fertilizer use (kg/ha) 2 39 125 150
Grain yield (kg/ha) 700 1 000 1 600 1 900
Tractors (thousands) 37 531 2 600 4 000
Area per tractor (ha) 3 600 260 55 36
Power tillers (thousand) 0 16 100 200
Draft animals (million) 80.4 73.4 60.3 50
4
Source: FAO (2011)

5. Small land holdings and mechanization
62.3
19
11.8
5.51
2001
Marginal (<1ha)
Small (1-2 ha)
Semi-medium (2-4
ha)
Medium (4-10 ha)
Large (>10 ha)
Category
Percentage Area
1991 2001
Marginal (<1ha) 15 18.7
Small (1-2 ha) 17.4 20.2
Semi-medium (2-4 ha) 23.2 24
Medium (4-10 ha) 27.1 24
Large (>10 ha) 17.3 13.2
Average land holding
1.33ha (2001)
1.57ha (1991)
2.28ha (1971)
5
Source: FAO (2011)

6. Small land holdings and mechanization
MECHANIZATION
Application of principles of engineering and technology for performing
different agricultural operations in a better way so as to increase the crop
yield and reduce human drudgery.
Barriers to small scale mechanization:
• Small farm size
• Lack of information and knowledge
• Resistance to change/risk
• Lack of training
• Lack of appropriate machines
• Tariff difference on machines and spare parts
6

7. Agricultural Mechanization
• OBJECTIVES:
• Increasing labour productivity
• Increasing land productivity
• Decreasing costs of production
• Farm power
• 2011  1.68 kW/ha
• Mission  2 kW/ha
10.92
5.77 5.09
27.23
8.02
6.37
19.95
46.7
51.08
41.57 41.12
37.46
1981-82 2005-06 2011-12
Contribution of different power sources in India
Agri. Worker % Draught Animals %
Tractor % Stationary Engine %
7
Source: FAO (2011)

8. Agricultural Mechanization
OTHER SIDE OF MECHANIZATION
Arguments against mechanization
• Underutilization and depreciation of machinery
• Low purchasing power of small farmers
• Unemployment of unskilled workers
• Farm to adjust with machinery
• Maintenance issues
• Soil fertility losses
• Accidents because of lack of knowledge and safety measures
8

9. Measuring degree of mechanization
Mechanization Index--> Ratio of cost of use of machinery in the farm to the total
machinery and animate cost.
Crops Average cost
of production
(INR/ha)
Component of the cost of cultivation
(INR/ha) Mechanization
Index %
Manual Animal Machinery
Paddy 13084 4503 929 490 8.27
Wheat 12523 2926 454 1379 28.99
Sorghum 5247 2176 851 271 8.22
9
Source: Gyanendra Singh, (2005).

10. Appropriate Mechanization
• It refers to the level of mechanization and how it is used for a
specific situation.
• Appropriateness can only be determined after carefully considering
the technical, economic and social characteristics of each situation.
• Choice of machinery and the degree of mechanization is the most
crucial and critical part
• Morawetz (1974), defined appropriate technology as the “set of
techniques which makes optimum use of available resources in a
given environment”
10

11. Case study findings (1/2)
• Aggarwal (1983):
The study revealed that for ploughing and sowing the use of tractors instead of bullocks
did not add to the yield of high yielding varieties of wheat. It appeared that the advantage
of timeliness of operation of a tractor was nominal, when the crop proceeding to wheat
could be harvested and threshed sufficiently in advance and the land could be released for
timely wheat ploughing and sowing even on bullock farms.
• Motilal (1971):
Yield increased for higher mechanization, however it is to be noted that tractor farms used
35% more fertilizer, so the credit of increase could not be entirely, attributed to tractors.
11

12. Case study findings (2/2)
• Pathak et al. (1978):
The average cropping intensity with fodder crop was reported to be higher for bullock farms
than that on tractor farms. However the cropping intensity without
fodder crop was comparatively higher for tractor farms.
• Rao and Singh (1964):
“Tractorization in Kanjhawala Block in DelhiTerritory” had showed that both tractor
as well as non-tractor farms had on an average 8.2 persons per farm and the labour
force at their disposal was neither surplus nor inadequate.
• A report presented by GIPE, Poona (1967) concluded that- by facilitating more intensive
cultivation tractorization generated greater demand for labour.Thus, there was no
significant displacement of human labour after tractorization.
12

13. Learning from other countries (1/2)
USA,Thailand : High area, low labours
Invest in mechanization
in terms of productivity of labours, low-input extensive farming systems are often more
productive than high-input intensive farming systems
Bangladesh: Low land, high labours
More emphasis on raising land productivity
Complementary mechanization technology like water pumps, pesticide applicators
Malaysia: Unavailability of machinery to increase labour productivity
Displacement of labours to other sections
Idle land and thus waste of resource
13

14. Learning from other countries (2/2)
Korea and China: Low area, low labours
Combination of labour saving mechanization along with biological and chemical
technologies so as to achieve high productivity of both labour and land.
Japan and Korea: Small land holding
Adaption to other supplementary activities which help them to grow
Overcrowding of population in agriculture sector is often avoided by absorbing
additional labour force in rural agriculture sector in non-agriculture sector.
Thailand : Custom hiring of tractors
High R&D in agriculture  Developed agriculture
0.4% for low income countries,
2% for middle income and
2.5% for high income countries
14

15. CONCLUSION
• The factors that played active role in success of Green Revolution often
forget mechanization as one of its inputs.
• Every coin has two sides and so as agricultural mechanization
• The productivity growth often comes with mechanization, improved seeds
and fertilizers, irrigation facilities so; calculating the effects only because of
mechanization is very difficult
• Mechanization enhances labour productivity and reduces human drudgery.
Mechanization doesn’t have significant affect on labour unemployment.
15

16. CONCLUSION
• Mechanization often increases cropping intensity but adaptation to
mechanization can restrict the mode of farming.
• Farm power usually increases productivity, and mechanization deals with
more and more farm power. Government is encouraging this by providing
credits and subsidies to farm machineries in India.
• Finally, for adapting appropriate mechanization- “there are no absolute and
generic guideline for transferring mechanization technology, nor is there a
definite set of strategies to promote the adoption of agricultural
machines”
16

17. References
• A G Rijk, (1989). Agriculture Mechanization Strategy, Study, Asian Productivity
Organization,Tokyo, pp.1-17
• FFTC Annual Report 2005
• Gyanendra Singh, (2005). Estimation of Mechanization Index and its Impacts on
Production and Economic Factors- a Case Study in India. Biosystems Engineering
(2006) pp. 99-106
• Joginder Singh, (2005). Scope, Progress and Constraints of Farm Mechanization in
India, Study, Punjab AgriculturalUniversity, Ludhiana pp. 48-56
• Mechanization for Rural Development:A review of patterns and progress from around
the world, FAO 2011,Vol. 20-2013
• S.D.Kulkarni, (2010). Mechanization ofAgriculture – Indian Scenario, Central Institute
of Agricultural Engineering (CIAE)
• S RVerma, (2005). Impact ofAgricultural Mechanization on Production, Productivity,
Cropping Intensity Income Generation and Employment of Labour, Study, Punjab
Agricultural University, Ludhiana pp. 133-153

18. References
• A.G. Rijk (1983),The role of farm mechanization in developing countries: experiences
in Asian countries, Small farm equipments for developing countries, pp. 3-23
• R.W. Herdt (1986) mechanization of rice production in developing asian countries:
perspective, evidence, and issues, Consequences of small-farm mechanization,
International Rice Research Institute and Agricultural Development Council, pp. 1-15
• Segun R. Bello (2012), Concepts of Agricultural Mechanization, Agriculture Machinery
and Mechanization, DPS Dominion Publishing Services, pp 1-21

19. THANKYOU…