The powerpoint includes value addition and channel for marketing of Mandarin Orange in Jajarkot District Nepal.

1. MARKETING OF MANDARIN ORANGE IN
JAJARKOT DISTRICT: A VALUE
CHAIN ANALYSIS
Presenter
SUSHMITA SHARMA
SACHIN UPADHAYAYA
Agriculture and Forestry University
Rampur chitwan

2. PRESENTATION OUTLINE
1. Introduction
1.1 Background
1.2 Statement of Problem
1.3 Rationale of the study
1.4 Objectives of the study
2. Literature review
3. Materials and Methods
4.Results and Discussion
5.Conclusion
6. Acknowledgment
7. Photo gallery

3. • Among citrus crops, mandarin orange occupies major portion of
growing area followed by sweet orange and acid lime (Gupta, 2018)
• Area occupied by mandarin was 2/3rd of total area occupied by citrus
in Nepal (Shrestha, 2015)
• 91.89% of total population in Jajarkot are dependent in agriculture
where about 7% of total land is cultivable (Jajarkot PMAMP
documentary, 2074)
• Nalgad municipality, Bheri municipality and Kushe rural municipal
are major mandarin growing areas
INTRODUCTION

4. Production trend of Mandarin Orange in jajarkot
SOURCE; (MOAD, 2017)
y = 2.869x + 133.71
y = 7.2595x + 1489.9
1350
1400
1450
1500
1550
1600
1650
1700
120
125
130
135
140
145
150
155
160
165
2010/11 2011/12 2012/13 2013/14 2014/15 2015/16 2016/17 2017/18
PRODUCTIONINMT
AREAINHA
YEARS
productive area production Linear (productive area) Linear (production)
Figure 1. Production trend of mandarin orange in jajarkot

5. Statement of Problem
• Limited access to the market and loss of major portion of produce
during transportation (AKC)
• The scattered production often in low volume poses difficulty for
traders in collection of produce
• High price of domestic mandarin in local market (Jajarkot PMAMP
documentary, 2074)
• Domestic mandarin is replaced and market is dominated by the
produce of districts nearby
• Although many researches have conducted related to citrus, none of
them have yet focused Jajarkot on the related topic

6. Rationale of the Study
• The study comprises the solution for market problems
• Study focuses on the reduction of gap in margin among actors
• The study aims to comprehend existing channel and suggest the
effective channel for value chain
• The result of the study provides information about price flow, linkage
and value governance in mandarin

7. Objectives
The general objective of the study was to analyze the value chain of
mandarin and suggest specific areas of intervention to upgrade the value
chain in Jajarkot
Specific objectives:
1. Identify marketing actors and their functions in value chain in
mandarin
2. Estimate marketing cost, margin, efficiency and producer share in
mandarin value chain
3. Analyze linkage, value governance and marketing problem of
mandarin orange

8. LITERATURE REVIEW
• Concept of Value chain and Marketing
• Value chain Actors and Supporters
• Value upgrading
• Market margin, Price spread, Market efficiency and Market channel
• Linkage and Value governance
• Policy sector

9. METHODS AND METHODOLOGY
Figure 2. Site of survey

10. Sample and Sampling Technique
• Sample size was selected by using formula (slovins formula)
n=N/(1+e2N)
n=number of samples
N= total number of populations
e=significance (10%)
• 60 farmers were selected (20 from each site) from the survey area using
stratified sampling.
• 5 collectors, 5 retailers, 10consumers and 2 processors were surveyed as
traders
• Altogether 82 respondents were surveyed

11. Contd….
Primary data: Household survey, FGD KIS
Secondary data: Reviews of different publications
Data analysis
• SPSS 20 and EXCEL 2019
• Descriptive statistics (Means, frequency, percentage)
Gross Market margin = Purchasing price – Selling price
Market efficiency = Consumer price-(market cost + market margin)
(market cost + market margin)
Price spread = Consumer price-Net price received by farmer * 100
Consumer price
(Hsu 2013)

12. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
• Mean age of respondent was
47.56
• Majority of respondents lie under
age group of 15-59
• Mean land holding of farmers
was found 11.933 ropani
Socio Demographic data
Table 1. distribution of respondents based on gender, education and
bearing trees
Source: field survey
Particulars Frequency
Gender
Male 36(60)
Female 24(40)
Education level
Literate 14(27.3)
Primary 22(36.7)
Secondary 21(35)
Higher secondary 3(5)
Number of bearing trees
<50 6(26.7)
50-100 25(41.7)
>100 19(31.7)

13. 16%
67%
8%
3% 4% 2%
agriculture mandarin livestock business remittance other
Figure 3. Contribution of mandarin orange in income

14. 0
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
small medium large
4.6333
6.79
12.25
Priceperpiece
Grades of mandarin orange
Figure 5. Grades of mandarin Orange with price
62%
38%
small-medium-large small-large
Figure 4. Percentage of respondent based on grading
pattern

15. 45
25
30
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
45
50
time of harvesting price in market method of
harvesting
Percentage
Market information
Figure 5. Market information obtained from traders

16. Table 2. Influence of stakeholders in decision of price
Stakeholders Index Rank
Traders 0.875 I
Consumer 0.766 II
Producer 0.504 III
Source: Field survey
The similar trend was found in (Pokhrel D. M., 2010).

17. 120
85
137
158
0
20
40
60
80
100
120
140
160
180
collector retailer contractorconsumer
Quantitysold(qtl)
Actors of Channel
20
26.7
16.7
36.7
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
collector contractor retailer consumer
Percentage
Actors of Channel
Figure 6. Mode of selling Figure 7. Quantity sold to actors of channel

18. Value chain map
Figure 8. Existing value chain map of Jajarkot district
INPUT
SUPPLIERS
PRODUCER
COLLECTORS/CO
NTRACTOR
RETAILER
CONSUMER
NURSERY FOR
SEEDLINGS,
AGROVET
FARMERS
FARMER
COLLECTOR/WH
OLESALER
PRODUCT
ION
MARKETI
NG/DISTR
IBUTION
CONSUM
PTION
SUPPORTERS
PMAMP
KRISHI GYAN
KENDRA
COOPERATIV
ES
NGOS
FUNCTION

19. Marketing channels of Mandarin Orange
• Channel 1: Farmer Consumer (Farmgate)
• Channel 2: Farmer Local consumer
• Channel 3: Farmer Retailer Local consumer
• Channel 4: Farmer Collector Retailer Distant
consumer
• Channel 5: Farmer Contractor Retailer Distant
consumer

20. Figure 9. Price flow through different channels
Rs.46.75/Kg
Rs.49.75/kg
Rs.67.58/kg Rs.61.2/kg
Rs.39.08/kg
Rs.81.07/kg
Rs.81.92/kg
Rs.84.76/kg Rs.110/kg
Rs.111/kg
FARMER
FARMGATE
CONSUMER
FARMER
CONSUMER
LOCAL LEVEL
FARMER FARMER FARMER
RETAILER
CONSUMER OF
KHALANGA
DISTANT
CONSUMER
DISTANT
CONSUMER
RETAILER RETAILER
COLLECTOR CONTRACTOR

21. Figure 10. Value Addition map
Packaging Rs.130/glass
No grading Grading(small-medium-large)
Rs.47.75/kg
Rs.8.444/piece
Grading(small-large)
Grading(small-medium-large)
Rs.8.777/piece ( 3.94% more profitable)
Grading grading(small-medium-large)
(4.188% profit)
Rs. 49.75/kg
Small-large
Rs130/
glass
FARMERS/
PRODUCER
COLLECTOR RETAILER CONSUMER
CONSUMER
CONSUMER
CONTRACTOR RETAILER CONSUMER
PROCESSING
(JUICE)
PROCESSING
(JUICE)

22. Linkage and Integration
Figure 11. Linkage and Integration in mandarin cultivation

23. Figure 12. Volume mapping in different channels
Farmers
Collector
Contractor
Retailers
Distant
consumer
Local
consumer
17%17%
20.4%
23%
39.6%

24. Figure 13. Market efficiency and producer share in long channel
FARMERS
TRADERS/CONTRACTO
RS
RETAILER CONSUMER
PRICE/KG
COST/KG
MARGIN/KG
PRICE SPREAD
MARKET EFFICIENCY
PRODUCER’S SHARE
47.75 81 110
28 22.8
27.42 32.25
64.19%
1.95%
58.35%

25. Channel 1 Channel 2 Channel 3 Channel 4 Channel 5
Farmer net price
(NRs/kg)
39.08 56.73 50.53 45.81 44.26
Price spread(%) 34.33 64.19 66.75
Producer share in
consumer
rupee(%)
40.39 58.35 60.13
Market
margin(NRs/kg)
23.08 29.25 30.93
Market efficiency
index(%)
4.88 1.45 1.95 1.49
Table 3. Efficiency, spread and producer share in different channels
Source; Field survey
Channel 1; farmer-
consumer (farmgate)
Channel 2; farmer-local
consumer
Channel 3; farmer-
retailer-consumer
Channel 4; farmer-
collector-retailer-
consumer
Channel 5; farmer-
contractor-retailer-
consumer

26. 0.45416
0.8333
0.8875
0.65
0.333
0
0.1
0.2
0.3
0.4
0.5
0.6
0.7
0.8
0.9
low price
offered
lack of
processing
facilities
lack of storage
facilities
high transport
cost
lack of market
information
Figure 14. Problems of marketing in Jajarkot
(Kandel, 2007) also found poor storage and high marketing cost
as marketing problem in Tanahun district.

27. VALUE GOVERNANCE
• Trade of mandarin was governed by the contractors of districts nearby
• There was no provision of advanced payment in contraction
• Farmers were compelled to sell mandarin at traders and buyers' price
• Overall value chain of mandarin in Jajarkot was buyer driven

28. SWOT ANALYSIS
STRENGHTS
 Availability of suitable climate for mandarin
production (south facing slopes and altitude
of 1000MASLto 1800MASL)
 Better quality due to juicier in nature
 Better reputation in organic production due
to organic district
 Agricultural Development Strategy has
prioritized Jajarkot as citrus zone
 Agricultural Prospective Plan had
prioritized citrus as high value crop in
midhills
WEAKNESS
 Scattered land and low production
 High transportation cost due to poor road
facility
 Poor knowledge in organic criteria and lack
of organic certification
 Lack of storage and processing facilities
 Negligible role of farmer in decision of
price
 High post-harvest loss and poor technical
knowhow
 Lack of coordination among different actors
of mandarin

29. OPPORTUNITIES
 Increase in demand of organic mandarin orange
 Better potential in export due to good quality
character (juicy)
 ADS has prioritized citrus in Jajarkot as citrus zone
 Development of cellar storage and processing unit
 High potential for value addition
 Availability of different projects
THREATS
 Incidence of insect pests and diseases
 Limited coordination among actors of
marketing
 Lack of market organization
 Political instability
 Labor crisis
Contd….

30. CONCLUSION
• Value adding activities were grading and packaging, Processing not found
• Grading fetched more price and hence more profit
• Shorter the chain less was the margin
• Highest market efficiency was found from farmer-local consumer channel
• Major volume of mandarin was sold to local consumer
• Poor storage and processing were major problems in marketing of mandarin
• Trade was buyer driven and price decision was solely of traders
• Backward linkage included farmer and nurseries (input suppliers) and forward
linkage included farmer and collectors and retailers

31. THANK YOU