Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
TOWARDS EMPOWERMENT OF WOMEN FARMERS IN VIDARBHA
Mahila Kisan Sashaktikaran Pariyojana
Baseline Survey Report, 2011-12
M. S. Swaminathan Research Foundation Chennai 600 113
1
2
Content
Chapter Page No.
1. Introduction 5
2. Salient Characteristics of Women Farmers’ Groups and their Members: An Overview of MKSP
7
3. An-Overview of the Prevalent Conditions of Women Farmers as per the Baseline, 2012
3.1 Basic Facilities
3.2 Land and Other Assets
3.3 Crop Pattern during the Base Period, 2011-12
3.4 Awareness and Adoption of Various Sustainable Agriculture Practices
3.5 Marketing Channels for the Major Crops Grown
3.6 Information about Rainfall, Price, Cultivation Practice etc
3.7 Kitchen Garden
3.8 Access to Health Care
3.9 Access to Public Distribution System
12
4. Concluding Observations 24
Annexure 26
3
List of Tables
Table 1: Preferred Criteria for membership in Women Farmers’ Group, MKSP, 2012
Table 2: Salient Features of MKSP, Vidarbha, 2007-2014
Table 3: Classification of Women Farmers’ Groups by Year of Formation, Vidarbha
Table 4: Classification of MKSP Members by Caste and Social Group, Vidarbha, 2012
Table 5: Classification of MKSP Members by Age Group, Vidarbha, 2012 Table 6: Classification of MKSP Members by Educational Attainment, Vidarbha, 2012 Table 7: Classification of MKSP members by Family Land Holding, Vidarbha, 2012 Table 8: Classification of MKSP Members by Landholding in their Name, Vidarbha, 2012 Table 9: Classification of MKSP Members’ Family Holdings by Type of Land, Vidarbha, 2012 Table 10: Block wise Details of Samples Selected, MKSP, Vidarbha, 2012 Table 11: Classification of Households by Own and Operated Holdings, Vidarbha, 2011-12 Table 12: Distribution of Households by Area under Crops, Vidarbha, 2011-12 Table 13: Distribution of Households that operate land by their Awareness and Adoption of Soil
& Water Conservation Practices, Vidarbha Table 14: Distribution of Households by Size Class and Adoption of Soil & Water Practices
Vidarbha, 2009-11 Table 15: Distribution of Households by Size Class and Awareness on Seed Treatment Practices,
2012 Table 16: Distribution of Households Who have Adopted Seed Treatment Practices Table 17: Distribution of Households by Ownership of land by Samiti Members and the Level of
Adoption of Seed Treatment Table 18: Distribution of Households by Awareness and Adoption of Nutrient Management
Practices, Vidarbha Table 19: Distribution of Sample Households by Size Class and Nutrient Management Practices
Adopted, Vidarbha, 2009-11 Table 20:Distribution of Households by Awareness and Adoption of Integrated Pest
Management Practices, Vidarbha
4
Table 21: Distribution of Households by Size Class and Integrated Pest Management Practices Adopted, Vidarbha, 2009-11
Table 22: Distribution of Households by Size Class and Marketing channels used for Cotton,
Vidarbha, 2011-12 Table 23: Distribution of Households by Size Class and Marketing channels used for Tur,
Vidarbha, 2011-12 Table 24: Distribution of Households by Size Class and Marketing channels used for Soyabean,
Vidarbha, 2011-12 Table 25: Distribution of Households by their Access to Information, Vidarbha, 2012 Table 26: Distribution of Households by Types of Ration Card holdings, 2012
5
1. Introduction
M.S. Swaminathan Research Foundation initiated the ‘Programme for the Empowerment of
Women Farmers’, the ‘Mahila Kisan Sashaktikaran Pariyojana (MKSP)’, for empowering
women farmers, including the widows of farmers who had committed suicide, in Wardha and
Yavatmal districts of Vidarbha region, in 2007. The programme aims at creating an environment
of hope that will help alleviate the mood of distress and empower women farmers to make key
decisions pertaining to their agricultural practices and their households. The empowerment
measures cover a wide range of areas related to: enhancing the productivity, profitability and
sustainability of small-scale rain-fed farming; promoting household food security; strengthening
institutions at the grassroots; and creating awareness on rights and entitlements.
MKSP is a membership-based programme wherein women farmers are formed into groups at the
village level, called in Marathi as Jagrit Mahila Shetkari Samitis. The groups have operational
guidelines, which ensure that their affairs are democratically managed, based on clearly spelt out
objectives, norms, and rules. Each ‘women farmers’ group’ is formed in such a way that it has a
minimum of 10 and a maximum of 20 members. While the MKSP programme was initiated in
2007, women farmers’ groups were formed since 2008 onwards. In 2008, in every women
farmers’ group that was formed there was at least one member who was a widow of a farmer who
had committed suicide. In other words, in 2008, groups were formed in villages which recorded
farmer suicides, and around suicide victims. In addition to the suicide victim the women farmers’
group comprised of other women farmers from the village. The understanding was that while the
widows of the farmers who have committed suicide are particularly vulnerable, having been left
to fend for themselves and their children, ‘women farmers’ in general are an unorganized group
and need support with regard to access to technology, credit and market.
The criteria followed for membership in women farmers’ group over the last few years are
presented in detail below. First, for a farmer to be eligible to become a member of a women
farmers’ group in her village she should fulfil the following criteria:
• she should be a resident of the same village;
• she should be actively engaged in agricultural activities.
In addition to these two basic criteria for membership in women farmers group, there are specific
criteria that define the broad socio-economic group from which members are drawn. These
specific criteria for membership in women farmers group have changed over the years. In 2012,
6
the specific criteria for membership in women farmers’ group were refined, on the basis of
detailed deliberations by staff, to ensure that women farmers from the most disadvantaged
sections of the society w.r.to caste, class and gender do not get excluded. In addition to the basic
requirement that she should be a resident of the same village and should be actively engaged in
farming, the following criteria have been set for women farmers to become eligible to be
members of a women farmers’ group.
Table 1: Preferred Criteria for membership in Women Farmers’ Group, MKSP, 2012
Pro-Poor criteria Pro-woman criteria
Economic criteria Social criteria
• Marginal (0 to 2.47 acres)
• Small (2.48 to 4.94 acres)
• Semi-medium (4.95 to 9.88 acres)
• Landless
• ST • SC • NT (Nomadic Tribes) • VJNT (Vimuktha Jati
Nomadic Tribes) • SBC (Special Backward
Class) • Minority Community
• Widow • Single woman
(deserted, divorced, unmarried )
In the table above, a criterion in each category-economic, social and pro-woman- is given a score
of 1 per criterion. A women farmer who satisfies all the 3 broad categories would get a score of
3. For eg. a woman farmer who is landless, belonging to Scheduled Tribes and a widow would
get a score of 3. The maximum score that an eligible woman farmer would get is 3 and the
minimum would be 1. Priority for membership in women farmers’ group would be given to
women farmers who have a score of 3 followed by women farmers with scores 2 and 1. This set
of criteria takes into account the multiple forms of marginalisation faced by women.
This programme has received financial support from the Ministry of Rural Development,
Government of India and the Government of Maharashtra since December 2011, for a period of
three years, till November 2014. With the funding received from the government sources, it has
been possible to strengthen and widen the reach of MKSP programme in Vidarbha. In the year
2012, a sample of 220 women farmers was drawn from the existing membership of 1835 women
farmers. A baseline survey was conducted for the 220 women farmers who figured in the sample.
This report comprises of two parts: Section-2 is a detailed note on the profile of all 3265
members of the Mahila Kisan Sashaktikaran Pariyojana as well as the growth of women farmers’
7
groups in the programme; Section-3 is a discussion of the results of the baseline survey, namely,
the prevailing conditions pertaining to the members as on 2012. The baseline report shall be used
for comparison with a later survey to be done, say, in 2014-15.
2. Salient Characteristics of Women Farmers’ Groups and their Members: An Overview of MKSP
The idea of MKSP was conceived by MSSRF in late 2007 and group formation was initiated in
the year 2008. By 2014, the MKSP programme has spread to 60 villages, covering 3265 women
farmers. The first women farmers’ group in MKSP was formed in the village Talegaon Talatule,
in Wardha District, in May 2008. By end 2008, there were 12 groups in Wardha District. In
2009, the programme was extended to cover the Ralegaon taluk of Yavatmal District. The first
group in Yavatmal District was formed in Parsoda village, in January 2009. By 2011, 71 groups
were formed in Wardha and Yavatmal Districts. In 2012 and 2013, 53 and 91 groups were
formed respectively. (see Tables 2 and 3)
Table 2: Salient Features of MKSP, Vidarbha, 2007-2014
Item
Total
Number of Women Farmers’ Groups
215
Number of Villages 60Number of Members 3265
Table 3: Classification of Women Farmers’ Groups by Year of Formation,
Vidarbha
Year of formation of WFG
Number of Women Farmers’ Groups (WFG) formed
Number of Women Farmers’ Groups -Cumulative
2008 12 122009 20 322010 13 452011 26 712012 53 1242013 91 215
8
An analysis of salient characteristics of the 3265 women farmers in MKSP indicates that they are
predominantly from the most deserving socio-economic groups, in consonance with the pro-poor
and pro-woman approach followed by the M S Swaminathan Research Foundation.
A detailed analysis of the marital status of 3265 MKSP members indicates that nearly 490 or
15% have a relatively more vulnerable domestic background, with 398 members reporting their
status as widowed and 92 members as deserted/divorced/never married. Among the 398
members who report their marital status as widowed, 24 are wives of farmers who committed
suicide in late 2000s due to the agrarian crisis.
An analysis of basic socio-economic characteristics of members is provided in the following
tables: An analysis of caste composition of members indicates that a predominant section of the
members are from the marginalised sections of our population, viz. the Scheduled Castes and
Scheduled Tribes. A large percentage of MKSP members, 41% , in Wardha and Yavatmal
districts are either Scheduled Castes or Scheduled Tribes. In the rural areas of Wardha and
Yavatmal districts, SCs and STs account for 32% of population, as per Census 2011. This
indicates that the MKSP has covered a relatively larger percentage of SCs and STs than their
proportion in the population. Around 44% of MKSP members, that is, 1428 out of 3265
members belong to the Other Backward Classes (Table 4).
Table 4: Classification of MKSP Members by Caste and Social Group, Vidarbha, 2012
Caste Number of Members Percentage of Members
Scheduled Castes 696 21.3 Scheduled Tribes 645 19.8 Nomadic Tribes 172 5.3 Special Backward Class 256 7.8 Other Backward Class 1428 43.7 Muslims 35 1.1 Others 33 1.0
Total 3265 100.0
9
Table 5: Classification of MKSP Members by Age Group, Vidarbha, 2012
Age group
Classification of Members by age group
Percentage of Members by age group
19-29 597 18.3
30-39 1208 37.0
40-49 1143 35.0
50-59 277 8.5
60-69 40 1.2
Total 3265 100.0Note: Data on age of members are collected at the time of group formation during 2008 to 2013and no effort has
been made to standardise the age of members’ w.r.to one time point. So the above table is indicative and may not be accurate.
An analysis of age of members indicates that it ranges from 19 to 66 years. A large percentage of
members, accounting for 72%, are in the age group 30-49, while 18% are in the younger age
group of 19-29 and about one tenth of all members are above 50 years of age.
Analysing the literacy levels of members it is seen that illiteracy is not low among MKSP
members. 572 members or 17% of members are illiterate. However, in the rural areas of Wardha
and Yavatmal districts taken together about 34% of women are illiterate, as per Census 2011.
With regard to educational attainments of members, about one third of literate members have
completed only up to primary level, that is, classes 1 to 5. About 15% of MKSP members have
completed higher secondary while 2% have completed graduation.
Table 6: Classification of MKSP Members by Educational Attainment, Vidarbha, 2012
Level of Education Classification of Members by educational attainment
Primary 778 (28.9)Upper-Primary 497 (18.5)High School 966 (35.9)Higher Secondary 404 (15.0)Graduate 48 (1.8)All Literates 2693 (100.0)Note: Figures in brackets give the percentage to total; Primary refers to classes 1 to 5; Upper Primary -
classes 6 to 8; High School –classes 9 to 10; Higher Secondary-classes 11 to 12.
10
About 70% of MKSP members are also members of Self Help Groups promoted by government
or other NGOs in Wardha as well as in Yavatmal Districts.
Table 7: Classification of MKSP members by Family Land Holding, Vidarbha, 2012
Size of land holding owned by member’s family (in acres)
Number of Members Extent of land owned by member’s family (in acres)
Nil (Landless) 417 (12.8) 0
0.01- 2.49 (Marginal) 378 (11.6) 703.35 (5.9)
2.50 - 4.99 (Small) 1639 (50.2) 5430.85 (45.5)
5.00 - 9.99 (Semi-medium) 704 (21.6) 4081.45 (34.2)
10.00- 14.99 (Medium) 97 (3.0) 1059.00(8.9)
15.00-24.99 (Medium) 20 (0.6) 331.00 (2.8)
25.00 + (Large) 10 (0.3) 324.00 (2.7)
Total 3265 (100.0) 11930.15 (100.0)
The 2848 MKSP members reporting ownership of family land own a total of 11930 acres,
amounting to an average of 4.19 acres per household. Nearly 85% of area owned by members’
families is holdings of less than 10 acres; marginal holdings account for 6%, small holdings
account for 46% while semi-medium account for 34%. About 4% of members’ families that own
more than 10 acres account for nearly 15% of area.
Table 8: Classification of MKSP Members by Landholding in their Name, Vidarbha, 2012
Size of land holding owned by member’s family (in acres)
Number of Members Extent of land owned by member (in acres)
0.01- 2.49 (Marginal) 78 (12.1) 150.75 (6.0)
2.50 - 4.99 (Small) 396 (61.2) 1300.60 (51.6)
5.00 - 9.99 (Semi-medium) 159 (24.6) 903.00 (35.7)
10.00- 14.99 (Medium) 10 (1.5) 101.00 (4.0)
15.00-24.99 (Medium) 4 (0.6) 68 (2.7)
Total 647 (100.0) 2523.4 (100.0)
11
Of 3265 MKSP members, about one fifth, that is 647 members, have land titles in their names1
accounting for 2523 acres (see Table 8). Of these nearly half have small holdings of less than 5
acres and nearly 93% of all holdings in members’ names are less than 10 acres.
Out of 11930 acres of land owned by MKSP members’ households, 24% of land is under
irrigation and about 22% of all landed households in the programme report ownership of
irrigated land (Table 9). Considering that in Wardha and Yavatmal Districts, area under
irrigation is quite low, just about 6% of gross cropped area in 2009-10, the analysis of MKSP
member households clearly indicates an over representation of irrigated households. In other
words, there is a very clear need to shift the future focus on the relatively marginalised
households with no or little access to irrigation.
Table 9: Classification of MKSP Members’ Family Holdings by Type of Land, Vidarbha, 2012
Type of Land Area (in Acres)
Irrigated 2809.7 (23.60)
Unirrigated 9120.5 (76.40)
Total 11930.2 (100.00)
In sum, basic characteristics of women farmers in the MKSP programme are as follows:
• 15 % of members report their marital status as widowed / divorced / deserted / never married;
• 55 % of members are from marginalized castes and social groups; • 51 % of members are small and marginal farmers; • 13 % of members are landless; • 18 % of members are illiterates.
1 It is important to recall that during the initial phase of the programme only such farmers who owned land in their names were eligible to be members of Women farmers’ groups
12
3. An Overview of the Prevalent Conditions of Women Farmers as per the Baseline, 2012
A simple random sample of 220 women farmers were drawn from a population of 1835 women
farmers who became members of the MKSP programme till December 2012. The MKSP
programme has spread across two districts, namely Wardha and Yavatmal and women farmers’
groups have been formed in three blocks of Deoli, Wardha, Hinganghat and Ralegaon.
Using Random Number Generator in Excel 2007, 220 random numbers were selected from
within the range of 0 to 1835. Duplicate numbers were not allowed. The selected samples were
representative of 56 villages in the population.
Table 10: Block wise Details of Samples Selected, MKSP, Vidarbha, 2012
Block No. of villages No. of Sample Households
Deoli 17 66Wardha 22 89Ralegaon 17 65Total 56 220
The following section provides the status of women farmers, as revealed by our baseline sample
study, conducted in 2012.
3.1. Basic Facilities
Analysing the basic facilities of the member farmers, as on 2012, we find that 97% of them (213
out of 220) live in their own houses. However, more than half of these houses -52%- are ‘kutcha’
while about one fourth of the houses are ‘pucca’ and the rest are semi-pucca. Regarding
drinking water, about half the households (54%) have access to piped water supply and (16%)
have access to hand pump and another 3% have access to both piped water and hand pump.
Nearly 27% of households access drinking water from open wells and other sources that are
relatively unsafe. As regards toilet facility, only 104 out 220 households, 47%, have this facility
while an even lower percentage, 44%, use the facility. Cow dung cakes and fuel wood are the
predominant sources of cooking fuel used by women farmers, followed by kerosene. However,
about 8 % of women farmers have access to liquid petroleum gas.
13
As on 2012, with respect to ownership of cell phone, about 80% of members report ownership by
one of the household members, while 11% of member farmers have their personal cell phones.
67% of households have television, 16% have radio, 20% have bicycle while 14% have
motorbike. Mobility based on private transport seems to be very low with just about one fifth
reporting ownership of bicycles and a lower percentage with motor cycles.
3.2. Land and Other Assets
Land related details were collected for the agriculrural year 2011-12. As per the baseline survey
of 220 women farmers, nearly one fifth belong to families that do not own any land. Of the 178
landed farmers, 10% are marginal farmers, 49% are small farmers, 28% are semi-medium
farmers and 13% are medium farmers. About 15% of farmers are engaged in leasing in and
leasing out operations-10% of farmers have leased in land while 5% have leased out land. Small
and marginal farmers have leased out land while semi-medium and medium farmers have leased
in land (Table 11)
Table 11: Classification of Households by Own and Operated Holdings, Vidarbha, 2011-12
Size Class of landholding (in Acres)
Classification of Households by Ownership Holding
Classification of Households by Operational Holding
Landless 42 48
0.01- 2.49 (Marginal) 17 13
2.50 - 4.99 (Small) 88 74
5.00 - 9.99 (Semi-medium) 49 53
10.00- 24.99 (Medium) 24 31
25.00+ (Large) 0 1
Total 220 220
The 172 women farmers who operated land and who were surveyed for the base line operated a
total of 1017 acres, of which nearly one fifth is irrigated. 94 of the 172 households that operate
land (that is, 55%) owned farm animals (bullock/buffalo/cow). Number of animals owned by
these 94 households were 244, amounting to an average of more than 2 animals per household.
14
Average number of animals was highest among medium holders at 4 animals per holding
followed by 3 animals per holding among large holders as well as marginal holders.
Analysing the pattern of ownership of agricultural implements among households that operate
land, we find:
• 48% do not own any implement; • 37% own a cart; • 34% have a spray pump; • 21% have pump sets; • 14% have a plough; • 12% have a seed driller; • 1 household has a tractor ; • 1 household has a thresher.
The positive relationship between size of operational holding and ownership of implements
comes out clearly from our baseline. Non-ownership of farm implements is highest among
marginal holders at 85%, followed by 64% among small holders, 32% among semi-medium
holders,26% among medium holders and nil among large holders.
3.3 Cropping Pattern during the Base Period, 2011-12
Cotton remains the most prominent crop of MKSP women farmers during the base period,
accounting for 63 per cent of the total area under cultivation in rainfed as well as in irrigated
condition. Soyabean is the second most important crop accounting for more than 35 per cent of
the area under cultivation operated by women farmers. Pigeon pea or Tur is grown as an
intercrop with cotton and soyabean. Only 6 households out of 172 households that operate land
cultivate jowar , which was at one point a staple food crop in the region. (Table 12).
Table 12: Distribution of Households by Area under Crops, Vidarbha, 2011-12
Crop Irrigated Area Rainfed Area No. of Households Reporting Cultivation of Crop
Extent of Area under Cultivation (in acre)
Percentage of Area under Cultivation
No. of Households Reporting Cultivation of Crop
Extent of Area under Cultivation (in acre)
Percentage of Area under Cultivation
Cotton 31 127.5 63.1 120 435.0 61.6
Soyabean 21 74.5 36.9 82 265.5 37.6
Jowar - - __-- 6 5.5 0.7
15
3.4 Awareness and Adoption of Various Sustainable Agriculture Practices
3.4.1 Land Improvement, Soil and Water Cultivation Practices
To the question posed to women farmers on their awareness regarding various soil and water
conservation practices such as bunds, farm ponds, soak pits, planting on bunds, cultivation across
the slope, gravel removal and soil test the response was quite high and positive. While the
awareness level among women farmers about bunds and bund repair works was the lowest at 71
per cent, awareness about all other practices ranged between 87 and 92 per cent. However,
adoption rates of various soil and water conservation practices were very low: soil test was done
by about 32 per cent of the members and bunds and bund repair works by about 14 per cent. All
other practices pertaining to soil and water conservation were adopted only by less than six per
cent of the members (Table 13).
Table 13: Distribution of Households that operate land by their Awareness and Adoption of Soil & Water Conservation Practices, Vidarbha
Soil and Water
Conservation Practices
Having Awareness, 2012 Adopted during the last 3 years (2009-11)
No. of HHs Percentage to Total Households
Operating Lands
No. of HHs Percentage to Total Households
Operating Lands
Bunds and Bund Repair work
122 70.9 24 14.0
Farm Ponds 158 91.9 2 1.2
Soak Pits 151 87.8 2 1.2
Planting on Bunds 156 90.7 5 2.9
Cultivation across the Slope
155 90.1 9 5.2
Gravel Removal 155 90.1 10 5.8
Soil Test 157 91.3 55 32.0
16
Table 14: Distribution of Households by Size Class and Adoption of Soil & Water Practices Vidarbha, 2009-11
Size Class of
Landholding
Bunding, bund repair
Farm ponds
Soak pits
Planting on
bunds
Cultivation across the
slope
Gravel removal
Soil test
No. of HHs
Operating Land
Marginal 1 0 0 0 0 1 2 13
Small 13 1 1 4 5 4 26 74
Semi - Medium 4 1 1 1 3 4 15 53
Medium 6 0 0 0 1 1 11 31
Large 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1
Total 24 2 2 5 9 10 55 172
Small farmers, from among our sample women farmers, have a higher rate of adoption of soil
and water conservation practices as compared to all other size class of farmers during the base
period (Table 14).
3.4.2 Seed Treatment Practices
About 76 per cent of the sample households that operate land were aware about the seed
treatment practices. Awareness levels were the lowest among the small farmers at 65 per cent
and it was quite high among all other categories of women farmers (Table 15). Here again, the
adoption rate had been abysmally low irrespective of the size classes and crops (Table 16). It is
just around five per cent of the sample households who have adopted the seed treatment practice.
The practice is better followed among the households where the women farmers/samiti members
own some land in their name (Table 17).
Table 15: Distribution of Households by Size Class and Awareness on Seed
Treatment Practices, Vidarbha, 2012 Size Class of Landholding
No. of HHs having Awareness, 2012
No. of HHs who are not aware of Seed Treatment
Practices
No. Of Households with Operational
Holdings Marginal 12 1 13 Small 48 26 74 Semi - Medium 42 11 53 Medium 29 2 31 Large 1 0 1 Total 132 40 172
17
Table 16: Distribution of Households Who have Adopted Seed Treatment Practices,
Vidarbha Size Class of Landholding Crop-wise Seed Treatment Practiced during the Last 3 Years
(2009-11) Tur Cotton Soybean
Marginal 0 0 0
Small 4 1 1
Semi - Medium 1 1 2
Medium 5 6 5
Large 0 0 0
Total 10 8 8
Table 17: Distribution of Households by Ownership of land by Women Farmers
and the Level of Adoption of Seed Treatment, Vidarbha
Size Class of Landholding
Crop-wise Seed Treatment Practiced during the Last 3 Years (2009-2011)
Tur Cotton Soybean
Marginal 0 0 0
Small 2 3 4
Semi - Medium 1 1 1
Medium 0 1 1
Large 0 0 0
Total 3 5 6
3.4.3 Nutrient Management Practices
Awareness level among women farmers vary greatly across different nutrient management
practices. The practice of applying farm yard manure, which is an age old practice is widely
known to all farmers. Bio-mass, sheep penning and vermi-composting are the other well known
practices. Awareness on composting, vermicomposting and biofertilizers was of the order of 80
per cent. On the other hand, only 63 per cent of the surveyed households were aware of the
plant/cow dung urine slurry/ flour based nutrient.
18
Table 18: Distribution of Households by Awareness and Adoption of Nutrient Management Practices, Vidarbha
Nutrient
Management Practices
Having Awareness, 2012 Adopted during the last 3 years (2009-11)
No. of HHs Percentage to Total Households
Operating Lands
No. of HHs
Percentage to Total Households Operating
Lands
Farm yard Manure 172 100.0 95 55.2
Sheep penning 151 87.8 8 4.7Biomass 157 91.3 24 14.0Composting 138 80.2 1 0.6Vermi composting 152 88.4 0 0.0Plant/cow dung-cow urine slurry/flour nutrient
108 62.8 2 1.2
Biofertilizers 134 77.9 43 25.0
As regards adoption of various nutrient management practices, we find that application of farm
yard manure is determined by ownership of cattle -bullock, cow, buffalo. We had noted earlier
that 55% of women farmers own cattle and that matches with those who apply farm yard
manure. Non ownership of cattle perhaps acts as a huge constraint for application of farm yard
manure. It is indeed interesting to find that nearly 25 per cent of women farmers have adopted
biofertilizers. All other nutrient practices were adopted by very few sample households (Table 18
and 19). This is true across various size classes as well.
Table 19: Distribution of Sample Households by Size Class and Nutrient Management Practices Adopted, Vidarbha, 2009-11
Size Class of
Landholding
Farm Yard Manure
Sheep penning
Biomass
Composting
Vermi composting
Plant/cow dung-cow urine slurry/flour nutrient
Bio fertilizers
No. of HHs that have Operational Holdings
Marginal 5 2 1 0 0 0 2 13Small 38 3 9 1 0 1 17 74Semi - Medium 29 2 9 0 0 1 13 53
Medium 22 1 5 0 0 0 10 31Large 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 1Total 95 8 24 1 0 2 43 172
19
3.4.4 Integrated Pest Management Practices
Awareness about botanical extracts was the highest among the sample households (87 per cent)
followed by Insect Resistance Management (IRM) practices (78%) and bio pesticides (76
percent). Least awareness prevailed about pheromone traps (64 per cent). However, adoption
rates were very poor. IRM practices were the widely adopted practices (40 per cent) (perhaps
related to focused efforts undertaken by the Central Institute of Cotton Research, Nagpur for
propagating IRM in Wardha and Yavatamal districts) and bio-pesticides (28 per cent) (Table 20).
When the livestock ownership and the integrated pest management practices are matched, there
is a clear positive relationship. Of 30 households that own bullock, 15 are able to practice IPM;
of 27 that have bullock and cow, 15 practice IPM. But this raises the important question that not
all households that own cattle and hence have easy access to cattle dung and urine, the raw
material for bio-pesticides preparation, do not prepare and adopt the same.
Table 20: Distribution of Households by Awareness and Adoption of Integrated Pest Management Practices, Vidarbha
Pest
Management Practices
Having Awareness, 2012 Adopted during the last 3 years (2009-11)
No. of HHs Percentage to Total Households
Operating Lands
No. of HHs
Percentage to Total Households Operating
Lands
Botanical Extracts 150 87.2 15 8.7
Pheromone Traps 110 64.0 1 0.6
Bio-pesticides 131 76.2 49 28.5
IRM Practices 134 77.9 68 39.5
Adoption of IPM practices are higher among bigger size classes (Table -21) , indicating the need
for focused efforts towards creating awareness on the benefits of IPM to small and marginal
farmers. Lack of availability of raw material is often cited as a reason for poor adoption levels.
Matching two sets of data-land ownership by women farmers and adoption of IPM practices -
suggest that adoption rates are higher when women farmers who receive systematic training on
IPM also happen to own land.
20
Table 21: Distribution of Households by Size Class and Integrated Pest Management Practices Adopted, Vidarbha, 2009-11
Size Class of Landholding
Botanical Extracts
Bio Pesticides
IRM Practices No. of HHs with Operational
Holdings
Marginal 0 3 5 13
Small 8 18 26 74
Semi - Medium 4 15 20 53
Medium 2 12 16 31
Large 1 1 1 1
All 15 49 68 172
3.4.5 Post – Harvest Practices
Our survey brought out clearly that post harvest practices were adopted only for pigeon pea or
Tur crop. For all other crops no post-harvest practices were undertaken by women farmers. None
of the households had processed the crops further for marketing. In other words, value addition
at the farmer level was nil.
3.5 Marketing Channels for the Major Crops Grown
As we have noted earlier, cotton, tur and soya were the main crops grown by the women farmers
during the base period. There were several marketing channels for these crops. The channels
vary from one crop to another. While the nearest APMC is the major channel of marketing for
cotton, for tur and soyabean, traders from outside the village is a major channel followed by
APMC (Table 22 to 24).
21
Table 22: Distribution of Households by Size Class and Marketing channels used for Cotton, Vidarbha, 2011-12
Size Class
of Landholdi
ng
Within the
village to traders
Ginning
Mill
Nearest
APMC
Outside village
Pvt trader
Within the Village
trader + Ginning
Mill
Ginning Mill +
Nearest APMC
Outside Village
Pvt trader + Others
Total
Marginal 0
4
1 3
0 1
0 9
Small 7
9 27 17
1
0
1 62
Semi - Medium
6 10 17 14 0 1
0 48
Medium 1 13 6 8 0 0
0 28
Large 0
0
0 1 0 0
0 1
Total 14 36 51 43 1 2
1 148
Table 23: Distribution of Households by Size Class and Marketing channels used for Tur,Vidarbha, 2011-12
Size Class of Landholding
Within the
village trader
Nearest
APMC
Outside Village to Pvt trader
Others
Within village
trader + Others
Nearest APMC
+ Others
Outside Village
Trader+ Others
Total
Marginal 0
0
1 5
0 1
2
9
Small 0
9 16 10
2 9
11 57
Semi - Medium 1
7
5 3
0 8
14 38
Medium 0
5
3 2
0 5
7 22
Large 0
0
1 0 0 0
0
1
Total 1 21 26 20 2 23 34 127
22
Table 24: Distribution of Households by Size Class and Marketing channels used for Soyabean, Vidarbha, 2011-12
Size Class of Landholding
Within the village trader
Nearest APMC
Outside Village Pvt
trader
Within the village trader
+ Outside village trader
Nearest APMC + Outside village Pvt
trader
Total
Marginal 0 3 1 0 0 4
Small 3 15 15 0 0 33
Semi - Medium 0 12 23 1 1 37
Medium 1 8 19 0 0 28
Large 0 0 1 0 0 1
Total 4 38 59 1 1 103
Private Traders from outside the village procured nearly 57 per cent of soyabean produce of
women farmers. Two other important sources of marketing of cotton were the outside village
trader (29 percent) and ginning mills (24 per cent). APMC and outside traders were the other
marketing channels together accounting for 35 percent of the total tur marketed by the women
farmers. Soyabean was sold at the nearest APMC (37 per cent) apart from outside traders. Thus
while there were three important marketing channels for cotton, there were only two important
channels for soyabean. Tur had multiple channels (five) in the survey area during the base
period.
The importance of marketing channels varies across size classes and crops. In the case of cotton
crop, for marginal farmers, ginning mill was the major marketing channel (44.4 per cent)
followed by private trade from outside the village (33 per cent). For small and semi-medium
farmers, APMC was the major channel (44 and 35 per cent) whereas it was ginning mill for the
medium sized holdings. Marketing channel for tur was very diverse across various size groups of
farmers as well . For soya, APMC was the dominant marketing channel for marginal and small
holders. Outside village traders was the dominant channel for semi-medium, medium and large
size holdings. So far, we have discussed various marketing channels for major crops marketed by
our sample women farmers. Let us now discuss the access to various kinds of information.
23
3.6 Information about Rainfall, Price, Cultivation Practices etc
Majority of the sample households received information about rainfall (66 per cent) and the
major source of information was television (92 per cent). Price information had reached 65 per
cent of the sample households during the base period. Again half of the households had got the
information about prices from the TV and another one quarter from the news papers during the
base period. Nearly half of those households who got information about price, got it from TV
and radio. Importantly, nearly one third of the sample households got no information from any
source about the cultivation practices. For those who got information about cultivation practices,
along with television, MSSRF was also an important source (Table 25).
Table 25: Distribution of Households by their Access to Information, Vidarbha, 2012
Types of Information No. of Households Major Sources of Information
Rainfall related 145 Television
Price related 144 Television, Newspaper and Other Farmers
Cultivation practices related 128 Television, MSSRF and Other Farmers
3.7 Kitchen Garden
Only 29 percent of our women farmers report having space for kitchen garden at their
homestead. 88 percent of these households have established a kitchen garden. Therefore, the
focus in future has to be to twofold: first, in making the concept of kitchen garden acceptable to
all those who have space at their homestead; second, identifying common land where community
kitchen gardens may be promoted for use of those who do not have access to private homestead
land.
3.8 Access to Health Care
More than 86 per cent of women farmers reported having received health care services from state
run hospitals. Almost all of them opined that these services were easily available and the quality
was good.
24
3.9 Access to Public Distribution System
One tenth of our women farmers did not have ration card. More than half of them got an Above
Poverty Line (APL) card and only 28 per cent have Below Poverty Line (BPL) cards. Seven per
cent of the households were classified as Antyodaya Anna Yojana (Table 26).
Table 26: Distribution of Households by Types of Ration Card holdings, 2012
Type of Ration Cards No. of Households Percentage
Above Poverty Line - Saffron 114 51.8
Above Poverty Line - White 5 2.3
Below Poverty Line 62 28.2
Antyodaya Anna Yojana 15 6.8
Annapoorna 1 0.5
No Ration card 23 10.5
Total 220 100
4. Concluding Observations Our analysis of basic data pertaining to women farmers of MKSP, Vidarbha clearly indicate that
the members are predominantly from the most deserving socio-economic groups. More than half
the members of MKSP belong to SCs and STs; Nearly half of the holdings are small and
marginal holdings; about three fourths of area under cultivation by members is under rain fed
conditions; half the households do not own any agricultural implements; 15 % of members report
their marital status as widowed / divorced / deserted / never married.
Cotton is the most important crop followed by soyabean. Tur is grown as an intercrop with
cotton as well as soyabean. While awareness levels about land improvement, soil and water
practices is high, the adoption rates of these practices are very low. Awareness levels about seed
practices are comparatively low and adoption rate is extremely poor. Regarding the awareness
and adoption levels of nutrient management practices, we find that the gap is very wide and also
25
there are significant differences in the gap between awareness and adoption across practices. The
same gap could be noticed regarding the integrated pest management practices also. We have not
found any significant post-harvest operations across various crops. The marketing channels vary
across crops and size class of farmers. Major source of information about rainfall, price and
cultivation practice is the television.
As far as kitchen garden is concerned, only 25 per cent of the households have kitchen garden
and we do not find the required level of vegetable diversity in the kitchen garden.
Issues that arise from the baseline survey and future focus of MKSP
• Significant gaps are found between awareness levels and adoption levels of various
sustainable agricultural practices. Efforts need to be focused on bridging this gap.
• Awareness levels about certain good practices are to be raised further.
• Number of farmers who own cattle but do not follow IPM or INM are significant and
they should be targeted for promotion of these practices.
• Post-Harvest practices are to be introduced in possible areas which would lead to an
increase in the value of the produce and diversify the income of some households who
take up these operations.
• Farmers who do not have space for kitchen garden are to be encouraged to explore ways
to raise kitchen garden. Community kitchen garden is a possibility that may be explored.
Greater diversity in the existing kitchen garden are to be ensured.
cgh
I
t<
b0a
e
t{
v)
oH
otr
'oGI
cl. (D
;ot)frl;
U)(BO
o.U'Y=
I
oL
. 5ogoF
oo5oro
.=oo(Eo
Nc;q)
(r{o()Eclz
frcsIrF ;F 3F Fglii €e ' NF.{ IE €( D t + . it r oo oe F
F i Z
nO
nUv)li()!
lEcE,
d
Else.T',
E(n
f
o)
Eooo)o
ila
dsPs.:s"\3a),as
\
: Br G'- E ' ' g
i G l m r + n \ o r €
g eEFtsTsgEf
' ' O *- a . l o $ h \ O F € O i i i
d i F r i
(o
N
b.L
ao
c)q
0..Av
I
ou)
--
t a
c l
t ,
u
OJ
F
E€FtEIEfrBE
0)ah
friE(fH
eq)a\B
()Bsg
16
tcc
. ' tq)
6l
=(J
frtat)ttst?)
I
c.l
(..1
frw
c?l
I
ol.
ol
c)a
(nH
unir,€)ou2
f-tlt
o
cl
€
oo
.h
a
oo
qi
. o
\o
# Ec- 9io0 '-' i .=
, tE9 =- : =o =
f i e, t r- 6
r E
b ;
H . O
b 0 _
a ao ! ?
. 6 X= v
E $
6 O6 e
o =A Ot s oo ^t r J Jr E 6
^o^ :-< Fo t e{ :- t EF at r €
' = 6
o x. ' r ' ) t l
9 ' o
ovI
(h(h
E&E)'voc)p
( r .
tr&I
ahq)
"t
s?a
$ r
E'CI
E f
H +E g
e sO F
g # ,n F
#()a E'4
1il)
gv
16/iE
ElcfrE€abI)L
]tt4ErtlBE,€,s2
cq
6lg
E E.EEE E' E ( E' a F
!U
rE
tlEFlEEp6FFlu
6E
tv
17
ll
|\IJlt
€L(|)
q)
E
c)
F
ccFlq)
E
I U
v'vU)tic.)
I
f r .
415|r56l€'ah
I
q)
-6tL
-ILb0
N
CA
N
>lo
U)(.)()o
c)6lk ( ). r L
w o, Q 3= l -6 6L -
'o !?o =9 =
> -. ) =6 Y
r.tI-l
,Z E,A i s\ . @
ro \a
o
aM,:U)u)
N
*o
U)()=c)o
6@EF:, h'5()ach
6)FvFq)
ohg
I
t:vIDc)r1Cgg(!o0 o.= qa v- t ;
frr( l ) &E 8o
EE€r
e(J
d
L
€trLo)
iiI6ttr
FF
i:(,I(\t
i;F
G'o)
FI
aE
]F#FEGI
B'a+EFFgo
I
o(J!
\o
isG€(l).x
Ira
lrqFEhoa
I
:E
d
FF
oO
Ic.l
bk.=+It6FEcll
a, v l(\l ri
t 3 -lw, I
,3. 6T F€- 63gt r oE Ac +E c. Y F\ J F
- oxo x
€ vo lQ r -
Et l 5. 9 t cE gi E 6e EE rq -r i 8
I
th
troI
€6log(,)
g4
ftJ
tvluE,!l.E
E@E'oC)
oo
vF Fe h t& Eo c )L ' O
Q 8g;)
c?t F
I EH - -K g
6l; ( )A a
.= l t rs ' EK 6 l9 ELri v9 rGl tii
H Ea\ li< i g
L O. a 0 I
6l
E} E9 EE EE €E ;c l -F { E
:E
FE
r^ lU
E+Q A
E EQ ;
p
frFFe6EF'll,
EogA6lq)
tA
cgtY.li
ciL(|)
.ta6-
EO b
E f! €E ;q ar-{ I
bE
FE
r - F
E+A a )E E
( J C )(l)g
F.rl-, -
?6t9 0> . 2? a >
E *T,
EN.E#> ! uE ]f'd G
E gA FO F
e
(\l
>io
k
U)()
c)H
rn
E
6ln
I
aDq)I
I6lLI
GIo()€tr3 U'
cdgo
FEb r& E
(Daoctt(l)
G'
EE€ r( n F
o
Eh v< F
EA Eo \ Z
cdb 6 EG +
* f ; ,
c €F A< , A. 6 4
6 =
E
&t E: ] vE 3€ a. e EE E6 E eF { g
d
at)
tr€)I
EIqla2gI
tr
6lg
Itftu)Epcd
,!)
'6
IE@E€c)6lho
frHe#)Fv
, vu2Qe(Jcl
I-o)
. L
€trL(D
t' ct{EOE!aaeIT'
c?)
N
>l(.)L
v)c)
c)aa
02H 1 8B d eU)
! . E
E*El o Fb 'rtq,)L
trGItr, lu- q 6R 1 '
GILA O F
= E 'tsbt r6)o
Gt
€ F
E rb t rgEEEE €5 F
trc)
F16
t. t rF +t | s vE . Fd 9F €\,, tr
3 €. 6 F '
1 7 ?I
E hfl
GI
d
ItluE
19
9 G l5 f
! . Ev =
avI
v)a
('l
IGI
FI
lrIuEl2tsfr
' 1 9F
6F
@. (.1
I
GI
(\l
a)
. Etr
€0oI
96llr-
a)q)oc|
?( D a> oe?, z; >s ta0 \J
.E
E E9' 'F.= "E- E> r FE E6 l EE EO F€
o- 4 ,Eh th
4vpFeEU'l-r()U'
,!)
€)I
9c)€gL
(|)
q)b0
c€
€)L
z
lupF
6g=d(d
Ef
6
|-r
aq)I
IGL
I
c)b06l
G
Itr
zI
clb0L
=
cn
N
*o
k
v)o
o
Kl\t
lce+6
-7
EEvt#E()
o
C)
o
Bt 'lr
-7
G.trl:l9
FFFGIx@FVF'
EvErr
FEe+.a0
u1.t)q)CJ
!
qh
o)
I
o
c)(J
I
La
1rE'
EItrFlo&IE@FvEI
(Db0GI
. c t
EAc)
. €q)
altrb0I
tr-
o
ot)
oL
EL
o
UL
tr
trt)o
o
zhk
FIF
Lr
E1
Lro0o()
lu6ID
i:o0
J.o
EE
17
v
Ew
Fo
O
EGIo)
6_ ' zx 9Es 'tao0 ,lE.E /Sb E
E .IE
g s'E
lE
F EE +* l E€ E
EfrHf r ^6 Z
€ s
trrI
v)<)tr
xf r l
g r€ Eo 6
eGt.,
B EE ve . E# E
(D. =( ) F
uE E.q' Er n ' 6
Fa)
h oM
rJ)q)
ca)
ao
cl>iq)
P
vtc)
q)q
trRF
E.t?
th
Ff iFG(EE(Dvt
HObI)
i=a)
Jl{(g
O.
'\a)
= 1 0
d ) r '
a .ttF Fz t r
Eq
cr16
C)
#FEc6o)
FCS
(n
wlc?Cgq.)q
C)bI)
gbo'Uc)
>F
+Ft<
B
Fa4
!YbI)
c)I
ttl
b0-v()6l
18@C)
v)()a
v*1'
()a
&c)
O
li
ftlFH
0)
B
v19(l)
C)L.
h0
a
FFc)N
€F(!)
FL)
. hc)q)a
0wnnlkc)
d 2 c\ ca rf, \n \o F\ oo o\ N ca
oMFv)a
]ufar,
lu
€(E?a
I
t\
N
ot
q)
a0
c)!
=
6l
*o
U)()c)q
U)M
I
v)(h
r-tH
z\ trt r Ec\. E-utq ) E
'd 'r. l
O O .P C dV2()o . t r
EcsIrU)
, h()C)aa
fr€vlE
E5tr
tt
Eo0
B
l-r
uia>r
qi
tr
Ft r t roItr18e ' t rF+
S c \ l c n $E
=
(!.
I;lv
4c
frptsw
frFlEtFb!
Fo€(D
tr
GI
Lrci
c)
(9Ie
gL
I
ei
Lro
oB
| . ^- [ l
&aU)I
I(\l
. ozLoog
IvFF
a
EFt2o
-9^-
IEh.l
Ef
6oluFE19ah()o()GI
3-
'5
.==U
ca
N
*D
lr
v)()()a
@I Ecl Il:
: 6E EE " F. E E
E ,IE
b E€ FH x= E€ E
8 2
Er,trItr
6ltcFG .+Il,'
Yt,
E6.F
FE
HaZ h
rqtu.
zr hv .=iH
,2cE' I
-
ci€
GF EF o
EE
F E& FE EA 5 t
F 8
g ?i s
(t)v;
v)at)
FEE
E
: zE >
!= .o6l rrr
GI*lti€)tr(|)
FEc)
q)
(,a
oz(n N crj s trt
€
N
>io
E
v)C)
G)q
o
6'EN
r,:9ltt
t,
EF'5(r)
I(\
GI
q)
oI
€)6l
xe
lrFFfrFEo
ec
o9
tiot,{)flJo
o
F
FEFg=
=, . 9
oo
EF
FT
FFEcrttub
E
63(tt
Ecl
'=
F.'=T9t2ao
'6=latrLGI
z
EIF'FF
I5E
boI
c)
. 9ao
oEoaE
r t l
obt)
Irc
l i E
V E() Fr. b F= 1 5s ' d€ EE FEEI FF F
.Y
E d3 r
trFv
€4EF€wFEFE.$t'F
EE'FtFeTDoC)
gE(,
ooo
trE19
E-ruDFcE'oc,--
Eoc)U)
oFI
@.EFvF(1>aI
It(r.olv
FEEIrtF'' 6
tFcq
I. ( \ t
oc!' I'o(D
cl
clv)
lEio. t rq)sq)
Eu,
I=U'
GI. o )
E' . =()tr
EIE
F.F' t ,EvE2
e=€CI
tr(D
Eq)
3
tr' ( I )
ti(D
q)
6
6l
IE()(|)
m-
t r t rr q 2
t r t r9 E
troztrU'
I
tc
Ec9a
F, F
t,FE€,
r n E, q E& Fg F
bP t L
F Eg l E
E El3 t'f ; F
.= .EE EE F: FS EgE
EE
b 'lg€ Fo U
F #
s € E
' 2o
9r-v
Ittl
aL€
F EH #E ' i. F st s AF O )] E E
H l
d ( - l
za c{ ca $
U)M
(h(A
F €
('r
N
*()au).)Ei()oql
cqt
oclho' 5
avI
h&(A(A
(l).(,o
q ( EE l 9
F gZ F
FtIErEFso0.Ecl
/ l
-t
=
(A
u0
J.
! F
€ f f# € d,
E : f
luFc)
6tz
dzr:(r)
