Final Report: Baseline Study - ASA India Baseline Study-Bihar-2012-13.pdfFinal Report: Baseline...

Final Report: Baseline Study In Bihar

0 | P a g e

Final Report: Baseline Study in Bihar

2012-13

http://www.google.co.in/imgres?um=1&hl=en&biw=1280&bih=602&tbm=isch&tbnid=0vM5v2qdYdnhCM:&imgrefurl=http://www.indiawaterportal.org/bulletin-board/20174&imgurl=http://www.indiawaterportal.org/sites/indiawaterportal.org/files/1_2.jpeg&w=267&h=189&ei=RLg8UOq0AZCqrAeWm4CACw&zoom=1


1 | P a g e

Table of Contents Acknowledgement .............................................................................................................................. 8

Abbreviation ....................................................................................................................................... 9

Executive Summary ........................................................................................................................... 10

1 Chapter: Background and Introduction .................................................................................... 15

1.1 Purpose of the Study ......................................................................................................... 15

1.2 Focus of the Baseline Study: ............................................................................................. 16

1.3 Methodology of the Study ................................................................................................ 16

1.3.1 Sample selection ....................................................................................................... 16

1.3.2 Pre- testing of Tool .................................................................................................... 17

1.3.3 Training ..................................................................................................................... 17

1.3.4 Field Work and Data Collection ................................................................................ 18

2 Chapter: Village Profile ............................................................................................................. 19

2.1 Demographic Profile ......................................................................................................... 19

2.2 Primary Occupation .......................................................................................................... 20

2.3 Poverty Status ................................................................................................................... 20

2.4 Basic Infrastructure ........................................................................................................... 21

2.4.1 Basic Infrastructure facilities ..................................................................................... 21

2.4.2 Agricultural facilities ................................................................................................. 22

2.4.3 Health facilities .......................................................................................................... 22

2.5 Irrigation Facilities ............................................................................................................. 23

3 Chapter: Household Profile ....................................................................................................... 24

3.1 Basic Profile ....................................................................................................................... 24

3.1.1 Household Category: ................................................................................................. 24

3.1.2 Poverty Status: .......................................................................................................... 24

3.1.3 House Type, Drinking Water and Toilet: ................................................................... 25

3.1.4 Education Profile: ...................................................................................................... 25

3.2 Activity Profile ................................................................................................................... 27

3.2.1 Working Women ....................................................................................................... 30

3.2.2 Details of non-wage generating Activities by Female Members: ............................. 30

3.2.3 Details of wage generating activities by Female Members ...................................... 30

3.2.4 Details of women involved in agricultural activities ................................................. 31

3.2.5 Level of Satisfaction amongst Women ..................................................................... 32

3.2.6 Decision making on choice of Work by Women ....................................................... 33


2 | P a g e

3.2.7 Decision making amongst women involved in agricultural activities ....................... 33

4 Chapter: Agricultural Practices ................................................................................................. 35

4.1 Cultivated Land Size .......................................................................................................... 35

4.2 Main Crops ........................................................................................................................ 36

4.2.1 Various crops grown by farmers in a year on their own field ................................... 37

4.3 Land Preparation ............................................................................................................... 38

4.4 Seed Selection ................................................................................................................... 39

4.4.1 Varieties of seeds used in the three districts ............................................................ 39

4.5 Irrigation ............................................................................................................................ 41

4.6 Nursery Raising and Transplantation ................................................................................ 42

4.7 Weeding ............................................................................................................................ 42

4.8 Fertilizer/ Pesticides Application....................................................................................... 43

4.8.1 Fertilizer and Manure................................................................................................ 43

4.8.2 Pesticides .................................................................................................................. 43

4.9 Harvest .............................................................................................................................. 45

4.10 Threshing ........................................................................................................................... 45

4.11 Storage .............................................................................................................................. 45

5 Chapter: Agriculture Income and Expenditure ......................................................................... 46

5.1 Income from Agriculture ................................................................................................... 46

5.1.1 Major crops grown in the three districts .................................................................. 46

5.1.2 Productivity ............................................................................................................... 46

5.1.3 Productivity per acre for three major crops i.e. Maize, Paddy and Wheat .............. 47

5.2 Sale and Consumption of the Produce ............................................................................. 49

5.2.1 Households that don’t sell ........................................................................................ 49

5.2.2 Households that sell produce ................................................................................... 50

5.3 Buyer and Reason for choosing buyer .............................................................................. 50

5.4 Time of payment and Advise received with regards to agriculture .................................. 51

5.5 Net Agricultural Income (Net Farm Income) ..................................................................... 52

5.5.1 Net agricultural income on the basis of district ........................................................ 52

5.5.2 Net agricultural income on the basis of land holding ............................................... 52

5.5.3 Net agricultural income on the basis of social category ........................................... 53

5.6 Agricultural expenditure ................................................................................................... 54

5.6.1 Agricultural Expenditure for Small & Marginal Farmers ........................................... 55

5.7 Non- farm income and its sources .................................................................................... 55


3 | P a g e

5.8 Net Household Income (Farm and Non Farm Income) ..................................................... 56

5.8.1 Net household income on the basis of districts ........................................................ 56

5.8.2 Net household income on the basis of land holding ................................................ 56

5.8.3 Net household income on the basis of social category ............................................ 57

5.9 Households taken Agriculture Loan .................................................................................. 58

6 Chapter: Government Schemes and Services Related to Agriculture and Food Security ........ 60

6.1 Agriculture Services Received ........................................................................................... 60

6.2 Government Schemes and Programme ............................................................................ 61

6.2.1 Status of government schemes and programmes in the three districts .................. 62

6.3 PDS and other schemes to improve food security ............................................................ 64

6.3.1 Receive Items through PDS ....................................................................................... 64

6.3.2 PDS items distributed amongst SC and ST category ................................................. 65

6.3.3 Food Crisis faced by households ............................................................................... 65

6.3.4 Households facing food Crisis in 2011 ...................................................................... 66

6.3.5 Effects of Food Crisis ................................................................................................. 67

7 Chapter: Relation with Primary and Secondary Institutions .................................................... 68

7.1 Membership of Village Level Groups ................................................................................ 68

7.2 Participation in SHG .......................................................................................................... 68

7.3 Participation in Other Groups ........................................................................................... 69

7.4 Personal Rapport with Panchayat Members, Village and Block Level Officials ................ 70

7.5 Role of PRI and NGOs in Agriculture ................................................................................. 70

8 Chapter: Conclusion and Recommendations ............................................................................ 72

A. Annexure1 ................................................................................................................................. 74

B. Annexure 2 ................................................................................................................................... 96


4 | P a g e

List of Tables

Table 1.1Sample Covered ..................................................................................................................... 17

Table 2.1: Caste-wise distribution of HHs in villages ............................................................................ 20

Table 2.2: irrigation Status in villages ................................................................................................... 23

Table 4.1: Major crops grown in all the 405 households ...................................................................... 37

Table 4.3: Households involved in vegetable production ..................................................................... 38

Table 4.4: Type of seeds used ............................................................................................................... 39

Table 4.5: Types of seed used in the three districts ............................................................................. 40

Table 4.6: Source of Procurement of seeds .......................................................................................... 41

Table 4.7: Type of Pesticides used ........................................................................................................ 44

Table 5.1: District wise distribution of major crops .............................................................................. 46

Table 5.2: Households that do not sell produce ................................................................................... 49

Table 5.3: Social category wise distribution of respondents who do not sell any produce ................. 50

Table 5.4: buyers for the produce and the reason of choosing them .................................................. 51

Table 5.5: Net agricultural income on the basis of land holding .......................................................... 52

Table 5.6: Net agricultural income on the basis of land holding .......................................................... 53

Table 5.7: Net agricultural income on the basis of social category ...................................................... 54

Table 5.8: Sources of non farm income ................................................................................................ 56

Table 5.9: Net household income on the basis of districts ................................................................... 56

Table 5.10: Net household produce on the basis of land holding ........................................................ 57

Table 5.11: Net household income on the basis of social category ..................................................... 57

Table 6.1: PDS items received amongst SC and ST categories .............................................................. 65

Table 6.2: Food crisis with respect to social category .......................................................................... 66

Table7.1: Participation of SC and ST households in SHGs and other groups ........................................ 69

Table 9.1: Type of House....................................................................................................................... 74

Table 9.2: Availability of Toilets ............................................................................................................ 74

Table 9.3: Main Source of Drinking Water ............................................................................................ 74

Table 9.4: Categorization of Working Women according to Social Category ....................................... 74

Table 9.5: Categorization of Women according to Economic Category ............................................... 74

Table 9.6: Average Hours spent on the Wage Activities on a daily basis ............................................. 75

Table 9.7: Categorization according to the Hours spent on Wage Earning Activities .......................... 75

Table 9.8: Level of Satisfaction amongst the Working Women ............................................................ 75

Table 9.9: Non Wage Activities by Female Members ........................................................................... 75

Table 9.10: Number of Hours spent on Non Wage Activities ............................................................... 76

Table 9.11: Having Livestock ................................................................................................................. 76

Table 9.12: Type of Livestock ................................................................................................................ 76

Table 9.13: Membership to Village Level Groups ................................................................................. 76

Table 9.14: Type of Groups ................................................................................................................... 76

Table 9.15: Participation in Other Groups ............................................................................................ 77

Table 9.16: Role of PRI in Agriculture ................................................................................................... 77

Table 9.17: NGOs working in the sector of Agriculture ........................................................................ 77

Table 9.18: Items Received under the Public Distribution System ....................................................... 77

Table 9.19: Regularity of Receiving Wheat under the PDS ................................................................... 77


5 | P a g e

Table 9.20: Fair Price of Wheat under PDS ........................................................................................... 78

Table 9.21: Right quantity of Wheat under PDS ................................................................................... 78

Table 9.22: Regularity of Receiving Rice under PDS ............................................................................. 78

Table 9.23: Right Quantity of Rice under PDS....................................................................................... 78

Table 9.24: Fair Price of Receiving Rice under PDS ............................................................................... 78

Table 9.25: Regularity of Receiving Kerosene under PDS ..................................................................... 79

Table 9.26: Right Quantity of Kerosene under PDS .............................................................................. 79

Table 9.27: Fair Price of Kerosene under PDS ....................................................................................... 79

Table 9.28: Regularity of receiving Sugar under PDS ............................................................................ 79

Table 9.29: Right Quantity of Sugar under PDS .................................................................................... 79

Table 9.30: Fair Price of Sugar under PDS ............................................................................................. 79

Table 9.31: Months wherein Food Crisis is faced by Respondents ....................................................... 80

Table 9.32: Food Crisis faced by Respondents in 2011 ......................................................................... 80

Table 9.33: Months in which Food Crisis was faced in 2011 ................................................................ 80

Table 9.34: Effects of Food Crisis .......................................................................................................... 81

Table 9.35: Items received under PDS, by HH facing crisis in 2011 ...................................................... 81

Table 9.36: Received Agriculture Extension Services in the Year 2011 ................................................ 81

Table 9.37: Institution from where Agriculture Services are received ................................................. 81

Table 9.38: Attended Demonstration on Agriculture ........................................................................... 81

Table 9.39: Institutions Disseminating these Demonstrations ............................................................. 82

Table 9.40: Part of Agriculture Related Demonstration Visits in 2011 ................................................. 82

Table 9.41: Institutions Disseminating Demonstration in the year 2011 ............................................. 82

Table 9.42: Main Crops Cultivated in the Area ..................................................................................... 82

Table 9.43: Source of Procurement of Seeds on an Overall Level ........................................................ 83

Table 9.44: Irrigation facilities used by the Respondents ..................................................................... 83

Table 9.45: Fertilizers Applied ............................................................................................................... 83

Table 9.46: Use of manure .................................................................................................................... 84

Table 9.47: Name of the Fertilizer ........................................................................................................ 84

Table 9.48: Place of Procurement of Fertilizers .................................................................................... 84

Table 9.49: name of the Pesticides Used across Crop Categories ........................................................ 85

Table 9.50: Place of Procurement of Pesticides across crop categories ............................................... 85

Table 9.51: Harvesting Machinery ........................................................................................................ 86

Table 9.52: Threshing Machinery .......................................................................................................... 86

Table 9.53: Storage of the Crop ............................................................................................................ 86

Table 9.54: Awareness about Schemes and Programmes .................................................................... 87

Table 9.55: Source of Information with regards to Schemes and Government Programmes ............. 87

Table 9.56: Regularity of Availing Benefits ........................................................................................... 87

Table 9.57: Reason for Storage ............................................................................................................. 88

Table 9.58: Place of Selling ................................................................................................................... 88

Table 9.59: Buyers for the Produce ...................................................................................................... 88

Table 9.60: Timing of Receiving the Payment ....................................................................................... 89

Table 9.61: Advice Received from with regards to Agriculture ............................................................ 89

Table 9.62: Productivity with respect to Major Crops .......................................................................... 89

Table 9.63: Caste wise Population covered under the Village Profile .................................................. 89

Table 9.64: Primary Occupation across the villages studied (from village profile) .............................. 90


6 | P a g e

Table 9.65: Poverty Status off the Village Population (from village profile) ........................................ 90

Table 9.66: Educational Infrastructure (from village profile) ............................................................... 90

Table 9.67: Drinking Water Sources (from village profile) .................................................................... 90

Table 9.68: Irrigation Sources (from village profile) ............................................................................. 91

Table 9.69: Land ownership on the basis of social category ................................................................ 91

Table 9.70: Land holding classification of SC and ST farmers ............................................................... 91

Table 9.71: Participation of Households in SHGs and other groups based on size of land holding ..... 91

Table 9.72: Sources of irrigation for villages( from village profile) ....................................................... 95

Table 9.73: various crops grown by farmers (season wise) .................................................................. 95


7 | P a g e

List of Figures

Figure 2-1: Division of villages on the basis of size ............................................................................... 19

Figure 2-2: Access to Basic infrastructure facilities .............................................................................. 21

Figure 2-3: Access to Agricultural facilities ........................................................................................... 22

Figure 2-4: Access to Health Facilities ................................................................................................... 22

Figure 3-1: Social Category of respondents .......................................................................................... 24

Figure 3-2: Economic Status of the respondents .................................................................................. 25

Figure 3-3: Educational Profile of household members (6 years and above) ....................................... 26

Figure 3-4: Gender distribution of educational profile of household members (6 years and above) .. 26

Figure 3-5: Activity Profile (above 14 years) ......................................................................................... 27

Figure 3-6: District wise distribution of major activities ....................................................................... 28

Figure 3-7: Number of days of involvement in all activities ................................................................. 28

Figure 3-8: Nature of involvement in agricultural activities ................................................................. 29

Figure 3-9: Details of earning activities amongst women .................................................................... 30

Figure 3-10: District wise composition of women involved in agricultural activities ........................... 31

Figure 3-11: level of satisfaction amongst women involved in income generating activities .............. 32

Figure 3-12: Reason of dissatisfaction amongst women engaged as agriculture daily wage labour ... 32

Figure 3-13: Decision making amongst working women ...................................................................... 33

Figure 3-14: Decision making amongst women involved in agricultural activities ............................... 33

Figure 4-1: Cultivated land size ............................................................................................................. 35

Figure 4-2: District wise distribution of farmers with own lands ......................................................... 36

Figure 4-3: Various crops grown by farmers in a year on their own field ............................................ 37

Figure 5-1: Productivity per acre with respect to major crops ............................................................. 47

Figure 5-2: Productivity per acre for farmers growing crops in land more than 5 acre ....................... 47

Figure 5-3: Productivity per acre for farmers growing crops in 2-5 acre land ...................................... 48

Figure 5-4: Productivity per acre for farmers growing crops in 1-2 acre land ...................................... 48

Figure 5-5: Productivity per acre for farmers growing crops in land more than 5 acre ....................... 49

Figure 5-6: Sale of produce ................................................................................................................... 50

Figure 5-7: Expenditure categories incurred by households with respect to Agriculture .................... 54

Figure 5-8: Expenditure categories incurred by marginal & small farmers with respect to agriculture

.............................................................................................................................................................. 55

Figure 5-9: Sources of agriculture loan ................................................................................................. 58

Figure 5-10: Purpose of availing agriculture loans ............................................................................... 59

Figure 6-1: Comparison between awareness and availing of schemes ................................................ 61

Figure 6-2: Satisfaction of beneficiaries ................................................................................................ 62

Figure 6-3: Status of government schemes and programmes in Khagaria district ............................... 63

Figure 6-4: Status of government schemes and programmes in Purnea district ................................. 63

Figure 6-5: Action taken to overcome food crisis ................................................................................. 67

Figure 7-1: Participation in SHG ............................................................................................................ 69

Figure 7-2: Personal rapport with members in authority ..................................................................... 70

Figure 7-3: Role of NGOs in agriculture ................................................................................................ 71


8 | P a g e

Acknowledgement

We are especially grateful to Mr.Ashis Mondal, Director, ASA, G Jayanthi, Theme Manager- HR and

team, for giving New Concept support and inputs at each stage of the Baseline Study.

Our special thanks to the Team Leaders, ASA, and team for their support throughout the field work

period especially to Yogesh Sharma for arranging the logistics for training at Purnea.

We express our thanks to the PEs, DAs and VRPs of ASA for their contribution to the field work.

We thank our field executives for their dedicated and sincere job in the field and to the New Concept

staff who spared no effort in going through the entire research process including analysis of the

data. Without their help, this task could not have been completed.

We are thankful to all the above mentioned who took time from their busy schedule and

contributed to the study in many ways. Without them, this work would not have been possible.

Last but not the least we express our gratitude to the community and households who spared their

time and patiently responded to our questions.


9 | P a g e

Abbreviation

ASA: Action for Social Advancement

BoD: Board of Directors

BRLPS: Bihar Rural livelihoods Promotion Society

DA: Development Assistant (ASA)

FGD: Focus Group Discussion

HR: Human Resource

INM: Integrated Nutrient Management

IPM: Integrated Pest Management

LRP: Local Resource Persons

MKP: Mahila Kisan Pathshala

MKPC: Manila Kisan Producer Company

MKSP: Manila Kisan Sashaktikaran Pariyojana

PE: Project Executive (ASA)

PG: Primary Group

PTD: Participatory Technology Development

SHG: Self Help Group

SRI: System of Rice Intensification

SWI: System of Wheat Intensification

VRP: Village Resource Person (ASA)

WFPC: Women Farmer Producer Groups

WI: Women Institution


10 | P a g e

Executive Summary

The primary focus of this baseline study was on current agricultural practices which include income

from agriculture, linkages with the government schemes related to agriculture and relationships

with primary and secondary institutions where the target groups are farmers. Keeping in mind this

objective of the study, a total of 15 villages were covered across three districts of Jamui, Khagaria

and Purnea. The Baseline Study covered 405 households in Bihar. In each village one village profile

was compiled and in each cluster, in the biggest village in terms of population, one FGD was also

conducted.

Village & Household Profile

With reference to the social categories of households surveyed in the study, it was observed that

amongst a total of 405 households interviewed, about 58 percent belonged to Other Backward

Class. Both SC and ST households were 16.8 percent of the total sample, OBC and general

households comprised 57.5 and 8.9 percent respectively of the 405 households studied.

Nearly one fourth of the members from the sampled households in the category of 6 years and

above (about 23 percent), were illiterate. Nearly 47 percent of the household members were

engaged in agricultural wage labour for 201-300 days a year. Also in the district of Purnea much

more people than the other two districts are involved in activities like Farming and Housework.

The basic infrastructure was also studied from the village profile and it was noted that all the villages

were electrified. In terms of Educational Infrastructure Primary Schools were reported to be present

in 60 percent of the villages. With respect to Drinking Water Sources, hand Pump was the pre-

dominant source present in nearly 68 percent of the villages

Amongst a total of 68 women (from the households sampled) involved in wage earning activities, 63

percent women were involved in agricultural daily wage labour for their source of earning. Nearly 49

percent women reported that they were satisfied and about 33 percent women reported that they

were not satisfied with the work they were doing (the remaining 18 percent could neither describe

themselves as satisfied or not satisfied). When considering women involved in agricultural activities,

it is noticed that majority of the decisions made for females engaged as agricultural daily wage

labourer are joint in nature, for women practicing agriculture in their own field, similar sort of trend

is seen as majority of the decisions for female members in this category are also jointly made i.e.

women’s opinion is taken into perspective.

Agriculture Profile and Practices

For the household questionnaire only those households were taken into perspective that owned

land. Among these sampled households it was observed that 67 percent of the farmers belonged to

the marginal category and owned less than 1 acre of land and very few fell in the category of large

farmers. It was not surprising to note that the main crops included Paddy and Maize, which form the

staple diet of the people in Bihar. About 42 percent of the household members also stated that they

cultivated Wheat. Accordingly, Maize, Paddy and Potato are the three most popular Kharif crops and


11 | P a g e

similarly Wheat, Brinjal and Cauliflower are the three most popular Rabi crops grown in the area

studied.

On further analysis to help assess the status of vegetable production, it can be concluded that not

many households were involved in the production and cultivation of vegetables, in fact save for

Potato (6.4 percent), cultivation of other vegetables was very insignificant. A percentage wise

distribution of all households that were involved in vegetable production shows that outside of

Potato, Brinjal (2 percent) and White Gourd (2.7 percent) are the two most grown vegetables.

With respect to seed selection, it was noted that hybrid varieties of seeds were popular amongst the

farmers for Maize and Brinjal, and high yield varieties were widely used for Paddy, Wheat and

Potato. Also traditional varieties of seeds were popular amongst farmers in district Jamui, whereas

for both Purnea and Khagaria hybrid varieties of seeds were most commonly used. In terms of

procurement of seeds, it was noted that direct procurement from markets seemed to be popular for

all crops. Seed treatment is not practiced in any other district except for Khagaria, where it is

practiced for Paddy. From both the FGD findings and the household questionnaire it was established

that bore well is the major source of irrigation in the area.

Further, broadcasting method of sowing was popular across all districts for all the varieties of crops.

Weeding is done manually in the districts of Purnea and Jamui, however in district Khagaria it was

noted that machine was used for weeding for Paddy. With respect to fertilizers and manure, the

results indicated that nearly 54 percent respondents used straight fertilizers, about 31 percent

respondents used complex fertilizers and nearly 15 percent respondents practiced the use of

micronutrients. With reference to the use of pesticides, the results obtained indicated that across all

the crops Maize, Paddy, Wheat, Potato, Banana and Brinjal, Insecticides appeared to be the most

popularly used which was followed by the use of herbicides. Most respondents reported that they

stored produce inside their house.

Agriculture Income & Expenditure

With respect to the productivity of the crops cultivated by the respondents, the findings are

interesting. From the sample who reported growing Maize, Paddy and Wheat, the largest proportion

reported that the productivity was below 10 quintal per acre in cases of Maize and Wheat, while for

Paddy the productivity ranged between 11 to 20 quintals.

It was also established that most of the households that do not sell their produce are from marginal

(less than 1 Acre) and small (1-2 Acre) households. District wise analysis of this data shows that

situation in Jamui and Khagaria is considerably worse off than district Purnea when considering

farmers that don’t sell their produce.

The respondents were asked about the buyers who usually bought their produce and here it was not

surprising to note that almost 80 percent respondents reported that their produce was traded in the

village itself whereas 15 percent reported that the produce was traded outside the village. In terms

of timing of payment received 46 percent reported that they received the payment on the same day,

nearly 28 percent received it within seven days and about 23 percent received it within 8-30 days

after the sale..


12 | P a g e

While considering the net agricultural income earned by farmers in the three districts it is clearly

seen that district Jamui lags far behind the other two districts when it comes to net income earned

from agriculture, in fact 90 percent of the people in this district reported to have incurred a loss in

2011 i.e. signifying that their expenditure was more than that of the income earned from selling

produce. Net agricultural income earned by various types of farmers show that as expected loss

incurred by farmers having only marginal land holdings i.e. less than 1 Acre exhibit the maximum

composition experiencing loss. Around 67 percent of all marginal farmers stated that they had

experienced negative agricultural income in 2011. Another important point to note here is the

production, sale and expenditure of crops amongst the various social categories of farmers, once

again the data as expected shows that majority of the SC and ST households reported that they

experienced loss, in fact a staggering 88.2 percent of SC and 91.2 percent of ST households stated

they had experienced a net negative agricultural income in 2011. While analyzing the various

expenditure heads incurred for agricultural activities, it is realized that fertilizers (28.2 percent),

irrigation (20.4 percent), tractor/power tiller (17.8 percent) and labour (17.8 percent) are the major

sources of expenditure for the 405 surveyed households.

While considering the net household income (including non-farm income) for farmers in the three

districts it can be said that non farm income has supplemented the overall household income of a

large number of households covered during the study, none more so than in district Jamui. Also

farmers whether marginal, small, medium or large have all augmented their net household income

from non-farm sources. While analyzing the net household income data for various social categories,

it was revealed that SC and ST households have drastically increased their household income as a

result of their non-farm ventures, only 11.8 and 13.2 percent of SC and ST households respectively

report to have incurred any loss in their net household income. While considering the non farm

income earned by households and various sources of it, wages earned through labour work emerged

as the single major contributor (around 81 percent).

The study also indicated that amongst the total respondents about 21 percent had taken agriculture

loan while the rest claimed not to have taken any loan. Further, probing with the respondents who

had taken loan for agriculture indicated that money lender was the pre dominant source of lending

for this purpose.

Government schemes and services related to Agriculture & Food Security

The results for the items that are received under the Public Distribution System by the respondents

indicated that nearly 56 percent reported to obtain wheat and rice under this system. About 98

percent respondents received kerosene. The observations with respect to receiving fair price and

quantity were tilted towards the negative side. Out of total sampled households, 52.3 percent stated

that they received Wheat and Rice respectively, out of those who said they received wheat 55

percent were OBC, whereas only 5.2 percent were from general category. The percent of SC who

received wheat was only 12.7 whereas that of ST was considerably better i.e. 27 percent. The

percentage composition for those who received Rice was quite similar to that of wheat.

With respect to the status of food crisis, it was noted that a little less than half the respondents,

about 48 percent reported that they had faced food crisis and the rest reported otherwise. A further

review found that out of those who had faced food crisis, 60 percent of the respondents had faced

this crisis every year. Facing food crisis every year seemed to be the norm amongst scheduled caste


13 | P a g e

and general category people. While interestingly, majority of scheduled tribe group reported facing

this occasionally. The months of February and March were when this crisis usually surfaced.

It is also important to understand what kind of efforts are made to overcome this food crisis, it was

observed that borrowing money seemed to be the most common solution amongst the respondents

(as about three fourth of the respondents resorted to this step).

With respect to Government schemes, it must be noted that except for awareness on subsidies

related to seeds, the knowledge on other schemes and programmes appears to be low amongst the

respondents and an effort must be made to raise awareness in this regard. However amongst those

aware, a large number of respondents were also availing the schemes. Hence, it can be implied that

if the awareness of schemes is raised amongst the farmers then availing the benefits of those

schemes will automatically follow.

From the district wise analysis of data regarding awareness and availing of government schemes and

programmes, it can be established that households in district Khagaria are majorly aware about only

two schemes i.e. subsidy on seeds and fertilizers, percentage of household beneficiaries only half

(50.8 percent) of those households that were aware of subsidy on loan were availing that scheme;

nearly 68 percent of those households that were aware of subsidy on fertilizer were availing/had

availed that subsidy. Percentage awareness about government schemes and programmes was even

lower in district Purnea than it was in district Khagaria, the maximum awareness was for the crop

loan scheme (45.1 percent), 39.5 percent were aware of subsidy on seeds and 24.7 percent for loan

for tractor/pump/machinery. Percentage of households availing the schemes and programmes were

also quite low, schemes that the households were less aware of also had less beneficiaries. The

statistics that emerged for district Jamui were quite abysmal; in fact not a single household in this

district was aware about any sort of scheme or programme by the government.

With reference to the source of information with regards to the schemes and programmes, it was

noted that most of the respondents, received this information from the Sarpanch/ Other GP officials.

It is interesting to note that media also plays a role in spreading awareness with respect to schemes

as nearly 9 percent reported that their awareness was from TV/Newspapers. Hence, it may be

inferred that this is an avenue which can serve good for spread of awareness. In terms of regularity

of availing the schemes of the respondents who reported to be the beneficiaries of schemes, it was

noted that not more than three fourth of the respondents reported of availing any type of scheme

regularly. An attempt was also made to understand whether those who reported to be benefitting

from the scheme were actually satisfied. The results obtained indicated that the satisfaction level

ranged from between 65 per to 100 percent on various schemes.

Linkages with Primary & Secondary Institutions

It is important that the communities are part of groups as these may help them in increasing their

awareness, exposure, and assist in solving occupational and other problems through discussions and

specific initiatives. However, amongst the 405 households studied only about 12 percent reported to

be part of village level groups or were members of Self Help Groups. Water user groups and

Producer Groups are not very popular amongst the respondents. The status of participation in the

group meetings was even worse though the awareness about the meetings being held was high.


14 | P a g e

Thus, it can be said that motivation is needed to encourage the respondents to participate in the

meetings as more awareness and attendance does persuade them to participate in decision making.

The rapport of the communities with Block level official, PRI, Agriculture officials was not that good,

in fact, only about 13 percent reported to have a rapport with the Sarpanch. Further, only about 19

percent respondents reported to share a rapport with the Agriculture Officer. An attempt was made

to understand the role that PRI plays in agricultural practices and productivity. Here, it was noted

that, not much effort was being taken on this front. It was also noted that nearly 75 percent

respondents reported that NGOs were working in this area.

It was also noted that nearly 66 percent respondents had received agriculture extension services in

the year 2011. With respect to the institution from where these respondents had received the

services included District/ Block level officials and Agriculture University as was popularly pointed

out. However, NGOs were pointed out by maximum respondents. Demonstrations on agriculture did

not seem to be a common response in the area and amongst the few that were held were

disseminated by the Districts/Block Level officers. Here, it can be concluded that though Krishi

Vigyan Kendra is established to disseminate knowledge to farmers, activities such as seminars and

demonstrations on agriculture services do not seem to be common. Further, most of the farmers

reported that they attend most of the activities being done by the NGOs in this area. .


15 | P a g e

1 Chapter: Background and Introduction

Bihar located in the eastern part of the country (between 83°-30' to 88°-00' longitude) is an entirely

land-locked state, though the outlet to the sea through the port of Kolkata is not far away. Bihar lies

mid-way between the humid West Bengal in the east and the sub humid Uttar Pradesh in the west

which provides it with a transitional position with respect to climatic conditions, economy and

culture. It is bounded by Nepal in the north and by Jharkhand towards the south. The plains of Bihar

are divided into two unequal halves by the river Ganga which flows through the middle from west to

east1. The climate of Bihar is similar to that of climatic pattern of the Indian subcontinent. It enjoys a

continental monsoon type of climate owing to its great distance from the sea2.

Agriculture is considered to be the backbone of Bihar’s economy as 81 percent of the workforce

here is employed in the field of Agriculture, which is much higher than the national average of 52

percent3. Nearly 42 per of the State Domestic Product is contributed by the Agriculture Sector (2004-

05, including forestry and fishing). The state is said to have gained self-sufficiency in food grains

production. However barring maize and pulses, productivity of various farm produce in Bihar is much

below national average. Though the area under cultivation is shrinking within the state, there is

tremendous scope for income generation in this sector. Adverse climatic conditions, like draught and

floods, do play a role in decreasing productions but the State Government attempts to re orient

agriculture through diversification policies and other measures4.

Major types of soil found in Bihar include the following:

1. Piedmont Swamp Soil - found in North-western part of west Champaran district

2. Terai Soil - found in northern part of the state along the border of Nepal

3. The Gangetic Alluvium - the plain of Bihar is covered by Gangetic Alluvium (both new as well

as old)

1.1 Purpose of the Study Action for Social Advancement (ASA) is a not for profit Non-Governmental Organisation working in

the sphere of livelihood and with millions of poor people in its operational regions in India. In

October 2011, ASA has started a project entitled “Enhancing status of small women farmers by

improving their strategic role in agriculture through building two tier women led collectives,

increased agriculture productivity and ensuring efficient backward and forward systems in three

districts- Purnea, Khagaria & Jamui of Bihar”.

The purpose of the Project is to collectivize women farmers at various levels for creating a strategic

role for them in agriculture and creating sustainable agriculture based livelihood for them. The major

components of the project include:

1. Building and nurturing farmers’ groups at the primary and apex level

2. Planning and Implementation of agriculture based livelihood initiatives

1http://gov.bih.nic.in/Profile/default.htm

2http://gov.bih.nic.in/Profile/default.htm

3http://articles.timesofindia.indiatimes.com/2012-03-17/varanasi/31204312_1_agriculture-icar-farmers

4http://krishi.bih.nic.in/defolt1.html

http://gov.bih.nic.in/Profile/default.htm

http://gov.bih.nic.in/Profile/default.htm

http://articles.timesofindia.indiatimes.com/2012-03-17/varanasi/31204312_1_agriculture-icar-farmers

http://krishi.bih.nic.in/defolt1.html


16 | P a g e

3. Formation and development of Mahila Kisan Producer Company for market linkages and

obtaining extension and knowledge services

The Key activities to be undertaken as a part of the project would include:

1. Training, exposure and several capacity building interventions for Mahila Kisan Samooh and

LRPs

2. Agriculture based livelihood interventions such as – trial and demonstration of Good

Agriculture Practices (replacement of varieties, SRI, SWI, vegetable garden, seed production

and dissemination, INM, IPM etc.), Land and Water Resources development (viz. Field bund,

levelling, diversion based irrigation, stop dam, talab, dug wells, lift irrigation, sprinkler etc.)

3. Formation and development of MKPC, for which activities will include awareness building,

drafting constitution, registration of the company, develop and establish system and

procedures related to admin, accounts, HR, develop business plan and implementation,

statutory compliance, etc.

The Project will be implemented with 18000 small and marginal farmers in 67 villages. There will be

in total 5 clusters of villages, each with 25 villages and 2000-2200 women farmers. In Purnea and

Khagaria there would be two clusters each and in Jamui there will be one cluster.

In this contest, ASA wanted to conduct a baseline study to understand the current scenario which

will serve as the base to mark changes during and post project implementation stages. ASA

commissioned New Concept Information Systems to conduct the baseline study in Bihar.

1.2 Focus of the Baseline Study: The baseline study primarily focuses on current agricultural practices which include income from

agriculture, linkages with the government schemes related to agriculture and relationships with

primary and secondary institutions where the target groups are farmers.

1.3 Methodology of the Study

1.3.1 Sample selection

The determination of the overall sample size for the Baseline study is governed by several

considerations, including key indicators, the availability of resources, and logistical considerations.

This study is seen as providing data for a baseline that can be compared at mid point and end of the

project in terms of improved practices of agriculture, increment in agriculture income and improved

status of women. The Baseline Study aimed to cover 405 households in Bihar

[Note: A sample of size 384 gives estimates with 95% of confidence and 5% of margin of error in

estimating proportions for a population size from 2,50,000 and above.5]

From each cluster 3 villages were selected and from each village 27 household were selected for

household interview. In each village one village profile was compiled and in each cluster, in the

5References:

1. Cochran, W.G. (1977), Sampling Techniques, 3rd edition, New York: John Wiley 2. Tripathi, P. C. (2003), A Text Book of Research Methodology in Social Sciences, Sultan Chand & Sons, New Delhi. (Pages -125-129)


17 | P a g e

biggest village in terms of population, one FGD was conducted to get an overall village overview.

(Refer Annexure 2 for detailed household selection process).

Table 1.1Sample Covered

District Cluster BLOCK VILLLAGE HH Interview

Village Profile

FGD

Jamui Chakai Chakai

Pojha 27 1 1

Rahima 27 1

Burhiatanr 27 1

Purnea

Bhawanipur -1 Bhawanipur

Supauli 27 1 1

Sondip 27 1

Parasbani 27 1

Bhawanipur -2 Bhawanipur

Sonima (Souna) 27 1 1

Madhoapur 27 1

Basantpur Chintamanmilik

27 1

Khagaria

Cluster-1 & 2 Chouthan

Nirpur 27 1 1

Bakeya 27 1

Partraha 27 1

Cluster-1 & 2 Chouthan

Devka 27 1 1

Saraiya 27 1

Navrolia 27 1

Total 405 15 5

In the baseline study three tools were used to collect information:

Household Tool

Village Profile and

Focus Group Discussion

1.3.2 Pre- testing of Tool

Pre-testing of household tools was carried out in a village called Rampur (District Hapur) in UP, near

New Delhi on 29 May 2012. The team pre-tested the tool and pointed out the problem areas in the

tools and the difficulties faced in administering the tool which was modified after discussion within

the New Concept team.

1.3.3 Training

Training for data collection was carried out at Purnea from 6th to 8th June 2012. The training agenda

and plan were prepared keeping in mind the information needed by the data collection team in

order to gather relevant and robust data for successful completion of the study.

Interactive sessions used for the training helped participants to learn three tools thoroughly and

they also participated enthusiastically in mock sessions. After each session/ tool, feedback was given

to the participants and also clarifications were made if any doubts arise in between the session.


18 | P a g e

Classroom training was followed by one day field practice which was very helpful the data collection

team obtained hands on experience. The field training was conducted in Chota Sahara village near

Purnea on 8th June.

1.3.4 Field Work and Data Collection

The entire field work was completed in around one month, it started on 9th June 2012 and

completed on 12th July 2012. In each village a team of two DAs (of ASA) spent 3 days to complete

household selection and household interviews. The PEs (of ASA) were involved in filling up of village

profile and conduct Focus Group Discussion. Field Executives monitored and supervised data

collection.

Scrutiny at village level was done by the data collection team under the guidance of Field Executives.

The data was then subjected to office level scrutiny in Delhi and entered. Computerised checks were

used to clean and validate the data, which was then analysed for table generation. The

chapterization and tabulation plan was shared with ASA team and agreed upon, which was referred

to while writing this report.


19 | P a g e

2 Chapter: Village Profile

The objective of this chapter is to understand the demographic profile and infrastructural facilities

across the 15 villages covered under the sample of this study. The Chapter is the result of the

analysis obtained from the village profile tool.

2.1 Demographic Profile The total number of households in all the villages combined was noted to be 4798. In terms of

demographic Profile, with respect to various castes residing in the 15 villages include Scheduled

Tribes- who seemed to be the pre dominant category as it formed nearly 47percent of the

households. The general category contributed about 12 percent of the households residing in the

sampled villages. Nearly 15 percent of the households belonged to other backward castes. (Refer to

Annexure Table 9.63: Caste wise Population covered under the Village Profile).

Also if the villages were to be divided on the basis of size, the below given pie chart would give an

illustration of the same:

Figure 2-1: Division of villages on the basis of size

For the purpose of this study, size would mean the total number of households found in the village,

for the sake of this analysis, a village is considered as small if it has less than 100 households, a

medium village would have households b/w 101-500 and a large village would mean any village

having more than 500 households.

20%

53.3%

26.7%

Division of villages on basis of size (HH in a village)(n=15)

Small Village(n=3)

Medium Village(n=8)

Large Village(n=4)


20 | P a g e

The table below gives a much more detailed description of the villages (that were part of this study)

and the division of households as per caste (existing in them).

Table 2.1: Caste-wise distribution of HHs in villages

District Village SC(HHs)

ST(HHs)

OBC(HHs)

General(HHs)

Total no of HHs

Pojha 35 120 25 0 180

Jamui Rahima 0 73 5 1 79

Burhiatanr 13 41 0 0 54

Supauli 10 2 140 0 152

Sondip 140 30 150 40 360

Parasbani 0 0 130 10 140

Sonima (Souna) 80 0 250 0 330

Purnea Madhoapur 39 23 170 0 232

Basantpur Chintamanmilik 20 0 390 55 465

Nirpur 90 0 525 10 625

Bakeya 227 0 0 0 227

Partraha 32 0 96 0 128

Khagaria Devka 90 0 650 25 765

Saraiya 135 0 400 144 679

Navrolia 100 0 425 0 525

2.2 Primary Occupation The study indicated that maximum proportion of the households was primarily involved in

agriculture and contributed to about 56 percent of the total households. About one fourth of the

households across all the 15 villages was reported to be landless labour and the rest were spread

across the occupations of Animal Husbandry, Artisan, petty Traders and Salaried Employees (Refer to

Annexure Table 9.64: Primary Occupation across the villages studied).

2.3 Poverty Status With respect to the Poverty Status of the households covered across the 15 villages, it was noted

that nearly half the households were Below Poverty Line cardholder and about one fourth the

population belonged to the category of Above Poverty Line. Amongst the rest, about 15 percent


21 | P a g e

reported to belong to the category of Antyodaya card holders (Refer to Annexure Table 9.65:

Poverty Status off the Village Population).

2.4 Basic Infrastructure The basic infrastructure was studied with respect to the villages and it was noted that all the villages

were electrified. In terms of Educational Infrastructure Primary Schools were reported to be present

is 60 percent of the villages (Refer to Annexure Table 9.66: Educational Infrastructure). With respect

to Drinking Water Sources, hand Pump was the pre-dominant source present in nearly 68 percent of

the villages (Refer to Annexure

Table 9.67: Drinking Water Sources).

Extension Officers, Roads, PACS, Rural Medical Practitioners etc seemed to be present in quite a few

villages though not in all.

These basic infrastructure facilities can be further divided into three sub-facilities namely:

1. Basic Infrastructure facilities i.e. Road to the village, electricity connection to the village,

presence of a post office in the village etc.

2. Agricultural facilities i.e. presence of canal and water reservoir/watershed for irrigation,

whether an extension officer serves in this village.

3. Health facilities i.e. presence of a sub-centre and a veterinary centre in the village, is there a

doctor/ Rural medical practitioner in the village.

2.4.1 Basic Infrastructure facilities

On further analyzing the data, it can be clearly seen that village Sondip in district Purnea has access

to 6 of the below given basic infrastructural facilities, also villages Nirpur, Devka and Saraiya (all in

district Khagaria) all have access to 5 of the below mentioned eight basic infrastructural facilities and

are all better off than the rest of the villages. On the flip side of the equation villages Rahima (in

district Jamui), Madhoapur (in district Purnea) and Partraha (in district Khagaria) only have access to

electricity.

Figure 2-2: Access to Basic infrastructure facilities

7

15

4

1

4

7

1

9

02468

10121416

Pu

cca/

tar

road

Elec

tric

ity

Po

st o

ffic

e

Co

op

era

tive

ban

k

Nat

ion

aliz

edB

ank

Pri

mar

yA

gric

ult

ure

Co

op

era

tive

…

We

ekly

mar

ket

Pri

mar

y Sc

ho

ol

(Till

5th

)

Acess to Basic infrastructure facilities

Number of villages


22 | P a g e

2.4.2 Agricultural facilities

Also another standard for measuring the basic infrastructure would be the access to services that

enhance the process of and the productivity from agriculture and allied activities i.e. agricultural

facilities (please refer figure below). Once again on further analysing it can be established that in

district Khagaria villages Saraiya and Nirpur both have access to a water reservoir/watershed and an

extension officer, also three villages in district Purnea have access to two of the agricultural facilities

, the villages being Supauli(access to canal and extension officer) , Sonima (access to water reservoir

and extension officer) and Basantpur Chintaman Milik (canal and extension officer). On the other

hand villages like Pojha and Rahima (both in Jamui District) and Partraha (in Khagaria district) do not

have access to any of the agricultural related facilities.

Figure 2-3: Access to Agricultural facilities

2.4.3 Health facilities

Yet another standard for measuring basic infrastructure would be access to institutions and

individuals that provide health facilities like sub-centre and doctors etc. Figure below shows that 8

villages have access to a doctor/rural medical practitioner, whereas only 3 villages have access to a

sub-centre and a veterinary centre. On further analyzing the data it is found that villages like

Rahima, Burhiatanr (both in district Jamui), Supauli, Parasbani, Sonima (Souna) (all three in Purnea)

and Partraha (in Khagaria district) don’t have access to any of the health facilities, whereas villages

like Pojha in Jamui district, and Nirpur, Bakeya both in Khagaria district have access to both a

doctor/rural medical practitioner and a veterinary centre.

Figure 2-4: Access to Health Facilities

5

0

10

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

Water reservoir/ watershedfor irrigation

KVK Extension officer serving

Acess to Agricultural facilities

3

3

8

3

0

2

4

6

8

10

Sub centre Doctor/rural medicalpractitioner

Veterinary centre

Acess to Health facilities

Number of villages


23 | P a g e

2.5 Irrigation Facilities With reference to irrigation facilities, it was noted that out of total cultivable land, maximum area

was under irrigation i.e. 8 villages reported to be fully irrigated (100%) out of these eight, five

villages namely Supauli, Sondip, Parasbani, Sonima and Madhoapur are all in Purnea District,

whereas the other three i.e. Nirpur, Bakeya and Devka are in district Khagaria. It can be clearly seen

from figure 5 that the status of irrigation in Jamui district is considerably worse off than the other

two districts, which is again testified by the fact that one village in that district reported that none of

its cultivable land was under irrigation (Village Pojha). Also if we look at the figure of irrigated

agricultural land we can clearly see that district Jamui lags far behind the other two districts, hence it

is here i.e. in villages of district Jamui where interventions to develop sound irrigation facilities is

most necessary.

Table 2.2: irrigation Status in villages

% Distribution of irrigated and un-irrigated land

District Village

Total agricultural land (acre)

% irrigated %un irrigated

Jamui

Pojha 60 0.00 100.00

Rahima 34 29.41 70.59

Burhiatanr 46 43.48 56.52

Purnea

Supauli 40 100.00 0.00

Sondip 900 100.00 0.00

Parasbani 400 100.00 0.00

Sonima (Souna) 560 100.00 0.00

Madhoapur 550 100.00 0.00

Basantpur Chintamanmilik

4600 56.52 43.48

Khagaria

Nirpur 65 100.00 0.00

Bakeya 300 100.00 0.00

Partraha 43 88.37 11.63

Devka 600 100.00 0.00

Saraiya 738 82.38 17.62

Navrolia 150 86.67 13.33

With respect to irrigation sources, it was noted that Bore Well was the pre-dominant source of

irrigation as reported in most of the villages. River was also noted as an irrigation source in 40

percent of the villages. (Refer to annexure Table 9.68: Irrigation SourceTable 9.68: Irrigation

Sources).


24 | P a g e

3 Chapter: Household Profile

This section portrays complete information about the profile of the households surveyed, i.e.

different social category, poverty status, type of houses that they reside in, availability of drinking

water and toilet facilities. In addition to this, the chapter highlights on the educational profile and

activity profile of household members with special focus on women work participation. Here, it must

be noted that analysis is done on the basis of the data that was captured through household tool.

3.1 Basic Profile

3.1.1 Household Category:

With reference to the social categories of households surveyed in the study, it can be concluded that

amongst a total of 405 households interviewed, a little more than half (about 57percent), belonged

to Other Backward Class. A significant number of households (about 17 percent) were from the

category of Scheduled Caste, also similar number of households were from Scheduled Tribe.

Approximately 9 percent of the households belonged to general category.

Figure 3-1: Social Category of respondents

3.1.2 Poverty Status:

In terms of the poverty status of the households surveyed, it was noted that a little more than half

(about 54 percent) fell in the category of Below Poverty Line. Quite a few (about 33percent) of the

respondents belonged to Above Poverty Line. It was also noticed that amongst all the respondents

surveyed, only a few, about 7 percent, responded that they held Antyodaya Cards. About 6 percent

reported that they did not possess any card.

SC 17%

ST 17%

OBC 57%

GEN 9%

Social Category (N=405)


25 | P a g e

Figure 3-2: Economic Status of the respondents

3.1.3 House Type, Drinking Water and Toilet:

In order to understand the profile of Respondents covered in the study, certain other factors such as

type of house that they reside in, availability of drinking water and sanitation facilities were also

studied. It was reported that amongst the 405 households surveyed (Refer to Annexure Error!

Reference source not found.), about 72percent resided in Kachha houses, 18 percent reported to

reside in Semi-Pucca houses and 10 percent reported that their house was of the Pucca category.

Thus, it can be concluded that Kachha type of house is predominant in the area and this data seems

to be consistent in relation to the predominance of BPL population in the study area.

In terms of availability of toilet facilities, it was noted that despite the numerous sanitation

programmes prevalent in the state, only about 18 percent of the 405 respondents reported to

possess a toilet and the rest did not.

The sources of drinking water available to the respondents was also studied and it was noted that

hand pump at home was the predominant source amongst the 405 households surveyed (Refer to

Annexure Error! Reference source not found.), as nearly 67 percent reported that it was their main

source of drinking water supply. 18 percent respondents reported that public hand pump was also

used as a source of water supply. Amongst the other sources of water supply used were, pipeline

into the house, rainwater collection, stream/river, protected dug well, unprotected dug well and

lake/pond.

3.1.4 Education Profile:

On the question of educational background of the Household members surveyed (a total count of

1894 members). Here, as shown in below given figures, it was noted that nearly one fourth of the

household members under the category of 6 years and above (about 23 percent), were illiterate, out

of which 34.3 % were males and 65.7% were females.

APL 33%

BPL 54%

Antodaya Card 7%

No card 6%

Poverty Status


26 | P a g e

Figure 3-3: Educational Profile of household members (6 years and above)

A little more than one fourth (about 27 percent), were educated till primary level although here the

percentage composition of males is 56% whereas that of females is 44%. It was also noticed that

very few household members reported to have been educated till and above Higher Secondary

levels of education. Another interesting statistics to note here is that even though only 2.8 percent

of the total household population reported to have a graduate degree, out of those graduates the

male-female ratio is highly skewed (male being 81% of those graduates)

Figure 3-4: Gender distribution of educational profile of household members (6 years and above)

23.1

5.6 8.7

26.9

12.7 10.6

7.3

2.1 2.8

0.0

5.0

10.0

15.0

20.0

25.0

30.0

No

t lit

erat

e

lite

rate

wit

ho

ut

form

al s

cho

olin

g

lite

rate

bu

t b

elo

wp

rim

ary

(le

ss…

Pri

mar

y (1

-5)

Mid

dle

(6

-7)

Seco

nd

ary

(8-1

0)

Hig

he

r se

con

dar

y(1

1-1

2)

Dip

lom

a/ce

rtif

icat

e co

urs

e

Gra

du

ate

Educational Profile of the household members (6 years and above)

% HHmembers(N=1894)

34.3 46.7 41.5

56.0 61.8 64.0 64.5 62.5

81.1

65.7

53.3 58.5

44.0 38.2 36.0 35.5 37.5

18.9

0.010.020.030.040.050.060.070.080.090.0

No

t lit

erat

e

Lit

erat

e w

ith

ou

tfo

rmal

sch

oo

ling

Lit

erat

e b

ut

bel

ow

pri

mar

y (l

ess

th

an 1

)

Pri

mar

y (1

-5)

Mid

dle

(6

-7)

Seco

nd

ary

(8-1

0)

Hig

he

r se

con

dar

y (1

1-

12

)

Dip

lom

a/ce

rtif

icat

eco

urs

e

Gra

du

ate

Educational profile of the household members (6 years and above)

% male respondents

% female respondents


27 | P a g e

3.2 Activity Profile An attempt was made to understand various activities that the respondents and their household

members aged above 14 years, are involved in for the purpose of livelihood and their days of

involvement in the same. Here, after studying the educational profile, and agriculture being the

predominant occupation in the state, it was not surprising to note that amongst a total of 1368

household members above the age of 14 (from 405 households), some 32 percent were involved in

farming. Also it is interesting to note that nearly one-third of the respondent (32.3percent) reported

to be involved in some or other form of household work. Youth, also formed a major portion of the

study, as 15 percent of the household members reported to be students and all these students are

above 14 years of age, and thus may be pursuing courses which are at par or above Higher

Secondary Level of education. Further, 5 percent reported to be involved as agricultural daily wage

labour and nearly 8 percent were involved as non-agricultural daily wage labour.

Figure 3-5: Activity Profile (above 14 years)

Figure below illustrates district wise break up of activity profile. It clearly shows that district Khagaria

and Purnea has considerably more people than Jamui district earning income by working as

agricultural daily wage labour. Also in the district of Purnea much more people than the other two

districts are involved in activities like farming and housework. Maximum proportion of people in

districts Khagaria and Purnea are involved in farming activity with 42.9 and 46.3 percent

respectively, whereas in district Jamui a major portion of the population i.e. 53.7 percent are

involved in housework.

5.3 7.8

32.0

1.5 2.9

32.3

15.0

1.3

0.0

5.0

10.0

15.0

20.0

25.0

30.0

35.0

Agr

icu

ltu

ral d

aily

wag

e la

bo

ur

No

n-A

gric

ult

ura

ld

aily

wag

e la

bo

ur

Farm

ing

Go

vt. s

ervi

ce

Pvt

. Ser

vice

(o

the

rth

an w

age

lab

ou

r)

Ho

use

Wo

rk

Stu

den

t

Un

em

plo

yed

Activity Profile (Above 14 years)

% of HHmembers(N=1368)


28 | P a g e

Figure 3-6: District wise distribution of major activities

Figure below shows that most of the working population engaged in wage earning activities (total

count of 1193 from 405 households) surveyed in the three districts of Bihar reported that they were

involved in work for 301-365 days, around 36 percent were involved for more than 200 and less than

300 days in the year 2011. However a significant composition (17.7%) of people surveyed also

reported that they were involved in wage earning activities for less than 200 days.

Figure 3-7: Number of days of involvement in all activities

Further, in order to understand the involvement in terms of number of days of work of the

household members who are engaged in farming activity and as agricultural daily wage labour, an

attempt was made to study the number of days of their involvement in this activity annually. Here,

the analysis is done on the basis of 72 household members involved as agricultural daily wage labour

and 438 household members involved in Farming (refer figure 14). Here, it is observed that most of

the household members (nearly 47 percent)engaged as agricultural wage labour, reported to be

involved as such for 201-300 days a year, also no one in this category reported to be involved for less

1.6

9.7 7.4

14.1 12.2

6.1

30.6

42.9 46.3

53.7

35.2

40.2

0.0

10.0

20.0

30.0

40.0

50.0

60.0

Jamui(N=255) Khagaria(N=361) Purnea(N=443)

District Wise breakup of major activities

Agricultural daily wage labour

Non-Agricultural daily wagelabour

Farming

House work

3.4

14.3

35.5

46.8

0.0

5.0

10.0

15.0

20.0

25.0

30.0

35.0

40.0

45.0

50.0

1 to 100 Days 101 to 200 Days 201 to 300 Days 301 to 365 Days

Number of days of involvement in all activities

%age (N=1193)


29 | P a g e

than 101 days in the year. In case of farming, the nature of involvement seemed to be higher as

nearly 39 percent reported that they were engaged in the activity for 301-365 days a year, whereas

the same figure for agricultural daily wage labour is a little more than 27 percent. In crude numerical

terms it can be said that 169 people involved in farming (out of a total of 438) were employed for a

period of 301-365 days in the year 2011, and only 20 out of a total of 72 engaged as agricultural daily

wage labourers were employed for the same period in the year 2011.

Figure 3-8: Nature of involvement in agricultural activities

The respondents in the Focus Group Discussions were also asked about occupation in their villages

and percentage of households that practiced agriculture. Agriculture, construction labour, drivers,

animal husbandry, teachers and blacksmiths were noted as the popularly practiced occupations

In the district of Jamui, agriculture was reported to involve about 95 percent households of

the village. Here, the respondents believed that agriculture is practiced by the entire

population except the people who do not own land. The farmers here, also reported that

women were involved in agriculture activities in the district and participated in

transplantation, harvesting and in all activities except ploughing.

However in the district of Khagaria, the findings observed were different as agriculture was

reported to be practiced by 75 percent of the total households and the rest were involved in

either business, or were self-employed/skilled labour. Women in this district were largely

involved in the activities of sowing, harvesting, weeding and transportation of the produce.

In the district of Purnea the responses revealed that 90 percent population practiced

agriculture except those who belonged to the Harijan category. Women here were basically

involved in weeding and harvesting.

In terms of predominant occupation it was noticed that wage labour was an occupation which was

practiced across the all districts except Khagaria, where skilled labour, private/government services

were reported to be predominant by the respondents.

25.7

47.1

27.1

4.7

20.4

36.3 38.6

0.0

5.0

10.0

15.0

20.0

25.0

30.0

35.0

40.0

45.0

50.0

1 to 100 Days 101 to 200Days

201 to 300Days

301 to 365Days

Number of days of involvement in Agricultural Activities

Agricultural daily wage(N=72)

Farming (N=438)


30 | P a g e

3.2.1 Working Women

It was noted that from a total of 638 women who were above the age of 14, covered in the sampled

households of 405, 68 women reported to be working in activities that generated some sort of

wages and the rest reported otherwise.

3.2.2 Details of non-wage generating Activities by Female Members:

The non-wage activities performed by the female members of the family range from cooking,

cleaning, washing clothes, taking care of children, firewood collection and agriculture in own field.

Very few women reported to perform activities such as teaching their children, purchasing

household items and rearing cattle/milking (Refer to Annexure

Table 9.9: Non Wage Activities by Female Members). Further, it is important to note that out of this

non-wage generating group,210 women reported that they were involved in agriculture practice in

their own field. In terms of the number of hours spent in a day on these activities, the women

reported that on an average they spend 8.4 hours a day on these activities (Refer to Annexure Table

9.10: Number of Hours spent on Non Wage Activities).

3.2.3 Details of wage generating activities by Female Members

An attempt was made to understand the wage generating activities of the women member covered

under the study. It was interesting to note that most of the women (more than 63 percent) out of

these 68 women involved in wage generating activity were dependent on their source of wage by

earning as daily wage labourers. Quite a few women (nearly 18 percent) were also involved in

nonagricultural daily wage labour for their source of earning.

Figure 3-9: Details of earning activities amongst women

Further, in order to understand the profile of these working women, an effort was made to look at

these women in terms of the Social and Economic Category (Refer to Annexure Error! Reference

source not found.) (Refer to Annexure Error! Reference source not found.) that they fall under.

Here, it was noticed that most of these women (nearly 54 percent), belonged to the category of

Other Backward Class, about one fourth belonged to the category of Scheduled Tribe and about 16

percent were from the category of Scheduled Caste. In terms of Economic Category, nearly, 66

63.2

17.6 8.8 7.4

1.5 0.0

10.0

20.0

30.0

40.0

50.0

60.0

70.0

Agr

icu

ltu

ral d

aily

wag

e la

bo

ur

No

n-A

gric

ult

ura

ld

aily

wag

e la

bo

ur

Go

vt. s

ervi

ce

Pvt

. Ser

vice

(o

the

rth

an w

age

lab

ou

r)

Art

isan

/ C

raft

s

Details of wage activities by women(N=68)

% Female workers(n=68)


31 | P a g e

percent were Below Poverty Line cardholders, about 7 percent women were Antyodaya cardholders

and nearly 24 percent women were Above Poverty Line cardholders.

Here, after studying the wage activities that are performed by these working women, it is also

important to understand the average number of hours that these women (involved in wage

generating activities) spend on these activities during the day. Here, it was noted that women spend

7.8 hours a day on an average (Refer to Annexure Table 9.6: Average Hours spent on the Wage

Activities on a daily basis), on their respective wage earning activities. In order to understand this in

more detail, a breakdown of the category of hours is important (Refer to Annexure Table 9.7:

Categorization according to the Hours spent on Wage Earning Activities), and here it is noted that

nearly 71 percent women spent somewhere around 5-8 hours a day on the earning activities and

nearly 24 percent spent 9-12 hours a day on the earning activities, apart from the household work

that had to be performed by them. Here, one important implication that can be deduced is that in

spite of the long hours put into these earning activities, most of the households were Below Poverty

Line Cardholders as indicated in the section on economic Status.

3.2.4 Details of women involved in agricultural activities

Only two types of activities performed by women has been labelled as agricultural in nature namely

agricultural daily wage labour (wage earning) and agricultural work on own field (non- wage

earning). An analysis of data collected for the same points that out of a total of 253 respondents

who claimed to have worked as either agricultural daily wage labour or performed some sort of

agriculture related activity on their own field, 210 said that they were involved in the non-wage

earning activity of working on their own field, only 43 said otherwise i.e. working as an agricultural

daily wage labour.

On further analysis of this data, it was not surprising to find that the majority of the respondents

from all three districts were involved in doing agricultural work in their own field. Percentage

composition of types of agricultural work done by women district wise tells us that in both Khagaria

and Purnea district similar composition is found, in district Jamui however the composition is

relatively more balanced as 24 % of women here involved in agricultural activities work as an

agricultural daily wage labour, whereas 76% are involved in practicing agriculture in their own field.

Figure 3-10: District wise composition of women involved in agricultural activities

24.4

15 15.4

75.6

85 84.6

0.0

10.0

20.0

30.0

40.0

50.0

60.0

70.0

80.0

90.0

Jamui (N=45) Khagaria(N=20) Purnea(N=188)

Women involved in agriculture activities

Agricultural daily wagelabour(%)

Agriculture in own field(%)


32 | P a g e

3.2.5 Level of Satisfaction amongst Women

An attempt was also made to understand whether the working women (in agriculture – as wage

labour or as working on household farms) were satisfied with the wage activities performed by them

(Refer to Annexure Table 9.8: Level of Satisfaction amongst the Working Women) and it was noted

that nearly 49 percent women reported that they were satisfied and about 33 percent women

reported that they were not satisfied (the remaining 18 percent could neither describe themselves

as satisfied or not satisfied).

On further examining the data collected to assess the level of satisfaction amongst women involved

in income generating activities, it is found (as given in figure below) women engaged as agricultural

daily wage labour had split opinions regarding their job, the number of women satisfied(37.2

percent) were almost similar with the number of women not-satisfied with their jobs. However

there is a stark difference when the same figures for non-agriculture daily wage labour as measured,

here the percent of women satisfied (58.3) far outweighs those who are not (25 percent).

Figure 3-11: level of satisfaction amongst women involved in income generating activities

The major reason why the women were not satisfied with their wage generating job of working as an

agricultural daily wage labour was because 72.7% of them felt that they were not paid well, some

also felt that they did not receive timely payment hence they were not satisfied. A snapshot of the

reasons why they were not satisfied with their jobs is given in figure below.

Figure 3-12: Reason of dissatisfaction amongst women engaged as agriculture daily wage labour

37.2

58.3

23.3 16.7

39.5

25.0

0.010.020.030.040.050.060.070.0

Agricultural daily wage labour(N=43)

Non-Agricultural daily wage labour(N=12)

Level of satisfaction amongst women involved in income generating activities

Satisfied (%)

Average (%)

Not satisfied (%)

72.7

18.2

4.5 4.5

0.010.020.030.040.050.060.070.080.0

Not paid well Don’t receive payment in time

Have to do hardwork

Difficult to makebalance of work athome and at work

place

Reason of dissatisfaction amongst women engaged as agriculture daily wage labour

%(N=22)


33 | P a g e

3.2.6 Decision making on choice of Work by Women

Here, it is also important to understand whether the women made the decision to work as wage

labourers on their own, or was the decision thrust upon them. With respect to women who were

engaged in wage labour 23.7% decided only on their own, while this was not so with respect to

76.3% of women. With regard to those working on the household farms the figures were 15.8

percent and 84.2 percent respectively. Other decision makers for these women included Elder Male

Members of the family, Elder Female Members of the family and the Male Member in the family.

Here, it is important to note that despite the women being involved in wage generating activities

considerably, in about 30 percent households the decision making was in the hands of the Male

members, Elder Female members or elder male members.

Figure 3-13: Decision making amongst working women

3.2.7 Decision making amongst women involved in agricultural activities Figure 3-14: Decision making amongst women involved in agricultural activities

When considering women involved in agricultural activities, it is noticed that majority of the

decisions made for females engaged as agricultural daily wage labourer are joint in nature, whereas

another interesting point to be noted is that self made decisions also constitute plenty (23.7 per

cent). For women practicing agriculture in their own field, similar sort of trend is seen as majority of

43.5

12.6

1.2

15.1

44.4

0.0

10.0

20.0

30.0

40.0

50.0

Self Male member Elder Femalemember

Elder malemember

Joint decision

Decision Making on choice of Work by Women (N=405)

%HH (N=405)

23.7

15.8

10.2

3.0 3.0

22.0 25.7

44.1

52.5

0.0

10.0

20.0

30.0

40.0

50.0

60.0

Agricultural daily wage labour(N=59)

Agriculture in own field(N=303)

Decision making amongst women involved in agricultural activities

Self (%)

Male member (%)

Elder Female member (%)

Elder male member(%)

Joint decision(%)


34 | P a g e

the decisions for female members in this category are also jointly made i.e. women’s opinion is

taken into perspective, as only in 3% of the cases decisions are made by male members.


35 | P a g e

4 Chapter: Agricultural Practices

The objective of this chapter is to understand various agriculture practices prevalent among the

community which in turn may give direction to the project to address the gaps and focus on area of

improvement.

4.1 Cultivated Land Size In order to understand the agricultural practices it is important to know the land size of the

respondents.6 As the chart shows, more than 67 percent of the farmers belonged to the marginal

category and owned less than 1 acre of land. Nearly 18 percent farmers belonged to the category of

small farmers with a land holding between one to two acres. About 11 percent respondents

belonged to the category of medium farmers with a land holding of 2 to 5 acres and only about a

handful were large farmers with land holding more than 5 acres.

Figure 4-1: Cultivated land size

This information is important to note, as most farmers have a cultivated land area of less than 1

acre, use of advanced techniques is the need of the hour and it is difficult to use advanced tools on

small plots of land, hence, in order to avail maximum utility from the area, viable and innovative

approaches would seem necessary.

Since the number of households surveyed from district Jamui were exactly half of what were

surveyed in the districts of Khagaria and Purnea, their composition in the total farmers working on

their own farm was bound to be less, as expected the lion’s share of composition (within the district)

of farmers having their own land comprised of marginal farmers (i.e having less then 1 acre) in every

district, particularly in distrcit Khagaria. Also in every district, as can be clearly seen from figure 4.2,

there is a wide difference in the number of farmers classified as marginal and the rest (i.e. medium,

small and big). Even though there were lessernumber of households surveyed in district Jamui, it

6Please note that for the purpose of this study we have classified farmers into four categories viz. 1) Marginal i.e. those

farmers that own less than 1 acre 2) Small i.e. those owning 1-2 acre 3) Medium i.e. owning 2-5 acre and finally 4) Large i.e. owning land more than 5 acre

67.4

17.5 10.9

4.2

0.0

10.0

20.0

30.0

40.0

50.0

60.0

70.0

80.0

Less than 1 Acre 1 to 2 Acre 2 to 5 Acre More than 5 Acre

Cultivated Land Size (N=405)

% HH (N=405)


36 | P a g e

was found that still the composition of big farmers here was less then the composition of the same

found in district Khagaria and Purnea.

Figure 4-2: District wise distribution of farmers with own lands

Also interesting to note is the type of land holders among SC and ST farmers covered in the survey,

(Refer to Annexure Table 9.70: Land holding classification of SC and ST farmers) which tells us that

almost all the SC farmers have land less than 1 acre i.e. marginal farmers (95.6 percent). The

situation for ST farmers was only slightly better as nearly 56 percent of all ST farmers were marginal

farmers, 28 percent could be labelled as small farmers, whereas 13.2 percent were medium land

holders.

4.2 Main Crops An attempt was made to understand the main crops that are cultivated in the area. Here (Refer to

Annexure Table 9.42: Main Crops Cultivated in the Area), it was not surprising to note that the main

crops included Paddy and Maize, which form the staple diet of the people in Bihar. Nearly 96 percent

respondents reported that the main crop that they cultivated was maize and about 87 percent

respondents reported that the main crop cultivated by them was Paddy. About 42 percent

respondents also expressed that they grew Wheat. Amongst other crops cultivated were, Tomato,

Onions, Soya, Jowar, Bajra, Gram, Arhar, Moong, Sesaham, Turmeric, Banana, Cashew Nut, Potato,

Garlic, Cabbage, cauliflower, Cucumber, Ginger, Brinjal, White Gourd and Raddish. The table below

mentions the major crops (i.e. the 12 most grown crops in the three districts) grown by the 405

households that were studied as part of this survey. An important point to note here is that a single

household may grow more than one crop. Given below are the list of major crops grown by the

households in the three districts studied, arranged according to seasons.

58

75

64.6

27.2

11.3 18.9

12.3 8.8

12.2

2.5 5 4.3

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

Jamui(N=81) Khagaria(N=162) Purnea(N=162)

District wise distribution of farmers

Marginal farmer (%)

Small Farmer (%)

Medium Farmer (%)

Big Farmer (%)


37 | P a g e

Table 4.1: Major crops grown in all the 405 households

Seasons Main Crops Bihar (N=405) Seasons Main Crops Bihar (N=405)

Kharif

Bajra 1.2 Rabi

Turmeric 0.5

Arhar/Tur 1.7 Garlic 1

Moong 3 Cabbage 1

Potato 6.4 Tomato 1

Paddy 88.6 Cauliflower 1.5

Maize 96.3 Wheat 41.5

4.2.1 Various crops grown by farmers in a year on their own field Figure 4-3: Various crops grown by farmers in a year on their own field

Major crops grown outside of Wheat, Paddy and Maize are Potato,Banana, Brinjal and White Gourd

grown respectively by 6.4, 4.9, 2.7 and 2 percent of the respondents.

From Figure 23 it can be established that almost all the farmers grow at least 2 crops in their own

field, which is to be expected. Also as one moves up the ladder of farm size ownership one finds that

the percentage composition of farmers who grow 3 crops on their own field also steadily increases

from 32.6 percent (as in the case of Marginal farmers) to 64.7 percent (in the case of Big farmers).

Although one unexpected outcome is that percentage composition of farmers that grow 5 crops is

more in the case of Marginal farmers (7.7%) then in the case of Small (5.6%) and Medium (6.8%)

Farmers, hence it can be deduced that marginal farmers are also heavily involved in the practice of

growing various crops. For season wise distribution of various crops grown by farmers Refer to

Annexure Table 9.8: Level of Satisfaction amongst the Working Women

4.2.1.1 Status of vegetable production

On further analysis to help assess the status of vegetable production, it can be concluded that not

many households were involved in the production of vegetables, in fact save for Potato, cultivation

of other vegetables was very insignificant. A percentage wise distribution of all households that were

91.2 93.0 95.5 94.1

32.6

57.7 59.1 64.7

9.9 9.9 15.9

23.5

7.7 5.6 6.8 11.8

0.0

20.0

40.0

60.0

80.0

100.0

120.0

Marginal farmers(N=273)

Smallfarmer(N=71)

Medium farmer(N=44)

Big farmer (N=17)

Various crops grown by farmers in a year on their own field

2 crops (%)

3 crops(%)

4 crops(%)

5 crops(%)


38 | P a g e

involved in vegetable production shows that outside of Potato, Brinjal (2 percent) and White Gourd

(2.7 percent) are the two most grown vegetables. Given below is the list of major crops grown by the

households in the three districts studied, arranged according to seasons.

Table 4.2: Households involved in vegetable production

Seasons Main Crops % of HH cultivating vegetables (N=405)

Seasons Main Crops % of HH cultivating vegetables (N=405)

Rabi Tomato 1 Zayad Cucumber 0.2

Rabi Onions 1 Rabi Pea 0

Kharif Potato 6.4 Rabi Brinjal 2

Rabi Cabbage 1 Zayad White gourd

2.7

Rabi Cauliflower 1.5 Rabi Radish 0.2

An attempt was also made to understand the main crops grown in the districts through Focus Group

Discussions, given below are the district wise findings that emerged out of that focus group

discussion.

In the district of Jamui as reported in the Household tool, it was observed that the major

crops grown included Paddy, Maize, Bajra, Potato and Wheat.

In Khagaria district main crops grown were maize, wheat and paddy. In addition to that

Arhar, moong, mustard. potato and onion were also reported to be grown in the district.

In the district of Purnea maize, paddy and wheat emerged as the main crops, however traces

of banana cultivation were also observed in certain areas.

4.3 Land Preparation Land preparation is the first activity that a farmer does with respect to agriculture. Land preparation

generally includes land levelling, weeding, applying manure etc.

With regards to preparation of land, the Focus Group Discussions indicated quite interesting results.

Jamui

o For the crops of Paddy, Maize, Moong, wheat and potato, the land was levelled with

the help of local leveller made of wood and the practice of light ploughing was

practiced.

o In terms of Paddy, Wheat and Maize, the type of manure used as reported included

urea and DAP, used at the time of transplantation

o Weeding was done through spade, or Khurpi manually

o For the crop of moong the process of adding manure and weeding was not

practiced.

o In the crop of Potato, DAP was added as manure and weeding was done manually

by using a spade.

Khagaria

o The practices that emerged in the district of Khagaria were quite different. Here, for

the crop of Paddy, Wheat and Maize it was reported that the ploughing was done, 6

to 9 inches deep with a the help of a khurpi

o Chemical weedicide were also used.


39 | P a g e

o Zinc, DAP, potash and urea were reported as the types of manure used for Paddy

Wheat as well as maize and were used after 15 days of transplantation

o In case of Paddy, however in the crop of Wheat and Maize manure was put at the

time of ploughing and irrigation.

Purnea

o In the district of Purnea, for the crop of Paddy, Maize and Wheat it was observed

that the levelling was done with machines which were charged at Rs 500 an hour

o The ploughing done was 4 to 5 inches deep.

o The type of manure used was DAP, potash and urea

o Weeding was done manually.

Deep plough in every 3 to 4years by using traditional plough or by tractor or power tiller gives better

yield. So, farmers should be educated in this area.

4.4 Seed Selection With respect to seed selection, it was noted from household interviews that hybrid varieties of seeds

were popular amongst the farmers for Maize and Brinjal, whereas high yield varieties were widely

used for Paddy, Wheat and Potato. Quite a few farmers also used traditional seeds for the

production of paddy. Most of the farmers used traditional seeds (suckers) for banana.

Table 4.3: Type of seeds used

Seed Type Maize (N=390)

Paddy (N=359)

Wheat (N=168)

Potato (N=26)

Banana (N=20)

Brinjal (N=8)

Hybrid 76.7 19.8 19.0 34.6 15.0 87.5

High yield variety 6.7 49.9 64.3 42.3 0.0 12.5

Traditional 16.7 30.4 16.7 23.1 85.0 0.0

Further analysis of household interviews indicated that, the variety of seed popular for Maize was

30V92 as reported by nearly 42 percent respondents. Nearly 49 percent and 79 percent farmers

reported to use mixed varieties for cultivation of Paddy and Brinjal respectively. Further, the use of

seed variety of 343 was popular for Wheat as reported by 51 percent respondents. In case of

Banana, Hisel Variety was used for cultivation by nearly 65 percent farmers.

4.4.1 Varieties of seeds used in the three districts

Since marginal & small farmers constitute the most predominant number in our total sample size, it

would be interesting to see the type of seed they used, which in turn should give us an idea of the

type of seed most commonly used in the three districts. The table below gives an idea of that. In

district Jamui traditional varieties of seeds are most commonly used, as major proportion of both

marginal (82.7 percent) and small (67.3 percent) farmers use them for cultivation. Usage of Hybrid

seeds in this district is low for both small & marginal farmers. In district Khagaria, however the exact

opposite is found to be true, hybrid seeds here are most commonly used amongst small & marginal

farmers, whereas traditional seeds are the least popular choice here. Similarly in Purnea, hybrid

seeds were found to be used widely, however high yield variety seeds are also used for a lot of

crops, 37.8 percent of marginal and 35.5 percent of all small farmers in Purnea reported to be using

high yield variety seeds. Traditional seeds here too were not the most popular choice.


40 | P a g e

Table 4.4: Types of seed used in the three districts

District Name Seed Type Less than 1 Acre(N=98) 1 to 2 Acre(N=52)

Jamui

Hybrid 7.1 13.5

High yield variety 10.2 19.2

Traditional 82.7 67.3

Khagaria

Seed Type Less than 1 Acre(N=312) 1 to 2 Acre(N=48)

Hybrid 61.2 54.2


Traditional 7.7 4.2

Purnea

Seed Type Less than 1 Acre(N=238) 1 to 2 Acre(N=93)

Hybrid 47.5 39.8


Traditional 14.7 24.7

Some of the findings from Focus Group Discussion alluded to the below given facts regarding the

various seed varieties used district wise:

Jamui

o Seed Variety: Sita/Swarna/HYV were used for Paddy

o Seed Variety: Desi/Kanchan were used for Maize

o Seed Variety: Lalaloo for Potato

o Seed Variety: Kanchan, Sonatika for Wheat

o Seed Variety: Desi for Kurthi

o Seed Variety: Desi for Mustard

Khagaria

o Seed Variety: PUSA 824/RBhagwati/PHB 71 for Paddy

o Seed Variety: 30V92/ 9081/ 90014 for Maize

o Traditional Varieties of Seeds were used only in the cultivation of Pulses such as

Arhar and Moong,

o Traditional varieties for mustard

o Seed Variety: 342, UP-262 used for Wheat

o Potato and Onion were also grown in the district, both for which traditional varieties

were used.

Purnea

o The use of hybrid seeds for cultivation seemed to be predominant as with regards to

Maize the varieties used included 3396, NK6607, 30V92.

o Varieties of Swarna, Rajendra and Ganga were used for the cultivation of Paddy.

o UP262 was the major seed variety used for the cultivation of Wheat.

In terms of Procurement of Seeds, it was noted that procurement from markets directly seemed to

be popular amongst all crops except Banana wherein most of the farmers procured the seeds

(suckers) from relative or neighbours as they use mostly traditional variety. Quite a few farmers also

reported to use the seeds of their last produce for re- cultivation for maize, paddy and wheat. Thus,

if analysed across the category of all crops, markets appear to be the pre-dominant source of


41 | P a g e

procurement of seeds. None of the farmers procured any types of seeds from the Krishi Vigyan

Kendra as well as the Agriculture Universities. This area needs to be given due consideration as these

institutions can serve as good catalysts to inculcate good agricultural practices amongst farmers, and

if hybrid or high yield variety seeds are available here, then farmers should be encouraged to

procure them.

Table 4.5: Source of Procurement of seeds

Source Maize

(N=390) Paddy

(N=359) Wheat

(N=168) Potato (N=26)

Banana (N=20)

Brinjal (N=8)

Market 80.5 65.5 64.3 80.8 20.0 87.5

Cooperative society 0.3 0.6 1.2 3.8 0.0 12.5

NGO 0.0 5.3 1.2 0.0 0.0 0.0

Own 19.2 27.0 33.3 15.4 5.0 0.0

From relatives/ neighbour

0.0 1.1 0.0 0.0 75.0 0.0

Farmer Producer Company

0.0 0.6 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

With respect to the information gathered through the Focus Group Discussions, it was understood

that for the crop of Paddy, Wheat and Potato,

In the district of Jamui, treated seeds were bought from the local markets for the purpose of

cultivation, after waiting in long queues at these crowded market places. However, with

regards to maize and Moong the scenario was different as the seeds of last yield available at

home were sown again.

Interestingly, in the district of Khagaria, the participants reported that for Paddy, Wheat and

Maize they used the seeds that were distributed at the demonstration programme by

companies and krishisalahkar, at the block level markets, however, here travelling to the

block level market was usually an issue for the farmers.

With regards to the district of Purnea, the types of seeds were usually bought from the

markets of Bhawanipur, Birouli, Rupauli and sometimes even the seeds of the last produce

were used.

Seed Treatment is not practiced in any district except Khagaria, where the treatment is being done

with carbon-dyne after the intervention of ASA with respect to Paddy. This intervention should also

be extended to other two districts.

4.5 Irrigation Irrigation is very vital for better agricultural production, and for a state which largely depends on

rain-fed water, adequate irrigation facilities are more important. Further, Paddy being one of the

main crops grown in the state, irrigation facilities become even more important because regular

water supply is needed for the crop to grow. Amongst the respondents (Refer to AnnexureTable

9.44: Irrigation facilities used by the Respondents), nearly 73 percent reported that they resorted to

bore wells for their source of irrigation facilities while rain water also seemed to be used by nearly

one fifth of the respondents. Dug well, pond, river, canal and stop dams were amongst other sources

of irrigation that were resorted to by the respondents. Resorting to bore wells for their source of

irrigation is an alarming situation in the long run, as the ground water table may deplete in the


42 | P a g e

future, making it difficult for the farmers to use their land pieces for cultivation purposes. So, there

should be more initiatives to form check dams and watershed to avoid such situation in future.

The Focus Group Discussion reiterated the findings obtained through the household tool:

In the district of Purnea, bore well was predominantly used for Irrigation purposes and the

problems faced here were reported to be the depleting levels of ground water tables and

insufficient supply of electricity to pump water.

However, in Jamui, agriculture was mostly dependant on rain and the respondents reported

that they did not have pump sets and the government had not made any investments with

respect to irrigation and creation of watersheds in this area.

In Khagaria district, the main source of irrigation was observed to be own bore wells or

public tube wells and river water; however maintenance of bore wells and supply of

electricity was an issue in this area.

Almost all the FGDs pointed to the fact that due to unavailability of proper electric connection and

lack of adequate government support, people in the village are not happy with the irrigation

facilities. Government and other organizations should support community to develop and maintain

watersheds.

4.6 Nursery Raising and Transplantation Analysis of nursery raising and transplantation has been done based on the findings from Group

Discussions.

In the district of Jamui it was observed that, for Paddy, broadcasting method of sowing

seeds over large area was practiced manually and no care or precautions were taken at the

time of sowing. Further, for all the other crops namely Maize, Wheat etc. no nursery was

raised.

Similarly in the district of Khagaria, for Paddy a nursery bed was prepared of 20”x5”x6”, in

which seeds were sowed and covered after irrigation. Here, at the time of sowing, care was

taken to ensure single seed were sowed in a row and line. For raising purposes, irrigation

was done in every 2-3 days and DAP and Potash were used. In order to ensure protection

from insects, Zinc and Bleaching Powder reported to be used. Nursery plants were not raised

in the case of other crops in the district of Khagaria.

In Purnea district SRI method was practiced by handful of farmers whereas broadcasting

method was widely used for Paddy. In the case of others crops no nursery was raised.

4.7 Weeding As mentioned earlier, based on FGD findings, weeding was done manually in the district of Jamui for

all the crops. In district Purnea too weeding is done manually, however some participants reported

the use of weedicide. In Khagaria, some participants reported about the use of Cono-weeder

machine for weeding of Paddy.


43 | P a g e

4.8 Fertilizer/ Pesticides Application

4.8.1 Fertilizer and Manure

In agriculture, application of fertilizers and manure plays a very important role in the quality and

quantity of the produce obtained, hence it is essential to understand the practices followed. Here,

the household respondents were asked about the fertilizers that they used for the major crops that

they cultivated. The results (Refer to Annexure Table 9.45: Fertilizers Applied) obtained indicated

that nearly 54 percent respondents used straight fertilizers, about 31 percent respondents used

complex fertilizers and nearly 15 percent respondents practiced the use of micronutrients. In terms

of use of organic manure, it was observed that this practice was prevalent only amongst significant

number of respondents (125 in number). Amongst these, about 90 percent reported that in terms of

organic manure they used cow dung. Amongst the other organic manure (Refer to Annexure

Table 9.46: Use of manure) Vermi-compost, KhahliKhad and MatkaKhad were used. Further analysis

was done to understand the name of the fertilizers that were used by the respondents and it was

noted that DAP, Urea, Potash and Zinc were predominantly used (Refer to Annexure Table 9.47:

Name of the Fertilizer).

With respect to place of procurement of these fertilizers, 99.5 percent respondents reported that

they procured it from the markets and the rest reported to procure it from the agriculture university

or from friends/neighbours (Refer to Annexure Table 9.48: Place of Procurement of Fertilizers).

According to the FGD findings following points came to light regarding fertilizer use, procurement

and application:

In district Jamui for Paddy, DAP and Urea is used, the respondents reported that they

generally procure these from local markets. The process of applying fertilizer is generally

practiced during sowing. For both Maize and Wheat along with DAP and Urea, MOP and Zinc

are also used as fertilizers.

In district Khagaria, fertilizers are mainly used for Paddy and Wheat. DAP, Urea and Potash

are used as fertilizers. They are generally procured form local markets or in some cases (if

not available in local markets) from markets at block headquarters. It was also reported that

DAP and Urea are used at the time of irrigation, rest all are used at the time of sowing.

In Purnea too fertilizers are generally used for Paddy and Maize. Urea, DAP and Potash are

mainly used as fertilizers. They are generally procured from market located at Bhawanipur.

Here the respondents reported that fertilizers are basically applied during field preparation

and 20-25 days after sowing.

4.8.2 Pesticides

An attempt was made to understand the practices with respect to the use of pesticides amongst the

household sample studied. The results obtained indicated that across all the crops Maize, Paddy,

Wheat, Potato, Banana and Brinjal, insecticides appeared to be the most widely used which was

followed by herbicides. Fungicides and organic pesticides were used only by a handful of

respondents across all the crops. It is interesting to note that in the case of Banana and Brinjal, all

the respondents reported to use only Insecticide.


44 | P a g e

Table 4.6: Type of Pesticides used

Pesticide Type Maize (N=319)

Paddy (N=126)

Wheat (N=66)

Potato (N=22)

Banana (N=20)

Brinjal (N=8)

Herbicide 14.7 16.7 28.8 13.6 0.0 0.0

Insecticide 80.3 78.6 63.6 81.8 100.0 100.0

Fungicide 2.2 4.8 7.6 0.0 0.0 0.0

Organic Pesticide 2.8 0.0 0.0 4.5 0.0 0.0

An attempt was also made to know the names of the pesticides used by the household sample

covered under the study and it was noted that Endosulphan was the most popularly used pesticide

for Paddy as reported by 50 percent of the respondents. Thimat was the most popularly used

pesticide with respect to maize as well as wheat and about 45 percent respondents and 32 percent

respondents reported to use it in respective cases. In case of Brinjal and Potatoes maximum

respondents reported to use mixed varieties of pesticides. 45 percent respondents reported to use

Thimat as a pesticide for Banana too. Other popular pesticides used were Candidor, Rogon and

Furudan.(Refer to Annexure Table 9.49: name of the Pesticides Used across Crop Categories ).

Further, in order to understand the use of pesticides in a detailed manner, an effort was made to

study the place of procurement of the pesticides amongst the sample covered. Undoubtedly, the

results obtained were similar to those of the place from where fertilizers and seeds were procured,

thus, markets emerged to be pre-dominant source for procurement of pesticides with respect to the

Maize, Paddy, Wheat, Potato, Banana and Brinjal (Refer to Annexure Table 9.50: Place of

Procurement of Pesticides across crop categories).

According to the FGD findings following points came to light regarding pesticide use, procurement

and application:

In district Jamui, Furudan pesticide is generally used and that too for only Paddy and Maize.

Furudan is generally obtained from local shops and market. A mixture of pesticide and water

(5 ml and 5 litre respectively) is sprayed in the field when the insect/pest attack is visible.

Villagers also said that while spraying pesticide they follow certain precautions like covering

mouth and face while spraying, and washing hands with soap after spraying.

In the district of Khagaria, it was reported that pesticides is generally used for Wheat, Maize

and Paddy, popular pesticides used were Thimat, Endosulphan and Candidor. Pesticide here

is sprayed in the field as when it is required. Local markets are the major sources of

pesticide. The participants also reported that hand and mouth are covered while spraying,

and they also take care of the direction of the wind and avoid spraying pesticide against it.

In the district of Purnea, pesticide is used for Wheat, Maize and also for Banana. Thimat and

Furudan are the most commonly used pesticides. Markets at Bhawanipur are used for

procuring pesticides. Almost all reported that pesticides mixed with fertilizers are applied

while field preparation. Precautions like covering hands and mouth while spraying and

washing hands after were practiced.


45 | P a g e

4.9 Harvest An attempt was made to understand the machinery that is used by the respondents to harvest their

yield, which would in turn help to comprehend the penetration of technology with respect to

agriculture amongst the sample covered. Using Sickle for harvesting was found to be the pre-

dominant tool used as reported by about 92 percent of the respondents.(Refer to AnnexureTable

9.51: Harvesting Machinery).Participants in the Focus Group Discussions also mentioned that

harvesting was done manually across all crop categories in all the three districts studied. Tractor and

Harvester are used by a small number of people.

4.10 Threshing In the Focus Group Discussions it emerged that in the districts of Jamui, Khagaria as well as Purnea,

threshing was done manually with the help of cows. Only a handful of respondents used equipments

like thresher in Khagaria and Purnea that too limited only for the crop of Paddy.

4.11 Storage Storage also contributes as an essential component of agriculture as it is one element which if

executed properly may fix a good price for the yield. The respondents were asked about whether

they stored the crop that they produced or directly transported it after the harvest. It was noted that

nearly 52 percent respondents reported that they did store their crop and the rest reported

otherwise (Refer to Annexure Table 9.53: Storage of the Crop). With reference to the enquiry on

where exactly did they store the crop, all the respondents reported that they stored it inside their

house. An attempt was also made to understand the reason for storage of crops as perceived by the

respondents and here it was noted that about 70 percent respondents reported that they stored the

crops due to family issues. 16 percent also reported that they believed in storing and wanted to sell

their produce only at the time of need and 8 percent respondents wanted to store for the purpose

of better prices (Refer to AnnexureTable 9.57: Reason for Storage). The respondents were also

probed with respect to the place of selling and here, nearly 76 percent respondents reported that

they sold their produce in their own village whereas about 15 percent respondents sold it at a

purchasing site near the village and 7 percent used Local Haats as the place for selling. Only a

handful resorted to Mandi and other options (Refer to Annexure Table 9.58: Place of Selling).

Focus Group Discussions confirmed that most of the crops that were produced by the participants

were usually for self-consumption, hence were stored in house only. Paddy was usually stored in

containers made of straw. Maize, Moong, Wheat, Potato etc. was stored in pitchers and no specific

care was taken at the time of storage since most of the stock was for self-consumption.


46 | P a g e

5 Chapter: Agriculture Income and Expenditure

The objective of this chapter is to analyse agriculture income and expenditure with respect to

respondents covered in the study. Analysis provided in this chapter takes into consideration the

findings and results obtained from both the household questionnaire and the FGD.

5.1 Income from Agriculture

5.1.1 Major crops grown in the three districts

In the district of Jamui, 81 households were included in the survey, all of them reported that they

cultivate paddy, whereas almost all (95.1 percent) reported to grow maize. The households in

district Purnea all said that they grow both Paddy and Maize, also a somewhat significant proportion

of the population reported to grow banana (12.3 percent), which was not grown in any other

district. Potato showed a trend almost opposite to that of banana as 8.6 and 11.7 percent of

households in Jamui and Khagaria respectively grew them but almost no one in Purnea engaged in

potato cultivation. Wheat was grown majorly in Khagaria whereas Garlic, Cabbage and Onions

although grown by a handful of households was grown only in the district of Khagaria.

Table 5.1: District wise distribution of major crops

Seasons Crop Name Jamui (N=81)(%) Khagaria (N=162)(%)

Purnea (N=162)(%)

Kharif

Paddy 100 71.6 100

Maize 95.1 92 100

Arhar/Tur 4.9 1.9 0

Moong 6.2 4.3 0

Potato 8.6 11.7 0.6

Rabi

Onions 0 2.5 0

Wheat 11.1 62.3 35.8

Garlic 0 2.5 0

Cabbage 0 2.5 0

Brinjal 0 3.7 1.2

Zayad White gourd 0 4.9 1.9

All year long Banana 0 0 12.3

5.1.2 Productivity

An attempt was made to understand the productivity of the crops cultivated by the respondents.

The findings are interesting, from the sample who reported to grow crops like Maize, Paddy and

Wheat, the largest proportion reported that the productivity was below 10 quintal per acre in case

of Maize while in the case of Paddy the productivity was generally less than 20 quintals. Overall

production of wheat was generally below 20 quintals. With respect to Potato and Brinjal, maximum

proportion of respondents reported that the productivity could range anywhere below 5 quintal and

with respect to Banana, the productivity ranged anywhere between 10 to 15 quintal (Refer to

Annexure Table 9.62: Productivity with respect to Major Crops).


47 | P a g e

Figure 5-1: Productivity per acre with respect to major crops

Please note: 1 quintal=100 kg

5.1.3 Productivity per acre for three major crops i.e. Maize, Paddy and Wheat

1) For farmers growing crops in land more than 5 Acre(Big Farmers): here figure 28 gives a very

surprised reading as it tells us that all the farmers falling in the category of Big (i.e. having land

holding of more than 5 acres) have very less productivity per acre i.e. below 10 quintals, this can

point to the fact that a)the amount of fertilizers or manure used for enhancing production by these

farmers is less or is not used evenly across the entire cultivated area b)because the area under

cultivation is large the variety of seeds used by these farmers is of low quality or the high quality

variety is not grown in the entire cultivated land. Another possibility could be that c) because the

area under cultivation is large it is difficult to manage hence leading to low output per area.

Figure 5-2: Productivity per acre for farmers growing crops in land more than 5 acre

2)For farmers growing crops in 2-5 acre land (Medium Farmer): Once again the pattern of

productivity was similar to that of Big Farmers, here too majority of the farmers had productivity of

less than 10 quintal, however for maize it was found that some respondents even stated that their

production was more than 31 quintals, a significant proportion of the maize growers (22.9 percent)

33.8

11.0

29.7

16.2 9.2

41.8 48.7

2.8 1.1 5.6

56.5

31.5

2.4 4.8 4.8

0.0

10.0

20.0

30.0

40.0

50.0

60.0

Below 10Quintal(%)

11 to 20Quintal(%)

21 to 30Quintal(%)

31 Quintal &Above(%)

NoResponse(%)

Productivity/acre with respect to major Crops

Maize (N=390)

Paddy (N=359)

Wheat (N=168)

84.8

100 100

15.2

0.0

20.0

40.0

60.0

80.0

100.0

120.0

Maize (N=33) Paddy (N=20) Wheat(N=4)

Productivity per acre for farmers growing crops in land more than 5 acre

Below 10 Quintal(%)

11 to 20 Quintal(%)

21 to 30 Quintal(%)

31 Quintal & Above(%)

No Response(%)


48 | P a g e

failed to give any response regarding the amount of production either because they weren’t aware

of the same or didn’t feel like disclosing the information for some reason. Production of paddy was

considerably better than that of wheat for Medium Farmers (2-5 Acre), as the percentage

composition of those who reported that their production was more than 10 quintals growing paddy

was more than the same category of wheat growers.

Figure 5-3: Productivity per acre for farmers growing crops in 2-5 acre land

3) For farmers growing crops in 1-2 acre land (Small Farmer):For maize out of the total respondents

who grew them( i.e. 42) majority said that their productivity was between 21-30 quintals/per acre

(54.8 percent), even more encouraging statistic was that a significant proportion (21.4 percent) even

stated that their maize production was 31 quintals and above. For paddy similar number of

respondents reported to have production below 10 quintals and in between 11-20 quintals (i.e. 42.3

percent each).

Figure 5-4: Productivity per acre for farmers growing crops in 1-2 acre land

4) For farmers growing crops in land in less than 1 Acre(Marginal Farmer): The maize growers

faired pretty well as compared to paddy and wheat growers when it comes to assessing productivity,

as they constitute the maximum composition of farmers having productivity of more than 21

quintals, on the other hand most of the paddy cultivators (i.e. total of 253 respondents) claimed that

55.7

70.6

94.4

7.1

29.4

5.6

8.6

5.7

22.9

0.0

20.0

40.0

60.0

80.0

100.0


Productivity per acre for farmers growing crops in 2-5 acre land

Below 10 Quintal(%)

11 to 20 Quintal(%)

21 to 30 Quintal(%)


No Response(%)

14.3

42.3

72.7

9.5

42.3

27.3

54.8

3.8

21.4

1.9 0.0

9.6

0.0

10.0

20.0

30.0

40.0

50.0

60.0

70.0

80.0


Productivity per acre for farmers growing crops in 1-2 acre land

Below 10 Quintal(%)

11 to 20 Quintal(%)

21 to 30 Quintal(%)


No Response(%)


49 | P a g e

their productivity is between 11-20 quintals, whereas the situation among wheat growers was even

worse, here the maximum composition amongst the wheat growers had production of less than 10

quintals (i.e. 48.9 percent), which points to the fact that either more people use better variety of

maize seeds, or they practice better cultivation practices when it comes to maize then other crops.

Yet another implication could be that the natural conditions in the area surveyed are more

conducive for maize then for paddy or wheat.

Figure 5-5: Productivity per acre for farmers growing crops in land more than 5 acre

5.2 Sale and Consumption of the Produce

5.2.1 Households that don’t sell

From the table below it is clearly visible, that most of the households that do not sell their produce

are from marginal (less than 1 Acre) and small (1-2 Acre) households. District wise analysis of this

data shows that situation in Jamui and Khagaria is considerably worse off than district Purnea when

considering farmers that do not sell their produce. In Jamui there were 41 percent, 87 percent and

90 percent of all marginal, small and medium farmers respectively that did not sell their produce.

District Purnea on the other hand displayed much better figures, as it constituted only 3.6 percent of

all marginal farmers and 8.7 percent of all small farmers that did not sell any of their produce. From

the below table it can also be interpreted that a total of 148 households in the 15 surveyed villages

do not sell any produce.

Table 5.2: Households that do not sell produce

Less than 1

Acre(N=112) 1 to 2

Acre(N=23) 2 to 5

Acre(N=10) More than 5 Acre(N=3)

Jamui 40.2 87.0 90 66.7

Khagaria 56.3 4.3 10 0.0

Purnea 3.6 8.7 0 33.3

Total 100.0 100.0 100 100.0

24.1

33.2

48.9

13.9

56.5

36.3 35.5

3.2 3.0

20.4

1.2

5.9 6.1 5.9 5.9

0.0

10.0

20.0

30.0

40.0

50.0

60.0

Maize grown in lessthan 1 Acre (N=245)

Paddy grown in lessthan 1 Acre(N=253)

Wheat grown in lessthan 1 Acre(N=135)

Productivity per acre for farmers growing crops in land less than 1 acre

Below 10 Quintal(%)

11 to 20 Quintal(%)

21 to 30 Quintal(%)


No Response(%)


50 | P a g e

On further analysis of no sell respondents on the basis of social category, gives a very important

reading, nearly 62 percent of all SC households do not sell any of their produce, whereas a

staggering 94 percent of all ST households also reported to not sell any agricultural output. The same

data for OBC and general category also reiterates the fact that it is majorly the SC and ST households

who never have enough produce to sell in the market, hence reducing their income.

Table 5.3: Social category wise distribution of respondents who do not sell any produce

SC(N=68) ST(N=68) OBC (N=233)

GEN (N=36)

Do not sell any produce 61.8 94.1 14.2 25.0

5.2.2 Households that sell produce

The respondents were also asked in the household tool about the sale of the produce to understand

their income cycle, as major proportion had reported to be dependent on agriculture for their daily

bread and butter. When considering all the crops that were sold in all the households, it was noted

that composition of all the crops sold above 80 percent were 56.7 percent of all crops sold. Similarly

crops sold between 60-79 percent were 15.6 percent of all sold crops. Please note: that here for sale

of produce N=462, as 462are the total no of crops that were sold, the remaining crops grown in the

15 surveyed villages were all used for self-consumption.

Figure 5-6: Sale of produce

It can be inferred that major proportion of the produce that is sold is sold in large quantities.

5.3 Buyer and Reason for choosing buyer An attempt was made to understand the market linkages with respect to agriculture prevalent in the

sample covered through both the household questionnaire and focus group discussion. The table

below shows the sale of all crops by all farmers (selling their produce) evaluated from the household

tool. As can be seen from the table, getting a higher price emerges as the major reason for selling

the produce (picked 172 times by respondents), getting immediate pay Is second in the list of

56.7

15.6 15.6 9.5

2.6

0.0

10.0

20.0

30.0

40.0

50.0

60.0

80 % andabove

60 % to79 % 40 % to 59% 20 % to39% 1% to19%

Sale of produce

Sale of produce(N=462)


51 | P a g e

reasons for selling produce, however a buyer accepting large quantities doesn’t seem to be high on

that list of reasons, which could mean that the produce left for sale is never large enough. Also

interesting to note that sellers are not too concerned about the distance between them and the

buyer (that reason was selected only 5 times), which points to the fact that the buyers are not

distantly located.

When considering the most important reason for selling the produce, it can be established from the

table that 78.5 percent of this produce (i.e. sold because it fetches higher price) is sold to a trader in

the village, crops sold because they are paid for by the buyer immediately are also mostly sold to a

trader in the village (79.7 percent), in fact whatever the reason maybe for selling, it can be said with

firm confidence that majority of the produce is sold to traders inside the village, which may point to

the reason as to why there are a lower number of respondents concerned with distance between

them and the buyer . However the responses for accepting large quantities are split even between

traders both in and outside the village.

Table 5.4: buyers for the produce and the reason of choosing them

Buyer

Have contract with him (N=53)

Gives higher price (N=172)

Accept large quantities (N=5)

Accept small quantities (N=60)

Pays immediately (N=133)

He is close by (N=5)

No other option (N=41)

Trader in the village

75.5 78.5 40 93.3 79.7 80 70.7

Trader outside the village

24.5 15.7 40 3.3 15.8 20 17.1

Local market/Shop

0.0 2.9 20 1.7 3.8 0 9.8

Wholesale market

0.0 1.2 0 1.7 0.0 0 2.4

Govt. Markets

0.0 1.7 0 0.0 0.8 0 0.0

5.4 Time of payment and Advise received with regards to agriculture According to findings that came to light with regards to time of payment through the household

questionnaire it was noted 46 percent of the respondents reported that they received the payment

on the same day, nearly 28 percent received it within seven days and about 23 percent received it

within 8-30 days after the sale


52 | P a g e

Table 9.60: Timing of Receiving the Payment). The respondents were also asked for their source of

advice with regards to agriculture and it was observed that maximum respondents (nearly 48

percent) used the advise their neighbours gave, a significant proportion (27.4 percent) also said that

they didn’t take the advice of anyone but practiced their own methods (Refer to Annexure Table

9.61: Advice Received from with regards to Agriculture.

5.5 Net Agricultural Income (Net Farm Income) Here we define net agricultural income as the difference in the amount earned by households by

selling agricultural produce and the expenditure incurred by the same households for purchasing

inputs and services that are needed for practicing agriculture in the first place. It should be noted

that this net agricultural income could also be less than zero i.e. expenditure is more then what is

earned by selling produce thus signifying loss.

5.5.1 Net agricultural income on the basis of district

From the table below it can be clearly seen that district Jamui lags far behind the other two districts

when it comes to net income earned from agriculture, in fact 90 percent of the people in this district

reported to have incurred a loss i.e. signifying that their expenditure was more than that of the

income earned from selling produce. The statistics that emerged for district Khagaria were only

marginally better as here 63.6 percent of the households reported to have undergone loss. Purnea

however fared much better as it was the only district where households reported to have made gain

(63.6 percent) were more than those which reported loss (36.4 percent), in fact 11.7 and 7.4 percent

of all households here stated that they had made a profit to the tune of 10001-20000 and 30001-

40000 respectively.

Table 5.5: Net agricultural income on the basis of land holding

Net Agricultural Income Jamui (N=81) Khagaria (N=162) Purnea (N=162)

Loss of Rs.10001 & above 2.5 15.4 3.1

Loss of Up to Rs.10000 87.7 48.1 33.3

No Profit No Loss 7.4 0.6 0.0

Up to Rs. 10000 2.5 13.0 33.3

Profit of Rs.10001 to 20000 0.0 7.4 11.7

Profit of Rs.20001 to 30000 0.0 3.7 1.9

Profit of Rs.30001 to 40000 0.0 2.5 7.4

Profit of Rs.40001 to 50000 0.0 2.5 3.7

Profit of Rs.50001 to 60000 0.0 1.2 1.9

Profit of Rs.60001 to 70000 0.0 1.2 0.6

Profit of Rs.70001 & Above 0.0 4.3 3.1

5.5.2 Net agricultural income on the basis of land holding

As expected loss incurred by farmers having only marginal land holdings i.e. less than 1 Acre exhibit

the maximum composition of households experiencing loss. Around 67 percent of all marginal

farmers stated that they had experienced negative agricultural income in 2011, which may be due to

small land holdings. However 22 percent of marginal farmers also reported to have earned profit up

to INR 10,000, a surprising finding that emerged here is that a handful of marginal farmers (1

percent) also reported to have made a profit of more than INR 70000, on further analyzing this 1

percent it was found that these are the farmers who have increased their cultivable land holding by


53 | P a g e

practicing agriculture on leased in land, thus in the process increasing their produce and net

agricultural income beyond foreseeable limits.

Table 5.6: Net agricultural income on the basis of land holding

Net Agricultural Income Less than 1 Acre(N=273)

1 to 2 Acre(N=71)

2 to 5 Acre(N=44)

More than 5 Acre(N=17)

Loss of Rs.10001 & above 8.8 5.6 4.5 11.8

Loss of Up to Rs.10000 57.5 38.0 38.6 11.8

No Profit No Loss 2.2 0.0 0.0 5.9

Profit of Up to Rs. 10000 22.0 11.3 11.4 23.5

Profit of Rs.10001 to 20000 5.5 14.1 13.6 0.0

Profit of Rs.20001 to 30000 0.7 7.0 4.5 0.0

Profit of Rs.30001 to 40000 1.1 8.5 13.6 5.9

Profit of Rs.40001 to 50000 0.7 9.9 0.0 5.9

Profit of Rs.50001 to 60000 0.4 1.4 2.3 11.8

Profit of Rs.60001 to 70000 0.4 0.0 4.5 0.0

Profit of Rs.70001 & Above 1 4.2 6.8 23.5

From the table it is clear that marginal & small farmers i.e. owing land less than 1 Acre and 1-2 Acre

respectively are the most predominant in number, it is also clear that it is these farmers that

experience significant loss of income i.e. farmers reporting negative agricultural income have more

significant composition amongst these two types of farmers then in the categories of medium (2-5

Acre) and large (More than 5 Acre) farmers. It could thus be safely assumed that these two types of

farmers are the most vulnerable, and land holding appears to be one of the most significant factors

that influence agricultural income.

5.5.3 Net agricultural income on the basis of social category

Another important point to note here is the production, sale and expenditure amongst the various

social categories of farmers. The table below gives a snapshot of the same. Once again the data as

expected shows that majority of the SC and ST households reported that they experienced loss, in

fact a staggering 88.2 percent of SC and 91.2 percent of ST households stated they had experienced

a net negative agricultural income in 2011. None of the SC and ST households reported to have

earned a high income from sale of agricultural goods. It is thus of no surprise that most of the SC and

ST households have low land holdings (Refer Annexure Table 9.68: Land ownership on the basis of

social category), in fact 98.5 percent of SC and 83.8 percent of ST households all have less than 2

acres of land holding . General and OBC category of households fared much better, although here

too a significant proportion of the households reported to have incurred loss.


54 | P a g e

Table 5.7: Net agricultural income on the basis of social category

Net Agricultural Income SC(N=68) ST(N=68) OBC(N=233) GEN(N=36)

Loss of Rs.10001 & above 13.2 1.5 7.3 13.9

Loss of Up to Rs.10000 75.0 89.7 33.9 33.3


Up to Rs. 10000 4.4 1.5 28.8 16.7

Profit of Rs.10001 to 20000 1.5 0.0 11.6 8.3

Profit of Rs.20001 to 30000 1.5 0.0 3.0 2.8

Profit of Rs.30001 to 40000 1.5 0.0 4.3 13.9

Profit of Rs.40001 to 50000 0.0 0.0 4.3 0.0

Profit of Rs.50001 to 60000 0.0 0.0 1.7 2.8

Profit of Rs.60001 to 70000 0.0 0.0 1.3 0.0

Profit of Rs.70001 & Above 0.0 0.0 3.9 8.3

5.6 Agricultural expenditure The figure below gives a distribution of costs incurred by farmers for agricultural activities, it can be

clearly seen from the pie chart that fertilizers (28.2 percent), irrigation (20.4 percent), tractor/power

tiller (17.8 percent) and labour (17.8 percent) are the major sources of expenditure for the 405

surveyed households. Also if the data is further analysed, it is noticed that maximum number of

farmers i.e. 95 percent reported to have spend money in 2011 on fertilizers, also 91, 76 and 72

percent of all farmers claimed to have spend money on Irrigation, Tractor/power tiller and Labour

respectively.

Figure 5-7: Expenditure categories incurred by households with respect to Agriculture

17.8

20.4

0.2 12.5

28.2

2.1

17.8

0.1 0.9

Expenditure Categories incurred by households with respect to agriculture(N=INR 6495661)

Labour

Irrigation

Power

Seed

Fertilizer

pesticides

Tractor/power tiller

Taxes

Transportation


55 | P a g e

Note: The denominator (N) used in the above case is 6495661, which is the total expenditure incurred

by all the households surveyed (i.e. 405) across the three districts for all crops for the above given

heads (shown in the pie chart).

5.6.1 Agricultural Expenditure for Small & Marginal Farmers

Since small and marginal farmers form the major proportion of all surveyed households, and as it is

these farmers who are most vulnerable and have least income it would be interesting to see the kind

of spending pattern they exhibit when it comes to agriculture.

Figure 5-8: Expenditure categories incurred by marginal & small farmers with respect to agriculture

The figure above gives a snapshot of the various sources of expenditure for the most vulnerable

category of farmers i.e. marginal & small, it shows that majority of the costs related to agriculture

was because of purchase of fertilizers (29.22 percent). Also money spent on irrigation (21.57

percent) of cultivated fields was also a significant component of the entire agricultural expenditure.

However money spent on power (0.37 percent), taxes (006), transportation (1.08 percent) and

pesticide (2.23 percent) was not that significant. It should come as no surprise that here the total

expenditure incurred by all households (in the category of small & marginal landholders) i.e.

4038446 is a significant portion of the total agricultural expenditure incurred by all 405 households,

as the percentage composition of small & marginal landholders in all the 405 households is also very

significant. Also one important piece of information that comes to light here is that composition of

all expenditure heads for the small & marginal farmers is quite similar to that of overall expenditure,

hence the major agricultural expenditure incurred are for irrigation, labour and fertilizer for all types

of farmers .

5.7 Non- farm income and its sources The total non- farm income earned by all the households amounts to INR 11154949, from the table

below it can be clearly interpreted that wages earned from wage labor constitutes a major portion

of the total non-farm income, net income from dairy/livestock, rental income of leased out land,

income by selling of livestock and income from selling of land all constituted 2.3, 1.1, 2.8 and 1.5

percent respectively.

15.40

21.57

0.37 12.67

29.22

2.23

17.40

0.06 1.08

Expenditure categories incurred by marginal & small farmers with respect to agriculture (N=4038446)

Labour

Irrigation

Power

Seed

Fertilizer

pesticides

Tractor/power tiller_

Taxes

Transportation


56 | P a g e

Table 5.8: Sources of non farm income

Activities Percentage composition(N=total non farm)

Wage labor 80.5

Net income from dairy/livestock 2.3

Rental income of leased out land 1.1

Income from selling land 1.5

Income selling livestock 2.8

Others 11.8

Total Amount 100

5.8 Net Household Income (Farm and Non Farm Income) It is also important to take into consideration the income earned by farmers from non-farm sources

of livelihood, as that income also adds to their overall household income. This net household income

is calculated by adding the net agricultural income (as calculated in the previous section) with the

income these households have earned from non-farm endeavours.

5.8.1 Net household income on the basis of districts

According to the table below it can be said that non farm income has supplemented the overall

household income of a large number of households covered during the study, none more so than in

district Jamui, where in section 5.5.1 it was shown that 90 percent of all households experienced

loss, after adding the income earned from non-farm activities it can be seen that that composition

has been significantly reduced to 13.6 percent, in fact majority of the households in this district now

show a profit of up to INR 20,000. Similarly composition of households in district Khagaria and

Purnea experiencing loss in the net agricultural income was also considerably reduced.

Table 5.9: Net household income on the basis of districts

Net Household Income Jamui(N=81) Khagaria(N=162) Purnea(N=162)

Loss of Rs.20001 & above 0.0 1.2 1.2

Loss of Up to Rs.20000 13.6 9.9 3.1

No Profit No Loss 1.2 0.6 0.0

Profit Up to Rs. 20000 64.2 22.8 19.1

Profit Rs.20001 to 40000 16.0 27.2 41.4

Profit Rs.40001 to 60000 1.2 15.4 17.9

Profit Rs.60001 to 80000 1.2 8.6 6.8

Profit Rs.80001 to 100000 2.5 3.7 7.4

Profit Rs.100001 & Above 0.0 10.5 3.1

5.8.2 Net household income on the basis of land holding

As seen in the net household income on the basis of districts, the table below also shows that the

farmers whether marginal, small, medium or large have all augmented their net household income

from non-farm sources. In fact for marginal farmers i.e. having land less than 1 acre the negative net

household income has reduced to 8.4 percent from an earlier finding of 66.3 percent (net

agricultural income).Also a significant portion of all types of farmers report to have made a profit of


57 | P a g e

INR 20000 and more. Thus it can be clearly seen by comparing the net agricultural and net

household incomes, that non-farm sources have supplemented the household income significantly.

Hence government and NGOs working in these areas in the sphere of livelihood should aim at not

only improving agriculture produce and thereby incomes, but also at promoting the skills and

capabilities of the inhabitants, so that they can get involved in non-farm livelihood activities and thus

supplement their income. Also access to credit, improvement in infrastructure and linkages with

various sources like markets (both forward and backward) should be enhanced, as they will lead to

more non-farm earning opportunities for people of these villages.

Table 5.10: Net household produce on the basis of land holding

Net Household Income Less than 1 Acre(N=273)

1 to 2 Acre(N=71)

2 to 5 Acre(N=44)


Loss of Rs.20001 & above 0.4 1.4 2.3 5.9

Loss of Up to Rs.20000 8.1 9.9 4.5 5.9


Profit Up to Rs. 20000 30.4 32.4 29.5 5.9

Profit Rs.20001 to 40000 35.2 16.9 25.0 29.4

Profit Rs.40001 to 60000 12.8 16.9 15.9 5.9

Profit Rs.60001 to 80000 6.6 5.6 6.8 5.9

Profit Rs.80001 to 100000 3.3 9.9 2.3 17.6

Profit Rs.100001 & Above 2.6 7.0 13.6 23.5

5.8.3 Net household income on the basis of social category

The findings here again reiterate the fact that non-farm sources of income and livelihood should be

promoted amongst all social categories of people none more so than the SC and ST category. These

households (SC and ST) have drastically increased their household income as a result of their non-

farm ventures, only 11.8 and 13.2 percent of SC and ST households respectively now report to have

incurred any loss ( as compared to 88 and 90 percent in the case of net agriculture income). The

general and OBC category have also become more affluent as a result of additional non farm

income.

Table 5.11: Net household income on the basis of social category

Net Household Income SC(N=68) ST(N=68) OBC(N=233) GEN(N=36)

Loss of Rs.20001 & above 0.0 0.0 0.9 5.6

Loss of Up to Rs.20000 11.8 13.2 5.2 8.3


Profit Up to Rs. 20000 39.7 66.2 15.9 30.6

Profit Rs.20001 to 40000 32.4 16.2 34.3 30.6

Profit Rs.40001 to 60000 5.9 0.0 21.5 2.8

Profit Rs.60001 to 80000 4.4 1.5 8.2 8.3

Profit Rs.80001 to 100000 1.5 2.9 6.4 5.6

Profit Rs.100001 & Above 1.5 0.0 7.7 8.3


58 | P a g e

The basic findings that came to light in the Focus Group Discussions, with regards to agriculture

income and expenditure are mentioned below. These findings are listed in district specific order:

1)Jamui: Here the respondents reported that they bought the seeds, fertilizers and pesticides from a

local market which was seven kms away, but the produce was always used for self-consumption.

2)Khagaria: In the district of Khagaria the scenario was quite different as here, the participants

reported that they bought the seeds, fertilizers and pesticides from the village itself. Here, the

produce was sold to the buyer in the village within a span of 25 days despite the fact that the rates

availed are not good. Here, the farmers believe that their problems can be minimized if government

agencies purchase their produce.

3)Purnea: here the participants reported that they purchased seeds, fertilizers and pesticides from

Bhawanipur which was 14 kms away. Urea and DAP was purchased from PACS only once until now in

the year 2011, and certain issues were faced with receiving the stock in time which delayed

application of the same on the crops. They sold their produce to village level traders who usually

collected it from their doorstep, who in turn decides the rate of the produce after weighing it.

5.9 Households taken Agriculture Loan The household study indicated that amongst the total respondents about 21 percent had taken

agriculture loan while the rest claimed not to have taken it. Further, probing with the respondents

who had taken Loan for agriculture indicated that money lender was the pre dominant source for

lending for this purpose. Banks had also made a good hold in the sector and were reported by nearly

29 percent respondents. Although microfinance institutions are making a good hold in rural areas, it

did not seem to be predominant in the state of Bihar for agriculture as reported by the respondents.

Despite of lot of efforts made by Govt. banks have not been able to reach to large extent. So, more

attention should be given on bank linkages.

Figure 5-9: Sources of agriculture loan

With respect to the purpose for which this loan was taken, Fertilizers/Pesticides/Seeds seemed to be

the predominant reason for availing loans as reported by nearly 66 percent respondents. This can be

correlated with the fact that most of the respondents reported earlier that they primarily used

hybrid seeds which are expensive than the traditional variety and availing loans for the same

28.6

3.6

0.0 50.0

10.7 8.3

Sources of Agriculture Loan (N=84)

Bank

MFI

Coop. society

Money lender

Friends/relative

Others


59 | P a g e

becomes the only solution for them which they may return once their produce is ripe. It is important

to note that the loan for entire crop cycle was taken by nearly one fifth the respondents.

Figure 5-10: Purpose of availing agriculture loans

The following findings emerged out of the focus group discussion for the three districts with regards

to agriculture credit:

1) Jamui: Agricultural loans were primarily obtained from banks located at Chikal, the rate of interest

charged hovered around 9-10 percent, the FGD participants believed that their experience of

obtaining loans from banks has not been good, as they believed they are not comfortable with the

amount and time of installments that need to pay back to the bank.

2) Khagaria: Loans here are majorly obtained from local landlords and relatives; bank contribution in

agricultural loan is minimal. Interest charged is somewhere between 5-7 percent. Here too the

respondents were not happy with the whole experience of obtaining loans, the villagers also

complained that loan is only given to them when the landlord have the money to spare.

3) Purnea: Loan is obtained from local money lenders present in and around the village. Everybody

was in agreement about the interest levied on the loan taken i.e. 5 percent. The villagers believe that

sometimes they have 4to ask for more than one money lender for the loan.

9.5

65.5

3.6

1.2 0.0

20.2

1.2

Purpose of Availing Agriculture Loans (N=84) Land development

Fertilizers/pesticides/seed

For purchasing tractor/powertillerFor purchasing harvester

For purchasing other machinery

For whole crop cycle

Other


60 | P a g e

6 Chapter: Government Schemes and Services Related to Agriculture

and Food Security

This chapter aims to give an understanding about the Government schemes and services available

with respect to agriculture in the study area and those being availed at the ground level by the

communities. This is important from the perspective of the study, as it forms a factor, which may

promote Agricultural practices and motivate use of technologies and advanced agricultural

techniques.

6.1 Agriculture Services Received The respondents were asked in the household questionnaire, whether they had received any

Agriculture extension services in 2011 (refer to Annexure Table 9.36: Received Agriculture Extension

Services in the Year 2011), and it was noted that nearly 66 percent respondents had received these

services in the year 2011, while the rest reported otherwise. With respect to the institution (Refer to

Annexure Table 9.37: Institution from where Agriculture Services are received) from where these

respondents had received the services, included District/ Block level officials as reported by nearly

66 percent respondents, Agriculture University as reported by 55 percent respondents and private

companies as reported by nearly 59 percent respondents. Receiving these services from NGOs

seemed to be more prevalent in the area as nearly 94 percent respondents reported this. Only about

15 percent respondents had received these services from Krishi Vigyan Kendra.

The respondents were also asked whether they had attended any demonstration on agriculture, and

the results indicated that only a handful (Refer to Annexure Table 9.38: Attended Demonstration on

Agriculture), around 14 percent had attended such demonstrations, while the rest reported

otherwise. Amongst those who had reported to attend such demonstrations (Refer to Annexure

Table 9.39: Institutions Disseminating these Demonstrations) nearly 58 percent reported that it was

disseminated by District/ Block level Officials, 45 percent reported to have attended those that were

conducted by NGOs and a handful, about 3 percent voted for Krishi Vigyan Kendra. With respect to

attending these demonstration activities in the year 2011, it was noted that about 10 percent

reported to have attended it while the rest reported otherwise (Refer to Annexure Table 9.40: Part

of Agriculture Related Demonstration Visits in 2011). Amongst those who reported to attend the

demonstration, 92 percent had attended those that were conducted by NGOs. Other Institutions

such as Krishi Vigyan Kendra, Private Companies, District/ Block level officials and Private companies

were not very popular in the year 2011 in terms of demonstration (Refer to Annexure Table 9.41:

Institutions Disseminating Demonstration in the year 2011).

Here, it can be concluded that though Krishi Vigyan Kendra is created to disseminate knowledge to

farmers, activities such as seminars and demonstrations on agriculture services do not seem to be

very active in this regard. Further, the work being done the NGOs in this area seems to attract more

farmers, as their activities are being attended by most of them.


61 | P a g e

6.2 Government Schemes and Programme In order to gain a deeper understanding of whether the respondents were aware about the

government schemes and programmes, the respondents were asked through the household

questionnaire on their awareness with regards to the same. Here, it was noted that a little less than

half, about 47 percent respondents were aware about the scheme on subsidies for seeds, out of

these 47 percent 44.1 percent availed this scheme, and about 22 percent were aware about the

scheme on subsidies for fertilizers, however here many of these 21.7 percent reported to avail this

scheme (almost 63 percent). Awareness with regards to crop loan was limited and was reported by

19 percent of the respondents. About 12 percent respondents reported that they were aware about

the loan schemes related to tractors, pumps and machinery (Refer to Annexure Table 9.54:

Awareness about Schemes and Programmes). Here, it must be noted that except for awareness on

subsidies related to seeds, the knowledge on other schemes and programmes appears to be low

amongst the respondents and a sincere effort must be made to raise awareness in this regard, as

schemes and services would be ineffective until and unless people are aware of the same. An

attempt made to understand whether amongst those who claimed to be aware about the respective

schemes were actually benefitting from these schemes showed that amongst those aware, number

of respondents availing the schemes is not very high.

Figure 6-1: Comparison between awareness and availing of schemes

With reference to the source of information with regards to the schemes and programmes, it was

noted that most of the respondents, nearly 43 percent received this information from the sarpanch/

Other GP officials. This is very surprising to note as when the respondents were asked about their

rapport with the sarpanch and GP officials, not many reported that they shared a personal rapport

with them. Further, quite a few respondents (36 percent) reported that they received their

information from relatives/friends or other village members. About 8 percent also reported that

their awareness was sourced from NGOs. It is interesting to note that media also plays an important

role in spreading awareness with respect to schemes as nearly 9 percent reported that their

awareness was from TV/Newspapers (Refer to Annexure Table 9.55: Source of Information with

46.4

21.7

3.5 10.1 12.3

19.0

44.1

62.5

50.0

34.1 36.0 36.4

0.0

10.0

20.0

30.0

40.0

50.0

60.0

70.0

sub

sid

y o

n s

eed

Sub

sid

y o

n f

erti

lizer

s

Sub

sid

y o

n p

est

icid

es

sub

sid

y o

n t

ract

or/

pu

mp

/ m

ach

ine

ry

Loan

fo

r t

ract

or/

pu

mp

/ m

ach

ine

ry

Cro

p lo

an

Comparison between the Awareness and Availing the Schemes

Awareness about the scheme(N=405)

Availing the scheme


62 | P a g e

regards to Schemes and Government Programmes). Hence, it may be applied that this is an avenue

which can serve good for spread of awareness. NGOs should play major role in spreading awareness

regarding schemes.

In terms of regularity of availing the schemes for the respondents who reported to be the

beneficiaries of the schemes, it was noted that not more than three fourth of the respondents

reported to avail the any type of scheme regularly. In terms of availing the subsidies on Fertilizers,

about 78 percent reported that it was regular, subsidies on seeds was voted for by about 72 percent

respondents and availing loan for tractors/pumps/machineries was voted for by nearly 61 percent

respondents (Refer to Annexure Table 9.56: Regularity of Availing Benefits). An attempt was also

made to understand whether those who reported to benefit from the scheme were actually satisfied

and the results obtained indicated that the satisfaction level ranged from between 65 per to 100

percent on various schemes.

Figure 6-2: Satisfaction of beneficiaries

6.2.1 Status of government schemes and programmes in the three districts

6.2.1.1 Khagaria

From the figure below it can be established that households in district Khagaria are majorly aware

about only two schemes i.e. subsidy on seeds and fertilizers, awareness level amongst households

for these two schemes being 76.5 and 50 percent respectively, for all other schemes awareness level

seems to be quite low, in fact not a single household covered in Khagaria was aware of subsidy on

drip irrigation and loan for dairy/goat. Percentage of household beneficiaries i.e. those availing the

schemes here are calculated on the households that are aware of those schemes, the data so

obtained further reiterates the point that government schemes and programmes are ineffective,

only half (50.8 percent) of those households that were aware of subsidy on loan were availing that

scheme, nearly 68 percent of those households that were aware of subsidy on fertilizer were

availing/had availed that subsidy. For no scheme was the aware and availing ratio 100 percent.

86.7 80.0

71.4 64.3 66.7

100.0

82.1

0.0

20.0

40.0

60.0

80.0

100.0

120.0

Sub

sid

y o

n s

eed

(N

=83

)

Sub

sid

y o

n f

erti

lizer

s(N

=5

5)

Sub

sid

y o

n p

est

icid

es(N

=7

)

Sub

sid

y o

n t

ract

or/

pu

mp

/ m

ach

ine

ry(N

=1

4)

Loan

fo

r t

ract

or/

pu

mp

/ m

ach

ine

ry(N

=1

8)

Loan

fo

r d

airy

/ go

ate

ryet

c (N

=1)

Cro

p lo

an (

N=2

8)

Satisfaction of Beneficiaries

% HH


63 | P a g e

Percentage of households satisfied after availing a particular scheme however was much more

encouraging, which goes to show that more people will avail the scheme if they were more aware

about them.

Figure 6-3: Status of government schemes and programmes in Khagaria district

6.2.1.2 Purnea

Percentage awareness about government schemes and programmes was even lower in district

Purnea then it was in district Khagaria. The maximum awareness was for the crop loan scheme (45.1

percent), 39.5 percent were aware of subsidy on seeds and 24.7 percent for loan for

tractor/pump/machinery. For all other schemes awareness level was quite low, in fact not a single

household covered in this district was aware that a subsidy is given on pesticide and drip irrigation.

Percentage of households availing the schemes and programmes were also quite low, schemes that

the households were less aware of also had less beneficiaries. Satisfaction level however was much

better for schemes like crop loan (80.8 percent) and subsidy on seed as nearly (75 percent).

Figure 6-4: Status of government schemes and programmes in Purnea district

76.5

50.0

8.6 6.8 6.2 2.5

50.8 67.9

50 36.4

70 50

90.5 80.0

71.4

100.0 85.7

50.0

0.0

20.0

40.0

60.0

80.0

100.0

120.0

Status of government schemes in district Khagaria

% of households aware aboutschmes and programmes(N=162)

% age of households availingschemes (calculated onhouseholds aware)

% age of households satisfied(calculated on householdsavailing)

39.5

4.3 19.1 24.7

45.1

31.3 32.3 27.5 35.6

75.0

40.0

54.5

80.8

0.010.020.030.040.050.060.070.080.090.0

subsidy onseed

Subsidy onfertilizers

subsidy ontractor/pump/

machinery

loan fortractor/pump/

machinery

crop loan

Status of government schemes in district Purnea

% of households aware aboutschmes and programmes(N=162)

% age of households availingschemes (calculated onhouseholds aware)

% age of households satisfied(calculated on householdsavailing)


64 | P a g e

6.2.1.3 Jamui

The statistics that emerged for district Jamui were quite abysmal; in fact not a single household in

this district was aware about any sort of scheme or programme by the government. Hence it is

extremely urgent that people here are made aware of the various government schemes and

services.

In the Focus Group Discussion, attempts were made by the moderators to discuss about government

schemes, and the results obtained seemed to confirm the findings of the Household tools, where in

the awareness level on government schemes is low. The district wise findings that emerged out of

the FGD are mentioned below:

In district Jamui, almost everyone was in agreement that the residents of the village do not

receive any benefits/support from government schemes related to agriculture.

In district Khagaria, agriculture department of the government does provide grants &

subsidies on purchase of seed and machines, also it was noted during the discussion that

Urea & DAP are provided by PACS at subsidized rates, however not all members of the

village where regular beneficiaries of such schemes, as they believed that benefits provided

were not timely, and never during time of its utmost need.

In district Purnea, the villagers have received Urea & DAP from PACS, however here too

many people were either not aware of the scheme or they believed that the benefits

provided were not timely.

6.3 PDS and other schemes to improve food security

6.3.1 Receive Items through PDS

It was noted that a total number of 373 households (around 92 percent) availed PDS services from

amongst 405 households covered under the study.

In order to understand the items that are received under the Public Distribution System by the

respondents, the respondents who had either APL, BPL or Antodaya card were questioned with

respect to the items they received. Here, it was observed that nearly 56 percent reported to obtain

Wheat and Rice under this system. About 98 percent respondents received Kerosene under the

Scheme. None of the respondents reported to receive cooking oil and Ghee under the Distribution

System (Refer to Annexure Table 9.18: Items Received under the Public Distribution System).

The study did not stop only at the items that were received under the scheme, but also attempted to

understand whether these items were received regularly, at a fair price and in the right quantity.

Here with respect to Wheat (Refer to Annexure Table 9.19: Regularity of Receiving Wheat under the

PDS) nearly 70 percent reported that they received the items every month, about 25 percent

reported that they received the items once in two months, nearly 4 percent reported that they

received Wheat once between 3-6 months and about 1 percent received it occasionally. This gives us

a glimpse as to the ineffectiveness of PDS as the items under the Public Distribution System are to

be received every month, and despite the country entering into its 67th year of independence, more

than one fourth of the sample reported that they do not receive one of the items, that is Wheat

regularly. With respect to receiving Wheat at a fair price (Refer to Annexure


65 | P a g e

Table 9.20: Fair Price of Wheat under PDS), about 65 percent reported that they did receive it at a

fair price while quite a few, about 35 percent reported otherwise. In terms of quantity, it was noted

that more than half the respondents did not receive the prescribed quantity under the Public

Distribution System (Refer to Annexure Table 9.21: Right quantity of Wheat under PDS).

Similarly, with respect to Rice under PDS, it was noted that nearly 70 percent reported that they

received Rice under the scheme and again nearly one fourth reported that they received it once in

two months. It was sad to note that, as observed in the case of wheat, nearly 4 percent reported to

receive it once in 3-6 months and about 1 percent received it occasionally (Refer to Annexure Table

9.22: Regularity of Receiving Rice under PDS), despite, rice being the staple diet in the state. In terms

of receiving this in the right quantity and at a fair price, nearly more than half reported that they did

not receive it in the right quantity (Refer to Annexure Table 9.23: Right Quantity of Rice under PDS)

and 35 percent reported that they did not receive it at a fair price (Refer to Annexure Table 9.24: Fair

Price of Receiving Rice under PDS).

An attempt was made to study the same factors with respect to Kerosene. As noted earlier,

maximum respondents reported to receive Kerosene under PDS. Amongst these (Refer to

AnnexureTable 9.25: Regularity of Receiving Kerosene under PDS) nearly 85 percent reported that

they received it every month, while about 13 percent reported that they received Kerosene once in

two months. About 2 percent respondents received Kerosene, once in 3-6 months. In terms of

receiving the right quantity (Refer to Annexure Table 9.26: Right Quantity of Kerosene under PDS)

and at fair prices (Refer to Annexure Table 9.27: Fair Price of Kerosene under PDS), 58 percent of the

respondents reported to receive the right quantity while about 23 percent reported that they did

not receive it at fair price.

6.3.2 PDS items distributed amongst SC and ST category

Out of total Households, 212 and 211 stated that they received Wheat and Rice respectively; it was

interesting to note the composition of people among SC and ST which received Wheat and Rice. The

table below gives an idea of the same, on analyzing this data it is found that SC households have not

received as much as the ST households have, for both wheat and rice, in fact the percent of SC

households that have received wheat and rice is 39.6 and 39.7 percent respectively. The distribution

amongst ST households however seems to be quite good as for both rice and wheat.

Table 6.1: PDS items received amongst SC and ST categories

Wheat Rice

SC(N=68) 39.6 39.7

ST(N=68) 83.9 83.8

6.3.3 Food Crisis faced by households

It is important to understand whether the households, covered under the study, have ever faced

food crisis ever, and in this case it was noted that a little less than half the respondents, about 48

percent reported that they had faced food crisis and the rest reported otherwise. When further

studied it was found that 60 percent of those respondents that had faced food crisis, had faced this

every year while about 37 percent faced it occasionally. Facing food crisis every year seemed to be

pre-dominant amongst Scheduled Caste as well as the general category. While, interestingly,


66 | P a g e

majority of Scheduled Tribe reported to face this occasionally, one reason for the same could be the

more dependence of Schedule Tribes on forest rather than agriculture as their primary source of

food. Quite a few respondents, 60 percent reported to face the crisis every year among other

backward category.

Table 6.2: Food crisis with respect to social category

Faced food crisis SC (N=50) ST (N=42)

OBC (N=95)

Gen (N=8)

Total (N=195)

Every year 70.0 45.2 60.0 75.0 60.0

Once in 2-3 years 4.0 4.8 0.0 0.0 2.1

Once in 4-5 years 0.0 2.4 1.1 0.0 1.0

Occasionally 26.0 47.6 38.9 25.0 36.9

Further, an attempt was made to understand the months in which this food crisis was faced and

maximum (nearly 43 percent) respondents reported that February was the month when they faced

food crisis, while quite a few (nearly 40 percent) voted for March too. September and October also

seemed to be the months where a little more than one fourth respondents reported to face food

crisis (Refer to Annexure Table 9.31: Months wherein Food Crisis is faced by Respondents).

6.3.4 Households facing food Crisis in 2011

With respect to food crisis, an effort was made to understand the status of food crisis in 2011; and

amongst those who had reported to have faced food crisis every year, nearly 85 percent reported to

have faced the crisis in 2011 and about 15 percent reported otherwise (Refer to Annexure Table

9.32: Food Crisis faced by Respondents in 2011). An attempt was made to understand whether the

respondents who reported to have faced food crisis in 2011 received the items under the Public

Distribution System (Refer to Annexure Table 9.35: Items received under PDS, by HH facing crisis in

2011). Here, it was noted that more than half the respondents received wheat and rice under the

PDS scheme, nearly 92 percent respondents reported to receive kerosene and only a handful

reported to receive sugar.

6.3.4.1 Action to overcome Food Crisis

It is also important to understand what kind of coping mechanisms adopted to overcome food crisis,

hence, the study also attempted to gather data on this front. Here, it was observed that borrowing

money seemed to be the most popular solution amongst the respondents as about three fourth of

the respondents resorted to this solution. Migration to another place was an option that was

practiced by nearly one fourth the respondents. Dependence on Forest produce seemed to be low

amongst the respondents in such situations.


67 | P a g e

Figure 6-5: Action taken to overcome food crisis

6.3.5 Effects of Food Crisis

In terms of effects of food crisis, it was observed that additional or extra labour seemed to be

predominant as nearly 78 percent respondents reported this. Further, nearly 68 percent

respondents reported that they had to cut down on other household expenditure and about 61

percent reported that additional debts was also another negative impact. (Refer to Annexure Table

9.34: Effects of Food Crisis).

In the Focus Group Discussion, an attempt was made to understand about the food security

situation:

In the district of Jamui, the respondents usually manage their food from own agricultural

produce and sometimes additional items were bought from a market (in Chakai), some

respondents also received food articles from PDS shop. However, food crisis was reported to

be faced by around 15-20 households, mainly during the dry months of March to July and

they recommended that this problem could be overcome if a system of daily wages could be

set up during these months.

In the district of Khagaria the scenario observed was a little different where the participants

reported to rely on agriculture as well as PDS for their food security supply. They held BPL,

Antyodaya and Annapurna yojana cards; however they reported that they had not faced any

major situations of food crisis.

In the district of Purnea the situation was similar to that in Jamui, where maximum

dependence was on agriculture and procurement of additional items was limited to village

level. The situation of food crisis was also similar to that observed in Jamui.

73.3 75.9

27.7

3.6 8.7

0.0

20.0

40.0

60.0

80.0B

orr

ow

fro

mre

lati

ve/f

rie

nd

s

Bo

rro

w f

rom

mo

ne

yle

nd

er/

emp

loye

r

Mig

rate

to

oth

er p

lace

De

pen

d o

nM

GN

REG

S(G

ovt

.P

rogr

amm

es

)

Mo

red

epe

nd

en

ceo

n f

ore

stp

rod

uce

Action to overcome Food Crisis (N=195)

% HH (N=195)


68 | P a g e

7 Chapter: Relation with Primary and Secondary Institutions

This Chapter basically aims to lay a focus on the village level groups, primary and secondary groups

and its meetings. In the context of this study, it is very important to understand the kind of

community groups that exist in the study area which may in turn be helpful to catalyze the objective

of the programme.

7.1 Membership of Village Level Groups The respondents were asked whether they were part of any village level groups. It is important that

the communities participate in such groups as these may help them in developing their own

personality, awareness, exposure, and also being parts of such groups helps them solve occupational

and other problems through discussions. Despite all such benefits of being a part of village level

group, it was noted that amongst the 405 respondents only about 12 percent reported to be part of

village level groups (Refer to Annexure Table 9.13: Membership to Village Level Groups). Amongst

the respondents who reported to be part of village level groups, most of them (96 percent

respondents) were members of Self Help Groups. Water user groups, though not very popular

amongst the respondent group, appeared to have 38 percent members. 8 percent and 2 percent of

respondents reported that they were part of Producer Groups and watershed Groups respectively

(Refer to Annexure Table 9.14: Type of Groups).

More support from government and other organizations is required to form such groups and to

encourage participation of the community members.

7.2 Participation in SHG In order to understand the membership to various groups and its impact on the development of

members, being mere members of the group may not be enough. It is important that these

members also participate in the group activities. Hence, an attempt was made to study the factors

with respect to this context. Here, it was noted that the participation in the group meetings was

reported by only about 42 percent of the respondents, however awareness about the meetings was

reports by nearly 98 percent members and nearly 88 percent reported that they attended the

meetings. Thus, it can be said that counselling is needed to motivate the respondents to participate

in the meetings. Most of the respondents, about 81 percent reported that they participated in the

election process of the groups.


69 | P a g e

Figure 7-1: Participation in SHG

7.3 Participation in Other Groups An attempt was made to understand the participation of the respondents who reported to be

members of other groups, in the group activities. Amongst these (Refer to Annexure Table 9.15:

Participation in Other Groups), nearly 80 percent reported that they were aware about the meetings

in the group and 72 percent reported that they did attend the meetings. However, with respect to

participation, merely 32 percent respondents reported that they participated in the group meetings.

88 percent respondents reported to participate in the election process of the group. Here, though

other factors such as elections, awareness about meetings and attending meetings are popular

amongst the respondents, however the participation in these meetings is low, indicating that most

of the members of the group remained passive members. Hence, encouragement for participation in

these meetings is very essential.

Participation of SC and ST households in SHGs and other groups is given in the table below, the data

shows that the reach of SHGs among both SC and ST is low, however it is still much better than its

reach among general and OBC category (which is almost negligible). On the whole the households in

these 15 villages it can be said that the SHGs and other village level livelihood based groups have

covered very few households

Table7.1: Participation of SC and ST households in SHGs and other groups

SC (N=68) ST (N=68

SHG 4.4 57.4

Producer’s group

0.0 1.5

Water user’s group

2.9 23.5

Watershed group

0.0 1.5

97.9

87.5

41.7

81.3

0.0

20.0

40.0

60.0

80.0

100.0

120.0

Awareness aboutthe meeting

Attending themeetings

Participation inthe meeting

Participation inelection

Participation in SHG (N=48)

% HH (N=48)


70 | P a g e

Participation of households in SHGs and other groups on the basis of land holding size also gives a

bleak picture (Refer to Annexure Table 9.71: Participation of Households in SHGs and other groups

based on size of land holding), only 10.6 percent of marginal land holders are involved in a SHG,

whereas the same data for small farmers is 14.1 percent.

Focus group Discussion confirmed the results obtained in the Household tool as the participants

spoke in line with the results indicated above.

7.4 Personal Rapport with Panchayat Members, Village and Block Level

Officials Various selected and elected members are present at the Panchayat, Village and Block levels in

order to promote agriculture and agricultural practices using advanced technologies. It is important

that the communities share a rapport with these members, who in turn may provide them with

know-how in the deeds occurring in the agricultural sector. The government has appointed

Agricultural officers, Development and Administrative officers who also maintain Agriculture and

development with respect to this sector in their portfolio. In this context, it was noted that the

rapport of the communities with these officials was not that good, in fact, only about 13 percent

reported that they knew the Sarpanch personally, and this is surprising to note as the Sarpanch

usually resides in the village or nearby village. Further, only about 19 percent respondents reported

that they knew the Agriculture Officer. Sometimes distance is being maintained by the officials

themselves, so it is very important from the part of these officials to take initiative and build rapport

with the community.

Figure 7-2: Personal rapport with members in authority

7.5 Role of PRI and NGOs in Agriculture An attempt was made to understand the role that PRI plays in agricultural practices and productivity.

Here, it was noted that, nearly 83 percent respondents reported that Panchayati raj Institutions do

not play any role in respect to this and only 17 percent respondents reported that the PRI members

teach them techniques about cultivation (Refer to Annexure Table 9.16: Role of PRI in

Agriculture).An attempt was made to understand whether, apart from decentralized Institutions

such as PRIs, any effort was being put in by other private and local institutions with respect to

12.6

19.3

7.9 9.1

4.7

9.9

18.5

0.0

5.0

10.0

15.0

20.0

25.0

Sarp

anch

War

d m

em

be

r

An

y o

the

r G

ram

Pan

chay

at M

em

be

r

GP

Sec

reta

ry

Vill

age

Ad

min

istr

ativ

eO

ffic

er

/Re

ven

ue

…

Blo

ck D

evel

op

men

tO

ffic

er

Agr

icu

ltu

re O

ffic

er

(blo

ck le

vel)

Personal Rapport with Members in Authority (N=405)

HH % (N=405)


71 | P a g e

agriculture. Here, it was noted that nearly 75 percent respondents reported that NGOs were working

in this area and the rest reported otherwise (Refer to Annexure Table 9.17: NGOs working in the

sector of Agriculture). When studied in detail, with respect to what activities were being executed by

the NGOs in this area, it was understood that work was being done with respect to seed treatment,

seed replacement, sowing methods, use of Fertilizers, PVSP and ICM as reported by the

respondents. NGOs like ASA are working in these areas. NGOs were working in all the 15 villages that

were part of this study.

Figure 7-3: Role of NGOs in agriculture

72.5

19.0

62.3

83.3

57.4

9.5

0.010.020.030.040.050.060.070.080.090.0

Seed

rep

lace

me

nt

PV

SP

Sow

ing

me

tho

ds

Seed

tre

atm

ent

Bal

ance

d u

se o

ffe

rtili

zers IC

M

Role of NGOs in Agriculture (N=305)

%HH (N=305)


72 | P a g e

8 Chapter: Conclusion and Recommendations

It is revealed from the study that a large number of households covered in the sample report that

they had an overall negative income i.e. have experienced loss. In fact around 60 percent of all

households have reported a negative net agricultural income. According to the findings given in the

report we believe the reasons for the same could be the following:

Low land holding: Most of the farmers covered in the sample had a very low land holdings, in

fact almost 85 percent of all farmers had land holding of less than 2 acres. Thus it is no

surprise that nearly 91 percent of all households that have experienced loss in the year 2011

are small & marginal farmers

Less agricultural produce: Households that do not sell any produce are nearly 37 percent of

sampled households, these are the households that practice agriculture just to squarely feed

themselves and their families, hence their net agricultural income is negative. Also as stated

above around 60 percent of all households report to having a negative net agricultural

income, thus around 23 percent of all households, all of which sell some agricultural produce,

also reported loss. Thus a very considerable proportion of households that have sold their

produce also have lost money as a result of agricultural activities.

Variety of seeds used: In the 3 districts high yield seed variety was not the most popular

choice, in fact in district Jamui still the majority of people reported to be using traditional

seed varieties, whereas in both Khagaria and Purnea hybrid varieties of seeds were the most

preferred . Both traditional and hybrid seed varieties have low yield compared to HYV seeds,

thus this could be another reason why so many households experienced loss in 2011.

Lack of awareness about government schemes and programs: the status of awareness of

government schemes and programs was very poor in all the 3 districts, especially in Jamui

where not a single household was aware about any sort of agricultural schemes or

programme by the government. The situation in both Khagaria and Purnea was only

marginally better

Poor relationships with primary and Secondary institutions: only about 12 percent all

households were members of SHGs, which is an abysmal figure. Being part of SHGs not only

enhances the knowledge and skill level of the participants, but it also acts as a financial net

for its members and helps addressing issues related to livelihood.

In accordance with our study Jamui district is clearly worse off than the other two districts, almost all

the farmers in this district reported to have a net negative agricultural income (97.53 percent). Also

it was the only district where still traditional seeds variety are preferred over other types of seeds,

not to mention the fact that no one here either knew or were availing any of the government

schemes or programs.

Actions that need to be taken:

Farmers need to be educated on the use of high yield and hybrid variety seed, the usage of

which is very low as compared to traditional variety;

Farmer should be trained through demonstrations and training on the land preparation,

seed treatment, application of manure and fertilizers, etc;


73 | P a g e

Watershed promotion needs to be explored which can perhaps then assist in reducing the

dependence on other existing sources of irrigation;

Women participation in agricultural activities should be encouraged;

Crop diversification can provide better yield and gain for the farmers, hence it should be

promoted, and technical support should be provided to them ;

There is low awareness level on government schemes and service, hence, benefits of the

existing schemes and services should be informed to the farmers;

Primary and secondary groups can work as catalyst for improvement in agriculture, so village

level groups like SHGs, producer groups, water user groups, etc to be formed and nurtured;

Linkages with cooperative society and banks should be strengthened so that farmers can

avail credits more easily which is very weak at this stage;

Community participation in distribution of food articles through PDS should be encouraged

to enhance the coverage which in turn will reduce the food insecurity during lean season;

Jamui needs a special attention as it is lagging behind the other two districts;

Among the social categories the vulnerable groups, SC and ST are performing very poorly and they

would need special attention.


74 | P a g e

9 Annexure Table 9.1: Type of House

Type % HH (N=405)

Pucca 9.6

Kachha 71.9

Mixed (Both) 18.5

Table 9.2: Availability of Toilets

Yes / No %HH (N=405)

Yes 17.8

No 82.2

Table 9.3: Main Source of Drinking Water

Main source of drinking water

%HH (N=405)

Pipeline into your house 2.2

Public tap water 4.2

Rainwater collection 0.2

Stream / River 1.2

Protected dug well 2.0

unprotected dug well 4.4

Hand pump at home 67.2

Public Hand pump 18.0

Lake/pond 0.5

Table 9.4: Categorization of Working Women according to Social Category

Sample SC ST OBC GEN Total

(N=68) 16.2 25.0 54.4 4.4 100.0

Table 9.5: Categorization of Women according to Economic Category

Sample APL BPL Antodaya Card

No card Total

(N=68) 23.5 66.2 7.4 2.9 100.0


75 | P a g e

Table 9.6: Average Hours spent on the Wage Activities on a daily basis

Average Hours Spend (N=68)

Hours spend on Earning Activities by Female worker

7.8

Table 9.7: Categorization according to the Hours spent on Wage Earning Activities

Category Hours Spend

% of Female members (N=68)

1 to 4 Hours 2.9

5 to 8 Hours 70.6

9 to 12 Hours 23.5

13 Hours & Above 2.9

Table 9.8: Level of Satisfaction amongst the Working Women

Level of satisfaction

% of Female members (N=68)

Satisfied 48.5

Average 19.1

Not satisfied 32.4

Total 100.0

Table 9.9: Non Wage Activities by Female Members

Non Earning Activity %HH (N=586)

Cooking 89.4

Cleaning 93.0

Washing clothes 91.5

Washing utensils 90.1

Take care of children 67.7

Purchasing household items 33.3

Firewood collection 49.3

Teaching child 8.7

Agriculture in own field 35.8

Rearing cattle/milking 14.2

Other 0.2


76 | P a g e

Table 9.10: Number of Hours spent on Non Wage Activities

Hours Spend (N=586)

Hours spend on non-earning activities female worker

8.4

Table 9.11: Having Livestock

Having Livestock %HH (N=405)

Yes 69.4

No 30.6

Total 100.0

Table 9.12: Type of Livestock

Livestock %HH (N=281)

Cattle (Bullocks/he Buffaloes /calves)

38.4

She Buffaloes /cows 78.3

Goats (he & She) 38.4

Sheep 0.4

Donkeys, horses 0.7

Poultry 15.3

Other livestock 5.7

Table 9.13: Membership to Village Level Groups

Yes / No Bihar (N=405)

Yes 12.3%

No 87.7%

Table 9.14: Type of Groups

Type of Groups Bihar (N=50)

SHG 96.0

Producer’s group 8.0

Water user’s group 38.0

Watershed group 2.0

Others 0.0


77 | P a g e

Table 9.15: Participation in Other Groups

Participation Bihar (N=24)

Awareness about the meeting

80.0

Attending the meetings 72.0

Participation in the meeting 32.0

Participation in election 88.0

Table 9.16: Role of PRI in Agriculture

Role in Agriculture % HH (N=405)

How to cultivate 17.0

Don't do anything 82.7

Other 0.2

Table 9.17: NGOs working in the sector of Agriculture

Yes / No %HH (N=405)

Yes 75.3

No 24.7

Table 9.18: Items Received under the Public Distribution System

Item % HH (N=380)

Wheat 55.8

Rice 55.5

Kerosene 98.2

Sugar 1.3

Table 9.19: Regularity of Receiving Wheat under the PDS

Regularity % HH (N=212)

Every month 70.3

Once in 2 months 24.5

Once in 3-6 Months 3.8

Occasionally 1.4

Never


78 | P a g e

Table 9.20: Fair Price of Wheat under PDS

Yes /No % HH (N=212)

Yes 65.1

No 34.9

Table 9.21: Right quantity of Wheat under PDS


Yes 44.8

No 55.2

Table 9.22: Regularity of Receiving Rice under PDS


Every month 69.7



Occasionally 1.4

Never

Table 9.23: Right Quantity of Rice under PDS


Yes 64.9

No 35.1

Table 9.24: Fair Price of Receiving Rice under PDS


Yes 44.1

No 55.9


79 | P a g e

Table 9.25: Regularity of Receiving Kerosene under PDS


Every month 84.5



Occasionally 0.5

Never

Table 9.26: Right Quantity of Kerosene under PDS


Yes 76.7

No 23.3

Table 9.27: Fair Price of Kerosene under PDS


Yes 57.9

No 42.1

Table 9.28: Regularity of receiving Sugar under PDS


Every month 80.0


Table 9.29: Right Quantity of Sugar under PDS

Yes /No % HH (N=5)

Yes 80.0

No 20.0

Table 9.30: Fair Price of Sugar under PDS

Yes /No % HH (N=5)

Yes 80.0

No 20.0


80 | P a g e

Table 9.31: Months wherein Food Crisis is faced by Respondents

Name of Month % HH (N=195)

Jan 8.7

Feb 42.6

Mar 39.5

Apr 8.2

May 14.9

June 13.8

July 11.8

Aug 17.9

Sep 26.2

Oct 26.2

Nov 9.7

Dec 5.1

Table 9.32: Food Crisis faced by Respondents in 2011


Yes 85.1

No 14.9

Table 9.33: Months in which Food Crisis was faced in 2011

Name of Month % HH (N=166)

Jan 0.6

Feb 8.4

Mar 30.1

Apr 2.4

May 2.4

June 6.6

July 6.0

Aug 7.2

Sep 21.1

Oct 22.3

Nov 7.8

Dec 3.6


81 | P a g e

Table 9.34: Effects of Food Crisis

Affects due to food crisis Bihar (N=195)

Additional Debts 60.7

Additional or Extra Labour 78.1

Cut down other household expenditure

67.9

Table 9.35: Items received under PDS, by HH facing crisis in 2011

Items % HH (N=166)

Wheat 54.2

Rice 54.2

Kerosene 92.2

Sugar 1.8

Cooking oil/ghee 0.0

Table 9.36: Received Agriculture Extension Services in the Year 2011


Yes 66.4

No 33.6

Table 9.37: Institution from where Agriculture Services are received

Institution % HH (N=269)

District/ Block level officials 66.2

Krishi Vighyan Kendra 15.2

Agriculture University 55.0

NGO 94.1

private companies 59.1

Table 9.38: Attended Demonstration on Agriculture

Yes / No % HH (N=405)

Yes 14.3

No 85.7


82 | P a g e

Table 9.39: Institutions Disseminating these Demonstrations

Institution % HH (N=58)



NGOs 44.8


Others 0.0

Table 9.40: Part of Agriculture Related Demonstration Visits in 2011

Yes / No % HH (N=405)

Yes 9.6

No 90.4

Table 9.41: Institutions Disseminating Demonstration in the year 2011

Institution Bihar (N=39)



NGOs 92.3


Others 0.0

Table 9.42: Main Crops Cultivated in the Area

Seasons Main Crops Bihar (N=405)

Kharif

Soya 0.2

Jowar 0.2

Bajra 1.2

Arhar/Tur 1.7

Moong 3

Potato 6.4

Paddy 88.6

Maize 96.3

Rabi

Ginger 0.2

Radish 0.2

Gram 0.2

Turmeric 0.5

Garlic 1

Cabbage 1

Tomato 1


83 | P a g e

Seasons Main Crops Bihar (N=405)

Onions 1

Cauliflower 1.5

Brinjal 2

Wheat 41.5

Jayad Cucumber 0.2

White gourd 2.7

Cashew nut 0.2

Banana 4.9

Table 9.43: Source of Procurement of Seeds on an Overall Level

Source % HH (N=1071)

Market 73.1

Cooperative society 1.1


KVK 0.0

NGO 4.1

Own 19.4

From relatives/ neighbor 1.8

Farmer Producer Company 0.2

Table 9.44: Irrigation facilities used by the Respondents

Sour of water % HH (N=405)

Rain water 21.5

Pond 0.5

River/ stream 4.0

Dug well 0.5

Tube well 73.1

Canal 1.5

Stop dam 2.2

Table 9.45: Fertilizers Applied

Fertilizer Type Bihar (N=1435)

Straight Fertilizer 53.7

Complex Fertilizers 31.1

Micronutrients 15.1


84 | P a g e

Table 9.46: Use of manure

Organic manure Bihar (N=125)

(GobarKhad) cow dung 90.4

Organic fertiliser 0.8

Vermi compost 8.0

KhahliKhad 0.8

MatkaKhad 0.0

Table 9.47: Name of the Fertilizer

Name of fertilizer Bihar (N=1435)

DAP 27.3

SSP 2.4

Urea 27.3

Potash 16.7

Ammonium Sulphate 1.9

Zinc 13.8

MOP 7.0

Other 3.6

Table 9.48: Place of Procurement of Fertilizers

Name of fertilizer Bihar (N=1435)

Market 99.5

Cooperative society 0.0


KVK 0.0

NGO 0.0

Own 0.0

from relatives/ neighbor 0.3


85 | P a g e

Table 9.49: name of the Pesticides Used across Crop Categories

Pesticide Type Maize (N=319)

Paddy (N=126)

Wheat (N=66)

Potato (N=22)

Banana (N=20)

Brinjal (N=8)

Bavidtin 0.6 0.0 1.5 0.0 5.0 0.0

Fighter 0.6 6.3 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

Persuit 0.0 0.8 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

Endosulphan 16.0 50.0 6.1 9.1 40.0 12.5

Niconil 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

Laso 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

candidor 0.0 0.0 7.6 0.0 0.0 0.0

Monopotas 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

Acifat 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

Monocrotophas 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

2-4-D 0.9 3.2 3.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

TurgaSupar 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

Nunalphas 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

Democran 0.3 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

Rogon 5.3 6.3 22.7 0.0 0.0 12.5

Inida 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

Furudan 17.9 8.7 7.6 9.1 0.0 12.5

Thimat 45.1 3.2 31.8 9.1 45.0 25.0

Trizophos 0.3 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

Other 12.9 21.4 19.7 72.7 10.0 37.5

Table 9.50: Place of Procurement of Pesticides across crop categories

Source Maize (N=319)

Paddy (N=126)

Wheat (N=66)

Potato (N=22)

Banana (N=20)

Brinjal (N=8)

Market 99.1 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0

Cooperative society 0.3 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

Agriculture University 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

KVK 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

NGO 0.6 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

Own 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

from relatives/ neighbour 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

Farmer Producer Company 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0


86 | P a g e

Table 9.51: Harvesting Machinery

Machine Name % HH (N=405)

Trailer 0.2

Combine harvester 0.2

Pesticide spray machine 0.0

Leveller 0.2

Hoe 1.5

Weeder 2.5

Sprayer/duster 0.0

Shovel 0.0

Sickle 91.9

Bullock Cart 0.0

Sprinkler 0.0

Other agriculture equipment 0.5

Table 9.52: Threshing Machinery

Machine Name % HH (N=405)

Trailer 0.2

Combine harvester 0.0

Pesticide spray machine 75.6

Leveler 0.0

Hoe 0.5

Weeder 0.0

Sprayer/duster 0.5

Shovel 0.0

Sickle 0.0

Bullock Cart 0.0

Sprinkler 0.2

Other agriculture equipment 3.0

Table 9.53: Storage of the Crop


Yes 51.9

No 48.1

Total 100


87 | P a g e

Table 9.54: Awareness about Schemes and Programmes

Programme % HH (N=405)

Subsidy on seed 46.4

Subsidy on fertilizers 21.7

Subsidy on pesticides 3.5

Subsidy on electricity 0.2

Subsidy on tractor/ pump/ machinery

10.1

Subsidy on drip irrigation 0.2

Loan for tractor/ pump/ machinery

12.3

Loan for dairy/ goatery etc 0.2

Crop loan 19.0

Loan for land development 0.0

Table 9.55: Source of Information with regards to Schemes and Government Programmes

Source of Information % HH (N=405)

Relatives/friends/other villagers

36.0

Sarpanch/other GP officials 43.0

Gram sabha 1.2

Ward member 8.4

Other government official 5.9

NGO 8.4

SHG 2.0

Media (TV/newspaper) 8.9

Other 0.0

Table 9.56: Regularity of Availing Benefits

Programme % HH Total Sample

Subsidy on seed 72.3 83

Subsidy on fertilizers 78.2 55

Subsidy on pesticides 28.6 7

Subsidy on electricity 0.0 0

Subsidy on tractor/ pump/ machinery 50.0 14

Subsidy on drip irrigation 0.0 0

Loan for tractor/ pump/ machinery 61.1 18

Loan for dairy/ goatery etc 0.0 1

Crop loan 46.4 28

Loan for land development 0.0 0


88 | P a g e

Table 9.57: Reason for Storage

Reasons Bihar (N=256)

for better price 7.8

no buyer 0.4

to sell at the time of need 16.0

due to bad weather/natural calamities

5.1

due to family problem 70.3

other 0.4

Table 9.58: Place of Selling

Selling Place Bihar (N=474)

Own Village 75.7

Purchasing Site near the village

15.4

Local Haat 6.5

Purchasing Town 1.7

Mandi 0.4

Others 0.2

Table 9.59: Buyers for the Produce

Buyer % HH (N=474)

Trader in the village 78.5

Trader outside the village 14.6

Local market/shop 3.4

Contractor 0.8

Wholesale buyer 0.8

Govt. market 0.8

LAMPs 0.4

Company 0.0

Others 0.6


89 | P a g e

Table 9.60: Timing of Receiving the Payment

Timing of payment % HH (N=474)

On the same day 46.0

Within 7 days of the sale 28.3

8-30 days after the sale 22.8

within 2 months of sale 1.1

More than 2 months of the sale

1.9

Table 9.61: Advice Received from with regards to Agriculture

Advice from % HH (N=405)

Relative 7.4

Neighbor 47.2

PRI member 5.9

Village/ panchayat level agriculture staff

9.6

Block level officer 0.7

KVK 1.0

None, do by myself 27.4

Other 11.4

Table 9.62: Productivity with respect to Major Crops

Productivity per Acre Potato (N=26)

Banana (N=20)

Brinjal (N=8)

Below 5 Quintal 34.6 20.0 75.0

5 to 10 Quintal 19.2 10.0 12.5

10 to 15 Quintal 11.5 70.0 12.5

10 to 15 Quintal 34.6 0.0 0.0

Table 9.63: Caste wise Population covered under the Village Profile

Caste wise Bihar (N=15)

SC 23.1

ST 46.8

OBC 14.5

General 11.8

Other 3.8


90 | P a g e

Table 9.64: Primary Occupation across the villages studied (from village profile)

Primary Occupation % Population (N=15)

Primarily Agriculturist 55.7

Landless labour 25.9

Animal Husbandry 5.4

Artisan 6.5

Petty traders 1.8

Salaried Employee (govt./pvt.) 4.7

Other____________________ 0.0

Table 9.65: Poverty Status off the Village Population (from village profile)

APL / BPL % Population

APL 24.0

BPL 48.7

Antodaya 15.1

No cards 12.3

Table 9.66: Educational Infrastructure (from village profile)

Infrastructure Bihar (N=15)

1 Primary School (till 5th) 60.0

2 Middle (6-7), 46.7

3 Secondary (8-10) 0.0

Senior secondary (11-12) 0.0

No school 26.7

College 6.7 Table 9.67: Drinking Water Sources (from village profile)

Infrastructure Bihar (N=15)

1 Tap water 13.3

2 Hand-pump 66.7

3 Dug Well 13.3

4 Bore well 20.0

5 Pond 0.0

6 River 0.0

7 Tank 0.0


91 | P a g e

Table 9.68: Irrigation Sources (from village profile)

Irrigation Sources % Viilages (N=15)

Canal 6.7

Hand-pump 13.3

Dug Well 6.7

Bore well 73.3

Pond 6.7

River 40.0

Tank 0.0

Table 9.69: Land ownership on the basis of social category

Types of Farmers SC(N=68) ST(N=68) OBC(N=233) GEN(N=36)

Less than 1 Acre 95.6 55.9 67.38197 36.1

1 to 2 Acre 2.9 27.9 18.45494 19.4

2 to 5 Acre 1.5 13.2 10.72961 25.0

More than 5 Acre 0.0 2.9 3.433476 19.4

Table 9.70: Land holding classification of SC and ST farmers

Social category

Less than 1 Acre

1 to 2 Acre

2 to 5 Acre

More than 5 Acre Total

SC(N=68) 95.6 2.9 1.5 0.0 100.0

ST(N=68) 55.9 27.9 13.2 2.9 100.0

Table 9.71: Participation of Households in SHGs and other groups based on size of land holding

Village level Groups

Less than 1 Acre(N=273)

1 to 2 Acre(N=71)

2 to 5 Acre(N=44)


SHG 10.6 14.1 18.2 5.9

Producer’s group 0.7 1.4 2.3 0.0

Water user’s group 4.4 4.2 6.8 5.9

Watershed group 0.4 0.0 0.0 0.0


92 | P a g e

Table 9.72: Sources of irrigation for villages( from village profile)

District Villages Sources of irrigation

Jamui

Pojha None

Rahima River

Burhiatanr Canal , Dug well

Purnea

Supauli Bore well

Sondip Bore well

Parasbani Bore well

Sonima (Souna) Bore well, River

Madhoapur Yes

Basantpur Chintaman milik Bore well, River

Khagaria

Nirpur Bore well, River and Pond

Bakeya River

Partraha None

Devka Bore well, Hand pump

Saraiya Bore well, River

Navrolia Hand pump,. River and bore well

Table 9.73: various crops grown by farmers (season wise)

Kharif

Land Size 2

Crops 3

crops 4

crops 5

crops

Marginal farmers (Less than 1 Acre, N=273) 76.2 22.0 6.2 1.8

Small farmer(1 to 2 Acre, N=71) 73.2 39.4 7.0 1.4

Medium farmer (2 to 5 Acre, N=44) 70.5 29.5 9.1 6.8

Large farmers (More than 5 Acre, N=17) 52.9 47.1 23.5 5.9

Rabi

Land Size 2

crops 3

crops 4

crops 5

crops

Marginal farmers (Less than 1 Acre, N=273) 15.0 10.6 3.7 5.9

Small farmer(1 to 2 Acre, N=71) 19.7 18.3 2.8 4.2

Medium farmer (2 to 5 Acre, N=44) 25 29.5 6.8 0

Large farmers (More than 5 Acre, N=17) 41.2 17.6 0 5.9


93 | P a g e

B. Annexure 2

The determination of the overall sample size for the Baseline study is governed by several

considerations, including the magnitude of the key indicators, the desired level of precision of the

estimates, the availability of resources, and logistical considerations.

This study is seen as providing estimates for a baseline that can be compared at mid point and end

of the project in terms of improved practices of agriculture, increment in agriculture income and

improved status of women.

The Baseline Study will cover 510 household in MP and 405 household in Bihar, so in total, 915

household will be covered in the study.

[Note: A sample of size 384 gives estimates with 95% of confidence and 5% of margin of error in

estimating proportions for a population size from 2,50,000 and above.7 Since there are 10 clusters in

MP and 5 clusters in Bihar, more household will be covered in MP than Bihar. For better distribution

of the samples among the clusters, 510 household in MP and 405 household in Bihar will be

interviewed.]

Name of

states to

be covered

No. of

district to

be covered

Total No of

Cluster to

be covered

Total No. of

Villages to be

covered(3 villages

to be covered in

each cluster)

No. of

Household to

be covered in

each village

Total number

of household

to be covered

MP 5 10 10×3=30 17 30×17=510

Bihar 3 5 5×3=15 27 15×27=405

Total 8 15 45 915

Household interview will be conducted with all 915 selected household.

FGD: Focused Group Discussion will be conducted with a group of farmers of 8-10. One FGD will be

conducted in the biggest village (among the selected villages) of every cluster. So, in total, there will

be10 FGDs in MP and 5 FGDs in Bihar.

Sample Selection for household interview:

7References:

1. Cochran, W.G. (1977), Sampling Techniques, 3rd edition, New York: John Wiley

2. Tripathi, P. C. (2003), A Text Book of Research Methodology in Social Sciences, Sultan Chand & Sons, New Delhi. (Pages -125-129)


94 | P a g e

Sample selection will involve multiple steps as depicted below.

Household Selection:

Before household selection all the household will be listed for villages with less than 1200

population (approximately 240 Household). However, for villages with more than 1200 population

two hamlets will be selected randomly. Then listing operation will be carried out in those selected

hamlets.

A listing sheet will be used to capture basic information like- Name of the head of the household, no.

of family members, land holding, whether cultivating or not and what are the major crops.

Listing of the household will be done separately in the selected hamlets. Household selection has

been illustrated with an example.

Assuming, the first of the selected hamlets has 35 households, and the second of the selected

hamlets has 150 households.

Total no. of HHs Total no. of HHs to be selected Gap number

H1 35

H2 150

Total 185 17 (in case of MP)

Proportion of households in each hamlet will be calculated- i.e., number of households in H1 divided

by the total number of households in both hamlets (= 35/185) and similarly for H2 (= 150/185). Then

multiplied this proportion by 17 (total number of households to be selected in both hamlets overall).

Village Selection

•Villages in the cluster will be arranged in descending order of household number

•Three villages will be selected randomly from each cluster (from the arranged list)

Household Selection

•Listing excercise of the household will be performed,

•Eliminate non farming household from the list.

•Required number of household will be selected randomly


95 | P a g e

Total no. of HHs Total no. of households to be

selected

Gap number

H1 35 = 17

185

35= 3.21 = 3

H2 150 = 17

185

150= 13.78 = 14

Total 185 17

So the sample size in this case is 3 households in the smaller hamlet and 14 households in the larger

hamlet.

Once the sample size is determined, the actual households for interviewed need to be selected. In

order to do this, first the gap number will be calculated.

Gap number = total number of households in the selected hamlet divided by the number of

households to be selected:

Total no. of HHs

Total no. of households to be

selected Gap number

H1 35 = 17185

35= 3.21 = 3

H2 150 = 17185

150= 13.78 =14

Total 185 17 = 17

185 = 10.88 = 11

In each hamlet, household selection will be done starting with 11th household every 12th household

(keeping an interval of 11) will be selected for interview.

Final Report: Baseline Study - ASA India Baseline Study-Bihar-2012-13.pdfFinal Report: Baseline...

Documents

Transcript of Final Report: Baseline Study - ASA India Baseline Study-Bihar-2012-13.pdfFinal Report: Baseline...