Problems and Prospects of Oilseeds Production in … Acknowledgements The study on “Problems and...

AAEERRCC RREEPPOORRTT 114488

Problems and Prospects of Oilseeds Production in Gujarat

Special Reference to Groundnut

Mrutyunjay Swain

Agro-Economic Research Centre For the states of Gujarat and Rajasthan

(Sponsored by the Ministry of Agriculture, Govt. of India)

Sardar Patel University,

Vallabh Vidyanagar, Dist. Anand, Gujarat

April 2013

AAEERRCC RREEPPOORRTT 114488

Problems and Prospects of Oilseeds Production in Gujarat:

Special Reference to Groundnut

Mrutyunjay Swain

Report submitted to the Ministry of Agriculture, Government of India,

New Delhi


(Sponsored by the Ministry of Agriculture, Govt. of India)

Sardar Patel University, Vallabh Vidyanagar, Dist. Anand, Gujarat

April 2013

AERC Report No. 148

© Agro-Economic Research Centre, Vallabh Vidyanagar 388120, Dist. Anand, Gujarat, India.

Prepared by

Mrutyunjay Swain

Research Officer

Research Team

Dr. Mrutyunjay Swain, Research Officer

Mrs. Kalpana Kapadia, Research Associate Mr. Manish Kant Ojha, Research Associate

Mr. Natawar Chauhan, Research Fellow Mr. Himanshu Parmer, Research Fellow

Published by

The Director Agro-Economic Research Centre For the states of Gujarat and Rajasthan (Sponsored by Ministry of Agriculture, Govt. of India)

H.M. Patel Institute of Rural Development, Opp. Nandalaya Temple,

Post Box No. 24, Sardar Patel University, Vallabh Vidyanagar 388120, Dist. Anand, Gujarat.

Ph. No. +91-2692-230106, 230799; Mobile- 09822437451; 7383554616

Fax- +91-2692-233106 Email: [email protected]; [email protected]

Published in April 2013

Printed At: Gramoddhar Mudranalaya, Vallabh Vidyanagar- 388 120, Dist. Anand, Gujarat.

i

Foreword Gujarat plays a pivotal role in oilseed production in the country. Oilseeds area and

production in the state constitute about 10.8 per cent and 14.5 per cent respectively in

India. Oilseeds are usually seen as the primary cash crop in Gujarat. The diverse agro-

ecological conditions in the state are favourable for growing oilseeds. A wide range of

oilseed crops is grown in different agro-climatic regions of the state. Among the oilseeds,

groundnut is the most important crop produced in the state. The state is the largest

producer of groundnut and castor and the second largest producer of sesame in the

country. The state has increased the oilseeds production mainly through increase in

yield since a long time. The growth performance of these crops in the state had been

prone to various kinds of risk over time and across the agro-climate regions. Several

biotic, abiotic, technological, institutional, and socio-economic constraints inhibit

exploitation of the yield potential of crops and need to be addressed. Rising input prices,

timely availability of good quality inputs, insufficient extension services have potential

negative effects on the farmers in the state.

This study on problems and prospects of oilseeds production in Gujarat is a part of national

level coordinated study which was coordinated by Centre for Management in Agriculture, IIM

Ahmedabad. This report analyzes the performance and potential of oilseeds sector in

Gujarat and identifies the major constraints facing the sector in the state. The study uses

both primary data and the secondary data collected from various published sources. On

the basis of the findings, policy relevant suggestions have been made for improvement

in agricultural policies and practices. I am thankful to Dr Mrutyunjay Swain and his

research team for putting in a lot of efforts to complete this excellent piece of work.

I also thank the Ministry of Agriculture, Government of India for the unstinted

cooperation and support. I hope this report will be useful for those who are interested in

understanding the problems and prospects of agriculture sector in state of Gujarat.

Agro-Economic Research Centre For the states of Gujarat and Rajasthan (Sponsored by Ministry of Agriculture, Govt. of India)

Sardar Patel University, Vallabh Vidyanagar 388120, Dist. Anand, Gujarat, India

S. S. Kalamkar Director

iii

Acknowledgements

The study on “Problems and Prospects of Oilseeds Production in Gujarat: Special Reference

to Groundnut” has been carried out at the Agro-Economic Research Centre, S.P. University,

Vallabh Vidyanagar, as suggested and sponsored by the Ministry of Agriculture, Government

of India, New Delhi.

I am extremely thankful to our Director Dr. S. S. Kalamkar for providing administrative

and intellectual support for undertaking this study. I am also thankful to him for his valuable

comments on the draft which has helped to enrich the study. I thank our Honorary Advisor

Dr. Mahesh T. Pathak and Deputy Director Dr. R. A. Dutta for their useful suggestions for

further improvement in the report.

I express my sincere gratitude to Ministry of Agriculture, Government of India and

State Government Departments for providing latest statistical information for inclusion in this

document. I am grateful to B.S. Bhandari, Advisor, Ministry of Agriculture and Mrs. A.

Sebastian, Deputy Economic Advisor, Ministry of Agriculture for their encouragement and

cooperation at every stage of the study. I register my sincere thanks to Prof. Vijay Paul

Sharma, Centre for Management in Agriculture, IIM Ahmedabad, who as a coordinator of the

study, provided necessary intellectual support as and when required. I thank the research

team at our Centre for their assistance in data collection and tabulation as required for the

study. I am thankful to all administrative staff and other support staff for providing excellent

support during the study. I thank all other agencies/ individuals who have provided directly or

indirectly the valuable help and guidance for preparing this report.

Agro-Economic Research Centre For the states of Gujarat and Rajasthan (Sponsored by Ministry of Agriculture, Govt. of India)

Sardar Patel University, Vallabh Vidyanagar 388120, Dist. Anand, Gujarat, India

Mrutyunjay Swain

Project Leader

v

Contents

Foreword i

Acknowledgements iii

List of Tables vii

List of Figures and Maps x

List of Annexure Tables xi

List of Abbreviations

Chapter I Introduction

xiii

1

1.0 Introduction

1

1.1 Role of Agriculture in State Economy 2

1.2 Importance of Oilseeds in State Agriculture 6

1.3 Problems in Oilseeds Production 9

1.4 Objectives of the Study 12

1.5 Organization of the Report 12

Chapter II Coverage, Sampling Design and Methodology 15

2.1 Coverage and Sampling Design 15

2.2 Conceptual Framework and Theoretical Models of the Study

18

Chapter III Overview of Oilseeds Sector: Current Status and Growth Behaviour

25

3.1 Cropping Pattern Changes in the State: Area Shifts in Major Crops and Crop Groups

25

3.2 Factors Underlying Changes in Cropping Pattern 31

3.3 Growth Trends in Area, Production and Yield of Major Oilseeds

32

3.4 Variability in Area, Production and Yield of Major Oilseed (Groundnut) vis-à-vis Competing Crop(Cotton) 44

3.5 Sources of Growth in Output of Oilseeds in the State 55

vi

3.6 Variability in Monthly/Annual Prices of Major Oilseeds in the State

59

Chapter IV Problems and Prospects of Oilseeds Production: An Empirical Analysis

63

4.1 Introduction 63

4.2 Characteristics of Sample Households 64

4.3 Production, Retention and Marketed Surplus Pattern of Oilseeds

74

4.4 Comparative Economics/Profitability of Oilseeds vis-à-vis Competing Crops

76

4.5 Access to Improved Technology and Markets for Oilseeds

83

4.6 Marketing Pattern of Oilseeds 84

4.7 Sources of Technology and Market Information 86

4.8 Determinants of Oilseed Production and Acreage Allocation

87

4.9 Perceived Constraints in Cultivation of Oilseeds 90

4.10 Suggestions for Improving Production and Productivity of Oilseeds

92

Chapter V Concluding Remarks and Policy Suggestions 97

5.1 Introduction 97

5.2 Summary of Findings 97

5.3 Conclusions and Policy Implications 114

References 119

Annexure Tables 123

Appendix I : Comments on the Report

151

Appendix I : Action Taken on the Comments 153

vii

List of Tables

Table No. Title Page

1.1 Sectoral Composition of Net State Domestic Product(NSDP) at constant (2004-05)price

4

1.2 Major Oilseeds Producing States in the Country in TE 2007-08

7

1.3 Change in Cropping Pattern in Gujarat 8

2.1 Major Oilseeds Producing States in TE 2007-08 16

2.2 Selected Crops, States and Sample Size 16

2.3 Criteria for Selection of Study Districts 17

2.4 Details of the Sample Size Distribution across Caste and Villages in Study Districts of Gujarat

18

3.1 Total Cropped Area under Selected Crops in Gujarat: TE 1983-84 to TE 2009-10

26

3.2A Cultivated Area and Irrigated Area: (TE 1983-84 to TE 2009-10)

27

3.2B Changes in Gross Cropped Area: Area Expansion and Crop Intensification Effects: TE 1983-84 to TE 2009-10

27

3.3 Crop- wise Net Changes in Area in Absolute and Relative Terms for Major Food Grains Crops in the Gujarat State: TE 1993-94 and TE 2009-10.

29

3.4 Trends in Average Area, Production, and Yield of Oilseeds in Gujarat

34

3.5 Changing Shares of Kharif and Rabi Oilseeds in Major Oilseeds Producing Districts in Gujarat: TE 1993-94 and TE 2009-10

38

3.6 Share of Selected Oilseeds: TE 2009-10 39

3.7 Share of Major Districts in Oilseeds Acreage in Gujarat: TE 1993-94 and TE 2009-10

41

3.8 Share of Major Districts in Oilseeds Production in Gujarat: TE 1993-94 and TE 2009-10

42

3.9 Irrigated Area under Oilseeds in the State: TE 2001-02 and 2003-04

43

viii

3.10 Trends in Average Area, Production, and Yield of Major Oilseed (Groundnut) Vis-A-Vis Major Competing Crop (Cotton) in the State

44

3.11 Share of Major Districts in Area under Groundnut in Gujarat

47

3.12 Share of Major Districts in Production of Groundnut in Gujarat

48

3.13 Share of Groundnut Irrigated Area under Groundnut and Gross Irrigated Area of the State

50

3.14 Classification of Districts according to Growth in Area under Groundnut in Gujarat

52

3.15 Classification of Districts according to Growth in Groundnut Production in Gujarat

53

3.16 Classification of Districts according to Productivity Levels and Growth in Productivity of Groundnut Gujarat

54

3.17 Decomposition of Output Growth of Main Oilseed Crop (Groundnut) and Competing Crop (Cotton) in the Selected Districts of Gujarat

56

3.18 Growth in Input Use for Oilseeds in the State 58

3.19 Variation in Annual Farm Harvest Price and Minimum Support Price in Gujarat

59

3.20 Average Wholesale Price of Main Oilseed Crop (Groundnut) in TE 2012

60

3.21 Average Wholesale Price of Main Oilseed Crop (Groundnut) in TE 2006

61

3.22

3.23

Average Wholesale Price of Competitive Crop (Cotton) in TE 2012 Average Wholesale Price of Competitive Crop (Cotton) in TE 2006

61

62

4.1 Distribution of Villages and Sample Households 63

4.2 Socio-economic Status of Sample Households 64

4.3 Land Ownership Pattern of Sample Households 66

4.4 Terms of Lease 67

4.5 Irrigated Area by Sources 68

4.6 Cropping Pattern 70

4.7 Average Yield of Major Crops on Sample Households

73

4.8 Total Oilseeds Production, Retention and Sale Pattern

75

4.9 Profitability of Major Oilseeds and Competing Crops 77

ix

4.10 Profitability vis-à-vis Risks in Oilseeds Production 79

4.11 Yield Risk and Price Risk of Main Oilseed and Competing Crop

79

4.12 Yield Gap Analysis 81

4.13

4.14

Technology Gap (TG) in Groundnut Cultivation Prevailing at Farmers' Level Access To Improved Technology and Markets

82

83

4.15A Sale Pattern of Major Oilseeds ( Groundnut )

85

4.15B Sale Pattern of Cotton (Main Competing Crop) 85

4.16 Sources of Technology and Market Information 87

4.17 Description and Results of Estimation of Production Function ( Groundnut and Cotton)

89

4.18 Description and Results of Estimation of Short-Run Area Response Function for Groundnut

90

4.19 Constraints in Cultivation of Oilseeds 91

4.20 Suggestions for Improving Production and Productivity of Oilseeds

93

x

List of Figures and Maps

Figure No./Map

No.

Figures and Maps Page

1.1 Sectoral Composition of NSDP at Current Price in Gujarat (2005-06 to 2010-11)

5

1.2 Changing Shares of Major Oilseeds in Total Production in India between TE1998-99 and TE 2008-09

6

3.1 Growth in Area (000 ha), Yield (Kg/ha) and Production (000 tonnes) of Total Oilseeds in Gujarat (1951-52 to 2009-10)

33

3.2 Changing Share of Districts in Area under Oilseeds in Gujarat

37

3.3 Changing Share of Districts in Oilseeds Production in Gujarat

37

3.4 Growth in Area („000 ha), Yield (Kg/ha) and Production („000 tonnes) of Groundnut in Gujarat (1951-52 to 2009-10)

45

3.5 Growth in Area (000 ha), Yield (Kg/ha) and Production (000 tonnes) of Cotton in Gujarat (1951-52 to 2009-10)

45

3.6 Changing share of districts in Area under Groundnut in Gujarat

49

3.7 Changing Share of Districts in Groundnut Production in Gujarat

49

Map 1.1 Crop Distribution in Gujarat (Source: mapsof india.com) 7

xi

List of Annexure Tables

Annexure No.

Annexure Page

1 Salient Features of Agro Climatic Zones of Gujarat 123

2 Cropping Pattern in Gujarat 124

3 Net Irrigated Area, Gross Irrigated Area, Net Sown Area, Gross Sown Area in Gujarat

125

4.1 Cropping Pattern at Districts Level in Gujarat (1991-92) 126






5 Area, Production and Yield of Groundnut, Cotton and Total Oilseeds of Gujarat

132

6.1 Area, Production and Yield of Different Oilseeds at Districts Level in Gujarat (1991-92)

133

6.2 Area, Production and Yield at Districts Level in Gujarat (1992-93)

134


135


136


137


138

7.1 Irrigated Area under Total Oilseeds in Gujarat 139

7.2 Irrigated Area under Groundnut in Gujarat 140

7.3 Gross Irrigated Area in Gujarat 141

7.4 Total Groundnut Area in Gujarat 142

xii

8.1 District wise Area under Groundnut in Gujarat 143

8.2 District wise Production of Groundnut in Gujarat 144

8.3 District wise yield of groundnut in Gujarat 145

9 Area, Production and Yield of Main Crops in Gujarat 146

10 District wise Average Annual Rainfall 149

11 Fertilizer Consumption in Selected Districts of Gujarat 150

xiii

List of Abbreviations

AMDP - Accelerated Maize Development Programme

APMC - Agricultural Produce Marketing Committee

ATC - Advance Technology Centre

ATMA - Agricultural Technology Management Agency

CAGR - Compound Annual Growth rate

CV - Coefficient of Variation

DMIC - Delhi Mumbai Industrial Corridor (DMIC)

FYP - Five Year Plan

FHP - Farm Harvest Price

F&V - Fruits and Vegetables

GCA - Gross Cropped Area

GIA - Gross Irrigated Area

GDP - Gross Domestic Product

GSDP - Gross State Domestic Product

GoI - Government of India

GoG - Government of Gujarat

Ha/ha - Hectare

HYV - High Yielding Variety

ICAR - Indian Council of Agricultural Research

ISOPOM - Integrated Scheme on Oilseeds, Pulses, Oil Palm and Maize

KVK - Krishi Vighyan Kendra

MSP - Minimum Support Price

NAFED - National Agricultural Cooperative Marketing Federation of India Ltd

NPDP - National Pulses Development programme

NFSM - National Food Security Mission

NHM - National Horticulture Mission

NIA - Net Irrigated Area

NSA - Net Sown Area

NSDP - Net State Domestic Product

NSSO - National Sample Survey Organization

xiv

NOA - Net Operated Area

OCI - Oilseed Constraint Index

OGL - Open General Licenses

OPDP - Oil Palm Development Programme

OLS - Ordinary Least Square

OPP - Oilseed Production Programme

RBD - Refined, Bleached and Deodorised

R&M - Rapeseed & Mustard

SAU - State Agricultural University

SSP - Sardar Sarovar Project

TE - Triennium Ending

TMO - Technology Mission on Oilseeds

WHS - Water Harvesting Structure

1

CHAPTER I

INTRODUCTION

1.0 Introduction

The State of Gujarat plays a prominent role in oilseed production in India. Oilseeds

are important next only to food grains in terms of area, production and value in the

state. Oilseeds area and production in the state constitute about 10.8 per cent and

14.5 per cent respectively in India. The diverse agro-ecological conditions in the state

are favourable for growing oilseeds. A wide range of oilseed crops is grown in

different agro-climatic regions of the state. Among the oilseeds, groundnut is the most

important crop produced in the state. The state is the largest producer of groundnut

and second largest producer of sesamum in the country. The area and production of

groundnut in the state constitute about 30.9 per cent and 37.1 per cent respectively in

India. The state is also the largest producer of castor in India. The productivity of

castor in the state is the highest not only in India but also in world. Though the state

ranks first in area and production of groundnut in India, the average productivity is

relatively low as groundnut is mostly grown under rainfed condition. Because of high

productivity under assured irrigation, groundnut cultivation in summer season is

gaining popularity in the state. There has been significant increase in production of

oilseeds in the state during last three decades mainly due to increase in yield. The

area under total oilseeds has been stagnated over the years. In fact, the area under

total oilseeds and the main oilseed (groundnut) has declined from 2936.9 thousand

ha and 1963.9 thousand ha in TE1993-94 to 2803.9 thousand ha and 1862.4

thousand ha in TE 2009-10 respectively. Only there has been a marginal growth in

area under oilseeds in the state during 1980s.

At the national level, the domestic achievements in oilseeds production are

unparallel when we observe that six times increase in oilseeds production during the

period of 1950–2011 was achieved under predominantly rainfed (72%) agro-

ecological conditions, which is even higher than the production increase in total food

grains during the corresponding period (Hegde, 2009). Though the growth in oilseeds

area and production at national level is impressive, there is still a huge demand-

supply gap in oilseeds and vegetable oils in the country. Since there is limited scope

2

to bring additional area exclusively under oilseeds as the demand for land for other

purposes and for producing other remunerative crops will continue to rise due to

population increase and rising living standards, it is crucial to search for newer

approaches to expand their cultivation under different cropping/farming situations. In

this context, the present study being a part of an all-India level coordinated study

attempts to analyze the prospects and constraints in cultivation of the edible oilseeds

with a special reference to groundnut and to suggest policy options to increase

oilseeds production and productivity in the State of Gujarat.

1.1 Role of Agriculture in State Economy

Gujarat economy is the one of the fastest growing economies in India. The state has

adopted a novel pattern of progress with the strategic development of the key sectors

like energy, industry and agriculture for which it has achieved ambitious double digit

growth rate since 10th Five Year Plan. The state constitutes 6.2 per cent of total

geographical area and 5.0 per cent of total population of India. About 3.5 crore people

of the state live in rural areas forming about 57.4 per cent of its total population (GoI,

2011). About 70.5 per cent of total workers in the state are rural based. Agriculture

continues to be the primary occupation for the majority of rural people in the state.

About 51.8 per cent of total workers are cultivators and agricultural labourers. Thus,

the agriculture in the state has been a major source of labour absorption. Moreover,

agriculture provides indirect employment to large portion of population in agro-based

occupations. Thus, prosperity and well being of people in the state are closely linked

with agriculture and allied activities. The state is divided into 7 agro-climatic zones

based on the characteristics of their agriculture and climate (See Annexure 1). The

State is endowed with abundant natural resources in terms of varied soil, climatic

conditions and diversified cropping pattern suitable for agricultural activities.

Agriculture in Gujarat is characterized by natural disparities such as (1)

drought prone areas and lowest annual rainfall amounting to only about 345 mm at

the North West end of the states; (2) assured and highest annual rainfall amounting to

about 2500 mm at the South-East end; (3) well drained deep fertile soils of central

Gujarat and shallow and undulating soils with poor fertility in hilly rocky areas in the

east; (4) moisture starved degraded areas and low lying waterlogged and saline

areas; (5) areas prone to frequent scarcity and areas prone to frequent cyclone or

floods or locusts (GoG, 2012a). Output of agricultural sector in Gujarat has been

3

largely dependent on south-west monsoon. The state frequently experiences erratic

behaviour of the south-west monsoon, which can partly be attributed to geographic

situation of the state.

Out of total reporting area of 18.8 million ha, 11.4 million ha (59.2%) is covered

under cultivation. About two-third of the area of the state is under arid and semi-arid

tropics, where the risk and instability in agricultural production and productivity usually

remain quite high. However, these arid and semi-arid areas of the State have clocked

high and steady growth at 9.6 per cent per year in agricultural state domestic product

since 1999-2000, whereas the GDP from agriculture and allied sectors has increased

by just 2.9 per cent at national level during the same period. The Gujarat government

has aggressively pursued an innovative agriculture development programme by

liberalizing markets, inviting private capital, reinventing agricultural extension,

improving roads and other infrastructure (Shah et al., 2009; Kumar et al., 2010,

Dholakia, 2010). The mass-based water harvesting and farm power reforms in dry

Saurashtra and Kachchh, and North Gujarat have helped energise Gujarat’s

agriculture (Shah et al., 2009). These semi-arid regions have outperformed the canal

irrigated South and Central Gujarat. The shift in agriculture to 8 per cent growth rate

during last decade was mainly responsible for the shift of the overall state economy to

higher growth path with10.6 per cent annual growth rate (Dholakia, 2010).

Agriculture and allied sector plays an important role in State’s economy.

Though its contribution in NSDP has gradually declined from around 50 per cent

during 1970s to around 21.6 per cent (at current prices) and 15 per cent (at constant

2004-05 prices) in 2010-11 (Table 1.1), agriculture yet forms the backbone of

development. More than half of the working population in Gujarat is still dependant on

agricultural activities for their livelihood. Thus, a higher priority to agriculture will

achieve the goals of reducing poverty and malnutrition as well as of inclusive growth.

Since agriculture forms the resource base for a number of agro-based

industries and agro-services, it would be more meaningful to view agriculture not as

farming alone but as a holistic value chain, which includes farming, wholesaling,

warehousing, processing, and retailing. Agriculture which forms the source of

livelihood of the majority in the State is largely dependent on rainfall. About 42.1 per

cent of the net sown area is irrigated in 2009-10. Since the rainfall amount is highly

erratic that varies widely across the different parts of the State, the expansion of

4

irrigation provisions and efficient water management can further strengthen the

agriculture sector in the State.

Table 1.1 Sectoral Composition of Net State Domestic Product(NSDP) at Constant (2004-05) Prices

(Rupees in Crore)

Year Agriculture Industries Services Total NSDP

Annual Growth Rate

(%)

Per Capita Income

(Rs)

Agriculture including animal

husbandry

Total Agriculture

sector

Manufacturing

Total Industries sector

2005-06 31896 43702 46822 63011 90557 197270 14.5 36102

(16.2) (22.2) (23.7) (31.9) (45.9) (100.0)

2006-07 31372 43256 52472 69900 100798 213954 8.5 38568

(14.7) (20.2) (24.5) (32.7) (47.1) (100.0)

2007-08 34750 46581 56893 79475 113197 239253 11.8 42498

(14.5) (19.5) (23.8) (33.2) (47.3) (100.0)

2008-09 30683 42085 58361 85090 122305 249480 4.3 43685

(12.3) (16.9) (23.4) (34.1) (49.0) (100.0)

2009-10 (P) 29816 41352 67871 100918 138659 280929 12.6 48511

(10.6) (14.7) (24.2) (35.9) (49.4) (100.0)

2010-11(Q) 34921 46291 74092 110010 153108 309409 10.1 52708

(11.3) (15.0) (23.9) (35.6) (49.5) (100.0)

Notes: (1)The figures shown in brackets denote percentage to NSDP (2) P- Provisional Estimates, Q- Quick Estimates. Source : GoG (2011a)

Gujarat’s economy has undergone considerable transformation in the recent

past in terms of growing manufacturing and service sectors, with the reducing share

of agriculture (including livestock) in the state’s NSDP. The services sector

contributes around 49.5 per cent in NSDP at constant (2004-05) prices followed by

the industry and agriculture sectors with 35.6 per cent and 15.0 per cent respectively

in the year 2010-11 (see Table 1.1). Over the last six years (2005-06 to 2010-11), the

share of agriculture, industry and services sectors in the total NSDP at constant

(2004-05) prices has changed from 22.2 per cent to 15.0 per cent, from 31.9 per cent

to 35.9 per cent and 45.9 per cent to 49.4 per cent, respectively. Thus, there has

been significant reduction in relative share of the agriculture sector in total NSDP

during last six years in Gujarat, while the contribution of service sector is constantly

growing. This indicates a shift from the traditional agrarian economy towards a

service dominated one. More importantly, this decrease in agriculture’s contribution to

NSDP has not been accompanied by a matching reduction in the share of agriculture

in employment. Some 11 million workers continue to be engaged in farming, out of

which a majority are small or marginal farmers. Increasing agricultural productivity

(water, land, labour) is critical for the future of the sector in Gujarat.

5

Though the relative share of agriculture and allied sectors to NSDP has

declined significantly, it may be noted from Figure 1.1 that the absolute contribution of

agriculture and allied sector has constantly increased. Agricultural NSDP at current

prices has been more than doubled from Rs 46503 crore in 2005-06 to Rs 95268

crore in 2011-12.

The analysis on change in cropping pattern in Gujarat reveals that the share of

cotton and wheat crops has significantly increased during last two decades. The

growth of horticultural crops has also contributed considerably towards the change in

cropping pattern in the state. The state occupied 4th, 6th and 3rd position at all India

level in production of fruit, vegetable and spices, respectively (GoG, 2010). The area

under horticultural crops in the state was 14.04 lakh ha constituting about 9.8 per cent

of GCA in 2010. The agricultural productivity of some crops in the state is highest in

India as well as in the world. The productivity of mustard, castor, cotton, onion and

potato in the state is highest in India. The productivity of groundnut, bajra and banana

is second highest in India. The reliance on livestock has also increased because of

risky rainfed agriculture in some parts of the state.

Figure 1.1. Sectoral Composition of NSDP at Current Price in Gujarat (2005-06 to 2010-11)

0

50000

100000

150000

200000

2005-06 2006-07 2007-08 2008-09 2009-10 2010-11

46503.054051.0

61956.0 61971.073060.0

95268.0

6673378702

93299106264

124493144992

93204107980

126324

146250

170460200682

Agriculture and allied Industry Service

Ru

pee

s in

cro

re

6

1.2. Importance of Oilseeds in State Agriculture

A wide range of oilseed crops is grown in different agro-climatic regions of India.

Among the oilseeds, groundnut which was the most important crop in TE1998-99 in

the country has lost its prime position to soybean in TE2008-09. Soybean is largely

grown in Madhya Pradesh, Maharashtra and Rajasthan, accounting for about 95 per

cent of total production in the country (Figure 1.2 & Table 1.2). The second most

important oilseed crop is groundnut, which is grown mainly in Gujarat, Andhra

Pradesh, Tamil Nadu, Rajasthan, Karnataka and Maharashtra. Gujarat, Andhra

Pradesh, Tamil Nadu and Karnataka together account for 77 per cent of the area and

almost 75 per cent of the production of groundnut in India (Mehrotra, 2011). The third

major oilseed crop, rapeseed-mustard, is grown in Rajasthan, Uttar Pradesh,

Haryana, Madhya Pradesh, Gujarat and West Bengal. These three crops account for

about 87 per cent of the total oilseeds production in the country. The other edible

oilseeds are sunflower, sesamum and safflower. Karnataka, Andhra Pradesh and

Maharashtra are the major sunflower producing states while West Bengal, Gujarat

and Rajasthan are major sesamum producing states.

Figure 1.2 Changing Shares of Major Oilseeds in Total Production in India between

TE1998-99 and TE 2008-09

Source: Sharma (2012)

Groundnut 35.1%

Soybean 26.6%

R&M 24.9%

Sunflower 4.4%

Castor seed 3.6% Seasmu

m 2.5%

Safflower 1.2% Linseed

1.2%

Niger seed 0.6%

TE 1998-99

Soybean 34.2%

Groundnut 26.9%

R&M 26.1%

Sunflower 5.0%

Castor seed 3.4%

Seasmum 2.5%

Safflower 0.8%

Linseed 0.6%

Nigerseed 0.4%

TE 2008-09

7

Table 1.2 Major Oilseeds Producing States in the Country in TE 2007-08

Crop Major producers

Groundnut Gujarat (37.1%), Andhra Pradesh (21.7%), Tamil Nadu (13.6%), Rajasthan (7.5%), Karnataka (7.0%)

Rapeseed-Mustard

Rajasthan (48.6%), Uttar Pradesh (13.8%), Haryana (12.4%), Madhya Pradesh (10.2%), Gujarat (4.6%)

Soybean Madhya Pradesh (59.1%), Maharashtra (27.8%), Rajasthan (8.1%)

Sunflower Karnataka (42.8%), Andhra Pradesh (28.2%), Maharashtra (13.4%)

Safflower Maharashtra (68.5%), Karnataka (25.7%), Andhra Pradesh (4.2%)

Sesamum West Bengal (24.6%), Gujarat (17.6%), Rajasthan (13.8%), Madhya Pradesh (10.5%), Karnataka (9.1%), Uttar Pradesh (5.2%), Tamil Nadu (4.2%), AP (4.2%)

Oil Palm Andhra Pradesh (85.7%), Kerala (10.7%), Karnataka (2.0%)

Note: The figures in parentheses are the percentages of total oilseeds production in India

Source: Sharma (2012)

Map 1: Crop Distribution in Gujarat

The major crops grown in different parts of Gujarat are bajra, wheat, jowar,

maize, cotton, groundnut, castor, rapeseed-mustard, fodder and horticultural crops

(Map 1.1). As per the cropping pattern in Gujarat, total cereals, oilseeds, pulses,

horticultural crops and fodder crops account for about 30.2 per cent, 23.4 per cent,

Source: www.mapsof india.com

8

6.7 per cent, 10.6 per cent and 8.4 per cent of GCA, respectively in 2010-11(Table

1.3). Among the oilseeds, groundnut (14.4%), caster (3.7%), rapeseed-mustard

(1.7%), sesamum (1.9%) were the major ones in 2010-11. During the overall period

(1990-91 to 2010-11), the share of the area under total oilseeds, total cereals, total

pulses and total food grains has declined; whereas the share of cotton and

horticultural crops has increased during last two decades. Though the share of the

area under total oilseeds has decreased from 26.5 per cent in 1990-91 to 23.4 per

cent in 2010-11, the absolute area under the oilseeds in the state has increased from

2818 thousand ha in 1990-91 to 3110 thousand ha in 2010-11. The share of area

under cotton, which is considered as a main competing crop of major oilseed

(groundnut) in the state, has significantly increased from 9.8 per cent in 1990-91 to

19.7 per cent in 2010-11.

Table 1.3: Change in Cropping Pattern in Gujarat

Major crops

1990-91 2000-01 2010-11

Area (000' ha)

% of GCA

Area (000' ha)

% of GCA

Area (000' ha)

% of GCA

Rice 623.0 (5.9) 583.5 (5.6) 808.0 (6.1)

Bajra 1394.3 (13.1) 989.2 (9.4) 873.0 (6.6)

Wheat 608.7 (5.7) 286.1 (2.7) 1589.0 (11.9)

Maize 366.2 (3.4) 382.9 (3.6) 566.0 (4.3)

Total Cereals 3799.8 (35.7) 2435.6 (23.2) 4014.4 (30.2)

Tur 428.9 (4.0) 317.9 (3.0) 277.0 (2.1)

Total Pulses 948.7 (8.9) 634.6 (6.0) 890.1 (6.7)

Total Foodgrains 4748.5 (44.7) 3070.2 (29.2) 4904.5 (36.9)

Seasmum 237.0 (2.2) 356.9 (3.4) 251.1 (1.9)

Groundnut 1826.1 (17.2) 1744.8 (16.6) 1922.0 (14.4)

Rape and Mustard 348.6 (3.3) 186.6 (1.8) 222.7 (1.7)

Caster 384.9 (3.6) 458.6 (4.4) 490.6 (3.7)

Total Oilseeds 2818 (26.5) 2746.9 (26.2) 3110.0 (23.4)

Cotton 1041.6 (9.8) 1615.4 (15.4) 2623.0 (19.7)

Tobacco 141.6 (1.3) 87.8 (0.8) 148.0 (1.1)

Horticultural crops 337.4 (3.2) 593.34 (5.7) 1404.0 (10.6)

Fodder crops 1325.1 (12.5) 1371.1 (13.1) 1111.8 (8.4)

Other crops 222.6 (2.1) 1012.3 (9.6) 0.0 (0.0)

All Crops 10634.8 (100.0) 10497.0 (100.0) 13301.3 (100.0)

Notes: (1) GCA for 2010 is provisional since the area under other crops is assumed to be zero due to unavailability. (2) Area under fodder crops in 2006-07 has been taken as proxy for the same in 2010-11. (3) Figures in parentheses are the percentages of GCA. Sources: (1) GoG (2011c) (2) Season and Crop Reports, Various Years, Government of Gujarat

9

Oilseeds are usually seen as the primary cash crop in Gujarat. The state

claims first position in the production of groundnut in India with a share of 37.1 per

cent (see Table 1.2). In absolute terms, the area under oilseeds especially under

groundnut has increased over the years. The area and production of groundnut in the

state was highest of 19.22 lakh ha and 33.66 lakh tonnes, respectively during 2010-

11. Castor seed and sesamum are other major oilseeds produced in the state. The

state also claims first position in area, production and yield of castor. The area (4.91

lakh ha) and production (9.86 lakh tones) of castor seeds in Gujarat constituted

respectively 55.8 per cent and 73.0 per cent of total area and production of castor in

India during 2010-11. The yield of caster seeds in the state during the corresponding

year was highest of 2008 kg/ha which was much higher than the national average of

1534 kg/ha.

Completion of Sardar Sarovar Project on a war footing basis, consolidating the

gains from the check dam program, expediting the spread of micro irrigation have

helped in further diversification towards high value crops like oilseeds in the state

(Gulati et al., 2009). Better adoption of technology in agriculture has generated a

positive impact in the state through increase in the yield per hectare. The irrigated

area as a percentage of the total area under oilseeds also increased significantly

during last three decades. Furthermore, the use of fertilizer, plant protection and

agronomic practices has considerably increased during last couple of decades that

has helped in oilseeds production in the state.

1.3. Problems in Oilseeds Production

This section analyses some specific problems faced by the oilseeds sector in the

country and as well as in the state of Gujarat. As discussed earlier, oilseeds sector

has played a prominent role in agricultural development in the country. India was self-

sufficient in edible oilseeds and oils till the mid 1960s and was a substantial export

earner through export of oilseeds, extractions and edible oils. With stagnation in

production as well as rise in population, the oilseed production fell short of pits

demand in the early seventies. By the mid 1980s, edible oils was the largest import

item, constituting about 30 per cent of the total supply, next only to petroleum

products despite the fact that India had the world’s second largest area under

oilseeds (Sharma, 2012). This was a matter of serious concern for the Government

and a decision was taken to achieve self-sufficiency in edible oilseeds by 1990s. The

10

initial strategy to overcome stagnant oilseed production was to promote technological

change in oilseed production and processing through centrally sponsored schemes.

In May 1986, Government of India launched Technology Mission on Oilseeds (TMO)

to increase production of oilseed, reduce imports and achieve self sufficiency in

edible oil. Oil Palm Development Programme (OPDP) was launched during 1991-92

with a focus on area expansion in Andhra Pradesh, Karnataka, Tamil Nadu, Orissa,

Gujarat and Goa. During the Tenth Plan Integrated Scheme on Oilseeds, Pulses, Oil

Palm and Maize (ISOPOM) was implemented by converging earlier schemes like

Oilseeds Production Programme (OPP), Oil Palm Development Programme (OPDP),

National Pulses Development Programme (NPDP) and Accelerated Maize

Development Programme (AMDP). From April 2010 pulses component of ISOPOM

has been merged with NFSM-Pulses to intensify efforts for production of pulses.

As a result of major initiatives in mid1980s and protection to domestic

industry from imports up to early 1990s, there was a significant progress in the

production of oilseeds from mid -1980s. Between TE 1985-86 and TE 1993-94,

production of oilseeds increased from 12.1 million tonnes to over 20 million tonnes,

largely due to improved yields. Average yields increased from 644 kg/ha to772 kg/ha

during the corresponding period. Increase in area also contributed to higher

production of oilseed in the country. Area under oilseeds increased from 18.9 million

ha in TE 1985-86 to about 26 million ha in TE 1993-94. However, in pursuance of the

policy of liberalization and globalization in the early 1990s, there were progressive

changes in the trade policy in respect of edible oils. Edible oils, which were in the

negative list of imports, were first decanalized partially in April 1994 with permission

to import edible vegetable palmolein under Open General Licenses (OGL) at 65 per

cent duty. This was followed by enlarging the basket of oils under OGL in March

1995, when all edible oils (except coconut oil, palm kernel oil, RBD palm stearin),

were brought under OGL import. With decanalization, imports of edible oils under

OGL started in 1994-95 and increased substantially during the subsequent years due

to reduction in import duty and removal of quantitative restrictions (QRs) and other

non-tariff barriers on all edible oils. Due to opening up of domestic markets, the

production of oilseeds in the country remained stagnant at about 20 million tonnes

during the 1990s but increased during the recent years and reached a level of about

27.9 million tonnes in TE 2010-11. The annual compound growth rate in oilseed

production was negative (-1.96%) between 1994-95 and 2000-01 but improved

11

significantly (6.85%) during the 2000s. The average productivity increased from 872

kg/ha in TE 2000-01 to 1042 kg/ha in TE 2010-11. However, the productivity levels of

oilseeds in the country are still very low compared to world average and other

countries. The yields remain low largely on account of dependence on dryland

farming. The production of oilseed has not been able to keep pace with the demand

for edible oils, which necessitated import of edible oils and India imports about half of

its edible oil requirement.

As far as the case of State of Gujarat is concerned, the major problems faced

by the oilseeds sector are more or less similar. Contrary to national scenario, the

state has increased the oilseeds production mainly through increase in yield since a

long time. Further expansion in area under oilseeds, further increase in yield levels of

oilseeds, reducing the levels of production risks, increase in irrigation coverage and

water use efficiency, stability in input prices and timely supply of quality inputs in

required quantity seem to play critical role in further development of oilseeds sector in

the state. Further expansion in area under oilseeds is only possible through more

adoption of oilseeds as inter crops and replacement of low remunerative crops. The

replacement of low remunerative crops is largely dependent on the increase in

irrigation coverage and irrigation efficiency. Near about 42.1 per cent of net sown

area and 44.3 per cent of GCA was irrigated during 2009-10. However, only 21.5

percent of total area under oilseeds was irrigated in Gujarat during 2003-04 (GoG,

2008). The irrigated area under groundnut was only 7.5 per cent during the

corresponding year in the state. Further development in micro level water resources,

rainwater harvesting and more adoption of micro irrigation systems provides ample

opportunity for increasing irrigation coverage in the state. Further expansion in

irrigation area is crucial for increase in area and production of oilseeds and other cash

crops in Rabi and summer season in the state.

Given the competing demands on agricultural land from various crops, the

production of oilseeds can be increased only if productivity is improved significantly

and farmers get remunerative and attractive prices in the state. The growth

performance of these crops in the state had been prone to various kinds of risk over

time and across the agro-climate regions because of the erratic rainfall behavior,

frequent drought occurrence in the state. Several biotic, abiotic, technological,

institutional, and socio-economic constraints inhibit exploitation of the yield potential

12

of crops and need to be addressed. Rising input prices, timely availability of good

quality inputs, insufficient extension services have potential negative effects on the

farmers in the state. Taking into account the changing policy environment, increasing

demand, concerns about slow growth in domestic production and rising imports, the

present study attempts to analyze performance and potential of oilseeds sector in

Gujarat and identify major problems or constraints facing the sector in the state.

1.4. Objectives of the Study

The specific objectives of the study are:

1. To examine trends and pattern of growth of different edible oilseeds over time and

across districts and identify the sources of growth in edible oilseeds output in the

State of Gujarat;

2. To determine the impact of price and non-price factors influencing the supply

response behavior and demand for edible oilseeds and oil in the state; and

3. To identify major constraints in the edible oilseed cultivation and suggest policy

options to increase oilseeds production and productivity in the state.

1.5. Organization of the Report

The present report is organized in five chapters. The first chapter discusses the role

of agriculture in economy of the state of Gujarat. The importance of oilseeds in the

state agriculture and problems in production of oilseeds in the state has been

discussed. Then the major objectives of the study have been stated followed by the

chapter scheme of the report.

The second chapter presents the methodology used for data collection and

data analysis. The coverage, sampling design and conceptual framework of the study

have been discussed in this chapter. The third chapter presents an overview of

oilseeds sector in the state that discussed the current status and growth behaviour of

area under oilseeds and its production and productivity. The factors underlying

changes in cropping pattern and the nature of variability in area, production and yield

of major oilseeds vis-à-vis competing crops during 1980s, 1990s and 2000s have

been examined in this chapter. The nature of variability in monthly/annual prices of

major oilseeds and edible oils in the state has also been discussed in this chapter.

The sources of output growth and input use for the main oilseed (groundnut), main

competing crop (cotton) and all oilseeds have also been analyzed in this chapter.

13

An empirical analysis of the problems and prospects of oilseeds production in

the state has been carried out with the help of primary level data in the fourth chapter.

The main features of the sample households including land ownership pattern,

cropping pattern have been analyzed. The pattern of production, retention and

marketed surplus of oilseeds has been examined and the comparative economics of

cultivation of oilseeds vis-à-vis competing crops have been analyzed. The extent of

yield gap and technology gap has been analyzed in this chapter. This chapter also

discusses the extent of access to improved technology and markets for oilseeds, the

marketing pattern of oilseeds and the sources of information on the technology and

market. The determinants of oilseed production and acreage allocation have been

examined by the use of appropriate regression models. The perceived constraints in

cultivation of oilseeds have been also analyzed in this chapter. The farmers’

suggestions for improving production and productivity of oilseeds in the study region

have also been presented in the chapter. The last chapter presents the summary,

concluding observations and policy implications of the study.

15

Chapter II Coverage, Sampling Design and

Methodology 2.1. Coverage and Sampling Design

The study was based on both primary and secondary data pertaining to edible

oilseeds, and competing crops in the state. In order to meet the first two objectives of

the study, the analysis of secondary data related to area, production and productivity

of oilseeds has been undertaken. In order to comprehend the behavior of the oilseeds

crops in the context of different policy regimes, the study has attempted a

disaggregated analysis of time series data covering different time periods. Apart from

a detailed crop-wise analysis of growth patterns and sources of growth of edible

oilseeds, the study has attempted to investigate the supply relations for major

oilseeds in the State. In order to identify major constraints in edible oilseed production

in the State, primary data from households growing oilseeds in the selected districts

were collected and analyzed.

It may be noted that the present study was a part of larger coordinated study

on Problems and prospects of oilseeds and oil palm production in India. The

multistate, purposive sampling method was used to select the states, districts, blocks

and farm households. At first stage, the States growing considerable quantities of

oilseeds and having potential were selected. In total, seven major oilseeds producing

states were selected for the study. The Table 2.1 presents the major oilseeds

producing states and the major oilseed crops they grow. It was decided to include

those crops and states whose share is significant in total acreage and production of

edible oilseeds. Accordingly, Gujarat and Andhra Pradesh were chosen for the

detailed study on groundnut since these states were found to be the major producers

of this crop. Table 2.2 gives the details of coverage of states, crops and the allocation

of sample size. This study was undertaken to generate better understanding of the

specific problems and prospects of oilseeds cultivation in the State of Gujarat with a

special focus on groundnut.

In the second stage, districts that grow significant quantities (area/production)

of groundnut were selected. The selection of districts was based on acreage and yield

as per the classification presented in Table 2.3. All districts growing groundnut were

categorized into four groups such as high area and high yield (HH), high area and low

16

yield (HL), low area and high yield (LH), and low area and low yield (LL). Since HH,

HL and LH categories of districts have the potential for further increase in production

of groundnut, it was decided to select at least one district each from these three

categories for household survey. Accordingly, Junagadh, Rajkot and Porbandar were

selected from Gujarat as HH, HL and LH category of districts respectively for the

detailed study.

Table 2.1 Major Oilseeds Producing States in TE 2007-08

Major oilseed crops grown

Andhra Pradesh

Oil Palm (85.7%), Groundnut (21.7%), Sunflower (28.2%), Castor seeds (12.3%)

Gujarat Castor seeds (65.9%), Groundnut (37.1%), Rapeseed & Mustard (4.6%)

Karnataka

Sunflower (42.8%), Safflower (25.7%), Groundnut (7.0%), Sesamum (9.1%), Oil Palm (2.0%)

Madhya Pradesh Soybean (59.1%), Sesamum (10.5%), Rapeseed& Mustard (10.2%)

Maharashtra Safflower (68.5%), Soybean (27.8%), Sunflower (13.4%)

Rajasthan

Rapeseed -mustard (48.6%), Sesamum (13.8%), Castor seeds (13.8%), Soybean (8.1%)

Tamil Nadu Groundnut (13.6%), Sesamum (4.2%)

Uttar Pradesh Rapeseed & Mustard (48.6%), Sesamum (5.2%)

West Bengal Sesamum (24.6%)

Source: Sharma, 2012.

Table 2.2 Selected Crops, States and Sample Size

Crop States Sample Size (HHs) Total Sample Size

Ground Nut 1. Gujarat 2. Andhra Pradesh

250 250

500

Soybean 1. Madhya Pradesh 2. Maharashtra

250 250

500

Rapeseed & Mustard 1. Rajasthan 2. Uttar Pradesh 3. Madhya Pradesh

200 200 100

500

Sunflower 1. Karnataka 2. Andhra Pradesh

250 150

400

Sesamum 1. West Bengal 250 250

Oil Palm 1. Andhra Pradesh 75 75

Grand Total 2225 2225


17

Table 2.3 Criteria for Selection of Study Districts

Area Yield

High Low

High High area - High yield (HH) High area – Low yield (HL)

Low Low area – High yield (LH) Low are – Low yield (LL)


At third stage, few major groundnut producing talukas/blocks were selected

and an appropriate number of villages (25) were selected for the household survey.

From each selected village, an appropriate number of farmers (250) representing

different farm categories (Marginal 0-1 ha, Small 1-2 ha, Medium 2-4 ha; Large >4 ha)

were selected based on probability proportional to size distribution at district/taluka

level and with a condition that in each district we get a minimum of 20 households in

each category1.

Households representing different farm sizes and socio-economic groups

cultivating groundnut were selected to ensure adequate heterogeneity. Table 2.4

presents the details of the households selected from various study villages of three

selected study districts of Gujarat. About 25 villages from 7 blocks of three study

districts were covered to get the desired sample households (250). The reference

year of the study for the household survey was 2011-12.

1 The present study initially attempted to categorize the sample farmers under four classes such

as Marginal (<1 ha), Small (1-2 ha), Medium (2-10 ha) and Large (>10 ha). However, it was found

about 64.5 per cent farmers came under only one category (Medium farmer with size of

operational holdings of 2-10 ha). To avoid the lop-sided distribution of the sample farmers, four

categories of the farmers have been defined as Marginal (<1 ha), Small (1-2 ha), Medium (2-4 ha)

and Large (>4 ha) in the present study. Also it was observed that the number of farmers with land

size of more than 10 ha were not many because of successive land fragmentation over the

generations in the study districts.

18

Table 2.4: Details of the Sample Size Distribution across Caste and Villages in Study Districts of Gujarat

Sr. No District Block Village Sample Households

SC ST OBC Gen Total

1 Junagadh Vishavadar Virpur 0 0 0 17 17

2 Junagadh Vishavadar Nani Monapari

0 0 0 10 10

3 Junagadh Vishavadar Ghantiyad 0 0 0 2 2

4 Junagadh Manavadar Sardargadh 0 0 0 14 14

5 Junagadh Manavadar Sanosara 0 0 0 5 5

6 Junagadh Una Gir Gathada 0 0 5 4 9

7 Junagadh Una Vadvalya 0 0 4 12 16

8 Junagadh Una Sultanpur 0 0 6 1 7

9 Junagadh Una Dhabavad 0 0 0 4 4

10 Junagadh Una Phtasar 0 0 0 4 4

11 Junagadh Una Undri 2 0 2 0 4

12 Junagadh Una Una 0 0 1 2 3

13 Porbandar Porbandar Vadala 0 0 10 0 10

14 Porbandar Porbandar Aadvana 0 0 15 1 16

15 Porbandar Porbandar Sisli 0 0 5 0 5

16 Porbandar Porbandar Bagavadar 0 0 2 0 2

17 Porbandar Porbandar Singeli 0 0 0 2 2

18 Porbandar Porbandar Ambarrna 0 0 1 0 1

19 Porbandar Porbandar Mahduada 0 0 1 0 1

20 Porbandar Kutiyana Mandva 0 0 10 1 11

21 Porbandar Kutiyana Thepada 0 0 13 0 13

22 Rajkot Gondal Biliyana 0 0 2 28 30

23 Rajkot Gondal Bhojapura 0 0 0 17 17

24 Rajkot Jasadan Atkot 0 0 0 17 17

25 Rajkot Jasadan Santhli 0 0 0 30 30

Total 2 0 77 171 250

(0.8) (0.0) (30.8) (68.4) (100.0)

Note: The figures in parentheses are the percentages of total.

Source : Field survey data

2.2. Conceptual Framework and Theoretical Models of the Study

As discussed earlier, the major objectives of the study were (i) to examine trends and

pattern of growth of different edible oilseeds over time and across districts and

identify the sources of growth in edible oilseeds output in Gujarat; (ii) to determine the

impact of price and non-price factors influencing the supply response behavior and

demand for edible oilseeds and oil in the state; and (iii) to identify major constraints in

the edible oilseed cultivation and suggest policy options to increase oilseeds

production and productivity in the State. As far as the first two objectives of the study

19

are concerned, secondary data on district-wise area, production, yield of major

crops/crop groups, and irrigated area under oilseeds, farm-harvest prices of selected

oilseeds and competing crops, annual rainfall were analysed using the averages,

percentages, coefficient of variations and compound annual growth rates.

The analysis on trends and pattern of growth of different edible oilseeds over

time and across districts has been carried out in a phased manner during 1980s,

1990s, and 2000s. The triennium averages of various data points have been used to

draw some meaningful conclusions on trends and patterns during different phases.

Mostly the data during TE 1983-84, TE 1993-94, TE 2003-04 and TE 2009-10 have

been used for analysis of area, production and yield of oilseeds and competing crops.

Appropriate graphs and diagrams have been presented at some places for better

understanding of the data.

2.2.1 Estimation of Growth in Area, Production and Yield

The estimation of growth rate is mostly done by employing two common methods of

growth rate including Linear Growth Rate and Compound Annual Growth Rate

(CAGR). Since the linear growth rate has inherent limitations to perform the

comparison of growth rates between periods and crops, it was more appropriate to

use the compound growth rate for analyzing the growth trend of agricultural crops

between two periods. The CAGR was estimated by fitting a semi-log trend equation

(1) of the following form:

.......................... 1LnY T

where, Y defines the time series data of production, area and yield of the selected

crops. ‘T’ is the trend term and ‘α’ is the constant coefficient. The slope coefficient ‘β’

measures the relative change in Y for a given absolute change in the value of

explanatory variable ‘T’. If we multiply the relative change in Y by 100, we will get

percentage change or growth rate in Y for an absolute change in variable‘T’. We can

calculate the compound growth rate using the following equation:

log 1 *100.......................... 2CAGR Anti

The equation (2) was estimated by applying Ordinary Least Square (OLS) method.

The t- test was performed to test the significance of ‘β’.

20

2.2.2 Decomposition of Output Growth of Selected Crops

To measure the relative contribution of area and yield towards the total output

change with respect of individual crop, the decomposition analysis was performed.

Several researchers have used this model to study growth performance of the crops

(Bhatnagar and Nandal, 1994; Gupta and Saraswat, 1997; Singh and Ashokan, 2000;

Siju and Kombairaju, 2001; Kalamkar, 2003; Kakali and Basu, 2006). With the help of

decomposition analysis, the relative contribution of area and yield towards the total

change in production of major oilseeds and competing crops has been assessed. The

analysis helped in identifying the sources of growth in output by breaking the change

in production into three effects i.e., area effect, yield effect and interaction effect.

(Pn-P0) = A0 (Yn-Y0) + Y0 (An - A0) + (An - A0) (Yn-Y0) ----------------- (3)

∆P = A0 ∆Y + Y0 ∆A + ∆A ∆Y ---------------------------------------------- (4)

Where,

Pn = Production in the current year

P0 = Production in the base year

An = Area in the current year

A0 = Area in the base year

Yn = Yield in the current year

Y0 = Yield in the base year

∆P = Change in production (Pn-P0)

∆Y= Change in yield (Yn-Y0)

∆A = Change in area (An - A0)

The equation-4 states that,

Change in production = Yield effect + Area effect + Interaction effect

Thus, the total change in production is attributed due to area and yield that can

be decomposed into three effects viz; yield, area and interaction effects. The

decomposition analysis was carried out on the major oilseeds and competing crops

mainly for three periods, i.e., Period I (TE1983-84 to TE 1993-94) Period II (TE1993-

94 to TE 2009-10) and overall period of TE1983-84 to TE 2009-10. During Period I,

the expansion of area under oilseeds was encouraged by introduction of Technology

21

Mission on Oilseeds (TMO) in 1986 by Government of India. During Period II, the

change in trade policy had considerably affected the domestic production and

consumption pattern of major oilseeds in the country.

For better understanding of the different sources of growth in output, analysis

was also carried out on growth in input use during different time periods. The growth

pattern of irrigation coverage, fertilizer consumption, annual rainfall, farm harvest

prices and minimum support prices have also been analyzed. The behavior of

monthly prices has also been examined so as to assess the variability in short-term

prices of the major oilseed and major competing crop.

2.2.3 Log-Linear Models for Estimating Oilseeds Production Function and Acreage Allocation Response Function

The attempt has been made to examine the effects of variation in major agricultural

inputs on crop yield with the help of a log-linear regression model which has been

estimated for main oilseed crop (groundnut) and main competing crop (cotton)

separately. The relative contribution and significance of the major factors such as

area under the crop, seed cost, fertilizer cost, pesticide/insecticide cost, human labour

cost, machine labour cost, irrigation charges and working capital to change in yield of

major oilseed and competing crop for sample farmers have been examined. The

interest on working capital has been taken as the proxy of total capital used for

cultivation of the main oilseed and the competing crop since higher the amount of

working capital, the higher the amount of interest on working capital.

We have stated our regression model with a log-linear functional form due to

the fact that the agricultural production function is usually assumed to follow a Cobb-

Douglas type that requires a log-linear transformation for estimation of input

coefficients. Thus the estimable equation is as follows:

i i 1 i 2 i 3 i 4 i 5 i

6 i 7 i 8 i 9 i i

LnY Ln A Ln AR Ln LS Ln SC Ln Ln

Ln Ln Ln Ln

FC PC

HL ML IC WC e

Where,

Y= Crop yield

AR = Area under the crop

LS= Size of operational holdings

22

SC = Seed cost

FC = Total cost of fertilizer and manures

PC = Total cost of pesticide and insecticide

HL = Total cost of human labour (family plus hired)

ML = Total cost of machine labour cost

IC = Irrigation charges

WC = Interest on working capital

As far as the acreage allocation between main oilseed crop and competing

crop by the sample farmers is concerned, another similar log-linear regression model

was fitted. Some major factors that actually influence the farmers’ decision to allocate

the available cultivable area for different crops have been taken into account as

explanatory variables and the area allocated for main oilseed (groundnut) has been

considered as the dependant variable. Some price and non-price factors were

selected as the explanatory variables for the fitted regression model which were the

size of land holdings (LSt), one year lagged area of groundnut (At-1), lagged yield of

groundnut (Yt-1), lagged price of groundnut (Pt-1), lagged area of cotton (ACt-1), lagged

yield of cotton (YCt-1) and the lagged price of cotton (PCt-1). The fitted model was as

follows:

t 1 t 2 t-1 3 t-1 4 t-1 5 t-1 6 t-1 7 t-1 i LnA Ln LS Ln A Ln Y Ln P Ln AC Ln YC Ln PC e

Where,

At = area under main oilseed crop (groundnut)

LSt = the average size of land holdings,

At-1 = one year lagged area of groundnut,

Yt-1 Lagged yield of groundnut

Pt-1 = Lagged price of groundnut

ACt-1 =Lagged area of main competing crop (cotton)

YCt-1 = Lagged yield of cotton

PCt-1 = Lagged price of cotton

23

2.2.4 Yield Gap and Technology Gap Analysis

The yield gap analysis was conducted for the main crop groundnut to ascertain the

gap between the potential yield and actual yield and between the experimental yield

and actual yield. The three types of yield gaps were calculated. The yield gap-I

measures the gap between the experimental yield and potential yield (often known as

technology gap), whereas the yield gap-II measures the gap between the actual yield

and potential yield. The yield gap-III measures the gap between the experimental

yield and actual yield which is also known as extension gap. An index for measuring

the feasibility of the evolved technology at the farmer’s fields was developed following

Samui et al (2000). The Index is stated as follows.

Technology index= {(Potential yield – Experimental yield)/ Potential yield} x 100.

The lower the value of technology index, the more is the feasibility of

technology. A detailed analysis on technology gap has been carried out by comparing

the farmers’ practices with recommended technology for different activities of farm

operations which has been presented in tabular form.

2.2.5 Identifying and Prioritizing Major Constraints for Growth in Oilseeds Production

Appropriate analytical techniques were used to identify and prioritize major

constraints facing oilseeds production in the state. The responses of the sample

farmers on the extent of severity of various constraints faced by them have been

ranked by using ordinal scores from 4 to 1 (severe =4, Moderate = 3, minor = 2, not

important =1). The major constraints considered for the study were technological

(non-availability of suitable varieties, poor crop germination, lack of irrigation facilities,

weeds infestation etc.), agro-climatic factors (drought at critical stages of crop growth,

excessive rains, extreme variations in temperature etc.), economic and institutional

(high-input cost on diesel, fertilizers, agrochemicals, shortage of human labor, low

and fluctuating prices, problem of timely availability of seed, non-availability of other

inputs, lack/poor extension services etc), and post-harvest, marketing and value-

addition (availability of marketing infrastructures and transportation facilities, high

transportation costs, exploitation by market intermediaries etc.). The results are

displayed in the form composite index called Oilseed Constraint Index (OCI) which

24

has been constructed as a weighted average as follows for different farmers’

categories.

The Oilseed Constraint Index (OCI) = 11/ C

n

i iin W

Where,

Ci = the number of farmers in a farmer category responded in favour of a particular

constraint with a particular rank score or weight (severe =4, Moderate = 3, minor = 2,

not important =1).

Wi = the weight attached to ith constraint takes the value ranging from 1 to 4. This

reflects the severity of impacts of the concerned constraint for the sample farmers.

n = the total number of farmers in a farmer category.

25

Chapter III

Overview of Oilseeds Sector: Current Status and Growth Behaviour

3.1. Cropping Pattern Changes in the State: Area Shifts in Major Crops and

Crop Groups

The major crops grown in different parts of Gujarat are bajra, wheat, jowar, maize,

cotton, groundnut, castor, rapeseed and mustard, fodder and horticultural crops. The

cropping pattern has changed over the last four decades as a result of development

of irrigation potential, production technology, increased market prices and industrial

demand in the state. Tables 3.1 and 3.2 show the nature of shift or changes in

cropping pattern in the state. It is evident that the share of area under oilseeds has

been stagnated since 1980s. The share of the area under total cereals, total pulses

and total food grains has also decreased over last three decades. There has been

very high growth in area under cotton and there has been moderate growth in area

under rapeseed-mustard and other oilseeds while the area under groundnut has been

declining in the state during the corresponding period.

It could be seen in Table 3.1 that the area under total oilseeds has decreased

from 24.8 per cent in TE 1983-84 to 24.1 per cent of gross cropped area (GCA) in TE

2009-10. However, there was some expansion in area under oilseeds in the state

during 1980s and early 1990s. It is evident from the fact that the share of oilseeds

area has increased to 27.3 per cent in TE 2003-04 from 24.8 per cent in TE 1983-84.

In absolute term, it has marginally increased from 2733.5 thousand ha in TE 1983-84

to 2803.9 thousand ha in TE 2009-10. However, the area under the main oilseed crop

groundnut has decreased continuously from 21.5 lakh ha in TE 1983-84 to 19.7 lakh

ha during TE 2003-04 and further to 18.6 lakh ha during TE 2009-10. On the other

hand, the area under rapeseed-mustard, sesamum and other oilseeds has increased

from 2.13 lakh ha, 1.47 lakh ha and 2.15 lakh ha in TE1983-84 to 2.83 lakh ha, 2.55

lakh ha and 4.05 lakh ha during TE 2009-10, respectively. It is worth-mentioning that

the area under the main competing crop cotton has steadily increased from 13.0 per

cent of GCA during TE 1993-94 to 20.7 per cent during TE 2009-10. In absolute term,

the area under the cotton has increased from 14.37 lakh ha during TE 1993-94 to

26

24.13 lakh ha during TE 2009-10. Better price and better marketing facilities available

in the state are the major factors contributing more adoption of cotton replacing the

main oilseed crop groundnut in the state.

Table 3.1: Total Cropped Area under Selected Crops in Gujarat: TE 1983-84 to TE 2009-10

Sr. No.

Crops Area (000' Hectare)

TE 1983-84 TE 1993-94 TE 2003-04 TE 2009-10

1 Rice 609.8 679.7 606.7 728.5 2 Wheat 708.7 557.3 555.1 1081.1 3 Other cereals 3009.9 2464.1 1655.4 1358.0 4 Total cereals 4474.6 3756.0 2817.2 3219.8 5 Total pulses 902.1 908.0 750.6 800.3 6 Total food grains 5376.7 4664.0 3570.7 4020.0 7 Groundnut 2150.5 1963.9 1973.5 1862.4 8 Rapeseed-mustard 213.0 345.0 225.7 282.3 9 Sesamum 146.8 260.9 375.4 254.7

10 Other oilseeds 214.7 344.0 279.1 404.5 11 Total oilseeds 2733.5 2936.9 2852.0 2803.9 12 Cotton 1436.8 1190.0 1675.2 2413.3 13 Sugarcane 116.6 184.0 185.0 207.5 14 Tobacco 116.4 139.1 73.4 52.6 15 Gross cropped area 11034.0 10744.7 10947.6 11632.7

Percentage to Gross Cropped Area

1 Rice 5.5 6.3 5.5 6.3 2 Wheat 6.4 5.2 5.1 9.3 3 other cereals 27.3 22.9 15.1 11.7 4 Total cereals 40.6 35.0 25.7 27.7 5 Total pulses 8.2 8.5 6.9 6.9 6 Total food grains 48.7 43.4 32.6 34.6 7 Groundnut 19.5 18.3 18.0 16.0 8 Rapeseed-mustard 1.9 3.2 2.1 2.4 9 Sesamum 1.3 2.4 3.4 2.2

10 Other oilseeds 1.9 3.2 2.5 3.5 11 Total oilseeds 24.8 27.3 26.1 24.1 12 Cotton 13.0 11.1 15.3 20.7 13 Sugarcane 1.1 1.7 1.7 1.8 14 Tobacco 1.1 1.3 0.7 0.5 15 Gross cropped area 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0

Note: cotton production in bales in 170 kgs. each lint, sugarcane production in gur Source : (i) Gujarat Statistics at a Glance 2010-11, Directorate of Agriculture, Government of Gujarat, Gandhinagar (ii) Agricultural Statistics of Gujarat, 1983-84 to 2007-08, Directorate of Economics and Statistics, Gujarat, Gandhinagar

As far as other crops and crop groups are concerned, the area under more

water consuming crops like rice and sugarcane has increased. The area under rice

and sugarcane has increased from 7.0 lakh ha and 1.17 lakh ha in TE 1983-84 to

7.29 lakh ha and 2.08 lakh ha in TE 2009-10, respectively. However, the share of

area under other cereals, total cereals and total food grains has declined considerably

in the corresponding period. The area under other cereals, total cereals and total food

27

grains has declined from 30.1 lakh ha, 44.75 lakh ha and 53.77 lakh ha in TE 1983-84

to 13.6 lakh ha, 32.2 lakh ha and 40.2 lakh ha in TE 2009-10, respectively.

The GCA in the state has marginally increased from 110.34 lakh ha in TE

1983-84 to 116.33 lakh ha in TE 2009-10. Overall, the gross cropped area in the state

has fluctuated a lot. Particularly during 1990s, there has been a steep decline in GCA.

It may be seen that GCA has declined to 107.45 lakh ha during TE 1993-94 from

110.34 lakh ha in TE 1993-94 (Table 3.2A). There has been a decline in GCA and

NSA by 289.3 thousand ha and 152.1 thousand ha respectively between TE 1983-84

and TE 1993-94 (Table 3.2B). After TE1993-94, the growth in GCA has been slow but

somewhat steady in the state. The gross irrigated area and net irrigated area have

increased successively over the years in the state.

Table 3.2A : Cultivated Area and Irrigated Area: (TE 1983-84 to TE 2009-10)

(Area in '000 ha)

TE 1983-84 TE 1993-94 TE 2003-04 TE 2009-10

GCA 11034.0 10744.7 10947.6 11632.7

GIA 2644.8 3269.9 3773.7 5248.7

NSA 9592.7 9440.6 9670.3 10302.0

NIA 2222.2 2518.2 3142.7 4336.0 Notes: GCA: Gross cropped area, NSA: Net sown area, GIA: Gross irrigated area, NIA: Net irrigated area

Sources: (1) Agriculture Statistics of Gujarat, 1980-81 to 1999-2000, Directorate of Economics and Statistics, Government of Gujarat, Gandhinagar.

(2) Annual Season & Crop Reports, year 2002-03 to 2006-07 Krishi Bhavan, Government of Gujarat, Gandhinagar. (3) Socio-Economic Review, various years (2007-08 to 2009-10), Directorate of Economics and Statistics, Government of Gujarat, Gandhinagar.

Table 3.2B : Changes in Gross Cropped Area: Area Expansion and Crop Intensification Effects: TE 1983-84 to TE 2009-10

(Area in '000 ha)

Indicators TE 1983-84 to

1993-94 TE 1993-94 to

2003-04 TE 2003-04 to

2009-10 TE 1983-84 to

2009-10

Change in GCA -289.3 202.9 685.1 598.7

Change in GIA 625.1 503.7 1475.0 2603.9

Area expansion

Change in NSA -152.1 229.7 631.7 709.3

Change in NIA 296.0 624.5 1193.4 2113.9

Crop intensification TE 1983-84 TE 1993-94 TE 2003-04 TE 2009-10

GCA - NSA 1441.3 1304.1 1277.3 1330.7

GIA - NIA 422.6 751.8 631.0 912.6

Notes: Same as Table 3.2A

Sources : Same as Table 3.2A

28

The overall area expansion effect has been better for the irrigated area than

the cultivated area for all reference periods (Table 3.2B). The gross irrigated area and

net irrigated area has increased by 2603.9 thousand ha and 2113.9 thousand ha,

respectively between TE 1983-84 and TE 2009-10 which was nearly 4.3 times and

3.0 times of increase in GCA and NSA respectively. However, the crop intensification

effect has been much better for the cultivated area (GCA-NSA) than the irrigated area

(GIA-NIA) for all reference periods. The average annual increase in GCA over NSA

was 1441.3 thousand ha during TE 1983-84 which was much higher than the

increase in GIA over NIA (422.6 thousand ha) during the corresponding period. The

crop intensification effect for the cultivated area (GCA-NSA) and the irrigated area

(GIA-NIA) in TE 2009-10 was 1330.7 thousand ha and 912.6 thousand ha

respectively, which were much larger than that during previous reference periods.

However, the crop intensification effect for the cultivated area (GCA-NSA) was

highest during the period of TE1983-84 to TE 1993-94 was highest (1441.3 thousand

ha).

The net changes in the cropping pattern from TE 1993-94 to TE 2009-10 in

absolute and relative terms in various districts of the state are presented in Table 3.3.

The area under all major crops has declined in 8 districts out of 26 districts between

the two periods. The number of districts that showed decline in area under cultivation

of total cereals, total pulses, total oilseeds and total food grains was 17, 11, 12 and

10, respectively. The number of districts that showed decline in area under cultivation

of main oilseed crop (groundnut) and main competing crop (cotton) in the

corresponding period was 10 and 3 respectively. At the state level, the area under

rapeseed-mustard and wheat has increased in both absolute and relative terms. The

area under groundnut has declined by 98.5 thousand ha (-5.2%) whereas the area

under cotton has increased by 1221.6 thousand ha (102.5%) between TE 1993-94

and TE 2009-10. Thus it is quite evident that the competing crop is being increasingly

adopted by the farmers in the State of Gujarat. Significant rise in area under cotton

has been observed in Bhavnagar, Amreli, Jamnagar, Rajkot and Surendranagar

districts. On the other hand, the significant increase in area under groundnut was

found in few districts like Porbandar, Sabarkantha and Banaskantha.

29

A R A R A R A R A R A R A R

Ahmedabad 26.0 35.9 48.0 60.3 -0.4 -80.2 -74.8 -75.8 -1.2 -0.5 0.3 1.3 136.6 49.1

Anand 85.9 NA 52.2 NA 0.5 NA 52.1 NA 190.6 NA 5.7 NA 268.5 NA

Banaskantha -0.2 -100.0 22.9 50.6 -3.2 -23.1 -223.1 -48.7 -203.6 -39.4 -23.3 -31.9 -74.8 -12.7

Bharuch -7.5 -35.7 3.9 25.1 -3.6 -63.2 -41.1 -60.1 -48.3 -43.6 -89.7 -58.1 -99.8 -37.7

Dahod 35.0 NA 41.0 NA 111.6 NA 17.2 NA 204.8 NA 69.6 NA 383.7 NA

Dang 8.3 97.0 0.6 864.5 2.5 726.9 -11.5 -42.8 -0.1 -0.3 0.0 -0.2 18.9 41.1

Gandhinagar 5.4 70.2 26.1 286.9 0.1 32.5 8.5 56.1 40.2 124.1 6.1 339.5 79.3 232.2

Kheda -58.8 -37.0 10.9 18.2 2.4 15.4 -88.5 -56.4 -134.0 -34.2 -23.7 -79.1 -53.4 -12.7

Mehsana -6.7 -49.8 -9.1 -11.9 0.3 116.9 -216.7 -77.7 -232.2 -63.0 -16.8 -35.5 -190.5 -45.8

Narmada 14.6 NA 2.1 NA 5.5 NA 9.5 NA 31.7 NA 21.9 NA 71.6 NA

Navsari 54.8 NA 0.4 NA NA NA 1.5 NA 56.7 NA 10.9 NA 82.4 NA

Panchmahal -57.5 -44.8 -19.1 -50.5 -75.5 -39.7 -39.0 -72.1 -191.1 -46.6 -57.7 -56.1 -147.2 -28.7

Patan NA NA 29.4 NA NA NA 78.1 NA 107.5 NA 47.8 NA 219.0 NA

Sabarkantha -11.7 -56.4 46.7 80.5 -14.0 -13.1 -59.0 -77.7 -38.0 -14.5 -52.7 -55.1 8.4 2.3

Surat -6.7 -8.5 -0.2 -2.2 0.0 -0.1 -55.0 -64.9 -61.9 -35.5 -29.1 -51.6 -28.4 -12.3

Tapi 18.8 NA 3.0 NA 1.0 NA 17.6 NA 40.4 NA 15.5 NA 52.7 NA

Vadodara 0.1 0.1 10.3 71.3 5.9 13.6 -46.7 -67.6 -30.4 -16.4 -30.5 -24.7 33.9 11.0

Valsad -50.8 -46.0 -2.0 -87.1 0.0 -100.0 -7.4 -41.4 -60.1 -46.1 -11.1 -39.7 -43.1 -27.3

Amreli -0.1 -100.0 14.7 86.8 -1.9 -67.4 -71.7 -82.9 -58.8 -55.4 9.9 209.6 -8.7 -7.8

Bhavnagar -0.3 -100.0 11.9 66.8 1.1 72.0 -178.5 -74.5 -165.8 -64.0 1.1 17.4 -110.7 -41.7

Jamnagar 0.0 -100.0 27.7 224.6 1.6 NA -53.4 -79.6 -24.1 -30.3 17.2 122.5 27.7 29.6

Junagadh -0.6 -100.0 121.3 292.7 -0.7 -100.0 -38.7 -65.1 81.3 79.6 4.7 43.4 181.0 160.3

Kutch NA NA 14.4 133.0 NA NA -33.0 -32.9 -18.6 -16.7 4.2 4.8 61.8 31.1

Porbandar NA NA 7.0 NA 0.1 NA 10.0 NA 17.1 NA 13.0 NA 42.5 NA

Rajkot 0.0 -100.0 39.4 107.1 0.8 1835.5 -60.5 -74.4 -20.4 -17.3 4.4 34.5 44.4 34.0

Surendranagar 0.3 74.4 20.1 132.3 NA NA -73.6 -56.9 -53.2 -36.7 -6.9 -30.1 -12.1 -7.2

Gujarat State 48.5 7.1 523.5 93.9 34.1 8.9 -1177.7 -54.3 -571.5 -15.1 -109.0 -12.0 943.7 20.1

Table 3.3: Crop wise net changes in area in absolute and relative terms for major foodgrains crops in the Gujarat State:

TE 1993-94 and TE 2009-10

[Absolute change (A) in '000 ha., Relative change (R) in percentage]

Total Pulses Total Food

Grains

District Rice Wheat Maize Other Cereals Total Cereals

30

A R A R A R A R A R A R A R A R

Ahmedabad -0.2 -46.5 0.3 4.0 -7.2 -83.8 -4.9 -24.1 -17.2 -42.0 49.1 32.6 -0.6 -85.2 156.5 32.5

Anand 0.6 NA 1.0 NA 2.7 NA 1.7 NA 6.0 NA 3.2 NA NA NA 291.9 NA

Banaskantha 21.9 681.0 15.5 158.4 -1.5 -1.0 -3.1 -3.8 28.2 11.4 10.6 59.3 -0.2 -100.0 -49.7 -5.7

Bharuch -7.2 -76.9 -0.5 -15.0 0.0 60.4 3.8 117.5 -6.4 -33.9 38.3 45.0 7.8 62.9 -74.2 -18.8

Dahod 1.4 NA 0.8 NA 0.2 NA 0.2 NA 2.6 NA 0.3 NA NA NA 386.5 NA

Dang 3.5 234.0 -0.1 -100.0 NA NA NA NA -0.3 -6.4 NA NA 0.1 1100.0 18.5 35.8

Gandhinagar 3.3 2596.3 2.0 1702.3 2.2 42.6 15.8 155.9 23.2 148.5 31.1 1440.5 NA NA 130.2 234.9

Kheda -8.4 -84.0 -2.9 -36.2 -3.4 -48.7 -0.6 -4.5 -15.9 -40.1 10.3 71.4 -0.7 -100.0 -155.9 -26.1

Mehsana 1.4 50.5 3.9 51.3 -91.8 -66.3 -34.3 -41.3 -125.2 -53.0 -41.1 -46.6 0.0 -100.0 -377.9 -49.6

Narmada 2.9 NA 0.2 NA NA NA 0.8 NA 3.8 NA 43.4 NA 4.4 NA 123.2 NA

Navsari 0.2 NA NA NA 0.1 NA 0.0 NA 0.3 NA NA NA 29.4 NA 112.2 NA

Panchmahal -16.6 -84.8 -0.8 -34.1 -2.0 -85.7 0.0 1.9 -19.4 -72.9 -3.6 -30.2 0.0 -15.7 -176.1 -31.6

Patan 0.0 NA 6.7 NA 48.4 NA 40.1 NA 95.2 NA 68.1 NA NA NA 382.4 NA

Sabarkantha 44.5 220.6 -2.2 -40.8 -2.3 -17.9 -8.8 -15.3 31.0 32.2 91.8 568.4 -0.5 -100.0 121.3 25.3

Surat -17.7 -65.0 -0.4 -91.4 0.1 733.3 -0.3 -55.0 -18.6 -65.3 -1.8 -32.7 -1.2 -1.1 -66.7 -16.8

Tapi 5.5 NA NA NA NA NA 0.3 NA 5.7 NA 3.0 NA 11.8 NA 73.2 NA

Vadodara 1.2 9.5 -1.0 -43.6 -0.1 -16.8 4.7 38.9 4.4 15.8 27.7 19.8 3.3 165.2 32.0 6.1

Valsad -0.6 -73.9 0.0 -100.0 0.0 -100.0 -0.3 -100.0 -3.1 -94.0 NA NA -24.0 -71.9 -107.8 -46.4

Amreli -64.9 -21.0 -22.6 -55.6 -1.3 -90.7 0.1 12.1 -88.9 -25.3 200.2 558.2 -5.6 -97.1 94.3 18.6

Bhavnagar -114.2 -50.2 -16.0 -36.8 0.1 589.7 -0.3 -48.5 -131.2 -48.2 206.0 204.3 -0.8 -82.2 -53.5 -8.1

Jamnagar 23.1 6.4 -22.3 -68.0 -1.0 -38.0 3.2 51.2 2.6 0.6 139.7 560.7 -0.2 -27.6 165.5 31.3

Junagadh 1.2 0.3 -12.6 -87.9 -0.2 -65.6 -5.1 -71.0 -17.7 -4.1 20.6 68.9 3.9 46.9 177.2 29.7

Kutch 6.8 9.9 22.0 162.5 5.2 91.8 26.1 90.2 57.6 48.2 18.1 40.8 -0.2 -53.3 132.1 35.9

Porbandar 88.8 NA 0.1 NA 0.1 NA 0.5 NA 89.5 NA 8.6 NA NA NA 140.6 NA

Rajkot -62.6 -14.1 -11.9 -39.5 -3.2 -94.1 -4.1 -33.1 -81.8 -16.7 178.1 191.2 -2.5 -92.5 130.8 18.1

Surendranagar -12.4 -41.4 25.4 50.9 0.0 1.4 25.5 988.4 37.5 44.5 119.8 36.2 -0.5 -73.1 142.9 24.4

Gujarat State -101.5 -5.2 -6.2 -2.4 -62.7 -18.2 60.5 17.6 -133.0 -4.5 1221.6 102.5 23.8 13.0 1749.6 18.7

Source : (i) Gujarat Agricultural Statistics at a Glance 2010-11, Directorate of Agriculture., Government of Gujarat, Gandhinagar.

(ii) Agriculture Statistics of Gujarat, various issues (1983-84 to 2007-08), Directorate of Economics and Statistics, Gujarat, Gandhinagar.

District Groundnut

Table 3.3 continued….

Sugarcane All major

crops

Rapeseed-

mustard

Sesame Soyabean Total oilseeds Cotton

31

It may be noted that the selected district with high area and high yield

(Junagadh) showed a very marginal increase in area under groundnut (0.3%) and the

selected district with high area with low yield (Rajkot) has experienced a further

decline in area under groundnut during the corresponding period of TE 1993-94 to TE

2009-10 by 62.6 thousand ha (14.1%). On the other hand, the selected district with

low area with high yield (Porbandar) has experienced an increase in area by 88.8

thousand ha during the corresponding period. Thus the higher yield in Porbandar has

encouraged the farmers to grow more groundnut in the district. As far as the case of

area under main competing crop (cotton) in the study districts is concerned, the crop

has experienced an increase in area under cultivation in all three study districts.

Particularly, in Rajkot where the yield of groundnut was among lowest experienced an

increase in area under cotton by 178.4 thousand ha between the corresponding

periods. Thus the farmers in the study districts have diversified their cropping pattern

in favour of the competing crop cotton.

3.2. Factors Underlying Changes in Cropping Pattern

Among various factors responsible for changes in cropping pattern, profitability,

change in tastes and preferences, availability of irrigation provisions and climatic

aberrations are the major ones in the state of Gujarat. Since the majority of farmers

are adopting HYVs for better income, the crop on which value addition is relatively

high will claim a larger share provided requisite inputs, especially irrigation water and

remunerative market prices are made available to them.

Looking at the district level data, it is well revealed that the area under

groundnut and sesamum has declined by 5.0 per cent and 16.3 per cent respectively

in the state and the decline has occurred in 11 districts and 18 districts respectively

during the period of TE 1993-94 to TE 2009-10. The decline in groundnut area was

basically due to poor post harvest price and higher level of production risk. On the

other hand, the area under cotton has significantly increased due to better market

price and lesser production risk. However, the area under other oilseeds like

sesamum, rapeseed-mustard and castor has increased considerably mainly because

these crops provide better returns and promote value-added agri-business

enterprises. Castor also has a high level of global demand. India imports about half of

its demand for edible oils and the international prices are a determining factor of the

prices of the oilseeds.

32

It may also be noted that a notable shift in cropping pattern has occurred

favoring spices, fruits, vegetables, floriculture and medicinal plants that has resulted

in reduction in area under other crops, mainly coarse cereals and pulses during

1990s and 2000s. Overall, cropping pattern in the state after mid-1990s is responding

to the forces of globalization. Commercialization does show the signs of deepening,

as the crops having greater market-orientation are consolidating their share in the

farm economy of Gujarat. Crops such as cotton, oilseeds, fruits, vegetables, spices

and flowers, amenable to processing and value addition, are on the increase (Mehta,

2012). The expansion of area under horticultural crops, pulses and oilseeds have

been promoted through various programmes like National Horticulture Mission

(NHM), National Food Security Mission (NFSM), Integrated Scheme of Oilseeds,

Pulses, Maize and Oil palm (ISOPOM), Agricultural Technology Management Agency

Programme (ATMA) etc. in the state. Since the required inputs in proper quality and

quantity have been provided at subsidized prices and remunerative prices have been

offered to the farmers, the area under these crops has depicted significant increase in

recent years compared to that in earlier periods in most of the districts in Gujarat.

The change in cropping pattern towards high value and or high-yielding crops

was facilitated by further expansion in irrigation facilities in the state. As against 32

per cent of net cultivated area under irrigation in the period TE1999-2000, the net

irrigated area increased to nearly 43.5 per cent of the sown area in TE 2009-10. The

dominant sources of irrigation were underground sources such as open wells (51.0%)

and tube wells (26%) in 2009-10. Only 19 per cent was irrigated by canals and 3 per

cent was by other sources such as tanks, and river lift in the state (Swain, 2012).

3.3. Growth Trends in Area, Production and Yield of Major Oilseeds

Though the growth in area under some major oilseeds has been almost stagnated in

Gujarat, the growth in production and yield of major oilseeds has been magnificent

over last 3 decades. Though the growth in production and yield of major oilseeds has

been satisfactory since 1950s, significant level of variability in these variables has

been observed over the years (Figure 3.1). The extent of variability in area under total

oilseeds has been much lower than that of production and yield of total oilseeds.

However, the growth in area under total oilseeds has been poor in the state. The

average annual area under total oilseeds has increased from 1545.9 thousand ha in

http://www.advanceagriculturalpractice.in/w/index.php/Integrated_Scheme_of_Oilseeds,_Pulses,_Maize_and_Oilpalm_(ISOPOM)



33

1950s to 2596.9 thousand ha in 1980s, that has further increased to 2862.7 thousand

ha in 2000s (Table 3.4).

On the other hand, the annual production and yield of total oilseeds in the

state have increased from 773.1 thousand tonnes and 500.1 kg/ha, respectively

during 1950s to 3686.2 thousand tonnes and 1287.7 kg/ha, respectively during

2000s. However, there have been a large number of ups and downs in average

production and yield between 1950s and 2000s.

Figure 3.1. Growth in Area, Yield and Production of Total Oilseeds in Gujarat

(1951-52 to 2009-10)

0

500

1000

1500

2000

2500

0.0

1000.0

2000.0

3000.0

4000.0

5000.0

6000.0

19

51

-52

19

53

-54

19

55

-56

19

57

-58

19

59

-60

19

61

-62

19

63

-64

19

65

-66

19

67

-68

19

69

-70

19

71

-72

19

73

-74

19

75

-76

19

77

-78

19

79

-80

19

81

-82

19

83

-84

19

85

-86

19

87

-88

19

89

-90

19

91

-92

19

93

-94

19

95

-96

19

97

-98

19

99

-00

20

01

-02

20

03

-04

20

05

-06

20

07

-08

20

09

-10

Total Oilseeds Area

Total Oilseeds Production

Total Oilseeds Yield

Oils

ee

ds Y

ield

(K

g/h

a)

Oils

ee

ds A

rea

(000

ha)

and

Pro

ductio

n (

00

0 to

nnes)

34

A/P/Y

Mean CAGR Mean CAGR Mean CAGR Mean CAGR Mean CAGR Mean CAGR Mean CAGR

1545.9 7.5 2207.3 -2.2 2286.7 1.9 2596.9 0.4 2894.5 -0.5 2862.7 -0.6 2391.1 1.5

773.1 22.4 1329.0 3.0 1749.5 0.8 2126.9 -3.4 2746.0 0.0 3686.2 -2.3 2041.0 4.8

500.1 13.9 602.1 5.3 765.1 -1.1 819.0 -3.8 948.7 0.5 1287.7 -1.7 853.6 3.2

8494.5 1.7 9121.9 0.4 9267.4 0.1 9140.1 -1.0 9122.7 -1.5 9072.2 1.0 9035.8 0.3

3882.0 11.8 6192.0 5.4 8307.7 0.7 9920.1 -1.3 12497.8 -1.6 17747.9 5.1 9622.5 4.1

457.0 9.9 678.8 5.0 896.4 0.6 1085.3 -0.3 1370.0 -0.1 1956.3 4.0 1064.9 3.8

Sources: Gujarat Agriculture Statistics at a Glance 2010-11, Directorate of Agriculture, Gujarat State, Gandhinagar.

Yield (kg/ha)

Total Agriculture Crops

Total Oilseeds

(11.8) (2.7) (3.4) (22.1)

(39.5)

Area (000

hectares) (27.8) (9.5) (10.9)

(42.9) (60.0)

(43.4)

(1.9)

Table 3.4: Trends in average area, production, and yield of Oilseeds in the Gujarat State

1951-52 to 1960-61 1961-62 to 1970-71 1971-72 to 1980-81 1981-82 to 1990-

91

1991-92 to 2000-

01

2001-02 to 2009-

10

1951-52 to 2009-

10

Note: Figures in parentheses are the CV in per cent.

(38.1) (32.5)

Yield (kg/ha)

(33.6) (28.6) (36.7) (39.7) (37.5) (30.7)

Production

(’000 tonnes) (52.2) (26.6)

Area (000

hectares)

Production

(’000 tonnes)

(4.8) (5.1) (9.7) (5.8) (7.4) (6.6)

(25.8) (53.1)

(23.9) (18.0) (20.3) (21.2) (21.7) (20.0) (50.4)

(27.0) (19.8) (22.9) (25.9) (25.4)

35

The growth in production and yield of total oilseeds during these periods has

been exemplary since the compound annual growth rate (CAGR) in production and

yield was 4.8 per cent and 3.2 per cent, respectively between the periods 1950-51

and 2009-10. The annual growth in area under total oilseeds was 1.5 per cent during

the corresponding period. It may be seen that the coefficient in variation (CV) in area

under total oilseeds was much lower compared to that of production and yield of total

oilseeds. The CV in area under total oilseeds was about 22.1 per cent while that for

production and yield of total oilseeds was 60.0 per cent and 43.4 per cent during a

period of 1951-52 to 2009-10.

Furthermore, the intra-year variation in area, production and yield of total

oilseeds is considerably large as noticed from variation in compound annual growth

rates across last five decades. Particularly, the annual growth of area under total

oilseeds has exhibited negative growth during 1960s and 1990s in the state. The

annual growth of oilseeds production has recovered from -3.38 per cent during 1980s

to 0.04 per cent during 1990s. The same has again dropped to -2.32 per cent during

2000s. Thus, the prevailing risk in production of oilseeds has been quite high in the

state.

In contrast to total oilseeds, the growth performance of all agricultural crops

was better on the front of yield only during the overall period of 1950-51 to 2009-10.

The annual growth in area and production of total oilseeds in the state has been

better than the all crops taken together the corresponding period. The annual growth

in area and production of all crops was 0.32 per cent and 4.12 per cent, respectively

during a period of 1951-52 to 2009-10 (Table 3.4) while the annual growth in area and

production of all oilseeds was 1.49 per cent and 4.75 per cent, respectively during the

corresponding period. However, the performance of all crops taken together was

better than oilseeds during 1960s and 2000s.

The district level analysis of area and production of oilseeds reveals that

Rajkot (16.6%), Junagadh (14.8%), Jamnagar (13.8%), Amreli (12.0%), Bhavnagar

(9.3%) and Banaskantha (8.4%) accounted for major share of area under oilseeds in

the state during TE 1993-94 (see Figure 3.2 and Table 3.5). The share of some of

these districts has declined marginally during TE 2009-10. The share of Rajkot,

Amreli and Bhavnagar has decreased to 14.5 per cent, 9.4 per cent and 5.0 per cent

of total area under oilseeds during TE 2009-10 respectively. Some of the districts

36

where the share of area has increased during TE 2009-10 over TE 1993-94 were

Junagadh (14.9%), Jamnagar (14.5%), and Banaskantha (9.8%). In absolute terms,

there has been moderate level of changes in the position of the districts with respect

to their share in total area under oilseeds in the state. Rajkot, Junagadh, Jamnagar,

Amreli, Banaskantha and Bhavnagar have been among first six districts during both

the periods (TE 1993-94 and TE 2009-10).

As far as the oilseeds production in the state is concerned, four districts out of

six districts having major share of oilseed acreage are among the six major districts

producing oilseeds during both the reference periods with some changes in their

positions. They were Banaskantha (14.4%), Junagadh (13.9%), Bhavnagar (10.5%)

and Rajkot (8.0%) during TE 1993-94 and Jamnagar (17.6%), Junagadh (16.6%),

Rajkot (11.9%) and Banaskantha (11.4%) during TE 2009-10 (see Figure 3.3 and

Table 3.5). There have been significant changes in the position of Amreli (with

production share declined) and Jamnagar (with production share increased) between

these two periods. Jamnagar district that accounted for only 5.8 per cent of total

oilseeds production in TE 1993-94 has occupied the first position in TE 2009-10 by

accounting for 17.6 per cent of total oilseeds production in the state.

The major districts growing Kharif oilseeds were Rajkot, Junagadh, Jamnagar,

and Amreli during both the period, viz., TE 1993-94 and TE 2009-10. The share of

Bhavnagar in total Kharif oilseeds acreage has declined from 10.6 per cent in TE

1993-94 to 5.6 per cent in TE 2009-10; whereas the share of Kachchh in total Kharif

oilseeds acreage has increased from 4.3 per cent in TE 1993-94 to 6.6 per cent in TE

2009-10. Thus there have been minor changes in share of districts with respect to

Kharif oilseeds acreage between the two reference periods.

37

Figure 3.2. Changing share of districts in area under oilseeds in Gujarat

Ahmedabad1%

Anand0%

Banaskantha8%

Bharuch1%

Dahod0%

Dang0%

Gandhinagar1%

Kheda1%

Mehsana8%

Narmada0%

Navsari0%

Panchmahal1%

Patan0%

Sabarkantha3%

Surat1%

Tapi0%

Vadodara1%

Valsad0%

Amreli12%

Bhavnagar9%

Jamnagar14%

Junagadh15%

Kutch4%

Porbandar0%

Rajkot17%

Surendarnagar3%

Ahmedabad1%

Anand0%

Banaskantha10%

Bharuch0%

Dahod0%

Dang0%

Gandhinagar1%

Kheda1%

Mehsana4%

Narmada0%

Navsari0%

Panchmahal0%Patan

3%Sabarkantha

5%Surat0%

Tapi0%

Vadodara1%

Valsad0%

Amreli9%

Bhavnagar5%

Jamnagar15%

Junagadh15%

Kutch6%

Porbandar3%

Rajkot15%

Surendarnagar4%

Figure 3.3. Changing share of districts in oilseeds production in Gujarat

Ahmedabad2% Anand

0%

Banaskantha14%

Bharuch1%

Dahod0%

The Dangs0%

Gandhinagar1%

Kheda2%

Mahesana14%

Narmada0%Navsari0%

Panchamahals

1%Patan0%

Sabarkantha6%Surat

1%

Tapi0%

Vadodara1%

Valsad0%

Amreli9%

Bhavnagar11%

Jamnagar6%

Junagadh14%

Kutch7%

Porbandar0%

Rajkot8%

Surendranaga

r2%

Ahmedabad1%

Anand0%

Banaskantha11%

Bharuch0%

Dahod0%

The Dangs0%

Gandhinagar2%

Kheda1%

Mahesana5%Narmada0%

Navsari0%

Panchamahals0%

Patan3%

Sabarkantha4% Surat

0%

Tapi0%

Vadodara1%

Valsad0%

Amreli5%

Bhavnagar4%

Jamnagar18%

Junagadh17%

Kutch6%

Porbandar5%

Rajkot12%

Surendranaga

r3%

TE 1993-94 TE 2009-10

TE 1993-94 TE 2009-10

38

Rajkot 485.5 (18.9) 169.0 (9.4) 406.9 (16.1) 462.9 (13.3)

Junagadh 433.4 (16.9) 300.6 (16.7) 416.9 (16.5) 642.8 (18.5)

Jamnagar 401.8 (15.6) 123.1 (6.8) 405.8 (16.1) 682.2 (19.7)

Amreli 350.2 (13.6) 184.8 (10.3) 262.8 (10.4) 207.6 (6.0)

Bhavnagar 271.5 (10.6) 227.9 (12.6) 141.0 (5.6) 149.1 (4.3)

Kachchh 111.4 (4.3) 143.2 (7.9) 166.4 (6.6) 230.7 (6.6)

Banaskantha 94.2 (3.7) 156.2 (8.7) 128.5 (5.1) 227.1 (6.5)

Mehsana 93.4 (3.6) 152.4 (8.5) 64.2 (2.5) 111.8 (3.2)

Sabarkantha 82.9 (3.2) 124.5 (6.9) 116.5 (4.6) 151.7 (4.4)

Surendrnagar 82.4 (3.2) 41.3 (2.3) 120.8 (4.8) 128.2 (3.7)

Porbandar 0.0 (0.0) 0.0 (0.0) 89.4 (3.5) 176.8 (5.1)

Gujarat State 2568.8 (100.0) 1803.0 (100.0) 2521.6 (100.0) 3471.4 (100.0)

Banaskantha 147.7 (42.8) 155.0 (42.7) 146.1 (51.8) 214.1 (52.3)

Mahesana 138.4 (40.1) 150.4 (41.5) 46.6 (16.5) 66.0 (16.1)

Sabarkantha 13.0 (3.8) 15.4 (4.2) 10.7 (3.8) 14.9 (3.7)

Ahmedeabad 8.6 (2.5) 10.3 (2.8) 1.4 (0.5) 1.7 (0.4)

Kheda 7.1 (2.1) 7.3 (2.0) 3.6 (1.3) 5.1 (1.3)

Kutch 5.6 (1.6) 6.0 (1.7) 10.8 (3.8) 16.8 (4.1)

Gandhinagar 5.2 (1.5) 5.6 (1.5) 7.5 (2.6) 11.2 (2.7)

Rajkot 3.4 (1.0) 3.7 (1.0) 0.2 (0.1) 0.3 (0.1)

Jamnagar 2.7 (0.8) 2.8 (0.8) 1.7 (0.6) 2.4 (0.6)

Panchmahal 2.3 (0.7) 2.5 (0.7) 0.3 (0.1) 0.5 (0.1)

Patan 0.0 (0.0) 0.0 (0.0) 48.4 (17.1) 69.0 (16.9)

Gujarat State 345.0 (100.0) 362.6 (100.0) 282.3 (100.0) 408.9 (100.0)

Rajkot 488.9 (16.6) 172.7 (8.0) 407.1 (14.5) 463.2 (11.9)

Junagadh 434.8 (14.8) 300.9 (13.9) 417.0 (14.9) 643.0 (16.6)

Jamnagar 404.9 (13.8) 125.9 (5.8) 407.5 (14.5) 684.6 (17.6)

Amreli 351.9 (12.0) 186.3 (8.6) 262.9 (9.4) 207.8 (5.4)

Bhavnagar 272.3 (9.3) 227.9 (10.5) 141.1 (5.0) 149.3 (3.8)

Banaskantha 246.5 (8.4) 311.2 (14.4) 274.7 (9.8) 441.1 (11.4)

Mehsana 236.0 (8.0) 302.9 (14.0) 110.9 (4.0) 177.8 (4.6)

Kutch 55.1 (1.9) 149.2 (6.9) 119.6 (6.3) 247.4 (6.4)

Sabarkantha 96.2 (3.3) 139.8 (6.5) 127.2 (4.5) 166.7 (4.3)

Surendarnagar 84.3 (2.9) 42.6 (2.0) 121.7 (4.3) 129.5 (3.3)

Patan 0.0 (0.0) 0.0 (0.0) 95.2 (3.4) 132.1 (3.4)

Porbandar 0.0 (0.0) 0.0 (0.0) 89.5 (3.2) 176.9 (4.6)

Gujarat State 2936.9 (100.0) 2165.6 (100.0) 2803.9 (100.0) 3880.4 (100.0)

Note: Figures in parentheses show the district's percentage share in state total area under oilseeds and

state total production.

Sources: (i) Season and Crop Report 1991-92 to 1993-94, Directorate of Agriculture, Krishi Bhavan, Gujarat

State

(ii) Gujarat Agriculture Statistics at a Glance 2010-11, Directorate of Agriculture, Gujarat State,

Gandhinagar

Table 3.5: Changing shares of Kharif and Rabi oilseeds in major oilsees producing districts in

( Area in 000' hectare and Production in 000' tonne)

District Kharif Oilseeds

TE 1993-94 TE 2009-10

Rabi Oilseeds

Total Oilseeds

Area Production Area Production

39

The major districts growing Rabi oilseeds during TE 1993-94 were

Banaskantha (42.8%), Mehsana (40.1%), Sabarkantha (3.8%) and Ahmedabad

(2.5%). However, there have not been major changes in the share of the districts with

respect to Rabi oilseeds acreage between two reference periods. Only Patan that

was not created during TE 1993-94 has occupied 2nd

position in TE 2009-10 with

Rabi oilseeds acreage of 17.1 per cent. The share of Kachchh has also significantly

increased from 1.9 per cent of Rabi oilseeds acreage in TE 1993-94 to 6.3 per cent in

TE 2009-10. Similar pattern was observed with respect to absolute and relative share

of districts in production of oilseeds during Rabi seasons which is evident from Table

3.5. Banaskantha, Mehsana and Patan have accounted for a major share (85.4%) of

total Rabi oilseeds production in the state.

It may be noted from Table 3.6 that among the Kharif oilseeds, groundnut,

castor and sesamum were the major crops occupying about 83.2 per cent of total

area under oilseeds during TE 2009-10 in the state. On the other hand, the rapeseed

and mustard was the major Rabi crop occupying about 9.7 per cent of total area

under oilseeds. Thus these four crops covered about 93 per cent of total area under

oilseeds in the state. The total area and production of Kharif oilseeds was 86.2 per

cent and 84.5 per cent of total oilseeds acreage and production respectively during

TE 2009-10 in the state.

Table 3.6: Share of Selected Oilseeds: TE 2009-10

(Area in 000' hectare, production and oil in 000' tonnes)

Oilseeds Area Production Oil Oil content of seeds (%)

Groundnut 1754.8 (60.5) 2379.3 (60.3) 1206.3 50.7

Castor 404.3 (13.9) 797.0 (20.2) 382.6 48.0

Sesamum 254.5 (8.8) 102.0 (2.6) 52.0 51.0

Soyabean 79.3 (2.7) 51.3 (1.3) 9.2 18.0

Nigerseed 6.0 (0.2) 4.7 (0.1) 1.8 39.0

Total kharif 2498.9 (86.2) 3334.3 (84.5) 6892.0 41.3

Summer Groundnut 107.3 (3.7) 193.0 (4.9) 0.0 NA

Rapeseed-mustard 282.3 (9.7) 408.7 (10.4) 134.9 33.0

Safflower 10.7 (0.4) 10.0 (0.3) 3.0 30.0

Total Rabi+Summer 400.3 (13.8) 611.7 (15.5) 385.4 31.5

Total Oilseeds 2899.3 (100.0) 3946.0 (100.0) 10642.3 38.5

Note: Figures in parentheses show the % share in state total area and production of oilseeds. Sources: (1) Agriculture Statistics at a Glance 2011, Directorate of Economics and Statistics, Gov. of India ; (2) www.inseda.org/oil%20seeds%20prodcution%20/sunflower, Accessed on 10th

January 2013; (3) www.crirec.com, Accessed on 10th January 2013; (4)

agridept.cg.gov.in/agriculture/seed-certi-variety/seed, Accessed on 10th January 2013.

http://www.inseda.org/oil%20seeds%20prodcution%20/sunflower

http://www.inseda.org/oil%20seeds%20prodcution%20/sunflower

http://www.crirec.com/

40

Total oil extracted from Kharif oilseeds and Rabi oilseeds during TE 2009-10

was 41.3 per cent and 31.5 per cent, respectively. The oil content of the seeds was

found to be highest for sesamum (51.0%) followed by groundnut (50.7%) and castor

(48.0%).

The change in performance of individual oilseed crops in terms of acreage and

production between the two reference periods (TE 1993-94 and TE 2009-10) has

been presented in Tables 3.7 and 3.8. It is well revealed from Table 3.7 that Rajkot,

Junagadh, Jamnagar and Amreli were the major districts cultivating groundnut during

both the reference periods; while Banaskantha, Mehsana, Sabarkantha, Kachchh and

Patan were emerged as the major districts producing rapeseed-mustard and castor in

the state. Surendranagar, Bhavnagar, Amreli, Kachchh, Jamnagar and Rajkot were

found to the major sesamum growing districts of the state. Banaskantha alone

occupied 42.8 percent of total area under rapeseed-mustard during TE 1993-94 and

51.7 per cent in TE 209-10. The share of Mehsana has sharply declined from 40.1

per cent of rapeseed-mustard acreage in TE1993-94 to 16.5 per cent in TE 2009-10

in the state. The newly formed Patan district has accounted for about 17.1 per cent of

total rapeseed-mustard acreage in TE 2009-10.

As far as the case of acreage under castor is concerned, the share of

Mehsana and Banaskantha has declined from 24.2 per cent and 23.6 per cent,

respectively in TE 1993-94 to 12.1 per cent and 19.3 percent, respectively in TE

2009-10. As regards sesamum acreage, the share of Surendranagar has increased

considerably from 19.1 per cent in TE 1993-94 to 29.5 per cent in TE 2009-10 in the

state. On the other hand, the share of Bhavnagar has decreased from 16.6 per cent

in TE 1993-94 to 10.8 per cent in TE2009-10. The relative performance of the districts

with respect to production of individual oilseed crops as presented in Table 3.8 was

more or less similar to acreage distribution. The performance of Mahesana and

Banaskantha was much better in terms of oilseeds production. Their position in terms

of area under oilseeds in TE 1993-94 was 6th

(8.4%) and 7th (8.0%) respectively.

However, their position in terms of oilseeds production in the corresponding year was

1st (14.4%) and 2

nd (14.0%) respectively. On the other hand, Junagadh, Jamnagar,

Rajkot and Banaskantha occupied first four positions in terms of both area and

production of oilseeds during TE 2009-10 in the state.

41

Table 3.7: Share of major district in oilseeds acreage in the Gujarat State: TE 1993-94 and TE 2009-10

(Area in 000'hectare)

Sl. No.

TE 1993-94 TE 2009-10

District Area District Area

1 Groundnut

Rajkot 443.2 (22.6) Junagadh 413.1 (22.2)

Junagadh 411.9 (21.0) Jamnagar 385.9 (20.7)

Jamnagar 362.7 (18.5) Rajkot 380.6 (20.4)

Amreli 308.7 (15.7) Amreli 243.8 (13.1)

Bhavnagar 227.4 (11.6) Bhavnagar 113.2 (6.1)

Kachchh 68.9 (3.5) Porbandar 88.8 (4.8)

Surendarnagar 30.0 (1.5) Kachchh 75.8 (4.1)

Gujarat State 1963.9 (100.0) Gujarat State 1862.4 (100.0)

2 Rapeseed - Mustard

Banaskantha 147.7 (42.8) Banaskantha 146.1 (51.7)

Mehsana 138.4 (40.1) Patan 48.4 (17.1)

Sabarkantha 13.0 (3.8) Mehsana 46.6 (16.5)

Ahmedabad 8.6 (2.5) Kachchh 10.8 (3.8)

Kheda 7.1 (2.1) Sabarkantha 10.7 (3.8)

Kachchh 5.6 (1.6) Gandhinagar 7.5 (2.6)

Gandhinagar 5.2 (1.5) Kheda 3.6 (1.3)


3 Sesamum

Surendrnagar 49.8 (19.1) Surendrnagar 75.2 (29.5)

Bhavnagar 43.4 (16.6) Kachchh 35.5 (13.9)

Amreli 40.7 (15.6) Bhavnagar 27.4 (10.8)

Jamnagar 32.8 (12.6) Banaskantha 25.3 (9.9)

Rajkot 30.0 (11.5) Rajkot 18.1 (7.1)

Junagadh 14.3 (5.5) Amreli 18.1 (7.1)

Kachchh 13.5 (5.2) Mehsana 11.4 (4.5)


4 Castor

Mehsana 83.1 (24.2) Banaskantha 78.1 (19.3)

Banaskantha 81.2 (23.6) Kachchh 55.1 (13.6)

Sabarkantha 57.5 (16.7) Mehsana 48.8 (12.1)

Kachchh 29.0 (8.4) Sabarkantha 48.7 (12.0)

Ahmedabad 20.5 (5.9) Patan 40.1 (9.9)

Kheda 14.1 (4.1) Surendarnagar 28.0 (6.9)

Rajkot 12.3 (3.6) Gandhinagar 25.9 (6.4)


5 Total Oilseeds

Rajkot 488.9 (16.6) Junagadh 417.0 (14.9)


Jamnagar 404.9 (13.8) Rajkot 407.1 (14.5)

Amreli 351.9 (12.0) Banaskantha 274.7 (9.8)

Bhavnagar 272.3 (9.3) Amreli 262.9 (9.4)

Banaskantha 246.5 (8.4) Kachchh 177.2 (6.3)

Mehsana 236.0 (8.0) Bhavnagar 141.1 (5.0)


Note: Figures in parentheses show the district's percentage share in state total area under oilseeds. Sources: (i) Season and Crop Report 1991-92 to 1993-94, Directorate of Agriculture, Krishi Bhavan, Gujarat State, Gandhinagar (ii) Gujarat Agriculture Statistics at a Glance 2010-11, Directorate of Agriculture, Gujarat State, Gandhinagar

42

District District

1


Bhavnagar 210.2 (18.0) Junagadh 638.0 (24.8)

Amreli 169.0 (14.5) Rajkot 428.6 (16.7)

Rajkot 143.7 (12.3) Amreli 198.7 (7.7)

Kachchh 112.2 (9.6) Porbandar 175.8 (6.8)

Jamnagar 109.9 (9.4) Bhavnagar 136.7 (5.3)

Surat 28.1 (2.4) Kachchh 120.8 (4.7)

Gujarat 1169.0 (100.0) Gujarat 2572.2 (100.0)

2


Mahesana 150.4 (41.5) Patan 69.0 (16.9)

Sabarkantha 15.4 (4.2) Mahesana 66.0 (16.1)

Ahmedabad 10.3 (2.8) Kachchh 16.8 (4.1)

Kheda 7.3 (2.0) Sabarkantha 14.9 (3.7)

Kachchh 6.0 (1.7) Gandhinagar 11.2 (2.7)

Gandhinagar 5.6 (1.5) Kheda 5.1 (1.3)

Gujarat 362.6 (100.0) Gujarat 408.9 (100.0)

3

Bhavnagar 16.5 (19.9) Surendranagar 30.6 (30.0)

Amreli 14.5 (17.6) Kachchh 16.7 (16.3)

Surendranagar 10.4 (12.6) Bhavnagar 11.5 (11.3)

Rajkot 8.6 (10.5) Banaskantha 8.8 (8.6)

Jamnagar 6.4 (7.7) Amreli 7.1 (7.0)

Junagadh 5.7 (6.9) Rajkot 7.1 (7.0)

Mahesana 3.9 (4.7) Jamnagar 5.7 (5.6)

Gujarat 82.6 (100.0) Gujarat 102.1 (100.0)

4


Mahesana 146.6 (26.6) Mahesana 101.4 (12.7)

Sabarkantha 100.5 (18.2) Kachchh 93.2 (11.7)

Kachchh 27.6 (5.0) Sabarkantha 82.7 (10.4)

Ahmedabad 25.2 (4.6) Surendranagar 65.6 (8.2)

Gandhinagar 17.4 (3.2) Patan 61.1 (7.7)

Rajkot 16.6 (3.0) Gandhinagar 56.4 (7.1)

Gujarat 551.4 (100.0) Gujarat 797.1 (100.0)

5

Banaskantha 311.2 (14.4) Jamnagar 684.6 (17.6)

Mahesana 302.9 (14.0) Junagadh 643.0 (16.6)

Junagadh 300.9 (13.9) Rajkot 463.2 (11.9)

Bhavnagar 227.9 (10.5) Banaskantha 441.1 (11.4)

Amreli 186.3 (8.6) Kachchh 247.4 (6.4)

Rajkot 172.7 (8.0) Amreli 207.8 (5.4)

Kachchh 149.2 (6.9) Mahesana 177.8 (4.6)

Gujarat 2165.6 (100.0) Gujarat 3880.4 (100.0)

Table 3.8: Share of major districts in oilseeds production in the Gujarat State: TE 1993-

94 and TE 2009-10

Production Production

Note: Figures in parentheses show the district's percentage share in state total

oilseeds production.

Sources: Same as Table 3.7

(Production in 000' tonne)

Sesamum

Castor

Total Oilseeds

Sl.

No.

TE 1993-94 TE 2009-10

Groundnut

Rapeseed-Mustard

43

Irrigation provision plays a critical role in expansion and stability in production

and productivity of oilseeds. Expansion of irrigation facilities would also help in area

expansion under various oilseeds in the state. As presented in Table 3.9,

Banaskantha, Mehsana, Kachchh, Patan, Sabarkantha and Gandhinagar were the

major districts where more irrigated oilseeds were increased during both Kharif and

Rabi seasons of TE 2003-04. The shares of other districts were very less ranging

from 0.1 per cent to 3.9 per cent of state irrigated oilseeds acreage. It is highly

desirable that irrigation facilities be expanded for further growth in oilseeds acreage

and production in the state.

Ahmedabad 14.9 (3.8) 8.7 (2.4) 2.3 (0.9) 2.4 (1.0) 17.2 (2.5) 11.1 (1.7)

Banaskantha 85.6 (21.6) 86.6 (23.5) 127.5 (52.8) 133.9 (58.3) 213.6 (31.2) 221.4 (33.7)

Vadodara 8.3 (2.1) 7.2 (1.9) 0.2 (0.1) 0.1 (0.1) 13.6 (2.0) 11.5 (1.7)

Bharuch 0.5 (0.1) 0.9 (0.2) 0.1 (0.0) 0.2 (0.1) 1.6 (0.2) 1.7 (0.3)

Narmada 0.3 (0.1) 0.5 (0.1) 0.0 (0.0) 0.0 (0.0) 0.7 (0.1) 1.1 (0.2)

Valsad 0.5 (0.1) 0.6 (0.2) 0.0 (0.0) 0.0 (0.0) 0.6 (0.1) 0.6 (0.1)

Navsari 0.2 (0.0) 0.1 (0.0) 0.0 (0.0) 0.1 (0.0) 0.3 (0.0) 0.4 (0.1)

Dang 0.0 (0.0) 0.0 (0.0) 0.0 (0.0) 0.0 (0.0) 0.1 (0.0) 0.1 (0.0)

Gandhinagar 17.4 (4.4) 20.1 (5.5) 6.4 (2.7) 6.9 (3.0) 24.0 (3.5) 27.4 (4.2)

Kheda 11.2 (2.8) 9.8 (2.7) 3.5 (1.5) 2.1 (0.9) 15.2 (2.2) 12.1 (1.8)

Anand 0.9 (0.2) 1.7 (0.5) 1.3 (0.6) 2.2 (1.0) 2.3 (0.3) 4.2 (0.6)

Mehsana 52.6 (13.3) 37.0 (10.0) 64.8 (26.9) 42.0 (18.3) 117.8 (17.2) 79.3 (12.1)

Patan 15.5 (3.9) 19.3 (5.2) 20.7 (8.6) 25.6 (11.1) 36.2 (5.3) 44.9 (6.8)

Panchmahal 1.3 (0.3) 1.3 (0.4) 0.3 (0.1) 0.2 (0.1) 3.1 (0.5) 2.8 (0.4)

Dahod 0.0 (0.0) 0.0 (0.0) 0.0 (0.0) 0.1 (0.0) 0.0 (0.0) 0.3 (0.1)

Sabarkantha 33.8 (8.5) 30.0 (8.2) 6.0 (2.5) 5.0 (2.2) 47.6 (6.9) 40.8 (6.2)

Surat 0.0 (0.0) 0.2 (0.1) 0.3 (0.1) 0.7 (0.3) 5.9 (0.9) 7.2 (1.1)

Amreli 7.0 (1.8) 12.6 (3.4) 0.3 (0.1) 0.3 (0.1) 7.9 (1.1) 13.7 (2.1)

Bhavnagar 3.6 (0.9) 2.5 (0.7) 0.3 (0.1) 0.3 (0.1) 4.5 (0.7) 13.1 (2.0)

Jamnagar 21.7 (5.5) 26.4 (7.2) 0.3 (0.1) 1.0 (0.5) 22.7 (3.3) 28.8 (4.4)

Junagadh 30.5 (7.7) 20.7 (5.6) 0.2 (0.1) 0.2 (0.1) 32.5 (4.7) 27.9 (4.2)

Porbandar 1.7 (0.4) 3.1 (0.8) 0.1 (0.0) 0.2 (0.1) 1.8 (0.3) 3.4 (0.5)

Kachhch 54.4 (13.7) 54.8 (14.9) 5.9 (2.4) 5.3 (2.3) 77.7 (11.3) 77.7 (11.8)

Rajkot 12.3 (3.1) 8.7 (2.4) 0.5 (0.2) 0.3 (0.1) 13.1 (1.9) 9.7 (1.5)

Surendarnagar 22.4 (5.6) 15.3 (4.1) 0.3 (0.1) 0.3 (0.1) 24.7 (3.6) 16.4 (2.5)

Gujarat State 396.6 (100.0) 368.2 (100.0) 241.3 (100.0) 229.6 (100.0) 685.3 (100.0) 657.6 (100.0)

Table 3.9: Irrigated area under Oilseeds in the state: TE 2001-02 and TE 2003-04

Note: Figure in parentheses show the district's per cent share in state acreage

Source: Season and Crop Reports, Various years (1999-2000 to 2003-04), Directorate of Agriculture, Krishi

Bhavan, Gandhinagar, Gujarat

Kharif Rabi Total

Districts

(Area in 000' hectare)

TE 2001-02 TE 2003-04 TE 2001-02 TE 2003-04 TE 2001-02 TE 2003-04

44

3.4. Variability in Area, Production and Yield of Major Oilseed (Groundnut)

vis-à-vis Competing Crop (Cotton)

3.4.1 Overall Growth and Variability in Main Oilseed and Competing Crop

Groundnut was found to be the major oilseed crop while the cotton was found to be

its major competing crop in Gujarat during TE 2009-10. The growth in area under

groundnut was considerably high during 1950s (10.3%). However, it has exhibited

negative trend since 1960s except 1970s. The compound annual growth rate of area

under groundnut was -2.7 per cent during 1960s that has marginally increased to 1.0

per cent during 1970s and thereafter continued to exhibit negative annual growth

(Table 3.10). In absolute term, the annual average area under groundnut has

increased from 1245.9 thousand ha during 1950s to 2252.8 thousand ha during

1970s and thereafter continued to fall to 1879.2 thousand ha during 1990s. There has

been some marginal increase in area during 2000s. The average annual production

and yield of groundnut has significantly increased from 703.4 thousand tonnes and

564.6 kg/ha during 1950s to 2550.7 thousand tonnes and 1327.9 kg/ha during 2000s.

A/P/Y

Mean CAGR Mean CAGR Mean CAGR Mean CAGR Mean CAGR Mean CAGR Mean CAGR

1245.9 10.3 1987.4 -2.7 2252.8 1.0 1928.8 -1.9 1879.2 -1.4 1920.8 -0.4 1868.3 1.4

703.4 25.3 1259.9 2.6 1515.9 -0.9 1435.7 -8.4 1559.1 -0.4 2550.7 -5.0 1486.4 4.2

564.6 13.6 633.9 5.4 672.9 -1.8 744.4 -6.6 829.7 1.0 1327.9 -4.6 795.6 2.8

1561.0 4.3 1733.2 0.3 1887.8 -3.7 1257.6 -4.1 1443.8 3.7 2061.6 4.4 1650.6 1.2

1000.0 14.7 1590.4 3.8 1929.7 -5.5 1597.5 -3.1 2348.8 -0.4 5599.6 20.2 2289.2 5.0

640.6 10.0 917.6 3.5 1022.2 -1.8 1270.3 1.0 1626.8 -3.9 2716.1 15.1 1386.8 3.8

(2) Cotton production in bales (1 bale = 170kg).

Sources: Gujarat Agriculture Statistics at a Glance 2010-11, Directorate of Agriculture, Gujarat State, Gandhinagar

(38.5)

(21.2)

Notes: (1) Figures in parentheses are the CV in per cent.

(79.2)

Yield (kg/ha)

(24.1) (10.3) (14.4) (26.6) (30.8) (35.4) (54.7)

Production

(’000 tonnes) (33.4) (10.5) (19.2) (32.9)

(58.5)

Yield (kg/ha)

(33.5) (29.3) (49.0) (54.0) (56.3) (39.8) (53.5)

Groundnut (main oilseed crop)

Area (000

hectares) (38.0) (10.9) (44.4) (12.8) (4.4) (3.8) (29.5)

Table 3.10: Trends in average area, production, and yield of major oilseed (groundnut) vis-a-vis major

competing crop (cotton) in the state

1951-52 to

1960-61

1961-62 to

1970-71

1971-72 to

1980-81

1981-82 to

1990-91

1991-92 to

2000-01

2001-02 to

2009-10

1951-52 to

2009-10

(45.6)

Production

(’000 tonnes) (57.0) (26.8) (40.9) (55.0) (55.2) (41.0)

Cotton (main competing crop)

Area (000

hectares) (18.2) (3.0) (10.4) (18.5) (13.9) (16.8)

45

Figure 3.4. Growth in Area (‘000 ha), Yield (Kg/ha) and Production (‘000 tonnes) of Groundnut in Gujarat

(1951-52 to 2009-10)

0

1000

2000

3000

4000

5000

60001

95

1-5

2

19

53

-54

19

55

-56

19

57

-58

19

59

-60

19

61

-62

19

63

-64

19

65

-66

19

67

-68

19

69

-70

19

71

-72

19

73

-74

19

75

-76

19

77

-78

19

79

-80

19

81

-82

19

83

-84

19

85

-86

19

87

-88

19

89

-90

19

91

-92

19

93

-94

19

95

-96

19

97

-98

19

99

-00

20

01

-02

20

03

-04

20

05

-06

20

07

-08

20

09

-10

Groundnut Area Groundnut Production Groundnut Yield

Figure 3.5. Growth in Area (000 ha), Yield (Kg/ha) and Production (000 tonnes) of Cotton in Gujarat

(1951-52 to 2009-10)

0

1000

2000

3000

4000

5000

6000

7000

8000

9000

19

51

-52

19

53

-54

19

55

-56

19

57

-58

19

59

-60

19

61

-62

19

63

-64

19

65

-66

19

67

-68

19

69

-70

19

71

-72

19

73

-74

19

75

-76

19

77

-78

19

79

-80

19

81

-82

19

83

-84

19

85

-86

19

87

-88

19

89

-90

19

91

-92

19

93

-94

19

95

-96

19

97

-98

19

99

-00

20

01

-02

20

03

-04

20

05

-06

20

07

-08

20

09

-10

Cotton Area Cotton Production Cotton Yield

46

Overall, the growth in production and yield of groundnut has been quite

impressive during 1990s and 2000s. However, the extent of variability in its area,

production and yield has also been quite large in terms of the level of fluctuations in

annual growth rates and magnitude of coefficient of variation (CV). On the other hand,

the growth in production and area under the main competing crop (cotton) has been

better. It may be seen from Figures 3.4 and 3.5 that the growth in production and

yield of cotton was outstanding during 2000s while compared with the groundnut.

While production and yield of groundnut has increased from 1559.1 thousand tonnes

and 829.7 kg/ha during 1990s to 2550.7 thousand tonnes and 1327.9 kg/ha during

2000s respectively; the production and yield of cotton has increased from 2348.8

thousand bales and 1626.8 bale/ha during 1990s to 5599.6 thousand bales and

2716.1 bale/ha during 2000s respectively. Not only the production and yield of

groundnut were less, the variability in production and yield of groundnut was much

larger than that of cotton. The CV of area and production of groundnut during the

reference periods was higher than that of cotton.

3.4.2 Inter-District Variation in Total Area and Production of Groundnut

As discussed earlier, Gujarat stands first in the cultivation of groundnut in the country.

The share of groundnut in total oilseeds in the state is about 66.4 per cent in TE

2009-10 (Table 3.11 and Figure 3.6). Over the last three decades, some districts like

Rajkot, Junagadh, Jamnagar, Amreli and Bhavnagar have dominated in terms of area

and production of groundnut. These five districts accounted for about 90 per cent of

total groundnut area of the state. However, the share of these major districts has

marginally declined over the years. Among these five districts, the share of Rajkot

and Amreli in total groundnut area has declined whereas the share of Junagadh and

Jamnagar has increased during the corresponding period. The share of Rajkot,

Amreli and Bhavnagar in total area under groundnut has reduced from respectively

22.6 per cent, 15.7 per cent and 11.6 per cent during TE 1993-94 to 20.4 per cent,

13.1 per cent and 6.1 per cent during TE 2009-10. On the other hand, the districts like

Junagadh and Jamnagar have experienced considerable increase in the area under

groundnut from 21.0 per cent and 18.5 per cent during TE 1993-94 to 22.2 per cent

and 20.7 per cent during TE 2009-10. Some districts whose share in area under

groundnut has remained somewhat stagnant are Mehsana, Banaskantha, Kheda,

Vadodara and Bharuch.

47

However, the major groundnut growing districts like Rajkot, Junagadh,

Jamnagar, Amreli, Surat and Bhavnagar have dominated in terms of area under

groundnut as a percent of total oilseeds area in the corresponding district. The share

of groundnut in total oilseeds acreage was more than 85 per cent in these districts

(Table 3.11). The major groundnut producing districts have exhibited similar pattern.

As is revealed from Table 3.12 and Figure 3.7, the similar pattern has also

emerged in production of groundnut in various districts of the state. The districts with

higher area under groundnut such as Rajkot, Junagadh, Jamnagar, Amreli and

Bhavnagar have dominated in terms of their share in production of groundnut in the

state. The district’s share in state’s total production of groundnut in Amreli, Bhavnagar

and Kachchh has declined from 14.5 per cent, 18.0 per cent and 9.6 per cent in TE

1993-94 to 7.7 per cent, 5.3 per cent and 4.7 per cent in TE 2009-10 respectively. At

the state level, the share of production of groundnut in total oilseeds production has

increased from 54.0 per cent in TE 1993-94 to 66.3 per cent in TE 2009-10.

TE 1993-94 TE 2003-04 TE 2009-10

Rajkot 443.2 (22.6) 414.7 (21.1) 380.6 (20.4) 90.6 88.9 93.5

Junagadh 411.9 (21.0) 413.6 (21.1) 413.1 (22.2) 94.7 96.6 99.1

Jamnagar 362.7 (18.5) 418.4 (21.3) 385.9 (20.7) 89.6 92.5 94.7

Amreli 308.7 (15.7) 284.7 (14.5) 243.8 (13.1) 87.7 85.7 92.7

Bhavnagar 227.4 (11.6) 174.7 (8.9) 113.2 (6.1) 83.5 79.9 80.2

Kachhch 68.9 (3.5) 77.2 (3.9) 75.8 (4.1) 57.6 47.5 42.8

Surendarnagar 30.0 (1.5) 23.3 (1.2) 17.6 (0.9) 35.6 18.8 14.5

Surat 27.3 (1.4) 18.4 (0.9) 9.5 (0.5) 95.8 87.9 96.6

Sabarkantha 20.2 (1.0) 35.4 (1.8) 64.7 (3.5) 21.0 41.4 50.9

Panchmahal 19.5 (1.0) 2.1 (0.1) 3.0 (0.2) 73.2 32.3 41.0

Vadodara 12.8 (0.6) 7.9 (0.4) 14.0 (0.7) 45.7 34.4 43.2

Kheda 10.0 (0.5) 0.6 (0.0) 1.6 (0.1) 25.3 2.3 6.8

Bharuch 9.4 (0.5) 1.4 (0.1) 2.2 (0.1) 50.0 15.8 17.5

Banaskantha 3.2 (0.2) 3.8 (0.2) 25.1 (1.3) 1.3 1.5 9.2

Mehsana 2.7 (0.1) 3.4 (0.2) 4.1 (0.2) 1.1 3.6 3.7

Porbandar 0.0 (0.0) 73.9 (3.8) 88.8 (4.8) NA 95.5 99.3

Gujarat 1963.9 (100.0) 1961.2 (100.0) 1862.4 (100.0) 66.9 66.9 66.4

Note: Figure in parentheses show the district's per cent share in state acreage

Sources: (i) Season and Crop Reports, various issues (1991-92 to 1993-94), Directorate of Agriculture,

Krishi Bhavan, Gujarat State, Gandhinagar.

TE 1993-94 TE 2003-04 TE 2009-10

Table 3.11: Share of Major Districts in Area under Groundnut in Gujarat

(Area in '000 hectare)

Share of district's groundnut area in state's total

area under groundnut

District Share of groundnut area in total

oilseed acreage of the district

48

TE 1993-94 TE 2003-04 TE 2009-10

Rajkot 143.7 (12.3) 517.2 (18.7) 428.6 (16.7) 83.2 93.2 92.5

Junaghadh 283.3 (24.2) 731.7 (26.5) 638.0 (24.8) 94.2 98.2 99.2

Jamnagar 109.9 (9.4) 493.6 (17.9) 645.4 (25.1) 87.3 92.2 94.3

Amreli 169.0 (14.5) 431.1 (15.6) 198.7 (7.7) 90.7 92.7 95.7

Bhavnagar 210.2 (18.0) 205.7 (7.5) 136.7 (5.3) 92.3 87.8 91.6

Kachhch 112.2 (9.6) 106.9 (3.9) 120.8 (4.7) 75.2 54.0 48.8

Surendarnagar 26.1 (2.2) 31.2 (1.1) 31.9 (1.2) 61.2 33.2 24.6

Surat 28.1 (2.4) 23.4 (0.8) 13.4 (0.5) 96.8 90.1 96.0

Sabarkantha 21.7 (1.9) 39.0 (1.4) 68.2 (2.7) 15.5 50.9 40.9

Panchmahal 21.1 (1.8) 3.0 (0.1) 4.7 (0.2) 75.2 35.5 45.0

Vadodara 12.2 (1.0) 11.5 (0.4) 23.7 (0.9) 41.9 38.1 47.4

Kheda 16.3 (1.4) 0.9 (0.0) 2.3 (0.1) 39.2 3.7 7.7

Bharuch 9.0 (0.8) 1.9 (0.1) 3.2 (0.1) 56.3 22.0 18.2

Banaskantha 2.4 (0.2) 4.9 (0.2) 42.3 (1.6) 0.8 1.3 9.6

Mehsana 1.9 (0.2) 4.8 (0.2) 5.6 (0.2) 0.6 3.9 3.2

Porbandar 0.0 (0.0) 142.7 (5.2) 175.8 (6.8) NA 97.2 99.4

Gujarat 1169.0 (100.0) 2760.3 (100.0) 2572.2 (100.0) 54.0 72.2 66.3

Note: Figure in parentheses show the district's per cent share in state's total production of groundnut.

Sources: (i) Season and Crop Reports, various issues (1991-92 to 1993-94), Directorate of Agriculture,

Krishi Bhavan, Gujarat State, Gandhinagar.

(ii) Gujarat Agriculture Statistics at a Glance 2010-11, Directorate of Agriculture, Gujarat State,

Gandhinagar.

Table 3.12: Share of Major Districts in Production of Groundnut in Gujarat

(Production in '000 tonne)

District Share of district's groundnut production in

state's total groundnut production

Share of groundnut production in total

oilseed production of the district

TE 1993-94 TE 2003-04 TE 2009-10

49

Figure 3.6. Changing share of districts in area under groundnut in Gujarat

Ahmedabad0%

Banaskantha0%

Vadodara1%

Bharuch0%

Narmada0%

Valsad0%

Navsari0%

The Dangs0%

Gandhinagar0%

Kheda1%

Anand0%

Mahesana0%

Patan0%

Panchamahals

1%Dahod0%

Sabarkantha1%

Surat1%

Tapi0%

Amreli16%

Bhavnagar12%

Jamnagar18%

Junagadh21%

Porbandar0%

Kutch4%

Rajkot23%

Surendranagar

2%

TE 1993-94Ahmedabad

0%Banaskantha

1%Vadodara

1%Bharuch

0%Narmada

0%Valsad

0%Navsari

0%The Dangs

0%Gandhinagar

0%

Kheda0%Anand

0%Mahesana

0%Patan

0%

Panchamahals

0%

Dahod0%

Sabarkantha3%

Surat1%

Tapi0%

Amreli13%

Bhavnagar6%

Jamnagar21%

Junagadh22%

Porbandar5%

Kachchh4%

Rajkot20%

Surendranagar

1%

TE 2009-10

Figure 3.7. Changing share of districts in groundnut production in Gujarat

Ahmedabad0%

Anand0%

Banaskantha0%

Bharuch1%

Dahod0%

Dang0%

Gandhinagar0% Kheda

1%Mehsana

0%

Narmada0%

Navsari0%

Panchmahal2%

Patan0%

Sabarkantha2%

Surat2%

Tapi0%

Vadodara1%

Valsad0%

Amreli14%

Bhavnagar18%

Jamnagar9%

Junagadh24%

Kutch10%

Porbandar0%

Rajkot12%

Surendrnagar

2%

TE 1993-94

Ahmedabad0%

Anand0%

Banaskantha2%

Bharuch0%

Dahod0%

Dang0%

Gandhinagar0%

Kheda0%

Mehsana0%

Narmada0%

Navsari0%

Panchmahal0%

Patan0%

Sabarkantha3%

Surat1%

Tapi0%

Vadodara1%

Valsad0%

Amreli8% Bhavnagar

5%

Jamnagar25%

Junagadh25%

Kutch5%

Porbandar7%

Rajkot17%

Surendrnagar

1%

TE 2009-10TE 2009-10

TE 2009-10

50

3.4.3 Inter-District Variation in Irrigated Area under Groundnut

The variability in area and production of oilseeds is largely linked to availability of

irrigation facilities. The share of irrigated area under groundnut to total area under

groundnut in the state has marginally increased from 8.3 per cent in TE 1993-94 to

10.5 per cent in TE 2007-08 (Table 3.13). However, the share of irrigated area under

groundnut to total irrigated area of the state has declined from 5.3 per cent in TE

1993-94 to 3.8 per cent in TE 2007-08.

Table 3.13: Share of Groundnut Irrigated Area in Gross Irrigated Area of the State (In percentage)

District

Share of irrigated groundnut to groundnut area of the district

Share of irrigated groundnut to gross irrigated area of the district

TE 1993-94 TE 2003-04 TE 2007-08 TE 1993-94 TE 2003-04 TE 2007-08

Ahmedabad 7.6 33.3 20.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Amreli 3.0 3.6 3.4 14.4 9.1 5.1

Anand 0.0 90.0 100.0 0.0 0.2 0.3 Banaskantha 21.8 22.8 9.8 0.2 0.2 0.4 Bharuch 46.2 48.8 56.4 6.6 0.7 0.9 Bhavnagar 9.2 6.7 18.8 15.4 6.2 8.3 Dahod 0.0 14.3 25.8 0.0 0.6 0.6 Dangs 0.0 4.4 9.0 0.0 31.3 29.5 Gandhinagar 52.4 25.0 14.2 0.2 0.4 0.3 Jamnagar 3.1 4.7 5.8 16.1 17.6 8.0 Junagadh 2.2 5.0 14.8 8.0 12.6 16.0 Kachchh 69.9 63.3 25.7 39.4 23.6 8.9 Kheda 74.9 26.3 44.0 2.1 0.1 0.1 Mehsana 24.7 9.7 15.7 0.1 0.1 0.2 Narmada 0.0 47.1 91.1 0.0 2.2 6.3 Navsari 0.0 57.1 80.0 0.0 0.1 0.3 Panchmahals 56.0 57.8 78.4 9.3 2.7 3.3 Patan 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Porbandar 0.0 3.2 1.8 0.0 12.8 3.4 Rajkot 1.3 0.4 1.9 3.6 0.8 1.9 Sabarkantha 22.5 17.9 14.4 2.7 3.6 3.0 Surat 25.3 33.8 54.0 3.4 2.4 3.7 Surendranagar 48.9 22.9 44.7 13.5 4.2 3.9

Tapi 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 17.8 Vadodara 55.4 54.4 89.9 3.9 1.8 4.5 Valsad 43.4 0.0 21.4 0.3 0.0 0.2 Gujarat 8.3 7.3 10.5 5.3 3.8 3.8

Sources: (i) Groundnut in Gujarat year 1990-99, Directorate of Economics and Statistics, Gujarat, Gandhinagar. (ii) Season and Crop Reports, various years (1999-2000 to 2004-05), Directorate of Agriculture, Krishi Bhavan, Gandhinagar.

It may also be noted that the distribution of irrigated area under groundnut and

total irrigated area has been much skewed. The districts belonging to North Gujarat

and Central Gujarat have enjoyed the major share of irrigated area from Sardar

Sarovar Project. The share of irrigated groundnut area to groundnut area of the

51

district was more in some districts like Anand, Bharuch, Kheda, Kachchh, Narmada,

Navsari, and Panchmahals. These districts have also better status in terms of the

share of irrigated groundnut area to gross irrigated area of the district.

3.4.4 Inter-district Variation in Growth Rates in Area, Production and

Productivity of Groundnut

There has been wide variation in the positions of the districts in terms of growth in

area, production and yield of groundnut during last few decades in the state. As

presented in Table 3.15, out of a total of 26, the number of districts that achieved

significant positive growth in area under groundnut during 1990s and 2000s were 7

and 11 respectively. On the other hand, the number of districts that experienced

significant negative growth in area under groundnut during 1990s and 2000s were 8

and 3 respectively. Thus the growth in area under groundnut in the state was much

better during 2000s than 1990s. The major districts with significant positive growth in

area under groundnut during 2000s were Ahmedabad (12.0%), Anand (9.3%),

Banaskantha (33.1%), Bharuch (5.6%), Dangs (6.5%), Gandhinagar (10.0%), Kheda

(16.4%), Narmada (17.6%), Panchmahals (5.7%), Sabarkantha (10.3%) and

Porbandar (3.2%).

During the entire period of 1991-92 to 2009-10, the first five positions for the

growth in area under groundnut were occupied by Anand (9.3%), Banaskantha

(11.7%), Dangs (7.6%), Gandhinagar (27.6%) and Mehsana (2.2%), which were, in

fact, not the major producers of the groundnut in the state. Jamnagar, Junagadh,

Rajkot and Valsad were the major districts where the growth in area under groundnut

has been stagnated during the 1990s. Similarly, Jamnagar, Rajkot, Amreli, Dahod

and Mehsana also experienced a stagnant growth in area under groundnut during

2000s. However, some of these districts were the major groundnut producing districts

in the state.

Similar trend has been observed in the case of production of groundnut in

Gujarat. However, the growth in production of groundnut has been much better than

the growth in area under the groundnut. Furthermore, the growth in production of

groundnut has been much better during 2000s compared to 1990s. More number of

districts (19) have exhibited considerable positive growth during 2000s (Table 3.15).

Similarly, the growth in yield has also been better during 2000s (Table 3.16).

52

Table 3.14: Classification of Districts According to Growth in Area under Groundnut in Gujarat

Degree of growth#

1990s (1991-92 to 2000-01)

2000s (2000-01 to 2009-10)

1991-92 to 2009-10

Significant Positive growth in Area

Ahmedabad (11.35*), Banaskantha (7.11**), Dangs (6.54**), Gandhinagar (24.36***), Mehsana (3.93**), Sabarkantha (3.81***) Kachhch (3.82)

Ahmedabad (12.01**),Anand (9.26**), Banaskantha (33.11***),Bharuch (5.59**), Dangs (6.54***), Gandhinagar (9.96***),Kheda (16.41***), Narmada (17.58***), Panchmahals (5.66*), Sabarkantha (10.28***), Porbandar (3.17***)

Anand (9.26**, Banaskantha (11.74***), Dangs (7.64), Gandhinagar (27.61***), Mehsana (2.15***), Narmada (17.58***), Sabarkantha (7.75***), Porbandar (3.17***)

Significant Negative Growth in Area

Bharuch (-11.28***), Kheda (-14.88***), Panchmahals ( -10.70***), Surat ( -3.63***), Vadodara (-2.20), Amreli(-2.47***), Bhavnagar (-4.08***), Surendrnagar (-3.25***)

Surat (-8.95**), Tapi (-13.64), Surendrnagar (-4.45**)

Ahmedabad (-7.58**), Bharuch (-10.12***), Kheda (-14.64)***, Panchmahals (-13.55)***, Surat (-5.23***), Valsad(-8.32***), Bhavnagar (-3.56), Surendrnagar (-3.03***)

Positive Stagnant Area

Valsad (1.43), Jamnagar (0.58), Junagadh (0.82)

Dahod (1.14), Mehsana (1.96), Navsari (0.55), Valsad (0.71)

Dahod (1.14), Navsari (0.55), Jamnagar (0.54*), Junagadh (0.12)

Negative Stagnant Area

Rajkot (-1.17*) Amreli (-1.77**), Jamnagar (-0.74), Kachchh (-1.10), Rajkot (-0.78)

Vadodara (-1.32), Amreli (-0.98***), Kachchh (-0.80), Rajkot (-0.57***)

Notes: (1) *, **, *** represent the significant level at 10%, 5% and 1% level of significance, respectively. (2) # Significant Positive growth implies annual growth rate upto +2; significant negative growth implies annual growth rate less than -2.0; positive stagnant growth implies annual growth rate between 0 and +1.0; and negative stagnant growth implies annual growth rate between 0 and -1.0. (3) Figures in parentheses are the CAGR in percent.

Sources: Computed from (i) Season and Crop Reports, various issues (1991-92 to 1993-94),

Directorate of Agriculture, Krishi Bhavan, Gujarat State, Gandhinagar. (ii) Gujarat Agriculture

Statistics at a Glance 2010-11, Directorate of Agriculture, Gujarat State, Gandhinagar.

Ahmedabad (3.81%), Banaskantha (2.98%), Dangs (12.50%), Gandhinagar

(5.01%) and Mehsana (3.45%) occupied first five positions during 1990s in terms of

significant positive growth in production of groundnut. However, during 2000s, the first

five positions were occupied by Ahmedabad (14.00%), Anand (43.44%),

Banaskantha (11.55%), Bharuch (10.04%) and Dahod (25.84%) for achieving

significant positive growth in production of groundnut. It may be noted that about 15

districts out of 26 districts of the state (57.7%) have achieved significant positive

growth in production of groundnut during a sufficiently longer period of 1990-91 to

2009-10. Remaining 11 districts which were not the major producers of the crop

53

experienced negative growth in production of groundnut during the corresponding

period. It may be noted that the growth rates in production and productivity of

groundnut in the majority of the districts were statistically insignificant during 1990s

but statistically significant during 2000s.

Table 3.15: Classification of Districts According to Growth in Groundnut Production in Gujarat.

Degree of growth#

1990s (1991-92 to 2000-01)

2000s (2000-01 to 2009-10)

1991-92 to 2009-10

Significant Increase in Production

Ahmedabad (3.81), Banaskantha (2.98), Dangs (12.50), Gandhinagar (5.01), Mehsana (3.45), Narmada (6.18), Sabarkantha (3.74*), Junagadh (7.21), Porbandar (26.35)

Ahmedabad (14.00), Anand (43.44***), Banaskantha (11.55***), Bharuch (10.04***), Dahod (25.84***), Dangs (3.67), Kheda (17.76)*, Mehsana (12.58*), Narmada (18.58***), Navsari (12.53***), Panchmahals (3.77), Patan (3.91), Kachchh (8.20), Sabarkantha (10.20)*, Surat (5.88), Tapi (12.34**), Valsad (39.47***), Jamnagar (20.91), Porbandar (3.13)

Anand (28.80***), Banaskantha (14.05***), Dahod (10.36***), Mehsana (5.29**), Narmada (3.65**), Tapi (40.06***), Valsad (10.14**), Jamnagar (16.17**), Junagadh (4.65**), Kachchh (2.62*), Porbandar (44.11***), Rajkot (8.23),

Significant Decline in production

Anand (-11.80), Bharuch (-15.73***), Dahod (-6.36), Kheda (-27.80***), Navsari (-3.71), Panchmahals (-20.28**), Patan (-11.80), Surat (-3.21), Valsad ( -7.97), Amreli (-4.81), Bhavnagar (-14.10), Rajkot (-5.36),

Gandhinagar (-2.40), Vadodara (-9.84*), Amreli (-15.77), Bhavnagar (-7.62),

Ahmedabad (-2.98), Bharuch (-7.18***), Dangs (-7.45)**, Kheda (-6.48), Panchmahals (-9.86)***, Patan (-3.57), Sabarkantha (-13.1***), Surat (-18.3***)

Positive trend but statistically non-significant

Ahmedabad, Banaskantha, Dangs, Gandhinagar, Mehsana, Narmada, Tapi, Vadodara, Jamnagar, Junagadh, Kachchh, Porbandar

Ahmedabad, Dangs, Gandhinagar, Panchmahals , Patan, Surat, Amreli, Bhavnagar, Jamnagar, Junagadh, Kachchh, Porbandar, Rajkot, Surendranagar

Gandhinagar, Vadodara, Rajkot, Surendranagar

Negative trend but statistically non-significant

Anand, Dahod, Navsari, Patan, Surat, Valsad, Amreli Bhavnagar, Rajkot, Surendranagar

Gandhinagar, Amreli, Junagadh, Rajkot, Surendranagar, Bhavnagar

Ahmedabad, Kheda, Navsari, Patan, Amreli, Bhavanagar

Notes: (1) *, **, *** represents the significant level at 10%, 5% and 1% level of significance, respectively; (2) # Significant increase in production implies annual growth rate upto +2; significant decline in production implies annual growth rate less than -2.0.; (3) Figures in parentheses are the CAGR in percent. Sources: Computed from (i) Season and Crop Reports, various issues (1991-92 to 1993-94), Directorate of

Agriculture, Krishi Bhavan, Gujarat State, Gandhinagar. (ii) Gujarat Agriculture Statistics at a Glance 2010-11,

Directorate of Agriculture, Gujarat State, Gandhinagar.

54

Table 3.16: Classification of Districts according to Productivity Levels and Growth in Productivity of

Groundnut in the Gujarat State

Criteria Significant increase in yield Significant decline in yield

Stagnant yield with positive sign

Stagnant yield with negative sign

1990s (1991-92 to 2000-01)

High Productivity

Ahmedabad (4.98), Bharuch (1.75), Panchmahals (18.16***), Valsad (16.42), Junagadh (10.12), Surendranagar (3.27)

Dangs (-21.67***), Gandhinagar (-12.32), Mehsana (-11.27***)

Nil Nil

Low Productivity

Surat (6.48*), Vadodara (14.54***), Amreli (5.69), Jamnagar (19.17), Rajkot (8.78)

Nil

Anand (0.00), Banaskantha (0.00), Dahod (0.00), Kheda (0.00), Narmada (0.00), Navsari (0.00), Patan (0.00), Sabarkantha (0.00), Tapi (0.00), Bhavnagar (0.00), Kachchh (0.00), Porbandar (0.00)

Nil

2000s (2001-02 to 2009-10)

High Productivity

Ahmedabad (1.63), Anand (2.15), Banaskantha (28.48*), Bharuch (6.29*), Gandhinagar (4.13), Vadodara (14.84)*, Junagadh (2.28), Kachchh (5.11**), Porbandar (4.67), Surendranagar (5.33)

Dahod (-8.13), Kheda (-7.28), Navsari (-6.52), Panchmahals (-8.62), Valsad (-6.52)

Nil Nil

Low Productivity

Dangs (15.91), Mehsana (11.18), Narmada (13.00*), Sabarkantha (2.12), Surat (4.54*), Bhavnagar (14.3), Jamnagar (42.3**), Rajkot (17.94)

Amreli (-2.62) Patan (0.00)

Nil

Entire period (1991-92 to 2009-10)

High Productivity

Ahmedabad (4.97), Bharuch (3.26**), Junagadh (4.52**), Surendranagar (4.7***)

Dangs (-13.12***), Gandhinagar (-17.49***), Mehsana(-11.76***)

Panchamahals (0.52), Valsad (0.95)

Nil

Low Productivity

Anand (2.15), Banaskantha (28.48**), Narmada (13.00***), Sabarkantha (2.12), Surat (6.48), Tapi (12.50), Vadodara (276.15***), Bhavnagar (3.28), Jamnagar (15.54**), Kachchh (5.11***), Porbandar (4.67), Rajkot (8.86)

Dahod (-8.13), Kheda (-7.28), Navsari (-6.52), Amreli (-2.62)

Nil Nil

Notes: (1) *, **, *** represents the significant level at 10%, 5% and 1% level of significance, respectively; (2) Figures in parentheses are the CAGR in percent. Sources: Computed from (i) Season and Crop Reports, various years (1991-92 to 1993-94), Directorate of Agriculture,

Krishi Bhavan, Gujarat State, Gandhinagar. (ii) Gujarat Agriculture Statistics at a Glance 2010-11, Directorate of

Agriculture, Gujarat State, Gandhinagar.

55

The trend in growth of yield of groundnut has been magnificent in Gujarat. The

number of districts with high productivity (i.e., productivity higher than the state

average) has increased from 9 during 1990s to 15 during 2000s. During last two

decades, a majority of districts (16) have exhibited significant increase in yield and

not a single district has registered stagnant growth with negative sign. The number of

districts with significant negative growth during 1990s and 2000s was only 3 and 6,

respectively. However, more number of districts (12) experienced stagnant growth

with positive sign during 1990s. The same situation was experienced only by one

district (Patan) during 2000s in the state. As presented in Table 3.16, some districts

with high productivity (yield > state average) and significant increase in yield during

1990s (6) were Ahmedabad (4.98%), Bharuch (1.75%), Panchmahals (18.16%),

Valsad (16.42%), Junagadh (10.12%) and Surendranagar (3.27%). The number of

districts with high productivity and significant increase in yield during 2000s was still

more (10) than that in 1990s. Anand, Banaskantha, Gandhinagar, Vadodara,

Kachchh and Porbandar were some of the districts those have performed well during

2000s over 1990s and entered into the bracket of high productivity and significant

increase in yield.

3.5 Sources of Growth in Oilseeds Production in the State

In preceding section, the pattern of growth in area, production and yield of major

oilseeds in various districts of Gujarat has been analyzed. However, it is imperative to

know about the major sources of the growth in production of total oilseeds, major

oilseed (groundnut) and the major competing crop (cotton) in the state. With the help

of decomposition analysis, the relative contribution of area and yield towards the total

change in production of major oilseed and competing crop has been assessed. The

analysis helped in identifying the sources of growth in output by breaking the change

in production into three effects i.e., area effect, yield effect and interaction effect. The

relative contribution of area, yield and their interaction to change in production of total

oilseeds, main oilseed crop (groundnut) and main competing crop (cotton) in the

selected districts of Gujarat is presented in Table 3.17.

If we consider the case of total oilseeds in the state, the yield effect was found

to contribute more to the change in output during all reference periods including the

overall period of TE1983-84 to TE 2009-10 (Table 3.17). The same was the case for

the study districts except Rajkot during Period I (TE 1983-84 to TE1993-94). The

56

expansion of area under oilseeds was the major source of growth in oilseeds

production in Rajkot during Period I. The yield effects also played a dominant role for

the main oilseed (groundnut) throughout the reference periods in the state. About

110.8 per cent of growth in total oilseeds in Gujarat was due to yield effects during

Period II (TE 1993-94 to TE 2009-10).

Period I Period II Period III

(TE 1983-84

to TE1993-94)

(TE 1993-94 to

TE2009-2010)

(TE 1983-84 to

TE2009-2010)

Area -83.93 -5.79 4.12

Yield 171.19 110.81 93.47

Interaction 12.74 -5.02 2.41

Area 25.97 -4.31 -28.80

Yield 81.07 109.99 148.73

Interaction -7.03 -5.68 -19.93

Area 703.27 29.15 19.89

Yield -728.40 34.94 47.69

Interaction 125.13 35.92 32.41

Area 19.46 -3.59 -28.49

Yield 86.53 108.00 143.93

Interaction -5.99 -4.41 -15.44

Area 28.15 0.24 -13.23

Yield 78.25 99.47 122.95

Interaction -6.40 0.30 -9.72

Area 29.28 24.86 20.16

Yield 61.84 44.49 41.34

Interaction 8.88 30.64 38.50

Area 100.34 -9.94 -2.06

Yield -0.29 132.03 106.63

Interaction -0.04 -22.09 -4.57

Area -26.51 -7.13 -(6.77)

Yield 117.96 124.75 (115.94)

Interaction 8.55 -17.62 -(9.16)

Area -248.68 34.68 17.87

Yield 480.40 22.44 38.87

Interaction -131.72 42.89 43.27

Note: District level data on Porbandar for TE 1983-84 and TE 1993-94 was not available.

Table 3.17: Decomposition of output growth of main oilseed crop (groundnut) and main

competing crop (cotton) in the selected districts of Gujarat

Source: Computed from data collected from: (1) Agriculture Statistics of Gujarat 1996,

Directorate of Economics and Statistics, Government of Gujarat, Gandhinagar.

(2) Gujarat Statistical at a Glance 2010-11, Directorate of Agriculture, Government of Gujarat,

Gandhinagar

State/

Districts

Crop Effects

Gujarat Total oilseeds

Groundnut

(main oilseed)

Cotton

(main competing

crop)

Junagadh Total oilseeds

Groundnut

(main oilseed)

Cotton

(main competing

crop)

Rajkot Total oilseeds

Groundnut

(main oilseed)

Cotton

(main competing

crop)

57

As far as the main oilseed (groundnut) of the state is concerned, the yield

effect accounted for 110.0 per cent of total output growth during the corresponding

period. However, the area effect was dominant during Period I (703.3%) and

interaction effect played a dominant role during Period II (35.9%) for the main

competing crop (cotton) in the state. The area effect in output growth of main oilseed

(groundnut) in Rajkot was negative throughout the reference periods whereas the

area effect in output growth of main competing crop (cotton) in the district was

negative only during Period I which implies that the farmers in the district have given

high priority to competing crop cotton during 1990s and 2000s. In another study

district Junagadh, the area effect of outout growth of cotton was positive and stronger

than that of groundnut.

Overall, the yield effect played significant role for both main oilseed crop and

competing crop in the state, particularly during the Period II. The logical sequence of

arguments brings us to know about the factors responsible for significant increase in

yield during this period. As intuition says, the increase in irrigation coverage, better

nutrient supply through application of adequate fertilizers and pesticides, availability

of quality seeds, increased input use efficiency and availability of better technological

and institutional infrastructure must have played a crucial role in enhancement of

production and productivity of oilseeds and other cash crops during the corresponding

period.

As could be seen from Table 3.18, the growth in supply of various agricultural

inputs in Gujarat state as well as in study districts has been somewhat satisfactory.

The growth in fertilizer use and gross irrigated area was good in the state where as

the growth in irrigated area under total oilseeds was not satisfactory since the annual

growth in irrigated oilseeds was -7.3 per cent during a period of TE 1993-94 to TE

2009-10. The area under irrigated groundnut has increased with a compound annual

growth rate of 2.2 per cent during the overall period of TE 1993-94 to TE 2009-2010.

However, the irrigated area under total oilseeds has decreased in the state as well as

in the study district Junagadh. The fertilizer use has increased in the state by annual

growth of 5.1 per cent.

58

CAGR (%)

(TE 1993-94

to 2009-10)

Irrigated area under

Groundnut (000'Ha)162.30 128.77 142.63 229.10 2.18


Oilseeds (000'Ha)*NA 685.30 657.57 NA -2.04

Total Irrigated Area (000'

Ha)3005.87 3513.33 3773.33 4977.00 3.20

Annual rainfall (mm) 1053.44 643.61 878.17 940.96 -0.70

Fertiliser use (000 MT) 706.30 877.16 907.00 1560.69 5.08


Groundnut (000'Ha)9.13 22.83 20.50 74.40 14.01


Oilseeds (000'Ha)*NA 325.33 279.33 NA -7.34


Ha)**118.00 174.08 163.93 NA 3.34

Annual rainfall (mm) 947.00 612.00 793.33 1286.33 1.93



Groundnut (000'Ha)***NA 0.75 2.37 3.20 19.88


Oilseeds (000'Ha)*NA 18.33 33.67 NA 35.51


Ha)*NA 149.92 18.50 NA -64.87

Annual rainfall (mm)*** NA 407.33 533.67 1235.00 14.87

Fertiliser use (000 MT)* NA 9.99 7.91 NA -11.01


Groundnut (000'Ha)5.63 0.33 1.70 6.60 0.99


Oilseeds (000'Ha)*NA 131.00 97.00 NA -13.95


Ha)**174.53 74.40 218.53 NA 2.27

Annual rainfall (mm) 699.73 361.67 546.33 826.00 1.04


(2) Socio Economic Review, Various issues, Directorate of Economics and Statistics ,

Gujarat State, Gandhinagar

Table 3.18 Growth in input use for oilseeds in the State

Input use Gujarat

TE 1993-94 TE 2001-02 TE 2003-04 TE 2009-10

Junagadh

Porbandar

Rajkot

Notes: (1)* The CAGR has been calculated for the period of TE2001-02 to TE2003-04. (2)

** The CAGR has been calculated for the period of TE 1993-94 to TE2003-04. (3) *** The

CAGR has been calculated for the period of TE 2001-02 to TE2009-10.

Sources: (1) Gujarat Agriculture Statistics at a Glance 2010-11, Directorate of Agriculture,

Gujarat State, Gandhinagar

59

3.6 Variability in Monthly/Annual Prices of Major Oilseeds in the State

The role of various non-price factors in increasing production of oilseeds in the state

has been discussed in the preceding section. It is amenable to discuss the growth

and relevance of price factors in influencing the growth in area and production of

oilseeds in the state. Farmers always desire to get remunerative price for their output

to sustain the agricultural venture, given the fact that they face innumerable number

of production risks and market risks. In this section, it is attempted to examine the

nature of market risks in terms of growth and variability in annual as well as monthly

market prices of selected oilseed and competing crop. The growth in Minimum

Support Prices (MSP) and Farm Harvest Prices (FHP) has been compared and

contrasted.

The extent of growth and variation in Minimum Support Prices (MSP) and

Farm Harvest Prices (FHP) of major oilseeds in the State of Gujarat has been

presented in Table 3.19.

Table 3.19: Variation in Annual Farm Harvest Price and Minimum Support Price in Gujarat

(Rs/ Quintal)

Oilseeds TE 1998-99 TE 2000-01 TE 2009-10

FHP MSP FHP MSP FHP MSP

Major Kharif crops

Groundnut 1360 1040

1339 1138

2318 2100

Sesamum 2352 1060

2101 1188

5272 2850

Cotton 1585 1440

1689 1547

2378 2500

Major Rabi crop

Rapeseed - Mustard 1226 940

1287 1100

2222 1830

Note: FHP stands for farm harvest price; MSP stands for minimum support price

Source: Directorate of Economics and Statistics, Department of Agriculture and Cooperation, Government of India

The growth in annual prices of major oilseeds has been impressive in Gujarat.

The FHP of groundnut and sesamum, which are the major Kharif oilseeds in the

state, has increased from Rs 1360 and Rs 2352, respectively in TE 1998-99 to Rs

2318 and Rs 5272, respectively in TE 2009-10. Similarly, the annual prices of major

Rabi oilseeds Rapeseed-mustard has increased from Rs 1226 in TE 1998-99 to Rs

2222 in TE 2009-10. It was good to find that the FHP of all major oilseeds was much

more than their MSPs in the state except cotton in TE 2009-10.

60

As evident from Tables 3.20 and 3.22, the extent of variability in annual

wholesale price of groundnut was somewhat lower than that of cotton both spatially

and temporally. The coefficient of variation of annual wholesale price of groundnut

was 7.0 per cent in TE 2012 while the coefficient of variation of annual wholesale

price of cotton was 9.8 per cent during the corresponding period in the state. The

variability in price of groundnut in terms of CV was found to be relatively more during

April (15.3%) and August (14.7%). On the other hand, the variability in price of cotton

in terms of CV was found to be relatively more during May to August in TE 2012.

Tables 2.21 and 2.23 present the monthly prices of groundnut and cotton respectively

during TE 2006. It may be noted that the average increase in prices of groundnut and

cotton was much larger between TE 2006 and TE 2012. It was 101.1 per cent for

groundnut and 96.1 per cent for cotton during the corresponding period.

Districts Janu

ary

Februr

ary

March April May June July AugustSepte

mber

Octo

ber

Nove

mber

Dece

mber

CV (%)

across

months

Amreli 3237 3145 3304 3525 3547 3684 3856 3878 3409 3634 3760 3839 7.04

Banaskantha 3105 2904 3181 3904 NA 3723 3809 5050 NA 3622 3574 3687 16.15

Bhavnagar 3272 3176 3310 3578 3516 3607 3848 3972 3669 3556 3719 3991 7.27

Dahod 3184 2968 2950 3373 3618 3898 3610 3667 3238 3270 3152 3917 9.78

Jamnagar 3146 3120 3172 3440 3470 3819 3834 3739 3402 3873 3920 3810 8.58

Junagarh 3110 3138 3375 3563 3865 3635 4017 4160 3704 3532 3576 3707 8.70

Kutch 3128 2703 3153 2240 3181 4060 3845 4216 4138 3277 3396 3124 17.75

Panchmahal NA NA NA 2600 NA 2642 3209 NA NA NA NA NA 12.07

Rajkot 3267 3289 3408 3667 3806 3787 4048 4041 3765 3640 3803 3944 7.18

Sabarkantha 2981 3006 3326 3471 3500 3662 3841 3681 3472 3721 3654 3658 7.80

Surat 3202 2662 3410 3555 3263 3641 3530 3432 2945 3538 3830 3933 10.44

Surendranagar 3629 2737 2462 2694 3326 3193 2919 3058 2852 3335 3292 3481 11.46

Vadodara 2633 2850 2550 NA 3705 3838 3560 2916 2749 3049 3862 3567 15.70

Gujarat 3169 3047 3250 3363 3557 3704 3715 3716 3460 3576 3723 3782 7.04

CV (%) across

districts

7.20 6.91 10.26 15.28 6.12 9.87 8.73 14.69 12.52 6.55 6.63 6.64

Sources: http://agmarkweb.dacnet.nic.in/SA_Pri_MonthD.aspx

Table 3.20: Average wholesale price of main oilseed crop (groundnut) in TE 2012

(Price in Rs/Qtl.)

61

Districts Janu

ary

Februr

ary


mber

Octo

ber

Nove

mber

Dece

mber

CV (%)

across

months

Amreli 1691 1710 1655 1684 1673 1709 1796 1779 1758 1812 1934 1838 4.69

Anand NA NA NA NA NA 1697 NA NA NA NA NA NA NA

Banaskantha 1683 1591 NA NA NA 1604 1696 1768 NA 1648 1680 1553 4.15

Bharuch NA NA NA NA NA NA 1210 NA NA NA NA NA NA

Bhavnagar 1653 1708 1677 1663 1634 1663 1821 1830 1806 1761 1785 1782 4.19

Dahod 1740 1506 1723 1717 1735 1704 1717 1746 1780 1926 1706 1706 5.34

Gandhinagar 1751 1679 1631 1618 1619 1669 1812 1705 1694 1618 1591 1689 3.82

Jamnagar 1678 1684 1663 1659 1633 1624 1735 1683 1646 1764 1806 1818 3.88

Junagarh 1737 1712 1680 1713 1630 1657 1718 1701 1631 1771 1788 1807 3.35

Kutch 1688 1624 1635 2155 1681 1663 2175 1795 1764 1956 1965 1779 10.68

Navsari NA 1718 1790 NA NA NA 1675 NA NA NA NA 2057 9.46

Panchmahal 1775 NA NA NA 1637 1512 1520 1697 NA NA 1550 1753 6.75

Rajkot 1834 1841 1822 1843 1893 1871 1935 2068 2037 1939 1926 1935 4.11

Sabarkantha 1678 1668 1604 1557 1568 1660 1735 1616 1531 1701 1749 1744 4.57

Surat 1772 1813 1764 1840 1759 1618 1733 1831 1480 1792 1920 1853 6.59

Surendranagar 1634 1654 1648 1599 1595 1623 1679 1770 1628 1831 1826 1914 6.29

Vadodara NA NA 1625 2044 1650 1672 1563 1838 2400 2050 NA 15.58

Gujarat 1725 1715 1697 1731 1692 1661 1779 1764 1724 1822 1811 1799 2.93

CV (%) across

districts

3.31 5.13 4.06 9.39 7.85 4.55 11.43 6.75 8.69 10.75 7.99 6.71


Table 3.21: Average Wholesale Price of Main Oilseed Crop (Groundnut) in TE 2006

(Price in Rs/Qtl.)

Districts Janu

ary

Februr

ary


mber

Octo

ber

Nove

mber

Dece

mber

CV (%)

across

months

Ahmedabad 3632 4037 4064 3861 3138 3001 2730 3210 NA 4563 4409 4081 16.33

Amreli 4172 4661 4653 4412 3711 3681 3834 4176 4024 4153 4360 4279 7.79

Banaskantha 4114 4469 5109 3250 NA NA NA NA 3395 4170 4248 4235 14.24

Bharuch 4250 4836 4255 3600 3545 NA 3725 3100 NA 4265 4267 4141 12.48

Bhavnagar 3928 4300 4230 3943 3620 3569 3832 4400 3241 3755 3947 3991 8.40

Gandhinagar 4136 4576 4327 4890 NA NA NA NA NA 4367 4320 4243 5.69

Jamnagar 4188 4466 4374 4358 3561 3221 3479 3678 3821 4230 4318 4195 10.47

Junagarh 4182 4520 4581 4362 3472 3090 3654 4285 3682 4202 4351 4266 11.48

Kutch 4242 4950 5068 4496 3467 3093 2322 NA 3573 4434 4568 4555 20.87

Kheda 3951 4441 4330 NA NA NA NA NA NA 4243 4127 3941 4.87

Mehsana 4252 4629 4618 4547 3797 3469 3576 4500 3921 4379 4360 4249 9.64

Panchmahal 3050 2950 NA NA 2433 2067 NA NA NA 3127 4030 3912 23.17

Patan 4206 4619 4575 4323 3549 3288 3126 NA 3818 4332 4327 4235 12.69

Rajkot 4216 4626 4651 4501 3924 3712 3834 4042 3848 4215 4368 4309 7.59

Sabarkantha 4127 4563 4689 4404 4093 3823 NA NA 3342 4311 4293 4223 9.18

Surat 3845 3913 4214 4139 3338 2829 3186 NA 3397 3993 4192 4123 12.69

Surendranagar 4162 4646 4574 4303 3514 3302 3330 3896 3764 4329 4333 4241 11.50

Vadodara 4137 4569 4592 4184 3191 3586 4646 NA 3750 4252 4354 4242 11.01

Gujarat 4080 4467 4466 4302 3495 3354 3554 3843 3710 4201 4288 4186 9.75

CV (%) across

districts

7.34 10.01 6.26 9.42 11.04 13.90 16.52 12.81 6.74 7.55 3.31 3.55


Table 3.22: Average wholesale price of comperitive crop (cotton) in TE 2012

(Price in Rs/Qtl.)

62

Districts Janu

ary

Februr

ary


mber

Octo

ber

Nove

mber

Dece

mber

CV (%)

across

months

Ahmedabad 1907 1756 1598 1602 1626 1427 NA NA NA 2104 2094 2053 14.00

Amreli 2308 2257 2089 2102 2073 2076 2128 2006 1993 2055 2102 2063 4.38

Banaskantha 2160 1926 NA NA NA NA NA NA NA 1889 1863 1966 6.02

Bharuch 4006 1851 1804 NA 1773 3023 3065 NA 1950 1752 1984 1978 33.30

Bhavnagar 2139 2146 2034 2035 1938 1930 1769 1828 1856 2017 2094 2017 6.11

Dahod 1580 1640 1477 NA NA NA NA NA NA NA 1755 NA 7.21

Gandhinagar NA NA NA 1929 1851 1632 NA NA 1900 2159 2226 2173 10.84

Jamnagar 2277 2177 2039 1929 1768 1789 1816 NA 1965 1969 2031 1983 7.91

Junagarh 2223 2200 2022 2020 1851 1939 NA NA 1952 2093 2124 2035 5.72

Kutch 2140 2078 1727 1572 1719 NA NA NA 2075 2098 2088 2071 11.01

Kheda 1893 1920 1428 NA NA NA NA NA NA 1840 2003 1936 11.27

Mehsana 2291 2228 2097 2091 1772 1847 1371 NA 2096 2026 2070 2029 12.70

Narmada NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA 1821 NA

Panchmahal 1841 1784 1533 NA 1390 NA NA NA NA NA 1764 1807 10.78

Patan 1980 1902 1811 1744 NA NA NA NA NA 2001 2052 2008 5.92

Rajkot 2349 2307 2232 2215 2174 2241 2294 2079 2081 2076 2104 2065 4.67

Sabarkantha 2177 2082 1846 1679 1508 1275 1050 NA 2075 2014 2009 1980 20.58

Surat 1750 NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA 1911 2009 1936 5.75

Surendranagar 1974 1946 1915 1977 1970 1930 NA NA 2083 2090 2044 1966 3.09

Vadodara 2065 2011 1863 1841 1767 2030 NA NA 2042 1959 2046 1974 5.21

Gujarat 2309 2144 1981 1992 1891 2004 2112 1990 2000 2017 2047 1993 5.22

CV (%) across

districts

23.22 9.60 13.04 10.62 11.55 22.76 34.06 6.57 4.03 5.33 5.81 4.25


(Price in Rs/Qtl.)

Table 3.23: Average Wholesale Price of Comperitive Crop (Cotton) in TE 2006

63

CHAPTER IV

PROBLEMS AND PROSPECTS OF OILSEEDS PRODUCTION: AN EMPIRICAL ANALYSIS

4.1. Introduction The cultivation of oilseeds involves higher cost of cultivation and generates higher

returns to farmers compared to cultivation of cereals and other staple crops. The

socio-economic characteristics of the farmers also have an important bearing on the

decision to cultivate these cash crops. For example, the resource poor farmers

normally don’t prefer to go for cash crops because of scarcity of resources. They

prefer to cultivate crops involving lower cost of production. On the other hand, the

large farmers and richer farmers usually prefer to cultivate oilseeds provided

necessary provisions are available to them. Thus it is imperative to examine the

characteristics of our sample farmers and their level of involvement in cultivation of

selected oilseeds. In addition to the socio economic characteristics of sample

households, this chapter also discusses about the cropping pattern, production

structure, problems and prospects of cultivation of oilseeds in the state of Gujarat.

About 250 households have been surveyed from 25 villages as presented in Table

4.1.

Table 4.1 Distribution of villages and sample households

Sl. No.

Name of the district

Category of district

Name of the block

Number of villages

Name of the villages

Total number of HHs

1 Junagadh HH Vishavadar 3 Virpur, Nani Monapari, Ghantiyad

29 (11.6)

Manavadar 2 Sardargadh, Sanosara 19 (7.6)

Una 2 Gir Gathada, Vadvalya, Sultanpur, Dhabavad, Phatsar, Undri, Una

47 (18.8)

2 Rajkot HL Gondal 2 Biliyana, Bhojpura 47 (18.8)

Jasdan 2 Atkot, Santhli 47 (18.8) 3 Porbandar LH Porbandar 7 Vadala, Advana, Sisli,

Ambarna, Singeli, Bagsvsdsr and

Mahduada

37 (14.8)

Kutiyana 2 Mandva, Thepada 24 (9.6)

Total 25 250 (100.0) Notes: 1.Districts have been chosen from category of (1)High area - High yield (HH), (2) High area – Low yield (HL) and (3) Low area – High yield (LH) 2. Figures in parentheses are the percentages of total number of Households (HH). Source : Field survey

64

Out of 25 study villages, 7 villages of Junagadh district belonged to high area

and high yield category. The number of villages covered under the category of high

area and low yield and the category of low area and high yield were 4 and 9,

respectively.

4.2. Characteristics of Sample Households

4.2.1 Socio-Economic Status of Sample Households Among the sample farmers, 15 were marginal farmers, 66 were small farmers, 87

were medium farmers and 82 were large farmers (Table 4.2). The average household

(HH) size for entire sample was of 6.3 persons. However, it is highest for large farmer

category (6.8) and lowest for small farmers (5.6). The average off-farm income per

sample household was Rs 43207 per annum. It was highest in the case of medium

farmers (Rs 49455) and lowest in the case of small farmers (Rs 30836). Near about

96.8 per cent members had crop farming as the main source of livelihood. The crop

farming was the main source of livelihood for all of large farmers and medium

farmers. About 86.7 per cent of marginal farmers were found to depend on crop

farming as their main source of livelihood.

Table 4.2: Socio-economic Status of sample households

Indicators Marginal Small Medium Large All Farms

No. of farmers 15 66 87 82 250 Age (years) 45.6 48.1 48.2 47.9 47.9

Main Occupation (%)

Crop farming 86.7 90.9 100.0 100.0 96.8 Service 13.3 6.1 0.0 0.0 2.4 Dairy 0.0 3.0 0.0 0.0 0.8 Farm Labour 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Others 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

Off Farm Income(Rs/Yr) 49230 30836 49455 45434 43207

Education (years of schooling)

8.3 7.7 7.2 8.4 7.8

Average family size (no) 5.7 5.6 6.3 6.8 6.3 Male 3.1 2.9 3.4 3.5 3.3 Female 2.6 2.7 3.0 3.4 3.0

Social Groups (%)

General 40.0 59.1 71.3 78.0 68.4 SC/ST 0.0 1.5 1.1 0.0 0.8 OBC 60.0 39.4 27.6 22.0 30.8

Head of household (%)

Male 100.0 97.0 96.6 97.6 97.2 Female 0.0 3.0 3.4 2.4 2.8

Source: Field survey

65

Among remaining sample households of marginal farmer category, dairy was

found to be the main source of livelihood for 13.3 per cent households. Dairy was also

found to be the major subsidiary source of income for the majority of sample

households. The data given in Table 4.2 reveals that that, about 68.4 per cent sample

households belonged to general caste category, 30.8 percent HHs belonged to OBC

category and remaining 0.8 per cent HHs belonged to SC/ST category. The farmer

category wise analysis of caste composition reveals that about 60 percent HHs of

marginal farmers belonged to OBC category whereas 78 percent large famer

category of HHs belonged to general caste category. The average number of years

of schooling was 7.8 years for the sample households. The number of years of

schooling was highest of 8.4 years for the large farmers and was lowest of 7.2 years

for the medium farmers.

The majority of decisions were taken by male farmers and that was observed

in the case of about 97.2 per cent of our sample HHs. Only 2.8 per cent sample HHs

had females as decision makers or head of household. About 52.0 per cent family

members were male and 48.0 per cent were female. The proportion of female

members was lowest (45.6%) in marginal farmer category of households and was

highest (49.3%) in large farmer category of households. It was good to find that the

average age of the respondents was 47.9.

4.2.2 Characteristics of operational holdings

The net sown area (NSA) and gross cropped area (GCA) of a sample household was

found to be 3.75 ha and 4.81 ha, respectively which imply that the cropping intensity

in the study area was 128.3 per cent. Thus the agricultural lands have been utilized in

an effective manner by the sample farmers. It can be observed from Table 4.3 that

3.63 ha out of a total of 3.69 ha of owned land of the sample farmers (98.4%) have

been put under cultivation, i.e., the size of fallow land/ waste land was low. In the

case of large farmers, fallow or wasteland of 0.15 ha per household was found. The

size of available own area for cultivation was 3.69 ha whereas the size of operational

holding was 3.75 ha. The size of operational holding in the case of small, medium and

large farmers was 1.62 ha, 3.20 ha, and 6.59 ha, respectively. It may be noted that

the proportions of leased out land was very less in the case of our sample farmers.

The average size of leased in and leased out land was 0.13 ha and 0.009 ha. It was

66

good to see that the area under irrigation was 81.9 per cent of total operated area2.

The irrigated area for the categories of marginal farmers, small farmers, medium

farmers and large farmers was 76.3 per cent, 86.1 per cent, 79.7 per cent and 82.3

per cent, respectively.

Table 4.3 Land ownership pattern of sample households

(Area in ha)


1. Total owned land

Irrigated 0.63 (70.8) 1.40 (86.1) 2.57 (82.3) 5.26 (81.3) 3.03 (82.0)

Un-irrigated 0.26 (29.2) 0.23 (13.9) 0.55 (17.7) 1.21 (18.7) 0.66 (18.0)

Total 0.90 (100.0) 1.62 (100.0) 3.12 (100.0) 6.46 (100.0) 3.69 (100.0)

2. Area under cultivation

Irrigated 0.63 (76.3) 1.38 (86.0) 2.53 (81.3) 5.16 (81.8) 2.98 (82.1)

Un-irrigated 0.20 (23.7) 0.23 (14.0) 0.58 (18.7) 1.15 (18.2) 0.65 (17.9)

Total 0.83 (100.0) 1.61 (100.0) 3.11 (100.0) 6.31 (100.0) 3.63 (100.0)

3. Leased-in land Irrigated 0 (0.0) 0.01 (100.0) 0.02 (23.4) 0.26 (85.4) 0.10 (71.9)

Un-irrigated 0 (0.0) 0 (0.0) 0.07 (76.6) 0.04 (14.6) 0.04 (28.1)

Total 0 (0.0) 0.01 (100.0) 0.09 (100.0) 0.31 (100.0) 0.13 (100.0)

4. Leased-out land

Irrigated 0 (0.0) 0 (0.0) 0 (0.0) 0.000 (0.0) 0.000 (0.0)

Un-irrigated 0 (0.0) 0 (0.0) 0 (0.0) 0.027 (100.0) 0.009 (100.0)

Total 0 (0.0) 0 (0.0) 0 (0.0) 0.027 (100.0) 0.009 (100.0)

5. Total Operational holding (2+3-4)

Irrigated 0.63 (76.3) 1.4 (86.1) 2.55 (79.7) 5.43 (82.3) 3.07 (81.9)

Un-irrigated 0.20 (23.7) 0.23 (13.9) 0.65 (20.3) 1.16 (17.7) 0.68 (18.1)

Total 0.83 (100.0) 1.62 (100.0) 3.20 (100.0) 6.59 (100.0) 3.75 (100.0)

Note: Figures in parentheses are the percentages of total.


2 The size of irrigated lands seems much larger than the state average. This is mainly because of

non-random selection of sample households. It may be noted that about 67.6 per cent of total

sample farmers were either large farmers or medium farmers. Since the farmer households having

good area coverage under oilseeds and other cash crops were purposively chosen, average size

of irrigated land was much larger. Another reason was over estimation of irrigated area. About 77.1

per cent of GCA was covered during Kharif season and only 22.9 per cent was covered under

Rabi season. Though the farmers have arranged life saving irrigation to a part of their cultivated

lands during Kharif season to save their crops, the entire plots have been counted as irrigated.

Thus the bias in data collection is also partly responsible for over estimation of irrigated area.

67

4.2.3 Nature of Tenancy

The tenancy contract, particularly share-cropping is the most popular form of tenancy

contract. With this arrangement, a given fraction of output is paid as rent that makes

the tenant, to some extent, to be insulated against output fluctuations, because he

can share some of these fluctuations with his landlord. This is primarily an ex-ante

risk management strategy used widely by the farmers to reduce their risk level.

However, in our study area in Gujarat, we found that the major proportion of sample

farmers preferred share cropping instead of fixed rent in cash form of tenancy

contract. Thus in the case of the sample farmers majority have shared the risks

instead of entirely shouldering the risk burden as happens in the case of fixed rent in

cash form of tenancy contract.

Table 4.4 shows the nature of tenancy in leased- in land in the study area. It

may be seen that only about 6.4 per cent of sample HHs were having leased in land

constituting about 3.6 per cent of total operated area. It is surprising to note that, the

large farmers and medium farmers had major share of leased-in area among the farm

categories. About 11.0 per cent large farmers had 4.7 per cent of net operated area

under leased-in category. Similarly, about 6.9 per cent medium farmers had 2.7 per

cent of net operated area under leased-in category.

Table 4.4: Terms of lease Farm Size

Incidence of lease (%)

Terms of leasing (% of leased-in HHs)

Terms of lease (Rent/amount)

% area leased-

in

% HHs leasing

in

For fixed

money

For fixed

produce

Share Cropp

ing

Others

Fixed money

(Rs/HH)

Fixed money (Rs/Ha)

Output shared

(Qtl/HH)

Output shared

(%)

Marginal 0.00 0.00 0.0 0.0 0.0 0 0 0 0 0

Small 0.75 1.52 0.0 0.0 100.0 0 0 0 6.0 50.0

Medium 2.70 6.90 16.7 0.0 83.3 0 20000 25000 12.1 46.7

Large 4.68 10.98 44.4 0.0 55.6 0 86850 31467 25.4 50.0

All farms

3.58 6.40 31.3 0.0 68.8 0 73480 31030 17.6 48.0

Note: output shared for share cropping as the term of lease is found for groundnut only.


The term of lease for about 68.8 per cent of HHs with leased-in lands was

share cropping and for remaining 31.3 per cent HHs, it was fixed rent in cash. Among

the sample households with ‘fixed money’ term of lease, the fixed money paid for

leasing in the land was Rs 73480 per HH and Rs 31030 per hectare. On the other

68

hand, among the sample households with ‘share cropping’ term of lease, the output

shared for leasing in the land was 17.6 quintals per HH. In percentage term, about 48

per cent of crop output was shared between the tenant and landlord as per the term

of share cropping. It was surprising to find that not a single farmer belonging to

marginal farmer category was found to have leased in lands.

4.2.4 Sources of Irrigation

Production of most oilseed crops requires adequate water at critical growth stages.

This makes irrigation a prerequisite for better profitability. Water quality and quantity

are both important for healthy growth of oilseed crops. As is revealed by Table 4.5,

about 81.9 per cent of gross cropped area (GCA) was irrigated through different

sources by a sample farmer on an average. Among different farmer categories, small

farmers were found to irrigate 86.1 per cent of net operated area, followed by the

large farmers with 82.3 per cent of GCA as net irrigated area. As far as different

sources of irrigation are concerned, as high as 83.1 per cent of total operated area of

sample farmers was irrigated by open well or dug wells followed by tube wells

(14.6%), usually energized by electricity and/or diesel. Canal and tank and other

source of irrigation are minor presence in the study area as their joint contribution is

about 2.2 per cent in the case of our sample farmers. The area irrigated through

canals only was nil and through rivers/ponds was only 1.5 per cent of total operated

area.

Table 4.5: Irrigated area by sources


Area under irrigation (Ha /HH)

0.6 1.4 2.6 5.4 3.1

Area under irrigation (% to total cropped area)

76.3 86.1 79.7 82.3 81.9

Sources of irrigation (%) Open well/dug well 100.0 89.2 90.3 78.5 83.1

Tube well 0.0 9.2 6.8 19.4 14.6

Ponds/rivers 0.0 1.7 2.9 0.9 1.5

Canals 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

Others 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.1 0.7


69

4.2.5 Cropping Pattern of Sample Farmers Since our main objective is to analyze the problems and prospects in cultivation of

oilseeds in the state so as to increase the area and productivity of oilseed crops,

creating employment opportunities and enhancement of income of the farmers, it is

pertinent to examine cropping pattern adopted by the sample households and

particularly proportion of area devoted to different type of oilseeds and other cash

crops. It is also worthwhile to examine and identify disparities in the crop distribution

during Kharif season, Rabi season and other seasons. The cropping pattern of the

sample household is presented in Table 4.6 that shows the area under different crops

in hectare and their percentage share to the respective crop group total per HH. The

GCA per HH was 4.8 ha for all farmers taken together whereas the large farmer had

highest GCA of 8.2 ha and marginal farmers had minimum GCA of 1.4 ha. Medium

and small farmer had 4.1 ha and 2.3 ha of GCA, respectively.

Overall, the per-HH area under Kharif crops and Rabi crops cultivated by the

sample farmers was 3.7 ha and 0.94 ha, respectively. In the case of marginal farmer

category, the per-HH area under Kharif crops and Rabi crops was 0.84 ha and 0.43

ha, respectively. The GCA of a HH under small farmer category was 2.25 hectare, out

of which, the area under Kharif crops and Rabi crops was 1.62 ha and 0.53 ha,

respectively. In the case of medium farmer category, the per-HH area under Kharif

crops and Rabi crops was 3.15 ha and 0.75 ha, respectively. So far as the large

farmer category is concerned, the per-HH area under Kharif crops and Rabi crops

was 6.48 ha and 1.55 ha, respectively.

Among various Kharif crops, the share of cereals and pulses was 0.2 per cent

each, whereas the share of oilseeds and other Kharif crops including cotton was 71.2

per cent and 28.3 per cent, respectively. Thus oilseeds and cotton have occupied

prominent postion in the cropping pattern in the state. Among Kharif oilseeds,

groundnut was found to be the major crop cultivated by the sample farmers of all

categories, whose share in total Kharif crops was 69.3 per cent. The second major

Kharif oilseed was castor whose share in total Kharif crops was 1.3 per cent. In case

of 80.6 per cent of Kharif oilseeds, the life saving irrigation facilities were provided,

which implies that the level of production risk induced by rainfall variability was quite

high in the study areas.

70

Sr.

No.

Season/

Crop

Irrigated/

Unirrigated

1 Maize Irrigated 0.00 (0.0) 0.00 (0.0) 0.00 (0.0) 0.01 (0.1) 0.01 (0.2)

Unirrigated 0.00 (0.0) 0.00 (0.0) 0.00 (0.0) 0.00 (0.0) 0.00 (0.0)

A

Irrigated 0.00 (0.0) 0.00 (0.0) 0.00 (0.0) 0.01 (100.0) 0.01 (100.0)

Unirrigated 0.00 (0.0) 0.00 (0.0) 0.00 (0.0) 0.00 (0.0) 0.00 (0.0)

Total 0.00 (0.0) 0.00 (0.0) 0.00 (0.0) 0.01 (100.0) 0.01 (100.0)

2 Irrigated 0.00 (0.0) 0.00 (0.0) 0.00 (0.0) 0.00 (0.0) 0.00 (0.0)

Unirrigated 0.00 (0.0) 0.00 (0.0) 0.00 (0.0) 0.00 (0.0) 0.00 (0.0)

3 Irrigated 0.00 (0.0) 0.00 (0.0) 0.00 (0.0) 0.03 (0.5) 0.01 (0.3)

Unirrigated 0.00 (0.0) 0.00 (0.0) 0.00 (0.0) 0.00 (0.0) 0.00 (0.0)

B

Irrigated 0.00 (0.0) 0.00 (0.0) 0.00 (0.0) 0.03 (93.8) 0.01 (93.8)

Unirrigated 0.00 (0.0) 0.00 (0.0) 0.00 (0.0) 0.00 (6.3) 0.00 (6.3)

Total 0.00 (0.0) 0.00 (0.0) 0.00 (0.0) 0.03 (100.0) 0.01 (100.0)

4 Irrigated 0.53 (62.7) 1.08 (66.7) 1.81 (57.5) 3.40 (52.5) 2.06 (55.6)

Unirrigated 0.26 (30.4) 0.16 (9.7) 0.46 (14.5) 0.91 (14.1) 0.51 (13.9)

5 Irrigated 0.00 (0.0) 0.02 (1.5) 0.01 (0.3) 0.01 (0.1) 0.01 (0.3)

Unirrigated 0.00 (0.0) 0.00 (0.0) 0.00 (0.0) 0.00 (0.0) 0.00 (0.0)

6 Irrigated 0.00 (0.0) 0.03 (2.0) 0.04 (1.2) 0.09 (1.4) 0.05 (1.4)

Unirrigated 0.00 (0.0) 0.00 (0.0) 0.00 (0.0) 0.00 (0.0) 0.00 (0.0)

C

Irrigated 0.53 (67.3) 1.13 (87.9) 1.86 (80.6) 3.50 (79.3) 2.12 (80.6)

Unirrigated 0.26 (32.7) 0.16 (12.1) 0.46 (19.8) 0.91 (20.7) 0.51 (19.5)

Total 0.78 (100.0) 1.29 (100.0) 2.30 (100.0) 4.41 (100.0) 2.64 (100.0)

7 Cotton Irrigated 0.05 (6.3) 0.21 (13.2) 0.60 (18.9) 1.70 (26.3) 0.83 (22.3)

Unirrigated 0.00 (0.0) 0.07 (4.1) 0.13 (4.1) 0.20 (3.0) 0.13 (3.4)

8 Irrigated 0.00 (0.0) 0.00 (0.0) 0.02 (0.7) 0.01 (0.2) 0.01 (0.3)

Unirrigated 0.01 (0.6) 0.00 (0.0) 0.00 (0.0) 0.00 (0.0) 0.00 (0.0)

9 Fodder Irrigated 0.00 (0.0) 0.05 (2.9) 0.09 (2.9) 0.09 (1.3) 0.07 (2.0)

Unirrigated 0.00 (0.0) 0.00 (0.0) 0.00 (0.0) 0.03 (0.5) 0.01 (0.3)

D

Irrigated 0.05 (90.9) 0.26 (79.6) 0.71 (84.6) 1.80 (88.6) 0.91 (86.8)

Unirrigated 0.01 (9.1) 0.07 (20.4) 0.13 (15.4) 0.23 (11.4) 0.14 (13.2)

Total 0.06 (100.0) 0.33 (100.0) 0.84 (100.0) 2.04 (100.0) 1.05 (100.0)

E

Irrigated 0.58 (69.0) 1.39 (86.2) 2.56 (81.4) 5.34 (82.4) 3.05 (82.4)

Unirrigated 0.26 (31.0) 0.22 (13.8) 0.58 (18.6) 1.15 (17.7) 0.65 (17.6)

Total 0.84 (100.0) 1.62 (100.0) 3.15 (100.0) 6.48 (100.0) 3.71 (100.0)

Groundnut

Sesamum

Castor

Total Kharif oilseeds (4+5+6)

Vegetables

Total Kharif crops(A+B+C+D)

Other Kharif crops (7+8+9)

Kharif crops

Total cereals

Moong

Urad

Total Kharif pulses(2+3)

Table 4.6: Cropping Pattern

(Area in hectare per HH)

Marginal Small Medium Large All Farms

71

Sr.

No.

Season/

Crop

Irrigated/

Unirrigated

10 Wheat Irrigated 0.20 (46.9) 0.20 (38.1) 0.37 (48.8) 0.74 (48.0) 0.44 (46.7)

Unirrigated 0.00 (0.0) 0.00 (0.0) 0.00 (0.0) 0.00 (0.0) 0.00 (0.0)

F

Irrigated 0.20 (100.0) 0.20 (100.0) 0.37 (100.0) 0.74 (100.0) 0.44 (100.0)

Unirrigated 0.00 (0.0) 0.00 (0.0) 0.00 (0.0) 0.00 (0.0) 0.00 (0.0)

Total 0.20 (100.0) 0.20 (100.0) 0.37 (100.0) 0.74 (100.0) 0.44 (100.0)

11 Moong Irrigated 0.00 (0.0) 0.00 (0.0) 0.02 (2.9) 0.01 (0.7) 0.01 (1.2)

Unirrigated 0.00 (0.0) 0.00 (0.0) 0.00 (0.0) 0.00 (0.0) 0.00 (0.0)

12 Gram Irrigated 0.01 (2.5) 0.00 (0.0) 0.03 (4.4) 0.04 (2.3) 0.02 (2.5)

Unirrigated 0.00 (0.0) 0.00 (0.0) 0.00 (0.0) 0.00 (0.0) 0.00 (0.0)

13 Urad Irrigated 0.00 (0.0) 0.00 (0.0) 0.00 (0.0) 0.00 (0.1) 0.00 (0.1)

Unirrigated 0.00 (0.0) 0.00 (0.0) 0.00 (0.0) 0.00 (0.0) 0.00 (0.0)

G

Irrigated 0.01 (100.0) 0.00 (0.0) 0.06 (100.0) 0.05 (100.0) 0.04 (100.0)

Unirrigated 0.00 (0.0) 0.00 (0.0) 0.00 (0.0) 0.00 (0.0) 0.00 (0.0)

Total 0.01 (100.0) 0.00 (0.0) 0.06 (100.0) 0.05 (100.0) 0.04 (100.0)

14 Cumin Irrigated 0.06 (14.8) 0.11 (20.4) 0.18 (24.3) 0.43 (27.5) 0.24 (25.2)

Unirrigated 0.00 (0.0) 0.00 (0.0) 0.00 (0.0) 0.00 (0.0) 0.00 (0.0)

15 Irrigated 0.09 (21.0) 0.11 (20.4) 0.03 (4.4) 0.08 (5.0) 0.07 (7.6)

Unirrigated 0.00 (0.0) 0.00 (0.0) 0.00 (0.0) 0.00 (0.0) 0.00 (0.0)

16 Garlic Irrigated 0.00 (0.0) 0.02 (4.5) 0.02 (2.2) 0.02 (1.3) 0.02 (2.0)

Unirrigated 0.00 (0.0) 0.00 (0.0) 0.00 (0.0) 0.00 (0.0) 0.00 (0.0)

17 Irrigated 0.00 (0.0) 0.05 (13.9) 0.00 (1.1) 0.00 (0.3) 0.01 (3.1)

Unirrigated 0.00 (0.0) 0.00 (0.0) 0.00 (0.0) 0.00 (0.0) 0.00 (0.0)

18 Others Irrigated 0.00 (0.0) 0.04 (7.9) 0.08 (11.2) 0.23 (15.1) 0.12 (12.5)

Unirrigated 0.06 (14.8) 0.00 (0.0) 0.01 (1.2) 0.00 (0.0) 0.01 (0.8)

H

Irrigated 0.15 (70.7) 0.33 (100.0) 0.32 (97.2) 0.76 (100.0) 0.46 (98.5)

Unirrigated 0.06 (29.3) 0.00 (0.0) 0.01 (2.8) 0.00 (0.0) 0.01 (1.5)

Total 0.22 (100.0) 0.33 (100.0) 0.33 (100.0) 0.76 (100.0) 0.46 (100.0)

I

Irrigated 0.37 (85.2) 0.53 (100.0) 0.74 (98.8) 1.55 (100.0) 0.93 (99.2)

Unirrigated 0.06 (14.8) 0.00 (0.0) 0.01 (1.2) 0.00 (0.0) 0.01 (0.8)

Total 0.43 (100.0) 0.53 (100.0) 0.75 (100.0) 1.55 (100.0) 0.94 (100.0)

19 Bajra Irrigated 0.00 (0.0) 0.005 (4.9) 0.04 (16.3) 0.01 (5.7) 0.02 (10.4)

Unirrigated 0.00 (0.0) 0.00 (0.0) 0.00 (0.0) 0.00 (0.0) 0.00 (0.0)

20 Groundnut Irrigated 0.00 (0.0) 0.00 (0.0) 0.10 (43.5) 0.04 (25.7) 0.05 (29.2)

Unirrigated 0.00 (0.0) 0.00 (0.0) 0.00 (0.0) 0.00 (0.0) 0.00 (0.0)

21 Sesamum Irrigated 0.06 (66.7) 0.09 (95.1) 0.05 (22.4) 0.09 (53.7) 0.08 (45.9)

Unirrigated 0.00 (0.0) 0.00 (0.0) 0.00 (0.0) 0.00 (0.0) 0.00 (0.0)

22 Others Irrigated 0.03 (33.3) 0.00 (0.0) 0.04 (17.9) 0.03 (14.9) 0.02 (14.6)

Unirrigated 0.00 (0.0) 0.00 (0.0) 0.00 (0.0) 0.00 (0.0) 0.00 (0.0)

J

Irrigated 0.10 (100.0) 0.10 (100.0) 0.23 (100.0) 0.17 (100.0) 0.17 (100.0)

Unirrigated 0.00 (0.0) 0.00 (0.0) 0.00 (0.0) 0.00 (0.0) 0.00 (0.0)

Total 0.10 (100.0) 0.10 (100.0) 0.23 (100.0) 0.17 (100.0) 0.17 (100.0)

23 Sugarcane Irrigated 0.03 (7.4) 0.00 (0.0) 0.00 (0.0) 0.00 (0.0) 0.00 (0.2)

Unirrigated 0.00 (0.0) 0.00 (0.0) 0.00 (0.0) 0.00 (0.0) 0.00 (0.0)

K Gross Cropped Area (E+I+J+23)

Irrigated 1.08 (76.8) 2.03 (90.1) 3.53 (85.6) 7.06 (86.0) 4.15 (86.3)

Unirrigated 0.33 (23.2) 0.22 (9.9) 0.59 (14.4) 1.15 (14.0) 0.66 (13.7)

Total 1.40 (100.0) 2.25 (100.0) 4.13 (100.0) 8.20 (100.0) 4.81 (100.0)

Notes: Figures in parentheses are the percentages of respective group total

Total Summer Crops (19+20+21+22)


Total Rabi Pulses (11+12+13)

Total Spices and Vegetables (14+15+16+17+18)

Total Rabi Cereals

Total Rabi Crops (F+G+H)

Rabi crops

Coriander

Vegetables

Table 4.6 continued…


72

The area under Rabi oilseeds for the sample farmers was almost nil in the

region. About 48.9 per cent of total Rabi acreage was under spices and vegetables

among which cumin was major one. Groundnut and sesamum were found to be

cultivated by the sample farmers during summer season. The area under summer

crop along with these two oilseeds was 3.5 per cent for all farmers, 7.1 per cent for

marginal farmers and 5.6 per cent for medium farmers. The sesamum occupied about

45.9 per cent of total summer crops in the cropping pattern in the region.

4.2.6 Yield of Major Crops Yield and farm harvest price of the crop determine the extent of profitability of the

farmers. Yield and profitability are the major driving forces for farmers to decide about

the crop they would grow. Thus the change in cropping pattern is largely linked to the

extent of variation in yield and profitability. In the case of our sample farmers, a wide

variation in yield was found between irrigated and rainfed conditions, particularly in

the cases of oilseeds, spices and vegetables. The average yield of Kharif crops and

Rabi crops under rainfed conditions was 9.9 quintals per hectare and 3.4 quintals per

hectare, respectively; whereas the average yield of Kharif crops and Rabi crops under

irrigated conditions was 21.5 quintals per hectare and 41.8 quintals per hectare,

respectively (Table 4.7). For all crops taken together, the average yield of irrigated

crops and rainfed crops was 26.0 quintals per hectare and 9.6 quintals per hectare,

respectively.

The average yield of Kharif oilseeds under rainfed and irrigated conditions was

7.1 quintals per hectare and 18.1 quintals per hectare, respectively. Among summer

oilseeds, sesamum and groundnut were major ones. The average yield of groundnut

and sesamum under irrigated conditions was 23.4 quintals per hectare and 11.1

quintals per hectare, respectively.

73

Table 4.7 Average Yield of Major Crops of Sample Households

(Yield in quintal per hectare)

Sr.No. Season/ Crop Irrigated/ Unirrigated

Marginal Small Medium Large All

farms

Kharif Crops

1 Maize Irrigated 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.38 0.38

Unirrigated 0.00 0.00 0.06 0.00 0.06

A Total Kharif Cereals

Irrigated 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.38 0.38

Unirrigated 0.00 0.00 0.06 0.00 0.06

Total 0.00 0.00 0.06 0.38 0.44

2 Moong Irrigated 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

Unirrigated 0.00 0.00 0.00 5.00 5.00

3 Urad Irrigated 0.00 0.00 0.00 6.25 6.25

Unirrigated 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

B Total Kharif Pulses(2,3)

Irrigated 0.00 0.00 0.00 6.25 6.25

Unirrigated 0.00 0.00 0.00 5.00 5.00

Total 0.00 0.00 0.00 6.17 6.17

4 Groundnut Irrigated 19.52 15.33 19.16 18.10 18.06

Unirrigated 13.91 11.36 5.33 7.12 7.11

5 Sesamum Irrigated 0.00 12.50 12.50 12.50 12.50

Unirrigated 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

6 Castor Irrigated 0.00 26.92 21.88 21.14 22.27

Unirrigated 0.00 0.00 0.00 12.50 12.50

C Total Kharif Oilseeds (4,5,6)

Irrigated 19.52 15.59 19.18 18.17 18.13

Un-irrigated 13.91 11.36 5.33 7.13 7.12

Total 17.69 15.08 16.44 15.89 15.98

7 Cotton Irrigated 25.50 23.93 23.40 24.16 23.96

Unirrigated 0.00 18.32 21.27 19.75 20.09

8 Vegetables Irrigated 0.00 0.00 418.75 100.00 296.15

Unirrigated 70.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 70.00

9 Fodder Irrigated 0.00 57.57 45.98 38.90 45.14

Unirrigated 0.00 0.00 0.00 23.43 23.43

D Other Kharif Crops (7,8,9)

Irrigated 25.50 29.91 38.61 25.49 29.38

Unirrigated 70.00 18.32 21.27 20.30 20.47

Total 29.55 27.54 35.95 24.90 28.20

E Total Kharif Crops( A,B,C,D)

Irrigated 20.07 18.26 24.57 20.58 21.46

Unirrigated 15.05 13.44 8.84 9.79 9.95

Total 18.51 17.59 21.64 18.67 19.43

74


Sr.No. Season/ Crop

Irrigated/ Unirrigated


Rabi crops

10 Wheat Irrigated 44.08 40.37 36.96 44.65 41.86

Unirrigated 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

F Total Rabi Cereals

Irrigated 44.08 40.37 36.96 44.65 41.86

Unirrigated 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

Total 44.08 40.37 36.96 44.65 41.86

11 Mung Irrigated 0.00 0.00 10.00 10.34 10.11

Unirrigated 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

12 Gram Irrigated 37.50 0.00 19.58 18.47 19.53

Unirrigated 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

13 Urad Irrigated 0.00 0.00 0.00 5.00 5.00

Unirrigated 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

G Total Rabi Pulses (11,12, 13)

Irrigated 37.50 0.00 15.75 16.10 16.30

Unirrigated 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

Total 37.50 0.00 15.75 16.10 16.30

14 Cumin Irrigated 2.50 7.97 10.18 29.06 20.95

Unirrigated 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

15 Coriander Irrigated 10.29 14.08 18.68 15.69 15.11

Unirrigated 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

16 Garlic Irrigated 0.00 24.88 11.11 5.88 14.05

Unirrigated 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

17 Vegetables Irrigated 0.00 119.41 175.00 15.00 119.72

Unirrigated 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

18 Others Irrigated 0.00 25.50 109.97 110.94 102.53

Unirrigated 6.25 0.00 0.00 0.00 3.41

H Total Spices and Vegetables (14,15,16,17,18)

Irrigated 7.07 12.41 11.45 26.20 19.28

Unirrigated 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

Total 7.07 12.41 11.45 26.20 19.28

I Total Rabi Crops (E,F,G)

Irrigated 28.33 33.32 36.40 47.48 41.79

Unirrigated 6.25 0.00 0.00 0.00 3.41

Total 25.06 33.32 35.95 47.48 41.51

19 Bajra Irrigated 0.00 31.25 26.50 25.00 26.57

Unirrigated 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

20 Groundnut Irrigated 0.00 0.00 25.82 17.50 23.36

Unirrigated 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

21 Sesamum Irrigated 6.25 11.60 10.91 11.44 11.11

Unirrigated 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

22 Others Irrigated 18.75 0.00 100.40 61.54 80.66

Unirrigated 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

75


J Total Summer Crops

Irrigated 10.42 12.56 35.93 21.21 26.43

Unirrigated 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

Total 10.42 12.56 35.93 21.21 26.43

23 Sugarcane Irrigated 18.75 0.00 0.00 0.00 18.75

Unirrigated 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

K All Crops Average Yield (E,I,J, 23)

Irrigated 22.09 21.95 27.80 26.51 26.03

Unirrigated 13.32 13.44 8.70 9.79 9.61

Total 20.01 21.11 25.04 24.17 23.77 Source: Field survey

4.3 Production, Retention and Marketed Surplus Pattern of Oilseeds

The major oilseeds cultivated by our sample households were groundnut, castor and

sesamum. The main competing crop for groundnut was found to be cotton which was

grown by 124 sample farmers. The sample farmers growing groundnut produced 39.9

quintals per household on an average, out of which 38.2 quintals of groundnut was

sold at the average price of Rs 3518 per quintal (Table 4.8). About 1.8 quintals of

groundnut (4.5%) was retained per household for household consumption and for use

as seed. In case large farmers, retention of groundnut was about 3.7 per cent. The

retention of groundnut by marginal farmers, small farmers and medium farmers was

about 3.9 per cent, 4.9 per cent and 5.4 per cent, respectively.

Table 4.8: Total Oilseeds Production, Retention and Sale Pattern

(Quintals)

Kharif Oilseed I (Groundnut) Kharif Oilseed 2 (Castor)

Production Retention Sold Price (Rs/q)

No. of farmers


No. of farmers

Marginal 12.7 0.5 12.2 3290 15 0.0 0.0 0.0 0 0

Small 18.3 0.9 17.4 3559 66 28.0 0.0 28.0 2875 2

Medium 35.0 1.9 33.1 3522 87 31.7 0.0 31.7 3083 3

Large 67.5 2.5 65.1 3524 82 40.1 0.0 40.1 3082 7

All farms 39.9 1.8 38.2 3518 250 36.0 0.0 36.0 3048 12

Kharif Oilseed 3 (Sesamum) Major competitive crop (Cotton)


No. of farmers


No. of farmers

Marginal 0.0 0.0 0.0 0 0 10.2 0.0 10.2 3775 2

Small 20.0 0.0 20.0 6000 1 16.7 0.0 16.7 4037 25

Medium 10.0 0.0 10.0 6000 1 30.9 0.0 30.9 4091 47

Large 7.0 0.0 7.0 6000 1 73.9 0.0 73.9 4131 50

All farms 12.3 0.0 12.3 6000 3 45.0 0.0 45.0 4091 124


76

In the case of castor, the sample farmers produced 36.0 quintals per

household on an average, all of which was sold at the average price of Rs 3048 per

quintal. In the case of sesamum, the sample farmers produced 12.3 quintals per

household on an average, all of which was sold at the average price of Rs 6000 per

quintal. As far as the case of main competing crop (cotton) is concerned, 45.0

quintals was produced per household, all of which was sold at the average price of Rs

4091 per quintal. No significant variation in prices of oilseeds and competing crops

was observed across farm size classes. In the case of groundnut, the highest selling

price was realized by the small farmers (Rs 3559 per quintal) followed by the large

farmers (Rs3524). In case of main competing crop cotton, the highest selling price

was realized by the large farmers (Rs 4131 per quintal), followed by the medium

farmers (Rs 4091). The lowest price was realized by the marginal farmers (Rs 3775

per quintal).

4.4. Comparative Economics/Profitability of Oilseeds vis-à-vis Competing Crops

4.4.1 Operational costs, yield and net returns from cultivation of oilseeds vis-à-vis competing crops

In this section, comparative analysis on variable costs of cultivation, average yield,

gross and net returns on cultivation of main oilseed (groundnut) and major competing

crop (cotton) has been carried out. The gross value of main product and value of bye-

product of groundnut across all size groups of farmers was found to be Rs 54532.7

and Rs 6242.0 per hectare, respectively (Table 4.9). The total variable cost of

cultivation of the crop including material cost and labour cost was Rs 37932.6 per

hectare. Thus the net income derived from cultivation of groundnut was Rs 22842.1

per hectare. The maximum annual net return from cultivation of the crop was earned

by large farmers which was Rs 26648.7 per hectare whereas the marginal, small and

medium farmers generated the net income of Rs 12471.6, Rs 18809.4 and Rs

22910.6 per hectare, respectively.

The similar analysis on per-hectare value of crop output, cost of production

and net return from the cultivation of major competing crops (cotton) reveals that, the

cultivation of the main competing crop (cotton) was much profitable over the main

oilseed (groundnut). The net income derived from the cultivation of cotton was Rs

54454.7 per hectare which was more than double of net income generated from

77

cultivation of main oilseed groundnut (Rs 22842.1). That is why, the share of cotton in

the cropping pattern of the farmers is gradual growing and that of groundnut is falling.

Table 4.9: Profitability of Major Oilseeds and Competing Crops (Rs/ha)

Cost Items Main Oilseed (Groundnut)


Seed 10938.2 9612.9 9715.2 9318.1 9631.3

Fertilizer & manure 3760.3 4478.4 4240.9 4051.5 4212.6

Insecticides & pesticides 2351.2 1892.2 1864.0 1568.1 1803.6

Total human labour 18704.8 14740.6 13191.6 11003.4 13213.6 (a) Family 6223.7 5021.8 3960.3 2369.2 3854.4 (b) Hired 12481.1 9718.8 9231.3 8634.2 9359.1 Machine labour 2834.0 2272.0 2195.0 2950.4 2501.4

Bullock labour 1341.7 1348.8 1216.3 981.7 1181.9

Irrigation 872.0 1079.9 1063.1 858.6 989.0 Harvesting & threshing (machine charges)

2840.3 1908.5 2220.6 1734.1 2015.8

Interest on working capital 2840.8 2514.8 2391.7 2185.1 2383.4

1. Total operational costs(TC) 46483.2 39848.1 38098.3 34650.9 37932.6

Yield (quintals) 16.2 14.8 15.4 15.7 15.5 Price 3290.0 3559.1 3521.6 3523.5 3518.2

2. Value of main-product 53298.0 52674.5 54232.8 55297.4 54532.7

3. Value of by-product 5656.9 5983.0 6776.2 6002.2 6242.0

Net Income (2+3) – (1) 12471.6 18809.4 22910.6 26648.7 22842.1

Cost of production (TC/q) 2869.3 2692.4 2473.9 2207.9 2447.3

Total cost of cultivation (TC/ha) 46483.2 39848.1 38098.3 34650.9 37932.6

Cost Items Major Competing Crop (Cotton)

Seed 3605.9 4754.6 4190.6 3733.1 4128.1 Fertilizer & manure 9460.9 9563.1 8708.7 7574.1 8384.0 Insecticides & pesticides 1812.5 1548.2 1575.0 1233.5 1443.6

Total human labour 31161.5 27555.1 20698.6 15174.9 20079.6

(a) Family 6994.8 7710.9 4607.2 2591.2 4480.7

(b) Hired 24166.7 19844.2 16091.4 12583.7 15599.0

Machine labour 2500.0 2245.2 2004.8 2059.8 2092.5

Bullock labour 781.3 1115.6 809.1 486.3 740.7

Irrigation 2031.3 1886.5 2228.4 1601.0 1909.4

Harvesting & threshing (machine charges)

0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

Interest on working capital 3382.1 3368.5 2728.0 2140.5 2636.3

1. Total operational costs(TC) 54735.4 52036.9 42943.2 34003.2 41414.1

Yield (Quintals) 25.5 25.7 23.0 23.7 23.4

Price 3775.0 4037.0 4091.0 4130.5 4087.6

2. Value of main-product 96262.5 103750.9 94092.0 97892.9 95837.9

3. Value of by-product 0.0 50.0 0.0 51.0 30.9

Net Income (2+3) – (1) 41527.1 51764.0 51148.8 63940.6 54454.7

Cost of production (TC/q) 2146.5 2024.8 1867.1 1434.7 1766.4

Total cost of cultivation (TC/ha)

54735.4 52036.9 42943.2 34003.2 41414.1


78

The gross value of main product of cotton was highest for small farmers (Rs

103750.9), followed by the large farmers (Rs 97892.9). This was due to higher yield

realized by the small farmers (25.7 q/ha). The total operational cost of cultivation of

the corresponding crops was highest for the marginal farmers (Rs 54375.4) followed

by small farmers (Rs 52036.9). The maximum annual net return from cultivation of

cotton was earned by large farmers which was Rs 63940.6 per hectare whereas the

marginal, small and medium farmers generated the net income of Rs 41527.1, Rs

51764.0 and Rs 51148.8 per hectare, respectively.

Among the cost components, labour charges accounted for the largest share

of the total operational costs for both main oilseed crop and major competing crop.

For cultivation of groundnut, total human labour and seed cost accounted for 34.8 per

cent and 25.4 per cent of total operational cost, respectively. Fertilizer consumption

accounted for 11.1 per cent of total operational cost of cultivation of groundnut.

Among the other costs, harvesting/threshing, machine charges and irrigation charges

accounted for 5.3 per cent, 2.6 per cent and 6.6 per cent of total operational cost,

respectively. The interest on working capital was about 6.3 per cent of total

operational cost of cultivation of groundnut. The overall pattern of cost of cultivation

for the selected competing crop was similar. However, the fertilizer and manure cost

was the second highest cost component in the case of cotton. Total human labour

and fertilizer consumption accounted for 48.5 per cent and 20.4 per cent, respectively

of total operational cost of cultivation of cotton. The cost on harvesting and threshing

was found to be nil on the competing crop. The irrigation charges and seed cost for

per hectare cultivation of cotton was 4.6 per cent and 10.0 per cent of total

operational cost, respectively.

4.4.2 Profitability vis-à-vis Risks in Oilseeds Production

Profitability is the major driving force for farmers to decide about the crop they would

cultivate. However, farmers often make trade-off between profitability and risk, while

choosing a suitable cropping pattern. From the profitability point of view, the main

competing crop cotton has proved to be much better option than the main oilseed

crop groundnut. On the production, income and price risk perspectives, the main

oilseed crop also exhibited poor results. The yield variability and net income variability

were substantially higher for the main crop. The coefficient of variation (CV) in yield

and net income as the measure of yield risk and net income risk for groundnut was

79

65.1 per cent and 146.2 per cent, respectively; whereas the same for cotton was only

27.1 per cent and 64.8 per cent, respectively (Table 4.10). The price variability of

groundnut (17.7%) was also higher than that of cotton (11.8%).

Table 4.10 Profitability vis-à-vis Risks in Oilseeds Production (Coefficient of Variation in per cent)


Main crop oilseed I (groundnut)

Acreage variability 48.5 35.7 43.7 50.1 73.8 Yield variability 54.8 62.6 63.3 72.3 65.1 Price variability 18.2 18.9 20.0 13.8 17.7 Net income variability 154.1 162.2 139.6 142.1 146.2

Main competing crop (cotton)

Acreage variability 28.3 32.5 49.5 50.7 77.8 Yield variability 14.1 23.0 27.7 29.5 27.1 Price variability 8.4 12.1 12.7 11.0 11.8 Net income variability 86.9 74.9 69.6 54.2 64.8

Source: Field survey.

Table 4.11: Yield Risk and Price Risk of Main Oilseed and Competing Crop

Farm Size

Main oilseed (Groundnut)

Year 2011-12 Year 2010-11

Yield (Quintal/Ha) Price (Rs/Quintal)

Yield (Quintal/Ha) Price (Rs/Quintal)

Realized Expected Realized Expected Realized Expected Realised Expected

Marginal 23 35 3273 4117

22 33 2835 3633

(67.3) (22.0) (18.0) (10.5)

(41.3) (14.6) (10.9) (8.2)

Small 16 29 3491 4261

18 29 3009 3644

(65.8) (30.7) (23.5) (20.4)

(42.2) (20.9) (13.3) (14.2)

Medium 19 30 3571 4328

22 32 3109 3675

(70.7) (37.4) (17.3) (12.5)

(35.5) (20.8) (14.1) (13.6)

Large 17 28 3459 4224

21 31 2961 3547

(74.3) (33.3) (21.9) (15.3)

(36.4) (22.6) (14.2) (12.8)

All Farmers 18 29 3495 4264 21 31 3018 3622

(71.2) (33.7) (20.6) (15.7) (38.3) (21.3) (14.0) (13.3)

Main competing crop (Cotton)

Marginal 25 38 3250 4750

26 38 3400 4125

(14.1) (23.6) (0.0) (7.4)

(3.4) (23.6) (6.2) (12.9)

Small 24 35 3655 4940

23 35 3625 4208

(30.9) (17.9) (12.6) (9.7)

(26.6) (18.0) (14.1) (11.8)

Medium 23 33 3751 4878

23 38 3806 4434

(28.7) (19.0) (13.1) (13.5)

(23.5) (100.2) (21.3) (23.9)

Lage 24 33 3656 4840

25 34 3696 4219

(33.8) (28.3) (18.8) (9.6)

(24.1) (23.3) (12.7) (13.5)

All Farmers 23 33 3685 4873

24 36 3718 4298

(31.0) (23.0) (15.5) (11.2) (24.2) (67.6) (16.9) (18.2) Note: Figures in parentheses are the CV in per cent. Source: Field survey

80

It may be noted that the acreage risk was found to be little higher for the major

competing crop (cotton) than the main oilseed crop (groundnut). The coefficient of

variation in acreage of the crop as the measure of acreage risk for groundnut and

cotton was 73.8 per cent and 77.8 per cent, respectively. Since the growth in area

under groundnut has been stagnated and that of cotton is increasing, the acreage

variability of cotton was slightly higher.

Another way of looking at yield risk and price risk has been presented in Table

4.11. The CV in both yield and price was substantially higher for groundnut than that

of cotton. More importantly, the gap between expected yield and realized yield was

considerably high for both the crops. The yield gap was higher for groundnut (11)

than that of cotton (10) in 2011-12. However, the average price gap was higher for

cotton (1188) than that of groundnut (768). This was mainly because of higher price

expectation by the prospective cotton growers in the state in the corresponding year.

However, the scenario was somewhat different in the earlier year. The average yield

gap was higher for cotton (12) than that of groundnut (10) and the price gap was

higher for groundnut in 2010-11.

4.4.3 Yield Gap and Technology Gap in Cultivation of Main Oilseed Crop

The yield gap analysis was conducted for the main crop groundnut to ascertain the


and actual yield. As presented in Table 4.12, the average potential yield of groundnut

was 31.7 quintal per hectare and the average experimental yield of the main crop was

29.7 quintal per hectare. However, the average actual yield of the crop was found to

be only 15.5 quintal per hectare. Thus, the yield gap-I, i.e., the gap between the

experimental yield and potential yield was 1.8 q/ha, whereas the yield gap-II, i.e., the

gap between the actual yield and potential yield was quite high (16.2 q/ha). The yield

gap-III, i.e., the gap between the experimental yield and actual yield (often known as

extension gap) was also found to be quite high of 14.2 q/ha. Among the three types of

yield gap, the yield gap –II was found to be largest. Thus the prevailing level of yield

gap is considerably large in the study regions of Gujarat.

It may be noted that the yield gap-II and yield gap-III are the highest for the

marginal farmers and lowest for the large farmers. Thus the marginal farmers have

experienced the larger fluctuation in yield of groundnut. Since the experimental yield

and potential yield are much higher than the actual yield, there is need of enhancing

81

the level of actual yield by further expansion of irrigation provisions, development of

micro-level water resources in rainfed areas of the state, ensuring efficient water

management through micro-irrigation systems and making available better quality

farm inputs sufficiently at reasonable prices.

Table 4. 12: Yield Gap Analysis

(Quintal/Ha)

Yield Marginal Small Medium Large All Farms

1. Experimental farm yield 30.5 29.9 29.7 29.5 29.7

2. Potential farm yield 32.1 31.6 31.5 31.3 31.5

3. Actual farm yield 16.2 14.8 15.4 15.7 15.5

Yield gap I (2-1) 1.5 1.7 1.8 1.8 1.8

Yield gap II (2-3) 16.3 17.1 16.3 15.8 16.2

Yield gap III (1-3) 14.3 15.1 14.3 13.8 14.2

Technology index 6.15 6.27 6.31 6.34 6.30

Notes : (1)Experimental and potential farm yields have been collected from ICAR/State Agri. University scientists (2). Technology index={(Potential yield – Experimental yield)/ Potential yield} x 100

Source: Field Survey

Surprisingly, the feasibility of technology is found to be more in the case of

marginal and small farmers as the Technology Index for the corresponding farmer

categories were lower of 6.15 per cent and 6.27 per cent, respectively. The detailed

analysis on technology gap in cultivation of groundnut in Gujarat as presented in

Table 4.13 reveals that, there was huge gap found in fertilizer dose applied, weeding,

disease management, control of pesticides and insecticides. Less gaps were found in

the case of kind of crop variety used, seed rate and harvesting methods.

82

Table 4.13: Technology Gap (TG) in Groundnut Cultivation Prevailing at Farmers' Level

Sr. No. Parameter Farmers' practices Recommended technology Gap analysis

1 Varieties GG-20, GG-37, GG-13, Deshi

GG-2, GG-10, GG-11, GG-20, GG-37, GG-13

Variety gap is almost nil

2 Land preparation

2-3 ploughing before days of sowing

1 and 2 ploughing, followed by 2 or 3 harrowing

Gap is about 20 per cent.

3 Seed rate 131 kg/ha 110-125 kg/ha Gap is low

4 Fertilizers dose

1. 115 kg/ha DAP; 2. FYM: 1.1 tonnes per ha; 3. Liquid S: 1 litre/bigha in 225 litre water; 4. Ammonium sulphate: 10 kg/bigha;

N: 12.5-25, P2O5: 40-50, K2O:0 kg/ha; DAP: 56 kg/ha

Over dose of ferteliser

5 Weeding Hand picking or khurpi for removal of weed

Application of herbicide along with one or two interculture operation

High level of gap exists.

6 Disease Management

Used chemical fungicide for root rot, collar rot, tikka disease

Deep poughing (8-10 inches) seed treatment with carbendazin 0.1 @ 2g/kg seed, formulations of Trichderma harzianum or T. viridi @ 4-10 g/kg seed before sowing, application of neem or casor cake @ 250-500 kg/ha at the time of sowing

50 per cent gap with reference to recommended technology

7 Insect-pest Thrips, jassids, aphid manage by chemicla insecticides

Cowpea as trap crop reduces aphid and jassids infestation, application of malathion 0.05 or dimethoate (0.03%) or phosphamidon (0.03%) or methyl-odemeton (0.03%) or quinalphos (0.05%) or monocrotophos (0.04%). Use of predator

50 per cent gap with reference to recommended technology

8 Harvesting 10 September -10 October

10 September -10 October No gap

9 Yield 1590 kg/ha; widely varied from as low as 590 kg/ha in Rajkot to as high as 2358 kg/ha in Junagadh

Research station yield =2970 kg/ha, Potential yield = 3170 kg/ha

Wide gaps are observed.

Source:Jha, et al. (2012); Field survey (2012)

83

4.5 Access to Improved Technology and Markets for Oilseeds

Better returns on cultivation of agricultural crops largely depend on better price on the

agricultural produces that, in turn, depends on the availability and access to improved

technology and markets for oilseeds. It is good to find that about 96.8 per cent of the

sample farmers have used HYVs for getting better yield of oilseeds (Table 4.14). The

area under HYVs was 90.1 per cent of total area under oilseeds. The major source of

seeds was market. Only 15.6 per cent of sample farmers used own seed while 96.8

per cent farmers purchased the seeds from the nearby markets. Most of the sample

farmers were aware about the minimum support price (MSP) of their crops that

helped them in getting and bargaining for the right price of their produce. It is

noteworthy that about 96.4 per cent of sample farmers have received the price of

groundnut which was higher than the prevailing MSP. One of the major problems of

the groundnut growers was the marketing problem. About 52.8 per cent of sample

farmers stated that they faced marketing problems for selling groundnut output.

Table 4.14 Access to Improved Technology and Markets (% households agreed)


Use of HYV

Yes 100.0 90.9 98.9 98.8 96.8 No 0.0 9.1 1.1 1.2 3.2

Area under HYV (% to total area under oilseeds)

96.7 87.2 91.2 89.9 90.1

Source of seed

Own 0.0 13.6 13.8 22.0 15.6 Market purchased 100.0 90.9 98.9 98.8 96.8

Use of recommended doses of fertilizers

Yes 100.0 86.4 75.9 53.7 72.8 No 0.0 0.0 11.5 30.5 14.0 Don’t know 0.0 13.6 12.6 15.9 13.2

Awareness about MSP

Yes 100.0 86.4 86.2 78.0 84.4 No 0.0 13.6 13.8 22.0 15.6 MSP for 2011-12 (Rs/q) 2700 2700 2700 2700 2700

Price realization

≥MSP 93.3 98.5 93.1 98.8 96.4 <MSP 6.7 1.5 6.9 1.2 3.6

Marketing problems

Yes 73.3 48.5 56.3 51.2 52.8 No 26.7 51.5 43.7 48.8 47.2

Source: Field survey.

84

4.6 Marketing Pattern of Oilseeds

It may be noted from Table 4.14 that about 52.8 per cent of farmers expressed that

there is marketing problems which can be improved further. As presented in Table

4.15A, about 65.6 per cent of farmers cultivating groundnut have sold their output to

village traders, not directly at Agricultural Produce Marketing Committee (APMC) or

market ward (mandi). Had they been able to sell their produce at APMC market ward

directly, they would have fetched better prices for their produce. Since the distance

from APMC market ward was considerably high and the transportation cost was also

high, they preferred to sell their output to village traders. Processing mills and

commission agents were next best options for the sample farmers to sell their output.

Among different farmer categories, more number of medium (20.7%) and large

farmers (18.3%) could directly sell groundnut to processing mill, whereas no marginal

farmers could sell groundnut to processing mill that fetched relatively better price.

About 11.2 per cent of groundnut output was sold to commission agent. Some of the

farmers (4.8% of all sample farmers) including 13.3 per cent of marginal farmers

could sell their output to Government agency, i.e., National Agricultural Cooperatives

Marketing Federation of India Ltd (NAFED), that procured groundnut on the

commercial basis.

As is revealed from the Table 4.15A, the average price received from various

sources ranged from Rs 3250 per quintal to Rs 4750 per quintal for the sample

farmers. The average price received from the commission agent was the lowest of Rs

3175 per quintal. The average price of groundnut was received from processing mills

was Rs 3771. About 1.6 per cent farmers had sold their groundnut output to private

companies under contract arrangement. A majority of farmers (65.2%) sold their

output to local village traders that fetched a price of Rs 3560 per quintal for the

farmers. The commission agent was found to be the second major agency to whom

the sample farmers sold their groundnut output. The average distance travelled by the

farmers to sell their produce was reasonable of 5.6 km. The average distance

travelled was lowest for the marginal farmers (2.0) since most of them sold their

output to the local village traders. About 13.3 per cent of marginal farmers and 11.0

per cent of large farmers sold their output to Government agency and received the

price of Rs 3250 per quintal.

85

Table 4.15A :Sale Pattern of Major Oilseeds (Groundnut)

Particulars Marginal Small Medium Large All Farms

Agency to whom sold (% share)

Local village trader 80.0 65.2 65.5 62.2 65.2

Processing mill 0.0 16.7 20.7 18.3 16.0

Government agency 13.3 4.5 1.1 7.3 4.8

Commission agent 13.3 9.0 13.8 11.0 11.2

Private company (contract arrangement)

0.0 1.5 2.3 1.2 1.6

Others 0.0 1.5 0.0 0.0 0.4

Price received (Rs/q)

Local village trader 3404 3616 3544 3569 3560

Processing mill 0 3809 3886 3637 3771

Government agency (NAFED) 3250 3250 3250 3250 3250

Commission agent 3000 3125 3252 3123 3175


0 4250 3875 3750 3938

Others 0 4750 0 0 4750

Average distance to sale point (km) 2.0 4.6 5.5 7.0 5.6


Table 15B Sale Pattern of Cotton (Main Competing Crop)

Particulars Marginal Small Medium Large All Farms

No. of cotton cultivators 2 25 47 50 124

Agency to whom sold (% share)

Local village trader 100.0 60.0 36.2 34.0 41.1

Processing mill 0.0 8.0 29.8 34.0 26.6

Government agency 0.0 12.0 14.9 12.0 12.9

Commission agent 0.0 16.0 17.0 20.0 17.7 Private company (contract arrangement)

0.0 8.0 0.0 0.0 1.6

Others 0.0 4.0 0.0 0.0 0.8

Price Received (Rs/q)

Local village trader 3775 3985 4029 4204 4065

Processing mill 0 4200 4014 4025 4031

Government agency (CCI) 0 4000 4214 4375 4234

Commission agent 0 4188 4072 4038 4150


0 0 3975 0 3975

Others 0 4000 0 0 4000

Average distance to sale point (km) 0.0 4.0 11.0 11.0 9.4


86

The sale of main competing crop (cotton) exhibited slightly different pattern.

Here the local village traders purchased slightly less output from the sample farmers

where the Government agency, i.e., Cotton Corporation of India (CCI) purchased

relatively more output from the farmers. About 12.9 per cent sample farmers sold their

cotton output to Government agency at CCI outlets. About 28.7 per cent of sample

farmers sold the output to local village traders at the average price of Rs 4065 per

quintal (Table 4.15B).

Other major purchasers were commission agents who purchased about 17.7

per cent of the total cotton output of the sample farmers. The average distance

travelled by the cotton farmers was 9.4 km which was higher than that for groundnut

farmers (5.6 km). This was mainly because of the fact that comparatively more

groundnut farmers sold their output to local village traders.

As far as the prices of cotton from different market agencies are concerned, it

may be noted that the Government agency i.e., CCI offered better price (Rs4234 per

quintal) than all other market agencies. CCI has very good presence in the cotton

growing areas of the state, particularly in Saurashtra area that supplies best quality

cotton. There were more than 30 procurement centres of CCI in the Saurashtra

region of the state. As per the farmers’ observation, CCI bought at Rs 40-50 more

than the prevailing market prices for a quintal of cotton which was lucrative for all the

farmers. For different quality of cotton, CCI offered different prices. For best quality

cotton the price was Rs 4500 per quintal. For inferior quality, the price was 4250 or

4000 per quintal of cotton. However the duration of procurement by CCI was not

sufficient in the region.

4.7. Sources of Technology and Market Information

Different sources of information on inputs, extension services and market for the

sample farmers is presented in Table 4.16. The major sources of information on

seeds were found to be local input market (89.2%), specialized organizations like

ICAR/SAU/KVK (71.6%) and fellow farmers (60.8%). The major sources of

information on extension services were found to be specialized organizations like

ICAR/SAU/KVK (84.4%), input dealers (82.4%) and fellow farmers (62.0%). It may be

noted that the awareness level of marginal and small farmers was also very good

compared to that of medium and large farmers. Input dealers, agricultural supervisors

on behalf of Department of Agriculture and specialized organizations like

87

ICAR/SAU/KVK have played key role in dissemination of required information to the

needy farmers. Besides, print media and commission agents also transmitted some

relevant information on agricultural markets to the sample farmers in an effective

manner.

Table 4.16: Sources of Technology and Market Information

(% of farmers agreed)

Marginal Small Medium Large All

Farms

(A) Sources of information on seeds

Own 53.3 65.2 65.5 70.7 66.4

Fellow farmer 60.0 68.2 59.8 56.1 60.8

State Dept. of Agri. 33.3 45.5 56.3 46.3 48.8

ICAR/SAU/KVK 53.3 78.8 74.7 65.9 71.6

Commission agent/ Ahrtiya

13.3 22.7 19.5 24.4 21.6

Market 80.0 95.5 90.8 84.1 89.2

Others (specify) 0.0 7.6 5.7 9.8 7.2

(B) Sources of information on extension services

State Dept. of Agri. 66.7 59.1 51.7 48.8 53.6

Private company 33.3 65.2 60.9 65.9 62.0

Input dealer 86.7 83.3 83.9 79.3 82.4

SAU/ICAR/KVK 86.7 90.9 80.5 82.9 84.4

Others (specify) 6.7 13.6 17.2 17.1 15.6

(C) Sources of market information

Radio/TV 86.7 92.4 93.1 98.8 94.4

Print media 86.7 98.5 96.6 98.8 97.2

Fellow farmer 80.0 92.4 90.8 90.2 90.4

APMC mandi 86.7 93.9 94.3 98.8 95.2

Commission agent/ Ahrtiya

53.3 59.1 48.3 64.6 56.8

Private company 53.3 66.7 66.7 65.9 65.6

Others (specify) 6.7 22.7 23.0 25.6 22.8


4.8. Determinants of Oilseed Production and Acreage Allocation

The level of variability in crop output remains considerably high in various parts of the

state. The determinants of changes in crop output and yield are numerous those may

be categorized into two major groups: (i) change in amount and productivity of

agricultural inputs such as labour, fertilizer, pesticides and irrigation and (ii) the

exposure to weather related risks and other exogenous risks such as dry spell,

drought, and pest attack etc. In this section, attempt has been made to examine the

effects of variation in major agricultural inputs on yield with the help of a log-linear

88

regression model which has been estimated for main oilseed crop (groundnut) and

main competing crop (cotton) separately. The relative contribution and significance of

the inputs such as area under the crop (AR), size of land holding (LS), seed cost

(SC), fertilizer cost (FC), pesticide/insecticide cost (PC), human labour cost (HL),

machine labour cost (ML), bullock labour cost (BL), irrigation charges (IC) and interest

on working capital (WC) to change in yield of major oilseed and competing crop for

sample farmers have been examined. We have stated our regression model with a

log-linear functional form due to the fact that the agricultural production function is

usually assumed to follow a Cobb-Douglas type that requires a log-linear

transformation for estimation of input coefficients. Thus the estimable equation is as

follows.

i i 1 i 2 i 3 i 4 i 5 i

6 i 7 i 8 i 9 i 10 i i

LnY Ln A Ln AR Ln LS Ln SC Ln Ln

Ln Ln Ln Ln Ln

FC PC

HL ML BL IC WC e

The description of the variables used and the summary of regression results

are shown in Table 4.17. The coefficient values of major explanatory variables as the

major determinants of groundnut yield in the study area got positive sign as expected.

Only the area under the concerned crop, irrigation charges and interest on working

capital along with size of land holding and area under the crop were found to affect

significantly to the groundnut yield. In the case of cotton which is the main competing

crop grown in the State, the fitted regression model was overall insignificant with very

low value of R2 and F statistic. The magnitude of input variables for the selected crops

has been quite low indicating that the magnitude of effects has been unsatisfactory. It

may be noted that the constant term A in Cobb-Douglas Production Function that

stands for other exogenous factors such as technological change, exposure to

weather related risks such as dry spell, drought, and pest attack etc was found to

significantly influence the yield of both groundnut and cotton.

89

Table 4.17 Description and Results of Estimation of Production Functions (Groundnut and Cotton)

Variables Description Main oilseed (groundnut) Main competing crop (cotton)

Coefficient t-value p-value Coefficient t-value p-value

AR Area under crop (Ha) -0.368 *** -2.831 0.005 0.113 1.524 0.130

LS Size of land holdings (Ha)

0.380 *** 2.885 0.004 -0.064 -0.831 0.408

SC Seed cost (Rs) -0.144 -0.608 0.544 -0.181 *** -2.809 0.006

FC Fertiliser and manure cost (Rs)

0.014 0.102 0.919 -0.027 -0.544 0.588

PC Insecticides/pesticides cost (Rs)

0.024 0.533 0.595 0.004 0.301 0.764

HL Total human labour cost (Rs)

0.020 0.094 0.925 -0.023 -0.147 0.884

ML Total machine labour cost (Rs)

0.024 0.827 0.409 0.000 0.015 0.988

BL Total bullock labour cost (Rs)

0.018 0.877 0.381 -0.005 -0.533 0.595

IC Irrigation charges (Rs/Ha)

0.041 ** 2.139 0.033 0.025 * 2.323 0.022

WC Interest on working capital (Rs)

1.057 ** 2.298 0.022 0.235 0.934 0.352

A (Constant) -6.91 *** -3.709 0.000 3.055 *** 3.1668 0.00198 Dependant Variable (Y) Rapeseed-mustard yield Wheat yield

R2 0.427 0.147

F observed 16.143 1.952

No. of observations ‘N’ 250 124

Note: * 10% level of significance, **5% level of significance, ***1% level of significance

Source: Computed from field survey data



was fitted. Some major factors that actually influenced the farmers’ decision to

allocate the available cultivable area for different crops were taken into account as

explanatory variables and the area allocated for main oilseed (groundnut) was

considered as the dependant variable. The selected explanatory variables were the

size of land holdings (LSt), one year lagged area under groundnut (At-1), lagged yield

of groundnut (Yt-1), lagged price of groundnut (Pt-1), lagged area of cotton (ACt-1),

lagged yield of cotton (YCt-1) and the lagged price of cotton (PCt-1). The fitted model

was as follows.

t 1 t 2 t-1 3 t-1 4 t-1 5 t-1 6 t-1 7 t-1 i LnA Ln LS Ln A Ln Y Ln P Ln AC Ln YC Ln PC e

90

The description of the variables used and the summary of regression results

are presented in Table 4.18. Only the one year lagged area under groundnut (At-1)

and the lagged yield of cotton (YCt-1) were found to have statistically significant

influence on the area allocated for the main oilseed crop groundnut. Among these

variables, one year lagged area under groundnut positively influenced the area

allocation for groundnut, whereas lagged yield of main competing crop cotton

negatively influenced the area allocation for the main oilseed crop groundnut.

Table 4.18: Description and Results of Estimation of Short-Run Area Response Function for Groundnut

Variables Description Main oilseed (Groundnut)

Coefficient t-value p-value

LSt Size of land holdings (Ha) 0.2059 *** 3.907 0.000

At-1 Lagged area of groundnut (Ha) 0.8115 *** 18.936 0.000

Yt-1 Lagged yield of groundnut (Qtl/Ha)

-0.03 -1.223 0.222

Pt-1 Lagged price of groundnut (Rs/Qtl.)

0.0193 0.213 0.831

ACt-1 Lagged area of cotton (Ha) 0.0031 0.097 0.923 YCt-1 Lagged yield of cotton (Qtl/Ha) -0.059 * -1.664 0.097

PCt-1 Lagged price of cotton (Rs/Qtl.) 0.0055 0.398 0.691

A (Constant) -0.185 -1.583 0.115

Dependant Variable (Y) Current area under Groundnut (At)

R2 0.9328

F observed 479.67 No. of observations ‘N’ 250

Note: * 10% level of significance, **5% level of significance, ***1% level of significance

Source: Computed from field survey data

4.9 Perceived Constraints in Cultivation of Oilseeds

Major constraints faced by the sample farmers on various fronts such as inputs

availability, extension services and availability of marketing infrastructures and

transportation facilities etc. has been presented in Table 4.19. Among the

technological constraints, lack of irrigation facilities, incidence of diseases, incidence

of insect pests and weed infestation were the major ones for our sample farmers.

These factors have affected to all farmers irrespective their categories or land holding

sizes. The incidence of diseases and pests and weed infestation has affected more to

marginal and small farmers. The poor quality of soils has affected more to medium

farmers.

91

Table 4.19: Constraints in Cultivation of Oilseeds (Composite index value*)

Constraints Marginal Small Medium Large All Farms

Technological

Non-availability of suitable varieties 1.86 1.66 1.69 1.78 1.72

Poor crop germination 2.57 2.57 2.51 2.45 2.51

Lack of irrigation facilities 3.07 2.96 2.80 2.79 2.86

Incidence of diseases 3.21 3.12 3.01 3.12 3.09 Incidence of insect pests 3.36 3.15 3.01 3.00 3.06 Weeds Infestation 3.00 2.76 2.77 2.68 2.75

Poor quality of soils 1.57 1.63 1.69 1.62 1.64

Agro-climatic Factors

Drought at critical stages of crop growth 2.93 1.97 2.08 1.94 2.05

Excessive rains 3.93 3.54 3.47 3.38 3.48

Extreme variations in temperature 2.21 1.90 1.98 1.95 1.96

Poor pod/grain setting 2.00 2.13 2.07 2.18 2.12

Risk of crop failure/yield variability due to biotic & a biotic stresses

3.14 3.07 2.80 2.94 2.94

Economic

High-input cost (diesel, fertilizers, agrochemicals)

3.29 3.43 3.24 3.35 3.33

Shortage of human labor 3.29 2.76 2.98 3.02 2.95

Low and fluctuating prices 2.71 2.75 2.78 2.85 2.79

Price risks – fear of glut leading to low price 2.64 2.22 2.49 2.35 2.38

Oilseeds less profitable compared with other crops

3.00 3.00 2.89 2.79 2.89

Oilseeds more risky compared with other crops

2.93 3.09 2.90 2.80 2.92

Institutional

Problem of timely availability of seed 2.00 1.97 2.11 2.11 2.07 Non-availability of other inputs 2.21 0.00 2.26 2.24 2.22

Poor quality of inputs 2.50 2.12 2.14 2.27 2.24 Lack/Poor extension services 2.71 2.28 2.08 2.11 2.08

Non-availability of institutional credit 2.00 1.93 1.56 1.40 1.47 Inadequate knowledge about disease and pest management

2.93 1.31 2.59 2.63 2.65

Irregular supply of power/electricity 3.14 2.70 2.74 2.82 2.79

Lack of awareness of improved oilseed technologies

2.43 2.13 2.25 2.18 2.21

Post-harvest, Marketing and Value-addition

Poor marketing system and access to markets

1.86 1.57 1.74 1.60 1.65

Lack of information about prices and markets

1.71 1.79 1.66 1.60 1.68

Exploitation by market intermediaries 2.21 1.57 1.61 1.54 1.61

Lack of processing facilities in the area 2.50 1.69 1.75 1.79 1.79 Lack of appropriate transport means 2.29 1.55 1.55 1.57 1.60

Inadequate storage facilities 2.71 1.91 2.03 1.91 2.00

Poor road infrastructure 1.64 1.46 1.55 1.57 1.54 High transportation costs 2.71 2.60 2.57 2.54 2.58

Note: * Composite index has been constructed based on weights (severe =4, Moderate = 3, minor = 2, not important =1) and number of households in each category. Source: Field survey

92

Among the agro-climatic factors, excessive rain during critical stages of crop

growth and the risk of crop failure/yield variability due to biotic and abiotic stresses

were found as major agro-climatic constraints for the sample farmers. The marginal

and small farmers have been affected more (with composite score of 3.93 and 3.54,

respectively) because of excessive rain at critical stage of crop growth. These two

categories of farmers have also been affected more for the risk of crop failure/yield

variability due to biotic and abiotic stresses. Among economic and institutional

constraints, high input costs, shortage of human labour, and wide variability in crop

yield were found to be major ones.

The Inadequate knowledge about disease and pest management, Irregular

supply of power/electricity, supply of poor quality inputs were also found to create

difficulties for the sample farmers. On the fronts of post-harvest, marketing and

value-addition, the sample farmers have faced problems due to high transportation

costs and inadequate storage facilities in some parts of the study region.

4.10. Suggestions for Improving Production and Productivity of Oilseeds

The sample farmers have made wide range of suggestions for improvement in

prevailing conditions and institutional arrangements that will be helpful for increasing

the production and productivity of oilseeds in the state. Different farmers have raised

different issues and based on those issues, they have suggested some measures for

improving production and productivity of oilseeds. Higher input cost was one of the

major constraints for the sample farmers. As presented in Table 4.20, 14.8 per cent of

sample farmers have suggested to reduce or to stabilize the prices of chemical

fertilizers, seeds and other inputs. However, the sample farmers were found to apply

over doses of chemical fertilizers that have negatively affected the groundnut yield

level. Since the prices of agricultural inputs are rising year after year, a good number

of farmers have suggested that Government should provide more subsidies on

fertilizer, seeds and other inputs, particularly to marginal and small farmers. A good

number of farmers have also suggested to cover more farmers under subsidized

credit provisions and crop insurance. Rot diseases and white fungus were widely

found to affect the groundnut crop in the study areas, particularly in Visavadar block

of Junagadh. Near about 18.4 per cent sample farmers expressed that they needed

better pesticides/plant protection chemicals for preventing or eradicating the crop

diseases.

93

Table 4.20: Suggestions for Improving Production and Productivity of Oilseeds (% of farmers with 'yes' in respective farm category)


1 Provide/need good quality seeds/improved variety seeds, fertilizers and pesticides

6.7 3.0 6.9 8.5 6.4

2 Reduce or stabilize the prices of chemical fertilizers, seeds and other inputs

40.0 10.6 14.9 13.4 14.8

3 Timely availability of fertilizer, Insecticide, herbicide, Pesticides in proper quantity at proper price

6.7 6.1 8.0 3.7 6.0

4 Need of crop insurance/weather insurance to deal with natural calamities

0.0 0.0 1.1 2.4 1.2

5 Electricity should be made available on regular basis for longer duration/ low voltage problem should be solved.

6.7 12.1 13.8 14.6 13.2

6 Legally specify MRP of insecticides and pesticides

0.0 0.0 0.0 1.2 0.4

7 Government should provide training to farmers specially on cultivation of

groundnut 6.7 6.1 6.9 7.3 6.8

8 Good irrigation facilities should be provided

20.0 12.1 26.4 18.3 19.6

9 Requirement of irrigation facilities in Rabi and Summer

0.0 4.5 2.3 0.0 2.0

10 Further extension of irrigation facilities from Narmada dam to Saurashtra region

0.0 4.5 4.6 1.2 3.2

11 Drainage system should be developed for release of excess water during rainy season for avoiding water logging

20.0 7.6 11.5 30.5 17.2

12 Subsidy requirement for irrigation in groundnut

0.0 0.0 1.1 1.2 0.8

13 Government should provide more subsidy on fertilizer, seeds and other inputs

0.0 3.0 4.6 1.2 2.8

14 Need of better godown and storage and green house facilities

0.0 0.0 2.3 1.2 1.2

15 Need of organic fertilizers for better production of groundnut

0.0 3.0 1.1 0.0 1.2

16 Requirement of extension services/advice of agricultural supervisor

0.0 1.5 5.7 1.2 2.8

17 Need of laboratory for farm level testing of soil, seeds, land types, use of insecticide /pesticides

0.0 3.0 2.3 2.4 2.4

18 Need of raising the awareness level about marketing facilities/government schemes/crop diseases etc.

0.0 0.0 2.3 3.7 2.0

94

Table 4.20 continued….


19 Need of better infrastructure facilities like road and transport facilities

0.0 0.0 1.1 0.0 0.4

20 Need of better prices of crop output/need to increase MSP

20.0 15.2 18.4 23.2 19.2

21 Outlets for sale of seeds/fertilizers/pesticides and other inputs should be opened by Govt. to reduce effects private agents

0.0 0.0 2.3 0.0 0.8

22 Need assistance for land development/improvement in soil fertility/reducing soil salinity

13.3 6.1 2.3 3.7 4.4

23 Need better pesticides/plant protection chemicals for crop diseases

6.7 16.7 19.5 20.7 18.4

24 Need assistance for fencing so as to protect from blue bull(Nilgai), and pig

0.0 9.1 12.6 6.1 8.8

25 Stabilize the prices of essential commodities

26.7 4.5 1.1 6.1 5.2

26 Steps should be taken to reduce the influence of middlemen/ intermediaries

0.0 0.0 1.1 0.0 0.4

27 The problem of shortage of agricultural labour should be addressed 0.0 15.2 17.2 26.8 18.8

28 Better provision of marketing facilities in nearby areas is required 0.0 1.5 3.4 1.2 2.0

29 Creating more WHSs like dug well, pond, cross bund etc.

13.3 3.0 4.6 2.4 4.0

30 Need of assistance to cope with increased occurrence of natural calamities like drought , high rainfall and flood due to climate change

0.0 4.5 5.7 3.7 4.4

31 Need to cover under crop/weather insurance

0.0 0.0 1.1 0.0 0.4

32 Drip irrigation technology should be promoted

0.0 1.5 3.4 0.0 1.6

33 Less fertilizer should be used by farmers

0.0 0.0 1.1 0.0 0.4

34 Credit from commercial banks and cooperative bank should be made available

0.0 0.0 1.1 0.0 0.4


The farmers have faced problem due to unavailability of quality seeds in

required time. A large number of sample farmers faced the problems of crop damage

by blue bull (Nilgai) and pigs. So some sample farmers expressed that they need

assistance for fencing so as to protect from crop damaging animals. The ground

water was a major source of irrigation for the sample farmers. However, the depth of

water level of groundwater was quite high particularly in Rajkot. Since irrigation water

95

was inadequate, the area under Rabi crops and summer crops was very less in the

study areas. So about 19.6 per cent of respondents have suggested to expand the

irrigation facilities in their regions. Besides, the adoption of drip irrigation system

should be promoted to increase the level of water use efficiency. Since the farmers

normally used electric pump sets for lifting water, availability of electricity for

reasonable duration is essential. About 13.2 per cent of sample farmers suggested

that electricity should be made available on regular basis for longer duration and low

voltage problem should be resolved.

It was found during the survey that majority of farmers in Rajkot district were

affected due to water logging problem during the reference year. About 17.2 per cent

farmers suggested that the drainage system should be developed for release of

excess water during rainy season for avoiding water logging in their region. As far as

the marketing of oilseeds is concerned, the market intermediaries/middlemen enjoyed

a sizeable proportion of returns on groundnut and cotton. Thus some farmers have

suggested to devise policies to check the influence of market intermediaries.

To summarise the major constraints faced by the sample farmers and their

suggestions to overcome these constraints, lack of irrigation facilities, incidence of

diseases and incidence of insect pests, water logging, rainfall deficiency at critical

stage of crop growth, erratic behavior of rainfall pattern and the risk of crop

failure/yield variability due to biotic and abiotic stresses were found to be the major

technological and agro-climatic constraints for the sample farmers. Among the

economic and institutional constraints, high input costs, shortage of human labour,

irregular supply of electricity and problem of timely availability of good quality certified

seeds were found to be major ones. As regards the issues of post-harvest, marketing

and value-addition, the sample farmers have faced problems due to inadequate

storage facilities, exploitation by market intermediaries, low output prices and high

transportation costs. The larger proportions of the sample farmers have thus

suggested to reduce these constraints through necessary policy instruments so as to

increase the production and productivity of oilseeds in the state.

97

Chapter V

Conclusions and Policy Suggestions

5.1 Introduction

This chapter consists of two sections. The first section highlights the summary of

findings of the study as discussed in the preceding chapters and the second section

contains some policy implications of the study. In this section, specific policy

recommendations are made for the overall improvement in production and

productivity of oilseeds in Gujarat with a special focus on the study crops and districts

of Gujarat.

5.2 Summary of Findings

5.2.1 Major Objectives of the Study

The present study was a part of larger coordinated study on problems and prospects

of oilseeds and oil palm production in India. The major objectives of the study for the

State of Gujarat were (i) to examine trends and pattern of growth of different edible

oilseeds over time and across districts and identify the sources of growth in edible

oilseeds output in Gujarat; (ii) to determine the impact of price and non-price factors

influencing the supply response behavior and demand for edible oilseeds and oil in

the state; and (iii) to identify major constraints in the edible oilseed cultivation and

suggest policy options to increase oilseeds production and productivity in the state.

As far as the first two objectives of the study are concerned, secondary data on

district-wise area, production, yield of major crops/crop groups, major inputs used,

irrigated area under oilseeds, farm-harvest prices of selected oilseeds and competing

crops and annual rainfall were used.

Apart from a detailed crop-wise analysis of growth patterns and sources of

growth of edible oilseeds, the study has attempted to investigate the supply relations

for major oilseeds in the state. In order to identify major constraints in edible oilseed

production in the state, primary data from households growing oilseeds in the

selected districts were collected and analyzed.

98

5.2.2 Data and Sampling Design

The multistate, purposive sampling method was used to select the states, districts,

blocks and farm households. At first stage, the states growing considerable quantities

of oilseeds and having potential were selected. In total, seven major oilseeds

producing states were selected for the study. Gujarat and Andhra Pradesh were

chosen for the detailed study on groundnut since these states were found to be the

major producers of this crop. The present study was undertaken to generate better

understanding of the specific problems and prospects of oilseeds cultivation in the

State of Gujarat with a special focus on groundnut.

In the second stage, all districts growing groundnut in the state were

categorized into four groups such as high area and high yield (HH), high area and low

yield (HL), low area and high yield (LH), and low area and low yield (LL). Junagadh,

Rajkot and Porbandar were selected from Gujarat as HH, HL and LH category of

districts, respectively for a detailed study. At third stage, about 25 villages from 7

blocks of three study districts were covered to get the desired number of sample

households (250) representing different farm categories (Marginal 0-1 ha, Small 1-2

ha, Medium 2-4 ha; Large >4 ha). The reference year of the study for the household

survey was 2011-12.

5.2.3 Data Analysis Methods and Tools

As far as the data analysis methods are concerned, the study used the simple

statistical methods like averages, percentage, coefficient of variation and compound

annual growth rate (CAGR) for the analysis of secondary data. The CAGR was

estimated by fitting a semi-log trend equation which was estimated by applying

Ordinary Least Square (OLS) method and the t- test was performed to test the

significance of ‘β’. To measure the relative contribution of area and yield towards the

total output change with respect of individual crop, the exercise on decomposition

analysis was performed for major oilseeds and competing crops. The analysis helped

in identifying the sources of growth in output by breaking the change in production

into three effects i.e., area effect, yield effect and interaction effect.

The decomposition analysis was carried out on the major oilseeds and

competing crops mainly for three periods, i.e., Period I (TE1983-84 to TE 1993-94)

Period II (TE1993-94 to TE 2009-10) and overall period of TE1983-84 to TE 2009-10.

99

During Period I, the expansion of area under oilseeds was encouraged by

introduction of Technology Mission on Oilseeds (TMO) in 1986 by Government of

India. During Period II, the effects of trade liberalization was examined since the

change in trade policy had considerably affected the domestic production and

consumption pattern of major oilseeds in the country.

For better understanding of the different sources of growth in output, analysis

was also carried out on growth in input use during different time periods. The growth

pattern of irrigation coverage, fertilizer consumption, annual rainfall, farm harvest

prices and minimum support prices have also been analyzed. The behavior of

monthly prices has also been examined so as to assess the variability in short-term

prices of the major oilseeds and major competing crop.

The attempt has been made to examine the effects of variation in major

agricultural inputs on crop yield with the help of a log-linear regression model which

was estimated for the main oilseed crop (groundnut) and the main competing crop

(cotton) separately. The relative contribution and significance of the major factors

such as area under the crop, seed cost, fertilizer cost, pesticide/insecticide cost,

human labour cost, bullock labour cost, machine charges, irrigation charges and

working capital to change in yield of major oilseed and competing crop for sample

farmers have been examined.



was fitted. Some major factors that actually influence the farmers’ decision to allocate

the available cultivable area for different crops have been taken into account as

explanatory variables and the area allocated for main oilseed (groundnut) has been

considered as the dependant variable. Some price and non-price factors were

selected as the explanatory variables for the fitted regression model which were the

size of land holdings (LSt), one year lagged area of groundnut (At-1), lagged yield of

groundnut (Yt-1), lagged price of groundnut (Pt-1), lagged area of cotton (ACt-1), lagged

yield of cotton (YCt-1) and the lagged price of cotton (PCt-1).

The yield gap analysis was conducted for the main crop groundnut to ascertain

the gap between the potential yield and actual yield and between the experimental

yield and actual yield. An index called ‘Technology Index’ was used for measuring the

100

feasibility of the evolved technology at the farmer’s fields. Appropriate analytical

techniques were used to identify and prioritize major constraints facing oilseeds

production in the state. The responses of the sample farmers on the extent of severity

of various constraints faced by them have been ranked by using ordinal scores from 4

to 1 (severe =4, Moderate = 3, minor = 2, not important =1). The results are displayed

in the form of composite index called Oilseed Constraint Index (OCI) which has been

constructed as a weighted average.

5.2.4 Overview of Oilseeds Sector: Current Status and Growth Behaviour

5.2.4.1 Nature and Causes of Change in Cropping Pattern

The major crops grown in different parts of Gujarat are bajra, wheat, jowar, maize,

cotton, castor, groundnut, rapeseed-mustard, fodder and horticultural crops. The

cropping pattern has changed over the last four decades as a result of development

of irrigation potential, production technology, increased market prices and industrial

demand in the state. It is evident that the share of area under oilseeds has been

stagnated since 1980s. The share of the area under total cereals, total pulses and

total food grains has also decreased over last three decades. There has been very

high growth in area under cotton and there has been moderate growth in area under

rapeseed-mustard and other oilseeds while the area under groundnut has been

declining in the state since 1980s.

The area under total oilseeds as a per cent of gross cropped area (GCA) has

decreased from 24.8 per cent in TE 1983-84 to 24.1 per cent in TE 2009-10. In

absolute term, it has marginally increased from 2733.5 thousand ha in TE 1983-84 to

2803.9 thousand ha in TE 2009-10. The area under the main oilseed crop groundnut

has decreased continuously from 21.5 lakh ha in TE1983-84 to 19.7 lakh ha in TE

2003-04 and further to 18.6 lakh ha during TE 2009-10. On the other hand, the area

under the main competing crop (cotton) has steadily increased from 13.0 per cent of

GCA in TE 1993-94 to 20.7 per cent in TE 2009-10. In absolute term, the area under

the cotton has increased from 14.37 lakh ha during TE 1993-94 to 24.13 lakh ha

during TE 2009-10. Better price and better marketing facilities available in the state

are the major factors contributing more to adoption of cotton replacing the main

oilseed crop (groundnut) in the state.

Overall, the GCA in the state has fluctuated a lot. The GCA in the state has

marginally increased from 110.34 lakh ha in TE 1983-84 to 116.33 lakh ha in TE

101

2009-10. The overall area expansion effect has been better for the irrigated area than

the cultivated area during all reference periods. The gross irrigated area and net

irrigated area has increased by 2603.9 thousand ha and 2113.9 thousand ha,

respectively between TE 1983-84 and TE 2009-10 which was nearly 4.3 times and

3.0 times of increase in GCA and NSA respectively.

The district level analysis of cropping pattern reveals that the area under all

major crops has declined in 8 districts out of 26 districts between TE 1993-94 and TE

2009-10. The area under groundnut has declined by 98.5 thousand ha (-5.0%)

whereas the area under cotton has increased by 1221.6 thousand ha (102.5%)

between TE 1993-94 and TE 2009-10 in the state. Significant rise in area under

cotton has been observed in Bhavnagar, Amreli, Jamnagar, Rajkot and

Surendranagar districts. On the other hand, the significant increase in area under

groundnut was found in few districts like Porbandar, Sabarkanta and Banaskantha.

Among various factors responsible for changes in cropping pattern,

profitability, change in tastes and preferences, familiarity of HYVs for better returns,

availability of irrigation provisions and climatic aberrations are the major ones in the

state of Gujarat. The decline in groundnut area was basically due to poor post harvest

price and higher level of production risk. On the other hand, the area under cotton has

significantly increased due to better market price and lesser production risk. However,

the area under other oilseeds like sesamum, rapeseed-mustard and castor has

increased considerably mainly because these crops yielded better returns and

promote value-added agri-business enterprises. The expansion of area under

horticultural crops, pulses and oilseeds have been promoted through various

programmes like NHM, NFSM, ISOPOM, ATMA etc. in the state in recent years

compared to earlier periods in most of the districts in Gujarat.

5.2.4.2 Growth Trends in Area, Production and Yield of Major Oilseeds

Though the growth in area under some major oilseeds has been poor in Gujarat, the

growth in production and yield of major oilseeds has been magnificent over last 3

decades. Though the growth in production and yield of major oilseeds has been

satisfactory since 1950s, significant level of variability in these variables has been

observed over the years. The average annual area under total oilseeds has increased

from 1545.9 thousand ha in 1950s to 2596.9 thousand ha in 1980s, that has declined

to 2862.7 thousand ha in 2000s. On the other hand, the annual production and yield

102

of total oilseeds in the state have increased from 773.1 thousand tonnes and 500.1

kg/ha, respectively during 1950s to 3686.2 thousand tonnes and 1287.7 kg/ha,

respectively during 2000s. Thus the oilseed production and yield have increased by

4.8 times and 2.6 times respectively during last six decades.

However, the intra-year variation in area, production and yield of total oilseeds

is considerably large as noticed from variation in compound annual growth rates

across last five decades. Particularly, the annual growth of area under total oilseeds

has exhibited negative growth during 1960s and 1990s in the state. The annual

growth of oilseeds production has recovered from -3.38 per cent during 1980s to 0.04

per cent during 1990s. The same has again dropped to -2.32 per cent during 2000s.

Thus, the prevailing risk in production of oilseeds has been quite high in the state.

The district level analysis of area under oilseeds reveals that Rajkot (16.6%),

Junagadh (14.8%), Jamnagar (13.8%), Amreli (12.0%), Bhavnagar (9.3%) and

Banaskantha (8.4%) accounted for major share of total area under oilseeds in the

state during TE 1993-94. The share of some of these districts has declined marginally

during TE 2009-10. Some of the districts where the share of area has increased

during TE 2009-10 over TE 1993-94 were Junagadh (14.9%), Jamnagar (14.5%), and

Banaskantha (9.8%).

As far as the oilseeds production in the state is concerned, four districts out of

six districts having major share of oilseed acreage are among the six major districts

producing oilseeds during both the reference periods with some changes in their

positions. They were Banaskantha (14.4%), Junagadh (13.9%), Bhavnagar (10.5%)

and Rajkot (8.0%) during TE 1993-94; and Jamnagar (17.6%), Junagadh (16.6%),

Rajkot (11.9%) and Banaskantha (11.4%) during TE 2009-10.

The major districts growing Kharif oilseeds were Rajkot, Junagadh, Jamnagar,

and Amreli during both the reference periods, viz., TE 1993-94 and TE 2009-10. The

share of Bhavnagar in total Kharif oilseeds acreage has declined from 10.6 per cent

in TE 1993-94 to 5.6 per cent in TE 2009-10; whereas the share of Kachchh in total

Kharif oilseeds acreage has increased from 4.3 per cent in TE 1993-94 to 6.6 per

cent in TE 2009-10. Thus there have been minor changes in share of the districts with

respect to Kharif oilseeds acreage between the two reference periods. The major

districts growing Rabi oilseeds during TE 1993-94 were Banaskantha (42.8%),

103

Mehsana (40.1%), Sabarkantha (3.8%) and Ahmedabad (2.5%). There have not

been any major changes in the share of the districts with respect to Rabi oilseeds

acreage between two reference periods.

The analysis on the change in performance of individual oilseed crops in terms

of acreage and production between the two reference periods (TE1993-94 and TE

2009-10) revealed that Rajkot, Junagadh, Jamnagar and Amreli were the major

districts cultivating groundnut during both the reference periods; while Banaskantha,

Mehsana, Sabarkantha, Kachchh and Patan were emerged as the major districts

producing rapeseed-mustard and castor in the state. Surendranagar, Bhavnagar,

Amreli, Kachchh, Jamnagar and Rajkot were found to be the major sesamum growing

districts of the state.

Irrigation provision plays a critical role in expansion and stability in production

and productivity of oilseeds. Expansion of irrigation facilities would also help in area

expansion under various oilseeds in the state. Banaskantha, Mehsana, Kachchh,

Patan, Sabarkantha and Gandhinagar were the major districts where more irrigated

oilseeds were grown during both Kharif and Rabi seasons. The shares of other

districts were very less ranging from 0.1per cent to 3.9 per cent of state irrigated

oilseeds acreage.

5.2.4.3 Variability in Area, Production and Yield of Major Oilseed (Groundnut)

vis-à-vis Competing Crop (Cotton)

Groundnut was found to be the major oilseed crop while the cotton was found to be

its major competing crop in Gujarat in TE 2009-10. The share of groundnut in total

oilseeds in the state was about 66.4 per cent in the corresponding period. The growth

in area under groundnut was considerably high during 1950s (10.3%). However, it

has exhibited negative trend since 1960s (except 1970s). The compound annual

growth rate of area under groundnut was -2.7 per cent during 1960s that has

marginally increased to 1.0 per cent during 1970s and thereafter continued to exhibit

negative annual growth. In absolute term, the annual average area under groundnut

has increased from 1245.9 thousand ha during 1950s to 2252.8 thousand ha during

1970s and thereafter continued to fall to 1879.2 thousand ha during 1990s. There has

been some marginal increase in area during 2000s.

The average annual production and yield of groundnut has significantly

increased from 703.4 thousand tonnes and 564.6 kg/ha during 1950s to 2550.7

104

thousand tonnes and 1327.9 kg/ha during 2000s. Particularly, the growth in

production and yield of groundnut has been quite impressive during 1980s and

2000s. However, the extent of variability in its area, production and yield has also

been quite large in terms of the level of fluctuations in annual growth rates and

magnitude of coefficient of variation (CV). On the other hand, the growth in area and

production of the main competing crop (cotton) has been better. Not only the

production and yield of groundnut were less, the variability in production and yield of

groundnut was much larger than that of cotton. The CV of area and production of

groundnut during the reference periods was higher than that of cotton.

Over the last three decades, some districts like Rajkot, Junagadh, Jamnagar,

Amreli and Bhavnagar have dominated in terms of area and production of groundnut.

These five districts accounted for about 90 per cent of total groundnut area of the

state. However, the share of these major districts has marginally declined over the

years. Some districts whose share in area under groundnut has remained somewhat

stagnant are Mehsana, Banaskantha, Kheda, Vadodara and Bharuch. The districts

with higher area under groundnut such as Rajkot, Junagadh, Jamnagar, Amreli and

Bhavnagar have dominated in terms of their share in production of groundnut in the

state. The district’s share in state’s total production of groundnut in Amreli, Bhavnagar

and Kachchh has declined from 14.5 per cent, 18.0 per cent and 9.6 per cent in TE

1993-94 to 7.7 per cent, 5.3 per cent and 4.7 per cent in TE 2009-10 respectively.

The variability in area and production of oilseeds is largely linked to availability

of irrigation facilities. The share of irrigated area under groundnut to total area under

groundnut in the state has marginally increased from 8.3 per cent in TE 1993-94 to

10.5 per cent in TE 2007-08. On the other hand, the share of irrigated area under

groundnut to total irrigated area of the state has declined from 5.3 per cent in TE

1993-94 to 3.8 per cent in TE 2007-08. There is a need to increase the irrigated

groundnut acreage so as to enhance the groundnut production and productivity in the

state.

5.2.4.4 Sources of Growth in Output of Oilseeds in the State

With the help of decomposition analysis, the relative contribution of area and yield

towards the total change in production of total oilseeds, major oilseed (groundnut)

and the major competing crop (cotton) was assessed. Among the three effects i.e.,

area effect, yield effect and interaction effect, the yield effect was found to contribute

105

more to the change in output during the all the reference periods and the overall

period of TE1983-84 to TE 2009-10. The same was the case for the study districts

except Rajkot during Period I (TE 1983-84 to TE1993-94). The expansion of area

under oilseeds was the major source of growth in oilseeds production in Rajkot during

Period I. The yield effects also played a dominant role for the main oilseed

(groundnut) throughout the reference periods in the state. About 110.8 per cent of

growth in total oilseeds in Gujarat was due to yield effects during Period II (TE 1993-

94 to TE 2009-10). As far as the main oilseed (groundnut) of the state is concerned,

the yield effect accounted for 110.0 per cent of total output growth during the

corresponding period. However, the area effect was dominant during Period I

(703.3%) and interaction effect played a dominant role during Period II (35.9%) for the

main competing crop (cotton) in the state.

The logical sequence of arguments brings us to know about the factors

responsible for significant increase in yield during this period. The better nutrient

supply through application of adequate fertilizers and pesticides, availability of quality

seeds, increased input use efficiency and availability of better technological and

institutional infrastructure have played a crucial role in enhancement of productivity of

oilseeds and other cash crops during the corresponding period. The growth in

fertilizer use and gross irrigated area was good in the state where as the growth in

irrigated area under total oilseeds was not satisfactory since the annual growth in

irrigated oilseeds was -7.3 per cent during a period of TE 1993-94 to TE 2009-10. The

fertilizer use has increased in the state by annual growth of 5.1 per cent.

5.2.4.5 Variability in Monthly/Annual Prices of Major Oilseeds in the State

The growth in annual prices of major oilseeds has been impressive in Gujarat. The

farm harvest price (FHP) of groundnut and sesamum, which are the major Kharif

oilseeds in the state, has increased from Rs 1360 and Rs 2352 in TE1998-99 to Rs

2318 and Rs 5272 in TE 2009-10, respectively. Similarly, the annual price of major

Rabi oilseed (rapeseed-mustard) has increased from Rs 1226 in TE1998-99 to Rs

2222 in TE2009-10. It was good to find that the FHP of all major oilseeds was much

more than their MSPs in the state.

As far the case of the major oilseed and the major competing crop is

concerned, it was found that the average increase in prices of groundnut and cotton

106

was much larger between TE 2006 and TE 2012. It was 101.1 per cent for groundnut

and 96.1 per cent for cotton during the corresponding period. However, the extent of

variability in annual wholesale price of groundnut was somewhat lower than that of

cotton both spatially and temporally. The coefficient of variation in annual wholesale

price of groundnut was 7.0 per cent in TE 2012 while that of cotton was 9.8 per cent

during the corresponding period in the state.

5.2.5 Problems and Prospects of Oilseeds Production: Empirical Analysis 5.2.5.1 Socio-Economic Status of Sample Households Among the sample farmers, 15 were marginal farmers, 66 were small farmers, 87

were medium farmers and 82 were large farmers. The average household (HH) size

for entire sample was of 6.3 persons. About 68.4 per cent sample households

belonged to general caste category, 30.8 percent HHs belonged to OBC category and

remaining 0.8 per cent HHs belonged to SC/ST category. The average off-farm

income per sample household was Rs 43207 per annum. Near about 96.8 per cent

members had crop farming as the main source of livelihood. The average number of

years of schooling was 7.8 years for the sample households.

The net sown area (NSA) and gross cropped area (GCA) of a sample

household was found to be 3.75 ha and 4.81 ha, respectively which imply that the

cropping intensity in the study area was 128.3 per cent. The size of operational

holding in the case of small, medium and large farmers was 1.62 ha, 3.20 ha, and

6.59 ha, respectively. It was good to see that the area under protective irrigation was

81.9 per cent of total operated area.

As regards the land tenancy, only about 6.4 per cent of sample HHs were

having leased in land constituting about 3.6 per cent of total operated area. The term

of lease for about 68.8 per cent of HHs with leased-in lands was share cropping and

for remaining 31.3 per cent HHs, it was fixed rent in cash.

As far as different sources of irrigation are concerned, as high as 83.1 per cent

of total operated area of sample farmers was irrigated by open well or dug wells

followed by tube wells (14.6%), usually energized by electricity and/or diesel. Canal

and tank and other source of irrigation had minor presence in the study area as their

joint contribution was about 2.2 per cent in the case of our sample farmers.

107

5.2.5.2 Cropping Pattern and Yield of Major Crops

The GCA per HH was 4.8 ha for all farmers taken together whereas the large farmer

had highest GCA of 8.2 ha and marginal farmers had minimum GCA of 1.4 ha.

Medium and small farmer had 4.1 ha and 2.3 ha of GCA, respectively. Overall, the

per-HH area under Kharif crops and Rabi crops cultivated by the sample farmers was

3.7 ha and 0.94 ha, respectively.

The share of cereals and pulses was 0.2 per cent each, whereas the share of

oilseeds and other Kharif crops including cotton was 71.2 per cent and 28.3 per cent,

respectively. Thus oilseeds and cotton have occupied prominent postion in the

cropping pattern in the state. Among Kharif oilseeds, groundnut was found to be the

major crop cultivated by the sample farmers of all categories, whose share in total

Kharif crops was 69.3 per cent. The second major Kharif oilseed was castor whose

share in total Kharif crops was 1.3 per cent. The area under Rabi oilseeds for the

sample farmers was almost nil in the region. About 48.9 per cent of total Rabi

acreage was under spices and vegetables among which cumin was major one.

Groundnut and sesamum were found to be cultivated by the sample farmers during

summer season.

The average yield of Kharif crops and Rabi crops under rainfed

conditions was 9.9 quintals per hectare and 3.4 quintals per hectare, respectively;

whereas the average yield of Kharif crops and Rabi crops under irrigated conditions

was 21.5 quintals per hectare and 41.8 quintals per hectare, respectively. The

average yield of Kharif oilseeds under rainfed and irrigated conditions was 7.1

quintals per hectare and 18.1 quintals per hectare, respectively. Among summer

oilseeds, sesamum and groundnut were major ones. The average yield of groundnut

and sesamum under irrigated conditions was 23.4 quintals per hectare and 11.1

quintals per hectare, respectively.

5.2.5.3 Production, Retention and Marketed Surplus Pattern of Oilseeds

The major oilseeds cultivated by our sample households were groundnut, castor and

sesamum. The main competing crop for groundnut was found to be cotton which was

grown by 124 sample farm households. The sample farmers growing groundnut

produced 39.9 quintals per household on an average, out of which 38.2 quintals of

groundnut was sold at the average price of Rs 3518 per quintal. About 1.8 quintals of

108

groundnut (4.5%) was retained per household for household consumption and for use

as seed.

As far as the case of main competing crop (cotton) is concerned, 45.0 quintals

was produced per household, all of which was sold at the average price of Rs 4091

per quintal. No significant variation in prices of oilseeds and competing crops was

observed across farm size classes. In the case of groundnut, the highest selling price

was realized by the small farmers (Rs 3559 per quintal) followed by the large farmers

(Rs3524). In case of main competing crop cotton, the highest selling price was

realized by the large farmers (Rs 4131 per quintal), followed by the medium farmers

(Rs 4091). The lowest price was realized by the marginal farmers (Rs 3775 per

quintal).

5.2.5.4 Comparative Economics/Profitability of Oilseeds vis-à-vis Competing

Crops

The cultivation of the major oilseed crop (groundnut) was less profitable over the

major competing crop (cotton) in the study areas. The gross value of main product

and value of by-product of groundnut across all size groups of farmers was found to

be Rs 54532.7 and Rs 6242.0 per hectare, respectively (Table 4.9). The total variable

cost of cultivation of the crop including material cost and labour cost was Rs 37932.6

per hectare. Thus the net income derived from cultivation of groundnut was Rs

22842.1 per hectare. On the other hand, the net income derived from the cultivation

of cotton was Rs 54454.7 per hectare which was more than double of net income

generated from cultivation of main oilseed groundnut (Rs 22842.1). That is why, the

share of cotton in the cropping pattern of the farmers is gradually growing and that of

groundnut is falling.

Among the cost components, labour charges accounted for the largest share

of the total operational costs for both main oilseed crop and major competing crop.

For cultivation of groundnut, total human labour and seed cost accounted for 34.8 per

cent and 25.4 per cent of total operational cost, respectively. Fertilizer consumption

accounted for 11.1 per cent of total operational cost of cultivation of groundnut. The

overall pattern of cost of cultivation for the selected competing crop was similar.

However, the fertilizer and manure cost was the second highest cost component in

the case of cotton. Total human labour and fertilizer consumption accounted for 48.5

109

per cent and 20.4 per cent, respectively of total operational cost of cultivation of

cotton. The per-hectare irrigation charges and the seed cost for cultivation of cotton

was 4.6 per cent and 10.0 per cent of total operational cost, respectively.

5.2.5.5 Profitability vis-à-vis Risks in Oilseeds Production

From the profitability point of view, the main competing crop cotton has proved to be

much better option than the main oilseed crop groundnut. On the production, income

and price risk perspectives, the main oilseed crop also exhibited poor results. The

yield variability and net income variability were substantially higher for the main crop.

The coefficient of variation (CV) in yield and net income as the measure of yield risk

and net income risk for groundnut was 65.1 per cent and 146.2 per cent, respectively;

whereas the same for cotton was only 27.1 per cent and 64.8 per cent, respectively.

The price variability of groundnut (17.7%) was also higher than that of cotton (11.8%).

The acreage risk was found to be little higher for the major competing crop (cotton)

than the main oilseed (groundnut). Since the growth in area under groundnut has

been stagnated and that of cotton is increasing, the acreage variability of cotton was

slightly higher.

The CV in both yield and price was substantially higher for groundnut than that

of cotton. More importantly, the gap between expected yield and realized yield was

considerably high for both the crops. The yield gap was higher for groundnut (11)

than that of cotton (10) in 2011-12. However, the average price gap was higher for

cotton (1188) than that of groundnut (768). This was mainly because of higher price

expectation by the prospective cotton growers in the state in the corresponding year.

5.2.5.6 Yield Gap and Technology Gap Analysis

The yield gap analysis was conducted for the main crop (groundnut) to ascertain the


and actual yield. The average potential yield of groundnut was 31.7 quintal per

hectare and the average experimental yield of the main crop was 29.7 quintal per

hectare. However, the average actual yield of the crop was found to be only 15.5

quintal per hectare. Thus, the yield gap-I, i.e., the gap between the experimental yield

and potential yield was 1.8 q/ha, whereas the yield gap-II, i.e., the gap between the

actual yield and potential yield was quite high (16.2 q/ha). The yield gap-III, i.e., the

gap between the experimental yield and actual yield (often known as extension gap)

110

was also found to be quite high of 14.2 q/ha. Among the three types of yield gap, the

yield gap –II was found to be largest. Thus the prevailing level of yield gap is

considerably high in the study regions of Gujarat.

Surprisingly, the feasibility of technology is found to be more in the case of

marginal and small farmers as the Technology Index for the corresponding farmer

categories were lower of 6.15 per cent and 6.27 per cent, respectively. The detailed

analysis on technology gap in cultivation of groundnut in Gujarat reveals that, there

was huge gap found in fertilizer dose applied, weeding, disease management, control

of pesticides and insecticides. Less gaps were found in the case of kind of crop

variety used, seed rate and harvesting methods.

5.2.5.7 Access to Improved Technology and Markets for Oilseeds

Better returns on cultivation of agricultural crops largely depend on better price on the

agricultural produces that, in turn, depends on the availability and access to improved

technology and markets for oilseeds. It is good to find that about 96.8 per cent of the

sample farmers have used HYVs for getting better yield of oilseeds. The major source

of seeds was market. Only 15.6 per cent of sample farmers used own seed while 96.8

per cent farmers purchased the seeds from the nearby markets.

The major source of seeds was market. Only 13.5 per cent of seeds was

farmers’ own seed. Most of the sample farmers were aware about the minimum

support price (MSP) of their crops that helped them in getting and bargaining for the

right price of their produce. It is noteworthy that about 84.4 per cent of sample

farmers have received the price of groundnut which was higher than the prevailing

MSP. It was found that the majority of farmers used more than recommended doses

of fertilizers and pesticides. About 52.8 per cent of sample farmers stated that they

faced marketing problems for selling groundnut output.

5.2.5.8 Marketing Pattern of Oilseeds

About 65.2 per cent of farmers cultivating groundnut have sold their output to village

traders, not directly at Agricultural Produce Marketing Committee (APMC) or market

ward (mandi). Since the distance from APMC market ward was considerably high and

the transportation cost was also high, they preferred to sell their output to village

traders. Processing mills and commission agents were next best options for the

sample farmers to sell their output. Some of the farmers (4.8% of all sample farmers)

including 13.3 per cent of marginal farmers could sell their output to Government

111

agency, i.e., National Agricultural Cooperatives Marketing Federation of India Ltd

(NAFED), that procured groundnut on the commercial basis. The average price

received from various sources ranged from Rs 3250 per quintal to Rs 4750 per

quintal for the sample farmers. The average price received from the commission

agent was the lowest of Rs 3175 per quintal. The average price of groundnut was

received from processing mills was Rs 3771. A majority of farmers (65.2%) sold their

output to local village traders that fetched a price of Rs 3560 per quintal for the

farmers.

The sale of main competing crop (cotton) exhibited slightly different pattern.

Here the local village traders purchased slightly less output from the sample farmers

where the Government agency, i.e., Cotton Corporation of India (CCI) purchased

relatively more output from the farmers. About 12.9 per cent sample farmers sold their

cotton output to Government agency at CCI outlets. About 28.7 per cent of sample

farmers sold the output to local village traders at the average price of Rs 4065 per

quintal. As far as the prices of cotton from different market agencies are concerned, it

may be noted that the Government agency i.e., CCI offered better price (Rs4234 per

quintal) than all other market agencies. CCI has very good presence in the cotton

growing areas of the state, particularly in Saurashtra area that supplies best quality

cotton.

The average distance travelled by the farmers to sell their produce was

reasonable of 5.6 km. The average distance travelled was lowest for the marginal

farmers (2.0) since most of them sold their output to the local village traders.

5.2.5.9 Sources of Technology and Market Information

The major sources of information on seeds were found to be local input market

(89.2%), specialized organizations like ICAR/SAU/KVK (71.6%) and fellow farmers

(60.8%). The major sources of information on extension services were found to be

specialized organizations like ICAR/SAU/KVK (84.4%), input dealers (82.4%) and

fellow farmers (62.0%). Input dealers, agricultural supervisors on behalf of

Department of Agriculture and specialized organizations like ICAR/SAU/KVK have

played key role in dissemination of required information to the needy farmers.

Besides, print media and commission agents also transmitted some relevant

information to the sample farmers in an effective manner.

112

5.2.5.10 Determinants of Oilseed Production and Acreage Allocation

The relative contribution and significance of the major factors (such as area under the

crop, seed cost, fertilizer cost, pesticide/insecticide cost, human labour cost, bullock

labour cost, machine charges, irrigation charges and working capital) to change in

yield of major oilseed and competing crop for sample farmers was analyzed with the

help of a log-linear model. The coefficient values of major explanatory variables as

the major determinants of groundnut yield in the study area got positive sign as

expected. Only the area under the concerned crop, irrigation charges and interest on

working capital along with size of land holding and area under the crop were found to

affect significantly to the groundnut yield. In the case of cotton which is the main

competing crop grown in the state, the fitted regression model was overall

insignificant with very low value of R2

and F statistic. The constant term A in Cobb-

Douglas Production Function that stands for other exogenous factors such as

technological change, exposure to weather related risks such as dry spell, drought,

and pest attack etc was found to significantly influence the yield of both groundnut

and cotton.

As far as the acreage allocation between main oilseed crop and competing crop

by the sample farmers is concerned, another similar log-linear regression model was

fitted. Some major factors that actually influenced the farmers’ decision to allocate the

available cultivable area for different crops were taken into account as explanatory

variables and the area allocated for main oilseed (groundnut) was considered as the

dependant variable. Only the one year lagged area under groundnut (At-1) and the

lagged yield of cotton (YCt-1) were found to have statistically significant influence on

the area allocated for the main oilseed crop groundnut. Among these variables, one

year lagged area under groundnut positively influenced the area allocation for

groundnut, whereas lagged yield of main competing crop cotton negatively influenced

the area allocation for the main oilseed crop groundnut.

5.2.5.11 Perceived Constraints in Cultivation of Oilseeds

Among the major technological constraints, lack of irrigation facilities, incidence of

diseases, incidence of insect pests and weed infestation were the major ones for our

sample farmers. These factors have affected to all farmers irrespective their

categories or land holding sizes. The incidence of diseases and pests and weed

infestation has affected more to marginal and small farmers. The poor quality of soils

113

has affected more to medium farmers. Among the agro-climatic factors, excessive

rain during critical stages of crop growth and the risk of crop failure/yield variability

due to biotic and abiotic stresses were found as the major agro-climatic constraints

for the sample farmers. Among economic and institutional constraints, high input

costs, shortage of human labour, and wide variability in crop yield were found to be

major ones. The Inadequate knowledge about disease and pest management,

irregular supply of power/electricity, supply of poor quality inputs were also found to

create difficulties for the sample farmers.

5.2.5.12 Farmers’ Suggestions for Improving Production and Productivity of Oilseeds

The larger proportion of the sample farmers suggested to take necessary measures

for alleviating the major constraints through necessary policy instruments so as to

increase the production and productivity of oilseeds in the state. About 14.8 per cent

of sample farmers have suggested to reduce or to stabilize the prices of chemical

fertilizers, seeds and other inputs. Since the prices of agricultural inputs are rising

year after year, a good number of farmers have suggested that government should

provide more subsidies on fertilizer, seeds and other inputs, particularly to marginal

and small farmers. A good number of farmers have also suggested to cover more

farmers under subsidized credit provisions and crop insurance. Near about 18.4 per

cent sample farmers expressed that they needed better pesticides/plant protection

chemicals for preventing or eradicating the crop diseases. Since irrigation water was

inadequate, the area under Rabi crops and summer crops was very less in the study

areas. So about 19.6 per cent of respondents have suggested to expand the irrigation

facilities in their districts.

Since the farmers normally used electric pump sets for lifting water, availability

of electricity for reasonable duration is essential. About 13.2 per cent of sample

farmers suggested that electricity should be made available on regular basis for

longer duration and low voltage problem should be resolved. A large number of

sample farmers faced the problems of crop damage by blue bull (Nilgai) and pigs. So

the sample farmers expressed that they need assistance for fencing in the form of

subsidies that will encourage them to build boundary walls/fences so as to protect

their cultivated lands from these crop damaging animals. As far as the marketing of

oilseeds is concerned, the market intermediaries/middlemen enjoyed a sizeable

114

proportion of returns on groundnut and cotton. Thus some farmers have suggested to

devise policies to check the influence of market intermediaries.

5.3 Conclusions and Policy Implications

The suggestions made by the sample oilseeds farmers have been highlighted in the

preceding section that specifically covered the issues related to the required

provisions or facilities to be created by the government to lessen the difficulties of the

oilseeds growers or to encourage the farmers to cultivate more areas under oilseeds.

If some of the suggestions of the sample farmers could be considered and

implemented by the policy makers, obviously that will help in further increase in area

and production of oilseeds in the state. Besides the farmers’ suggestions, few more

issues have been discussed in the following sections that may help the policy makers

to devise the policy for further expansion of area under oilseeds in the state and to

increase the production and productivity of oilseeds in the state.

5.3.1 Scope for Expansion of Area under Oilseeds in the State

From the analysis of relative contribution of area, yield and their interaction to change

in production of total oilseeds in the selected districts of Gujarat, it was found that the

yield effect was found to contribute more to the change in output during all reference

periods and the overall period of TE1983-84 to TE 2009-10. The area under oilseeds

has not increased at the satisfactory rate in the state so far.

Though the scope of expansion of area under oilseeds in recent years looks

gloomy in the state, it is possible to increase the area under the oilseeds by further

irrigation expansion and offering better prices. The district level analysis reveals that 7

out of 26 districts (Junagadh, Jamnagar, Rajkot, Amreli, Bhavanagar, Porbandar and

Kachchh) accounted for about 91.3 per cent of total oilseeds area of the state. So

there is possibility of increasing the area under oilseeds in other districts with very thin

area under oilseeds. The oilseeds area can also be increased in the districts with low

area under oilseeds but high productivity. Some of this type of districts are Tapi (

where oilseeds area constitutes only 7.7% of GCA of the district with oilseeds yield of

2232 kg/ha, with 0.94% of state oilseeds area), Narmada (where oilseeds area

constitutes only 2.1% of GCA of the district with oilseeds yield of 1882 kg/ha, and with

0.13% of state oilseeds area), Vadodara (0.94% of state oilseeds area, oilseeds area

115

constituting 3.5 % of district GCA with yield of 1607 kg/ha), Panchmahals (0.23% of

state oilseeds area, oilseeds area constituting 1.1% of district GCA with yield of 1429

kg/ha) and Surat (0.31% of state oilseeds area, oilseeds area constituting 2.0% of

district GCA with yield of 1325 kg/ha). However, there is a need of further irrigation

expansion along with subsidized and sufficient power supply for agriculture in these

districts to encourage more farmers to adopt these high value crops.

5.3.2 Scope for Enhancing Oilseeds Productivity in the State

Major avenues for increase in oilseed production in the state are expected to come

through increase in yield levels of the oilseed crops. The possibility in productivity

enhancement in oilseed crops is probably highest among any group of crops in the

state. Our study finds that there is a considerable yield gap in cultivation of selected

oilseed crop in the state. In the case of our main oilseed crop groundnut, the yield

gap-II, i.e., the gap between the actual yield and potential yield was found to be very

high (16.2 q/ha). Thus there is huge scope for increasing the yield of oilseeds in major

parts of the state.

There were some districts where the share of oilseeds area in GCA is

considerably large but the yield levels of oilseeds were very low. Some of such

districts were Rajkot (oilseeds area constituting 42.2% of district GCA with yield of

only 406 kg/ha), Amreli (oilseeds area constituting 38.8% of district GCA with yield of

only 187 kg/ha), Junagadh (oilseeds area constituting 45.1% of district GCA with yield

of only 911 kg/ha), Bhavnagar (oilseeds area constituting 18.1% of district GCA with

yield of only 585 kg/ha) and Surendranagar (oilseeds area constituting 13.4% of

district GCA with yield of only 869 kg/ha). These are some of the prospective districts

where the increase in yield levels should be emphasized in practice by the policy

makers.

Since there is limited scope for increasing area under oilseeds, a combination

of land saving technologies involving high yielding varieties and hybrids and efficient

crop management and nutrient management strategies need to be adopted so as to

increase the yield levels. The losses due to incidence of pests and diseases need to

be minimized.

116

5.3.3 Future Strategies for Oilseeds Sector in the State

As discussed in previous section, the expansion of area under oilseeds should be in

focus in some parts of the state, while the increase in yield level should be

emphasized in some other targeted regions of the state. As far as the area expansion

in oilseed crops in the state is concerned, oilseed cultivation in rice fallows and non-

traditional areas may be emphasized by the policy makers. Besides, incorporating

oilseeds in intercropping sequence and inclusion of oilseeds as a component in crop

diversification plans may help in further expansion of area under oilseeds in the state.

The major thrust of strategies should be on enhancement of yield of oilseeds.

The diverse sources of productivity enhancement such as improved agro-techniques

and improvement in input use efficiency and effective technology dissemination are

essential for further increase in yield of oilseed crops in the state. The suggested key

strategies for the oilseed productivity improvement in the state are:

Irrigation expansion through promotion of water harvesting structures and

further expansion of canal command area

Ensuring the timely availability of quality/certified seeds of improved varieties

Providing incentives to promote balanced crop nutrition

Promoting efficiency in water use through protective irrigation such as drip and

sprinkler and other micro irrigation techniques

Popularizing the effective crop management techniques

Encouraging farmers to adopt integrated pest and nutrient management

Promoting farm mechanization in oilseed cultivation

Supporting the farmers to use more resource conservation technologies and

precision farming technologies

Providing incentives/subsidies for fencing so as to help farmers protect their

crop from crop damaging animals

Providing better extension services by hiring more extension personnel and

equipping them with necessary skill set through proper training.

Removing the marketing constraints is crucial for encouraging the farmers to

adopt more oilseed crops in their crop allocation. For reducing the level of market

constraint, some policy initiatives are essential. The major functional areas of policy

backing are:

117

Reducing the distress sale by limiting the influence of the market

intermediaries in deciding the farm harvest price actually offered to the farmers

Effective market interventions for oilseeds and edible oils by increasing the

volume of procurement by NAFED and CCI

Creating necessary rural and marketing infrastructures such as processing

units and market wards etc.

Favourable trade policy

The State Government has taken some useful measures for reducing the

market constraints in the state. However, there is a need of radical changes in the

policy front to enable the traditional oilseeds processing sectors to increase their

efficiency and capacity utilization. Implementation of decontrolling of traditional

oilseeds processing from small scale sector would help in this direction. The effective

market interventions like price support system, price signaling etc. have to be

strengthened.

Looking at the major constraints faced by the sample farmers, reducing the

influence of middlemen/ intermediaries, better infrastructure and transport facilities

with reasonable charges on the services for reducing the transport costs, better

storage facilities and stabilizing the prices of chemical fertilizers, seeds and other

inputs need a special policy attention. Among others, timely availability of fertilizer,

insecticide, herbicide, pesticides in proper quantity at proper price, creating more

WHSs like dug well, tank, cross bund etc. and expansion of irrigation from canal

wherever possible, reducing the disruptions in power supply for irrigation purposes

may be emphasized by the policy makers. There is an urgent need to invent and

popularise oilseed varieties, which require less water and have more productivity and

at the same time are affordable to farmers.

119

References

Basitine, C.L. and K. P. Palanisami (1994), ‘An analysis of growth trends in principal

crops in Kerala’, Agricultural Situation in India, 48 (12): 885-891.

Bhatnagar, S. and D.S. Nandal (1994), ‘Growth in Wheat in Haryana’, Agricultural

Situation in India, 49 (1): 75-78.

Dholakia, R.H. (2010), Has Agriculture in Gujarat Shifted to High Growth Path? in

Dholakia, R.H. and S.K. Dutta (eds), ‘High Growth Trajectory and Structural

Changes in Gujarat Agriculture’, Centre for Management in Agriculture, IIM

Ahmedabad, pp.1-19.

Dutta, R.A. and K. Kapadia, (2011), Possibilities and Constraints in Increasing Pulses

Production in Gujarat and Impacts of National Food Security Mission on Pulses,

Research Report No. 140, Agro-Economic Research Centre, S.P. University,

V.V. Nagar.

GoI (2011a), ‘State of Indian Agriculture 2011-12’, Department of Agriculture and

Cooperation, Ministry of Agriculture, Government of India.

GoI (2011b), Economic Survey 2011-12, Ministry of Finance, Government of India.

GoG, 2008, Irrigation in Gujarat 2008-09, Directorate of Economics and Statistics,

Government of Gujarat, Gandhinagar.

GoG (2009), Agriculture Statistics of Gujarat, 2009-10, Directorate of Economics and

Statistics, Government of Gujarat.

GoG (2010), National Conference on Kharif Camping-2010, Department of

Agriculture & Cooperation, Government of Gujarat.

GoG (2011a), Socio- Economic Review, 2011-12, Gujarat State, Directorate of

Economics and Statistics, Government of Gujarat.

GoG (2011b), National Conference on Rabi Camping-2011, Department of

Agriculture & Cooperation, Government of Gujarat, 14-15 September

GoG (2011c), Gujarat Agriculture Statistics at a Glance 2010-11, Directorate of

Economics and Statistics, Government of Gujarat

GoG (2012a), State Agriculture Profile,

(http://agri.gujarat.gov.in/informations/state_agri_profile.htm, Accessed on 25th

September), Government of Gujarat.

GoG (2012b), Sector Profile: Food & Agri Business,

(http://www.vibrantgujarat.com/images/pdf/food-agro-details.pdf, Accessed on

20th September 2012), Government of Gujarat.

http://agri.gujarat.gov.in/informations/state_agri_profile.htm

http://www.vibrantgujarat.com/images/pdf/food-agro-details.pdf

120

GoG (2012c), Gujarat Agriculture Competitiveness Project, Department of Agriculture,

Government of Gujarat Agriculture Competitiveness Project, January.

Gulati, Ashok, Tushaar Shah, Ganga Shreedhar (2009), Agriculture Performance in

Gujarat since 2000, International Food Policy Research Institute,

http://www.gujaratcmfellowship.org/document/Agriculture/Agriculture%20Perfor

mance%20in%20Gujarat%20since%202000_IWMI%20&%20IFPRI%20Report-

_May%202009.pdf.

Gupta, B.S. and P.K. Saraswat (1997), Growth of Rapeseed and Mustard in Western

Gujarat, Agricultural Situation in India, 54(5): 261-263.

Hegde, D. M., Can India Achieve Self-Reliance in Vegetable Oils? In National

Symposium on Vegetable Oils Scenario: Approaches to Meet the Growing

Demands, 29–31 January 2009, pp. 1–15.

Jha, G.K., S. Pal, V.C. Mathur, G. Bisaria, P. Anbukkani, R.R. Barman and S.K.

Dubey (2012), Edible Oilseeds Supply and Demand Scenarios in India:

Implications for Policy, Division of Agricultural Economics, IARI, New Delhi.

Kalamkar, S.S. (2003), ‘Agricultural Development and Sources of Output Growth in

Maharashtra State’, Artha Vijnana, 45 (3-4):297-324.

Kumar, D. M., A. Narayanamoorthy, OP Singh, MVK Sivamohan, Manoj Sharma and

Nitin Bassi (2010), Gujarat’s Agricultural Growth Story: Exploding Some Myths,

Occasional Paper No. 2-0410, Institute for Resource Analysis and Policy,

Hyderabad.

Meena, B. L, R. P. Meena, R. H. Meena1 and C. M. Balai (2012), Yield Gap Analysis

of Rapeseed-Mustard through Front Line Demonstrations in Agro Climatic Zone

IVa of Gujarat, Journal of Oilseed Brassica, 3(1): 51-55.

Mehrotra, Nirupam (2011), Commodity Specific Study: Groundnut, NABARD,

Mumbai.

Mehta, Niti (2012), Performance of Crop Sector in Gujarat during High Growth Period:

Some Explanations, Agricultural Economics Research Review, Vol. 25, No.2,

pp.195-204.

Ninan, K. N. (1987) ‘Edible Oilseeds: Growth and Area Responses’, Economic and

Political Weekly, 22(39): A97 - A110.

Pathak, M.T. and P.K. Singh (2007), Frontiers of Agricultural development in Gujarat,

in Dholakia, R. (Ed.), Frontiers of Agricultural Development in Gujarat, Indian

Institute of Management, Ahmedabad.

121

Rehman, F.U., I.Saeed, A. Salam (2011), ‘Estimating Growth Rates and

Decomposition Analysis of Agricultural Production in Pakistan: Pre and Post

SAP Analysis’, Sarhad Journal of Agriculture, 27(1):125-131.

Samui, S.K., Maitra, S, Roy, D.K., Mandal, A.K. and Saha, D.( 2000), Evaluation of

Front Line Demonstration on Groundnut. Journal of Indian Society of Coastal

Agricultural Research, 18: 180-183.

Shah, Tushaar, Ashok Gulati, Hemant P, Ganga Shreedhar, R C Jain (2009), ‘Secret

of Gujarat’s Agrarian Miracle after 2000,Economic and Political Weekly, Vol.46,

No.52, pp- 45-55

Sharma, V. P. (2012), ‘Problems and Prospects of Oilseeds and Oil Palm Production

in India’, A Proposal Paper, Indian Institute of Management, Ahmedabad.

Siju, T. and S. Kombairaju (2001), ‘Rice Production in Tamil Nadu: A Trend and

Decomposition Analysis’, Agricultural Situation in India, 58 (4), pp. 143-145.

Singh, G. and S. R. Asokan (2000), ‘Competitiveness of Indian Oilseeds under WTO’,

Artha Vijnana, 42(3): 240-249.

Srinivasan, P. V. (2005), ‘Impact of Trade Liberalization on India’s Oilseeds and

Edible Oils Sector’, Indira Gandhi Institute of Development Research, Mumbai.

Swain, M., R.H. Patel, and M. Ojha (2011), ‘Impacts of National Horticulture Mission

Scheme in Gujarat’, Research Report No. 142, Agro-Economic Research

Centre, S.P. University, Vallabh Vidyanagar.

Swain, M. (2012), ‘State of Gujarat Agriculture 2011-12’, AERC Report No. 146, Agro-

Economic Research Centre, S.P. University Vallabh Vidyanagar.

Websites: http://www.krishi.Gujarat.gov.in http://rsamb.Gujarat.gov.in

http://www.thehindubusinessline.com

www.mapsofindia.com, Accessed on 15th September 2012

http://agri.gujarat.gov.in, Accessed on 15th September 2012

http://www.raghuvirindustries.in/about_us.html

http://www.livemint.com/Politics/LoGoMERwbaK4uc7pw5kogP/As-cotton-fields-thrive-

so-do-concerns.html

****************************

http://www.thehindubusinessline.com/

http://www.mapsofindia.com/

http://agri.gujarat.gov.in/

http://www.raghuvirindustries.in/about_us.html

http://www.livemint.com/Politics/LoGoMERwbaK4uc7pw5kogP/As-cotton-fields-thrive-so-do-concerns.html

http://www.livemint.com/Politics/LoGoMERwbaK4uc7pw5kogP/As-cotton-fields-thrive-so-do-concerns.html

123

South

Gujarat

(Heavy

Rain Area.)

Semi-

arid to

dry sub-

humid

Navsari, Dang, Valsad and

Valod, Vyara, songadh and

Mahuva taluks of Surat.

1500

and

more

Rice, Sorghum, Ragi, Kodra,

Seasamum, Pigeonpea,

Groundnut,Cotton,

Sugarcane, Chillies, Wheat,

Gram

Deep black with

few patches of

coastal alluvial,

laterite and

medium black

South

Gujarat

Semi-

arid to

dry sub-

humid

Surat and Amod, Ankleshwar,

Broach, Dekdopada, Honsot,

Jhagadia, Nanded, Sagbara

and Valia talukas of Broach.

1000-

1500

Rice, Wheat, Gram,

Perlmillets,Sorghum, Maize,

Kodra, Ragi, Pigeonpea,

groundnut, Sesamum,

Castor, Cotton, Sugarcane,

Deep black clayey

Middle

Gujarat

Semi-

arid

Panchmahals, Baroda and

Anand, Balasinor, Borsad,

Kapadvanj, Kheda, Matar,

Ahmedabad, Nadiad, Petlad

and Thasara and taluks of

800-

1000

Rice, Wheat, Gram,


Kodra, Ragi, Pigeonpea,

groundnut, Sesamum,


Deep black,

medium black to

loamy sand

North

Gujarat

Arid to

semi-

arid

Sabarkantha, Gandhinagar,

Dehgam, Daskroi, Sanand

talukas of Ahmedabad,

Deesa, Dhenera, Palanpur,

Dandta, Wadgam taluks of

Banaskantha and Chanasma,

Kadi, Kalol, Kheralu, Mehsana,

Patan, Sidhpur, Visnagar,

Vijapur taluks and Mehsana.

625-875 Rice, Wheat, Gram,


groundnut, Sesamum,


Cumin, Rapeseed & Mustard.

Sandy loam to

sandy

Bhal &

Coastal

Area

Dry sub-

humid

Bhavnagar (Vallabhipur,

Bhavnagar talukas),

Ahmedabad (Dholka,

Dhanduka talukas), and

Vagra, Jambusa talukas of

Bharuch.

625-

1000

Rice, Pearl millets. Medium black,

poorly drained

and saline

South

Saurashtra

Dry sub-

humid

Junagadh, Ghodha, Talaja,

Mahava taloukas of Bhavnagar

Kodinar, Rajula and Jafrabad

talukas of Amerli and Dhoraji,

625-

750

Rice, Maize, Sugarcane

Wheat, Gram Pearl millets

,Sorghum, Groundnut,

Seasamum,Cotton, Pulses,

Shallow medium

black calcareous

North

Saurashtra

Dry sub-

humid

Jamnagar, Rajkot, Chotila,

Limdi, Lakhtar, Muli, Sayla,

Wadhwan talukas of

Surendranagar and Gadheda,

Umrala, Botad, Kundla, Dihor,

Garidhar, Palitana talukas of

Bhavnagar and Amreli, Babra,

Lathi, Lalia, Kunkavav,

Khamba, Dhari taluks of

Amreli.

400-

700

Pearlmillets, Sorghum,

Groundnut, Seasamum,

Castor, Cotton, Pulses.

Shallow medium

black

North West

Zone

Arid to

semi-

arid

Kutch, Rajkot, Malia Halvad,

Dhrangdhra, Dasada taluks of

Surendranagar, Sami and

Harij taluks of Mahsana,

Santhalpur, Radhanpur,

Kankrej, Deodar, Vav, Tharad

taluks of Banaskantha and

Viramgam taluka of

Ahmedabad.

250 Rice, Wheat, Gram,


Pigeon pea, groundnut,

Sesamum, Castor, Cotton,

Rapeseed & Mustard , barley.

Sandy and saline

Source: Directorate of Economics and Statistics, Department of Agriculture and Cooperation, Government of

Gujarat, Gandhinagar

Annexure 1: Sailent Features of Agro- Climatic Zones of Gujarat

Zone Climate Districts Covered Rainfall

(mm)

Major Crops Soil

Annexure Tables

124

Sr.

No.

Year Rice Wheat Other

Cereals

Total

Cereals

Total

Pulses

Total

Foodgra

ins

Ground

nut

Rapeseed

and

Mustard

Sesam

um

Other

Oilseeds

Total

Oilseeds

Cotton Sugar

cane

Tobacco GCA

1 1981-82 610.1 675.5 3159.3 4444.9 861.9 5306.8 2177.5 196.3 130.7 204.1 2708.6 1513.7 116.7 119.6 10954.0

2 1982-83 591.2 638.4 3150.9 4380.5 915.6 5296.1 2105.5 213.5 146.4 215.6 2681.0 1511.6 119.4 107.4 10998.0

3 1983-84 628.2 812.2 3158.0 4598.4 928.7 5527.1 2168.4 229.3 163.3 249.9 2810.9 1285.2 113.8 122.2 11150.0

4 1984-85 627.2 671.5 3109.9 4408.6 974.8 5383.4 2091.2 248.8 163.3 290.7 2794.0 1334.0 121.9 130.7 11017.0

5 1985-86 585.3 507.0 3120.7 4213.0 870.1 5083.1 1868.1 220.2 144.9 258.4 2491.6 1450.7 123.0 129.2 10439.0

6 1986-87 555.8 377.6 3116.4 4049.8 826.6 4876.4 1827.4 218.4 128.4 201.5 2375.7 1321.8 119.1 116.6 9976.7

7 1987-88 496.4 327.0 2477.5 3300.9 701.3 4002.2 1362.2 230.9 100.8 162.6 1856.5 762.2 120.3 121.2 8037.5

8 1988-89 591.3 631.5 2805.6 4028.4 943.1 4971.5 1823.4 307.6 168.8 259.5 2559.3 1142.1 123.3 131.3 10703.8

9 1989-90 621.2 575.2 2633.3 3829.7 940.6 4770.3 2038.1 327.1 189.0 318.9 2873.1 1212.8 148.3 138.0 10683.0

10 1990-91 623.0 608.7 2568.1 3799.8 948.7 4748.5 1826.1 348.6 237.0 406.3 2818.0 1041.6 168.4 141.6 10580.6

11 1991-92 671.5 509.9 2450.5 3631.9 882.7 4514.6 1976.1 334.3 210.2 343.9 2864.5 1164.3 172.6 139.1 10501.8

12 1992-93 679.8 630.4 2614.8 3925.0 961.7 4886.7 1880.1 355.2 302.7 380.6 2918.6 1228.1 180.0 136.8 11003.4

13 1993-94 687.9 531.7 2491.4 3711.0 879.7 4590.7 2035.4 345.6 269.8 376.7 3027.5 1177.6 199.4 141.5 10728.9

14 1994-95 719.6 793.8 2412.6 3926.0 931.8 4857.8 1913.7 261.9 257.1 548.3 2981.0 1312.6 221.5 140.7 11245.1

15 1995-96 726.4 592.0 2315.7 3634.1 876.9 4511.0 1870.5 344.8 250.4 446.0 2911.7 1517.4 250.8 134.1 10995.5

16 1996-97 735.4 648.5 2260.3 3644.2 915.1 4557.3 1803.0 325.5 288.0 433.3 2849.8 1541.9 231.7 138.2 11056.0

17 1997-98 756.0 697.5 2166.3 3619.8 905.0 4524.8 1838.7 304.5 304.6 436.7 2884.5 1597.7 225.2 134.8 11213.0

18 1998-99 729.2 633.6 2083.2 3446.0 884.2 4330.2 1881.1 301.5 298.7 445.7 2927.0 1672.1 243.3 139.2 11200.1

19 1999-00 719.7 518.1 1969.4 3207.2 792.0 3999.2 1848.5 271.6 298.9 414.6 2833.6 1610.9 255.3 141.9 10701.7

20 2000-01 583.5 286.1 1566.0 2435.6 634.6 3070.2 1744.8 186.6 356.9 458.6 2746.9 1615.4 177.7 87.8 10497.0

21 2001-02 664.0 470.1 1600.8 2734.9 730.4 3465.3 1887.7 247.1 379.6 304.7 2819.1 1749.8 175.8 85.5 10791.0

22 2002-03 480.8 435.6 1599.0 2515.4 697.7 3213.1 2029.4 160.8 344.1 237.2 2771.5 1634.8 202.9 66.4 10630.7

23 2003-04 675.3 759.5 1766.4 3201.2 823.6 4033.8 2003.4 269.3 402.4 290.3 2965.4 1641.0 176.4 68.2 11421.0

24 2004-05 679.4 727.4 1543.9 2950.7 709.8 3660.5 1985.0 291.2 371.9 330.5 2978.6 1906.3 196.7 71.3 11009.0

25 2005-06 672.9 858.8 1587.5 3119.2 725.3 3844.5 1942.0 314.4 364.0 341.6 2962.0 2010.8 213.2 65.1 11304.0

26 2006-07 689.3 1072.3 1597.7 3359.3 828.9 4188.2 1852.5 347.8 328.8 327.1 2856.2 2372.1 216.1 57.0 11807.4

27 2007-08 758.6 1273.9 1567.3 3599.8 881.0 4480.8 1857.1 337.0 299.6 358.1 2851.8 2422.0 211.0 45.7 18888.4

28 2008-09 747.3 1091.4 1360.3 3199.0 784.0 3983.0 1907.4 293.9 238.5 433.9 2873.7 2353.6 221.3 49.2 17736.4

29 2009-10 679.5 878.0 1303.2 2860.7 735.8 3596.3 1822.6 216.0 225.9 421.6 2686.1 2464.4 190.3 62.8 11614.0

(Area in 000' ha.)

Annexure 2: Cropping Pattern in Gujarat (1981-82 to 2009-10)

Note: cotton production in bales in 170 kgs. each lint, sugarcane production in gur.

Source : Gujarat Agriculture Statistics at a Glance 2010-11, Directorate of Agriculture, Government of Gujarat, Gandhinagar.

125

Year

Net

Irrigated

Area

Percentage

of NIA to

Net Sown

Area

Gross

Irrigeted

Area

Percentage

of GIA to

Gross

Sown Area

GCA NSA

1981-82 215.5 2.3 252.3 2.3 1095.4 957.7

1982-83 224.0 2.3 261.4 2.4 1099.8 958.4

1983-84 227.1 2.4 279.7 2.5 1115.0 961.7

1984-85 232.4 2.4 271.0 2.5 1101.7 965.4

1985-86 204.0 2.2 238.1 2.3 1043.9 940.2

1986-87 196.2 2.2 230.1 2.3 997.7 911.4

1987-88 175.8 2.4 210.0 2.6 803.8 728.5

1988-89 249.4 2.7 290.4 2.7 1070.4 928.9

1989-90 246.4 2.6 290.7 2.7 1068.3 947.2

1990-91 243.8 2.6 291.1 2.8 1058.1 929.6

1991-92 237.2 2.6 322.7 3.1 1050.2 929.1

1992-93 264.3 2.8 308.7 2.8 1100.3 958.3

1993-94 254.1 2.7 349.6 3.3 1072.9 944.7

1994-95 300.2 3.1 365.5 3.3 1124.5 966.5

1995-96 289.2 3.0 349.9 3.2 1099.6 965.5

1996-97 304.2 3.1 364.2 3.3 1105.6 966.7

1997-98 305.9 3.2 378.0 3.4 1121.3 967.4

1998-99 308.2 3.2 384.1 3.4 1120.0 972.3

1999-00 298.0 3.1 362.7 3.4 1070.2 949.9

2000-01 280.6 3.0 334.2 3.2 1049.7 949.0

2001-02 299.4 3.1 357.3 3.3 1079.1 967.8

2002-03 304.6 3.2 363.7 3.4 1063.1 948.1

2003-04 338.8 3.4 411.1 3.6 1142.1 985.2

2004-05 352.8 3.6 428.0 3.9 1100.9 985.2

2005-06 390.7 4.0 476.4 4.1 1149.5 972.2

2006-07 423.8 4.3 527.9 4.5 1180.7 980.1

2007-08 433.6 4.2 553.5 4.6 1211.0 1030.2

2008-09 433.6 4.2 527.8 4.5 1165.0 1030.2

2009-10 433.6 4.2 493.3 4.4 1113.8 1030.2

( Area in 000' ha.)

Annexure 3: Net Irrigated Area, Gross Irrigated Area, Net Sown Area, Gross

Sown Area in Gujarat (1981-82 to 2009-10)

Source: (1) Agriculture Statistics of Gujarat, 1980-81 to 1999-2000, Directorate

of Economics and Statistics, Government of Gujarat, Gandhinagar.

(2) Annual Season & Crop Reports, various years (2002-03 to 2006-07), Krishi

Bhavan, Government of Gujarat, Gandhinagar.

(3) Socio-Economic Review, various years (2007-08 to 2009-10), Directorate of

Economics and Statistics, Government of Gujarat, Gandhinagar.

126

District Rice Wheat Maize Other

Coarse

Cereals

Total

Cereals

Total

Pulses

Total

Foodgrains

Ground

nut

Sesa

mum

Mustard Castor Total

oilseeds

Total

Cotton

Total Fruits

and

Vegetables

Sugar

cane

Tobacco All

Major

Crops

Panchmahals 129.2 37.0 189.2 52.8 408.2 95.1 503.3 22.5 2.0 3.6 2.4 30.6 14.8 2.5 0.1 4.2 555.6

Kachhch 0.0 9.5 0.0 89.7 99.2 79.7 178.9 57.0 10.6 6.1 29.1 104.5 48.3 4.4 0.3 0.0 336.4

Junagadh 0.5 34.1 0.5 55.9 91.0 9.7 100.7 418.3 9.4 0.2 4.3 433.3 31.4 9.8 9.5 0.0 584.8

Valsad 112.6 2.5 0.0 20.5 135.7 27.4 163.1 0.8 0.0 0.0 0.3 3.1 0.0 35.2 28.4 0.0 229.8

Dangs 8.6 0.0 0.4 26.6 35.5 10.6 46.1 1.4 0.1 0.0 0.0 5.6 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 51.7

Kheda 153.7 59.5 13.5 152.3 379.0 29.6 408.6 12.1 7.1 6.1 14.2 40.0 15.2 30.0 1.1 92.0 586.9

Vadodara 55.6 13.4 44.0 73.7 186.8 123.3 310.1 13.8 2.4 0.6 9.6 26.8 138.0 17.9 1.5 30.1 524.5

Jamnagar 0.0 7.4 0.0 51.8 59.2 8.8 68.1 372.0 23.1 1.9 5.7 403.0 21.9 3.8 1.0 0.0 497.8

Ahmedabad 73.4 75.7 1.2 94.1 244.4 25.8 270.2 0.6 4.7 7.7 20.3 38.8 146.5 10.7 0.6 1.3 468.2

Gandhinagar 7.2 9.5 0.3 15.8 32.9 2.0 34.9 0.0 0.2 5.8 10.2 16.3 2.4 3.5 0.0 0.1 57.1

Bharuch 20.2 12.7 6.2 67.8 107.0 163.4 270.3 11.0 3.4 0.1 3.7 20.0 72.9 14.2 9.6 0.6 387.7

Surat 76.8 7.3 1.9 87.6 173.6 58.0 231.6 26.4 0.4 0.0 0.5 27.7 6.1 16.8 107.0 0.0 389.2

Rajkot 0.0 24.3 0.1 80.5 105.0 11.6 116.5 434.3 24.3 3.2 9.2 470.9 90.3 7.8 4.5 0.0 690.1

Bhavnagar 0.3 19.7 0.9 252.4 273.4 6.3 279.8 230.7 37.6 0.0 0.6 269.5 96.3 16.8 0.9 0.0 663.3

Mehsana 13.0 73.9 0.4 282.3 369.6 41.6 411.2 2.3 5.9 129.3 76.1 216.3 89.4 14.8 0.0 4.8 736.6

Banaskantha 0.1 41.8 14.0 464.4 520.2 68.7 588.9 2.5 9.6 147.0 74.6 238.6 18.8 6.8 0.2 5.5 858.7

Amreli 0.1 13.1 3.2 88.5 104.8 4.1 109.0 312.9 37.5 0.8 1.0 352.5 30.0 2.2 6.1 0.0 499.8

Sabarkantha 19.7 55.8 107.5 81.6 264.6 98.0 362.6 19.4 5.9 13.5 57.7 96.6 18.5 6.8 0.5 0.4 485.4

Surendranagar 0.5 14.2 0.0 128.2 142.9 22.9 165.8 29.2 53.1 0.5 2.7 86.2 329.7 1.8 0.7 0.0 584.1

Gujarat State 671.5 509.9 383.4 2067.1 3631.9 882.7 4514.6 1976.1 210.2 334.3 323.6 2864.5 1164.3 205.7 172.1 139.1 9187.6

Source :(i) Gujarat Agriculture Statistic at a Glance 2010-11, Directorate of Agriculture, Government of Gujarat, Gandhinagar.

(ii) Agriculture Statistics Gujarat, Various Years (1983-84 to 2007-08), Directorate of Economics and Statistics, Gujarat, Gandhinagar.

Annexure 4.1: Cropping Pattern at Districts Level in Gujarat (1991-92)


127


Cereals

Total

Cereals

Total

Pulses

Total

Foodgrains

Ground

nut

Sesa

mum


oilseeds

Total

Cotton

Total Fruits

and

Vegetables

Sugar

cane

Tobacco All

Major

Crops

Panchmahals 131.4 38.6 187.1 56.0 413.0 102.2 515.3 17.8 2.3 1.7 2.3 24.1 10.9 2.8 0.1 3.6 556.8

Kachchh 0.0 12.5 0.0 121.3 133.8 111.9 245.6 86.7 18.6 5.3 32.2 147.3 55.3 5.7 0.4 0.0 454.3

Junagadh 0.8 56.2 0.8 61.3 119.1 13.6 132.7 408.2 19.2 0.4 6.8 435.7 29.4 11.1 8.5 0.0 617.3

Valsad 110.2 2.2 0.0 18.1 130.5 29.0 159.5 0.8 0.0 0.0 0.2 3.3 0.0 37.8 33.5 0.0 234.2

Dangs 8.1 0.0 0.3 26.6 35.0 9.7 44.7 1.4 0.0 0.0 0.0 5.3 0.0 0.1 0.0 0.0 50.1

Kheda 159.1 58.2 15.9 163.9 397.1 29.8 426.9 9.0 7.6 7.0 13.2 37.6 15.1 29.0 0.5 91.5 600.5

Vadodara 55.0 14.3 44.4 70.3 184.0 125.0 309.0 11.9 2.2 0.4 13.6 28.6 141.0 16.8 1.7 29.9 526.8

Jamnagar 0.0 25.3 0.0 77.6 102.9 22.3 125.2 324.6 44.3 5.6 6.2 381.3 28.9 4.4 0.6 0.0 540.5

Ahmedabad 69.9 79.6 0.3 102.1 251.8 31.6 283.5 0.3 7.3 8.8 19.1 42.4 152.9 11.1 0.7 1.3 491.9

Gandhinagar 7.7 9.7 0.3 16.7 34.4 1.8 36.2 0.2 0.1 4.9 10.0 15.3 2.3 2.9 0.0 0.0 56.8

Bharuch 21.6 16.9 6.1 68.0 112.5 157.9 270.4 8.5 4.0 0.1 3.1 18.8 84.9 13.8 10.6 0.5 399.1

Surat 82.4 7.1 1.7 82.2 173.4 56.3 229.8 27.5 0.4 0.0 0.5 28.7 5.9 16.2 112.8 0.0 393.4

Rajkot 0.0 70.3 0.0 84.8 155.1 15.9 171.1 419.9 38.6 5.8 13.6 478.0 103.1 9.0 2.1 0.0 763.4

Bhavnagar 0.3 19.7 1.8 248.7 270.4 6.8 277.2 214.6 45.6 0.0 1.3 262.3 101.8 16.5 1.1 0.0 659.0

Mehsana 13.2 77.8 0.2 281.1 372.4 50.1 422.5 2.7 8.0 144.1 86.9 246.0 89.7 18.1 0.0 4.2 780.5

Banaskantha 0.1 44.6 13.3 450.2 508.1 75.4 583.5 2.9 10.1 147.3 83.6 249.1 19.0 7.1 0.2 5.4 864.3

Amreli 0.1 21.4 2.8 93.0 117.3 4.0 121.3 290.1 46.2 1.5 0.8 338.7 38.4 2.6 6.1 0.0 507.0

Sabarkantha 20.6 57.7 107.7 78.8 264.8 95.2 360.0 20.9 5.0 12.8 56.8 95.6 15.8 9.2 0.4 0.5 481.5

Surendranagar 0.2 17.2 0.0 131.7 149.1 23.2 172.3 31.6 43.2 1.7 2.3 80.4 333.8 1.9 0.6 0.0 589.0

Gujarat State 679.8 630.4 382.9 2231.9 3925.0 961.7 4886.7 1880.1 302.7 355.2 352.5 2918.6 1228.2 216.0 180.0 137.0 9566.3


(ii) Agriculture Statistics Gujarat, various years (1983-84 to 2007-08), Directorate of Economics and Statistics, Gujarat, Gandhinagar.



128


Cereals

Total

Cereals

Total

Pulses

Total

Foodgrains

Ground

nut

Sesa

mum


oilseeds

Total

Cotton

Total Fruits

and

Vegetables

Sugar

cane

Tobacco All

Major

Crops

Panchmahals 124.1 37.6 193.3 53.6 408.6 111.3 519.8 18.3 2.8 1.8 2.3 25.4 10.1 2.6 0.1 3.3 561.4

Kachchh 0.0 10.5 0.0 89.4 99.9 71.2 171.5 63.1 11.3 5.6 25.7 106.9 29.8 5.7 0.2 0.0 314.2

Junagadh 0.4 34.0 0.9 60.9 96.3 9.2 105.4 409.2 14.5 0.3 10.2 435.3 29.1 10.7 6.8 0.0 587.3

Valsad 107.8 2.2 0.0 14.8 124.8 27.2 152.0 0.8 0.0 0.0 0.2 3.5 0.0 39.7 38.1 0.0 233.3

Dangs 9.0 0.1 0.4 27.4 36.8 10.6 47.4 1.6 0.1 0.0 0.0 5.3 0.0 0.4 0.0 0.0 53.1

Kheda 164.1 61.4 17.8 154.6 397.9 30.3 428.2 9.0 9.0 8.2 14.8 41.2 13.1 29.2 0.5 95.1 607.3

Vadodara 63.4 15.9 41.8 63.3 184.4 122.9 307.2 12.6 2.0 0.3 13.2 28.5 139.9 20.0 2.9 29.2 527.7

Jamnagar 0.0 4.3 0.0 71.7 76.1 10.9 87.0 391.6 31.0 0.8 6.8 430.6 23.9 4.4 0.7 0.0 546.5

Ahmedabad 74.0 83.3 0.0 100.0 257.3 23.3 280.6 0.4 6.8 9.4 22.0 41.3 152.2 9.6 0.7 1.2 485.6

Gandhinagar 8.2 8.1 0.4 13.0 29.8 1.6 31.4 0.1 0.1 5.0 10.1 15.3 1.7 3.9 0.0 0.1 52.4

Bharuch 21.2 17.0 4.9 69.4 112.4 141.7 254.2 8.6 3.6 0.1 2.9 17.4 97.4 12.7 16.9 0.3 399.0

Surat 78.1 11.1 1.8 84.8 175.9 54.9 230.8 27.9 0.4 0.0 0.6 29.0 4.4 16.9 123.5 0.0 404.7

Rajkot 0.0 15.7 0.0 78.7 94.4 10.5 103.9 475.3 27.0 1.2 14.1 517.9 86.2 5.5 1.3 0.0 714.7

Bhavnagar 0.2 13.8 2.0 217.7 233.6 5.9 239.5 236.9 47.0 0.0 0.3 285.1 104.3 17.1 0.8 0.0 646.8

Mehsana 14.4 76.5 0.2 273.2 364.2 50.5 414.8 3.1 8.6 141.8 86.4 245.8 85.1 19.7 0.0 4.2 769.6

Banaskantha 0.4 49.3 14.0 459.5 523.1 74.8 597.9 4.3 9.6 148.7 85.2 251.8 16.0 8.7 0.2 7.5 882.1

Amreli 0.1 16.4 2.3 77.8 96.7 6.0 102.7 323.2 38.4 2.0 0.6 364.5 39.2 3.1 5.2 0.0 514.7

Sabarkantha 21.8 60.4 106.6 67.4 256.1 93.8 349.9 20.2 4.9 12.8 57.9 96.5 14.1 10.6 0.6 0.5 472.3

Surendranagar 0.5 14.2 0.0 128.2 142.9 22.9 165.8 29.2 53.1 0.5 2.7 86.2 329.7 1.8 0.7 0.0 584.1

Gujarat State 687.9 531.7 388.3 2103.1 3711.0 879.7 4590.7 2035.4 270.1 345.6 356.1 3027.5 1177.6 222.3 199.1 141.4 9356.8





129

District Rice Wheat Maize

Other

Coarse

Cereals

Total

Cereals

Total

Pulses

Total

Foodgrains

Ground

nut

Sesa

mumMustard Castor

Total

oilseeds

Total

CottonSugarcane

Tobac

co

All Major

Crops

Ahmedabad 108.0 150.2 0.0 28.9 287.1 34.0 321.1 0.2 7.7 1.5 11.3 20.7 185.2 0.1 0.0 527.1

Anand 91.1 54.5 0.1 52.8 198.5 5.0 203.5 0.9 1.1 2.4 1.8 6.2 3.7 0.0 13.0 226.4

Banaskantha 0.0 83.0 11.6 275.8 370.4 74.9 445.3 21.8 38.0 185.0 60.8 305.6 24.8 0.0 0.0 775.7

Bharuch 12.6 18.6 1.8 26.7 59.7 50.9 110.6 1.8 3.6 0.2 6.4 12.0 129.4 22.0 0.0 274.0

Dahod 39.3 65.3 102.1 34.8 241.5 82.4 323.9 2.0 1.3 0.3 0.2 3.8 0.6 0.0 0.0 328.3

Dangs 16.8 0.4 2.2 19.2 38.6 9.1 47.7 5.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 5.0 0.0 0.1 0.0 52.8

Ganghinagar 15.8 43.8 0.4 28.6 88.6 5.1 93.7 3.6 1.9 7.2 24.3 37.0 32.1 0.0 0.0 162.8

Kheda 104.6 78.4 20.2 78.5 281.7 8.0 289.7 1.0 4.4 4.1 17.4 26.9 16.6 0.0 20.2 353.4

Mehsana 8.3 64.7 0.1 68.2 141.3 35.8 177.1 3.7 14.0 49.4 42.5 109.6 43.4 0.0 0.5 330.6

Narmada 13.6 2.1 5.7 7.7 29.1 21.4 50.5 2.9 0.1 0.0 1.0 4.0 44.5 4.5 0.0 103.5

Navsari 50.9 0.3 0.0 1.5 52.7 8.5 61.2 0.2 0.0 0.1 0.0 0.3 0.0 31.0 0.0 92.5

Panchmahals 78.4 20.8 117.2 20.6 237.0 46.3 283.3 3.8 1.3 0.4 1.9 7.4 9.1 0.1 0.3 300.2

Patan 0.0 32.6 0.0 95.2 127.8 63.6 191.4 0.0 6.0 52.0 31.5 89.5 66.3 0.0 0.1 347.3

Sabarkantha 10.3 119.4 101.1 24.0 254.8 48.0 302.8 70.3 4.5 14.5 43.5 132.8 101.1 0.0 0.0 536.7

Surat 88.4 9.7 3.5 41.2 142.8 44.9 187.7 14.3 0.1 0.1 0.2 14.7 6.8 125.9 0.0 335.1

Tapi 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

Vadodara 61.4 30.1 51.8 26.5 169.8 93.4 263.2 17.1 1.5 0.7 16.6 35.9 173.4 3.9 11.6 488.0

Valsad 58.3 0.3 0.0 11.4 70.0 15.7 85.7 0.2 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.2 0.0 9.9 0.0 95.8

Amreli 0.0 46.7 0.9 16.7 64.3 17.3 81.6 243.2 19.3 0.2 0.7 263.4 235.6 0.3 0.0 580.9

Bhavnagar 0.0 49.5 2.8 58.1 110.4 6.2 116.6 119.1 32.4 0.1 0.1 151.7 304.4 0.1 0.0 572.8

Jamnagar 0.0 48.5 1.8 15.6 65.9 32.0 97.9 365.0 12.1 2.4 10.9 390.4 185.5 0.7 0.0 674.5

Junagadh 0.0 179.6 0.0 23.1 202.7 18.4 221.1 407.2 1.5 0.1 2.7 411.5 58.7 11.7 0.0 703.0

Kachhch 0.0 30.2 0.0 97.0 127.2 105.6 232.8 77.1 42.3 14.9 54.9 189.2 56.9 0.2 0.0 479.1

Porbandar 0.0 13.3 0.0 6.7 20.0 16.0 36.0 90.8 0.2 0.1 0.6 91.7 13.9 0.0 0.0 141.6

Rajkot 0.0 90.9 0.7 24.8 116.4 16.8 133.2 387.5 18.1 0.3 5.3 411.2 281.8 0.2 0.0 826.4

Surendranagar 0.8 41.0 0.0 59.7 101.5 21.7 123.2 18.4 88.2 1.0 23.5 131.1 448.2 0.3 0.0 702.8

Gujarat State 758.6 1273.9 424.0 1143.3 3599.8 881.0 4480.8 1857.1 299.6 337.0 358.1 2851.8 2422.0 211.0 45.7 10011.3



Annexure 4.4: Cropping Pattern at Districts Level in Gujarat in 2007-08


130

District Name Rice Wheat Maize

Other

Coarse

Cereals

Total

Cereals

Total

Pulses

Total

Foodgrains

Ground

0nut

Sesa

mumMustard Castor

Total

oilseeds

Total

CottonSugarcane

Tobac

co

All Major

Crops

Ahmedabad 98.4 140.8 0.0 29.2 268.4 32.6 301.0 0.4 7.1 1.6 15.9 25.0 193.9 0.1 0.6 520.6

Anand 90.4 53.7 0.8 48.5 193.4 5.9 199.3 0.5 1.0 3.3 1.9 6.7 3.1 0.0 15.6 224.7

Banaskantha 0.0 56.2 10.7 220.9 287.8 39.9 327.7 26.5 19.7 150.9 82.7 279.8 28.2 0.0 0.0 635.7

Bharuch 15.4 21.4 2.1 31.2 70.1 67.1 137.2 2.0 3.3 0.1 7.8 13.2 133.6 20.9 0.0 304.9

Dahod 36.1 24.9 114.6 16.5 192.1 59.5 251.6 1.3 0.8 0.2 0.3 2.6 0.2 0.0 0.0 254.4

Dangs 17.9 0.7 3.1 18.0 39.7 10.1 49.8 5.2 0.0 0.0 0.0 5.2 0.0 0.1 0.0 55.1

Ganghinagar 12.8 32.8 0.6 24.6 70.8 5.7 76.5 3.0 2.5 10.3 29.9 45.7 33.8 0.0 0.1 156.1

Kheda 103.4 67.8 20.2 65.3 256.7 5.3 262.0 2.2 6.0 4.5 14.4 27.1 29.3 0.0 22.5 340.9

Mehsana 5.9 63.0 1.1 62.5 132.5 28.9 161.4 5.2 10.8 52.0 58.2 126.2 41.3 0.0 1.7 330.6

Narmada 15.2 1.9 5.6 10.7 33.4 23.5 56.9 2.9 0.4 0.0 0.8 4.1 40.9 4.7 0.0 106.6

Navsari 52.4 0.3 0.0 1.2 53.9 8.5 62.4 0.3 0.0 0.1 0.0 0.4 0.0 31.5 0.0 94.3

Panchmahals 72.4 19.9 113.9 13.6 219.8 45.3 265.1 3.0 1.7 0.3 3.0 8.0 7.2 0.1 0.4 280.8

Patan 0.0 26.2 0.0 68.9 95.1 42.0 137.1 0.1 6.3 48.2 42.1 96.7 71.3 0.0 0.2 305.3

Sabarkantha 10.1 90.0 90.3 14.1 204.5 41.5 246.0 60.8 2.5 9.8 48.0 121.1 110.1 0.0 0.0 477.2

Surat 68.1 6.1 1.1 19.0 94.3 21.5 115.8 6.3 0.0 0.1 0.2 6.6 3.4 112.4 0.0 238.2

Tapi 26.4 4.9 1.6 24.4 57.3 21.7 79.0 8.8 0.0 0.0 0.2 9.0 5.0 19.5 0.0 112.5

Vadodara 60.4 24.4 48.6 22.2 155.6 95.2 250.8 16.5 1.1 0.2 18.2 36.0 166.5 6.6 8.1 468.0

Valsad 61.1 0.3 0.0 10.0 71.4 15.5 86.9 0.2 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.2 0.0 9.6 0.0 96.7

Amreli 0.0 39.3 0.6 14.8 54.7 17.2 71.9 252.3 18.6 0.1 1.2 272.2 227.1 0.1 0.0 571.3

Bhavnagar 0.0 33.9 1.3 70.5 105.7 10.0 115.7 125.2 25.6 0.2 0.7 151.7 306.2 0.2 0.0 573.8

Jamnagar 0.0 35.6 1.9 12.4 49.9 33.8 83.7 399.4 10.6 2.4 9.1 421.5 142.4 0.5 0.0 648.1

Junagadh 0.0 188.1 0.0 16.7 204.8 15.0 219.8 423.0 2.2 0.1 2.2 427.5 42.5 14.6 0.0 704.4

Kachhch 0.0 20.1 0.0 46.4 66.5 91.4 157.9 64.0 24.9 8.1 63.9 160.9 67.5 0.1 0.0 386.4

Porbandar 0.0 5.6 0.0 6.9 12.5 15.3 27.8 89.7 0.2 0.1 0.6 90.6 6.4 0.0 0.0 124.8

Rajkot 0.0 97.0 0.8 16.3 114.1 15.0 129.1 386.8 16.6 0.2 4.6 408.2 245.0 0.2 0.0 782.5

Surendranagar 0.9 36.5 0.0 56.6 94.0 16.6 110.6 21.8 76.6 1.1 28.0 127.5 448.7 0.1 0.0 686.9

Gujarat State 747.3 1091.4 418.9 941.4 3199.0 748.0 3983.0 1907.4 238.5 293.9 433.9 2873.7 2353.6 221.3 49.2 9480.8



Annexure 4.5: Cropping Pattern at Districts Level in Gujarat in 2008-09


131

District Name Rice Wheat Maize

Other

Coarse

Cereals

Total

Cereals

Total

Pulses

Total

Foodgrains

Ground

0nut

Sesa

mumMustard Castor

Total

oilseeds

Total

CottonSugarcane

Tobac

co

All Major

Crops

Ahmedabad 89.0 91.5 0.3 13.6 194.4 15.2 622.1 0.1 4.7 1.1 19.4 25.3 220.0 0.1 0.0 867.5

Anand 76.2 48.3 0.5 54.9 179.9 6.1 402.8 0.4 1.0 2.3 1.4 5.1 2.8 0.0 13.9 424.6

Banaskantha 0.0 65.0 9.4 208.0 282.4 34.3 773.0 27.1 18.2 102.5 90.8 238.6 32.6 0.0 0.2 1044.4

Bharuch 12.5 18.4 2.4 24.0 57.3 76.0 247.8 2.7 2.4 0.0 6.9 12.0 107.0 17.6 0.0 384.4

Dahod 29.7 32.9 118.1 0.2 180.9 66.9 575.5 0.8 0.3 0.1 0.1 1.3 0.1 0.0 0.0 576.9

Dangs 15.8 0.8 3.3 8.8 28.7 11.6 97.5 4.9 0.0 0.0 0.0 4.9 0.0 0.1 0.0 102.5

Ganghinagar 10.6 29.1 0.4 18.0 58.1 13.0 170.2 3.7 1.8 4.9 23.4 33.8 34.0 0.0 0.0 238.0

Kheda 92.4 65.5 14.1 61.6 233.6 5.5 551.7 1.6 4.7 2.3 8.5 17.1 28.5 0.0 35.4 632.7

Mehsana 6.2 73.2 0.6 55.8 135.8 27.1 338.5 3.3 9.3 38.5 45.7 96.8 56.3 0.0 0.1 491.7

Narmada 15.0 2.2 5.1 10.2 32.5 20.8 107.4 2.8 0.1 0.0 0.5 3.4 44.7 3.9 0.0 159.4

Navsari 61.0 0.7 0.0 1.9 63.6 15.7 123.6 0.2 0.0 0.1 0.0 0.3 0.0 25.8 0.0 149.7

Panchmahals 61.4 15.3 112.1 11.1 199.9 43.9 548.4 2.1 1.7 0.3 2.2 6.3 8.7 0.1 0.8 564.3

Patan 0.0 29.3 0.0 70.3 99.6 37.9 328.5 0.0 7.7 45.0 46.8 99.5 66.6 0.0 0.0 494.6

Sabarkantha 6.7 104.5 88.3 12.7 212.2 39.5 548.8 63.1 2.4 7.8 54.5 127.8 112.5 0.0 0.2 789.3

Surat 60.8 9.2 0.8 29.3 100.1 15.6 303.5 8.0 0.0 0.0 0.3 8.3 0.8 101.4 0.0 414.0

Tapi 30.1 4.0 1.4 28.3 63.8 24.7 79.0 7.6 0.0 0.0 0.6 8.2 4.0 15.8 0.0 107.0

Vadodara 52.5 20.1 47.5 18.5 138.6 90.9 514.0 8.3 1.1 0.2 15.6 25.2 162.1 5.6 12.2 719.1

Valsad 59.0 0.3 0.0 9.9 69.2 19.2 172.6 0.2 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.2 0.0 8.6 0.0 181.4

Amreli 0.0 9.1 1.2 12.9 23.2 9.5 153.5 236.0 16.3 0.1 0.8 253.2 245.5 0.1 0.0 652.3

Bhavnagar 0.0 5.4 3.9 54.5 63.8 6.2 232.3 95.2 24.3 0.1 0.3 119.9 309.7 0.2 0.0 662.1

Jamnagar 0.0 36.0 1.1 13.0 50.1 27.8 181.6 393.2 8.8 0.3 8.3 410.6 165.8 0.5 0.0 758.5

Junagadh 0.0 120.5 0.0 22.3 142.8 13.1 440.9 409.2 1.5 0.1 1.3 412.1 50.6 10.1 0.0 913.7

Kachhch 0.0 25.3 0.0 58.1 83.4 78.5 390.7 86.2 39.2 9.5 46.6 181.5 63.5 0.1 0.0 635.8

Porbandar 0.0 2.2 0.3 16.3 18.8 7.8 63.8 85.9 0.0 0.0 0.2 86.1 5.6 0.0 0.0 155.5

Rajkot 0.0 40.6 0.9 21.3 62.8 19.3 262.3 367.4 19.7 0.1 14.8 402.0 287.2 0.2 0.0 951.7

Surendranagar 0.6 28.6 0.0 50.8 80.0 9.9 233.8 12.6 60.7 0.7 32.6 106.6 455.8 0.1 0.0 796.3

Gujarat State 679.5 878.0 411.7 891.5 2860.7 735.6 3591.5 1822.6 225.9 216.0 421.6 2686.1 2464.4 190.3 62.8 13867.4



Annexure 4.6: Cropping Pattern at Districts level in Gujarat in 2009-10


132

Area Production Yield Area Production Yield Area Production Yield Area Production Yield

1951-52 822.0 159.7 194 1235.4 428.1 347 1141.2 203.7 178 7540.5 1773.6 235

1952-53 721.2 241.6 335 1112.5 648.0 582 1027.8 295.0 287 8128.9 2710.2 333

1953-54 683.3 444.2 650 1219.7 862.4 707 1038.4 531.0 511 8355.4 4080.0 488

1954-55 1152.8 655.0 568 1540.8 1277.3 829 1493.1 747.9 501 8604.6 4495.4 522

1955-56 890.3 340.9 383 1751.2 1201.2 686 1262.5 420.7 333 8561.3 3627.3 424

1956-57 1247.0 885.5 710 1835.8 1111.3 605 1568.6 969.9 618 8790.0 4245.8 483

1957-58 1515.2 841.1 555 1841.4 932.8 507 1771.9 902.4 509 8525.0 3757.6 441

1958-59 1570.7 1311.0 835 1776.5 1324.3 745 1847.6 1391.1 753 8827.3 5461.4 619

1959-60 1874.8 941.7 502 1494.0 738.4 494 2118.7 1009.5 476 8840.0 3824.8 433

1960-61 1981.6 1213.7 612 1802.6 1476.4 819 2189.5 1259.5 575 8772.0 4843.8 552

1961-62 2265.2 1479.7 653 1698.6 1358.2 800 2469.2 1536.9 622 9134.4 5690.6 623

1962-63 2344.4 1166.9 498 1744.7 1717.8 985 2550.5 1226.4 481 8991.9 5519.6 614

1963-64 1847.0 1266.6 686 1743.2 1404.3 806 2077.0 1329.2 640 8881.6 5686.4 640

1964-65 2143.4 1646.8 768 1845.5 1646.3 892 2346.3 1697.9 724 9084.2 6581.7 725

1965-66 2065.8 944.7 457 1751.0 1490.5 851 2275.5 998.3 439 9079.9 5239.1 577

1966-67 1957.1 912.3 466 1726.3 1492.3 864 2209.9 977.7 442 9116.9 5146.3 564

1967-68 1942.0 1408.7 725 1639.3 1604.4 979 2181.8 1492.5 684 9322.3 6951.1 746

1968-69 1874.6 864.6 461 1700.5 1547.4 910 2079.7 923.2 444 9109.2 5291.9 581

1969-70 1656.9 1040.0 628 1737.7 1738.7 1001 1860.3 1101.4 592 9005.8 6642.3 738

1970-71 1777.6 1868.6 1051 1745.0 1904.1 1091 2022.5 2006.2 992 9492.3 9171.1 966

1971-72 1990.5 1744.9 877 2204.4 2888.0 1310 2233.1 1867.9 836 9522.2 9341.5 981

1972-73 1948.7 378.6 194 2147.7 1720.8 801 2179.1 468.9 215 9280.3 4977.8 536

1973-74 1700.2 1341.2 789 1990.7 1837.3 923 1983.0 1490.9 752 9491.3 7752.5 817

1974-75 1613.6 484.5 300 1745.9 1615.7 925 1887.9 594.5 315 7947.8 4780.4 601

1975-76 1774.5 2190.4 1234 1859.2 1758.4 946 2099.5 2359.3 1124 9451.8 9070.6 960

1976-77 2076.6 2074.4 999 1855.6 1761.5 949 2432.3 2345.1 964 9281.8 8943.1 964

1977-78 5051.5 1859.4 368 1969.6 2036.5 1034 2409.7 2155.8 895 9298.2 9069.0 975

1978-79 2085.5 1613.9 774 1822.2 2143.5 1176 2456.9 1963.5 799 9344.7 9799.3 1049

1979-80 2108.1 1855.7 880 1716.6 1796.6 1047 2534.3 2243.8 885 9462.2 9420.0 996

1980-81 2179.0 1615.5 741 1566.2 1738.4 1110 2651.4 2005.2 756 9593.4 9923.0 1034

1981-82 2177.5 2175.6 999 1513.7 2039.7 1347 2708.6 2785.8 1029 9795.8 11743.1 1199

1982-83 2105.5 1285.4 610 1511.6 1628.6 1077 2681.0 1872.4 698 9754.6 9697.3 994

1983-84 2168.4 1805.9 833 1285.2 1469.4 1143 2810.9 2509.7 893 9892.1 11918.5 1205

1984-85 2091.2 1595.8 763 1334.0 2159.3 1619 2794.0 2377.5 851 9799.2 11807.3 1205

1985-86 1868.1 473.2 253 1450.7 2122.3 1463 2491.6 964.1 387 9313.8 7463.6 801

1986-87 1827.4 1329.2 727 1321.8 1156.9 875 2375.7 1747.6 736 8844.1 7992.9 904

1987-88 1362.2 166.6 122 762.2 415.3 545 1856.5 600.3 323 6889.9 4435.9 644

1988-89 1823.4 2872.7 1575 1142.1 1558.3 1364 2559.3 3788.3 1480 8968.8 12559.0 1400

1989-90 2038.1 1669.6 819 1212.8 1894.4 1562 2873.1 2579.5 898 9186.5 11130.6 1212

1990-91 1826.1 983.3 538 1041.6 1530.9 1470 2818.0 2043.7 725 8956.2 10452.9 1167

1991-92 1976.1 711.1 360 1164.3 1202.7 1033 2864.5 1650.5 576 8898.1 8670.6 974

1992-93 1880.1 2199.6 1170 1228.1 2060.6 1678 2918.6 3332.2 1142 9400.2 13349.8 1420

1993-94 2035.4 596.3 293 1177.6 1748.9 1485 3027.5 1549.8 512 9181.9 9670.3 1053

1994-95 1913.7 2305.0 1204 1312.6 2521.7 1921 2981.0 3684.2 1236 9562.4 14393.4 1505

1995-96 1870.5 1031.9 552 1517.4 2407.5 1587 2911.7 2211.5 760 9376.3 12223.2 1304

1996-97 1803.0 2367.8 1313 1541.9 2818.6 1828 2849.8 3802.1 1334 9376.3 15455.1 1648

1997-98 1838.7 2493.6 1356 1597.7 3417.0 2139 2884.5 3865.9 1340 9422.6 15746.7 1671

1998-99 1881.1 2464.5 1310 1672.1 4003.7 2394 2927.0 3881.1 1326 9363.3 16707.4 1784

1999-00 1848.5 733.4 397 1610.9 2145.6 1332 2833.6 1826.3 645 8900.8 11261.4 1265

2000-01 1744.8 688.2 394 1615.4 1161.4 719 2746.9 1656.0 603 7744.7 7499.9 968

2001-02 1887.7 2646.6 1402 1749.8 1702.7 973 2819.1 3630.4 1288 8341.4 12433.2 1491

2002-03 2029.4 1094.5 539 1634.8 1684.5 1030 2771.5 1673.1 604 7936.6 9290.9 1171

2003-04 2003.4 4477.6 2235 1641.0 4026.9 2454 2965.4 5655.0 1907 8924.9 18391.6 2061

2004-05 1985.0 1812.0 913 1906.3 5543.5 2908 2978.6 2898.8 973 8859.1 16260.3 1835

2005-06 1942.0 3358.1 1729 2010.8 6871.6 3417 2962.0 4657.4 1572 9147.7 20998.9 2296

2006-07 1852.5 1850.4 999 2372.1 7876.4 3320 2856.2 3020.3 1057 9748.2 19617.4 2012

2007-08 1857.1 3298.9 1776 2422.0 8275.7 3417 2851.8 4699.2 1648 10091.9 24582.1 2436

2008-09 1907.4 2660.9 1395 2353.6 7013.8 2980 2873.7 3931.8 1368 9544.0 19710.3 2065

2009-10 1822.6 1756.9 964 2464.4 7401.4 3003 2686.1 3010.1 1121 9056.3 18446.6 2037

Note: Cotton production in bales.

Sources: Gujarat Agriculture Statistics at a Glance 2010-11, Directorate of Agriculture, Gujarat State, Gandhinagar.

Total Crops( A/P/Y)

(Area in 000 'hectare, production in '000 tonnes and yield in kg/ha.)

Annexure 5: Area, Production and Yield of Groundnut, Cotton and Total Oilseeds in Gujarat

YearGroundnut Cotton Total Oilseeds

133

Area Production Yield Area Production Yield Area Production Yield Area Production Yield Area Production Yield

Ahmedabad 0.6 0.3 509 7.7 8.0 1035 4.7 1.0 212 20.3 23.0 1133 38.8 32.3 832

Anand 0.0 0.0 0 0.0 0.0 0 0.0 0.0 0 0.0 0.0 0 0.0 0.0 0

Banaskantha 2.5 1.5 595 147.0 164.3 1118 9.6 0.3 31 74.6 134.4 1801 238.6 300.5 1259

Bharuch 11.0 9.6 876 0.1 0.1 1389 3.4 0.6 179 3.7 5.2 1417 20.0 15.5 775

Dahod 0.0 0.0 0 0.0 0.0 0 0.0 0.0 0 0.0 0.0 0 0.0 0.0 0

Dangs 1.4 0.4 276 0.0 0.0 0 0.1 0.0 0 0.0 0.0 0 5.6 0.4 71

Gandhinagar 0.0 0.0 0 5.8 6.8 1172 0.2 0.0 0 10.2 14.5 1418 16.3 21.3 1309

Kheda 12.1 17.9 1485 6.1 7.1 1171 7.1 1.3 182 14.2 11.6 817 40.0 37.9 948

Mehsana 2.3 1.3 556 129.3 165.8 1282 5.9 1.7 286 76.1 138.0 1813 216.3 306.8 1418

Narmada 0.0 0.0 0 0.0 0.0 0 0.0 0.0 0 0.0 0.0 0 0.0 0.0 0

Navsari 0.0 0.0 0 0.0 0.0 0 0.0 0.0 0 0.0 0.0 0 0.0 0.0 0

Panchmahals 22.5 21.3 945 3.6 4.2 1175 2.0 0.4 196 2.4 3.4 1428 30.6 29.3 959

Patan 0.0 0.0 0 0.0 0.0 0 0.0 0.0 0 0.0 0.0 0 0.0 0.0 0

Sabarkantha 19.4 19.5 1004 13.5 16.7 1241 5.9 2.9 487 57.7 105.8 1834 96.6 144.9 1501

Surat 26.4 22.9 866 0.0 0.0 0 0.4 0.1 243 0.5 0.7 1333 27.7 23.7 857

Tapi 0.0 0.0 0 0.0 0.0 0 0.0 0.0 0 0.0 0.0 0 0.0 0.0 0

Vadodara 13.8 11.1 807 0.6 0.7 1079 2.4 0.7 291 9.6 13.6 1422 26.8 26.1 975

Valsad 0.8 0.6 797 0.0 0.0 0 0.0 0.0 0 0.3 0.5 1479 3.1 1.1 352

Amreli 312.9 80.2 256 0.8 1.0 1199 37.5 6.0 160 1.0 1.5 1442 352.5 88.7 252

Bhavnagar 230.7 89.7 389 0.0 0.0 0 37.6 7.0 186 0.6 0.8 1413 269.5 97.5 362

Jamnagar 372.0 10.6 28 1.9 2.2 1160 23.1 4.5 194 5.7 8.1 1421 403.0 25.4 63

Junagadh 418.3 235.3 562 0.2 0.2 1064 9.4 5.1 544 4.3 6.1 1410 433.3 246.7 569

Kachchh 57.0 95.8 1680 6.1 7.1 1172 10.6 1.7 160 29.1 14.0 480 104.5 118.6 1135

Porbandar 0.0 0.0 0 0.0 0.0 0 0.0 0.0 0 0.0 0.0 0 0.0 0.0 0

Rajkot 434.3 68.0 157 3.2 3.7 1168 24.3 4.4 181 9.2 13.0 1419 470.9 89.1 189

Surendrnagar 29.2 25.1 859 0.5 1.5 2762 53.1 3.0 57 2.7 5.3 1956 86.2 34.9 405

Gujarat State 1976.1 711.1 360 334.3 389.4 1165 210.2 40.7 194 323.6 499.5 1544 2864.5 1640.7 573

Sources: (i) Season and Crop Reports, various years (1991-92 to 1993-94), Directorate of Agriculture, Krishi Bhavan, Gujarat State, Gandhinagar.

(ii) Gujarat Agriculture Statistics at a Glance 2010-11, Directorate of Agriculture, Gujarat State, Gandhinagar.

Annexure 6.1: Area, Production and Yield of different Oilsseds at District Level in Gujarat in 1991-92

(Area in 000' hectare, production in 000 'tonnes and yield in kg/ha)

DistrictGroundnut R&M Sesamum Castor Total Oilseeds

134


Ahmedabad 0.3 0.3 1038 8.8 12.4 1406 7.3 4.1 565 19.1 23.0 1206 42.4 39.8 940

Anand 0.0 0.0 0 0.0 0.0 0 0.0 0.0 0 0.0 0.0 0 0.0 0.0 0

Banaskantha 2.9 3.5 1214 147.3 164.2 1115 10.1 8.8 868 83.6 145.8 1744 249.1 322.3 1294

Bharuch 8.5 11.0 1292 0.1 0.1 1754 4.0 4.2 1043 3.1 5.3 1720 18.8 20.6 1094

Dahod 0.0 0.0 0 0.0 0.0 0 0.0 0.0 0 0.0 0.0 0 0.0 0.0 0

Dang 1.4 1.6 1109 0.0 0.0 0 0.0 0.0 0 0.0 0.0 0 5.3 1.6 304

Gandhinagar 0.2 0.3 1478 4.9 5.4 1094 0.1 0.0 0 10.0 16.6 1655 15.3 22.3 1454

Kheda 9.0 14.9 1649 7.0 7.5 1072 7.6 4.0 527 13.2 14.2 1075 37.6 40.6 1081

Mehsana 2.7 3.2 1183 144.1 156.8 1088 8.0 5.2 646 86.9 132.9 1529 246.0 298.1 1212

Narmada 0.0 0.0 0 0.0 0.0 0 0.0 0.0 0 0.0 0.0 0 0.0 0.0 0

Navsari 0.0 0.0 0 0.0 0.0 0 0.0 0.0 0 0.0 0.0 0 0.0 0.0 0

Panchmahal 17.8 17.6 990 1.7 1.8 1071 2.3 1.3 559 2.3 3.9 1727 24.1 24.6 1021

Patan 0.0 0.0 0 0.0 0.0 0 0.0 0.0 0 0.0 0.0 0 0.0 0.0 0

Sabarkantha 20.9 24.5 1170 12.8 15.6 1219 5.0 1.8 360 56.8 105.5 1858 95.6 147.4 1541

Surat 27.5 30.5 1109 0.0 0.0 0 0.4 0.2 495 0.5 0.8 1684 28.7 31.5 1097

Tapi 0.0 0.0 0 0.0 0.0 0 0.0 0.0 0 0.0 0.0 0 0.0 0.0 0

Vadodara 11.9 13.4 1122 0.4 0.4 1136 2.2 1.8 830 13.6 15.5 1143 28.6 31.1 1089

Valsad 0.8 1.0 1274 0.0 0.0 0 0.0 0.0 0 0.2 0.3 1538 3.3 1.3 389

Amreli 290.1 325.5 1122 1.5 1.6 1101 46.2 32.5 704 0.8 1.3 1686 338.7 360.9 1066

Bhavnagar 214.6 441.4 2056 0.0 0.0 0 45.6 35.7 782 1.3 2.2 1745 262.3 479.3 1827

Jamnagar 324.6 313.9 967 5.6 5.6 1005 44.3 14.3 323 6.2 9.7 1560 381.3 343.5 901

Junagadh 408.2 474.1 1161 0.4 0.5 1185 19.2 10.3 538 6.8 11.7 1720 435.7 496.6 1140

Kachchh 86.7 140.9 1625 5.3 5.8 1094 18.6 6.3 338 32.2 44.5 1383 147.3 197.5 1341

Porbandar 0.0 0.0 0 0.0 0.0 0 0.0 0.0 0 0.0 0.0 0 0.0 0.0 0

Rajkot 419.9 344.7 821 5.8 6.3 1095 38.6 19.9 515 13.6 23.5 1725 478.0 394.4 825

Surendrnagar 31.6 37.3 1179 1.7 1.8 1074 43.2 18.5 428 2.3 4.0 1734 80.4 61.6 766

Gujarat State 1880.1 2199.6 1170 355.2 385.8 1086 302.7 168.9 558 352.5 560.7 1591 2918.6 3315.0 1136



Sesamum Castor Total oilseeds

Annexure 6.2: Area, production and yield of different oilsseds of district level in Gujarat year 1992-93

District

(Area in 000'hectare, production 000'tonnes and yield kg/ha)

Groundnut R&M

135


Ahmedabad 0.4 0.2 464 9.4 10.6 1133 6.8 0.7 103 22.0 29.5 1341 41.3 41.0 992

Anand 0.0 0.0 0 0.0 0.0 0 0.0 0.0 0 0.0 0.0 0 0.0 0.0 0

Banaskantha 4.3 2.3 541 148.7 136.4 917 9.6 0.3 31 85.2 171.8 2016 251.8 310.8 1235

Bharuch 8.6 6.3 729 0.1 0.1 1724 3.6 0.4 112 2.9 4.9 1663 17.4 11.7 671

Dahod 0.0 0.0 0 0.0 0.0 0 0.0 0.0 0 0.0 0.0 0 0.0 0.0 0

Dang 1.6 0.4 245 0.0 0.0 0 0.1 0.0 0 0.0 0.0 0 5.3 0.4 76

Gandhinagar 0.1 0.2 1504 5.0 4.5 906 0.1 0.0 0 10.1 21.1 2097 15.3 25.8 1688

Kheda 9.0 16.1 1796 8.2 7.4 905 9.0 2.0 223 14.8 20.7 1398 41.2 46.2 1121

Mehsana 3.1 1.3 424 141.8 128.7 907 8.6 4.7 550 86.4 169.0 1956 245.8 303.7 1235

Narmada 0.0 0.0 0 0.0 0.0 0 0.0 0.0 0 0.0 0.0 0 0.0 0.0 0

Navsari 0.0 0.0 0 0.0 0.0 0 0.0 0.0 0 0.0 0.0 0 0.0 0.0 0

Panchmahals 18.3 24.3 1328 1.8 1.6 912 2.8 0.3 108 2.3 3.9 1672 25.4 30.1 1185

Patan 0.0 0.0 0 0.0 0.0 0 0.0 0.0 0 0.0 0.0 0 0.0 0.0 0

Sabarkantha 20.2 21.0 1038 12.8 13.8 1075 4.9 2.2 447 57.9 90.2 1558 96.5 127.2 1318

Surat 27.9 30.9 1109 0.0 0.0 0 0.4 0.1 283 0.6 0.9 1616 29.0 31.9 1099

Tapi 0.0 0.0 0 0.0 0.0 0 0.0 0.0 0 0.0 0.0 0 0.0 0.0 0

Vadodara 12.6 12.0 955 0.3 0.3 935 2.0 0.3 151 13.2 17.4 1321 28.5 30.0 1053

Valsad 0.8 0.6 785 0.0 0.0 0 0.0 0.0 0 0.2 0.4 1762 3.5 1.0 287

Amreli 323.2 101.4 314 2.0 1.8 885 38.4 5.1 133 0.6 1.0 1672 364.5 109.3 300

Bhavnagar 236.9 99.6 420 0.0 0.0 0 47.0 6.7 142 0.3 0.5 1618 285.1 106.8 375

Jamnagar 391.6 5.2 13 0.8 0.5 661 31.0 0.3 10 6.8 2.7 397 430.6 8.7 20

Junagadh 409.2 140.5 343 0.3 0.2 760 14.5 1.6 111 10.2 17.1 1669 435.3 159.4 366

Kachhch 63.1 99.8 1582 5.6 5.1 913 11.3 2.3 204 25.7 24.3 947 106.9 131.5 1230

Porbandar 0.0 0.0 0 0.0 0.0 0 0.0 0.0 0 0.0 0.0 0 0.0 0.0 0

Rajkot 475.3 18.4 39 1.2 1.1 898 27.0 1.6 59 14.1 13.4 949 517.9 34.5 67

Surendrnagar 29.2 15.8 541 0.5 0.5 921 53.1 9.6 181 2.7 5.3 1956 86.2 31.2 362

Gujarat State 2035.4 596.3 293 345.6 312.6 905 270.1 38.2 141 356.1 594.1 1668 3027.5 1541.2 509


Annexure 6.3: Area, Production and Yield of Different Oilsseds at District Level in Gujarat in 1993-94

(Area in 000' hectare, production in 000 'tonnes and yield in kg/ha)


Total oilseedsDistrict

Groundnut R&M Sesamum Castor

136


Ahmedabad 0.2 0.4 2000 1.5 2.0 1333 7.7 2.1 273 11.3 17.5 1549 20.7 22.0 1063

Anand 0.9 1.4 1556 2.4 3.9 1625 1.1 0.4 364 1.8 3.5 1944 6.2 9.2 1484

Banaskantha 21.8 38.8 1780 185.0 306.5 1657 38.0 15.5 408 60.8 135.3 2225 305.6 496.1 1623

Bharuch 1.8 2.8 1556 0.2 0.4 2000 3.6 0.5 139 6.4 12.7 1984 12.0 16.4 1367

Dahod 2.0 3.6 1800 0.3 0.4 1333 1.3 0.5 385 0.2 0.4 2000 3.8 4.9 1289

Dangs 5.0 8.8 1760 0.0 0.0 0 0.0 0.0 0 0.0 0.0 0 5.0 8.8 1760

Gandhinagar 3.6 6.5 1806 7.2 11.9 1653 1.9 0.6 316 24.3 54.1 2226 37.0 73.1 1976

Kheda 1.0 1.8 1800 4.1 6.7 1634 4.4 1.0 227 17.4 27.5 1580 26.9 37.0 1375

Mehsana 3.7 6.5 1757 49.4 84.1 1702 14.0 5.6 400 42.5 91.9 2162 109.6 188.1 1716

Narmada 2.9 3.8 1310 0.0 0.0 0 0.1 0.1 1000 1.0 2.0 2000 4.0 5.9 1475

Navsari 0.2 0.3 1500 0.1 0.1 1000 0.0 0.0 0 0.0 0.0 0 0.3 0.4 1333

Panchmahals 3.8 5.1 1342 0.4 0.6 1500 1.3 0.6 462 1.9 3.8 2000 7.4 10.1 1365

Patan 0.0 0.0 0 52.0 82.7 1590 6.0 2.6 433 31.5 47.0 1492 89.5 132.3 1478

Sabarkantha 70.3 70.0 996 14.5 21.2 1462 4.5 1.0 222 43.5 65.3 1501 132.8 157.5 1186

Surat 14.3 21.1 1476 0.1 0.1 1000 0.1 0.1 1000 0.2 0.4 2000 14.7 21.7 1476

Tapi 0.0 0.0 0 0.0 0.0 0 0.0 0.0 0 0.0 0.0 0 0.0 0.0 0

Vadodara 17.1 28.0 1637 0.7 1.1 1571 1.5 0.6 400 16.6 22.7 1367 35.9 52.4 1460

Valsad 0.2 0.4 2000 0.0 0.0 0 0.0 0.0 0 0.0 0.0 0 0.2 0.4 2000

Amreli 243.2 431.3 1773 0.2 0.4 2000 19.3 9.4 487 0.7 1.3 1857 263.4 442.4 1680

Bhavnagar 119.1 203.2 1706 0.1 0.2 2000 32.4 15.2 469 0.1 0.3 3000 151.7 218.9 1443

Jamnagar 365.0 615.6 1687 2.4 3.9 1625 12.1 6.9 570 10.9 36.4 3339 390.4 662.8 1698

Junagadh 407.2 732.7 1799 0.1 0.2 2000 1.5 0.9 600 2.7 5.4 2000 411.5 739.2 1796

Kachchh 77.1 120.9 1568 14.9 22.3 1497 42.3 21.3 504 54.9 101.4 1847 189.2 265.9 1405

Porbandar 90.8 143.5 1580 0.1 0.2 2000 0.2 0.1 500 0.6 1.2 2000 91.7 145.0 1581

Rajkot 387.5 809.7 2090 0.3 0.5 1667 18.1 7.7 425 5.3 16.1 3038 411.2 834.0 2028

Surendrnagar 18.4 42.7 2321 1.0 1.7 1700 88.2 48.2 546 23.5 62.1 2643 131.1 154.7 1180

Gujarat State 1857.1 3298.9 1776 337.0 551.1 1635 299.6 140.9 470 358.1 708.3 1978 2851.8 4699.2 1648




(Area in 000 'hectare, production in 000 'tonnes and yield in kg/ha)

Groundnut R&M Sesamum Castor Total OilseedsDistrict

137


Ahmedabad 0.4 0.6 1500 1.6 1.8 1125 7.1 2.4 338 15.9 28.5 1792 25.0 33.3 1332

Anand 0.5 1.0 2000 3.3 3.7 1121 1.0 0.3 300 1.9 3.7 1947 6.7 8.7 1299

Banaskantha 26.5 37.1 1400 150.9 171.3 1135 19.7 5.7 289 82.7 178.4 2157 279.8 392.5 1403

Bharuch 2.0 3.2 1600 0.1 0.1 1000 3.3 0.4 121 7.8 15.4 1974 13.2 19.1 1447

Dahod 1.3 1.9 1462 0.2 0.2 1000 0.8 0.3 375 0.3 0.6 2000 2.6 3.0 1154

Dangs 5.2 7.4 1423 0.0 0.0 0 0.0 0.0 0 0.0 0.0 0 5.2 7.4 1423

Gandhinagar 3.0 4.5 1500 10.3 14.6 1417 2.5 0.8 320 29.9 64.4 2154 45.7 84.3 1845

Kheda 2.2 3.3 1500 4.5 5.1 1133 6.0 1.4 233 14.4 20.8 1444 27.1 30.6 1129

Mehsana 5.2 7.1 1365 52.0 54.5 1048 10.8 4.9 454 58.2 116.2 1997 126.2 182.7 1448

Narmada 2.9 5.3 1828 0.0 0.0 0 0.4 0.1 250 0.8 1.5 1875 4.1 6.9 1683

Navsari 0.3 0.4 1333 0.1 0.1 1000 0.0 0.0 0 0.0 0.0 0 0.4 0.5 1250

Panchmahals 3.0 5.2 1733 0.3 0.3 1000 1.7 0.5 294 3.0 6.0 2000 8.0 12.0 1500

Patan 0.1 0.1 1000 48.2 54.8 1137 6.3 2.0 317 42.1 68.3 1622 96.7 125.2 1295

Sabarkantha 60.8 62.8 1033 9.8 11.2 1143 2.5 0.6 240 48.0 90.0 1875 121.1 164.6 1359

Surat 6.3 8.7 1381 0.1 0.1 1000 0.0 0.0 0 0.2 0.5 2500 6.6 9.3 1409

Tapi 8.8 17.6 2000 0.0 0.0 0 0.0 0.0 0 0.2 0.4 2000 9.0 18.0 2000

Vadodara 16.5 28.7 1739 0.2 0.2 1000 1.1 0.4 364 18.2 27.9 1533 36.0 57.2 1589

Valsad 0.2 0.3 1500 0.0 0.0 0 0.0 0.0 0 0.0 0.0 0 0.2 0.3 1500

Amreli 252.3 123.2 488 0.1 0.1 1000 18.6 7.9 425 1.2 2.3 1917 272.2 133.5 490

Bhavnagar 125.2 145.0 1158 0.2 0.3 1500 25.6 12.1 473 0.7 1.4 2000 151.7 158.8 1047

Jamnagar 399.4 656.5 1644 2.4 2.8 1167 10.6 6.1 575 9.1 26.9 2956 421.5 692.3 1642

Junagadh 423.0 809.2 1913 0.1 0.1 1000 2.2 0.7 318 2.2 4.4 2000 427.5 814.4 1905

Kachchh 64.0 102.3 1598 8.1 11.4 1407 24.9 9.2 369 63.9 105.6 1653 160.9 228.5 1420

Porbandar 89.7 213.6 2381 0.1 0.1 1000 0.2 0.1 500 0.6 1.2 2000 90.6 215.0 2373

Rajkot 386.8 375.9 972 0.2 0.2 1000 16.6 5.6 337 4.6 10.7 2326 408.2 392.4 961

Surendrnagar 21.8 40.0 1835 1.1 1.3 1182 76.6 23.4 305 28.0 76.6 2736 127.5 141.3 1108

Gujarat State 1907.4 2660.9 1395 293.9 334.3 1137 238.5 84.9 356 433.9 851.7 1963 2873.7 3931.8 1368




(Area in '000 hectare, production in '000 tonnes and yield in kg/ha)

Groundnut R&M Sesamum Castor Total oilseedsDistrict

138


Ahmedabad 0.1 0.1 1000 1.1 1.4 1273 4.7 1.3 277 19.4 26.8 1381 25.3 29.6 1170

Anand 0.4 0.8 2000 2.3 3.7 1609 1.0 0.3 300 1.4 2.7 1929 5.1 7.5 1471

Banaskantha 27.1 51.0 1882 102.5 164.4 1604 18.2 5.1 280 90.8 214.3 2360 238.6 434.8 1822

Bharuch 2.7 3.7 1370 0.0 0.0 0 2.4 0.5 208 6.9 13.5 1957 12.0 17.7 1475

Dahod 0.8 0.8 1000 0.1 0.3 3000 0.3 0.1 333 0.1 0.2 2000 1.3 1.4 1077

Dangs 4.9 5.2 1061 0.0 0.0 0 0.0 0.0 0 0.0 0.0 0 4.9 5.2 1061

Gandhinagar 3.7 4.2 1135 4.9 7.2 1469 1.8 0.6 333 23.4 50.7 2167 33.8 62.7 1855

Kheda 1.6 1.7 1063 2.3 3.6 1565 4.7 1.4 298 8.5 13.5 1588 17.1 20.2 1181

Mehsana 3.3 3.2 970 38.5 59.4 1543 9.3 3.9 419 45.7 96.0 2101 96.8 162.5 1679

Narmada 2.8 5.2 1857 0.0 0.0 0 0.1 0.1 1000 0.5 1.1 2200 3.4 6.4 1882

Navsari 0.2 0.2 1000 0.1 0.1 1000 0.0 0.0 0 0.0 0.0 0 0.3 0.3 1000

Panchmahals 2.1 3.7 1762 0.3 0.5 1667 1.7 0.6 353 2.2 4.2 1909 6.3 9.0 1429

Patan 0.0 0.0 0 45.0 69.5 1544 7.7 1.5 195 46.8 67.9 1451 99.5 138.9 1396

Sabarkantha 63.1 71.9 1139 7.8 12.4 1590 2.4 0.8 333 54.5 92.8 1703 127.8 177.9 1392

Surat 8.0 10.5 1313 0.0 0.0 0 0.0 0.0 0 0.3 0.5 1667 8.3 11.0 1325

Tapi 7.6 17.1 2250 0.0 0.0 0 0.0 0.0 0 0.6 1.2 2000 8.2 18.3 2232

Vadodara 8.3 14.4 1735 0.2 0.3 1500 1.1 0.4 364 15.6 25.4 1628 25.2 40.5 1607

Valsad 0.2 0.2 1000 0.0 0.0 0 0.0 0.0 0 0.0 0.0 0 0.2 0.2 1000

Amreli 236.0 41.7 177 0.1 0.1 1000 16.3 4.0 245 0.8 1.6 2000 253.2 47.4 187

Bhavnagar 95.2 62.0 651 0.1 0.1 1000 24.3 7.3 300 0.3 0.7 2333 119.9 70.1 585

Jamnagar 393.2 664.2 1689 0.3 0.5 1667 8.8 4.2 477 8.3 29.9 3602 410.6 698.8 1702

Junagadh 409.2 372.2 910 0.1 0.1 1000 1.5 0.5 333 1.3 2.5 1923 412.1 375.3 911

Kachhch 86.2 139.2 1615 9.5 16.6 1747 39.2 19.5 497 46.6 72.6 1558 181.5 247.9 1366

Porbandar 85.9 170.4 1984 0.0 0.0 0 0.0 0.0 0 0.2 0.4 2000 86.1 170.8 1984

Rajkot 367.4 100.3 273 0.1 0.1 1000 19.7 8.0 406 14.8 54.7 3696 402.0 163.1 406

Surendrnagar 12.6 13.0 1032 0.7 1.1 1571 60.7 20.3 334 32.6 58.2 1785 106.6 92.6 869

Gujarat State 1822.6 1756.9 964 216.0 341.4 1581 225.9 80.4 356 421.6 831.4 1972 2686.1 3010.1 1121




(Area in '000 hectare, production in '000 tonnes and yield in kg/ha)

Groundnut R&M Sesamum Castor Total OilseedsDistrict

139

1999-2000 2000-01 2001-02 2002-03 2003-04 1999-2000 2000-01 2001-02 2002-03 2003-04 1999-2000 2000-01 2001-02 2002-03 2003-04

Ahmedabad 21.8 12.6 10.4 8.1 7.7 3.3 1.8 1.7 2.3 3.1 25.2 14.4 12.1 10.4 10.8

Banaskantha 82.8 84.1 89.8 96.6 73.5 134.6 122.1 125.8 118.4 157.5 218.4 206.4 216.1 216.4 231.7

Vadodara 8.7 8.4 7.7 7.1 6.7 0.1 0.2 0.2 0.1 0.1 15.1 14.3 11.4 10.8 12.3

Bharuch 0.8 0.3 0.3 0.9 1.4 0.0 0.0 0.2 0.2 0.1 2.9 0.8 1.1 1.9 2.2

Narmada 0.0 0.5 0.5 0.4 0.7 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.0 0.0 1.6 0.6 0.7 2.0

Valsad 0.4 0.3 0.7 0.5 0.5 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.7 0.3 0.7 0.5 0.5

Navsari 0.0 0.1 0.4 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.0 0.3 0.6 0.2 0.3

Dangs 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.2 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1

Gandhinagar 7.7 23.3 21.3 21.5 17.6 2.1 9.6 7.5 7.2 6.1 9.9 33.2 29.0 29.1 24.0

Kheda 12.6 9.0 11.9 10.8 6.7 6.6 1.9 2.0 2.0 2.3 20.7 11.0 14.0 12.9 9.3

Anand 0.0 1.4 1.3 2.4 1.5 0.0 2.0 2.0 2.3 2.4 0.0 3.4 3.5 4.9 4.3

Mehsana 71.9 44.8 41.1 37.1 32.7 99.5 48.5 46.4 41.7 38.0 171.9 93.7 87.9 79.2 70.9

Patan 0.0 23.6 22.9 15.8 19.1 0.0 32.7 29.5 18.7 28.6 0.0 56.3 52.4 34.5 47.7

Panchmahals 1.7 0.7 1.4 0.9 1.7 0.5 0.1 0.3 0.2 0.2 5.8 1.1 2.5 2.0 3.9

Dahod 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.2 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.2 0.7

Sabarkantha 40.6 31.6 29.2 33.2 27.7 8.9 4.2 4.9 4.7 5.5 56.6 44.2 42.0 41.8 38.5

Surat 0.0 0.1 0.0 0.2 0.5 0.2 0.3 0.3 0.6 1.3 6.7 5.6 5.3 6.9 9.3

Amreli 5.9 5.8 9.4 9.7 18.7 0.6 0.1 0.2 0.2 0.4 7.3 6.0 10.3 10.7 20.1

Bhavnagar 6.2 2.0 2.7 2.6 2.1 0.6 0.0 0.3 0.5 0.2 8.1 2.1 3.2 26.3 9.9

Jamnagar 22.4 21.3 21.5 38.7 19.1 0.3 0.2 0.5 0.2 2.4 22.9 21.7 23.4 39.1 24.0

Junagadh 36.3 27.7 27.6 19.7 14.9 0.1 0.1 0.3 0.1 0.2 38.7 28.6 30.3 20.8 32.7

Porbandar 0.0 3.4 1.6 3.2 4.5 0.0 0.1 0.2 0.1 0.3 0.0 3.6 1.9 3.3 4.9

Kachchh 54.8 56.4 52.0 53.3 59.0 8.9 4.0 4.8 5.3 5.7 84.1 74.1 75.0 74.0 84.1

Rajkot 15.3 12.4 9.3 9.8 7.0 1.3 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.8 16.9 12.7 9.7 10.3 9.1

Surendarnagar 12.6 20.8 33.8 6.8 5.2 0.4 0.3 0.3 0.2 0.3 14.6 24.3 35.3 7.6 6.3

Gujarat State 402.5 390.6 396.8 379.3 328.6 268.0 228.3 227.6 205.4 255.8 727.6 659.8 668.5 644.6 659.6


Annexure 7.1: Irrigated Area under Total Oilseeds in Gujarat

District Kharif Rabi Total

Source: Season and Crop Reports, Various Years (1999-2000 to 2003-04), Directorate of Agriculture, Krishi Bhavan, Gandhinagar, Gujarat.

140

1991-92 1992-93 1993-94 2001-02 2002-03 2003-04 2005-06 2006-07 2007-08

Ahmedabad 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1

Amreli 10.3 10.1 7.1 5.5 7.2 17.8 8.1 13.7 5.1

Anand 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.3 0.2 0.4 0.5 0.7 0.9

Banaskantha 0.6 0.6 0.9 0.5 1.4 0.7 2.5 1.8 1.4

Bharuch 5.0 3.6 4.4 0.6 0.8 0.7 0.8 1.6 0.7

Bhavnagar 25.1 20.1 17.9 1.9 24.8 8.9 25.2 24.6 28.0

Dahod 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.1 0.4 0.5 0.5 0.7

Dangs 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.4 0.4 0.5

Gandhinagar 0.0 0.1 0.1 0.3 0.9 0.3 0.4 0.7 0.4

Jamnagar 10.4 15.9 7.9 17.5 26.8 15.3 15.7 14.6 35.5

Jundagarh 5.5 13.7 8.2 21.4 13.6 26.5 44.0 64.7 74.4

Kachchh 42.4 54.7 47.5 49.4 45.2 52.0 16.0 19.2 15.1

Kheda 9.5 6.8 6.2 0.1 0.1 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.5

Mahesana 0.8 0.9 0.3 0.4 0.4 0.2 0.3 1.3 0.2

Narmada 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.2 1.3 1.9 2.6 2.7

Navsari 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.1 0.2 0.6 0.1 0.1

Panchmahals 13.8 8.6 10.4 0.8 0.9 2.0 1.6 1.8 3.5

Patan 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

Porbandar 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.7 2.7 3.7 0.2 1.4 3.2

Rajkot 8.5 6.9 1.5 0.3 2.4 2.4 9.0 7.1 6.6

Sabarkantha 4.9 3.8 4.9 8.5 5.2 5.3 2.8 15.1 7.3

Surat 6.2 6.7 7.8 5.0 6.1 7.5 9.5 16.1 3.6

Surendranagar 14.2 15.9 13.9 12.9 1.3 1.8 10.6 8.0 9.1

Tapi 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 13.5

Vadodara 7.2 6.7 7.3 3.5 4.0 5.5 9.1 9.5 16.0

Valsad 0.3 0.4 0.3 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.2 0.0

Gujarat State 164.8 175.5 146.6 130.1 144.5 153.3 160.1 206.0 229.1

DistrictYear

Annexure 7.2: Irrigated Area under Groundnut in Gujarat


Sources: (i) Groundnut in Gujarat year 1990-99, Directorate of Economics and Statistics, Gujarat,

Gandhinagar.

(ii) Season and Crop Reports, various years (1999-2000 to 2004-05), Directorate of Agriculture,Krishi

Bhavan, Gandhinagar.

141

1991-92 1992-93 1993-94 2001-02 2002-03 2003-04 2005-06 2006-07 2007-08

Ahmedabad 167.6 177.5 190.7 161.9 168.8 208.9 270.9 277.0 282.6

Amreli 58.7 69.6 62.1 101.1 115.0 118.8 145.4 211.3 171.8

Anand 0.0 0.0 0.0 143.9 176.2 231.4 257.8 241.6 246.3

Banaskantha 370.6 394.9 404.0 490.0 490.4 472.1 531.5 517.6 511.4

Bharuch 62.6 65.6 67.7 92.7 97.7 108.6 117.5 124.6 119.5

Bhavnagar 134.3 143.2 132.1 164.0 196.9 214.6 264.7 297.4 377.5

Dahod 0.0 0.0 0.0 8.5 22.4 74.9 76.1 78.5 127.7

Dangs 0.1 0.3 0.3 0.0 0.5 0.5 1.1 1.4 1.9

Gandhinagar 47.3 45.1 35.7 128.4 127.7 113.8 128.0 141.9 161.3

Janbanagar 55.5 110.5 46.2 87.5 97.7 152.7 204.8 258.8 355.6

Jundagarh 99.5 132.2 108.8 154.0 116.7 219.3 309.9 397.5 438.5

Kachchh 102.2 141.1 123.3 199.0 199.5 222.3 163.5 209.2 195.5

Kheda 351.3 353.3 370.5 189.1 188.4 255.6 276.9 283.3 300.5

Mahesana 444.5 477.8 471.2 265.2 258.4 243.6 273.3 273.3 283.9

Narmada 0.0 0.0 0.0 18.3 24.5 29.9 46.1 33.2 35.0

Navsari 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.6 99.7 100.2 89.8 97.3 95.3

Panchmahals 115.6 112.3 124.8 40.8 50.1 47.9 64.1 64.0 81.1

Patan 0.0 0.0 0.0 145.6 137.7 125.3 138.3 153.5 145.4

Porbandar 0.0 0.0 0.0 19.4 13.7 22.3 38.1 47.7 55.9

Rajkot 128.6 221.4 114.3 161.4 192.4 262.6 354.5 400.8 429.3

Sabarkantha 173.5 158.5 173.4 181.8 172.0 177.3 224.9 286.5 324.4

Surat 190.2 201.4 214.0 259.7 256.6 271.8 281.4 302.2 215.8

Surendranagar 115.2 105.0 105.3 128.8 123.5 130.2 199.2 252.7 251.9

Tapi 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 75.8

Vadodara 177.3 178.3 187.1 235.9 248.3 244.6 236.3 265.3 274.1

Valsad 107.6 116.1 122.5 50.3 50.1 51.5 70.1 62.1 56.1

Gujarat State 2902.0 3204.2 3054.0 3527.6 3624.9 4100.8 4764.2 5278.7 5614.1


Gandhinagar.

Annexure 7.3: Gross Irrigated Area in Gujarat


DistrictYear

(ii) Season and Crop Reports, various years (1999-2000 to 2004-05), Directorate of Agriculture, Krishi


142

1991-92 1992-93 1993-94 2001-02 2002-03 2003-04 2005-06 2006-07 2007-08

Ahmedabad 0.6 0.3 0.4 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.2 0.2

Amreli 312.9 290.1 323.2 270.7 283.2 300.1 281.8 258.8 243.2

Anand 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.3 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.7 0.9

Banaskantha 2.5 2.9 4.3 3.3 5.3 2.8 18.6 17.5 21.8

Bharuch 11.0 8.5 8.6 1.6 1.6 1.1 1.4 2.3 1.8

Bhavnagar 230.7 214.6 236.9 164.0 192.7 175.5 157.7 138.0 119.1

Dahod 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.1 1.2 1.9 2.3 2.3 2.0

Dangs 1.4 1.4 1.6 2.2 2.3 2.3 4.8 4.6 5.0

Gandhinagar 0.0 0.2 0.1 1.7 1.8 2.5 2.9 4.1 3.6

Janbanagar 372.0 324.6 391.6 387.5 439.3 428.4 416.4 347.9 365.0

Jundagarh 418.3 408.2 409.2 397.9 413.4 429.5 421.1 406.5 407.2

Kachhch 57.0 86.7 63.1 86.8 59.2 85.7 53.8 64.7 77.1

Kheda 12.1 9.0 9.0 0.4 0.8 0.7 0.7 0.8 1.0

Mahesana 2.3 2.7 3.1 3.4 3.6 3.3 4.6 3.2 3.7

Narmada 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.0 0.6 1.8 2.1 2.9 2.9

Navsari 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.2 0.2 0.3 0.6 0.2 0.2

Panchmahals 22.5 17.8 18.3 1.7 1.7 3.0 2.5 2.5 3.8

Patan 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

Porbandar 0.0 0.0 0.0 69.2 73.8 78.7 87.8 87.4 90.8

Rajkot 434.3 419.9 475.3 391.9 419.1 433.0 400.6 410.8 387.5

Sabarkantha 19.4 20.9 20.2 29.3 37.6 39.4 45.3 58.9 70.3

Surat 26.4 27.5 27.9 17.9 17.6 19.6 17.7 22.1 14.3

Surendranagar 29.2 31.6 29.2 23.3 21.9 24.6 23.8 19.8 18.4

Tapi 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

Vadodara 13.8 11.9 12.6 7.5 7.9 8.5 10.4 11.0 17.1

Valsad 0.8 0.8 0.8 0.2 0.2 0.3 0.6 0.6 0.2

Gujarat State 1967.3 1879.8 2035.4 1863.3 1985.4 2043.5 1958.1 1867.8 1857.1


Gandhinagar.

(ii) Season and Crop Reports, various years (1999-2000 to 2004-05), Directorate of Agriculture, Krishi


Annexure 7.4: Total Groundnut Area in Gujarat (1991-92 to 2007-08)


DistrictYear

117

1991-92 1992-93 1993-94 1994-95 1995-96 1996-97 1997-98 1998-99 1999-2000 2000-01 2001-02 2002-03 2003-04 2004-05 2005-06 2006-07 2007-08 2008-09 2009-10

Ahmedabad 0.6 0.3 0.4 0.2 0.6 0.5 0.7 0.8 0.8 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.2 0.2 0.4 0.1

Banaskantha 2.5 2.9 4.3 4.5 5.6 4.9 5.4 4.9 4.1 3.3 3.3 5.3 2.8 5.7 18.6 17.5 21.8 26.5 27.1

Vadodara 13.8 11.9 12.6 14.3 14.9 13.3 13.5 9.8 11.2 7.5 7.5 7.9 8.5 7.7 10.4 11.0 17.1 16.5 8.3

Bharuch 11.0 8.5 8.6 6.9 5.8 4.5 4.7 4.7 4.3 1.6 1.6 1.6 1.1 1.5 1.4 2.3 1.8 2.0 2.7

Narmada 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.0 1.0 0.6 1.8 1.6 2.1 2.9 2.9 2.9 2.8

Valsad 0.8 0.8 0.8 0.8 0.9 0.8 1.2 0.7 0.8 0.3 0.2 0.2 0.3 0.2 0.6 0.6 0.2 0.2 0.2

Navsari 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.3 0.7 0.6 0.2 0.2 0.3 0.2

The Dangs 1.4 1.4 1.6 1.6 1.6 1.4 2.9 2.5 1.9 2.2 2.2 2.3 2.3 2.3 4.8 4.6 5.0 5.2 4.9

Gandhinagar 0.0 0.2 0.1 0.2 0.2 0.1 0.4 0.5 0.4 1.7 1.7 1.8 2.5 3.0 2.9 4.1 3.6 3.0 3.7

Kheda 12.1 9.0 9.0 7.3 7.9 7.7 4.1 3.8 3.0 0.4 0.4 0.8 0.7 0.7 0.7 0.8 1.0 2.2 1.6

Anand 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.4 0.4 0.5 0.7 0.9 0.5 0.4

Mahesana 2.3 2.7 3.1 2.7 3.1 3.7 3.9 3.1 3.0 3.4 3.4 3.6 3.3 3.3 4.6 3.2 3.7 5.2 3.3

Patan 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.0

Panchamahals 22.5 17.8 18.3 16.8 17.5 13.7 10.5 15.8 6.3 1.7 1.7 1.7 3.0 3.3 2.5 2.5 3.8 3.0 2.1

Dahod 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.1 1.1 1.2 1.9 2.2 2.3 2.3 2.0 1.3 0.8

Sabarkantha 19.4 20.9 20.2 22.8 23.1 24.5 24.1 25.6 26.3 29.3 29.3 37.6 39.4 55.9 45.3 58.9 70.3 60.8 63.1

Surat 26.4 27.5 27.9 24.2 25.4 23.1 22.4 21.7 20.5 17.9 17.9 17.6 19.6 22.6 17.7 22.1 14.3 6.3 8.0

Tapi 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 8.8 7.6

Amreli 312.9 290.1 323.2 303.9 278.0 259.2 266.3 262.1 265.8 270.8 270.7 283.2 300.1 285.5 281.8 258.8 243.2 252.3 236.0

Bhavnagar 230.7 214.6 236.9 199.4 171.5 182.7 172.0 179.5 169.4 164.0 164.0 192.7 175.5 138.0 157.7 138.0 119.1 125.2 95.2

Jamnagar 372.0 324.6 391.6 374.2 381.6 360.9 364.3 384.3 373.8 387.5 387.5 439.3 428.4 423.5 416.4 347.9 365.0 399.4 393.2

Junagadh 418.3 408.2 409.2 394.5 398.0 399.9 424.5 426.1 448.3 397.8 397.9 413.4 429.5 434.4 421.1 406.5 407.2 423.0 409.2

Porbandar 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 69.2 69.2 73.8 78.7 85.6 87.8 87.4 90.8 89.7 85.9

Kachchh 57.0 86.7 63.1 90.1 98.0 76.7 98.0 98.2 77.4 86.8 86.8 59.2 85.7 59.7 53.8 64.7 77.1 64.0 86.2

Rajkot 434.3 419.9 475.3 419.2 407.8 401.7 394.3 413.4 409.0 391.9 391.9 419.1 433.0 428.0 400.6 410.8 387.5 386.8 367.4

Surendranagar 29.2 31.6 29.2 30.0 28.7 23.4 25.3 23.7 25.2 23.3 23.3 21.9 24.6 23.5 23.8 19.8 18.4 21.8 12.6

Gujarat State 1967.3 1879.8 2035.4 1913.6 1870.1 1802.8 1838.5 1881.3 1851.5 1863.2 1863.3 1985.4 2043.5 1989.4 1958.1 1867.8 1857.1 1907.4 1822.6

Sources: (i) Season and Crop Reports, various years (1991-92 to 1993-94), Directorate of Agriculture, Krishi Bhavan, Gujarat.

(ii) Gujarat Agriculture Statistics at a Glance 2010-11, Directorate of Agriculture, Gandhinagar, Gujarat.

District Year

Annexure 8.1: District-wise Area under Groundnut in Gujarat (1991-92 to 2009-10)


143

118

1991-92 1992-93 1993-94 1994-95 1995-96 1996-97 1997-98 1998-99 1999-2000 2000-01 2001-02 2002-03 2003-04 2004-05 2005-06 2006-07 2007-08 2008-09 2009-10

Ahmedabad 0.3 0.3 0.2 0.2 0.3 0.6 1.0 1.1 0.4 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.2 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.6 0.1

Banaskantha 1.5 3.5 2.3 5.6 4.6 5.7 7.6 6.6 2.8 1.5 4.5 4.3 5.9 5.5 32.2 30.2 38.8 37.1 51.0

Vadodara 11.1 13.4 12.0 18.0 16.3 18.9 20.0 14.0 12.1 12.8 10.1 8.7 15.6 11.9 16.7 17.6 28.0 28.7 14.4

Bharuch 9.6 11.0 6.3 8.9 4.7 5.8 6.6 3.9 4.9 1.1 2.1 1.5 2.0 2.3 2.4 3.9 2.8 3.2 3.7

Narmada 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 3.0 1.4 0.5 2.5 2.2 2.9 4.1 3.8 5.3 5.2

Valsad 0.6 1.0 0.6 1.0 0.9 1.2 1.7 1.1 0.7 0.1 0.3 0.1 0.7 0.2 1.1 1.0 0.4 0.3 0.2

Navsari 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.5 0.2 0.3 0.5 1.1 1.1 0.3 0.3 0.4 0.2

Dangs 0.4 1.6 0.4 1.9 0.8 1.9 3.9 3.3 0.9 1.2 3.0 1.3 5.2 2.1 8.3 8.0 8.8 7.4 5.2

Gandhinagar 0.0 0.3 0.2 0.3 0.1 0.1 0.6 0.8 0.3 0.9 2.3 1.4 5.5 3.0 5.0 7.1 6.5 4.5 4.2

Kheda 17.9 14.9 16.1 13.8 12.9 14.1 6.9 6.4 3.4 0.3 0.6 0.6 1.4 0.9 1.2 1.4 1.8 3.3 1.7

Anand 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.9 1.2 1.4 1.0 0.8

Mahesana 1.3 3.2 1.3 3.2 2.3 5.0 5.3 4.2 1.7 1.6 4.7 2.3 7.3 3.0 7.9 5.5 6.5 7.1 3.2

Patan 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.0

Panchamahals 21.3 17.6 24.3 18.5 18.9 20.5 11.2 22.6 7.4 0.8 1.6 1.9 5.6 5.0 3.5 3.5 5.1 5.2 3.7

Dahod 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.3 0.7 0.8 4.0 2.4 4.0 4.0 3.6 1.9 0.8

Sabarkantha 19.5 24.5 21.0 23.8 28.8 33.1 25.1 34.9 28.2 25.0 27.8 31.5 57.7 60.8 97.1 125.3 70.0 62.8 71.9

Surat 22.9 30.5 30.9 24.1 30.0 41.9 26.4 26.0 22.7 16.3 22.3 24.1 23.9 31.9 24.2 35.3 21.1 8.7 10.5

Tapi 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 17.6 17.1

Amreli 80.2 325.5 101.4 285.2 150.3 334.5 224.1 299.9 86.8 49.3 393.1 203.4 696.7 90.6 309.2 284.2 431.3 123.2 41.7

Bhavnagar 89.7 441.4 99.6 157.8 55.4 242.6 167.0 195.8 67.6 13.6 223.5 185.4 208.2 63.1 230.5 201.6 203.2 145.0 62.0

Jamnagar 10.6 313.9 5.2 477.1 119.5 377.5 456.1 315.4 18.1 9.4 540.6 16.1 924.2 410.4 634.2 530.2 615.6 656.5 664.2

Junagadh 235.3 474.1 140.5 614.8 369.3 694.0 780.4 831.3 304.3 381.6 641.8 372.6 1180.6 598.6 868.9 838.0 732.7 809.2 372.2

Porbandar 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 72.8 111.7 66.4 250.0 95.5 183.3 182.4 143.5 213.6 170.4

Kachhch 95.8 140.9 99.8 138.9 116.5 97.3 146.4 153.0 123.1 102.5 105.8 82.6 132.3 66.5 72.4 89.0 120.9 102.3 139.2

Rajkot 68.0 344.7 18.4 484.2 75.1 469.5 570.4 514.8 27.0 21.8 495.8 53.0 1002.7 337.2 852.2 873.0 809.7 375.9 100.3

Surendranagar 25.1 37.3 15.8 27.7 25.2 25.3 32.9 29.4 21.0 22.8 22.8 26.6 44.2 35.7 46.0 38.2 42.7 40.0 13.0

Gujarat 711.1 2199.6 596.3 2305.0 1031.9 2367.8 2493.6 2464.5 733.4 739.5 2617.3 1086.0 4577.5 1830.7 3405.4 3285.3 3298.9 2660.9 1756.9

Sources: (i) Season and Crop Reports, (1991-92 to 1993-94), Directorate of Agriculture, Krishi Bhavan, Gujarat.


(Production in 000' tonnes)

Annexure 8.2: District wise Production of Groundnut in Gujarat (1991-92 to 2009-10)

District Year

144

119

1991-92 1992-93 1993-94 1994-95 1995-96 1996-97 1997-98 1998-99 1999-2000 2000-01 2001-02 2002-03 2003-04 2004-05 2005-06 2006-07 2007-08 2008-09 2009-10

Ahmedabad 509 1038 464 1143 525 1330 1401 1321 488 1471 1000 1000 2000 1000 2000 1500 2000 1500 1000

Banaskantha 595 1214 541 1245 821 1154 1410 1361 676 450 1364 811 2107 965 1731 1726 1780 1400 1882

Vadodara 807 1122 955 1258 1096 1424 1477 1429 1079 1710 1347 1101 1835 1545 1606 1600 1637 1739 1735

Bharuch 876 1292 729 1291 806 1289 1407 826 1145 685 1313 938 1818 1533 1714 1696 1556 1600 1370

Narmada 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3145 1400 833 1389 1375 1381 1414 1310 1828 1857

Valsad 797 1274 785 1287 1006 1441 1462 1491 901 400 1500 500 2333 1000 1833 1667 2000 1500 1000

Navsari 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2347 1000 1500 1667 1571 1833 1500 1500 1333 1000

Dangs 276 1109 245 1153 504 1331 1350 1312 468 542 1364 565 2261 913 1729 1739 1760 1423 1061

Gandhinagar 0 1478 1504 1571 562 885 1493 1457 806 516 1353 778 2200 1000 1724 1732 1806 1500 1135

Kheda 1485 1649 1796 1896 1636 1824 1699 1669 1136 682 1500 750 2000 1286 1714 1750 1800 1500 1063

Anand 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 375 1333 1667 1500 1750 1800 1714 1556 2000 2000

Mahesana 556 1183 424 1198 737 1359 1365 1337 565 477 1382 639 2212 909 1717 1719 1757 1365 970

Patan 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 990 1000 0 0 0 0 0 0 1000 0

Panchamahals 945 990 1328 1099 1082 1495 1062 1428 1184 471 941 1118 1867 1515 1400 1400 1342 1733 1762

Dahod 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 285 636 667 2105 1091 1739 1739 1800 1462 1000

Sabarkantha 1004 1170 1038 1044 1247 1349 1042 1365 1071 854 949 838 1464 1088 2143 2127 996 1033 1139

Surat 866 1109 1109 995 1180 1812 1179 1199 1109 911 1246 1369 1219 1412 1367 1597 1476 1381 1313

Tapi 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2000 2250

Amreli 256 1122 314 939 541 1291 841 1144 327 182 1452 718 2322 317 1097 1098 1773 488 177

Bhavnagar 389 2056 420 792 323 1328 971 1091 399 83 1363 962 1186 457 1462 1461 1706 1158 651

Jamnagar 28 967 13 1275 313 1046 1252 821 48 24 1395 37 2157 969 1523 1524 1687 1644 1689

Junagadh 562 1161 343 1558 928 1735 1839 1951 679 959 1613 901 2749 1378 2063 2062 1799 1913 910

Porbandar 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1053 1614 900 3177 1116 2088 2087 1580 2381 1984

Kachchh 1680 1625 1582 1541 1189 1269 1493 1558 1591 1180 1219 1395 1544 1114 1346 1376 1568 1598 1615

Rajkot 157 821 39 1155 184 1169 1447 1245 66 56 1265 126 2316 788 2127 2125 2090 972 273

Surendranagar 859 1179 541 924 879 1080 1299 1240 832 978 979 1215 1797 1519 1933 1929 2321 1835 1032

Gujarat 361 1170 293 1205 552 1313 1356 1310 396 397 1405 547 2240 920 1739 1759 1776 1395 964

Sources: (i) Season and Crop Reports, (1991-92 to 1993-94), Directorate of Agriculture, Krishi Bhavan, Gujarat.


Annexure 8.3: District wise Yield of Groundnut in Gujarat

(Yield in kg/ha)

District Year

145

120

Area Production Yield Area Production Yield Area Production Yield Area Production Yield Area Production Yield Area Production Yield Area Production Yield Area Production Yield

1 1981-82 610.1 919.6 1507 1105.8 660.1 597 1513.4 1505.0 994 675.5 1358.0 2010 320.4 407.6 1272 53.0 51.0 962 13.9 15.1 1086 4444.9 5014.5 1128

2 1982-83 591.2 615.0 1040 1129.6 543.7 481 1490.0 1207.8 811 638.4 1439.5 2255 327.9 333.1 1016 46.7 39.5 846 13.4 12.1 903 4380.5 4245.2 969

3 1983-84 628.2 917.2 1460 1068.7 623.9 584 1555.6 1738.4 1118 812.2 1780.0 2192 329.5 477.0 1448 50.1 54.1 1080 11.8 13.7 1161 4598.4 5704.4 1241

4 1984-85 627.2 939.6 1498 1082.5 605.7 560 1509.1 1666.3 1104 671.5 1393.4 2075 328.3 397.4 1210 51.6 48.5 940 10.2 11.2 1098 4408.6 5151.6 1169

5 1985-86 585.3 549.9 940 1134.3 420.1 370 1506.4 713.1 473 507.0 887.3 1750 309.4 109.2 353 45.7 31.5 689 11.2 10.7 955 4213.0 2761.8 656

6 1986-87 555.8 533.5 960 1126.6 339.2 301 1493.4 1161.8 778 377.6 721.8 1912 338.9 475.7 1404 45.8 24.8 541 9.0 9.6 1067 4049.8 3301.3 815

7 1987-88 496.4 396.3 798 768.2 192.2 250 1213.0 555.1 458 327.0 543.0 1661 342.0 113.0 330 43.0 18.0 419 9.5 7.2 758 3300.9 1864.3 565

8 1988-89 591.3 953.9 1613 715.5 434.7 608 1610.4 1649.1 1024 631.5 1520.5 2408 355.0 484.0 1363 37.7 34.8 923 9.5 10.8 1137 4028.4 5130.6 1274

9 1989-90 621.2 863.2 1390 672.3 417.5 621 1486.3 1464.5 985 575.2 1061.1 1845 356.3 547.1 1536 36.7 33.4 910 10.2 9.8 961 3829.7 4438.0 1159

10 1990-91 623.0 990.5 1590 697.2 387.3 556 1394.3 1090.7 782 608.7 1295.9 2129 366.2 515.0 1406 34.3 31.4 915 12.0 13.0 1083 3799.8 4359.3 1147

11 1991-92 671.5 813.5 1211 554.0 203.8 368 1416.7 871.6 615 509.9 1107.8 2173 383.4 361.2 942 32.0 24.2 756 12.1 13.1 1083 3631.9 3420.2 942

12 1992-93 679.8 996.0 1465 642.9 386.0 600 1486.4 1862.6 1253 630.4 1376.9 2184 382.9 587.8 1535 29.6 24.4 824 14.6 15.0 1027 3925.0 5285.3 1347

13 1993-94 687.9 960.5 1396 610.5 297.9 488 1396.0 841.5 603 531.7 1043.4 1962 388.3 392.8 1012 29.2 30.6 1048 13.6 12.9 949 3711.0 3602.4 971

14 1994-95 719.6 1119.6 1556 540.9 271.0 501 1383.2 1355.8 980 793.8 2044.6 2576 396.0 361.2 912 29.0 23.3 803 15.6 15.9 1019 3926.0 5215.0 1328

15 1995-96 726.4 1093.1 1505 489.5 304.4 622 1328.2 1172.2 883 592.0 1232.2 2081 415.4 427.8 1030 27.5 25.7 935 13.3 12.2 917 3634.1 4287.4 1180

16 1996-97 735.4 1257.6 1710 448.3 393.6 878 1314.8 1536.4 1169 648.5 1501.8 2316 418.5 665.9 1591 27.2 25.4 934 13.3 21.7 1632 3644.2 5425.3 1489

17 1997-98 756.0 1224.3 1619 386.7 297.5 769 1281.2 1623.7 1267 697.5 1575.3 2258 430.8 715.3 1660 22.5 21.1 938 12.1 17.2 1421 3619.8 5495.7 1518

18 1998-99 729.2 1379.5 1892 326.5 277.6 850 1245.4 1427.2 1146 633.6 1498.9 2366 442.4 749.8 1695 24.2 25.2 1041 13.7 20.1 1467 3446.0 5398.5 1567

19 1999-00 719.7 1043.3 1450 304.0 243.2 800 1153.7 981.5 851 518.1 1077.1 2079 445.6 586.8 1317 25.0 27.8 1112 11.1 14.2 1279 3207.2 3992.0 1245

20 2000-01 583.5 472.7 810 163.2 98.0 600 989.2 823.8 833 286.1 649.0 2268 382.9 288.5 753 19.6 14.0 714 11.1 2.1 189 2435.6 2348.1 964

21 2001-02 664.0 1028.7 1549 182.4 169.3 928 939.8 1262.3 1343 470.1 1144.7 2435 443.5 884.6 1995 21.0 21.5 1024 14.1 3.3 234 2734.9 4514.4 1651

22 2002-03 480.8 596.4 1240 156.1 121.7 780 940.2 907.0 965 435.6 856.6 1966 464.5 792.6 1706 24.6 15.9 646 13.6 2.6 191 2515.4 3292.8 1309

23 2003-04 675.3 1277.0 1891 172.6 173.6 1006 1071.2 1599.9 1494 759.5 2036.5 2681 484.5 831.9 1717 21.0 24.1 1148 17.1 5.8 339 3201.2 5948.8 1858

24 2004-05 679.4 1196.6 1761 121.8 134.4 1103 915.1 1089.0 1190 727.4 1805.5 2482 459.5 412.5 898 24.3 25.8 1062 23.2 7.9 341 2950.7 4671.7 1583

25 2005-06 672.9 1283.6 1908 129.1 157.0 1216 946.0 1205.8 1275 858.8 2319.2 2701 456.9 722.4 1581 21.7 23.2 1069 33.8 25.7 760 3119.2 5736.9 1839

26 2006-07 689.3 1141.2 1656 146.5 149.3 1019 925.7 956.9 1034 1072.3 2791.5 2603 447.7 201.7 451 20.4 20.5 1005 NA NA NA 3359.3 5329.3 1586

27 2007-08 758.6 1474.2 1943 128.0 156.4 1222 921.6 1306.6 1418 1273.9 3837.7 3013 424.0 583.1 1375 21.7 18.2 839 NA NA NA 3599.8 7462.3 2073

28 2008-09 747.3 1302.9 1743 174.2 208.2 1195 703.3 961.3 1367 1091.4 2592.6 2375 418.9 602.6 1439 19.4 20.0 1031 NA NA NA 3199.0 5735.8 1793

29 2009-10 679.5 1293.0 1903 163.4 171.3 1048 673.0 828.8 1232 878.0 2351.3 2678 411.7 396.6 963 14.7 11.0 748 NA NA NA 2860.7 5086.0 1778

Source : Gujarat Agriculture Statistic at a Glance 2010-11, Directorate of Agriculture., Government of Gujarat, Gandhinagar.

YearRice Jowar Bajra Ragi Barley Total CerealsWheat

(Area in 000' ha, production in 000 M.T., yield in kg/ha.)

Annexure 9: Area, Production and Yield of main crops in Gujarat State

Sr.

No

.

Maize

146

121

Annexure 9 continued…

Area Production Yield Area Production Yield Area Production Yield Area Production Yield Area Production Yield Area Production Yield Area Production Yield Area Production Yield Area Production Yield Area Production Yield

1 1981-82 101.5 92.7 913 305.4 251.1 822 455.0 212.7 467 861.9 556.5 646 5306.8 5571.0 1050 130.7 42.6 326 2177.5 2175.6 999 196.3 333.9 1701 195.5 229.9 1176 2708.6 2785.8 1029

2 1982-83 143.2 114.8 802 340.1 250.6 737 432.3 198.2 458 915.6 563.6 616 5296.1 4808.8 908 146.4 43.2 295 2105.5 1285.4 610 213.5 244.7 1146 206.7 294.2 1423 2681.0 1872.4 698

3 1983-84 114.0 111.3 976 377.8 248.2 657 436.9 365.7 837 928.7 725.2 781 5527.1 6429.6 1163 163.3 59.4 364 2168.4 1805.9 833 229.3 319.6 1394 242.0 319.0 1318 2810.9 2509.7 893

4 1984-85 120.8 104.7 867 403.1 303.7 753 450.9 281.6 625 974.8 690.0 708 5383.4 5841.6 1085 163.3 58.8 360 2091.2 1595.8 763 248.8 309.9 1246 281.9 403.6 1432 2794.0 2377.5 851

5 1985-86 87.7 44.8 511 359.8 263.8 733 422.6 76.4 181 870.1 385.0 442 5083.1 3146.8 619 144.9 25.4 175 1868.1 473.2 253 220.2 245.1 1113 247.0 215.4 872 2491.6 964.1 387

6 1986-87 57.0 32.4 568 368.2 145.7 396 401.4 191.9 478 826.6 370.0 448 4876.4 3671.3 753 128.4 12.4 97 1827.4 1329.2 727 218.4 285.3 1306 201.5 120.7 599 2375.7 1747.6 736

7 1987-88 46.6 23.5 504 402.4 126.8 315 252.3 52.5 208 701.3 202.8 289 4002.2 2067.1 516 100.8 3.9 39 1362.2 166.6 122 230.9 229.9 996 155.7 198.0 1272 1856.5 600.3 323

8 1988-89 101.4 64.1 632 410.2 296.6 723 431.5 238.4 552 943.1 599.1 635 4971.5 5729.7 1153 168.8 93.0 551 1823.4 2872.7 1575 307.6 424.6 1380 243.4 388.8 1597 2559.3 3788.3 1480

9 1989-90 88.6 55.2 623 414.2 321.6 776 437.8 195.1 446 940.6 571.9 608 4770.3 5009.9 1050 189.0 68.8 364 2038.1 1669.6 819 327.1 386.7 1182 302.6 444.1 1468 2873.1 2579.5 898

10 1990-91 129.5 79.9 617 428.9 365.0 851 390.3 178.6 458 948.7 623.5 657 4748.5 4982.8 1049 237.0 68.1 287 1826.1 983.3 538 348.6 349.1 1001 384.9 629.9 1637 2818.0 2043.7 725

11 1991-92 80.3 46.9 584 427.2 257.1 602 375.2 115.1 307 882.7 419.1 475 4514.6 3839.3 850 210.2 40.7 194 1976.1 711.1 360 334.3 389.4 1165 323.6 499.5 1544 2864.5 1650.5 576

12 1992-93 105.1 66.8 636 422.7 353.1 835 433.9 235.8 543 961.7 655.7 682 4886.7 5941.0 1216 302.7 168.9 558 1880.1 2199.6 1170 355.2 385.8 1086 352.5 560.7 1591 2918.6 3332.2 1142

13 1993-94 89.3 51.1 572 409.1 371.2 907 381.3 126.4 331 879.7 548.7 624 4590.7 4151.1 904 269.8 38.2 142 2035.4 596.3 293 345.6 312.5 904 355.9 594.1 1669 3027.5 1549.8 512

14 1994-95 138.6 113.1 816 377.5 238.5 632 415.7 193.7 466 931.8 545.3 585 4857.8 5760.3 1186 257.1 95.1 370 1913.7 2305.0 1204 261.9 493.9 1886 429.1 780.6 1819 2981.0 3684.2 1236

15 1995-96 89.7 53.6 598 387.1 277.7 717 400.1 155.0 387 876.9 486.3 555 4511.0 4773.7 1058 250.4 89.4 357 1870.5 1031.9 552 344.8 383.6 1113 429.9 699.5 1627 2911.7 2211.5 760

16 1996-97 112.4 84.0 747 409.9 384.9 939 392.8 194.9 496 915.1 663.8 725 4557.3 6089.1 1336 288.0 146.1 507 1803.0 2367.8 1313 325.5 454.8 1397 414.3 823.6 1988 2849.8 3802.1 1334

17 1997-98 120.8 97.5 807 379.1 272.2 718 405.1 247.8 612 905.0 617.5 682 4524.8 6113.2 1351 304.6 177.1 581 1838.7 2493.6 1356 304.5 313.5 1030 416.9 871.6 2091 2884.5 3865.9 1340

18 1998-99 127.2 105.9 833 370.1 352.1 951 386.9 181.7 470 884.2 639.7 723 4330.2 6038.2 1394 298.7 137.2 459 1881.1 2464.5 1310 301.5 419.0 1390 424.7 849.2 2000 2927.0 3881.1 1326

19 1999-00 76.9 38.8 505 368.6 297.3 807 346.5 109.6 316 792.0 445.7 563 3999.2 4437.7 1110 298.9 84.9 284 1848.5 733.4 397 271.6 271.0 998 420.0 724.2 1724 2833.6 1826.3 645

20 2000-01 16.5 8.6 521 317.9 107.2 337 319.8 134.5 421 634.6 189.7 299 3070.2 2537.8 827 356.9 98.4 276 1744.8 688.2 394 186.6 280.6 1504 458.6 638.8 1393 2746.9 1656.0 603

21 2001-02 49.1 27.2 554 332.3 187.2 563 681.3 352.6 518 730.4 379.8 520 3465.3 4894.2 1412 379.6 226.6 597 1887.7 2646.6 1402 247.1 292.1 1182 304.7 465.1 1526 2819.1 3630.4 1288

22 2002-03 57.5 28.9 503 313.0 197.1 630 640.2 298.3 466 697.7 327.2 469 3213.1 3621.0 1127 344.1 123.2 358 2029.4 1094.5 539 160.8 172.3 1072 242.2 283.1 1169 2771.5 1673.1 604

23 2003-04 149.6 132.3 884 296.7 258.0 870 377.3 621.9 1648 823.6 621.9 755 4033.8 6570.7 1629 402.4 240.8 598 2003.4 4477.6 2235 269.3 395.5 1469 290.3 541.1 1864 2965.4 5655.0 1907

24 2004-05 122.7 98.5 803 254.4 236.0 928 332.7 146.5 440 709.8 481.0 678 3660.5 5152.7 1408 371.9 117.1 315 1985.0 1812.0 913 291.2 404.9 1390 330.5 564.8 1709 2978.6 2898.8 973

25 2005-06 125.6 126.3 1006 263.7 276.0 1047 336.0 205.5 612 725.3 607.8 838 3844.5 6344.7 1650 364.0 142.5 391 1942.0 3358.1 1729 314.4 491.8 1564 341.6 665.0 1947 2962.0 4657.4 1572

26 2006-07 197.0 187.2 950 256.8 215.3 838 375.1 150.3 401 828.9 552.8 667 4188.2 5882.1 1404 328.8 105.0 319 1852.5 1850.4 999 347.8 476.1 1369 327.1 588.8 1800 2856.2 3020.3 1057

27 2007-08 214.8 210.2 979 265.1 294.2 1110 401.1 239.3 597 881.0 743.7 844 4480.8 8206.0 1831 299.6 140.9 470 1857.1 3298.9 1776 337.0 551.1 1635 358.1 708.3 1978 2851.8 4699.2 1648

28 2008-09 175.4 176.8 1008 266.1 262.7 987 342.5 169.8 496 784.0 609.3 777 3983.0 6345.1 1593 238.5 84.9 356 1907.4 2660.9 1395 293.9 334.3 1137 433.9 851.7 1963 2873.7 3931.8 1368

29 2009-10 132.2 124.9 945 266.6 241.5 906 337.0 153.5 455 735.8 519.9 707 3596.3 5607.0 1559 225.9 80.4 356 1822.6 1756.9 964 216.0 341.4 1581 421.6 831.4 1972 2686.1 3010.1 1121


Note: cotton production in bales in 170 kgs. each lint, sugarcane production in gur

Caster Oil Total OilseedsTur Other PulsesGram Total Pulses Groundnut Rapeseed and MustardSr.

No

.

YearTotal Foodgrains Seasmum

147

122

Annexure 9 continued…

Area Production Yield Area Production Yield Area Production Yield Area Production Yield Area Production Yield Area Production Yield

1 1981-82 1513.7 2039.7 1347 116.7 828.0 7095 21.0 23.4 1114 9.4 232.0 24681 119.6 263.2 2201 9795.8 11743.1 1199

2 1982-83 1511.6 1628.6 1077 119.4 870.7 7292 26.9 24.4 907 12.2 304.3 24943 107.4 188.1 1751 9754.6 9697.3 994

3 1983-84 1285.2 1469.4 1143 113.8 893.5 7851 20.5 18.1 883 12.4 385.6 31097 122.2 212.6 1740 9892.1 11918.5 1205

4 1984-85 1334.0 2159.3 1619 121.9 733.1 6014 22.8 36.7 1610 12.4 457.0 36855 130.7 202.1 1546 9799.2 11807.3 1205

5 1985-86 1450.7 2122.3 1463 123.0 714.5 5809 22.0 44.0 2000 14.2 267.6 18845 129.2 204.3 1581 9313.8 7463.6 801

6 1986-87 1321.8 1156.9 875 119.1 899.4 7552 21.4 20.2 944 13.1 295.2 22534 116.6 202.3 1735 8844.1 7992.9 904

7 1987-88 762.2 415.3 545 120.3 884.0 7348 13.9 18.3 1317 13.6 264.8 19471 121.2 186.1 1535 6889.9 4435.9 644

8 1988-89 1142.1 1558.3 1364 123.3 923.8 7492 25.7 35.2 1370 15.6 310.8 19923 131.3 212.9 1621 8968.8 12559.0 1400

9 1989-90 1212.8 1894.4 1562 148.3 1051.9 7093 26.9 38.1 1416 17.1 337.7 19749 138.0 219.1 1588 9186.5 11130.6 1212

10 1990-91 1041.6 1530.9 1470 168.4 1207.2 7169 20.6 27.6 1340 17.5 416.7 23811 141.6 244.0 1723 8956.2 10452.9 1167

11 1991-92 1164.3 1202.7 1033 172.6 1212.2 7023 24.4 30.8 1262 18.6 483.5 25995 139.1 251.6 1809 8898.1 8670.6 974

12 1992-93 1228.1 2060.6 1678 180.0 1372.7 7626 31.7 38.0 1199 18.3 390.0 21311 136.8 215.3 1574 9400.2 13349.8 1420

13 1993-94 1177.6 1748.9 1485 199.4 1482.4 7434 25.6 30.8 1203 19.6 453.8 23153 141.5 253.5 1792 9181.9 9670.3 1053

14 1994-95 1312.6 2521.7 1921 221.5 1686.8 7615 29.4 33.4 1136 19.4 452.9 23345 140.7 254.1 1806 9562.4 14393.4 1505

15 1995-96 1517.4 2407.5 1587 250.8 2059.9 8213 26.6 30.3 1139 24.7 524.1 21219 134.1 216.2 1612 9376.3 12223.2 1304

16 1996-97 1541.9 2818.6 1828 231.7 1665.0 7186 28.3 42.0 1484 29.1 790.8 27175 138.2 247.5 1791 9376.3 15455.1 1648

17 1997-98 1597.7 3417.0 2139 225.2 1466.7 6513 27.5 29.9 1087 28.1 628.0 22349 134.8 226.0 1677 9422.6 15746.7 1671

18 1998-99 1672.1 4003.7 2394 243.3 1734.1 7127 27.8 32.7 1176 23.7 769.9 32485 139.2 247.7 1779 9363.3 16707.4 1784

19 1999-00 1610.9 2145.6 1332 255.3 1866.8 7312 29.5 28.3 959 30.4 696.5 22911 141.9 260.2 1834 8900.8 11261.4 1265

20 2000-01 1615.4 1161.4 719 177.7 1269.5 7144 13.9 10.5 755 32.8 716.1 21832 87.8 148.6 1692 7744.7 7499.9 968

21 2001-02 1749.8 1702.7 973 175.8 1246.5 7090 13.6 12.1 890 32.3 802.0 24830 85.5 145.3 1699 8341.4 12433.2 1491

22 2002-03 1634.8 1684.5 1030 202.9 1407.1 6935 12.1 10.5 868 35.8 780.0 21788 66.4 114.7 1727 7936.6 9290.9 1171

23 2003-04 1641.0 4026.9 2454 176.4 1266.9 7182 9.1 8.4 923 31.0 738.8 23832 68.2 124.9 1831 8924.9 18391.6 2061

24 2004-05 1906.3 5543.5 2908 196.7 1457.0 7407 6.4 5.7 891 39.3 1088.7 27702 71.3 113.9 1597 8859.1 16260.3 1835

25 2005-06 2010.8 6871.6 3417 213.2 1778.6 8342 7.5 6.8 907 44.6 1238.3 27765 65.1 101.5 1559 9147.7 20998.9 2296

26 2006-07 2372.1 7876.4 3320 216.1 1655.4 7660 6.9 6.4 928 51.7 1078.4 20859 57.0 98.4 1726 9748.2 19617.4 2012

27 2007-08 2422.0 8275.7 3417 211.0 1519.0 7199 8.3 7.9 952 72.3 1795.6 24835 45.7 78.7 1722 10091.9 24582.1 2436

28 2008-09 2353.6 7013.8 2980 221.3 1171.4 5293 7.4 6.7 905 55.8 1171.4 20993 49.2 70.1 1425 9544.0 19710.3 2065

29 2009-10 2464.4 7401.4 3003 190.3 1330.4 6991 9.0 8.5 944 47.4 987.7 20838 62.8 101.5 1616 9056.3 18446.6 2037

Note: cotton production in bales in 170 kgs. each lint, sugarcane production in gur


Total Sr.

No.Year

Cotton Sugarcan Chillies Potatoes Tobacco

148

123

1981 1982 1983 1984 1991 1992 1993 1994 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

Kachchh 598 146 257 306 82 522 124 800 310 219 243 136 712 293 305 571 560 338 475 864

Banaskantha 476 356 646 704 536 935 857 1345 219 339 694 209 783 391 745 1371 844 545 377 856

Patan NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA 156 267 540 209 753 462 749 975 906 517 290 730

Mahesana 637 511 762 627 460 557 696 1125 664 413 930 291 821 553 1220 1420 1119 619 459 783

Sabarkantha 829 465 997 925 798 634 690 1206 437 420 593 373 846 732 1037 1721 1294 651 662 855

Gandhinagar 618 472 519 846 534 503 611 1094 558 326 421 323 1125 814 1374 1066 1104 731 558 918

Ahmedabad 1263 759 1090 763 541 577 665 1325 608 559 658 327 776 754 1142 941 879 746 363 1027

Surendrnagar 641 532 453 498 202 492 358 656 195 326 671 322 580 608 967 652 840 769 302 814

Rajkot 641 470 637 539 341 682 402 1015 311 345 429 341 740 558 729 843 1047 797 539 1142

Jamnagar 1369 884 855 665 275 456 195 1047 251 252 583 325 829 546 617 766 1173 644 894 1515

Porbandar NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA 164 435 623 275 743 583 822 971 1316 661 1372 1672

Junagadh 1387 1131 2538 1215 586 879 582 1380 442 498 896 432 944 1004 961 1009 1592 1131 1174 1554

Amreli 805 828 1088 294 269 610 508 717 414 234 509 559 673 593 1071 823 1064 731 500 878

Bhavnagar 764 418 654 449 348 637 446 798 443 173 622 633 609 509 924 733 995 722 393 759

Anand NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA 319 305 525 400 965 688 1307 1015 876 785 361 831

Kheda 1052 598 812 710 651 592 628 1279 738 519 715 519 1110 841 1273 1388 1114 773 439 779

Panchmahal 1054 634 1040 818 667 755 901 1117 331 357 677 581 948 955 875 1445 1016 692 504 752

Dahod NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA 352 271 530 605 916 1039 565 1204 872 596 426 576

Vadodara 766 662 1389 707 703 765 864 1377 358 398 826 742 1069 1027 1328 1673 1183 866 520 917

Narmada NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA 455 521 822 854 1339 1124 1156 1606 1390 1146 817 881

Bharuch 1131 501 1381 799 433 942 856 1373 523 533 885 714 806 786 889 920 900 768 428 889

Surat 1240 1182 1967 1053 738 2169 1179 1940 946 772 1126 1076 1942 1811 2305 2059 1555 1578 1447 1599

The Dangs 3064 1665 2915 2743 2145 1935 3211 4646 3111 1431 2200 2442 2129 1640 3802 2626 1860 2611 1490 1819

Navsari NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA 948 1250 2014 1374 2471 2102 2858 2081 1733 2196 1455 1961

Valsad 1917 1523 3047 1823 1532 2102 2079 3212 1573 1446 2104 1815 2355 2589 1285 2448 2245 2353 1841 2415

Tapi NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA 1427 991 1139

Gujarat state 1066 723 1213 868 623 881 834 1445 593 504 833 635 1079 920 1212 1293 1179 977 734 1113

NA: Not Avaliable

Sources: Socio Economic Review 1987-88,1993-94, 1998-99, 2005-06 and 2006-07Directorate of Economics and Statistics , Gujarat State,

Gandhinagar

DistrictsYear

Annexure 10: District wise Average Annual Rainfall (1981-2010)

(In Millimetres)

Note: During the year 1998 six new districts (Porbandar, Patan, Anand, Dahod, Narmada and Navasari) have been formed. Hence, Rainfall data are

avaliable for 25 districts from the year 1998 and Tapi district have been formed year 2007.

149

124

N P K Total N P K Total N P K Total N P K Total

1981-82 255.40 114.64 41.42 411.45 15.45 17.86 4.25 37.55 NA NA NA NA 24.39 21.36 7.46 53.22

1982-83 236.39 115.74 34.32 386.44 16.20 18.08 3.51 37.78 NA NA NA NA 22.95 17.96 5.42 46.33

1983-84 317.04 140.42 38.32 495.78 21.60 21.84 4.13 47.57 NA NA NA NA 32.04 23.67 5.97 61.67

1991-92 456.59 216.99 59.69 733.26 24.24 20.99 4.41 49.64 NA NA NA NA 27.29 22.65 4.85 54.79

1992-93 496.17 181.14 39.29 716.61 27.80 17.21 2.89 47.90 NA NA NA NA 35.72 20.64 3.48 59.84

1993-94 472.83 157.02 39.18 669.03 24.01 13.98 2.25 40.23 NA NA NA NA 26.99 16.20 2.27 45.46

1999-00 632.13 264.73 68.75 965.61 22.47 17.41 1.81 41.69 3.96 2.71 0.17 6.84 39.26 34.16 3.91 77.33

2000-01 498.96 195.67 56.01 750.64 14.85 9.59 1.04 25.49 5.32 3.82 0.17 9.30 23.92 13.95 1.76 39.63

2001-02 605.64 240.23 69.36 915.23 24.88 17.20 1.87 43.95 8.22 5.31 0.31 13.84 39.07 25.06 3.52 67.65

2002-03 510.80 207.04 71.59 789.43 16.96 13.27 1.56 31.80 2.94 2.65 0.12 5.71 27.41 20.79 3.11 51.31

2003-04 687.55 255.28 73.50 1016.33 37.54 24.20 2.59 64.33 2.24 1.76 0.19 4.19 60.41 34.46 5.38 100.25

2005-06 753.99 296.26 96.22 1146.48 44.30 29.55 4.44 78.28 NA NA NA NA 67.92 36.96 6.61 111.50

2006-07 834.74 328.46 116.73 1279.92 45.86 29.99 4.92 80.77 NA NA NA NA 84.78 42.91 10.20 137.89

2007-08 879.85 343.96 118.03 1341.83 51.84 32.26 5.68 89.78 NA NA NA NA 100.22 49.97 13.14 163.33

2008-09 1052.63 424.52 146.11 1623.26 57.87 36.45 6.60 100.91 NA NA NA NA 115.62 60.72 17.53 193.87

2009-10 1068.83 465.17 182.99 1716.99 59.66 39.13 8.08 106.87 NA NA NA NA 104.59 62.90 20.00 187.49

Annexure 11: Sample District-wise Fertilizer Consumption in Gujarat

(Fertilizer use 000'MT)

Sources: (1) Gujarat Agriculture Statistics at a Glance 2010-11, Directorate of Agriculture, Gujarat State, Gandhinagar

(2) Socio Economic Review, Various issues, Directorate of Economics and Statistics , Gujarat State, Gandhinagar.

Gujarat Junagadh Porbandar RajkotYear

150

125

APPENDIX I: COMMENTS ON THE REPORT

1. Title of the Draft Study Report Examined: Problems and Prospects of Oilseeds

Production in Gujarat: Special Reference to Groundnut

2. Date of Receipt of the Draft Report: April 10, 2013

3. Date of Despatch of Comments: May 17, 2013

4. Comments on the Objectives of the study:

The objectives of the study are quite comprehensive and address major issues related to

problems in oilseeds production in the State. The study specifically studies trends and

pattern of growth of different edible oilseeds over time and across districts and identify the

sources of growth in edible oilseeds output in the state; examines the impact of price and

non-price factors influencing the supply response behaviour and demand for edible oilseeds

and oils in the state; and identifies major constraints in the edible oilseed and palm

cultivation and suggest policy options to increase oilseeds production and productivity in the

State.

5. Comments on the Methodology:

Appropriate sampling technique has been used by the author for selection of district(s),

blocks, villages and sample households. The study is based on both primary and secondary

data. The study uses simple analytical tools like linear and compound growth rates,

coefficient of variation, decomposition analysis, regression analysis for estimating

production and acreage response functions, etc.

6. Comments on the Presentation, Get up etc.:

The role of agriculture and oilseeds in the State economy and objectives of the study are

discussed in Chapter 1. Chapter 2 is devoted to discussion on coverage of the study,

sampling design, analytical framework and model(s). Chapter 3 provides an overview of

oilseeds sector in the state and discusses the current status and growth behaviour of area

under oilseeds and production and productivity. The factors underlying changes in cropping

151

126

pattern and the nature of variability in area, production and yield of major oilseeds vis-à-vis

competing crops during the last three decades have been examined in this chapter. The

sources of output growth and input use for groundnut, main competing crop (cotton) and all

oilseeds have also been analyzed in this chapter.

In Chapter 4 an empirical analysis of the problems and prospects of oilseeds

production in the state has been carried out with the help of primary level data. The

production, retention and marketed surplus pattern of oilseeds and the comparative

economics of cultivation of oilseeds vis-à-vis competing crops have also been analyzed.

The extent of yield gap and technology gap has been analyzed in this chapter. The

determinants of oilseed production and acreage allocation have been examined using

regression models. The perceived constraints in cultivation of oilseeds have been also

analyzed and farmers’ suggestions for improving production and productivity of oilseeds

have also been presented in the chapter. The last chapter presents the summary,

concluding observations and policy implications of the study.

Overall View on Acceptability of the Report: The report is quite comprehensive and of very good quality and may be accepted for

publication.

152

127

APPENDIX II: ACTION TAKEN ON COMMENTS ON THE REPORT We thank Dr. Vijay Paul Sharma, IIM Ahmedabad for his review comments. The report has

been further improved based on the comments made by the Coordinating Centre.

************************

153


(Sponsored by Ministry of Agriculture, Govt. of India) H.M. Patel Institute of Rural Development, Opp. Nanadalaya Temple, Post Box No. 24,

Sardar Patel University,

Vallabh Vidyanagar 388120, Dist. Anand, Gujarat.

Ph. No. +91-2692-230106, 230799; Fax- +91-2692-233106 Email: [email protected]; [email protected]

Problems and Prospects of Oilseeds Production in … Acknowledgements The study on “Problems and...

Documents

Transcript of Problems and Prospects of Oilseeds Production in … Acknowledgements The study on “Problems and...