Short Duration Chickpea Cultivars Adoption and Diffusion Pattern in Andhra Pradesh

Transcription

1 Short Duration Chickpea Cultivars Adoption and Diffusion Pattern in Andhra Pradesh Komal Shah and Namrata Pradhan Summer Interns, GIPE C F Bentley Conference Hall 5 th July 2013

2 Importance of Chickpea Chickpea is the third largest food legume crop and grown in around 52 countries of the world (15% of total pulse area) South and South-East Asia (SSEA) alone contributes about 86 per cent of global production (India s share 80% ) Nearly 70% of world production is consumed in India It is a rainfed, post-rainy winter crop predominantly grown in residual soil moisture and rarely irrigated or fertilized Crop is sensitive to high (>35 C) as well as low (<15 C) temp Chickpea is one of the major sources of dietary protein (20%) in India (especially vegetarians) With varied environments, the crop fit well with different farming systems (90 to 120 days maturity) and minimize the risk

3 Yield kg per ha Area and production Chickpea Performance in India Yield (Kg per ha) Area (m ha) Production (m ton) It occupies 35% area and 47% production of total pulses in India Currently all are exhibiting positive trends and productivity is in its peak In long term: area, production and productivity are increasing

4 State-wise chickpea performance States Area (% share) Production (% share) productivity (kg/ha) Andhra Pradesh Maharashtra Madhya Pradesh Gujarat Punjab Uttar Pradesh Bihar Rajasthan Karnataka India

5 District-wise performance in Andhra Pradesh, District Area (000 ha) Production (000 tons) Yield (Kg/ha) Kurnool (37) (38) Prakasam 87.2 (14) (18) Anantapur 86.7 (14) 83.1 (10) Kadapa 72.8 (12) 60.8 (7) Medak 38.6 (6) 43.7 (5) Nizamabad 26.2 (4) 52.5 (6) Mahabubnagar 25.3 (4) 38.7 (5) Andhra Pradesh (100) (100) Figures in the parenthesis indicates percent to column total

6 Study Objectives To understand the pattern of first adoption of chickpea improved cultivars in the sample districts Tracking the adoption of improved chickpea cultivars in the sample To understand the dynamics of varietal replacement across sample farmers To document the perceived behavioural changes of sample farmers in relation to technology adoption Socio-economic factors influencing the chickpea adoption (N=1080)

7 Chickpea adoption and impact study in AP

8 District Chickpea growing mandals Sampling framework No. of mandals with >3000 ha Total chickpea cropped area Area coverage of mandals with > 3000 ha % covered Anantapur Kurnool Kadapa Nellore Prakasam Guntur Mahabubnagar Medak Nizamabad Total

9 Chickpea adoption study sample Sr.no Name of No of No of No of famers District Mandals Villages 1 Kurnool (43.3) 2 Anantapur (16.7) 3 Mahbubnagar (3.3) 4 Prakasam (13.3) 5 Kadapa (16.7) 6 Medak (3.3) 7 Nizamabad (3.3) Total (100.0) Figures in the parenthesis indicates percent to column total Non CP sample= 30 X 3 X 3 = 270 HH

10 Reasons for growing Chickpea All the 810 farmers interviewed in the 7 districts have given more or less similar reasons for adopting the short- duration chickpea improved cultivars Chickpea cultivation is less-labor intensive Relatively low investment per acre is needed Viewed as a less risky crop Assured yields, market and good remunerative prices Highly suitable for mechanical operations Lower pest problem Improves soil fertility Can easily cultivate in large-scale

11 Prominent chickpea cultivars in Andhra Pradesh Year of release Cultivar Desi/kabuli 1978 Annegeri-1 Desi 1997 JAKI-9218 Desi 1999 JG-11 Desi 1999 KAK-2 (PKV-Kabuli-2) Kabuli 2002 Vihar/( PHULE G-95311) Kabuli 2012 N Be G-3 Desi

12 PART-1 Results from Kurnool, Anantapur and Mahabubnagar

13 Results from Kurnool, Anantapur, and Mahabubnagar districts Socio-economic characteristics of sample farmers Pattern of first adoption of improved cultivars Current Adoption of cultivars ( ) Diffusion process Behavioral changes in relation to technology adoption Determinants to chickpea adoption

14 Socio-economic characteristics of sample farmers District Kurnool Anantapur Mahabubnagar Average years of chickpea farming (Years) Average family size (no.) Average Education (Years) Average Age (Years) Avg. family members working on farm (no.) Average land holding size (acres) Proportion of total area under CP cultivation 92.17% 77.61% 59.3%

15 NUMBER OF FARMERS First adoption of chickpea improved cultivars (Annegiri & JG-11) in Kurnool (no. of farmers) JG-11 ANNEGIRI

16 First adoption of chickpea improved cultivars in Kurnool (cumulative no. of farmers)

17 First adoption pattern of chickpea improved cultivars in Anantapur (cumulative no. of farmers)

18 First adoption pattern of chickpea improved cultivars in Mahabubnagar (cumulative no. of farmers)

19 Area allocation under chickpea, District Area trend Crops Increasing Decreasing Constant Total replaced by chickpea KUL Sunflower (22.2) (6.6) (71.2) 100.0) ANA Groundnut (7.4) (14.1) (78.5) (100.0) MAH Sunflower (18.5) (7.4) (74.1) (100.0) Overall (18.1) (8.6) (73.3) (100.0)

20 Tracking the adoption of chickpea improved cultivars, Improved cultivar JG-11, a desi variety, is highly preferred over the other cultivars in the three sample districts All sample farmers in Mahabubnagar cultivates only JG-11 Although there is a scattered inclusion of the kabuli varieties of KAK-2 and Vihar it is not as evident as JG-11 in Kurnool and Anantapur

21 Composition of cultivars in Kurnool sample, % 1% 12% 86% JG-11 Annegiri KAK-2 Vihar (phule-g)

22 Major cultivars in Anantapur sample, % 2% 95% JAKI-9218 JG-130 JG-11

23 Pattern of varietal replacement District (no. of farmers) Annegiri to JG-11 Annegiri to KAK2 Annegiri to Vihar Kurnool (N=351) Anantapur (N=135) Mahabubnagar (N=27) % % % % 0 0% 0 0% % 0 0% 0 0% Total

24 Chickpea sample farmers (N=810) ADOPTERS NON-ADOPTERS A1 A2 A3 Farmers who cultivate Chickpea on part of the own land only Farmers whose total owned land is allocated for chickpea cultivation only Farmers who grow chickpea on their own land and also have leased in land for chickpea cultivation Farmers who did not adoption chickpea improved cultivars SW Farmers blended into the adoption trend and have switched from other postrainy crops.

25 Types of chickpea farmers DISTRICT Kurnool Anantapur Mahabubnagar A1 130 (37.0) 46 (34.1) 7 (25.9) A2 64 (18.2) 43 (31.9) 7(25.9) A3 95 (27.1) 16 (11.9) 9 (33.3) Switchers 62 (17.7) 30 (22.2) 4 (14.8) Non-adopters 0 (0.0) 0 (0.0) 0 (0.0) Total 351 (100.0) 135 (100.0) 27 (100.0)

26 Pattern of diffusion (JG11) in Kurnool Kurnool houses a major seed development centre at Nandhyal. The Nandhyal Research Station may be the initial tipping point from where the diffusion of the improved cultivars of JG-11 started and later spread over to surrounding mandals. However, initial access to JG11 was observed from 1996 onwards. Sr. no Year District Gudur Kurnool Koilkuntla Aspari Sanjmala Chippagiri Midthur Maddikera (East) Uyyalawada Dorinipadu Banaganapalle Alur Adoni

27 Diffusion pattern of JG11 (first adoption) in Kurnool district NANDYAL RESEARCH CENTRE

28 Is adoption of improved cultivars leading to Agricultural intensification? Based on past experiences in irrigated agriculture (especially the Rice and Wheat cultivation) during Green Revolution technology period Is the introduction of improved cultivars/technology in SAT leading to Agricultural intensification? Some of broad parameters to measure intensification: 1. Cropping intensity (no.of crops per year) 2. Land use intensity (own/leased-in allocation) 3. In-put use behavior (seed rate, fert and pesti etc.) 4. Extent of mechanization etc. 5. Soil and water conservation practices

29 Type of change Perceived behavioral changes in Anantapur district (N=134) Change Old allocation Revised allocation RANGE Yes % Average Average Old allocation New allocation Own land allocation (acres) % Leased-in land allocation (acres) % Mechanization (Rs per acre) % Fertilizer application cost (Rs/acre) % Pesticide application cost (Rs/acre) % Irrigation expenditure (Rs/acre) % Soil & water conservation expenditure (Rs/acre) %

30 Type of change Perceived behavioral changes in Kurnool district (N=349) Change Old Revised Range allocation allocation Yes % Average Average Old Revised allocation allocation Own land allocation (acres) % Leased-in land allocation (acres) % Mechanization (Rs per acre) % Fertilizer application cost (Rs/acre) % Pesticide application cost (Rs/acre) % Irrigation expenditure (Rs/acre) Soil & water conservation expenditure (Rs/acre) %

31 Perceived behavioral changes in Mahabubnagar district (N=26) Type of change Change Old allocation Revised allocation Range Yes % Average Average Old allocation New allocation Own land allocation (acres) 2 7.7% Leased-in land allocation (acres) 2 7.7% Mechanization (Rs per acre) % Fertilizer application cost (Rs/acre) Pesticide application cost (Rs/acre) % % Irrigation expenditure (Rs/acre) Soil & water conservation expenditure (Rs/acre)

32 Summary of perceived behavioral changes With about 0.5% of the farmers have only opted to intensify chickpea cultivation gradually during coming years, the rest of 99% of the sample households have already intensified their farms Marginal increase in land allocation either owned or leased-in Conspicuous changes in the use of the fertilizer, pesticides and increased usage of mechanization was observed across study districts Farmers who initially spent Rs.1500/acre, today are willing to spend Rs.3000/acre for mechanization, since it is benefitting them significantly Farmers whose initial investment in fertilizer application/acre was around Rs.1400, but today willing to enhance it up to Rs.2000/acre The relative pesticide expenditure/acre of Kurnool sample farmers was much higher (Rs.4000) when compared to the rest of the districts

33 PART-2 Results from Prakasam, Kadapa, Medak and Nizamabad

34 Results from Prakasam, Kadapa, Nizamabad and Medak Socio-economic characteristics of sample farmers Pattern of first adoption of improved cultivars Current adoption of cultivars ( ) Diffusion process Behavioral changes in relation to technology adoption Determinants to chickpea adoption

35 Socio-economic characteristics of sample farmers District Prakasam Kadapa Medak Nizamabad Average years of chickpea farming (years) Average family size (no.) Average education (Years) Average age (Years) Avg. family member working in farm (no.) Average land holding size (acres) Proportion of total area under CP Cultivation 73.53% 80.13% 42.50% 64.44%

36 First adoption of chickpea improved cultivars in Prakasam (cumulative no. of farmers)

37 First adoption of chickpea improved cultivars in Medak (cumulative no. of farmers)

38 First adoption of chickpea improved cultivars in Nizamabad (cumulative no. of farmers)

39 First adoption of chickpea improved cultivars in Kadapa (cumulative no. of farmers)

40 First adoption of chickpea improved cultivars in the overall study sample (N=810)

41 Area allocation under chickpea, District Area trend Crops replaced by Increasing Decreasing Constant Total chickpea PRM 29 (26.9) 3 (2.8) 76 (70.4) 108 (100.0) Cotton, Tobacco KAD 28 (20.7) 3 (2.2) 104 (77.0) 135 (100.0) Groundnut NIZ 7 (25.9) 0 (0.0) 20 (74.1) 27 (100.0) Sorghum MED 1 (3.7) 7 (25.9) 19 (70.4) 27 (100.0) - Overall 65 (21.8) 13 (4.4) 219 (73.8) 297 (100.0) -

42 Adoption of improved cultivars, Kabuli (KAK2) is the most dominant cultivar in Prakasam district Medak, Kadapa and Nizamabad dominated by desi variety (JG11) Even though the kabuli variety gives less yield and fetches more market price, desi is preferred by the farmers because of its low risk and high consumption demand Relatively, Prakasam district farmers are having high innovative attitude as well as risk loving behavior

43 Adoption of improved cultivars in Prakasam sample farmers, % 1% 38% 55% JG-11 KAK2 DOLLAR (BOLD) VIHAR

44 Composition of major cultivars in Nizamabad sample, % 68% JG-11 ANNEGIRI

45 Major chickpea cultivars in Medak sample, % 50% JG-11 ANNEGIRI

46 Composition of cultivars in Kadapa sample, % 1% 16% 82% JG-11 VIHAR

47 Pattern of varietal replacement District (no. of farmers) Annegiri to JG-11 Annegiri to KAK2 Annegiri to Vihar Prakasam (N=108) Kadapa (N=135) Medak (N=27) % 41 38% % % % % % 0 0.0% 0 0.0% Nizamabad (N=27) % 0 0.0% 0 0.0% Total

48 Chickpea sample farmers (N=810) ADOPTERS NON-ADOPTERS A1 A2 A3 Farmers who cultivate Chickpea on part of the own land only Farmers whose total owned land is allocated for chickpea cultivation only Farmers who grow chickpea on their own land and also have leased in land for chickpea cultivation Farmers who did not adoption chickpea improved cultivars SW Farmers blended into the adoption trend and have switched from other postrainy crops.

49 Types of chickpea farmers Districts Prakasam Kadapa Medak Nizamabad Type A1 13 (12.1) 36 (26.7) 13 (48.2) 14 (51.8) A2 6 (5.6) 33 (24.4) 0 (0.0) 0 (0.0) A3 31 (28.7) 24 (17.8) 1 (3.7) 4 (14.8) SW 58 (53.7) 42 (31.1) 0 (0.0) 1 (3.7) NA 0 (0.0) 0 (0.0) 13 (48.2) 8 (29.6) Total 108 (100.0) 135 (100.0) 27 (100.0) 27 (100.0)

50 Diffusion pattern of KAK-2 (first adoption) in Prakasam district

51 Perceived behavioral changes in Prakasam district (N=107) Type of change Change Old allocation Revised allocation Range Yes % Avg Avg Old allocation New allocation Own land allocation (acres) 40 37% Leased-in land allocation (acres) % Mechanization (Rs per acre) % Fertilizer application cost (Rs/acre) % Pesticide application cost (Rs/acre) % Irrigation expenditure (Rs/acre) 0 0% Soil & water conservation expenditure (Rs/acre) 2 1.8%

52 Type of change Perceived behavioral changes in Kadapa district (N=124) Change Old allocati on Revised allocation Range Yes % Avg Avg Old New allocation allocation Own land allocation (acres) Leased-in land allocation (acres) Mechanization (Rs per acre) Fertilizer application cost (Rs/acre) Pesticide application cost (Rs/acre) Irrigation expenditure (Rs/acre) Soil & water conservation expenditure (Rs/acre)

53 Perceived behavioral changes in Medak district (N=13) Change Old Revised Range Type of change allocation allocation Yes % Avg Avg Old New allocation allocation Own land allocation (acres) Leased-in land allocation (acres) Mechanization (Rs per acre) Fertilizer application cost (Rs/acre) Pesticide application cost (Rs/acre) Irrigation expenditure (Rs/acre) Soil & water conservation expenditure (Rs/acre)

54 Type of change Perceived behavioral changes in Nizamabad district (N=18) Change Old allocation Revised allocation Yes % Avg Avg Old allocation Range New allocation Own land allocation (acres) Leased-in land allocation (acres) Mechanization (Rs per acre) Fertilizer application cost (Rs/acre) Pesticide application cost (Rs/acre) Irrigation expenditure (Rs/acre) Soil & water conservation expenditure (Rs/acre)

55 Behavioural changes summary Among the four study districts, changes were more evident in case of Prakasam followed by Kadapa Medak and Nizamabad showed relatively less changes in terms of land allocation etc. However, variables like extent of mechanization, fertilizer and pesticide applications were significantly reported across four districts Further deeper analysis is required to understand these perceptions across districts

56 Determinants of chickpea adoption in Sample farmers Used Logistic Regression Function to understand the determinants of the chickpea adoption in the total study sample (N=1080) Dependent variable : Adopted (1)/Non-adopted (0) Explanatory variables: 1. Years of farming experience (years) 2. Proportion of Leased-in land in the total holding 3. Total assets of households (Rs in lakhs) 4. Share of black soils in the total land holding 5. Proportion of own farm labour in the family 6. Type of credit requirements by the household (scale 1-7) 7. Share of rabi cropped area in the total land holding 8. Area under commercial crops (acres) 9. Area under non- commercial crops (acres)

57 Determinants of chickpea adoption Predictor Co.eff SE Coef Z P Odds Ratio Constant Years of farming experience Proportion of Leased in Land Total Assets of Households Share of black soils in the total holdings Share of own farm labour in family Type of Credit requirements by households Share of Rabi Cropped Area in the total land holding Area under commericial crops (acres) Area under non-commericial crops (acres) Goodness of fit Method Chi-Square DF P Pearson Deviance Hosmer-Lemeshow

58 Conclusions Overall, Annigeri (old cultivar) took nearly years to reach the peak level of adoption whereas JG11 (improved cultivar) reached it with in 8-10 years time Tracking improved chickpea cultivars adoption in Andhra Pradesh, proved that nearly 98% area under improved cultivars The single dominant variety ruling the state is JG11 with nearly 85% share of cropped area. It was followed by Vihar (mostly in Kurnool) and KAK2 (highly in Prakasam) Presence of Annigeri was observed in some small pockets of Medak and Nizamabad districts

59 Contd., The initial adoption lags were conspicuously different across study districts. Districts like Prakasam and Kurnool exhibited 6-8 years while Nizamabad and Medak took nearly 10 years Most of the sample (66%) shifted from Annigeri to JG11 and another 15% sample farmers shifted directly from Annigeri to Kabuli (KAK2 or Vihar) types Overall, nearly 35% sample farmers fell under A1 category and another 20% sample under A2. The remaining 45% represented the A3 and SW types. A3 and SW group farmers were much progressive contributing significantly to Chickpea Revolution

60 Contd., The initial results on behavioral changes provided evidence towards intensification process. Allocation of more area, mechanization and applying more inputs were some of the significant variables to be analyzed further Some of the determinants for adoption of chickpea are: availability of Leased-in land, availability of suitable black soils, credit availability, share of rabi crops and allocation of area under non-commercial crops

61 Thank you! ICRISAT is a member of the CGIAR Consortium