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
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
1950 1952 1954 1956 1958 1960 1962 1964 1966 1968 1970 1972 1974 1976 1978 1980 1982 1984 1986 1988 1990 1992 1994 1996 1998 2000 2002 2004 2006 2008 2010 Yield kg per ha Area and production Chickpea Performance in India 1000 900 800 12.00 10.00 700 600 500 400 300 200 100 0 8.00 6.00 4.00 2.00 0.00 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
State-wise chickpea performance States Area (% share) Production (% share) productivity (kg/ha) 1966-68 2008-10 1966-68 2008-10 1966-68 2008-10 Andhra Pradesh 0.99 7.27 0.40 10.64 238 1317 Maharashtra 4.70 15.33 2.42 14.00 305 815 Madhya Pradesh 20.15 35.79 15.82 38.56 469 972 Gujarat 0.59 1.91 0.30 2.20 337 1032 Punjab 6.46 0.03 8.61 0.04 775 1197 Uttar Pradesh 29.49 6.90 29.94 7.04 607 923 Bihar 3.71 2.01 3.73 0.77 598 1042 Rajasthan 15.40 15.56 15.58 13.70 620 760 Karnataka 2.52 10.52 1.83 7.05 430 600 India 100.00 100 100.00 100.00 594 902
District-wise performance in Andhra Pradesh, 2009-11 District Area (000 ha) Production (000 tons) Yield (Kg/ha) Kurnool 227.0 (37) 309.5 (38) 1363.3 Prakasam 87.2 (14) 150.1 (18) 1721.6 Anantapur 86.7 (14) 83.1 (10) 957.7 Kadapa 72.8 (12) 60.8 (7) 835.5 Medak 38.6 (6) 43.7 (5) 1134.0 Nizamabad 26.2 (4) 52.5 (6) 2000.5 Mahabubnagar 25.3 (4) 38.7 (5) 1525.9 Andhra Pradesh 612.3 (100) 807.7 (100) 1319.0 Figures in the parenthesis indicates percent to column total
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)
Chickpea adoption and impact study in AP
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 42 7 81362 64717 79.5 Kurnool 53 23 209255 172291 82.3 Kadapa 30 12 79942 68043 85.1 Nellore 18 0 10728 0 0.0 Prakasam 50 10 84004 45853 54.6 Guntur 30 0 10514 0 0.0 Mahabubnagar 31 3 27035 18438 68.2 Medak 45 3 31014 11721 37.8 Nizamabad 30 3 20705 13788 66.6 Total 329 61 554559 394851 71.2
Chickpea adoption study sample Sr.no Name of No of No of No of famers District Mandals Villages 1 Kurnool 13 39 351 (43.3) 2 Anantapur 5 15 135 (16.7) 3 Mahbubnagar 1 3 27 (3.3) 4 Prakasam 4 12 108 (13.3) 5 Kadapa 5 15 135 (16.7) 6 Medak 1 3 27 (3.3) 7 Nizamabad 1 3 27 (3.3) Total 30 90 810 (100.0) Figures in the parenthesis indicates percent to column total Non CP sample= 30 X 3 X 3 = 270 HH
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
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
PART-1 Results from Kurnool, Anantapur and Mahabubnagar
Results from Kurnool, Anantapur, and Mahabubnagar districts Socio-economic characteristics of sample farmers Pattern of first adoption of improved cultivars Current Adoption of cultivars (2011-12) Diffusion process Behavioral changes in relation to technology adoption Determinants to chickpea adoption
Socio-economic characteristics of sample farmers District Kurnool Anantapur Mahabubnagar Average years of chickpea farming (Years) 11 11 9 Average family size (no.) 5.2 5.2 5.3 Average Education (Years) 5.95 6.60 5.93 Average Age (Years) 47.4 48.8 49.5 Avg. family members working on farm (no.) 3.08 3.04 3.03 Average land holding size (acres) 21.05 20.38 16.20 Proportion of total area under CP cultivation 92.17% 77.61% 59.3%
1988 1990 1991 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 NUMBER OF FARMERS First adoption of chickpea improved cultivars (Annegiri & JG-11) in Kurnool (no. of farmers) 90 80 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 JG-11 ANNEGIRI
First adoption of chickpea improved cultivars in Kurnool (cumulative no. of farmers)
First adoption pattern of chickpea improved cultivars in Anantapur (cumulative no. of farmers)
First adoption pattern of chickpea improved cultivars in Mahabubnagar (cumulative no. of farmers)
Area allocation under chickpea, 2009-12 District Area trend Crops Increasing Decreasing Constant Total replaced by chickpea KUL 78 23 250 351 Sunflower (22.2) (6.6) (71.2) 100.0) ANA 10 19 106 135 Groundnut (7.4) (14.1) (78.5) (100.0) MAH 5 2 20 27 Sunflower (18.5) (7.4) (74.1) (100.0) Overall 93 44 376 513 - (18.1) (8.6) (73.3) (100.0)
Tracking the adoption of chickpea improved cultivars, 2011-12 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
Composition of cultivars in Kurnool sample, 2011-12 1% 1% 12% 86% JG-11 Annegiri KAK-2 Vihar (phule-g)
Major cultivars in Anantapur sample, 2011-12 3% 2% 95% JAKI-9218 JG-130 JG-11
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) 271 77.20% 3 0.85% 46 13.15% 104 77.03% 0 0% 0 0% 23 81.52% 0 0% 0 0% Total 397 3 46
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.
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)
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 1 1998 Gudur 2 2000 Kurnool 3 2000 Koilkuntla 4 2001 Aspari 5 2001 Sanjmala 6 2002 Chippagiri 7 2002 Midthur 8 2002 Maddikera (East) 9 2002 Uyyalawada 10 2002 Dorinipadu 11 2002 Banaganapalle 12 2004 Alur 13 2004 Adoni
Diffusion pattern of JG11 (first adoption) in Kurnool district 2000 2002 2004 1998 2004 2001 2002 2002 NANDYAL RESEARCH CENTRE 2002 2002 2000 2001 2002
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
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) 26 28.14% 7.11 13.03 0-20 0-40 Leased-in land allocation (acres) 15 6.71% 3.57 16.37 0-10 0-60 Mechanization (Rs per acre) 134 100% 1469.5 2175.6 300-2500 500-4000 Fertilizer application cost (Rs/acre) 134 100% 578.0 1055.7 200-1400 650-1800 Pesticide application cost (Rs/acre) 134 100% 575.89 994.32 250-1000 500-1600 Irrigation expenditure (Rs/acre) 1 0.74% 0 1200 0 0-1200 Soil & water conservation expenditure (Rs/acre) 3 2.23% 0 10000 0 0-10000
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) 134 38.39% 8.04 15.77 0-70 0-70 Leased-in land allocation (acres) 69 19.7% 2.88 12.14 0-38 0-116 Mechanization (Rs per acre) 342 98% 1225.46 2177.89 0-2500 0-4000 Fertilizer application cost (Rs/acre) 349 100% 728.64 1428.47 100-2000 800-3500 Pesticide application cost (Rs/acre) 349 100% 695 1343.53 200-2000 400-4000 Irrigation expenditure (Rs/acre) 0 - - - - - Soil & water conservation expenditure (Rs/acre) 3 0.86% 0 7000 0 0-7000
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% 3.5 4 0-6 0-7 Leased-in land allocation (acres) 2 7.7% 2 13 0-2 0-22 Mechanization (Rs per acre) 26 100% 1734.61 2678.46 600-2100 2000-3500 Fertilizer application cost (Rs/acre) Pesticide application cost (Rs/acre) 26 100% 681.92 1316.53 250-1800 900-2200 26 100% 555.76 1028.84 250-900 600-1440 Irrigation expenditure (Rs/acre) 0 - - - - - 0 - - - - - Soil & water conservation expenditure (Rs/acre)
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
PART-2 Results from Prakasam, Kadapa, Medak and Nizamabad
Results from Prakasam, Kadapa, Nizamabad and Medak Socio-economic characteristics of sample farmers Pattern of first adoption of improved cultivars Current adoption of cultivars (2011-12) Diffusion process Behavioral changes in relation to technology adoption Determinants to chickpea adoption
Socio-economic characteristics of sample farmers District Prakasam Kadapa Medak Nizamabad Average years of chickpea farming (years) 9 8 16 7 Average family size (no.) 3.98 4.74 5.85 5.62 Average education (Years) 5.86 7.69 4.85 5.42 Average age (Years) 50.3 47.26 49.61 49.57 Avg. family member working in farm (no.) 2.66 2.87 3.59 3.48 Average land holding size (acres) 13 18 10 10 Proportion of total area under CP Cultivation 73.53% 80.13% 42.50% 64.44%
First adoption of chickpea improved cultivars in Prakasam (cumulative no. of farmers)
First adoption of chickpea improved cultivars in Medak (cumulative no. of farmers)
First adoption of chickpea improved cultivars in Nizamabad (cumulative no. of farmers)
First adoption of chickpea improved cultivars in Kadapa (cumulative no. of farmers)
First adoption of chickpea improved cultivars in the overall study sample (N=810)
Area allocation under chickpea, 2009-12 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) -
Adoption of improved cultivars, 2011-12 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
Adoption of improved cultivars in Prakasam sample farmers, 2011-12 6% 1% 38% 55% JG-11 KAK2 DOLLAR (BOLD) VIHAR
Composition of major cultivars in Nizamabad sample, 2011-12 32% 68% JG-11 ANNEGIRI
Major chickpea cultivars in Medak sample, 2011-12 50% 50% JG-11 ANNEGIRI
Composition of cultivars in Kadapa sample, 2011-12 1% 1% 16% 82% JG-11 VIHAR
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) 26 24.07% 41 38% 2 0.18% 83 61.48% 1 0.74% 22 16.3% 13 48.14% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% Nizamabad (N=27) 17 62.96% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% Total 139 42 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.
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)
Diffusion pattern of KAK-2 (first adoption) in Prakasam district 2002 2004 2004 2003
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% 2.6 6.43 0-13 0-16 Leased-in land allocation (acres) 45 42.05% 2.0 10.6 0-20 0-50 Mechanization (Rs per acre) 106 99.06% 1220.3 2703.0 0-2400 0-3800 Fertilizer application cost (Rs/acre) 107 100% 818.6 1876.6 0-2000 700-3600 Pesticide application cost (Rs/acre) 107 100% 642 1434 0-1800 100-1500 Irrigation expenditure (Rs/acre) 0 0% - - - - Soil & water conservation expenditure (Rs/acre) 2 1.8% 125 700 0-150 0-1000
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) 11 8.87 8.13 11.32 0-50 0-71 Leased-in land allocation (acres) 7 5.64 0 11.14 0 0-25 Mechanization (Rs per acre) 124 99.19 1889.87 2777.2 0-2850 1400-4000 Fertilizer application cost (Rs/acre) 123 99.19 776.77 1413.46 0-1800 900-2500 Pesticide application cost (Rs/acre) 124 100 640 1086.69 0-1100 600-1700 Irrigation expenditure (Rs/acre) - - - - - - Soil & water conservation expenditure (Rs/acre) 1 0.80 2000 0 0-2000
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) 13 100 2042.3 2907.7 700-2900 1500-4000 Fertilizer application cost 13 100 596.2 1115.4 200-1200 500-2000 (Rs/acre) Pesticide application cost 13 100 692.3 1207.7 250-1300 500-2100 (Rs/acre) Irrigation expenditure (Rs/acre) - - - - - - Soil & water conservation expenditure (Rs/acre) 1 7.69-4000 - 0-4000
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) 3 16.66 2.33 5.33 0-4 0-8 Leased-in land allocation (acres) 2 11.11 0 5 0 0-5 Mechanization (Rs per acre) 18 100 1931.2 2781.2 400-2800 800-3900 Fertilizer application cost (Rs/acre) 18 100 841.11 1504.44 400-1500 800-3090 Pesticide application cost (Rs/acre) 18 100 678.88 1180 300-2200 500-2500 Irrigation expenditure (Rs/acre) - - - - - - Soil & water conservation expenditure (Rs/acre) - - - - - -
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
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)
Determinants of chickpea adoption Predictor Co.eff SE Coef Z P Odds Ratio Constant -5.93 0.58-10.30 0.00 Years of farming experience 0.00 0.01 0.06 0.95 1.00 Proportion of Leased in Land 1.07 0.40 2.70 0.01 2.92 Total Assets of Households 0.01 0.01 1.49 0.14 1.01 Share of black soils in the total holdings 4.64 0.35 13.31 0.00 103.43 Share of own farm labour in family 0.51 0.49 1.05 0.29 1.67 Type of Credit requirements by households 2.78 0.48 5.77 0.00 16.19 Share of Rabi Cropped Area in the total land holding 0.47 0.25 1.86 0.06 1.60 Area under commericial crops (acres) -0.07 0.04-1.78 0.07 0.93 Area under non-commericial crops (acres) 0.19 0.02 7.99 0.00 1.21 Goodness of fit Method Chi-Square DF P Pearson 3437.66 1070.00 0.00 Deviance 579.67 1070.00 1.00 Hosmer-Lemeshow 20.86 8.00 0.01
Conclusions Overall, Annigeri (old cultivar) took nearly 12-16 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, 2011-12 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
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
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
Thank you! ICRISAT is a member of the CGIAR Consortium