Indian J. Agric. Res.., 46 (3) : 256-261, 2012 AGRICULTURAL RESEARCH COMMUNICATION CENTRE www.ar.arccjour ccjournals.com / indianjournals.com nals.com THE SOCIO-ECONOMIC STATUS TUS OF PINEAPPLE GROWERS UNDER CONTRACT FARMING CONDITION Atanu Nanda*,Ranjit Sarkar and Sagar Mondal Department of Agril. Extension, Bidhan Chandra Krishi Viswavidyalaya, Mohanpur -741 252, India Received: 01-07-2011 Accepted: 14-01-2012 ABSTRACT The present study was carried out in the block Phansidewa under Darjeeling district. It is famous for pineapple cultivation. For this reason Darjeeling district as well as Phansidewa block was selected purposively.. This study was conducted to assess the socio-economic status of pineapple cultivators under contract farming condition in Pineapple export zone. Fifty pineapple growers were selected as respondents. The data were processed into frequency and percentage. From this study it was found that pineapple cultivators of Phansidewa block were e predominantly middle aged and generally educated as about 42 percent of the cultivators were middle aged and 46 percent had middle level education. Ninety six percent of the pineapple cultivator s primary occupation was cultivation and 40 percent of the cultivators were having one to three acres land. Sixty eight percent of pineapple cultivators had one to two draught animals whereas 90 percent had television set and furniture. Their social participation was very poor as only 20 percent of them actively take part in election process. It was also noted that the pine apple grower used radio,, educational farm, news paper,, farm m publication and demonstration some time to gain knowledge about their occupation. Fur urther ADO s,p s,panchayat Personnel,Society personnel and input dealers were the cosmopolite source where as friends, neighbours, and village leaders as localite source of farm information. Key Words: Pineapple export zone, Contract farming, Socio-economic status. INTRODUCTION The concept of contract farming has come a long way from such an origin. In the last couple of decades contract farming is viewed as a tool to provide technology, extension service, credit etc. to the farmers. It is perceived as a mutually beneficial arrangement between the firm and the farmers by many national governments and international aid agencies. The new Agricultural Policy of 2000 announced by the Government of India sought to promote growth of private sector participation in agribusiness through contract farming. There are several agricultural and horticultural crops produced in some form of contractual arrangements with the farmers in India. Big corporate houses such as Hindustan Lever, Pepsi Foods, A.V. Thomas, Dabur, Godrej etc. adopted contract farming for many crops apart from several small players. In West Bengal Company like Hindustan Lever Ltd, Reliance India Ltd., ITC, Calypso Bengal Pvt. Ltd. has taken initiative for introducing contract farming. In some part of West Bengal they are gaining confidence of farmers and in some parts yet to achieve this. In North Bengal especially in Siliguri and Utar Dinajpur Calypso Bengal Pvt. Ltd. has undergone several contractual agreements with farmer for crops like pineapple, turmeric etc. Therefore to encourage the contract farming system to improve the economic status of the farming community, it is desirable to assess the existing status of the contract farmers. Accordingly this study was conducted to know the socio economic status of the pineapple contract farmers. MATERIALS AND METHODS The block Phansidewa under Darjeeling district is famous for pineapple cultivation. For this * Corresponding author s e mail and address: atanu_nanda17@yahoo.co.in; VILL: Khoskhana,P.O.:Dimarihut,P.S.: Tamluk,Dist.: Purba Midnapur, West Bengal,PIN:721668
Vol. 46, No. 3, 2012 reason Darjeeling district as well as Phansidewa block was selected purposively. The total sample size was of 50 pineapple growers which was drawn randomly by the researcher during the year 2007-2008.The interview schedule was prepared for the purpose of data collection. The data were collected personally by interviewing the respondents. Simple tabular analysis with frequency and percentage calculation were used to interpret the data. RESULTS TS AND DISCUSSION Socio-economic status of pineapple growers The purpose for selection of this objective was to study the personal characteristics of the pineapple cultivators like age, educational qualification, occupation, holding size, farm power, material possession and social participation and are presented in Table 1. Age: It was found that the majority of 42 percent of pineapple cultivators of Phansidewa block of Darjeeling district were predominantly middle aged. About 30 percent of the pineapple cultivators were old aged i.e. 51 years and above. About 28 percent pineapple cultivators were young i.e. upto 35 years old. Educational: The pineapple cultivators in Phansidewa block were literate. Table 1 shows that category illiterate, can read only and read and write each represents 2 percent. About 34 percent of pineapple cultivators were primary school level passed. Forty six percent had Madhyamik level education and 14 percent were high school level. There were no graduate pineapple cultivators. Occupation: Most of the pineapple cultivator s primary occupation was cultivation as about 96 percent belonged to this category. Most of these farmers major crop were pineapple, Tea etc. Four percent of the pineapple cultivators had secondary occupation like shop owner, tuitions etc. Holding Size: It noted from table 1 that 18 percent of pineapple cultivators were having less than one acre of land. Major portion of the pineapple cultivators were having one to three acre land as about 40 percent belonged to this category. Eighteen percent of the pineapple cultivators had land holding between three to five acres. Another category more than seven acres also represents 18 percent pineapple cultivators. Six percent of the pineapple 257 cultivators had land holding between five to seven acres. Farm Power: Sixty eight percent of the pineapple cultivators had one to two draught animals. About 22 percent of the pineapple cultivators had three to four draught animals. Ten percent of cultivators had five to six draught animals. Material Possession: Almost all the pineapple cultivator possessed both furniture and Television. Table 1 show that 90 percent of the pineapple cultivators had furniture while 92 percent of the pineapple cultivators had a Television set. About 30 percent of the pineapple cultivator possessed two wheeler. Twelve percent of the cultivator had tractor or power tiller for their own ploughing purpose or for others on rent. None of the pineapple cultivators had no bullock cart, improved agricultural implement and car. Social Participation: Table 1 shows that 20 percent of pineapple cultivators were Gram Panchayat members. Eight percent of the pineapple cultivators were members of village co-operatives. Six percent of the pineapple grower took part in Zilla Parishad election. Six percent of the pineapple cultivators were members of Youth Club. Distribution of respondents according to their mass media exposure Radio: It was found that 56 percent of pineapple cultivator never listened radio for any agricultural programme. Forty four percent of pineapple cultivator sometime used to listen radio for agricultural programme. No farmers were in the category most often or often listening of agricultural radio programme. Educational farm: Table 2 shows that 56 percent of pineapple cultivator had never visited to educational farm for any consultation or suggestion. About 44 percent of pineapple cultivator had sometime visited educational farm for seeking any suggestion. Under the category most often and often there was no pineapple cultivators. News paper: Regarding news paper reading it was found that 50 percent of the pineapple cultivator did never study news paper. Forty four percent of the pineapple cultivator sometime read news paper. Only 6 percent of the pineapple cultivator read news
258 INDIAN JOURNAL OF AGRICULTURAL RESEARCH paper often. While there was no pineapple cultivator under category most often. Farm Publication: Table 2 shows that 70 percent of the pineapple cultivators were sometime dependent on farm publication for several information regarding cultivation practices or insect infestation etc. Eighteen percent of pineapple cultivator often used farm publication for information gathering. Twelve percent of farmer never used farm publication. There were no farmers under category most often used farm publication. Poster: Table 2 shows that 70 percent of the pineapple cultivator often viewed poster for obtaining information. There were 28 percent of the pineapple cultivators who sometimes used to use poster for getting information. Only 2 percent of pineapple cultivators never depend on poster. Demonstration: It was found that 56 percent of pineapple cultivation had sometime attended any demonstration programme. About 38 percent of the pineapple cultivator had often attended demonstration or had conducted demonstration in their own field. There were 6 percent pineapple cultivators who never had attended any demonstration programme. There was no pineapple cultivator under the category Most often. Field Trips: Table-2 shows that most of the pineapple cultivators did never attend any field trips as about 82 percent of the pineapple cultivators belonged to this category. Fourteen percent of pineapple cultivators attended some time field trips programme. Four percent of the pineapple cultivators often attended field trips programme. There were no farmers who most often visited field trips programme. TABLE 1: Socio- Economic Status of the Respondents. (N = 50) Age Young (upto 35 years) 14 28 Middle aged (36-50 years) 21 42 Old (51 years and above) 15 30 Education Illiterate 1 2 Can read only 1 2 Read and write 1 2 Primary 17 34 Middle 23 46 High school 7 14 Graduate 00 00 Occupation Primary cultivation 48 96 Secondary others 2 4 Holding size Less than one (1) acre 9 18 One (1) to three (3) acres 20 40 Three (3) to five (5) acres 9 18 Five (5) to seven (7) acres 3 6 More than seven (7) acres 9 18 Farm power One (1) to Two (2) draught animal 34 68 Three (3) to Four (4) draught animals 11 22 Five (5) to Six (6) draught animals 5 10 Material possession Bullock cart 00 00 Furniture 45 90 TV 46 92 Improved agricultural implements 00 00 Car 00 00 Two wheeler 15 30 Tractor/Power tiller 6 12 Social participation Gram Panchayat 10 20 Zilla parishad 04 08 Co-operative 03 06 Youth club 03 06 Other 00 00
Krishi Mela: From the table 2 it was apparent that most of the pineapple cultivators did never visit or attend any Krishi Mela as about 98 percent of the pineapple cultivators belonged to this category. Only 2 percent of the pineapple cultivators had sometime visited the Krishi Mela. Distribution of respondents according to their contact with personal cosmopolite and personal localite source of information: A) Personal cosmopolite: Agricultural Development Officer: Table 3 shows that a considerable percentage of pineapple cultivators never consulted or visited to ADO s office for getting suggestion as about 56 percent of pineapple cultivators belonged to this category. Forty four percent of pineapple cultivators sometime consulted Vol. 46, No. 3, 2012 259 or visited ADO s office. Whereas there were no farmer under category most often and often. Block Development Officer: It was found that 80 percent of the pineapple cultivators had never visited to the BDO s office. 12 percent of the pineapple cultivators sometime visited to the BDO s office. Only 8 percent of the pineapple cultivators had often visited to the BDO s office. There were no farmers who most often visited to BDO s office. Village Level Worker(VLW) or Krishi Prayukti Sahayaks(KPS): Table-3 shows that 98 percent of the pineapple cultivators had never interacted with the VLW or KPS. Only 2 percent of the pineapple cultivators had sometime interacted with VLW. Again there were no farmer who most often and often interacted with VLW Panchayat : It was found that most of the pineapple cultivators were in good contact with TABLE 2: Distribution of respondents according to their mass media exposure. (N = 50) Radio Most often 00 00 Never 28 56 Educational farm Most often 00 00 Never 28 56 News paper Most often 00 00 Often 03 06 Never 25 50 Farm publication Most often 00 00 Often 09 18 Some time 35 70 Never 06 12 Poster Most often 00 00 Often 35 70 Some time 14 28 Never 01 02 Demonstration Most often 00 00 Often 19 38 Some time 28 56 Never 03 06 Field trips Most often 00 00 Often 02 04 Some time 07 14 Never 41 82 Krishi Mela Most often 00 00 Some time 01 02 Never 49 98
260 INDIAN JOURNAL OF AGRICULTURAL RESEARCH TABLE 3: Distribution of respondents according to their personal cosmopolite and personal localite contacts. ( N=50 ) A) Personal cosmopolite ADO Most often 00 00 Never 28 56 BDO Most often 00 00 Often 04 08 Some time 06 12 Never 40 80 VLW Most often 00 00 Some time 01 02 Never 49 98 Panchayat Most often 00 00 Often 46 92 Some time 04 08 Never 00 00 Crop society personnel Most often 00 00 Often 07 14 Some time 20 40 Never 23 46 Bank personnel Most often 00 00 Often 06 12 Some time 04 08 Never 40 80 Input dealers Most often 04 08 Often 46 92 Some time 00 00 Never 00 00 B) Personal localite (N=50) Friends and relatives Most often 00 00 Often 07 14 Some time 39 78 Never 04 08 Neighbour Most often 00 00 Often 36 72 Some time 13 26 Never 01 02 Village leader Most often 00 00 Often 01 02 Some time 26 52 Never 23 46 Farmers outside the villages Most often 00 00 Some time 01 02 Never 49 98 Panchayat Office. 92 percent of the pineapple cultivators had often visited to Panchayat Office. Eight percent of the farmer sometimes visited to the Panchayat Office. It is good that there were no farmers who never interacted with Panchayat. But there were no pineapple cultivators who most often interacted with Panchayat.
Vol. 46, No. 3, 2012 Crop Society Personnel: It was found that 40 percent of the pineapple cultivator had sometime interacted with crop society personnel. Whereas 14 percent of pineapple cultivators often interacted with crop society personnel. A major portion of the pineapple cultivators had never interacted with crop society personnel as about 46 percent belonged to this category. There were no farmers who most often interacted with crop society personnel. Bank Personnel: Table 3 shows that a major portion of 80 percent of the pineapple cultivator had no interaction with bank personnel. Twelve percent of the pineapple cultivator often had interactions with bank personnel because they were provided loans for purchasing power tiller or tractor by banks. Eight percent of the pineapple cultivators had sometime interacted with bank personnel. There were no pineapple cultivators who most often had interacted with bank personnel. Input dealers: It was found that most of the pineapple cultivators often gets suggestion or recommendation from input dealers or shopkeepers. Table3 shows that 92 percent of pineapple cultivator often gets suggestion from input dealers. Only 8 percent of pineapple growers get suggestion most often from input dealers. There were no farmer who never or some time interacted with input dealers. B) Personal localite: Friends and relatives: It was found that a major portion of the pineapple cultivator had some time sought any suggestion from their relatives as about 78 percent of pineapple growers belonged to this category. Fourteen percent of pineapple growers often sought any suggestion or guidance from their relatives or friends. Eight percent of the pineapple growers never sought any suggestion from their friends or relatives. There was no farmer under most often category. Neighbour: Table 3 shows that 72 percent of pineapple growers had often taken help or advice regarding cultivation from their neighbour. Twenty six percent pineapple 261 growers some time took help or advice from their neighbour. Whereas only 2 percent pineapple growers never took any help from their neighbour. There were no pineapple growers under category Most Often. Village leader: Table 3 shows that no pineapple growers had most often taken guidance from the village leader. Only 2 percent pineapple growers took guidance from the village leader. Fifty two percent of the pineapple growers some time used to take guidance from the village leader. Forty six percent of the pineapple cultivators never took any guidance from the village leader. Farmers outside the village: It was found that 98 percent of the pineapple cultivators had never taken any guidance from farmers outside the villages. Two percent of the pineapple growers sometimes took guidance from farmers outside the villages. There were no pineapple growers who most often or often took any suggestion from farmers outside the village. CONCLUSION It was found that pineapple cultivators of Phansidewa block were predominantly middle aged and generally educated as about 42 percent of the cultivators were middle aged and 46 percent had Madhyamik level education. 96 percent of the pineapple cultivator s primary occupation was cultivation and 40 percent of the cultivators were having one to three acres land. Sixty percent of pineapple cultivators hand one to two draught animals whereas nearly 90 percent had television set and furniture. Their social participation was very poor as only 20 percent of them actively take part in election process. It was also noted that the pine apple grower used radio, educational farm, news paper, farm publication and demonstration some time to gain knowledge about their occupation. Further ADO s, Panchayat Personnel, Society personnel and input dealers were the cosmopolite source where as friends, neighbours, and village leaders as localite source of farm information.