Volume 5 Issue 2 Sepember, 2014 179-183 e ISSN-2231-6434 Inernaional Research Journal of Agriculural Economics and Saisics Visi Us - www.researchjournal.co.in DOI : 10.15740/HAS/IRJAES/5.2/179-183 Research Paper Economics of grape producion in Marahwada region of Maharashra sae S.H. KAMBLE, R.A. KOLAMBKAR, R.V. CHAVAN AND S.P. PATIL See end of he paper for auhors affiliaions Correspondence o : R.A. KOLAMBKAR Deparmen of Agriculural Economics, College of Agriculure, Vasanrao Naik Marahwada Krishi Vidyapeeh, PARBHANI (M.S.) INDIA Email: kolambkar.rachana14@gmail. com Paper Hisory : Received : 01.05.2014; Revised : 00.00.2014; Acceped: 00.00.2014 ABSTRACT : Presen sudy was underaken for he year 2011-2012. The popular varieies of grape culivaed by sample growers were Thompson seedless, Tas-A-Ganesh, Sonaka, Manik -chaman, Sharad seedless, and Cheemasahebi, ou of which share of Thompson seedless variey was 60 per cen. The per hecare esablishmen cos of grape orchard was Rs. 3,55,520 ou of which maximum expendiure was made on planaion. Regarding he profiabiliy, grape culivaion was profiable a all cos levels. Benefi-cos raio a cos A, cos B and cos C were 2.45, 1.46 and 1.31, respecively. Financial feasibiliy analysis showed ha, NPW of he projec was 2558845, BCR was 2.37 and IRR 149.37 per cen, which indicaed invesmen made in grape producion was financially highly feasible. The problem faced by sample culivaors in grape producion were non-availabiliy of labour in ime, followed by non-availabiliy of ferilizers, credi and pesicides repored by 100, 94, 90, 74 per cen growers, respecively. KEY WORDS : Grape, Economics, Producion, Feasibiliy HOW TO CITE THIS PAPER : Kamble, S.H., Kolambkar, R.A., Chavan, R.V. and Pail, S.P. (2014). Economics of grape producion in Marahwada region of Maharashra sae. Inerna. Res. J. Agric. Eco. & Sa., 5 (2) : 179-183. INTRODUCTION Many fruis and vegeables are good source for he nuriional securiy. Among hem he Queen of fruis grape is one. In India, grape is known over a long period and has been menioned by subsraa (Aari and Chand, 1997) in heir ancien medicinal reaies. In erms of area under culivaion and producion of grape, Maharashra leads he counry, followed by Karnaaka, Punjab, Andhra Pradesh and Tamil Nadu. In 2008-09, In India grapes occupy he fifh posiion amongs frui crops wih a producion of 1.08 MT from an area of 0.04 Million ha. I is culivaed mainly in Maharashra, Karnaaka, Andhra Pradesh, Tamil Nadu, Madhya Pradesh, Uar Pradesh, Delhi, Punjab, Haryana and Rajashan. Maharashra wih a producion of 0.68 MT followed by Karnaaka and Tamil Nadu. Maharashra conribued more han 63 per cen in he counry's oal producion of grape. Grape (Viis vinefera) is one of he commercially imporan frui crops in India. Grape is one of he mos delicious, refreshing and nourishing fruis rich in minerals, sugars and viamins. Is juice is a simulaing drink for kidneys and is a laxaive. Grape culivaion is widespread hroughou he world and several counries are engaged in grape culivaion. Toal area under grape in he world is esimaed o be abou 77.1 housand ha wih annual producion of 68 MT. China conribued larges share in world grape producion (12.89 %) followed by Ialy (11.60 %), USA (10.10 %), Spain (9.10 %), France (8.71 %) and Turkey (6.34 %) (Source: FAO:2012). In India area under grape culivaion is 1,11,000 ha wih annual producion of abou 1235 housand onnes. The produciviy of grape in India was 11.10 MT /ha during he year 2011-2012 (Source: NHB, 2012). Sharanesh e al., 1977. In India 75 per cen of grape is uilized for able purpose, 20 per cen for raisins, 3 per cen for wine making and 2 per cen for expor (Deshmukh, 2004; Sunderesan and Thanasekaran, 1984).
S.H. KAMBLE, R.A. KOLAMBKAR, R.V. CHAVAN AND S.P. PATIL Maharashra is ranked firs in producion of grapes, Ahmednagar, Nasik, Pune, Solapur, Sangli and Saara disrics are he main grapes growing disrics in Maharasra. Pune has been providing good suppor for he developmen of grapes in he sae. Thompson seedless is he main variey of able grapes being culivaed. In recen years grapes are produced and expored from Osmanabad and Laur disrics of Marahwada region. Since he area under grape culivaion is increasing in Marahwada region in recen years, is profiabiliy and economic viabiliy needs o be esed. In his view, he presen sudy on, economics of grape producion in Marahwada region was underaken. MATERIALS AND METHODS Laur and Osmanabad disrics were seleced purposively, because of maximum area under grape culivaion. The area under grape in Laur and Osmanabad disrics were 643 and 860 hecares, respecively during 2012. Laur disric comprised of 10 ahsils ou of which 6 ahsils were growing grape. On he basis of area, Laur, Ausa and Nilangaahsil were seleced for he sudy. Osmanabad disric comprised of 8 ahils ou of which 5 ahsils were grape growers. On he basis of area, Osmanabad, Tuljapur and Bhoom were seleced for he sudy, i.e. from each disric hree ahsils were seleced and from each ahsil one village was seleced purposively on he basis of highes area under grape producion, from each village 5 sample culivaors were seleced randomly. The oal size of sample consiued 30 farmers. The survey mehod of economic invesigaion was adoped for he work of daa collecion. A specially designed quesionnaire for geing he informaion on cos of culivaion, financial feasibiliy and oher relaed aspecs was used. Tabular analysis comprised of arihmeic means, percenages and raios was used o deermine he cos and reurns of grape culivaion. The financial feasibiliy of invesmen in grape producion was worked ou by using he following echniques: =n B C Ne presen worh = =1 (1+ i) =n B C Inernal rae of reurn = = 0 =1 (1+i) Benefi cos raio =n B =1 (1+ i) = =n C =1 (1+ i) In he mahemaical formulaions, B = benefi in each year, C = cos in each year, = 1, 2, n, n = number of years i = ineres (discoun) rae. RESULTS AND DATA ANALYSIS The resuls obained from he presen invesigaion as well as relevan discussion have been summarized under he following heads : Per hecare esablishmen cos of grape orchard : Per hecare esablishmen cos of grape orchard was esimaed and are presened in Table 1in six broad caegories. I was observed from he Table 1 ha he per ha esablishmen cos of grape orchard was Rs. 3,55,520 of which maximumi.e. 58.99 per cen was planaion cos (which include he cos of bower sysem, bamboo suppor, nursery plans, grafing ec.) followed by he cos of drip sysem and i s insallaion (27.28 %). The iniial cos of manures, ferilizers and micronuriens applied while land preparaion was 6.46 per cen of oal cosi.e. Rs. 23,000, 4.03 per cen (Rs. 14,347) cos of oal esablishmen cos was spen on preparaion of land i.e. ploughing, leveling, bed preparaion ec. while 2.73 per cen (Rs. 9,737) was plan proecion charge and 0.47 per cen (Rs. 1,500) was he cos of growh regulaor. More or less similar resuls were obained by Chauhan and Singh, 1988 in vegeable markeing. Cos and reurn srucure in grape producion : Farmers are conscious of aspec like coss of producion, 180 Table 1 :Per hecare esablishmen cos of grape orchard Sr. No. Name of operaion Cos (Rs.) Percenage 1. Land preparaion 14347 4.03 2. Planaion 209735 58.99 3. Insallaion of drip se 97000 27.28 4. Manures and ferilizers 23000 6.46 5. Plan proecion 9737 2.73 6. Growh regulaor 1701 0.47 Toal 355520 100 Inerna. Res. J. Agric. Eco.& Sa., 5 (2) Sep., 2014 : 179-183
ECONOMICS OF GRAPE PRODUCTION Table 2a : Per hecare cos of culivaion of grapes Sr. No. Pariculars Quaniy Rae (Rs.) Value (Rs.) 1. Hired human labour (Man days) (a) Male 430 150 64500 (14.07) (b) Female 155 100 15500 (3.38) 2. Bullock power (pair days) 1.25 700 875 (0.19) 3. Machine power (hrs.) 180.42 80.60 14541.85 (3.17) 4. Manures (qls.) 187.31 150.4 28171.4 (6.14) 5. Ferilizers (kg) (a) N 145.1 23.3 3380.63 (0.73) (b) P 375.3 27.8 10433.34 (2.27) (c) K 94.1 35.3 3321.73 (0.72) 6. Irrigaion charges - - 7190.71 (1.56) 7. Bioferilizers /micronuriens - - 3615.60 (0.78) 8. Plan proecion charges - - 46318.93 (10.11) 9. Incidenal charges 3537.70 (0.77) 10. Repairs on farm implemen - - 753.37 (0.16) 11. Working capial (1 + 10) - - 202140.50 (44.12) 12. Ineres on working capial (13 %) 26278.26 (5.73) 13. Depreciaion on farm implemens - - 15546.34 (3.39) 14. Land revenue and oher axes - - 445.69 (0.09) 15. Cos A (11 o 14) - - 244410.79 (53.35) 16. Renal value of land - - 1000023.85 (21.83) 17. Ineres on fixed capial (10 %) - - 16750.91 (3.65) 18. Amorizaion cos - - 47596.58 (10.95) 19. Cos (B) (16+17+18 +19) - - 408782.13 (89.23) 20. Family labour (days) (a) Male 145.00 150 21750 (4.74) (b) Female 30.11 100 3011 (0.65) 21. Supervision charges@10% cos A 24554.00 (5.35) 22. Cos C - - 458097.13 (100) Noe: Figures in parenheses indicae he percenages Table 2b : Per hecare profiabiliy of grape producion Sr. No. Pariculars Value (Rs.) 1. Toal cos (Rs.) 458097.13 2. Toal oupu (qls) 171.24 3. Gross income (Rs.) 600143.11 4. Per ql cos of producion 2675.17 5. 6. 7. Cos Cos A 244410.79 Cos B 408782.13 Cos C 458097.13 Income Farm business income 355732.32 Farm labour income 191360.98 Ne income 142045.98 Oupu-inpu raio a cos A 2.45 Oupu-inpu raio a cos B 1.46 Oupu-inpu raio a cos C 1.31 Inerna. Res. J. Agric. Eco.& Sa., 5 (2) Sep., 2014 : 179-183 181
S.H. KAMBLE, R.A. KOLAMBKAR, R.V. CHAVAN AND S.P. PATIL ne profi gained or loss susained by hem and hey ried o minimize he coss in order o maximize he reurns. I was observed from he Table 2a ha he per hecare oal cos of culivaion (cos C) of grape was Rs. 4,58,097.13 in which share of cos A was 53.35 per cen and cos B was 89.23 per cen. In oal cos of culivaion, proporion of working capial was 44.12 per cen i.e. Rs. 2,02,140.50 which was he acual paid ou cos by he farmers. Among he various iems of coss, he share of human labour cos (family + hired) was maximum i.e. 22.84 per cen of oal cos followed by renal value of land (21.83%). Since he exen of mechanizaion was more on seleced farm, he cos of machine power used was 14,541.85 as agains he cos of bullock labour of Rs. 875.00 only. The oal ferilizer cos was Rs.17,135.70 which was 3.72 per cen of oal cos and he charges paid for plan proecion were Rs. 46,318.93 (10.11%) which was one of he major iems of cos C. Anoher major iem of cos was amorized cos i.e. Rs. 47,596.58 which was 10.95 per cen of oal cos. The per share of supervision charges and fixed capial was 5.35 and 3.65 per cen, respecively. Reurn from grape culivaion : The per hecare oal cos, oal produce, reurns and ne profi a various level of cos. i.e. a cos A, cos B and cos C were worked ou and are presened in Table 2b. I can be seen from able ha per hecare average producion of grape was recorded o be 171.24 q. and a gross income of Rs. 600143.11. The oal cos (cos C) required o produce 171.24 qls. of grape was Rs.458097.13 and per quinal cos of grape producion was Rs.2675.17. Profi was also worked ou a various cos levels i.e. cos A, cos B and cos C i.e. farm business income, farm labour income and ne income, respecively. Farm business income i.e. profi a cos A was Rs.3,55,732.22, farm labour income i.e. profi a cos B was 1,91,360.98 and ne income i.e. profi a cos C was Rs.1,42,045.98. The benefi cos raio i.e. raio of gross reurns o oal cos (cos C) was 1.31 which indicaed ha grape producion was on profiable line in he sudy area. Financial feasibiliy in grape producion : Financial feasibiliy in grape producion was esed by discouned measure like ne presen worh (NPW), beneficos raio (BCR) and inernal rae of reurn (IRR) and calculaed and presened in Table 3. I is seen from Table 3 ha NPW of grape producion was Table 3 : Financial feasibiliy of invesmen per hecare in grape garden Pariculars Resuls Ne presen worh (Rs.) 2558845 Inernal rae of reurn (%) 149.88 Benefi cos raio 2.37 Table 4 : Problems in producion of grape culivaion (N = 30) Sr. No. Pariculars No. Percenages 1. Non-availabiliy of ferilizer in ime 28 94 2. Non-availabiliy of labour in ime 30 100 3. High cos of pesicides 22 74 4. High wage rae of labour 28 94 5. Non-availabiliy of adequae credi in ime 6. Inadequae credi supply by he financial in siuaion 27 90 28 94 Rs. 25,58,845 a 14 per cen discoun rae. The NPW means Ne presen worh of he ne cash flows generaed in 15 years, i was posiive, which indicaed ha projec was accepable. Benefi-cos raio was 2.37 a 14 per cen discoun rae which was more han one indicaed projec was highly profiable. IRR from grape producion aciviy was worked ou o 149.88 per cen which was more han ruling rae of ineres of 13 o 14 per cen. Therefore, grape producion aciviy was highly profiable in he seleced area. Gangwar and Singh, 1998 in Nagpur Mandrains; Garg and Azad, 1960 in oranges; Kaur and Singh, 2007 in kinnow; Maan, 1967 in omaoes; Maheshwari, 2009 in fruis and Mohapara, 2001 in onion. Consrains faced by grape growers : I is observed from Table 4 ha he non-availabiliy of labour in ime, non-availabiliy of ferilizer in ime, were major problems faced in producion of grape which were repored by 100 and 94 per cen of grape growers. I was also observed he high cos of pesicides, high wages of labour, non-availabiliy of credi in ime, inadequae credi supply by he financial insiuions were some consrains repored by 74, 94, 90 and 94 per cen of grape growers, respecively. Dhakare (2005) has repored he effeciveness of grape producion under differen vine gromming condiions and Kamble e al. (2007) and Dhakane e al. (2009) and Karpagame al. (2010) repored he consrains in producion and markeing of grapes from Sangali and Solapur disrics of Maharasra, respecively. Conclusion : The per hecare esablishmen cos of grape orchard was Rs. 355520 of which maximum expendiure was made on planaion. Regarding he profiabiliy of grape culivaion crop was found o be profiable a all cos levels. Benefi-cos raio a cos A, cos B and cos C were 2.45, 1.46 and 1.31, respecively. Financial feasibiliy analysis showed ha, NPW of he projec was Rs 2558845, BCR was 2.37 and IRR 149.37 per cen, projec is srongly recommended for coninuaion in fuure. The problem faced by sample culivaors in grape producion were non availabiliy of labour in ime, followed by non-availabiliy 182 Inerna. Res. J. Agric. Eco.& Sa., 5 (2) Sep., 2014 : 179-183
ECONOMICS OF GRAPE PRODUCTION of ferilizers, credi and pesicides repored by 100,94,90, 74 per cen growers, respecively. Auhors affiliaions: S.H. KAMBLE, S.P. PATIL AND R.V. CHAVAN, Deparmen of Agriculural Economics, College of Agriculure, Vasanrao Naik Marahwada Krishi Vidyapeeh, PARBHANI (M.S.) INDIA Email : kamblesh77@gmail.com, chavanrv74@rediffmail.com LITERATURE CITED Aeri, B.R. and Chand, Puran (1997). Producion, consumpion and processing scenario of fruis and vegeables in India. Indian J. Agric. Econ., 52 (3) : 651-652. Chauhan, R.S. and Singh, J.N. (1998). Vegeable markeing sysem in Azamgarh disric of Uar Pradesh. Indian J. Agric. Econ., 53 (3) : 413-414. Deshmukh, S.N. (2004). Producion and markeing managemen of grape in Solapur disric. Thesis, Mahama Phule Krishi Vidhyalaya, Rahuri, AHMEDNAGAR, M.S. (INDIA). Dhakane, I.P. (2005). The effeciveness of grape producion under differen vine growing condiions.world Agric. Econ. & Rural Socio., 23 (6) : 505. Dhakane, S.S., Khalache, P.G. and Gaikwad, J.H. (2009). Consrains in grape producion echnology in Barshi ahsil of Solapur disric, Agric. Updae. 4(1) : 23-25. Gangwar, L.S. and Singh, S. (1998). Price spread and markeing margins for Nagpur Mandarins-A Case Sudy. Indian J. Agric. Econ., 53 (3) : 394. Garg, J.S. and Azad, M.P. (1960). Markeing of oranges a Nagpur marke. Rural India, 2 (7) : 275-278. Kamble, B.H., Jadhav, M.S. and Yadav, D.B. (2007). Consrains in producion and markeing of grapes in Sangali disric of Maharashra. Agric. Econ. Res. Rev., 20 : 595-596. Karpagam, C., Theodore, Kumar Ravi, Palanisamy, S. and Shanhy, Rajula, T. (2010). Grape producion-an Overview.Kisan World, 37 (7) : 43-45. Kaur, H. and Singh, I.P. (2010). Markeing of kinnow in Sri Ganganagar disric of Rajashan Sae. Indian J. Agric. Mkg., 24 (1) : 141-148. Maan, G.S. (1967). Markeing of omaoes in Punjab wih special reference o Ludhiana and Amrisar Markes. M.Sc. Disseraion, Deparmen of Economics and Sociology, Punjab Agriculural Universiy, Ludhiana (PUNJAB) INDIA. Maheshwari, Sumi (2009). Producion and markeing of fruis: A case sudy of Bahinda Disric. M.Phil Disseraion, Deparmen of Economics, Punjabi Universiy, Paiala (PUNJAB) INDIA. Mohapara, S.C. (2001). Producion and markeing of onion in Bolangir disric of Orissa. Bihar J. Agric. Mkg., 9 (2) : 211-214. Sharanesh S.H, Hiremah, G.K., Deshpande, S.V. and Gumgolmah, K.C. (1997). Economic feasibiliy of grape culivaion in Bijapur disric of Karnaaka, Agric. Banker., 20 (1) : 16-20. Sunderesan, R.M. and Thanasekaran (1984). Producion and markeing of grapes in Madurai disric. Indian J. Mkg., 14(1) : 26-29. 5 h Year of Excellence Inerna. Res. J. Agric. Eco.& Sa., 5 (2) Sep., 2014 : 179-183 183