Impact of Hybrid Rice Cultivation on Production in Tamil Nadu
Assistant Professor, Department of Economics, Guru Nanak College, Chennai 600042, India
Professor and Head, Department of Economics and Director i/c, Agro Economic Research Centre,
University of Madras, Chennai 600005, India
ABSTRACT:
This study explored new varieties of Hybrid rice and its impact on overall production and productivity in Tamil Nadu. The study has been collected from two districts namely Nagapattinam and Tiruvarur of Tamil Nadu. The districts are harvesting relatively higher concentration of hybrid rice cultivation within the group of National Food Security Mission districts in Tamil Nadu. In each of the districts of Nagapattinam and Tiruvarur, two representative blocks namely Kuttalam, Mayladuthurai, Needmangalam and Valangaiman are taken respectively and within each block two villages are selected. After introduction of hybrid rice technology since 1994, there has been slow development in that technology in Tamil Nadu, mainly because of the unawareness of the benefits of the hybrid rice and the farmers mainly used the HYVs because of cost-effectiveness. Even after two decades, the hybrid rice technology did not spread all over Tamil Nadu due to lukewarm policy of the government, unfamiliarity with the technology and high cost of cultivation and shortage of labour force. Therefore, the farmers did not shift their cropping pattern from HYVs into hybrid rice technology.
KEYWORDS: Hybrid rice cultivation– HYV rice growers, Productivity, Tamil Nadu.
INTRODUCTION:
India has a large agrarian economy with majority of its rural population subsisting on farming activities. Over the decades since independence, the Government of India has made concerted efforts to improve the lot of the farmers. By the mid-sixties, it was realized that for India to achieve self-sufficiency in foodgrains, there was no alternative to technological change in the agricultural sector. The spread of HYV technology resulting in the Green Revolution in India in the last few decades and achievement of self-sufficiency in food-grains represent a success story for science and technology sector.
The most widely debated issue about the Green Revolution was the growing disparities in income between the different regions and the different classes of farmers. This was observed in the early phase of the Green Revolution i.e., until about the mid-seventies. These trends however, got reversed after mid-seventies which are typical of a diffusion process characterized by the spread of Green Revolution to new areas, and the increasing adoption of new technology by small farmers. Indeed, the achievements in agricultural production so far do not fully reflect the strength of our agricultural research system to meet the specific requirements of Indian agriculture in diverse agro-climatic conditions. The gains from the Green Revolution have so far been limited largely to wheat and rice grown more or less in homogenous tracts- both agro-climatically and socio-economically-served with assured sources of irrigation.
The achievements so far in respect of raising yields and reducing variability in the unfavorable agro-climatic regions are not comparable with those realized from the favourable environments. The limited spread of the Green Revolution can be explained partly by the nature of available technology itself and partly by the uneven development of infrastructure, physical and institutional, which is a pre-requisite for the adoption of improved practices. Against such a background, it is necessary to examine the needed changes in agricultural research strategy to boost up agricultural production in the light of emerging agro-climatic and socio-economic challenges. Redressal of crop regional imbalances in growth, imparting stability to agricultural output and bringing the benefits of agricultural research technology to the resource poor farmers are the three major concerns. All these had necessitated widening the base of research involving evolution of high yielding seeds incorporating multiple resistances to the biotic (insects and diseases) and abiotic stresses like drought, rain-fed upland, saline/alkaline soil conditions to cover a large number of crops grown under diverse agro-climatic conditions. Rice being the dominant staple food for millions of people in the country, agricultural scientists and policy makers are constantly making efforts to find solutions to various production problems through technology development. The research scientists considered hybrid rice technology as a readily available option to shift the yield frontier upward in the face of declining trend of the yield potential of the existing varieties. It was projected that hybrid rice technology was about another rice revolution in the country. However, although a number of varieties of hybrid rice are released by the Government, the extent of adoption of hybrid rice varieties in the country is too meager to make an impact on rice production. Against this backdrop, the present study is conceptualized and undertaken at the instance of the Directorate of Economics and Statistics, Ministry of Agriculture, Government of India with a view to assessing the actual spread of hybrid rice varieties replacing the conventional HYVs to make an overall impact of rice production.
Rice is the most important cereal crop in India in terms of area occupied, production and consumption as a principal food and thus occupies a prominent place in Indian agriculture. India produced 99.18 million tonnes of rice (2008-09). It is cultivated over an area of 45.54 million hectares which account for 23.25 percent of the gross cropped area and 37.08 percent of the area sown to foodgrain. Rice production contributes 42.3 percent of the total foodgrains production in the country. It increased to 104.32 MT in 2011-12.
Over the last four decades, the country witnessed an impressive growth in rice production due to the adoption of semi-dwarf high yielding varieties coupled with the adoption of intensive input-based management practices. However, in recent years, the growth in production has decelerated from 4 percent during 1980s to 1.7 percent during 1990s. This deceleration is largely on account of slowing down in the growth of yield from 3.6 percent during the 1980s to 1.3 percent during the 1990s. Plateauing trend in the yield of HYVs, declining and degrading natural resources like land and water and acute shortage of labour make the task of increasing rice production quite challenging. The current situation necessitates looking for some innovative technologies to boost rice production.
After six decades, the agricultural sector development is a challenging one in India. Especially, food production has to be increased to meet the demand for food of the growing population of the country. But in reality, operational holdings of the farm land are declining on the one hand and population is increasing on the other hand in India. A majority of the people consumed rice, but the conventional high yielding varieties of rice could not increase production. Therefore, we need the new rice varieties of rice could not increase production. Therefore, we need new rice varieties to meet the consumption needs of the growing population in future.
The spread of the newer hybrid varieties replacing the older one is essential for the growth of the economy and population growth of the country; otherwise it will affect the whole economic system. This will help to break the yield plateau that we have been experiencing in rice crop in the recent past and to increase the production and productivity of rice. The Union and State Governments have given high priority to the development of agricultural sector in India. In 2013, the Union Government has passed Food Security Bill in the Parliament. Therefore, it has become absolutely essential to introduce new rice varieties. Nearly 46 new hybrid varieties of rice have been introduced for increasing the foodgrain production. A number of steps like Frontline Demonstration and Minikit supply are being taken up by the Government to popularize these varieties. Therefore, there is need to conduct a study to evaluate the spread of new hybrid varieties of rice in terms of area and production in Tamil Nadu.
1. To indicate the extent of adoption and the level of participation by the different categories of farmers in the cultivation of hybrid rice. To assesses the overall impact of hybrid rice cultivation on rice production and productivity in Tamil Nadu.
2. To study the economics of cultivation of hybrid rice varieties versus HYVs in Tamil Nadu. To identify factors determining the adoption of hybrid rice varieties in Tamil Nadu.
3. To address various constraints and outline the prospects for increasing hybrid rice cultivation; and to suggest policy measures for expansion of hybrid rice cultivation.
The first hybrid rice varieties were introduced in Andhra Pradesh in 1994 and till now 59 varieties have been released from public and private sectors. During 2011, area cultivated under hybrid rice was 2.0 million ha; the share of hybrid rice in total rice cultivation area was 4.54 percent in 2011; it is expected to cover 3 to 5 million ha. during the next five years. More than 20 private seed companies are involved in the hybrid research activities. Nearly 95 percent of the hybrid seeds are produced by the private sector in the country. By cultivation of hybrid rice, farmers are obtaining an additional yield advantage of 1-2 t/ha., the additional net profit being in the range of Rs. 3,000-5,000 per ha. In hybrid rice seed production, seed yields of around 2.0 t/ha. are obtained with a net profit of Rs. 25,000 to Rs. 30,000/- per ha. for the seed growers.
DATA BASE AND RESEARCH METHODOLOGY:
The data for the study has been collected from primary and secondary sources in Tamil Nadu. The secondary data obtained from Government of Tamil Nadu publications relating to area, production and productivity of rice has been used to arrive at the trends in area, production and productivity. For the sake of comparison, it is usual to compare the performance of rice in the pre-introduction period of hybrid rice with that in post-introduction period as a whole. In India, the first hybrid varieties were introduced, developed and realized for commercial cultivation in 1994. Therefore, to analyse the growth trends of hybrid and HYV rice, the study is divided into three periods: 1984-85 to 1993-94, 1994-95 to 2003-04 and 2004-05 to 2009-10. The first period (1984-85 to 1993-94) refers to the pre-introduction period of hybrid rice while the second (1994-95 to 2003-04) and third periods (2004-05 to 2009-10) are post-introduction periods. Besides, official data regarding the activities like Frontline Demonstrations, Minikit Supply and organizing training programme undertaken by the government to popularize hybrid varieties are analyzed in the study area of Tamil Nadu.
Primary data has been collected from two districts namely Nagapattinam and Tiruvarur of Tamil Nadu. The two districts are having relatively higher concentration of hybrid rice cultivation within the group of National Food Security Mission districts chosen for the present study in Tamil Nadu. In each of the districts of Nagapattinam and Tiruvarur, two representative blocks namely Kuttalam, Mayladuthurai, Needamangalam and Valangaiman are taken respectively and within each block two villages are selected (Table:1). In each village, a complete list of cultivating households including SC, ST and women farmers growing hybrid rice and HYV has been prepared and stratified according to four land size groups such as marginal (less than 1 hectare), small (1 to 2 hectares), medium (2 to 4 hectares) and large (more than 4 hectares). In each district, 40 hybrid rice growers from the list of hybrid rice growing cultivators are drawn at random from household farmers with different land sizes on the basis of their proportion in the universe. In addition to the above sample, conventional 10 HYV rice growers but non-adopters of hybrid rice are selected randomly from households with different land sizes amongst HYV rice growing cultivators following the same method. Thus, altogether, 50 rice growing cultivators are selected from each district (Tiruvarur and Nagapattinam). In all, 100 rice growing cultivators among two districts form the selected sample size in the study.
For the primary survey, the reference years are 2009-10 and 2010-11. Accordingly, two kharif seasons and two rabi seasons for the rice crop are covered in the study. Primary data is obtained by administering a structured schedule. The random sample methods adopted at the district, block and village level for the primary survey are given in Table 1. It can be observed that the majority of the farmers fall in the small farmers’ category (35 percent) and large farmers (29 percent).
Table: 1. Sample Distribution of Nagapattinam and Thiruvarur Districts of Tamil Nadu
Village Name |
Marginal Farm |
Small Farm |
Medium Farm |
Large Farm |
Total No. of Farms |
Nagapattinam District Kuttalam Block |
|||||
1.Palaiyur |
6 |
- |
3 |
3 |
12 |
2.Kokur |
- |
6 |
3 |
4 |
13 |
Myladuturai Block |
|||||
3. Maraiyur |
1 |
6 |
4 |
2 |
13 |
4.Uluthukuppai |
1 |
6 |
4 |
1 |
12 |
Thiruvarur District Needamangalam Block |
|||||
5. Needamangalam |
- |
6 |
2 |
5 |
13 |
6. Vaikalathur |
2 |
5 |
3 |
2 |
12 |
Valangaiman Block |
|||||
7. Alangudi |
1 |
3 |
3 |
6 |
13 |
8.Ayyathur |
2 |
3 |
1 |
6 |
12 |
Total Samples |
13 |
35 |
23 |
29 |
100 |
Nagapattinam |
8 |
18 |
14 |
10 |
50 |
Thiruvarur |
5 |
17 |
9 |
19 |
50 |
Total Samples |
13 |
35 |
23 |
29 |
100 |
Source: Field Survey
The percentage of farmers in medium and marginal size is 23 percent and 13 percent respectively. About 100 sample households have been chosen from eight villages in the four blocks of Nagapattinam and Thiruvarur districts of Tamil Nadu at the rate of two villages in a block and two blocks from each district on the basis of official list. From each village, 20 sample farmers and 5 sample farmers are selected based on hybrid adopters and non-adopters basis respectively based on the official list in a particular village.
Log-Linear Model:
A simple tabular analysis is followed to analyze the farm level data in ascertaining the farm level spread and impact of hybrid rice technology. In order to identify the factors affecting the yield of rice, yield response function separately for hybrid and HYV rice is estimated using Log Linear Models. Several explanatory variables are regressed upon the dependent variable yield per hectare of rice. The explanatory variables include seed (Kg./Ha.), manure (Rs./Ha.), fertilizer (Rs./Ha.), irrigation (number of irrigation/ha), human labour (man days/ ha.), mechanized labour (Hrs./Ha.) and plant protection chemicals (Rs./Ha.). In finding out the determinants of participation in hybrid rice cultivation, suitable statistical technique is employed. For Secondary data obtained from the Government of Tamil Nadu official publications, the equation of the exponential curve is used to measure the growth in area, production and productivity of the rice crop. Besides, for measuring the instability in crop production, the co-efficient of variation technique is used.
The present paper is divided into five sections. The first section is deals with introduction about importance of Hybrid rice cultivation. Second section describes with data and methodology. Third section explains with section III.
Trend and Composition of HYV Rice and Hybrid Rice in Tamil Nadu:
Tamil Nadu occupied the fifth place in terms of rice production in India. Rice is the staple food occupying 33 percent of the gross area sown. Of the total rice area, 93 percent is irrigated and balance is under rainfed lands mostly under semi-dry conditions. Rice is cultivated in 19.32 L. ha and production was expected to increase from 66.11 L.MT in 2006-07 to 75.96 L.MT in 2011-12. The average yield of rice increased from 3423 kg./ ha. to 3746 kg./ha. during the same period.
In Tamil Nadu, an innovative method called System of Rice Intensification (SRI) technology was introduced in 2007-08. The government has taken steps to the popularize the technology and for its adoption over a larger area in Tamil Nadu. The area under SRI paddy cultivation expanded to 24 percent (4.21 L. Ha.) of the total paddy area of 17.89 L. Ha. during 2007-08. When compared with conventional method, SRI rice productivity increased by 66 percent (4051 kg./ha.). The basic objective of the SRI scheme is to increase rice production in districts and to expand area under the SRI and to improve the productivity in the state. National Food Security Mission (NFSM) is being implemented in Nagapattinam, Tiruvarur, Pudukottai, Ramanathapuram and Sivagangai districts. Implementation of Seed Multiplication /Seed Village schemes has resulted in increased seed replacement rate to 68 percent against 33 percent norm fixed by the Government of India.
The trend and composition of total rice cultivation in Tamil Nadu by three notified seasons from 1985-86 to 2011-12 are presented in the Table.2.2. The Table gives details of rice cultivation in three different periods of time; a) first period from 1985-86 to 1993-94 represents the pre-hybrid rice period, b) the second period from 1994-95 to 2003-04 is the post-hybrid rice period and c) the third period from 2004-05 to 2011-12 is the second post-hybrid rice period.
The area under rice cultivation expanded from 16.96 lakh ha. (74.91 percent) to 17.55 lakh ha. (76.12 percent) during pre-hybrid rice period for winter season. The area declined to 14.37 lakh ha. during post-hybrid rice period upto 2003-04 and again increased to 14.44 lakh ha. during second post- hybrid period upto 2011-12. The area declined to 2.52 lakh ha. during three decades due to urbanization, real estate and non-cultivable area in Tamil Nadu. The production of rice increased from 38.91 lakh tonnes to 50.14 lakh tonnes during pre-hybrid period. During post-hybrid period, rice production declined to 36.28 lakh tonnes but increased to 83.88 lakh tonnes in 2011-12. Production of rice increased by 44.97 lakh tonnes during three decades due to increase in yield of rice, advanced technology used in the cultivation and favourable monsoon.
The top rice producing states like West Bengal (15.80 percent), Andhra Pradesh (12.71 percent), Uttar Pradesh (11.91 percent), Punjab (10.86 percent), Odisha (7.31 percent), Tamil Nadu (7.08 percent) and Chhattisgarh (5.40) produce both high yielding varieties and local varieties. In Tamil Nadu, there is still marginal food deficit. The demand for rice is expected to increase but at the present growth rate of yield of HYV varieties and inbred varieties it may not be able to meet the future demand. Tamil Nadu farmers did not adopt hybrid rice varieties in a big way during the first two decades; there was not much improvement until 2004 but since then farmers have been adopting hybrid rice cultivation in a small way and all districts are not yet covered.
Table 2: Trend and Composition of HYV Rice in Tamil Nadu: 1995-96 to 2009-10 (Area in Ha.)
Period of Study |
Autumn / Kuruvai |
Winter / Samba |
Summer / Kodai |
All Seasons |
1995-96 |
277270 (97.16) |
1382210 (93.35) |
181947 (98.57) |
1841427 (94.40) |
1996-97 |
246081 (95.88) |
1545261 (93.50) |
255810 (96.80) |
2047152 (94.18) |
1997-98 |
275913 (95.82) |
1610394 (94.97) |
269002 (97.16) |
2155309 (95.34) |
1998-99 |
296972 (96.95) |
1615028 (94.47) |
253232 (97.72) |
2165232 (95.18) |
1999-2000 |
309195 (98.02) |
1487905 (94.82) |
190922 (97.71) |
1988022 (95.58) |
2000-01 |
306899 (98.63) |
1388972 (96.93) |
192650 (99.65) |
1888521 (97.47) |
2001-02 |
306366 (99.63) |
1364151 (99.35) |
240251 (99.90) |
1910768 (99.46) |
2002-03 |
182568 (98.72) |
1132911 (94.05) |
127022 (99.96) |
1442501 (95.12) |
2003-04 |
138841 (98.73) |
1078727 (94.88) |
118369 (99.37) |
1335937 (95.65) |
2004-05 |
302361 (99.27) |
1401318 (97.46) |
128163 (98.27) |
1831842 (97.81) |
2005-06 |
319967 (99.41) |
1453005 (94.88) |
196506 (99.64) |
1969478 (96.05) |
2006-07 |
354991 (98.32) |
1317492 (90.74) |
115968 (98.00) |
1788451 (92.60) |
2007-08 |
290701 (98.45) |
1251437 (90.98) |
116534 (98.44) |
1658672 (92.71) |
2008-09 |
340150 (98.59) |
1325410 (91.96) |
143795 (98.97) |
1809355 (93.67) |
2009-10 |
277533 (97.56) |
1328260 (92.00) |
115449 (98.36) |
1721242 (93.26) |
Source: Directorate of Economics and Statistics, Government of Tamil Nadu, Chennai-18.
Note: Figures in Parenthesis are the Percentages of respective Area of High Yielding Varieties of Rice Crop
Table 2 shows the trend and composition of area of HYV rice in Tamil Nadu during 1995-96 to 2009-10. The farmers generally used both high yielding and local varieties of rice in Tamil Nadu. They used the HYV seeds during three seasons. The area under HYV cultivation declined from 98.57 percent in 1994-95 to 98.36 percent in 2009-10 but during the period 2000-01 to 2003-04 and 2005-06, the area under HYV cultivation was cent percent during the summer season. The local varieties used by the farmers covered a small percentage of land, which increased from 1.43 percent to 1.64 percent during the study period.
The area under rice expanded from 97.16 percent in 1994-95 to 97.56 percent in 2009-10 during autumn season. During 2001-02, 2004-05 and 2005-06 periods, there was cent percent coverage of land under HYV seeds. During winter season, the farmers used the HYV seeds, but the area declined from 93.35 percent in 1994-95 to 92.0 percent in 2009-10. That is because local varieties are mostly used in that season and the area increased to 8.0 percent in 2009-10 from 6.65 percent in 1994-95. The aggregate area declined from 94.40 percent in 1994-95 to 93.26 percent in 2009-10. The remaining area was occupied by local varieties of rice, which increased from 5.60 percent to 6.74 percent during the same period. This implies that majority of the farmers of Tamil Nadu preferred HYV seeds irrespective of the seasons due to the higher yield of rice, short duration of crop, low cost of cultivation and government support to the farmers. Only a very small percentage of the farmers used the local varieties of seed in the farm because of low production, long duration of crop and lack of subsidy. It may be noted that a majority of the farmers used the HYV technology during summer and autumn seasons than in winter season. But winter season accounted for the largest area under rice cultivation and the highest production of rice. The majority of the farmers used the high yielding varieties of rice instead of local varieties due to higher production and short duration of crop.
Trend and Composition of Hybrid Rice in Tamil Nadu
Hybrid rice has increased significantly in the past two decades in India. The area under hybrid rice has increased more than 28 times during the last two decades. The area under rice cultivation has registered an impressive growth. Considering the entire period, the increase in hybrid rice area is largely due to serious efforts of the Centres and State Governments in the field. During the last two decades, area under hybrid rice increased from 0.12 percent in 1996 to 3.2 percent of gross rice area in 2008 (Janaiah and Xie, 2010).
In India, the hybrid rice cultivation is not practised in all the states more or less in an equal manner due to farmers’ lack of interest in adopting the hybrid varieties in rice cultivation, lack of coordination and tardy implementation of schemes. There are wide variations in adopting the hybrid rice cultivation in India. When we look at different states, we find that more than 80 percent of the eastern states have adopted hybrid technology but only 15 percent of northern states and 5 percent of the southern states adopted the technology respectively. Currently more than 80 percent of the total hybrid rice area is in states like Uttar Pradesh, Jharkhand, Bihar, Chhattisgarh, Madhya Pradesh, Assam, Punjab and Haryana (Viraktamat, 2010).
In India, Andhra Pradesh adopted the hybrid technology in 1994. Before that even top rice producing states did not adopt hybrid rice cultivation mostly due to technical problems. Some of the eastern states were a little better than other states in this regard. But in Tamil Nadu the exercise was a different one, because during the period from 1995 to 2005, there was no extension of area in many districts. The evidence shows that there is no unique nature of area extended under hybrid rice. Hybrid rice was not cultivated even in 5 percent of the area during two decades.
In Tamil Nadu, the development of hybrid rice technology was adopted with the initiatives made by ICAE, United National Development Programme (UNDP), Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) and International Rice Research Institute (IRRI) during 1990s. Tamil Nadu Agricultural University released three hybrid rice varieties namely CORH, CORH 1, and CORH 2. The DRR Research study (1996, 99) indicated that the productivity of hybrid rice was 6 to 6.5 tonnes/ha. It is 15-20 percent higher than the yield of HYV. However, in Tamil Nadu, productivity estimates of farmers who adopted hybrid rice for cultivation along with conventional HYVs show similar trends, but with increased production loss for hybrid rice cultivation during 1994 and 1997 (Janaiah, 2000, Hossain 2001).
The area covered under hybrid rice cultivation in Tamil Nadu during 2006-07 to 2011-12 is presented in the Table: 2.4. The percentage share of area under hybrid rice cultivation in total area of rice in Tamil Nadu increased to 0.59 percent in 2011-12 against 0.06 percent in 2006-07. That shows the area under hybrid rice cultivation expanded by 0.53 percent between 2006-07 to 2011-12. It also means in a way that the state has not evinced much interest in hybrid rice technology. Tamil Nadu had only less than one percent of total area under hybrid rice cultivation compared to all-India percentage of 3.5 percent. From the observation, it may be noted that the state could not adopt the hybrid rice technology even after two decades. The technology did not spread to many districts of Tamil Nadu in a big way.
The area expanded under hybrid rice cultivation was only 0.01 percent: Thiruvarur (265 ha.), Kancheepuram (248 ha.), Theni (173 ha.), Thanjavur (116 ha.) and Perambalur (100 ha.). The percentage share of hybrid rice in total area under rice recorded the highest percentage (0.28 percent) in Thiruvarur (5330 ha.), followed by Theni (1618 ha.) with 0.08 percent and Pudukkottai (1494 ha.) with 0.08 percent, Cuddalore (1250 ha) with 0.07 percent during 2011-12.
The lowest share was recorded by Erode (4.38 ha.) at 0.0002 percent. Districts like Kancheepuram, Perambalur and Thanjavur stopped cultivating hybrid rice during 2011-12 period.
Table 3: Area covered under Hybrid Rice Cultivation in Tamil Nadu during 2006-07 to 2011-12 (Area in Hectares)
Name of the District |
2006-07 |
2007-8 |
2008-09 |
2009-10 |
2010-11 |
2011-12 |
||||||
Actual |
Percent |
Actual |
Percent |
Actual |
Percent |
Actual |
Percent |
Actual |
Percent |
Actual |
Percent |
|
Kancheepuram |
248 |
0.01 |
361 |
0.02 |
523 |
0.03 |
- |
- |
- |
- |
- |
- |
Thiruvallur |
- |
- |
- |
- |
- |
- |
- |
- |
- |
- |
- |
- |
Cuddalore |
10 |
0.001 |
120 |
0.01 |
210 |
0.01 |
0 |
0.00 |
1600 |
0.08 |
1250 |
0.07 |
Villupuram |
- |
- |
- |
- |
50 |
0.003 |
21 |
0.001 |
- |
- |
- |
- |
Vellore |
48 |
0.002 |
64 |
0.004 |
102 |
0.01 |
- |
- |
- |
- |
- |
- |
T.V.Malai |
- |
- |
- |
- |
50 |
0.003 |
77 |
0.004 |
1002 |
0.05 |
- |
- |
Salem |
70 |
0.004 |
150 |
0.01 |
200 |
0.01 |
155 |
0.01 |
155 |
0.01 |
- |
- |
Namakkal |
46 |
0.002 |
58 |
0.003 |
150 |
0.01 |
- |
- |
- |
- |
- |
- |
Dharmapuri |
5 |
0.0003 |
- |
- |
40 |
0.002 |
100 |
0.01 |
- |
- |
- |
- |
Krishnagiri |
- |
- |
- |
- |
- |
- |
55 |
0.003 |
- |
- |
- |
- |
Coimbatore |
- |
- |
- |
- |
50 |
0.003 |
- |
- |
- |
- |
230 |
0.01 |
Erode |
- |
- |
- |
- |
120 |
0.01 |
32 |
0.002 |
- |
- |
4.38 |
0.0002 |
Trichy |
- |
- |
- |
- |
20 |
0.001 |
- |
- |
- |
- |
- |
- |
Perambalur |
100 |
0.01 |
- |
- |
250 |
0.01 |
- |
- |
- |
- |
- |
- |
Karur |
- |
- |
- |
- |
- |
- |
- |
- |
- |
- |
- |
- |
Pudukkottai |
20 |
0.001 |
120 |
0.01 |
615 |
0.03 |
566 |
0.03 |
480 |
0.03 |
1494 |
0.08 |
Thanjavur |
116 |
0.01 |
- |
- |
125 |
0.01 |
25 |
0.001 |
- |
- |
- |
- |
Nagapattinam |
- |
- |
20 |
0.001 |
1250 |
0.06 |
1500 |
0.08 |
- |
- |
247.75 |
0.01 |
Thiruvarur |
265 |
0.01 |
410 |
0.02 |
675 |
0.03 |
785 |
0.04 |
- |
- |
5330 |
0.28 |
Madurai |
- |
- |
20 |
0.00 |
20 |
0.001 |
- |
- |
- |
- |
- |
- |
Theni |
173 |
0.01 |
579 |
0.03 |
625 |
0.03 |
4840 |
0.26 |
- |
- |
1618 |
0.08 |
Dindigul |
- |
- |
- |
- |
- |
- |
- |
- |
- |
- |
- |
- |
Ramnad |
- |
- |
50 |
0.003 |
110 |
0.01 |
50 |
0.003 |
90 |
0.005 |
129 |
0.01 |
Sivaganga |
- |
- |
50 |
0.003 |
160 |
0.01 |
750 |
0.04 |
- |
- |
280 |
0.01 |
Virudunagar |
- |
- |
- |
- |
20 |
0.001 |
- |
- |
- |
- |
- |
- |
Tirunelveli |
- |
- |
- |
- |
280 |
0.01 |
- |
- |
- |
- |
- |
- |
Toothukudi |
- |
- |
- |
- |
80 |
0.004 |
- |
- |
- |
- |
709 |
0.04 |
Kanyakumari |
- |
- |
- |
- |
- |
- |
- |
- |
- |
- |
- |
- |
Area under Hybrid Rice in Tamil Nadu |
1101 |
0.06 |
2002 |
0.11 |
5725 |
0.30 |
8956 |
0.49 |
3327 |
0.17 |
11292.13 |
0.59 |
Total Area under Rice in Tamil Nadu |
1931397 |
100.00 |
1789170 |
100 |
1931603 |
100 |
1845553 |
100 |
1905726 |
100 |
1903772 |
100 |
Source: Directorate of Economics and Statistics, Government of Tamil Nadu, Chennai-18
Table 4: Average Yield Rate of Hybrid Rice and HYVs Rice
Farm Size (Ha) |
2009-10 |
2010-11 |
||||
Average Yield (kg./ha.) |
Change in Percent |
Average Yield (kg./ha.) |
Change in Percent |
|||
Hybrid |
HYVs |
Hybrid |
HYVs |
|||
Marginal Farm |
6975.46 |
5607.76 |
24.37 |
7104.17 |
5856.21 |
21.32 |
Small Farm |
7059.91 |
5588.96 |
26.32 |
7140.09 |
5835.63 |
22.34 |
Medium Farm |
6890.00 |
5544.66 |
19.52 |
7079.55 |
5825.65 |
21.52 |
Large Farm |
7012.05 |
5613.27 |
24.92 |
7110.66 |
5881.61 |
20.89 |
All Sizes |
7020.61 |
5614.67 |
25.04 |
7133.06 |
5872.42 |
21.48 |
Source: Field Survey.
The above empirical evidence shows that many districts adopted hybrid rice varieties only to a small extent. Even today some of the districts in Tamil Nadu like Thiruvallur, Karur, Dindugal, and Kanniyakumari did not adopt the hybrid rice technology, mainly because of lack of awareness among the farmers, small amount of availability hybrid seeds, technical problems, and high cost of cultivation and absence of enthusiasm from government side.
1 Productivity Performance of Hybrid Rice and HYV Rice:
It is the discretion of the farmers either to adopt hybrid rice cultivation or to follow conventional HYV rice cultivation. Any new technology in the crop yield can generate additional profit to the farmers through (a) the change in the crop yield (b) the change in the price of the product and (c) the change in the cost of cultivation. The yield performance of hybrid rice and HYV rice cultivation by the sample households in the study areas of Tamil Nadu during 2009-10 and 2010-11 is presented in Table 4.
The average yield rate of hybrid rice adopters is better than HYV rice cultivators during 2009-10 and 2010-11. It is found to be 7021 kg./ha. And for HYV rice adopters, it is 5615 kg./ha. This shows that the hybrid rice adopters have achieved 25.04 percent additional yield rate over the high yielding rice adopters during 2009-10. During 2010-11, the hybrid rice adopters have recorded high yield of 7133 kg./ha. than high yielding rice cultivators (5872 kg./ha). It is interesting to note from the table that the average hybrid rice yield rate had increased (21.48 percent) significantly over the high yielding rice varieties during 2010-11. But, it should be mentioned here that the average yield rate of hybrid rice has declined marginally from 25.04 percent to 21.48 percent.
The yield performance of hybrid rice improved from 7021 kg./ha. in 2009-10 to 7133 kg./ha. in 2010-11. In the same way, yield performance of high yielding rice varieties also increased from 5615 kg./ha. to 5872 kg./ha. Among different farm households, hybrid rice yield was better than high yielding rice varieties in both the years. The small and large size of sample farmers has obtained the highest yield among hybrid rice adopters in both the years. The large and the marginal farmers obtained the highest yield among high yielding rice cultivators in both the years.
2 Changes in Productivity:
A comparative analysis of hybrid rice and HYV rice cultivation is done in the study. Some studies found that the average yield rate of hybrid rice is better than HYV rice in China, whereas it is the other way round in the sample area because of soil and climatic conditions in India.
3 Factors Affecting Productivity:
In order to understand the factors that affect productivity of hybrid and high yielding rice varieties in the sample districts, the study used log-linear method. The Log-linear model is fitted to identify the factors affecting productivity of hybrid and high yielding rice cultivation.
Table 5: Productivity Response Function for Hybrid Rice- Log Linear Estimates
Variable |
Coefficient ‘b’ |
Standard Error |
‘t’ Ratios |
Seeds |
0.72 |
4.83 |
0.15 |
Manure |
0.01 |
0.01 |
1.21 |
Fertilizer |
-0.005 |
0.10 |
-0.05 |
Irrigation |
-4.99 |
5.07 |
-0.99 |
Human Labour |
0.37 |
0.47 |
0.78 |
Mechanized Labour |
0.07 |
2.55 |
0.03 |
Pesticides |
-1.78 |
5.52 |
-0.32 |
Constant |
3.29 |
68.44 |
0.05 |
R2 |
0.15 |
|
|
Source: Field Survey.
The log-linear estimation results are furnished in Table 5. It is found from the analysis that there is a significant relationship between manure, seeds, human and mechanized labour and they are positively related with productivity of hybrid rice cultivation. The variables like seed, manure, human labour and mechanized labour are very supportive to the farmers for cultivation of hybrid rice in the study area. Seeds are one of the main deciding factors in the hybrid rice production. Supplying seeds at zero cost is very effective and welcomed by the farmers in both the study areas.
Ironically, it is found from the results that other variables such as fertilizers, irrigation, and pesticides are negatively related to the production of hybrid rice cultivation. It is noted from the results that the fertilizers and pesticides are not available to the farmers as required for cultivation. Irrigation is also one of the main factors in determining the production and scarcity of water affects the agricultural production severely. The farmers have reported that majority of the wells in the study area are contaminated by salt content. Therefore, the production of paddy is badly affected, and declined. The authorities may have to take measures to rectify the problems.
Table 6: Productivity Response Function for High Yielding Rice-Log Linear Estimates (For Hybrid Adopters only)
Variables |
Coefficient of B |
Standard Error |
t |
Constant |
2571.48 |
2737.01 |
0.94 |
Seed (Kg. / Ha.) |
12.40 |
11.21 |
1.11 |
Manure (Rs. /Ha.) |
0.84** |
0.41 |
2.07 |
Fertilizer (Rs. /Ha.) |
-0.24 |
0.25 |
-0.93 |
Irrigation (No. time/Ha.) |
-2.18 |
31.43 |
-0.07 |
Human Labour (Man days/Ha.) |
27.85* |
7.45 |
3.74 |
Machine Labour (Man days/Ha.) |
-115.70*** |
62.49 |
-1.85 |
Plant Protection (Rs. /Ha.) |
-0.41 |
0.87 |
-0.47 |
Land Size in Ha. |
-6.57 |
23.82 |
-0.28 |
R2 Value |
0.313 |
|
|
Number of Observations |
80 |
|
|
Source: Field Survey. * indicates 1 percent, ** indicates 5 percent and *** refers 10 percent. Note: Yield rate is a dependent variable
The log-linear estimation result is presented in Table 6. It is found from the analysis that there exists a positive relationship between production and manure and human labour. Manure and human labour have increased yield rate of HYV. The natural manure and human labour are among the most important determinant factors in the adoption of HYV rice cultivation. Since seeds are available at zero cost, the farmers are happy to use them as required for cultivation.
Table 7: Productivity Response Function for High Yielding Rice-Log Linear Estimates (For Hybrid Adopters and Non-adopters only)
Variables |
Coefficient of B |
Standard Error |
t |
Constant |
12586.66* |
4001.53 |
3.15 |
Seed (Kgs. / Ha.) |
-32.25** |
13.28 |
-2.43 |
Manure (Rs. /Ha.) |
-0.23 |
0.51 |
-0.45 |
Fertilizer (Rs. /Ha.) |
0.20 |
0.69 |
0.29 |
Irrigation (No. time/Ha.) |
-38.36 |
41.74 |
-0.92 |
Human Labour (Man days/Ha.) |
-15.02 |
18.41 |
-0.82 |
Machine Labour (Man days/Ha.) |
-37.23 |
81.77 |
-0.46 |
Plant Protection (Rs. /Ha.) |
-0.77 |
0.87 |
-0.89 |
Land Size in Ha. |
-19.28 |
23.76 |
-0.81 |
R2 Value |
0.090 |
|
|
Number of Observations |
100 |
|
|
Source: Field Survey. * indicates 1 percent level, ** indicates 5 percent level.
On the contrary, there is a negative relationship between production and fertilisers, irrigation, mechanized labour and plant protection. It can be noted that the farmers are using fertilisers and pesticides sparingly due to high cost. In the study area, the farmers mostly rely on Cauvery water sources for cultivation and during the study period, the river basin was dry.
Therefore, a majority of the farmers mainly depended on ground water sources instead of Cauvery water. Another finding is that in the study area, a majority of the farmers were using the machinery during planting and harvesting season; therefore, the demand for machinery is inevitably high in all the seasons, but it is not matched with supply of machinery. There is a high demand for pesticides in farming and if the required quantity in not available, it will be a problem.
Table 7 furnishes log-linear results; it is found that there is a positive relationship between production and fertilizers among hybrid adopters and non-adopters. Fertilizers are supplied by the co-operative society in adequate quantities. The fitted model explained 90 percent of the variation in the yield of high yielding varieties of rice in the study area.
On the other hand, a majority of farmers are using the manure with high cost; irrigation is a major problem faced by the farmers as they rely on river water rather than ground water. It is found that the seeds are having germination problem to the high yielding rice cultivators; as they are available at zero cost, they have been used continuously. Availability of farm labour has been another major problem in recent years as a majority of the rural workers are engaged in non-farm activities and many go to work in MGNREGS in the study area. Pesticide is one of the core inputs in agricultural activity. The price of pesticides is higher in the study area and not only that, sometimes, the pesticides are hoarded for speculative motive and artificial scarcity is created in order to increase the price and to make abnormal profits. Therefore, the price and paucity in the supply of pesticides affect the production of paddy in the study area.
The farmers face many constraints in the marketing of the hybrid rice. Both the private traders and the Government procurement centre is the study area are not trading the hybrid rice varieties on par with other varieties. In addition, Government Procurement Centre could not fix higher price for the hybrid rice due to poor grain quality and broken condition. Therefore, the hybrid rice cultivators are getting lower price for their produce in the private market as well as in the Government procurement centre.
CONCLUSIONS:
The study has attempted to examine the spread of hybrid rice new technologies at the gross roots level in the study area of Tamil Nadu. It focuses on the experience and performance of hybrid rice in the field. Hybrid rice is one of the important crops recently introduced for achieving food security in India. Food security can be achieved by focusing on issues such as increasing production and productivity, efficient use of water, integrated water management, agricultural pricing and crop insurance.
Tamil Nadu is one of well-developed Indian states fast growing service sector to be followed by the growing industrial sector. But the performance of agricultural sector is not so encouraging due to various constraints like lack of irrigational infrastructural facilities, absence of regular water supply, increasing inputs costs, migration of labour to non-farm sectors.
The area under rice cultivation expanded marginally from 16.96 lakh ha (74.91 percent) to 17.55 lakh ha (76.12 percent) during pre-hybrid rice period for winter season. It has declined to 14.44 lakh ha during second post- hybrid period. It is observed that urbanization, rapid development of real estate and increasing non-cultivable area in Tamil Nadu are some of the reasons for these trends. During autumn season, it has increased from 2.86 lakh ha (12.67 percent) to 3.35 lakh ha (17.63 percent). But, the cultivable area expanded by only 0.49 lakh ha (5 percent) during the last three decades.
The highest share of area under hybrid rice cultivation was held by large and medium size farmers. For the small farmers in the sample, the average area had declined from 0.40 ha. to 0.37 ha. Thus, the large and medium size farmers were more interested in cultivating the hybrid rice than the marginal farmers. The marginal farmers were facing constraints like small size of operating land (an average 0.40 ha.), absence of storage room and lack of awareness about the scheme.
Farmers are ready to diversify farm lands for the cultivation of HYV rice than hybrid rice varieties. A majority of them cultivate HYV rice varieties due to easy availability of seeds, well known technology and conventional farming techniques. But, the hybrid rice cultivation is marked by high cost of cultivation, inadequate seed supply and one-time seed usage and unknown technology.
REFERENCE:
1. Barker R, Herdt RW (1985), The Rice Economy of Asia. Washington, D.C. (USA): Resources for the Future.
2. Barwale BR (1993), Hybrid Rice Food Security in India, Macmillan India Limited, Madras
3. Central Rice Research Institute (1996), Miracle Rice Varieties, Cuttack (India), CRRI.
4. David CC, Otsuka K (1994), Modern Rice Technology and Income Distribution in Asia, Boulder, Col, (USA), Lynne Reiner Publishers.
5. Directorate of Rice Research, (1997), Development and Use of Hybrid Rice Technology in India: Project Report, Hyderabad, India, and DRR.
6. Directorate of Rice Research, (2000-08), Progress Reports of Hybrid Rice Project and AICRIP, (Various Issues), Hyderabad, India.
7. Evenson RE, Mckinsey JW (1991), Research, Extension Infrastructure and Productivity Change in Indian Agriculture in Evenson RE, Pray CE, Editors, Research and Productivity in Asian Agriculture, Ithaca, N.Y. (USA): Cornell Univ. Press.
8. Evenson RE (1993), Technological Distance and Rice Productivity in India, Paper Presented at the National Workshop on Agricultural Research Evaluation: Methods and Applications, National Academy of Agricultural Management (NAARM), Hyderabad.
9. He Guiting, Zhu X, Flinn JC. 1987. A Comparative Study of Economic Efficiency of Hybrid and Conventional Rice Production in Jiangsu Province. Oryza 24:285-296.
10. Hossain M (1997), Rice Supply and Demand in Asia: A Socio-economic and Biophysical Analysis, in Teng PS, Kropff M, Editors, Application of Systems Approaches at the Farm and Regional Levels, London (UK), Kluwer Academic Publishers.
11. Hussain M, Hossain M, Janaiah A, (2001), Hybrid Rice Adoption in Bangladesh: A Socio-economic Assessment of Farmers’ Experiences, Monograph #18, BRAC, Dhaka, and IRRI, Philippines.
12. Janaiah A, Ahmed MI, Viraktamath BC (1993), Hybrid Rice: An Opportunity for Food Security in India. Yojana 37(20)
13. Janaiah A (1995), Economic Assessment of Hybrid Rice Potential in India: An Ex-ante Study, Ph.D. Thesis (unpublished), Institute of Agricultural Sciences, Banaras Hindu University, Varanasi, India.
14. Janaiah A (2000), Economic Impact of Crop Management on Productivity and Profitability of Hybrid and HYV Rice in India: Evidences from a Farm-level Study, Indian Journal of Agriculture Science 70(2).
15. Janaiah A, Hossain M (2000), Hybrid Rice for Food Security in the Tropics: An Evaluation of Farm level Experiences in India. Paper presented at the 3rd International Crop Science Congress held in Hamburg, Germany, 17-22 August 2000.
16. Janaiah A, Hossain M, Hussain M (2002), Hybrid Rice for Tomorrow’s Food Security: Can the Chinese Miracle be Replicated in Other Countries? Outlook Agriculture, 31(1)
17. Janaiah A (2002), Hybrid Rice for Indian Farmers: Myths and Realities, Economic and Political Weekly 37(42).
18. Janaiah A, Hossain M (2003), Can Hybrid Rice Technology Help Productivity Growth in Asian Tropics? Farmers’ Experiences, Economic and Political Weekly, 38(25)
19. Janaiah A. (2003), The Seed Delivery System in Andhra Pradesh: Institutional and Policy Issues, Indian Journal of Agriculture Market, 17(2).
20. Janaiah A, Hossain M, (2004), Partnership in the Public Sector Agricultural Research and Development Evidence from India. Economic and Political Weekly 39(50)
21. Janaiah A, Otsuka K, Hossain M, (2005), Is the Productivity Impact of the Green Revolution in Rice Vanishing? Empirical Evidence from TFP Analysis for Rice, Economic and Political Weekly,40 (53)
22. Janaiah A, Hossain M, Otsuka K, (2006), Productivity Impact of the Modern Varieties of Rice in India, Development Economics, 44 (2).
23. Kumar P, Rosegrant MW (1994), Productivity and Sources of Growth for Rice in India, Economic and Political Weekly 29 (53)
24. Pingali PL, Hossain M, Gerpacio RV (1997), Asian Rice Bowls: The Returning Crisis? Oxon, Wallingford (UK): CAB International.
25. Rao NGP, Singh A, Sivasubramanian V, Murthy KS, Mukhopadhyay AN, Abraham CC (1998), Rice Research and Production in India: Present Status and a Future Perspective, Quinquennial Review Report, Directorate of Rice Research, Hyderabad, India.
26. Ramesh MS, Hari Prasad AS, Revathi P, Senguttuvel P, Viraktamath BC (2009), Rice Hybrids Released in India. Technical Bulletin No. 40, Directorate of Rice Research (ICAR), Hyderabad, India.
27. Srinivasa Rao, K (2013) Strategies for Enhancing Production, Productivity of Rice in India, National Institute of Advanced Studies, New Delhi.
28. Praduman Kumar, Mark W Rosegrant (1994) Productivity and Sources of Growth for Rice in India, Economic and Political Weekly, December 31
29. Parshuram Samal (2013) Growth Production, Productivity, Costs and Profitability of Rice in India during 1980 -2010, National Institute of Advanced Studies, New Delhi
30. Karunakaran, K R (2013) Agricultural Research and Development Investment by India and China: A Comparative Analysis with Specific Emphasis on Rice Production, National Institute of Advanced Studies, New Delhi.
31. State of Indian Agriculture, (2012-13) Ministry of Agriculture, Government of India, New Delhi
32. Seasonal Crop Report (2011-12) Directorate of Economics and Statistics, Government of Tamil Nadu, Chennai-18.
33. Commissioner, Commsionarate of Agriculture, Government of Tamil Nadu, Chennai-05 FAO, IFPRI Impact, 2011
34. Ministry of Agriculture, Government of India, (2010) Hindustan Times, 2008
35. Planning Commission (2005), Government of India, New Delhi
Received on 19.06.2019 Modified on 27.07.2019
Accepted on 08.01.2020 ©AandV Publications All right reserved
Res. J. Humanities and Social Sciences. 2020; 11(1):48-56.
DOI: 10.5958/2321-5828.2020.00008.X