Impact of technological interventions on farmers' income and employment in the Trans-Gangetic Plain region


240 / 310

Authors

  • RAJ NARAYAN ICAR-Agriculture Technology Application and Research Institute, Jodhpur Rajasthan 342 005, India
  • SAROJ CHOUDHARY ICAR-Agriculture Technology Application and Research Institute, Jodhpur Rajasthan 342 005, India
  • J P MISHRA ICAR-Agriculture Technology Application and Research Institute, Jodhpur Rajasthan 342 005, India
  • S K JHA Indian Council of Agricultural Research, New Delhi image/svg+xml
  • U S GAUTAM Indian Council of Agricultural Research, New Delhi image/svg+xml

https://doi.org/10.56093/ijas.v94i3.148623

Keywords:

Household, Interventions, Income, Productivity

Abstract

Agriculture is a cornerstone of India's economy, employing around half of the workforce. However, a very large proportion of agricultural land in India does not have the desirable productivity, which diminishes the prospects for reasonable income to the farmers. Recognizing this challenge, a study on agricultural practices and income of 640 farmers of 32 villages in Haryana was conducted during the period 2016–17 and 2020–21. The analysis revealed an increase in productivity and consequent income of the farmers with varying degrees. The growth in productivity and income was more conspicuous in adopted villages due to technological interventions such as introduction and adoption of high yielding verities/hybrids/breeds, scientific management practices, resource conservation technologies, cost reduction measures and supplementary enterprises, etc. as compared to non-adopted villages. The income augmentation was noticed in field and horticultural crops, livestock and subsidiary enterprises. The highest increase in income was registered with high value commodities. Inter-district variations were noticed in the increase in productivity and income in adopted and non-adopted villages. The net income of marginal farmers increased the most amongst the different categories of farmers during the period of study. The field crops, horticultural crops and livestock contributed more to total additional income. To sustain the growth in productivity and consequent income of the farmers the Government can strengthen mechanism for continuous infusion of improved technologies and management practices in developmental programmes along with incentives to the farmers for quality seed and planting materials and matching critical inputs through a Misson-mode approach, more so in disadvantaged and challenged ecologies.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

References

Adekunle O. 2013. Analysis of effectiveness of agricultural extension service in among rural women: Case study of Odeda local government, Ogun State, Nigeria. Journal of Agricultural Science 5(12): 65.

Asrers E, Nohmi M, Yasunobu K and Ishida A. 2013. Effect of agricultural extension program on smallholders' farm productivity: Evidence from three peasant associations in the highlands of Ethiopia. Journal of Agricultural Science 5(8): 163.

Balkrishna A, Phour M, Thapliyal M and Arya V. 2021. Current status of Indian agriculture: Problems, challenges and solution. Biological Forum-An International Journal 13(3): 361–74.

Birthal P S, P K Joshi, D Roy and A Thorat. 2007. Diversification in Indian agriculture towards high-value crops: The role of small-holders. Discussion paper no. 00727, pp. 29. International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI), Washington, USA.

Birthal P S, Joshi P K, Negi D S and Agarwal S. 2014. Changing source growth in Indian agriculture: Implication of regional priorities for accelerating agricultural growth. Discussion paper no. 1446. International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI), Washington DC, USA.

Chander M. 2015. The Krishi Vigyan Kendras (KVKs) in India: The full potential yet to be unleashed. Agricultural Extension in South Asia Blog 46, April 2015.

Goswami S N, Choudhary A N and Khan A K. 1996. Yield gap analysis of major oilseed of Nagaland. Journal of Hill Research 9(1): 85–88.

Hiremath S M and Nagaraju M V. 2010. Evaluation of on-farm frontline demonstrations on the yield of chilli. Karnataka Journal of Agricultural Sciences 23(2): 341–42.

Ministry of Agriculture and Framers Welfare (MoAFW). 2023. Press Information Bureau. August 2023.

Mula G and Sarker S C. 2013. Impact of improved agro-techniques on sustainable livelihood empowerment: An economic study from West Bengal. Agricultural Economics Research Review 26(347): 129–37.

Pachiyappan P, Kumar P, Reddy K V, Kumar K N R, Konduru S, Paramesh V, Rajanna G A, Shankarappa S K, Jaganathan D and Immanuel S. 2022. Protected cultivation of horticultural crops asa livelihood opportunity in western India. An Economic Assessment. Sustainability 14: 7430.

Prabhakar I. 2013. ‘Protected cultivation technology: An assessment of adoption and impact’. PhD. Thesis, ICAR-Indian Agricultural Research Institute, New Delhi.

Prabhakar I, Vijayaragavan K, Singh P, Singh B, Manjunatha B L, Jaggi S and Sekar I. 2017. Constraints in adoption and strategies to promote polyhouse technology among farmers: A multi-stakeholder and multi-dimensional study. The Indian Journal of Agricultural Science 87(4): 485–90.

Rastogi N, Singh N K and Chaturvedi P. 2022. Yield and extension gap analysis through frontline demonstration in mustard crop of the district. The Pharma Innovation 11(3): 1523–526.

Rodrigues G S, Campanhola C and Kitamura P C. 2003. An environmental impact assessment system for agricultural R&D. Environmental Impact Assessment Review 23(2): 219–44.

Rosenbaum P R and Rubin D B. 1985. Constructing a control group using multivariate matched sampling methods that incorporate the propensity score. The American Statistician 39(1): 33–38.

Sharafat A A, Altarawneh M and Altahat E. 2012. Effectiveness of agricultural extension activities. American Journal of Agricultural and Biological Sciences 7(2): 194–200.

Shukla N, Singh N K and Chaturvedi P. 2022. Yield and extension gap analysis through frontline demonstration in mustard crop of the district. The Pharma Innovation Journal 11(3): 1523–526.

Singh B and Sharma A K. 2017. Impact of frontline demonstrations on productivity enhancement of cumin in Arid zone. International Journal Seed Spices 7(2): 72–76.

Zingiro A, Okello J J and Guthiga P M. 2014. Assessment of adoption and impact of rainwater harvesting technologies on rural farm household income: The case of rainwater harvesting ponds in Rwanda. Environment, Development and Sustainability 16: 1281–298.

Downloads

Submitted

2024-02-16

Published

2024-05-08

How to Cite

NARAYAN, R. ., CHOUDHARY, S. ., MISHRA, J. P. ., JHA, S. K. ., & GAUTAM, U. S. . (2024). Impact of technological interventions on farmers’ income and employment in the Trans-Gangetic Plain region. The Indian Journal of Agricultural Sciences, 94(3-1), 10–17. https://doi.org/10.56093/ijas.v94i3.148623
Citation