Economic impact of high-yielding cassava varieties in Tamil Nadu: Insights on farmer adoption and preferences

prakash pachiyappan; D Jaganathan; Sheela Immanuel

doi:10.56093/ijas.v95i10.165934

Authors

prakash pachiyappan
D Jaganathan
Sheela Immanuel

https://doi.org/10.56093/ijas.v95i10.165934

Keywords:

cassava cultivation, technology adoption, cost-benefit analysis, ocio-economic impact, propensity score matching, logit regression model, sustainability

Abstract

This study examines the socio-economic impact of cassava production in Tamil Nadu, India based on a survey of 300 farm households in the major cassava producing districts of Salem, Tiruchirappalli, Namakkal, Cuddalore, Dharmapuri and Pudukkottai conducted in 2022-2023. We employed cost-benefit analysis, propensity score matching and a logit regression model to assess the profitability of high-yielding cassava varieties (HYVs) and determine the factors influencing their adoption. Adoption rates were 46%, resulting in a 13% increase in yield and a 17% increase in income compared to local varieties. Factors driving adoption of HYVs included higher yield (p=0.037), farm size (p=0.012), tuber price (p=0.102), technical advice (p=0.001) and irrigation access. Farmers reported income growth as the primary motivation, followed by reinvestment in agriculture and loan repayments. The Sree Athulya variety was found to yield the highest net income per hectare. Key challenges included reliance on intermediaries and labor-intensive harvesting. Farmers preferred traits such as high yield, pest resistance, short duration, and drought tolerance. Promoting HYVs can boost the cassava sector and contribute to Sustainable Development Goals, driving economic prosperity and sustainability in the region.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

Author Biographies

D Jaganathan

Senior Scienist, Section of Extension and Social Sciences, ICAR-CTCRI, Thiruvannathapuram, Kerala
Sheela Immanuel

Principal Scientist, Extension and Social Sciences, ICAR-CTCRI, Thiruvananthapuram

References

1. Bokanga, M. 1999. Cassava: Post-harvest operations. In Information network on post- harvest operations, pp. 1–26, Rome: FAO.

2. Lebot, V. 2009. Tropical root and tuber crops: Cassava, sweet potato, yams and aroids. Crop Production Science in Horticulture No. 17, CABI Publishing, Oxfordshire, UK. https://doi.org/10.1017/ S0014479709007832.

3. Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO), FAOSTAT, 2022. Retrieved from http://www.fao.org/faostat/en/

4. Parmar, A., Sturm, B., and Hensel, O. 2017. Crops that feed the world: Production and improvement of cassava for food, feed, and industrial uses Food Sec., 9:907–927.

5. Rees, D., Westby, A., Tomlins, K. I., Oirschot, Q. E. A. Van, Chemma, M. U., Cornelius, E., and Amjad, M. 2012. Tropical root crops. In D. Rees, G. Farrel, and J. Orchard (Eds.), Crop Post-Harvest: Science and Technology: Perishables (first edit., 2012, pp. 392–396). Sussex: Wiley Blackwell publishing ltd. UK.

6. Howeler, R., Lutaladio, N., and Thomson, G. 2013. Save and grow: Cassava. A guide for sustainable production and intensification. Rome: Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations.

7. Immanuel S., Jaganathan D., Prakash P., and Sivakumar P.S. 2024. Cassava for food security, poverty reduction and climate resilience: A review. Indian J. Ecol, 51(1): 21-31.

8. Kleih, U., Phillips, D., Wordey, M. T., and Komlaga, G. 2013. Cassava market and value chain analysis: Ghana case study. Natural Resources Institute, University of Greenwich, UK. https://agriknowledge.org/ downloads/cn69m4217.

9. Uchechukwu-Agua, A. D., Caleb, O. J., and Opara, U. L.2015. Postharvest handling and storage of fresh cassava root and products: A review. Food and Bioprocess Technol, 8(4), 729–748.

10. Nweke, F. I., Spencer, D. S. C., and Lynam, J. K. 2002. The cassava transformation: Africa’s best-kept secret. East Lansing: Michigan State University Press.

11. Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO), FAOSTAT, 2021. Retrieved from http://www.fao.org/faostat/en/

12. GoI. 2021-2022. Agricultural and Processed Food Products Export Development Authority (APEDA), Ministry of Commerce and Industry, Govt. of India.

13. Ashok K.R., Giuliani, A., Thilagavathi, M., Varadha Raj, S., Ramamoorthy, R., Devi, M., and Sanjeevikumar A. 2017. Trait valuation in genetically modified crops: an ex-ante analysis of gm cassava against cassava mosaic disease, Agric. Econ. Res. Rev. 30(02): 223-234.

14. Aditya, K, S., Md Tajuddin Khan and Avinash Kishore. 2018. Adoption of crop insurance and impact: insights from India. Agric. Econ. Res. Rev., 31 (2), 163-174.

15. Wordofa, M.G., Hassen, J.Y., Endris, G.S., Aweke C.S., Moges, D. K., and Rorisa, D. T. 2021. Adoption of improved agricultural technology and its impact on household income: a propensity score matching estimation in eastern Ethiopia. Agric. Food Secur.10, 5.

16. Polson, R.A., and Spencer, D.S.C. 1991. The technology adoption process in subsistence agriculture: the case of cassava in South Western Nigeria. Agric. Sys., 36: 65-77.

17. Breen, R., Karlson, K.B., and Holm, A. 2018. Interpreting and understanding logits, probits, and other nonlinear probability models. Annu. Rev. Sociol., 44:39–54.