Socio-economic impact and adoption of improved post-rainy sorghum (Sorghum bicolor) production technologies in Maharashtra
376 / 52
Keywords:
Adoption, Impact of production technologies, Income utilization pattern, Post-rainy sorghum, Yield advantagesAbstract
Low remuneration and poor adoption of sorghum [Sorghum bicolor (L.) Moench] production technologies were major constraints in drastic decline in area under cultivation. Therefore, evaluation of production potential, adoption, economic and other benefits of the technologies in social perspectives of the farmers was undertaken. The study was conducted with 200 adopted farmers under frontline demonstrations programme organized during five years from 2009-10 to 2013-14 in five districts in two prominent sorghum growing regions in Maharashtra, India. The yield potential and merits were measured by following before and after method, and data were collected through semistructured interview schedule, group meetings, recorded data and empirical observations. The performance of the demonstrated technologies resulted into increase in adoption (27%), higher net returns (170%), followed by grain yield (58%) with better quality (78%) and fodder yield (26%). It enabled to motivate the farmers and increase in area under sorghum by 29% of the adopted farmers. Out of fifteen demonstrated practices, only five practices namely, use of high yielding variety, maintaining plant spacing, use of treated seeds or seed treatment, weed control measures andnitrogen fertilizer application were found suitable by the farmers which can be easily practiced and gave significant results with low cost. Furthermore, the additional returns helped them in spending significantly higher on purchase of household items (111%) followed by, on attending more social functions (109%), purchase of animals (91%), in start of new business (86%), deposit in bank (77%) and investment in farm development activities (62%). It also revealed that more number of family members and years of adoption under FLD programme resulted into high impact. The
findings aptly indicated that the impact of the production technologies was very vital in meeting out the farmers’ social, educational, health and financial needs apart from food and fodder. To boost-up the adoption, large family size of the farmers, their dependency on farming and continuing newly selected farmers with field demonstration of location-specific low-cost technologies up to five years should be considered.
Downloads
References
Ashok Kumar A, Reddy B V S, Ramaiah B, Sahrawat K L and Pfeiffer W H. 2013. Gene effects and heterosis for grain iron and zinc concentration in sorghum [Sorghum bicolor (L.) Moench]. Field Crops Research 146: 86–95. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fcr.2013.03.001
Ashok Kumar A, Reddy B V S, Ramaiah B, Sahrawat K L and Pfeiffer W H. 2012. Genetic variability and character association for grain iron and zinc contents in sorghum germplasm accessions and commercial cultivars. The European Journal of Plant Science and Biotechnology 6 (Special Issue 1): 66–70.
Annonymous. 2015. Agricultural Statistics at a Glance, Directorate of Economics and Statistics, Department of Agriculture, Cooperation and Farmer Welfare, Ministry of Agriculture and Farmer Welfare, Government of India.
Casley D J and Kumar K. 1992. The collection, analysis and use of monitoring and evaluation data. Washington D.C., U.S.A: The World Bank.
Chapke R R. 2014. Feasibility and appropriateness of recommended sorghum production technologies. SpingerPlus 3: 453. (Available at: http://www.springerplus.com/content/pdf/2193- 1801-3-453.pdf) DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/2193-1801-3-453
Chari A, Kumar R S, Reddy C S, Bhagwat V R, Mukesh P and Subbarayudu B. 2008. A decade of frontline demonstrations on sorghum: Results and Impact 1996-97 to 2006-07. National Research Centre for Sorghum, All India Coordinate Sorghum Improvement Project, Rajendranagar, Hyderabad 500 030, Andhra Pradesh, India (ISBN 81-89335-21-9). p 72.
Deb U K and Bantilan M C S. 2003. Impacts of genetic improvement in sorghum. R E Evenson and D Gollin (Eds.) Crop variety improvement and its effects on productivity, Wallingford, CABI. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1079/9780851995496.0183
Deb U K, Bantilan M C S and Reddy B V S. 2005. Impact of Improved Sorghum Cultivars in India. In: Impact of Agricultural Research: Post-Green Revolution Evidence from India. National Centre for Agricultural Economics and Policy Research and International Crops Research Institute for the Semi-Arid Tropics, New Delhi. pp 69–84.
Fraenkel J R and Wallen N E. 2000. How to Design and Evaluate Research in Education, New York. McGraw-Hill Publishing Co., New York.
Gafsi M and Brossier J. 1997. Farm management and protection of natural resources: analysis of adoption process and dependence relationship. Agricultural Systems 55: 71–97. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/S0308-521X(96)00079-0
Okuthe I K, Ngesa F U and W Ochola W W. 2013. The Socio- Economic determinants of the adoption of improved sorghum varieties and technologies by smallholder farmers: Evidence from South Western Kenya. International Journal of Humanities and Social Science, 3(18): 280–92.
Parthasarathy Rao P, Birthal P S, Reddy B V S, Rai K N and Ramesh S. 2006. Diagnostics of sorghum and pearl millet grains-based nutrition in India. International Sorghum and Millets Newsletter 47: 93–6.
Paterson A H, Bowers J E and Bruggmann R. 2009. The Sorghum bicolor genome and the diversification of grasses. Nature 457: 551–6. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/nature07723
Paudel G S and Thapa G B. 2004. Impact of social, institutional and ecological factors on land management practices in mountain watersheds of Nepal. Applied Geography 24: 35–55. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apgeog.2003.08.011
Pray C E and Nagarajan L. 2009. Pearl millet and sorghum improvement in India. IFPRI 2020 Vision Discussion Paper 00919. Washington DC: International Food Policy Research Institute. 27 pp. (http://www.ifpri.org/publication/pearl-millet-and-sorghum-improvement-india).
Reddy B V S, Ashok Kumar A and Sanjana Reddy P. 2010. Recent advances in sorghum improvement research at ICRISAT. Kasetsart Journal (National Science) 44: 499–506.
Rogers E M and Shoemaker F F. 1971. Communication of innovations. Free Press, New York.
Sombatpanit S, Zobisch M A, Sanders D W and Cook M G. 1996. Soil conservation extension: from concept to adoption. Science Publishers, Inc, Enfield, New Hampshire.
Tiwari K R, Sitaula B K, Nyborg I L P and Paudel G S. 2008. Determinants of farmers’ adoption of improved soil conservation technology in a middle mountain watershed of Central Nepal. Environmental Management 42: 210–22. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00267-008-9137-z
Downloads
Submitted
Published
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2018 The Indian Journal of Agricultural Sciences

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
The copyright of the articles published in The Indian Journal of Agricultural Sciences is vested with the Indian Council of Agricultural Research, which reserves the right to enter into any agreement with any organization in India or abroad, for reprography, photocopying, storage and dissemination of information. The Council has no objection to using the material, provided the information is not being utilized for commercial purposes and wherever the information is being used, proper credit is given to ICAR.