Information, credit and market access by upland tribals in north-eastern Himalaya of India: An empirical study

D K PANDEY; H K DE; B R PHUKAN; T S MEHRA; B P MISHRA; T M CHANU; KRISHNA S TOMAR

doi:10.56093/ijas.v88i12.85443

Authors

D K PANDEY Associate Professor, College of Horticulture and Forestry, Central Agricultural University (I), Pasighat, Arunachal Pradesh 791 102
H K DE Principal Scientist, ICAR-CIFA, Bhubaneswar
B R PHUKAN Associate Professor, College of Horticulture and Forestry, Central Agricultural University (I), Pasighat, Arunachal Pradesh 791 102
T S MEHRA Associate Professor, College of Horticulture and Forestry, Central Agricultural University (I), Pasighat, Arunachal Pradesh 791 102
B P MISHRA Assistant Professor, College of Horticulture and Forestry, Central Agricultural University (I), Pasighat, Arunachal Pradesh 791 102
T M CHANU Assistant Professor, College of Horticulture and Forestry, Central Agricultural University (I), Pasighat, Arunachal Pradesh 791 102
KRISHNA S TOMAR SWO, College of Horticulture and Forestry, Central Agricultural University (I), Pasighat, Arunachal Pradesh 791 102

https://doi.org/10.56093/ijas.v88i12.85443

Keywords:

The present study was conducted during 2016-17 in Arunachal Pradesh, Manipur, Meghalaya, Mizoram, Nagaland and Tripura states of the North-Eastern Himalayan (NEH) region to analyze the extent of institutional support, viz. information, credit and market a

Abstract

The present study was conducted during 2016-17 in Arunachal Pradesh, Manipur, Meghalaya, Mizoram, Nagaland and Tripura states of the North-Eastern Himalayan (NEH) region to analyze the extent of institutional support, viz. information, credit and market access in the tribal dominated districts. Findings of the study reveal that 87.80% respondents owned/use mobile phone, whereas extension contact was found to be very poor in the study area as a whole. Awareness and usage of formal information sources reveal that about one fourth (24%) were aware of Indian
Council of Agricultural Research (ICAR) centres, whereas only 17.6% respondents were aware of Krishi Vigyan Kendra and Agricultural University/line department. Access to these institutions was found to be poor owing to poor connectivity and remoteness of the area. About 43% respondents had no access to institutional credit, whereas informal sources of rural credit account for about 21.8% of the loan volume to tribal households and kins/relatives
(41.4%) were the largest source of informal credit. Marketing and associated infrastructure were identified as major determinants of their livelihood diversification.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

References

Anonymous. 2014. List of 272 BRGF including 22 new districts, http://www.panchayat.gov.indocuments/10198/562728/Annexure%20for%202421.pdf

Belcher B, Achdiawan Ramadhani and Dewi Sonya. 2014. Forest-based livelihoods strategies conditioned by market remoteness and forest proximity in Jharkhand, India. World Development 66: 269–79. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.worlddev.2014.08.023

Census of India. 2011. Office of the Registrar General and Census Commissioner, India, Ministry of Home Affairs, Government of India, New Delhi.

Chi VK, van Rompaey A, Govers G, Vanacker V, Schmook B and Hieu N. 2013. Land transitions in Northwest Vietnam: An integrated analysis of biophysical and socio-cultural factors. Human Ecology 41: 37–50. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10745-013-9569-9

DFID. 2002. Livelihoods Approaches to Information and Communication in Support of Rural Poverty Elimination and Food Security. Department for International Development, London.

DFID. 2000. Sustainable Livelihood Guidance Sheets. Department for International Development (DFID), London, UK.

FAO. 2015. FAO Policy on Indigenous and Tribal Peoples, Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, Rome.

Kemp D A. 1976. The nature of knowledge: An introduction for librarians. Clive Bingley, London.

Kumar G T P and Siddaramaiah B S. 1996. Influence of socio-psychological characteristics of participant farmers on their knowledge about Joint Forest Planning and Management. My Forest 32: 259–63.

Lahiri B, Anurag S, Chauhan J K, Sangma A K, and Sangma S M. 2017. Mobile phone use efficiency of Garo tribal farmers in North- Eastern Himalayan Region of India. Indian Research Journal of Extension Education 17: 24–31.

Luck DJ et al. 1981.Marketing Research. Prentice Hall of India, New Delhi.

Planning Commission. 2014. Evaluation study of Backward Regions Grant Fund (BRGF), PEO Report No. 223,Programme Evaluation Organisation, Government of India, New Delhi.

Raina R. 1998. Information marketing. DESIDOC Bulletin of Information Technology 18:(3) 3–5. DOI: https://doi.org/10.14429/dbit.18.3.3393

Ray D 1998. Development Economics. Princeton University Press, Princeton, NJ, US.

Satyanarayan K and Jagadeeswary V. 2010. A study on knowledge and adoption behaviour of livestock farmers. Indian Journal of Animal Research 44: 100–6.

Shoji M, Aoyagi K, Kasahara R, Sawada Y, and Ueyama M. 2012. Social capital formation and credit access: Evidence from Sri Lanka. World Development 40: 2522–36. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.worlddev.2012.08.003

TRAI. 2016. Highlights of Telecom Subscription Data as on 30th April, 2016. Telecom Regulatory Authority of India (TRAI), Goverment. of India, New Delhi, Press Release no. 49/2016.

Van Vliet N, Mertz O, Heinimann A, Langanke T, Pascual U, Schmook B, Adams C, Schmidt-Vogt D, Messerli P, Leisz S et al. 2012. Trends, drivers and impacts of changes in swidden cultivation in tropical forest-agriculture frontiers: A global assessment. Global Environmental Change 22: 418–29. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2011.10.009

Van Vliet N. Mertz O. Birch-Thomsen T. Schmook B. 2013. Is there a continuing rationale for swidden cultivation in the 21st century? Human Ecology 41: 1–5. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10745-013-9562-3