Impact of Mera Gaon Mera Gaurav (MGMG) Programme in Uttar Pradesh and Haryana

SUKANYA SOM; R ROY BURMAN; J P SHARMA; A K SINGH; SUDIPTA PAUL

doi:10.56093/ijas.v89i7.91653

Authors

SUKANYA SOM Scientist, ICAR-Indian Agricultural Research Institute, New Delhi 110 012, India
R ROY BURMAN Principal Scientist, Division of Agricultural Extension; 2Scientist, ICAR-Central Inland Fisheries Research Institute, Barrackpore, Kolkata 700120
J P SHARMA Joint Director (Extension and Research), ICAR-Indian Agricultural Research Institute, New Delhi 110 012, India
A K SINGH Deputy Director General (DDG), Agricultural Extension, ICAR-Indian Agricultural Research Institute, New Delhi 110 012, India
SUDIPTA PAUL Scientist, ICAR-Indian Agricultural Research Institute, New Delhi 110 012, India

https://doi.org/10.56093/ijas.v89i7.91653

Keywords:

MGMG, Quantitative framework, Impact assessment

Abstract

The present study aimed to evaluate impact of Mera Gaon Mera Gaurav (MGMG) programme by developing a quantitative framework. Five clusters of villages were randomly selected from Uttar Pradesh (UP) and Haryana and 15 respondents from each cluster were selected, making a total sample size of 150. One control village was selected against each experimental village using Propensity Score Matching (PSM) technique. Four components namely, farmer-scientist interface, farm output, institutional awareness and linkage were extracted in the index by applying Principal Component Method. The analyses revealed significant increase in frequency of farmer-scientist interaction, farmersâ€™ meet and increase in yield of rice, wheat and mustard. An increase of 59.73% and 37.28% in gross return was noticed in UP and Haryana, respectively. Though significant difference in awareness level and institutional linkage was found in UP between experimental and control groups, no significant difference was noticed in Haryana. Respondents reported high and medium level (48% and 41.33%) of timeliness of services in UP and Haryana, respectively. Total 44% and 42.67% respondents in UP and Haryana respectively, reported high level of relevancy. Similarly, 54.67 % and 46.67 % respondents in UP and Haryana, respectively reported high level of satisfaction with the services. Total 41.33% respondents in UP and 42.67% in Haryana stated medium level of usefulness of the services. The mean index scores in case of UP and Haryana were 0.692 and 0.528, respectively. Strategies were proposed to enhance the performance of MGMG programme.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

References

Census of India. 2011. Available at www.censusindia.gov.in.

Deshpande V. 2015. MeraGaonMera Gaurav: Agriculture scientists have a new job- help govtrealise PM’s ‘lab to land’ dream. The Indian Express, July 14, 2018. Available at https://indianexpress.com/article/cities/pune/mera-gaon-mera-gaurav-agriculture-scientists-have-a-new-job-help-govt-realise-pms-lab-to-land-dream/.

Gabor M R.2007. Non-probabilistic sampling use in Qualitative Marketing Research. Haphazard sampling.Volunteer sampling, The Annals of Oradea University, TOME XVI 2007 VOLUME II, pp. 954-958, ISSN1582-5450, Available at http://anale.steconomice.evonetro/arhiva/2007/management-and-marketing/56.pdf

Glendenning C J, Babu S andOkyere K A. 2010. Review of Agricultural Extension in India Are Farmers’ Information Needs Being Met? IFPRI Discussion Paper 01048.

Li Tao., Zhang H, Yuan C, LiuZ and Fan C. 2012. A PCA-based method for construction of composite sustainability indicators. The International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment 17(5): 593–603. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11367-012-0394-y

NSSO (National Sample Survey Organisation). 2005. Situation assessment survey of farmers: Access to modern technology for farming, 59th round (January–December 2003). Report No. 499(59/33/2). New Delhi: Ministry of Statistics and Programme Implementation.

PIB. 2016. ICAR–Committed to Generate Cost Effective and Environment Friendly Technologies. Press Information Bureau. Government of India, Ministry of Agriculture & Farmers Welfare.

United Nations. 2007. The Wye Group Handbook, Rural Households’ Livelihood and Well Being, Statistics on Rural Development and Agriculture Household Income, New York and Geneva.