Research Journal of Agricultural Sciences, July 2012, 3(4): 873-875

ISSN: 0976-1675

Production, Marketing and Storage Constraints of Maize Growers in district Chickaballapur Karnataka
Y M Gopala, B Krishnamurthy and T P Bharathkumar
Department of Agricultural Extension, University of Agricultural Sciences, Bangalore - 560 065, Karnataka, India
e-mail: gopalym@gmail.com Received: 17 November 2011 Accepted: 05 April 2012

ABSTRACT
The present investigation was carried out in Chickaballapur district of Karnataka state. Three taluks viz Shidlaghatta, Bagepalli and Chinthamani were purposively selected for the study in the year 2010. The production constraints as perceived by participants of FFS showed that, most (98.33%) of the participants perceived high cost of plant protection chemicals as the constraint in production and 81.67 per cent of non-participants perceived timely non availability of labour as the major constraint. The data showed that 80.00 per cent of participants perceived that storage facilities are located far away from villages as the main constraint and 71.67 per cent of non participants perceive that storage facilities are located far away from village as their main storage constraint. The data indicated that, 91.67 per cent of participants perceive that fluctuation in the market prices as their major constraint in marketing and 83.33 per cent of non participants felt that fluctuation in market prices as their main constraint. Key words: Maize, Production, Marketing, Constraints, Karnataka In Karnataka the farmer field school (FFS) in farmer field was initiated during 1994-95. Under this programme, farmers are made experts in identifying the natural enemies, monitoring regular pests and taking suitable management measures. Among several activities leading to enhanced agricultural development in the research area farmer field school occupies a significant place (Nagaraja 2003). Farmer field school was considered as an effective and comprehensive non-formal educational method to teach and technically empower adult farmers and farm women. Farmers as adult learners have unique advantage as well as some particular handicaps. They have some specific needs to be met for which they are willing to make purposeful efforts. Adults have certain advantages, they are mature persons. Their approach to life and events is likely to be better balanced and more rational. They can evaluate better and integrate their learning with past experience more easily. Once they are interested in something, convinced of its usefulness and gain self confidence, they become as good learners as anybody else. Maize with a total area of 6.6 lakh hectares is the largest cereal crop next to the paddy and sorghum in Karnataka. Maize crop in the state mainly depends on the monsoons. The area irrigated is negligible in the study area, though the extension functionaries have concentrated their efforts towards dissemination of the generated technology to grass root level at farmers field (Gallagher 2003). Still there is big gap between the achievable yields and achieved yields. The average yield of maize in the research area is less when compare to the package of practice yield. The technological gap may be one of the reasons for the low yields. There is an increasing trend in the area, production Research Journal of Agricultural Sciences 3 (4) 873 and productivity in Karnataka. Maize is grown in all the three seasons in an area of 936,000 ha, with an annual production of 273,000 tonnes and productivity of 2.9 tonnes/ha. Keeping in view above aspects the study was conducted among the participant and non participant maize growers of the farmer field schools of Chickaballapur district with the objective to identify the constraints in production, storage and marketing by maize growers.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

The present investigation was carried out in Chickaballapur district of Karnataka state in the year 2010 to study the constraints faced by participants and nonparticipant maize growers of farmer field school. Three taluks viz Shidlaghatta, Bagepalli and Chinthamani were purposively selected for the study where FFS has been organized in the year 2004-05 by UAS Bangalore and other NGOs. List of villages where FFS has been organized was collected from Karnataka community based tank management project head quarters located at UAS, Bangalore. Six FFS were selected randomly for the study and a total of 120 respondents were selected, 10 participants and 10 non participants from each FFS were selected randomly. For instance the present study was concentrated on cultivation practices of maize. However, KCBTMP has established FFS for different crops like vegetables, cereals etc. Ex-post facto research design was employed for conducting the study. Data was collected by using a detailed pretested interview schedule and PRA technique was employed where ever necessary. The information was gathered scored, quantified, categorized, tabulated and interpreted using statistical methods like percentage. https:// www.rjas.info

Gopala et al.

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

Production constraints faced by participants The production constraints as perceived by participants of farmer field schools (Table 1) showed that, most (98.33%) of the participants perceived high cost of plant protection chemicals as the constraint in production, followed by high cost of seed material (90.00%), timely non-availability of labour (88.33%), high cost of fertilizers (78.33%), timely unavailability of irrigation (71.67%), lack of technical guidance (68.33%), non-availability of loan on time (66.66%), untimely availability of seed material (48.33%), non-availability of agricultural implements (41.67%), high pests incidence (46.67%) and lastly timely non-availability of sowing implements (40.00%), high incidence of diseases (34.00%). Table 1 Production constraints faced by participants of farmer field schools (n = 60) Statements %* Rank High cost of plant protection chemicals 98.33 I High cost of seed material 90.00 II Timely non-availability of labour 88.33 III High cost of fertilizers 78.33 IV Timely unavailability of irrigation 71.67 V Lack of technical guidance 68.33 VI Non-availability of loan on time 66.66 VII Untimely availability of seed material 48.33 VIII Non-availability of agricultural implements 41.67 IX High pests incidence 46.67 X Timely non-availability of sowing implements 40.00 XI High incidence of diseases 34.00 XII
*Multiple responses

(80.00%), timely unavailability of irrigation (78.33%), high cost of seed material (75.00%), high cost of fertilizers (73.33%), non-availability of loan on time (71.67%), lack of technical guidance (63.33%), untimely availability of seed material (56.67%), non availability of agricultural implements (41.67%), high incidence of diseases (40.00%), timely non-availability of sowing implements (40.00%) and high pests incidence (26.67%). The non-availability labour is the main problem at each stage of the production that non participants are encountering. Because in study area, cost of labour is more and labour resources are very less. The findings are in conformity with the findings of past researchers such as Ravishankar and Katteppa (2000), Faruq (2008). Table 2 Production constraints faced by non-participants of farmer field schools Statements %* Rank Timely non-availability of labour 81.67 I High cost of plant protection chemicals 80.00 II Timely unavailability of irrigation 78.33 III High cost of seed material 75.00 IV High cost of fertilizers 73.33 V Non-availability of loan on time 71.67 VI Lack of technical guidance 63.33 VII Untimely availability of seed material 56.67 VIII Non-availability of agricultural implements 41.67 IX High incidence of diseases 40.00 X Timely non-availability of sowing implements 40.00 X High pests incidence 26.67 XI
*Multiple responses

The participants perceived that high cost of plant protection chemicals and high cost of seed material as their main problem because of trader who are creating artificial demand for the plant protection chemicals in the market. The non-availability of labors is another problem at each stage of the production, because the labour hiring charges are more and the growers are not able to get the required number of labourers in time. Another problem is timely loan availability in the season. The banks are following so many formalities to lend the money and this leads to delay in sanctioning, because of this the sowing season may over. In the sowing season all farmers engaged in sowing activities, lead to shortage of agricultural implements availability. In Chikkaballapur district, the major problem is the irrigation water availability in time. This is mainly because the decrease in ground water table level and frequent fluctuations and power cut. The lack of technical guidance regarding recommended quantity of chemicals, chemical fertilizers and bio-control agents are also the problems faced by the maize growers. Production constraints faced by non-participants The production constraints as perceived by nonparticipants (Table 2) revealed that 81.67 per cent of nonparticipants perceived timely non availability of labour as the major constraint, high cost of plant protection chemicals Research Journal of Agricultural Sciences 3 (4) 874

Storage constraints faced by participants The storage constraints as perceived by participants revealed that 80.00 per cent of participants perceived that storage facilities are located far away from villages as the main constraint followed by high cost of storage (70.00%), lack of pledge loan facility for the stored grains (56.67%) and storage provision in terms of quantity stored is less (50.00%). Storage facilities are far away from the village and non-availability of storage in rural areas to enable the farmers to market their produce at remunerative prices and non-availability of funds are the storage problems. Table 3 Storage constraints faced by participants of farmer field schools Statements %* Rank Storage facilities are located far away from 80.00 I village High cost of storage 70.00 II No pledge loan facility for the stored 56.67 III Storage provision in terms of quantity stored 50.00 IV is less
*Multiple responses

Storage constraints faced by non-participants The data regarding storage constraints as perceived by nonparticipants revealed that 71.67 per cent of non participants perceive that storage facilities are located far https:// www.rjas.info

Production, Marketing and Storage Constraints of Maize Growers away from village as their main storage constraint, high cost of storage (68.33%), no pledge loan facility for the stored produce (58.33%), storage provision in terms of quantity stored is less (51.67%). In case of non participants also the far away distance of storages, no pledge loan facility for the produce stored and High cost of storage are important storage constraints because most of storages requires infrastructure facility like power, land, building which will not be available in the village. The findings are conforming to the findings of past researchers such as Waman and Patil (2000), Balasubramaniam and Eshwaran (2008). Table 4 Storage constraints faced by non-participants of farmer field schools Statements %* Rank Storage facilities are located far away from 71.67 I village High cost of storage 68.33 II No pledge loan facility for the stored 58.33 III Storage provision in terms of quantity stored 51.67 IV is less
*Multiple responses

demand price of that particular produce decreases and vice versa as a result of which a lot of fluctuations in the market prices occurs. Hence, the fluctuation in the market price has been found to be a major problem in the marketing of maize by the growers. The problems regarding more commission charges and hamali charges, delay in cash payment and cheating in weighing needs the attention of the agencies involved in marketing of maize. The problem of high cost of transportation and markets are far away also need the due consideration of the government and other marketing organizations. Table 6 Marketing constraints faced by non-participants of farmer field schools Statements %* Rank Fluctuation in market prices 83.33 I High Hamali charges 68.33 II Commission agent charge is more 66.67 III High cost of transportation 65.00 IV Market places are far away 50.00 V Malpractices in weighing 48.33 VI Delayed cash payment from the traders 43.33 VII
*Multiple responses

Table 5 Marketing constraints faced by participants of farmer field schools Statements %* Rank Fluctuation in market prices 91.67 I High cost of transportation 83.33 II High hamali charges 75.00 III Commission agent charge is more 66.67 IV Malpractices in weighing 61.67 V Market places are far away 51.67 VI Delayed cash payment from the traders 50.00 VII
*Multiple responses

Marketing constraints faced by participants The marketing constraints as perceived by participants indicated that, 91.67 per cent of participants perceive that fluctuation in the market prices as their major constraint in marketing followed by high cost of transportation (83.33%), high hamali charges (75.00%), commission agent charge is more (66.67%), malpractices in weighing (61.67%), market places are far away (51.67%), delayed cash payment from the traders (50.00%). The main aim of farmer is to produce more and get better prices for their produce. But, unfortunately, as the supply of product increases, the

Marketing constraints faced by non-participants The marketing constraints as perceived by non participants were reveled in the results indicates that, 83.33 per cent of non participants felt that fluctuation in market prices as their main constraint followed by high hamali charges (68.33%), commission agent charge is more (66.67%), high cost of transportation (65.00%), market places are far away (50.00%), malpractices in weighing (48.33%) and the delay in cash payment from the traders (43.33%). The main constraint faced by non participant respondents is price fluctuation of produce in the market. The findings are conforming to the findings of past researchers such as Sharma and Singh (2006), Balasubramaniam and Eshwaran (2008). The results revealed that participants perceived high cost of plant protection chemicals and storage facilities as the production constraint and non-participants perceived timely non availability of labour and price fluctuation in market as the major constraint. Therefore, it is suggested that the immediate steps should be taken to combat the above constraints, so that the farmers particularly maize growers take advantage from the farming.

LITERATURE CITED
Balasubramaniam M and Eshwaran R. 2008. Marketing practices and problems of cotton cultivators in Virudhanagar district. Indian Journal of Marketing : 27-32. Faruq H M. 2008. Economic efficiency and constraints of maize production in the northern region of Bangladesh. Journal of Innovative Development Strategy 1(1): 18-32. Gallagher K. 2003. Fundamental elements of a farmers field school. Leisa 19(1): 5-6. Nagaraja N. 2003. Farmers field schools in Karnataka community cased tank management project implementation guidelines. University of Agricultural Sciences, Bangalore, Karnataka. Ravishankar R L and Kateppa Y. 2000. Constraints analysis of potato farmers. Journal of Extension Education 11(2): 2714-2715. Sharma D K and Singh V K. 2006. Marketing of mango in Haryana. Agricultural Marketing 49(1): 32-36. Waman G K and Patil P S. 2000. Production, storage and marketing constraints faced by onion growers. Maharashtra Journal of Extension Education 19: 104-108. Research Journal of Agricultural Sciences 3 (4) 875 https:// www.rjas.info