Asia Pacific Journal of Marketing & Management Review__________________________________________ ISSN 2319-2836

Vol.2 (5), May (2013)

Online available at indianresearchjournals.com

A CASE STUDY ON SUGUNA POULTRY PRODUCTION THROUGH

CONTRACT FARMING IN ANDHRA PRADESH
MRK MURTHY*; S. BINDU MADHURI**

*RESEARCH ASSOCIATE,
PH.D RESEARCH SCHOLAR, JNTUH,
NATIONAL ACADEMY OF AGRICULTURAL RESEARCH MANAGEMENT (NAARM),
RAJENDRANAGAR, HYDERABAD, A.P, INDIA

**ASSISTANT PROFESSOR,
DEPARTMENT OF POULTRY SCIENCE,
COLLEGE OF VETERINARY SCIENCE,
SRI VENKATESWARA VETERINARY UNIVERSITY TIRUPATI,
RAJENDRANAGAR, HYDERABAD
_____________________________________________________________________________________

ABSTRACT
Contract Farming has become an increasingly important aspect of agri-business as well as
poultry sector in recent years. Poultry farming could play an effective role in improving the
economic status of the rural people by increasing their income besides providing nutritious food
through meat and eggs. From the farmer‟s point of view, contractual arrangement can provide
them with access to production services, credit as well as knowledge of new technology and
moreover pricing arrangements can reduce the risk and uncertainty. Contract farming can act as
an effective tool in mitigating risks faced by farmers while marketing of broiler produce to final
consumer. This paper will throw light on contract farming helps both the parties i.e., the
producers and the companies, which are involved in contract farming system. The case study
found that contract farming major benefits come from reduction in transaction costs and
assurance of regular income for broilers farmers. A comparative analysis made of the contract
and non-contract farming techniques carried by specifying how these can be overcome and can
be advantageous to the producer for the overall development and improvement.

KEYWORD: Contract Farming, Non-Contract Farming, Poultry, Meat, Marketing, Livestock,

Rural income
_____________________________________________________________________________________

INTRODUCTION:
Growth in poultry sector can contribute to enhanced nutrition and poverty reduction in India,
because a large share of the rural poor is dependent on poultry for food and income. The
Government of India recognizes the growth in the poultry sector has so far marginally
contributed to the poverty reduction and improved nutrition. Both demand and supply side
factors are responsible for the growing importance of livestock in Indian agriculture. According
to the 2006 National Sample Survey (NSS) Report on Livestock Ownership (GoI, 2006a), the
landless, marginal and small scale farmers, which account for about 90% of the 107 million
agricultural households in India, keep about 85% of the poultry stock of the country. The export
of meat and meat products, which recorded a growth rate of 11.81 per cent per annum during
1992-2001, accelerated to 27 per cent during 2010. India is currently ranked as the fifth largest
poultry producer in the world, behind the United States, Brazil, the European Union (EU), and

58
Asia Pacific Journal of Marketing & Management Review__________________________________________ ISSN 2319-2836
Vol.2 (5), May (2013)
Online available at indianresearchjournals.com

China in the year 2012. Of late India is the world‟s fourth largest egg producer and fifth major
producer of broilers. India exports a variety of poultry products like eggs, hatching eggs, egg
powder, frozen egg yolk, frozen poultry and poultry meat to Europe, Japan, Maldives, Oman and
other countries. Poultry exports are mostly to Maldives and Oman. The Indian poultry products
have good market in Japan, Malaysia, Indonesia and Singapore.

Poultry industry in Andhra Pradesh:

The era of globalization, the concept of „Contract Farming‟ is an effective way to co-ordinate
and promotes production and marketing in agriculture. “Contract Farming can be defined as an
agreement between farmers and processing or marketing firms for the production and supply of
agricultural products under forward agreements, frequently at predetermined prices.” The
advantages, disadvantages and problems arising from contract farming will vary according to the
physical, social and market environments. More specifically, the distribution of risks will depend
on such factors as the nature of the markets for both the raw material and the processed product,
the availability of alternative earning opportunities for farmers, and the extent to which relevant
technical information is provided to the contracted farmers. These factors are likely to change
over time, as will the distribution of risks.
Andhra Pradesh is the leading poultry meat producing state within India and it accounts for one-
fifth of the poultry meat as well as egg production in the country. About 30% of its broiler output
and 15% of the egg output are exported to other states in India. One major aspect that can be
observed in the poultry sector is it is highly prone to production and market risk, which in turn
affect the profitability of broiler production particularly on the small farms. In order to reduce the
risks to the producers and sustain the profitability in the industry, some of the major firms (like
Suguna Hatcheries, Venkateshwara Hatcheries) began integrating their activities with that of the
broiler producers through the contract farming.
The impressive growth in the poultry meat industry is the technological breakthroughs in
breeding, feeding and health, sizeable investments from the private sector. The expansion in the
supply has been spurred by rising incomes and has resulted in the lower poultry prices in South
India where much of the growth has occurred (USDA 2004).
In this paper a comparative study is been carried out between the producers of the contract and
non-contract farming techniques carried so as to minimize the production risk and increase the
profit for the producers.

Contract in poultry production:

In a poultry contract, the hatcheries provide day-old chick, feed and medicines to the contract
growers. The contract growers supply land, labour and other variable like inputs. At the end of
the production cycle the farmer receives a net price that is the price set by a group of poultry
companies (not the retail price). Thus the farmers receive considerable price insurance. For the
deviations of the retail price from the industry price farmers receive an incentive. This practice
lessens the incentives to default on the part of the growers and reflects the competition from the
non- contract sector.
The broiler contract is an instance of a production management contract where the processor
supplies inputs and extension, credit, provides price insurance and monitors grower effort
through inspections. The detailed monitoring is required because of the considerable credit
advanced by the processor that provides more than 90 percent of the cost of production in terms
of the value of inputs.

59
Asia Pacific Journal of Marketing & Management Review__________________________________________ ISSN 2319-2836
Vol.2 (5), May (2013)
Online available at indianresearchjournals.com

Figure 1. Marketing channels for sampled broiler farms in Andhra Pradesh

Poultry farmers

Contract Farmers Independent

Producers

Integrators Traders

Own Processing Plant Big wholesale traders Retailers

Retailers Small wholesale Consumers

traders

Consumers Retailers

Consumers

METHODS AND METHODOLOGY:

The primary data was collected from 40 contract growers (who are in contract with Suguna
Foods) and the non-contract growers from the parts of Ranga Reddy district (Shadnagar,
Chevella, Moinabad, Shankerpally, Uppal, Ghatkesar) where in poultry production is much
followed and practiced. The data was collected with the help of questionnaire where it included
of three parts a) Village profile b) House hold profile c) Cost and returns in broiler farming and
also from the other farm income.
In the first part Village profile mostly concentrates on the transportation aspects to the villages
i.e., Road and railway connectivity and how far is the urban center located from the village of the
producer. This in turn helps us to find out the effect transportation cost for the marketing of the
end produce (especially for the non contract farmers where in the sell the produce directly and
not in the case of contract farming where in the company sells the produce to their traders) and it
was observed that as the peri-urban areas Ranga Reddy district are quite well developed with
transportation facilities not much of difficulty is been faced by the producers either in the
contract or non contract. All the villages have connectivity to the commercial bank, veterinary
dispensary and hospital and its seen observed that 90% facilities are available from the villages
of the producers.

60
Asia Pacific Journal of Marketing & Management Review__________________________________________ ISSN 2319-2836
Vol.2 (5), May (2013)
Online available at indianresearchjournals.com

Table 1. Infrastructure availability (in the villages of the producers Hypothesis)

Item Contract Non contract

Road connectivity + +
Railway connectivity + +
Post office + +
Cooperative credit society + +
Regional Rural bank + +
Commercial bank + +
Primary dairy cooperative society + +
Veterinary Hospital + +
Veterinary dispensary + +
Source: Primary data

For the contract producers the farms/hatcheries provide the day old chick, feed, vaccination and
medicines to the contract growers. The producer has the supply the land, labor and other variable
inputs like electricity, which is not in the observed in the case of the non-contract producers
where in the producer, has to go to the nearby urban village for any of the transaction regarding
the poultry rearing.
The second part of the questionnaire consists of the characteristics of the poultry growers in
contract and non-contract farming. It is been observed in the table that the non contract growers
are more experienced in the poultry rearing when compared to the contract growers and the
growers aged between 35-36 years are more interested in poultry rearing where in persons aged
more than 40 years are interested in contract farming and poultry rearing. It can also be observed
from the table that non contract farmers were more involved in the agriculture and their main
occupation was not in poultry rearing.

Table 2. Characteristics of Poultry Producers

Item Contract Non contract

Experience in poultry 3.967 21.5
Age 45 36
Years of schooling 12 14
Proportion of farmers whose main occupation is in poultry 25 20
Proportion of farmers who earlier occupation was in 79 80
agriculture/poultry/ dairy/agriculture related activities
Proportion of farmers who‟s earlier occupation was in non 28 27
agriculture
Source: Primary data

The third aspect of the questionnaire is consists of the input, output and the revenues obtained
per cycle for contract and non-contract producers.

61
Asia Pacific Journal of Marketing & Management Review__________________________________________ ISSN 2319-2836
Vol.2 (5), May (2013)
Online available at indianresearchjournals.com

Table3. Input use by poultry producers: Average per production cycle

Item Contract Non contract

Time (cycle) 38 40
Manure value (Rs.) 4420 6035.135
Litter value (Rs.) 5129.31 5857.143
Number of chicks 8505.091 7038.095238
Chick value 81283.12 209430.9524
Feed quantity 290997.7 29990.47619
Medicine + feed value (Rs.) 11928.59 6961.9048
Vaccination per cycle 3 2
Veterinarian fees (Rs.) 8660.619 17919.0476
Labour cost 6853.659 4492.857
Total shed area(square feet) per 10891.52 17514.5
grower
Total equipment cost (Rs.) 71811.36 138216.2
Electricity charges 2865.909 1788.095
Source: Primary data

It can be observed from the table that the non contract producers have longer production cycles
and they invest less on the labour, medicine and also on the vaccination when compared to the
contract growers but the feed quantity is more even though their flock size is less when related to
the contract producers.

Table 4. Output and revenue: Average per production cycle

Item Contract Non contract

Output (no. of birds sold) 7757.523 6209.52381
Mortality 747.5682 740.9524
Average weight of the total birds sold (Kgs.) 12917.16 13224.7619
Revenues from the bird sold 644566.2 377014.3
Average revenue / kg of bird sold 82.2 61.64026
Source: Primary data

This table tries to compare the output and the revenues of both contract and non-contract
growers. The contract producers have larger chick size housed in their output thought the kgs
sold is not much high the amount they receive on the whole is more which is not in the case of
non contract growers this is because the company assures that the quality produced is of high
standards and sells it to the trader where in it fetches more price and also the producer is assured
of the price incentive when price fluctuations are observed where as in the case of non contract
producers they sell the produce near the farm gate where at times they are not assured about the
price risks at times they might fetch high price according to the prevailing market prices and at
times low price.
The last section of the questionnaire is considered for the contract growers i.e., the information
between the contract growers and the processors. As specified before the in contract poultry the

62
Asia Pacific Journal of Marketing & Management Review__________________________________________ ISSN 2319-2836
Vol.2 (5), May (2013)
Online available at indianresearchjournals.com

chicks, feed, medicines and other veterinary services are given by the company and the farmer
has to supply land, buildings, labour and other variable inputs like the disinfectants and
electricity. On an average the out of pocket expenses for the inputs for the contract farmers is
less than 4% of the total input costs.
The below table describes the major components of production costs in both modes of
production. It can be observed that cost structure s comparable across two production systems.
Feed, medicine and veterinary services account for about 75% of the total variable cost. The
expenditure on chicks account for about 20 to 25% where as the labour and electricity charges
account for about 4-5% of the total variable cost.

Table 5. Cost structure of poultry production averages per cycle

Item Contract Non contract
Chicks value (Rs.) 81283.12 209430.9524
Feed & medicines (including vaccinations) 11928.59 6961.9048
Labour electricity and over head charges 9718 6280
102929.71 222671
Source: Primary data

In the total input and output cost the farm income has also been taken into account to know the
percent contribution of it in the overall income the producer gets. For this purpose the crops
grown and its farm revenue was also been calculated and compared with the broiler
management. Two crops which are predominantly grown in the Ranga Reddy district where
taken into account they are Paddy and Vegetable crops (especially green chillies, tomato where
grown mostly). Their amount received and the net profit was been calculated and it is compared
with the average of the poultry cycle can be observed:

Table 6. Net profit of contract and non contract broiler, vegetable and paddy producers
Item Contract Non contract
Paddy
area (Acres) 5.133333333 4.659090909
Production (Quintals) 98.06785714 36.54545455
Amount received 51638.46154 53252.27273
Cost of production 38145.55 26252.4545
net profit 13492.91154 26999.81823
Vegetables Contract Non contract
area (Acres) 4.083333333 3
Production (Quintals) 14.16666667 23.47619048
Amount received 35500 25666.66667
cost of production 22000 15672.498
net profit 13500 9994.168667
Broiler production
Number of chicks placed per cycle 8505.090909 7038.095238
Cost of production 403161.8252 264302.381
Amount received 644566.2386 377014.2857
Net profit 241404.4134 112711.9048

63
Asia Pacific Journal of Marketing & Management Review__________________________________________ ISSN 2319-2836
Vol.2 (5), May (2013)
Online available at indianresearchjournals.com

It can be observed from the above chart is that when compared to the vegetable production the
producers prefer to grow paddy as it fetches them better market price and value and most of the
producers prefer rearing of the poultry though the market risks is quite high in the broiler
management at times the amount received after completion of each cycle is huge when compared
with any other cultivation and the vegetables production is mostly used for the household
purpose and very negligible amount of it is been used for commercial purpose

Table 7. Production costs from vegetables under contract and non-contract farming
Item Contract farmers Non contract % Difference
farmers
Paddy
Area (Acres) 5.133333333 4.659090909 9.685904379
Production (Q) 98.06785714 36.54545455 91.40611998
Cost of production 38145.55 26252.4545 36.9362237
Amount received (Rs.) 51638.46154 53252.27273 -3.077128214
Net profit 241404.4134 112711.9048
Vegetables
area (Acres) 4.083333333 3 30.58823529
Production (Q) 14.16666667 23.47619048 -49.46236559
Cost of production 22000 15672.498 33.59215521
Amount received 35500 25666.66667 32.15258856
Source: Primary data

The above table gives us the brief idea about the production cost involved by the contract and
non contract farmers in paddy and vegetable growing and how this is in turn contributing for
improving the living standards for both the sectors and a percent difference is also been
calculated to know the exact value of difference in each sector.

64
Asia Pacific Journal of Marketing & Management Review__________________________________________ ISSN 2319-2836
Vol.2 (5), May (2013)
Online available at indianresearchjournals.com

Table 8. Production costs and net benefits from broilers under contract and non-contract farming

Item Contract Non- % Difference T- statistic

contract
Number of producer households 40 40 NA NA
Number of chicks placed per crop 8505.090 7038.095 18.87638296 2.349423
(cycle)
Mean length of the production cycle 40.8 41.2 -0.975 NA
Mortality rate (percent) 7.47 7.4 0.941492939 0.328464
Feed conversion rate (kg feed/kg body 1.769 1.711 3.285620127 1.651802
weight)
Body weight (kg/ bird) 1.65 2.2 -28.5714285 -11.6781
Cost of production (Rs/ton body 403161.8 264302.3 41.60805718 NA
weight)
Gross profit (Rs/ton body weight) 644566.2 377014.3 NA NA
Sale from poultry manure 4420 6035.135 NA NA
Sale from litter 5129.31 5857.143 NA NA
Net profit from broilers (Rs/ ton body 241404.4 112711.9 NA NA
weight)
Note: At 0.5% and 1% level of significance, NA- Not Applicable

From above tables 7and 8 where the production and transaction cost of the contract and non
contract farmers the „t‟ statistic and the percent difference was calculated at 0.5 and 1% level of
significance (this significance is taken to get the accurate values at very less percent of
difference).

Table 9. Selected characteristics of Contract and Non-contract producers

Variable Definition Hypothesis

Age of the household Age in years of the household makes decision +
Schooling of the householdSchooling years of the household makes +
decision
Experience in particular Experience in years of producing a particular +
activity commodity.
Land size Size of the land in acres +
Total stock Number of live stock or size of the broiler shed +
Non-farm income Yes if there is any non farm income, otherwise +
zero
Labour available with the Adult workers available for agriculture in the +
household household

An hypothesis is been calculated by taking in few common characteristics of both contract and
non contract farmers to know their similarities and does it contribute and have and positive (+)
effect on the improving the living standards of the farmers and it can be observed that all the

65
Asia Pacific Journal of Marketing & Management Review__________________________________________ ISSN 2319-2836
Vol.2 (5), May (2013)
Online available at indianresearchjournals.com

characteristics have an positive effect and they do contribute in improving the living standards of
the farmers in both the sectors.
Is contract production more efficient than the non contract farming can also be derived from the
above data available in table 7 and 8. Cost in the contract production could be lower than in non
contract production in two different ways. First because of technology and management practices
given by the processor, contract production could be more efficient than non contract production
and the second reason can be that if the processor can access some inputs such as insurance and
credit at lower cost to the growers then contract production could be cheaper than non contract
production even if the production efficiency is unchanged.
There have been certain apprehension that the contract farming could ultimately lead to a
situation where in it could lead the exploitation of the farmers. Such a situation arises when the
market is not competitive and one of the trading partners tries to exploit the farmers. To verify
this phenomenon a comparison was done for the prices offered to contract farmers with those in
the current market. In the case of broilers the prices were fixed by BROMARK and the firm
shared additional profits due to rise in the market prices with the farmers. Also the firm offered
an incentive of 25 per cent for a better feed conversion ratio.
Sharing of risk between the producer and the firm is and big advantage present in the poultry
production industry because the firm bears the markets risks up to certain extent. The mortality
risk up to 5 percent is been borne by the firm. For mortality exceeding more than 5 percent the
firm charges Rs. 0.10/ kg of live body weight of the grown up broiler for every one percent
increase in the mortality. This kind of risk sharing mechanism provides protection to the
producer‟s especially marginal and small land holding farmers under very risk and volatile
markets situations.
Do contract growers earn more than non contract growers to know this we calculate their average
income per kg of output from a production cycle. This is the difference between the revenues and
input costs. Revenues are from the sale of grown chicks, litter and manure. The value of home
consumption if any is also taken into account if present but in the current study this was not
taken because there was no home consumption seen in the both sectors. Inputs consist of chicks,
feed, medicine, vaccine, litter, veterinary fees, labour, electricity and disinfectants. Compared to
the non contract growers the contract growers needs less working capital and therefore incurs
lower interest costs.
According to the all India rural credit survey, formal sector accounted for 53% of all rural credit
in 1991. Money lenders and friends or relatives account for rest. More recent data from the
World Bank indicates that access to formal sector credit is very limited for poorer households.
According to the same survey, the median interest from the banks (the primary institutional
source) in 2003 was 12.5% per annum while the average interest rate from informal sources was
48%. For credit from institutional sources, transactions costs are also significant. These arise
because of distance to financial institutions, cumbersome procedures and bribes ranging from
10% to 20% of loan amount (Srivastava and Basu). As a result the effective cost of credit from
the formal sources is likely to be greater than the median interest rate.
A survey in 2001 of the poultry sector reports that interest rates on commercial loans were
typically around 15% per annum (USDA, 2004). As informal credit is more costly than this, an
interest cost of 15% per annum can be taken to be a lower bound to the cost of credit for
growers.

66
Asia Pacific Journal of Marketing & Management Review__________________________________________ ISSN 2319-2836
Vol.2 (5), May (2013)
Online available at indianresearchjournals.com

CONCLUSION:
The contract farming we find that the gains to the contract growers is in relative to the non
contract growers is much higher and greater in cost of funds and we can also observe that
contracting shifts a large portion of the risks from the growers to the processors. We find that the
contract production is more beneficial when compared to the independent poultry growers this is
because the poultry processor choose those whose skills, experience and access to credit market
make them relatively poor prospects as the independent growers. The next major advantage of
the contract farming is the improved technology and specialized management practices. This
results in low feed consumption.
The poultry farming suggest that contracting is a useful institutional arrangement for supply of
credit, insurance and technology for the farmers which are quite beneficial to the producer
otherwise all of these are quite demanding problems.
As mentioned earlier the major advantage in the non contract farming is that the producer is able
to sell the produce directly to the traders at the current prevailing market price on the current day
at the nearest market where as this is not possible in the case of contract farming and
disadvantage is that he cannot be assured of market risks and any price fluctuations. However we
can observe from the two modes of production is that the independent producers are the ones
who are more interested in taking up the poultry farming but due to some lacunas like non
availability of labour at times and providing of medicines and vaccinations at improper time and
the time taken by the company processing (delaying) of the accounts (i.e., payments) after the
end produce is ready they are not willing to shift into the contracting with any company even
though they face the market risks.
The key advantage to the contract growers is that the poultry processors choose those whose
skills, experience and access to credit make them relatively poor prospects as independent
growers. With the contract production, these growers achieve incomes comparable to that of
independent growers. As a result the processor is able to capture most of the surplus from
contract production while offering at the same time significant gains to contract growers in terms
of a reduction in risk as well as higher expected returns. Crucial to this outcome are the improved
technology and management practices that are employed in contract production. This results in
lower feed conversion ratio and is achieved by producers whose endowments are not as well
versed with that of poultry production as the independent growers. This is possibly due to the
standardization of production practices in contract production as contract growers‟ exhibit a
striking homogeneity in feed conversion ratios and expected returns relative to independent
growers as this is achieved by close supervision by the processor.
These lacunas can be overcome by the company by
 providing better extension services i.e., regular vaccinations and medicines to the chicks
without any delay
 seeing that the payment is done at the time when the produce is handed over to the
processor and avoiding any late payments
 seeing that the process time to start a particular unit is being reduced
 extension services should not only be provided for the rearing the chicks but also to the
producer in case of any trouble faced like getting a bank loan for setting up a new unit
seeing that the amount is received at less rate of interest. This in turn helps in building up
good faith and rapport between the processor and the producers

67
Asia Pacific Journal of Marketing & Management Review__________________________________________ ISSN 2319-2836
Vol.2 (5), May (2013)
Online available at indianresearchjournals.com

By following certain institutional arrangements the contract farming can be made quite popular
among the farming community as the current trend is shifting from agriculture to non-agriculture
activities this contracting method can help the producer to fetch more revenue when compared to
the other allied activities and that to at completion of each cycle (35-40 days maximum). The
poultry case study suggest that contract farming is a useful institutional arrangement for the
supply of insurance, credit and technology to farmers all of which are otherwise very crucial and
demanding problems. For many commodities, however contract faming in India is not legal
because of the agricultural produce marketing acts which make it mandatory for commodities
under the act to be wholesaled in regulated markets. Removing these prohibitions would be
important to widen the scope of contract farming. Some believe that the contract farming should
be regulated to ensure that processors live up to the promises made in the contract regarding the
quality of inputs, provision of credit and the buyback arrangement. As a result the interests of the
processors and the grower are closely aligned together.

REFERENCES:
1. Bhavani, T.A., Ashok Gulati and Devesh Roy. 2007. Structure of the Indian Food
Processing Industry: Towards Scaling Up and Consolidation. International Food Policy
Research Institute, New Delhi.
2. Gulati, Ashok. 2008. Fragmenting Bottom and Consolidating Top: India‟s Changing
Food System and Implications for Small Holders, in India: Some aspects of Economic
and Social development (eds.) S.Mahendra Dev and K.S. Babu. Academic Foundation,
India. 2008.
3. Srivastava, Ravi.2008. Prospects for Small Holding Agriculture in India presented at the
workshop titled Exploring Alternatives Futures for Agricultural Knowledge, Science and
Technology (KST) organized by National Council of Applied Economic Research and
International Food Policy Research Institute at India Habitat Center, Amaltas Hall, New
Delhi. 01 July 2008.
4. Birthal.S. Pratap, Joshi P.K, Gulati April 2005, Vertical co-ordination in High Value
Food Commodities : Implications for Small holders (International Food Policy Research
Institute)
5. Birthal.S.Pratap: Making Contract Farming work in Smallholder Agriculture.
6. Kumar Promod: Resource Provision, Productivity and Contract Farming – A Case study
in Punjab.
7. Otte.J and Ciamarra-Pica .U – Research report: RR Nr. 09-02; February 2009: Poultry,
Food Security and Poverty in India: looking beyond the Farm Gate
8. Eswaran, Mukesh and Ashok Kotwal, (1985), “A Theory of Contractual Structure in
Agriculture”, American Economic Review, pp 352-367.
9. USDA, (2004), India‟s Poultry Sec-tor, Development and Prospects, Agriculture and
Trade Reports, Economics Research Service, WRS-04-03.
10. Ramaswami Bharat, Bhirthal Pratap, Joshi P.K: February, 2005: Efficiency Distribution
in Contract Farming: The case study of Indian Poultry Growers.

68