Study on Livelihood and Scope of Value Addition: a Case of Jamnagar District of Gujarat
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
International Journal of Agriculture Sciences ISSN: 0975-3710&E-ISSN: 0975-9107, Volume 8, Issue 21, 2016, pp.-1376-1380. Available online at http://www.bioinfopublication.org/jouarchive.php?opt=&jouid=BPJ0000217 STUDY ON LIVELIHOOD AND SCOPE OF VALUE ADDITION: A CASE OF JAMNAGAR DISTRICT OF GUJARAT SAVALIYA DIVYA1, KHUNT K.A.1, CHAUDHARI V.P.1, MAHAMMADHUSEN K.2 AND KAMANI H.V.3 1PGIABM, Junagadh Agricultural University, Junagadh, 362001 2Department of Agricultural Economics, Junagadh Agricultural University (JAU), Junagadh, 362001 3Tata Chemicals Society for Rural Development (TCSRD), Mithapur, 361 345, Okhamandal, Gujarat *Corresponding Author: Email - [email protected] Received: April 09, 2016; Revised: April 15, 2016; Accepted: April 16, 2016 Abstract- An attempt has been made for studying rural development activities in the Okhamandal area of Gujarat. The Gini coefficient was estimated to 0.043. Among all the ten groups, Madhav group had the highest share (17.38 %) in total income. Regarding the value addition in the Okhaman dal area about 23 per cent farmers did the value addition which was very poor as compare to their future expectations i.e. 82 per cent farmers. The highest scope of value addition was observed in commodities like chillies (27 farmers), tomato (20 farmers) and groundnut (48 farmers). Per acre net income was obtained Rs, 6,03,526. The crops like sapota, coconut, coriander, chillies, brinjal and cotton were the major sources of farm income. In case of animal husbandry, the average gross income received per cluster from animal husbandry was estimated at Rs. 1,19,502 per annum. Labour activities in the form of driving, industrial and agril labour, masonry works etc. were the major alternative sources of income in the study area. Keywords- Gini coefficient, Total income, Net income, Value addition, Cluster Citation: Savaliya Divya, et al., (2016) Study on Livelihood and Scope of Value Addition: A Case of Jamnagar District of Gujarat. International Journal of Agriculture Sciences, ISSN: 0975-3710 & E-ISSN: 0975-9107, Volume 8, Issue 21, pp.-1376-1380. Copyright: Copyright©2016 Savaliya Divya, et al., This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited. Introduction The livelihood approach looks to improve the incomes from farm and non-farm Table-1 List of selected clusters of TCSRD activities for landless people by comprises the capabilities, assets and activities Group No. Village Name Group Name Total Farmers required for a means of living. Value addition in agriculture for the development of 1 Ghadechi Shiv Aagna 15 rural livelihood is a major factor for income generation via transforming a product 2 Ghadechi Rutu Dhwaj 15 from its original state to a more valuable state. India is estimated to have around 3 Goriyali Aashapura 13 4 Goriyali Vachhraj 11 3.3 million NGOs in year 2009, which is just over one NGO per 400 Indians, and 5 Poshitra Bhumiputra 14 many times the number of primary schools and primary health centers in India [4]. 6 Ladva Dwarkadhish 10 Tata Chemicals Limited (TCL) Established in 1939 had set up a Tata Chemical 7 Dwarka Gomti 11 Society for Rural Development (TCSRD) in 1980 to fulfill its social commitment to 8 Vasai Magic 11 the communities and services were subsequently extended to the different regions 9 Korada Dwarkesh 12 of the state. TCSRD is working for rural poor of the Okhamandal area of Jamnagar 10 Tupani Madhav 11 district. The community development journey began in the 80’s in Mithapur, which is part of Dwarka Taluka in the Jamnagar District. Mithapur is the home to the The income disparity among the cluster groups of TCSRD was measured using Gini coefficient. The Gini coefficient is a measure of inequality for given chemical division of Tata Chemical Ltd. The emphasize was made to assess the impact of the effort made by this organization by studying the income disparity, distribution. It is defined as a ratio with values between 0 and 1. The Gini index is explore the scope for value addition in agriculture in clusters and identification of the Gini coefficient expressed as a percentage and is equal to the Gini coefficient the areas of alternative source livelihood for the clusters. multiplied by 100. The Gini coefficient is often used to measure income inequality. Here, 0 indicates to perfect income equality (i.e. everyone has the same income) Materials and Methods and 1 indicates corresponds to perfect income inequality (i.e. one person has all The present study was carried out in Okhamandal taluka, which is located the income, while everyone else has zero income). The trapezoidal method was Jamnagar district of Gujarat. TCSRD has formed the 20 groups of farmers used to work out Gini coefficient using formula as under [2]: considering the size of holding, location of farm, resident etc. The minimum size of ∑푛 (푃 − 푃 ) (푄 + 푄 ) each group is ten members and the maximum size is up to sixteen members. Out 퐺 = 1 − 푘=1 푘 푘−1 푘 푘−1 of twenty cluster groups of the TCSRD project area, ten clusters groups were 10000 selected randomly. Finally, from each selected cluster group, 10 farmers from each were selected out of 123 farmers listed in [Table-1]. Thus, the size of the Where, sample was of 100 farmers. The primary data about socioeconomic information, G = The Gini coefficient crop production, off farm activities, income sources, alternative livelihood etc. had P = Cumulative percentage of groups of households been collected with the help of structured questionnaires. Qk = Cumulative proportion of per group average income International Journal of Agriculture Sciences ISSN: 0975-3710&E-ISSN: 0975-9107, Volume 8, Issue 21, 2016 || Bioinfo Publications || 1376 Study on Livelihood and Scope of Value Addition: A Case of Jamnagar District of Gujarat Qk-1 = Preceding proportion of per group average income the extent of 23.26 per cent in total income while the share of other income Similar method was used by [1] and [3] for the income inequality measurement. restricted to 8.72 per cent only. The same trend is also observed across the The relative contribution of each of the sources of overall inequality assessed by groups except the cases of Gomti and Bhumiputra groups. Besides the positive decomposition of the Gini coefficients that measured provides the contributions of impact of works of TCSRD on rural development, it also helps to reduce the different income sources income disparity among the groups of beneficiaries. The detail about the distribution of the groups in different income classes is Results and Discussion described in [Table-3]. It can be observed from the table that the share of 70 per Income disparity: The distribution of income among groups of households is cent groups in total income was nearly 54 percent. The average annual income of presented in [Table-2]. The highest per cent of income was observed in Madhav this groups was nearly Rs. 2,31,671 per group. The Gini coefficient was 0.043 group of households contributing 17.38 per cent (Rs. 5,21,766) to total income of which is nearer to zero. This indicates that every group has more or less same all the ten groups of households, followed by Dwarkesh group (14.72 %), income. This indicates that income was more evenly distributed in all the groups. Bhumiputra group (13.88 %), Ashapura group (11.00 %), Rutudhwaz group (9.26 Thus, could be inferred that the groups might be more or less homogeneous in %), Gomti group (8.74 %), Magic group (7.77 %), Vachhraj group (6.16 %) and earning the income. [Fig-1] shows the magnitude of inequalities for the income of Dwarkadhish group (5.67 %). The lowest contribution to total income of all the clusters. Observed inequality was due to difference in farm holding size, different sample groups was 5.42 per cent i.e. Rs. 1,62,769 by Shivangna group (5.42%). alternative sources of income generation, technological uses in farming and On an average, agriculture seemed to be the major source of total income of all livestock keeping. [5] had also found that the non-farm sources have contributed the clusters contributing 68.02 per cent. The animal husbandry has contributed to more than 90 per cent towards income inequality. Table-2 Component wise income distribution among groups of TCSRD Cumulative Sr. Name of No. of % of Cumulative % Average % of (Pk - Pk-1) % Pk - Pk-1 Qk + Qk-1 No. Group Households Households of Households Net Income (Rs.) Income (Qk + Qk-1) of Income 1 Shivagna 10 10 10 162769 5.42 5.42 10 5.42 54.22 2 Rutudhwaz 10 10 20 278011 9.26 14.68 10 20.11 201.06 3 Dwarkesh 10 10 30 441751 14.72 29.40 10 44.08 440.84 4 Vachhraj 10 10 40 184975 6.16 35.56 10 64.96 649.63 5 Gomti 10 10 50 262321 8.74 44.30 10 79.86 798.64 6 Madhav 10 10 60 521766 17.38 61.68 10 105.98 1059.85 7 Dwarakadish 10 10 70 170190 5.67 67.35 10 129.04 1290.36 8 Bhumiputra 10 10 80 416555 13.88 81.23 10 148.58 1485.83 9 Magic 10 10 90 233166 7.77 89.00 10 170.23 1702.27 10 Ashapura 10 10 100 330270 11.00 100.00 10 189.00 1889.98 Total 100 100 3001774 100.00 100 957.27 9572.68 Gini coefficient = 0.043 Table-3 Distribution of income among groups of households Sr.