Impact Evaluation of RKVY of NADP Was Based on Agro-Climatic Zones of Tamil Nadu and the 9 Districts Chosen Were from Five Agro-Climatic Zones

Impact Evaluation of Rashtriya Krishi Vikas Yojana (RKVY) Implemented Projects Report 2013 - 14

Prepared as per the NADP Guideline

Coordinated by

Tamil Nadu Watershed Development Agency (TAWDEVA) A state level Nodal agency

DHAN Foundation Prepared and Submitted on Building Institutions for Generations April 2017

Tata-Dhan Academy T. Malaipatti, Thenkarai (BO), Mullipallam (SO) Vadipatti Taluk, Madurai District 625 207, Tamil Nadu, India Tata-Dhan Academy Email: [email protected]; Web: www.dhan.org/tda/ DHAN Foundation Madurai Table of Contents

List of Figures ...... vi List of Tables ...... viii List of Maps ...... viii Abbreviations ...... ix Acknowledgement ...... xi Executive Summary ...... xiii 1. Introduction ...... 3 1.1 Introduction ...... 3 1.2 RKVY Guidelines ...... 3 1.3 RKVY Fund allocation to Southern States ...... 5 1.4 Tamil Nadu Watershed Development Agency (TAWDEVA) ...... 6 1.5 Third party evaluation ...... 7 1.6 Specific activities as per Terms of Reference (TOR) ...... 7 1.7 Structure of the report ...... 8 2. Literature Review ...... 13 2.1 Introduction ...... 13 2.2 Why Agriculture project Impact Evaluation ...... 13 2.3 Way to conduct Impact Evaluation ...... 14 2.4 Findings through impact evaluation ...... 16 2.5 Major limitations in impact evaluation ...... 18 3. Study Design and Methodology ...... 23 3.1 Introduction ...... 23 3.2 Frame work for the study ...... 23 3.3 Tools and Techniques ...... 24 3.4 Study area ...... 27 4. Allocation and Expenditure under RKVY in Tamil Nadu ...... 33 4.1 Introduction ...... 33 4.2 Sectoral share of RKVY fund allocation in Tamil Nadu during 2013-14 ...... 33 4.3 Agriculture ...... 38 4.4 Horticulture ...... 41 4.5 Agricultural Engineering...... 44 4.6 Agricultural Marketing ...... 46 iv Table of Contents

4.7 Tamil Nadu Agricultural University ...... 47 4.8 Animal Husbandry and Veterinary Services ...... 49 4.9 Dairy Development and Milk Production ...... 50 4.10 Fisheries department ...... 52 4.11 Co-operative Societies ...... 57 4.12 Summary and conclusion ...... 57 5. Assessment of Agricultural Performance...... 61 5.1 Introduction ...... 61 5.2 Sector wise contribution of GDP of India ...... 61 5.3 Performance of agriculture sector in overall GDP ...... 63 5.4 Production ...... 64 5.5 Land Utilization pattern ...... 65 5.6 Land Holding ...... 65 5.7 Rainfall ...... 66 5.8 Soil fertility ...... 67 5.9 Agricultural Wages in India ...... 67 5.10 Mahatma Gandhi National Rural Employment Gurantee Act (MGNERA) ...... 68 5.11 Summary and conclusion ...... 69 6. Socio Economic Characteristics, Cropping Pattern and Value of Output of the Sample Household 73 6.1 Introduction ...... 73 6.2 Socio-economic status of selected households ...... 75 6.3 Landholding pattern and source of irrigation of the sample beneficiaries ...... 78 6.4 Cropping pattern ...... 79 6.5 Livestock holding ...... 80 6.6 Beneficiary households' awareness about the RKVY programme...... 81 6.7 Value of the RKVY projects ...... 82 6.8 Intangible benefits ...... 90 6.9 Major noteworthy benefits due to RKVY programme ...... 91 6.10 Satisfaction level of beneficiaries ...... 92 6.11 Project wise satisfaction level ...... 93 6.12 Summary of impact in agriculture and allied sectors ...... 95 7. Good Practices ...... 99 7.1 Introduction ...... 99 Table of Contents v

7.2 System Rice Intensification – A Milestone in second Green Revolution ...... 101 7.3 Vegetable Cultivation with Pandal ...... 102 7.4 Propagation of Fish culture in Farm Pond – case of Mr.M.Murugan, Mullipallam, Madurai 104 7.5 Impact of introducing high yielding fodder crop in S S Kulam Block through NADP Project 105 7.6 Upgradation of Rural Sandhai in Maniyachi village, Alanganallur block, Madurai district 106 7.7 Providing adequate infrastructure facilities at Trichy dairy ...... 109 7.8 Agricultural Mechanization - Combined harvester ...... 112 7.9 Agricultural Mechanization – Maize Husker and Sheller ...... 113 7.10 Agricultural Mechanization – Power weeder ...... 114 7.11 Agricultural Mechanization – Rotavator ...... 115 7.12 Rainfed Area Development Programme (RADP), 1) Horticulture Based Farming System, 2) Pipe & precasted distribution system, 3) In-situ water conservation ...... 115 7.13 Rainfed Area Development Programme (RADP), 1) Horticulture Based Farming System, 2) Pipe & precasted distribution system, 3) Bore well and 4) Water lifting machine ...... 117 8. Key Findings ...... 121 8.1 Background of the Impact Evaluation Study ...... 121 8.2 Summary of the findings ...... 122 8.3 Suggestions for the Better Implementation of RKVY Programme...... 129 8.4 A Way Forward ...... 129 8.5 A Way Forward for the implementing agency ...... 134 References ...... 138 Annexures ...... 143 vi List of Figures

List of Figures

Figure 1.1: Trend in Share of Southern States from NADP allocation ...... 6 Figure 3.1: Study framework ...... 23 Figure 3.2: Schematic representation of sampling framework ...... 27 Figure 4.1: Sectoral share of RKVY fund allocation during 2013-14 ...... 34 Figure 4.2: Agriculture Sectoral share of RKVY fund allocation during 2013-14 ...... 35 Figure 4.3: Allied Sectoral share of RKVY fund allocation during 2013-14 ...... 35 Figure 4.4: Department wise percentage of fund allocation for Normal and Sub schemes under RKVY during 2013-14 ...... 36 Figure 4.5: Performance of departments in financial target and allocation under RKVY programme during 2013-14 ...... 37 Figure 4.6: Percentage of financial achievement of the departments, 2013-14 ...... 37 Figure 4.7: Percentage of financial achievement of Agriculture department projects, 2013-14...... 39 Figure 4.8: Share of Agriculture projects, 2013-14 ...... 40 Figure 4.9: Financial target and achievement of agriculture department of sample districts ...... 41 Figure 4.10: Share of Horticulture projects, 2013-14 ...... 43 Figure 4.11: Financial target and achievement of horticulture department of sample districts ...... 43 Figure 4.12: Percentage of financial achievement of Agricultural engineering department projects, 2013-14 ...... 44 Figure 4.13: Share of Agricultural engineering projects, 2013-14 ...... 45 Figure 4.14: Share of agricultural marketing projects, 2013-14 ...... 47 Figure 4.15: Share of TNAU projects, 2013-14 ...... 49 Figure 4.16: Share of Dairy development and milk production department projects, 2013-14 ...... 51 Figure 4.17: Share of Fisheries development projects, 2013-14 ...... 53 Figure 5.1: Sector wise contribution of GDP of India (1950-2014) ...... 61 Figure 5.2: Sector wise growth rate percentage in Tamil Nadu ...... 62 Figure 5.3: Sectoral share in India and Tamil Nadu ...... 63 Figure 5.4: Land Utilization pattern in Tamil Nadu, 2013-14 ...... 65 Figure 5.5: Monthly Rainfall distribution in Tamil Nadu ...... 66 Figure 5.6: Agricultural labour wage rate in India ...... 67 Figure 5.7: Person days projected and generated over the period in Tamil Nadu ...... 68 Figure 6.1: Sector-wise details of selected households (% of beneficiaries) ...... 75 Figure 6.2: Gender profile of sample beneficiaries ...... 76 Figure 6.3: Age profile of sample beneficiaries ...... 76 Figure 6.4: Family size ...... 76 Figure 6.5: Type of House ownership ...... 76 Figure 6.6: Type of house roof...... 76 Figure 6.7: Electricity availability ...... 77 Figure 6.8: Access to water at household premises ...... 77 Figure 6.9: Types of fuel used for cooking purposes ...... 77 Figure 6.10: Access to individual household latrine ...... 77 Figure 6.11: Education profile ...... 78 List of Figures vii

Figure 6.12: Kisan card availability ...... 78 Figure 6.13: SB account availability ...... 78 Figure 6.14: Land holding size ...... 79 Figure 6.15: Source of irrigation ...... 79 Figure 6.16: Cropping pattern among selected households ...... 80 Figure 6.17: Livestock holding by the sample households (in numbers) ...... 81 Figure 6.18: Source of awareness about RKVY programme to the beneficiary households ...... 82 Figure 6.19: Cost involved in RKVY programme implementation during 2013-14 ...... 83 Figure 6.20: Mode of fund received under RKVY by the beneficiary ...... 83 Figure 6.21: Major impacts due to RKVY agricultural projects ...... 84 Figure 6.22: Major investments in productive and non productive assets due to RKVY agricultural projects ...... 85 Figure 6.23: Major impacts due to RKVY horticultural projects ...... 86 Figure 6.24: Major investments in productive and non productive assets due to RKVY horticultural projects ...... 86 Figure 6.25: Major impacts due to RKVY agricultural engineering projects ...... 87 Figure 6.26:Major investments in productive and non productive assets due to RKVY agricultural engineering projects ...... 87 Figure 6.27:Major impacts due to RKVY TNAU projects ...... 88 Figure 6.28:Major investments in productive and non productive assets due to RKVY TNAU projects ...... 88 Figure 6.29:Major impacts due to RKVY animal husbandry projects ...... 89 Figure 6.30:Major investments in non productive assets due to RKVY animal husbandry projects .... 89 Figure 6.31:Major impacts due to RKVY fisheries projects ...... 90 Figure 6.32: Major investments in productive and non productive assets due to RKVY fisheries projects ...... 90 Figure 6.33: Grant received from other sources for the livelihood improvement of the beneficiary during 2013-14 ...... 91 Figure 6.34: Grant received from other sources to improve the standard of living of the beneficiary during 2013-14 ...... 91 Figure 6.35: Major impacts due to RKVY programme in agriculture and allied sectors ...... 96 Figure 6.36:Major investments in productive and non productive assets due to RKVY projects in agriculture and allied sectors ...... 96 Figure 7.1: Selection criteria for good practices ...... 100 Figure 8.1: Tripartite project implementation model ...... 133

List of Tables viii

List of Tables

Table 2.1: Advantages and Disadvantages of Various Evaluation Designs and Methodologies ...... 15 Table 3.1: Framework of Impact Evaluation Study of NADP projects implemented during 2013-14 . 24 Table 3.2: List of selected districts for the study ...... 29 Table 4.1: Projects sanctioned for Agriculture under NADP/RKVY, 2013-14 ...... 38 Table 4.2: Projects sanctioned for Horticulture department under NADP/RKVY, 2013-14 ...... 42 Table 4.3: Projects sanctioned for Agricultural Engineering under NADP/RKVY, 2013-14 ...... 45 Table 4.4: Projects sanctioned for Agricultural Marketing under NADP/RKVY, 2013-14 ...... 46 Table 4.5: Fund allocation and Expenditure details for TNAU under RKVY, 2013-14 ...... 48 Table 4.6: Fund allocation and Expenditure details for Dairy Development and Milk Production department under RKVY, 2013-14 ...... 50 Table 4.7: Fund allocation and Expenditure details for Fisheries department under RKVY, 2013-14 52 Table 4.8: Progress of Fish Culture in Multipurpose Farm pond in Tamil Nadu ...... 54 Table 4.9: Training for beneficiaries of MPFP ...... 55 Table 4.10: Integrated Aquaculture units for the fish farmers of Tamil Nadu at Thanjavur district .... 55 Table 4.11: Upgradation of Fishing Efficiency of Inland Fishermen of Tamil Nadu (50 % subsidy for fishing nets) ...... 56 Table 4.12: Input subsidy assistance for FRP Catamaran under NADP: 2013-14 ...... 56 Table 4.13: Details of 5 vans purchased under Co-operative societies ...... 57 Table 5.1: Performance of primary sector: Sub-sectoral income (GSDP) at constant (2004-05), Rs. In crore ...... 63 Table 5.2: Area, Production and Productivity of principal crops 2013-14 ...... 64 Table 5.3: Rainfall pattern in India and Tamil Nadu ...... 66 Table 5.4: District-wise Person days Generated in 2013-2014 ...... 68 Table 6.1: Activity wise share in value and numbers of projects during 2013-14 under RKVY – Tamil Nadu ...... 73 Table 6.2: Details of the selected numbers of production, infrastructure and sub scheme beneficiaries in Tamil Nadu ...... 74 Table 6.3: Satisfaction level of beneficiaries in RKVY programme implementation ...... 92 Table 7.1: Department wise classification of good practices ...... 100 Table 7.2: Providing adequate infrastructure facilities at Trichy dairy – component wise details ..... 110 Table 7.3: Comparison between manual weeding vs. machine weeding in one acre of banana orchard ...... 114 Table 7.4: Subsidy Amount released in details to Mr. S.Periyakaruppan, Aritapatty, Melur block of Madurai ...... 116 Table 7.5: Subsidy Amount released in details to Ms. Pappammal, A. Valayapatti, Melur block of Madurai ...... 117

List of Maps

Map 3.1: Study area ...... 28 Abbreviations ix

Abbreviations

AE Advanced Estimates AFDP Additional Fodder Development Programme AGRISNET Agriculture Resource Information Systems and Networking AMI & BPC Agro Market Intelligence and Business Promotion Centre BGREI Brining Green Revolution to Eastern India BRGF Backward Regions Grant Fund CARDS Centre for Agriculture and Rural Development Studies CCS Centrally Sponsored Schemes CRIS Customized Rainfall Information System DAP District Agriculture Plans DARE Department of Agricultural Research and Education DARS Dryland Agriculture Research Station

DDP Desert Development Programme DEMIC Domestic and Export Market Intelligence Cell

DES Directorate of Economics And Statistics DHAN Development of Humane Action DoLR Department of Land Resources DPAP Drought Prone Areas Programme DRDA District Rural Development Agency DSR Direct Seeded Rice

EPA Environment Protection Authority FGD Focus Group Discussion FMD Foot & Mouth Disease

FYP Five-Year Plans GDP Gross Domestic Product

GIS Geographic information system GO Government Order GSDP Gross State Domestic Product HRD Human Resource Development ICT Information and Communication Technology IES Impact Evaluation Study IFAD International Fund for Agricultural Development

INSIMP Initiative for Nutritional Security through Intensive Millets Promotion

IWDP Integrated Watershed Development Programme IWMP Integrated Watershed Management Programme MGNERA Mahatma Gandhi National Rural Employment Gurantee Act MoRD Ministry of Rural Development MT Metric Tonnes NADP National Agriculture Development Programme NDC National Development Council x Abbreviations

NFSM National Food Security Mission NGO Non-Governmental Organization NIC National Informatics Centre

NIRD National Institute of Rural Development NMPS National Mission for Protein Supplements NMSA National Mission for Sustainable Agriculture NRAA National Rainfed Area Authority NREGS National Rural Employment Guarantee scheme OBC Other Backward Class PACS Primary Agricultural Cooperative Societies PIA Participatory Impact Assessment

PVC Polyvinyl chloride QE Quick Estimates RADP Rainfed Area Development Programme

RBI Reserve Bank of India RCT Randomized control trials RE Revised Estimates RKVY Rashtriya Krishi Vikas Yojana ROI Return On Investment RSO Resource Support Organization SAP State Agriculture Plans

SC/ST Scheduled Castes/Scheduled Tribes SGSY Swarnjayanti Gram Swarozgar Yojana SLSC State Level Sanctioning Committee SSEPERS - ATMA Support to State Extension Programme for Extension Reforms Scheme TAWDEVA Tamil Nadu Watershed Development Agency TNAU Tamil Nadu Agricultural University TOR Terms Of Reference TRFA Targeting Rice Fallow Areas UT Union Territory WDF Watershed Development Fund WGDP Western Ghats Development Programme

WHS Work Health and Safety

Acknowledgement xi

Acknowledgement

DHAN Foundation, a professional development institution has many agricultural discipline professionals in their rolls got a valuable opportunity of doing Third Party Impact Evaluation of National Agricultural Development Programme [NADP} under the coordination of Tamil Nadu Watershed Development Authority [TAWDEVA], a state nodal agency during November 2016. With DHAN‘s capacity and credentials in grassroots development intervention, the impact evaluation study has been successfully completed by constituting an exclusive resourceful impact evaluation team.

DHAN Foundation conveys its gratitude and thanks to Dr. R. Anandkumar, I.A.S., Executive Director of TAWDEVA for awarding the impact evaluation and acknowledges his cooperation and support by thanking him profusely. DHAN also convey it‘s thanks to Thiru. V. Chandrasekaran, I.A.S. incumbent Executive Director of TAWDEVA for accepting the final report and his valuable suggestions.

DHAN intend to convey thanks to the Directors of all main department viz. Agriculture, Horticulture, Agricultural Engineering, Animal Husbandry and Livestock, Dairy and Co-operation, Fisheries, CARDS Head of Department of TNAU, Agricultural Marketing.

DHAN expresses its sincere thanks to all the nodal officers of the Agriculture and allied sector and sub-scheme department in the nine study districts and all their officers for their continued support in providing data and identifying the right beneficiaries for evaluating the impact.

DHAN conveys to applaud and thank all the senior officers in TAWDEVA; with a special mention about Ms. Susila, ADA. Without their continuous encouragement and constant feedback, the study could not become reality.

DHAN Foundation would fail in its duty, if it forgets to acknowledge all the beneficiary farmers who have expressed their impact with clarity, despite the farm sector during the study period time has been reeling under drought and water scarcity. Thanks may look simple and the study team wish to bow to their relentless struggle to make farming successful and ensuring food security of the state.

Last but not the least, DHAN intend to convey its wishes to all those who are directly and indirectly extended their cooperation and support to make the study outcomes with sustained impact. All the members of study team and their extensive travel during the short study duration has been worth acknowledging by DHAN Foundation.

A.Gurunathan Programme Leader And Co-ordinator of Impact Evaluation Study

Executive Summary xiii

Executive Summary

RKVY/NADP guidelines were framed by Department of Agriculture and Co-operation of Ministry of Agriculture of Govt. of India during August 2007 and later revised during 12th Five year plan on 11th December 2014. These are applicable to all the states and Union Territories. It aims at achieving 4 percent annual growth by evolving a holistic development of Agriculture and allied sectors. Atleast 7 percent of the allocated fund to the state government should be utilized under specific projects and 25 percent is available for strengthening existing sector scheme and fixing the resource gaps.

A state is permitted to use about 1 percent of its total RKVY funds for incurring administrative expenditure.

Tamil Nadu state has received Rs.3118.83 millions during the year 2013-14 which is 1.99 percent from the total allocation of central government. This has been the lowest allocation ever since 2007. Tamil Nadu Watershed Development Agency [TAWDEVA] acts as the nodal agency for channelizing the funds for the NADP scheme. The impact study fulfilled the following objectives:

. To assist the project functionaries at various levels, the organizational learning processes need to be facilitated through the observations of Associate agency. . To examine the various activities implemented by the departments and confirm that the project activities are implemented as per the RKVY Guidelines, Government orders and implementation guidelines issued by the implementing departments. . To get timely and appropriate information on the performance of projects, measured by combining qualitative and quantitative performance indicators. . To study the value of the project . To study the socio economic profile of farmers pre and post project. . To find out the opinion of the farmers regarding the implementation of projects . To document the success stories and best practices which will be useful for replication . The Associate agency should add value to the project for achievement of expected outcome and impact.

Institute of Social and Economic Change [ISEC}, Bangalore [2014] adopted a multi-stage sampling method and covered 25 States and 2 UTs, covering 171 districts, 353 taluks, 3164 villages and 8174 beneficiaries. The study revealed that all sectors together created an average number of 11 days of additional employment per household constituting 6 days of own and 5 days of hired labour annual. The average subsidy received by the Household who availed the benefits was Rs. 24000 per household. 58.7 percent infrastructure projects achieved 100 percent as per the plan. About 7.5 percent of the respondents said an average amount of bribe of Rs.6711 per beneficiary households was spent to avail benefits under RKVY.

xiv Executive Summary

Framework of Impact Evaluation Study of NADP projects implemented during 2013-14

S. Sources of Tools and Objectives Indicators to be assessed No. information Techniques

1. Project activities List of projects implemented by the agency Secondary Discussion, implemented as with the implementation steps data from line Secondary data per the RKVY departments, about their Guidelines Implementing programme agency implementation

`2. Value of the 1. Type of the project Farmers and Focus group project 2. Project cost implementing discussion and 3. Duration of the project agency Interview schedule 4. No. of beneficiaries 5. Impact of the project 3. Socio economic 1. Working days Farmers from 8 Interview profile of 2. Yield districts -Socio schedule, beneficiaries pre 3. Income economic Participatory and post project 4. Cropping intensity profile impact evaluation 5. Irrigation intensity with the farmers 6. Ground water table 7. Crop diversification 8. Asset creation 9. Standard of living 10. Nutritional care 4. Opinion of the Farmers from 8 Interview farmers regarding districts - schedule, the Opinion about Participatory implementation of the impact evaluation

projects implemented with the farmers

projects – With justification 2013 -14

5. Success stories . Case studies / Success stories Farmers and Case studies and and Good . Good practices implementing Good practices practices agency documentation

In the present impact evaluation conducted by the third party agency viz. DHAN Foundation, the study team intensively enquired 494 beneficiaries at 244 villages, 27 blocks in 9 districts. Besides, the study team also conducted 17 participatory impact evaluation conducted with 169 beneficiaries in 7 districts. Case study method/Video documentation of best practices adopted by the implementing agencies by intensively evaluating one unit of programme by taking district as a whole. The study area for Impact Evaluation of RKVY of NADP was based on agro-climatic zones of Tamil Nadu and the 9 districts chosen were from five agro-climatic zones.

Tamil Nadu is the second largest state economy in the country next to Maharastra holds agriculture as the prime sources of livelihood for more than 40 percent of the population. Nonetheless, it receives on all-time high record production of 10.1 million tonnes of Rice and received ―Krishi Karman Award‖. During 2013-14, the central government has sanctioned about Rs.31188.28 lakhs to the State which is Executive Summary xv

about approximately 2 percent of the total allocation under the scheme.This has been utilized for implementing 44 normal schemes and 10 sub-schemes. While 84 percent of the financial allocation was directly related to agriculture sector and the remaining 16 percent of the financial allocation was focused on allied sector. Out of the total allocation under agriculture sector, the fund was allocated to Agriculture (57 percent), Agriculture Engineering (24 percent), Horticulture (13 percent), Agriculture marketing (5 percent) and Tamil Nadu Agriculture University (1 percent) respectively. On Allied sector, the fund was allocated for Dairy Development (51 percent), Animal Husbandry (28 percent), Fisheries (19 percent) and co-operation (2 percent) respectively.

On the Agriculture sector utilization front, Agriculture department had achieved 97.38 percent utilization as it could not achieve the target under sustainable sugarcane initiative, Agriculture Engineering department had indeed utilized 97.09 percent, and the reason for the short-fall was on account of less target achievement in providing diesel engine pump set with rain gun, portable irrigation system and river valley projects. Nonetheless, the departments like horticulture, animal husbandry, agriculture marketing, fishery, dairy development, co-operation as well as TNAU has 100 percent utilized the fund allocated to them respectively.

The land utilization pattern during the period of evaluation in Tamil Nadu say 2013-14 is graphically given under:

Only 35 percent of the net area was sown and 17 percent of the land has been put into Non- agricultural use. During the year 2013, the state rainfall was 741.9 mm as against normal monsoon average was 914.4. But during the year 2014, the state received 913.2 mm rainfall.

xvi Executive Summary

Impact Evaluation

The third party evaluation has considered the above- said scope and context in which NADP was implemented in the state. The study covered 86 percent of male respondents/beneficiaries and 14 percent women beneficiaries. The sample chosen was purposive and proportionate to the fund allocation and therefore the sample beneficiaries selected from Agriculture (45 percent), Horticulture (18 percent), Agriculture Engineering (12 percent), Fisheries (11 percent), Animal Husbandry (7 percent) and the remaining beneficiaries have been chosen from Dairy development, TNAU and Agriculture Marketing.

The study revealed that 97 percent of the household possessed own house. Out of the total sample interviewed, 63 percent of the sample households purely depended on agriculture and the rest 37 percent had alternate source of livelihood like Vending, Wage earning through MGNREGA, Construction workers in addition to small holder agriculture. The sample beneficiaries‘ representation under the study was Marginal farmers (33 percent), small farmers (36 percent), semi-medium (14 percent), medium farmers (7 percent) and large farmers (1 percent) respectively. About 59.5 percent of the farm holding has bore well based irrigation, Open well was next followed by river and irrigation tanks.

The interviewed farm households were into cultivation of food grains, pulses, oilseeds, commercial crops, vegetables, coconut grooves, fruits and flowers according to the soil type, irrigation facility and tradition. But, in few locations, farmers have gone for crop diversification after the implementation of NADP Scheme. To cite few examples, Bhendi cultivation by farmers in Sedapatti block, Pandhal system to grow snake guard and other vegetables in Pollachi North, SRI method of Paddy cultivation in canal and tank commands, high yielding fodder crop in Thondamuthur block in Coimbatore district and so on.

The study also brought out that the main source of awareness among farmers about RKVY was through concerned department staff followed by relatives and friends. Moreover, it is good to find out that beneficiaries also contributed amount equal to NADP Subsidy either with their own resources or availing loan from bank. About 29 percent of the beneficiaries interviewed told that they had availed loan from the bank and at the time of the interview most of them they have repaid the loan too.

In main agriculture sector, among the sample households interviewed and also information collated through Focus Group discussion highlighted that 88 percent of the households had enhanced crop yield, 75 percent mentioned about improved quality of life followed by 72 percent beneficiaries told the cropping intensity got increased. Because of the NADP project support, the study team could arrive that 35 percent of male and 36 percent of female were able to get agricultural employment in the farms of beneficiaries ranging from 25 days to 45 days. The project impact assessment also led to the finding that 35 percent of the farm has experienced improved ground water table.

In Horticulture, the beneficiaries interviewed said that the incremental income because of NADP intervention ranged from Rs. 1000 to Rs.20,000 per season. Under Horticulture department NADP intervention, it could be very well seen that additional days of employment for laborers got in the range of 25 days to 140 days. The impact of agricultural engineering department is seen about 91.8 Executive Summary xvii

percent of the beneficiaries had responded in getting additional income due to less cost of cultivation in lieu of farm mechanization and micro irrigation practices. Timeliness in package of practices, enhanced crop productivity and quality of life was mentioned by 77 percent of the respondents.

Whereas in Animal Husbandry, 91.7 percent beneficiaries had got additional income in lieu of 66.7 percent of beneficiaries added the number of livestock, self consumption of milk and milk based product had indeed improved nutrition level of 22.2 percent households. Fodder cultivation with high yielding variety had become integral component of their farming practice. In Fisheries, nearly 50% of the male got additional days of employment and about 48.1 percent beneficiaries had indeed made inland fisheries as micro-enterprise and getting regular income.

On the intangible benefits, about 8.7 percent of the sample respondents had raised fund to the tune of RS.28.66 Lakhs to improve their standard of living by constructing RCC roofs in their home and toilet construction. About 50 percent of families had availed fund from various sources in the form of credit in addition to the subsidy received from NADP scheme to improve their livelihood and their quality of life got improved better.

The major noteworthy performance of benefits realized out of NADP Programme during 2013-14, from the interview schedule are listed under:

. Improving new crop cultivation habits . Their confidence level about government scheme has increased . Learned about inter cropping . Improved water use efficiency . Environment safety ensured . Cost of cultivation reduced . Government collaboration is strengthened . Post harvest processing is easy . Transport cost from cultivated spot to post harvest place is reduced . Effective utilization of labour . Labour shortage problem overcome . Income enhanced both farmer and NADP beneficiary in farm machinery project . Innovative implementation of new and advancement method in agriculture . Alternative and supportive livelihood for agriculture . Knowledge improvement in new and improved techniques

Chapter 1 Introduction

1. Introduction

1.1 Introduction Farming is the world‘s oldest profession across the country and remained as the single most prominent sector in engaging unskilled labour force into farming operations. Though, there has been significant growth in other sectors, the Agriculture Sector still remains to be the mainstay of livelihood for human civilization. Development in the agricultural sector is very vital for ensuing food security and also in reducing poverty across the rural regions, in addition to supporting the growth of other sectors. Nonetheless, growth of non-farm sectors, viz. Secondary and Tertiary can be sustained only when the agricultural sector continues to develop and supply sufficient demand for goods and services. The above facts are highly relevant for Tamil Nadu where nearly 42.1 percent of the workforce is engaged in agriculture and allied activities as on 2011 (Census 2011). Even though, the share of workers involved in agricultural activities are revealing reducing trend, yet, a quantum of workforce mainly depends on agriculture sector.

To strengthen the growth of Agriculture and allied sectors, the National Development Council (NDC), in its meeting held on 29th May, 2007 resolved that a special Additional Central Assistance Scheme could be introduced with an aim to incentivize States so as to improve the public investment in agriculture and allied sectors. Hither to, Rashtriya Krishi Vikas Yojana (RKVY) came into reality and operational. It was also fairly evident from the resolutions of NDC that agricultural development strategies must be reoriented to meet the needs of farmers and called upon the Central and State governments to evolve a strategy to rejuvenate agriculture on agro-climatic contexts. The NDC reaffirmed edits commitment to achieve 4 percent annual growth in the agricultural sector during the 11th five year plan onwards.

Undoubtedly, National Agriculture Development Programme (NADP)/RKVY is an important national level flagship programme of Government of India for strengthening agriculture and allied sectors based economy in different states. Government of Tamil Nadu, through its Department of Agriculture has been implementing the RKVY since its inception in 2007 - 08. These schemes are implemented through different departments with convergence approach with the prime objective of increasing agriculture production and enhancing socio-economic status of the farmer. Allied departments are also involved in implementation of the project activities based on their priorities.

1.2 RKVY Guidelines Guidelines are essential in project implementation, which provide the main framework for the entire project. A guideline is a statement by which state and/or agency have to determine a course of action, 4 Introduction

fund allocation, approval processes, stakeholders, project outcome, etc., which aims to streamline the specific processes according to a set routine. NADP/RKVY is a nation wide programme with the perspective of production enhancement, asset & infrastructure development and sub schemes. Projects enlisted in the http://rkvy.nic.in website have been emphasized to advance Gross Domestic Product (GDP) growth and boost up the socio-economic status of the farmers. Project selection, implementation and monitoring are not possible without any guideline.

Guidelines for NADP/ RKVY programme were framed by Department of Agriculture and Cooperation Ministry of Agriculture, Government of India during August, 2007. Revised guidelines for implementation of RKVY were amended during XII Five Year Plan on 11th December 2013. These guidelines are applicable to all the States and Union Territories. RKVY Sub-Schemes Guidelines are available for the following schemes in the RKVY website.

. Brining Green Revolution to Eastern India (BGREI) . Additional Fodder Development Programme (AFDP) . Saffron Mission . Crop Diversification Programme . Livestock Health & Disease Control / Foot & Mouth Disease (FMD) . Beekeeping . Targeting Rice Fallow Areas (TRFA)

1.2.1 Basic Features of the RKVY as per the guideline1 The RKVY aims at achieving 4 percent annual growth in the agriculture sector during the XI Plan period, by ensuring a holistic development of Agriculture and allied sectors. The main objectives of the scheme are:

i. To incentivize the states so as to increase public investment in Agriculture and allied sectors. ii. To provide flexibility and autonomy to states in the process of planning and executing Agriculture and allied sector schemes. iii. To ensure the preparation of agriculture plans for the districts and the states based on agro- climatic conditions, availability of technology and natural resources. iv. Toensurethatthelocalneeds/crops/prioritiesarebetterreflectedinthe agricultural plans of the states. v. To achieve the goal of reducing the yield gaps in important crops, through focused interventions. vi. To maximize returns to the farmers in Agriculture and allied sectors. vii. To bring about quantifiable changes in the production and productivity of various components of Agriculture and allied sectors by addressing them in a holistic manner.

The RKVY is a State Plan Scheme. The eligibility for assistance under the scheme depend upon the amount provided in State Plan Budgets for Agriculture and allied sectors, over and above the base line percentage expenditure incurred by the State Governments on Agriculture and allied sectors. The list

1Guidelines for NADP/ RKVY programme were framed by Department of Agriculture and Cooperation Ministry of Agriculture, Government of India during August, 2007 Introduction 5

of allied sectors as indicated by the Planning Commission will be the basis for determining the sectoral expenditure, i.e. Crop Husbandry (including Horticulture), Animal Husbandry and Fisheries, Dairy Development, Agricultural Research and Education, Forestry and Wildlife, Plantation and Agricultural Marketing, Food Storage and Warehousing, Soil and Water Conservation, Agricultural Financial Institutions, other Agricultural Programmes and Cooperation. Each state will ensure that the baseline share of agriculture in its total State Plan expenditure (excluding the assistance under the RKVY) is at least maintained, which is mandatory to access the RKVY funds. The RKVY funds are provided to the states as 100 percent grant by the Central Government.

RKVY is encouraging convergence with schemes like National Rural Employment Guarantee scheme (NREGS), Swarnjayanti Gram Swarozgar Yojana (SGSY) and Backward Regions Grant Fund (BRGF), the Planning Commission and the Ministry of Agriculture, Ministry of Rural Development (MoRD), Department of Agricultural Research and Education (DARE), and National Rainfed Area Authority (NRAA), if the convergence has been aptly factored in.

At least 75 percent of the allocated amount should be proposed under Stream-I for specific projects. The amount under Stream- II, i.e. 25 percent is available for strengthening the existing state sector schemes and filling the resource gaps. A State Level Sanctioning Committee (SLSC) headed by the Chief Secretary of the state have the authority to sanction specific projects under the Stream-I. The Government of India‘s representative participation in the SLSC meetings is mandatory.

Districts and State have to prepare Agriculture Plan by integrating its allied sectors with budgetary allocation. RKVY allocates fund based on the State allocation. A state is permitted to use up to 1 percent of its total RKVY funds for incurring administrative expenditure that includes payments to consultants, recurring expenses of various kinds, staff costs, etc. However, no permanent employment can be created, nor vehicles can be purchased. The permissible carryover of unspent balance can be 10 percent of the Central allocation.

Major focus area of RKVY are Integrated development of major food crops such as wheat, paddy, coarse cereals, minor millets, pulses, oilseeds, Agriculture mechanization, enhancement of soil health, Developmentofrain-fedfarmingsystemsinandoutsidewatershedareas,andalso Integrated development of watershed areas, wastelands, river valleys, Support to State seed farms, Integrated Pest Management schemes, Encouraging non-farm activities, Strengthening of Market Infrastructure and marketing development, Strengthening of Infrastructure to promote Extension Services, Activities relating to enhancement of horticultural production and popularization of micro irrigation systems, Animal husbandry and fisheries development activities, Special schemes for beneficiaries of land reforms, Undertaking concept to completion projects, Grant support to the State Government institutions that promote agriculture/horticulture, Study tours of farmers, Organic and bio-fertilizers, and Innovative schemes.

1.3 RKVY Fund allocation to Southern States The central government has sanctioned RKVY fund to the Tamil Nadu and other Southern States every year from the inception of the programme. Tamil Nadu has received Rs. 3118.83 millions during 2013-14, nearly, 3 percent from the total allocation. Tamil Nadu has received the highest share of allocation, 12.6 percent during 2007-08 followed by 7.2 percent in 2012-13. 6 Introduction

Figure 1.1: Trend in Share of Southern States from NADP allocation

14.00 12.6

12.00 11.54

10.77 10.77

10.00 10.00

10.00 9.32

8.88

7.98 7.63

8.00 7.2

6.53

6.35

6.25 5.85

6.00

4.85

4.4

4.3

4.23

4.12

3.4

3.23 3.06

4.00 3.0

3.0

2.91

2.86

2.72

2.68

2.23 1.90 2.00

0.00 Andhra Pradesh Karnataka Kerala Tamil Nadu

Share in Percentage

2007-08 2008-09 2009-10 2010-11 2011-12 2012-13 2013-14 2014-15

Source: http://rkvy.nic.in/#, accessed on 6th April, 2017 by 10.00 a.m.

Karnataka State has got higher share from the NADP total allocation than other Southern States, except in the year 2010-11. Kerala State has got lower share than other Southern States, except in the year 2014-15.

1.4 Tamil Nadu Watershed Development Agency (TAWDEVA) TAWDEVA was established in 2002 with objectives to conserve water resources and promote efficient use of water for increasing productivity of the crops. The agency is implementing Integrated Watershed Management Programme (IWMP), Watershed Development Fund (WDF) and Western Ghats Development Programme (WGDP). TAWDEVA acts as the Nodal Agency for channelizing funds for the NADP scheme funded by the Government of India. Apart from NADP, central government schemes like National Mission for Sustainable Agriculture (NMSA), National Food Security Mission (NFSM), Support to State Extension Programmes for Extension Reforms Schemes (SSEPERS - ATMA) and Agriculture Resource Information Systems and Networking (AGRISNET) are also channelized by TAWDEVA2.

Role of TAWDEVA as the nodal agency are listed below3,

. Preparing State Agriculture Plan (SAP) and ensuring the preparation of the District Agriculture Plans (DAP). . Effective coordination with various Departments and implementing Agencies for preparation and appraisal of projects through SLSC, implementing, monitoring, and evaluation. . Management and disbursement of funds received from the Central and State Governments

2http://www.tawdeva.in accessed on 7th April, 2017 by 10.00 am

3Guidelines for NADP/ RKVY programme were framed by Department of Agriculture and Cooperation Ministry of Agriculture, Government of India during August, 2007 Introduction 7

. Furnishing of utilization certificates and quarterly physical & financial progress reports to the Department of Agriculture and Cooperation. . Establishing an effective Management Information System, I.T. based.

1.5 Third party evaluation TAWDEVA, a state level Nodal agency has sent an official correspondence to the Executive Director of DHAN (Development of Humane Action) Foundation with a focus of limited Tender seeking quotation for the impact evaluation study of centrally sponsored RKVY / NADP implemented in Tamil Nadu for the period 2013-14 based on DHAN Foundation‘s high credentials and capability in carrying out similar evaluations for agencies like State Planning Commission, Department of Economics and Applied Research (DEAR), Water Resources Department etc. As envisaged in the RKVY guidelines for XII five-year plan as outlined in para-12, an effective third party evaluation system for a comprehensive and in-depth assessment of various completed projects under the scheme in Tamil Nadu state for 2013-14 is a must, DHAN Foundation, a professional development organization has expressed its keen interest to take up the implementation and evaluation of NADP projects in the state. DHAN Foundation has been selected as a third party to carry impact evaluation of NADP projects implemented during 2013-14, based on its competitive quote.

1.5.1 Need for an Effective Evaluation4 The terms and conditions as part of Third Party impact evaluation agreed upon by DHAN Foundation are mentioned under:

1.6 Specific activities as per Terms of Reference (TOR)5 The impact study fulfils the following.

4 Lr. No.812/TAWDEVA/NADP/2014 dt.18.10.2016

5 Lr. No.812/TAWDEVA/NADP/2014 dt.18.10.2016 8 Introduction

i. The selection of samples by DHAN Foundation carefully done by involving all the RKVY implementing departments, under all the category of projects and it also includes different level of pattern of investments. ii. DHAN Foundation had done plan and undertaken activities to achieve the objectives outlined. iii. DHAN Foundation had made visits/ surveys/ discussions/ consultations etc. to have specific information/ assessment of the impact and outcome of each and every project separately run by the concerned Departments/ organizations under Govt. of Tamil Nadu. iv. Socio-economic impact of the locality as a whole is studied. v. The scope for replicating the projects in other areas and scaling up is studied. vi. Relevant photograph and videos is submitted along with the report for better appreciation and presentation to be made subsequently. vii. DHAN Foundation had provided detailed impact evaluation report for the year 2013-14, which contains separate chapters for department wise projects. viii. The report of the study is presented to the Govt. of Tamil Nadu (TAWDEVA, Nodal Department of RKVY for Tamil Nadu State) and no portion of it has been released to any other agency/Department. ix. TAWDEVA issued required letters authorizing DHAN Foundation to contact various government agencies to procure/ collect desired information. x. DHAN Foundation submitted necessary number of copies of the draft report and finalized report to the TAWDEVA, Agriculture Department, and Govt. of Tamil Nadu after the approval. xi. The video documentation of any best five projects is submitted along with the Impact Evaluation Report.

1.7 Structure of the report This report has been framed as eight chapters, as follows,

Chapter 1 Introduction: This chapter illustrates about the background, RKVY guideline, basic features of RKVY, fund allocation to Tamil Nadu state, TAWDEVA – a nodal agency, Third party evaluation, and specific activities proposed as per TOR and composition of the document outlines.

Chapter 2 Literature Review gives the results of literature review in the areas of why impact evaluation studies and its different meaning, way to conduct impact evaluation, findings and major limitations to carry out the impact evaluation

Chapter 3 Study design and Methodology explains about the framework for the study, tools and techniques used to capture the impact study, area and its geographical features

Chapter 4 Allocation and Expenditure under RKVY in Tamil Nadu explains the department wise sectoral allocation for the state and district

Chapter 5 Assessment of Agricultural Performance during the Recent Planned Period characterizes the performance of agriculture in the recent years, rainfall pattern, land utilization pattern, land holding size, and labour market Introduction 9

Chapter 6 Socio Economic Characteristics, Cropping Pattern and Value of Output of the Sample Household explains the Introduction, Selected sample and their socio-economic profile, Landholding details of beneficiary households, Livestock and farm assets, Cropping pattern, Household income, crop productivity and profitability, Beneficiary households‘ awareness about the RKVY programme

Chapter 7 Good Practices explains the Success stories documented during the visit

Chapter 8 Key findings and Recommendations explains the results in the areas of impact and recommendations based on the study.

Chapter 2 Literature Review

2. Literature Review

2.1 Introduction The literature review is one of the accepted research requirements which describe how the proposed study is gaining relevant insights for study design, methodology and the like from the prior studies. In specific, review of literature justifies the proposed methodology and demonstrates the preparedness to complete the research in time. Impact evaluation appraises the transformations that can be ascribed to a particular intervention, such as a project, program or policy, both the intended ones, as well as ideally the unintended ones. The International Fund for Agricultural Development (IFAD) impact evaluation guidelines defines impact as ―the attainment of development goals of the project or program, or rather the contributions to their attainment.‖ Measuring the impact of any investments has been a key priority; impact assessment program helps to refine the priorities moreover learn the lessons from current and past projects.

2.2 Why Agriculture project Impact Evaluation Impact Evaluation is an independent study that measures the changes in production, income and/or other program objectives that are attributable to the defined intervention. Impact evaluations require a credible and rigorously defined counterfactual that estimates what would have happened to the beneficiaries in the absence of such project. Estimated impacts, when contrasted with total related costs, provide an assessment of the intervention‘s cost-effectiveness, what is commonly referred to as the project‘s ―bang for the buck‖. Impact evaluations serve two key purposes – accountability and learning. Accountability compares costs and impacts on final outcomes such as income and poverty that are attributed to investments. Learning tests development hypotheses and explores how well or poorly a particular development approach works. Learning relates to better understanding of the causal chains expected to link the investments to these income changes. For example, trained farmers should: 1) learn why improved soil management practices increase yields; 2) adopt these practices; 3) improve their yields; 4) increase farm income; and 5) ultimately raise their household incomes. Learning requires understanding how and why these causal linkages do or don‘t happen and is essential to testing the assumptions behind program design6.

The proper analysis of impact requires a counterfactual of what those outcomes would have been in the absence of the particular intervention7. Counterfactual analysis is also called with versus without method. This is not the same as before versus after, as the situation before may differ in respects other than the intervention. There are, however, some cases in which before versus after is sufficient to establish impact, this being cases in which no other factor could plausibly have caused any observed change in outcomes (e.g. reductions in time spent fetching water following the installation of water pumps).

6 Katherine Farley et al., October 2012, Principles into Practice: Impact Evaluations of Agriculture Projects, Millennium Challenge Corporation, United States of America

7 “The central objective of quantitative impact evaluation is to estimate… unobserved counterfactual outcomes” Impact Evaluation: methodological and operational issues, Asian Development Bank, September 2006; and “determining the counterfactual is at the core of evaluation design”, Judy Baker Evaluating the Impact of Development Projects on Poverty, World Bank, 2000. 14 Literature Review

2.2.1 Different meanings of impact evaluation8 Impact evaluation has taken different meanings during the last twenty years. The following have been the most common:

. An evaluation which looks at the impact of an intervention on final welfare outcomes, rather than only at project outputs, or a process evaluation which focuses on implementation; . An evaluation concerned with establishing the counterfactual, i.e. the difference the project made (how indicators behaved with the project compared to how they would have been without it); . An evaluation carried out some time (five to ten years) after the intervention has been completed so as to allow time for impact to appear; and . An evaluation considering all interventions within a given sector or geographical area.

These four definitions are not mutually exclusive – many impact evaluations in the 1990s were carried out five or more years after the intervention closed and also tried to establish a counterfactual. But nor need they coincide. Participatory impact evaluation follows the first definition, reporting beneficiary perspectives on how the intervention changed their lives, but makes no formal reference to a counterfactual.

2.3 Way to conduct Impact Evaluation Evaluators need to keep a balanced appreciation of the strengths and weaknesses of different methodological approaches. One could argue that the combination of randomization and panel dataset offers the potential for a rigorous impact analysis. However, no single methodology for impact evaluation is perfect under all settings—each method has advantages and disadvantages (table 2.1). Careful theoretical analysis of the impact pathway is important in guiding the choice of design and methodology to evaluate a specific program. There is a growing emphasis on measuring results in agricultural interventions using Impact Evaluation methodology9.

10Randomized control trials (RCTs or experimental designs), with appropriate use of mixed methods, are the impact evaluation methodology that generally provides the greatest opportunity for learning and for structuring a strong counterfactual. However, when an RCT is not feasible or desirable, quasi- experimental impact evaluations that use methodologies such as propensity score matching and regression discontinuity design, combined with mixed methods, are other means that facilitate learning and allow for attribution of impact.

8 Alain Barbu, Impact Evaluation - The experience of the Independent Evaluation Group of The World BANK, www.worldbank.org

9 IEG (Independent Evaluation Group). 2011. Impact Evaluations in Agriculture: An Assessment of the Evidence. Washington, DC: World Bank.

10 Katherine Farley et al., October 2012, Principles into Practice: Impact Evaluations of Agriculture Projects, Millennium Challenge Corporation, United States of America Literature Review 15

Table 2.1: Advantages and Disadvantages of Various Evaluation Designs and Methodologies

Evaluation design Advantages Disadvantages Experimental . Free from selection bias issues . May be expensive and time consuming . Ease of measurement (simple . Can be politically difficult Risk of econometric methods) contamination of control group . Ease of interpreting results High . Difficult to ensure assignment is truly random internal validity Quasi-experimental . Can draw on existing secondary . Reliability of the results is often reduced, as data sources the methodology may not completely solve . Can be quicker and cheaper to the problem of selection bias implement . Some techniques can be statistically . Evolving econometric methods complex that require unique skills Non-experimental . Relatively cheap . Reliability of results is reduced as the . Easy to implement since it can methodology is less robust statistically draw on existing data sources . Some techniques can be statistically . Well-developed econometric complex that require unique skills methods . Full correction of selection bias remains a challenge . Identifying good instrumental variables can be problematic

Sources: Maredia 2009 and IEG.

The main objective of the Impact Evaluation Study (IES) of RKVY by the ISEC, Bangalore (2014) is to examine the extent to which the components and activities under the RKVY have actually met or / are meeting their stated targets (objectives) for improving agricultural productivity, production and in enhancing economic conditions of the farmers. The sectoral report in the series of three reports is based on the primary survey data collected from beneficiary farm household and infrastructure / asset beneficiaries collected from all the 28 states and 2 UTs. A multi-stage sampling method was followed for the selection of beneficiary farmers. At the first stage, 20 percent of the districts in the States and UTs were selected purposely based on the district-wise RKVY expenditures and interaction with the RKVY nodal/implementing authorities. In smaller states a minimum of 5 districts or whole state was selected if the state consists of fewer than 5 districts. In the next stage, two taluks from each selected districts were selected, drawing one taluk from the nearby district headquarters and the second at a distance of 15-20 kilometre from the district headquarter. Subsequently, at the third stage, 3-6 cluster/ contiguous villages were selected from each taluk to collect primary data from 25 selected households. By following multi-stage sampling frame work as well as through discussions with the nodal agency / implementing authorities, totally 171 districts, 353 taluks, 3164 villages and 8174 beneficiary farmers were selected. As significant expenditure (30 per cent of the total) was accounted for infrastructure/assets development during the 11th Plan, a suitable number of infrastructure and asset beneficiaries were covered in each state representing various sectors11.

At the initiative of DoLR, MoRD, NIRD (2011-12) has completed the impact assessment of watershed projects sanctioned under DPAP, DDP and IWDP. The study titled as "A Comprehensive Study of Impacts of Investments in Watershed Projects" was taken up. Impact study desired by the

11 Parmod kumar et al, November 2014, “Impact evaluation of Rashtriya Krishi Vikas Yojana Report – II : Sectoral report”, Agricultural development and rural transformation centre, Institute for Social and Economic Change, Bangalore – 560 072, sponsored by : Department of Agriculture and Co-operation (RKVY Division), Ministry of Agriculture, Government of India 16 Literature Review

Ministry of Rural Development has been confined to the watershed projects implemented under the support of the DoLR funds. The study covered watersheds in all the 28 States and the 10 per cent of watersheds have been selected in proportionate term sanctioned and completed between 1st April 2002 to 31st March 2005. State wise sampling is based on the number of projects (DDP, DPAP & IWDP) sanctioned under each scheme. The study has covered households proportional to the number of households in the watershed area. Fifteen nodal agencies were identified to elicit the needed data from the beneficiaries (@75 per watershed) and through FGDs besides PIA and district level officials using six schedules. The components included EPA, HRD activities, training and capacity building, NRM (SMC works, WHSs, plantation) crop demonstration, production systems and use of revolving fund12.

It is mandatory for any government sponsored rural development programme to extend benefits to stake holders belonging to Schedule Castes and Scheduled Tribes. Since RKVY is no exception, the survey also collected details related to caste of beneficiaries to just have some approximate idea on the proportion of SC/STs covered under RKVY programme. All the regions are found to have covered SC/STs exceeding 15 percent of their respective sample size. Though, southern region covered about 18 percent of SC/STs, the two major states of Tamil Nadu (9.67 percent). However, more than 50 percent of Other Backward Class (OBC) households consisted of total sample in Tamil Nadu13.

2.4 Findings through impact evaluation The Impact Assessment program currently commissions three types of finished project assessments. The first are primarily economic evaluations, assessments are undertaken by independent consultants with specialist expertise in measuring the impact of agricultural research by analyzing economic return on investment (ROI) and assessing social and environmental impacts. The second type of finished project evaluations is adoption studies. Adoption studies provide deeper understanding about the pathways to change in the complex contexts, typically undertaken three to four years after the completion of the research phase of the project. These studies help to assess the difference the project has made at the scientific and community levels in the partner countries. Seek to learn at least as much from failure as success. The third type of finished project evaluations is impact pathway analysis. Using an impact pathway framework as an evaluation tool involves tracing the pathway to change from research outputs (the results or findings), to outcomes (use of this knowledge by the next and final users), to impact (the ultimate change in social, economic and/or environmental conditions that occurs with widespread adoption of new research findings)14.

An overall perspective on RKVY spending in relation to recent historical challenges to Tamil Nadu agriculture is one of cautious optimism. The programs are targeting the known problem areas (water management and market access), along with increased investment which might alleviate the additional input concerns farmers had when similar projects were implemented. Previous research suggested that

12 S.S.P.Sharma et al, 2011-12, “Comprehensive Study of Impact of Investment in Watershed, April 2002 to March 2005” Centre for Water and Land Resources (CWLR), National Institute of Rural Development (NIRD) Hyderabad – 5000 030

13 Parmod kumar et al, November 2014, “Impact evaluation of Rashtriya Krishi Vikas Yojana Report – II : Sectoral report”, Agricultural development and rural transformation centre, Institute for Social and Economic Change, Bangalore – 560 072, sponsored by : Department of Agriculture and Co-operation (RKVY Division), Ministry of Agriculture, Government of India

14 Andrew Alford, 2008, Impact Assessment Program, International Food Policy Research Institute, Washington Literature Review 17

the faulty pricing of rural water supply was a major problem and there is no indication that has changed, but enough programs both directly and indirectly related to water conservation are being funded that there is a chance that RKVY expenditure has made a lasting and beneficial impact on Tamil Nadu‘s agricultural sector15.

2.4.1 Findings from Impact Evaluation of RKVY report – II: Sectoral report16 Around 40 percent only were aware about the RKVY or they had heard about the RKVY programme before accessing the subsidy. Even after accessing also majority of households did not know that they obtained subsidy under the RKVY programme. In most of the cases, households accessed the concerned departments that provided input or subsidy under RKVY programme through the village or Gram Parcharak (informer).All India level, crop development, micro/minor irrigation, horticulture, animal husbandry and agriculture mechanisation were the top five sectors with respect to investment under RKVY programme during the 11th Five year Plan. Among our selected households, 21 per cent availed the benefit under the broad category of mechanization. The intervention cost for mechanization per household on average was around Rs 85 thousand out of which subsidy provision under the RKVY programme was around 38 percent that turns out around Rs.32 thousand per household.

In the process of implementation of the program most of the components/sectors played both direct and indirect role in contributing to the over all development of agriculture. In many cases investment put up by the beneficiary households also led to ancillary benefits to the neighbouring farmers and agricultural labourers in terms of better information, better access to the machinery and other resources on rental basis, better capacity building of the farmers, better marketing and transportation facilities and at times additional employment to the agricultural wage earners. In our field questionnaire we tried to capture some of these advantages that RKVY programme might have generated in the implementation process. Among selected beneficiary households, around 22 percent undertook training across the country. The proportion was highest about 29 percent in the case of south region and almost equal proportion around 21 percent in all other regions. Access to mobile phone by the farmers is vital to extend information technology services to farming community. Nearly 12 percent of the beneficiaries at aggregate did not own a mobile and therefore were not reachable through mobile phone. Highest farmers not having a mobile access were found in the south around 17 percent.

At the aggregate, all sectors together created an average number of 11 days of additional employment per household constituting 6 days of own and 5 days of hired labour annually. Interestingly, households‘ opinion about the increase in employment as a result of RKVY intervention was either no change or only 10 percent increase in employment. At the aggregate of all India, about 9.5 percent of the RKVY beneficiaries availed benefits from different Central and Centrally Sponsored Schemes (CCS) and state sponsored scheme in addition to RKVY. The average subsidy received by those

15 Parmod Kumar et al, December 2013, Impact Evaluation of Rashtriya Krishi Vikas Yojana Report-I Sponsored by :Department of Agriculture and Co-operation (RKVY Division), Ministry of Agriculture, Govt. of India, Agriculture Development And Rural Transformation Centre Institute For Social And Economic Change , Bangalore - 560 072

16Parmod kumar et al, November 2014, “Impact evaluation of Rashtriya Krishi Vikas Yojana Report – II : Sectoral report”, Agricultural development and rural transformation centre, Institute for Social and Economic Change, Bangalore – 560 072, sponsored by : Department of Agriculture and Co-operation (RKVY Division), Ministry of Agriculture, Government of India 18 Literature Review

households who availed the benefits was Rs 24 thousand per household. This was slightly less than the average amount of subsidy (Rs 29 thousand per household) given under the RKVY programme. Outof856reportedinfrastructureprojects, only 502 projects (58.7percent) recorded a hundred per cent achievement of objectives and the remaining projects did not fulfill all the proposed objectives.

About 7.5 percent of the beneficiaries/ respondents at the aggregate paid an average amount of bribe of Rs 6711 per beneficiary household to avail the benefits under RKVY. In Southern region only less than 1 per cent households paid bribe as per the responses recorded from them. Lack of awareness about the RKVY programme was the biggest constraint among the households. Around, 36 per cent quoted that capacity building/ technical advice was not provided; around 30 percent opined that contacts details of the department which pay subsidy were not available, another 25 to30 per cent of the beneficiaries pointed out that procedure for subsidy was very tedious; number of documents required for availing subsidy were too many; there was long time-gap between the purchase and receiving the subsidy amount; and subsidy was paid only after the purchase whereas the initial payment remained the highest problem for buying the instrumentor investing in the assets as other major important constraints.

More than two third of the beneficiaries reported that provision of subsidies facilitated investment in acquiring farm machinery and equipments, livestock, development of infrastructure, adoption of and diversification of agriculture which otherwise would have been difficult. The suggestions to improve RKVY implementation varied from 0.5 percent beneficiaries suggesting supply of quality feed supplement for livestock to 34 percent of the beneficiary suggesting improvements in capacity building. Similarly, nearly 20 per cent of the beneficiaries suggested ensuring timely availability of subsidy as well as less documentation to avail the subsidy offered under different components of RKVY. There was suggestion for the provision of better quality inputs (14.2 percent).

2.5 Major limitations in impact evaluation17 18 The data available in the Website of RKVY is not adequate and meaningful to make effective analysis of the programme. Initially year wise data for several parameters was neither available on the website nor was received from any State. Secondly, the allocation and expenditure data provided by the Ministry of Agriculture & Cooperation, Government of India for the States and the data provided by Website does not concur with each other. A possible explanation for this could be that, the expenditure shown in the website might have been repeated as the same projects and are repeated in several years. Thirdly, the data provided by the ministry on releases for the States in most cases shown as utilization and expenditure. This is not the case in website data. The website data only shows the expenditure, not the release. A few States have provided the release data now; this data is same as expenditure data. Fourthly, as the number of projects reported is repeated and hence the number of individual projects are higher as compared to the actual projects. Finally, the physical

17Parmod Kumar et al, December 2013, Impact Evaluation of Rashtriya Krishi Vikas Yojana Report-I Sponsored by :Department of Agriculture and Co-operation (RKVY Division), Ministry of Agriculture, Govt. of India, Agriculture Development And Rural Transformation Centre Institute For Social And Economic Change , Bangalore - 560 072

18 Parmod kumar et al, November 2014, “Impact evaluation of Rashtriya Krishi Vikas Yojana Report – II : Sectoral report”, Agricultural development and rural transformation centre, Institute for Social and Economic Change, Bangalore – 560 072, sponsored by : Department of Agriculture and Co-operation (RKVY Division), Ministry of Agriculture, Government of India Literature Review 19

targets and achievement data are not properly entered. In many cases, the targets, achievements, expenditure data is not available.

The report is based on the primary data collected from the farm household and infrastructure/ asset beneficiaries pertaining to the 11th Five Year Plan across states and UTs. The report mostly relies on data collected through interview using pre-tested questionnaires. Some quantity of recall bias is bound to be associated with the collection of data since the farmers have not maintained any record of cultivation expenses, application of inputs or returns. However, efforts were made to minimize the error through cross checks at the time of data collection. Due to limited time, the research study is restricted to only limited number of Infrastructure/asset beneficiaries.

Chapter 3 Study Design and Methodology

3. Study Design and Methodology

3.1 Introduction Study design facilitates the research team of DHAN Foundation for accurate data collection both quantitative as well as qualitative. Data collection is the prime step in any research, for this kind of impact evaluation study, which leads to proper estimates of parameters relevant to the study objective. This chapter deals about the study frame work, methodology adopted to capture the impact, study area and its geographical features.

3.2 Frame work for the study On according approval by the state Nodal Agency, TAWDEVA to DHAN Foundation, Madurai, the third party evaluator has constituted exclusive research teams (Given in Appendix 1) for the entire period of research and gave periodic orientations on study frame works, tools and techniques, data collection both primary and secondary, data entry, consolidation and analysis.

Each methodology mentioned below has comparative advantages in addressing particular concerns and needs in impact evaluation. A mix of methods is useful to triangulate the information from different approaches, which can be used to assess different facets of complex outcomes or impacts, yielding greater validity than from a single method. Stratified random sampling and purposive sampling method were used to find out the beneficiaries under each scheme.

Figure 3.1: Study framework

Literature review

Data from line Individual departments survey

Study Framework Secondary Case studies / data Good collection Practices

Video Participatory documentatio impact n of Best evaluation Practices

24 Study Design and Methodology

Table 3.1: Framework of Impact Evaluation Study of NADP projects implemented during 2013-14

S. Sources of Tools and Objectives Indicators to be assessed No. information Techniques 1. Project activities List of projects implemented by the agency Secondary Discussion, implemented as with the implementation steps data from line Secondary data per the RKVY departments, about their Guidelines Implementing programme agency implementation `2. Value of the 6. Type of the project Farmers and Focus group project 7. Project cost implementing discussion and agency Interview schedule 8. Duration of the project 9. No. of beneficiaries 10. Impact of the project 3. Socio economic 11. Working days Farmers from 8 Interview profile of 12. Yield districts -Socio schedule, beneficiaries pre economic Participatory and post project 13. Income profile impact evaluation 14. Cropping intensity with the farmers 15. Irrigation intensity 16. Ground water table 17. Crop diversification 18. Asset creation 19. Standard of living 20. Nutritional care 4. Opinion of the Farmers from 8 Interview farmers regarding districts - schedule, the Opinion about Participatory implementation of the impact evaluation projects implemented with the farmers projects –

2013 -14 With justification 5. Success stories . Case studies / Success stories Farmers and Case studies and and Good . Good practices implementing Good practices practices agency documentation

3.3 Tools and Techniques Designing a tool for data collection is more of a skilful task and therefore lot of exercises are needed in a systematic way. Interview schedule, Participatory Impact Evaluation tool, case study / good practices and video documentation tools were used for primary data collection. Study team that took up this evaluation study is enclosed as annexure 1.

3.3.1 Interview schedule To design an interview schedule for NADP impact evaluation study, the following steps were followed.

1. Drafting the variables and questions objective wise 2. Consulting the experts and redrafting the interview schedule 3. Pre-test of the interview schedule 4. Preparing guidelines to the interview schedule Study Design and Methodology 25

After pre-testing/piloting the interview schedule, training was given to the study team for maintaining uniform clarity. Socio economic profile of the beneficiaries‘ during pre and post project period were evaluated based on the following indicators: working days, yield, income, cropping intensity, irrigation intensity, ground water table, crop diversification, asset creation, standard of living and nutritional care. Interview schedule is enclosed as annexure 2 and 3. Indicators were chosen based on the perspective of production enhancement, asset & infrastructure development and sub schemes. A separate set of questionnaire was used to assess the fishery department beneficiary. Totally, 494 beneficiaries were interviewed at 244 villages, 27 blocks in 9 districts.

Photo 3.1. Individual survey at Kaveripattinam, Krishnagiri and Pallipet, Thiruvallur

3.3.2 Participatory impact evaluation Participatory impact evaluation with the farmers was conducted based on the number of farmers residing in a single village and department concerned to measure the value of project impact. Purpose of this survey is to determine the beneficiary satisfaction with the NADP project. Each items scored were based on the beneficiary satisfaction. A ―1‖ indicates the highest satisfaction and a ―5‖ indicates the lowest satisfaction. Completely satisfied, very satisfied, satisfied, less satisfied and dissatisfied scores were used for assessment. Check list used for participatory impact evaluation is enclosed as annexure 4. Minimum 6 beneficiaries to maximum of 12 from the same village were selected for this assessment. Totally, 17 Participatory impact evaluations were conducted with 169 beneficiaries at 17 villages, 12 blocks in 7 districts. The following parameters were assessed during the Participatory impact evaluation:

. Project commencement in appropriate time . Stakeholders (implementing agency) support in Project implementation . Equality in project access . Quality process adopted during the project implementation . Additional Income due to project intervention . Increased productivity . Asset creation 26 Study Design and Methodology

. Sustainability/follow up of the product or service or practice . What is the beneficiaries‘ level of satisfaction with the product or service of the project? . What is the level of beneficiary satisfaction with the project management process? . Overall observation about the projects and impact due to this project implementation . Recommendations to improve the project implementation

Photo 3.2. Participatory Impact Evaluation with the beneficiaries at DARS, Chettinad, Marungapuri, Tiruchirapalli and Pudur block, Tuticorin district

3.3.3 Case study on Good practices Case study method is useful to study intensely about one unit of programs as a distinct whole. Case studies take considerable time and energy to do well, which document to answer the ‗what happened?‘ question. So, Case study evaluation allows creating a full, complex picture of what occurred. Purposive sampling techniques used to identify the good practices based on the interview schedule. Documenting success stories and best practices is helpful to scale up the similar kind of projects and process. The following good practices are documented and exhibited in Chapter 8.

I. Production enhancement projects 1. System Rice Intensification – A Milestone in second Green Revolution 2. Vegetable Cultivation with Pandal 3. Propagation of Fish culture in Farm Pond – case of Mr.M.Murugan, Mullipallam, Madurai 4. Impact of introducing high yielding fodder crop in S S Kulam Block, Coimbatore district through NADP Project

Study Design and Methodology 27

II. Infrastructure and Asset creation projects 1. Upgradation of Rural Sandhai in Maniyachi village, Alanganallur block, Madurai district 2. Providing adequate infrastructure facilities at Trichy dairy 3. Agricultural Mechanization - Combined harvester 4. Agricultural Mechanization – Maize Husker and Sheller 5. Agricultural Mechanization – Power weeder 6. Agricultural Mechanization – Rotavator III. Sub schemes 1. Rainfed Area Development Programme (RADP), 1) Horticulture Based Farming System, 2) Pipe & precasted distribution system, 3) In-situ water conservation 2. Rainfed Area Development Programme (RADP), 1) Horticulture Based Farming System, 2) Pipe & precasted distribution system, 3) Bore well and 4) Water lifting machine Photo 3.3. Pandhal cultivation at Krishnagiri

Figure 3.2: Schematic representation of sampling framework

Tamil Nadu

28 % of the district - 9

Blocks covered from each selected district - 27

Contiguous villages from each block - 244

Beneficiaries - 700

3.4 Study area The study area for Impact Evaluation Study of NADP projects implemented during 2013 – 14 was based on the agro climatic zones of Tamil Nadu. Eight districts have been selected from five climatic zones. Apart from these eight districts, Tamil Nadu Agricultural University (TNAU), an implementing agency has added, Sivaganga, one more district in Southern zone. Hence, additionally 28 Study Design and Methodology

beneficiaries under Dryland Agriculture Research Station (DARS), TNAU research station, Chettinad have been taken for the study.

28 percent of the districts in the Tamil Nadu State have been selected intentionally based on the district-wise RKVY expenditures and interaction with the RKVY nodal/implementing authorities. One or two districts have been preferred from each zone based on the RKVY expenditure and interaction with the implementing agency. High altitude, hilly zone and high rainfall zone were not considered due to administrative reasons. The list of selected districts is illustrated in Map 3.1 and Table 3.2.

Two blocks from each selected districts were considered for the study. Two blocks were selected based on the distance of block, such as one block from the nearby district headquarters and the second at a distance of 15 - 20 kilometres from the district headquarter. Accordingly, 1 - 2 cluster or contiguous villages were selected depending upon the department to find out the beneficiary from each block to collect primary data.

Map 3.1: Study area

Study Design and Methodology 29

Table 3.2: List of selected districts for the study

Total no. Blocks S. Agro Climatic Proposed of Blocks covered No. zones districts in the 19 under study district

North-Eastern Cuddalore 13 4 1. zone Thiruvallur 14 3 North-Western Krishnagiri 2. 10 4 zone 3. Western zone Coimbatore 12 3

Cauvery Delta Thanjavur 14 2 4. zone Tiruchirapalli 14 2 Madurai 13 4 5. Southern zone Thoothukudi 12 3 Sivaganga 12 2

By following stratified random sampling and purposive sampling method, totally 9 districts, 27 blocks, 244 villages and 700 beneficiaries, which include farm, infrastructure/asset and sub scheme beneficiaries were selected for individual survey, participatory impact assessment and case studies through discussions with the nodal agency/implementing authorities. Out of 114 blocks from the selected districts, 24 percent of the blocks have been covered under the study, i.e. 27 blocks.

19http://www.tnrd.gov.in/databases/Blocks.pdf accessed on 12th November 2016 by 12.30 pm

Chapter 4 Allocation and Expenditure under RKVY in Tamil Nadu

4. Allocation and Expenditure under RKVY in Tamil Nadu

4.1 Introduction Tamil Nadu lies in the Southern part of India, bordered by the union territory of Puducherry, South Indian states of Kerala, Karnataka, and Andhra Pradesh. It is bounded by the Eastern Ghats on the north, by the Nilgiri, the Anamalai Hills, and Kerala on the west, Bay of Bengal in the east, Gulf and the Palk Strait on the southeast, and Indian Ocean on the south. The state shares a maritime border with the nation of Sri Lanka.

Tamil Nadu is the eleventh-largest state in India by area and the sixth-most populous20. The state was ranked sixth among States in India according to the Human Development Index in 201121. Tamil Nadu is the second largest State economy in India with 13,842 billion (US$210 billion) in gross domestic product after Maharashtra22. Tamil Nadu was ranked as one of the top seven developed states in India, based on a "Multidimensional Development Index" in a 2013 report published by the Reserve Bank of India.

The central government has sanctioned RKVY fund, to the Tamil Nadu State every year from the inception of the programme. During 2013-14 the state received Rs. 31188.28 Lakhs which is nearly, 1.99 percent of the total allocation. This chapter describes about the department as well as district wise allocation the State received under central RKVY scheme.

4.2 Sectoral share of RKVY fund allocation in Tamil Nadu during 2013-14 Agriculture is the prime source of livelihood for more than 40 percent of the population of Tamil Nadu. Agriculture provides raw materials for the industrial sector. A good performance of the agriculture sector is viewed as an effective instrument for attainment of inclusive economic growth and poverty reduction. The State achieved an all-time high record production of 10.1 million tonnes of food grains during 2011-12 and received the Krishi Karman Award from the Government of India.

The government of India is allocating 100 percent grant – aid subsidy to the States and Union territories to boost up the agriculture and allied sector production and sustainable development under RKVY scheme. Tamil Nadu is the prominent State in productivity of food grains, oilseeds, maize, sugarcane, etc.

23During the 12th Five Year Plan (2012-17), the State Department of Agriculture‘s focus will be on stabilizing food grain production so as to ensure food and nutrition security. It is planned to achieve the growth rate of 5.0 percent in agricultural output. Further, it aims to increase the production to 170 lakh tonnes in the case of food grains, 5 lakh bales of cotton, 545 lakh tonnes of cane and 17 lakh tonnes of oilseeds.

20 Census of India 2011

21Inequality adjusted Human Development Index for India's States 2011, United Nations Development Programme

22GSDP at constant prices 2015

23http://www.tn.gov.in/dear/Agriculture.pdf 34 Allocation and Expenditure under RKVY in Tamil Nadu

The task is highly challenging, which is not feasible by a single stakeholder. Joint effect will give fruitful results. RKVY is the central government flagship programme which is focused to improve the yield rate per unit of land / water. Apart from that, for attaining higher levels of production, crop and context-specific strategies were drawn. According to that, Tamil Nadu is obtaining RKVY fund every year from the central government for the betterment of farmers and State.

Figure 4.1: Sectoral share of RKVY fund allocation during 2013-14

Allied sector 16%

Agri. Sector 84%

Source: G.O. Passed by the SLSC during 2013-14 financial years under RKVY projects

Tamil Nadu had received Rs. 31188.28 Lakhs during 2013-14 under RKVY programme to implement 44 normal schemes and 10 sub schemes. Among these schemes, 84 percent of the financial allocation was directly related with agriculture sector and 16 percent of the project financial allocation focused on allied sector. Total amount sanctioned to the agriculture sector was Rs.26275.43 Lakhs and for allied sector was Rs. 4912.85 Lakhs. Agriculture sector had achieved 97.7 percent of financial allocation, whereas, the allied sector had achieved 100 percent of its financial allocation. Totally, 33 projects sanctioned to agriculture sector, which includes production enhancement, infrastructure and asset creation and sub schemes. 21 projects focused about agriculture allied sectors including production enhancement, infrastructure and asset creation and sub schemes.

All these 54 projects has distributed to general, scheduled casete and scheduled tribes. Based on the secondary data collection from the agriculture and allied departments, minimum of 10 percent to maximum of 40 percent has been sanctioned to the SC/ST beneficiaries. Usually, the beneficiaries‘ selection depends on the context, need of the farmers, and other scheme eligible criteria.

4.2.1 RKVY fund allocation to the agriculture sector in Tamil Nadu during 2013-14 Nearly, Rs. 26275.43 Lakhs sanctioned to agriculture sectors during 2013-14 under RKVY. Agriculture sector comprises of five departments, Agriculture, Horticulture, Agricultural Engineering, Agricultural Marketing and TNAU. Among these five departments, agriculture department had received the maximum portion Rs. 14854 Lakhs, i.e. 57 percent followed by Agricultural Engineering department, Rs. 6414 Lakhs, i.e. 24 percent. Horticulture department had received 13 percent of share, i.e. Rs. 3373 Lakhs followed by agriculture marketing department, Rs. 1275 Lakhs. TNAU had received the lowest share among the agriculture sector, i.e. 1 percent with Rs. 360 Lakhs. Out of these five departments, Agricultural Marketing and TNAU had achieved 100 percent financial target, but Allocation and Expenditure under RKVY in Tamil Nadu 35

the agriculture department had spent Rs. 14464.412 Lakhs, (97 percent), where the rest of the fund was diverted to kuruvai package during 2015-16 and completed.

Horticulture department had achieved 99 percent of its financial target, Rs. 3334.54 Lakhs and savings was diverted to Red gram cultivation during 2014-15. Agricultural Engineering department also utilized 97 percent of its financial allocation, Rs. 6227.52 Lakhs and savings was diverted to agricultural mechanization during 2015-16.

Figure 4.2: Agriculture Sectoral share of RKVY fund allocation during 2013-14

Agri. Marketing TNAU 5% 1%

Agri.Engineerin g 24%

Agriculture 57%

Horticulture 13%

Source: G.O. Passed by the SLSC during 2013-14 financial years under RKVY projects

4.2.2 RKVY fund allocation to the allied sector in Tamil Nadu during 2013-14 Agriculture allied sectors are back bone of agriculture sectors. The allied sectors contribute to safeguard the farmers‘ nominal income, whenever there is failure of agriculture activity due to external factors. Nearly, Rs. 4912.85 Lakhs was sanctioned to allied sectors during 2013-14 under RKVY. Allied sector comprise of four departments, i.e. animal husbandry, dairy development, fisheries and cooperatives. Among these four departments, dairy development share was high, Rs. 2507 Lakhs, i.e. 51 percent during 2013-14 followed by the animal husbandry department, 28 percent, i.e. Rs. 1387.40 Lakhs.

Figure 4.3: Allied Sectoral share of RKVY fund allocation during 2013-14

Co.operatio n 2%

Animal Fisheries Husbandry 19% 28%

Dairy Developmen t 51%

Source: G.O. Passed by the SLSC during 2013-14 financial years under RKVY projects 36 Allocation and Expenditure under RKVY in Tamil Nadu

Fishery department had received 19 percent of share from the allied sector allocation under RKVY during 2013-14, Rs.948.44 Lakhs. Cooperatives department had received 2 percent of the share from the allocation to the allied sector, Rs. 70 Lakhs. All the departments in the allied sector had achieved 100 percent of their financial allocation.

4.2.3 Department share of normal and sub schemes Nearly, 78.40 percent of financial allocation was sanctioned to normal scheme and 21.60 percent towards sub scheme during 2013-14. Almost, 47.63 percent of total fund allocation in the State was allocated to the Agriculture department followed by Agricultural Engineering department. Cooperatives department had received the lowest fund allocation of 0.22 percent, i.e. Rs.70 Lakhs.

Likewise, Agriculture department had received 51.66 percent of financial allocation from the total normal scheme allocation followed by 26.23 percent to Agricultural -Engineering department. Cooperatives department had received 0.29 percent of share while calculating the normal scheme allocation alone among the departments. All the nine departments had received the financial as well as physical allocation under normal scheme of RKVY.

Sub schemes were sanctioned to Agriculture, Horticulture, Animal husbandry, Dairy development and Fisheries department. Three departments in agriculture sector and one department in allied sector did not receive any financial allocation under sub schemes during 2013-14. Agriculture department had received the highest financial allocation of 33 percent followed by Horticulture department, 32.70 percent and Dairy development department, 19.30 percent. Animal husbandry and Fisheries department share was each 7.5 percent.

Figure 4.4: Department wise percentage of fund allocation for Normal and Sub schemes under RKVY during 2013-14

60 50 40 30 20 10

In Percentage In 0 Agri. Agri. TNA Ani. Dai. Co.o Agri. Hort. Fish. Eng. Mark. U Hus. Dev. p. Normal scheme under RKVY 51.66 4.78 26.23 5.21 1.47 3.61 4.94 1.81 0.29 Sub Schemes under RKVY 33.00 32.70 0.00 0.00 0.00 7.50 19.30 7.50 0.00 Total fund allocation 47.63 10.81 20.57 4.09 1.15 4.45 8.04 3.04 0.22

Source: G.O. Passed by the SLSC during 2013-14 financial years under RKVY projects

4.2.4 Performance of departments in financial target and allocation under RKVY programme Agriculture marketing (Rs. 1275 Lakhs), TNAU (Rs. 360 Lakhs), Animal husbandry (Rs.1387.40 Lakhs), Dairy development (Rs.2507 Lakhs), Fisheries (Rs. 948.44 Lakhs) and Cooperatives (Rs. 70 Lakhs) departments achieved 100 percent of financial target followed by Horticulture department Allocation and Expenditure under RKVY in Tamil Nadu 37

which achieved 98.86 percent of its financial target, i.e. Rs. 3372.83 Lakhs was allocated to Horticulture department, the department utilized Rs. 3334.54 Lakhs only.

Figure 4.5: Performance of departments in financial target and allocation under RKVY programme during 2013-14

16000.00 14000.00 12000.00

10000.00

14853.60 14464.41

8000.00

6414.00 6227.52

6000.00

Rs. inLakhs Rs. 3372.83

4000.00 3334.54

2507.01 2507.01

1387.40 1387.40

1275.00 1275.00 948.44

2000.00 948.44

360.00 360.00

70.00 70.00

0.00

TNAU

Fisheries

Dairy Dairy

Agriculture

Horticulture

Co.operation

Development Agri. Marketing Agri.

Allocation Expenditure Agri.Engineering Animal HusbandryAnimal Source: G.O. Passed by the SLSC during 2013-14 financial years under RKVY projects

Agriculture department had achieved 97.38 percent of its financial target, i.e. Rs. 14853.60 Lakhs allocated and the department spent Rs. 14464.41 Lakhs. 100 percent achievement was reduced because, the agriculture department could not achieve 100 percent target in sustainable sugarcane initiative project and special programme on oil palm area expansion project.

Figure 4.6: Percentage of financial achievement of the departments, 2013-14

100.50 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 99.50 98.86 99.00 98.50 98.00 97.38 97.50 97.09 97.00 96.50 96.00

95.50

TNAU

Animal Animal

Fisheries

Dairy

Agriculture

Husbandry

Horticulture

Co.operation

Development Agri.Engineeri Agri. MarketingAgri.

Source: G.O. Passed by the SLSC during 2013-14 financial years under RKVY projects 38 Allocation and Expenditure under RKVY in Tamil Nadu

Agricultural Engineering department had achieved 97.09 percent of their financial target, i.e. allocation was Rs. 6414 Lakhs, and amount spent against the allocation was Rs. 6227.52 Lakhs. This is because of less achievement in provision of diesel engine pump set with rain gun / portable sprinkler irrigation system and river valley projects.

4.3 Agriculture Agriculture continues to be the engine of economic growth in most developing countries. Now-a- days, agriculture sector is facing developmental issues like erratic and inadequate monsoon rain, declining trend of net area sown, conversion of fertile agricultural lands to non-agricultural purposes, depletion of ground water, increase of fallow lands, deterioration of soil health due to over use of certain chemical fertilizers and leaching away of organic matter of the soil and unfavourable pattern of land ownership.

The government is sanctioning fund to overcome these issues under NADP/RKVY and from other sources.

Total outlay of NADP fund towards Agriculture department was Rs. 14853.6 Lakhs. This is 47.63 percent from the total fund allocated to Tamil Nadu under RKVY during 2013-14. Normal scheme share was 51.66 percent, i.e. Rs. 12631.08 Lakhs and sub scheme share was 33 percent, Rs. 2222.52 Lakhs, which was sanctioned to 10 normal schemes and 4 sub schemes.

Table 4.1: Projects sanctioned for Agriculture under NADP/RKVY, 2013-14

Finance Physical S. Name of the Project Allocation Expenditure Unit No. (Rs. In (Rs. In Target Achievement Lakhs) Lakhs) 1 Agriculture Normal scheme

Farmers Mass contact programme No of 1 4400.00 4400.00 12168 12168 (Uzhavar Peruvizha) villages

2 Programme on Paddy Mission 830.11 830.11 5000 5000 Ha 3 Programmes on Millet Mission 600.00 599.96 20000 18297 Ha

4 Programmes on Pulses Mission 2393.45 2393.45 20000 28640.25 Ha

Sustainable Sugarcane Initiative in 5 2403.00 2351.60 7000 4463 Ha 20000 Ha Enrichment of soil through Trash 6 101.00 100.95 5000 4998 Ha Mulching in Sugarcane. Comprehensive input supply 7 545.52 545.52 227 227 No.s management system

8 Bringing Fallow land into cultivation 756.40 756.40

9 GIS mapping 1.60 1.60 40 40 Ha Invigorating Extension Through ICT 10 600.00 595.39 358 358 Tools Agriculture Normal scheme total 12631.08 12574.968 Agriculture Sub Schemes Allocation and Expenditure under RKVY in Tamil Nadu 39

Finance Physical S. Name of the Project Allocation Expenditure Unit No. (Rs. In (Rs. In Target Achievement Lakhs) Lakhs) Special programme on Oil palm Area 1 952.44 619.36 1500 926.5 Ha Expansion Initiative for Nutrition Security 2 through Intensive Millets Promotion 273 273.00 14500 14638 Ha (INSIMP) Rain fed Area Development 3 997.08 997.08 6950 6950 Ha programme Agriculture Sub Scheme total 2222.52 1889.444 Agriculture Total 14853.6 14464.412

Source: G.O. (Ms).No.160, dated 02.08.13, G.O.(Ms). No.169, dated 21.08.13, G.O Ms. No .171, dated.21.08.13, G.O Ms. No .248, dated.11.12.13 and G.O Ms. No .171, dated.21.08.13

Agriculture department received 14 projects, among these, eight projects focused on production enhancement, two projects focused on soil and water conservation, one project each focused on training and capacity building of farmers, infrastructure and asset creation, Information and Communication Technology (ICT) and nutritional security.

Figure 4.7: Percentage of financial achievement of Agriculture department projects, 2013-14

120.00

100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00

99.99

99.95

99.56

99.23

97.86 97.38

100.00 85.01

80.00 65.03

60.00

40.00

20.00

0.00

Source: G.O. (Ms).No.160, dated 02.08.13, G.O.(Ms). No.169, dated 21.08.13, G.O Ms. No .171, dated.21.08.13, G.O Ms. No .248, dated.11.12.13 and G.O Ms. No .171, dated.21.08.13

The figure 4.7 illustrates about the Percentage of financial achievement of Agriculture department projects during 2013-14. Farmers mass contact programme (Rs. 4400 Lakhs), paddy (Rs. 830.11 Lakhs), millet (Rs.600 Lakhs) and pulse Mission (Rs. 2393.45 Lakhs), enrichment of soil through trash mulching (Rs. 101 Lakhs), comprehensive input supply management system (Rs. 545.52 Lakhs), Bringing fallow land (Rs. 756.4 Lakhs), GIS mapping (Rs. 1.6 Lakhs), INSIMP (Rs. 273 Lakhs), rain 40 Allocation and Expenditure under RKVY in Tamil Nadu

fed area development programme (Rs. 997.08 Lakhs) projects was achieved 100 percent of financial allocation. Invigorating extension through ICT tools project achievement was 99.23 percent and sustainable Sugarcane initiative project financial achievement was 98 percent.

Agriculture department normal schemes had achieved 99.56 percent of total allocation towards the department, where as in sub scheme, the financial achievement was 85 percent. Hence, the agriculture department financial achievement was 97.38 percent under RKVY during 2013-14. Total outlay for special programme on oil palm area expansion under RKVY sub scheme was Rs. 952.44 Lakhs, but, actual expenditure incurred was Rs. 619.364 Lakhs, hence, the financial achievement notices as 65 percent. Physical allotment for this programme was 1500 Hectares, but achievement was only 926.5 Hectares.

Integrated pulses villages (A3P) project in sub scheme shows zero in both physical and financial allocation. As per the G.O Ms. No .248, dated.11.12.13 in tenth SLSC of RKVY programme was sanctioned Rs. 650 Lakhs to the department of agriculture for Integrated pulses villages project. Apart from this, with the same GO, the SLSC was diverted an unspent balance of Rs. 119.982 Lakhs which had arose from the scheme distribution of pulses and oilseed minikits to Thane cyclone affected coconut growers implemented during 2012-13. But, funds under the scheme were not released by GOI.

Figure 4.8: Share of Agriculture projects, 2013-14

Farmers Mass contact programme (Uzhavar 2% Peruvizha) Programme on Paddy Mission 0% 7% Programmes on Millet Mission

6% Programmes on Pulses Mission

30% Sustainable Sugarcane Initiative in 20000 Ha 0% 4% Enrichment of soil through Trash Mulching in Sugarcane. 5% Comprehensive input supply management system 4% Bringing Fallow land into cultivation

1% GIS mapping

5% Invigorating Extension Through ICT Tools

16% Special programme on Oil palm Area 4% Expansion Integrated pulses villages (A3P)

16% INSIMP

Rain fed Area Development programme

Source: G.O. (Ms).No.160, dated 02.08.13, G.O.(Ms). No.169, dated 21.08.13, G.O Ms. No .171, dated.21.08.13, G.O Ms. No .248, dated.11.12.13 and G.O Ms. No .171, dated.21.08.13

Farmers mass contact programme received the maximum portion (30percent) of fund allocated towards agriculture department, through this programme 12168 villages were benefitted. Average cost Allocation and Expenditure under RKVY in Tamil Nadu 41

incurred per village under this project was Rs. 36160.00. Programmes on Pulses Mission and Sustainable Sugarcane Initiative project was received each 16 percent of total agriculture department allocation. Enrichment of soil through Trash Mulching in Sugarcane, GIS mapping and INSIMP projects each received less than 2 percent of total allocation.

Figure 4.9: Financial target and achievement of agriculture department of sample districts

400.00

350.00

335.00 360.94 336.25 339.79

368.00

291.11 291.11

300.00 272.70

268.58 255.88

250.00 212.86

200.00 172.83

150.00 138.85 Rs. in Lakhs in Rs.

100.00

61.76 61.76

50.00 0.00 0.00

Finacial targets Financial achievements Districts

Source: Secondary data from Agriculture departments of concerned district

Thiruchiraapalli and Krishnagiri district achieved 100 percent of their financial target followed by Cuddalore district, 98.59 percent. Madurai and Thiruvallur districts achieved 93 percent of financial target. Tuticorin district achieved 80 percent and Thanjavur district achieved 79 percent of its financial target. Financial target for Coimbatore district was not available.

4.4 Horticulture Tamil Nadu, which has Seven Agro-Climatic conditions with varied soil types, is better for production of fruits and vegetables. Nearly, 2.72 lakh hectares in the State are covered under vegetable and the estimated annual production of vegetables and fruits are 76.72 lakh MTs. Now-a- days, the demand for fruits and vegetables are showing an increasing trend due to greater awareness about the nutritional value of those commodities. The consumption has increased.

Even then, the horticulture department is facing development issues like establishment of orchards requires high investment and many farmers are unable to take up, immediate post-harvest glut leads to sharp decline in the unit prices and erodes the profit of the farmers, highly perishable nature of horticultural products and lack of adequate storage facilities at affordable cost, long gestation period up to economic bearing of fruit trees, seasonal aberrations due to erratic monsoon behaviour, remoteness of production centres resulting in huge transportation costs and transit losses and declining availability of farm labourers especially during harvest seasons.

The government sanctioned Rs. 3372.83 Lakhs for the horticulture department to overcome these situations during 2013-14. The department received three projects, one project under RKVY normal 42 Allocation and Expenditure under RKVY in Tamil Nadu

scheme and other two projects under sub schemes. The department received 10.81 percent of share from the total allocation to the state under RKVY during 2013-14. Especially, sub schemes received 32.7 percent of share from total sub scheme allocation and normal scheme received 4.78 percent of fund from the total outlay of normal scheme.

Table 4.2: Projects sanctioned for Horticulture department under NADP/RKVY, 2013-14

Financial Physical Allocation Name of the project Expenditure Units (Rs. In Target Achievement (Rs. In Lakhs) Lakhs) NADP for the productivity 1169.93 1131.64 3524 3288 Ha Enhancement of Horticulture Crops Horticulture Normal scheme total 1169.93 1131.64 3524 3288 Horticulture Sub Schemes Peri metro Vegetable Cluster 1200 1200 Development Programme for Trichy Rain fed Area Development 1002.9 1002.9 2000 1830 Ha programme II Horticulture Sub Schemes Total 2202.9 2202.9 Horticulture Total 3372.83 3334.54

Source: G.o. (Ms).No.160, dated 02.08.13, G.O.(Ives).No.238, dated 06.12.13 and G.O.(Ms).No.198, dated 30.09.13

Out of these three projects, two projects focused on production enhancement and one project focused on market linkage of farmers‘ produces.

The horticulture department achieved 99 percent of its financial target, whereas, the sub scheme achievement was 100 percent and normal scheme achievement was 96.7 percent. Financial target of normal scheme, NADP for the productivity enhancement of horticulture crops was Rs. 1169.93 Lakhs, achievement was Rs. 1131.64 Lakhs. The physical target of normal scheme was 3524 Hectares, but achievement was only 3288 Hectares.

Even though, the financial achievement of sub scheme was 100 percent of the total allocation, the physical achievement of Rain fed Area Development programme II was 91.5 percent only, physical target was 2000 Hectares, and achievement was 1830 Hectares.

Among these three projects illustrated in figure 4.10, NADP for the productivity enhancement of horticulture crops and peri metro vegetable cluster development programme each received 35 percent of total fund allocation to the horticulture department. The share of Rain fed Area Development programme II was 30 percent.

Allocation and Expenditure under RKVY in Tamil Nadu 43

Figure 4.10: Share of Horticulture projects, 2013-14

NADP for the Rain fed Area productivity Development Enhancement of programme II Horticulture 30% Crops 35%

Peri metro Vegetabie Cluster Develcpment Programme 35%

Source: G.o. (Ms).No.160, dated 02.08.13, G.O.(Ives).No.238, dated 06.12.13 and G.O.(Ms).No.198, dated 30.09.13

Figure 4.11: Financial target and achievement of horticulture department of sample districts

500

450 433.77

400 379.15 350

300 224.75 250 221.48

200

Rs. In Lakhs In Rs. 131.225

150 131.225

109.2115 109.2115 68.89

100 63.245

53.77 53.77

45 45 50 0

Districts Finacial targets Financial achievements

Source: Secondary data from Agriculture departments of concerned district

Thiruvallur, Tuticorin, Cuddalore, and Thiruchirapalli districts have achieved 100 percent of their financial targets. Krishnagiri district has achieved 98.54 percent of financial target followed by Madurai district 91.81 percent. Madurai district could not achieve 100 percent financial target because of parliament election 2014 code of conduct, Thirumanagalam and Alanganallur blocks in Madurai district did not achieve their physical and financial targets. Coimbatore district achieved only 87 percent of financial target. Thanjavur district data was not available. 44 Allocation and Expenditure under RKVY in Tamil Nadu

4.5 Agricultural Engineering Agricultural Engineering is one of the chief sectors in agriculture and allied activities to introduce modernization/mechanization. Agricultural mechanization, provision of farm equipments for the use of farmers, to promote agricultural mechanization as there is shortage of labour in the Agriculture sector and also to provide employment to the rural youths. Creation of infrastructure, storage godown facilitates the farmers to get optimum price for their product through keeping their product up to lean season. Demand is high, so, product can get good price.

The development of agricultural engineering in the State is still in its stage of infancy. Peak seasonal operations and scarcity of labour promote ample opportunities for stepping up the process of farm mechanization. Water and soil conservation works are to be intensified. Drought, water scarcity, and depleting ground water table create vast scope for the development of water harvesting structures. Farmers need training in the up-keep of the machinery and implements.

Tamil Nadu state received Rs. 6414 Lakhs to develop the Agricultural Engineering sector under RKVY during 2013-14.Amount spent for the same was Rs.6227.52 Lakhs. The department achieved 97 percent of financial target. This setback was due to less utilization of fund in Provision of Diesel Engine Pump set with Rain gun / Potable Sprinkler irrigation System and River Valley projects.

Figure 4.12: Percentage of financial achievement of Agricultural engineering department projects, 2013-14

120.00 100.00 96.54 100.00 99.15 100.00 97.11 100.00

80.00 56.89 60.00

40.00

20.00

0.00 Agricultural Formation of Provision of onion Promotion of 20 Nos Provision of Diesel Revival of River Valley Project Mechanization in farmers group storage structure on of Poly house tunnel Engine Pump set Agriculture in Fallow Tamil Nadu including package of pilot basis type Solar Chilli drier with Rain gun / Lands Machinery, Training Potable Sprinkler on operation and lrrigation System Maintenance

Source: G.O.(Ms).No.160, dated 02.08.13, G.O.(Ms).No.165, dated13.08.13, G.O.(Ms).No.1 85, dated04.09.13

The Agricultural Engineering department received sanction for seven projects during 2013-14. Among these seven projects, Agricultural Mechanization, Provision of onion storage structure, Revival of Agriculture in fallow lands projects, the achievement was 100 percent. The department had spent only 56.89 percent of financial allocation towards provision of diesel engine pump set with rain gun / potable sprinkler irrigation system; this is the lowest achievement in Agri. Engineering department. Formation of farmers group including package of machinery and training on operation and maintenance of farm machinery and River valley project financial achievement was 97 percent. Allocation and Expenditure under RKVY in Tamil Nadu 45

Table 4.3: Projects sanctioned for Agricultural Engineering under NADP/RKVY, 2013-14

Financial Physical Allocation Expenditure Name of the project Achieve- Units (Rs. In (Rs. In Target ment Lakhs) Lakhs) Agricultural Mechanization in Tamil Nadu 4800 4799.82 14,942 54083 Nos. Formation of farmers group including package of Machinery and Training on operation and 10 9.654 30 29 Nos. Maintenance of farm Machinery Provision of onion storage structure on pilot basis for a total capacity of 250 MT varying in sizes from2 MT to 20 MT capacities to the farmers in 10 10.00 250 250 MT 12 maloronion growing districts based on the demand at a unit cost of Rs 8000/MT Promotion of 20 Nos of Poly house tunnel type Solar Chilli drier in five major chilli growing 40 39.66 20 12 Nos districts at a unit cost of Rs 2.00 lakhs (4 nos. in each district)at 100% subsidy Provision of Diesel Engine Pump set with Rain 350 199.10 350 350 Sets gun / Potable Sprinkler irrigation System Revival of Agriculture in Fallow Lands 4 4.00 100 100 Acre 10321.77 10564 ha/ River Valley Project 1200 1165.284 ha/109 1084 6 nos Nos. Agricultural Engineering Normal scheme Total 6414 6227.518

Source: G.O.(Ms).No.160, dated 02.08.13, G.O.(Ms).No.165, dated13.08.13, G.O.(Ms).No.1 85, dated04.09.13

Five projects in this department focused on Asset and Infrastructure creation, one project focused on production enhancement through bringing fallow land in to cultivable land, through which soil conservation is also feasible. The river valley project focused on soil and water conservation.

Figure 4.13: Share of Agricultural engineering projects, 2013-14

Agricultural Mechanization 19% Formation of farmers group including package of Machinery & Training 0% Provision of onion storage structure 1% 5% 0% Promotion of Poly house tunnel type Solar Chilli drier 0% Provision of Diesel Engine Pump set with Rain gun / Pofiable Sprinkler

75% Revival of Agriculture in Fallow Lands

River Valley Project

Source: G.O.(Ms).No.160, dated 02.08.13, G.O.(Ms).No.165, dated13.08.13, G.O.(Ms).No.1 85, dated04.09.13

Agricultural Mechanization project had received the maximum portion of fund allocated towards Agri. Engineering department, Rs. 4800 Lakhs, i.e. 75 percent followed by river valley project, Rs.1200 Lakhs, i.e. 19 percent. Formation of farmers group including package of machinery and 46 Allocation and Expenditure under RKVY in Tamil Nadu

training on operation and maintenance of farm machinery, provision of onion storage structure, promotion of poly house tunnel type solar Chilli drier and Revival of Agriculture in Fallow Lands projects received very less amount when compared with agri. Mechanization and river valley projects.

4.6 Agricultural Marketing Agricultural Marketing and Agri. Business performs a vital role in the agrarian economy of the country. Marketing functions include assembling the products, grading, storage, transportation and supply to the end point. Establishment of Marketing infrastructure is significant not only for the performance of various marketing functions but also for conveying right price indications leading to better marketing efficiency. An efficient marketing system would facilitate the farmers to gain the best probable returns, minimize the price spread among the producer and the consumer, besides make all products of farm origin accessible to consumers at rational price with quality.

In the current scenario, there has been emphasis on market oriented liberalization to get ‗prices and institutions right‘. Agricultural marketing policy in India has been distinguished by State participation in marketing activities; State intervention in procurement and distribution of food grains; directing agricultural economy through regulatory mechanism such as licensing, creation of facilitating centres through regulated markets; encouraging co‐ operative marketing; construction of supporting infrastructure like storage and warehousing; and establishment of link roads, market information, marketing extension, etc.

Present agricultural marketing arrangement in India is the result of government interventions. Rural– Urban linkage, farmers market, emergence of Producer Company lays new path way in Agri. Marketing. The system has undergone lot of changes over the last 60 years due to the increased marketed surplus; urbanization, increase in Per capita income and purchase power, boost up in linkages with far-away and overseas markets; moreover government interventions.

The State Government is taking a variety of technical interventions to ensure remunerative price to the farmers for their products. Among those initiatives, Construction of Building for Regulated Markets, Establishment of Transaction Shed in Regulated Markets, Establishment of Tender Coconut Market Complex and Upgradation of Rural Sandhais was the major initiatives taken by the State Government under NADP scheme in Tamil Nadu during 2013-14.

Table 4.4: Projects sanctioned for Agricultural Marketing under NADP/RKVY, 2013-14

Allocation Expenditure Achieve Name of the project (Rs. In (Rs. In Target -ment Lakhs) Lakhs) Construction of Building for Regulated Markets 150 150 1 1 Establishment of Transaction Shed in Regulated Markets 560 560 7 7 Establishment of Tender Coconut Market Complex at 325 325 1 1 Pollachi, Coimbatore Dt. Upgradation of Rural Sandhais in Tamil Nadu 240 240 10 10 Agricultural Marketing Normal scheme total 1275 1275 19 19

Source: G.O.(Ms).No.160, dated 02.08.13 and G O.(Ms).No.170, dated 21.08.13 Allocation and Expenditure under RKVY in Tamil Nadu 47

Table 4.4: illustrates about four projects are implemented by Agricultural Marketing department in Tamil Nadu during 2013-14. Rs. 1275 Lakhs was allocated and spent to enhance the market linkage through creation of 19 units across the state. Nearly, 4 percent of the share was allotted to Agricultural marketing department from the total RKVY project sanctioned towards Tamil Nadu. The department ensured 100 percent achievement in physical and financial targets.

Figure 4.14: Share of agricultural marketing projects, 2013-14

12% 19% Construction of Building for Regulated Markets Establishment of Transaction Shed in Regulated Markets Establishment of Tender Coconut Market 25% Complex 44% Upgradation of Rural Sandhais

Source: G.O.(Ms).No.160, dated 02.08.13 and G O.(Ms).No.170, dated 21.08.13

Out of four projects, the investment for Establishment of Transaction Shed in Regulated Markets is high, Rs.560 Lakhs, i.e. 44 percent followed by Establishment of Tender Coconut Market Complex at Pollachi, Coimbatore district, Rs.325 Lakhs, 25 percent. This Tender Coconut Market Complex received the highest unit cost too. The lowest unit cost was sanctioned to Upgradation of Rural Sandhais, Rs.24 Lakhs.

4.7 Tamil Nadu Agricultural University Tamil Nadu Agricultural University (TNAU) is a leading agro technology provider of India and its graduates are recognized throughout the world. The University is grooming young professionals towards agriculture and allied sectors for its growth. Apart from education services, the university is offering training programmes, Lab to Land programme, extension services and technology upgradation programme through 36 Research Centres for agro technology development, 14 Farm Science Centres for outreach and Centres of Excellence. Out of 16 centres in TNAU, Centre for Agriculture and Rural Development Studies (CARDS) is coordinating the NADP activities. Since 2007-08, under NADP –RKVY scheme, TNAU has implemented 73 projects with a budget of Rs.123.92 crores. The funding was the grant-in-aid received from Ministry of Agriculture and Cooperation, Government of India through Government of Tamil Nadu. The Director CARDS, TNAU is the Nodal Officer for coordinating the implementation of the projects under NADP in TNAU. 48 Allocation and Expenditure under RKVY in Tamil Nadu

CARDS have its own regional research stations, E.g. Dryland Agricultural Research Station (DARS), Chettinad. Hence, the fund sanctioned to the TNAU has been spent across the state. During 2013-14 the following projects were implemented by the TNAU:

. Demonstration of synchronized maturing pulses varieties with key technologies and mechanization for higher productivity . Promotion of quality seed production in green manures . Enhancement of productivity and quality in Grapes through Hi- tech management practices . Demonstration of Direct Seeded Rice (DSR) in Dry and Puddled Condition to Enhance Productivity in Selected Districts of TN . Establishment of Back office at TNAU to interface with e resource of Agro Market Intelligence and Business Promotion Centre (AMI & BPC)

Table 4.5: Fund allocation and Expenditure details for TNAU under RKVY, 2013-14

Finance Physical

Allocation Expenditure Project title Achieve- Unit (Rs. In (Rs. In Target ment Lakhs) Lakhs)

Demonstration of synchronized maturing pulses varieties with key technologies and 60 60.00 150 90 No.s mechanization for higher productivity Promotion of quality seed production in green 40 40.00 48 59.11 Ha manures

Enhancement of productivity and quality in 90 90.00 1 1 Grapes through Hi- tech management practices

Demonstration of Direct Seeded Rice (DSR)in Dry and Puddled Condition to Enhance 100 100.00 100 100 Ha Productivity in Selected Districts of TN

Establishment of Back office at TNAU to interface 70 70.00 1 1 Unit with e resource of AMI & BPC TNAU Normal scheme Total 360 360 300 251.11

Source: G.O.(Ms).No 160, dated 02.08.13

TNAU has utilized 100 percent of funds allotted under RKVY during 2013-14. Out of five projects implemented during 2013-14 under RKVY, production enhancement projects are high than infrastructure and asset projects. The major share, 27.78 percent was distributed to demonstration of DSR in Dry and Puddled Condition to Enhance Productivity in Selected Districts of TN followed by Enhancement of productivity and quality in Grapes through Hi- tech management practices. DSR project implemented through one of the research stations of TNAU, DARS, Chettinad, Sivagangai district.

Allocation and Expenditure under RKVY in Tamil Nadu 49

Figure 4.15: Share of TNAU projects, 2013-14

Demonstration of synchronized maturing pulses varieties , 16.67 Establishment of Back office at TNAU, 19.44 Promotion of quality seed production in green manures, 11.11

Demonstration of Direct Seeded Rice (DSR) in Dry and Puddled Condition Enhancement of , 27.78 productivity and quality in Grapes , 25.00

Source: G.O.(Ms).No 160, dated 02.08.13

Back office of AMI & BPC has been established with Domestic and Export Market Intelligence Cell (DEMIC), TNAU at the cost of Rs.70 Lakhs. Collaborating institutions are AMI & BPC, Coimbatore, Trichy and National Informatics Centre (NIC), Chennai. These institutions are connecting production and marketing to get better prices, it‘s the ―Market Intelligence‖. This intelligence is made available to the farmers well in advance of the sowing seasons. After harvest, farmers are advised on whether to store the produce or immediately sell the same. Thus, market intelligence plays a vital role in taking decisions on production and marketing.

4.8 Animal Husbandry and Veterinary Services Animal Husbandry and Dairying play a significant role in development of India‘s economy and in the socio-economic development of the country. These sectors also play a significant role in supplementing family incomes and generating profitable employment in the rural context, mostly, among the landless labourers, small and marginal farmers and women. Besides, this sector is providing cheap nutritional food to millions of people. Meanwhile, Livestock are the best insurance against the rapid changes in the climate and extreme events like drought, famine and other natural calamities. Livestock rearing is the major livelihood source for rural farmers subsequent to the agricultural activities. Agriculture and livestock rearing are like twins for farmers.

Even then, this sector is facing development issues like demand – supply gap of green fodder, diminishing grazing lands, lack of knowledge on animal rearing practices, infertility problem and insufficient processing and marketing facilities in most of the Milk Producers Unions. To overcome these backlogs, RKVY project is allocating fund to improve the situation of Animal Husbandry department.

During 2013-14 the following projects were implemented by the Department of Animal Husbandry and Veterinary Services: 50 Allocation and Expenditure under RKVY in Tamil Nadu

 Provision of Ultra Sound scanning facilities for Veterinary Clinician Centres, Cattle Breeding units and Departmental Livestock farms as normal scheme. Total amount sanctioned against this project was Rs.881.9 Lakhs to establish 53 units. An ultrasound scan is a medical test which uses high-frequency sound waves to create images of organs and structures inside the body. An Ultra Sound scanning facilities is bequest and milestone for veterinary care which lays a new pathway ahead. Scan machine has special features for camps, portable with documenting the scan result for reference. Apart from large animal, Goat and Sheep rearing is the major income source for the landless labourer. This technology is useful to detect pregnancy in small animals including pet animal. It helps to diagnose problems of internal organs such as Liver, Gallbladder, Pancreas, Ovaries, Kidneys, Bladder and Appendix. Early and exact examination solves major problems. Innovation and technology upgradation is doing wonder in human health; alike, miracles are feasible with the support of Ultra Sound scanning machine in veterinary care too.  Intensive Goat Production for enhancing protein supplement (NMPS l) scheme sanctioned as sub scheme. The total cost of the project was Rs.505.5 Lakhs. This scheme is beneficial to landless labours, small and marginal farmers.

4.9 Dairy Development and Milk Production India has immense resources of livestock, which play an important role in the national economy. India has one of the largest stocks of cattle and buffaloes: more than 50 percent of the world's buffaloes and 20 percent of its cattle. The Indian dairy sector contributes a large share of the agricultural GDP. India is currently the largest producer of milk in the world. The cooperative movement has been important in dairy marketing in different parts of the country and definitely has played an important role in keeping smallholders involved with this fast-growing sector.

Table 4.6: Fund allocation and Expenditure details for Dairy Development and Milk Production department under RKVY, 2013-14

Finance Physical Allocation Expenditure Project title Achieve (Rs. In (Rs. In Target -ment Lakhs) Lakhs) Increasing milk production in rural areas to ensure optimum supply to consumers by providing adequate facilities at 311.38 311.38 2 2 Trichy dairy and Pudukkottai Creation of facilities at Vellore dairy for value addition of 203.5 203.5 1 1 milk procured from farmers Encouraging farmers to adopt milch animal rearing by 109 109 1 1 providing facilities at Villupuram dairy lncreasing milch animal productivity by scientific feeding by 350 350 1 1 expanding Cattle Feed Plant at Erode lntegrated development of dairies at Krishnagiri and Kancheepuram, Tiruvallur union for enhancing milk 86.5 86.5 3 3 procurement at village level Ensuring better shelf life of milk and milk products derived from the milk of rural producers by providing cold chain 50 50 1 1 network Allocation and Expenditure under RKVY in Tamil Nadu 51

Finance Physical Allocation Expenditure Project title Achieve (Rs. In (Rs. In Target -ment Lakhs) Lakhs) Creation of facilities for assuring quality milk and milk products from rural milk procurement and green energy 50 50 1 1 dairying at Madhavaram dairy lncrease the shelf life of end products of milk received from 46.63 46.63 1 1 rural areas by providing facility at Sholinganallur dairy Sub Total of normal scheme 1207.00 1207.00 11 11 Creation of facilities at Ambattur dairy for better product mix 1300 1300 from the producers’ milk received from rural areas Grand total 2507.01 2507.01

Source: G.O.(Ms).No.184,dated 04.09.13 and G.O.(Ms).No.112, dated 12.8.14

The department has achieved 100 percent physical and financial targets. Totally, nine projects were sanctioned to dairy development department during 2013-14 under RKVY, includeing sub schemes. Out of nine, three projects focused milk production enhancement, three projects related with value addition of milk and milk based products and three projects towards infrastructure and asset creation.

The major share allotted to sub scheme, Creation of facilities at Ambattur dairy for better product mix from the producers‘ milk received from rural areas was 52 percent from the total allotment to the department, Rs. 1300 Lakhs. This scheme occupies 19.30 percent of the share from the total sub schemes allotted to the state. But, the normal scheme contribution of dairy development department was 4.94 percent, Rs. 1207 Lakhs.

Among the normal schemes, increasing milch animal productivity by scientific feeding by expanding Cattle Feed Plant at Erode project received highest amount of Rs. 350 Lakhs (14 percent from the total dairy development department allocation) followed by Increasing milk production in rural areas to ensure optimum supply to consumers by providing adequate facilities at Trichy dairy and Pudukkottai project worth of Rs. 311.38 Lakhs (12 percent).

Figure 4.16: Share of Dairy development and milk production department projects, 2013-14

lncreasing milk production in rural 12% areas Creation of facilities at Vellore dairy

Encouraging farmers to adopt milch 8% animal rearing lncreasing milch animal productivity 4% lntegrated development of dairies 52% Ensuring better shelf life of miik and milk products 14% Creation of facilities for assuring quality milk and milk products lncrease the shelf life of end products 4% of milk received 2% Creation of facilities at Ambattur dairy 2%2%

Source: G.O.(Ms).No.184,dated 04.09.13 and G.O.(Ms).No.112, dated 12.8.14 52 Allocation and Expenditure under RKVY in Tamil Nadu

The minimum share allocated to Ensuring better shelf life of milk and milk products derived from the milk of rural producers by providing cold chain network, Creation of facilities for assuring quality milk and milk products from rural milk procurement and green energy dairying at Madhavaram dairy and increase the shelf life of end products of milk received from rural areas by providing facility at Sholinganallur dairy, each project has received on an average of Rs.50 Lakhs, which shows each project is contributing 2 percent to the total outlay of dairy development department.

4.10 Fisheries department During 2013-14, under National Agriculture Development Programme, DoF has raised proposals for various activities and the sanctioned projects are given below.

4.10.1 Projects Implemented By DoF with NADP Assistance during 2013-14 Fishery department received 3.04 percent fund from total allocation to the state under RKVY through normal and sub schemes with the amount of 948.44 Lakhs. With this, normal scheme share was 1.81 percent and sub scheme share was 7.50 percent from the total state allocation. The department achieved 100 percent of its financial target.

Fishery department received seven RKVY normal projects and two sub schemes. Seven projects focused on production enhancement and two projects focused on infrastructure and asset creation.

Table 4.7: Fund allocation and Expenditure details for Fisheries department under RKVY, 2013-14

Finance Physical S. Allocation Project title Expenditure Achieve- Units No. (Rs. In Target (Rs. In Lakhs) ment Lakhs) Introduction of Fish culture in Multi-Purpose 1 farm ponds of Drought affected Cauvery 311.84 311.840 1700 2661 Nos. Delta Region. Propagation of Fish culture in Multi-Purpose 2 33.46 33.460 138 193 Nos. farm ponds in Tamil Nadu Augmenting Fish Production in Fish Farms 3 28.4 28.4 25 15 units with improved culture technology. Up gradation of Fishing Efficiency of Inland 4 37.88 37.88 500 500 units Fishermen of Tamil Nadu Introduction of Improved fishing craft for 5 1.37 1.37 27 27 units exploitation of reservoir fisheries Propagation of Litopenaeus vannamei in 6 22.79 22.79 12 7 units Coastal Aquaculture Provision of Hygienic fish handling 7 equipment and accessories in modern fish 7.7 7.70 3 3 stalls stalls of TNFDC LTD Fisheries Normal scheme total 443.44 443.440

Fisheries Sub Scheme

1 Integrated Aquaculture Unit at Thanjavur 252.5 252.5 1 1 2 Integrated Aquaculture Unit at Thiruvarur 252.5 252.5 1 1 Fisheries Sub Scheme total 505 505

Fisheries Total 948.44 948.44

Source: G O.(Ms).No.183, dated 04.09.13 and G O (Ms) No 197, dated 30.09.13 Allocation and Expenditure under RKVY in Tamil Nadu 53

Figure 4.17: Share of Fisheries development projects, 2013-14

Introduction of Fish culture in Multi- Purpose farm ponds

Propagation of Fish culture in Multi- Purpose farm ponds

33% Augmenting Fish Production

Up gradation of Fishing Efficiency of Inland Fishermen

Introduction of Improved fishing craft for 53% exploitation of reservoir fisheries

Propagation of Litopenaeus vannamei

Provision of Hygienic fish handling equipment and accessories in modern 4% fish stalls Integrated Aquaculture Unit 3%

1% 2% 0% 4%

Source: G O.(Ms).No.183, dated 04.09.13 and G O (Ms) No 197, dated 30.09.13

Among the nine projects, the sub schemes, i.e. Integrated aquaculture unit at Thanjavur and Thiruvarur received the highest portion of financial allocation towards fisheries department, Rs. 505 Lakhs, i.e. 53 percent followed by introduction of Fish culture in Multi-Purpose farm ponds of drought affected Cauvery Delta Region project, Rs. 311.84 Lakhs, i.e. 33 percent. Rest of the seven projects received minimum share from the total allocation to the fisheries department.

4.10.2 Fish Culture in Farm Ponds During 2013-14, Department of Fisheries, Tamil Nadu Government intervened by way of creating multipurpose farm ponds and introducing fish culture in the ponds for the small & marginal farmers especially of the Cauvery Delta area. As part of creating additional income and alternative livelihood focus the same activity was taken up in Cauvery Delta districts of Tamil Nadu and also in other part of Tamil Nadu.

Multi Purpose Farm Ponds – overview: Farm ponds are small water bodies formed either by the construction of a small embankment across a field waterway or by excavating a dug out. Rain water is usually harvested from small catchment areas and then used for irrigation when the crops need wetting. Since a farm pond is formed in the low-lying area in an agricultural farm it will act as a runoff collection water body. Farm ponds are traditionally in use in coastal agriculture in some parts of Tamil Nadu like Nagapattinam district

4.10.3 Advantages of farm pond . It provides water to raise crop nursery well in advance . Protects the crop during dry spell between two rainfalls during the crop season and thereby stabilizes the yield. . Supplies water for domestic purposes and livestock. . Facilitates crop diversification and promotes dry land horticulture. 54 Allocation and Expenditure under RKVY in Tamil Nadu

. Promotes fish rearing. . Farm pond bund provides space to raise vegetables and fruit trees. Thereby the farm household gets additional income and also nutritional food. . Gives confidence to the farmer; thereby the farmer is able to apply adequate farm inputs and perform farming operations on time. . Catch water where it falls' is possible with farm pond. . Increases cropping intensity. . Recharges the ground water. . Improves drainage. . Excavated earth has a high value and can be used as nutrient and soil amendment, and also for land levelling and construction of farm roads.

Source: Farm Ponds for Enhancing Food Security, Policy Brief 11, by DHAN Foundation.

4.10.4 Fish Culture in Farm Ponds during 2013-14 Fish culture in Farm Ponds in agricultural lands provides additional income for the small and marginal farmers and also helps to increase the area of fish cultivation in Tamil Nadu. During 2013-14, when severe drought occurred in Tamil Nadu, Farmers understood the importance and its uses. With the support of NADP, during 2013-14, DoF undertook projects titled ―Introduction of Fish culture in Multi-Purpose farm ponds of Drought affected Cauvery Delta Region.‖ and ―Propagation of Fish culture in Multi-Purpose farm ponds in Tamil Nadu‖.

In multipurpose farm ponds, by using composite fish culture technique, fishes were reared and Indian Major Carps were reared mostly. As a part of this programme, training on composite fish farming was organized to beneficiaries.

Table 4.8: Progress of Fish Culture in Multipurpose Farm pond in Tamil Nadu

Fish Culture

Total financial Target (Rs. lakh) Achievement (Ponds) No of Qty Sl. Name of ponds Harvest- Remarks No the District harvest- Average ed (Kg) No. No. ed produc- (size (size % of tion per Area Area Alloca- Achieve- of of achieve- hectare (ha.) (ha.) tion ment 2500 2500 ment in Kgs sq.m) sq.m)

1. Thoothukudi 5 1.25 25 1.25 1.21 1.16381 95.94 25 1186 948.8 Very low

2. Madurai 10 2.50 13 0.666 2.41 0.567 23.49 13 915 1374 Low

3. Krishnagiri 5 1.25 13 1.251 1.22 1.02 83.61 13 7430 5939 higher production achieved

4. Cuddalore 25 2.25 84 2.240 4.50 3.31 73.66 84 7220 3223 Moderate

5. Tanjore 500 45.00 827 45.000 90.00 57.59 63.99 827 131350 2918 Moderate

6. Trichy 250 22.50 255 5.950 45.00 13.765 30.59 255 11565 1943 Low

7. Coimbatore 3 0.75 33 0.743 0.73 0.655 89.85 33 1829 1115 Low

TOTAL 798 75.5 1250 57.1 145.07 78.07081 1250 161495

Source: G.O.(Ms).No.'183, dated 04.09.13 Allocation and Expenditure under RKVY in Tamil Nadu 55

Table 4.9: Training for beneficiaries of MPFP

Name of the Target Achievement Project Physical Financial Physical Financial Cuddalore 50 0.350 50 0.35 Thanjavur 250 1.750 231 1.603

Coimbatore - - 33 0.392 Total 314 2.345

Source: G.O.(Ms).No.'183, dated 04.09.13

4.10.5 Augmenting Fish production in Fish farming with improved Fish culture technology During 2013-14, in Cauvery delta area, with improved fish culture technique, increasing the income and production of fishes in fish ponds was planned and sanctioned by NADP. The activities planned were integrated and the activities which were integrated in this project are seed rearing, Nursery, grow out pond and marketing.

The project envisaged addressing the non availability of enough seeds in time, through promoting seed rearing unit locally and subsidy was provided to encourage the farmers. Along with inputs for grow out ponds, trainings were also provided to adopt scientific fish farming techniques in their fish farm in Thanjore district. Apart from that, the important input for fish farming, Fish feed was also planned to be produced locally within the reach of farmers, which were not taken up. The end product marketing was also supported and mainly to create infrastructure for marketing the fishes was also planned and implemented.

The activity was implemented in Tanjore district and the details are given below

Table 4.10: Integrated Aquaculture units for the fish farmers of Tamil Nadu at Thanjavur district

% of Target Achievement Sl. No of achievement Name of the Project No. Financial Physical Financial Beneficiaries Physical P F (lakh) (ha.) (lakh) 1 Construction of fish 1 unit 15.00 1 14.82 1 100 99 seed Rearing, (10 million capacities) @ Thirumangalakottai. 2 Construction of fish 10 ha. 24.00 6.99 16.79 42 (Culture 70 70 nursery (max. 10 ha.) alone - 22 subsidy @ 2.4 lakh per (13.64 ha), ha. Rearing alone - 10 (3.399 ha, Both - 10 3 Construction of grow- 40 ha. 80.00 21.43 42.86 (7.791 + 53.5 53.5 out ponds (Total 40 ha. 2.0963 ha.) & max ceiling per beneficiary is 2 ha.) Subsidy @ 2.0 lakh / ha. 56 Allocation and Expenditure under RKVY in Tamil Nadu

% of Target Achievement Sl. No of achievement Name of the Project No. Financial Physical Financial Beneficiaries Physical P F (lakh) (ha.) (lakh) 4 Input cost for seed 10 ha. 8.00 3.47 2.77 22 (Culture 80 80 rearing (subsidy @ 0.80 alone - 10 lakh per ha.) (7.675 ha), Rearing alone - 6(2.287 ha), 5 Input cost for fish 40 ha. 32.00 12.07 9.66 Both - 6 (4.404 75 75 production (subsidy @ + 1.1813 ha) ) 0.80 lakh per ha.) 6 Construction of feed 1 unit 45.00 1 0.00 1 100 mill 7 Construction of 1 unit 46.00 1 13.80 1 100 30 marketing infrastructure & marketing vehicle Total 250.00 100.71 40

Source: G O (Ms) No 197, dated 30.09.13

4.10.6 Providing improved Gears and Crafts to improve fishing efficiency During 2013-14, DoF, Tamil Nadu proposed to NADP two more projects to improve fishing efficiency of fishermen. The projects are

. Upgradation of fishing efficiency of inland fishermen of Tamil Nadu . Introduction of Improved Fishing craft for exploitation of Reservoir fisheries

Under this project, fishing nets were purchased and distributed to inland fishermen to improve the fishing efficiency. Apart from that, subsidy was given to buy FRP Catamaran to fishermen to enhance the fishing. The details are given below.

Table 4.11: Upgradation of Fishing Efficiency of Inland Fishermen of Tamil Nadu (50 % subsidy for fishing nets)

Financial Physical Sl. no District (Rs. in lakh) % Ach Remarks Target Ach Target Ach 1 Cuddalore 95 98 7.13 7.13 100 % 2 Thiruvallur 40 29 3 0.82 27% Remaining amount surrounded Total 135 127 10.13 7.95

Source: G O.(Ms).No.183, dated 04.09.13

Table 4.12: Input subsidy assistance for FRP Catamaran under NADP: 2013-14

Target Achievement Sl. District COMPONENT Financial Financial Balance Remarks No. Physical Physical (in Rs) (in Rs)

1 Thiruvallur FRP Catamaran 27 1.35 27 1.35 0 .

G O.(Ms).No.183, dated 04.09.13 Allocation and Expenditure under RKVY in Tamil Nadu 57

4.11 Co-operative Societies Agriculture, including farming, forestry, fisheries and livestock, is the main source of employment and income in rural areas. Agricultural cooperatives play an important role in supporting small agricultural producers and marginalized groups by creating sustainable rural employment. Strong cooperatives are able to overcome many of the difficulties faced by the farmers; wherein in a country like India 85 percent are small and marginal farmers. Agriculture Co-operatives organize, promote and market, processing and storage of agricultural, horticultural and forest produce. They distribute agricultural machinery; undertake wholesale, retail and foreign trade. Currently, the Farmers Producer Organizations are the good initiatives by the government and private organizations in India.

The registrar of cooperative received an amount of Rs. 70 Lakhs to purchase five vehicles for the consumer outlets for transporting vegetables procured from the farmers in the growing areas for sale at the farm fresh consumer outlets in Chennai. The share of co-operative societies department from the total allocation to the state was 0.22 percent.

Table 4.13: Details of 5 vans purchased under Co-operative societies

Source: G.o.(Ms).No.194, dated 26.09.13

These vans are useful to control the increase of price of the vegetables in the open market. This initiative helps the farmers to get better price to the produces and consumer can get fresh vegetables daily. Demand vs. supply is equalized.

4.12 Summary and conclusion Nearly, Rs. 31188.28 Lakhs was released by the central government under RKVY during 2013-14 for Tamil Nadu. The State achieved 98 percent of its financial target, Rs. 30574.32 Lakhs towards production enhancement, infrastructure and asset creation and sub schemes through the nine departments. 54 projects were implemented during 2013-14 under RKVY; the effects of projects towards the socio-economic changes among the beneficiaries were documented in chapter 6. All those impacts depend upon the internal and external factors. Impact of the programme assessment is not possible without assessing these factors, which was assessed during the impact assessment process and documented in chapter 5.

Chapter 5 Assessment of Agricultural Performance

5. Assessment of Agricultural Performance

5.1 Introduction India has an agricultural sector that includes a large number of households reliant on small and fragmented land holding for subsistence. There are donors providing assistance in addition to the activities of the Governments, includes RKVY fund, but the current global crisis with soaring food prices, climate change, among other consequences, has demonstrated the vulnerability of the farming communities and the need to further enhance the agriculture policies aimed to support small and marginal farmers and farmers‘ organizations. The support of private and public stakeholders in the agricultural sector, to restructure agriculture on sustainable basis is important to increase the agricultural production and to develop rural areas.

Three types of capitals are important in agriculture development, i.e. natural capital (conducive climate, soil health, irrigation water availability, terrain, etc.,), social capital (labour availability, farmer skill, extension workers/researchers and marketing facility) and economical capital (on time credit and other financial resources). These capitals determine the agriculture production and country‘s GDP. This chapter deals with how much Agriculture sector contributes to the country‘s GDP, trend over the period, and influence of those three capitals in agriculture production.

5.2 Sector wise contribution of GDP of India Figure 5.1. Illustrates about how much Agriculture sector contributes to the country‘s GDP and trend over the period. It compares the country‘s Agriculture sector performance, agriculture and its allied sector is one the major contributor to our country‘s GDP. As per the graph shown below, the percentage share of agriculture in 1950 started from 50 – 55 percent and kept reducing and maintaining a steady percentage from 2004 to 2014 as 15-20 percent.

Figure 5.1: Sector wise contribution of GDP of India (1950-2014)

Source: Ministry of Statistics and Programme Implementation, Planning Commission, Government of India.

62 Assessment of Agricultural Performance

Figure 5.2: Sector wise growth rate percentage in Tamil Nadu

Source: Department of Economics and Statistics, Chennai – 6.

All the three major sectors displayed positive growth during 2013-14. However, the modest recovery of the overall economy during 2013-14 was mainly supported by growth in the tertiary sector (9.31 percent) on the back of 6.05 percent growth in the previous year. The primary sector was able to rebound from the loss of production that occurred during the previous year due to adverse weather conditions. The growth of secondary sector at 3.07 percent during 2013-14 had experienced a marginal pick-up from 2.06 percent during 2012-13. In 2012-13, the GSDP at constant prices in the State increased to Rs.4,47,944 crore from Rs.4,33,238 crore during 2011-12 registering a moderate growth of 3.39 percent which was lower than the previous year‘s growth of 7.39 percent. The steep and unprecedented decline of 10.20 percent posted by the primary sector during 2012-13 pulled down the overall growth rate of the State economy during the year24.

Agricultural sector will generate adequate linkages both forward linkages, i.e. percentage of output purchased by other industries and backward linkages, i.e. percentage of output bought from input supplying industries. Agriculture is a part in serving the end of development by assisting in the growth of other sectors, in particular, manufacturing, which are viewed as the locomotives for economic development. Thus, growth in agriculture encourages growth elsewhere. During the year 2013-14, the primary sector registered a growth of 7.24 percent and recovered from the negative growth of 10.20 percent in 2012-13. This could be made possible mainly due to a hefty growth rate of 8.22 percent recorded by the agriculture sub-group. During 2012-13, the primary sector was hit severely because of precipitous fall in area, production and yield of crops due to adverse weather and non-release of due share of water in inter-State rivers. In spite of the growth rate recorded by ―Forestry & Logging‖ (3.44 percent), ―Fishing‖ (1.03 percent) and ―Mining and Quarrying‖ (5.95 percent), could not compensate

24http://www.tn.gov.in/dear/State%20Income.pdf Assessment of Agricultural Performance 63

the loss in the income of the agricultural and allied activities due to their low weight among the sub- groups25.

Table 5.1: Performance of primary sector: Sub-sectoral income (GSDP) at constant (2004-05), Rs. In crore

5.3 Performance of agriculture sector in overall GDP Following pie chart indicates the sector wise GDP distribution of India and Tamil Nadu state in the fiscal year of 2013- 2014 alone. It is inferred that state‘s Agriculture and allied in total contributes 6 percent of its total GDP whereas nation‘s Agriculture and its allied in total contributes 11 percent. The percentage contribution of Tamil Nadu state from agriculture sector is less as that of India‘s contribution whereas the industrial sector is higher than that of India having 24 percent as to that of 20 percent. Figure 5.3: Sectoral share in India and Tamil Nadu

INDIA T.N. 11% 6% Agriculture and Allied 2013-14 5% 9% Agriculture 2013-14 Industry 2013-14 47% 24% 50% Mining and Quarrying 2013-14 20% 0% Manufacturing 2013-14 15% Services 2013-14 12% 1%

Source: Planning Commission of India

25http://www.tn.gov.in/dear/State%20Income.pdf 64 Assessment of Agricultural Performance

5.4 Production Unlike industry or manufacturing sector, Agriculture sector‘s production depends on various natural factors like rainfall, temperature, etc. The following table shows the area, production and productivity of food grains and other major crops during 2013-14.

Table 5.2: Area, Production and Productivity of principal crops 2013-14

Assessment of Agricultural Performance 65

5.5 Land Utilization pattern Figure 5.5 illustrates about the land utilization pattern of Tamil Nadu during 2013-14. The share of net sown area was high, 35 percent from the total land availability followed by forest and land under miscellaneous tree crops and groves, 18 percent and land put to non-agricultural uses, 17 percent.

Figure 5.4: Land Utilization pattern in Tamil Nadu, 2013-14

Source: Department of Economics and Statistics, Chennai-6

5.6 Land Holding26 A combination of factors such as increasing industrialization, urbanization, housing activities and infrastructure development triggered the conversion of agricultural land in to non agricultural uses. This has resulted in a decline of the area under cultivation. The scope for expansion of the area available for cultivation is also very limited. The pattern of land ownership imposes limitations on the models that can be adopted for agricultural development. As per the latest Agricultural Census 2010- 11, marginal and small holdings of less than 2 hectares accounted for 92.0 percent of the total holdings and 61.0 percent of the total operated area.

The total number of operational land holdings in the State declined from 81.93 lakh in 2005 – 06 to 81.18 lakh in 2010 – 11 (0.9 percent).This implies that the farmers may have given up their cultivation because of the lucrative price offered for land on account of fast urbanization.

According to the 2010-11 Agricultural census, the State had 81.18 lakh holdings with on operating area of 64.88 lakh ha. Marginal farmers (area less than 1 ha.) constitute 77 percent who operated 35 percent of the total area. Small farmers (1to2 ha) had a share of 15 percent and operated 25.3 percent

26 Season and crop report of Tamil Nadu (2012-13) 66 Assessment of Agricultural Performance

of the total area. Semi-medium (2 to 4 ha.) and medium farmers (4 to10 ha.) accounted for 7.5 percent and operated 34.0 percent of the total area. Large farmers (more than 10 ha.) had a share of 0.4 percent operated 5.4 percent of total area. Average size of holding in the state was 0.80 ha. In Tamil Nadu the per capita availability of land is only 0.19 ha and the per capita net sown area is only 0.10 ha.

They in turn are unsuitable for conventional technology and machinery use to boost agricultural production. This led to a process of marginalization of small land marginal farmers and casualization of agricultural labourers. To derive the best results and to empower marginal and small farmers, they may be motivated to form farmers‘ groups so as to get all the technical inputs in time and to ensure judicious use of various scarce resources.

5.7 Rainfall Agriculture and allied sector needs water to survive, an on time rain pattern is usually vital to healthy plants and its production, high or low rainfall can be harmful, even devastating to crops.

Table 5.3: Rainfall pattern in India and Tamil Nadu

Actual Rainfall Normal Rainfall Unit in 2013 2014 mm Tamil Tamil Tamil India India India Nadu Nadu Nadu Annual 1186.2 914.4 1242.6 741.9 1186.2 913.2

Source: Customized Rainfall Information System (CRIS), India Meteorological Department

Figure 5.5: Monthly Rainfall distribution in Tamil Nadu

600 252.2

500

110 400 117.7 98.9

300 127.9 112.3 66 67.5 113.5 Rainfall in mm in Rainfall 200 46 50.6 110.7

180.2 53.2 8.3 170 100 6.1 8.1 42 54.6 42.7 7.4 20.3 115.8 30.9 30 87.4 88 3.9 67.5 68 0 42.3 46 17.5 13.4 18.3

Month

Normal Rainfall in mm 2013 – Actual Rainfall in mm 2014 – Actual Rainfall in mm

Source: Customized Rainfall Information System (CRIS), India Meteorological Department Assessment of Agricultural Performance 67

Table 5.3 illustrates about the normal rainfall for India as 1186.2 mm and for Tamil Nadu as 914.4 mm. Hence, the actual rainfall was compared with normal rainfall; India received excess rainfall, 1242.6 mm during 2013 and on par during 2014. But, in case of Tamil Nadu, it received low rainfall, 741.9 mm during 2013 and nearer to normal rainfall during 2014. Rainfall shortage is one of the main reasons for reduction in Agriculture sector GDP during 2012-13. Figure 5.6 shows the monthly rainfall pattern of Tamil Nadu during 2013 and 2014.

5.8 Soil fertility Indiscriminate fertilizer and pesticide usage, coupled with mono-cropping and non-application of base manure like cow dung and green manure, has taken a severe toll on the organic content in soil. Experts in the field say organic matter in the soil has dropped from 1.2 percent in 1971 to 0.68 percent in 2002. Organic matter has further reduced to 0.5 percent in several districts, according to a study conducted during 2014 by the Department of Soil Science and Agriculture Chemistry of TNAU. This is against a desirable level of 0.8 percent to 1.3 percent of organic carbon.

Madurai is the worst with just 0.23 percent of organic content in soil, followed by Krishnagiri (0.36 percent). Erode and Vellore are well above the ideal limit with 4.04 percent and 4.2 percent respectively. Scientists at Tamil Nadu Agricultural University say that carbon content of soil depends on the amount of carbon matter that is replenished. "In some districts in the Cauvery delta region, farmers leave behind the rest of the crop after harvest. This recharges the carbon content. However, this practice is declining across the state," said vice chancellor of TNAU K Ramasamy.

5.9 Agricultural Wages in India 27Agriculture is a labour intensive sector. But now the trend has changed due to invention of farm machines and the wages for agriculture workers are also in an increasing trend. Figure 5.7 explains about the rise of agricultural wage rate from Rs. 78 to Rs. 232.2 for male workers in 2013-14 and Rs. 57.9 to Rs. 182.5 for female workers in India.

Figure 5.6: Agricultural labour wage rate in India

27 Labour Bureau, 2007-08 to 2013-14 68 Assessment of Agricultural Performance

5.10 Mahatma Gandhi National Rural Employment Gurantee Act (MGNERA) The Mahatma Gandhi National Rural Employment Guarantee Act (MGNREGA) was conceptualized and endorsed as an act of the parliament in September 2005 to provide a statutory backing to the scheme. In Tamil Nadu, the scheme was first notified in 2006 in 6 districts, which was subsequently extended to other districts in a phased manner. The major objectives of the scheme were to enhance livelihood security in rural areas by providing at least 100 days of guaranteed wage employment in a year as unskilled manual work, to generate productive assets, to protect the environment, to empower rural women, to cultivate gender equity in terms of the wage rate, to reduce rural-urban migration and to foster social equity.

Figure 5.7: Person days projected and generated over the period in Tamil Nadu

Source: http://www.nrega.nic.in/netnrega/home.aspx

Table 5.4: District-wise Person days Generated in 2013-2014

S. Projected person Person days Person days Districts No days generated achieved (%) 1 Tiruchirappalli 15027000 18808112 125.16 2 Krishnagiri 14000000 15774205 112.67 3 Cuddalore 24086000 23233733 96.46 4 Madurai 16051136 15190890 94.64 5 Thoothukkudi 9600000 8944408 93.17 6 Tiruvallur 16300000 13541627 83.08 7 Coimbatore 6552998 5428682 82.84 8 Thanjavur 16851000 12205535 72.43

Source: http://www.nrega.nic.in/netnrega/home.aspx

Huge number of man days is generated through MGNREGA. This is the main source of income for the rural households. Usually, NREGA jobs are given to the job card holders during lean seasons. Even though, to achieve the projected man days, sometimes Panchayats are offering job during peak season also. Villagers like to go for NREGA instead of an agricultural worker, which creates labour shortage. Small and marginal farmers could not cope up with the wage rate rise to the labourers, which leads to barren and uncultivable land. Those farmers are migrating to urban or semi urban areas Assessment of Agricultural Performance 69

as construction workers or as other workers. Agricultural mechanization through farmers group is the good solution given under RKVY to overcome these situations by the farmers.

5.11 Summary and conclusion The current chapter focused on the share of agricultural sector GDP with overall GDP growth of state. In every financial year, agriculture sector plays a significant role in overall GDP growth. Adverse climate situation caused negative growth of agriculture sector during 2012-13, because of this negative growth, the overall growth rate also had fallen from 7.39 percent in 2011-12 to 3.39 percent in 2012-13. And in the subsequent year, 2013-14, the situation was reversed and the overall GDP growth rate was 7.29 percent.

Agriculture sector attained 2.2 percent growth rate during the eleventh five year plan as per annual average GDP growth rate, which was less than the tenth five year plan, i.e. 4.4 percent.

Chapter 6 Socio Economic Characteristics, Cropping Pattern and Value of Output of the Sample Household

6. Socio Economic Characteristics, Cropping Pattern and Value of Output of the Sample Household

6.1 Introduction The impact of RKVY has been measured using selected growth indicators. As a result of the RKVY program, the total agriculture budget of all 28 states‘ outlay increased by 62 percent in the 11th Plan over the 10th Plan (RBI, 2013). The expenditure on agriculture as a percentage of agriculture GSDP also increased from 8.80 percent in 10th Plan to 12.42 percent in 11th Plan (DES, 2013). The overall growth rate of GSDP of 28 states (excluding the UTs) also went-up from 7.61 percent in 10th FYP to 8.63 percent in the 11th FYP. Similarly, the overall agriculture GSDP of 28 states grew from 2.38 percent in 10th FYP to 3.66 percent in 11th FYP28.

Tamil Nadu had received Rs. 3118.85 million during 2013-14 under RKVY programme to implement 44 normal schemes and 10 sub schemes. Among these schemes, 84 percent of the financial allocation was directly related with agriculture sector and 16 percent of the project financial allocation focused on allied sector.

Table 6.1: Activity wise share in value and numbers of projects during 2013-14 under RKVY – Tamil Nadu

S. No. of % to the total Expenditure % to the total Sectors No. projects projects (Rs. in Lakhs) expenditure 1. Agricultural Mechanization 3 5.6 5008.57 16.4 2. Crop development 8 14.8 7881.56 25.8 3. Dairy development 10 18.5 3388.91 11.1 4. Extension 2 3.7 160.00 0.5 5. Fisheries 9 16.7 948.44 3.1 6. Horticulture 2 3.7 2134.54 7.0 7. Information and Communication Technology 2 3.7 665.39 2.2 8. Input supply 1 1.9 545.52 1.8 9. Marketing and post harvest management 8 14.8 2594.66 8.5 10. Nutrition security 2 3.7 778.50 2.5 11. Organic farming 1 1.9 40.00 0.1 12. Soil and water conservation 5 9.3 2028.23 6.6 13. Training 1 1.9 4400.00 14.4 Total 54 100.0 30574.32 100.0

Source: G.O. Passed by the SLSC during 2013-14 financial years under RKVY projects

28 Parmod kumar et al, November 2014, “Impact evaluation of Rashtriya Krishi Vikas Yojana Report – II : Sectoral report”, Agricultural development and rural transformation centre, Institute for Social and Economic Change, Bangalore – 560 072, sponsored by : Department of Agriculture and Co-operation (RKVY Division), Ministry of Agriculture, Government of India 74 Socio Economic Characteristics, Cropping Pattern and Value of Output of the Sample Household

expenditure met up was against crop development, Rs. 7881.56 Lakhs, i.e. 25.8 percent to the total expenditure for 8 projects followed by Agricultural Mechanization, Rs. 5008.57 Lakhs, i.e. 16.4 percent of total expenditure towards 3 projects.

Table 6.2: Details of the selected numbers of production, infrastructure and sub scheme beneficiaries in Tamil Nadu

Zone District Block Villages Beneficiaries Cuddalore 5 78 Annagramam 14 40 Cuddalore Panruti 1 3 Kurinjipadi 11 28 North-Eastern zone Cuddalore total 4 31 148 Pallipet 20 39 Tiruvallur Tiruvallur 2 5 Poondi 24 49 Tiruvallur total 3 46 93 North-Eastern total 2 7 77 241 Krishnagiri 11 18 Kaveripattanam 27 39 North-Western zone Krishnagiri Shoolagiri 1 1 Uthangarai 1 1 North-Western total 1 4 40 59 Thondamuthur 12 33 Western zone Coimbatore Pollachi (N) 19 45 S.S.Kulam 4 18 Western total 1 3 35 96 Thanjavur 3 4 Thanjavur Orathanadu 2 3 Thanjavur total 2 5 7 Cauvery Delta zone Tiruchirapalli Manikandam 16 47 Marungapuri 12 44 Tiruchirapalli total 2 28 91 Cauvery Delta total 2 4 33 98 Melur 10 36 Sedapatti 25 43 Madurai Vadipatti 1 1 Alanganallur 1 5 Madurai total 4 37 85 Thoothukudi 6 29 Southern zone Thoothukudi Pudur 6 41 Vilathikulam 4 29 Thoothukudi total 3 16 99 Thiruppathur 1 7 Sivaganga Sakkottai 5 15 Sivaganga total 2 6 22 Southern total 3 9 59 206 Tamil Nadu 9 27 244 700 Socio Economic Characteristics, Cropping Pattern and Value of Output of the Sample Household 75

A beneficiary list was obtained from the concerned departments who had carried out the RKVY projects for sample selection. Sample selection carefully taken care to give attention for representation from agriculture sectors (Agriculture, Horticulture, Agricultural Engineering, Agricultural Marketing and TNAU) and allied sectors (Animal Husbandry, Dairy Development, Fisheries and Cooperatives), which includes production enhancement projects, infrastructure and asset creation and sub schemes. Stratified random sampling method and purposive sampling method has chosen for survey and case study documentation.

Figure 6.1: Sector-wise details of selected households (% of beneficiaries)

TNAU 5% Agricultural Agricultural Marketing Engineering 1% 12% Horticulture 18%

Fisheries 11%

Agriculture Dairy 45% Development 1% Animal Husbandary 7%

45 percent of the beneficiaries covered had been benefited under Agriculture projects followed by Horticulture department beneficiaries, 18 percent.

6.2 Socio-economic status of selected households The impact evaluation study has covered 86 percent of male beneficiaries and 14 percent of female beneficiaries. The demographic profile of households indicates their socio-economic characteristics. Average family size of the beneficiary households is 5. The maximum family size recorded is 16. Nearly, 50 percent of the households family size falls on 5 to 8 members, whereas, 46 percent of the family falls under 1 to 4members. Average age of sample beneficiaries is 50. 33 percent each of the sample beneficiaries falls under 40 – 49 years and 50 - 59 years age categories followed by 13 percent each under 30 – 39 years and 60 – 69 years categories.

76 Socio Economic Characteristics, Cropping Pattern and Value of Output of the Sample Household

Figure 6.2: Gender profile of sample beneficiaries Figure 6.3: Age profile of sample beneficiaries

6% 2% Female 14% 20 - 29 years old 13% 13% 30 - 39 years old 40 - 49 years old 50 - 59 years old 60 - 69 years old 33% Male 33% 70 - 79 years old 86% > 80 years old

Figure 6.4: Family size Figure 6.5: Type of House ownership

9 to 12 >13 Lease 4% 0% 0% Rent 3%

1 to 4 46%

5 to 8 50%

Own 97%

Almost, 97 percent of the households has own house followed by 3 percent of households in rental houses. 63 percent of the households purely depends on Agriculture and allied sector, whereas 37 percent of the households has alternate source of livelihood as vending, MGNREGA, construction labourers, small business and as other workers.

Figure 6.6: Type of house roof

Note: Some beneficiaries are having more than one house with different types of roofs. Hence, the total exceeds the sample size. Socio Economic Characteristics, Cropping Pattern and Value of Output of the Sample Household 77

Figure 6.7: Electricity availability Figure 6.8: Access to water at household premises

Figure 6.9: Types of fuel used for cooking purposes

Note: Some beneficiaries are having more than fuels are cooking. Hence, the total exceeds the sample size.

Figure 6.10: Access to individual household latrine

15%

Yes No

85%

78 Socio Economic Characteristics, Cropping Pattern and Value of Output of the Sample Household

Figure 6.11: Education profile

Figure 6.12: Kisan card availability Figure 6.13: SB account availability

Yes No

91%

Looking at the education qualification of the registered beneficiaries whose name the subsidy was given to the households, a majority of them completed their primary (25.9 percent), upper primary (22.7 percent) and secondary education (24.9 percent). 9.1. percent of the samples are illiterate. Availability of kisan card and savings bank account with commercial bank or cooperative societies has been documented to assess the forward linkage for agriculture development of the registered households. In this, 91 percent of the households are maintaining their savings bank account in one or two commercial banks. RKVY backended subsidy amount had been deposited in to the beneficiaries SB account only. While assessing the kisan card availability, only 14.6 percent of the households have access to kisan card facility, almost 70 percent of the farmers do not know about the benefits of kisan card.

6.3 Landholding pattern and source of irrigation of the sample beneficiaries According to the survey, the sample beneficiaries‘ holdings with on operating area of 2343.3 acres of land and 9 percent of the beneficiaries are landless. Landless are also covered under RKVY Fisheries department projects. Marginal farmers (area lessthan2.5 acres) constitute 33 percent, small farmers (2.6 to 5 acres) had a share of 36 percent, semi-medium (5.1 to 10 acres) accounted for 14 percent of the share and medium farmers (10.1 to 25 acres) accounted for7 percent of land holding. Large farmers (more than 25 acres) had a share of 1 percent. Average size of holding in the sample households was 4.8 acres. Apart from own land, 29 percent of the sample households are having lease land for agriculture purposes. Socio Economic Characteristics, Cropping Pattern and Value of Output of the Sample Household 79

Figure 6.14: Land holding size

> 25 acres 1%

10.1 - 25 Landless acres 9% 7%

5.1 - 10 acres 14%

< 2.5 acres 33%

2.6 - 5 acres 36%

Borewell is the major sources of irrigation for about 59.5 percent of the sample households followed by open well, 40 percent. Almost half of the beneficiaries have more than one source for irrigation. The habit of construction of farm ponds are sporadically emerging among the farmer especially who are in drought belt. MGNREGA lays a basement for the same.

Figure 6.15: Source of irrigation

Note: Some beneficiaries are having more than one source of irrigation. Hence, the total exceeds the sample size.

6.4 Cropping pattern The cropping pattern provides a profile of crops grown by the beneficiary households. RKVY programme provided subsidy to the households through production enhancement, asset and infrastructure creation and sub schemes. Especially, Agriculture department had focused to increase the productivity of Paddy, Millet, Pulses, Sugarcane and Oil palm crops through programme on concerned crop mission projects during 2013-14 in Tamil Nadu, which were targeted for the particular crop.

80 Socio Economic Characteristics, Cropping Pattern and Value of Output of the Sample Household

Figure 6.16: Cropping pattern among selected households

Mulberry 0.90 Fodder 3.14 Medicinal plant 2.69 Flowers 2.02 Fruits 24.44 Vegetables 31.61 Coconut 10.99 Sugarcane 18.61 Cotton 10.31 Groundnut 9.19 Pulses 19.73 Maize 8.30 Millets 8.52 Paddy 63.90

0.00 10.00 20.00 30.00 40.00 50.00 60.00 70.00

Note: Beneficiaries are cultivating more than one crop per season and subsequent season. Hence, the total exceeds the sample size.

Thus, most of the crops cultivated by the farmers including that of food grains (Paddy, Sorghum, Pearl millet, Finger millet, Barnyard millet, Maize, etc.,), pulses (Red gram, Black gram, Green gram, Cow pea, etc.,), oilseeds (Groundnut, Sun flower, etc.,), commercial crops (Sugarcane, Areca nut and Cotton), Coconut grooves, vegetables (Onion, Chilly, Tomato, Brinjal, Bhendi, Raddish, Cabbage, Guards, Coriander, Cluster bean, etc.,), fruits (Mango, Banana, Guava, Grapes, Sapota, Lemon, etc.,), flower crops (Jasmine, Tuber roses, Frangipani, Roses, etc.,), medicinal plants (Turmeric, Tulsi, Calamus (Vasambu), etc.,) and other miscellaneous crops like Betel vine, Casurina, fodder and mulberry. Hence, the cropping pattern followed by the selected beneficiaries was not particularly affected by the RKVY programme. But, crop diversification has happened due to RKVY in some parts of Tamil Nadu during 2013-14, still, farmer continues the crop suggested under RKVY. E.g. Bhendi seed had been provided to the farmers in Sedapatti block of Madurai district and most of the farmers were new for Bhendi cultivation during 2013-14. With package of practices training to the farmers, and the handhold support from the department, farmers had good harvest and income. Currently, 1/3rd of the famers have continued Bhendi cultivation in subsequent years.

At the aggregate, around 63.90 percent of the farmers are growing paddy followed by 31.6 percent are cultivating vegetables and fruits, 24.4 percent. 19.73 percent of the farmers are growing pulses. Around 23 percent of the Paddy growers have the practice of rice fallow pulse based on water availability. Farmers have the practice of intercropping pulses, groundnut or vegetables between Coconut grooves and orchards. Less than one percent of the farmers among the selected households are practising sericulture. Around 3 percent of the farmers are growing fodder crops for their livestock and or for commercial sale. Nearly, 18.61 percent of the farmers are cultivating Sugarcane.

6.5 Livestock holding Farmers usually rear animal husbandry with crop husbandry to maintain the income sustainability; nearly 68 percent of the RKVY beneficiaries are rearing milch animals (minimum of 1 to maximum Socio Economic Characteristics, Cropping Pattern and Value of Output of the Sample Household 81

of 30), goat (minimum of 1 to maximum of 65), sheep and poultry for their domestic and commercial purposes. Animal husbandry is not only additional source of earnings but they are also a major source of energy for the agriculture sector. Farmers rear cattle, bovine and poultry not only for milk, eggs and meat purpose but they are also a major source of draught power for cultivation.

Figure 6.17: Livestock holding by the sample households (in numbers)

Bull 5

Poultry 56

Sheep 140

Goat 486

Buffalo 10

Cow 873

0 200 400 600 800 1000 In numbers

The livestock reared by the selected beneficiary households are categorized into cow, buffalo, goat, sheep, poultry and bull. Totally, 873 cows which include calves are reared by the sample households followed by goat, 486. Only one house from the sample is rearing buffalo in 10 numbers. Sheep population is 140 from the selected households.

6.6 Beneficiary households' awareness about the RKVY programme Documentation has been done about households' awareness level about the RKVY programme and from whom the beneficiaries obtained information about the programme. Figure 6.18 shows details about the source of awareness about the RKVY programme during 2013-14 in Tamil Nadu. While, during survey the beneficiaries could recollect the department staff, process adopted to avail RKVY benefit and kind of benefit received, but, they failed to recollect that, the benefits were obtained under RKVY programme. Hardly, less than 20 percent of the beneficiaries only knew that, they had obtained subsidy under the RKVY programme. Even, the agricultural machinery purchased under RKVY programme do not exhibit the RKVY name board, instead, the machine supplier name is displayed.

82 Socio Economic Characteristics, Cropping Pattern and Value of Output of the Sample Household

Figure 6.18: Source of awareness about RKVY programme to the beneficiary households

Panchayat Self initiative Newspaper 4% 3% 4% Relatives/Friends 8%

Farmers club/SHG 3%

Extension prog. 0%

Department staff 78%

The main source of awareness about the RKVY programme was through the concerned department staff, 78 percent followed by relatives/friends, and 8 percent. Progressive farmers have regular contact with the department staffs and these farmers gain the awareness to avail government schemes easily.

Application is submitted with photo copy of Chitta, Adankal, Photo, Ration card and voter id by the beneficiary to the department for RKVY programme. Farmers are approaching the department based on their need and if this need matched with the scheme available with the department, farmer can obtain the subsidy as per the procedure.

6.7 Value of the RKVY projects This evaluation study tries to identify and value the costs and benefits that arose from the RKVY project and compare them with the situation as it would be without the project. The difference is the incremental net benefit arising from the project investment. The value of the project has been studied in three different dimensions, i.e. production enhancement, infrastructure and asset creation (cost reduction through mechanization - total production may not increase, but a benefit arises because the costs have been trimmed, reduced transport costs, losses avoided) and sub schemes. Other kinds of tangible benefits are not only from cost reduction, as noted earlier, but also from time savings, development activities in areas newly accessible to markets, soil conservation, better nutrition etc., and intangible benefits like creation of new job opportunities, confidence arose to approach government and non government department for their welfare.

Direct cost involved in RKVY programme implementation during 2013-14 with the 86 percent of the selected households is exhibited in Figure 6.19. Remaining 14 percent of the beneficiaries are obtaining benefits from common infrastructure created under RKVY programme, like utilizing tender coconut market complex, upgradation of rural sandhai, demonstration of direct seeded rice and ultra sound scanning machine at Animal husbandry department.

Socio Economic Characteristics, Cropping Pattern and Value of Output of the Sample Household 83

Figure 6.19: Cost involved in RKVY programme implementation during 2013-14

120 113.25

100

80 54.8 58.45 60

Rs. In Lakhs In Rs. 0 Project cost Beneficiary Total cost contribution

Financial allocation to the state during 2013-14 under RKVY programme was Rs. 31188.28 Lakhs, in this, nearly 54 percent of the fund sanctioned as direct cost to the farmers and remaining 46 percent of the fund sanctioned to the department for training, asset and infrastructure creation and mass contact programme, etc., as indirect cost. This indirect cost created awareness among the beneficiaries and beneficiaries are utilizing those asset and infrastructure for their welfare.

About Rs. 54.8 Lakhs sanctioned to the selected beneficiaries as direct cost under RKVY to improve their livelihood by way of production enhancement, asset and infrastructure creation, innovation schemes, etc.,. This amount induced the farmers‘ contribution as Rs. 58.45 Lakhs. Total cost of Rs. 113.25 Lakhs involved with the agriculture and allied sector growth among the sample beneficiaries. Beneficiaries around 29 percent approached bank for mobilizing their own contribution, because of this project bank leverage happened and those farmers repaid their loan too.

Only 5 percent of the beneficiaries had expressed their unhappiness in project distribution, fund sanctioning process over delay in sanctioning and involvement of local politicians. The mode of fund received by the sample beneficiaries is exhibited in Figure 6.20. About 44.7 percent of the beneficiaries had received the fund as back ended subsidy followed by seed/seedling & fertilizer directly supplied to the beneficiary as 25.5 percent.

Figure 6.20: Mode of fund received under RKVY by the beneficiary

Note: Beneficiaries had received fund from more than one mode. Hence, the total exceeds the sample size. 84 Socio Economic Characteristics, Cropping Pattern and Value of Output of the Sample Household

Especially, beneficiaries under agricultural engineering department had received assistance as front end subsidy, that is the amount was credited to the machine supplier from the department and beneficiary also deposited the amount to the machine supplier and machine was delivered to the beneficiary.

Fifteen indicators were taken to assess the impact and value of RKVY programme, viz., whether the project enhanced crop yields, additional income generated due to this project, increase in cropping and irrigation intensity, additional days of employment generation for male and female, improvement in ground water table, crop diversification, initiation of micro-enterprises (Sericulture / Apiary / Mushroom / Vermi composting / Farm pond (Fisheries)), livestock rearing (Any shift or Addition in numbers), improvement in quality of beneficiary life and nutrition care, additional expenditure due to the project, major investments in production and non production assets. Department wise impact is as follows.

6.7.1 Agriculture Alike, 89 percent of agricultural department project beneficiaries had responded that they earned additional income due to 88 percent of enhanced crop yield. Leads improved quality of beneficiary life by 75 percent. 72 percent of the beneficiaries increased their cropping intensity.

Figure 6.21: Major impacts due to RKVY agricultural projects

Additional expenditure due to the … 35 Improvement in nutritional care 56 Improved Quality of beneficiary life 75 Micro-enterprises initiative 4 Crop Diversification 25 Improved ground water table 35 Additional days Employment… 36 Additional days Employment… 35 Increase in irrigation intensity 48 Increase in cropping intensity 72 Additional income 89 Enhanced crop yields 88

0 20 40 60 80 100 In percentage

56 percent of the sample household are concentrating on their nutrition and balanced diet because of good income from the farm land. Only 4 percent of the beneficiaries concentrated on creating micro- enterprises like vermicomposting for their sustainable income from the farm. Additional days of employment generation had happened to 35 percent of male and 36 percent of female from minimum of 25 days to maximum of 45 days. Micro irrigation and 25 percent of crop diversification practices facilitated to improve the irrigation intensity for about 48 percent of benefitted farmers field which led to improved ground water table in 35 percent of the beneficiaries land.

Due to RKVY projects additional expenditure arose among 35 percent of the beneficiaries from Rs.555 to Rs.4500 for land preparation, seed treatment, etc.

Socio Economic Characteristics, Cropping Pattern and Value of Output of the Sample Household 85

Figure 6.22: Major investments in productive and non productive assets due to RKVY agricultural projects

Land acqui Farm House sition 30.0 30.0 25.0 25.0 Increa sing ir 20.0 Other 20.0 rigatio 11.7 s 24.7 Others 15.0 Residential house 15.0 n/pipe line 10.0 14.8 10.0 2.7 2.75.0 5.0 1.3 0.0 0.0 Farmi Tree 13.9 ng ma crops 3.6 27.4chiner 16.1 y Household articles Vehicle 11.7 28.3

Farm 24.7Livest ponds ock Ornaments

By the way, the impact of RKVY programme has been measured based on major investments made against productive and non productive assets by the selected beneficiaries. Besides, 27.4 percent of the beneficiaries had purchased farm machinery followed by each 24.7 percent of the beneficiaries had strengthened their pipeline to increase irrigation facility and additional livestock purchased. Nearly 14 percent of the beneficiaries had planted tree crops, land acquisition had happened among 2.7 percent of the beneficiaries. 28.3 percent of the households had purchased vehicle for their local conveyance followed by 16.1 percent of the respondents had added household articles like Television, Radio, etc.,. The beneficiaries had built their farm house and residential house with the support of income from RKVY projects, earlier savings and through other government projects, 11.7 percent and 14.8 percent respectively.

6.7.2 Horticulture Nearly, 88.9 percent of the beneficiaries had realized additional income by minimum of Rs.1000 to maximum of Rs.20000 per annum; beneficiaries are expecting minimum of Rs.15000 as additional income from their orchard created under RKVY project. These projects had enhanced the crop yield among 78.9 percent of the beneficiaries. Being a perennial crop, the cropping intensity increased in to 54.4 percent of the households. Because of RKVY intervention, 65.6 percent of the farmers diversified their regular crops and 71.1 percent of the sample households improved their quality of life. Vegetable and fruit consumption from their own land had improved their family nutritional status among 45.6 percent of the beneficiaries. Regular maintenance is required for perennial crops, hence, 47.8 percent of the responses obtained in additional expenditure due to the project. Minimum of 25 to maximum of 140 days additional days of employment generated to 54.4 percent of male and 42.2 percent of female. Pipeline supply, creation of new bore well and bore well recharge structures increased the irrigation intensity to 21.1 percent of landholds and 13.3 percent of the respondent ground water table increased.

86 Socio Economic Characteristics, Cropping Pattern and Value of Output of the Sample Household

Figure 6.23: Major impacts due to RKVY horticultural projects

Additional expenditure due to the project 47.8 Improvement in nutritional care 45.6 Improved Quality of beneficiary life 71.1 Micro-enterprises initiative 3.3 Crop Diversification 65.6 Improved ground water table 13.3 Additional days Employment generation for … 42.2 Additional days Employment generation for … 54.4 Increase in irrigation intensity 21.1 Increase in cropping intensity 54.4 Additional income 88.9 Enhanced crop yields 78.9

0.0 20.0 40.0 60.0 80.0 100.0 In percentage Figure 6.24: Major investments in productive and non productive assets due to RKVY horticultural projects

Farm Land acquisit House ion 60.0 40.0 50.0 Increasing irr 40.0 30.0 20.0 36.7 Others igation/pipeli 30.0 18.9 Househ Reside 20.0 ne old 20.0 ntial articles 31.1 house 10.0 10.0 14.4 1.1 0.0 0.0 Farming mac Tree crops 26.7 27.8 hinery 8.9 20.0

25.6 Ornam 53.3Vehicle Farm ponds Livestock ents

Figure 6.24 shows that, 36.7 percent of the beneficiaries improved their irrigation pipeline, 27.8 percent shifted to purchase farming machinery, 26.7 percent had created orchards, 25.6 percent increased their livestock rearing by increasing numbers and 20 percent of the beneficiaries had bought land for cultivation. 8.9 percent of the newly created farm pond to cope up drought with the support of income from RKVY project and MGNREGA scheme. 53.3 percent of the beneficiaries had bought vehicle followed by 31.1 percent had added their household articles. 20 percent had bought ornaments for their future and 18.9 percent had constructed their farm house to store their horticultural products and 14.4 percent of the beneficiaries had renovated their residential houses.

6.7.3 Agricultural Engineering The impact of agricultural engineering department projects is seen in additional income, nearly, 91.8 percent of the beneficiaries had responded in this category by means of less cost of cultivation and timeliness in package of practices followed by enhanced crop yield and improved quality of life, 77 percent respectively. Increase in cropping and irrigation intensity reported with 45.9 percent and 42.6 percent of beneficiaries respectively. Additional days of employment generated among 73.8 percent of male and 42.6 percent of female from 40 days to 90 days. After their own use, agricultural machinery was used for other needy persons in the same village or nearer village on rental basis. Socio Economic Characteristics, Cropping Pattern and Value of Output of the Sample Household 87

Additional income to the beneficiary households had facilitated their nutritional care among 59 percent of sample household.

Figure 6.25: Major impacts due to RKVY agricultural engineering projects

Additional expenditure due to the … 27.9 Improvement in nutritional care 59.0 Improved Quality of beneficiary life 77.0 Micro-enterprises initiative 1.6 Crop Diversification 13.1 Improved ground water table 13.1 Additional days Employment… 42.6 Additional days Employment… 73.8 Increase in irrigation intensity 42.6 Increase in cropping intensity 45.9 Additional income 91.8 Enhanced crop yields 77.0

0.0 20.0 40.0 60.0 80.0 100.0 In percentage

Figure 6.26:Major investments in productive and non productive assets due to RKVY agricultural engineering projects nd Far acq m uisi Hou tion se 70.0 50.0 39.3 60.0 Inc rea 40.0 Oth 50.0 sin ers 30.0 40.0 g ir Hou Resi 37.7 30.0 ri… seho 20.0 denti ld al 20.0 3.3 articl 27.9 hous 10.01.6 10.0 es 4.9 e 0.0 Far Tre 0.0 9.8 min e 1.6 g cro 62.3ma ps c… 16.4 29.5 Far Liv Orna m Vehi est ment 45.9 po cle ock s nds

Almost, 62.3 percent of farming machinery, 37.7 percent of pipeline/irrigation facility and 29.5 percent of livestock rearing added because of agricultural engineering projects. Likewise, 45.9 percent of beneficiaries had purchased new vehicles, 39.3 percent had constructed farm houses, 27.9 percent had increased their household articles and 16.4 percent had purchased ornaments.

6.7.4 TNAU Training and regular follow up improved the quality of 86.4 percent of beneficiary life by the way of additional income and improved crop yield in 81.8 percent among the sample household respectively. Cropping and irrigation intensity had increased among 68.2 percent and 63.6 percent of beneficiaries respectively. Almost, 77.3 percent of the households are taking care of their nutritional care because of increased income and quality of life. Ground water table improved among 40.9 percent of sample households. 88 Socio Economic Characteristics, Cropping Pattern and Value of Output of the Sample Household

Figure 6.27:Major impacts due to RKVY TNAU projects

Additional expenditure due to the project 36.4 Improvement in nutritional care 77.3 Improved Quality of beneficiary life 86.4 Micro-enterprises initiative 0.0 Crop Diversification 13.6 Improved ground water table 40.9 Additional days Employment generation … 22.7 Additional days Employment generation … 22.7 Increase in irrigation intensity 63.6 Increase in cropping intensity 68.2 Additional income 81.8 Enhanced crop yields 81.8

0.0 10.0 20.0 30.0 40.0 50.0 60.0 70.0 80.0 90.0100.0 In percentage

Figure 6.28:Major investments in productive and non productive assets due to RKVY TNAU projects

Land acq Farm uisition House 25.0 50.0

20.0 Increasin 40.0 g irrigatio Others 15.0 n/pipelin 30.0 e 10.0 Househ Residen 9.1 20.0 old tial 4.5 0.0 4.5 5.0 articles 18.2 10.0 house 4.5 0.0 0.0 4.5 Farming Tree 13.6 machiner crops 4.5 4.5 y

Orname 40.9 Vehicle Farm po Livestoc nts nds 22.7 k

22.7 percent of beneficiaries had added livestock, 13.6 percent had increased their farming machinery and 9.1 percent had improved their irrigation facilities. 40.9 percent of the households had added vehicle and 18.2 percent had added household articles.

6.7.5 Animal husbandry Nearly, 91.7 percent of the beneficiaries had reported their additional income because of 66.7 percent of beneficiaries increased their livestock numbers, which is expressed in additional days of employment generation among male and female as 61.1 percent respectively. 52.8 percent of the beneficiaries had expressed that due to animal husbandry projects their quality of life is improved and self consumption of milk and milk based products had increased their nutritional level. 22.2 percent of the households had reported additional expenditure due to this project as maintenance cost for their livestock. 36.1 percent of the beneficiaries had expressed their shift in crop cultivation, they are growing fodder crops based on the training given by the department under RKVY to meet out the fodder demand.

Socio Economic Characteristics, Cropping Pattern and Value of Output of the Sample Household 89

Figure 6.29:Major impacts due to RKVY animal husbandry projects

Additional expenditure due to the project 22.2 Improvement in nutritional care 55.6 Improved Quality of beneficiary life 52.8 Livestock rearing 66.7 Micro-enterprises initiative 2.8 Crop Diversification 36.1 Improved ground water table 25.0 Additional days Employment generation … 61.1 Additional days Employment generation … 61.1 Increase in irrigation intensity 25.0 Increase in cropping intensity 27.8 Additional income 91.7 Enhanced crop yields 38.9

0.0 10.0 20.0 30.0 40.0 50.0 60.0 70.0 80.0 90.0100.0 In percentage

Figure 6.30:Major investments in non productive assets due to RKVY animal husbandry projects

Farm House 20.016.7

15.0

10.0 Household Residential articles 5.0 house 8.3 0.0 0.0

8.3

13.9 Ornaments Vehicle

The effect of animal husbandry department projects has been expressed through 16.7 percent of beneficiaries had built their farm house followed by 13.9 percent had bought vehicles and 8.3 percent had added household articles and ornaments respectively.

6.7.6 Fisheries Almost, 64.8 percent of the beneficiaries had reported additional income because of fisheries projects under RKVY programme. 50 percent of the male had got additional days of employment and 55.6 percent had reported that their quality of life improved and nutritional requirement of the family fulfilled in 29.6 perent of the sample households. 48.1 perent of the beneficiaries had converted this practice as micro-enterprises. Lack of knowledge on fish rearing, 50 percent of the beneficiaries made additional expenditure. Proper training will reduce this kind of expenditure and will convert this activity as a profitable. 90 Socio Economic Characteristics, Cropping Pattern and Value of Output of the Sample Household

Figure 6.31:Major impacts due to RKVY fisheries projects

Additional expenditure due to the project 50.0 Improvement in nutritional care 29.6 Improved Quality of beneficiary life 55.6 Livestock rearing 9.3 Micro-enterprises initiative 48.1 Crop Diversification 9.3 Improved ground water table 16.7 Additional days Employment generation for … 11.1 Additional days Employment generation for … 50.0 Increase in irrigation intensity 22.2 Increase in cropping intensity 14.8 Additional income 64.8 Enhanced crop yields 11.1

0.0 10.0 20.0 30.0 40.0 50.0 60.0 70.0 In percentage

Figure 6.32: Major investments in productive and non productive assets due to RKVY fisheries projects

Land acqui Farm sition House 40.0 20.0 35.0 30.0 Increasing i 15.0 9.3 Others 25.0 rrigation/pip 20.0 eline 10.0 9.3 Househ Reside 15.0 old ntial 10.0 9.3 articles 5.0 house 3.7 5.0 0.0 1.9 0.0 0.0 9.3 9.3 Farming m 0.0 Tree crops achinery 9.3

Ornam 16.7Vehicle Farm pond ents Livestock s 35.2

6.8 Intangible benefits The sample households had got knowledge and confidence about how to approach government and non government organizations for their welfare after RKVY projects implementation. Likewise, the Grant received from other sources for their livelihood as well as standard of living improvement during 2013-14 has been documented and exhibited in figure 6.33 and 6.34. Nearly, Rs. 27.7 Lakhs worth of grant mobilized by 15.4 percent of the selected beneficiaries for their livelihood improvement, especially to strengthen the agricultural production and water conservation by getting micro irrigation, agricultural machinery, livestock, seeds, fruit seedlings and other inputs under various government schemes.

Socio Economic Characteristics, Cropping Pattern and Value of Output of the Sample Household 91

Figure 6.33: Grant received from other sources for the livelihood improvement of the beneficiary during 2013-14

Figure 6.34: Grant received from other sources to improve the standard of living of the beneficiary during 2013-14

8.7 percent of the selected sample beneficiaries had raised fund of Rs. 28.66 Lakhs to improve their standard of living by construction of RCC houses and latrine from various government schemes during 2013-14. Almost other 50 percent of the beneficiaries has raised fund in the subsequent years from various sources including RKVY for their livelihood as well as standard of living improvement. Farmers‘ involvement and frequency of touch has been increased, once they realised the benefit from the government scheme. Hence, the RKVY programme act as a bridge between needy and the department. By the way, 69 percent of marginal and small farmers had benefited under RKVY during 2013-14 as per the sample households. Reaching the unreached farmers in the subsequent year of RKVY implementation will enable to cover the entire State and able to increase the farm income by 2 to 3 times from the present level as envisaged in twelfth five year plan of Tamil Nadu (2012-17).

6.9 Major noteworthy benefits due to RKVY programme Some of the significant benefits to the beneficiaries through this RKVY programme which is aimed to increase the agricultural production and their standard of living are,  Improving new crop cultivation habits  Their confidence level about government scheme has increased  Learned about inter cropping  Improved water use efficiency 92 Socio Economic Characteristics, Cropping Pattern and Value of Output of the Sample Household

 Environment safety ensured  Cost of cultivation reduced  Government collaboration is strengthened  Post harvest processing is easy  Transport cost from cultivated spot to post harvest place is reduced  Effective utilization of labour  Labour shortage problem overcome  Income enhanced both farmer and NADP beneficiary in farm machinery project  Innovative implementation of new and advancement method in agriculture  Alternative and supportive livelihood for agriculture  Knowledge improvement in new and improved techniques

6.10 Satisfaction level of beneficiaries The satisfaction level of RKVY beneficiaries was evaluated based on five point scale and the result is exhibited in Table 6.3.

Table 6.3: Satisfaction level of beneficiaries in RKVY programme implementation

Scale29 Description of evaluation Item Inference30

1. Project Commencement in appropriate time 47.06 17.65 5.88 11.76 17.65 Very good 2. Stakeholders (implementing agency) support in Project 17.65 64.71 5.88 5.88 5.88 Excellent implementation 3. Equality in project access 35.29 52.94 0.00 5.88 5.88 Excellent 4. Quality process adopted during the project 41.18 35.29 17.65 0.00 5.88 Excellent implementation 5. Additional Income due to project intervention 29.41 29.41 29.41 0.00 11.76 Very good 6. Increased productivity 23.53 35.29 29.41 0.00 11.76 Very good 7. Asset creation 11.76 35.29 11.26 17.65 23.53 Good 8. Sustainability/follow up of the product or service or 11.76 41.18 35.29 5.88 5.88 Very good practice 9. What is your overall level of satisfaction with the 17.65 47.06 29.41 0.00 5.88 Very good product or service of the project? 10. What is your overall level of satisfaction with the 11.76 52.94 29.41 0.00 5.88 Very good project management process?

The satisfaction level of beneficiaries was assessed based on ten parameters with five point scale. Stakeholders (implementing agency) support in project implementation, equality in project access and quality process adopted during the project implementation parameters had scored excellent. As per this scale, nearly 50 percent of the beneficiaries had created asset. Project Commencement in

29 Value expressed in percentage

30Note: Inference drawn based on the sum of completely satisfied and very satisfied value and the sum up value falls between 100 -75 = Excellent, 74 – 50 = Very good, 49 – 25 = Good, > 24 = Bad Socio Economic Characteristics, Cropping Pattern and Value of Output of the Sample Household 93

appropriate time, additional Income due to project intervention, increased productivity, sustainability/follow up of the product or service or practice, overall level of satisfaction with the product or service of the project and overall level of satisfaction with the project management process parameters had scored very good.

Few suggestions given by the farmers for transforming the good and very good scale to excellent are,

 Frequent training required to enhance the activity  Projects in correct time/season with proper orientation/training  Exposure visit to the best farmers/model farm who implemented the project successfully  Tank renovation projects converged with MGNREGA and other government schemes  Fund allocation for maintaining common resources like tank, infrastructure created under RKVY and other government infrastructure related with agriculture/allied sector  Context based projects  The share of allocation may be high to the farmers organizations/groups rather than individuals under infrastructure & asset projects, hence, small and marginal farmers can be benefited

6.11 Project wise satisfaction level Assessment of project wise beneficiary was difficult in this vast context, like nine departments, normal and sub schemes as well as production enhancement, infrastructure and asserts creation and sub schemes with the sample districts. As mentioned in the TOR, the RKVY guideline states that, 25 percent of the projects sanctioned by the State each year under the three streams like RKVY – 1. Production growth, 2. Infrastructure and Asset, 3. Sub schemes have taken up for Impact Evalaution covering not less than eight districts. The projects selected based on the timely represeantative random nature as per the standard research methodology. The following picture shows that, out of 54 projects, 29 projects, i.e. 54 percent have been taken for impact evaluation study.

Total projects Streams sanctioned Studied Production growth 24 13 Infrastructure & Asset 20 10 Sub schemes 10 6 Total 54 29

The following projects have evaluated under production growth projects, viz., Farmers Mass contact programme (Uzhavar Peruvizha), Programme on Paddy Mission, Programmes on Pulses Mission, Comprehensive input supply management system, NADP for the productivity Enhancement of Horticulture Crops, Promotion of quality seed production in green manures, Demonstration of Direct Seeded Rice (DSR) in Dry and Puddled Condition to Enhance Productivity in Selected Districts of TN, lncreasing milk production in rural areas to ensure optimum supply to consumers by providing 94 Socio Economic Characteristics, Cropping Pattern and Value of Output of the Sample Household

adequate facilities at Trichy dairy and Pudukkottai, Encouraging farmers to adapt milch animal rearing by providing facilities, Introduction of Fish culture in Multi-Purpose farm ponds of Drought affected Cauvery Delta Region, Propagation of Fish culture in Multi-Purpose farm ponds in Tamil Nadu, Augmenting Fish Production in Fish Farms with improved culture technology and Introduction of Improved fishing craft for exploitation of reservoir fisheries.

All these projects were well received by the beneficiaries and they are still practicing those activities. Current year, 2016-17 is acute drought year. Therefore farmers cannot practice their farm activities as per the schedule. Apart from these projects, farmers are expecting field level training on their own or nearby villages as demo plot, which will enhance the production and NADP project reach. But, farmers mass contact programme was slightly achieved the goal. Instead, exposure to model farm, good practices of progressive farmer may be focused in this slot.

The following projects have evaluated under infrastructure and asset projects, viz., Agricultural Mechanization in Tamil Nadu, Formation of farmers group including package of Machinery and Training on operation and Maintenance of farm Machinery (100 percent grant), Provision of onion storage structure on pilot basis for a total capacity of 250 MT varying in sizes from 2 MT to 20 MT capacities to the farmers in 12 malor onion growing districts based on the demand at a unit cost of Rs. 8000/MT 50 percent, Provision of Diesel Engine Pump set with Rain gun / Pofiable Sprinkler lrrigation System, Construction of Building for Regulated Markets, Establishment of Tender Coconut Market Complex at Pollachi, Coimbatore Dt., Upgradation of Rural Sandhais in Tamil Nadu, Establishment of Back office at TNAU to interface with e resource of AMI & BPC, Provision of Ultra Sound Scanning facilities for Veterinary Clinician Centres, Cattle Breeding units and Departmental Livestock farms, and Ensuring better shelf life of miik ano milk products derived from the milk of rural producers by providing cold chain network.

Projects sanctioned under infrastructure and asset stream was well received by the beneficiaries. Farm machineries provided under NADP is still in working condition and utilization part also good, except power weeder. Maintenece and repair cost is high in power weeder. Selection of company for machinery purchase is based on lowest quotation rather than quality; this practice should be changed in future to minimize the maintenance cost. Few beneficiaries have sold their agricultural machinery like power tiller and harvestor to others in Madurai and Thiruvallur districts; this can be avoided by proper selection of beneficiary.

Common infrastructure like, storage godown, market structures, and buildings created in rural areas, i.e. now in the control of Block Development Officers (Due to inactive Panchayat system) will be handed over to well functioning community based organizations or Farmers Producer Organization in the same area for hundred percent utilization by the needy and well maintenance. Because, BDO’s may not ensure the daily utilization of those infrastructures created under NADP due to their preoccupied duties. Eg. Up-gradation of rural sandhai structure in Alanganallur block of Madurai district. The entire structure is utilized by the nearby 18 villagers on every Wednesday, because, that is the weekly market day. So, this unit is active from Tuesdayto Wednesday. Rest of the five days in closed condition. Villagers are expecting this unit will be active for 24*7 hours by post harvest processing, agricultural product quality checking, grading and packing unit. Currently, this is not possible due to key and control with the block level office. Self help group or Socio Economic Characteristics, Cropping Pattern and Value of Output of the Sample Household 95

farmers group in this area can play a vital role in proper utilization and maintenance. Common infrastructures need proper maintenance, which need money; this can be overcome by community participation.

The following projects have evaluated under sub schemes, viz., Rain fed Area Development programme, Pen metro Vegetabie Cluster Develcpment Programme for Trichy, Rain fed Area Development programme II, lntensive Goat Production for enhancing protein supplement (NMPS l), Integrated Aquaculture Unit at Thanjavur, and Integrated Aquaculture Unit at Thiruvarur.

These projects created very good impact in the beneficiaries’ life. Beneficiaries are expecting higher portion of subsidy and working cost or maintenance will be bearable by them in all kind of projects.

6.12 Summary of impact in agriculture and allied sectors Additional income earned by the agriculture sector beneficiaries are high, 89.30 percent when compared with allied sector, 76.1 percent. 83.08 percent of the beneficiaries had recorded enhanced crop yield in agriculture sector. 63.18 percent and 42.29 percent of beneficiaries had recorded increased cropping and irrigation intensity respectively in agriculture sector. Improved quality of life had increased in agriculture sector by 75.87 percent, whereas in allied sector, 54.3 percent. Nutritional care of the beneficiaries‘ households had high in agriculture sector, 55.47 percent and in allied sector, 41.3 percent. Additional days of employment generated for male and female in agriculture sector among the beneficiaries was 45.52 percent and 38.06 percent respectively, alike in allied sector was, 40.2 percent and 30.4 percent respectively. Diversification of crop was high in agriculture sector, 32.59 percent then allied sector, 20.7 percent. Water table level was improved high due to agriculture sector projects, 27.11 percent then allied sector projects, 19.6 percent.

96 Socio Economic Characteristics, Cropping Pattern and Value of Output of the Sample Household

Figure 6.35: Major impacts due to RKVY programme in agriculture and allied sectors

40.2 Additional expenditure due to the project 36.57 41.3 Improvement in nutritional care 55.47 54.3 Improved Quality of beneficiary life 75.87 31.5 Livestock rearing 24.13 30.4 Micro-enterprises initiative 3.23 20.7 Crop Diversification 32.59 19.6 Improved ground water table 27.11 Additional days Employment generation for 30.4 female 38.06 40.2 Additional days Employment generation for male 45.52 22.8 Increase in irrigation intensity 42.29 20.7 Increase in cropping intensity 63.18 76.1 Additional income 89.30 22.8 Enhanced crop yields 83.08

0.00 20.00 40.00 60.00 80.00 100.00 Allied Agriculture

Figure 6.36:Major investments in productive and non productive assets due to RKVY projects in agriculture and allied sectors

Land Farm acqui Hous sition e 35.0 40.0 35.0 30.0 Incre asing 30.0 25.0 Other irriga 25.0 17.2 Resid s 28.4tion/p 20.0 20.0 13.0 ential ipelin house 15.0 15.0 6.5 e 10.0 12.4 1.5 10.0 5.4 5.4 1.5 5.0 0 1.1 3.3 5.0 0.0 0.0 3.3 5.4 5.4 Farmi Tree 15.7 ng m 3.3 16.3 Hous 22.4 crops 4.5 31.8 achin ery ehold Vehicl article 14.9 e s 36.8

21.7 25.0 Farm 25.9 Lives pond Orna tock s ments Agriculture Allied Agriculture Allied

Farming machinery, irrigation pipeline and tree crops assets had increased among agriculture sector beneficiaries, 31.8 percent, 28.4 percent and 15.7 percent respectively. Farm pond and livestock rearing was high among allied sector beneficiaries. 36.8 percent of agriculture sector sample households had bought vehicle followed by household article, 22.4 percent.

Chapter 7 Good Practices

7. Good Practices

7.1 Introduction Success story shows a positive change and shows how that change benefits the people. A good success story uses evidence from evaluation to show the value of Extension. A success story about part of RKVY programme implemented during 2013-14 in Tamil Nadu is particularly noteworthy and significant, which is about an innovation, emergency response, continuity, sustainability, spill over or outstanding effort. These success stories have been documented after two years of programme completion, which shows a collected evidence of long-term impact.

DHAN Foundation has been instrumental in identifying, documenting and disseminating success stories from RKVY schemes implemented during 2013-14 on agricultural innovation and technologies through impact evaluation study with an aim to enable all stakeholders to adopt successful practices.

These good practices have been classified in to three major categories, (1) Production enhancement, (2) Infrastructure and Asset creation and (3) Sub schemes.

This chapter highlights eleven success stories namely:

(1) Production enhancement projects a. System Rice Intensification – A Milestone in second Green Revolution b. Vegetable Cultivation with Pandal c. Propagation of Fish culture in Farm Pond – case of Mr.M.Murugan, Mullipallam, Madurai d. Impact of introducing high yielding fodder crop in S S Kulam Block, Coimbatore district through NADP Project (2) Infrastructure and Asset creation projects a. Upgradation of Rural Sandhai in Maniyachi village, Alanganallur block, Madurai district b. Providing adequate infrastructure facilities at Trichy dairy c. Agricultural Mechanization - Combined harvester d. Agricultural Mechanization – Maize Husker and Sheller e. Agricultural Mechanization – Power weeder f. Agricultural Mechanization – Rotavator (3) Sub schemes a. Rainfed Area Development Programme (RADP), 1) Horticulture Based Farming System, 2) Pipe & precasted distribution system, 3) In-situ water conservation b. Rainfed Area Development Programme (RADP), 1) Horticulture Based Farming System, 2) Pipe & precasted distribution system, 3) Bore well and 4) Water lifting machine

This chapter will be immensely useful to all those engaged in implementing RKVY programme for agriculture and allied sector development in Tamil Nadu and India.

DHAN Foundation has documented nearly 20 good practices across Tamil Nadu state in selected districts. Eleven good practices have been illustrated in this chapter based on the following criteria. 100 Good Practices

Figure 7.1: Selection criteria for good practices

• Less cost of cultivation • Context specific • Easy adaptability Production enhancement • Spillover projects • Continuity of the projects • Sustainable income over the period • Market availability

• Large scale access • Solution for shortage of labour Infrastructure and • Timely availability of inputs Asset creation during peak seasonal operations • Less cost of cultivation • Drudgery reduced

• Context specific • Easy adaptability • Spillover Sub schemes • Continuity of the projects • Market availability • Innovation

Table 7.1: Department wise classification of good practices

Name of the Department Good practices documented Production enhancement projects Agriculture System Rice Intensification – A Milestone in second Green Revolution Horticulture Vegetable Cultivation with Pandal Propagation of Fish culture in Farm Pond – case of Mr.M.Murugan, Mullipallam, Fishery Madurai Impact of introducing high yielding fodder crop in S S Kulam Block through NADP Animal Husbandry Project Infrastructure and Asset creation Upgradation of Rural Sandhai in Maniyachi village, Alanganallur block, Madurai Agricultural Marketing district Dairy development Providing adequate infrastructure facilities at Trichy dairy Agricultural Mechanization - Combined harvester Agricultural Mechanization – Maize Husker and Sheller Agricultural engineering Agricultural Mechanization – Power weeder Agricultural Mechanization – Rotavator Sub schemes Horticulture Rainfed Area Development Programme (RADP), 1) Horticulture Based Farming Good Practices 101

Name of the Department Good practices documented System, 2) Pipe & precasted distribution system, 3) In-situ water conservation Rainfed Area Development Programme (RADP), 1) Horticulture Based Farming System, 2) Pipe & precasted distribution system, 3) Bore well and 4) Water lifting machine

I. Production enhancement projects

7.2 System Rice Intensification – A Milestone in second Green Revolution

Excellence is a continuous process and not an accident by A.P.J. Abdul Kalam

The System of Rice Intensification (SRI) is a methodology aimed at increasing the yield of rice farming. It is a low water, labor-intensive, method that uses younger seedlings singly spaced and typically hand weeded with special tools. Ms. Prasanna, Chinnapatti village from Madurai West Taluk of Madurai district, Tamil Nadu has one acre land. As per the suggestions given by Agricultural Officer on SRI Rice cultivation, the package of practices followed by her is as follows,

Paddy variety selection – Trichy – 3 from Thanjavur Agricultural Research Station was selected with the support of ADA and AO.

Seed Treatment – 2 Kg of Paddy seeds used for 68 Cents of land. Pseudomonas, Ashospirillam and Phosphobacteria was used to treat the seeds and nursery prepared.

Basal application and field preparation - 20 load of Farm Yard Manure, 10 bags of vermicompost, summer ploughing with goat manure and green manure was applied. Apart from organic manure, the following composition of inorganic manure also applied in the field, DAP : 68 Kgs, Urea : 34 Kgs, Potash : 17 Kgs was applied with 4 Kgs of micronutrients. Ashospirillam and Phospobacteria each 14 packets were used along with FYM.

Transplantation - As suggested by Agriculturist, 14 days paddy seedlings transplanted to main field with the help of marker as single seedling with the distance of 22.5 * 22.5 cm.

Fertilizer application and weeding – Applied 3 Kgs of Blue Green Algae mixed with sand on 10th day after transplanting. Weeding was done on 10th, 20th, 30th and 40th day after transplanting with the help of Cono weeder. Old and dead roots were cut off and new roots emerged while using cono weeder for weeding, which facilitated to emerge new tillers. Weeds used as manure. After 20th day of transplantation, 17 Kgs of Urea and Potash each was applied. Application of nitrogenous fertilizer was done based on the leaf colour chart. On an average, 49 tillers emerged from each plant.

Plant protection measures – Leaf folder infestation was rectified by using 3 % neem oil spray and leaf spot was controlled by 100 gm of Pevistin in 200 Liters of water. Alternate wetting and drying method of irrigation was used. The climate condition was also good.

Harvesting - all the above said practices revealed good yield and harvested 3223 Kgs of paddy grains, i.e. 16115 Kgs per Hectare and honored for highest Rice productivity / producer at Tamil Nadu 102 Good Practices

by Honorable Chief Minister with Rs. 5.00 Lakhs Cash award. Harvesting was done with the help of harvester.

Transplanting by using Marker and single seedling method Weeding by using cono weeder

Harvesting by Harvester Harvested Paddy Grains

Weighed for selection of highest productivity rice producer at TN Productivity Assessment

7.3 Vegetable Cultivation with Pandal Tamil Nadu‘s diverse soil and climate, comprising seven agro-climatic zones, make it conducive to grow a wide variety of horticulture crops comprising of fruits, vegetables, root and tuber crops, flowers, ornamental plants, medicinal and aromatic plants, spices, condiments, plantation crops and mushrooms, which form a significant part of aggregate agricultural produce. Good Practices 103

Cultivation of horticultural crops provides an important source of livelihood and generates substantial employment, which are essential to ensure nutritional security of the people. Tamil Nadu being endowed with diversified agro-climatic conditions has a vibrant horticulture sector which has been identified as one of the growth engines for increasing overall agriculture growth. Tamil Nadu produces 5 percent of the country‘s vegetable production. RKVY is an important flagship programme to increase vegetable production.

Horticulture department in Madurai district has received Rs.10 Lakhs against Pandhal cultivation under RKVY scheme. Nearly, 1.46 Lakhs was allocated to Vadipatti block for promotion of vegetable cultivation with Pandhal. Mr. T. Ragunathan from Kutlampatti village, Vadipatti block was one of the beneficiaries under vegetable cultivation with Pandhal system. Beneficiary has 5 acres of land, out of which, he received subsidy amount for 0.25 acre for vegetable cultivation with Pandhal during 2013- 14 under RKVY scheme. Subsidy Amount Rs. 48600 was released. Beneficiary also contributed nearly Rs.45000 against infrastructure development and as working capital.

Bitter gourd seeds US agri. supplied though department with 100 percent subsidy. Farmer took up fertilizer application and plant protection measures as per the advice of department officials and got 3.2 tonnes yield, the yield was doubled during that season. Net profit was Rs.73600. profit per hectare was Rs.294400.

The farmer got motivated and increased his area of vegetable cultivation with Pandhal up to 1 acre after visualizing the income and production enhancement. Crop production measures taught by the department are still useful to him for cultivation. Now, this unit act as a demonstration plot for other farmers in the same area, because, Vadipatti block is an agrarian block. Nearby village and same village farmers are learning fertilizer usage, plant protection measures and other cultivation practices from Mr. T. Ragunathan. Few farmers have started their vegetable cultivation with Pandhal system. It‘s a significant impact. 104 Good Practices

7.4 Propagation of Fish culture in Farm Pond – case of Mr.M.Murugan, Mullipallam, Madurai Mullipallam is a small village located in Vadipatti Taluk of Madurai district, Tamil Nadu with total 2173 families residing. The Mullipallam village has population of 7903 of which 3972 are males while 3931 are females as per Population Census 2011. Out of total population, 349 were cultivators (owner or co-owner) while 1862 were Agricultural labourer.

Mr.M.Murugan, Farmer belongs to Mullipallam and held ten acres earlier and he sold four and half acres for his daughter‘s Marriage. He has three daughters and all of them got married and presently he and his spouse are there in his own house. He has land in two places having good water resources. He cultivates Banana and Paddy. Part of his land is occupied by Coconut trees. He has his own irrigation tube well having potable ground water source in fifteen feet.

During 2012-13, with the support of MHNREGS, he dug out one farm pond nearer to the tube well with the area of 360 Sq.m. The farm pond is filled with rain water and tops up the tube well water and maintaining five feet water depth. Even though he has not been trained to rear fishes, with the available knowledge he reared fishes during 2013-14 with the support of NADP scheme implemented by DoF, Tamil Nadu.

7.4.1 Under Propagation of Fish culture in MPFPs scheme for non delta districts In Tamil Nadu, he was given inputs for fish rearing. DoF provided 75 Kgs of Pelleted fish feed as part of this project and the same was used by the farmer with satisfaction of saying that he got quick growth of fishes The total biomass harvested from his pond was 200 kgs and sold the same at the rate Rs 100/Kg locally. He has taken for consumption which he could not say the biomass which may be more than 30 Kgs by assumption. Apart from pellet feed, he fed with Rice barn and ground nut oil cake also. While discussing with him, we understood that he over fed to rear fishes which escalated the production cost of fishes more than 60 rupees per kg. This is due to poor knowledge on composite fish farming and also not having much technical knowledge in rearing fishes. But good scope is there to improve his production by providing technical training on fish rearing and the same was also expressed by him.

While visiting his farm pond during evaluation, he is maintaining good plankton population, which is natural food for fishes. Apart from that he is providing supplementary feed of Rice bran randomly. He Good Practices 105

is getting good support from DoF Madurai in inputs supply but he should be trained to achieve higher production which will help to scale up the same in this village. Water source is good and good scope for developing integrated inland fishery with agriculture.

The impacts of this project told by Mr.Murugan are

1. He gained additional income through fish rearing 2. He and his family feed on fresh nutritious fishes. 3. He gained some knowledge by doing this activity and continuing the same. 4. Ground water is improved in his farm land

7.5 Impact of introducing high yielding fodder crop in S S Kulam Block through NADP Project The veterinary dispensary is situated in Saravanampatti under the control of Animal Husbandry Department. This area is coming under Sarkar Sambakulam Block and earlier it was with Saravanampatti town panchayat and now it is integrated with Coimbatore Corporation. Though Urbanization is fast growing here from Coimbatore Corporation the area is still practicing agriculture.

The veterinary surgeon Dr Rajangam used to visit the farms on frequent basis to meet the demands of farmers related to annual health particularly on dairy animals. In this situation, the NADP scheme has been sanctioned in this area. During the visit by Dr. Rajangam, the area farmers expressed their concern on fodder issue as the following were the challenges in fodder availability related matter as:

. The fodder (green) is transported from nearby Erode district area called Satyamangalam through four wheelers. Farmers used to purchase fodder for Rs.300-400 per day. . Because of fodder coming from outside through vehicle, the vehicles were seized by RTO and traffic police and for that fodder vendors pay the money to RTO and others and so the cost of fodder is accordingly hiked. . Due to above issue, farmers faced problem of daily cash flow and went for purchase of concentrated feed and which is costly. . CO-1 and CO-2 variety of fodders and other Kothirai masal fodders cultivated and those varieties of fodder have problems of their own psychological characters. . Due to fodder insufficiency and others, the animal health issue such as infertility, health diseases, etc. was farmers‘ frequent problems as they shared during the interview.

In this situation, Dr Rajangam organized meeting through Vellakinaru milk producer cooperative near Saravanampatti and 40 farmers attended this meeting. Then Dr Rajangam shared the advantages of CO-4 fodder and Azolla cultivation under NADP.

Then farmers shared their fodder availability issues above. Then 22 farmers came forward to produce CO-4 and Azolla cultivation under NADP project. Out of 22 farmers, 15 have cultivated CO-4 fodder as Rs.3000 has been given as assistance under NADP project to take up CO-4 cultivation in their 0.25 acre of land for each farmer.

The assistance of Rs.3000 is with following components as: 106 Good Practices

CO-4 SLIPS purchase Rs.1600 Land preparation Rs.400 Ploughing Rs.600 Fertilizer Rs.400 Total Rs.3000

The amount is deposited in their individual bank account.

The 7 farmers have been assisted for Azolla cultivation.

According to the focus group discussion made with 4 farmers, the following are the concrete benefits out of cultivating CO-4 fodder cultivation as

1. Now green fodder availability with 22 farmers is in surplus 2. Diseases resistance of animals are increased now 3. Increased production 2-3 litres/animal per day 4. The conception rate of animal increased drastically 5. Healthy and sound animals ensured 6. Cost of fodder expenditure drastically reduced as outside purchase is drastically reduced 7. Per family no. of animals increased. e.g. V.A. Kalidas has increased his animal size from 2-8 and entire family is handling this animal management and dairy unit 8. Their interaction with line department started and they attend Collector‘s grievance day and other farmers.

The veterinary dispensary has also given training on how to cultivate CO-4 with package of practices, as all 22 farmers attended the training after attending the first meeting.

7.5.1 Way forward Though the initiative of CO-4 introduced during 2013-14, all 4 farmers, interviewed, keeping the 0.25 acre of fodder now also.

The farmers shared that the Saravanampatti area farmers face fodder issue as they every year go to Satyamangalam for bulk purchase of fodder. Now this CO-4 fodder and Azolla have drastically reduced the outside purchase of fodder.

II. Infrastructure and Asset creation projects

7.6 Upgradation of Rural Sandhai in Maniyachi village, Alanganallur block, Madurai district The Honourable minister of Agriculture made an announcement during budget session for upgradation of Rural Sandhais in Tamil Nadu. The Tenth State Level Sanctioning Committee (SLSC) Meeting of National Agriculture Development Programme was held under the chairmanship of Chief Secretary to Government on 19-03-2013 to sanction the project proposals of Agriculture/Allied sectors. Among others, the department of Agricultural Marketing and Agri. Business placed the Good Practices 107

upgradation of Rural Sandhais in Tamil Nadu proposal for an amount of Rs.240 Lakhs for 10 units and it was sanctioned by SLSC.

These ten units were proposed in ten districts, viz., Villupuram, Erode, Selam, Thirunelveli, Namakkal, Trichirapalli (Not constructed), Coimbatore (Thondamuthur), Dindigul, Krishnagiri (Pochampalli, Mathur) and Madurai (Maniyachi, Alanganallur). Out of ten districts, four districts have been covered as per the study design. Among the sample, Trichy district did not utilize the fund for construction of unit due to administrative reasons. Space was identified with the support of District Rural Development Agency (DRDA) for infrastructure creation based on the need. Here, the stake of village Panchayat is significant in maintenance and cleaning.

Alanganallur is one of the agrarian blocks in Madurai district with 37 Panchayats and 2 town Panchayats. The block has a total population of 111609 as per 2011 census. The share of workers from the total population is 55.34 percent. In this 64.28 percent of the workers depend on Agriculture. Percentage of net area sown is 95.39. Maniyachi is a small village, which has a population of 2071. The major occupation of the households is agriculture and allied activities. Paddy, Brinjal, Bhendi, Tomato, Coriander, Cucumber, Gourds, Moringa, Banana, Jasmine, Rose and Marigold are the major crops cultivated in and around this village. The harvested vegetables are sold in local markets and in vegetable market, Madurai. Maniyachi is one among the local weekly markets in Alanganallur block, which bridges demand vs. supply stream between farmers and consumers. Nearly, farmers from 30 village/hamlets* are assembling at Maniyachi on every Wednesday to trade their farm produces and more than 2000 consumers are getting the benefits out of this market.

Total area of the market place is 2 acres. About 220 shops run their business every week. Out of these 220, 175 shops are run by farmers themselves with their own produces. Based on the space availability, support from villages and Panchayat, Farmer as trader, Maniyachi village was selected for the project Upgradation of Rural Sandhai. 12*10 m size of hall constructed with Galvalume sheet roof top, Bore well, water lifting machine, PVC water tank about 1000 litres for cleaning, sorting, grading and washing facilities. Apart from this, five numbers of electronic weighing balance, 50 numbers of display board, market information ticker board and 500 numbers of plastic crates have been provided for marketing operations. This unit was inaugurated by the honourable Chief Minister of Tamil Nadu on 16th June 2015. 108 Good Practices

The infrastructure is effectively utilized by the farmers, traders and consumers on every Wednesday from 08.00 am to 07.00 pm. 50 – 60 farmers cum traders are regularly cleaning, washing and sorting their vegetables. These processes enable them to get good market price for their produces. E.g. Bhendi market price after grading is Rs.30, but, without grading, price is only Rs.20. Definitely, farmers earning 1/3rd extra income because of this infrastructure. Every farmer/trader cannot sell their produces in the same day, due to these post harvest processes, pest and disease infected vegetables eliminated from the lot and the shelf-life of these perishables is extended. Hence, Farmers are able to store their goods in this hall itself till next day and sell to the nearer market. So, transportation cost is also minimized.

This unit becomes busy on every Wednesday. Rest of the days, it is idle. Moreover, the space around the hall is used for defecation during night time by the local villagers, which can be overcome by construction of compound wall through any convergence scheme. This unit was handed over to Block Development Office through Panchayat President. Agricultural Marketing department is promoting Marketing groups at village level. These groups or Farmers Producer Organization in the locality or any Women Self Help Group can take charge to maintain this kind of infrastructure effectively through charging minimum amount from the traders; providing membership card to the farmers; other than Wednesday, the group members can collectively use this infrastructure by preparing any value added product from agricultural produces. As a result, the entire system can be efficiently utilized.

*30 villages/hamlets are Thethur, Palamedu, 66 Mettupatti, Senthamangalam, Pondugampatti, Sarathangi, Moduvarpatti, Periyaerunakumal, Keelakarai, Periyaoorseri, Sukkampatti, Konaptti, Valayappatti, Chitra valayapatti, Vallapatti, 15 B Mettupatti, Vavidamaruthur, Araiyur, Ambalathadi, Siruvalai, Thandalai, Maniyachi, Kottaimedu, Kallanai, Valasai, Pudupatti, Ayyur, Alagapuri, Anaikoilpatti and Vaikasipatti.

Good Practices 109

Upgradation of Rural Sandhai in Maniyachi village, Alanganallur block, Madurai district

7.7 Providing adequate infrastructure facilities at Trichy dairy The Trichy District Co-operative Milk Producers Union Ltd., Pudukkaottai Road, Kottappattu Dairy unit at Trichy has been provided with adequate facilities to handle increased procurement up to 5 LLPD with a Project cost of Rs.201.13 lakhs under RKVY scheme during 2013-14. In the Central Dairy Trichy, had to phase out the two worn out pasteurizers (10 KL each) and replace them with new 10 KL pasteurizers. Union received one 10 kl pasteurizer worth Rs. 25.00 lakh. As the milk separation is likely to go up due to enhanced procurement, the unit had to purchase two new 10 KL Cream Separators by replacing the existing old two 5 KL Cream Separators and this Union received one 10 klph cream separator worth Rs. 25.00 lakhs. One new Homogenizer had to be purchased as a standby to ensure uninterrupted supply of quality homogenized milk to the Consumers and one new 10 KL PH homogenizer received by the Union for Rs. 50.00 lakhs.

The unit has to purchase one 2KL Cream pasteurizer and the same was received with a sanctioned amount of Rs. 15.125 lakhs. To meet out the power crisis, the unit had to purchase a 750 KVA Genset and 25KVA Genset 2 Nos. for BMCs to phase out the existing rental Gen sets and received the same. To use soft water for the entire Dairy, Union received one 20000 LPH capacity water softener to the sanctioned amount of Rs. 5.0 Lakh. For the Three Chilling Centres, Union received 3 Nos. of 2000 LPH capacity solar hot water generation system for hot water facility for cleaning and sanitation of cans, tanks, chiller etc., to maintain hygienic handling of milk and also two2000 LPH capacity water softener for Manapparai and Karur received and5000 LPH capacity water softener for Perambalur CC.

110 Good Practices

Table 7.2: Providing adequate infrastructure facilities at Trichy dairy – component wise details

Name of the Item Location 10 KL PH Pasteurizer Trichy dairy 10 KL PH Homogenizer Trichy dairy 10 KL PH Cream Separator Trichy dairy 2 KL PH Cream pasteurizer Trichy dairy Generator 750 KVA Trichy dairy Generator 25 KVA BMC Water softener 20000LPH Trichy dairy Solar water heating system 2000 LPH Manapparai, Karur and perambalur CCs Water softener 5000 LPH Karur CC Water softener 2000 LPH Manapparai CC

Purchase of these machineries was made through tender following TT Act and implemented at Chilling centres, Bulk milk cooler centres and Central Dairy. Economical usage of manpower, electricity, fuel, water cost is coming as working capital in this project. Technology or Improved practice adopted through this project is clean milk production, replacement of worn out machinery, enhancement of handling capacity, purchase of new machineries for new product manufactures and prompt supply to consumers. Benefits accrued from the project and future plan are,

. Providing quality milk to the consumers . Reduction in processing /chilling cost . Coverage of more rural producers under co-operative ambit . Quantity and quality of milk increased beneficial to both producer farmers and consumers . Future plan from this unit are improved handling capacity, future milk procurement and production of new products

750 KVA GENSET 20,000 LPH WATER SOFTNER Good Practices 111

10 KL PASTEURIZER 10 KL HOMOGINIZER

2 KL CREAM PASTEURIZER 10 KL CREAM SEPARATOR

2000 LPH Solar Water Heating System (at Manapparai, Karur & Perambalur CC)

2000 LTRS CAP.WATER SOFTNER 112 Good Practices

5000 LTRS CAP.WATER SOFTNER- at CC 25 KVA GENSET ( BMCCs)

7.8 Agricultural Mechanization - Combined harvester Government of India and Tamil Nadu have made an announcement for certain measures for maintaining agriculture as the chief occupation of the farming community, to promote their economic status and for their upliftment of their Agricultural occupation. Agricultural mechanization, provision of farm equipments for the use of farmers, to promote agricultural mechanization as there is shortage of labour in the Agriculture sector and also to provide employment to the rural youth. The 10th SLSC meeting of RKVY allocated Rs. 4800 Lakhs for Agricultural mechanization under RKVY during 2013-14 to the Department of Agricultural Engineering.

Under Agricultural mechanization scheme, farmers received farming equipments like multicrop thresher, power thresher, power weeder, power sprayer, paddy transplanter, coconut tree climber, power tiller, rotavator, laser land leveller, zero till seed drill, belar, coconut dehusker, paddy reaper, sugarcane trash shredder, etc.,

Mr. S.Arumugavadivu, Kandukondanmanikkam village, Sathankulam block in Thoothukudi district is a farmer who has 2 acres of land. Farmer is cultivating paddy as a major crop. To sort out the labour issue during harvesting phase, he approached Agricultural Engineering department to get combined harvester at subsidized rate. Likewise, total cost of the equipment was Rs. 16 Lakhs, in this, Rs.12 Lakhs was beneficiary contribution and Rs.4 Lakhs was received as subsidy under RKVY scheme. Farmer received bank loan to meet out the financial shortage. The subsidy amount was also received as front end subsidy. Benefits realized by the farmer due to this machine are:

. Labour shortage was easily managed . Private parties who are having harvesting machine, are charging high rate per hour, this amount was saved . Leverage with the bank is possible . Currently, beneficiary has closed the loan dues after meeting out the working capital, within three years, break even has been achieved . Quality of seeds are good due to mechanical way of post harvest practices . Farmer become entrepreneur in farming activity Good Practices 113

7.9 Agricultural Mechanization – Maize Husker and Sheller Mr. K. Ramamoorthy, Sakkammalpuram village in Vilathikulam block of Thoothukudi district has 20 acres of rain-fed land. He is cultivating Maize as a major crop in the entire land. Farmer decided to buy Maize husker and sheller because of labour shortage and high cost for maize post harvest practices. He approached Agricultural Engineering department to get a machine at subsidized rate. Likewise, the department allotted maize husker and sheller during 2013-14 under RKVY agricultural mechanization programme. Total cost of the maize husker and sheller was Rs.127500, beneficiary contributed Rs.67500 and department sanctioned Rs.60500 as front end subsidy to dealer for the same.

Before mechanization, Mr.K.Ramamoorthy depended on labour in the same area for maize harvesting. Farmer could not harvest the maize even if it was ready for harvest. He had to wait for labourers due to labour shortage. Now, he is able to harvest the produce on time after getting this machine. Usually, he has to pay Rs.3500 as labour charge per acre, now it is reduced as Rs.1500 by using this machine harvester. Now, his cost of cultivation has been reduced to Rs. 2000 per acre during harvest and post harvest practices. Therefore, he is earning Rs.30000 extra per season from his 20 acres of land. He is giving this machine as rental to nearer farmers, due to this; his number of working days has increased and 4 women labours also get work opportunity. He earned Rs. 50000 as rent from this machine looking after maintenance cost. Now-a-days, farmer is earning a minimum of Rs.80000 per annum. 114 Good Practices

7.10 Agricultural Mechanization – Power weeder Mr. T. Vijayakumar Gnanaraj is residing in Kalvilai village of Thiruchandur block, Thoothukudi district. He is having 4 acres of land. 3 acres of land is occupied by Coconut and rest is occupied with Banana. On time manual weeding is the biggest problem due to labour shortage. He got the power weeder with the total cost of Rs.62798. Out of this, Rs.29904 is the subsidy amount received from the government as front end subsidy.

Table 7.3: Comparison between manual weeding vs. machine weeding in one acre of banana orchard

Particulars Manual weeding Machine weeding Labour requirement for weeding per time 15 1 Labour charge per day Rs. 150 Rs. 150 Fuel charge/acre/one time Nil Rs.250 (3 litres) Total expanses Rs.2250 Rs.400

Savings per time due to mechanization = Rs.1850

Banana crop requires 8 times of weeding, so, total savings are Rs.14800 per acre. Bund formation, making ridges and furrows are also possible with this weeder. Due to clear maintenance of field, pest and disease incidences will be minimized thus reducing the expenditure on plant protection measures. Good Practices 115

Before weeding After weeding with the help of power weeder 7.11 Agricultural Mechanization – Rotavator Mr. S. Balasudhakar, Kulaiyankarisal village in Thoothukudi block of Thoothukudi district. He is having 6.67 acres of land. He is cultivating Paddy, Gingelly and Watermelon as the major crops. He received rotavator under RKVY scheme during 2013-14 from Agricultural Engineering department. Total cost of the machine was Rs.91910, farmer has contributed Rs.71910 and got front end subsidy from the department as Rs.20000.

Earlier, he got rental rotavator for ploughing his land with the hire charge of Rs.3000 per acre. But, now, he is able to plough his land by his own rotavator with the maintenance cost of Rs.900 per acre (Fuel charge – Rs.400 and Driver wage of Rs.500). So, he is reducing the cost of cultivation Rs.2100 / acre per ploughing. On an average, he is saving Rs.14000 from the entire land per season from the ploughing practices. Apart from this, he is earning through rental charge from nearer farmers.

III. Sub schemes

7.12 Rainfed Area Development Programme (RADP), 1) Horticulture Based Farming System, 2) Pipe & precasted distribution system, 3) In-situ water conservation Integrated farming and mixed crop cultivation is the bequest to get regular income in rain-fed situation. Failure of one crop can be manageable with another crop/activity. Hence, income sustainability can be ensured to the farmer. RADP is one of the good initiatives under RKVY sub scheme. Horticulture Based Farming System, Pipe and precasted distribution system, In-situ water 116 Good Practices

conservation, provision of bore well and water lifting machine are the important schemes under RKVY.

Mr. S.Periyakaruppan is a farmer residing in Aritapatty, Melur block of Madurai district. He has 9.5 acres of dry land. Melur is one of the backward blocks in Madurai district. It is an agrarian block and drought prone area too. In this situation, the farmer received 100 mango seedlings and 20 Kg of blackgram seeds (COCG912) under Horticulture Based Farming System in RKVY scheme during 2013-14 for a hectare. Apart from this, the same farmer received Pipe and precasted distribution system and In-situ water conservation scheme for effective water management in the same financial year under RKVY. Beneficiary has contributed 50 percent of amount and rest of 50 percent released under RKVY scheme by the department as back ended subsidy and materials also distributed.

Table 7.4: Subsidy Amount released in details to Mr. S.Periyakaruppan, Aritapatty, Melur block of Madurai

Horticulture Based Farming System Rs.25000/Hec Component wise cost Mango grafts 100 Nos. x Rs. 50= Rs.5000 Blackgram seeds 20 Kg. x Rs. 88 = Rs.1760 Urea & Potash each 150 Kg= Rs.3333 Plant protection chemicals= Rs.3498 Mango Fruit Baskets= Rs.3500 Cash Portion= Rs.4630 Total= Rs.21721 Pipe & precasted distribution system Rs. 10000/Hec. PVC Pipes subsidy released Rs.10000/ Hec. In-situ water conservation Rs. 2500/Hec Water saving pit around tree Rs.1875/0.75Hec Grand Total subsidy released Rs.33596

Mango crop is now three years old. For regular watering the grafts he made such an excellent technique. The mud pots of 5 litres capacity were placed into the soil near the root zone area of each Good Practices 117

mango tree and filled with water (Pitcher irrigation method). A small hole was made in the bottom of the pot to insert cotton cloth piece so that the water is dripping continuously near the root zone. Thus he is able to maintain 90 trees out of 100 given to him and the yield is being expected after 2 years.

Blackgram seeds received were sown but due to poor rainfall there was failure. So Castor seeds were sown and farmer got Rs.12000/- as profit. Next crop Gingelly has sown as intercrop and got good yield was 5 Quintals, the income around Rs. 40000/-. After receiving this RKVY fund, farmer could approach Agriculture and Horticulture department frequently to get other schemes available with the department. In the same way, he received rain gun from agriculture department.

Because of these schemes farmer felt the impact as, 1. Mango orchard newly created, 2. Additional man-day‘s of employment around 150 days for weeding and maintenance, 3. Water use efficiency improved, 4. Satisfaction, 5. Environment safety ensured and 6. Increased awareness and confidence to approach various departments for new schemes.

7.13 Rainfed Area Development Programme (RADP), 1) Horticulture Based Farming System, 2) Pipe & precasted distribution system, 3) Bore well and 4) Water lifting machine Ms. Pappammal is a farmer residing in A. Valaiyapatti village in Melur block of Madurai district. She has 5 acres of dry land. Melur is one of the backward blocks in Madurai district. It is an agrarian block and drought prone area too. In this situation, the farmer has received 100 mango seedlings and 20 Kg of blackgram seeds under Horticulture Based Farming System in RKVY scheme during 2013- 14 for a hectare. Apart from this, the same farmer has received Pipe and precasted distribution system, Bore well and water lifting machine for effective crop management in the same financial year under RKVY. Beneficiary has contributed 50 percent of amount and rest of 50 percent released under RKVY scheme by the department as back ended subsidy and materials also distributed.

Table 7.5: Subsidy Amount released in details to Ms. Pappammal, A. Valayapatti, Melur block of Madurai

Horticulture Based Farming System Rs.25000/Hec Component wise cost Mango grafts 100 Nos. x Rs. 50= Rs.5000 Blackgram seeds 20 Kg. x Rs. 88 = Rs.1760 Urea & Potash each 150 Kg= Rs.3333 Plant protection chemicals= Rs.3498 Mango Fruit Baskets= Rs.3500 Cash Portion= Rs.4630 Total= Rs.21721 Pipe & precasted distribution system Rs. 10000/Hec. PVC Pipes subsidy released (50 Nos.) Rs.10000/ Hec. Bore well Rs. 25000/ Bore well with pipe line Rs.25000/ Water lifting machine Rs. 10000 Motor Engine subsidy released Rs.10000 Grand Total subsidy released Rs.

118 Good Practices

Mango crop is now three years. The yield is being expected after 1 or 2 years. Blackgram crop yield obtained was 360 Kg. and it was sold @ Rs.63/Kg, Total income from blackgram was Rs.22680. Expenditure up to harvest was Rs.3000, Net Profit was Rs.19680. Second crop Sunflower was sown as intercrop. The yield from sunflower was 1600Kgs and income around Rs. 48000/-.Due to these RKVY schemes, standard of living of farmer has increased and additionally she created Guava orchard for 2 acres with effectively utilizing Bore well and pipeline.

Because of these schemes farmer felt the impact as, 1. Crop diversification, 2. Learned about inter cropping Mango with black gram, 3. No. of additional working days increased as 150 days, 4. Learned to get government project, which was helpful to access the Housing project from government.

Chapter 8 Key Findings

8. Key Findings

8.1 Background of the Impact Evaluation Study To strengthen the growth of Agriculture and allied sectors, the National Development Council (NDC), in its meeting held on 29th May, 2007 resolved that a special Additional Central Assistance Scheme, Rashtriya Krishi Vikas Yojana (RKVY) been launched. Introduce a new Additional Central Assistance scheme to incentivize States to draw up plans for their agriculture sector more comprehensively, taking agro-climatic conditions, natural resource issues and technology into account, in addition to integrating livestock, poultry and fisheries. This involved a new scheme for Additional Central Assistance to State Plans, administered by the Union Ministry of Agriculture over and above its existing Centrally Sponsored schemes, to supplement the State-specific strategies including special schemes for beneficiaries of land reforms.

Under this programme, major projects related to cropping, agriculture extension, horticulture, farm mechanization, soil water conservation, marketing infrastructure and processing are being implemented from 11th Five year plan to 12th Five year plan. A 100 percent centrally sponsored programme till 2014-15, with a policy shift of fund sharing pattern between the centre and State in the ratio of 60:40 from 2015-16, Tamil Nadu government has implemented by setting operational set up exclusively for RKVY/NADP in the state. The RKVY aims at achieving 4 percent annual growth in the agriculture sector during the XI Plan period, by ensuring a holistic development of Agriculture and allied sectors. The eligibility for assistance under the scheme depend upon the amount provided in State Plan Budgets for Agriculture and allied sectors, over and above the base line percentage expenditure incurred by the State Governments on Agriculture and allied sectors. The central government has sanctioned RKVY fund to the Tamil Nadu state every year from the inception of the programme. The state has received Rs. 31188.28 Lakhs during 2013-14, nearly, 1.99 percent from the total allocation.

TAWDEVA acts as the Nodal Agency for channelizing funds for the NADP scheme funded by the Government of India. As envisaged in the RKVY guidelines for XII five year plan as outlined in para- 12, an effective third party evaluation system for a comprehensive and in-depth assessment of various completed projects under the scheme in Tamil Nadu state for 2013-14, DHAN Foundation has been selected as a third party to carry impact evaluation of NADP projects implemented during 2013-14, based on the lowest auction.

Need for an effective evaluation is to assist the project functionaries at various levels, the organizational learning processes need to be facilitated through the observations of Associate agency; to examine the various activities implemented by the departments and confirm that the project activities are implemented as per the RKVY Guidelines, Government orders and implementation guidelines issued by the implementing departments; to get timely and appropriate information on the performance of projects, measured by combining qualitative and quantitative performance indicators; to study the value of the project; to study the socio economic profile of farmers pre and post project; to find out the opinion of the farmers regarding the implementation of projects; to document the 122 Key Findings

success stories and best practices which will be useful for replication and the Associate agency should add value to the project for achievement of expected outcome and impact.

The study area for Impact Evaluation Study of NADP projects implemented during 2013 – 14 was based on the agro climatic zones of Tamil Nadu. Eight districts have been selected from five climatic zones. Apart from these eight districts, Tamil Nadu Agricultural University (TNAU), an implementing agency concerned, Sivaganga, one more district in Southern zone has added. Hence, additionally beneficiaries under Dryland Agriculture Research Station (DARS), TNAU research station, Chettinad has been taken for the study.

By following stratified random sampling and purposive sampling method, totally 9 districts, 27 blocks, 244 villages and 700 beneficiaries, which includes farm, infrastructure/asset and sub scheme beneficiaries were selected for individual survey, participatory impact assessment and case studies through discussions with the nodal agency/implementing authorities.

8.2 Summary of the findings

8.2.1 RKVY fund allocation Tamil Nadu had received Rs. 31188.28 Lakhs during 2013-14 under RKVY programme to implement 44 normal schemes and 10 sub schemes. Among these schemes, 84 percent of the financial allocation was directly related with agriculture sector and 16 percent of the project financial allocation focused about allied sector. Total amount sanctioned to the agriculture sector was Rs.26275.43 Lakhs and for allied sector was Rs. 4912.85 Lakhs. Agriculture sector had achieved 97.7 percent of financial allocation, whereas, the allied sector had achieved 100 percent of its financial allocation. Totally, 33 projects sanctioned to agriculture sector, which includes production enhancement, infrastructure and asset creation and sub schemes. 21 projects focused about agriculture allied sectors including production enhancement, infrastructure and asset creation and sub schemes.

Nearly, 78.40 percent of financial allocation was sanctioned to normal scheme and 21.60 percent towards sub scheme during 2013-14. Almost, 47.63 percent of total fund allocation in the State was allocated to the Agriculture department followed by the Agricultural Engineering department. Cooperatives department had received the lowest fund allocation of 0.22 percent, i.e. Rs.70 Lakhs. Likewise, Agriculture department had received 51.66 percent of financial allocation from the total normal scheme allocation followed by 26.23 percent to Agricultural -Engineering department. Cooperatives department had received 0.29 percent of share while calculating the normal scheme allocation alone among the department. All the nine departments had received the financial as well as physical allocation under normal scheme of RKVY.

Sub schemes were sanctioned to Agriculture, Horticulture, Animal husbandry, Dairy development and Fisheries department. Three departments in agriculture sector and one department in allied sector have not received any financial allocation under sub schemes during 2013-14. Agriculture department had received the highest financial allocation of 33 percent followed by Horticulture department, 32.70 percent and Dairy development department, 19.30 percent. Animal husbandry and Fisheries department share was each 7.5 percent. Key Findings 123

8.2.2 Agricultural performance over the period The assessment was done between India and Tamil Nadu and the tenth as well as eleventh five year plan. Overall GDP (from 7.6 percent to 8 percent) and Agriculture sector GDP (from 2.4 percent to 4.1 percent) was showing an increasing trend from the tenth year plan to eleventh five year plan in India. The agriculture sector contributes a significant part, especially in Eleventh five year plan where it is shown that nearly half of its GDP is contributed from agriculture sector.

Whereas, in Tamil Nadu both the Overall GDP (from 9.7 percent to 7.7 percent) and Agriculture sector GDP (from 4.3 percent to 2.2 percent) was showing an decreasing trend from the tenth year plan to eleventh five year plan, which was due to negative growth of 10.20 percent in the financial year 2012-13 due to precipitous fall in area, production and yield of crops due to adverse weather, which affects the overall GDP of the State. The share of agriculture GDP in tenth five year plan was nearly half of its portion. But, the status was reduced to one fourth during eleventh five year plan due to some adverse situation. RKVY guideline is insisting to bring 4 percent GDP growth in agriculture sector, which was achieved by the country. In case of Tamil Nadu, it was not attained due to the adverse condition during 2012-13.

The land utilization pattern of Tamil Nadu during 2013-14 shows that the share of net sown area was high, 35 percent from the total land availability followed by forest and land under miscellaneous tree crops and groves, 18 percent and land put to non-agricultural uses, 17 percent. The total number of operational land holdings in the State declined from 81.93 lakh in 2005 – 06 to 81.18 lakh in 2010 – 11 (0.9 percent). This implies that the farmers may have given up their cultivation because of the lucrative price offered for land on account of fast urbanization. According to the 2010-11 Agricultural census, the State had 81.18 lakh holdings with on operating area of 64.88 lakh ha. Marginal farmers (area less than 1 ha.) constitute 77 per cent who operated 35 percent of the total area. Small farmers (1 to 2 ha) had a share of 15 percent and operated 25.3 percent of the total area. Semi-medium (2 to 4 ha.) and medium farmers (4 to 10 ha.) accounted for 7.5 percent and operated 34.0 percent of the total area. Large farmers (more than 10 ha.) had a share of 0.4 percent operated 5.4 percent of total area. Average size of holding in the state was 0.80 ha. In Tamil Nadu the per capita availability of land is only 0.19 ha and the per capita net sown area is only 0.10 ha.

RKVY scheme had definitely played a significant role in the growth of agriculture and allied sector while it is complex to isolate the extent of RKVY‘s contribution for that growth. 54 projects had sanctioned under RKVY during 2013-14 to Tamil Nadu state for 13 different activities. The highest expenditure met up against crop development, Rs. 7881.56 Lakhs, i.e. 25.8 percent to the total expenditure for 8 projects followed by Agricultural Mechanization, Rs. 5008.57 Lakhs, i.e. 16.4 percent of total expenditure towards 3 projects.

8.2.3 Socio-economic status of selected households

The impact evaluation study has covered 86 percent of male beneficiaries and 14 percent of female beneficiaries. The demographic profile of households indicates their socio-economic characteristics. Average family size of the beneficiary households are 5. The maximum family size recorded as 16. Nearly, 50 percent of the households family size falls on 5 to 8 members, whereas, 46 percent of the family falls under 1 to 4 members. Average age of sample beneficiaries is 50. 33 percent each of the 124 Key Findings

sample beneficiaries falls under 40 – 49 years and 50 - 59 years age categories followed by 13 percent each under 30 – 39 years and 60 – 69 years categories. Almost, 97 percent of the households has own house followed by 3 percent of households in rental houses. 63 percent of the households purely depends on Agriculture and allied sector, whereas 37 percent of the households has alternate source of livelihood as vending, MGNREGA, construction labourers, small business and as other workers.

Looking at the education qualification of the registered beneficiaries whose name the subsidy was given to the households, a majority of them completed their primary (25.9 percent), upper primary (22.7 percent) and secondary education (24.9 percent). 9.1. percent of the samples are illiterate. Availability of kisan card and savings bank account with commercial bank or cooperative societies has documented to assess the forward linkage for agriculture development of the registered households. In this, 91 percent of the households are maintaining their savings bank account in one or two commercial banks. RKVY back ended subsidy amount had deposited in to the beneficiaries SB account only. While assessing the kisan card availability, only 14.6 percent of the households only access to kisan card facility, almost 70 percent of the farmers does not know about the benefits of kisan card.

According to the survey, the sample beneficiaries‘ holdings with on operating area of 2343.3 acres of land and 9 percent of the beneficiaries are landless. Landless also covered under RKVY Fisheries department projects. Marginal farmers (area less than 2.5 acres) constitute 33 percent, small farmers (2.6 to 5 acres) had a share of 36 percent, semi-medium (5.1 to 10 acres) accounted 14 percent of the share and medium farmers (10.1 to 25 acres) accounted for 7 percent of land holding. Large farmers (more than 25 acres) had a share of 1 percent. Average size of holding in the sample households was 4.8 acres. Apart from own land, 29 percent of the sample households are having lease land for agriculture purposes. Borewell is the major sources of irrigation for about 59.5 percent of the sample households followed by open well, 40 percent. Almost half of the beneficiaries have more than one source for irrigation. The habit of construction of farm ponds are sporadically emerging among the farmer especially who are in drought belt. MGNREGA lays a basement for the same.

At the aggregate, around 63.90 percent of the farmers growing paddy followed by 31.6 percent are cultivating vegetables and fruits, 24.4 percent. 19.73 percent of the farmers are growing pulses. Around 23 percent of the Paddy grower has the practice of rice fallow pulse based on water availability. Farmers have the practice of intercropping pulses, groundnut or vegetables between Coconut grooves and orchards. Less than one percent of the farmers among the selected households are maintaining sericulture. Around 3 percent of the farmers are growing fodder crops for their livestock and or for commercial sale. Nearly, 18.61 percent of the farmers are cultivating Sugarcane.

Farmers usually rear animal husbandry with crop husbandry to maintain the income sustainability; nearly 68 percent of the RKVY beneficiaries are rearing milch animals (minimum of 1 to maximum of 30), goat (minimum of 1 to maximum of 65), sheep and poultry for their domestic and commercial purposes. The livestock reared by the selected beneficiary households are categorized into cow, buffalo, goat, sheep, poultry and bull. Totally, 873 cows which include calves are rearing by the sample household followed by goat, 486. Only one house from the sample is rearing buffalo in 10 numbers. Sheep population is 140 from the selected households. Key Findings 125

8.2.4 Beneficiary households' awareness about the RKVY programme

Documentation has been done about households' awareness level about the RKVY programme and from whom the beneficiaries obtained information about the programme. Figure 6.18 shows details about the source of awareness about the RKVY programme during 2013-14 in Tamil Nadu. While, during survey the beneficiary could able to recap the department staff, process adopted to avail RKVY benefit and kind of benefit received, but, they fail to recap the benefit obtained under RKVY programme. Hardly, less than 20 percent of the beneficiaries only knew, they had obtained subsidy under the RKVY programme. Even, in the agricultural machinery purchased under RKVY programme does not exhibit the RKVY name board, instead, the machine supplier name is displayed. The main source of awareness about the RKVY programme was through the concerned department staff, 78 percent followed by relatives/friends, 8 percent. Progressive farmers has regular contact with the department staffs, these farmers has the awareness to avail government schemes easily.

Application submitted with photo copy of Chitta, Adankal, Photo, Ration card and voter id by the beneficiary to the department for RKVY programme. Farmers are approaching the department based on their need, if this need matched among the scheme available with the department, farmer can obtain the subsidy as per the procedure.

8.2.5 Value of the RKVY projects

This evaluation study tries to identify and value the costs and benefits that arose from the RKVY project and compared them with the situation as it would be without the project. The difference is the incremental net benefit arising from the project investment. The value of the project has been studied in three different dimensions, i.e. production enhancement, infrastructure and asset creation (cost reduction through mechanization - total production may not increase, but a benefit arises because the costs have been trimmed, reduced transport costs, losses avoided) and sub schemes. Other kinds of tangible benefits not only from cost reduction, as noted earlier, but also from time savings, development activities in areas newly accessible to markets, soil conservation, better nutrition etc., and intangible benefits like creation of new job opportunities, confidence arose to approach government and non government department for their welfare.

Financial allocation to the state during 2013-14 under RKVY programme was Rs. 31188.28 Lakhs, in this, nearly 54 percent of the fund sanction as direct cost to the farmers and remaining 46 percent of the fund sanctioned to the department for training, asset and infrastructure creation and mass contact programme, etc., as indirect cost. This indirect cost created awareness among the beneficiaries and beneficiaries are utilizing those asset and infrastructure for their welfare. About Rs. 54.8 Lakhs sanctioned to the selected beneficiaries as direct cost under RKVY to improve their livelihood by way of production enhancement, asset and infrastructure creation, innovation schemes, etc.,. This amount induced the farmers‘ contribution as Rs. 58.45 Lakhs. Total cost of Rs. 113.25 Lakhs involved with the agriculture and allied sector growth among the sample beneficiaries. Beneficiaries around 29 percent approached bank for mobilizing their own contribution, because of this project bank leverage happened and those farmers repaid their loan too. 126 Key Findings

Only 5 percent of the beneficiaries had expressed their unhappiness in project distribution, fund sanctioning process moreover delay in sanctioning and involvement of local politicians. The mode of fund received by the sample beneficiaries is exhibited in Figure 6.20. About 44.7 percent of the beneficiaries had received the fund as back ended subsidy followed by seed/seedling & fertilizer directly supplied to the beneficiary as 25.5 percent.

Especially, beneficiaries under agricultural engineering department had received as front end subsidy, amount credited to the machine supplier from the department and beneficiary also deposited the amount to the machine supplier and machine delivered to the beneficiary.

Fifteen indicators had taken to assess the impact and value of RKVY programme, viz., whether the project enhanced crop yields, additional income generated due to this project, increase in cropping and irrigation intensity, additional days of employment generation for male and female, improvement in ground water table, crop diversification, initiation of micro-enterprises (Sericulture / Apiary / Mushroom / Vermi composting / Farm pond (Fisheries)), livestock rearing (Any shift or Addition in numbers), improvement in quality of beneficiary life and nutrition care, additional expenditure due to the project, major investments in production and non production assets. Sectoral impact is as follows.

Additional income earned by the agriculture sector beneficiaries are high, 89.30 percent when compared with allied sector, 76.1 percent. 83.08 percent of the beneficiaries had recorded enhanced crop yield in agriculture sector. 63.18 percent and 42.29 percent of beneficiaries had recorded increased cropping and irrigation intensity respectively in agriculture sector. Improved quality of life had increased in agriculture sector by 75.87 percent, whereas in allied sector, 54.3 percent. Nutritional care of the beneficiaries‘ households had high in agriculture sector, 55.47 percent and in allied sector, 41.3 percent. Additional days of employment generated for male and female in agriculture sector among the beneficiaries was 45.52 percent and 38.06 percent respectively, alike in allied sector was, 40.2 percent and 30.4 percent respectively. Diversification of crop was high in agriculture sector, 32.59 percent then allied sector, 20.7 percent. Water table level was improved high due to agriculture sector projects, 27.11 percent then allied sector projects, 19.6 percent.

Micro-enterprises initiatives and livestock rearing was high among the allied sector beneficiaries, 30.4 percent and 31.5 percent respectively then agriculture sector beneficiaries, 3.23 percent and 24.13 percent respectively. Additional expenditure due to the allied sector projects was high, 40.2 percent then agriculture sector, 36.57 percent. Farming machinery, irrigation pipeline and tree crops assets had increased among agriculture sector beneficiaries, 31.8 percent, 28.4 percent and 15.7 percent respectively. Farm pond and livestock rearing was high among allied sector beneficiaries. 36.8 percent of agriculture sector sample households had bought vehicle followed by household article, 22.4 percent.

8.2.6 Intangible benefits

The sample households had got knowledge and confidence about how to approach government and non government organizations for their welfare after RKVY projects implementation. Likewise, the Grant received from other sources for their livelihood as well as standard of living improvement during 2013-14 has been documented and exhibited in figure 6.33 and 6.34. Nearly, Rs. 27.7 Lakhs Key Findings 127

worth of grant mobilized by 15.4 percent of the selected beneficiaries for their livelihood improvement, especially to strengthen the agricultural production and water conservation by getting micro irrigation, agricultural machinery, livestock, seeds, fruit seedlings and other inputs under various government schemes.

8.2.7 Major noteworthy benefits and satisfaction level of beneficiaries

Some of the significant benefits to the beneficiaries through this RKVY programme which is aimed to increase the agricultural production and their standard of living are,

 Improving new crop cultivation habits – like vegetable cultivation through Pandhal system in Vadipatty block of Madurai district and Pollachi block in Coimbatore district, introduced Bhendi crop in Sedapatti block of Madurai district by Horticulture department under NADP.  Their confidential level about government scheme has increased  Learned about inter cropping  Improved water use efficiency through pipe line distribution  Environment safety ensured through tree plantation  Cost of cultivation reduced because of Mechanization  Government collaboration is strengthened  Post harvest processing is easy due to storage godown and mechanization  Transport cost from cultivated spot to post harvest place is reduced  Effective utilization of labour because of Mechanization  Labour shortage problem overcome because of Mechanization  Income enhanced both farmer and NADP beneficiary in farm machinery project  Innovative implementation of new and advancement method in agriculture like SRI techniques  Alternative and supportive livelihood for agriculture through milch animal distribution and fisheries  Knowledge improvement in new and improved techniques

The satisfaction level of beneficiaries had assessed based on ten parameters with five point scale. Stakeholders (implementing agency) support in project implementation, equality in project access and quality process adopted during the project implementation parameters had scored excellent. As per this scale, nearly 50 percent of the beneficiaries had created asset. Project Commencement in appropriate time, additional Income due to project intervention, increased productivity, sustainability/follow up of the product or service or practice, overall level of satisfaction with the 128 Key Findings

product or service of the project and overall level of satisfaction with the project management process parameters had scored very good.

Assessment of project wise beneficiary was difficult in this vast context, like nine departments, normal and sub schemes as well as production enhancement, infrastructure and asserts creation and sub schemes with the sample districts. As mentioned in the TOR, the RKVY guideline states that, 25 percent of the projects sanctioned by the State each year under the three streams like RKVY – 1. Production growth, 2. Infrastructure and Asset, 3. Sub schemes have taken up for Impact Evalaution covering not less than eight districts. The projects selected based on the timely represeantative random nature as per the standard research methodology. The following picture shows that, out of 54 projects, 29 projects, i.e. 54 percent have been taken for impact evaluation study. List of studies projects elaborated in Chapter 6.

All the production growth enhancement projects were well received by the beneficiaries and they are still practicing those activities. Current year, 2016-17 is acute drought year. Therefore farmers cannot practice their farm activities as per the schedule. Apart from these projects, farmers are expecting field level training on their own or nearby villages as demo plot, which will enhance the production and NADP project reach. But, farmers mass contact programme was slightly achieved the goal. Instead, exposure to model farm, good practices of progressive farmer may be focused in this slot.

Common infrastructure like, storage godown, market structures, and buildings created in rural areas, i.e. now in the control of Block Development Officers (Due to inactive Panchayat system) will be handed over to well functioning community based organizations or Farmers Producer Organization in the same area for hundred percent utilization by the needy and well maintenance. Because, BDO’s may not ensure the daily utilization of those infrastructures created under NADP due to their preoccupied duties. Eg. Up-gradation of rural sandhai structure in Alanganallur block of Madurai district. The entire structure is utilized by the nearby 18 villagers on every Wednesday, because, that is the weekly market day. So, this unit is active from Tuesdayto Wednesday. Rest of the five days in closed condition. Villagers are expecting this unit will be active for 24*7 hours by post harvest processing, agricultural product quality checking, grading and packing unit. Currently, this is not possible due to key and control with the block level office. Self help group or farmers group in this area can play a vital role in proper utilization and maintenance. Common infrastructures need proper maintenance, which need money; this can be overcome by community participation. Key Findings 129

The projectsunder Sub schemes created very good impact in the beneficiaries’ life. Beneficiaries are expecting higher portion of subsid, then only working cost or maintenance will be bearable by them in all kind of projects.

8.3 Suggestions for the Better Implementation of RKVY Programme

Few suggestions given by the farmers for transform the good and very good scale to excellent are,

 Frequent training / capacity building required to enhance the activities like package of practices for cultivation, agriculture and allied entrepreneurship development, etc., - Almost 67 percent of the beneficiaries are expecting.  Projects in correct time/season with proper orientation/training – schemes related with annual crop and production enhancement projects should be implemented in appropriate time.  Exposure visit to the best farmers/model farm who implemented the project successfully – 53 percent of the beneficiares especially in horticulture, fisheries and animal husbandry departments are expecting.  Provision of quality inputs on time – Horticulture and Fisheries department beneficiaries are expecting.  Tank renovation projects converged with MGNREGA and other government schemes are expected by agricultural enginnering department beneficiaries.  Fund allocation for maintaining common resources infrastructure created under RKVY and other government infrastructure related with agriculture/allied sector – Buildings and godown constructed under Upgradation of rural Santhai scheme in Madurai district and infrastructure creation projects beneficiaries as well as officials involving with these projects are expecting.  Context based projects – Implementation of schemes in Thanjavur and Sivaganga or Thoothukudi is not equal.  The share of allocation may be high to the farmers‘ organizations/groups rather than individuals under infrastructure & asset projects, hence, small and marginal farmers can be benefited – Custom hiring centre and other group based benefits in NADP is less than the individual schemes.

8.4 A Way Forward

A way forward for the better implementation of RKVY programmes and to attain the 5 percent growth rate in agricultural GDP are:

Vibrant products - The study has also brought to the fore that farmers seem to be content with adopting innovative schemes like SRI whereas there have been evidences in sample districts like Madurai, Thanjavur, Thoothukudi, etc. Likewise, similar projects (Vegetable Cultivation with Pandhal system in Coimbatore and Madurai districts) being popular with beneficiaries have been successfully implemented. This calls for specific attention by implementing agency, policy makers and researchers for learning and introduction of innovative projects to the core. Examples, Shade net cultivation of vegetables and annual flower crops, Creation of community solar drier, etc. The approach in future development would be identifying ideally suited locations and improvements through technologies. For instance, regions in Kovilpatty and Chettinade in Tamil Nadu can be identified as rainfed tracts and the interventions would be popularization of location-specific technologies including forecasting and demonstrations. 130 Key Findings

Production counselling - conducting training programs for capacity building and individual counselling related to farming and allied activities to the needy persons should be focused. A specific topic with innovative pedagogy instead of lecture about the subjects in a single training programme will be effective. Development in extension services are the need of the hour to ensure transmission of agriculture technology to the farmers. Post harvest handling of perishables, organic farming, and soil conservation techniques, forecasting about animal diseases, crop selection based on season and market availability are some of the needy areas as expressed by the sample households for training. Exposure visits to model farms reveals insights towards production enhancement.

Grassroots’ visioning – the implementing agency that are implementing production enhancement projects has to enable the farming communities to foresee their growth and production plan through participatory methods. This visioning exercise will facilitate to attain the expected growth rate envisaged in Twelfth five year plan about agriculture production projection. More emphasis has to be done on Farmer Centric Approach and Farmers’ growth.

Setting Standards - With the RKVY guideline, the implementing agency has to set standards and standard operating procedure for each and every project to achieve best.

Recognizing the good practices, behaviour and habits – the implementing agency can take a lead to recognize the RKVY beneficiaries / institutions for their good practices in front of common village forum like gramasabha, which facilitate others towards the cause. These type of reorganization will smoothen the project implementation and can reach the unreached needy. Proper reorganization will strengthen the objectives of RKVY.

Production Champions - What the research team discerned during the interactions in Thoothukudi, Thiruvallur, Krishnagiri and Madurai districts FGD and individual interview is that the progressive farmers have been a great inspiration to motivate the neighbours to get RKVY projects (Pipeline distribution under Rainfed Area Development Projects, Tarpauline sheet under Pulsse Mission, and Bhendi Seed in Sedapatti block, Madurai district, etc.) and its successful implementation. These progressive farmers have displayed a passionate connect with the department and in the process besides being role model for the entire village. RKVY implementing agency in consovence with the project implementation should identify, encourage and recognize a team of progressive farmers as champions to give inspiration to the other needy in areas where there is lopsided growth.

Dynamic Leveraging - as RKVY beneficiaries, there is better appreciation by the members, especially, the asset and infrastructure related projects, the way projects had leveraged with the banking system including the access to the cash-credit. In other hand, beneficiaries are leveraging their experience gained through RKVY projects with other government schemes for their standard of living (Individual Household Latrine contruction under Swachh Bharat and New house contruction or House upgradation under Indira Awas Yojana (IAY)) and livelihood welfare (Benefits under National Horticultural Mission by beneficiary in Melur block of Madurai district, Fishery department scheme in Thoothukudi district, etc.). There is the scope for innovation in this process through dynamic leveraging wherein as the convergence. Key Findings 131

Prepare for the unexpected - practically, agriculture and allied sector depends on both internal and external factors. Suspense is a common phenomenon, which affects agricultural production, which can be overcome to some extent with an element of insurance to meet the financial loss. Insurance has been observed that there have been sporadic instances of, where enabling process/schemes is focused. Insurance in the current scenario have to address multiple risk viz. life, health, livelihood assets such as crop and animal husbandry to absorb the financial loss. The premium amount for all these risks together has been felt as strain. The advent of Jan Dhan Yojana coupled with Pradhan Mantri Jeevan Jyoti Bima Yojana (PMJJBY), Pradhan Mantri Suraksha Bima Yojana (PMSBY) along with the Prime Minister Fasal Bhima Yojana sensitize the importance and coverage. The implementing agency has to motivate and ensure their beneficiaries‘ social security through these less premium policies. Proper insurance literacy and orientation which would to large extent reduce the problems of non- renewal of insurance policies.

Connectivity – provision of foreword linkages like quality seed, fertilizer, organic manure, cattle feed and plant protection measures as well as backward linkages like marketing facilitation through provision of timely price information, storage facility, identifying market and provision of transportation are must to advance the productivity. The price stability measures need to be further strengthened. More focus on Value-addition to reduce wastage of food grains, fruits and vegetables have to be made.

RKVY as a “Foundation and Fount” for agricultural production - From a National perspective, RKVY holds the key to a fulsome agricultural production. More so, the subsidized amount from the RKVY lays the foundation as the first and foremost financial service and get the opportunity for exposing the farmer to the external environment, which does the role of the fount to facilitate access to other financial services line credit, insurance, pension and remittances, etc. As a part of this drive, special awareness and literacy programmes, campaigns to promote RKVY products need to be operationalized widely across the country/state.

Mechanization - availability of farm machineries and equipments is essential to overcome the labour shortage and ensure timely farm operations. Provision for purchase of agricultural machinery is embedded with the project. Maintenance of advanced equipments and training regarding the use of those equipments to the farmers/group/department/centres will facilitate hundred percent utilization. The study has brought out, usually, the first list beneficiaries had received the machine with demo and training for handling those machineries, but, the subsequent list of people had got the machine without orientation or the vigour was low, which should be ensured across the batches, Eg. Ultrasound Scanning Machine to Madurai and other districts Animal Hunsbandry department. The purchase of machineries had to be done based on quality than through lowest tendering, Eg. Pwer weeder and Tiller. Provision of pump sets, bore well and water lifting machine projects have to ensure the availability of electricity/diesel for operating /utilization, Eg. Beneficiaries in Thiruvallur district.

Smaller and manual operated mechineries for Paddy transplanting, Groundnut Decardicator, Weeder and other small mechineries will useful for small and marginal landholders.

There is a need to allocate more funds for agriculture especially on infrastructure development. 132 Key Findings

Maintenance and monitoring – The production oriented projects should be linked with the proper marketing so that the project will be continued in future and utilize the infrastructural facilities created, Eg. Vegetable cluster and Upgradation of rural Sandhai projects in Trichy and Alanganallur block of Madurai dsitrict. The common infrastructure created in the rural areas may be maintained by the farmers association /SHG / Producer Company / locally operating community organizations, which will ensure the continuous utilization and maintenance. They can charge nominal amount for the maintenance of those infrastructure from the beneficiaries with proper record where there is no maintenance cost from the scheme. Good performing completed projects must be scaled up for better outcome as it is very useful for the farming community. Adopted villages must be frequently visited by the technical staff. Field staff should be trained for regular follow-up.

Project work performance evaluation/audit/monitoring should be assigned to academic and research institution or any specialized agency annually. RKVY portal needs to be updated periodically to monitor the progress.

Timeliness brings novelty - timely availability of subsidy, good quality seeds, availability of appropriate and required fertilizers, pesticides and other inputs, simple procedure for availing those inputs, enhancing the coverage and hikes the percentage of subsidy given to the production enhancement projects. SLSC meeting should be conducted early and funds should be released earlier i.e., in the month of April/May, which will help in planning and execution of work on time. The annual action plans should be framed before the on-set of fiscal year and provision should be made for release of total allocated funds to the implementing agencies.

Way to sustainability - While talking about the project/product sustainability, RKVY as a unique resource plays a crucial role in advancing agriculture technologies thereby enhancing the production and income. This is from the individuals‘ perspective and what the process of RKVY has done from the social perspective is to enhance the agricultural GDP for the sustainability of overall GDP. Gestation period for the project may also be allowed for any meaningful result. Transfer of technology and extension activities should be considered as continuous processes. Adequate resources should be allocated accordingly.

State level farmers seminar by inviting benefited farmers twice a year by the TAWDEVA, as a nodal agency will strengthen the RKVY project impacts and which will create the space to understand about the ground reality.

RKVY implementation is only related with the concerned government department, that too, the allocation is very low while spread to nine departments. The allocation will increase depending upon the project importance. RKVY project implementation may be through different stakeholders, like, government departments, state agricultural universities/research stations, public-private partners and Resource Support Organization (RSO)/ Non-Governmental Organization (NGO), viz., MSSRF, DHAN Foundation, etc.,. The tripartite project implementation leads to better results.

Key Findings 133

Figure 8.1: Tripartite project implementation model

Concerned TNAU/State department Agri. (Fund University allocation and (Technology sanctioning) updation)

RSO/NGO (Project implementation)

Role of implementing agency - In the overall framework, role of implementing agency is distinctive. It has been observed that the performance of projects and its quality of enabling process. During the course of study, it is seen that there is an imbalance in the quality of enabling the beneficiaries/ institutions which is reflected in the system for maintaining record of beneficiaries, Eg. Pollachi block of Coimbatore district etc., performance of projects, its continuity and response of beneficiaries to the subject under study. For, where the implementing agency is merely to complete their task mechanically, it reflects poorly on the performance of projects not only on apt beneficiary selection, but on other parameters such as outcome, utilization and sustainability. This calls for capacity building of the staff of implementing agency on the ―Holistic Perspective of RKVY. The concerned department may nominate a person for RKVY implementation, those should be well trained. Ledger should be available with the implementing agency both in the form of soft and hard copy which include exact postal address and contact details.

The implementing agency can go with cluster approach for beneficiary selection, instead of selecting the beneficiaries across block/district. Cluster approach leads to saturation and synergistic effect on project impact. Doordharsan or FM radio can be used for advertising the RKVY project details, which will reach the grassroots without hitch. Proportion of small and marginal farmers reach, facilitate to achieve a farm output growth of 5 percent, incremental productivity gains and technology diffusion.

Now-a-days, the extension of urban and peri-urban areas are rapidly growing in which context, innovative projects can be framed especially for urban and peri-urban areas like Thirupur, Thiruvallur, Kanchipuram, etc., districts.

Action Research - As we have seen in the course of research study, there is fascinating multifaceted aspects of RKVY projects with the beneficiaries and the interplay in the new dynamics, spin off effects has brought in. There is also a curiosity to find what is happening on the aspects of impact with poor in the States. Longitudinal study in-depth including the beneficiaries from the RKVY inception will bring versatile dimensions. Several action research topics could be generated and 134 Key Findings

initiated in consultation with leading players in the field. Long term funding should be promised for research oriented projects.

8.5 A Way Forward for the implementing agency To meet the growing demand for agricultural produce and to ensure food security, the following measures / new projects are proposed to the implementing agency based on the study findings and deep discussion with the department officials. Way forward received from Tamil Nadu Agricultural University and enclosed as Annexure 5.

Measures/New projects for Agriculture department 1. Rainfed farming - In situ water conservation methods, seed ball promotion 2. Crop diversification 3. Water conservation through precision farming 4. Waste land development through millet promotion 5. Village adoption for pulses, oilseeds and millets 6. Millet seed production should be scaled up 7. Farmers educate to balanced fertilizer application 8. Model Mixed Farming System at Village Level

Measures/New projects for Horticulture department 1. Urban/ Peri-urban farming, especially, roof gardening to ensure nutritional security 2. Rainfed farming- In situ water conservation methods, seed ball promotion and orchard creation 3. Hybrid vegetable seedlings production through pro- traymethod under Shade Net House 4. Augmentation of horticultural crop Nurseries 5. Poly house Cultivation 6. Propagation under shade net

Key Findings 135

Measures/New projects for Agricultural Engineering department 1. Facilitating farmers for tank silt application 2. Uprooting Prosophis juliflora in private land, converting to cultivable land 3. Proper training to Agri. machinary beneficiaries 4. Modern Seed Processing Unit 5. Promotion of community solar drier 6. Introduction of Smaller and manual operated mechineries for Paddy transplanting, Groundnut Decardicator, Weeder 7. Provision of palm sugar extractor machine for Palm Sugar Production using indigenous Technology Transfer

Measures/New projects for Agricultural Marketing department 1. Maintenance of existing infrastructure with the support of producer company/FPO/SHG instead of Panchayat 2. Millet procurement and announcing minimum support price 3. Context based storage godown, ensuring with utility 4. Promotion of terminal markets 5. Palm Products Training cum Production unit 6. Samai/ millet Mini Mill 7. Seed Bank promotion

Measures/New projects for Tamil Nadu Agricultural University 1. More number of outreach programme 2. More focus on Value-addition to reduce wastage of food grains, fruits and vegetables 3. Allocation of more fund on infrastructure development 4. Meteorological data should be contextualised with the support of research stations and periodical dissemination is must, Eg. in Kovilpatti and Chettinadu 5. Popularization of location-specific technologies including forecasting and demonstrations 6. Price stability measures to be strengthened 7. More emphasis has to be done on Farmer Centric Approach and Farmers' development 8. Training on Oyster mushroom cultivation under Thatched shed to the farmers with inputs 9. Milky mushroom cultivation under Thatched shed and sunken ploy house with Blue Silpaulin sheet. 10. Capacity building to middle & top level line department staffs, ADA, JDA, DDA

136 Key Findings

Measures/New projects for Animal Husbandry department 1. Encouraging native breed rearing 2. Promoting fodder cultivation 3. Integrated fodder production (Azola Cultivation) 4. Proper orientation to handle machineries / instruments like ultra sound scanning machine 5. Setting up of Goat Farms under Stall Feed Method 6. Establishment of Poultry Incubators

Measures/New projects for Dairy Development department 1. Training to handle the instruments 2. Literacy related with livestock insurance 3. Cattle feed production unit 4. Provision of Milk Cooler Tanker for the Cluster Level Dairy Federation 5. Proper orientation to handle machineries / instruments like ultra sound scanning machine

Measures/New projects for Fisheries department 1. Intensive training programmes on Composite fish farming, integrated fish farming, Poly culture with Fresh water prawn culture can be given and refresher trainings to be conducted yearly 2. Inputs supply to be given atleast for 3 years with reducing the percentage of subsidy will helpful to sustain the activity 3. Availability of Feeds (pellet feed, floating feed etc) at district level through FFDA 4. Promotion of Tilapia farming 5. Linkage with Banks for financial assistance to deepen the ponds will help to small & marginal farmers 6. Ornamental Fish Culture 7. Cage culture / Crab Fattening

Key Findings 137

Measures/New projects for Cooperatives department 1. Ensure social security both farmer as well as milch animal like Karnataka State Cooperatives model 2. Rural-Urban linkage 3. Awareness on crop insurance among the farmers

To sum up, agriculture development is predicated by improvement in farm production and productivity, better utilization of agriculture inputs, proper marketing infrastructure and support, stepping up of investment in agriculture with due regard and environmental concerns and efficient food management.

References

1. Alain Barbu, Impact Evaluation - The experience of the Independent Evaluation Group of The World BANK, www.worldbank.org 2. IEG (Independent Evaluation Group). 2011. Impact Evaluations in Agriculture: An Assessment of the Evidence, Washington, DC: World Bank. 3. ―Determining the counterfactual is at the core of evaluation design‖, Judy Baker Evaluating the Impact of Development Projects on Poverty, World Bank, 2000 4. Census of India 2011 5. Katherine Farley et al., October 2012, Principles into Practice: Impact Evaluations of Agriculture Projects, Millennium Challenge Corporation, United States of America 6. GSDP at constant prices 2015 7. ―The central objective of quantitative impact evaluation is to estimate unobserved counterfactual outcomes‖ Impact Evaluation: Methodological and operational issues, Asian Development Bank, September 2006; 8. Andrew Alford, 2008, Impact Assessment Program, International Food Policy Research Institute, Washington 9. Customized Rainfall Information System (CRIS),India Meteorological Department 10. Department of Economics and Statistics, Chennai – 6 11. Farm Ponds for Enhancing Food Security, Policy Brief 11, by DHAN Foundation 12. G O (Ms) No 197, dated 30.09.13 13. G O.(Ms).No.170, dated 21.08.13 14. G.O Ms. No .171, dated.21.08.13 15. G.O Ms. No .248, dated.11.12.13 16. G.O. (Ms).No.160, dated 02.08.13, 17. G.O. Passed by the SLSC during 2013-14 financial years under RKVY projects 18. G.O.(Ives).No.238, dated 06.12.13 19. G.O.(Ms).No.185, dated04.09.13 20. G.O.(Ms). No.169, dated 21.08.13 21. G.O.(Ms).No.112, dated 12.8.14 22. G.O.(Ms).No.165, dated13.08.13 23. G.O.(Ms).No.'183, dated 04.09.13 24. G.O.(Ms).No.184,dated 04.09.13 25. G.O.(Ms).No.194, dated 26.09.13 26. G.O.(Ms).No.198, dated 30.09.13 References 139

27. http://www.nrega.nic.in/netnrega/home.aspx 28. http://www.tn.gov.in/dear/Agriculture.pdf 29. http://www.tn.gov.in/dear/State%20Income.pdf 30. http://www.tnrd.gov.in/databases/Blocks.pdf accessed on 12th November 2016 by 12.30 pm 31. Inequality adjusted Human Development Index for India's States 2011, United Nations Development Programme 32. Labour Bureau, 2007-08 to 2013-14 33. Ministry of Statistics and Programme Implementation, Planning Commission, Government of India 34. Parmod Kumar et al, December 2013, Impact Evaluation of Rashtriya Krishi Vikas Yojana Report-I Sponsored by :Department of Agriculture and Co-operation (RKVY Division), Ministry of Agriculture, Govt. of India, Agriculture Development And Rural Transformation Centre Institute For Social And Economic Change , Bangalore - 560 072 35. Parmod kumar et al, November 2014, ―Impact evaluation of Rashtriya Krishi Vikas Yojana Report – II : Sectoral report‖, Agricultural development and rural transformation centre, Institute for Social and Economic Change, Bangalore – 560 072, sponsored by : Department of Agriculture and Co-operation (RKVY Division), Ministry of Agriculture, Government of India 36. Planning Commission of India 37. S.S.P.Sharma et al, 2011-12, ―Comprehensive Study of Impact of Investment in Watershed, April 2002 to March 2005‖ Centre for Water and Land Resources (CWLR), National Institute of Rural Development (NIRD) Hyderabad – 5000 030 38. Season and crop report of Tamil Nadu (2012-13)

Annexures

Annexure 1: Study Team

S. Name and Designation Qualification Role in the impact evaluation No. study 1. M. P. Vasimalai, Executive M. Sc. (Agri.), MBA Advisor Director, DHAN Foundation (IIM, Ahmadabad) 2. A. Gurunathan, Director, Tata- B. E. (Agri.), PGDRM Project leader and study team Dhan Academy (IRMA) member for Cuddalore and Coimbatore districts 3. N. Venkatesan, CEO, DHAN B. E. (Agri.) Study team member for Vayalagam Foundation Cuddalore and Coimbatore districts 4. P. Dheivanai, Faculty, Tata- M. Sc. (Agri.) Study team member for Madurai Dhan Academy and Thoothukudi. Data analysis and report preparation 5. S. P. Madhan mohan, Team B. F. Sc. Study team member for Leader, DHAN Vayalagam Trichirapalli, Thanjavur, and Foundation Thoothukudi. Report preparation on Fisheries department 6. J. Mohan, Team Leader, DHAN B. E. (Agri.) Study team member for Vayalagam Foundation Trichirapalli and Thanjavur 7. V. Duraimurugan, Senior Project B. E. (Agri.) Study team member for Executive, DHAN Vayalagam Thiruvallur Foundation 8. Ms. Saral Neuroji, Senior Project B. Sc. (Agri.) Study team member for Executive, DHAN Vayalagam Thoothukudi Foundation 9. Ms. Sathya, Project Executive, B. E. (Agri.) Study team member for DHAN Kalanjiam Foundation Thiruvallur 10. Dr. Sivasubramanian, Project B. V. Sc. Study team member for Executive, DHAN CALL Cuddalore programme 11. Praveen, Researcher M. Tech Study team and report Tata-Dhan Academy preparation on assessment of Agricultural performance 12. C.Kannan, Programme B.A. Study team member for Associate, DHAN People Trichirapalli and Thanjavur Academy 13. Ponnazhagan, Staff, DHAN B.A. Study team member for Vayalagam Foundation Krishnagiri and Coimbatore 14. Thirumal Dip. Agri. Study team member for Krishnagiri and Coimbatore

144 Annexures

Annexure 2

Impact Evaluation Study of NADP projects implemented during 2013 – 14 -

Interview schedule to the farmers for assessing the impact of the project * Required

Part A : Basic information

1. Project under benefited: *

2. Department Concerned *

3. Year & Month of fund received: *

4. District *

5. Block *

6. Panchayat *

7. Village: * 8. Beneficiary Name: *

9. Beneficiary contact no: *

10. Gender * Male / Female 11. Age: *

12. No. of Family members (No. of Adult > 14 years & No. of children <14 years): *

13. Education qualification of the beneficiary * Illiterate / Primary education / Upper primary education / Secondary education / Higher secondary education / Diploma / Under Graduate / Post Graduate/ Other:

14. Primary occupation * 15. Secondary occupation *

16. Land holding size in Acres *

Annexures 145

17. Type & No. of livestock: *

18. Source of irrigation: * Open well / Bore well / River / Tank / Other:

19. Major crops cultivated *1. 2. 3. 20. Kisan card availability * Yes / No

21. SB account availability * Yes / No

22. SB account details where NADP benefit received *

23. Type of House: * Own / Lease / Rent

24. Type of House Roof: * Thatched / Tiled / RCC roof / Built through government scheme

25. Electricity availability at house : * Yes / No

26. Access to toilet (Individual Household Latrine (IHHL)): * Yes / No

27. Access to water at household premises * Yes / No

28. Type of fuel used for cooking purpose * Liquefied Petroleum Gas (LPG) / Bio- gas plant / Fire wood / Kerosene

Project details

29. By whom you received NADP project information: *

30. Process adopted to get the project: *

31. Component wise project cost and Beneficiary contribution in Rs. *

32. Mode of fund received: * Amount deposited in to SB account as a Back ended subsidy / Amount credited as a front end subsidy to the dealer for Agri. Machinery purchase / Fertilizer s u p p l i e d through PACS / Basket or pipe line supplied / Materials supplied / Farming Machinery supplied / Seed or Seedlings & Fertilizer directly supplied/ Training/ Other: 146 Annexures

33. Stages / installment to got fund *

34. Any Grant received from other sources for your livelihood improvement * Yes / No

35. If yes, specify the amount and source

36. Any Grant received from other sources for housing or toilet construction or some other purpose to improve your standard of Living * Yes / No

37. If yes, specify the amount and source

Part B : Changes due to the project as compared to the start of the project

Note: Each question has other option, please ask justification for Yes or No answer from the beneficiary and enter that option

1. Enhanced crop yields * Yes / No / Not Applicable / Don't Know Justification:

2. Additional income * Yes / No / Not Applicable / Don't Know Justification:

3. Increase in cropping intensity * Yes / No / Not Applicable / Don't Know

Justification:

4. Increase in irrigation intensity * Yes / No / Not Applicable / Don't Know

Justification:

5. Additional days Employment generation for male * Yes / No / Not Applicable / Don't Know Justification:

6. Additional days Employment generation for female * Yes / No / Not Applicable / Don't Know Justification:

7. Improved ground water table * Yes / No / Not Applicable / Don't Know Annexures 147

Justification:

8. Crop Diversification * Yes / No / Not Applicable / Don't Know Justification:

9. Micro-enterprises initiative (Sericulture / Apiary / Mushroom / Vermi composting / Farm pond (Fisheries) Others specify: ) * Yes / No / Not Applicable / Don't Know Justification: 10. Livestock rearing (Any shift or Addition in numbers) * Yes / No / Not Applicable / Don't Know Justification:

11. Improved Quality of beneficiary life * Yes / No / Not Applicable / Don't Know Justification:

12. Improvement in nutritional care * Yes / No / Not Applicable / Don't Know Justification:

13. Additional expenditure due to the project * Yes / No / Not Applicable / Don't Know Justification:

14. Major investments in production Assets * (Put ⱱ mark in the relevant column)

Parameters Yes No Not applicable Don’t know Land acquisition Increasing irrigation/pipe line Farming machinery Livestock Farm ponds Tree crops Others 15. Major investments in non production Assets *(Put ⱱ mark in the relevant column)

Parameters Yes No Not applicable Don’t know Farm House Residential house Vehicle Ornaments Household articles Others

148 Annexures

Part C: Significant Impact

1. Brief major 5 Noteworthy impacts due to this project *

Interviewer signature with name & Date: *

Beneficiary signature: *

Annexures 149

Annexure 3 Data Collection for Integrated fish rearing in Farm Ponds Name of the Farmer Village and block name Total land area Size of Farm pond Preparatory works done before water filling Liming - Soil test - Water filled date - Manuring details - Organic Inorganic Type and quantity - Date of Application both - Date of fish stocking - Fingerlings stocked - Variety of fish seed - Size of fish seed - Cost of fingerlings - Transportation cost - Feed applied - Type and quantity – Daily activity chart - Days of rearing - Manuring applied - Feed applied - Partial harvest - Income per harvest - Size and variety of fishes - Water taken for irrigation - Rain fall - Over flow - Any others - Bund cropping Date of sowing or planting - Type and cost of seeds - No of irrigation done – Total harvest - Gross income and net income- 150 Annexures

Agriculture Type of crop details - No of irrigation at different stages of crop- Yield increased - Block : District : Name of the farmer and age: Village:

Size of farm pond formed for action research (l x b x d): SF No.:

Contribution : Farmer –

I. Details of crop income from the same land prior to formation of farm pond

1 Crop raised and variety 2 Annual net income (Rs.)

II. Details of crop and income due to action research activities

A Cost details of action research 1st year 2nd year 3rd year 1 Cost of forming the farm pond 2 Cost of preparing the farm pond for fish rearing 3 Fish variety, nos stocked and cost 4 Cost of feeding and manuring 5 Date of stocking of fingerlings 6 Period of water storage in the pond 7 Different dates of fish harvest Cost of fish rearing (including fingerlings, feed, 8 labour, etc.) 9 Total weight of fish harvested and income 10 Net income through fishing B 1 Area and crop / bund crop irrigated 2 Net income from the crop (Rs.) 3 Total Net income from the farm pond (A10+B2)

Photo

Annexures 151

Annexure 4

Impact Evaluation Study of NADP projects implemented during 2013– 14 Participatory Satisfaction Evaluation Tool

(The purpose of this survey is to determine your satisfaction with the NADP project. For each item below, please mark your response that best fits your satisfaction. A ―1‖ indicates the highest satisfaction and a ―5‖ indicates the lowest satisfaction. Minimum of 6 beneficiaries to maximum of 12 from the same village will be selected for assessment) * Required

1. Project Name : *

2. Department: *

3. Year & Month of fund received: *

4. Village

5. Panchayat: *

6. Block *

7. District: *

8. No. of Beneficiaries participated *

9. Description of evaluation Item (Put ⱱ mark in the relevant column)

Completely Very Less Particulars Satisfied Dissatisfied satisfied Satisfied Satisfied 1. Project Commencement in appropriate time 2. Stakeholders (implementing agency) support in Project implementation 3. Equality in project access 4. Quality process adopted during the 152 Annexures

Completely Very Less Particulars Satisfied Dissatisfied satisfied Satisfied Satisfied project implementation 5. Additional Income due to project intervention 6. Increased productivity 7. Asset creation 8. Sustainability/follow up of the product or service or practice 9. What is your overall level of satisfaction with the product or service of the project? 10. What is your overall level of satisfaction with the project management process?

10. Overall observation about the projects and impact due to this project implementation *

11. Recommendations to improve the project implementation *

Signature of the beneficiaries: *

Data collector name, Signature with date*

154 Annexures

Impact Evaluation of Rashtriya Krishi Vikas Yojana (RKVY) Implemented Projects Report 2013 - 14

Prepared as per the NADP Guideline

Coordinated by

Tamil Nadu Watershed Development Agency (TAWDEVA) A state level Nodal agency

DHAN Foundation Prepared and Submitted on Building Institutions for Generations April 2017