Agri Impact Assessment -II- II Mott MacDonald India ‘More From the Cotton Fields’ Agrocel Industries Ltd Agrocel Industries Ltd Koday Cross Roads, Ta: Mandvi, Koday-370460 Dist: Kutch Gujarat (India)
Agri Impact Assessment -II ‘More from the Cotton Fields’
January 2008
Mott MacDonald India 501, Sakar-II, Nr Ellisbridge Ahmedabad – 380 006 Gujarat - India Tel: #91-79-26575550 Fax: #91-79-26575558 E mail. [email protected]
Impact Assessment_Cotton II_ Gujurat_India
Agri Impact Assessment -II- II Mott MacDonald India ‘More From the Cotton Fields’ Agrocel Industries Ltd
Agri Impact Assessment -II for More From Cotton Fields
December 2007
Issue and Revision Record Rev Date Originator Checker Approver Description Ms. Zainab 01 01-12-2007 Umesh Shukla Ajey Nandurkar Draft Report Kapasi Ms. Zainab 02 16-01-2008 Umesh Shukla Ajey Nandurkar Final Draft Kapasi
This document has been prepared for the titled project or named part thereof and should not be relied upon or used for any other project without an independent check being carried out as to its suitability and prior written authority of Dalal Mott MacDonald being obtained. Dalal Mot MacDonald accepts no responsibility or liability for the consequence of this document being used for a purpose other than the purposes for which it was commissioned. Any person using or relying on the document for such other purpose agrees, and will by such use or reliance be taken to confirm his agreement to indemnify Dalal Mott MacDonald for all loss or damage resulting therefrom. Dalal Mott MacDonald accepts no responsibility or liability for this document to any party other than the person by whom it was commissioned.
Impact Assessment_Cotton II_ Gujurat_India i
Agri Impact Assessment -II- II Mott MacDonald India ‘More From the Cotton Fields’ Agrocel Industries Ltd
Acknowledgement
The Mott MacDonald team would like to acknowledge the support and contribution of the Agrocel Field Survey team during the survey. We would like to thank them for their sincere co-operation and active support through out, which helped us to conduct the Field Survey work in such an efficient and timely manner. Without their committed team efforts, at all locations and their assistance it would not have been possible to cover as many respondents, in such a short span of time. Above all we would like to thank Mr. Hasmukhbhai Patel – G.M Agrocel Service Division, who spared his valuable time from his hectic schedules and accompanied the survey team in entire survey and ensured that accurate and clear information is captured from member farmers, which reflected the actual conditions of the farmers. We also thank other Agrocel office staff, specifically Shri. Shailesh Patel and Ms.Diptiben for their co-operation in providing all secondary data about the member farmers.
Agrocel Team at Rapar and Mandvi 1. Shri Gordhanbhai K Rangapar 2. Shri Pachanbhai Aahir 3. Shri Mukeshbhai Bareliya 4. Shri Bhawanbhai Makwana 5. Shri Bhaveshbhai Vasani 6. Shri Gangarambhai Vadekhaniya 7. Ms. Krupa Patel-Koday-Mandvi 8. Shri Laljibhai Patel (Navadiya)
Agrocel Team at Dhrangadhra 1. Shri Chamanbhai Patel 2. Shri Yogeshbhai Patel 3. Shri Narendrabhai Adhara 4. Shri Mahendrabhai Makasniya 5. Shri Dilipbhai Sapprola 6. Shri Laljibhai Navadiya
Impact Assessment_Cotton II_ Gujurat_India ii
Agri Impact Assessment -II- II Mott MacDonald India ‘More From the Cotton Fields’ Agrocel Industries Ltd
List of Contents
Chapters and Appendices
1 Introduction 5 1.1 About The Client 5 1.2 About the Consultants 6 1.2.1 Services 7 (i) Management Consultancy 7 (ii) Social Solutions 7 (iii) Engineering Services 7 (iv) Infrastructure 7 (v) Industry 8 (vi) Buildings 8 1.3 Project Background 8 1.3.1 Project Objectives 10 1.3.2 Purpose and Indicators of the Project 10 1.3.3 Scope of Work 11 1.4 Approach and Methodology 12 1.4.1 Questionnaire Design 13 1.4.2 Data Entry, Processing and Report Preparation 14 1.5 Limitations of the Study 14
2 Organic Farming and Fair trade 15 2.1 Organic Farming 15 (i) The Concept 15 (ii) Relevance 16 2.2 Fair Trade 16 (i) Concept 16 (ii) Relevance 17 2.3 Geographical distribution of the Programme 17
3 Survey Findings 18 3.1 Geographical distribution of the survey 18 3.1.1 Year of joining the Project 19 3.1.2 Average distance from Agrocel Service centre 20 3.1.3 Family Type 21 3.1.4 Family Size 22 3.2 Findings on the Economical Aspects 22 3.2.1 Alternate sources of Income 22 3.2.2 Change in type of house 23
Impact Assessment_Cotton II_ Gujurat_India i
Agri Impact Assessment -II- II Mott MacDonald India ‘More From the Cotton Fields’ Agrocel Industries Ltd 3.2.3 Change in Ownership of House 24 3.2.4 Change in Facilities available in the house 24 3.2.5 Land holding details 26 3.2.6 Change in Land Ownership 27 3.2.7 Change in Agricultural facilities available 27 3.2.8 Change in Agricultural Income 29 3.2.9 Cost of production 29 3.2.10 Percentage Distribution of Input Cost 30 3.2.11 Change in Price realization or Yield 31 3.2.12 Major Benefits of Organic Farming 31 3.3 Findings on the Agricultural/Environmental Aspects 34 3.3.1 Perception about increase in Yield 34 3.3.2 Perception about Contamination in Cotton 35 3.3.3 Perception about occurrence of crop disease and pests in cotton crop 36 3.3.4 Perception about Improvement in Soil quality 37 3.3.5 Perception about Improvement in Water quality 38 3.3.6 Perception about the Crop rotation 38 3.3.7 Information about Alternate crops 39 3.3.8 Benefits of crop rotation 40 3.4 Findings on the Social Aspects 40 3.4.1 Findings on road blocks and obstacles faced in the Project 40 3.4.2 Social Standing 41 3.4.3 Social status of labourers/co-workers 42 3.4.4 Perception of OF/FT with regards to personal and social life 42 3.4.5 Indebtedness at initial stage 43 3.4.6 Reduction in Indebtedness 44 3.4.7 Change in Working Conditions 44 3.4.8 Income Sufficiency 45 3.4.9 Reverse Migration 46 3.4.10 Perceptions about long term sustainability of OF/FT 46 3.4.11 Perceptions about future prospects of OF/FT 47 3.4.12 Facilities provided by Agrocel 47 3.4.13 Suggestions given by farmers regarding the project 48 (i) Agricultural Assistance 48 (ii) Financial assistance 48 (iii) Community development 49
4 Key Findings of the Field Survey 49 4.1 Demographic 49 4.2 Economic Impact 49 4.3 Environmental Impact 51 4.4 Social Impact Aspects 51
5 Work done by Agrocel on the Social front 53
6 Case Studies 56
Impact Assessment_Cotton II_ Gujurat_India ii
Agri Impact Assessment -II- II Mott MacDonald India ‘More From the Cotton Fields’ Agrocel Industries Ltd 6.1 Shri Laljibhai Ramji Patel 56 6.2 Shri Praveenbhai Varmora 57 6.3 Shri Kedabhai Madheva Mali 58 6.4 Head of household: Shri. Gelabhai Dosabhai Mor 59 6.5 Shri Ravajibhai Devaji Bangali 60 6.6 Shri Parvatbhai Sauji Ravariya 61 6.7 Shri Dhanabhai Ambavi Nor 62 6.8 Head of household: Shri. Aayabhai Teja Parmar 63 6.9 Shri Karsanbhai Manji Chaudhary 64 6.10 Shrimati Narmadaben Harilal Chowdhary 65
7 Conclusions 65 7.1 Economic Impact Assessment 66 7.2 Environment / Agriculture Impact 66 7.3 Social Impact 67 7.4 Overall Impact of Organic Farming and Fair trade Program 67 7.5 Farmers’ Aspirations from Agrocel 68 7.6 Suggestions for Agrocel 68
Appendix A: Field Survey Questionnaire A-1
Appendix B: List of Respondent Farmers for Field Survey B-1
Figures Figure 1-1: Agrocel Service Centres In Gujarat ...... 6 Figure 3-1: Use of Kit given for Cotton Contamination Prevention ...... 36 Figure 5.1: Deepening of Village Lakes in Rapar Taluka ...... 54 Figure 5.2: Solar Street Lighting From Fare Trade Premium ...... 54 Figure 5.3: Drinking Water Tanks in Schools with Water Conservation Slogans ...... 55 Figure 5.4: Compost Pit Assistance by Fair trade ...... 55
Tables Table 1.1: Location of Agrocel Service Centre’s in Gujarat ...... 5 Table 1.2: Locations of Agrocel Service Centre’s nationwide ...... 5 Table 2.1: Geographical Distribution of the Programme ...... 17 Table 3.1: Member Farmers Number Details of Kutch Area ...... 18 Table 3.2: Member Farmers Number Details of Surendranagar Area...... 18 Table 3.3: Sample Size and Geographical distribution ...... 19 Table 3.4: Villages covered in the Survey ...... 19 Table 3.5: Year of joining the Project ...... 20 Table 3.6: Average Distance from Agrocel Service Centre ...... 20 Impact Assessment_Cotton II_ Gujurat_India iii
Agri Impact Assessment -II- II Mott MacDonald India ‘More From the Cotton Fields’ Agrocel Industries Ltd Table 3.7: Percentage Distribution of Family Type ...... 21 Table 3.8: Percentage Distribution of Family Size...... 22 Table 3.9: Percentage Distribution of Farmers with Alternate Source of Income ...... 22 Table 3.10: Percentage Change in Type of House ...... 23 Table 3.11: Percentage change in housing facilities...... 24 Table 3.12: Land holding details ...... 26 Table 3.13: Farmers’ distribution on the basis of Land holding size ...... 26 Table 3.14: Percentage change in Land Ownership ...... 27 Table 3.15: Percentage change in Agricultural facilities ...... 27 Table 3.16: Difference perceived in Agricultural Income ...... 29 Table 3.17: Average Percentage Cost of Production ...... 29 Table 3.18: Average Percentage Distribution of Input Cost ...... 30 Table 3.19: Perceived Difference in Price realization of yield ...... 31 Table 3.20: Rating response summary for Kutch District ...... 32 Table 3.21: Rating response summary for Surendranagar District ...... 32 Table 3.22: Rating response summary for both (Combined) Districts...... 33 Table 3.23: Perceived Difference in Yield ...... 34 Table 3.24: Contamination free cotton ...... 35 Table 3.25: Perceived Difference in Occurrence of crop disease and pests ...... 36 Table 3.26: Perceived improvement in Soil quality ...... 37 Table 3.27: Perceived Improvement in Water Quality ...... 38 Table 3.28: Perception about the Crop Rotation ...... 38 Table 3.29: Responses about Alternate Crops ...... 39 Table 3.30: Benefits of Crop Rotation ...... 40 Table 3.31: Problems faced in adopting Organic Farming ...... 40 Table 3.32: Perceived Improvement in Social Standing ...... 41 Table 3.33: Perceived improvement in Social status of labourers/co workers ...... 42 Table 3.34: Perceptions of effects of OF/FT on personal and social life ...... 43 Table 3.35: Indebtedness at Initial stage ...... 43 Table 3.36: Reduction in Indebtedness ...... 44 Table 3.37: Perceived change in Working conditions ...... 44 Table 3.38: Income Sufficiency ...... 45 Table 3.39: Occurrence of Reverse Migration ...... 46 Table 3.40: Sustainability of OF/FT ...... 46 Table 3.41: Future prospects of OF/FT ...... 47 Table 3.42: Facilities provided by Agrocel ...... 47 Table 5.1: Awareness and Training Work Provided by Agrocel ...... 53 Table 5.2: Agricultural Assistance Provided by Agrocel ...... 53 Table 5.3: Community Work done using Fair Trade Premium by Agrocel ...... 54
Impact Assessment_Cotton II_ Gujurat_India iv
Agri Impact Assessment -II- II Mott MacDonald India ‘More From the Cotton Fields’ Agrocel Industries Ltd 1 Introduction
1.1 About The Client
Agrocel Industries limited , was earlier a Joint venture company, between the Shroff Group of Companies who held 89% stake in the company and Gujarat Agro Industries Corporation (GAIC- a Gujarat Government Enterprises), who held the remaining 11% stake. It has now become a wholly owned subsidiary of the Shroff Group of companies, after they bought off GAIC’s 11% share in the year 2006. Agrocel Industries is a unique example of a successful private venture in the field of providing agricultural extension services to remote rural areas of the country.
Agrocel Industries Limited , hereafter referred to as Agrocel , was established in 1989, with the primary objective of serving the farming community and in particular the small and marginal farmers by providing them high quality technical advice, agricultural inputs and guidance at a fair price and also supporting the farmers in the agricultural output marketing with value addition. Agrocel has established a chain of 19 Agrocel Service Centres across the country with a team of agronomists based at each centre to interact with the farmers and provide them with appropriate services. Out of 19 service centres, 9 are situated in Gujarat. Locations of Agrocel service centres in Gujarat and India are summarized in following table 1.1. and 1.2. Locations in Gujarat are also shown on the Map of Gujarat in Figure 1.1.
Table 1.1: Location of Agrocel Service Centre’s in Gujarat
Sr. No Location 1 Koday –Kutch 2 Mundra- Kutch 3 Nakhatrana-Kutch 4 Kothara- Kutch 5 Kukma-Kutch 6 Rapar- Kutch 7 Dhabhoi-Vadodara 8 Sayla- Surendranagar 9 Dhrangadhra - Surendranagar Source: Agrocel –Koday office.
Table 1.2: Locations of Agrocel Service Centre’s nationwide
Sr. No Location State 1 Rayagada Orissa 2 Kaital Haryana 3 Kaushalgung Uttar Pradesh 4 Salur Andhra Pradesh
Impact Assessment_Cotton II_ Gujurat_India 5
Agri Impact Assessment -II- II Mott MacDonald India ‘More From the Cotton Fields’ Agrocel Industries Ltd
Sr. No Location State 5 Zolarpet Tamilnadu 6 Nimpith West Bengal 7 Sangli Maharashtra 8 Kudal Maharashtra 9 Sanksheswar Karnataka 10 Belgam Karntaka Source: Agrocel –Koday office. Figure 1-1: Agrocel Service Centres In Gujarat
Today Agrocel has a network of more than 25,000 farmers, which include approximately 7000 farmers in Gujarat, whom they provide services through their service centres. Agrocel has a long term of goal of ensuring a sustainable livelihood for these farmers in an environmentally friendly way; it aims to structure the entire supply chain in a manner which enables the farmers to receive the maximum profit from their produce and maintain accurate documentation of the same.
1.2 About the Consultants
Mott MacDonald Private Limited (MM India) is a leading multi-disciplinary management and engineering consultancy based in India, with offices nationwide.
As part of the global Mott MacDonald Group headquartered in U.K., MM India is able to draw on world-class technical and managerial resources comprising more than 50 strategic centres world-wide.
Impact Assessment_Cotton II_ Gujurat_India 6
Agri Impact Assessment -II- II Mott MacDonald India ‘More From the Cotton Fields’ Agrocel Industries Ltd MM India is engaged in planning and development touching many aspects of everyday life–from water, energy, industry, environment and transport, to building, healthcare, tourism and social development. Across these sectors MM India works for national and local governments, public and private utilities, industrial and commercial companies, investors, developers, banks and financial institutions, international and bilateral funding agencies and private entrepreneurs. MM India’s strengths enable our clients to realize their projects optimally from concept to commissioning. With more than 1100 professionals, MM India takes care of the entire process – including providing advice on the best procurement route and the optimum approach for maintaining the project, once the Client enters for service with it.
1.2.1 Services
(i) Management Consultancy
MM India provides business planning and project management services for a wide spectrum of clients in industry, infrastructure and social development, including international development banks and funding agencies. MM India also help clients such as accountancy practices, financial institutions and industrial companies in making a realistic appraisal of their fixed assets, and in preparing for disinvestment, mergers or de-mergers, acquisitions, takeovers, insurance or liquidation, collaborations and joint ventures .
(ii) Social Solutions
MM India has undertaken numerous studies and advisory roles for leading development banks and funding agencies. Projects range from implementing vital AIDS eradication programmes and pro-poor initiatives to studies for institutional strengthening, sector reform and impact evaluation. MM India also offers specialist expertise in assisting with public consultation .
(iii) Engineering Services
MM India’s range of engineering services enables clients to realise optimal implementation of projects. MM India takes care of every stage – site evaluation, basic and detailed engineering, contract preparation, project management, procurement, equipment inspection and testing, site supervision and commissioning .
(iv) Infrastructure
One of the key strengths of MM India lies in large-scale integrated urban infrastructure development, encompassing water supply, drainage, and solid waste, roads, sanitation, and community buildings.
Impact Assessment_Cotton II_ Gujurat_India 7
Agri Impact Assessment -II- II Mott MacDonald India ‘More From the Cotton Fields’ Agrocel Industries Ltd Here our services range from planning and advisory assistance to detailed engineering and construction management.
(v) Industry
MM India’s skills and experience have earned it a leading reputation – especially in Chemicals, Textiles, Oil and Gas, Agriculture - Food processing and Life sciences, as well as bulk drugs, pharmaceuticals and biotechnology. MM India is known particularly for its expertise in process engineering and licensing for speciality chemical production based on laboratory/pilot plant know- how developed by R&D centres.
(vi) Buildings
MM India’s business covers all sectors from commercial and leisure to industry, education and healthcare. MM India provides the full range of architectural, structural, mechanical and electrical design skills, along with planning and project management expertise. Building services are a special capability, notably building management systems, vertical transportation, telecommunications and security.
1.3 Project Background
During the course of its work, Agrocel came across the cotton farmers of the Western Gujarat regions of Kutch - Mandvi and Surendranagar districts, who were facing difficult times due to following reasons,
a) Cotton farmers were facing difficulties in selling their produce due to the unstable crop prices caused by the US and EU dumping cheap and subsidised cotton in the world markets.
b) The high use of chemical pesticides in the industry leading to not only increase in the debt burden on the farmers, and as the supplier of the pesticides Agrocel many times acted as creditors.
c) Use of chemical pesticides also leading to the degradation of the environment and inevitably harming the agricultural communities working in the cotton farms.
To overcome these perennial problems, Agrocel came up with an innovative concept of converting these farmers, into producers of pure and high quality organic cotton and providing them access to the high-end European Markets through Fair trade. The Organic cotton fibre so produced has a variety of applications; such as personal care items like sanitary products, make–up removal pads, cotton puffs etc; children’s products such as toys, diapers etc; and clothes of all kinds and styles, be it loungewear,
Impact Assessment_Cotton II_ Gujurat_India 8
Agri Impact Assessment -II- II Mott MacDonald India ‘More From the Cotton Fields’ Agrocel Industries Ltd sportswear or workplace attire. Agrocel is providing end to end solution for Organic cotton growers of the area.
The seed capital required for this project was provided by the Shell Foundation, U.K., which is a charitable organisation, which focuses on providing enterprise solutions to poverty and environmental challenges. It acts like an investor, identifying financially sustainable solutions to these challenges that can be taken to scale and replicated to achieve global impact. The first project was aptly named “Straight from the cotton fields of India” and was initially started with a 3 year time frame. It was designed to primarily improve the environmental, economical and social standards of the cotton farmers participating in the project and provide them with a stable livelihood through means of sustainable organic farming.
The other broad objectives specified at the start of the project were for addressing the problems of bankruptcy, rural-urban migration, checking the deterioration in worsening soil and water quality, crop vulnerability to pest attack and tackling the problems of adverse climatic conditions, as well as providing better market access for their agriculture produce.
The other extremely significant stakeholders in this project are Vericott (Vertical integration in cotton) Ltd. UK and Traidcraft Exchange. UK. Vericott stepped in to work with Agrocel to design, add value to the garments made from organic and fairly traded cotton and create markets for them in high-end segments in UK and Europe. Whereas Traidcraft; the leading fair trade organisation in the UK, has played the key role in helping Agrocel, establish relations in the export market, providing relevant Market Information and helping in managing export market assistance for the project.
On completion of the first three years period of the project, the first Agri Impact Assessment was undertaken in the year 2004, by then Dalal Mott MacDonald (DMM), and the findings of that Agri Impact Assessment were very positive. The overwhelming success of first 3 years of “Straight From the Cotton Fields”- SFCF program had prompted the concerned parties to extend the project further for next 3 years period, with the appropriate new name given to it as “ More From the Cotton Fields ”- shortly named as MFCF - by Agrocel and all concerned.
This project was designed to more or less reinforce the objectives of the earlier project, besides to address certain additional aspects, such as a year round economic utilization of the land, development of additional organic products from the alternate crops taken in the same land as crop rotation and also adding value added processing, Supply chain creation etc; for these alternate crops.
The second project has also completed in September 2007, and Agrocel Industries Ltd has approached IMM again, with the desire to get assessed the project gains, in a scientific manner as it was done
Impact Assessment_Cotton II_ Gujurat_India 9
Agri Impact Assessment -II- II Mott MacDonald India ‘More From the Cotton Fields’ Agrocel Industries Ltd earlier, by getting a new Agri Impact Assessment II done. This will also help Agrocel and all the stake holders, to understand the gains from this program in quantifiable manner, when they compare against the benchmarking done earlier, in the form of Baseline studies done at the start of second phase project implementation as well as against the findings of first Agri Impact Assessment done in the year 2004.
It is important to mention here that Agrocel has made substantial progress in terms of spreading this novel concept to larger geographical areas and involving more number of cotton growers from their first program level. They are active not only in specified districts of Gujarat, but also in Orissa.
1.3.1 Project Objectives
At the start of this project, “Overall objectives and indicators” for this project were clearly defined by Vericott & Agrocel, in consultation with their partner organization, Traidcraft Exchange, U.K, and the funding agency Shell Foundation.
The prime objective of this study is to assess the overall impact the second phase project has made on the beneficiary cotton farming community, with respect to:
economical aspects Agricultural aspects Environmental aspects Social aspects The study aims to explore that to which extent the objectives of the project have been met, keeping in view above specific aspects and assess such achievements, in a quantifiable manner, through primary and secondary research methods. The primary research is mainly focussed to collect facts and figures regarding above aspects, by having personal interviews using structured questionnaire (The copy of the Questionnaire is enclosed as Appendix-A to this report).
The study will also encompass a detailed analysis of available secondary and primary data about the project and its impact, in order to assess the scope and areas of improvement, also to identify any specific problem or hurdles faced during the implementation of the project.
1.3.2 Purpose and Indicators of the Project
The contribution made by this Organic Cotton growing project will be evidenced by following Indicators and keeping in view these indicators, measurable responses will be obtained from actual beneficiaries using close ended questions.
Economic indicators –
Impact Assessment_Cotton II_ Gujurat_India 10
Agri Impact Assessment -II- II Mott MacDonald India ‘More From the Cotton Fields’ Agrocel Industries Ltd • Stabilization of overall numbers employed
• Increasing incomes,
• Increasing value of cotton,
• Functioning market access,
• Year wise Sales figures (From Agrocel)
Environment/health indicators
• Stabilization of water /soil quality (Analysis records from Agrocel)
• Health of Farmers and Farm workers.
Social indicators
• Reduction in migration to cities (Through individual & Group discussions)
• Less indebtedness.
In short, the study will provide the Client with an extensive analysis and Impact assessment, in a report form, along with salient observations regarding the Organic cultivation program implemented by them. This will provide a specific insight and overview of the gains and short falls of the proposed program and also bring out further expectations / aspirations of member farmers from Agrocel.
1.3.3 Scope of Work
The main objectives of the study are as follows:
• Based on the secondary information regarding their member farmers, to be given by Agrocel, define stratification of beneficiary farmer groups for fairly distributed sample selection purpose.
• Based on given Objectives and indicators of MFCF project, develop Quantifiable (measurable) Indicators for making objective evaluation between different stratified groups.
• Define objectives of field survey and data to be obtained from various stake holders of the project
• Undertake field survey of smallholder cotton growers (the ultimate beneficiaries) for collecting direct information, through structured questionnaire, as well as informal discussions regarding the MFCF (Phase-2) project.
• Make analysis of field data to clearly bring out the impact of phase-2 project, as regards defined objectives and indicators of the MFCF (Phase-2) project on beneficiary groups and in project areas.
Impact Assessment_Cotton II_ Gujurat_India 11
Agri Impact Assessment -II- II Mott MacDonald India ‘More From the Cotton Fields’ Agrocel Industries Ltd • Provide this Impact analysis in report form to client, with salient observations emerged from this Agri Impact Assessment-II study, as regards the said project.
1.4 Approach and Methodology
Our approach for carrying out this study was to utilize a combination of both, desk as well as field research in order to get a thorough understanding of the impact of the project for the beneficiaries. Primary activities consisted were:
• Development of an effective work plan for execution of the assignment based on a clear understanding of the nature and scope of work.
• Gathering all available secondary data from Agrocel’s Koday- office regarding the project and the beneficiary farmers.
• Defined the objectives of the field survey and the data to be obtained from the various stakeholders of the project.
• On the basis of these data defined, selection of an evenly distributed sample of the beneficiary farmers for field survey purposes.
• Developed a structured questionnaires and check lists for field investigations
• Field survey was undertaken for the collection of all relevant data through primary research (field survey) conducted in Surendranagar and Kutch district, covering three main Taluka of Agrocel project area.
• Processing, collating, interpreting and analyzing the data generated from the study so as to provide objective recommendations and observations regarding Impact of MFCF project implementation by Agrocel in their project areas.
• Proper generation of output tables through active interaction between data analyst and the Consultant, interpreting the output of data analysis.
• Based on the objectives of “More From the Cotton Field” project, developed quantifiable indicators to evaluate the progress of the project and impact it has made on the member farmers’ economic, agriculture, environmental and social aspects.
The Field Survey
A Field survey was undertaken to collect the relevant and appropriate data. Impact Assessment_Cotton II_ Gujurat_India 12
Agri Impact Assessment -II- II Mott MacDonald India ‘More From the Cotton Fields’ Agrocel Industries Ltd From the records of the participating farmers available from Agrocel, the list of potential respondents for the field survey was prepared.
Both structured questionnaire as well as unstructured interview- a kind of informal discussions, will be used to collect the first hand information from the project beneficiaries, regarding targeted Impact assessment aspects of the project.
A comprehensive analysis of the data obtained form the field survey will be done to quantify the gains and measure the impact of the project on relevant aspects, by using the earlier defined quantifiable indicators of the objectives of the project.
1.4.1 Questionnaire Design
Keeping in view the objectives of the study the questionnaire as designed. The questionnaire is framed in such a manner that it can be easily understood by the respondents (Farmers and their family members). Most of the questionnaires are pre-coded with fixed response categories; however certain open ended questions have also been included to encourage discussion with the respondents. The questionnaire is designed so as to cover all the important issues related to the study.
Major aspects covered in the questionnaire are:
• Demographic details of the farmer, including his family size, Ownership of house, type of house, other facilities in house and changes if any since adoption of organic farming and Fair Trade.
• Land Holding particulars of the Farmer including total land and land under Organic Cotton cultivation, other crops taken as alternate or inter crops in the same land and changes if any
• Facilities available for farming and changes if any in the same.
• Increase/ Decrease in yield of Cotton and the same in terms of actual quantities and percentage
• Changes if any in the quality of cotton, and visible parameters of quality
• Changes if any in the Price realisation of the yield.
• Improvement in Soil and Water quality farmers; perceptions and visible parameters
• Farmers’ perception about reduction in indebtedness,
• Farmers’ perception regarding checking in migration from family and Village
• Farmers’ perception about financial and social conditions
• Over all determination about adoption of Organic Cotton farming and Fair Trade
The questionnaire used for the Field Survey has been attached as Appendix-A.
Impact Assessment_Cotton II_ Gujurat_India 13
Agri Impact Assessment -II- II Mott MacDonald India ‘More From the Cotton Fields’ Agrocel Industries Ltd 1.4.2 Data Entry, Processing and Report Preparation
After editing of the questionnaires, the data is processes and analysed using Tailor-made software made in Oracle-SQL. Sufficient validation checks are provided for elimination of inconsistent records due to errors inflowing at field level or errors at the time of data entry.
Inspite of initial examination of the completed questionnaires by the field officers on the field itself, the questionnaires will be re-edited at the IMM office as well. Besides this, a computer based check is also conducted to clean the data and remove any inconsistencies or redundancies in the data and eliminating all such incorrect questionnaires. Only questionnaire which pass through all the checks will be finally processed and used for analysis. The pre-coded questions present in the questionnaires facilitate generation of required output tables.
1.5 Limitations of the Study
Like all other such studies, this study also has a few limitations, which should be kept in mind while evaluating the outcome of the field survey responses and inferences derived from such responses.
A base line survey of beneficiary farmers was conducted at the start of this project, by two French students, Ms.BESSON Béatrice & Ms.ROBIN Cécile in July 2005. However, the number of farmers participating in the programme around that time was approximately 750 which have now increased on completion of the programme to about 1020 farmers in Gujarat. This addition of farmers gradually over the operation of the programme in the span of last three years, as well as the change in the geographical distribution of the farmers limits the findings of the field study to a small extent. There could be a difference in using the findings of this baseline survey for this study as its purpose and intensity is not very clear from the study details available. Furthermore, there are chances of miscommunication or misinterpretation due to language limitations of surveyors and respondents and also between the Agrocel staff assisting the surveyors and Farmers.
There will be difference due to different baseline and project time period used by the surveyors and IMM in this field survey.
Impact Assessment_Cotton II_ Gujurat_India 14
Agri Impact Assessment -II- II Mott MacDonald India ‘More From the Cotton Fields’ Agrocel Industries Ltd 2 Organic Farming and Fair trade
2.1 Organic Farming
(i) The Concept
The concept of organic farming is not a new to Indian farmers in general and farmers in the project areas in particular, as the traditional farming done up to approx. 50-60 years before was very close to Organic farming, however the Organic Farming that we know now began with the Organic movement in the 1930s as a response to the increasing dependence of agriculture on chemical fertilizers and pesticides.
Organic farming in essence is a holistic approach towards agriculture, where the main objective is to sustain and enhance the health of the ecosystem. It follows the principle of exclusion of use of synthetic /chemical fertilizers and pesticides. It relies almost entirely on natural methods and processes such as crop rotation and Integrated Pest Management (IPM), naturally available renewable resources such as crop residue and compost (Farm Yard Manure), vermi-compost, provide crop nutrition with the concept of Integrated Nutritional Management (INM), and also providing simultaneously protection to respective crop from pests and diseases.
Sustainability and enhancing soil fertility (productivity) are the two main pillars of Organic Farming. Sustainability here is used to encompass not just environmental sustainability in terms of conservation of non-renewable resources such as soil, energy and minerals but economic and social sustainability as well.
As per the recent estimates available from the secondary search, approximately 31 million hectares, that is 75 million acres is grown organically, worldwide.
Certification
Organic farming in its current form is regulated by formal standards. These standards could be voluntary or legislated. Where such legislation regarding Organic Farming exists, organic certification to farms or farmers is available for a fee, after a thorough inspection of the practices undertaken by the farmers and examining the soil, water and crop analysis details for consecutive 3 years period.
Farms certified as organic farms are regulated and detailed records of them are kept by the regulating authorities, thereby facilitating traceability as well as establishing quality control systems which include keeping records of water and soil tests conducted regularly.
Impact Assessment_Cotton II_ Gujurat_India 15
Agri Impact Assessment -II- II Mott MacDonald India ‘More From the Cotton Fields’ Agrocel Industries Ltd In India, standards for organic agriculture were announced in May 2001, and the National Programme on Organic Production (NPOP) is administered under the Ministry of Commerce. In the said SFCF and MFCF programs farmers’ certification has been coordinated by Agrocel and subsequently also all the documentation and records of farmers’ produce are maintained by Agrocel to provide most important aspect of such certification-traceability.
(ii) Relevance
Organic Farming is of overwhelming relevance to MFCF, as MFCF is primarily a project in which farmers are converted from intensive /conventional farming to Organic Farming. The reasons for the same are amply obvious, sustainability and enhancement of the ecosystem, as well as its positive impact on the economic and social conditions of the farmers participating in the project.
Agrocel Industries Ltd has played a pivotal role in the project; it has done the basic groundwork to implement this project. Due its existing rapport with the farmers it has been able to convince farmers to convert to Organic Farming by demonstrating to them various advantages of Organic Farming. Agrocel has also paid for the Organic certification of farms besides providing the farmers with agricultural inputs supply and technical advice.
2.2 Fair Trade
(i) Concept
Fair trade differs from standard trade in five principal ways, which are:
• Fair trade focuses on trading with poor and marginalised producer groups, helping them develop skills and sustainable livelihoods through the trading relationship
• It pays fair prices that cover the full cost of production and enable a living wage and other fair rewards to be earned by producers.
• It provides credit when needed to allow orders to be fulfilled and pays premiums to be used to provide further benefits to producer communities.
• It encourages the fair treatment of all workers, ensuring good conditions in the workplace and throughout the supply chain.
• It aims to build up long-term relationships, rather than looking for short-term commercial advantage.
Impact Assessment_Cotton II_ Gujurat_India 16
Agri Impact Assessment -II- II Mott MacDonald India ‘More From the Cotton Fields’ Agrocel Industries Ltd Sales of fair trade products have been gaining momentum in the UK in recent years, and they are now more widely available than ever before.
(ii) Relevance
Most of the farmers participating in the MFCF project have also been certified for Fair Trade after close inspection of the practices followed by the farmers. The farmers who are certified as Fair Trade farmers receive a Fair Trade premium on the sale of their produce. This premium is then used in various community development activities for the farmers. Fair Trade in this manner plays a special role in the lives of these farmers and is significantly relevant to this project as it our objective to assess the impact of the project which includes both Organic Farming as well as Fair Trade.
2.3 Geographical distribution of the Programme
It is imperative to mention here before proceeding further that though for the purpose of the survey the Project population has been taken as 560 farmers in Kutch and 460 in Surendranagar, this is done on account of this being the figure at the end of the year 2006-07. Farmers added in the project in the year 2007-08, have not been included as since this being their first year of participation, they will not have experienced any effect of Organic Farming or Fair Trade. Hence their inclusion would distort the findings of the survey.
The Geographical distribution of the Project is thus greater than that of the survey. The actual and latest figures and geographical distribution of the Project is given in the following table 2.1.
Table 2.1: Geographical Distribution of the Programme
Sr.No Centre State Old Farmers Total Farmers Villages
1 Mandvi Kutch 8 8 1
2 Rapar Kutch 560 710 14
3 Dhrangadhra Surendranagar 460 757 19
4 Sayla Surendranagar - 125 4
5 Rayagada Rayagada - Orissa 392 1960 72
Total 1420 3560 110
Source: Agrocel –Koday office.
Impact Assessment_Cotton II_ Gujurat_India 17
Agri Impact Assessment -II- II Mott MacDonald India ‘More From the Cotton Fields’ Agrocel Industries Ltd 3 Survey Findings
3.1 Geographical distribution of the survey
The distribution of farmers participating in the project has changed since the first Agri Impact Assessment conducted in the year 2004. To give the overview of the changes in the composition of farmers in Kutch and Surendranagar districts over the period of two projects SFCF and MFCF, farmer member details are summarised in the following table 3.1.
Table 3.1: Member Farmers Number Details of Kutch Area
Total Running New Sanctioned Sr.No Year Farmers Farmers Farmers Farmers (Year End) 1 2001-02 35 0 0 35 2 2002 -03 35 121 0 156 3 2003-04 156 0 0 156 4 2004-05 156 10 4 162 5 2005-06 162 243 15 390 6 2006-07 390 170 0 560 Source: Agrocel –Koday office.
Table 3.2: Member Farmers Number Details of Surendranagar Area
Total Running New Sanctioned Sr.No Year Farmers Farmers Farmers Farmers (Year End) 1 2001-02 24 0 0 24 2 2002-03 24 70 0 94 3 2003-04 94 413 43 464 4 2004-05 464 134 90 508 5 2005-06 508 20 62 466 6 2006 -07 466 139 145 460 Source: Agrocel –Koday office.
At the end of year 2007, the distribution of the farmers participating in the project stood at 560 farmers in the Kutch Area and 460 in the Surendranagar Area. Taking the sum of these figures 1020 as the total farmers’ population size, we arrived at a samples size of 125, constituting 10% of the population (102) and adding further to it approx.20 % of the sample size(23), as error margin on account of any incomplete questionnaires, contradictory answers etc. It has been tried to keep the geographical distribution of the sample size is as per the geographical distribution of the farmers population and as far as possible include 10% sample size of each location and also include approx. 50 % of the farmers
Impact Assessment_Cotton II_ Gujurat_India 18
Agri Impact Assessment -II- II Mott MacDonald India ‘More From the Cotton Fields’ Agrocel Industries Ltd from the original SFCF program to maintain the continuity in their assessment for comparing the overall performance of these programs within them selves. The geographical distribution of selected sample size from respective project areas and also village wise is summarized in following table 3.3 and 3.4.
Table 3.3: Sample Size and Geographical distribution No. Taluka District No. of contacts 1 Rapar Kutch 75 2 Mandvi Kutch 05 3 Dhrangadhra Surendranagar 45 TOTAL 125 Source: IMM interpretation from Agrocel farmers’ Information.
Table 3.4: Villages covered in the Survey
No. Villages Taluka District 1 Navalgadh Dhrangadhra Surendranagar 2 Chandrasar Dhrangadhra Surendranagar 3 Ramgadh Dhrangadhra Surendranagar 4 Dhrumath Dhrangadhra Surendranagar 5 Padampar Rapar Kutch 6 Bhimasar Rapar Kutch 7 Bhangera Rapar Kutch 8 Kidiyanagar Rapar Kutch 9 Bhutakiya Rapar Kutch 10 Pragpar Rapar Kutch 11 Koday Mandvi Kutch Source: IMM selection from Agrocel farmers’ Information.
3.1.1 Year of joining the Project
The SFCF project started in the year 2001-02 from Kutch district and later on started in Surendranagar district, hence in Agri Impact Assessment both these districts were included. Farmers currently participating in the project are located largely in the Dhrangadhra Taluka of Surendranagar district and the Rapar Taluka of Kutch district. The number of farmers participating in the Mandvi Taluka of Kutch has reduced drastically, due to increase in salinity of water in the region and large scale conversion of farmers to BT Cotton cultivation for immediate economic benefits. Thus, in the present field survey for Agri Impact Assessment-II , majority of farmers in the Kutch region are farmers located in Rapar Taluka, who joined during the project period of MFCF program. Year wise/ District wise distribution of Farmers surveyed are given in following table 3.5.
Impact Assessment_Cotton II_ Gujurat_India 19
Agri Impact Assessment -II- II Mott MacDonald India ‘More From the Cotton Fields’ Agrocel Industries Ltd Table 3.5: Year of joining the Project Sr. No. Year No. of Farmers % of District % of Total Kutch 1 2001-02 17 21.25 13.6 4 2004-05 43 53.75 34.4 5 2005-06 18 22.5 14.4 6 2006-07 2 2.5 1.6 Surendranagar 1 2002-03 45 100 36.00 Source: IMM selection from Agrocel farmers’ Information.
As indicated in the Terms of reference of this assignment the survey team has tried to incorporate an equal amount of farmers from both SFCF and MFCF, to gain a holistic view on the impact of Organic Farming on the participating farming community over an entire project period. Out of the total surveyed farmers, a total of 63 (50.4%) are with this project and Agrocel since SFCF and have continued in MFCF as well and a total of 62(49.6%) farmers are those who has joined latter in the MFCF project.
3.1.2 Average distance from Agrocel Service centre
It has been one of the primary objectives of Agrocel to provide ready accessibility to the farmers in order to provide better services to them, with agricultural inputs and technical guidance. Agrocel thus considered it imperative to locate its service centres such that it can facilitate close interactions with the farmers, educating them about various aspects of organic farming practices, pest and disease control, harvesting etc. The District wise distribution of average distance of an Agrocel Service Centre is summarised in the following table 3.6.
Table 3.6: Average Distance from Agrocel Service Centre Sr. Distance In Kms In Number % of District % of Total No Kutch Surendranagar Kutch Surendranagar 1 Less than 10 5 21 6.25 46.67 20.80 2 11 to 15 4 12 5.00 26.67 12.80 3 16 to 20 12 1 15.00 2.22 10.40 4 21 to 25 51 11 63.75 24.44 49.60 5 More than 26 8 0 10.00 0 6.40 Total 80 45 100 100 100 Source: IMM analysis from total field survey responses.
It can be observed from the findings of the survey that 40% of the times, an Agrocel Service Centre is located within 20 Kms of a farmer and there is 50% probability that an Agrocel Service Centre is locate within 21 to 25 Kms of a farmer, there is a less than 10% chance that an Agrocel Service Centre is more than 26 Kms away from a farmer.
Impact Assessment_Cotton II_ Gujurat_India 20
Agri Impact Assessment -II- II Mott MacDonald India ‘More From the Cotton Fields’ Agrocel Industries Ltd It has also been noted that the Average distance to an Agrocel Service Centre is shorter in Surendranagar district, than in Kutch, as 20% of farmers in Surendranagar are located at a distance of less than 10Kms, whereas the same for Kutch is only 6%.
Efforts should be made to take this situation into account and accordingly plan to provide same level of services in both districts by engaging more number of field staff and provide them vehicles for better accessibility in remote areas.
3.1.3 Family Type
The family type of the farmers helps in gaining insight into the farmer’s social life. The District wise percentage distribution of the family type of the farmers is given in the following table.
Table 3.7: Percentage Distribution of Family Type Sr. Family Type In Number % of District % of Total No Kutch Surendranagar Kutch Surendranagar 1 Joint Family 49 35 61.25 77.78 67.20 2 Nuclear Family 26 10 32.50 22.22 28.80 3 Cluster of Relatives 5 0 6.25 0.0 4.00 Total 80 45 100 100 100 Source: IMM analysis from total field survey responses.
The findings of the survey shows that 60% of farmers in Kutch and about 77% of farmers in Surendranagar live in Joint families, however the phenomenon of living in a cluster of relatives is almost completely absent in Surendranagar there are still 5% farmers in Kutch who live in a cluster of relatives. 32.5% farmers in Kutch leave as nuclear family and in Surendranagar 22.22 % farmers leave as nuclear family.
One can infer from the above that Kutch being a resource constrained region, it has traditionally undertaken organic farming which has helped to retain its traditional family structure. It was observed during the survey that many farmers though functioning as nuclear families were actually part of a cluster of relatives on near by farms, whereas in Surendranagar being a comparatively resourceful district has historically been an intensive farming region, which led to greater migration and lesser joint families, however the scenario has changed since the adoption of organic farming and there seems to be a resurgence in joint families.
Impact Assessment_Cotton II_ Gujurat_India 21
Agri Impact Assessment -II- II Mott MacDonald India ‘More From the Cotton Fields’ Agrocel Industries Ltd 3.1.4 Family Size
Findings related to Family size are also incorporated to understand better the social and economical situation of the farmer. District wise percentage distribution of family size details is given in the following table 3.8.
Table 3.8: Percentage Distribution of Family Size Sr. Members In Number % of District % of Total No Kutch Surendranagar Kutch Surendranagar 1 1 to 5 members 28 19 35.00 42.22 37.60 2 6 to 10 members 46 23 57.50 51.11 55.20 3 11 to 15 members 5 3 6.25 6.67 6.40 4 More than 15 members 1 0 1.25 0 0.80 Total 80 45 100 100 100 Source: IMM analysis from total field survey responses. The findings of family type corroborate here with more than 50% of families both in Kutch and Surendranagar consisting of 6 to 10 members, generally comprising of a cluster of relatives such as brothers with their respective families or a group of first cousins living together. One can consider the fact that agriculture still being mainly manual labour oriented in both these districts, the average numbers in family is generally higher than urban and semi-urban areas of the project districts, so that they will be less dependent on outside labour forces.
3.2 Findings on the Economical Aspects
3.2.1 Alternate sources of Income
The purpose of adding this question was mainly to assess the extent of dependency of the respondents on farming activities and income, i.e., the importance of farming as their primary source of income. District wise percentage distributions of farmers who possess alternate sources of income are given in following table 3.9
Table 3.9: Percentage Distribution of Farmers with Alternate Source of Income Sr. No. District In Number % of District % of Total 1 Kutch 14 17.5 11.20 2 Surendranagar 9 20 7.20 Total 23 NA 18.4 Source: IMM analysis from total field survey responses. The survey has found that approx.18.4 % of the farmers also have alternate sources of income. In terms of district wise data in Kutch approx. 17.5 % farmers have alternate source of income and in Surendranagar approx. 20% farmers have alternate income source.
Impact Assessment_Cotton II_ Gujurat_India 22
Agri Impact Assessment -II- II Mott MacDonald India ‘More From the Cotton Fields’ Agrocel Industries Ltd It was also observed during the survey that among the farmers with alternate sources of income, 39% (7% overall) of them had either a son or any other member of the family, had a job in the city, whilst 60% (11% overall) have side businesses or part time professions in the village itself, such as provision stores, electric repairs, auto repairing, Panchayat activities, Carpenter, Drip Irrigation Agency etc;. It is clear from this analysis that agriculture and farming is still an important source of income in rural areas in general and in project areas in particular. It is worth to note that overall approximately 82% of the farmers are completely dependent on agriculture for their livelihoods and it’s their prime source of income. Due to agriculture being prime source of income, it’s very crucial to make it a sustainable activity in terms of economically, environmentally and socially. Realizing the importance of agriculture as their prime source of income these farmers have joined with Agrocel and Fair trade activities to make their farming sustainable in long terms.
3.2.2 Change in type of house
In order to clearly measure the impact in the economic condition of the respondents, we selected the basic indicator such as “The type of house ’ they lived in, and any significant change in it, to assess the change in the economic conditions of respondent farmers.
As it can be observed from the findings given in table 3.10 here below; there has been change in a 41% of the total respondents in the type of house they live in.
Table 3.10: Percentage Change in Type of House
In Number In Number % of District % of Surendran Kutch Surendranagar Kutch Total agar Sr. Type of House No. Now Now Before Before Avg. % Change Change Change Change Change
1 Kuccha House 26 13 -13 17 4 -13 -50.0 76.47 63.23 2 Pucca House 03 8 5 18 28 10 +166.6 +55.55 111.08 3 Semi Pucca 51 59 8 10 13 3 +15.68 +30.00 22.84 Total 80 80 26 45 45 26 32.50 57.78 41.60 Source: IMM analysis from total field survey responses.
As it can be clearly observed from the above table;
Out of total 26 people living in Kuccha house 13 have shifted to Semi- Pucca (8) and Pucca (5) houses in Kutch district, i.e. almost 50 % have made positive change in type of house they live. Furthermore, in Kutch there is also shift from semi Pucca to Pucca house as the number have increased from 3 to 8,
Impact Assessment_Cotton II_ Gujurat_India 23
Agri Impact Assessment -II- II Mott MacDonald India ‘More From the Cotton Fields’ Agrocel Industries Ltd almost 166.6 % increase. Similarly, in Surendranagar also there has been shift from semi Pucca to Pucca house as the total number has increased from 18 to 28, a rise of 55.55 %.
Out of total 17 persons living in Kuccha house previously, 13 persons have changed the type of house they live in. This is almost 76.47 % have made positive change in type of house they live in.
It is clearly indicated from these findings that there has been economic progress in the lives of these farmers in the project areas, and this is clearly reflected in the change happening in the type of house they live in, as that being the primary aspiration of all these farmers and also first priority investment avenue from their farming income.
3.2.3 Change in Ownership of House
There has not been any significant change in the ownership of the houses in the project area, as most of the respondents in this survey; they owned (Possessed) the house they live in, even before joining the project. A very small number of respondents earlier lived in rented houses are now possessing their own house and this also indicate their economic prosperity and stability.
3.2.4 Change in Facilities available in the house
Another quantifiable indicator (parameter) of economic development used in this survey is the change in the facilities available in the houses of the respondents. The change in house hold facilities as indicated by the respondents are summarized in following table 3.11.
Table 3.11: Percentage change in housing facilities
In Number In Number % of District % of Kutch Surendranagar Kutch Surendranagar Total Sr. Housing No. Facilities Now Now Before Before Change Change Change Change Change
1 Potable Water 55 72 17 15 44 29 21.25 64.44 36.8 2 Electricity 56 68 12 40 43 3 15 6.67 12 3 Gas Connection 4 14 10 13 38 25 12.5 55.56 28 4 Bath & Toilets 15 29 14 16 45 29 17.5 64.44 34.4 5 Kitchen 61 73 12 36 44 8 15 17.78 16 6 Yard 67 75 8 31 39 8 10 17.78 12.8 7 Cattle Shed 31 52 21 27 36 9 26.25 20.00 24 8 Storage Facility 34 55 21 13 35 22 26.25 48.89 34.4 Total no. of 9 Rooms 80 NA 29 42 NA 13 36.25 28.89 33.6 Source: IMM analysis from total field survey responses
Impact Assessment_Cotton II_ Gujurat_India 24
Agri Impact Assessment -II- II Mott MacDonald India ‘More From the Cotton Fields’ Agrocel Industries Ltd The most significant change has been witnessed in the availability of potable water, bath and toilet facilities and farm produce storage facilities and addition in number of rooms in the house. There has been change in case of respondent farmers to the extent at 36%, 34%, 36% and 33% change in each of these facilities respectively.
Since electricity, kitchen and yard were available earlier also in most households, there has not been significant change observed in respondent farmers. Almost all respondents in Surendranagar have toilets with an improvement of 64%; however the number is much lower in Kutch with only 36% respondents in Kutch having appropriate toilet / bath facilities and correspondingly the improvement here has also been much lower at 17%.
It can be inferred from the above observations that there has been greater improvement in housing facilities in Surendranagar in comparison to Kutch. Though, on the whole it can be said that there is an increase in awareness regarding hygiene and standard of living, among the respondents. On the basis of the above mentioned findings which shows that more than 60% of respondents in Kutch and 40% in Surendranagar now possess electricity, potable water and Kitchen facility, it can safely be said that in comparison to the farmers in other districts of the state, farmers in Kutch and Surendranagar are more prosperous and economically more well – off. One can consider that these farmers of both the districts are relatively prosperous and economically well–off conditions.
It was also observed during the survey that many farmers may not have added new facilities, but have made some improvements in their houses such as concrete flooring in their Yards, plastering the kitchens, painting their houses, adding facilities for storage and in cattle shed etc.
Similar situation is seen in the case of availability (access) to cooking Gas connection with an improvement of 55% in Surendranagar and only 12% in Kutch. Primary reason for low Gas connection facility in Kutch is the remote locations of farmers, mostly living on their farm and this makes it difficult to get service from the supplier companies. Moreover, abundant availability of cheap Farm / agriculture / dairy animal waste which is widely used as cooking fuel in most of the places. It is worth to mention here that some respondent farmers have procured Gobar Gas plant from the Fair Trade premium under community development program and now this gas is available to them at much cheaper rate and also utilizing available resources in optimum way. There are in total about 85 farmers benefiting from the Gobar Gas plant in Navalgadh village of Surendranagar. They have procured this Gobar gas plant from fair Trade premium under community development program and this gas is available to them
Impact Assessment_Cotton II_ Gujurat_India 25
Agri Impact Assessment -II- II Mott MacDonald India ‘More From the Cotton Fields’ Agrocel Industries Ltd at much cheaper rate and also utilizing available resources in optimum way. The liquid slurry coming out after getting gas can still be used as liquid organic fertilizer for crops being cultivated by member farmers.
3.2.5 Land holding details
District wise details regarding total land held by the respondent farmers and also land under organic farming has been collected in this survey. As observed from following table 3.12, in Kutch district, the total land held by the respondents is 763.29 Acres of which 710.29 Acres (almost 93.0 %) is under Organic Farming/Fair Trade. Whereas the total land held by respondents in Surendranagar district is 999 Acres of which 754 Acres (75.48 %) is under Organic Farming/Fair Trade.
Table 3.12: Land holding details In Acres In % District Total Land (Acres) OF/FT Conventional OF/FT Conventional Kutch 770.29 717.29 53 93.12 6.88 Surendranagar 993 748 245 75.33 24.67 Total 1763.29 1465.29 298 83.10 16.90 Source: IMM analysis from total field survey responses
IMM has also carried out analysis based on the size of land holding and this will give insight regarding the real beneficiary groups among the respondent farmers and also geographically. These data are summarized in following table 3.13.
Table 3.13: Farmers’ distribution on the basis of Land holding size Sr. Members In Number % of District % of Total No Kutch Surendranagar Kutch Surendranagar 1 1 to 5 Acres 16 1 20 2.22 13.6 2 6 to 10 Acres 36 6 45 13.33 33.6 3 11 to 15 Acres 21 10 26.25 22.22 24.8 4 15 to 20 Acres 7 10 8.75 22.22 13.6 5 20 to 25 Acres 0 7 0 15.56 5.6 6 More than 25 Acres 0 11 0 24.44 8.8 Total 80 45 100 100.00 100 Source: IMM analysis from total field survey responses
It can be seen that while almost 45% of the respondents in Kutch hold 1 to 10 acres of land, only 15% of respondents of Surendranagar hold the same. However the most striking difference is seen in the percentage of farmers holding more than 20 acres of land, which is a mere 9% in Kutch and an overwhelming 60% in Surendranagar. This fact is also corroborated in later findings regarding
Impact Assessment_Cotton II_ Gujurat_India 26
Agri Impact Assessment -II- II Mott MacDonald India ‘More From the Cotton Fields’ Agrocel Industries Ltd agricultural facilities available with farmers, which shows that while only 8% farmers in Kutch possess tractors the percentage for the same in Surendranagar is about 31%.
3.2.6 Change in Land Ownership
Similar to the ownership of house, there has not been any significant change in the ownership of land, since most of the respondents of the survey already had ownership of the land, even before joining the project. Land ownership data and its analysis are summarized in following table 3.14.
Table 3.14: Percentage change in Land Ownership
In Number In Number % of District Kutch Surendranagar Kutch Kutch Sr. Land Ownership No. Status
Now Now Before Before Change Change Change
1 Owned 78 78 0 45 45 0 0 2 Leased * 1 4 3 0 0 0 5.0 3 Partnership* 1 8 7 0 0 0 10.0 Total 80 80 +10 45 45 0 15.0 Source: IMM analysis from total field survey responses, N.B. * This land is in addition to their owned land and to expand their farming activities including organic farming.
Few respondents in Kutch have however taken additional land, either in partnership or on lease, which has led to increase in their land availability. However, such number having taken land under partnership is 5.0 % and land on lease is 10.0 %, is relatively very small as compared to total number of respondents. Together this makes 15% of total respondents. It may be noted that such partnership/ leasing of land is done over and above their owning of land and hence total number is coming as 90.
3.2.7 Change in Agricultural facilities available
The facilities available for farming and improvement thereon are other quantifiable indicators of economic development of the farmers, as it can be observed from the summary of responses given in table 3.15 below.
Table 3.15: Percentage change in Agricultural facilities
In Number In Number % of District % of Kutch Surendranagar Kutch Surendranagar Total Sr. Agriculture No. Facilities Now Now Before Before Change Change Change Change Change Tractor without 1 trolley 7 9 2 14 14 0 2.5 0.00 1.6
Impact Assessment_Cotton II_ Gujurat_India 27
Agri Impact Assessment -II- II Mott MacDonald India ‘More From the Cotton Fields’ Agrocel Industries Ltd
Tractor with 2 trolley 7 8 1 13 16 3 1.25 6.67 4 Tractor 3 attachments 7 8 1 10 17 7 1.25 15.56 6.4 Mechanized 4 harvesting 2 3 1 1 2 1 1.25 2.22 1.6 facilities 5 Water/Tube well 61 75 14 15 19 4 17.5 8.89 14.4 Electric/Oil 6 engine pump 62 71 9 12 20 8 11.25 17.78 13.6 Drip Irrigation 7 facilities 4 8 4 2 9 7 5 15.56 8.8 Source: IMM analysis from total field survey responses,
As observed from above table, out of total 80 respondents in Kutch district only 8 (10%) own tractor / tractors with trolley and other farm implements (attachments). In case of Surendranagar district this is significantly different and out of 45 respondents 14 (31.11%) are having tractors / tractors with trolley and other farm attachments.
This corroborates with the landholding findings which show that there are more small holding farmers in Kutch than in Surendranagar, due to which lesser farmers in Kutch require farming equipments such as Tractors than in Surendranagar.
As regards, mechanized harvesting facilities, in Kutch out of 80 respondents only 3(3.75 %) are having such equipments. In case of Surendranagar, out of total 45 respondents, only 1 (2.22%) is having such facilities.
It is worth noting here, that there is significant change in irrigation facilities as it can be seen in the increase in the Water / Tube /Bore well facilities and the related Electric motor /Oil engine facilities on these wells, specifically indicated by change percentage of total as 14% and 13% respectively.
There is also significant change in terms of adoption of drip irrigation facilities in both districts. As it can be observed from the data about Kutch earlier 5 % farmers were using Drip irrigation, which has increased to 10 % level and in terms of numbers from 4 people to 8 persons. Similarly, in Surendranagar, earlier only 2 (4.44 %) persons were having drip irrigation and now 9 (20 %) persons are having drip irrigation facilities.
Since 80% of the respondents are smallholding farmers, they feel that investment in farming equipments such as tractors or mechanized harvesting are unjustifiable due to size of their land holding. According to them, the area worth investing in is irrigation. The survey findings data and analysis given above also substantiate these facts.
Impact Assessment_Cotton II_ Gujurat_India 28
Agri Impact Assessment -II- II Mott MacDonald India ‘More From the Cotton Fields’ Agrocel Industries Ltd 3.2.8 Change in Agricultural Income
The agricultural income which in most cases is the only source of income of these farmers is the clearest unit of measuring the economic progress of these farmers. The District wise Percentage distribution of the perception of farmers regarding change in their agricultural income is given in the following table.
Table 3.16: Difference perceived in Agricultural Income Sr. No. District In Number % of District Avg. % Yes No Yes No Difference 1 Kutch 78 2 97.50 2.5 16.75 2 Surendranagar 43 2 95.56 4.44 17.65 Total 121 4 96.80 3.20 17.08 Source: IMM analysis from total field survey responses
As it can be observed from the above table 3.16, that more than 95% farmers in both Surendranagar as well as Kutch region agree to having seen a positive change in their income, with the farmers in Kutch perceiving on an average increase of 16% in their income and farmers in Surendranagar perceiving on an average an increase of 17% in their agricultural income.
Interactions with farmers during the survey also revealed that the farmers attributed the increase in their income largely on reduced cost of production and increased in their income from cotton selling.
3.2.9 Cost of production
The farmers’ responses from both districts, regarding the average percentage of their income, as input cost for crop cultivation are summarized in following table 3.17.
Table 3.17: Average Percentage Cost of Production Sr. No. District % Used as Input Cost 1 Kutch 54.75 2 Surendranagar 53.06 Total 54.14 Source: IMM analysis from total field survey responses,
On an Average respondents of both Kutch and Surendranagar claim to spend approximately 54% of their income back into farming, termed here as the cost of production of the crop.
Impact Assessment_Cotton II_ Gujurat_India 29
Agri Impact Assessment -II- II Mott MacDonald India ‘More From the Cotton Fields’ Agrocel Industries Ltd 3.2.10 Percentage Distribution of Input Cost
The percentage distribution of the input cost was included to determine the major costs incurred by the farmers and areas in which organic farming helps reduce costs. The percentage distribution of the average distribution cost is given the table 3.18.
Table 3.18: Average Percentage Distribution of Input Cost Sr. No. Particulars Kutch Surendranagar Avg. % Distribution 1 Seed 14.95 12.22 13.97 2 Fertilizers 21.52 24.57 22.62 3 Pesticides 8.50 11.42 9.55 4 Irrigation 33.52 22.48 29.55 5 Labour 31.01 35.42 32.60 Source: IMM analysis from total field survey responses,
It can be observed from the table that for farmers following organic farming practices minimum expense is incurred on pesticides and seeds, contrary to conventional farming, where maximum expense is incurred on pesticides. This accounts for the significant difference in the cost of production in conventional and Organic Farming.
The costs associated with conventional farming differs from those of organic farming mainly with respect to fertilizers and pesticides, costs of labour and irrigation also differ slightly due to associated facts, as organic farming is less labour and water intensive than conventional farming.
Cost of inputs varies across different regions depending on the type of soil conditions and the extent of water resources available in the region. In the Mandvi Region, input costs are as high as Rs. 10,000 per hectare44. On conversion to organic farming, costs fell to under Rs. 2,00045. Over time, organic farming means self-sufficiency and in-farm availability of various agricultural inputs – manure and urine from livestock such as oxen/ cows and biomass and residues from plants/ trees –crashes costs of production. Many Agrocel farmers rear oxen/ cows that could be a source of additional income in the future. There are instances of farmers buying oxen/ cows for the first time to cater to their organic farming needs, and some buying more; sale of organic inputs is also another source of revenue.
Major difference between organic farming and conventional farming is seen in the cost of chemical fertilizers and chemical pesticides use. In conventional farming chemical pesticides and fertilizers are used, which are not only very expensive, but are also required in higher
Impact Assessment_Cotton II_ Gujurat_India 30
Agri Impact Assessment -II- II Mott MacDonald India ‘More From the Cotton Fields’ Agrocel Industries Ltd quantities as time passes, whereas in organic farming pest control is done by bio-pesticides like neem oil, cow urine, fermented buttermilk, bio pesticide etc. which is produced naturally and readily available with farmers from their farm animals / trees and thus can be easily procured at minimum cost, which helps in significantly reducing the input cost in organic farming as mentioned in previous paragraph.
The major expenses for farmers are Irrigation and Labour. Since most of the farmers use motors or pumps to fetch water from the tube well or bore wells for irrigation purposes, the electricity bill for the same forms a substantial portion; approximately 30% of the input cost. Labour here encompasses labour used for harvesting purposes as well as during the cultivation process, and thus cumulatively comprises of almost 32% of the input cost.
3.2.11 Change in Price realization or Yield
The price realization of the yield is one of the most important and direct instrument for measuring the impact of organic farming or fair trade on the financial conditions of the member farmers. The response to which has been overwhelmingly positive with only one farmer in Kutch replying in negative, rest all of the respondents claim to have seen a positive change in the price realization received for their yield. Farmers’ responses are summarized in following table 3.19.
Table 3.19: Perceived Difference in Price realization of yield Sr. No. District In Number % of District Avg. % Yes No Yes No Difference 1 Kutch 79 1 98.75 1.25 13.19 2 Surendranagar 45 0 100.00 0.00 11.36 Total 124 1 99.20 0.80 12.54 Source: IMM analysis from total field survey responses It can be seen from the table above that farmers in Kutch perceived on an average 13% increase in the price they received for their yield, whereas farmers in Surendranagar perceived on an average a slightly lower increase of approximately 11% in their price realization.
3.2.12 Major Benefits of Organic Farming
By collecting comparative ratings on the various benefits as perceived by the farmers of Organic Farming, an effort is made to discover the benefits which are more eminent to farmers and those which are not of much significance to them. An Average percentage rating of each benefit for Kutch is given in table 3.20 and similarly that for Surendranagar in table 3.21 and overall for both districts in table 3.22.
Impact Assessment_Cotton II_ Gujurat_India 31
Agri Impact Assessment -II- II Mott MacDonald India ‘More From the Cotton Fields’ Agrocel Industries Ltd Table 3.20: Rating response summary for Kutch District Sr. Rating (Kutch) Particulars No. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 1 Better Price realisation 41.03 38.46 15.38 2.56 1.28 1.28 0.00 0.00 2 Greater Market Accessibility 38.16 26.32 22.37 10.53 1.32 0.00 1.32 0.00 3 Stability of crop and prices 23.08 40.00 27.69 6.15 0.00 0.00 1.54 1.54 4 Improvements of soil and water 68.75 16.25 8.75 3.75 1.25 1.25 0.00 0.00 quality 5 Improvement in quality of cotton 17.72 25.32 25.32 15.19 13.92 2.53 0.00 0.00 produced 6 Improvement in financial strength 9.33 14.67 18.67 30.67 18.67 2.67 5.33 0.00 7 Reduction in cost of production 8.11 13.51 16.22 32.43 17.57 6.76 5.41 0.00 8 Low cost agricultural inputs 13.79 5.17 17.24 18.97 32.76 10.34 1.72 0.00 9 Technical guidance 4.69 10.94 15.63 23.44 18.75 20.31 4.69 1.56 10 Use of Fair Trade premium in 16.36 10.91 14.55 16.36 23.64 7.27 9.09 1.82 social projects Source: IMM analysis from total field survey responses In Kutch, an overwhelming 68% of farmers have rated improvement in soil quality as the most important benefit of Organic Farming, followed by better price realization with 41%. It can thus be inferred that even though financial profits are of significance to the farmers, they are more concerned with the long term well being of their land and thus consider improvement in their land to be greatest benefit of Organic Farming.
Close observation of the ratings given by farmers of Kutch also reveals that the farmers also consider Market accessibility and the stability of crop and prices that has taken place since undertaking Organic Farming to be a benefit more significant than the reduction in cost of production and agricultural inputs.
It also worth noting here that the farmers in Kutch do not consider improvement in the quality of cotton produced or the technical guidance provided by Agrocel as substantial benefits of Organic Farming and have given them much lower ratings than the earlier stated benefits.
Table 3.21: Rating response summary for Surendranagar District Sr. Rating (Surendranagar) Particulars No. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
1 Better Price realisation 9.09 40.91 34.09 4.55 4.55 4.55 2.27 0.00 2 Greater Market Accessibility 35.56 31.11 15.56 8.89 4.44 4.44 0.00 0.00 3 Stability of crop and prices 11.11 28.89 26.67 6.67 8.89 6.67 8.89 2.22
Impact Assessment_Cotton II_ Gujurat_India 32
Agri Impact Assessment -II- II Mott MacDonald India ‘More From the Cotton Fields’ Agrocel Industries Ltd Sr. Rating (Surendranagar) Particulars No. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Improvements of soil and water 4 60.00 17.78 15.56 4.44 0.00 0.00 2.22 0.00 quality Improvement in quality of cotton 5 22.22 24.44 24.44 8.89 13.33 4.44 2.22 0.00 produced Improvement in financial 6 6.82 22.73 20.45 29.55 11.36 4.55 4.55 0.00 strength 7 Reduction in cost of production 13.33 24.44 22.22 13.33 15.56 2.22 4.44 4.44 8 Low cost agricultural inputs 11.90 21.43 26.19 16.67 14.29 7.14 0.00 2.38 9 Technical guidance 28.95 21.05 21.05 7.89 15.79 2.63 2.63 0.00 Use of Fair Trade premium in 10 3.23 9.68 3.23 19.35 22.58 22.58 12.90 6.45 social projects Source: IMM analysis from total field survey responses In line with the findings of Kutch, farmers in Surendranagar have also decreed improvement in Soil and Water quality as the most eminent benefit of Organic Farming. Findings of Surendranagar are by large similar to that of Kutch except farmers here have rated Market Accessibility higher than better Price realization, which suggests that farmers in this region have in the past inspite of having good crops suffered due lack of Market Access or have been subjected to exploitation by Market forces.
Table 3.22: Rating response summary for both (Combined) Districts. Sr. Rating (All District) Particulars No. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 1 Better Price realisation 29.51 39.34 22.13 3.28 2.46 2.46 0.82 0.00 2 Greater Market Accessibility 37.19 28.10 19.83 9.92 2.48 1.65 0.83 0.00 3 Stability of crop and prices 18.18 35.45 27.27 6.36 3.64 2.73 4.55 1.82 Improvements of soil and water 4 65.60 16.80 11.20 4.00 0.80 0.80 0.80 0.00 quality Improvement in quality of cotton 5 19.35 25.00 25.00 12.90 13.71 3.23 0.81 0.00 produced Improvement in financial 6 8.40 17.65 19.33 30.25 15.97 3.36 5.04 0.00 strength 7 Reduction in cost of production 10.08 17.65 18.49 25.21 16.81 5.04 5.04 1.68 8 Low cost agricultural inputs 13.00 12.00 21.00 18.00 25.00 9.00 1.00 1.00 9 Technical guidance 13.73 14.71 17.65 17.65 17.65 13.73 3.92 0.98 Use of Fair Trade premium in 10 11.63 10.47 10.47 17.44 23.26 12.79 10.47 3.49 social projects
Impact Assessment_Cotton II_ Gujurat_India 33
Agri Impact Assessment -II- II Mott MacDonald India ‘More From the Cotton Fields’ Agrocel Industries Ltd Source: IMM analysis from total field survey responses
3.3 Findings on the Agricultural/Environmental Aspects
3.3.1 Perception about increase in Yield
The difference in production yield of the crop is a direct impact of organic farming and thus ideal measure for assessment of impact due to adoption of organic farming. The response here has also been overwhelmingly positive with only one farmer in Surendranagar replying in negative, rest all of the respondents claim to have seen a positive change in the yield of their crop. Farmers’ perceptions are summarized in following table 3.23.
Table 3.23: Perceived Difference in Yield Sr. No. District In Number % of District Avg. % Yes No Yes No Difference 1 Kutch 80 0 100 0 15.47 2 Surendranagar 44 1 97.78 2.22 18.97 Total 124 1 99.20 0.80 16.71 Source: IMM analysis from total field survey responses
Majority of farmers both in Kutch and Surendranagar professed to have witnessed an increase in the average yield of their crop since adopting organic farming. It can be seen from the column no.3 and 4 in table 3.23 above, there was a 100% consensus among the respondents in Kutch. As shown in last column Kutch farmers indicated 15.47% an average increase in their annual crop yield, whereas farmers in Surendranagar indicated that they get an average yield increase of 18.97 % slightly higher than Kutch. The weighted average of both districts combined is 16.71 % increase in yield.
However a report on Organic farming in Kutch prepared by Geoff Jackson for Agrocel substantiates the above mentioned finding and states that organic cotton farmers have witnessed yields similar to and sometimes in excess of those they obtained before turning organic. And because they obtain the organic premium and have far lower input costs, their net earnings are on average far higher.
This defies the conventional wisdom which has it that under organic farming systems yields are reduced, and perhaps quality also, but this is compensated for by lower input costs and higher prices for the harvested product so that net earnings are similar.
It should be noted here however that in the first year of conversion to Organic Farming, all farmers experienced a some drop in their annual yield, on account for their land becoming
Impact Assessment_Cotton II_ Gujurat_India 34
Agri Impact Assessment -II- II Mott MacDonald India ‘More From the Cotton Fields’ Agrocel Industries Ltd hard and sterile due to intensive application of chemical pesticides and fertilizers. Organic Farming is a gradual process and shows results year on year, which required the farmers to have a holistic view and be patient. It is to the credit of Agrocel and the faith it has instilled in the farmers that the member farmers persisted with Organic Farming practices and have reaped the benefits thereafter.
3.3.2 Perception about Contamination in Cotton
One of the pre requisites of Organic cotton is its being contamination free. In order to fulfil this condition, the Organic Farming practices must be rigorously monitored. Information was thus collected on whether the farmers perceived their cotton to be contamination free. The District wise percentage distribution of the responses is given in the following table 3.24.
Table 3.24: Contamination free cotton In Number In Percentage Sr. No. District Yes No Yes No 1 Kutch 67 13 83.75 16.25 2 Surendranagar 40 5 91.11 8.89 Total 77 48 86.40 13.60 Source: IMM analysis from total field survey responses
It is to be noted here that farmers here have included occurrence of pests and crop disease as a kind of contamination. 16% respondents in Kutch and 9% in Surendranagar have responded in the negative, from which we can infer that largely majority of the respondents from both the districts feel their crop is contamination free.
Agrocel records show that participating farmers rigorously follow contamination free cotton practices, Agrocel organizes many training programs and also distributes a kit for collecting contamination free cotton from the fields, consisting of head scarf to prevent human-hair contamination with the cotton, cotton aprons for men and women labours and a cotton collecting cloth to keep the collected cotton contamination free. As a result of these measures the program farmers have very good awareness with respect to keeping their cotton crop contamination free. The use of this kit is shown in following picture in Figure 3.2 taken in the cotton filed during cotton crop harvesting.
Impact Assessment_Cotton II_ Gujurat_India 35
Agri Impact Assessment -II- II Mott MacDonald India ‘More From the Cotton Fields’ Agrocel Industries Ltd Figure 3-1: Use of Kit given for Cotton Contamination Prevention
3.3.3 Perception about occurrence of crop disease and pests in cotton crop
Taking matters forward from the previous question, to further understand the conditions of the crop and the impact on it due to Organic Farming, information has been collected on the occurrence of pests and crop diseases in their crops since adopting organic Farming. Farmers’ response regarding occurrence of diseases and pest are summarized in table 3.25.
Table 3.25: Perceived Difference in Occurrence of crop disease and pests In Number In Percentage Sr. No. District Yes No Yes No 1 Kutch 70 10 87.50 12.50 2 Surendranagar 28 17 62.22 37.78 Total 98 27 78.40 21.60 Source: IMM analysis from total field survey responses
Farmers’ response analysis show that 12% farmers in Kutch and 37% farmers in Surendranagar perceive little or no change in the occurrence of pests and crop diseases, whereas in all around 78% respondents feel that the occurrence of pest diseases has either has reduced or become negligible.
Agrocel records also show that occurrence of diseases and pest is lesser in organic farming as compared to conventional farming. Organic farming being a knowledge intensive activity, it is more essential to provide the farmers with the right training and proper information to prevent such occurrences using bio pesticides.
Impact Assessment_Cotton II_ Gujurat_India 36
Agri Impact Assessment -II- II Mott MacDonald India ‘More From the Cotton Fields’ Agrocel Industries Ltd This is done by Agrocel on a regular basis through its various training programs, seminars and its field staff, due to which such occurrences are reduced considerably. This is evident from the fact that more than 60% of the program farmers undertake composting in a scientific way and get very good manure which they apply to their soil.
A report on Organic farming in Kutch prepared by Geoff Jackson for Agrocel states that pest occurrences in Kutch is much lower than are found in Punjab, Haryana, N.E. Rajasthan, Andhra Pradesh etc. Conventional crops are generally fertilised with Urea and fertilisation with urea, particularly in excess, as often happens, increases the vegetative growth and general succulence of the crop making it more attractive to pests. The organically grown cotton plant is smaller, tougher and hardier.
For instance, the Desi varieties comprising most of the organic cotton have a high silica content and hairy leaves which are known to deter jassids, aphids and whiteflies. They also have high gossypol content and a hard pericarp to the boll, which deter bollworms.
Around 10 farmers in Kutch and a few farmers in Surendranagar complained of having their crops infested this year by pests such as Thrips, Machariyo etc. In such situations the farmers are immediately advised by Agrocel field officers on the remedial actions and preventive measures for the future.
3.3.4 Perception about Improvement in Soil quality
As has been observed from the findings of Q.22 according to the respondents the greatest benefit from Organic Farming is the improvement in the Soil quality of their land. Those findings have been reinforced here with more than 96% and 97% respondents in Kutch and Surendranagar respectively have claimed that the soil quality of their land has improved. Farmers’ perception is summarized in following table 3.26.
Table 3.26: Perceived improvement in Soil quality In Number In Percentage Sr. No. District Yes No Yes No 1 Kutch 77 3 96.25 3.75 2 Surendranagar 44 1 97.78 2.22 Total 121 4 96.80 3.20 Source: IMM analysis from total field survey responses
Majority of the respondents felt that there land has become more fertile, as it has become softer than before and has greater water retention capacity than earlier. The District wise percentage distribution of the responses has been given in the table above.
Impact Assessment_Cotton II_ Gujurat_India 37
Agri Impact Assessment -II- II Mott MacDonald India ‘More From the Cotton Fields’ Agrocel Industries Ltd A report on Organic farming in Kutch prepared by Geoff Jackson for Agrocel also states that due to the attention paid to proper fertilisation in Organic farming and the resultant improvement in soil fertility, organic farmers have got higher yields than non – organic farmers.
This finding is line with Agrocel records which shows that as a result of the various practices subscribed by Agrocel under organic farming, there is seen a gradual improvement in the soil quality.
3.3.5 Perception about Improvement in Water quality
The impact of Organic Farming on water quality is ideally assessed scientifically; the information collected here simply states the perception of the respondents on the effect of Organic Farming on Water Quality. In comparison to the unanimously positive response given regarding improvement in Soil quality, the response to improvement to Water quality is more modest with only 65% and 48% of respondents in Kutch and Surendranagar respectively responding in positive. Farmers’ response is summarized in following table 3.27.
Table 3.27: Perceived Improvement in Water Quality In Number In Percentage Sr. No. District Yes No Yes No 1 Kutch 28 52 35.00 65.00 2 Surendranagar 23 22 51.11 48.89 Total 51 74 40.80 59.20 Source: IMM analysis from total field survey responses
3.3.6 Perception about the Crop rotation
Crop Rotation is a widely adopted practice in the farming community and this has reflected in the findings of information collected on Crop rotation. The same are distributed district wise and given in the following table 3.28.
Table 3.28: Perception about the Crop Rotation In Number % of District Sr. No. District Yes No Yes No 1 Kutch 79 1 98.75 1.25 2 Surendranagar 44 1 97.78 2.22 Total 123 2 98.40 1.60 Source: IMM analysis from total field survey responses
Impact Assessment_Cotton II_ Gujurat_India 38
Agri Impact Assessment -II- II Mott MacDonald India ‘More From the Cotton Fields’ Agrocel Industries Ltd It can be observed from the table that in both the districts all respondents, but one, claim to rotate their crops and consider it a beneficial and necessary farming practice. The major reasons behind this widespread awareness among the respondents are manifold and include traditional wisdom passed on by elders as well as training and seminars conducted by Agrocel on the benefits of Crop rotation.
3.3.7 Information about Alternate crops
The information collected on the various alternate crops cultivated by farmers in both the districts, reveals subtle differences in the pattern of alternate crops preferred in each region. The District wise Percentage distribution of the alternate crops is given in table 3.29.
Table 3.29: Responses about Alternate Crops
Sr. No Alternate Crop Kutch Surendranagar 1 Sorghum – Juvar (Fodder) 48.75 77.78 2 Bajri-Pearl millet 50.00 15.56 3 Sesame Seed – Tal (Oil seed) 43.75 77.78 4 Castor seed – Eranda (Oil seed) 45.00 0.00 5 Wheat 13.75 22.22 6 Mung – Green Gram- Pulse crop 52.50 2.22 7 Math – Pulses 13.75 0.00 8 Guar seeds (vegetable & animal feed) 23.75 2.22 9 Jira (Cumin seeds) 2.50 4.44 10 Rajko ( Green fodder) 15.00 13.33 11 Lasan – Garlic 0.00 11.11 12 Others 3.75 2.22 Source: IMM analysis from total field survey responses
It is clearly visible from the above table that sesame and sorghum are the alternate crops most preferred in the Surendranagar district, compared to which while sesame and sorghum area also relatively popular in Kutch, Pulses, Bajri and Castor are also cultivated on an equally large scale, whereas a negligible amount of respondent in Surendranagar grow pulses and Castor.
As it can be observed from above data, almost 45 % farmers grow Oilseeds (Sesame or Castor) as alternate crop in Kutch district. Similarly, almost 78 % farmers grow Sesame as an alternate crop. Keeping in view this aspect, Agrocel has already taken initiatives to provide market support to such farmers and they are also co-ordinating value added processing to get maximum returns for these growers. Thus, in true sense Agrocel is getting “More From the Cotton Fields” .
Impact Assessment_Cotton II_ Gujurat_India 39
Agri Impact Assessment -II- II Mott MacDonald India ‘More From the Cotton Fields’ Agrocel Industries Ltd 3.3.8 Benefits of crop rotation
Farmers’ response was also obtained regarding the various benefits of crop rotation and these responses have been tabulated in following table 3.30.
Table 3.30: Benefits of Crop Rotation
Sr. In Number % of District Family Type % of Total No Kutch Surendranagar Kutch Surendranagar 1 Increase In Crop Yield 49 31 61.25 38.75 64.00 2 Reduction In Pest 17 8 37.78 17.78 20.00 3 Soil Improvement 58 30 46.40 24.00 70.40 4 Reduce Labour Cost 0 4 0.00 3.20 3.20 5 Better Fertility 41 2 32.80 1.60 34.40 6 Reduction In Water Usage 6 2 4.80 1.60 6.40 Source: IMM analysis from total field survey responses
According to the findings of the survey, the farmers feel that the greatest benefit of crop rotation is the improvement in the soil (70%) followed closely by the increase in the yield (64%). The respondents were all well aware of that by rotating the crops, they are able to replenish the nutrients of the soil and hence improve the quality of the soil which subsequently results in increase in the yield of the ensuing crop. Many respondents have equated soil fertility with improvement in soil quality and thus together these two benefits constitute the most significant benefit of crop rotation
It can also be inferred from the findings that the farmers are not much concerned with the indirect benefits of crop rotation such as reduction in labour cost or usage of water. The respondents feel that all these benefits are interrelated and that crop rotation is altogether a beneficial and requisite framing practice.
3.4 Findings on the Social Aspects
3.4.1 Findings on road blocks and obstacles faced in the Project
Information was also collected on the problems faced by the respondents during the transition from Conventional to Organic Farming and or Fair Trade (OF/FT). The findings are quite self explanatory and are given in the following table 3.31.
Table 3.31: Problems faced in adopting Organic Farming Sr. In Number % of District Problem Type % of Total No Kutch Surendranagar Kutch Surendranagar 1 Low Yield In Initial Years 7 7 8.75 15.56 11.2 2 Family Resistance 1 3 1.25 6.67 3.2 Total 8 10 18 10 22.22
Impact Assessment_Cotton II_ Gujurat_India 40
Agri Impact Assessment -II- II Mott MacDonald India ‘More From the Cotton Fields’ Agrocel Industries Ltd Source: IMM analysis from total field survey responses
It can be observed from the table that there were major two obstacles, which the respondents faced in adopting Organic Farming, which were Low yield in the initial years and resistance from family for economic reasons. Of which it can be seen that there was greater family resistance in Surendranagar than in Kutch, this could be because Surendranagar has historically been an intensive farming region and there was bound to be more resistance to change than in Kutch which on account of being bereft of resources has been a traditionally organic farming region.
It is also worth noting that only 22% of the respondents have claimed to have experienced any kind of problem in adopting Organic Farming, which reveals that they were well prepared and well informed for the conversion, which again is a credit to Agrocel for hand holding the farmers so ably during their transition period and even thereafter.
3.4.2 Social Standing
To gain insight into the social lives of the farmers, information on the social status of the farmers as perceived by them was collected. The findings of the same are very heartening as more than 90% farmers in both Kutch and Surendranagar have perceived a positive change in their social status. However the percentage is higher in Kutch with approximately 98% of the respondents considering their social standing to have risen compared to 93% in Surendranagar. Farmers’ perception is given in following table 3.32.
Table 3.32: Perceived Improvement in Social Standing Sr. In Number % of District District No. Yes No Yes No 1 Kutch 79 1 98.75 1.25 2 Surendranagar 42 3 93.33 6.67 Total 121 4 96.80 3.20 Source: IMM analysis from total field survey responses
It can thus be inferred from the above findings that Organic Farming had a striking impact on the social lives of the member farmers. Many farmers, who pioneered Organic Farming in their villages, claim to have become opinion leaders, with other farmers now coming to them for advice on other matters as well besides farming practices.
Other aspect worth mentioning here is that the respondents especially in Kutch felt that Organic Farming facilitated them in being able to fulfil all their social obligations in a very respectable manner, which has led to increase in their social status in their community.
Impact Assessment_Cotton II_ Gujurat_India 41
Agri Impact Assessment -II- II Mott MacDonald India ‘More From the Cotton Fields’ Agrocel Industries Ltd 3.4.3 Social status of labourers/co-workers
The Labourers working in the fields for the farmers are also indirectly participants of the project and thus information was also collected on their social status. This information was collected from the respondents, so it in essence their perception regarding the social lives of the labourers or co workers working on their farms. The findings are given in Table 3.33.
Table 3.33: Perceived improvement in Social status of labourers/co workers Sr. In Number % of District District No. Yes No Yes No 1 Kutch 79 1 98.75 1.25 2 Surendranagar 40 5 88.89 11.11 Total 119 6 95.20 4.80 Source: IMM analysis from total field survey responses
The findings here collate with those of the previous section. The respondents believe that along with the improvement in their own social conditions, those of their labourers and co-workers have also improved.
The respondents claim that they now pay more to their labourers than they did before. We can infer from this that the benefits of Organic Farming are being passed down to the farthest end of the supply chain and fair and ethical practices are being followed by the farmers.
It is learnt from Agrocel that the average labour wages paid to farm labourers in Kutch are in the range of Rs.80 to 120/-per day and in Surendranagar it is in the range of Rs. 80 to 125/- per day. It is worth mentioning here that the according to the Minimum Wage Act, Government of India, Ministry of Labour, for Kutch and Surendranagar areas, the minimum wages payable to agriculture labour is Rs.50/- per day and thus the Agrocel member farmers actually pay 1.6 to 2.5 times higher than stipulated in the Minimum Wages Act. This indicates that the labourers working with the participant farmers are paid better wages than other labourers and thus they have higher social status than others.
Due to adoption of organic farming it is also not affecting their health due to harmful effects of chemical pesticides and improves their health condition over a period.
3.4.4 Perception of OF/FT with regards to personal and social life
To learn more about the impact of Organic Farming on the personal lives of the respondents, they were further probed regarding their family life as well financial strength. District wise percentage distribution of the responses given by the respondents is shown in the following table
Impact Assessment_Cotton II_ Gujurat_India 42
Agri Impact Assessment -II- II Mott MacDonald India ‘More From the Cotton Fields’ Agrocel Industries Ltd Table 3.34: Perceptions of effects of OF/FT on personal and social life Sr. Family Type In Number % of District % of Total No Kutch Surendranagar Kutch Surendranagar 1 Greater Financial Strength 76 38 95 84.44 91.20 2 Better Family Life 74 44 92.5 97.78 94.40 3 Others 19 0 23.75 0.00 15.20 Source: IMM analysis from total field survey responses
In line with the trend seen in the above sections, the answers have here too been largely positive. However the respondents felt that there was a greater improvement in their family life than in their financial conditions.
We can infer from this that even though Organic Farming may not be as remunerative as BT, it provides a more relaxing livelihood. Respondents claim that they are able to give more attention and time to their families, and are more relaxed as they are relieved from the anxiety of bad crops, high costs of pesticides, Market access. They are also confident about obtaining assistance from Agrocel whenever required.
3.4.5 Indebtedness at initial stage
At the onset of the SFCF Programme, indebtedness was a serious concern for majority of the farmers participating in the project. Thus information regarding indebtedness was collected to understand the current scenario of the farmers with regards to indebtedness. The findings of the same are given in the following table 3.35.
Table 3.35: Indebtedness at Initial stage Sr. No. In Number % of District District Yes No Yes No 1 Kutch 22 58 27.5 72.50 2 Surendranagar 10 35 22.22 77.78 Total 32 93 25.6 74.4 Source: IMM analysis from total field survey responses
The findings regarding indebtedness are most encouraging as it shows that more than 74% of the respondents are debt-free and currently only 27% of respondents in Kutch and 22% respondents in Surendranagar are in debt. Also the Average of the debt is less than Rs 5000 and the duration of the debt is 1-2 years.
It is obvious from the findings that indebtedness has largely been controlled and most farmers are now in a much improved financial condition than before.
Impact Assessment_Cotton II_ Gujurat_India 43
Agri Impact Assessment -II- II Mott MacDonald India ‘More From the Cotton Fields’ Agrocel Industries Ltd 3.4.6 Reduction in Indebtedness
To further study the relation between Organic Farming and the reduction in indebtedness of the respondents, information was collected on various impacts of Organic Farming with regards to debt. The findings of the same are presented in table 3.36.
Table 3.36: Reduction in Indebtedness Sr. Family Type In Number % of District % of Total No Kutch Surendranagar Kutch Surendranagar No, OF/FT has not reduced by 1 5 4 6.25 8.89 7.20 Burden at all Yes, It has helped me repay 2 15 11 18.75 24.44 20.80 Some of my existing debt. Yes, I have been able to repay all 3 11 12 13.75 26.67 18.40 My debts Yes, I no longer need to take any 4 Debts as my income suffices my 6 11 7.5 24.44 13.60 Expenses 5 Others 1 2 1.25 4.44 2.40 Source: IMM analysis from total field survey responses
It can be observed form the above table that 20% of the respondents claim that Organic Farming has helped them in repaying some of their existing debt, whereas 18% believe that they have been able to repay all of their debt with the help of Organic Farming. The finding which is most indicative of the progress of the respondents is that more than 13% of them feel that they no longer need to take debt to meet their regular expenses
Its is obvious from the above findings that Organic Farming has helped the farmers combat indebtedness in varying degrees and the farmers have acknowledged that fact.
3.4.7 Change in Working Conditions
The Working condition of the farmers is a very important aspect with respect to the impact of Organic Farming in their progress. The findings on it are given in the following table 3.37.
Table 3.37: Perceived change in Working conditions Sr. Family Type In Number In Percentage % of Total No Kutch Surendranagar Kutch Surendranagar No, the working conditions are 1 1 1 1.25 2.22 1.60 The same as before Yes, I have more help (labourers) 2 52 23 65 51.11 60.00 To help in my work
Impact Assessment_Cotton II_ Gujurat_India 44
Agri Impact Assessment -II- II Mott MacDonald India ‘More From the Cotton Fields’ Agrocel Industries Ltd Yes, I have greater amenities 3 (Tractors, irrigation etc.) to help in 27 16 33.75 35.56 34.40 My work Yes, my health is better due to the 4 Reduction is use of chemical 69 34 86.25 75.56 82.40 Pesticides Yes, the improvement in soil and 5 Water quality has helped my 76 34 95 75.56 88.00 Working conditions Source: IMM analysis from total field survey responses
The impact of Organic Farming on the working conditions of the respondents is clearly visible, with 86% respondents in Kutch claiming that their has been improvement in their health on account of reduced usage of chemical pesticides and a staggering 95% respondents believe that due to improvement in the soil and water quality they now need to put in lesser hard work thus helped improve their working conditions. The figures for the same in Surendranagar are 75%.However one should note that only few respondents attribute improvements in the amenities they possess to Organic Farming.
One can infer from the above finding that according to the respondents Organic Farming has helped improve their working conditions largely from an agricultural, environmental and health aspect, however financially Organic Aspect has not contributed greatly to the improvement in their working conditions.
3.4.8 Income Sufficiency
Information regarding whether the respondents feel that the income generated by Organic Farming is sufficient to fulfil al their expenses was collected as a prelude to the subject of Migration. The District wise distribution of respondents regarding income sufficiency is given in the following table3.38.
Table 3.38: Income Sufficiency Sr. In Number % of District District No. Yes No Yes No 1 Kutch 77 3 96.25 3.75 2 Surendranagar 42 3 93.33 6.67 Total 119 6 95.2 4.80 Source: IMM analysis from total field survey responses
The findings are self explanatory with 96% respondents in Kutch and 93% in Surendranagar asserting that the income from Organic Farming suffices all their expenses.
Impact Assessment_Cotton II_ Gujurat_India 45
Agri Impact Assessment -II- II Mott MacDonald India ‘More From the Cotton Fields’ Agrocel Industries Ltd It stands to reason from these findings that the respondents would be less prone to migrate into cities looking fir livelihoods, when they feel that their existing income is more than adequate.
3.4.9 Reverse Migration
Besides collecting information on checking of migration, information on the effect of Organic Farming with respect to Reverse migration was also collected. The findings of the same are in table 3.39 given below.
Table 3.39: Occurrence of Reverse Migration Sr. In Number % of District District No. Yes No Yes No 1 Kutch 9 71 11.25 88.75 2 Surendranagar 12 33 26.67 73.33 Total 21 104 16.8 83.20
Respondents were asked whether they had witnessed any case of reverse migration on account of Organic Farming, and the response to the question has been surprisingly much higher than expected. Especially in the Surendranagar region 12 respondents have claimed to know at least one case of reverse migration, which translates into 26% of the respondents. Overall 21% of the respondents claim to know of one case of reverse migration on account of Organic Farming.
3.4.10 Perceptions about long term sustainability of OF/FT
It is important from a strategic point of view to know the perceptions of the farmers regarding the long term sustainability of Organic Farming/ Fair Trade. Only if the farmers consider Organic Farming/Fair Trade to be sustainable in the long run will they continue with it and would also be a deciding factor when considering migration. Farmers’ response is summarized in table 3.40.
Table 3.40: Sustainability of OF/FT Sr. In Number % of District District No. Yes No Yes No 1 Kutch 79 1 98.75 1.25 2 Surendranagar 45 0 100.00 0.00 Total 124 1 99.2 0.80 Source: IMM analysis from total field survey responses
A staggering 99% of the respondents believe in the sustainability of Organic Farming, as a matter of fact many respondents claimed that Organic Farming is the only sustainable for of agriculture for the future.
Impact Assessment_Cotton II_ Gujurat_India 46
Agri Impact Assessment -II- II Mott MacDonald India ‘More From the Cotton Fields’ Agrocel Industries Ltd One can infer from this that the respondents have reaped the benefits of Organic Farming are aware of the difference it has made in their lives, especially agriculturally and environmentally and thus believe in its sustainability.
3.4.11 Perceptions about future prospects of OF/FT
This is a further extension of the previous section, used simply to probe the farmers further, regarding how they financially perceive the future prospects of Organic Farming and Fair Trade. The District wise percentage distribution of the responses has been shown in the following table 3.41.
Table 3.41: Future prospects of OF/FT Sr. In Number % of District District No. Yes No Yes No 1 Kutch 10 70 12.5 87.50 2 Surendranagar 11 34 24.44 75.56 Total 22 104 17.6 83.20 Source: IMM analysis from total field survey responses
It can be observed from the table above that the respondents in Kutch are more positive about the future prospects of Organic Farming than the respondents in Surendranagar. Also to be noted is the fact that though the current crop pf farmers are largely positive about farming, most of them have expressed that their children do not share views.
It has been noticed that on being asked about the future prospects of Organic Farming most respondents have taken it in a generic sense and have expressed their opinions regarding farming on the whole and seem to consider it as a viable occupation in the future as well, though as mentioned earlier their children generally do not subscribe to this view.
3.4.12 Facilities provided by Agrocel
In the end information was collected from the respondents regarding the importance they gave to the various services Agrocel provided to them. The findings are stated below in table 3.42.
Table 3.42: Facilities provided by Agrocel Sr. Family Type In Number % of District % of Total No Kutch Surendranagar Kutch Surendranagar 1 Agricultural Inputs 80 40 100 88.89 96.00 2 Buy backs 73 42 91.25 93.33 92.00 3 Fair Trade premiums 78 34 97.5 75.56 89.60
Impact Assessment_Cotton II_ Gujurat_India 47
Agri Impact Assessment -II- II Mott MacDonald India ‘More From the Cotton Fields’ Agrocel Industries Ltd 4 Ot hers 9 15 11.25 33.33 19.20 Source: IMM analysis from total field survey responses
It can be seen from the above table that according to the respondents, that they attach a lot of importance to the facilities Agrocel provides to them, of which they consider the agricultural inputs, such as advice on crops, bio- fertilizers, seeds etc as the most important, with 96%, closely followed by the Buy back and Fair Trade premiums.
3.4.13 Suggestions given by farmers regarding the project
There has been a wide variety of suggestions made by the respondents regarding the other activities that can be undertaken under the Project. That is not to say that the farmers are not satisfied with the ongoing project. Most farmers have expressly conveyed that they are extremely pleased with the assistance and facilities they have been provided under the project. These suggestions are to simply increase the coverage of the work done under the project. The suggestions can be divided into three categories:
(i) Agricultural Assistance
It is Agrocel’s primary objective to provide the farmers with various types of agricultural assistance and this need has been reiterated by the respondents. Many farmers have suggested arranging more training and work shop programmes to educate them on topics such as new farming techniques for improving soil fertility, prevention of crop diseases and pest occurrence, cultivation of crops in scarce water conditions, animal farming, crop storage etc. The respondents also want Agrocel to undertake various water conservation projects such as deepening of local ponds, which Agrocel has already done in Rapar.
The farmers also want Agrocel to buy the alternate crops that they grow or provide marketing assistance for them. Many farmers feel that Agrocel should set up its own ginning and storage facility. Agrocel has already taken this suggestion into account and has built its own ginning, storing, packaging and grading facility in Dhrangadhra which will begin functioning in 2008.
(ii) Financial assistance
Besides acquiring knowledge about new f ar ming techniques, the respondents also seemed equally eager to implement these practices. However, they for this they require financial assistance. Most farmers have suggested providing subsidies or soft loans for various purposes like installing new irrigation facility, purchasing farming equipment, building animal shelters, levelling their land, adding crop storage facilities etc.
Impact Assessment_Cotton II_ Gujurat_India 48
Agri Impact Assessment -II- II Mott MacDonald India ‘More From the Cotton Fields’ Agrocel Industries Ltd (iii) Community development
Lastly the farmers have given suggested a plethora of activities for the development of the entire community such as providing guidance and monetary assistance in getting crop insurance, group personal and accident insurance.
However, the suggestion most respondents have stressed upon is providing assistance for their children’s education. It could be through scholarships, monetary help given to purchase books, uniforms etc, or assistance to build a primary school in the village. The respondents have also suggested running computer classes for children. Many have also suggested sewing classes and knitting for the women. These suggestions clearly indicate that the farmers are eager to progress from all aspects and are open to imbibe new mediums to get there.
4 Key Findings of the Field Survey
The key findings of the field survey are mentioned briefly in the following paragraphs of this section.
4.1 Demographic
The Average distance to an Agrocel Service Centre is shorter in Surendranagar, than in Kutch, Efforts should be made to take this situation into account and make amendments in present operating system and providing support for field services.
Being a resource constrained region Kutch has traditionally undertaken organic farming, which has helped it retain its traditional family structure. Many farmers in Kutch though functioning as nuclear families are actually part of a cluster of relatives staying on nearby farms, in comparison Surendranagar being a resourceful has historically been an intensive farming region which led to greater migration and lesser joint families, however the scenario has changed, since the adoption of organic farming and there seems to be a resurgence of joint families.
Findings of Both the family type and number of members in the family show that more than fifty percent of the farmers still live in joint families of about 6 to 10 members. This also supports the fact that still agriculture is requiring more human labour as important input, and majority people prefers to have larger family living together.
4.2 Economic Impact The farmers have progressed on the economic front which is most evident from the change that has taken place in the type of houses they live in.
Impact Assessment_Cotton II_ Gujurat_India 49
Agri Impact Assessment -II- II Mott MacDonald India ‘More From the Cotton Fields’ Agrocel Industries Ltd There has been greater improvement in housing facilities in Surendranagar in comparison to Kutch. Though, on the whole it can be said that there is an increase in awareness regarding hygiene and standard of living among all the respondents. One can consider the farmers of both the districts to be in relatively prosperous and economically well –off conditions.
There are more smallholder farmers in Kutch than Surendranagar as 90% of respondents of Kutch own less than 20 acres land while the figure for Surendranagar is 60%.
Collectively more than 80% of the respondents are smallholding farmers; hence they feel that investment in farming equipments such as tractors and mechanized harvesting are unjustifiable. According to them, the area worth investing in is irrigation, this is substantiated by the 14% increase in Tube/Bore well facility and corresponding 14% increase in Oil/Engine pumps required for the wells.
95% of respondents believe their agricultural income has risen since adopting Organic Farming, most of them have attributed this largely to the reduced cost of production and cost of selling
Farmers practising organic farming incurred minimum expense on pesticides and seeds, contrary to conventional farming, where maximum expense is incurred on pesticides. This accounts for the significant difference in the cost of production in conventional and Organic Farming
Respondents of both Kutch and Surendranagar deemed improvement in Soil and Water quality as the greatest benefit of Organic Farming followed by greater price realisation of yield, better market accessibility and stability of crops and prices. Farmers feel that due to the direct purchase of their crop by Agrocel, they are spared the exploitation by Market forces that they faced earlier where even good crops did not yield appropriate prices. The reduction in crop failure on account of improvement in the soil quality has brought about a feeling of stability in the farmers.
More than 80% of farmers are solely dependent on farming for their livelihoods but there seems to be a shift in this trend with the next generation, who prefer jobs to farming. This trend needs to be watched closely to ensure that farming does not become a lost cause with the next generation.
Impact Assessment_Cotton II_ Gujurat_India 50
Agri Impact Assessment -II- II Mott MacDonald India ‘More From the Cotton Fields’ Agrocel Industries Ltd 4.3 Environmental Impact
In the first year of conversion to Organic Farming, all farmers experienced some drop in their annual yield as their land has become hard and sterile due to intensive application of chemical pesticides and fertilizers. Organic Farming is a gradual process and shows results on a year by year basis, which required patience on part of the farmers. It is to the credit of Agrocel and the faith it has instilled in the farmers that the member farmers persisted with Organic Farming practices and have subsequently reaped its benefits.
Majority of the respondents from both the districts feel their crop is contamination free; however there have been some occurrences of crop diseases, the number of which has been higher in Kutch than in Surendranagar.
Most of the respondents felt that there land has become more fertile, as it has become softer than before and has greater water retention capacity than earlier.
All respondents of both the districts except one claim to rotate their crops and consider it a beneficial and necessary farming practice. The major reasons behind this widespread awareness among the respondents are manifold and include traditional wisdom passed on by elders as well as training and seminars conducted by Agrocel on the benefits of Crop rotation.
Sesame and sorghum are the alternate crops most preferred in the Surendranagar district, compared to which while sesame and sorghum area also relatively popular in Kutch, Pulses, Bajri (pearl millet) and Castor seeds are also cultivated on an equally large scale, whereas a negligible amount of respondent in Surendranagar grow pulses and Castor
4.4 Social Impact Aspects
Only 22% of the respondents have claimed to have experienced any kind of problem in adopting Organic Farming, which reveals that they were well prepared and well informed for the conversion, which again is a credit to Agrocel for hand holding the farmers so ably during their transition period and even thereafter
Organic Farming has had a striking impact on the social lives of the member farmers. Many farmers, who pioneered Organic Farming in their villages, claim to have become opinion leaders, with other farmers now coming to them for advice on other matters as well besides farming practices.
Impact Assessment_Cotton II_ Gujurat_India 51
Agri Impact Assessment -II- II Mott MacDonald India ‘More From the Cotton Fields’ Agrocel Industries Ltd Respondents especially in Kutch felt that Organic Farming facilitated them in being able to fulfil all their social obligations in a very respectable manner, which has led to an increase in their social status.
The respondents claim that they now pay more to their labourers than they did before. We can infer from this that the benefits of Organic Farming are being passed down to the farthest end of the supply chain and fair and ethical practices are being followed by the farmers.
Even though Organic Farming may not be as remunerative as BT, it provides a more relaxing livelihood. Respondents claim that they are able to give more attention and time to their families, and are more relaxed as they are relieved from the anxiety of bad crops, high costs of pesticides and Market access. They are also confident about obtaining assistance from Agrocel whenever required.
Organic Farming has helped the farmers to combat indebtedness in varying degrees and the farmers have acknowledged that fact that they are now in a much improved financial condition than before.
Organic Farming has helped improve the working conditions of the respondents, primarily from an agricultural, environmental and health aspect; however from the financial aspect Organic Farming has not contributed greatly to the improvement in their working conditions.
Respondents are now less prone to migrate into cities looking fir livelihoods as they feel that their existing income is more than adequate.
Most farmers are aware of the difference Organic Farming has made in their lives, especially agriculturally and environmentally and believe it is sustainable and consider it as a viable occupation,
Impact Assessment_Cotton II_ Gujurat_India 52
Agri Impact Assessment -II- II Mott MacDonald India ‘More From the Cotton Fields’ Agrocel Industries Ltd 5 Work done by Agrocel on the Social front
Agrocel has always taken the initiative to provide the farming community with as much assistance as it can, be it through various awareness and training programs and seminars, or by providing the farmers with agri inputs such as bio fertilizers, or assisting the farmers in obtaining farming equipments, as well as providing credit facility of above Rs 12 Lacs ever year.
Below given are two tables tabulating the different kinds of community development and Awareness and Training Programmes carried out by Agrocel.
Table 5.1: Awareness and Training Work Provided by Agrocel Sr. No Particular Year Place No. of Participant Farmers 1 Lokbharati Organic Seminar 2002 Sanosara 13 2 Drip awarness Tour 2003 Kutch 12 3 Organic Farming Seminar 2004 Vandhay 15 4 Demonstration & Meeting on cotton 2004 Dhrumath 300 seed-Gujarat-23 5 ICM Seminar- Dr. O.P. Sharma 2005 Ramgadh 200 6 Organic Farming Training for staff 2005 Malvan Chokdi 15 7 Seminar on Organic Farming 2005 Vardha 12 8 Sugar beet Seminar 2006 Mangadh 200 9 Drip Seminar 2006 Navalgadh 700 10 Fair-trade Seminar 2007 Navalgadh 400 11 Training for Fair-trade 2007 Rapar 15 12 Seminar on Vegetable 2007 Chotila 150 13 Ajeet Demonstration Tour 2007 Dhrangadhra 15 14 Demonstration & Meeting on cotton 2007 Chandrasar 900 seed- Ajeet-11 15 Seminar on Drip & Organic Farming 2007 Thoriyali-Sayala 500 Source: Information provided by Agrocel-Koday office.
Table 5.2: Agricultural Assistance Provided by Agrocel Sr. No Particulars of Agricultural Assistance Provided 1 Distributed Sonthary -50 KG 2 Distributed Rock Phosphate-50 kg 3 Distributed Neemcake-50 kg 4 Field Service support to farmers 5 Drip Instrument (Rewinder) No.s 6 Biogas Plants - 85 Cubic MTRS
Impact Assessment_Cotton II_ Gujurat_India 53
Agri Impact Assessment -II- II Mott MacDonald India ‘More From the Cotton Fields’ Agrocel Industries Ltd Sr. No Particulars of Agricultural Assistance Provided 7 Inputs :- Credit facility above Rs.12 Lacs every year Source: Information provided by Agrocel-Koday office.
Table 5.3: Community Work done using Fair Trade Premium by Agrocel
Sr. No Particular 1 Deepening of local lakes in the Rapar region for better water conservation 2 Solar Street lights in villages in Rapar 3 Donation of drinking water tanks in local schools 4 Preparation of composting pit and farmers’ training. Source: Information provided by Agrocel-Koday office.
Figure 5.1: Deepening of Village Lakes in Rapar Taluka
Figure 5.2: Solar Street Lighting From Fare Trade Premium
Impact Assessment_Cotton II_ Gujurat_India 54
Agri Impact Assessment -II- II Mott MacDonald India ‘More From the Cotton Fields’ Agrocel Industries Ltd Figure 5.3: Drinking Water Tanks in Schools with Water Conservation Slogans
Figure 5.4: Compost Pit Assistance by Fair trade
Impact Assessment_Cotton II_ Gujurat_India 55
Agri Impact Assessment -II- II Mott MacDonald India ‘More From the Cotton Fields’ Agrocel Industries Ltd
6 Case Studies
6.1 Shri Laljibhai Ramji Patel
Location:
Surendranagar – Navalgadh
Family:
Nuclear family with 5 members
Organic Farming:
Since 2001-02 Land:
Total – 23 Acres; 18 Acres – Organic 15 Acres – Conventional
Brief:
Laljibhai is one of the pioneers of Organic Farming in the Navalgadh village of Surendranagar district. He lives there with his wife and three children. Being one of the biggest land owners in the region, Laljibhai’s opinion has influenced many others in the village, which helped the cause of Organic Farming in Navalgadh. Today the farmers in Navalgadh have purchased a Gobar Gas plant from the premium of Fair Trade, which provides Gas connection to the farmers of the village, which they did not have earlier. Laljibhai has been instrumental in spreading Fair Trade concept amongst these farmers. Laljibhai had joined the SFCF project in 2001-02, the first year itself. The economic prosperity of his family since adopting Organic Farming is quite noticeable. Recently he bought a television and refrigerator for his house, besides adding new rooms and a storage facility in the house. Laljibhai claims to have witnessed a 25% increase in his income due to Organic Farming from which he has purchased more land for Organic Farming. This is the result of the conviction Laljibhai had in Organic Farming which made him stick with it. Laljibhai’s four brothers, who took up service as alternate source of income, are also impressed by his progress and prosperity, after his adopting Organic Farming and joining Fare Trade program.
Impact Assessment_Cotton II_ Gujurat_India 56
Agri Impact Assessment -II- II Mott MacDonald India ‘More From the Cotton Fields’ Agrocel Industries Ltd 6.2 Shri Praveenbhai Varmora
Location :
Surendranagar – Ramgadh
Family :
Joint family with 10 members
Organic Farming :
Since 2001-02
Land:
Total – 21 Acres; 9 Acres – Organic 12 Acres – Conventional
At Praveenbhai’s farm with Agrocel and Filed survey team Brief:
Praveenbhai is an innovative farmer, who lives in the Ramgadh village of Surendranagar in a joint family. Besides farming Praveenbhai also does carpenter work-his family profession in his spare time to supplement his income.
Praveenbhai decided to convert to Organic Farming inspite of resistance from his family and joined the SFCF project in 2001-02, however today his family are happy about the decision he made. Through this project Praveenbhai has learnt various farming techniques and has set up a Vermicompost preparation facility on his farm. According to him the greatest benefit of Organic Farming has been the improvement in the quality of life and improvement in soil quality.
Impact Assessment_Cotton II_ Gujurat_India 57
Agri Impact Assessment -II- II Mott MacDonald India ‘More From the Cotton Fields’ Agrocel Industries Ltd 6.3 Shri Kedabhai Madheva Mali
Location :
Kutch – Rapar
Family:
Joint family with 7 members
Organic Farming :
Since 2002-03
Land :
Total – 14.5 Acres; 14.5 Acres – Organic
Shri. Kedabhai with his family at his house Brief:
Shri. Kedabhai lives in the Rapar district of Kutch with his wife, two sons; both of whom are married and daughter. With the proceeds of Organic Farming Mr. Kedabhai has got his uneven land levelled and put sprinkler irrigation in place for his farm. Kedabhai makes optimum use of the facilities provided by Agrocel such as the contamination kit, agri inputs etc and also does extensive crop rotation; he grows castor, pulses and Bajri as alternate crops.
It is obvious from Kedabhai’s actions that he is a very progressive farmer and has shown great acumen for Organic Farming, so much so that he has become an opinion leader in his village and surrounding areas regarding Organic farming.
Impact Assessment_Cotton II_ Gujurat_India 58
Agri Impact Assessment -II- II Mott MacDonald India ‘More From the Cotton Fields’ Agrocel Industries Ltd 6.4 Head of household: Shri. Gelabhai Dosabhai Mor Respondent: Shri Babubhai Mor (Son of Shri Gelabhai, the land owner) Location:
Kutch – Rapar (Padampar)
Family:
Joint family with 8 members
Organic Farming:
Since 2001-02
Land:
Total – 20 Acres; 20 Acres – Organic
Brief:
At first glance, few will suspect Shri. Babubhai of being a farmer. However, after close interaction and you will realise that this educated and well spoken man is besides being the farmer practising Organic Farming, also the principal of the village school – The Modern School and an opinion builder in community.
Shri. Babubhai responded our questions and his father Shri. Gelabhai owns 20 Acres of land in the Padampar village of Kutch has been doing Organic Farming since 2001-02. Babubhai has seen a 30% increase in his agricultural income and attributes it largely to the reduction in the cost of production. He also feels that the project has helped in arresting the exploitation of the farmers, as participant farmers get paid premium prices for their produce and are assured of a buyer for their product.
Babubhai also believes that the seminars, awareness programs and tours arranged by Agrocel under the programme have helped them learn of more efficient ways of farming and made them more knowledgeable.
Impact Assessment_Cotton II_ Gujurat_India 59
Agri Impact Assessment -II- II Mott MacDonald India ‘More From the Cotton Fields’ Agrocel Industries Ltd 6.5 Shri Ravajibhai Devaji Bangali Location:
Kutch – Rapar (Padampar)
Family:
Joint family with 4 members
Organic Farming:
Since 2002-03
Land:
Total – 14 Acres; 14 Acres – Organic
Ravajibhai sitting on the parapet of his Bore well recharging pit Brief:
Ravajibhai lives in the Rapar region of Kutch and is doing Organic Farming since 2002-03. He believes that the Project has helped provide the farmers with greater market access than ever before and that the assistance and guidance given to the farmers regarding Organic and general farming such as the financial assistance given to him under the project to acquire bore well recharging equipment has helped increase their yield by 5% - 10%. He has also introduced a variety of alternate crops such as gram, sesame, pearl millet, sorghum etc with the guidance from Agrocel.
Impact Assessment_Cotton II_ Gujurat_India 60
Agri Impact Assessment -II- II Mott MacDonald India ‘More From the Cotton Fields’ Agrocel Industries Ltd 6.6 Shri Parvatbhai Sauji Ravariya Location:
Kutch – Rapar (Padampar)
Family:
Joint family with 9 members
Organic Farming:
Since 2002-03
Land:
Total – 11 Acres; 11 Acres – Organic
Parvatbhai standing beside a solar street light in Padampar Brief:
Shri. Parvatbhai is the President of the local farmer’s Association in the Padampar village of Kutch, where he lives in a joint family with 20 members. Parvatbhai joined the project in 2002-03 and has been one of the fore runners of Organic Farming in his village. Today the village of Padampar has got 8 solar street lights in their village from the Fair Trade premium they received.
Shri. Parvatbhai was given assistance under the project to build a cow urine collection platform in his cattle shed for preparing bio-fertilizers. According to Parvatbhai in the project you are not only given advice on the different farming practices, but you are also shown how to implement them as well as given assistance in implementing it.
Impact Assessment_Cotton II_ Gujurat_India 61
Agri Impact Assessment -II- II Mott MacDonald India ‘More From the Cotton Fields’ Agrocel Industries Ltd 6.7 Shri Dhanabhai Ambavi Nor
Location:
Kutch – Rapar (Padampar)
Family:
Joint family with 8 members
Organic Farming:
Since 2001-02
Land:
Total – 20 Acres; 20 Acres – Organic
Dhanabhai with Field Survey Team member from Mott MacDonald Brief:
Shri. Dhanabhai’s case is one of the remarkable success stories of the reverse migration made feasible using Organic farming as the project. Dhanabhai moved to Mumbai in search of better means of livelihood, where he worked in as a diamond cutter. However, the income and the living conditions there were sub marginal and in an accident Dhanabhai had his right arm paralyzed. Things were looking very bleak for him and he returned back to his village.
On returning back to his village Dhanabhai took up Organic Farming under the Project and says that since then his hardships have eased greatly. Today he is able to provide his family with a healthy and stable income. According to Dhanabhai, he has been able to conduct all his social occasions in a dignified manner and that has been the greatest benefit of joining the project
Impact Assessment_Cotton II_ Gujurat_India 62
Agri Impact Assessment -II- II Mott MacDonald India ‘More From the Cotton Fields’ Agrocel Industries Ltd 6.8 Head of household: Shri. Aayabhai Teja Parmar Respondent: Shri. Ramabhai Aaya Parmar (Son of Aayabhai, the land owner )
Location:
Kutch – Rapar
Family:
Joint family with 7 members
Organic Farming:
Since 2002-03
Land:
Total – 8 Acres; 5 Acres – Organic 3 Acres – Conventional
Brief:
Shri. Aayabhai lives in the Rapar region of Kutch as a member of a joint family of seven. His father Ramabhai Parmar is the head of the household and owns 8 acres of land, of which 5 acres is being used for organic farming since 2002–03. Aayabhai also runs a taxi (Toofan cruiser) besides framing on his father’s land. Aayabhai’s family had suffered great losses in the 2001 earthquake in Kutch, yet they did not despair and they have today with the help of Organic Farming built a new and better home. Aayabhai also got filling and levelling done to improve his land.
Aayabhai is quite contemporary in his outlook and is open to modern and innovative methods of farming if they are beneficial to him, which is why he joined the project in the first place. Aayabhai makes full use of the agricultural inputs provided under the project, such as compost fertilisers and bio pesticides like neem cake etc. He believes that the combination of a 5% - 10% increase in price realisation of the yield as well as a decrease in cost of production has helped increase their income and also save for a better future.
Impact Assessment_Cotton II_ Gujurat_India 63
Agri Impact Assessment -II- II Mott MacDonald India ‘More From the Cotton Fields’ Agrocel Industries Ltd
6.9 Shri Karsanbhai Manji Chaudhary Location:
Mandvi (Koday)
Family:
Nuclear family with 4 members
Organic Farming:
Since 2001-02
Land:
Total – 14 Acres; 14 Acres – Organic
Shri. Karsanbhai showing Organic Cotton from his farm. Brief:
Karsanbhai is one of the first farmers to have the joined the project when it initially began in Mandvi in 2001-02. Being a foresighted farmer Karsanbhai realised the advantages of Organic Farming and has under the project adopted many beneficial farming practices on his farm, such as using drip irrigation, preparing compost etc. He also cultivates crops such as castor, gram and sesame as alternate crops and has also set up a Gobar Gas unit on his farm.
Karsanbhai believes that besides increase in the financial strength of the farmers, the improvement in the soil is the most important aspect of Organic Farming, which will be beneficial for the farmers in the long term.
Impact Assessment_Cotton II_ Gujurat_India 64
Agri Impact Assessment -II- II Mott MacDonald India ‘More From the Cotton Fields’ Agrocel Industries Ltd 6.10 Shrimati Narmadaben Harilal Chowdhary
Location:
Mandvi- (Koday)
Family:
Joint family, with 5 members.
Organic Farming:
Since 2001-02
Land:
Total – 8 Acres; 8 Acres – Organic
Brief:
Narmadaben is the only female respondent of the survey and on this basis alone deserves a special mention. She lives in Mandvi in family of five and is the head of the household. Narmadaben had to face a lot residence from her family when she decided to join the project. Inspite of this she went ahead with her decision; she says that her family accepted her decision when they saw the assistance provided to her under the project.
With the help of the guidance given under the project by Agrocel, Narmadaben has introduced various new methods of farming on her farm. According to her, these factors have led to 10% increase in her annual income, besides improvement in the working conditions on the farm on account of not using chemical pesticides and fertilizers any longer. Narmadaben is convinced that Organic Farming is the way for the future and that more projects like these should be implemented to guide the farmers in the right direction.
7 Conclusions This Agri Impact Assessment- II, has been carried out to ascertain that the basic objectives set at the start of this program “More From the Cotton filed” have been accomplished and to what extent.
On the basis of the secondary data about member farmers available from Agrocel Industries Ltd, and limited field survey (primary research) was conducted in Surendranagar and Kutch districts to get one
Impact Assessment_Cotton II_ Gujurat_India 65
Agri Impact Assessment -II- II Mott MacDonald India ‘More From the Cotton Fields’ Agrocel Industries Ltd to one response from the actual beneficiaries of this program in November, 2007. Farmers’ responses have been compiled and analysed scientifically in previous sections of this report and discussed in detail in this analysis. Based on this analysis, key findings about the respective impact assessment targeted, have also been given in previous section. In the light of these discussions following conclusions are made from this study.
7.1 Economic Impact Assessment
There is majority perception amongst farmers that their income has increased after joining organic farming and Fair Trade programme. This is due to increase in their crop yield and also higher price available from Agrocel against their selling in market.
Using different economic indicators about farmers’ economic condition at start and now, it is clearly observed that farmers in both districts have positively gained due to their participation in this program. This is reflected from the fact that there is mark improvement in their living conditions, starting from improvement in type of house they live, improvement in basic facilities like potable water, bath, toilet and electric connection, increase in rooms, improvement in their existing facilities like kitchen, yard, cattle sheds and storage for farm produce etc;.
With the increase in economic prosperity farmers have also invested in improving the irrigation facilities, by making new well / tube well / or putting electric motor/ oil engine and also adopting modern concept of drip irrigation.
Due to better economic conditions, either it has helped farmers to reduce their debt or has prevented occurrences of indebtness. In fact many farmers have been able to invest in their house hold facilities or improve their agriculture facilities, and their living condition.
7.2 Environment / Agriculture Impact
As regards, environmental impact majority of farmers have perceived mark difference in improvement of soil after adopting organic farming. It is their clear perception that this factor has also helped them in increasing their crop yield , reducing their production cost ( due to less efforts in ploughing) and increasing soil capacity to retain more moisture, and also allowing plants to spread their roots more deeper and wider, resulting in higher growth and crop yields.
These farmers have also clearly mentioned that after adoption of organic farming labours working in the farm are more healthy and willing to work preferentially in such farms.
Impact Assessment_Cotton II_ Gujurat_India 66
Agri Impact Assessment -II- II Mott MacDonald India ‘More From the Cotton Fields’ Agrocel Industries Ltd There is no clear perception in majority of farmers about improvement in water quality. The main reason for this response was not having any water analysis data with them.
In majority cases there have not been any occurrences of plant diseases or pest after adopting organic farming, and when ever such incident happens, technical advice from Agrocel is solving such problem. However, recently in Surendranagar district at few places there are incidents of pest infestation affecting the crop adversely.
7.3 Social Impact
Majority farmers, nearly 80 % have not faced any problems in adopting organic farming and joining fair trade programme.
Many farmers have clearly expressed that after joining Organic farming and fair trade program their social status has improved. They are working as opinion leaders for other farmers. Farmers in both districts have agreed that by joining in this program of Agrocel they have been able to fulfil most of their social obligations and this has given them respectable position in their society.
It is clearly evident that organic farming has helped to check migration from rural areas to urban areas, mainly happening earlier due to problems of sustainability. In fact, in Kutch there are incidences of reverse migration from urban areas, to their native places and improving their economic conditions than before.
There are no incidences of farmer’s suicide due to indebtness, amongst the member farmers in both districts.
7.4 Overall Impact of Organic Farming and Fair trade Program
There is increase in total number of farmers from 650 at the start of this program to approx.1500, mainly in two districts of Gujarat, Surendranagar and Kutch. Agrocel has also spread this organic cotton cultivation in Rayagada district of Orissa. Thus, the objective of spreading this concept in small and marginal cotton growers of Gujarat and Orissa have been attained.
Due to availability of community development funds from Fair trade, majority farmers have expressed their feelings that such funds have helped them in carrying out projects of community development, such as deepening of village lakes, providing drinking water
Impact Assessment_Cotton II_ Gujurat_India 67
Agri Impact Assessment -II- II Mott MacDonald India ‘More From the Cotton Fields’ Agrocel Industries Ltd facilities in schools, building approach roads to villages, and organizing farmers’ training programs, building community Gobar gas plant to get cheaper, cleaner fuel for cooking etc;.
In short, Agrocel has shown the way to member farmers for carrying out the sustainable agriculture in successful manner in the project areas.
7.5 Farmers’ Aspirations from Agrocel
Though, in general all the respondent farmers are happy with support provided by Agrocel, through their service centres and field officers, on asking what further aspiration they have from Agrocel, they came out with following responses:
Many farmers in Surendranagar still expect higher returns of their produce from Agrocel to make their farming more remunerable like cultivation of BT Cotton. They also expect that Agrocel should support them in certification process and also in marketing of other organic produce from the same land.
In Kutch, district many farmers have expressed their desire to have soft loans from Agrocel for development of their farming activities, like installing drip irrigation and purchasing of farm implements.
During the informal discussions with these farmers, few have also requirement of Agrocel support for education of their children and Agrocel providing them more information about improved farm practices in other parts of the state and country.
7.6 Suggestions for Agrocel
After having interactions with member farmers and Agrocel officials, the consultants have few relevant suggestions for the Agrocel to adopt or implement in the project area. These are as below:
Agrocel should take initiatives in organizing cultivation of other short terms Organic crops like seasonal and off-season vegetables and spices, and provide market support to farmers in such organic crops, by having market tie-up with retail chains dealing in fresh vegetables and food items.
In Gujarat, Agrocel is mainly working in Kutch and Surendranagar districts, which are now proven earthquake prone zones. As emerged from this survey, residential house is the prime asset and investment priority for all member farmers. Agrocel should provide some kind of group
Impact Assessment_Cotton II_ Gujurat_India 68
Agri Impact Assessment -II- II Mott MacDonald India ‘More From the Cotton Fields’ Agrocel Industries Ltd insurance facilities to cover such risk of member farmers, using the funds available from Fair trade programme and educate farmers about importance of such risk cover.
Agrocel may organize health check up camps for member farmers and their families, through participation of some voluntary organizations from the project area, from time to time in different villages. Agrocel can also spread awareness about different insurance schemes available from various government agencies and cashless Medi-claim insurance facilities, in their member farmers, so that they can minimise such risk, which is at time putting stress on their economic resources.
Agrocel can create some funds from the community development funds available from Fair trade premium, to provide support to the family members of member farmers in primary and higher education, and can consider providing prizes, scholarships, and other incentive and support to children and also spreading awareness in the project areas about importance of women education.
Impact Assessment_Cotton II_ Gujurat_India 69
Agri Impact Assessment -II- II Mott MacDonald India ‘More From the Cotton Fields’ Agrocel Industries Ltd
Appendix A: Field Survey Questionnaire QUESTIONNAIRE FOR AGRI IMPACT ASSESSMENT OF “MORE FROM THE COTTON FIELDS PROGRAMME”
Questionnaire #
1. Name of Respondent Name of Head of household( If other than respondent)
2. District Kutch Surendranagar
3. Taluka Code:
4. Access to Village: 1 – State Highway 2 – District Highway 3 – Village Road 4 – Kuccha Road
5. Distance from Agrocel Office: In Kilometres
6. Gender: Male Female
7. Marital Status: Married Unmarried
8. Family Type: 1 – Joint Family 2 – Nuclear Family 3 – Cluster of Relatives
8a. No of Members in the family:
9. Started Organic Farming in: 2001-02 2002-03 2003-04 2004-05 2005-06 2006-07
10. Apart from agriculture, what are your major sources of income? If any 1. 2. 3.
I. Economic Impact Aspects
11. Type of house you live in? Before Now A Kuccha House B Pucca House C Semi Pucca
12. Ownership of the house? Before Now A Owned
Impact Assessment_Cotton II_ Gujurat_India A-1
Agri Impact Assessment -II- II Mott MacDonald India ‘More From the Cotton Fields’ Agrocel Industries Ltd
B Rented C Others (specify)
13. Facilities available in your house? Before Now Improvements A Potable Water B Electricity C Gas connection D Bath & Toilets E Kitchen F Yard G Cattle Shed Before Now Improvements H Storage facility I Total no of rooms J Others (specify)
14. Land holding details: ( In hectares) A Total cultivable land B Land under Organic Farming / Fair Trade C Land under BT cotton
15. Ownership of the land? Before Now A Owned B Leased C Partnership
16. Which agricultural facilities do you have? Before Now Improvements A Tractor without trolley B Tractor with trolley C Tractor attachments D Mechanized harvesting facilities E Water/Tube well F Electric/Oil engine pump G Drip Irrigation facilities H Others (specify)
17. Has there been a noticeable difference in your agricultural income since adopting Organic Farming / Fair Trade Programme? Yes No If Yes, in what %
18. What approximate percentage of your income is used as input cost?
Impact Assessment_Cotton II_ Gujurat_India A-2
Agri Impact Assessment -II- II Mott MacDonald India ‘More From the Cotton Fields’ Agrocel Industries Ltd 19. Approximate percentage distribution of the input cost: A Seed B Fertilizers C Pesticides D Irrigation E Labour
20. Has there been a noticeable difference in the price realization of your yield since adopting Organic Farming / Fair Trade Programme? Yes No If Yes, in what %
21. What difference has Organic Farming made in terms of Market accessibility? 1. 2. 3.
22. What according to you have been the major benefits of Organic Farming / Fair Trade Programme? Rate from 1 to 5 ( 1=Highest and 10=Lowest) A Better price realization B Greater Market accessibility C Stability of crop and prices D Improvements in soil and water quality E Improvement in quality of cotton produced F Improvement in financial strength G Re duction in cost of production H Low cost agricultural inputs I Technical guidance J Use of Fair Trade premium in social projects
II. Agricultural Impact Aspects
23. Has there been a noticeable difference in your actual yield since adopting Organic Farming/Fair Trade? Yes No If Yes, in what %
24. Is the cotton cultivated by Organic Farming contamination free? Yes No
25. Have you noticed any difference in the occurrence of crop disease since adopting Organic Farming? Y No If Yes, what?
26. Has there been a noticeable difference in the soil quality since adopting Organic Farming? Yes No If Yes, how?
27. Has there been a noticeable difference in the water quality since adopting Organic Farming? Yes No If Yes, how?
Impact Assessment_Cotton II_ Gujurat_India A-3
Agri Impact Assessment -II- II Mott MacDonald India ‘More From the Cotton Fields’ Agrocel Industries Ltd
28. Do you do undertake crop rotation? Yes No
28.A If yes, then which are the other organic crops you cultivate under crop rotation? 1. 2. 3.
29. Benefits of crop rotation, if any, according to you? 1. 2. 3.
III. Social Impact Aspects
30. Problems faced, if any, in participating in Fair Trade Programme? 1. 2. 3.
31 Has your social status benefited from participating in Fair Trade Programme? Yes No
32. Has the social and financial status of your labourers benefited from participating in Fair Trade Programme? Yes No
33. What difference has Fair Trade Programme made in your personal and social life? A Greater financial strength B Better family life C Others (specify)
34. Due have any unpaid debts? Yes No
35. Has Fair Trade Programme helped you to reduce debt burden? A No, the Fair Trade programme has not reduced my debt burden at all. B Yes, It has helped me repay some of my existing debt. C Yes, I have been able to repay all my debts. D Yes, I no longer need to take any debts as my income suffices my expenses, E Others (specify)
36. Has Fair Trade Programme helped improve your overall working conditions? A No, the working conditions are the same as before B Yes, I have more help (labourers) to help in my work C Yes, I have greater amenities (tractors, irrigation etc) to help in my work. D Yes, my health is better due to the reduction is use of chemical pesticides E Yes, the improvement in soil and water quality has helped my working conditions F Others (specify)
37. Is the income from Organic Farming/ Fair Trade Programme enough to fulfil all your
Impact Assessment_Cotton II_ Gujurat_India A-4
Agri Impact Assessment -II- II Mott MacDonald India ‘More From the Cotton Fields’ Agrocel Industries Ltd family’s expenses? Yes No
38. Do you think Organic farming/Fair Trade Programme is sustainable? Yes No
39. Do you feel the need to go to cities in search of better future prospects? Yes No
40. Have you witnessed anybody returning to the villages from cities due to the sustainability and better livelihood provided by of Organic farming/ Fair Trade Programme than found in the cities? Yes No
41. What kind of facilities does Agrocel provide to you? A Agricultural Inputs B Buy backs C Fair Trade premiums D Others (specify)
42. What is your overall perception about Fair Trade Programme? What further development do you want from the programme?
Date: Name of Interviewer:
Impact Assessment_Cotton II_ Gujurat_India A-5
Agri Impact Assessment -II- II Mott MacDonald India ‘More From the Cotton Fields’ Agrocel Industries Ltd
Appendix B: List of Respondent Farmers for Field Survey
List of Surendranagar Farmers
1. Harsinghbhai Tarshibhai Jadhav 24. Mansukhbhai V Patel
2. Baldevbhai Ramjibhai Utadiya 25. Praveenbhai H Varmora
3. Naranbhai Darjibhai Patel 26. Jayrambhai N Patel
4. Lalitbhai Babubhai Patel 27. Parsottambhai G Patel
5. Laljibhai Ramjibhai Patel 28. Narottambhai B Patel
6. Chaturbhai Manabhai Makwana 29. Mahadevbhai V Patel
7. Sanjaybhai Natwarbhai Devji 30. Jayantbhai D Patel
8. Nalinbhai Kunja 31. Bhagwanji J Jakasania
9. Kantibhai Patel 32. Khimjibhai N Patel
10. Dilipbhai Bhimabhai 33. Jiteshbhai I Patel
11. Praveen Ranchhod Ramji 34. Chamanbhai N Patel
12. Ranabhai Ramji Rabari 35. Shantilal K Patel
13. Ishwarbhai Popatbhai Patel 36. Hirabhai V Jadhav
14. Jatamalbhai Vanol 37. Ramabhai M Rabari
15. Ghanshyambhai Dhayabhai Patel 38. Baldevbhai M Patel
16. Vasudevbhai Harjibhai Patel 39. Rameshbhai B Patel
17. Bharatbhai Raghunathbhai Patel 40. Ramjibhai R Kumbhari
18. Dhanabhai P Patel 41. Harilalbhai M Patel
19. Dhayabhai Patel 42. Ramanikbhai A Patel
20. Shivabhai M Patel 43. Arvindbhai D Patel
21. Chikabhai S Patel 44. Valji A Patel
22. Chaturbhai P Patel 45. Prabhubhai M Patel
23. Prabhubhai M Patel
Impact Assessment_Cotton II_ Gujurat_India B-1
Agri Impact Assessment -II- II Mott MacDonald India ‘More From the Cotton Fields’ Agrocel Industries Ltd
List of Kutch Farmers
46. Dineshbhai S Chauhan 71. Jemalbhai N Mali
47. Parbatbhai Sunjha Padhariya 72. Dineshbhai N Mali
48. Babubhai N Chavda 73. Mansangh k Makwana
49. Meghabhai Dudha 74. Mohan B Mali
50. Gelabhai J Chavda 75. Deepakbhai S Rathod
51. Bhupatbhai K Makwana 76. Bhikhabhai B Makwana
52. Ratanbhai B Chauhan 77. Ramjibhai S Vidiaya
53. Bababhai B Chauhan 78. Pethabhai K Verani
54. Lakhmanbhai A Chavda 79. Dayabhai B Chauhan
55. Khimabhai B Rathod 80. Ratanbhai Gela Chauhan
56. Pethabhai Chavda 81. Bhudabhai B Vidiya
57. Vasudevbhai B Chavda 82. Noghabhai G Parmar
58. Velabhai M Patel 83. Babubhai Jaisangh Vidiya
59. Vasabhai K Bhimani 84. Rameshbhai Bhajak
60. Jamalbhai K Bayad 85. Babubhai Parmar
61. Doyabhai D Lodani 86. Jogabhai Bayad
62. Sargambhai R Bharwad 87. Pathabhai Makwana
63. Vasafbhai H Nor 88. Surabhai Makwana
64. Navinbhai K Kali 89. Panchabhai Bharmal
65. Kedabhai Madheva Mali 90. Babubhai V Bhoya
66. Naghabhai K Bhimani 91. Khimabhai R Makwana
67. Virabhai D Lodani 92. Jesabhai krasan
68. Khimabhai J Chauhan 93. Gelabhai D Mor
69. Savabhai B Chauhan 94. Ravaji D Bangali
70. Raghabhai B Mali 95. Parvatbhai S Ravariya
Impact Assessment_Cotton II_ Gujurat_India B-1
Agri Impact Assessment -II- II Mott MacDonald India ‘More From the Cotton Fields’ Agrocel Industries Ltd 96. Devrajbhai B Mor 112. Bhavanbhai M Ravariya
97. Ketabhai B Ravariya 113. Momayabhai K Chowdhary
98. Hargovindbhai B Lodariya 114. Kimanabhai K Gadhvi
99. Babubhai Bhandiya 115. Lakshmanbhai Bera
100. Jagdishbhai Ravariys 116. Bhanabhai D Parjapati
101. Pethabhai C Koli 117. Ambanibhai J Ghera
102. Karsanbhai R Ravariya 118. Govindbhai B Gadhvi
103. Ambavibhai R Ravariya 119. Bababhai L Harijan
104. Veerabhai M Ravariya Mandvi
105. Baljibhai B Bamaniya 120. Aayabhai R Parmar
106. Babubhai D Minaat 121. Karsanbhai M Chawdhary
107. Ketabhai A Nor 122. Narmadaben Chowdhary
108. Dhanabhai A Nor 123. Tulsibhai M Chowdhary
109. Bambhaniyabhai H Bechara 124. Harjibhai M Mukhi
110. Devrajbhai D Bharadiya 125. Archanbhai L Gadhvi
111. Hirjibhai H Meena
Impact Assessment_Cotton II_ Gujurat_India B-2